# IRIAF | News and Discussions



## SOHEIL

*QAHER F-313-B*















​

Reactions: Like Like:
25 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## raptor22

nice work but it's different with Qaher ... intakes, its back i think that's why you called it B?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

raptor22 said:


> nice work but it's different with Qaher ... intakes, its back i think that's why you called it B?



*Ya !!!*


----------



## mohsen

soheil, what has happened to scientists in soheil Aerospace industry? you ruined all of it's stealth properties, you have to eliminate all of those curves again.
also it's air intake is a design flaw, that hemisphere must go inside and be covered. if you wanted to redesign air intake, the idea of putting 2 extra dynamic air intakes was much better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

mohsen said:


> soheil, what has happened to scientists in soheil Aerospace industry? you ruined all of it's stealth properties, you have to eliminate all of those curves again.
> also it's air intake is a design flaw, that hemisphere must go inside and be covered. if you wanted to redesign air intake, the idea of putting 2 extra dynamic air intakes was much better.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Argus Panoptes

Wow! Beautiful airplane.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mosu

waow nice work

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LegionnairE

did it fly yet?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## faisal6309

nice looking plan
nice work

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

LegionnairE said:


> did it fly yet?



not yet ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

raptor22 said:


> nice work but it's different with Qaher ... intakes, its back i think that's why you called it B?



Not only intake, nuzzle also


----------



## LegionnairE

Soheil said:


> not yet ...



Is there a timetable? Say, is it known when will it make it's maiden flight, if ever?


----------



## SOHEIL

LegionnairE said:


> Is there a timetable? Say, is it known when will it make it's maiden flight, if ever?



not yet ...


----------



## S-DUCT

Nice work.

which program you have used to create CGI?


----------



## SOHEIL

S-DUCT said:


> Nice work.
> 
> which program you have used to create CGI?



Autodesk 3ds Max 2013

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Uhuhu

well done soheil, Thanks for sharing. i suggest you to put the Link of every image below images to people can see in the big size easily.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AShkan

Dear Haman,
As promised! 

In 1986 The Iranian F-14A Tomcats faced a shortage of air to air missile during the Iran-Iraq war. As a result, a team of 13 Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force personnel were tasked to resolve the situation. The outcome of the project was the adaptation of the MIM-23 Hawk surface to air missile to a medium range air to air missile, which was vastly available and accessible in The Iranian Armed Forces arsenal.

In 1986, during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), The IRIAF F-14A Tomcats faced a serious problem; a shortage of air to air missiles. The American made air superiority fighter aircraft was employed in The Imperial Iranian Air Force in January of 1976, armed with the long range Phoenix missile. Before the deployment of the short range Sidewinder missile model “L” and the medium range Sparrow missile model “F”, which were adapted to the F-14, The Iranian Revolution broke out in early 1979. As a result, all military contracts were nullified by the new Islamic Government, leaving the F-14s armed with only the Phoenix missile and the 20mm M61 Vulcan Cannon. 

Once the Iran-Iraq war began in September of 1980, the F-14s scrambled to defend the country; however, the prolonged war and the imposed military sanctions by the U.S., caused The Tomcats to suffer from a shortage of operational Phoenix missiles. Although The IRIAF still had substantial quantities of the Phoenix missile, but the lack of coolant and the decaying batteries of the missile left the F-14s unarmed. The F-14s were also armed with Sparrow E-4 and Sidewinder G air to air missiles, but the missiles used for the F-4s were not 100% compatible to the F-14’s radar, the AWG-9, and offered a degraded rate of accuracy. The IRIAF needed a new accessible and reliable air to air missile. The newly created office of Air Force Deputy to the Office of Self-Sufficiency Movement proposed the use of MIM-23 Hawk surface to air missile as a replacement for the Phoenix missile; however, the suggestion was strongly opposed by Col. Houshang Seddigh, The IRIAF Commander and his Air Defense Directors.

Nevertheless, The Air Force Deputy to the Office of Self-Sufficiency Movement, despite oppositions to the proposal, presented its confidential plan to The Deputy Commander in Chief at the time, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The plan was approved for the commencement of the tests and orders were forwarded to Col. Seddigh. One F-14 and five out of service MIM-23 Hawk Missiles returned back from the front lines were delivered to a hanger for the experimentation.

The project was classified as Top Secret under the supervision of the Self-Sufficiency Movement Office. A team1 of 13, IRIAF personnel consisting of one Pilot, 2 Weapons System Officers “WSO” and 10 specialized personnel, directed by Maj. Fereidoun AliMazandarani, and a support team2 consisting of 9, IRIAF personnel were ordered to finalize the tests within six months. 

The missile chosen for the project, MIM-23 Hawk, was longer, wider and heavier than the Phoenix missile making it possible to load only on two of the pylons, No. 1 & 8. The pylons and missiles both were internally reinforced and modified with the proper parts to load the Hawk missiles for flight test. Due to the rapid progress of the program, The IRIAF Commander, Col. Seddigh, began supporting the program unreservedly. 

Upon the successful flight of the two hanging missiles for take off, aircraft maneuverability, onboard missile stability, landing and all other required tests, the next stage began: the drop of the missile safely before its rocket fired underneath the aircraft. The MIM-23 Hawk missile launched from its launcher directly once it was fired; however, in order for it to be fired from an aircraft, it needed to separate and then fire its rocket at a safe distance from the fighter to avoid damaging it. Besides separating, the missile had to make a 90 degree clockwise turn on its longitudinal axis first before firing its rocket. After finalizing the ground tests, it was time to initiate the first live test.

Six aircrafts were involved in the first live test; i.e., missile release, firing & target acquirement, one F-14 as leader of the group flown by Maj. Fereidoun AliMazandarani, director and pilot of the Sedjil project group, & WSO Capt. Mohammad Oghbaei, two F-4s which would fly on each side of the F-14 and from the rear recording the test by their TISEO, one 707 fuel tanker just in case the test flight took longer than expected and one Falcon Jet flying at 2000ft equipped with cameras and telemetric systems to capture the release and the firing of the missile from below as it flew at line up rest formation. The sixth craft was a remotely controlled BQM-34 Target Drone which was designated as a target for the initial firing test of the SEDJIL air to air missile. After the briefing was finalized by Maj. AliMazandarani in the afternoon, the Falcon pilot declined to fly his aircraft due to the possibility of explosion from the missile if it failed. Although the distance between all aircrafts involved were at a safe distance and breaking away instructions were given to each aircraft, the Falcon pilot still refused to fly his plane on this mission. The debate went on for a few hours and by the time they were finished without reaching a conclusion, it was already too late to initiate the test. Maj. AliMazandarani contacted Col. Seddigh, advising him of the situation and requested a new flight crew that would go through with the plan and test. The Air Force Commander advised the Major to reschedule take off flight for the following morning at 8 am, using his Falcon Jet for the test and sitting in the co-pilot seat himself. Although the commander of the IRIAF, the next morning Col. Seddigh attended the briefing as the co-pilot of the Falcon Jet, while Maj. AliMazandarani, as head of the project and flight leader, briefed everyone once again. The flights took off at 8am from Mehrabad Airport and once everyone was in their position, Major AliMazandarani turned his F-14 towards the target and WSO Capt. Oghbaei fired the first missile at the drone in Semnan Controlled Range. Upon confirmation of the safe dropping and firing sequence of the missile towards the drone, Col. Seddigh ordered the F-14 to fire the second missile as well and after going through the relative processes, a lock on the target was acquired and the second missile was fired by Maj. AliMazandarani toward its target drone. The test was a success in terms of the release and safe firing of both MIM-23s, as well as target pursuit by the missiles. After viewing the test films, the team realized that the time between release and ignition of the missile is slightly long. Since The IRIAF did not have any manufacturing testing equipment, they resorted to unconventional methods of testing. As a result, a trench was dug along the trim pad area in The 8th TFB in Esfahan with the F-14 suspended by a rescue crane over it while having pylon No.1 in the center line of the trench for the firing sequence test. 






*The F-14 hung by a crane for testing of the MIM-23 Hawk missile release. The missile can
be seen hung from a reinforced pylon.*

The warhead was removed and the timing between the release and ignition was precisely computed by telemetry instruments without the rocket actually firing. All systems on board the aircraft were on except for the engines and with the help of WSO Lt. Yousef Ahmadi, the time between release and firing was shortened by 5 milliseconds.





*The release of the MIM-23 Hawk missile.*





*The trench dug for the release test of the MIM-23 Hawk missile.*

After the initial test, the most difficult step began which was the compatibility of the AWG-9 radar’s onboard computer to the Hawk missile. The MIM-23 surface to air missile’s radar system receives all information from the target and feeds it to the missile before firing from its ground launcher; however, if fired from the F-14, it would require a constant data exchange between the AWG-9 radar and the Hawk missile. The MIM-23 needed to understand the data from the AWG-9 that was being fed to it. After a week of intense planning and computer programming, the team came up with a hardware interface box, translating the signals between the F-14 computer and the Hawk missile. Now the F-14 could identify the Hawk missile and the missile could understand all data for flight and trajectory corrections being fed to it from the aircraft. In less than 40 days, the missile was ready and it was time for the live test of the MIM-23 Hawk missile, renamed SEDJIL Missile.

Fifteen days later the same crew scheduled the first hot flight test armed with the Sedjil missile. The F-14 was flying at 22,000 ft and the drone was at 25000 ft with a 25º angle off and a range of 45Km. After the target was picked up and locked on, Maj. AliMazandarani fired his missile as he simultaneously turned opposite the drone’s flight path and several seconds later the target was hit and splashed. However, after these successful tests, there was skepticism amongst the high ranking officers of The Air Defense who suggested testing in a more difficult scenario. This time Maj. AliMazandarani was ordered to stand down and the flight was carried out by the supporting team members, Col. Shahram Rostami, Deputy Director to the Air Force Operations, and WSO Lt. Davood MasoumParast. Major AliMazandarani briefed the flight crew of the process of tracking, locking and firing sequence. Along with Col. Babaii, Director of Air Force Operations, they headed to The Semnan Range and oversaw the test. Once the target was acquired and hit, both the Colonel and Major were the first to arrive at the scene of the downed drone, confirming the kill. Everyone seemed to be satisfied; however, after a few days The Air Defense authorities stated that in order to release the Hawk missiles to the Tomcats, a third hot flight in none ideal conditions and worst case scenario is needed.





*The red finned MIM-23 Hawk missile is clear seen hanging from the F-14.*

The Sedjil Project team was planning a non ideal scenario for the third test drone, when Col. Babaii called from Bushehr 6th TFB directing Maj. AliMazandarani to fly to Bushehr and commence testing on an actual enemy aircraft. After 3 days of full alert, Maj. AliMazandarani and Lt. Ansarin scrambled their F-14A towards incoming Iraqi fighters heading towards KharkIsland. At a distance of 25 miles the F-14 fired its first Sedjil missile; however, the missile was one of five missiles used during the initial tests of the project which was loaded by mistake. The bad rocket dropped, fired and did a barrel roll over the front of the cockpit and Radom missing the Tomcat as it headed down towards the sea. The pilots reacquired the target, locked on and fired the second missile at a range of 20 miles, hitting it several seconds later, thus proving the success of the project. It was sheer luck or destiny that saved the F-14 from a disaster that may have suspended the project altogether and perhaps change the face of the war. 

On the way back to the base, it was discovered that the downed fighter was the French made Super Etendard capable of carrying the infamous anti ship Exocet missile, one of the five fighters leased from the French government. The test not only proved successful, but revived the IRIAF Tomcats, striking fear into the Iraqi Air Force that the F-14s were still a threat; especially, with the downing of the Super Etendard fighter. After the test, several of the F-14s were modified to carry the Sedjil missile along with the limited supply of operational Phoenix missiles.

The first operational Sedjil air to air missile shot down two Iraqi aircrafts over Kermansha Province flying in close formation with a single Sedjil missile by IRIAF F-14 pilot, Lt. Col. Asadollah Adeli, eliminating all doubts regarding the reliability and effectiveness of the adapted missile.





*Two F-14s are shown carrying a variety of Air to Air Missiles.*

As the war ended in 1988, The IRIAF had time to try and revive the Phoenix missiles using substitutes for the coolant and batteries. The IRIAF F-14s now carry both the Phoenix and Sedjil missile on their pylons! 





*Sedjil Missile becomes standard armament of The IRIAF.*


*1- SEDJIL Main Team Members:*

- Major Fereidoun AliMazandarani F-14 Pilot & Head of the Team

- Captain Mohammad Oghbaei F-14 WSO

- 1st Lt. Ebrahim Ansarin F-14 WSO

- 1st Master Homafar Hamzeh Khodaverdian Tech. Specialist and Head of the Technical Team 

- 1st Master Homafar Hassan NikAkhtar F-14 Radar Specialist

- 3rd Master Homafar Asghar Akbari F-14 Radar Specialist

- 3rd Master Homafar Reza Koordoghli F-14 Electronic & Armament Specialist

- 3rd Master Homafar Karim SetamdadRad MIM-23 Hawk Missile Specialist “TRMF”

- 3rd Master Homafar Hassan Abbasi MIM-23 Hawk Missile Specialist “TRMF”

- 3rd Master Homafar Reza Rousta F-14 APG Specialist

- Civilian Technician Ali Gholamali Wing & Fuselage Sheet Metal Specialist

- Dr. Mahmoud Mani Ph.D. Aerodynamics (Civilian)

- Engineer Ali Gili M.S. Mechanical Engineering (Civilian)


*2-SEDJIL Support Team Members:*


- Col. Shahram Rostami F-14 Pilot

- 1st Lt. Davood MasoumParast F-14 WSO

- 3rd Master Homafar Naser HajAmiri F-14 Weapons Specialist

- 3rd Master Homafar Abbas Izadi Moghadam MIM-23 Hawk Missile

- 3rd Master Homafar Asghar Khoshdooni Farahani MIM-23 Hawk Missile

- Master Sgt. Hossein Farsi Sheet Metal Specialist

- 1st Homafar Akbar Golshani MIM-23 Hawk

- 1st Homafar Hamid Naraghi F-14 APG Specialist

- 1st Homafar Bahman Jafari F-14 APG Specialist

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
23


----------



## haman10

very nice article , good job @AShkan

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Fahad Khan 2

That made me lol... Surface to Air missile on fighter...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AShkan

Fahad Khan 2 said:


> That made me lol... Surface to Air missile on fighter...



Neccessaty is the mother of invention and/or innovation!! It does look ridiculously large for a fighter plane doesn't it? But this missile alone shot one of the Super Etendards as well as two Iraqi fighter planes with one shot!! Not a bad record for SAM on a fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sage

Out of the box thinking ....awesome !

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## karakoram

Very well written article and great job by the team

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Juggernautjatt

How many F-14s are in service with Iranian Air force now?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AShkan

Sage said:


> Out of the box thinking ....awesome !



I am not sure but I believe the idea was not originally the IRIAF as there had been discussions before about the possibility of matching the AWG and Hawk Missile. I believe some adaptation of the Standard Missile was also made on the F-4 Phantom but not as widely as the above. The purpose was to hunt the high speed and flying Iraqi Mig-25s but wasn't successful.



Juggernautjatt said:


> How many F-14s are in service with Iranian Air force now?



Well the information is classified but I estimate around 30 may be combat ready. I believe several key spare parts were received long after the war had ended.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sage

AShkan said:


> I am not sure but I believe the idea was not originally the IRIAF as there had been discussions before about the possibility of matching the AWG and Hawk Missile. I believe some adaptation of the Standard Missile was also made on the F-4 Phantom but not as widely as the above. The purpose was to hunt the high speed and flying Iraqi Mig-25s but wasn't successful.
> 
> 
> 
> Well the information is classified but I estimate around 30 may be combat ready. I believe several key spare parts were received long after the war had ended.


They did bring down the Etender ...so far so good in war time with so little resources !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AShkan

I found more photos related to this topic:






F-4s Escorting and Filming the F-14 during the Sedjeel Project Test.






Release of the MIM-23 During Flight Test 





Project Sedjil Receives Second Place During the 6th Khawrazmi Science Competition. Col. AliMazandarani Receiving the Certificate on Behalf of The Air Force's Office of Self-Sufficiency Movement.







Certificate of Second Place in Khawrazmi Science Competition.







Commendation to AliMazandarani by the then President, Ali Khameneii

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## giger

I like tomcat it's nostalgic qaher is not nostalgic .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Desertfalcon

I must say, damned impressive, but then again, I find it impressive that Iran has kept those old Tomcats flying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AShkan

Desertfalcon said:


> I must say, damned impressive, but then again, I find it impressive that Iran has kept those old Tomcats flying.



They were taught by the best and of course got paid well for that service!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Desertfalcon

AShkan said:


> They were taught by the best and of course got paid well for that service!


For sure, but that has been that has been almost 40 years ago now. I can't believe those same airframes are still up patrolling the skies. Quite a feat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AShkan

Desertfalcon said:


> For sure, but that has been that has been almost 40 years ago now. I can't believe those same airframes are still up patrolling the skies. Quite a feat.



True, but as long as one can overhaul the frame and the different parts, they can keep on flying. The F-14 is a magnificent plane and was quite far ahead of its time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AShkan

Biography of Colonel AliMazandarani, head of the Sedjil project:

Part One


Fereidoun AliMazandarani (3 October 1951 - ) nicknamed “Fery” (short for Fereidoun) by his friends and comrades was an Iranian F-14 pilot and considered a fighter Ace during the 8 year Iran-Iraq war claiming as many as nine aerial victories and five indirect ones as a result of enemy aircraft crashes. He was also the head of The Sedjil Project in an effort to fit the surface to air missile, MIM-23 Hawk, to the F-14 Tomcat. He logged in about 3,000 hours on the F-14 and flew over 540 missions during the war and up to his retirement. During his career, he held posts such as Deputy to the Air Force Operations Intelligence, Air Force Operations & Mission Planning Supervisor and was the armed forces’ representative in the P.O.W. exchange negotiation team. Colonel Fereidoun Ali Mazandarani retired from the IRIAF on March 22, 1999 after serving over 27 years.
*Early Life*
Born on October 3rd, 1951, Fereidoun grew up in a military family. In 1960, his father, a military man serving in The Special Guard Group to the Shah, left for the U.S. to undertake a course related to his specialty. While seeing off his father at the airport, he was mesmerized by the airplanes taking off and landing at Mehrabad Airport, Tehran. At the age of 10, he was so fascinated with the airplanes that his family thought he had returned home by himself as he sat by the terminal window for hours, watching the airplanes. He had already decided then that he would become the person flying those machines. Upon graduation from high school, he immediately took the entrance exam for Iran Air “Homa” Airlines and passed. His friends dared him to take The Imperial Iranian Air Force entrance exam which was said to be much harder than the Homa Airlines. Taking the dare seriously and being a matter of honor, he was one of the few in that group of volunteers who passed the exam and the medical tests. Being from a military family, he changed his mind to attend the flight courses in Homa Airlines and enrolled in The Imperial Iranian Air Force Academy.
*Professional Career
The IIAF*
F. AliMazandarani joined the Imperial Iranian Air Force on November 22, 1971 and a year later in December of 1972, he was sent to The United States to complete the “UPT” (Undergraduate Pilot Training) course and become a fighter pilot. He completed his English Language training at Lackland Air Force Base and was one of the first groups to be sent to Medina AFB in San Antonio, Texas, to train on the Cessna T-41 in 1973. 


*



Cadet AliMazandarani





Lackland School of Language, 1973





Medina AFB 1973, AliMazandarani is first on the right

He was then sent to Laughlin AFB to start academic training and fly with the T-37 & T-38. Among his instructors were Captain J. Kelly, a Vietnam War veteran and one of the top pilots of the F-4 Phantom, who was shot down, captured and later escaped. During his training, Captain Kelly tried to teach additional points outside the designated syllabus, which later became useful to AliMazandarani during Iran-Iraq war.





Laghlin AFB 1973, AliMazandarani standing first from right

He flew his first solo flight with the T-37 on December 7th, 1973, which resulted in an emergency landing. Against his instructor, Capt. J. Kelly, and Laughlin AFB commander’s, Col. Harry Falls, advice to eject, the young cadet decided to land the aircraft when the right main gear failed to open after repeated attempts. He continued his training on the T-38 with Capt. Shwain, one of the experienced F-4 pilots and continued with Lt. Blockland. He finalized his training with squadron commander, Capt. Friski, one of F-4’s skilled pilots and instructors. Fereidoun AliMazandarani got his wings on November 1st, 1974 and returned to Iran.





Laghlin AFB, T-38

He spent some time in The 11th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron waiting for the opening of the F-5A & F-5B ground school at the 1st TFB Mehrabad and in January 1975, he left for The 41st Training Squadron in 4th TFB in Dezful. In June 1975 he finalized his tactical training on the F-5A & B and was transferred to the 42nd Tactical Squadron. 





Dezful 41st Tactical Squadron, AliMazandarani 3rd standing from right

In October 1975 he finished his tactical training on the newly imported F-5E & F with the 43rd Training Squadron and was transferred back to the 42nd Tactical Squadron as a fighter pilot on the above fighters and Squadron’s Standardization Officer.










Dezful 43rd Tactical Squadron F-5E, AliMazandarani 4th sitting from the right

In November 1977, he was chosen as one the candidates for the F-14A, the most advanced interceptor fighter jet of its time, after 815 hours of flight time on the F-5 Tiger II. 1st Lt. AliMazandarani was transferred to the 8th TFB in Isfahan to join the 81st Training Squadron. He started training under the direction of Iranian and American instructors and flew his first flight with Capt. Abbas Hazin, another one of the Ace Pilots of Iran-Iraq war that shot down a number of Iraqi fighters. Several of the American instructors whom worked for Grumman were based in Isfahan at the time including Mr. Calaway, Mr. Minhold, Mr. Holmberg, Mr. Becker, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Voreck, Mr. Peinemann, Mr. Bero, Mr. Marteney, etc. Also, some of the instructors were from active top pilots in The U.S. Navy that flew the F-14; such as, Maj. Noris, Maj. Stutszman, and Capt. Bouck. The training was under the supervision of former Navy Admiral Chuck Zangs at the time. During a short visit by Maj. D. Ewing, F-14 test pilot for Grumman, the young Lt. AliMazandarani was honored to fly with him twice in which Ewing began showing him the capabilities of the air superiority fighter. Ewing went through all the maneuvers he performed during the testing of this magnificent bird once he realized AliMazandarani’s eagerness to learn. These maneuvers and capabilities were not indicated in the F-14 book or syllabus and Ewing encouraged him to perform them without fear. His invaluable teachings along with Mr. M. Holmberg’s, came to his rescue on several occasions saving his plane as well as the encounters he had with enemy fighters during the Iran-Iraq war. Lt. AliMazandarani finished his F-14 tactical training on June 14th, 1978 and his flight time on the F-14 had reached 170 hours in 110 sorties by the time the Iran- Iraq war started.






To be continued . . .
*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

According to Mashregh News a new 1:1 mock up of Borhan fighter was revealed. It is speculated that it is a derivative of earlier Shafaq project. It is a two seated jet fighter that weighs around 2800 kg, can carry 1200 kg of payload and has a speed of 0.65 mach. It has a single 15000 KN jet engine and has a range of 1800 km. It will be mostly used for training purposes and ground attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

rest of article: this is what we was supposed to build in cooperation with Russians, yet after their withdrawal, project has been halted at the design phase, till they find a foreign investor.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AShkan

Part Two 







Isfahan 8th TAB 1977

In early 1979, during the uprising of the Iranian people against the regime and the mayhem within the military, the F-14 pilots, including 1st Lt. F. AliMazandarani, managed to secure the fighters and relative top secret parts and components from the angry crowd and the American personnel stationed in Khatami AFB, home of the Tomcats at the time. The U.S. personnel left the base weeks before The Shah of Iran was overthrown. 
*IRIAF*
Between February 1979 and September 22nd, 1980, like any other Air Force Bases, the F-14s were flying with very low frequency due to post revolution chaos resulting in purging of personnel. The 8th TFB in Esfahan was filled with different political leaders and groups which had turned this base into the most political military base in the country as well as creating an undesirable atmosphere in The IRIAF. Amidst the chaos, 1st Lt. AliMazandarani decided to resign from the air force and while the base commander was against his resignation, he managed to obtain travel permission to H.Q. to submit his resignation and receive approval along with two of the other F-14 pilots on September 9th, 1980. The same night after returning home late, he found a letter requesting his presence at 03:30am in 8th TFB’s Command Post. Prior to the official attack of Iraq on September 22nd, 1980, there had been some light exchange of fire alongside the boarder as well as Iraqi fighters bombing border villages and cities in Iranian territory. Upon his arrival to the command post with his colleague Maj. Shahram Rostami, they were briefed by base commander, Col. H. Sadeghpour, of an operation inside Iraqi territory presumably in response to the bombing of Iranian border villages and cities. The plan was to escort a strike group of F-4 fighters, as they bombed a Fighter Base deep into Iraqi territory. The operation was called Sultan (King) later on. Only a few hours later and just before dawn, with military discharge papers in hand awaiting final approval, AliMazandarani took off alone from Esfahan 8th TFB with WSO 2nd Lt. M. Reza BenJavad Talebi. The flight leader, Major Rostami, encountered an engine after burner blow out in both jet engines during takeoff roll leaving AliMazandarani’s F-14 as the only support fighter. It was on the return of this flight that the infamous report of mass Iraqi ground forces behind the border was given by 1st Lt. AliMazandarani and passed on to The Joint Chiefs of Staff. After this operation, 1st Lt. AliMazandarani began flying regularly until September 22nd, when the war officially started. His discharge papers were never signed and approved.





Elected President Abolhassan Banisadr visiting Air Force H.Q. shaking hands with AliMazandarani

The Tomcats had increased patrol and needed aerial refueling during the day as well as night; however, the night aerial refueling of the F-14 had not been done by the Americans or the Iranians till that time. The 72nd squadron based in 7th TFB, Shiraz was responsible to work on this project; however, on September 14th, 1980, 1st Lt. F. AliMazandarani & Maj. Mohammad Hashem Ale-Agha acting as WSO, successfully managed to refuel at night in one of their night scramble missions and practiced both dry & wet contacts up to 40 times. Upon return, although Maj. Ale-Agha was an IPSO (instructor), however since the flight was not a training mission, 1st Lt. Ali Mazandarani as the commander of the F-14 was reprimanded by Col. H. Sadeghpour, the base commander, for performing actions against standard flight regulations.But when Col. Javad Fakouri, The IRIAF Commander, was informed of the incident, he immediately ordered to schedule all active pilots in Isfahan Air Base for night refueling check, as well as expunging 1st Lt. AliMazandarani’s reprimand from his personnel file.
Three days later, 1st Lt. Fereidoun AliMazandarani, accompanied by WSO 2nd Lt. Ghasem Sultani, fired his first Phoenix missile with enough overtake from 11 Milles in trail of an Iraqi fighter, a MIG- 23 Flogger, and shot it down over the city of Mehran. This would be the first ever fired Phoenix missile in pursuit of an enemy fighter instead of the standard head on firing profile. On September 25th, he and WSO 2nd Lt. Hassan Najafi flying at an altitude of 24,000 feet and a range of 40Km fired two Phoenix missiles simultaneously downing two Iraqi fighters flying below 100 feet near the city of Yasoudj. One of the pilots ejected after seeing his comrade struck, crushing both elbows during ejection due to his haste.
1st Lt. AliMazandarani and WSO 2nd Lt. Ghasem Sultani provided air cover at the border for four F-4E Phantoms on September 30th, when they attacked and bombed Osirak Nuclear Plant successfully. On November 13th, 1980 he got into an intense dogfight with a Mig-23. Both skilled pilots tried to get each other in their respected gun sight and in a proficient display of aerial combat, both aircrafts started descending from 24,000 feet at high speed in a tight spiral scissor like maneuver. 1st Lt. AliMazandarani requested repeated altitude check and an alert at 300 feet above ground level from his WSO, 2nd Lt. Yousef Ahmadi, as he only managed to fire two bursts of gun, while the Iraqi pilot skillfully dodged the 20mm rounds. Once they hit 300 feet, AliMazandarani pulled up and inverted his aircraft observing the Mig-23 crash into the ground before the formidable adversary had a chance to eject. He later requested from the search and rescue team to check the identity of the Iraqi pilot only to find out his rank, a Major, possibly one of the Squadron Commanders of Al-Shoeibieh Base in Iraq.
On November 30th, another two Iraqi fighters were shot down while 2nd Lt. Ebrahim Ansareen acted as his WSO over Khor Mosa in The Persian Gulf, firing two Phoenix missiles. April 24th, 1981 flying with WSO 1st Lt. M. FarrokhNazar, they shot down an Iraqi fighter using their Phoenix missile. In February of 1984, he and WSO 2nd Lt. M. Sezavar Shokouh shot down a Mirage using guns in Northeast of Boubian Island. On March 24th, 1985, while flying with limited amount of fuel (Bingo Fuel), he and his WSO, 1st Lt. Abbas Sanatkar, were ordered to engage 13 aircrafts heading for the numerous loaded oil tankers anchored next to Kharq Island in The Persian Gulf. Outnumbered and low on fuel, they managed to defeat several incoming air to air missiles launched from the escort fighters causing the bombers to drop their load in the water, break formation and return frantically with their escorts. Not being able to pursue the enemy due to extremely low fuel, they returned to hook up with the B-707 tanker. As a result of this engagement at altitudes below 50ft over the water, it was discovered later by the listening posts that 3 out of 13 aircrafts, 2 Mirage F-1EQs & 1 Mig-27, never made it back, most likely crashing into the water. 
During the war, Iraq had devised a few tactics to shoot down Iranian F-14 Tomcats. One of these methods was attacking from several directions with multiple aircrafts. For this type of strategy, the Iraqis would usually use the Mirage F-1EQ and its modern Super Matra air to air missiles, known to the Iranian pilots as the “Red Head” to hunt the F-14s. During Capt. AliMazandarani’s annual stand check flight and CAP mission southwest of Kharq Island area, he and WSO Maj. Javad Shokraei, an F-14 IP (instructor) himself, encountered two groups of three and two Iraqi fighters coming towards them from two different directions. Flying below 50ft over The Persian Gulf and at a speed of 690 Knots, they engaged the fighters when they realized that the Master Arm switch had failed. At the same time the Iraqi fighters had fired six Super Matra missiles towards them. Defenseless, the F-14 had no choice but to perform hard and extensive maneuvers to defeat the missiles. Finally, one of fighters, a Mirage F-1EQ, was seen by the crew to hit the water and shortly after, the rest fled back to their base. On the way back to the base, they were advised by radar and ELINT posts that only 3 out of 5 aircrafts had returned, indicating a second loss of an Iraqi fighter. However, as a result of these maneuverings and high G turns of up to 11.5Gs, Capt. AliMazandarani cracked his helmet from hitting the canopy and ripped his G-Suit due to sudden increase in pressure. Maj. Shokraii suffered neck injury from checking their six o’clock during the maneuvers and had to wear a neck brace for six months after this flight. After retiring, AliMazandarani was forced to perform two extensive knee surgeries on both his knees, minor surgery on his wrists and a heart surgery. Later he lost motor function on the right side of his body that required spinal surgery and a protease implant in his cervical spine, mainly to this and other CAP missions. The crew was not the only casualty of this flight. Non-destructive Inspection (NDI) analysis of the F-14 showed 19 cracks and fractures along the longitudinal axis of the aircraft which put the aircraft out of service for almost two years. 
In early 1987, due to shortage of Phoenix missile coolants & batteries, the IRIAF was in search of suitable and reliable air to air missiles. As a result, Project SEDJIL was initiated. The team, directed by Maj. AliMazandarani, was tasked to find proper missiles available in the Iranian Armed Forces’ arsenal and as a result the MIM-23 Hawk surface to air missile was selected.
Upon the completion of the program, the final test was to be performed on an actual enemy aircraft in form of live test and in real combat scenario. As a result, after 3 days of alert status, Maj. Fereidoun AliMazandarani, scrambled his F-14 from Busher AFB with his Sedjil teammate, WSO 1st Lt. Ebrahim Ansareen, and headed towards the targets over The Persian Gulf. The first missile failed as the ground crew had loaded a bad rocket used for the initial tests on his F-14. Quickly the target was reacquired by radar and locked on. The second Hawk missile (renamed Sedjil) was fired at a range of 20 miles striking its target dead on. The downed fighter was later confirmed to be the French made Super Etendard that was able to carry the infamous Exocet anti ship missiles. After the successful operational test, it was immediately ordered to equip several of the F-14s with the modified MIM-23 missile, renamed SEDJIL.
Col. Fereidoun AliMazandarani flew over 540 sorties and logged in over 2,800 hours of flight time during the 8 year war up to his retirement; a total of over 650 sorties and almost 3,000 hours on The Tomcat, making him one of the most successful pilots during the history of this superior interceptor.





*AliMazandarani saluting the fallen IRIAF commander, Col. Abbas Babaii, K.I.A. by friendly AAA fire.*




*Commemoration of the war, 1993
No. 6, AliMazandarani, No.10, Abolfazl Mehreganfar, No.12, Fazlollah Javidnia, No.14, Jalil Zandi* 

Besides being a fighter pilot, Col. Fereidoun AliMazandarani had been assigned to several other responsibilities during the war period and post war period. These responsibilities included supervising the affairs of the air force personnel (K.I.A., P.O.W. and Veterans) from Jan. 1981 to November 1995, active duty in Operations Training Management, Air Force Operations & Mission Planning Supervisor, Biweekly, alternate operation flights, between Isfahan, Shiraz, Bushehr and Omidiyeh AFBs until the end of the war and afterwards, Special Investigator to some of the air force aircraft accidents during the war, air force permanent representative in the “P.O.W. Support Committee”, The Armed Forces’ representative to the P.O.W. exchange negotiation team, Deputy to the M.I.A. Committee of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Deputy to the Air Force Operations Intelligence (Nov.1995-Mar. 1999), the establish, setup and running of Safat Airlines and chairman of the board of directors from 1993-1999.

Besides being a fighter pilot, Col. Fereidoun AliMazandarani had been assigned to several other responsibilities during the war period and post war period. These responsibilities included supervising the affairs of the air force personnel (K.I.A., P.O.W. and Veterans) from Jan. 1981 to November 1995, active duty in Operations Training Management, Air Force Operations & Mission Planning Supervisor, Biweekly, alternate operation flights, between Isfahan, Shiraz, Bushehr and Omidiyeh AFBs until the end of the war and afterwards, Special Investigator to some of the air force aircraft accidents during the war, air force permanent representative in the “P.O.W. Support Committee”, The Armed Forces’ representative to the P.O.W. exchange negotiation team, Deputy to the M.I.A. Committee of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Deputy to the Air Force Operations Intelligence (Nov.1995-Mar. 1999), the establish, setup and running of Safat Airlines and chairman of the board of directors from 1993-1999.






*Return of P.O.W. F-4 Pilot Davood Sehati





Return of P.O.W. F-4 Pilot Mohammad Seddigh*





*Return of P.O.W. F-4 Pilot Houshang Azhari*

Colonel Fereidoun AliMazandarani served the Iranian Air Force for 27 years and 4 months and was retired from The IRIAF on March 22nd, 1999, thirty two months sooner than the 30 year norm. He is currently country manager for Emirates Industrial Lab in Iran as well as a consultant and inspector for commercial airliners interested in purchasing commercial and cargo planes.





*Retired Col. Fereidoun AliMazandarani*





*Retired AliMazandarani visiting the Antonov Factory*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raazh

mohsen said:


> rest of article: this is what we was supposed to build in cooperation with Russians, yet after their withdrawal, project has been halted at the design phase, till they find a foreign investor.


Why would a foreign investor fund an Iranian defence project ?? or you wanted to say a foreign design partner? The design does look good for a light weight CAS fighter or advance trainer. Just like a Yak-130 or Chinese L15. But Iran should ask for 4-6 squadrons of Su30 from Russia on urgent basis.


----------



## mohsen

raazh said:


> Why would a foreign investor fund an Iranian defence project ?? or you wanted to say a foreign design partner? The design does look good for a light weight CAS fighter or advance trainer. Just like a Yak-130 or Chinese L15. But Iran should ask for 4-6 squadrons of Su30 from Russia on urgent basis.


naturally they will be the co-owner, so it will be their defence project too.
our military is working on another training aircraft, that's why this one has been halted. we just have to wait.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

raazh said:


> Why would a foreign investor fund an Iranian defence project ?? or you wanted to say a foreign design partner? The design does look good for a light weight CAS fighter or advance trainer. Just like a Yak-130 or Chinese L15. But Iran should ask for 4-6 squadrons of Su30 from Russia on urgent basis.


Well apparently building military aircraft has the least priority in our defense strategy for good reasons. 
I think the defense minister was trying to say that the project can be completed subject to enough fund being provided (i.e. there is no technical issues holding it up). 
As Mohsen said, we should wait and see. We have a number of projects currently idle at the 1:1 mockup stage. I'm sure at some point one of them will get the funds required.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Arminkh said:


> Well apparently building military aircraft has the least priority in our defense strategy for good reasons.
> I think the defense minister was trying to say that the project can be completed subject to enough fund being provided (i.e. there is no technical issues holding it up).
> As Mohsen said, we should wait and see. We have a number of projects currently idle at the 1:1 mockup stage. I'm sure at some point one of them will get the funds required.


 except this one, I'm not much agree with the mockup stage.
رونمایی از جنگنده پیشرفته صاعقه ۲

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> except this one, I'm not much agree with the mockup stage.
> 
> I heard it is going to be a two seated version of the current model. We should wait and see if there is any other major changes.


----------



## A.Rafay

Another mockup! No real development, what's next? A mockup of aircraft carrier?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Arminkh said:


> I heard it is going to be a two seated version of the current model. We should wait and see if there is any other major changes.


actually, I was referring to the training aircraft.


> ورونمایی از یک هواپیمای آموزشی تاپایان امسال خبرداد...


----------



## Arminkh

A.Rafay said:


> Another mockup! No real development, what's next? A mockup of aircraft carrier?



1:1 mockups are part of the "real development" the next stage is a flying prototype. But what can you do when there is not enough funds assigned? Iran is currently investing on its tactical missiles, air defense and navy. We usually have good news in one of these fields every other month.

And just so you know, there was actually an air craft carrier mockup built almost 4 month ago. Of course it was only for training purposes.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> actually, I was referring to the training aircraft.



Yeah! I forgot about that. I think it was called "Kosar"


----------



## SQ8

Arminkh said:


> According to Mashregh News a new 1:1 mock up of Borhan fighter was revealed. It is speculated that it is a derivative of earlier Shafaq project. It is a two seated jet fighter that weighs around 2800 kg, can carry 1200 kg of payload and has a speed of 0.65 mach. It has a single 15000 KN jet engine and has a range of 1800 km. It will be mostly used for training purposes and ground attack.



The only project that had actual potential and now even that is dead. A 15000KN jet engine for that aircraft means it is ridiculously underpowered. All things considered, keeping some ally on board would have helped, the airframe at least has great potential but then again, things in Iran arent focused on practicality.


----------



## Stephen Cohen

Iran should focus on its economy and then later on buy Su 30 from Russia


----------



## Arminkh

Oscar said:


> The only project that had actual potential and now even that is dead. A 15000KN jet engine for that aircraft means it is ridiculously underpowered. All things considered, keeping some ally on board would have helped, the airframe at least has great potential but then again, things in Iran arent focused on practicality.



It can cruise at 740 Km/hr. It is more than enough for ground attack and training. It is not a dogfight jet fighter.

Furthermore, I think whoever has outlined Iran's defence strategy has been very wise and practical. Currently the ultimate short term goal for Iran is to build credible deterrence in shortest time possible. Not against its neighbors but against Israel and USA. It is not worth spending time and money on developing jet fighters while it is a no brainer that nothing that Iran can build at this stage would stand a chance against strongest air force in the world. Iran has built enough deterrence against Naval threats in the Persian Gulf and has enough arsenal of ballistic missiles to make Israel think twice before attempting anything stupid. Now it is working on its early warning and air defence systems to increase the potential cost of any air raids. And it is doing it in the fastest and most practical way possible i.e. upgrading or adding to what it already has while developing new systems at the same time.

Following all of the news about Iran for the past 6 years I'm confident that it is only because of the above strategy that today there is a real negotiation happening with 5+1. Otherwise, they had either invaded Iran or bombed our facilities long ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

Stephen Cohen said:


> Iran should focus on its economy and then later on buy Su 30 from Russia



Buying military equipment is never the right choice as they will all become obsolete or grounded in no time when a real war starts. We learned this the hard way during the war with Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SQ8

Arminkh said:


> It can cruise at 740 Km/hr. It is more than enough for ground attack and training. It is not a dogfight jet fighter.
> 
> Furthermore, I think whoever has outlined Iran's defence strategy has been very wise and practical. Currently the ultimate short term goal for Iran is to build credible deterrence in shortest time possible. Not against its neighbors but against Israel and USA. It is not worth spending time and money on developing jet fighters while it is a no brainer that nothing that Iran can build at this stage would stand a chance against strongest air force in the world. Iran has built enough deterrence against Naval threats in the Persian Gulf and has enough arsenal of ballistic missiles to make Israel think twice before attempting anything stupid. Now it is working on its early warning and air defence systems to increase the potential cost of any air raids. And it is doing it in the fastest and most practical way possible i.e. upgrading or adding to what it already has while developing new systems at the same time.
> 
> Following all of the news about Iran for the past 6 years I'm confident that it is only because of the above strategy that today there is a real negotiation happening with 5+1. Otherwise, they had either invaded Iran or bombed our facilities long ago.



As I stated, the airframe itself has all the potential to be a light interceptor as well, but without a suitable powerplant it is limited to ground attack by having no other choice. 

Progress is pointless when the focus is on fantasy projects such as the Qaher or trying to come up with a reverse engineered RQ-180. What is needed is focus on practical projects lie the Shafagh was and yet it seems this has been stalled as well. The IRIAF is in dire need of new platforms to replace its outdated and aging fleet. Ballistic missiles create the potential for either negotiations or the justification of an all out campaign to bomb and destroy the Iranian military via the failure of those negotiations.


----------



## Arminkh

Oscar said:


> As I stated, the airframe itself has all the potential to be a light interceptor as well, but without a suitable powerplant it is limited to ground attack by having no other choice.
> 
> Progress is pointless when the focus is on fantasy projects such as the Qaher or trying to come up with a reverse engineered RQ-180. What is needed is focus on practical projects lie the Shafagh was and yet it seems this has been stalled as well. The IRIAF is in dire need of new platforms to replace its outdated and aging fleet. Ballistic missiles create the potential for either negotiations or the justification of an all out campaign to bomb and destroy the Iranian military via the failure of those negotiations.



Yeah, it would be great to have everything at the same time but the reality is the resources are limited so you need to stick with your strategy and prioritize.

Why do you think Qaher is a fantasy project? That was again a mock up of a project in progress. I have reasons to believe it is an extension of Iran's defence doctrine. Drones are also cheap and practical solution to make up for conventional air force weaknesses for light ground attack and surveillance. They also make a great test bed for manned aircraft. Even USA uses drones for these purposes.

As long as you don't want to invade anyone, Air force will get the last priority. As it is expensive and you should either be able to do it better then your opponent or you are just wasting your time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

Oscar said:


> As I stated, the airframe itself has all the potential to be a light interceptor as well, but without a suitable powerplant it is limited to ground attack by having no other choice.
> 
> Progress is pointless when the focus is on fantasy projects such as the Qaher or trying to come up with a reverse engineered RQ-180. What is needed is focus on practical projects lie the Shafagh was and yet it seems this has been stalled as well. The IRIAF is in dire need of new platforms to replace its outdated and aging fleet. Ballistic missiles create the potential for either negotiations or the justification of an all out campaign to bomb and destroy the Iranian military via the failure of those negotiations.



It's not that easy, we would be more than happy if we could buy a batch of Su-34s or Mig-31s too, but that's not going to happen.

IRIAF itself is doing best thing it can: Upgrading current aircrafts and developing new arms for them, also producing modified version of F-5, aka Saeghe with improved avionics, arms etc, that's the best we can do for now. It's not like we can go out there and select from a variety of fancy aircraft. As far as I know, Iran is working hard to build a well capable Turbofan engine (and it's going well it seems) and since engine is now our main problem, it's going to solve most of the problems, We already produce J-85 engines that are used in F-5s and Saeghe, but it's not a capable engine as you know.

Also, right now, Iran is extremely focused on improving its air defense systems, navy and missile program since they are the easier way to have a detterance. Just in a very few years, I assure you, Iran will have the best air defense system in the region with advantage that all of them are produced inside the country, so we won't have to rely on any foreign country for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SvenSvensonov

Yes, the aspect ratio is off in this picture!

Looks nice, a bit compacted, but a serviceable platform none the less. Still, it would be very problematic to takeoff with that center-line tank. It's a doable project. Not overly ambitious and well within Iran's capabilities. I like it. Hope to see this project actually pan out and enter into service.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

SvenSvensonov said:


> View attachment 155121
> 
> 
> Looks nice, a bit compacted, but a serviceable platform none the less. Still, it would be very problematic to takeoff with that center-line tank. I like it. Hope to see this project actually pan out and enter into service.



I think the aspect ratio of the picture is not correct. It should be a little longer than what it seems in the picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SvenSvensonov

Arminkh said:


> I think the aspect ratio of the picture is not correct. It should be a little longer than what it seems in the picture.



I noticed that too. I think it should look a bit more like this.

M-346 Master





Or similar to the Yak-130 in size and shape.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raazh

Serpentine said:


> As far as I know, Iran is working hard to build a well capable Turbofan engine (and it's going well it seems) and since engine is now our main problem, it's going to solve most of the problems.
> Also, right now, Iran is extremely focused on improving its air defense systems, navy and missile program since they are the easier way to have a detterance. Just in a very few years, I assure you, Iran will have the best air defense system in the region with advantage that all of them are produced inside the country, so we won't have to rely on any foreign country for them.



Trying to develop an indigenous Turbo Fan engine, IMO, will be a naive and unrealistic goal. IF money is not the problem then this is the perfect time for Iran to get anything from Russia. Russia is being cornered by west and they wont mind selling anything RIGHT NOW.

If money is a problem then indeed the priority should be on Air defence, Ballistic and Anti shipping missiles. But for Israeli threat you definitely need a Su30 type of plane with long range, large payload and decent range radar to deter any Israeli strike.


----------



## Arminkh

Iranian Phantom jet strikes the Islamic State in Iraq - IHS Jane's 360

An Iranian McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II jet has struck Islamic State targets in the eastern Iraqi province of Diyala, footage shot by regional media shows.

At least one F-4 is seen conducting a bombing run against ground targets in the footage shot by _Al Jazeera_ , which erroneously identified the aircraft as an Iraqi fighter. Iran and Turkey are the only regional operators of the F-4, and the location of the incident not far from the Iranian border, and Turkey's unwillingness to get involved in the conflict militarily, indicate this to be an Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) aircraft.

While the IRIAF is known to have contributed Sukhoi Su-25 'Frogfoot' ground attack aircraft to the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq (ostensibly donated to the Iraqi Air Force, but believed to be crewed by Iranian pilots), this footage is the first visual evidence of direct IRIAF involvement in the conflict.

The _Al Jazeera_ footage, which was shot on 30 November, shows the IRIAF F-4 supporting Iraqi forces retaking the town of Sa'adiya in what was purported to be the government's largest operation against the Islamic State since June. Its release comes weeks after _IHS Jane's_ reported growing evidence of Iranian involvement in the war in Iraq.

Video footage and photographs shown on social media sites have increasingly been showing Iranian military hardware in the hands of Shia militias fighting in Iraq. This hardware includes the 12.7 mm AM-50 anti-materiel rifle, at least one Iranian-made Safir jeep mounted with a 107 mm multiple rocket launcher (MRL), as well as an Iranian 122 mm HM 20 MRL.

*COMMENT*
While the US-led effort to combat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has been widely publicised by the Department of Defense (DoD) and its coalition allies, Iran's involvement has been altogether more opaque.

Iran was the first country to pledge and deliver military support to Iraq when the Islamic State began its offensive earlier in the year. At the time that the first IRIAF Su-25s arrived over Baghdad in late June, there was much speculation that Iran and the United States may come together in some form of joint operation against the Islamic State. However, the recent détente between the two countries is still in its very early stages, and neither side much relished the prospect of military co-operation to such a degree.

As such, there appear to be two parallel military campaigns being waged against the Islamic State, with the United States and its allies conducting their air campaign over Iraq and Syria, and Iran pursuing its own military agenda in Iraq at the same time. So far, this dual approach does appear to be working (at least in terms of de-conflicting the two military campaigns), but should they happen to cross paths over the coming weeks and months it would no doubt muddy still further an already complicated conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Viking 63

Good Job wipe them out.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

http://01.00ll00.com/iTube/15973681-Iraqi forces reclaim two key towns from ISIL.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Arminkh

Shahryar Hedayati said:


> http://01.00ll00.com/iTube/15973681-Iraqi forces reclaim two key towns from ISIL.mp4


Yeah, nice that's the clip that showed the f-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

awesome job 

one of the most important things here is that we must have iraqi govt's consent over the runs . there is enough sectarian tension going on over there .

Also , if IRIAF wants to use F-4s to suppress ISIS , Tabrizi F-4s are the closest and easiest option (closest due to the fact that Hamedan airbase does not incorporate refuel tankers )

in that case , mid-air refueling should be done which exhausts the crew . we need a temporary F-4 set up here in kermanshah for ex.

@kollang @New @rahi2357 @Serpentine @jack 86000 @1000 @Malik Alashter @Dizer @SOHEIL @Horus @Jungibaaz

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Malik Alashter

haman10 said:


> awesome job
> 
> one of the most important things here is that we must have iraqi govt's consent over the runs . there is enough sectarian tension going on over there .
> 
> Also , if IRIAF wants to use F-4s to suppress ISIS , Tabrizi F-4s are the closest and easiest option .
> 
> in that case , mid-air refueling should be done which exhausts the crew . we need a temporary F-4 set up here in kermanshah for ex.
> 
> @kollang @New @rahi2357 @Serpentine @jack 86000 @1000 @Malik Alashter @Dizer @SOHEIL @Horus @Jungibaaz





Shahryar Hedayati said:


> http://01.00ll00.com/iTube/15973681-Iraqi forces reclaim two key towns from ISIL.mp4


That's the F-4 beautiful old fighter.

Bro @haman10 this is a war against the terrorism it's a world wide one so it should be a responsibilty of the other countries to help Iraqis to get rid of those cockroaches. Turkey should involve in this war too so they don't say shea fighting sunni in iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## haman10

Malik Alashter said:


> That's the F-4 beautiful old fighter.
> 
> Bro @haman10 this is a war against the terrorism it's a world wide one so it should be a responsibilty of the other countries to help Iraqis to get rid of those cockroaches. Turkey should involve in this war too so they don't say shea fighting sunni in iraq.


Thats a very very nice attitude brother .

indeed , this is not just Iraq and Syria Versus the ISIS . this is a war between the whole region and the filthy rats of "islamic" state .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

haman10 said:


> awesome job
> 
> one of the most important things here is that we must have iraqi govt's consent over the runs . there is enough sectarian tension going on over there .
> 
> Also , if IRIAF wants to use F-4s to suppress ISIS , Tabrizi F-4s are the closest and easiest option (closest due to the fact that Hamedan airbase does not incorporate refuel tankers )
> 
> in that case , mid-air refueling should be done which exhausts the crew . we need a temporary F-4 set up here in kermanshah for ex.
> 
> @kollang @New @rahi2357 @Serpentine @jack 86000 @1000 @Malik Alashter @Dizer @SOHEIL @Horus @Jungibaaz


I'm sure it has been coordinated with Iraq's government. I remember in early days when ISIS took Mosoul Iran had moved some fighters close to the border and had gave them strike permission in case ISIS got any closer than 50 Km to the border.
I also saw a clip in news here showing what was claimed to be an Iranian armored division to enter Iraq overnight when ISIS got too close to Arbil couple of months ago. They had pushed ISIS back and then had returned. So I guess a lot is happening behind the scene that we don't know about.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Echo_419

haman10 said:


> awesome job
> 
> one of the most important things here is that we must have iraqi govt's consent over the runs . there is enough sectarian tension going on over there .
> 
> Also , if IRIAF wants to use F-4s to suppress ISIS , Tabrizi F-4s are the closest and easiest option (closest due to the fact that Hamedan airbase does not incorporate refuel tankers )
> 
> in that case , mid-air refueling should be done which exhausts the crew . we need a temporary F-4 set up here in kermanshah for ex.
> 
> @kollang @New @rahi2357 @Serpentine @jack 86000 @1000 @Malik Alashter @Dizer @SOHEIL @Horus @Jungibaaz



Great Job Wipe the Suckers out

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## haman10

Echo_419 said:


> Great Job Wipe the Suckers out


Tnx dear 



Arminkh said:


> I'm sure it has been coordinated with Iraq's government. I remember in early days when ISIS took Mosoul Iran had moved some fighters close to the border and had gave them strike permission in case ISIS got any closer than 50 Km to the border.
> I also saw a clip in news here showing what was claimed to be an Iranian armored division to enter Iraq overnight when ISIS got too close to Arbil couple of months ago. They had pushed ISIS back and then had returned. So I guess a lot is happening behind the scene that we don't know about.


yeah bro ...

i donno why i have the feeling that i know u from somewhere else too , due to the fact that you reside in canada and you have arash kamangir's pic as your avatar 

do we know each other ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

haman10 said:


> Tnx dear
> 
> 
> yeah bro ...
> 
> i donno why i have the feeling that i know u from somewhere else too , due to the fact that you reside in canada and you have arash kamangir's pic as your avatar
> 
> do we know each other ?


Not sure. Which university were you in?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monaspa

very good news. 
waiting for Iranian PGM-s

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kiarash

can someone fix the headline to IRIAF ????

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Come on guys it must be turkey . Iran several time stated that we won't participate in such operations directly. 
We are only support with training planning and logistics


----------



## haman10

JEskandari said:


> Come on guys it must be turkey


seriously ? that was the least informative post ever from ya 

bro , even the USofA confirmed it . and turkey ? are u kidding me ? be happy they are not bombing iraqis instead 



Arminkh said:


> Not sure. Which university were you in?


eh , i was talking abt another forum .

i think i'm mistaken .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Kiarash said:


> can someone fix the headline to IRIAF ????


Good point. I had not noticed it. I don't think I can do it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

JEskandari said:


> . Iran several time stated that we won't participate in such operations* directly*.
> We are *only* support with training planning and logistics

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

haman10 said:


> seriously ? that was the least informative post ever from ya
> 
> bro , even the USofA confirmed it . and turkey ? are u kidding me ? be happy they are not bombing iraqis instead



Come on how can you understimate the effect of uncle Sam slapping at the back of the hand of Recep Tayeb .

Well as far as I'm concerned Iranians official denied any direct involvements.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> seriously ? that was the least informative post ever from ya
> 
> bro , even the USofA confirmed it . and turkey ? are u kidding me ? be happy they are not bombing iraqis instead


How many refugees is Iran hosting Dr. Haman jan?


----------



## Serpentine

xenon54 said:


> How many refugees is Iran hosting Dr. Haman jan?



Between 1.5 to 2 million, mostly Afghans.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## xenon54 out

Serpentine said:


> Between 1.5 to 2 million, mostly Afghans.


I meant regarding Syria and Iraq, since he is accusing us with bombing Arabs.


----------



## Serpentine

xenon54 said:


> I meant regarding Syria and Iraq, since he is accusing us with bombing Arabs.



We also have hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees from gulf war era, but not from recent conflict in Iraq.
We are not a neighbour of Syria, so it's natural if we don't have refugees from Syria. If we had borders with them, situation would be much more different.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xenon54 out

Serpentine said:


> We also have hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees from gulf war era, but not from recent conflict in Iraq.
> We are not a neighbour of Syria, so it's natural if we don't have refugees from Syria. If we had borders with them, situation would be much more different.


Well, Turkey accepted Sunnis, Shias, Alevis, Yezidis, Christians, Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens without any restriction, its quite unfair to say we would bomb them if you consider that Turkey is spending around 4 billion annually for refugees food, education, residing and medical treatment.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

xenon54 said:


> Well, Turkey accepted Sunnis, Shias, Alevis, Yezidis, Christians, Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens without any restriction, its quite unfair to say we would bomb them if you consider that Turkey is spending around 4 billion annually for refugees food, education, residing and medical treatment.


Yes, and I didn't say that at all. But I do believe Erdogan's role in Syria is anything but constructive.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xenon54 out

Serpentine said:


> Yes, and I didn't say that at all. But I do believe Erdogan's role in Syria is anything but constructive.


I agree but i dont think Erdogan would bomb Iraqis or Syrians to be honest, you might think that way since you mentioned him out of nowhere but i would say its far fetched.


----------



## M.harris

Good job keep it up Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Losers are wondering how we have kept our F-4s flying! They just can't believe that we make the parts ourselves!:

Ingenuity keeps Iran’s Vietnam-war-era planes flying in fight against Isis | World news | The Guardian

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## haman10

Arminkh said:


> Losers are wondering how we have kept our F-4s flying! They just can't believe that we make the parts ourselves!:
> 
> Ingenuity keeps Iran’s Vietnam-war-era planes flying in fight against Isis | World news | The Guardian


hilarious 

OMG , the propaganda is so ridiculous that even their reporters are affected by it .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

JEskandari said:


> Come on guys it must be turkey . Iran several time stated that we won't participate in such operations directly.
> We are only support with training planning and logistics


Why should Turkey use half a century old fighters to attack Iraq while she has F-16s which are suitable for such cases? Do you have any brain?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

rmi5 said:


> Why should Turkey use half a century old fighters to attack Iraq while she has F-16s which are suitable for such cases? Do you have any brain?


1- he for sure has more brain than u 

2-you're right since they probably don't like losing yet another plane to a foreign force in the past couple of years :\

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AXO4D

what a fcked up move. shia killing sunni written all over it.
this will increase the wedge between sunni and shia.
what could iran airstrikes with his stone age tech have accomplished which is not being accomplished by US coalition airstrikes.


----------



## SOHEIL

AXO4D said:


> what a fcked up move. shia killing sunni written all over it.
> this will increase the wedge between sunni and shia.
> what could iran airstrikes with his stone age tech have accomplished which is not being accomplished by US coalition airstrikes.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> 1- he for sure has more brain than u
> 
> 2-you're right since they probably don't like losing yet another plane to a foreign force in the past couple of years :\


Its still 2-1 for Turkey.


----------



## haman10

xenon54 said:


> Its still 2-1 for Turkey.


good for turkey , killing a soviet syrian chopper ...

syrian AF is currently stretched up or else , they would probably end your airforce with a couple of runs and thats it 



AXO4D said:


> what a fcked up move. shia killing sunni written all over it.
> this will increase the wedge between sunni and shia.
> what could iran airstrikes with his stone age tech have accomplished which is not being accomplished by US coalition airstrikes.


brace for more baby 

incoming ......

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> good for turkey , killing a soviet syrian chopper ...
> 
> syrian AF is currently stretched up or else , they would probably end your airforce with a couple of runs and thats it


That Syria could down a Turkish plane was just a moments of, lets say, incautiousness, otherwise Syrian Airforce is no match against Turkey, not in Hardware term or training, how would Syria end Turkish Airforce explain pls?

I thought you are going to become a doctor, how about a little bit critical thinking Haman jan?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

xenon54 said:


> Its still 2-1 for Turkey.



It's not a game... It's humans life

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## xenon54 out

SOHEIL said:


> It's not a game... It's humans life


Tell this to your compatriot whos making silly statements here, not promoting anything, just stating facts.


----------



## AXO4D

haman10 said:


> good for turkey , killing a soviet syrian chopper ...
> 
> syrian AF is currently stretched up or else , they would probably end your airforce with a couple of runs and thats it
> 
> 
> 
> incoming ......



 if turkey wanted to invade syria you wouldnt last few hours let alone a day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

xenon54 said:


> I thought you are going to become a doctor, how about a little bit critical thinking Haman jan?


some points mate:

the word "jan" in persian means " as dear as my life" so when i for example call my friend rahi : "rahi jan" means that he is extremely dear to me . i am pretty sure thats not what u mean  

also :



xenon54 said:


> incautiousness


as the incautious as the "sa'ar" crew of zionist entity when hezbollah sunk their boat ? 

how can they be incautious ? u mean their radars were turned off ? :O



xenon54 said:


> , not in Harware term or training


pretty sure that in case of a war , AD systems and missile systems get involved won't they ? 

just a couple of pinpoint BMs on your airfields and kaboom .....



xenon54 said:


> Tell this to your compatriot whos making silly statements here, not promoting anything, just stating facts.


i'm also stating facts . you're not 2-1 ...... you cannot compare the value of a fighter jet to a chopper 



AXO4D said:


> if turkey wanted to invade syria you wouldnt last few hours let alone a day.


 

don't get into grown up discussion .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

AXO4D said:


> if turkey wanted to invade syria you wouldnt last few hours let alone a day.



IRAF operation against ISIS | Page 3

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Daneshmand

rmi5 said:


> Why should Turkey use half a century old fighters to attack Iraq while she has F-16s which are suitable for such cases? Do you have any brain?



There are several reasons:

First as the saying goes, a machine is only as capable as its operator. Can Turkish pilots stand up for the job? Or will they be beaten up on their streets as has been recently reported that Turkish F-16 pilots are being beaten up on the streets of Turkey by Arab diplomats (for example one Turkish F-16 pilot who is actually the Son-in -law of Turkish Chief of Airforce was reported to have his nose broken by a Kuwaiti diplomat on a Turkish street in front of his wife, therefore losing his flying status). 

Secondly an F-4 despite its age, can carry much bigger a bomb load than an F-16. For a ground run mission, bomb load is more important than aerial maneuverability in ground missions.

Thirdly, F-16 is a single engine aircraft. A mechanical failure above enemy territory will cause a huge embarrassment for mission planners as they lose an aircraft and will have to deal now with a captured pilot. F-4 has two engines and therefore, there is less of such a probability.

Fourth, you have to achieve your strategic goals using the tools available. F-16 is not available to Iran, but Iran has been able to achieve its strategic goals by using F-4's. Has Turkey been able to achieve its strategic goals using its F-16's? The answer is clear.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## haman10

Daneshmand said:


> There are several reasons:
> 
> First as the saying goes, a machine is only as capable as its operator. Can Turkish pilots stand up for the job? Or will they be beaten up on their streets as has been recently reported that Turkish F-16 pilots are being beaten up on the streets of Turkey by Arab diplomats (for example one Turkish F-16 pilot who is actually the Son-in -law of Turkish Chief of Airforce was reported to have his nose broken by a Kuwaiti diplomat on a Turkish street in front of his wife, therefore losing his flying status).
> 
> Secondly an F-4 despite its age, can carry much bigger a bomb load than an F-16. For a ground run mission, bomb load is more important than aerial maneuverability in ground missions.
> 
> Thirdly, F-16 is a single engine aircraft. A mechanical failure above enemy territory will cause a huge embarrassment for mission planners as they lose an aircraft and will have to deal now with a captured pilot. F-4 has two engines and therefore, there is less of such a probability.
> 
> Fourth, you have to achieve your strategic goals using the tools available. F-16 is not available to Iran, but Iran has been able to achieve its strategic goals by using F-4's. Has Turkey been able to achieve its strategic goals using its F-16's? The answer is clear.


welcome aboard dadashi

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Daneshmand

haman10 said:


> i'm also stating facts . you're not 2-1 ...... you cannot compare the value of a fighter jet to a chopper
> 
> 
> get yourself some food mate , and literally :
> 
> don't get into grown up discussion .



The aircraft Turkey lost was a high value strategic one, an RF-4E. A dedicated recon and electronic warfare aircraft. Choppers and fighters can not be compared to such a loss.



haman10 said:


> welcome aboard dadashi



Thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> some points mate:
> 
> the word "jan" in persian means " as dear as my life" so when i for example call my friend rahi : "rahi jan" means that he is extremely dear to me . i am pretty sure thats not what u mean


We have the same word with same meaning in Turkish haman jan. 



> also :
> 
> 
> as the incautious as the "sa'ar" crew of zionist entity when hezbollah sunk their boat ?
> 
> how can they be incautious ? u mean their radars were turned off ? :O


We didnt thought that Syrians would shoot down without warning and thats why we did the same from that point with their Aircrafts.
The missiles came from Russian base on Mediterranian coast, but thats another story too.




> pretty sure that in case of a war , AD systems and missile systems get involved won't they ?
> 
> just a couple of pinpoint BMs on your airfields and kaboom .....


Yeah like this was just for decoration. 

NATO missile defence system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

C'mon man give it up are you really saying that Syria would stand a chance against Turkey in any war scenario?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> We have the same word with same meaning in Turkish haman jan.
> 
> 
> We didnt thought that Syrians would shoot down without warning and thats why we did the same from that point with their Aircrafts.
> The missiles came from Russian base on Mediterranian coast, but thats another story too.
> 
> Yeah like this was just for decoration.
> 
> C'mon man give it up are you really saying that Syria would stand a chance against Turkey in any war scenario?



Though your post is not directed to me, but I would like to reply to it.

You openly subvert a foreign country and openly call for the dissolution of its state and then send in a spy plane and you expect they don't shoot down the aircraft? I guess this only happens in Turkish logic.

The missile came from Russia in the form of Pantsyr-1 system that Syria had bought from Russia. The Turkish aircraft had come from US which Turkey had got as part of NATO aid during the cold war. 

Yes, do hide behind the NATO while you throw stones at your neighbors. That is so manly of you. By the way if Turkey is so strong then why didn't you just jump in to remove Assad? Oh, I see. NATO over ruled you. Can you do anything without the permission of NATO? Anything at all?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## haman10

xenon54 said:


> We have the same word with same meaning in Turkish haman jan


Thanks xenon jan , i appreciate that 



xenon54 said:


> We didnt thought that Syrians would shoot down without warning and thats why we did the same from that point with their Aircrafts.


its not important what you thought , were the radars on or off ?

thats what matters  if u make the bold claim that they were turned off , its another story .

but if they were on , its a FAIL no matter what 

i guess someone should pay for disrespecting others borders , not ?



xenon54 said:


> The missiles came from Russian base on Mediterranian coast, but thats another story too.


donno about that , and i think thats a ridiculous claim , but even if its true , why did turkey react so emotionally then ?




xenon54 said:


> C'mon man give it up are you really saying that Syria would stand a chance against Turkey in any war scenario?


pretty much dear 

i think in a normal situation , a 2009 syrian airforce can kick turkey's 2014 airforce in the butt

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> You openly subvert a foreign country and openly call for the dissolution of its state and then send in a spy plane and you expect they don't shoot down the aircraft? I guess this only happens in Turkish logic.


The plane was on a mission over Cyprus and accidentally entered Syrian airspace.



> The missile came from Russia in the form of Pantsyr-1 system that Syria had bought from Russia. The Turkish aircraft had come from US which Turkey had got as part of NATO aid during the cold war.


I have no clue why this is relevant.



> Yes, do hide behind the NATO while you throw stones at your neighbors. That is so manly of you. By the way if Turkey is so strong then why didn't you just jump in to remove Assad? Oh, I see. NATO over ruled you. Can you do anything without the permission of NATO? Anything at all?


Im not supporting Erdogans policy about Syria but lets talk about facts, Turkey doesnt need NATO at all against Syria and Assads army is no match it barely survives against rag tags with Iranian and Russian support so pls leave this ridiculous talk.
Erdogan surely wants to remove Assad but not at this cost, another point is that people in Turkey would heavily oppose a war.
I would also like to remind you that Turkey already threatened Syria with war in 90s Where Hafez Assad in return send Apo out of country.

Cyprus invasion was certainly against NATO interest which Turkey got sanctioned for but there are still 30000 Turkish troops on the island with a de-facto independent state.




haman10 said:


> pretty much dear
> 
> i think in a normal situation , a 2009 syrian airforce can kick turkey's 2014 airforce in the butt


I will leave the rest unanswered since this sentence alone shows how much sense it makes to have a discussion with you.

Just for the record, there are only three Airforces which can be counted as powerful in ME, you know which one no need to explain it. 

Take care Haman Jan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

xenon54 said:


> Take care Haman Jan.


nice talk dear 

always leave the questions unanswered cause that really helps you in making your point 

take care mate

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> nice talk dear
> 
> always leave the questions unanswered cause that really helps you in making your point
> 
> take care mate


Nah its just that this discussion doesnt make sense and the fact that PDF got another update where you cant partially quote anymore, just too lazy to make such an effort for obvious answers. 

BTW: @Daneshmand welcome.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

xenon54 said:


> Nah its just that this discussion doesnt make sense


that maybe your feeling , not true on my side 



xenon54 said:


> you cant partially quote anymor


you still can do that 

just left click and drag on the text

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> you still can do that
> 
> just left click and drag on the text


Does the ''Quote'' button pop up when you do this? It doesnt work on me anymore, it kinda sucks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> The plane was on a mission over Cyprus and accidentally entered Syrian airspace.
> 
> 
> I have no clue why this is relevant.
> 
> 
> Im not supporting Erdogans policy about Syria but lets talk about facts, Turkey doesnt need NATO at all against Syria and Assads army is no match it barely survives against rag tags with Iranian and Russian support so pls leave this ridiculous talk.
> Erdogan surely wants to remove Assad but not at this cost, another point is that people in Turkey would heavily oppose a war.
> I would also like to remind you that Turkey already threatened Syria with war in 90s Where Hafez Assad in return send Apo out of country.
> 
> Cyprus invasion was certainly against NATO interest which Turkey got sanctioned for but there are still 30000 Turkish troops on the island with a de-facto independent state.
> 
> 
> 
> I will leave the rest unanswered since this sentence alone shows how much sense it makes to have a discussion with you.
> 
> Just for the record, there are only three Airforces which can be counted as powerful in ME, you know which one no need to explain it.



1- Accidentally?. I see now. Well, then it follows it. The shoot down was also accidental. Why you are taking it so personally when it was all an accident. 

2- Because you brought it in, dear. You said their missile was Russian made. So was your plane. 

3- Well, Erdogan's policy has been condemned both inside and outside Turkey. If Turkey does not need NATO, then why Turkey is all the time begging NATO for intervention in Syria. Just jump in and see what happens to your "uber" military. 

You do not want to pay the cost for your dreams and strategic vision but you love your dreams so much that some one else should pay for them. Is this what you are saying, because your logic is so twisted. So who should pay this cost in your opinion? NATO that you do not need? Iran? Russia? China? Who exactly? For the love of your dreams. 

4- Cyprus situation had nothing to do with NATO. It was blue on blue. In house fighting. The truth is, Turkey can not move a millimeter without first getting permission from Brussels. Syria situation proved this beyond any doubt. And many countries threatened many countries in the course of history. Only few countries succeeded in implementing their strategic visions. We know what group Turkey belongs to. So please, do not push me to spell it out for you.

5- An airforce that can not support a state's strategic planning is only for decoration. Just like jewelry that women wear and take pride in. It has no real function. It is only there to pump some air into immature ego balloons. Nothing more. Just for kids like you to show off on internet forums. A ultra expensive show off.



xenon54 said:


> BTW: @Daneshmand welcome.



Thank you Xenon.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> 1- Accidentally?. I see now. Well, then it follows it. The shoot down was also accidental. Why you are taking it so personally when it was all an accident.
> 
> 2- Because you brought it in, dear. You said their missile was Russian made. So was your plane.
> 
> 3- Well, Erdogan's policy has been condemned both inside and outside Turkey. If Turkey does not need NATO, then why Turkey is all the time begging NATO for intervention in Syria. Just jump in and see what happens to your "uber" military.
> 
> You do not want to pay the cost for your dreams and strategic vision but you love your dreams so much that some one else should pay for them. Is this what you are saying, because your logic is so twisted. So who should pay this cost in your opinion? NATO that you do not need? Iran? Russia? China? Who exactly? For the love of your dreams.
> 
> 4- Cyprus situation had nothing to do with NATO. It was blue on blue. In house fighting. The truth is, Turkey can not move a millimeter without first getting permission from Brussels. Syria situation proved this beyond any doubt. And many countries threatened many countries in the course of history. Only few countries succeeded in implementing their strategic visions. We know what group Turkey belongs to. So please, do not push me to spell it out for you.
> 
> 5- An airforce that can not support a state's strategic planning is only for decoration. Just like jewelry that women wear and take pride in. It has no real function. It is only there to pump some air into immature ego balloons. Nothing more. Just for kids like you to show off on internet forums. A ultra expensive show off.


1. Tit for Tat its that easy, its not unusual that aircrafts violate airspaces but shooting down without warning on the other hand is.

2. I pointed out that the missile came probably from a Russian base in Syria, the origin of Hardware is irrelevant.

3. Already explained it here.



> Im not supporting Erdogans policy about Syria but lets talk about facts, Turkey doesnt need NATO at all against Syria and Assads army is no match it barely survives against rag tags with Iranian and Russian support so pls leave this ridiculous talk.
> Erdogan surely wants to remove Assad but not at this cost, another point is that people in Turkey would heavily oppose a war.
> I would also like to remind you that Turkey already threatened Syria with war in 90s Where Hafez Assad in return send Apo out of country.
> 
> Source: IRAF operation against ISIS | Page 4



4. And thats why Turkey got sanctioned by west? Spell out whatever you think im curious.

5. Now your starting with name callings, Syria also thought our Airforce was just a decoration with fatal results.


----------



## waz

To hell with such vermin. I hope everyone bombs them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

Xenon,

1- Well, this is due to a technical issue. The new Russian AD systems use artificial intelligence and are completely automated. They just send a brief radio transmission to the pilot in Russian "готовы?" and then launch their missiles. 

2- It is my understanding that the Turkish aircraft had also come from a NATO base, much like the case of the Syrian missile from a Russian base.

3- Already explained.

4- Yes, not sanctioned actually. Turkish Central Bank was not black listed or any such thing. Just some NATO aid was delayed for a while. When you fight with your buddy who pays and loans you money for your lifestyle then it is all natural for your buddy to slap you on the wrist.

5- There is no name calling here. Only factual discussion. Turkey also thought Syrian AD to be a decoration with devastating results. It cuts both ways. But the question remains, what Turkey achieved strategically with its air force?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xenon54 out

1. Well it is what it is, noone needs to whine about the consequences then. 

2. The jet came from a Turkish base piloted by a Turkish pilot.

4. Also selling of military hardware was sactioned.

5. Calling someone a little kid who you barely know is name calling in my opinion. 

And what do you think what Airforce is for, to bomb the country you dont like? A Airforce is more for the defence of your Airspace except your a Superpower like US but for country in size of ours it isnt the case, economic and political power is much more important for a strategic prevalence, thats why US is sanctioning Iran and EU - Russia, booth countrys feel the pain of embargos which is much more effective than a actual war.


----------



## rmi5

haman10 said:


> 1- he for sure has more brain than u


 No one with brain become


> 2-you're right since they probably don't like losing yet another plane to a foreign force in the past couple of years :\





Daneshmand said:


> There are several reasons:
> 
> First as the saying goes, a machine is only as capable as its operator. Can Turkish pilots stand up for the job? Or will they be beaten up on their streets as has been recently reported that Turkish F-16 pilots are being beaten up on the streets of Turkey by Arab diplomats (for example one Turkish F-16 pilot who is actually the Son-in -law of Turkish Chief of Airforce was reported to have his nose broken by a Kuwaiti diplomat on a Turkish street in front of his wife, therefore losing his flying status).
> 
> Secondly an F-4 despite its age, can carry much bigger a bomb load than an F-16. For a ground run mission, bomb load is more important than aerial maneuverability in ground missions.
> 
> Thirdly, F-16 is a single engine aircraft. A mechanical failure above enemy territory will cause a huge embarrassment for mission planners as they lose an aircraft and will have to deal now with a captured pilot. F-4 has two engines and therefore, there is less of such a probability.
> 
> Fourth, you have to achieve your strategic goals using the tools available. F-16 is not available to Iran, but Iran has been able to achieve its strategic goals by using F-4's. Has Turkey been able to achieve its strategic goals using its F-16's? The answer is clear.


It seems that being stupid, having zero knowledge and being a troll is in the DNA of some specific people.
bunch of garbages and made up stories, but have you ever tried to think if phantom is better than f16 in targetting ground targets, and reliability, why they designed f-16? Do you think US air force engineers are as stupid as you?
phantom was good for her era which is half a century ago, but no sane person would choose it over any 4th generation fighter for attacking ground targets.


----------



## gangsta_rap

Taking matters into their own hands, after seeing how _selective_ the U.S was in its targeting ISIS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daneshmand

rmi5 said:


> It seems that being stupid, having zero knowledge and being a troll is in the DNA of some specific people.
> bunch of garbages and made up stories, but have you ever tried to think if phantom is better than f16 in targetting ground targets, and reliability, why they designed f-16? Do you think US air force engineers are as stupid as you?
> phantom was good for her era which is half a century ago, but no sane person would choose it over any 4th generation fighter for attacking ground targets.



The only one who is stupid is you and your DNA. The reason F-16 was designed was not reliability nor attacking ground targets. F-16 came out of a fierce philosophical debate about air to air combat within Pentagon bureaucracy during 1960's. A group of people spearheaded by a talented fighter pilot/engineer by the name of John Boyd who had developed the energy–maneuverability theory (E-M theory), convinced the Pentagon to develop two fighter designs based on his theory of air to air combat. The expensive design became known as F-15 and the cheaper design became F-16. It had nothing to do with ground missions. Your ignorance is really pathetic. F-4 carries more ammo and its twin engine design makes it ideal for such missions where no air to air combat is likely to occur.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> 1. Well it is what it is, noone needs to whine about the consequences then.
> 
> 2. The jet came from a Turkish base piloted by a Turkish pilot.
> 
> 4. Also selling of military hardware was sactioned.
> 
> 5. Calling someone a little kid who you barely know is name calling in my opinion.
> 
> And what do you think what Airforce is for, to bomb the country you dont like? A Airforce is more for the defence of your Airspace except your a Superpower like US but for country in size of ours it isnt the case, economic and political power is much more important for a strategic prevalence, thats why US is sanctioning Iran and EU - Russia, booth countrys feel the pain of embargos which is much more effective than a actual war.



1- That is right. Turkey should not have made a big deal out of it by going to Brussels and begging for NATO AD to be placed on Turkey in order to protect Turkey against Syrian AF and BM. 

2- The missile came from a Syrian base operated by a Syrian soldier.

4- My dear. Was the slap on the wrist so hard? Is it still burning? What did Turkey do to punish NATO for such a harsh slap on the wrist? Did Turkey leave NATO and started a nuclear program in tandem with a ballistic missile program?

5- Kid is actually a cool name in my dictionary but if you do not like it, then I sincerely apologize. 

The air force is there not to bomb another nation but to protect a nation strategically and if that air force is a good air force then project strategic vision of the state beyond the borders. Yes, a super power like US is doing that, no doubt. But so is Iranian air force. But Turkish air force has proved to be at best a tactical one and at worst just a decoration. And it is good to see you are conceding on this point. 

As for political and economic power, will you explain to us here what Turkey achieved economically or politically out of its policies regarding Syria? Turkey spent almost all of its political capital on this issue and got nothing in return. Economically Turkey will have to deal with a war ravaged country on its border and millions of refugees for decades to come. In fact lots of Turkish analysts already have warned that Turkey is on its way to become Pakistanized, referring to Pakistan's role in Afghanistan and the disastrous effects that policy has had on Pakistan. As for sanctions on Iran, it is too soon to count your chickens. Let's see who will budge in the end.



rmi5 said:


> You are another fool. F-15 very well serves for air superiority missions, while F-16 is very good at attacking ground targets, but it is obviously not as good as F-15 in air to air combat. Next time you wanted to write some garbage, make sure to write it only for your fool fellows, not for non-Iranians.



You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

Daneshmand said:


> You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.




Another fool who thinks phantom is better than F-16 
I just wasted my time on you.


----------



## Daneshmand

rmi5 said:


> Another fool who thinks phantom is better than F-16
> I just wasted my time on you.



Yes, for such ground missions that Iran is conducing right now indeed F-4 is better since its twin engine design protects it against unfortunate engine failures and its capability to carry much more bombs and ammo than F-16 means more firepower can be delivered. By the way as I told in my first reply to you, a machine is only as capable as its operator, in this case a pilot. I am not sure, Turkish pilots can handle such missions whether in support of Isis or against them, as the situation on the ground has proved. So your point is moot. Even if Turkey had F-15E, it still could not use it to its strategic advantage. Since the Turkish air force is not a strategic force, it is just a decoration. A box of jewelry. Nothing more. Meanwhile IRIAF will continue to implement Iran's strategic plans in the region, while Turkish air force can play with its toys such as F-16.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> 1- That is right. Turkey should not have made a big deal out of it by going to Brussels and begging for NATO AD to be placed on Turkey in order to protect Turkey against Syrian AF and BM.
> 
> 2- The missile came from a Syrian base operated by a Syrian soldier.
> 
> 4- My dear. Was the slap on the wrist so hard? Is it still burning? What did Turkey do to punish NATO for such a harsh slap on the wrist? Did Turkey leave NATO and started a nuclear program in tandem with a ballistic missile program?
> 
> 5- Kid is actually a cool name in my dictionary but if you do not like it, then I sincerely apologize.
> 
> The air force is there not to bomb another nation but to protect a nation strategically and if that air force is a good air force then project strategic vision of the state beyond the borders. Yes, a super power like US is doing that, no doubt. But so is Iranian air force. But Turkish air force has proved to be at best a tactical one and at worst just a decoration. And it is good to see you are conceding on this point.
> 
> As for political and economic power, will you explain to us here what Turkey achieved economically or politically out of its policies regarding Syria? Turkey spent almost all of its political capital on this issue and got nothing in return. Economically Turkey will have to deal with a war ravaged country on its border and millions of refugees for decades to come. In fact lots of Turkish analysts already have warned that Turkey is on its way to become Pakistanized, referring to Pakistan's role in Afghanistan and the disastrous effects that policy has had on Pakistan. As for sanctions on Iran, it is too soon to count your chickens. Let's see who will budge in the end.
> 
> 
> 
> You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.


1. I believe the Nato AD is more connected to T-Loramids tender rather than a real treat from Syria.

4. Why schould Turkey punish Nato?

5. Did you just compare Iranian Airforce to US airforce with its international missions? Let me tell you something, only because Iraq allowed Iran to bomb target doesnt mean your airforce is somehow special.

You asked what Turkish airforce is doing to protect our interests, well Turkey was bombing pkk camps in north Iraq since years, nothing special at all.

I know where this is going, im sure you also believe Iran has the best airforce in ME.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Use that long range attack UAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

Daneshmand said:


> Yes, for such ground missions that Iran is conducing right now indeed F-4 is better since its twin engine design protects it against unfortunate engine failures and its capability to carry much more bombs and ammo than F-16 means more firepower can be delivered. By the way as I told in my first reply to you, a machine is only as capable as its operator, in this case a pilot. I am not sure, Turkish pilots can handle such missions whether in support of Isis or against them, as the situation on the ground has proved. So your point is moot. Even if Turkey had F-15E, it still could not use it to its strategic advantage. Since the Turkish air force is not a strategic force, it is just a decoration. A box of jewelry. Nothing more. Meanwhile IRIAF will continue to implement Iran's strategic plans in the region, while Turkish air force can play with its toys such as F-16.


@cabatli_53 @gambit 
Bunch of garbage out of brain farts.
In contrast to your stupid world, the ability of a pilot is highly dependent on his flight hours, trainings he receives, the jet he uses, .... Even thinking that an Iranian pilot with a phantom is better than a turkish(NATO) pilot, is an unbelievable joke, which shows the extent of your unimaginable stupidity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> 1. I believe the Nato AD is more connected to T-Loramids tender rather than a real treat from Syria.
> 
> 4. Why schould Turkey punish Nato?
> 
> 5. Did you just compare Iranian Airforce to US airforce with its international missions? Let me tell you something, only because Iraq allowed Iran to bomb target doesnt mean your airforce is somehow special.
> 
> You asked what Turkish airforce is doing to protect our interests, well Turkey was bombing pkk camos in north Iraq since decades, nothing special at all.
> 
> I know where this is going, im sure you also believe Iran has the best airforce in ME.



1- Well, that was not what it was reported. We have to be factual here if we want to have a meaningful discussion. Turkey had explicitly had demanded and in fact called for an emergency meeting of NATO and demanded to be provided AD by NATO.

4- Since they had "sanctioned" you right? That is what you said. I did not claim that. I said it was an inhouse brawl. You implied it was more serious than that. 

5- Yes, I did. An air force is just a tool. Nothing more. The purpose of that tool is to do a job. In this case strategic support for its state. US air force is doing that. Iranian air force is doing that. Turkish air force has failed to do its job. 

Well, officially Iraq has not allowed Iran to bomb anywhere. Officially Iraq has denied Iranian aircrafts have conducted missions in Iraq. And officially Iran has denied everything and yet nothing has been denied. This is their strategy. Like it or not, it is theirs and not NATO's strategy.

Oh, you mean you were using your air force against your own people. I do not know what to say to this one. I just know that air force should not do the job of police. And no, such police work does not quality an airfoce as a strategic force. 

No I do not think Iran has the best AF in middle east. Iranian AF is badly in demand for new aircrafts whether by purchasing from Russia or China or by developing indigenous designs. But this does not mean, that Iranian AF is asleep. They are well aware of their responsibility and where there is lack of equipment, the fill the gap with bravery and planning. Things that can not be said about many other AF's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xenon54 out

rmi5 said:


> @cabatli_53 @gambit
> Bunch of garbage out of brain farts.
> In contrast to your stupid world, the ability of a pilot is highly dependent on his flight hours, trainings he receives, the jet he uses, .... Even thinking that an Iranian pilot with a phantom is better than a turkish(NATO) pilot, is an unbelievable joke, which shows the extent of your unimaginable stupidity.


Bro i seriously dont know what to say anymore, hes trying to make fun of Turkish airforce which is among the strongest in ME among Israeli and Saudi and comparing the capabilitys of Iranian Airforce only to those of US airforce, i seriously dont beleive that Iranian with its ancient aircrafts can be considered strong, at least not in modern warfare.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

rmi5 said:


> @cabatli_53 @gambit
> Bunch of garbage out of brain farts.
> In contrast to your stupid world, the ability of a pilot is highly dependent on his flight hours, trainings he receives, the jet he uses, .... Even thinking that an Iranian pilot with a phantom is better than a turkish(NATO) pilot, is an unbelievable joke, which shows the extent of your unimaginable stupidity.



You have called your friends to save you. But let me tell you that no body can save you from truth.

The Turkish pilots can not even protect themselves against Arab diplomats on Turkish streets and get beaten up in front of their wives by Arab diplomats. Go google and see for yourself. 

Turkish pilots have failed to implement Turkish strategic vision in the area. Iranian pilots have done that. Actions speak louder than words. The situation on the ground proves this. 

It is not about who is better and who has the "uber" jets. It is about who gets the job done. It is obviously IRIAF. Turkish air force is only for decoration purposes with no strategic value. Whatsoever.



xenon54 said:


> Bro i seriously dont know what to say anymore, hes trying to make fun of Turkish airforce which is among the strongest in ME among Israeli and Saudi and comparing the capabilitys of Iranian Airforce only to those of US airforce, i seriously dont beleive that Iranian with its ancient aircrafts can be considered strong, at least not in modern warfare.



Your belief and prejudice is not important. The important thing is the facts. The fact is IRIAF is doing its strategic job while the Turkish airforce is incapable in this regard.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> 1- Well, that was not what it was reported. We have to be factual here if we want to have a meaningful discussion. Turkey had explicitly had demanded and in fact called for an emergency meeting of NATO and demanded to be provided AD by NATO.
> 
> 4- Since they had "sanctioned" you right? That is what you said. I did not claim that. I said it was an inhouse brawl. You implied it was more serious than that.
> 
> 5- Yes, I did. An air force is just a tool. Nothing more. The purpose of that tool is to do a job. In this case strategic support for its state. US air force is doing that. Iranian air force is doing that. Turkish air force has failed to do its job.
> 
> Well, officially Iraq has not allowed Iran to bomb anywhere. Officially Iraq has denied Iranian aircrafts have conducted missions in Iraq. And officially Iran has denied everything and yet nothing has been denied. This is their strategy. Like it or not, it is theirs and not NATO's strategy.
> 
> Oh, you mean you were using your air force against your own people. I do not know what to say to this one. I just know that air force should not do the job of police. And no, such police work does not quality an airfoce as a strategic force.
> 
> No I do not think Iran has the best AF in middle east. Iranian AF is badly in demand for new aircrafts whether by purchasing from Russia or China or by developing indigenous designs. But this does not mean, that Iranian AF is asleep. They are well aware of their responsibility and where there is lack of equipment, the fill the gap with bravery and planning. Things that can not be said about many other AF's.




Seriously dude a discussion with you is tiring your twisting my words and trying to imply how much superior Iranian airforce is which doesnt even possess modern fighters, just another delusional member nothing more.


----------



## rmi5

xenon54 said:


> Bro i seriously dont know what to say anymore, hes trying to make fun of Turkish airforce which is among the strongest in ME among Israeli and Saudi and comparing the capabilitys of Iranian Airforce only to those of US airforce, i seriously dont beleive that Iranian with its ancient aircrafts can be considered strong, at least not in modern warfare.


Iranian airforce is a joke. They only have 2 operational squadron of F-14, which are over 3 decades old, and I doubt if they can even tolerate 3G aka they are jokes. Their next option is Mig-29 which are second hand old monkey version(Soviet downgraded equipments were called monkey version) and not upgraded versions. Basically they are another jokes. They have no Awacs either. They have no bomber either. rest of their fleet are a couple of half a century old F-4s and F-5s. IRIAF is not even top 5 in the middle east.


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> Seriously dude a discussion with you is tiring your twisting my words and trying to imply how much superior Iranian airforce is which doesnt even possess modern fighters, just another delusional member nothing more.



Well, it is because you are not answering the question and go on rumbling about your "uber F-16". What Turkish airforce has achieved strategically?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

Daneshmand said:


> You have called your friends to save you. But let me tell you that no body can save you from truth.
> 
> The Turkish pilots can not even protect themselves against Arab diplomats on Turkish streets and get beaten up in front of their wives by Arab diplomats. Go google and see for yourself.
> 
> Turkish pilots have failed to implement Turkish strategic vision in the area. Iranian pilots have done that. Actions speak louder than words. The situation on the ground proves this.
> 
> It is not about who is better and who has the "uber" jets. It is about who gets the job done. It is obviously IRIAF. Turkish air force is only for decoration purposes with no strategic value. Whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> Your belief and prejudice is not important. The important thing is the facts. The fact is IRIAF is doing its strategic job while the Turkish airforce is incapable in this regard.


Bunch of garbage. The two persons that I have mentioned, are military professionals, and one of them has been US air force. I just mentioned them, in the case that they want to teach you something.
BTW, I already mocked you enough, they can also enjoy your insightful comments !!!


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> Well, it is because you are not answering the question and go on rumbling about your "uber F-16". What Turkish airforce has achieved strategically?


Ok let me play the same game, we are bombing pkk in north iraq since years, what did Iranian Airforce archieved strategically?


----------



## Daneshmand

rmi5 said:


> Iranian airforce is a joke. They only have 2 operational squadron of F-14, which are over 3 decades old, and I doubt if they can even tolerate 3G aka they are jokes. Their next option is Mig-29 which are second hand old monkey version(Soviet downgraded equipments were called monkey version) and not upgraded versions. Basically they are another jokes. They have no Awacs either. They have no bomber either. rest of their fleet are a couple of half a century old F-4s and F-5s. IRIAF is not even top 5 in the middle east.



It does not matter. What matters is that IRIAF has the balls to get the job done. Turkish AF meanwhile is a joke that can not even protect its pilots who are taking their wives to hospital and get beaten up by Arab diplomats on Turkish streets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

Daneshmand said:


> It does not matter. What matters is that IRIAF has the balls to get the job done. Turkish AF meanwhile is a joke that can not even protect its pilots who are taking their wives to hospital and get beaten up by Arab diplomats on Turkish streets.


What the hell are you talking about? bunch of non-sense lies?
In reality, it is Iranian air force pilots who will be killed in their own country, if they raise their voice:
Nader Jahanbani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Amir Hossein Rabii - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> Ok let me play the same game, we are bombing pkk in north iraq since years, what did Iranian Airforce archieved strategically?



And what you achieved strategically? Nothing. The Kurds in Turkey today are even angrier than they were years ago. The same Turkish air force that was bombing Kurds has refused to bomb Isis in Kobani right at the border of Turkey where US has to fly missions from faraway AC. In fact the Turkish AF behavior in this regard not only has achieved nothing strategic outside the borders of Turkey but has had a negative effect inside the Turkey by making Kurds angry. 

As for Iranian AF, they are supporting Iran's strategic plan for Iraq and Syria as defined by Iranian state. I am sure, you read the news and you know where Iran stands with regard to these two countries and where Turkey stands.



rmi5 said:


> What the hell are you talking about? bunch of non-sense lies?
> In reality, it is Iranian air force pilots who will be killed in their own country, if they raise their voice:
> Nader Jahanbani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Amir Hossein Rabii - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Yes, anybody who tries to subvert and try to bring about a military coup will be eliminated. Iran is not Turkey where every now and then its military rebels and concurs its own country in acts of mutiny. In Iran military officers who even dream about such action are fast forwarded to the next world. But they are handled by Iranians. No Arab diplomat can beat up an Iranian fighter pilot in front of his wife and get away with it. As it happens in Turkey.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> And what you achieved strategically? Nothing. The Kurds in Turkey today are even angrier than they were years ago. The same Turkish air force that was bombing Kurds has refused to bomb Isis in Kobani right at the border of Turkey where US has to fly missions from faraway AC. In fact the Turkish AF behavior in this regard not only has achieved nothing strategic outside the borders of Turkey but has had a negative effect inside the Turkey by making Kurds angry.
> 
> As for Iranian AF, they are supporting Iran's strategic plan for Iraq and Syria as defined by Iranian state. I am sure, you read the news and you know where Iran stands with regard to these two countries and where Turkey stands.


Yeah wasting billions on Assad and Hamas, Syria ruined Hamas the same as always, what a great strategy, and what exactly did Iran archieve till now? 



Daneshmand said:


> It does not matter. What matters is that IRIAF has the balls to get the job done. Turkish AF meanwhile is a joke that can not even protect its pilots who are taking their wives to hospital and get beaten up by Arab diplomats on Turkish streets.


Finaly showing your real intention, just another Iran stroo00nk hurrr durrr talk.


----------



## Daneshmand

xenon54 said:


> Yeah wasting billions on Assad and Hamas, Syria ruined Hamas the same as always, what a great strategy, and what exactly did Iran archieve till now?
> 
> 
> Finaly showing your real intention, just another Iran stroo00nk hurrr durrr talk.



Just like Turkey wasting billions on Isis. Has Turkey stopped buying oil from Isis or the deal is still on? 

I am just stating the facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

Daneshmand said:


> And what you achieved strategically? Nothing. The Kurds in Turkey today are even angrier than they were years ago. The same Turkish air force that was bombing Kurds has refused to bomb Isis in Kobani right at the border of Turkey where US has to fly missions from faraway AC. In fact the Turkish AF behavior in this regard not only has achieved nothing strategic outside the borders of Turkey but has had a negative effect inside the Turkey by making Kurds angry.
> 
> As for Iranian AF, they are supporting Iran's strategic plan for Iraq and Syria as defined by Iranian state. I am sure, you read the news and you know where Iran stands with regard to these two countries and where Turkey stands.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, anybody who tries to subvert and try to bring about a military coup will be eliminated. Iran is not Turkey where every now and then its military rebels and concurs its own country in acts of mutiny. In Iran military officers who even dream about such action are fast forwarded to the next world. But they are handled by Iranians. No Arab diplomat can beat up an Iranian fighter pilot in front of his wife and get away with it. As it happens in Turkey.


Another garbage response. When Jahanbani committed a coup?!!!
Spare me of your BS.


----------



## xenon54 out

Daneshmand said:


> Just like Turkey wasting billions on Isis. Has Turkey stopped buying oil from Isis or the deal is still on?
> 
> I am just stating the facts.


Oh boy there we go again, just stop watching press tv.


----------



## usernameless

Daneshmand said:


> The Turkish pilots can not even protect themselves against Arab diplomats on Turkish streets and get beaten up in front of their wives by Arab diplomats. Go google and see for yourself.


someone who uses this kind of arguments on a defense site to measure strength between countries is pathetic to say the least, your whole credibility just dropped and says enough about your logic and the hatred which for now is hidden behind your mask, but will become more visible through your sneaky demeaning troll posts. Another thing, writing a wall of text won't increase your credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gold Eagle

rmi5 said:


> Another fool who thinks phantom is better than F-16
> I just wasted my time on you.



You don't even know what he is talking about and You just keep insulting him. The problem is either you don't understand what he says or you just don't want to do so. 
Although a block 52 F16 is definitely far more capable than an aging F4 but in case of an operation against these terrorists, Iranian phantoms can do the same task which a modern fighters like f16 does. 
Iranian Phantoms are capable of using precious munitions such as laser ,TV/IR guided bombs and missiles and also they carry modern targeting pods. not to mention that they are match with iranian UAVs. So they can do the same job a modern 4th gen aircraft does in a ground attack against terrorist organizations.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Wave

Daneshmand said:


> It does not matter. What matters is that IRIAF has the balls to get the job done. Turkish AF meanwhile is a joke that can not even protect its pilots who are taking their wives to hospital and get beaten up by Arab diplomats on Turkish streets.


Either ur really young or plain stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

Gold Eagle said:


> Iranian Phantoms are capable of using precious munitions such as laser ,TV/IR guided bombs and missiles and also they carry modern targeting pods. not to mention that they are match with iranian UAVs. So they can do the same job a modern 4th gen aircraft does in a ground attack against terrorist organizations.


 These are all fictional, and not true. In reality, 90% of these stuff are just unveiled in fake ceremonies, but never have been used.


----------



## F117

The Aviationist » Previously unknown details about Iranian F-4, F-5, Su-24 and UAVs involvement in air strikes on ISIS targets in Iraq

An insight into the IRIAF missions in Iraq was provided by Iranian defense expert Babak Taghvaee, a very well known author of several publications about the Iranian air forces and a regular contributor to some of the most read aviation magazines.

Taghvaee summed up the key features about the Iranian air raids in an email to The Aviationist.

– 18th to 20th November, several interdiction sorties were performed by the 2nd and 4th TFB’s F-5s in the Diyala province.

– Between Nov. 20t and Nov. 23 November, the RF-4Es of IRIAF and UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) of the IRGC-ASF (Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp Aerospace Force) performed recce sorties over Jalula and Saadia.

– Between Nov. 23 and Nov. 30, the F-4Es of the 3rd TFB and 9th TFB performed CAS (Close Air Support) sorties for the Kurdish Peshmerga, Badr militia and Iraqi SpecOps.

– On Dec. 1 and 2, four Su-24MKs performed several combat air patrols and on-call CAS sorties deep inside Iraqi borders.

– On 29th and 30th November, the indigenous Sattar 4 LGBs and GBU-78/A Ghased TV guided bombs were used against the Daesh’s strongholds and heavy trucks successfully for first time in battle zone.

In conclusion, the Kurds and Iraqis retrieved the cities of Jalula and Saadia under fire support of IRIAF.

“The Americans had full coordination with Iranians during the combat sorties of IRIAF,” Taghvee highlighted.

Indeed, although it was theoretically possible for Iranian planes to fly inside Iraq without any coordination with other air forces operating in the same airspace, it would have been suicidal. For proper deconfliction of tactical assets, prior coordination and air space management and control are required.

There are several aircraft performing Airspace Control, Airborne Early Warning over Syria and Iraq: no plane could fly undetected in the area.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Daneshmand said:


> Yes, for such ground missions that Iran is conducing right now indeed F-4 is better since its twin engine design protects it against unfortunate engine failures and its capability to carry much more bombs and ammo than F-16 means more firepower can be delivered.


There is a reason why the A-10 have its two engines physically separated: To avoid one engine failure causing the other to fail as well.

What kind of engine failure determine whether the pilot can recover the aircraft or not. Take the F-4, for example, if a missile causes an explosive failure of the turbine system, you can bet the ejection handle that the other engine that sits so close will be so severely damaged that the pilot will *NOT* be able to recover the jet.

Am not saying that we designed the F-16 with its single engine because General Dynamics believed the single engine to be superior to the twin engine configuration. The F-16 was designed that way because of original idea of being a lightweight and highly maneuverable fighter to be the dogfighter that no one want to meet in combat. If the F-16 was moved into the ground strike missions, it was because the fighter proved to be highly versatile and capable enough at *ANY* mission.

The other part of the equation is the pilot and his training. Even for the rugged A-10, no A-10 pilot is going to fly in ways that would place his jet into unnecessary harm. No A-10 pilot is going to say to himself: 'I have two very tough engines placed far apart from each other, that mean I can low and slow and if one engine is hit, I can live with the loss.' The A-10 was designed that way not to give the pilot the license to be careless but to increase his survivable quotient in the event his jet is damaged.

Same mentality for the F-4 and F-16 pilots.They are not going to fly in ways that would allow their jets to be hit whether their jets are as tough as the A-10 -- or not. The F-4 and F-16 pilots are not going to say: 'My jet is not as tough as the A-10 so I am going to refuse this mission.' No, they will find ways to minimize exposure of weaknesses while still committed to support ground operations. This is where innovative tactics and training make the F-16 pilots of one country better than the F-16 pilots of another country.

Between the F-4 and the F-16, pilots will chose the F-16 any day. Whether it is for ground strike missions or not. The days of the F-4, as great a jet as it is, is over.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daneshmand

gambit said:


> There is a reason why the A-10 have its two engines physically separated: To avoid one engine failure causing the other to fail as well.
> 
> What kind of engine failure determine whether the pilot can recover the aircraft or not. Take the F-4, for example, if a missile causes an explosive failure of the turbine system, you can bet the ejection handle that the other engine that sits so close will be so severely damaged that the pilot will *NOT* be able to recover the jet.
> 
> Am not saying that we designed the F-16 with its single engine because General Dynamics believed the single engine to be superior to the twin engine configuration. The F-16 was designed that way because of original idea of being a lightweight and highly maneuverable fighter to be the dogfighter that no one want to meet in combat. If the F-16 was moved into the ground strike missions, it was because the fighter proved to be highly versatile and capable enough at *ANY* mission.
> 
> The other part of the equation is the pilot and his training. Even for the rugged A-10, no A-10 pilot is going to fly in ways that would place his jet into unnecessary harm. No A-10 pilot is going to say to himself: 'I have two very tough engines placed far apart from each other, that mean I can low and slow and if one engine is hit, I can live with the loss.' The A-10 was designed that way not to give the pilot the license to be careless but to increase his survivable quotient in the event his jet is damaged.
> 
> Same mentality for the F-4 and F-16 pilots.They are not going to fly in ways that would allow their jets to be hit whether their jets are as tough as the A-10 -- or not. The F-4 and F-16 pilots are not going to say: 'My jet is not as tough as the A-10 so I am going to refuse this mission.' No, they will find ways to minimize exposure of weaknesses while still committed to support ground operations. This is where innovative tactics and training make the F-16 pilots of one country better than the F-16 pilots of another country.
> 
> Between the F-4 and the F-16, pilots will chose the F-16 any day. Whether it is for ground strike missions or not. The days of the F-4, as great a jet as it is, is over.



I have no issue with rationality of your comment. I am also not going into the argument of why US navy always wanted twin engine designs for exactly the reasons I enumerated. But my argument was not about the survivability of A-10. It was about the strategic role of IRIAF vs. Turkish AF. 

In your technical view (I assume you have a technical background from your neat writing), has Turkish AF achieved that state's strategic objectives? The answer is obvious. With F-16 or without it. Simple. 

An AF is not there to impress us with its "uber" aircrafts. It has to achieve what it is there for. The strategic objectives of a country. IRIAF has done it. That is what matters.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

rmi5 said:


> Why should Turkey use half a century old fighters to attack Iraq while she has F-16s which are suitable for such cases? Do you have any brain?


Why not and dont forget turkey half century old airplanes are upgraded by their friend at eastern part of Mediterranean sea.



gambit said:


> There is a reason why the A-10 have its two engines physically separated: To avoid one engine failure causing the other to fail as well.
> 
> What kind of engine failure determine whether the pilot can recover the aircraft or not. Take the F-4, for example, if a missile causes an explosive failure of the turbine system, you can bet the ejection handle that the other engine that sits so close will be so severely damaged that the pilot will *NOT* be able to recover the jet.
> 
> Am not saying that we designed the F-16 with its single engine because General Dynamics believed the single engine to be superior to the twin engine configuration. The F-16 was designed that way because of original idea of being a lightweight and highly maneuverable fighter to be the dogfighter that no one want to meet in combat. If the F-16 was moved into the ground strike missions, it was because the fighter proved to be highly versatile and capable enough at *ANY* mission.
> 
> The other part of the equation is the pilot and his training. Even for the rugged A-10, no A-10 pilot is going to fly in ways that would place his jet into unnecessary harm. No A-10 pilot is going to say to himself: 'I have two very tough engines placed far apart from each other, that mean I can low and slow and if one engine is hit, I can live with the loss.' The A-10 was designed that way not to give the pilot the license to be careless but to increase his survivable quotient in the event his jet is damaged.
> 
> Same mentality for the F-4 and F-16 pilots.They are not going to fly in ways that would allow their jets to be hit whether their jets are as tough as the A-10 -- or not. The F-4 and F-16 pilots are not going to say: 'My jet is not as tough as the A-10 so I am going to refuse this mission.' No, they will find ways to minimize exposure of weaknesses while still committed to support ground operations. This is where innovative tactics and training make the F-16 pilots of one country better than the F-16 pilots of another country.
> 
> Between the F-4 and the F-16, pilots will chose the F-16 any day. Whether it is for ground strike missions or not. The days of the F-4, as great a jet as it is, is over.


Let change scenario a little more if enemy use guns and airdefence cannons not missiile then which one is more survivable in a CAS mission F-4 or F-16.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

JEskandari said:


> Why not and dont forget turkey half century old airplanes are upgraded by their friend at eastern part of Mediterranean sea.
> 
> 
> Let change scenario a little more if enemy use guns and airdefence cannons not missiile then which one is more survivable in a CAS mission F-4 or F-16.


The F-16. Because it is more maneuverable and able to make quicker unpredictable moves. Anti-aircraft gunnery is essentially making predictions as to where the target is *GOING TO BE*, aka 'leading the target', then shoot at that point in the sky, hoping that the target will be at the intercept point.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hyperion

Well done Iran. Keep it up and bomb the takfiri bastards to hell!

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## gambit

Daneshmand said:


> I am also not going into the argument of why US navy always wanted twin engine designs for exactly the reasons I enumerated.


And the US Navy is going to the F-35, a single engine fighter.



Daneshmand said:


> But my argument was not about the survivability of A-10.


I used the A-10 only as an example of a highly specialized aircraft.



Daneshmand said:


> It was about the strategic role of IRIAF vs. Turkish AF.
> 
> In your technical view (I assume you have a technical background from your neat writing), has Turkish AF achieved that state's strategic objectives? The answer is obvious. With F-16 or without it. Simple.
> 
> An AF is not there to impress us with its "uber" aircrafts. It has to achieve what it is there for. The strategic objectives of a country. IRIAF has done it. That is what matters.


I responded to your comment that a twin engine fighter is somehow 'better' than a single engine one because of the availability of a 'spare' engine in case of an engine failure. We now know that argument is not really valid any more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

Daneshmand said:


> And what you achieved strategically? Nothing. The Kurds in Turkey today are even angrier than they were years ago. The same Turkish air force that was bombing Kurds has refused to bomb Isis in Kobani right at the border of Turkey where US has to fly missions from faraway AC. In fact the Turkish AF behavior in this regard not only has achieved nothing strategic outside the borders of Turkey but has had a negative effect inside the Turkey by making Kurds angry.
> 
> As for Iranian AF, they are supporting Iran's strategic plan for Iraq and Syria as defined by Iranian state. I am sure, you read the news and you know where Iran stands with regard to these two countries and where Turkey stands.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, anybody who tries to subvert and try to bring about a military coup will be eliminated. Iran is not Turkey where every now and then its military rebels and concurs its own country in acts of mutiny. In Iran military officers who even dream about such action are fast forwarded to the next world. But they are handled by Iranians. No Arab diplomat can beat up an Iranian fighter pilot in front of his wife and get away with it. As it happens in Turkey.


mate , after sometime u can easily realize the fanboys in this forum are the overwhelming majority .

sometimes u have to just be silent in response , which is much more effective on fanboys 



gambit said:


> I responded to your comment that a twin engine fighter is somehow 'better' than a single engine one because of the availability of a 'spare' engine in case of an engine failure. We now know that argument is not really valid any more.


B.S .

for fighters like F-14 and F-15 or basically any fighter jet whose engines are far apart , that maybe a valid discussion .

but for fighters like F-18 or F-5 , the second engine is always an "spare" as u call it , to the second one in case of engine failure .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Daneshmand said:


> The only one who is stupid is you and your DNA. The reason F-16 was designed was not reliability nor attacking ground targets. F-16 came out of a fierce philosophical debate about air to air combat within Pentagon bureaucracy during 1960's. A group of people spearheaded by a talented fighter pilot/engineer by the name of John Boyd who had developed the energy–maneuverability theory (E-M theory), convinced the Pentagon to develop two fighter designs based on his theory of air to air combat. The expensive design became known as F-15 and the cheaper design became F-16. It had nothing to do with ground missions. Your ignorance is really pathetic. F-4 carries more ammo and its twin engine design makes it ideal for such missions where no air to air combat is likely to occur.


Welcome Daneshmand!

Don't argue with him it is of no use. In his narrow mind whoever doesn't think like him or agree with him is an idiot. I wonder when he will realize that if you are living in a world that everyone seems like a fool, then maybe you are the one that is a fool not them!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

gambit said:


> The F-16. Because it is more maneuverable and able to make quicker unpredictable moves. Anti-aircraft gunnery is essentially making predictions as to where the target is *GOING TO BE*, aka 'leading the target', then shoot at that point in the sky, hoping that the target will be at the intercept point.



Your reply is dishonest. Firstly there is no sophisticated missile or AAA in the hands of Isis, nor they have the human resources to field such systems. The engine failure is a very real possibility and it need not be an explosive one. A twin engine design certainly gives a much better survival possibility than a single engine design, specially in such situation that IRIAF is operating. Secondly, an F-4 carries much heavier load of bombs than F-16, thereby cutting down on number of sorties required for the job therefore decreasing the possibility of losing a bird over Isis territory due to an engine failure. If compressor sheds a blade which happens from time to time, there is a great possibility that the F-16 pilot will be on a video with a knife at his throat. The F-4 pilot will come home with the other engine running.



gambit said:


> And the US Navy is going to the F-35, a single engine fighter.
> 
> 
> I used the A-10 only as an example of a highly specialized aircraft.
> 
> 
> I responded to your comment that a twin engine fighter is somehow 'better' than a single engine one because of the availability of a 'spare' engine in case of an engine failure. We now know that argument is not really valid any more.



The US navy is* "GOING"*. It has not yet gone. The F-35 is an unproven platform. It is ill suited to CAS, since it is a fast flying jet with thin skin. For CAS, an aircraft like Su-25 is better than F-35 since at ranges it operates, stealth has no meaning. Besides, F-35 has a very compromised design. A CAS or ground attack aircraft that uses fuel in its hydraulic system as F-35 does, in place of conventional non-flammable hydraulic fluid in order to save weight is a poor design. Even a hit from small arms fire will bring that plane down in fire. It is not a survivable plane.

A-10 is truly an excellent design. I do not dispute that.

You are again being dishonest. But then it seems you are a dishonest person, hiding behind your prejudice. I did not claim that twin engine fighter is "better" than a single engine one. Go and read my comments again. I said, in this particular situation a mission planner would send in a twin design for the reasons I have enumerated above. And you did not answer the central question here, which was not about twin/single engine design. It was about the failure of Turkish AF in its strategic objectives. Which you did not even address. So much so for your honesty in argument.



haman10 said:


> mate , after sometime u can easily realize the fanboys in this forum are the overwhelming majority .
> 
> sometimes u have to just be silent in response , which is much more effective on fanboys
> 
> 
> B.S .
> 
> for fighters like F-14 and F-15 or basically any fighter jet whose engines are far apart , that maybe a valid discussion .
> 
> but for fighters like F-18 or F-5 , the second engine is always an "spare" as u call it , to the second one in case of engine failure .



Yes, I can see that. They are immature. They have failed miserably in their strategic planning. Let them feel good about their "uber" aircrafts. When kids start crying, we give them toys. Let them have their toys.

Basically that is right. The farther engines are from each other the safer the design becomes. But in A-10, they have gone even further by placing engines outside the mainframe of the aircraft and as far away from fuel tanks as well. It is an excellent design. In Su-25, they have placed a titanium armor plate between the engines to separate them from each other so in case one engine explodes, the other remains safe.



Arminkh said:


> Welcome Daneshmand!
> 
> Don't argue with him it is of no use. In his narrow mind whoever doesn't think like him or agree with him is an idiot. I wonder when he will realize that if you are living in a world that everyone seems like a fool, then maybe you are the one that is a fool not them!



Well, he is angry. It is understandable. Turkey has lost so much in the past 4 years over the issue of Syria. Their dreams of becoming the leader of Islamic world has gone down the drain. They have now to deal with millions of refugees with whom they have little cultural affinity (they are Arabs), for decades and possibly forever. Alot of these refugees will eventually have to be given Turkish citizenship and will inevitably through their presence modify the Turkish culture and society. The Turkish society has become polarized and fragmented. The core of Turkish state which rests on the idea of secularism has come under doubt. And so on and so forth. It is his anger at his loss and his jealousy of Iran that forces him to behave in the way that he does. We are just pouring petrol on him. 

Arminkh,

Thank you for the welcome!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## black-hawk_101

Any pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

black-hawk_101 said:


> Any pictures.


Please see first page of the same thread. There is also a video clip that shows the F-4 flying above the newly liberated city.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Daneshmand said:


> Your reply is dishonest. *Firstly there is no sophisticated missile or AAA in the hands of Isis*, nor they have the human resources to field such systems. The engine failure is a very real possibility and it need not be an explosive one. A twin engine design certainly gives a much better survival possibility than a single engine design, specially in such situation that IRIAF is operating. Secondly, an F-4 carries much heavier load of bombs than F-16, thereby cutting down on number of sorties required for the job therefore decreasing the possibility of losing a bird over Isis territory due to an engine failure. If compressor sheds a blade which happens from time to time, there is a great possibility that the F-16 pilot will be on a video with a knife at his throat. The F-4 pilot will come home with the other engine running.


It does not matter. 

No air force, not even US, can afford to field different grades of fighters for different grades of opponents. We did not build an A-10 for tank and a lesser A-10 for the infantry. No, we built an A-10 for tank and if we happened to encounter an opponent that does not have tanks, too bad for the other side.

As for the F-16, it is not the world's most versatile fighter because of our opinion. The 'twin engine is superior to single engine because of survival reason' is done debating and you lost by virtue of the real world with real air forces with real financial constraints.



Daneshmand said:


> The US navy is* "GOING"*. It has not yet gone. The F-35 is an unproven platform. It is ill suited to CAS, since it is a fast flying jet with thin skin. For CAS, an aircraft like Su-25 is better than F-35 since at ranges it operates, stealth has no meaning. Besides, F-35 has a very compromised design. A CAS or ground attack aircraft that uses fuel in its hydraulic system as F-35 does, in place of conventional non-flammable hydraulic fluid in order to save weight is a poor design. Even a hit from small arms fire will bring that plane down in fire. It is not a survivable plane.


Let US know when Iran can field something better.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Coming soon ...

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## haman10

Damn whaaat ? 

^_^

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## zaid butt

wow

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kiarash

what about the engine ??

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

@SOHEIL why is catsoo's watermark all over the pics ? did he take those pics ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

haman10 said:


> @SOHEIL why is catsoo's watermark all over the pics ? did he take those pics ?



Don't know!



Kiarash said:


> what about the engine ??



Probably another engine!

*Aircraft of comparable role :*

*> EADS CASA C-295*

*> Alenia C-27J Spartan*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Abii

"coming soon"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

Abii said:


> "coming soon"


I am just amazed how some people take him seriously.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abii

rmi5 said:


> I am just amazed how some people take him seriously.


Exactly. Soheil is entitled to his opinion. In the end he's not the issue. 

It's all the other simpletons that just make you question human intelligence. Even when facts on the ground don't change for years, their opinions and actions remain the same. A smart man would look at the facts and change his opinion with time. These lot never change.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abii

zaid butt said:


> wow


Would you look at that 6 inch plastic model of what looks like a plane! WOW indeed. 

More like WOW, you actually bought that mullah bs?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

The engine must be replaced, current one has got no chance in passenger airliners let alone in military sector ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rmi5

raptor22 said:


> The engine must be replaced, current one has got no chance in passenger airliners let alone in military sector ...


For the engine of military jets and designing jets, I have heard that they have had some talks with Sukhoi company. It's just what I have heard, and no sources, yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Icewolf

Is this real or just another Iranian stealth jet


----------



## SOHEIL

Icewolf said:


> Is this real or just another Iranian stealth jet

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## raptor22

rmi5 said:


> For the engine of military jets and designing jets, I have heard that they have had some talks with Sukhoi company. It's just what I have heard, and no sources, yet.



As I know and has heard its engine wouldn't work properly in Iran's warm and dry climate, that's why it gotta take off in early morning to avoid the heat of the day .... I hope the engine eventually get changed.

P.S: Please stop lableing people gullible, backwards, goose, fools and so on ... as it seems the list goes on ... It's not called a sensible rational discussing it would be called murdering through words ....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## zaid butt

Abii said:


> Would you look at that 6 inch plastic model of what looks like a plane! WOW indeed.
> 
> More like WOW, you actually bought that mullah bs?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rmi5

raptor22 said:


> As I know and has heard its engine wouldn't work properly in Iran's warm and dry climate, that's why it gotta take off in early morning to avoid the heat of the day .... I hope the engine eventually get changed.


You mean the Turbo prop engine? I was not talking about Turbo prop.
But, about that turbo prop engine and Iran-140, it just had a maintenance, and it was what Ukrainians said to not fly it after 8 AM since the weather would be too warm. Also, overloading the plane was another reason of the clash, and also pilot's fault.
I know that before Iran, it was suggested to bombardier of Canada, but Canadians finally refused the plan.

Mod Edit

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

rmi5 said:


> You mean the Turbo prop engine? I was not talking about Turbo prop.
> But, about that turbo prop engine and Iran-140, it just had a maintenance, and it was what Ukrainians said to not fly it after 8 AM since the weather would be too warm. Also, overloading the plane was another reason of the clash, and also pilot's fault.
> I know that before Iran, it was suggested to bombardier of Canada, but Canadians finally refused the plan.
> 
> Mod Edit


The pilot had no guilt in the incident one engine failed and the other one could not provide enough power in that warm climate . 
That engine was a wrong choice for the plane they must have designed it with a more powerful engine even if it was designed for cold weather . if you look at the an-140 crashes some of its engine failures happened in cold weather.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Penguin

Very similar to CASA 235/295. Indonesia has a license for those, right?


----------



## haman10

Penguin said:


> Very similar to CASA 235/295. Indonesia has a license for those, right?


who is indonesia ?  what is CASA ? 

IrAn-140 is Iranian licensed production of An-140-100 which is a ukranian civil plane 

Antonov An-140 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Penguin



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

Penguin said:


>


So?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Penguin

kollang said:


> So?


SO nothing. Just an observation. <hint: remove chip from shoulder>



haman10 said:


> who is indonesia ?  what is CASA ?
> 
> IrAn-140 is Iranian licensed production of An-140-100 which is a ukranian civil plane
> 
> Antonov An-140 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Thank you, that is what I figured. It is very similar to CN-235/9: a tactical military transport, not a regional airliner.

AN-140 succeeds AN-24. An-24T was a tactical transport. AN-24 led to military AN-26 (with ramp, like those CASA planes) . Similarly, An-140-100 can be built for civilian, military and special purpose: maritime patrol, medical, aerial photography, geological exploration, freight etc.









FOr your information and amusement.

"During a ceremony marking the commemoration of the Antonov An-140 first official flight in Iran on 11 October 2000, the country's military officials showed interest toward absorbing the licensed-built turboprop into Iranian armed forces' aging fleet of transport and patrol aircraft.
Iranian military intends to incorporate An-140 in such badly needed roles as light tactical transport, due to its short (1,350m) and unprepared runway performance. Airborne early warning radar platform will also be a desired mission for An-140, taking into account Iran's diverse terrain and the need to provide coverage for low altitude airborne target detection and tracking. "
An-140 Attracts Military Support As it Enters Production in Iran

2013
An-140 Enters Service with Russian Military | Defense: Aviation International News

2014
Russia Dumps An-140T Airlifter for Home-Made Ilyushins | Defense: Aviation International News

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

I suppose these upgraded IRIAF Phantoms are more than enough for those savage terrorists

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Dominance

What are these two different pods? (yellow on top and the white on bottom image)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

Dominance said:


> What are these two different pods? (yellow on top and the white on bottom image)


The yellow one is for laser guidance and the white one is an optical pod for TV guided weapons.(Ghased as example)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

kollang said:


> I suppose these upgraded IRIAF Phantoms are more than enough for those savage terrorists
> View attachment 164569
> View attachment 164570


Oh Yeaaah! Especially when they are armed with Sattar 4 LGB and Ghased. I don't like to be anywhere near where they drop those smart bombs! This is a great opportunity for Iran to test the newly developed weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> The F-16. Because it is more maneuverable and able to make quicker unpredictable moves. Anti-aircraft gunnery is essentially making predictions as to where the target is *GOING TO BE*, aka 'leading the target', then shoot at that point in the sky, hoping that the target will be at the intercept point.


Then I wonder how you are going to do your bombing and gunning campaign if you fly like a drunk bee ?

and if you are going to fly like that only if you are attacked , well I wonder how you are going to evade something that you can't see by your eye or your instruments

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

JEskandari said:


> Then I wonder how you are going to do your bombing and gunning campaign if you fly like a drunk bee ?
> 
> and if you are going to fly like that only if you are attacked , well I wonder how you are going to evade something that you can't see by your eye or your instruments


Good point!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daneshmand

JEskandari said:


> Then I wonder how you are going to do your bombing and gunning campaign if you fly like a drunk bee ?
> 
> and if you are going to fly like that only if you are attacked , well I wonder how you are going to evade something that you can't see by your eye or your instruments



Leave him. He is clearly a very dishonest and prejudiced person. A bigot. And I think he also suffers from dysgraphia. I believe what he actually meant to say but screwed up while writing it is that the F-16 is easier to fly from the perspective of the pilot because of its fly by wire system. That F-16 system puts less emphasis on pilot skills specially during maneuvers compared with a fighter like F-4. At any rate, as I said above, air force is just a tool and if that tool be the most uber one that fails to materialize strategic gains for its owner, then it is useless compared to a less uber air force that actually produces tangible strategic gains for its owner. IRIAF produces strategic results. Turkish air force failed every time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

JEskandari said:


> Then I wonder how you are going to do your bombing and gunning campaign if you fly like a drunk bee ?
> 
> and if you are going to fly like that only if you are attacked , well I wonder how you are going to evade something that you can't see by your eye or your instruments


It is called 'technology' ? Just because Iran does not have something, that does not mean we do not. Just because Iranian pilots cannot do something, that does not mean American pilots cannot.



Daneshmand said:


> Leave him. He is clearly a very dishonest and prejudiced person. A bigot. And I think he also suffers from dysgraphia. I believe what he actually meant to say but screwed up while writing it is that the F-16 is easier to fly from the perspective of the pilot because of its fly by wire system. That F-16 system puts less emphasis on pilot skills specially during maneuvers compared with a fighter like F-4. At any rate, as I said above, air force is just a tool and if that tool be the most uber one that fails to materialize strategic gains for its owner, then it is useless compared to a less uber air force that actually produces tangible strategic gains for its owner. IRIAF produces strategic results. Turkish air force failed every time.


And I bet the closest you ever got to an aircraft is boarding an airliner. Go back to whatever sandbox you came from and let adults talk.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

gambit said:


> It is called 'technology' ? Just because Iran does not have something, that does not mean we do not. Just because Iranian pilots cannot do something, that does not mean American pilots cannot.
> 
> 
> And I bet the closest you ever got to an aircraft is boarding an airliner. Go back to whatever sandbox you came from and let adults talk.


You can ask your elder fellas about Iranian pilots and their heroic performance in Iran-Iraq war.

H3 airstrike - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> It is called 'technology' ? Just because Iran does not have something, that does not mean we do not. Just because Iranian pilots cannot do something, that does not mean American pilots cannot.


well I perfectly get the point , USA can do it , the others cant do it .
by the way here is the debate between Turkey and Iran nobody said anything about USA air-force. here we are talking about if turkey is the one who did the attack is there any reason that they prefer f-16 over F-4 for such operation .


By the way aside from Venezuela are you aware of any country that have less advanced F-16 than USA ?


----------



## hawk11



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Archdemon

LegionnairE said:


> did it fly yet?



On wings of imagination.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

Archdemon said:


> On wings of imagination.


Not even on them


----------



## Malik Alashter

Who knows they may make it come true all they need money and some help from some other countries who already have these programs especialy when some countries like Russia thinks it need allies in the region.

I would say the world is heading like unstopable train toward WW3 may God help the poor people every we will be stepped on as a collateral damage.

Sorry of off topic: But Soheil your CGI is awsome. Some time I think you show project that is in making?.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Malik Alashter said:


> Who knows they may make it come true all they need money and some help from some other countries who already have these programs especialy when some countries like Russia thinks it need allies in the region.
> 
> I would say the world is heading like unstopable train toward WW3 may God help the poor people every we will be stepped on as a collateral damage.
> 
> Sorry of off topic: But Soheil your CGI is awsome. Some time I think you show project that is in making?.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

*Another version :*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Penguin

haman10 said:


> who is indonesia ?



A country of which 88.1% of the population is Muslim and which has 12.7% of total world population of Muslims within its borders.That is, a larger Muslim population than any other country in the world (with approximately 202.9 million identified as Muslim out of Indonesia's total population of 237 million). From 1800 to 1949, Indonesia was a colony of the Netherlands (although the Dutch became the dominant European power much earlier, namely in 1602 when the Dutch East India Company (VOC) was established).
Indonesia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Daneshmand



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daneshmand

Too bad. F-16 was shot down, with the poor pilot now captured by the animals. One engine is always risky. F-4 could have come back home: BBC News - Islamic State 'shoots down coalition plane in Syria'

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Daneshmand said:


> Too bad. F-16 was shot down, with the poor pilot now captured by the animals. One engine is always risky. F-4 could have come back home: BBC News - Islamic State 'shoots down coalition plane in Syria'


Yeah, The report says the RJAF is still not sure if it was an engine failure or did ISIS really shoot the plane down.

Poor pilot. I would have stayed with my plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Militant Atheist

I'm more interested to know about the results!


----------



## Malik Alashter

Daneshmand said:


>


I wonder why they don't use small RC plane instead of the wind tunnel.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xenon54 out

Malik Alashter said:


> I wonder why they don't use small RC plane instead of the wind tunnel.


RC model cant replace wind tunnel tests, in fact a RC model cant give you any valuable data for development of a jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

xenon54 said:


> RC model cant replace wind tunnel tests, in fact a RC model cant give you any valuable data for development of a jet.


Why not if they use some sensors on it like a camera or something else to monitor it's performance?.


----------



## xenon54 out

Malik Alashter said:


> Why not if they use some sensors on it like a camera or something else to monitor it's performance?.


I think you dont know what a wind tunnel does exactly, you cant reproduce a test environment with a RC plane like a wind tunnel, take a look at this.






Besides, a RC plane has a different mass as a real jet thus has a completely different flight characteristics and thrust-weight ratio, thats why you can litterally let fly every object.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

xenon54 said:


> I think you dont know what a wind tunnel does exactly, you cant reproduce a test environment with a RC plane like a wind tunnel, take a look at this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, a RC plane has a different mass as a real jet thus has a completely different flight characteristics and thrust-weight ratio, thats why you can litterally let fly every object.


Great, I really don't know what's going on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

*New IRIAF pictures*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

​

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## rockstar08

any plans for new Fighter jets inductions ? and what are the options for IRIAF ?


----------



## Last Samuri

ancient air force now

was well on its way to being the best in middle east until 1979 and iran revolution


----------



## SOHEIL

Last Samuri said:


> ancient air force now
> 
> was well on its way to being the best in middle east until 1979 and iran revolution



Independence has a price !

At Least nobody got balls to bomb our civilians by drones !

In the coming future we will talk about ancient stuff ...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Tomyris

Arminkh said:


> Buying military equipment is never the right choice as they will all become obsolete or grounded in no time when a real war starts. We learned this the hard way during the war with Iraq.


not during the war iran iraq we were fortunate to have the F-14 that we are given the advantage and the F-4 ... if we had not the fighter we have lost the war to tell the truth .... yes it should not depend 100% of other pays..mais comander just what we need not make us dependent countries 100 150 su-30/35 will do much to defend the country and deter our enemy.


Stephen cohen: not iran can not buy su-30 as the embargo and not lifted and we can not wait too long either because we will biento an aviation ground



non pendant la guerre iran irak nous avons eu la chance d'avoir les F-14 qui nous on donné l'avantage, ainsi que les F-4...si on avais pas ces chasseur la on aurai perdu la guerre faut dire la verité....oui il faut pas dependre a 100% des autre pays..mais comander juste ce que nous avons besoin fait pas de nous un pays dependant 100 a 150 su-30/35 fera largement l'affaire pour defendre le pays et dissuader nos ennemie.


@Stephen Cohen :non l'iran pourra pas acheté des su-30 tant que l'embargo et pas levé et on pourra pas attendre trop longtemps non plus car on aura biento une aviation au sol


----------



## Gabriel92

Great looking plane,congratz. 
Even with the embargo,iran seems to do great achievements...



> *Iran's Defense Ministry has unveiled a new domestically-built advanced supersonic trainer fighter jet, named Saeqeh 2 (Thunderbolt 2).*
> 
> The double-cockpit supersonic Saeqeh 2 fighter jet has been designed and manufactured by experts and engineers of Defense Ministry's Aerospace Industries Organization and in cooperation with the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF), Iran's Deputy Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said on Monday.
> 
> The fighter jet will do close-range cover and backup tactical missions as well as advanced pilot training missions, he added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The commander noted that the new jet is the second generation of Saeqeh model which has been manufactured with enhanced combat capabilities.
> 
> The aircraft has been equipped with Electro Avionics systems and advanced weapons to enhance the training of pilots.
> 
> Hatami added that the plane is capable of engaging in intense aerial missions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The unveiling ceremony comes on the 8th day of the ten-day celebrations commemorating the 36th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
> 
> Saeqeh was unveiled as a prototype in 2004 and later became operational in 2006. The jet is Iran’s second domestically-developed fighter with many calling it the Iranian F-18.
> 
> The bomber has the ability to track down enemy aircraft, engage in combat, target locations on the ground, and carry a load of assorted weapons and ammunition.
> 
> In the recent years, Iran has made great achievements in the defense sector and gained self-sufficiency in essential military hardware and defense systems.
> 
> The country has repeatedly announced that its defense might does not pose any threat to other countries as Iran's defense doctrine is totally based on deterrence.



PressTV-Iran unveils supersonic fighter jet

Reactions: Like Like:
30


----------



## farhan_9909

Good development

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Daneshmand

One step at a time. It is a long journey.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## rockstar08

Is it just me , or this plane looks bit similar to some fighter ? @Serpentine @haman10 ?
anyway good Development ...... I hope Iran and Pakistan corporate on Aviation sector , we can share lots of things , that can benefit us both

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

Good for training and CAS
But .... way to go



rockstar08 said:


> Is it just me , or this plane looks bit similar to some fighter ?


It's designed based on the F-5

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## C130

indigenous my ***. looks like a copy for the F-5

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## trident2010

Gabriel92 said:


>



Nice looking plane. Well done !!

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## N/A

this jet will be blown to pieces when it faces another jet

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kollang

As Shahriyar said, Saeghe 2 is great for training,CAS and pin-point air stike.yet its not well equipped for air to air missions since it lacks BVR capabilities and air refueling.also it seems there is no ECM capability as well.maybe that plane is only a unveiling prototype and more systems will be rided on the fighter. 

But for begining, its great.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> this jet will be blown to pieces when it faces another jet



''The fighter jet will do close-range cover and backup tactical missions as well as advanced pilot training missions''

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## RAMPAGE

Congrats.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## N/A

I would not have fucked with Iranian air force during the rule of the shah....but now its a different story

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rmi5

Congrats for repainting a F-5F jet with original Asia minor camouflage. Big achievement indeed.



Daneshmand said:


> One step at a time. It is a long journey.


Nah, it's just really half of a step away from F-22.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kollang

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> I would not have fucked with Iranian air force during the rule of the shah....but now its a different story


Dude, shut up.this is a training plane with some combat capabilities.nothing ultra is claimed here.
............

For @rmi5 case, just "mass-report" him.it seems previous bans were not enough punishment for him.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Imran Khan

take 2 F-5 freedom fighter jets cut vertical stabilizers of both and instal both stabilizers on one jet new irani jets ready

USA also use iran made new fighter jet

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## SOHEIL

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> I would not have fucked with Iranian air force during the rule of the shah....but now its a different story




This is a trainer ...

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## N/A

SOHEIL said:


> You can **** yourself now !
> 
> This is a trainer ...


its a shame to see the current shape of the Iranian air force

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

kollang said:


> Dude, shut up.this is a training plane with some combat capabilities.nothing ultra is claimed here.
> ............
> 
> For @rmi5 case, just "mass-report" him.it seems previous bans were not enough punishment for him.


LOL, like I really care, or if anyone cares about your reports.
Anyway, big achievement for you! Although you won't find a job in your country, and will be ruled by 7th century dinosaurs, you will have a super indigenous half of a century old F-5F

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kaykay

Honestly speaking then Its looking very cool as a trainer. Even ground attack and close air support seems very much promising with this jet. Nic Job.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## N/A

rmi5 said:


> LOL, like I really care, or if anyone cares about your reports.
> Anyway, big achievement for you! Although you won't find a job in your country, and will be ruled by 7th century dinosaurs, you will have a super indigenous half of a century old F-5F


dude i would still take the Iraniani airforce over the Azerbaijani air force anyday

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

rmi5 said:


> LOL, like I really care, or if anyone cares about your reports.
> Anyway, big achievement for you! Although you won't find a job in your country, and will be ruled by 7th century dinosaurs, you will have a super indigenous half of a century old F-5F


@mods actually care alot.now get yourself a cure for the butthurtness.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## haviZsultan

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> its a shame to see the current shape of the Iranian air force


If you can't make bridges don't tear them apart. We need good relations with every country. Once US sanctions Pakistan we might find the use of Iran as an ally.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## haviZsultan

SOHEIL said:


> If you want to know the meaning of the shame look at your own country !


This is not the subject discussion. Its a plane that Iran invented. Build bridges and you make friends. Argue with a troll and you sink into the same gutter they came from.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## kollang

Saeghe 2, armed:






@rmi5 
OK, you can get away for now.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Guys, calm down.

I hope Iran and Pakistan could cooperate more on the aerospace domain.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Winchester

SOHEIL said:


> If you want to know the meaning of the shame look at your own country !


almost 10000 posts and you still drag an entire country when countering a troll

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SipahSalar

rockstar08 said:


> Is it just me , or this plane looks bit similar to some fighter ?


It's not a new plane. It's a modification or reverse engineered F-5 with a bit of F-18 influence in the tail section, still a good job.
I just don't understand what was the need to make it twin-engined or give it two tail-fins. It was fine before that. Or maybe they wanted it to look like F-18 hornet?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> your you dumb Azerbaijani air force over Pakistani....you must be high



Bro, no matter what is the current situation for Iran, they are still very hard working country on their own, so they deserve the credits for this factor alone.

BTW, it is not easy to work on your indigenous military industrial complex when you got full of sanctions.

China has also experienced this painful moment back in several decades ago.

However, when you have fully caught by your own, you will be proven to be a more competitive country.

The western sanctions will only make Iran stronger if they can manage to survive, just like they have done to China before.

Reactions: Like Like:
21


----------



## Daneshmand

SquadronLeaderDin said:


> its a shame to see the current shape of the Iranian air force



Dude, you do not know what you are talking about. Iranian air force has been BVR capable since 1960's and nowadays manufactures its own BVR missiles. Compare it for instance to Pakistan that only got its first BVR capability in 2008, and this capability only became operationalized in 2010. Pakistan still can not manufacture its own BVR missiles. Give credit where it is due.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Sugarcane

Congrats !!!

Do Iran manufacture engines locally or they are imported?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Neptune

It obviously has very limited combat capabilities. But they are doing that under very hard conditions. Sanctions, Cyber attacks, assassination of scientists and more. However, more could have been done IMO.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## rockstar08

SipahSalar said:


> It's not a new plane. It's a modification or reverse engineered F-5 with a bit of F-18 influence in the tail section, still a good job.
> I just don't understand what was the need to make it twin-engined or give it two tail-fins. It was fine before that. Or maybe they wanted it to look like F-18 hornet?



yeah but which engine they are using ?? that is most important part and hard to make ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SouI

Neptune said:


> It obviously has very limited combat capabilities. But they are doing that under very hard conditions. Sanctions, Cyber attacks, assassination of scientists and more. However, more could have been done IMO.


Well, at least their 'trainers' have jet turbines rather than ours having... ehmm.. I can't even say it >.>


----------



## haman10

LoveIcon said:


> Congrats !!!
> 
> Do Iran manufacture engines local or they are imported?


the following engines are produced locally :

J85 , J79 , G90/J90 (iranian design) , TF-30 (partially - overhaul capability)

=================================

This is a trainer fighter jet for 4th & 5th gen. fighters while being also used for CAS and point air defence .

it features Multiple Function Displays (MDF) and it can incorporate ECM and ECCM pods as well @kollang 

it has no BVR capability but it can sure be a credible threat from dogfights to Medium-range engagements due to 1- Low RCS because of its small size 2- High maneuvering capabilities due to design and upgraded J85 engines 

the previous version of Saghe incorporated the radar of Mig-29 fighter jet , we are still awaiting on more info regarding this one .



Neptune said:


> It obviously has very limited combat capabilities


how is it obvious my friend ? can u give us some details on what you mean ?



haviZsultan said:


> This is not the subject discussion. Its a plane that Iran invented. Build bridges and you make friends. Argue with a troll and you sink into the same gutter they came from.


i agree , don't engage in trolling of others @SOHEIL . just report them and let the staff take care of them .

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## SipahSalar

Daneshmand said:


> Dude, you do not know what you are talking about. Iranian air force has been BVR capable since 1960's and nowadays manufactures its own BVR missiles.


I take it you are talking about Phoenix. That missile is indeed BVR. But it was made to counter Bombers carrying nukes in cold war. It was very ineffective against fighters of past, forget targeting them today, I believe Iran is manufacturing some version of Phoenix? As far as i know it cannot be used in any plane other than F14, it was made to be used by a very specific radar. Granted the IAF in 60's was indeed very capable, but soon after the revolution there was a purge in military and a lot of very skilled pilots were lost.


----------



## Daneshmand

SipahSalar said:


> I take it you are talking about Phoenix. That missile is indeed BVR. But it was made to counter Bombers carrying nukes in cold war. It was very ineffective against fighters of past, forget targeting them today, I believe Iran is manufacturing some version of Phoenix? As far as i know it cannot be used in any plane other than F14, it was made to be used by a very specific radar. Granted the IAF in 60's was indeed very capable, but soon after the revolution there was a purge in military and a lot of very skilled pilots were lost.



You are just a troll. You know nothing and will remain incapable of learning in future as well. Phoenix AIM-54 was designed and built to counter all threats from cruise missiles to fighters to bombers to tankers. Its primary mission was to counter fighters and other threats approaching the US Navy aircraft carrier. It is one of the most capable very long range BVR missiles in the world.

Beside the AIM-54, Iran also has been maintaining a stockpile of AIM-7 (both are now reverse engineered). In addition to these Iran also operates Vympel R-27 as well as Sedjil (a local air to air copy of MIM-23).

And more are in the line.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SipahSalar

Daneshmand said:


> You are just a troll.


Questioning the Phoenix makes me a troll? very well then, happy to be one.



Daneshmand said:


> You know nothing and will remain incapable of learning in future as well. Phoenix AIM-54 was designed and built to counter all threats from cruise missiles to fighters to bombers to tankers.


Read about it from actual sites rather than wikipedia. It was made to counter slow moving bombers and yes cruise missiles, but NOT fighters, it was simply not maneouverable enough. Some modifications were made to it in 90's by USA to give it some effectiveness vs fighters, but with questionable results. Even so Iran did not get that upgrade from USA since it was post-revolution.


Daneshmand said:


> It is one of the most capable very long range BVR missiles in the world.


Wrong. It has been used a few times and failed to get a single kill. In 30 years of use, it has been unable to secure a single kill. Iran claims to have shot some planes with it but that, like other claims by Iran, is questionable. Iran used F14's as a poor man's AWACs in the Iran-Iraq war rather than as a fighter due to its powerful radar.


----------



## Established_1965

Iran accomplished something on it's own without any outside help that's *INNOVATION *for you all

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

SipahSalar said:


> It's not a new plane. It's a modification or reverse engineered F-5 with a bit of F-18 influence in the tail section, still a good job.
> I just don't understand what was the need to make it twin-engined or give it two tail-fins. It was fine before that. Or maybe they wanted it to look like F-18 hornet?


Stability during high angle of attack maneuver. It is also canted which means it will still maintain its contact with undistorted air at high AOA
What's the Difference Between a Single Tail and Double Tail Design on a Fighter Jet? - Quora

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Full Moon

Gabriel92 said:


> Great looking plane,congratz.
> Even with the embargo,iran seems to do great achievements...
> 
> 
> 
> PressTV-Iran unveils supersonic fighter jet


 
That's a cheap propaganda made by Press TV (an offical TV funded by the Iranian government). They do that regularly so please don't take them seriously.

Take care.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SipahSalar said:


> It's not a new plane. It's a modification or reverse engineered F-5 with a bit of F-18 influence in the tail section, still a good job.
> I just don't understand what was the need to make it twin-engined or give it two tail-fins. It was fine before that. Or maybe they wanted it to look like F-18 hornet?


well it's based on f-5 which had 2 engine to begin with . about two tail well , I believe some people are trying to master designing a fighter air frame and no way is better than start by making change to a proven airframe.



at the end honestly I believe that Saeqhe I & II is not a new airplane program but an upgrade and Overhaul program for Iranian fleet of F-5



SipahSalar said:


> I take it you are talking about Phoenix. That missile is indeed BVR. But it was made to counter Bombers carrying nukes in cold war. It was very ineffective against fighters of past, forget targeting them today, I believe Iran is manufacturing some version of Phoenix? As far as i know it cannot be used in any plane other than F14, it was made to be used by a very specific radar. Granted the IAF in 60's was indeed very capable, but soon after the revolution there was a purge in military and a lot of very skilled pilots were lost.



well Phoenix have Itself proven by destroying some Iraqi Mig-25 and the fact that in the first war between allied force and Iraq t was enough for US F-14 to turn their radar on for the sky to become clear



Militant Atheist said:


> Agha! Man in aksa ro ghablan ham dididam, hey rang mikonand mian migan jangande sakhtim, agha ya harf nazanid ya age mikhaye neshon bedin yek chizi neshon bedin dele maham khosh beshe. In tahrim ha keshvaro badbakht karde, key mikhaeed befahmid?
> 
> Although, I must say I'm enjoying the troll war between Iranian and Pakistani members. Especially @SquadronLeaderDin is a very funny dude with PhD in trolling from the Stanford University!
> 
> I been away for some times now? Are you for real?​


the perevious Saeqeh was based on F-5e this one is clearly based on F-5b

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pangu

Nice. Nothing wrong by learning through modifying proven airframes for a start. Good going Persians!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

Abii said:


> Khosham miad hadeaghal indafe nagoftin stealthe 5th generatione! kam kam darin yad migirin.


even the last time nobody claimed Saeqeh is stealth 5th generation

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Syrian Lion

Masha'Allah, I'm very proud of Iran's achievements, they never stop coming!! God Bless Iran! no sanctions/war can stop them! Only moving forward!

Nice fighter, you know maybe we should start seeing it in Syria soon!  use it to kill to those terrorists Insha'Allah

Keep them coming!

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Aamna Ali

It really does not matter which fighter the Saeqeh is based on/copied from. What is really commendable is the Iranian efforts in trying to approach the problem of sanctions and finding a way to workaround it. Even China started by copying and modifying soviet jets. That experience of the Iranian engineers will be priceless in the next decade or two when they embark on actual designing and testing of fighters.
You have to start somewhere...even if it is just refurbishing engines, redesigning older aircrafts,locally manufacture spares or cannibalizing other aircrafts
A look at North Korean airforce is all it takes to understand what happens if a country is sanctioned for so long.
Atleast Iran is trying. Even though the Qaher-313 is wideley regarded as made for propaganda, I believe that too represents the aspirations and will of the Iranian people to learn,research and overcome challenges.
@haman10 @kollang @SOHEIL @JEskandari @Arminkh

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Abii

JEskandari said:


> even the last time nobody claimed Saeqeh is stealth 5th generation



Qaher 313, hamoon ke az moghava sakhtin, pas chi bood? Goftin stealthe lol

Dar morede hamin Saegheham koli harto poort kardin oon avalesh. Hala eshkali nadare, hadeaghal indafe ziad zaye bazi dar nayovordin.


----------



## Arminkh

Full Moon said:


> That's a cheap propaganda made by Press TV (an offical TV funded by the Iranian government). They do that regularly so please don't take them seriously.
> 
> Take care.


As it turns out, Iran is not the only country that takes western platforms and change them. At least Iran used a fighter platform.

This one is really funny.
IAI reveals new business jet-based maritime patrol aircraft - IHS Jane's 360

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DJ Crudept

Looks great  congrats to our Iranian friends I hope one day Iran will make a new 4th generation fighter too 



SquadronLeaderDin said:


> What do you think...of course not. Pakistan and Iran are allies, I think we need more cooperation. Iran needs to consider the jf17


Nah man, they already have more than enough trainer aircrafts in their air force

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Indos

Please share the aerobatic show of this plane (youtube) if any, I just want to see its maneuverability. If it is a trainer or light attack aircraft, so the competitor in the market will be T-50 Golden Eagle from South Korea. They use F-16 as air frame inspiration and get helped by Lockheed Martin. 






T-50, Golden Eagle

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## New World

Shahryar Hedayati said:


>


Iran just changed F-5's color and other few changes to make it saqeh 2..



SquadronLeaderDin said:


> What do you think...of course not.* Pakistan and Iran are allies*, I think we need more cooperation. *Iran needs to consider the jf17*


I think KSA and Pakistan are allied and KSA wants share in JF-17?


----------



## gau8av

looks a bit like the USAF's T 38 Talon trainer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## topgun047

As someone said before, Iranian people have done a tremendous job in doing the best, working around the sanctions.

Good job job and it will only help your country in the long run.

Hopefully India and Iran can collaborate in building a jet in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Umair Nawaz

Nilesh Singh said:


> As our Iranian friend are saying that it is trainer with limited attack capability, in that sense i think it is superb. Really with so much sanction IRAN keep on rolling out these nice fighter.
> As for detractors (some Pakistani member) keep in mind their* own country indigenous capability which is frankly Zero, *claiming we have China shows utter nonsense , as if Chinese are going to do their share of work. Wake up man.
> By the way on topic Great job, Keep up Iran. Especially congrats to @SOHEIL ,@kolleang and many more Iranian friend.


LOL here comes a hindu.......Does yr teja still flies?


----------



## New World

Umair Nawaz said:


> LOL here comes a hindu.......*Does yr teja still flies*?


yar zakham pe namak to mat feko..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Gabriel92 said:


> Great looking plane,congratz.
> Even with the embargo,iran seems to do great achievements...
> 
> 
> 
> PressTV-Iran unveils supersonic fighter jet


Here comes F-5 BLOCK II for GOD sake Iranians better you try to get secretly jets from China or Russia just like Sudan has done many times


----------



## gau8av

Umair Nawaz said:


> LOL here comes a hindu.......Does yr teja still flies?


NLCA NP-1 outperformed our expectations, says ADA- Climb rate observed to be double than projected. 

but this thread is about the Iranian trainer, let's not derail it. 

good job, Iran !

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## SOHEIL

This is a trainer ... Really hard to understand !?

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## gslv mk3

Umair Nawaz said:


> LOL here comes a hindu.......Does yr teja still flies?



Tejas is in service.Can your country develop an ultralight aircraft on its own ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Major Shaitan Singh

*Bombs away!

https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video/B9eEe7BCMAAewTw.mp4*


----------



## yavar

*Iran Raw footage HESA manufactured Saeqeh 2 two seats supersonic fighter jet *

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## asad71

Shahryar Hedayati said:


>



Alhamdullillah! Allah be praised.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Nilesh Singh

Umair Nawaz said:


> LOL here comes a hindu.......Does yr teja still flies?


You a$$hole why are you bringing religion in every thing, i can also get into your gutter level and can call some nasty thing to you based on your religion, but i come from better environment and upbringing and two of my close friend are Muslim so basically i will be insulting them if i give nasty comment on religion to get back to you, but it just shows how backward thinking your country is and its people.
Now on tejas i think you need to Google to see that serial production has started, and how much indigenous your JF17 is another matter



New World said:


> yar zakham pe namak to mat feko..


Baccha hai, bacche ke tarah behave kar, nahi to Baap ko thik karna ata hai.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xyxmt

any video of its flying



Nilesh Singh said:


> Now on tejas i think you need to Google to see that serial production has started, and how much indigenous your JF17 is another matter



I dont think Pakistan ever claimed JFT is indigenous made, Indigenous Industries, Inc. is a Russian company :bobbleHead:


----------



## syedali73

Shahryar Hedayati said:


>


I am just a layman, but I can see a decent HUD and only one gun as appose to two in F5-E. I guess the gun is replaced to house extra avionics. F5-E is small and nimble and two vertical stabilizer would certainly reduce its radar signature.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

yavar said:


> *Iran Raw footage HESA manufactured Saeqeh 2 two seats supersonic fighter jet *



Great video. Well-done, every thing in this plane is engineered and developed in Iran, and this is indeed commendable to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## kollang

This is kowsar's cockpit.Iran's future transonic trainer jet which is similar to M-346 and Yak-130.Saeghe 2 probably uses similar cockpit.and the second picture is said to be saeghe's new cockpit.




Saeghe 2 also is equipped with a indigenous ejection seat which is based on K-36.it passed the test successfully at Armita flying lab
.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kurlang

No offence to iranian members however they are their biggest enimes. They rant alot and do no harm to enemy instead bring trouble upon themselves.


----------



## Stranagor

Full Moon said:


> That's a cheap propaganda made by Press TV (an offical TV funded by the Iranian government). They do that regularly so please don't take them seriously.
> 
> Take care.



Did you shake hand with cartoon image (with the guy behind the image sticking out his hand from some hole on the picture) of the dictator that passed away recently? Quite a sight was it!

Well done, Iran!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Manticore

PLAY NICELY KIDS


----------



## Faiez

Aamna Ali said:


> It really does not matter which fighter the Saeqeh is based on/copied from. *What is really commendable is the Iranian efforts in trying to approach the problem of sanctions and finding a way to workaround it.* Even China started by copying and modifying soviet jets. That experience of the Iranian engineers will be priceless in the next decade or two when they embark on actual designing and testing of fighters.
> You have to start somewhere...even if it is just refurbishing engines, redesigning older aircrafts,locally manufacture spares or cannibalizing other aircrafts
> A look at North Korean airforce is all it takes to understand what happens if a country is sanctioned for so long.
> Atleast Iran is trying. Even though the Qaher-313 is wideley regarded as made for propaganda, I believe that too represents the aspirations and will of the Iranian people to learn,research and overcome challenges.
> @haman10 @kollang @SOHEIL @JEskandari @Arminkh



They can stop nuclear programme, that will solve everything. Problem is not sanctions, problem is regime and nuclear programme.


----------



## Aamna Ali

Faiez said:


> They can stop nuclear programme, that will solve everything. Problem is not sanctions, problem is regime and nuclear programme.


Iran, as a sovereign,stable nation with better than average education levels has full rights to a peaceful Nuclear Program which their own scientists are developing. Why should any third country have a problem? And why should Iran even care? Especially when their energy sources and national products are being sanctioned?

Iran is no North Korea..They have some of the best brains in the world. Some of India's greatest Scientists have Parsee origins. The regime might be a problem for a few countries to deal with but thats a problem if at all for the Iranians to deal with.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## yavar

Faiez said:


> They can stop nuclear programme, that will solve everything. Problem is not sanctions, problem is regime and nuclear programme.


in your wet dream

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gau8av

inshallah, soon no sanctions on Iran and India and Iran can collaborate on a light fighter, space program and medicine 

jooz be damned, they'll come sniffing contract money anyway

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Full Moon

Stranagor said:


> Did you shake hand with cartoon image (with the guy behind the image sticking out his hand from some hole on the picture) of the dictator that passed away recently? Quite a sight was it!
> 
> Well done, Iran!!!


 
I am loyal to his majesty the King though I love to fairly criticize him and the whole regime sometimes. That video you are talking about is an isolated incident that was arranged in a school somewhere. It is not something that everybody has done - which as you pointed out very stupid.

Assuming that you are not a false flagler, you should remain quiet as you know dam well how the Georgian Stalin and the Ukrainian Khrushchev enslaved the whole Russian nation under the threat of being sent to the Gulag. If you are an Iranian covering under the Russian flag, then I should be quiet about whom you are waiting for to fix the universe's problems .


----------



## C130

I want to make it clear I love the F-5 and this copy. cheap to make and fly. good enough to take on terrorist scum.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Echo_419

Aamna Ali said:


> Iran, as a sovereign,stable nation with better than average education levels has full rights to a peaceful Nuclear Program which their own scientists are developing. Why should any third country have a problem? And why should Iran even care? Especially when their energy sources and national products are being sanctioned?
> 
> Iran is no North Korea..They have some of the best brains in the world. Some of India's greatest Scientists have Parsee origins. The regime might be a problem for a few countries to deal with but thats a problem if at all for the Iranians to deal with.



Agreed Iran has full right to a Nuclear Program

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## C130

Echo_419 said:


> Agreed Iran has full right to a Nuclear Program




everyone has the right to Nukes 
just like a child should be allowed to play with fire. it's just the responsible thing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Echo_419

C130 said:


> everyone has the right to Nukes
> just like a child should be allowed to play with fire. it's just the* responsible thing *



Agreed


----------



## C130

Echo_419 said:


> Agreed


lol, 
but I can see why Iran wants nukes so bad.
Israel got them
U.S got them
Saudi Arabia??? maybe

it's becoming a dangerous world everyday

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Echo_419

C130 said:


> lol,
> but I can see why Iran wants nukes so bad.
> Israel got them
> U.S got them
> Saudi Arabia??? maybe
> 
> it's becoming a dangerous world everyday



Indeed,the world is getting warmer & more dangerous everyday

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SALMAN F

C130 said:


> everyone has the right to Nukes
> just like a child should be allowed to play with fire. it's just the responsible thing


The first and the last country who used them was you

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## C130

SALMAN AL-FARSI said:


> The first and the last country who used them was you



and thank god it was us 
do you think Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan would of be as responsible with that kinda power???

we could of nuked the world into submission if we wanted, but that's not our MO


----------



## SALMAN F

C130 said:


> and thank god it was us
> do you think Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan would of be as responsible with that kinda power???
> 
> we could of nuked the world into submission if we wanted, but that's not our MO


You are the biggest threat to world peace that's why the international community need to take your nuclear arsenal away

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## C130

SALMAN AL-FARSI said:


> You are the biggest threat to world peace that's why the international community need to take your nuclear arsenal away




do you honestly think the world would be closer to world peace if the U.S never existed??


or if Western Europe never existed??

I believe world peace is only possible when us humans go extinct. 

God willing though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Aamna Ali said:


> Iran, as a sovereign,stable nation with better than average education levels has full rights to a peaceful Nuclear Program which their own scientists are developing. Why should any third country have a problem? And why should Iran even care? Especially when their energy sources and national products are being sanctioned?
> 
> Iran is no North Korea..They have some of the best brains in the world. Some of India's greatest Scientists have Parsee origins. The regime might be a problem for a few countries to deal with but thats a problem if at all for the Iranians to deal with.



Boy, ever since I joined this forum my respect for India and Indian people has sky rocketed! They are thriving in every aspect of science and economy yet are still so humble and respectful! 

This site is a great tool to find out who are the real friends and who are the real enemies. I hope our administration also come to the same conclusion and expand its ties with friendly nations like India. (I think they have already started!)

Thank you India for your kind attention like always!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Faiez

Aamna Ali said:


> Iran, as a sovereign,stable nation with better than average education levels has full rights to a peaceful Nuclear Program which their own scientists are developing. Why should any third country have a problem? And why should Iran even care? Especially when their energy sources and national products are being sanctioned?
> 
> Iran is no North Korea..They have some of the best brains in the world. Some of India's greatest Scientists have Parsee origins. The regime might be a problem for a few countries to deal with but thats a problem if at all for the Iranians to deal with.





yavar said:


> in your wet dream



biased towards Iran due to religious beliefs...

Iran keeps threatening its neighbours (most of them) with war all the time, funds hezbollah, funds syrian regime, stones citizens to death etc etc...

Iran is nothing on its own without russian and chinese backing. FACT.



Arminkh said:


> Boy, ever since I joined this forum my respect for India and Indian people has sky rocketed! They are thriving in every aspect of science and economy yet are still so humble and respectful!
> 
> This site is a great tool to find out who are the real friends and who are the real enemies. I hope our administration also come to the same conclusion and expand its ties with friendly nations like India. (I think they have already started!)
> 
> Thank you India for your kind attention like always!



the reason is the common socialistic thinking that Iranians and Indians both have...Same is the case with Iranian relationship with Russia and China. These guys just love socialism.


----------



## monitor

Congratulation to Iranian brothers for their achievement but the plane seems very old degine compare to modern Chinese Russian or European degine

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Faiez said:


> biased towards Iran due to religious beliefs...
> 
> Iran keeps threatening its neighbours (most of them) with war all the time, funds hezbollah, funds syrian regime, stones citizens to death etc etc...
> 
> Iran is nothing on its own without russian and chinese backing. FACT.



China and Russia have supported two rounds of UN sanctions on Iran. Russia used the same as an excuse for not delivering the S-300 system to Iran when Iran was being threated by Israel and US every day. Is this the support you are talking about?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Faiez

Arminkh said:


> China and Russia have supported two rounds of UN sanctions on Iran. Russia used the same as an excuse for not delivering the S-300 system to Iran when Iran was being threated by Israel and US every day. Is this the support you are talking about?



When you're threatening to wipe out entire countries (Israel and Saudi Arabia) off the map, not even your best friends are going to support you...Other than that, you very well know the kind of technical support Russia and China gives to Iran.


----------



## The SC

Arminkh said:


> China and Russia have supported two rounds of UN sanctions on Iran. Russia used the same as an excuse for not delivering the S-300 system to Iran when Iran was being threated by Israel and US every day. Is this the support you are talking about?


Without the Indian voice in the UN to support the sanctions against Iran, these sanctions could not have been implemented. It was the biggest betrayal to Iran ever and it came from India, Your own dearest and soothing friend. Read a bit about it...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Gabriel92 said:


> @kollang @Arminkh @Serpentine @haman10 @Daneshmand @Shahryar Hedayati @SOHEIL @ResurgentIran @rahi2357
> 
> Can someone translate a little part of this video ?


I will do it tonight if none of my fellow country men did it by then.



Faiez said:


> When you're threatening to wipe out entire countries (Israel and Saudi Arabia) off the map, not even your best friends are going to support you...Other than that, you very well know the kind of technical support Russia and China gives to Iran.



When was Saudi Arabia added to the list?? Wiping out Israel was also a wrong translation that Israelis used very well to their own advantage.

Providing technical support is not the kind of support that keeps countries relevant in the political struggle. Support is what Russia and China did for Syrian government. They didn't let a single threatening resolution pass in UN. Any country can get technical help when it pays for it. I'm sure yours can and already does too.

At the end of the day, any country should and would look after its own interest. Russia in particular doesn't want to see Iran becoming a big power in the middle east but also doesn't want it to be taken over by the west and become another poppet nation. So if you pay close attention you'll see that it is trying to maintain a balance, whenever it thinks Iran is becoming too strong, it is on the west side supporting their action. Whenever it feels it is getting to the point that Iran may fall apart and become a western satellite state, it changes its position and starts supporting Iran. There is no good will. It is just Russia looking after its own interest. Same is true for China.



The SC said:


> Without the Indian voice in the UN to support the sanctions against Iran, these sanctions could not have been implemented. It was the biggest betrayal to Iran ever and it came from India, Your own dearest and soothing friend. Read a bit about it...



Countries look after their own interests and so does India. Nobody should reasonably expect India to jeopardize its economic ties with the west in return for keeping its trade with Iran which is insignificant compared to what it may lose.

What I call a good, friendly nation is the one that is looking after its own interest and is happy when its neighbors are also progressing. What I call an unfriendly nation are those that are not going anywhere themselves and feel threatened when another nation does and do try to sabotage that nation's interests in any way they can. India has never been that sort of country towards Iran.

I also think the new Indian government has a totally different attitude and from what I can see in this forum it is consistent with overall Indian public opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SALMAN F

C130 said:


> do you honestly think the world would be closer to world peace if the U.S never existed??
> 
> 
> or if Western Europe never existed??
> 
> I believe world peace is only possible when us humans go extinct.
> 
> God willing though.


Your so called us and Western Europe are responsible for genocide and wars and starvations 

The world will be more peaceful if wasn't for your warmonger politicians and military complex

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The SC

Arminkh said:


> I will do it tonight if none of my fellow country men did it by then.
> 
> 
> 
> When was Saudi Arabia added to the list?? Wiping out Israel was also a wrong translation that Israelis used very well to their own advantage.
> 
> Providing technical support is not the kind of support that keeps countries relevant in the political struggle. Support is what Russia and China did for Syrian government. They didn't let a single threatening resolution pass in UN. Any country can get technical help when it pays for it. I'm sure yours can and already does too.
> 
> At the end of the day, any country should and would look after its own interest. Russia in particular doesn't want to see Iran becoming a big power in the middle east but also doesn't want it to be taken over by the west and become another poppet nation. So if you pay close attention you'll see that it is trying to maintain a balance, whenever it thinks Iran is becoming too strong, it is on the west side supporting their action. Whenever it feels it is getting to the point that Iran may fall apart and become a western satellite state, it changes its position and starts supporting Iran. There is no good will. It is just Russia looking after its own interest. Same is true for China.
> 
> 
> 
> Countries look after their own interests and so does India. Nobody should reasonably expect India to jeopardize its economic ties with the west in return for keeping its trade with Iran which is insignificant compared to what it may lose.
> 
> What I call a good, friendly nation is the one what is looking after its own interest and is happy when its neighbors are also progressing. What I call an unfriendly nation are those that are not going anywhere themselves and feel threatened when another nation does and do try to sabotage that nation's interests in any way they can. India has never been that sort of country towards Iran.
> 
> I also think the new Indian government has a totally different attitude and from what I can see in this forum it is consistent with overall Indian public opinion.



I am not sure about it brother. looks can be deceiving. And India is befriending Iran's top enemies who live and die with "by way of deception". This was the biggest betrayal of any "friendly" country of Iran, since it allowed these 35 years sanctions imposed on Iran. Not long ago, maybe a year or so, An Indian oil ship poured its highly polluting waist in Iranian water and took its oil from Iraq... For no reason other than Iran asking for its oil money!!! Think whatever you want about it, but these are not friendly behaviors. Iranians are wise enough to know how to deal with overt or covert threats...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Daneshmand

SipahSalar said:


> Questioning the Phoenix makes me a troll? very well then, happy to be one.
> 
> 
> Read about it from actual sites rather than wikipedia. It was made to counter slow moving bombers and yes cruise missiles, but NOT fighters, it was simply not maneouverable enough. Some modifications were made to it in 90's by USA to give it some effectiveness vs fighters, but with questionable results. Even so Iran did not get that upgrade from USA since it was post-revolution.
> 
> Wrong. It has been used a few times and failed to get a single kill. In 30 years of use, it has been unable to secure a single kill. Iran claims to have shot some planes with it but that, like other claims by Iran, is questionable. Iran used F14's as a poor man's AWACs in the Iran-Iraq war rather than as a fighter due to its powerful radar.



You are a troll who is ignorant. It is of no use to debate with you. As can be seen you have a very illogical and distorted way of thinking. You are the same person who is saying that Pakistan does not have any BVR capability on another thread, and then on this thread you have the audacity to criticize Iran's BVR capability in an ignorant unscientific way. Let's look at your statement: Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2 | Page 560



> our agreement with USA forbids BVR weapons on [Pakistani] F-16s.




So if as per you, Pakistan is not even "*allowed*" to have BVR capability by United Sates, hurrah to Iran that actually reverse engineers AIM-54 and AIM-7.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Gabriel92 said:


> Can someone translate a little part of this video ?


Blah...Blah...It's the result of two years project (saeqe1->saeqe2), it's a multi-role fighter for use in air to air missions, close combat support for ground and naval unites, and also advanced training.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SipahSalar

Daneshmand said:


> You are a troll who is ignorant. It is of no use to debate with you. As can be seen you have a very illogical and distorted way of thinking. You are the same person who is saying that Pakistan does not have any BVR capability on another thread, and then on this thread you have the audacity to criticize Iran's BVR capability in an ignorant unscientific way. Let's look at your statement: Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2 | Page 560


Meh, read my posts on this thread. When did this become PAF vs IAF?


Daneshmand said:


> So if as per you, Pakistan is not even "*allowed*" to have BVR capability by United Sates, hurrah to Iran that actually reverse engineers AIM-54 and AIM-7.


Yes, that belief was based on an interview with a PAF pilot several years ago. Still, it was good to be corrected, i did't argue pointlessly after the reference was given. Again, totally irrelevant since this is not about PAF vs IAF, or even IAF. It's about AIM-54.


----------



## C130

SALMAN AL-FARSI said:


> Your so called us and Western Europe are responsible for genocide and wars and starvations
> 
> The world will be more peaceful if wasn't for your warmonger politicians and military complex



lmao, how naive. these things have been happening for thousands of years.
get off your high horse Hussein.


----------



## CMYX4BJ

Is the engine also indigenous? If not , how did they get it despite sanctions?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dominance

CMYX4BJ said:


> Is the engine also indigenous? If not , how did they get it despite sanctions?


It's probably the Iranian version of the Klimov RD-33 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Faiez said:


> Iran is nothing on its own without russian and chinese backing. FACT.
> .


yes I like your facts China ohohoho according to you our friend which have done everything in past 37 years to harm us and eaten our money every time possible . only one question my fact friend can tell me how much money China owe Iran on oil money which they are not paying ?? or how much money China has eaten on military contract ??
and especially Russia our best friend according to you .i do not think this Russia BS need any explanation they are so our friend my fact friend and we look upon them as friend so i do not need to say anything


if I am allowed you can F*** both and keep them

just one more question my fact friend why is it Iran only improving it relation only i say only with India if Iran need them two countries ??

you many want to have look at thread below
Iran and India relation Banking oil gas culture economy



when fool open it's mouths it only embarrass himself

my fact friend you can ask every single Iranian member here in
forum if they look at Russia and China less than enemy

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Abii said:


> Qaher 313, hamoon ke az moghava sakhtin, pas chi bood? Goftin stealthe lol
> 
> Dar morede hamin Saegheham koli harto poort kardin oon avalesh. Hala eshkali nadare, hadeaghal indafe ziad zaye bazi dar nayovordin.


Well I guess there is some differences between qaher and saeqeh also if qaher is made of paper , well then it really is stealth . 
By the way there never was a single claim about saeqeh being stealth .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SipahSalar

CMYX4BJ said:


> Is the engine also indigenous? If not , how did they get it despite sanctions?


Yes, the question about engine is a very important one. So far even China has not been able to make its own engine (its in the pipeline). I think this fighter is more likely a refit of F-5. If not then they will have to transfer the engine of old F-5s' to the new planes.


----------



## Arminkh

SipahSalar said:


> Yes, the question about engine is a very important one. So far even China has not been able to make its own engine (its in the pipeline). I think this fighter is more likely a refit of F-5. If not then they will have to transfer the engine of old F-5s' to the new planes.


Iran does copy some of the jet engines. There is a facility in Iran called Tuga that is specialized in building gas turbines for power generation industry. I know they had plans to start a jet engine line as well. Iran has been manufacturing F-5 engine (J-85) for some time. It is not a modern jet engine so you should not compare it with what China is trying to achieve.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TurAr

A new season of Iran unveiling supersonic things has started already?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## xenon54 out

TurAr said:


> A new season of Iran unveiling supersonic things has started already?


WTF? The guy who made this is a genious.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Iran is beating the odds. Give where credit is due. 

I am new guy in this forum but would like to question why Muslims question or mock the progress of other Muslims. It is indeed sad!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

flatron said:


> If you can differentiate between Progress and Propaganda, you will understand the reason for mocking.Be it a muslim ,christian or ateist. If you do this scale of scam, people will mock you regardless of your religious back ground.


what's the propaganda about this airplane ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

flatron said:


> If you can differentiate between Progress and Propaganda, you will understand the reason for mocking.Be it a muslim ,christian or ateist. If you do this scale of scam, people will mock you regardless of your religious back ground.



Show me one single country in the middle east which has got knowledge and capability to design and make all needed parts of a fighter jet domestically and from scratch while unlike Iran they enjoy scientific and technological aids from western countries and they don't need to struggle with toughest sanctions ever imposed on a nation in the history.
We don't care if others mock us or underestimate our capabilities actually it's a matter of time one day all these efforts will take us to a position that all these mocking will fade away and shame will remain for these clowns. in that time we will laugh at them.
If you see Iran put satelites in the orbit you should realize we started or missile program by working on stove pipes and now we capable to do such a things.
during Iran and Iraq war our soldiers did not have diving suit to pass river and retake our lands and now we make submarines frigate and what ever we need to secure our seas.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## yavar

JEskandari said:


> what's the propaganda about this airplane ?


you see the propaganda is that especially with two countries more upset then others . when it comes to China and west Asia supper power ( Turkey ) every thing we do to close our technological gap is propaganda it al because we no longer have to buy the chinese crap

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

flatron said:


> Sorry if i offended people. Deleting my message.


there is nothing to be sorry about .
this is forum and we Iranians know how you Chinese feel about it . 
is not only you from China we have some other chinese members here who feel sameway like you and did post same way as you did .
this is one of best thing in Pakistani forum everybody is allowed to express their point of view

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indos

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Iran is beating the odds. Give where credit is due.
> 
> I am new guy in this forum but would like to question why Muslims question or mock the progress of other Muslims. It is indeed sad!



Maybe because Ali Khomeini support Bashar Al-Assad regime and send Hisbullah to Syria to back that authoritarian regime blindly. 200.000 death is something my friend. Iran should accept peace agreement condition by leaving Bashar alone. Muslim should unite of course, but why Ali Khomeini keep helping that criminal for the sake of his ego .....?

There will be a respond of any reaction. Before, Iran was good, even Indonesia helped Iran when we were still in UN security council by voting against US vote. The name of Iran was good in my country before, but Today is quite different though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> Maybe because Ali Khomeini support Bashar Al-Assad regime and send Hisbullah to Syria to back that authoritarian regime blindly. 200.000 death is something my friend. Iran should accept peace agreement condition by leaving Bashar alone. Muslim should unite of course, but why Ali Khomeini keep helping that criminal for the sake of his ego .....?
> 
> There will be a respond of any reaction. Before, Iran was good, even Indonesia helped Iran when we were still in UN security council by voting against US vote. The name of Iran was good in my country before, but Today is quite different though.


well three question ?
1 - who is Ali Khomeini ?
2 - why foreigner must decide who rule Syria ? , why not accept that Bashar Asad also must participate in the election so Syrian decide if they want him or not .?
3 - Did you support terrorists like ISIS and Al-Nosra front or Hypocrite like FSA if they were operating in Indonesia not Syria ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Indos

JEskandari said:


> well three question ?
> 1 - who is Ali Khomeini ?
> 2 - why foreigner must decide who rule Syria ? , why not accept that Bashar Asad also must participate in the election so Syrian decide if they want him or not .?
> 3 - Did you support terrorists like ISIS and Al-Nosra front or Hypocrite like FSA if they were operating in Indonesia not Syria ?



Ok, good you ask that.........

1.






2. Bashar has already had his term since he is 36 years old, more than enough now, more than 10 years. Even our Prophet only has around that time as a ruler. And we all have learned something about another Muslim past ruler ( the just ones), Abu Bakr, Umar, Usmant, and Ali, they also had not more or about 10 years maximal as rulers. 

So, for any country who try to use Islam as their main principle to run a country, it should be seen as mistake if the people there don't try to limit their ruler time or seeing another leader who rules more than 10 years like Assad as something that is still appropriate morally and religiously. Here, in Indonesia we also have a law limiting our ruler to be in power not more than 10 years ( 2 term )

Secondly, the reason of why Bashar should not participate in the election because it is already too late for him for doing that. If he make election before the war happen, people can still accept this, but after he makes a war against his own people..........????

Even in Indonesia we forced Soeharto to step down despite the fact that he offered another election to us. And why then Soeharto stepped down...Does he surrender voluntarily ? Nope, It is because leaders around him and in parliament (not elected fairly at that time and can be regarded as a crony of Soeharto but surprisingly still have heart ) leaved him and understand that the time for democracy has come. Your support to him makes him strong inside his country, so you have responsibility of that killings and deaths.

And after the civil war happen, do you still think that he is even still worthy to run again ????? Dont you understand that he is the one who is cruel enough to sacrifice hundred thousand of his people and many infrastructure in order to remain in power.....? Why just step down and sacrifice his power for the sake of the peace and unity of his own country.....???? 

3. I dont support ISIS or Al-Qaeda, only fools who support them. And hey, I am not a fanatic person, I am no follower of any Islamic sect or leader. I see some truth in Wahhabi and in the same time seeing other truth in Sufism. Both of them also has some weakness that I don't follow. I combine both of them. I also try to learn some from your 12 Imams. I am not a blindly supporter of any stream or leader. And I see Today so many Muslim become a fanatic of their leader or sect/stream without thinking and see deeply to his/her heart what their heart actually try to tell.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## spiderkiller

@Indos dude at least use google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## New World

Nilesh Singh said:


> Baccha hai, bacche ke tarah behave kar, nahi to Baap ko thik karna ata hai.



Oops! me tou Dar gaya


----------



## raptor22

Indos said:


> Ok, good you ask that.........
> 
> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Bashar has already had his term since he is 36 years old, more than enough now, more than 10 years. Even our Prophet only has around that time as a ruler. And we all have learned something about another Muslim past ruler ( the just ones), Abu Bakr, Umar, Usmant, and Ali, they also had not more or about 10 years maximal as rulers.
> 
> So, for any country who try to use Islam as their main principle to run a country, it should be seen as mistake if the people there don't try to limit their ruler time or seeing another leader who rules more than 10 years like Assad as something that is still appropriate morally and religiously. Here, in Indonesia we also have a law limiting our ruler to be in power not more than 10 years ( 2 term )
> 
> Secondly, the reason of why Bashar should not participate in the election because it is already too late for him for doing that. If he make election before the war happen, people can still accept this, but after he makes a war against his own people..........????
> 
> Even in Indonesia we forced Soeharto to step down despite the fact that he offered another election to us. And why then Soeharto stepped down...Does he surrender voluntarily ? Nope, It is because leaders around him and in parliament (not elected fairly at that time and can be regarded as a crony of Soeharto but surprisingly still have heart ) leaved him and understand that the time for democracy has come. Your support to him makes him strong inside his country, so you have responsibility of that killings and deaths.
> 
> And after the civil war happen, do you still think that he is even still worthy to run again ????? Dont you understand that he is the one who is cruel enough to sacrifice hundred thousand of his people and many infrastructure in order to remain in power.....? Why just step down and sacrifice his power for the sake of the peace and unity of his own country.....????
> 
> 3. I dont support ISIS or Al-Qaeda, only fools who support them. And hey, I am not a fanatic person, I am no follower of any Islamic sect or leader. I see some truth in Wahhabi and in the same time seeing other truth in Sufism. Both of them also has some weakness that I don't follow. I combine both of them. I also try to learn some from your 12 Imams. I am not a blindly supporter of any stream or leader. And I see Today so many Muslim become a fanatic of their leader or sect/stream without thinking and see deeply to his/her heart what their heart actually try to tell.




You missed one point mentioned by @JEskandari :

why not accept that Bashar Asad also must participate in the election so Syrian decide if they want him or not .?​It's not Iran, America or any other power to decide he should step down or not , it's a decision that Syrian people should make not anyone else. As you said you as a nation forced Soeharto to step down, not America or Arab monerchies not some bunch of terrorists from all over world.

Democracy will come when someone stop interfearing in other countries internal affairs, and be sure none of these countries that seek removal of Assad care for democracy and human right. Palestine issue is a clear example for it.
Saudi could bring democracy first for his people and then for his doorstep Bahrain, at least Assad was elected during an election what about those kings?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Otocal

Don't intend to troll but this is simply F-5 NG (Next Gen) nothing revolutionary


----------



## Zabaniyah

A very impressive achievement. 

Especially the engine part which is the hardest in any aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Otocal said:


> Don't intend to troll but this is simply F-5 NG (Next Gen) nothing revolutionary



Yes... Just a trainer !

Using existing platform is the fastest way...

& where exactly we said anything about being revolutionary !?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

TurAr said:


> A new season of Iran unveiling supersonic things has started already?





xenon54 said:


> WTF? The guy who made this is a genious.


any words on anka yet , butthurt torks ? 

look , once again , for the millionth time : if our military industries shyte and that shyte crap itself to death , the shitty result will be light years ahead of you in technology . 

you can ridicule others till you die , this is what you do like other muslims in the region : you make fun of others cause you are not capable of keeping up with them .

i'd love to see you when in 2018 first iranian astronaut finishes his sub-orbital exploration and you are still busy posting carp 

@Serpentine please remove off-topic butthurtness

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Otocal

SOHEIL said:


> Yes... Just a trainer !
> 
> Using existing platform is the fastest way...
> 
> & where exactly we said anything about being revolutionary !?



So what are you doing to counter the Arabs? They have the latest F-16's, F-15's and Typhoons and afaik you only have a few Mig29 base variants. Arabs will obviously hire mercs to fly so no pilot skill won't be an issue for them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Dominance said:


> It's probably the Iranian version of the Klimov RD-33 engine.



Holy shit! 

Please do some research about the size of RD-33 engine!



Otocal said:


> So what are you doing to counter the Arabs? They have the latest F-16's, F-15's and Typhoons and afaik you only have a few Mig29 base variants. Arabs will obviously hire mercs to fly so no pilot skill won't be an issue for them



Unlike fat Arabs we can't buy & we have to develop! 

You have your own program... So you know! 

Takes time & patience.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Otocal said:


> Don't intend to troll but this is simply F-5 NG (Next Gen) nothing revolutionary


You are correct. It is using the same platform.

I haven't seen enough details about this version but the changes to the one seated versions are as follow:


Two canted stabilizers which will increase its stability during high AOA manuver
Removal of one of the cannons which is an indication of larger radar or avionics
Change to the air inlet. I'm not sure what it would mean.
The engine section is bulged out that is an indication of a larger engine being used.
Here is a useful summary:

Iran's F-5-based fighter - signs of progress? - The Woracle

Steve Trimble has posted new pictures of the Iranian-developed Saegheh fighter over on his blog, The DEW Line. Look past the Blue Angels colour scheme and you will see subtle but significant differences between the two aircraft featured that suggest Iran’s “Lightning” is more than simply a reverse-engineered Tiger with two tails.

The first aircraft, presumably the earliest, looks pretty much like an F-5E and even the twin fins have a “tacked-on” appearance.









But the second aircraft, while similar in planform, has a number of differences including enlarged and reshaped inlets.









The first aircraft’s inlets are F-5 sized and shaped. The second one (right) has rectangular inlets that appear larger, and the wing leading-edge root extensions are slightly different.








A closer look shows the second aircraft’s intake trunk is bulged compared with the F-5E’s classic “coke-bottle” shape, although the auxiliary inlet is still there.








The base of the fin also has a more faired-in appearance, so the second aircraft could be the production version. The reason for the inlet redesign is not clear as the nozzles of both aircraft look similar, suggesting the engines have not changed.

But maybe there is a bigger engine in the pipeline, making for a higher performing aircraft. Which might explain why they would spoil the classic lines of the F-5 by doubling up on tails.

Meanwhile, this picture from Tehran’s military parade on 22 September shows two of the round-intake aircraft and one square-intake (top left)


- See more at: Iran's F-5-based fighter - signs of progress? - The Woracle

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Otocal

SOHEIL said:


> Holy shit!
> 
> Please do some research about the size of RD-33 engine!
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike fat Arabs we can't buy & we have to develop!
> 
> You have your own program... So you know!
> 
> Takes time & patience.



You can't buy Russian stuff?

They have Su30 and 35 available. Or Mig29K the latest one with all latest tech.


----------



## Indos

raptor22 said:


> You missed one point mentioned by @JEskandari :
> 
> why not accept that Bashar Asad also must participate in the election so Syrian decide if they want him or not .?​It's not Iran, America or any other power to decide he should step down or not , it's a decision that Syrian people should make not anyone else. As you said you as a nation forced Soeharto to step down, not America or Arab monerchies not some bunch of terrorists from all over world.
> 
> Democracy will come when someone stop interfearing in other countries internal affairs, and be sure none of these countries that seek removal of Assad care for democracy and human right. Palestine issue is a clear example for it.
> Saudi could bring democracy first for his people and then for his doorstep Bahrain, at least Assad was elected during an election what about those kings?



1. As I said before, Bashar is not eligible any more to remain in power morally, please read why I said so at my post above

2. By seeing so many demonstrations happening at their city streets especially at Homs, so we can see what people really want in Syria, at least the majority really want to change the regime. As Indonesian, who was under authoritarian regime before, we know exactly what people really feel under such regime, especially young people. And for your understanding, the demonstration that we did against Soeharto during 1997-1998 was only done by university students, so few compared to what happened in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Libya etc but we still can topple him because many of our leaders see the logic and moral on that, so they supported us and left Soeharto alone, which make him feel under pressure. Actually our Army was still loyal to him during that time, but Soeharto knows the time for democracy cannot be stopped anymore, so he step down after people started burning the city and the parliament open their building complex for university students which is then followed by many of his ministers resigned. After stepping down, we forgive him and still see him as one of our respected leader. Many opposition leader who are his enemy during 1997-98 came to his funeral to show respect. Case closed and every one happy.

3. The time to determine whether democracy should be implemented or not is when people are badly protesting to have that, so in a time where chaos is going to start, it is the time for any ruler to let go their power, so they should give the power to his vice president and then is followed by fair election. Thats why all terrible things that we saw in Libya and Syria actually could be prevented if Moammar Gadafi or Bashar act fast by stepping down, so all of political infrastructure that still remain can ensure smooth transition from authoritarianism into democracy system. Exactly like Indonesia and Tunisia did.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Otocal said:


> You can't buy Russian stuff?
> 
> They have Su30 and 35 available. Or Mig29K the latest one with all latest tech.



Yes... They had S-300 !

But what happened? 

We have to develop indigenous stuff to counter threats...

Relying on foreign products is the last thing we want! 

Specially in military sector...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

SOHEIL said:


> Holy shit!
> 
> Please do some research about the size of RD-33 engine!



I may agree with RD-33 option based on what I mentioned above.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Otocal

Arminkh said:


> You are correct. It is using the same platform.
> 
> I haven't seen enough details about this version but the changes to the one seated versions are as follow:
> 
> 
> Two canted stabilizers which will increase its stability during high AOA manuver
> Removal of one of the cannons which is an indication of larger radar or avionics
> Change to the air inlet. I'm not sure what it would mean.
> The engine section is bulged out that is an indication of a larger engine being used.
> Here is a useful summary:
> 
> Iran's F-5-based fighter - signs of progress? - The Woracle
> 
> Steve Trimble has posted new pictures of the Iranian-developed Saegheh fighter over on his blog, The DEW Line. Look past the Blue Angels colour scheme and you will see subtle but significant differences between the two aircraft featured that suggest Iran’s “Lightning” is more than simply a reverse-engineered Tiger with two tails.
> 
> The first aircraft, presumably the earliest, looks pretty much like an F-5E and even the twin fins have a “tacked-on” appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the second aircraft, while similar in planform, has a number of differences including enlarged and reshaped inlets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first aircraft’s inlets are F-5 sized and shaped. The second one (right) has rectangular inlets that appear larger, and the wing leading-edge root extensions are slightly different.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A closer look shows the second aircraft’s intake trunk is bulged compared with the F-5E’s classic “coke-bottle” shape, although the auxiliary inlet is still there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The base of the fin also has a more faired-in appearance, so the second aircraft could be the production version. The reason for the inlet redesign is not clear as the nozzles of both aircraft look similar, suggesting the engines have not changed.
> 
> But maybe there is a bigger engine in the pipeline, making for a higher performing aircraft. Which might explain why they would spoil the classic lines of the F-5 by doubling up on tails.
> 
> Meanwhile, this picture from Tehran’s military parade on 22 September shows two of the round-intake aircraft and one square-intake (top left)
> 
> 
> - See more at: Iran's F-5-based fighter - signs of progress? - The Woracle



Sir you are taking the right steps in the right direction. 

Hopefully we can co-operate one day if the US lifts some sanctions on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Arminkh said:


> I may agree with RD-33 option based on what I mentioned above.



There is no way to place RD-33 engines inside! 

Only something like F-20 tiger shark will be possible with a single RD-33 smoking engine!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abii

Otocal said:


> You can't buy Russian stuff?
> 
> They have Su30 and 35 available. Or Mig29K the latest one with all latest tech.


Russia isn't allowed to sell the mullahs offensive weapons (UN sanctions). But more importantly, the mullahs are broke these days. They don't have any money, period. 

Just to put things in perspective for you, last year Iran exported just a touch over a million barrels a day! Canada exported 3 million a day to just the US and growing. That's right, Canada exports 3 times more oil than Iran. 10 years ago this would've been unfathomable. But here we are. By 2020 the gap will get even more comical. 

In any case, they don't have the cash to buy dick these days and it's only gonna get worse. Russia won't sell it to them anyway. Even if it wanted to there's the matter of those pesky UN sanctions.


----------



## Otocal

SOHEIL said:


> Yes... They had S-300 !
> 
> But what happened?
> 
> We have to develop indigenous stuff to counter threats...
> 
> Relying on foreign products is the last thing we want!
> 
> Specially in military sector...



What a spirit... pity in India we don't have even an inkling of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TurAr

haman10 said:


> any words on anka yet , butthurt torks ?
> 
> look , once again , for the millionth time : if our military industries shyte and that shyte crap itself to death , the shitty result will be light years ahead of you in technology .
> 
> you can ridicule others till you die , this is what you do like other muslims in the region : you make fun of others cause you are not capable of keeping up with them .
> 
> i'd love to see you when in 2018 first iranian astronaut finishes his sub-orbital exploration and you are still busy posting carp
> 
> @Serpentine please remove off-topic butthurtness



Indeed if you had one, it would have been a shitty one but you don't even have a military industry. What you have is a mullah propaganda machine pumping up these ridicilous "unveilings" every now and then.

By the way, the Iranian astronaut has already finished his little space exploration and rewarded with a banana on its return. Don't you remember?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Otocal

Abii said:


> Russia isn't allowed to sell the mullahs offensive weapons (UN sanctions). But more importantly, the mullahs are broke these days. They don't have any money, period.
> 
> Just to put things in perspective for you, last year Iran exported just a touch over a million barrels a day! Canada exported 3 million a day to just the US and growing. That's right, Canada exports 3 times more oil than Iran. 10 years ago this would've been unfathomable. But here we are. By 2020 the gap will get even more comical.
> 
> In any case, they don't have the cash to buy dick these days and it's only gonna get worse. Russia won't sell it to them anyway. Even if it wanted to there's the matter of those pesky UN sanctions.



I see. With Keystone XL that gap will multiply. 

Does Russia care much about the UN? Matter of time the "freedom fighters" link up with Kaliningrad district.

And then theres China always. You can buy J-11 from them. But your spirit to make indigenous is just amazing. Keep it up after all Rome was not built in a day and neither did the USA import F-16 from any other country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

TurAr said:


> Don't you remember?


i remember sending you up there . unfortunately the mission was a total success .

use the K+ and P+ in the banana to help out your countrymen in designing anka .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

Otocal said:


> I see. With Keystone XL that gap will multiply.
> 
> Does Russia care much about the UN? Matter of time the "freedom fighters" link up with Kaliningrad district.
> 
> And then theres China always. You can buy J-11 from them. But your spirit to make indigenous is just amazing. Keep it up after all Rome was not built in a day and neither did the USA import F-16 from any other country.


The equation may change. One thing that one should always remember is that there is an end to any trend and nothing will go forever, even the sanctions on Iran:

Russia Invokes Threat of Anti-Western Bloc Centered on Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

TurAr said:


> Indeed if you had one, it would have been a shitty one but you don't even have a military industry. What you have is a mullah propaganda machine pumping up these ridicilous "unveilings" every now and then.
> 
> By the way, the Iranian astronaut has already finished his little space exploration and rewarded with a banana on its return. Don't you remember?



I can award you a big banana if you close your insulting mouth little ape!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

TurAr said:


> Indeed if you had one, it would have been a shitty one but you don't even have a military industry. What you have is a mullah propaganda machine pumping up these ridicilous "unveilings" every now and then.
> 
> By the way, the Iranian astronaut has already finished his little space exploration and rewarded with a banana on its return. Don't you remember?


Are you back from vacation? Hadn't see you for a while around here

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Arminkh said:


> Are you back from vacation? Hadn't see you for a while around here



He was in a suborbital mission!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Abii

Otocal said:


> I see. With Keystone XL that gap will multiply.
> 
> Does Russia care much about the UN? Matter of time the "freedom fighters" link up with Kaliningrad district.
> 
> And then theres China always. You can buy J-11 from them. But your spirit to make indigenous is just amazing. Keep it up after all Rome was not built in a day and neither did the USA import F-16 from any other country.


Yes it does. The sanctions only specify offensive weapons, but after the sanctions came into effect, Russia refused to sell the S300, which is a defensive weapon. They went beyond the sanctions. 

In any case, as I said, the mullahs don't have the money anymore. Iran is broke. 

The Keystone XL will add at least another million barrels a day to our exports in the short run. Total exports will probably be around 5 million barrels a day by 2020.


----------



## haviZsultan

C130 said:


> lol,
> but I can see why Iran wants nukes so bad.
> Israel got them
> U.S got them
> Saudi Arabia??? maybe
> 
> it's becoming a dangerous world everyday



What about the US which has the second highest stockpile, AND happens to be the only country to have used a nuke which culminated in the death of 200,000. It surrounds Iran from 2 sides. Iraq and Afghanistan. No wonder the Iranians feel threatened.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Abii said:


> Yes it does. The sanctions only specify offensive weapons, but after the sanctions came into effect, Russia refused to sell the S300, which is a defensive weapon. They went beyond the sanctions.
> 
> In any case, as I said, the mullahs don't have the money anymore. Iran is broke.
> 
> The Keystone XL will add at least another million barrels a day to our exports in the short run. Total exports will probably be around 5 million barrels a day by 2020.



Good luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## C130

haviZsultan said:


> What about the US which has the second highest stockpile, AND happens to be the only country to have used a nuke which culminated in the death of 200,000. It surrounds Iran from 2 sides. Iraq and Afghanistan. No wonder the Iranians feel threatened.




my my this same excuse. we had to build the nuke. Nazi Germany knew about the potential of the Nuke and so did Imperial Japan, but in the latter they decided to go the biological weapons route and even tested it on poor Chinese 


and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified, and yet I don't hear no one cry about all the firebombing of Japan and Germany that killed many more, lol.

nukes are not just for show sometimes you gotta use them, and I think both Iran and Israel won't shy from that. annihilate each other for all I care.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

This is for anyone who thinks Iran is broke:


*Iran’s car sales up 32% *
*
Iran’s car sales rose 32 percent this year as the industry started emerging from years of sanctions, an official has said.*

As many as 1.1 million units were sold in the current Iranian year which ends on March 21, 2015, head of the commerce and sales office of Saipa Co. Mohammad Reza Abbasi said. 

The figures compared to 737,000 cars sold last year, he said. Abbasi said both production and sales by Saipa rose 32 percent during the period.

Saipa and Iran Khodro account for 82 percent of the country’s auto making market.

“Saipa has currently two sanctions-busting plans in order to increase sales,” Abbasi said.

He said the automaker will start producing a low-cost car, Saina, in the first half of the new Iranian year.

Saipa will also unveil more than 10 models at the next auto show in the central of Isfahan, he added.

Iran’s auto industry is the biggest in the Middle East which it has developed for five decades. The country produced 1.6 million vehicles in 2011, the year new sanctions were introduced by the Europeans.

PressTV-Iran’s car sales up 32%



*Western firms in rush for Iran trade *
*
Multinational companies are jockeying for position as nuclear talks between Iran and international negotiators shift to high gear amid hopes of a final deal.*

“I am already seeing a rush to market by US and EU companies and no one wants to be left behind,” says Nigel Kushner, a director of British-Iranian Chamber of Commerce.

“There is certainly an element of competition between US and EU exporters and EU companies may feel they have strength in numbers by unifying,” he said in remarks published by The Wall Street Journal.

Kushner is the chief executive of W Legal Ltd., a law firm that specializes in sanctions.

Iran’s lucrative, untapped market has always offered a mouth-watering prospect to foreign firms, but a web of US-led sanctions has kept them at bay.

The Europeans now “fear their American rivals will be able to move first once sanctions are lifted”, The Journal wrote. 

“Their main concern is that European companies face often-complicated national regimes to approve exports to Iran while their US counterparts operate with a unified, clearer export approval process,” it said.

*Europeans feel sacrificed*

US trade with Iran rose to $315 million in 2013 from $234 million in 2011, according to US Census Bureau data. During the same period, European trade fell to 6 billion euros ($8.2 billion) from 28 billion euros, European Commission figures show.

US company World Eco Energy has signed a preliminary agreement to invest $1.175 billion to generate electricity in Iran by turning solid waste into power.

Last October, US aerospace giant Boeing booked its first sales to Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. American energy giants Halliburton and ExxonMobil have been testing the waters for work in Iran. Dell Inc. and General Electric Co. have approached potential Iranian distributors to sell personal computers and power-generation equipment.

Apple has been reported to be exploring the Iranian market for possible sales of iPhone should sanctions ease.

The Europeans are complaining. According to Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the EU parliament, the European Union needs to address concerns with the US.

“American sanctions vis-a-vis Iran have had undesired extra-territorial impact on EU business,” Schaake, who was in Iran in December, has told Bloomberg.

Wary of lagging behind, the Europeans have rolled up sleeves, forming a European-Iranian Business Alliance with the Iranian chambers of commerce.

The group intends to raise with the EU the hurdles which European exporters face in finding banks to handle their transactions with Iran.

Exporters say when banks refuse Iran transactions, EU governments cite it a commercial decision.

But in practice, “the US is bullying companies through the banks,” Norman Lamont, president of British-Iranian Chamber of Commerce, told The Wall Street Journal.

*Iran’s potentials*

In Iran, officials are sanguine. “Iran will soon achieve the best economic standing in the Middle East and North Africa,” Economy Minister Ali Tayyeb-Nia said.

The West “must put an end to tyrannical sanctions on the Iranian nation as soon as possible”, he added.

Iran is the world’s 18th largest economy worth $1.2 trillion at purchasing-power parity.

The country of 80 million prides itself on a well-educated pool of population, sitting on the world’s third largest oil and second largest gas reserves.

Tehran’s stock exchange is the Middle East’s second largest, worth $150 billion.

“With the prudence and the guidelines of the Leader (Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei), the evil of sanctions will be removed.”

PressTV-Western firms in rush for Iran trade

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Indos said:


> Maybe because Ali Khomeini support Bashar Al-Assad regime and send Hisbullah to Syria to back that authoritarian regime blindly. 200.000 death is something my friend. Iran should accept peace agreement condition by leaving Bashar alone. Muslim should unite of course, but why Ali Khomeini keep helping that criminal for the sake of his ego .....?
> 
> There will be a respond of any reaction. Before, Iran was good, even Indonesia helped Iran when we were still in UN security council by voting against US vote. The name of Iran was good in my country before, but Today is quite different though.



The Takfir-led war was imposed on Syria by the same powerful forces who created Israel in our midst. These are the same Takfiri forces who have been used against Libya, Iraq, Somalia and Pakistan. Don't fall for the campaign to create Sunni -- Shia internal civil war in Islam. Henry Kissinger has stated that they (Zionists) need 100-year war between the two houses of Islam: Sunni vs Shia. Whether you believe or not, Syrian government is the last Arab nationalist state that is standing. All others have already fell, and this war is to remove this remaining Arab nationalist state.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

The SC said:


> This is for anyone who thinks Iran is broke:
> 
> 
> *Iran’s car sales up 32% *
> *
> Iran’s car sales rose 32 percent this year as the industry started emerging from years of sanctions, an official has said.*
> 
> As many as 1.1 million units were sold in the current Iranian year which ends on March 21, 2015, head of the commerce and sales office of Saipa Co. Mohammad Reza Abbasi said.
> 
> The figures compared to 737,000 cars sold last year, he said. Abbasi said both production and sales by Saipa rose 32 percent during the period.
> 
> Saipa and Iran Khodro account for 82 percent of the country’s auto making market.
> 
> “Saipa has currently two sanctions-busting plans in order to increase sales,” Abbasi said.
> 
> He said the automaker will start producing a low-cost car, Saina, in the first half of the new Iranian year.
> 
> Saipa will also unveil more than 10 models at the next auto show in the central of Isfahan, he added.
> 
> Iran’s auto industry is the biggest in the Middle East which it has developed for five decades. The country produced 1.6 million vehicles in 2011, the year new sanctions were introduced by the Europeans.
> 
> PressTV-Iran’s car sales up 32%
> 
> 
> 
> *Western firms in rush for Iran trade *
> *
> Multinational companies are jockeying for position as nuclear talks between Iran and international negotiators shift to high gear amid hopes of a final deal.*
> 
> “I am already seeing a rush to market by US and EU companies and no one wants to be left behind,” says Nigel Kushner, a director of British-Iranian Chamber of Commerce.
> 
> “There is certainly an element of competition between US and EU exporters and EU companies may feel they have strength in numbers by unifying,” he said in remarks published by The Wall Street Journal.
> 
> Kushner is the chief executive of W Legal Ltd., a law firm that specializes in sanctions.
> 
> Iran’s lucrative, untapped market has always offered a mouth-watering prospect to foreign firms, but a web of US-led sanctions has kept them at bay.
> 
> The Europeans now “fear their American rivals will be able to move first once sanctions are lifted”, The Journal wrote.
> 
> “Their main concern is that European companies face often-complicated national regimes to approve exports to Iran while their US counterparts operate with a unified, clearer export approval process,” it said.
> 
> *Europeans feel sacrificed*
> 
> US trade with Iran rose to $315 million in 2013 from $234 million in 2011, according to US Census Bureau data. During the same period, European trade fell to 6 billion euros ($8.2 billion) from 28 billion euros, European Commission figures show.
> 
> US company World Eco Energy has signed a preliminary agreement to invest $1.175 billion to generate electricity in Iran by turning solid waste into power.
> 
> Last October, US aerospace giant Boeing booked its first sales to Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. American energy giants Halliburton and ExxonMobil have been testing the waters for work in Iran. Dell Inc. and General Electric Co. have approached potential Iranian distributors to sell personal computers and power-generation equipment.
> 
> Apple has been reported to be exploring the Iranian market for possible sales of iPhone should sanctions ease.
> 
> The Europeans are complaining. According to Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the EU parliament, the European Union needs to address concerns with the US.
> 
> “American sanctions vis-a-vis Iran have had undesired extra-territorial impact on EU business,” Schaake, who was in Iran in December, has told Bloomberg.
> 
> Wary of lagging behind, the Europeans have rolled up sleeves, forming a European-Iranian Business Alliance with the Iranian chambers of commerce.
> 
> The group intends to raise with the EU the hurdles which European exporters face in finding banks to handle their transactions with Iran.
> 
> Exporters say when banks refuse Iran transactions, EU governments cite it a commercial decision.
> 
> But in practice, “the US is bullying companies through the banks,” Norman Lamont, president of British-Iranian Chamber of Commerce, told The Wall Street Journal.
> 
> *Iran’s potentials*
> 
> In Iran, officials are sanguine. “Iran will soon achieve the best economic standing in the Middle East and North Africa,” Economy Minister Ali Tayyeb-Nia said.
> 
> The West “must put an end to tyrannical sanctions on the Iranian nation as soon as possible”, he added.
> 
> Iran is the world’s 18th largest economy worth $1.2 trillion at purchasing-power parity.
> 
> The country of 80 million prides itself on a well-educated pool of population, sitting on the world’s third largest oil and second largest gas reserves.
> 
> Tehran’s stock exchange is the Middle East’s second largest, worth $150 billion.
> 
> “With the prudence and the guidelines of the Leader (Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei), the evil of sanctions will be removed.”
> 
> PressTV-Western firms in rush for Iran trade



These kinds of fantasy like claims come only from a certain number of people in this forum. And I already know their answer to your post: Press TV??? Ha ha ha!

You can wake up a person who is asleep but you can't do the same to a person who is pretending to be asleep.

I'd also like to add this:

List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

haman10 said:


> any words on anka yet , butthurt torks ?
> 
> look , once again , for the millionth time : if our military industries shyte and that shyte crap itself to death , the shitty result will be light years ahead of you in technology .
> 
> you can ridicule others till you die , this is what you do like other muslims in the region : you make fun of others cause you are not capable of keeping up with them .
> 
> i'd love to see you when in 2018 first iranian astronaut finishes his sub-orbital exploration and you are still busy posting carp
> 
> @Serpentine please remove off-topic butthurtness


My comment is entirely about that funny video, i didnt lost a word about Iran, why so sensitive?  I think we dont need to compare anything here, everything is pretty obvious. 


And since you asked Anka block B made its maiden flight. 

Anka MALE UAV Program | Page 53


----------



## Dominance

SOHEIL said:


> There is no way to place RD-33 engines inside!
> 
> Only something like F-20 tiger shark will be possible with a single RD-33 smoking engine!





> پیشرانه این هواپیما دو دستگاه موتور* RD-33* می باشد که امکان پرواز تا سرعتهای 5/1تا 8/1 ماخ را به این هواپیما می دهد. رادار این هواپیما از نوع N019-ME می‌باشد که کارایی آن بر ضد اهداف زمینی است. بیشترین وزن محموله این هواپیما 4,400 کیلوگرم و وزن خالی این هواپیما 8,000 کیلوگرم و بیشترین وزن برخاست این هواپیما 15,000 تا 18,000 کیلوگرم بوده و بردی در حدود 600 کیلومتر را داراست.
> 
> آشنایی با جنگنده شکاری صاعقه





> صاعقه هواپیمای جت جنگنده بمب‌افکن ساخت جمهوری اسلامی ایران است. در این هواپیما از بدنه هواپیمای اف-۵ استفاده شده است. تفاوت ظاهری این هواپیما با اف-۵ وجود دو سکان عمودی V شکل است که برای ایجاد توانایی لازم برای مانور پذیری بهتر جنگنده صورت گرفته است. هواپیمای جنگنده صاعقه ۱۰ تا ۱۵ درصد بزرگ‌تر شده هواپیماهای اف-۵ است که دو سکان عمودی V شکل (برای کاهش سطح مقطع راداری) و سیستم های الکترونیک و موتورهای روسی آر دی-۳۳ (*RD-۳۳*) دارد.
> جنگنده صاعقه ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران





> Fighter aircraft Azarakhsh was built by Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Industrial on the basis of the U.S. fighter plane F-5E produced in the 1960s. The United States sold these aircrafts to Iran’s shah before 1979. 50 F-5Es are still in the arsenal of the Iranian army. Iranian engineers increased the length and weight of the F-5 and changed the shape of its tail fin and engine unit. Two American engines J85-GE-21B were replaced by Russian *RD-33s*. The plane also received a new radiolocation station. According to media repots, this may be an Iranian radar with Russian component parts or the N-019ME Topaz radar produced by Russia’s Fazotron-NIIR. The Azarakhsh performed its first flight in June 1997. Four jets with engines taken from old Russian MiG-29s have already been successfully tests. The planes are to be equipped with new Russian engines.
> 
> Iranian Fighters to Fly with Russian Engines - Kommersant Moscow


----------



## yavar

TurAr said:


> Ithe Iranian astronaut has already finished his little space exploration and rewarded with a banana on its return. Don't you remember?




more talk from banana country so called west asia super power

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Here are some interesting comparison. Looking at this, one should be convinced that even so Saegheh and F-5 look alike, they are totally different airplanes and thus claiming that it is totally redesigned is not false. I wonder why nobody had done this comparison before?

RD-33:


*Type:* afterburning turbofan
*Length:* 4,229 mm (166.50 in)
*Diameter:* 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
*Dry weight:* 1,055 kg (2,326 lb)
J-85:

*Type:* Turbojet engine (with or without afterburner)
*Length:* 45.4–51.1 in (115–130 cm) (depending on accessory equipment installed)
*Diameter:* 17.7 in (45 cm)
*Dry weight:* 396–421 lb (180–191 kg) (depending on accessory equipment installed)
RD-33 is only 30cm (little more than width of a hand) larger on each side. Looking at the bulged Body of Saegheh where the engine fits, it is quite credible that they have fitted 2 RD-33 inside that airplane.

The only question is how they maintained the balance with almost 1728kg additional wight added at the tail? They need to have pushed the wings further back to maintain the balance.

Comparing the two, Saegheh is almost 1.45 m longer. It is probably added length to the nose section which adds more space for radar and avionics and also kind of balances the additional weight of the engines.

Saegheh:


*Crew:* 1
*Length:* 15.89 m ()
*Wingspan:* 8.13 m ()
F-5:


*Crew:* 1
*Length:* 47 ft 4¾ in (14.45 m)
*Wingspan:* 26 ft 8 in (8.13 m)
I'm not sure how accurate these sketches are but even here you can see that the Saegheh doesn't have that tapered body of F-5 where the engines are.

In the nose section, Segheh has a curved surface on the lower surface while F-5 has flat surface. This should indicate larger radar or avionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

They just took the F-5 freedom fighter and *optimized* it. That is all they had and they have made the best of it.
They might make their own reverse engineered F-14 Tomcat one of these days and optimize it too. That will be quite an achievement, and is quite possible again since they have overhauled it and have a good knowledge of all its parts.
If they can do the F-14, they will become more than a force to recon with. This bird was and I believe still one of the best designed and most sophisticated warplanes ever made, it already had the phoenix BVR missiles, variable geometry wings and an extremely powerfull radar and avionics, This bird was made in the 70's and could already track 24 enemy airplanes and shoot down 6 at a time. I see nothing newer in the most recent and sophisticated 4++ generation warplanes.
Iran can add composites where they should be, an AESA radar and stealth paint based on nano-carbon fiber, all technologies that Iran masters already.
The remaining question will be the engines, and why not they too can be reverse engineered if it is not already done or on its way to be finished.
This is optimistic, but based on reality with nothing fantastic about it but the achievement when it will be done.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 500

Impressive jet. Twin tail will give it outstanding maneuvering capabilities on pair with the Su-35. Brown-yellow nano-molecular ferromagnetic stealth paint reduces RCS level to to -1.24 dB. Plasma technology would decrease RCS even further. Nano-fiber-carbon wing and fuselage construction materials reduces its weight and increases T/W capabilities to Eurofighter Typhoon level. Seems it is also equipped with side looking L-band AESA radars. Little antennas under the fuselage and behind cabin indicate that it is equipped with modern JTIDS/MIDS for net enabled operations and state of the art ELINT systems. I think that overall performance should be similar to Rafale in air to air missions and Grippen NG in air to ground missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

500 said:


> Impressive jet. Twin tail will give it outstanding maneuvering capabilities on pair with the Su-35. Brown-yellow nano-molecular ferromagnetic stealth paint reduces RCS level to to -1.24 dB. Plasma technology would decrease RCS even further. Nano-fiber-carbon wing and fuselage construction materials reduces its weight and increases T/W capabilities to Eurofighter Typhoon level. Seems it is also equipped with side looking L-band AESA radars. Little antennas under the fuselage and behind cabin indicate that it is equipped with modern JTIDS/MIDS for net enabled operations and state of the art ELINT systems. I think that overall performance should be similar to Rafale in air to air missions and Grippen NG in air to ground missions.


Yeah, I was wondering where you were? Your comments were kind of missing in this thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Indos

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> The Takfir-led war was imposed on Syria by the same powerful forces who created Israel in our midst. These are the same Takfiri forces who have been used against Libya, Iraq, Somalia and Pakistan. Don't fall for the campaign to create Sunni -- Shia internal civil war in Islam. Henry Kissinger has stated that they (Zionists) need 100-year war between the two houses of Islam: Sunni vs Shia. Whether you believe or not, Syrian government is the last Arab nationalist state that is standing. All others have already fell, and this war is to remove this remaining Arab nationalist state.



You are so easy to be brainwashed, every one knows that FSA is the first major opposition power fighting against Bashar regime, another power like Al-Nusra and ISIL come later. Actually it should be done before the war, but Bashar keep fighting for the sake of his own power, not letting his country to transform into democracy right away before it is too late and civil war comes. 

Enough for A vs B argument, it is the time where we should thing something bigger than that and start to feel about what Syrian people right now feel and suffer. Just accepting the peace condition imposed by Syrian oppositions group by sacrificing Bashar in Syria future politics should not be very difficult to do. 

And it is the choice of the people to determine whether his country want to be a secular or not. And the political system should also be set in flexible mode to hinder any chaos like what we are seeing now in ME region. If the secular or Shia or Sunni or Islamist wins the election, every one on the system should accept this, and they can try to get into power again 5 years from now, It is the essence of democracy. Thinking in a wide and longer perspective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Sorry... There is no way!


----------



## Arminkh

SOHEIL said:


> Sorry... There is no way!


There is a bigger engine in there. If not RD-33, then something else but it is definitely not J-85.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Arminkh said:


> Here are some interesting comparison. Looking at this, one should be convinced that even so Saegheh and F-5 look alike, they are totally different airplanes and thus claiming that it is totally redesigned is not false. I wonder why nobody had done this comparison before?
> 
> RD-33:
> 
> 
> *Type:* afterburning turbofan
> *Length:* 4,229 mm (166.50 in)
> *Diameter:* 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
> *Dry weight:* 1,055 kg (2,326 lb)
> J-85:
> 
> *Type:* Turbojet engine (with or without afterburner)
> *Length:* 45.4–51.1 in (115–130 cm) (depending on accessory equipment installed)
> *Diameter:* 17.7 in (45 cm)
> *Dry weight:* 396–421 lb (180–191 kg) (depending on accessory equipment installed)
> Length wise they are almost the same and RD-33 is only 30cm (little more than width of a hand) larger on each side. Looking at the bulged Body of Saegheh where the engine fits, it is quite credible that they have fitted 2 RD-33 inside that airplane.
> 
> The only question is how they maintained the balance with almost 1728kg additional wight added at the tail? They need to have pushed the wings further back to maintain the balance.
> 
> Comparing the two, Saegheh is almost 1.45 m longer. It is probably added length to the nose section which adds more space for radar and avionics and also kind of balances the additional weight of the engines.
> 
> Saegheh:
> 
> 
> *Crew:* 1
> *Length:* 15.89 m ()
> *Wingspan:* 8.13 m ()
> F-5:
> 
> 
> *Crew:* 1
> *Length:* 47 ft 4¾ in (14.45 m)
> *Wingspan:* 26 ft 8 in (8.13 m)
> I'm not sure how accurate these sketches are but even here you can see that the Saegheh doesn't have that tapered body of F-5 where the engines are.
> 
> In the nose section, Segheh has a curved surface on the lower surface while F-5 has flat surface. This should indicate larger radar or avionics.







Arminkh said:


> There is a bigger engine in there. If not RD-33, then something else but it is definitely not J-85.



I'm completely sure... 

لطفا این بحث رو تمام کن ... آبروریزی میشه

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

500 said:


> Impressive jet. Twin tail will give it outstanding maneuvering capabilities on pair with the Su-35. Brown-yellow nano-molecular ferromagnetic stealth paint reduces RCS level to to -1.24 dB. Plasma technology would decrease RCS even further. Nano-fiber-carbon wing and fuselage construction materials reduces its weight and increases T/W capabilities to Eurofighter Typhoon level. Seems it is also equipped with side looking L-band AESA radars. Little antennas under the fuselage and behind cabin indicate that it is equipped with modern JTIDS/MIDS for net enabled operations and state of the art ELINT systems. I think that overall performance should be similar to Rafale in air to air missions and Grippen NG in air to ground missions.


U know what , i enjoy this very much . the more pathetic you get , the more i enjoy your posts .

don't you ever think that we get bothered by you . keep posting please .


Arminkh said:


> only 30cm



Bro , RD-33 has 4 times the length of J-85  they are not "almost the same" .

the using of J-85 is a sure thing , but it's new generation will have higher thrust , still i'm not sure if they have used the new generation or not

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Guynextdoor2

The SC said:


> They just took the F-5 freedom fighter and *optimized* it. That is all they had and they have made the best of it.
> They might make their own reverse engineered F-14 Tomcat one of these days and optimize it too. That will be quite an achievement, and is quite possible again since they have overhauled it and have a good knowledge of all its parts.
> If they can do the F-14, they will become more than a force to recon with. This bird was and I believe still one of the best designed and most sophisticated warplanes ever made, it already had the phoenix BVR missiles, variable geometry wings and an extremely powerfull radar and avionics, This bird was made in the 70's and could already track 24 enemy airplanes and shoot down 6 at a time. I see nothing newer in the most recent and sophisticated 4++ generation warplanes.
> Iran can add composites where they should be, an AESA radar and stealth paint based on nano-carbon fiber, all technologies that Iran masters already.
> The remaining question will be the engines, and why not they too can be reverse engineered if it is not already done or on its way to be finished.
> This is optimistic, but based on reality with nothing fantastic about it but the achievement when it will be done.



I don't think they can reverse engineer the Tomcat, especially the variable geometry wings with their complex hydraulics.


----------



## haman10

Guynextdoor2 said:


> I don't think they can reverse engineer the Tomcat, especially the variable geometry wings with their complex hydraulics.


lol . bro , those wings have been replaced many times . there is probably ZERO part of the F-14s which has not been replaced . from the AWG-9 avionics to the wings and .....

Many of them were even damaged during the war , iran brought them back to life .

there is already an upgraded F-14 plan going on which will promote the F-14A to *F-14AM* standard .

the "AM" standard includes :1- Digital circuit for the analogue radar of F-14 . better CPUs to run the thing too 

2- Auxiliary power unit (APU) for the TF-30 engine in order to solve the Compressor Stall problem at Extremely high G-maneuvers . to your surprise this was done with the help of a JV with indian AF scientists 

3- Repaired and Overhauled Platform (body) and replacing all the old Instruments with new ones 

@kollang @New @SOHEIL @mohsen @Arminkh

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Guynextdoor2

haman10 said:


> lol . bro , those wings have been replaced many times . there is probably ZERO part of the F-14s which has not been replaced . from the AWG-9 avionics to the wings and .....
> 
> Many of them were even damaged during the war , iran brought them back to life .
> 
> there is already an upgraded F-14 plan going on which will promote the F-14A to *F-14AM* standard .
> 
> the "AM" standard includes :1- Digital circuit for the analogue radar of F-14 . better CPUs to run the thing too
> 
> 2- Auxiliary power unit (APU) for the TF-30 engine in order to solve the Compressor Stall problem at Extremely high G-maneuvers . to your surprise this was done with the help of a JV with indian AF scientists
> 
> 3- Repaired and Overhauled Platform (body) and replacing all the old Instruments with new ones
> 
> @kollang @New @SOHEIL @mohsen @Arminkh



I was talking about completely re-engineering the Tomcat

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

haman10 said:


> U know what , i enjoy this very much . the more pathetic you get , the more i enjoy your posts .
> 
> don't you ever think that we get bothered by you . keep posting please .
> 
> 
> Bro , RD-33 has 4 times the length of J-85  they are not "almost the same" .
> 
> the using of J-85 is a sure thing , but it's new generation will have higher thrust , still i'm not sure if they have used the new generation or not


That was my mistake. I corrected that. But the fact that Saegheh is 1.5 m longer still is there. And its frame is bulged around where the engine is. All of them point to a bigger engine compared to original F-5 I don't believe the designer go through all of the trouble of recalculating the whole aerodynamics of the aircraft due to those changes for nothing. 

10% more length means more weight. Using the same engine with a heavier body means reduction in acceleration and maneuverability. It doesn't make sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Wisdom

yavar said:


> more talk from banana country so called west asia super power


Yavar buddy I missed you at Iran Military Forum, without you the site has become useless. Please be more talkative on this forum and ignore any people that challenge you. Those who understand you know that your information is solid. It's great to see you again buddy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Guynextdoor2 said:


> I don't think they can reverse engineer the Tomcat, especially the variable geometry wings with their complex hydraulics.



Variable wings are out of business...

What is the point of reverse engineering F-14 ?

F-5 reverse engineered for experience ...

we are designing new airframes...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Guynextdoor2

SOHEIL said:


> Variable wings are out of business...
> 
> What is the point of reverse engineering F-14 ?
> 
> F-5 reverse engineered for experience ...
> 
> we are designing new airframes...



I was responding to the person who said that you may try to re-engineer the Tomcat.


----------



## yavar

Wisdom said:


> Yavar buddy I missed you at Iran Military Forum, without you the site has become useless. Please be more talkative on this forum and ignore any people that challenge you. Those who understand you know that your information is solid. It's great to see you again buddy.




np brother . it is good to see you as well .
you can follow me and other brothers here .


----------



## Arminkh

Guynextdoor2 said:


> I was responding to the person who said that you may try to re-engineer the Tomcat.


Overhaul of F-14 in Iran:

عکس/ اورهال هواپیمای جنگنده f14 - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Sinan said:


> Another super-hyper-ulra-mega weapon platform... Well done Iran.
> 
> Next, build the "Millennium Falcon" pls.



Pathetic...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> Ok, good you ask that.........
> 
> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Bashar has already had his term since he is 36 years old, more than enough now, more than 10 years. Even our Prophet only has around that time as a ruler. And we all have learned something about another Muslim past ruler ( the just ones), Abu Bakr, Umar, Usmant, and Ali, they also had not more or about 10 years maximal as rulers.
> 
> So, for any country who try to use Islam as their main principle to run a country, it should be seen as mistake if the people there don't try to limit their ruler time or seeing another leader who rules more than 10 years like Assad as something that is still appropriate morally and religiously. Here, in Indonesia we also have a law limiting our ruler to be in power not more than 10 years ( 2 term )
> 
> Secondly, the reason of why Bashar should not participate in the election because it is already too late for him for doing that. If he make election before the war happen, people can still accept this, but after he makes a war against his own people..........????
> 
> Even in Indonesia we forced Soeharto to step down despite the fact that he offered another election to us. And why then Soeharto stepped down...Does he surrender voluntarily ? Nope, It is because leaders around him and in parliament (not elected fairly at that time and can be regarded as a crony of Soeharto but surprisingly still have heart ) leaved him and understand that the time for democracy has come. Your support to him makes him strong inside his country, so you have responsibility of that killings and deaths.
> 
> And after the civil war happen, do you still think that he is even still worthy to run again ????? Dont you understand that he is the one who is cruel enough to sacrifice hundred thousand of his people and many infrastructure in order to remain in power.....? Why just step down and sacrifice his power for the sake of the peace and unity of his own country.....????
> 
> 3. I dont support ISIS or Al-Qaeda, only fools who support them. And hey, I am not a fanatic person, I am no follower of any Islamic sect or leader. I see some truth in Wahhabi and in the same time seeing other truth in Sufism. Both of them also has some weakness that I don't follow. I combine both of them. I also try to learn some from your 12 Imams. I am not a blindly supporter of any stream or leader. And I see Today so many Muslim become a fanatic of their leader or sect/stream without thinking and see deeply to his/her heart what their heart actually try to tell.


1 - He is not mr. Khomeini he is mr. Khamenei

2 - Syria is not an Islamic state its secular so why they most base their rules according to your not existent rule . if that's a rule first some of Arab monarch most hand over the government and more importantly why you made that comical conclusion because the holy prophet died at the age of 63 which was a very good age at that time and only was leader of the government for 10 year then no one most rule over 10 year . answer me if he lived for another 10 year who wanted to be leader instead of him . and its not too late if people don't want Bashar Asad they simply vote him out of office. and democracy mean if people vote him he stay if they don't vote him he step down but FSA terrorist feared to compete with him and used foreign terrorist to destroy the country.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Indos

JEskandari said:


> 1 - He is not mr. Khomeini he is mr. Khamenei
> 
> 2 - Syria is not an Islamic state its secular so why they most base their rules according to your not existent rule . if that's a rule first some of Arab monarch most hand over the government and more importantly why you made that comical conclusion because the holy prophet died at the age of 63 which was a very good age at that time and only was leader of the government for 10 year then no one most rule over 10 year . answer me if he lived for another 10 year who wanted to be leader instead of him . and its not too late if people don't want Bashar Asad they simply vote him out of office. and democracy mean if people vote him he stay if they don't vote him he step down but FSA terrorist feared to compete with him and used foreign terrorist to destroy the country.



It is a revolution already, different context, it is just similar like Iran Revolution many years ago ( in order for you to understand I try to use your own country experience now as an example). Do you think your people was going to be patience and wait for the election to determine whether Iran should be ruled by Shah Iran once again or let other people take it through election like Khomeini in that kind of circumstances.....?

Of course not every one opposes Bashar, similar like in Egypt, Tunisia, Indonesia, etc........there are always a supporter of current leader but in that kind of situation it is a must to overthrow current leader in order to avoid civil war like what we are seeing in Syria already. Similar like Iran, not every one supported Khomeini, but they just get silence at that time. 

And the other significant context that I have mentioned again and again is that Bashar has already had a war with his own people who disagree with him. There is no record in world history showing that kind of person is still possible to be given another chance to lead. Dont forget about the fairness of the next election process in Syria if Bashar still there.

And by leaving Bashar, it doesnt mean that any political power under Bashar get ruined and cannot participate in the election. So, the condition that is offered by opposition group in Syria is quite a compromise one. Not like in Egypt, Iraq, or in your own country in which previous power was forbidden to fight in election. The condition is more like in Indonesia and Tunisia where we still allow past political power (political party under previous ruler) to participate in the election.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> It is a revolution already, different context, it is just similar like Iran Revolution many years ago ( in order for you to understand I try to use your own country experience now as an example). Do you think your people was going to be patience and wait for the election to determine whether Iran should be ruled by Shah Iran once again or let other people take it through election like Khomeini in that kind of circumstances.....?
> 
> Of course not every one opposes Bashar, similar like in Egypt, Tunisia, Indonesia, etc........there are always a supporter of current leader but in that kind of situation it is a must to overthrow current leader in order to avoid civil war like what we are seeing in Syria already. Similar like Iran, not every one supported Khomeini, but they just get silence at that time.
> 
> And the other significant context that I have mentioned again and again is that Bashar has already had a war with his own people who disagree with him. There is no record in world history showing that kind of person is still possible to be given another chance to lead. Dont forget about the fairness of the next election process in Syria if Bashar still there.
> 
> And by leaving Bashar, it doesnt mean that any political power under Bashar get ruined and cannot participate in the election. So, the condition that is offered by opposition group in Syria is quite a compromise one. Not like in Egypt, Iraq, or in your own country in which previous power was forbidden to fight in election. The condition is more like in Indonesia and Tunisia where we still allow past political power (political party under previous ruler) to participate in the election.


Good you mentioned my country as an example , well let me tell you something even 2 month after revolution Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was legally king then we held a referendum and its the picture of what people throw in the boxes





it ask do you want the old government to change to Islamic republic ? yes / No
well you see we gave sort of chance to the old government but Do you think 98.26 of 98% of eligible people who voted is something that we face in Syria.

and about the fairness he offered to held it with international observer

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Indos

JEskandari said:


> Good you mentioned my country as an example , well let me tell you something even 2 month after revolution Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was legally king then we held a referendum and its the picture of what people throw in the boxes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it ask do you want the old government to change to Islamic republic ? yes / No
> well you see we gave sort of chance to the old government but Do you think 98.26 of 98% of eligible people who voted is something that we face in Syria.
> 
> and about the fairness he offered to held it with international observer



OK, we dont talk about percentage here which was taken after you already kicked Shah Iran out of your politics, but I just want to bring common sense here of why Bashar should go.......

Too many hates already in Syria, why Iran dont sacrifice Bashar and just let his follower in Baath Party to continue your interest there and we all can enjoy peace process in Syria to start ....? 

If Iran leadership still so stubborn, so the other option to bring peace there is only by dividing Syria into two part.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Sinan said:


> Why ?
> 
> I will be Han solo and drive the ship....you can be princess laila.





@haman10

@Daneshmand 

We need a doctor here...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## haman10

Sinan said:


> I will be Han solo and drive the ship


Be sure its not the ship who drives you instead .

@kollang , you seem to know their language 

i know he is writing , but idk what he is saying , cause i don't speak "little tard"

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> OK, we dont talk about percentage here which was taken after you already kicked Shah Iran out of your politics, but I just want to bring common sense here of why Bashar should go.......
> 
> Too many hates already in Syria, why Iran dont sacrifice Bashar and just let his follower in Baath Party to continue your interest there and we all can enjoy peace process in Syria to start ....?
> 
> If Iran leadership still so stubborn, so the other option to bring peace there is only by dividing Syria into two part.


It's not our Say , only Syrian can do that .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Viper0011.

Gabriel92 said:


> Great looking plane,congratz.
> Even with the embargo,iran seems to do great achievements...
> 
> PressTV-Iran unveils supersonic fighter jet



Re manufactured F-5.......there is nothing Iranian in it besides some Russian avionics and weapons!


----------



## thesolar65

@haman10 
Good Job!! in spite all the possible sanctions against your country. This shows the resilience of your country.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mike2000

Gabriel92 said:


> Great looking plane,congratz.
> Even with the embargo,iran seems to do great achievements...
> 
> 
> 
> PressTV-Iran unveils supersonic fighter jet



Good post ,on ami Gabriel. Irans efforts indeed needs to be applauded. They are at least trying to do something by themselves under severe sanctions which will make almost any other middle eastern country collapse/crumble if they were in Irans situation. So to see other of Irans so called 'Muslim brothers' making fun of Iran is indeed laughable, especially those countries who are semi failed states/terrorists haven(You know which countries im talking about.lol) and other countries who depend on our NATO protection and tech transfers. 

Anyway, Iran has great scientists that is one thing i know, so im not surprised they are have been able to do many things that no country in the region has been able to do e.g building an indegenious SLV/satellite launch. However, i said it before, Iran is still operating wayyyy below its real potential, due to the sanctions which has greatly affected Irans economy(their GDP contracted last year and will barely grow this year as well). This is something i think can be avoided, if Irans Ayatollahs stop basing their foreign policy on ideology/religion and supporting terrorists Sunni groups(who by the way hate them Shias like hell.lol) like Hamas against Israel. and make a rapproachment with the West/U.S just like China and the U.S did in the 70s after decades of hostility/isolation which impeded Chinas own growth potential. Iran really needs more competent/pragmatic/realistic leaders/foreign policy makers like me at their helm. hihihihihihihihi..

Just my 2 cents. But Keep up the good work Iranian Scientistst(not the leaders)., you should be an inspiriration to to other middle eastern countries who are either broken/in conflict/civil wars/failed states/wahabists/oil dependent/dont produce anything/are droned by foreign powers without doing anything etc. lol

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TurAr

Guys please, don't judge Iran. Iranian pilots need such trainers so that they can rule the skies with Iran's state of the art 5th gen Qaher-313s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

TurAr said:


> *so that they to rule the skies*


Eh ?

english please .



TurAr said:


> Iran's state of the art 5th gen Qaher-313s.


now , we'll fly 6th gen. Germen anka instead .

or 7th gen. italian T-129 .

you have nothing left for me to mock , so GTFO

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TurAr

haman10 said:


> Eh , monkey ?
> 
> english please .
> 
> 
> now , we'll fly 6th gen. Germen anka instead .
> 
> or 7th gen. italian T-129 .
> 
> you have nothing left for me to mock , so GTFO



Stick to the topic and refrain from insults please.


----------



## TOPGUN

A copy of an F-5 however, good step ahead indeed congrats to all Iranian brothers .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

We are developing something like yf-17 ...

@yavar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> We are developing something like yf-17 ...
> 
> @yavar


70 time better as you know very well there is few project

we have to wait for Qaher hopefully maybe i said maybe they show Qaher soon this year or next year

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> 70 time better as you know very well there is few project
> 
> we have to wait for Qaher hopefully maybe i said maybe they show Qaher soon this year or next year








So... What do you think @yavar ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Minute by Minute

The name "Ghaher 313" has such a huge importance in Shia, that it is imposible, our military leaders have chosen it randomly. That alone is enough to asure me about the project.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## -SINAN-

mike2000 said:


> So to see other of Irans so called 'Muslim brothers' making fun of Iran is indeed laughable, especially those countries who are semi failed states/terrorists haven(You know which countries im talking about.lol) and other countries who depend on our NATO protection and tech transfers.


Your obsession with Turkey is unbelievable. 

Could you act against Turkey an guarantor state when we invaded Cyprus ?? Talk is cheap my friend.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> So... What do you think @yavar ?


about what ??


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> about what ??



The model !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> The model !!!


i already said what i tought


yavar said:


> 70 time better as you know very well there is few project
> 
> we have to wait for Qaher hopefully maybe i said maybe they show Qaher soon this year or next year


----------



## mike2000

Sinan said:


> Your obsession with Turkey is unbelievable.
> 
> Could you act against Turkey an guarantor state when we invaded Cyprus ?? Talk is cheap my friend.



Who told u im talking about Turkey? Or do you think Turkey depends on NATO for protection and tech transfer?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## -SINAN-

mike2000 said:


> Who told u im talking about Turkey?


Don't play the stupid, mate.



mike2000 said:


> Or do you think Turkey depends on NATO for protection and tech transfer?


Nope...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mike2000

Sinan said:


> Don't play the stupid, mate.
> 
> 
> Nope...



Huh...who is playing Stupid?You alone quoted a sentence from my long post and attributed it to Turkey. Nobody did that but you. So i dont know why you think that, it applies to Turkey.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Skull and Bones

Serves well as a light fighter and advanced trainer.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL

Skull and Bones said:


> Serves well as a light fighter and advanced trainer.



Yes ... i can't understand the problem with people !

This is just a goddamn trainer ...

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Dissecting the latest generation Saegheh fighter, from new body to Iranian radar

Thanks to the posters at IMF, that is where I got this report. Of course, non-Persian speakers like myself need Google translator.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The SC

TOPGUN said:


> A copy of an F-5 however, good step ahead indeed congrats to all Iranian brothers .


F-16 blocks 52 or 60 are copies of F-16A, however...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TOPGUN

The SC said:


> F-16 blocks 52 or 60 are copies of F-16A, however...




That makes simply no sense lolz


----------



## The SC

TOPGUN said:


> That makes simply no sense lolz


Put it in its context of an answer to the guy saying that the latest Saequa is just a copy of the F-5. That is as true as saying that the F-16 block 52 is a copy of the F-16A, C or 15...etc, which obiously makes no sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VelocuR

Great progress but I have question - why Iran developed simple flat thin design, no muscle? 

similar to missiles, satellites, and now this plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TOPGUN

The SC said:


> put it in its context of the guy saying that the latest Saequa is just a copy of the F-5. That is as true as saying that the F-16 block 52 is a copy of the F-16A, C or 15...etc




No its not as all each blk f-16 blocks are newer upgrades of the original f-16 or have some differences its a huge difference in words and in reality with facts . Hence, the fighter Iran made is simply a "copy" with some modifications there is a huge difference from what that guy , you and from what I am saying simply I just state the facts although I am very much happy for them Iran that is .


----------



## Arminkh

VelocuR said:


> Great progress but I have question - why Iran developed simple flat thin design, no muscle?
> 
> similar to missiles, satellites, and now this plane.


Cost efficiency. No point in overkilling it when you know you are lagging behind in technology.

For satellites it is a totally different reason. They are all experimental, each testing a different aspect of putting a satellite in geo orbit.



TOPGUN said:


> No its not as all each blk f-16 blocks are newer upgrades of the original f-16 or have some differences its a huge difference in words and in reality with facts . Hence, the fighter Iran made is simply a "copy" with some modifications there is a huge difference from what that guy , you and from what I am saying simply I just state the facts although I am very much happy for them Iran that is .


They are not exactly the same. Saeghe is 10% larger. Compare the dimensions of both F-5 and Saeghe in Wikipedia.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The SC

TOPGUN said:


> No its not as all each blk f-16 blocks are newer upgrades of the original f-16 or have some differences its a huge difference in words and in reality with facts . Hence, the fighter Iran made is simply a "copy" with some modifications there is a huge difference from what that guy , you and from what I am saying simply I just state the facts although I am very much happy for them Iran that is .


Do you know what kind of avionics, radar, engines or new aerospace technologies that Iran has equiped its Saequas with? obviously not, nor do I nor the other guy. One thing is for sure, is that they have made it at least one generation above the original F-5E.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL

Next year is the time to show up the muscles !

New drone

New fighter 

New submarine

New SLV !



Our time beginning !

Low life creatures using qaher to bother us ... But it's gonna change !

We are going to use qaher to bother them !

A big lesson ...

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Arminkh

SOHEIL said:


> Next year is the time to show up the muscles !
> 
> New drone
> 
> New fighter
> 
> New submarine
> 
> New SLV !
> 
> 
> 
> Our time beginning !
> 
> Low life creatures using qaher to bother us ... But it's gonna change !
> 
> We are going to use qaher to bother them !
> 
> A big lesson ...


Khoda az dahanet beshnave, bezar biyad, bad begoo

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TOPGUN

The SC said:


> Do you know what kind of avionics, radar, engines or new aerospace technologies that Iran has equiped its Saequas with? obviously not, nor do I nor the other guy. One thing is for sure, is that they have made it at least one generation above the original F-5E.



I don't need to know nor care , I was just justifying your post and so called claim or what have you. Whatever they "Iran" have done I am very happy for them and my prayers are all for them as well and that's where it ends with this.



Arminkh said:


> Cost efficiency. No point in overkilling it when you know you are lagging behind in technology.
> 
> For satellites it is a totally different reason. They are all experimental, each testing a different aspect of putting a satellite in geo orbit.
> 
> 
> They are not exactly the same. Saeghe is 10% larger. Compare the dimensions of both F-5 and Saeghe in Wikipedia.




Never said it was the same , in the world of Aviation a modified copy of something is exactly what It means as in this case .. meaning taken of paper from a pervious jet with a modified version with changes in to a new one. Anyhow I am very happy for Iran regardless but facts are facts simply.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

TOPGUN said:


> I don't need to know nor care , I was just justifying your post and so called claim or what have you. Whatever they "Iran" have done I am very happy for them and my prayers are all for them as well and that's where it ends with this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never said it was the same , in the world of Aviation a modified copy of something is exactly what It means as in this case .. meaning taken of paper from a pervious jet with a modified version with changes in to a new one. Anyhow I am very happy for Iran regardless but facts are facts simply.


Thanks for the justification brother. It was not clear as such, so I have reconfirmed the posting.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## fafarkhan

new saeghe

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SouI

fafarkhan said:


> View attachment 195343
> 
> new saeghe


When are these going to be mass-produced?


----------



## Ray_of_Hope

fafarkhan said:


> View attachment 195343
> 
> new saeghe


Is it me or this jet looks like a dual tail F16??

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

war khan said:


> Is it me or this jet looks like a dual tail F16??

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Ray_of_Hope

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 195408
> View attachment 195409
> View attachment 195410
> View attachment 195411


So.............

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

war khan said:


> So.............


he is trying to say an iranian Fighter jet which is similar to F-16 in looks , is on the way .

its called Murghe-Ashura Tactical Fighter or (M-ATF) .

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

haman10 said:


> he is trying to say an iranian Fighter jet which is similar to F-16 in looks , is on the way .
> 
> its called Murghe-Ashura Tactical Fighter or (M-ATF) .



No ... I mean it's not a dual tail F16 !!! 



haman10 said:


> on the way

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## haman10

SOHEIL said:


> No ... I mean it's not a dual tail F16 !!!


zahr mar 

it sure looks like an F-16 bro 

just take the intakes and put them on the belly

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

haman10 said:


> zahr mar
> 
> it sure looks like an F-16 bro
> 
> just take the intakes and put them on the belly





Looks like a single engined Mig-29 !

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TOPGUN

The SC said:


> Thanks for the justification brother. It was not clear as such, so I have reconfirmed the posting.




Its all good brother

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BordoEnes

SouI said:


> When are these going to be mass-produced?



They probably never will, just a squadron or maybe two after which they will probably stop the production. Just like with the other F-5 knock-offs.

But i am actually surprized to see Iran focusing on building an aircraft that actually looks like a proper aircraft. The Qaher-313 is still making me laugh to this day.

Good luck with the development to Iranian aviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

BordoEnes said:


> They probably never will, just a squadron or maybe two after which they will probably stop the production. Just like with the other F-5 knock-offs.
> 
> But i am actually surprized to see Iran focusing on building an aircraft that actually looks like a proper aircraft. The Qaher-313 is still making me laugh to this day.
> 
> Good luck with the development to Iranian aviation.


As bird of prey showed this king on design is feasible . But not in a super sonic design . Actually USA made an airplane on this design but it could not meet their needs so they just abandoned it.

But well if a country need a subsonic stealth plane then that design something they can consider.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Azeri440

haman10 said:


> we'll even build some for glorious North azerbaijan when its free from foreign dictatorship
> 
> long live iran - azerbaijan



Azerbaijan is levels ahead in freedom compared to Iran 
and compared to many other muslim countries 

worry about your 3rd world country with collapsing economy first before worrying about others

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## usernameless

will this one actually really fly? the photoshop affaire makes me hesitate so much. never got the chance to see the overhyped and super advanced Qaher fly either...
its cockpit looked cool and professional enough though...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cheetah786

rmi5 said:


> Congrats for repainting a F-5F jet with original Asia minor camouflage. Big achievement indeed.
> 
> 
> Nah, it's just really half of a step away from F-22.



players gonna play, play, play, play, play
And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate


Congratulation to our Iranian brothers. Keep it up.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Vatoz

Come on guys give the Iranians some credit. After all they did put a lot of work to develop a new trainer plane. Even if it is a very simular to the American F-5...it is THE newest plane of IRAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BordoEnes

Vatoz said:


> Come on guys give the Iranians some credit. After all they did put a lot of work to develop a new trainer plane. Even if it is a very simular to the American F-5...it is THE newest plane of IRAF.



I think Iran pretty much gave up on having a proper functioning and effective airforce, which is understandable considering the situation they are in. Thats probably the reason why they are focused on making alot of anti-air systems insted. Which honestly arent THAT great either, although the Bavar-373 shows promise.


----------



## Arya Desa

Amazing!! When I hear good news from Iran I am as happy as when I hear good news from India. They are amazing people and truly our friends!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Shams313

haman10 said:


> he is trying to say an iranian Fighter jet which is similar to F-16 in looks , is on the way .
> its called Murghe-Ashura Tactical Fighter or (M-ATF) .



So what happended to M-ATF programme??
Iran is starving for a advanced fighter from a decade.


----------



## SOHEIL

Optimus prime said:


> So what happended to M-ATF programme??
> Iran is starving for a advanced fighter from a decade.



Wait ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kurlang

Congratulations but when it is going to fly


----------



## SOHEIL

Kurlang said:


> Congratulations but when it is going to fly



What !?


----------



## killerbee1

congratulations to Iranian brothers. no matter what anyone says it is great achievement. best of luck for future projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kurlang

SOHEIL said:


> What !?



M-ATF


----------



## Shams313

Kurlang said:


> Congratulations but when it is going to fly


Just loading it's wings.

can anyone translate the persian 1392-10-15 into equivalent eng date.


----------



## SOHEIL

Kurlang said:


> M-ATF



Cancelled !!!

Replaced with another project ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kurlang

SOHEIL said:


> Cancelled !!!
> 
> Replaced with another project ...



Why? Was it serving as a prototype for other project than what is the other project. I don't know that i am confused or the Iranians.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

fafarkhan said:


> new saeghe


But this one is different from orginal m-atf design. It has no circular wing like m-atf.
May be this design is derived from m-atf and the development of this programme is continuing.
m-atf




Soheil ! Am i.......?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Kurlang said:


> what is the other project.



Soon ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The SC

JEskandari said:


> As bird of prey showed this king on design is feasible . But not in a super sonic design . Actually USA made an airplane on this design but it could not meet their needs so they just abandoned it.
> 
> But well if a country need a subsonic stealth plane then that design something they can consider.


Did you know that the British harrier was subsonic? not stealth though...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

The SC said:


> Did you know that the British harrier was subsonic? not stealth though...


Even there are newer plane like YAK-130 & Mig-AT from Russia or Hongdu JL-8 from China are subsonic .


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

SOHEIL said:


>



Any picture from cockpit?


----------



## SOHEIL

raptor22 said:


> Any picture from cockpit?



Nope ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SHAHED



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SHAHED



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## بلندر

Saegheh 1 .... there are some changes compare to prototypes ( Saegheh with blue angels painting ) 


R0SC0SM0S said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jack 86000

IRIAF OPS IN IRAQ TODAY

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

jack 86000 said:


> IRIAF OPS IN IRAQ TODAY


Doing what? Aerial operation?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

JEskandari said:


> As bird of prey showed this king on design is feasible . But not in a super sonic design . Actually USA made an airplane on this design but it could not meet their needs so they just abandoned it.
> 
> But well if a country need a subsonic stealth plane then that design something they can consider.


if you look at some gen 6 designs you will find it way more than just feasible.


----------



## kollang

Optimus prime said:


> Where is the boy.... (@SOHEIL ) ?...............let him explain....why su-30 in Tabriz.....


Fake photo......

This photo was published 5 years ago, not now.and @SOHEIL knows it very well.now ,the real question is what was the intention of him to publish such a fake photo? Spreading rumor?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

he is posting pics without descriptions every time, maybe he likes to confuse people...makes no sense to me anymore..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## annating

These sounds interesting, ah, I like

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

why the message was clear it?


----------



## warfareknow

kollang said:


> Fake photo......
> 
> This photo was published 5 years ago, not now.and @SOHEIL knows it very well.now ,the real question is what was the intention of him to publish such a fake photo? Spreading rumor?



Wished we could build them in license


----------



## Tomyris

warfareknow said:


> Wished we could build them in license


must already ordered them. and later built under license. there is an urgent need OPERATIONAL order.

but you have to wait up to emabrgo

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

The percentages of progress of projects under development by SAHA in 2006-2007 (8 years ago):

It says: Projects and their progress:

Mastering the technology and reverse engineering of TV3 engines = %59
Overhaul line for Eastern origin Engines = %14
Toloue-5 jet Engine = %59
J-85 Upgraded Engine = %17
Wankel Engines Production Line: %75
Engine Life Duration Testing Lab = %91
Building all engine parts: %95


These numbers are for 8 years ago.... Although I guess since the RQ-170, there would be new changes in this plans... As USA gifted us their engine know how by mistake! @SOHEIL what can you add?


J-85 Engine:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> The percentages of progress of projects under development by PANHA in 2006-2007 (8 years ago):
> 
> It says: Projects and their progress:
> 
> Mastering the technology and reverse engineering of TV3 engines = %59
> Overhaul line for Eastern origin Engines = %14
> Toloue-5 jet Engine = %59
> J-85 Upgraded Engine = %17
> Wankel Engines Production Line: %75
> Engine Life Duration Testing Lab = %91
> Building all engine parts: %95
> 
> 
> These numbers are for 8 years ago.... Although I guess since the RQ-170, there would be new changes in this plans... As USA gifted us their engine know how by mistake! @SOHEIL what can you add?
> 
> 
> J-85 Engine:


I not talking about the engine, but the capacity of REDAR, with Lee embargo it will be to purchase new aircraft, the problem will be to install a radar and also that will have good ability, even the Russian and Chinese are in trouble


----------



## SOHEIL

scythian500 said:


> PANHA





scythian500 said:


>





scythian500 said:


> @SOHEIL what can you add?



SAHA ... not PANHA !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

SOHEIL said:


> SAHA ... not PANHA !


yes you're right...


----------



## rahi2357

Guys , Which one ?  Just sayin

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Daneshmand

rahi2357 said:


> Guys , Which one ?  Just sayin
> 
> View attachment 237394



This one please: Assessing the Sukhoi PAK-FA / Sukhoi/KnAAPO T-50/I-21/Article701 PAK-

The rest are going to be obsolete in few years time anyways.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rahi2357

Daneshmand said:


> This one please: Assessing the Sukhoi PAK-FA / Sukhoi/KnAAPO T-50/I-21/Article701 PAK-
> 
> The rest are going to be obsolete in few years time anyways.


Yes sir . how many ?
But I think it's unlikely Russians sell PAK-FA to Iran ... or not anytime soon .

@The Last of us 
Any comment ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## masud

rahi2357 said:


> Guys , Which one ?  Just sayin
> 
> View attachment 237394
> 
> View attachment 237395
> View attachment 237396
> 
> View attachment 237402



This one (150 unit)..............................

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## black-hawk_101

Its better for IRAN to make up a deal with US for the possible supply of Engine and Airframe spares all of them for:
F-14s - A4 and F-5s
Also, possible sale of Mirage F1s to Morocco as spares or full aircraft.

Moreover, buying used Russian MiG-29s with latest upgrades and also PAF F-7Ps with trainers too.


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

rahi2357 said:


> Guys , Which one ?  Just sayin
> 
> View attachment 237394
> 
> View attachment 237395
> View attachment 237396
> 
> View attachment 237402



This one...







or maybe this one ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## black-hawk_101

Also, IRAN can now sign up a deal with Russia for possible joining of Land Vehicle, Marine Vessels and Aircraft production and R&D.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## masud

and also su 34..................

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Last of us

@rahi2357

I think Iran's focus should be on 5th generation technology. Iran must not just buy the 5th gen planes, Iran must buy the technology and bring them to Iran and start manufacturing those technology inside. The airforce sector is one we are quite behind in, we need to close that gap very soon. We must get as much transfer of technology as possible and even try to buy into companies that have this tech.

There is no reason why Iran by the next decade, should not have couple hundred 5th plane and have the industrial capability inside to manufacture such planes as well. For that we need to be very pushing and try very hard to get the technology.

4th gen planes will be useful for only bombing terrorists like ISIS. For the real threats facing our airforce, Iran needs 5th gen planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Daneshmand

rahi2357 said:


> Yes sir . how many ?
> But I think it's unlikely Russians sell PAK-FA to Iran ... or not anytime soon .
> 
> @The Last of us
> Any comment ?



Ah, mmmm, 250 please.

With vanilla. 

You are right. But there is no harm in trying. Putin is under pressure, Russia is under sanctions, and fighting a war in Ukraine.

PAK-FA and its FGFA version are suffering fund shortages and delays after delays. Iran is about to get hundreds of billions of dollars. It is quite a mouth watering deal. Russia needs the money. Putin is being isolated and he needs to have an improved economy both to be seen as tsar leader of Russia as well as for aesthetics of his upcoming re-election in 2018.

India has a 25-30 billion dollar program to get something about 200 of these custom designed for India and with complete technology transfer to be built in India. 

Iran can do the same. It is all about money. 

Second option should be J-20. Which is about as good.



The Last of us said:


> @rahi2357
> 
> I think Iran's focus should be on 5th generation technology. Iran must not just buy the 5th gen planes, Iran must buy the technology and bring them to Iran and start manufacturing those technology inside. The airforce sector is one we are quire behind in, we need to close that gap very soon. We must get as much transfer of technology as possible and even try to buy into companies that have this tech.
> 
> There is no reason why Iran by the next decade, should not have couple hundred 5th plane and have the industrial capability inside to manufacture such planes as well. For that we need to be very pushing and try very hard to get the technology.
> 
> 4th gen planes will be useful for only bombing terrorists like ISIS. For the real threats facing our airforce, Iran needs 5th gen planes.



You mean something like India's FGFA program? I fully support that.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

Daneshmand said:


> You mean something like India's FGFA program? I fully support that.



That would be even better and I don't see why it is not possible. Russians will want to keep Iran in their side so Iran does not fully abandon them for the west. The very fact Putin lifted the embargo on the s-300 was an attempt to get on Iran's good side. It was a pure political move. Although they have been untrustworthy in the past (Remember shafaq?). this time we need to play our cards right and get them to stick to the program. Even shafaq was not a total loss as we still have the design for it, we only lack the engines. 

I think any 5th generation technology is one we must try and get the technology for. Even if it just a small component. They key thing here is first Iran getting 5th get planes and then quickly developing the technology and industry to be able to make them ourselves. If we can get cooperation like FGFA then even better!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daneshmand

The Last of us said:


> That would be even better and I don't see why it is not possible. Russians will want to keep Iran in their side so Iran does not fully abandon them for the west. The very fact Putin lifted the embargo on the s-300 was an attempt to get on Iran's good side. It was a pure political move. Although they have been untrustworthy in the past (Remember shafaq?). this time we need to play our cards right and get them to stick to the program. Even shafaq was not a total loss as we still have the design for it, we only lack the engines.
> 
> I think any 5th generation technology is one we must try and get the technology for. Even if it just a small component. They key thing here is first Iran getting 5th get planes and then quickly developing the technology and industry to be able to make them ourselves. If we can get cooperation like FGFA then even better!



I think with proper and serious negotiation it is very much possible. Negotiators like Zarif who can go to China and Russia and negotiate for such technology transfers as Indians do. I am not sure if Iran's defense ministry even has any such negotiators.

And it is not only about military stuff. Iran needs lots of other technologies from water management systems, modern agriculture, geostationary satellites, automobile etc and all these need competent negotiators who can go and buy the best technology that can be bought. For example I have never understood why Iran gets its auto technology from France that makes crappy cars. No one in the world buys them. Any where in North America you can not even find a single French car in a one thousand kilometer radius. Why Iran does not negotiate with Germany or Japan?

I think most of these problems even with Shafagh comes back and has roots in the way Iran handles these things. I am not saying Russians are blameless. They should be blamed. But we should find what can we do to improve the situation. If India can do it with Russia today and if China was doing it with Russia 50 years ago, then why can't Iran do it. I just understand. Most probably because the defense ministry negotiators are people like Jalili. Dry, cold and stiff as an iron rod.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Last of us

Daneshmand said:


> I think with proper and serious negotiation it is very much possible. Negotiators like Zarif who can go to China and Russia and negotiate for such technology transfers as Indians do. I am not sure if Iran's defense ministry even has any such negotiators.
> 
> And it is not only about military stuff. Iran needs lots of other technologies from water management systems, modern agriculture, geostationary satellites, automobile etc and all these need competent negotiators who can go and buy the best technology that can be bought. For example I have never understood why Iran gets its auto technology from France that makes crappy cars. No one in the world buys them. Any where in North America you can not even find a single French car in a one thousand kilometer radius. Why Iran does not negotiate with Germany or Japan?
> 
> I think most of these problems even with Shafagh comes back and has roots in the way Iran handles these things. I am not saying Russians are blameless. They should be blamed. But we should find what can we do to improve the situation. If India can do it with Russia today and if China was doing it with Russia 50 years ago, then why can't Iran do it. I just understand. Most probably because the defense ministry negotiators are people like Jalili. Dry, cold and stiff as an iron rod.



I hope so brother. I really hope we see some serious development in the airforce.
Our airdefence, missile etc are already top notch. Hopefully Iranian military officials will start to seriously concentrate on the airforce. The IRGC has been impressive with their development, but the regular army no so much. Lets hope that changes soon. Lets hope we see major development. It's been a long time coming.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Great One

Daneshmand said:


> I think most of these problems even with Shafagh comes back and has roots in the way Iran handles these things. I am not saying Russians are blameless. They should be blamed. But we should find what can we do to improve the situation. If India can do it with Russia today and if China was doing it with Russia 50 years ago, then why can't Iran do it. I just understand. Most probably because the defense ministry negotiators are people like Jalili. Dry, cold and stiff as an iron rod.


I am not sure if the PAK-FA is a very good investment. There have been too many articles claiming that IAF doesn't like its stealth features as well as engines/radar . While the Su-55 aka FGFA is going to be different, how different could its airframe be? After all shaping is far too important for radar evasion. IMO Iran should probably look out for KF-X or TF-X. Those will atleast have a chance of proper ToT unlike the Russians who will give screwdriver tech after double-charging and much delays.
And for Ind-Rus collaboration, well, after cold-war ended India financed and bought a lot of Russian stuff, so there was and had always been a lot of mutual trust, viz why they offered us a 50:50 partnership in FGFA in the first place (apart from money) and money cannot buy this trust.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

The Great One said:


> I am not sure if the PAK-FA is a very good investment. There have been too many articles claiming that IAF doesn't like its stealth features as well as engines/radar . While the Su-55 aka FGFA is going to be different, how different could its airframe be? After all shaping is far too important for radar evasion. IMO Iran should probably look out for KF-X or TF-X. Those will atleast have a chance of proper ToT unlike the Russians who will give screwdriver tech after double-charging and much delays.
> And for Ind-Rus collaboration, well, after cold-war ended India financed and bought a lot of Russian stuff, so there was and had always been a lot of mutual trust, viz why they offered us a 50:50 partnership in FGFA in the first place (apart from money) and money cannot buy this trust.



PAK-FA is good enough for Iran. TF-X and KF-X are jokes. In that category we already have Q-313. Russia has been building planes since when my great grand daddy was playing with his toys. I would rather trust Russians.



The Last of us said:


> I hope so brother. I really hope we see some serious development in the airforce.
> Our airdefence, missile etc are already top notch. Hopefully Iranian military officials will start to seriously concentrate on the airforce. The IRGC has been impressive with their development, but the regular army no so much. Lets hope that changes soon. Lets hope we see major development. It's been a long time coming.



I hear you. Air force really needs some new equipment. No major purchases have happened in the past 40 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

black-hawk_101 said:


> Its better for IRAN to make up a deal with US for the possible supply of Engine and Airframe spares all of them for:
> F-14s - A4 and F-5s
> Also, possible sale of Mirage F1s to Morocco as spares or full aircraft.
> 
> Moreover, buying used Russian MiG-29s with latest upgrades and also PAF F-7Ps with trainers too.


For God's sake there can't be any spare part for f-14 from anywhere around the world but Iran even usa cant produce those equipment anymore as they destroyed the tools needed to produce the parts.



The Last of us said:


> @rahi2357
> 
> I think Iran's focus should be on 5th generation technology. Iran must not just buy the 5th gen planes, Iran must buy the technology and bring them to Iran and start manufacturing those technology inside. The airforce sector is one we are quite behind in, we need to close that gap very soon. We must get as much transfer of technology as possible and even try to buy into companies that have this tech.
> 
> There is no reason why Iran by the next decade, should not have couple hundred 5th plane and have the industrial capability inside to manufacture such planes as well. For that we need to be very pushing and try very hard to get the technology.
> 
> 4th gen planes will be useful for only bombing terrorists like ISIS. For the real threats facing our airforce, Iran needs 5th gen planes.


You want a 5th generatio you must invest in it and learn it no one will hand the technology to you

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Great One

Daneshmand said:


> PAK-FA is good enough for Iran. TF-X and KF-X are jokes. In that category we already have Q-313. Russia has been building planes since when my great grand daddy was playing with his toys. I would rather trust Russians.


The point of PAK-FA is stealth. And PAK-FA has too many irregularities visible to even eyeballs - exposed inlet fan, naked engine, rivets etc. So has been said by IAF too. 
KF-X is being assisted by Lockheed and already found a customer/partner in Indonesia with fixed orders. It is very much real. Although partnership with Lockheed also creates an obstacle as do its GE engines, so on second thought that's probably a bad idea. I don't know how far TF-X has progressed. Overall, if I were Iran I would take Su-35 for today.


----------



## Daneshmand

The Great One said:


> The point of PAK-FA is stealth. And PAK-FA has too many irregularities visible to even eyeballs - exposed inlet fan, naked engine, rivets etc. So has been said by IAF too.
> KF-X is being assisted by Lockheed and already found a customer/partner in Indonesia with fixed orders. It is very much real. Although partnership with Lockheed also creates an obstacle as do its GE engines, so on second thought that's probably a bad idea. I don't know how far TF-X has progressed. Overall, if I were Iran I would take Su-35 for today.



Even if it is not stealth and even it glows on radar screen like a 200 W bulb, still it is good enough for Iran. If KF-X is being designed by US, then it is OUT OF QUESTION that Iran will be able to get it. As for TF-X, we already have Q-313. We do not need two Q-313 in different layouts.

The point is, Iran needs new fighter jets. These will be bought either from Russia or China. In this regard Russia has much more experience. If Russia refuses then backup option is China. 

By the way the kind of objections that you raise about PAk-FA also have been raised against F-22 which kills its pilot midflight in the cockpit, and F-35 which apparently can hardly fly let alone manuever. I am sure if the PAK-FA was that bad, India would have terminated the project. I personally see PAK-FA as an improved low cross section version of Su-35 with possibility of future gradual upgreades over the life of the plane. And at the end you get what you pay for. At less than half the price of F-35, this is what you get. Which is good enough.


----------



## The Great One

Daneshmand said:


> Even if it is not stealth and even it glows on radar screen like a 200 W bulb, still it is good enough for Iran. If KF-X is being designed by US, then it is OUT OF QUESTION that Iran will be able to get it. As for TF-X, we already have Q-313. We do not need two Q-313 in different layouts.


Once again, PAK-FA is being touted as Fifth Generation plane. We all know that Russia is miles behind the West when in comes to Electronics and EW, but if the plane lacks stealth itself, then what is the point of paying the extra buck over the Su 35's?


Daneshmand said:


> By the way the kind of objections that you raise about PAk-FA also have been raised against F-22 which kills its pilot midflight in the cockpit, and F-35 which apparently can hardly fly let alone manuever. I am sure if the PAK-FA was that bad, India would have terminated the project. I personally see PAK-FA as an improved low cross section version of Su-35 with possibility of future gradual upgreades over the life of the plane. And at the end you get what you pay for. At less than half the price of F-35, this is what you get. Which is good enough.


The kind of objections I raised are very fundamental. The ones which you raised are used only by looney conspiracy theorists. F-35 is as nimble as the F-16 per actual quote of its pilots. The oxygen problem on F-22 was discovered, studied and solved.
As for India, we only signed a preliminary draft agreement in 2007. The final contract was to be signed in 2012 and as per latest news, things have progressed to such a place that Indian MoD refused to meet a Russian delegation to discuss this issue. You saw all the MMRCA drama that just happened? According to our Ex-Navy Chief, FGFA is in a deeper shithole. Also it's claimed price of $100mn unit is costlier than F-35's expected price of $85mn a pop. Which is a bit optimistic considering that our last batch of Su 30MKI's came in at $80mn each.


----------



## Daneshmand

The Great One said:


> Once again, PAK-FA is being touted as Fifth Generation plane. We all know that Russia is miles behind the West when in comes to Electronics and EW, but if the plane lacks stealth itself, then what is the point of paying the extra buck over the Su 35's?
> 
> The kind of objections I raised are very fundamental. The ones which you raised are used only by looney conspiracy theorists. F-35 is as nimble as the F-16 per actual quote of its pilots. The oxygen problem on F-22 was discovered, studied and solved.
> As for India, we only signed a preliminary draft agreement in 2007. The final contract was to be signed in 2012 and as per latest news, things have progressed to such a place that Indian MoD refused to meet a Russian delegation to discuss this issue. You saw all the MMRCA drama that just happened? According to our Ex-Navy Chief, FGFA is in a deeper shithole. Also it's claimed price of $100mn unit is costlier than F-35's expected price of $85mn a pop. Which is a bit optimistic considering that our last batch of Su 30MKI's came in at $80mn each.



Then India should pull out of the project instead of pouring in 30 billion dollars into it. India has the option to go with F-35. Iran will be glad to fill India's role in FGFA. How much India has spent in FGFA? Five billion? I am sure Iran can write the check for that and take over. Happy?

By the way F-35 is going to cost 150 to 200 million dollar a pop. Not 85 million. US sells F-16 for 85 million dollars.


----------



## The Great One

Daneshmand said:


> Then India should pull out of the project instead of pouring in 30 billion dollars into it. India has the option to go with F-35. Iran will be glad to fill India's role in FGFA. How much India has spent in FGFA? Five billion? I am sure Iran can write the check for that and take over. Happy?
> 
> By the way F-35 is going to cost 150 to 200 million dollar a pop. Not 85 million. US sells F-16 for 85 million dollars.


This discussion is going nowhere. Ciao

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## masud

i have some question for our iranian brothers.
Gyes i heard that iranian parlament issue a decree that if iranian air force want a new fighter then they sould built in indeginous. don,t know it,s true or false. and last time i read a article that some irgc generals saying that they can built a capable fighter in any day but the real essue is the engine.......................hope iranian brothers will put some more knowledge.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

READ CAREFULLY/READ CAREFULLY/READ CAREFULLY/READ CAREFULLY

salam to all my brothers..je'm glad the embargo lifted. but I have a question, the sanction against lesarme are lifted? or wait 5 years ?

.this issue and important because if you have to wait 5 years, so I can assured you that Iran will have the pakfa, within 5 years the pakfa will be ready and if we must iran will put money into the project to have quickly with a good version.

if the embargo lifted and immediatly, then it must quickly order hunter russia and su-35 are the best actuelement, you know that old hunter and maintain more expensive than bought new?

su-35 fighter and capable of combatre the 5th generation, one can buy the su-35 and negotiate the pakfa for years to come with technology, but in an emergency must be bought to defend our country, the hunter 5th generation of not many in the region, against the F-15 / F-16 are majority (USA, Saudi saoudi, Turki, israel, jordan etc ... etc ...) and the su-35 can easily countered all these aircraft.
su-35 to a wide autonomy in flight, it is an ultra-powerful equip radar and long range missile, it would be perfect to cover and defend the Iranian sky, facing the future threat you better have the su-35 rather as F-1 and F-4. if you wait a long time we will put the country in danger. whereas if we receive new aircraft and its S-300 will definitely spell the end of the military threat.

.if ever we decrease our activity and that Western does not respect their commitment and challenge the sanction? or if israel decides to attack? the better to do in the immediate and dismissed any threat with strengthening the air defense (s-300) and fighters (su-30 or 35)

if the embargo will put our country will not be weak. with good naked power can negotiate with Russia or China Technology in auronautique

Remember that Russia wanted the embargo lifted soon be weapon, russia MIG want to save, but did not find the money, I think that Russia will iran has proposed the mig-35 and technology transfer, iran will not deny technology, and MIG will be saved, iran can also participate in the project as the submarine lada amur equip AIP, Russian is not enough means and iran will have much money. russia needs iran iran and russia needs.

in 5 or 10 years iran will be equipping the PAKFA and S-400 system is well on request of several technology project, but in this case Iran would do well to buy fighter jets and negotiate the S-400 which are proposing to export.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

@edit:no excuse for the engine, the Chinese seek the assistance of one Russian, one can very well use the Russian engine, but aviation and tough field and we're late admittedly. So it would be best to order hunter and launch a cooperation that in the future there will be autonomous

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

توییتر دقایقی قبل
#Iran orders from #China 150
J-10 fighter jets that
incorporate #Israel -i technology
theiranproject.com/
blog/2015/07/3…
pic.twitter.com/VKJIIFlk91

Here we have a news of Iran buying 150 J-10 fighter jet from China.I hope its true and I hope its B varient and I hope its with Russian engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

kollang said:


> Here we have a news of Iran buying 150 J-10 fighter jet from China.I hope its true and I hope its B varient and I hope its with Russian engine.



Highly unlikely. Don't forget that for 5 years, we can't buy arms unless it is approved by UNSC. After 5 years, we can buy whatever we want. Now this news of buying 150 aircraft all at once, it doesn't even make sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

kollang said:


> توییتر دقایقی قبل
> #Iran orders from #China 150
> J-10 fighter jets that
> incorporate #Israel -i technology
> theiranproject.com/
> blog/2015/07/3…
> pic.twitter.com/VKJIIFlk91
> 
> Here we have a news of Iran buying 150 J-10 fighter jet from China.I hope its true and I hope its B varient and I hope its with Russian engine.



LOL


----------



## kollang

Serpentine said:


> Highly unlikely. Don't forget that for 5 years, we can't buy arms unless it is approved by UNSC. After 5 years, we can buy whatever we want. Now this news of buying 150 aircraft all at once, it doesn't even make sense.


We can order them now and recieve them once the related arm embargo is lifted.this time type of plane and its quatity is rational and it worth a care.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Why would Iran waste money on the J-10? Iran should not buy anything less than 5th generations. 4th gen are good for bombing missions against terrorists but for air superiority / air to air combat, Iran must concentrate on 5th gen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

The Last of us said:


> Why would Iran waste money on the J-10? Iran should not buy anything less than 5th generations. 4th gen are good for bombing missions against terrorists but for air superiority / air to air combat, Iran must concentrate on 5th gen.


Bro, do you really believe that Russia sell Su-50 to Iran? 

In my own opinion we should go after a cheap but working 4 gen fighter jet in order to maintain good quantity in the air force. The best option is j-10B. 150 to 250 J-10B would be awesome.

In order to maintain good quality in the air force, we should buy 80 to 120 Su-35/J-11D.

And meanwhile we should import necessary technologies and start cooperation with Chinese/Russian/Indian/Pakistani counterparts to make a decent 5 gen fighter.also Qaher project will boost amd it will help alot as a special role fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rahi2357

kollang said:


> توییتر دقایقی قبل
> #Iran orders from #China 150
> J-10 fighter jets that
> incorporate #Israel -i technology
> theiranproject.com/
> blog/2015/07/3…
> pic.twitter.com/VKJIIFlk91
> 
> Here we have a news of Iran buying 150 J-10 fighter jet from China.I hope its true and I hope its B varient and I hope its with Russian engine.


Iran orders from China 150 J-10 fighter jets that incorporate Israeli technology

Bro , That's just more debka sh!t .

They claimed something crazy few days earlier :

Iran buys 100 Russian refueling aircraft for its air force to reach any point in the Mid East

==================================================

What you guys thinking? Because Iran made a deal with 5+1 is going to order whatever with no negotiating ? Is Iran so much " javgir " ? You guys should wait one year then maybe we can hear something about ordering jet fighters .
*But for now* " Negotiations on delivery of a more modernized Russian air defense system than S-300 to Iran are close to a successful conclusion, a source in the Iranian Defense Ministry told Sputnik on Saturday. "

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

kollang said:


> Bro, do you really believe that Russia sell Su-50 to Iran?
> 
> In my own opinion we should go after a cheap but working 4 gen fighter jet in order to maintain good quantity in the air force. The best option is j-10B. 150 to 250 J-10B would be awesome.
> 
> In order to maintain good quality in the air force, we should buy 80 to 120 Su-35/J-11D.
> 
> And meanwhile we should import necessary technologies and start cooperation with Chinese/Russian/Indian/Pakistani counterparts to make a decent 5 gen fighter.also Qaher project will boost amd it will help alot as a special role fighter jet.



The problems is bro, by the time we get those 100's of 4th gen planes, 4th gen planes would have already been outdated. I just don't see how 4th gen planes will make that much of a difference to us.
That's why I said, we need to seek 5th gen platforms. I am sure there are ways we can buy technologies for 5th gen and enter cooperation to make joint projects and yes, I don't see any reason why Russian would not sell the T-50. Why would they not sell it bro? What makes me sad is that I simply don't see a big desire from Iran to modernise the airforce. It's like it has been abandoned. I don't understand why the regular army is so crap. Is it because of their incompetency or is it political reason? Iran needs to push very hard to get 5th gen planes and at the same time get technologies as well. We need to close the technological gap. Iran needs to become very hungry for jet fighter technology and if that happens, we'll have a decent indigenous platform in no time. Just need ways to buy technologies for engines etc. Our current technological base for airforce is probably better than we think, but they need much more money.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Siavash

Avionics, Avionics, Avionics ... I wish we put money in developing more avionics. Advanced Avionics, good Radar, decent sensor pods and EECM and ECM ...and a decent BVR capability makes even Azarakhsh shine! (as long as it can carry and fit all those). I know they can build and design anything they think of in Iran but one problem may be not seeing the state of the art makes you settle on mediocre or outdated design.

Iraq's new F-16 batch is a good source of inspiration. I hope they don't notice one of the 4 missing!  May be we could get our hands on one of them just to see what has changed in western design during these years that we had been cut off.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

Our avionics is not that bad at the moment:
We have seen many example showing good advancements:







You know what is nice about above? It is using Iranian made TACHRA processor:







Also another video Iranian MFD's etc, the video is about 5 years old:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Siavash

The Last of us said:


> Our avionics is not that bad at the moment:
> We have seen many example showing good advancements:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know what is nice about above? It is using Iranian made TACHRA processor:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also another video Iranian MFD's etc, the video is about 5 years old:


Wow, that is a surprise. Didn't know Iran made a processor. Good job. What made them decide to build one instead of using off the shelve processors? The expertise they gained building this SPARC processor will help them designing special purpose chips for the military. I think it is the right move. I guess building know how would be the reason they did that. Anyway very interesting.

Is Parse Semiconductor still active in Iran? It seems they are no more active. Probably merged.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

Siavash said:


> Wow, that is a surprise. Didn't know Iran made a processor. Good job. What made them decide to build one instead of using off the shelve processors? The expertise they gained building this SPARC processor will help them designing special purpose chips for the military. I think it is the right move. I guess building know how would be the reason they did that. Anyway very interesting.
> 
> Is Parse Semiconductor still active in Iran? It seems they are no more active. Probably merged.



That chip was introduced many years ago now. The company is either active or merged because someone is still making those chip as those MFD pics are from last year.

Iran has all the excellent engineers it needs. It just needs the funding and hopefully we'll have a large semi conductor fab. Electronic engineering is something Iran has great engineers in.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

Chinese claimed that one of their radars detected the F-22 from 500 KM if that is true ten fifth generation fighters good only in electronics not the stealthiness domain.

So, fourth generation fighters still good for at least 3 decades if not more than that the Chinese keep building them in big number also European do so.

except the US and that's due to their big budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

Malik Alashter said:


> Chinese claimed that one of their radars detected the F-22 from 500 KM if that is true ten fifth generation fighters good only in electronics not the stealthiness domain.



No one said F-22 is invisible to radar. Nations who have HF/VHF technology can detect stealth targets like F-22. The so called stealth planes are difficult to detect using X band radars, I.e the radars used by most planes. Thus stealth can be very useful for air to air combat.
In any case, where did you hear this chinese claim? Don't tell me it was by some random member on the internet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Malik Alashter said:


> Chinese claimed that one of their radars detected the F-22 from 500 KM if that is true ten fifth generation fighters good only in electronics not the stealthiness domain.
> 
> So, fourth generation fighters still good for at least 3 decades if not more than that the Chinese keep building them in big number also European do so.
> 
> except the US and that's due to their big budget.


VHF radars are good for detecting targets but crappy for locking on them .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

Malik Alashter said:


> Chinese claimed that one of their radars detected the F-22 from 500 KM if that is true ten fifth generation fighters good only in electronics not the stealthiness domain.
> 
> So, fourth generation fighters still good for at least 3 decades if not more than that the Chinese keep building them in big number also European do so.
> 
> except the US and that's due to their big budget.


Detecting a stealth jet is no more a hard task.many countries including Iran have VHF radars that are capable of detecting such a type of planes.capturing the Rq-170 is the evidence.

The problem is Radars with high energy signals including X band radars which are used for tracking targets can not detect stealth planes unless they are very close.

In other words detecting such a plane isnt a hard tast but destroying it is very hard and nearly impossible. At least not in Iran's capabilities.

@rahi2357 jan I really didnt say I am optimistic about the news.what i said was regarding my concern about our Air force's aging fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

kollang said:


> In other words detecting such a plane isnt a hard tast but destroying it is very hard and nearly impossible. At least not in Iran's capabilities.



This is not true brother  Irgc does have the capability attack stealth targets. The alam al hoda radar is a VHF fire control radar. Meaning it will be used to guide missile to stealth targets. This poster of it was seen during the leader's visit to the military exhibition a few years ago:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

kollang said:


> Detecting a stealth jet is no more a hard task.many countries including Iran have VHF radars that are capable of detecting such a type of planes.capturing the Rq-170 is the evidence.
> 
> The problem is Radars with high energy signals including X band radars which are used for tracking targets can not detect stealth planes unless they are very close.
> 
> In other words detecting such a plane isnt a hard tast but destroying it is very hard and nearly impossible. At least not in Iran's capabilities.
> 
> @rahi2357 jan I really didnt say I am optimistic about the news.what i said was regarding my concern about our Air force's aging fleet.


Combination of optical sensors with radars will solve that problem. One solution is to fire the missile at approximate location of the target determined by VHF radars and leave the rest to the missile optical and infrared system for precision strike.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kollang

Arminkh said:


> Combination of optical sensors with radars will solve that problem. One solution is to fire the missile at approximate location of the target determined by VHF radars and leave the rest to the missile optical and infrared system for precision strike.


With a vhf radar detecting is possible, with a optical sensor, tracking is possible.meanwhile we should notice that such system (optical) has very limited range. It wont be beyond 50 km even with a very sophisticated lenz sensor and in a very clear sky.



The Last of us said:


> This is not true brother  Irgc does have the capability attack stealth targets. The alam al hoda radar is a VHF fire control radar. Meaning it will be used to guide missile to stealth targets. This poster of it was seen during the leader's visit to the military exhibition a few years ago:


Wow. VHF tracking radar?? Might be the first one.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Malik Alashter

Ok, as long as you can detect it then you can send your fighters to intercept it.

Now you can say but those fighters can't because they equipped with X band radar ok, but those x band has the ability to detect and lock on on it from some distance at least 40-80 km depend on the radar power.

Also some planes equipped with ols or irst systems which also can detect them from a decent distance.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

kollang said:


> Wow. VHF tracking radar?? Might be the first one.



Yes dadash, on the poster below:






It states:

*Alam-ol-Hoda radar, The first phased array fire control radar in VHF band, (for) Stealth and Radar Evading targets.*

Iran is much more advanced in radar and air defence tech than alot of us know.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

JEskandari said:


> VHF radars are good for detecting targets but crappy for locking on them .


that problem of lacking precision is fixed years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Malik Alashter

The Last of us said:


> In any case, where did you hear this chinese claim? Don't tell me it was by some random member on the internet.


Bro that was when I read about the KJ-500 aew-c plane.

Any way lets pray peace prosper in our region so that we don't need to spend billions on fighters while we can spend them on infrastructures.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

Malik Alashter said:


> Bro that was when I read about the KJ-500 aew-c plane.
> 
> Any way lets pray peace prosper in our region so that we don't need to spend billions on fighters while we can spend them on infrastructures.



You can never be in peace as long states like US and their industrial military complex exist. 
As for the Chinese claims, I have heard many such claims and they all turned out to be made up by fanboys.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

kollang said:


> With a vhf radar detecting is possible, with a optical sensor, tracking is possible.meanwhile we should notice that such system (optical) has very limited range. It wont be beyond 50 km even with a very sophisticated lenz sensor and in a very clear sky.
> 
> 
> Wow. VHF tracking radar?? Might be the first one.


The unofficial report says 90km for Iranian variations. PAK-FA sensor allegedly has a range of 130km! For infrared you don't necessarily need clear sky.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

"علم الهدی" یک رادار آرایه فازی کنترل آتش در باند VHF است که اولین رادار کنترل آتش در این باند محسوب می‎شود.

سایت مشرق در گزارشی به معرفی «علم الهدی»، ناشناخته‌ترین سامانه شکار جنگنده‌های رادارگریز کشور پرداخته است.

در بخشی از این گزارش آمده است: رادار علم الهدی یک رادار آرایه فازی کنترل آتش در باند VHF است که اولین رادار کنترل آتش در این باند محسوب می‎شود.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

I second that. There are methods Iran uses to obtain software, CAD and parts that is not possible to mention here. Just knowing and tracking friends of mine from 1998 in DOD and see where they are now and what is their company name and product tells me they all are still working for DOD and their talents I haven't yet seen in the companies I have had worked for.
Microwave is an Art, you find many artists in this field in Iran with good knowledge base.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rahi2357

kollang said:


> jan I really didnt say I am optimistic about the news.what i said was regarding my concern about our Air force's aging fleet.


I see bro but it has nothing to do with being optimistic . I am optimistic more than you are . What i was trying to say is that buying jet fighters ain't buying nuts .Can't happen in one day. It needs another Nuclear talks. It needs at least one or two years of negotiating (specially in case of Iran ) . 

Az ghavitarin air force khavar miane ye mooze moonde faghat . omidvaram daastan e omr dehiye f-4 ro bikhial shan o 2 zaar pool be niroo havayiy e artesh bedan. ta 6 saal pish mitonestan jet bekharan vali tooye in 36 saal faghat 20 ta mig kharidan ke be lotf e russia faghat mitoonest parvaz kone .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

rahi2357 said:


> I see bro but it has nothing to do with being optimistic . I am optimistic more than you are . What i was trying to say is that buying jet fighters ain't buying nuts .Can't happen in one day. It needs another Nuclear talks. It needs at least one or two years of negotiating (specially in case of Iran ) .
> 
> Az ghavitarin air force khavar miane ye mooze moonde faghat . omidvaram daastan e omr dehiye f-4 ro bikhial shan o 2 zaar pool be niroo havayiy e artesh bedan. ta 6 saal pish mitonestan jet bekharan vali tooye in 36 saal faghat 20 ta mig kharidan ke be lotf e russia faghat mitoonest parvaz kone .


not the friend. the purchase of combat aircraft and vital to the defense of the country .we have time to negotiate before taking a decision if iran command of Chinese J-10B's fine with me problem, but it would take an order su-35 have a powerful air defense.

russia revival of the project mig 5generation, or a lightweight fighter of 5th generation sukhoi, iran can negotiate with Russia to create a partnership and the development of an aircraft of Russian-Iranian joint comabt. the reliable Russian partner we need in the region, and we need a lot of money, and we have everything her.

so you have bought hunter quickly ruled out any military threat, and at the same time the opportunity to make input of technology and partanaire in our project, I'm sure that in 10 to 20 years iran has a good fighter mad in iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## masud

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 247705​


is it photoshop or real?


----------



## Tomyris

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 247705​


remains how many F-14 service?

it is the AIM-54 PHOENIX ??? or fakkor?


----------



## Blackmoon



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

Blackmoon said:


>


Are these real? The reason I was asking is there is a nonbeliever which I want to convince that the Saeghe is mass produced and I want to show the picture. It would be bad if it is photoshopped. The edge of them seems staggered, I think it is photoshopped, do you think so?


----------



## Blackmoon

Siavash said:


> Are these real? The reason I was asking is there is a nonbeliever which I want to convince that the Saeghe is mass produced and I want to show the picture. It would be bad if it is photoshopped. The edge of them seems staggered, I think it is photoshopped, do you think so?



No i don't think the pic is fake i believe its real at least iran have 4 saeghe with new paint job ,but i don't think saeghe is in mass production these were made few years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

the issue is that it is the role of HESA SAEQEH in IRIAF?


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> the issue is that it is the role of HESA SAEQEH in IRIAF?


Probably as it was, a light combat aircraft and a light multirole aircraft as Tejas is in india despite other programs. I think it is in the right place.

F-5 was also bought as a light combat supersonic aircraft. we need something to act like F-14 did, therefore we need to buy one.


----------



## Blackmoon

Tomyris said:


> the issue is that it is the role of HESA SAEQEH in IRIAF?


In my opinion is just for show off or maybe same purpose as F-5 because they have a lot in common.


----------



## Siavash

Blackmoon said:


> In my opinion is just for show off or maybe same purpose as F-5 because they have a lot in common.



F-5 position will be replaced by Saegheh and the platform upgraded as it goes. Already it has HUD ... and they are working on other aspects of it. Today I saw they built its landing gear and made it Iranian as well. They put Saegheh in place because F-5's were too old and they wanted something just like it and in its role and cheap. I don't think it is show off.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> Probably as it was, a light combat aircraft and a light multirole aircraft as Tejas is in india despite other programs. I think it is in the right place.
> 
> F-5 was also bought as a light combat supersonic aircraft. we need something to act like F-14 did.


oh stop you make me laugh too, the HESA SAEQEH will be a training aircraft or bomber but it will never replace the F-14, it's not a fighter, this aircraft is low, the only aircraft that will replace the f -14 is the su-su-30 and 35

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> oh stop you make me laugh too, the HESA SAEQEH will be a training aircraft or bomber but it will never replace the F-14, it's not a fighter, this aircraft is low, the only aircraft that will replace the f -14 is the su-su-30 and 35




Je pense que vous manquez compris , n'a dit qu'il va remplacer les F- 14 de . Je l'ai dit nous avons besoin de quelque chose pour remplacer F - 14 et je voulais dire que nous devons acheter de la Russie ou ailleurs . Le F - 14 a été liée commentaire sur le fait que Dehghan dit nous sommes en discussion avec les Russes . Cela signifie essentiellement F - 5 / Saegheh a sa propre place et F - 14 dispose de son propre . Il n'y a aucune question de savoir pourquoi nous avons besoin Saegheh ou maintenant ce propos Saegheh !

I think you missunderstood. No one said it will replace F-14's. I said we need something to replace F-14 and Iment we have to buy it from Russia or elsewhere. The F-14 comment was related to the fact that Dehghan said we are in talk with Russians. It basically means F-5/Saegheh has its own place and F-14 has its own. There is no question why we need Saegheh or now what about Saegheh!


----------



## Arminkh

Tomyris said:


> the issue is that it is the role of HESA SAEQEH in IRIAF?


A full squadron has been stationed in Tabriz. Their role is interception as they are meant to be.


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> oh stop you make me laugh too, the HESA SAEQEH will be a training aircraft or bomber but it will never replace the F-14, it's not a fighter, this aircraft is low, the only aircraft that will replace the f -14 is the su-su-30 and 35


I see where the confusion on the wording comes. It was meant we need something to act like F-14 did and we need to buy one as discussed in my previous posts. Anyway the sentence was added to avoid the confusion. My other post in another thread is more clear on this.


----------



## بلندر

Tomyris said:


> oh stop you make me laugh too, the HESA SAEQEH will be a training aircraft or bomber but it will never replace the F-14, it's not a fighter, this aircraft is low, the only aircraft that will replace the f -14 is the su-su-30 and 35



Air force just want to suck R&D budget for itself ...
Our Army and our Air force want to keep budget for themselves ....
That's why they show useless thing like Aghareb , WW 2 vehicle and Saeqeh ..


----------



## Tomyris

Arminkh said:


> A full squadron has been stationed in Tabriz. Their role is interception as they are meant to be.


hhhhhh HESA SAEQEH interceptor? hahaha. plz stop. The HESA SAEQEH can intercept anything this is just f-5.

it will intercept what ?? Turkish F-16s? a can of serious .... iran needs a real powerful aerial strength. during the war iran / iraq, the F-14 was of very high technology, that is why we beat iraq in the air, HESA SAEQEH has no chance it will get eaten by anyone.



Siavash said:


> I see where the confusion on the wording comes. It was meant we need something to act like F-14 did and we need to buy one as discussed in my previous posts. Anyway the sentence was added to avoid the confusion. My other post in another thread is more clear on this.



yes I am from iran agreement needs a Russian aircraft aerial superiority, india beat britain 12-0, su-30 mid piece in the English typhoon. this is what I call an aerial superiority fighter. su-35 is even better I want to buy iran.
in the area it will be biento F-15 AESA radar to equip it vay have burst and f-35. and you want them countered with the HESA SAEQEH? this is a bad joke? iran must ratraper are late is the best thing to do and ordered su-35 and Mig-35 with Russian technology transfer




بلندر said:


> Air force just want to suck R&D budget for itself ...
> Our Army and our Air force want to keep budget for themselves ....
> That's why they show useless thing like Aghareb , WW 2 vehicle and Saeqeh ..


Maghreb? I hoped for you qu'tu not talking about not too much confidence algerie.prend the Algerian army and awesome if you have just faced the is able. we must wake up to watch the reality is opposite ... iran will purchase Russian aircraft as it purchased the S-300 and in the end it is I who will be right. I learned to be realistic, iran has not sufficient technology for a modern fighter aircraft, our fleet and aerial low and it costs very expensive, the best solution and replace.
and cost us much moin expensive new planes than to continue to maintain what we have already.


----------



## Blackmoon

F-4E never gets old.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

Blackmoon said:


> F-4E never gets old.


Yet one day he will age and maintenance costs extrenement expensive, it's a beautiful picture it looks like it is new, but the reality is that we must quickly replace all its


----------



## Blackmoon

Tomyris said:


> Yet one day he will age and maintenance costs extrenement expensive, it's a beautiful picture it looks like it is new, but the reality is that we must quickly replace all its


Hopefully it will with Russian technology, but i really wanted to see modern western fighter jets in our air force but seems not gonna happen.


----------



## Tomyris

Blackmoon said:


> Hopefully it will with Russian technology, but i really wanted to see modern western fighter jets in our air force but seems not gonna happen.


Russian planes are very good, the su-30 Indian beat the English 12-0 typhoon. we must understand that the only aircraft that can replace the F-14 is the su-30/35.

I will still repeat myself but these aircraft are heavy with great autonomy (3000km) their radar and missile are worn very long, it is perfect for defending Iran's skies as the F-14 to pass the ...

Western planes are smaller moin is autonomous, only the powerful burst parrait me, but if it does not carry the AESA radar and missile meteor is not very good. is more it costs way too much for this price Rather widely su-35.

within 5 years iran will probably negotiate the pakfa with Russia, if we can have the pakfa is even better.

but I am sure of one thing is that MIG needs a serious partner and Iran is a potential partanaire that Russia will accept.iran will have a great ability aeronautics.

a faith Technology in hand, over time we can launch comun project to develop with Western armaments.
iran must renew the army with modern equipment,

S-400
Su-t50pakfa
T-14Armata
U-212 (submarine)
Mi-28 Havoc

this is what the current iran needs and quickly and if there can be a transfer of technology is the TOP but weapons that I quoted is very modern.
russia comercialise a new jamming system equipping the aircraft; the same one that has blurred the American aircraft carrier and has etein the system aegis ettein as a TV if Iran comes to getting this technology our military will be formidable and no country can fight

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

*تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه؛ آب یا سراب ؟*​
به طور معمول وقتی یک جنگنده به کشوری صادر می شود، هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف تر هستند؛ اما زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.
به گزارش گروه دفاع و امنیت مشرق، وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در نشست خبری اخیر خود به مناسبت روز صنعت دفاعی، ضمن بیان آخرین دستاوردها و برنامه های دفاعی کشورمان، از طرح جدید ایران برای طراحی و تولید مشترک جنگنده با کشور روسیه و موافقت این کشور با این طرح خبر داد. اما سوابق روسیه و آنچه که ایران می تواند در این شراکت به دست آورد، نکات مهمی است که به آن خواهیم پرداخت.​
در ابتدا باید اشاره کرد که شوروی سابق یکی از بزرگترین تولیدکنندگان هواپیما در جهان بود و محصولات هوایی این کشور خصوصا جنگنده های آن، در بسیاری از کشورهای جهان وارد خدمت شده است. از آن زمان تا به امروز دو کشور به صورت عمده، مشتری بزرگ محصولات نظامی روسی به خصوص در بخش هوایی بوده اند و حتی در کشور خود نیز اقدام به ساخت این هواپیماها کرده اند. چین و هندوستان از دهه 1950 میلادی به این سو صنعت هوایی خود را با کمک شوروی سابق پایه گذاری کردند.​
چین به خاطر نزدیکی فکری که با سیستم حکومتی شوروی سابق داشت، از همان ابتدای کار از کمک روسها برخوردار شده و سنگ بنای صنعت هوایی این کشور با تولید مشترک جت جنگی میگ 17 که در چین به اسم J-5 شناخته می شود، گذاشته شد. چینی ها بمب افکن H-6 را نیز بر پایه توپولوف 16 روسی ساختند؛ هواپیمایی که همچنان به صورت عمده در چین به خدمت مشغول است و البته توسط صنایع هوایی این کشور کاملا ارتقاء یافته است.​




J-5​




H-6
برای چند دهه در طول جنگ سرد، به دلیل بروز اختلاف بین دو غول جهان کمونیسم، روابط دو کشور رو به تیرگی رفت و کمک روسها به صنعت هوایی چین قطع شد اما چینی ها با تکیه بر توان بومی و البته به لطف برقراری روابط گرم با غرب در اواخر جنگ سرد، توانستند صنعت هواپیمایی خود را همچنان به پیش ببرند. ماه عسل بین غرب و چین در این حوزه البته دیری نپایید و با وقوع کشتار میدان تیانانمن در سال 1989 میلادی، این کمک ها از جانب غرب قطع شد.​
اما باز هم شانس با چینی ها یار بود و در مدت کوتاهی اتحاد شوروی از هم پاشید و روسیه با حجم زیادی بدهی و مشکلات اقتصادی، میراث دار اصلی شوروی سابق بود. چین که به تازگی دوران رشد اقتصادی خود را آغاز کرده بود به سرعت چندین قرارداد خرید سلاح را با روسها به امضاء رساند و جنگنده های سوخوی 27 را به خدمت گرفت.​
در ادامه چینی ها گونه ای از این هواپیما را به صورت تحت لیسانس به اسم J-11 تولید کردند که تا به امروز مدل های بسیار پیشرفته تر از آن توسط خود چینی ها مثل J-15 و J-16 ساخته شده است.​




J-11
امروزه نیز دو کشور در بخش بالگردی برنامه ای برای تولید گونه پیشرفته بالگرد سنگین میل 26 را در دست اقدام دارند. چینی ها به لطف برنامه ریزی صحیح توانستند از برنامه تولید تحت امتیاز سوخو 27 امروزه به یکی از کشورهای پیشرو در صنعت هوایی تبدیل شده و در بسیاری بخش ها بدون نیاز به روسها به تولید جنگنده بپردازند.​
اما مورد بعدی درباره تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه کشور هندوستان است. این کشور در ابتدای کار با تولید میگ 21 روسی به صورت تحت امتیاز کار خود را آغاز کرد و به شراکت در طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه موسوم به پاکفا رسید. هندی ها در دهه 1960 میلادی برای اولین بار میگ 21 را خریداری کردند و به دلیل عملکرد مناسب این هواپیما در خدمت هندی ها، در مجموع نزدیک به 1200 فروند از این جنگنده یا از شوروی سابق به هند وارد شده و یا در این کشور تولید شد.​
هندی ها تاسیسات بسیار وسیعی را برای تعمیر و نگهداری، ارتقاء و همچنین ساخت جنگنده های خود در طول سالهای بعد ساختند که میگ 21 مدل ال اف، یکی از محصولات این کارخانجات بود.​




میگ 21 ال اف
هندی ها برخلاف چینی ها چه در زمان جنگ سرد و چه در دوره پس از آن روابط خوبی را با اکثر کشورهای صاحب صنعت جهان حفظ کرد. در سال 2000 روابط نظامی هند و روسیه با امضاء قرارداد جنگنده های سوخوی 30 مدل ام کا آی وارد مرحله جدیدی شد. این جنگنده در تاسیسات شرکت هندی HAL ساخته می شوند و در کنار قطعات روسی، از قطعات ساخت هند و فرانسه نیز در آن استفاده می شود. در ادامه با آغاز طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه با عنوان پاکفا طرحی نیز با مشارکت هند بر اساس این جنگنده برای نیاز این کشور با عنوان فاگفا آغاز شده است.​




سوخوی 30 ام کا آی
در اینجا بایستی به یک نکته بسیار کلیدی و مهم اشاره کرد. در حال حاضر، میزان سقوط جنگنده های روسی ساخت شده در هند، مثل میگ 21 و 27، همچنین سوخوی 30 بسیار بالا هستند. پروژه جنگنده بومی هند به نام "تجاس" با وجود کمک های فراوان روسیه، آمریکا و فرانسه در بخش های مختلف هنوز وارد مراحل تولیدی نشده است و این در حالی است که در همین زمان، چین با وجود دسترسی بسیار کمتر به صاحبان صنعت هوایی، به لطف سرمایه گذاری و مدیریت صحیح در حال آزمایش جنگنده های نسل پنجم خود است و در بحث جنگنده های نسل 4.5 نیز تقریبا به خودکفایی کامل رسیده است.​
تاریخچه ساخت جنگنده در ایران​
پیش از پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی قرار بود در تاسیسات شرکت صنایع هواپیما سازی ایران در اصفهان، هواپیماهای آمریکایی اف 16 مونتاژ شوند که این طرح با پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی و شکست آمریکا از مردم کشورمان، متوقف ماند.​
این اولین باری است که خبری درباره تولید مشترک یک هواپیمای رزمی با کشوری دیگر از طرف مسئولین کشور پس از پیروزی انقلاب اعلام می شود و با توجه به اینکه یکی از نقاط قوت صنایع هوایی ایران، در بخش تعمیر و نگهداری است شاید گزافه نباشد اگر بگوییم که در طول این 35 سال، اخیر متخصصان ایرانی در بحث تعمیر و نگهداری انواع جنگ افزارهای خود، خصوصا وسایل پرنده که از طرف مقام معطم رهبری به عنوان "عمردهی انقلابی" به آن اشاره شده است به متخصصانی صاحب سبک بدل شده اند.​
به عنوان مثال، در طول این 35 سال انواع هواپیماهای رزمی ساخت آمریکا، فرانسه، چین و روسیه در ایران به صورت اساسی تعمیر شده و ارتقاء های خاصی نیز بر روی آنها اجزاء شد که از این میان می توان به پروژه اضافه کردن قابلیت سوخت گیری هوا به هوا به میگ های 29 روسی برای اولین بار در جهان و یا نصب موشک های هوا به سطح هاوک بر زیر هواپیماهای اف 14 به عنوان یک سلاح هوا به هوا اشاره کرد.​




اف 14 ایرانی مجهز به موشک هاوک
در بحث طراحی و ساخت جنگنده نیز جمهوری اسلامی ایران با پروژه صاعقه نشان داده است که با وجود تمامی مشکلات ناشی از تحریم ها امکان طراحی و ساخت جنگنده در داخل کشور را نیز دارد. لذا مشخص است با توجه به اشراف کامل صنایع هوایی کشورمان در بحث تعمیر،نگهداری، ساخت و حتی ارتقاء، زیر ساخت های تولید جنگنده مشترک با کشوری دیگر، تا حد قابل توجهی فراهم است.​
تاثیرات تولید جنگنده مشترک در ایران​
اما شاید این سوال برای بسیاری پیش بیاید که بحث تولید مشترک چه امتیازهایی را می تواند برای کشور ما داشته باشد؟​
با طرح این مسئله و با امضاء قرارداد بین طرفین، مسلما خط تولید جنگنده یا جنگنده های مورد نظر در داخل ایران به راه خواهد یافت. این خط تولید به حجم بسیار زیادی از دستگاه ها و ماشین آلات و قطعات صنعتی بسیار پیشرفته نیاز دارد که بخشی از آنها از طریق زیر ساخت های موجود و برخی دیگر نیز برای اولین بار به کشور وارد می شود.​
با ورود این صنایع و قطعات به داخل کشور، کارگران و مهندسین ایرانی بایستی برای کار با این محصولات آموزش های بیشتری دیده و در نتیجه با علم روز جهان نیز بیشتر و عملا آشنا می شوند. در عین حال بسیاری از صنایع و علوم مرتبط مثل الکترونیک و مخابرات و یا هوا-فضا نیز از این شراکت سود خواهند برد.​
با توجه به نوع قرارداد امضاء شده، بحث انتقال فناوری مطرح می شود. که این فناوری ها می تواند در بخش های گوناگونی مثل رادار و الکترونیک پروازی، موتور، جنگ افزار و یا طراحی و ساخت بدنه باشد و به همین خاطر، بسیاری از این فناوری ها را می توان برای ارتقاء ناوگان فعلی هواپیماهای رزمی ایران نیز استفاده کرد.​
فناوری هایی با کاربرد مشترک بین هواپیماهای جنگی و مسافربری مثل "پرواز با سیم" یا "نمایشگرهای صفحه تخت" نیز در این قراردادها می تواند وجود داشته باشد که با نصب آنها می توان طرح های مربوط به ساخت هواپیمای مسافربری بومی را توسعه داد. در عین حال بایستی اشاره کرد که به طور معمول در بازار سلاح وقتی یک هواپیمای جنگی به کشوری صادر می شود این هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف می شود، اما در زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، در حقیقت کشور ثانی هم بخشی از پروژه مذکور شده و احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.​
ذکر این نکته نیز در اینجا خالی از لطف نیست که روسیه به دلیل شرایط بد اقتصادی که اخیرا به آن دچار شده است برای بدست آوردن ارز به منابع مختلفی روی آورده است و از این گذر می توان با صرف هزینه بیشتر، بسیاری از فناوری های کلیدی را که شاید در شرایط عادی امکان تهیه آن نباشد را برای ایران تهیه کرد.​
مسئله ایجاد اشتغال و سود آوری برای کشور از دیگر نکات مثبت این طرح است. همان گونه که مشخص است برای ساخت یک جنگنده در داخل هر کشوری، به تاسیسات و کارخانه های زیادی نیاز است که بخشی از این زیرساخت ها در کشور ما موجود و برخی دیگر نیز بایستی ساخته شود.​
بحث دیگر نیز بازاریابی برای فروش هواپیماهای مورد نظر است. برای نمونه، امروزه چین و پاکستان به صورت مشترک در برنامه جنگنده JF-17 سرمایه گذاری کرده اند و بازاریابی برای آن را نیز به صورت مشترک بر عهده دارند. در صورت یافتن مشتری و فروش جنگنده، سود بسیار قابل توجهی متوجه جمهوری اسلامی ایران خواهد شد و برند صنایع نظامی کشورمان نیز ارتقاء خواهد یافت.​
کدام جنگنده ها را می توان در ایران تولید کرد؟​
در عین حال مناسب است که به برخی از جنگنده های روسی که می توانند به عنوان انتخاب های بالقوه کشورمان باشند نیز اشاره کرد.​
یکی از اولین هواپیماها پرنده رزمی – آموزشی یاک 130 است که نیاز اصلی برای آموزش خلبان به منظور پرواز با جنگنده های پیشرفته می باشد. یک جت دو سرنشین مافوق صوت که برای آموزش پیشرفته خلبانان از آن بهره برداری می شود و در صورت لزوم توان حمل جنگ افزار خصوصا در نقش پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی را نیز دارد. در عین حال باید به طرح جنگنده آموزشی "برهان" نیز اشاره کرد که پروژه آن شباهت قابل توجهی با این هواپیما دارد و مدتهاست خبر جدیدی از تداوم فرآیند تولید آن منتشر نشده است.​




یاک 130
در بخش جنگنده ها می توان به چند انتخاب معروف اشاره کرد. در مرحله اول میگ 35 روسی قرار دارد که به عنوان آخرین عضو از خانواده جنگنده های سری میگ 29 شناخته می شود. توان مانوردهی خارق العاده با استفاده از موتورهای تغییردهنده بردار رانش، قابلیت حمل انواع تسلیحات هدایت شونده هوا به هوا و هوا به سطح به همراه رادار آرایه فازی فعال این پرنده را تبدیل به یک انتخاب مناسب برای ما می کند. در عین حال با توجه به وجود جنگنده میگ 29 در نهاجا مسلما زمان و هزینه کمتری برای پذیرش این جنگنده در داخل کشور صرف خواهد شد.​



میگ 35​
اما مسلما خانواده جنگنده های سری فلانکر از شرکت سوخوی روسیه را نمی توان نادیده گرفت؛ جنگنده های چند منظوره این خانواده مثل سوخوی 30 و سوخوی 35 در حال حاضر در خط تولید حضور داشته و برای نیروی هوایی روسیه و مشتریان در حال تولید هستند.

سوخوی 35
این هواپیماها، در مقایسه با خانواده میگ 29 از برد پروازی و قابلیت حمل حجم بیشتری از مهمات را داشته و در حوزه های جنگ الکترونیک نیز از پادهای جنگال بسیار پیشرفته ای بهره می برد. باید این نکته را در اینجا نیز ذکر کرد که خود روسها نیز در حال حاضر عمدتا جنگنده های ساخت شرکت سوخو را به مدل های ساخت میگ ترجیح می دهند. البته در مقایسه با جنگنده ای مثل میگ 35 برای مشتری مثل ایران، هواپیمایی مثل سوخوی 30 یا سوخوی 35 هزینه های بیشتری را چه در بخش خرید و چه در بخش راه اندازی زیرساخت ها برای تولید داخلی خواهد داشت.

اگرچه همکاری روسیه با دو کشور چین و هند برای تولید جنگنده، با دو نتیجه تقریبا متفاوت همراه بوده اما می توان با مدیریت صحیح منابع مادی و انسانی، از فرصت پیش آمده نهایت بهره را برد و گام بلندی را در پیشرفت صنعت هوایی کشور برداشت.​@Tomyris
Dear, post your offtopic posts in Iranian chill thread not sticky Iranian threads.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> *تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه؛ آب یا سراب ؟*​
> به طور معمول وقتی یک جنگنده به کشوری صادر می شود، هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف تر هستند؛ اما زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.
> به گزارش گروه دفاع و امنیت مشرق، وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در نشست خبری اخیر خود به مناسبت روز صنعت دفاعی، ضمن بیان آخرین دستاوردها و برنامه های دفاعی کشورمان، از طرح جدید ایران برای طراحی و تولید مشترک جنگنده با کشور روسیه و موافقت این کشور با این طرح خبر داد. اما سوابق روسیه و آنچه که ایران می تواند در این شراکت به دست آورد، نکات مهمی است که به آن خواهیم پرداخت.​
> در ابتدا باید اشاره کرد که شوروی سابق یکی از بزرگترین تولیدکنندگان هواپیما در جهان بود و محصولات هوایی این کشور خصوصا جنگنده های آن، در بسیاری از کشورهای جهان وارد خدمت شده است. از آن زمان تا به امروز دو کشور به صورت عمده، مشتری بزرگ محصولات نظامی روسی به خصوص در بخش هوایی بوده اند و حتی در کشور خود نیز اقدام به ساخت این هواپیماها کرده اند. چین و هندوستان از دهه 1950 میلادی به این سو صنعت هوایی خود را با کمک شوروی سابق پایه گذاری کردند.​
> چین به خاطر نزدیکی فکری که با سیستم حکومتی شوروی سابق داشت، از همان ابتدای کار از کمک روسها برخوردار شده و سنگ بنای صنعت هوایی این کشور با تولید مشترک جت جنگی میگ 17 که در چین به اسم J-5 شناخته می شود، گذاشته شد. چینی ها بمب افکن H-6 را نیز بر پایه توپولوف 16 روسی ساختند؛ هواپیمایی که همچنان به صورت عمده در چین به خدمت مشغول است و البته توسط صنایع هوایی این کشور کاملا ارتقاء یافته است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-5​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> H-6
> برای چند دهه در طول جنگ سرد، به دلیل بروز اختلاف بین دو غول جهان کمونیسم، روابط دو کشور رو به تیرگی رفت و کمک روسها به صنعت هوایی چین قطع شد اما چینی ها با تکیه بر توان بومی و البته به لطف برقراری روابط گرم با غرب در اواخر جنگ سرد، توانستند صنعت هواپیمایی خود را همچنان به پیش ببرند. ماه عسل بین غرب و چین در این حوزه البته دیری نپایید و با وقوع کشتار میدان تیانانمن در سال 1989 میلادی، این کمک ها از جانب غرب قطع شد.​
> اما باز هم شانس با چینی ها یار بود و در مدت کوتاهی اتحاد شوروی از هم پاشید و روسیه با حجم زیادی بدهی و مشکلات اقتصادی، میراث دار اصلی شوروی سابق بود. چین که به تازگی دوران رشد اقتصادی خود را آغاز کرده بود به سرعت چندین قرارداد خرید سلاح را با روسها به امضاء رساند و جنگنده های سوخوی 27 را به خدمت گرفت.​
> در ادامه چینی ها گونه ای از این هواپیما را به صورت تحت لیسانس به اسم J-11 تولید کردند که تا به امروز مدل های بسیار پیشرفته تر از آن توسط خود چینی ها مثل J-15 و J-16 ساخته شده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-11
> امروزه نیز دو کشور در بخش بالگردی برنامه ای برای تولید گونه پیشرفته بالگرد سنگین میل 26 را در دست اقدام دارند. چینی ها به لطف برنامه ریزی صحیح توانستند از برنامه تولید تحت امتیاز سوخو 27 امروزه به یکی از کشورهای پیشرو در صنعت هوایی تبدیل شده و در بسیاری بخش ها بدون نیاز به روسها به تولید جنگنده بپردازند.​
> اما مورد بعدی درباره تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه کشور هندوستان است. این کشور در ابتدای کار با تولید میگ 21 روسی به صورت تحت امتیاز کار خود را آغاز کرد و به شراکت در طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه موسوم به پاکفا رسید. هندی ها در دهه 1960 میلادی برای اولین بار میگ 21 را خریداری کردند و به دلیل عملکرد مناسب این هواپیما در خدمت هندی ها، در مجموع نزدیک به 1200 فروند از این جنگنده یا از شوروی سابق به هند وارد شده و یا در این کشور تولید شد.​
> هندی ها تاسیسات بسیار وسیعی را برای تعمیر و نگهداری، ارتقاء و همچنین ساخت جنگنده های خود در طول سالهای بعد ساختند که میگ 21 مدل ال اف، یکی از محصولات این کارخانجات بود.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> میگ 21 ال اف
> هندی ها برخلاف چینی ها چه در زمان جنگ سرد و چه در دوره پس از آن روابط خوبی را با اکثر کشورهای صاحب صنعت جهان حفظ کرد. در سال 2000 روابط نظامی هند و روسیه با امضاء قرارداد جنگنده های سوخوی 30 مدل ام کا آی وارد مرحله جدیدی شد. این جنگنده در تاسیسات شرکت هندی HAL ساخته می شوند و در کنار قطعات روسی، از قطعات ساخت هند و فرانسه نیز در آن استفاده می شود. در ادامه با آغاز طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه با عنوان پاکفا طرحی نیز با مشارکت هند بر اساس این جنگنده برای نیاز این کشور با عنوان فاگفا آغاز شده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> سوخوی 30 ام کا آی
> در اینجا بایستی به یک نکته بسیار کلیدی و مهم اشاره کرد. در حال حاضر، میزان سقوط جنگنده های روسی ساخت شده در هند، مثل میگ 21 و 27، همچنین سوخوی 30 بسیار بالا هستند. پروژه جنگنده بومی هند به نام "تجاس" با وجود کمک های فراوان روسیه، آمریکا و فرانسه در بخش های مختلف هنوز وارد مراحل تولیدی نشده است و این در حالی است که در همین زمان، چین با وجود دسترسی بسیار کمتر به صاحبان صنعت هوایی، به لطف سرمایه گذاری و مدیریت صحیح در حال آزمایش جنگنده های نسل پنجم خود است و در بحث جنگنده های نسل 4.5 نیز تقریبا به خودکفایی کامل رسیده است.​
> تاریخچه ساخت جنگنده در ایران​
> پیش از پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی قرار بود در تاسیسات شرکت صنایع هواپیما سازی ایران در اصفهان، هواپیماهای آمریکایی اف 16 مونتاژ شوند که این طرح با پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی و شکست آمریکا از مردم کشورمان، متوقف ماند.​
> این اولین باری است که خبری درباره تولید مشترک یک هواپیمای رزمی با کشوری دیگر از طرف مسئولین کشور پس از پیروزی انقلاب اعلام می شود و با توجه به اینکه یکی از نقاط قوت صنایع هوایی ایران، در بخش تعمیر و نگهداری است شاید گزافه نباشد اگر بگوییم که در طول این 35 سال، اخیر متخصصان ایرانی در بحث تعمیر و نگهداری انواع جنگ افزارهای خود، خصوصا وسایل پرنده که از طرف مقام معطم رهبری به عنوان "عمردهی انقلابی" به آن اشاره شده است به متخصصانی صاحب سبک بدل شده اند.​
> به عنوان مثال، در طول این 35 سال انواع هواپیماهای رزمی ساخت آمریکا، فرانسه، چین و روسیه در ایران به صورت اساسی تعمیر شده و ارتقاء های خاصی نیز بر روی آنها اجزاء شد که از این میان می توان به پروژه اضافه کردن قابلیت سوخت گیری هوا به هوا به میگ های 29 روسی برای اولین بار در جهان و یا نصب موشک های هوا به سطح هاوک بر زیر هواپیماهای اف 14 به عنوان یک سلاح هوا به هوا اشاره کرد.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اف 14 ایرانی مجهز به موشک هاوک
> در بحث طراحی و ساخت جنگنده نیز جمهوری اسلامی ایران با پروژه صاعقه نشان داده است که با وجود تمامی مشکلات ناشی از تحریم ها امکان طراحی و ساخت جنگنده در داخل کشور را نیز دارد. لذا مشخص است با توجه به اشراف کامل صنایع هوایی کشورمان در بحث تعمیر،نگهداری، ساخت و حتی ارتقاء، زیر ساخت های تولید جنگنده مشترک با کشوری دیگر، تا حد قابل توجهی فراهم است.​
> تاثیرات تولید جنگنده مشترک در ایران​
> اما شاید این سوال برای بسیاری پیش بیاید که بحث تولید مشترک چه امتیازهایی را می تواند برای کشور ما داشته باشد؟​
> با طرح این مسئله و با امضاء قرارداد بین طرفین، مسلما خط تولید جنگنده یا جنگنده های مورد نظر در داخل ایران به راه خواهد یافت. این خط تولید به حجم بسیار زیادی از دستگاه ها و ماشین آلات و قطعات صنعتی بسیار پیشرفته نیاز دارد که بخشی از آنها از طریق زیر ساخت های موجود و برخی دیگر نیز برای اولین بار به کشور وارد می شود.​
> با ورود این صنایع و قطعات به داخل کشور، کارگران و مهندسین ایرانی بایستی برای کار با این محصولات آموزش های بیشتری دیده و در نتیجه با علم روز جهان نیز بیشتر و عملا آشنا می شوند. در عین حال بسیاری از صنایع و علوم مرتبط مثل الکترونیک و مخابرات و یا هوا-فضا نیز از این شراکت سود خواهند برد.​
> با توجه به نوع قرارداد امضاء شده، بحث انتقال فناوری مطرح می شود. که این فناوری ها می تواند در بخش های گوناگونی مثل رادار و الکترونیک پروازی، موتور، جنگ افزار و یا طراحی و ساخت بدنه باشد و به همین خاطر، بسیاری از این فناوری ها را می توان برای ارتقاء ناوگان فعلی هواپیماهای رزمی ایران نیز استفاده کرد.​
> فناوری هایی با کاربرد مشترک بین هواپیماهای جنگی و مسافربری مثل "پرواز با سیم" یا "نمایشگرهای صفحه تخت" نیز در این قراردادها می تواند وجود داشته باشد که با نصب آنها می توان طرح های مربوط به ساخت هواپیمای مسافربری بومی را توسعه داد. در عین حال بایستی اشاره کرد که به طور معمول در بازار سلاح وقتی یک هواپیمای جنگی به کشوری صادر می شود این هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف می شود، اما در زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، در حقیقت کشور ثانی هم بخشی از پروژه مذکور شده و احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.​
> ذکر این نکته نیز در اینجا خالی از لطف نیست که روسیه به دلیل شرایط بد اقتصادی که اخیرا به آن دچار شده است برای بدست آوردن ارز به منابع مختلفی روی آورده است و از این گذر می توان با صرف هزینه بیشتر، بسیاری از فناوری های کلیدی را که شاید در شرایط عادی امکان تهیه آن نباشد را برای ایران تهیه کرد.​
> مسئله ایجاد اشتغال و سود آوری برای کشور از دیگر نکات مثبت این طرح است. همان گونه که مشخص است برای ساخت یک جنگنده در داخل هر کشوری، به تاسیسات و کارخانه های زیادی نیاز است که بخشی از این زیرساخت ها در کشور ما موجود و برخی دیگر نیز بایستی ساخته شود.​
> بحث دیگر نیز بازاریابی برای فروش هواپیماهای مورد نظر است. برای نمونه، امروزه چین و پاکستان به صورت مشترک در برنامه جنگنده JF-17 سرمایه گذاری کرده اند و بازاریابی برای آن را نیز به صورت مشترک بر عهده دارند. در صورت یافتن مشتری و فروش جنگنده، سود بسیار قابل توجهی متوجه جمهوری اسلامی ایران خواهد شد و برند صنایع نظامی کشورمان نیز ارتقاء خواهد یافت.​
> کدام جنگنده ها را می توان در ایران تولید کرد؟​
> در عین حال مناسب است که به برخی از جنگنده های روسی که می توانند به عنوان انتخاب های بالقوه کشورمان باشند نیز اشاره کرد.​
> یکی از اولین هواپیماها پرنده رزمی – آموزشی یاک 130 است که نیاز اصلی برای آموزش خلبان به منظور پرواز با جنگنده های پیشرفته می باشد. یک جت دو سرنشین مافوق صوت که برای آموزش پیشرفته خلبانان از آن بهره برداری می شود و در صورت لزوم توان حمل جنگ افزار خصوصا در نقش پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی را نیز دارد. در عین حال باید به طرح جنگنده آموزشی "برهان" نیز اشاره کرد که پروژه آن شباهت قابل توجهی با این هواپیما دارد و مدتهاست خبر جدیدی از تداوم فرآیند تولید آن منتشر نشده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> یاک 130
> در بخش جنگنده ها می توان به چند انتخاب معروف اشاره کرد. در مرحله اول میگ 35 روسی قرار دارد که به عنوان آخرین عضو از خانواده جنگنده های سری میگ 29 شناخته می شود. توان مانوردهی خارق العاده با استفاده از موتورهای تغییردهنده بردار رانش، قابلیت حمل انواع تسلیحات هدایت شونده هوا به هوا و هوا به سطح به همراه رادار آرایه فازی فعال این پرنده را تبدیل به یک انتخاب مناسب برای ما می کند. در عین حال با توجه به وجود جنگنده میگ 29 در نهاجا مسلما زمان و هزینه کمتری برای پذیرش این جنگنده در داخل کشور صرف خواهد شد.​
> 
> 
> 
> میگ 35​
> اما مسلما خانواده جنگنده های سری فلانکر از شرکت سوخوی روسیه را نمی توان نادیده گرفت؛ جنگنده های چند منظوره این خانواده مثل سوخوی 30 و سوخوی 35 در حال حاضر در خط تولید حضور داشته و برای نیروی هوایی روسیه و مشتریان در حال تولید هستند.
> 
> سوخوی 35
> این هواپیماها، در مقایسه با خانواده میگ 29 از برد پروازی و قابلیت حمل حجم بیشتری از مهمات را داشته و در حوزه های جنگ الکترونیک نیز از پادهای جنگال بسیار پیشرفته ای بهره می برد. باید این نکته را در اینجا نیز ذکر کرد که خود روسها نیز در حال حاضر عمدتا جنگنده های ساخت شرکت سوخو را به مدل های ساخت میگ ترجیح می دهند. البته در مقایسه با جنگنده ای مثل میگ 35 برای مشتری مثل ایران، هواپیمایی مثل سوخوی 30 یا سوخوی 35 هزینه های بیشتری را چه در بخش خرید و چه در بخش راه اندازی زیرساخت ها برای تولید داخلی خواهد داشت.
> 
> اگرچه همکاری روسیه با دو کشور چین و هند برای تولید جنگنده، با دو نتیجه تقریبا متفاوت همراه بوده اما می توان با مدیریت صحیح منابع مادی و انسانی، از فرصت پیش آمده نهایت بهره را برد و گام بلندی را در پیشرفت صنعت هوایی کشور برداشت.​@Tomyris
> Dear, post your offtopic posts in Iranian chill thread not sticky Iranian threads.



lol. I was right


----------



## raazh

2800 said:


> *تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه؛ آب یا سراب ؟*​
> به طور معمول وقتی یک جنگنده به کشوری صادر می شود، هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف تر هستند؛ اما زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.
> به گزارش گروه دفاع و امنیت مشرق، وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در نشست خبری اخیر خود به مناسبت روز صنعت دفاعی، ضمن بیان آخرین دستاوردها و برنامه های دفاعی کشورمان، از طرح جدید ایران برای طراحی و تولید مشترک جنگنده با کشور روسیه و موافقت این کشور با این طرح خبر داد. اما سوابق روسیه و آنچه که ایران می تواند در این شراکت به دست آورد، نکات مهمی است که به آن خواهیم پرداخت.​
> در ابتدا باید اشاره کرد که شوروی سابق یکی از بزرگترین تولیدکنندگان هواپیما در جهان بود و محصولات هوایی این کشور خصوصا جنگنده های آن، در بسیاری از کشورهای جهان وارد خدمت شده است. از آن زمان تا به امروز دو کشور به صورت عمده، مشتری بزرگ محصولات نظامی روسی به خصوص در بخش هوایی بوده اند و حتی در کشور خود نیز اقدام به ساخت این هواپیماها کرده اند. چین و هندوستان از دهه 1950 میلادی به این سو صنعت هوایی خود را با کمک شوروی سابق پایه گذاری کردند.​
> چین به خاطر نزدیکی فکری که با سیستم حکومتی شوروی سابق داشت، از همان ابتدای کار از کمک روسها برخوردار شده و سنگ بنای صنعت هوایی این کشور با تولید مشترک جت جنگی میگ 17 که در چین به اسم J-5 شناخته می شود، گذاشته شد. چینی ها بمب افکن H-6 را نیز بر پایه توپولوف 16 روسی ساختند؛ هواپیمایی که همچنان به صورت عمده در چین به خدمت مشغول است و البته توسط صنایع هوایی این کشور کاملا ارتقاء یافته است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-5​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> H-6
> برای چند دهه در طول جنگ سرد، به دلیل بروز اختلاف بین دو غول جهان کمونیسم، روابط دو کشور رو به تیرگی رفت و کمک روسها به صنعت هوایی چین قطع شد اما چینی ها با تکیه بر توان بومی و البته به لطف برقراری روابط گرم با غرب در اواخر جنگ سرد، توانستند صنعت هواپیمایی خود را همچنان به پیش ببرند. ماه عسل بین غرب و چین در این حوزه البته دیری نپایید و با وقوع کشتار میدان تیانانمن در سال 1989 میلادی، این کمک ها از جانب غرب قطع شد.​
> اما باز هم شانس با چینی ها یار بود و در مدت کوتاهی اتحاد شوروی از هم پاشید و روسیه با حجم زیادی بدهی و مشکلات اقتصادی، میراث دار اصلی شوروی سابق بود. چین که به تازگی دوران رشد اقتصادی خود را آغاز کرده بود به سرعت چندین قرارداد خرید سلاح را با روسها به امضاء رساند و جنگنده های سوخوی 27 را به خدمت گرفت.​
> در ادامه چینی ها گونه ای از این هواپیما را به صورت تحت لیسانس به اسم J-11 تولید کردند که تا به امروز مدل های بسیار پیشرفته تر از آن توسط خود چینی ها مثل J-15 و J-16 ساخته شده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-11
> امروزه نیز دو کشور در بخش بالگردی برنامه ای برای تولید گونه پیشرفته بالگرد سنگین میل 26 را در دست اقدام دارند. چینی ها به لطف برنامه ریزی صحیح توانستند از برنامه تولید تحت امتیاز سوخو 27 امروزه به یکی از کشورهای پیشرو در صنعت هوایی تبدیل شده و در بسیاری بخش ها بدون نیاز به روسها به تولید جنگنده بپردازند.​
> اما مورد بعدی درباره تولید مشترک جنگنده با روسیه کشور هندوستان است. این کشور در ابتدای کار با تولید میگ 21 روسی به صورت تحت امتیاز کار خود را آغاز کرد و به شراکت در طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه موسوم به پاکفا رسید. هندی ها در دهه 1960 میلادی برای اولین بار میگ 21 را خریداری کردند و به دلیل عملکرد مناسب این هواپیما در خدمت هندی ها، در مجموع نزدیک به 1200 فروند از این جنگنده یا از شوروی سابق به هند وارد شده و یا در این کشور تولید شد.​
> هندی ها تاسیسات بسیار وسیعی را برای تعمیر و نگهداری، ارتقاء و همچنین ساخت جنگنده های خود در طول سالهای بعد ساختند که میگ 21 مدل ال اف، یکی از محصولات این کارخانجات بود.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> میگ 21 ال اف
> هندی ها برخلاف چینی ها چه در زمان جنگ سرد و چه در دوره پس از آن روابط خوبی را با اکثر کشورهای صاحب صنعت جهان حفظ کرد. در سال 2000 روابط نظامی هند و روسیه با امضاء قرارداد جنگنده های سوخوی 30 مدل ام کا آی وارد مرحله جدیدی شد. این جنگنده در تاسیسات شرکت هندی HAL ساخته می شوند و در کنار قطعات روسی، از قطعات ساخت هند و فرانسه نیز در آن استفاده می شود. در ادامه با آغاز طرح جنگنده نسل پنجم روسیه با عنوان پاکفا طرحی نیز با مشارکت هند بر اساس این جنگنده برای نیاز این کشور با عنوان فاگفا آغاز شده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> سوخوی 30 ام کا آی
> در اینجا بایستی به یک نکته بسیار کلیدی و مهم اشاره کرد. در حال حاضر، میزان سقوط جنگنده های روسی ساخت شده در هند، مثل میگ 21 و 27، همچنین سوخوی 30 بسیار بالا هستند. پروژه جنگنده بومی هند به نام "تجاس" با وجود کمک های فراوان روسیه، آمریکا و فرانسه در بخش های مختلف هنوز وارد مراحل تولیدی نشده است و این در حالی است که در همین زمان، چین با وجود دسترسی بسیار کمتر به صاحبان صنعت هوایی، به لطف سرمایه گذاری و مدیریت صحیح در حال آزمایش جنگنده های نسل پنجم خود است و در بحث جنگنده های نسل 4.5 نیز تقریبا به خودکفایی کامل رسیده است.​
> تاریخچه ساخت جنگنده در ایران​
> پیش از پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی قرار بود در تاسیسات شرکت صنایع هواپیما سازی ایران در اصفهان، هواپیماهای آمریکایی اف 16 مونتاژ شوند که این طرح با پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی و شکست آمریکا از مردم کشورمان، متوقف ماند.​
> این اولین باری است که خبری درباره تولید مشترک یک هواپیمای رزمی با کشوری دیگر از طرف مسئولین کشور پس از پیروزی انقلاب اعلام می شود و با توجه به اینکه یکی از نقاط قوت صنایع هوایی ایران، در بخش تعمیر و نگهداری است شاید گزافه نباشد اگر بگوییم که در طول این 35 سال، اخیر متخصصان ایرانی در بحث تعمیر و نگهداری انواع جنگ افزارهای خود، خصوصا وسایل پرنده که از طرف مقام معطم رهبری به عنوان "عمردهی انقلابی" به آن اشاره شده است به متخصصانی صاحب سبک بدل شده اند.​
> به عنوان مثال، در طول این 35 سال انواع هواپیماهای رزمی ساخت آمریکا، فرانسه، چین و روسیه در ایران به صورت اساسی تعمیر شده و ارتقاء های خاصی نیز بر روی آنها اجزاء شد که از این میان می توان به پروژه اضافه کردن قابلیت سوخت گیری هوا به هوا به میگ های 29 روسی برای اولین بار در جهان و یا نصب موشک های هوا به سطح هاوک بر زیر هواپیماهای اف 14 به عنوان یک سلاح هوا به هوا اشاره کرد.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اف 14 ایرانی مجهز به موشک هاوک
> در بحث طراحی و ساخت جنگنده نیز جمهوری اسلامی ایران با پروژه صاعقه نشان داده است که با وجود تمامی مشکلات ناشی از تحریم ها امکان طراحی و ساخت جنگنده در داخل کشور را نیز دارد. لذا مشخص است با توجه به اشراف کامل صنایع هوایی کشورمان در بحث تعمیر،نگهداری، ساخت و حتی ارتقاء، زیر ساخت های تولید جنگنده مشترک با کشوری دیگر، تا حد قابل توجهی فراهم است.​
> تاثیرات تولید جنگنده مشترک در ایران​
> اما شاید این سوال برای بسیاری پیش بیاید که بحث تولید مشترک چه امتیازهایی را می تواند برای کشور ما داشته باشد؟​
> با طرح این مسئله و با امضاء قرارداد بین طرفین، مسلما خط تولید جنگنده یا جنگنده های مورد نظر در داخل ایران به راه خواهد یافت. این خط تولید به حجم بسیار زیادی از دستگاه ها و ماشین آلات و قطعات صنعتی بسیار پیشرفته نیاز دارد که بخشی از آنها از طریق زیر ساخت های موجود و برخی دیگر نیز برای اولین بار به کشور وارد می شود.​
> با ورود این صنایع و قطعات به داخل کشور، کارگران و مهندسین ایرانی بایستی برای کار با این محصولات آموزش های بیشتری دیده و در نتیجه با علم روز جهان نیز بیشتر و عملا آشنا می شوند. در عین حال بسیاری از صنایع و علوم مرتبط مثل الکترونیک و مخابرات و یا هوا-فضا نیز از این شراکت سود خواهند برد.​
> با توجه به نوع قرارداد امضاء شده، بحث انتقال فناوری مطرح می شود. که این فناوری ها می تواند در بخش های گوناگونی مثل رادار و الکترونیک پروازی، موتور، جنگ افزار و یا طراحی و ساخت بدنه باشد و به همین خاطر، بسیاری از این فناوری ها را می توان برای ارتقاء ناوگان فعلی هواپیماهای رزمی ایران نیز استفاده کرد.​
> فناوری هایی با کاربرد مشترک بین هواپیماهای جنگی و مسافربری مثل "پرواز با سیم" یا "نمایشگرهای صفحه تخت" نیز در این قراردادها می تواند وجود داشته باشد که با نصب آنها می توان طرح های مربوط به ساخت هواپیمای مسافربری بومی را توسعه داد. در عین حال بایستی اشاره کرد که به طور معمول در بازار سلاح وقتی یک هواپیمای جنگی به کشوری صادر می شود این هواپیمای صادراتی به نسبت نمونه های اصلی که توسط سازنده به کار می رود ضعیف می شود، اما در زمانی که دو کشور به صورت مشترک در پروژه ای سرمایه گذاری می کنند، در حقیقت کشور ثانی هم بخشی از پروژه مذکور شده و احتمال ضعیف شدن تجهیزات بسیار کمتر خواهد شد.​
> ذکر این نکته نیز در اینجا خالی از لطف نیست که روسیه به دلیل شرایط بد اقتصادی که اخیرا به آن دچار شده است برای بدست آوردن ارز به منابع مختلفی روی آورده است و از این گذر می توان با صرف هزینه بیشتر، بسیاری از فناوری های کلیدی را که شاید در شرایط عادی امکان تهیه آن نباشد را برای ایران تهیه کرد.​
> مسئله ایجاد اشتغال و سود آوری برای کشور از دیگر نکات مثبت این طرح است. همان گونه که مشخص است برای ساخت یک جنگنده در داخل هر کشوری، به تاسیسات و کارخانه های زیادی نیاز است که بخشی از این زیرساخت ها در کشور ما موجود و برخی دیگر نیز بایستی ساخته شود.​
> بحث دیگر نیز بازاریابی برای فروش هواپیماهای مورد نظر است. برای نمونه، امروزه چین و پاکستان به صورت مشترک در برنامه جنگنده JF-17 سرمایه گذاری کرده اند و بازاریابی برای آن را نیز به صورت مشترک بر عهده دارند. در صورت یافتن مشتری و فروش جنگنده، سود بسیار قابل توجهی متوجه جمهوری اسلامی ایران خواهد شد و برند صنایع نظامی کشورمان نیز ارتقاء خواهد یافت.​
> کدام جنگنده ها را می توان در ایران تولید کرد؟​
> در عین حال مناسب است که به برخی از جنگنده های روسی که می توانند به عنوان انتخاب های بالقوه کشورمان باشند نیز اشاره کرد.​
> یکی از اولین هواپیماها پرنده رزمی – آموزشی یاک 130 است که نیاز اصلی برای آموزش خلبان به منظور پرواز با جنگنده های پیشرفته می باشد. یک جت دو سرنشین مافوق صوت که برای آموزش پیشرفته خلبانان از آن بهره برداری می شود و در صورت لزوم توان حمل جنگ افزار خصوصا در نقش پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی را نیز دارد. در عین حال باید به طرح جنگنده آموزشی "برهان" نیز اشاره کرد که پروژه آن شباهت قابل توجهی با این هواپیما دارد و مدتهاست خبر جدیدی از تداوم فرآیند تولید آن منتشر نشده است.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> یاک 130
> در بخش جنگنده ها می توان به چند انتخاب معروف اشاره کرد. در مرحله اول میگ 35 روسی قرار دارد که به عنوان آخرین عضو از خانواده جنگنده های سری میگ 29 شناخته می شود. توان مانوردهی خارق العاده با استفاده از موتورهای تغییردهنده بردار رانش، قابلیت حمل انواع تسلیحات هدایت شونده هوا به هوا و هوا به سطح به همراه رادار آرایه فازی فعال این پرنده را تبدیل به یک انتخاب مناسب برای ما می کند. در عین حال با توجه به وجود جنگنده میگ 29 در نهاجا مسلما زمان و هزینه کمتری برای پذیرش این جنگنده در داخل کشور صرف خواهد شد.​
> 
> 
> 
> میگ 35​
> اما مسلما خانواده جنگنده های سری فلانکر از شرکت سوخوی روسیه را نمی توان نادیده گرفت؛ جنگنده های چند منظوره این خانواده مثل سوخوی 30 و سوخوی 35 در حال حاضر در خط تولید حضور داشته و برای نیروی هوایی روسیه و مشتریان در حال تولید هستند.
> 
> سوخوی 35
> این هواپیماها، در مقایسه با خانواده میگ 29 از برد پروازی و قابلیت حمل حجم بیشتری از مهمات را داشته و در حوزه های جنگ الکترونیک نیز از پادهای جنگال بسیار پیشرفته ای بهره می برد. باید این نکته را در اینجا نیز ذکر کرد که خود روسها نیز در حال حاضر عمدتا جنگنده های ساخت شرکت سوخو را به مدل های ساخت میگ ترجیح می دهند. البته در مقایسه با جنگنده ای مثل میگ 35 برای مشتری مثل ایران، هواپیمایی مثل سوخوی 30 یا سوخوی 35 هزینه های بیشتری را چه در بخش خرید و چه در بخش راه اندازی زیرساخت ها برای تولید داخلی خواهد داشت.
> 
> اگرچه همکاری روسیه با دو کشور چین و هند برای تولید جنگنده، با دو نتیجه تقریبا متفاوت همراه بوده اما می توان با مدیریت صحیح منابع مادی و انسانی، از فرصت پیش آمده نهایت بهره را برد و گام بلندی را در پیشرفت صنعت هوایی کشور برداشت.​@Tomyris
> Dear, post your offtopic posts in Iranian chill thread not sticky Iranian threads.



English translation plz !


----------



## Arminkh

raazh said:


> English translation plz !


Too long to be translated. 

Simply reviews Russians two most extensive combat airplane co-production with two of its allies: China and India.

Then tries to list the possible scenarios in which Iran and Russia can start co-production of fighters and names Yak 130, Mig 35 and Sokhoi 35

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

Arminkh said:


> Too long to be translated.
> 
> Simply reviews Russians two most extensive combat airplane co-production with two of its allies: China and India.
> 
> Then tries to list the possible scenarios in which Iran and Russia can start co-production of fighters and names Yak 130, Mig 35 and Sokhoi 35


Nice Summary however the article is much richer than this and impossible to translate.

The article has talked about history of aircraft manufacturing in China and India. And the Russian technology that was transmitted to China and India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> Nice Summary however the article is much richer than this and impossible to translate.
> 
> The article has talked about history of aircraft manufacturing in China and India. And the Russian technology that was transmitted to China and India.


This is what I told you from the beginning, the Russian fighter are excelent, and you can have a technology transfer as the Russian-Iranian relationship is strong and we have the same interest in facing a common enemy, the Russian one really need money for their industry and iran has lots of money, we can produce the yak-130 mig-35 and MIG but will sukhoi his hardest to have its technology, but can also


----------



## Aramagedon

Tomyris said:


> This is what I told you from the beginning, the Russian fighter are excelent, and you can have a technology transfer as the Russian-Iranian relationship is strong and we have the same interest in facing a common enemy, the Russian one really need money for their industry and iran has lots of money, we can produce the yak-130 mig-35 and MIG but will sukhoi his hardest to have its technology, but can also


Russians are very advanced in aircraft technology. They have given their technology to India and especially China since 1950 (Russia and China as two communist countries). However Chinese even have used Western technologies more than Indians. Chinese and Indian aircrafts are 100% copy of Russian aircrafts since decades ago and even now. All of their aircraft technologies are transmitted from Russia.


----------



## The Last of us

@MrTopal27 

I quote you here because that thread is being taken off topic.

The design of qaher is feasable for its mission. Its design to allow it to fly at low altutude. Look at its wings.

What I would say is that qaher needs to be made unmanned. As for your comment of parades. Yes, I agree, they're just none-sense. I rather have exhibitions than military parades.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> Russians are very advanced in aircraft technology. They have given their technology to India and especially China since 1950 Russian and China as two communist countries). However Chinese even have used Western technologies more than Indians. Chinese and Indian aircrafts are 100% copy of Russian aircrafts since decades ago and even now. All of their aircraft technologies is transmitted from Russians.


russia to its own technology, called me how posted photo and I show you a picture of the great Russian pakfa if iran want to have modern hunter and industry must develop are working with Russian

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Worf

The Last of us said:


> @MrTopal27
> 
> I quote you here because that thread is being taken off topic.
> 
> The design of qaher is feasable for its mission. Its design to allow it to fly at low altutude. Look at its wings.
> 
> What I would say is that qaher needs to be made unmanned. As for your comment of parades. Yes, I agree, they're just none-sense. I rather have exhibitions than military parades.


Dude that's exactly my point. Regarding the feasibility of the plane; i really still don't think its going to be reality; the wings don't mean much, if anything they are to small. Don't get me wrong, as i mentioned in my earlier comments Iranians have are strong 'with' ballistic missiles; but a 5th generation jet seems bit far off. Don't you think m8? I believe if we do see an 'Iranian low altitude jet ', it will have a very different design than the qaher.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

MrTopal27 said:


> Dude that's exactly my point. Regarding the feasibility of the plane; i really still don't think its going to be reality; the wings don't mean much, if anything they are to small. Don't get me wrong, as i mentioned in my earlier comments Iranians have are strong 'with' ballistic missiles; but a 5th generation jet seems bit far off. Don't you think m8? I believe if we do see an 'Iranian low altitude jet ', it will have a very different design than the qaher.....



LOL bro, who told you this was a 5th gen project? Any Iranian who claimed qaher was a 5th gen plane would need their head examined. Iran never made that statement. They just said it was a cheap, easy to produce plane for flying at low altitude, as hinted, for attacking ships etc. 

Iran is decades away from being able to design and produce a 5th gen plane. Unless the Russian or Chinese give Iran TOT, then this will remain the case.


----------



## black-hawk_101

Will IRAN going to procure used F-5 and F-4 from current and former operators now. As the pilots have more and more experience on these jets. F-5 with upgrade can be a very effective Interceptor, where as F-4 with upgrades can be a very effective Strike Platform; like in case for Bombing ISIS.

How many F-4 and F-5 flying which IRAN can acquire.


----------



## Tomyris

Visiting MAKS 2015 exhibition in Russia, Iran's Vice-President for Science and Technology, Dr.Sorena Sattari , confirms reports circulated about ongoing negotiations with Russian officials regarding possible acquiring of Sukhoi Su-30 multirole fighter jet.

I was right, I'm too smart



black-hawk_101 said:


> Will IRAN going to procure used F-5 and F-4 from current and former operators now. As the pilots have more and more experience on these jets. F-5 with upgrade can be a very effective Interceptor, where as F-4 with upgrades can be a very effective Strike Platform; like in case for Bombing ISIS.
> 
> How many F-4 and F-5 flying which IRAN can acquire.


pfffff!!!!Forgot these aircraft cardboard, it is their course, now need the rempalcer

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## black-hawk_101

Tomyris said:


> Visiting MAKS 2015 exhibition in Russia, Iran's Vice-President for Science and Technology, Dr.Sorena Sattari , confirms reports circulated about ongoing negotiations with Russian officials regarding possible acquiring of Sukhoi Su-30 multirole fighter jet.
> 
> I was right, I'm too smart
> 
> pfffff!!!!Forgot these aircraft cardboard, it is their course, now need the rempalcer


That would be the FA-50 and MiG-35s.


----------



## Tomyris

black-hawk_101 said:


> That would be the FA-50 and MiG-35s.


I hoped, but it is in longtemps.il pakfa is not even yet in service with the Russian and Indian army, I think that Iran will commadner of su-30 or even su-35, the pakfa may be later.


and for mig35 there is a possibility of teranfert technology and local building

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> I hoped, but it is in longtemps.il pakfa is not even yet in service with the Russian and Indian army, I think that Iran will commadner of su-30 or even su-35, the pakfa may be later.
> 
> 
> and for mig35 there is a possibility of teranfert technology and local building


Why is it so much talk about Su-30 and not SU-35, isn't the engine more reliable on SU-35 than the SU-30? I think the range and the sensors of Mig-35 is inferior. What is holding them back on SU-35.


----------



## Arminkh

Siavash said:


> Why is it so much talk about Su-30 and not SU-35, isn't the engine more reliable on SU-35 than the SU-30? I think the range and the sensors of Mig-35 is inferior. What is holding them back on SU-35.


because it is the most possible first purchase:

نگاهی به سوخو۳۰؛ گزینه احتمالی‌ایران برای تجهیز نیروی هوایی +عکس - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Siavash

Arminkh said:


> because it is the most possible first purchase:
> 
> نگاهی به سوخو۳۰؛ گزینه احتمالی‌ایران برای تجهیز نیروی هوایی +عکس - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir


Thanks for the article but it doesn't say why not SU-35? or does it and i missed it? I thought SU-35 is also in service and production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> Thanks for the article but it doesn't say why not SU-35? or does it and i missed it? I thought SU-35 is also in service and production.


yes su-35 is in service with the Russian army, and it is above the su-30, they are in the same aircraft category, su-30 already has an AESA radar while the su-35 yet.
that this be the su-30 or the top 35 will be his if iran can have one of these fighter ..

su-35 radar and more powerful engine.

su-30/35 are from the category of f-14/15. while the mig-35 is classified as F-16 / rafale / typhoon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Siavash said:


> Thanks for the article but it doesn't say why not SU-35? or does it and i missed it? I thought SU-35 is also in service and production.


You should consider the cost I think. Iran's military is very cost avert. As long as it is advanced enough to make opponents think twice is ok for them. They are not really after having a top notch air force right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

Arminkh said:


> You should consider the cost I think. Iran's military is very cost avert. As long as it is advanced enough to make opponents think twice is ok for them. They are not really after having a top notch air force right now.


Economic does not mean forgetting efficiency. I know if you know but viellisante air force and much more expensive than a new aircraft, iran fai big effort to keep these old aircraft, if IRIAF buy new planes costed much its going cheaper.

I will explain the different su-30 with another component

su-30MKI (India has Israeli component)
su-30MKA (Algerian component has french)
su-30SM (Russian a Russian component)

Algeria will modernize these problablement su-30 to SM format that is equipping of AESA radar, and a friend-foe identification system.

the aircraft will work and it will be stealthy,
India vaudrai modernize the su-30 Brahmos be equipping the missile.

I think iran deverait order, be the su-30SM or be su-35s.

in all cases iran gain in efficiency and technology and especially his will be much more economical.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> Economic does not mean forgetting efficiency. I know if you know but viellisante air force and much more expensive than a new aircraft, iran fai big effort to keep these old aircraft, if IRIAF buy new planes costed much its going cheaper.
> 
> I will explain the different su-30 with another component
> 
> su-30MKI (India has Israeli component)
> su-30MKA (Algerian component has french)
> su-30SM (Russian a Russian component)
> 
> Algeria will modernize these problablement su-30 to SM format that is equipping of AESA radar, and a friend-foe identification system.
> 
> the aircraft will work and it will be stealthy,
> India vaudrai modernize the su-30 Brahmos be equipping the missile.
> 
> I think iran deverait order, be the su-30SM or be su-35s.
> 
> in all cases iran gain in efficiency and technology and especially his will be much more economical.


I noticed SU-35 is single piloted. That is also a problem for Iran. We prefer two piloted Multirole aircrafts. I read somewhere (don't know where) that single pilot airplanes puts a lot of stress on the pilot depending on the mission for sure.

There should be a good reason mission wise, why SU-35 is single piloted aircraft but Iran also wants same technology but two piloted option.



Arminkh said:


> You should consider the cost I think. Iran's military is very cost avert. As long as it is advanced enough to make opponents think twice is ok for them. They are not really after having a top notch air force right now.


Good point. Beside they can always modify it. Just the AL-41 engines seems much better. But we are used to Mig-29 crappy ones so shouldn't be a problem.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> I noticed SU-35 is single piloted. That is also a problem for Iran. We prefer two piloted Multirole aircrafts. I read somewhere (don't know where) that single pilot airplanes puts a lot of stress on the pilot depending on the mission for sure.
> 
> There should be a good reason mission wise, why SU-35 is single piloted aircraft but Iran also wants same technology but two piloted option.
> 
> 
> Good point. Beside they can always modify it. Just the AL-41 engines seems much better. But we are used to Mig-29 crappy ones so shouldn't be a problem.


not the su-35 to a super technology, the pilot was he even a hunter component  good night


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> not the su-35 to a super technology, the pilot was he even a hunter component  good night


is this what you meant?
pas le Su-35 à une technologie ultra , le pilote est lui même un composant de chasseur  bonne nuit

You mean one shouldn't rely on higher technology and the pilot is the driving force and the hunter! or do you mean:
Su-35 has superior technology and it does the job of the pilot!

Shouldn't type French and run away, I had to reverse engineer and I came up with two different tales of what you said 
goodnight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

As with the S-300, if Iran gets the Su-30 it will be a heavily modernised one suited to Iran's needs. I think the reason they are talking about getting the Su-30 and not su-35 and mig-35 (in the short term anyway) is probably because:

a) There is more willingness on the Russian part to give TOT and allow license production for the su-30.
b) The Mig-35 and Su-35 are not yet in proper mass production whereas the Su-30 has been in production for a long time so Iran probably can get it much faster.

Initially, Iran will probably import directly from Russia su-30's and in the longer term, there will be licensed production inside Iran.

Su-30 can greatly modernise Iranian airfore obviously. If Iran can get license production of it inside Iran, it will be good news.

Just my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

The Last of us said:


> As with the S-300, if Iran gets the Su-30 it will be a heavily modernised one suited to Iran's needs. I think the reason they are talking about getting the Su-30 and not su-35 and mig-35 (in the short term anyway) is probably because:
> 
> a) There is more willingness on the Russian part to give TOT and allow license production for the su-30.
> b) The Mig-35 and Su-35 are not yet in proper mass production whereas the Su-30 has been in production for a long time so Iran probably can get it much faster.
> 
> Initially, Iran will probably import directly from Russia su-30's and in the longer term, there will be licensed production inside Iran.
> 
> Su-30 can greatly modernise Iranian airfore obviously. If Iran can get license production of it inside Iran, it will be good news.
> 
> Just my opinion.


or there is no money. we buy this we buy that!


----------



## Shams313

Hi guys.just heared two mind blowing news....
Farsnews

Tehran and Moscow started talks on the supply of the Russian-made Sukhoi 30 fighter jets to Iran.

Farsnews

Iranian and Russian companies reached an initial agreement to jointly manufacture new helicopters in Iran.

Sounds pretty good to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tomyris said:


> Economic does not mean forgetting efficiency. I know if you know but viellisante air force and much more expensive than a new aircraft, iran fai big effort to keep these old aircraft, if IRIAF buy new planes costed much its going cheaper.
> 
> I will explain the different su-30 with another component
> 
> su-30MKI (India has Israeli component)
> su-30MKA (Algerian component has french)
> su-30SM (Russian a Russian component)
> 
> Algeria will modernize these problablement su-30 to SM format that is equipping of AESA radar, and a friend-foe identification system.
> 
> the aircraft will work and it will be stealthy,
> India vaudrai modernize the su-30 Brahmos be equipping the missile.
> 
> I think iran deverait order, be the su-30SM or be su-35s.
> 
> in all cases iran gain in efficiency and technology and especially his will be much more economical.


The su-30mkl have AESA but Su-30sm have PESA radar


----------



## Hack-Hook

The Last of us said:


> As with the S-300, if Iran gets the Su-30 it will be a heavily modernised one suited to Iran's needs. I think the reason they are talking about getting the Su-30 and not su-35 and mig-35 (in the short term anyway) is probably because:
> 
> a) There is more willingness on the Russian part to give TOT and allow license production for the su-30.
> b) The Mig-35 and Su-35 are not yet in proper mass production whereas the Su-30 has been in production for a long time so Iran probably can get it much faster.
> 
> Initially, Iran will probably import directly from Russia su-30's and in the longer term, there will be licensed production inside Iran.
> 
> Su-30 can greatly modernise Iranian airfore obviously. If Iran can get license production of it inside Iran, it will be good news.
> 
> Just my opinion.


Well su-30 is all about optimization .not two country got the same su-30 . This deal if true can vary from good to the worst possible.
For example look at the chinese and indian models . The indian one has better radar and is more agile while the chinese can cary more weapon. And it seems its because of limitation in engine that made them to opt something between. 
Now I wonder if its possible to install the engine installed in su-35 inside the su-30 they are talking about. It mean alot less maintenance and more power for a more potent radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> As with the S-300, if Iran gets the Su-30 it will be a heavily modernised one suited to Iran's needs. I think the reason they are talking about getting the Su-30 and not su-35 and mig-35 (in the short term anyway) is probably because:
> 
> a) There is more willingness on the Russian part to give TOT and allow license production for the su-30.
> b) The Mig-35 and Su-35 are not yet in proper mass production whereas the Su-30 has been in production for a long time so Iran probably can get it much faster.
> 
> Initially, Iran will probably import directly from Russia su-30's and in the longer term, there will be licensed production inside Iran.
> 
> Su-30 can greatly modernise Iranian airfore obviously. If Iran can get license production of it inside Iran, it will be good news.
> 
> Just my opinion.


I agree with me, but the su-35 in service, it is the transition between the 4th and 5th generation, it has 5th generation component, it is much stronger than the su-30, it could even have a modernisaiton with the engine pakfa and are arming and are radar AESA.

The good side is that the su-30 and known by many countries, India is working with israel, while su-35 no one knows him apart russia and Algeria will surely order su- 35 for the interception

iran Devera control the su-35 su-30SM or, as I said in all cases iran will have an army of modern air and high technology, the combination su-30 / s300 is a real graveyard for any country will finally buried its military options the US and israel


----------



## IrbiS

JEskandari said:


> The su-30mkl have AESA but Su-30sm have PESA radar



MKI too has PESA, for now.


----------



## Serpentine

Can we demand Russians to equip the Su-30s with Irbis radars used in Su-35? It's one of the best airborne radars in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Last of us

Serpentine said:


> Can we demand Russians to equip the Su-30s with Irbis radars used in Su-35? It's one of the best airborne radars in the world.



I don't see why not. Iran should ask for su-35 engines to be used in the su-30 if it is possible. The plane will be made suited to Iran's requirement so I don't see why it will not be possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

The Last of us said:


> As with the S-300, if Iran gets the Su-30 it will be a heavily modernised one suited to Iran's needs. I think the reason they are talking about getting the Su-30 and not su-35 and mig-35 (in the short term anyway) is probably because:
> 
> a) There is more willingness on the Russian part to give TOT and allow license production for the su-30.
> b) The Mig-35 and Su-35 are not yet in proper mass production whereas the Su-30 has been in production for a long time so Iran probably can get it much faster.
> 
> Initially, Iran will probably import directly from Russia su-30's and in the longer term, there will be licensed production inside Iran.
> 
> Su-30 can greatly modernise Iranian airfore obviously. If Iran can get license production of it inside Iran, it will be good news.
> 
> Just my opinion.


Actually, Buying Su-30 and its license production was another project of Khatami era, which was abandoned later, like S-300, production of Tor in Iran, ...



Serpentine said:


> Can we demand Russians to equip the Su-30s with Irbis radars used in Su-35? It's one of the best airborne radars in the world.



What is the point of buying Su-30 and not Su-35 when you want to change its engine and radar by its counterparts in Su-35? The platform is the same, Su-35, and Su-30 are both upgrades of flanker family. Now you can improve the engine and make it stealth to have PAKFA  Russians may sell Su-35 in limited amounts, but I doubt it if they provide its ToT at all. For Su-30 though, they may accept ToT, and license production.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> What is the point of buying Su-30 and not Su-35 when you want to change its engine and radar by its counterparts in Su-35? The platform is the same, Su-35, and Su-30 are both upgrades of flanker family. Now you can improve the engine and make it stealth to have PAKFA  Russians may sell Su-35 in limited amounts, but I doubt it if they provide its ToT at all. For Su-30 though, they may accept ToT, and license production.



Not the engines necessarily, but only the radar.

Also, Su-35 uses advanced Titanium alloy composites that makes its durability almost twice the Su-30, and also increases its range and efficiency. 

There is a thread in forum for comparison of two models:

Su-30MKI vs Su-35S

*Below are the similarities between Su-30MKI and Su-35S:*
12 Hard Points
8000kgs external ordinance
G-limit 9
Same Air-Air and Air-Ground weapons package
Has Thrust Vectoring
Can house external jammers and all varieties of pods.
Has inflight re-fueling
etc.. etc..


*Differences:*
*Su-30MKI*-
Maximum internal fuel - 9,640kgs
Max Range(without mid-air refueling) - 3000kms
Max ceiling - 17.3km
Max Speed - Mach 1.9
Canards - Yes
Crew - 2
Max Afterburner Thrust - 12500kgf, Emergency Thrust - 12800kgf
External Fuel Tanks - No
Composites - Not in significant quantity.
Empty Weight - unknown. Estimated to be around 18400kgs.
Airframe life - 3,000hrs or 15 years(at 200 hours flight time each year)
Internal Jammer - No
RCS - unofficial estimate 11.5m2
Airbrake - Yes
Supercruise- No


*Su-35S*-
Maximum internal fuel - 11,500kgs
Max Range(without mid-air refueling, without external fuel tanks) - 3600kms
Max ceiling - 18km
Max Speed - Mach 2.25
Canards - No (since radar isn't heavy)
Crew - 1
Max Afterburner Thrust - 14500kgf(gives a massive boost to TWR compared to Su-30MKI)
External Fuel Tanks - Yes (can carry 2 drop tanks of 1400kgs fuel in each of them)
Composites - Yes. Extensive use of Titanium Alloys.
Empty Weight - Unknown. Estimated to be around 18800kgs.
Airframe life - 6,000hrs or 30 years(at 200 hours flight time each year)
Internal Jammer - Yes
RCS - unofficial estimate between 1-3m2
Airbrake - No. Powerful modified rudders act as Airbrakes.
Supercruise - Yes

*Radar-*
This deserves a separate mention. Because this is where the difference is at its max.
*Su-30MKI has a N-011M BARS Radar*
*Transmitter peak power - 5kw*
Transmitter average power - 1.2kw
Can Track- 15 Targets
Can Simultaneously Engage - 4 Targets
*Max Detection for 5 sqm RCS - 140 km*(Upgraded Radar with upgraded transmitter power, if any in service, its range is unknown.)

*Su-35S has N-035 IRBIS-E. The most powerful Fighter Plane mounted X Band radar in the world. Specs are as follows.*
*Transmitter peak power - 20kw*
Transmitter average power - 5kw
Can Track - 30 Targets
Can Simultaneously Engage - 8 Targets
*Max Detection for 5 sqm RCS - 426 km*
Max Detection for 3 sqm RCS - 375 km
Max Detection for 1 sqm RCS - 285 km
Max Detection for 0.01 sqm RCS - 90 km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

Serpentine said:


> Not the engines necessarily, but only the radar.
> 
> Also, Su-35 uses advanced Titanium alloy composites that makes its durability almost twice the Su-30, and also increases its range and efficiency.
> 
> There is a thread in forum for comparison of two models:
> 
> Su-30MKI vs Su-35S
> 
> *Below are the similarities between Su-30MKI and Su-35S:*
> 12 Hard Points
> 8000kgs external ordinance
> G-limit 9
> Same Air-Air and Air-Ground weapons package
> Has Thrust Vectoring
> Can house external jammers and all varieties of pods.
> Has inflight re-fueling
> etc.. etc..
> 
> 
> *Differences:
> Su-30MKI*-
> Maximum internal fuel - 9,640kgs
> Max Range(without mid-air refueling) - 3000kms
> Max ceiling - 17.3km
> Max Speed - Mach 1.9
> Canards - Yes
> Crew - 2
> Max Afterburner Thrust - 12500kgf, Emergency Thrust - 12800kgf
> External Fuel Tanks - No
> Composites - Not in significant quantity.
> Empty Weight - unknown. Estimated to be around 18400kgs.
> Airframe life - 3,000hrs or 15 years(at 200 hours flight time each year)
> Internal Jammer - No
> RCS - unofficial estimate 11.5m2
> Airbrake - Yes
> Supercruise- No
> 
> 
> *Su-35S*-
> Maximum internal fuel - 11,500kgs
> Max Range(without mid-air refueling, without external fuel tanks) - 3600kms
> Max ceiling - 18km
> Max Speed - Mach 2.25
> Canards - No (since radar isn't heavy)
> Crew - 1
> Max Afterburner Thrust - 14500kgf(gives a massive boost to TWR compared to Su-30MKI)
> External Fuel Tanks - Yes (can carry 2 drop tanks of 1400kgs fuel in each of them)
> Composites - Yes. Extensive use of Titanium Alloys.
> Empty Weight - Unknown. Estimated to be around 18800kgs.
> Airframe life - 6,000hrs or 30 years(at 200 hours flight time each year)
> Internal Jammer - Yes
> RCS - unofficial estimate between 1-3m2
> Airbrake - No. Powerful modified rudders act as Airbrakes.
> Supercruise - Yes
> 
> *Radar-*
> This deserves a separate mention. Because this is where the difference is at its max.
> *Su-30MKI has a N-011M BARS Radar
> Transmitter peak power - 5kw*
> Transmitter average power - 1.2kw
> Can Track- 15 Targets
> Can Simultaneously Engage - 4 Targets
> *Max Detection for 5 sqm RCS - 140 km*(Upgraded Radar with upgraded transmitter power, if any in service, its range is unknown.)
> 
> *Su-35S has N-035 IRBIS-E. The most powerful Fighter Plane mounted X Band radar in the world. Specs are as follows.
> Transmitter peak power - 20kw*
> Transmitter average power - 5kw
> Can Track - 30 Targets
> Can Simultaneously Engage - 8 Targets
> *Max Detection for 5 sqm RCS - 426 km*
> Max Detection for 3 sqm RCS - 375 km
> Max Detection for 1 sqm RCS - 285 km
> Max Detection for 0.01 sqm RCS - 90 km



Dude, I understood your comment and I know the differences of Su-30 and Su-35. My point is that these two planes are defined as two levels of upgrades of the same platform. Russians are willing to sell the lower upgrade with ToT, while they may just sell the higher upgrade. Radar is a very important component of the upgrade. It's like countries which upgrade their F-16s from block 20 to 50+. The upgraded version will be still lacking some features compared to originally made block 50+s, but they will call the upgraded version block 50+ because the crucial parts are updated to block 50+ level. Anyway, everything depends on how baraadaran e dallaal e aslaheh betounan sibil e khodeshoun va rous ha ra charb konand, vali kheyli omidi baraaye ToT nist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> Dude, I understood your comment and I know the differences of Su-30 and Su-35. My point is that these two planes are defined as two levels of upgrades of the same platform. Russians are willing to sell the lower upgrade with ToT, while they may just sell the higher upgrade. Radar is a very important component of the upgrade. It's like countries which upgrade their F-16s from block 20 to 50+. The upgraded version will be still lacking some features compared to originally made block 50+s, but they will call the upgraded version block 50+ because the crucial parts are updated to block 50+ level. Anyway, everything depends on how baraadaran e dallaal e aslaheh betounan sibil e khodeshoun va rous ha ra charb konand, vali kheyli omidi baraaye ToT nist.



If we can get Irbis-E radars from Russians, it would still be very great, even if they don't agree with ToT for the radar.

The best choice is to buy 100-120 Su-30's most advanced upgrades available with ToT and also buy 50-100 Su-35s without ToT (if they agree with it). With the current economic situation of Russians and their stand off with Europe and U.S, they will be more than happy to have a customer buying nearly 200 aircrafts from them, so we should get as much as we can from them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

@Serpentine will the engine on su-30 be able to divert 4 time the electricity to the new radar without being tasked?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rmi5

Serpentine said:


> If we can get Irbis-E radars from Russians, it would still be very great, even if they don't agree with ToT for the radar.
> 
> The best choice is to buy 100-120 Su-30's most advanced upgrades available with ToT and also buy 50-100 Su-35s without ToT (if they agree with it). With the current economic situation of Russians and their stand off with Europe and U.S, they will be more than happy to have a customer buying nearly 200 aircrafts from them, so we should get as much as we can from them.



Russians currently have 2-3 squadrons of Su-35, so purchasing 50-100 Su-35, and 100-120 Su-30s(which they have about 3-4 squadron of it in service) is not what they will want. But, I fully understand your point.

About financial part of 150-200 jets, I can say that they will ask about 10-12 billion dollars, plus 2-3 more billions for required trainings, ... If IRIAF decides to use this fleet for 30-40 years, there would be about 500 million per year cost of maintenance, ... for this fleet. Some people inside Iran may not like it, as you know. But, anyway IRIAF needs to be modernized.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

JEskandari said:


> @Serpentine will the engine on su-30 be able to divert 4 time the electricity to the new radar without being tasked?



I'm not an expert in electricity generation in fighter jets, but if I'm not wrong, electric power in jets is provided by emergency power unit which is a gas turbine using water/hydrazine as fuel. So if there is more demand for electricity, simply a more powerful power unit can be used and since the Su-30 and Su-35 are almost the same in air frame, there wouldn't be a problem with space or fitting in a new power unit.

Again, I'm not an expert in this field, maybe others can elaborate.



rmi5 said:


> Russians currently have 2-3 squadrons of Su-35, so purchasing 50-100 Su-35, and 100-120 Su-30s(which they have about 3-4 squadron of it in service) is not what they will want. But, I fully understand your point.
> 
> About financial part of 150-200 jets, I can say that they will ask about 10-12 billion dollars, plus 2-3 more billions for required trainings, ... If IRIAF decides to use this fleet for 30-40 years, there would be about 500 million per year cost of maintenance, ... for this fleet. Some people inside Iran may not like it, as you know. But, anyway IRIAF needs to be modernized.



Of course, but regardless of the costs, the air force needs a huge boost.

Another option is to go for fewer number of jets (Su-30 or Su-35) and wait for PAK FA to be fully operational, then we can buy a good number of them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rmi5

Serpentine said:


> I'm not an expert in electricity generation in fighter jets, but if I'm not wrong, electric power in jets is provided by emergency power unit which is a gas turbine using water/hydrazine as fuel. So if there is more demand for electricity, simply a more powerful power unit can be used and since the Su-30 and Su-35 are almost the same in air frame, there wouldn't be a problem with space or fitting in a new power unit.
> 
> Again, I'm not an expert in this field, maybe others can elaborate.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, but regardless of the costs, the air force needs a huge boost.
> 
> Another option is to go for fewer number of jets (Su-30 or Su-35) and wait for PAK FA to be fully operational, then we can buy a good number of them.



@JEskandari the below picture can emphasis your point:





Inke damaagheh che ghadr jaa dashteh basheh ham mohem hast:





Albatteh ba'zi radar ha(mesle ba'zi radar haye PAKFA) ra rouye labe ye baal hastand. Yekami kaar mibare vali ehtemaalan misheh. vali khob in amalan mesle hamoun ghaziye kharidan e F-16 block 20 va upgrade be block 50+ hast. Khob age bahs serfan kharid hast, az avval besheh block 50+ kharid ke digeh behtar hast.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daneshmand

JEskandari said:


> @Serpentine will the engine on su-30 be able to divert 4 time the electricity to the new radar without being tasked?



Oh, yes. That should not be a problem. Each engine on that plane can produce about 20 MW of power. Drawing just 20 KW would be no problem for it.



Serpentine said:


> I'm not an expert in electricity generation in fighter jets, but if I'm not wrong, electric power in jets is provided by emergency power unit which is a gas turbine using water/hydrazine as fuel. So if there is more demand for electricity, simply a more powerful power unit can be used and since the Su-30 and Su-35 are almost the same in air frame, there wouldn't be a problem with space or fitting in a new power unit.
> 
> Again, I'm not an expert in this field, maybe others can elaborate.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, but regardless of the costs, the air force needs a huge boost.
> 
> Another option is to go for fewer number of jets (Su-30 or Su-35) and wait for PAK FA to be fully operational, then we can buy a good number of them.



Actually the generators are powered by the main engines. And the wonderful thing about the aircraft power source is their frequency which is much higher than the standard ground ones. The aircrafts use 400 Hz frequency since the higher the frequency the smaller the motors, generators and transformers therefore keeping the weight burden low (for an increase in transmission losses, but since the distances between electricity production and consumption are not great on an aircraft, this would not matter much).

But I would love Iran to get PAK FA. Since that plane really has some potential over the coming decades to be upgraded and played around with. Specially if Iran get a similar deal as the Indians with ToT. I also agree with you that Iran needs to get something meanwhile till PAK FA become available. And Su-35 is a good option specially if it comes with ToT since the company is the same, it will also help with ToT of PAK FA in future too.

@Serpentine

Deal beh in migan: 160 Kamov choppers to be built in India, 40 in Russia

Compare with: Jane's: Egypt set to receive Ka-52 attack helicopters

Just importing will not get us anywhere. Without ToT and local manufacturing capability, things will be as if they were in 70's. That is also if we are lucky and can get some worthy stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

Serpentine said:


> If we can get Irbis-E radars from Russians, it would still be very great, even if they don't agree with ToT for the radar.
> 
> The best choice is to buy 100-120 Su-30's most advanced upgrades available with ToT and also buy 50-100 Su-35s without ToT (if they agree with it). With the current economic situation of Russians and their stand off with Europe and U.S, they will be more than happy to have a customer buying nearly 200 aircrafts from them, so we should get as much as we can from them.



this is what I said from the beginning



Tomyris said:


> this is what I said from the beginning



I agree that Iran obtains a limited number of su-35 until arriving the pakfa

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Russians currently have 2-3 squadrons of Su-35, so purchasing 50-100 Su-35, and 100-120 Su-30s(which they have about 3-4 squadron of it in service) is not what they will want. But, I fully understand your point.
> 
> About financial part of 150-200 jets, I can say that they will ask about 10-12 billion dollars, plus 2-3 more billions for required trainings, ... If IRIAF decides to use this fleet for 30-40 years, there would be about 500 million per year cost of maintenance, ... for this fleet. Some people inside Iran may not like it, as you know. But, anyway IRIAF needs to be modernized.


I am not a fan on excessive spending on military but 500 million $ is peanuts for having a fist in the region to lean on. The GCC is getting bolder and bolder every day.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Siavash said:


> I am not a fan on excessive spending on military but 500 million $ is peanuts for having a fist in the region to lean on. The GCC is getting bolder and bolder every day.


Even 200 su30 wont make our airforce stronger than gcc . Won't forget when we get those planes they got f-15 silent eagle and f-35

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

JEskandari said:


> Even 200 su30 wont make our airforce stronger than gcc . Won't forget when we get those planes they got f-15 silent eagle and f-35


Are you sure they will get F-35? I thought it is only going to be sold to Israel?
We wont need to match 1 to 1 with GCC. We don't want to wage a total war with them just enough to stop an attack. They will not dare to fly all against us and as a defensive force we don't need to match their numbers but at least have something airworthy and modern to fly with!


----------



## masud

i thought iran will chose paf-fa.......... but they chose su-30 !


----------



## Tomyris

500 million is nothing for power that Iran will win. no air force in the region is higher the f-35 is not as effiace her, and it is very expensive, the su-35 can easily destroy the f-15 Saudi Arabia, our aviation and our air defense, NO COUNTRY can not attack iran,

I explain that maintain an old aerial fleet as the F-4, f-1, f-14 etc ... cost us far too expensive. bought new planes will cost her dear moin has iran and therefore with a number (200 250) can be obtained advantage russia, we will do a lot of power economy and we will be superior to all the other countries in the region .

su-35 equipping the missile R-77M1 / E has a range of more air / air 200Km, no country in the region can be countered

russia also offers the scrambling system which system etein the aegis of the American aircraft carrier, remember the American aircraft carrier in crime, russia quarreled with the su-24 ... and she offers this system has export

I think iran Devera purchased

120 su-35s
100 mig-35 (ie not force you can start a local programe with MIG)
24 su-34 (su-34 on bomabrdier is super efficient and equip jamming system
36 a 60 PAKFA

her we made a total of 280 to 304 modern fighter,if we add 4 to 6 the AWACS IRIAF become the best air force in the region is one of the best in the world and with such a large order can get a transfer technology and local service center. if we add the S-400 Iran's sky will be keyed and invincible, no army will take the risk of attacking us.all Arab countries met with israel could do nothing against us, so stop crying for 500million.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

JEskandari said:


> Even 200 su30 wont make our airforce stronger than gcc . Won't forget when we get those planes they got f-15 silent eagle and f-35



Raah e hal e saadeh, dashtan e quality e behtar hast. Ya'ni Su-35 dar baraabar e eagle, va PAKFA dar baraabar e F-35, ke dar in sourat hattaa ba quantity ye kam tar, bartari ba Iran khahad boud. Baraaye kaahesh e hazineh ham, yek te'daad e ziyaadi Su-30 be onvaan e badaneh ye asli ye IRIAF. dar kol IRIAF be 450-500 ta jet e jadid niyaaz khahad dasht. Albatteh inhaayi ke man matrah mikonam, serfan plan e kolli hast, va be in mafhoum nist ke IRIAF donbaal e in khahad raft ya aslan poulesh ra khahad dasht.



Siavash said:


> I am not a fan on excessive spending on military but 500 million $ is peanuts for having a fist in the region to lean on. The GCC is getting bolder and bolder every day.



500 million serfan hazine ye ezaafi ye saalaaneh baraaye maintenance hast! IRIAF kheyli poul dar nist!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> 500 million serfan hazine ye ezaafi ye saalaaneh baraaye maintenance hast! IRIAF kheyli poul dar nist!!!


Areh vali bazam chizi nist ke!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRGCA Harbin Y-12 reconnaissance of U.S aircraft carrier in persian gulf *


----------



## Serpentine

JEskandari said:


> Even 200 su30 wont make our airforce stronger than gcc . Won't forget when we get those planes they got f-15 silent eagle and f-35



And why should we plan to make an air force stronger than GCC? That doesn't make sense.

We need an air force that can contain any attacking forces, being able to deliver a huge blow to them and make any war too costly for them.

We would need an air force stronger than GCC if we wanted to conquer those countries. Don't forget that we have also other means to counter them in any possible war.

Basically, IRIAF should be strong enough to stand firm in face of any invaders, preventing them from establishing an air superiority in a short time.

There is a massive effort undergoing to bolster Iran's air defense systems and I promise in less than 5 years, we'll have the best air defense protection in the region. The most important factor is that most of those air defense systems will be built domestically, so if one is gone, we don't have to beg any country to sell another to us with an overpriced value, exactly the same thing that happenned in Iran-Iraq war.

Now tell me, how many countries in region are capable of producing capable air defense systems? (Perhaps except for Turkey in near future)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Serpentine said:


> And why should we plan to make an air force stronger than GCC? That doesn't make sense.
> 
> We need an air force that can contain any attacking forces, being able to deliver a huge blow to them and make any war too costly for them.
> 
> We would need an air force stronger than GCC if we wanted to conquer those countries. Don't forget that we have also other means to counter them in any possible war.
> 
> Basically, IRIAF should be strong enough to stand firm in face of any invaders, preventing them from establishing an air superiority in a short time.
> 
> There is a massive effort undergoing to bolster Iran's air defense systems and I promise in less than 5 years, we'll have the best air defense protection in the region. The most important factor is that most of those air defense systems will be built domestically, so if one is gone, we don't have to beg any country to sell another to us with an overpriced value, exactly the same thing that happenned in Iran-Iraq war.
> 
> Now tell me, how many countries in region are capable of producing capable air defense systems? (Perhaps except for Turkey in near future)


don't forget about occupied palestin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

Serpentine said:


> And why should we plan to make an air force stronger than GCC? That doesn't make sense.
> 
> We need an air force that can contain any attacking forces, being able to deliver a huge blow to them and make any war too costly for them.
> 
> We would need an air force stronger than GCC if we wanted to conquer those countries. Don't forget that we have also other means to counter them in any possible war.
> 
> Basically, IRIAF should be strong enough to stand firm in face of any invaders, preventing them from establishing an air superiority in a short time.
> 
> There is a massive effort undergoing to bolster Iran's air defense systems and I promise in less than 5 years, we'll have the best air defense protection in the region. The most important factor is that most of those air defense systems will be built domestically, so if one is gone, we don't have to beg any country to sell another to us with an overpriced value, exactly the same thing that happenned in Iran-Iraq war.
> 
> Now tell me, how many countries in region are capable of producing capable air defense systems? (Perhaps except for Turkey in near future)


You are right. Iran already has the most accurate and effective missiles. Investment on fighters which needs huge money is waste of money. Especially by considering Iran's current situation. Building hellfire missiles and improving our air defense are enough effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

JEskandari said:


> don't forget about occupied palestin



Israel gets enormous technical and economical help from west and U.S. Without their help, they wouldn't be even half of what they are now. But yes, they do have a strong military and air defense. Since they are not close to Iran geographically, it's not much of a concern.


----------



## Siavash

Serpentine said:


> Israel gets enormous technical and economical help from west and U.S. Without their help, they wouldn't be even half of what they are now. But yes, they do have a strong military and air defense. Since they are not close to Iran geographically, it's not much of a concern.


That is not correct! Basically Israel gives a lot of technical assistance to US and without their assistance many US companies would have problems. If you have ever worked with Israelis (which I have) or have ever seen the core startups and core research they do and know their universities you would have not said that. Economically and after peace process when they diverted their 25% mil budget to normal levels their economy is growing and not only because of US and European help but on their own skills. All major US companies rely on Israeli engineers for their research. We have to know our adversaries as they are not as we please. Honestly, an Israel without the Likud party and the right wing is better than PLO and Hamas for sure. I bet Palestinians would be happier with it than with Hamas and PLO together. If the two state solution is implemented and we accept Israel existence as PLO will, and normalize relations. They are more near to us culturally than we know.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

no I disagree, an air defense system and really hard to do, I mean the modern not old system which are easily blurred, the C4i technology and too complex and iran does not control if the iran can get S-400 is more S-300 which we will acquire more biento local system, our air defense will power.

but we can not do without a powerful aviation, we need a strong defense aviation heaven in addition to air defense, we need it especially the electronic jamming and stealth, and our planes could destroy any force of enemy invasion, and aviation and important for a powerful nation.

and I agree that we must achieve a self-sufficiency and produce our material to beg a person, but until you can do some things that we are forced to bought, but you have purchased inteligement offer big contract technology transfer exchange, like her we will have the power weapon to defend the country and the technology to develop an even stronger weapons that in the future our country will buy more but will hight tech equipment.


----------



## The Last of us

Didn't where else to post this.

MOA signed between Iran and Russia in MAKS 2015 for joint production of jet engines and gas turbines.


تفاهم ایران و روسیه برای تولید موتور هواپیما
در سفر هیات بلند پایه ایران به روسیه که همزمان با برگزاری نمایشگاه هوایی ماکس 2015 در شهر ژوکوفسکی بود، تفاهمنامه دوجانبه ای در خصوص همکاری مشترک در زمینه تولید موتورهای توربینی با مجموعه "کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" به امضاء رسیده است.
به گزارش مشرق، دکتر منطقی در گفتگو با اسپوتنیک بیان نمود پیشرانی علم و فناوری صنعت هوایی در دیگر زمینه ها و منافع حاصل از سرریز فناوریهای توسعه یافته یا بومی سازی شده به دیگر بخش ها نیز از جمله دیگر عواملی هستند که صنعت هوایی تجاری را، هم در سطح ملی و هم سطح جهانی، به یک بخش راهبردی تبدیل کرده است.

اهمیت موتورهای توربینی و کاربرد گسترده آن‌ها در توسعه کشورها باعث شده است کشورهایی که روابط اقتصادی مشترکی برای رقابت در صحنه جهانی دارند در زمینه طراحی و تولید آن‌ها سرمایه‌گذاری مشترک انجام دهند.

کشور روسیه و ایران با توجه به روابط نزدیک اقتصادی می‌توانند در این زمینه همکاری مشترکی انجام دهند و به همین علت کشور ما آمادگی کامل دارد با "کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" همکاری مشترک خود را در زمینه سرمایه‌گذاری، طراحی، تولید و ارتقاء پلتفرم موتور توربینی نسل جدید جهت کاربری‌های اقتصادی انجام دهد.
"کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" در حال حاضر یکی از بزرگترین مجموعه‌های طراحی و تولید موتور توربینی در جهان است.


تفاهم ایران و روسیه برای تولید موتور هواپیما - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir

Can't read Persian well but if this includes jet engines for fighter jets, then it is big news.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

The Last of us said:


> Didn't where else to post this.
> 
> MOA signed between Iran and Russia in MAKS 2015 for joint production of jet engines and gas turbines.
> 
> 
> تفاهم ایران و روسیه برای تولید موتور هواپیما
> در سفر هیات بلند پایه ایران به روسیه که همزمان با برگزاری نمایشگاه هوایی ماکس 2015 در شهر ژوکوفسکی بود، تفاهمنامه دوجانبه ای در خصوص همکاری مشترک در زمینه تولید موتورهای توربینی با مجموعه "کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" به امضاء رسیده است.
> به گزارش مشرق، دکتر منطقی در گفتگو با اسپوتنیک بیان نمود پیشرانی علم و فناوری صنعت هوایی در دیگر زمینه ها و منافع حاصل از سرریز فناوریهای توسعه یافته یا بومی سازی شده به دیگر بخش ها نیز از جمله دیگر عواملی هستند که صنعت هوایی تجاری را، هم در سطح ملی و هم سطح جهانی، به یک بخش راهبردی تبدیل کرده است.
> 
> اهمیت موتورهای توربینی و کاربرد گسترده آن‌ها در توسعه کشورها باعث شده است کشورهایی که روابط اقتصادی مشترکی برای رقابت در صحنه جهانی دارند در زمینه طراحی و تولید آن‌ها سرمایه‌گذاری مشترک انجام دهند.
> 
> کشور روسیه و ایران با توجه به روابط نزدیک اقتصادی می‌توانند در این زمینه همکاری مشترکی انجام دهند و به همین علت کشور ما آمادگی کامل دارد با "کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" همکاری مشترک خود را در زمینه سرمایه‌گذاری، طراحی، تولید و ارتقاء پلتفرم موتور توربینی نسل جدید جهت کاربری‌های اقتصادی انجام دهد.
> "کنسرسیوم طراحی و ساخت توربین‌های گاز و موتور هواپیما" در حال حاضر یکی از بزرگترین مجموعه‌های طراحی و تولید موتور توربینی در جهان است.
> 
> 
> تفاهم ایران و روسیه برای تولید موتور هواپیما - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir
> 
> Can't read Persian well but if this includes jet engines for fighter jets, then it is big news.


It says turbine engine which include both turboprop and turbojet.


----------



## Tomyris

Arminkh said:


> It says turbine engine which include both turboprop and turbojet.


hummmmmmmmmm, that's good news for our glorious nation.

our country will develop its technologically in the future, but its still not prevent the purchase of aircraft currently because it is urgent

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Indus Falcon said:


> @The Last of us and other respected members. Can you please tell me about these two missiles i.e. Sajiel and Fakour-90
> 
> From what I understand Sajiel did not go into production, whereas the Fakour-90 did. Can more learned members kindly shed more light on this?


From what I know, Fakour is in limited production as of now and not in mass production. From last year's news, they're developing a new air to air missile. Time will tell if this new missile will replace the fakour.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> From what I know, Fakour is in limited production as of now and not in mass production. From last year's news, they're developing a new air to air missile. Time will tell if this new missile will replace the fakour.



What is the best missile AIR-AIR The IRIAF? is there mass production?


----------



## scythian500

Siavash said:


> All major US companies rely on Israeli engineers for their research.


With all due respect, this is non sense..
it reminds me of a tourist calling all people of a city as blind as he encountered couple of them when passing by that city...

Israelis are less than a DOT in American ocean of science and tech pool

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> With all due respect, this is non sense..
> it reminds me of a tourist calling all people of a city as blind as he encountered couple of them when passing by that city...
> 
> Israelis are less than a DOT in American ocean of science and tech pool


No one said entirely! No one forgets the population ratio as well. Read it objectively in response to the subject and you know what I mean. I think it is clear what I meant in the response anyway it meant they give a major weight to their Israeli counterparts whenever they have access or involved and that is for good reason. None think lightly of an Israeli engineer in Israel when hearing from. Do I need to elaborate more! World is not like what Mashregh news depicts outside of Iran. With all due respect, I don't do piss contests here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lastofthepatriots

yavar said:


> *Iran IRIAF Fada'eeyan-e Harim-e Velayat 5 (Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary 5) maneuver*



What does velayat mean in farsi?


----------



## haman10

lastofthepatriots said:


> What does velayat mean in farsi?


Velayat in Farsi is similar to the one in Urdu .

"Sanctuary" and "reign" . 

the drill is named " the protectors of sanctuary" or sth to that extent



The Last of us said:


> Can't read Persian well


WTF 

you need to keep up bro

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

IRIAF FHV 5 maneuvers:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

Serpentine said:


> IRIAF FHV 5 maneuvers:




Which birds participate in this drill? I could see only F14, Su24, F5 and Mig29 ... what about F4 and Saeghe 2 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

raptor22 said:


> Which birds participate in this drill? I could see only F14, Su24, F5 and Mig29 ... what about F4 and Saeghe 2 ?



Yes, I haven't seen F-4 and Saeghe either, don't know the reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

+


Serpentine said:


> Yes, I haven't seen F-4 and Saeghe either, don't know the reason.


+ Mirage F1 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> Areh vali bazam chizi nist ke!



Manteghan be nazar miyaad chizi nist va hagh ba shomaast, vali arteshi ke poul e ghazaaye sarbaz hash ra ham be zour nemitouneh bede, in poul baraash kheyli hast.

Vali joda az in harfhaa, fekr mikoni ke che ghadr ehtemaal daare ke rous ha in jet ha ra oun ham ba ToT be Iran bedand? Hameye harf hayi ke man tou in thread zadam be kenaar, Vali man ke kheyli roush hesaab baaz nemikonam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## black-hawk_101

Why not IRAN put a request for acquiring F-4, F-5 and F-14s along with spares in the global market. Also, start negotiation with US and other operators; for F-14s it's only the US that can supply spares but for for F-5 and F-4 there are many of them.

On F-5, F-4 and F-14s, IRIAF has a great experience of many decades and still they can use it for another 7-10 years with upgrades to avionics. In this mean time they can go for JV with China-Russia over a new plane too. So, these upgraded F-4, F-5 and F-14s can easily guard the skies and seas along with some used MiG-29s from Russia and other operators too.


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Manteghan be nazar miyaad chizi nist va hagh ba shomaast, vali arteshi ke poul e ghazaaye sarbaz hash ra ham be zour nemitouneh bede, in poul baraash kheyli hast.
> 
> Vali joda az in harfhaa, fekr mikoni ke che ghadr ehtemaal daare ke rous ha in jet ha ra oun ham ba ToT be Iran bedand? Hameye harf hayi ke man tou in thread zadam be kenaar, Vali man ke kheyli roush hesaab baaz nemikonam.


Man ham fekr nemikonam. TOT roosa sustem haye pishrafteh va pichideh nist.

Vali aslan kharide ma az roosieh eshtebast. Ina alaan nizai be havapeyma pishrafteh nadaran. Agar khatar GCC hastesh ba sharayete jahani nemitoonan bar aleihe GCC kari anjam bedan va behtareh bahashoon ashti konan. Agar mikhan ba ISIS bejangan hamin F-4 va F-5 va behtaresh SU-25 az hameh chi arzoon tareh va behtareh. In abayad sabr konan ta 2 ya 3 saal be France nazdik shan agar mikhan vaghean kari bokonan ya az sweden bekhan joint venture bezanana na az ye hamsayeh. Alaan sharayet baraye kharideh ezafeh haye F-4 donya farahameh. Alman kolli too storage dareh, Taiwan,... GCC va Israel ham mokhalefati nemikoneh chon midooneh arzeshe razmi nadareh vali az sare ISIS ham ziadeh ba ghodrate bombaranesh.

Roosieh mikhad m avabasteh nezamish bashim ta do ghotbi roo haminjoori negah dareh. Hanooz az zamaneh USSR faregh nashodeh va ba negahe sharghish hich vaght nemishe. Hich vaght ham vaghean ghodratmand be manaye vagheie nemishe. 

Dar nahayat ma mimoonim ye seri tajhizat roosi aghab oftadeh ba ye seri sardare tahsil kardeh roosieh ke nofooze fogholadeh darand va siasate khareji ma ro be tanesh ba gharb pish mibarand. Nemidoonam in nazareh maneh.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

black-hawk_101 said:


> Why not IRAN put a request for acquiring F-4, F-5 and F-14s along with spares in the global market. Also, start negotiation with US and other operators; for F-14s it's only the US that can supply spares but for for F-5 and F-4 there are many of them.
> 
> On F-5, F-4 and F-14s, IRIAF has a great experience of many decades and still they can use it for another 7-10 years with upgrades to avionics. In this mean time they can go for JV with China-Russia over a new plane too. So, these upgraded F-4, F-5 and F-14s can easily guard the skies and seas along with some used MiG-29s from Russia and other operators too.


Well do you really believe what you have said.
By the way even if USA want they are in no position to offer any spare for f14

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

JEskandari said:


> Well do you really believe what you have said.
> By the way even if USA want they are in no position to offer any spare for f14


We need our homeless pilots and technicians visit here: we will find spare parts, I don't know if there are trolleys near by:
Photos: Grumman F-14... Tomcat Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Siavash said:


> We need our homeless pilots and technicians visit here: we will find spare parts, I don't know if there is trollies near by:
> Photos: Grumman F-14... Tomcat Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net


All the f14 have been shreeded . only one or two in opperable one kept in USA museums.

By the way that picture belong to November 1994

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

JEskandari said:


> All the f14 have been shreeded . only one or two in opperable one kept in USA museums.


Damn, Ok where is the shreds? there might be something in between. Forget about F-14 lets ask for those sun tanned F-4s


----------



## Hack-Hook

Siavash said:


> Damn, Ok where is the shreds? there might be something in between. Forget about F-14 lets ask for those sun tanned F-4s


Well guess we already produce the spare for f4. By the way no one really like f4 . the only reason the plane with its awful aerodynamic can fly is because of j79 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> We need our homeless pilots and technicians visit here: we will find spare parts, I don't know if there are trolleys near by:
> Photos: Grumman F-14... Tomcat Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net


not we not have to play again but had, all you voyer in this picture must be replaced


----------



## Siavash

JEskandari said:


> Well guess we already produce the spare for f4. By the way no one really like f4 . the only reason the plane with its awful aerodynamic can fly is because of j79 engine.


Really, I heard they love it? Ok I love it anyway!


Tomyris said:


> not we not have to play again but had, all you voyer in this picture must be replaced


I had been thinking for a while and tonight finally decided I am not going to purchase from Russia! As the MOD is going to listen to me, they are already talking to leader and we are changing our policies and trying to be a good boy in the region. Later we are going to purchase Rafale (how do you spell this weird plane) !

You should go and rest now. SU-30, 35 or Mig is out of question now! Nothing is going to happen in 5 years so no worries!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

haman10 said:


> WTF
> 
> you need to keep up bro



I left Iran when I was 7 bro. I never really learned how to properly read and write, thought I can speak Farsi well. Never really had the chance to learn Farsi here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## warfareknow

"I left Iran when I was 7 bro. I never really learned how to properly read and write, thought I can speak Farsi well. Never really had the chance to learn Farsi here. "

Same here bro  but i was 8 years old.
Since I follow every news here and on IMF for many years now, I am able to
read farsi but very slow and not everything does seem to make sense

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

warfareknow said:


> "I left Iran when I was 7 bro. I never really learned how to properly read and write, thought I can speak Farsi well. Never really had the chance to learn Farsi here. "
> 
> Same here bro  but i was 8 years old.
> Since I follow every news here and on IMF for many years now, I am able to
> read farsi but very slow and not everything does seem to make sense



 I know how you feel bro. One day when I have more time I might go to some Farsi classes and learn how to read and write.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> Man ham fekr nemikonam. TOT roosa sustem haye pishrafteh va pichideh nist.
> 
> Vali aslan kharide ma az roosieh eshtebast. Ina alaan nizai be havapeyma pishrafteh nadaran. Agar khatar GCC hastesh ba sharayete jahani nemitoonan bar aleihe GCC kari anjam bedan va behtareh bahashoon ashti konan. Agar mikhan ba ISIS bejangan hamin F-4 va F-5 va behtaresh SU-25 az hameh chi arzoon tareh va behtareh. In abayad sabr konan ta 2 ya 3 saal be France nazdik shan agar mikhan vaghean kari bokonan ya az sweden bekhan joint venture bezanana na az ye hamsayeh. Alaan sharayet baraye kharideh ezafeh haye F-4 donya farahameh. Alman kolli too storage dareh, Taiwan,... GCC va Israel ham mokhalefati nemikoneh chon midooneh arzeshe razmi nadareh vali az sare ISIS ham ziadeh ba ghodrate bombaranesh.
> 
> Roosieh mikhad m avabasteh nezamish bashim ta do ghotbi roo haminjoori negah dareh. Hanooz az zamaneh USSR faregh nashodeh va ba negahe sharghish hich vaght nemishe. Hich vaght ham vaghean ghodratmand be manaye vagheie nemishe.
> 
> Dar nahayat ma mimoonim ye seri tajhizat roosi aghab oftadeh ba ye seri sardare tahsil kardeh roosieh ke nofooze fogholadeh darand va siasate khareji ma ro be tanesh ba gharb pish mibarand. Nemidoonam in nazareh maneh.



Bahs sar e in hast ke Iran option e digeh i joz rousiye va chin nadaareh. Vaghti tou oun mamlekat har rouz be amrica fohsh midan, va ba oun moushak poushak haye 2zaarishoun esraeil ra tahdid mikonand, hich keshvar e gharbi, kouft ham beheshoun nemideh, che bereseh be havaapeyma ye jangi!!! hamin pakstan ham, ba'd az bahs e atomish, hamin moshkel ra daasht, va baraaye hamin raft soraagh e chin baraaye JF-17. Pakestani ha divouneh naboudand ke raftand soraagh e chin, raah e dige i nadaashtand joz inke ashghal haye chini ra bekharand.
BTW, havaapeyma haye rousi ashghal nist. man nemidounam ki hamchin harfi be shoma zade. hamin Su-35, az har havaapeymaye dige ye ham nasl e khodesh behtar hast. havaapeyma haye rousi, hamishe az maanovr paziri ye behtari barkhordaar boudand. khoub va bad ham albatteh daarand, va export version(monkey version) va version e asli daarand. 
Dar mored e Daesh, hamoun Iraq va Syria mitounand ke havaapeymaa haye behtari bekharand va niyaazi nist ke IRIAF 4 ta ashghal e ezaafi ham bekhare. IRIAF alaan shode mesle in kaaseh-boshghaabi ha 
dar zemn bahs faghat GCC nist. yek air force ra ham nemisheh az sefr dorost kard. Hamin alaan ham pilot haye IRIAF baayad kolli amouzesh bebinand ta ba technology ye alaan ashna beshand. 10-20 saal dige ke az alaan ham bad tar misheh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

warfareknow said:


> "I left Iran when I was 7 bro. I never really learned how to properly read and write, thought I can speak Farsi well. Never really had the chance to learn Farsi here. "
> 
> Same here bro  but i was 8 years old.
> Since I follow every news here and on IMF for many years now, I am able to
> read farsi but very slow and not everything does seem to make sense





The Last of us said:


> I know how you feel bro. One day when I have more time I might go to some Farsi classes and learn how to read and write.


Ouch ! 

both of you need to come back ASAP

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

*Second day of IRIAF drills:*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC8MMlp3y1M*
*Iran IRIAF Fada'eeyan-e Harim-e Velayat 5 (Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary 5) maneuver day One*





*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC8MMlp3y1M*
*Iran IRIAF Fada'eeyan-e Harim-e Velayat 5 (Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary 5) maneuver day Two*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## warfareknow

haman10 said:


> Ouch !
> 
> both of you need to come back ASAP


Haman jan let me tell you what school marks I had back then in Iran
first and second form.

20 Maths
20 Olum , not sure what it is, I think biology???
20 Varzesh
and so on
AAAnd 20 at Farsi ;DDDD

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

warfareknow said:


> AAAnd 20 at Farsi ;DDDD


lol


----------



## Nadhem Of Ibelin

Old aircraft but iran knows how to benefit from them by reverse engineering some of them and gaining professional pilots thanks to conducting many manoeuvres...good luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Bahs sar e in hast ke Iran option e digeh i joz rousiye va chin nadaareh. Vaghti tou oun mamlekat har rouz be amrica fohsh midan, va ba oun moushak poushak haye 2zaarishoun esraeil ra tahdid mikonand, hich keshvar e gharbi, kouft ham beheshoun nemideh, che bereseh be havaapeyma ye jangi!!! hamin pakstan ham, ba'd az bahs e atomish, hamin moshkel ra daasht, va baraaye hamin raft soraagh e chin baraaye JF-17. Pakestani ha divouneh naboudand ke raftand soraagh e chin, raah e dige i nadaashtand joz inke ashghal haye chini ra bekharand.
> BTW, havaapeyma haye rousi ashghal nist. man nemidounam ki hamchin harfi be shoma zade. hamin Su-35, az har havaapeymaye dige ye ham nasl e khodesh behtar hast. havaapeyma haye rousi, hamishe az maanovr paziri ye behtari barkhordaar boudand. khoub va bad ham albatteh daarand, va export version(monkey version) va version e asli daarand.
> Dar mored e Daesh, hamoun Iraq va Syria mitounand ke havaapeymaa haye behtari bekharand va niyaazi nist ke IRIAF 4 ta ashghal e ezaafi ham bekhare. IRIAF alaan shode mesle in kaaseh-boshghaabi ha
> dar zemn bahs faghat GCC nist. yek air force ra ham nemisheh az sefr dorost kard. Hamin alaan ham pilot haye IRIAF baayad kolli amouzesh bebinand ta ba technology ye alaan ashna beshand. 10-20 saal dige ke az alaan ham bad tar misheh.


< "havaapeyma haye rousi ashghal nist!" > nemigam ashghal hastand. Migam vabastegi be hamsayehie ke zatan aggressive hastesh eshtebah hast vagarneh Havapeypa haye roosi baraye nasl 4 va 4.5 bad nistand. Harchand tajrobeh hend migeh spare part haye har havapeyma makhsoose ooneh ke nemidoonam cheghadr doroste.


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> < "havaapeyma haye rousi ashghal nist!" > nemigam ashghal hastand. Migam vabastegi be hamsayehie ke zatan aggressive hastesh eshtebah hast vagarneh Havapeypa haye roosi baraye nasl 4 va 4.5 bad nistand. Harchand tajrobeh hend migeh spare part haye har havapeyma makhsoose ooneh ke nemidoonam cheghadr doroste.



Bahs ineh ke Iran hamin havaapeymaahaye rousi ra ham ma'loum nist betouneh tahvil begireh, che berese be gheyr e rousi va chini. Felan ke IRIAF che bekhaad va che nakhaad, baayad be rous ha vaabaste basheh. Aziz, F-35 va Eurofighter va Rafael, ... ke be IRIAF nemidan.


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Bahs ineh ke Iran hamin havaapeymaahaye rousi ra ham ma'loum nist betouneh tahvil begireh, che berese be gheyr e rousi va chini. Felan ke IRIAF che bekhaad va che nakhaad, baayad be rous ha vaabaste basheh. Aziz, F-35 va Eurofighter va Rafael, ... ke be IRIAF nemidan.


Ghabool daram ke alaan nemidan, valikan masaleh ine ke aslan ehtiaji beheshon ta 5 saale digeh nadarim! Baraye moghabele ba daaesh ham F-5, F-4, SU-24, SU-25 and Mirage hamaoon kafieh. Ta 5 ya 10 saale digeh agar masaleh solhe felestini ha hal shod kharide jangandeh az France ya Sweden ham hal mishe.

Noktash ine ke kharid jangandeh jadid aslan lozoom nadareh alaan. to postam eshareh kardam chera ehtiaj nadarim.


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> Ghabool daram ke alaan nemidan, valikan masaleh ine ke aslan ehtiaji beheshon ta 5 saale digeh nadarim! Baraye moghabele ba daaesh ham F-5, F-4, SU-24, SU-25 and Mirage hamaoon kafieh. Ta 5 ya 10 saale digeh agar masaleh solhe felestini ha hal shod kharide jangandeh az France ya Sweden ham hal mishe.
> 
> Noktash ine ke kharid jangandeh jadid aslan lozoom nadareh alaan. to postam eshareh kardam chera ehtiaj nadarim.



Shoma fekr konam ke kheyli chizi az havaapeyma haye jangi nemidouni. havaapeymaaye fighter ke 30-40 saal az omresh gozashteh basheh, be khaater e khastegi ye badaneh, 3G ra ham nemitouneh tahammol kone! F-14 haye Iran ham already faghat digeh daaran soukht haroum mikonan, che berese be F-4, F-5, ... Be alaaveh, ba tavajjoh be siyaasat e khareji ye regime, ehtemaal e dargiri khareji kam nist. Dar mored e daesh, ... ounhaa alaan be selaah haye zed e havaayi va doush partaab be tor e gostarde dastresi nadaaran, vali ageh Iran bekhaad be tor e jeddi vaared e dargiri beshe, oun vaght arab ha selaah haye zed e havaayi ham be daesh, ... midan(hamoun tor ke TOW baraaye moghaabele ba zerehi ye Assad daadand), va oun moghe daesh kheyli raahat mitoune in F-4 va F-5 haye nim gharn pish ra biyaare paayin.


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Shoma fekr konam ke kheyli chizi az havaapeyma haye jangi nemidouni. havaapeymaaye fighter ke 30-40 saal az omresh gozashteh basheh, be khaater e khastegi ye badaneh, 3G ra ham nemitouneh tahammol kone! F-14 haye Iran ham already faghat digeh daaran soukht haroum mikonan, che berese be F-4, F-5, ... Be alaaveh, ba tavajjoh be siyaasat e khareji ye regime, ehtemaal e dargiri khareji kam nist. Dar mored e daesh, ... ounhaa alaan be selaah haye zed e havaayi va doush partaab be tor e gostarde dastresi nadaaran, vali ageh Iran bekhaad be tor e jeddi vaared e dargiri beshe, oun vaght arab ha selaah haye zed e havaayi ham be daesh, ... midan(hamoun tor ke TOW baraaye moghaabele ba zerehi ye Assad daadand), va oun moghe daesh kheyli raahat mitoune in F-4 va F-5 haye nim gharn pish ra biyaare paayin.



Chera midoonam khastegi badaneh chieh va har kasi in chiza ro midooneh. Masaleh ine ke agar 40 saal kar kardeh 45 ham roosh ... Bara ina farghi nemikone.

..."ehtemaal e dargiri khareji kam nist" ==> ....Dar soorat dargiri khareji farghi nemikoneh chi dashteh bashim, 100 ta SU-30 ham kafi nist dar barabare hajme nirooye motokhasem. Siasat kharejishoon tabeh baghashooneh va mitoonan tanesho kam konan. Behtareh nadashteh bashan va tanesho kam konan. Dar spporate dagiri shekast sakhti mikhoran ... hamishe barayandeh GDP harfe avvalo zadeh dar janga ... ina har chi ham khodeshoon dorost konan harifeh barayandeh GDP va ghodrate GCC nemishan va aghebat nadareh ... Siasat regime tabeh baghaye nezameh va in siasat ba kharideh SU-30 be tore majazi jari tar misheh.

..."F-4 va F-5 haye nim gharn pish ra biyaare paayin" ... ==> Ehtemalesh kameh vali hast, Bara hamin ham goftam agar counter measure hasho ezafeh konan too 2 saale ayandehg ke emkan pazire mitoonan felan nakharan ta sharayet avaz she. Hengame offensive Havayi va zamini ehtemalesh kamtare t afaghat offensive havayi ... vali hast. Behtareh su-25 begiran agar mikhan tazeh chizi begiran.


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> Chera midoonam khastegi badaneh chieh va har kasi in chiza ro midooneh. Masaleh ine ke agar 40 saal kar kardeh 45 ham roosh ... Bara ina farghi nemikone.
> 
> ..."ehtemaal e dargiri khareji kam nist" ==> ....Dar soorat dargiri khareji farghi nemikoneh chi dashteh bashim, 100 ta SU-30 ham kafi nist dar barabare hajme nirooye motokhasem. Siasat kharejishoon tabeh baghashooneh va mitoonan tanesho kam konan. Behtareh nadashteh bashan va tanesho kam konan. Dar spporate dagiri shekast sakhti mikhoran ... hamishe barayandeh GDP harfe avvalo zadeh dar janga ... ina har chi ham khodeshoon dorost konan harifeh barayandeh GDP va ghodrate GCC nemishan va aghebat nadareh ... Siasat regime tabeh baghaye nezameh va in siasat ba kharideh SU-30 be tore majazi jari tar misheh.
> 
> ..."F-4 va F-5 haye nim gharn pish ra biyaare paayin" ... ==> Ehtemalesh kameh vali hast, Bara hamin ham goftam agar counter measure hasho ezafeh konan too 2 saale ayandehg ke emkan pazire mitoonan felan nakharan ta sharayet avaz she. Hengame offensive Havayi va zamini ehtemalesh kamtare t afaghat offensive havayi ... vali hast. Behtareh su-25 begiran agar mikhan tazeh chizi begiran.



Aziz, shoma mesl e inke kollan az marhaleh parti.
mesle in hast ke yek keshti be zarfiyat e nahaayi por shode, ba'd begi haalaa in 100 ton ezaafe ra ham mizaarim tou keshti. keshti kheyli shik, ghargh mishe! 
Gharaar nist ke 5 saal e digeh, gharbi ha be Iran havaapymay jangi beforoushand. kamaa inke ghabl az bahs e atomi va zamaan e khatami ham ke raabeteh 1000 martabeh behtar boud, hamin France 4 ta moushak e zeperti ham baraaye Mirage ha be Iran nemidaad, ke alaan ham in mirage ha amalan khaali miparan! France na mikhaad va na mitouneh ke be Iran havaapeymaa ye jangi beforousheh. Grippen ham bish tar e component hash kharej az Sweden tolid misheh(menjomleh bakhsh e bozorgish dar amrica), va ageh amrica ejaaze nade(ke ejaaze nemide), Swededn ageh ham bekhaad, nemitouneh Grippen be Iran beforousheh. Rous ha ham Iran ra sar e kaar khahand gozasht. Su-24, va Su-25 momken hast be Iran bedand, vali hamin Su-30 ra ba'id hast ke be saadegi be Iran befroushand.


----------



## بلندر



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Aziz, shoma mesl e inke kollan az marhaleh parti.
> mesle in hast ke yek keshti be zarfiyat e nahaayi por shode, ba'd begi haalaa in 100 ton ezaafe ra ham mizaarim tou keshti. keshti kheyli shik, ghargh mishe!
> Gharaar nist ke 5 saal e digeh, gharbi ha be Iran havaapymay jangi beforoushand. kamaa inke ghabl az bahs e atomi va zamaan e khatami ham ke raabeteh 1000 martabeh behtar boud, hamin France 4 ta moushak e zeperti ham baraaye Mirage ha be Iran nemidaad, ke alaan ham in mirage ha amalan khaali miparan! France na mikhaad va na mitouneh ke be Iran havaapeymaa ye jangi beforousheh. Grippen ham bish tar e component hash kharej az Sweden tolid misheh(menjomleh bakhsh e bozorgish dar amrica), va ageh amrica ejaaze nade(ke ejaaze nemide), Swededn ageh ham bekhaad, nemitouneh Grippen be Iran beforousheh. Rous ha ham Iran ra sar e kaar khahand gozasht. Su-24, va Su-25 momken hast be Iran bedand, vali hamin Su-30 ra ba'id hast ke be saadegi be Iran befroushand.



..."mesle in hast ke yek keshti be zarfiyat e nahaayi por shode"... sharayete badaneh inha ro na to midooni na man ... vali ina mitoonan ta 5 saale digeh ahm ina ro negah darand..

..."Gharaar nist ke 5 saal e digeh, gharbi ha be Iran havaapymay jangi beforoushand".... Masaleh hamineh.. Sharayet ta 5 saale digeh mitooneh avaz beshe.. hameh chi bastegi be raftare regime dareh ... Ina raftare konooni ra nemitoonan edameh bedan va in masaleh ehtemale taghiresh bishtar az baghashe ... Ba dide alaan 5 saal digeh ro nemishe negah kard, kolleh bahs hamineh ke sharayet bayad avaz she va in emkan pazireh..

..."Grippen ham bish tar e component hash kharej az Sweden" ... Ino midoonam up to 40 % va kheili az chizash ingilisi hastesh ... Bazz migam gharar nist sharayet be halat alaan bemooneh ... kolle bahs hamineh...
1- Sharayet nabayad va nemitooneh injoori bemooneh va ina mitoonan taghiresh bedan
2- Ehtiaj be havapeyma pishrafteh alaan nadaran va bayad tanesho kam konan
3- 40 to 45 saal negahdari mojoodi mitooneh farghi nakoneh. Sharayete badaneh roi na shoma midoonin na man.
4- Kharideh SU-30 pool door rikhtaneh too sharayete bassazi va kharideh SU-25 behtareh. Hatta kharideh bazmandeh F-4 va F-5 ham behtareh va sharayetesh hast.
5- Midoonim Grippin 40% kharehje sweden hasteh ino baaz hameh midoonan va midoonim Rafale nemidan alaan vali bahs sareh ine ke bayad sharayeto ina avaz konan too 5 saal.Va in karo mitoonan bokonnan
6- Ba khatride SU-30 sharayete inha az nazare outcome ye dargiri dar mantagheh taghiri nemikone va keshvaro bishtar be roosieh vabasteh mikonan va sardar ha dar siasate khareji jari tar mishan


Agar democrat ha pirooz beshan too entekhabat. Project baadi Israel peace process and 2 state solution hastesh . agar two state solution dorost she sharayet baraye taghir amadeh mishe va in ta 5 saale digeh inevitable hastesh. Agar ina hamrah nashan too mantaghe zarar bozorgi mikonan va farghi nemikoneh chi dashteh bashan oona bishtar khahand dasht. Endakhtane 100 SU-30 baraye oona peanuts hastesh. Agar hamrah beshan va komak konan sharayet eb tore kolli avaz mishe. Agar republicana bian farghi nemikoneh ina chi bekharan.


----------



## rmi5

Siavash said:


> ..."mesle in hast ke yek keshti be zarfiyat e nahaayi por shode"... sharayete badaneh inha ro na to midooni na man ... vali ina mitoonan ta 5 saale digeh ahm ina ro negah darand..
> 
> ..."Gharaar nist ke 5 saal e digeh, gharbi ha be Iran havaapymay jangi beforoushand".... Masaleh hamineh.. Sharayet ta 5 saale digeh mitooneh avaz beshe.. hameh chi bastegi be raftare regime dareh ... Ina raftare konooni ra nemitoonan edameh bedan va in masaleh ehtemale taghiresh bishtar az baghashe ... Ba dide alaan 5 saal digeh ro nemishe negah kard, kolleh bahs hamineh ke sharayet bayad avaz she va in emkan pazireh..
> 
> ..."Grippen ham bish tar e component hash kharej az Sweden" ... Ino midoonam up to 40 % va kheili az chizash ingilisi hastesh ... Bazz migam gharar nist sharayet be halat alaan bemooneh ... kolle bahs hamineh...
> 1- Sharayet nabayad va nemitooneh injoori bemooneh va ina mitoonan taghiresh bedan
> 2- Ehtiaj be havapeyma pishrafteh alaan nadaran va bayad tanesho kam konan
> 3- 40 to 45 saal negahdari mojoodi mitooneh farghi nakoneh. Sharayete badaneh roi na shoma midoonin na man.
> 4- Kharideh SU-30 pool door rikhtaneh too sharayete bassazi va kharideh SU-25 behtareh. Hatta kharideh bazmandeh F-4 va F-5 ham behtareh va sharayetesh hast.
> 5- Midoonim Grippin 40% kharehje sweden hasteh ino baaz hameh midoonan va midoonim Rafale nemidan alaan vali bahs sareh ine ke bayad sharayeto ina avaz konan too 5 saal.Va in karo mitoonan bokonnan
> 6- Ba khatride SU-30 sharayete inha az nazare outcome ye dargiri dar mantagheh taghiri nemikone va keshvaro bishtar be roosieh vabasteh mikonan va sardar ha dar siasate khareji jari tar mishan
> 
> 
> Agar democrat ha pirooz beshan too entekhabat. Project baadi Israel peace process and 2 state solution hastesh . agar two state solution dorost she sharayet baraye taghir amadeh mishe va in ta 5 saale digeh inevitable hastesh. Agar ina hamrah nashan too mantaghe zarar bozorgi mikonan va farghi nemikoneh chi dashteh bashan oona bishtar khahand dasht. Endakhtane 100 SU-30 baraye oona peanuts hastesh. Agar hamrah beshan va komak konan sharayet eb tore kolli avaz mishe. Agar republicana bian farghi nemikoneh ina chi bekharan.



Siyaasat e khareji, dast e rahbar hast, va gharaar ham nist ke siyaasat hash ra taghyir bede. Hamin emrouz, rahbar gofte ke ta 25 saal e dige, esraaeil naaboud misheh va sohbat az naboud kardan e esraeil kardeh. Ghaziyeh Israel va arab ha ham faghat yeki az noghaat e gir hast ke hal shodani ham nist. Hamas ham ageh ba israel solh bekoneh, inha PIJ ra taghviyat mikonand ya yek gorouh digeh ijaad mikonand. 
shoma mitouni alaki khoshbin bashi, vali I prefer to be a realist than an optimist.


----------



## Siavash

rmi5 said:


> Siyaasat e khareji, dast e rahbar hast, va gharaar ham nist ke siyaasat hash ra taghyir bede. Hamin emrouz, rahbar gofte ke ta 25 saal e dige, esraaeil naaboud misheh va sohbat az naboud kardan e esraeil kardeh. Ghaziyeh Israel va arab ha ham faghat yeki az noghaat e gir hast ke hal shodani ham nist. Hamas ham ageh ba israel solh bekoneh, inha PIJ ra taghviyat mikonand ya yek gorouh digeh ijaad mikonand.
> shoma mitouni alaki khoshbin bashi, vali I prefer to be a realist than an optimist.


Rahbar adateshe ... jang jang ta piroozi yadeteh ... badesh jame zahr oomad ...Rahbari harfe gondeh ziad mizaneh ... baad az 38 saal hameh midoonan sharayet ke tang beshe rahbari khali az jafang mishe ...
Darsaani man omidi nadaram ishoon 5 saal digeh rahbar bashand ... Ellate tajil akhir dar BARJAM hamin bood. Ishoon alaki ghabool nakardan ke Barjam anjam beshe. Momken bood agar tool midadan ya anjam nemishod digeh isoon nabashand va baaz az ishoon maloom nabood chi mishe

15 billiopn dolar agar kharje su-30 nashe hatman ekhtelas mishe vali ba tavajjoh be ehtemale taghire sharayet behtare too jibe roosa nareh!


Hameh excited hastand az kharid vali be nazareh man in be soode Iran nist.


----------



## scythian500

Siavash said:


> Rahbar adateshe ... jang jang ta piroozi yadeteh ... badesh jame zahr oomad ...Rahbari harfe gondeh ziad mizaneh ... baad az 38 saal hameh midoonan sharayet ke tang beshe rahbari khali az jafang mishe ...
> Darsaani man omidi nadaram ishoon 5 saal digeh rahbar bashand ... Ellate tajil akhir dar BARJAM hamin bood. Ishoon alaki ghabool nakardan ke Barjam anjam beshe. Momken bood agar tool midadan ya anjam nemishod digeh isoon nabashand va baaz az ishoon maloom nabood chi mishe
> 
> 15 billiopn dolar agar kharje su-30 nashe hatman ekhtelas mishe vali ba tavajjoh be ehtemale taghire sharayet behtare too jibe roosa nareh!
> 
> 
> Hameh excited hastand az kharid vali be nazareh man in be soode Iran nist.


Iran leader is right with whatever he says or does these days... His thoughts, Analysis, actions and words in majority are all in benefit of Iran in short, medium and long term... I can easily compare Khamenei performance with that of glorious leaders of Iran Zamin. Whatever comes out of his mouth is smart if not genius... Israel bayad nabood shavad va mishavad... Iran ham az har gorouhi ke ba Israel va USA mokhalef bashe, hemayat mikone... In doroste...


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> Iran leader is right with whatever he says or does these days... His thoughts, Analysis, actions and words in majority are all in benefit of Iran in short, medium and long term... I can easily compare Khamenei performance with that of glorious leaders of Iran Zamin. Whatever comes out of his mouth is smart if not genius... Israel bayad nabood shavad va mishavad... Iran ham az har gorouhi ke ba Israel va USA mokhalef bashe, hemayat mikone... In doroste...



He is the main reason of lots of mishandling and troubles in the past 15 years! From killing of dissidents by Saeed Emami (Fallahian gang) to endorsement of Ahmadinejad and his way of thinking. Basically Velayate Faghih is failed concept and should be removed! Having one person with such executive and legal powers is dangerous and in Iran it has proven why!

Iran would have been better without him for sure! Logical to say, whatever he came up of strategical thinking a think tank panel in Iran would have found out better even if we consider he is capable of it, without the poison of his biased thinking. e.g. Even Shamkhani (and he is smart) can think better strategically than his 75 year old mind!

I am no fan of Mousavi or Karroubi but his vicious way of handling it just shows what kind of dictator we are dealing with. Have a referendum and see what people think! More than 60% I bet consider him evil. People have to put their lives on the line and say it loud so everyone hears and its taboo broken just like 2009. Right now it is not the time for it giving the circumstances but it will happen.

There are a lot of examples:
Nuclear issue, Presidential elections, killing of dissidents, Jailing of opposition and Iron fist approach. Empowerment of IRGC in political affairs with his approval ...


----------



## scythian500

Siavash said:


> He is the main reason of lots of mishandling and troubles in the past 15 years! From killing of dissidents by Saeed Emami (Fallahian gang) to endorsement of Ahmadinejad and his way of thinking. Basically Velayate Faghih is failed concept and should be removed! Having one person with such executive and legal powers is dangerous and in Iran it has proven why!
> 
> Iran would have been better without him for sure! Logical to say, whatever he came up of strategical thinking a think tank panel in Iran would have found out better even if we consider he is capable of it, without the poison of his biased thinking. e.g. Even Shamkhani (and he is smart) can think better strategically than his 75 year old mind!
> 
> I am no fan of Mousavi or Karroubi but his vicious way of handling it just shows what kind of dictator we are dealing with. Have a referendum and see what people think! More than 60% I bet consider him evil. People have to put their lives on the line and say it loud so everyone hears and its taboo broken just like 2009. Right now it is not the time for it giving the circumstances but it will happen.
> 
> There are a lot of examples:
> Nuclear issue, Presidential elections, killing of dissidents, Jailing of opposition and Iron fist approach. Empowerment of IRGC in political affairs with his approval ...



I appreciate your analysis but my understanding says he is the right guy for Iran and Iranians... Iranians will say THANKS for him in decades after he is gone... Iranians will celebrate him as one of the Iranian glorious leaders that led Iran into greatness once again... he knows A to Z of Iran, Iranian people and the world issues and character... He knows very well that Iran can not take the same road to greatness as those of others... Iran is unique in culture, political minds, expectations, enemies and fans, strategic treasures and strategic deprivements that Iran has... He is doing a very great job... I can see no other man in today's world can do the job that he does...

Iranian democratic system is a unique one that is tailored by its people needs and will. Iranians won't survive a liberal or socialist democracy or a monarchic system... The current system with some modifications is the only system that worked well for Iranians with mostly a weak to strong sense of patriotism and religiousness...

He like any other person did some mistakes during his responsibility but who does n't? 

He somehow became ready and perfect to lead only a decade or so ago. Before that he was gaining experience. 

Judging by his current views on different issues of Iran and the world, I give him at least a 9 out of 10 for his performance. 

Velayate Faiqih issue is something I both am agreed and disagreed with some of it. The current version if taken into account from Shia perspective is beneficial and very much in good use. If the system is judged materialistically, then there will be better systems I bet. 

You Iranian youngsters who will be the future of Iran need to be patient. This rushing and impatience is the same mistake that hits Iran hard. A nation's journey toward a constant, stable growth and quality is not an over night phenomenon. Iranian nation has rightly pushed into different essential phases of the road toward glory and quality. Acutally, Islamic revolution is just another phase of a bigger project that started by Reza Khan Mir Panj reign. 

Today with current character and layers of Iranian nation, I see no better alternative for Iranians than the Islamic republic although it will work better if authorities and people fulfill all Islamic Republic needs as it is sketched in first place and modified later during Islamic Republic.

Not every phenomenon is easy to be judged. It is not an economic indicator to judge it by histroic numbers and decide. It is not about why IKCO still does not have cars sold in USA! To my simple brain, the way the current governmental system is thought and run by the leader and the president is just near to perfect for Iranians... This things need more time to show its profit... It is like when in Rafsanjani era the gov had limited budget but still insisted to invest hard in infra such as dams, power plants, storage silos, gas pipe lines, steel factories, Azad university, and so on... In remember those days when some so called Enlightened layer of the society used to hint at high inflation, condemning Rafsanjani actions to spend money on very long term investments... Today, Iran has a world class infra for its citizens... Today Iranian citizens have world class access to sanitation, electricity, clean water, natural gas, telephone, internet in even remote villages...

This giving an absolute judgement on huge issues like what you and some other members talk about so definite is something not so wise to do... It is as weight less as some comments here naming strong issues by words like "Garbage, Bullshit, thugs, failure, civilized, etc... Everything is relative in this world... There are no single culture and basic characteristics among nations... This is why sometimes a monarchic system works for some nation while democracy does not work for Arabs!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## بلندر

F14 with Alamo

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

^ OMG F-5 is so tiny 

it looks like netanyahoo's dick in comparison to F-14 (being a normal human) .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rahi2357

haman10 said:


> ^ OMG F-5 is so tiny
> 
> it looks like netanyahoo's dick in comparison to F-14 (being a normal human) .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

I always liked to be a jet pilot since my childhood but fcking school lessons didn't let me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

@yavar

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

SOHEIL said:


> @yavar


what does venezuelan F-16 have anything to do with us ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## بلندر

J-90 turbofan jet engine will unveiled in this year ( 94 ) ... 
probably turbofan version of J-85 with maximum 25-30 kilo Newton dry trust ... 

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10134/Image_4~3.jpg

J-90 turbofan jet engine will unveiled in this year ( 94 ) ... 
probably turbofan version of J-85 with maximum 25-30 kilo Newton dry trust ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The Last of us

We need a proper exhibition with HD photos not all these blurry pics which we can't see crap of.
Instead of all the parades we have, lets have one proper exhibition once a year showcasing projects like the J-90...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Siavash

بلندر said:


> J-90 turbofan jet engine will unveiled in this year ( 94 ) ...
> probably turbofan version of J-85 with maximum 25-30 kilo Newton dry trust ...
> 
> http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10134/Image_4~3.jpg
> 
> J-90 turbofan jet engine will unveiled in this year ( 94 ) ...
> probably turbofan version of J-85 with maximum 25-30 kilo Newton dry trust ...


This is something! Now if the have J-90 does it mean they can manufacture Saeghe-2 in numbers? (F-5 uses J-85 right?) This taghvaee guy made me confused what is happening!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> @yavar


old news

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shahryar Hedayati

*تولید نخستین موتورهای هوایی G90 کشور تا پایان سال 94*

» سرویس: علمي و فناوري - علم و فناوري ايران
کد خبر: 93103016735
سه‌شنبه ۳۰ دی ۱۳۹۳ - ۱۱:۴۵



برای نخستین بار در کشور نمونه اولیه و عملیاتی موتورهای هوایی G90 با کاربرد گسترده در صنعت بالگرد و هواپیما تا پایان سال ۹۴ توسط «داما» در قالب طرح کلان فناوری تولید می‌شود.



به گزارش سرویس فناوری ایسنا، دکتر سورنا ستاری معاون علمی و فناوری رییس جمهوری در جریان بازدید از شرکت طراحی و ساخت موتورهای هوایی (داما)، با ابراز رضایت از پیشرفت های صنایع پیشرفته موتورهای هوایی و هوافضا در کشور، از دستاورد صنعتگران و متخصصان این حوزه بازدید کرد.



شرکت طراحی و ساخت موتورهای هوایی (داما)، شرکتی فناور است که با استفاده از توان شرکت‌های دانش بنیان ایرانی و نخبگان کشور در زمینه طراحی، ساخت و تعمیرات اساسی سامانه‌های پیشران صنعت هوایی فعالیت می‌کند.



برهمین اساس، قرار است برای نخستین بار در کشور نمونه اولیه و عملیاتی موتورهای هوایی G90 با کاربرد گسترده در صنعت بالگرد و هواپیما تا پایان سال ۹۴ توسط «داما» و با همکاری معاونت علمی و فناوری ریاست جمهوری در قالب طرح کلان فناوری تولید شود.



ساخت این موتور، در جهت خودکفایی کشور و نیز تبدیل دانش بومی به محصول انجام شده است و طبق توافقات انجام شده در بازدید معاون علمی و فناوری رییس جمهوری از این شرکت مقرر شد با توجه به اینکه طراحی مفهومی و ساخت زیرسامانه های این موتور به اتمام رسیده و دانش فنی آن نیز تدوین شده است، حداکثر تا پایان سال 94 یک نمونه عملیاتی این موتور تولید شود.



پیش از این فناوری تولید این موتور تنها در اختیار برخی از شرکت‌های آمریکایی و روسیه ای بوده است. این محصول بعد از تولید در داخل کشور، برای دریافت گواهینامه پروازی و انجام آزمایش استانداردسازی به دستگاه های مربوطه ارایه خواهد شد.



پایان پیام

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> old news



Sure ... but what happened !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Azeri440

بلندر said:


>



any info on that pod?


----------



## SOHEIL

Azeri440 said:


> any info on that pod?



*TLS-99* laser targeting pod

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Siavash

When I grow up I want to buy an F-4E! I love its shape, for me it is stealth if I turn off my Radar!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blackmoon

IRIAF F-4 armaments

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## بلندر

look like We built some F4 body from scratch .... but they don't make it public because because Licenses issue ... 

if IRAF budget get increased , they can replace all F4 body (air frame ) with new one ...


----------



## Siavash

بلندر said:


> look like We built some F4 body from scratch .... but they don't make it public because because Licenses issue ...
> 
> if IRAF budget get increased , they can replace all F4 body (air frame ) with new one ...


Does the licensing still matter after 30 years?


----------



## بلندر

Siavash said:


> Does the licensing still matter after 30 years?



when you have a country with VETO right , then yes , its matter ... 

they made some F5 but they still use register of old F5 for this sake ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

بلندر said:


> when you have a country with VETO right , then yes , its matter ...
> 
> they made some F5 but they still use register of old F5 for this sake ...


Is what This Babak Taghvaee saying right? Have you seen the article regarding Saegheh-2? I think Iran won't have any problem building F-5 if the J-90 is ready but Babak T. makes it look like it was a propaganda plot and never happened.


----------



## SOHEIL

Siavash said:


> Is what This Babak Taghvaee saying right? Have you seen the article regarding Saegheh-2? I think Iran won't have any problem building F-5 if the J-90 is ready but Babak T. makes it look like it was a propaganda plot and never happened.



Babak is an idiot! 

He leaves & works in west... He has to say this bullshits ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Siavash

SOHEIL said:


> Babak is an idiot!
> 
> He leaves & works in west... He has to say this bullshits ...


Hope you are right, by the way Khameneie is serious on military work, he would not have accepted this. But at the same time I know bribery and corruption is everywhere! Babak writes it as if it was just a plot to get more money for the project from government.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Siavash said:


> Hope you are right, by the way Khameneie is serious on military work, he would not have accepted this. But at the same time I know bribery and corruption is everywhere! Babak writes it as if it was just a plot to get more money for the project from government.



Let's see

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Kiarash

So Soheil what B.T said was horse sh$t right ? it really made me sad at first

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

Kiarash said:


> So Soheil what B.T said was horse sh$t right ? it really made me sad at first



He is an idiot !

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## SOHEIL

@yavar

150 kN !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

SOHEIL said:


> @yavar
> 
> 150 kN !?


WTF ! bia telegram bebinam kalak


----------



## SOHEIL

haman10 said:


> WTF ! bia telegram bebinam kalak



:|


----------



## Siavash

SOHEIL said:


> @yavar
> 
> 150 kN !?


Chi 150KN? ghodrate motor? In ke 2 barabare ghodrate motor F-16 (GE F110) ba after burn hastesh! chi 150KN? AL-31 (SU-35) ham 142 KN ba afterburn hastesh!


----------



## SOHEIL

Siavash said:


> Chi 150KN? ghodrate motor? In ke 2 barabare ghodrate motor F-16 (GE F110) ba after burn hastesh! chi 150KN? AL-31 (SU-35) ham 142 KN ba afterburn hastesh!



Ba AB


----------



## Siavash

SOHEIL said:


> Ba AB


Aalieh!


----------



## بلندر

عزیزان ، توهم زدن هم حدی داره ... ما هنوز توی ساخت توربو فن 20 کیلو نیوتونی موندیم ، شما از 150 کیلو نیوتنی صحبت می کنید !؟ 
نکنه موتور موردنظر شما یکبار مصرفه !؟

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Siavash said:


> Aalieh!



یه چند سالی با عملیاتی شدن فاصله داره



بلندر said:


> عزیزان ، توهم زدن هم حدی داره ... ما هنوز توی ساخت توربو فن 20 کیلو نیوتونی موندیم ، شما از 150 کیلو نیوتنی صحبت می کنید !؟
> نکنه موتور موردنظر شما یکبار مصرفه !؟



نکنه حس ششم داری؟

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

rahi2357 said:


> baba ye sefresho kam konid dorost mishe . 15 KN  J-85 12 KN hast .
> 
> 
> ini ke shoma migi dadash bara ye strategic bomber 2 ta motoresh kefayat mikone  Lamasab yechizayiam migi adam heyfesh miad bavar nakone...
> 
> Hala قI her chi shod belakhare ? ( joda az shukhi )



ba AB mishe 150 ... thrust khoshkesh kamtare ...

In motor ro fekr mikoni baraye chi misazan ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

بلندر said:


> عزیزان ، توهم زدن هم حدی داره ... ما هنوز توی ساخت توربو فن 20 کیلو نیوتونی موندیم ، شما از 150 کیلو نیوتنی صحبت می کنید !؟
> نکنه موتور موردنظر شما یکبار مصرفه !؟


Maybe Mr Rohani has given new promises!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gold Eagle

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 259515








This mock-up is every where, yet there is no information about it! 

What is that under the fuselage, a kind of cruise missile or something?!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 259506
> 
> 
> View attachment 259515



Is this pic recent?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

The Last of us said:


> Is this pic recent?


yes , it is . i think it's from mehrabad air show which is now open to public .

that is Iranian Lion designated by westerners as F/B-44

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

haman10 said:


> yes , it is . i think it's from mehrabad air show which is now open to public .
> 
> that is Iranian Lion designated by westerners as F/B-44



Thanks Haman Jaan. To be frank, I think this plane and its design should be replaced with a more stealthy design. It has been around for so many years now that it 'feels' obsolete. I would not mind them building one or two for experience gaining, but they should either make a new stealthy design or turn this current version into a stealthy version. Stealth is overrated, but there is no doubt it is a good added capability to any plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## بلندر

Saegheh .... These are newest and closet pics from Saegheh ... I merely past it from another site ... 







http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10206/20150923_095547.jpg
















http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10206/20150923_095707.jpg

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10206/photo_2015-09-23_15-36-09.jpg

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10206/20150923_103957.jpg






more pics at : 

http://www.military.ir/forums/topic/29477-اختصاصی-میلیتاریگزارش-تصویری-از-نمایشگاه-نیرو/

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kompromat

Iran seriously needs new fighter aircraft.


----------



## The Last of us

New Iranian radars in development for Iranian F-4?:





*بنر مربوط به پروژه ارتقاء رادار جنگنده فانتوم در جهاد خودکفایی نهاجا

این رادار جدید بر خلاف نمونه اصلی که هم اکنون روی جنگنده های اف 4 کشورمان نصب است، یک دیش نیست بلکه از فناوری آرایه ای بهره می برد. در این مدل از رادارها که به عنوان "Planar array" در دنیا شناخته می شوند، به مانند مدل قبلی، دیش رادار همچنان به صورت مکانیکی به اطراف حرکت می کند اما حجم فرستنده و گیرنده ها در این گونه رادارها بیشتر شده و مقاومت آن ها در برابر جنگ الکترونیک نیز افزایش می یابد.*

فانتوم‌های ایرانی مجهز به رادارهای اف 16 و JF-17 می‌شوند +عکس - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir

@haman10 @SOHEIL @yavar @rahi2357 @Serpentine @Arminkh @Commandant @Kiarash @scythian500 @Blackmoon @Daneshmand @MTN1917

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## The Last of us

Comment made by Eagle2009 from IMF with regards to the poster:

-Bottom image is the original APQ-120 radar
-Middle image shows the original APQ's parabolic radar antenna but the rest of the radar system (the real "guts") is new. Perhaps a "digital" upgrade of the original APQ-120?
-Top image is a fully replaced radar system, showing a mechanically scanning planar array antenna.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

The Last of us said:


> Comment made by Eagle2009 from IMF with regards to the poster:
> 
> -Bottom image is the original APQ-120 radar
> -Middle image shows the original APQ's parabolic radar antenna but the rest of the radar system (the real "guts") is new. Perhaps a "digital" upgrade of the original APQ-120?
> -Top image is a fully replaced radar system, showing a mechanically scanning planar array antenna.



And I'm sure they don´t show the "next image", which should be a electronically scanning array antenna (i.e. PESA or AESA radar).

Iran already manufactures AESA radars for Air Defence. It Iran already has a MESA design for aircraft, the step from a MESA to a PESA or AESA should be "inmediate" for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## بلندر

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> And I'm sure they don´t show the "next image", which should be a electronically scanning array antenna (i.e. PESA or AESA radar).
> 
> Iran already manufactures AESA radars for Air Defence. It Iran already has a MESA design for aircraft, the step from a MESA to a PESA or AESA should be "inmediate" for Iran.


the problem is budget ... 
our Air force upgrade some of F14 A to new Standard , FA14AM ; but they didn't have enough budget to upgrade all of F14 A to F14 AM standard ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

بلندر said:


> the problem is budget ...
> our Air force upgrade some of F14 A to new Standard , FA14AM ; but they didn't have enough budget to upgrade all of F14 A to F14 AM standard ...


thats not the case . i assume you're saying that because only one F-14 has the splinter camo .

but thats it . they will NOT change the camo in F-14AM as splinter camo gradually puts the wingman to sleep 

that F-14 was a symbol of the project and further upgraded F-14AMs are not going to receive that camo .


----------



## Arminkh

The Last of us said:


> Comment made by Eagle2009 from IMF with regards to the poster:
> 
> -Bottom image is the original APQ-120 radar
> -Middle image shows the original APQ's parabolic radar antenna but the rest of the radar system (the real "guts") is new. Perhaps a "digital" upgrade of the original APQ-120?
> -Top image is a fully replaced radar system, showing a mechanically scanning planar array antenna.


So, are these the stages of the upgrade project? I mean are the going to happen in three phases over time or some of the stages are already done?


----------



## Tomyris

how much is there of f-14 in service


----------



## The Last of us

Arminkh said:


> So, are these the stages of the upgrade project? I mean are the going to happen in three phases over time or some of the stages are already done?



There is no indicator at what stage they're at right now, but if I had to guess, I would say they probably already made the 3rd stage!


----------



## بلندر

The Last of us said:


> There is no indicator at what stage they're at right now, but if I had to guess, I would say they probably already made the 3rd stage!



the problem is that our air force become a museum , supporting and keeping all these various aircraft operational is sucking budget like hell ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

بلندر said:


> the problem is that our air force become a museum , supporting and keeping all these various aircraft are sucking budget like hell ...



Hopefully we can get some Su-30 license production so we can get rid of all these junks. They could turn them into unmanned planes for target practise of our surface to air missiles etc. But you're right, they are just sucking money from the airforce! They should use those moneys in R&D projects instead for engines like J-90 etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## بلندر

گزارش تصویری از پانزدهمین نمایشگاه دستاوردهای پژوهش و فناوری - گالري نيروي هوايي - Military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

*Iran Air Force exhibition in Tehran نمایشگاه نیروی هوایی در تهران*


----------



## Tomyris

this article about the Algerian command su-30 said that Iran calls for licensed production of su-30  This is good news. How long could take its production su-30 in the Iranian teritoire?

Algeria Buys More Su-30MKs as Iranian Interest Grows | Defense News: Aviation International News

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran made Akhgar gatling gun mounted on Bell 214 chopper نصب تفنگ چرخشي اخگر روي بالگرد بل 214 ايران*


----------



## Exocet

I heard that you will purchase 150 J-10 fighters from China is it true?


----------



## Siavash

Exocet said:


> I heard that you will purchase 150 J-10 fighters from China is it true?


No it is not true.


----------



## Exocet

How many F-14's are there in service?


----------



## jammersat

Exocet said:


> How many F-14's are there in service?


probably around 14-15 .. just a guestimate


----------



## Siavash

jammersat said:


> probably around 14-15 .. just a guestimate


27 active!


----------



## jammersat

Siavash said:


> 27 active!


 
my bad , 28 according to wikipedia , maybe 27 after the one who crashed , but that's according to american intelligence (israeli) , my guestimation was based at watching all those planes and chinooks at the Mehr Abad airport


----------



## haman10

jammersat said:


> my bad , 28 according to wikipedia , maybe 27 after the one who crashed , but that's according to american intelligence (israeli) , my guestimation was based at watching all those planes and chinooks at the Mehr Abad airport


Please be silent . can you ? there are ZERO F-14s stationed at mehrabad and all of them are located in esfehan . 

the numbers are way higher than 27 . are you kidding ?

just a couple of years ago 40 of them flied at once to show their readiness near bushehr power plant .

yeah right 27 .

people should stop reading wikipedia .

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Siavash

haman10 said:


> Please be silent . can you ? there are ZERO F-14s stationed at mehrabad and all of them are located in esfehan .
> 
> the numbers are way higher than 27 . are you kidding ?
> 
> just a couple of years ago 40 of them flied at once to show their readiness near bushehr power plant .
> 
> yeah right 27 .
> 
> people should stop reading wikipedia .


There is no info on the number of F-14 on wikipedia. Where did you find it on wiki? I just checked. The number is lower than 27.go and count and come back! If it was higher I paypal you 100 CAD otherwise stop the BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

Siavash said:


> There is no info on the number of F-14 on wikipedia. Where did you find it on wiki? I just checked. The number is lower than 27.go and count and come back! If it was higher I paypal you 100 CAD otherwise stop the BS.


Chera asabani mishi ? Keep your 100 CAD to yourself please . If you have some inside info and you eat dizi with the IRIAF commanders , that's sth else .

But if you're talking out of your medeh , please stop

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

haman10 said:


> Chera asabani mishi ? Keep your 100 CAD to yourself please . If you have some inside info and you eat dizi with the IRIAF commanders , that's sth else .
> 
> But if you're talking out of your medeh , please stop


Of course I am talking out of my ***  He asked how many and I said 27 out of my ***  I didn't look wiki. That is annoying to tell someone he looked wiki and typed here when he or she can easily type in whatever he wants as long as it is lower than expected! Wiki is cheatinga nd by myself is ingenuity and fun! It would have been cool if Wiki said the sam ethough! I will enter it there as well!

But honestly who on earth would ask someone in the forum for a number of active fighters which is a kept secret! Of course such question requires a pull out of someone ***! answer! by the way it could have been 27 ugly ducklings ... I wrote 27 only

I was not angry I was continuing the game! No really I want to send you 100 CAD! No way I would as you wouldn't be able to count it either despite the fact that 14 had been cannibalized out of 40 .... bla bla bla ... by the way 100 CAD is 10 sub sandwiches combo! I know how to use it so I set the conditions that you never would get it anyway!

Unfortunately I would continue such answers whenever fit and the reader should know when he is asking too much! One has to spend money and sacrifice to gain state secrets otherwise others have the right to have fun!

Besides, really who cares how many outdated F-14 we have say 12, you don't need to come out and defend the number! Not that anyone is scared of them anyway or cares! By the way I love F-14 as I love my Grandma! My Grandma died but F-14 is still running all 27 of them! strange!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

Siavash said:


> Of course I am talking out of my ***  He asked how many and I said 27 out of my ***  I didn't look wiki. That is annoying to tell someone he looked wiki and typed here when he or she can easily type in whatever he wants as long as it is lower than expected! Wiki is cheatinga nd by myself is ingenuity and fun! It would have been cool if Wiki said the sam ethough! I will enter it there as well!
> 
> But honestly who on earth would ask someone in the forum for a number of active fighters which is a kept secret! Of course such question requires a pull out of someone ***! answer! by the way it could have been 27 ugly ducklings ... I wrote 27 only
> 
> I was not angry I was continuing the game! No really I want to send you 100 CAD! No way I would as you wouldn't be able to count it either despite the fact that 14 had been cannibalized out of 40 .... bla bla bla ... by the way 100 CAD is 10 sub sandwiches combo! I know how to use it so I set the conditions that you never would get it anyway!
> 
> Unfortunately I would continue such answers whenever fit and the reader should know when he is asking too much! One has to spend money and sacrifice to gain state secrets otherwise others have the right to have fun!
> 
> Besides, really who cares how many outdated F-14 we have say 12, you don't need to come out and defend the number! Not that anyone is scared of them anyway or cares! By the way I love F-14 as I love my Grandma! My Grandma died but F-14 is still running all 27 of them! strange!


Bro chill out . I've never treated you without respect and i expect the same thing in return . I didn't even quote you here and you just went off like an old grenade without any poking. 
Chill out mate . Everythings alright. Whatever you say bro 

You're right . My bad . I made a mistake


----------



## Siavash

haman10 said:


> Bro chill out . I've never treated you without respect and i expect the same thing in return . I didn't even quote you here and you just went off like an old grenade without any poking.
> Chill out mate . Everythings alright. Whatever you say bro
> 
> You're right . My bad . I made a mistake


come on wasn't it obvious I was joking!  The sarcasm is all over the text!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blackmoon

A Syrian officer takes a photo with an Iran air force C-130 Roustam that had delivered troops and ammunition for the Resistance forces in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## masud

Blackmoon said:


> A Syrian officer takes a photo with an Iran air force C-130 Roustam that had delivered troops and ammunition for the Resistance forces in Syria.


iranien should also send agriculter equipment, seeds etc to start cultivation localy. it will help to gain trust with local civilien and provide food locally for troops. ..................

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

masud said:


> iranien should also send agriculter equipment, seeds etc to start cultivation localy. it will help to gain trust with local civilien and provide food locally for troops. ..................


Iran has already spent tens of billions of dollars of investment and give ways to Syria in all different fields... but unfortunately few Syrians never knew who is their brother and who is the backstabber...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## masud

scythian500 said:


> Iran has already spent tens of billions of dollars of investment and give ways to Syria in all different fields... but unfortunately few Syrians never knew who is their brother and who is the backstabber...


is you gyes setup any tv channel in syriea or not? if not then the blam goes to you gyes. because today every thing is propaganda. one example in 2006 israely army vs hizbollah class we saw israel army was bitten by hizbollah. we all know that,s in war time every one took some casulty but one popular tv channel AL-MANNER provide some show of blew up markava tank that lead us to belive that the so called high tech israely army can also be bitten.....................

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

masud said:


> is you gyes setup any tv channel in syriea or not? if not then the blam goes to you gyes. because today every thing is propaganda. one example in 2006 israely army vs hizbollah class we saw israel army was bitten by hizbollah. we all know that,s in war time every one took some casulty but one popular tv channel AL-MANNER provide some show of blew up markava tank that lead us to belive that the so called high tech israely army can also be bitten.....................


We didn't set up any Tvs inside Syria... Iran were never after show up.. Iran is doing all these for Syria just becoz Syria was the only Arab country to not only not helping Saddam against Iran but also helped us to fight him.. Also, Syria was and still is a big part of resistance axis that fights Israel and its puppets... This is why Iran invested a lot in Syria before war and helped Syria with even more after war... Although Iran don't have any TVs inside Syria, she created even more powerful ones Arab-wide... Al Mayadeen and Al Menar are bothIranian sponsored and Al Alam is Iranian owned Tvs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## masud

scythian500 said:


> We didn't set up any Tvs inside Syria... Iran were never after show up..


i think it,s a big mistak my friend. as a ordinery person how do i know who is my friend and who is my enemy? if i don,t get any information from any where?
my friend naver underestimet the power of propaganda.......................

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

IRIAF F-14 Tomcat escorts Russian Tu-95 in Iranian airspace en route to bomb targets in Syria.






@haman10 @rahi2357 @Daneshmand @JEskandari @scythian500 @2800 @raptor22 @Kiarash

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## haman10

Serpentine said:


> IRIAF F-14 Tomcat escorts Russian Tu-95 in Iranian airspace en route to bomb targets in Syria.


Although I've lost some interest in letting russians pass our airspace and it had a negative impact on our reputation in providing safe airspace for foreign airliners ; Still Syria is much more important .

ALCON , they can send them all in one sortie and reduce the negative impact this can cause . 

why just one Tu-95 ? send them all in one sortie and get it over with .

BTW : Look at that F-14 !! So F-ing beautiful man ! 

i just love it's obohat

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Serpentine

haman10 said:


> Although I've lost some interest in letting russians pass our airspace and it had a negative impact on our reputation in providing safe airspace for foreign airliners ; Still Syria is much more important .
> 
> ALCON , they can send them all in one sortie and reduce the negative impact this can cause .
> 
> why just one Tu-95 ? send them all in one sortie and get it over with .
> 
> BTW : Look at that F-14 !! So F-ing beautiful man !
> 
> i just love it's obohat



I understand, but as long as it's with our permission it's all okay. Besides none of this is going to pose any danger to civilian flights or change their routes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

Serpentine said:


> I understand, but as long as it's with our permission it's all okay. Besides none of this is going to pose any danger to civilian flights or change their routes.


Tedad parvaz haye khareji ke az asemoon Iran estefade mikardan , be shedat az zaman shelik mooshak haye klub roosie kahesh peyda karde . midooni cheghad arz avari dasht vase Iran ? 

As i said Syria is much much more important , but still , they could limit the downsides of they story , you know ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

haman10 said:


> Tedad parvaz haye khareji ke az asemoon Iran estefade mikardan , be shedat az zaman shelik mooshak haye klub roosie kahesh peyda karde . midooni cheghad arz avari dasht vase Iran ?
> 
> As i said Syria is much much more important , but still , they could limit the downsides of they story , you know ?



Yes, that's mostly the point for cruise missiles, I agree with that.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kiarash

The White Swan launched the missiles (00:50 in the video) near the city of Khamat in Khuzestan Province, Iran.










And this was already posted by dear *Serpentine*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## scythian500

haman10 said:


> Tedad parvaz haye khareji ke az asemoon Iran estefade mikardan , be shedat az zaman shelik mooshak haye klub roosie kahesh peyda karde . midooni cheghad arz avari dasht vase Iran ?
> 
> As i said Syria is much much more important , but still , they could limit the downsides of they story , you know ?


fekr nakonam ha... man flightradar24 ro har rooz chand bar check mikonam be ye ellati... be nazar hame chiz normal miad...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

Iran’s air force to enter Syria conflict: report

BEIRUT – Iran is preparing to deploy two fighter jet squadrons to Syria to conduct strikes on behalf of the Bashar al-Assad regime, according to a Kuwaiti daily with close access to Moscow’s military intervention in the war-torn country.

“The Iranian participation [in the Syrian conflict] is headed for more advancement with preparation for the arrival of two fleets of Iranian planes,” sources in the Damascus joint operations room of the “4+1” military coalition of Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah told Al-Rai's newspaper’s chief international correspondent, Elijah J. Magnier.

The sources added that Russian-manufactured Sukhoi jets would be deployed to the Tiyas (T4) airbase east of Homs after Iranian engineers finish preparations at the facility, which is near the Al-Shayrat base where Russia already plans to begin operating from.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## raptor22

Serpentine said:


> Iran’s air force to enter Syria conflict: report
> 
> BEIRUT – Iran is preparing to deploy two fighter jet squadrons to Syria to conduct strikes on behalf of the Bashar al-Assad regime, according to a Kuwaiti daily with close access to Moscow’s military intervention in the war-torn country.
> 
> “The Iranian participation [in the Syrian conflict] is headed for more advancement with preparation for the arrival of two fleets of Iranian planes,” sources in the Damascus joint operations room of the “4+1” military coalition of Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah told Al-Rai's newspaper’s chief international correspondent, Elijah J. Magnier.
> 
> The sources added that Russian-manufactured Sukhoi jets would be deployed to the Tiyas (T4) airbase east of Homs after Iranian engineers finish preparations at the facility, which is near the Al-Shayrat base where Russia already plans to begin operating from.



Su-24 or F-4? by the way not bad it could be a real training in a real war for our pilots ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

Serpentine said:


> Iran’s air force to enter Syria conflict: report
> 
> BEIRUT – Iran is preparing to deploy two fighter jet squadrons to Syria to conduct strikes on behalf of the Bashar al-Assad regime, according to a Kuwaiti daily with close access to Moscow’s military intervention in the war-torn country.
> 
> “The Iranian participation [in the Syrian conflict] is headed for more advancement with preparation for the arrival of two fleets of Iranian planes,” sources in the Damascus joint operations room of the “4+1” military coalition of Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah told Al-Rai's newspaper’s chief international correspondent, Elijah J. Magnier.
> 
> The sources added that Russian-manufactured Sukhoi jets would be deployed to the Tiyas (T4) airbase east of Homs after Iranian engineers finish preparations at the facility, which is near the Al-Shayrat base where Russia already plans to begin operating from.


KICK their dirty smelly butts IRIAF . I pray that this news is true .

we can vaporize them ISIS B!tches like we did in Iraq

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Serpentine said:


> Iran’s air force to enter Syria conflict: report
> 
> BEIRUT – Iran is preparing to deploy two fighter jet squadrons to Syria to conduct strikes on behalf of the Bashar al-Assad regime, according to a Kuwaiti daily with close access to Moscow’s military intervention in the war-torn country.
> 
> “The Iranian participation [in the Syrian conflict] is headed for more advancement with preparation for the arrival of two fleets of Iranian planes,” sources in the Damascus joint operations room of the “4+1” military coalition of Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah told Al-Rai's newspaper’s chief international correspondent, Elijah J. Magnier.
> 
> The sources added that Russian-manufactured Sukhoi jets would be deployed to the Tiyas (T4) airbase east of Homs after Iranian engineers finish preparations at the facility, which is near the Al-Shayrat base where Russia already plans to begin operating from.


 
Not a good news in my opinion. Next thing that we should be waiting to hear is that either Israel or Turkey shoot down our jets. I think Iran had a wise approach not to bring heavy equipment into the equation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

This is good news, but Russia should deliver aircraft to Iran, it is necessary that the Iranian aviation russieprotege with these su-30 and the S-300/400.

in my opinion it would launch a military operation to liberate Iraq before because Russia is Iran will launch a major operation to terestre attacked syrie.il must be prepared to attack our frontier has daesh


----------



## yavar

*Iran experienced helicopter Pilots get training EC155 Helicopter at Heli Holland company*





Iranian experienced helicopter Pilots get training of EC155 Helicopter in Dutch school Emmer-Compascuum at Heli Holland company
Emmer-Compascuum - Three experienced helicopter pilots from Iran go to school in Emmer-Compascuum.

There they learn to fly a special type of helicopter. They follow their training at Heli Holland. That company soon going helicopters to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran MIG 29 overhauled by Tabriz TAB personnel بازسازي اساسي ميگ 29 پايگاه هوايي تبريز ايران

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Iran Nasr airborne anti-ship cruise missiles delivered to IRAF موشک کروز نصرهواپایه

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Uhuhu

yavar said:


> Iran MIG 29 overhauled by Tabriz TAB personnel بازسازي اساسي ميگ 29 پايگاه هوايي تبريز ايران



Thanks to those personnel. officials declare to buy su-30s from russia and transferring technology to iran. and the deal is going to be signed nowadays. how we can trust Russia? Iran bought all its MIG-29's except four of them from russians, but as you can see in the above news, they have not been supporting those migs properly. why?

in idiocy of the leader policy, whenever we have abnormal relationship with west and limite ourselves only to russians or chinese, they use the opportunity very well and once upon a time they throw out something and in return receive a good Tribute.
If right now they are selling us su-30s, its all because we have access to other sellers like Chinese,France,Sweden.
how we can be sure khamenei and his fellows dont screw the relationship with west after ruhani presidency? and again we will find same problems as we had with mig-29s and nuclear power plants and so on ?


----------



## Salman_Farsi

Su-24 and F-14 , probably in Mehrabad...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raazh

How many Mig29 are now active with Iran ? Also will Iran go just for Su30 in the future or will it also look for a lighter plane like Mig35 to replace its old fleet? Although its still a double engine jet but since you already operate it so it wont be a bad idea .. IMO i.e.


----------



## Salman_Farsi

raazh said:


> How many Mig29 are now active with Iran ? Also will Iran go just for Su30 in the future or will it also look for a lighter plane like Mig35 to replace its old fleet? Although its still a double engine jet but since you already operate it so it wont be a bad idea .. IMO i.e.



We have 28 Mig-29 in total.






Iran will probably sign a contract with Russia for the Su-30.
There were some rumours about the J-10 and J-17 as a light fighter but nothing is confirmed yet. It's also probable that Iran will try to develop a new jet with the cooperation of China and/or Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Uhuhu said:


> Thanks to those personnel. officials declare to buy su-30s from russia and transferring technology to iran. and the deal is going to be signed nowadays. how we can trust Russia? Iran bought all its MIG-29's except four of them from russians, but as you can see in the above news, they have not been supporting those migs properly. why?
> 
> in idiocy of the leader policy, whenever we have abnormal relationship with west and limite ourselves only to russians or chinese, they use the opportunity very well and once upon a time they throw out something and in return receive a good Tribute.
> If right now they are selling us su-30s, its all because we have access to other sellers like Chinese,France,Sweden.
> how we can be sure khamenei and his fellows dont screw the relationship with west after ruhani presidency? and again we will find same problems as we had with mig-29s and nuclear power plants and so on ?


having multiple sources not only wont change anything, it will increase our problems as it has happened already. we are the only country with so many different fighters.

so leader is to be blamed instead of innocent westerns. just like Mosaddeq, right? it was khameneie who screwed our relation with west and toppled the Mosaddeq.
maybe you are missing Khatami's foreign achievements: the title of "Axis of evil".
or maybe you really have the delusion that west powers will sell any weapon to us, some Mirage maybe .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Uhuhu

mohsen said:


> having multiple sources not only wont change anything, it will increase our problems as it has happened already. we are the only country with so many different fighters.
> 
> so leader is to be blamed instead of innocent westerns. just like Mosaddeq, right? it was khameneie who screwed our relation with west and toppled the Mosaddeq.
> maybe you are missing Khatami's foreign achievements: the title of "Axis of evil".
> or maybe you really have the delusion that west powers will sell any weapon to us, some Mirage maybe .



should i blame west for not selling their own products to us? 
china, india and north korea all are against west and try to be independent. but among these 3 countries china and india instead of confronting directly with west. tried to have a normal relationship with everyone while never accepted US and west Avarice.they understood their own positions and their own powers. tried to make a strong economy because they are wise enough to understand having strong economy is the first step to become a powerful country. not like some extremists in iran who destroyed the economy and its capacity and brought the country to ledge of collapsing.

ignorants who instead of building their own country, spend the oil money for their adventures and clashes in the world meanwhile lots of critical problems are threating the existence of iran in next decades.
how much blackmail you paid to Russians in last decade while they even didnt overhaul properly your old fighters, submarines and over 30 years they are building an old nuclear power plant? why during last decade you were not able to buy su-30's and its license? let me enlighten you.
its all because of the Fantasies of dictator, iran limited itself only to russia and china. so they used irans leader stupidity as much as they could.

but look at the third country. north korea who have same mind as khamenei.
in there some stupid people also every day yelling against west while their country is much backward than the world. they are trying to be independent and insulting west and US as you and khamenei do. but the fact is, nowadays they became slaves of Chinese. completely dependent on china in every field.

though we also experienced a Milder version for a short time during sanction period and previous government.

if you would think more like a wise person, you could considered gripen, mirage and .. also, why not.. like india.

but unfortunately the ignorance of the dictator has no ending..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Uhuhu said:


> should i blame west for not selling their own products to us?
> china, india and north korea all are against west and try to be independent. but among these 3 countries china and india instead of confronting directly with west. tried to have a normal relationship with everyone while never accepted US and west Avarice.they understood their own positions and their own powers. tried to make a strong economy because they are wise enough to understand having strong economy is the first step to become a powerful country. not like some extremists in iran who destroyed the economy and its capacity and brought the country to ledge of collapsing.
> 
> ignorants who instead of building their own country, spend the oil money for their adventures and clashes in the world meanwhile lots of critical problems are threating the existence of iran in next decades.
> how much blackmail you paid to Russians in last decade while they even didnt overhaul properly your old fighters, submarines and over 30 years they are building an old nuclear power plant? why during last decade you were not able to buy su-30's and its license? let me enlighten you.
> its all because of the Fantasies of dictator, iran limited itself only to russia and china. so they used irans leader stupidity as much as they could.
> 
> but look at the third country. north korea who have same mind as khamenei.
> in there some stupid people also every day yelling against west while their country is much backward than the world. they are trying to be independent and insulting west and US as you and khamenei do. but the fact is, nowadays they became slaves of Chinese. completely dependent on china in every field.
> 
> though we also experienced a Milder version for a short time during sanction period and previous government.
> 
> if you would think more like a wise person, you could considered gripen, mirage and .. also, why not.. like india.
> 
> but unfortunately the ignorance of the dictator has no ending..


the only ignorance I see here is yours and those who don't learn from the past.
you can't compare us with china, india or any other country, our situation is absolutely different. our problem is Ideological while the problem between Chinese, Russians, Indians and Americans is just a power struggle. I brought 2 clear examples of our relations with west in the past and you ignored all of them, because none of them supports your theories.
while you are dreaming of buying western weapons, your new friend, Mrs sherman called you an extremist. so good luck with the rest of your dreams.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Uhuhu

mohsen said:


> the only ignorance I see here is yours and those who don't learn from the past.
> you can't compare us with china, india or any other country, our situation is absolutely different. our problem is Ideological while the problem between Chinese, Russians, Indians and Americans is just a power struggle. I brought 2 clear examples of our relations with west in the past and you ignored all of them, because none of them supports your theories.
> while you are dreaming of buying western weapons, your new friend, Mrs sherman called you an extremist. so good luck with the rest of your dreams.



Dont try to divert the subject. actually i never ignored them thats why i named india,china. you can ask Indians and Chinese to clarify you that what west interfere means.. their experiment is much worse than us. but they learned how to treat to don't let those events happen again while you just let this happen again by another one.
good luck going to worship your Great idol, khamenei.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Tomyris

150 Su-30/35
40 su-34
6 AWACS
j-10 or E-35, or an Iranian fighter develop with the help of Russian and Chinese  

this is what would take to iran, with its aviation as it will be the first air power in the region.


----------



## VEVAK

Tomyris said:


> help of Russian and Chinese





Tomyris said:


> 150 Su-30/35
> 40 su-34
> 6 AWACS
> j-10 or E-35, or an Iranian fighter develop with the help of Russian and Chinese
> 
> this is what would take to iran, with its aviation as it will be the first air power in the region.



Sorry azizam vali that's just what we need right now for our air force to rival that of Soodi Arabia but not surpass it by any means. FYI by 2019 the Soodii soosools will receive all 84 F-15's they have on order now


Sooodi soosools will have

~238 F-15 by 2019 (150 active right now)
~70 Eurofighter Typhoons
~80 Tornados (Being upgraded)
~7 AWACS
~14 Airborne Refueling

The Su-30 is great platform but it's upgrades is the only thing that will determine whether it will be superior to these fighters or not for example upgraded F-15SA will operate AESA radars
&
If Iran orders them now the 1st batch will arrive 2019 and it will take well over a decade for all of them to be delivered and our pilots fully trained and that will unfortunately give the Soosools ample time to respond by buying more fighters

So if we want to rival Soosool Arabia's Air Force within the next decade we need to purchase

250 Su-30/35 fighters
50 Su-34
100 Multirole fighters (Start production of an Iranian multirole fighter)
10 AWACS (purchase 5 AWACS & build 5 using IR-140 &(or) Iran-150 if possible)
10 Air refueling

Unfortunately, Iranian leaders don't put much stock in having a superior air force so I don't believe Iran has any intentions of taking such measures. Iran will likely purchase 50-80 Su-30 just so it has an air force and will likely continue doing what it's been doing and expand on the development of it's missiles for the next decade


----------



## NaCon

if Iran wants a strong air force then they should start their own fighter program and invest in it heavily. They shouldn't count on the Russians or the Chinese those countries wont help rebuild Iran's air force in a million years as long as they maintain good relations with Israel.

the fact that Iran just signed a contract with Boeing to buy around a hundred airplanes just after the US court ruled that they should pay 10.5 billion dollars for the 9/11 attacks and the confiscation of 2 billion dollars of Iran's frozen assets due to another court ruling regarding the Beirut attacks proves that some politicians in Iran just don't get it that the only way iran can build a strong military capability is by relying on themselves and their home grown talent


----------



## VEVAK

NaCon said:


> if Iran wants a strong air force then they should start their own fighter program and invest in it heavily. They shouldn't count on the Russians or the Chinese those countries wont help rebuild Iran's air force in a million years as long as they maintain good relations with Israel.
> 
> the fact that Iran just signed a contract with Boeing to buy around a hundred airplanes just after the US court ruled that they should pay 10.5 billion dollars for the 9/11 attacks and the confiscation of 2 billion dollars of Iran's frozen assets due to another court ruling regarding the Beirut attacks proves that some politicians in Iran just don't get it that the only way iran can build a strong military capability is by relying on themselves and their home grown talent




Yes under ideal circumstances that's what Iran should be doing but unfortunately Iran is not under ideal circumstances and due to years of sections Iran has not been able to purchase any significant number of fighters for the past 40 years and the fact that Iranian engineers have been able to keep 40-50 year old American Aircraft flying for so long is nothing short of a miracle!!!! BUT the fact is, if Iran doesn't make a large purchase within the next decade or so Iran will be left with no Air Force to speak of. And unfortunately, Iran currently does not have the capability to build a large enough air force within that timespan. Hell, Iran can't even purchase aircrafts fast enough to even try to match the Saudi Air Force within the next decade let alone build them...


----------



## ZAC1

iran air force is no match to KSA air force.they should purchase new technology


----------



## NaCon

VEVAK said:


> Yes under ideal circumstances that's what Iran should be doing but unfortunately Iran is not under ideal circumstances and due to years of sections Iran has not been able to purchase any significant number of fighters for the past 40 years and the fact that Iranian engineers have been able to keep 40-50 year old American Aircraft flying for so long is nothing short of a miracle!!!! BUT the fact is, if Iran doesn't make a large purchase within the next decade or so Iran will be left with no Air Force to speak of. And unfortunately, Iran currently does not have the capability to build a large enough air force within that timespan. Hell, Iran can't even purchase aircrafts fast enough to even try to match the Saudi Air Force within the next decade let alone build them...


Iran will never have the purchasing power that the Saudis have but that's not the point, Saudi Arabia is not a threat to Iran militarily and will never be in my opinion, but I digress. The only choice Iran has now for building an airforce is to start a serious fighter programm, not beg Russia to sell them aircraft that are substandard and are not gonna chalange the us airforce. mind you iran is capable of creating an interceptor aircraft that can defend its airspace.


----------



## mohsen

NaCon said:


> Iran will never have the purchasing power that the Saudis have but that's not the point, Saudi Arabia is not a threat to Iran militarily and will never be in my opinion, but I digress. The only choice Iran has now for building an airforce is to start a serious fighter programm, not beg Russia to sell them aircraft that are substandard and are not gonna chalange the us airforce. mind you iran is capable of creating an interceptor aircraft that can defend its airspace.


giving too much credit to foreign products and underestimating the domestic potentials and minds is the main problem, you see they suspend a domestic fighter project with the excuse of lack of money, yet at the very fooking same time they talk about buying Russian fighters, as if this budget shortage is only for domestic things.

The situation in our air force is same as in our car industry, decades of assembling obsolete model of foreign cars with sh!ttiest quality and having no R&D, with the excuse of we didn't have the tech, as if tech is something which is produced in foreign markets and not labs.


----------



## VEVAK

NaCon said:


> Iran will never have the purchasing power that the Saudis have but that's not the point, Saudi Arabia is not a threat to Iran militarily and will never be in my opinion, but I digress. The only choice Iran has now for building an airforce is to start a serious fighter programm, not beg Russia to sell them aircraft that are substandard and are not gonna chalange the us airforce. mind you iran is capable of creating an interceptor aircraft that can defend its airspace.



Even if Iran was capable of developing a fighter as good as the Su-30 it is most definitely not capable of carrying out serial production (10-24 per year) let alone mass production (+24 per year) of such an aircraft within the next 10-15 years hell Iran currently doesn't even have to tools to build the aircraft's airframe at such rates let alone anything else

I'm Iranian and I would of loved it if Iran had a real fighter program! Hell, even if Iran was capable of building a fighter comparable to the Canadian Avro Arrow I'd say YES lest build our own fighter but we currently are not

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow






Iran currently doesn't have a large enough vacuum furnace (titanium) to build a single Su-30 or Avro Arrow Air Frame so starting a fighter project is going to cost Iran a lot more than buying fighters because you first need to buy or develop the tools....

Plus, Iran's Air Force is in such short supply that even if they were to purchase 100 Su-30's tomorrow that would still not be enough...

One of the main reason Iran chose the F-5 to reverse engineer is due to the extremely low titanium requirements (comparatively) of that airframe


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Even if Iran was capable of developing a fighter as good as the Su-30 it is most definitely not capable of carrying out serial production (10-24 per year) let alone mass production (+24 per year) of such an aircraft within the next 10-15 years hell Iran currently doesn't even have to tools to build the aircraft's airframe at such rates let alone anything else
> 
> I'm Iranian and I would of loved it if Iran had a real fighter program! Hell, even if Iran was capable of building a fighter comparable to the Canadian Avro Arrow I'd say YES lest build our own fighter but we currently are not
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran currently doesn't have a large enough vacuum furnace (titanium) to build a single Su-30 or Avro Arrow Air Frame so starting a fighter project is going to cost Iran a lot more than buying fighters because you first need to buy or develop the tools....
> 
> Plus, Iran's Air Force is in such short supply that even if they were to purchase 100 Su-30's tomorrow that would still not be enough...
> 
> One of the main reason Iran chose the F-5 to reverse engineer is due to the extremely low titanium requirements (comparatively) of that airframe


Avro Arrow was a marvel of engineering in its time.Its climb rate was second to none. Unfortunately for Canada, the government of the time (maybe bribed by US arms giants) was convinced that with the new ballistic missiles being developed, the era of fighters is over. So they scrapped the production plan and even trashed the two prototypes that were built fearing the technology fall into Soviet hands. The move made the company responsible, Avro, to go bankrupt. All of the brilliant minds that were working for that company moved to US and started working for the Aersospace companies there including NASA.

Canadians are still cursing that decision. 

Point is, if a country wants to have its own Aerospace program, it should build whatever it can and put it into use. Be it a trainer jet or a ground attack jet that is no match for its foreign counterparts. If not, the longer you wait, the further you will be behind the rest of the world. Some Canadian military people are still insisting that Canada should build its own jet fighter, especially now that Canada can't choose how to replace its aging CF-18s as there doesn't seem to be any good options. But being part of Nato and having lost the ability to do so won't let them get too far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Avro Arrow was a marvel of engineering in its time.Its climb rate was second to none. Unfortunately for Canada, the government of the time (maybe bribed by US arms giants) was convinced that with the new ballistic missiles being developed, the era of fighters is over. So they scrapped the production plan and even trashed the two prototypes that were built fearing the technology fall into Soviet hands. The move made the company responsible, Avro, to go bankrupt. All of the brilliant minds that were working for that company moved to US and started working for the Aersospace companies there including NASA.
> 
> Canadians are still cursing that decision.
> 
> Point is, if a country wants to have its own Aerospace program, it should build whatever it can and put it into use. Be it a trainer jet or a ground attack jet that is no match for its foreign counterparts. If not, the longer you wait, the further you will be behind the rest of the world. Some Canadian military people are still insisting that Canada should build its own jet fighter, especially now that Canada can't choose how to replace its aging CF-18s as there doesn't seem to be any good options. But being part of Nato and having lost the ability to do so won't let them get too far.




Canada had 3 massive vacuum furnaces by the time Avro Arrow ended "3" and they had only constructed 6 by then but were fully ready to head into mass production!!!! Iran doesn't even have a single one that size!

What Iran needs to do is slowly invest in the tools and facilities it needs threw time because that is the only way Iran can burden the costs of a real fighter program!

You have to be realistic, fighters like the Saegheh, Azarakhsh and F-5 are not capable of meeting all the needs of IRIAF!
And if you look at the combat history of Iran-Iraq war the F-5E had the least Air-to-Air kill & had the least successful strikes despite flying more sorties than any other fighter! F-5E is only good for close air support a roll that UAV's are slowly starting to take over

More than any other fighter Iran need's Air Superiority fighters a fighter Iran is incapable of producing at any rate


----------



## NaCon

VEVAK said:


> Canada had 3 massive vacuum furnaces by the time Avro Arrow ended "3" and they had only constructed 6 by then but were fully ready to head into mass production!!!! Iran doesn't even have a single one that size!
> 
> What Iran needs to do is slowly invest in the tools and facilities it needs threw time because that is the only way Iran can burden the costs of a real fighter program!
> 
> You have to be realistic, fighters like the Saegheh, Azarakhsh and F-5 are not capable of meeting all the needs of IRIAF!
> And if you look at the combat history of Iran-Iraq war the F-5E had the least Air-to-Air kill & had the least successful strikes despite flying more sorties than any other fighter! F-5E is only good for close air support a roll that UAV's are slowly starting to take over
> 
> More than any other fighter Iran need's Air Superiority fighters a fighter Iran is incapable of producing at any rate


how much would a fighter program cost? 20 billion 30 billion that's nothing when you look at it in the long run. Iran can certainly afford a program like that.


----------



## AmirPatriot

NaCon said:


> how much would a fighter program cost? 20 billion 30 billion that's nothing when you look at it in the long run. Iran can certainly afford a program like that.



In the long run, a domestic fighter program is much cheaper and more secure than buying from abroad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Canada had 3 massive vacuum furnaces by the time Avro Arrow ended "3" and they had only constructed 6 by then but were fully ready to head into mass production!!!! Iran doesn't even have a single one that size!
> 
> What Iran needs to do is slowly invest in the tools and facilities it needs threw time because that is the only way Iran can burden the costs of a real fighter program!
> 
> You have to be realistic, fighters like the Saegheh, Azarakhsh and F-5 are not capable of meeting all the needs of IRIAF!
> And if you look at the combat history of Iran-Iraq war the F-5E had the least Air-to-Air kill & had the least successful strikes despite flying more sorties than any other fighter! F-5E is only good for close air support a roll that UAV's are slowly starting to take over
> 
> More than any other fighter Iran need's Air Superiority fighters a fighter Iran is incapable of producing at any rate





NaCon said:


> how much would a fighter program cost? 20 billion 30 billion that's nothing when you look at it in the long run. Iran can certainly afford a program like that.





AmirPatriot said:


> In the long run, a domestic fighter program is much cheaper and more secure than buying from abroad.



Plus above, an air superiority fighter is usually the most expensive and complicated type of combat airplane. We don't need to start with that. We can start with subsonic ground attack air craft like Russian Su25 that IRGC currently uses a lot or trainer jets that can also be used as light attack air craft like Kosar. Q-313 is designed as a low flying sub sonic ground attack jet. Kosar is a viable trainer jet well within Iran's capacity. 

I know that right now, Kosar has got priority in Iran's aerospace programs. That can act as a platform to gain experience and build up on. Eventually those will lead to indigenous jet fighter program. Until then, missile defense should fill the gap for lack of competent jet fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

NaCon said:


> how much would a fighter program cost? 20 billion 30 billion that's nothing when you look at it in the long run. Iran can certainly afford a program like that.



1st If you think Iran has the money and is going to invest $30 Billion USD on a fighter program then they surely have the money to invest an additional $15 Billion USD on 120-150 Su-30's to ensure the country doesn't go without an Air Force

Problem is, Iranian leader are under the impression that they can start a real fighter program from the ground up with only $2-$3 billion

Iran still needs to build the infrastructure to produce the raw martials (high grade aluminum / titanium & other composite materials)

And Iran would need to construct the infrastructure to produce every part and component of that aircrafts from the engine, landing gear, tires, ejection seat, radar, MFD, weapons system, avionics, INS, fly by wire system, radar, airframe, fuel cells, etc, etc, just imagine every one of these components require their own facility, tools and personal that need to be built from the ground up and such an effort will take well beyond a decade mainly because the infrastructure to mass produce even the raw materials required to produce some of these components aren't there let alone the components themselves so everything needs to be built from the ground up! From the facilities, to the tools and personal need to be developed and Iran's Air Force just doesn't have the time to solely rely on a dream!
This is an effort Iran should have invested $10-$20 billion dollars in 10 years ago when it was drowning in cash but now it's too late to solely rely on such a program!

In my opinion this is what Iran should do:

1. Invest $15 Billion USD in the procurement of ~ 150 Su-30's 50 to be direct sales & 100 to be produced in Iran at a rate of +20 per year

2. Invest in high grade aluminum and titanium production and you'll need to build massive vacuum furnaces to build single peace parts

3. Start competition between IRIAF & AFAGIR for a working fighter prototype, requirements being:

- 2 engine multirole fighter ( The engines to be provided for by the government AL-31 if possible if not the RD-33 )
- Max speed of at least Mach 1.8 & Service Ceiling +50K ft
- Reduced RCS requirements to include no vertical surfaces & an internal weapons bay 
-Fly-By-Wire system
-Air refueling capabilities
-IRST to be designed into airframe
-1 year to come up with design and scale down model testing
-2 years to build working prototype using currently available part ...
Each side will be assigned 1 university and 3 companies for assistance

Goal here is to come up with the best platform and the best platform wins the $10 Billion contract to go on and build a production model which for Iran will take 7-10 years giving you some time fix the engine problem, here you need to procure engines by any means necessary preferably develop or reverse engineer if not buy... Regardless you'll need to make multi billion dollar investment here as well

You also need help from the private sector so you can offer contracts to any company that takes up this endeavor to produce various parts or components 

And if all goes to plan in about 10-12 years from now Iran would have to spend another $5 billion and put an order in for 50 fighter deliver to start 15 years from now at rate of just under 20 a year


----------



## NaCon

VEVAK said:


> 1st If you think Iran has the money and is going to invest $30 Billion USD on a fighter program then they surely have the money to invest an additional $15 Billion USD on 120-150 Su-30's to ensure the country doesn't go without an Air Force.
> 1. Invest $15 Billion USD in the procurement of ~ 150 Su-30's 50 to be direct sales & 100 to be produced in Iran at a rate of +20 per year


Russia will never sell Iran aircrafts that can challenge the Israeli air force. in my opinion its better for Iran to invest all of this money in acquiring technologies rather than buying tanks aircrafts or ships, that way Iran's economy will flourish even more and will become even more immune to future economic sanctions.

The only reason Russia delivered the S-300 defensive system in limited amounts mind you is because was because of the law suit and the fact that Israel will be acquiring the F35 in the near future. the F35 is capable of destroying s300 batteries. what i mean to say is that Russia will never undermine Israel's strike capability so Iran should never rely on Russia for arms sales.


----------



## VEVAK

NaCon said:


> Russia will never sell Iran aircrafts that can challenge the Israeli air force. in my opinion its better for Iran to invest all of this money in acquiring technologies rather than buying tanks aircrafts or ships, that way Iran's economy will flourish even more and will become even more immune to future economic sanctions.
> 
> The only reason Russia delivered the S-300 defensive system in limited amounts mind you is because was because of the law suit and the fact that Israel will be acquiring the F35 in the near future. the F35 is capable of destroying s300 batteries. what i mean to say is that Russia will never undermine Israel's strike capability so Iran should never rely on Russia for arms sales.



What love lost do you think Russia has with Israel? Money is money & Iran is a much bigger market! The absolute only thing the Russian would fear is U.S. pressure and sanctions that's it!

Iran has already put an order in for 48 Su-30's deliver to begin 2019 (Which will likely get delayed for a year or two) I'll bet if the 1st batch turns out to be as good as expected then I believe Iran will put in another order in...


----------



## NaCon

VEVAK said:


> What love lost do you think Russia has with Israel? Money is money & Iran is a much bigger market! The absolute only thing the Russian would fear is U.S. pressure and sanctions that's it!
> 
> Iran has already put an order in for 48 Su-30's deliver to begin 2019 (Which will likely get delayed for a year or two) I'll bet if the 1st batch turns out to be as good as expected then I believe Iran will put in another order in...



first the Su 30 that Iran will allegedly receive won't challenge the Israeli air force. Second why did Russia delay the S-300 system for nearly a decade? and when they agreed to finally sell them the system, Iran(considering the fact that they are developing a similar system to the S-300) requested the S-400 but Russia refused? Why did Russia stop the joint development of the trainer aircraft (Shafaq)? and why didn't they sell Iran, during the past 2 decades, anything of significance? don't tell me its because of the sanctions, because they could have easily vetoed them.
That being said the situation can change in the future, if the relations between Russia and Nato deteriorierte, Russia and Iran might become strategic allies rather than two countries having similar points of view on some regional matters, in that case they will have no choice but to sell Iran (even at low prices) advanced and sophisticated weapons to defend their national security.


----------



## VEVAK

NaCon said:


> first the Su 30 that Iran will allegedly receive won't challenge the Israeli air force. Second why did Russia delay the S-300 system for nearly a decade? and when they agreed to finally sell them the system, Iran(considering the fact that they are developing a similar system to the S-300) requested the S-400 but Russia refused? Why did Russia stop the joint development of the trainer aircraft (Shafaq)? and why didn't they sell Iran, during the past 2 decades, anything of significance? don't tell me its because of the sanctions, because they could have easily vetoed them.
> That being said the situation can change in the future, if the relations between Russia and Nato deteriorierte, Russia and Iran might become strategic allies rather than two countries having similar points of view on some regional matters, in that case they will have no choice but to sell Iran (even at low prices) advanced and sophisticated weapons to defend their national security.




Are you under the delusion that the Russians were bargaining to sell Iran less Su-30's rather than more because of Israel? My God! LOL!

Russians gave them maybe because due to the Nuclear Deal Russia now doesn't need to fear US sanctions and US repercussions so it has absolutely nothing to do with Israel!! Israeli's have delusions of grandeur and this is one of them!

No Israel didn't design or contribute to the design of the J-10 and the Chinese didn't steal, buy or borrow Israeli blueprints!
No Russia's delay of the S-300 had absolutely nothing to do with Israel!
No Russia is not reliant on Israeli drone technology!

These are nothing but Israeli delusions!

As I said before Russia is more afraid of U.S. pressures and sanctions than anything else and if the U.S. doesn't abide by the JCPOA Iran can restart it's nuclear program! That mean by 2021 according to the JCPOA Iran can purchase whatever weapon it wants and Russia will be more than happy to provide them without having to fear U.S. sanctions!

FYI I'd take an upgreaded Su-30 or Su-37 over the F-35 any day!!!


----------



## yavar

*Iran Panha overhauled 8 helicopters for IRGC, IRCS هشت بالگرد بازسازي شده سپاه و هلال احمر ايران*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAUCI

Yavar brother.I logged in just to make contact with you its Berislac from IMF.What happened to our forum??Can you contact me?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

PAUCI said:


> Yavar brother.I logged in just to make contact with you its Berislac from IMF.What happened to our forum??Can you contact me?


Hi brother . the IMF i think is finished . but i don't know really for sure .
i am here at this moment and you can follow my youtube chanel .
do you know any other forum like Bosnian forum which we can join

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

PAUCI said:


> Yavar brother.I logged in just to make contact with you its Berislac from IMF.What happened to our forum??Can you contact me?



Berislac, nice to see you again.



yavar said:


> Hi brother . the IMF i think is finished . but i don't know really for sure .
> i am here at this moment and you can follow my youtube chanel .
> do you know any other forum like Bosnian forum which we can join



I think IMF is down temporaly, but I'm not sure.

Brother, which youtube channel is yours??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Brother, which youtube channel is yours??


https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCoqCvoqnnG7X0OLDgrD52iQ


----------



## AmirPatriot

PAUCI said:


> Yavar brother.I logged in just to make contact with you its Berislac from IMF.What happened to our forum??Can you contact me?


Hi bro. Nice to see you here. 

Haman and fafnir are here too. 

I too have tried to see what's up with IMF. I think I'll do some more digging soon but this seems more significant than the past issues.


----------



## raptor22

Due to not having a thread about IRIAA I ask my Q here :
What happened to projects aimed to arm our AH-1j by missiles like Mavric and sidewinder? any idea?


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> Due to not having a thread about IRIAA I ask my Q here :
> What happened to projects aimed to arm our AH-1j by missiles like Mavric and sidewinder? any idea?
> 
> View attachment 325665
> View attachment 325666


we developed a capability, but it doesn't mean it will implemented on all copters, specially when there is no money.
see Russian helicopters in Syria!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> we developed a capability, but it doesn't mean it will implemented on all copters, specially when there is no money.
> see Russian helicopters in Syria!


Actually it is silly to develop a capability and then drop it ......How much does such a thing would cost?


----------



## Ibrahim2006

Iran production National turbojet engine ساخت موتور ملی توربو جت اوج


----------



## Ibrahim2006




----------



## Ibrahim2006

موتورهای جت با چهار برابر قدرت کنونی دردست ساخت است






* معاون علمی و فن آوری رئیس جمهور گفت: در شرکت دانش بنیان م‍پنا موتور جت با چهار برابر قدرت موتور جت رونمایی شده در مراسم روز صنعت دفاعی در دست ساخت است. *
به گزارش پایگاه اطلاع رسانی شبکه خبر ، سورنا ستاری با اشاره به رونمایی از موتور جت هواپیما در وزارت دفاع افزود: این موتور با همکاری30 شرکت دانش بنیان تولید شده است.
وی تصریح کرد: محققان جوان کشورمان توانستند فن آوری ساخت این موتورها را در کشور بومی سازی کنند.
ستاری گفت:‌ وزارت دفاع می تواند نیازهای خود را در سه دسته مختلف طبقه بندی و تولید آن را به شرکت های دانش بنیان واگذار کند.
معاون علمی و فن آوری رئیس جمهور تاکید کرد: ما می توانیم محصولات مختلفی را تولید و تجاری سازی کنیم







.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

finally we got a date for Qaher 313, taxi tests of the 1:1 model, before the end of current Iranian year which ends mar 2017.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Samak

Finally 

Defence Minister : IRAF rejected Qaher313 but IRGC asked for 1:1 prototype to test it ...


KOWSAR 88

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nemrod

Iran and Russia to Co-Produce Sukhoi Su-30 Fighter Jet

I do not know the reliability of this news. Until now Russia is still reluctant to sell these sophisticated aircraft to Iran. US pressures ? Israelis pressures ? I do not know, but this assertion seems to me dubious. If someone among you could verify please.


----------



## AmirPatriot

nemrod said:


> Iran and Russia to Co-Produce Sukhoi Su-30 Fighter Jet
> 
> I do not know the reliability of this news. Until now Russia is still reluctant to sell these sophisticated aircraft to Iran. US pressures ? Israelis pressures ? I do not know, but this assertion seems to me dubious. If someone among you could verify please.


Nothing has actually been signed yet... but Iran is in pursuit of an agreement to buy the Sukhois.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

According to Iranian law passed by the parliament almost a decade ago any fighter deal would have to include assembly and or co-production in Iran at some time!

That's how much Iran is insisting on co-production!

Currently I believe the Russians have yet to agree on co-production and the deal is for 48 Su-30's delivery of 1st batch to begin in 2019 at a rate of 12 per year but due to sanction delivery may be delayed till 2021 depending on Iran's relations with the U.S.....

I believe Iran needs 100 - 150 Su-30's so it can retire it's F-14's. Maintenance and repair for Iranian F-14's is a nightmare & Iran shouldn't be sending some of it's best pilots up in 40 year old aircrafts anyways....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

VEVAK said:


> According to Iranian law passed by the parliament almost a decade ago any fighter deal would have to include assembly and or co-production in Iran at some time!
> 
> That's how much Iran is insisting on co-production!
> 
> Currently I believe the Russians have yet to agree on co-production and the deal is for 48 Su-30's delivery of 1st batch to begin in 2019 at a rate of 12 per year but due to sanction delivery may be delayed till 2021 depending on Iran's relations with the U.S.....
> 
> I believe Iran needs 100 - 150 Su-30's so it can retire it's F-14's. Maintenance and repair for Iranian F-14's is a nightmare & Iran shouldn't be sending some of it's best pilots up in 40 year old aircrafts anyways....



Nice to see you back bro, you were absent for a bit.

I agree, Iran does need su-30 in the hundreds but I feel the deal they're signing may initially involve much less, but they will increase it with time. 

Once this Su-30 deal is done, Iran must and must only pursue fifth gen planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> finally we got a date for Qaher 313, taxi tests of the 1:1 model, before the end of current Iranian year which ends mar 2017.



Don't put your hops on the Qaher-313 it is nothing but a technology demonstrator and in no way will it be superior to the Saegheh fighter.

IRGC is wasting it's time! Rather than building a working prototype of a flawed design they should be working on improving the design to make it more viable!

1st remove all the flaws for example the wings(shouldn't be slanted), relocate air intakes(Under wing), smaller and fully movable frontal canards and a fly by wire system....

2ndly they should build a twin engine version (~ 20K lbf each) ! They should 1st work on building a small working prototype based off 2 owj engines and if successful they can later work on building a larger version with internal weapons bay with larger more powerful engine

Finally they need to accept the fact that if they want a viable fighter they need titanium and this idea that they can produce a cheap easy to produce viable fighter without it is nothing but a dream...

If it was me I would sack the program and look more towards improving the sofreh mahi design


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Don't put your hops on the Qaher-313 it is nothing but a technology demonstrator and in no way will it be superior to the Saegheh fighter.
> 
> IRGC is wasting it's time! Rather than building a working prototype of a flawed design they should be working on improving the design to make it more viable!
> 
> 1st remove all the flaws for example the wings(shouldn't be slanted), relocate air intakes(Under wing), smaller and fully movable frontal canards and a fly by wire system....
> 
> 2ndly they should build a twin engine version (~ 20K lbf each) ! They should 1st work on building a small working prototype based off 2 owj engines and if successful they can later work on building a larger version with internal weapons bay with larger more powerful engine
> 
> Finally they need to accept the fact that if they want a viable fighter they need titanium and this idea that they can produce a cheap easy to produce viable fighter without it is nothing but a dream...
> 
> If it was me I would sack the program and look more towards improving the sofreh mahi design
> 
> View attachment 330001


actually the picture which you posted is pure experimental.
Qaher is totally practical and in its second phase will become an interceptor. the only reason that it's taking the close combat role today is the lack of proper engine.
being twin engine or single engine doesn't matter. F-16 or F-35 both are very good fighters.
look at gen 6 designs, many of them have upper side air intake. do you think you know more than those designers?!


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> actually the picture which you posted is pure experimental.
> Qaher is totally practical and in its second phase will become an interceptor. the only reason that it's taking the close combat role today is the lack of proper engine.
> being twin engine or single engine doesn't matter. F-16 or F-35 both are very good fighters.
> look at gen 6 designs, many of them have upper side air intake. do you think you know more than those designers?!



1st off the F-35 is not a good fighter when compared to it's price tag! The total cost of the F-35 program has risen to $1 Trillion USD! The main reason you would put a single engine on a fighter is to save production costs and at $1 Trillion USD that defied the whole purpose of a single engine fighter!
And the cost of the engine will also be more than 2 GE-F110 engines combined!

Now to the F-16 do you honestly think the F-16 would ever be able to go up against an F-15 or a Su-30? The F-16 was a fighter that the U.S. would have no problem selling to almost any country because at the end of the day it posed no real threat!
You do know that right after the Revolution the U.S. tried to get Iran to exchange it's F-14's with the F-16's Iran had ordered! Lucky for us we had some smart Air Force officers that stopped the deal because if it had gone through the Iran-Iraq war would have gone a whole lot differently....

And the only reason the F-16 platform has been a success is due to it's speed and agility because it can shoot and run at max speed of Mach 2

Close combat support is slowly becoming a mission for UCAV's so there is no future in building a light manned fighter!

And for a country the size of Iran light short ranged fighters are useless and the Iran-Iraq war proved it

Wake up! The main characteristic of all interceptors is speed so the F-313 with it's current configuration and a single engine will never be an Interceptor!
and no one is building interceptors anymore they are building Air Superiority fighters

To produce a platform that would never be able to compete with aircrafts built 50 years ago is absorbed and will lead to the death of a true Iranian fighter just as the Skorpian lead to the death of a true Polish fighter program.

Yes the F-313 looks very cool but by no means is it a practical fighter!

And on the F-313 the intakes should be below the wing because it will increase the aerodynamic properties of the fighter not because of anything else....

And what 6th Gen fighter are you referring to? there are so many imaginary designs!


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> 1st off the F-35 is not a good fighter when compared to it's price tag! The total cost of the F-35 program has risen to $1 Trillion USD! The main reason you would put a single engine on a fighter is to save production costs and at $1 Trillion USD that defied the whole purpose of a single engine fighter!
> And the cost of the engine will also be more than 2 GE-F110 engines combined!
> 
> Now to the F-16 do you honestly think the F-16 would ever be able to go up against an F-15 or a Su-30? The F-16 was a fighter that the U.S. would have no problem selling to almost any country because at the end of the day it posed no real threat!
> You do know that right after the Revolution the U.S. tried to get Iran to exchange it's F-14's with the F-16's Iran had ordered! Lucky for us we had some smart Air Force officers that stopped the deal because if it had gone through the Iran-Iraq war would have gone a whole lot differently....
> 
> And the only reason the F-16 platform has been a success is due to it's speed and agility because it can shoot and run at max speed of Mach 2
> 
> Close combat support is slowly becoming a mission for UCAV's so there is no future in building a light manned fighter!
> 
> And for a country the size of Iran light short ranged fighters are useless and the Iran-Iraq war proved it
> 
> Wake up! The main characteristic of all interceptors is speed so the F-313 with it's current configuration and a single engine will never be an Interceptor!
> and no one is building interceptors anymore they are building Air Superiority fighters
> 
> To produce a platform that would never be able to compete with aircrafts built 50 years ago is absorbed and will lead to the death of a true Iranian fighter just as the Skorpian lead to the death of a true Polish fighter program.
> 
> Yes the F-313 looks very cool but by no means is it a practical fighter!
> 
> And on the F-313 the intakes should be below the wing because it will increase the aerodynamic properties of the fighter not because of anything else....
> 
> And what 6th Gen fighter are you referring to? there are so many imaginary designs!
> 
> View attachment 330168
> 
> View attachment 330169
> 
> 
> View attachment 330170
> 
> View attachment 330171


Q-313 was not meant to be a dog fighter. It is a low flying ground support attack aircraft. The tandem wings helps it make use of the ground effect. Enabling it stay flying with much less power than a normal aircraft at low altitudes (1-2 times its wingspan). That is the reason why the air intakes are on top of the body and not below. This way water and dust are less likely to get into the engine while flying low.

That's why IRIAF is not interested in Q-313 while IRIGC has placed an order for a 1:1 testing prototype.

I suspect the reason for IRIGC's interest in Q-313 is that it lends itself well to their asymmetric warfare doctrine. It can fly 2-3m above the sea level and deliver the antiship missiles. It's low flying capacity and stealth design will make it very difficult to track.


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> actually the picture which you posted is pure experimental.
> Qaher is totally practical and in its second phase will become an interceptor. the only reason that it's taking the close combat role today is the lack of proper engine.
> being twin engine or single engine doesn't matter. F-16 or F-35 both are very good fighters.
> look at gen 6 designs, many of them have upper side air intake. do you think you know more than those designers?!


F16 is good fighter but with its limitation about f35 the best thing we can say is who knows .

About qaher well I believe its very hard to use that design as supersonic aircraft .I believe bomber and cas are more suitable for that design unless the designer of the airplane have found a revolutionary way on making it stable.


----------



## Arminkh

Q-313 is simply this in a smaller scale:






Please note the similarities: tandem wings and engines placed on top of the body to mitigate water from entering the engines.

I even think it was intended for sea attack (where you can best utilize ground effect).


----------



## Rukarl

Arminkh said:


> Q-313 is simply this in a smaller scale:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please note the similarities: tandem wings and engines placed on top of the body to mitigate water from entering the engines.
> 
> I even think it was intended for sea attack (where you can best utilize ground effect).



"Form follows function", forgetting the fact they themselves said qaher is for low altitude flights and at it will be used to defend Iran in the Persian gulf, it was therefore a plane designed for a specific purpose and that purpose was not an air superiority fighter but what you said. I think they could ultimately even make an UCAV version as well, for unmanned anti ship roles. As an anti ship role, it is actually a good design. Low flying, stealthy, small, cheap etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Q-313 was not meant to be a dog fighter. It is a low flying ground support attack aircraft. The tandem wings helps it make use of the ground effect. Enabling it stay flying with much less power than a normal aircraft at low altitudes (1-2 times its wingspan). That is the reason why the air intakes are on top of the body and not below. This way water and dust are less likely to get into the engine while flying low.
> 
> That's why IRIAF is not interested in Q-313 while IRIGC has placed an order for a 1:1 testing prototype.
> 
> I suspect the reason for IRIGC's interest in Q-313 is that it lends itself well to their asymmetric warfare doctrine. It can fly 2-3m above the sea level and deliver the antiship missiles. It's low flying capacity and stealth design will make it very difficult to track.



Do you know how skilled a pilot would have to be to maintain 3 m above the sea for long distances? NO!

Iran's Karrar UCAV can do the same thing at a faster speed and lower RCS without putting a life at risk and Iran's armed version of the RQ-170 will even out perform that so why waist time and resources?

And of course IRIAF wont order it! It's useless!


----------



## scythian500

OWJ Turbojet engine testing video;

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/621260/فیلم-کارگاه-ساخت-موتور-توربوجت-اوج

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Do you know how skilled a pilot would have to be to maintain 3 m above the sea for long distances? NO!
> 
> Iran's Karrar UCAV can do the same thing at a faster speed and lower RCS without putting a life at risk and Iran's armed version of the RQ-170 will even out perform that so why waist time and resources?
> 
> And of course IRIAF wont order it! It's useless!


Have you ever heard of the operation "Dam Busters"? In WWII, British Royal Airforce used bouncing bombs against German dams to bypass its protective fence and hit the structure. For it to work, they had to fly at a very specific height above the water level of the lake behind the dam (5-6m) and keep it steady and then at a certain distance and certain speed release the bomb. To keep the bomber at the required height, at the absence of modern electronics, they used two spot lights at the bottom of the bomber that pointed towards earth at an angle so that at the exact same altitude their light merged. 

Now do you think Iranian pilots are any less skilled than those pilots and you are totally ignoring use of modern avionics to keep the airplane steady. This Soviet era ship buster could do that so can Q-313:






And with your logic, we can rule out any use for IRGC fast attack boats because they will put life of their crew at risk by getting close to enemy fleet while Karrar can do the same??? No. drones may work against some barefoot zombies but it never works against an advanced army. They can be hacked, their com link can be jammed and then they are useless. Drones still can't replace manned aircraft until the day that their AI is at least as capable of a 5 year old child.

And of course IRAF will not order it. The difference between Iran regular army and IRGC and that they are actually lagging behind IRGC is that one is thinking out of the box and the other one is trying to imitate their foe. If you fight your enemy with the same means that he has (and even better and more of) you are doomed. IRGC took a recreational fast boat and turned it into a deadly weapon that nobody had thought of before. They will do the same with Q-313 as well and show the world that you can use cheap and smart designs for totally different purpose. Q-313 can easily replace their flying boats that they currently are using.

Have some imagination my friend.


----------



## Samak

IRAF made clear what they want when they asked Su30 ...
IRAF want heavy multi role fighter with two engine and long range .... They even reject j10 and Mig 29-35 , so Qaher 313 doesn't have any place in IRAF ....


----------



## VEVAK

JEskandari said:


> F16 is good fighter but with its limitation about f35 the best thing we can say is who knows .
> 
> About qaher well I believe its very hard to use that design as supersonic aircraft .I believe bomber and cas are more suitable for that design unless the designer of the airplane have found a revolutionary way on making it stable.





Arminkh said:


> Have you ever heard of the operation "Dam Busters"? In WWII, British Royal Airforce used bouncing bombs against German dams to bypass its protective fence and hit the structure. For it to work, they had to fly at a very specific height above the water level of the lake behind the dam (5-6m) and keep it steady and then at a certain distance and certain speed release the bomb. To keep the bomber at the required height, at the absence of modern electronics, they used two spot lights at the bottom of the bomber that pointed towards earth at an angle so that at the exact same altitude their light merged.
> 
> Now do you think Iranian pilots are any less skilled than those pilots and you are totally ignoring use of modern avionics to keep the airplane steady. This Soviet era ship buster could do that so can Q-313:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And with your logic, we can rule out any use for IRGC fast attack boats because they will put life of their crew at risk by getting close to enemy fleet while Karrar can do the same??? No. drones may work against some barefoot zombies but it never works against an advanced army. They can be hacked, their com link can be jammed and then they are useless. Drones still can't replace manned aircraft until the day that their AI is at least as capable of a 5 year old child.
> 
> And of course IRAF will not order it. The difference between Iran regular army and IRGC and that they are actually lagging behind IRGC is that one is thinking out of the box and the other one is trying to imitate their foe. If you fight your enemy with the same means that he has (and even better and more of) you are doomed. IRGC took a recreational fast boat and turned it into a deadly weapon that nobody had thought of before. They will do the same with Q-313 as well and show the world that you can use cheap and smart designs for totally different purpose. Q-313 can easily replace their flying boats that they currently are using.
> 
> Have some imagination my friend.



Your wrong!






If you knew more about the so called Caspian Sea monster you wouldn't have even brought it up!

F-313 is a light fighter the KM (Caspian Sea Monster) is only a ground effect vehicle with a maximum altitude of ~50 ft! It's not an Aircraft capable of flight

F-313 was built to takeoff from an airstrip not the water!

This is a ground effect vehicle







This is a light fighter jet







And it can not land in the water so NO Iranian pilots can't use it to fly 5 meters up for long distances and that is a FACT


----------



## Fafnir

Samak said:


> IRAF made clear what they want when they asked Su30 ...
> IRAF want heavy multi role fighter with two engine and long range .... They even reject j10 and Mig 29-35 , so Qaher 313 doesn't have any place in IRAF ....


Agreed,now let us hope they get them [su30]


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Your wrong!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you knew more about the so called Caspian Sea monster you wouldn't have even brought it up!
> 
> F-313 is a light fighter the KM (Caspian Sea Monster) is only a ground effect vehicle with a maximum altitude of ~50 ft! It's not an Aircraft capable of flight
> 
> F-313 was built to takeoff from an airstrip not the water!
> 
> This is a ground effect vehicle
> 
> View attachment 330409
> 
> 
> 
> This is a light fighter jet
> 
> View attachment 330410
> 
> 
> 
> And it can not land in the water so NO Iranian pilots can't use it to fly 5 meters up for long distances and that is a FACT



I know that is a ground effect vehicle. I mentioned that myself above and Q-313 is also designed to benefit from it. it has tandem wing design that is one of the three ways of utilizing ground effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle

There is no other justification for using a tandem wing design if you don't want to use the ground effect as you are only increasing the drag force without any justification. 

And that's the only reason why you would put the engine air intakes above the body as it will prevent it from high g maneuvers as the engine will suffocate in high angle of attack in this kind of design.

So because of the above two characteristics, Q-313 is designed mainly as a ground effect vehicle. My claim is consistent with its designer opinion. 
Hopefully you take the word of its designer for a fact:

http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13911124000700

مدیرعامل صها افزود: البته قابلیت ویژه‌ای که برای قاهر تعریف شده، پرواز در ارتفاع پست است؛ قابلیتی که در نمونه‌های مشابه در دنیا دیده نمی شود.

پروانه تصریح کرد: ارتفاع پست، ارتفاعی است که بتوان در آن از شرایط Ground effect (اثرسطح) یک سطح استفاده کرد که عمده جنگنده ها در این شرایط دچار اشکال می‌شوند چراکه طراحی آنها برای مراحل بعد از گراند افکت صورت می‌گیرد. این همان نکته ایست که شما وقتی می خواهید از یک محصول استفاده کنید، شرایطی که طراحان آن تجهیزات در نظر گرفتند، به شما تحمیل میشود ولی ما با طراحی بومی این جنگنده توانستیم از این مانع عبور کنیم.

Even he says it is primarily a ground effect vehicle.

And being a ground effect vehicle doesn't mean it can't fly at higher altitude. Even that Caspian sea monster could fly above its ground effect altitude but for that to happen it had to burn a lot of fuel which was not economical. It performed best at its ground level effect range. 

You don't need to be able to land on water in order to fly 3-5 m above sea level. Cruise missiles do that without a pilot and/or the ability to land in sea. The same control system that keeps the cruise missile steady above water, can keep Q-313 above water as well. It's a simple avionics system. You may call it an assisted pilot system that engages when you are below a certain altitude. So don't worry about our pilots


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> Your wrong!


am I ?
let look at some similar design
Boeing Bird of Prey: Weight 3,356 kg, Speed 482km , *Powerplant:* 1 × Pratt & Whitney Canada JT15D-5C 3,190 lbf (14.2 kN)
Lockheed Have Blue: Weight 5,670 kg, Speed 966km, *Powerplant:* 2 × General Electric J85-GE-4A turbojets 2,950 lbf (13.1 kN) each
Northrop Tacit Blue : *weight:* 13,606 kg, Speed 462 km, *Powerplant:* 2 × Garrett ATF3-6 high-bypass turbofans, 5,440 lbf (24 kN) each
Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk: *weight:* 23,800 kg, Speed Mach 0.92, *Powerplant:* 2 × General Electric F404-F1D2 turbofans, 10,600 lbf (48.0 kN) each

IAIO Qaher-313 : PowerPlanet Owj (Based on GE J85-GE-21) 3,500 lbf (16 kN) Weight:At least 4000kg Speed ?

you yourself can fill that ? in front of speed
two j-85 even cant make f-5 go supersonic without afterburner and that airplane is a lot more suitable for high speed so let not talk bout a single engine based on J-85 without afterburner.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Samak

Single engine air craft are easier to design and produce and maintain , but I don't think making a single engine air craft with a jet engine like j85 is wise design ....

This will be even less useful than f5 ....


Will they make q313 and fly it !? 
Yeah , q313 was an embracement for our Defence Industry , so at least they have to make it and fly it to shut up some mouth ....

Will Iran mass produce q313 !? IRAF won't Eve look at it , but IRGC will test it and then they will decide ..... 

At least I hope the first prototype of Q313 be different that mock up model

Anyway this CG pics of q313 that I found in web







اگه قاهر ۳۱۳ بتونه به اهداف پروژه برسه ، باعث می شه ریسک حمله به ایران از طریق خلیج فارس برای تمامی اعراب خلیجی و آمریکا بالاتر بره و به صورت مستقیم امنیت ملی ما رو بالا تر ببره ‌....

به علاوه اگه ده تا کلیپ دو دقیقه ای ازش توی اینترنت پخش بشه باعث میشه اعتماد به نفس طراحان ما بیشتر بشه 

شما یک بچه ی سیزده یا چهارده ساله ی ایرانی رو فرض کنید که کلیپ پرواز قاهر با ظاهر خاص و سینمایش ببینه ، تا آخر عمرش این کلیپ روش تاثیر می گذاره ، چه ایرانی باشه ، چه عرب یا حتی آمریکایی ....

پرواز قاهر حتی اگه از لحاظ نظامی ارزشی نداشته باشه ، ولی از لحاظ تبلیغاتی و روانی خیلی ارزش منده


Don't underestimate power of propaganda , we did prevent USA invasion in bush era by simply big talk and exegerat about our ballistic missile power while we were so damn weak at that time ....

We saved our country by lunching the some missile as same time in show that famous clip to world and then talk big words .....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> I know that is a ground effect vehicle. I mentioned that myself above and Q-313 is also designed to benefit from it. it has tandem wing design that is one of the three ways of utilizing ground effect:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle
> 
> There is no other justification for using a tandem wing design if you don't want to use the ground effect as you are only increasing the drag force without any justification.
> 
> And that's the only reason why you would put the engine air intakes above the body as it will prevent it from high g maneuvers as the engine will suffocate in high angle of attack in this kind of design.
> 
> So because of the above two characteristics, Q-313 is designed mainly as a ground effect vehicle. My claim is consistent with its designer opinion.
> Hopefully you take the word of its designer for a fact:
> 
> http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13911124000700
> 
> مدیرعامل صها افزود: البته قابلیت ویژه‌ای که برای قاهر تعریف شده، پرواز در ارتفاع پست است؛ قابلیتی که در نمونه‌های مشابه در دنیا دیده نمی شود.
> 
> پروانه تصریح کرد: ارتفاع پست، ارتفاعی است که بتوان در آن از شرایط Ground effect (اثرسطح) یک سطح استفاده کرد که عمده جنگنده ها در این شرایط دچار اشکال می‌شوند چراکه طراحی آنها برای مراحل بعد از گراند افکت صورت می‌گیرد. این همان نکته ایست که شما وقتی می خواهید از یک محصول استفاده کنید، شرایطی که طراحان آن تجهیزات در نظر گرفتند، به شما تحمیل میشود ولی ما با طراحی بومی این جنگنده توانستیم از این مانع عبور کنیم.
> 
> Even he says it is primarily a ground effect vehicle.
> 
> And being a ground effect vehicle doesn't mean it can't fly at higher altitude. Even that Caspian sea monster could fly above its ground effect altitude but for that to happen it had to burn a lot of fuel which was not economical. It performed best at its ground level effect range.
> 
> You don't need to be able to land on water in order to fly 3-5 m above sea level. Cruise missiles do that without a pilot and/or the ability to land in sea. The same control system that keeps the cruise missile steady above water, can keep Q-313 above water as well. It's a simple avionics system. You may call it an assisted pilot system that engages when you are below a certain altitude. So don't worry about our pilots



1. Modeereh porojeh is not the same as the designer. And god knows how much money they funneled from the government for that ridicules design so what exactly do you expect him to say? "It's a crappy useless aircraft"!

2. According to him the Aircrafts "main characteristic" is that it doesn't "LOOK" like any other fighter in the world. What I pickup from that is their main goal was to build something that looked different not something better or even as good as any other fighter "Gheyafeh monhaser be fard" Maskharast!

3. You would need a fly by wire system to have any type of assisted pilot system to allow you to fly 5 meters above sea level which the Q-313 does not have that means wind or a wave or the smallest mistake or a twitch mean the death of a skilled pilot. Q-313 doesn't have a fly by wire system so stop making things up!

4.According to this guy the one they showed years ago was not a mock up!! Now if that's the case the Q-313 will be even worse than I expected either that or this guy has absolutely no idea what he is talking about because that model did not have an internal weapons bay...

.That's just sad!

** قاهر رونمایی شده ماکت نبود*

مدیر پروژه قاهر در پاسخ به این سوال که آیا نمونه رونمایی شده با توجه به نصب نبودن بسیاری از تجهیزات آن، یک نمونه واقعی بود یا مدل (ماک آپ)، گفت: نمونه ای که نمایش داده شد، نمونه اصلی بود که بزودی وارد مرحله تست های پروازی می‌شود و در خصوص نصب تجهیزات نیز لزومی نداشت تا ما در این
مرحله، تجهیزات کامل را بر روی بدنه آن نصب کنیم


Pass degheh lazem neest montazer bosheen!!! I still had a little hope tah ghalbam that they would wise up and make some adjustments to the real thing but it appears that was the real thing and not a mock up!!! Someone truly ripped off the government for that junk!

** تایید قاهر توسط متخصصان هوایی*

وی در بخش دیگری از این گفتگو به برداشت اشتباه برخی رسانه مبنی بر اعلام انجام پرواز توسط نمونه نهایی قاهر اشاره کرد و افزود: این هواپیما در مراحل بعدی تست های تاکسی و پروازی را انجام خواهد داد.

مدیرعامل صها افزود: آقای رییس‌جمهور در روز رونمایی از قاهر به درستی فرمودند که یکی از خلبانان باسابقه نیروی هوایی که چندین هزار ساعت پرواز در کارنامه خود دارد، عملکرد این جنگنده را به عنوان یکی کارشناس تایید کرده که البته برخی رسانه ها اشتباها اینطور برداشت کردند که گویا قاهر پروازی داشته که البته بعدا این اشتباه را تصحیح کردند.

پروانه در بخش پایانی این گفتگو به موضوع تحریم‌های صورت گرفته علیه کشورمان در طول سالهای پس از انقلاب و نیز تاثیر آن بر رشد روند خودکفایی در صنایع دفاعی اشاره کرد و گفت: از ابتدای پیروزی انقلاب که ملت ایران به رهبر و مقتدای خود لبیک گفتند، دشمنی های کشورهای مستکبر شروع شد و با تمام قوا سعی کردند تا به انحاء مختلف مانع رشد و پیشرفت ملت ایران شوند و در این مسیر هر کاری که از دستشان برآمد، دریغ نکردند.


So one pilot tells the President it's a good fighter and that's all the analysis they need!! MY GOD! It just keeps getting sadder!!!



JEskandari said:


> am I ?
> let look at some similar design
> Boeing Bird of Prey: Weight 3,356 kg, Speed 482km , *Powerplant:* 1 × Pratt & Whitney Canada JT15D-5C 3,190 lbf (14.2 kN)
> Lockheed Have Blue: Weight 5,670 kg, Speed 966km, *Powerplant:* 2 × General Electric J85-GE-4A turbojets 2,950 lbf (13.1 kN) each
> Northrop Tacit Blue : *weight:* 13,606 kg, Speed 462 km, *Powerplant:* 2 × Garrett ATF3-6 high-bypass turbofans, 5,440 lbf (24 kN) each
> Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk: *weight:* 23,800 kg, Speed Mach 0.92, *Powerplant:* 2 × General Electric F404-F1D2 turbofans, 10,600 lbf (48.0 kN) each
> 
> IAIO Qaher-313 : PowerPlanet Owj (Based on GE J85-GE-21) 3,500 lbf (16 kN) Weight:At least 4000kg Speed ?
> 
> you yourself can fill that ? in front of speed
> two j-85 even cant make f-5 go supersonic without afterburner and that airplane is a lot more suitable for high speed so let not talk bout a single engine based on J-85 without afterburner.



I have no idea what your going on about! 1st off I was taking to Arminkh about Q-313 not being able to fly long distances 5 meters above sea level and I have no Idea how you got in there so I don't know what your talking about...

2nly even if you put 2 F110 engines on the current configuration of the F-313 it still wouldn't be able to break the sound barrier due to it's aerodynamics.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_barrier


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> 1. Modeereh porojeh is not the same as the designer. And god knows how much money they funneled from the government for that ridicules design so what exactly do you expect him to say? "It's a crappy useless aircraft"!
> 
> 2. According to him the Aircrafts "main characteristic" is that it doesn't "LOOK" like any other fighter in the world. What I pickup from that is their main goal was to build something that looked different not something better or even as good as any other fighter "Gheyafeh monhaser be fard" Maskharast!
> 
> 3. You would need a fly by wire system to have any type of assisted pilot system to allow you to fly 5 meters above sea level which the Q-313 does not have that means wind or a wave or the smallest mistake or a twitch mean the death of a skilled pilot. Q-313 doesn't have a fly by wire system so stop making things up!
> 
> 4.According to this guy the one they showed years ago was not a mock up!! Now if that's the case the Q-313 will be even worse than I expected either that or this guy has absolutely no idea what he is talking about because that model did not have an internal weapons bay...
> 
> .That's just sad!
> 
> ** قاهر رونمایی شده ماکت نبود*
> 
> مدیر پروژه قاهر در پاسخ به این سوال که آیا نمونه رونمایی شده با توجه به نصب نبودن بسیاری از تجهیزات آن، یک نمونه واقعی بود یا مدل (ماک آپ)، گفت: نمونه ای که نمایش داده شد، نمونه اصلی بود که بزودی وارد مرحله تست های پروازی می‌شود و در خصوص نصب تجهیزات نیز لزومی نداشت تا ما در این
> مرحله، تجهیزات کامل را بر روی بدنه آن نصب کنیم
> 
> 
> Pass degheh lazem neest montazer bosheen!!! I still had a little hope tah ghalbam that they would wise up and make some adjustments to the real thing but it appears that was the real thing and not a mock up!!! Someone truly ripped off the government for that junk!
> 
> ** تایید قاهر توسط متخصصان هوایی*
> 
> وی در بخش دیگری از این گفتگو به برداشت اشتباه برخی رسانه مبنی بر اعلام انجام پرواز توسط نمونه نهایی قاهر اشاره کرد و افزود: این هواپیما در مراحل بعدی تست های تاکسی و پروازی را انجام خواهد داد.
> 
> مدیرعامل صها افزود: آقای رییس‌جمهور در روز رونمایی از قاهر به درستی فرمودند که یکی از خلبانان باسابقه نیروی هوایی که چندین هزار ساعت پرواز در کارنامه خود دارد، عملکرد این جنگنده را به عنوان یکی کارشناس تایید کرده که البته برخی رسانه ها اشتباها اینطور برداشت کردند که گویا قاهر پروازی داشته که البته بعدا این اشتباه را تصحیح کردند.
> 
> پروانه در بخش پایانی این گفتگو به موضوع تحریم‌های صورت گرفته علیه کشورمان در طول سالهای پس از انقلاب و نیز تاثیر آن بر رشد روند خودکفایی در صنایع دفاعی اشاره کرد و گفت: از ابتدای پیروزی انقلاب که ملت ایران به رهبر و مقتدای خود لبیک گفتند، دشمنی های کشورهای مستکبر شروع شد و با تمام قوا سعی کردند تا به انحاء مختلف مانع رشد و پیشرفت ملت ایران شوند و در این مسیر هر کاری که از دستشان برآمد، دریغ نکردند.
> 
> 
> So one pilot tells the President it's a good fighter and that's all the analysis they need!! MY GOD! It just keeps getting sadder!!!


You said it is not a ground effect vehicle and I showed you that was the intention. Rest of the things you have mentioned about wasting money and etc is irrelevant.

Whatever!


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> You said it is not a ground effect vehicle and I showed you that was the intention. Rest of the things you have mentioned about wasting money and etc is irrelevant.
> 
> Whatever!



I said it is not a Ground Effect Vehicle! which it is not! The slanted wings will give the aircraft stability and will probably help in low level flight but that doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to sustain 5 meters above sea level for long distances and this is not a new wing design if that design which originated in Boeing Bird of Pray and if it had more pro's than con's then the U.S. would have implemented it's slanted wing design in it's UCVS but they didn't did they? The Aircraft's max speed was under 300 MPH so F-313 will likely be no faster

Eurocopter X3 has a max of 293 MPH

Sikorsky S-97 Helicopter has a cruise speed of 253 MPH

So I'm sorry, building a fighter jet that's about as fast as future US helicopters makes absolutely no sense to me!



Samak said:


> Single engine air craft are easier to design and produce and maintain , but I don't think making a single engine air craft with a jet engine like j85 is wise design ....
> 
> This will be even less useful than f5 ....
> 
> 
> Will they make q313 and fly it !?
> Yeah , q313 was an embracement for our Defence Industry , so at least they have to make it and fly it to shut up some mouth ....
> 
> Will Iran mass produce q313 !? IRAF won't Eve look at it , but IRGC will test it and then they will decide .....
> 
> At least I hope the first prototype of Q313 be different that mock up model
> 
> Anyway this CG pics of q313 that I found in web
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> QUOTE]





Samak said:


> Single engine air craft are easier to design and produce and maintain , but I don't think making a single engine air craft with a jet engine like j85 is wise design ....
> 
> This will be even less useful than f5 ....
> 
> 
> Will they make q313 and fly it !?
> Yeah , q313 was an embracement for our Defence Industry , so at least they have to make it and fly it to shut up some mouth ....
> 
> Will Iran mass produce q313 !? IRAF won't Eve look at it , but IRGC will test it and then they will decide .....
> 
> At least I hope the first prototype of Q313 be different that mock up model
> 
> Anyway this CG pics of q313 that I found in web
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اگه قاهر ۳۱۳ بتونه به اهداف پروژه برسه ، باعث می شه ریسک حمله به ایران از طریق خلیج فارس برای تمامی اعراب خلیجی و آمریکا بالاتر بره و به صورت مستقیم امنیت ملی ما رو بالا تر ببره ‌....
> 
> به علاوه اگه ده تا کلیپ دو دقیقه ای ازش توی اینترنت پخش بشه باعث میشه اعتماد به نفس طراحان ما بیشتر بشه
> 
> شما یک بچه ی سیزده یا چهارده ساله ی ایرانی رو فرض کنید که کلیپ پرواز قاهر با ظاهر خاص و سینمایش ببینه ، تا آخر عمرش این کلیپ روش تاثیر می گذاره ، چه ایرانی باشه ، چه عرب یا حتی آمریکایی ....
> 
> پرواز قاهر حتی اگه از لحاظ نظامی ارزشی نداشته باشه ، ولی از لحاظ تبلیغاتی و روانی خیلی ارزش منده
> 
> 
> Don't underestimate power of propaganda , we did prevent USA invasion in bush era by simply big talk and exegerat about our ballistic missile power while we were so damn weak at that time ....
> 
> We saved our country by lunching the some missile as same time in show that famous clip to world and then talk big words .....




Problem is as stated by the project manager the one they showed wasn't a mock up! That was the real thing according to the project manager (which probably got rich off that ripoff)

** قاهر رونمایی شده ماکت نبود
*
مدیر پروژه قاهر در پاسخ به این سوال که آیا نمونه رونمایی شده با توجه به نصب نبودن بسیاری از تجهیزات آن، یک نمونه واقعی بود یا مدل (ماک آپ)، گفت: نمونه ای که نمایش داده شد، نمونه اصلی بود که بزودی وارد مرحله تست های پروازی می‌شود و در خصوص نصب تجهیزات نیز لزومی نداشت تا ما در این
مرحله، تجهیزات کامل را بر روی بدنه آن نصب کنیم

Like the pic btw!


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> I said it is not a Ground Effect Vehicle! which it is not! The slanted wings will give the aircraft stability and will probably help in low level flight but that doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to sustain 5 meters above sea level for long distances and this is not a new wing design if that design which originated in Boeing Bird of Pray and if it had more pro's than con's then the U.S. would have implemented it's slanted wing design in it's UCVS but they didn't did they? The Aircraft's max speed was under 300 MPH so F-313 will likely be no faster
> 
> Eurocopter X3 has a max of 293 MPH
> 
> Sikorsky S-97 Helicopter has a cruise speed of 253 MPH
> 
> So I'm sorry, building a fighter jet that's about as fast as future US helicopters makes absolutely no sense to me!



The point is not that its back wings are slanted. They have nothing to do with ground effect. They are slanted to prevent vibration at the tip of the wings and fatigue caused by the turbulence behind front canards (or wings in this case).

It is a tandem wing design where you have two main wings one at the front one at the back like this:






The reason one wing is above the other in most of tandem wing designs is for avoiding the same issue of turbulence that I mentioned above. In Q-313, geometry of the design didn't allow placing front and back wing on different levels so the the back wings are slanted.

In Q-313 front canards are almost the same size as the back wing, making it a tandem wing design which is one of the three ways of utilizing the ground effect. 

And I do agree with the project manager that it is a new and unprecedented design for a war plane. 

Ground effect works at an altitude up to 2 times the wing span. Judging by the pictures, in Q-313 case it should be less than 8m above ground to utilize the ground effect.

I'm confident I have red every singe expert comment and article on the web that you can find regarding Q-313 and what I told you above is my accumulative understanding. 

So if they want to utilize the ground effect, they should figure out a way to keep it steady 5m above sea level. If it needs a fly by wire system for that so be it. That's what this bird is designed for.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Samak

Finally , Supreme leader order our military and MoD to increase Iran military capacity ...this become official , our Air force will revive ....

Now , we will either see A massive order of fighters from foreign country ( Su 30 )
Or making real fighter jet ( at least something comparable to last version f16 )

Previously our leader gave same kind of order about Air defence system and navy ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Samak said:


> Finally , Supreme leader order our military and MoD to increase Iran military capability ...this become official , our Air force will revive ....
> 
> Now , we will either see A massive order of fighters from foreign country ( Su 30 )
> Or making real fighter jet ( at least something comparable to last version f16 )
> 
> Previously our leader gave same kind of order about Air defence system and navy ....


Offensive Capacity. Yes, it is the first time he talks about increasing offensive capacity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

IRIAF needs atleast 4 squadrons of a multirole 4.5 generation fighter. Whatever domestic projects has yielded out so far or will in future doesnt even matter because the dire need is there for aircover.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

drmeson said:


> IRIAF needs atleast 4 squadrons of a multirole 4.5 generation fighter. Whatever domestic projects has yielded out so far or will in future doesnt even matter because the dire need is there for aircover.


That's true. I think the Sukhu 30 procurement will answer the need to some extent.


----------



## Samak

Arminkh said:


> That's true. I think the Sukhu 30 procurement will answer the need to some extent.



I doubt Russians sell Su-30 to us in large number ( more than 60 fighters ) .... this government cant sign a fair deal to any foreign country ... they are basically naive ....


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> The point is not that its back wings are slanted. They have nothing to do with ground effect. They are slanted to prevent vibration at the tip of the wings and fatigue caused by the turbulence behind front canards (or wings in this case).
> 
> It is a tandem wing design where you have two main wings one at the front one at the back like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason one wing is above the other in most of tandem wing designs is for avoiding the same issue of turbulence that I mentioned above. In Q-313, geometry of the design didn't allow placing front and back wing on different levels so the the back wings are slanted.
> 
> In Q-313 front canards are almost the same size as the back wing, making it a tandem wing design which is one of the three ways of utilizing the ground effect.
> 
> And I do agree with the project manager that it is a new and unprecedented design for a war plane.
> 
> Ground effect works at an altitude up to 2 times the wing span. Judging by the pictures, in Q-313 case it should be less than 8m above ground to utilize the ground effect.
> 
> I'm confident I have red every singe expert comment and article on the web that you can find regarding Q-313 and what I told you above is my accumulative understanding.
> 
> So if they want to utilize the ground effect, they should figure out a way to keep it steady 5m above sea level. If it needs a fly by wire system for that so be it. That's what this bird is designed for.



Again I will repeat my original statement! The Q-313 is NOT by any means a ground effect vehicle! I'm sorry but you sound absurd when you keep on repeating it!

And every Tandem winged aircraft is not a Ground Effect Vehicle! My GOD!

And maybe you should 1st read what I wrote before commenting! I said the slanted wings will give the Aircraft greater stability! And your just repeating what I originally told you!











Every aircraft in the world utilizes ground effect and the degree of which depends on the wingspan but that doesn't make the F-313 a ground effect vehicle

The edge of the wings of the F313 is made to give it stability so the Aircraft wouldn't require an expensive fly by wire system and that blows your whole theory of the aircraft's capability to fly long distances 3-5 meters above seal level out of the water!

And as I told you the major powers of the world are now building helicopters capable of flying as fast as the F-313 which makes the production of such an aircraft absolutely ridicules


----------



## Aramagedon

Samak said:


> Single engine air craft are easier to design and produce and maintain , but I don't think making a single engine air craft with a jet engine like j85 is wise design ....
> 
> This will be even less useful than f5 ....
> 
> 
> Will they make q313 and fly it !?
> Yeah , q313 was an embracement for our Defence Industry , so at least they have to make it and fly it to shut up some mouth ....
> 
> Will Iran mass produce q313 !? IRAF won't Eve look at it , but IRGC will test it and then they will decide .....
> 
> At least I hope the first prototype of Q313 be different that mock up model
> 
> Anyway this CG pics of q313 that I found in web
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اگه قاهر ۳۱۳ بتونه به اهداف پروژه برسه ، باعث می شه ریسک حمله به ایران از طریق خلیج فارس برای تمامی اعراب خلیجی و آمریکا بالاتر بره و به صورت مستقیم امنیت ملی ما رو بالا تر ببره ‌....
> 
> به علاوه اگه ده تا کلیپ دو دقیقه ای ازش توی اینترنت پخش بشه باعث میشه اعتماد به نفس طراحان ما بیشتر بشه
> 
> شما یک بچه ی سیزده یا چهارده ساله ی ایرانی رو فرض کنید که کلیپ پرواز قاهر با ظاهر خاص و سینمایش ببینه ، تا آخر عمرش این کلیپ روش تاثیر می گذاره ، چه ایرانی باشه ، چه عرب یا حتی آمریکایی ....
> 
> پرواز قاهر حتی اگه از لحاظ نظامی ارزشی نداشته باشه ، ولی از لحاظ تبلیغاتی و روانی خیلی ارزش منده
> 
> 
> Don't underestimate power of propaganda , we did prevent USA invasion in bush era by simply big talk and exegerat about our ballistic missile power while we were so damn weak at that time ....
> 
> We saved our country by lunching the some missile as same time in show that famous clip to world and then talk big words .....


دقيقا. راه حمله به ايران از طريق درياست و مقامات جمهوري اسلامي اينو به خوبي ميدونن.



VEVAK said:


> Again I will repeat my original statement! The Q-313 is NOT by any means a ground effect vehicle! I'm sorry but you sound absurd when you keep on repeating it!
> 
> And every Tandem winged aircraft is not a Ground Effect Vehicle! My GOD!
> 
> And maybe you should 1st read what I wrote before commenting! I said the slanted wings will give the Aircraft greater stability! And your just repeating what I originally told you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every aircraft in the world utilizes ground effect and the degree of which depends on the wingspan but that doesn't make the F-313 a ground effect vehicle
> 
> The edge of the wings of the F313 is made to give it stability so the Aircraft wouldn't require an expensive fly by wire system and that blows your whole theory of the aircraft's capability to fly long distances 3-5 meters above seal level out of the water!
> 
> And as I told you the major powers of the world are now building helicopters capable of flying as fast as the F-313 which makes the production of such an aircraft absolutely ridicules


Q-313 IS A LIGHT SNAPPY AND 'CHEAP' AIRCRAFT TO PROTECT IRANIAN WARSHIPS IN PERSIAN GULF AND MAKRAN SEA.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Samak

انگلیس یک ناو هلیکوپتر بر و یک ناو تخصصی پدافند هوایی رو به خلیج فارس فرستاده ... 
انگار نقطه ی ضعف دولت فعلی (‌ترس از غرب و عافیت طلبی )‌رو حسابی درک کردند ، دیگه ول کن نیستند ...


----------



## VEVAK

Samak said:


> Finally , Supreme leader order our military and MoD to increase Iran military capacity ...this become official , our Air force will revive ....
> 
> Now , we will either see A massive order of fighters from foreign country ( Su 30 )
> Or making real fighter jet ( at least something comparable to last version f16 )
> 
> Previously our leader gave same kind of order about Air defence system and navy ....



Currently the order is for 48 Su-30's deliver to begin in 2019 at a rate of 12 per year but the U.S. does have the capability to block the delivery till 2021...

I believe the right thing for Iran to do at this time is to purchase 150-200 Su-30's to give it's self time to develop and lay the grounds to mass produce a 5th or 6th generation platform at a rate of 24 per year by 2040.

To spend billions on a fighter platform that doesn't have the following characteristics makes no sense at all:

1. Stealth design with internal weapons bay
2. Max speed of over Mach 1.8 with internal weapons
3. Combat radius +1000 km
4. 2D Thrust vectoring
5. Internal IRST
6. Internal Laser for Jamming IRST & incoming heat seeking missiles
7. Air Refueling capability
8. +40,000 Lbf of Thrust
9. Thrust to weight ratio of +1

U.S. has Stealth Fighter, China & Russia are working on theirs version
According to a Swedish Air Force commander the JAS 39 will be useless by 2020 so Saab is also working on a Stealth fighter.
India & Japan have both been working on a real project and countries like Turkey & S.Korea despite being F-35 buyers are also looking towards their own Stealth program!

While Iranian Air Force commanders have dug their heads in the sand and are just waiting around for someone to hand them something! And Iran's media is clearly incapable of being objective and glorifies a peace of junk like the Q-313.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

2800 said:


> دقيقا. راه حمله به ايران از طريق درياست و مقامات جمهوري اسلامي اينو به خوبي ميدونن.
> 
> 
> Q-313 IS A LIGHT SNAPPY AND 'CHEAP' AIRCRAFT TO PROTECT IRANIAN WARSHIPS IN PERSIAN GULF AND MAKRAN SEA.




Do you know how absurd that sounds? Protect them against what exactly????

F/A-18, F-15's or F-22's? A close supersonic flyby by any of those fighter will shatter the F-313 Airframe! So yes it's snappy as in it will snap in half by a simple sonic boom! (And no I don't mean that literally by the way)

And in terms of Anti Ship missiles take a good look and tell me if you think the Q-313 would be able to carry a single air born Ghadir missile!






And I know Iran has lighter air born Anti Ship missiles like the Nasr but that would require a slow moving Q-313 to get within 30km of the ship and even at low altitudes below the ships radar any country with an AWACS can pick it up and intercept it long before it could get within firing range


----------



## masud

it,s time to deal with Mikoyan design bureau. FOR co-development of 5th generation fighter....................


----------



## Aramagedon

VEVAK said:


> Currently the order is for 48 Su-30's deliver to begin in 2019 at a rate of 12 per year but the U.S. does have the capability to block the delivery till 2021...
> 
> I believe the right thing for Iran to do at this time is to purchase 150-200 Su-30's to give it's self time to develop and lay the grounds to mass produce a 5th or 6th generation platform at a rate of 24 per year by 2040.
> 
> To spend billions on a fighter platform that doesn't have the following characteristics makes no sense at all:
> 
> 1. Stealth design with internal weapons bay
> 2. Max speed of over Mach 1.8 with internal weapons
> 3. Combat radius +1000 km
> 4. 2D Thrust vectoring
> 6. Internal IRST
> 7. Internal Laser for Jamming IRST & incoming heat seeking missiles
> 8. Air Refueling capability
> 9. +40,000 Lbf of Thrust
> 10. Thrust to weight ratio of +1
> 
> U.S. has Stealth Fighter, China & Russia are working on theirs version
> According to a Swedish Air Force commander the JAS 39 will be useless by 2020 so Saab is also working on a Stealth fighter.
> India & Japan have both been working on a real project and countries like Turkey & S.Korea despite being F-35 buyers are also looking towards their own Stealth program!
> 
> While Iranian Air Force commanders have dug their heads in the sand and are just waiting around for someone to hand them something! And Iran's media is clearly incapable of being objective and glorifies a peace of junk like the Q-313.


Iran's military budget is little and investing to design and produce a 4++/5 gen fighter needs huge money which Iran doesn't have. moreover even if Iran had that money spending that huge money is just waste of money cause Iran right now has much more important jobs to do. Iran needs cheap and effective military products that's it. btw Iran has increased its missile power as much as possible and it is working on impermeable air defence to counter lack of having very strong air force. furthermore Iran can built Turbojet engines which is a massive step forward plus Iran might buy jet fighters from Russia in future, so be optimist.


----------



## VEVAK

2800 said:


> Iran's military budget is little and investing to design and produce a 4++/5 gen fighter needs huge money which Iran doesn't have. moreover even if Iran had that money spending that huge money is just waste of money cause Iran right now has much more important jobs to do. Iran needs cheap and effective military products that's it. btw Iran has increased its missile power as much as possible and it is working on impermeable air defence to counter lack of having very strong air force. furthermore Iran can built Turbojet engines which is a massive step forward plus Iran might buy jet fighters from Russia in future, so be optimist.



Iran's Military budget is set by Iran's government and Iran's government is one of the top 10 richest governments in the world and I'm not talking about GDP's! Government budget that comes from taxes, Oil, Gas, telecommunication and other government owned companies.... Iran for years stocked up it's money in foreign reserves and watched it get stolen when they could have invested in the country to create high tech jobs and work towards the development of a real fighter program so no money is by no means a issue it's an excuse!

Iran hasn't purchased modern fighter in over 35 years! So the excuse that we don't have money for a country like Iran is absolute nonsense and nothing but an excuse created by the IRGC in particular and it's nothing but utter nonsense.

Khoda nakoneh jang besheh joon only then will people like you realize that you can't substitute an Air Force with Air Defense system in a country the size of Iran whose terrain is made up of 60% mountains and once take down your Air Defense you have nothing to protect your missiles and facilities that develop them

Take a good look at Syria! If it wasn't because of Russian Air Power things would have been a whole lot differently! 
Without an Air Force, Air Defense Systems can be Jammed, overwhelmed and taken out and once that goes all your missiles become noting but target practice.

Iran-Iraq war proved that in a country the size of Iran light and cheep fighters like the F-5 are practically useless and you want Iran to build a fighter that's lighter and cheaper than the F-5! My God!

If it wasn't because of Iran's Air Force Iran would have lost the war within a year! And if it wasn't because Iran's inability to properly maintain and equip it's Air Force Iran could have destroyed Iraq within a year!

Conclusion: Producing a heavy and advanced Iranian stealth fighter should be one of Iran's top priorities! A $30-$50 Billion USD program to last Iran for generations, give it self sufficiency & who knows maybe even make some money off of it!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

VEVAK said:


> Do you know how absurd that sounds? Protect them against what exactly????
> 
> F/A-18, F-15's or F-22's? A close supersonic flyby by any of those fighter will shatter the F-313 Airframe! So yes it's snappy as in it will snap in half by a simple sonic boom! (And no I don't mean that literally by the way)
> 
> And in terms of Anti Ship missiles take a good look and tell me if you think the Q-313 would be able to carry a single air born Ghadir missile!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I know Iran has lighter air born Anti Ship missiles like the Nasr but that would require a slow moving Q-313 to get within 30km of the ship and even at low altitudes below the ships radar any country with an AWACS can pick it up and intercept it long before it could get within firing range


Let's wait for Qaher then we will talk about it.


VEVAK said:


> Iran's Military budget is set by Iran's government and Iran's government is one of the top 10 richest governments in the world and I'm not talking about GDP's! Government budget that comes from taxes, Oil, Gas, telecommunication and other government owned companies.... Iran for years stocked up it's money in foreign reserves and watched it get stolen when they could have invested in the country to create high tech jobs and work towards the development of a real fighter program so no money is by no means a issue it's an excuse!
> 
> Iran hasn't purchased modern fighter in over 35 years! So the excuse that we don't have money for a country like Iran is absolute nonsense and nothing but an excuse created by the IRGC in particular and it's nothing but utter nonsense.
> 
> Khoda nakoneh jang besheh joon only then will people like you realize that you can't substitute an Air Force with Air Defense system in a country the size of Iran whose terrain is made up of 60% mountains and once take down your Air Defense you have nothing to protect your missiles and facilities that develop them
> 
> Take a good look at Syria! If it wasn't because of Russian Air Power things would have been a whole lot differently!
> Without an Air Force, Air Defense Systems can be Jammed, overwhelmed and taken out and once that goes all your missiles become noting but target practice.
> 
> Iran-Iraq war proved that in a country the size of Iran light and cheep fighters like the F-5 are practically useless and you want Iran to build a fighter that's lighter and cheaper than the F-5! My God!
> 
> If it wasn't because of Iran's Air Force Iran would have lost the war within a year! And if it wasn't because Iran's inability to properly maintain and equip it's Air Force Iran could have destroyed Iraq within a year!
> 
> Conclusion: Producing a heavy and advanced Iranian stealth fighter should be one of Iran's top priorities! A $30-$50 Billion USD program to last Iran for generations, give it self sufficiency & who knows maybe even make some money off of it!


----------



## VEVAK

2800 said:


> Let's wait for Qaher then we will talk about it.




Magheh nashneedee? F-313 ro namayee shodeh maket nabood khod e khodesh bood!!! So there is nothing to wait for!

*http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13911124000700*

** قاهر رونمایی شده ماکت نبود
*
مدیر پروژه قاهر در پاسخ به این سوال که آیا نمونه رونمایی شده با توجه به نصب نبودن بسیاری از تجهیزات آن، یک نمونه واقعی بود یا مدل (ماک آپ)، گفت: نمونه ای که نمایش داده شد، نمونه اصلی بود که بزودی وارد مرحله تست های پروازی می‌شود و در خصوص نصب تجهیزات نیز لزومی نداشت تا ما در این
مرحله، تجهیزات کامل را بر روی بدنه آن نصب کنیم


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Again I will repeat my original statement! The Q-313 is NOT by any means a ground effect vehicle! I'm sorry but you sound absurd when you keep on repeating it!
> 
> And every Tandem winged aircraft is not a Ground Effect Vehicle! My GOD!
> 
> And maybe you should 1st read what I wrote before commenting! I said the slanted wings will give the Aircraft greater stability! And your just repeating what I originally told you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every aircraft in the world utilizes ground effect and the degree of which depends on the wingspan but that doesn't make the F-313 a ground effect vehicle
> 
> The edge of the wings of the F313 is made to give it stability so the Aircraft wouldn't require an expensive fly by wire system and that blows your whole theory of the aircraft's capability to fly long distances 3-5 meters above seal level out of the water!
> 
> And as I told you the major powers of the world are now building helicopters capable of flying as fast as the F-313 which makes the production of such an aircraft absolutely ridicules


Ok, you seem to know more than anyone else about Q-313 even more than its project manager (and you even know how fast it is going to fly just by looking at it! wow! ).Good for you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Ok, you seem to know more than anyone else about Q-313 even more than its project manager (and you even know how fast it is going to fly just by looking at it! wow! ).Good for you.



If the Q-313 Project Manager knew anything then he would have never approved the design! Unless the whole point was to steal money because If he is claiming that the version they showed is the real deal then yes that Aircraft with the engine it has will never reach 435 MPH

The Air intake are big enough to accommodate 1 J-85 at best combined with the thickness of the wings and the fuselage design and that aircraft will not reach 700 kph (435MPH) I doubt it can even reach 350 MPH

If he is saying the Aircraft they showed was the real thing and not a mock up then someone stole a lot of money for this project!

Did you even read the entire article? He is basically claiming that the aircraft has thrust vectoring and an internal weapons bay not to mention that the one they showed was the real deal! SO YES I KNOW MORE THAN THAT GHALTAGH!

Put your hopes on something else because that Q-313 is junk! This could just be a blurry picture but I know they are still playing around with the F-5 design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> If the Q-313 Project Manager knew anything then he would have never approved the design! Unless the whole point was to steal money because If he is claiming that the version they showed is the real deal then yes that Aircraft with the engine it has will never reach 435 MPH
> 
> The Air intake are big enough to accommodate 1 J-85 at best combined with the thickness of the wings and the fuselage design and that aircraft will not reach 700 kph (435MPH) I doubt it can even reach 350 MPH
> 
> If he is saying the Aircraft they showed was the real thing and not a mock up then someone stole a lot of money for this project!
> 
> Did you even read the entire article? He is basically claiming that the aircraft has thrust vectoring and an internal weapons bay not to mention that the one they showed was the real deal! SO YES I KNOW MORE THAN THAT GHALTAGH!
> 
> Put your hopes on something else because that Q-313 is junk! This could just be a blurry picture but I know they are still playing around with the F-5 design
> 
> View attachment 332302


the only junk here is your baseless theories about Q313, and hopefully time will prove it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## f1000n

Any new pics of IL-76's


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> the only junk here is your baseless theories about Q313, and hopefully time will prove it.


Bla bla ba!!! Time will truly tell!!!

As I said keep your hopes on other variants of the Saegheh if the tests go well the next one will have it's wings over the inlets with a larger dome















this is the old Saegheh but the angle give you a look into what it may look like or is it? zoom in

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Bla bla ba!!! Time will truly tell!!!
> 
> As I said keep your hopes on other variants of the Saegheh if the tests go well the next one will have it's wings over the inlets with a larger dome


Yeah, I keep my hope on the final goal in Qaher project and that's what defense minister said, an stealth interceptor.

Saeqe is Saeqe, whether with up or down inlets.


----------



## SOHEIL

VEVAK said:


> Bla bla ba!!! Time will truly tell!!!
> 
> As I said keep your hopes on other variants of the Saegheh if the tests go well the next one will have it's wings over the inlets with a larger dome
> 
> View attachment 334366
> View attachment 334367
> View attachment 334368
> View attachment 334369
> 
> 
> this is the old Saegheh but the angle give you a look into what it may look like or is it? zoom in



https://defence.pk/threads/iran-tests-a-saegheh-shafagh-hybrid-in-wind-tunnel.447816/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Yeah, I keep my hope on the final goal in Qaher project and that's what defense minister said, an stealth interceptor.
> 
> Saeqe is Saeqe, whether with up or down inlets.



I can't help you! you are truly too far gone! Main characteristics of an interceptor is speed and the ability to fire BVR missiles!

Qaher is a cheep subsonic platform!

And according to your own source the one they showed was the main one and not a mock up!

Until Iran has the ability to produce a more advanced engine it can not produce a platform that much more superior than the Saegheh / F-5E design

I feel like I'm talking to a little baby and trying to take his lollypop away by telling him I know it tastes good but it's not good for you!

and just like that lollypop I know the Q-313 looks nice but it's not a good aircraft and it is not good for Iran to pursue and Iranian Engineers and Air Force personal know this!!! And if you were truly listening and looking at Dehghans body language in the 1st interview where the Q-313 was brought up you would understand that the Q-313 is an aircraft that Iran has absolutely no intention of producing & yes at best they will probably build one just to prove that it can fly but it will not go beyond that!

Do you know how many aircraft's the U.S. designed and built before they got it right? As the test pilot for the Saegheh said not every platform is meant to be a success what matters is that you build them and you learn what to do and what not to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> I can't help you! you are truly too far gone! Main characteristics of an interceptor is speed and the ability to fire BVR missiles!
> 
> Qaher is a cheep subsonic platform!
> 
> And according to your own source the one they showed was the main one and not a mock up!
> 
> Until Iran has the ability to produce a more advanced engine it can not produce a platform that much more superior than the Saegheh / F-5E design
> 
> I feel like I'm talking to a little baby and trying to take his lollypop away by telling him I know it tastes good but it's not good for you!
> 
> and just like that lollypop I know the Q-313 looks nice but it's not a good aircraft and it is not good for Iran to pursue and Iranian Engineers and Air Force personal know this!!! And if you were truly listening and looking at Dehghans body language in the 1st interview where the Q-313 was brought up you would understand that the Q-313 is an aircraft that Iran has absolutely no intention of producing & yes at best they will probably build one just to prove that it can fly but it will not go beyond that!
> 
> Do you know how many aircraft's the U.S. designed and built before they got it right? As the test pilot for the Saegheh said not every platform is meant to be a success what matters is that you build them and you learn what to do and what not to do.


as long as I can listen to their voice, I wont need body language.
Yes, Qaher will need an advanced engine to become an interceptor, and that's why Dehghan said it's a close combat support in the first phase and an interceptor in the next phases. which part of it you don't understand?!

It's better to gradually improve a platform, rather than spending time and money to design and build different ones.


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> as long as I can listen to their voice, I wont need body language.
> Yes, Qaher will need an advanced engine to become an interceptor, and that's why Dehghan said it's a close combat support in the first phase and an interceptor in the next phases. which part of this sentence you don't understand?!
> 
> It's better to gradually improve a platform, rather than spending time and money to design and build different ones.



Go 21:40 into the video





Between 21:50 - 21:55

He states that we built a working prototype and chose not to pursue it! If you understood Farsi you would understand that!
And he continues by clearly implying that the Saegheh & Kowsar 88 are superior

But he doesn't kill hope!!! Politely says that he spoke to the Qhaher project manager we have to reconsider some of the characteristics of the Qaher & after the Kowsar 88 project is completed we will restart R&D in a revised version of the Q-313

Basically he told the F-313 project manager you have until the end of the Kowsar 88 project to bring me a new design of the Qaher that has the potential of being superior to the Saegheh & I will give you the R&D funds, tools a facilities to build a prototype! 

But the F-313 that you have a picture of with those wings and that shape is dead because it's been tested and rejected. and a more powerful engine is not going to solve the issue and he has till the end of the Kowsar 88 project to come up with a design that the DIO will investigate and decide whether to fund or not as it should be


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Go 21:40 into the video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Between 21:50 - 21:55
> 
> He states that we built a working prototype and chose not to pursue it! If you understood Farsi you would understand that!
> And he continues by clearly implying that the Saegheh & Kowsar 88 are superior
> 
> But he doesn't kill hope!!! Politely says that he spoke to the Qhaher project manager we have to reconsider some of the characteristics of the Qaher & after the Kowsar 88 project is completed we will restart R&D in a revised version of the Q-313
> 
> Basically he told the F-313 project manager you have until the end of the Kowsar 88 project to bring me a new design of the Qaher that has the potential of being superior to the Saegheh & I will give you the R&D funds, tools a facilities to build a prototype!
> 
> But the F-313 that you have a picture of with those wings and that shape is dead because it's been tested and rejected. and a more powerful engine is not going to solve the issue and he has till the end of the Kowsar 88 project to come up with a design that the DIO will investigate and decide whether to fund or not as it should be


and that's where I doubt whether you talk persian!

full translation:
Host asks about Saege.
Dehghan:
Saege was produced and was delivered to air force.

host insists and asks about a more advanced version of Saeqe:

Dehghan:
*look, that aircraft (project) is over*, has been delivered to airforce, and is operational.
about Qaher, a conceptual and engineer design has been done and a *sample *was built (nothing about a working prototype),
*yet we didn't continue it, the reason was* that we had Saeqe, plus Kowthar 88 (project) which is a transonic training aircraft; we put it in our agenda to finish it first *to cover the airforce training needs*. then we go toward Qaher which could be a close (combat) support aircraft, and later in future versions could be an interceptor, a bomber, etc,
and today I talked with Mr Shah Safi (the chief commander of airforce, not the project manager) to reconsider some of its features (so nothing about which version, temporary or constant or custom ver, upgrade or downgrade), god willing after kowthar88 reached production phase, we will put the Qaher's R&D in our agenda.

so it's clear either you don't understand Persian or you just live in your delusion.

your argument about Qaher 313 is so childish and baseless that I really have to push myself to answer them. some like the place of inlet, the shape of wings, etc.
an interceptor doesn't necessary need to be dog fight capable (though they say Qaher has it), look at Mig 25 for example. also our country isn't that big and if we can use Qaher as a point defense then the whole speed argument will become irrelevant.

a mach 3 monster, look at its wings:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> and that's where I doubt whether you talk persian!
> 
> full translation:
> Host asks about Saege.
> Dehghan:
> Saege was produced and was delivered to air force.
> 
> host insists and asks about a more advanced version of Saeqe:
> 
> Dehghan:
> *look, that aircraft (project) is over*, has been delivered to airforce, and is operational.
> about Qaher, a conceptual and engineer design has been done and a *sample *was built (nothing about a working prototype),
> *yet we didn't continue it, the reason was* that we had Saeqe, plus Kowthar 88 (project) which is a transonic training aircraft; we put it in our agenda to finish it first *to cover the airforce training needs*. then we go toward Qaher which could be a close (combat) support aircraft, and later in future versions could be an interceptor, a bomber, etc,
> and today I talked with Mr Shah Safi (the chief commander of airforce, not the project manager) to reconsider some of its features (so nothing about which version, temporary or constant or custom ver, upgrade or downgrade), god willing after kowthar88 reached production phase, we will put the Qaher's R&D in our agenda.
> 
> so it's clear either you don't understand Persian or you just live in your delusion.
> 
> your argument about Qaher 313 is so childish and baseless that I really have to push myself to answer them. some like the place of inlet, the shape of wings, etc.
> an interceptor doesn't necessary need to be dog fight capable (though they say Qaher has it), look at Mig 25 for example. also our country isn't that big and if we can use Qaher as a point defense then the whole speed argument will become irrelevant.
> 
> a mach 3 monster, look at its wings:




I'm talking about the thickness of the wing and it's fuselage

XFV-12 was Mach 2+ aircraft and needed max thrust of 30,000 lbf to get there so it's possible but needs to be redesigned








mohsen said:


> and that's where I doubt whether you talk persian!
> 
> full translation:
> Host asks about Saege.
> Dehghan:
> Saege was produced and was delivered to air force.
> 
> host insists and asks about a more advanced version of Saeqe:
> 
> Dehghan:
> *look, that aircraft (project) is over*, has been delivered to airforce, and is operational.
> about Qaher, a conceptual and engineer design has been done and a *sample *was built (nothing about a working prototype),
> *yet we didn't continue it, the reason was* that we had Saeqe, plus Kowthar 88 (project) which is a transonic training aircraft; we put it in our agenda to finish it first *to cover the airforce training needs*. then we go toward Qaher which could be a close (combat) support aircraft, and later in future versions could be an interceptor, a bomber, etc,
> and today I talked with Mr Shah Safi (the chief commander of airforce, not the project manager) to reconsider some of its features (so nothing about which version, temporary or constant or custom ver, upgrade or downgrade), god willing after kowthar88 reached production phase, we will put the Qaher's R&D in our agenda.
> 
> so it's clear either you don't understand Persian or you just live in your delusion.
> 
> your argument about Qaher 313 is so childish and baseless that I really have to push myself to answer them. some like the place of inlet, the shape of wings, etc.
> an interceptor doesn't necessary need to be dog fight capable (though they say Qaher has it), look at Mig 25 for example. also our country isn't that big and if we can use Qaher as a point defense then the whole speed argument will become irrelevant.
> 
> a mach 3 monster, look at its wings:



Because a new design wouldn't be called Saegheh anymore or else the Saegheh should just be called Azarakhsh

And I didn't do a word for world translation

Yek nemoneh as on sakhteh shood = a working prototype

Khodeto mekhay khar koni, befarma.... vali hagheegat ean e

nemoneh sakhteh shod vali ma on o edameh nadodeem daleelesh ham hast Saegheh (yeh maks kard Hint Saegheh is far superior so why the hell would we) kowsar 88 keh soratehsham kheyli balla has... (Hint the F-313 was too slow)

Agheh vaghean to farsi balad bodi manzoresho mefahmeedi

akharesh ya khari o ya fahmeh dark kardaneh harf a sho nadari!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

The testing was no more negative than any other experimental aircraft program BUT the real reason the Navy cancelled was the lack of armament capabilities.

They slanted the wings on the XFV-12 to reduce wing size because they wanted VTOL aircraft

Go read a little about how the speed of sound was broken and you will understand why the F-313 will need major changes to go subsonic

The aircraft had greater than 1 weight to thrust ratio and it still couldn't takeoff vertically

Putting slanted wings is a mistake and I'm not talking about the edge of the wings

The F-313 is a light single engine aircraft with 2 Vertical Stabilizers in the back and 2 slanted stabilizers on the edge of the wings add to the slanted wings this all increases drag for no reason

B-70A and the edge of the wings on the B-70 are like that for whole another reason

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> I'm talking about the thickness of the wing and it's fuselage
> 
> XFV-12 was Mach 2+ aircraft and needed max thrust of 30,000 lbf to get there so it's possible but needs to be redesigned
> 
> View attachment 334762
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because a new design wouldn't be called Saegheh anymore or else the Saegheh should just be called Azarakhsh
> 
> And I didn't do a word for world translation
> 
> Yek nemoneh as on sakhteh shood = a working prototype
> 
> Khodeto mekhay khar koni, befarma.... vali hagheegat ean e
> 
> nemoneh sakhteh shod vali ma on o edameh nadodeem daleelesh ham hast Saegheh (yeh maks kard Hint Saegheh is far superior so why the hell would we) kowsar 88 keh soratehsham kheyli balla has... (Hint the F-313 was too slow)
> 
> Agheh vaghean to farsi balad bodi manzoresho mefahmeedi
> 
> akharesh ya khari o ya fahmeh dark kardaneh harf a sho nadari!


Dehghan said sample, and if you translate it to prototype, still it doesn't mean a working prototype.
you just love to troll on Qaher 313 subject, even by making lies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype

Qaher's wings are fine, thickness, size and shape. but of course you know a lot more than our engineers, they had to hire your smart arse to understand how to design a fighter!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Iran can redesign the F-313 around 2 powerful engines far better designed than this and give it stealth characteristics BUT

1. Wings shouldn't be slanted

2. remove the edge of the wings because fixed slanted wings at the angle that they are will cause the aircraft to shake just like the F-4 does at supersonic speeds

2. increase the angle of the wing

3. reduce the thickness of the wings

4. Replace the front wings to canards again if you don't this will cause the aircraft to shake at supersonic speeds

5. You need bigger inlets for bigger engines and a more aerodynamic body



mohsen said:


> Dehghan said sample, and if you translate it to prototype, still it doesn't mean a working prototype.
> you just love to troll on Qaher 313 subject, even by making lies.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype
> 
> Qaher's wings are fine, thickness, size and shape. but of course you know a lot more than our engineers, they had to hire your smart arse to understand how to design a fighter!



Again go read about how the speed of sound was broken!!!

Even your own source the project manager said in the link you posted that it was not a mockup but the real thing!!!

Ya mekhay beh zoor khodeto khar koni, ya mekhay to ean site chosi beyay ya vagheann khari!!!

Dehghan also said bayad dar bareh bazi az vejegee hash tajdeedeh nazar koneem va bad as ean keh Kowsar 88 beh toleed reseed bad on o to kar ha """tahgheeghati va pajoheshe mebareem""" 

So they have to fix the design bad DIO will do some tahgheeghat on it!!! SO we will not produce this version you have a picture of!!! Get that through your head!!!


----------



## OldTwilight

do you want that our Defense Ministry appoint you as Qaher Project manager and head designer !? 
most of us are ordinary people who are wasting their times in a military forum rather than telegram ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

Iran obv has the money for very good fighter jets. its not an issue of money. Main issue is access, quality and reliability of the potentially new purchases.


----------



## rahi2357

Guys end the fight over Q-313 . Our Defense Minister said IRIAF rejected it but IRGC wants a flyable 1:1 prototype . So we are not going to see it in IRIAF . As simple as that .

Some photos of old times.
F-16 prototype & Iran's flag















Our air force started with this















Once upon a time F-14

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rukarl

@VEVAK 

Could you give an explanation of the different grades of Titanium etc and composites Iran needs and what is the difficulty in producing them in lab scale and mass producing. What stage is Iran at?

Not long ago their revealed the vacuum arc remelting etc, this is surely a good news. I hope to see bigger versions of those.


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> do you want that our Defense Ministry appoint you as Qaher Project manager and head designer !?
> most of us are ordinary people who are wasting their times in a military forum rather than telegram ...



I promise you if I was the head of that project and I had access to the facilities, materials, tools and personal required I could have easily developed an Airframe for a fighter jet platform far superior to the Q-313, Saegheh, Shafaq, F-4E, F-1, Su-24 & F-7 and I'm willing to bet my life on it accept to be mamoueel khoroj for life and if I was not able to preform as advertised with a working prototype within 6 years they are fully free to execute as long as they adhere to my requirements for the project. 

1. The fighter will have to be a twin engine aircraft with a combined max thrust of +23k lbf dry / +35,000 lbf with afterburner and they will have to provide me the engines. RD-33 should do I can work with J-79 but it will cost them range
2.Access to all the materials, tools & personal I would require that's already available in Iran.
3.Access to any already available equipment & part I would require from ejection seats to any other aircraft part or equipment already available in Iran for the full scare prototype.

Even with 2 OWJ engines I can easily build an airframe that has a smaller RCS than the Saegheh and is faster than the F-313 and capable of carrying up to 3 weapons internally the aircraft would be a bit slower than the saegheh but will have a greater combat radius and the airframe's titanium requirements will be under 1500 lb using the same type of aluminum /Titanium composite they used in the saegheh



Rukarl said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Could you give an explanation of the different grades of Titanium etc and composites Iran needs and what is the difficulty in producing them in lab scale and mass producing. What stage is Iran at?
> 
> Not long ago their revealed the vacuum arc remelting etc, this is surely a good news. I hope to see bigger versions of those.



_https://books.google.com/books?isbn=161503062X_


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> I promise you if I was the head of that project and I had access to the facilities, materials, tools and personal required I could have easily developed an Airframe for a fighter jet platform far superior to the Q-313, Saegheh, Shafaq, F-4E, F-1, Su-24 & F-7 and I'm willing to bet my life on it accept to be mamoueel khoroj for life and if I was not able to preform as advertised with a working prototype within 6 years they are fully free to execute as long as they adhere to my requirements for the project.
> 
> 1. The fighter will have to be a twin engine aircraft with a combined max thrust of +23k lbf dry / +35,000 lbf with afterburner and they will have to provide me the engines. RD-33 should do I can work with J-79 but it will cost them range
> 2.Access to all the materials, tools & personal I would require that's already available in Iran.
> 3.Access to any already available equipment & part I would require from ejection seats to any other aircraft part or equipment already available in Iran for the full scare prototype.
> 
> Even with 2 OWJ engines I can easily build an airframe that has a smaller RCS than the Saegheh and is faster than the F-313 and capable of carrying up to 3 weapons internally the aircraft would be a bit slower than the saegheh but will have a greater combat radius and the airframe's titanium requirements will be under 1500 lb using the same type of aluminum /Titanium composite they used in the saegheh
> 
> 
> 
> _https://books.google.com/books?isbn=161503062X_


Like I said they just didn't have you!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

@Rukarl 

Read this book
_https://books.google.com/books?isbn=161503062X
_
Titanium or black sand is one of the top 10 most abundant materials in the world it looks like black sand and Iran has a lot of it but turning it into alloy is extremely difficult and expensive you basically have to 1st turn it into gas form (mixed with chlorine) and then extract the chlorine from that and turn in into titanium sponge and then there is another process to turn it into alloy

You also need magnesium which is also expensive

Also producing titanium and aluminum both require a lot of electricity and also there are different titanium aluminum composites that will also be required in producing a fighter and they are also extremely expensive to produce
The titanium used in the F-5 is mostly in the Aluminum titanium composite required in the airframe

the difference in being able to produce it in a lab va industrial production is basically the difference of enriching uranium using 1 centrifuge in a lab vs having 100,000 centrifuges to meet the needs of a country the size of Iran (This is just an example)

Also working with titanium is extremely difficult and expensive you also need to do heat treatments and the larger the part the harder it is to work with for large parts you need massive vacuum furnaces

It's an extremely expensive process that requires advanced and expensive tools








mohsen said:


> Like I said they just didn't have you!



Has nothing to do with me! I know Iranian personally that could do a far better job that I ever could both in management and design!!

In fact the aircraft with 2 OWJ engines I was talking about is one of their designs...

The problem we have is in party bazi games that give jobs to people that don't deserve it.


----------



## Darkman

https://defence.pk/threads/boeing-saab-to-unveil-their-t-x-design-today.449150/page-2#post-8692242


----------



## The SiLent crY

One of the most memorable moments of my military service happened 2 days ago when I was in the 8th Raptor airbase .

I saw an F-14 taking off in front of me from like 100 meters distance . It was outstanding .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*بالگرد ( بل ) 412 ساخت پنها *
*



*



از 6 فروند بالگرد جدید جمعیت هلال‌احمر رونمایی شد
صبح امروز و با حضور معاون اول رئیس جمهوری، وزیر بهداشت، درمان و آموزش پزشکی، معاون علمی و فناوری رئیس جمهوری، رئیس جمعیت هلال احمر و دیگر مسئولان ارشد جمعیت از 6 فروند بالگرد جدید هلال‌احمر رونمایی شد.
به گزارش گروه اجتماعی خبرگزاری آنا از جمعیت هلال احمر، صبح امروز در مراسمی با حضور اسحاق جهانگیری؛ معاون اول رئیس‌جمهوری، حسن هاشمی؛ وزیر بهداشت، درمان و آموزش پزشکی، سورنا ستاری؛ معاون علمی و فناوری رئیس جمهوری، امیر محسن ضیائی؛ رئیس جمعیت هلال احمر و حجت الاسلام و المسلمین معزی؛ نماینده مقام معظم رهبری در هلال‌احمر و دیگر مسئولان جمعیت، مراسم رونمایی از 6 فروند بالگرد جدید 412 ای. پی در سازمان امداد و نجات جمعیت برگزار شد.
با اضافه شدن این 6 فروند بالگرد، ناوگان امداد هوایی به 23 فروند بالگرد مجهز شد.
همچنین اسحاق جهانگیری در آیین رونمایی از 6 فروند بالگرد امدادی هلال احمر فرمان پرواز این بالگردها را صادر کرد.

وی در این فرمان اظهار کرد: با استعانت از ارواح پاک شهدای اسلام، فرمان پرواز بالگردهای امدادی هلال احمر صادر می‌شود امیدوارم با ورود این 6 فروند بالگرد امدادی به ناوگان امداد هوایی کشور جمعیت هلال احمر بیش از گذشته در خدمت به مردم و ایران اسلامی و همچنین افراد در سایر مناطق بکوشیم

http://new.ana.ir/news/147731

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Iran IRCS received 3 PANHA 412EP class helicopter twin engines&four propellersبالگرد ۴۱۲ ای. پی پنها

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

What happened to P-1 !?


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> Iran IRCS received 3 PANHA 412EP class helicopter twin engines&four propellersبالگرد ۴۱۲ ای. پی پنها



made in iran? or just overhauled and upgraded augusta company product?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> made in iran? or just overhauled and upgraded augusta company product?


fully Iran made . engines propellers fuel tank body avunice electronic everything

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> made in iran? or just overhauled and upgraded augusta company product?



412 is a bell product not augusta !


----------



## Skull and Bones

Iran buying/making any new platforms?


----------



## Penguin

SOHEIL said:


> 412 is a bell product not augusta !


Over 700 Model 412s have been built (including 260 by AgustaWestland)


----------



## SOHEIL

Penguin said:


> Over 700 Model 412s have been built (including 260 by AgustaWestland)



Originally designed & manufactured by bell ... License production is another story !



yavar said:


> fully Iran made . engines propellers fuel tank body avunice electronic everything



What happened to P-1 !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> What happened to P-1 !?


بالگرد تهاجمی اماده است ولی در مورد
P1
چیزی نمیشه گفت

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> بالگرد تهاجمی اماده است ولی در مورد
> P1
> چیزی نمیشه گفت



شاهد 216 دو تا موتور تی وی 3 داره

تیغه اصلی 5 پره هست

متاسفانه اسکید بجای چرخ

پی 1 هم احتمالا کنسل شده


----------



## Penguin

SOHEIL said:


> Originally designed & manufactured by bell ... License production is another story !





> Agusta-Bell AB 412EP
> Italian-built version of the Bell 412EP
> Panha 412EP
> Iranian domestically reverse-engineered version of AB 412EP, which has been in use with Iranian military.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_412#Operators


This is incorrect then?
Note Iran is not listed here or with 212 as operator. It IS listed as operator of UH1-N Twin Huey.



> Agusta-Bell AB 212ASW
> Anti-submarine warfare, anti-shipping version of the AB 212 helicopter, built under license in Italy by Agusta. Operated by the Italian Navy, Hellenic Navy and Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, Peru, Spain, Turkey, and Venezuela.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran
> 
> Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force
> Islamic Republic of Iran Army (Army Aviation)
> Islamic Republic of Iran Navy (Navy Aviation) (AB 212)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_UH-1N_Twin_Huey#Operators

I don't think BELL came up with a naval version of the Twin Huey....

Sipri lists Italy as supplier of 20 AB-212 ASW helicopter, ordered 1974, delivered 1976-1979.

From the US came:
11 Bell-212/UH-1N Helicopter (1970) 1970-1971 
296 Bell-214A Helicopter (1972) 1975-1978
39 Bell-214C Helicopter (1976) 1976-1978 SAR version


----------



## yavar

*ششمین رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فدائیان حریم ولایتIran IRIAF sixth "Eghtedar Harim Velayat" air exercises*





ششمین رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فدائیان حریم ولایت
اهداف و ویژگی‌های رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فدائیان حریم ولایت نیروی هوایی تشریح شد
http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13950725001612

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIAF sixth "Eghtedar Harim Velayat" air exercises Phase oneششمین رزمایش فدائیان حریم ولایت*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIAF 6th Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary wargame, Phase Twoششمین رزمایش فدائیان حریم ولایت*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

IRIAF Boeing 707 ELINT

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran IRIAF 6th Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary wargame, Phase Twoششمین رزمایش فدائیان حریم ولایت

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran IRIAF 6th Devotees of the Velayat Sanctuary wargame, Phase Threeششمین رزمایش فدائیان حریم ولایت

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar




----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ashool

*saba 248
*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## raptor22

yavar said:


>


Was unveiled before :

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ashool

*saba 248 so beauty 
*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aryzin

Why does the tail state DAUPHIN 2 ?


----------



## SOHEIL

ashool said:


> *saba 248 so beauty *



Eurocopter dauphin

Saba 248 pictures posted in forum


----------



## Aryzin

Sure this is not a French helicopter?

Ok thanks


----------



## SOHEIL

ashool said:


> *saba 248*



Take a look at tail section !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

she is new generation in building choper with new landing gear and some stealth in it





*its airshow in kish 2016 panha industry maid in iran look at those landing gear its not rail
*


----------



## SOHEIL

ashool said:


> she is new generation in building choper with new landing gear and some stealth in it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *its airshow in kish 2016 panha industry maid in iran look at those landing gear its not rail*


----------



## scimitar19

SOHEIL said:


> Take a look at tail section !













scimitar19 said:


>


----------



## AmirPatriot

scimitar19 said:


> View attachment 354134
> View attachment 354135


Fenestron tails are nothing new... I think Soheil was referring to the "dauphin 2" written on the tail. Thats a eurocopter, not saba 248.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

in iran this type tail and landing gear (cycle) is new . i dont mean other country in iran all of chopper is with rail but this one is not and its very good job and of course tail

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

ashool said:


> in iran this type tail and landing gear (cycle) is new . i dont mean other country in iran all of chopper is with rail but this one is not and its very good job and of course tail



It's not Iranian !!!


----------



## ashool

why you say its not made by iran






its in pahna room left to right shahed 278 shahed 412 and red one saba but they dont unviling it maybe its not complet yet but its saba





they are always do that first show something and after that unviling it
*به‌زودی؛ رونمایی از تانک پیشرفته کرار و بالگرد صبا مشرق*


----------



## SOHEIL

ashool said:


> why you say its not made by iran
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its in pahna room left to right shahed 278 shahed 412 and red one saba but they dont unviling it maybe its not complet yet but its saba
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they are always do that first show something and after that unviling it
> *به‌زودی؛ رونمایی از تانک پیشرفته کرار و بالگرد صبا مشرق*



@Serpentine 

Troll alert


----------



## ashool

but maybe not complete

plz maybe master can explain that dont say no and not have reason


----------



## AmirPatriot

ashool said:


> but maybe not complete
> 
> plz maybe master can explain that dont say no and not have reason



It literally says on the back of the red helicopter "dauphin 2". That's not Iranian, it's a French Eurocopter Dauphin!


----------



## Windjammer

A top Iranian military official meets Air Chief of the Pakistan Air force on the sidelines of IDEAS 2016 defence exhibition in Karachi, Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran to buy new fighter jets to boost defense capabilities: Senior commander*

Wed Nov 23, 2016 4:15PM





File photo shows a MiG-29 fighter jet operated by Iranian Army's Air Force.
Iran plans to purchase new fighter jets to boost the country’s air defense capabilities, a senior Iranian commander says.

Talks have been held on the purchase of new aircraft, Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Pourdastan, the second-in-command of the Iranian Army, told reporters on Wednesday.

He, however, did not provide details on the type of aircraft or their country of origin.

Pourdastan (seen below) also said that the fighter jets of Iran’s Air Force "have been overhauled and are ready to defend the country and counter any threats."






The senior commander highlighted Iran’s plan to employ domestic capacities to reinforce its defense capabilities, particularly air combat readiness, adding that the Islamic Republic manufactures new military hardware in proportion to the potential threats facing the country.

In recent years, Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing important military equipment and systems.

The Islamic Republic has repeatedly assured other countries that its military might poses no threat to other states, saying that its defense doctrine is entirely based on deterrence.

Last week, Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said the country was set to unveil a new domestically-manufactured helicopter and an advanced tank in the near future.

Dehqan said on November 16 that the Saba-248 helicopter and the Karrar tank would be soon unveiled.

He added that the newly-developed military hardware was designed and manufactured by local experts at the Iranian Defense Ministry in cooperation with science and research centers as well as knowledge-based enterprises in the country.

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/11/23/494855/Iran-military-equipment-fighter-jet-Pourdastan






Anti Saudi15 hours ago
In 8 years from now Iran will have unrivalled Air power in the middle east that will happen! go Iran
Reply

+0
-0






Ahmad19 hours ago
buy both Russian SU34 and Chinese The Chengdu J-20. Long Live Iran!
Reply

+0
-0






Guttan21 hour ago
The ingenuity of Iranian technologists is a major contributor to the strength of its military. Iran needs a fast economic growth and a a much larger economy to fund a military with scale
Reply


----------



## yavar

Windjammer said:


> A top Iranian military official meets Air Chief of the Pakistan Air force on the sidelines of IDEAS 2016 defence exhibition in Karachi, Pakistan.


Pakistani chief invited him . they just met nothing more .

نمایشگاه بین المللی تولیدات صنایع دفاعی پاکستان Pakistan defense exhibition IDEAS-2016

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

compare this image ... 






to our regulare Phantom 






look like in first picture , our F4s have smaller nose !!! do you think they used new radar for them !?


----------



## AmirPatriot

OldTwilight said:


> do you think they used new radar for them !?


No.

Iran actually has 3 versions of F-4. One is the F-4E, which is the "regular" and more common type in the inventory.






It has an AN/APQ-120 radar and an internal cannon.

Another is the RF-4E, a reconnaissance version of the F-4E with no armament and the cannon replaced by a camera.






The one with the smaller radar is the F-4D, which is a bit older than the F-4E. It has the AN/APQ-109 radar, which is similar in dimensions to the F-4Es. The major difference is the lack of an internal cannon, which is why the nose is so much smaller.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

@yavar @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL @iranianmembers

Watch 0:48 and forward. Video over Deir Ezzor, Syria. It seems to me F-15 or F-14.
Are there iranian F-14 in Syria??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> @yavar @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL @iranianmembers
> 
> Watch 0:48 and forward. Video over Deir Ezzor, Syria. It seems to me F-15 or F-14.
> Are there iranian F-14 in Syria??



The engines are too close to each other for that to be an F-14. Either an F-15 or Syrian MiG-25.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> @yavar @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL @iranianmembers
> 
> Watch 0:48 and forward. Video over Deir Ezzor, Syria. It seems to me F-15 or F-14.
> Are there iranian F-14 in Syria??




@yavar 
Bro, any comment on this?


----------



## yavar

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> @yavar
> Bro, any comment on this?


brother how can i comment on it . let say if we even did should ............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> @yavar @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL @iranianmembers
> 
> Watch 0:48 and forward. Video over Deir Ezzor, Syria. It seems to me F-15 or F-14.
> Are there iranian F-14 in Syria??



NO Iranian F-14's in Syria! F-14 are primarily an Air Superiority fighters!!!!! So what would Iran need F-14's in Syria?
It could be an Iranian Saegheh but why would Iran do that? Russia has it's air force their, Iran Has UAV's there,...
If it was Air Strikes over Mosul I would say it could be an Iranian Saegheh but from that image you can't really see anything for all I know it's an Israeli showing off it's F-35! (That's a Joke BTW)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

VEVAK said:


> NO Iranian F-14's in Syria! F-14 are primarily an Air Superiority fighters!!!!! So what would Iran need F-14's in Syria?
> It could be an Iranian Saegheh but why would Iran do that? Russia has it's air force their, Iran Has UAV's there,...
> If it was Air Strikes over Mosul I would say it could be an Iranian Saegheh but from that image you can't really see anything for all I know it's an Israeli showing off it's F-35! (That's a Joke BTW)



There's an open front in Deir Ezzor, with "coalition" aircrafts attacking SAA and allies troops. 
It has a lot of sense sending air superiority aircraft to that region, to stop this back stab attacks. Either russian aircrfats or sirian or iranian.
It's curious there are no news of coalition attacks on SAA troops in Deir Ezzor for some time, even attacks on the yihadists in the region. "Strange"...

By the way, the longer time passes, the more it seems to me it's an "strange" aircraft. 
It seems F-15 or F-14, but watching F-15 in youtube it sounds different. F-15 engines sound different.

I have lot of dudes with this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

VEVAK said:


> NO Iranian F-14's in Syria! F-14 are primarily an Air Superiority fighters!!!!! So what would Iran need F-14's in Syria?
> It could be an Iranian Saegheh but why would Iran do that? Russia has it's air force their, Iran Has UAV's there,...
> If it was Air Strikes over Mosul I would say it could be an Iranian Saegheh but from that image you can't really see anything for all I know it's an Israeli showing off it's F-35! (That's a Joke BTW)


I think Tomcat has ground attack capabilities ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> I think Tomcat has ground attack capabilities ...


They are pretty limited, at least in Iran's F-14s. I don't think they have the targeting equipment to fire precision guided weapons, unlike the American versions. Iran's always used the F-4, F-5, Su-24 etc. fleet for ground attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> There's an open front in Deir Ezzor, with "coalition" aircrafts attacking SAA and allies troops.
> It has a lot of sense sending air superiority aircraft to that region, to stop this back stab attacks. Either russian aircrfats or sirian or iranian.
> It's curious there are no news of coalition attacks on SAA troops in Deir Ezzor for some time, even attacks on the yihadists in the region. "Strange"...
> 
> By the way, the longer time passes, the more it seems to me it's an "strange" aircraft.
> It seems F-15 or F-14, but watching F-15 in youtube it sounds different. F-15 engines sound different.
> 
> I have lot of dudes with this.









It's a MIG-29 for sure, and you are seeing it from this angle:





It's carrying external fuel tanks or bombs:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> It's a MIG-29 for sure, and you are seeing it from this angle:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's carrying external fuel tanks or bombs:


Broad wing shape and shiny rear engine cowls all point to an F-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> Broad wing shape and shiny rear engine cowls all point to an F-15.


Now that you pointed to the shiny engines of F-15, then I'm more sure it's not F-15, also wing and their edge completly matches Mig29 and not F-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Now that you pointed to the shiny engines of F-15, then I'm more sure it's not F-15, also wing and their edge completly matches Mig29 and not F-15.


The MiG-29 and F-15 have very similar wing shapes, its just that the F-15 has a larger wing and overall fuselage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> I think Tomcat has ground attack capabilities ...


They do BUY they are primarily an Air Superiority Aircraft this is not the type of Aircraft Iran would use against ISIS.

F-14's have an extremely high maintenance requirements too so this is not an Aircraft Iran can easily land at a Syrian Air Base!

Iran has troop & artillery on the ground with armed UAV's in the sky & they can call in Russian Air strikes when needed! And if Iran was going to take a fighter to Syria it would be one of it's Russian made aircrafts that would be able to get service on the ground!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*پایگاه اورژانس هوایی در جهرم Iran Air ambulance base in Jahrom*


----------



## AmirPatriot

IRIAF F-14 3-6039 in old camo! Probably the last one operational to do so! This very aircraft shot down an Iraqi Mirage F1EQ almost 150 km away on the 20th of February 1987 with an AIM-54 Pheonix.

Photos taken from Esfahan TAB-8:











I wonder, is it possible this F-14 was recently overhauled and brought back into service? That would mean it has been brought back into the air after over 20 years of inactivity!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

SubWater said:


>


I always thought this was a cluster bomb dispenser. I was so wrong. i wonder if they can equip this with a turbofan and turn into a standoff cruise missile that would wipe a tank battalion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Iran Converts Regular Bombs to Retarded bombs تبديل بمب هاي معمولي به بمب هاي تاخيري ايران

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

arashkamangir said:


> I always thought this was a cluster bomb dispenser. I was so wrong. i wonder if they can equip this with a turbofan and turn into a standoff cruise missile that would wipe a tank battalion.


the full documentary about some project of IRIF
http://www.doctv.ir/programs/7356/بر-فراز-قله-ها



yavar said:


>


Hello yavar jan
do you can put full documentary in your YouTube channel 
your channel is the best

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

SubWater said:


> the full documentary about some project of IRIF
> 
> 
> Hello yavar jan
> do you can put full documentary in your YouTube channel
> your channel is the best



This was fantastic. Thank you so much.


----------



## eagle2007

Arashkamangir,

Perhaps I missed something in the KITE-2000 video (mine you, I just watched it as the audio is meaningless to me) but from all appearances, the KITE does appear to be a sub-munition dispenser.

The fact that is a powered-munition is just a practical feature, as some sub-munition dispensers simply remained attached to the aircraft (such as Germany's MW-1 and UK's JP233), which can be a bit risky. The KITE therefore is more akin to the DWS-24/Mjolner, developed Germany, but with a small rocket motor. 

Now it's definitely not a straight-up cluster bomb (something Iran has also shown off but not with much fanfare), but still a member of the "cluster munition" family.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

eagle2007 said:


> Arashkamangir,
> 
> Perhaps I missed something in the KITE-2000 video (mine you, I just watched it as the audio is meaningless to me) but from all appearances, the KITE does appear to be a sub-munition dispenser.
> 
> The fact that is a powered-munition is just a practical feature, as some sub-munition dispensers simply remained attached to the aircraft (such as Germany's MW-1 and UK's JP233), which can be a bit risky. The KITE therefore is more akin to the DWS-24/Mjolner, developed Germany, but with a small rocket motor.
> 
> Now it's definitely not a straight-up cluster bomb (something Iran has also shown off but not with much fanfare), but still a member of the "cluster munition" family.



I was surprised about how KITE dispense it's payload. My interpretation is that the dispensing mechanism is not a simple release of bomblets (excuse my ignorance here). From the static testing footage (@0:07 of this YouTube link) [ /shared?ci=-yHCsqFdc8Q] they are demonstrating a "Hydra" like launch mechanism of the KITE. They are also claiming that the KITE itself can engage another target after deployment of the "bomblets".


----------



## yavar

SubWater said:


> the full documentary about some project of IRIF
> http://www.doctv.ir/programs/7356/بر-فراز-قله-ها
> 
> 
> Hello yavar jan
> do you can put full documentary in your YouTube channel
> your channel is the best


ok thanks i will


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## eagle2007

Arashkamangir,

I see what you're talking about. The idea of selective/staged release of the sub-munitions makes good sense and is a feature on many similar dispensers. 

Now, given the limited size of the guidance section, the idea that it "chooses" another target is likely a bit overdone. More likely, there is a timing mechanism built-in that allows it to be pre-programmed to disperse munitions at specific time intervals after it is launched. 

The need for such a mechanism is an answer to the one penalty free-flying munition dispensers have compared to other models like the JP233: Active control. The JP233 is attached/connected to its aircraft until all munitions are expended and thus the pilot/crew can choose exactly when to dispense them. 

The disadvantage of this is, you need to fly directly over your intended target, not a great proposition in heavily-defended airspace. 

Hence the idea of a "free-flying" munition dispenser.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

eagle2007 said:


> Arashkamangir,
> 
> I see what you're talking about. The idea of selective/staged release of the sub-munitions makes good sense and is a feature on many similar dispensers.
> 
> Now, given the limited size of the guidance section, the idea that it "chooses" another target is likely a bit overdone. More likely, there is a timing mechanism built-in that allows it to be pre-programmed to disperse munitions at specific time intervals after it is launched.
> 
> The need for such a mechanism is an answer to the one penalty free-flying munition dispensers have compared to other models like the JP233: Active control. The JP233 is attached/connected to its aircraft until all munitions are expended and thus the pilot/crew can choose exactly when to dispense them.
> 
> The disadvantage of this is, you need to fly directly over your intended target, not a great proposition in heavily-defended airspace.
> 
> Hence the idea of a "free-flying" munition dispenser.



Ah I see. Yes, they did mention about pre-program instructions. Nevertheless due to my lack of knowledge on existence of these class of weapons I found it quite intriguing.


----------



## WarFariX




----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


>


Old picture, you are trolling.


----------



## TruthHurtz

AmirPatriot said:


> Old picture, you are trolling.



Lol speaking of which did Iran even have any plans for the F-313 beyond the mockup that was shown?

If so how's development, funding, will Batman ride in it etc.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TruthHurtz said:


> did Iran even have any plans for the F-313 beyond the mockup that was shown?


Of course there were plans... Qaher is/was a real project. There was wind tunnel testing, CAD models, RC test models and of course the mockup. Mockups are part of any development process. This particular one was exploited by the media.



TruthHurtz said:


> how's development, funding


Therein lies the problem. We have heard little from Qaher. The last we heard of it the IRIAF have given up on it but the IRGC have taken the project. The IRGC has a reputation for getting things done, but not for aircraft. We'll have to wait and see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Erl

yavar said:


>


Brilliant footage Yavar brother. Can you post more of them?
When our eagles fly, our hearts also fly with them.
Any footage of hava-nirooz with simorgh soundtrack is welcome brother.



MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


>


mikham ghiafato bebinam vaghti in oghab parvaz kard.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

Erl said:


> Brilliant footage Yavar brother. Can you post more of them?
> 
> 
> mikham ghiafato bebinam vaghti in oghab parvaz kard pofius.


translation?



AmirPatriot said:


> Old picture, you are trolling.


no i m not..i luv the design tbh..just need proper engine and avionics


----------



## Erl

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> translation?


finally will fly. Means it is sure to fly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> translation?
> 
> 
> no i m not..i luv the design tbh..just need proper engine and avionics



He's just saying he wants to see your reaction when this plane actually Flys.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Fafnir

Heres an interesting sequence showing af engineers dismantling and later reassembling irans mig29 simulator before and after its overhaul by iranian engineers

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/836003774334447617

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

https://sputniknews.com/photo/201702271051073847-fifth-generation-fighters/
































































© AP PHOTO/ ISNA, AMIR POURMAND
The Iranian Qaher-313 or Dominant-313 fighter jet was unveiled in February 2013. According to officials’ claim, it can evade radar. However, some experts doubt that it is able to meet the fifth-generation requirements.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> https://sputniknews.com/photo/201702271051073847-fifth-generation-fighters/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> © AP PHOTO/ ISNA, AMIR POURMAND
> The Iranian Qaher-313 or Dominant-313 fighter jet was unveiled in February 2013. According to officials’ claim, it can evade radar. However, some experts doubt that it is able to meet the fifth-generation requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tokhme khar

Amir, so it is pretty much confirmed now that no Su-30 for Iran.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Tokhme khar said:


> Amir, so it is pretty much confirmed now that no Su-30 for Iran.


There has been no confirmation. I for one don't like to speculate much about these sorts of dealings, they are highly politicised. Like with the S-300 debacle, I will wait and see what happens.


----------



## WarFariX

Tokhme khar said:


> Amir, so it is pretty much confirmed now that no Su-30 for Iran.


really ? :-/


----------



## Tokhme khar

And what happened to IMF?



AmirPatriot said:


> There has been no confirmation. I for one don't like to speculate much about these sorts of dealings, they are highly politicised. Like with the S-300 debacle, I will wait and see what happens.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Tokhme khar said:


> And what happened to IMF?


Owner mysteriously stopped making payments to the site hosting company, and mods/admins could not contact him.


----------



## Tokhme khar

........what we do now bro?



AmirPatriot said:


> Owner mysteriously stopped making payments to the site hosting company, and mods/admins could not contact him.


----------



## ashool

iran news today said iran going to buy SU-30SM FROM RUSSIA and maybe building inside iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

ashool said:


> iran news today said iran going to buy SU-30SM FROM RUSSIA and maybe building inside iran



Sounds too good to be true lol.

But if it is then I'm all for it, time to get a real air force.


----------



## Arminkh

A member of Iranian Parliament National Security Council says a number of Su30 SM will be delivered to Iran in coming days!

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/696886/فلاحت-پیشه-جنگنده-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل-می-شود

WTF??!! When did they even sign the contract?

@vostok @BRICSFTW Hello Guys, do you know anything about this? Have you heard any rumors?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> A member of Iranian Parliament National Security Council says a number of Su30 SM will be delivered to Iran in coming days!
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/696886/فلاحت-پیشه-جنگنده-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل-می-شود
> 
> WTF??!! When did they even sign the contract?


If it is true then why it was announced by him?where is our DOD minister .. and if it was a secret then why again he unveiled it before being delivered? sounds bs.


----------



## Blue In Green

Arminkh said:


> A member of Iranian Parliament National Security Council says a number of Su30 SM will be delivered to Iran in coming days!
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/696886/فلاحت-پیشه-جنگنده-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل-می-شود
> 
> WTF??!! When did they even sign the contract?



Ummm... what?

How did thus fly under the radar, it just can't be true or at least it's some sort of error in reporting/translation.


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> If it is true then why it was announced by him?where is our DOD minister .. and if it was a secret then why again he unveiled it before being delivered? sounds bs.





BlueInGreen2 said:


> Ummm... what?
> 
> How did thus fly under the radar, it just can't be true or at least it's some sort of error in reporting/translation.


تا نباشد چیزکی مردم نگویند چیزها!

sorry @BlueInGreen2 can you read Persian? What I said above is a proverb that says "people wouldn't talk about it if there weren't anything happening"

It is reasonable for Iran to seal the deal as soon as possible just like it did with the passenger aircrafts. No one knows how long current status quo will last and having a good number of potent SU 30 SM in their arsenal will raise the bar again for any unfriendly nation who is fantasizing about things they shouldn't. At the very least, it will put our friends who are too proud of their AF in their place. This is a nice article:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...eagle-vs-russias-su-35-fighter-who-wins-13815

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

reverse engineer the shit out of it


----------



## Arminkh

Draco.IMF said:


> reverse engineer the shit out of it


Oh they will. Soon you will see all variants of it on display. Iranians love to take a design and alter it.


----------



## ashool

i wish those butties cames to iran as soon as possible and iran going to build su-30 in our dear homeland IRAN
زنده باد ایران
but we must make our own fighter jet bc WE CAN DO THAT if those cowards people let them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> A member of Iranian Parliament National Security Council says a number of Su30 SM will be delivered to Iran in coming days!
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/696886/فلاحت-پیشه-جنگنده-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل-می-شود
> 
> WTF??!! When did they even sign the contract?



I am highly doubtful of this. 


There has not been any confirmation by the people you would expect - Defence Minister, President, IRIAF commander etc.
There has not been any recent consultation between Iranian and Russian defence officials of any level, as there was a few months ago between the defence ministers of both countries, and when negotiations between the two countries on the Su-30 was officially confirmed.
*Delivering *aircraft before 2021 would be a breach of UNSC 2231, something I don't think Russia would do. Just negotiating or signing a contract however, would not.
It's too sudden. It doesn't make sense. It may be that this MP is simply seeking attention.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> تا نباشد چیزکی مردم نگویند چیزها!
> 
> sorry @BlueInGreen2 can you read Persian? What I said above is a proverb that says "people wouldn't talk about it if there weren't anything happening"
> 
> It is reasonable for Iran to seal the deal as soon as possible just like it did with the passenger aircrafts. No one knows how long current status quo will last and having a good number of potent SU 30 SM in their arsenal will raise the bar again for any unfriendly nation who is fantasizing about things they shouldn't. At the very least, it will put our friends who are too proud of their AF in their place. This is a nice article:
> 
> http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...eagle-vs-russias-su-35-fighter-who-wins-13815


I hope it would be true but even with the current status quo sealing the deal to deliver these birds is against the UNSC resolution & remember we talk about Russians ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

Draco.IMF said:


> reverse engineer the shit out of it


however till that time (after a decade) flankers will start losing importance to 5th gen


----------



## Arminkh

AmirPatriot said:


> I am highly doubtful of this.
> 
> 
> There has not been any confirmation by the people you would expect - Defence Minister, President, IRIAF commander etc.
> There has not been any recent consultation between Iranian and Russian defence officials of any level, as there was a few months ago between the defence ministers of both countries, and when negotiations between the two countries on the Su-30 was officially confirmed.
> *Delivering *aircraft before 2021 would be a breach of UNSC 2231, something I don't think Russia would do. Just negotiating or signing a contract however, would not.
> It's too sudden. It doesn't make sense. It may be that this MP is simply seeking attention.



There is a caveat to UNSC 2231 resolution:

http://www.un.org/en/sc/2231/restrictions-arms.shtml

*How long will the restrictions on arms-related transfers apply? *
These restrictions on arms-related transfers shall apply until the date five years after the JCPOA Adoption Day (18 October 2015) *or until the date on which the IAEA submits a report confirming the Broader Conclusion, whichever is earlier.
*
Not sure what Broader Conclusion means but starting with capital letters means it has a legal description. Could it be the recent report from IAEA considering Iran totally compatible with the requirements of UNSC 2231?



raptor22 said:


> I hope it would be true but even with the current status quo sealing the deal to deliver these birds is against the UNSC resolution & remember we talk about Russians ..


Please see above. 

I know but having lost all its traditional allies in Eastern Europe to NATO, it is in Russia's best interest for now to keep Iran out of harm. It is not easy to find allies in a kind of cold war scenario against US. And according to both sides, the relation between Russia and US is in an all time low since the impulsion of USSR and a direct conflict between Iran and US more likely than ever.


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> I am highly doubtful of this.
> 
> 
> There has not been any confirmation by the people you would expect - Defence Minister, President, IRIAF commander etc.
> There has not been any recent consultation between Iranian and Russian defence officials of any level, as there was a few months ago between the defence ministers of both countries, and when negotiations between the two countries on the Su-30 was officially confirmed.
> *Delivering *aircraft before 2021 would be a breach of UNSC 2231, something I don't think Russia would do. Just negotiating or signing a contract however, would not.
> It's too sudden. It doesn't make sense. It may be that this MP is simply seeking attention.



This is my reasoning, unless Russia has predicted that a war will begin soon and is hedging its bets on Iran and countering US then yes this can be true, but other than that if this were to happen the gulf states and Israel will absolutely flip their shits.

Lol can you imagine the look on their faces.

Well... do any of us here actually know the depth of Iranian and Russian cooperation? If this true then one can safely assume the status of Russian and Iran alliance is more grest than previously thought of. Good if ture, but still we have to wait and see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> There is a caveat to UNSC 2231 resolution:
> 
> http://www.un.org/en/sc/2231/restrictions-arms.shtml
> 
> *How long will the restrictions on arms-related transfers apply? *
> These restrictions on arms-related transfers shall apply until the date five years after the JCPOA Adoption Day (18 October 2015) *or until the date on which the IAEA submits a report confirming the Broader Conclusion, whichever is earlier.
> *
> Not sure what Broader Conclusion means but starting with capital letters means it has a legal description. Could it be the recent report from IAEA considering Iran totally compatible with the requirements of UNSC 2231?


http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/09/22/arriving-at-iaea-broader-conclusion-for-iran-pub-64665

You are free to read it, but I will tell you now that it is not going to happen in the 3 years and 7 months (approx.) left until the 5 years is up. Don't expect the west to allow sanctions to be lifted a minute earlier than they can have them. Any attempt by the IAEA to reach a Broader Conclusion would be politicised to hell.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

AmirPatriot said:


> http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/09/22/arriving-at-iaea-broader-conclusion-for-iran-pub-64665
> 
> You are free to read it, but I will tell you now that it is not going to happen in the 3 years and 7 months (approx.) left until the 5 years is up. Don't expect the west to allow sanctions to be lifted a minute earlier than they can have them. Any attempt by the IAEA to reach a Broader Conclusion would be politicised to hell.


It seems like Iran already qualifies for the "Broader Conclusion" status.

I agree that US will resist any attempt by IAEA for such a conclusion but if Russia is determined to make this sale to Iran, then they probably can convince the board to agree with it:

*Board Members for 2016-2017*
The 35 Board Members for 2016-2017 are Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Denmark, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Latvia, Namibia, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and Uruguay.

Anyway it remains to be seen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tokhme khar

So it doesn't sound good Amir.........Without a large number of Su-30SM's, the odds are heavily against the IRIAF. It is very quiet now about Su-30 delivery. No news at all!



AmirPatriot said:


> http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/09/22/arriving-at-iaea-broader-conclusion-for-iran-pub-64665
> 
> You are free to read it, but I will tell you now that it is not going to happen in the 3 years and 7 months (approx.) left until the 5 years is up. Don't expect the west to allow sanctions to be lifted a minute earlier than they can have them. Any attempt by the IAEA to reach a Broader Conclusion would be politicised to hell.


----------



## WarFariX

Tokhme khar said:


> So it doesn't sound good Amir.........Without a large number of Su-30SM's, the odds are heavily against the IRIAF. It is very quiet now about Su-30 delivery. No news at all!


take jf17block 3 in large numbers


----------



## Tokhme khar

The Su-30SM fits Iran's requirements for a powerful, heavy, long range warplane, which surpasses the F-14 substantially in performance to become the backbone of the IRIAF until Iran develops and tests it's own local designs.



MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> take jf17block 3 in large numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> take jf17block 3 in large numbers


...no thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

AmirPatriot said:


> ...no thanks.


thousand times better than saegayh or whatever the name was *in a brotherly manner*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> thousand times better than saegayh or whatever the name was *in a brotherly manner*


Saeqeh was just first step. if JF17 was that good, you wouldn't beg for 4 F-16s from U.S *in a brotherly manner*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> thousand times better than saegayh or whatever the name was *in a brotherly manner*


Irrelevant, gayF-17 is still shit *in a brotherly manner*


----------



## Tps43

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> thousand times better than saegayh or whatever the name was *in a brotherly manner*


How can u say a word against 
*Saeqeh?*
**

If Saeqehs are soo good then why did u brought Mig 29 and r in negotiations for su 30?
and yeah what abt Iraqi F1's?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

mohsen said:


> Saeqeh was just first step. if JF17 was that good, you wouldn't beg for 4 F-16s from U.S *in a brotherly manner*


both hv different roles bro...jf17 is meant to replace aging fighters with 4gen capabilities...while f16 is medium weight fighter used mainly for bombing internal terrorists currently and frontline fighter...with block 3 i doubt we would even consider more f16 however i wish to see more f16 to have good numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> How can u say a word against
> *Saeqeh?*
> **
> 
> If Saeqehs are soo good then why did u brought Mig 29 and r in negotiations for su 30?
> and yeah what abt Iraqi F1's?



You really know nothing about the IRIAF, do you?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

سردار دهقان در گفتگوی تفصیلی با فارس جنگنده بومی قاهر سال آینده پرواز می‌کند

*کار ساخت جنگنده قاهر تمام شده است*

** برخی اخبار مبنی بر متوقف شدن پروژه جنگنده قاهر مطرح شده بود اما حضرتعالی طی سال جاری خبر از پیشبرد این پروژه داده بودید. در حال حاضر وضعیت پروژه جنگنده قاهر به چه صورت است؟*

نمونه یک به یک قاهر را قبل از پایان سال تاکسی خواهیم کرد و این جنگنده روی باند خواهد آمد و حرکت می‌کند و تست‌های پروازی آن نیز در سال آینده انجام می‌شود.

کار ساخت قاهر تمام شده است و آماده تست‌های مختلف است که اولین تست آن روشن کردن موتور و روی باند آمدن آن است
http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13951210000096

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

yavar said:


> سردار دهقان در گفتگوی تفصیلی با فارس جنگنده بومی قاهر سال آینده پرواز می‌کند
> 
> *کار ساخت جنگنده قاهر تمام شده است*
> 
> ** برخی اخبار مبنی بر متوقف شدن پروژه جنگنده قاهر مطرح شده بود اما حضرتعالی طی سال جاری خبر از پیشبرد این پروژه داده بودید. در حال حاضر وضعیت پروژه جنگنده قاهر به چه صورت است؟*
> 
> نمونه یک به یک قاهر را قبل از پایان سال تاکسی خواهیم کرد و این جنگنده روی باند خواهد آمد و حرکت می‌کند و تست‌های پروازی آن نیز در سال آینده انجام می‌شود.
> 
> کار ساخت قاهر تمام شده است و آماده تست‌های مختلف است که اولین تست آن روشن کردن موتور و روی باند آمدن آن است
> http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13951210000096


کشتن ما رو با این قاهر لعنتی. حتما یه موتور ژ-۸۵ میزارن توش میگن بیا اینم تاکسی قاهر، جنگنده ی نثل پنج. 

خدایا کمکمون کن. دیگه آبروریزی نمیتونیم داشته 
باشیم .قبل از آخر سال؟ یعنی تو دو هفته ی بعد

علی جان بدون من ایران رو دوست دارم اما این آبروریزی به نام قاهر چهار ساله داره ما رو میکشه.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> کشتن ما رو با این قاهر لعنتی. حتما یه موتور ژ-۸۵ میزارن توش میگن بیا اینم تاکسی قاهر، جنگنده ی نثل پنج.
> 
> خدایا کمکمون کن. دیگه آبروریزی نمیتونیم داشته
> باشیم .قبل از آخر سال؟ یعنی تو دو هفته ی بعد
> 
> علی جان بدون من ایران رو دوست دارم اما این آبروریزی به نام قاهر چهار ساله داره ما رو میکشه.



امیر جان‌اگر این پروژه برای تحقیقات است ارزش ‌‌ا تستها را دارد. پیشرفته ترین کشورها‌۱۰-۱۵ سال رو این پروژه ها کار میکنند.


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> امیر جان‌اگر این پروژه برای تحقیقات است ارزش ‌‌ا تستها را دارد. پیشرفته ترین کشورها‌۱۰-۱۵ سال رو این پروژه ها کار میکنند.



با زمان مشکل ندارم.
با آبروریزی قاهر پلاستیک مشکل دارم.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> both hv different roles bro...jf17 is meant to replace aging fighters with 4gen capabilities...while f16 is medium weight fighter used mainly for bombing internal terrorists currently and frontline fighter...with block 3 i doubt we would even consider more f16 however i wish to see more f16 to have good numbers


They both are multirole single engine fighters.

in less than 15 days we will see Qaher 313 taxi tests. and next year, it will fly.
and it's just another step.


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> با زمان مشکل ندارم.
> با آبروریزی قلهر پلاستیک مشکل دارم.



میدانم اما این را در نظر داشته باش که ما برای خودمان کار میکنیم نه برای بقیه. یک روز میرسه که اولین مدل پروازی هم‌خواهیم‌دید

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> کشتن ما رو با این قاهر لعنتی. حتما یه موتور ژ-۸۵ میزارن توش میگن بیا اینم تاکسی قاهر، جنگنده ی نثل پنج.
> 
> خدایا کمکمون کن. دیگه آبروریزی نمیتونیم داشته
> باشیم .قبل از آخر سال؟ یعنی تو دو هفته ی بعد
> 
> علی جان بدون من ایران رو دوست دارم اما این آبروریزی به نام قاهر چهار ساله داره ما رو میکشه.


The most important aspect of Qaher 313 is it's unique stealth design, when we produced a better engine and proper radar, we will see it's next version.
This taxi test should have happened 4 years ago, with whatever F-5 engine that we had, but a political decision suspended the project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

سردار دهقان در گفتگوی با خبرگزاری فارس Iran DM Gen Dehqan interview Fars News: Bavar 3737,Qaher 313

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

QAHER F-313 FLAYING IN YEAR 96 GENERAL DEHQAN SAID 
WE WAITING WHEN ITS FLY AND SEE LONG FACE OF THOSE ONE SAID ITS FAKE YAVAR I THINK YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE I THINK

اهمیتی نداره چه موتوری داخلش باشه مهم اینه که کاربری داشته باشه موتور جی 85 هم موتور خوبی هست و تا الان هم امتحانشو پس داده پس لطفا ایرادای بنی اسراییلی نگیرید تا دیروز که پلاستیکی بود حالا موتوراگه پرواز کنه و مثلا از اف18 هم بهتر باشه مثلا شما میگید نه این بدرد نمیخوره چون حتما باید بهتر از اف22 و35 و تی50 باشه نکنه انتظار داری موتور بشقاب پرنده توش بزارن تا شما راضی شی


----------



## Hack-Hook

کسی که میخواد ایراد بگیره همیشه یک ایراد پیدا میکنه . برای من که اگه پرواز کنه و بتوانیم اونرا در حین پرواز پایدار نگه کنیم کافی هست. این مهمترین بخش توی طراحی هواپیما هست . بعدا توی مراحل بعدی میتونیم به چیزهای دیگه برسیم.


ashool said:


> QAHER F-313 FLAYING IN YEAR 96 GENERAL DEHQAN SAID
> WE WAITING WHEN ITS FLY AND SEE LONG FACE OF THOSE ONE SAID ITS FAKE YAVAR I THINK YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE I THINK
> 
> اهمیتی نداره چه موتوری داخلش باشه مهم اینه که کاربری داشته باشه موتور جی 85 هم موتور خوبی هست و تا الان هم امتحانشو پس داده پس لطفا ایرادای بنی اسراییلی نگیرید تا دیروز که پلاستیکی بود حالا موتوراگه پرواز کنه و مثلا از اف18 هم بهتر باشه مثلا شما میگید نه این بدرد نمیخوره چون حتما باید بهتر از اف22 و35 و تی50 باشه نکنه انتظار داری موتور بشقاب پرنده توش بزارن تا شما راضی شی

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> میدانم اما این را در نظر داشته باش که ما برای خودمان کار میکنیم نه برای بقیه. یک روز میرسه که اولین مدل پروازی هم‌خواهیم‌دید


قاهر پلاستیک برایه ما کاری نمی‌کنه، فقط برایه غربی‌ها خوبه که ایران رو ضعیف نشون بدن. 

برایه این که واقعی‌ باشه باید یه چیزی با سخت پروفشنال مثل ج-۳۱ یا ف‌‌-۳۵ ببینیم. تاره نه ها، اما باید بنظر بید که واقعی‌ هست و خوب پرواز می‌کنه. تورو خدا فکر میکنی‌ ما مثل ج-۳۱ یا ف‌‌-۳۵ میبینیم؟ من که خوشبین نیستم درباره این قاهر.


----------



## WarFariX

mohsen said:


> They both are multirole single engine fighters.
> 
> in less than 15 days we will see Qaher 313 taxi tests. and next year, it will fly.
> and it's just another step.


r u sure :-D less than 15 days ? wow i m excited..i want iran to slap face of every one who makes fun of their capabilities

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> in less than 15 days we will see Qaher 313 taxi tests


خدایا رحم کن


----------



## ashool

IT FLY IN YEAR 96 NOT LESS THAN 15 YEARS 
من فکر میکنم بعصی ها تو این سایتها درمورد ساخت جنگده انتظارات عجیب وغریب دارن(ومنتظر یک یوفوهستن) شما باید خدا را شکر کنیدبا این بودجه کم ودر این شزایط تحریم و حال ما این جنگنده ساخته شده من جای شما بودم به جای انرژی منقی واب در اسیاب بعضی ها ریختن به متخصصها بابت این همه تلاش دست مریزاد میگفتم

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> خدایا رحم کن


راست میگی داداش. منم نگرانم. لااقل اگه آماده نیست هی نیان بگن آماده اس. پدر ما رودرآوردن با این قاهر. دوستش دارم ولی پیرمون کرد
اوایل خیلی روش تعصب داشتم ولی میبینم خیلی داره شرایط رو بغرنج میکنه!!!امیدوارم بالاخره رونمایی بشه و پرواز کنه و لااقل یه موشک از لانچر استیلث ش پرتاب کنه یه نفس راحت بکشیم از دست این قاهر.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Hmm... this is a gamble. If they don't pull through it will look really bad, I mean really bad.

Grain of gentlemen, grain of salt.


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> قاهر پلاستیک برایه ما کاری نمی‌کنه، فقط برایه غربی‌ها خوبه که ایران رو ضعیف نشون بدن.
> 
> برایه این که واقعی‌ باشه باید یه چیزی با سخت پروفشنال مثل ج-۳۱ یا ف‌‌-۳۵ ببینیم. تاره نه ها، اما باید بنظر بید که واقعی‌ هست و خوب پرواز می‌کنه. تورو خدا فکر میکنی‌ ما مثل ج-۳۱ یا ف‌‌-۳۵ میبینیم؟ من که خوشبین نیستم درباره این قاهر.



نه‌امکان‌نداره، چون خیلی بیشتر از اینها زمان میبره. اما یک‌سری از زیر مجموعه ها را می‌توان امتحان کرد... مانند سیستمهای چرخ، ترمز، و سیستمهای هدایتی روی باند، سیستمهای برقی و موتور... برای تست کردن این زیر مجموعه ها آیا ‌نیاز به آماده بودن هوا پیما به پرواز است؟


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> You really know nothing about the IRIAF, do you?


What do u want me to Know?
I know What I should and thats pretty much.



AmirPatriot said:


> خدایا رحم کن


Fiqr kunam rooz milli iran besha 12 farvardin


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## WarFariX

SOHEIL said:


>


are you feeling all right ?


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> What do u want me to Know?
> I know What I should and thats pretty much.
> 
> 
> Fiqr kunam rooz milli iran besha 12 farvardin


We bought MiG-29s 25 years ago  long before anyone thought about Saeqeh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

AmirPatriot said:


> We bought MiG-29s 25 years ago  long before anyone thought about Saeqeh.


what radar , ecm , pod , missiles , engine is saeqeh using

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> what radar , ecm , pod , missiles , engine is saeqeh using


Its an advanced trainer, combat equipment is not relevant.


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> We bought MiG-29s 25 years ago  long before anyone thought about Saeqeh.


6 years before first prototype of ur indigenous AC
well include Su 24 in that list



MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> what radar , ecm , pod , missiles , engine is saeqeh using


yeah and is it using Fly by fire sys?



AmirPatriot said:


> Its an advanced trainer, combat equipment is not relevant.


so its a trainer not a combat AC?


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> 6 years before first prototype of ur indigenous AC



And?



tps77 said:


> well include Su 24 in that list



What list?



tps77 said:


> yeah and is it using Fly by fire sys?



No.



tps77 said:


> so its a trainer not a combat AC?



It has some combat equipment but combat is not the intended role. The Yak-130 has a similar role.


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> And?
> 
> 
> 
> What list?
> 
> 
> 
> No.


So what do u call it acc to western norms 4th or 3th gen AC?



AmirPatriot said:


> And?
> 
> 
> 
> What list?
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> It has some combat equipment but combat is not the intended role. The Yak-130 has a similar role.


Means ground attack?
Well baradr mann yek jayee shaneedam az sarhang nero havae kah iran ba pakistan wa china shubat kard morod e jf 17?



AmirPatriot said:


> And?
> 
> 
> 
> What list?
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> It has some combat equipment but combat is not the intended role. The Yak-130 has a similar role.


In the list of mig 29


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> So what do u call it acc to western norms 4th or 3th gen AC?



3rd generation, though since it's a trainer it isn't going up against F-22s.



tps77 said:


> Means ground attack?



Yes.



tps77 said:


> Well baradr mann yek jayee shaneedam az sarhang nero havae kah iran ba pakistan wa china shubat kard morod e jf 17?



There is no truth in this.



tps77 said:


> In the list of mig 29



...and?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> 3rd generation, though since it's a trainer it isn't going up against F-22s.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no truth in this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and?


Obv It wont go up against F 22 but what would be ur answer to F 22, F35 , F 15 SE , F 16 blk 60 ?


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> F 22, F35 , F 15 SE , F 16 blk 60 ?


Air Defence systems and fighters procured in the future.


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> Air Defence systems and fighters procured in the future.


if khudanakunaa u r attacked after an year then?


----------



## AmirPatriot

tps77 said:


> if khudanakunaa u r attacked after an year then?


Modernisation is slow, but we have sufficient deterrence until we modernise.


----------



## ashool

iran showing saba 248 in 17 esfand mean 7 mar 2017

tomorrow


----------



## Tps43

AmirPatriot said:


> Modernisation is slow, but we have sufficient deterrence until we modernise.


منطزرم


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Modernisation is slow, but we have sufficient deterrence until we modernise.


Amir, i have an idea. We will develop Saeqeh-3 no doubt but we can replace F-4s and F-5s with third generation of JF-17. Pak has enough infrastructures so that we could ask them twin engined JF-17s. It can be capable of replacing old F-4-5s and due to it's low RC, i will like this happens. Our investment can help JF-17 to become a legendary fighter jet. What do you think about that?
Twin engined JF-17 with AESA radar. @SOHEIL can you design it, twin engined JF-17?
What is your idea @tps77 ?


----------



## Faravahar

mohammad45 said:


> Amir, i have an idea. We will develop Saeqeh-3 no doubt but we can replace F-4s and F-5s with third generation of JF-17. Pak has enough infrastructures so that we could ask them twin engined JF-17s. It can be capable of replacing old F-4-5s and due to it's low RC, i will like this happens. Our investment can help JF-17 to become a legendary fighter jet. What do you think about that?
> Twin engined JF-17 with AESA radar. @SOHEIL can you design it, twin engined JF-17?
> What is your idea @tps77 ?


 
There will be no more Saeqes and the Jf-17 is useless for Iran. It's basically a poor man's F-16.
SU-30's can be a temporary solution for Iran but even that is not enough. We're in a transitional period now where nations are starting to develop or import 5th gen fighters.

Iran must start to invest in 5th gen planes. Start a co-development for such planes etc. Even UAE stated interest in such a thing with Russia recently. I can live with the su-30, but Iran investing in anything else other than 5th gen tech is an extremely bad waste of cash.


----------



## WarFariX

AmirPatriot said:


> 3rd generation, though since it's a trainer it isn't going up against F-22s.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no truth in this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and?


engine?


----------



## Muhammed45

Faravahar said:


> There will be no more Saeqes and the Jf-17 is useless for Iran. It's basically a poor man's F-16.
> What Iran needs is replacement for its legendary F-14's. SU-30's can be a temporary solution but even that is not enough. We're in a transitional period now where nations are starting to develop or import 5th gen fighters.
> 
> Iran must start to invest in 5th gen planes. Start a co-development for such planes etc. Even UAE stated interest in such a thing with Russia recently. I can live with the su-30, but Iran investing in anything else other than 5th gen tech is an extremely bad waste of cash.


It's AESA version will not be useless bro, believe me. Our scientists are ready to cooperate with their **** counterparts.
I was speaking of F-4-5s not F-14. Even SU-30's variants are not capable of fulfilling it's absence. I can put my faith in SM version but still not enough to replace the F-14s. As you said we need a 5th generation fighter jet homemade or Russian tech both are available for us.
I like third generation of JF-17 to replace F-4-5s. Likely it's twin engined versions

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Faravahar

mohammad45 said:


> It's AESA version will not be useless bro, believe me. Our scientists are ready to cooperate with their **** counterparts.
> I was speaking of F-4-5s not F-14. Even SU-30's variants are not capable of fulfilling it's absence. I can put my faith in SM version but not still not enough to replace the F-14s. As you said we need a 5th generation fighter jet homemade or Russian tech both are available for us.
> I like third generation of JF-17 to replace F-4-5s. Likely it's twin engined versions



SU-30's can replace F-14, F-5 and F-4. The F-5 was not a very good plane to begin with, if one looks at the Iran-Iraq war, that becomes apparent. Jf-17 is a simple waste of cash bro. Why spend money on that when that money can go elsewhere? Remember bro, Iran even rejected the J-10, nevermind the Jf-17. 

The problem is, even if we received the SU-30's tomorrow, their usefulness would not last for more than a decade. They will provide only a very temporary solution. Iran needs to :

1)Think about purchasing the PAK-FA and see if Russians will allow any level of tech transfer.
2) Start own Co-development of a 5th gen plane with foreign aid, preferably the Russians.

What happens beyond 5th gen remains to be seen, perhaps 6th gen will mostly be unmanned. Iran is already in a very good position for unmanned system, we must not lose our momentum in this sector.


----------



## Muhammed45

Faravahar said:


> SU-30's can replace F-14, F-5 and F-4. The F-5 was not a very good plane to begin with, if one looks at the Iran-Iraq war, that becomes apparent. Jf-17 is a simple waste of cash bro. Why spend money on that when that money can go elsewhere? Remember bro, Iran even rejected the J-10, nevermind the Jf-17.
> 
> The problem is, even if we received the SU-30's tomorrow, their usefulness would not last for more than a decade. They will provide only a very temporary solution. Iran needs to :
> 
> 1)Think about purchasing the PAK-FA and see if Russians will allow any level of tech transfer.
> 2) Start own Co-development of a 5th gen plane with foreign aid, preferably the Russians.
> 
> What happens beyond 5th gen remains to be seen, perhaps 6th gen will mostly be unmanned. Iran is already in a very good position for unmanned system, we must not lose our momentum in this sector.


There is some evidence that Iran has already purchased SU-50. :::





Anyway i think that JF-17 has a good platform to replace the old American fighters like F-4-5s or Chinese F-7s or Russian SU-24-25s. More importantly it can help a Muslim country to develop better fighters, my intentions are not only based on superiority of that fighter compared to it's American and Russian similar aircrafts.


----------



## WarFariX

mohammad45 said:


> There is some evidence that Iran has already purchased SU-50. :::
> View attachment 382149
> 
> Anyway i think that JF-17 has a good platform to replace the old American fighters like F-4-5s or Chinese F-7s or Russian SU-24-25s. More importantly it can help a Muslim country to develop better fighters, my intentions are not only based on superiority of that fighter compared to it's American and Russian similar aircrafts.


people underestimate the capabilities of jf17..the current blocks r not worthy for big strategic countries like iran but block 3 is hell of a machine which is deadly and poisonous for flankers guys...it has sooo small rcs while flankers specially su-30 and 27 have hell of biggest rcs of all jets worldwide. they r too much exposed even in bvr...Block 3 in large numbers around 200 will make hell of an interceptor and fighter accompanoier force...meanwhile other fighters such as su30 or a 5th gen accomodated by a squadron of thunders can outmatch many enemy forces...given irans's sources , its one of the best options to replace old jets also cheaper than any fighter of its category


----------



## Faravahar

mohammad45 said:


> There is some evidence that Iran has already purchased SU-50. :::
> View attachment 382149
> 
> Anyway i think that JF-17 has a good platform to replace the old American fighters like F-4-5s or Chinese F-7s or Russian SU-24-25s. More importantly it can help a Muslim country to develop better fighters, my intentions are not only based on superiority of that fighter compared to it's American and Russian similar aircrafts.





There is no need for us to import many different types of fighters. Especially some which have very little to offer Iran. As I said, the SU-30 can replace many of Iran current fleet, including the F-4 and F-5. Although, I prefer the development of our own bomber bomber to replace the F-4. From my understanding, the IRGC is developing their own bomber.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> There is no need for us to import many different types of fighters. Especially some which have very little to offer Iran. As I said, the SU-30 can replace many of Iran current fleet, including the F-4 and F-5. Although, I prefer the development of our own bomber bomber to replace the F-4. From my understanding, the IRGC is developing their own bomber.





Which bomber? the F-5 copy? the Fake Qaher?


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Which bomber? the F-5 copy? the Fake Qaher?





That F-5 copy is still lightyears ahead of what your kind can produce and same with Qaher. Qaher is as fake as this F-117 design was here:







I obviously don't expect you lot to understand how development work, given your kind can't even manufacture a pen and has to import it.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> Stick to drinking your camel urine and don't waste time here.
> 
> That F-5 copy is still lightyears ahead of what you sand dwellers can produce and same with Qaher. Qaher is as fake as this F-117 pre-development design was here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I obviously don't expect bunch of subhumans to understand how development work, given your kind can't even manufacture a pen and has to import it.





Cockpit+ plane meant for midgets?? What are you gonna put under those wings? Handgrenade?
Don't make it a 2 seats aircraft.. otherwise no more place for fuel tank...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Cockpit+ plane meant for midgets?? What are you gonna put under those wings? Handgrenade?



That picture is of the American Have blue project. Like I said, you have no understanding of how development works. First design, then mockup, then making 1:1 scale of plane then taxi flights and then more intense flight tests.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> That picture is of the American Have blue project. Your brain is obviously mushed due to all that camel urine you've been consuming, assuming you people have brains to being with.
> 
> Like I said, you sad dwelling subhumans have no understanding of how development works. First design, then mockup, then making 1:1 scale of plane then taxi flights and then more intense flight tests.



Still waiting the 9 february taxi of the Qaher... 
I think I will wait few... never I think...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Still waiting the 9 february taxi of the Qaher...
> I think I will wait few... never I think...



No-one cares about what bunch of clueless kids are waiting for. You think anyone takes your kind seriously?

Once Qaher starts its flight tests, we'll see where you'll be then.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> No-one cares about what bunch of subhumans are waiting for. You think anyone takes your kind seriously?
> 
> Once Qaher starts its flight tests, we'll see where you'll be then. Anyway, go back to kissing your camel your filth out of the Iranian section. You're stinking the place.



Well it can fly...but will it blend?
Look you can believe whatever crap your regime says about those incoming" 5th and 6th generation aircraft" , the reality is that Iran do not have the knowledge alone to make it to 5th gen or even 4th gen aricraft... So at least see it with open mind and eyes and don't believe every propaganda crap, just bc it's from your revolution guards or ayathollah, give yourself the ability to think and accept what is false and true...

As for insulting "Pakistani JF-17" that plane is dozens of year ahead of any Iranian project...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Well it can fly...but will it blend?
> Look you can believe whatever crap your regime says about those incoming" 5th and 6th generation aircraft" , the reality is that Iran do not have the knowledge alone to make it to 5th gen or even 4th gen aricraft... So at least see it with open mind and eyes and don't believe every propaganda crap, just bc it's from your revolution guards or ayathollah, give yourself the ability to think and accept what is false and true...
> 
> As for insulting "Pakistani JF-17" that plane is dozens of year ahead of any Iranian project...



They never claimed to have developed 5th gen planes. Qaher is a stealth, low altitude plane for anti ship purposes, this is not the same thing as a 5th gen plane. Furthermore, there is nothing the IRGC has stated that they have not backed. They have never created any form of achievement which turned out not to be true.

No one is insulting the JF-17 which is actually mostly a Chinese plane. All we've said that it has little uses for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> What are you balabbing about subhuman? They never claimed to have developed 5th gen planes, you low IQ camel piss drinker. Qaher is a stealth, low altitude plane for anti ship purposes, this is not the same thing as a 5th gen plane. Furthermore, there is nothing the IRGC has stated that they have not backed. They have never created any form of achievement which turned out not to be true.
> 
> No one is insulting the JF-17 which is actually mostly a Chinese plane. All we've said that it has little uses for Iran.
> 
> What does this have to do with you anyway? go back to your desert and hunt lizards and don't get involved in conversation you have no clue about.



Don't worry, I just saw some crappy comments about something and some delusional comments about fake project and I wanted to give my cents... 
Have fun
Bye
ps: Btw I love camels  you know that animals that can run faster than the Qaher...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Don't worry, I just saw some crappy comments about something and some delusional comments about fake project and I wanted to give my cents...
> Have fun
> Bye
> ps: Btw I love camels  you know that animals that can run faster than the Qaher...



Yes, and the American F-117 was also fake. 

The only thing fake here is your brain. You people are so hopeless that you can't even comprehend how development works. I don't blame you, given all you know about these things is just paying the westerners and simply receiving the products. You have no comprehension about the stages of actually having to develop something yourselves.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> Yes, and the American F-117 was also fake.
> 
> The only thing fake here is your brain. You people are so hopeless that you can't even comprehend how development works. I don't blame you, given all you know about these things is just paying the westerners and simply receiving the products. You have no comprehension about the stages of actually having to develop something yourselves.



No need to delete your insults... they are already quoted in mine  
Have fun
Mister who lack basic education from Momma and papa...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> No need to delete your insults... they are already quoted in mine
> Have fun
> Mister who lack basic education from Momma and papa...



Leave this section kid, return to your camels.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> Leave this section kid, return to your camels.



Yeah no worry.. I leave this TRUE NEWS section of "I believe in every crap..."
Have fun in your delusion...

Next news---> Qahere can go in Orbit...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Yeah no worry.. I leave this TRUE NEWS section of "I believe in every crap..."
> Have fun in your delusion...
> 
> Next news---> Qahere can go in Orbit...



Those "craps" are still light years compared to what your kind can produce.

As for orbit, Iran has placed sats in orbits, whilst your kind are too busy kissing camels and drinking their urines.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> Those "craps" are still light years compared to what your kind can produce.
> 
> As for orbit, Iran has placed sats in orbits, whilst your kind are too busy kissing camels and drinking their urines.



What hidden fantasy do you have with Camels & piss ?? Want to try? 
Bc I don't...


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> What hidden fantasy do you have with Camels & piss ?? Want to try?
> Bc I don't...



I'll let your kind try for me instead, since that's the only thing you're good at, well that and blowing yourselves up.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> I'll let your kind try for me instead, since that's the only thing you're good at, well that and blowing yourselves up.



Are you asking for a FAVOR? not manly enough to do it alone? Am I right?


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Are you asking for a FAVOR? not manly enough to do it alone? Am I right?



It's not about being a man, it's about the fact I am sane human and drinking camels' urines and kissing them is something reserved for your kind.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> It's not about being a man, it's about the fact I am sane human and drinking camels' urines and kissing them is something reserved for your kind.



Tbh with you , we do not have camels, at least not alot in my country. but since you hatred for arabs gave you the opportunity to sink in despair and insults.. you didn't see it...
Anyway.
Have Fun


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Tbh with you , we do not have camels, at least not alot in my country. but since you hatred for arabs gave you the opportunity to sink in despair and insults.. you didn't see it...
> Anyway.
> Have Fun



I don't hate arabs, I hate wahabi desert dwellers with no brain capacity.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Faravahar said:


> I don't hate arabs, I hate wahabi desert dwellers with no brain capacity.



Yeah... Whoever is against Iran policy or lies is a whahabi desert dwellers...
Anyway
Have fun


----------



## Faravahar

HannibalBarca said:


> Yeah... Whoever is against Iran policy or lies is a whahabi desert dwellers...
> Anyway
> Have fun



Not true, Zionists, Americans and their wahabi desert dwelling slaves are against Iranian policies. Don't feel special, you're just slaves at the end of the day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

HannibalBarca said:


> Yeah... Whoever is against Iran policy or lies is a whahabi desert dwellers...
> Anyway
> Have fun


You are an unwanted troll Hannibal.


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> engine?



J-85 or an Iranian copy (Owj jet engine).



mohammad45 said:


> Twin engined JF-17



Just... no.

Can you think of any 3rd, 4th or 5th generation fighter that was modified to change engine configuration? I can only think of the F-20 Tigershark (Twin Engine F-5 made into single engine F-20), and even that never reached production, besides it was a conversion from twin engine to single, not the other way around.

Changing engine configuration is a huge task. You are changing the aircraft in a massively fundamental way. Basically all the internals have to be completely reworked, and a lot of the externals as well. Flight characteristics will change, in both positive and negative ways.

And this is the JF-17, which is a small aircraft. Its like trying to shoehorn a Chevy V8 into a Peugeot 206 (size-wise). There is simply no point. Much better to buy a twin engine aircraft from the start.



mohammad45 said:


> There is some evidence that Iran has already purchased SU-50. :::



Not an official poster. There is no evidence of Iran buying the Su-50.

Sorry but I'm now going to crush all speculation of Iran buying the JF-17.

Iran is *twice* as big as Pakistan. Bigger country means you need longer ranged planes. The JF-17, as a small single engine aircraft, does *not *have the required range for the role Iran requires, which is *air superiority. *The JF-17 is meant to supplement the F-16 (even though the F-16 was actually designed as a light fighter).

Pakistan's enemy (India) borders Pakistan. Pakistan, therefore, does not require it's aircraft to have a long range to engage in offensive operations. Iran's accessible (I say accessible because I hardly expect Iran to go bombing Israel, that's what the ballistic missiles are for) enemies are across the Persian Gulf (Saudi and whoever decides to support it), and in the Gulf of Oman (US Navy). Iran needs long ranged aircraft to strike back at these adversaries.

As I already said, Iran desperately needs an air superiority fighter. The JF-17 is *not *such an aircraft. It is a light fighter. As such it not only has low range but also low payload. Another vital thing required for Iran's needs. Furthermore, with Iran being mindful of its spending, it would prefer a multirole aircraft that can also strike enemy targets. While the JF-17 is multirole, its low payload again hampers its efficacy in such a role.

For sure, the JF-17 is probably more capable than almost all of Iran's fighters, bar the F-14. But we are not looking for replacements for the sake of replacements, we want replacements that fit our needs and requirements. The JF-17 does not do this.

An Su-30 would fit this role, though the future requires stealth aircraft.

Lastly, to the troll, fvck off.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WarFariX

AmirPatriot said:


> J-85 or an Iranian copy (Owj jet engine).
> 
> 
> 
> Just... no.
> 
> Can you think of any 3rd, 4th or 5th generation fighter that was modified to change engine configuration? I can only think of the F-20 Tigershark (Twin Engine F-5 made into single engine F-20), and even that never reached production, besides it was a conversion from twin engine to single, not the other way around.
> 
> 
> Changing engine configuration is a huge task. You are changing the aircraft in a massively fundamental way. Basically all the internals have to be completely reworked, and a lot of the externals as well. Flight characteristics will change, in both positive and negative ways.
> 
> And this is the JF-17, which is a small aircraft. Its like trying to shoehorn a Chevy V8 into a Peugeot 206 (size-wise). There is simply no point. Much better to buy a twin engine aircraft from the start.
> 
> 
> 
> Not an official poster. There is no evidence of Iran buying the Su-50.
> 
> Sorry but I'm now going to crush all speculation of Iran buying the JF-17.
> 
> Iran is *twice* as big as Pakistan. Bigger country means you need longer ranged planes. The JF-17, as a small single engine aircraft, does *not *have the required range for the role Iran requires, which is *air superiority. *The JF-17 is meant to supplement the F-16 (even though the F-16 was actually designed as a light fighter).
> 
> Pakistan's enemy (India) borders Pakistan. Pakistan, therefore, does not require it's aircraft to have a long range to engage in offensive operations. Iran's accessible (I say accessible because I hardly expect Iran to go bombing Israel, that's what the ballistic missiles are for) enemies are across the Persian Gulf (Saudi and whoever decides to support it), and in the Gulf of Oman (US Navy). Iran needs long ranged aircraft to strike back at these adversaries.
> 
> As I already said, Iran desperately needs an air superiority fighter. The JF-17 is *not *such an aircraft. It is a light fighter. As such it not only has low range but also low payload. Another vital thing required for Iran's needs. Furthermore, with Iran being mindful of its spending, it would prefer a multirole aircraft that can also strike enemy targets. While the JF-17 is multirole, its low payload again hampers its efficacy in such a role.
> 
> For sure, the JF-17 is probably more capable than almost all of Iran's fighters, bar the F-14. But we are not looking for replacements for the sake of replacements, we want replacements that fit our needs and requirements. The JF-17 does not do this.
> 
> An Su-30 would fit this role, though the future requires stealth aircraft.
> 
> Lastly, to the troll, fvck off.


what are ur specualtion of iran entering j31v2 program ? @SOHEIL


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> what are ur specualtion of iran entering j31v2 program ?


Unfortunately, painfully low, mostly because of politics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

How willing are the Chinese to actually have iran participate in a fully mutual manor. Without taking money and running or giving a gimped product?


----------



## ashool

SABA 248

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Iran Panha Co 4th gen Saba-248 dual engine 4 blade helicopter ساخت بالگرد صبا ۲۴۸

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

ashool said:


> QAHER F-313 FLAYING IN YEAR 96 GENERAL DEHQAN SAID
> WE WAITING WHEN ITS FLY AND SEE LONG FACE OF THOSE ONE SAID ITS FAKE YAVAR I THINK YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE I THINK
> 
> اهمیتی نداره چه موتوری داخلش باشه مهم اینه که کاربری داشته باشه موتور جی 85 هم موتور خوبی هست و تا الان هم امتحانشو پس داده پس لطفا ایرادای بنی اسراییلی نگیرید تا دیروز که پلاستیکی بود حالا موتوراگه پرواز کنه و مثلا از اف18 هم بهتر باشه مثلا شما میگید نه این بدرد نمیخوره چون حتما باید بهتر از اف22 و35 و تی50 باشه نکنه انتظار داری موتور بشقاب پرنده توش بزارن تا شما راضی شی



You don't know much about anything!

Building an aircraft that looks nice but has 0 to limited military application is a mistake! And unless they make major design changes & modification to the Q-313 that they showed that aircraft will have limited capabilities & limited applications and other than a technology demonstrator it will be nothing but a waist of time & money!

J-85 is NOT a good engine! And an fighter jet powered by a single J-85 with the Q-313 design will not be able to go faster than 750km/h & will have a cruise speed of under 600km/h
For you to understand what that means the slow moving Su-25 that's practically a flying tank has a max speed of over 900km/h and can carry far more weapons

J-85 is a simple cheep & an extremely weak engine NOT a GOOD engine!

Also the Q-313 is not going to be a stealth fighter! Yes it has reduced RCS but so does the Saegheh!

Saegheh in every aspect from speed, payload, maneuverability, max G force,.... is a superior platform!

Unless Iran plans on producing them at a rate of 200 per year for the next 20 years they will give Iran no advantage against any country in the region! And even then Iran would still be better off building 100 Saegheh per year using 2 J-85 engines over that ridicules fighter they showed!

Instead of wasting time and money on that ridicules Q-313 Iran should have been working on adding built in IRST, Helmet Mounted HUD, Glass cockpit, Air refueling capability, PGM capabilities, upgraded radar & sensors, reduced RCS cockpit & canopy, vectored thrust, upgraded weapons & weapons systems to it's current Saegheh platform!
And then the next step for a platform should have been building a larger version using a larger turbofan engines!

Reduced RCS will not save you from ground sensors nor will it save you from IR missile it's slow speed means ground early warning systems will convey your position to interceptors with IRST's IR missiles and due to your slow speed your aircraft will be intercepted & downed using IR missiles long before you get to your target!

And the only thing the Q-313 will be able to intercept are helicopters & slow UAV's for it wont even be fast enough to intercept a Tomahawk cruise missile let alone a fighter jet!

So again other than use as a jet trainer the Q-313 is USELESS and UNLESS Iran builds a larger twin engine super sonic version with major design changes, that aircraft is NOTHING but a wait of TIME & MONEY! And anyone that tells you different doesn't have the slightest clue of what he or she is talking about!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WarFariX

so 9 march has passed ..where is qaher ?


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> so 9 march has passed ..where is qaher ?


He said before end of Iranian year, which is 20th of March.


----------



## WarFariX

AmirPatriot said:


> He said before end of Iranian year, which is 20th of March.


iranian year  what is that..heard it for the first time..my apologies


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> iranian year  what is that..heard it for the first time..my apologies


Iranian new year is different to the Gregorian calendar. Our new year is on the 20th of March.


----------



## WarFariX




----------



## raptor22

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> iranian year  what is that..heard it for the first time..my apologies



*Iranian Calendar*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> You don't know much about anything!
> 
> Building an aircraft that looks nice but has 0 to limited military application is a mistake! And unless they make major design changes & modification to the Q-313 that they showed that aircraft will have limited capabilities & limited applications and other than a technology demonstrator it will be nothing but a waist of time & money!
> 
> J-85 is NOT a good engine! And an fighter jet powered by a single J-85 with the Q-313 design will not be able to go faster than 750km/h & will have a cruise speed of under 600km/h
> For you to understand what that means the slow moving Su-25 that's practically a flying tank has a max speed of over 900km/h and can carry far more weapons
> 
> J-85 is a simple cheep & an extremely weak engine NOT a GOOD engine!
> 
> Also the Q-313 is not going to be a stealth fighter! Yes it has reduced RCS but so does the Saegheh!
> 
> Saegheh in every aspect from speed, payload, maneuverability, max G force,.... is a superior platform!
> 
> Unless Iran plans on producing them at a rate of 200 per year for the next 20 years they will give Iran no advantage against any country in the region! And even then Iran would still be better off building 100 Saegheh per year using 2 J-85 engines over that ridicules fighter they showed!
> 
> Instead of wasting time and money on that ridicules Q-313 Iran should have been working on adding built in IRST, Helmet Mounted HUD, Glass cockpit, Air refueling capability, PGM capabilities, upgraded radar & sensors, reduced RCS cockpit & canopy, vectored thrust, upgraded weapons & weapons systems to it's current Saegheh platform!
> And then the next step for a platform should have been building a larger version using a larger turbofan engines!
> HOW DO YOU KNOW THEY DID NOT?
> 
> Reduced RCS will not save you from ground sensors nor will it save you from IR missile it's slow speed means ground early warning systems will convey your position to interceptors with IRST's IR missiles and due to your slow speed your aircraft will be intercepted & downed using IR missiles long before you get to your target!
> 
> 
> And the only thing the Q-313 will be able to intercept are helicopters & slow UAV's for it wont even be fast enough to intercept a Tomahawk cruise missile let alone a fighter jet!
> 
> So again other than use as a jet trainer the Q-313 is USELESS and UNLESS Iran builds a larger twin engine super sonic version with major design changes, that aircraft is NOTHING but a wait of TIME & MONEY! And anyone that tells you different doesn't have the slightest clue of what he or she is talking about!



let it show up and after that make judgement plz 
you speak about it like you are one of those who make qaher . who said its one engine maybe 2 .su 25 is 2 engine too
and did you think they are not too stupid to making fighter with max speed 700 kmh . i dont think so .in our condition (iran) no one goingto sell us anything or helping us to make one so the only choice is we ourselves do something and this is good starting . second are you iranian ?
and i dont say qaher engine is j85 i said j85 is good engine and it is . dont expect we are in first try to make fighter going to make UFO( BOSHGAB PARANDE)
with laser canon .
third

how do you know they didnt upgrade saeqes

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


>


Photoshop image. Please don't use to imply it's fly-worthy.


----------



## WarFariX

WordsMatter said:


> Photoshop image. Please don't use to imply it's fly-worthy.


perhaps some burnol may do sir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WarFariX

by tommorow we must get QAHER news .....where is itt ..kept us waiting toooooooooooooooooooooooo long @SOHEIL @AmirPatriot


----------



## Rukarl

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> by tommorow we must get QAHER news .....where is itt ..kept us waiting toooooooooooooooooooooooo long @SOHEIL @AmirPatriot



Who told you we're going to get such news tomorrow bro?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WarFariX

Rukarl said:


> Who told you we're going to get such news tomorrow bro?


irani new year is coming


----------



## Rukarl

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> irani new year is coming



I understand, but when did they say they will show anything regarding qaher? They just said it will have its first taxi flight. They should not show it. They should only show it when it is doing its full flights. We don't need another media shitstorm bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## warfareknow

Qaher?


----------



## WarFariX

qaher :-( ?


----------



## mohsen

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> qaher :-( ?


no news yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

*Russian Helicopters Plans Ka-226 and Ansat Assembly In Iran*

Russian Aviaton » Monday April 3, 2017 18:05 MSK
Russian Helicopters and Iran’s Industrial Development and Renovation Organization (IDRO) have planned a joint venture to assemble KA-226 and Ansat light civilian helicopters, portal Defense World reported.

The Joint Venture to assemble light civilian helicopters in Iran was announced by Russian Helicopters firm last week.

A memorandum of understanding was signed by Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky and the chairman of the Board of Directors of IDRO Mansour Moazami. The document is aimed at promoting cooperation between Russia and Iran as part of the program on upgrading the Iranian helicopter fleet.

Russian Helicopters also intends to explore potential for cooperation with IDRO to develop business in the Middle East.

“We see that the demand for light helicopters is high in Iran, and the country needs them for civilian agencies. said Boginsky.

The joint venture between Russia and Iran would consider assembling light Ka-226 or Ansat helicopters. Currently, negotiations on this issue are ongoing. Iran uses almost the whole range of helicopters of this type: Mi-17, Mi-171, Mi-171E, Mi-8MTV and Mi-17V-5s.

These medium-class helicopters are used for law enforcement and to fight organized crime. Just as in other countries of the region, Russian helicopters in Iran have become known primarily as machines that allow to perform tasks in high temperatures and at high altitudes.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mark Pyruz

This is a bit late, apologies:

*Imagery, details from IRIAF "Path of Light" Air Show at Dezful*
http://inteloniran.blogspot.com/2017/04/iriaf-path-of-light-air-show-2017.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> *Russian Helicopters Plans Ka-226 and Ansat Assembly In Iran*



Why are they investing in this when they claim they are producing local designs?


----------



## mohsen

Sina-1 said:


> Why are they investing in this when they claim they are producing local designs?


Ka226 can give us plenty of knowledge, and ansat could be just a cover up for supplying some stuff.
Though in the Rouhani's import government, EVERYTHING is possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WordsMatter

mohsen said:


> *Russian Helicopters Plans Ka-226 and Ansat Assembly In Iran*
> 
> Russian Aviaton » Monday April 3, 2017 18:05 MSK
> Russian Helicopters and Iran’s Industrial Development and Renovation Organization (IDRO) have planned a joint venture to assemble KA-226 and Ansat light civilian helicopters, portal Defense World reported.
> 
> The Joint Venture to assemble light civilian helicopters in Iran was announced by Russian Helicopters firm last week.
> 
> A memorandum of understanding was signed by Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky and the chairman of the Board of Directors of IDRO Mansour Moazami. The document is aimed at promoting cooperation between Russia and Iran as part of the program on upgrading the Iranian helicopter fleet.
> 
> Russian Helicopters also intends to explore potential for cooperation with IDRO to develop business in the Middle East.
> 
> “We see that the demand for light helicopters is high in Iran, and the country needs them for civilian agencies. said Boginsky.
> 
> The joint venture between Russia and Iran would consider assembling light Ka-226 or Ansat helicopters. Currently, negotiations on this issue are ongoing. Iran uses almost the whole range of helicopters of this type: Mi-17, Mi-171, Mi-171E, Mi-8MTV and Mi-17V-5s.
> 
> These medium-class helicopters are used for law enforcement and to fight organized crime. Just as in other countries of the region, Russian helicopters in Iran have become known primarily as machines that allow to perform tasks in high temperatures and at high altitudes.



But why?! Iran just claimed a "domestically built" helo. Why buy Russian if you can produce a helo already?!

Iran has unveiled what it purports to be a new domestically developed and manufactured helicopter, national media announced on 7 March.

The Saba-248, which was reportedly designed and built by Iran's Helicopter Renovation and Logistics Company (PANHA) in partnership with the Defence Ministry's Aviation Industries Organization, was revealed during a ceremony that was attended by top military officials.


----------



## samparis75

Didn't IRIAF plan to buy some Kamov KA52? I know that they have began the production of Shahed 216, but this is more for the IRGC...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

samparis75 said:


> I know that they have began the production of Shahed 216


Are you serious ???????
Are they produce TV3 locally or got from Russians ?????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ilia

SubWater said:


> Are you serious ???????
> Are they produce TV3 locally or got from Russians ?????


 Locally

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

Iran made fighter plane Qaher F 313 taxi test آزمایش تاکسی جنگنده قاهر اف ۳۱۳ 






جنگنده قاهر «تاکسی» کرد
همچنین در این مراسم آزمایش تاکسی، حرکت برروی زمین و آماده سازی برای پرواز جنگنده قاهر اف 313 برای استفاده نیروهای مسلح و کاربران کشوری رونمایی شد.
http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/82492911/

Tehran, April 15, IRNA – President Hassan Rouhani participated Saturday in an exhibition displaying the achievements of the Defense Ministry gained during the past two years.
Also, the president attended a ceremony on preparation of the flight of the Qaher-313 fighter.
http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82493008/

===========================================================





 هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر
با حضور حجت الاسلام و المسلمین حسن روحانی صبح شنبه در سازمان پیشتیانی و نوسازی هلی کوپترهای ایران از نخستین هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر رونمایی شد.
http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/82492911/


Tehran, April 15, IRNA – President Hassan Rouhani participated Saturday in an exhibition displaying the achievements of the Defense Ministry gained during the past two years.
Also, the president President Rouhani unveiled the domestic training jet named Kosar,
http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82493008/

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ashool

this is another train fighter jet kosar

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

========================================================

*Iran made BVR fighter air-to-air missile "Fakour" موشک هوا به هوای فکور*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SubWater



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WarFariX

New trainer jet Kosar is also unveiled








yavar said:


> ========================================================
> 
> *Iran made BVR fighter air-to-air missile "Fakour" موشک هوا به هوای فکور*


looks too heavy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> looks too heavy


Not for the F-14.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Arminkh

yavar said:


> Iran made fighter plane Qaher F 313 taxi test آزمایش تاکسی جنگنده قاهر اف ۳۱۳
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> جنگنده قاهر «تاکسی» کرد
> همچنین در این مراسم آزمایش تاکسی، حرکت برروی زمین و آماده سازی برای پرواز جنگنده قاهر اف 313 برای استفاده نیروهای مسلح و کاربران کشوری رونمایی شد.
> http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/82492911/
> 
> Tehran, April 15, IRNA – President Hassan Rouhani participated Saturday in an exhibition displaying the achievements of the Defense Ministry gained during the past two years.
> Also, the president attended a ceremony on preparation of the flight of the Qaher-313 fighter.
> http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82493008/
> 
> ===========================================================
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر
> با حضور حجت الاسلام و المسلمین حسن روحانی صبح شنبه در سازمان پیشتیانی و نوسازی هلی کوپترهای ایران از نخستین هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر رونمایی شد.
> http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/82492911/
> 
> 
> Tehran, April 15, IRNA – President Hassan Rouhani participated Saturday in an exhibition displaying the achievements of the Defense Ministry gained during the past two years.
> Also, the president President Rouhani unveiled the domestic training jet named Kosar,
> http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82493008/


@yavar jan shadam kardi. Khoda shader kone

@SOHEIL jan now let's go to all the losers who were laughing at us and see what they have to say? I'm right behind you.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## T-55

Su-24








Mig-21




http://russianplanes.net

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

@AmirPatriot Is this real or just a propaganda?! Venezuelan Falcon in Iran


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> @AmirPatriot Is this real or just a propaganda?! Venezuelan Falcon in Iran


Scale models. Made by the late modeller and photographer Fariborz Shammas.

He was very talented, and at first glance most people mistake his work for the real thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Scale models. Made by the late modeller and photographer Fariborz Shammas.
> 
> He was very talented, and at first glance most people mistake his work for the real thing.


There are rumors bro, do we really have Falcon? Some say 1 of them was delivered before revolution took place, the 'A' version which shah had ordered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> There are rumors bro, do we really have Falcon? Some say 1 of them was delivered before revolution took place, the 'A' version which shah had ordered.



The F-16s were scheduled to be delivered in 1980. So I don't think we even got that 1 F-16.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

AmirPatriot said:


> The F-16s were scheduled to be delivered in 1980. So I don't think we even got that 1 F-16.



lol shouldve waited a year before u guys went nannas

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

We can be 99.9% sure no F-16s ended up in Iran, due to the projected delivery schedule. There is some evidence that some AGE kit (power carts for example) and possibly some ATM-9L training rounds were delivered in 1978-1979. These items are rumored to have been sold/traded to Pakistan back in the 1980s. IIRC, the first components for the first batch of aircraft had been manufactured but no complete aircraft by the time of the Revolution. 

Ironically, the F-16s that were on the assembly-line meant for Iran, likely ended up delivered to Israel's air force. In fact, the cancellation of Iran's initial order for 160 F-16A/Bs actually caused the unit cost of the F-16 to increase across-the-board quite a bit (I'll have to hunt for the actual percentage, swear I have it in one of my books). 

The Venezuelan rumor is so far just that, a rumor of a rumor of a rumor. We do know Iranian DoD personnel got to see/inspect some of Venezuela's F-16s but that's all we can confirm. I think the most you can hope for is the IRIAF got to send some pilots there to do some cross-training.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Wonder if this project is a parallel to Qaher. MATF
@AmirPatriot


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> Wonder if this project is a parallel to Qaher. MATF
> @AmirPatriot


Its from the '90s. More likely Qaher is parallel to this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

AmirPatriot said:


> Its from the '90s. More likely Qaher is parallel to this.



lmao how many fighter jet projects do u have?


----------



## Kastor

TruthHurtz said:


> lmao how many fighter jet projects do u have?


I wonder where in Israel you're located. You're obviously more than a casual observer here. You must be very low on the Totem pole if you're assigned to this forum...Now I'm LMAO.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

Kastor said:


> I wonder where in Israel you're located. You're obviously more than a casual observer here. You must be very low on the Totem pole if you're assigned to this forum...Now I'm LMAO.



have u seen some of my comments about jews and israel? lmao


----------



## AmirPatriot

TruthHurtz said:


> lmao how many fighter jet projects do u have?



Shafaq/M-ATF was actually an advanced trainer or light fighter that we were going to co develop with the Russians before they gave in to US pressure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eagle2007

AmirPatriot,

To be even more accurate:

Russian designer Fatadin Mukhamedov founded a small design bureau that, among other things, designed an advanced trainer to compete with the MiG-AT and Yak-130, called the M-AT or "Integral". This was made public around 1998. 

Shortly there after, the design is seen in Iran as the "Shafagh", in which at least some redesign was considered. There is talk of a 2xJ85 powered variant instead of the original RD-33 (non after-burning) configuration (I believe the only sources is from an edition of Jane's all the World's Aircraft but I could be wrong). We also know a chin-mounted intake (similar to a F-16's) was considered (see attached, courtesy the folks at ACIG).






So clearly, the advanced trainer design made it to Iran and was likely worked on jointly to some degree (original Russian design being tweaked by Iranian engineers to fit their specific needs). Given how small his company was, his chances of winning the trainer contract in Russia were likely always slim, regardless of how good his design was, so he likely accepted a pitch from Iranian aviation folks to come there and continue his work. 

In the end, only a wooden mock-up was ever built in Iran. 

The "swept wing Shafagh" was in fact a related/but separate design referred to variously as the M-ATF, MMF, or Vityaz. The original patent for this particular design is still out there and refers to it simply as a "Multifunctional Fighter". 
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/pub...10816&DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&locale=en_EP
(see page 13-15 for the actual drawings)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

TruthHurtz said:


> have u seen some of my comments about jews and israel? lmao


Indeed and I just did. My apologies, you're a retired military reservists right-wing nut job, you're living on a pig farm in the middle of N. Dakota. Probably sitting on old wood colonial furniture typing this on a desktop computer under the "Don't tread on me" flag. You're also glowing about the fact Trump won so he can finally take your country back from the Blacks, Jews and Muzzies. So you just happen to drop in here to see what them damn I-ranians are cooking up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Windjammer said:


> View attachment 397829


These are model aircraft!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> These are model aircraft!


Yes I'm aware of that.
1/72 Hasegawa


----------



## AmirPatriot

_Oh my God
















_

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Zathura

AmirPatriot said:


> _Oh my God
> 
> View attachment 399055
> 
> 
> View attachment 399056
> 
> 
> View attachment 399057
> 
> _



That is a beautiful paint job on the Tom-cat. I seriously hope that Iran chooses a great paint job such as this one for their future Su-30s.
Not a big fan of the patterns on the mig-29s though.


----------



## Iranm

Zathura said:


> That is a beautiful paint job on the Tom-cat. I seriously hope that Iran chooses a great paint job such as this one for their future Su-30s.
> Not a big fan of the patterns on the mig-29s though.


I've just heard from someone in IRIG that Iran has bought some fighters from China(in wooden boxes) and Pakistan and Russia (mig 29 from what he says)
He also says that Pakistan and Chinese jets are not so reliable.


----------



## Avicenna

Iranm said:


> I've just heard from someone in IRIG that Iran has bought some fighters from China(in wooden boxes) and Pakistan and Russia (mig 29 from what he says)
> He also says that Pakistan and Chinese jets are not so reliable.



LOL. Wrong!



AmirPatriot said:


> _Oh my God
> 
> View attachment 399055
> 
> 
> View attachment 399056
> 
> 
> View attachment 399057
> 
> _



Gorgeous pics!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iranm

Avicenna said:


> LOL. Wrong!


Which part buying jets or reliabilities?
Not in numbers probably for testing or ....


----------



## Avicenna

Iran buying jets. Highly doubt it. Still under arms embargo. 

Although I am hoping some sort of modernization program gets underway soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

AmirPatriot said:


> _Oh my God
> 
> View attachment 399055
> 
> 
> View attachment 399056
> 
> 
> View attachment 399057
> 
> _



The Tomcat in the 1st picture is not the same one as in the 2nd and 3rd pictures!


----------



## AmirPatriot

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The Tomcat in the 1st picture is not the same one as in the 2nd and 3rd pictures!


The one in the 2nd and 3rd pictures is the first F-14AM, the one in the 1st is the 2nd F-14AM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gold Eagle

Beauty And Beast At the same Time!

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Avicenna

The F-14 is a BEAUTY!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Is there any reason that our fighter jets radomes are look like this, I wanna know aren't we able to produce needed coating to paint them? or there is another reason ..?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> Is there any reason that our fighter jets radomes are look like this, I wanna know aren't we able to produce needed coating to paint them? or there is another reason ..?


This question was a source of discussion on IMF all the time, some speculated it was because of the high speed these jets move at but no-one was able to make a definite conclusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> This question was a source of discussion on IMF all the time, some speculated it was because of the high speed these jets move at but no-one was able to make a definite conclusion.


Could it be due to powerful AN/AWG-9 radar radiations? and whatever the reason would be , shouldn't it be repainted every now and then?


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> Could it be due to powerful AN/AWG-9 radar radiations? and whatever the reason would be , shouldn't it be repainted every now and then?


Possibly, but we really cannot be sure. As for painting, sure they should, but the IRIAF is in a bit of a rough shape atm.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

AmirPatriot said:


> Possibly, but we really cannot be sure. As for painting, sure they should, but the IRIAF is in a bit of a rough shape atm.


The radomes gradually turn red and they get repainted when ever the Aircraft goes in for an overhaul.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The radomes gradually turn red and they get repainted when ever the Aircraft goes in for an overhaul.


you know why?


----------



## Draco.IMF

is iran even not allowed to purchase training jets like the Yak-130?






or the italian M-346?






ok, maybe Yak-130 can be problematic because it can be equipped with rockets/missiles/bombs, but there are plenty of other trainer jets out there....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Draco.IMF said:


> is iran even not allowed to purchase training jets like the Yak-130?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or the italian M-346?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ok, maybe Yak-130 can be problematic because it can be equipped with rockets/missiles/bombs, but there are plenty of other trainer jets out there....



Nope. The US (Israel/Saudi the usual suspects) doesn't want Iran to have a competent Air force or even one that close to it. Having one would complete Irans defensive architecture and make any attack on Iran nearly impossible without guaranteed heavy casualties.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

raptor22 said:


> you know why?


I don't know why!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I don't know why!


Well heat , oxygen and high-energy radiation from radars are sure recipe for oxidataion .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samparis75

Just saw that you were talking about the Yak 130...If i'm not wrong, Iran was developing a training/light attack jet named Shafaq... What about it? What's going on with this project? Any news?


----------



## Readerdefence

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Nope. The US (Israel/Saudi the usual suspects) doesn't want Iran to have a competent Air force or even one that close to it. Having one would complete Irans defensive architecture and make any attack on Iran nearly impossible without guaranteed heavy casualties.


Hi I don't think Saudi & Americans can stop Russian to sell them if they want to as they already have russsian fighters and Chinese f7 series so china can also supply them jl10 or any other like they supplying to African countries 
Thx


----------



## AmirPatriot

Readerdefence said:


> Hi I don't think Saudi & Americans can stop Russian to sell them if they want to as they already have russsian fighters and Chinese f7 series so china can also supply them jl10 or any other like they supplying to African countries
> Thx



They can put pressure on Russia/China. They've done it before.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> Could it be due to powerful AN/AWG-9 radar radiations? and whatever the reason would be , shouldn't it be repainted every now and then?



The change in color on the radome is due to the Aircrafts flight at high speeds some turn red due to particles in the air rubbing off the outer layer and this especially becomes evident on multi color domes with white tips (mainly used on naval fighters and NOT over dry countries like Iran) and in most of the cases it's due to the outer layer of paint rubbing off due to high friction.... gunpowder residue is also a factor that's why the side with the gun goes red faster 

To paint an F-14 requires a special paint to paint the Radome requires a very special paint that is free of some materials that could effect the radar (especially lead) and has to be both high heat & friction resistant (capable of resisting Mach 2) and this type of paint is a more recent development in Iran and was not produced in Iran at the time that picture was taken which makes painting (*more like repairing because they likely have to be placed in a vacuumed oven*) the radome as often as you like not so easy or cheap due to sanctions!

Also white radomes are mostly for naval fight jets and rarely used for Mach 2 fighters that have to takeoff, land & mainly operate over a dry country with high dust particles on a daily bases and the U.S. likely knew this would help them increase maintenance costs when they sold the F-14's to Iran and they would have claimed the radome couldn't be painted and had to be replaced or sent back to the US to be repaired or replaced by the manufacturer (May have been true in the 70's due to a lack of equipment in Iran IDK) and being a good capitalist country that they are they recommended the multi color radome with the white tip on all Iranian F-14's







vs






look at the video below and what happens to the paint when the missile hits high speeds on a single launch within seconds and that's not even the nose of the rocket & now imagine the nose having to be radar absorbent... of course the heat created inside the rocket is also a major factor but it gives you an idea of the heat and friction the radome of a Mach 2 fighter has endure so Iran can't be picky with those white tips on a multi color radome....

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

*Iran's Training Jet, The 'Kosar' هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

Saba 248 Helicopter

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zathura

_I am posting this particular article here because SU-30 sm is the leading contender to be purchased by Iran in the future for its air force. 
Also I find the following quote very interesting: "the upgraded Su-30SM1 will equal the fifth-generation aircraft in its capabilities". _
===============================================

*MAKS 2017: Russian MoD eyes improved variant of the Su-30SM fighter jet*
Russia’s Ministry of Defense and Irkut Corporation are completing modernization of the Su-30SM multirole fighter. The upgraded version will be designated the Su-30SM1. Improvements will be made to avionics, and the aircraft will also be able to use the latest precision-guided weapons. According to experts, the upgraded Su-30SM1 will equal the fifth-generation aircraft in its capabilities, writes the newspaper Izvestia.
As Izvestia was told at Russia’s Aerospace Forces Command, the modernization of the Su-30SM is currently underway, taking into account the experience of daily and combat operation of fighters. The upgraded aircraft will feature a number of improvements to avionics, as well as an expanded range of precision-guided munitions. Several Su-30SMs have already been modernized. The United Aircraft Corporation confirmed that the work was underway, but declined to comment further.
Expert Anton Lavrov told Izvestia that if a single digit is added to the designation of an aircraft, then it’s most likely about adding new types of ammunition to the range of weapons used by the fighter. "_The Su-30SM is a very good aircraft," the expert said. "In the case of the Su-30SM1, this may be the addition of new suspended surveillance systems and the integration of additional weapons. It can be assumed that the upgraded fighters will be able to use the KAB-250 precision-guided bombs and Kh-59MK2 air-to-surface missiles._"
The KAB-250 bomb has a modular design and can be fitted with satellite- and laser-guided systems. It was developed in response to the development of guided air bombs of the SDB (Small Diameter Bomb) family in the United States. These bombs are used to equip the American F-22 and F-35 fifth-generation fighters. The KAB-250 with a laser seeker and a HE warhead is designed to destroy soft skin equipment, railway junctions, warehouses and other enemy facilities. The air bomb can be used both singly and in salvo from an aircraft equipped with on-board laser target designators, as well as when the targets are externally illuminated from the ground.
The Kh-59MK2 is an advanced version of the Kh-59 missile. The latter was intended to destroy surface targets such as "boat" or "ship." The MK2 version has added a capability to destroy low-contrast ground-based stationary targets with known coordinates to these capabilities. This is an airborne fire-and-forget precision-guided missile.

The Su-30SM fighter is the latest version of Russia’s most mass-produced Su-30 generation 4++ multirole fighter. Its super maneuverability is achieved through a highly effective integral aerodynamic configuration of the airframe, the use of AL-31FP engines with a thrust vectoring control system, and canard surfaces. The Bars onboard radar enables the pilot to use weapons in a maneuverable flight at a long range. The aircraft is able to use the entire range of current and advanced precision-guided air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons and fly up to 3,000 km without refueling and external fuel tanks. During a recent visit to the Irkutsk Aviation Plant, Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov said that in 2017 the Aerospace Forces expect to receive 17 new Su-30SM fighters, recalls the newspaper Izvestia.

*Source: airrecognition*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Iran and MAKS-2017
sputnik news spanish
https://mundo.sputniknews.com/tecnologia/201707271071085214-iran-aeronautica-exposicion/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Readerdefence

AmirPatriot said:


> They can put pressure on Russia/China. They've done it before.


I think not anymore with the Present situation around as recently Russia has completed the delivery of s300 
So I'm positive if Iran has the means to pay one way or the other they can get these kind of items which is technically not a threat for Americans easily 
Thx


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Readerdefence said:


> I think not anymore with the Present situation around as recently Russia has completed the delivery of s300
> So I'm positive if Iran has the means to pay one way or the other they can get these kind of items which is technically not a threat for Americans easily
> Thx



S-300 is a defensive weapon system and does not fall under the UN arms embargo on Iran. Combat Aircraft are considered as offensive weapons and are banned until 2021 at the earliest and even then I predict that the arms embargo will most likely be extended past 2021.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

2 Iranian F 14 Tomcat perform Barrel Roll maneuver

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Avicenna

What a beauty the F-14 is!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

yavar said:


> *Iran's Training Jet, The 'Kosar' هواپیمای جت آموزشی بومی کشور با نام کوثر*



A bit of a disappointment! Although Iran needs a sub sonic trainer as a step below jumping into a Simorgh / Saegheh-2 (F-5) I hoped for something better at least something that can not only do training but also has the payload capacity to do low level close Air Support something with a big gun, electro optics, PGM capability and a fairly good payload!

And why of all places would you build the prototype in Tehran? Are they really going to do test flights of a new Aircraft over the city? That's absurd!


----------



## sahureka2

VEVAK said:


> A bit of a disappointment! Although Iran needs a sub sonic trainer as a step below jumping into a Simorgh / Saegheh-2 (F-5) I hoped for something better at least something that can not only do training but also has the payload capacity to do low level *close Air Support *something with a big gun, electro optics, PGM capability and a fairly good payload!
> 
> And why of all places would you build the prototype in Tehran? Are they really going to do test flights of a new Aircraft over the city? That's absurd!



What makes you think it is not already set up for support missions, all modern triner have this ability





from the photos, it is noted that the front landing gear is offset to one side, , perhaps leaving the other side a place at *20mm M39 *! or similari !!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

sahureka2 said:


> What makes you think it is not already set up for support missions, all modern triner have this ability
> 
> from the photos, it is noted that the front landing gear is offset to one side, , perhaps leaving the other side a place at *20mm M39 *! or similari !!



They won't mass produce it ... its Nth trainer jet project Iran and all of previous one were abandoned after making 1 or 2 prototype .... Officials just want the money ... Genreral Sattari had plane to make 300 modernized F-5 till 2005/2006 for first step of modernizing Iran Air force but with his death , his dream was abondend and others just want to pass days and get their salutary in the end of month ...


----------



## sahureka2

OldTwilight said:


> They won't mass produce it ... its Nth trainer jet project Iran and all of previous one were abandoned after making 1 or 2 prototype .... Officials just want the money ... Genreral Sattari had plane to make 300 modernized F-5 till 2005/2006 for first step of modernizing Iran Air force but with his death , his dream was abondend and others just want to pass days and get their salutary in the end of month ...



Possible but at the moment are just your suppositions, and as always, it will be the time that will be able to resolve the doubt "will be realized or not".
However unlike the F-5, I think you will not have to wait a long time.


----------



## VEVAK

sahureka2 said:


> What makes you think it is not already set up for support missions, all modern triner have this ability
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from the photos, it is noted that the front landing gear is offset to one side, , perhaps leaving the other side a place at *20mm M39 *! or similari !!



If Iran only built 12 of these specifically for a certain level of training before your pilots quickly moved on to the F-5 then I would say OK! But even then the cost of R&D & resources wasted just to produce 12 of these would be too high and wouldn't make much sense!

This is the problem when you don't create competition! From the start there should have been 2-3 prototype projects competing with each other. Either 2 teams in one company or two separate government owned companies & one privet company(If available) competing for a contract of 50 to start & that way not only would the project moved on faster but the designs & equipment prebuilt into the design of the prototypes would have been much better!

And on a low thrust subsonic aircraft such as this you need to pre build the cannon & optics in the structure to reduce drag!

Also, future twin seat fighters will be designed to give the rear pilot the ability to control UAV's & something like this is vital for a country like Iran that doesn't have space based communication equipment and sensors! And this is a capability the government should have set as a requirement by analyzing what a future battlefield would look like
Also, I would even argue a low RCS airframe with minimal vertical surfaces & an internal weapons bay should have also been a requirement for an advanced subsonic trainer!

Iran doesn't have the budget to design an Aircraft for every situation and if your going to build an advanced subsonic aircraft then it needs to work both as a trainer and an attack aircraft and that means offensively at the very least the aircraft needs to be as capable as a Su-25 & A-10
That means with a low thrust Aircraft like the Kowsar your Gun & Optics should be prebuilt into the Airframe!

Iranian Pilots that would be training on an advance subsonic trainer already know how to fly so your not just teaching them how to fly a faster Aircraft but you also have to teach them to multi task faster! Target search, accusation & engagement while flying the aircraft and learning how to take full advantage of all your instrumentation!

The most simplistic design with limited capabilities & no foresight into the future is what you end up with when there is no competition!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

This is just the first prototype, none of us at this time can know what it really can conceal within the plane's nose in the operational configuration, but I think the position of the front landing gear indicates that they have designed to have a lot of space Free from the opposite side,
Space I imagine could be profusely used for electronic systems and not only.
My personal interpretation, fantasizing about armament, and also using the free space in the plane's nose.




However I did not exaggerate !!??

Certainly, in order to be competitive and economically feasible it must be built in all versions,: trainer, close air support, reconnaissance, in at least one hundred aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

sahureka2 said:


> This is just the first prototype, none of us at this time can know what it really can conceal within the plane's nose in the operational configuration, but I think the position of the front landing gear indicates that they have designed to have a lot of space Free from the opposite side,
> Space I imagine could be profusely used for electronic systems and not only.
> My personal interpretation, fantasizing about armament, and also using the free space in the plane's nose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However I did not exaggerate !!??
> 
> Certainly, in order to be competitive and economically feasible it must be built in all versions,: trainer, close air support, reconnaissance, in at least one hundred aircraft




Iran right now has the potential to develop and in the future(8-10 years from now) sell an advanced subsonic trainer/attack Aircraft to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, North Korea & Armenia! And that's at the very least! BUT you have to come up with something that's both innovative & low cost that could potentially attract these consumers!

If you come up with an innovative flying prototype then your friends and allies will take notice & once your Air Force starts flying them and showing off their capabilities that's when your friends and allies will start making inquiries about the Aircraft & if you are successful in making one sale & delivering on your contract, that's when orders start coming in & that's the type of Aircraft a smart manufacturer invests in developing not this!

This is what you end up with when there is no competition to push the limits of design and capability & this is exactly what you end up with when you lack foresight!

Lets look at some well known facts:
1.Modern IRST have a far greater range & capability than an F-5E Radar & they are passive!
2.Stealth fighter & Low RCS aircraft are more susceptible to IRST & optical sensors than they are to radars making optical sensors vital for both Air to Air and Air to Ground operations in any future fighter
3.You can use low cost methods to reduce your radar signature simply by designing your aircraft a certain way
4.Having an internal weapons bay not only reduces your RCS but it also greatly reduces drag & increases maneuverability of an armed Aircraft.

Now these aren't state secrets these are well known facts and if from the start you have designed something that doesn't have any of these characteristics then you've designed a failure! And you've wasted years of funding and recourses on a platform that never had a chance


----------



## sahureka2

We start from the fact that this is mainly a trainer jet , with close air support capabilities, certainly very useful, but nothing to do with a jet fighter plane in the style of Mig-29, F-15, F-14 Tomcat or the modern SU-30 , F-22, F-35, Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale etc.,
Therefore in designing Kowsar is not strictly necessary as you write.
Besides, the Jet Trainer with the features mentioned above counts on the fingers of one hand and all descendants from the same basic design
YAK-130
M-346
L-15
made by three nations with a long tradition of aeronautics production.
All the other Jet Trainer currently in the catalog, follow much simpler parameters
K-8
JL-8
L-39 / L-59
M-345
IA-63 Pampa
BAE Hawk
Boeing TX
T-50
To remember also that nations like Germany and France have abandoned the design and construction of jet trainers.
Therefore, Kowsar, with all the limitations that you want to attribute, can represent a significant leap forward of the Iranian aerospace industry and constitute the starting point for future and more challenging projects.
Certainly, the Kowsar project will be able to see the light with a substantial production of aircraft, only if the propulsion engines (OWJ) will be made in adequate numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

BT is saying that IRIAF will get 4 squadrons of J-10C and JH-7 from China soon, after deal with Kremlin for Su-30 SME/Su-35SE has failed because IRIAF wanted TOT and Kremlin was not giving them that. IRIAF is actually looking for TOT production of J-31 in future so this will just be a stop gap procurement. 

and he is claiming that Russia has already delivered Su-27SE to IRIAF recently ??? 

and that negotiations were held at MAKS for up-gradation of Fulcrum fleet to SMT standard and Fencers to M2 standard. 

I don't like this guy but he is not a fool either.


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> I don't like this guy but he is not a fool either.



I wouldn't take him too seriously. They guy is prone to making huge mistakes and outlandish stories.

This man says Khamenei is an ex-MI6 agent...



drmeson said:


> and he is claiming that Russia has already delivered Su-27SE to IRIAF recently ???



I think he said Russia was ready to deliver Su-27SM3s, not that they actually delivered.

In any case I'm not taking him seriously.


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> I wouldn't take him too seriously. They guy is prone to making huge mistakes and outlandish stories.
> 
> This man says Khamenei is an ex-MI6 agent...
> 
> 
> 
> I think he said Russia was ready to deliver Su-27SM3s, not that they actually delivered.
> 
> In any case I'm not taking him seriously.



he comes across to me as a patriotic person but somehow emotionally hurt and angry with administration specially IRGC (personal reasons). So I don't read his political comments. 

On the contrary his IRIAF news mostly (not all) have proven to be true. Before anyone he correctly gave the actual numbers of Mig-29s in IRIAF (which were believed in 2000s to be atleast 4 squadrons but turned out to be merely 2), he disclosed the news of failure of Azarakhash/Saeghe program as well as Chinese F-4ED upgradations. Again his emotional political rants are a different story but his Airforce news are mostly correct.

few days ago he claimed that IRGC will ask for funds for Ya-Ali LACM production and Majlis approved it later.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> but somehow emotionally hurt and angry with administration specially IRGC (personal reasons)



I'm not surprised. He is openly and overtly a shahi.



drmeson said:


> On the contrary his IRIAF news mostly (not all) have proven to be true. Before anyone he correctly gave the actual numbers of Mig-29s in IRIAF (which were believed in 2000s to be atleast 4 squadrons but turned out to be merely 2), he disclosed the news of failure of Azarakhash/Saeghe program as well as Chinese F-4ED upgradations.



As @eagle2007 will tell you, he is right in some cases but it is more common for him to be wrong lately.


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> I'm not surprised. He is openly and overtly a shahi.
> 
> 
> 
> As @eagle2007 will tell you, he is right in some cases but it is more common for him to be wrong lately.



I know. I have been following this guy for a long time now. What I have understood from his reporting is that sometimes he ends up wrong because (apart from his hatred for IRGC) Iranian weaponry policies change very quickly as well. For example, do they talk about Saeghe now ? some 7 years ago generals were saying we will mass produce them, squadrons after squadrons, people made fun of BT back then too when he was claiming that these are just rebuilt F-5E's which are not even from shelves of IRIAF. I remember he also broke news of that Mukahmedov-Shafagh-MATF connection. 

Again, I am not defending this person, nor do I like his anti IRGC ranting but I take him seriously because he off-course has connections.


----------



## WordsMatter

It's really a wistful position that IRI finds itself in: neither Russia nor China are willing, or able (China mostly due to pressure from US), to help IRI build-up her Air Forces. What's really left for IRI? It can't produce it's own fighters, and no one is selling her any. And yet all her neighbors are arming themselves with the latest and greatest air platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

WordsMatter said:


> It's really a wistful position that IRI finds itself in: *neither Russia nor China are willing*, or able (China mostly due to pressure from US), to help IRI build-up her Air Forces. What's really left for IRI? It can't produce it's own fighters, and no one is selling her any. And yet all her neighbors are arming themselves with the latest and greatest air platforms.



and How do you know that ?


----------



## WordsMatter

drmeson said:


> and How do you know that ?


The vast majority of IRI's Air Force consists of 1970s platforms. What do you mean "how do you know that"? If Russia or China were willing partners they would have supplied IRI with her Air Force needs already. That's not happening, is it?! Do you know otherwise?


----------



## drmeson

WordsMatter said:


> The vast majority of IRI's Air Force consists of 1970s platforms. What do you mean "how do you know that"? If Russia or China were willing partners they would have supplied IRI with her Air Force needs already. That's not happening, is it?! Do you know otherwise?



Actually I do know otherwise. One very strong argument that is often provided is that Iranian administration is actually not trying to re-equip its AF because of 1) Political reasons (explainable) 2) Lack of available funds (IRGC takes the cake) 3) Overall defence doctrine priority hierarchy of Missiles > AD > Navy > AF. 

Refusal by Chinese or Russians doesn't even make sense when Iranian administration itself doesn't want spend $ on IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

WordsMatter said:


> If Russia or China were willing partners they would have supplied IRI with her Air Force needs already.


cough




cough






cough






cough

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WordsMatter

AmirPatriot said:


> cough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cough


Yes Yes cough... Put any one of these aging planes against the European, American, Israeli, Saudi, UAE, Russian, or Chinese platforms and let's see if you still have something stuck in your throat. Do you seriously think IRI's AF is a match against any of the Arab countries? Let's be real here: The Arab countries spend far more on their AF than IRI can ever hope for.
I am not trying to belittle IRI, but from time to time one needs a dose of reality: IRI has no AF... yes it has a better AF than Afghanistan, but to even hint that it's a match against Israel, SA, UAE (the very counties that are challenging IRI for regional supremacy) is ridiculous. 
And before IRI's advocates go off on another name calling, vulgar rant about how "un-informed" I am, remember this adage: Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## airmarshal

MiG-29 has not proved itself to be a commendable aircraft in recent encounters against Western jets. The rest of IRIAF fleet is quite obsolete. Iran Air Force might make up that technology gap by being very good fighter pilots but training and motivation without equipment can take you only so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

When was the last time Babak T had some valuable correct information? He is so often wrong that those few useless information he sometimes have are nothing against it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Navigator

Babak T writing that Russia offered Su-27SM3 with delivering in this year instead Su-35, however it's looks like as absolutely unreliable. First - it's a open violation of UN sanctions that are in force until 2020. Second - Su-27SM3 it's nonexport version for Russian AF. There were manufactured only 12 such new planes in 2011 year + undergoing upgrade old versions of Su-27 in Su-27SM3.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

WordsMatter said:


> Yes Yes cough... Put any one of these aging planes against the European, American, Israeli, Saudi, UAE, Russian, or Chinese platforms and let's see if you still have something stuck in your throat. Do you seriously think IRI's AF is a match against any of the Arab countries? Let's be real here: The Arab countries spend far more on their AF than IRI can ever hope for.
> I am not trying to belittle IRI, but from time to time one needs a dose of reality: IRI has no AF... yes it has a better AF than Afghanistan, but to even hint that it's a match against Israel, SA, UAE (the very counties that are challenging IRI for regional supremacy) is ridiculous.
> And before IRI's advocates go off on another name calling, vulgar rant about how "un-informed" I am, remember this adage: Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.


I was disproving your absolute claim that Russia and China don't sell planes to Iran. They did it in the 1990s and *could *do it again.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> I was disproving your absolute claim that Russia and China don't sell planes to Iran. They did it in the 1990s and *could *do it again.



The fact you compare the geopolitical climate for Iran in 1990's to today is puzzling.

Fact is Iran wasnt even a significant regional power in the 90's. It was a country recovering from a brutal war.

The Soviet Union had just dissolved and there was a fire sale on arms. They were desperate for cash. They were willing to sell to anyone. 

But yet even when Iran was barely a threat, the US still put pressure on Russia and China for arms deals made with iran in the 90's.

Several people in the Iranian military are critical of the establishment for not BUYING more during the early to mid 90's when Iran had a chance to procure significant arms (subs, strategic long range bombers etc)

Compare that today and it's hard to see that Russia and China will ever engage Iran seriously in any significant offensive arms deal. China is not desperate for Cash and has other clients. US can leverage South China Sea dispute to put pressure on China.

Russia is not desperate for cash and has other clients. It will use Iran as leverage for its more important interest which is sanctions and Crimea/Ukraine situation.

Furthermore, Iran doesn't have enough cash to make any mega arms deals. So why would China and Russia put their neck out for some small arms deals?

If anyone thinks that the arms embargo is going to easily come off they are naive.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

@WordsMatter fatty idiot stop trolling.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WordsMatter

2800 said:


> @WordsMatter fatty idiot stop trolling.


Again you take an observation to be a facetious; it's not. And BTW, I am not fat, that's just my avatar.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> The fact you compare the geopolitical climate for Iran in 1990's to today is puzzling.
> 
> Fact is Iran wasnt even a significant regional power in the 90's. It was a country recovering from a brutal war.
> 
> The Soviet Union had just dissolved and there was a fire sale on arms. They were desperate for cash. They were willing to sell to anyone.
> 
> But yet even when Iran was barely a threat, the US still put pressure on Russia and China for arms deals made with iran in the 90's.
> 
> Several people in the Iranian military are critical of the establishment for not BUYING more during the early to mid 90's when Iran had a chance to procure significant arms (subs, strategic long range bombers etc)
> 
> Compare that today and it's hard to see that Russia and China will ever engage Iran seriously in any significant offensive arms deal. China is not desperate for Cash and has other clients. US can leverage South China Sea dispute to put pressure on China.
> 
> Russia is not desperate for cash and has other clients. It will use Iran as leverage for its more important interest which is sanctions and Crimea/Ukraine situation.
> 
> Furthermore, Iran doesn't have enough cash to make any mega arms deals. So why would China and Russia put their neck out for some small arms deals?
> 
> If anyone thinks that the arms embargo is going to easily come off they are naive.



I get it, the situation is different now than in the 90s. But I was only correcting an incorrect statement.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mse21

@AmirPatriot 
چرا خواب رو جوری بهش می دین که سو استفاد کنه و بهت حتی تیکه هم بندازه؟

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

WordsMatter said:


> Again you take an observation to be a facetious; it's not. And BTW, I am not fat, that's just my avatar.


I didn't say you are your avatar's picture. You are a troll.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cthulhu

drmeson said:


> Overall defence doctrine priority hierarchy of Missiles > AD > Navy > AF.


This is not a good doctrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> The fact you compare the geopolitical climate for Iran in 1990's to today is puzzling.
> 
> Fact is Iran wasnt even a significant regional power in the 90's. It was a country recovering from a brutal war.
> 
> The Soviet Union had just dissolved and there was a fire sale on arms. They were desperate for cash. They were willing to sell to anyone.
> 
> But yet even when Iran was barely a threat, the US still put pressure on Russia and China for arms deals made with iran in the 90's.
> 
> Several people in the Iranian military are critical of the establishment for not BUYING more during the early to mid 90's when Iran had a chance to procure significant arms (subs, strategic long range bombers etc)
> 
> Compare that today and it's hard to see that Russia and China will ever engage Iran seriously in any significant offensive arms deal. China is not desperate for Cash and has other clients. US can leverage South China Sea dispute to put pressure on China.
> 
> Russia is not desperate for cash and has other clients. It will use Iran as leverage for its more important interest which is sanctions and Crimea/Ukraine situation.
> 
> Furthermore, Iran doesn't have enough cash to make any mega arms deals. So why would China and Russia put their neck out for some small arms deals?
> 
> If anyone thinks that the arms embargo is going to easily come off they are naive.




The person that's naïve is you!
In the 90's Iran had already started it's weapons industry!

And don't confuse propaganda created to sell more arms to the Saudi's as FACT'S! And even in the 90's Iran was more after Technology Transfers & Co-production then purchasing weapons because it goes against Iran's defense doctrine!

Except for limited purchases for reverse engineering in the 90's Iran concluded that for specific weapons Iran would require foreign assistance & foreign weapons like Fighter Jets, Heavy Helicopters(10+ passengers), Heavy Submarines
But the problem with those type of weapons is that after a year or two (depending on the weapon) unless your getting continued foreign assistance and parts they will be useless so Iran made a limited purchase & worked towards building parts & learning how to maintain them inside the country! So a large purchase without the ability to maintain, equip & upgrade them would have just created a large junk yard nothing more!

And it was in the 90's & Iran's experience in the 80's that Iran choose to build it's defense doctrine around weapons they can produce & maintain themselves!
*
Right now there is a LAW passed by the Parliament prohibiting the purchase of "Fighter Jets" unless they foreign country was to at the very least agree to co-produced inside Iran!* 

So this idea that Iran going around knocking on doors and desperate and waiting to buy a bunch of fighter jets is nothing but a delusion! The reality is that Iran will ONLY ARGEE to buy them if the other side agrees on Co-production & gives Iran access to the weapons system!

Now US Generals & weapons dealers can go to the UAE and hype up the UAE Air Force & rant about how they have a more powerful Air Force than Iran! BUT at the end of the day they all know that even if the UAE had 500 F-35's it's wouldn't matter because Iran can at the end of the day wipe out the entire UAE Military within hours!

Why would Iran pay $150 Million USD for a Su-30 (Gear, weapons, parts,...) when with the cost of a single fighter they can drop 150 missiles or more on an Air Base, take out the enemy's Air Force & Air Defense & then use their 70's era Air Force (that they can maintain & build weapons for) plus Iranian built UCAV to take out the rest?

And yes Iran has showed interest in Co-Producing the Su-30 but due to Iran's experience in the 80's Iran is not going to simply buy that Aircraft without having access to it's weapons systems & the permission to take the Aircraft apart and produce their own spar parts!

Instead Iran will continue to invest in building it's own Jet Powered UAV's with Air-Air capabilities to be used as crude interceptors! Especially with the proliferation of Stealth Aircraft!
It's simple today Early Warning Systems can pick up stealth aircraft but since they can't detect the altitude they can't lock on so you equip a stealth jet powered UCAV with a small RCS with an IRST & IR Weapons flying at 800kph & you send two towards that heading one flying at low altitude(1000ft) one at high(15,000-20,000ft) you can control them from the ground up to 200km away but if jammed you program them to automatically detect and take out anything that doesn't have friendly IR signature once they get to that general area

Modern IR Air-Air missiles don't require you to point the nose directly at the Aircraft making it easier for UAV's to take on this task!

The UAV may be very expensive and only good for defensive purposes over your own boarder but at the end of the day it will be far cheaper than buying and operating a bunch of Su-30's that will never have a chance against an F-22
At least with the UAV you can overwhelm them with numbers because they are far cheaper and just because YOU haven't seen such a UAV in Iran it doesn't mean it's not there!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist. 

IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC. 

Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality. 

Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe. 

All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF. 

I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe. 

yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Parsipride

drmeson said:


> I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist.
> 
> IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC.
> 
> Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality.
> 
> Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe.
> 
> All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF.
> 
> I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe.
> 
> yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?



You brought up a lot of valid points. I have one question for you. If air force is to be neglected, the. why invest in the F313?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Airpower is good for low intensity warfare and there UAVs are the future. The resource difference is magnitudes. Some info:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ilia

Campare this :




To this :





This is the interesting part :





Zing zing
Iaio : hello
BT : hi
Iaio : this is a pro islamic republic organization. Who are you ?
BT : I am a pro shah , anti islam , anti revolution , anti ....
Iaio : so what do you want ?
BT : classified information about everything
Iaio : ok , there is no problem ,check your email , i sent the data
BT : thank you , boos boos
Iaio : boos boos

گوش های ما هم مخملی

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## drmeson

Parsipride said:


> You brought up a lot of valid points. I have one question for you. If air force is to be neglected, the. why invest in the F313?



No one knows future but for now I would be inclined to call Q-313 as an amalgam of 1) Propaganda 2) Academic Utopia 3) Some reality from Shafagh experience.

Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Q-313 are all in same category of aspiring projects gone to trash (unless Q-313 actually flies). Shafagh on the other hand was a real project. How do I know that ? ... because real money+ foreign technical help + foreign procurement + Local academic research was involved. Shafagh was a novel concept that came from Soviet designer Latvian born Fatedin Mukhamedov who envisioned circular disc like fuselages with large LERX to be highly maneuverable and stealthy designs. I guess he patented this large LERX design back in early 90s. Shafagh's model was first showed back in mid 90s in Dubai air show. There was real work going in Malek Ashtar University where Russian engineers were collaborating with local ones. Avionics suite was supposed to come from Russia. Jet was supposed to powered by actual Klimov RD-2000 sophisticated nonburning turbofans. It passed wind tunnel tests too. This could have become Iranian Yak-130 with appreciable combat capability ... and the story doesn't stop here. There was supposed to be a fighter version of this aircraft. Among all the combat jet projects that started in Iran, Shafagh as of today was the real most. 

One can go on and say where are the blue prints ? what became of that training and gaining of information from Experienced Russian engineers who came to Iran in 1990s. Even failed projects yield something out. If there is any reality to Qaher-313 than it must have some background from Shafagh designs, otherwise i see no future of this project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

drmeson said:


> I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist.
> 
> IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC.
> 
> Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality.
> 
> Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe.
> 
> All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF.
> 
> I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe.
> 
> yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?



your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .

I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .

In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.

I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )

I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .

about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

drmeson said:


> I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist.
> 
> IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC.
> 
> Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality.
> 
> Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe.
> 
> All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF.
> 
> I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe.
> 
> yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?




FYI the day's where the government was scared of the Artesh gaining too much power is long passed my friend! Those are nothing but western delusions! 

I would not mix the IRIAF with IRGC Aerospace forces if you want to shake up the IRIAF then sack the head of the IRIAF specifically for a lack of innovation

Fact is IRIAF has no one to blame but it's self!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1.Iran's Navy is building it's own Ships and Subs many of which were developed by it's own personal & proper management and coordination with Iran's Defense Industry & they are far ahead of the IRGC Navy!

2.IRGC Aerospace forces are building Advanced Ballistic Missiles & UAV's far more capable than most Air Force UAV's & it's not because of funding! 

3.Iran's Artesh Ground Forces are building various types of equipment some impressive & some not so much

4. Iran's Air Defense Forces are building various radars & SAM's that are very impressive 

And yes they all did it by cooperating with various defense industry companies! 

BUT What have IRIAF commanders done when faced with sanctions in terms of innovation not upkeep?????

IRIAF has highly educated personal, they have tools & facilities required to build many of the parts plus the tools they didn't have they could and should have built so they can develop their own Jet engines & prototypes and if they had built a prototype worth producing then they could of handed it over to the defense industry for production!

If your country is being sanctioned & prohibited from buying Aircraft then they are at war with you! And it may be a different type of war but still you need to adjust yourself and your command decisions accordingly!

By 2005 Iran's Air Force should have built all the tools and facilities required to at the very least build a full scale working prototype of a new Air Frame and an new engine every two years 
For the prototypes you use parts already available F-14 Landing Gears, F-4 Cockpit, F-4 J-79 Engines & all Airframes equipped with internal weapons bays with low RCS & IRST built in!
By now they should have had 5 designs of Airframes & Engines combined the best of the best & started production

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

pin gu said:


> your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
> right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .
> 
> I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .
> 
> In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
> compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.
> 
> I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
> I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )
> 
> I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .
> 
> about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .


----------



## VEVAK

pin gu said:


> your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
> right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .
> 
> I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .
> 
> In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
> compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.
> 
> I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
> I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )
> 
> I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .
> 
> about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .



Buying Aircrafts that you can't maintain, build parts & weapons for goes against Iran's defense doctrine but if they agree to a technology transfer of all components of a Su-30 I believe Iran would buy a large number +200 because that's a technology boost in various fields so it wouldn't be just about the Air Force!

But I agree if the Russians don't agree to licensed production of all components and don't give Iran access to the weapons system and the ability to build it's own spare parts then Iran might at maximum agree to buy a maximum of 50-60 units but even that they would at the very least have to agree on an assembly line inside Iran because Iranian laws prohibit such sales!
But 50-60 will only be for Air Superiority over Iranian Airspace 

At a minimum It will cost Iran upwards of $150 Million USD per unit to purchase a simple Su-30 (Aircraft, Spare Parts, Pilot Gear, Training equipment, limited weapons) And that doesn't include the cost of training a pilot for years before they can even fly such an aircraft, fuel cost & upkeep of the Aircraft.
With that money Iran can build 150 $1million usd cruise missiles and take out one or at max 2 Airbases within 1500km of Iranian boarders with fairly good accuracy! And then use it's UAV's, Su-24's & F-4's to do the rest

I disagree on Saeghe & Azarakhsh (F-5) other than to be used as trainers I believe Iran's experience in the Iran-Iraq war has showed them to be quite useless

F-5's don't have the payload capacity, their Engines are too small & weak and lack the endurance required for Air-Air refueling
And Iran and a few other countries have added Air refueling capability on some of their F-5's but the aircraft's airframe & engines are not built for it

Iran can build engines and Air Frames in limited numbers & the tools and hours required to build a J-85 engine is roughly the same it would be if you were going to build something double that size using the same amount of moving parts and it would be easer to make some of the parts sturdier and stronger like the ball bearings and you can potentially get a lot more power out of it
Same with the Airframe Iran will always be limited in the numbers they can build so you might as well build something bigger with the potential of carrying more advanced electronics from IRST to Radars


I think Iran can take the J-79 replace half the moving compressors in the front half with larger fixed Airflow blades and add a bigger fan upfront (not by making the fans longer rather the design of the casing wider designed in a way so you can have limited bypass (it would be better if it had 2 CRP's) And then you up grade the combustion chamber & fuel injection system the J-79 was built in the 60's so there are many upgrades within Iran's capability to do if they choose to


I think Iran should invest in building bigger engines using different types of fuel like bigger LNG based engines on a bigger low RCS fighter & work towards making the combustion chambers sturdier & more compact capable taking in a mixture of high pressure vaporized LNG + conventional spray

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Airpower is good for low intensity warfare and there UAVs are the future. The resource difference is magnitudes. Some info:



Except that a combat aircraft has certain advantages over a missile. Namely payload, and reusability.

You gave a typical CAS cost. I found a helpful site which gives F-15E loadouts.

Take this mixed CAS loadout, for OEF (Operation Enduring Freedom) in Afghanistan.







http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/weapon...s/125-enduring-freedom#0-5-loadout-5-mixedcas

That is about 4 tons worth of air to ground munitions (not counting the air-to-air munitions). Assuming a Fateh-313 has a 650 kg warhead and costs $1 million, to achieve the same effect as a single F-15E you'd have to expend about 6 Fatehs, costing $6 million.

So your 1 F-15E sortie costing approx. $220,000 is about 27 times cheaper than a Fateh attack.

Of course, a F-15E costs $44 million to buy. But after 8 missions, your Fatehs have cost $48 million and your F-15E $46 million. Assuming your F-15E survives at least 8 missions (they survive more...), you are saving money with a proper air force. And besides, with the F-15 you can hit 8 targets, with the Fateh only 6.

Now, even if you are optimistic and say a Fateh-313 costs $500,000 (personally I don't think so), that would be 16 missions. Still pretty good.

I've said this before, missiles should be used to penetrate and destroy air defences, as well as to strike high value targets. Aircraft should defend airspace and when on the offensive, clean up. Then keep the enemy's head down with their high payload capacity.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

Good calculation. However I wasn't talking about missiles, I said UAVs are the future for low intensity warfare. The graphics I provided show data in favor for UAVs.

Missiles are for high intensity warfare and in total more expensive than airpower as you pointed out, more so if you want to use it down to CAS. The least expensive way is to end the high intensity warfare with missiles and simply start a ground operation with artillery for the low intensity portion of the conflict.

PS: I think the Fateh-313 costs significantly less than 500k $ a piece for Iran but that's speculation

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> Good calculation. However I wasn't talking about missiles, I said UAVs are the future for low intensity warfare. The graphics I provided show data in favor for UAVs.
> 
> Missiles are for high intensity warfare and in total more expensive than airpower as you pointed out, more so if you want to use it down to CAS. The least expensive way is to end the high intensity warfare with missiles and simply start a ground operation with artillery for the low intensity portion of the conflict.
> 
> PS: I think the Fateh-313 costs significantly less than 500k $ a piece for Iran but that's speculation



But all high intensity warfare does not require missiles. Striking enemy supply lines and and especially industry would be much easier with aircraft. You can save your missiles for high value targets - air defence sites, runways, command and control etc. Then with the air defence and airfields degraded, the air force can go against a weakened opposition and achieve air superiority. With the high payload capacity of aircraft they can take out enemy hardened aircraft shelters to achieve air supremacy. Then, if the war is serious enough, industry can be targeted. Considering Iran's current regional enemies, that can mean oil production/refineries, ports etc.

All this can be done very rapidly. Air fields can be repaired quickly, and missiles are not always accurate, numerous or effective enough to keep them down for sufficient time. One would expect a massive missile swarm to destroy air defence sites and make runways inoperable. With aerial enemy air defence (both ground and air based) degraded or destroyed, the air force would have a much freer hand in enemy airspace, allowing it to pummel runways which *may* have only sustained minor damage, as well as destroy enemy aircraft on the ground - much easier with the firepower and precision of aircraft. All of this paragraph could be done in less than 24 hours, if you have enough missiles and TELs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rahi2357

BMs and jets are different animals And we need both .No Question about it .
But when you can't afford jets then tactical BMs and CMs are the best pain killers .
Guys we need a proper air force , otherwise " we need nukes " , As dear @OldTwilight always says .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.

The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.

You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.

I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure. 

Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.

The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.

That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.

In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> 1.Iran's Navy is building it's own Ships and Subs many of which were developed by it's own personal & proper management and coordination with Iran's Defense Industry & they are far ahead of the IRGC Navy!
> squadron



I disagree with this post. 

1) Iran's (military) shipbuilding is quite simply a joke.

Jamaran was unveiled what 10 years ago? How many mowj and mowj upgrade variants are in commission? Two? 

2 small 1970 era design corvettes in 10 years is terrible build rate.

There have been no new Ghadir subs produced in 5 years.

The Fateh sub was built with such low quality materials that it had to be rebuilt! A long delayed project.

The Khalij destroyer project is no where to be found outside of plastic toy models.

At this rate Iran won't have a decent navy for another 25+ years!

Second your comparison of Iran Navy and IRGC Navy is flawed. They are operating two different doctrines.

Iran Navy is a blue ocean Navy (or at least it desires this capability). Thus it will be built with traditional naval ship structure (subs, destroyers, frigates, etc)

IRGC Navy is focused on coastline and khalij defense. Operation prey mantis showed even with the latest navy ships, the US could demolish Iran ships on a ship vs ship basis. US has been building naval ships since pre-WWI (you could say prior to 1800s)

Thus the IRGC developed a low cost asymmetric swarm technique. They are focused on fast highly maneuverable low RCS speedboats that can fire cruise missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.
> 
> The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
> At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.
> 
> You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.
> 
> I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure.
> 
> Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
> But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.
> 
> The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.
> 
> That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.
> 
> In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.



I strongly disagree.

I deliberately said enemy air defence would be "degraded" not destroyed. It is not easy to be sure when you are using missiles and therefore cannot be sure of the destruction of your targets, since they have not been launched from an aircraft than could confirm this. Iran's current UAV (and to a smaller degree RF-4E, if it is even operational anymore) based aerial reconnaissance capability can only really enter permissive airspace.

I therefore think it would be foolish to send UCAVs with no self defence capabilities when even a few aircraft that remained airborne or are using foreign airbases survive or a few remaining batteries that used movement effectively could slaughter them in the air.

Furthermore, I don't think UCAVs with a few Sadid PGMs each would be nearly enough firepower. I already said that airpower would be used to deliver the major firepower after the missiles have taken out high priority/capability targets. A 35 kg Sadid will NOT punch through a hardened aircraft shelter. It would scratch it. Same for runways. It would NOT do major damage to heavy industry.

There is a VERY good reason why the US uses 2000 lb GBU-31s, why the Russians have their KAB-1500L, why the Israelis, French and British have their special runway destroying bombs.

A dual track approach is the best. It is what the US follows, except instead of ballistic missiles they use cruise missile swarms.

Moreover I'm still of the opinion that Iran needs aircraft for air defence and future A2/AD roles. Modern fighter aircraft almost always have a multirole capability and to not take advantage of this would be a waste of assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Agreed, you can not be sure whether the enemies air defense is sufficiently degraded to be inoperational.

Then there is the question is it necessary to have air superiority over the whole airspace of the enemy? High value targets deep inside the country are the task for the BM/CM force. All the rest like CAS takes place close to the front. A Bavar-373 close to the front will reach around 300km into the enemies airspace. For all that 300km, the UACV force could operate against a degraded enemy and do all the hauling.

In your mind is a high offensive capability, there a smaller fleet of PAK-FA or Mig-31BM would be good to finish-off the remaining airpower deeper in the enemy country, agreed. 
What I'm talking about is the bombing capability beside the missile force that Iran currently lacks in Syria. I advocate the use of smaller UACV swarms for that purpose not fighter/bombers.
Now you added the requirement to establish complete air superiority over the complete enemy airspace. Good for that luxury 100 Mig-31BM would be quite useful. Lets see where Iran wants to get with the Qaher-313, it might be that added capability.

Irans first serious capability was establishing the offensive missile force, result is a high intensity paralyzing capability that could on it's own end the conflict.

The came a SAM force will become operational soon that can reach deep into a neighboring airspace, protect the own airspace, the own offensive missile forces and contest airspace over the front.

In future an UACV fleet will become operational that can also do the low intensity bombardment portion of the conflict if the enemy don't come to the table after the high intensity missile phase.

After that the capability could be extended with those 100 Mig-31 to establish airsuperiority over the whole enemy airspace to completely dominate it.

And after that another luxury will be added that increases the warfighting capability.


As for the firepower: the 35kg Sadid will be sufficient for 70% of the targets during a war. All the rest could be done by RQ-170 size UACV with 2 one ton bombs each. In fact, if the +5000m altitude capability is degraded sufficiently, something like a C-130 bomber variant could do the heavy bombing...


One has to realize that Iran is confronted with opponents with up to 10 times the defense budget regionally and 100 times globally. If you want to win a war against such a superiority, you can't do it with their methods. If Iran would go for a conventional airpower competition, it would never be able to win a war against them. It's a true trap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> I disagree with this post.
> 
> 1) Iran's (military) shipbuilding is quite simply a joke.
> 
> Jamaran was unveiled what 10 years ago? How many mowj and mowj upgrade variants are in commission? Two?
> 
> 2 small 1970 era design corvettes in 10 years is terrible build rate.
> 
> There have been no new Ghadir subs produced in 5 years.
> 
> The Fateh sub was built with such low quality materials that it had to be rebuilt! A long delayed project.
> 
> The Khalij destroyer project is no where to be found outside of plastic toy models.
> 
> At this rate Iran won't have a decent navy for another 25+ years!
> 
> Second your comparison of Iran Navy and IRGC Navy is flawed. They are operating two different doctrines.
> 
> Iran Navy is a blue ocean Navy (or at least it desires this capability). Thus it will be built with traditional naval ship structure (subs, destroyers, frigates, etc)
> 
> IRGC Navy is focused on coastline and khalij defense. Operation prey mantis showed even with the latest navy ships, the US could demolish Iran ships on a ship vs ship basis. US has been building naval ships since pre-WWI (you could say prior to 1800s)
> 
> Thus the IRGC developed a low cost asymmetric swarm technique. They are focused on fast highly maneuverable low RCS speedboats that can fire cruise missiles.



1st I'm NOT talking about Tactics I'm talking about equipment!
2ndly Your knowledge about how Iran's military is structured & the equipment Iran's Navy is producing is quite limited!

3rd You don't know anything all you know is what Iran chooses to show on TV & the idea that Iran hasn't built a Ghadir Sub in the past 5 years is only in your head!

Here is a small glimpse
Iran's Navy designs, builds overhauls & upgrades all of it's own vessels & this is also how Iran trains future engineers that are not only educated but also experienced for the countries civilian ship industry

As for your delusions about what limited equipment they build:













So in terms of large ships they 1st built the Jamaran then the Damavand frigtates then they shift focus on a research vessel & then went back to finishing the Sahand frigate (They can deploy it within weeks if they needed too) 
In terms of equipment every ship has been more advanced than the one before in terms of equipment!

So far they have built 5 Missile Boats with the 6th being almost completed (They also have 3-4 Missile Boat halls completed but they haven't been a priority so they've been sitting around for years) and newer Iranian missile boats are more advance than some countries corvettes

Aside from those they have built Hovercrafts, Landing Crafts, Training equipment & simulators, various types of weapons from Naval Cannons to mines & torpedo's, various types of sensors from radars to sonars, large naval facilities for naval research & development, Dry docks, portable dry-docks, tugboats, a new large Naval port is currently under development, Iran navy has built mine layer & countermeasures...

Iran's navy has built 2 classes of SDV, Nahang Sub(was Iran's 1st sub), Ghadir Subs Iran's 2nd sub class has been produced in large numbers & to this day Iran plays around with the hall design with some being wider and other longer, Fatteh Sub & yes the 1st one had problems but SO WHAT? Iran just learned how not to do a thing that's normal in R&D & Beesat Sub that's under development

Iran's Navy's Overhaul & Upgrade program goes unnoticed but Iran has overhauled & upgraded everything from it's largest ship Kharg & to costal patrol vessels to it's corvettes & frigates.

So you see if Iran's Naval commanders were stupide they could have easily just focused their efforts on building a bunch of large warship & importing some of the harder equipment to produce! But then I think any intelligent person could have easily told you what would of happened then.... 

A truly domestic & independent Navy needs Research Vessels & Facilities, Training Equipment & simulators, In shore and off shore Repair & logistical support equipment & vessels of all types from tugboats & landing crafts to Warships & subs!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.
> 
> The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
> At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.
> 
> You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.
> 
> I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure.
> 
> Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
> But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.
> 
> The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.
> 
> That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.
> 
> In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.



There is what Iran's minimum capabilities should be and what Iran's future potential should be!

In terms of Aircraft the U.S. is already developing 6th Gen aircraft who will be twin seat & the rear pilot will be controlling other UCAV(s). But now ask yourself why? why not strictly rely on SATCOM & make all your 6th gen fighters unmanned? 

And the answer is simple!
1st You don't put all your eggs in one basket because their is a chance that your communication can be jammed, hacked, or destroyed whether it be on the ground or in space!

2ndly The simple fact is fixed sites & satellites in a fixed orbit are easier to disrupt or destroy for a country that has that capability as oppose to a fast moving LOW RCS Aircraft moving around at different altitudes....

3rd A prepared Air Force using Early Warning Systems & other sensors can scramble it's aircraft in the Air Before cruise missiles have time to reach that facility & larger conventional Ballistic Missiles currently don't have the accuracy to hit targets accurately enough to destroy a well protected Aircraft bunker (Plus that's not the type of weapon Iran is facing)

So to build a military without an Air Force equipped without Fighter Jets, Air born early warning systems & sensors is to build a military based on the assumption that your enemy is stupid & they are not going to target your Radars, Early Warning Systems, sensors & communication sites using a blitz missiles attack before they send in their Air Force when in reality those are the 1st targets they'll be going after to make their enemy Death(communication), Dumb(taking out command centers) & Blind (Taking out radars & sensors of all types)

So although having UAV's that can do all types of tasks is very important BUT at the end of the day you can not replace one for the other! And Iran needs both manned fighter jets & manned airborne sensors AND UAV's & UCAV all types


Now whether Iran should buy fighter Jets like the Su-30 or Build our own well that depends on if that's going to be a technology transfer or NOT!
If it's a technology transfer where Iran fully gains the ability to build the Air Frame, Engine, Radar, sensors, weapons & weapons system then yes I would invest in it even if the minimum order is 300 Aircraft & even if the cost is $100Billion to be paid at a rate of $10 Billion USD a year for the next ten years

But if it's not a full tech transfer then NO! Iran needs to invest in building it's own and small low payload fighter like the Saegheh, Kowsar, Q-313,... are NOT the way!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

PeeD said:


> Agreed, you can not be sure whether the enemies air defense is sufficiently degraded to be inoperational.
> 
> 
> 
> In future an UACV fleet will become operational that can also do the low intensity bombardment portion of the conflict if the enemy don't come to the table after the high intensity missile phase.




I'm curious at what UACV fleet you speak of. I don't remember Iran having any operational UACV fleet that can drop heavy payloads. Shahid-129 seems to be proven, but Iran has unvield man armed drones but we've yet to see if they truly work. Like the RQ-170 model bomber a while ago. I only wish the Sadid was like a Yankee hellfire missile but it seems to be more of a bomb with a small payload than a rocket. If Iran wants a deadly UACV capability it would require better and more powerful engines in order to carry heavier payloads. This is something we have always had a problem with. Engines!!!


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> A Bavar-373 close to the front will reach around 300km into the enemies airspace.



That is not necessarily true, since targets could be outside of the 300 km range. Even the Damman oil facilities of Saudi are not fully within range of a Bavar-373 deployed at, say, Bushehr AB. Enemy aircraft with missiles could take out Iranian UAVs.

Those UAVs, by the way, with 35 kg bombs, cannot do significant damage to strategic or heavy infrastructure or industry. 



PeeD said:


> RQ-170 size UACV with 2 one ton bombs each.



1. It would have to be much bigger than a RQ-170, which was an unarmed reconnaissance drone.
2. This is a long way off.
3. The fact that you say a RQ-170 type UAV with stealth features shows your scenario does not envision permissible airspace.



PeeD said:


> the 35kg Sadid will be sufficient for 70% of the targets during a war



And what are these 70% of targets? I can only think of terrorist technicals or lightly built buildings. Not many strategic targets in a nation state can be destroyed by 35 kg bombs (with even less actual explosive mass).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

AmirPatriot said:


> That is not necessarily true, since targets could be outside of the 300 km range. Even the Damman oil facilities of Saudi are not fully within range of a Bavar-373 deployed at, say, Bushehr AB. Enemy aircraft with missiles could take out Iranian UAVs.



This is why Iran needs the capability to deploy stand of weapons on its drones. Its such a major tactical advantage to be able to fire a rocket towards your enemy before entering their airspace from maybe 10 km range.


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> I'm curious at what UACV fleet you speak of. I don't remember Iran having any operational UACV fleet that can drop heavy payloads. Shahid-129 seems to be proven, but Iran has unvield man armed drones but we've yet to see if they truly work. Like the RQ-170 model bomber a while ago. I only wish the Sadid was like a Yankee hellfire missile but it seems to be more of a bomb with a small payload than a rocket. If Iran wants a deadly UACV capability it would require better and more powerful engines in order to carry heavier payloads. This is something we have always had a problem with. Engines!!!



1st Due to Iran's terrain UAV's, UCAV's & Cruise Missiles can be tested without anyone knowing not even the U.S. 

Iran has 320 Airports & 1000's of smaller airfield where they can be launched from & the U.S. can't keep sat's over every Iranian Airport 24/7 just because Iran might at some point test a UAV at one of them plus some Iranian UAV's don't even require an Airfield like the Karrar

Iran has been building Mini Jet Engines for over a decade now and by the most part you have no idea what these engines power
















Germany's 2 Tone V-1 flying bomb was powered by 660 lbf pulse jet engine and carried 1800lb payload!
The U.S. 5000lb JB-2 was also powered by a 660lbf pulsejet engine & carried 2000lb payload
The U.S. Tomahawk under 700lbf

Iran's Tolue-4 mini jet engine has 775 lbf & only weighs 56kg (less than Tomahawk engine) which mean in terms of thrust it's lighter & more powerful than a Tomahawk cruise missile engine so even if it's rate of consumption was double that of a tomahawk it's range would only be half in the same airframe but could potentially carry more fuel due to higher thrust so ~1500km easy on a land attack cruise missile configuration
1000km or more for a UCAV with 1000lb payload (4 250lb or 2 500lb)


A more expensive & powerful design can also be achieved using Iran's OWJ (J-85) Engines

So for jet powered UCAV's it's not a matter of Thrust but you can almost double your range by developing Turbofan engines with the same thrust which is something Iran will eventually get to it's just a matter of time!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK



> In terms of Aircraft the U.S. is already developing 6th Gen aircraft who will be twin seat & the rear pilot will be controlling other UCAV(s). But now ask yourself why? why not strictly rely on SATCOM & make all your 6th gen fighters unmanned?
> 
> And the answer is simple!
> 1st You don't put all your eggs in one basket because their is a chance that your communication can be jammed, hacked, or destroyed whether it be on the ground or in space!



Right, now three problems:
Iran won't be able to build a 6th gen fighter for decades (mainly due to engine tech.).

How likely is that the airbase from which those fighters want to operate from remains intact after the first missile saturation attack and keeps on operating with its airstrip intact? You are right that Iran has many airfields, which could be used but this is a fundamental flaw of airpower. The US might not be able to launch a CM saturation attack that could hit sufficient targets in Iran to stop airfield based airpower to be operated. However in a decade they may decide to make their B-1, -2, -52, -21 Tomahawk capable to fly massive CM saturation attacks.
We are just fortunate that they haven't done that yet and their new turbofan JASSM will certainly give them that capability (even to their fighter fleet).
Then you have to protect against, lets say more than 10.000 cruise missiles in the first day of the conflict (60.000 within the first week) or to put a simple name for it: Your airbases and all unhardened static targets must survive the high intensity missile phase of a conflict.
Iran would need a enormously huge IADS to offer sufficient protection against future threats, in order to operate runway based airpower.
In my Mig-31 scenario, you would store them in mountain tunnel bases and bring them out after the high intensity phase was won, repair the runways and send them for UACV protection deep into the enemy country...

Last but not least: The also stored UACV swarm which might not need runways, would have a LOS MW swarm communication. No ASAT prone SATCOM communication and range limited ground based LOS MW communication but a many times redundant and expandable swarm communication with members of the swarm acting as flying relays.



> 2ndly The simple fact is fixed sites & satellites in a fixed orbit are easier to disrupt or destroy for a country that has that capability as oppose to a fast moving LOW RCS Aircraft moving around at different altitudes....



As described, if it is vertical start and landing, plus long range mach 3 capable plus low on X-band RCS, we can have a talk. However the combination of these capabilities is probably 50 years away, 20 for the US.



> 3rd A prepared Air Force using Early Warning Systems & other sensors can scramble it's aircraft in the Air Before cruise missiles have time to reach that facility & larger conventional Ballistic Missiles currently don't have the accuracy to hit targets accurately enough to destroy a well protected Aircraft bunker (Plus that's not the type of weapon Iran is facing)[(quote]
> 
> So how they want to land after one of the 2.000 CM has damaged the airstrip and the next 2000 are about to come in an hour? What if fuel, ammo etc. is taken out by CM attacks?
> Irans Ghadr with a cluster warhead can endanger operations from airbases to such a degree that they become effectively inoperable. It depends in what interval you send a Ghadr.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> using a blitz missiles attack before they send in their Air Force when in reality those are the 1st targets they'll be going after to make their enemy Death(communication), Dumb(taking out command centers) & Blind (Taking out radars & sensors of all types)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anything valuable that is not heavily hardened and mobile would be destroyed in the high intensity missile phase. Mobile communication and radars plus hardened or mobile command centers, this is how its done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Iran needs both manned fighter jets & manned airborne sensors AND UAV's & UCAV all types
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For a limited resources country like Iran, this would be a doomed path.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But if it's not a full tech transfer then NO! Iran needs to invest in building it's own and small low payload fighter like the Saegheh, Kowsar, Q-313,... are NOT the way!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually it's Irans decision makers wisdom displayed that they go with a Q-313 and don't waste too much resources on fighter and fighter production.
Click to expand...


@AmirPatriot 



> That is not necessarily true, since targets could be outside of the 300 km range. Even the Damman oil facilities of Saudi are not fully within range of a Bavar-373 deployed at, say, Bushehr AB. Enemy aircraft with missiles could take out Iranian UAVs.



Airpower for Iran means CAS and the destruction of mobile and low priority targets (high intensity missile phase is already over). 80% of the missions would hence be flown in the frontline area and there long range SAMs can provide a umbrella for UAV operations.



> Those UAVs, by the way, with 35 kg bombs, cannot do significant damage to strategic or heavy infrastructure or industry.



If counter-value missions are necessary, it's mainly the task of battlefield rockets such as the Zelzal-2. They are quite cost effective for value targets outside the frontline area.



> 1. It would have to be much bigger than a RQ-170, which was an unarmed reconnaissance drone.
> 2. This is a long way off.
> 3. The fact that you say a RQ-170 type UAV with stealth features shows your scenario does not envision permissible airspace.



Yes it is long way off, I said the low intensity swarm UACV force structure would be a future capability.
I think the RQ-170 size is sufficient for payloads like 1-2 Mk84. It is a high lift flying wing, only its range and altitude performance should be decreased.
In that sense: The RQ-170 airframe is good for the UACV task because of its high lift capability. The stealth, whether fully deployed in the design or not, is just a secondary feature.



> And what are these 70% of targets? I can only think of terrorist technicals or lightly built buildings. Not many strategic targets in a nation state can be destroyed by 35 kg bombs (with even less actual explosive mass).



There would be no strategic targets left in the enemy country due to BM/CM attacks. I talk about the low intensity phase of the conflict with the UACV swarm deployed and there the 35kg Sadid is sufficient for 70% of the (mainly CAS) targets.
The only problem would be created by systems that are mobile and here the upper tier of the UACV fleet, like RQ-170 bombers would be deployed. The radar and communication portion of those mobile targets left, could be even taken out by Hormuz BM's and EM-wave suicide drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Qased?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

VEVAK said:


> 1st Due to Iran's terrain UAV's, UCAV's & Cruise Missiles can be tested without anyone knowing not even the U.S.
> 
> Iran has 320 Airports & 1000's of smaller airfield where they can be launched from & the U.S. can't keep sat's over every Iranian Airport 24/7 just because Iran might at some point test a UAV at one of them plus some Iranian UAV's don't even require an Airfield like the Karrar
> 
> Iran has been building Mini Jet Engines for over a decade now and by the most part you have no idea what these engines power
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 417582
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 417583
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's 2 Tone V-1 flying bomb was powered by 660 lbf pulse jet engine and carried 1800lb payload!
> The U.S. 5000lb JB-2 was also powered by a 660lbf pulsejet engine & carried 2000lb payload
> The U.S. Tomahawk under 700lbf
> 
> Iran's Tolue-4 mini jet engine has 775 lbf & only weighs 56kg (less than Tomahawk engine) which mean in terms of thrust it's lighter & more powerful than a Tomahawk cruise missile engine so even if it's rate of consumption was double that of a tomahawk it's range would only be half in the same airframe but could potentially carry more fuel due to higher thrust so ~1500km easy on a land attack cruise missile configuration
> 1000km or more for a UCAV with 1000lb payload (4 250lb or 2 500lb)
> 
> 
> A more expensive & powerful design can also be achieved using Iran's OWJ (J-85) Engines
> 
> So for jet powered UCAV's it's not a matter of Thrust but you can almost double your range by developing Turbofan engines with the same thrust which is something Iran will eventually get to it's just a matter of time!


The pic you posted actually has a turbofan in it,its on the left hand side with the inlet almost facing the camera,this is the soumar cruise missiles powerplant

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> 1st Due to Iran's terrain UAV's, UCAV's & Cruise Missiles can be tested without anyone knowing not even the U.S.
> 
> Iran has 320 Airports & 1000's of smaller airfield where they can be launched from & the U.S. can't keep sat's over every Iranian Airport 24/7 just because Iran might at some point test a UAV at one of them plus some Iranian UAV's don't even require an Airfield like the Karrar
> 
> Iran has been building Mini Jet Engines for over a decade now and by the most part you have no idea what these engines power
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 417582
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 417583
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's 2 Tone V-1 flying bomb was powered by 660 lbf pulse jet engine and carried 1800lb payload!
> The U.S. 5000lb JB-2 was also powered by a 660lbf pulsejet engine & carried 2000lb payload
> The U.S. Tomahawk under 700lbf
> 
> Iran's Tolue-4 mini jet engine has 775 lbf & only weighs 56kg (less than Tomahawk engine) which mean in terms of thrust it's lighter & more powerful than a Tomahawk cruise missile engine so even if it's rate of consumption was double that of a tomahawk it's range would only be half in the same airframe but could potentially carry more fuel due to higher thrust so ~1500km easy on a land attack cruise missile configuration
> 1000km or more for a UCAV with 1000lb payload (4 250lb or 2 500lb)
> 
> 
> A more expensive & powerful design can also be achieved using Iran's OWJ (J-85) Engines
> 
> So for jet powered UCAV's it's not a matter of Thrust but you can almost double your range by developing Turbofan engines with the same thrust which is something Iran will eventually get to it's just a matter of time!



Thanks for the info!. I'm a bit new to Iran so I'm still not 100% familiar with all Irans military developments. 

Do you think its more of a financial issue as to why a heavy UCAV production is not being done. Irans budget is 14 billion and I'm pretty sure half of it goes to sepah. Theirs not much cash left for production and procurement. I don't doubt Iranians technological capabailities, its far beyond regional countries, but with a weak economy, it will not be possible to field the kind of firepower in all sectors of the military that we know Iran has the potential for in a reasonable amount of time


----------



## pin gu

It seems we are moving towards arms race . with new DM nominate future plans we are going to
invest at least 5% of our GDP on military plus new credit line for possible huge contracts that means for every 1$ for our Russian friends there is possible 5$ for Americans .
its not good for us not good for SA not even good for Russians . there is only 1 winner in this race

I know its reactionary behavior from us but will it really make our armed forces stronger ? I don't think so


----------



## Stryker1982

pin gu said:


> It seems we are moving towards arms race . with new DM nominate future plans we are going to
> invest at least 5% of our GDP on military plus new credit line for possible huge contracts that means for every 1$ for our Russian friends there is possible 5$ for Americans .
> its not good for us not good for SA not even good for Russians . there is only 1 winner in this race
> 
> I know its reactionary behavior from us but will it really make our armed forces stronger ? I don't think so



We don't have the economy to compete in an Arms race, we are too poor, especially compared to our regional competitors.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> 
> 
> Right, now three problems:
> Iran won't be able to build a 6th gen fighter for decades (mainly due to engine tech.).
> 
> How likely is that the airbase from which those fighters want to operate from remains intact after the first missile saturation attack and keeps on operating with its airstrip intact? You are right that Iran has many airfields, which could be used but this is a fundamental flaw of airpower. The US might not be able to launch a CM saturation attack that could hit sufficient targets in Iran to stop airfield based airpower to be operated. However in a decade they may decide to make their B-1, -2, -52, -21 Tomahawk capable to fly massive CM saturation attacks.
> We are just fortunate that they haven't done that yet and their new turbofan JASSM will certainly give them that capability (even to their fighter fleet).
> Then you have to protect against, lets say more than 10.000 cruise missiles in the first day of the conflict (60.000 within the first week) or to put a simple name for it: Your airbases and all unhardened static targets must survive the high intensity missile phase of a conflict.
> Iran would need a enormously huge IADS to offer sufficient protection against future threats, in order to operate runway based airpower.
> In my Mig-31 scenario, you would store them in mountain tunnel bases and bring them out after the high intensity phase was won, repair the runways and send them for UACV protection deep into the enemy country...
> 
> Last but not least: The also stored UACV swarm which might not need runways, would have a LOS MW swarm communication. No ASAT prone SATCOM communication and range limited ground based LOS MW communication but a many times redundant and expandable swarm communication with members of the swarm acting as flying relays.
> 
> 
> 
> As described, if it is vertical start and landing, plus long range mach 3 capable plus low on X-band RCS, we can have a talk. However the combination of these capabilities is probably 50 years away, 20 for the US.
> 
> 
> 
> @AmirPatriot
> 
> 
> .



1st I never said Iran needs a 6th Gen fighter right now! I was pointing out the fact that the U.S. is already thinking about building UCAV's that can go up against countries capable of taking out their SATCOM...! 

2ndly Once you have a large enough twin seat high payload low RCS platform then through time you can upgrade your engine, you electronics, sensors,.....

For now, building a strong twin seat air frame that in design is equivalent to a 5th Generation fighter will suffice! And for a country like Iran with limited facilities, tools and human resources in fighter production it's better to pay 10x more for materials & stick with Fighter Airframes that have the potential to be force multipliers rather than wasting that talent on lighter Aircraft that will be less useful than UAV's! 
And when designing a fighter platform today you have to take into account & plan for where the countries technological capabilities will be 20-30 years from now not where we are at today!

Also, the notion that Fighters Jets are some how easer to take out than Air Defense systems or large armed UCAV that relies on relaying info back and forth via another system is just NOT TRUE! And it doesn't matter if your using 1 UAV to relay info or 10 out of 100 for a country like Iran the fixed location whether it be on the ground or in space will be the prime target not the individual UAV's

Iranian precision guided ballistic missiles give Iran ~600km cushion, cruise missiles 1000km & current UCAV's if programed to attack autonomously against fixed targets at best ~600km effective range varies depending on altitude Cruise Missiles & UAV's can't be sent on a fixed trajectory because they'll be easy targets & they can't take defensive countermeasures witch makes them easy targets for cheaper algorithm based Air Defense systems because they won't be changing speed or trajectory between the time it takes to lock, fire and hit so you can use a cheaper missile to counter swarm attacks 

Also I don't see how a J402 turbojet engine will allow a country that's 10,000km away to fire 10,000 missiles at Iran in the 1st wave. In terms of fuel consumption it's only a little more energy efficient than Iran's Tolue-4 & since it has less thrust you can compact it in a smaller system and make it Air Launched for 1000km version.
At max they'll get 1200 fired from Fighters & Bombers + ~ 1000 Ship based tomahawks + another 1000 from land based system (Worst Case)
That's 3000 cruise missiles coming in the 1st wave & if Iran can't detect that many missiles and take appropriate measures before they travel 200km into Iranian Air Space (like scramble it's fighters) then we are doomed anyways!

Also, if Iran was to buy or start mass production of a fighter today in a best case scenario it would take Iran a decade to build up a fleet of 250-300 fighter jets so if Iran choses to invest and design an advanced fighter today it would take over a decade to build a production model and start serial production and another decade to build up a fleet so your looking at what you want your countries security situation to look like 30 years from now and before you go down that path for next decade Iran's major focus should be mass production of various types of missiles & increase the number of missile bases & Air Defense equipment to give yourself enough deterrence power....


As for runways, they can be repaired quickly enough if your prepared for them & naturally more expensive Aircraft will require more expensive shelters Iran would just have to make sure that no conventional warhead under 4000lb would be able to penetrate the bunkers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

1: Aircrafts are concentrated at airbases while ground based air defense can be anywhere and stored in tunnel bunkers. So yes, aircrafts are easier to take out than SAMs. The communication lines can have very small footprints for SAMs, mobile troposcatter systems for higher tier and LOS MW for lower are very difficult to detect. Plus aircraft also need data-links these days.

2: If you agree to use soft fighting elements, you have to defend against saturation attacks of JASSM like CMs. Or you don't agree to that game and secure you systems with passive defense, mountain bunkers.
If you add passive defense, the burden on the ground based IADS gets much lower. 80% interception rate is sufficient to protect the systems. For a airbase, even with HASes with all the other soft elements around, you better built up a defense with 99% interception rate.
Irans mountain missile bases offer up to nuclear warhead protection of the systems and even 30% interception capability would be sufficient to enable employment of the arsenal.
One reason why Qaher-313 uses up position intakes is most likely that they don't expect intact runways in a war. So I hope the landing gear is sufficiently hardened to enable take of from dirtstrips/roads with massive FOD objects around. In Soviet frontline concept for the MiG-29, nobody believed that intact runways would be available too.

3: Iran does resource management. Only the most cost effective weapon systems are taken into consideration. If you want the development of a heavy 5 gen. fighter, I will say let's skip that luxury and use that money for missiles. My argument will win, at least the wisdom of Iranian military till now suggests that.

4: We talk about the future, a 5th gen. fighter program would be something of the future. In future a fleet of 100 B-1 (JASSM-ER wired), 20 B-2 (JASSM-ER wired), 75 B-52, 100 B-21 would launch a enormous first wave of 1000-1500km range VLO CM's. Calculate for yourself that kind of numbers they would be able to haul...
Iran prepares and has to prepare itself for such a massive force in near future.
How many TOR-M1 class systems you wan to build and deploy to protect you vital assets without the massive use of passive defense/hardening? You would be doomed in such a saturation scenario... Plus, nuclear weapon warfare remains on the table.



I really hope you all realize what kind of performance Iran has to deliver to counter such a massive superiority. Such a performance won't be delivered with a 5th gen. fighter program. It's the systems the IRGC-ASF is showing that can counter and deter the Americans in non-nuclear ways. 
Expect 100.000 cruise missiles in the first days of a conflict, just to soften the situation for airpower deployment. This is our future scenario which Iran has to outperform with 1% of the enemies budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pin gu

* فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان از تست موفق تسلیحات جدید روی جنگنده



*
* F-۷ خبر داد*
به گزارش خبرگزاری تسنیم، امیر مسعود روزخوش فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان از آزمایش موفق موشک‌ها و تسلیحات جدید روی جنگنده‌ F-7 خبر داد و افزود: بمب‌های مختلفی در حال آزمایش است.

فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی ادامه داد: قابلیت عملیات رزمی با هواپیماهای PC-7 ایجاد شده و مسلسل روی آن نصب و با موفقیت آزمایش شده است.




منبع: فارس


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> 1: Aircrafts are concentrated at airbases while ground based air defense can be anywhere and stored in tunnel bunkers. So yes, aircrafts are easier to take out than SAMs. The communication lines can have very small footprints for SAMs, mobile troposcatter systems for higher tier and LOS MW for lower are very difficult to detect. Plus aircraft also need data-links these days.
> 
> 2: If you agree to use soft fighting elements, you have to defend against saturation attacks of JASSM like CMs. Or you don't agree to that game and secure you systems with passive defense, mountain bunkers.
> If you add passive defense, the burden on the ground based IADS gets much lower. 80% interception rate is sufficient to protect the systems. For a airbase, even with HASes with all the other soft elements around, you better built up a defense with 99% interception rate.
> Irans mountain missile bases offer up to nuclear warhead protection of the systems and even 30% interception capability would be sufficient to enable employment of the arsenal.
> One reason why Qaher-313 uses up position intakes is most likely that they don't expect intact runways in a war. So I hope the landing gear is sufficiently hardened to enable take of from dirtstrips/roads with massive FOD objects around. In Soviet frontline concept for the MiG-29, nobody believed that intact runways would be available too.
> 
> 3: Iran does resource management. Only the most cost effective weapon systems are taken into consideration. If you want the development of a heavy 5 gen. fighter, I will say let's skip that luxury and use that money for missiles. My argument will win, at least the wisdom of Iranian military till now suggests that.
> 
> 4: We talk about the future, a 5th gen. fighter program would be something of the future. In future a fleet of 100 B-1 (JASSM-ER wired), 20 B-2 (JASSM-ER wired), 75 B-52, 100 B-21 would launch a enormous first wave of 1000-1500km range VLO CM's. Calculate for yourself that kind of numbers they would be able to haul...
> Iran prepares and has to prepare itself for such a massive force in near future.
> How many TOR-M1 class systems you wan to build and deploy to protect you vital assets without the massive use of passive defense/hardening? You would be doomed in such a saturation scenario... Plus, nuclear weapon warfare remains on the table.
> 
> 
> 
> I really hope you all realize what kind of performance Iran has to deliver to counter such a massive superiority. Such a performance won't be delivered with a 5th gen. fighter program. It's the systems the IRGC-ASF is showing that can counter and deter the Americans in non-nuclear ways.
> Expect 100.000 cruise missiles in the first days of a conflict, just to soften the situation for airpower deployment. This is our future scenario which Iran has to outperform with 1% of the enemies budget.



1. Do you think Iran can't detect(Not target) Stealth Aircraft & Cruise missiles using Early Warning Systems before they can fly 100's of km into Iranian Air Space? If so & if you believe in Swarm attacks then the idea that SAM's are harder to destroy is a miss conception because a ready Air Force will scramble it's jet.
2. Any fixed (radar) based Sam like the Hawk, Sayad-1, SA-1, SA-2, SA-5 systems will have it's radars taken out. And long before they send in an Air Force they'll have cheap armed UAV's flying at high altitudes to clear a path searching for mobile radar systems & SAM's and in both cases finding Aircrafts with Air refueling capability that have scrambled into the Air is much harder to find
3. Would a country build a stronger & more protective bunker for a $100 Million USD Aircraft or a $5Million-$20 Million USD SAM Tel's? & Iran has such a limited number of S-300 that they'll likely be prime target number 1 in a US attack.
4.Any Aircraft or SAM Iran buys or builds HAS to be EMP shielded because even the US is not stupid enough to attack Iran without their use!

5.*And this is the MOST important part* requiring the Air Force to have R&D program that's required to design & build the most advanced fighter jet prototype within their capabilities every 2 years should be a minimum requirement. And the government just needs to provide or help them build the tools(like Vacuumed ovens of all sizes....) and materials (at least 40 tones of titanium every 2 years,...) and require their R&D team to design & build the most advanced Air Frame & Engine within their capabilities until they have something worth producing 10 years down the line. *AND the most important part is the fact that* this is NOT just about having an Air Force in fact the most important part is creating an intelligent & experience workforce that will later contribute to Iran's civilian sector or defense industry in various fields! 

This is why the to 10 most advanced countries, who are the top 10 largest producers of the world also have the top 10 largest defense budgets (Except for Saudi Arabia that buy's it's weapons) Because there is a direct coloration between a countries defense budget & it's technological & production capability because most new technologies and achievements get either directly transferred to the civilian sector or indirectly via an experienced work force so it's NOT just about the Air Force having a bunch of new fighter Jets it's about advancing you countries capabilities and high tech workforce in various fields that will later contribute to the civilian sector

Providing the Air Force with 20tones of titanium a year & a few tools & requiring them to build the most advanced prototype within their capabilities every 2 years is not going to stop Iran from mass producing Missiles & UAVs

And honestly I would put 90% of the blame on Air Force commanders because they should have pushed the country towards Titanium production 20 years ago!

Iran's Air Force has not even built an Air Frame sufficient enough for there to be a real discussion about Missiles vs Fighter jets!

Look at what IRGC Aerospace Forces have done when it comes to Missiles and how Iran civilian Space Industry is starting to boom...
Look at what Iran's Navy has done in the past 2 decades and now Iran's Civilian Naval industry is starting to boom
All you have to do to truly comprehend it is look at the growth of facilities off Busher, Bandar Abbas, ISOICO, Bandar Anzali,... in the past 20 years!
Iran's Navy may not have the funding to build whatever it wants but the R&D they did and creating experience for their conscripts & full time personal in design & R&D created an experienced workforce who turned around and contributed to Iran's Civilian Sector which in many ways is still at it's infancy.

And this happened due to proper leadership! Iran's Navy & IRGC Aerospace forces understood and reacted to sanction as if they were at war & they understood that it may be a different type of war that they are fighting today but it is a war none the less and they responded accordingly same with Iran's Air Defense Force once they separated from the Air Force they didn't just site back and wait to be handed something

While Iran's Air Force stood back and complained about being handed equipment! Today the IRGC is more capable of building UAV's than Iran's Air Force so this is not about funding it's about proper leadership and lack of proper planning

U.S. built the F-14 in the late 60's at a time when industrial robots, computer aided precision guided cutting equipment, composite materials, 3D printers,.... didn't exist! So when Iran's Air Force was faced with sanctions they should have responded to that threat accordingly but they didn't and IRIAF hasn't built a prototype where I can sit here and argue for additional funding in fighter production over Iranian Built Missiles & UCAV



pin gu said:


> * فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان از تست موفق تسلیحات جدید روی جنگنده
> 
> 
> 
> *
> * F-۷ خبر داد*
> به گزارش خبرگزاری تسنیم، امیر مسعود روزخوش فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان از آزمایش موفق موشک‌ها و تسلیحات جدید روی جنگنده‌ F-7 خبر داد و افزود: بمب‌های مختلفی در حال آزمایش است.
> 
> فرمانده پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی ادامه داد: قابلیت عملیات رزمی با هواپیماهای PC-7 ایجاد شده و مسلسل روی آن نصب و با موفقیت آزمایش شده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> منبع: فارس



This is a PC-7





So did they install weapons on both?

He also said Iran is building a new combat aircraft by upgrading the Saegheh which is absurd and nothing but a waist of TIME and Resources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He should be fired or they should have someone like Shamkhani come in and start up a real R&D program

IRIAF clearly took no lesson from their experience in the Iran-Iraq war which clearly showed light fighters with no Air Refueling capabilities to be quite useless!!!!!!

F-5's small radars is less capable in range than IRST, Their engines and Air Frames are just too small & weak for Air-Air refueling 
And I understand building the Azarakhsh & Saegheh for R&D purposes but not to move on to a bigger and better Airframe & engine and to spend funding & resources to produce that fighter is like shooting yourself in the foot because it terms of range it wont be able to fly 300km outside Iranian Airspace with a sufficient payload so your better off using Fatteh Class Missiles, UAV's, UCAV's & cheaper cruise missiles for attack missions!

In terms of Air to Air capabilities It's lack of IRST, sufficient thrust, maneuverability, sensor & targeting capability makes it useless in Air to Air operation!

And reducing the F-5's RCS by adding V shaped stabilizers doesn't make much sense when they are required to carry their weapons externally & the reason it makes sense on the F/A-18 is 1st you need 2 stabilizers for increased yaw to get precision landing on a moving Aircraft Carrier 2ndly it reduces the height of the stabilizers without loosing yaw power. 
(Other reasons include lower RCS upon returning to the carrier reduces the chances for the enemy to approximate the location of the carrier group, increase drag & control at the tail helps with better control upon decent on a carrier also gives the aircraft higher angle of attack capability 
So on a carrier the benefits out way cost of increased drag which leads to higher fuel consumption, reduced payload & reduced speeds.

But aside from R&D to put V shaped stabilizers on a F-5 that already has problems with Thrust, Speed, Range & Payload is absurd! 
For a country the size of Iran to produce a fighter without Air refueling capability is absurd enough!

I think any IRIAF commander that doesn't develop a new fighter prototype & a new Jet engine prototype every 2 years should be fired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And this guy wants a medal for putting a weapon on 50's era fighter! Even China started producing the J-7 in the 60's

SOMEONE FIRE THIS GUY!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Fafnir said:


> The pic you posted actually has a turbofan in it,its on the left hand side with the inlet almost facing the camera,this is the soumar cruise missiles powerplant



It really isn't that much more difficult to build a Turbofan even if you wanna design your own but in Iran's case, Iran has had X-55 cruise missiles for years so reverse engineering them was just a matter of time but the cost to produce them will be higher because you'll need 2 axils with 2 turbines and you'll need stronger more expensive materials 
Where as Iran's Tolue-4 only uses a single axil & a single turbine which makes it not only cheaper in terms of materials but also the time it take to assemble is shorter & they can get 770lbf out of it that's over 10% more power than a Tomahawk engine which should be able to carry more fuel with the same size warhead 

OR you can go with a more innovative unconventional design which is what I think the U.S. has done with it's F-107 tomahawks engines!

Regardless, Iran's Tolue-4 should be very easy to mass produce for a more cost effective ~20ft long +1500km cruise missile for targets within ~1000km of Iranian boarders & the Soumar powered by a more powerful more expensive turbofan engine for longer ranged targets beyond 1000km of Iranian boarders. 

You have to realize compared to the 80's, technology in battery power and consumption, memory storage, computer processing, INS, Avionic sensors, optics,.... have drastically reduced in size & increased in capability. Also, the use of composite materials allows you to use lighter & stronger airframes, fuel tanks,.... all this allows for more fuel to be carried 

Iran has had the Russians X-55 R-95 turbofan engines to reverse engineer for decades so if anyone thinks Iran hasn't been able reverse engineer that engine is only fooling themselves but unless they make some major changes to Iran's version compared to the Russian version they have I don't believe Iran would want to advertise it and risk upsetting their Russian partners!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Some additional points:

- Most potent weapons in the world are ballistic missiles and submarines. The reason the Navy is now supportent is because Iran is ready to start a submarine program.

- The IRIAF gets no support and resources because they could convince nobody that they could actually build a fighter on their own. It's not due to titanium (one can do can everything titanium can with high strength super steel alloy for structural airframe elements), but because they can't build the most vital part of a aircraft, the engine. Nobody would believe them claiming that they could build a 2017 state of the art engine in 20 years from now. OTOH IRGC missile division and Navy build every bit of the vital parts on their own.

- Iran is just lucky that the US is a believer in airpower and hence would use JASSM-ER and CMs in future (against which economic interception is possible to some extent). The situation for Iran would be much worse if they would field an Iskander-M like TBM or better...

- Some countries built mountain tunnel air bases. Iran has not and it would be too expensive. There is not HAS in the world with protection levels even near to mountain tunnels. Chinese and North Koreans did it at times when their missile arsenal was not potent enough. A SAM truck can be just stored in a minimal wide mountain tunnel...


Now just one more: conventional airpower requires static bases, there is no room for static elements in high intensity saturation warfare. Irans missile bases are not bases with runways, outdoor maintain hangars, munition bunkers and fuel depots. They are just tunnels in massive rock in which the valuable missile arsenal is stored until a preemptive strike (nuclear or not) is fend off and its mobile low footprint missiles assets can be employed. This is very different from an airbase, and you can store everything in them, from mobile SAMs with radars to mobile BM and CM launchers etc.
There is just one thing that is static in Irans doctrine and this is the OTH radar. It is only expected to remain operational for the first hours of the conflict and provide the necessary early warning for that phase. So I would give my blessings if the at one time decide to build a mountain tunnel airbase close to that OTH radar, with several steel super concrete runways. If then a large portion of available defense systems would be located at that central point, it could remain operational for a few hours together with the OTH radar, after a few volleys of 1000+ simultaneous JASSM-ER and Tomahawk strikes are launched against them.
For a OTH radar, such central defense tactic might be worth it, but the mountain airbase would be much more expansive than a similar missile solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

VEVAK said:


> 1. Do you think Iran can't detect(Not target) Stealth Aircraft & Cruise missiles using Early Warning Systems before they can fly 100's of km into Iranian Air Space? If so & if you believe in Swarm attacks then the idea that SAM's are harder to destroy is a miss conception because a ready Air Force will scramble it's jet.
> 2. Any fixed (radar) based Sam like the Hawk, Sayad-1, SA-1, SA-2, SA-5 systems will have it's radars taken out. And long before they send in an Air Force they'll have cheap armed UAV's flying at high altitudes to clear a path searching for mobile radar systems & SAM's and in both cases finding Aircrafts with Air refueling capability that have scrambled into the Air is much harder to find
> 3. Would a country build a stronger & more protective bunker for a $100 Million USD Aircraft or a $5Million-$20 Million USD SAM Tel's? & Iran has such a limited number of S-300 that they'll likely be prime target number 1 in a US attack.
> 4.Any Aircraft or SAM Iran buys or builds HAS to be EMP shielded because even the US is not stupid enough to attack Iran without their use!
> 
> 5.*And this is the MOST important part* requiring the Air Force to have R&D program that's required to design & build the most advanced fighter jet prototype within their capabilities every 2 years should be a minimum requirement. And the government just needs to provide or help them build the tools(like Vacuumed ovens of all sizes....) and materials (at least 40 tones of titanium every 2 years,...) and require their R&D team to design & build the most advanced Air Frame & Engine within their capabilities until they have something worth producing 10 years down the line. *AND the most important part is the fact that* this is NOT just about having an Air Force in fact the most important part is creating an intelligent & experience workforce that will later contribute to Iran's civilian sector or defense industry in various fields!
> 
> This is why the to 10 most advanced countries, who are the top 10 largest producers of the world also have the top 10 largest defense budgets (Except for Saudi Arabia that buy's it's weapons) Because there is a direct coloration between a countries defense budget & it's technological & production capability because most new technologies and achievements get either directly transferred to the civilian sector or indirectly via an experienced work force so it's NOT just about the Air Force having a bunch of new fighter Jets it's about advancing you countries capabilities and high tech workforce in various fields that will later contribute to the civilian sector
> 
> Providing the Air Force with 20tones of titanium a year & a few tools & requiring them to build the most advanced prototype within their capabilities every 2 years is not going to stop Iran from mass producing Missiles & UAVs
> 
> And honestly I would put 90% of the blame on Air Force commanders because they should have pushed the country towards Titanium production 20 years ago!
> 
> Iran's Air Force has not even built an Air Frame sufficient enough for there to be a real discussion about Missiles vs Fighter jets!
> 
> Look at what IRGC Aerospace Forces have done when it comes to Missiles and how Iran civilian Space Industry is starting to boom...
> Look at what Iran's Navy has done in the past 2 decades and now Iran's Civilian Naval industry is starting to boom
> All you have to do to truly comprehend it is look at the growth of facilities off Busher, Bandar Abbas, ISOICO, Bandar Anzali,... in the past 20 years!
> Iran's Navy may not have the funding to build whatever it wants but the R&D they did and creating experience for their conscripts & full time personal in design & R&D created an experienced workforce who turned around and contributed to Iran's Civilian Sector which in many ways is still at it's infancy.
> 
> And this happened due to proper leadership! Iran's Navy & IRGC Aerospace forces understood and reacted to sanction as if they were at war & they understood that it may be a different type of war that they are fighting today but it is a war none the less and they responded accordingly same with Iran's Air Defense Force once they separated from the Air Force they didn't just site back and wait to be handed something
> 
> While Iran's Air Force stood back and complained about being handed equipment! Today the IRGC is more capable of building UAV's than Iran's Air Force so this is not about funding it's about proper leadership and lack of proper planning
> 
> U.S. built the F-14 in the late 60's at a time when industrial robots, computer aided precision guided cutting equipment, composite materials, 3D printers,.... didn't exist! So when Iran's Air Force was faced with sanctions they should have responded to that threat accordingly but they didn't and IRIAF hasn't built a prototype where I can sit here and argue for additional funding in fighter production over Iranian Built Missiles & UCAV
> 
> 
> 
> This is a PC-7
> View attachment 417989
> 
> 
> So did they install weapons on both?
> 
> He also said Iran is building a new combat aircraft by upgrading the Saegheh which is absurd and nothing but a waist of TIME and Resources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> He should be fired or they should have someone like Shamkhani come in and start up a real R&D program
> 
> IRIAF clearly took no lesson from their experience in the Iran-Iraq war which clearly showed light fighters with no Air Refueling capabilities to be quite useless!!!!!!
> 
> F-5's small radars is less capable in range than IRST, Their engines and Air Frames are just too small & weak for Air-Air refueling
> And I understand building the Azarakhsh & Saegheh for R&D purposes but not to move on to a bigger and better Airframe & engine and to spend funding & resources to produce that fighter is like shooting yourself in the foot because it terms of range it wont be able to fly 300km outside Iranian Airspace with a sufficient payload so your better off using Fatteh Class Missiles, UAV's, UCAV's & cheaper cruise missiles for attack missions!
> 
> In terms of Air to Air capabilities It's lack of IRST, sufficient thrust, maneuverability, sensor & targeting capability makes it useless in Air to Air operation!
> 
> And reducing the F-5's RCS by adding V shaped stabilizers doesn't make much sense when they are required to carry their weapons externally & the reason it makes sense on the F/A-18 is 1st you need 2 stabilizers for increased yaw to get precision landing on a moving Aircraft Carrier 2ndly it reduces the height of the stabilizers without loosing yaw power.
> (Other reasons include lower RCS upon returning to the carrier reduces the chances for the enemy to approximate the location of the carrier group, increase drag & control at the tail helps with better control upon decent on a carrier also gives the aircraft higher angle of attack capability
> So on a carrier the benefits out way cost of increased drag which leads to higher fuel consumption, reduced payload & reduced speeds.
> 
> But aside from R&D to put V shaped stabilizers on a F-5 that already has problems with Thrust, Speed, Range & Payload is absurd!
> For a country the size of Iran to produce a fighter without Air refueling capability is absurd enough!
> 
> I think any IRIAF commander that doesn't develop a new fighter prototype & a new Jet engine prototype every 2 years should be fired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> And this guy wants a medal for putting a weapon on 50's era fighter! Even China started producing the J-7 in the 60's
> 
> SOMEONE FIRE THIS GUY!



I think Mr rozkhosh could match pdf standards as great member  if he was member here . he is clearly trolling by say this even ww1 airplanes is enough for our enemies


----------



## mohsen

mohsen said:


> *Russian Helicopters Plans Ka-226 and Ansat Assembly In Iran*
> 
> Russian Aviaton » Monday April 3, 2017 18:05 MSK
> Russian Helicopters and Iran’s Industrial Development and Renovation Organization (IDRO) have planned a joint venture to assemble KA-226 and Ansat light civilian helicopters, portal Defense World reported.
> 
> The Joint Venture to assemble light civilian helicopters in Iran was announced by Russian Helicopters firm last week.
> 
> A memorandum of understanding was signed by Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky and the chairman of the Board of Directors of IDRO Mansour Moazami. The document is aimed at promoting cooperation between Russia and Iran as part of the program on upgrading the Iranian helicopter fleet.
> 
> Russian Helicopters also intends to explore potential for cooperation with IDRO to develop business in the Middle East.
> 
> “We see that the demand for light helicopters is high in Iran, and the country needs them for civilian agencies. said Boginsky.
> 
> The joint venture between Russia and Iran would consider assembling light Ka-226 or Ansat helicopters. Currently, negotiations on this issue are ongoing. Iran uses almost the whole range of helicopters of this type: Mi-17, Mi-171, Mi-171E, Mi-8MTV and Mi-17V-5s.
> 
> These medium-class helicopters are used for law enforcement and to fight organized crime. Just as in other countries of the region, Russian helicopters in Iran have become known primarily as machines that allow to perform tasks in high temperatures and at high altitudes.


* Russian Helicopters to test Ka-226T in Iran *

Posted on August 10th, 2017 by Russian Aviation Insider in Aerospace, Russia







The tests in Iran are meant to demonstrate Ka-226T's capability to operated at extreme temperatures (Russian Helicopters)
The Russian Helicopters holding along with the Iran Helicopters Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC) will carry out usability tests on its light utility Ka-226T helicopter, particularly in high temperature conditions. The testing will be done at the IHSRC’s facility.

This follows from a memorandum signed between the two parties at HeliRussia-2017, in May. The rotorcraft, which has already arrived at the Iranian facility, will continue high temperature tests through the end of August.

The tests are meant to demonstrate the Ka-226T’s capability of being operated at extreme temperatures of up to +50 degrees. “The testing of the Ka-226T in the extreme climatic conditions of Iran will make the helicopter even more attractive for potential operators not only in Iran, but also throughout the Middle East,” said Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky. “We already notice great interest towards the helicopter in the region even now.”

Russian Helicopters is planning on meeting with IHSRC in September, after the conclusion of testing, for a conference in Iran for the promotion of the helicopter to potential customers.

The Ka-226T has already successfully been promoted to India, with a road map of serial production in that country already drawn up by both sides. 200 helicopters are on order to the Indian Armed Forces and deliveries to begin in 2019. The type is also already in use by the Russian military and has found use in the medevac market in that country.



--------
seen in Iran flying alongside a Bell-214.










http://defapress.ir/fa/news/252218/کاموف-226-در-آسمان-تهران-به-پرواز-درآمد

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> * Russian Helicopters to test Ka-226T in Iran *
> 
> Posted on August 10th, 2017 by Russian Aviation Insider in Aerospace, Russia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tests in Iran are meant to demonstrate Ka-226T's capability to operated at extreme temperatures (Russian Helicopters)
> The Russian Helicopters holding along with the Iran Helicopters Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC) will carry out usability tests on its light utility Ka-226T helicopter, particularly in high temperature conditions. The testing will be done at the IHSRC’s facility.
> 
> This follows from a memorandum signed between the two parties at HeliRussia-2017, in May. The rotorcraft, which has already arrived at the Iranian facility, will continue high temperature tests through the end of August.
> 
> The tests are meant to demonstrate the Ka-226T’s capability of being operated at extreme temperatures of up to +50 degrees. “The testing of the Ka-226T in the extreme climatic conditions of Iran will make the helicopter even more attractive for potential operators not only in Iran, but also throughout the Middle East,” said Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky. “We already notice great interest towards the helicopter in the region even now.”
> 
> Russian Helicopters is planning on meeting with IHSRC in September, after the conclusion of testing, for a conference in Iran for the promotion of the helicopter to potential customers.
> 
> The Ka-226T has already successfully been promoted to India, with a road map of serial production in that country already drawn up by both sides. 200 helicopters are on order to the Indian Armed Forces and deliveries to begin in 2019. The type is also already in use by the Russian military and has found use in the medevac market in that country.
> 
> 
> 
> --------
> seen in Iran flying alongside a Bell-214.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/252218/کاموف-226-در-آسمان-تهران-به-پرواز-درآمد




Adding coaxial rotor technology to Iran's Helicopters Fleet is important because they are capable of flying at higher altitudes but this helicopter uses extremely weak engines!

When Russian official visited IHCRS they were surprised with what they saw! The saw a company that had all the tools, personal, facilities and equipment to mass produce helicopters wasting most of it's resources on taking Helo's apart & overhauling them while they could have been producing that same Helo at a much faster pace at the same cost if they had changed their focus on production instead!

Hopefully this project will change the way they do business towards mass production because Iran's SABA-248 approximately has the same specs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Some additional points:
> 
> - Most potent weapons in the world are ballistic missiles and submarines. The reason the Navy is now supportent is because Iran is ready to start a submarine program.
> 
> - The IRIAF gets no support and resources because they could convince nobody that they could actually build a fighter on their own. It's not due to titanium (one can do can everything titanium can with high strength super steel alloy for structural airframe elements), but because they can't build the most vital part of a aircraft, the engine. Nobody would believe them claiming that they could build a 2017 state of the art engine in 20 years from now. OTOH IRGC missile division and Navy build every bit of the vital parts on their own.
> 
> - Iran is just lucky that the US is a believer in airpower and hence would use JASSM-ER and CMs in future (against which economic interception is possible to some extent). The situation for Iran would be much worse if they would field an Iskander-M like TBM or better...
> 
> - Some countries built mountain tunnel air bases. Iran has not and it would be too expensive. There is not HAS in the world with protection levels even near to mountain tunnels. Chinese and North Koreans did it at times when their missile arsenal was not potent enough. A SAM truck can be just stored in a minimal wide mountain tunnel...
> 
> 
> Now just one more: conventional airpower requires static bases, there is no room for static elements in high intensity saturation warfare. Irans missile bases are not bases with runways, outdoor maintain hangars, munition bunkers and fuel depots. They are just tunnels in massive rock in which the valuable missile arsenal is stored until a preemptive strike (nuclear or not) is fend off and its mobile low footprint missiles assets can be employed. This is very different from an airbase, and you can store everything in them, from mobile SAMs with radars to mobile BM and CM launchers etc.
> There is just one thing that is static in Irans doctrine and this is the OTH radar. It is only expected to remain operational for the first hours of the conflict and provide the necessary early warning for that phase. So I would give my blessings if the at one time decide to build a mountain tunnel airbase close to that OTH radar, with several steel super concrete runways. If then a large portion of available defense systems would be located at that central point, it could remain operational for a few hours together with the OTH radar, after a few volleys of 1000+ simultaneous JASSM-ER and Tomahawk strikes are launched against them.
> For a OTH radar, such central defense tactic might be worth it, but the mountain airbase would be much more expansive than a similar missile solution.




Your mistaken! As I said before the U.S. doesn't put all it's eggs in one basket and neither should we!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

U.S. used them in Iraq & Afghanistan the U.S. hides them in some of their MLRS systems. There Battlefield Tactical Ballistic Missiles currently have a max range of 300km but by 2022 upgraded 500km versions will be fielded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-140_ATACMS#cite_note-19

In March 2016, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon announced they would offer a missile to meet the U.S. Army's Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF) requirement to replace the ATACMS. The missile will use advanced propulsion to fly faster and further, out to 500 kilometres (310 mi) (limited by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty),[18] while also being thinner and sleeker, increasing loadout to two per pod, doubling the number able to be carried by M270 MLRS and M142 HIMARS launchers. One contractor is to be downselected in 2018-19 to begin production in 2021-22

So for high priority Targets within 500km of their bases in the region (Air Defense systems & Missile bases) they'll likely use them before the cruise missiles reach or pass through the area!
*
As for the Air force the blame is STRICKTLY on the IRIAF* and yes they have had the tools and facilities to build Aluminum/Steel based flying prototypes for decades!

On a prototype they don't have to invent a new ejection seat all they have to do is copy the ones they have on the F-14's & F-4's & build around them They didn't have to invent a new landing gear all they had to do is copy and use F-14 landing gears on their prototypes and it's the same with many of the components.... 

In my opinion IRIAF lack of innovation has gone largely unnoticed!

IRIAF knew Titanium is a major requirement for any advanced fighter decades ago & that's when they should have done R&D on titanium production handed the research to the government and pushed for Titanium production 20 years ago!

20 years ago they should have evaluated and one by one removed the obstacles preventing them from building various fighter prototypes 

And building various Steel/Aluminum based flying prototypes using J-79 engines or RD-33 engines is what they should have done 10-15 years ago! 

And building Titanium/Aluminum based Airframes & New Jet Engine designs more advanced than the J-79 & even the TF-30 is what they should have done in the past decade!

The problem with IRIAF commanders is that they didn't comprehend that sanctions were and are a type of war against Iran and as a part of Iran's military they where obligated to fight it with every tool at their disposal but they failed!

And this has NOTHING to do with funding! TF-30 Jet engine was built in the 60's! 60! when there was no computer aided designs, precision cutting equipment,...... and NO internet to get practically free access to various more advanced designs so If the IRIAF failed to build a prototype of an engine more advanced than the TF-30 with an Airframe more capable than the F-14 by today then they have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves!

To this day the IRIAF has failed to even come up with a prototype Airframe & Engine worth producing! And Iran is not a capitalist country for a privet companies to require funding for personal and resources to invest time and materials on a maybe!
In Iran one of the Air Forces duties should have been to come up with a prototype of an Airframe and engine worth producing!

And it's not important if the government chooses not to produce them! What's important is to have an R&D program with innovation being one of your main duties

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

It's a huge endeavor to serial produce a 3-4th gen fighter today. China was struggling to just recently to serial produce a turbofan with a core from the early 70's. How high are Irans industrial capability compared to the Chinese? If I had any power I would veto giving the IRIAF the prospect for a 3-4-5th gen fighter serial production. Too costly too fragile.

I would agree to a serial production of a RQ-170 UAV/UACV if missile deterrence level reaches a certain threshold. Based on that I might would agree to a highly unconventional cheap light fighter which would use the same small but advanced turbofan as the S-171. This still fragile conventional airpower asset described, the Qaher-313 would at least keep the IRIAF alive until a future systems gives airforces it's relevance back.

All this would only get a blessing because it's rather simple, engines would be shared and only if the RQ-170 has provided Iran with a leap in this technology. Catching up with F-14 as baseline is a absolutely no option.

We have one huge advantage over the Americans which we have to do the best usage of: the IRIAF is not influential enough. The USAF and USN pilot community is a huge driving force against full concentration on UAVs. They have a political problem to move away from fighter based airpower to UAV based airpower. Iran is very dynamic compared to them, a lobbying of IRIAF pilots against full UAV employment wouldn't lead far.
The other huge advantage is that the US is the role model for the world on MTCR. On that Iran has already made best use with it's missile forces.
Iran would be foolish not to make maximum use of those two advantages. On one, it has and the other one looks to go in the right direction.

Fortunately Irans missile power has reached necessary high levels to enable doing works like S-171 serial production, down to Qaher-313 development. That's a good indicator for the missile power level, the serious asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> It's a huge endeavor to serial produce a 3-4th gen fighter today. China was struggling to just recently to serial produce a turbofan with a core from the early 70's. How high are Irans industrial capability compared to the Chinese? If I had any power I would veto giving the IRIAF the prospect for a 3-4-5th gen fighter serial production. Too costly too fragile.
> 
> I would agree to a serial production of a RQ-170 UAV/UACV if missile deterrence level reaches a certain threshold. Based on that I might would agree to a highly unconventional cheap light fighter which would use the same small but advanced turbofan as the S-171. This still fragile conventional airpower asset described, the Qaher-313 would at least keep the IRIAF alive until a future systems gives airforces it's relevance back.
> 
> All this would only get a blessing because it's rather simple, engines would be shared and only if the RQ-170 has provided Iran with a leap in this technology. Catching up with F-14 as baseline is a absolutely no option.
> 
> We have one huge advantage over the Americans which we have to do the best usage of: the IRIAF is not influential enough. The USAF and USN pilot community is a huge driving force against full concentration on UAVs. They have a political problem to move away from fighter based airpower to UAV based airpower. Iran is very dynamic compared to them, a lobbying of IRIAF pilots against full UAV employment wouldn't lead far.
> The other huge advantage is that the US is the role model for the world on MTCR. On that Iran has already made best use with it's missile forces.
> Iran would be foolish not to make maximum use of those two advantages. On one, it has and the other one looks to go in the right direction.
> 
> Fortunately Irans missile power has reached necessary high levels to enable doing works like S-171 serial production, down to Qaher-313 development. That's a good indicator for the missile power level, the serious asset.



Again your talking about production! The Chinese can carryout detailed cost vs benefit annalists on Domestic Engine production vs purchasing vs license production! Iran doesn't have that luxury! And yet the Chinese DON'T stop R&D on domestic designs!

Clearly China is not going to be satisfied with a high maintenance engine like the TF-30 or something similar of their own design for their fighter jet when they have access to better and more reliable engines! 
Again, Iran doesn't have that luxury! You think the TF-30 doesn't have problems?

Also, Chinese engines problems are on durability & high G performance of their own design vs engines they can easily buy, co-produce or do license production of! YET STILL the Chinese choose to continue R&D on their own design WHY? And answer is clear! Because it's not about what engine you choose to put on your fighters today & whether or not you choose a domestic engine on a future fighter in the immediate future! It's about being innovative and creating an innovative workforce who will contribute to various industries in the country & also the hope that they will one day power all their fighter with their own engines & one day surpass U.S. & Russian designs!

When it comes to fighter production the cost of building a production model is what's expensive because you have to build all the tool, equipment, facilities & training the right amount of personal for not just the engine & airframe but every component of the fighter from avionics, sensors, radars, radar,.... which makes it an expensive endeavor and you also have to build a weapon system & weapons around your new platform which is also expensive,....

BUT that's not what we are talking about! Building a prototype of a new Air Frame around already existing parts (F-14 Landing Gear, hydraulic pumps, Air refueling probe, ejection seat,...) is a whole other story and a new Turbofan Engine prototypes (not production models) again is a whole other story

Basically you get a bunch of already existing components & you have your Air Frame R&D team design & build an Airframe around them! In the past decade IRIAF should have come up with a flying prototype every 2 years using their own personal and a test teams fly's & tests the prototype & sends the info back to the guys building the next prototype to correct flaws add features.... 

IRIAF also should have had R&D teams working on propulsion, R&D teams in electronics, R&D teams on metallurgy, R&D teams on Air-Air weapons, Pilot gear, PGM..... (Filling the team with 50% full time personal & 50% conscripts educated in that field on equipment that don't require high security clearance & 100% full time personal on components that do) 

Now for a privet company in Iran this would be an expensive endeavor with no assurances for the defense industry your again spending recourses for decades again on a maybe but IRIAF has both the personal & facilities and whether the prototype gets produced or not shouldn't have been the point! Fact is IRIAF hasn't provided the Defense Industry with a platform or engine worth producing!


Q-313 & Saegheh are nice for concept design but THEY ARE NOT WORTH producing! In fact anyone that argues for a light cheap fighters to produce clearly took no experience from the Iran-Iraq war!
Fighters with No Air refueling capability, low combat radius, low payload capacity, with limited sensor & low situational awareness is not only worthless in terms of capability but it is also nothing more than a flying target! 

People that talk about the Q-313 talk about it as if Iran can somehow produce 1000 a year! Which is absurd! and even if we could have somehow produced 100 a year at the end of the day you would have been better off with producing 12-18 force multipliers a year like the F-15, F-14, Su-30 as oppose to 100 Q-313's a year both in capability, cost of production and the cost of operating and maintaining them would have been cheaper in the long run as well!

We mine our country produced strategic metals & turn around and sell it to countries that wont even sell the product they produce with that alloy back us it's absurd & the funny thing is that they take pride in the fact that they are exporting it

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

What you describe was done in the Army with the Zolfaghar tank project. It kept the Army R&D busy and lost at the start of the production stage to system based on "Iranized" Russian R&D.

This is nothing bad if you have sufficient resources and the Army had it. But the resources necessary for a IRIAF R&D program would be simply too large for Iran and it's situation.

The tank is a weapon that is more cost effective than a fighter, which is another reason the Army was allowed the resources for the Zolfaghar R&D program. Now in 2017 Iran has sufficient resources for a tank production run, won by the Karrar.

In the same way another foreign R&D input, the RQ-170 might get a production line with the S-171 while the Saeghe not.

This just teaches us that IRIAF was not cleared to receive the huge resources for a fighter R&D program, the Saeghe was the maximum and the Q-313 is only there because its a cooperation program lead by the MOD.

Only if the Q-313 is simple/low maintenance enough to be operated for 200 hours in field conditions, start from dirtfields (via a hardened landing gear and top intakes), it has any reasonable chance to be of any operational use in a high intensity conflict. It should not cost more than 5 mil $ an airframe to have any degree of cost effectiveness. But I think I don't need to repeat myself, you already know my opinion about survivability and worth of fighter/bombers in high intensity warfare.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> What you describe was done in the Army with the Zolfaghar tank project. It kept the Army R&D busy and lost at the start of the production stage to system based on "Iranized" Russian R&D.
> 
> This is nothing bad if you have sufficient resources and the Army had it. But the resources necessary for a IRIAF R&D program would be simply too large for Iran and it's situation.
> 
> The tank is a weapon that is more cost effective than a fighter, which is another reason the Army was allowed the resources for the Zolfaghar R&D program. Now in 2017 Iran has sufficient resources for a tank production run, won by the Karrar.
> 
> In the same way another foreign R&D input, the RQ-170 might get a production line with the S-171 while the Saeghe not.
> 
> This just teaches us that IRIAF was not cleared to receive the huge resources for a fighter R&D program, the Saeghe was the maximum and the Q-313 is only there because its a cooperation program lead by the MOD.
> 
> Only if the Q-313 is simple/low maintenance enough to be operated for 200 hours in field conditions, start from dirtfields (via a hardened landing gear and top intakes), it has any reasonable chance to be of any operational use in a high intensity conflict. It should not cost more than 5 mil $ an airframe to have any degree of cost effectiveness. But I think I don't need to repeat myself, you already know my opinion about survivability and worth of fighter/bombers in high intensity warfare.



NO it is NOT too much for the IRIAF! And it's absolutely absurd to think that it is! It's about how you choose to allocate your resources! The Facilities are there the Personal is there building handful of large vacuumed ovens is something IRIAF should have done 15 years ago it's not ROCKET science!

Iran's Navy Commanders choose to allocate the resources available to them by starting R&D programs in various fields! And it doesn't matter that they don't have the funding to produce everything they want what's important is continuing R&D

As for the Zolfaghar when you have the option of license production of a more durable Tanks at a lower cost yes just as China chooses Russian Engines for it's Aircraft your going to do a cost vs benefits analysis and your going to choose which one your going to procure BUT your NOT going to stop R&D


Lets say a Q-313 at the end of the day comes out to only $10 Million USD (Airframe, Engine, Sensors... but not including spare parts, maintenance costs, pilot gear, weapons,...) will 8 of them be able to take on a single $80 Million USD Su-35?
NO!
Will it be cheaper to fuel 8 $10 Million USD fighter or 1 Su-35?
Will it be cheaper to build bunkers for 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
Will it be easier to train pilots on 8 Q-313's or 1 Su-35?
Will it be cheaper and faster to maintain 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
And most important will Iran be able to produce at such a high rate?
And I can keep going on an on

And as a result the Q-313 is a nice concept fighter BUT NOT a Fighter worth producing!

Azarakhsh & Saegheh should have only been a stepping stone after the Saegheh instead of putting resources into production they should have continued on to a bigger fighter BUT TO DO SO you require 20 tones of titanium a year for both an Air Frame & Engine!
That and a few other strategic metals is the ONLY extra resources the MOD should have provided the IRIAF R&D program until they had something worth producing!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

VEVAK said:


> FYI the day's where the government was scared of the Artesh gaining too much power is long passed my friend! Those are nothing but western delusions!
> 
> I would not mix the IRIAF with IRGC Aerospace forces if you want to shake up the IRIAF then sack the head of the IRIAF specifically for a lack of innovation
> 
> Fact is IRIAF has no one to blame but it's self!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 1.Iran's Navy is building it's own Ships and Subs many of which were developed by it's own personal & proper management and coordination with Iran's Defense Industry & they are far ahead of the IRGC Navy!
> 
> 2.IRGC Aerospace forces are building Advanced Ballistic Missiles & UAV's far more capable than most Air Force UAV's & it's not because of funding!
> 
> 3.Iran's Artesh Ground Forces are building various types of equipment some impressive & some not so much
> 
> 4. Iran's Air Defense Forces are building various radars & SAM's that are very impressive
> 
> And yes they all did it by cooperating with various defense industry companies!
> 
> BUT What have IRIAF commanders done when faced with sanctions in terms of innovation not upkeep?????
> 
> IRIAF has highly educated personal, they have tools & facilities required to build many of the parts plus the tools they didn't have they could and should have built so they can develop their own Jet engines & prototypes and if they had built a prototype worth producing then they could of handed it over to the defense industry for production!
> 
> If your country is being sanctioned & prohibited from buying Aircraft then they are at war with you! And it may be a different type of war but still you need to adjust yourself and your command decisions accordingly!
> 
> By 2005 Iran's Air Force should have built all the tools and facilities required to at the very least build a full scale working prototype of a new Air Frame and an new engine every two years
> For the prototypes you use parts already available F-14 Landing Gears, F-4 Cockpit, F-4 J-79 Engines & all Airframes equipped with internal weapons bays with low RCS & IRST built in!
> By now they should have had 5 designs of Airframes & Engines combined the best of the best & started production



I wouldn't call IRIAF the culprit here, if you cut down budget of the organization it will not produce results. How can you expect them to yield out things when they can not import anything and the funds are just not there ?

Making fighter jets is far more difficult then making Ballistic missiles. Engines, Radars, Avionics suite etc they are all to be imported or built under license, even countries like India and china cant produce their own fighter jets without heavy procurement spree from outside world. If IRIAF today cant give out even a 4.0 generation fighter jet, its because Iranian diplomatic front has failed miserably or may be govt. itself did not want IRIAF to be re-equipped. They failed to see the future, otherwise they could have tried to bargain TOT or high number imports from Russia on Engines, Radars, Avionics in late 90s when Russia itself was desperate for cash and khatami was seen as a moderate by west. Even something on lines of imports or TOT of RD-33 along with Zhuk 8-10 would have made sense for basing our local fighter project on those proven systems. We saw no effort literally. They could have even invested in FC-1 program of China which was perfect to replace F-5 E/F and F-4E/D Fleet. They did nothing. 

When your decision makers are not doing anything for you then you how can a military organization is expected to survive ? All of this when they already saw Azarakhsh program failing in 90s. They cant even upgrade these ancient planes in Iran let alone build something new.


----------



## VEVAK

drmeson said:


> I wouldn't call IRIAF the culprit here, if you cut down budget of the organization it will not produce results. How can you expect them to yield out things when they can not import anything and the funds are just not there ?
> 
> Making fighter jets is far more difficult then making Ballistic missiles. Engines, Radars, Avionics suite etc they are all to be imported or built under license, even countries like India and china cant produce their own fighter jets without heavy procurement spree from outside world. If IRIAF today cant give out even a 4.0 generation fighter jet, its because Iranian diplomatic front has failed miserably or may be govt. itself did not want IRIAF to be re-equipped. They failed to see the future, otherwise they could have tried to bargain TOT or high number imports from Russia on Engines, Radars, Avionics in late 90s when Russia itself was desperate for cash and khatami was seen as a moderate by west. Even something on lines of imports or TOT of RD-33 along with Zhuk 8-10 would have made sense for basing our local fighter project on those proven systems. We saw no effort literally. They could have even invested in FC-1 program of China which was perfect to replace F-5 E/F and F-4E/D Fleet. They did nothing.
> 
> When your decision makers are not doing anything for you then you how can a military organization is expected to survive ? All of this when they already saw Azarakhsh program failing in 90s. They cant even upgrade these ancient planes in Iran let alone build something new.



1st IRIAF having an R&D program has nothing to do with fighter production! Now how large your R&D program is can be debated but IRIAF having an R&D programs in various fields is a necessity not a luxury

2ndly Your talking about production of avionics, radars,.... and the parts required in a 4th gen fighter while I'm strictly talking about R&D. For the IRIAF to allocate ~2% of if human resources towards R&D should be the minimum requirement so if you have 25,000 personal at least 500 should be for R&D broken down into 10 teams of 50 personal
1.Team on Air Frame
2.Propulsion
3.Electronics Sensors, INS & cockpit electronics & displays
4.Metelergy, Composites.... 
5.Weapons & Weapons systems.
6.Radar & IRST
7.Flight control & Avionics (Fly by wire, Throttle, Hydraulics, electric pumps.....) 
8.Pilot Gear & Survival
9.Communication Data link,....
10. Tools,.... cutting, welding, titanium casting, 3D printing, mass production concepts, vacuums,.... 
I would also have separate teams working on Lasers, Optics, Countermeasures, RCS & a few other things

IRIAF is not going to break if 500-700 of it's current personal strictly do R&D & IRIAF has more facilities than they know what to do with that just leaves materials & a limited number of tools & that's not too much to ask for an Air Force that hasn't purchased a fighter in 30 years 

Now Titanium is one of the top 10 most abundant minerals in the world but to turn it into an alloy is expensive and you require a more rare mineral called magnesium which by the way the top producers of this alloy today are China, U.S., Russia, Israel,... & 2 years ago Iran started magnesium production & it seems we have such an abundance that they starting exporting it
And very soon titanium production facilities will also go operational

So overall it's absurd to think that Iran can't afford to give IRIAF enough raw martials to develop a new fighter prototype every 2 years

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK

More points:

- IRIAF needs a high budget to do R&D in critical subsystems, and if it is not given to them they can just do what they have done til today: R&D on less critical systems, radios, altimeter, pumps, PGMs, AAMs, landing gears etc.
Making a copy of the J79 as prototype is such a hard task that they just can't do it with the budget they have (nor would it make sense, the only engine in Iran that would be worth it is the RD-33 and the small RQ-170 engine).

- Chinese did not buy the Al-31 because it was cheaper but because their own WS-10 had a much lower TBO.
You said: 
"Lets say a Q-313 at the end of the day comes out to only $10 Million USD (Airframe, Engine, Sensors... but not including spare parts, maintenance costs, pilot gear, weapons,...) will 8 of them be able to take on a single $80 Million USD Su-35?
NO!
Will it be cheaper to fuel 8 $10 Million USD fighter or 1 Su-35?
Well right, the Su-35 would be cheaper to fuel. But if the Q-313 could be operated from small airfields, highways and so on where the Su-35 could not with a similar support footprint, then that benefit get smaller.

Will it be cheaper to build bunkers for 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
There is no aircraft bunker that could survive multiple hits by penetration payloads of CM's. The Q-313 could be simple and rugged (+ short take off capabilities) enough to operate from the many airfields and highways with a very small ground support footprint. So if you don't have mountain tunnel airbases, dispersing Q-313 with no physical protection but just camouflage would be the most survivable concept for them.

Will it be easier to train pilots on 8 Q-313's or 1 Su-35?
The Q-313 could have a very high degree of automation. Actually in my idea of a very low ground effect land operation of it would require it to fly most of the flight via autopilot, avoid dogfights and mainly use two long range AAM's. It would act like a flying SAM and the bombing operations would also be highly automatized. Even automatic take off and landing could be implemented. My concept for the Q-313 might be wrong but if not, training pilots for it would be very low cost.

Will it be cheaper and faster to maintain 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
Possibly the 8 Q-313. You might know that a F-5 needed something like 4-5 times less man hours for maintenance and I think for the F-14 it was something like 8 times. Now the Q-313 does not use a after burner and operates closer to a nominal regime because it does no dogfights in my concept of it.
The Su-35 is not comparable to the over-complex F-14 but the Q-313 could also be much easier to maintain than the F-5. The rugged, simple concept I foresee for the Q-313 would require very low maintenance requirements so that it would have to be designed for that goal.

And most important will Iran be able to produce at such a high rate?
If it is designed to be simple and low cost with a restricted operation regime, they could produce it in quantities. This is not a JF-17 which is small and cheap, but want to compete and operate like a F-16. No. The Q-313 team would not be foolish enough to compete with eastern and westerns, well established conventional airpower concept. Something asymmetrical is the only possible answer. I'm happy that the Q-313 makes sense for such a novel operation doctrine. If Iran would build something like the JF-17, I would agree production numbers would never reach necessary levels.

And I can keep going on an on
You are welcome. I'm not a friend of conventional manned airpower for a country with the boundary conditions like Iran, but the Q-313 looks promising.




VEVAK said:


> Azarakhsh & Saegheh should have only been a stepping stone after the Saegheh instead of putting resources into production they should have continued on to a bigger fighter



I think at the time of the Azarashkh the IRIAF still had a powerful lobbying power. However as a conventional concept would lead Iran nowhere, those supporters of it were retired and further fighter R&D was stopped. A very positive thing if you ask me.
Now the Q-313 is a mod initiative that might lead the IRIAF to be re-equipped with a fighter, a possibly very unconventional one.
We know that the old IRIAF cadre wanted next after the Ararashkh and the Saeqhe, a JF-17 like light fighter. If they would have been successful with it and if it would have entered production due to the IRIAF veterans influence, it would have negative impact on Irans warfighting capability.
We all respect the IRIAF and it's veterans, but doctrinal development is the job of scientists and engineers. Well possible that Iran would have been attacked long ago, if those science based decision making for a missile force instead of re-equipping the IRIAF after the war was not made.

Something else VEVAK:

Titanium is a good thing to have. However you can do EVERYTHING titanium does with super steel alloys.
Titanium has high tensile strength for its weight and super steel alloys have higher MPa ratings but at higher weight.
What you say was true for the 70's/80's and if available its still state of the art today. However it is absolutely no show stopper for IRIAF R&D.

I give you and example: Due to its properties, Soviets decided to build titanium hull submarines in the 70's and 80's at immense costs. Alfa class submarines and other "titaniums" are today seen as one of the reasons Soviet defense expenses exploded and ultimately lead to its bankruptcy.
Today Russians have moved back to use super steel alloys for the best submarines, because it meanwhile has similar mechanical properties as titanium for it higher weight. The same is true for airframe structural elements. If Iran has not mastered such super steel alloys (very likely), those airframe structural parts would weight 50-25% more than a comparable titanium structural part. This is certainly something but certainly not a show stopper for R&D.
Today going for steel superalloys with +1500MPa ratings is a way to skip titanium and make easier use of 3D production methods. Mastering it is equally difficult as mastering titanium.


----------



## OldTwilight



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

OldTwilight said:


>


Already posted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

These photos above and many other excellent photos from this site of German photographer that was on Kish Air Show 








http://www.st-doerfer.de/Kish2016/html/default.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> More points:
> 
> - IRIAF needs a high budget to do R&D in critical subsystems, and if it is not given to them they can just do what they have done til today: R&D on less critical systems, radios, altimeter, pumps, PGMs, AAMs, landing gears etc.
> Making a copy of the J79 as prototype is such a hard task that they just can't do it with the budget they have (nor would it make sense, the only engine in Iran that would be worth it is the RD-33 and the small RQ-170 engine).
> 
> - Chinese did not buy the Al-31 because it was cheaper but because their own WS-10 had a much lower TBO.
> You said:
> "Lets say a Q-313 at the end of the day comes out to only $10 Million USD (Airframe, Engine, Sensors... but not including spare parts, maintenance costs, pilot gear, weapons,...) will 8 of them be able to take on a single $80 Million USD Su-35?
> NO!
> Will it be cheaper to fuel 8 $10 Million USD fighter or 1 Su-35?
> Well right, the Su-35 would be cheaper to fuel. But if the Q-313 could be operated from small airfields, highways and so on where the Su-35 could not with a similar support footprint, then that benefit get smaller.
> 
> Will it be cheaper to build bunkers for 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
> There is no aircraft bunker that could survive multiple hits by penetration payloads of CM's. The Q-313 could be simple and rugged (+ short take off capabilities) enough to operate from the many airfields and highways with a very small ground support footprint. So if you don't have mountain tunnel airbases, dispersing Q-313 with no physical protection but just camouflage would be the most survivable concept for them.
> 
> Will it be easier to train pilots on 8 Q-313's or 1 Su-35?
> The Q-313 could have a very high degree of automation. Actually in my idea of a very low ground effect land operation of it would require it to fly most of the flight via autopilot, avoid dogfights and mainly use two long range AAM's. It would act like a flying SAM and the bombing operations would also be highly automatized. Even automatic take off and landing could be implemented. My concept for the Q-313 might be wrong but if not, training pilots for it would be very low cost.
> 
> Will it be cheaper and faster to maintain 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
> Possibly the 8 Q-313. You might know that a F-5 needed something like 4-5 times less man hours for maintenance and I think for the F-14 it was something like 8 times. Now the Q-313 does not use a after burner and operates closer to a nominal regime because it does no dogfights in my concept of it.
> The Su-35 is not comparable to the over-complex F-14 but the Q-313 could also be much easier to maintain than the F-5. The rugged, simple concept I foresee for the Q-313 would require very low maintenance requirements so that it would have to be designed for that goal.
> 
> And most important will Iran be able to produce at such a high rate?
> If it is designed to be simple and low cost with a restricted operation regime, they could produce it in quantities. This is not a JF-17 which is small and cheap, but want to compete and operate like a F-16. No. The Q-313 team would not be foolish enough to compete with eastern and westerns, well established conventional airpower concept. Something asymmetrical is the only possible answer. I'm happy that the Q-313 makes sense for such a novel operation doctrine. If Iran would build something like the JF-17, I would agree production numbers would never reach necessary levels.
> 
> And I can keep going on an on
> You are welcome. I'm not a friend of conventional manned airpower for a country with the boundary conditions like Iran, but the Q-313 looks promising.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think at the time of the Azarashkh the IRIAF still had a powerful lobbying power. However as a conventional concept would lead Iran nowhere, those supporters of it were retired and further fighter R&D was stopped. A very positive thing if you ask me.
> Now the Q-313 is a mod initiative that might lead the IRIAF to be re-equipped with a fighter, a possibly very unconventional one.
> We know that the old IRIAF cadre wanted next after the Ararashkh and the Saeqhe, a JF-17 like light fighter. If they would have been successful with it and if it would have entered production due to the IRIAF veterans influence, it would have negative impact on Irans warfighting capability.
> We all respect the IRIAF and it's veterans, but doctrinal development is the job of scientists and engineers. Well possible that Iran would have been attacked long ago, if those science based decision making for a missile force instead of re-equipping the IRIAF after the war was not made.
> 
> Something else VEVAK:
> 
> Titanium is a good thing to have. However you can do EVERYTHING titanium does with super steel alloys.
> Titanium has high tensile strength for its weight and super steel alloys have higher MPa ratings but at higher weight.
> What you say was true for the 70's/80's and if available its still state of the art today. However it is absolutely no show stopper for IRIAF R&D.
> 
> I give you and example: Due to its properties, Soviets decided to build titanium hull submarines in the 70's and 80's at immense costs. Alfa class submarines and other "titaniums" are today seen as one of the reasons Soviet defense expenses exploded and ultimately lead to its bankruptcy.
> Today Russians have moved back to use super steel alloys for the best submarines, because it meanwhile has similar mechanical properties as titanium for it higher weight. The same is true for airframe structural elements. If Iran has not mastered such super steel alloys (very likely), those airframe structural parts would weight 50-25% more than a comparable titanium structural part. This is certainly something but certainly not a show stopper for R&D.
> Today going for steel superalloys with +1500MPa ratings is a way to skip titanium and make easier use of 3D production methods. Mastering it is equally difficult as mastering titanium.


----------



## scimitar19

if you want strong base for aviation and aeronautics industry you need one of these

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Seem you post was lost, you just quoted last my post.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> More points:
> 
> - IRIAF needs a high budget to do R&D in critical subsystems, and if it is not given to them they can just do what they have done til today: R&D on less critical systems, radios, altimeter, pumps, PGMs, AAMs, landing gears etc.
> Making a copy of the J79 as prototype is such a hard task that they just can't do it with the budget they have (nor would it make sense, the only engine in Iran that would be worth it is the RD-33 and the small RQ-170 engine).
> 
> - Chinese did not buy the Al-31 because it was cheaper but because their own WS-10 had a much lower TBO.
> You said:
> "Lets say a Q-313 at the end of the day comes out to only $10 Million USD (Airframe, Engine, Sensors... but not including spare parts, maintenance costs, pilot gear, weapons,...) will 8 of them be able to take on a single $80 Million USD Su-35?
> NO!
> Will it be cheaper to fuel 8 $10 Million USD fighter or 1 Su-35?
> Well right, the Su-35 would be cheaper to fuel. But if the Q-313 could be operated from small airfields, highways and so on where the Su-35 could not with a similar support footprint, then that benefit get smaller.
> 
> Will it be cheaper to build bunkers for 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
> There is no aircraft bunker that could survive multiple hits by penetration payloads of CM's. The Q-313 could be simple and rugged (+ short take off capabilities) enough to operate from the many airfields and highways with a very small ground support footprint. So if you don't have mountain tunnel airbases, dispersing Q-313 with no physical protection but just camouflage would be the most survivable concept for them.
> 
> Will it be easier to train pilots on 8 Q-313's or 1 Su-35?
> The Q-313 could have a very high degree of automation. Actually in my idea of a very low ground effect land operation of it would require it to fly most of the flight via autopilot, avoid dogfights and mainly use two long range AAM's. It would act like a flying SAM and the bombing operations would also be highly automatized. Even automatic take off and landing could be implemented. My concept for the Q-313 might be wrong but if not, training pilots for it would be very low cost.
> 
> Will it be cheaper and faster to maintain 8 Q-313 or 1 Su-35?
> Possibly the 8 Q-313. You might know that a F-5 needed something like 4-5 times less man hours for maintenance and I think for the F-14 it was something like 8 times. Now the Q-313 does not use a after burner and operates closer to a nominal regime because it does no dogfights in my concept of it.
> The Su-35 is not comparable to the over-complex F-14 but the Q-313 could also be much easier to maintain than the F-5. The rugged, simple concept I foresee for the Q-313 would require very low maintenance requirements so that it would have to be designed for that goal.
> 
> And most important will Iran be able to produce at such a high rate?
> If it is designed to be simple and low cost with a restricted operation regime, they could produce it in quantities. This is not a JF-17 which is small and cheap, but want to compete and operate like a F-16. No. The Q-313 team would not be foolish enough to compete with eastern and westerns, well established conventional airpower concept. Something asymmetrical is the only possible answer. I'm happy that the Q-313 makes sense for such a novel operation doctrine. If Iran would build something like the JF-17, I would agree production numbers would never reach necessary levels.
> 
> And I can keep going on an on
> You are welcome. I'm not a friend of conventional manned airpower for a country with the boundary conditions like Iran, but the Q-313 looks promising.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think at the time of the Azarashkh the IRIAF still had a powerful lobbying power. However as a conventional concept would lead Iran nowhere, those supporters of it were retired and further fighter R&D was stopped. A very positive thing if you ask me.
> Now the Q-313 is a mod initiative that might lead the IRIAF to be re-equipped with a fighter, a possibly very unconventional one.
> We know that the old IRIAF cadre wanted next after the Ararashkh and the Saeqhe, a JF-17 like light fighter. If they would have been successful with it and if it would have entered production due to the IRIAF veterans influence, it would have negative impact on Irans warfighting capability.
> We all respect the IRIAF and it's veterans, but doctrinal development is the job of scientists and engineers. Well possible that Iran would have been attacked long ago, if those science based decision making for a missile force instead of re-equipping the IRIAF after the war was not made.
> 
> Something else VEVAK:
> 
> Titanium is a good thing to have. However you can do EVERYTHING titanium does with super steel alloys.
> Titanium has high tensile strength for its weight and super steel alloys have higher MPa ratings but at higher weight.
> What you say was true for the 70's/80's and if available its still state of the art today. However it is absolutely no show stopper for IRIAF R&D.
> 
> I give you and example: Due to its properties, Soviets decided to build titanium hull submarines in the 70's and 80's at immense costs. Alfa class submarines and other "titaniums" are today seen as one of the reasons Soviet defense expenses exploded and ultimately lead to its bankruptcy.
> Today Russians have moved back to use super steel alloys for the best submarines, because it meanwhile has similar mechanical properties as titanium for it higher weight. The same is true for airframe structural elements. If Iran has not mastered such super steel alloys (very likely), those airframe structural parts would weight 50-25% more than a comparable titanium structural part. This is certainly something but certainly not a show stopper for R&D.
> Today going for steel superalloys with +1500MPa ratings is a way to skip titanium and make easier use of 3D production methods. Mastering it is equally difficult as mastering titanium.



Your views on the Air Force is extremely bleak & short sighted you see the Air Force as a burden the country has to endure because of the foreign oppressors while in reality a countries Air Force should be a beacon of innovation and progress whos workforce whether they be conscripts or full time personal get properly trained & get the experience required to contribute to various industries inside Iran
An aeronautical engineer that gets conscripted into the military should head straight into the Air forces R&D program & from there he gains limited experience to be recruited into civil or military (MOD) aerospace companies. 

As for the J-79 today with computer aided designs capability & precision cutting capability & what is known about jet engines to reverse engineer & produce the J-79 would be absurd!
This is why if the IRIAF had a proper R&D program they could have upgraded various characteristics of the J-79 for at the least a better consumption ratio & greater air flow and at best added dry thrust
But yes reverse engineering the J-79 as oppose to the RD-33 wouldn't make much sense because the RD-33 not only has greater thrust and at the same time it's fuel consumption is ~15% better (Dry thrust) 

2ndly when it comes to engines if you don't have access to materials you need your ability to play around with various designs especially when it comes to high heat resistant materials or compressors or fan blades that require a big chunk of titanium or other supper alloys is limited 

And tensile strength is not the only characteristic in titanium's that makes it a requirement in Jet engines & Air Frames titanium also has high corrosion & high fatigue resistance characteristics & it's capable of keeping those characteristics while under heat created by fiction all at the same time and that's what makes it a super alloy or else tensile strength on it's own is just NOT enough
And for R&D purposes there is only so far you can go using other alloys and composites for an engine but for an Airframe and a concept design it is not a necessity 

As for why the Chinese choose a Russian engines the MAIN reason is cost & by cost it's not just about what the engine costs it's about maintenance hours per flight hour, life expectancy, fuel consumption,.... you have to take into account all the costs not simply what the engine costs upon purchase which is the same mistake you & frankly Iran is doing with it's Q-313 & it's complete miss calculation in terms of cost vs benefit Iranian F-14 Airframes went through an 8 year long war and are still flying after 40 years which would not have been possible without titanium! 

Finally when you wanna buy fighter for your Air force (whether they be foreign or domestic purchases) you have to analyze why it is that you need those fighters!
For a country like Iran we need Fighters in our Air Force to do specific things that can't be done with Missiles & UCAV's! And one of the MAIN things Fighters can do that UCAV's & Missiles can't do is carry a large +2000lb PGM & Air Launched Cruise Missiles which would be required to take out various heavily fortified bunkers, command centers, facilities,... to ships parked in the Indian Ocean

Do you think Iran is the only country that has thought about putting it's vital facilities both civilian & military under ground with reinforced concrete?
Do you think the U.S. would be deluded enough to start a war with Iran while their ships are in the Persian Gulf?

We also need Air Superiority fighters to do escort missions, interceptions & to work with Iran's Air Defense Force to counter incoming Aircrafts & due to the proliferation of low RCS aircraft having IRST & Aircrafts with radars that can differentiate a bird from a high moving aircraft at an optimal range should be a requirement

Also, due to Iran's size any fighter we purchase should have Air Refueling capability this is another thing that separates fighters from UAV's

Lack of situational awareness made Iranian F-5's easy targets in the Iran-Iraq war and it doesn't matter if a fighter is meant for a ground attack role or an Air Superiority role because even on a ground attack role you need to know what's out there so you know when to run

So my question is what exactly do think a Q-313 can accomplish that a UAV or a Fatteh class missile can't?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

I try to be progressive and not bound to old concepts. In some sense your pro manned-airpower position is reflected in materials with you titanium argumentation. It's obsolete.. there are alternatives.

The Russians are now playing with the idea to introduce just small number of PAK-FA/Su-57 into service until their economical situation improves. However there are no limitations for S-400 and Yars missiles.
Russia represents eastern airpower tradition and wants to keep it but they know about its limited role in a high intensity conflict. Now Russsia has the worlds most potent strategic nuclear forces, what about Iran? How should Iran go for conventional airpower when Russia pays low attention?
The cost-effect calculation just doesn't fit.

Next, you have a simplistic view on how incredibly difficult it is to copy an turbine engine. Iran now seems to have managed to copy the J85, a incredibly simple design. To get a J79 copy working with all computer support would still be a huge task. The RD-33 is generations more advanced than the J79 and still competitive. Thats why there are rumors about a heavily upgraded J85, as J90 next and a RD-33 copy for a larger fighter than the Q-313. However because it would be a monumental task to copy the RD-33 with any useful TBO rating, I would stop such a project and put the huge professional workforce necessary into missile or UCAV projects. As a reminder, for the Chinese the lifetime of the WS-10 was too low and hence its TBO to replace the Al-31:
Engine building is the highest discipline in material science and among the top in engineering. Iran is doing it, but for more useful things like cruise missiles and in future for ~2ton payload jet UCAV (S-171).

Regarding titanium: the most advanced engines would neither use it for the compressors (Al hybrid alloys) nor for the fans (carbon fiber/Al), even not at all. Iran could try to go for those technologies superior to Ti. Those, plus super steel alloys with high yield strength would be one way to skip titanium for engines and structural parts of the airframe (rest of the airframe should be composites anyway).
Fatigue and corrosion resistance properties for such super alloys pose no obstacle.
Catching up is done by Chinese with their huge resources. For Iran catching up to Ti or F-14 is no option, only novel new an unconventional approaches have chances to beat the leaders.
Your insistence on manned airpower and is the same as on Ti: There are alternatives.

The job of the Q-313 would be the following:
- Operate in friendly or at best contested airspace (not even the F-22 is survivable in an opposing advanced IADS environment)
- Operate inside IADS to have GCI provided situational awareness via continuous data-link connection.
- Use GCI to act like a fast, flexible SAM site with BVR Fakkur-90 like long range AAMs. Fill up holes and after the high intensity phase, enter enemy airspace for bombing missions.
- Employ miniaturized sensor electronics to achieve own situational awareness, much higher than the crude F-5 sensors/electronics.
- Be located anywhere except the home airbases in order to survive the first attack and remain operable.
- Never fly too far, as there is no tanker support that has survived the high intensity phase.
- A fleet of 600-800 built in 5 years is needed

All that can also be done by a swarm UAV/UACV fleet, which also includes jet powered ones like a S-171 bomber for heavy hauls. The single benefit is the anti-air BVR engagements, where a manned aircraft is a good benefit.

The missile/UACV combination can hardy be beaten in the cost-effect calculation. The king in costs is just a missile force that has such a devastating capability, that no low intensity phase with ground warfare etc. is necessary because the enemy is ready to come to the table.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> How should Iran go for conventional airpower when Russia pays low attention?



Unlike Russia, our missiles do not have thermonuclear warheads. They basically cannot use their ballistic missile force, even in a high intensity conflict, unless it is an existential threat. That's why their air force has thousands and thousands of aircraft.


----------



## PeeD

I said Russians are ready to limit procurement of the PAK-FA/Su-57, but make no compromises on S-400, Iskander-M, Kh-101, Yars, Bulava. The reason is that the Su-57 and hence conventional airpower has lower priority for them than those other weapon categories. The lesson is that Iran should spend its resources on similar missile weapons instead of Q-313 or even a F-14 copy.
Irans benefit is that through Israeli and U.S tech input on UAVs, it has made a jump start on those fields and can now also employ them. So UAVs come after the missile weapons and then a manned fighter like the Q-313 and only if it is really the revolutionary asymmetric concept which I think it may be.

Our BMs are available in thousands to be used against area targets, first and foremost enemy airbases.

Its our equivalent to Russians strategic nuclear forces. At a much smaller scale but sufficient to do the job.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Our BMs are available in thousands to be used against area targets, first and foremost enemy airbases.



But many countries use special runway penetrating bombs to make sure repairing is not a fast process. And hardened aircraft shelters are smaller, harder to hit targets.


----------



## PDF

Has Iran evaluated JF-17 Thunder? What are the disadvantages/advantages of it for IRIAF? Anybody with details? PS image:


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

Some time ago I did a numbers calculation on BMs vs. airbase here.
Airbases are so critical for enemy war efforts that literally spending hundreds of BMs is cost effective to be launched against them. There is no airbase 2000km around Iran that could survive a mach 3-4 impacting Qiam or Shahab-3 warhead, the overpressure/shockwave alone would do enormous damage, no ordinary bunkerbuster bomb can compete here.
A combination of cluster warheads and HE, possibly even airburst would cripple the base and its operations if lets say 500 missiles are launched against it. Statistically there would be penetrating hits on HAS too. There is also no anti-runway weapon that could compete with a BM HE/penetrating warhead.

This vulnerability, that exists at a lower level for aircraft carriers, is the reason why I'm not a friend of fighter based manned airpower. In the league of near-peer adversaries, conventional airbases are just too fragile.

I want to see the Q-313 with hardened landing gear, mobile support team (fuel/ammo), high no-maintenance-hours tolerance, its top-side air intake, possibly even jet-assisted take-off, operating from highways and countryside small airfields. This is the only feasible strategy for survivable manned airpower and in total not even a good solution.
A mountain superairbase... too expensive. Overall any conventional airpower solution has low bang-for-the-buck ratio.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> I try to be progressive and not bound to old concepts. In some sense your pro manned-airpower position is reflected in materials with you titanium argumentation. It's obsolete.. there are alternatives.
> 
> The Russians are now playing with the idea to introduce just small number of PAK-FA/Su-57 into service until their economical situation improves. However there are no limitations for S-400 and Yars missiles.
> Russia represents eastern airpower tradition and wants to keep it but they know about its limited role in a high intensity conflict. Now Russsia has the worlds most potent strategic nuclear forces, what about Iran? How should Iran go for conventional airpower when Russia pays low attention?
> The cost-effect calculation just doesn't fit.
> 
> Next, you have a simplistic view on how incredibly difficult it is to copy an turbine engine. Iran now seems to have managed to copy the J85, a incredibly simple design. To get a J79 copy working with all computer support would still be a huge task. The RD-33 is generations more advanced than the J79 and still competitive. Thats why there are rumors about a heavily upgraded J85, as J90 next and a RD-33 copy for a larger fighter than the Q-313. However because it would be a monumental task to copy the RD-33 with any useful TBO rating, I would stop such a project and put the huge professional workforce necessary into missile or UCAV projects. As a reminder, for the Chinese the lifetime of the WS-10 was too low and hence its TBO to replace the Al-31:
> Engine building is the highest discipline in material science and among the top in engineering. Iran is doing it, but for more useful things like cruise missiles and in future for ~2ton payload jet UCAV (S-171).
> 
> Regarding titanium: the most advanced engines would neither use it for the compressors (Al hybrid alloys) nor for the fans (carbon fiber/Al), even not at all. Iran could try to go for those technologies superior to Ti. Those, plus super steel alloys with high yield strength would be one way to skip titanium for engines and structural parts of the airframe (rest of the airframe should be composites anyway).
> Fatigue and corrosion resistance properties for such super alloys pose no obstacle.
> Catching up is done by Chinese with their huge resources. For Iran catching up to Ti or F-14 is no option, only novel new an unconventional approaches have chances to beat the leaders.
> Your insistence on manned airpower and is the same as on Ti: There are alternatives.
> 
> The job of the Q-313 would be the following:
> - Operate in friendly or at best contested airspace (not even the F-22 is survivable in an opposing advanced IADS environment)
> - Operate inside IADS to have GCI provided situational awareness via continuous data-link connection.
> - Use GCI to act like a fast, flexible SAM site with BVR Fakkur-90 like long range AAMs. Fill up holes and after the high intensity phase, enter enemy airspace for bombing missions.
> - Employ miniaturized sensor electronics to achieve own situational awareness, much higher than the crude F-5 sensors/electronics.
> - Be located anywhere except the home airbases in order to survive the first attack and remain operable.
> - Never fly too far, as there is no tanker support that has survived the high intensity phase.
> - A fleet of 600-800 built in 5 years is needed
> 
> All that can also be done by a swarm UAV/UACV fleet, which also includes jet powered ones like a S-171 bomber for heavy hauls. The single benefit is the anti-air BVR engagements, where a manned aircraft is a good benefit.
> 
> The missile/UACV combination can hardy be beaten in the cost-effect calculation. The king in costs is just a missile force that has such a devastating capability, that no low intensity phase with ground warfare etc. is necessary because the enemy is ready to come to the table.



The Notion that Titanium is obsolete is absurd and today Aircraft Manufacturers may have reduced Titanium use compared to before on Subsonic Civilian Aircrafts to reduce weight & production cost but at the same time the structure of their aircraft is far weaker than before & for them that doesn't matter but for military applications it does!
And today you may be able to replace various parts and large parts of the outer surface with Kevlar, High Grade Fiberglass & Carbon Fibers but to completely replace titanium in a supersonic Aircraft is just not in the realms of reality & NO 5th Generation fighter has been able to accomplish this not the F-22 (which uses a lot of titanium) or the F-35 or the Su-Pak (25% of the entire Aircraft is titanium)
So countries far more advanced than Iran haven't been able to accomplish what your suggesting so your talking nonsense!

And your assumptions about Russian Aircraft Production would have made sense if the Russians weren't producing other Fighters for their Air Force but they are ! And the reasons why the Russians don't wanna take the Su-pak into mass production (25% titanium & 20% composites) is because:

1.Su-35's & MiG-35 in their own test have shown to be quite capable of taking on & surpassing F-35's & the Russians don't put much stock in reduced RCS via Radar deflection
2. U.S. has started working on 6th Generation fighters so starting mass production of the Pak-Fa is a bit premature until u have more intel on what is to come and for all we know the Russians have chosen to move on to a better design covertly or more likely are waiting on intel to improve on the PaK-Fa so it can compete with a 6th gen fighter before production.
Force multipliers are key in modern fighter jets & 6th Gen fighters will have 3 key characteristics that increases that capability 1.They'll be twin seat with the rear pilot controlling UCAV's 2.They will have advanced Laser Countermeasures that will be able to destroy incoming Air-Air missiles & SAM's of all kinds. 3. Greater payload capacity then 5th Gen fighters. 
3.The U.S. only has 187 operational F-22's

As for Russian Fighter Purchases this is what's been going on in the past 3-4 years:
Russian Air Force has 3 *Su-30s* and 20 Su-30M2 (all delivered)[65] and 74 Su-30SM fighters as of July 2017 with 8 delivered to Russian Knights aerobatic team.[66][67][68][69][70][71][72] An order for 28 Su-30SM fighters in April 2016 is to increase the total to 88 of the variant, with deliveries to be completed by 2018.[73]
Russian Naval Aviation - 28 Su-30SMs on order,[74] with 50 planned. 17 aircraft were delivered as of late May 2017.[75]

Russian Air Force — 58 *Su-35S* fighters in inventory as of December 2016.[2][132] 50 ordered in January 2016.[65]
Russian Air Force – 30 *MiG-35's* on order, 170 planned.
*16 MiG-29SMT* delivered in 2016
As for the *MiG-31* they are modernizing them 152-190 (MiG-31/B/BM) active,[26][89] +18 BMs in 2014,[90] 80 totally (2016) and 6 more in 2017,[91][92] 100 units in mod. BM on 2018[93] 110+ modernized MiG-31BM and MiG-31BSM as of August 2017. Modernization of another MiG-31B/BS/DZ will be continued

*100 Su-34* have been built for their Air Force in the past decade


So I would suggest you 1st research what it is your talking about before making deluded statements & the Russian have added far more Aircrafts then S-400 systems & don't confuse an entire system with Launchers

FYI Air Defense systems loose over 50% of their effectiveness & survivability when they are not backed by and working along side an Air Force!

As for the reason why Iran is building the J-85 it's because it requires a much smaller chunk of Titanium to cut from

Iran has already made the decision for Titanium Production & If Ti was so easily replaceable they wouldn't have made that decision 
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/09/17/485086/Iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment

whether you wanna accept it or not Ti is irreplaceable that's why Iran is investing in it's production now one of the MAJOR problems with titanium is waist & Aircraft Airframe and engine manufactures are the largest producers of titanium scraps for example if a Pak-Fa uses only 25% Ti using conventional cutting methods they would still need at a minimum 20tonnes of Ti or more to build 18,000kg Aircraft so the biggest problem with Ti is waist so the real way to go around that is by Titanium 3D printing + Titanium Casting (F-22 except for specific areas of the Airframe, most of the Ti used in the F-22 was done though Ti casting which wont be as strong as conventional methods but good enough especially when combined with composites)

This is Ti casting 



FYI if Ti was so easily replaceable no one would have bothered with creating new Ti 3D printing & new Casting methods 

So once Ti production is in full scale mode Iran could potentially build 50 Fighters a year using 1000-2000 tonnes of Ti with engine and all

As for the F-14 the F-14 Ti was forged with cutting methods & I have no doubt that if Iran had a proper R&D program they could potentially building something more similar to the F-22 in terms Airframe using more economical & much faster casting methods! So no I wouldn't pick the F-14 to reverse engineer


I'll get to the Q-313 a later gtg

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 


With obsolete I didn't mean titanium but this argumentation of you that Ti is without alternatives.
You claim again and again that the lack of Ti is one main reason the IRIAF was not able to do R&D... 

I'm not saying that Ti is bad, I just say the lack of it is no show stopper.

Your information is outdated. I told you about the alternatives available today.

Now, if you have a already existing Ti supply line, tools and vast experience, industry/companies you will keep it and use it. No need to go for steel super alloys or carbon fiber, as Ti is still competitive. I just told you that meanwhile there are alternatives which would potentially have only a acceptable performance penalty.
So no, the lack of Ti is not the reason why the IRIAF R&D didn't go beyond the Saeghe, that's the point.

Let me repeat myself: Today it is possible to develop state of the art fighters and engines without any use of Ti.


Your idea that Russians not want to start high number production of the Pak Fa because they await U.S 6th gen fighter is wrong.
Agreed the Su-35 is potent enough for F-22/35. But why should the Russians not acquire as much Pak Fa they can? If 5th gen. fighter are so detrimental for war fighting capability, they should reduce production of Iskander-M and S-400, put the resources on Pak Fa production.
They don't because neither Su-35 nor Su-57 has a higher priority for them as Iskander and S-400. Irans stance to weapon class priority should be going in the same direction and it does.



VEVAK said:


> FYI Air Defense systems loose over 50% of their effectiveness & survivability when they are not backed by and working along side an Air Force!



How so?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

VEVAK said:


> 1st IRIAF having an R&D program has nothing to do with fighter production! Now how large your R&D program is can be debated but IRIAF having an R&D programs in various fields is a necessity not a luxury



I am sorry but where is that R&D program supposed to come from when budget itself would not even allow it to pickup. Military generals and engineers working in workshops are not supposed to invent something. This job is for designated scientists, a team which is paid for research, they have leverages, labs, resources, money. Are we supposed to believe that abominations like Saeghe and Qaher came from such teams ? obviously no. I would go on and say that R&D culture never actually got developed in IRIAF because big wigs from govt. never allowed it. 

Besides, even for sake of argument if I accept that IRIAF should have had an IRIAF program despite its midget budgets ... then what was Shafagh for ? a credible project with indigenous design, foreign collaboration, actual procurement plans for engines and radars. Why did it never fly ? instead of tail re-welded F-5E/F and mockups of Qaher.




VEVAK said:


> 2ndly Your talking about production of avionics, radars,.... and the parts required in a 4th gen fighter while I'm strictly talking about R&D. For the IRIAF to allocate ~2% of if human resources towards R&D should be the minimum requirement so if you have 25,000 personal at least 500 should be for R&D broken down into 10 teams of 50 personal
> 1.Team on Air Frame
> 2.Propulsion
> 3.Electronics Sensors, INS & cockpit electronics & displays
> 4.Metelergy, Composites....
> 5.Weapons & Weapons systems.
> 6.Radar & IRST
> 7.Flight control & Avionics (Fly by wire, Throttle, Hydraulics, electric pumps.....)
> 8.Pilot Gear & Survival
> 9.Communication Data link,....
> 10. Tools,.... cutting, welding, titanium casting, 3D printing, mass production concepts, vacuums,....
> I would also have separate teams working on Lasers, Optics, Countermeasures, RCS & a few other things
> 
> IRIAF is not going to break if 500-700 of it's current personal strictly do R&D & IRIAF has more facilities than they know what to do with that just leaves materials & a limited number of tools & that's not too much to ask for an Air Force that hasn't purchased a fighter in 30 years
> 
> Now Titanium is one of the top 10 most abundant minerals in the world but to turn it into an alloy is expensive and you require a more rare mineral called magnesium which by the way the top producers of this alloy today are China, U.S., Russia, Israel,... & 2 years ago Iran started magnesium production & it seems we have such an abundance that they starting exporting it
> And very soon titanium production facilities will also go operational
> 
> So overall it's absurd to think that Iran can't afford to give IRIAF enough raw martials to develop a new fighter prototype every 2 years



the problem with your post is that you are somehow avoiding the fact that IRIAF engineering teams have zero exposure to the modern technology, they dont go out to some fighter producing country for training, there may be minor level visits etc but they get no proper foreign education, there is zero collaboration with anyone. Even if IRIAF gets its own 200-300 engineers, scientists dedicated to work on some project I believe they will not be able to yield out anything above a 3rd generation light fighter like F-5II ... as a matter of fact we already have Saeghe example, if you read about where this program started from, they initially wanted a domestically made 4.0 F-5 II derivative with Russian armaments and avionics, basically a russian F-20 Tigershark and they ended up 12 years later welding additional tails on retired F-5E and F air-frames. Even the minimal changes they did on air-intakes of earliest prototype was proven to be a technical failure because of shock specification, they had to revert back to D shaped traditional design.... and we expect them to build turbofans and AESA radars, Maws, RWR, jamming pods ? 

These people can not do anything because they are not getting exposure, education and money. I personally believe that if Iran ever gets a domestic fighter jet and it needs to be an indigenous design, they will have to have massive foreign involvement. Either choose Russian or Chinese turbofans, radars, avionics and armaments suite and design a light fighter jet based upon it which is not practical and risky ... or... pickup a cancelled project from these countries (Mig LFI-MATF or original Mig-33) and start investing in it to adapt the design into domestic production. Problem with such approaches is that the day such 4th generation fighter jet will roll out of factories ... it will already be obsolete. Thats the dilemma that our decision makers never realized. 

Only way out of this mess for IRIAF is to somehow buy 7-8 squadrons of a 4+ MRCA from Russia or China to put some level fight even against regional foes in air. Our current Shahi AF cant do that. In 3-4 years they will just be rust buckets. Meanwhile, somehow start focusing on 4++ or early 5th generation. Start sending teams for training outside, get ppl educated, technicians trained, work on projects, then you will get a generation ready to start such projects at home. Only if diplomatic front doesnt fail ... and there is proper will in govt.



M.Musa said:


> Has Iran evaluated JF-17 Thunder? What are the disadvantages/advantages of it for IRIAF? Anybody with details? PS image:



It could have been replacement for F-5E/F fleet.

May be if a TOT on a very modernized version is offered then it can be a good option for IRIAF. AESA+HMS and armed with RVV-MD and SD will pack a good punch if supported by AWACS.

If rumors are to be believed than China may offer FC-20C and JH-7 to IRIAF (Hope its TOT for FC-20). 

IRIAF actually needs larger MRCA in higher numbers, we have a large area to cover.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> 
> With obsolete I didn't mean titanium but this argumentation of you that Ti is without alternatives.
> You claim again and again that the lack of Ti is one main reason the IRIAF was not able to do R&D...
> 
> I'm not saying that Ti is bad, I just say the lack of it is no show stopper.
> 
> Your information is outdated. I told you about the alternatives available today.
> 
> Now, if you have a already existing Ti supply line, tools and vast experience, industry/companies you will keep it and use it. No need to go for steel super alloys or carbon fiber, as Ti is still competitive. I just told you that meanwhile there are alternatives which would potentially have only a acceptable performance penalty.
> So no, the lack of Ti is not the reason why the IRIAF R&D didn't go beyond the Saeghe, that's the point.
> 
> Let me repeat myself: Today it is possible to develop state of the art fighters and engines without any use of Ti.
> 
> 
> Your idea that Russians not want to start high number production of the Pak Fa because they await U.S 6th gen fighter is wrong.
> Agreed the Su-35 is potent enough for F-22/35. But why should the Russians not acquire as much Pak Fa they can? If 5th gen. fighter are so detrimental for war fighting capability, they should reduce production of Iskander-M and S-400, put the resources on Pak Fa production.
> They don't because neither Su-35 nor Su-57 has a higher priority for them as Iskander and S-400. Irans stance to weapon class priority should be going in the same direction and it does.
> 
> 
> 
> How so?



How bad is the situation for Iran currently?

Can Iran truly rely on missiles alone in a war time scenario?


----------



## drmeson

BlueInGreen2 said:


> How bad is the situation for Iran currently?
> 
> Can Iran truly rely on missiles alone in a war time scenario?



It should be a combination of both. 

Accuracy and payload favors air power massively. We saw that recently when 6 BM strikes with a fairly accurate CEP of 30-50 m probably achieved what single sortie by 2-3 attack MRCA's would have achieved far more destructively. Same fighters can also defend your airspace, BMs cant do that. 

Future wars that Iran will fight wont be massive air battles or dogfights, IRIAF would need long range MRCA's to launch attacks inside Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and also fly armed petrols over Persian Gulf. All that with a very credible interception capability. 

One BM can provide you a warhead of 750-1000 kgs ... Iranian SRBM's and MRBMs can achieve a practical CEP of 30-150 m. A single 4+ MRCA can lift as much as 8 times of that warhead which can be dropped with far more accuracy and at multiple targets, same vehicle can come back and fly again with 8 AAM's to provide aircover. 

I am not biased towards any one kind of weapon, Iran should build up IRIAF with MRCAs and keep developing MRBM GRV's with CBRN warheads. Remember we are responsible for our allies too now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PDF

drmeson said:


> It could have been replacement for F-5E/F fleet.
> 
> May be if a TOT on a very modernized version is offered then it can be a good option for IRIAF. AESA+HMS and armed with RVV-MD and SD will pack a good punch if supported by AWACS.
> 
> If rumors are to be believed than China may offer FC-20C and JH-7 to IRIAF (Hope its TOT for FC-20).
> 
> IRIAF actually needs larger MRCA in higher numbers, we have a large area to cover.


If the requirement is in high numbers, we are open for ToT negotiation. FC-1,FC-20 or JH-7 all are capable aircraft And with good relations with China, you can hope to get trouble free fighter jet from sanctions etc with good supply chain management. Block III of JF-17 is reported to have all the above said specifications along with in flight air fueling capability. JF-17 along with the aerial threat also brings destruction to terrorists. It has successfully participated and even now continuing to target terrorists under Pakistan operations to wipe out terrorism.





Can anybody give a detail prospects of the fighter jets that should be looked into for IRIAF?


----------



## PeeD

@BlueInGreen2 

Iran knows that no Su-30 would be able to enter contested airspace or even enemy IADS and take out a defended high value target (and come back). The only thing that could carry out such a operation without being killed on its way are BMs and below it CMs.

All possible enemies have selected manned airpower as main warfare tool. Good for us because all their airbases (area targets) will be such high priority targets which will be instantly neutralized.

The cultural influence of American airpower (VEVAK) and Russian airpower (drmeson), built up from childhood have created a distorted mindset for them. I was also a fan of manned airpower before I recently realized, due to sober thinking and listening to some experts, that it is overrated.

Irans BM and CM deterrence is capable to create such devastating effect on enemy warfighting capability, not to talk about industry and cities, that they will come to the negotiation table very fast.
In the case they don't, airpower becomes useful, not manned conventional but unmanned asymmetric one. Combined with armored ground forces, it is the most cost effective way to force a enemy to submission.

I talk about novel warfare methods; a fleet of small cheap/expandable unmanned UACVs with 4 Sadid bombs and 24 hours loitering time. Any enemy that pops up would get a Sadid PGM because a UACV would be just 5km away on loitering station (the rest is done by the ground forces).
I also would like to see a RQ-170 bomber variant with 6x Mk82 dumb bombs, launched from 20k feet alt, unguided, but via a SVP-24 gefest like automatic ballistic system. In that way even the low numbers of hardened static targets would be neutralized without the cost of PGM use.
For all that we need prices in the following range:

-Expandable flying-wing propeller UACV (24 hours endurance with 4 Sadid) = 100k $ (3000 necessary)

- RQ-170 bomber with reduced stealth capability for better cost and wide field optics/SAR/MTI (8 hours/1500km operation radius, 6 unguided Mk.82) = 3m $ (200 necessary)

- Karrar MBT = 200k $ (3000 neccessary)

These are roughly the prices necessary to win against a much superior force if it is stubborn enough to not agree for a ceasefire to our conditions after the BM/CM phase.

Now everyone is free to judge what added value a 8m $ Qaher could provide or a 60m$ Su-30SM.
There is no space for a 60m $ conventional heavy fighter in a asymmetric force structure we see developing in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> @BlueInGreen2
> 
> Iran knows that no Su-30 would be able to enter contested airspace or even enemy IADS and take out a defended high value target (and come back). The only thing that could carry out such a operation without being killed on its way are BMs and below it CMs.
> 
> All possible enemies have selected manned airpower as main warfare tool. Good for us because all their airbases (area targets) will be such high priority targets which will be instantly neutralized.
> 
> The cultural influence of American airpower (VEVAK) and Russian airpower (drmeson), built up from childhood have created a distorted mindset for them. I was also a fan of manned airpower before I recently realized, due to sober thinking and listening to some experts, that it is overrated.
> 
> Irans BM and CM deterrence is capable to create such devastating effect on enemy warfighting capability, not to talk about industry and cities, that they will come to the negotiation table very fast.
> In the case they don't, airpower becomes useful, not manned conventional but unmanned asymmetric one. Combined with armored ground forces, it is the most cost effective way to force a enemy to submission.
> 
> I talk about novel warfare methods; a fleet of small cheap/expandable unmanned UACVs with 4 Sadid bombs and 24 hours loitering time. Any enemy that pops up would get a Sadid PGM because a UACV would be just 5km away on loitering station (the rest is done by the ground forces).
> I also would like to see a RQ-170 bomber variant with 6x Mk82 dumb bombs, launched from 20k feet alt, unguided, but via a SVP-24 gefest like automatic ballistic system. In that way even the low numbers of hardened static targets would be neutralized without the cost of PGM use.
> For all that we need prices in the following range:
> 
> -Expandable flying-wing propeller UACV (24 hours endurance with 4 Sadid) = 100k $ (3000 necessary)
> 
> - RQ-170 bomber with reduced stealth capability for better cost and wide field optics/SAR/MTI (8 hours/1500km operation radius, 6 unguided Mk.82) = 3m $ (200 necessary)
> 
> - Karrar MBT = 200k $ (3000 neccessary)
> 
> These are roughly the prices necessary to win against a much superior force if it is stubborn enough to not agree for a ceasefire to our conditions after the BM/CM phase.
> 
> Now everyone is free to judge what added value a 8m $ Qaher could provide or a 60m$ Su-30SM.
> There is no space for a 60m $ conventional heavy fighter in a asymmetric force structure we see developing in Iran.



Agreed on everything especially the last part that being Iran is the world's foremost example of what an asymmetrical military looks like.

Real question to ask (and one that I've practically came to a conclusion to) is how many CM And BM does Iran have? Me and Soheil had a good discussion about it and I will take the more radical plunge and say that Iran does indeed have BM in the thousands and CM in the thousands. It's really the only logical conclusion given the fact that none of Iran's enemies have attacked her and some IRGC members have gone on record saying that Iran is producing so many missiles that it is having a hard time finding places to store them.

But, this is a question that's been circling around my head for a little while now. From Iran's enemies point of view. How many BM's can a country get to, to where they collectively act as sort of a WMD. Maybe I'm just in over thinking it, but to the Israelis if they attack Iran and Iran responds with an overwhelming volley of BM''s will Israel retaliate with nukes same with the Saudis and so forth.

I guess it's really all speculation but I do believe Iran has the world's largest stockpile of BM's. It just makes the most sense to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD there a few holes in your arguments. 

In desert storm the coalition's cruise missiles were not used against hardened targets like aircraft shelters. They were used against high priority soft targets. Even in the recent Shayrat airbase attack, many of the tomahawks only damaged, not destroyed, the HAS' they were attacking. 

As for runways, when I say specialised runway busting bombs, I don't mean any ordinary bunker buster.

"Designed to be dropped from low altitudes, the bomb's fall is slowed by a parachute. The maximum release speed is 550 knots (1,020 km/h; 630 mph) and the minimum release altitude is 200 feet (61 m). When the bomb has reached a 40° angle due to the parachute's drag, it fires a rocket booster that accelerates it into the runway surface. The 100-kilogram (220 lb) primary charge explodes once the weapon has penetrated the concrete and drives the secondary charge even deeper. The 15-kilogram (33 lb) secondary charge then explodes after a one-second delay. Later production weapons have a programmable fuze that can delay the secondary detonation up to several hours.

The weapon can penetrate up to 40 centimetres (16 in) of concrete, and creates a crater 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) deep and approximately 5 metres (16 ft) in diameter. In addition, concrete slabs around the crater are disturbed in an area approximately 15 metres (49 ft) in diameter. The disturbed slabs are displaced up to 50 centimetres (20 in) above the original surface, making repair more difficult than the simple crater from a conventional bomb.[1]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matra_Durandal

Oh, and I have no idea where you get the idea that 3000 Karrar MBTs will cost just $200k each. *Maybe* the first 500 or so as they can be upgrades of existing T-72s, but the other 2500 new build Karrars costing $200k each?


----------



## PeeD

@BlueInGreen2 

Israel would certainly retaliate with nukes if Iran wanted to spend all its BMs on it.

I think the calculation is easy: enemy warmachine uses primary airpower --> determine how many potential hostile airbases are within 2000km around Iran --> depending on the size, hardening and missile defense, a number of 300-1000, 750-1000kg HE-frag/cluster warheads are necessary for stop of operations and high degree of asset neutralization --> calculate the totals and make an estimation on cost per missile and cost per nuclear-hardened mountain base.

What many simply ignore is that all of Irans airbases would be destroyed by nukes in a serious war. Only the missile arsenal in mountain bases could survive a nuclear war and potentially carry out second strikes that although conventional, would still have devastating effects in a counter-value employment. But I expect Iran to have nuclear weapons.

@AmirPatriot

CMs like Tomahawks have much less destructive power than BMs but are more accurate. If you want to knock out a certain HAS just send 4 Tomahawks 5 minutes behind each other with a penetration warhead. The chances to take out that hardened HAS will be very high.

Your anti-runway bomb is good for the variant with several minutes/hours delay fuse. In that way you can hinder airbase operations.
A good idea for a sub-munition warhead of a BM with parachute retarding. In any other case, the BMs normal HE warhead would create a much larger crater due to the kinetic energy than a durandal like bomb ever could.

Finally as for the Karrar cost. I think 200k $ is feasible in a 3000 production run. I know that you have values of 8m $ a shot in you mind for a M1A2, 40 times the price of my Karrar, but this is misleading.

The Karrar looks to be king in price-performance. I list you the subsystem costs:
Diesel engine + drivetrain = 40k
Complete TI (something that used to be very expensive in the past years) and EO sight system = 50k
Gun and autoloader system = 30k
Chassis =50K
Armour + ERA =50k
The rest =30-80k

The total should be ~250-350k (1-1,4b toman). Export price? 1m$.
T-90 export price? 2m$, internal maybe 500k$.
So don't ask my how the American capitalists were able to produce a 8m$ tank with the M1A2SEP...
From the 80s to the late 2000s, prices for TI sights and availability was such that it easily costed 200-500k for each tank. That was a reason why prices exploded for TI equipped tanks, but today Iran can produce a complete TI sight system at a friction of that price.

A MBT makes only sense at a certain price tag and the T-90SM/Karrar are the world leaders in that field. MBTs with prices like M1, Leo2, K2, Altai ect. are nonsense. In 1989, for each western tank there where 10+ Soviet T tanks... it would have been a bloody massacre of westen tanks if WWIII happened...
Numbers = firepower = what counts.
I just hope Karrar has serious backers so that no corruption pulls the price higher than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> CMs like Tomahawks have much less destructive power than BMs but are more accurate. If you want to knock out a certain HAS just send 4 Tomahawks 5 minutes behind each other with a penetration warhead. The chances to take out that hardened HAS will be very high.



OK, 4 cruise missiles per HAS. Lets say that works.

Taking the RSAF as an example, adding the combat aircraft they have on order will be upwards of 300. So upwards of 1200 CMs _just for HAS_. And that's not including any HAS from other countries Iran may have to fight.



PeeD said:


> Your anti-runway bomb is good for the variant with several minutes/hours delay fuse. In that way you can hinder airbase operations.
> A good idea for a sub-munition warhead of a BM with parachute retarding. In any other case, the BMs normal HE warhead would create a much larger crater due to the kinetic energy than a durandal like bomb ever could.



The question is if a BM would just create a massive crater that can be patched up quickly with asphalt, or will it do what the durandal does and actually shift the surrounding concrete slabs which is much more difficult to fix.



PeeD said:


> The Karrar looks to be king in price-performance. I list you the subsystem costs:
> Diesel engine + drivetrain = 40k
> Complete TI (something that used to be very expensive in the past years) and EO sight system = 50k
> Gun and autoloader system = 30k
> Chassis =50K
> Armour + ERA =50k
> The rest =30-80k
> 
> The total should be ~250-350k (1-1,4b toman). Export price? 1m$.
> T-90 export price? 2m$, internal maybe 500k$.
> So don't ask my how the American capitalists were able to produce a 8m$ tank with the M1A2SEP...
> From the 80s to the late 2000s, prices for TI sights and availability was such that it easily costed 200-500k for each tank. That was a reason why prices exploded for TI equipped tanks, but today Iran can produce a complete TI sight system at a friction of that price.
> 
> A MBT makes only sense at a certain price tag and the T-90SM/Karrar are the world leaders in that field. MBTs with prices like M1, Leo2, K2, Altai ect. are nonsense. In 1989, for each western tank there where 10+ Soviet T tanks... it would have been a bloody massacre of westen tanks if WWIII happened...
> Numbers = firepower = what counts.
> I just hope Karrar has serious backers so that no corruption pulls the price higher than that



Russia sells its T-90MS, which the Karrar is comparable to, for $4.5 million. Now, either Iran can make tanks cheaper than the practically legendary Uralvagonzavod, or Russia is running over 2300% profit margins. I think neither is likely.


----------



## Blue In Green

yavar said:


> View attachment 419287
> 
> 
> http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg


New tracking system?


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

Iran would not use CMs for HASes, particularly Saudi superbases would be attacked with HE warheads. No HAS, not even Saudi ones would survive a direct 1ton BM hit. 1 BM is not precise enough but the numbers do it.
When BMs start to hit the base every several minutes, operation will be shut down.

Cluster warhead craters and mach 3 impact craters will have a very adverse effect on a runway, even without durandal imitating submunitions or delayed warheads.


Russia sells T-90SM to the free world market. If the next (similar capability) tank is the Leo2 in terms of price, they will not offer it for 1 million but for something like Leo2's 4m, but somewhat less. If the profit margin is huge for them, well be it, its a free market, they certainly wont have a production run of more than a few hundert.
In total the T-90SM pushes the technology to the limits, with systems that would be much cheaper with just somewhat less capability, if for no other reason then because its a export-oriented tank with gimmicks and extras that can be sold for a large profit margin. Compared to this the Karrar is a more sober, simple T72 mod but with very similar fighting capability. 

Iran got the T-72S for 400k $ a piece back in the mid-90's plus the license for nearly everything, even the engine.
Now using that production capability and expanding it saves a lot.
If Russians sold T-72S with profit margin in 1994 to Iran for 400k $ a piece, be sure that their own production cost was not more than 200k $. The Karrar is is T-72S with much advanced Armour, a TI sight and FCS system made by 2017 prices, a remote controlled MG and a somewhat up-rated engine. The war fighting capability has increased enormously by this modifications but the extra money necessary for it is rather small.

I did the subsystem breakdown, if Iran was wise enough to copy the V-84 engine and add a turbocharger to it (unlike the foolish idea of the Chinese to copy a western engine and get unreliable crap out of it), all subsystems are made locally. So I'm open for critics on the costs I predict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> View attachment 419287
> 
> 
> http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg



some info yavar please, so we should guess, lets see:

can it divine somebodys thoughts? a thought-reader ?


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> 
> With obsolete I didn't mean titanium but this argumentation of you that Ti is without alternatives.
> You claim again and again that the lack of Ti is one main reason the IRIAF was not able to do R&D...
> 
> I'm not saying that Ti is bad, I just say the lack of it is no show stopper.
> 
> Your information is outdated. I told you about the alternatives available today.
> 
> Now, if you have a already existing Ti supply line, tools and vast experience, industry/companies you will keep it and use it. No need to go for steel super alloys or carbon fiber, as Ti is still competitive. I just told you that meanwhile there are alternatives which would potentially have only a acceptable performance penalty.
> So no, the lack of Ti is not the reason why the IRIAF R&D didn't go beyond the Saeghe, that's the point.
> 
> Let me repeat myself: Today it is possible to develop state of the art fighters and engines without any use of Ti.
> 
> 
> Your idea that Russians not want to start high number production of the Pak Fa because they await U.S 6th gen fighter is wrong.
> Agreed the Su-35 is potent enough for F-22/35. But why should the Russians not acquire as much Pak Fa they can? If 5th gen. fighter are so detrimental for war fighting capability, they should reduce production of Iskander-M and S-400, put the resources on Pak Fa production.
> They don't because neither Su-35 nor Su-57 has a higher priority for them as Iskander and S-400. Irans stance to weapon class priority should be going in the same direction and it does.
> 
> 
> 
> How so?




NO! I never said the lack of Titanium prevents Iran from doing R&D the lack of Ti production & other super alloys prevents Iran from producing an Engine more powerful than the J-85 & prevents Iran from producing a fighter larger & more powerful than the F-5, Azarakhsh, Saegheh,.... But it doesn't prevent R&D

And when it comes to Jet engines Titanium is the least of Iran's worries you need high grade chrome, Nickle & alloys far rarer than Titanium
BUT if you don't pursue an RD program You'll never know if you'll be able to replace the combustion chamber or the ball brings with ceramic composites more assessable alloys using minerals available & mined inside the country!

Other industries in Iran may not need high grade chromium or Nickle which leaves it up to the Air Forces R&D program in metallurgy & composites to lead the way in how those alloys are produced & hand the info to a MOD or government owned mining company for production or to a privet company with guaranties of orders

The problem in Iran is that the Air force thinks these things should just be handed to them & should naturally be produced in the country! If Iran's Missiles program had operated under those assumptions Iran's missile program wouldn't be where it is today!
Today the IRGC Aerospace will likely be more officiant and better adapted to coming up to a solution in terms of metallurgy and composites for an Iranian Turbojet or Turbofan engine than Iran's own Air Force 

And having 50 guys in a lab doing R&D on metallurgy & combining different elements together to gain specific properties required in Aircrafts & equipment used by the Air Force using different methods with lab scale sized equipment & your own personal is not going to cost a lot of money & this is something that should have been done over decades with tools and equipment being added over time & that's how you turn your Air Force into a beacon of innovation & progress that contributes to the country in various ways rather than just a tool used when needed & imposed upon the country because of threats
And yes it may be hard for a company like HESA to hire 50 guys for R&D just in metallurgy where as IRIAF already has the personal it's just a matter of how they choose to allocate resources & then that info can be sold to the HESA or another company in exchange for further tools or equipment that you may need

As for the J-85 that engine just doesn't have the diameter to be turned into a more powerful engine

As for the Q-313 your suggesting to build over 600 of them to be operated in area's and conditions where they rely mostly on Ground Data & Support & if that's the case why exactly do you need a pilot in that Aircraft? If your so sure that your comme's can't be damaged, jammed or destroyed you might as well just build a UCAV that's far cheaper, far stealthier, lighter, faster, more maneuverable, more payload, easier & faster to produce... piloted by pilots in deep underground bunkers

600 at $10million per = $6 Billion USD (Not including spare parts, weapons, maintenance & operating equipment & facilities, Pilot training,....) for a subsonic Aircraft that can't even go 250km outside Iranian Airspace & is too slow to intercept modern fighters???

So IRIAF can somehow afford to train over 1200 pilots on the Q-313, afford the maintenance nightmare in terms of repair crews on the ground, tools, facilities & equipment of repairing 1200 jet engines & 600 aircraft,.... With the facilities, tools and manpower to build over 100 Q-313 a year & over 200 J-85's a year all for an Aircraft that can't go 250km outside Iranian Air Space BUT they can't afford an R&D program?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> NO! I never said the lack of Titanium prevents Iran from doing R&D the lack of Ti production & other super alloys prevents Iran from producing an Engine more powerful than the J-85 & prevents Iran from producing a fighter larger & more powerful than the F-5, Azarakhsh, Saegheh,.... But it doesn't prevent R&D
> 
> And when it comes to Jet engines Titanium is the least of Iran's worries you need high grade chrome, Nickle & alloys far rarer than Titanium
> BUT if you don't pursue an RD program You'll never know if you'll be able to replace the combustion chamber or the ball brings with ceramic composites more assessable alloys using minerals available & mined inside the country!
> 
> Other industries in Iran may not need high grade chromium or Nickle which leaves it up to the Air Forces R&D program in metallurgy & composites to lead the way in how those alloys are produced & hand the info to a MOD or government owned mining company for production or to a privet company with guaranties of orders
> 
> The problem in Iran is that the Air force thinks these things should just be handed to them & should naturally be produced in the country! If Iran's Missiles program had operated under those assumptions Iran's missile program wouldn't be where it is today!
> Today the IRGC Aerospace will likely be more officiant and better adapted to coming up to a solution in terms of metallurgy and composites for an Iranian Turbojet or Turbofan engine than Iran's own Air Force
> 
> And having 50 guys in a lab doing R&D on metallurgy & combining different elements together to gain specific properties required in Aircrafts & equipment used by the Air Force using different methods with lab scale sized equipment & your own personal is not going to cost a lot of money & this is something that should have been done over decades with tools and equipment being added over time & that's how you turn your Air Force into a beacon of innovation & progress that contributes to the country in various ways rather than just a tool used when needed & imposed upon the country because of threats
> And yes it may be hard for a company like HESA to hire 50 guys for R&D just in metallurgy where as IRIAF already has the personal it's just a matter of how they choose to allocate resources & then that info can be sold to the HESA or another company in exchange for further tools or equipment that you may need
> 
> As for the J-85 that engine just doesn't have the diameter to be turned into a more powerful engine
> 
> As for the Q-313 your suggesting to build over 600 of them to be operated in area's and conditions where they rely mostly on Ground Data & Support & if that's the case why exactly do you need a pilot in that Aircraft? If your so sure that your comme's can't be damaged, jammed or destroyed you might as well just build a UCAV that's far cheaper, far stealthier, lighter, faster, more maneuverable, more payload, easier & faster to produce... piloted by pilots in deep underground bunkers
> 
> 600 at $10million per = $6 Billion USD (Not including spare parts, weapons, maintenance & operating equipment & facilities, Pilot training,....) for a subsonic Aircraft that can't even go 250km outside Iranian Airspace & is too slow to intercept modern fighters???
> 
> So IRIAF can somehow afford to train over 1200 pilots on the Q-313, afford the maintenance nightmare in terms of repair crews on the ground, tools, facilities & equipment of repairing 1200 jet engines & 600 aircraft,.... With the facilities, tools and manpower to build over 100 Q-313 a year & over 200 J-85's a year all for an Aircraft that can't go 250km outside Iranian Air Space BUT they can't afford an R&D program?



I agree with Vevak here, Q-313 is not sufficient for defending the airspace of Iran. It could be good as a CAS bomber for supporting the troops, or anti-shipping (assuming armed with anti-shiiping cruise missiles), but otherwise insufficient. Still the future seems to lie in UCAV's and R&D should go towards developing reliable, and fast reactive UCAV CAS, and survallence using Forward observers like the americans do with thier airforce. I envision foward obervers calling in UCAV support with a few percision guided munitions and karrar like drone bombing designated targets for drone pilots.


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Ti aside. The IRIAF could have gone for R&D on larger fighters after the Saeghe without Ti and something like a RD-33 copy also without Ti. They didn't and to me it looks like they were not given a go ahead from upper tiers. We even know their next project, a JF-17 like fighter, a step higher than the F-5.
Every fundamental technology was available to start that R&D project but from 2005 onward IRIAF R&D on such scale was stopped. Today they have, together with the MOD, created the Kowsar and many primary avionic subsystems that could be used in a future F-313. Gathering avionic subsystems is quite important. For me a good decision to not go for the next step, that JF-17 like fighter because it would likely have taken more than a decade for the IRIAF R&D to come up with a prototype.

You correctly said that nickel super alloys are the real critical material for any R&D on engines necessary for fighters. But I have a good news for you, MAPNA is the main force in that field for Iran, no need for IRIAF R&D.
They are so advanced in that field that without announcement, they certainly produce single crystal turbineblades.

So we have neither a problem when hot turbine parts are necessary for engine R&D, nor are we forced to use Ti in engines and airframes. On that I have another good news from another field: Irans uranium centrifuges use steel superalloys for some critical parts and high grade carbon fiber for the rotors.
Ti is available anyway via the Chinese.

Metallurgy and materials are incredibly important and hard to master, we need at least several hundred experts for that field. I bet, or rather hope that the IRGC-ASF would go directly to MAPNA for nickle base alloys and to the centrifuge department for marraging steels if they want to copy the RQ-170 powerplant.

On the Qaher:
If your airpower can survive the high intensity phase of a conflict and actively fight in it, then airpower has a degree of flexibility that is very much desired.
I painted a scenario in which the F-313 is such a low maintenance design, with such a small logistical footprint and rugged operation regime that it would have the necessary survivability, distributed around the country and camouflaged.
This is the basis for manned airpower in Iran and if Q-313 are operational within the high intensity phase their flexibility and situational awareness can be used. When is it superior to a similar UACV? 
In air to air combat, foremost BVR. A unmanned S-171 bomber can always attack its target even without communication link on a pre-programmed course. A pilot can acquire the target, decide and shot with no communications working.
The mobility of a aircraft is uncontested, with two Fakkur-90 (pop-up --> shoot --> dive and run) the F-313 is a fast and flexible "SAM site" and with bombs it can attack targets of opportunity. If IADS has problems to do the task with SAMs, a F-313 is guided via a short communication contact to the coarse airspace where the enemy aircraft should roughly operate, and the F-313 will switch on its own small 100km range AESA to find the target and attack it with all its AAMs and disappear via terrain masking (maybe take a second look for mid course update in safe distance).

The F-313 needs to be extremely low maintenance (15% of that for a Su-30). I require it to fly 100 hours with just fueling and maybe new oil/filter. I want it's two engines to operate max. at just 60% duty cycle with no afterburner and still power it to mach 0,95 at sea level.
I require a huge amount of automation in order to reduce pilot training + advanced simulators.
I require all the other things already described on rugged/short take-off and landing on dirtfields.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> No HAS, not even Saudi ones would survive a direct 1ton BM hit.



1. The same principle follows. How many BMs do you need to be sure of getting a direct hit on a HAS? 3? 4? 5? Assuming 30/50 metre CEP, At least 3 and probably 4 would be a good number. But then you have to fire 1200 missiles just for HAS. 

2. And since you advocate basically no offensive air force capability, you still need thousands more missiles to hit actual runways, command posts, air defence sites, EW radars, ports, oil production/refinery... I'd love it for Iran to have a million missiles but unfortunately, unlike aircraft, using BMs to hit absolutely everything is not financially feasible.

3. The accurate missiles that Iran would use against a regional enemy are the Fateh class of missiles, with 650 kg or 750 kg warheads. Iran's liquid fuelled missiles with the 1 ton payload are nowhere near accurate enough.



PeeD said:


> Cluster warhead craters



Which would be really bad against runways. Cluster bombs are small and the holes are easy to patch.



PeeD said:


> mach 3 impact craters will have a very adverse effect on a runway



The question remains. Will they just create a big hole that can be filled with asphalt, or will they cause damage that is difficult to fix, like dislodging concrete slabs?

Moreover, since you don't want an offensive air force capability, you do realise that you will have to keep sending hundreds of BMs to keep those runways down? 1 strike is not enough. It can be repaired. You need persistence. 



PeeD said:


> Russia sells T-90SM to the free world market. If the next (similar capability) tank is the Leo2 in terms of price, they will not offer it for 1 million but for something like Leo2's 4m



Leo 2A6 cost in 2010 dollars = $6 million

T-90 = "In 2010, Uralvagonzavod received 18 billion rubles (US$294 million) to deliver 261 units until the end of 2010." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90

So $1.13 million. With no export. Now unless Uralvagonzavod, which is a public limited company, is charging a nearly 600% profit margin... a Karrar is going to cost Iran more than $200 k. *Certainly *it will cost more than what Russia is making.


----------



## TheCamelGuy

Why not develop supersonic cruise missiles, cheaper for conventional payloads


----------



## Blue In Green

TheCamelGuy said:


> Why not develop supersonic cruise missiles, cheaper for conventional payloads


Ramjet. Iran hasn't developed a reliable ramjet yet.


----------



## Stryker1982

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Ramjet. Iran hasn't developed a reliable ramjet yet.



all irans anti-ship missiles are subsonic, which is kind of a problem in terms of probability of defeating enemy systems


----------



## Parsipride

PeeD said:


> @BlueInGreen2
> 
> Iran knows that no Su-30 would be able to enter contested airspace or even enemy IADS and take out a defended high value target (and come back). The only thing that could carry out such a operation without being killed on its way are BMs and below it CMs.
> 
> All possible enemies have selected manned airpower as main warfare tool. Good for us because all their airbases (area targets) will be such high priority targets which will be instantly neutralized.
> 
> The cultural influence of American airpower (VEVAK) and Russian airpower (drmeson), built up from childhood have created a distorted mindset for them. I was also a fan of manned airpower before I recently realized, due to sober thinking and listening to some experts, that it is overrated.
> 
> Irans BM and CM deterrence is capable to create such devastating effect on enemy warfighting capability, not to talk about industry and cities, that they will come to the negotiation table very fast.
> In the case they don't, airpower becomes useful, not manned conventional but unmanned asymmetric one. Combined with armored ground forces, it is the most cost effective way to force a enemy to submission.
> 
> I talk about novel warfare methods; a fleet of small cheap/expandable unmanned UACVs with 4 Sadid bombs and 24 hours loitering time. Any enemy that pops up would get a Sadid PGM because a UACV would be just 5km away on loitering station (the rest is done by the ground forces).
> I also would like to see a RQ-170 bomber variant with 6x Mk82 dumb bombs, launched from 20k feet alt, unguided, but via a SVP-24 gefest like automatic ballistic system. In that way even the low numbers of hardened static targets would be neutralized without the cost of PGM use.
> For all that we need prices in the following range:
> 
> -Expandable flying-wing propeller UACV (24 hours endurance with 4 Sadid) = 100k $ (3000 necessary)
> 
> - RQ-170 bomber with reduced stealth capability for better cost and wide field optics/SAR/MTI (8 hours/1500km operation radius, 6 unguided Mk.82) = 3m $ (200 necessary)
> 
> - Karrar MBT = 200k $ (3000 neccessary)
> 
> These are roughly the prices necessary to win against a much superior force if it is stubborn enough to not agree for a ceasefire to our conditions after the BM/CM phase.
> 
> Now everyone is free to judge what added value a 8m $ Qaher could provide or a 60m$ Su-30SM.
> There is no space for a 60m $ conventional heavy fighter in a asymmetric force structure we see developing in Iran.



Your whole analysis is a wet dream. What makes you think that the Americans going to sit idle? They have already shown they can sabotage NK missile launches. 

We had plenty of opportunities to neutralize the Wahabis in Syria . That did not happen. The tide of the war changed when the Russian Air power started to decimate ISIS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 



AmirPatriot said:


> 1. The same principle follows. How many BMs do you need to be sure of getting a direct hit on a HAS? 3? 4? 5? Assuming 30/50 metre CEP, At least 3 and probably 4 would be a good number. But then you have to fire 1200 missiles just for HAS.



Basically the oldest Shahab series are fired continuously and randomly on the base. If the numbers are high enough, they reach a level that statistically also hardened objects will be hit. Whether all HASes are neutralized or not is then not the question anymore, they may or may not. You could try to target each HAS individually with a more advanced BM, but if your goal is really to destroy all HASes, send several CM's with penetration warheads against them.
The real goal of BMs is to suppress the airpower capability sufficiently that it can be handled, sufficiently that CMs can be used with higher survivebility, sufficiently that a RQ-170 bomber can take over that tast.
However at the moment it seems Iran wants to move to a more efficient point target approach instead of area target and upgrade its missile arsenal accordingly.



AmirPatriot said:


> 2. And since you advocate basically no offensive air force capability, you still need thousands more missiles to hit actual runways, command posts, air defence sites, EW radars, ports, oil production/refinery... I'd love it for Iran to have a million missiles but unfortunately, unlike aircraft, using BMs to hit absolutely everything is not financially feasible.



As said, its currently not about HAS or runway, but airbase, a area target. Air defense and EW radars as point targets that first need reconnaissance and then are either targeted by Hormuz like BMs or CMs or an expensive new Sedjil/Zolfaghar variant with terminal radar/IIR guidance. For communication and radars that are closer, Iran uses suicide drones.
Once the intensity of the conflict reduces, so that airpower can be employed for those targets --> UACV.



AmirPatriot said:


> 3. The accurate missiles that Iran would use against a regional enemy are the Fateh class of missiles, with 650 kg or 750 kg warheads. Iran's liquid fuelled missiles with the 1 ton payload are nowhere near accurate enough.



Iran has area target weapons: Shahab and Ghadr series and very small area targets like Fateh and Zolfaghar. Once they get some sort of terminal guidance like the Khalij e Fars ASBM, they can try to hit point targets.



AmirPatriot said:


> Which would be really bad against runways. Cluster bombs are small and the holes are easy to patch.



The numbers do it, many small craters. Cluster warheads are today the main anti-runway weapon, the U.S uses it too.
In Irans case we talk about one cluster warhead BM every 20-30 minutes or less. Figure what a mess it would create in that airbase and the ongoing repair operations. It has a terror effect on the morale.
This is the price you have to pay for operating a static area target.
I would even equip all legacy Shahabs with cluster warheads and stop the use of HE warheads, in that way the intervals of cluster warhead attacks could be reduced significantly. HASes would then survive probably but air operations would be suppressed to a high degree and none of their ABM systems would have any effect.



AmirPatriot said:


> The question remains. Will they just create a big hole that can be filled with asphalt, or will they cause damage that is difficult to fix, like dislodging concrete slabs?



Should the damage of a mach 3 impact be insufficient, they could develop a durandal submunition. But seems to be sufficient because they haven't.



AmirPatriot said:


> Moreover, since you don't want an offensive air force capability, you do realise that you will have to keep sending hundreds of BMs to keep those runways down? 1 strike is not enough. It can be repaired. You need persistence.



Once the enemy airbase operations --> its airpower, are suppressed, the high intensity phase is over. In low intensity phase, the existing IRIAF fleet and a future UACV fleet would do what you called persistence.



AmirPatriot said:


> So $1.13 million. With no export. Now unless Uralvagonzavod, which is a public limited company, is charging a nearly 600% profit margin... a Karrar is going to cost Iran more than $200 k. *Certainly *it will cost more than what Russia is making.



Those T-90's had a French TI sight system which probably costed several 100k $. Even the T-90SM shown in 2012 had some subsystems that were very expensive. With matured technology of 2017, many costs can be decreased in the electronics/computer and sensor field.
Iran is quite smart on that, it always starts a production line of something if all subsystems have reached a matured price. Russians back in the 2000s had all, except for a potent cost-effective TI sight, but still started production.
I did a cost breakdown, if it is not reasonable, criticize it.

PS: 4m for Leo2 A5.
Plus another info: A safir jeep costs 6-7$ while a unarmored humvee costs at least 60-70k$. Price differences of magnitudes are possible and the only solution against a massive overpower.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> if your goal is really to destroy all HASes, send several CM's with penetration warheads against them.



You already said this:



PeeD said:


> Iran would not use CMs for HASes



So would Iran use CMs for HASes or not?



PeeD said:


> As said, its currently not about HAS or runway, but airbase, a area target



And an airbase has critical parts. Namely the Runway, hardened aircraft shelters, and support buildings.

The HASes are small, the runway is narrow, and the support buildings are quite small too.

If you hit an empty patch of sand within the perimeter of the airbase, yes you've attacked the area of the airbase but you haven't actually achieved anything.



PeeD said:


> In Irans case we talk about one cluster warhead BM every 20-30 minutes or less.



So that's 48+ BMs per minute, nearly 1500 per month. Just on runways. And you have to replace them.

You are advocating using missiles for both the opening high intensity phase, _and _the ensuing low_er_ intensity phase. This does not make financial or logistical sense.

It's like comparing rocket artillery with gun artillery - rocket artillery will give you a short, powerful barrage. But gun artillery will grant constant firepower. You need both. Rockets to first paralyse an enemy, then keep them down.

I don't even think within your limited air force idea of flying wing tactical bombers there is sufficient return. 2 ton payload like with the F-117 is for limited strikes of high value targets. A bigger aircraft with at least double the payload is required for heavier bombardment, IMHO.



PeeD said:


> Should the damage of a mach 3 impact be insufficient, they could develop a durandal submunition.



And what to drop it from?



PeeD said:


> But seems to be sufficient because they haven't.



Or Iran has a gap in its capability.



PeeD said:


> Those T-90's had a French TI sight system which probably costed several 100k $



I can't find the price of the Thales sight so for now I'll leave it, but really, "probably" isn't enough. We need a better estimation.



PeeD said:


> A safir jeep costs 6-7$



What?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 



AmirPatriot said:


> You already said this:
> 
> So would Iran use CMs for HASes or not?



I would not waste my time on HASes and only destroy them when airbase operations are suppressed when the low intensity phase has started. But should it be necessary, CMs are the tools for it.



AmirPatriot said:


> And an airbase has critical parts. Namely the Runway, hardened aircraft shelters, and support buildings.
> 
> The HASes are small, the runway is narrow, and the support buildings are quite small too.
> 
> If you hit an empty patch of sand within the perimeter of the airbase, yes you've attacked the area of the airbase but you haven't actually achieved anything.



In such an area target attack you don't attack specific objects like runways etc. your CEP gives you a "somewhere around the base" accuracy. 100 submunitions are released at 200km altitude, outside the atmosphere and just randomly impact the airbase, no ABM defense possible.
I advocate a cluster-only BM attack every 5 minutes for two days (60.000 submunitions total..)... the results on runways and everything else would be devastating and the base operations suppressed. After that any S-171 bomber with just 4 Mk.82 (on the same spot) would be able to cripple any known HAS in the region and whats inside it.



AmirPatriot said:


> You are advocating using missiles for both the opening high intensity phase, _and _the ensuing low_er_ intensity phase. This does not make financial or logistical sense.



I want missile warfare in the high intensity phase and UAV airpower for the low intensity phase that would finish up whats remaining, HASes etc, at lower cost.



AmirPatriot said:


> I don't even think within your limited air force idea of flying wing tactical bombers there is sufficient return. 2 ton payload like with the F-117 is for limited strikes of high value targets. A bigger aircraft with at least double the payload is required for heavier bombardment, IMHO.



If you really want heavy bombardment, use the old IRIAF fleet as bomb trucks if they survive the high intensity phase. When they face no opposition from enemy fighters, any old F-4 or Su-22 will do the job.
I want novel approaches, like Sadid airstrikes by loitering UACV swarms.



AmirPatriot said:


> And what to drop it from?



BMs, submuntions of BMs..



AmirPatriot said:


> Or Iran has a gap in its capability.



They are smarter than you and me combined, be sure about that.



AmirPatriot said:


> I can't find the price of the Thales sight so for now I'll leave it, but really, "probably" isn't enough. We need a better estimation.



A worldclass MBT more expensive than 500k $ makes no sense for Iran. Turks are now waiting for the first 20 Altai MBT in 2022... Such approaches make no sense for Iran.



AmirPatriot said:


> What?



I knew you would be shocked to hear that. Yes you get 10 7k$ Safir jeeps for one unarmored humvee, doing the same job effectively.
That's how it is and you would be probably shocked to if you knew how much Iranian BMs cost each.
Prices are a internal thing, if modern tanks cost 5m $ on the world market, it says absolutely nothing about Irans internal prices.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> 100 submunitions are released at 200km altitude, outside the atmosphere and just randomly impact the airbase, no ABM defense possible.



I doubt the number of submunitions hitting even the perimeter of the airbase would be in the double (if any) digits from that high of an altitude. That's space.



PeeD said:


> I advocate a cluster-only BM attack every 5 minutes for two days (60.000 submunitions total..)



So about 300 BMs per airbase, in 2 days. Using a month as a standard time-frame, the other 28 days would have missiles raining down at what you said earlier every 20-30 minutes.



PeeD said:


> If you really want heavy bombardment, use the old IRIAF fleet as bomb trucks if they survive the high intensity phase.



That is, if it is still flyable. And even then, it is vulnerable to lingering enemy AD/AF activity.

I really want to dispel this idea that air forces are useless in a high intensity environment.

First of all, our only enemy isn't the US. In fact, I'd wager we are more likely to have a war with the Saudis than the US. The Saudis do not have LACMs, resorting to air based CMs that have a shorter range than the Tomahawks. *But, *and this is critical, their Storm Shadows have a longer range than even our S-200s. We cannot allow even our regional adversaries to have such a great advantage over us. They are not the USA, and we should not allow them to have similar advantages over us. Funnily enough, the "shoot the archer" concept is what much of the F-14's capability was built around. A long term replacement with similar range is required. If we cannot shoot their archers from the ground, we must do it in the air.

Aircraft survivability improvement is not an impossible science. Obviously one would make sure aircraft are more active and in the air in high tension, so they cannot be grounded. Moreover, if the airbase is inoperable, there can be other landing areas used. One would be airfields further away from the combat area, which may not be affected if the enemy does not have sufficient ranged capability. Another one would be the use of roads and highways for landing and limited servicing. A technique made famous by the Fins and Swedes.









PeeD said:


> BMs, submuntions of BMs..



I don't think a Durandal like warhead can be fitted to a Mach 3 BM. The impact energy would likely inhibit such precise warhead mechanisms.



PeeD said:


> They are smarter than you and me combined, be sure about that.



That doesn't mean that Iran as a country doesn't have gaps in its technical, financial or logistical capabilities.



PeeD said:


> I knew you would be shocked to hear that. Yes you get 10 7k$ Safir jeeps for one unarmored humvee, doing the same job effectively.



I was shocked to hear $5-7, not $7,000.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

Awsome discussion!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cthulhu

AmirPatriot said:


> I really want to dispel this idea that air forces are useless in a high intensity environment.


The idea that "Air force is bad, useless, and waste of money. We can do whatever we want with missiles." became popular thanks to mental diarrhea of sites like mashreghnews.ir & farsnews.ir and their "experts". After reading some of their articles (mental diarrhea), One will be convinced that missiles can do the role of air force with more efficiency and at a lesser cost.


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot



AmirPatriot said:


> I doubt the number of submunitions hitting even the perimeter of the airbase would be in the double (if any) digits from that high of an altitude. That's space.



If the submunition warhead is designed correctly for it that altitude and space environment, its no technical obstacle.



AmirPatriot said:


> So about 300 BMs per airbase, in 2 days. Using a month as a standard time-frame, the other 28 days would have missiles raining down at what you said earlier every 20-30 minutes.



You misunderstand. The two days "orbital" bombardment should sufficiently degrade the airbase capability. The rest is low intensity warfare.



AmirPatriot said:


> Aircraft survivability improvement is not an impossible science.



I described that in my last posts for the Qaher. It's possible, more so if you aircraft is specially designed for low footprint maintenance and supply chain.
If you want to operate Su-30 in such a way, it will be very inefficient and needs very well trained crews. I hope the IRIAF knows that such operation is the only way it can survive a high intensity war.



AmirPatriot said:


> I don't think a Durandal like warhead can be fitted to a Mach 3 BM. The impact energy would likely inhibit such precise warhead mechanisms.



With parachute retardation its possible. But normal cluster warheads seems to be their solution.

In total, Russians are using a maintenance heavy swing wing low level interdictor to bomb enemies without +5km alt airdefense capability. They do this with heavy bombs.
People think this is the way to do it and Iran lacks it. The truth is; it is a quite inefficient, old way to project airpower.
A UACV concept with low maintenance, low airframe cost, low fuel consumption, miniaturized weapons and most importantly long loitering time over the target would be much superior and efficient.
I want this to be used against a BM crippled enemy, not something outdated and inefficient.

A fighter-bomber is designed to fight a high intensity war, the Su-24 is not designed for the bombtruck task in Syria, thats a waste. There is no need for that capability in Iran, we have better systems. What is needed is something that is designed for low intensity warfare-only and has max. efficiency while doing it.

PS: Saudi air launched CMs of their first wave are few enough for Irans IADS and they will just have that first wave.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

Thanks to @PeeD and @VEVAK for their constructive conversation.
hopefully our defense decision maker are smart enough to don't follow western and eastern doctrine of defense.
we should first know our grands and goals and then create air force base on that.
Peed is right about mobility and minimizity of new generation of weapons and we can not trust big and static weapons in wars more.

big airplanes like Su35 and F22 and ... need static infrastructure to support them and protecting these infrastructures is impossible, so the only choice is *mobile and low maintenance air force* and we are going already toward that direction with drones like Saeghe which use launchers to take off and parachutes for landing also our future manned jet should be able to take of and landing outside of airports and be low maintenance.





absolutely, at these situation we would have weaker air force in compare of our enemy but we would have more reliability and survivability in the air.
mobile cruise and ballistic launchers are very hard to target as well as our mobile air defense force which support our weaker air force.

at end I like remember you guys 1939 when weaker and smaller German army finished more modern and bigger French army and that happened b/c weaker and smaller German army could do what french army unable to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Ti aside. The IRIAF could have gone for R&D on larger fighters after the Saeghe without Ti and something like a RD-33 copy also without Ti. They didn't and to me it looks like they were not given a go ahead from upper tiers. We even know their next project, a JF-17 like fighter, a step higher than the F-5.
> Every fundamental technology was available to start that R&D project but from 2005 onward IRIAF R&D on such scale was stopped. Today they have, together with the MOD, created the Kowsar and many primary avionic subsystems that could be used in a future F-313. Gathering avionic subsystems is quite important. For me a good decision to not go for the next step, that JF-17 like fighter because it would likely have taken more than a decade for the IRIAF R&D to come up with a prototype.
> 
> You correctly said that nickel super alloys are the real critical material for any R&D on engines necessary for fighters. But I have a good news for you, MAPNA is the main force in that field for Iran, no need for IRIAF R&D.
> They are so advanced in that field that without announcement, they certainly produce single crystal turbineblades.
> 
> So we have neither a problem when hot turbine parts are necessary for engine R&D, nor are we forced to use Ti in engines and airframes. On that I have another good news from another field: Irans uranium centrifuges use steel superalloys for some critical parts and high grade carbon fiber for the rotors.
> Ti is available anyway via the Chinese.
> 
> Metallurgy and materials are incredibly important and hard to master, we need at least several hundred experts for that field. I bet, or rather hope that the IRGC-ASF would go directly to MAPNA for nickle base alloys and to the centrifuge department for marraging steels if they want to copy the RQ-170 powerplant.
> 
> On the Qaher:
> If your airpower can survive the high intensity phase of a conflict and actively fight in it, then airpower has a degree of flexibility that is very much desired.
> I painted a scenario in which the F-313 is such a low maintenance design, with such a small logistical footprint and rugged operation regime that it would have the necessary survivability, distributed around the country and camouflaged.
> This is the basis for manned airpower in Iran and if Q-313 are operational within the high intensity phase their flexibility and situational awareness can be used. When is it superior to a similar UACV?
> In air to air combat, foremost BVR. A unmanned S-171 bomber can always attack its target even without communication link on a pre-programmed course. A pilot can acquire the target, decide and shot with no communications working.
> The mobility of a aircraft is uncontested, with two Fakkur-90 (pop-up --> shoot --> dive and run) the F-313 is a fast and flexible "SAM site" and with bombs it can attack targets of opportunity. If IADS has problems to do the task with SAMs, a F-313 is guided via a short communication contact to the coarse airspace where the enemy aircraft should roughly operate, and the F-313 will switch on its own small 100km range AESA to find the target and attack it with all its AAMs and disappear via terrain masking (maybe take a second look for mid course update in safe distance).
> 
> The F-313 needs to be extremely low maintenance (15% of that for a Su-30). I require it to fly 100 hours with just fueling and maybe new oil/filter. I want it's two engines to operate max. at just 60% duty cycle with no afterburner and still power it to mach 0,95 at sea level.
> I require a huge amount of automation in order to reduce pilot training + advanced simulators.
> I require all the other things already described on rugged/short take-off and landing on dirtfields.



1st mistake they did was stopping further R&D in larger Airframes because you never stop R&D regardless of what the Government MOD agrees on producing!
I believe the Air force made it clear to the MOD that if we want a bigger fighter then we need to mass produce our own Ti and have our own Titanium industry for any domestic fighter program to make sense because if we were to import them the cost of each F-5, Saegheh or Azarakhsh with under 1 tone Ti requirement (Aircraft, tools, equipment, spare parts...) Would come out to an average cost of $100 million USD per Aircraft & the simple fact that a larger Airframe like the F-14 requires 20tonnes of Ti scared the hell out of the MOD 

The Air Force has to have a constant R&D program on Air Frames, Avionics, Engines, Metallurgy, Tools & equipment, Weapons & Weapons systems,...!
People keep saying R&D program cost too much but I'm not suggesting that the Air force should go and hire 700 new people to put towards R&D Yes that would cost too much & hiring that many people without selling anything would be a burden on any MOD company where as the Air Force just has to reallocate it's current human resources and facilities towards R&D and do a better job at recruiting it's conscripts from Universities
Whether the MOD chooses to produce an Aircraft matters NOT! What matters is that the Air Force comes out and tests a new Air Frame each more advanced than the other every two years so the youth currently in high schools & universities have something to aspire too
As long as you treat the Air force as if it's a burden imposed on the country & a tool to be used only when needed then it will act as such but if you treat it as the main center for progress & innovation in aviation technology then it will also behave as such!
And if and when your R&D program builds something worth producing then you can sell it to a MOD company in exchange for more equipment,.... 

FYI Buying or producing a single engine Aircraft like the F-16 or JF-17 for a country the size of Iran is a mistake! Unless you are capable of buying & or producing them at a rate of 50 per year every year without exception! Where as a larger twin engine force multipliers can produce more electrical power to carry more sensors for better situational awareness produced at rates of 14-24 per years every year will be more than sufficient for Iran and will be more cost effective for Iran in the long run when it comes to operations!
*
Iran’s Attempt to Procure Titanium Alloy Was Violation of Anti-Proliferation Resolution 1737 (2006), Sanctions Committee Tells Security Council*
https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12163.doc.htm


Weak the hell up!!!!!!!!!!!! They don't even want Iran to produce Titanium!!!!!!!!! And you think China is going to hand military grade Ti Alloy to Iran and even if they do they will not sell it at a price so domestic fighter production would make any type of sense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So the only people that truly don't want Iran to produce Ti are the Western oppressors so any argument about Iran not needing that strategic alloy is an argument made by and for those who want to keep Iran in the dark and as a backward and dependent nation!

Ti may not be a requirement for continued R&D but it sure as hell is for production and higher stages of R&D that lead to production!!!

The 100 Q-313 even if they had the capability to carry & deploy the Fakour-90 (which they don't) will never be able to go up against 24 F-15's, Su-30's or Typhoons let alone anything more advanced!
J-85 is 17.7 inches in Diameter the AiM-54 is 15 inches 

U.S. annalists are talking about 4 F-22's backed by 2 B-1 armed with BVR missiles taking on 40 Aircraft in BVR using sensor fuzzed tech before the F-22's even open their weapons bay's so that's the immediate future your looking at!

And the Q-313 will be a good unmanned future UCAV but it is NOT good enough to be a manned fighter at least not at it's current state 

Also, Against the U.S. Iran has to be ready to deploy at least 100 upgraded version of Karrar-4 towards a squadron of F-22's backed by B1's before sending in more expensive UCAV & manned fighters all of whom have to be equipped with the capability to target an F-22 using IRST once they get within ~40-30km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> all irans anti-ship missiles are subsonic, which is kind of a problem in terms of probability of defeating enemy systems



That's not correct.

The Fatteh-110 antiship variants (Persian gulf missile, Hormuz missile, etc.) are supersonic during terminal phase as they are quasi-BMs



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Ramjet. Iran hasn't developed a reliable ramjet yet.



Iran has said they are working on supersonic CMs.

The main issue would be range, at supersonic speeds range could be severely limited. 

Can iran develop a supersonic CM with the range of zolfghar missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> That's not correct.
> 
> The Fatteh-110 antiship variants (Persian gulf missile, Hormuz missile, etc.) are supersonic during terminal phase as they are quasi-BMs
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has said they are working on supersonic CMs.
> 
> The main issue would be range, at supersonic speeds range could be severely limited.
> 
> Can iran develop a supersonic CM with the range of zolfghar missile?




Oh yes, thats right I forgot about the khalej fars missles, but what I was really referring to was the subsonic cruise missiles like Noor or Qader. Supersonic missiles are ideal, but expensive. It could take quite a bit of time to have a supersonic Anti-shipping cruise missile with the range that qader has. But it would be sooo deadly, no one would even think about attacking Iran.


----------



## TheImmortal

The problem with these war scenarios is that they are mostly in the realm of fantasy rather than realism.

Any Iran vs US conflict (if it ever occurred) would not be a US land invasion or occupation of Iran. Thus these all out war scenarios are kind of a mute point.

It would likely be a skirmish maybe a short war while Russia/China press for UN declared ceasefire.

The issue that will always lie on Iran's shoulders is to respond but not escalate the skirmish. Iran attacking and sinking a US warship will only escalate the conflict and invite an even greater counter response. No US president will back down and be seen as "weak" after a loss of a ship and its crew. It's not politically feasible.

Thus the real scenarios are how does Iran respond in event of US skirmish and what steps does it take to respond appropriately while not escalating the situation outside of either sides comfort zone.

It's similar to war scenarios of China vs US over the South China Sea.

The fact that Iran and US are fighting through proxy wars shows that neither side wants direct conflict with the other. Even in the case of direct conflict Iran may choose to attack US allies in the region while carefully calculating any response of US aggression.


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Ok slowly we are reaching convergence.
Good, here the things I would do different:

- Fighter prototyping is not useful at the moment for the IRIAF. The Mig-29 is the most advanced design they could base up theirs upon (starting point). In total a too expensive and time consuming/complex. If we catch a F-35 like we catched the RQ-170, I would be open to talks about a serious fighter project, that starting point is sufficiently close to the enemy's. What is good and what IRIAF are doing is avionics R&D, yavar posted photos of one of their airborne radar R&D projects. If young people want innovative aviation expertise, they can join the IRGC-ASF with their drone projects up to S-171.

- Ti alloy production is good to have and would be welcome.

- Twin engine aircraft are welcome too and the F-313 has two.

- The J85 is a incredibly simple, small and cheap design, originally made for large CMs. However it is too outdated for the use in the F-313. Lets see if that J90 project does make it into production and another more advanced option would be the use of the unknown RQ-170 engine (although it should have a somewhat too high bypass ratio for the low flying F-313). The F-313 should be equipped with those engines, if the price is in the sufficient low range.
A engine as complex and expensive as a RD-33 copy would, for example, be too expensive for a up-sized F-313 variant. We would neither reach the price necessary, nor to production numbers.

- In my predicted concept for the F-313, it would take guerrilla warfare up in the air. Hit and run sorties with BVR LRAAM and do such sorties cyclic one after the other, like a flying 3rd Khordad SAM. The flexibility to be where needed when the enemy puts high pressure on one front section is what fighter (if able to survive and operate) are still very good for. Our real force multiplier will be that Iranian fighters, fight within a strong friendly IADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Can anyone really believe that all these countries like Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi, India etc are building up their airforces because they are stupid ? Half of the countries I named have have large missile arsenals of variety as well still they are getting TOT's and 4++ jets purchased. 

Anyone who believes that lack of AF can be compensated by BM's is a fool. We recently saw that even accurate (30-50 m CEP is considered accurate for BMs) 6 x BMs couldn't do much damage with their 500-750 kg conventional warheads against unhardened, undefended targets. A single MRCA can deliver a packed punch of around 6-7 tons of PGM with far better accuracy and as i said before, same craft can come back and fly again with 8 AAM's to guard the airspace. A large country like Iran at-least needs 16 squadrons of 4+ MRCA under ideal conditions. Iran most probably would not fight against US in future but against regional alliances. All of the enemies have large air forces which can take out our Surface fleet and cause massive damage to our without air cover infrastructure. Yes we can respond to them with Missiles but what would stop them from doing same ? We don't have ABM shield guarding us either. AF is such a weapon that its deadly yet it doesn't make a nation a political villain globally. A potent AF of 20 squadrons of 4+ generation is far more deadly than an arsenal of few fueled S/MRBM even if they are moderate to fair accurate (~50 m CEP). 

I am not saying Missiles are useless. They have their place esp with unconventional CBRN's warheads. They are a strategic deterrent but they cant defend the airspace of Iran, only a potent AF can. Its a dynamic force that can attack, defend, assist land and sea forces. AD can only fight to an extent and can be taken out as well. 

We should not forget that iran dominated 80s war in duration when IRIAF was active to its optimum best.

Iranians planners have landed on faces with all these projects of Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Shafagh and now Qaher. I feel hopeful for Kowsar that at-least an indigenous design will probably fly and get into service. Its no rebuilt aged up air-frame with welded tails and failed air intakes innovation like Saeghe, its no mock-up of a miniature utopian design like Qaher either. 

I personally feel amused when people talk about a local fighter jet. Its such a complex combination of different machines. Where would the turbofan come from ? the radar the avionics the combat suite ... who would design the FBW ? the ECM, ECCM ... lost goes on and on. Best we can locally achieve probably is a barely 4.0 generation platform with almost everything else Russian or Chinese fitted in it. It will come into service in 2025 at earliest and would be obsolete at its birth ... so whats the point then ? Best option for mullahs is to some how negotiate a TOT with Russia and China for a 4++ MRCA which can number up-to 10-12 squadrons at least along with 4 AWACS for support. Rest of the talk is just BS. We have spent years discussing the super technology hidden in glorious airframes of Saeghe and rest and what did they turn out to be ... literally the generals do not even talk about these projects anymore. I think they themselves are ashamed.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

drmeson said:


> Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi, India etc



None of them has any serious missile arsenal. Some have a few for nukes.



drmeson said:


> AF is such a weapon that its deadly yet it doesn't make a nation a political villain globally



What do you think, why is having BMs = "political villain"???
Because its the single deadliest and in any terms most effective weapon system that is known to mankind.
Iran has more political will and is smarter then the countries you listed.
Russians and Americans want no country on this planet to have a missile arsenal like Iran.

Indians develop a conventional BM force? = no love anymore from Russia and the U.S
If you look close enough, the others try to somehow develop BMs, but only with restricted payloads and ranges.
I'm quite sure that Israelis threaten Americans to develop a conventional BM arsenal, but they persuade them with cheap F-35. Americans do everything to stop any country to take Iran as a role model, no need for a Israeli role model. Israel will soon reach the threshold at which their small country and airbases in it, have no chance to win a conventional conflict against Iran, they either go for BMs or have their BM based nukes as deterrence.

As for the Zolfaghar, you as a soft target was not there, close to the impact, to feel the mach 3 caused shockwave.
Nor did they use the Zolfaghar in numbers required for killing hardened targets. Either it was a display on single round performance to the world, or they really wanted to kill soft targets in those buildings.



drmeson said:


> We should not forget that iran dominated 80s war in duration when IRIAF was active to its optimum best.



A respected past.



drmeson said:


> Best we can locally achieve probably is a barely 4.0 generation platform with almost everything else Russian or Chinese fitted in it. It will come into service in 2025 at earliest and would be obsolete at its birth ... so whats the point then ?



Agreed, true for conventional fighter design.

Hopefully and it looks very well like it, Iran will not play to the rules set by U.S and Russians --> use conventional airpower. Just never play to the game rules set by the enemy. No one can catch up to Russiand and American aeronautics... Its lost.

Russians are sneaky, want to export their expensive toys/fighters to backward countries. But themselves know that their strategic bomber delivered sub- and supersonic CM arsenal (they agreed with the US not to use ground launched CMs, MRBMs, IRBMs) and their nuclear and non-nuclear BM force is what really breaks the neck of a peer enemy state.

PS: none of the neighboring countries is what Iran prepares against, those are magnitudes weaker than what Iran faces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

@drmeson please don't call @PeeD a fool. You and I may disagree with him but he is making his arguments with facts and logic.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> @drmeson please don't call @PeeD a fool. You and I may disagree with him but he is making his arguments with facts and logic.



It was not directed at anyone in particular. 

I respect every good member very much here including @PeeD.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Parsipride

drmeson said:


> Can anyone really believe that all these countries like Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi, India etc are building up their airforces because they are stupid ? Half of the countries I named have have large missile arsenals of variety as well still they are getting TOT's and 4++ jets purchased.
> 
> Anyone who believes that lack of AF can be compensated by BM's is a fool. We recently saw that even accurate (30-50 m CEP is considered accurate for BMs) 6 x BMs couldn't do much damage with their 500-750 kg conventional warheads against unhardened, undefended targets. A single MRCA can deliver a packed punch of around 6-7 tons of PGM with far better accuracy and as i said before, same craft can come back and fly again with 8 AAM's to guard the airspace. A large country like Iran at-least needs 16 squadrons of 4+ MRCA under ideal conditions. Iran most probably would not fight against US in future but against regional alliances. All of the enemies have large air forces which can take out our Surface fleet and cause massive damage to our without air cover infrastructure. Yes we can respond to them with Missiles but what would stop them from doing same ? We don't have ABM shield guarding us either. AF is such a weapon that its deadly yet it doesn't make a nation a political villain globally. A potent AF of 20 squadrons of 4+ generation is far more deadly than an arsenal of few fueled S/MRBM even if they are moderate to fair accurate (~50 m CEP).
> 
> I am not saying Missiles are useless. They have their place esp with unconventional CBRN's warheads. They are a strategic deterrent but they cant defend the airspace of Iran, only a potent AF can. Its a dynamic force that can attack, defend, assist land and sea forces. AD can only fight to an extent and can be taken out as well.
> 
> We should not forget that iran dominated 80s war in duration when IRIAF was active to its optimum best.
> 
> Iranians planners have landed on faces with all these projects of Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Shafagh and now Qaher. I feel hopeful for Kowsar that at-least an indigenous design will probably fly and get into service. Its no rebuilt aged up air-frame with welded tails and failed air intakes innovation like Saeghe, its no mock-up of a miniature utopian design like Qaher either.
> 
> I personally feel amused when people talk about a local fighter jet. Its such a complex combination of different machines. Where would the turbofan come from ? the radar the avionics the combat suite ... who would design the FBW ? the ECM, ECCM ... lost goes on and on. Best we can locally achieve probably is a barely 4.0 generation platform with almost everything else Russian or Chinese fitted in it. It will come into service in 2025 at earliest and would be obsolete at its birth ... so whats the point then ? Best option for mullahs is to some how negotiate a TOT with Russia and China for a 4++ MRCA which can number up-to 10-12 squadrons at least along with 4 AWACS for support. Rest of the talk is just BS. We have spent years discussing the super technology hidden in glorious airframes of Saeghe and rest and what did they turn out to be ... literally the generals do not even talk about these projects anymore. I think they themselves are ashamed.





I said the same thing. He has been rambling on for pages with his wet dream analysis. How are the BMS going to be launched when Iran will lose control of her air space in a full on conflict against the US in a matter of weeks?

With an antiquated air force ( most of which are 5 decades old) and no access to modern aircraft, the establishment's investment in BMS is the only viable option.

Iran is years away from posing any challenge to US air power with home made AD systems and a few Russian S300 batteries( which their effectiveness has yet to be proven in Syria or any other conflict).

You are talking about the current maritime empire ( you control the seas, you control the world and win wars), which spends almost 700 billion dollars on defense annually and has a base in over 100 countries. You really think they are not able to disrupt BM missile launches in a skirmish with Iran or anyone else? We are not talking about a Hezbollah IDF war launching katyusha rockets from donkeys hidden behind trees that do not need to travel more than a few kilometers.

If and when Iran builds Iron dome over Iranian sky, and has thousands of Fateh type missiles ready and spread across the country in a given notice, then you can say that Iran will make US or any regional force pay a heavy price for an armed conflict.

Iran's defense doctrine has been built towards local hostile countries( SA,UAE,Pakistan, Azarbayejon,Turkey) most of which have incompetent armed forces wholly dependent on outside forces.

I am not trying to be disrespectful to anyone on this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Iran should stay with the soviet/russian doctrine -> putting most resources/money into missiles and subs...
fancy jets dont win wars BUT! they have theyr purpose



raptor22 said:


> View attachment 419682



any infos about this missile?
Ah, its an C802, an chinese anti ship missile (export version)..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 419682


Wow!,these must be really old pics,especially when we see one of the original old chinese supplied c802s,altho I had thought that the chinese had only supplied iran with the rocket powered short ranged version of the c802 not the longer ranged turbojet powered version that we see here,so when were these acquired?


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> any infos about this missile?
> Ah, its an C802, an chinese anti ship missile (export version)..


 airborn Nasr is does same


----------



## Avicenna

Not sure that its wise to neglect and potentially lose the ability to have a potent Air Force. 

Not a good idea to put all your eggs in one basket and go the missile route whether it is SAMS or SSMS.

I hope Iran locally produces either a Russian or Chinese fighter soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Ok slowly we are reaching convergence.
> Good, here the things I would do different:
> 
> - Fighter prototyping is not useful at the moment for the IRIAF. The Mig-29 is the most advanced design they could base up theirs upon (starting point). In total a too expensive and time consuming/complex. If we catch a F-35 like we catched the RQ-170, I would be open to talks about a serious fighter project, that starting point is sufficiently close to the enemy's. What is good and what IRIAF are doing is avionics R&D, yavar posted photos of one of their airborne radar R&D projects. If young people want innovative aviation expertise, they can join the IRGC-ASF with their drone projects up to S-171.
> 
> - Ti alloy production is good to have and would be welcome.
> 
> - Twin engine aircraft are welcome too and the F-313 has two.
> 
> - The J85 is a incredibly simple, small and cheap design, originally made for large CMs. However it is too outdated for the use in the F-313. Lets see if that J90 project does make it into production and another more advanced option would be the use of the unknown RQ-170 engine (although it should have a somewhat too high bypass ratio for the low flying F-313). The F-313 should be equipped with those engines, if the price is in the sufficient low range.
> A engine as complex and expensive as a RD-33 copy would, for example, be too expensive for a up-sized F-313 variant. We would neither reach the price necessary, nor to production numbers.
> 
> - In my predicted concept for the F-313, it would take guerrilla warfare up in the air. Hit and run sorties with BVR LRAAM and do such sorties cyclic one after the other, like a flying 3rd Khordad SAM. The flexibility to be where needed when the enemy puts high pressure on one front section is what fighter (if able to survive and operate) are still very good for. Our real force multiplier will be that Iranian fighters, fight within a strong friendly IADS.



Sorry if I sound like a broken record but again I have to mention that "IF you treat the IRIAF as tool to be used only when needed then it will act as such & If you treat it as center for growth and progress in aviation technology then it will also act as such" So saying that IRIAF shouldn't be building fighter prototypes is like saying that they should remain a tool to be used if and when needed which is short sighted!
In terms of cost If one breaks down an R&D program into 4 main parts it would
1.Human Resources
2.Facilities
3.Tools & Equipment
4.Matirials
IRIAF already has the top 2 major components that would make it harder for MOD companies & Privet companies to compete with!
R&D needs to be conducted in fields & tech's that don't already exist so if a company in Iran has already started developing an alloy, composite, Navigation system,... Your job in R&D is to either improve on it or develop something better for example something with the same characteristics but cheaper & easier to produce.
As for the IRGC I would say they should have an R&D program too but I believe they already do in various fields just not in larger Fighter Air Frames so they should either be competitive programs or joint programs!

And you keep saying J-90, J-90 but the J-90 is just a Tolue-4 Engine it's life span is 50 flight hours vs the Turbofan of the RD-33 that has a lifespan of 4,000 hours so you would need 80 J-90's to last as long as a single RD-33 engines and an Aircraft powered by 2 J-90's would required 160 engines to last as long as a single RD-33 that would have a far greater thrust! The J-85 also has a low lifespan compared to the RD-33
So If a single RD-33 costs $3 Million USD the cost of building 160 J-90's at only $20,000 USD would be more by the end of a single RD-33's lifespan

So NO! The J-90 & J-85 are not sufficient not in thrust nor in cost for a manned fighter! And just because an engine is cheaper upon purchase doesn't make it cost effective

And what's worse is production capacity of the J-90 powering a single Kowsar Trainers reduces Iran's ability to power a cruise missile or a UCAV using a Tolue-4 engine at a rate of 160 for every Kowsar Trainer 

So for a manned Aircraft of any kind Iran is far better off building far more expensive Turbofan engine at much lower rates (~50 -100 per year or 1-2 per week) that are bigger, made with stronger and more expensive materials and would last longer over a cheaper and smaller engine produced in the 1000's

An upgraded supersonic variant of the F-313(Would mean a total redesign) powered by 2 Iranian versions of the RD-33 equipped with the most advanced sensors and electronics available inside Iran would mean Iran wouldn't need to produce them at a rate of 100 per year because 12-24 a year will be more than enough

The ONLY thing I can potentially see that the F-313 would be good for (In it's current design powered by 2 J-85's) is to be used as a LOW RCS Air Refueling Tanker!!!! I would fill the wings and airframe up with as much fuel as possible & I would turn it into a short range Air Refueling Tanker! NOTHING MORE!
But as an Air Refueling Tanker it would make sense instead of buying or building 3-4 large tankers that will be easy targets you can instead build a total of 50-100 Q-313 probably at a lower price! NOTHING MORE!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

The J90 is not a Tolue-4 based engine.
It is expected to be a something in the thrust class the Al-222, the next step after the J85 copy Owj.
Two J90 are the likely engines of the F-313.

About lifespan: the RD-33 at the time it went into production was to some extend beyond the capabilities of its production plant. Its TBO was something around 500 hours. Now after 35 years it may has reached 4000 (but I doubt that's TBO, but whole lifespan as you said).
The good news for you is that there seems to be a RD-33 copy project in Iran. I regard it as too expensive.
I want a high degree of automation for the F-313 with lower pilot skill and training requirements, hence less complex/high quality engine. 



VEVAK said:


> An upgraded supersonic variant of the F-313(Would mean a total redesign) powered by 2 Iranian versions of the RD-33 equipped with the most advanced sensors and electronics available inside Iran would mean Iran wouldn't need to produce them at a rate of 100 per year because 12-24 a year will be more than enough



Enough for that? You want to play a well choreographed game with someone who is the uncontested king in conventional airpower, with 100 times higher resources for it?
What do you expect the outcome would be in that symmetric approach?
For serious decision making, the warfighting potential of the system is determined and a cost threshold calculated in respect with available alternative systems. So if the F-313 with those cheap engines and its size would cost 8m $ a piece, it might would be considered to be acquired as a weapon system, otherwise alternative systems would be selected.

I'm in total not against 60 Su-30SM for the IRIAF, mainly as saber rattling tool, base them somewhere to deliver the threat message. What I talk about is a cold calculation for a country with very limited resources on what will give it the biggest bang for the buck against a massively superior enemy. A life or death decision. There the calculated cost-performance ranking for any fighter would allays be lower than alternatives.



VEVAK said:


> The ONLY thing I can potentially see that the F-313 would be good for (In it's current design powered by 2 J-85's) is to be used as a LOW RCS Air Refueling Tanker!!!! I would fill the wings and airframe up with as much fuel as possible & I would turn it into a short range Air Refueling Tanker!



I see. You have realized the high fuel reserve design aspect of the F-313 (although not for a tanker for my taste). The designers seems to know of what importance range is. 
Many people are not aware that payloads for a fighter that has to fly 600-800km (needed against Iran) to the target seldom exceeds 1-2 tons on average and any threat on the way could let to jettisoning the weaponload and a mission kill.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> If the submunition warhead is designed correctly for it that altitude and space environment, its no technical obstacle.



How do you design an unguided, light projectile released at 200 km to hit the target?



PeeD said:


> You misunderstand. The two days "orbital" bombardment should sufficiently degrade the airbase capability. The rest is low intensity warfare.



So these ballistic missiles in the high intensity phase are expected to take out multiple major airbases, air defence sites, command centres, communication... how many missiles do you want to use against, say, a regional adversary?



PeeD said:


> I hope the IRIAF knows that such operation is the only way it can survive a high intensity war.



Also actually fighting in the war would be nice. I remind you of the shoot the archer concept.



PeeD said:


> With parachute retardation its possible.



Parachute retarded ballistic missiles. Next we'll be dropping paratroopers from Shahab-3s... 



PeeD said:


> In total, Russians are using a maintenance heavy swing wing low level interdictor to bomb enemies without +5km alt airdefense capability.



Being replaced by the Su-34.



PeeD said:


> A UACV concept with low maintenance, low airframe cost, low fuel consumption, miniaturized weapons and most importantly long loitering time over the target would be much superior and efficient.



Great. But that doesn't mean you don't need multirole fighter aircraft that can do both defensive and offensive roles.



PeeD said:


> PS: Saudi air launched CMs of their first wave are few enough for Irans IADS and they will just have that first wave.



Over 300 of them.


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 



AmirPatriot said:


> How do you design an unguided, light projectile released at 200 km to hit the target?



First I use a missile that has a 1km CEP, an old Shahab-3. The submunitions will increase that CEP to 2km suitable for a airbase-like area target.
Instead of a 1,2 ton warhead with 1km CEP, 100 10kg submunitions hit with a CEP of 2km.

The release timing and the dispersion acceleration must be correctly designed and a suitable cheap ablative heatshield used.



AmirPatriot said:


> So these ballistic missiles in the high intensity phase are expected to take out multiple major airbases, air defence sites, command centres, communication... how many missiles do you want to use against, say, a regional adversary?



Figure out how many hardened superbases are around and how many normal ones. As example 300 1t cluster warheads for unhardened and double the number for hardened for two days.
My number for the Safir jeep war 7k, lets say 10k$. My number on Karrar was 200k$, lets say 600k$. What would Iranian made missiles cost then? What if the claim that there is no hardened space to store them with their production rate true? I don't really want to go into details on that topic, I can only recommend you to leave "conventional missile numbers" behind.



AmirPatriot said:


> Also actually fighting in the war would be nice. I remind you of the shoot the archer concept.



Forget about shooting the archer if he intends to use 300km+ range stand-off weapons. They will do it and escape if necessary.



AmirPatriot said:


> Parachute retarded ballistic missiles. Next we'll be dropping paratroopers from Shahab-3s...



Parachute retarding bombs are/were something completely normal. But that irrelevant. Iran will not use a durandal like BM-submunition but cluster warheads for runways. Just wanted to say its technically feasible.



AmirPatriot said:


> Being replaced by the Su-34.



That is even a higher overkill. Too high performance/cost/numbers to be used as a bomber for low intensity warfare and to be honest not sufficiently surviveable to attack high value targets deep inside europe, considering all the fighter airpower in west europe. Su-35 need to take out the Typhoons first and then Su-34 have to take part in a SEAD/DEAD campaign to then finally attack the high value target. Ballistic missile up to today do not need such a degradation phase to attack any high value target.



AmirPatriot said:


> Great. But that doesn't mean you don't need multirole fighter aircraft that can do both defensive and offensive roles.



As said above: "For serious decision making, the warfighting potential of the system is determined and a cost threshold calculated in respect with available alternative systems. So if the F-313 with those cheap engines and its size would cost 8m $ a piece, it might would be considered to be acquired as a weapon system, otherwise alternative systems would be selected.

I'm in total not against 60 Su-30SM for the IRIAF, mainly as saber rattling tool, base them somewhere to deliver the threat message. What I talk about is a cold calculation for a country with very limited resources on what will give it the biggest bang for the buck against a massively superior enemy. A life or death decision. There the calculated cost-performance ranking for any fighter would allays be lower than alternatives."



AmirPatriot said:


> Over 300 of them.



Without ABC warhead as irrelevant for a conflict as their DF-3 and -21 arsenal. Iran has and is working on an IADS to deal with those threats, with numbers low enough not to saturate the IADS (Americans have the numbers to saturate it).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

real news or fake news?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893938685338669057

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Avicenna

Why not try the Chinese? J-10B or C?

The most important thing, regardless of any deal, would have to be ToT and production in Iran.


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> real news or fake news?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893938685338669057


no


----------



## Parsipride

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/08/21/532390/Russia-Syria-Daesh-Dayr-alZawr


yavar said:


> no


----------



## Zathura

Draco.IMF said:


> real news or fake news?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893938685338669057



That was a rumour that appeared on the internet for a day or two and it was dismissed quickly by Russia. They confirmed that they're in talk with Iran over Su-30.


----------



## Navigator

BTW ready AFAR radar for MiG-35 while doesn't exist. The first pre-serial prototype is planned to be created before the end of the year. After this there needs many tests. Therefore even the first serial batch of MiG-35 for Russian Airforce will be equipped with Zhuk-M radars, which are now put on the MiG-29SMT fighters.
https://rg.ru/2017/07/11/novejshij-radar-dlia-mig-35-sozdadut-do-konca-goda.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

So how are the chances Iran getting the Su-30?
Afaik the UN resolution forbids Iran offensive weapons which russia also agree to.

but then we have such news:

http://thediplomat.com/2016/12/iran-russia-inching-closer-to-su-30-fighter-jet-deal/


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> So how are the chances Iran getting the Su-30?
> Afaik the UN resolution forbids Iran offensive weapons which russia also agree to.
> 
> but then we have such news:
> 
> http://thediplomat.com/2016/12/iran-russia-inching-closer-to-su-30-fighter-jet-deal/


Not a chances , Iranian can not get such weapons at least for several year and then I'm not sure if Russia still produce su-30 or if there is not better options in market .


----------



## Navigator

UN weapons sanctions end in autumn of 2020 year. Su-30SM will be at least produced for few years, since there are already contracts for the Russian Air Force and Belarus until 2020.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> The J90 is not a Tolue-4 based engine.
> It is expected to be a something in the thrust class the Al-222, the next step after the J85 copy Owj.
> Two J90 are the likely engines of the F-313.
> 
> About lifespan: the RD-33 at the time it went into production was to some extend beyond the capabilities of its production plant. Its TBO was something around 500 hours. Now after 35 years it may has reached 4000 (but I doubt that's TBO, but whole lifespan as you said).
> The good news for you is that there seems to be a RD-33 copy project in Iran. I regard it as too expensive.
> I want a high degree of automation for the F-313 with lower pilot skill and training requirements, hence less complex/high quality engine.
> 
> 
> 
> Enough for that? You want to play a well choreographed game with someone who is the uncontested king in conventional airpower, with 100 times higher resources for it?
> What do you expect the outcome would be in that symmetric approach?
> For serious decision making, the warfighting potential of the system is determined and a cost threshold calculated in respect with available alternative systems. So if the F-313 with those cheap engines and its size would cost 8m $ a piece, it might would be considered to be acquired as a weapon system, otherwise alternative systems would be selected.
> 
> I'm in total not against 60 Su-30SM for the IRIAF, mainly as saber rattling tool, base them somewhere to deliver the threat message. What I talk about is a cold calculation for a country with very limited resources on what will give it the biggest bang for the buck against a massively superior enemy. A life or death decision. There the calculated cost-performance ranking for any fighter would allays be lower than alternatives.
> 
> 
> 
> I see. You have realized the high fuel reserve design aspect of the F-313 (although not for a tanker for my taste). The designers seems to know of what importance range is.
> Many people are not aware that payloads for a fighter that has to fly 600-800km (needed against Iran) to the target seldom exceeds 1-2 tons on average and any threat on the way could let to jettisoning the weaponload and a mission kill.



Go 4:50 into the Video 




The J-90 is what they'll use to power the Kowsar and it is just an upgraded Tolue-4 that has a little more power with a little more life span! And still the math doesn't add up in terms of overall cost compared to the RD-33 because NO Turbojet engine's math will ever add up when compared to Turbofan engine on a manned aircraft

And it is logical for Iran to have a minimum requirement of Missiles, UCAV,... & Asymmetric Weapons to retaliate incase of a U.S. attack to be used as the countries minimum deterrent capability BUT Iran can NOT base it's entire military structure & doctrine based on what to do if the U.S. attacks!

If you treat your military & military industry as some tool only to be used if and when needed then that's not only short sighted but your not getting your money's worth out of them! A countries Military & Military industry should be the leading organizations in Science & Technology helping to move the country past theories and scientific papers into product that can compete globally! In both the military and civilian sector whos personal get properly trained and ready to contribute to various fields.
We can't base your entire countries future on how to react to a U.S. attack! And a countries military and military industry needs to be a driving force in the countries technological capabilities not some reactionary tool as if it's a stone you can use to throw back at a bully! 

And an engine that cost $2 Million USD to produce (per unit) Isn't necessarily more cost effective than an engine that's only $100,000 USD with 1/10 the life span!

The Q-313 was 1st showcased in 2013 with a full scale mockup and the designers thought they had everything figured out & here we are 4 years later & they figured out that neither the wingspan or the thrust was enough to do what they were claiming!
Fact is regardless of the cost of the Q-313 Iran doesn't have the facilities or the human resources to build over 100 per year and a minimum of one Upgraded J-85 per day! Regardless of the price!!!!!!! If they were so easily mass produced then Iran would have had a squadron up doing test flights by now!

And to spend all that money on the facilities to build an Aircraft where 10 of them can't even take on a single Iranian F-14 let alone F-15, Su-30,.... Or to spend all that money on manpower and facilities on an engine that has a higher consumption ratio per pound than an AL-21 or J-79 with a much lower lifespan is absurd!

And you talk about the Q-313 potential range! But what good is rang when you don't have the speed, maneuverability & situational awareness necessary to go with it? So NO!
Q-313 will be good as a short ranged tanker that allows Iran to concentrate a more advanced fighter in central Iran & as a tanker you can keep 1/3 on active duty for training & the rest in storage all spread across the country at various airfields tasked with refueling more advanced fighters once they get to their area of operations!

As for the Su-30 is the Russian don't do a complete tech Transfer (which they won't) I'd rather see Iran build it's own fighter comparable in size & thrust to the Russian Su-30 or the Chinese J-20

But that requires Iran to invest in building an engine that cost $2Million USD to build & an Airframe that requires large amounts of Titanium

That way instead of building 100 a year you can concentrate on something more advanced at rates of 12-24 per year! Instead of having 100 8 Million USD aircrafts a year I'd rather see 12-24 $60-$80Million USD aircrafts a year that would last longer and can be upgraded as time passes 
Instead of 400 J-85's per year (one per day) at $100k per I'd rather see 1-2 engines per week!
And I don't think funding from the missile program should go towards this! No! Funding should rather be added to both!



Navigator said:


> UN weapons sanctions end in autumn of 2020 year. Su-30SM will be at least produced for few years, since there are already contracts for the Russian Air Force and Belarus until 2020.



UN sanctions on Weapons will last another 5 years! In Syria, I believe Iran has proven to the world that when it comes to security and military issues Iran will get down and dirty and will stand with it's allies when the going gets tuff regardless of the economic situation at home!
So honestly I think Russia can't find a better ally that will be willing to fight along side them when needed! But for that to happen Russia needs to start treating Iran as a true partner rather than a consumer!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

VEVAK said:


> I'd rather see Iran build it's own fighter comparable in size & thrust to the Russian Su-30 or the Chinese J-20



this will take decades!, and only IF! Iran will be able to produce it! (know how/sanctions/....)


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK

First you are badly confused about the J90.

Second just ask yourself that sense it makes to produce 24, say a Su-30 equivalent each year? Do you know the fleet size of the Americans? You want to reach their level in 100 years or have a kill ratio 1:10 in favor of your fighter? This is lost.

Third why should we not just concentrate on fighting the Americans or a equivalent force? It's a monumental task to achieve a near peer status against the U.S and Iran is going in that direction very effectively.
I know one or two things about military, but if you ask anyone if Iran will ever stand any chance against the U.S military behemoth, the answer will be NEVER. No chance, don't even try it, just accept it.

Iran is doing the impossible and needs to invest its resources very wisely.


So much on that.

The J90 has NOTHING to do with the Tolue-4, a mini turbojet. The J-90 is a small turbofan with two fan stages, 3 LP and 6 HP (the Tolue has 3 stages in total...). If they do it right it will be a very effective design in thrust, cost and SFC.
Do you really think the Kowsar would have such large nacelles if they wanted to fit a Tolue-4 that fits in a C-802?

No. The J90 is Irans first own jet engine design, a turbofan and in class of the Al-222. It is very promising for the F-313 application. They only question is whether they will be able to get it working. It would be a huge accomplishment which no more than about 5 countries in the world are capable of. However because its so huge I don't believe it will happen anytime soon.


Then you say the Qaher was wrongly designed because of the engine number change. What if the IRIAF got interested in that AIO project but would not accept a single engine fighter? Now that we know the IRIAF is involved in the project, almost certainly twin engine was one of their requirements.
I already wrote that in the Qaher thread: Due to the low level operation regime I foresee for the Qaher, two small non-afterburning turbofans are sufficient to mach 0,9 sea level operation. Under those conditions a chasing F-16 with AAMs wont do mach 1,1-1,2 on afterburner. Terrain masking and low level hit and run tactics are what I foresee for the F-313. Its large fuel reserves and non-afterburning engines are the key to the range performance required for Iran and hit and run tactics. Only such a asymmetric approach on manned airpower makes sense against U.S level of manned airpower.

At the end we need to get the job done and figure out how. How fighting against such a professional superior force and not loose? 24 Su-30 copies a year for 60m $ an airframe or 100 "asymmetric" F-313 for 6-10m $ an airframe? If you want to accomplish the impossible, the answer is clear.

A conventional airforce adds some flexibility. 60 Su-35 (WVR+BVR), 20 Mig-29 (WVR+BVR) 40 F-14AM (BVR+ emergency WVR) and 80 F-4 (mach 2 dash BVR intercept and escape) as IADS emergency firefighters and UCAV bomber escort into a degraded enemy airspace are welcome. If resources are available why not. But a larger fleet size would bring it outside the good to have flexibility sphere and be counter productive for the serious missile/UAV based weapon systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Zathura

mohsen said:


> *Russian Helicopters Plans Ka-226 and Ansat Assembly In Iran*
> 
> Russian Aviaton » Monday April 3, 2017 18:05 MSK
> Russian Helicopters and Iran’s Industrial Development and Renovation Organization (IDRO) have planned a joint venture to assemble KA-226 and Ansat light civilian helicopters, portal Defense World reported.
> 
> The Joint Venture to assemble light civilian helicopters in Iran was announced by Russian Helicopters firm last week.
> 
> A memorandum of understanding was signed by Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky and the chairman of the Board of Directors of IDRO Mansour Moazami. The document is aimed at promoting cooperation between Russia and Iran as part of the program on upgrading the Iranian helicopter fleet.
> 
> Russian Helicopters also intends to explore potential for cooperation with IDRO to develop business in the Middle East.
> 
> “We see that the demand for light helicopters is high in Iran, and the country needs them for civilian agencies. said Boginsky.
> 
> The joint venture between Russia and Iran would consider assembling light Ka-226 or Ansat helicopters. Currently, negotiations on this issue are ongoing. Iran uses almost the whole range of helicopters of this type: Mi-17, Mi-171, Mi-171E, Mi-8MTV and Mi-17V-5s.
> 
> These medium-class helicopters are used for law enforcement and to fight organized crime. Just as in other countries of the region, Russian helicopters in Iran have become known primarily as machines that allow to perform tasks in high temperatures and at high altitudes.



*Ka-226 Helicopter To Receive Crash-resistant Fuel System by 2019*
Russian Helicopters’ lightweight multirole helicopter Ka-226 will be the first to receive new crash-resistant fuel system which is expected to arrive by early 2019.

"This is one of system remaining in the priority list. Activities on this topic have been underway for several years. We identified the aircraft to be the first one fitted with this system - this is Ka-226 helicopter," department director of Technodinamika Holding Egor Chetvertnykh told TASS Monday.

First specimens will be supplied to Russian Helicopters company in 18-24 months, he added.

Ka-226T is a lightweight multirole helicopter with the takeoff weight of 3.4 tonnes. It is intended to carry up to 1.5 tonnes of cargo or up to 7 passengers on board to a distance of 600 km.

Source: Defense World

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Navigator said:


> UN weapons sanctions end in autumn of 2020 year. Su-30SM will be at least produced for few years, since there are already contracts for the Russian Air Force and Belarus until 2020.


and that make the airplane not suitable , by the way if i'm not wrong sanction for airplanes last 2 more years after sanction for other weapons.


----------



## OldTwilight

When they can take the money for themselves , why should they spend it in R&D section and Airforce ... 
answer of this question is the right answer for whole damn issue ... 

I feel sorry for myself because I was defending them for years ( more than 10 years in Websites and forums and society )


----------



## VEVAK

Draco.IMF said:


> this will take decades!, and only IF! Iran will be able to produce it! (know how/sanctions/....)



And it will take even longer the longer they wait to go towards that direction!

A proper decision should have been taken over a decade ago after the flight tests of the Saegheh were completed as to what Airframe & Engine you'll need in your fleet 20 years from now!
You may be able to build a flying prototype in a matter of few years but a production model will take much longer & building the facilities for industrial size production even longer!

But in my opinion they made a major mistake and a complete miscalculation in their cost vs benefits annalists & they completely miscalculated cost upon purchase with overall cost of operations with a complete disregard of the Military, economic & technological advances of the country when building the most advanced Aircraft & Engine within their capability as oppose to something that's cheep upon purchase!

Right then and there while Oil prices were at $100 per barrel they should have made a decision in Titanium production & It's not like they didn't have Titanium mines in the country they have an ample supply and whether or not some like to admit or not Titanium is a major hurdle for Iran that's why Iran is sanctioned from buying & producing it!

Iran has the potential to produce various rare earth & strategic alloys! It took Iran about 6 months of R&D to start producing *Magnesium* which is 30% lighter than aluminum over 50% lighter than *titanium*, and 75% lighter than steel. Yet for many applications it's *stronger* per unit volume than all three of those structural metals. Although by it's self it is too expensive to be used on fighter but it has the potential of being mixed with other alloys to create other alloy composite used in fighter Airframes. 
And that to me means anyone who is trying to sell Iranian Magnesium should be shot!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Draco.IMF said:


> So how are the chances Iran getting the Su-30?



zero ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> And it will take even longer the longer they wait to go towards that direction!
> 
> A proper decision should have been taken over a decade ago after the flight tests of the Saegheh were completed as to what Airframe & Engine you'll need in your fleet 20 years from now!
> You may be able to build a flying prototype in a matter of few years but a production model will take much longer & building the facilities for industrial size production even longer!
> 
> But in my opinion they made a major mistake and a complete miscalculation in their cost vs benefits annalists & they completely miscalculated cost upon purchase with overall cost of operations with a complete disregard of the Military, economic & technological advances of the country when building the most advanced Aircraft & Engine within their capability as oppose to something that's cheep upon purchase!
> 
> Right then and there while Oil prices were at $100 per barrel they should have made a decision in Titanium production & It's not like they didn't have Titanium mines in the country they have an ample supply and whether or not some like to admit or not Titanium is a major hurdle for Iran that's why Iran is sanctioned from buying & producing it!
> 
> Iran has the potential to produce various rare earth & strategic alloys! It took Iran about 6 months of R&D to start producing *Magnesium* which is 30% lighter than aluminum over 50% lighter than *titanium*, and 75% lighter than steel. Yet for many applications it's *stronger* per unit volume than all three of those structural metals. Although by it's self it is too expensive to be used on fighter but it has the potential of being mixed with other alloys to create other alloy composite used in fighter Airframes.
> And that to me means anyone who is trying to sell Iranian Magnesium should be shot!




Our leaders made the mistake of completely disregarding airforce, and its funding is garbage. Fully focused on missiles as a substitute. We didn't need huge production of fighters but we should've been building the base, the resources, the plants to process materials. You are right, we should have already had this capability years ago, and their are only slight indications that we are going in this direction but by the time we see an indigenouns 4 gen squadron from Iran would take 10+ years. Maybe with some imports it'll be less but not fully indigenous. We've totally fucked it. Missiles cannot be a substitute for airforce. Only in the initial high intensity phase is where you'd lob 100's of missiles to soften air defences and attack vital assets in enemy country. The airforce then moves in just like how the Americans did in Iraq. We have one step of that nearly complete, we just need more range and accuracy on the zolfiqars. Maybe 30 years ago i'd say the airforce doesn't win wars but I beleive that in modern ages, the airfoce absolutely has the ability to stop an entire armoured bridage in its tracks,or give that final troops the punch they need to move forward. This isn't WW2 anymore, countries can smack a 2 ton bomb in a trench. Did you guys see the highway of death the americans did to Iraqi armourded vehicles. That right there wins wars. Only because of how precise airforces have become.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

OldTwilight said:


> zero ....


Russia isn't an ally to Iran. More like that one friend that helps you sometimes.


----------



## Navigator

JEskandari said:


> and that make the airplane not suitable , by the way if i'm not wrong sanction for airplanes last 2 more years after sanction for other weapons.



No, there only ballistic missiles transfers and techs with prolonged terms. Combat aircrafts, tanks etc restrictions until the date five years after the JCPOA Adoption Day (18 October 2015).
http://www.un.org/en/sc/2231/restrictions-arms.shtml

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

iran does produce titanium:

http://www.iran-daily.com/News/168841.html


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> First you are badly confused about the J90.
> 
> Second just ask yourself that sense it makes to produce 24, say a Su-30 equivalent each year? Do you know the fleet size of the Americans? You want to reach their level in 100 years or have a kill ratio 1:10 in favor of your fighter? This is lost.
> 
> Third why should we not just concentrate on fighting the Americans or a equivalent force? It's a monumental task to achieve a near peer status against the U.S and Iran is going in that direction very effectively.
> I know one or two things about military, but if you ask anyone if Iran will ever stand any chance against the U.S military behemoth, the answer will be NEVER. No chance, don't even try it, just accept it.
> 
> Iran is doing the impossible and needs to invest its resources very wisely.
> 
> 
> So much on that.
> 
> The J90 has NOTHING to do with the Tolue-4, a mini turbojet. The J-90 is a small turbofan with two fan stages, 3 LP and 6 HP (the Tolue has 3 stages in total...). If they do it right it will be a very effective design in thrust, cost and SFC.
> Do you really think the Kowsar would have such large nacelles if they wanted to fit a Tolue-4 that fits in a C-802?
> 
> No. The J90 is Irans first own jet engine design, a turbofan and in class of the Al-222. It is very promising for the F-313 application. They only question is whether they will be able to get it working. It would be a huge accomplishment which no more than about 5 countries in the world are capable of. However because its so huge I don't believe it will happen anytime soon.
> 
> 
> Then you say the Qaher was wrongly designed because of the engine number change. What if the IRIAF got interested in that AIO project but would not accept a single engine fighter? Now that we know the IRIAF is involved in the project, almost certainly twin engine was one of their requirements.
> I already wrote that in the Qaher thread: Due to the low level operation regime I foresee for the Qaher, two small non-afterburning turbofans are sufficient to mach 0,9 sea level operation. Under those conditions a chasing F-16 with AAMs wont do mach 1,1-1,2 on afterburner. Terrain masking and low level hit and run tactics are what I foresee for the F-313. Its large fuel reserves and non-afterburning engines are the key to the range performance required for Iran and hit and run tactics. Only such a asymmetric approach on manned airpower makes sense against U.S level of manned airpower.
> 
> At the end we need to get the job done and figure out how. How fighting against such a professional superior force and not loose? 24 Su-30 copies a year for 60m $ an airframe or 100 "asymmetric" F-313 for 6-10m $ an airframe? If you want to accomplish the impossible, the answer is clear.
> 
> A conventional airforce adds some flexibility. 60 Su-35 (WVR+BVR), 20 Mig-29 (WVR+BVR) 40 F-14AM (BVR+ emergency WVR) and 80 F-4 (mach 2 dash BVR intercept and escape) as IADS emergency firefighters and UCAV bomber escort into a degraded enemy airspace are welcome. If resources are available why not. But a larger fleet size would bring it outside the good to have flexibility sphere and be counter productive for the serious missile/UAV based weapon systems.



Did you watch the Video I posted? The J-90 is not the Tolue-4 but it is based on it!

And if Iran wants to truly build a jet engine of it's own then they need to start with building larger & heavier engines and work their way down and the government accepts to pay the correct price for them? A company like MAPNA working alongside IAIO could potentially develop a Turbofan worth taking into production! Clearly MAPNA is far better equipped in terms of Tools and Equipment than any Aviation company in Iran
But will the MOD ever accept to pay $2 Million USD per engine to MAPNA for an Iranian Engine with the same characteristic as an RD-33 that's the Million dollar question!

*The notion that ANY Air Force in their right mind would choose 100 Q-313 over 24 Su-30's is beyond absurd!* And it doesn't matter if it's against the U.S. or Afghanistan! 

And yes 24 Su-30 or J-20 size Aircrafts is more than enough for the next decade until you have a fleet of 240 and then you can bring down production to 12 per year of a more advanced more expensive version! A country the size of Iran needs a minimum of 12 fighters(The most advanced within the countries capabilities )+ 2 support Aircrafts added to it's fleet on a yearly bases and I don't care if those fighter go the IRGC ASF or IRIAF as long as the country has them! And they should ALL be twin engine, twin seat that can potentially be upgraded so the rear pilot can command and control UAV's & UCAV's! And that's how you catchup to a superior fleet!

And the Aircrafts need to be large enough & powerful enough that a decade from now you can equip one out of every 4 with lasers to be used as countermeasures against incoming SAM's & Air-Air missiles 

And stealth alone by it's self is not enough that's why the U.S. retired the F-117 and Iran's ability to capture the RQ-170 is further prof of that fact!
You need speed! You need maneuverability to counter incoming missiles! You need situational awareness, INS, Avionics, HOTAS, Helmet mounted heads up display, Glass cockpit! You need Jamming & Anti Jamming capabilities! Countermeasures! You need secure communication & datalink! You need an IRST! You need a good Thrust to weight ratio and a fighter that relies on it's engine for lift rather than it's wings or worse yet it's fuselage! You need a fly by wire system for various reason to tell you when your reaching the Aircrafts structural limits to an advanced autopilot! You need BVR capability, PGM capability and target accusation and targeting using various sensor! You need a good Weapons package & a good size payload! and you need an aircraft that's fully protected from EMP & could withstand a close hit and live to tell about it! You need a platform that has the room and potential of being upgraded with various future systems as technology advances....
And the conclusion is putting all that equipment on a small, low thrust, low payload, low speed, low maneuvering Airframe because you wanna save a few bucks upon purchase is just NOT smart!


----------



## drmeson

PeeD said:


> None of them has any serious missile arsenal. Some have a few for nukes.



Allow me to inform you that you are argument is wrong. India has a tested IRBM-ICBM and their space program is way ahead of Iran. Pakistan has solid fueled MIRV-MRBMs along with deployed long ranged LACM, SLCM. Israel has ICBM, LACM capability. And these states are not just equipped with "few" for nukes, they may have hundreds of missiles tipped with fission/fusion warheads, yielding from megaton to tactical battlefield ones.



PeeD said:


> What do you think, why is having BMs = "political villain"???
> Because its the single deadliest and in any terms most effective weapon system that is known to mankind.
> Iran has more political will and is smarter then the countries you listed.
> Russians and Americans want no country on this planet to have a missile arsenal like Iran.
> 
> Indians develop a conventional BM force? = no love anymore from Russia and the U.S
> If you look close enough, the others try to somehow develop BMs, but only with restricted payloads and ranges.
> I'm quite sure that Israelis threaten Americans to develop a conventional BM arsenal, but they persuade them with cheap F-35. Americans do everything to stop any country to take Iran as a role model, no need for a Israeli role model. Israel will soon reach the threshold at which their small country and airbases in it, have no chance to win a conventional conflict against Iran, they either go for BMs or have their BM based nukes as deterrence.



Why are you assuming that all these countries like Israel, India, KSA, Pakistan, Turkey etc are run by stupid defense strategists that they have strong nuclear tipped missile programs yet they keep developing their AF's as well. Your whole argument of Russia/USA not wanting anyone to have a missile force is dusted by the fact that Russia has sold more weaponry to China and India than anyone yet India and China both have missile forces (Chinese one is on another level). Israel bought the whole Apartheid RSA program in 80s to cover for its missile program, yet they kept receiving weaponry from USA, Pakistan gets western weaponry despite a nuclear triad armed military with an arsenal of BM/CM. It is not because these countries are brainless idiots, it is because their diplomatic fronts work and ours so far has failed on global level. 

And kindly do tell which country has reduced payloads and ranges because of US/Russian pressure ?.



PeeD said:


> As for the Zolfaghar, you as a soft target was not there, close to the impact, to feel the mach 3 caused shockwave.
> Nor did they use the Zolfaghar in numbers required for killing hardened targets. Either it was a display on single round performance to the world, or they really wanted to kill soft targets in those buildings.



6 x Zolfaghar strikes with a CEP of 30-50 m hardly delivered around 4.2-4.5 tons of conventional warhead over an area of 50 m. A single sortie by 5 x MRCA's (4+ generation) can deliver ... guess what ... 25+ tons of same warhead with CEP of 5 m. And also at variety of targets. Again I repeat, same platforms can serve as air guards that's why they are called MRCA.



PeeD said:


> Hopefully and it looks very well like it, Iran will not play to the rules set by U.S and Russians --> use conventional airpower. Just never play to the game rules set by the enemy. No one can catch up to Russiand and American aeronautics... Its lost.
> 
> Russians are sneaky, want to export their expensive toys/fighters to backward countries. But themselves know that their strategic bomber delivered sub- and supersonic CM arsenal (they agreed with the US not to use ground launched CMs, MRBMs, IRBMs) and their nuclear and non-nuclear BM force is what really breaks the neck of a peer enemy state.
> 
> PS: none of the neighboring countries is what Iran prepares against, those are magnitudes weaker than what Iran faces.



You are again assuming that Iran's only enemy is USA so either we prepare against USA or we just do not against anyone else. I would go on and say that Iran will fight a future war against a KSA led Arab Alliance rather than USA. Can we match even their air power ? no. Today they do not have BM/CM's, what if they start procuring them from China, what if cash loving Pakistan starts selling them BM/CMs or even set up a TOT factory inside KSA ... you have this imagination that your enemies are some idiot orcs who can not think. Shahi Iran was an arms importer too, how many years did it take us to become a local arms developing country, why do you think same can not happen in enemy countries across the PG. They have the cash and world is willing to help them unlike us.

This cold war era mentality of Russians and USA controlling the world etc is sickening, no one is no ones proxy or poodle anymore. Iranian skies are unsafe no other argument is valid here, if we are faced with a regional air invasion in future (some 500+ Rafale, EF-2000, F-35, F-15SE, F-16 blk 60, Mig-35), do not expect few Almaz batteries to take them all out, fire BM's towards their bases and they will start doing the same to our infrastructure, against which by the way we have no defense as of yet. IRIAF needs to be equipped from scratch with at-least 14-16 squadrons of 4+ MRCAs to defend Iran in such a future. Buy TOT assembly lines from Russia or China, Su-30SM or J-20C, doesn't matter but it needs to happen now.

Missiles are equally important too but they are not the only deterrent. IRIN is spending millions and millions of dollars on making new corvettes and frigates. In future there will be some 10-12 such vessels in PG ... with no air cover. In case of war these vessels will be taken out easily. Are we ready to send our thousands of sailors to such slaughter. IRIN itself needs at least 4 squadrons to provide air-cover and also launch strikes on enemy vessels. We do not want to repeat another praying mentis.

..............................................


By the way this talk of Qaher 313 is absurd since Aircraft is not just a single machine that we can make or we can't. I would ask the very basic question here. Where would it high performance turbofan come from ? What about an AESA radar, avionics, armaments ... BVR, WVR, Radar, TFR, HMD, RWR, MAWS, IRST, FLIR, ECM, ECCM, IFF ... Do we make all of it inside Iran ? off-course we do not. This project is nothing but an aeronautical academic utopia without all of these equipment procurement issues addressed. It is small, less powered even if it flies. I am not against it, let the engineers and scientists gain experience but mark my words this will never enter production without MASSIVE foreign support or get ready for another Saeghe abomination.


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> Our leaders made the mistake of completely disregarding airforce, and its funding is garbage. Fully focused on missiles as a substitute. We didn't need huge production of fighters but we should've been building the base, the resources, the plants to process materials. You are right, we should have already had this capability years ago, and their are only slight indications that we are going in this direction but by the time we see an indigenouns 4 gen squadron from Iran would take 10+ years. Maybe with some imports it'll be less but not fully indigenous. We've totally fucked it. Missiles cannot be a substitute for airforce. Only in the initial high intensity phase is where you'd lob 100's of missiles to soften air defences and attack vital assets in enemy country. The airforce then moves in just like how the Americans did in Iraq. We have one step of that nearly complete, we just need more range and accuracy on the zolfiqars. Maybe 30 years ago i'd say the airforce doesn't win wars but I beleive that in modern ages, the airfoce absolutely has the ability to stop an entire armoured bridage in its tracks,or give that final troops the punch they need to move forward. This isn't WW2 anymore, countries can smack a 2 ton bomb in a trench. Did you guys see the highway of death the americans did to Iraqi armourded vehicles. That right there wins wars. Only because of how precise airforces have become.




And the fact that they haven't even attempted to build a larger supersonic fighter after the Saegheh to me shows how misguided Iranian Air force commanders truly are and how miss managed Iran's Air Force is!

And I can't really blame the government for this because if the Air Force had developed a prototype worth producing then one could blame the MOD & the government for refusing to fund that program! But for now to me it looks like the Air Force had a problem and instead of trying to solve it as the IRGC did with it's missiles, UAV's,... and as Iran's Navy did with it's ships, subs, hovercraft, facilities,.... As Iran's Air Defense force did with developing various Air Defense systems....
To me it looks like IRIAF did nothing in the past decade to go after a larger more capable Air Frame & an engine to power them!

And I don't see why an Oil rich country like Iran should be worried about the cost of fueling it's jet but if they were worried about fueling them they should have started R&D in Natural Gas based Jet Fuel & Jet Engines!
That's something Iran has ample supply of!


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> And the fact that they haven't even attempted to build a larger supersonic fighter after the Saegheh to me shows how misguided Iranian Air force commanders truly are and how miss managed Iran's Air Force is!
> 
> And I can't really blame the government for this because if the Air Force had developed a prototype worth producing then one could blame the MOD & the government for refusing to fund that program! But for now to me it looks like the Air Force had a problem and instead of trying to solve it as the IRGC did with it's missiles, UAV's,... and as Iran's Navy did with it's ships, subs, hovercraft, facilities,.... As Iran's Air Defense force did with developing various Air Defense systems....
> To me it looks like IRIAF did nothing in the past decade to go after a larger more capable Air Frame & an engine to power them!
> 
> And I don't see why an Oil rich country like Iran should be worried about the cost of fueling it's jet but if they were worried about fueling them they should have started R&D in Natural Gas based Jet Fuel & Jet Engines!
> That's something Iran has ample supply of!



God the more I think about it the more angry i get. The Airforce has literally nothing to show for itself, as you mentioned every other branch has built its own systems. Even the big projects like impressively made fateh submarines are moving forward. The only real achievement is the kowsar training jet. Which isn't really much if we look at the last 20 years. Once the best branch of the Iranian military as well. Such a shame

I'm not sure about Saegheh. Isn't it just a overhauled & alittle upgraded F-5, including the use of their parts?. We didn't actually build it ourselves i think. The Kowsar is the first actually Iranian built system, and we need to continue work from there. I can't be sure though, I don't know much about Saegheh.


Shafagh was something really realistic and has great potential. If we can get those RD-33 finished, we'd actually have a chance at building the foundations for a modern airforce in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Stryker1982 said:


> God the more I think about it the more angry i get. The Airforce has literally nothing to show for itself, as you mentioned every other branch has built its own systems. Even the big projects like impressively made fateh submarines are moving forward. The only real achievement is the kowsar training jet. Which isn't really much if we look at the last 20 years. Once the best branch of the Iranian military as well. Such a shame
> 
> I'm not sure about Saegheh. Isn't it just a overhauled & alittle upgraded F-5, including the use of their parts?. We didn't actually build it ourselves i think. The Kowsar is the first actually Iranian built system, and we need to continue work from there. I can't be sure though, I don't know much about Saegheh.
> 
> 
> Shafagh was something really realistic and has great potential. If we can get those RD-33 finished, we'd actually have a chance at building the foundations for a modern airforce in my opinion.



Money is a really important aspect to an effective air force. Given the sheer size of Iran and it's old and inadequate air force the amount of money that needs to be injected into the defense budget to compensate for these deficiencies is staggering.

The figure of Iran's defense budget would have to jump from circa 10 billion to around 25-35 billion. This would logically include a heavy focus on the air force and the rebuilding of its structure plus aquiring new jets of different types. If Iran wants to build its own jets then we're talking about around 20 years or 10 years of a strong concerted national effort to produce an effective 4+ generation fighter, multirole, or interceptor. 

Of course Iran will have to invest a lot of money to get any of these such ideas off the ground. Simple as that.


----------



## Dinky

can someone explain why there is a zero chance on Iran getting russian jets like Su-30?


----------



## mohsen

Dinky said:


> can someone explain why there is a zero chance on Iran getting russian jets like Su-30?


Because under this shitty deal, arms sanctions will remain for another 4 years, and with zero doubt U.S will scrap the deal before that due date.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Russia isn't an ally to Iran. More like that one friend that helps you sometimes.



they are not friend , they just don't want to confront USA alone and use Iran as their useless pawn against west ...



Dinky said:


> can someone explain why there is a zero chance on Iran getting russian jets like Su-30?



because we have never good relationship with them in past 250 years ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

hello dear mate @VEVAK
Where is your source about 6 generation fighters ????

also very interesting news I found
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...lateral-ties-with-us/articleshow/60129840.cms

part of news
WASHINGTON: The US decision to sell 22 Sea Guardian drones to India at an estimated cost of USD 2 billion​
that mean each drone cost: 2 billion $/ 22 = 90.9 million $
while each SU 30 cost around 40 million $


also this part is interesting
This summer, India received 10 advanced Heron drones from Israel for USD 400 million, making Israel a weapons supplier competitor to the United States.​unlike you guys I am not fan of huge investing on big manned fighter and that is b/c of future of wars


----------



## Dinky

mohsen said:


> Because under this shitty deal, arms sanctions will remain for another 4 years, and with zero doubt U.S will scrap the deal before that due date.


Wow I thought the deal was just about Iran lowering its enrichment in return of lifting sanctions, I didnt know it also included restrictions on its military, didnt Zarif say it will only be about the nuclear issue and nothing else. 

Also then what the hell can Iran do, if Qaher will take a decade like some of you guys say in this thread and you cant buy Jets from Russia because they arent your friends and the shitty nuclear deal blocks it, then what option is left?


----------



## sobhan

Dinky said:


> Wow I thought the deal was just about Iran lowering its enrichment in return of lifting sanctions, I didnt know it also included restrictions on its military, didnt Zarif say it will only be about the nuclear issue and nothing else.
> 
> Also then what the hell can Iran do, if Qaher will take a decade like some of you guys say in this thread and you cant buy Jets from Russia because they arent your friends and the shitty nuclear deal blocks it, then what option is left?


No bro i am disagree with some of these ideas ..... whether Iran and Russia are friends or not they are in a wanted or unwanted alliance .... just look at Karrar mbt tank all of us know that we receive technologies of T90ms from Russians and they receive our Shahed and drone's technologies from us to make Orion and etc .... bro i think we have chance of receive Su30 from Russia but we should make basic factories and facilities of producing fighters and bombers in Iran then receive these aircraft's technologies to co produce with Russia .... even we are starting titanium producing in these months


----------



## mohsen

Dinky said:


> Wow I thought the deal was just about Iran lowering its enrichment in return of lifting sanctions, I didnt know it also included restrictions on its military, didnt Zarif say it will only be about the nuclear issue and nothing else.


1.Zarif is a known liar.
2.He traded to keep the arms sanctions and in return lift the sanctions for commercial planes.




Dinky said:


> Also then what the hell can Iran do, if Qaher will take a decade like some of you guys say in this thread and you cant buy Jets from Russia because they arent your friends and the shitty nuclear deal blocks it, then what option is left?


due to the costs and superiority of U.S in the air, airforce isn't part of Iran's defensive doctrine.

we keep upgrading our current fighters till we reach the capability to replace them by our own domestic fighters, but again for a limited use within our defensive doctrine.


----------



## samparis75

Lol, didn't know that we had some political experts right there...Some of you really don't understand the stakes of this deal.This deal will remain, and mark my words: Iran will buy some fighters, whether it is today or in 2019 or in 2021..Technocrats of this government know that they need a good AF to be enough dissuasive, even though they already have plenty missiles and good GF..You can't sign an arms deal in just two years, especially with Iran that has been under sanctions for decades (don't forget that Iran will probably want to get the technology for these fighters and some help for the F-313) , it will take time but Iran's (positive) hour will come soon, don't forget that some people said that IranAir would never get the new airplanes, and how is it going on right now? Quite good, same thing for Peugeot, or Renault, Iran is getting more and more connected to the international economy, it's taking some time, more than some other countries, but it is going on

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

samparis75 said:


> Lol, didn't know that we had some political experts right there...Some of you really don't understand the stakes of this deal.This deal will remain, and mark my words: Iran will buy some fighters, whether it is today or in 2019 or in 2021..Technocrats of this government know that they need a good AF to be enough dissuasive, even though they already have plenty missiles and good GF..You can't sign an arms deal in just two years, especially with Iran that has been under sanctions for decades (don't forget that Iran will probably want to get the technology for these fighters and some help for the F-313) , it will take time but Iran's (positive) hour will come soon, don't forget that some people said that IranAir would never get the new airplanes, and how is it going on right now? Quite good, same thing for Peugeot, or Renault, Iran is getting more and more connected to the international economy, it's taking some time, more than some other countries, but it is going on



We also need to improve our productivity, our gdp per capita is to low because our country is unemployed and runs on oil.


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cthulhu

Draco.IMF said:


> iran does produce titanium:
> 
> http://www.iran-daily.com/News/168841.html





sobhan said:


> even we are starting titanium producing in these months


I guess you guys don't realize that titanium isn't the main problem here, Superalloys are.


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK



VEVAK said:


> Did you watch the Video I posted? The J-90 is not the Tolue-4 but it is based on it!



If you believe a unscaled CGI or an unknown engine (clearly larger than Tolue-4) tells you anything, you have grave issues with you methodic. If you think two Tolue-4 based mini jet engines could power a trainer of that size, you have grave flaws in your basic physical understanding.

I won't argue with you about that.



VEVAK said:


> The notion that ANY Air Force in their right mind would choose 100 Q-313 over 24 Su-30's is beyond absurd!





VEVAK said:


> And to spend all that money on the facilities to build an Aircraft where 10 of them can't even take on a single Iranian F-14 let alone F-15, Su-30,....



I wont argue about that too. If you think 10 F-313 as I described it, could not take on a F-14A. Good. If you think a symmetric approach in airpower will lead Iran anywhere in the current threat situation. Good too.

@drmeson



drmeson said:


> Allow me to inform you that you are argument is wrong. India has a tested IRBM-ICBM and their space program is way ahead of Iran.



They don't have conventional arsenal. Thats what I said. Only a very small number for their nukes.



drmeson said:


> Pakistan has solid fueled MIRV-MRBMs along with deployed long ranged LACM, SLCM.



Same as above in a much restricted manner.



drmeson said:


> Why are you assuming that all these countries like Israel, India, KSA, Pakistan, Turkey etc are run by stupid defense strategists that they have strong nuclear tipped missile programs yet they keep developing their AF's as well.



They are not stupid. They neither have the political will, and some no technology.
KSA purchased a small number from China, the only such case in history. If they would have purchased higher numbers the west would be very unpleased.

Just look at the history of South Korean BM's and teach yourself.

Iran is smart and has the political will. It makes better decisions than those countries because it has a force that is very flexible, unconventional, let say revolutionary that don't stick to rules and traditions in warfare, the IRGC.



drmeson said:


> Your whole argument of Russia/USA not wanting anyone to have a missile force is dusted by the fact that Russia has sold more weaponry to China and India than anyone yet India and China both have missile forces (Chinese one is on another level).



Yes China is among the nations with a conventional BM arsenal. As veto superpower it has no problems to do so.
So ask yourself: China is a proven "non-stupid" country in warfare, so why don't the Indians with their space program have a arsenal like the Chinese with both their huge airforce.



drmeson said:


> Israel bought the whole Apartheid RSA program in 80s to cover for its missile program, yet they kept receiving weaponry from USA, Pakistan gets western weaponry despite a nuclear triad armed military with an arsenal of BM/CM.



Look. Nuclear powers are allowed to have BMs/CMs for their nukes. But conventional arsenals like Iranians and Chinese, as the main warfare tool are not welcome by the big powers in the same way nukes are not welcome.



drmeson said:


> And kindly do tell which country has reduced payloads and ranges because of US/Russian pressure ?.



The huge technology democracy South Korea as said?



drmeson said:


> 6 x Zolfaghar strikes with a CEP of 30-50 m hardly delivered around 4.2-4.5 tons of conventional warhead over an area of 50 m. A single sortie by 5 x MRCA's (4+ generation) can deliver ... guess what ... 25+ tons of same warhead with CEP of 5 m. And also at variety of targets. Again I repeat, same platforms can serve as air guards that's why they are called MRCA.



Typical argumentation... Your 5 MRCAs 4+ will get their assess served to them if they try to fly bomb loaded into a capable IADS with fighters keeping air superiority over the target area.
Not even 5. gen MRCAs can strike a high priority target at will with chance of survival.
All this nonesense floating around in the minds... 5 tons ordnance for a penetration attack??? Never, maybe with a defenseless Su-34 if the target is close enough. Be lucky with 4 x 500kg for 2tons PGMs.

Even with some of those MRCAs as escort they could only stand a chance against less protected targets.

Irans BM force will neutralize ANY target within 2000km around the country it wants.



drmeson said:


> You are again assuming that Iran's only enemy is USA so either we prepare against USA or we just do not against anyone else.



Anything enough for America, will be enough for the rest by magnitudes, except for Russia and China.



drmeson said:


> Today they do not have BM/CM's, what if they start procuring them from China, what if cash loving Pakistan starts selling them BM/CMs or even set up a TOT factory inside KSA ... you have this imagination that your enemies are some idiot orcs who can not think.



Aha, so in the same way any country can easily become a nuclear power too? Yes I equate a conventional missile arsenal like Irans and Chinas to as dangerous as nukes. In some sense they are better because you would fight conventionally and force the enemy to go unconventional if available.



drmeson said:


> This cold war era mentality of Russians and USA controlling the world etc is sickening, no one is no ones proxy or poodle anymore.



I didn't say that. Russians and Americans have a deal between themselves on BMs/CMs, its mainly the west that enforces the limitation of BMs/CMs for the world, by all the polito-economical power they have. Russians are happy about that too and Chinese too (with their sells/support to Saudis and Pakistan).



drmeson said:


> fire BM's towards their bases and they will start doing the same to our infrastructure, against which by the way we have no defense as of yet



Be sure that none wants a counter-value attack by Shahab-3 on infrastructure.



drmeson said:


> IRIN is spending millions and millions of dollars on making new corvettes and frigates. In future there will be some 10-12 such vessels in PG ... with no air cover. In case of war these vessels will be taken out easily. Are we ready to send our thousands of sailors to such slaughter. IRIN itself needs at least 4 squadrons to provide air-cover and also launch strikes on enemy vessels. We do not want to repeat another praying mentis.



You completely ignore ground/sea based air defense. No need for fighters in the IRIN.
The fruit of the IRIN will someday be hopefully its submarine force with missiles as their main weapons.


----------



## Navigator

Dinky said:


> Wow I thought the deal was just about Iran lowering its enrichment in return of lifting sanctions, I didnt know it also included restrictions on its military, didnt Zarif say it will only be about the nuclear issue and nothing else.



As i remember, Zarif's agreement during the talks to preserve weapons sanctions for five years even surprised Russia and China, that supported the initial position of Iran - to remove all international sanctions immediately.


----------



## VEVAK

SubWater said:


> hello dear mate @VEVAK
> Where is your source about 6 generation fighters ????
> 
> also very interesting news I found
> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...lateral-ties-with-us/articleshow/60129840.cms
> 
> part of news
> WASHINGTON: The US decision to sell 22 Sea Guardian drones to India at an estimated cost of USD 2 billion​
> that mean each drone cost: 2 billion $/ 22 = 90.9 million $
> while each SU 30 cost around 40 million $
> 
> 
> also this part is interesting
> This summer, India received 10 advanced Heron drones from Israel for USD 400 million, making Israel a weapons supplier competitor to the United States.​unlike you guys I am not fan of huge investing on big manned fighter and that is b/c of future of wars



When you see a country like India buying 10-20 overpriced drones it's mostly to gain access to the advanced optics, electronics, SATCOM,.... of those drones to reverse engineer!
India is not looking at those as a replacement for fighters!

As for future of wars this is where we are at today!

For Air to Air operation your looking at a fleet of 4 F-22's Backed by 2 B-1's equipped with BVR weapons Sensor fused with the F-22's taking on a fleet of at least *48* upgraded 4th Generation fighters in BVR
So 24-48 F-22's flying at high altitude backed by 10-20 B-1's can take out the Air Force of most countries on the planet!

And what's coming in the next decade is a larger low RCS B-1 size variant with super cruise Equipped with laser to back them up with laser countermeasures that can destroy incoming SAM's & Air to Air missiles to create a ~500meter shield around the squadron

And what your looking at 20-30 years from now with the proliferation of 5th gen fighters are 6th generation fighters with directed energy weapons either laser or something else to be used as a countermeasures either added on to some to work as a shield around a squadron or added on to all 
All 6th Generation fighters will likely be twin seat with the rear pilot controlling 1 or more semi autonomous high speed UCAV's that will extend the sensor range of the fleet without putting anyone at risk

Ground or SATCOM operated UCAV may be an option against less advanced countries but they are NOT an option for any country with advanced space technology!

Future fighters may become easier to fly by adding AI systems not a real AI but more automation where the takeoff and landing gets "fully" automated, low altitude flights are done by computers, your navigation is more computer assisted, Air Refueling is done by a computer, hard maneuvers and countermeasure deployed to counter incoming missiles gets computer assisted,..... some of these techs already exist but the point is to find ways to make piloting easer & safer while making pilot training easier but the idea that manned fighters will be totally replaced by UCAV's in the next 50-60 years is just not going to happen!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sobhan

Cthulhu said:


> I guess you guys don't realize that titanium isn't the main problem here, Superalloys are.


bro i didnt mean that titanium is the main problem i meant that we start to make basic things to make a home made aircraft just now we should wait to make bases of this industry we cannot keep calm and do nothing and just seek to buy Russian su30 or etc even for co producing we should make bases at first then use their technologies in our aircraft



samparis75 said:


> Lol, didn't know that we had some political experts right there...Some of you really don't understand the stakes of this deal.This deal will remain, and mark my words: Iran will buy some fighters, whether it is today or in 2019 or in 2021..Technocrats of this government know that they need a good AF to be enough dissuasive, even though they already have plenty missiles and good GF..You can't sign an arms deal in just two years, especially with Iran that has been under sanctions for decades (don't forget that Iran will probably want to get the technology for these fighters and some help for the F-313) , it will take time but Iran's (positive) hour will come soon, don't forget that some people said that IranAir would never get the new airplanes, and how is it going on right now? Quite good, same thing for Peugeot, or Renault, Iran is getting more and more connected to the international economy, it's taking some time, more than some other countries, but it is going on


i am agree bro we should wait ... i can time will show all of reals .... i even think Iran has a chance to buy European fighters like Eurofighter and mirage and etc from European union

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

samparis75 said:


> Lol, didn't know that we had some political experts right there...Some of you really don't understand the stakes of this deal.This deal will remain, and mark my words: Iran will buy some fighters, whether it is today or in 2019 or in 2021..Technocrats of this government know that they need a good AF to be enough dissuasive, even though they already have plenty missiles and good GF..You can't sign an arms deal in just two years, especially with Iran that has been under sanctions for decades (don't forget that Iran will probably want to get the technology for these fighters and some help for the F-313) , it will take time but Iran's (positive) hour will come soon, don't forget that some people said that IranAir would never get the new airplanes, and how is it going on right now? Quite good, same thing for Peugeot, or Renault, Iran is getting more and more connected to the international economy, it's taking some time, more than some other countries, but it is going on


about IranAir, all of our politicians claims turned out to be *sheer lie*. so far has been no financier, all of the 7 planes (3 Airbus and 4 ART) *were bought in cash* and illegally using *our nation reserves* (before the elections) to fool some political experts like yourself, lol, experts who think turning the country to a junk assembler is quit good.


----------



## samparis75

mohsen said:


> about IranAir, all of our politicians claims turned out to be *sheer lie*. so far has been no financier, all of the 7 planes (3 Airbus and 4 ART) *were bought in cash* and illegally using *our nation reserves* (before the elections) to fool some political experts like yourself, lol, experts who think turning the country to a junk assembler is quit good.


where did you get that news plz?  and even if it's true, we can easily talk about the loans from some other countries (Russia,SK, some from Europe), and these loans and all these financial arrangements take a lot of time. Quite funny that you think that Iran would be the only country like that, same thing for all the emerging countries lol and also present in the western world but in a more hidden way (live there and know what i'm talking about)..junk assembler? what emerging country in the world is not assembling stuff from other countries? it takes a lot of time, please be patient, let's see Iran in 2025...


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Forget about shooting the archer if he intends to use 300km+ range stand-off weapons. They will do it and escape if necessary.



But that's the great thing about a proper air force with LRAAMs. Aircraft, unlike surface based air defence, can operate further away from the areas they are defending, therefore increasing the effective range. You might have an S-300 with 200 km range, but if the enemy has a 300 km+ missile, you cannot shoot the archer. Something like an F-14 with a Phoenix can go to the edge of the S-300 range, and take down an archer 400 km away from the defended area. And that's with 1970s technology. A modern aircraft with modern LRAAMs (which ramjets are increasing the range and energy while reducing size and weight) can reach much further than that. 

If you think of aircraft as part of a multilayered air defence network, you will come to appreciate their effectiveness much more.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe a unscaled CGI or an unknown engine (clearly larger than Tolue-4) tells you anything, you have grave issues with you methodic. If you think two Tolue-4 based mini jet engines could power a trainer of that size, you have grave flaws in your basic physical understanding.
> 
> I won't argue with you about that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wont argue about that too. If you think 10 F-313 as I described it, could not take on a F-14A. Good. If you think a symmetric approach in airpower will lead Iran anywhere in the current threat situation. Good too.
> 
> @drmeson
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar has a Max Takeoff weight of 6180kg or 13558lb so the Idea that it is powered by two Iranian 5000lbf turbofan engines is only in your head!


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> You might have an S-300 with 200 km range, but if the enemy has a 300 km+ missile, you cannot shoot the archer.



Shooting the archer is good but high capability enemies can just use CMs with ranges of a JASSM-ER and there, not even a Mig-31 interceptor can do much. This is the deadly access denial nature of CMs.
You can try to send a Mig-31BM or F-14D to intercept the archer, but considering your chances to catch it in time and fend-off their escorting fighters is low. Do you have early warning capabilities against a 3000 feet AGL flying archer?

CMs will always try to circumvent S2A threats and saturate where necessary. You might be able to shoot an archer with high speed specialized interceptors with a good OTH early warning capability against Black Shahin class CM equipped enemy. Without hypersonic fighters and missiles, it's a lost game to intercept an archer with JASSM-ER class CM. Loitering drones with BVR AAMs could be a tool, I don't know, a near impossible task. A calculation on speeds + ranges --> timings will determine whats possible and what not.



AmirPatriot said:


> Something like an F-14 with a Phoenix can go to the edge of the S-300 range, and take down an archer 400 km away from the defended area. And that's with 1970s technology.



An archer just needs to fly at 3000 feet AGL and a S-300 will be only able to target it at maybe 80km. So its not a protection out to 200km, but can be if the archer for some reason needs to fly at 30k feet AGL.

Nor can an AIM-54A intercept a fighter at 200km, maybe one closing at mach 2. But yes I'm for long range BVR missiles on any future Iranian fighter.



AmirPatriot said:


> A modern aircraft with modern LRAAMs (which ramjets are increasing the range and energy while reducing size and weight) can reach much further than that.



As said I want many F-313 close the possible threat zones and just equipped with two Fakkur-90 variants. High low-altitude speed, high endurance, highway operation and low price. I want the missile to do the main job and the carrier to be far away from a direct encounter.



AmirPatriot said:


> If you think of aircraft as part of a multilayered air defence network, you will come to appreciate their effectiveness much more.



I'm not a friend to compete in a field where the enemy has overwhelming superiority. This approach has seldom good results.
Hence manned Iranian airpower must be very asymmetric to be effective. Hence I hope the F-313 is the asymmetric asset speculate it to be. Its geo-flexibility is the best trait.

@VEVAK 



> Kowsar has a Max Takeoff weight of 6180kg or 13558lb so the Idea that it is powered by two Iranian 5000lbf turbofan engines is only in your head!





So you seriously want to power the Kowsar with 2 x 3,5kn mini jets?

For comparison the Yak-130 trainer has a take-off weight of ~7t (Kowsar ~6t) and is powered by 2 x 24kn engine.

Does these numbers make any sense? The Kowsar should use ~7 times less thrust because its 0,15 x lighter than the Yak-130? 
Even the midget 4t Indian HJT-36 has more than 17kn....
Incredible...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

PeeD said:


> Shooting the archer is good but high capability enemies can just use CMs with ranges of a JASSM-ER and there, not even a Mig-31 interceptor can do much. This is the deadly access denial nature of CMs.
> You can try to send a Mig-31BM or F-14D to intercept the archer, but considering your chances to catch it in time and fend-off their escorting fighters is low. Do you have early warning capabilities against a 3000 feet AGL flying archer?
> 
> CMs will always try to circumvent S2A threats and saturate where necessary. You might be able to shoot an archer with high speed specialized interceptors with a good OTH early warning capability against Black Shahin class CM equipped enemy. Without hypersonic fighters and missiles, it's a lost game to intercept an archer with JASSM-ER class CM. Loitering drones with BVR AAMs could be a tool, I don't know, a near impossible task. A calculation on speeds + ranges --> timings will determine whats possible and what not.
> 
> 
> 
> An archer just needs to fly at 3000 feet AGL and a S-300 will be only able to target it at maybe 80km. So its not a protection out to 200km, but can be if the archer for some reason needs to fly at 30k feet AGL.
> 
> Nor can an AIM-54A intercept a fighter at 200km, maybe one closing at mach 2. But yes I'm for long range BVR missiles on any future Iranian fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> As said I want many F-313 close the possible threat zones and just equipped with two Fakkur-90 variants. High low-altitude speed, high endurance, highway operation and low price. I want the missile to do the main job and the carrier to be far away from a direct encounter.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not a friend to compete in a field where the enemy has overwhelming superiority. This approach has seldom good results.
> Hence manned Iranian airpower must be very asymmetric to be effective. Hence I hope the F-313 is the asymmetric asset speculate it to be. Its geo-flexibility is the best trait.
> 
> @VEVAK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you seriously want to power the Kowsar with 2 x 3,5kn mini jets?
> 
> For comparison the Yak-130 trainer has a take-off weight of ~7t (Kowsar ~6t) and is powered by 2 x 24kn engine.
> 
> Does these numbers make any sense? The Kowsar should use ~7 times less thrust because its 0,15 x lighter than the Yak-130?
> Even the midget 4t Indian HJT-36 has more than 17kn....
> Incredible...


F-313 can carry 2 two Fakkur-90 or you just assume it?


----------



## Muhammed45

Avicenna said:


> Why not try the Chinese? J-10B or C?
> 
> The most important thing, regardless of any deal, would have to be ToT and production in Iran.


J-10 series is good at huge numbers.
Due to it's properties , we need more than 350 fighters for complete support for our airspace.
J-10 will require almost 70-80 of an other class of interceptor for compensation.
But due to the budget problems, we are waiting on SU-30's SM variant. It is the only fighter that currently could fulfill our need to a long range Bomber-AirsuperiorityFighter-Interceptor.

If China agrees with FC-31 expo version, undoubtedly we will go for it otherwise i would say No thanks to Chinese companies. However i am sure that Chinese products are good in world class fighters.

We are hardly working on heavy engines, 5th gen properties, drones and 3rd gen fighters. A big lack in 4th gen fighters which only FC-31 and SU-30SM can fulfill. We will catch the tech edge in aviation industries, but in time pass and the only Chinese option for us remains FC31.


----------



## Navigator

BTW J-10 still produced with Russian engines and therefore contract in any case, will require some agreements with Russian side for export of engines and future supplies of spare parts and new engines.
As for FC-31, while it's only prototypes that is developed on own funds of AVIC, that obviously slows down the process. And prototypes also flying with Russian engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

raptor22 said:


> F-313 can carry 2 two Fakkur-90 or you just assume it?



No. We know so little about the F-313 that almost everything is uncertain. I created an asymmetric operation regime that *could *be applied by it from what is known (outlined in the Daher thread).

I hope that's whats the plan, as anything less would be useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> As said I want many F-313 close the possible threat zones and just equipped with two Fakkur-90 variants. High low-altitude speed, high endurance, highway operation and low price. I want the missile to do the main job and the carrier to be far away from a direct encounter.



There are a couple of problems with this concept:

1. The operating regime. Low altitude, subsonic speed SEVERELY inhibit the effectiveness of the Fakour-90. Range, energy, everything is worse, by a significant margin. So much so that effective range would be rather short, definitely less than 100 km. Whereas for the enemy effective range would be closer to the maximum range. So, if they have an AMRAAM D with 160 km range, and you have a Fakour-90 with 300 km range (being generous), you are toast. Because your opponent is launching from what, 30k, 40k feet above you, maybe even at supersonic speed, whereas you are launching at what, 3k? 5k AGL? They just have so, so much more energy than you. The AMRAAM will end up having a longer EFFECTIVE range than the Fakour-90 with this operating regime.

2. The aircraft and it's payload. Remember the Fakour-90 is based on the AIM-54 which weighs 1000 lb, is longer than a Mk-84 bomb, and TWICE as wide (because of the "wingspan"). Now even if you implement folding wings bringing the diameter down to about 400 mm (the Mk-84 is about 450 mm), *there is no way *you can fit 2 of these missiles inside the small, cheap aircraft you envisage. The aircraft would have to be similar in size to an F-35. At which point it's not really cheap anymore.

Low altitude flying for combat aircraft is almost exclusively for penetration aircraft like the Su-24, F-111 etc. Not fighter aircraft. Speed is life, and altitude is life insurance. It was like that in WW2 and it's still like that today.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> 1. The operating regime. Low altitude, subsonic speed SEVERELY inhibit the effectiveness of the Fakour-90. Range, energy, everything is worse, by a significant margin. So much so that effective range would be rather short, definitely less than 100 km.



Right and that's why the F-313 would gain altitude for a shot in a short pop-up maneuver. Speed would still be subsonic but altitude would make up for that in kinematics.



AmirPatriot said:


> Whereas for the enemy effective range would be closer to the maximum range. So, if they have an AMRAAM D with 160 km range, and you have a Fakour-90 with 300 km range (being generous), you are toast.



Dream values. AMRAAM will never do 160km, they should be thankful if 50km is achieved in operational conditions.
300km for AIM-54 is impossible too.



AmirPatriot said:


> Because your opponent is launching from what, 30k, 40k feet above you, maybe even at supersonic speed, whereas you are launching at what, 3k? 5k AGL? They just have so, so much more energy than you.



I said already about the pop-up. About the speed: F-16 will maybe do mach 1,3 in good conditions, a difference of mach 0,4 if the F-313 is at mach 0,9.
The F-15 might do mach 1,6 at the shot, a delta of mach 0,7.
All others are around the same. The kinematic advantage of a larger missile will easily make up for a speed difference of mach 0,4 - 0,7.



AmirPatriot said:


> Remember the Fakour-90 is based on the AIM-54 which weighs 1000 lb, is longer than a Mk-84 bomb, and TWICE as wide (because of the "wingspan"). Now even if you implement folding wings bringing the diameter down to about 400 mm (the Mk-84 is about 450 mm),



Of course a internal bay variant of the F-90 would need to be developed.



AmirPatriot said:


> *there is no way *you can fit 2 of these missiles inside the small, cheap aircraft you envisage.



... I guarantee you that there would be enough space for two 450mm dia. weapons in the bays, if its designend for that. Size is enough, fuel is enough, landing gear accordingly designed and price is not the issue.



AmirPatriot said:


> Low altitude flying for combat aircraft is almost exclusively for penetration aircraft like the Su-24, F-111 etc. Not fighter aircraft. Speed is life, and altitude is life insurance. It was like that in WW2 and it's still like that today.



Interdictors fly low with terrain masking to evade the enemy and the IADS, the F-313 does the same. Speed is done by the missile, altitude by pop-up.
We are just entering real BVR age, throw away those dogfight rules, the F-313 must not enter dogfights or even air combat maneuvering. Its just now that technology is far enough to have guided BVR weapons with sufficiently high PK and low cost. Let the missile do the job, its not the 60's where atolls and sidewinders performed so low and forced to move back to dogfights and guns...

The only grave impact would be on situational awareness --> for which the IADS is available. And, if you would use small size AAMs like the AMRAAM for a subsonic carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Right and that's why the F-313 would gain altitude for a shot in a short pop-up maneuver. Speed would still be subsonic but altitude would make up for that in kinematics.



A pop up manoeuvre which would light up on a radar screen. And which wouldn't be particularly quick, because you envisage the F-313 as a subsonic aircraft without even an afterburner. The popup cannot be quick otherwise you would stall.

And besides, how high is this popup? Maybe to 10k AGL? 15k at a push? That's still 2 or 3 times lower than your opponent, who is going much faster than you because they haven't had to do a popup manoeuvre.



PeeD said:


> Dream values. AMRAAM will never do 160km, they should be thankful if 50km is achieved in operational conditions.
> 300km for AIM-54 is impossible too.



160 km is the rmax (maximum range), just like the rmax of 190 km for the AIM-54. I didn't say either was the effective range.

50 km is *extremely *optimistic. I think 50 km would probably be within the AIM-120D's NEZ.

You are underestimating what a 35k altitude advantage (enemy aircraft at 45k AGL) means. Firstly, at that altitude air density is 0.24 kg/m^3, whereas at 10k AGL it is more like 0.9 kg/m^3. That's nearly 4 times more drag being exerted on the AIM-54.

But most importantly there is a _massive _kinematic advantage for the opponent at 45k AGL. How you expect an AIM-54 like missile climb 90k feet from 10k AGL up to 100k AGL (which is how the AIM-54 works, going to high altitude and then diving down), and have a longer range than the AIM-120D which has a massive headstart, I don't know, but you need to give some proof. Facts and figures please.



PeeD said:


> Of course a internal bay variant of the F-90 would need to be developed.





PeeD said:


> I guarantee you that there would be enough space for two 450mm dia. weapons in the bays, if its designend for that. Size is enough, fuel is enough, landing gear accordingly designed and price is not the issue.



The AIM-54's missile body diameter is 380 mm. Its still going to be too big for such a small aircraft.

And remember to guide these LRAAMs you need a big enough radar. More weight, more size, more thrust, the more this operating regime becomes unfeasible.

Reactions: Like Like:
 2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> A pop up manoeuvre which would light up on a radar screen.



Airpower has no VHF-band radars, at best UHF-band AEW. So how do you want to detect a GCI directed F-313 at ranges that would occur? LO/VLO is a main design aspect of the F-313 and a main enabler.



AmirPatriot said:


> The popup cannot be quick otherwise you would stall.



It would reach 12km in less then 3 minutes at 65m/s rate of climb (Prowler).



AmirPatriot said:


> And besides, how high is this popup? Maybe to 10k AGL? 15k at a push? That's still 2 or 3 times lower than your opponent, who is going much faster than you because they haven't had to do a popup manoeuvre.



About 40k feet AGL for the pop-up. The speed of the opponent would be of low relevance because the F-313 would work as a ambush tool guided by the IADS --> Pop-up at the right/safe position determined by the IADS --> acquire the already via IADS detected target --> shot its two 100km class AAMs --> dive down to low level --> make a quick re-acquisition for mid course update when necessary or just via IADS data and omni-directional data link.

The concept is to be at safe distance from the high speed enemy and quick enough gone to evade a possible counter attack.



AmirPatriot said:


> 50 km is *extremely *optimistic. I think 50 km would probably be within the AIM-120D's NEZ.



Yes



AmirPatriot said:


> You are underestimating what a 35k altitude advantage (enemy aircraft at 45k AGL) means. Firstly, at that altitude air density is 0.24 kg/m^3, whereas at 10k AGL it is more like 0.9 kg/m^3. That's nearly 4 times more drag being exerted on the AIM-54.



I'm aware of this and the pop-up maneuver is a integral element of my F-313 operation concept.



AmirPatriot said:


> But most importantly there is a _massive _kinematic advantage for the opponent at 45k AGL. How you expect an AIM-54 like missile climb 90k feet from 10k AGL up to 100k AGL (which is how the AIM-54 works, going to high altitude and then diving down), and have a longer range than the AIM-120D which has a massive headstart, I don't know, but you need to give some proof. Facts and figures please.



The AIM-54 or a more advanced F-90 has a massively stronger booster. At 12km AGL pop-up, only a AMRAAM launched from space could have a longer range. The concept is to make up the kinematic disadvantage of the carrier F-313 with a much more advanced missile. Fortunately, Iran is strong on missiles to do that. By carrier I mean carrier, going for a air superiority fighter will go nowhere.



AmirPatriot said:


> The AIM-54's missile body diameter is 380 mm. Its still going to be too big for such a small aircraft.



Who says this? Because US stealth fighters are not designed for it? The whole layout of the F-313 is for massive fuel reserves and a weaponbay-fightersize ratio bigger than any other fighter out there.
I recommend you to open your mind. Asymmetric approach doesn't stick to rules like F-313<F-35=F-313_wbay<F-35_wbay. Its all requirements and design.



AmirPatriot said:


> And remember to guide these LRAAMs you need a big enough radar. More weight, more size, more thrust, the more this operating regime becomes unfeasible.



The same as above: Things have changes. You could use IADS target coordinates for the ARH-AAM shot or new generation AESAs that with high gain to scan a small portion of airspace with higher power where something was detected by the IADS. The key enabler is the IADS, its data-link capability, anti-stealth capability and sensor fusion. Only this enables something relatively low performing like the F-313 to accomplish its mission in friendly airspace. My concept would make the F-313 the emergency firefighter asset to soften the spearhead of the enemy airpower concentrated/directed at a less defended or saturated IADS sector. It's a tool of the IADS, not a fighter of western airpower doctrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Airpower has no VHF-band radars, at best UHF-band AEW. So how do you want to detect a GCI directed F-313 at ranges that would occur? LO/VLO is a main design aspect of the F-313 and a main enabler.



The thing is, you are making your model extremely optimistic.

An aircraft that needs 2 engines (I'll get to those later), a LOT of avionics and electronics (since you want to make it highly automated), sensor fusion with robust enough communication equipment that it won't be jammed otherwise the aircraft will be basically blind (unless you want that AESA), a ton of fuel, and needs to be big enough to carry 2 _huge _AIM-54 class missiles *internally, *have a long range, be able to land on small runways and even roads. _*And *_it needs to be VLO?

All of this. For $8 million.

I'm sorry bro, but it is just not happening. At all.

Look how big an AIM-54 is. It is a 4 metre long monster. The F-14 was designed to carry this missile externally. And we know how big the F-14 is.







You also compare the climb rate of your F-313 with a Prowler, which has 2 J52 engines producing 10,400 lb thrust each. But you also say your F-313 would be powered by 2 Al-222 class engines, bearing in mind the Al-222 produces about 5,500 lb thrust dry (and you said your F-313 is non-afterburning).

This is what I think your concept would look like if put into an F-313 shaped airframe.






A bad sketch, I know, but whatever. I based it on the actual F-313, and the size of the F-35 relative to the full aircraft.






What I'm trying to say is that this "cheap", "small", "light" aircraft would actually be around the same size as an F-35. Unless the body is made of plywood it cannot fly with just those 2 low powered engines.

We could save ourselves a lot of risk and add a lot of capability if we went for a proper air force.



PeeD said:


> Airpower has no VHF-band radars, at best UHF-band AEW. So how do you want to detect a GCI directed F-313 at ranges that would occur? LO/VLO is a main design aspect of the F-313 and a main enabler.



Airpower doesn't need VHF when you are making an $8 million LO aircraft. Even if your $8 million aircraft is designed just to fly and do nothing else (assuming it is the same size as the aircraft you describe), it would not be enough money to incorporate sufficient LO features. It would, at best, be as LO as an F/A-18E/F, which is very, very detectable with modern AESA radars. Probably a bigger RCS though, with those top mounted intakes.

But an actual combat aircraft?

That just doesn't add up. Nothing in this hypothetical aircraft add up.

That little thrust, the massive amount of fuel that you say (where will it all fit I wonder), a climb to not quite 40k feet AGL with all that fuel and weapons on board.

I'm not sure it would even fly with 2 Al-222s, and if it did, it would take quite a bit longer than 3 minutes to get up to launch altitude.



PeeD said:


> It would reach 12km in less then 3 minutes at 65m/s rate of climb (Prowler).





PeeD said:


> About 40k feet AGL for the pop-up. The speed of the opponent would be of low relevance because the F-313 would work as a ambush tool guided by the IADS --> Pop-up at the right/safe position determined by the IADS --> acquire the already via IADS detected target --> shot its two 100km class AAMs --> dive down to low level --> make a quick re-acquisition for mid course update when necessary or just via IADS data and omni-directional data link.
> 
> The concept is to be at safe distance from the high speed enemy and quick enough gone to evade a possible counter attack.



The Prowler has twice the thrust that this does. And that cannot even reach 40k feet AGL. It's like trying to take a Paykan up Damavand at 70 km/h... just not going to happen.



PeeD said:


> Who says this? Because US stealth fighters are not designed for it? The whole layout of the F-313 is for massive fuel reserves and a weaponbay-fightersize ratio bigger than any other fighter out there.
> I recommend you to open your mind. Asymmetric approach doesn't stick to rules like F-313<F-35=F-313_wbay<F-35_wbay. Its all requirements and design.



Scale says this. You want to make a small aircraft that fits these gigantic missiles *internally*. It doesn't work geometrically. The F-14 was only able to carry 2 behind each other under its belly because the F-14 was _equally _gigantic and therefore had the engines mounted on the side of the fuselage, not inside it as in small stealth aircraft like the F-35, J-31 and F-313.

By limiting a 16 metre long aircraft to such a strange operating regime all you are doing is building a house and only living in one of the rooms.

By the way, exactly how light on logistics are 600 aircraft and their assorted crew, weapons and fuel, all being landed on dozens of small airfields and roads? Road landings are designed to be a last resort, in order to be able to land aircraft in case there is no other location available within its range. Roads are roads, not airbases.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

I know about western airpower and its high capabilities that I don't even come to the idea to fight it symmetrically.
This is why my model for operation is restricted, you restrict something if there is no other solution... You become an allrounder if you have excess capabilities.

Then you make comparisons that are wrong: e.g you compare a full length afterburning high-power turbofan in a F-35 fuselage, with two low power short length non-afterburing turbofans in F-313 fuselage. Your conclusion and the picture then is that there is not sufficient space for a large weapon bay.
No. One huge benefit of two smaller engines is the shorter length in fuselage. The other huge benefit for non-afterburning engines is again the shorter length.
The F-313 has all those benefits which the F-35 does not.

Your illustration shows this quite well. The placement of ducts and intake is another clear indicator that a large weaponbay is the design goal. The F-313 is just 12-13m long and could accomplish to house two 4m long missiles in its bays. Just because this or something similar was the design goal and the layout from engines, landing gear, intakes to ducts is done for that purpose.



AmirPatriot said:


> a LOT of avionics and electronics (since you want to make it highly automated), sensor fusion with robust enough communication equipment that it won't be jammed otherwise the aircraft will be basically blind (unless you want that AESA), a ton of fuel, and needs to be big enough to carry 2 _huge _AIM-54 class missiles *internally, *have a long range, be able to land on small runways and even roads. _*And *_it needs to be VLO?
> 
> All of this. For $8 million.
> 
> I'm sorry bro, but it is just not happening. At all.



It needs to happen to make any sense and win production against alternative weapon systems.

For avionics we have miniaturization due to technology and placement where space its available. Everything is possible. Maybe not for $8m but it needs to be in that range to be competitive to alternatives.



AmirPatriot said:


> You also compare the climb rate of your F-313 with a Prowler, which has 2 J52 engines producing 10,400 lb thrust each. But you also say your F-313 would be powered by 2 Al-222 class engines, bearing in mind the Al-222 produces about 5,500 lb thrust dry (and you said your F-313 is non-afterburning).



Please take weight,if not even lift into consideration. The Prowler is representative for a normal rate of climb of a non-afterburning fighter/bomber/aircraft. The F-313 would be similar, even with its ~ one third of the empty weight.



AmirPatriot said:


> What I'm trying to say is that this "cheap", "small", "light" aircraft would actually be around the same size as an F-35. Unless the body is made of plywood it cannot fly with just those 2 low powered engines.



Ok, so far in this post I described some additional details. So tell me what exactly, preferably with numbers is impossible? ~50kn dry thrust is not sufficient for a 10t loaded weight class sub-sonic fighter?



AmirPatriot said:


> We could save ourselves a lot of risk and add a lot of capability if we went for a proper air force.



A proper airforce does not fulfill the requirements Iran has. If designed correctly, with operation restrictions, speed-class restrictions, G-load restrictions etc., it has the chance to achieve the goals. But well that's my opinion.



AmirPatriot said:


> Airpower doesn't need VHF when you are making an $8 million LO aircraft. Even if your $8 million aircraft is designed just to fly and do nothing else (assuming it is the same size as the aircraft you describe), it would not be enough money to incorporate sufficient LO features.



What are LO features? What kind of subsonic-rated composite materials and production methods are today available? What automatic benefits do all the selected design features such as intakes and exhaust have, as well as the overall shape?
Point is: western airpower must first detect the LO F-313 doing the pop-up maneuver for the 100km LRAAM shot with their X-band fighter radars.



AmirPatriot said:


> it would not be enough money to incorporate sufficient LO features. It would, at best, be as LO as an F/A-18E/F, which is very, very detectable with modern AESA radars. Probably a bigger RCS though, with those top mounted intakes.



Come on bro, I can't work with such "facts", give me something solid.
Top mounted intakes are ideal for a aircraft that needs to evade ground based airdefense and above fighters searching for it, a very telling feature.



AmirPatriot said:


> That little thrust, the massive amount of fuel that you say (where will it all fit I wonder)



Take a good look of the volume of the rear main wings, very telling too.



AmirPatriot said:


> a climb to not quite 40k feet AGL with all that fuel and weapons on board.



<1000kg weapons in dragless internal weaponbays are now a argument for high weight?



AmirPatriot said:


> I'm not sure it would even fly with 2 Al-222s, and if it did, it would take quite a bit longer than 3 minutes to get up to launch altitude.



Again, I can't work with such arguments. Get more precise. Is a max. loaded thrust to weight ratio of 1:2 more than the max. loaded thrust to weight ratio of the Prowler of 1:3?



AmirPatriot said:


> Scale says this. You want to make a small aircraft that fits these gigantic missiles *internally*. It doesn't work geometrically.



Very simple: We have a lets say for the calculation 12m long aircraft that needs to fit a 4m long missile. You say this is impossible geometrically. I say its possible if 4m missile + 4m engines + 4m nose section and rest.
Now prove me again that its impossible.



AmirPatriot said:


> not inside it as in small stealth aircraft like the F-35, J-31 and F-313.



The F-313 is anything then a conventional design. Please don't make such comparisons anymore..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pin gu

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/06/07/1504778/مکلف-به-افزایش-توان-موشکی-هستیم-آغاز-مطالعات-برای-تولید-جنگنده-سنگین-بزودی-باور373-در-کنار-s300-مستقر-می-شود

وی خاطر نشان کرد: ما برای تولید جنگنده سنگین برنامه داریم و در این زمینه مقدمات کار و مطالعات اولیه انجام شده است‌؛ ما حتما باید به سمت یک قدرت هوایی راهبردی حرکت کنیم.

MOD: We have plan to produce heavy fighters and we started to research on this field ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

pin gu said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/06/07/1504778/مکلف-به-افزایش-توان-موشکی-هستیم-آغاز-مطالعات-برای-تولید-جنگنده-سنگین-بزودی-باور373-در-کنار-s300-مستقر-می-شود
> 
> وی خاطر نشان کرد: ما برای تولید جنگنده سنگین برنامه داریم و در این زمینه مقدمات کار و مطالعات اولیه انجام شده است‌؛ ما حتما باید به سمت یک قدرت هوایی راهبردی حرکت کنیم.
> 
> MOD: We have plan to produce heavy fighters and we started to research on this field ...



Yes it's good to hear but I wish they had done it the day after the Saegheh finished it's test flights!






We need MOD leaders that are thinking 10-20 years down the line! So if you want to have a real fighter in production 20 years from now you need to start working on it today!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Then you make comparisons that are wrong: e.g you compare a full length afterburning high-power turbofan in a F-35 fuselage, with two low power short length non-afterburing turbofans in F-313 fuselage. Your conclusion and the picture then is that there is not sufficient space for a large weapon bay.
> No. One huge benefit of two smaller engines is the shorter length in fuselage. The other huge benefit for non-afterburning engines is again the shorter length.



Diameter is also important. Unless your engines are narrow enough and are placed close enough together to be placed between the weapons bays housing these huge missiles in this small aircraft, the two engines must be placed behind the bay.

The F-35, with its single engine, has the front portion of its engine between the two weapons bays.








PeeD said:


> Maybe not for $8m but it needs to be in that range to be competitive to alternatives.



An Embraer Super Tucano costs up to $14 million.






A Yak-130, around $15 million.






Both of these are small aircraft derived from trainers. They have no stealth. No radar. No sensor fusion. One of them is even propeller powered. 

$8 million is optimistic by several times.



PeeD said:


> Point is: western airpower must first detect the LO F-313 doing the pop-up maneuver for the 100km LRAAM shot with their X-band fighter radars.



Not just fighter radars. Their significant AWACS capability also plays a part.



PeeD said:


> Take a good look of the volume of the rear main wings, very telling too.



The MiG-29 also had fuel tanks in its wings, but was infamous for its notoriously short range. Of course, it was a substantially more thirsty aircraft, but it was bigger as well.



PeeD said:


> <1000kg weapons in dragless internal weaponbays are now a argument for high weight?



Not so much the weapons, but you describe the F-313 as having a very long range with a lot of fuel load so I was under the impression the fuel would be a significant dampener on performance.



PeeD said:


> if not even lift into consideration.



An EA-6B would probably have more lift. It has longer wings with less of a sweep. 



PeeD said:


> The F-313 would be similar, even with its ~ one third of the empty weight.





PeeD said:


> Ok, so far in this post I described some additional details. So tell me what exactly, preferably with numbers is impossible? ~50kn dry thrust is not sufficient for a 10t loaded weight class sub-sonic fighter?



That seems like a very optimistic weight.

The empty weight of a Yak-130 is also around the 5,000 kg mark. Although it has an extra pilot, it is likely to be smaller than your F-313 because it lacks an internal weapons bay. It also does not have the copious fuel volume you want, nor the radar, nor the advanced avionics designed to reduce the need for highly trained pilots.



PeeD said:


> Now prove me again that its impossible.



You are asking me to prove a negative.

I ask you instead to prove to me how one can fit all the components of such an aircraft into something the same length of a Yak-130, which by the way is designed to be small and light to be easier controlled by inexperienced pilots. It is not designed to carry enormous LRAAMs internally.



PeeD said:


> The F-313 is anything then a conventional design. Please don't make such comparisons anymore..



Of course it is an unconventional design, but even these require engines and somewhere to put them. To maintain stealth, placing them inside the fuselage is advantageous.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Diameter is also important. Unless your engines are narrow enough and are placed close enough together to be placed between the weapons bays housing these huge missiles in this small aircraft, the two engines must be placed behind the bay.



The diameter is not a deal breaker obviously. More so with an internal weaponbay variant of the F-90.

Honestly said, I don't expect them to be so competent and innovative to even think about such a capability as two LRAAMs in weaponays. But as the design allows it, its my wish as LRAAMs are the only way to counter the overall airpower superiority of the enemy.



AmirPatriot said:


> The F-35, with its single engine, has the front portion of its engine between the two weapons bays.



As said, the F-35 is not representative. Look at that illustration: take away the inlet ducts, the liftfan, shorten the engine length by half and then see whether you can fit a 6-8m missile in that fuselage space (I just need 4m for the F-313).



AmirPatriot said:


> An Embraer Super Tucano costs up to $14 million.



Ok, like with the Karrar I see things different and find such comparisons useless. Most costly elements are engines and then radar and in both the F-313 takes the lowest end but selfmade.



AmirPatriot said:


> Not just fighter radars. Their significant AWACS capability also plays a part.



... I mentioned AEW in the post before my last one. If S- and UHF-band AEW assets could detect the F-313 at 200km we could start a debate about its survivability at it's pop-up. As my F-313 is infact an asset of the IADS, GCI would guide it to a optimal position with max distance to the UHF-band E-2 via passive ELINT. An S-band E-3 should have no capability against a LO target at beyond 100km AAM launch range of the F-313.

Even if. Sensor fusion and data-link capability is necessary to shot a AMRAAM with outside AEW data. Lets say not all current U.S assets have that.



AmirPatriot said:


> The MiG-29 also had fuel tanks in its wings, but was infamous for its notoriously short range. Of course, it was a substantially more thirsty aircraft, but it was bigger as well.



Again, unrepresentative. Look again at the wing thickness of the F-313 rear wings. Due to its subsonic nature, it benefits from such thick wings for its fuel reserves. All modern fighters have tanks in their wings, but none is to the level of the F-313 (at its size class). Even its canards have tanks...
The F-313 has less fuel consumption than a dry single RD-33 Mig-29, it is something completely different.



AmirPatriot said:


> Not so much the weapons, but you describe the F-313 as having a very long range with a lot of fuel load so I was under the impression the fuel would be a significant dampener on performance.



Fuel yes. it would enter combat at 50% fuel and this will be its biggest mass. But performance is a function of wight, thrust, drag and lift. So its not an argument that due to its large fuel reserves, it cant achieve the rate of climb of the Prowler.



AmirPatriot said:


> An EA-6B would probably have more lift. It has longer wings with less of a sweep.



Maybe... I listed the main parameters for flight performance, its more complex than that. All I can say is that the rate of climb of the Prowler should be in the range of the F-313.



AmirPatriot said:


> That seems like a very optimistic weight.
> 
> The empty weight of a Yak-130 is also around the 5,000 kg mark. Although it has an extra pilot, it is likely to be smaller than your F-313 because it lacks an internal weapons bay. It also does not have the copious fuel volume you want, nor the radar, nor the advanced avionics designed to reduce the need for highly trained pilots.



Yes, who knows. Maybe its 4000kg due to RQ-170 derived new gen. composites. Maybe its 7000kg due to its width/volume and fuel reserves. None is a deal breaker on rate of climb for pop-up.



AmirPatriot said:


> ou are asking me to prove a negative.
> 
> I ask you instead to prove to me how one can fit all the components of such an aircraft into something the same length of a Yak-130, which by the way is designed to be small and light to be easier controlled by inexperienced pilots. It is not designed to carry enormous LRAAMs internally.



I wont draw a CAD model of the Q-313 layout. What I can do is a flashover bill of 3x4m = engine + weaponbay + nosesection = 12m.
Now If you have problems with that, draw it in scale and prove that my flashover bill is false.



AmirPatriot said:


> Of course it is an unconventional design, but even these require engines and somewhere to put them. To maintain stealth, placing them inside the fuselage is advantageous.



Bro, nobody would be stupid to design auch a inconvenient intake-duct design or auch a complicated landing gear design if the aim would not be to have a huge weaponbay in the fuselage. As simple as that. This is a indirect proof for a large weaponbay. Maybe they are stupid, yes, but to me it looks good so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The diameter is not a deal breaker obviously. More so with an internal weaponbay variant of the F-90.





PeeD said:


> Honestly said, I don't expect them to be so competent and innovative to even think about such a capability as two LRAAMs in weaponays. But as the design allows it, its my wish as LRAAMs are the only way to counter the overall airpower superiority of the enemy.



It really depends what Iran envisions for the F-313.



PeeD said:


> As said, the F-35 is not representative. Look at that illustration: take away the inlet ducts, the liftfan, shorten the engine length by half and then see whether you can fit a 6-8m missile in that fuselage space (I just need 4m for the F-313).



The F-35B depicted in the picture mostly sacrifices fuel load. 1/3 less than the F-35A, in fact. And you want to have a lot of fuel.








PeeD said:


> Ok, like with the Karrar I see things different and find such comparisons useless. Most costly elements are engines and then radar and in both the F-313 takes the lowest end but selfmade.



My friend, neither the Yak-130 nor the Super Tucano have radars. The Super Tucano doesn't even have a jet engine, its a turboprop. You want the F-313 to have 2 turbofan engines, a radar, stealth, and sophisticated communications gear, but cost about the same as a Super Tucano? 



PeeD said:


> ... I mentioned AEW in the post before my last one. If S- and UHF-band AEW assets could detect the F-313 at 200km we could start a debate about its survivability at it's pop-up.



Except because the F-313 will be operating at a low altitude for most of its time, it won't be facing the AWACS frontally, where the RCS is lowest. It will be showing its top, which has a much larger surface area.



PeeD said:


> Even if. Sensor fusion and data-link capability is necessary to shot a AMRAAM with outside AEW data. Lets say not all current U.S assets have that.



Link 16 is standard across all US combat aircraft that have radars, and even in some that don't.



PeeD said:


> Again, unrepresentative. Look again at the wing thickness of the F-313 rear wings. Due to its subsonic nature, it benefits from such thick wings for its fuel reserves. All modern fighters have tanks in their wings, but none is to the level of the F-313 (at its size class). Even its canards have tanks...
> The F-313 has less fuel consumption than a dry single RD-33 Mig-29, it is something completely different.



Fair enough.



PeeD said:


> But performance is a function of wight, thrust, drag and lift.



The F-313 has less of all of those. Sure, the weight and drag may help, but I think the low thrust especially is a big problem. And the margin of weight is still a matter of discussion because of the size.



PeeD said:


> Yes, who knows. Maybe its 4000kg due to RQ-170 derived new gen. composites. Maybe its 7000kg due to its width/volume and fuel reserves. None is a deal breaker on rate of climb for pop-up.





PeeD said:


> I wont draw a CAD model of the Q-313 layout. What I can do is a flashover bill of 3x4m = engine + weaponbay + nosesection = 12m.
> Now If you have problems with that, draw it in scale and prove that my flashover bill is false.



The Al-222 is 3.1 metres long and the F-135 is 5.6 metres long. Considering some of the F-135 pokes in between the weapons bays, their length behind the weapons bays is about the same. 

Though the front fuselage needs to be a bit longer than conventional aircraft since the intake, canard, nose and cockpit are all in that section.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> The F-35B depicted in the picture mostly sacrifices fuel load. 1/3 less than the F-35A, in fact. And you want to have a lot of fuel.



My fuel is at other, better places to allow for one large central weaponbay.



AmirPatriot said:


> My friend, neither the Yak-130 nor the Super Tucano have radars. The Super Tucano doesn't even have a jet engine, its a turboprop. You want the F-313 to have 2 turbofan engines, a radar, stealth, and sophisticated communications gear, but cost about the same as a Super Tucano?



I wanted to say that if Iran manages to produce a cheap turbofan and a cheap 120km max. track range AESA, it can significantly push down the price, it was not meant for comparison with those two trainers.

I can just tell you that the budget of Irans AIO is given by the state. In contrast to embraer its a non-profit company for Iran. Iran don't by its equipment from private companies.
Hence its a complete different thing.
Why do you think the price difference of a tucano compared to the Yak is just $1m? Does this makes any sense? Now Russia was forces to privatize parts of its aerospace industry. In Iran all is selfmade with no profit margin in the chain.
This is the key to get such prices.



AmirPatriot said:


> Except because the F-313 will be operating at a low altitude for most of its time, it won't be facing the AWACS frontally, where the RCS is lowest. It will be showing its top, which has a much larger surface area.



No. Its main radar evasive asset would be terrain masking. LO would be just secondary for the pop-up and if something try to hunt it. Infact if designed correctly the 20° aspect to the top aspect RCS could be low enough, remember that the huge underside of the B-2 also has a very low RCS.



AmirPatriot said:


> Link 16 is standard across all US combat aircraft that have radars, and even in some that don't.



Well if the U.S fleet can shot the AMRAAM with passive data via link-16, good for the Americans, could help. As said the AEW position would be certainly known to Irans IADS and they would operate at stand-off ranges. I have grave doubts about tracking the LO F-313 from 200km+ range with their AEW radars.



AmirPatriot said:


> The F-313 has less of all of those. Sure, the weight and drag may help, but I think the low thrust especially is a big problem. And the margin of weight is still a matter of discussion because of the size.



To complex for such a judgment.



AmirPatriot said:


> The Al-222 is 3.1 metres long and the F-135 is 5.6 metres long. Considering some of the F-135 pokes in between the weapons bays, their length behind the weapons bays is about the same.
> 
> Though the front fuselage needs to be a bit longer than conventional aircraft since the intake, canard, nose and cockpit are all in that section.



I don't follow you: So you have seen that a non-afterburning low power turbofan is about half the length than the F-135. You also know that there is no intake that act as a barrier nor a landing gear. So whats the problem?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> My fuel is at other, better places to allow for one large central weaponbay.



But wouldn't having sizeable fuel in the wings require sturdier wing construction, which increases weight, cost, and complexity?



PeeD said:


> Why do you think the price difference of a tucano compared to the Yak is just $1m? Does this makes any sense? Now Russia was forces to privatize parts of its aerospace industry. In Iran all is selfmade with no profit margin in the chain.
> This is the key to get such prices.



Good point, but even if the Yak-130 was half the price at $8 million for domestic purchases (actually more like $9 million because of inflation), your estimates of $8 million for a stealthy combat aircraft are optimistic.



PeeD said:


> No. Its main radar evasive asset would be terrain masking.



But what if it is deployed in Iran's flatter southern and eastern areas, or even over the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman?









PeeD said:


> I have grave doubts about tracking the LO F-313 from 200km+ range with their AEW radars.



Well an E-3 can detect a "small" fighter size target from up to 270 km away. http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Articles/PG/PGSA.htm

Other sources give a 320 km range for low flying targets without giving RCS figures.

Assuming a small fighter is something like an F-16 with an RCS of 1.2 m^2, a LO aircraft with an RCS similar to the F/A-18E/F/G's 0.5 m^2 could be detected from outside the AIM-54's rmax, and certainly outside its NEZ.



PeeD said:


> You also know that there is no intake that act as a barrier nor a landing gear



Well if you look at the F-313 design, you can see that the intake and the canards do not overlap. The intake is before the canard.






I personally think that cockpit would have to be moved forward, a bit further away from the intake, to allow for more room for life support systems and to make the cockpit big enough for proper HUDs and controls. There is also the issue of having enough space for a second seat in conversion trainers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> My fuel is at other, better places to allow for one large central weaponbay.
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to say that if Iran manages to produce a cheap turbofan and a cheap 120km max. track range AESA, it can significantly push down the price, it was not meant for comparison with those two trainers.
> 
> I can just tell you that the budget of Irans AIO is given by the state. In contrast to embraer its a non-profit company for Iran. Iran don't by its equipment from private companies.
> Hence its a complete different thing.
> Why do you think the price difference of a tucano compared to the Yak is just $1m? Does this makes any sense? Now Russia was forces to privatize parts of its aerospace industry. In Iran all is selfmade with no profit margin in the chain.
> This is the key to get such prices.
> 
> 
> 
> No. Its main radar evasive asset would be terrain masking. LO would be just secondary for the pop-up and if something try to hunt it. Infact if designed correctly the 20° aspect to the top aspect RCS could be low enough, remember that the huge underside of the B-2 also has a very low RCS.
> 
> 
> 
> Well if the U.S fleet can shot the AMRAAM with passive data via link-16, good for the Americans, could help. As said the AEW position would be certainly known to Irans IADS and they would operate at stand-off ranges. I have grave doubts about tracking the LO F-313 from 200km+ range with their AEW radars.
> 
> 
> 
> To complex for such a judgment.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't follow you: So you have seen that a non-afterburning low power turbofan is about half the length than the F-135. You also know that there is no intake that act as a barrier nor a landing gear. So whats the problem?



Regardless of it's purchasing price the Q-313 is NOT a fighter worth producing! And yes you can pack the Aircraft up with fuel to be used as a short range Air Refueling tanker BUT you CAN NOT pack it with Fuel & Weapons because the aircraft's max payload with those small engines will prevent you from doing so! 

Putting a weapons bay on an Aircraft is not just about reducing RCS!
A properly designed fighter with a weapons bay allows the platform to reduce drag while loaded with weapons that allows you to increase speed, maneuverability & range
Q-313 lacks both speed, maneuverability & range due to it's poor design features

An Aircraft built to fly at low altitudes needs to be heavily armored & capable of withstanding multiple hits & Q-313 is not such an Aircraft
An Aircraft built to fly at low altitudes needs to have it's IRST & optical sensors located at a position that it can detect threats from above which means putting the IRST underneath the aircraft doesn't make sense & the reason the US puts it underneath F-35 is because they are trained to fly at high altitudes to take advantage of max range

NOTHING about the Q-313 makes any type of sense and it doesn't matter what excuses you keep giving at the end of the day the Aircraft is poorly designed & the Airframe is just not worth the engines on the Aircraft!

Your too fixated on the initial price of the Aircraft & you don't seem to understand the long term implication of Iran producing such a poorly designed Air Frame

There is no reason why Iran should waist it's human resources, tools and facilities on such a poorly unconventional wing design when they can easily redesign the wings to a simpler more conventional delta wing design.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD I've been thinking a bit on your assertion that in any war Iran might face, there is no point in having an air force because we are so inferior to our enemies.

I can foresee 3 possible wars we may have to fight:

1. War with the US. Because of things like conflict escalation and things, I think the only possible war we would have with the US would be a big one. _The _Big One. The US, while aggressive and a leviathan, is not stupid. It will not start a war over something small in the Persian Gulf with a regional power like Iran, or try to strike Iran's nuclear program thinking it will not be retaliated against. Iran will respond with full force because that is part of our deterrence. 

Therefore, any war between the US and Iran would be a huge clash on par with the Vietnam or Korean wars. In such a case, yes, there is no point having a proper air force, but I'd argue there is no point having any air force at all. We must remember the US has a monumental air force and navy that if it deployed it with *full force,* would overwhelm our air defence and air force easily. With sheer force of numbers and quality. Think F-22s, B-2s, their stockpile of 3,500 Tomahawks, as well as enough JSOW and HARM for anyone to be fearful of.

In such a case, we would have no choice but to rely on powerful allies like Russia or China to provide heavy armament support, and draft millions upon millions of our men. A total war that would dwarf the Sacred Defence.

Thankfully, such a thing is very unlikely to happen.

2. War with Israel. Likely over our nuclear program. Now, Israel may be less powerful than the US, but they are more por roo. They may attempt to strike our nuclear program. In such a case they would obviously use combat aircraft, but because of sheer distance they would only be able to field a small number of albeit advanced aircraft, like the F-35.

In such a case, the quality, not the quantity, is what Iran needs. Even a small-medium number of advanced fighters coupled with the IADS could be very useful. 

3. War with Saudi Arabia. In my opinion, the most likely out of the 3. For sure Saudi Arabia has a big air force. But that doesn't mean we cannot have the same. We are after a regional power and need to be able to protect this status. Any war with Saudi Arabia would probably be a short lived one, fought on the seas and in the air. There will be no ground war, for geographical reasons. Yes, I want us to go against them in the air with similar forces. It worked well for us in the 1980s against a similarly symmetrical foe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD I've been thinking a bit on your assertion that in any war Iran might face, there is no point in having an air force because we are so inferior to our enemies.
> 
> I can foresee 3 possible wars we may have to fight:
> 
> 1. War with the US. Because of things like conflict escalation and things, I think the only possible war we would have with the US would be a big one. _The _Big One. The US, while aggressive and a leviathan, is not stupid. It will not start a war over something small in the Persian Gulf with a regional power like Iran, or try to strike Iran's nuclear program thinking it will not be retaliated against. Iran will respond with full force because that is part of our deterrence.
> 
> Therefore, any war between the US and Iran would be a huge clash on par with the Vietnam or Korean wars. In such a case, yes, there is no point having a proper air force, but I'd argue there is no point having any air force at all. We must remember the US has a monumental air force and navy that if it deployed it with *full force,* would overwhelm our air defence and air force easily. With sheer force of numbers and quality. Think F-22s, B-2s, their stockpile of 3,500 Tomahawks, as well as enough JSOW and HARM for anyone to be fearful of.
> 
> In such a case, we would have no choice but to rely on powerful allies like Russia or China to provide heavy armament support, and draft millions upon millions of our men. A total war that would dwarf the Sacred Defence.
> 
> Thankfully, such a thing is very unlikely to happen.
> 
> 2. War with Israel. Likely over our nuclear program. Now, Israel may be less powerful than the US, but they are more por roo. They may attempt to strike our nuclear program. In such a case they would obviously use combat aircraft, but because of sheer distance they would only be able to field a small number of albeit advanced aircraft, like the F-35.
> 
> In such a case, the quality, not the quantity, is what Iran needs. Even a small-medium number of advanced fighters coupled with the IADS could be very useful.
> 
> 3. War with Saudi Arabia. In my opinion, the most likely out of the 3. For sure Saudi Arabia has a big air force. But that doesn't mean we cannot have the same. We are after a regional power and need to be able to protect this status. Any war with Saudi Arabia would probably be a short lived one, fought on the seas and in the air. There will be no ground war, for geographical reasons. Yes, I want us to go against them in the air with similar forces. It worked well for us in the 1980s against a similarly symmetrical foe.




I think if case 2 occurs American would be dragged into war eventually and vice versa ... and if it gets more complicated Saudis, the UAE would get involved too ... But I think Saudis would not start war without American green light, and American would not give green light without being sure of security of israel ... so as far as you could keep isreal in check .. nothing would happen ...


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> I think if case 2 occurs American would be dragged into war eventually and vice versa ... and if it gets more complicated Saudis, the UAE would get involved too ... But I think Saudis would not start war without American green light, and American would not give green light without being sure of security of israel ... so as far as you could keep isreal in check .. nothing would happen ...



It really depends on the type of conflict. If Israel succeeds, Iran would seek revenge very forcefully and this *may *mean American involvement. Personally I think this "Israel will not exist in 20 years" talk as propaganda. Iran will not go for the destruction of Israel at our current level of power. 

If they fail, Iran would still retaliate because it has been attacked, but hostilities would end before the Americans get involved.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

AmirPatriot said:


> It really depends on the type of conflict. If Israel succeeds, Iran would seek revenge very forcefully and this *may *mean American involvement. Personally I think this "Israel will not exist in 20 years" talk as propaganda. Iran will not go for the destruction of Israel at our current level of power.
> 
> If they fail, Iran would still retaliate because it has been attacked, but hostilities would end before the Americans get involved.


That statement refers to the school of thought that Israel represents. I don't think any of Iranian leaders mean physical destruction when they talk about existence of Israel. All this animosity will disappear over night if they either give Palestinians Citizen rights or accept them as an independent, internationally recognized nation with all the rights that it brings.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> But wouldn't having sizeable fuel in the wings require sturdier wing construction, which increases weight, cost, and complexity?



Tanks in wings is a must for Iran due to its size. Generally I want to see novel airframing methods, vast use of composites, large access-less panels etc. Maybe methods of the RQ-170 can be applied. The airframe needs to be cheap, that's the key element beside engine and radar cost.



AmirPatriot said:


> Good point, but even if the Yak-130 was half the price at $8 million for domestic purchases (actually more like $9 million because of inflation), your estimates of $8 million for a stealthy combat aircraft are optimistic.



What does stealthy means to you? I can use a special cheap outer airframe panel made from a composite that incorporates RAM, a RAS and still end up cheaper then machined aluminium, even polymers could be employed for a subsonic fighter.
There are many ways to achieve that.
The Yak-130 might have private companies involved, making the engines (Ukraine) and avionics. Irans defense industry for the F-313 on the other hand is fully state controlled, similar to that of the Soviet Union. This would push the price down to those levels I suggested.



AmirPatriot said:


> But what if it is deployed in Iran's flatter southern and eastern areas, or even over the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman?



Look at your map. Iran is one of the few countries in the world with such a mountain topology. We better make best use of this and operate the F-313 in terrain masking. It's a must to remain survivable against a huge overpower.
The F-313 better avoids operating away from the mountain chains. The reach two LRAAMs would provide is there to make up for that fact. The F-313 would be a strike and airdefense fighter operating exclusively inside Irans IADS for the duration of the high intensity phase.



AmirPatriot said:


> Well an E-3 can detect a "small" fighter size target from up to 270 km away. http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Articles/PG/PGSA.htm
> 
> Other sources give a 320 km range for low flying targets without giving RCS figures.
> 
> Assuming a small fighter is something like an F-16 with an RCS of 1.2 m^2, a LO aircraft with an RCS similar to the F/A-18E/F/G's 0.5 m^2 could be detected from outside the AIM-54's rmax, and certainly outside its NEZ.



AEW operate at safe stand-off stations, they keep >100km away from threat zones. 270km against a Mig-21/F-16 is not enough to detect a 0,1m² S-band F-313.



AmirPatriot said:


> Well if you look at the F-313 design, you can see that the intake and the canards do not overlap. The intake is before the canard.



I don't follow you. Whats the problem with a top intake and duct and that canard?



AmirPatriot said:


> I personally think that cockpit would have to be moved forward, a bit further away from the intake, to allow for more room for life support systems and to make the cockpit big enough for proper HUDs and controls.



You think there is not sufficient space for a HUD?

As for you 3 scenarios: Why do you want to fight the Saudis with a proper airforce? Why do you want a airforce of the size of the Saudis to compete with them? Because it worked in the 80's you want it now too?

Bro, war is something professional. Iran is professional. We kill the Saudis as quick and as decisively as anyhow possible with the best, most effective AND efficient means available. No games, no mercy, this is serious stuff.
If we can stop the U.S airpower, we can break the neck of Saudi airpower. If the means for that is the BM/CM force, then because it is the most effective/efficient one.
Iran prepares for the worst, Saudis and Israelis are in between.
I'm slowly fed up with such reactionary views and can only hope Iranian decision makers don't fall for this.

@VEVAK 

You already expressed you view about the F-313. Our views are too different to make another try for discussion. Until you believe it is powered by upgraded Toloue-4, I'm out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

PeeD said:


> You already expressed you view about the F-313. Our views are too different to make another try for discussion. Until you believe it is powered by upgraded Toloue-4, I'm out.


I'm wondering how can VEVAK believe that a three stage axial designed engine can power up a fighters jet?!!! Let alone the required thrust for a take off. 


AmirPatriot said:


> It really depends on the type of conflict. If Israel succeeds, Iran would seek revenge very forcefully and this *may *mean American involvement. Personally I think this "Israel will not exist in 20 years" talk as propaganda. Iran will not go for the destruction of Israel at our current level of power.
> 
> If they fail, Iran would still retaliate because it has been attacked, but hostilities would end before the Americans get involved.


Israel is an apartheid regime Amir!
That regime will collapse internally, you don't need to attack it. 
Look at it's population, it is full of traitor Arabs of Palestine who have accepted the conquer of Israel. You should guess how would Israelis treat them. How long a humiliated human can stay humiliated? Israeli society is more like a cobweb!!!
Evenif you forget about the Arabs inside Israeli society, you cannot ignore the racism between Zionist-Jews. AshkeNAZI Zions treat other Jews like a rubbish. 

In medias, you won't see these! only a make up of it's wormy nature is on the front of our eyes.


----------



## Draco.IMF

you guys forget one important factor -> The downing of RQ-170 drone
asfaik, because Iran gets access to its engine technology, it boosted the iranian jet engine industry ~ 30 years ahead.
I dont understand some guys here why Iran should rely on some old Touloue engines when Iran has access to much better engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Tanks in wings is a must for Iran due to its size. Generally I want to see novel airframing methods, vast use of composites, large access-less panels etc.



I know, but having very large tanks in wings mean more weight, which would also mean more reinforcement needed to keep those wings structurally stable.



PeeD said:


> What does stealthy means to you?



RAM and stealth shaping. RAM isn't cheap, and it is costly to maintain as well. Shaping requires expensive development and special production techniques, especially if they are for sensitive parts like wing box which will require Titanium.



PeeD said:


> The Yak-130 might have private companies involved, making the engines (Ukraine) and avionics.



Might.

The engines are produced in Russia.

And I really must insist that you get this $8 million range out of your equations. Someone of your stature should not be dealing in such fantasies. It is a dream number. However many private companies get involved in a prop driven Super Tucano, a twin jet stealth combat aircraft is NOT going to be cheaper to design, build or maintain than it in ANY circumstances. *Especially *considering Iran's inexperience in building combat aircraft will mean we will have to spend more money for R&D, since we don't have the off the shelf components that many other countries can use, nor do we have the industrial capacity built up yet.

I think the F-313 you envision is likely to cost in the $20-30 million range, because of the inherent costs required in setting up an entirely new production line (rather than re-tooling an existing one) because we don't have any for fighter aircraft, designing and producing turbofans, a 120 km ranged radar, which is AESA by the way. Sensor fusion and considerable amounts of electronics. An airframe with stealth shaping and coated in RAM, that has to withstand high subsonic at very low altitude (where there is high air density and pressure). At such altitude strenuous manoeuvres may be required since you envision the F-313 operating in mountain ranges. And considerable effort would have to be made to make the aircraft as reliable as possible (first time turbofan, making it reliable...) since at very low altitude there is no margin for error or malfunction. Consider for a moment the high fatality rate from accidents because of such a low altitude flight regime.

At such a price level the concept is not feasible. Having 600 $25 million aircraft costing $15 billion is not going to work better than, say, 200 advanced aircraft costing $70 million each, $14 billion total.



PeeD said:


> The F-313 better avoids operating away from the mountain chains.



So what will protect the flat areas? Khuzestan, home to most of our oil and therefore our biggest source of hard cash, is a flat area.



PeeD said:


> AEW operate at safe stand-off stations, they keep >100km away from threat zones. 270km against a Mig-21/F-16 is not enough to detect a 0,1m² S-band F-313.



>100 km should be enough to detect a 0.1 m^2 F-313.



PeeD said:


> I don't follow you. Whats the problem with a top intake and duct and that canard?



For your operating regime, nothing. But that doesn't mean they do not take up space.



PeeD said:


> You think there is not sufficient space for a HUD?



My mistake. I meant displays, specifically MFDs.



PeeD said:


> Why do you want to fight the Saudis with a proper airforce? Why do you want a airforce of the size of the Saudis to compete with them? Because it worked in the 80's you want it now too?



Because I don't think your model is financially or operationally feasible. Air forces remain the most cost effective offence in terms of bang for buck. And advanced combat aircraft remain a strong tool for the IADS. They are also more flexible, which your model of the F-313 is not.



PeeD said:


> Iran is professional. We kill the Saudis as quick and as decisively as anyhow possible with the best, most effective AND efficient means available.



Exactly. We deal with them efficiently. That is, with a highly capable and fierce high intensity warfare doctrine combining vast numbers of BMs and CMs, with advanced tactical aircraft that can survive in an impermissible environment to provide additional firepower and precision. Defensively, a modern IADS using SAMs for point defence (this doesn't mean short range, it just means highly capable systems guarding HVTs) and the long range and mobility of fighter aircraft for area and forward defence. These fighter aircraft can also aid SAMs in defending against large attacks on HVTs.



PeeD said:


> If we can stop the U.S airpower



We cannot, for reasons I have already explained.


----------



## Sina-1

AmirPatriot said:


> And I really must insist that you get this $8 million range out of your equations.



Amir jan there is a difference between price and cost. The aircraft you are pointing to are *listed* *price*, while PEED is referring to *manufacturing cost*. 
It is not a secret that Aircraft manufacturers hike the aircraft *price* by several orders. 
Another fact is certification. Every *single part *used in an fighter jet needs to be certified in the west which can take anything from 1-2 year (now imagine the cost in both man and calendar hours!). China for example does not have as rigorous certification processes and thus they are able to develop and produce (by looks of it) state of the art fighter jets much more quickly.

In conclusion if you remove the "profit" and the extremely expensive certification processes then IMO PEEDs numbers are not far off.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sina-1 said:


> Amir jan there is a difference between price and cost. The aircraft you are pointing to are *listed* *price*, while PEED is referring to *manufacturing cost*.



I tried to find the manufacturing costs for the Super Tucano and the domestic purchase price for the Yak-130 but couldn't. 



Sina-1 said:


> It is not a secret that Aircraft manufacturers hike the aircraft *price* by several orders.
> Another fact is certification. Every *single part *used in an fighter jet needs to be certified in the west which can take anything from 1-2 year (now imagine the cost in both man and calendar hours!). China for example does not have as rigorous certification processes and thus they are able to develop and produce (by looks of it) state of the art fighter jets much more quickly.



Actually China's J-20 had its first flight over 6 years ago and is still not in serial production so I don't think that is correct.



Sina-1 said:


> In conclusion if you remove the "profit" and the extremely expensive certification processes then IMO PEEDs numbers are not far off.



I don't think any sane businessman will charge someone more for a prop driven trainer/COIN plane than a twin jet stealth tactical aircraft.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I know, but having very large tanks in wings mean more weight, which would also mean more reinforcement needed to keep those wings structurally stable.



Of course everything needs to be reinforced up to the requirements and it costs more.



AmirPatriot said:


> RAM and stealth shaping. RAM isn't cheap, and it is costly to maintain as well. Shaping requires expensive development and special production techniques, especially if they are for sensitive parts like wing box which will require Titanium.



What about no use of RAM or one that is already built in into the composite suface? What about a cheap RAM?
What about carbonfiber loads structures instead of titanium due to lower G limits and lower airframe lifetime?



AmirPatriot said:


> And I really must insist that you get this $8 million range out of your equations. Someone of your stature should not be dealing in such fantasies. It is a dream number. However many private companies get involved in a prop driven Super Tucano, a twin jet stealth combat aircraft is NOT going to be cheaper to design, build or maintain than it in ANY circumstances.



You misunderstand how Irans defense industry works. Its not a market driven capitalist system.
State orders a certain subsystem to be built and pays for it's R&D and production line. Be it the turbofan, the airborne AESA, or down to a radio data-link.
They start development of those systems and subsystems until they get that capability. If almost all of those systems and subsystems are ready, the time has come for the F-313 production. A F-313-version of all those systems and subsystems is developed and provided.

Hence the R&D costs for the system and subsystems are not part of the F-313 cost.

For some systems this gets more tricky. Possible that the 2013 F-313 was planned to use a locally made J-85 or a non-afterburning RD-33. This would mean that the F-313 project was forced to change because one of its main systems had changed, the engines. Why had it changed? Because now the IRGC-ASF had the RQ-170 engine available and wanted the engine industry to copy that instead of a e.g RD-33 (because their S-171 project needs it). 
So if this story would have been like that and this created the J90 small turbofan, the F-313 would be forced to use it. This is why R&D costs of systems and subsystems are not directly in the F-313 project.

Its rather so that the F-313 team has mostly to check which systems and subsystems are available/projected in Irans state defense companies and develop their project based on whats available. Of course some less "strategic", cheaper subsystems would be developed specially for the F-313 only.

My $8m number even excludes R&D cost, just the pure cost for one airframe.

I would do a cost break down plus a CAD model if I had any confidence that the F-313 is not a fake disinformation project and really is close to my interpretation. Which I don't have atm.



AmirPatriot said:


> Sensor fusion and considerable amounts of electronics.



One of the fields where huge savings can be done due to the jump in modern solid state technologies. Miniaturization and best use of high computing power, memory tech. etc.
No need for bulky stuff from a "proven company/team" = old, influential and not progressive.
As Sina said, no need for certification process, just state testes.



AmirPatriot said:


> An airframe with stealth shaping and coated in RAM, that has to withstand high subsonic at very low altitude (where there is high air density and pressure).



Gust winds needs to be taken care of, but I would opt for a 5G max. loadlimit. This is not a fighter but a BVR carrier that would not be able to doge a missile anyway. Just benefit from the cost benefits of the 5G limit.



AmirPatriot said:


> And considerable effort would have to be made to make the aircraft as reliable as possible (first time turbofan, making it reliable...)



I want its J90 engines to have just 500 hours TBO instead of 4000. Again a huge cost benefit and due to very low training requirements and short duration of a modern conflict, a sober decision. Ground testing will make sure it's working and two of them make sure that a failure of one is not catastrophic. It's better not a clean sheet design and hopefully heavily based on the RQ-170 engine.



AmirPatriot said:


> since at very low altitude there is no margin for error or malfunction. Consider for a moment the high fatality rate from accidents because of such a low altitude flight regime.



I would use unmanned variants for low level tests until its proven sufficiently.



AmirPatriot said:


> So what will protect the flat areas? Khuzestan, home to most of our oil and therefore our biggest source of hard cash, is a flat area.



The F-313 would add flexibility to the IADS to make up for a local enemy spearhead. Those 10% of the country without mountains close enough for the pop-up of the 100km shot, would need a high SAM concentration if they house high value targets.
Take this as another restriction, but its again absolutely no deal breaker.



AmirPatriot said:


> >100 km should be enough to detect a 0.1 m^2 F-313.



Radar equation says its not.



AmirPatriot said:


> My mistake. I meant displays, specifically MFDs.



Iran makes MFDs which I find too bulky for our age of time. We need a innovative company that stops the use of this 30 year old technology. There is no capitalist company lobby in Iran that pushed for the purchase of their old, bulky but proven technologies. They better use their youth and dynamics/innovation to develop a miniaturized MFD. Again: Iran is not the U.S or Russia with a ancient traditional and capable aerospace industry. We need to make best use of the dynamics this provides to go for new and better solutions.
The 5G load rating contributes contributes such fields immensely.



As for airpower: If you think its a better idea to fight Saudis with 200 Su-30, good for you.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> You already expressed you view about the F-313. Our views are too different to make another try for discussion. Until you believe it is powered by upgraded Toloue-4, I'm out.



I said if the Kowsar is going to be powered by a J-90 then that would likely be powered by an engine based on the Toloue-4! That's not the same as saying the Kowsar is powered by the Toloue 4! And has nothing to do with the Q-313!

The Q-313 even if you redesign the engines & intakes to carry 2 RD-33 engines it wouldn't make a difference because the Aircraft is poorly designed starting with it's wing's

And yes the Q-313 looks very cool & it would make a nice concept Aircraft BUT it will never be a good combat aircraft!

And nonsense excuses like it can takeoff from a small runway are nothing but BS! It would be far simpler and it would make far more sense in every way to build a bunch of ground equipment to quickly cleanup and repair a runway then it would be to sacrifice the combat capability of your aircraft just so you can takeoff quicker with weaker engines! It's not like Iran is some backward country that can't even build it's own roads!

Iran should have stuck with or tried to make adjustments to it's Sofrh Mahi designs for a combat aircraft rather than this absurdly ridicules Q-313 design


----------



## ashok321

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/903978270667956224

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> What about no use of RAM or one that is already built in into the composite suface? What about a cheap RAM?



No use of RAM means you are just hampering yourself. As for the other two, examples? Details? 



PeeD said:


> What about carbonfiber loads structures instead of titanium due to lower G limits and lower airframe lifetime?



If you want to pull 5 Gs while holding both wings which are full of fuel, you need something very strong like Titanium. Carbon fibre is mostly used in the aerospace industry because of it doesn't substitute much stiffness for lightness, but that doesn't mean its near Titanium.

Those wings, by the way, would also be carrying externally carried weapons and/or fuel if you are smart and make your aircraft capable of conducting non-stealth missions with greater firepower.



PeeD said:


> Hence the R&D costs for the system and subsystems are not part of the F-313 cost.



That's not a matter of cost savings, that's a matter of bad accounting. Just because you hide the procurement cost somewhere else doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



PeeD said:


> I want its J90 engines to have just 500 hours TBO instead of 4000. Again a huge cost benefit and due to very low training requirements and short duration of a modern conflict, a sober decision. Ground testing will make sure it's working and two of them make sure that a failure of one is not catastrophic. It's better not a clean sheet design and hopefully heavily based on the RQ-170 engine.



So that means in peace time you will barely be able to fly your aircraft if at all otherwise you'd have to be _constantly _changing out the entire engine. This means poorly trained crews and whatever automation you have my friend, if there is a guy in there he needs to have lots of flight time in order to be properly trained. I hope we are not in the realm of the Arab monarchies who think you can compensate for bad soldiers with good equipment.



PeeD said:


> I would use unmanned variants for low level tests until its proven sufficiently.



And it would have to be _very _sufficiently, because of the non-existent margin for error.



PeeD said:


> The F-313 would add flexibility to the IADS to make up for a local enemy spearhead. Those 10% of the country without mountains close enough for the pop-up of the 100km shot, would need a high SAM concentration if they house high value targets.
> Take this as another restriction, but its again absolutely no deal breaker.



I think its a very bad idea to leave your main cash generators protected with only ground based AD. One of my biggest criticisms of a purely ground based military is that if you have no air force the enemy has to only deal with 1 thing - your SAMs. If you have a good air force and SAMs, they have to fight 2 things at once, with is much harder in every respect. 



PeeD said:


> Radar equation says its not.



I was looking for this radar equation when I was looking for E-3 stats. Can you explain/link me to this equation please?



PeeD said:


> As for airpower: If you think its a better idea to fight Saudis with 200 Su-30, good for you.



Well I think of a different mix of aircraft but that is the general idea, a large advanced air force.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> No use of RAM means you are just hampering yourself. As for the other two, examples? Details?



No RAM could mean anything. It could mean LO rating instead of VLO which could be sufficient for its operation regime.
Then you want examples of integrated RAM? It falls under the therm RAS, search for yourself.

Look Amir: sometimes there are technologies which change the whole cost and performance numbers of established technologies. The Israelis did this with their Hermes drone family. It had a revolutionary design which kicked up the time of flight and pushed down the costs.
You think everything has to be conventional, like the Yak-130 is conventional.

No. Iran needs novel approaches to be able compete in airpower. A subsonic rated composite that includes RAM --> RAS would be one such ways.
So no RAM is not a cost driving deal breaker for the F-313, either they use a new technology or omit it totally (for the main structures, not the gaps).



AmirPatriot said:


> If you want to pull 5 Gs while holding both wings which are full of fuel, you need something very strong like Titanium.



Who said that? First 5G might be allowed just at 50% fuel, a certain weight limit. Second, novel structural approached can do it with composites and carbon fiber. Third, a wing that had no hardpoints for weapons due to a w-bay, can carry the allowed weight in form of fuel.



AmirPatriot said:


> Carbon fibre is mostly used in the aerospace industry because of it doesn't substitute much stiffness for lightness, but that doesn't mean its near Titanium.



Who said that? Are you and VEVAK airframe engineers? You must be because the engineering problem is very complex to be judged in such a certain way.

No. This is a subsonic rated, 5G limit rated (at 50% fuel, <1000kg weapon payload) concept with no tons of weapons underwing, just fuel. How do you or VEVAK want to determine that Ti is necessary instead of a load carrying hull + a carbon/composite load structure? You can't.

Maybe Ti is planned to be used because it is determined to be cost effective for load structures...



AmirPatriot said:


> Those wings, by the way, would also be carrying externally carried weapons and/or fuel if you are smart and make your aircraft capable of conducting non-stealth missions with greater firepower.



I'm smarter and mount them at the fuselage instead of the wings. Even smarter would be to used cost-effective UACV for that kind of missions.



AmirPatriot said:


> That's not a matter of cost savings, that's a matter of bad accounting. Just because you hide the procurement cost somewhere else doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



This is not an export item. For what do you want the accounting. Excluding R&D I want a cost of $8m per airframe.



AmirPatriot said:


> So that means in peace time you will barely be able to fly your aircraft if at all otherwise you'd have to be _constantly _changing out the entire engine. This means poorly trained crews and whatever automation you have my friend, if there is a guy in there he needs to have lots of flight time in order to be properly trained. I hope we are not in the realm of the Arab monarchies who think you can compensate for bad soldiers with good equipment.



The F-313 would be an automated BVR missile carrier. So yes, I want as less as possible live training for it's pilots.
It has nothing to do with Arabs and bad soldiers. Saudis are stupid that they fly a hanger queen like the F-15 for training their pilots regularly ($40k per hour...). The Americans squeeze the dollars out of them and their contracted western ground crews make additional dollars. Utterly stupid.

Iran is better not so stupid to go for a 300 flight hours training per year fighter. Because one way to defeat a country is to drive it into bankruptcy with subtile methods and ideas just developed to do so.
The Soviets showed well how effective automation can be employed with their submarine force. 



AmirPatriot said:


> I think its a very bad idea to leave your main cash generators protected with only ground based AD. One of my biggest criticisms of a purely ground based military is that if you have no air force the enemy has to only deal with 1 thing - your SAMs. If you have a good air force and SAMs, they have to fight 2 things at once, with is much harder in every respect.



Our enemy ABSOLUTLY overpowers us in airpower. So what is conventional airpower worth against it? You want to compete with it in that field, or go for something they have problems to handle? They have problems to handle a ground based IADS, so we better go for what they are weaker in.



AmirPatriot said:


> I was looking for this radar equation when I was looking for E-3 stats. Can you explain/link me to this equation please?



http://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/The Radar equation in practice.en.html

It's math.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> A subsonic rated composite that includes RAM --> RAS would be one such ways.



Examples?



PeeD said:


> Third, a wing that had no hardpoints for weapons due to a w-bay, can carry the allowed weight in form of fuel.



And that makes the aircraft incredibly limited in role and capable of next to no flexibility. 



PeeD said:


> How do you or VEVAK want to determine that Ti is necessary instead of a load carrying hull + a carbon/composite load structure? You can't.



Can you give examples of aircraft that use carbon/composite wing boxes?



PeeD said:


> I'm smarter and mount them at the fuselage instead of the wings.



Not really possible when your small fuselage is taken up mostly by weapons bays. Out of all tactical stealth combat aircraft like the F-22, F-35, J-20, J-31 and T-50, only the T-50 has hard points on the fuselage (just 2, it has more on the wings), and those are on the engine nacelles that run the side of the aircraft, which won't happen with your F-313 since it is a much, much smaller design.



PeeD said:


> Even smarter would be to used cost-effective UACV for that kind of missions.



A cost effective UCAV would have to be pretty big to match the payload of, say, a Yak-130, therefore reducing that cost effectiveness. It's still a major project my friend. And in some cases it still isn't possible. It could do it in permissible airspace, but not really semi-permissible airspace. In short, you'd need aerial supremacy, aerial superiority isn't enough.



PeeD said:


> This is not an export item. For what do you want the accounting. Excluding R&D I want a cost of $8m per airframe.



Even if it isn't an export item, it still needs to be paid for. You can't pay a (arbitrary large number) billion dollars for R&D of an airframe for the F-313 and then just pretend it isn't relevant to the F-313. You have to include it.



PeeD said:


> The F-313 would be an automated BVR missile carrier. So yes, I want as less as possible live training for it's pilots.
> It has nothing to do with Arabs and bad soldiers. Saudis are stupid that they fly a hanger queen like the F-15 for training their pilots regularly ($40k per hour...). The Americans squeeze the dollars out of them and their contracted western ground crews make additional dollars. Utterly stupid.



They don't use the F-15 for training, its for practice to retain and improve skills. Flight hours are a basic instrument of improving skill, @kollang will tell you that.



PeeD said:


> Iran is better not so stupid to go for a 300 flight hours training per year fighter.



The Americans didn't even do that in their peak of budget and relative aerial power, which was the 1980s/90s. They did 200 hours back then, about 150 now. Even if you do just 100 hours now, its only 5 years of life in that airframe, nevermind it will be flying much more than that in conflict.



PeeD said:


> Our enemy ABSOLUTLY overpowers us in airpower.



That's not because we've been trying our hardest to have a powerful air force and they've just beaten us at that because they're better. It's because Iran neglected the IRIAF for decades and now we have reached this. If Iran started putting the same sort of effort and resources it put into its ballistic missile force, into the IRIAF, we could envision a bright future for the IRIAF.



PeeD said:


> http://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/The Radar equation in practice.en.html



We don't have the detailed figures of the E-3 radar to use the equation.



PS: I'm enjoying this discussion. They are difficult to come by.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Examples?



The RQ-170 is rumored to use such a integrated RAM. But you can imagine it's hard to come by. Its certainly technically possible for low thermal stressed = subsonic airframes.



AmirPatriot said:


> Can you give examples of aircraft that use carbon/composite wing boxes?



No, as I'm not so much informed on aircrafts anymore. But from engineering perspective, you can do anything you want, carbon composite, steel or even new aluminium alloys. The question is only what performs better for weight and which one is less expensive.
If titanium is too expensive for the set cost limit many different other materials can be used for a 5g rated missile carrier.



AmirPatriot said:


> Not really possible when your small fuselage is taken up mostly by weapons bays. Out of all tactical stealth combat aircraft like the F-22, F-35, J-20, J-31 and T-50, only the T-50 has hard points on the fuselage (just 2, it has more on the wings), and those are on the engine nacelles that run the side of the aircraft, which won't happen with your F-313 since it is a much, much smaller design.



Look at the F-15E for a fuselage hardpoint arrangement applicable to the F-313 on a bomb truck mission.



AmirPatriot said:


> A cost effective UCAV would have to be pretty big to match the payload of, say, a Yak-130, therefore reducing that cost effectiveness. It's still a major project my friend. And in some cases it still isn't possible. It could do it in permissible airspace, but not really semi-permissible airspace. In short, you'd need aerial supremacy, aerial superiority isn't enough.



We had that discussion here, no need to repeat it.



AmirPatriot said:


> Even if it isn't an export item, it still needs to be paid for. You can't pay a (arbitrary large number) billion dollars for R&D of an airframe for the F-313 and then just pretend it isn't relevant to the F-313. You have to include it.



So include the R&D on my 600 airframes. But bear in mind that this is not a conventional decade long project like the 20billion Turkish program. But I told you about the state procurement concept of Iran.



AmirPatriot said:


> They don't use the F-15 for training, its for practice to retain and improve skills. Flight hours are a basic instrument of improving skill, @kollang will tell you that.



The skill level of my F313 would be fortunately low because of its operation regime and high automation (due to the high available processing power of today).
A F-15 pilot on the other hand needs to train all the skills for bombing/interdiction, BVR positioning and dogfighting. They can't reach those skills in a T-38 trainer but need to do it at $40k an hour on a F-15. If they do those 150 hours on their F-15, it's 6 million dollars a year for training.
Training is always important but with a much smaller skill requirement, you need much less hours.
We slowly reach the age of maneuvering UCAV, in 10-15 years, automation is a game changer.



AmirPatriot said:


> That's not because we've been trying our hardest to have a powerful air force and they've just beaten us at that because they're better. It's because Iran neglected the IRIAF for decades and now we have reached this. If Iran started putting the same sort of effort and resources it put into its ballistic missile force, into the IRIAF, we could envision a bright future for the IRIAF.



When do you think Iran Khodro would be able to compete with Mercedes Benz? 10 years? 100 years? What market share does Mercedes have and hence available money?

Never go for something where the enemy has absolute advantage if there are alternatives to it.
So you might go for a novel small city electric car to compete, but not for a limousine with combustion engine. That's your only hope to compete until the next 50 years.
But I pointed this out too here with VEVAK, no need to repeat.



AmirPatriot said:


> We don't have the detailed figures of the E-3 radar to use the equation.



I know about the much more powerful S-band Big Bird radar and its detection capability via the radar equation on my spreadsheet. No, an E-3 would never be able to detect a LO 0,1m² target (F-313) at ranges over 100km.

The F-313 would have to fear the X-band fighter radars searching for it after it turns on its radar for the LRAAM shot and then try to hunt it. However X-band performance against a LO target such as the F-313 is low --> secondary key to survive as a subsonic mach 0,9 fighter at low altitude, first key is terrain masking. As said, the B-2 uses the same methods for survival.


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> I think if case 2 occurs American would be dragged into war eventually and vice versa ... and if it gets more complicated Saudis, the UAE would get involved too ... But I think Saudis would not start war without American green light, and American would not give green light without being sure of security of israel ... so as far as you could keep isreal in check .. nothing would happen ...



I don't think the Americans are worried of Iran attacking Israel if there was a war between Iran & Saudi Arabia!

And I would say the Saudi's would be more worried of what Iran would do to their own infrastructure than anything else & the Americans would be more worried of what Iran would do to their own bases & ships than anything else!
As for Israel it's doubtful Iran would use the missiles it has pointing at Israel unless the Israeli's get directly involved & Israeli's would have to be fools to get involved when two Muslim countries start attacking each other!

Iran didn't build large stocks of Fatteh Class, Zolfaghar Class, Qiam Class, Ya Ali class,... Missiles for Israeli targets!

I would say the only countries that will see Iran's wrath if the Saudi's start a war with Iran by themselves would be the UAE & Bahrain Iran will takeout UAE Military within an hour because Iran can't afford to allow the Saudi's to have an untouched forward operating base in the Persian Gulf & a few months ago I would have put Qatar on that list too 
And any Saudi target between Iran & Riyhad will be taken out quickly!

As for the U.S., aside from selling weapons & giving intel It's not in the U.S. interest to get directly involved in a war between Iran & Saudi Arabia because the more Saudi Weapons & Facilities Iran destroys the more money the Americans will make in the long run!
From American military industrial complex to US Oil companies to large US construction companies to media moguls & the Israeli lobby... all without exception would love to see Iran & Saudi Arabia destroy themselves!

The U.S. doesn't see Saudi Arabia as a beacon of stability in the region so they would love to see Iran & Saudi Arabia destroy themselves so it's doubtful that you would see the U.S. lift a finger in the 1st months or year of war and because neither country is strong enough to invade the other all they have to do is wait around! As for giving the go ahead to the Saudi's they'll easily do that as they did to Saddam both against Iran & Kuwait! Hell they have been covertly creating tensions between both countries for years for this very reason!

Which means Iran would have NO CHOICE but to go after U.S. bases in the region & if the U.S. knew a Saudi war against Iran was coming they would more likely withdraw their personal to 1000km from Iranian borders & wait till Iran empty's out it's missiles on empty bases or bases with limited personal & equipment 

U.S. likes easy wars and they have already done the math of what the costs would be if they initiate direct military confrontation with Iran without large scale use of nukes it would make Vietnam look like a cakewalk so the best option for them is for another country to start the war so they can wait around and later come in and finish an easy war!

So it's just a question of how stupid the Saudi's are and whether or not they are stupid enough to fall for this trap!
Because there is absolutely nothing Saudi Arabia would gain from a direct military confrontation with Iran! They don't have the power to invade Iran so there is no territory to be gained they don't have the power to change the government in Iran or even change Iran's foreign policy so there would be no political or strategic victory! And because of Iran's support of Hezbullah they can't even use a war with Iran as even a simple distraction just to distract Iran as they take down Syria covertly! And the only thing that would be ensured in a war with Iran is the weakening of their own military & destruction of their own infrastructure!
Saudi's are struggling with the poorest country in the region right off their own border in a country where they speak the language & can cut off supplies too so there would be no victory to be gained in a direct confrontation with Iran & any Saudi monarch would have to be either stupid, insane or a CIA operative to initiate a war with Iran! 

I think the next major challenge Iran will be facing will likely be in Kurdistan. ISIS didn't work out for the U.S. because their religious views were just too insane for regional & global populations to accept but that's not a problem when it comes to the Kurds their views are purely ethnic that would translate to nationalistic with an independent Kurdish state & they'll easily sell out to the U.S., Israeli & Saudi's if it results in them having their own independent state!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

Draco.IMF said:


> you guys forget one important factor -> The downing of RQ-170 drone
> asfaik, because Iran gets access to its engine technology, it boosted the iranian jet engine industry ~ 30 years ahead.
> I dont understand some guys here why Iran should rely on some old Touloue engines when Iran has access to much better engines.


Turbofan engines consist of four sections: the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, and turbine. For the fan and the compressor in the fore half section, where the temperature is relatively low (600˚C or lower), A titanium alloy is mainly used. For the turbine and the combustion chamber in the rear half section where temperatures are higher (1500˚C or higher), a nickel-based alloy or iron-based alloy (a.k.a Superalloys) is used. Having access to a Turbofan engine doesn't give you the technology needed for creating alloys and superalloys.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The RQ-170 is rumored to use such a integrated RAM



Must be a very obscure rumour. I haven't heard about this at all. On the contrary, I've heard the RQ-170 uses minimal physical stealth shaping techniques (beyond the obvious flying wing config) and instead relies on RAM for most of its stealth capacity.



PeeD said:


> No, as I'm not so much informed on aircrafts anymore. But from engineering perspective, you can do anything you want, carbon composite, steel or even new aluminium alloys. The question is only what performs better for weight and which one is less expensive.



Even commercial airliners use Titanium in their wing boxes and structures, though they do include composites for some parts. And commercial airliners aren't expected to pull 5 Gs.



PeeD said:


> Look at the F-15E for a fuselage hardpoint arrangement applicable to the F-313 on a bomb truck mission.



Like I said, the F-15 isn't a stealth aircraft and doesn't need to set aside fuselage space for weapons bays.

Not going to work very well when you have those massive bays (relative to the aircraft). You couldn't use both at the same time unless you get very creative with (unstealthy) sections of airframe poking out of the general shape to support those weapons.



PeeD said:


> So include the R&D on my 600 airframes. But bear in mind that this is not a conventional decade long project like the 20billion Turkish program.



If anything R&D will be more expensive than you expect, since this is a very unconventional design that requires unconventional design solutions.



PeeD said:


> Training is always important but with a much smaller skill requirement, you need much less hours.



So what, 3 times less, to 50? Still only 10 years of peacetime flying, much less in combat. Whereas IRIAF aircraft have been serving for 40 years now and some of them have been adapted to useful (though not competitive) roles given their age.



PeeD said:


> When do you think Iran Khodro would be able to compete with Mercedes Benz?



You could pose the same question to China. Compared to the Soviets', Europeans' and Americans' 100 years of experience, they had what, 20 years of experience *designing* combat aircraft, before they started making stealth aircraft? 



PeeD said:


> I know about the much more powerful S-band Big Bird radar and its detection capability via the radar equation on my spreadsheet. No, an E-3 would never be able to detect a LO 0,1m² target (F-313) at ranges over 100km.



Difference is, the Big Bird is a ground based radar and the E-3 is thousands of feet up.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Must be a very obscure rumour. I haven't heard about this at all. On the contrary, I've heard the RQ-170 uses minimal physical stealth shaping techniques (beyond the obvious flying wing config) and instead relies on RAM for most of its stealth capacity.



There is no reason to talk about something that is classified everywhere. Let me just say that integrated RAM in composite is technically feasible and more so for subsonic design. It's just a question about performance and cost. As said, RAM might only be used for gaps if the target is LO instead of VLO.



AmirPatriot said:


> Even commercial airliners use Titanium in their wing boxes and structures, though they do include composites for some parts. And commercial airliners aren't expected to pull 5 Gs.



Commercial airliners safe every kg where possible, weight = fuel = money. More so for decade old companies with decade old supply chain and decade old engineers which are used to titanium.
The F-313 needs to be cost-effective, so if another material is available, even at lower performance, it might get selected for wing boxes and high loaded structures.



AmirPatriot said:


> Like I said, the F-15 isn't a stealth aircraft and doesn't need to set aside fuselage space for weapons bays.
> 
> Not going to work very well when you have those massive bays (relative to the aircraft). You couldn't use both at the same time unless you get very creative with (unstealthy) sections of airframe poking out of the general shape to support those weapons.



At the bombtruck mission you want no stealth aircraft is stealthy.

You want to carry a high payload with the F-313 outside the w-bay. Here is a fuselage hardpoint arrangement that fulfill your wish without wing hardpoints:






At the AMRAAM positions



AmirPatriot said:


> If anything R&D will be more expensive than you expect, since this is a very unconventional design that requires unconventional design solutions.



One can speculate about it. Lets do that if it is proven to be a real project and with my suggested function...



AmirPatriot said:


> So what, 3 times less, to 50? Still only 10 years of peacetime flying, much less in combat. Whereas IRIAF aircraft have been serving for 40 years now and some of them have been adapted to useful (though not competitive) roles given their age.



Nobody knows. I just want a high degree of automation due to today available software and hardware. Maybe 50 hours a year plus extensive complex simulator and advanced trainer training.



AmirPatriot said:


> You could pose the same question to China. Compared to the Soviets', Europeans' and Americans' 100 years of experience, they had what, 20 years of experience *designing* combat aircraft, before they started making stealth aircraft?



China has almost unlimited resources and manpower. It's the only country that plays this catch-up game and when they started a precision BM/CM arsenal was no feasible option.
From what is known, their stealth designs are based on espionage data from the Americans, without it they would lag much further behind.
Even if not, their designs do not have the 5th gen kinematics of Su-57 and F-22. Kinematics is at least as important as stealth, they still struggle to build high TBO 12KN engines, just now they want to fit a 14KN engine on the J-20 and it's supercruising capability is in question. For reference, Russians and Americans are working or have ~18KN engines for the same size.

Now with all that, they have a more than 50 year old fighter building industry. You seriously suggests Iran to join the catch-up game in airpower???



AmirPatriot said:


> Difference is, the Big Bird is a ground based radar and the E-3 is thousands of feet up.



Aperture power makes the difference. You talk about line of sight. So again, no, the E-3 would not be able to detect a 0,1m² F-313 at ranges exceeding 100km.


----------



## WordsMatter

Cthulhu said:


> Turbofan engines consist of four sections: the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, and turbine. For the fan and the compressor in the fore half section, where the temperature is relatively low (600˚C or lower), A titanium alloy is mainly used. For the turbine and the combustion chamber in the rear half section where temperatures are higher (1500˚C or higher), a nickel-based alloy or iron-based alloy (a.k.a Superalloys) is used. Having access to a Turbofan engine doesn't give you the technology needed for creating alloys and superalloys.


Yep makes sense... Can't argue against a well argued point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Cthulhu said:


> Turbofan engines consist of four sections: the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, and turbine. For the fan and the compressor in the fore half section, where the temperature is relatively low (600˚C or lower), A titanium alloy is mainly used. For the turbine and the combustion chamber in the rear half section where temperatures are higher (1500˚C or higher), a nickel-based alloy or iron-based alloy (a.k.a Superalloys) is used. Having access to a Turbofan engine doesn't give you the technology needed for creating alloys and superalloys.




Iran already solved the Magnesium problem & the next step would be titanium alloy, Iran's developing CMC (Ceramic Matric Composites) for ball brings which means they will continue to add CMC materials for heat shielding as well & continued advancement would allow them to build and use cmc turbine blades if they haven't already & 3D printing will revolutionize various conventional known Jet engine design within the next decade which will lessen Ti waist & use but Titanium is a light super alloy that's not going anywhere 

Iran's Tolue-4 runs at 28,000 RPM but only has 770lbf's & that' mainly due to the diameter & size of the intakes but using cheap materials means you end up with an engine with a 50 hour lifespan

A J-47 with fairly similar design meaning a simple single shaft single turbine design (but much larger in diameter) running at 8000 rpm's at ~3ft in diameter can put out 6000lbf & 7000lbf if cooled
& until Iran starts playing around with a larger diameter engine they will never be able to perfect an engine design for a supersonic manned fighter worth producing

now the J-47 was build at a time when many composite materials, super alloys & precision cutting equipment didn't really exist or didn't exist at a production scale limiting everything from it's ball brings on up
It's turbine was built using an insufficient design, it's combustion chambers were too big requiring the shaft to be longer than it needed to be & it's airflow regulators & compressors can easily be improved upon using known methods 

meaning there are a lot of problems you could potentially solve on a J-47 to make the engine more compact in length, more powerful & improve energy efficiency using tech already available to Iran now that's an engine Iran should have reverse engineered & improved upon as appose to the J-85 that's only 17 inches in diameter with little room for any significant upgrades!

Unfortunately, Iran's continued insistence on building lighter & cheaper fighters with an absurd fixation on initial production & purchasing cost will be the downfall of an Iranian fighter program! 


Some here like to talk about the special engines on the RQ-170 well at best the RQ-170 had an electric turbofan engines meaning they took a small turbojet engine connected it to a brushless alternator that produces enough constant high powered electricity to power an advanced brushless DC electric engine(S) connected to a gearbox to turn a fan that runs counter to the jet engines turbine & compressor to give you a more stable, low noise, high airflow, hi bypass engine
I suspect that is the main reason why the intakes have that honeycomb shield because the electric powered fans aren't powerful enough to take a hit from small flying objects like birds & allows for an evenly distributed constant flow of air lessening shockwave they may have been put on the fans....

Brushless engines have made great advancements due to sensor, computing power & Composite materials & 3D printers allow you to play around with designs at a much faster pace using various types of materials and we have already seen BLDC engines that can run up to 109,000 RPM so having a brushless engine(s) connected to a gearbox that gives it enough power & torque to propel the aircraft at subsonic speeds with fans made out of composites running at ~3000 RPM's is within the realm of possibility & such an engine would produces less heat & noise than normal aircraft engines that size 

RQ-170 is a platform used by the CIA for deep stealthy penetration of enemy territory at sufficient speed & range so they needed a platform with limited amount of thermal, radar & noise signature 
I believe that's why to this day the US has not provided detailed specs on the RQ-170 while specs on newer more capable designs like the X-47 are readily available


----------



## VEVAK

Su-30 in IRAN!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

VEVAK said:


> Su-30 in IRAN!


@AmirPatriot 
It was already posted, soheil said that it's a lie!
But i had seen a claim of an MP. Look at this :
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/69...ه-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل

See also 
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/459592/ستاری-ایران-دو-مدل-جنگنده-از-روسیه-می-خرد

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohammad45 said:


> @AmirPatriot
> It was already posted, soheil said that it's a lie!
> But i had seen a claim of an MP. Look at this :
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/69...ه-های-سوخو-30-در-چند-روز-آینده-به-ایران-تحویل
> 
> See also
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/459592/ستاری-ایران-دو-مدل-جنگنده-از-روسیه-می-خرد
> 
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



It's no lie! You can see Iranian F-4's in the background!
I'm not saying those are Iranian Su-30's but it is clearly a Su-30 at an Iranian Air Base!


Regardless, Iran has made public it's interest to purchase ~60 Su-30's!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

VEVAK said:


> Su-30 in IRAN!


How many times should we debunk this cgi overlay?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

arashkamangir said:


> How many times should we debunk this cgi overlay?



I really don't see what the big deal is about Russian Su-30's flying to Syria from a military base in Hamedan!
What's the big deal!
It's not like Russia has taken over that base! They just used it as a pit stop!


----------



## Muhammed45

arashkamangir said:


> How many times should we debunk this cgi overlay?


What an overlap!!!?
The operator should be marhoom Steve Jobs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

VEVAK said:


> I really don't see what the big deal is about Russian Su-30's flying to Syria from a military base in Hamedan!
> What's the big deal!
> It's not like Russia has taken over that base! They just used it as a pit stop!


No I'm saying this is a computer generated imagery on top of a f-14

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> I suspect that is the main reason why the intakes have that honeycomb shield because the electric powered fans aren't powerful enough to take a hit from small flying objects like birds & allows for an evenly distributed constant flow of air lessening shockwave they may have been put on the fans....



Your idea about a electric fan is quite good, it is also one of my candidates. We know that the engine is small and it produces a unique noise signature different to any known jet engine. Agreed, a possibility.

However the grid at the intake has just a LO usage + birdstrike protection. At centimetric band the grid acts like a solid surface, a clever and effective solution for subsonic LO/VLO designs. Subsonic aircraft do not have issues with intake air shockwaves and at the fan face.



VEVAK said:


> Unfortunately, Iran's continued insistence on building lighter & cheaper fighters with an absurd fixation on initial production & purchasing cost will be the downfall of an Iranian fighter program!



Everyone wants an all aspect-VLO large, long range fighter which supercruises at mach 1,6-1,8. However today on this earth, only America and Russia could produce something like that, even Britain would the next likely candidate before China.
So you better realize that you need a different approach to fight those next generation fighters. Go figure out which approach would have chances against those monsters.
We are really fortunate that the F-22 does not reach the kinematic performance that was expected and nor is it available in the numbers planned. If it would have in form of a F/A-22C we would not even have to talk about 200 Su-30 etc.
I myself am no friend of light fighters but the F-313 could be an approach or e.g an Iranian Mig-31 afterburning mach 2,5 supersonic cruiser. The target is only to remain survivable against such threats, question is how.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Your idea about a electric fan is quite good, it is also one of my candidates. We know that the engine is small and it produces a unique noise signature different to any known jet engine. Agreed, a possibility.
> 
> However the grid at the intake has just a LO usage + birdstrike protection. At centimetric band the grid acts like a solid surface, a clever and effective solution for subsonic LO/VLO designs. Subsonic aircraft do not have issues with intake air shockwaves and at the fan face.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone wants an all aspect-VLO large, long range fighter which supercruises at mach 1,6-1,8. However today on this earth, only America and Russia could produce something like that, even Britain would the next likely candidate before China.
> So you better realize that you need a different approach to fight those next generation fighters. Go figure out which approach would have chances against those monsters.
> We are really fortunate that the F-22 does not reach the kinematic performance that was expected and nor is it available in the numbers planned. If it would have in form of a F/A-22C we would not even have to talk about 200 Su-30 etc.
> I myself am no friend of light fighters but the F-313 could be an approach or e.g an Iranian Mig-31 afterburning mach 2,5 supersonic cruiser. The target is only to remain survivable against such threats, question is how.



Standard titanium fans on subsonic aircraft being turned by it's own independent turbine & gears will NOT face that problem no!
But we are not talking about a standard engine!
An electric Turbine engine would need to create electricity from the heat & the motion to create enough constant electricity to power probably 3-6 advanced BLDC electric engines to create enough power to turn a large enough fan at high speeds and the fans would likely have to be built with much lighter materials than Titanium that aren't as strong!

As for the F-313 The answer is quite simple! 1st off when your a low budget country that wants to build it's own fighter so the smart thing to do is look at history of fighter and use the experience and knowledge gained by others rather than pick an unconventional design that you know nothing about!

I can tell you by just looking at the F-313 that the Aircraft will have major problems in maneuverability and in Yaw for landing!!!
I can tell you by just looking at it that the nose is too small and you need to widen it so you can fit a real cockpit inside! and it should at least be big enough to fit a Kowsar cockpit inside 
The wing design is totally flawed! 
The square cracks underneath will not only not reduce RCS but will negatively effect aerodynamics so they need to be rounded off around the edges

No one is stopping Iran from building a larger more powerful engine but Iran it's self and that is a FACT! 

And it's not like we don't have Oil & Natural gas to have fuel problems!

And you need to stop seeing the U.S. as Iran's only security challenge! Just because a US Air Force would be stronger than Iran's is not an excuse to not have a real Air Force or a real fighter program!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> I can tell you by just looking at the F-313 that the Aircraft will have major problems in maneuverability and in Yaw for landing!!!
> I can tell you by just looking at it that the nose is too small and you need to widen it so you can fit a real cockpit inside! and it should at least be big enough to fit a Kowsar cockpit inside
> The wing design is totally flawed!
> The square cracks underneath will not only not reduce RCS but will negatively effect aerodynamics so they need to be rounded off around the edges



You have a strange approach to judge a design. If it makes no conventional sense to you, they must be design flaws.
How about interpreting it for a different operation regime?

- Maneuverability might be neglected due to high off bore sight AAMs, HMS and a 5 G limitation.
- Landing gear yaw angle might be limited because in a ground effect operation, the yaw angle can me much less for landing ---> GE operation indicator?
- Nose/cockpit section might be slender because the forward landing gear does not fold into that section but the fuselage? Nose area for radar might be small because its optimized for GCI/IADS guidance and not self emitting? Cockpit equipment space might be small because a new generation of such equipment is anticipated at the time of it entering production?
- Wing design might be optimized for low level ground effect flight?
- What if rounded lower fuselage edges with LO/VLO capability would be too expensive to employ? What if aerodynamic penalty of those edges are negligible in subsonic operation regime just like for the F-117?

You remind me of Americans on their forums who find many flaws with the PAK-FA design... Do you guys really have such an aerospace engineering self confidence that you think your smarter than a whole team of aerospace engineers, professionals?
At least say that you don't agree with a certain design solution, but calling such fundamentals flawed???

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

@VEVAK that video is CGI, I cannot count the number of times it has been brought up and debunked.



PeeD said:


> There is no reason to talk about something that is classified everywhere. Let me just say that integrated RAM in composite is technically feasible and more so for subsonic design. It's just a question about performance and cost. As said, RAM might only be used for gaps if the target is LO instead of VLO.



Are you trying to tell me that we shouldn't talk about it for OPSEC reasons? 

Because without a source or at least knowing the nature of the source, the rumour is has next to no technical credibility. 



PeeD said:


> The F-313 needs to be cost-effective, so if another material is available, even at lower performance, it might get selected for wing boxes and high loaded structures.



What would be great would be if there could be examples and/or proof that using composites for high load structures is feasible from both an engineering and safety standpoint. 

Also remember that your aircraft has very weak engines, and therefore needs to be as light as possible. Using a bit of high grade material is lighter than using a lot of lower grade material. 



PeeD said:


> At the bombtruck mission you want no stealth aircraft is stealthy.



I know, but my point is you may have to shape your airframe in unstealthy ways to accommodate this arrangement, and therefore would affect the aircraft even in its stealthy configuration. 



PeeD said:


> You want to carry a high payload with the F-313 outside the w-bay.



And I'm saying if you do that, the weapons will block the weapons bays (because the latter takes up so much surface area given your design). That means you will lose the capacity of those bays, which given their size is up to 2x 2000 lb bombs. 



PeeD said:


> Maybe 50 hours a year plus extensive complex simulator and advanced trainer training.



Which is still only 10 years of *peacetime *operation given your stated aircraft life. I expect it would only last 1 or 2 years of warfare even if new. 



PeeD said:


> You seriously suggests Iran to join the catch-up game in airpower???



Iran is the first country to have operational ASHBMs. We caught up in precision BM technology. 

We caught up in LACM technology with the Soumar.

We caught up in LR AD with the Bavar-373.

We caught up in radar technology with the Najm-802 and Matla ul Fajr 2.

We caught up in tank technology with the Karrar.

We caught up in drone tech with the Shahed-129.

All through that, everyone was doubting us and saying we couldn't do it. They called our drones RC Toys, our missiles Scuds, and our tanks T-72s with cosmetic upgrades.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Are you trying to tell me that we shouldn't talk about it for OPSEC reasons?
> 
> Because without a source or at least knowing the nature of the source, the rumour is has next to no technical credibility.



Sometimes there are no examples because of opsec. But feasibility is something else. You might have no professional aerospace experience to judge that.

There is a new generation of airframe technology. It has large seamless outer shell structures which are made completely by composites. They are not applicable to supersonic aircraft because their thermal and max-q properties and their lifetime might be lower.
So I don't give you a source or example, but keep a professional approach before saying: "... has next to no technical credibility"...



AmirPatriot said:


> What would be great would be if there could be examples and/or proof that using composites for high load structures is feasible from both an engineering and safety standpoint.



There is no debate about this. Carbon fiber is just not used in wingboxes because there are already established conventional materials and methods which achieve the target at lower price.

I'm not anti-titanium but ask any engineer with knowledge: Carbon fiber does everything titanium does, just better, maybe more expensive but better. So let us end this.



AmirPatriot said:


> Also remember that your aircraft has very weak engines, and therefore needs to be as light as possible. Using a bit of high grade material is lighter than using a lot of lower grade material.



If titanium wingboxes would be too expensive for a $8m airframe and a lower performing solution had to be selected, the weight saving would be done somewhere else. In the end the overall performance matters.



AmirPatriot said:


> I know, but my point is you may have to shape your airframe in unstealthy ways to accommodate this arrangement, and therefore would affect the aircraft even in its stealthy configuration.



No, the current F-313 shape can do this.



AmirPatriot said:


> And I'm saying if you do that, the weapons will block the weapons bays (because the latter takes up so much surface area given your design). That means you will lose the capacity of those bays, which given their size is up to 2x 2000 lb bombs.



They don't block them, they would be at the outer, lower edge of the broad fuselage.



AmirPatriot said:


> Which is still only 10 years of *peacetime *operation given your stated aircraft life. I expect it would only last 1 or 2 years of warfare even if new.



Moden fighter engines have 50% the lifetime of the airframe. My 500 hour TBO J90s would be overhauled/changed and a 2000 hours rated expendable $8m airframe instead of 8000, could be just replaced with a new one or rebuild.



AmirPatriot said:


> Iran is the first country to have operational ASHBMs. We caught up in precision BM technology.
> 
> We caught up in LACM technology with the Soumar.
> 
> We caught up in LR AD with the Bavar-373.
> 
> We caught up in radar technology with the Najm-802 and Matla ul Fajr 2.
> 
> We caught up in tank technology with the Karrar.
> 
> We caught up in drone tech with the Shahed-129.
> 
> All through that, everyone was doubting us and saying we couldn't do it. They called our drones RC Toys, our missiles Scuds, and our tanks T-72s with cosmetic upgrades.



All those systems are highly cost effective. Some of them are scientifically extremely advanced but none of them is in production as difficult to master as jet engine technology.

Of those systems, only the Shahed-129 is more fragile than conventional airpower. But the S-129 is expendable, cheap and does not have the immense hurdle of a jet engine.

Iran will certainly spend a smaller portion on airpower as intercontinental hypersonic aircraft of the future will make airpower serious again. Until then, a F-313 to my operational regime is a good solution.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> You have a strange approach to judge a design. If it makes no conventional sense to you, they must be design flaws.
> How about interpreting it for a different operation regime?
> 
> - Maneuverability might be neglected due to high off bore sight AAMs, HMS and a 5 G limitation.
> - Landing gear yaw angle might be limited because in a ground effect operation, the yaw angle can me much less for landing ---> GE operation indicator?
> - Nose/cockpit section might be slender because the forward landing gear does not fold into that section but the fuselage? Nose area for radar might be small because its optimized for GCI/IADS guidance and not self emitting? Cockpit equipment space might be small because a new generation of such equipment is anticipated at the time of it entering production?
> - Wing design might be optimized for low level ground effect flight?
> - What if rounded lower fuselage edges with LO/VLO capability would be too expensive to employ? What if aerodynamic penalty of those edges are negligible in subsonic operation regime just like for the F-117?
> 
> You remind me of Americans on their forums who find many flaws with the PAK-FA design... Do you guys really have such an aerospace engineering self confidence that you think your smarter than a whole team of aerospace engineers, professionals?
> At least say that you don't agree with a certain design solution, but calling such fundamentals flawed???



Sooner or later once the F-313 starts doing flight test you will see!

If Maneuverability is neglected on a light airframe with low survivability your nothing but target practice because the MAIN reason 5th gen fighter have thrust vectoring is to be used as a countermeasure to incoming missiles so in a modern battlefield maneuverability comes into play as a countermeasure to incoming missiles 1st & Dogfights last! 

WHO IN THIER RIGHT MIND would hand off Speed, Range, Maneuverability & Survivability for ground effect in a country where the majority of the terrain is mountains!

A Jet powered ground effect aircraft didn't even make sense over water let alone over land and the Russian proved that! And if F-313 designers had spent a little time researching history they would know that!

And YOU WOULDN'T put your optics underneath the Aircraft if the Aircraft was built for ground effect flight! That's absurd!

And making the aircraft more aerodynamic wouldn't effect cost AT ALL! That's the MOST absurd thing I've heard you say so far!

And the F-117 had MAJOR problems in maneuverability & stability due to it's aerodynamics that required a very advanced fly by wire system so no IT IS NOT negligible AT ALL but they kept it due to it's stealth features but those features only work if you fly straight towards a specific radar & that's why the US only kept a limited number active to be used for specific operations! Iran on the F-313 is trying to solve the stability problem with those absurd wing design but what they clearly haven't figured out is the effect it will have on Yaw which will cause MAJOR problems especially if you wanna fly the aircraft in ground effect mode!
F-117 had swept back wings at 50 degrees with 20,000 lbf of dry trust to achieve high subsonic speeds!

The F-313 low RCS characteristics are nowhere near the F-117, And it's not the design of the F-313 that makes it a low cost aircraft but rather the materials used in the Airframe

And building a low surviving airframe to fly at low altitude makes you susceptible to cheap ground fire, AAA & MANPAD's that can be easily hidden and easily moved so it is an absolute absurd and totally deluded idea! 

And to sacrifice Maneuverability, Speed, Combat Radius, Survivability, Situational Awareness, Angle of Attack, Thrust to Weight ratio, aerodynamics, payload capacity, onboard sensor capability, thrust, Yaw, Max G... All to have an aircraft with high ground effect capability & short takeoff capability on a manned aircraft that's susceptible to ground fire & cheap & light AAA & MANPADS IS ABSURD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And to mass produce such an absurd design is absolutely NUTS!

It's absurd for Iran to have one of the lowest military budget per capita & per GDP of the region! Iran has the 2nd largest economy of the region so we should have the 2nd largest military budget as well!
Iran IS the FASTEST growing country in Science & Technology in the world and the ONLY organization in the country that could potentially have the budget to turn that science into products is the MILITARY but because of the governments refusal to invest properly in the defense industry (+ lack of leadership in the IRIAF) to create high tech jobs we have brain drain in the country! And the notion that we don't have the money is absurd! We get more money in Tax's than we get from Oil! And more funding in the defense industry = more JOBs! = More taxes = better Iranian military & none military products

Right now Myanmar with a GDP(nominal) of $75 Billion has added more ships to it's blue water naval fleet than Iran has in the past decade! Even Kuwait is arming it's self with F/A-18's Angola & Algeria are buying Su-30's

And Iran's Navy is fully capable of building more ships & Subs at a much faster pace if funded to do so!
Iran is fully capable of building jet engines with a dry thrust of over 10,000 lbf at 4ft in diameter if funded to do so!
Iran is fully capable of building more advanced Helo's at a much faster pace if funded to do so!
Iran is fully capable of building an F-15 size Fighter with an internal weapons bay & a Low RCS using titanium casting hardened with composites if funded to do so!
Iran is fully capable of building more advanced 3D printers that will speed up & reduce the costs of R&D if funded to do so 
Any high school student at home can easily use sea water & a little DC electricity to separate oxygen & hydrogen that are extremely flammable so you have limitless supply of potential fuel source!
etc etc etc


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> The F-313 low RCS characteristics are nowhere near the F-117, And it's not the design of the F-313 that makes it a low cost aircraft but rather the materials used in the Airframe


how do you know what material used in q 313 are you one of designer we dont know i read your things you speak like someone how build or make qaher or anything else . why speak so strongly about q-313 or else the commanders or designer dont say anything about engine or material but you know like that 500 meters cep please dont say anything you dont know its right or say its my idea


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> If Maneuverability is neglected on a light airframe with low survivability your nothing but target practice because the MAIN reason 5th gen fighter have thrust vectoring is to be used as a countermeasure to incoming missiles so in a modern battlefield maneuverability comes into play as a countermeasure to incoming missiles 1st & Dogfights last!



Yes maneuverability is mainly for missile dodging these days. However it does not mean the F-313 would have to do the same if this capability increases airframe cost by 100%. Evasion by LO/VLO and terrain masking/clutter is another option.



VEVAK said:


> WHO IN THIER RIGHT MIND would hand off Speed, Range, Maneuverability & Survivability for ground effect in a country where the majority of the terrain is mountains!
> 
> A Jet powered ground effect aircraft didn't even make sense over water let alone over land and the Russian proved that! And if F-313 designers had spent a little time researching history they would know that!



I wont argue with you about that. There are many indicators that the F-313 is designed to make use of GE. There has never been a GE aircraft that fly above solid ground but many jet powered GE aircraft that fly over water.



VEVAK said:


> And YOU WOULDN'T put your optics underneath the Aircraft if the Aircraft was built for ground effect flight! That's absurd!



No it's not... Even top mounted optics would be next to useless in land GE operation. Optics are used during pop-up, GE for cruise.



VEVAK said:


> And making the aircraft more aerodynamic wouldn't effect cost AT ALL! That's the MOST absurd thing I've heard you say so far!



Any rounded LO/VLO rated airframe surfaces WILL BE more expensive than flat ones. So their use of faceted fuselage could very well be cost driven. The aerodynamic penalty could be acceptable low.



VEVAK said:


> And the F-117 had MAJOR problems in maneuverability & stability due to it's aerodynamics that required a very advanced fly by wire system so no IT IS NOT negligible AT ALL but they kept it due to it's stealth features but those features only work if you fly straight towards a specific radar & that's why the US only kept a limited number active to be used for specific operations! Iran on the F-313 is trying to solve the stability problem with those absurd wing design but what they clearly haven't figured out is the effect it will have on Yaw which will cause MAJOR problems especially if you wanna fly the aircraft in ground effect mode!
> F-117 had swept back wings at 50 degrees with 20,000 lbf of dry trust to achieve high subsonic speeds!



The F-313 is aerodynamically much better than the F-117 and likely aerodynamically stable.
I know that you have no basis for your "low yaw performance" claims because you use inappellable examples and comparisons. I give you a story to think about: American T-38 (F-5) trainers with their low power J85 are able to supercruise dry without afterburners. Think about that fact and stop judging complex matters by poor simplistic comparisons.



VEVAK said:


> The F-313 low RCS characteristics are nowhere near the F-117, And it's not the design of the F-313 that makes it a low cost aircraft but rather the materials used in the Airframe



Neither you nor me know that.



VEVAK said:


> And building a low surviving airframe to fly at low altitude makes you susceptible to cheap ground fire, AAA & MANPAD's that can be easily hidden and easily moved so it is an absolute absurd and totally deluded idea!



The F-313 would operate as defensive IADS asset during high intensity warfare. Only in very special cases like a tanker/AWACS hunt over sea surface, it would leave Irans borders. Btw. cruise missiles are then also very easy targets?



VEVAK said:


> And to sacrifice Maneuverability, Speed, Combat Radius, Survivability, Situational Awareness, Angle of Attack, Thrust to Weight ratio, aerodynamics, payload capacity, onboard sensor capability, thrust, Yaw, Max G... All to have an aircraft with high ground effect capability & short takeoff capability on a manned aircraft that's susceptible to ground fire & cheap & light AAA & MANPADS IS ABSURD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And to mass produce such an absurd design is absolutely NUTS!



This is a complex game of margins and I'm sure you have not calculated my F-313 operation regime. Again a poor judgment.



VEVAK said:


> Iran is fully capable of building jet engines with a dry thrust of over 10,000 lbf at 4ft in diameter if funded to do so!
> Iran is fully capable of building an F-15 size Fighter with an internal weapons bay & a Low RCS using titanium casting hardened with composites if funded to do so!



Beware of such statements. I even agree to some extend but I suspect you vastly underestimate what monumental task that is. Nor are you able to judge whether doing such a project offers enough bang for the bucks for Iran atm.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

ashool said:


> how do you know what material used in q 313 are you one of designer we dont know i read your things you speak like someone how build or make qaher or anything else . why speak so strongly about q-313 or else the commanders or designer dont say anything about engine or material but you know like that 500 meters cep please dont say anything you dont know its right or say its my idea



You don't know me! And you don't know what I do know and what I don't know!
And a 500 meter CEP on a Ballistic Missile that has a range of 1700km for a country that not equipped with various space assets is astonishing!
The reason you think it's not is due to your limited knowledge on the subject!
And it's disrespectful to the kids that worked day and night to achieve it!
Achieving 500 meter CEP means you can target large facilities which allows you to cut that CEP by over 50% with further adjustments & upgrades 
And FYI Iran was already working on Emad-2 when they tested the Emad so honestly YOU DON'T KNOW JACK!

As for the Materials used on the Airframe of the Q-313 again if you truly spoke Farsi and had the attention span of an adult you would know that the Airframe was made out of low cost materials based on info given by Iran it's self & what I know and how I know is NONE of your business!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

why dont trust in iranian engineers?
I think they know better what they are doing than some forummembers?
If they want to go with Q-313, than there should be good reasons, so let them!
we will see what the final product can.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Yes maneuverability is mainly for missile dodging these days. However it does not mean the F-313 would have to do the same if this capability increases airframe cost by 100%. Evasion by LO/VLO and terrain masking/clutter is another option..



That's the problem when you look at initial purchasing price with a complete disregard to everything else! Even if your Airframe comes out to $30 Million USD as appose to $7 Million Iran's own history with it's own fleet has shown that it's well worth it!
If designed on a proper platform your Titanium bulkheads & structure just as in the F-14 will not only increase your max G, survivability & potentially speed but it will last you for decades allowing for an expensive airframe to be overhauled & upgraded and improved upon for years on end that's why Airframe are the MOST expensive part of any capable fighter!



PeeD said:


> I wont argue with you about that. There are many indicators that the F-313 is designed to make use of GE. There has never been a GE aircraft that fly above solid ground but many jet powered GE aircraft that fly over water..



Why do you think aircrafts designed to make use of GE are mainly used on water? The Russian played around with GE for how long until they finally abandoned it? For a low budget country to not take note of other countries experiences in the development of it's own fighter is a colossal mistake! 



PeeD said:


> No it's not... Even top mounted optics would be next to useless in land GE operation. Optics are used during pop-up, GE for cruise..



You basically saying the Aircraft is going to fly blind in terms of sensor capability & fully rely on ground systems for everything from areal targets to ground targets to even the location of every AAA & clearly that means don't comprehend the value of a Fighter! One of the main reasons countries have Aircrafts is because they know hitting an aircraft in the Air as appose to an asset on the ground at long ranges (+300km) is extremely hard & next to impossible! 
And one of the main targets in an incoming attack is Radar, Sensors & communication and even if they did survive how deep into enemy territory do you think you can transmit secure information without detection without any space based assets? 




PeeD said:


> Any rounded LO/VLO rated airframe surfaces WILL BE more expensive than flat ones. So their use of faceted fuselage could very well be cost driven. The aerodynamic penalty could be acceptable low..



I'm sorry my friend but that's completely absurd! They made it square to deflect radar to make it look stealthy like the F-117






And you don't have to believe me go ~6min into the video

It has NOTHING to do with cost! It's a miss understanding as to what reduces your RCS & that's the angle of your surfaces not the cracks and until you develop a low RCS Canopy, cockpit & pilot gear what is the POINT? & in fact those cracks will work against you unless you fly straight towards the radar!

And they keep saying it's capable of short takeoff now comparatively with the same engines you can claim that it would require less runway compared to an F-5 for example but it is NOT a short take off aircraft because the engines are just not powerful enough to achieve the speed required in a short time unless assisted with another device or rocket 



PeeD said:


> The F-313 is aerodynamically much better than the F-117 and likely aerodynamically stable.
> I know that you have no basis for your "low yaw performance" claims because you use inappellable examples and comparisons. I give you a story to think about: American T-38 (F-5) trainers with their low power J85 are able to supercruise dry without afterburners. Think about that fact and stop judging complex matters by poor simplistic comparisons..



Yes it's more stabile than an F-117 due to it's wings! As I said they tried to solve the stability problem with that absurd wing design! So yes it will be very stable in subsonic flight but it will have problems in Yaw and if it ever reaches production model they'll either have to put controlled surfaces on the tip of the wings OR reduce it in size by at least 50% of more Or completely redesign the wings altogether 

The F-313 won't even be able to go transonic let alone supersonic & what limits it from going supersonic is it's design not it's engines! And even with 2 RD-33 it still wouldn't go supersonic! J-85 are capable of supersonic flight everyone knows that! It's engines reduce it's payload, sensor capability, endurance, survivability,..... And the F-313 design is purposely made for subsonic flights ONLY and any 1st year aeronautical engineer would know that! 

A single modified J-85 allowed the BD-10 to fly at Mach 1.4 & cruise at almost 1000kph but that doesn't mean it was a good aircraft to be used for combat!



PeeD said:


> Neither you nor me know that..



Actually I do know that FOR A FACT! 



PeeD said:


> The F-313 would operate as defensive IADS asset during high intensity warfare. Only in very special cases like a tanker/AWACS hunt over sea surface, it would leave Irans borders. Btw. cruise missiles are then also very easy targets?.



Cruise Missiles are easy targets if you don't have the capability to map a correct rout! In fact the major hurdle for Iran's capability to use Land Attack Cruise Missile in large scales effectively is not targeting but rather the lack of space based assets that give you fast and up to date info to map a safe route for your cruise missiles to take to the target! If you fly cruise missiles in a straight line with no regard to land assets they will be easy pickings & nothing but target practice 




PeeD said:


> This is a complex game of margins and I'm sure you have not calculated my F-313 operation regime. Again a poor judgment..



It's poor judgment for Iran to waist it's human resources & facilities on such a platform! 



PeeD said:


> Beware of such statements. I even agree to some extend but I suspect you vastly underestimate what monumental task that is. Nor are you able to judge whether doing such a project offers enough bang for the bucks for Iran atm.



It will only be a huge undertaking if you try to re invent the wheel as Iran is trying to do with an absurd unconventional design like the F-313

Take a lesson from the Chinese & build a design based on known proven designs

The real question is WHY THE HELL doesn't Iran have the 2nd largest Military budget of the region! And I'm not advocating that Iran should go and buy a bunch of toy's to create jobs in other countries! We have the talent at home! We clearly have the money why shouldn't the government spend money to both create high tech jobs at home and make the country stronger!

Choosing a light fighter with small engines because you don't wanna pay the fuel costs in an oil rich country that's constantly under threat is reckless

For the country to compete globally the military needs to take charge and constantly push the boundaries of the countries capabilities or else science and technology growth will remain on theories and scientific papers & the top minds of the country will be recruited from the country to advance other countries capabilities 

When you build the MOST advanced fighter, sub, robot,.... within your capability than all the subsystems that go with it and the composites and materials used and the tools, software & hardware developed to build it will all help increase the quality, quantity & variety of your civilian products 
So it's not just about having a capable fighter!

As for the cost! Your using mines that are owned by the government for the materials & as long as nothing is imported the cost is irrelevant because whatever you pay as long as it's completely domestic then it's going right back into the countries economy and the key is to not let a single toman leave the country for any component & it will take as long as it takes as long as your pushing the boundaries of technologies to increase the countries capabilities
and any naysayers in your project should be fired and replaced with people that believe

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> That's the problem when you look at initial purchasing price with a complete disregard to everything else! Even if your Airframe comes out to $30 Million USD as appose to $7 Million Iran's own history with it's own fleet has shown that it's well worth it!



You are too much in history. In 1980, the value and position of the airforce was much different than today with the advent of missiles and drones.



VEVAK said:


> If designed on a proper platform your Titanium bulkheads & structure just as in the F-14 will not only increase your max G, survivability & potentially speed but it will last you for decades allowing for an expensive airframe to be overhauled & upgraded and improved upon for years on end that's why Airframe are the MOST expensive part of any capable fighter!



I claim terrain masking and low level flight + VLO is better than a high-G manouver, for missile evasion. Now what?



VEVAK said:


> Why do you think aircrafts designed to make use of GE are mainly used on water? The Russian played around with GE for how long until they finally abandoned it? For a low budget country to not take note of other countries experiences in the development of it's own fighter is a colossal mistake!



Again you live in the past and take lessons of a technological past. Just like Russian subs were a better alternative than ground effect CM carriers (which is the reason why to didn't go forward with it) conventional airpower has better alternatives today for Iran.
Leaps in computers, memory, sensors totally change today form the 70's.



VEVAK said:


> You basically saying the Aircraft is going to fly blind in terms of sensor capability & fully rely on ground systems for everything from areal targets to ground targets to even the location of every AAA & clearly that means don't comprehend the value of a Fighter! One of the main reasons countries have Aircrafts is because they know hitting an aircraft in the Air as appose to an asset on the ground at long ranges (+300km) is extremely hard & next to impossible!
> And one of the main targets in an incoming attack is Radar, Sensors & communication and even if they did survive how deep into enemy territory do you think you can transmit secure information without detection without any space based assets?



The F-313 lacks the capability to be a useful offensive aircraft, hence it will mainly operate in friendly airspace with an advanced IADS. In cruise phase with GE it will be almost blind, but when it does the pop-up for target acquisition, its eyes will open. Irans IADS is more important than its airforce and hence will not be taken out anytime soon.



VEVAK said:


> I'm sorry my friend but that's completely absurd! They made it square to deflect radar to make it look stealthy like the F-117
> It has NOTHING to do with cost! It's a miss understanding as to what reduces your RCS & that's the angle of your surfaces not the cracks and until you develop a low RCS Canopy, cockpit & pilot gear what is the POINT? & in fact those cracks will work against you unless you fly straight towards the radar!



... I tell you that faceted stealth is certainly cheaper during airframe manufacturing. This is a fact, anyone with any knowledge in engineering knows this. Advanced curved stealth is harder to manufacture and hence more expensive...

Its stealth features look sound up until now and will improve for the flight prototype.



VEVAK said:


> And they keep saying it's capable of short takeoff now comparatively with the same engines you can claim that it would require less runway compared to an F-5 for example but it is NOT a short take off aircraft because the engines are just not powerful enough to achieve the speed required in a short time unless assisted with another device or rocket



You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...



VEVAK said:


> Yes it's more stabile than an F-117 due to it's wings! As I said they tried to solve the stability problem with that absurd wing design! So yes it will be very stable in subsonic flight but it will have problems in Yaw and if it ever reaches production model they'll either have to put controlled surfaces on the tip of the wings OR reduce it in size by at least 50% of more Or completely redesign the wings altogether



Again: You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...

At this stage we see 6 large yaw moment producing control surfaces on two wings,



VEVAK said:


> The F-313 won't even be able to go transonic let alone supersonic & what limits it from going supersonic is it's design not it's engines! And even with 2 RD-33 it still wouldn't go supersonic! J-85 are capable of supersonic flight everyone knows that! It's engines reduce it's payload, sensor capability, endurance, survivability,..... And the F-313 design is purposely made for subsonic flights ONLY and any 1st year aeronautical engineer would know that!
> 
> A single modified J-85 allowed the BD-10 to fly at Mach 1.4 & cruise at almost 1000kph but that doesn't mean it was a good aircraft to be used for combat!



It is certainty subsonic. But you can't judge its speed, payload, endurance etc.
Just tell me why a T-38 can supercruise on dry J85? In your simplistic world, this should be impossible. A 4-5 ton jet go subsonic on 18KN =~1,8t thrust?
No, you cant make such judgment, aerospace is more complex than that.



VEVAK said:


> Actually I do know that FOR A FACT!


 
Aha so how do you know the RCS of the F-117? We can approximate both in a paper of the size of a masters or better PhD degree via simulations. I myself think the F-117 has better stealth than the F-313, but I don't claim to know it for fact. You have a very flawed methodic.



VEVAK said:


> Cruise Missiles are easy targets if you don't have the capability to map a correct rout! In fact the major hurdle for Iran's capability to use Land Attack Cruise Missile in large scales effectively is not targeting but rather the lack of space based assets that give you fast and up to date info to map a safe route for your cruise missiles to take to the target! If you fly cruise missiles in a straight line with no regard to land assets they will be easy pickings & nothing but target practice



Iran can have very good topological maps of the country for the F-313 to operate in and that's sufficient.
CMs are never easy to shot down and hard to detected both because of their low altitude and high subsonic speed. Now in Iran terrain masking gets added to this.
Btw. there is even a possibility that topological maps were captured with the RQ-170.



VEVAK said:


> It will only be a huge undertaking if you try to re invent the wheel as Iran is trying to do with an absurd unconventional design like the F-313
> 
> Take a lesson from the Chinese & build a design based on known proven designs



They better re-invent the wheel, because they lack the key, a state of the art engine like at the moment just Russians (about to) and Americans have. To compete with a kinematic monster at high altitude, you need that key.
It looks like they just did the best thing possible for a country with inferior engine technology. A completely different approach which keeps it out of the kinematic-altitude game but can kill those.

Chinese at least were never as creative as Iranians in defense. We should be proud about such unconventional solutions.



VEVAK said:


> Choosing a light fighter with small engines because you don't wanna pay the fuel costs in an oil rich country that's constantly under threat is reckless



Come on, it was never about fuel... It is about engines, engines and engines. If the RQ-170 was advanced to boost Iran to the edge of the competition, while to difficult to upscale, they better go for RQ-170 engine copies in the F-313. Its better than playing the 30-40 year old technology catch up game (RD-33/WS-10). A 10 year catch up game could be worth the effort.
I don't know whether the J90 is based on that engine but you mainly build a light fighter if you lack engine tech.
You also build light fighters to just buy the entry ticket into airpower. 100 license built Su-30 have no chance against US airpower, but 800 expandable F-313 might have.
Or more simple: 100 Su-30= joke, 800 F-313= a credible capability (still below IADS capability), 2000 F-313= a serious capability, 2000 Su-30= good way to bankruptcy= TKO.



VEVAK said:


> For the country to compete globally the military needs to take charge and constantly push the boundaries of the countries capabilities or else science and technology growth will remain on theories and scientific papers & the top minds of the country will be recruited from the country to advance other countries capabilities



That unconventional, unproven, never existed in similar form, F-313 might be just that.



VEVAK said:


> As for the cost! Your using mines that are owned by the government for the materials & as long as nothing is imported the cost is irrelevant because whatever you pay as long as it's completely domestic then it's going right back into the countries economy and the key is to not let a single toman leave the country for any component & it will take as long as it takes as long as your pushing the boundaries of technologies to increase the countries capabilities
> and any naysayers in your project should be fired and replaced with people that believe



Agreed and fortunately we see just that. Soon a fighter subsystems will be built at home and then we can talk about the serial production of the F-313 (if it is a real project).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> So I don't give you a source or example, but keep a professional approach before saying: "... has next to no technical credibility"...



If you have no sources or examples, then this is an unproven and experimental materials concept. Now, innovation is no bad thing, but you must remember the most advanced aircraft we've made is an F-5 with an extra tail and some newer electronics. We are in no position to try things the great powers of the aviation world haven't tried.



PeeD said:


> I'm not anti-titanium but ask any engineer with knowledge: Carbon fiber does everything titanium does, just better



Except that Titanium unlike Carbon Fibre is isotropic and can therefore hold tension in both directions, which would allow for more effective, cheaper, and less complex construction than just using Carbon Fibre.



PeeD said:


> If titanium wingboxes would be too expensive for a $8m airframe



$8 million for just the airframe without subsystems is still a little optimistic, but ok.



PeeD said:


> They don't block them, they would be at the outer, lower edge of the broad fuselage.



So you want them to stick out like the F-15E's side pylons (LCT-14 to LCT-16 in the below diagram). Not great for stealth.









PeeD said:


> All those systems are highly cost effective. Some of them are scientifically extremely advanced but none of them is in production as difficult to master as jet engine technology.



Then we do what we must do, and steal, bribe, reverse engineer, and hack the necessary technology for designing and producing jet engines. We cannot ignore this technology and make less advanced engines hoping we won't need the more advanced ones. It is an extremely important technology for the present and future.



PeeD said:


> Yes maneuverability is mainly for missile dodging these days.



Not really. HOBS missiles of the present cannot be dodged. Maneuverability is used for getting suitable firing positions on enemy aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> If you have no sources or examples, then this is an unproven and experimental materials concept. Now, innovation is no bad thing, but you must remember the most advanced aircraft we've made is an F-5 with an extra tail and some newer electronics. We are in no position to try things the great powers of the aviation world haven't tried.



That F-5 was just an IRIAF internal project, while the F-313 has the whole defense industry behind it and access to all available subsystems.
So the situation is very different.

As for no proven equivalent. The RQ-170 is one. It seems to have titanium load structures for the wings, but its wings are much longer and heavier loaded than the short weaponless F-313 wings.
I see a good chance to avoid massive use of expensive conventional load structures for the F-313.



AmirPatriot said:


> Except that Titanium unlike Carbon Fibre is isotropic and can therefore hold tension in both directions, which would allow for more effective, cheaper, and less complex construction than just using Carbon Fibre.



In many directions yes. Whether it is cheaper remains open but it is certainly not more effective. Whether its anisotropic nature can't be exploited for the "wing boxes" remains open too. Whether Iran is not already strong in carbon fiber manufacturing, remains also open.
I want to see smart innovative solutions for a subsonic, 5g rated fighter. If titanium is for some reason more cost effective and available, go for it in the amount necessary.



AmirPatriot said:


> $8 million for just the airframe without subsystems is still a little optimistic, but ok.



No, with everything the complete product.



AmirPatriot said:


> So you want them to stick out like the F-15E's side pylons (LCT-14 to LCT-16 in the below diagram). Not great for stealth.



LCT 1-3 and RCT 1-3. Why you mention stealth? You asked for a secondary bomb truck capability. Any external weapons will compromise stealth but you wanted to have a massive bombing capability at low intensity phase.



AmirPatriot said:


> Then we do what we must do, and steal, bribe, reverse engineer, and hack the necessary technology for designing and producing jet engines. We cannot ignore this technology and make less advanced engines hoping we won't need the more advanced ones. It is an extremely important technology for the present and future.



This is a difficult discipline that just requires experience, decades of materials experience in the production. That's why this capability can't become instantly available like most other fields.
They have started. The J90 is the first real product. We are in a fortunate position because out industry has companies like MAPNA which at least trains material engineers.
The point is, that just now Iran can allow the luxury to go for engine technology and mainly because of the RQ-170 in all it's ways, if you ask me.



AmirPatriot said:


> Not really. HOBS missiles of the present cannot be dodged. Maneuverability is used for getting suitable firing positions on enemy aircraft.



It's about dodging BVR AAMs at the edges of its envelope... 5th gen. fighters will come at supersonic speed and high altitude and shot their BVR AAMs before you can shot. Maneuverability is not of much use for this concept, except for trying to dodge the AAM.
If they have spend all of their BVR AAMs they will just leave the battlefield at will and you 3-4 gen fighter can't hunt them.
Hence to get to the pole position for the AMRAAM shot, no super-maneuverability is needed.

Of course the F-313 better not agrees to these game rules.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> You don't know me! And you don't know what I do know and what I don't know!
> And a 500 meter CEP on a Ballistic Missile that has a range of 1700km for a country that not equipped with various space assets is astonishing!
> The reason you think it's not is due to your limited knowledge on the subject!
> And it's disrespectful to the kids that worked day and night to achieve it!
> Achieving 500 meter CEP means you can target large facilities which allows you to cut that CEP by over 50% with further adjustments & upgrades
> And FYI Iran was already working on Emad-2 when they tested the Emad so honestly YOU DON'T KNOW JACK!
> 
> As for the Materials used on the Airframe of the Q-313 again if you truly spoke Farsi and had the attention span of an adult you would know that the Airframe was made out of low cost materials based on info given by Iran it's self & what I know and how I know is NONE of your business!


1.and you know perfectly about them(are you minister of defense) 2. who said those things you so proud about. is perfectly right. 3 its an iranian forum and im iranian so its my business what you say about iran and iran made your pm full of maybe lie or Biased or negative wave i dont know this one . im 41 years old and im in army but i think if you are adult you are mad one be nice and accept you mistake 


VEVAK said:


> And FYI Iran was already working on Emad-2 when they tested the Emad so honestly YOU DON'T KNOW JACK!


nadide ghayb gofti .when you have no right information dont behavior like ..... attention you have no flag and i dont think (if you are iranian) you have good or honest option or negative personality about made in iran


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> You are too much in history. In 1980, the value and position of the airforce was much different than today with the advent of missiles and drones.



That's absolutely wrong! And has no factual bases! In fact if there was an inkling of truth in that statement Iran wouldn't of needed to the Russians to come in with their bombers & fighters to fight off a rag tag group of terrorists! Plus, all you have to do is look around at the money being spent to advance Air forces all across the globe!

Yes the number of fighter required has reduced because countries are buying more advanced more expensive force multipliers & they are replacing the need for "cheep" fighters with limited capabilities with missiles & UCAV's

Limited capabilities means limited sensor, radar, low payload with limited survivability due to a lack of speed, range, endurance, maneuverability & limited situational awareness! 




PeeD said:


> I claim terrain masking and low level flight + VLO is better than a high-G manouver, for missile evasion. Now what?



Any Aircraft can fly low! specially with advanced Fly by wire systems extreme low level flights will be done by computers without the need of advanced flying skills! But is your airframe strong enough to do it & get hit a few times by AAA and shrapnel that's the real question! 

And Speed, maneuverability & endurance are key in evading missiles just ask any fighter pilot! 



PeeD said:


> Again you live in the past and take lessons of a technological past. Just like Russian subs were a better alternative than ground effect CM carriers (which is the reason why to didn't go forward with it) conventional airpower has better alternatives today for Iran.
> Leaps in computers, memory, sensors totally change today form the 70's.



Yes technology has advanced which allows for thrust vectoring which means basing a Fighter Jet on GE is absurd! 



PeeD said:


> The F-313 lacks the capability to be a useful offensive aircraft, hence it will mainly operate in friendly airspace with an advanced IADS. In cruise phase with GE it will be almost blind, but when it does the pop-up for target acquisition, its eyes will open. Irans IADS is more important than its airforce and hence will not be taken out anytime soon.



Working on IADS should not impede you from working on a fighter Air Frame and engines & if anything the tech gained should help with developing better weapons & sensors

If war start and your Air Force is limited to your own Air Space & your incapable of making your enemy death, dumb & blind then you will lose!

It seem you don't even understand the science behind why aircrafts fly at low levels if you think we need a fighter with GE capability to be used over our own airspace!

The reason you fly low is due to the line of sight, terrain and the curvature of the earth that limits ground based radars from detecting aircrafts regardless of it's shape and RCS!

So building a fighter to fly low but only over your own terrain is even more absurd! 



PeeD said:


> ... I tell you that faceted stealth is certainly cheaper during airframe manufacturing. This is a fact, anyone with any knowledge in engineering knows this. Advanced curved stealth is harder to manufacture and hence more expensive...
> 
> Its stealth features look sound up until now and will improve for the flight prototype.



O MY GOD! Inaccurate, absurd NONSESNE!

You can claim that radar deflection is a cheaper way to reduce RCS than RAM (Radar Absorbent Materials) but no one in their right mind would ever tell you that rounding off the edges using the same materials has any effect on price! That's absurd!

And again, for radar deflection to work you need to map the enemy radar & fly straight towards it! And if your claiming the F-313 will only be used over Iranian territory then what radar are you planning to fly it towards?

And if the Aircraft is meant to fly in GE mode then why the hell do you need radar deflection underneath your aircraft at all? again, nothing about the F-313 makes any type of sense! 



PeeD said:


> You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...






PeeD said:


> Again: You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...
> 
> At this stage we see 6 large yaw moment producing control surfaces on two wings,



I'm sorry but if I see my country throwing it's self in an endless pit just because a few people that don't know a damn thing about what an Air Force & and fighter program should be think the F-313 looks cool and we should build it! When I see that happening & I see idiots on Iranian media that know nothing keep bringing it up that puts pressure on the MOD over a useless aircraft I sure as hell am going to judge and scream and makes as much noise as I can to prevent it when I know for a FACT that the country is capable of building something much more capable that that ridicules aircraft!



PeeD said:


> It is certainty subsonic. But you can't judge its speed, payload, endurance etc.
> Just tell me why a T-38 can supercruise on dry J85? In your simplistic world, this should be impossible. A 4-5 ton jet go subsonic on 18KN =~1,8t thrust?
> No, you cant make such judgment, aerospace is more complex than that.



You mean it can go Supersonic not Super cruise! The F-5 can also go Supersonic at altitude!

1st and foremost you have to see if your engine is capable of supersonic flight just because an engine has 20,000lbf doesn't necessarily make it supersonic!
2ndly there are Aerodynamic limitation for example the size, thickness & angle of the wings could restrict your speed
depending on your design and thrust a simple thing like taileron vs fixed low angle elevator will restrict speeds and if you have too much power a low angle elevator will cause your aircraft to shake so the aerodynamic properties of an aircraft from it's wings to it's canards(if there are any), the moving parts, taileron & fuselage are extremely important! 

Next is the thrust to weight ratio of an aircraft although it clearly doesn't prevent you from going supersonic but if you want super cruise a lot of things have to go right & super cruise ONLY matters if you can do it on an armed aircraft or else an unarmed aircrafts performance is irrelevant in the world of combat fighters like the BD-10
That's why I'm not a fan of the F-16 or the F/A-18! Yes an unarmed F-16 & F/A-18 have a low RCS and they perform beautifully when they are not armed with anything & they can do a OK job when running away BUT like the F-5 put a fuel pod on them and a few thousand pounds of ordnance and then see how they preform! 






PeeD said:


> Aha so how do you know the RCS of the F-117? We can approximate both in a paper of the size of a masters or better PhD degree via simulations. I myself think the F-117 has better stealth than the F-313, but I don't claim to know it for fact. You have a very flawed methodic.
> 
> 
> Iran can have very good topological maps of the country for the F-313 to operate in and that's sufficient.
> CMs are never easy to shot down and hard to detected both because of their low altitude and high subsonic speed. Now in Iran terrain masking gets added to this.
> Btw. there is even a possibility that topological maps were captured with the RQ-170.



O MY GOD! Yes you know it for a FACT! Angle of the wing, Cockpit, Optical System,.... So yes you know it for a FACT! 

Getting the topography for Iran is quite simple! The tech behind it is simple! And Iran has the sat to do it! Whether you wanna believe it or not the tech is not that complicated & Iran has it! 



PeeD said:


> They better re-invent the wheel, because they lack the key, a state of the art engine like at the moment just Russians (about to) and Americans have. To compete with a kinematic monster at high altitude, you need that key.
> It looks like they just did the best thing possible for a country with inferior engine technology. A completely different approach which keeps it out of the kinematic-altitude game but can kill those.
> 
> Chinese at least were never as creative as Iranians in defense. We should be proud about such unconventional solutions.



Your mistaken! va tavanaii bacheh ha e khodemoon o dast e kam megeerri! Do you see how many Iranians are working and JPL and NASA & these are kids coming from Iran not Iranian Americans that have been here for years! If you fail to invest in them then your failing the country! 



PeeD said:


> Come on, it was never about fuel... It is about engines, engines and engines. If the RQ-170 was advanced to boost Iran to the edge of the competition, while to difficult to upscale, they better go for RQ-170 engine copies in the F-313. Its better than playing the 30-40 year old technology catch up game (RD-33/WS-10). A 10 year catch up game could be worth the effort.
> I don't know whether the J90 is based on that engine but you mainly build a light fighter if you lack engine tech.
> You also build light fighters to just buy the entry ticket into airpower. 100 license built Su-30 have no chance against US airpower, but 800 expandable F-313 might have.
> Or more simple: 100 Su-30= joke, 800 F-313= a credible capability (still below IADS capability), 2000 F-313= a serious capability, 2000 Su-30= good way to bankruptcy= TKO.
> 
> 
> That unconventional, unproven, never existed in similar form, F-313 might be just that.
> 
> 
> Agreed and fortunately we see just that. Soon a fighter subsystems will be built at home and then we can talk about the serial production of the F-313 (if it is a real project).



RQ-170 style engines on a subsonic aircraft with limited sensor capability sure why not! But again that doesn't mean the F-313 is worth producing!

Iran's new defense minister has already announced that they plan on starting a real fighter project which again means the F-313 is clearly inadequate and they know it! I just hope they build a twin seat fighter off an existing 5th gen design like the F-22, YF-23 or J-33!

And how do your jump from 100 Su-30's to 2000 Su-30's?

With $50 Billion USD Iran can buy almost 500 Su-30's paid at a rate of $5 Billion per year in a span of a decade that would be $5 Billion USD a year & you cut your purchase to 12 aircrafts a year after the 1st decade & NO ONE will go bankrupt! But I would only advocate for that if & only if the aircrafts were co produced inside Iran with Iran having access to the weapons system so we can build our own weapons!

Air to Air mode 1000 F-313 will never be able to stand up to 200 Su-30's or F-15's or Typhoons so NO 800 F-313 = a JOKE!
And I'll take 100 Su-35's or F-35's or F-22's or J-31's or Su-Paks over 800 F-313 any day any time & in any situation!



ashool said:


> 1.and you know perfectly about them(are you minister of defense) 2. who said those things you so proud about. is perfectly right. 3 its an iranian forum and im iranian so its my business what you say about iran and iran made your pm full of maybe lie or Biased or negative wave i dont know this one . im 41 years old and im in army but i think if you are adult you are mad one be nice and accept you mistake
> 
> nadide ghayb gofti .when you have no right information dont behavior like ..... attention you have no flag and i dont think (if you are iranian) you have good or honest option or negative personality about made in iran



Admit my mistake! LOL! You don't know anything! When Emad was tested publicly the system was already distributed across our bases!
Emad's successor was almost completed when they did the public testing & it's CEP is 500 meters you can cry about it all your want it is what it is!

And I'm not going to go waist my time finding a flag so you can feel better! I'm 100% Iranian! I was born in Iran I went to school in Iran so cry cry away!

Junk is Junk and when Iran produces amazing equipment like Zolfagar Missile, Shahed-129, Simorgh, Saegheh, Karrar, Soumar, Ya Ali, Ghadir, Jamaran, Sina, Sejil-2, Emad, Bina, Qassed1/2/3..... I don't shy away from saying it & when they produce Junk like F-313 I'm not going to shy away from saying it because when we produce junk we should know that it's junk so we correct it so we don't fall into a false sense of pride & produce junk just because it looks cool & it was made in Iran!
Junk is Junk & 500 meters is good accuracy on a ballistic projectile at 1700km
41 & in the Army means nothing to me most Iranians have to serve so what??????& yes I did! So what?


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> That's absolutely wrong! And has no factual bases! In fact if there was an inkling of truth in that statement Iran wouldn't of needed to the Russians to come in with their bombers & fighters to fight off a rag tag group of terrorists! Plus, all you have to do is look around at the money being spent to advance Air forces all across the globe!
> 
> Yes the number of fighter required has reduced because countries are buying more advanced more expensive force multipliers & they are replacing the need for "cheep" fighters with limited capabilities with missiles & UCAV's
> 
> Limited capabilities means limited sensor, radar, low payload with limited survivability due to a lack of speed, range, endurance, maneuverability & limited situational awareness!



Nobody cares about what world air forces do. I care about what the Soviet military was doing in the 80's. That is serious adult stuff. I care about what fear and terror the Oka missile system was causing in NATO command. The fear that it would ground their airpower on which they relied so much.

Iran had nothing comparable after the revolution, just it's airforce, the strongest force it had. But this belongs to the past. The position of the airforce have shifted down.



VEVAK said:


> Any Aircraft can fly low! specially with advanced Fly by wire systems extreme low level flights will be done by computers without the need of advanced flying skills! But is your airframe strong enough to do it & get hit a few times by AAA and shrapnel that's the real question!
> 
> And Speed, maneuverability & endurance are key in evading missiles just ask any fighter pilot!



Speed and maneuverability as well as altitude is what counts in conventional air combat. Everyone will try to keep it's speed and altitude.
So this is the textbook.
Now to the F-313 which will pop-up, shoot and dive. why i it doing this? Because it may take too long for you to acquire that LO/VLO target and shoot your AMRAAM. Even if you manage to shot, the disappearance of the F-313 behind terrain, makes you loose contact to the target. Loss of contact will force you to hunt it in oder to provide your AMRAAM with a necessary course update.
Even if your AMRAAM gets to the F-313, its altitude of 15-20m above clutter, the attack aspect necessary and its X-band LO/VLO vs. the small AMRAAM aperture (+ chaff + ECM). Will give you similar, if not better capability to evade the shot than a 10g turn at 40k feet.

So much about simple textbook tactics and we didn't even consider the loss of kinematic capability = range, the hunting fighter/AMRAAM would encounter against a low level target etc.



VEVAK said:


> Yes technology has advanced which allows for thrust vectoring which means basing a Fighter Jet on GE is absurd!



On a simple look, yes. But in reality, GE means effectively more thrust compared to a non-GE aircraft and compensating the lower thrust is a main objective.
I already said it: at sea level the dry and armed F-313 might do mach 0,7 without GE and mach 0,9 with. The armed afterburning F-15 might do mach 1,2 at sea level.



VEVAK said:


> If war start and your Air Force is limited to your own Air Space & your incapable of making your enemy death, dumb & blind then you will lose!



In the past yes. Today BMs and CMs will do the crippling work and much better.
Hence the primary role of the F-313 can very well and good be that of a dedicated IADS asset.

Imagine S-171 doing the target acquisition and Zolfaghars striking.



VEVAK said:


> The reason you fly low is due to the line of sight, terrain and the curvature of the earth that limits ground based radars from detecting aircrafts regardless of it's shape and RCS!
> 
> So building a fighter to fly low but only over your own terrain is even more absurd!



... the same counts for airborne radars if you are lucky enough to have a country with the mountainous topography like Iran. Low level flight of the F-313 is primary for evading airborne X-band radars trying to hunt it.



VEVAK said:


> O MY GOD! Inaccurate, absurd NONSESNE!
> 
> You can claim that radar deflection is a cheaper way to reduce RCS than RAM (Radar Absorbent Materials) but no one in their right mind would ever tell you that rounding off the edges using the same materials has any effect on price! That's absurd!



Look, it's very basic: Curvature stealth like on the F-22 is not only harder to compute and design than F-117 style faceted stealth. it is also harder and more expensive to manufacture. Very basic and has nothing to do with RAM.

Do you have any manufacturing knowledge to get it?



VEVAK said:


> And again, for radar deflection to work you need to map the enemy radar & fly straight towards it! And if your claiming the F-313 will only be used over Iranian territory then what radar are you planning to fly it towards?



My F-313, pop-ups and shoots BVR AAMs. During the pop-up and later evasion, stealth features help survival against X-band radars.



VEVAK said:


> And if the Aircraft is meant to fly in GE mode then why the hell do you need radar deflection underneath your aircraft at all? again, nothing about the F-313 makes any type of sense!



The belly will be exposed in the pop-up maneuver...



VEVAK said:


> You mean it can go Supersonic not Super cruise! The F-5 can also go Supersonic at altitude!



I meant supercruise --> flying subsonic without afterburners, the T-38 was capable of that. But it shouldn't in your simplistic world, or not?



VEVAK said:


> 1st and foremost you have to see if your engine is capable of supersonic flight just because an engine has 20,000lbf doesn't necessarily make it supersonic!
> 2ndly there are Aerodynamic limitation for example the size, thickness & angle of the wings could restrict your speed
> depending on your design and thrust a simple thing like taileron vs fixed low angle elevator will restrict speeds and if you have too much power a low angle elevator will cause your aircraft to shake so the aerodynamic properties of an aircraft from it's wings to it's canards(if there are any), the moving parts, taileron & fuselage are extremely important!
> 
> Next is the thrust to weight ratio of an aircraft although it clearly doesn't prevent you from going supersonic but if you want super cruise a lot of things have to go right & super cruise ONLY matters if you can do it on an armed aircraft or else an unarmed aircrafts performance is irrelevant in the world of combat fighters like the BD-10
> That's why I'm not a fan of the F-16 or the F/A-18! Yes an unarmed F-16 & F/A-18 have a low RCS and they perform beautifully when they are not armed with anything & they can do a OK job when running away BUT like the F-5 put a fuel pod on them and a few thousand pounds of ordnance and then see how they preform!



Ok, agreed on many points. Now based on that, how you want to judge the F-313 performance?



VEVAK said:


> O MY GOD! Yes you know it for a FACT! Angle of the wing, Cockpit, Optical System,.... So yes you know it for a FACT!



Its more complex than that. Let me say that you neither know the F-117 RCS nor that of the F-313. We haven't even seen a flight-rated prototype of the F-313.



VEVAK said:


> Getting the topography for Iran is quite simple! The tech behind it is simple! And Iran has the sat to do it! Whether you wanna believe it or not the tech is not that complicated & Iran has it!



Certainly. And we better make best use of it for the "air defense fighter" F-313.



VEVAK said:


> Your mistaken! va tavanaii bacheh ha e khodemoon o dast e kam megeerri! Do you see how many Iranians are working and JPL and NASA & these are kids coming from Iran not Iranian Americans that have been here for years! If you fail to invest in them then your failing the country!



Talent is one thing, a healthy large enough industry to produce it, another. They show their talent with the innovative (maybe revolutionary), F-313 design and even more by designing a PRODUCABLE fighter for our current industry and the numbers necessary.
This shows the tavanaii of the bacheha



VEVAK said:


> RQ-170 style engines on a subsonic aircraft with limited sensor capability sure why not! But again that doesn't mean the F-313 is worth producing!



Sensor capability is secondary if you operate within an IADS. The F-313 is a survivable flying TEL.



VEVAK said:


> Iran's new defense minister has already announced that they plan on starting a real fighter project which again means the F-313 is clearly inadequate and they know it! I just hope they build a twin seat fighter off an existing 5th gen design like the F-22, YF-23 or J-33!



Good if they have necessary spare money. They can try and we wait to see numbers of them entering service. They better be in F-22/Su-57 class because we need to beat those. Su-30/F-15 are of the past and would be killed too soon.



VEVAK said:


> And how do your jump from 100 Su-30's to 2000 Su-30's?
> 
> With $50 Billion USD Iran can buy almost 500 Su-30's paid at a rate of $5 Billion per year in a span of a decade that would be $5 Billion USD a year & you cut your purchase to 12 aircrafts a year after the 1st decade & NO ONE will go bankrupt! But I would only advocate for that if & only if the aircrafts were co produced inside Iran with Iran having access to the weapons system so we can build our own weapons!



2000 Su-30, because this is the number needed to fight the U.S. It's not me who wants to fighter fire with fire, you guys insists on airpower. This in light of the known impotence of US airpower against ground based S2A threats... fighting fire with water is not cool enough ha?



VEVAK said:


> Air to Air mode 1000 F-313 will never be able to stand up to 200 Su-30's or F-15's or Typhoons so NO 800 F-313 = a JOKE!
> And I'll take 100 Su-35's or F-35's or F-22's or J-31's or Su-Paks over 800 F-313 any day any time & in any situation!



My IADS asset F-313 would be a real killer of any 4th gen. fighter and have a credible capability against 5th. Yes only inside Irans IADS, but that's a limitation I can live with.
Most importantly it would be a killer that could be delivered in numbers, just as the Karrar tank is. Something that can satisfy our needs, not something produced at 12 or 24 pieces a year...

As the soviets called such things: a mobilization weapon. Its mass numbers of Dshk, or 107mm MLR or 106 recoiless guns that provide the firepower, not fancy catalog weapons. The same with airpower and Iran seems to have understood this.
We certainly have no time to play childish games like many other countries...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Nobody cares about what world air forces do. I care about what the Soviet military was doing in the 80's. That is serious adult stuff. I care about what fear and terror the Oka missile system was causing in NATO command. The fear that it would ground their airpower on which they relied so much.
> 
> Iran had nothing comparable after the revolution, just it's airforce, the strongest force it had. But this belongs to the past. The position of the airforce have shifted down....



The real fear from Soviet Missiles are the NUKE's that you can arm them with! And I've already posted how many fighters the Soviets have added to their fleet just in the past few years!
So using the Russians as an example is absurd!

Russians fly the fastest interceptors on the planet! Fly large supersonic fighters, extremely large heavy bombers, to high maneuvering bombers! Russians fly the most maneuverable fighters on the planet even more maneuverable than American fighters! The thrust to weight ratio on their fighters is the best in the world! Russians also have one of the most diverse Air Forces on the planet with each fighter being built for a specific purpose! And Russian investment in Fighter R&D continues with plans on having a space based fighters in the next 20-30 years 

The reason Russians put their IRST on the top of the nose is because they specifically built them for tactics to be used against the American who are mostly trained to fly at high altitudes 



PeeD said:


> Speed and maneuverability as well as altitude is what counts in conventional air combat. Everyone will try to keep it's speed and altitude.
> So this is the textbook.
> Now to the F-313 which will pop-up, shoot and dive. why i it doing this? Because it may take too long for you to acquire that LO/VLO target and shoot your AMRAAM. Even if you manage to shot, the disappearance of the F-313 behind terrain, makes you loose contact to the target. Loss of contact will force you to hunt it in oder to provide your AMRAAM with a necessary course update.
> Even if your AMRAAM gets to the F-313, its altitude of 15-20m above clutter, the attack aspect necessary and its X-band LO/VLO vs. the small AMRAAM aperture (+ chaff + ECM). Will give you similar, if not better capability to evade the shot than a 10g turn at 40k feet....



Again, absurd! and how is that any different from any other fighter? Any fighter can fly low and hid behind terrain!
Su-25's are built like Tanks, they fly at low altitudes & can achieve what 900km at low altitudes? But that doesn't mean they'll ever be able to go up against F-15 in Air to Air combat!
And more advanced fighter with fly by wire systems can do it far more safely without the need of advanced flying skills!
Also, modern fighters can do it at higher speeds with high maneuverability! A Russian Su-35/37 will fly low, will use the IRST on it's nose to passively target a high altitude stealth aircraft and will target a stealth fighter without the need of any other system & it's R-74 will likely achieve the same range of a Fakur-90 being fired at low speed & low altitudes! And at what range & flying at what speed did you plan on popping up? & at what altitude did you plan on firing your missile?

Fakour-90 is a heavy, low maneuvering missile(comparatively) & it's mainly built to be fired at high speed, high altitude flight for a look down shoot down capability! 

F-313 is NOT capable of high angel of attack & it's wings & Airframe design will prevent it from having a high climb ratio & Americans have IRST on their fighters supported by AWACS systems & sats so even if you could somehow manage to fool the Radar (Which I doubt) there is NO WAY your going to fool SAT's, AWACS & IRST altogether to get within weapons range, lock on & fire before your shot down! And even Iran's Media is not claiming that the Aircraft will be used in a Air to Air role!

At best it's a cheep low RCS platform to have to be used in close Air Support or for specific mission! It will either carry 2 modified version of the Bina, Kowsar, NASR or NASER Missile or another engine assisted air to ground platform allowing the aircraft to target & fire projectiles outside the range of any AAA system!

And if it is capable of GE it would still need an advanced Fly by wire system to fly the aircraft over land especially over Iranian terrain while taking advantage of aerodynamic properties of GE at cruise speeds & without various sub systems flying a low altitude aircraft with a single pilot that has to pilot at low altitudes & target ground targets in a high risk situation with a low surviving airframe is just not a good idea unless you have various subsystems

For a single pilot version flying at low altitudes you'll need an Advanced Fly by Wire system, with an advanced auto pilot, Sensor fused electronics, HOTAS, your optics will have to be placed on top (NOT the bottom), you'll need some kind of helmet mounted targeting capability, every PGM you use either has to be modified to be dropped from a weapons bay or you'll need to add more weight by putting hydro mechanical pod that can safely bring the weapons out for targeting & at the end of the day putting all those systems on a low surviving airframe on a high risk low flying, low payload platform doesn't make sense & putting 2 pilots on a low payload platform doesn't make sense either! 



PeeD said:


> So much about simple textbook tactics and we didn't even consider the loss of kinematic capability = range, the hunting fighter/AMRAAM would encounter against a low level target etc....



American fighters are mostly built for look down shoot down capability & this idea that low lever flight is going to save you is far from reality! 



PeeD said:


> On a simple look, yes. But in reality, GE means effectively more thrust compared to a non-GE aircraft and compensating the lower thrust is a main objective.
> I already said it: at sea level the dry and armed F-313 might do mach 0,7 without GE and mach 0,9 with. The armed afterburning F-15 might do mach 1,2 at sea level....



Su-25 that's built like a tank does Mach 0.7 at sea level & doing Mach 0.9 in GE requires advanced Fly by wire system & advanced terrain counter mapping because it's just not humanly possible to maintain that speed & not crash at long distances!!! Automatically piloted Russian Cruise Missiles had trouble maintaining low level flight in Iran's terrain so the idea that a human can do it is just not in the realm of possibility 



PeeD said:


> In the past yes. Today BMs and CMs will do the crippling work and much better.
> Hence the primary role of the F-313 can very well and good be that of a dedicated IADS asset.
> 
> Imagine S-171 doing the target acquisition and Zolfaghars striking....



BM's & LACM capability to do damage has been around for decades! It may be a fairly recent development for Iran but this is nothing new!

For fixed targets within 600km of Iranian boarders I believe Iranian missiles & UAV's can do the job! So again you'll need an Air Force with fighters and bombers for ranges beyond that making light aircraft & weak engines like the F-313 useless! 
And you have to realize that your enemy is NOT stupid! No one is going to attack Iran and park it's Air Assets within 600km of Iranian boarders 



PeeD said:


> ... the same counts for airborne radars if you are lucky enough to have a country with the mountainous topography like Iran. Low level flight of the F-313 is primary for evading airborne X-band radars trying to hunt it....



This only applies to long ranges & it doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to get within weapons range! Low level flying is nothing new! A Su-25 flying at low altitudes will NEVER be able to go up against an F-15 for areal combat & that's why the Russians never armed them to do so because it ridicules! 



PeeD said:


> Look, it's very basic: Curvature stealth like on the F-22 is not only harder to compute and design than F-117 style faceted stealth. it is also harder and more expensive to manufacture. Very basic and has nothing to do with RAM.
> 
> Do you have any manufacturing knowledge to get it?...



WRONG! 1st off the F-22 uses Titanium Casting which was a new method that had to be developed that required new tools! And that's the main thing that sets it apart from the Airframe of most fighters
42% of the F-22 is made out of Titanium as appose to ~22% used on the F-14 but building the F-14 titanium parts required wasting more ti than was used on the aircraft! where as the F-22 used more Ti rather than wasting it & instead used composites to further strengthen the airframe rather than more treatment
The Ti on F-14 although stronger they are not as wildly used as the F-22 & instead steel is used on the F-14 & result is an overall lighter & stronger Airframe! And the wide use of titanium reduces weight that results in better performance!

The nonsense you just said would ONLY be relevant if an F/A-18 was somehow cheaper to produce than an F-117 
And it is NOT!

And most of the cost of an Air Frame is due to the materials used, the amount & size!

Whether you make your mold square or round on steel & composites or whether or not you wanna cut your titanium or aluminum a certain shape has little to no effect on cost!

It's absolute BS! Especially if your Airframe is made out of steel, aluminum & composite mixture!

now certain area's of an Aircraft like where you put your landing gear & where and how your connect your wings depending of the fighters require you to do treatments and even if you do press, heat & oxidation treatment you can still round off the edges with precision cuts
If your using a mold for your random you can press the mold in any shape or from you want

SO NO it's absolute NONSESE! It's like saying if we make the Saeghe square we could potentially save money! 




PeeD said:


> My F-313, pop-ups and shoots BVR AAMs. During the pop-up and later evasion, stealth features help survival against X-band radars.
> 
> 
> 
> The belly will be exposed in the pop-up maneuver......



Again, absurd! 



PeeD said:


> I meant supercruise --> flying subsonic without afterburners, the T-38 was capable of that. But it shouldn't in your simplistic world, or not?...



The BD-10 doesn't even have afterburners!!!! T-38 does! It doesn't make it a capable combat aircraft!



PeeD said:


> Ok, agreed on many points. Now based on that, how you want to judge the F-313 performance?...



It's like taking a Su-25 removing it's survivability factor & payload capability just to reduce the RCS & yes it may be useful for specific situations but most definitely nothing worth mass producing & nothing a low budget country like Iran should be wasting it's resources on 






PeeD said:


> Certainly. And we better make best use of it for the "air defense fighter" F-313....



F-313 will never be an Air Defense fighter and Iran has never claimed that it is!



PeeD said:


> Talent is one thing, a healthy large enough industry to produce it, another. They show their talent with the innovative (maybe revolutionary), F-313 design and even more by designing a PRODUCABLE fighter for our current industry and the numbers necessary.
> This shows the tavanaii of the bacheha...







PeeD said:


> Good if they have necessary spare money. They can try and we wait to see numbers of them entering service. They better be in F-22/Su-57 class because we need to beat those. Su-30/F-15 are of the past and would be killed too soon....



Having a fighter program is not just about what you plan on doing in a war with the U.S.! That's the wrong way to look at it!

GTG ttyl


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> The real fear from Soviet Missiles are the NUKE's that you can arm them with! And I've already posted how many fighters the Soviets have added to their fleet just in the past few years!
> So using the Russians as an example is absurd!



NATO feared that the Soviets could fight a conventional war and cripple their airpower by systems like the Oka. The degradation would then force NATO to use nukes first. The Oka was forbidden and destroyed and is one of Irans role models instead of high attention to airpower.

What Russians do today or not is not applicable to Iran. They might be able to afford the luxury of 4th gen. airpower in numbers...



VEVAK said:


> Any fighter can fly low and hid behind terrain!
> Su-25's are built like Tanks, they fly at low altitudes & can achieve what 900km at low altitudes? But that doesn't mean they'll ever be able to go up against F-15 in Air to Air combat!



This is one tactic. The B-2 applies it in case of detection. If terrain and low level flight capability is available this tactic can be used.
If a F-15 detects a F-90 shooting F-313 at 100km despite stealth, maybe due to radar emissions, it will start the hunt. The question is now where the terrain masking F-313 is by the time it reached the point of last detection. It could have escaped in any direction. It can fly and look down with it's radar, but what really counts in such a engagement is the fuel spent to do so. The F-15 is 20-50% faster but if the search takes too long, it has to abort and go home.
Yes one has to think a moment to understand this...



VEVAK said:


> A Russian Su-35/37 will fly low, will use the IRST on it's nose to passively target a high altitude stealth aircraft and will target a stealth fighter without the need of any other system & it's R-74 will likely achieve the same range of a Fakur-90 being fired at low speed & low altitudes!



The F-313 would reach high altitude in the pop-up for the shoot



VEVAK said:


> And at what range & flying at what speed did you plan on popping up? & at what altitude did you plan on firing your missile?



12km altitude and 100km (~130km start of pop-up) distance to target is my operation regime model.



VEVAK said:


> F-313 is NOT capable of high angel of attack & it's wings & Airframe design will prevent it from having a high climb ratio



If the climb rate is = ~3min to 12km AGL, it is sufficient. It doesn't have to be a F-104...



VEVAK said:


> Americans have IRST on their fighters supported by AWACS systems & sats so even if you could somehow manage to fool the Radar (Which I doubt) there is NO WAY your going to fool SAT's, AWACS & IRST altogether to get within weapons range, lock on & fire before your shot down! And even Iran's Media is not claiming that the Aircraft will be used in a Air to Air role!



Yes Iranian Media is not claiming it, it is a concept I put up.

You overestimate U.S detection capability. Have you witnessed that during a ~20° climb angle, the intake of the F-313 is not visible, just the facet stealth belly? Maybe because it is designed for a pop-up, which would also be the most dangerous period of its operation? It does the pop-up undetected with it's X- to S-band stealth (=AWACS, APG-XX), (E-2 excluded at this point).
As for IRST and space sensors... those capabilities are either unknown or for IRST, the F-313 does to best possible defense against it --> pop-up climb without afterburner.



VEVAK said:


> At best it's a cheep low RCS platform to have to be used in close Air Support or for specific mission! It will either carry 2 modified version of the Bina, Kowsar, NASR or NASER Missile or another engine assisted air to ground platform allowing the aircraft to target & fire projectiles outside the range of any AAA system!



This would be ridiculous with Irans current drone capabilities... If it's operation regime is just that, then they better cancel it...



VEVAK said:


> And if it is capable of GE it would still need an advanced Fly by wire system to fly the aircraft over land especially over Iranian terrain while taking advantage of aerodynamic properties of GE at cruise speeds & without various sub systems flying a low altitude aircraft with a single pilot that has to pilot at low altitudes & target ground targets in a high risk situation with a low surviving airframe is just not a good idea unless you have various subsystems



And this is exactly where the talent of the Iranians can be employed effectively. Building such a FBW terrain avoidance autopilot is what is in reach and produced at a very low price. No materials, no complex production.
It is one of the enabler for my F-313 operation regime to work...



VEVAK said:


> American fighters are mostly built for look down shoot down capability & this idea that low lever flight is going to save you is far from reality!



They have reduced range performance while doing so. But what I meant is that also a AMRAAM used against a low flying target will have reduced range due to higher dynamic pressure...



VEVAK said:


> Su-25 that's built like a tank does Mach 0.7 at sea level & doing Mach 0.9 in GE requires advanced Fly by wire system & advanced terrain counter mapping because it's just not humanly possible to maintain that speed & not crash at long distances!!! Automatically piloted Russian Cruise Missiles had trouble maintaining low level flight in Iran's terrain so the idea that a human can do it is just not in the realm of possibility



I don't want the pilot doing the low level GE flight, it must be fully automated.



VEVAK said:


> BM's & LACM capability to do damage has been around for decades! It may be a fairly recent development for Iran but this is nothing new!
> 
> For fixed targets within 600km of Iranian boarders I believe Iranian missiles & UAV's can do the job! So again you'll need an Air Force with fighters and bombers for ranges beyond that making light aircraft & weak engines like the F-313 useless!
> And you have to realize that your enemy is NOT stupid! No one is going to attack Iran and park it's Air Assets within 600km of Iranian boarders



Our context is Iran and high precision BM/CM is a recent capability.

Look, the Russians have avoided all-aspect stealth for the Su-57 because they have no hope that it could strike targets deep in a advanced opponents territory.
The F-22 was designed to do this but has very questionable chance against a country like Iran with its IADS.

Everything else needs a massive SEAD/DEAD machinery like only the Americans have and then it would take huge efforts to reach a protected target inside an advanced IADS.
Now if the target is time critical and degrades your warfighting capabilities, you better pay the price of a 2000km range BM or high numbers of CMs to kill that target.

It just means one thing: give me something better than the F-22, or a huge several thousand large fighter/bomber fleet or skip the idea to kill 600km+ targets with conventional airpower.



VEVAK said:


> This only applies to long ranges & it doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to get within weapons range! Low level flying is nothing new! A Su-25 flying at low altitudes will NEVER be able to go up against an F-15 for areal combat & that's why the Russians never armed them to do so because it ridicules!



I'm not a big believer in B-2 survivability, but that low level escape tactic is THE main survivability mean of the B-2. Were B-2 also too stupid and didn't take their lesson from the Su-25?



VEVAK said:


> WRONG! 1st off the F-22 uses Titanium Casting which was a new method that had to be developed that required new tools! And that's the main thing that sets it apart from the Airframe of most fighters
> 42% of the F-22 is made out of Titanium as appose to ~22% used on the F-14 but building the F-14 titanium parts required wasting more ti than was used on the aircraft! where as the F-22 used more Ti rather than wasting it & instead used composites to further strengthen the airframe rather than more treatment
> The Ti on F-14 although stronger they are not as wildly used as the F-22 & instead steel is used on the F-14 & result is an overall lighter & stronger Airframe! And the wide use of titanium reduces weight that results in better performance!
> 
> The nonsense you just said would ONLY be relevant if an F/A-18 was somehow cheaper to produce than an F-117
> And it is NOT!
> 
> And most of the cost of an Air Frame is due to the materials used, the amount & size!
> 
> Whether you make your mold square or round on steel & composites or whether or not you wanna cut your titanium or aluminum a certain shape has little to no effect on cost!
> 
> It's absolute BS! Especially if your Airframe is made out of steel, aluminum & composite mixture!
> 
> now certain area's of an Aircraft like where you put your landing gear & where and how your connect your wings depending of the fighters require you to do treatments and even if you do press, heat & oxidation treatment you can still round off the edges with precision cuts
> If your using a mold for your random you can press the mold in any shape or from you want
> 
> SO NO it's absolute NONSESE! It's like saying if we make the Saeghe square we could potentially save money!



You are way off VEVAK... Be sure that the F-313 body parts are some kind of composite, almost certainly a sandwich or honeycomb design. It seems you have no idea how much easier=cheaper it is to manufacture even facet geometries with sandwich composite?

What the hell have F-22 titanium body parts to do with this??? They have to use Ti because of thermal loads which supercruising creates --> a task for which Ti is very good... the F-313 is subsonic/"cold".
You'r way off the topic



VEVAK said:


> The BD-10 doesn't even have afterburners!!!! T-38 does! It doesn't make it a capable combat aircraft!



Ok, I see you don't get what I meant...



VEVAK said:


> It's like taking a Su-25 removing it's survivability factor & payload capability just to reduce the RCS & yes it may be useful for specific situations but most definitely nothing worth mass producing & nothing a low budget country like Iran should be wasting it's resources on



Su-25: Armored, capable of low level piloted flight of 30-100m AGL
F-313 proposal: LO or VLO, autopiloted GE low level flight of 15-20m AGL, ECM, exclusive use of terrain masking
B-2: VLO, autopiloted low level flight of 30-50m AGL, high power ECM, use of terrain masking at opportunity.

One question would be the anti-clutter performance of the AIM-120 seeker against a target at 15m AGL.



VEVAK said:


> F-313 will never be an Air Defense fighter and Iran has never claimed that it is!



Right. Any other use than what I described would make no sense, it would be predestined to be replaced by drones.



VEVAK said:


> Having a fighter program is not just about what you plan on doing in a war with the U.S.! That's the wrong way to look at it!



It is what Iran has done ever since the post-war era and is what has brought it where it is today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zathura

*Russian Helicopters’ Ka-226T Clears Iranian High-temperature Tests*

Russian Helicopters’ Ka-226T light multi-purpose helicopter has cleared tests with support from Iran Helicopter Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC).

The tests were carried out in the framework of a memorandum signed by Helicopters of Russia JSC (part of Rostekh State Corporation) and IHSRC at the HeliRussia international exhibition in May 2017, and their purpose was to confirm the possibility of operating the helicopter at ambient temperatures up to +50 degrees Celsius, the company said in a statement Wednesday.

"Testing of the Ka-226T in the extreme climatic conditions of Iran will make the helicopter even more attractive for the potential operators not only in this country but also throughout the Middle East. We can notice the great interest towards this helicopter in the region even now, and we hope that our cooperation with our partners from IHSRC will allow us to turn this interest into several contracts and agreements," said Andrey Boginsky, CEO of Russian Helicopters.

The light utility helicopter Ka-226T has a coaxial twin-rotor system, its maximum takeoff weight is 3.6 t, and it is able to transport up to 1 t of payload. The main distinctive feature of the helicopter is its modular design - a transport cabin that can carry up to 6 people or modules with special equipment can be easily installed on the Ka-226T. Improved performance characteristics of the Ka-226T, its eco-friendly features, cost effectiveness; advanced avionics and additional flight safety solutions make this helicopter one of the best models in its class.

SOURCE: defenceworld

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> Admit my mistake! LOL! You don't know anything! When Emad was tested publicly the system was already distributed across our bases!
> Emad's successor was almost completed when they did the public testing & it's CEP is 500 meters you can cry about it all your want it is what it is!
> 
> And I'm not going to go waist my time finding a flag so you can feel better! I'm 100% Iranian! I was born in Iran I went to school in Iran so cry cry away!
> 
> Junk is Junk and when Iran produces amazing equipment like Zolfagar Missile, Shahed-129, Simorgh, Saegheh, Karrar, Soumar, Ya Ali, Ghadir, Jamaran, Sina, Sejil-2, Emad, Bina, Qassed1/2/3..... I don't shy away from saying it & when they produce Junk like F-313 I'm not going to shy away from saying it because when we produce junk we should know that it's junk so we correct it so we don't fall into a false sense of pride & produce junk just because it looks cool & it was made in Iran!
> Junk is Junk & 500 meters is good accuracy on a ballistic projectile at 1700km
> 41 & in the Army means nothing to me most Iranians have to serve so what??????& yes I did! So what?


how old are you i think you are kid who go and read some army magazine from west and come with prude man say dehghan said cep 500 find lol where he said that and after that be so manor f-313 made of cheap material are you made those material if you are iranian you must prude of it and show it and where are you now in iran or like this manoto tv watcher in uk or usa or uae or sua which one and where are you served im official not vazife lol i think you are fool who think now any think go watch kids tv its beter for you


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> bia degheh ean am bara ma ghod ghod mekonan...
> har vaght sakhtesh 100 dar 100 shod bad harf bezaneed... ba oon ghaher keh aberoo eay melato bordeen!


this is yours too but now you speak about it material go and find peace with .....


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> NATO feared that the Soviets could fight a conventional war and cripple their airpower by systems like the Oka. The degradation would then force NATO to use nukes first. The Oka was forbidden and destroyed and is one of Irans role models instead of high attention to airpower.
> 
> What Russians do today or not is not applicable to Iran. They might be able to afford the luxury of 4th gen. airpower in numbers....



Absurd!!!!!!!!!!! Russia developed the MiG-25 1st & had the fastest large scaled deployed fighter force on the planet!
MiG-25 First flight 1964 introduced 1970
Su-24-1974
Su-25 Introduced 1981
MiG-31 Introduced 1981
MiG-29 Introduced 1982
Su-27 stared production 1982 introduced in 1985
Tu-22M Large Supersonic Bomber 500 produced 1967-1997 Before that the Tu-22 & Tu-28
Let me not waist my time and post this so you can see how absurd your statement is!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aircraft_of_the_Soviet_Union_and_the_CIS

All the fighters built across EU couldn't match them in Quantity, Quality & variety!

And Air Defense systems in the 80's in EU although developed, lacked the capabilities of high altitude, high speed engagement that means the biggest threat were Russian High speed, High Altitude, Heavy Payload, Long Range bombers deployed in large scales that could do carpet bombing of any target in EU & conventional missiles were NOTHING compared to that! 



PeeD said:


> This is one tactic. The B-2 applies it in case of detection. If terrain and low level flight capability is available this tactic can be used.
> If a F-15 detects a F-90 shooting F-313 at 100km despite stealth, maybe due to radar emissions, it will start the hunt. The question is now where the terrain masking F-313 is by the time it reached the point of last detection. It could have escaped in any direction. It can fly and look down with it's radar, but what really counts in such a engagement is the fuel spent to do so. The F-15 is 20-50% faster but if the search takes too long, it has to abort and go home.
> Yes one has to think a moment to understand this....



1st off the MAX Range of the Fakour-90 is 90km at high speed and high altitude engagement in a look down shoot down scenario fired from F-14's flying at +40,000 ft!

And at 100km the point of detection will be as soon as you come up from behind a mountain & you'll be detected and engaged upon using much faster radars & missiles in an easy look down shoot down tactic which is what Americans are trained for! And they'll empty their missiles turn around and easily move out of range of your missile even if you did some how have the time to lock on!



PeeD said:


> The F-313 would reach high altitude in the pop-up for the shoot
> 12km altitude and 100km (~130km start of pop-up) distance to target is my operation regime model.
> If the climb rate is = ~3min to 12km AGL, it is sufficient. It doesn't have to be a F-104....



3 min as your climbing their AESA radars will detect you & empty out their BVR missiles & turn back & head out of your range! There is no hiding behind terrain when you plan to start taking altitude at 130km & you'll give them a bigger target once you pull up the nose & show your belly (Not the other way around) & while your missile is climbing to get to cruise altitude for long range engagement their missiles are coming right at your! It's absurd ask any IRIAF pilot!



PeeD said:


> Yes Iranian Media is not claiming it, it is a concept I put up.
> 
> You overestimate U.S detection capability. Have you witnessed that during a ~20° climb angle, the intake of the F-313 is not visible, just the facet stealth belly? Maybe because it is designed for a pop-up, which would also be the most dangerous period of its operation? It does the pop-up undetected with it's X- to S-band stealth (=AWACS, APG-XX), (E-2 excluded at this point).
> As for IRST and space sensors... those capabilities are either unknown or for IRST, the F-313 does to best possible defense against it --> pop-up climb without afterburner..



F-313 just as in the F-117 uses radar deflection! radar feactures is what is used on the F-22 where the angels of your wings, intakes, stabilizers,.. are all the same....

F-117 like the F-313 uses an outdated stealth feature that relies on deflection & unlike the F-22 the aircraft HAS to fly directly towards a radar at a correct angle for it to work & that's why U.S. built a limited number to be used for specific missions where your flying straight towards 1 radar & that method is outdated because the very same thing that made the F-117 stealthy worked against it in a digitized multi radar & EWS networked Air Defense network which is what most countries that the U.S. considers a threat now have!

Modern IRST don't need your afterburners to be turned on! Today the lack of afterburners only reduces engagement range of cheaper MANPAD's! Lack of afterburners don't protect UAV's, Helo's, A-10 or Su-25's from modern MANPAD's let alone an IRST! The heat created by fiction is enough! And how often do you think a fighter can turn on it's afterburners for you to think an Aircraft manufacturers put IRST on an aircraft for if and when an enemy fighter turns on it's burners?



PeeD said:


> This would be ridiculous with Irans current drone capabilities... If it's operation regime is just that, then they better cancel it....



Good so they should cancel it! Or if they have gone too far already just produce it in limited numbers because that is it's max capability! & yes produced in limited numbers for specific missions like flying out 400km towards the Indian Ocean to engage ships from a distance of 50-100km would expand Iran's reach using a cheap Low RCS platform!

I would also say I would use them as small & cheap Tankers spread out across the country allowing me to station most of my Air Force deeper in the country & they would be a much harder target to hit than 4 or 5 large tankers



PeeD said:


> And this is exactly where the talent of the Iranians can be employed effectively. Building such a FBW terrain avoidance autopilot is what is in reach and produced at a very low price. No materials, no complex production.
> It is one of the enabler for my F-313 operation regime to work....



You wanna put advanced fly by wire system, advanced avionic, sensor fused capability, HOTAS, Helmot mounted display, terrain counter mapping capable autopilot, PGM targeting from weapons bay,.... & a highly trained pilot on an low surviving, low maneuvering, high drag airframe to fly in a high risk low altitude sorties with limited payload & full reliance on ground equipment for anything beyond visible range!
And does every spot in Iran have cell coverage for you to think that Iran will be able to securely relay large amounts of data securely at low altitudes? NO! & the same terrain that will hide you will prevent you from receiving secure data!

And If it was so cheap and easy to upgrade your electronics package why doesn't Iran just do that with it's current Saegheh, Azarakhsh & F-5's....
In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-5's were easy targets due to their limited radar, lack of situational awareness, range & speed! And they had a lower RCS than Iranian F-14's & that was in the 80's!






PeeD said:


> They have reduced range performance while doing so. But what I meant is that also a AMRAAM used against a low flying target will have reduced range due to higher dynamic pressure....



Wrong! Americans like build their Air capability around look down shoot down capability & that would only be true if the missile 1st dove down & then flew straight at you again that's absurd & it's based on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!



PeeD said:


> I don't want the pilot doing the low level GE flight, it must be fully automated..



So why do you need a pilot? The Aircraft is going to fly it's self and your Air Defense is going to target the Aircrafts! what you just push the button?



PeeD said:


> Our context is Iran and high precision BM/CM is a recent capability.
> 
> Look, the Russians have avoided all-aspect stealth for the Su-57 because they have no hope that it could strike targets deep in a advanced opponents territory.
> The F-22 was designed to do this but has very questionable chance against a country like Iran with its IADS.
> 
> Everything else needs a massive SEAD/DEAD machinery like only the Americans have and then it would take huge efforts to reach a protected target inside an advanced IADS.
> Now if the target is time critical and degrades your warfighting capabilities, you better pay the price of a 2000km range BM or high numbers of CMs to kill that target.
> 
> It just means one thing: give me something better than the F-22, or a huge several thousand large fighter/bomber fleet or skip the idea to kill 600km+ targets with conventional airpower..



Again, wrong! aside from that fact that they have so many nukes that No super power would be stupid enough to start a war with them!

The fact that Missiles are your 1st strike weapon for the Russians & the U.S. is not in doubt! But that doesn't reduces their need for an Air Force! Russians have a lot of space based assets that allows them to see, locate & target any relevant SAM system & in a conventional attack they'll use missiles & long range air to ground PGM to 1st take out any Air Defense system, communication & command structure! And only then their Air Force will come into play!

And in Air to Air battles they rely on countermeasures & tactics to evade incoming missiles & they are confident in their ability to detect & target stealth Aircraft using onboard systems on their Aircraft! And if the Russians are sure of their ability to detect stealth then they are sure the Americans can do it too

Plus with advances in NANO tech you can probably make any Aircraft stealth



PeeD said:


> I'm not a big believer in B-2 survivability, but that low level escape tactic is THE main survivability mean of the B-2. Were B-2 also too stupid and didn't take their lesson from the Su-25?.



B-2's use RAM & their design allows for long range bombing missions & they will not be deployed over enemy territory until US missiles destroy your high altitude SAM capability & even then they'll be escorted by F-22's!



PeeD said:


> You are way off VEVAK... Be sure that the F-313 body parts are some kind of composite, almost certainly a sandwich or honeycomb design. It seems you have no idea how much easier=cheaper it is to manufacture even facet geometries with sandwich composite?.




What the hell have F-22 titanium body parts to do with this??? They have to use Ti because of thermal loads which supercruising creates --> a task for which Ti is very good... the F-313 is subsonic/"cold".
You'r way off the topic.[/QUOTE]

Even with a honeycomb design you can round off the edges in the same way you round off a Helo's rotor blades by simply cutting them!
SO WRONG! And absolutely absurd to think the F-313 even uses a honeycomb design! they use simple Radar Deflection nothing more!

No I'm not! You claimed the F-22 was more expensive to build than the F-117 because the F-117 uses flat surfaces & I'm explaining to you how absurd that is and the main reason why the F-22 is so expensive is due to the large amount of TI used & it's Ti casting method not it's curved design!

F-14, F-15, Su-Pak all use under 25% Ti & even less on the F-117 vs the F-22 that uses 42% which allows for Supercruise on a low drag air frame with internal weapons bay with greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio & if you used Ti casting you'll automatically get a smoother Air Frame!

If the Russians take the Su-Pak design & increase ti to 40-50% using Ti casting in a 2-3 peace fuselage design it will be capable of super cruise in fact if you do that to any Russian fighter that has grater than 1 thrust to weight ratio it will be capable of super cruise 
large Ti casting is key because it removes the need of adding useless bolts and screws & allows you to carry more fuel





PeeD said:


> Su-25: Armored, capable of low level piloted flight of 30-100m AGL
> F-313 proposal: LO or VLO, autopiloted GE low level flight of 15-20m AGL, ECM, exclusive use of terrain masking
> B-2: VLO, autopiloted low level flight of 30-50m AGL, high power ECM, use of terrain masking at opportunity
> 
> One question would be the anti-clutter performance of the AIM-120 seeker against a target at 15m AGL.
> 
> 
> Right. Any other use than what I described would make no sense, it would be predestined to be replaced by drones..



OMG! You think from above 25,000 ft 30m or 15m is going to make a difference? NO! unless your directly hidden behind a terrain it makes no difference in a look down shoot down scenario!

Now if your a high maneuvering fighter with a greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio flying low with high sensor capability you may be able to make the missile miss on a hi g maneuver on it's final approach which will cause it to hit the ground before it can turn but you don't need to be that close to the ground even at 200 meters the missile is coming at you in a dive at Mach 4
F-313 lack the sensor capability to even react especially with your optics underneath the nose your dead!



PeeD said:


> It is what Iran has done ever since the post-war era and is what has brought it where it is today.



If you stick to an easily predictable tactic & you refuse to adapt while your enemy is adapting to you then you'll be an easy target

In Iran most of the countries mines are owned by the government! Iran is easily poised to develop a highly capable Airframe with a high thrust engine!
Iran has Ti, Iridium, Tungsten, Magnesium,.... all at home! The mines are mostly owned by the government & we are not a capitalist country that sells weapons to it's self! We have Oil and making Hydrogen & Oxygen is as simple as sticking DC power into sea water! So again I don't see any logic behind producing an Air frame using cheap materials using light fuel efficient engines!
Increasing the size of your Jet Engines is really not that difficult!

If it was up to me I'd take the F-14 exterior design & I would make modification to the front to allow it to carry an internal weapons bay & increase fuel capacity. Using Ti & Ti casting (40-50% Ti) in a 3-4 large peace design fuselage reinforced with campsites
powered by a 4ft in diameter Turbojet engine to start (To be upgraded in time)
Equipped with the upgraded digitalized AWG-9 (To be upgraded in time)
I would keep the wings until I can develop Thrust Vectoring & only them for a fixed simpler design

For RCS reduction I would use nano-coating for radar deflection just as how a small DLP chip has tiny mirrors I would use deflection in a nano scale on areas with high RCS

And who cares about what the US has this is about pushing the boundaries of technology inside Iran!

We have Ti it's owned by the government & there is no reason why we shouldn't be producing our own products with it!

Government needs to invest in the Youth and on a fighter program that pushes the boundaries of technology in side the country regardless of how advanced the U.S. Air Force is! And the F-313 is just not something that could ever do that!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Absurd!!!!!!!!!!! Russia developed the MiG-25 1st & had the fastest large scaled deployed fighter force on the planet!
> MiG-25 First flight 1964 introduced 1970



I don't care what manned airpower Russians operate since WWI to the 90's. 
I care which of their weapon systems were game changers. The Oka was one, the Mig-25 not.

... well I don't know how we came back on that topic... Either you don't understand what I write or I write unclear.



VEVAK said:


> And at 100km the point of detection will be as soon as you come up from behind a mountain & you'll be detected and engaged upon using much faster radars & missiles in an easy look down shoot down tactic which is what Americans are trained for! And they'll empty their missiles turn around and easily move out of range of your missile even if you did some how have the time to lock on!



Detection depends on the LO or VLO level of the F-313. Only very powerful radars such as the APG-81 might be able to pick up a stealth F-313 from ranges beyond 100km. My open source calculations show that a F-313 with a RCS of 0,02m² would be able to go undetected to around 100km against the APG-81.

But even if it is detected, we talk about distances of 100km range. Which AMRAAM variant do they want to use to catch the F-313 before it shoots and dives down?



VEVAK said:


> 3 min as your climbing their AESA radars will detect you & empty out their BVR missiles & turn back & head out of your range! There is no hiding behind terrain when you plan to start taking altitude at 130km & you'll give them a bigger target once you pull up the nose & show your belly (Not the other way around)



So you again know more than anyone else. The belly RCS of the F-313 is too large to counted U.S radars? No. In stealth even larger but featureless area (such as the F-313 belly), can have a lower RCS than a front with intakes and cockpit.



VEVAK said:


> F-313 just as in the F-117 uses radar deflection! radar feactures is what is used on the F-22 where the angels of your wings, intakes, stabilizers,.. are all the same....



The F-22/-35 also uses deflection + RAM, just in a more advanced manner necessary for its aerodynamic requirements.



VEVAK said:


> F-117 like the F-313 uses an outdated stealth feature that relies on deflection & unlike the F-22 the aircraft HAS to fly directly towards a radar at a correct angle for it to work & that's why U.S. built a limited number to be used for specific missions where your flying straight towards 1 radar & that method is outdated because the very same thing that made the F-117 stealthy worked against it in a digitized multi radar & EWS networked Air Defense network which is what most countries that the U.S. considers a threat now have!



I think I know what you want to say. But it is wrong. F-22 and F-117 stealth work in the same way, no need for straight flight nonsense. Both have RCS management with certain spikes...



VEVAK said:


> Modern IRST don't need your afterburners to be turned on! Today the lack of afterburners only reduces engagement range of cheaper MANPAD's! Lack of afterburners don't protect UAV's, Helo's, A-10 or Su-25's from modern MANPAD's let alone an IRST! The heat created by fiction is enough! And how often do you think a fighter can turn on it's afterburners for you to think an Aircraft manufacturers put IRST on an aircraft for if and when an enemy fighter turns on it's burners?



Again you have a very simplistic, useless view. You want to detect the F-313 starting the pop-up with IRST against a warm ground, in warmer air, at what ranges? 100km? 150km? What would the range be against a afterburner equipped aircraft? 200km?

As long as the non-afterburning F-313 at its pop-up remains undetected till the F-90 shoot, it has won.



VEVAK said:


> You wanna put advanced fly by wire system, advanced avionic, sensor fused capability, HOTAS, Helmot mounted display, terrain counter mapping capable autopilot, PGM targeting from weapons bay,.... & a highly trained pilot on an low surviving, low maneuvering, high drag airframe to fly in a high risk low altitude sorties with limited payload & full reliance on ground equipment for anything beyond visible range!



The good thing is, those systems are just expensive and difficult in R&D, production can be very low cost. A very good thing. Unlike engines, which are difficult in R&D AND production AND raw materials...
So Iran better makes max. use of that advantage.



VEVAK said:


> And does every spot in Iran have cell coverage for you to think that Iran will be able to securely relay large amounts of data securely at low altitudes? NO! & the same terrain that will hide you will prevent you from receiving secure data!



One of the few good point you made. Yes terrain masking will pose a problem. What I want to see are not just com-sats but high flying relay drones in very large numbers, a kind of expandable drone based satcom. Not just for the F-313 but anything.



VEVAK said:


> And If it was so cheap and easy to upgrade your electronics package why doesn't Iran just do that with it's current Saegheh, Azarakhsh & F-5's....
> In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-5's were easy targets due to their limited radar, lack of situational awareness, range & speed! And they had a lower RCS than Iranian F-14's & that was in the 80's!



New avionics like that need to be first developed for the F-313 and then we can think about if it's worth the money to upgrade the IRIAF legacy force with it. In some instances new avionics are implemented.

Whats frontal RCS had the F-5? 1-2m² frontal? What the F-14? 6-8m²? This is 4-8 times RCS difference. In stealth we want to achieve 10-20-25 times less RCS in X-band. At 20 times, things become serious and Americans dream/claim about 35-40 times these days. The Objective for the F-313 should be 20 times.



VEVAK said:


> Wrong! Americans like build their Air capability around look down shoot down capability & that would only be true if the missile 1st dove down & then flew straight at you again that's absurd & it's based on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!



Sorry, I'm not that stupid. No, its about the AMRAAM that does 80km head on at 12km altitude and mach 1,8. But this is for a target which is also at 12km altitude. At 20m, the same AMRAAM shot under the same conditions will have to go down into dense atmosphere and retain G-capability. It means, against a F-313 that AMRAAM would have a range of 50km, while 80km against a Su-35. You are just not aware of such effects...



VEVAK said:


> So why do you need a pilot? The Aircraft is going to fly it's self and your Air Defense is going to target the Aircrafts! what you just push the button?



Yes. Until you don't give them a AI sorftware that can do all the stuff a RIO does as well as a 100% secure and continuous communication...



VEVAK said:


> Plus with advances in NANO tech you can probably make any Aircraft stealth



The question is what degree of stealth and against which bands...



VEVAK said:


> B-2's use RAM & their design allows for long range bombing missions & they will not be deployed over enemy territory until US missiles destroy your high altitude SAM capability & even then they'll be escorted by F-22's!



Good. The F-313 better also uses RAM. But the point is: The Americans spent 2billions an airframe for something that is not survivable on its own? No. They changed it mid during development to offer the low level evasion capability.
It better be escorted by F-22 yes, but it is not completely helpless, it dives down an disappears if the package gets intercepted.



VEVAK said:


> Even with a honeycomb design you can round off the edges in the same way you round off a Helo's rotor blades by simply cutting them!
> SO WRONG! And absolutely absurd to think the F-313 even uses a honeycomb design! they use simple Radar Deflection nothing more!



Aha... I didn't say it uses honeycomb composite its just one possibility. But what I say is that you have no idea about composites and manufacturing.

I try to tell you how it works: a rounded F-22 like stealth design computed and tested has very tight form tolerances. If you want to build those parts with say a sandwich composite, the necessary efforts =costs are much higher.
Now imagine how much cheaper a faceted stealth design with even surfaces is...



> No I'm not! You claimed the F-22 was more expensive to build than the F-117 because the F-117 uses flat surfaces & I'm explaining to you how absurd that is and the main reason why the F-22 is so expensive is due to the large amount of TI used & it's Ti casting method not it's curved design!
> 
> F-14, F-15, Su-Pak all use under 25% Ti & even less on the F-117 vs the F-22 that uses 42% which allows for Supercruise on a low drag air frame with internal weapons bay with greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio & if you used Ti casting you'll automatically get a smoother Air Frame!
> 
> If the Russians take the Su-Pak design & increase ti to 40-50% using Ti casting in a 2-3 peace fuselage design it will be capable of super cruise in fact if you do that to any Russian fighter that has grater than 1 thrust to weight ratio it will be capable of super cruise
> large Ti casting is key because it removes the need of adding useless bolts and screws & allows you to carry more fuel



Please, don't repeat yourself about Ti. The Su-57 is about the have equal or better supercruising capabilities than the F-22 by using more composite material...

If the F-313 has a composite based sandwich bodypart design with integrated RAM at lower price than Al or Ti, then everything is fine.
If a sufficiently good facet stealth is developed for major airframe sections, so that those composite bodyparts can be even geometry, even higher cost savings are possible. Bear in mind, as sub-sonic design, there is no need for complex/expensive rounded stealth for aerodynamic reasons.



> Now if your a high maneuvering fighter with a greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio flying low with high sensor capability you may be able to make the missile miss on a hi g maneuver on it's final approach which will cause it to hit the ground before it can turn but you don't need to be that close to the ground even at 200 meters the missile is coming at you in a dive at Mach 4



Long range shoots (needed as F-313 would shoot at 100km), are always at the edge of the envelope, speed won't be mach 4 at 12km altitude and wont be more than mach 2,5 at 50m altitude.



> F-313 lack the sensor capability to even react especially with your optics underneath the nose your dead!



If it becomes reality, expect optical warning sensors for the production F-313.



> If it was up to me I'd take the F-14 exterior design & I would make modification to the front to allow it to carry an internal weapons bay & increase fuel capacity.



The Turks have started a project for a 5th gen. fighter, a 20 billion project until production stage. They will get help on engines from GB and help from various European companies. South Korea is doing another such textbook airpower project, Indians have one such too.

Such projects are immensely difficult and in total too conventional textbook approached for Iran.
-Iran of 1990 was thinking about deterring Israel in future.
-Iran of 2000 could deter Israel and was thinking about wining a conventional war against Israel and deter the U.S.
-Iran of 2010 could force ceasefire (win) in a conventional war upon Israel and had a deterrence against the U.S.
-Iran of 2020 should be able to annihilate Israel and force ceasefire (win) a conventional war against the U.S
-Iran of 2030 should be able to put a high (conventional) destructive risk against U.S mainland.

How can such ambitions afford a 20 billion, 15 years textbook project for manned airpower?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

happened for the first time, overhaul of IL-76 after three years grounding:
*فیلم/ نخستین تعمیر هواپیمای فوق سنگین در کشور *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

IRIAF B-747 delivering 40 tons of humanitarian aid from Iranian Red Crescent to Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh





ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار




ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار





​

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sorry for the late response @PeeD. 



PeeD said:


> That F-5 was just an IRIAF internal project, while the F-313 has the whole defense industry behind it and access to all available subsystems.
> So the situation is very different.



Nevertheless, their experience and established industry allows them to do experimental designs, of which I'm sure you are aware of. 

Trawling through Cold War aviation designs/prototypes and their in many cases utterly mental nature is a favourite pastime of mine.



PeeD said:


> As for no proven equivalent. The RQ-170 is one. It seems to have titanium load structures for the wings, but its wings are much longer and heavier loaded than the short weaponless F-313 wings.



Again, it has Titanium load structures. Besides, those wings are very thin, whereas Qaher's are quite thick.



PeeD said:


> No, with everything the complete product.



I think we discussed this enough already. We just have to agree to disagree, even though I find this miscalculation a critical flaw in your concept.



PeeD said:


> LCT 1-3 and RCT 1-3. Why you mention stealth? You asked for a secondary bomb truck capability. Any external weapons will compromise stealth but you wanted to have a massive bombing capability at low intensity phase.



I was talking more about the pylons themselves, though now I think on it a bit more, the pylons can be removed, like those on the F-35 and F-22.

Though I'm still not convinced that something like a 2000 lb bomb will not prevent the bomb bay doors from opening, which would mean, considering the fact that the AIM-54 is actually bigger than a GBU-31, another 4000 lb of unused capacity.



PeeD said:


> It's about dodging BVR AAMs at the edges of its envelope



That is more to do with depriving it of it's energy reserves rather than outright dodging. If you detect a missile, say, 50 km away, you can turn around and make manoeuvres into different altitudes and directions. The missile would have to follow this, and because at this stage of it's flight it is unpowered, it will not have the energy and therefore range to even reach you, let alone force you to dodge it. This is the standard method used in professional air forces.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Sorry for the late response @PeeD.



No worries.



AmirPatriot said:


> Again, it has Titanium load structures. Besides, those wings are very thin, whereas Qaher's are quite thick.



Actually we don't know what it is, its just likely Ti. The RQ-170 wings are equally thick as those on the F-313, only getting thinner as they extend. Actually thicker wingroots are better for the structural connection, enabling the use of materials with high volume / mechanical strength ratio like composites.
Anyway, if it is Ti on the RQ-170, it could be primary due to the extrem length of the fueled wings, as said.



AmirPatriot said:


> I was talking more about the pylons themselves, though now I think on it a bit more, the pylons can be removed, like those on the F-35 and F-22.
> 
> Though I'm still not convinced that something like a 2000 lb bomb will not prevent the bomb bay doors from opening, which would mean, considering the fact that the AIM-54 is actually bigger than a GBU-31, another 4000 lb of unused capacity.



No issue if designed correctly.



AmirPatriot said:


> That is more to do with depriving it of it's energy reserves rather than outright dodging. If you detect a missile, say, 50 km away, you can turn around and make manoeuvres into different altitudes and directions. The missile would have to follow this, and because at this stage of it's flight it is unpowered, it will not have the energy and therefore range to even reach you, let alone force you to dodge it. This is the standard method used in professional air forces.



I don't know anymore the context. Bleeding energy is a way to bring down the G capability of the AAM, be it by flying in opposite direction or flying in dense air layers or forcing it to maneuver to bring it into intercept position. All counts and at the time it reaches you, a 5 g turn could be sufficient to evade it.


----------



## VEVAK

ashool said:


> how do you know what material used in q 313 are you one of designer we dont know i read your things you speak like someone how build or make qaher or anything else . why speak so strongly about q-313 or else the commanders or designer dont say anything about engine or material but you know like that 500 meters cep please dont say anything you dont know its right or say its my idea



Really! What are you 10? You claim to be 40 year's old and in Iran's Army & I have to explain to you why the F-313 has a cheap Airframe?
Clearly your knowledge base regarding the subject is quite limited!
F-5's have cheap Airframes, Saegheh & Azarakhsh have cheap airframes, F-16's have cheap Air frames & the Q-313 also has a cheap Airframe!
If you had limited knowledge regarding Fighters you would know this & you wouldn't need me to explain it to you!
Clearly your either a Child or someone with NO knowledge regarding Fighters!
Your just going based on emotion! Not FACTs!


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> I don't care what manned airpower Russians operate since WWI to the 90's.
> I care which of their weapon systems were game changers. The Oka was one, the Mig-25 not.
> 
> ... well I don't know how we came back on that topic... Either you don't understand what I write or I write unclear.



1st You claimed the Russian have chosen Air Defense systems like S-400 over fighters because they've built no more than a handful of Su-Pak-Fa!
So I showed you how many fighters they have added to their fleet in the past decade alone!

Then you claimed that the main threat to NATO was a 500km Ballistic Missile produced between 1979 - 1987!

Vs 100's of large supersonic, high altitude bombers they had active each capable of flattening a city or an Air Base! And a 500km Oka missile & today's Iskandar missiles are NOTHING compared to the lethality of those bombers & every weapons has it's use!

Systems like the Oka & today's Eskandar have the capability to cripple enemy Radar, Communication & disrupt operations at bases within RANG!

Even with the USSR's old boarder that missile was not something that could pose a threat to most EU countries it couldn't even fly past Germany! So again your statement is absurd!



PeeD said:


> Detection depends on the LO or VLO level of the F-313. Only very powerful radars such as the APG-81 might be able to pick up a stealth F-313 from ranges beyond 100km. My open source calculations show that a F-313 with a RCS of 0,02m² would be able to go undetected to around 100km against the APG-81.
> 
> But even if it is detected, we talk about distances of 100km range. Which AMRAAM variant do they want to use to catch the F-313 before it shoots and dives down?



OMG your contradicting yourself! 1st ether the Aircraft can go undetected at high altitudes up to 100km or NOT! Which is it! If it can then why the hell do you need GE? It is absurd to have a pilot fly in a high risk environment for NO GOOD reason! If your building a fighter to only fly over your own territory & it's stealth characteristics protect it from detection & targeting up to 100km then you would have to be insane to deploy the added drags of an increased GE capability on your fighter jet! 

You said you plan on climbing at 130km sowing your belly & it's a miss calculation on your part to think it would be stealthy!!!!! And what would be the point if they can't detect you at 100km away why the hell would you fly low and then be forced to clime painstakingly slowly to get to an optimal altitude so you can fire your Fakour-90's! 2ndly when a missiles MAX range is 90km that means it has that range when firing it at high altitude at supersonic speeds! The Fakkour-90 Max range fired from F-313 in the most optimal condition possible will at best be 60-70km! In Iran-Iraq war F-14 pilots would hold off firing the AiM-54 until they got to within 30-50km 






PeeD said:


> from 1979 until 1987 So you again know more than anyone else. The belly RCS of the F-313 is too large to counted U.S radars? No. In stealth even larger but featureless area (such as the F-313 belly), can have a lower RCS than a front with intakes and cockpit.


 
WRONG! Using radar deflection, if the U.S. had made the F-117 any bigger it would have been detected!







So No! The cracks aren't what made the F-117 stealthy it's a miss conception it's was the angle of the surface that gives you the stealth features & the reason the US Air force chose not to make the F-117 more aerodynamic was because they thought it was MAGIC & due to a lack of understanding of what it was that made it stealthy they chose to keep it like that! And now that they do understand those methods they aren't being used anymore

And it's your absolute miss understanding as to how a radars works makes you think that you can somehow show your belly and remain stealth! The F-117, F-22 or the F-313 would not remain stealth by showing their belly the is why the F-22 was made to force the pilot into a straight and stabile flight & this is why the F-117's got pre programed to fly straight & maintain a direct path to their designated target! 

Making the aircraft square doesn't effect cost! If anything any structural designers would tell you that you would end up with a weaker Airframe which would in term require you to use more materials which results in an increase cost! 

Curved structure is one of reasons why a Turtles shell is strong it is why Soda cans are made round instead of square... 







PeeD said:


> The F-22/-35 also uses deflection + RAM, just in a more advanced manner necessary for its aerodynamic requirements.



Yes the F-22 uses various types of stealth features including but not redistricted to deflection! they use various methods in different parts and I suspect they even use a honeycomb design likely with a mix of ceramic, iridium,.... with an interior honeycomb matrix design to make a bulky but stealthy & high heat resistant TVC



PeeD said:


> I think I know what you want to say. But it is wrong. F-22 and F-117 stealth work in the same way, no need for straight flight nonsense. Both have RCS management with certain spikes...



WRONG! As explained before, the F-117 uses deflection & the RAM used on it is ONLY for the purpose of getting a clear deflection off the reflective surfaces of the aircraft! NOTHING MORE!





PeeD said:


> you have a very simplistic, useless view. You want to detect the F-313 starting the pop-up with IRST against a warm ground, in warmer air, at what ranges? 100km? 150km? What would the range be against a afterburner equipped aircraft? 200km?
> 
> As long as the non-afterburning F-313 at its pop-up remains undetected till the F-90 shoot, it has won.



Long range known IRST have ~40-50km max range depending on whether its the front or back or weather you have afterburners on or off! Although every advanced country in the world is working to increase that and the most advanced versions of any country is not likely to be made public!

Body heat from a human can be detected on the ground using advanced optics let alone an Aircraft! Here your special RQ-170 engine with the thermal signature of the UAV being detected with Iranian optics










PeeD said:


> The good thing is, those systems are just expensive and difficult in R&D, production can be very low cost. A very good thing. Unlike engines, which are difficult in R&D AND production AND raw materials...
> So Iran better makes max. use of that advantage.







PeeD said:


> One of the few good point you made. Yes terrain masking will pose a problem. What I want to see are not just com-sats but high flying relay drones in very large numbers, a kind of expandable drone based satcom. Not just for the F-313 but anything.
> 
> 
> New avionics like that need to be first developed for the F-313 and then we can think about if it's worth the money to upgrade the IRIAF legacy force with it. In some instances new avionics are implemented.
> 
> Whats frontal RCS had the F-5? 1-2m² frontal? What the F-14? 6-8m²? This is 4-8 times RCS difference. In stealth we want to achieve 10-20-25 times less RCS in X-band. At 20 times, things become serious and Americans dream/claim about 35-40 times these days. The Objective for the F-313 should be 20 times.



Your claiming with $8-10Million USD per aircraft Iran can not only build the aircraft but build 100 per year! If building advanced Avionics, electronics & sensor fusing an Aircraft was so cheap and easy they would have done it here





And I'm not saying it's out of Iran's capabilities but what I am saying is the cost will add up to a point that it would not make sense to put a pilot & those electronics on a platform with a cheap airframe & limited payload!



PeeD said:


> Sorry, I'm not that stupid. No, its about the AMRAAM that does 80km head on at 12km altitude and mach 1,8. But this is for a target which is also at 12km altitude. At 20m, the same AMRAAM shot under the same conditions will have to go down into dense atmosphere and retain G-capability. It means, against a F-313 that AMRAAM would have a range of 50km, while 80km against a Su-35. You are just not aware of such effects...


 
Why would you think an AMRAM's range would be any different against a F-313 vs a Su-35?

1st you said you plan on taking altitude at 130km away are you changing that? If your planning on staying at 20meters altitude up to 50km even if you could get that close at what range do you plan on taking altitude? Worst case for US fighter is that they see you at 50km but can't lock on using radar base missiles so they'll either turn around make you chase something you can't catch & empty your fuel or speed up and dive for an IRST lock at ~35-40km before you can get within weapons range

But more likely than not they'll lock on using radar based AMRAMS long before you can get within 50km




PeeD said:


> Good. The F-313 better also uses RAM. But the point is: The Americans spent 2billions an airframe for something that is not survivable on its own? No. They changed it mid during development to offer the low level evasion capability.
> It better be escorted by F-22 yes, but it is not completely helpless, it dives down an disappears if the package gets intercepted.



Just like the F-117 the F-313 would have to use RAM coating for a clear Radar deflection! The F-117 didn't use RAM to build the skin or structure it's just paint!




PeeD said:


> Aha... I didn't say it uses honeycomb composite its just one possibility. But what I say is that you have no idea about composites and manufacturing.
> 
> I try to tell you how it works: a rounded F-22 like stealth design computed and tested has very tight form tolerances. If you want to build those parts with say a sandwich composite, the necessary efforts =costs are much higher.
> Now imagine how much cheaper a faceted stealth design with even surfaces is...












You have little understanding of composites, structural design & manufacturing if you think that's true!

And again it's Ti used & Ti casting what made the F-22 expensive! It has nothing to do with round vs square 



PeeD said:


> Please, don't repeat yourself about Ti. The Su-57 is about the have equal or better supercruising capabilities than the F-22 by using more composite material...
> 
> If the F-313 has a composite based sandwich bodypart design with integrated RAM at lower price than Al or Ti, then everything is fine.
> If a sufficiently good facet stealth is developed for major airframe sections, so that those composite bodyparts can be even geometry, even higher cost savings are possible. Bear in mind, as sub-sonic design, there is no need for complex/expensive rounded stealth for aerodynamic reasons.
> 
> Long range shoots (needed as F-313 would shoot at 100km), are always at the edge of the envelope, speed won't be mach 4 at 12km altitude and wont be more than mach 2,5 at 50m altitude.
> 
> If it becomes reality, expect optical warning sensors for the production F-313.



The F-22 uses 42% Ti + composites + it's Ti casting of large part that removes the need for a bunch of bolts that not only further reduces it's weight but also gives it a smoother surface & that = less drag, higher thrust to weight ratio, more room for fuel!!!! which = Super cruise!

You'll NEVER get a 100km from the Fakour-90 off the F-313! NOT POSSIBLE AT ANY ALTITUDE



PeeD said:


> The Turks have started a project for a 5th gen. fighter, a 20 billion project until production stage. They will get help on engines from GB and help from various European companies. South Korea is doing another such textbook airpower project, Indians have one such too.
> 
> Such projects are immensely difficult and in total too conventional textbook approached for Iran.
> -Iran of 1990 was thinking about deterring Israel in future.
> -Iran of 2000 could deter Israel and was thinking about wining a conventional war against Israel and deter the U.S.
> -Iran of 2010 could force ceasefire (win) in a conventional war upon Israel and had a deterrence against the U.S.
> -Iran of 2020 should be able to annihilate Israel and force ceasefire (win) a conventional war against the U.S
> -Iran of 2030 should be able to put a high (conventional) destructive risk against U.S mainland.
> 
> How can such ambitions afford a 20 billion, 15 years textbook project for manned airpower?



The notion that Iran can't afford to add $1.5 Billion a year towards a fighter program is absurd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sub systems developed on such a program have wider implications and will result in the growth of the country in various fields both in terms of civilian & military products!
It's NOT just about a fighter!
As for the engine I would say Iran would have to develop it's OWN! It wouldn't matter if the engine is a larger Turbojet engine as long as it's the MOST advanced engine within Iran's capabilities!

Everything from the materials used to the sub components will help the countries economy grow by expanding the production of various alloys and sub systems....

Any Iranian politician, leader or... that thinks that after 40 years of not upgrading the countries Fighter Fleet SHOULD BE SHOOT!
Where is Iranian petrol dollars & tax money going? We have real problem on our hands if we are stuck with leaders who think paying $1.5 Billion a year to develop our own fighter is too high a price to pay especially after almost 40 years of neglect of Iran's Air Force!
$1.5 Billion a year is NOT going to make or break Iran! It won't turn Iran into a super power if spent on increased Missile production & It won't break Iran if spent on a fighter program!

The need to produce various super alloys like Titanium, Iridium, Tungsten, CMC,.... go well beyond the need to produce a fighter! 
Even the components that aren't duel use in a fighter are made out of materials that are!

On one hand you claim that Iran can't afford to pay $1.5 Billion for a fighter program & on the other hand you claim we can somehow afford a high cost war against Israel & the U.S. without even needing an advanced Air Force!
And the capability your suggesting Iran will have in the next 3 years without an advanced Air Force is absurd let alone your claims for the next decade!

To win a war against the U.S. in the M.E. and have a true deterrent this is what you'll need in the next decade!
1.A fleet of 500 Su-35/37 (or better) + 60 5th Gen Stealth Air Superiority fighters Su-PAK, J-31 or F-22's & you'll need 4-5 new bases across central Iran with bunkers that are harder to hit & capable of faster deployment.
2.A Fleet of at least 10 Supersonic Bombers B-1 or Tu-22M type
3.A fleet of at least 5 Large size AWACS + 20 Smaller to mid size AWACS + 20 Air born UAV control & command 
4.A fleet of 20-50 Small to mid size Air refueling Tankers! (Iran should of attempted to redesign the AN-140 into a more glide capable Airframe strengthened with composites for military use only! equipped with a variant of Iranian Owj engines!
(Basically for your Air Force you'll need to spend $12-$15 Billion a year for the next decade with a mix of purchases and domestic products)
5.1000 armed version of the Simorgh UCAV (or better)
6.1000's of MALE UCAV's
7.You'll need 25 Battalions of S-300 or Bavar-373 spread across the country with at least 500-600 Tel's on top of what Iran already has today 
8.You'll need a stock of 10,000 Cruise Missiles & Karrar's & the ability to fire at least 1000 per day
9.You'll need 10,000 MRBM missiles with the ability to fire 1000 per day all with the accuracy of 200 meters or less and you'll need 10,000 Zolfaghar & Fatteh Class missiles CEP 50 meters or less!
10.You'll need 30 Fatteh Class subs or larger for your blue water sub fleet! 

And if all you have is 30,000 missiles & you fire 3000 per day you'll just run out in 10 day's or you can just fire 300 per day and you would still run out in 100 day's!!!! It's a delusion to think you can replace an Air force with a bunch of Missiles!


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> To win a war against the U.S. in the M.E. and have a true deterrent this is what you'll need in the next decade!
> 1.A fleet of 500 Su-35/37 (or better) + 60 5th Gen Stealth Air Superiority fighters Su-PAK, J-31 or F-22's & you'll need 4-5 new bases across central Iran with bunkers that are harder to hit & capable of faster deployment.
> 2.A Fleet of at least 10 Supersonic Bombers B-1 or Tu-22M type
> 3.A fleet of at least 5 Large size AWACS + 20 Smaller to mid size AWACS + 20 Air born UAV control & command
> 4.A fleet of 20-50 Small to mid size Air refueling Tankers! (Iran should of attempted to redesign the AN-140 into a more glide capable Airframe strengthened with composites for military use only! equipped with a variant of Iranian Owj engines!
> (Basically for your Air Force you'll need to spend $12-$15 Billion a year for the next decade with a mix of purchases and domestic products)
> 5.1000 armed version of the Simorgh UCAV (or better)
> 6.1000's of MALE UCAV's
> 7.You'll need 25 Battalions of S-300 or Bavar-373 spread across the country with at least 500-600 Tel's on top of what Iran already has today
> 8.You'll need a stock of 10,000 Cruise Missiles & Karrar's & the ability to fire at least 1000 per day
> 9.You'll need 10,000 MRBM missiles with the ability to fire 1000 per day all with the accuracy of 200 meters or less and you'll need 10,000 Zolfaghar & Fatteh Class missiles CEP 50 meters or less!
> 10.You'll need 30 Fatteh Class subs or larger for your blue water sub fleet!
> 
> And if all you have is 30,000 missiles & you fire 3000 per day you'll just run out in 10 day's or you can just fire 300 per day and you would still run out in 100 day's!!!! It's a delusion to think you can replace an Air force with a bunch of Missiles!





Its really sad because you think with all this oil and natural gas Iran has you wonder where all this money is going?? Not with this economy can Iran support even half of what is required here, because of garbage economy. Somehow the country with the most natural resources and potential only has a $400 billion GDP. I hate to say it but its true. Iran definitely has the technical expertise and smart youth to do alot of what is needed here without purchasing abroad but the country is somehow not wealthy because of bad leadership and politics. When will this change?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> 1st You claimed the Russian have chosen Air Defense systems like S-400 over fighters because they've built no more than a handful of Su-Pak-Fa!
> So I showed you how many fighters they have added to their fleet in the past decade alone!



They basically keep their current and past numbers by replacing old ones. Officials already indicated that if the economic situation does not get better, numbers of Su-57 would be low.



VEVAK said:


> Then you claimed that the main threat to NATO was a 500km Ballistic Missile produced between 1979 - 1987!
> 
> Vs 100's of large supersonic, high altitude bombers they had active each capable of flattening a city or an Air Base! And a 500km Oka missile & today's Iskandar missiles are NOTHING compared to the lethality of those bombers & every weapons has it's use!
> 
> Systems like the Oka & today's Eskandar have the capability to cripple enemy Radar, Communication & disrupt operations at bases within RANG!
> 
> Even with the USSR's old boarder that missile was not something that could pose a threat to most EU countries it couldn't even fly past Germany! So again your statement is absurd!



500km is enough to take out close airbases. The whole idea is to force enemy airpower to operate at longer ranges which limits deep strike capability, survivability and Sortie generation rate.
Most importantly in a conventional conflict, as any superpower level country can just nuke everything, but the stronger one can even win conventionally. Game changers like the Oka helped there.



VEVAK said:


> OMG your contradicting yourself! 1st ether the Aircraft can go undetected at high altitudes up to 100km or NOT! Which is it! If it can then why the hell do you need GE? It is absurd to have a pilot fly in a high risk environment for NO GOOD reason! If your building a fighter to only fly over your own territory & it's stealth characteristics protect it from detection & targeting up to 100km then you would have to be insane to deploy the added drags of an increased GE capability on your fighter jet!



- No contradiction, just too complex for you
- Nobody knows the real APG-81 range performance
- GE increases thrust, effectively speaking. You use GE and low level regime because you can't compete on engines at high altitude, but as the gap gets smaller, you come close to compete kinematicaly at low level with GE.



VEVAK said:


> And what would be the point if they can't detect you at 100km away why the hell would you fly low and then be forced to clime painstakingly slowly to get to an optimal altitude so you can fire your Fakour-90's! 2ndly when a missiles MAX range is 90km that means it has that range when firing it at high altitude at supersonic speeds! The Fakkour-90 Max range fired from F-313 in the most optimal condition possible will at best be 60-70km! In Iran-Iraq war F-14 pilots would hold off firing the AiM-54 until they got to within 30-50km



Your numbers are wrong and you know nothing about the F-90 or a further development of it for the F-313.



VEVAK said:


> So No! The cracks aren't what made the F-117 stealthy it's a miss conception it's was the angle of the surface that gives you the stealth features & the reason the US Air force chose not to make the F-117 more aerodynamic was because they thought it was MAGIC & due to a lack of understanding of what it was that made it stealthy they chose to keep it like that! And now that they do understand those methods they aren't being used anymore
> 
> And it's your absolute miss understanding as to how a radars works makes you think that you can somehow show your belly and remain stealth! The F-117, F-22 or the F-313 would not remain stealth by showing their belly the is why the F-22 was made to force the pilot into a straight and stabile flight & this is why the F-117's got pre programed to fly straight & maintain a direct path to their designated target!



There are two driving parameters, surface area as you said an smoothness of the surface. The B-2 and less so the F-313 belly are smooth, this helps to have a lower RCS despite a large area. It also means RAM can be easier and better applied.



VEVAK said:


> Making the aircraft square doesn't effect cost! If anything any structural designers would tell you that you would end up with a weaker Airframe which would in term require you to use more materials which results in an increase cost!
> 
> Curved structure is one of reasons why a Turtles shell is strong it is why Soda cans are made round instead of square...



- Skin airframe has almost no impact on structural strength, this is done by the inner skeleton structures.
- Making a brick square aircraft, sure as hell reduces manufacturing costs. That you don't realize this, speaks volumes...



VEVAK said:


> WRONG! As explained before, the F-117 uses deflection & the RAM used on it is ONLY for the purpose of getting a clear deflection off the reflective surfaces of the aircraft! NOTHING MORE!



There are just two basic physical methods in stealth: Deflection and absorption. Whether curved stealth or facted stealth is used, is unimportant... The Su-57 uses faceted stealth at nacelle and lower fuselage...



VEVAK said:


> Long range known IRST have ~40-50km max range depending on whether its the front or back or weather you have afterburners on or off! Although every advanced country in the world is working to increase that and the most advanced versions of any country is not likely to be made public!
> 
> Body heat from a human can be detected on the ground using advanced optics let alone an Aircraft! Here your special RQ-170 engine with the thermal signature of the UAV being detected with Iranian optics



Ok, so your IRST can't detect the F-313 at 100 shooting range? Good enough.
Certainly modern IRST have longer range and work better at high altitudes with afterburning, supersonic aircraft. The fact that you have problems with those statements, again speaks volumes.



VEVAK said:


> Why would you think an AMRAM's range would be any different against a F-313 vs a Su-35?
> 
> 1st you said you plan on taking altitude at 130km away are you changing that? If your planning on staying at 20meters altitude up to 50km even if you could get that close at what range do you plan on taking altitude? Worst case for US fighter is that they see you at 50km but can't lock on using radar base missiles so they'll either turn around make you chase something you can't catch & empty your fuel or speed up and dive for an IRST lock at ~35-40km before you can get within weapons range
> 
> But more likely than not they'll lock on using radar based AMRAMS long before you can get within 50km



Again you have not understood what I wrote there...
Su-35=high altitude=less drag for AMRAAM
F-313=low altitude=more drag for AMRAAM

You might think if it goes ballistic it has a longer downrange against a low altitude F-313 but dynamic pressure will force it down to speeds like mach 1, where a 3g maneuver is enough to dodge it.
No, a F-313 hunting AMRAAM must retain at least mach 2 at impact to be effective and this means a considerably reduced range.
The whole evasion and survivability discussion involves to many parameters to make it as simple as you want.



VEVAK said:


> Just like the F-117 the F-313 would have to use RAM coating for a clear Radar deflection! The F-117 didn't use RAM to build the skin or structure it's just paint!



As a product of today, the F-313 would need to use a skin with integrated RAM, RAS as on the F-35 for example. Otherwise the need of maintenance for its operation regime would be too high.



VEVAK said:


> You have little understanding of composites, structural design & manufacturing if you think that's true!
> 
> And again it's Ti used & Ti casting what made the F-22 expensive! It has nothing to do with round vs square



So you compare filament tanks to laminate/sandwich/honeycomb, RAM/RAS skin part of an airframe? Its very clear who has no knowledge on this...



VEVAK said:


> If building advanced Avionics, electronics & sensor fusing an Aircraft was so cheap and easy they would have done it here



Keep your argumentation at a useful level... Avionics are certainly cheaper in everything than an engine for example, manufacturing, engineering, materials, maybe in rare cases just except for R&D...
That they have not created Iranian ones for the Il-76 is simply because it is not worth the effort, too small fleet size and affordable alternatives.
They would certainly design an advanced avionics suite for the F-313 to allow low level flight. This is the area in which we can jump forward as there is no 50-100 years metallurgy experience necessary to get the right formula for a long-life turbine blade.



VEVAK said:


> The F-22 uses 42% Ti + composites + it's Ti casting of large part that removes the need for a bunch of bolts that not only further reduces it's weight but also gives it a smoother surface & that = less drag, higher thrust to weight ratio, more room for fuel!!!! which = Super cruise!



Check the Su-57... as a supercruising 15g rated airframe it uses traditional Russian Ti but has a much higher composite amount than the F-22. But I have no idea what this has to do with our topic.



VEVAK said:


> You'll NEVER get a 100km from the Fakour-90 off the F-313! NOT POSSIBLE AT ANY ALTITUDE



You can't and don't know... You seem to not be aware that the speed difference for teen fighters compared to the F-313 would be just mach 0,5-0,8 in real life and they make claims claims of above 100km for the small and low power AMRAAM. And we are not talking about a further improved F-90 for the F-313 which could e.g use a composite motor casing.



As for the 5th gen. fighter project discussion.
The F-313 could be the first right step. The next airpower asset that would make sense for Iran would be a twin engine/seat, kinematic monster superior to the Mig-31 and with VLO capabilities above that of the F-22 (although future sensor technology could negate stealth).

This would make sense for Iran as a airpower weapon system and we are many years away from building it. But the F-313 and its "mass production" will help immensely.

The point is simply that a weapon system bust be superior to alternatives to be acquired and not for the sake to have a large airforce or because everybody is doing something.


PS: I haven't watched it, but I recommend you to avoid youtube uploaded U.S documentations about U.S weapon systems... at least don't bring them up as source...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> Its really sad because you think with all this oil and natural gas Iran has you wonder where all this money is going?? Not with this economy can Iran support even half of what is required here, because of garbage economy. Somehow the country with the most natural resources and potential only has a $400 billion GDP. I hate to say it but its true. Iran definitely has the technical expertise and smart youth to do alot of what is needed here without purchasing abroad but the country is somehow not wealthy because of bad leadership and politics. When will this change?



Iran's economy won't change until Iran decides to make 2 major changes

1. Increasing Tourism & expand on industries inside Iran (At least parts of Iran) by removing a few absurd and outdated religious restrictions at least in specific areas that have the potential of being Tourist destinations!

Enforcing Hejab, Ban on Alcoholic Beverages, Restrictions on Music & entertainment,.... These actions directly effect Tourism which is the LARGEST industry in the world!!!!!!!!! This is what allows Turkey to have 20-40 Million Tourists every year & that's a lot of foreign capital coming in to spend money! And various industries inside of Turkey very smartly took advantage of that from industries directly effected by it like Airline, Hotels & Resorts to industries that were indirectly effected by it like clothing, beverage, entertainment,..... & Turkish products evolved & got better in terms of quality, verity,....
As appose to Iran's 3-5 Million Tourists who by a vast majority are religious pilgrims who don't come to spend money! And you have a major deficit in that regard & every year millions of Iranians take the capital made inside the country to spend outside the country because what they consider fun is none existent inside the country. which results in more cash going out than coming in!

And it results in Turkey with a population of 80 million which technologically is not much more advanced than Iran having a GDP(nominal) DOUBLE that of Iran's at $860 Billion & a GDP(ppp) of $2 Trillion USD ranked 13th in the world! And they do it without any major Oil or Gas industry & they don't produce the most advanced car's in the world or the most advanced computers in the world so technologically they are not more advanced!

In Iran sanctions are often used as an excuse but sanctions have nothing to do with it! It's Iran's own policies that's shooting it's self in the foot!


2.Iran needs a massive investment in it's defense industry especially for building and mass producing the most advanced military products within the countries capabilities! Iran's defense industry should be at the front line of Iran's technological advancements in almost every field! And what they produce should have a direct effect on civilian products all across the country! Without it, trying to compete globally whether it be civilian or military products will be extremely difficult! (This is also lacking in Turkey & it's what separates more technologically advanced countries like S.Korea, Germany, France, U.K., Japan with roughly the same population from Turkey) 



Now unlike many of those governments Iran's government on top of taxes is getting a steady supply of funding via oil, natural gas, mining, telecommunications & various other government owned and operated companies & service providers!
Which makes the Iranian government one of the top 15 richest governments in the world at least they have one of the top 15 largest budgets! So the idea that out of ~$300Billion USD budget you can't cut, move around and find a way to add an additional $20 Billion to your military is beyond absurd! In fact, every penny they get from oil should go directly towards Iran's Military Industry especially for the next 4 years!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Iran's economy won't change until Iran decides to make 2 major changes
> 
> 1. Increasing Tourism & expand on industries inside Iran (At least parts of Iran) by removing a few absurd and outdated religious restrictions at least in specific areas that have the potential of being Tourist destinations!
> 
> Enforcing Hejab, Ban on Alcoholic Beverages, Restrictions on Music & entertainment,.... These actions directly effect Tourism which is the LARGEST industry in the world!!!!!!!!! This is what allows Turkey to have 20-40 Million Tourists every year & that's a lot of foreign capital coming in to spend money! And various industries inside of Turkey very smartly took advantage of that from industries directly effected by it like Airline, Hotels & Resorts to industries that were indirectly effected by it like clothing, beverage, entertainment,..... & Turkish products evolved & got better in terms of quality, verity,....


So west anti Iranian propaganda has no effect, but Iranian culture (for example the hijab) is the obstacle!
American's visa ban has no effect, but the restriction of Alcohol is an obstacle!
The Tourist: hey I don't wanna visit Iranian culture cause there is no Alcohol in it! (sounds more like a drug addict)
----------
But here is the real world numbers, while the whole European tourists weren't more than 100,000, number of regional tourists decrease from 4,442,419 to 4,091,354 after the JCPOA:







آدرس غلط مسئولین به مردم در پسابرجام به ضرر صنعت گردشگری خواهد بود
چرا مسئولین حوزه گردشگری پشت سفارت عربستان پنهان می‌شوند!؟
بعد از برجام گردشگران ورودی از کشورهای همسایه کم شدند
مجموع گردشگران اروپایی که بعد از برجام به ایران آمدند به 100 هزار نفر نمی رسد


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Your distorted view and understanding shows itself again with the tourism argument.

You have a static, non-felxible, non-open, almost reactionary view on things, a kind of (western) textbook approach.

Its funny that your tourism case is so similar to that on airpower and the jet engine... Same as we can't compete in those areas, we also can't compete with Turkish alcohol flatrate offers at their (closer) Mediterranean beaches and their developed tourism infrastructure. They have all the KPIs on their side, its a lost cause.
Its actually sad, as many people in Iran, who have not seen the outside world, think Iran can become big via tourism...
At least try to take Japan or South Korea as a example who produce products with high added values and don't try to host drunk party foreigners with sun at beaches...
This is not meant to condemn Turkish tourism model or even alcoholic westen tourism style, it works for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Parsipride

*Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.*






Did you listen to Donald Trump’s UN speech today? 

*Standing in front of the world, Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.*

He then blamed Iran for terrorism and lauded Saudi Arabia - which birthed ISIS and Al Qaeda - as the region’s great fighter of terror.

Finally, Trump claimed to stand in solidarity with the Iranian people. Think about that. This is the man who tried to ban all Iranians from the United States, including students, green card holders, and even grandparents.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Parsipride said:


> *Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you listen to Donald Trump’s UN speech today?
> 
> *Standing in front of the world, Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.*
> 
> He then blamed Iran for terrorism and lauded Saudi Arabia - which birthed ISIS and Al Qaeda - as the region’s great fighter of terror.
> 
> Finally, Trump claimed to stand in solidarity with the Iranian people. Think about that. This is the man who tried to ban all Iranians from the United States, including students, green card holders, and even grandparents.



He's been saying he's gonna rip it out before even becoming president. Nothing is certain until he does. It would be a clever strategy for the U.S to constantly threaten to deal to prevent foriegn invesment into Iran. To keep people from investing there through fear of iminint tear up of the deal. Sec Tillerson already said Iran is in technical complaince of the deal. What more is their if you are technically correct?.


----------



## ashool

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Your distorted view and understanding shows itself again with the tourism argument.
> 
> You have a static, non-felxible, non-open, almost reactionary view on things, a kind of (western) textbook approach.
> 
> Its funny that your tourism case is so similar to that on airpower and the jet engine... Same as we can't compete in those areas, we also can't compete with Turkish alcohol flatrate offers at their (closer) Mediterranean beaches and their developed tourism infrastructure. They have all the KPIs on their side, its a lost cause.
> Its actually sad, as many people in Iran, who have not seen the outside world, think Iran can become big via tourism...
> At least try to take Japan or South Korea as a example who produce products with high added values and don't try to host drunk party foreigners with sun at beaches...
> This is not meant to condemn Turkish tourism model or even alcoholic westen tourism style, it works for them.


exactly the 100% manoto watcher only manoto or voa or bbc i see too but not like him i see both side


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> They basically keep their current and past numbers by replacing old ones. Officials already indicated that if the economic situation does not get better, numbers of Su-57 would be low....



The number of Aircraft the Russians have active & the number they have in storage is like Night & Day so this is not about replacing the Old they are adding to their stockpile & if they had all these money problems they would of just done a overhaul and upgrade as they are doing with the MiG-31's!

There is no reason for the Russian to have 1000's of Fighter Jets on active duty! And the number of fighters they have active today will be nothing compared to what they'll have in a short time if & when needed!



PeeD said:


> 500km is enough to take out close airbases. The whole idea is to force enemy airpower to operate at longer ranges which limits deep strike capability, survivability and Sortie generation rate.
> Most importantly in a conventional conflict, as any superpower level country can just nuke everything, but the stronger one can even win conventionally. Game changers like the Oka helped there....



Game changer!!!!!! LOL! OMG! Take a look at a map before you type! They won't even be able to reach U.S. radar sites in Poland with 500km! What game changer???

This is only in your head!



PeeD said:


> - No contradiction, just too complex for you
> - Nobody knows the real APG-81 range performance
> - GE increases thrust, effectively speaking. You use GE and low level regime because you can't compete on engines at high altitude, but as the gap gets smaller, you come close to compete kinematicaly at low level with GE....



Wrong! Your over simplifying things & constantly trying to come up with excuses!

Plus, it's a simple question will the Q-313 be detected at altitude at beyond 100km or NOT?

As for engine! Iran can simply increase the diameter of the OWJ engine without increasing the length of the compressors blades with little adjustment! And yes you will use more fuel but fuel consumption is irrelevant if your focus is over your own territory!

Plus J-85's are capable of supersonic flight which means you need a good excuse for adding drag of added GE capability! And if your claiming that you'll be fully stealth at altitude regardless then there is no reason why anyone in their right mind would sacrifice speed for GE




PeeD said:


> Your numbers are wrong and you know nothing about the F-90 or a further development of it for the F-313....



I don't need to know about the F-90 in terms of range it will not surpass the AiM-54 & Iran it's self is claiming it's a Mid range missile not a BVR missile

Your making things up!

You claim Iran's Air Defense systems will be doing the targeting which may be possible if the aircraft was flying at altitude but to data link to an Aircraft at 20-50 meters off the ground it's absurd!



PeeD said:


> There are two driving parameters, surface area as you said an smoothness of the surface. The B-2 and less so the F-313 belly are smooth, this helps to have a lower RCS despite a large area. It also means RAM can be easier and better applied....



Vay vay vay!!!!!!!!!!! Again you don't understand how radars work! Smoothness allows for better deflection at an angle! To over simplify it for you, have you ever skipped rocks off water? Now if you don't throw at a right angle your rock will sink & if the water is wavy (not smooth) it will cause your rock to sink! In the same manner you can deflect laser light off water or a surface at an angle!!!!!!!!!! So the belly of the F-117, F-22, F-313, F-35, Su-Pak, J-31..... NONE of them will be stealthy!!!!!!!!!! 



PeeD said:


> - Skin airframe has almost no impact on structural strength, this is done by the inner skeleton structures.
> - Making a brick square aircraft, sure as hell reduces manufacturing costs. That you don't realize this, speaks volumes...
> ...



YOU DON'T have a CLUE do you! LOL! No point in me arguing with someone who keeps denying well known facts!






PeeD said:


> Again you have not understood what I wrote there...
> Su-35=high altitude=less drag for AMRAAM
> F-313=low altitude=more drag for AMRAAM
> 
> You might think if it goes ballistic it has a longer downrange against a low altitude F-313 but dynamic pressure will force it down to speeds like mach 1, where a 3g maneuver is enough to dodge it.
> No, a F-313 hunting AMRAAM must retain at least mach 2 at impact to be effective and this means a considerably reduced range.
> The whole evasion and survivability discussion involves to many parameters to make it as simple as you want.
> ...



You can fly a Su-35 at any altitude!!!!!!!!!!!! Again at what altitude did you plan on pupping up? And a Su-30 at altitude has BVR capability!




PeeD said:


> So you compare filament tanks to laminate/sandwich/honeycomb, RAM/RAS skin part of an airframe? Its very clear who has no knowledge on this...
> ...






PeeD said:


> Keep your argumentation at a useful level... Avionics are certainly cheaper in everything than an engine for example, manufacturing, engineering, materials, maybe in rare cases just except for R&D...
> That they have not created Iranian ones for the Il-76 is simply because it is not worth the effort, too small fleet size and affordable alternatives.
> They would certainly design an advanced avionics suite for the F-313 to allow low level flight. This is the area in which we can jump forward as there is no 50-100 years metallurgy experience necessary to get the right formula for a long-life turbine blade.
> ...



LOL!!! You don't know anything buddy!






It doesn't matter what shape it is if your using Ti or Composites or a sandwich because your either cutting or using a mold & casting! It sure as hell doesn't effect the overall costs in any meaningful way! 

And as I told you before square straight vs round and curve = weaker = more materials required!!!! What goes on in your head is nothing more than fiction made up due to your limited knowledge on the subject! 



PeeD said:


> Check the Su-57... as a supercruising 15g rated airframe it uses traditional Russian Ti but has a much higher composite amount than the F-22. But I have no idea what this has to do with our topic.
> ...



Traditional Ti means putting it in a press & doing Thermal, oxidation & pressure treatment & it results in a heavier & stronger Ti than the ones used on the F-22 but the F-22 doesn't require 1000's of heavy bolts to keep the Airframe together and it also results in a smoother surface! all these combined = better super cruise = better stealth 



PeeD said:


> You can't and don't know... You seem to not be aware that the speed difference for teen fighters compared to the F-313 would be just mach 0,5-0,8 in real life and they make claims claims of above 100km for the small and low power AMRAAM. And we are not talking about a further improved F-90 for the F-313 which could e.g use a composite motor casing.
> ...



Yea sure go talk to a pilot and tell him how 0.5 mach is not a big deal! LOL! my God!



PeeD said:


> As for the 5th gen. fighter project discussion.
> The F-313 could be the first right step. The next airpower asset that would make sense for Iran would be a twin engine/seat, kinematic monster superior to the Mig-31 and with VLO capabilities above that of the F-22 (although future sensor technology could negate stealth).
> 
> This would make sense for Iran as a airpower weapon system and we are many years away from building it. But the F-313 and its "mass production" will help immensely.
> 
> The point is simply that a weapon system bust be superior to alternatives to be acquired and not for the sake to have a large airforce or because everybody is doing something.
> 
> 
> PS: I haven't watched it, but I recommend you to avoid youtube uploaded U.S documentations about U.S weapon systems... at least don't bring them up as source...



Like it or NOT F-313 is a JOKE!

And your delusions about Iran producing 800 of them will be meet with reality!!!!!!!!! At max I can see Iran producing 50 or so NOTHING MORE! 
These are nothing but wishes and hopes of a child and all I have to do is wait and time will prove it!

So this one goes out to all the foolish supporters of the F-313 that think 800 F-313 will ever be produced or could even go up against 200 F-15 or Su-30's






P.S. I'll post whatever I want! I suggest you try to prove your BS! O wait but how could you! Because it retarded with no factual bases!



mohsen said:


> So west anti Iranian propaganda has no effect, but Iranian culture (for example the hijab) is the obstacle!
> American's visa ban has no effect, but the restriction of Alcohol is an obstacle!
> The Tourist: hey I don't wanna visit Iranian culture cause there is no Alcohol in it! (sounds more like a drug addict)
> ----------
> But here is the real world numbers, while the whole European tourists weren't more than 100,000, number of regional tourists decrease from 4,442,419 to 4,091,354 after the JCPOA:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> آدرس غلط مسئولین به مردم در پسابرجام به ضرر صنعت گردشگری خواهد بود
> چرا مسئولین حوزه گردشگری پشت سفارت عربستان پنهان می‌شوند!؟
> بعد از برجام گردشگران ورودی از کشورهای همسایه کم شدند
> مجموع گردشگران اروپایی که بعد از برجام به ایران آمدند به 100 هزار نفر نمی رسد



Yea good thing we are the ones that invented wine! LOL! Iranian culture has nothing to do with it!

Turkey Tourism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Turkey

They hit 40 Million in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So NOPE!

Forcing women to ware the Hijab has nothing to do with Iranian Culture & has nothing to do with Islam!
Banning Alcoholic Beverages has nothing to do with Iranian culture! It has to do with Islam! And it's this deluded Ban the prevents the government from properly regulating (And that why Basiji's won't go unemployed instead they will be diverted towards regulations and keep the public safe rather than harassing them) 

People that like to learn about other cultures during travel have a CHOICE! Go to a country where the government puts a dress code on you vs ones that don't! It's an easy choice really!
People travel to have fun, shop & enjoy life! Which seems to be something your incapable of understanding!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> There is no reason for the Russian to have 1000's of Fighter Jets on active duty! And the number of fighters they have active today will be nothing compared to what they'll have in a short time if & when needed!



The storage is one thing. The active fleet with competitive gear and pilots with experience on them another...



VEVAK said:


> Game changer!!!!!! LOL! OMG! Take a look at a map before you type! They won't even be able to reach U.S. radar sites in Poland with 500km! What game changer???
> 
> This is only in your head!



Keep the context, I was talking about the Oka being a game changer when it appeared... in the 80s it could attack airbases inside France... In total one key to success is to force the enemy airpower away.



VEVAK said:


> Wrong! Your over simplifying things & constantly trying to come up with excuses!
> 
> Plus, it's a simple question will the Q-313 be detected at altitude at beyond 100km or NOT?



Are you kidding? How could anybody know that?...



VEVAK said:


> As for engine! Iran can simply increase the diameter of the OWJ engine without increasing the length of the compressors blades with little adjustment! And yes you will use more fuel but fuel consumption is irrelevant if your focus is over your own territory!



Nonsense... increasing the diameter with simple adjustments...



VEVAK said:


> Plus J-85's are capable of supersonic flight which means you need a good excuse for adding drag of added GE capability! And if your claiming that you'll be fully stealth at altitude regardless then there is no reason why anyone in their right mind would sacrifice speed for GE



If you can't fly fast at high altitude, you have to find solutions. GE and subsonic low altitude is one such.



VEVAK said:


> I don't need to know about the F-90 in terms of range it will not surpass the AiM-54 & Iran it's self is claiming it's a Mid range missile not a BVR missile
> 
> Your making things up!



Range of F-90 is unknown and that 90 is certainly not the range...



VEVAK said:


> You claim Iran's Air Defense systems will be doing the targeting which may be possible if the aircraft was flying at altitude but to data link to an Aircraft at 20-50 meters off the ground it's absurd!



IADS does the detection.



VEVAK said:


> Vay vay vay!!!!!!!!!!! Again you don't understand how radars work! Smoothness allows for better deflection at an angle! To over simplify it for you, have you ever skipped rocks off water? Now if you don't throw at a right angle your rock will sink & if the water is wavy (not smooth) it will cause your rock to sink! In the same manner you can deflect laser light off water or a surface at an angle!!!!!!!!!! So the belly of the F-117, F-22, F-313, F-35, Su-Pak, J-31..... NONE of them will be stealthy!!!!!!!!!!



F-117, Tacit Blue and B-2 were specially designed to have a featureless belly to have low RCS against ground radars...



VEVAK said:


> You can fly a Su-35 at any altitude!!!!!!!!!!!! Again at what altitude did you plan on pupping up? And a Su-30 at altitude has BVR capability!



What has this to do with what I said???



VEVAK said:


> It doesn't matter what shape it is if your using Ti or Composites or a sandwich because your either cutting or using a mold & casting! It sure as hell doesn't effect the overall costs in any meaningful way!
> 
> And as I told you before square straight vs round and curve = weaker = more materials required!!!! What goes on in your head is nothing more than fiction made up due to your limited knowledge on the subject!



Look, you have problems with the fuselage shape of the F-313 and think the designers are stupid and you know better.
I told you it can have many different reasons why it is not rounded like on F-22, one of them is cost.
Now you argument that a molded laminate could be as or almost as cheap as flat skin parts.
Yes could, many things could, but what point does it make to talk about something we don't know about? Useless waste of time...
How you would want to mold a 3D geometry honeycomb structure, at what cost?
This is useless... Just accept that there could be reasons for that design decision, including cost/producebility and others. Being a smarta** and saying the designers are fools is useless.



VEVAK said:


> Yea sure go talk to a pilot and tell him how 0.5 mach is not a big deal! LOL! my God!



Again you show little understanding of the context and physics: Of a total speed of 1500m/s, 150m/s (10%) is decreased due to the subsonic F-313 for a total of 1350m/s instead. The reality is more complex but this is a small display of the difference of mach 0,5 on a mach 5 missile...



VEVAK said:


> Like it or NOT F-313 is a JOKE!
> 
> And your delusions about Iran producing 800 of them will be meet with reality!!!!!!!!! At max I can see Iran producing 50 or so NOTHING MORE!
> These are nothing but wishes and hopes of a child and all I have to do is wait and time will prove it!
> 
> So this one goes out to all the foolish supporters of the F-313 that think 800 F-313 will ever be produced or could even go up against 200 F-15 or Su-30's



Keep your facts straight: I never said Iran will produce 800 F-313, I also never said that my airdefense operation regime for the F-313 is reality.
But I like the idea more than 200 Su-30.

Point is, IR Iran has somehow survived up without the U.S neutralizing it. It's not due to uninnovative conventional approaches which you advocate but for example a light fighter with my operation regime proposal, as the F-313.

With your ideas, the IR Iran would have been neutralized long time ago.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> The storage is one thing. The active fleet with competitive gear and pilots with experience on them another....



Yea because they can afford to keep adding fighters to their stock but a pilot that's just too expensive! 
As if the country has no reserve forces & keeps adding fighters to their storage without any thought to who is going to pilot them in case of an emergency! 

And here you go again, assuming people are stupid!



PeeD said:


> Keep the context, I was talking about the Oka being a game changer when it appeared... in the 80s it could attack airbases inside France... In total one key to success is to force the enemy airpower away..



Fired how many missiles and from where? 
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! I TOLD YOU TO LOOK AT A MAP BEFOR YOU TYPE!

USSR wouldn't of been able to fire it's Oka missiles from one side of Germany to the other side of Germany!
And even if they had managed to somehow magically transported it's Oka missiles in western parts of east Germany they still wouldn't of been able to hit Paris & would of at best been able to go 150km into French territory!

That is NO Game Changer!

For the Russians in the 80's & 90's in terms of conventional weapons Su-27, Various Russian diesel and nuclear subs, Long range high altitude supersonic bombers, S-300, Kh-55... These were game changers! Weapons that if even one was taken out would of changed calculation on a large scale! 



PeeD said:


> Are you kidding? How could anybody know that?....



Your the one that claimed that a F-313 will not be detected at that range! 



PeeD said:


> Nonsense... increasing the diameter with simple adjustments....



Yes it is possible & easily within Iran's capability to do with little adjustment to the existing OWJ engines! Building larger diameter engines is well within Iran's capability to do especially if you don't change the length of the Turbines and compressors!
The hard part would always be increasing lifespan, and reducing fuel consumption! And even in that aspect it would be easier to play around with on a larger diameter engine rather than a smaller diameter engine. 



PeeD said:


> If you can't fly fast at high altitude, you have to find solutions. GE and subsonic low altitude is one such..



In terms of Air to Air capability what your claiming is absurd! Any fighter can fly low! That's a tactic you don't limit and build fighters around one tactic! It's absurd!

Your not just limiting speed! Your limiting climb rate, turn rate, maneuverability, speed, BVR capability,... 



PeeD said:


> Range of F-90 is unknown and that 90 is certainly not the range....



What ever the range is Iran claims it's a Mid range Air to Air missile!



PeeD said:


> IADS does the detection..



IADS can do all the detection it wants the point is there is no way you can target the aircraft unless it can somehow have two way secured communication with the fighter having it's direct coordinates & guide the missile to a range where it can turn on it's active seeker!

Flying low in GE mode limits line of sight limiting your ability to have secured 2 way communication in GE in between mountains in the middle of nowhere

One way frequency will never be secure because you don't know who is broadcasting and who your targeting! 



PeeD said:


> F-117, Tacit Blue and B-2 were specially designed to have a featureless belly to have low RCS against ground radars....



Absolutely WRONG! Their belly are stealth only at level flight! If they show their belly in a high angle turn or climb they will be detected! ALL OF THEM!





PeeD said:


> Look, you have problems with the fuselage shape of the F-313 and think the designers are stupid and you know better.
> I told you it can have many different reasons why it is not rounded like on F-22, one of them is cost.
> Now you argument that a molded laminate could be as or almost as cheap as flat skin parts.
> Yes could, many things could, but what point does it make to talk about something we don't know about? Useless waste of time...
> How you would want to mold a 3D geometry honeycomb structure, at what cost?
> This is useless... Just accept that there could be reasons for that design decision, including cost/producebility and others. Being a smarta** and saying the designers are fools is useless..



It's not just the Fuselage! It's the wings, Engines, intakes,...

And your making things up! What part of it is Honeycombed & I'll explain to you how!

Is it the skeleton of the nose that's honeycombed? If so you cut it in any shape you want it! 
Is it the skin? if that was the case you would need 4-5 flat pieces welded or bolted to each other for the nonsense your saying to make any kind of sense! which it is nonsense! Your making up excuse for a pour job!
There are no 4-5 pieces! It's a single peace mold on the nose and you can cut out the mold for the Airframe in any shape you want with little effect! 

Your just making up BS & you just wanna make sense out of something that doesn't make sense using cost as an excuse!

As I repeated a million times already the F-22 is more expensive due to the amount of Ti used & Ti Casting of large parts that require larger tools that's what sets it apart not whether it was rounded or straight!

The reason why the F-117 is shaped that way was due to a miss understanding as to what caused it to be stealth!
And once the U.S. got into detail as to why, they stopped building stealth Aircraft in that manner! 





PeeD said:


> Again you show little understanding of the context and physics: Of a total speed of 1500m/s, 150m/s (10%) is decreased due to the subsonic F-313 for a total of 1350m/s instead. The reality is more complex but this is a small display of the difference of mach 0,5 on a mach 5 missile....



Again, your basing your info on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!

An Air to Air missile in a ballistic trajectory will have a longer range at lower altitude! That's FACT! That's common sense! 

Now you can claim your radar targeting will be effected due to ground clutter! That is factual! But the range of your missile is not going to be reduced by the numbers your claiming! In fact the opposite is true if your trying to calculate the max range of a missile your range will reduce at higher altitudes!
Also nothing is stopping Russian Fighter from flying low either!




PeeD said:


> Keep your facts straight: I never said Iran will produce 800 F-313, I also never said that my airdefense operation regime for the F-313 is reality.
> But I like the idea more than 200 Su-30..



What you like and what reality is are two different things!



PeeD said:


> Point is, IR Iran has somehow survived up without the U.S neutralizing it. It's not due to uninnovative conventional approaches which you advocate but for example a light fighter with my operation regime proposal, as the F-313.
> 
> With your ideas, the IR Iran would have been neutralized long time ago.



Iran hasn't been without an Air Force! Hell in the 90's the Americans shredded their own F-14's because they didn't want Iran flying it's own F-14's and over the years they have gone to great lengths to prevent Iran from having a real Air Force So NO! Absolutely WRONG!

If Iran had purchased only 12 Su-27/Su-30 fighters a year for the past 2 decades it would have been much stronger today than it already is NOT LESS!

And no one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Missile Program should be cut for a fighter program! That's absurd! It's like saying from now on I'm not going to buy shoes only socks! It's absurd!
You need shoes and socks! Air Force & Missiles!

Security challenges change, countries adapt & if you fail to adapt you will lose! F-313 looks like a covert US attempt to prevent Iran from having a Air force that could challenge their Air Superiority!
Why every time they try to build a fighter they stick with small diameter engines or single engine fighters in an Oil rich country with vast territory it's absurd!

I'd rather have a larger faster fighter capable of firing more capable missiles! 
MiG-25 was a steel base Airframe! I'd rather see Iran build an interceptor like that to make up the difference than the F-313 in an Air to Air role


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> Yea because they can afford to keep adding fighters to their stock but a pilot that's just too expensive!
> As if the country has no reserve forces & keeps adding fighters to their storage without any thought to who is going to pilot them in case of an emergency!
> 
> And here you go again, assuming people are stupid!
> 
> 
> 
> Fired how many missiles and from where?
> AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! I TOLD YOU TO LOOK AT A MAP BEFOR YOU TYPE!
> 
> USSR wouldn't of been able to fire it's Oka missiles from one side of Germany to the other side of Germany!
> And even if they had managed to somehow magically transported it's Oka missiles in western parts of east Germany they still wouldn't of been able to hit Paris & would of at best been able to go 150km into French territory!
> 
> That is NO Game Changer!
> 
> For the Russians in the 80's & 90's in terms of conventional weapons Su-27, Various Russian diesel and nuclear subs, Long range high altitude supersonic bombers, S-300, Kh-55... These were game changers! Weapons that if even one was taken out would of changed calculation on a large scale!
> 
> 
> 
> Your the one that claimed that a F-313 will not be detected at that range!
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is possible & easily within Iran's capability to do with little adjustment to the existing OWJ engines! Building larger diameter engines is well within Iran's capability to do especially if you don't change the length of the Turbines and compressors!
> The hard part would always be increasing lifespan, and reducing fuel consumption! And even in that aspect it would be easier to play around with on a larger diameter engine rather than a smaller diameter engine.
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of Air to Air capability what your claiming is absurd! Any fighter can fly low! That's a tactic you don't limit and build fighters around one tactic! It's absurd!
> 
> Your not just limiting speed! Your limiting climb rate, turn rate, maneuverability, speed, BVR capability,...
> 
> 
> 
> What ever the range is Iran claims it's a Mid range Air to Air missile!
> 
> 
> 
> IADS can do all the detection it wants the point is there is no way you can target the aircraft unless it can somehow have two way secured communication with the fighter having it's direct coordinates & guide the missile to a range where it can turn on it's active seeker!
> 
> Flying low in GE mode limits line of sight limiting your ability to have secured 2 way communication in GE in between mountains in the middle of nowhere
> 
> One way frequency will never be secure because you don't know who is broadcasting and who your targeting!
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely WRONG! Their belly are stealth only at level flight! If they show their belly in a high angle turn or climb they will be detected! ALL OF THEM!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not just the Fuselage! It's the wings, Engines, intakes,...
> 
> And your making things up! What part of it is Honeycombed & I'll explain to you how!
> 
> Is it the skeleton of the nose that's honeycombed? If so you cut it in any shape you want it!
> Is it the skin? if that was the case you would need 4-5 flat pieces welded or bolted to each other for the nonsense your saying to make any kind of sense! which it is nonsense! Your making up excuse for a pour job!
> There are no 4-5 pieces! It's a single peace mold on the nose and you can cut out the mold for the Airframe in any shape you want with little effect!
> 
> Your just making up BS & you just wanna make sense out of something that doesn't make sense using cost as an excuse!
> 
> As I repeated a million times already the F-22 is more expensive due to the amount of Ti used & Ti Casting of large parts that require larger tools that's what sets it apart not whether it was rounded or straight!
> 
> The reason why the F-117 is shaped that way was due to a miss understanding as to what caused it to be stealth!
> And once the U.S. got into detail as to why, they stopped building stealth Aircraft in that manner!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, your basing your info on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!
> 
> An Air to Air missile in a ballistic trajectory will have a longer range at lower altitude! That's FACT! That's common sense!
> 
> Now you can claim your radar targeting will be effected due to ground clutter! That is factual! But the range of your missile is not going to be reduced by the numbers your claiming! In fact the opposite is true if your trying to calculate the max range of a missile your range will reduce at higher altitudes!
> Also nothing is stopping Russian Fighter from flying low either!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you like and what reality is are two different things!
> 
> 
> 
> Iran hasn't been without an Air Force! Hell in the 90's the Americans shredded their own F-14's because they didn't want Iran flying it's own F-14's and over the years they have gone to great lengths to prevent Iran from having a real Air Force So NO! Absolutely WRONG!
> 
> If Iran had purchased only 12 Su-27/Su-30 fighters a year for the past 2 decades it would have been much stronger today than it already is NOT LESS!
> 
> And no one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Missile Program should be cut for a fighter program! That's absurd! It's like saying from now on I'm not going to buy shoes only socks! It's absurd!
> You need shoes and socks! Air Force & Missiles!
> 
> Security challenges change, countries adapt & if you fail to adapt you will lose! F-313 looks like a covert US attempt to prevent Iran from having a Air force that could challenge their Air Superiority!
> Why every time they try to build a fighter they stick with small diameter engines or single engine fighters in an Oil rich country with vast territory it's absurd!
> 
> I'd rather have a larger faster fighter capable of firing more capable missiles!
> MiG-25 was a steel base Airframe! I'd rather see Iran build an interceptor like that to make up the difference than the F-313 in an Air to Air role




Will we ever though be able to challenge U.S Airpower in case of war, even with large quantities of Su-30's or Su-35 or Iranian equivalent. I'm not saying we shouldn't even have a program or spend any money on airforce. Airforce is really key element in modern warfare. But in terms of going up against say, 2 b-1 lancers, and 4 F-22's. These 6 fighters with long range firepower alone will destroy dozens of aircraft.


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> Will we ever though be able to challenge U.S Airpower in case of war, even with large quantities of Su-30's or Su-35 or Iranian equivalent. I'm not saying we shouldn't even have a problem or spend any money on airforce. Airforce is really key element in modern warfare. But in terms of going up against say, 2 b-1 lancers, and 4 F-22's. These 6 fighters with long range firepower alone will destroy dozens of aircraft.



You can't go up against them in a conventional sense! But if it's over your own territory you need an Air Force capable of coming up with unconventional or revised tactics!
For example every fighter Iran builds should be 2 seat fighters & in war time each fighter should have it's own UAV with a back pilot controlling it!

If you have fairly equivalent speed over your own territory backed by your air defense and UCAV's you can come at them from various angel & in numbers! But lacking speed a lot of these options go away because you won't even be able to catch them!

Yes there is no way for Iran to go up against 4 F-22's with even 12 Su-35's!
But 12 Su-35's backed by 12 UCAV's with Air Defense system that sending 6-8 Karrar-4's directly towards them that's a capability you can play around with & you can catch them and go at them from different angle at different altitudes!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Yea because they can afford to keep adding fighters to their stock but a pilot that's just too expensive!
> As if the country has no reserve forces & keeps adding fighters to their storage without any thought to who is going to pilot them in case of an emergency!



Russians are replacing their legacy fleet. You might think, Mig-23, Su-15 with thousand of hours are useful as storage fighters. Not so much and even putting their turbojet Su-24 in storage is a good move although these really have the potential to be useful as storage bomb trucks.
In total again: they are just maintaining their fleet size, not significantly expanding it.



VEVAK said:


> Fired how many missiles and from where?
> AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! I TOLD YOU TO LOOK AT A MAP BEFOR YOU TYPE!
> 
> USSR wouldn't of been able to fire it's Oka missiles from one side of Germany to the other side of Germany!
> And even if they had managed to somehow magically transported it's Oka missiles in western parts of east Germany they still wouldn't of been able to hit Paris & would of at best been able to go 150km into French territory!
> 
> That is NO Game Changer!



You sound confused... why would they not have been able to place Okas in western east Germany??? Again, that asset could take out any forward operating base along the frontline and you seems completely unaware what a 500 combat radius reduction or increased tanker requirement would cause for 80's tactical airpower...



VEVAK said:


> For the Russians in the 80's & 90's in terms of conventional weapons Su-27, Various Russian diesel and nuclear subs, Long range high altitude supersonic bombers, S-300, Kh-55... These were game changers! Weapons that if even one was taken out would of changed calculation on a large scale!



Take the Su-27 out and you are on the right track.



VEVAK said:


> Your the one that claimed that a F-313 will not be detected at that range!



I said it is within technical feasibility and hence can be considered.



VEVAK said:


> Yes it is possible & easily within Iran's capability to do with little adjustment to the existing OWJ engines! Building larger diameter engines is well within Iran's capability to do especially if you don't change the length of the Turbines and compressors!
> The hard part would always be increasing lifespan, and reducing fuel consumption! And even in that aspect it would be easier to play around with on a larger diameter engine rather than a smaller diameter engine.



In real application, jet engines are so complex, that modifying something like the diameter means a completely new R&D. engineering etc.
Iran has just proven it's manufacturing capability with the Owj, demonstrating own engineering capability is an at least as difficult task...
No, this is anything than easy, even for something like the J-85.



VEVAK said:


> In terms of Air to Air capability what your claiming is absurd! Any fighter can fly low! That's a tactic you don't limit and build fighters around one tactic! It's absurd!
> 
> Your not just limiting speed! Your limiting climb rate, turn rate, maneuverability, speed, BVR capability,...



Too large technical hurdles to take away those limits.



VEVAK said:


> What ever the range is Iran claims it's a Mid range Air to Air missile!



Expect at least AIM-54 performance levels for the F-90 or at least for a evolved variant for the F-313.



VEVAK said:


> IADS can do all the detection it wants the point is there is no way you can target the aircraft unless it can somehow have two way secured communication with the fighter having it's direct coordinates & guide the missile to a range where it can turn on it's active seeker!
> 
> Flying low in GE mode limits line of sight limiting your ability to have secured 2 way communication in GE in between mountains in the middle of nowhere
> 
> One way frequency will never be secure because you don't know who is broadcasting and who your targeting!



One way coded communication in HF is one way. Mass use of expandable relay drones, SATCOM (in future), etc.



VEVAK said:


> Absolutely WRONG! Their belly are stealth only at level flight! If they show their belly in a high angle turn or climb they will be detected! ALL OF THEM!



Yes, belly RCS is normally larger than frontal, because that's the design objective. However it is just up to the design for what operational regime it is effective. Well possible that the F-313 is designed to deflect RF at the climb angle, well possible that a highly effective skin integral RAM is present at the belly. Basically everything is possible, so just stop your "that is IMPOSSIBLE!", you and me don't know the details to make such statements.



VEVAK said:


> It's not just the Fuselage! It's the wings, Engines, intakes,...
> 
> And your making things up! What part of it is Honeycombed & I'll explain to you how!
> 
> Is it the skeleton of the nose that's honeycombed? If so you cut it in any shape you want it!
> Is it the skin? if that was the case you would need 4-5 flat pieces welded or bolted to each other for the nonsense your saying to make any kind of sense! which it is nonsense! Your making up excuse for a pour job!
> There are no 4-5 pieces! It's a single peace mold on the nose and you can cut out the mold for the Airframe in any shape you want with little effect!
> 
> Your just making up BS & you just wanna make sense out of something that doesn't make sense using cost as an excuse!



Look. Based on a low level of information you made a final judgment that the facet stealth design of the fuselage is a sign of stupidity. I have the same low information on the F-313 as you, but I defended that detail for producebility/cost as argument for it.
I won't enter a useless discussion whether or not what detail is used or not.
Stay on your opinion that it is just do to poor design. Possible, who knows...



VEVAK said:


> The reason why the F-117 is shaped that way was due to a miss understanding as to what caused it to be stealth!
> And once the U.S. got into detail as to why, they stopped building stealth Aircraft in that manner!



No. It was due to low computing power and bad software. It's poor understanding, not miss understanding. with evolved capability they mastered curved stealth.
However what else than better aerodynamic capability does curved stealth has? Has it higher stealth capability than the more discrete facet stealth? Not proven.



VEVAK said:


> Again, your basing your info on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!
> 
> An Air to Air missile in a ballistic trajectory will have a longer range at lower altitude! That's FACT! That's common sense!
> 
> Now you can claim your radar targeting will be effected due to ground clutter! That is factual! But the range of your missile is not going to be reduced by the numbers your claiming! In fact the opposite is true if your trying to calculate the max range of a missile your range will reduce at higher altitudes!
> Also nothing is stopping Russian Fighter from flying low either!



I agree that thinking that is common sense. However common sense and physics are sometimes different, like in this case.

It will have a longer ranger yes. However the kinetic state it has at that edge of envelope will hardy be sufficient to achieve a kill. The AMRAAM that glides to 80km on a ballistic course would have a too low terminal velocity in range of mach 1 to achieve a kill. This means a AAM always has to retain a minimum of kinetic state to be effective. This makes it different to ballistic missiles or bombs.

To retain a mach 2 capability at low level, the AMRAAM can't be at the edge of its envelope like at 12km, where it slowly passes below the required mach 3 velocity. Once at that state, it has not enough energy to do the diving into high-q dense atmosphere and reach the intercept point at 20m. A common misconception is to think that the acceleration caused by gravity would help to retain speed, no, its so small that it is negligible at those speeds.

This here gives a idea about this phenomenon:






There is hence a range penalty to pay if you try to kill (not just reach) a low flying target. I want the F-313 to make max. use of that.



VEVAK said:


> Iran hasn't been without an Air Force! Hell in the 90's the Americans shredded their own F-14's because they didn't want Iran flying it's own F-14's and over the years they have gone to great lengths to prevent Iran from having a real Air Force So NO! Absolutely WRONG!



The F-14 has some brute force methods such as the AIM-54 that make it a kind of threat even today. It can thus even be called unconventional airpower. However to think that the Americans were somehow forced to destroy their F-14 because the threat of the 40 or 60 Iranian F-14 pose goes too far. They did it because the complex F-14 would certainly never again re-enter U.S service and lowering the risk of operational Iranian F-14 as reason to destroy them, not just store them.
The Americans are very sensitive to losses. In the 90's and 2000's, Iranian F-14s would may have been able to kill 100 U.S fighters in the course of a conflict... The question is whether this was part of the true deterrence that saved Iran from an attack or not.
Due to the (in relation) low numbers, I think it had only a very small share in that deterrence mix.



VEVAK said:


> If Iran had purchased only 12 Su-27/Su-30 fighters a year for the past 2 decades it would have been much stronger today than it already is NOT LESS!



What kind of statement is this? Sure, this is the only result possible. The real question is whether there were no more cost effective systems available.



VEVAK said:


> I'd rather have a larger faster fighter capable of firing more capable missiles!
> MiG-25 was a steel base Airframe! I'd rather see Iran build an interceptor like that to make up the difference than the F-313 in an Air to Air role



Good that your memory is better than mine here and you reminded me that the Mig-25 and to lesser extend Mig-31 is the example of a steel/low-Ti airframe...
I'm a friend of large, high speed, missile-carrier aircraft. A good counter to conventional airpower. However the aeronautic capabilities required, cost, the large footprint, high maintenance, long take-off, the inefficient operation of it are counters to it.
It would be an incredible feat if a similar counter-airpower capability could be reached with a much more efficient system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Russians are replacing their legacy fleet. You might think, Mig-23, Su-15 with thousand of hours are useful as storage fighters. Not so much and even putting their turbojet Su-24 in storage is a good move although these really have the potential to be useful as storage bomb trucks.
> In total again: they are just maintaining their fleet size, not significantly expanding it..



Wrong again! As expected!

Russian's are keeping Su-27's, Su-30's, MiG-29's, Tu-22M, Tu-160,... In storage!!!!!!!!!! Wake the hell up! look at the calendar, look at how many they have produced and how many they keep on active duty! 



PeeD said:


> You sound confused... why would they not have been able to place Okas in western east Germany??? Again, that asset could take out any forward operating base along the frontline and you seems completely unaware what a 500 combat radius reduction or increased tanker requirement would cause for 80's tactical airpower.....



You seem to not understand what 80's tactical Air Power was! 80's Air Power was the Tu-160, Tu-22, MiG-31, MiG-29, Su-27, Tornado, Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000, Mirage 4, Mirage 5, Harrier, Avro Vulcun, Handly Victor, F-14, F-15,...

So NO! 500km was NOTHING! How many Oka Missiles was the USSR going to fire & from where to hit what target? Look at a map!



PeeD said:


> Take the Su-27 out and you are on the right track...



The Su-27 was the main fighter that pushed the U.S. to develop the F-22 & it gave the Russian's Air Supremacy over all of Europe! So NO YOU DON'T have a clue of what your talking about!

Russia would still be Russia with or without the Oka or Iskandar missile but without the Su-27 & it s variants the entire world would look a lot different than it does today! And that is a FACT! SO NO!



PeeD said:


> In real application, jet engines are so complex, that modifying something like the diameter means a completely new R&D. engineering etc.
> Iran has just proven it's manufacturing capability with the Owj, demonstrating own engineering capability is an at least as difficult task...
> No, this is anything than easy, even for something like the J-85...



It is FAR easier than you may think! In fact If you can jam pack everything in a small diameter engine putting them in a larger diameter engine would be easier because it will give you more room! The only time it was hard to do this was when cutting was done with far less advanced equipment! Today cutting is fully automated, you have precision cutting, precision measuring equipment,... On top of that you have access to the Russian R-13 & the Chinese variant of that engine on your J-7's

The only reason Iran is NOT doubling the J-85 design is because they know for a FACT they are capable of building something more powerful, with lower fuel consumption & higher lifespan! Also, the main problem would still be not having a platform to put them on!

Iran has already done the hard part and that is to gather & build the tools, facilities & equipment necessary to build various components of a Jet engine & produce or at least gain the know how on how to produce various super alloys and composites!
Cutting out larger specs using computer aided designs that's the easy part!




PeeD said:


> Expect at least AIM-54 performance levels for the F-90 or at least for a evolved variant for the F-313...






PeeD said:


> One way coded communication in HF is one way. Mass use of expandable relay drones, SATCOM (in future), etc.
> ..



Frequency is Frequency it's just a matter of what type of receiver & transponder you have or don't have on your platform! You can send coded messages in any type of frequency coms and then it's just a matter of having a registry with your receiver that uses a code that acts like a password.
That means if they decode your registry they can have you shooting down your own fighters & UAV's and you wouldn't even know it! And knowing that they have the computing power to do that in a short period of time it's absurd!
There is a reason why SAM's & Air to Air missiles have their own Terminal Guidance system & what your suggesting is to build a manned fighter that doesn't have it's own Radar but is capable of firing missiles that have their own radar! And fully reliant on HF signals coming for situational awareness and targeting It's absurd!
WHAT would be the point of having a pilot in there at all?????




PeeD said:


> Yes, belly RCS is normally larger than frontal, because that's the design objective. However it is just up to the design for what operational regime it is effective. Well possible that the F-313 is designed to deflect RF at the climb angle, well possible that a highly effective skin integral RAM is present at the belly. Basically everything is possible, so just stop your "that is IMPOSSIBLE!", you and me don't know the details to make such statements...



Yes everything is possible! 



PeeD said:


> Look. Based on a low level of information you made a final judgment that the facet stealth design of the fuselage is a sign of stupidity. I have the same low information on the F-313 as you, but I defended that detail for producebility/cost as argument for it.
> I won't enter a useless discussion whether or not what detail is used or not.
> Stay on your opinion that it is just do to poor design. Possible, who knows.....



GOOD! 1st comes acceptance



PeeD said:


> No. It was due to low computing power and bad software. It's poor understanding, not miss understanding. with evolved capability they mastered curved stealth.
> However what else than better aerodynamic capability does curved stealth has? Has it higher stealth capability than the more discrete facet stealth? Not proven...



Yes during the Have Blue program it was poor understanding of what was causing the waves to deflect

And it was poor understanding at the top levels that the F-117 kept it's shape because from a technical point of view they had already figured out that making it more aerodynamic wouldn't effect it's stealth features and that's why they even offered to make it more aerodynamic but according to them the people at the top refused 



PeeD said:


> I agree that thinking that is common sense. However common sense and physics are sometimes different, like in this case.
> 
> It will have a longer ranger yes. However the kinetic state it has at that edge of envelope will hardy be sufficient to achieve a kill. The AMRAAM that glides to 80km on a ballistic course would have a too low terminal velocity in range of mach 1 to achieve a kill. This means a AAM always has to retain a minimum of kinetic state to be effective. This makes it different to ballistic missiles or bombs.
> 
> To retain a mach 2 capability at low level, the AMRAAM can't be at the edge of its envelope like at 12km, where it slowly passes below the required mach 3 velocity. Once at that state, it has not enough energy to do the diving into high-q dense atmosphere and reach the intercept point at 20m. A common misconception is to think that the acceleration caused by gravity would help to retain speed, no, its so small that it is negligible at those speeds.
> 
> This here gives a idea about this phenomenon:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is hence a range penalty to pay if you try to kill (not just reach) a low flying target. I want the F-313 to make max. use of that.
> ..



Either you don't understand this chart or I don't because all I see here is further prof of my point!

The lower you are the lower your range will be! And this chart is not about low flying objects! It's about the max rang of the missile being fired at different altitudes against a low maneuvering high altitude bomber!

Here is a hint! Your Aircraft is on the 0 axis not the other way around!
It's showing the various ranges of an AiM-120 when it's going head on vs when it's chasing at different altitudes! (It's further prof that speed is life for someone how understands the chart)
Also, it further evidence that you don't waist BVR missiles by putting them on low altitude subsonic fighters!

So you got that the other way around buddy! And achieving both velocity & altitude are a major factor especially on heavier missiles!

Also, the AIM-120 has explosives onboard! And it doesn't actually need to hit you to get a kill especially on such a weak Airframe!



PeeD said:


> The F-14 has some brute force methods such as the AIM-54 that make it a kind of threat even today. It can thus even be called unconventional airpower. However to think that the Americans were somehow forced to destroy their F-14 because the threat of the 40 or 60 Iranian F-14 pose goes too far. They did it because the complex F-14 would certainly never again re-enter U.S service and lowering the risk of operational Iranian F-14 as reason to destroy them, not just store them.
> The Americans are very sensitive to losses. In the 90's and 2000's, Iranian F-14s would may have been able to kill 100 U.S fighters in the course of a conflict... The question is whether this was part of the true deterrence that saved Iran from an attack or not.
> Due to the (in relation) low numbers, I think it had only a very small share in that deterrence mix..



Clearly you don't comprehend the value of an Air Force! Even Iranian IRGC officers on the ground in Syria understood that even against a rag tag group of terrorist the Syrian Air Force was not sufficient & that they would also need air cover to protect their forces from the Israeli's, U.S.,... to be able to send forces in and move forces around in Syria!

And if all the U.S. did was shred a few F-14's I would say maybe! But that's not all they did! On top of the Sanctions they even went to the extent of buying the MiG-29's Iran ordered from Russia! Those are extreme masseurs! And it's extreme enough to say that this is a country that would also go to the extreme of covertly trying to prevent Iran from building a capable fighter of it's own!



PeeD said:


> What kind of statement is this? Sure, this is the only result possible. The real question is whether there were no more cost effective systems available..



MY GOD! Increasing your military budget and spending ~$1.5 Billion a year on your Air Force wouldn't of had any major effect on Iran's economy or military! That is the minimum a country the size of Iran should be spending on yearly fighter accusation! Iran's Air Force has had 30 years of neglect!
And yes I would prefer that Iran spends that money at home so they can create high tech jobs and advance the countries technological capabilities!

You can debate all you want on whether it should be domestic or imported but spending that money on fighter accusation shouldn't be a matter of debate!

Iranian Oil, Natural Gas, Mining, various services,..... these are all government owned and controlled + the taxes they get & if the money is NOT being spent to protect Iranian Air Space then one must wonder where the money is going!




PeeD said:


> Good that your memory is better than mine here and you reminded me that the Mig-25 and to lesser extend Mig-31 is the example of a steel/low-Ti airframe...
> I'm a friend of large, high speed, missile-carrier aircraft. A good counter to conventional airpower. However the aeronautic capabilities required, cost, the large footprint, high maintenance, long take-off, the inefficient operation of it are counters to it.
> It would be an incredible feat if a similar counter-airpower capability could be reached with a much more efficient system.



MiG-25 was a steel based fighter but it paid dearly in terms of combat radius limiting it to only 300km!

But today if Iran builds a fighter that size using stainless steel + composites + Ti using an upgraded reverse engineered AWG-9 + an internal weapons bay you could have a capable fighter with an upgraded Fakour-90 & you can also reduce it's RCS using simple known methods + you'll have room to add air refueling pod & the fighter will be big enough to be used in various missions like tanker role, supersonic bomber, interceptor, high altitude recon,...!

If you can get the power plant to put out that much thrust & an Airframe design capable of Mach 3 then you'll have something the U.S. will have trouble with if deployed in numbers & if you can achieve 7 G's that's more than sufficient! 

I wouldn't focus on the length of the Runway instead I would focus on building a large number of robotic or semi autonomous construction equipment capable of cleaning & repairing the runway quickly
Your fighters should be in the Air before enemy missiles reach and your robots should be able to fix the runway before you land!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Wrong again! As expected!
> 
> Russian's are keeping Su-27's, Su-30's, MiG-29's, Tu-22M, Tu-160,... In storage!!!!!!!!!! Wake the hell up! look at the calendar, look at how many they have produced and how many they keep on active duty!



Yes they do because they have no money. They keep their production lines alive by small lot's and dream about having enough spare money to activate those stored fighters which they were forced to put into storage during the dark 90's. They will probably never reach pre-90 numbers of airpower ever again.



VEVAK said:


> You seem to not understand what 80's tactical Air Power was! 80's Air Power was the Tu-160, Tu-22, MiG-31, MiG-29, Su-27, Tornado, Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000, Mirage 4, Mirage 5, Harrier, Avro Vulcun, Handly Victor, F-14, F-15,...
> 
> So NO! 500km was NOTHING! How many Oka Missiles was the USSR going to fire & from where to hit what target? Look at a map!



500km radius reduction would have degraded much of the capability of most of your listed airpower assets. Mentioning a incredible machine such as the Tu-160 among them is a shame.



VEVAK said:


> The Su-27 was the main fighter that pushed the U.S. to develop the F-22 & it gave the Russian's Air Supremacy over all of Europe! So NO YOU DON'T have a clue of what your talking about!
> 
> Russia would still be Russia with or without the Oka or Iskandar missile but without the Su-27 & it s variants the entire world would look a lot different than it does today! And that is a FACT! SO NO!



Tell me what combat radius you expect from the Su-27, that you want it to fight over all Europe? It was a great machine but purely tactical.



VEVAK said:


> It is FAR easier than you may think! In fact If you can jam pack everything in a small diameter engine putting them in a larger diameter engine would be easier because it will give you more room! The only time it was hard to do this was when cutting was done with far less advanced equipment! Today cutting is fully automated, you have precision cutting, precision measuring equipment,... On top of that you have access to the Russian R-13 & the Chinese variant of that engine on your J-7's
> 
> The only reason Iran is NOT doubling the J-85 design is because they know for a FACT they are capable of building something more powerful, with lower fuel consumption & higher lifespan! Also, the main problem would still be not having a platform to put them on!
> 
> Iran has already done the hard part and that is to gather & build the tools, facilities & equipment necessary to build various components of a Jet engine & produce or at least gain the know how on how to produce various super alloys and composites!
> Cutting out larger specs using computer aided designs that's the easy part!



Manufacturing is not the game stopper, changing the design is, mastering engine design is. What kind of chain reaction on ALL design parameters would you expect by changing the dia. ? New blades --> new disks --> new bearings --> new shafts... basically a complete new design.
Iran is at the coping stage in this highest of all engineering discipline, mastering such a redesign has not been proven yet.



VEVAK said:


> Frequency is Frequency it's just a matter of what type of receiver & transponder you have or don't have on your platform! You can send coded messages in any type of frequency coms and then it's just a matter of having a registry with your receiver that uses a code that acts like a password.
> That means if they decode your registry they can have you shooting down your own fighters & UAV's and you wouldn't even know it! And knowing that they have the computing power to do that in a short period of time it's absurd!



This is a basic problem. If you think there is no way to avoid Americans hack into coms, then it applies to nearly every field.



VEVAK said:


> There is a reason why SAM's & Air to Air missiles have their own Terminal Guidance system & what your suggesting is to build a manned fighter that doesn't have it's own Radar but is capable of firing missiles that have their own radar! And fully reliant on HF signals coming for situational awareness and targeting It's absurd!
> WHAT would be the point of having a pilot in there at all?????



I already answered on why manned is needed at this time. Troposcattering HF is one way, I listed others. SAMs use missile sensors for many other reasons, even some rather recent systems like the KS-1 use command guidance...



VEVAK said:


> The lower you are the lower your range will be! And this chart is not about low flying objects! It's about the max rang of the missile being fired at different altitudes against a low maneuvering high altitude bomber!



The reason for lower range is aerodynamic friction, this is what I try to say! So it applied also to the low flying F-313 as I tried to explain in detail. The misconception of many is that range of a high altitude shot will be higher against a low flying target than a high flying, it's the opposite.



VEVAK said:


> And if all the U.S. did was shred a few F-14's I would say maybe! But that's not all they did! On top of the Sanctions they even went to the extent of buying the MiG-29's Iran ordered from Russia! Those are extreme masseurs! And it's extreme enough to say that this is a country that would also go to the extreme of covertly trying to prevent Iran from building a capable fighter of it's own!



The reason was that those Mig-29 were nuke-wired from which Iran could have learned something about operating nukes. They were also offered at such low prices that it was no issue for the U.S to buy them.

Airpower is dangerous, any weapon system is dangerous. However being dangerous at Iraq 1991 level is not the same as 2017 Iran with it's BM arsenal.



VEVAK said:


> Clearly you don't comprehend the value of an Air Force! Even Iranian IRGC officers on the ground in Syria understood that even against a rag tag group of terrorist the Syrian Air Force was not sufficient & that they would also need air cover to protect their forces from the Israeli's, U.S.,... to be able to send forces in and move forces around in Syria!



Quite costly to operate supersonic interdictors against rag tag groups... Timing is not right, otherwise Irans drone capability would have had the same capability as Russian airpower, only at much lower price.



VEVAK said:


> MY GOD! Increasing your military budget and spending ~$1.5 Billion a year on your Air Force wouldn't of had any major effect on Iran's economy or military! That is the minimum a country the size of Iran should be spending on yearly fighter accusation! Iran's Air Force has had 30 years of neglect!
> And yes I would prefer that Iran spends that money at home so they can create high tech jobs and advance the countries technological capabilities!
> 
> You can debate all you want on whether it should be domestic or imported but spending that money on fighter accusation shouldn't be a matter of debate!
> 
> Iranian Oil, Natural Gas, Mining, various services,..... these are all government owned and controlled + the taxes they get & if the money is NOT being spent to protect Iranian Air Space then one must wonder where the money is going!



I favor skipping this soon obsolete path and go directly for UCAV's. We need to be progressive if we want to come closer to the level of our adversaries. If it means, giving your 1,4 billion to the IRGC-ASF drone program instead of the IRIAF, so be it.



VEVAK said:


> MiG-25 was a steel based fighter but it paid dearly in terms of combat radius limiting it to only 300km!



300km is a U.S number for staying on afterburner at mach 2,8 all the time. But yes the 60's grade steel alloys and the somewhat fuel thirsty turbojets were the main reasons for the relative short range. The Mig-31 uses just somewhat less steel but achieves much higher range due to the better 70's alloys and new turbofans.
Would Iran go for a heavy fighter, it would certainly have those 70's alloys equivalent by now 2017. If it would have 90's state of the art alloys, it may could skip the use of Ti.



VEVAK said:


> But today if Iran builds a fighter that size using stainless steel + composites + Ti using an upgraded reverse engineered AWG-9 + an internal weapons bay you could have a capable fighter with an upgraded Fakour-90 & you can also reduce it's RCS using simple known methods + you'll have room to add air refueling pod & the fighter will be big enough to be used in various missions like tanker role, supersonic bomber, interceptor, high altitude recon,...!
> 
> If you can get the power plant to put out that much thrust & an Airframe design capable of Mach 3 then you'll have something the U.S. will have trouble with if deployed in numbers & if you can achieve 7 G's that's more than sufficient!



I would like that too. Its the technological risk and the end cost of the system that creates doubts about its bucks for bang ratio.
This all would require high aeronautic capabilities and the engine question would still e open for debate. Less risk, less system cost, lower physical parameter levels, this are all arguments and the F-313 could be the answer to it.



VEVAK said:


> I wouldn't focus on the length of the Runway instead I would focus on building a large number of robotic or semi autonomous construction equipment capable of cleaning & repairing the runway quickly
> Your fighters should be in the Air before enemy missiles reach and your robots should be able to fix the runway before you land!



I would go for underground mountain basing or even a underground runway...

But if you want a sober answer: I want a aircraft rugged enough to operate from our dried salt lakes, with lowest to no preparation, with one fuel truck and 3-4 other vehicles of the mobile caravan. Small footprint.
I want a aircraft far away from physical edges to have minimal maintenance interval, better operate the first 100 hours with next to no maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> If it means, giving your 1,4 billion to the IRGC-ASF drone program instead of the IRIAF, so be it.



Then you might as well disband the IRIAF.



PeeD said:


> I want a aircraft rugged enough to operate from our dried salt lakes, with lowest to no preparation, with one fuel truck and 3-4 other vehicles of the mobile caravan. Small footprint.
> I want a aircraft far away from physical edges to have minimal maintenance interval, better operate the first 100 hours with next to no maintenance.



This aircraft should also carry an AESA radar, 2 enormous LRAAMs, have special stealthy materials like RAS or RAM, liberal use of carbon fibre, 2 turbofan engines, and an advanced FBW system. Oh, and it should cost less than $8 million.

So you want an impossible aircraft.



PeeD said:


> I don't know anymore the context. Bleeding energy is a way to bring down the G capability of the AAM, be it by flying in opposite direction or flying in dense air layers or forcing it to maneuver to bring it into intercept position. All counts and at the time it reaches you, a 5 g turn could be sufficient to evade it.



Possible, but I'm fairly sure in most situations the objective is to make the missile fall out of range rather than anything else.

Though I don't know why we're debating this since it's not relevant to the discussion.



PeeD said:


> No issue if designed correctly.



So how would you design it? Surely a 2000 lb bomb is going to block the bay. Unless you put it on the other pylon, attached more to the side of the fuselage than underneath it.


----------



## Zathura

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/912045897613299713

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/912052734513352704


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Then you might as well disband the IRIAF.



The fittest survives and Irans security has no room for sentimental feelings.



AmirPatriot said:


> This aircraft should also carry an AESA radar, 2 enormous LRAAMs, have special stealthy materials like RAS or RAM, liberal use of carbon fibre, 2 turbofan engines, and an advanced FBW system. Oh, and it should cost less than $8 million.
> 
> So you want an impossible aircraft.



You are repeating yourself. Good I have understood that this is your opinion.



AmirPatriot said:


> Possible, but I'm fairly sure in most situations the objective is to make the missile fall out of range rather than anything else.
> 
> Though I don't know why we're debating this since it's not relevant to the discussion.



The relevance comes from the concept of flying low and subsonic to survive long range BVR shots, instead of flying high and fast and pull high Gs.

Bleeding the energy of the AAM is the main method for both concepts.



AmirPatriot said:


> So how would you design it? Surely a 2000 lb bomb is going to block the bay. Unless you put it on the other pylon, attached more to the side of the fuselage than underneath it.



Yes more to the side, at the edge of the fuselage. I already pointed that out in the f-15 illustration.


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 427553



Huh. I didn't know the F-4 had buddy refuelling capabilities.


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> Huh. I didn't know the F-4 had buddy refuelling capabilities.


well it's dated back to 80s (1367) and for the first time for f4,




And happened because of this:


----------



## raptor22

Iran military jet F4 Phantom filmed tailing the USA's F18 over Persian gulf:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Yes they do because they have no money. They keep their production lines alive by small lot's and dream about having enough spare money to activate those stored fighters which they were forced to put into storage during the dark 90's. They will probably never reach pre-90 numbers of airpower ever again.
> .



You keep your production lines active & you constantly add to your reserves all based on your threat assessment!

Russians figured out a long time ago that it's far more important to continue to produce a verity of advanced weapons than it is to keep a large "active" military!
That's why they have far more reserves than active military!
That's why they are constantly adding to their storage!

There is absolutely NO logical reason why the Russian would or should pay full time paychecks + benefits to 3 Million people! If the average cost of each Solders comes out to $10,000 USD a year that's Salary, Healthcare, housing & other benefits combined that would be $30 billion USD a year which would take up ~45% of the Russian Military budget!

So you see the best way of cutting a countries budget is not by cutting weapons production! To keep your strength the best way is to reduce active personal & you make up for it by continued R&D and production of new weapons and by keeping a large military reserve & large stocks of weapons in storage to go with it!

And what you call the dark 90's is mainly due to bad leadership & bad management!



PeeD said:


> 500km radius reduction would have degraded much of the capability of most of your listed airpower assets. Mentioning a incredible machine such as the Tu-160 among them is a shame.
> .



Absurd!!!!! Show me! Fired how many missiles? Fired from where? and at what site? 

Yes the Oka missile is a good quick reaction missile to have but it is not a game changer! It is NOT a weapon system that could change the tides of war!



PeeD said:


> Tell me what combat radius you expect from the Su-27, that you want it to fight over all Europe? It was a great machine but purely tactical..



If you want to truly understand it's value all you have to do is look at what only ~70 Iranian F-14's with limited weapons & spare parts were able to accomplish in the Iran Iraq war & multiply that by 100!

If Iran didn't have it's F-14's Iraqi forces inside Iranian territory would of had air cover & equipped with 5x the armored unites they would have been able to continue advancing into Iranian territory! 

If Iran didn't have F-14's Iran wouldn't of been able to escort it's F-4's towards Iraqi Airbases in operation like kaman99

If Iran didn't have F-14's Iran's Morvarid operations where we took out 80% of the Iraqi Navy would have never happened!

The most valuable asset Iran had in the Iran Iraq war where it's F-14 & that's why the U.S. tried fool a few Iranian leaders to replace it's F-14's with F-16!

Your comments is just further prof that you clearly don't comprehend the value of an Air Force!

Sadly Iranian IRGC officers never understood that the only reason they were able stop Iraqi Armored unites & push them back using limited Infantry Support weapons was because the Iraqi's that called in Air support never got it & they never got it directly because of Iranian F-14's & IRGC officers never understood this because these battles were going on in the sky's 100's of km away and many times the battle was won by F-14's without even an engagement! Iranian F-14 would lock-on Iraqi fighters as they took off an they would just land their aircraft or as soon as an F-14 was spotted they would run and land the aircraft! 

So yes the Su-27 was a massive game changer & that's why the Americans built the F-22



PeeD said:


> Manufacturing is not the game stopper, changing the design is, mastering engine design is. What kind of chain reaction on ALL design parameters would you expect by changing the dia. ? New blades --> new disks --> new bearings --> new shafts... basically a complete new design.
> Iran is at the coping stage in this highest of all engineering discipline, mastering such a redesign has not been proven yet.
> .



Again it's not a question of can't! Don't you see! Every fighter project that they have persuade has either been a single engine fighter or a light twin engine (OWJ/J85) fighter so this is not a question of CAN'T this is a conscious decision for building a low cost Airframe with a low maintenance & low fuel consumption!
Which makes it a conscious mistake & has nothing to do with can or can't!



PeeD said:


> This is a basic problem. If you think there is no way to avoid Americans hack into coms, then it applies to nearly every field.
> .



Yes it does! When Iran can hack into US coms do you think they equipped with far more computing power can't hack into ours? Coms are not secure & any manned fighter that's "fully reliant" on ground coms will NEVER be successful hell they'll be more of a security risk than an asset!
And having ground or Air systems constantly emitting any type of radio wave or frequency will make them an easy target

I have NO problem with completely cutting out the Radar system of a stealth fighter as long as it's replaced with "multiple" high powered IRST & optical systems! But what I do have a problem with is sacrificing speed, maneuverability, turn rate, clime rate,... for NO GOOD reason! 

And ANY fighter can fly at low altitude & unless your hidden directly behind a specific terrain 50 meters vs 20 meters against a fighter flying above 10,000 meters isn't going to make a difference! 

Clearly no human can operate a fighter at low altitudes for long distances without computer assistance 



PeeD said:


> The reason for lower range is aerodynamic friction, this is what I try to say! So it applied also to the low flying F-313 as I tried to explain in detail. The misconception of many is that range of a high altitude shot will be higher against a low flying target than a high flying, it's the opposite.
> .



You were trying to show that chart as some kind of proof & it was exactly the opposite! And your wrong!
Modern AiM-120 have been upgraded to take different trajectories depending on the altitude of the target! and they have been specifically adjusted to after low altitude fighters! So NO!
The chart you showed was showing the range of the missile when the Aircraft was at lower altitude & if anything that goes against the F-313 mission profile!
Meaning for a BVR capability or at ranges above 15km (Distance) the fighter that's lower in altitude will be at a disadvantage all the way up to the fighters service ceiling of 20,000 meters!

This is why the American are trained to take the high altitude because it does make a difference a whole lot of difference! The range of your missile fired at 20,000 ft would be about half of what it could be at 40,000ft
This has nothing to do with what type of Missile you have this is physics and the rules are the same for everyone!

The idea that your going to sneak up on a high altitude supersonic fighter and some how climb undetected with limited thrust & climb ratio with a subsonic aircraft to reach an altitude so your missile can reach him before his missile can reach you is beyond absurd and nothing but a childish delusion!

And your also wrong about low altitude targets because modern AiM-120 choose the best trajectory depending on the altitude of the target vs your altitude so against low altitude targets they can take what is called a LOFT Trajectory like the AiM-54 & in this mode the lower you are the higher their range will be it's just physics 

Yes if an AIM-120 had to do most of it's flying at low altitude to reach a low altitude fighter then yes it's range would be reduced but that's not how it works! So WRONG!



PeeD said:


> The reason was that those Mig-29 were nuke-wired from which Iran could have learned something about operating nukes. They were also offered at such low prices that it was no issue for the U.S to buy them.
> .



LOL! That's just absurd! Iran had Iraqi MiG-29's in 1991 during the 1st US Iraq war! So no! It had nothing to do with trying to get a new technology related to a nuclear weapons program!

Iran tried to renew it's fighter fleet & the U.S. prevented it! U.S. has been working overtime in trying to prevent Iran from having an Air Force or Building one! 

And creating the tech to protect against EMP's can be done with high power electricity & a little ingenuity you really don't need to buy a fighter for that! 



PeeD said:


> Airpower is dangerous, any weapon system is dangerous. However being dangerous at Iraq 1991 level is not the same as 2017 Iran with it's BM arsenal.
> .



You talk as if Ballistic Missiles are some kind of new invention! They are NOT! Russians didn't stop building fighter jets and bombers just because they built an accurate BM! That's absurd!

Ballistic Missiles can't protect your troops on the ground & your infrastructure from areal bombardment! They can't provide air cover for your ground troops, They can't escort your transport Aircraft or your airborne command and control & AWACS, They can't provide cover for your helicopters, ships, armored division... from high altitude threats, BM can't take out harden targets!

Also targeting Aircrafts at long distances is next to impossible! That's why countries have Airborne command & control that's why a US president gets Airborne in Air Force 1 when there is a threat..... 

And if anything fighters are far more valuable in a modern war than they were in the 90's




PeeD said:


> Quite costly to operate supersonic interdictors against rag tag groups... Timing is not right, otherwise Irans drone capability would have had the same capability as Russian airpower, only at much lower price.
> .



That's DELUSIONAL!

1. The idea that Israel would of just sat back and looked as Iran moved in MALE UCAV is absurd
2. Pro Assad and Iranian backed forces would have been bombed if they didn't have the Russian Air Force and Air Defense to give them cover!

3. Without Russian heavy ground penetrating ordnance to hit and take out underground tunnel thing would have look a lot differently in Syria!

4. Without Russian carpet bombing things would have looked a lot different


Iranian UAV can carry what at max of 8 PGM each with 20kg warhead! That means if in a building all they have to do is go into the basement and nothing would happen to them! & they wouldn't of been able to touch underground tunnels!

A Shahed-129 fly's at under 200kph that's about twice as fast as a car and you need a large airfield to deploy them so if your troops get in trouble if deployed at a base within 200km it could be an hour or more to get to them where a fighter would get there in less than 15 minutes! 




PeeD said:


> I favor skipping this soon obsolete path and go directly for UCAV's. We need to be progressive if we want to come closer to the level of our adversaries. If it means, giving your 1,4 billion to the IRGC-ASF drone program instead of the IRIAF, so be it.
> .



You can not pick one system over another! Iran can't choose between fighters, UCAV's & Missiles! They are all a necessity!

I agree that it may be best to have the IRGC spear head R&D in an advanced supersonic fighter program & maybe if they had done so we would of had at least a 4.5 generation fighter by now! But you can not replace UCAV with fighters it's just not possible because Coms will never be secure!

Iran needs fighters for escort missions, interception, heavy high altitude bombing, heavy ordinance PGM bombings,.....

Spending $2 Billion a year on Aircraft acquisition (~$1.5B on fighter & $500m heavy Aircrafts) wouldn't break or make Iran!
To consciously not spend that money is irresponsible & reckless!

UAV's are also a necessity & there should be a minimum limit of $500 million USD a year for UAV & UCAV acquisition

That 250 $1Million USD Jet powered UCAV + 250 $500K MALI UAV's like the Shahed-129 a year & that leaves $100M for other UAV's & $25M for R&D 



PeeD said:


> 300km is a U.S number for staying on afterburner at mach 2,8 all the time. But yes the 60's grade steel alloys and the somewhat fuel thirsty turbojets were the main reasons for the relative short range. The Mig-31 uses just somewhat less steel but achieves much higher range due to the better 70's alloys and new turbofans.
> Would Iran go for a heavy fighter, it would certainly have those 70's alloys equivalent by now 2017. If it would have 90's state of the art alloys, it may could skip the use of Ti.
> .



Why would Iran skip Ti when they have already started mining for it? And they have already started magnesium alloy production which is more rare and expensive than Ti! It's absurd! Are you afraid of sanctions?

U.S. banned the sale of Civilian Aircraft to Iran again so Iran needs to start getting ready! 



PeeD said:


> I would like that too. Its the technological risk and the end cost of the system that creates doubts about its bucks for bang ratio.
> This all would require high aeronautic capabilities and the engine question would still e open for debate. Less risk, less system cost, lower physical parameter levels, this are all arguments and the F-313 could be the answer to it.
> 
> I would go for underground mountain basing or even a underground runway...
> 
> But if you want a sober answer: I want a aircraft rugged enough to operate from our dried salt lakes, with lowest to no preparation, with one fuel truck and 3-4 other vehicles of the mobile caravan. Small footprint.
> I want a aircraft far away from physical edges to have minimal maintenance interval, better operate the first 100 hours with next to no maintenance.




When calculating bang for your buck you need to look at it in the long run and take into account all the aircrafts capabilities! Which means an Aircraft initial purchasing price becomes less relevant!

Having a Ti industry & mining and producing other super alloys is not the burden of a real fighter program it is the positive outcome of having a fighter program which will eventually allow Iran to expand the quantity, variety & quality of other Iranian products! Ti is NOT a rare earth alloy!


----------



## Stryker1982

It would be ridiculous to suggest an airforce is a burden rather than an asset. Iran proved this in the war. The absolute necessity for a modern airforce especially now more than ever, with better guidance, precisions and payloads and all kinds of weapons system available. And russia has proven this in Syria as well. Without russian airforce assad wouldn't win this war, they single handily won the war, but softening defence so much for easy capitulation. and people are still arguing about if we need a robust airforce or not. I really don't get it.



VEVAK said:


> You keep your production lines active & you constantly add to your reserves all based on your threat assessment!
> 
> Russians figured out a long time ago that it's far more important to continue to produce a verity of advanced weapons than it is to keep a large "active" military!
> That's why they have far more reserves than active military!
> That's why they are constantly adding to their storage!
> 
> There is absolutely NO logical reason why the Russian would or should pay full time paychecks + benefits to 3 Million people! If the average cost of each Solders comes out to $10,000 USD a year that's Salary, Healthcare, housing & other benefits combined that would be $30 billion USD a year which would take up ~45% of the Russian Military budget!
> 
> So you see the best way of cutting a countries budget is not by cutting weapons production! To keep your strength the best way is to reduce active personal & you make up for it by continued R&D and production of new weapons and by keeping a large military reserve & large stocks of weapons in storage to go with it!
> 
> And what you call the dark 90's is mainly due to bad leadership & bad management!
> 
> 
> 
> Absurd!!!!! Show me! Fired how many missiles? Fired from where? and at what site?
> 
> Yes the Oka missile is a good quick reaction missile to have but it is not a game changer! It is NOT a weapon system that could change the tides of war!
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to truly understand it's value all you have to do is look at what only ~70 Iranian F-14's with limited weapons & spare parts were able to accomplish in the Iran Iraq war & multiply that by 100!
> 
> If Iran didn't have it's F-14's Iraqi forces inside Iranian territory would of had air cover & equipped with 5x the armored unites they would have been able to continue advancing into Iranian territory!
> 
> If Iran didn't have F-14's Iran wouldn't of been able to escort it's F-4's towards Iraqi Airbases in operation like kaman99
> 
> If Iran didn't have F-14's Iran's Morvarid operations where we took out 80% of the Iraqi Navy would have never happened!
> 
> The most valuable asset Iran had in the Iran Iraq war where it's F-14 & that's why the U.S. tried fool a few Iranian leaders to replace it's F-14's with F-16!
> 
> Your comments is just further prof that you clearly don't comprehend the value of an Air Force!
> 
> Sadly Iranian IRGC officers never understood that the only reason they were able stop Iraqi Armored unites & push them back using limited Infantry Support weapons was because the Iraqi's that called in Air support never got it & they never got it directly because of Iranian F-14's & IRGC officers never understood this because these battles were going on in the sky's 100's of km away and many times the battle was won by F-14's without even an engagement! Iranian F-14 would lock-on Iraqi fighters as they took off an they would just land their aircraft or as soon as an F-14 was spotted they would run and land the aircraft!
> 
> So yes the Su-27 was a massive game changer & that's why the Americans built the F-22
> 
> 
> 
> Again it's not a question of can't! Don't you see! Every fighter project that they have persuade has either been a single engine fighter or a light twin engine (OWJ/J85) fighter so this is not a question of CAN'T this is a conscious decision for building a low cost Airframe with a low maintenance & low fuel consumption!
> Which makes it a conscious mistake & has nothing to do with can or can't!
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it does! When Iran can hack into US coms do you think they equipped with far more computing power can't hack into ours? Coms are not secure & any manned fighter that's "fully reliant" on ground coms will NEVER be successful hell they'll be more of a security risk than an asset!
> And having ground or Air systems constantly emitting any type of radio wave or frequency will make them an easy target
> 
> I have NO problem with completely cutting out the Radar system of a stealth fighter as long as it's replaced with "multiple" high powered IRST & optical systems! But what I do have a problem with is sacrificing speed, maneuverability, turn rate, clime rate,... for NO GOOD reason!
> 
> And ANY fighter can fly at low altitude & unless your hidden directly behind a specific terrain 50 meters vs 20 meters against a fighter flying above 10,000 meters isn't going to make a difference!
> 
> Clearly no human can operate a fighter at low altitudes for long distances without computer assistance
> 
> 
> 
> You were trying to show that chart as some kind of proof & it was exactly the opposite! And your wrong!
> Modern AiM-120 have been upgraded to take different trajectories depending on the altitude of the target! and they have been specifically adjusted to after low altitude fighters! So NO!
> The chart you showed was showing the range of the missile when the Aircraft was at lower altitude & if anything that goes against the F-313 mission profile!
> Meaning for a BVR capability or at ranges above 15km (Distance) the fighter that's lower in altitude will be at a disadvantage all the way up to the fighters service ceiling of 20,000 meters!
> 
> This is why the American are trained to take the high altitude because it does make a difference a whole lot of difference! The range of your missile fired at 20,000 ft would be about half of what it could be at 40,000ft
> This has nothing to do with what type of Missile you have this is physics and the rules are the same for everyone!
> 
> The idea that your going to sneak up on a high altitude supersonic fighter and some how climb undetected with limited thrust & climb ratio with a subsonic aircraft to reach an altitude so your missile can reach him before his missile can reach you is beyond absurd and nothing but a childish delusion!
> 
> And your also wrong about low altitude targets because modern AiM-120 choose the best trajectory depending on the altitude of the target vs your altitude so against low altitude targets they can take what is called a LOFT Trajectory like the AiM-54 & in this mode the lower you are the higher their range will be it's just physics
> 
> Yes if an AIM-120 had to do most of it's flying at low altitude to reach a low altitude fighter then yes it's range would be reduced but that's not how it works! So WRONG!
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! That's just absurd! Iran had Iraqi MiG-29's in 1991 during the 1st US Iraq war! So no! It had nothing to do with trying to get a new technology related to a nuclear weapons program!
> 
> Iran tried to renew it's fighter fleet & the U.S. prevented it! U.S. has been working overtime in trying to prevent Iran from having an Air Force or Building one!
> 
> And creating the tech to protect against EMP's can be done with high power electricity & a little ingenuity you really don't need to buy a fighter for that!
> 
> 
> 
> You talk as if Ballistic Missiles are some kind of new invention! They are NOT! Russians didn't stop building fighter jets and bombers just because they built an accurate BM! That's absurd!
> 
> Ballistic Missiles can't protect your troops on the ground & your infrastructure from areal bombardment! They can't provide air cover for your ground troops, They can't escort your transport Aircraft or your airborne command and control & AWACS, They can't provide cover for your helicopters, ships, armored division... from high altitude threats, BM can't take out harden targets!
> 
> Also targeting Aircrafts at long distances is next to impossible! That's why countries have Airborne command & control that's why a US president gets Airborne in Air Force 1 when there is a threat.....
> 
> And if anything fighters are far more valuable in a modern war than they were in the 90's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's DELUSIONAL!
> 
> 1. The idea that Israel would of just sat back and looked as Iran moved in MALE UCAV is absurd
> 2. Pro Assad and Iranian backed forces would have been bombed if they didn't have the Russian Air Force and Air Defense to give them cover!
> 
> 3. Without Russian heavy ground penetrating ordnance to hit and take out underground tunnel thing would have look a lot differently in Syria!
> 
> 4. Without Russian carpet bombing things would have looked a lot different
> 
> 
> Iranian UAV can carry what at max of 8 PGM each with 20kg warhead! That means if in a building all they have to do is go into the basement and nothing would happen to them! & they wouldn't of been able to touch underground tunnels!
> 
> A Shahed-129 fly's at under 200kph that's about twice as fast as a car and you need a large airfield to deploy them so if your troops get in trouble if deployed at a base within 200km it could be an hour or more to get to them where a fighter would get there in less than 15 minutes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can not pick one system over another! Iran can't choose between fighters, UCAV's & Missiles! They are all a necessity!
> 
> I agree that it may be best to have the IRGC spear head R&D in an advanced supersonic fighter program & maybe if they had done so we would of had at least a 4.5 generation fighter by now! But you can not replace UCAV with fighters it's just not possible because Coms will never be secure!
> 
> Iran needs fighters for escort missions, interception, heavy high altitude bombing, heavy ordinance PGM bombings,.....
> 
> Spending $2 Billion a year on Aircraft acquisition (~$1.5B on fighter & $500m heavy Aircrafts) wouldn't break or make Iran!
> To consciously not spend that money is irresponsible & reckless!
> 
> UAV's are also a necessity & there should be a minimum limit of $500 million USD a year for UAV & UCAV acquisition
> 
> That 250 $1Million USD Jet powered UCAV + 250 $500K MALI UAV's like the Shahed-129 a year & that leaves $100M for other UAV's & $25M for R&D
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Iran skip Ti when they have already started mining for it? And they have already started magnesium alloy production which is more rare and expensive than Ti! It's absurd! Are you afraid of sanctions?
> 
> U.S. banned the sale of Civilian Aircraft to Iran again so Iran needs to start getting ready!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When calculating bang for your buck you need to look at it in the long run and take into account all the aircrafts capabilities! Which means an Aircraft initial purchasing price becomes less relevant!
> 
> Having a Ti industry & mining and producing other super alloys is not the burden of a real fighter program it is the positive outcome of having a fighter program which will eventually allow Iran to expand the quantity, variety & quality of other Iranian products! Ti is NOT a rare earth alloy!




Wait do we have the ability to produce the titanium alloys necessary for aircraft production? In terms of material engineering and mining, how are we doing here?



VEVAK said:


> Wrong again! As expected!
> 
> 
> But today if Iran builds a fighter that size using stainless steel + composites + Ti using an upgraded reverse engineered AWG-9 + an internal weapons bay you could have a capable fighter with an upgraded Fakour-90 & you can also reduce it's RCS using simple known methods + you'll have room to add air refueling pod & the fighter will be big enough to be used in various missions like tanker role, supersonic bomber, interceptor, high altitude recon,...!



Well within Iran abilities if a project like this is taken seriously and funded seriously.


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> It would be ridiculous to suggest an airforce is a burden rather than an asset. Iran proved this in the war. The absolute necessity for a modern airforce especially now more than ever, with better guidance, precisions and payloads and all kinds of weapons system available. And russia has proven this in Syria as well. Without russian airforce assad wouldn't win this war, they single handily won the war, but softening defence so much for easy capitulation. and people are still arguing about if we need a robust airforce or not. I really don't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait do we have the ability to produce the titanium alloys necessary for aircraft production? In terms of material engineering and mining, how are we doing here?
> 
> 
> 
> Well within Iran abilities if a project like this is taken seriously and funded seriously.




If you can produce magnesium alloy, aluminum alloy & you understand how to enrich uranium then clearly you have the technological capability to produce various types of Ti alloy!
So the Know how is there

Titanium is one of the top 10 most abundant metals on earth and it's widely distributed so yes Iran has Titanium!

So it's a matter of choosing to do so and investing in building the tools & facilities required & these are tool Iran would have to build it's self because no one would sell them to Iran or invest in Iranian Ti industry due to sanctions!

If the IRGC was behind the fighter program they would of started Ti industry, produce Ti alloy and produced various Ti made products & sold them on top of the fighter! Where as IRIAF isn't allowed to participate in Iran's Economy!
and this is another aspect that makes the IRGC better suited for developing a more capable fighter!

BUT again sadly many IRGC high ranking officials don't comprehend the value of a fighter!

Iran will clearly be facing new security challenges






Iran's Kurdish region is most definitely not this big! So what is Iran going to do about it?

Fight them off with handful of outdated M-60's?






This is how reckless Iran's government has been! Where is the money going? These Tanks should be in storage used in a worst case scenario only!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> You keep your production lines active & you constantly add to your reserves all based on your threat assessment!
> 
> Russians figured out a long time ago that it's far more important to continue to produce a verity of advanced weapons than it is to keep a large "active" military!
> That's why they have far more reserves than active military!
> That's why they are constantly adding to their storage!
> 
> There is absolutely NO logical reason why the Russian would or should pay full time paychecks + benefits to 3 Million people! If the average cost of each Solders comes out to $10,000 USD a year that's Salary, Healthcare, housing & other benefits combined that would be $30 billion USD a year which would take up ~45% of the Russian Military budget!
> 
> So you see the best way of cutting a countries budget is not by cutting weapons production! To keep your strength the best way is to reduce active personal & you make up for it by continued R&D and production of new weapons and by keeping a large military reserve & large stocks of weapons in storage to go with it!



We will see what happens with Su-57 production numbers. As a game changer it should be put into production at a relative high rate. I already told you that it would be the dream of Russians to have 800 Mig-29 in service like 1989, but they don't have the economy for that anymore.
Its nonsense that their storage concept is the reason for the small fleet.



VEVAK said:


> Absurd!!!!! Show me! Fired how many missiles? Fired from where? and at what site?
> 
> Yes the Oka missile is a good quick reaction missile to have but it is not a game changer! It is NOT a weapon system that could change the tides of war!



I already showed you whats necessary. Now the Soviets were a nuclear power so a conventional attack was secondary, but once they got that capability with the Oka (and like before it), the conventional scenario changed. Negating 80% of enemy airpower would be game changing wouldn't it?



VEVAK said:


> If you want to truly understand it's value all you have to do is look at what only ~70 Iranian F-14's with limited weapons & spare parts were able to accomplish in the Iran Iraq war & multiply that by 100!
> 
> If Iran didn't have it's F-14's Iraqi forces inside Iranian territory would of had air cover & equipped with 5x the armored unites they would have been able to continue advancing into Iranian territory!



The F-14 was the single most potent Iranian weapon system in that period, so yes it was immensely important. In 2017 not anymore, so no need to talk about the F-14 as airpower example.



VEVAK said:


> Sadly Iranian IRGC officers never understood that the only reason they were able stop Iraqi Armored unites & push them back using limited Infantry Support weapons was because the Iraqi's that called in Air support never got it



Typical western nonsense. Just a few day ago in a TV show, the commander of the IRGC said how important air superiority inside Iran was for them...



VEVAK said:


> Again it's not a question of can't! Don't you see! Every fighter project that they have persuade has either been a single engine fighter or a light twin engine (OWJ/J85) fighter so this is not a question of CAN'T this is a conscious decision for building a low cost Airframe with a low maintenance & low fuel consumption!
> Which makes it a conscious mistake & has nothing to do with can or can't!



Seems like you want to push me to say Iran can't produce useful jet engines?
The J85 is a veeery low tech. engine, originally made for large cruise missile. This was the reason why Iran went for it and designs that use it! You have no slight idea.



VEVAK said:


> Yes it does! When Iran can hack into US coms do you think they equipped with far more computing power can't hack into ours? Coms are not secure & any manned fighter that's "fully reliant" on ground coms will NEVER be successful hell they'll be more of a security risk than an asset!
> And having ground or Air systems constantly emitting any type of radio wave or frequency will make them an easy target
> 
> I have NO problem with completely cutting out the Radar system of a stealth fighter as long as it's replaced with "multiple" high powered IRST & optical systems! But what I do have a problem with is sacrificing speed, maneuverability, turn rate, clime rate,... for NO GOOD reason!



Ok mate. So communication is useless/fragile. Guess even Farsi voice communication with a farsi code-word is. Good, it is a interesting topic and you can open a thread about it. But if you want to criticize the F-313 with that argument, we can continue the talk forever.



VEVAK said:


> Clearly no human can operate a fighter at low altitudes for long distances without computer assistance



Why you bring up such arguments which I have answered already?



VEVAK said:


> You were trying to show that chart as some kind of proof & it was exactly the opposite! And your wrong!
> Modern AiM-120 have been upgraded to take different trajectories depending on the altitude of the target! and they have been specifically adjusted to after low altitude fighters! So NO!
> The chart you showed was showing the range of the missile when the Aircraft was at lower altitude & if anything that goes against the F-313 mission profile!
> Meaning for a BVR capability or at ranges above 15km (Distance) the fighter that's lower in altitude will be at a disadvantage all the way up to the fighters service ceiling of 20,000 meters!
> 
> This is why the American are trained to take the high altitude because it does make a difference a whole lot of difference! The range of your missile fired at 20,000 ft would be about half of what it could be at 40,000ft
> This has nothing to do with what type of Missile you have this is physics and the rules are the same for everyone!
> 
> The idea that your going to sneak up on a high altitude supersonic fighter and some how climb undetected with limited thrust & climb ratio with a subsonic aircraft to reach an altitude so your missile can reach him before his missile can reach you is beyond absurd and nothing but a childish delusion!
> 
> And your also wrong about low altitude targets because modern AiM-120 choose the best trajectory depending on the altitude of the target vs your altitude so against low altitude targets they can take what is called a LOFT Trajectory like the AiM-54 & in this mode the lower you are the higher their range will be it's just physics
> 
> Yes if an AIM-120 had to do most of it's flying at low altitude to reach a low altitude fighter then yes it's range would be reduced but that's not how it works! So WRONG!



You don't understand. Dynamic pressure is the main kinetic energy killer. At 40k feet altitude you have low dynamic pressure compared to sea level. So the dive maneuver will bleed energy from the AIM-120. This is one a several means to reduce the range.



VEVAK said:


> LOL! That's just absurd! Iran had Iraqi MiG-29's in 1991 during the 1st US Iraq war! So no! It had nothing to do with trying to get a new technology related to a nuclear weapons program!
> 
> Iran tried to renew it's fighter fleet & the U.S. prevented it! U.S. has been working overtime in trying to prevent Iran from having an Air Force or Building one!
> 
> And creating the tech to protect against EMP's can be done with high power electricity & a little ingenuity you really don't need to buy a fighter for that!



Nuke wiring is something much can be learned from, so if you don't understand it, so be it. Americans feared that. They also feared the Mig-29 to a lower extend. But this is no proof that their goal is to avoid Iranian airpower and we should go that path. By now they would probably want a Saeghe like airpower program in Iran, for it to waste it's resources.



VEVAK said:


> You talk as if Ballistic Missiles are some kind of new invention! They are NOT!



Almost 30 years younger than manned airpower...



VEVAK said:


> They are NOT! Russians didn't stop building fighter jets and bombers just because they built an accurate BM! That's absurd!
> 
> Ballistic Missiles can't protect your troops on the ground & your infrastructure from areal bombardment! They can't provide air cover for your ground troops, They can't escort your transport Aircraft or your airborne command and control & AWACS, They can't provide cover for your helicopters, ships, armored division... from high altitude threats, BM can't take out harden targets!
> 
> Also targeting Aircrafts at long distances is next to impossible! That's why countries have Airborne command & control that's why a US president gets Airborne in Air Force 1 when there is a threat.....
> 
> And if anything fighters are far more valuable in a modern war than they were in the 90's



I neither said BMs are everything nor the rest of nonsense you imply. However their effectiveness was the reason why Iran first concentrated on them.



VEVAK said:


> That's DELUSIONAL!
> 
> 1. The idea that Israel would of just sat back and looked as Iran moved in MALE UCAV is absurd
> 2. Pro Assad and Iranian backed forces would have been bombed if they didn't have the Russian Air Force and Air Defense to give them cover!
> 
> 3. Without Russian heavy ground penetrating ordnance to hit and take out underground tunnel thing would have look a lot differently in Syria!
> 
> 4. Without Russian carpet bombing things would have looked a lot different
> 
> 
> Iranian UAV can carry what at max of 8 PGM each with 20kg warhead! That means if in a building all they have to do is go into the basement and nothing would happen to them! & they wouldn't of been able to touch underground tunnels!
> 
> A Shahed-129 fly's at under 200kph that's about twice as fast as a car and you need a large airfield to deploy them so if your troops get in trouble if deployed at a base within 200km it could be an hour or more to get to them where a fighter would get there in less than 15 minutes!



You have a very narrow and limited view... 
- S2A assets could take care for the Israeli scenario and protect.
- Any special penetration warhead from BMs would be more potent against the quite few underground targets...
- The higher loitering time and the lower costs would make up for the low speed of S-129. In turn the high loitering capability would provide this unmanned airpower with something Russian conventional airpower could never deliver in Syria to the full possible extend --> continuous wide area CAS. 
Heck with that hypothetical unmanned airpower force structure, the war would have already been won without Russians...



VEVAK said:


> You can not pick one system over another! Iran can't choose between fighters, UCAV's & Missiles! They are all a necessity!



The recipe for failure... No, get serious. Only the most cost effective assets will be pursued. No cool 5th gen. program for you if it there are better, more cost effective systems. You can protest and show then South Koreans, Turks, Indians etc., telling "but they have done it too..."



VEVAK said:


> Why would Iran skip Ti when they have already started mining for it? And they have already started magnesium alloy production which is more rare and expensive than Ti! It's absurd! Are you afraid of sanctions?
> 
> U.S. banned the sale of Civilian Aircraft to Iran again so Iran needs to start getting ready!



I don't say it should skip it. It started with you saying it is a must and the lack of it somehow shows bad decision making. I said: Not necessary, there could be other reasons.


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> If you can produce magnesium alloy, aluminum alloy & you understand how to enrich uranium then clearly you have the technological capability to produce various types of Ti alloy!
> So the Know how is there
> 
> Titanium is one of the top 10 most abundant metals on earth and it's widely distributed so yes Iran has Titanium!
> 
> So it's a matter of choosing to do so and investing in building the tools & facilities required & these are tool Iran would have to build it's self because no one would sell them to Iran or invest in Iranian Ti industry due to sanctions!
> 
> If the IRGC was behind the fighter program they would of started Ti industry, produce Ti alloy and produced various Ti made products & sold them on top of the fighter! Where as IRIAF isn't allowed to participate in Iran's Economy!
> and this is another aspect that makes the IRGC better suited for developing a more capable fighter!
> 
> BUT again sadly many IRGC high ranking officials don't comprehend the value of a fighter!
> 
> Iran will clearly be facing new security challenges
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Kurdish region is most definitely not this big! So what is Iran going to do about it?
> 
> Fight them off with handful of outdated M-60's?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how reckless Iran's government has been! Where is the money going? These Tanks should be in storage used in a worst case scenario only!




Everyone in the government and high ranking army positions should be shot. What the hell?


Do these utter morons, not see what has happened to Syria? Where even T-90s are getting knocked out left right and center for years now. And somehow these bastards are talking about ghodrate Iran kheli bozorge. Idiots. A simple small batch of ATGMs shipped to separatists and that entire tank formation is destroyed with ease. Even rpgs can do that job.

None of those infantry are even mechanized, completely unprotected, so basically what were looking at here is WW2 army. Tanks and un protected infantry. Those men should be mechanized not on foot. Fucking hell if you told me this was 1988 I would believe you. After 30 years this is what the government has delivered to its people. This. Iraqi army is more fucking modern than us. We are no stronger than them in our ground forces. And we've peace of 30+ years while they've time and time again been ravaged by war. Syrian army is the same as well. Better equipped army after 7 years of war. This is a disgrace for the nation. All of them should be shot. Most especially our officials of the army as traitors to our security. How are we meant to fight america with these as they like to say? They'd all get wiped out in less than 5 minutes. With this army we'll end up like Syria.

How is it possible that we can only build BMP-1 copies? Like I really don't get it. It's so frustrating to see. Are we seriously not more capable than this!?


Ma kheli ghodrat darim. retards...


----------



## mohsen

Stryker1982 said:


> Do these utter morons, not see what has happened to Syria? Where even T-90s are getting knocked out left right and center for years now.


Yes, they have seen it and knew it even before the Syrian war and even before the 33day war when we did the same to Israeli tanks.
It just shows the cleverness of our commanders.
guess what happened to T14!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Do these utter morons, not see what has happened to Syria? Where even T-90s are getting knocked out left right and center for years now. And somehow these bastards are talking about ghodrate Iran kheli bozorge. Idiots. A simple small batch of ATGMs shipped to separatists and that entire tank formation is destroyed with ease. Even rpgs can do that job.
> 
> .



Simply not true. 

T-90's are not getting taken out left or right. In fact overall tank losses have dropped considerably for many months now. Most if not all t-90s come with the shorta APS system.

For other tanks, Syria developed (not sure if completely on their own) the Sarab-1 jammer and attached it old tanks, newer tanks, vehicles, APCs. There are articles on it that discuss it further. But basically it's a type of jammer that has nonetheless led to tank losses dropping significantly. 

Either way tactics matter as well. Syria was using tanks as the charging ram into fortified areas with little close air support and infantry protecting it from potential anti tank crew teams. Furthermore, on the defensive side they were parked in the open and used like artillery pieces.

Syria's dense terrain or hilly terrain allowed small anti tank crews to fire from safe distance and leave. Since these older tanks had no jammers or APS system, the advantage went to the anti tank team.

Even in Yemen sandal wearing Houthis are destroying Abrams tanks and top of line APCs, because again terrain favors Anti tank crews and the saudis military tactics leave them susceptible.

We know that Iran is working on APS system (the type that tries to intercept the warhead) and has demonstrated a jammer system as well with their Karrar tank I believe.


----------



## Parsipride

VEVAK said:


> If you can produce magnesium alloy, aluminum alloy & you understand how to enrich uranium then clearly you have the technological capability to produce various types of Ti alloy!
> So the Know how is there
> 
> Titanium is one of the top 10 most abundant metals on earth and it's widely distributed so yes Iran has Titanium!
> 
> So it's a matter of choosing to do so and investing in building the tools & facilities required & these are tool Iran would have to build it's self because no one would sell them to Iran or invest in Iranian Ti industry due to sanctions!
> 
> If the IRGC was behind the fighter program they would of started Ti industry, produce Ti alloy and produced various Ti made products & sold them on top of the fighter! Where as IRIAF isn't allowed to participate in Iran's Economy!
> and this is another aspect that makes the IRGC better suited for developing a more capable fighter!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUT again sadly many IRGC high ranking officials don't comprehend the value of a fighter!
> 
> Iran will clearly be facing new security challenges
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Kurdish region is most definitely not this big! So what is Iran going to do about it?
> 
> Fight them off with handful of outdated M-60's?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how reckless Iran's government has been! Where is the money going? These Tanks should be in storage used in a worst case scenario only!



Notice that we have yet to see a single Karrar in any combat exercises. At production rate of 10 a year, we should already have 6-10 operational units. Assuming that they had already started mass production/upgrade program when they unveiled the tank and videos of its supposed mass production facility.


----------



## Stryker1982

mohsen said:


> Yes, they have seen it and knew it even before the Syrian war and even before the 33day war when we did the same to Israeli tanks.
> It just shows the cleverness of our commanders.
> guess what happened to T14!



But in this case, we are the tank operators, not the israelis. We know how to fight against heavy armor with just infantry.



TheImmortal said:


> Simply not true.
> 
> T-90's are not getting taken out left or right. In fact overall tank losses have dropped considerably for many months now. Most if not all t-90s come with the shorta APS system.
> 
> For other tanks, Syria developed (not sure if completely on their own) the Sarab-1 jammer and attached it old tanks, newer tanks, vehicles, APCs. There are articles on it that discuss it further. But basically it's a type of jammer that has nonetheless led to tank losses dropping significantly.
> 
> Either way tactics matter as well. Syria was using tanks as the charging ram into fortified areas with little close air support and infantry protecting it from potential anti tank crew teams. Furthermore, on the defensive side they were parked in the open and used like artillery pieces.
> 
> Syria's dense terrain or hilly terrain allowed small anti tank crews to fire from safe distance and leave. Since these older tanks had no jammers or APS system, the advantage went to the anti tank team.
> 
> Even in Yemen sandal wearing Houthis are destroying Abrams tanks and top of line APCs, because again terrain favors Anti tank crews and the saudis military tactics leave them susceptible.
> 
> We know that Iran is working on APS system (the type that tries to intercept the warhead) and has demonstrated a jammer system as well with their Karrar tank I believe.




Well their you go, the reason that overall tank losses have dropped was do to Shorta system and other jammers. Other than that several hundreds and hundreds of t-72 and t-90, taken out by us backed extremists, with western made tows.

None of our T-60s looked upgraded at all!., our t-72S's can't stand up to Tows, non of our armored vehicles for that matter. Just like how the west destroyed Syria with TOWs, they can do the same to us. We need to watch Syria carefully. Shotora was a gift from god. 

On a tactic level i agree with you, their was alot of incompetence on the Syrian side, I hope we are not like this either.

Where are the karrars? I've yet to see any deliveries of them to anyone. What you say is very good, karrars with jammers and APS, but these are not proven until I actually see units of karrars in a training drill, to know they are genuinely produced. What I'm trying to say is IRan should really be taking lessons from Syria. They should really understand what it means to have a weak and poorly equipped ground force. It means 7 years of war rather than complete annihilation of our enemies and/or separatists in 1 month. If Syria army was any good, with smart equipment, we wouldn't have to save their asses with our money and blood.


----------



## VEVAK

Parsipride said:


> Notice that we have yet to see a single Karrar in any combat exercises. At production rate of 10 a year, we should already have 6-10 operational units. Assuming that they had already started mass production/upgrade program when they unveiled the tank and videos of its supposed mass production facility.



If your production rate is only 10 per year then your not really producing only assembling imported parts!







If your not producing a sufficient amount of products then heating up those ovens isn't going to make a whole lot of sense and they don't all have to be Tanks but 10 a years is just not sufficient to even build such large ovens! 

Plus modern battlefields are going to look a lot different & will require different type of equipment!

If your producing your own weapons then you have to take into account what the battlefield will look like 10 20 50 years from now

So any highly armored heavy vehicle you build today needs to be capable of controlling multiple unmanned vehicles and your outdated tanks need to be transformed so they can be controlled remotely & placed in storage & only a limited number used for training! 

The fact that they are training with manned M-60 is NOT a good sign!

Iran needs to produce large tanks that control multiple smaller lighter remote control tanks + outdated tanks configured to be remotely controlled


----------



## Stryker1982

Parsipride said:


> Notice that we have yet to see a single Karrar in any combat exercises. At production rate of 10 a year, we should already have 6-10 operational units. Assuming that they had already started mass production/upgrade program when they unveiled the tank and videos of its supposed mass production facility.



10 a year is really poor production rate.


----------



## PeeD

1: No such ovens are needed for smart-production designs like T-72.

2: The T-72S is the only Iranian tank that can survive a TOW-2 frontal hit

3: The number of 10 Karrars per years comes from nowhere

4: If you are in the tactical situation where you were smart enough to create low threat situation for your tanks. You can use their cheap and massive firepower, with low chances for one to get hit. This is what the Hezbollah and IRGC has teach to the Syrians and their huge T-55 family fleet --> don't get yourself into a situation where you can be hit. Tanks in a spearhead high-intensity operation must be at least of the protective level of the T-72S today, all the rest is 2-3 generations of armor protection behind the T-72S.

5: We better get things right and create a spearhead armor backbone of Karrars, all the rest is hopeless, from Chieftains to M60s.

6: Iran will only start tank production if 100% of it, including the engine, is built locally. They are reaching that point by now.

7: This all is off-topic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD the problem is I think you have the wrong idea in mind what a revitalised IRIAF would be for. Of course it is not for going head on against the full might of the USAF and/or USN. No air force in the world does that - but Russia and China still have air forces.

No, the IRIAF's role against the US would be deterring a limited (by which I mean "not all out attack") strike against Iranian nuclear facilities or even IRGC bases (a possibility that has been discussed in various think tanks). The US could do it if it _really _wanted to - but they don't. The level of forces required would be the same as an all out war. The IRIAF would also neutralise any possible Israeli action.

In an unlikely all out war, it is also possible that the IRIAF could do something similar to the Vietnamese air force in the Vietnam war - protect HVTs and large population centres, but try not to confront the Americans in the south where they would win decisively if confronted.

I would also want the IRIAF to at least match the best regional air forces e.g the RSAF. You will say "but that is competing with a western style powerful air force!", and I say we do the same and get a western style (though obviously not actually western) powerful air force. It worked great before. Don't forget Iran is a regional power, and our greatest weakness is our lack of conventional military power. We have to rectify this. If we do, we will have the region's largest and most diverse BM force, one of the best air forces, and (if existing systems are deployed on a wide scale) the best IADS.

But for now we are extraordinarily weak conventionally, helmets, body armour, pistols, SMGs, assault rifles, towed artillery, SP artillery, MRAPs, APCs, IFVs, tanks, utility helicopters, attack helicopters, heavy lift helicopters, trainer aircraft, tactical transports, strategic transports, aerial refuellers, AWACS, EW aircraft, maritime patrol aircraft strike aircraft, bombers, fighter jets, air to air missiles, surface to air missiles, corvettes, frigates, destroyers, all these are what Iran doesn't have, is very old, or we have prototypes of but in wide service are old. That is *almost *our entire military.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

AmirPatriot said:


> But for now we are extraordinarily weak conventionally, helmets, body armour, pistols, SMGs, assault rifles, towed artillery, SP artillery, MRAPs, APCs, IFVs, tanks, utility helicopters, attack helicopters, heavy lift helicopters, trainer aircraft, tactical transports, strategic transports, aerial refuellers, AWACS, EW aircraft, maritime patrol aircraft strike aircraft, bombers, fighter jets, air to air missiles, surface to air missiles, corvettes, frigates, destroyers, all these are what Iran doesn't have, is very old, or we have prototypes of but in wide service are old. That is *almost *our entire military.



It's really painful to read this cause its true.

Our Surface to air missile are not bad though. Just to few quantity of SAM systems in general.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Stryker1982 said:


> Our Surface to air missile are not bad though



Oh of course. Our SAMs are competitive and very good. But from what I've seen with satellite imagery, they have not yet been deployed apart from 1 or 2 batteries I think. SA-3 and Hawk especially dominate the medium SAM coverage.



Stryker1982 said:


> It's really painful to read this cause its true.


Some of our artillery is WW2 vintage.


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

The conventional airpower question is a complex one.

Following points must be considered:

- Is your airpower survivable on the ground?
- Can it sustain operations when under attack?
- How much maintenance/supply is necessary and how large/fragile is the necessary infrastructure?
- Which competing indigenous weapon systems could provide the same capability?
- Which one is more cost effective?
- Do you have a indigenous capability to produce fighters in necessary numbers?
- Can you produce most critical parts, the engine? Which thrust class?
etc.

I already told that I like the positional flexibility of airpower.
I also described your example of Vietnamese homeland defense as a good way to kill more advanced enemies.

Something of the size and capability of Irans current airforce is sufficient for that task, replacing the fleet with 60 Su-30SM too.
But anything more, requires a revolutionary new concept with high numbers as described with my F-313.

I already told that enemies want Iran to pursue weapon system paths that lead to inefficiency, with the final goal of bankruptcy. VEVAK is a supporter of the "we need it all" concept that would certainly lead a limited resource country like Iran to bankruptcy. Its up to the wisdom of the decision makers to make the right choices. Only with a precise evaluation it can be decided/managed to go for a Saudi size import airforce which many of you would so much love to see, or not.
Upgrade a hopelessly under.armored tank like the M60, or skip it.
Select and skip where necessary as we lack the resources for symmetric nonsense approaches.

So let me finally say, I want the IRIAF to be there as it is, present a threat dimension for which the enemy at least has to add AAMs to it's mission or forced to jettison its bombs. This is a real added value. Hit and run tactics, etc.
That's good, despite the huge maintenance effort.
And maybe a future system like my F-313 could give new life to manned airpower in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> - Is your airpower survivable on the ground?



Ideally in a time of crisis, a large proportion of your aircraft will be out there on Combat Air Patrol (CAP), while the rest will be in a high state of readiness. As soon as ground and air based radars detect an incoming tomahawk attack, those aircraft in a high state of readiness would move to take off immediately, which can be completed in a manner of minutes. Proper use of Hardened Aircraft Shelters (HAS) to protect aircraft under maintenance or in a low state of readiness as well as effective SHORAD can allow those HAS to protect their aircraft and take minimal losses (since multiple tomahawks are likely needed to destroy a HAS). Against a less capable regional force, this will work out even better. Iran used HAS to great effect in the sacred defence.



PeeD said:


> - Can it sustain operations when under attack?



Like I said, ideally the majority of aircraft will be in the air at that point. At this point, AWACS and aerial refuelling aircraft should allow enough time to repel an attack without having to land. Intact runways in more heavily defended areas can be used to allow aircraft to land while their home bases are being repaired. Use of roads to allow aircraft not in range of aerial refuelling aircraft to land, refuel, and fly to safer areas.



PeeD said:


> - How much maintenance/supply is necessary and how large/fragile is the necessary infrastructure?



Enough to support a large IRIAF. Thankfully this is already largely in place because of the Shah's pre-revolutionary IIAF expansion plans, and the rapid construction of infrastructure and supply structures. Probably even the HAS may not need building, but possibly improvement. Iran will probably have to expand its maintenance capabilities, and these can be in more "homeland defence" areas like the Vietnamese concept.

As for fragility, I suppose you are talking about fuel depots and such in TABs closer to combat zones. Something like the Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility can be of great use and isn't out of reach considering Iran's mountainous terrain and the IRGC's industrial capacity.



PeeD said:


> - Which competing indigenous weapon systems could provide the same capability?



As of now, nothing in Iran allows the flexibility, mobility and power of conventional airpower. And your Qaher-313 would not be as powerful as it either.



PeeD said:


> - Which one is more cost effective?



I maintain that Qaher is not as cost effective as you say it is. And aircraft are more cost effective than missiles, owing to their re usability. Missiles should be used for striking HVTs, SEAD/DEAD, or striking targets inaccessible to airpower. 



PeeD said:


> - Do you have a indigenous capability to produce fighters in necessary numbers?



Of course we do not have this now. But we must invest in it. We did the same for our missiles, and our tanks (Dorud factory). 



PeeD said:


> - Can you produce most critical parts, the engine? Which thrust class?
> etc.



We are working on it. Something like the RD-33, improved somewhat to grant about 20,000 lb of wet thrust, could be used in a twin engine fighter about the same size and capability as the J-31. I think it is feasible for us to try and gain access to engine production capability in a similar way to how achieved tank production capability. It may not succeed, but it is something that must be pursued.

By the way, how did you hear about the RD-33 possible reverse engineering? Not asking for your sources if you don't want to reveal them, but I also heard of it, from word of mouth. I'm just curious.



PeeD said:


> Something of the size and capability of Irans current airforce is sufficient for that task... I want the IRIAF to be there as it is, present a threat dimension for which the enemy at least has to add AAMs



It really isn't. 

http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/weapons/loadout-configurations/124-iraqi-freedom

I've shown you this site before. Even with air superiority USAF F-15Es usually carry 2 AIM-9M/Xs and 2 AMRAAMs. We rarely see the IRIAF carry AIM-9s (which are so old they are not even all-aspect) and AIM-7s. The USAF would need a very small number of aircraft to deal with our current air force. They can jam everything we have, and outrange everything we have apart from the F-14 (which is still very jammable and in small numbers). 40 F-14As won't hold two carriers worth of aircraft, or those plus an airbase or two. Especially since the enemy can employ stealth aircraft that could negate the F-14's range advantage.

In any case, I doubt the IRIAF's current state of readiness will allow it to get many aircraft in the air before they are destroyed on the ground.



PeeD said:


> I already told that enemies want Iran to pursue weapon system paths that lead to inefficiency



We do not have to go down the Saudi route. I do not envision us spending $80 billion on our military. After the Syrian war is over (and by the looks of things, it is nearing its end), Iran will have a lot more money on its hands.

Also consider that the Turkish defence budget is just $18 billion and they have a capable air force, a powerful navy, and a modern (and rapidly modernising) army.



PeeD said:


> Only with a precise evaluation it can be decided/managed to go for a Saudi size import airforce which many of you would so much love to see, or not.



I want us to have a powerful air force. I do not want us to just import them and have a situation like the sacred defence. We have to be able to maintain and keep all our aircraft in service. And domestic production is a huge priority.

Now, if an opportunity arises and we get something like a J-20 or J-31, I would probably accept import - as long as once imported, those aircraft never have to leave the country again for maintenance. This would probably mean at least some sort of TOT.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Ideally in a time of crisis, a large proportion of your aircraft will be out there on Combat Air Patrol (CAP), while the rest will be in a high state of readiness. As soon as ground and air based radars detect an incoming tomahawk attack, those aircraft in a high state of readiness would move to take off immediately, which can be completed in a manner of minutes. Proper use of Hardened Aircraft Shelters (HAS) to protect aircraft under maintenance or in a low state of readiness as well as effective SHORAD can allow those HAS to protect their aircraft and take minimal losses (since multiple tomahawks are likely needed to destroy a HAS). Against a less capable regional force, this will work out even better. Iran used HAS to great effect in the sacred defence.



I have to wonder how fragile modern aircraft are to overpressure and vibration of a near HAS hit? You can get early warning and intercept many CMs but its saturation and the massive that would eventually let the first ones trough only slowly degrade base operations. But ok, it might work out to some extend if no BMs and hypersonic CMs are used (or against low power regional countries).



AmirPatriot said:


> As for fragility, I suppose you are talking about fuel depots and such in TABs closer to combat zones. Something like the Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility can be of great use and isn't out of reach considering Iran's mountainous terrain and the IRGC's industrial capacity.



Fuel, weapons, sensitive maintenance infrastructure, all those large area targets. As for underground fuel depots, yes, like HASes its a way to improve the situation. But at the end the question is if all that hardening is worth the resources spent on it? The Saudis have probably the best and most hardened conventional airbases in the world, but how much did they spend on them and whats their capability against a very strong enemy?



AmirPatriot said:


> As of now, nothing in Iran allows the flexibility, mobility and power of conventional airpower. And your Qaher-313 would not be as powerful as it either.



This is a key point. As of now Iran has not spend large resources on conventional airpower, so it has the choice to switch to something different like drone based airpower or F-313.



AmirPatriot said:


> I maintain that Qaher is not as cost effective as you say it is. And aircraft are more cost effective than missiles, owing to their re usability. Missiles should be used for striking HVTs, SEAD/DEAD, or striking targets inaccessible to airpower.



Drones/UCAV? But we already discussed it. I don't say missiles only.



AmirPatriot said:


> We are working on it. Something like the RD-33, improved somewhat to grant about 20,000 lb of wet thrust, could be used in a twin engine fighter about the same size and capability as the J-31. I think it is feasible for us to try and gain access to engine production capability in a similar way to how achieved tank production capability. It may not succeed, but it is something that must be pursued.
> 
> By the way, how did you hear about the RD-33 possible reverse engineering? Not asking for your sources if you don't want to reveal them, but I also heard of it, from word of mouth. I'm just curious.



The RD-33 is the only conventional engine Iran has that would be worth considering copying. But they also showed it among indigenous projects, so there might be a project on it.
It is still incredibly difficult to master a serial production of the RD-33. Why not try to avoid such a difficult path and go for a alternative?



AmirPatriot said:


> I've shown you this site before. Even with air superiority USAF F-15Es usually carry 2 AIM-9M/Xs and 2 AMRAAMs. We rarely see the IRIAF carry AIM-9s (which are so old they are not even all-aspect) and AIM-7s. The USAF would need a very small number of aircraft to deal with our current air force. They can jam everything we have, and outrange everything we have apart from the F-14 (which is still very jammable and in small numbers). 40 F-14As won't hold two carriers worth of aircraft, or those plus an airbase or two. Especially since the enemy can employ stealth aircraft that could negate the F-14's range advantage.
> 
> In any case, I doubt the IRIAF's current state of readiness will allow it to get many aircraft in the air before they are destroyed on the ground.



I want to see all IRIAF fighters being upgraded with R-73 or a Iranian equivalent. I want them to use terrain masking and IADS to close in advanced enemy fighters. I want new radars for F-4E and Fakkur-90 as AIM-7 and Sejil replacement. I want F-14 to do high altitude hit and run operations with Fakkur-90.
This all combined will create a threat situation that will require allocated additional assets and reduced operational capability. Its not meant to take on the enemy face to face, but another asymmetric approach.



AmirPatriot said:


> We do not have to go down the Saudi route. I do not envision us spending $80 billion on our military. After the Syrian war is over (and by the looks of things, it is nearing its end), Iran will have a lot more money on its hands.
> 
> Also consider that the Turkish defence budget is just $18 billion and they have a capable air force, a powerful navy, and a modern (and rapidly modernising) army.



Saudis and Turkey are completely conventional countries with next to no strategic capability, superpowers would eat them for breakfast. Sorry bro, but if you admire their fancy toys, you should rethink your views.



AmirPatriot said:


> I want us to have a powerful air force. I do not want us to just import them and have a situation like the sacred defence. We have to be able to maintain and keep all our aircraft in service. And domestic production is a huge priority.
> 
> Now, if an opportunity arises and we get something like a J-20 or J-31, I would probably accept import - as long as once imported, those aircraft never have to leave the country again for maintenance. This would probably mean at least some sort of TOT.



One day we might be technologically at a point to produce a cost effective and potent manned fighter. Maybe the F-313 will be the start as the low end solution, waiting for a high end solution. But I would not bet on it in times where many say that the U.S 6th gen. fighter will be unmanned. Better go for the newest trend.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> I have to wonder how fragile modern aircraft are to overpressure and vibration of a near HAS hit?



Ask the air forces all over the world who use them. If an investment that large did not yield sufficient gain (especially since it isn't some sort of shiny pointy weapons system like the F-35) in protection, no-one would use it.



PeeD said:


> You can get early warning and intercept many CMs but its saturation and the massive that would eventually let the first ones trough



The idea is to thin the swarm so that they would not deal sufficient damage to seriously affect operations. For example, if it takes 2 Tomahawks to penetrate a HAS, bring that down to 1 Tomahawk and your HAS survives or your aircraft sustain at worst minor damage.



PeeD said:


> Fuel, weapons



Can be stored hardened underground depots.



PeeD said:


> sensitive maintenance infrastructure



A little more problematic. Ideally, forward airbases would have minimal maintenance infrastructure, and overhaul level maintenance would be based in well protected areas further away from the combat zone.



PeeD said:


> if all that hardening is worth the resources spent on it?



A survivable, powerful air force is certainly worth it.



PeeD said:


> Drones/UCAV? But we already discussed it. I don't say missiles only.



Fighter aircraft are a great aid to the IADS, so you would want to have them as a defensive asset. But most aircraft today are multirole. If you are on the offensive and have 100 fighter jets to spare, some of those can be pounding enemy industry, infrastructure, military bases. If you have a warfighting asset available you don't leave it lying around doing nothing.



PeeD said:


> It is still incredibly difficult to master a serial production of the RD-33. Why not try to avoid such a difficult path and go for a alternative?



Because we have to start investing in these high capability technologies sooner rather than later. Or else we'll be stuck with turbojets and subsonic turbofans. Better jet engine technology is not only good for a future air force, it can be applied in the Navy as well, for gas turbines to power ships (and most modern warships are powered by turbines).



PeeD said:


> I want to see all IRIAF fighters being upgraded with R-73 or a Iranian equivalent. I want them to use terrain masking and IADS to close in advanced enemy fighters. I want new radars for F-4E and Fakkur-90 as AIM-7 and Sejil replacement. I want F-14 to do high altitude hit and run operations with Fakkur-90.



Nevermind you want to replace a medium range AIM-7 with a very long range Fakour-90. You want to do all this on 40-50 year airframes. If a high priority and resources are given to such a project (IRIAF getting high priority... lol), they will be 50-60 year old airframes by the time the upgrade is done. Accident prone, very high maintenance, low sortie generation. And for what? 60 year old 3rd generation fighters, and 50 year old 4th generation fighters. It is a wonder the IRIAF continues to be able to fly F-14As and F-4Ds at all, and you want them to be combat effective?



PeeD said:


> Saudis and Turkey are completely conventional countries with next to no strategic capability, superpowers would eat them for breakfast. Sorry bro, but if you admire their fancy toys, you should rethink your views.



I didn't say we should be like them. Unconventional, strategic capabilities have their place. But so do conventional capabilities. I again remind you of Vietnam, which had both the unconventional VietCong, and the conventional NVA. They Turkish example was specifically to highlight that a powerful military does not have to come at extraordinary cost.

Thus, as I have said time and time again, we retain our strategic capability, ballistic missile, and expand it by making a large proportion of them precision guided, to make them more suitable offensive assets. Our unconventional defence being the IADS, coupled with the BM capability, presents a classic A2/AD problem for the enemy. *Meanwhile,* we modernise our conventional forces, being the IRIAF, IRIA, and IRIN. The conventional forces provide depth and complexity to our doctrine. 

Because after all, what is harder to attack? Ground based air defence, or ground based air defence _and _a powerful air force? A large submarine force and coastal missile emplacements, or all of those _plus_ modern destroyers, frigates, and aircraft? What is harder to deal with, a town infested with ATGM teams and rocket artillery, or a town infested with ATGM teams and rocket artillery _plus _attack helicopters, tanks and self propelled artillery that can counter-attack if you overextend?


----------



## TheCamelGuy

What about MIG-31, Mig-25's were effective in the 1991 gulf war against F-15's


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheCamelGuy said:


> What about MIG-31, Mig-25's were effective in the 1991 gulf war against F-15's


Mig25 was not effective even agaist f16 
Let just not talk about f15
They only managed to down one f18 and one mq1 and that f18 was dawned before USA deploy amraam


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> 1: No such ovens are needed for smart-production designs like T-72.
> 
> 2: The T-72S is the only Iranian tank that can survive a TOW-2 frontal hit
> 
> 3: The number of 10 Karrars per years comes from nowhere
> 
> 4: If you are in the tactical situation where you were smart enough to create low threat situation for your tanks. You can use their cheap and massive firepower, with low chances for one to get hit. This is what the Hezbollah and IRGC has teach to the Syrians and their huge T-55 family fleet --> don't get yourself into a situation where you can be hit. Tanks in a spearhead high-intensity operation must be at least of the protective level of the T-72S today, all the rest is 2-3 generations of armor protection behind the T-72S.
> 
> 5: We better get things right and create a spearhead armor backbone of Karrars, all the rest is hopeless, from Chieftains to M60s.
> 
> 6: Iran will only start tank production if 100% of it, including the engine, is built locally. They are reaching that point by now.
> 
> 7: This all is off-topic



Yes such ovens are needed & Iran has these ovens & T-72 don't use some modern method! T-90's chassis are constructed by welding together multiple sections that have also been pressure treated on top of both temp & oxidization treatment!






So yes they have the ovens large enough to cook a 1 peace tank chassis if they wanted too

There is no magical method that's going to take away from requiring both Temp & Oxidization treatment! And there is no method faster than casting for steal!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

IRIAF F 14 Flight Check After Overhaul In IACI :

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

TheCamelGuy said:


> What about MIG-31, Mig-25's were effective in the 1991 gulf war against F-15's



The discussion was about platforms not the weapons and weapon systems the Iraqi's had or didn't have on their MiG's

The reason why Air Forces are picky about the pilots they choose is because having a smart and skilled pilot goes well beyond just learning how to fly and land a fighter jet!

According to Iranian Air Force in the Iran-Iraq war most of the Iraqi pilots were badly trained to a point that they wouldn't even attempt to turn their Aircraft when they were fired upon and clearly saw missile coming at them!
I'm not saying Iraq didn't have skilled pilots (THEY DID) but by the most part most were ill trained!

A good pilot understands the strength and weaknesses of it's own & the enemies Aircraft, weapons and weapons systems and makes full use of them!

Also, a fighter is only as good as the weapon & weapon system it has onboard!

MiG-25 & MiG-31's can fly faster and higher than most other fighter and equipped with the proper weapons that means in terms of BVR you will have the advantage the higher & faster you go making them a great interceptor to have if & ONLY IF the platform is equipped with proper weapons & weapon system!

Before the revolution Russians pilots flying MiG-25's would toy with Iranian F-4 pilots all the time because they knew exactly how to use them!


----------



## VEVAK

JEskandari said:


> Mig25 was not effective even agaist f16
> Let just not talk about f15
> They only managed to down one f18 and one mq1 and that f18 was dawned before USA deploy amraam



Weapons & Weapons systems have come a long way from the 90's!
If Iran builds a platform similar to the MiG-25's then they need to build long range high maneuvering BVR missiles to go with them with a high powered radar with look down shoot down capability!
And within ~40km equipped with modern IRST & newer IR missiles you don't need to point the nose directly at an enemy fighter anymore and you can build larger IR missiles with greater range and maneuverability capable of chasing enemy fighters 

If your aircraft is faster and capable of higher altitudes with greater payload than your enemy then you build BVR & IR missiles around that capability

So I would take a MiG-25 over an F-16 any day as long as the weapons and weapons systems are designed to take full advantage of the aircrafts strengths


----------



## N_Al40

Hello all, I'm a new member to Defense PK. I hope to contribute to the forums well! More about me here (as this forum is inappropriate for personal introductions): https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/about-me.522238/

With respect to the the IRIAF, what are your thoughts on the proposed 'Saeqeh-3' project?









It certainly looks like a promising 4th generation + design; will require at least $2 billion though, and extensive R&D, along with wind tunnel tests, taxi tests, and flight tests. They will almost certainly face some bottlenecks.

However, Iranians being intelligent and given that their defense industry is not a Military Industrial Complex (MIC) that purposefully drags out fighter jet programs (F-35 for instance) to rack a profit (Lockheed Martin); this hopefully should enter service in 12 years, assuming they initiate the program of course.

This is my personal opinion, may well be wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

At this point the only known new fighter jet program is F-313 and even that is up for debate at where it is in the development process.

So far it went from mock up to limited taxi tests in April with significant changes made to airframe from mock up version.

But we have to wait for further confirmation that this project is being taken seriously by Iran's military complex.


----------



## VEVAK

N_Al40 said:


> Hello all, I'm a new member to Defense PK. I hope to contribute to the forums well! More about me here (as this forum is inappropriate for personal introductions): https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/about-me.522238/
> 
> With respect to the the IRIAF, what are your thoughts on the proposed 'Saeqeh-3' project?
> View attachment 430374
> View attachment 430375
> 
> 
> It certainly looks like a promising 4th generation + design; will require at least $2 billion though, and extensive R&D, along with wind tunnel tests, taxi tests, and flight tests. They will almost certainly face some bottlenecks.
> 
> However, Iranians being intelligent and given that their defense industry is not a Military Industrial Complex (MIC) that purposefully drags out fighter jet programs (F-35 for instance) to rack a profit (Lockheed Martin); this hopefully should enter service in 12 years, assuming they initiate the program of course.
> 
> This is my personal opinion, may well be wrong.



Welcome brother!

Iran has come a long way from that old design! Also, to decide to build a single engine fighter it's capabilities would have to far out way Iran's current capabilities & the aircraft would have to preform tasks that modern Iranian UAV's, Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Kowsar & precision guided missiles wouldn't be able to preform!

In a country the size of Iran Single engine fighters are only good for Close Air support with limited air to air & strike capabilities
Iran has the Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Kowsar, UCAV like the Simorgh, Shahed-129 and in the future F-313 to preform close Air Support and for strikes within ~700km of Iranian boarders Iran will likely use Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfaghar Missiles which would be equivalent to the strike capability of a single engine fighter with combat radius of ~1000km from its base on a fighter without Air refueling capability or with limited endurance capability (meaning adding air refueling pods wouldn't effect range by that much due to endurance factors)

So what Iran needs to invest in as it pertains to fighters is a large twin engine, high powered, high endurance twin seat force multiplier for Air Superiority to defend against incoming fighters & Long range high payload strike capability to go after heavily fortified bunkers at long ranges 

The reason small countries like Israel can use & upgrade single engine fighters like the F-16 for Air Superiority is mainly due to the small size of the country allowing them to fly the aircraft at a higher thrust than the aircrafts normal cruise speed to intercept and for Air to Air engagements but Iran due to it's size doesn't have that luxury & has to invest in larger force multipliers or else Iran would have to build over 1200 single engine fighters to even come close to match that capability in a country the size of Iran

Titanium is the key component that's holding Iran back from producing a capable Air Frame 
For now UN has placed sanctions on Iran prohibiting it from buying OR producing it's own Titanium alloy! Because that's how scared they are of Iran's technological progress & that's how much they fear Iran's capability to one day produce a capable fighter airframe of it's own! Iran has already started laying the foundation for Titanium production & I believe they were hoping that under the JCPOA after a certain amount of time those sanction would be lifted but that may come sooner than expected

I believe the best way forward is for Iran($500 Million per year), Iraq($500 Million per year), Syria($250Milllion per year) & Lebanon($150 Million per year) to pull their resources together and invest in a Joint project to produce a capable Low RCS fighter prototype I believe if they manage to build a capable prototype other countries may join in and with more investment you can build an even more advanced production model!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> At this point the only known new fighter jet program is F-313 and even that is up for debate at where it is in the development process.
> 
> So far it went from mock up to limited taxi tests in April with significant changes made to airframe from mock up version.
> 
> But we have to wait for further confirmation that this project is being taken seriously by Iran's military complex.



F-313 is a subsonic fighter and if the flight test are successful they will be built mainly for specific low altitude air to ground missions the Aircraft will not have the speed, maneuverability, altitude & sensors required for Air to Air missions 

Iran has already announced that they have already started initial research in the development of a large fighter jet!
So the F-313 is NOT the only project!
But most likely than not R&D in a larger fighter is likely a backup plan for Iran if they are unable to get a co-production deal with the Russians or the Chinese at that point Iran would have no choice but to go at it alone!

The 1st step in producing a capable fighter airframe is to have your own Titanium Industry http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/09/17/485086/Iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment

And this is something Iran is clearly investing in! Within the next decade Iran's Aluminum & Titanium industry will reach a point that they can divert enough Ti alloy towards a capable fighter Airframe

In terms of power plant Iran is clearly capable of producing the J-85 so again within the next decade best case would be an engine superior to the RD-33 turbofan engine & worst case would be an upgraded version of the J-79 (reduce the number of compressors, increase the size of the 1st 3 Airflow regulators, allow for limited bypass & upgrade the combustion chamber & ball brings)

In terms of optics Iran is making good advancements so developing an IRST within the next decade would be possible

In terms of Radars Iran is making good advancements at a high rate worst case there is continued upgrade of the AWG-9 antenna and digitizing it

In terms of Air to Air weapons Iran's is continuing to make great advancements in SAM, Iran is also making advancements in thrust vectoring engines software and hardware for it's ballistic missile program which will all contribute to developing an advance Air to Air missile

Iran's ability to build PGM is a proven fact

And Iran didn't go threw the trouble of funding and building this if they weren't serious about a domestic fighter program 







That's a major investment towards something some like to claim to be nothing but propaganda!


----------



## N_Al40

VEVAK said:


> Welcome brother!
> 
> Iran has come a long way from that old design! Also, to decide to build a single engine fighter it's capabilities would have to far out way Iran's current capabilities & the aircraft would have to preform tasks that modern Iranian UAV's, Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Kowsar & precision guided missiles wouldn't be able to preform!
> 
> In a country the size of Iran Single engine fighters are only good for Close Air support with limited air to air & strike capabilities
> Iran has the Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Kowsar, UCAV like the Simorgh, Shahed-129 and in the future F-313 to preform close Air Support and for strikes within ~700km of Iranian boarders Iran will likely use Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfaghar Missiles which would be equivalent to the strike capability of a single engine fighter with combat radius of ~1000km from its base on a fighter without Air refueling capability or with limited endurance capability (meaning adding air refueling pods wouldn't effect range by that much due to endurance factors)
> 
> So what Iran needs to invest in as it pertains to fighters is a large twin engine, high powered, high endurance twin seat force multiplier for Air Superiority to defend against incoming fighters & Long range high payload strike capability to go after heavily fortified bunkers at long ranges
> 
> The reason small countries like Israel can use & upgrade single engine fighters like the F-16 for Air Superiority is mainly due to the small size of the country allowing them to fly the aircraft at a higher thrust than the aircrafts normal cruise speed to intercept and for Air to Air engagements but Iran due to it's size doesn't have that luxury & has to invest in larger force multipliers or else Iran would have to build over 1200 single engine fighters to even come close to match that capability in a country the size of Iran
> 
> Titanium is the key component that's holding Iran back from producing a capable Air Frame
> For now UN has placed sanctions on Iran prohibiting it from buying OR producing it's own Titanium alloy! Because that's how scared they are of Iran's technological progress & that's how much they fear Iran's capability to one day produce a capable fighter airframe of it's own! Iran has already started laying the foundation for Titanium production & I believe they were hoping that under the JCPOA after a certain amount of time those sanction would be lifted but that may come sooner than expected
> 
> I believe the best way forward is for Iran($500 Million per year), Iraq($500 Million per year), Syria($250Milllion per year) & Lebanon($150 Million per year) to pull their resources together and invest in a Joint project to produce a capable Low RCS fighter prototype I believe if they manage to build a capable prototype other countries may join in and with more investment you can build an even more advanced production model!



Good point made regarding the size of Iran and the link to engine size. Come to think of it, Saudi Arabia is a good case study: roughly Iran's size, and its air force is almost wholly made up of F-15s, no single engine F-16s (or any other for that matter).

Definitely agree on the fact that Iran needs an air superiority fighter, rather then CAS jets, whose roles are as you said, being filled by Shahed-129 UCAV, and SRBMs. However, I don't think we should expect an indigenous air-air fighter any time soon. Iran has already drafted an MOU with Russia regarding SU-30 purchases and limited TOT (production line and producing few engine components), after the conventional arms embargo is fully eliminated under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2020). Though I think this measure is temporary to allow IRIAF to become a lethal fighting force immediately, while working on better long-term solutions at home, so Iran is not reliant on other countries for high-tech weapon exports.

As for the afore mentioned nations coming together to work on such a program, that is currently unimaginable giving what Syria and Iraq are explicitly going through, coupled with a low technological know-how, for which Iran would have to shoulder the burden. Lebanon on the other hand is at the mercy of the US, France, and the KSA when it comes to its military. All three provide military aid of some sort, on the condition that the Lebanese armed forces buy selected and approved military equipment. Safe to say that if they invested into an Iran led fighter jet program, that military aid would be annulled; I don't think Lebanon would want that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

N_Al40 said:


> Good point made regarding the size of Iran and the link to engine size. Come to think of it, Saudi Arabia is a good case study: roughly Iran's size, and its air force is almost wholly made up of F-15s, no single engine F-16s (or any other for that matter).
> 
> Definitely agree on the fact that Iran needs an air superiority fighter, rather then CAS jets, whose roles are as you said, being filled by Shahed-129 UCAV, and SRBMs. However, I don't think we should expect an indigenous air-air fighter any time soon. Iran has already drafted an MOU with Russia regarding SU-30 purchases and limited TOT (production line and producing few engine components), after the conventional arms embargo is fully eliminated under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2020). Though I think this measure is temporary to allow IRIAF to become a lethal fighting force immediately, while working on better long-term solutions at home, so Iran is not reliant on other countries for high-tech weapon exports.
> 
> As for the afore mentioned nations coming together to work on such a program, that is currently unimaginable giving what Syria and Iraq are explicitly going through, coupled with a low technological know-how, for which Iran would have to shoulder the burden. Lebanon on the other hand is at the mercy of the US, France, and the KSA when it comes to its military. All three provide military aid of some sort, on the condition that the Lebanese armed forces buy selected and approved military equipment. Safe to say that if they invested into an Iran led fighter jet program, that military aid would be annulled; I don't think Lebanon would want that.



An Air superiority fighter will not be something that will be achieved anytime soon
1st thing Iran has to take care of is developing a Titanium industry & other super alloys and composites which is something Iran is currently doing and it will take at least a decade before can produce enough titanium alloy so an adequate amount can be diverted towards a fighter Air Frame production

Iran's Su-30 deal with Russia is not 100% and looking at how the U.S. is reacting to the JCPOA & how KSA is running to Russia to make large weapons deals out of fears that Iran may upgrade it's Air force with an Aircraft superior to the F-15 it is more likely that the U.S. with Saudi Arabia will pay Russia to prevent such a sale from happening so Iran can't afford not to have a back up plan! Russia knows that unlike Saudi Arabia Iran will never agree to $20 Billion USD a year weapons sales & the Russian's will happily sacrifice $1-2 Billion USD of weapons sales per year to Iran for $20 Billion USD from the Saudi's so Iran needs a back up plan

In a properly funded program it would take ~3-5 years to come up with 2 competing advanced prototype airframes and another 10 years of yearly investments to develop the infrastructure required to take a capable large twin engine fighter Airframe into production & perfect an engine to take into production so your looking at a fighter going into production between 2030-2040 in a properly funded program 

For Iran the technological aspect of it would be easier than funding it on it's own that's why they would be better if they can team up with their allies & friends

Developing an Airframe prototype with off the shelf engines shouldn't take any more than 5 years plus a year of testing and fixing the flaws if the cost is divided between 3 countries Iran, Iraq & Syria it shouldn't cost any more than $100 Million per year per country to develop 2 competing prototypes that's a $1.5 program & if they are worth producing then you start investing in developing the tools and facilities required to take the aircraft into mass production

Also, there would be less chance for corruption if there are engineers and monitors from 3 countries regulating & monitoring how, where & on what the money is being spent on
And clearly such a project would have to remain covert inside Iran with Iraqi & Syria engineers and monitors moving to Iran until the prototypes are built & it would likely have to remain covert until production starts 

I believe all 3 countries should be investing in joint ventures just as the EU is doing


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> Definitely agree on the fact that Iran needs an air superiority fighter, rather then CAS jets, whose roles are as you said, being filled by Shahed-129 UCAV, and SRBMs. However, I don't think we should expect an indigenous air-air fighter any time soon. Iran has already drafted an MOU with Russia regarding SU-30 purchases and limited TOT (production line and producing few engine components), after the conventional arms embargo is fully eliminated under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2020). Though I think this measure is temporary to allow IRIAF to become a lethal fighting force immediately, while working on better long-term solutions at home, so Iran is not reliant on other countries for high-tech weapon exports.



You are naive to think that it is a slam dunk the arms embargo will get lifted.

China and Russia were surprised Iran agreed to delay lifting of embargo, because by not getting it immediately it allows the West to later refuse to lift it using a whole set of excuses. 



VEVAK said:


> F-313 is a subsonic fighter and if the flight test are successful they will be built mainly for specific low altitude air to ground missions the Aircraft will not have the speed, maneuverability, altitude & sensors required for Air to Air missions
> 
> Iran has already announced that they have already started initial research in the development of a large fighter jet!
> So the F-313 is NOT the only project!
> But most likely than not R&D in a larger fighter is likely a backup plan for Iran if they are unable to get a co-production deal with the Russians or the Chinese at that point Iran would have no choice but to go at it alone!
> 
> The 1st step in producing a capable fighter airframe is to have your own Titanium Industry http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/09/17/485086/Iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment
> 
> And this is something Iran is clearly investing in! Within the next decade Iran's Aluminum & Titanium industry will reach a point that they can divert enough Ti alloy towards a capable fighter Airframe
> 
> In terms of power plant Iran is clearly capable of producing the J-85 so again within the next decade best case would be an engine superior to the RD-33 turbofan engine & worst case would be an upgraded version of the J-79 (reduce the number of compressors, increase the size of the 1st 3 Airflow regulators, allow for limited bypass & upgrade the combustion chamber & ball brings)
> 
> In terms of optics Iran is making good advancements so developing an IRST within the next decade would be possible
> 
> In terms of Radars Iran is making good advancements at a high rate worst case there is continued upgrade of the AWG-9 antenna and digitizing it
> 
> In terms of Air to Air weapons Iran's is continuing to make great advancements in SAM, Iran is also making advancements in thrust vectoring engines software and hardware for it's ballistic missile program which will all contribute to developing an advance Air to Air missile
> 
> Iran's ability to build PGM is a proven fact
> 
> And Iran didn't go threw the trouble of funding and building this if they weren't serious about a domestic fighter program
> 
> View attachment 430501
> 
> 
> 
> That's a major investment towards something some like to claim to be nothing but propaganda!



If what you say is true, then it will take Iran 10 years just to have enough technology threshold to build a large fighter jet, that doesn't include testing, prototype flight trials, etc. which could add another 10-15 years onto the development time depending on how serious priority it is given.

So you are talking about a large fighter that will be using old technology by the time it is even reaches service which could be 2+ decades away!


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> You are naive to think that it is a slam dunk the arms embargo will get lifted.
> 
> China and Russia were surprised Iran agreed to delay lifting of embargo, because by not getting it immediately it allows the West to later refuse to lift it using a whole set of excuses.
> 
> 
> 
> If what you say is true, then it will take Iran 10 years just to have enough technology threshold to build a large fighter jet, that doesn't include testing, prototype flight trials, etc. which could add another 10-15 years onto the development time depending on how serious priority it is given.
> 
> So you are talking about a large fighter that will be using old technology by the time it is even reaches service which could be 2+ decades away!



I'm talking about a large fighter "platform" with 2 wide diameter engines!

Platforms can be upgraded with modern weapons & sensor in time but it's important to 1st have a large enough platform that can be upgraded!

Strictly talking about platforms in a properly funded program with modern tech 5 years is more than enough to go from 0 - flight testing of 2 prototypes & you can do it at a much faster pace due to CAD & far more advanced tools
F-15, Su-27,.... were done in 5 years in the early 70's
Canada between 1953-1959 went from design to the production of 5 Avro Arrows with 0 computing power! SO NO! It's NOT going to take 10 years for prototype testing

The idea that Iran technologically needs another 10 years is absurd! You should go check out how many Iranians educated in Iran (Bachelors & Master from Iran with continued education in the U.S.) are now working at JPL

So going from 0 to conducting test of a full size flying prototype isn't going to take 5 years "IF IT IS PROPERLY FUNDED" especially on a larger airframe designed around existing parts

A lot of the components & subsystems Iran is already producing for it's F-14's can be used like landing gears, avionics, Hydraulics,... & you can easily reverse engineer F-14 ejection seats,......
And designing around existing large diameter engines allows you to speed up the process in perfecting an Airframe


If Iran chooses a large airframe around parts and subsystems used on the F-14 It will cost Iran no more than $250-$300 Million USD a year for the next 3-4 years to develop 2 competing Airframes (that includes funding going towards R&D for a production model engine as well) & they'll need 2 years of flight testing and fixing flaws with likely 4 prototypes built by the 6th year

But going from that to a production model while you build and developing the tools, facilities & personal to start serial production and continued R&D for an engine would take another 5-6 years "IF" you choose to stick with many of the sub systems Iran is already building or can reverse engineer off it's F-14's which would be the smart thing to do if you choose a large platform

Getting the Titanium required for 4 prototypes in a 4 year timespan is not an issue & you don't really need a lot of Titanium for your early prototypes but producing enough Titanium to take a large fighter in to production is currently a problem and will take time & that's not a matter of technology or knowhow it's strictly a matter of funding!

Iran is already doing this and not just with Ti but with various other super alloys so production levels will easily reach the required amount within a decade!

Your prototypes will be flying with existing engines but Iran will need 10 years of R&D to take a fairly good engine into production The life span & maintenance hours required may not be as good as Russian & American engines but that will naturally improve in time!


So in about 10-12 years time & ~$3Billion spent you can start serial production of a fighter about the size of an F-14, with an eternal weapons bay & reduced RCS using known methods and it will take another 10 years of developing weapons and upgrading the weapons systems & sensors to match current F-35's (NOT future F-35) 

So yes Iran is at least 2 decades behind when it comes to sensors, weapons and weapons systems! In 20 years US F-35's & 6th Gen fighters may be equipped with directed energy weapons or at least directed energy countermeasures plus 6th gen fighters may be escorted by semi autonomous UCAV's piloted by the rear pilots of 6th Gen fighters or upgraded twin seat F-35's and by then US will likely be testing sub orbital prototypes!

If your platform is large enough building directed energy countermeasures and semi autonomous jet powered UCAV's with Air to Air capability are both within Iran's technological capability if funded to do so!

This is why I believe small manned fighters are a waist of time and money!

With a large twin seat 70ft long platform you can build Air to Air weapons with greater range and maneuverability + added laser countermeasures & the ability to control multiple cheaper UCAV which will overall reduce the number of manned fighter jet you'll need & you can make up the difference with semi autonomous jet powered UCAV with air to air capability


----------



## N_Al40

TheImmortal said:


> You are naive to think that it is a slam dunk the arms embargo will get lifted.
> 
> China and Russia were surprised Iran agreed to delay lifting of embargo, because by not getting it immediately it allows the West to later refuse to lift it using a whole set of excuses.
> 
> 
> 
> If what you say is true, then it will take Iran 10 years just to have enough technology threshold to build a large fighter jet, that doesn't include testing, prototype flight trials, etc. which could add another 10-15 years onto the development time depending on how serious priority it is given.
> 
> So you are talking about a large fighter that will be using old technology by the time it is even reaches service which could be 2+ decades away!



As a UNSC Resolution, the US can't do a damn thing because the resolution has already been adopted. The arms embargo was included in the resolution passed in 2015, and the US voted for it; it cannot simply veto or annul a single CLAUSE of that resolution, it is diplomatically impossible, or any for that matter. UNSC Resolution 2231 included a whole host of other temporary sanctions that have been suspended and that are soon to be permanently annulled.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of how this resolution works: It's been voted upon and adopted by the UNSC; the resolution hasn't yet fully achieved what it has been set out to do because there are time restrictions in place; among them is the arms embargo (2020), ballistic missile sanctions removal (2023) [This specific one can happen earlier though, provided the IAEA: reaches the “Broader Conclusion” that “all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities”], and centrifuges sanctions removal (2025), where Iran is no longer obligated to use only 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Among many other time-related sanctions removals.

The veto power can only be used if a resolution has not yet passed.

Why do you think the US is kicking up a fuss about the 'Sunset Clause' in 2025? Because as I said earlier, they can't do a damn thing, because the resolutions has already passed. If they could veto that clause (or any for that matter), which is the impression your under, why try so desperately to "Renegotiate", "Scrap", or "Make the 2025 sunset clause permanent". Because my brother, the US knows it can't do nothing to stop Iran using IR-8 centrifuges come October 2025 as the deal stands. A prospect that puts Iran a mere weeks away from Nuclear Threshold Capability, an idea that frightens Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Your prototypes will be flying with existing engines but Iran will need 10 years of R&D to take a fairly good engine into production The life span & maintenance hours required may not be as good as Russian & American engines but that will naturally improve in time!
> 
> 
> So in about 10-12 years time & ~$3Billion spent you can start serial production of a fighter about the size of an F-14, with an eternal weapons bay & reduced RCS using known methods and it will take another 10 years of developing weapons and upgrading the weapons systems & sensors to match current F-35's (NOT future F-35)
> 
> So yes Iran is at least 2 decades behind when it comes to sensors, weapons and weapons systems! In 20 years US F-35's & 6th Gen fighters may be equipped with directed energy weapons or at least directed energy countermeasures plus 6th gen fighters may be escorted by semi autonomous UCAV's piloted by the rear pilots of 6th Gen fighters or upgraded twin seat F-35's and by then US will likely be testing sub orbital prototypes!



All that rambling and yet you end up agreeing with me. 

I wasn't saying that it would take 10 years for just prototype testing I was saying it would take 10 years to get to production mode of an airframe. This was based on your estimate or should I say "guess" that it would take iran 10 years to be able to build up enough production for the right alloys and titanium. 

So I said that you would need another potentially 10 years for all that technology going into the fighter to develop and mature not to mention build up a decent fighter force.


----------



## raptor22

Iranian F14 Tomcat locked on an unknown aircraft in Persian Gulf

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> As a UNSC Resolution, the US can't do a damn thing because the resolution has already been adopted. The arms embargo was included in the resolution passed in 2015, and the US voted for it; it cannot simply veto or annul a single CLAUSE of that resolution, it is diplomatically impossible, or any for that matter. UNSC Resolution 2231 included a whole host of other temporary sanctions that have been suspended and that are soon to be permanently annulled.
> 
> There seems to be a misunderstanding of how this resolution works: It's been voted upon and adopted by the UNSC; the resolution hasn't yet fully achieved what it has been set out to do because there are time restrictions in place; among them is the arms embargo (2020), ballistic missile sanctions removal (2023) [This specific one can happen earlier though, provided the IAEA: reaches the “Broader Conclusion” that “all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities”], and centrifuges sanctions removal (2025), where Iran is no longer obligated to use only 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Among many other time-related sanctions removals.
> 
> The veto power can only be used if a resolution has not yet passed.
> 
> Why do you think the US is kicking up a fuss about the 'Sunset Clause' in 2025? Because as I said earlier, they can't do a damn thing, because the resolutions has already passed. If they could veto that clause (or any for that matter), which is the impression your under, why try so desperately to "Renegotiate", "Scrap", or "Make the 2025 sunset clause permanent". Because my brother, the US knows it can't do nothing to stop Iran using IR-8 centrifuges come October 2025 as the deal stands. A prospect that puts Iran a mere weeks away from Nuclear Threshold Capability, an idea that frightens Saudi Arabia and Israel.



Again you are naive if you think the West (EU) is going to allow Iran to re-arm and become even more influential in the Middle East.

Mind I remind you that Russia didn't sell a DEFENSIVE weapon system (s-300) to Iran for many years even though it was allowed, because they simply wanted to please the US and EU.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dinky

TheImmortal said:


> Again you are naive if you think the West (EU) is going to allow Iran to re-arm and become even more influential in the Middle East.
> 
> Mind I remind you that Russia didn't sell a DEFENSIVE weapon system (s-300) to Iran for many years even though it was allowed, because they simply wanted to please the US and EU.


I guess Russia didnt please the US enough since they got sanctioned anyways lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> All that rambling and yet you end up agreeing with me.
> 
> I wasn't saying that it would take 10 years for just prototype testing I was saying it would take 10 years to get to production mode of an airframe. This was based on your estimate or should I say "guess" that it would take iran 10 years to be able to build up enough production for the right alloys and titanium.
> 
> So I said that you would need another potentially 10 years for all that technology going into the fighter to develop and mature not to mention build up a decent fighter force.



Yes Iran would need 10 years and 10 years is a standard timeline in talking a large twin engine supersonic Airframe from design to serial production in a adequately funded program! 
I believe it would be reckless of Iran NOT to fund such a program for the next decade fact is the only way the U.S. wouldn't attempt to stop a Co production fighter deal with Russia is if Iran develops an Airframe that has the potential of being a greater threat than known Su-30's in the future

I just don't see the U.S. allowing a Russian Co-production deal to happen unless Iran has it's own large twin-engine fighter program 

For Iran to match the U.S. in manned aircraft (excluding Suborbital capability) Iran would need to spend at least $300 Billion over the next 30 years for R&D and production in producing engines, fighters, supersonic bombers, radars, optics, lasers, weapons,... So unless a group of countries join Iran for various joint projects it's not likely!

But Iran doesn't need to match US capability over it's own territory! Just to give you an example over it's own territory using current tech
by spending only ~$500 Million USD a year in a span of 20 years Iran can station 15,000 ground based sensors, radars & optics some equipped with Iranian built short range SAM & AAA each unit costing no more than an average of $700,000 USD to build each capable of relaying info to every Iranian fighter for low altitude engagements & increasing your fighters situational awareness & making up the difference in sensor capability compared to US fighters

Add to that a mass UAV program to make up for US superiority in force multipliers

But they'll still need a fighter program that will cost ~$40 Billion in the next 15-20 years if they are forced to go at it alone to mass the same number of fighters if they were to pay $20 Billion to the Russians but after the 1st 15 years that's when your fighter program will start to pay off in time

But regardless whether Iran produces it's' own fighters or co-produces with the Russians they still need to build many of the same facilities and knowing the state of your Air Force why wouldn't you invest in a domestic fighter as a backup program


----------



## raptor22

میراژ اف وان بی کیو تازه اورهال شده در یاشی

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Russian SU-57 Stealth Fighter with Syrian and Iranian flags on it. 

Want to know if you guys think that this is significant?


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> Russian SU-57 Stealth Fighter with Syrian and Iranian flags on it.
> 
> Want to know if you guys think that this is significant?



Just photoshop from some enthusiasts.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Your distorted view and understanding shows itself again with the tourism argument.
> 
> You have a static, non-felxible, non-open, almost reactionary view on things, a kind of (western) textbook approach.
> 
> Its funny that your tourism case is so similar to that on airpower and the jet engine... Same as we can't compete in those areas, we also can't compete with Turkish alcohol flatrate offers at their (closer) Mediterranean beaches and their developed tourism infrastructure. They have all the KPIs on their side, its a lost cause.
> Its actually sad, as many people in Iran, who have not seen the outside world, think Iran can become big via tourism...
> At least try to take Japan or South Korea as a example who produce products with high added values and don't try to host drunk party foreigners with sun at beaches...
> This is not meant to condemn Turkish tourism model or even alcoholic westen tourism style, it works for them.



YOU PEOPLE are DELUSIONAL!
Japan get over 20 Million Tourists a year! South Korea with a population of only 50 million gets 11 million tourists a year!!! And people go there to spend money! They don't travel there on buses to just visit religious sites spend as little as they can and get out! Or just to cross the boarder to meet family members & stay at there homes and spend as little as they can and get out! 
On top of that South Korea is a leading country in Smart Phones, TV, Home appliances, Car industry

Any country the size of Iran whether developed technologically or NOT will NOT have a healthy economy unless it has 15-20 million tourists a year coming in to spend money!!!

YOU CAN CRY all the nonsense you want!!! That is a FACT! and to sacrifice Iran's economy for absurd outdated thing is absurd!!!!!!!!!

Hell even in Iran's foreigner policy one of the main reason the Syrian people don't connect with us is because of the same thing! The pro Assad's are pro Russian & the Anti Assad are pro Turkey!
And that's why the Saudi's failed in Syria!!!

You need to get out of your little bubble!

FYI I DO NOT drink Alcoholic beverages but I know for a fact that any Iranian can have it delivered to their house with a simple phone call but it's something tourists can't get their hands on & the Iranian government can't make money off of



Stryker1982 said:


> Will we ever though be able to challenge U.S Airpower in case of war, even with large quantities of Su-30's or Su-35 or Iranian equivalent. I'm not saying we shouldn't even have a program or spend any money on airforce. Airforce is really key element in modern warfare. But in terms of going up against say, 2 b-1 lancers, and 4 F-22's. These 6 fighters with long range firepower alone will destroy dozens of aircraft.



NO! You can't challenged them outside Iranian Airspace at all! Your Air Force needs to be backed by your Air Defense just as much as your Air Defense needs to be backed by your Air Force!



AmirPatriot said:


> Just photoshop from some enthusiasts.



But I believe they were covertly tested inside Iran to see how they do in high heat high dust areas!

But it's doubtful that the U.S. would even allow Iran to get co-production rights of the Su-30 let alone anything more advanced!
And the Su-PAK needs many years of work and upgrades to reach what the Russians want out of it!
Russia claims to have plasma stealth capability which means they can give stealth capability to any of their current fleet!
And Su-35/37 are far more maneuverable and durable due to years of upgrades and improvements! And that just leaves super cruise and unless the Russians vastly reduce the weight of the Su-Pak or come up with a far better engine that's not going to happen!

Also, the F-22 & F-35 are vastly overrated both fighters need 2 day's of maintenance after each flight making them a large target on the ground against a capable Air Force!

With 120 F-22's to have an F-22 up every day you can't keep more than 40 up every day & the Russian can easily win with numbers regardless of the vast force multiplying capability of the F-22

If they deploy 60 to the Persian Gulf that's only 20 up every day on a daily bases! So you can easily outnumber them if you have a good size Air Force backed by your Air Defense & UCAV's

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

ashool said:


> exactly the 100% manoto watcher only manoto or voa or bbc i see too but not like him i see both side



I don't watch Manoto at ALL! And I have seen clips from VOA & BBC Farsi on YouTube before regarding various subject & both are without a doubt anti Iranian BUT I have NEVER seen either one of these news outlets talk about Tourism in Iran or the negative effects some of Iran's religious policies has on Tourism!!!! NOT 1 Video!
I'm not claiming that they do or don't exist I'm saying I wouldn't know because I have never seen it!

I didn't even know Manoto reported news! I thought it was TV shows, Documentaries, reality shows & Music videos!
but if do have reports regarding Tourism in Iran or lack there of I would LOVE to see it! Same goes for BBC & VOA!

On a daily bases I get my news from Farsnews, Tasnimnews & PressTV those are the ONLY sites I actually go to but aside from that anything on VOA OR BBC would be clips on youtube and saying I see eve 1 clip a month from each would be an overstatement!

I'm not going to dig my head in the sand I wanna see what the traitors have to say!!!!

FACTS are FACTS!

1



United States 18,569,100 U.S. has 1 Million Immigrants coming in on a yearly bases + And due to high restrictions after 9-11 tourism fell in the U.S. from 9 million per week to 5 million per week Also, with 350 million population & a vast country most of the money made from tourism is done in house between states! 

2



China[n 2] 11,218,281

As of 2015, China is the fourth most visited country in the world, after France, United States, and Spain, with 56.9 million international tourists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_China


3



Japan 4,938,644

20-25 Million

4



Germany 3,466,639

In 2012, over 30.4 million international tourists arrived in Germany, bringing over US$38 billion in international tourism receipts to the country.[4] Domestic and international travel and tourism combined directly to contribute over EUR43.2 billion to the German GDP. Including indirect and induced impacts, the industry contributes 4.5% of German GDP and supports 2 million jobs (4.8% of total employment).[5] The ITB Berlin is the world's leading tourism trade fair.[6]

5



United Kingdom 2,629,188

The United Kingdom is the world's 8th biggest tourist destination, with 36.115 million visiting in 2015

6



France 2,463,222

*France* was visited by 85.7 million foreign *tourists* in 2013, making it the most popular *tourist* destination in the world

7



India 2,256,397 (Clearly lacking in international Tourism but with simple taxes coming in from a population of over 1 Billion their government can function without it but lack of Tourism = increased poverty and that is a problem India) Yes their government has money to invest in R&D due to a vast population but for life to improve for their population they need a major boost in international tourism) 

*Tourism in India* is economically important and is growing rapidly. In October 2015, India's medical tourism sector was estimated to be worth US$3 billion. It is projected to grow to $7–8 billion by 2020.[2] In 2014, 184,298 foreign "patients" traveled to India to seek medical treatment.[3]

About 88.90 lakh (8.89 million) foreign tourists arrived in India in 2016 compared to 80.27 lakh (8.027 million) in 2015, recording a growth of 10.7%.[4][5][6] Domestic tourist visits to all states and Union Territories numbered 1,036.35 million in 2012, an increase of 16.5% from 2011.[7] In 2014, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh were the most popular states for tourists.[8] Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Agra and Jaipur have been the five most visited cities of India by foreign tourists during the year 2015. Worldwide, Delhi is ranked at 28 by the number of foreign tourist arrivals, while Mumbai is ranked at 30, Chennai at 43, Agra at 45, Jaipur at 52 and Kolkata at 90.[9]

The _Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2017_ ranks India 40th out of 136 countries overall

8



Italy 1,850,735

With 48.6 million *tourists* a year (2014), *Italy* is the fifth most visited country in international *tourism*


9



Brazil 1,798,622

The country only had 6.36 million visitors in 2015 (extremely low) but they have a population of 200 Million allows the government to function with taxes! A glance at the figures from the IBGE (Brazil's government statistics bureau,) reveals that 16.2 million people (*8.5 percent* of the population,) still live on less than R$70 per month – the equivalent of around US$1.30 per person per day


10



Canada 1,529,224

A country with a population of only 36 Million by 2012 had over 16 million tourists arriving in Canada, bringing US$17.4 billion in international tourism receipts to the economy

11



South Korea 1,411,246

Population 50 million has 11 million

12



Russia[n 3] 1,280,731

foods and souvenirs, and show a great variety of traditions, including Russian banya, Nizhny Novgorod Khokhloma and Matryoshka, Tatar Sabantuy, or Siberian shamanist rituals. In 2013, Russia was visited by 33 million tourists, making it the ninth-most visited country in the world and the seventh-most visited in Europe


13



Australia 1,258,978

Population of only 24 Million In calendar year 2015, there were 7.4 million visitor arrivals (That's a country with less than 1/3 of Iran's population)

*Tourism in Australia* is an important component of the Australian economy. In the financial year 2014/15, tourism represented 3.0% of Australia's GDP contributing A$47.5 billion to the national economy.[2] Domestic tourism is a significant part of the tourism industry, representing 73% of the total direct tourism GDP

14



Spain 1,232,597

_Tourism in Spain_ is a major contributor to the national economic life just after the industry, contributing about 10-11% of Spain's GDP.

In 2016 Spain was the third most visited country in the world, recording 75.3 million tourists which marked the fourth consecutive year of record-beating numbers


15



Mexico 1,046,002

10 Million Tourists a year (A low number for a country with 120 Million people and as a result you have vast poverty and most of the GDP is in the hands of Americans companies making products with cheap labor)

16



Indonesia 932,448

*Tourism in Indonesia* is an important component of the Indonesian economy as well as a significant source of its foreign exchange revenues

During 2016 about 12.02 million foreign tourists visited Indonesia, which was 15.5% higher than that of 2015.[3] In year 2015, 9.73 million international visitors entered Indonesia, staying in hotels for an average of 7.5 nights and spending an average of US$1,142 per person during their visit



17



Turkey 857,429
18



Netherlands 771,163
19



Switzerland 659,850
20



Saudi Arabia 639,617

*
So clearly it is NOT possible to have a healthy economy without a healthy Tourism industry* and yes with population over 200 million people there are way's to make up the difference BUT!

There is NOT a single country on the planet with a population the size of Iran that has a healthy economy without a healthy Tourism industry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is an undeniable FACT! You people can put your head in the sand and cry all you want but that is a FACT!
*
If your so close minded that your not even willing to even see restrictions be removed from "SOME" parts of Iran "OUTSIDE THE CAPITAL" then YOU are the issue!!!!! And you need to weak up and check yourself into a mental institution!*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> I don't watch Manoto at ALL! And I have seen clips from VOA & BBC Farsi on YouTube before regarding various subject & both are without a doubt anti Iranian BUT I have NEVER seen either one of these news outlets talk about Tourism in Iran or the negative effects some of Iran's religious policies has on Tourism!!!! NOT 1 Video!
> I'm not claiming that they do or don't exist I'm saying I wouldn't know because I have never seen it!
> 
> I didn't even know Manoto reported news! I thought it was TV shows, Documentaries, reality shows & Music videos!
> but if do have reports regarding Tourism in Iran or lack there of I would LOVE to see it! Same goes for BBC & VOA!
> 
> On a daily bases I get my news from Farsnews, Tasnimnews & PressTV those are the ONLY sites I actually go to but aside from that anything on VOA OR BBC would be clips on youtube and saying I see eve 1 clip a month from each would be an overstatement!
> 
> I'm not going to dig my head in the sand I wanna see what the traitors have to say!!!!
> 
> FACTS are FACTS!
> 
> 1
> 
> 
> 
> United States 18,569,100 U.S. has 1 Million Immigrants coming in on a yearly bases + And due to high restrictions after 9-11 tourism fell in the U.S. from 9 million per week to 5 million per week Also, with 350 million population & a vast country most of the money made from tourism is done in house between states!
> 
> 2
> 
> 
> 
> China[n 2] 11,218,281
> 
> As of 2015, China is the fourth most visited country in the world, after France, United States, and Spain, with 56.9 million international tourists
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_China
> 
> 
> 3
> 
> 
> 
> Japan 4,938,644
> 
> 20-25 Million
> 
> 4
> 
> 
> 
> Germany 3,466,639
> 
> In 2012, over 30.4 million international tourists arrived in Germany, bringing over US$38 billion in international tourism receipts to the country.[4] Domestic and international travel and tourism combined directly to contribute over EUR43.2 billion to the German GDP. Including indirect and induced impacts, the industry contributes 4.5% of German GDP and supports 2 million jobs (4.8% of total employment).[5] The ITB Berlin is the world's leading tourism trade fair.[6]
> 
> 5
> 
> 
> 
> United Kingdom 2,629,188
> 
> The United Kingdom is the world's 8th biggest tourist destination, with 36.115 million visiting in 2015
> 
> 6
> 
> 
> 
> France 2,463,222
> 
> *France* was visited by 85.7 million foreign *tourists* in 2013, making it the most popular *tourist* destination in the world
> 
> 7
> 
> 
> 
> India 2,256,397 (Clearly lacking in international Tourism but with simple taxes coming in from a population of over 1 Billion their government can function without it but lack of Tourism = increased poverty and that is a problem India) Yes their government has money to invest in R&D due to a vast population but for life to improve for their population they need a major boost in international tourism)
> 
> *Tourism in India* is economically important and is growing rapidly. In October 2015, India's medical tourism sector was estimated to be worth US$3 billion. It is projected to grow to $7–8 billion by 2020.[2] In 2014, 184,298 foreign "patients" traveled to India to seek medical treatment.[3]
> 
> About 88.90 lakh (8.89 million) foreign tourists arrived in India in 2016 compared to 80.27 lakh (8.027 million) in 2015, recording a growth of 10.7%.[4][5][6] Domestic tourist visits to all states and Union Territories numbered 1,036.35 million in 2012, an increase of 16.5% from 2011.[7] In 2014, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh were the most popular states for tourists.[8] Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Agra and Jaipur have been the five most visited cities of India by foreign tourists during the year 2015. Worldwide, Delhi is ranked at 28 by the number of foreign tourist arrivals, while Mumbai is ranked at 30, Chennai at 43, Agra at 45, Jaipur at 52 and Kolkata at 90.[9]
> 
> The _Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2017_ ranks India 40th out of 136 countries overall
> 
> 8
> 
> 
> 
> Italy 1,850,735
> 
> With 48.6 million *tourists* a year (2014), *Italy* is the fifth most visited country in international *tourism*
> 
> 
> 9
> 
> 
> 
> Brazil 1,798,622
> 
> The country only had 6.36 million visitors in 2015 (extremely low) but they have a population of 200 Million allows the government to function with taxes! A glance at the figures from the IBGE (Brazil's government statistics bureau,) reveals that 16.2 million people (*8.5 percent* of the population,) still live on less than R$70 per month – the equivalent of around US$1.30 per person per day
> 
> 
> 10
> 
> 
> 
> Canada 1,529,224
> 
> A country with a population of only 36 Million by 2012 had over 16 million tourists arriving in Canada, bringing US$17.4 billion in international tourism receipts to the economy
> 
> 11
> 
> 
> 
> South Korea 1,411,246
> 
> Population 50 million has 11 million
> 
> 12
> 
> 
> 
> Russia[n 3] 1,280,731
> 
> foods and souvenirs, and show a great variety of traditions, including Russian banya, Nizhny Novgorod Khokhloma and Matryoshka, Tatar Sabantuy, or Siberian shamanist rituals. In 2013, Russia was visited by 33 million tourists, making it the ninth-most visited country in the world and the seventh-most visited in Europe
> 
> 
> 13
> 
> 
> 
> Australia 1,258,978
> 
> Population of only 24 Million In calendar year 2015, there were 7.4 million visitor arrivals (That's a country with less than 1/3 of Iran's population)
> 
> *Tourism in Australia* is an important component of the Australian economy. In the financial year 2014/15, tourism represented 3.0% of Australia's GDP contributing A$47.5 billion to the national economy.[2] Domestic tourism is a significant part of the tourism industry, representing 73% of the total direct tourism GDP
> 
> 14
> 
> 
> 
> Spain 1,232,597
> 
> _Tourism in Spain_ is a major contributor to the national economic life just after the industry, contributing about 10-11% of Spain's GDP.
> 
> In 2016 Spain was the third most visited country in the world, recording 75.3 million tourists which marked the fourth consecutive year of record-beating numbers
> 
> 
> 15
> 
> 
> 
> Mexico 1,046,002
> 
> 10 Million Tourists a year (A low number for a country with 120 Million people and as a result you have vast poverty and most of the GDP is in the hands of Americans companies making products with cheap labor)
> 
> 16
> 
> 
> 
> Indonesia 932,448
> 
> *Tourism in Indonesia* is an important component of the Indonesian economy as well as a significant source of its foreign exchange revenues
> 
> During 2016 about 12.02 million foreign tourists visited Indonesia, which was 15.5% higher than that of 2015.[3] In year 2015, 9.73 million international visitors entered Indonesia, staying in hotels for an average of 7.5 nights and spending an average of US$1,142 per person during their visit
> 
> 
> 
> 17
> 
> 
> 
> Turkey 857,429
> 18
> 
> 
> 
> Netherlands 771,163
> 19
> 
> 
> 
> Switzerland 659,850
> 20
> 
> 
> 
> Saudi Arabia 639,617
> 
> *
> So clearly it is NOT possible to have a healthy economy without a healthy Tourism industry* and yes with population over 200 million people there are way's to make up the difference BUT!
> 
> There is NOT a single country on the planet with a population the size of Iran that has a healthy economy without a healthy Tourism industry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> This is an undeniable FACT! You people can put your head in the sand and cry all you want but that is a FACT!
> *
> If your so close minded that your not even willing to even see restrictions be removed from "SOME" parts of Iran "OUTSIDE THE CAPITAL" then YOU are the issue!!!!! And you need to weak up and check yourself into a mental institution!*



Indeed, Its not even just money or hijab, its the hundreds of thousands of jobs that would be created by having similar tourism input like Turkey, and with a country as rich in history and culture as iran this should be soooooooo easy.


----------



## AmirPatriot

VEVAK said:


> But I believe they were covertly tested inside Iran to see how they do in high heat high dust areas!


...ok


----------



## Dinky

VEVAK said:


> *
> If your so close minded that your not even willing to even see restrictions be removed from "SOME" parts of Iran "OUTSIDE THE CAPITAL" then YOU are the issue!!!!! And you need to weak up and check yourself into a mental institution!*


And what would some of that restrictions be you want removed?


----------



## N_Al40

I think Iran might take a similar approach, like the Russians with their 5th gen. fighter, and produce early versions of the F-313 with Owj Turbojet engine and then re-produce an improved version with the J90 Turbofan.

This would give the IRIAF and IRGCAF some breathing space until a better F-313 is rolled out, with a Turbofan engine.


----------



## VEVAK

Dinky said:


> And what would some of that restrictions be you want removed?



1.Iran is restricting it's self in the Entertainment Industry from Music Industry, clubs,....
2.In the south most of Iran's Islands & clear blue water beaches are under developed & there is a good reason for that!
3.Iran's Capital and a few major cities are overpopulated & the reason for that is clear! all the jobs are there & people go where there are jobs and economic opportunities!
4.Alcoholic Beverage industry is a major industry from wine, beer to liquor! Iranians invented win! And God knows that getting your hands on Alcohol is as easy as a phone call away! Any Iranian can get it regardless of Age & the government can't regulate it because it has it's head in the sand as a result some opportunist without any restrictions sell home made moonshine & vodka which as been causing blindness!
5.As for Hejab fact is if there was a vote in Iran over 70% of the population would vote against Hejab by force! And another fact is if the restriction were removed o~70% of Iranian women would dress the same way they do today!
Hejab by force is UNISLAMIC! Hejab by force and an enforced dress code is destroying Iran's ability to have a healthy Tourism Industry!
Also, Iranians should have a choice if some in Iran want to live a certain way they should be free to move to a city inside the country & live the way they want!
Just because the people of Syria aren't forced to live a certain way in public doesn't mean they are not Muslims!
And a true Islamic country would allow people to have a choice if you want to live in a city where Hejab is force that is your right! And if you don't that is your right as well!

And like it or not Tourism is THE biggest industry in the world and it's indirect effects on your economy and products produced in your country far out way it's initial direct effects

Tourism is also a major source of international currency without it the currency of your country can't stabilize!

Also, you can use removing restrictions in underdeveloped areas as a way to promote both foreign and domestic investment in those areas so the population of your country don't get cramped in a few major city's

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## VEVAK

N_Al40 said:


> View attachment 432524
> 
> 
> I think Iran might take a similar approach, like the Russians with their 5th gen. fighter, and produce early versions of the F-313 with Owj Turbojet engine and then re-produce an improved version with the J90 Turbofan.
> 
> This would give the IRIAF and IRGCAF some breathing space until a better F-313 is rolled out, with a Turbofan engine.




J-90 will power the Kowsar Jet trainer we'll see how that goes! 50 have already been ordered by the Air Force!

As for the F-313 in it's flight tests it's RCS testing & range would have to out perfume Iran's Saegheh with the same amount of ordinance! If it fails to do so it is not likely that Iran would invest in it because Iran's titanium plants would be online before that aircraft hits serial production!
And the Saegheh Airframe doesn't require a lot of Ti unlike other fighters like the F-14, F-15,.... So it would be a relatively cheep airframe to produce if you produce your own Ti & you don't have to smuggle it in at over 100 times the cost!


----------



## arashkamangir

VEVAK said:


> J-90 will power the Kowsar Jet trainer we'll see how that goes! 50 have already been ordered by the Air Force!
> 
> As for the F-313 in it's flight tests it's RCS testing & range would have to out perfume Iran's Saegheh with the same amount of ordinance! If it fails to do so it is not likely that Iran would invest in it because Iran's titanium plants would be online before that aircraft hits serial production!
> And the Saegheh Airframe doesn't require a lot of Ti unlike other fighters like the F-14, F-15,.... So it would be a relatively cheep airframe to produce if you produce your own Ti & you don't have to smuggle it in at over 100 times the cost!


@VEVAK could you please provide references for the air force order of Kowsar and the J-90 usage.

Thanks


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> 1.Iran is restricting it's self in the Entertainment Industry from Music Industry, clubs,....
> 2.In the south most of Iran's Islands & clear blue water beaches are under developed & there is a good reason for that!
> 3.Iran's Capital and a few major cities are overpopulated & the reason for that is clear! all the jobs are there & people go where there are jobs and economic opportunities!
> 4.Alcoholic Beverage industry is a major industry from wine, beer to liquor! Iranians invented win! And God knows that getting your hands on Alcohol is as easy as a phone call away! Any Iranian can get it regardless of Age & the government can't regulate it because it has it's head in the sand as a result some opportunist without any restrictions sell home made moonshine & vodka which as been causing blindness!
> 5.As for Hejab fact is if there was a vote in Iran over 70% of the population would vote against Hejab by force! And another fact is if the restriction were removed o~70% of Iranian women would dress the same way they do today!
> Hejab by force is UNISLAMIC! Hejab by force and an enforced dress code is destroying Iran's ability to have a healthy Tourism Industry!
> Also, Iranians should have a choice if some in Iran want to live a certain way they should be free to move to a city inside the country & live the way they want!
> Just because the people of Syria aren't forced to live a certain way in public doesn't mean they are not Muslims!
> And a true Islamic country would allow people to have a choice if you want to live in a city where Hejab is force that is your right! And if you don't that is your right as well!
> 
> And like it or not Tourism is THE biggest industry in the world and it's indirect effects on your economy and products produced in your country far out way it's initial direct effects
> 
> Tourism is also a major source of international currency without it the currency of your country can't stabilize!
> 
> Also, you can use removing restrictions in underdeveloped areas as a way to promote both foreign and domestic investment in those areas so the population of your country don't get cramped in a few major city's



Look at the way nasrallah runs Hezbollah and Lebenon. They are our biggest allies, practically a branch of our military and yet the difference in freedoms Lebanese people have compared to Iran is 10 fold. ITs not hard to find women with no hejab, and showing their arms while carrying a portrait of nasrallah and hezbollah flag. Hezbollahi's don't force Lebanese people to not drink alcohol or wear hijab, or no dancing. Why does our government treat our people worse than people of other countries. I'd rather have nasrallah run Iran because atleast he's a good, charismatic,smart and freedom loving guy. They love nasrallah because forcing people to do things is unislamic. Everyone knows that a large majority of our people do not like hejab, this is a fact and this is not good for the health of a country, this division is bad. Freedoms is a way to solve social divisions. Their are tens of thousands of highly educated women, and men leaving each year because of lack of social freedoms.

Just a month ago, OUR OWN WOMEN are banned from watching in stadiums while SYRIAN FOREIGNERS were allowed in. How retarded is this government. They treat foreigners better than their own citizens. This is a national shame. More shameful than the fact we still use M60's.


----------



## skyshadow

New clothes for Air Force Brigade Nohod 65

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> New clothes for Air Force Brigade Nohod 65
> View attachment 432879
> View attachment 432880
> View attachment 432881



This is for nohed 65th brigade? It would be about time for their equipment to be upgraded. They will be well protected and supplied with these tactical vests and helmets. I would really like to see nohed 65th to take a more forward offensive role in areas of interest in west asia but they dont


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> This is for nohed 65th brigade? It would be about time for their equipment to be upgraded. They will be well protected and supplied with these tactical vests and helmets. I would really like to see nohed 65th to take a more forward offensive role in areas of interest in west asia but they dont



Yes, these clothes are made special for the air force. And for long missions they need to have a lot of ammunition as well as bulletproof vests that should at least be able to prevent the penetration of g-3 bullets. This is part of the functionality of this dress that is said. According to the (soro)project, all military uniforms of the next generation should be high resistance and also have smart communication equipment. داریم پیشرفت میکنیم مشخص است که این لباس های برای ماموریت های خارج از کشوره ولی نمیگن اینارو.


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> It would be ridiculous to suggest an airforce is a burden rather than an asset. Iran proved this in the war. The absolute necessity for a modern airforce especially now more than ever, with better guidance, precisions and payloads and all kinds of weapons system available. And russia has proven this in Syria as well. Without russian airforce assad wouldn't win this war, they single handily won the war, but softening defence so much for easy capitulation. and people are still arguing about if we need a robust airforce or not. I really don't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait do we have the ability to produce the titanium alloys necessary for aircraft production? In terms of material engineering and mining, how are we doing here?
> 
> 
> 
> Well within Iran abilities if a project like this is taken seriously and funded seriously.



A lot of Iranians are badly miss informed due to a poor job of the Iranian Media when it comes to reporting on the military!

Sadly Iran's major media outlets are filled with bad reporters! And people that have failed the country miserably as it pertains to the Military!!!

If the reporters were doing their job properly most Iranians of all political parties (not politicians) would be outraged of the low budget that actually goes towards weapons acquisition compared to other countries in the world!!!!!!!!!!
For a country like Iran with the natural resources we have & need to protect, with the security challenges that we face, with the technological capability that exist among our youth for a country like us to spend less than half of what the UAE is spending on acquisition is absurd!

Spending $2 Billion USD a year on acquisition for your Air Force in a country the size of Iran is NOTHING!
And it doesn't matter that sanctions have prevented Iran from buying an Air Force if you can't buy it then that money needs to go towards R&D & towards building the most advanced fighter within your capability!

At the very least Iran needs to be spending $16-$17 Billion on yearly weapons acquisitions and at least $2 Billion USD should go towards new manned Aircrafts for the Air Force whether it's domestic or not can be debated but that money needs to be spent 

If we can't even outspend the UAE by $3 Billion on weapons acquisition and R&D then there is something wrong! Especially since unlike the UAE most of that money will create new jobs and will get recycled into Iran's economy!



arashkamangir said:


> @VEVAK could you please provide references for the air force order of Kowsar and the J-90 usage.
> 
> Thanks








3:40 into the video 50 have been ordered the engine is J-90 but the camera man showed Tolu-4 engine when he was talking about the engine so that's not the J-90 but the Kowsar is powered by the J-90



Stryker1982 said:


> Look at the way nasrallah runs Hezbollah and Lebenon. They are our biggest allies, practically a branch of our military and yet the difference in freedoms Lebanese people have compared to Iran is 10 fold. ITs not hard to find women with no hejab, and showing their arms while carrying a portrait of nasrallah and hezbollah flag. Hezbollahi's don't force Lebanese people to not drink alcohol or wear hijab, or no dancing. Why does our government treat our people worse than people of other countries. I'd rather have nasrallah run Iran because atleast he's a good, charismatic,smart and freedom loving guy. They love nasrallah because forcing people to do things is unislamic. Everyone knows that a large majority of our people do not like hejab, this is a fact and this is not good for the health of a country, this division is bad. Freedoms is a way to solve social divisions. Their are tens of thousands of highly educated women, and men leaving each year because of lack of social freedoms.
> 
> Just a month ago, OUR OWN WOMEN are banned from watching in stadiums while SYRIAN FOREIGNERS were allowed in. How retarded is this government. They treat foreigners better than their own citizens. This is a national shame. More shameful than the fact we still use M60's.



Forcing Hejab doesn't make a country Islamic or lack of a forced Hejab doesn't make a country UNISLAMIC
Syria, Iraq, Lebanon,... These are all Islamic countries but Hijab is not forced on people!
Some people here live in a bubble!

The fact that Iran forces Hijab is not only bad for tourism but it's also bad for it's image among regional allied countries!
In Syria Iranian solders feels this in their relations with Syrian solders!
In Lebanon they used to scare the Lebanese population that if Hezbullah takes power Lebanon will be like Iran! Hejab will be forced and night clubs closed down which would have resulted in the death of their tourism industry! 

Hejab by force is absolutely UNISLAMIC and nowhere in the Quran is such a thing even allowed! And you tell that to people and they claim Hejab by force is part of our culture! What the hell kind of culture gets forced on people by the end of a wipe! IT'S ABSURD!

Only enemies of Iran like Israel, Saudi Arabia & U.S. want that law to continue! Because it destroys Iran's economy, makes Iran's currency unstable & susceptible to sanctions & it gives them a extra talking point to try to separate Iran's population from this government!
I just don't see any logic behind anyone that wants this government to stay in power to continue to support an absurd retarded law like Hejab by force!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

Is the J-90 based on the RD-33? 

And does it have better wet thrust?


----------



## arashkamangir

N_Al40 said:


> Is the J-90 based on the RD-33?
> 
> And does it have better wet thrust?


No it's a turbofan version of Tolu  Owj turbojet which itself is a reversed engineeree J-85.


----------



## N_Al40

arashkamangir said:


> No it's a turbofan version of Tolu turbojet which itself is a reversed engineeree J-85.



Ahh right.

Someone in this forum mentioned that Iran is working on a RD-33 like-engine, so I assumed it was the J-90. Must be a different project then.


----------



## N_Al40

N_Al40 said:


> Ahh right.
> 
> Someone in this forum mentioned that Iran is working on a RD-33 like-engine, so I assumed it was the J-90. Must be a different project then.








Claims that Iran already has a turbofan engine [emoji1312]


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

IIRC, the Tolu series of jet engines are small types with no relations to the J85 at all (see their confirmed use in the C-802 family of Iranian AshMs and the Karrar target drones, ranging from 800-900lbs of thrust). So any reference to the J90 being a turbofan variant of the Tolu would logically point to it being a small turbofan engines with ~1000lb of thrust. 

The Iranian-built J85-GE-21 recently shown publicly goes by the name of "Owj". 

Concerning the bit about the JT8D, and PeeD can confirm this or not, refers to Iranian companies being able to manufacture major components of the engine but NOT the engine engine itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> A lot of Iranians are badly miss informed due to a poor job of the Iranian Media when it comes to reporting on the military!
> 
> Sadly Iran's major media outlets are filled with bad reporters! And people that have failed the country miserably as it pertains to the Military!!!
> 
> If the reporters were doing their job properly most Iranians of all political parties (not politicians) would be outraged of the low budget that actually goes towards weapons acquisition compared to other countries in the world!!!!!!!!!!
> For a country like Iran with the natural resources we have & need to protect, with the security challenges that we face, with the technological capability that exist among our youth for a country like us to spend less than half of what the UAE is spending on acquisition is absurd!
> 
> Spending $2 Billion USD a year on acquisition for your Air Force in a country the size of Iran is NOTHING!
> And it doesn't matter that sanctions have prevented Iran from buying an Air Force if you can't buy it then that money needs to go towards R&D & towards building the most advanced fighter within your capability!
> 
> At the very least Iran needs to be spending $16-$17 Billion on yearly weapons acquisitions and at least $2 Billion USD should go towards new manned Aircrafts for the Air Force whether it's domestic or not can be debated but that money needs to be spent
> 
> If we can't even outspend the UAE by $3 Billion on weapons acquisition and R&D then there is something wrong! Especially since unlike the UAE most of that money will create new jobs and will get recycled into Iran's economy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3:40 into the video 50 have been ordered the engine is J-90 but the camera man showed Tolu-4 engine when he was talking about the engine so that's not the J-90 but the Kowsar is powered by the J-90
> 
> 
> 
> Forcing Hejab doesn't make a country Islamic or lack of a forced Hejab doesn't make a country UNISLAMIC
> Syria, Iraq, Lebanon,... These are all Islamic countries but Hijab is not forced on people!
> Some people here live in a bubble!
> 
> The fact that Iran forces Hijab is not only bad for tourism but it's also bad for it's image among regional allied countries!
> In Syria Iranian solders feels this in their relations with Syrian solders!
> In Lebanon they used to scare the Lebanese population that if Hezbullah takes power Lebanon will be like Iran! Hejab will be forced and night clubs closed down which would have resulted in the death of their tourism industry!
> 
> Hejab by force is absolutely UNISLAMIC and nowhere in the Quran is such a thing even allowed! And you tell that to people and they claim Hejab by force is part of our culture! What the hell kind of culture gets forced on people by the end of a wipe! IT'S ABSURD!
> 
> Only enemies of Iran like Israel, Saudi Arabia & U.S. want that law to continue! Because it destroys Iran's economy, makes Iran's currency unstable & susceptible to sanctions & it gives them a extra talking point to try to separate Iran's population from this government!
> I just don't see any logic behind anyone that wants this government to stay in power to continue to support an absurd retarded law like Hejab by force!!!!




50 Kowsars have been ordered? Wow thats alot, Kowsars besides being a trainer should be able to perform CAS is that correct? Whats the point of Qaher when airforce clearly doesn't care. Is Iran going to have Qaher for Sepah and Kowsar for artesh? Again, their is so much inefficient and waste in the military industry.


----------



## arashkamangir

eagle2007 said:


> ALCON,
> 
> IIRC, the Tolu series of jet engines are small types with no relations to the J85 at all (see their confirmed use in the C-802 family of Iranian AshMs and the Karrar target drones, ranging from 800-900lbs of thrust). So any reference to the J90 being a turbofan variant of the Tolu would logically point to it being a small turbofan engines with ~1000lb of thrust.
> 
> The Iranian-built J85-GE-21 recently shown publicly goes by the name of "Owj".
> 
> Concerning the bit about the JT8D, and PeeD can confirm this or not, refers to Iranian companies being able to manufacture major components of the engine but NOT the engine engine itself.



Oops you are right I meant Owj not Tolu. I'll correct my post.


----------



## mohsen

یادداشت شاداب عسگری در پاسخ به شبهات مطروحه امیر رستمی در «خشت خام»:
*پاسخ تحریف‌های تاریخی امیر سرتیپ شهرام رستمی/ چگونه در روز روشن واقعیت حمله امریکا به طبس و سرنگونی هواپیمای مسافربری مورد تحریف قرار می‌گیرد؟/ شاداب عسگری: اظهارات رستمی ریشه در ضعف اطلاعاتی وی دارد*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

eagle2007 said:


> ALCON,
> 
> IIRC, the Tolu series of jet engines are small types with no relations to the J85 at all (see their confirmed use in the C-802 family of Iranian AshMs and the Karrar target drones, ranging from 800-900lbs of thrust). So any reference to the J90 being a turbofan variant of the Tolu would logically point to it being a small turbofan engines with ~1000lb of thrust.
> 
> The Iranian-built J85-GE-21 recently shown publicly goes by the name of "Owj".
> 
> Concerning the bit about the JT8D, and PeeD can confirm this or not, refers to Iranian companies being able to manufacture major components of the engine but NOT the engine engine itself.



1.Despite what people say It's not a matter of CAN'T! If you look at all of Iranian fighter projects they are all either single engine fighters OR small twin engine fighters with small diameter engines like the Saegheh!

The Iranian government wants a fighter that has a low fuel consumption or else building a larger turbojet engine like the J-79 is 50's tech! To put that in perspective for you the 1st portable calculator was released in 1971

So whomever claims that Iran can't build a turbojet engine superior to the J-79 is living in a delusion! If your going to spend money to build an engine your going to need a platform to put it on and choosing a light fighter in a country the size of Iran is and has always been a mistake!

2.In terms of producing super alloys R&D and lab scale production of various super alloys started back in the late 90's & Iran accomplished Titanium alloy casting on a lab scale by 2008 but the funding that should have gone towards mining and production of these alloys didn't happen because Iran ended up with a government that thought it was a good idea to hand out chump change $30 USD a month to 70 million people (~$20Billion USD a year) while there is an enemy that's sanctioning you and building bases around you & threatening you so as a result you lack the budget required to invest in R&D and in the production of new Turbojet & Turbofan Engines!

Lack of funding wouldn't have been a problem if from the start the government had decided to provide only the bottom 10%-15% $40 USD of monthly aid sure that's fair and reasonable but it should have never been any more than the bottom 15% of the population & it should have been aid & job placement programs rather than cash handouts!
Ahmadinejads policies brook the back of the Iranian government & when you break something putting it back together again is not so easy especially when you don't live in a dictatorship and there are political backlashes!

And the Rohani government has also failed when it comes to the military! When you have a government that spends less than half of what the UAE spends on acquisitions and R&D then as a result you will not have the funding to build the tools, materials & infrastructure required for an fighter Airframe or engine!

It's seems the Rohani governments entire platform on fixing the economy is solely based on getting foreign investment! 
1.And they haven't been willing to spend political capital to get rid of "Yaraneh" monthly chump change which is a big whole in government budget! And a major source of corruption!
2.They haven't increased the military budget when it comes to acquisition and R&D
3.They haven't come up with innovative ideas to increase the quantity, quality & variety of Iranian products
4.They are too afraid to even open up debate about Hijab by force & it's negative impact on the economy. They have failed to explain the vital importance of a healthy Tourism Industry to the population & how without it stabilizing your currency is next to impossible! And having a healthy tourism industry in a country that enforces a dress code is next to impossible! There are no guarantees that your tourism would be fixed without it but it is most definitely not going to be fixed with it!


----------



## Raghfarm007

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 430197





mohsen said:


> یادداشت شاداب عسگری در پاسخ به شبهات مطروحه امیر رستمی در «خشت خام»:
> *پاسخ تحریف‌های تاریخی امیر سرتیپ شهرام رستمی/ چگونه در روز روشن واقعیت حمله امریکا به طبس و سرنگونی هواپیمای مسافربری مورد تحریف قرار می‌گیرد؟/ شاداب عسگری: اظهارات رستمی ریشه در ضعف اطلاعاتی وی دارد*


Traitors trying to justify why they destroyed documents in the airstrike..... then they blamed it on Banisadr...


----------



## mohsen

Raghfarm007 said:


> Traitors trying to justify why they destroyed documents in the airstrike..... then they blamed it on Banisadr...


You mean the same famous traitor Mr BaniSadr who dressed as a woman and alongside Rajavi the head of MKO terrorist group escaped to west, right?! the same traitor who was receiving money from CIA right?
The same traitor who demoted legendary army commander Sayyad Shirazi and appointed commanders like Shadmehr and Bagheri who disabled Iranian air defense systems during American's operation.
Banisadr was the head of all Iranian armed forces and destroying the evidences was performed by his direct order.
the same traitor who ordered all Hezbollahi (pro revolution) troops in army to be transferred to Kurdestan right before American's operation.
even his name makes me sick!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> 50 Kowsars have been ordered? Wow thats alot, Kowsars besides being a trainer should be able to perform CAS is that correct? Whats the point of Qaher when airforce clearly doesn't care. Is Iran going to have Qaher for Sepah and Kowsar for artesh? Again, their is so much inefficient and waste in the military industry.



When your only spending $6Billion USD a year on acquisitions it's just not possible for there to be any waist! Actually despite what people think one of the least corrupt institutions and industries in Iran is the military and the military industry
Yes there are corrupt people in the military & MOD but their corruption doesn't come out of Iran's Military budget! And the budget is so limited that there just isn't much room for corruption!
To put that in perspective for you Iran khodro's revenue in 2011 was $12 Billion USD with only 50,000 employees so $6 Billion on acquisition on your entire military is really NOTHING!

Q-313 will likely not go into production until the Kowsar orders have been completed! & if they do produce it, that will come after the Kowsar order has been completed till then they'll likely try testing and try to prefect it & they'll likely wanna see how the engines on the Kowsar perform!

50 is not a lot in a country the size of Iran with an aircraft with limited range & speed!



Raghfarm007 said:


> Traitors trying to justify why they destroyed documents in the airstrike..... then they blamed it on Banisadr...



Banisadr was a traitor OR he was an absolute MORON either way good riddance! And that fact became clear when the Iran-Iraq war started & the generals both in the IRGC & Artesh witnessed his behavior in person!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parsipride

Interesting video I came across about the first Japanese made fighter after WW2. It resembles the F-5 and was in service until 2006 for nearly 30 years. Hopefully the establishment has taken the Air Force seriously after fighting along side the Russians. 

On a positive note, Iran is not too far away from start and production of Indigenous answer to our air force problem. Japan, a first world economy, was operating a F-5 similar air craft until 10 years ago.


----------



## VEVAK

Parsipride said:


> Interesting video I came across about the first Japanese made fighter after WW2. It resembles the F-5 and was in service until 2006 for nearly 30 years. Hopefully the establishment has taken the Air Force seriously after fighting along side the Russians.
> 
> On a positive note, Iran is not too far away from start and production of Indigenous answer to our air force problem. Japan, a first world economy, was operating a F-5 similar air craft until 10 years ago.



That's absolutely WRONG!
Mitsubishi F-1 was *Produced* 1975-1987 (Modified copy of the F-4)
Mitsubishi F-2 was Produced between 1995-2011 with 100 produced (Modified copy of the F-16)
223 F-15J produced in Japan by the Japanese Air Self Defense Force with 155 still in operations

Where do you people come up with this stuff?


----------



## Parsipride

VEVAK said:


> That's absolutely WRONG!
> Mitsubishi F-1 was *Produced* 1975-1987 (Modified copy of the F-4)
> Mitsubishi F-2 was Produced between 1995-2011 with 100 produced (Modified copy of the F-16)
> 223 F-15J produced in Japan by the Japanese Air Self Defense Force with 155 still in operations
> 
> Where do you people come up with this stuff?



May be the narrator is speaking in Turkish and not English. It clearly states that they built them through 1987( span of 10 years )which yielded 77units.They were in service until 2006.

I did not say that they did not build any other aircraft, nor did I say anything about other joint projects. F-1 was part of the Japanese Air Force for nearly 3 decades.

Iran is not Japan but this is not 1977 either.


----------



## yavar

Iran IRIAF Defenders of Velayat Sanctuary 7 wargame هفتمین رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فداییان حریم ولایت




Iran IRIAF Defenders of Velayat Sanctuary 7 wargame P-1 رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فداییان حریم ولایت۷

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar




----------



## VEVAK

Parsipride said:


> May be the narrator is speaking in Turkish and not English. It clearly states that they built them through 1987( span of 10 years )which yielded 77units.They were in service until 2006.
> 
> I did not say that they did not build any other aircraft, nor did I say anything about other joint projects. F-1 was part of the Japanese Air Force for nearly 3 decades.
> 
> Iran is not Japan but this is not 1977 either.



No buddy, you made it sound as if the F-1 was the backbone of the Japanese Air Force up to a decade ago and Iran is not that far off because we reverse engineered the F-5!

It's a common practice in Iran, miss informed people come on Iranian TV and make it sound as if Japan & Germany don't have a military and don't spend any money on their military industry.
I apologies if I miss understood you, and put you in their category!

I just wanna make it clear, Japan is one of the top 10 countries in the world in the amount of money they spend on weapons acquisition & military R&D and at the end of the day that's why they have been successful in producing various fighter jets!

As long as Iran is NOT spending at the very least $16-$18 Billion USD on weapons production & R&D with at least $2.5 Billion USD a year going towards a fighter program (Air frame, engine, sensors, weapon system,...) producing a capable fighter will NOT be possible!

Iran has the know how! It's the governments refusal to fund it that's the problem! Iran gained the know how on how to produce & Cast Titanium Alloy on a lab scale in 2008 yet here we are almost 10 years later and they still haven't started Ti alloy mass production at a large scale.

Iran's OWJ engine should have started mass production almost a decade ago because all the tech was there!

And it's the government that keeps putting a requirement for the production of a fighter with low fuel consumption! Which is absurd in a country the size of Iran that's rich in Oil & Gas and has access to the sea which means you can make Hydrogen & Oxygen with electricity!

TF-30 engines were built in the 60's the idea that Iran can't build something superior is absurd! It just requires funding in the production of various superalloys the rest is just cutting and casting using tools and equipment available to Iran that were far superior to anything the U.S. had in the 60's & 70's
And worst case is Iran builds an engine with the same specs in terms of thrust but a little heavier!

As for the Air Frame Iran wants to cheat it's way around Titanium! and keeps insisting on Airframes with low Titanium requirements which is absurd and delusional! It's just not possible to build a viable fighter Airframe with under 40,000 lb of Titanium alloy & that's ~ $1 Million USD worth of Titanium alloy just for the Titanium required in the Air frame

Iran also needs to invest in high grade Nickle, stainless steel, chrome, iridium, tungsten,... And increase it's aluminum production 

Titanium is NOT a rare earth alloy and Iran has plenty of it & needs to be producing at a minimum 20,000 tones of Ti alloy per year specifically for the production of various Military Aircraft from airframe to various parts & components of fighter jets, Helo's & UCAV's

Iran also needs at least 3 large vacuum ovens for oxidation treatment (At least 2-3 times the size of the ones we have today) just for fighter production

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

In 2006, Venezuela provided Iran with one or more F-16 fighter jets to enable Iran to strengthen its radars so that Iranian radars could detect this type of aircraft and to know the abilities of this fighter. To prevent any air strike by the United States or Israel.


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 434358
> View attachment 434359
> View attachment 434360
> View attachment 434361
> View attachment 434362
> View attachment 434363
> View attachment 434364
> View attachment 434365
> View attachment 434366
> View attachment 434367
> View attachment 434368
> View attachment 434369
> 
> 
> 
> In 2006, Venezuela provided Iran with one or more F-16 fighter jets to enable Iran to strengthen its radars so that Iranian radars could detect this type of aircraft and to know the abilities of this fighter. To prevent any air strike by the United States or Israel.


The pictures of the F-16 in "IIAF" colours are scale models, not real aircraft. And it was never proven that Venezuala provided Iran with those jets.

Though it does seem odd that Iran never acquired the engines for reverse engineering purposes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zathura

*Iranian Warplanes Practice Night ‘Carpet-bombing’ During Drill
*
Warplanes of the Iranian Air Force have conducted ‘carpet-bombing’ of mock enemy positions amid the aerial maneuvers in the central province of Isfahan.
Flying at low altitude, Iran’s Sukhoi-24 and Phantom aircraft practiced the bombardment technique, which features dropping a large number of bombs on enemy targets in an area with the aim of causing 'uniform' destruction.
The Air Force’s F-4 planes were also backing up the overnight mission by releasing flares to light up the drill zone.

Brigadier General Massoud Rouzkhosh, the spokesman for the drills, told Iranian media that this stage of the maneuvers also witnessed aerial refueling of Phantom combat planes at low altitude under the air cover of F-14 jets, Press TV reported.
Meanwhile, Sukhoi-24-to-Sukhoi-24 refueling was also performed for the first time at low altitude, the general added.
The two-day drills, codenamed Fada’ian-e Harim-e Velayat 7 (Death-defying Defenders of Velayat’s Sanctuary) 7, began on Tuesday morning.
The event enlists the services of all Iranian airbases, with the Shahid Babayi Airbase in Isfahan Province playing the central role.
Also joining the drills are MiG-29 and ‘Lightning bolt’ fighter bombers, alongside interceptor aircraft, manned and unmanned reconnaissance planes, Boeing 707 and 747 cargo planes as well as logistical aircraft.

Source: http://www.defenseworld.net/news/21...__Carpet_bombing____During_Drill#.WfmXxlRL_Dc

====================================


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIAF Defenders of Velayat Sanctuary 7 wargame P-2 رزمایش اقتدار هوایی فداییان حریم ولایت۷*





*Iran Aerial bombardment of C-130 in Defenders of Velayat Sanctuary 7 wargame بمباران هوایی سی-۱۳۰*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Parsipride

*Lebanon Plunges Into Crisis After Premier Resigns, Fearing Assassination Plot*

Hariri's resignation comes at a time when Iran's regional power is surging, having recently played a critical role in the quashing of the Iraqi Kurdistan referendum, as well as collaborating with Russia in Syria to preserve the regime of al Assad and defeat local Islamic State forces. As U.S. and Saudi Arabia have sought ways to curb Iran's growing influence in the region, Hariri has come under pressure to distance himself from the militant group which has sent thousands of troops to neighboring Syria to shore up President Bashar Assad's forces.

Speaking from Saudi Arabia, Hariri may have decided to simply remain with his Saudi friends for the foreseeable future, and was not immediately clear if the now former premier intended to return to Lebanon. In a statement, the presidential office said Aoun was informed by Hariri in a phone call of his resignation, adding that the president now awaits Hariri's return to clarify the circumstances of his resignation and proceed accordingly.






http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...er-premier-resigns-fearing-assassination-plot


----------



## VEVAK

Parsipride said:


> *Lebanon Plunges Into Crisis After Premier Resigns, Fearing Assassination Plot*
> 
> Hariri's resignation comes at a time when Iran's regional power is surging, having recently played a critical role in the quashing of the Iraqi Kurdistan referendum, as well as collaborating with Russia in Syria to preserve the regime of al Assad and defeat local Islamic State forces. As U.S. and Saudi Arabia have sought ways to curb Iran's growing influence in the region, Hariri has come under pressure to distance himself from the militant group which has sent thousands of troops to neighboring Syria to shore up President Bashar Assad's forces.
> 
> Speaking from Saudi Arabia, Hariri may have decided to simply remain with his Saudi friends for the foreseeable future, and was not immediately clear if the now former premier intended to return to Lebanon. In a statement, the presidential office said Aoun was informed by Hariri in a phone call of his resignation, adding that the president now awaits Hariri's return to clarify the circumstances of his resignation and proceed accordingly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...er-premier-resigns-fearing-assassination-plot



Going to Saudi Arabia and resigning just shows you were nothing more than a Saudi puppet & shows how little support you have at home that you had to run away! LOL!

It's clear Saudi's are pissed that their ISIS lackeys lost directly because of Iran both in Syria & Iraq despite the fact that the Saudi's outspent Iran by well over 10 to 1!

When this moron runs away to Saudi Arabia and say's Iran has no right medaling in Arab affairs basically implies that Saudi Arabia should be de facto owner of all Arab countries of the region & Saudi Arabia should be saying who should be running what Arab country rather than the actual people of that country!

Saudi's fund ISIS in Iraq to overthrow that government
Saudi's fund ISIS & Ansarullah in Syria to overthrow Assad
Saudi's are bombing Yemen because they believe Houthies which are 40% of Yemen's population should have no right in who governs any part of Yemen.
Saudi's tried to blockade Qatar
Saudi's have practically brought the Egyptians to their knees & they practically stole Egypt's attempt to create a democracy
Saudi's have been medaling in Kurdistan
Saudi's have been medaling in Lebanon & I guess it's Lebanon's turn again!

You have to be absolutely blind not to see who the real trouble maker of the region is and that's Saudi Arabia a monarchy that cuts off heads in the middle of squares as government policy & is just celebrating allowing women to DRIVE!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Next Up
*Is Saudi Arabia Pushing Israel Into War With Hezbollah and Iran?*
_




A truck carries a submarine as a member of Iranian Naval forces sitting on it, past President Hassan Rohani and military commanders during the Army Day parade in Tehran on April 18, 2015. Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu Agency
*Netanyahu: Iran Seeks to Send Its Submarines to Syria's Mediterranean Ports*
In first public mention of Israeli military concern, prime minister says Iran wants to send aerial forces, divisions and military vessels to the region

Amos Harel
18:50
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday in a BBC interview that Iran is seeking to use its close ties with Syria to dock its submarines in Syrian ports. Netanyahu made the same claim in his remarks at the London policy institute Chatham House on Friday.


It was the first public mention by a senior Israeli figure of this possibility, which has concerned the country’s military establishment for some time.

*The Crucial Statement Hidden in PM's Latest Rant*

*An Iranian, Russian and Israeli Walk Into Syria*
Israel has been warning about Iran entrenching itself in Syria for the past year. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman have warned several times that Israel could be forced into military action under such circumstances, particularly with regard to the deployment of pro-Iranian Shi’ite militias in southern Syria near the border with Israel in the Golan Heights.

Among other things, there has been talk of establishing an Iranian air force base in Syria and of Iranian plans to build weapons factories for Hezbollah in Syria and in Lebanon. In March, Netanyahu, after meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, said Iran sought was seeking to lease naval facilities along Syria’s Mediterranean coast, as Russia had done at the port of Tartus.


Speaking on “The Andrew Marr Show” on BBC One, Netanyahu said, “Iran openly calls for our destruction. Iran openly says it’s out to destroy what they call the ‘small Satan’ en route to the ‘Great Satan’ which is the United States. ... It is seeking to colonize Syria for that purpose – that is, to ‘Lebanonize’ Syria; what they did in Lebanon that Prime Minister [Saad] Hariri resigned over is basically took over the country. ... The same thing is being done in Syria.






“As ISIS [the Islamic State] collapses, as ISIS moves out, Iran moves in, but they want to bring their air force there, right next to Israel; they want to bring Shi’ite and Iranian divisions right next to Israel, they want to bring submarines and military vessels into the Mediterranean, right next to Israel. So we will not let that happen; we will resist it.”

When asked if Israel would go to war to stop this from happening, Netanyahu responded, “You know, the more we’re prepared to stop it, the less likely we’ll have to resort to much greater things. There is a principle I very much adhere to, which is to nip bad things in the bud.”


The Iranian navy operates several types of submarines, including midget or mini submarines it would deploy if attacked by navies in the Persian Gulf. By docking submarines in Syrian ports, the Iranians could gather intelligence or conduct sabotage operations against Israel.





*Trending Now*



*Larry David Slammed for Holocaust Jokes on SNL*



*Israel's Subs Scandal: Netanyahu Confidants Detained for Questioning*



*Hariri's Exit Threatens Iranian Hold Over Lebanon*



*Ballistic Missile Fired at Saudi Capital Riyadh*



*Lebanese PM Hariri Resigns Over Tensions With Hezbollah, Iran*



*Tensions Throw Israel Into a New State of Emergency*



*Christian Zionists See Signs of Messiah in Major Anniversary Year for Israel*



*Balfour Centennial Wasn't About Israel or Palestine*


Subscribe
Privacy Policy
Contact us
Advertise
  
© Haaretz Daily Newspaper Ltd.
All Rights Reserved
_


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

*ساخت «جنگنده سنگین» در دستور کار وزارت دفاع است*





* وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح از اجرایی کردن برنامه ساخت جنگنده سنگین در این وزارتخانه خبر داد. *
به گزارش گروه رسانه های خبرگزاری تسنیم، امیر سرتیپ «امیر حاتمی» وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در گفت‌وگو با دفاع پرس، در خصوص برنامه‌های این وزارتخانه جهت تقویت نیروی هوایی ارتش اظهار داشت: تقویت نیروی هوایی از برنامه‌های اصلی این وزارتخانه است.

وی با بیان اینکه بخش بزرگی از برنامه‌ای که تقدیم مجلس و دولت شده، در راستای تقویت توان هوایی کشور است، ادامه داد: ان‌شاالله در این دوره برای دستیابی به قدرت هوایی راهبردی اقدامات خوبی را انجام خواهیم داد.

وزیر دفاع تصریح کرد: محور اصلی این برنامه‌ها نیز طراحی و ساخت جنگنده‌های سنگین است که کارهایش در دست انجام است.

وی در پایان تاکید کرد: قدرت دفاعی جمهوری اسلامی به طور دائم افزایش خواهد یافت و به هیچ وجه قابل مذاکره نیست.

@VEVAK @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL​

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

جنگنده شفق که طراحیش 98 درصد تکمیل شده و مثل اینکه تا کمتر از یکسال دیگه خط تولیدش در اصفهان راه اندازی بشه . البته هنوز خبر تایید نشده است.


----------



## N_Al40

raptor22 said:


> *ساخت «جنگنده سنگین» در دستور کار وزارت دفاع است*
> 
> View attachment 435938
> 
> * وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح از اجرایی کردن برنامه ساخت جنگنده سنگین در این وزارتخانه خبر داد. *
> به گزارش گروه رسانه های خبرگزاری تسنیم، امیر سرتیپ «امیر حاتمی» وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در گفت‌وگو با دفاع پرس، در خصوص برنامه‌های این وزارتخانه جهت تقویت نیروی هوایی ارتش اظهار داشت: تقویت نیروی هوایی از برنامه‌های اصلی این وزارتخانه است.
> 
> وی با بیان اینکه بخش بزرگی از برنامه‌ای که تقدیم مجلس و دولت شده، در راستای تقویت توان هوایی کشور است، ادامه داد: ان‌شاالله در این دوره برای دستیابی به قدرت هوایی راهبردی اقدامات خوبی را انجام خواهیم داد.
> 
> وزیر دفاع تصریح کرد: محور اصلی این برنامه‌ها نیز طراحی و ساخت جنگنده‌های سنگین است که کارهایش در دست انجام است.
> 
> وی در پایان تاکید کرد: قدرت دفاعی جمهوری اسلامی به طور دائم افزایش خواهد یافت و به هیچ وجه قابل مذاکره نیست.
> 
> @VEVAK @AmirPatriot @SOHEIL​



Let’s hope! I feel like Amir Hatami is serious about this project, he understands the needs of the IRIAF. 

Maybe it’s Shafaq?


----------



## skyshadow

*

*


“جنگنده شفق” اسطوره‌ ایرانی که رویای F4 را به تاریخ سپرد
*“جنگنده شفق” اسطوره‌ ایرانی که رویای F4 را به تاریخ سپرد*
سياسي نظرات:يک نظر admin
هواپیمای جنگنده شفق نخستین هواپیمای رادار گریز ساخت جمهوری اسلامی ایران است که در سال ۱۳۸۶ به ناوگان نیروی هوایی کشور پیوست.

پروژه جنگنده شفق پس از فرمان مقام معظم رهبری مبنی بر جهاد خودکفایی توسط وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح جمهوری اسلامی ایران سرمایه‌گذاری و به همت دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر طراحی شد؛ ویژگی رادارگریزی در طراحی این هواپیما بسیار مورد توجه طراحان آن بوده زیرا بدنه شفق از مواد جاذب امواج راداری ساخته شده که توانایی ایجاد RCS کمتر از یک متر مربع را به جنگنده می‌دهد.



به گزارش ممتاز نیوز،جمهوری اسلامی ایران به ترتیب پس از کشورهای فرانسه، آمریکا و چین چهارمین کشوری است که جنگنده رادارگریز دارد و “شفق” باقدرت استتار راداری ۹۲% سومین جنگنده ضد رادار دنیا از لحاظ استتار محسوب می‌شود.

هواپیمای شفق در ابتدا برای آموزش خلبانان طراحی شد ولی پس از مدتی تصمیم‌ها بر این مبنا قرار گرفت که نوع جنگنده آن نیز تولید شود.

این جنگنده اکنون در سه نوع آموزشی دو نفره، جنگنده دو نفره و جنگنده یک نفره طراحی شده است.

پروژه شفق پس از فرمان مقام معظم رهبری مبنی بر جهاد خودکفایی توسط وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح جمهوری اسلامی کشورمان سرمایه‌گذاری و به همت مجتمع دانشگاهی هوایی(Aviation University Complex) که زیر مجموعه‌ای از دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر است، طراحی شد.

آزمایشات این پروژه با همکاری دو گروه کارشناس و طراح از ایران و روسیه (۲۰ کارشناس طراحی کارخانجات میکویان و سوخو) به صورت کاملا سری در یک پایگاه دور افتاده در نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران انجام گرفت.

اولین معرفی جنگنده شفق در سال ۲۰۰۲ و در نمایشگاه صنایع هوایی ایران اتفاق افتاد که در آن نمایشگاه یک نمونه از این هواپیما در ابعاد واقعی به نمایش گذاشته شده بود.

در سال ۲۰۰۴ نیز سیمای جمهوری اسلامی ایران فیلمی از یک نمونه در ابعاد واقعی از این هواپیما نشان داد. در این نمونه تغییراتی نسبت به یاک-۱۳۰ دیده می‌شد که احتمال رسیدن به سرعت مافوق صوت را برای این هواپیما مطرح می‌کرد.

بنا به برخی اظهارات طراحی نمونه بعدی شفق که شامل بسیاری از اصلاحات در قسمت بال‌ها، دهانه خروجی موتور و همچنین سیستم‌های راداری پیشرفته‌تر است در سال ۱۳۸۷ به ناوگان هوایی کشور تحویل داده شد.

ویژگی رادارگریزی در طراحی این هواپیما بسیار مورد توجه طراحان آن بوده، زیرا بدنه شفق از مواد جاذب امواج راداری(radar absorbing materials) ساخته شده که توانایی ایجاد RCS کمتر از یک متر مربع را به جنگنده می‌دهد.

این جنگنده رادار گریز با طول ۱۰٫۴۸ و پهنای بال ۱۰٫۴۵ و با ارتفاع ۴٫۲۶ متر از لحاظ تیپیک طرح بدنه کمی شبیه به جنگنده اف/ای-۲۲ رپتور است.

وزن خالی شفق ۴٫۳۶۱ و ماکزیمم وزن برخاست آن ۴٫۹۰۰ کیلوگرم بوده و سرعت ماکزیمم این جنگنده ۲٫۵ ماخ( ۲۳۰۰ کیلومتر بر ساعت) است که با توجه به سرعت پیمایش یک ماخی(۱۱۵۰ کیلومتر بر ساعت) و حد اوج‌گیری ۱۶۷۵۰ متری و قابلیت بالا در سرعت اوج گیری (۱۱۰ متر بر ثانیه) این جنگنده در نوع خود به جنگنده‌ای صاحب‌نام تبدیل شده تا حدی که در رده‌بندی کارشناسان ناتو از میان صدها جنگنده در جهان، رتبه پنجم را کسب کرده است.

در طراحی شفق مساحت ریشه بال‌ها بسیار بیشتر از نوک بال است(بال‌های قیفی شکل) که این امر باعث می‌شود تا جنگندهبتواند در داگ فایت(DOG FIGHT) سرعت زاویه حمله خود را بسوی هدف تغییر دهد، همچنین به‌ دلیل طراحی ویژه بدنه آن توانایی پیچش، غلتش و قابلیت مانور‌پذیری شفق تا حد زیادی افزایش یافته است.

شفق دارای هفت جایگاه برای حمل تسلیحات گوناگون بوده و نوع سازه بکار رفته در آن به طرز مناسبی اجازه حمل انواع بمب، موشک‌های هوابه‌هوا و هوا به‌ زمین و همچنین انواع بمب با هدایت لیزری را به این هواپیما می‌دهد.

جنگنده شفق دارای ۳ جایگاه حمل تسلیحات زیر هر بال و یک جایگاه در زیر بدنه است و کابین خلبان آن هم از نمایشگرهای LCDسه گانه و ایونیک دیجیتال و سامانه HOTAS و HUD بهره می‌بردکه این توانایی باعث استفاده کمتر از نمایشگرهای آنالوگ شده است. 

این نمایشگرها که به صورت سری و در کنار هم قرار دارند، قابلیت‌هایی چون کنترل صفحه رادار برای رهگیری پرنده‌های مشکوک، مدیریت تسلیحات موجود در جنگنده، کنترل سیستم‌های دفاع الکترونیک برای استفاده در نبردهای الکترونیکی و نیز سیستم هدایت و کنترل شلیک انواع موشک‌ها و بمب‌های هدایت راداری یا لیزری را به این جنگنده داده است.

از لحاظ آیرودینامیکی در جنگنده شفق از لبه‌های تیز خودداری شده و برای کارایی هر چه بهتر از تکنولوژی‌های مرسوم همچونLERX نیز استفاده شده است. برای مدل‌های اولیه شفق دو موتور توربوفن بر اساس J-85 در نظر گرفته شده بود ولی بعدها طرح یک موتوره شد که البته باز هم در ادامه تغییرات قرار شد شفق از دو موتور کلیوف Rd-33 یا J-79 که نهایتا موتور J-79 بدلیل مشکلات در هم‌سازی با بدنه از برنامه حذف شد.






در سامانه خروج اضطراری صندلی‌های پرتاب شونده نیز K36-D روسی به کار رفته و دریچه مهمات در جنگنده شفق به جای پایین آمدن، به بالا رفته و داخل جنگنده جای می‌گیرد که این ویژگی باعث عدم آشکار شدن آن به هنگام شلیک یا بمباران و استتار بیشتر شفق شده است.

چون سرعت شلیک موشک در این جنگنده ۰٫۰۰۰۱ ثانیه است فقط موشک هواپیما در رادار نشان داده می‌شود و درصد موفقیت مأموریت این جنگنده به دلیل این که دقت اکثر رادارهای دنیا روی موشک جت تنظیم نمی‌شود، بسیار بالا است.

نوع رادار این جنگنده AN\AWG – ۹ بوده و نیز قابلیت شلیک موشک اسپارو، ساید وایندر و نیز موشک‌های سری R روسی از جمله R-73 و R-77 و موشک‌های KH-29 و KH-31 به همراه موشک هدایت تلویزیونی ماوریک، توانایی ارزشمندی را به این جنگنده ایرانی در نبردهای چند منظوره داده است.

شفق دارای سیستم ضد موشکی ۲۲ تایی ستاره‌ای، ۱۹ تایی نامنظم، ۲۵ تایی خطی بوده و از قابلیت رهگیری ۲۴ هدف و انهدام همزمان ۶ هدف و مانور سقوط اضطراری و کاهش سریع سرعت برخوردار است.

این جنگنده برای مأموریت‌های ضربتی و ضد کشتی مجهز است و در تمامی مدل‌ها توانایی پرواز کوتاه و فرود در زمین‌های خشن را نیز دارد.

طراحی و ساخت جنگنده رادار‌گریز و پنهان‌کار شفق نشان می‌دهد که با وجود اعمال تحریم‌های شدید علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران از سوی غرب، متخصصین صنایع نظامی کشورمان به دستاوردی جدید در حوزه سیستم‌های پنهان‌کاری راداری دست یافته‌اند که در نتیجه آن قوای موشکی، دریایی و هوایی جمهوری اسلامی ایرانبه تدریج از این فناوری بهره خواهند برد.

گردآورنده: مرضیه ارجمندی

انتهای پیام/

باشگاه خبرنگاران


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> *
> 
> *
> 
> 
> “جنگنده شفق” اسطوره‌ ایرانی که رویای F4 را به تاریخ سپرد
> *“جنگنده شفق” اسطوره‌ ایرانی که رویای F4 را به تاریخ سپرد*
> سياسي نظرات:يک نظر admin
> هواپیمای جنگنده شفق نخستین هواپیمای رادار گریز ساخت جمهوری اسلامی ایران است که در سال ۱۳۸۶ به ناوگان نیروی هوایی کشور پیوست.
> 
> پروژه جنگنده شفق پس از فرمان مقام معظم رهبری مبنی بر جهاد خودکفایی توسط وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح جمهوری اسلامی ایران سرمایه‌گذاری و به همت دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر طراحی شد؛ ویژگی رادارگریزی در طراحی این هواپیما بسیار مورد توجه طراحان آن بوده زیرا بدنه شفق از مواد جاذب امواج راداری ساخته شده که توانایی ایجاد RCS کمتر از یک متر مربع را به جنگنده می‌دهد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> به گزارش ممتاز نیوز،جمهوری اسلامی ایران به ترتیب پس از کشورهای فرانسه، آمریکا و چین چهارمین کشوری است که جنگنده رادارگریز دارد و “شفق” باقدرت استتار راداری ۹۲% سومین جنگنده ضد رادار دنیا از لحاظ استتار محسوب می‌شود.
> 
> هواپیمای شفق در ابتدا برای آموزش خلبانان طراحی شد ولی پس از مدتی تصمیم‌ها بر این مبنا قرار گرفت که نوع جنگنده آن نیز تولید شود.
> 
> این جنگنده اکنون در سه نوع آموزشی دو نفره، جنگنده دو نفره و جنگنده یک نفره طراحی شده است.
> 
> پروژه شفق پس از فرمان مقام معظم رهبری مبنی بر جهاد خودکفایی توسط وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح جمهوری اسلامی کشورمان سرمایه‌گذاری و به همت مجتمع دانشگاهی هوایی(Aviation University Complex) که زیر مجموعه‌ای از دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر است، طراحی شد.
> 
> آزمایشات این پروژه با همکاری دو گروه کارشناس و طراح از ایران و روسیه (۲۰ کارشناس طراحی کارخانجات میکویان و سوخو) به صورت کاملا سری در یک پایگاه دور افتاده در نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران انجام گرفت.
> 
> اولین معرفی جنگنده شفق در سال ۲۰۰۲ و در نمایشگاه صنایع هوایی ایران اتفاق افتاد که در آن نمایشگاه یک نمونه از این هواپیما در ابعاد واقعی به نمایش گذاشته شده بود.
> 
> در سال ۲۰۰۴ نیز سیمای جمهوری اسلامی ایران فیلمی از یک نمونه در ابعاد واقعی از این هواپیما نشان داد. در این نمونه تغییراتی نسبت به یاک-۱۳۰ دیده می‌شد که احتمال رسیدن به سرعت مافوق صوت را برای این هواپیما مطرح می‌کرد.
> 
> بنا به برخی اظهارات طراحی نمونه بعدی شفق که شامل بسیاری از اصلاحات در قسمت بال‌ها، دهانه خروجی موتور و همچنین سیستم‌های راداری پیشرفته‌تر است در سال ۱۳۸۷ به ناوگان هوایی کشور تحویل داده شد.
> 
> ویژگی رادارگریزی در طراحی این هواپیما بسیار مورد توجه طراحان آن بوده، زیرا بدنه شفق از مواد جاذب امواج راداری(radar absorbing materials) ساخته شده که توانایی ایجاد RCS کمتر از یک متر مربع را به جنگنده می‌دهد.
> 
> این جنگنده رادار گریز با طول ۱۰٫۴۸ و پهنای بال ۱۰٫۴۵ و با ارتفاع ۴٫۲۶ متر از لحاظ تیپیک طرح بدنه کمی شبیه به جنگنده اف/ای-۲۲ رپتور است.
> 
> وزن خالی شفق ۴٫۳۶۱ و ماکزیمم وزن برخاست آن ۴٫۹۰۰ کیلوگرم بوده و سرعت ماکزیمم این جنگنده ۲٫۵ ماخ( ۲۳۰۰ کیلومتر بر ساعت) است که با توجه به سرعت پیمایش یک ماخی(۱۱۵۰ کیلومتر بر ساعت) و حد اوج‌گیری ۱۶۷۵۰ متری و قابلیت بالا در سرعت اوج گیری (۱۱۰ متر بر ثانیه) این جنگنده در نوع خود به جنگنده‌ای صاحب‌نام تبدیل شده تا حدی که در رده‌بندی کارشناسان ناتو از میان صدها جنگنده در جهان، رتبه پنجم را کسب کرده است.
> 
> در طراحی شفق مساحت ریشه بال‌ها بسیار بیشتر از نوک بال است(بال‌های قیفی شکل) که این امر باعث می‌شود تا جنگندهبتواند در داگ فایت(DOG FIGHT) سرعت زاویه حمله خود را بسوی هدف تغییر دهد، همچنین به‌ دلیل طراحی ویژه بدنه آن توانایی پیچش، غلتش و قابلیت مانور‌پذیری شفق تا حد زیادی افزایش یافته است.
> 
> شفق دارای هفت جایگاه برای حمل تسلیحات گوناگون بوده و نوع سازه بکار رفته در آن به طرز مناسبی اجازه حمل انواع بمب، موشک‌های هوابه‌هوا و هوا به‌ زمین و همچنین انواع بمب با هدایت لیزری را به این هواپیما می‌دهد.
> 
> جنگنده شفق دارای ۳ جایگاه حمل تسلیحات زیر هر بال و یک جایگاه در زیر بدنه است و کابین خلبان آن هم از نمایشگرهای LCDسه گانه و ایونیک دیجیتال و سامانه HOTAS و HUD بهره می‌بردکه این توانایی باعث استفاده کمتر از نمایشگرهای آنالوگ شده است.
> 
> این نمایشگرها که به صورت سری و در کنار هم قرار دارند، قابلیت‌هایی چون کنترل صفحه رادار برای رهگیری پرنده‌های مشکوک، مدیریت تسلیحات موجود در جنگنده، کنترل سیستم‌های دفاع الکترونیک برای استفاده در نبردهای الکترونیکی و نیز سیستم هدایت و کنترل شلیک انواع موشک‌ها و بمب‌های هدایت راداری یا لیزری را به این جنگنده داده است.
> 
> از لحاظ آیرودینامیکی در جنگنده شفق از لبه‌های تیز خودداری شده و برای کارایی هر چه بهتر از تکنولوژی‌های مرسوم همچونLERX نیز استفاده شده است. برای مدل‌های اولیه شفق دو موتور توربوفن بر اساس J-85 در نظر گرفته شده بود ولی بعدها طرح یک موتوره شد که البته باز هم در ادامه تغییرات قرار شد شفق از دو موتور کلیوف Rd-33 یا J-79 که نهایتا موتور J-79 بدلیل مشکلات در هم‌سازی با بدنه از برنامه حذف شد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> در سامانه خروج اضطراری صندلی‌های پرتاب شونده نیز K36-D روسی به کار رفته و دریچه مهمات در جنگنده شفق به جای پایین آمدن، به بالا رفته و داخل جنگنده جای می‌گیرد که این ویژگی باعث عدم آشکار شدن آن به هنگام شلیک یا بمباران و استتار بیشتر شفق شده است.
> 
> چون سرعت شلیک موشک در این جنگنده ۰٫۰۰۰۱ ثانیه است فقط موشک هواپیما در رادار نشان داده می‌شود و درصد موفقیت مأموریت این جنگنده به دلیل این که دقت اکثر رادارهای دنیا روی موشک جت تنظیم نمی‌شود، بسیار بالا است.
> 
> نوع رادار این جنگنده AN\AWG – ۹ بوده و نیز قابلیت شلیک موشک اسپارو، ساید وایندر و نیز موشک‌های سری R روسی از جمله R-73 و R-77 و موشک‌های KH-29 و KH-31 به همراه موشک هدایت تلویزیونی ماوریک، توانایی ارزشمندی را به این جنگنده ایرانی در نبردهای چند منظوره داده است.
> 
> شفق دارای سیستم ضد موشکی ۲۲ تایی ستاره‌ای، ۱۹ تایی نامنظم، ۲۵ تایی خطی بوده و از قابلیت رهگیری ۲۴ هدف و انهدام همزمان ۶ هدف و مانور سقوط اضطراری و کاهش سریع سرعت برخوردار است.
> 
> این جنگنده برای مأموریت‌های ضربتی و ضد کشتی مجهز است و در تمامی مدل‌ها توانایی پرواز کوتاه و فرود در زمین‌های خشن را نیز دارد.
> 
> طراحی و ساخت جنگنده رادار‌گریز و پنهان‌کار شفق نشان می‌دهد که با وجود اعمال تحریم‌های شدید علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران از سوی غرب، متخصصین صنایع نظامی کشورمان به دستاوردی جدید در حوزه سیستم‌های پنهان‌کاری راداری دست یافته‌اند که در نتیجه آن قوای موشکی، دریایی و هوایی جمهوری اسلامی ایرانبه تدریج از این فناوری بهره خواهند برد.
> 
> گردآورنده: مرضیه ارجمندی
> 
> انتهای پیام/
> 
> باشگاه خبرنگاران
> 
> View attachment 435954
> View attachment 435955
> View attachment 435956
> View attachment 435957
> View attachment 435958
> View attachment 435959


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


>


خبر امد خبری در راه است سر خوش آن دل کبدان اگاه است. اعلام کرده بودن در سال 2017 پرواز میکنه


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

IRIAF Fighter Pilot Emergency Ejection and Survival training.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Shafaq is under development ...

And it's different ... Probably twin engined !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> خبر امد خبری در راه است سر خوش آن دل کبدان اگاه است. اعلام کرده بودن در سال 2017 پرواز میکنه


The shafaq you posted is shelved for good . that was alight trainer not a heavy fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

SOHEIL said:


> Shafaq is under development ...
> 
> And it's different ... Probably twin engined !





Shafaq project is dead! If they wanted to invest into the Shafaq design they would have chosen the Shafaq instead of the Kowsar for a jet trainer the fact that they didn't means the Shafaq project is completely DEAD!

Shafaq was about 40ft long a heavy fighter needs to be at least ~60ft long!
F-4, Su-27, Su-Pak, F-15, F-14, J-20, F-22,.... are all over 60Ft long!


If it was me I would gather all the top minds in the field and I would have them design a twin seat low RCS airframe about the size of an F-14 (+60ft long) with an internal weapons bay using F-14 landing gears, refueling pod, radar & engines. Designed in a way that it could potentially be upgraded to carry laser counter measures in the future. 
And using the same engines I would have also had them design ~100ft long bomber as well


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Shafaq project is dead! If they wanted to invest into the Shafaq design they would have chosen the Shafaq instead of the Kowsar for a jet trainer the fact that they didn't means the Shafaq project is completely DEAD!
> 
> Shafaq was about 40ft long a heavy fighter needs to be at least ~60ft long!
> F-4, Su-27, Su-Pak, F-15, F-14, J-20, F-22,.... are all over 60Ft long!
> 
> 
> If it was me I would gather all the top minds in the field and I would have them design a twin seat low RCS airframe about the size of an F-14 (+60ft long) with an internal weapons bay using F-14 landing gears, refueling pod, radar & engines. Designed in a way that it could potentially be upgraded to carry laser counter measures in the future.
> And using the same engines I would have also had them design ~100ft long bomber as well



When the F-313 was announced, the DM or a military official said we went to the Supreme Leader of Iran and said what type of plane do you want us to build. There was a reference to offering to build a reverse engineered F-14. However, the SL said to build a new design.

So either Iran cannot build a reverse engineered F-14 or it has determined for whatever reason it is not worth it to do so.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> When the F-313 was announced, the DM or a military official said we went to the Supreme Leader of Iran and said what type of plane do you want us to build. There was a reference to offering to build a reverse engineered F-14. However, the SL said to build a new design.
> 
> So either Iran cannot build a reverse engineered F-14 or it has determined for whatever reason it is not worth it to do so.


F14 is good airplane but it's wing made it ridiculously hard to maintain .
If we want to build an airplane I rather it be a simpler design.


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> F14 is good airplane but it's wing made it ridiculously hard to maintain .
> If we want to build an airplane I rather it be a simpler design.


If it be a new design it could take a decade. what about now?


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> If it be a new design it could take a decade. what about now?


Don't knew but probably for a little more they want to play with qaher. 

But don't forget unless they show More robust engine you can't expect something bigger or more powerful than f5.

I guess for know they can built some drone with air to air capabilities

Probably some sort of suicide karrar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zathura

Iran cannot create a deterrent by only a strong air defense system. Making a world class fighter that will give Iran the advantage takes at least a couple of decades with the help of other countries. Considering that all our neighbours have very capable air-forces and no western power will give Iran a worthy fighter jet, we need to make every effort to acquire Su-30s , Su-35s and Su-57s. 
*=====================================*
*DUBAI: USA discussing F-35 sale to United Arab Emirates*

The US government is discussing the potential sale of Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters with the United Arab Emirates, the US Air Force’s vice chief of staff has confirmed.

After the Obama administration pushed back on a previous request from the UAE, the possibility of an F-35 sale appears to have gained renewed traction under President Donald Trump.

In an interview with reporters on the eve of the Dubai air show, Gen Stephen Wilson confirmed news reports on the preliminary discussions with the UAE.
“As you look here in the Middle East they share common threats and so we’re looking at options on who we share those [F-35s] within the Gulf,” Wilson says. “So the discussions are ongoing now with the new administration on selling F-35s to partner nations that need them and require them.”

In February, Abu Dhabi signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia to develop a fifth-generation fighter jet, potentially hindering any F-35 sale. However, Wilson declines to comment on the issue.

Operating a mixed inventory of American and Russian fighters is not unprecedented, although the fleets do not often include stealth aircraft. Malaysia flies both Boeing F/A-18s and Sukhoi Su-30s; Egypt operates F-16s and MiG-21s; and Pakistan uses F-16s and Chinese-built JF-17s.

Israeli objections could also quash any potential sale of the F-35 to the UAE. But even a sale to an adversary in the Gulf may not erode Tel Aviv's qualitative military edge, since deliveries would not begin in the near term.

The Israeli air force received its initial batch of Joint Strike Fighters earlier this year and deliveries of all 50 aircraft are expected to be complete in 2027.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...ussing-f-35-sale-to-united-arab-emira-443118/


----------



## veg

If Iranian air defence system is able to hit F-35 of US, then it means that era of fighter jets is over, just like era of Tanks is almost over due to modern anti-tank missiles. 

So, Iran should not put such huge money in buying stuff like Su-30 etc.

Instead of this, Iran should invest in Sofar-e-Mahi type small stealth drones, which are cheap and could be made in large numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

SOHEIL said:


> Shafaq is under development ...
> And it's different ... Probably twin engined !



just stop this kind of nonsense .... even if they make it , it will be just 0ne or 2 prototype ... just like so called Karrar Mbt ...



VEVAK said:


> *Shafaq project is dead! If they wanted to invest into the Shafaq design they would have chosen the Shafaq instead of the Kowsar for a jet trainer* the fact that they didn't means the Shafaq project is completely DEAD!



Kowsar is just another project to just fill some random guys resume and a useless propaganda tool .... nothing more ...

our administrators are corrupted and with this kind of people , we can't make even WW II fighters till 3017 ....


----------



## TheImmortal

veg said:


> If Iranian air defence system is able to hit F-35 of US, then it means that era of fighter jets is over, just like era of Tanks is almost over due to modern anti-tank missiles.





How quick you seem to forget.

It was Russia's Air Force that turned the tide of the Syrian civil war not Iran's militias, not Iran's ballistic missiles, not Iran's strategies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> How quick you seem to forget.
> 
> It was Russia's Air Force that turned the tide of the Syrian civil war not Iran's militias, not Iran's ballistic missiles, not Iran's strategies.


i see some where of your body on fire i say to you go buy a ss pain killer or call 911 for fire rescue maybe they can help you with put fire rescue water pipe in that hell burning hole baby


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> How quick you seem to forget.
> 
> It was Russia's Air Force that turned the tide of the Syrian civil war not Iran's militias, not Iran's ballistic missiles, not Iran's strategies.


That's what you love to believe, but your soldiers on the battlefield say something else:

*FSA rebels: We would have won if not for Iran | Syria News | Al Jazeera*


----------



## veg

TheImmortal said:


> How quick you seem to forget.
> 
> It was Russia's Air Force that turned the tide of the Syrian civil war not Iran's militias, not Iran's ballistic missiles, not Iran's strategies.



Please note 2 things.

(1) Russian Air Force did this job against a non-existent Air Defence System.

(2) But in case of Iran, it has to face US and it's allies, who all have much advanced Air Defence Systems as compared to Iran.
In this situation Iranian Fighter Jets have absolutely no chance.

So, the condition applies here is this: "If even the Iranian air defence systems are able to hit F-16s and F-15s and F-35s of the opponents, then the opponents also have absolutely no chance against Iran and their Air Force also becomes useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parsipride

veg said:


> Please note 2 things.
> 
> (1) Russian Air Force did this job against a non-existent Air Defence System.
> 
> (2) But in case of Iran, it has to face US and it's allies, who all have much advanced Air Defence Systems as compared to Iran.
> In this situation Iranian Fighter Jets have absolutely no chance.
> 
> So, the condition applies here is this: "If even the Iranian air defence systems are able to hit F-16s and F-15s and F-35s of the opponents, then the opponents also have absolutely no chance against Iran and their Air Force also becomes useless.



The monkeys across the Persian Gulf do not have F-35S. Even if our air defenses are 50% accurate, we will annihilate them. Then the missiles start raining down.

*Arab League To Hold Urgent Meeting On Iran As Saudis Reportedly Mobilize Fighter Jets*

*So the monkeys cannot beat Yemen after 2 years, now they want to start a war with Iran.

CAIRO (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has called for an urgent meeting of Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo next week to discuss Iran’s intervention in the region, an official league source told Egypt’s MENA state news agency on Sunday. 

The call came after the resignation of Lebanon’s prime minister pushed Beirut back into the center of a rivalry between Sunni kingdom Saudi Arabia and Shi‘ite Iran and heightened regional tensions.


*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> just stop this kind of nonsense .... even if they make it , it will be just 0ne or 2 prototype ... just like so called Karrar Mbt ...
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar is just another project to just fill some random guys resume and a useless propaganda tool .... nothing more ...
> 
> our administrators are corrupted and with this kind of people , we can't make even WW II fighters till 3017 ....



1.There is corruption in every country! In the U.S. they sell the Javelin ATGM to their military for $126,000 USD for each system & $70,000 USD per missile
And the fact is even if you were to build something far superior to the Javelin at half the selling price your still not going to get that contract from the U.S. military!
You think that's not corruption? 

Even with $1Million USD worth of yearly bribes aka "Campaign Contributions" + a Missile that have 10x the range
and is less than half the price of each Javelin you still won't be able to get that contract! 

Iran only spends $6Billion USD per year on weapons acquisition by comparison Iran Khodro 2011 revenue was $12 Billion USD! And that's just one car company in Iran so there just isn't much room for corruption in Iran's MOD because Iran isn't really spending a lot of money on weapons acquisition.

2.Iran's Air Force has already ordered 50 Kowsar Jet trainers and at the latest 1st batch should be delivered in the next 3 years so we'll see soon enough!

3.Karrar MBT is just an upgraded T-72 with a new Turret & added electronics, optics & sensors and Iran has produced the T-72 in the past under license. Plus, Iran can upgrade it's current T-72 to the Karrar every time they need to go in for a full overhaul
Again nothing special for Iran not to be able to produce and if Iran is not buying T-90's for $2 Million USD each it's because they can get more bang for their buck using that money to produce various other weapons systems with that cash

For example instead of buying 10 $2 Million USD T-90's ($20M)you can build:

1.50 $20,000 USD trucks & arm each of them with a $20,000 infantry support weapon like an ATGM or multiple rockets or a drone... ($2M)
2. 8 Shahed-129 UAV's ($4M)
3. 8-10 Precision guided Fatteh-110 ($4M) 
4. 4 $1Million USD armored mobile command & control stations ($4M)
5. 20 $100,000 USD armed UGV ($2M)
6. $2Million USD worth of mobile Air Defense equipment like the herz-9 ($2M)
7. 8 IFV/APC Howeyzeh and Talayeieh

Now which is more intimidating? all of that or 10 T-90's

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

veg said:


> Please note 2 things.
> 
> (1) Russian Air Force did this job against a non-existent Air Defence System.
> 
> (2) But in case of Iran, it has to face US and it's allies, who all have much advanced Air Defence Systems as compared to Iran.
> In this situation Iranian Fighter Jets have absolutely no chance.
> 
> So, the condition applies here is this: "If even the Iranian air defence systems are able to hit F-16s and F-15s and F-35s of the opponents, then the opponents also have absolutely no chance against Iran and their Air Force also becomes useless.



You think Iran is going to use it's Air Force for it's initial retaliation against any attack? LOL!

Yea that's why Iran's built over 40 "Large" Ballistic Missile bases not to mention the small bases or the cruise missile bases,.....

Iran's Ballistic Missile, Cruise Missile & UAV capabilities are nothing compared to what it was in 2002 & the U.S. got it's answer using it's own simulation of "KNOWN" Iranian weapons in it's Millennial challenge 2002!

At that time Iran's cruise missiles had a max range of 400km, Iran's Fatteh-110 had a CEP of ~500meters, Iran had just started producing 50 Shahab-3's per year at a max range of 1,300km (Which was the longest range BM Iran had) the most advanced Iranian UAV was 250km Mohajer UAV 


In a war with Iran Saudi Arabia would have to park it's Air Force at least 600km from Iranian Territory! Right now they need U.S. logistical support to bomb a country right off their own boarder & still they can't stop them from firing Missies at them!
Yes, the Saudi's would have absolute Air Superiority if Iran was going to use it's Air Force but based on Iran's weapons production and acquisition any Idiot can see that Iran has shown no interest in taking that route!
Even if Iran buy's 100 Su-30's in the next 10 years those fighters will mainly be for Air Defense operations over Iranian territory!

Iran's initial response will be with ~1000 missiles in the 1st day & Iran produces a large variety of missiles and they can probably maintain a 200 missile monthly attack using it's current production capacity & stockpile of 1000's of missiles in storage!

with 1000 missiles even if 80% fail to reach target or get intercepted and that's an extremely optimistic figure!!
a more realistic figure would be ~35% success rate for Iran at the start & that number slowly increases as Iran makes adjustments to it's missiles & Saudi Air Defense gets damaged or depleted)

so that's at the very least 200-350 hits out of 1000
That's:
20-35 missiles on major Saudi Oil infrastructure!
20-35 missiles on Saudi Power Plants
20-35 Missiles on Saudi Ports & naval bases
20-35 Missiles on Major Saudi Radars & Air Defense
20-35 missiles on major Saudi command and control & communication infrastructure
20-35 missiles on Saudi Royal family & it's assets
20-35 missiles on Saudi Depot & other critical financial infrastructure
20-35 missiles on Saudi Army Bases, Missile Facilities,...
40-70 missiles on Saudi Air Force Bases (within 800km of Iranian Airspace)

And that's just with 1000 Iranian missiles which is NOTHING compared to Iran's overall stockpile!

In the past 20 years Iran's produced Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313, Zolfaghar, Sejil-2, Shahab-2, Shahab-3, Qiam-1, Ghadr-H, Ghadr-F, Emad-1, Soumar, Ya-Ali missiles. All of which are capable of reaching various targets in Saudi Arabia & 100 of each is really nothing for Iran!

And that's not including Iranian Anti-ship Missile or Air Launched cruise missiles or new missiles like the Khorramshar & other missiles Iran has not made public or unguided rockets like the Zelzal....

To top that off Iranian UAV's & UCAV's will likely go after soft targets like Oil rigs, Factories,....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## veg

VEVAK said:


> You think Iran is going to use it's Air Force for it's initial retaliation against any attack? LOL!
> 
> Yea that's why Iran's built over 40 "Large" Ballistic Missile bases not to mention the small bases or the cruise missile bases,.....
> 
> Iran's Ballistic Missile, Cruise Missile & UAV capabilities are nothing compared to what it was in 2002 & the U.S. got it's answer using it's own simulation of "KNOWN" Iranian weapons in it's Millennial challenge 2002!
> 
> At that time Iran's cruise missiles had a max range of 400km, Iran's Fatteh-110 had a CEP of ~500meters, Iran had just started producing 50 Shahab-3's per year at a max range of 1,300km (Which was the longest range BM Iran had) the most advanced Iranian UAV was 250km Mohajer UAV
> 
> 
> In a war with Iran Saudi Arabia would have to park it's Air Force at least 600km from Iranian Territory! Right now they need U.S. logistical support to bomb a country right off their own boarder & still they can't stop them from firing Missies at them!
> Yes, the Saudi's would have absolute Air Superiority if Iran was going to use it's Air Force but based on Iran's weapons production and acquisition any Idiot can see that Iran has shown no interest in taking that route!
> Even if Iran buy's 100 Su-30's in the next 10 years those fighters will mainly be for Air Defense operations over Iranian territory!
> 
> Iran's initial response will be with ~1000 missiles in the 1st day & Iran produces a large variety of missiles and they can probably maintain a 200 missile monthly attack using it's current production capacity & stockpile of 1000's of missiles in storage!
> 
> with 1000 missiles even if 80% fail to reach target or get intercepted and that's an extremely optimistic figure!!
> a more realistic figure would be ~35% success rate for Iran at the start & that number slowly increases as Iran makes adjustments to it's missiles & Saudi Air Defense gets damaged or depleted)
> 
> so that's at the very least 200-350 hits out of 1000
> That's:
> 20-35 missiles on major Saudi Oil infrastructure!
> 20-35 missiles on Saudi Power Plants
> 20-35 Missiles on Saudi Ports & naval bases
> 20-35 Missiles on Major Saudi Radars & Air Defense
> 20-35 missiles on major Saudi command and control & communication infrastructure
> 20-35 missiles on Saudi Royal family & it's assets
> 20-35 missiles on Saudi Depot & other critical financial infrastructure
> 20-35 missiles on Saudi Army Bases, Missile Facilities,...
> 40-70 missiles on Saudi Air Force Bases (within 800km of Iranian Airspace)
> 
> And that's just with 1000 Iranian missiles which is NOTHING compared to Iran's overall stockpile!
> 
> In the past 20 years Iran's produced Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313, Zolfaghar, Sejil-2, Shahab-2, Shahab-3, Qiam-1, Ghadr-H, Ghadr-F, Emad-1, Soumar, Ya-Ali missiles. All of which are capable of reaching various targets in Saudi Arabia & 100 of each is really nothing for Iran!
> 
> And that's not including Iranian Anti-ship Missile or Air Launched cruise missiles or new missiles like the Khorramshar & other missiles Iran has not made public or unguided rockets like the Zelzal....
> 
> To top that off Iranian UAV's & UCAV's will likely go after soft targets like Oil rigs, Factories,....



I wish all this is true and Iran has indeed invested all the money for Fighter Jets into the missiles, and thus possessing thousands of missiles today instead of 300-400 fighter jets.

Question is, does Iran need fighter jets for "Defensive Purposes"? Or that job could also be done with air defence missiles and fighter drones like Sofar-e-Mahi.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari




----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

veg said:


> I wish all this is true and Iran has indeed invested all the money for Fighter Jets into the missiles, and thus possessing thousands of missiles today instead of 300-400 fighter jets.
> 
> Question is, does Iran need fighter jets for "Defensive Purposes"? Or that job could also be done with air defence missiles and fighter drones like Sofar-e-Mahi.



1.Currently UCAV may be able to fill the role of Close Air Support, strikes, hassle incoming fighters, target subsonic mid altitude aircraft, UAV's & Helo's but they are far from being able to go up against BVR equipped Supersonic Air superiority fighters in any meaningful way!

Pilots know "Speed is life"! If Iran limits it's self with subsonic UCAV for Air Defense then all the U.S. would need to do is equip B-2 & B-1 bombers with bunch of Air to Air missiles & they'll be able to shoot down Iranian Air Defense UCAV like fly's 

Iran is just too vast of a country and lack of any supersonic air superiority fighter or interceptor leaves a BIG whole in your countries ability to defend it's Air Space against countries capable of taking advantage of that like the U.S! 

2.If Iran makes the Sofreh Mahi Supersonic, arms it with BVR Missiles, advanced sensors,..... at some point the price tag would get so high that it wouldn't make sense not putting a pilot on the aircraft rather than ground control systems that also cost money, that can be jammed, hacked or taken out from long ranges!

Targeting UAV ground control systems on the ground from 1000km-2000km away is really not that difficult for any major power but targeting a high speed aircraft in the air from that range is practically impossible & that's what makes Air assets valuable because you can scramble your aircraft to prevent them from being easy targets!

And for a country like Iran even a SATCOM version wouldn't make a difference because you still have to transmit from the ground! SATCOM may make all the difference in the world for the U.S. against Iran because their ground control operators can operate from over 10,000km away but Iran doesn't have that luxury!


3. As for Iran's Missiles
I would say Iran currently on a yearly bases is produces at the very least
100 Fatteh-110 
100 Fatteh-313 
100 Zolfaghar Missiles 
100 Qiam-1 Missiles 
50 Ya-Ali cruise missiles 
50 Sejil-2 Missiles 
50 Emad Missiles 
50 Gadr-H 
50 Gadr-F 
50 Soumar Cruise Missiles 

I doubt it would cost Iran even $1Billion USD to produce that many missiles!

And this is during peace time with facilities producing far from max capacity so even at a min production rate of 700 missiles on a yearly bases that would be 2,800 missiles massed just in the past 4 years alone! Lets say in the 6 years before that Iran was producing only 500 missiles per year that's another 3000 for a total of ~5,800 +300km missiles massed since 2007! And that's an extremely low figure!

And I would say it's safe to assume that of the $6Billion USD Iran is spending on weapons acquisition at the very least $1Billion USD is strictly spent on land attack missiles with ranges beyond 300km!

You have to realize that since 2002 U.S. has threatened Iran, called Iran the Axis of Evil, carries out simulated attacks against Iran, has built over 30 bases surrounding Iran, targeted Iran's economy,.... So I would say spending $1Billion USD a year over the past 15 years would be the absolute minimum for Iran's Ballistic Missile program and even at a cost of $2 Million USD per that would be 7,500 Missiles massed in the past 15 years! and $2m would likely be the MOST expensive missile Iran is producing today!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> 2.If Iran makes the Sofreh Mahi Supersonic, arms it with BVR Missiles, advanced sensors,..... at some point the price tag would get so high that it wouldn't make sense not putting a pilot on the aircraft rather than ground control systems that also cost money, that can be jammed, hacked or taken out from long ranges!



Is there any proof that project is even active?

The sofreh mahi project was a very early stage project before Iran captured an RQ-170. The last I heard of it I think they designed a sub scale prototype or maybe mock up for testing.

Now that Iran has an actual viable flying wing design that it could enlarge if it so desired.....why would Iran go with the Sofreh Mahi project?

Iran loves copying Western arms and to some extent eastern arms. It would rather use Western designs especially in the UAV field as the basis of its UAVs than struggle with a brand new design.

That's one of the reasons the airforce is just a depleted mess. They can't even get their own designed light weight fighter project (F-313) past taxi testing after 5 years!


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Is there any proof that project is even active?
> 
> The sofreh mahi project was a very early stage project before Iran captured an RQ-170. The last I heard of it I think they designed a sub scale prototype or maybe mock up for testing.
> 
> Now that Iran has an actual viable flying wing design that it could enlarge if it so desired.....why would Iran go with the Sofreh Mahi project?
> 
> Iran loves copying Western arms and to some extent eastern arms. It would rather use Western designs especially in the UAV field as the basis of its UAVs than struggle with a brand new design.
> 
> That's one of the reasons the airforce is just a depleted mess. They can't even get their own designed light weight fighter project (F-313) past taxi testing after 5 years!


Do you really think f-313 progress is slow ?
Specially for a country that never designed an airplane before and considering F-313 unorthodox design .why not compare it with su-47 or x-29.
Its problem with unorthodox designs specially if all the aspects of a viable program is not already ready and is in development.
And don't forget before it air force was not top priority for Iran .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Is there any proof that project is even active?
> 
> The sofreh mahi project was a very early stage project before Iran captured an RQ-170. The last I heard of it I think they designed a sub scale prototype or maybe mock up for testing.
> 
> Now that Iran has an actual viable flying wing design that it could enlarge if it so desired.....why would Iran go with the Sofreh Mahi project?
> 
> Iran loves copying Western arms and to some extent eastern arms. It would rather use Western designs especially in the UAV field as the basis of its UAVs than struggle with a brand new design.
> 
> That's one of the reasons the airforce is just a depleted mess. They can't even get their own designed light weight fighter project (F-313) past taxi testing after 5 years!



NO! It was just an example! Vag said the Sofreh Mahi could be made to fill the role of Air superiority fighters & interceptors... and I was just explaining to make such a UAV capable enough that it could fully take on that role so Iran wouldn't need manned Air Superiority fighters the price tag of such a UAV will be so high that it wouldn't make sense NOT putting a pilot on it because the aircraft will not only have to be Supersonic but it will require enough thrust and power to carry a massive Radar, various other sensors and communication systems & massive BVR missiles! 

Subsonic manned or unmanned aircraft may be able to hassle an incoming fleet of supersonic fighters but by no means will they have the capability to go up against them in any meaning full way that they could fully replace Iran's requirements for Air superiority fighters or interceptors 

Sofreh Mahi is clearly designed to have a high maneuvering capability which means Sofreh Mahi design if produced could potentially be equipped with IR missiles & it would be a good replacement for the Karrar-4 BUT the RQ-170 design will NEVER be able to fill that role due to a lack of maneuverability! 

As for Designing your own platform whether it be SAM missiles, fighter jets or helicopters will cost far more than reverse engineering proven known designs and that's is the MAIN reason Iran sticks to reverse engineering! So limited funding is the main reason Iran sticks with reverse engineering NOT anything else!!

I personally believe the F-313 project should have been cancelled years ago! I think Iran's Air Force should have taken issue with that design from the start & the aircraft should have never been made public! They are wasting time on a high drag platform with limited thrust, payload, limited speed, limited sensor, limited situational awareness, limited maneuverability and extremely low survivability! So the fact that Iran hasn't gone all in with that project is really not surprising! 
The F-313 may have a lot of supporters in Iran amongst people that don't have a clue because to them it "looks cool" but I doubt it has much support amongst experienced pilots in Iran! 

Iran's new Defense Minister just recently announced plans to produce a new heavy fighter now if that fighter is a co-production of the Su-30 or an Iranian design I couldn't tell you but at least they have finally realized that Building a manned fighter Airframe without Titanium & Ti/aluminum composites is NOT realistic! 

Also, technology in directed energy weapons & directed energy countermeasures are advancing everyday and as that technology advances manned fighters that don't have the thrust, power & payload capacity to carry & power such systems will be obsolete and that means the F-313 was built without a seconds thought to what a future battle field would look like and that makes it a platform that is most definitely not worth investing in at least not in any significant way!
And if anyone thinks directed energy weapons are this futuristic thing that's decades away from reality then they are living in a bubble!


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Do you really think f-313 progress is slow ?
> Specially for a country that never designed an airplane before and considering F-313 unorthodox design .why not compare it with su-47 or x-29.
> Its problem with unorthodox designs specially if all the aspects of a viable program is not already ready and is in development.
> And don't forget before it air force was not top priority for Iran .



The F-313 program is an absurd program that that the Air Force should have stood up against! 
It would be both cheaper in the long run & far more effective military to build a single $100 Million USD fighter (The most advanced fighter within Iran's capability to build) as appose to building 10 $10Million USD F-313 fighters!

for every 10 F-313 fighters you need 40 Jet engines as appose to 4 engines for a single twin engine heavy $100 Million USD fighter 

You'll need 10 Aircraft shelters / bunkers as appose to a single heavily fortified bunker

You'll need to fuel 10 aircrafts as appose to 1 which means 10X more fuel equipment on the ground & even on a heavier fighter the overall fuel cost will be at least 3-5 times more

You'll need to train at least 5x as many pilots (single seat vs twin seat) & you'll need 10X as many sorties for training 

You'll need 10 times as many maintenance equipment, parts & 10x as many maintenance personal on the ground 

And at the end of the day 10 F-313's will NOT be able to go up against a single $100 Million USD 5th generation fighter! 

Asymmetric warfare on the ground works for Iran because for the price of 10 T-90's ($20M) Iran can build a large verity of weapons & equipment that could easily take on 10 Abrams tanks and it may be the same at sea with the Navy but it's not the same with the Air Force at least the F-313 is not an Aircraft that could fill that role due to the high operating costs of fighter jets!


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 437590



The red one looks like Mr Taster.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> The red one looks like Mr Taster.



But this guy has much more hair on his head

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

I’m happy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> View attachment 438605
> 
> 
> I’m happy



Unfortunately, while Artesh leaders may want to boost the IRIAF, the political and military establishment does not favour this. The establishment is firmly supportive of the IRGC's doctrine of war. Hatami being appointed in the first place is a boost but for now there is not enough indication that the revitalisation of the IRIAF is in motion.


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> Unfortunately, while Artesh leaders may want to boost the IRIAF, the political and military establishment does not favour this. The establishment is firmly supportive of the IRGC's doctrine of war. Hatami being appointed in the first place is a boost but for now there is not enough indication that the revitalisation of the IRIAF is in motion.



Maybe after the IRGC’s first-hand experience in the Syrian Civil War, and witnessing the importance of air power/dominance, the establishment will reconsider?

Why are they so against the IRIAF’s revival anyway? Is it the whole thing about Khomenei saying: “The Artesh has the Shah in its blood”


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Unfortunately, while Artesh leaders may want to boost the IRIAF, the political and military establishment does not favour this. The establishment is firmly supportive of the IRGC's doctrine of war. Hatami being appointed in the first place is a boost but for now there is not enough indication that the revitalisation of the IRIAF is in motion.



If this was correct....then IRGC would not start an airforce wing. The Syrian civil war taught the IRGC....actually FORCED the IRGC to realize the importance of close air support. IRGC wants a close air support fighter for its own forces.

Second Iran's army airforce is in the hands of morons or losers or actually both. Incompetence is ripe. Iran is not going to throw money at the airforce so it can build more reverse engineered f-5's with an added tail or whatever baloney they think makes them look good.



N_Al40 said:


> Why are they so against the IRIAF’s revival anyway? Is it the whole thing about Khomenei saying: “The Artesh has the Shah in its blood”



Its actually pretty simple, to build a modern day fighter with the necessary supply chain and amount of industries involved is a tremendous undertaking both financially and logistically.

Could Iran coordinate to build a 5th gen or 4++ fighter? They proved with the nuclear program they can if the benefits out the costs. But the nuclear program was started decades ago....where as a true modern fighter development project is yet to be seen.

The next option is buying from aboard and hoping for ToT to help advance Iran's domestic technology. With an arms embargo on and a big uncertainty wether it will actually come off or expire under the Nuclear deal....Iran is not left with a lot of options.

The main countries that build their own fighter jets today are Russia, China, and US. Now other countries have/had their own programs and have demonstrated the capability to build their own fighters (France and Britain to name a couple). But as fighter jets become more and more technologically advanced the main players in the field are few.

So again the part of the Military that Iran wants to develop (Air Force) is more difficult to modernize than modernizing a Navy or Air defense or missile force. On top of that, Iran doesn't have a lot of options to choose from.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> If this was correct....then IRGC would not start an airforce wing. The Syrian civil war taught the IRGC....actually FORCED the IRGC to realize the importance of close air support. IRGC wants a close air support fighter for its own forces.



Having a COIN aircraft is one thing, a powerful air force that can face off against regional powers, quite another.



TheImmortal said:


> Iran is not going to throw money at the airforce so it can build more reverse engineered f-5's with an added tail or whatever baloney they think makes them look good.



I thought the IRIAF was against that project.


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Having a COIN aircraft is one thing, a powerful air force that can face off against regional powers, quite another.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the IRIAF was against that project.



Well the IRGC doesn't want a full force airforce for itself as that goes against its overall stratergy. A COIN aircraft fits within its military framework.

Back to the IRIAF...

The IRIAF doesn't know what it wants, it's leadership is incompetent. If you look at its accomplishments over the last 20 years what do you see? Disappointment.

They make bold statements such as we inspected Chinese military fighters and they don't meet our standards. Like are you serious? Well what can you build? Nothing! You have 1960's aircraft flying!

Then they say they want Russian fighters. Then they say we got our own projects.

The airforce leadership is a joke. All they do is roll out 30 year aircraft that have been overhauled and expect everyone to praise them.

If it wasn't for the F-14, Iran would be competing with North Korea for most antique and useless airforce.


----------



## VEVAK

N_Al40 said:


> Maybe after the IRGC’s first-hand experiences in the Syrian Civil War, and witnessing the importance of air power/dominance, the establishment will reconsider?
> 
> Why are they so against the IRIAF’s revival anyway? Is it the whole thing about Khomenei saying: “The Artesh h as the Shah in its blood”





AmirPatriot said:


> Unfortunately, while Artesh leaders may want to boost the IRIAF, the political and military establishment does not favour this. The establishment is firmly supportive of the IRGC's doctrine of war. Hatami being appointed in the first place is a boost but for now there is not enough indication that the revitalisation of the IRIAF is in motion.




Iran is under weapons embargo's and the U.S. has been prohibiting Iran from even buying passenger aircraft let alone fighter jets! So it's not about Iran's leadership!

As for Iran producing it's own fighter, until Iran can get it's own Titanium industry going by producing various Ti composites any dream of producing a capable supersonic fighter at home is only that a dream!

One of the main reason Iran picked the F-5 to reverse engineer is due to the Aircrafts LOW titanium requirement and one of the reason the Aircraft cost Iran so much to build was because they didn't have a Ti industry at home!
And sanctions prohibit the sale of high grade or military grade titanium alloy to Iran.






As for buying Fighter Jets I don't think Iran would have any problem affording to pay $1.5Billion per year to rebuild it's Air Force and I truly don't see the military or the civilian leadership having a problem with that if they could! But until those sanctions are lifted Iran needs to spend it's money in a way that would make them regret ever putting sanctions on Iran in the 1st place!

Iran's Air Force has known for decades that they need a domestic Ti industry to be able to produce a viable fighter at home and they should have lobbied the government to allow them to use ~$200 Million USD a year of their own funding towards getting the countries Titanium industry going a decade ago BUT people in the Air Force think that shouldn't be their responsibility and so we are where we are today because no one wanted to take on that responsibility! And that's something that would have NEVER happened if the Air Force had someone like Tehrani Moghadam leading it or leading it's R&D program!

So I would say the Air Force is more to blame when it comes to a domestic fighter then the civilian or military leadership


----------



## N_Al40

Not only does it specify an export version for Iran, but also mentions how many units Iran has or will probably order.

Maybe this is part of the $10 billion military package between Iran and Russia that was on the news a year ago.


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> View attachment 439059
> 
> 
> Not only does it specify an export version for Iran, but also mentions how many units Iran has or will probably order.
> 
> Maybe this is part of the $10 billion military package between Iran and Russia that was on the news a year ago.



That poster is made by Russian military enthusiasts.


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> That poster is made by Russian military enthusiasts.



Oh...well that’s disheartening.

Looks quite official though; when I saw the Sukhoi logo I was like this has got to be legit!


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> That poster is made by Russian military enthusiasts.



Do you think Iran will acquire them anyway at some point?


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> Do you think Iran will acquire them anyway at some point?



It seems very unlikely to me. Iran has a bad history with purchasing Russian weaponry - more often than not, the deal goes sour because the Russians give in to American pressure. Even now that Iran is pursuing Russian aircraft, it is the cheaper and less sensitive Su-30. And we don't know how serious Iran is going to be... would it be a full modernisation, replacing most aircraft in the IRIAF? Or a small purchase, maybe just a squadron or two. We don't know how keen either side is.


----------



## N_Al40

Close up pictures of Azarkesh and Saeqeh fighters:


----------



## N_Al40

I think they should produce 3 Saeqeh 2 squadrons, just so they can at least retain some potent and semi-modern air-air and CAS capability. While also working on Qaher-313, Kowsar, and the Shafaq. 

Also, @SOHEIL mentioned something about a Saeqeh-90 with a turbofan engine a few months ago. Any news on that?


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> Close up pictures of Azarkesh and Saeqeh fighters:
> 
> View attachment 439100
> View attachment 439101
> View attachment 439102


Interesting. I have not seen these before.

I hope these projects have given Iran some experience that could help it build modern fighters in the future.


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> Interesting. I have not seen these before.
> 
> I hope these projects have given Iran some experience that could help it build modern fighters in the future.



I truly hope so Amir, I really do.


----------



## Parsipride

AmirPatriot said:


> Interesting. I have not seen these before.
> 
> I hope these projects have given Iran some experience that could help it build modern fighters in the future.



Amir,

What is the significance in these photos? New canopy, radar, engine?


----------



## OldTwilight

Parsipride said:


> Amir,
> 
> What is the significance in these photos? New canopy, radar, engine?



the Hud is different ...


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> I think they should produce 3 Saeqeh 2 squadrons, just so they can at least retain some potent and semi-modern air-air and CAS capability



The Saeqeh isn't modern in armament. It carries no precision guided weapons.

In my opinion, Iran shouldn't waste money on making them in any numbers. It might be useful as a testbed though.



Parsipride said:


> What is the significance in these photos? New canopy, radar, engine?



It seems to have a different HUD, as well as different avionics (which can be anything from navigation equipment, RWR, radar as well). The strange streak on the engine is present in standard F-5s. However I will say the HUD does look very similar, if not identical, to HUDs used on standard F-5s. There seems to be two types. Maybe @eagle2007 could help in this regard.


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> The Saeqeh isn't modern in armament. It carries no precision guided weapons.
> 
> In my opinion, Iran shouldn't waste money on making them in any numbers. It might be useful as a testbed though.
> 
> 
> 
> It seems to have a different HUD, as well as different avionics (which can be anything from navigation equipment, RWR, radar as well). The strange streak on the engine is present in standard F-5s. However I will say the HUD does look very similar, if not identical, to HUDs used on standard F-5s. There seems to be two types. Maybe @eagle2007 could help in this regard.


Not a new HUD at least base on this photo we have same old reflex sight in Saeghe while they used a HUD in Azaraksh .. why ? I don't know..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Qaher-313 Flare dispenser: 






IRIAF Anti-Radiation Missile (I think):






TACAN and ILS installation on IRIAF Mig-29:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

Heat output on the underside of the engine on the Qaher-313 to reduce heat signature:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## eagle2007

N_Al40,

1) Possibly. Then again, given the relatively small size of the Qaher, those holes seem a bit small for a Chaff/Flare dispenser. Oddly enough, the models Iran manufactures (via IEI's website), vary from 26/40/60 mm in size, so it's hard to be sure.

2) Yes and no. The missile in the background on the LEFT is a Russian Kh-58 anti-radiation missile. The two missiles in the foreground on the other hand are Kh-29s. The one on the left is the TV-guided model (Kh-29T) & the one on the right is the laser-guided model (Kh-29L). The markings are definitely meant to suggest they are Iranian built (one actually says "TV SEEKER", not something you'd see on a Russian-manufactured missile).

3) Well, the poster image you posted clearly states that it's a VHF Omnidirectional range and distance measuring equipment (aka the "VOR/DME" on the poster). From my quick research however, an ILS (Instrument Landing System) can using the existing VOR antenna and thus save you from having to mount another one. Whether one of those antennas is for a TACAN is very difficult to tell from appearance alone. Whether they be for VOR, ILS, TACAN, etc, such antennas on fighters (thanks to them needing to be small to not hurt the aerodynamics) are going to be very similar in appearance. In the case of the MiG-29 pictured, both blades appear identical but are differently located, I don't see how we can tell which is what.

4) Definitely would have to disagree there. I don't see how the exhaust could be piped that far forward of the exhaust given the rather ordinary appearance of the Qaher's exhaust. Also, if you are looking to disperse unwanted exhaust heat, you do so on TOP of the airframe (see the YF-23 exhaust design for example), not along the bottom, the side of the airframe most exposed to air defense systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

Beautiful

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

IRIAF F-4E Phantom being Overhauled:






IRIAF F-4E Phantom with upgraded navigation system, armament system, radar and radio (after overhaul):

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## N_Al40

Never understood why Iran didn’t reverse engineer the Dassault Mirage F-1. It’s a successful fighter platform with a very good record and a low accident rate:


----------



## arashkamangir

N_Al40 said:


> Never understood why Iran didn’t reverse engineer the Dassault Mirage F-1. It’s a successful fighter platform with a very good record and a low accident rate:
> 
> View attachment 440380



single engine => survivability issues

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

arashkamangir said:


> single engine => survivability issues



Could you elaborate?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

N_Al40 said:


> Could you elaborate?



If an engine fails in a single engine fighter, the plane won't survive flight back to base.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 440655
> View attachment 440656
> View attachment 440657



Isn’t this Iran’s old AWACS that crashed during a military parade?


----------



## skyshadow

N_Al40 said:


> Isn’t this Iran’s old AWACS that crashed during a military parade?
> 
> i think so. It's called Simorgh. But they say the aircraft is completely restored and all internal parts are replaced with Iranian made parts and now its fully operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Do you have a link to this by any chance?


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

If you haven't seen the actual crash footage, I suggest you do so. This wasn't some bad landing or mild crash. It was, to be put it plainly (with respect to the airmen who lost their lives that day), a nasty crash, in which the body and wings (tail and antenna already gone) cartwheeled straight into the ground in a large fireball. I highly doubt there was much intact wreckage to even salvage and thus little to "restore".

None of those images are new and the top & bottom right images are clearly Russian A-50s, not the ex-Iraqi Adnan/Simorgh (the antenna design and mounting gives it away). The two images on the left are actually the same, just one stretched and zoomed in. 

I don't mean to dash any hopes but there's no chance the Simorgh will ever be restored/rebuilt. Only that another IL-76 could be modified to replicate its design.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

N_Al40 said:


> Do you have a link to this by any chance?



Not yet. But I keep track of her.

http://www.yjc.ir/fa/news/5647627/رصد-آسمان-منطقه-با-آواکس‌-ایرانی-فیلم-و-تصاویر

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eagle2007

Skyshadow,

I'm sorry but from what I gather in the translated article, it's mostly rubbish. 

First, it tries to claim that the Simorgh "first flew" on 29 April 2008, even though it was photographed airborne before then and had been a fixture at Mehrabad airport for many many years before hand. Google Earth imagery confirms this as well. 

Second, denies all fact that it was built/converted by Iraqi engineers and that it was a French-designed radar that occupied it's rotating radome and that it began life as the Adnan-1 before fleeing to Iran in 1991. Whether the aircraft worked as the Iraqis had hoped remains to be seen but they are the ones who actually did the difficult work of making it a reality, they should get their due credit. 

Third, it seems to claim the Simorgh is the same as the Russian A-50, which it isn't, since Russian A-50s were purpose built for the job, not converted transports and have many differences in airframe modifications. Let alone the two designs were based on VERY different internal systems. The A-50 is a true AEW&C aircraft, whereas the Adnan-1/Simorgh was likely just a limited (only had a 2D radar system) early warning platform with no command capability. 

Fourth and most damning of all, it seems to make absolutely no mention of the fatal crash of the aircraft in 2009. You would think in an article discussing the supposed achievement of the Simorgh would warrant the mention of the 7 member flight crew who gave their lives flying it a little over a year after it "first flew"...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

---





Babak Taghvaee

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

raptor22 said:


> Babak Taghvaee


Really???

You mean a miracle happened or his head has touched the wall???


----------



## WordsMatter

For those interested to know what it takes to build/assemble an aero engine (civilian aircraft), here's a very nice video.


----------



## Muhammed45

Iranian made trainer/fighter Jets, so far


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammed45

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 447541
> View attachment 447542


Did we had women piloting Mig-29s???


----------



## skyshadow

mohammad45 said:


> Did we had women piloting Mig-29s???



I do not know. but there are no laws to prevent women from being pilots in Iran. And even female pilots have recently completed military training with light aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

skyshadow said:


> I do not know. but there are no laws to prevent women from being pilots in Iran. And even female pilots have recently completed military training with light aircraft.


She is too cute to be in military (specially with painted nails ) just saying man

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> I do not know. but there are no laws to prevent women from being pilots in Iran. And even female pilots have recently completed military training with light aircraft.


Just go and find her connection.
She even don't have a flight suit .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Human One

skyshadow said:


> I do not know. but there are no laws to prevent women from being pilots in Iran. And even female pilots have recently completed military training with light aircraft.



Good. If not a pilot, could she be an engineer or ground crew?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 447541
> View attachment 447542


The Photo of the 2 Tomcats is photo shopped!


----------



## skyshadow

Human One said:


> Good. If not a pilot, could she be an engineer or ground crew?



Yes, female engineers even work in nuclear power plants. Military bases also use female engineers.



Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The Photo of the 2 Tomcats is photo shopped!



I did not notice them thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

mohammad45 said:


> Did we had women piloting Mig-29s???





Not Iranian but she is Laura Luse a member of a Lettonian Baltic Bees Jet Team member took photo during Kish Air Show ..







        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Avicenna

Very nice video for my Iranian friends. Someone please send this to Fox News!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Human One

skyshadow said:


> Yes, female engineers even work in nuclear power plants. Military bases also use female engineers.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not notice them thank you.



Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

به احتمال خیلی زیاد قاهر 3 نمونه عملیاتی خواهد داشت.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Allah huma Salah Alla Muhammad va ala alleha Muhammad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40




----------



## VEVAK




----------



## Human One

Avicenna said:


> Very nice video for my Iranian friends. Someone please send this to Fox News!


 
That's a great video. It's rare.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> *Iran tests stealth fighter jet: military official*
> Source: Xinhua| 2018-01-28 04:00:28|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Jan. 27 (Xinhua) -- Iran is in the process of testing a state-of-art stealth fighter jet named Qaher (Conqueror), former Iranian Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan said on Saturday.
> 
> Dehqan pointed to the development process of Qaher by domestic experts, saying that the fighter jet has been designed to conduct close air support missions, according to Tasnim news agency.
> 
> Qaher is undergoing pre-flight tests, and among them is fast taxiing test, he told Tasnim.
> 
> Taxiing is the movement of aircraft on the ground, under its own power, in contrast to towing or push-back where the aircraft is moved by a tug.
> 
> Dehqan also mentioned the development of another homegrown jet, dubbed Kowsar-88, saying that it is also performing fast taxi runs, preparing to take off.
> 
> Iranian military experts and technicians have in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of indigenous equipment.
> 
> Copyright © 2000-2018 XINHUANET.com All rights reserved.


No no no please don't let this news spread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> No no no please don't let this news spread



Loool. Why?


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> Loool. Why?



Don't want more of the Qaher saga coming up in the news.


----------



## Fafnir

Heres the latest from our good friend the committed royalist and noted military aviation journalist Babak Taghvaee.This "article" appeared online at a site called Arabian Aerospace,which is a website for a gulfie aerospace magazine that I must confess I had never heard of before,interestingly for a publication that uses arabian in the title all of the main staff whose profile were on line appeared to be exclusively western,so I suspect that about the only thing arabian in this whole enterprise would be the "arabian" in title itself,I think that in good old traditional gulfie fashion this is some rich gulfies pet project where he put up the money,oh and the title too no doubt,but that everything else is western/imported.
The article is pretty much what I`ve come to expect from Mr Taghvaee these days at last as far as the iri and its military is concerned.
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/a-tale-of-fact-and-fiction.html

*A tale of fact and fiction*

Posted 13 September 2017 

Iran paraded many new defence products and capabilities during a major show in April but what was actual achievement and what was merely propaganda? Babak Taghvaee sorts out the fact from the fiction.President Hasan Rouhani’s government, The Iranian Ministry of Defense, The Iranian Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), and the Iranian Defense Industries Organization (IDIO) pulled out all the stops as they unveiled their latest defence equipment for public consumption on April 15.The trouble was that, along with some genuine major achievements, there were a number of items that were there merely for propaganda purposes. And it is some of these that stole the headlines.Take the Qaher F-313 fifth generation combat aircraft for example. Reported to be a sub-sonic close air support aircraft with limited air-to-air combat capability, it drew the attention of the media more than all the other unveiled products.The original mock-up of the aircraft was first unveiled during a propaganda ceremony in February 2013 in front of former president Mahmood Ahmadi-Nejad.Unfortunately, the aircraft was suffering from a number of obvious design flaws, which caused derision in the international press. The project was suspended and then quickly stopped after the Iranian presidential election in May 2013. The former IACI CEO, Hossein Parvaneh, who supervised the project, was dismissed amid allegations of corruption.In 2016, after Russia turned down Iran’s request to procure at least 48 Su-30SMs and 24 Yak-130s, the Iranian MoD was put under pressure to speed up the development of the Kowsar-88 future advanced jet trainer and also reactivated the unfortunate Qaher F-313 project.Subsequently, in September 2016, work started on design and construction of a new Qaher F-313 mock-up. It was completed in March and unveiled (again) as Qaher 313 on April 15. It was equipped with a larger two-piece canopy, dual wheel nose landing gear, and a pair of General Electric J85-GE-13 Turbojet engines, which provided power for it to taxi – but that’s about all.The other ‘hoax’ achievement demonstrated to the president was the Saba-248 utility helicopter, which was claimed to be completely designed and manufactured by the Iran Helicopter Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC) domestically while, in fact, it was a recycled Tara Helicopter Services Agusta A109E, which had been damaged due to a hard landing a couple of years before.These ‘fakes’ overshadowed the real and genuine defence achievements in the media.The Iranian Aircraft Manufacturing Industries (IAMI) Kowsar-88 Advanced Jet Trainer, for example, and the Babaiee Missile Industries Fakkur-90 semi-active radar homing air-to-air missile, are two genuinely good defence products.The Kowsar-88 is equipped with a pair of General Electric J85-GE-13 Turbojet engines, Zvezda/ IAMI K-36DMIR ejection seats, a glass cockpit with three multi-function displays (MFDs) in aft and front cabin instrument panels, a head-up display (HUD), and four under-wing hardpoints for carriage of air-to-ground weapons.It will form the future fleet of the IRIAF’s advanced jet trainers for use in the Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) and Combat Commands Training (CCT) squadrons.Design and development of the Kowsar 88 began in December 2007 after the failure of project “Ya-Hossein”.Lessons learnt from development of the IRIAF’s Dorna, Tondar and Tazarv advanced jet trainers were considered during design of the Kowsar-88, which is planned to replace 12 50-year-old F-5A/Bs from the IRIAF’s 43rd CCTS within the next 10 years.The Fakkur-90 air-to-air missile (AAM) is another genuine achievement.The new medium-range AAM is planned for the IRIAF fleet of 62 F-14A/AMs in the near future. It consists of Shahin components but in a domestically manufactured AIM-54 shell (manufactured by Babaiee Missile Industries company).The Fakkur-90 is planned to be successor of the IRIAF’s existing but ageing AIM-7E Sparrow missiles, while the recently overhauled and restored AIM-54A+ Phoenix missiles will remain in service as Tomcat long-range weapons.IHSRC also demonstrated around a dozen recently overhauled and modernised Iranian Armed Forces helicopters. These included a recently restored and renovated Iranian Navy Aviation (IRINA) RH-53D and AB.212ASW; an upgraded Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Mi-171Sh, equipped with forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera and new targeting system for C-802 and C-704 anti-ship missiles; two Iranian Army Aviation (IRIAA) AH-1J None-Tow International Cobras plus an AB.206B and a Bell 214A; and an Iranian Police Aviation Force Bell 214A and AB.205A-1.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> Don't want more of the Qaher saga coming up in the news.


Is it true?IRIAF F14 Tomcat with new HUD?






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/958095351776448513


----------



## raptor22

So untrue and funny ..
*http://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/770735/ایران-از-روسیه-جنگنده-می‌گیرد*
*ایران از روسیه جنگنده می‌گیرد*


----------



## N_Al40

BIG NEWS:


----------



## NaCon

N_Al40 said:


> BIG NEWS:
> 
> View attachment 451599


fake news

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

Russia stopped producing Mig-31 long time ago ...


----------



## AmirPatriot

NaCon said:


> fake news


I second that.


----------



## N_Al40

Worth noting that it says it has TURBOFAN engines:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

Any idea what model they could be? Reversed engineered RD-33 or indigenous J-90?


----------



## Hack-Hook

N_Al40 said:


> Any idea what model they could be? Reversed engineered RD-33 or indigenous J-90?


or the one inside RQ-170


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> or the one inside RQ-170


J-90 turbofan variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Human One

This is a good article with a good photo.

120 The Iranian F-14 – the last Tomcat

https://www.aviationclassics.co.uk/issue-13-f-14-tomcat/

*Issue 13 - F-14 Tomcat: The Iranian F-14 – the last Tomcat
*
Published: 12:01PM Nov 22nd, 2011
_By: David Oliver_

The last operator of the F-14 in front line service is also the only export customer for the aircraft. David Oliver tells the story of Iran’s acquisition and combat use of the Tomcat.






_An Imperial Iranian Air Force (IIAF) F-14A on a test flight off the east coast of the US in 1976. Luigino Caliaro_

In 1941, Iran’s pro-Axis stance led to an Anglo-Russian occupation of the neutral nation to protect the oilfields belonging to the British-controlled Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, forcing the ruling Shah to abdicate in favour of his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
A decade later Shah Pahlavi’s position was threatened when the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was nationalised by his Prime Minister, Mohammed Mosaddegh, who was removed from power in a coup codenamed Operation Ajax in August 1953, organised and carried out by the United States’ CIA at the request of the British MI6.

After the 1953 coup, British influence in Iran began to wane and the country became one of the client states of the United States. During the following two decades, the grateful Shah began to spend his ever- increasing oil revenues on expanding his armed forces with the latest American equipment, and state-of-the-art combat aircraft for the Imperial Iranian Air Force (IIAF) in particular.

Since the early 1970s, Soviet MiG-25R Foxbat supersonic interceptors had regularly overflown Iran with immunity from attack by the IIAF. The search for a new fighter/interceptor began with senior Iranian pilots test flying virtually every Western fighter aircraft available at the time, plus covertly flying MiGs in other ‘friendly’ countries.

In the end, the Grumman F-14A Tomcat armed with Hughes AIM-54A Phoenix AAM, unquestionably one of the most potent warplanes in the world at that time, was selected in August 1973 as the IIAF’s principal interceptor. The importance to US foreign policy of the Shah was indicated by the fact that Iran was the only export customer for this sophisticated and expensive package.

An initial order signed in January of 1974 covered the purchase of 30 F-14s, but in June an additional 50 Tomcats were added to the contract. The Iranian Tomcats were virtually identical to the US Navy F-14A variant, with only a few classified avionics items being omitted.

The base site for Iranian Tomcat operations was Khatami Air Force Base at Isfahan and 1 Squadron at Shiraz Tactical Fighter Base. Imperial Iranian Air Force aircrew, mainly experienced F-4 pilots, began to arrive in the US for training in May of 1974, the first pilots going to Naval Air Station Miramar in California and the second group to Naval Air Station Oceana in Virginia. After completion of F-14 training in USA, they returned home to become IIAF F-14 instructor pilots with one of them remaining in the US to test fire the Phoenix missile. After returning to Isfahan, the qualified instructors started training the rest of the pilots with the co-operation of four American F-14 instructors who were part of the original contract.

The Iranian Tomcats were fairly late on the production line and were therefore delivered with the Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-414A after-burning turbofans, which were much more reliable than the compressor-stall-prone P-412A engine. The first two of 79 Tomcats arrived in Iran in January of 1976, one of which was flown by an IIAF pilot. By May of 1977, when Iran celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Royal House, 12 had been delivered.

During this period Soviet MiG-25 Foxbats were still overflying Iran and the Shah ordered live firing tests of the Phoenix to be carried out as a warning. In August of 1977, an IIAF Tomcat crew shot down a BQM-34E drone flying at 50,000 feet and the Soviets took the hint and promptly ended the Foxbat overflights.

The IIAF Tomcats bore the US Navy serial numbers of 160299/160378 and were assigned the IIAF serial numbers 3-863 to 3-942, later 3-6001 to 3-6080. The 79th F-14 was delivered to Iran in 1978 with the last Tomcat, BuNo 160378, being retained in the US for use as a test bed. Iran had also ordered a total of 714 AIM-54A Phoenix missiles, but only 284 were ever delivered.

However, the Shah’s westernisation of his country and authoritarian rule alienated the powerful mullahs and following massive demonstrations and the imposition of martial law, he was forced to flee from the country in January 1979. A Revolutionary Council presided over by the exiled cleric Ayatollah Khomeini took over the reins of power and established the Islamic Republic of Iran and set about eradicating the relationship with the West, and the United States in particular. The defence budget was severely curtailed and all outstanding orders placed by the Shah’s government, including an additional order for 400 AIM-54A Phoenix missiles, were cancelled.

This was followed by the imposition of a strict arms embargo against Iran by the West which caused a severe shortage of spare parts and skilled personnel, in addition to which many experienced pilots and maintenance personnel had followed the Shah into exile. As a result, by 1980, the air force was only a shadow of its former self. This embargo was to have an especially severe long-term effect on the Tomcat fleet, since the embargo prevented the delivery of any airframe or engine spares, and air-launched weapons.

The shortcomings of the new Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) were highlighted when the sporadic war with neighbouring Iraq gained momentum in 1982 when Iran launched an offensive to regain much of the border area occupied by Iraq in late 1980. Air power did not play a dominant role in the Iran-Iraq war but during the early phase of the war, Iranian aircraft had the fuel, armament and the endurance to win most of the aerial encounters, either by downing Iraqi aircraft with their first shot of an AIM-9 sidewinder or else by forcing Iraqi fighters to break off the engagement.

Iranian pilots initially had the edge in training and experience, but as the war dragged on, this advantage was gradually lost because of the repeated purges within the ranks of the IRIAF that removed experienced officers who were suspected of disloyalty to the Islamic regime. As the stalemated war continued, the IRIAF could not generate more than 60 sorties per day, whereas the number of sorties that Iraq could mount steadily increased year after year, reaching a peak as high as 600 in 1986-88.

It is extremely difficult to get any reliable estimates of just how many Iranian F-14As were in service at any one time during the war, with some having to be cannibalised to keep others flying. In the summer of 1984, it was estimated that only 15 to 20 IIRAF Tomcats were operational. However, although few of them were available for air combat, several were used to good effect serving in a mini-AWACS role by virtue of their powerful AN/AWG-9 radars and two-man crew.

Those that were able to engage the enemy during the war, scored most of their kills with AIM-54A Phoenix missiles, losing only one Tomcat in combat when it was caught off-guard while operating as a singleton by an Iraqi MiG-21, apparently a Fishbed modified to fire Magic Mk.1 AAMs, after which all the Tomcats operated in pairs. Another was lost when its crew ejected after losing control when the aircraft entered in spin and a surface-to-air missile (SAM) hit another F-14 over the disputed Kharg Island in the Persian Gulf. Iraq’s late model Mirage F.1EQ-6 fighters with Super R-530 AAMs were the closest it had to match the Tomcat, finally downing a pair just before the end of hostilities in the summer 1988.

The IRIAF’s top-scoring pilot was Brigadier General Jalil Zandi who served for the full duration of the Iran-Iraq war. His record qualifies him as an ace and the most successful pilot of that conflict. Described as ‘brazen’, he began his career in the Shah’s IIAF and stayed on to serve in the IRIAF when it was somewhat dangerous for pilots to continue their military service. While a major, he often clashed with his superior Col Baba’ie, the officer responsible for keeping Iran’s Air Force in the skies. He spent at least two periods in prison, one under a threatened death sentence that was decreed by revolutionary Mullahs.

Nevertheless, he was reliably credited with shooting down nine Iraqi aircraft and three probable kills. These included two MiG-23s, two Su-22s, one MiG-21 and three Mirage F1s. His record made him the most successful F-14 Tomcat combat pilot ever. He was shot down once, in February 1988, when his Tomcat was hit by missiles fired from Iraqi Mirage F-1EQ. He tried to return to base but his remaining engine failed and he was forced to eject. He rose to the rank of Brigadier General and his last official post was Deputy for Planning and Organisation of the IRIAF. He died in a car accident near Tehran in 2001.

In spite of the Western arms embargo, Iran has been able to maintain a more-or-less steady supply of spare parts for its fleet of Tomcats from several sources including the Iranian Aircraft Industries based at 1st Tactical Air Base in Tehran. Some may also have been smuggled into Iran by Israel and it has been rumoured that the Russians provided assistance to upgrade Tomcat’s ageing airframe, and it has been experimentally fitted with a Russian-built engine and ejection seat. The US government also supplied a limited amount of arms to Iran in exchange for its assistance in getting hostages held in Lebanon released although these were unlikely to be F-14 spares. However, as a result of the notorious Iran-Contra scandal, Iran was reported to have received Tomcat landing gear equipment and avionics.

Iran’s indigenous aircraft industries have kept the AN/AWG-9 radar operational, and the IRIAF Tomcats are capable of firing AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow missiles and anti-ship missiles. Most Iranian Tomcats fly with a missile load of four Sparrows and two Sidewinders for air-to-air operations. Iran is reportedly developing a domestic version of the Sparrow to replace its stock of expended missiles.

The IRIAF has also experimented with a number of Raytheon MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missiles for carriage on its F-14 Tomcat fighters in the air-to-air role under a programme known as Sky Hawk and has recently revealed its own version of the Hawk, the Shahin, which it claims to be under production.

A number of foreign nationals have in fact been implicated in efforts to illegally smuggle aircraft components from the United States to Iran. Two men were charged in December 2000 for attempting to illegally purchase F-4, F-5, and F-14 parts and ship them to Iran by way of Singapore. A fugitive named Houshang Amir Bagheri is also listed on the US Customs ‘Most Wanted’ list for his attempts to acquire classified F-14 components on behalf of Iran.

“Given the current situation in Iran” the US Department of Defense announced in January 2007 that sales of surplus spare parts for the US Navy’s recently retired F-14s were to be suspended due to concerns that they could end up in Iran. In July 2007, the remaining US Navy F-14 Tomcats were being scrapped to ensure that F-14 spare parts would not be acquired by governments “considered hostile to the US”. In the summer of 2010, Iran requested that the United States deliver the 80th F-14 it had purchased in 1974 but delivery was withheld after the Islamic Revolution. The request was rejected but it is not clear if this aircraft still exists.

Iran now claims to have more than 20 operational F-14As and as many again in storage for spare parts. The Iranian aerospace industry has been producing up to 70% of spare parts for several US types including the Tomcat, and IRIAF’s Tomcat Overhaul Centre at Isfahan has been modifying the extant fleet’s wiring and fire control system for compatibility with iron bombs, to become ‘Bombcats’.

Three Tomcat units, the 81st, 82nd and 83rd Tactical Fighter Squadrons, are all based at the 8th Tactical Fighter Base at Isfahan, the last home of the outstanding F-14 Tomcat, one of the world’s greatest long-range interceptors, the last of Grumman’s fighting felines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961678444768714753


----------



## drmeson

IRIAF is a joke ....


----------



## Nahid

drmeson said:


> IRIAF is a joke ....


TOTALLY AGREE.


----------



## BHarwana

Iran has successfully overhauled F-14 that means many retired F-14 will be revived.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961751969990717440

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Iranian F-5 Pilot scoring gun hits on a MiG-25 





I would say the MiG-25 pilot either got confused during the rush of battle or his Aircraft had technical problems or he was running extremely low on fuel because although an F-5 will always outmaneuver a MiG-25 but against a F-5 the only thing the MiG pilot really had to do was hit his afterburners and taken altitude....
It takes a lot of guts to try to take on a MiG-25 with an F-5 and even more guts to try to go after that aircraft with your guns. 

Air Defense systems alone will NEVER be enough to defend the Air Space of a country the size of Iran. Also, taking out SAM's and Radar systems on the ground is far simpler than taking out an Aircraft in the Air

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

IRIAF pilots are currently being trained in Pakistan. 10 Iran Air force pilots are being trained in Pakistan Air force academy.

_All of IRIAF F-14 tomcats are being brought back to service and are being modernized by some unknown company. this Image is of November 2017 shown IRIAF F-14's in Air_

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## N_Al40

BHarwana said:


> IRIAF pilots are currently being trained in Pakistan. 10 Iran Air force pilots are being trained in Pakistan Air force academy.
> 
> _All of IRIAF F-14 tomcats are being brought back to service and are being modernized by some unknown company. this Image is of November 2017 shown IRIAF F-14's in Air_



Interesting indeed.

Source?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

N_Al40 said:


> Interesting indeed.
> 
> Source?



There are 2 news for which one do you need source for? 
Pilots or F-14?

If you want source about Pilots being trained in Pakistan. that source is defence minister of Pakistan giving brief to senate today mentioned that Irani Pilots are being trained in Pakistan.

here is the link where the news can be found.

Currently, some 647 Pakistani troops are also stationed in Qatar, whereas Pakistan air force is training 10 Iranian pilots, according to the local media.

http://aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/10-000-saudi-soldiers-being-trained-in-pakistan/1067750

the source for the Tomcat F-15 is the exercises Iran conducted recently in Nov 2017 the Tomcats were spotted flying in those exercises. Previously they have been all grounded but lately they are becoming active again and till Nov 2017 there were reports of 8 being overhauled and modified. The tweet is Spanish but use the translator to read it.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951759285993734144
This is the old cockpit of F-14 image from NASA 






Below is the IRIAF F-14 cockpit there is a change try spotting it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

BHarwana said:


> There are 2 news for which one do you need source for?
> Pilots or F-14?
> 
> If you want source about Pilots being trained in Pakistan. that source is defence minister of Pakistan giving brief to senate today mentioned that Irani Pilots are being trained in Pakistan.
> 
> here is the link where the news can be found.
> 
> Currently, some 647 Pakistani troops are also stationed in Qatar, whereas Pakistan air force is training 10 Iranian pilots, according to the local media.
> 
> http://aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/10-000-saudi-soldiers-being-trained-in-pakistan/1067750
> 
> the source for the Tomcat F-15 is the exercises Iran conducted recently in Nov 2017 the Tomcats were spotted flying in those exercises. Previously they have been all grounded but lately they are becoming active again and till Nov 2017 there were reports of 8 being overhauled and modified. The tweet is Spanish but use the translator to read it.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951759285993734144
> This is the old cockpit of F-14 image from NASA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is the IRIAF F-14 cockpit there is a change try spotting it.


Those images and tweets have little if anything to do with each other.

I'm almost certain this rumour is not true.


----------



## BHarwana

AmirPatriot said:


> Those images and tweets have little if anything to do with each other.
> 
> I'm almost certain this rumour is not true.



The Image is from the Irani exercises and four can be seen which were not there before.


----------



## AmirPatriot

BHarwana said:


> The Image is from the Irani exercises and four can be seen which were not there before.


There is no image on this page of an Iranian aircraft on a military exercise.


----------



## BHarwana

AmirPatriot said:


> There is no image on this page of an Iranian aircraft on a military exercise.


here now there are


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

BHarwana said:


> Iran has successfully overhauled F-14 that means many retired F-14 will be revived.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961751969990717440



The Overhaul of F-14s in Iran is not a new development. The first F-14 overhaul in Iran took place back in 1983! The proof is that F-14s have been in continious service in IRIAF ever since the Revolution

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Human One

*In the 1980s, Iran Outfitted F-14s as Heavy Bombers*
One Iranian Tomcat lobbed a 7,000-pound munition


----------



## OldTwilight

Human One said:


> *In the 1980s, Iran Outfitted F-14s as Heavy Bombers*
> One Iranian Tomcat lobbed a 7,000-pound munition


and bomb a turkish bridge ...


----------



## sanel1412

Ć


BHarwana said:


> Below is the IRIAF F-14 cockpit there is a change try spotting it.
> 
> ]



It has new HUD...F-14 orginaly project data on windshield glass....



sanel1412 said:


> It has new HUD...F-14 orginaly project data on windshield glass....


Just to add..I'm not sure that image is IRIAF F-14A...helmets doesn't lools like one IRIAF pilots use....I dont see patchs so I cant say for sure but you may want check again...news portals and cannels often use other images as reference..in these case you will see tag "from archive" or "reference"..or something similar iit means image is only reference...if I remeber corectly there is already image of IRIAF f14 with HUD online...I remember we discussed about this once and I think there was image of F-14 with HUD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Well I'll be damned


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/966406708510842880


----------



## drmeson

IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF. It will get the funds and care it badly needs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Fafnir

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 455313
> View attachment 455314
> View attachment 455315
> View attachment 455316
> View attachment 455317
> View attachment 455318
> View attachment 455319
> View attachment 455320


Does anyone know how long iran has had the the at6/shturm atgm capable version of the mil17 for?,when were they delivered and what version of the at6/shturm does it use?.


----------



## skyshadow

Fafnir said:


> Does anyone know how long iran has had the the at6/shturm atgm capable version of the mil17 for?,when were they delivered and what version of the at6/shturm does it use?.



داداش میگن در سال 2003 وارد شده ولی اطلاعات دقیقی درباره ورودش نیست چون این اولین باره که دیده شده مثل اینکه.



Iranian Mil-171 equipped with AT-6 missile .
.
بالگرد میل-171 مسلح به موشک AT-6
.
.
سالهاست که مساله وجود موشک 9k114 Shturm ملقب به 9M114 Kokon با نام ناتوی AT-6 Spiral در کشور و در منابع مختلف غیررسمی مطرح میشود.

تصویر اول، تنها تصویر از حضور این موشک ضدزره در کشور میباشد که تاکنون منتشر شده و تصویر دوم نیز مربوط به سایت هدفیابی همین موشک میباشد.

موشک AT-6 دارای دو مدل زمین پایه و هواپایه میباشد و همانند بسیاری از موشکهای ضدزره ازجمله خانواده تاو-توفان بصورت فرمان به خط دید هدایت میشود، یعنی اپراتور باید از طریق سایت اپتیک تا لحظه اصابت موشک به هدف، آن را تعقیب کند و مرکز پردازش با توجه به موقعیت هدف و موقعیت موشک در هر لحظه، فرامین اصلاح مسیر را به موشک ارسال میکند.

تفاوت اصلی این موشک با موشکی مثل مثلا تاو-توفان این هست که فرامین اصلاح مسیر بجای اینکه از طرق سیم به موشک ارسال شود، از طریق فرمانهای رادیویی ارسال و این فرمانها به آنتن گیرنده در انتهای موشک رسیده و اجرا میشود. ارسال فرامین بصورت رادیویی بجای استفاده از سیم باعث امکان افزایش برد تا 5 کیلومتر (در برخی مدلهای ارتقاء یافته تا 7 کیلومتر) در این موشک شده است ولی درمقابل ممکن هست آسیب پذیری دربرابر اخلالگرهای رادیویی را باعث شود.

یک ویژگی دیگر این موشک در نسخه زمین پایه میتواند مثمر ثمر باشد این است که که بجای پرواز در خط دید، پروفایل پروازی میتواند بصورت پرواز در بالای خط دید باشد یعنی اینکه موشک تا نزدیکی هدف در ارتفاعی بالاتر از خط دید حرکت میکند و وقتی که سنسور لیزری موشک هدف را احساس کرد، موشک کاهش ارتفاع به خط دید میدهد. این مساله با موضوع تاپ اتک یا حمله از بالا متفاوت هست و صرفا بمنظور جلوگیری از برخورد موشک از موانع احتمالی در مسیر حرکت بوده و قابلیت غیرفعال کردن نیز میباشد. قبلا گفته شده است که موشکهای تاپ اتک دو نوع میباشند یکی شیرجه از بالا روط هدف، دیگری انفجار در بالای هدف و موشک اشتورم متفاوت از این دو نوع هست.

درباره میزان واردات و عملیاتی بودن این موشک نمیتوان نظر قطعی داشت ولی با توجه به اینکه در این سالها تصاویری از این موشک در هیچ رزمایشی مشاهده نشده، احتمالا واردات بصورت کم تعداد و یا احتمالا آزمایشی بوده است.

تصویر دوم مربوط به سایت هدفگیری این موشک، منصوب بر روی بالگردهای MIL-171 میباشد. با دقت در تصویر اول، در زیر دماغه بالگرد جسمی دیده میشود که درواقع همین سایت هدفگیری میباشد.


----------



## Fafnir

skyshadow said:


> داداش میگن در سال 2003 وارد شده ولی اطلاعات دقیقی درباره ورودش نیست چون این اولین باره که دیده شده مثل اینکه.
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Mil-171 equipped with AT-6 missile .
> .
> بالگرد میل-171 مسلح به موشک AT-6
> .
> .
> سالهاست که مساله وجود موشک 9k114 Shturm ملقب به 9M114 Kokon با نام ناتوی AT-6 Spiral در کشور و در منابع مختلف غیررسمی مطرح میشود.
> 
> تصویر اول، تنها تصویر از حضور این موشک ضدزره در کشور میباشد که تاکنون منتشر شده و تصویر دوم نیز مربوط به سایت هدفیابی همین موشک میباشد.
> 
> موشک AT-6 دارای دو مدل زمین پایه و هواپایه میباشد و همانند بسیاری از موشکهای ضدزره ازجمله خانواده تاو-توفان بصورت فرمان به خط دید هدایت میشود، یعنی اپراتور باید از طریق سایت اپتیک تا لحظه اصابت موشک به هدف، آن را تعقیب کند و مرکز پردازش با توجه به موقعیت هدف و موقعیت موشک در هر لحظه، فرامین اصلاح مسیر را به موشک ارسال میکند.
> 
> تفاوت اصلی این موشک با موشکی مثل مثلا تاو-توفان این هست که فرامین اصلاح مسیر بجای اینکه از طرق سیم به موشک ارسال شود، از طریق فرمانهای رادیویی ارسال و این فرمانها به آنتن گیرنده در انتهای موشک رسیده و اجرا میشود. ارسال فرامین بصورت رادیویی بجای استفاده از سیم باعث امکان افزایش برد تا 5 کیلومتر (در برخی مدلهای ارتقاء یافته تا 7 کیلومتر) در این موشک شده است ولی درمقابل ممکن هست آسیب پذیری دربرابر اخلالگرهای رادیویی را باعث شود.
> 
> یک ویژگی دیگر این موشک در نسخه زمین پایه میتواند مثمر ثمر باشد این است که که بجای پرواز در خط دید، پروفایل پروازی میتواند بصورت پرواز در بالای خط دید باشد یعنی اینکه موشک تا نزدیکی هدف در ارتفاعی بالاتر از خط دید حرکت میکند و وقتی که سنسور لیزری موشک هدف را احساس کرد، موشک کاهش ارتفاع به خط دید میدهد. این مساله با موضوع تاپ اتک یا حمله از بالا متفاوت هست و صرفا بمنظور جلوگیری از برخورد موشک از موانع احتمالی در مسیر حرکت بوده و قابلیت غیرفعال کردن نیز میباشد. قبلا گفته شده است که موشکهای تاپ اتک دو نوع میباشند یکی شیرجه از بالا روط هدف، دیگری انفجار در بالای هدف و موشک اشتورم متفاوت از این دو نوع هست.
> 
> درباره میزان واردات و عملیاتی بودن این موشک نمیتوان نظر قطعی داشت ولی با توجه به اینکه در این سالها تصاویری از این موشک در هیچ رزمایشی مشاهده نشده، احتمالا واردات بصورت کم تعداد و یا احتمالا آزمایشی بوده است.
> 
> تصویر دوم مربوط به سایت هدفگیری این موشک، منصوب بر روی بالگردهای MIL-171 میباشد. با دقت در تصویر اول، در زیر دماغه بالگرد جسمی دیده میشود که درواقع همین سایت هدفگیری میباشد.


So not much information at all then,indeed it even sounds quite possible that it might not actually be in service at all or that just a single example or very small number were obtained for evaluation.
Its rather weird that they`re using the mil-17 as a platform for this weapon as its not really ideal,a far better choice would have been using this as a weapons upgrade for irans cobra attack helos to replace the old wire guided sub-sonic tow/toophan atgms.
Frankly I think that iran badly needs to replace its elderly cobra attack helos with some brand new aircraft like the mil-28 or ka-52 perhaps in combo with some multi purpose heavy weight attack/transport helos like the mil-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

[QUOTE = "Fafnir, post: 10275447, member: 177539"] So not much information at all then, in fact it even sounds quite possible that it may not actually be in service at all or that just a single example or very small number were obtained for evaluation.
Its rather weird that they're using the mil-17 as a platform for this weapon as its not really ideal, much better option would have used it as a weapon upgrade for irans cobra attack helos to replace the old wire guided sub- sonic tow / toophan hell
Frankly I think that Ian badly needs to replace its elderly cobra attack helos with some brand new aircraft such as the mil-28 or ka-52 perhaps in a combo with some multi-purpose heavy weight attack / transport helos like the mil-35.











[/ QUOTE]

I will play devils advocate here and say that in all honesty Iran should have little to no stock in the Russians as far as weapons deals and deliveries go. Russia is way to concerned with it's own futile attempts at making good with the US and the rest of Europe to sully its efforts over reinforcing Iran's badly shaped air-force.

This is one of my biggest problems with the Russians from the get-go. Historically speaking, the Russians are Iranians / Persians enemies and not much has changed other then both have found themselves on the same side of the playing field and have to support one another. Russians help Iran begrudgingly, if worse came to worse I would not put my faith in the Russians I just will not. They are not friends.

But lets give them the benefit of the doubt, lets see when the weapons embargo is lifted will the Russians make good and will the Iranian take a chance and buy given all the past horrible experiences with weapon acquisition from Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

drmeson said:


> IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF. It will get the funds and care it badly needs.



Compared to the IRIAF the IRGC has far better leadership skills when it comes to R&D and domestic weapons development but IRGC top brass are not big fans of importing fighter jets 

Iran needs at least 100-150 new interceptors/Air Superiority fighters to backup it's Air Defense and most of IRGC's top brass remain under the illusion that Air Defense systems alone are sufficient & against the U.S. we will lose those fighters anyways so instead they are focused mainly on Iran's response 

Today an F-15 armed with SDB's can approach from low altitude and fire on over 16 ground targets from 100km away 
That means in an initial strike 60 F-15's can take on close to 1000 targets with deadly precision & from outside the range of Iranian SAM's


But the problem with that way IRGC top brass thinks is that 1st they are assuming that the U.S. is the ONLY main threat facing Iran 2nd They are assuming that a regional leader deluded enough to attack Iran is actually a logical person and Iran's retaliatory response would actually deter such a person 3rd Asymmetric tactics will no longer work for Iran in 20 years when vast majority of Iran's population is over 50-60 years old.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF. It will get the funds and care it badly needs.



I don't think any IRGC and Artesh branch will ever merge in that sense since they are fundamentally different organisations that fight and act in completely different ways. The IRGC is in some ways an anti-coup force which means that by its very nature it must stay separate from the Artesh. This approach is woefully inefficient and I think it must be ditched if Iran ever wants to be a military force to be reckoned with. After all, even the Shah never needed a second force to guarantee his regime. Even after he left the Artesh was loyal enough to try out coups (like the Nojeh coup) to try and bring him back. Which just shows that the Artesh - properly managed - is loyal to the government once the government has consolidated its control.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 455560
> View attachment 455561
> View attachment 455562
> در پی ساخت انیمیشنی توسط عربستان سعودی مبنی بر حمله عربستان به ایران و شکست ایران. شرکت های ایرانی در حال ساخت و اتمام انیمیشنی به نام عملیات نجات مکه هستند موضوع این انیمیشن هم نجات عربستان و مکه از دست خانواده ال سعود است. در این انیمیشن از هواپیمای اف 14 در صحنه های نبرد هوایی بسیار استاده شده
> 
> با سرچ #عملیات نجات مکه .در اینستاگرام هم میتوانید .مراحل ساخت این انیمیشن را دنبال کنید و تماشا کنید
> 
> https://www.aparat.com/v/QGUNW
> 
> View attachment 455553
> View attachment 455554
> View attachment 455555
> View attachment 455556
> View attachment 455557
> View attachment 455558
> View attachment 455559


well the demo was short but honestly quality wise , KSA and IRIB must go and learn from them how to build Animation

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

Interesting read:

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-کرد-مستشاران-آمریکا-در-ایران-جاسوسی-می-کردند


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> I don't think any IRGC and Artesh branch will ever merge in that sense since they are fundamentally different organisations that fight and act in completely different ways. The IRGC is in some ways an anti-coup force which means that by its very nature it must stay separate from the Artesh. This approach is woefully inefficient and I think it must be ditched if Iran ever wants to be a military force to be reckoned with. After all, even the Shah never needed a second force to guarantee his regime. Even after he left the Artesh was loyal enough to try out coups (like the Nojeh coup) to try and bring him back. Which just shows that the Artesh - properly managed - is loyal to the government once the government has consolidated its control.



What are you talking about ? IRIAF fighting with 50 years old rebuilt F-5E/F and some 20-30 x tomcats ? that when enemy will be fielding dozens of squadrons of Rafale, Tyfoon, F-15SE and what not ... Merger of IRIAF with IRGC will at-least build confidence in Mullah circles that aerial wing is not gonna threaten their grip on Tehran. They would allow deals with China or Russia for TOT of 4.5 gen MRCA's that can at-least safeguard Iranian skies against regional foes. This merger means IRGC chief asking for funds for this sick organization directly which means a big deal. 

10 x conventional BM carrying 500 kg strikes with 100 CEP can not achieve what you can achieve with a single sortie of of 4.5 generation MRCA on an attack mission. Same MRCA can come back and guard airspace.


----------



## muhammadali233

any pics of IRIAF mfi-17s?


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> What are you talking about ? IRIAF fighting with 50 years old rebuilt F-5E/F and some 20-30 x tomcats ? that when enemy will be fielding dozens of squadrons of Rafale, Tyfoon, F-15SE and what not



When have I said that? All my time I've been following Iranian defence matters, I've wanted the IRIAF to be completely modernised!



drmeson said:


> Merger of IRIAF with IRGC will at-least build confidence in Mullah circles that aerial wing is not gonna threaten their grip on Tehran. They would allow deals with China or Russia for TOT of 4.5 gen MRCA's that can at-least safeguard Iranian skies against regional foes.



I've already said why a merger is not possible.

Iran has to bite the bullet and stop having these overlapping armed forces. It is a waste of resources. But that doesn't mean moving assets where they don't belong.


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> When have I said that? All my time I've been following Iranian defence matters, I've wanted the IRIAF to be completely modernised!
> 
> 
> 
> I've already said why a merger is not possible.
> 
> Iran has to bite the bullet and stop having these overlapping armed forces. It is a waste of resources. But that doesn't mean moving assets where they don't belong.



You said before that it fights and act differently than IRGC. I was merely mentioning that an air wing with no credible modern weapon in the sky can not fight or act.

Mullah do not want a strong IRIAF. Nojeh Coup mentality is not going to change and in few years IRIAF will literally be reduced to dirt if drastic political decisions are not made. It already is a sick joke in the region. Mullahs do trust IRGC though, IRGC chief has considerable power and they get funds and all kinds of support so why not give them IRIAF as well so that IRGC can take over this dying, ageing, rotten organization and use their funds and resources to modernize it? Look how far they have dragged the missile program that its a proper offensive threat to regional foes. I see them quickly modernizing IRIAF to a a credible offensive arm too in 5-10 years with proper procurement and management.


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> Mullah do not want a strong IRIAF. Nojeh Coup mentality is not going to change and in few years IRIAF will literally be reduced to dirt if drastic political decisions are not made. It already is a sick joke in the region. Mullahs do trust IRGC though, IRGC chief has considerable power and they get funds and all kinds of support so why not give them IRIAF as well so that IRGC can take over this dying, ageing, rotten organization and use their funds and resources to modernize it? Look how far they have dragged the missile program that its a proper offensive threat to regional foes. I see them quickly modernizing IRIAF to a a credible offensive arm too in 5-10 years with proper procurement and management.



Well they are after the Su-30 which at least shows that they want to modernise it, but I don't think the IRGC even want the IRIAF, it doesn't fit in with their asymmetric doctrine. You'd have to change the whole officer corps into one that fights asymmetrically and those just don't exist, at the very least not in Iran. No, the Artesh must remain on its own. The problem is procurement and management, at least procurement is trying to be solved with the Su-30 purchase, but I'm afraid poor management may doom the "semi-heavy fighter" project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

drmeson said:


> IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF. It will get the funds and care it badly needs.



IRGC should merged in Artesh and act under its name while keep her structure ... ( this should happen even on paper )



AmirPatriot said:


> Well they are after the Su-30 which at least shows that they want to modernise it, but I don't think the IRGC even want the IRIAF, it doesn't fit in with their asymmetric doctrine. You'd have to change the whole officer corps into one that fights asymmetrically and those just don't exist, at the very least not in Iran. No, the Artesh must remain on its own. The problem is procurement and management, at least procurement is trying to be solved with the Su-30 purchase, but I'm afraid poor management may doom the "semi-heavy fighter" project.



They should stop increase rank of the officer base on their loyalty and they should stop recruiting officers base on their loyalty ... 

Islamic Republic as whole is facing with mismanagement so Artesh and IRGC are effected as well ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zartosht

this is the most depressing page of this forum for me to visit. At least people are not blaming IRIAF supposed "lack of creativity" for their state anymore. and seeing the reality of complete government abandonement. 

I have met several old army officers from the shah era who still hold nostalgia and loyalty to the shah. one can only imagine the air force sentiment. must be a very demoralised force. 

especially given the overwhelming role they played in the Iraq war. Despite the air force personnel getting treated like garbage. seeing colleauges jailed/executed and held in suspicion. 

The Iranian government is never going to pour tens of billions of dollars to modernise a force it never trusted and doesn't see as a tool of government survival. that's just the reality of the situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dinky

Everyone here is blaming everyone and everything, are you all idiots?.

You can definitely have multiple forces, the problem isn't all on mismanagement. There is mismanagement and corruption in every countries armed forces, The real problem is the lack of funds. Aircraft's are probably the most expensive things to develop,
"F-35 development started in 1992 with the origins of the Joint Strike Fighter program and is set to culminate in full production in 2018" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

It can takes decades to develop new up to date aircraft with huge amounts of money and resources needed. The reality is Iran doesn't have the money and with a budget Iran has, it has to prioritize what it needs to fund for its deterrence policy. Iran cant buy aircraft from Russia due to the sanctions and restrictions of the nuclear deal and I dont think Russia would sell them anyways as to not upset its economic partners in the region.

Unfortunately I dont think there is a solution to modernize the Iranian Airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

MiG 29


----------



## OldTwilight

Dinky said:


> Everyone here is blaming everyone and everything, are you all idiots?.
> 
> You can definitely have multiple forces, the problem isn't all on mismanagement. There is mismanagement and corruption in every countries armed forces, The real problem is the lack of funds. Aircraft's are probably the most expensive things to develop,
> "F-35 development started in 1992 with the origins of the Joint Strike Fighter program and is set to culminate in full production in 2018" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
> 
> It can takes decades to develop new up to date aircraft with huge amounts of money and resources needed. The reality is Iran doesn't have the money and with a budget Iran has, it has to prioritize what it needs to fund for its deterrence policy. Iran cant buy aircraft from Russia due to the sanctions and restrictions of the nuclear deal and I dont think Russia would sell them anyways as to not upset its economic partners in the region.
> 
> Unfortunately I dont think there is a solution to modernize the Iranian Airforce



when one person can just take 3 billion dollars from people and run away and live his happy life in Canda and almost no one take responsibility for it and then this damn thing ( stealing people money and running ) repeat years after years and it just grow in scale , then that means there is money for funding project ( from civil project to military projects ) but the funds are missing ...

our problem is not making something like F22 or Rafael , our problem is that we knew our country is capable to build something like modernized version of F-5 with modern avionics and in good number but there is no result ...

for god Sake we are losing our most capable engineers every year , and they leave our country to go to and live in western countries due corruption and mismanagement ...

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/27/middleeast/irans-mit-sharif-university-technology/index.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dinky

OldTwilight said:


> when one person can just take 3 billion dollars from people and run away and live his happy life in Canda and almost no one take responsibility for it and then this damn thing ( stealing people money and running ) repeat years after years and it just grow in scale , then that means there is money for funding project ( from civil project to military projects ) but the funds are missing ...
> 
> our problem is not making something like F22 or Rafael , our problem is that we knew our country is capable to build something like modernized version of F-5 with modern avionics and in good number but there is no result ...
> 
> for god Sake we are losing our most capable engineers every year , and they leave our country to go to and live in western countries due corruption and mismanagement ...
> 
> https://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/27/middleeast/irans-mit-sharif-university-technology/index.html


First of all that money was stolen from an institution(bank), not the budget, so I dont know why you are comparing this with that. There is corruption everywhere and mismanagement, just look at Pakistan and with all their billionaire politicians


----------



## OldTwilight

Dinky said:


> First of all that money was stolen from an institution(bank), not the budget, so I dont know why you are comparing this with that. There is corruption everywhere and mismanagement, just look at Pakistan and with all their billionaire politicians



almost all medium and great economic institute in Iran are under government ....
we did revolution to stop corruption and cut hand of thieves from our national wealth not to change thieves ....


----------



## Dinky

OldTwilight said:


> almost all medium and great economic institute in Iran are under government ....
> we did revolution to stop corruption and cut hand of thieves from our national wealth not to change thieves ....


You clearly have no idea what the hell you are talking about, the money that was stolen was the bank's money not the army's money. You are acting like if the money was not stolen, it would have gone to the army, NO it would not have. Each agency and department have their own budget they receive and the air force's and army's budget are too small for any major changes. Revolution changes policies, its does not end corruption

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

Dinky said:


> You clearly have no idea what the hell you are talking about, the money that was stolen was the bank's money not the army's money. You are acting like if the money was not stolen, it would have gone to the army, NO it would not have. Each agency and department have their own budget they receive and the air force's and army's budget are too small for any major changes. Revolution changes policies, its does not end corruption


Well said sir,well said!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

IRGC unveiled a new air to ground anti armor missile dubbed "Azarakhsh".
length: 3096 cm
diameter: 127 mm
weight: 70 kg
firing range: 10 km
missile's seeker lock range: 6 km
max speed:550 m/s











*پروژه موشکی «آذرخش» در هوانیروز سپاه رونمایی شد+تصاویر*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> IRGC unveiled a new air to ground anti armor missile dubbed "Azarakhsh".
> length: 3096 m
> diameter: 127 mm
> weight: 70 kg
> firing range: 10 km
> missile's seeker lock range: 6 km
> max speed:550 m/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *پروژه موشکی «آذرخش» در هوانیروز سپاه رونمایی شد+تصاویر*



What on earth...? That's an AIM-9... AIM-9 anti-armour version...


----------



## Fafnir

mohsen said:


> IRGC unveiled a new air to ground anti armor missile dubbed "Azarakhsh".
> length: 3096 m
> diameter: 127 mm
> weight: 70 kg
> firing range: 10 km
> missile's seeker lock range: 6 km
> max speed:550 m/s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *پروژه موشکی «آذرخش» در هوانیروز سپاه رونمایی شد+تصاویر*


I seriously doubt that these pics are the atgm weapon in question as this is clearly an old sidewinder or possibly more likely an old aa2 atoll with what judging from its front fin set up looks to be possibly a modified r13-m1 front section altho the seeker looks to be bigger,this is clearly an infrared guided a2a missile not an atgm.


----------



## mohsen

another view of Azarakhsh missile:









Fafnir said:


> I seriously doubt that these pics are the atgm weapon in question as this is clearly an old sidewinder or possibly more likely an old aa2 atoll with what judging from its front fin set up looks to be possibly a modified r13-m1 front section altho the seeker looks to be bigger,this is clearly an infrared guided a2a missile not an atgm.


Please!

AGM-87 Focus
AGM-122 Sidearm




The AGM-122 Sidearm was produced by the re-manufacture of AIM-9C missiles that had been taken out of service

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## Fafnir

mohsen said:


> Please!
> 
> AGM-87 Focus
> AGM-122 Sidearm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The AGM-122 Sidearm was produced by the re-manufacture of AIM-9C missiles that had been taken out of service


The agm-122s are in fact anti-radiation[anti-radar] weapons and these werent converted from the regular ir homing sidewinders but from the sarh [radar guided] sidewinder variant.
The agm-87 was however converted from ir homing sidewinders but was used primarily against soft skinned vehicles and then only for a very short period probably because there were simply much better purpose designed A2G/ATGM weapons available.
I`m not arguing that you cant use these a2a missiles in another role as an ad hoc ground attack munition of sorts,but the simple fact is that they were designed to do a very,very different job entirely so their suitability in this role,especially as an A2G/ATGM is pretty questionable,altho I suppose that if you have large stocks of these weapons laying around and need to find some sort of a use for them that could be one possible option,but I think that with a specialised weapon like this ones options for re-purposing is pretty limited at best,altho personally I would have considered trying to upgrade them in the a2a role first.
Frankly this whole thing to me has the appearance of an answer in search of a question written all over it and I`m not particularly impressed with the result to be perfectly honest,tho what would`ve impressed me would`ve been seeing the iranian reverse/re-engineered spike copy,now that would`ve been good or better yet confirmation that the soumar LACM was now officially in service with the iri armed forces[sigh!].


----------



## sanel1412

Fafnir said:


> The agm-122s are in fact anti-radiation[anti-radar] weapons and these werent converted from the regular ir homing sidewinders but from the sarh [radar guided] sidewinder variant.
> The agm-87 was however converted from ir homing sidewinders but was used primarily against soft skinned vehicles and then only for a very short period probably because there were simply much better purpose designed A2G/ATGM weapons available.
> I`m not arguing that you cant use these a2a missiles in another role as an ad hoc ground attack munition of sorts,but the simple fact is that they were designed to do a very,very different job entirely so their suitability in this role,especially as an A2A/ATGM is pretty questionable,altho I suppose that if you have large stocks of these weapons laying around and need to find some sort of a use for them that could be one possible option,but I think that with a specialised weapon like this ones options for re-purposing is pretty limited at best,altho personally I would have considered trying to upgrade them in the a2a role first.
> Frankly this whole thing to me has the appearance of an answer in search of a question written all over it and I`m not particularly impressed with the result to be perfectly honest,tho what would`ve impressed me would`ve been seeing the iranian reverse/re-engineered spike copy,now that would`ve been good or better yet confirmation that the soumar LACM was now officially in service with the iri armed forces[sigh!].


This is very smart solutions to give modern Atgm 2x more fire range,basicly front part of the missile is ATGM warhead + guidence.If you look front part of the missile you can see clearly Where ATGM is attached,modern ATGM's are very limited in range when fire crew fire it from ground...5km max range is in practice 1-2km effective range,from air it is much longer since they have much better insight(that is why even ground forces always is seeing to set ATGM on higher ground if possible)and also missile Will hit target from much better angle and it has better chance to penetrate.This missile doesn't use same warhead as aim-9 and it is not in my opinion adhoc solutions...simple becauase we can clearly see that Atgm warhead is attached to sidewinder body and in practice missle should have same or even better impact on target considering speed and better angle.So you May ask why would IRGC do this instead to use already available ATGM's in A2G role..In my opinion it is probably range and speed,that speed we can see in specifications is almost double of Atgm like TOW and it will increase penetration perfomance and effective range.I suppose integration ability is also one factor,IRGC Aero-Space force include CAS/Attack aircrafts and some number of tactical bombers ,this missile could easy be integrate at any aircraft in their inventory ,air lunched ATGM's are good for helicopters or UCAV but you can't put any of them on fast aircrafts in existing containers or naked and also it would require integration of some components.that is why I said it smart solution,simple because it would allow cheap and effective missle that can be used with existing IRGC-AF jets

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

Those images of jet engines are quite interesting..

It took a fair amount of searching but the top images (showing three engines) are JT8D-200 series turbofan engines. Iran's sizable civilian fleet of MD-80 series airliners use these engines. 

The second image appears to be a Rolls Royce Tay turbofan engine. This type of engine is used by the Fokker family of smaller jet airliners in Iranian civilian aviation companies.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## N_Al40

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456658
> View attachment 456659
> View attachment 456660
> View attachment 456661
> View attachment 456662
> View attachment 456663
> View attachment 456664
> View attachment 456665
> View attachment 456666
> View attachment 456667
> View attachment 456668
> View attachment 456669
> View attachment 456670
> View attachment 456671
> View attachment 456672
> View attachment 456673
> View attachment 456674



Absolutely adore the new camo. on those helicopters! Are they Iranian reverse-engineered or are they the original US ones but overhauled?

Also, where can the auto Muharram heavy machine gun be employed? Seems a bit big for efficient application.


----------



## AmirPatriot

eagle2007 said:


> ALCON,
> 
> Those images of jet engines are quite interesting..
> 
> It took a fair amount of searching but the top images (showing three engines) are JT8D-200 series turbofan engines. Iran's sizable civilian fleet of MD-80 series airliners use these engines.
> 
> The second image appears to be a Rolls Royce Tay turbofan engine. This type of engine is used by the Fokker family of smaller jet airliners in Iranian civilian aviation companies.



Good to see you back eagle, you hadn't been active for a little while.

This may seem like a slightly dumb question, but why are they interesting? I thought it was established that Iran could overhaul these engines.


----------



## skyshadow

N_Al40 said:


> Absolutely adore the new camo. on those helicopters! Are they Iranian reverse-engineered or are they the original US ones but overhauled?
> 
> Also, where can the auto Muharram heavy machine gun be employed? Seems a bit big for efficient application.








Night vision cameras are made by Iran. Iran has built many cameras in recent years. The heavy Muharram machine gun is very large and its much slower than the smaller machine guns, but it also has a higher caliber. I do not think it would be possible to install a large machine gun like Moharram on helicopters. The machine gun that was shown in the picture is Nasir, which is much better than the Muharram machine gun for air support.

nasir machine gun









akhgar machine gun

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fafnir

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456658
> View attachment 456659
> View attachment 456660
> View attachment 456661
> View attachment 456662
> View attachment 456663
> View attachment 456664
> View attachment 456665
> View attachment 456666
> View attachment 456667
> View attachment 456668
> View attachment 456669
> View attachment 456670
> View attachment 456671
> View attachment 456672
> View attachment 456673
> View attachment 456674


Good to see these old bell helos getting a flir upgrade,hopefully the rest of the entire military helo fleet is going to be equipped and not just these three examples.Iran desperately needs to start spending some very serious cash on modernising,upgrading and expanding its helo fleet as well as acquiring some brand new modern machines to start replacing the elderly pahlavi era us supplied stuff which is only getting longer in the tooth with each year that passes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456768
> View attachment 456769


LOL!,its this frankenstein monster missile again.
We`ve seen the bottom one a few times before mounted on a drone and frankly it doesnt look very convincing at all,not to mention the fact that it is clearly missing its actual control surfaces.The top one however does look a lot more interesting and could even perhaps possibly be a real prototype or test object of some sort,it looks to be an crotale/hq7 missile fitted with a new electro-optical front end possibly off a sadid glide bomb,its probably got a range of around 13km judging by the crotale/hq7 specs,but is it fire and forget or wireless guided with a datalink link like the drone glide bombs,who knows?.This could potentially be used as an extremely long range anti-tank/helo weapon,thats provided of course that the firing platform can detect targets out to the maximum range.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Fafnir said:


> LOL!,its this frankenstein monster missile again.
> We`ve seen the bottom one a few times before mounted on a drone and frankly it doesnt look very convincing at all,not to mention the fact that it is clearly missing its actual control surfaces.The top one however does look a lot more interesting and could even perhaps possibly be a real prototype or test object of some sort,it looks to be an crotale/hq7 missile fitted with a new electro-optical front end possibly off a sadid glide bomb,its probably got a range of around 13km judging by the crotale/hq7 specs,but is it fire and forget or wireless guided with a datalink link like the drone glide bombs,who knows?.This could potentially be used as an extremely long range anti-tank/helo weapon,thats provided of course that the firing platform can detect targets out to the maximum range.





Iranian AH-1J equipped with Shafagh missile
.
.
گونه جدید موشک شفق
.
.
جدیدترین تصویر از نصب موشک شفق بر روی بالگرد کبرای ارتقاء یافته هوانیروز ارتش با استتار جدید منتشر شده است.

نکته قابل توجه اینکه، موشک شفق نصب شده بر روی این بالگرد نسبت به موشک شفقی که چند سال پیش رونمایی شد، تفاوت کرده و همانند ریشه اصلی خودش یعنی موشک شهاب ثاقب دارای بالک جلویی هست. موشک شفق درواقع محصول تغییر کاربری در موشک زمین به هوای "شهاب ثاقب" میباشد که با افزودن جستجوگر حرارتی به آن، تولید شده است.

دقیقا مشخص نیست که پروژه ساخت بدون بالک جلویی شفق، کنسل شده است یا هر دو گونه با هم در جریان هستند.

خود موشک شهاب ثاقب هم در سالهای اخیر گونه بدون بالکش توسعه داده شده است.

مشخصات گونه قبلی موشک شفق بدین شرح اعلام شده بود: برد 8-10 کیلومتر، سرعت 2-2.7 ماخ و وزن 60 کیلوگرم، میزان نفوذ در زره تا 1500 میلیمتر و دقت 30 سانتیمتر در 10 کیلومتر

مشخصات گونه جدید این موشک تاکنون اعلام نشده است. حتی ممکن است که این مدل جدید بجای نقش هوا به زمین، نقش هوا به هوا هم داشته باشد که البته صرفا یک احتمال است. همچنین سیکر موشک به نظر از نوع اپتیکی هست.

در کل میتوان گفت که موشک_ضدزره_شفق مشخصات بهتری نسبت به موشک_ضدزره_آذرخش دارد که روز گذشته رونمایی شد و همین موضوع این فرضیه را تقویت میکند که موشک آذرخش، درواقع بازسازی و تغییر کاربری سایدوایندرهای از رده خارج بوده است نه طراحی و ساخت موشک جدید.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456712
> 
> 
> Night vision cameras are made by Iran. Iran has built many cameras in recent years. The heavy Muharram machine gun is very large and its much slower than the smaller machine guns, but it also has a higher caliber. I do not think it would be possible to install a large machine gun like Moharram on helicopters. The machine gun that was shown in the picture is Nasir, which is much better than the Muharram machine gun for air support.
> 
> nasir machine gun
> 
> View attachment 456713
> View attachment 456714
> 
> 
> akhgar machine gun
> 
> View attachment 456715
> View attachment 456716
> View attachment 456717
> 
> 
> View attachment 456718
> 
> 
> View attachment 456719
> View attachment 456720
> View attachment 456721
> View attachment 456722
> View attachment 456723
> [/QUO





skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456712
> 
> 
> Night vision cameras are made by Iran. Iran has built many cameras in recent years. The heavy Muharram machine gun is very large and its much slower than the smaller machine guns, but it also has a higher caliber. I do not think it would be possible to install a large machine gun like Moharram on helicopters. The machine gun that was shown in the picture is Nasir, which is much better than the Muharram machine gun for air support.
> 
> nasir machine gun
> 
> View attachment 456713
> View attachment 456714
> 
> 
> akhgar machine gun
> 
> View attachment 456715
> View attachment 456716
> View attachment 456717
> 
> 
> View attachment 456718
> 
> 
> View attachment 456719
> View attachment 456720
> View attachment 456721
> View attachment 456722
> View attachment 456723



Thanks for the clarification! Makes a lot more sense now; thought it was Muharram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Human One

OldTwilight said:


> and bomb a turkish bridge ...



When?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Muhammed45

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 456941
> View attachment 456942
> View attachment 456943
> View attachment 456944

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

mohammad45 said:


>


میخواستم پستش کنم الان 

Iranian Azarakhsh missile
.
.
انتشار تصویر جدیدی از شلیک 
موشک_ضدزره_آذرخش
.
.
همانطور که در تصویر مشخص هست، موشک از پرتابگر زمینی شلیک شده است.

گفته شده است که در حالت شلیک از پرتابگر زمینی، علاوه بر نقش ضدزره، نقش موشک زمین به هوا علیه اهداف ارتفاع پست را نیز خواهد داشت، درصورت صحت این گفته منطقی هست که در حالت شلیک از بالگرد نیز بتواند نقش هوا به هوا را نیز ایفا کند.

البته آنچه که مشخص هست در حالت استفاده علیه اهداف هوایی تغییراتی باید در سرجنگی و همچنین افزودن فیوز مجاورتی در موشک اعمال شود تا مناسب این نقش باشد.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

mohammad45 said:


>


What is new with this photo?


----------



## Parsipride

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 457681
> View attachment 457682



What aircraft is this? Is it the shared 278? I thought it was just prototype like all the other Iranian Helicopters we have seen so far.


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 457483



why a helicopter of the Italian Army?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

cockpit of new upgraded Cobras:
https://yekupload.ir/4Ntu/IRIAA_Cobra_and_Bell214_FLIR_upgrade.mp4
invention of Channel one HD !







In my opinion it has a better cockpit design compared to what we saw in Toufan2 helicopters which had a huge stick between the legs of the pilot!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Parsipride said:


> What aircraft is this? Is it the shared 278? I thought it was just prototype like all the other Iranian Helicopters we have seen so far.




No .this is photo of a iranian Cobra helicopter , which has been completely overhauled.



sahureka2 said:


> why a helicopter of the Italian Army?




In the above picture, you see a Iran-made helicopter ( shahed 218 ) that is quite similar to that helicopter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> cockpit of new upgraded Cobras:
> https://yekupload.ir/4Ntu/IRIAA_Cobra_and_Bell214_FLIR_upgrade.mp4
> invention of Channel one HD !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my opinion it has a better cockpit design compared to what we saw in Toufan2 helicopters which had a huge stick between the legs of the pilot!



Is this what your referring too as a huge stick? 





Building Helmets equipped with simple sensors should be a requirement for all Iranian HELO's equipped with cameras or IR sensors 

Even if you don't invest in building a Helmet mounted heads up display at the very least they should build helmets with simple sensors so the camera and or gun moves based on the movement of the weapons officer or co-pilots helmet then locks towards the general direction of a target with a push of a button and then a joystick and standard MFD screen is used for more detailed targeting

OR you can go with a single large touch screen with multiple fixed cameras or a rotating camera that shows 120-180 degree panoramic view and you select your target general location by touch allowing your more advanced sensors to zoom in and lock on that position 

If your not worried about EMP's these would be fairly simple and comparatively inexpensive upgrades


----------



## zartosht

Some Bad News/dose of reality for people who might think a domestic fighter program is in the making.

looks like Japan has abandoned its attempt at building a completely domestic stealth fighter jet due to financial and capacity restraints. and are looking to work with an existing American/british design. 

this in spite of putting 40 billion dollars into the program, and being goddamn Japan. one of the most advanced countries in the world with a many years of experience 

http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201803090026.html
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/jap...opment-of-5th-generation-stealth-fighter-jet/

I think people VASTLY underestimate the amount of resources, capacity, money and dedication it takes to build a modern fighter jet. 

Irans best shot I think might be Russia for the foreseeable future. given the state of western/Russian relations. theres no reason why the Iranian government shouldn't be able to negotiate a serious TOT deal with the Russians if they are actually commited. (The Chinese option is also a dead end as they way too vulnerable to western pressure) 

That might be irans only realistic shot of having an airforce in the next few decades.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

zartosht said:


> Some Bad News/dose of reality for people who might think a domestic fighter program is in the making.
> 
> looks like Japan has abandoned its attempt at building a completely domestic stealth fighter jet due to financial and capacity restraints. and are looking to work with an existing American/british design.
> 
> this in spite of putting 40 billion dollars into the program, and being goddamn Japan. one of the most advanced countries in the world with a many years of experience
> 
> http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201803090026.html
> https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/jap...opment-of-5th-generation-stealth-fighter-jet/
> 
> I think people VASTLY underestimate the amount of resources, capacity, money and dedication it takes to build a modern fighter jet.
> 
> Irans best shot I think might be Russia for the foreseeable future. given the state of western/Russian relations. theres no reason why the Iranian government shouldn't be able to negotiate a serious TOT deal with the Russians if they are actually commited. (The Chinese option is also a dead end as they way too vulnerable to western pressure)
> 
> That might be irans only realistic shot of having an airforce in the next few decades.


translation to your news:
Americans scrapped their puppet's domestic fighter program. nothing surprising.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

zartosht said:


> Some Bad News/dose of reality for people who might think a domestic fighter program is in the making.
> 
> looks like Japan has abandoned its attempt at building a completely domestic stealth fighter jet due to financial and capacity restraints. and are looking to work with an existing American/british design.
> 
> this in spite of putting 40 billion dollars into the program, and being goddamn Japan. one of the most advanced countries in the world with a many years of experience
> 
> http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201803090026.html
> https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/jap...opment-of-5th-generation-stealth-fighter-jet/
> 
> I think people VASTLY underestimate the amount of resources, capacity, money and dedication it takes to build a modern fighter jet.
> 
> Irans best shot I think might be Russia for the foreseeable future. given the state of western/Russian relations. theres no reason why the Iranian government shouldn't be able to negotiate a serious TOT deal with the Russians if they are actually commited. (The Chinese option is also a dead end as they way too vulnerable to western pressure)
> 
> That might be irans only realistic shot of having an airforce in the next few decades.


nothing new , USA did the same to Canada . at a time they had a domestic jet that was better than usa conterparts but USA bribed some of their politicians and the program get scrapped.
it was called Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow , the jet first flight was in 1958 and it was supposed to be Canada air force main interceptor , it could reach Mach 2 and fly up to 50000 feet , they even built a jet engine for the aircraft which was called Orenda PS.13 Iroquois and was better than Pratt & Whitney J75 that USA used at the same time.





and guess what they get instead of that superior interceptor, this inferior fighter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_F-101_Voodoo

not only that even Israel once had an indigenous fighter program ,but after some serious talk from uncle Sam they had to abandon it and be contented with F16 and permission to play with them to some extent.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> nothing new , USA did the same to Canada . at a time they had a domestic jet that was better than usa conterparts but USA bribed some of their politicians and the program get scrapped.
> it was called Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow , the jet first flight was in 1958 and it was supposed to be Canada air force main interceptor , it could reach Mach 2 and fly up to 50000 feet , they even built a jet engine for the aircraft which was called Orenda PS.13 Iroquois and was better than Pratt & Whitney J75 that USA used at the same time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and guess what they get instead of that superior interceptor, this inferior fighter
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_F-101_Voodoo
> 
> not only that even Israel once had an indigenous fighter program ,but after some serious talk from uncle Sam they had to abandon it and be contented with F16 and permission to play with them to some extent.


By the way a domestic fighter jet is really expensive .. I hope it wouldn't stop us.


----------



## zartosht

I honestly suspected the American pressure as being one of the main reasons... and I'm quite familiar with the avro arrow debacle. There is still controversy surrounding it.. but one has to give the benefit of the doubt and assume Japanese politicians are not complete sell out traitors and some rational reasoning went towards this decision. 

you have to consider that when it comes to aircraft: Building prototypes and building production planes is a completely different ballgame. Even in serious aircraft producing nations like the US/Russia. It takes them a good decade of work, refinement and pouring cash to work out the kinks and come to a finished usable product after their prototypes make their maiden flights. ( Just look at all the delays, and difficulty the F35 is facing. Despite throwing a trillion dollars at it, and having a century of aircraft building experience, and the best engineers money can buy working on it.) 

building the critical parts like the engine is hard. But building a reliable engine is what sets the serious players apart from. Could an inexperienced Canada have been able to convert the avrow into a workable product? while still keeping it financially viable? Its a question people are still debating... 

But id cautios on the Zionist plane. Their piece of crap never stood a chance. they are a welfare state living off the teet of the American tax payer. THe americans were already on the hook for subsidizing the Zionist military to the tune of billions (in peacetime, with room for unlimited growth in time of need). Why would they be funding them to make them a competitor?

makes no sense whatsoever. The Zionist economy cannot support projects the size of aircraft. Better to concentrate on certain sub-systems. an area they can be productive in, and make a little money out of.


----------



## Hack-Hook

zartosht said:


> I honestly suspected the American pressure as being one of the main reasons... and I'm quite familiar with the avro arrow debacle. There is still controversy surrounding it.. but one has to give the benefit of the doubt and assume Japanese politicians are not complete sell out traitors and some rational reasoning went towards this decision.
> 
> you have to consider that when it comes to aircraft: Building prototypes and building production planes is a completely different ballgame. Even in serious aircraft producing nations like the US/Russia. It takes them a good decade of work, refinement and pouring cash to work out the kinks and come to a finished usable product after their prototypes make their maiden flights. ( Just look at all the delays, and difficulty the F35 is facing. Despite throwing a trillion dollars at it, and having a century of aircraft building experience, and the best engineers money can buy working on it.)
> 
> building the critical parts like the engine is hard. But building a reliable engine is what sets the serious players apart from. Could an inexperienced Canada have been able to convert the avrow into a workable product? while still keeping it financially viable? Its a question people are still debating...
> 
> But id cautios on the Zionist plane. Their piece of crap never stood a chance. they are a welfare state living off the teet of the American tax payer. THe americans were already on the hook for subsidizing the Zionist military to the tune of billions (in peacetime, with room for unlimited growth in time of need). Why would they be funding them to make them a competitor?
> 
> makes no sense whatsoever. The Zionist economy cannot support projects the size of aircraft. Better to concentrate on certain sub-systems. an area they can be productive in, and make a little money out of.


and well after Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow the same thing happened to IAI Lavi and now Mitsubishi X-2 .
all of them were competing with USA offer or were better than them all of them have finished their flight test with best scores and all of them get cancelled after some talking with Uncle Sam . so well one thinks......

by the way all the aircraft had their engines and subsystem designed so there was no problem there as a matter of fact the money which was to spend on designing were spend so nobody can claim the design expense as result of cancellation . the only thing that remained for these aircraft was serial production and at this stage they get cancelled.


----------



## zartosht

Yes that's the hardest and most important part. Getting it into serial production is what seperates the the boys from the men. As the kinks and problems become to costly to overcome, the aircraft might be deemed not financially viable. 

just look at the way the Indians are chasing their tails in this regard... And they have more money, resources and better access to foreign tech then iran. 

just look at the F-35... its been in production a decade. its hundreds of billions over budget. if it weren't for nearly unlimited American resources, lesser nations might have deemed it financially non-viable and killed or re-designed it into something cheaper/simpler long time ago.

There is room for debate on the Avro.... (though I'm a skeptic on it based on what ive read). But there is no question in my mind the Zionist piece of crap was not viable. The Zionist are the only entity on earth that americans actually sacrifice their national interests for. There is no way on earth I would ever believe any lobby could bully them off a product in their national interest to appease uncle sam. 

Canada and japan maybe. not Israel.


----------



## Hack-Hook

zartosht said:


> Yes that's the hardest and most important part. Getting it into serial production is what seperates the the boys from the men. As the kinks and problems become to costly to overcome, the aircraft might be deemed not financially viable.
> 
> just look at the way the Indians are chasing their tails in this regard... And they have more money, resources and better access to foreign tech then iran.
> 
> just look at the F-35... its been in production a decade. its hundreds of billions over budget. if it weren't for nearly unlimited American resources, lesser nations might have deemed it financially non-viable and killed or re-designed it into something cheaper/simpler long time ago.
> 
> There is room for debate on the Avro.... (though I'm a skeptic on it based on what ive read). But there is no question in my mind the Zionist piece of crap was not viable. The Zionist are the only entity on earth that americans actually sacrifice their national interests for. There is no way on earth I would ever believe any lobby could bully them off a product in their national interest to appease uncle sam.
> 
> Canada and japan maybe. not Israel.


India problem is they can't still find a suitable solution for engine.
about IAI Lavi well there was some debate in USA congress and they refused to dish out the money needed for producing it and at the time Israel used 28% of its income on military and they simply couldn't afford to spend more on building airplanes.

and serial producing an airplane which has completed its development is not more expensive than building it .and honestly you thin Mitsubishi X-2 would have been more expensive than F-35 that Japan gonna get at best as F-22 is forbidden to be sold


----------



## zartosht

Well engines are probably the most difficult part of an airplane to build. especially building a reliable engine. there are very few countries that have been able to successfully do it. you seem to be downplaying the indian problems. 

their progress on airframes leaves a lot to be desired also.... I think Indians are a good example of what not to do. 

also to say that going from prototype to production model is not a big deal/expensive is completely false.

just look at the f-35 production. Boeing was actually competing for and put out a prototype https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-32 to try and win the trillion dollar contract. how much do you think they spent on it? not even in the same universe as the figures were looking at for the F35. 

I really don't think you grasp how complex building a state of the art military fighter plane is. 1950s tech is not comparable to todays standards. 

It is not a single machine. But many different machines and components that have to work perfectly together. That's the real challenge. 

just to give you a single example. The trillion dollar f-35. After decades of work, production, the pedigree of a century of aircraft building and unlimited time and money going into it. 

one of the many current problems it has is the "bump" when it takes off from aircraft carriers. There is a slight design flaw that gives the aircraft a "kick" when it takes off. And that is enough to sometimes even knock the all important helmet off the pilots head and temporarily disorient him. 

They are seriously considering just leaving this design flaw as is as it would take many billions of dollars and probably years and a large re-design to fix.. 

you have to overcome many challenges like this from prototype, To production, to serial production before you get to the end product. to say that from prototype to finished product is a simple or cheap process is completely false.

that is probably what scared japan as well... 

looking at the history of modern aircraft. virtually all of them have been greatly over budget, Late and faced with enormous difficulties. 

If japan wanted to invest 40 billion in the program. They would have had to take the risks of massive cost overruns taking the project into 100 billion dollar categories with no guarantee of success......

their other option was to go for more of a sure thing. And join the American program. Which is the option they chose. There is room for debate on it, but to automatically dismiss it as some sort of national betrayal by Japanese politicans with 0 rational reasoning behind it would be false.


----------



## TheImmortal

zartosht said:


> Well engines are probably the most difficult part of an airplane to build. especially building a reliable engine. there are very few countries that have been able to successfully do it. you seem to be downplaying the indian problems.
> 
> their progress on airframes leaves a lot to be desired also.... I think Indians are a good example of what not to do.
> 
> also to say that going from prototype to production model is not a big deal/expensive is completely false.
> 
> just look at the f-35 production. Boeing was actually competing for and put out a prototype https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-32 to try and win the trillion dollar contract. how much do you think they spent on it? not even in the same universe as the figures were looking at for the F35.
> 
> I really don't think you grasp how complex building a state of the art military fighter plane is. 1950s tech is not comparable to todays standards.
> 
> It is not a single machine. But many different machines and components that have to work perfectly together. That's the real challenge.
> 
> just to give you a single example. The trillion dollar f-35. After decades of work, production, the pedigree of a century of aircraft building and unlimited time and money going into it.
> 
> one of the many current problems it has is the "bump" when it takes off from aircraft carriers. There is a slight design flaw that gives the aircraft a "kick" when it takes off. And that is enough to sometimes even knock the all important helmet off the pilots head and temporarily disorient him.
> 
> They are seriously considering just leaving this design flaw as is as it would take many billions of dollars and probably years and a large re-design to fix..
> 
> you have to overcome many challenges like this from prototype, To production, to serial production before you get to the end product. to say that from prototype to finished product is a simple or cheap process is completely false.
> 
> that is probably what scared japan as well...
> 
> looking at the history of modern aircraft. virtually all of them have been greatly over budget, Late and faced with enormous difficulties.
> 
> If japan wanted to invest 40 billion in the program. They would have had to take the risks of massive cost overruns taking the project into 100 billion dollar categories with no guarantee of success......
> 
> their other option was to go for more of a sure thing. And join the American program. Which is the option they chose. There is room for debate on it, but to automatically dismiss it as some sort of national betrayal by Japanese politicans with 0 rational reasoning behind it would be false.



Comparing 1950's tech to today's standard is just as flawed.

You have to consider the technology available (no supercomputer simulations, no perfect cutting lasers, etc.) at the time for the product produced. So while a 1950's plane made today doesn't seem like a huge feat, it was a big one in 1950 with the technology they had to work with.

My point is that enormous hurdles occur throughout history irregardless of the time period. A country like Japan and Israel had/has many options in regarding procuring advanced arms tech. Thus the most economical is usually undertaken. Iran on the other has little to no options to accure advanced arms. Thus irregardless of the monetary/economic pain it likely has to proceed with a domestic fighter program.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Heard from inside sources that Iran is still low-key working on a fighter jet with Russia.

Can anyone confirm or deny this?


----------



## raptor22

@Hack-Hook @AmirPatriot @VEVAK


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> @Hack-Hook @AmirPatriot @VEVAK
> View attachment 460178


Since when has Iran had the Su-35...


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Since when has Iran had the Su-35...


Nothing officially yet

All rumors, but this website is more credible with Dmitry Rogozin quotes during his meeting with DM Dehqan. 
https://southfront.org/russia-suggests-iran-buy-su-27sm3-fighters-iran-wants-su-30sm-su-35-reports/


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> Since when has Iran had the Su-35...


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

Those are just the reports of talks from last year, mostly based on reports from B.T. with only a tiny hint of Russian confirmation of the talks. Nothing new there. 

Assuming all that talk last year was true (which only discussed talks, with no deals apparently signed), the MoD wanted the Su-30SME, arguably the most advanced Flanker export model, but the Russians weren't keen on it. The idea of them offering Su-27SM3 at first seems a little odd. For one, there are actually some evidence this variant are indeed new-built (various news reports referred to them as "new" vs the modernized Su-27SM/SM2) or at least could be. Regardless of whether they would have been new-built or modernized ex-RuAF stock, in terms of technology, they would have been a major step down from the Su-30SME. 

The SM3 effectively mated the avionics of the Su-30MK2 to the Su-27S airframe plus new-built engines with increased thrust and reliability. So while it's a decently equipped bird, it looks rather poor compared to the PESA-equipped Su-30SM. 

The confusion with the variants is understandable though. What most folks don't know is that there are two separate/competing production lines of Su-30s alone: KnAAPO-designed Su-30MK family (MKK, MK2, MKV) and Irkut-designed Su-30MKI family (MKI, MKA, MKM, SM). The Su-35 family is built by another group as well. So today, there are at least three groups of Flanker builders who are effectively independent of each other and even compete with one another but yet fall under the overall Sukhoi umbrella.

Raptor22,

...and? A random tweet from someone who is NOT the MoD or an official Russian source.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KapitaanAli

zartosht said:


> Well engines are probably the most difficult part of an airplane to build. especially building a reliable engine. there are very few countries that have been able to successfully do it. you seem to be downplaying the indian problems.
> 
> their progress on airframes leaves a lot to be desired also.... I think Indians are a good example of what not to do.


Our problem was that the development agency was asked to change the parameters midway to make it a multi-role fighter. And so, we decided to develop the engine and AESA among other things by ourselves, which as you know, is elite tech and resulted in delays.
Sanctions in between made it worse.

If you can upgrade your fighters like we did with M2000, Mig29, Jaguar and Mig21 to modern standards as much as possible, there's nothing about our slow-ish development that you shouldn't follow.
But if you desperately need fighters, don't follow us.
Indeed, you shouldn't follow us because IRIAF desperately needs new fighters and lacks the resources to upgrade their fighters beyond a limit. So either develop a fighter that's on par with Tejas Mk1 (not Mk1A) with Russian/Chinese help, or buy Sukhois. Or both.


----------



## AmirPatriot

eagle2007 said:


> ALCON,
> 
> Those are just the reports of talks from last year, mostly based on reports from B.T. with only a tiny hint of Russian confirmation of the talks. Nothing new there.
> 
> Assuming all that talk last year was true (which only discussed talks, with no deals apparently signed), the MoD wanted the Su-30SME, arguably the most advanced Flanker export model, but the Russians weren't keen on it. The idea of them offering Su-27SM3 at first seems a little odd. For one, there are actually some evidence this variant are indeed new-built (various news reports referred to them as "new" vs the modernized Su-27SM/SM2) or at least could be. Regardless of whether they would have been new-built or modernized ex-RuAF stock, in terms of technology, they would have been a major step down from the Su-30SME.
> 
> The SM3 effectively mated the avionics of the Su-30MK2 to the Su-27S airframe plus new-built engines with increased thrust and reliability. So while it's a decently equipped bird, it looks rather poor compared to the PESA-equipped Su-30SM.
> 
> The confusion with the variants is understandable though. What most folks don't know is that there are two separate/competing production lines of Su-30s alone: KnAAPO-designed Su-30MK family (MKK, MK2, MKV) and Irkut-designed Su-30MKI family (MKI, MKA, MKM, SM). The Su-35 family is built by another group as well. So today, there are at least three groups of Flanker builders who are effectively independent of each other and even compete with one another but yet fall under the overall Sukhoi umbrella.
> 
> Raptor22,
> 
> ...and? A random tweet from someone who is NOT the MoD or an official Russian source.



I don't really buy in to B.T's claim that Russia doesn't want to sell Iran the SME because Russia is somehow concerned about Iranian actions in the region. Going off his Twitter, it seems all he does are political rants now.

I just think the Russians were not keen on selling it before the sanctions end in 2020. It is possible they fear repercussions in other areas. 

I don't know how much you know about Russian arms export trends, but I wonder if some of their cautiousness is because Iran hasn't put forward a big enough order to entice them into the sale. I do think Iran needs to buy a significant number of fighters and would be concerned if it spent all that political capital on a major arms purchase, without making a big arms purchase. The S-300 saga comes to mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eagle2007

AmirPatriot,

Quantity is likely of little interest to Russia, since they quite recently agreed to sell just 6 Su-30SMEs to Myanmar. This is a tiny order, especially compared to previous orders of this sub-family of Flankers (Algeria, India, and Malaysia). 

I believe Russia's hesitance, if the reports are true, is a real mystery. Tis the season for giving the US and her allies the proverbial finger and yet, the Russians supposedly offer Iran one of the cheapest, least capable Flanker model? Russia often prides itself with the idea that they won't move to upset a region's balance of power, but in a time when the Saudis are importing 84 new-built F-15SAs (the most capable Eagle ever) and have now reportedly signed a new order of Eurofighter Typhoons, isn't it high time the Russians cash in and do a little re-balancing? The delivery of the S-300s is trivial given the history of the deal itself and the relatively small number of systems. Either the Russians are diligently holding the timeline of the nuclear agreement or something else is in play between the two nations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

AmirPatriot said:


> I don't really buy in to B.T's claim that Russia doesn't want to sell Iran the SME because Russia is somehow concerned about Iranian actions in the region. Going off his Twitter, it seems all he does are political rants now.



BTW, there even B.T. wrote that there are no problems with the Su-30SME, all about Su-35. 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893084046724648962
However, I repeat that all the info from B.T. there looks completely untrustworthy, as he there assured that Russia was ready to deliverу the Su-27SM3 in the past year, in violation of the existing UN sanctions.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893169038708355074


----------



## Muhammed45

Navigator said:


> BTW, there even B.T. wrote that there are no problems with the Su-30SME, all about Su-35.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893084046724648962
> However, I repeat that all the info from B.T. there looks completely untrustworthy, as he there assured that Russia was ready to deliverу the Su-27SM3 in the past year, in violation of the existing UN sanctions.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/893169038708355074


The problem with SU 27 SM3 is that it's radar has no superiority to AN/AWG9 and Russia has no newly built SU 27 series, and its production line doesn't exist anymore. The few remaining Tomcats are worth of investing in upgrading and modification compared to SU 27.

Even if there was delivery of SU 30, a single seat hunter is still needed. Name it SU 35.


----------



## Navigator

mohammad45 said:


> The problem with SU 27 SM3 is that it's radar has no superiority to AN/AWG9 and Russia has no newly built SU 27 series, and its production line doesn't exist anymore. The few remaining Tomcats are worth of investing in upgrading and modification compared to SU 27.
> Even if there was delivery of SU 30, a single seat hunter is still needed. Name it SU 35.



Yes, but I think that 24-48 Su-30SME as universal multi-role fighter could be an excellent initial purchase for Iran, immediately after the end of UN sanctions in 2020. There anyway Iranian airforce need in practically complete modernisation, but the level of Iranian military spending will not allow to simultaneously buy everything at once.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Navigator said:


> Yes, but I think that 24-48 Su-30SME as universal multi-role fighter could be an excellent initial purchase for Iran, immediately after the end of UN sanctions in 2020. There anyway Iranian airforce need in practically complete modernisation, but the level of Iranian military spending will not allow to simultaneously buy everything at once.


True

Some of our friends are suggesting Chinese made aircrafts specifically J family. I am sure that China has had huge progress in aviation industry, but obviously the SU 30 SM non export version is still superior to J 20. Not undermining Chinese industry, but fact is fact even if it's bitter. While having J 20 mass production line, they bought SU 35 export version, says a lot. 

American are comparing F 35 to SU 35, in Syria SU 35 went on F 22, asking for its ID lol, I have no doubt about Russian aviation industry, hopefully we will invest as much as possible to buy a reliable one not outdated useless SU 27s.


----------



## Tps43

mohammad45 said:


> True
> 
> Some of our friends are suggesting Chinese made aircrafts specifically J family. I am sure that China has had huge progress in aviation industry, but obviously the SU 30 SM non export version is still superior to J 20. Not undermining Chinese industry, but fact is fact even if it's bitter. While having J 20 mass production line, they bought SU 35 export version, says a lot.
> 
> American are comparing F 35 to SU 35, in Syria SU 35 went on F 22, asking for its ID lol, I have no doubt about Russian aviation industry, hopefully we will invest as much as possible to buy a reliable one not outdated useless SU 27s.


U guys cant get JH-7 JF 17 and J 10 from china nothing else.


----------



## raptor22

eagle2007 said:


> ALCON,
> 
> Those are just the reports of talks from last year, mostly based on reports from B.T. with only a tiny hint of Russian confirmation of the talks. Nothing new there.
> 
> Assuming all that talk last year was true (which only discussed talks, with no deals apparently signed), the MoD wanted the Su-30SME, arguably the most advanced Flanker export model, but the Russians weren't keen on it. The idea of them offering Su-27SM3 at first seems a little odd. For one, there are actually some evidence this variant are indeed new-built (various news reports referred to them as "new" vs the modernized Su-27SM/SM2) or at least could be. Regardless of whether they would have been new-built or modernized ex-RuAF stock, in terms of technology, they would have been a major step down from the Su-30SME.
> 
> The SM3 effectively mated the avionics of the Su-30MK2 to the Su-27S airframe plus new-built engines with increased thrust and reliability. So while it's a decently equipped bird, it looks rather poor compared to the PESA-equipped Su-30SM.
> 
> The confusion with the variants is understandable though. What most folks don't know is that there are two separate/competing production lines of Su-30s alone: KnAAPO-designed Su-30MK family (MKK, MK2, MKV) and Irkut-designed Su-30MKI family (MKI, MKA, MKM, SM). The Su-35 family is built by another group as well. So today, there are at least three groups of Flanker builders who are effectively independent of each other and even compete with one another but yet fall under the overall Sukhoi umbrella.
> 
> Raptor22,
> 
> ...and? A random tweet from someone who is NOT the MoD or an official Russian source.


The tweet is from an Iranian F14 pilot colonel ... sure not an official one but he wasn't the only one that made such a statement ... all the sudden all of them decided to make such a false claim? 
Another questions is did any f15 eagles crashed in Persian gulf recently?


----------



## Muhammed45

tps77 said:


> U guys cant get JH-7 JF 17 and J 10 from china nothing else.


Your rival is India my friend.

Indian made Su 30 Mki had bad losses against F 16s, block 3 of AESA j17 can easily counter them.

Our requirements are different and more complicated.

We want a good and reliable fighter, otherwise, not going to buy fighter, due to budget problems, prefer to invest in missiles rather than unreliable fighter jets


----------



## Tps43

mohammad45 said:


> Your rival is India my friend.
> 
> Indian made Su 30 Mki had bad losses against F 16s, block 3 of AESA j17 can easily counter them.
> 
> Our requirements are different and more different.


No I am answering wrt u saying that people in iran are favouring J series from china and In J series u cant get any variant of flankers btw I am in favour of u guys getting SU 35 not Su 30.


----------



## Muhammed45

tps77 said:


> No I am answering wrt u saying that people in iran are favouring J series from china and In J series u cant get any variant of flankers btw I am in favour of u guys getting SU 35 not Su 30.


Anf I wasn't talking about people in Iran, most of us are not favouring China made fighters

@VEVAK


----------



## yavar

tps77 said:


> U guys cant get JH-7 JF 17 and J 10 from china nothing else.


we don't have much interest in Chinese equipments

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tps43

yavar said:


> we don't have much interest in Chinese equipments


So?


----------



## VEVAK

tps77 said:


> No I am answering wrt u saying that people in iran are favouring J series from china and In J series u cant get any variant of flankers btw I am in favour of u guys getting SU 35 not Su 30.





mohammad45 said:


> Your rival is India my friend.
> 
> Indian made Su 30 Mki had bad losses against F 16s, block 3 of AESA j17 can easily counter them.
> 
> Our requirements are different and more complicated.
> 
> We want a good and reliable fighter, otherwise, not going to buy fighter, due to budget problems, prefer to invest in missiles rather than unreliable fighter jets





mohammad45 said:


> True
> 
> Some of our friends are suggesting Chinese made aircrafts specifically J family. I am sure that China has had huge progress in aviation industry, but obviously the SU 30 SM non export version is still superior to J 20. Not undermining Chinese industry, but fact is fact even if it's bitter. While having J 20 mass production line, they bought SU 35 export version, says a lot.
> 
> American are comparing F 35 to SU 35, in Syria SU 35 went on F 22, asking for its ID lol, I have no doubt about Russian aviation industry, hopefully we will invest as much as possible to buy a reliable one not outdated useless SU 27s.



Due to Iran's size single engine fighters like the J-10, J-17 & F-16 will be useless to Iran! At best those fighter have a max combat radius of 500km 

And yes you can potentially upgrade any of those platforms to become superior even in BVR capability to Su-30's or Su-35's but addressing their lack of range is a completely different matter as is their ability to produce electrical power that will also be limited to the max capability of one engine as appose to two 
And due to their limited payload capacity & power output the potential for any future upgrades will also be limited and for Iran future upgrades in the coming decades could mean being able to put laser countermeasures on your fighter platforms 

Due to Iran's size and security concerns and for Iran to have any hope of it's fighters surviving an initial attack a new fleet of Iranian fighters would by the most part have to be placed at bases that are ~200km or more inside Iranian territory (Isfahan, Shiraz, Hamedan...) because the MAIN thing that would protect Iranian fighters on the ground are your early warning systems and your fleets readiness and ability to scramble at a moments notice! NOT SAM's

So If you were to ask me I would pick 100 Iranian assembled twin seat Su-30's over 250 F-16 or J-10's any day

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tps43

VEVAK said:


> Due to Iran's size single engine fighters like the J-10, J-17 & F-16 will be useless to Iran! At best those fighter have a max combat radius of 500km
> 
> And yes you can potentially upgrade any of those platforms to become superior even in BVR capability to Su-30's or Su-35's but addressing their lack of range is a completely different matter as is their ability to produce electrical power that will also be limited to the max capability of one engine as appose to two
> And due to their limited payload capacity & power output the potential for any future upgrades will also be limited and for Iran future upgrades in the coming decades could mean being able to put laser countermeasures on your fighter platforms
> 
> Due to Iran's size and security concerns and for Iran to have any hope of it's fighters surviving an initial attack a new fleet of Iranian fighters would by the most part have to be placed at bases that are ~200km or more inside Iranian territory (Isfahan, Shiraz, Hamedan...) because the MAIN thing that would protect Iranian fighters on the ground are your early warning systems and your fleets readiness and ability to scramble at a moments notice! NOT SAM's
> 
> So If you were to ask me I would pick 100 Iranian assembled twin seat Su-30's over 250 F-16 or J-10's any day


1 Question : What about the replacements of J 7 , F 5 , F 4 and Mirage F 1's . Economy of Iran doesnt allow to have and maintain 250 Flankers at best It may allow for 120-150 .
P.S= J 10 , JFT and F16 have combat radius of more than 500 km and F 16 + J 10 are medium multi role fighters.



VEVAK said:


> Due to Iran's size single engine fighters like the J-10, J-17 & F-16 will be useless to Iran! At best those fighter have a max combat radius of 500km
> 
> And yes you can potentially upgrade any of those platforms to become superior even in BVR capability to Su-30's or Su-35's but addressing their lack of range is a completely different matter as is their ability to produce electrical power that will also be limited to the max capability of one engine as appose to two
> And due to their limited payload capacity & power output the potential for any future upgrades will also be limited and for Iran future upgrades in the coming decades could mean being able to put laser countermeasures on your fighter platforms
> 
> Due to Iran's size and security concerns and for Iran to have any hope of it's fighters surviving an initial attack a new fleet of Iranian fighters would by the most part have to be placed at bases that are ~200km or more inside Iranian territory (Isfahan, Shiraz, Hamedan...) because the MAIN thing that would protect Iranian fighters on the ground are your early warning systems and your fleets readiness and ability to scramble at a moments notice! NOT SAM's
> 
> So If you were to ask me I would pick 100 Iranian assembled twin seat Su-30's over 250 F-16 or J-10's any day


I suggest u guys a combo of Flankers and J 10 of 400 AC's TBH.


----------



## VEVAK

tps77 said:


> 1 Question : What about the replacements of J 7 , F 5 , F 4 and Mirage F 1's . Economy of Iran doesnt allow to have and maintain 250 Flankers at best It may allow for 120-150 .
> P.S= J 10 , JFT and F16 have combat radius of more than 500 km and F 16 + J 10 are medium multi role fighters.
> 
> 
> I suggest u guys a combo of Flankers and J 10 of 400 AC's TBH.



An F-16 armed with a fuel pod and 4 1000lb bombs has a max combat radius of 550km and in that configuration it's maneuverability and speed is quit limited

Also, in terms of cost just the cost of Fuel, maintenance, pilot training & ordinance cost over time means in a conflict in terms of overall costs it would be cheaper to use Missiles like the Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfaghar than fighters (And that's without the actual cost of the fighter it's self!)

As for replacing Iranian F-5, J-7, F-4's & F-1's for a fighter like the J-10 for now Iran's immediate concern is a platform for intercept operations as a back up to it's Air Defense and until that happens what's the point of talking about something that's a luxury rather than a necessity!

Mass producing Fatteh-110(250km), Fatteh-313(500km) & Zolfaghar(700km) in far greater numbers in my opinion should be a greater priority than purchasing fighters like the J-10, F-16 or JF-17

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

VEVAK said:


> An F-16 armed with a fuel pod and 4 1000lb bombs has a max combat radius of 550km and in that configuration it's maneuverability and speed is quit limited
> 
> Also, in terms of cost just the cost of Fuel, maintenance, pilot training & ordinance cost over time means in a conflict in terms of overall costs it would be cheaper to use Missiles like the Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfaghar than fighters (And that's without the actual cost of the fighter it's self!)
> 
> As for replacing Iranian F-5, J-7, F-4's & F-1's for a fighter like the J-10 for now Iran's immediate concern is a platform for intercept operations as a back up to it's Air Defense and until that happens what's the point of talking about something that's a luxury rather than a necessity!
> 
> Mass producing Fatteh-110(250km), Fatteh-313(500km) & Zolfaghar(700km) in far greater numbers in my opinion should be a greater priority than purchasing fighters like the J-10, F-16 or JF-17


Couldn't say better.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Navigator said:


> Yes, but I think that 24-48 Su-30SME as universal multi-role fighter could be an excellent initial purchase for Iran, immediately after the end of UN sanctions in 2020. There anyway Iranian airforce need in practically complete modernisation, but the level of Iranian military spending will not allow to simultaneously buy everything at once.



Far too small a number when the Saudis on the other side of the Persian Gulf will have 300+ F-15s and 120 EF Typhoons by the time all their orders are delivered...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

In reality, Saudi fighters need both *fuel *and air refueling from *U.S tankers* even to reach their targets in Yemen (Sana), U.S didn't give them neither the domestic fuel production, nor these tankers, even though it's current dictator is their own puppet.
Now imagine Saudis buy their tankers, were could they hide it?!


for those who haven't read it already:
* امیر عبداللهیان در برنامه "دست‌خط" مطرح کرد: *
*دمشق دو بار به اندازه تار مویی به سقوط نزدیک شد/ ماجرای نشست مسئولان نظام با رهبر انقلاب در ابتدای بحران سوریه/ اگر پیام مقتدارنه رهبری نبود، حتی یک جسد از منا برنمی‌گشت*


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> An F-16 armed with a fuel pod and 4 1000lb bombs has a max combat radius of 550km and in that configuration it's maneuverability and speed is quit limited
> 
> Also, in terms of cost just the cost of Fuel, maintenance, pilot training & ordinance cost over time means in a conflict in terms of overall costs it would be cheaper to use Missiles like the Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfaghar than fighters (And that's without the actual cost of the fighter it's self!)
> 
> As for replacing Iranian F-5, J-7, F-4's & F-1's for a fighter like the J-10 for now Iran's immediate concern is a platform for intercept operations as a back up to it's Air Defense and until that happens what's the point of talking about something that's a luxury rather than a necessity!
> 
> Mass producing Fatteh-110(250km), Fatteh-313(500km) & Zolfaghar(700km) in far greater numbers in my opinion should be a greater priority than purchasing fighters like the J-10, F-16 or JF-17


Certainly more important than J-10 or F-16 but I believe acquiring a noticeable fleet of Modern interceptors are more important.


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> In reality, Saudi fighters need both *fuel *and air refueling from *U.S tankers* even to reach their targets in Yemen (Sana), U.S didn't give them neither the domestic fuel production, nor these tankers, even though it's current dictator is their own puppet.
> Now imagine Saudis buy their tankers, were could they hide it?!
> 
> 
> for those who haven't read it already:
> * امیر عبداللهیان در برنامه "دست‌خط" مطرح کرد: *
> *دمشق دو بار به اندازه تار مویی به سقوط نزدیک شد/ ماجرای نشست مسئولان نظام با رهبر انقلاب در ابتدای بحران سوریه/ اگر پیام مقتدارنه رهبری نبود، حتی یک جسد از منا برنمی‌گشت*


They have.


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> They have.


VS 
the reality:
*Pentagon To Senate: We Can’t Know If U.S. Fuel Helps Saudi Arabia Kill Civilians In Yemen*
The Defense Department gave two reasons for not having that information. It said it does not know whether the Saudi and United Arab Emirates planes that receive American aerial refueling are headed for bombing runs or reconnaissance missions, and it cannot investigate the impact of Saudi-UAE airstrikes since Yemen is a conflict zone


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> VS
> the reality:
> *Pentagon To Senate: We Can’t Know If U.S. Fuel Helps Saudi Arabia Kill Civilians In Yemen*
> The Defense Department gave two reasons for not having that information. It said it does not know whether the Saudi and United Arab Emirates planes that receive American aerial refueling are headed for bombing runs or reconnaissance missions, and it cannot investigate the impact of Saudi-UAE airstrikes since Yemen is a conflict zone


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 460951


Your photo VS the *REALITY*, good luck.


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Your photo VS the *REALITY*, good luck.



The *REALITY *is that the RSAF DOES operate KC-135 tankers, and probably uses some of them in Yemen. But they also use US tankers, probably because they have to loiter over the area and need extra tankers to do that.


----------



## eagle2007

Mohsen & raptor22,

The RSAF has 5 remaining KE-3 aerial refueling aircraft. They originally imported 8 decades ago but they had three converted to specialized electronic warfare platforms. These were purchased alongside 5 E-3 AWACs. 

So the "TRUTH" is both of you are right in a way. The RSAF has an active and operational tanker fleet but given the sortie traffic over Yemen, a fleet of just 5 aircraft isn't enough for sustained ops. There is a golden rule of aircraft maintenance: the more you fly, the more you break and with older airframes, these breaks will increase in frequency and duration. Finally, if RSAF E-3s are anything like their American siblings, they're only getting harder and more expensive to maintain. 

So while the Saudis almost certainly are producing all the jet fuel they need, they don't have enough tankers to feasibly deliver the demand required by the RSAF, thus the USAF's assistance.

AmirPatriot,

To be clear, the RSAF does NOT have KC135s, but KE-3s. Saudi KE-3s have identical airframes and engines to their E-3 AWACs, which are truly Boeing 707s. 

USAF KC135s on the other hand, while very similar looking, are actually different. Their dimensions are subtly different, they have many small but important differences in components and design. 

But it's a common misunderstanding.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

eagle2007 said:


> Mohsen & raptor22,
> 
> The RSAF has 5 remaining KE-3 aerial refueling aircraft. They originally imported 8 decades ago but they had three converted to specialized electronic warfare platforms. These were purchased alongside 5 E-3 AWACs.
> 
> So the "TRUTH" is both of you are right in a way. The RSAF has an active and operational tanker fleet but given the sortie traffic over Yemen, a fleet of just 5 aircraft isn't enough for sustained ops. There is a golden rule of aircraft maintenance: the more you fly, the more you break and with older airframes, these breaks will increase in frequency and duration. Finally, if RSAF E-3s are anything like their American siblings, they're only getting harder and more expensive to maintain.
> 
> So while the Saudis almost certainly are producing all the jet fuel they need, they don't have enough tankers to feasibly deliver the demand required by the RSAF, thus the USAF's assistance.
> 
> AmirPatriot,
> 
> To be clear, the RSAF does NOT have KC135s, but KE-3s. Saudi KE-3s have identical airframes and engines to their E-3 AWACs, which are truly Boeing 707s.
> 
> USAF KC135s on the other hand, while very similar looking, are actually different. Their dimensions are subtly different, they have many small but important differences in components and design.
> 
> But it's a common misunderstanding.


sorry, but on both fuel and fuel tankers, I prefer to believe our own sources, which matches the reality and Americans admission, rather than other speculations.

Saudis had a very active air campaign at the beginning, but it has reduced greatly, I see no reason for aerial refueling from Americans tankers today, unless they have no tankers at all.


----------



## eagle2007

Mohsen,

IMHO, the fuel is an absurd point to argue, as the Saudis have abundant refining capacity and there's plenty of stats a simple Google search will return proving it.

But back to the tankers, you may be on to something. 

1) Availability- small fleets of unique aircraft tend to have poor availability, aka it's unlikely even under ideal conditions that all are fully mission capable. Even in the USAF, with nearly 400 tankers in inventory, ~25% are not mission ready at any given time. 
2) Age- The USAF has >30 E-3s and their availability is even worse than the tankers. The "youngest" KE-3 in Saudi service is 32 years old and if USAF E-3s are having an increasingly hard time keeping their flights up, imagine what the RSAF is going through. 

So, I will modify my previous comments. 

As you pointed out, the early phase of the intervention show major action by the RSAF, possibly the highest tempo the RSAF has ever exercised. Dozens and dozens of sorties per day for months on straight. When you have only 5 tankers supporting likely several squadrons of combat aircraft, the wear and tear likely increased "regular" maintenance to several times that of peacetime. Something else that crops up with increased flying is inspection cycles, especially heavy or depot-level maintenance. In peacetime, aircraft can go over a year without having to go through such because such inspections on based on hours flown/time on airframe. In this scenario, what normally would take a year or more to accumulate is done is just 1-2 months of sustained high tempo flying. Once 1 of the 5 are on the ground for heavy maintenance, the pressure on the remaining aircraft increases and so begins an escalation of maintenance problems. 

Under this kind of scenario, even with a decent supply chain, it's not hard to see how the fleet could become less and less available and eventually could become effectively grounded with only 2 or 3 airframes available for any operations and unable to conduct sustained high tempo for more than a week or so at a time. 

Finally, you have to remember one final factor: training. In addition to any combat operations, the RSAF still has to maintain and train new KE-3 crews and also be available for F-15 pilots for refueling ops training (which, for the F-15 pilots at least, is not as intensive). 

This would explain the need for USAF tankers, even to this day. The small and inadequately sized KE-3 fleet is simply incapable of dealing with this much workload. 

These problems will only escalate with the continued deliveries of the new F-15SAs (84 to be delivered over the next several years)...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

eagle2007 said:


> Mohsen,
> 
> IMHO, the fuel is an absurd point to argue, as the Saudis have abundant refining capacity and there's plenty of stats a simple Google search will return proving it.


well Abdollahian's argument was that Saudi's F-15 need a specific fuel which they don't produce it themselves. in your simple search, can you find anything about that?!


----------



## raptor22

eagle2007 said:


> Mohsen,
> 
> IMHO, the fuel is an absurd point to argue, as the Saudis have abundant refining capacity and there's plenty of stats a simple Google search will return proving it.
> 
> But back to the tankers, you may be on to something.
> 
> 1) Availability- small fleets of unique aircraft tend to have poor availability, aka it's unlikely even under ideal conditions that all are fully mission capable. Even in the USAF, with nearly 400 tankers in inventory, ~25% are not mission ready at any given time.
> 2) Age- The USAF has >30 E-3s and their availability is even worse than the tankers. The "youngest" KE-3 in Saudi service is 32 years old and if USAF E-3s are having an increasingly hard time keeping their flights up, imagine what the RSAF is going through.
> 
> So, I will modify my previous comments.
> 
> As you pointed out, the early phase of the intervention show major action by the RSAF, possibly the highest tempo the RSAF has ever exercised. Dozens and dozens of sorties per day for months on straight. When you have only 5 tankers supporting likely several squadrons of combat aircraft, the wear and tear likely increased "regular" maintenance to several times that of peacetime. Something else that crops up with increased flying is inspection cycles, especially heavy or depot-level maintenance. In peacetime, aircraft can go over a year without having to go through such because such inspections on based on hours flown/time on airframe. In this scenario, what normally would take a year or more to accumulate is done is just 1-2 months of sustained high tempo flying. Once 1 of the 5 are on the ground for heavy maintenance, the pressure on the remaining aircraft increases and so begins an escalation of maintenance problems.
> 
> Under this kind of scenario, even with a decent supply chain, it's not hard to see how the fleet could become less and less available and eventually could become effectively grounded with only 2 or 3 airframes available for any operations and unable to conduct sustained high tempo for more than a week or so at a time.
> 
> Finally, you have to remember one final factor: training. In addition to any combat operations, the RSAF still has to maintain and train new KE-3 crews and also be available for F-15 pilots for refueling ops training (which, for the F-15 pilots at least, is not as intensive).
> 
> This would explain the need for USAF tankers, even to this day. The small and inadequately sized KE-3 fleet is simply incapable of dealing with this much workload.
> 
> These problems will only escalate with the continued deliveries of the new F-15SAs (84 to be delivered over the next several years)...


Thanks ,
My Q is distance btw these 2 ain't that much, actually they are neighbors and Yemen doesn't have an air force and there is no AD except using R-27 to shoot down Saudis fighter jet otherwise RSAF faces no threat in Yemen sky so there would be no dog fight or chasing or risky situation that need more fuel ... so why do they need refueling? can't they use extra fuel tanks?about loitering as Amir said drones could not be replaced? 
Second Q, what about Iran? surly Iran fleet is much more older.


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Certainly more important than J-10 or F-16 but I believe acquiring a noticeable fleet of Modern interceptors are more important.



You'll get no argument from me there! Iran needs a replacement for it's F-14 fleet for intercept and air superiority missions to back up it's Air Defense and that should be top priority for Iran next to mass producing various types of Missiles & UAV's.


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> well Abdollahian's argument was that Saudi's F-15 need a specific fuel which they don't produce it themselves. in your simple search, can you find anything about that?!


Its unbelievable that KSA can't produce Jet-4 (Phased out) or Jet-8 fuel. all the country in the middle east produce it for their F-15 and F-16 which use the same engine


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> Its unbelievable that KSA can't produce Jet-4 (Phased out) or Jet-8 fuel. all the country in the middle east produce it for their F-15 and F-16 which use the same engine


commercial aviation flights use jet A1 fuel whereas Americans use jet A, and U.S military uses JP8, similar, but different standards and specially different from the maintenance point of view.
Now USAF uses JP8+100.


We don't know no sh!t, so better not to argue on something which have no clue about. you are free to believe whatever and whoever you want.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Its unbelievable that KSA can't produce Jet-4 (Phased out) or Jet-8 fuel. all the country in the middle east produce it for their F-15 and F-16 which use the same engine





mohsen said:


> commercial aviation flights use jet A1 fuel whereas Americans use jet A, and U.S military uses JP8, similar, but different standards and specially different from the maintenance point of view.
> Now USAF uses JP8+100.
> 
> 
> We don't know no sh!t, so better not to argue on something which have no clue about. you are free to believe whatever and whoever you want.



OMG! It's just sad to see how we continue to underestimate our regional rivals and enemies! 
Saudi Arabia has a vast petrol empire and they spend the bulk of their military spending's on their Air Force so to be under the illusion that they can't even provide fuel for their fighters is absurd!
And even if we assume that they can't produce the fuel themselves it would be delusional of us not to assume that they have enough reserve fuel saved up to easily last them a year or two in an all out war! 

Saudi leaders may not be the smartest people on the planet but they are far from being that stupid!

Yes in Yemen the U.S. provides air to air refueling for them and the main reason for that is because there are no real targets left in Yemen and Saudi fighters have to constantly search the terrain searching for some target to hit! 

There are no large Military Depots or factories left to hit! There no more Air Force bases to hit, there are no Naval bases to hit! there are no major radar sites or SAM sites to hit there are no major command centers to hit.....







That's how far way King Khalid Air Force Base is from northern Yemen 

King Khalid Air Force base is a massive base and even a WW2 era V1 would have the range and accuracy to hit that base from Yemen and yet after years of war by the most part it remains untouched so I wouldn't be so quick to underestimate Saudi Military capabilities 

And producing MRBM at rates of 200 per year is not significant enough to make up for a countries lack of Air Force!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> there are no real targets left in Yemen and Saudi fighters have to constantly search the terrain searching for some target to hit!


really? I thought that's what drones and satellites do, but apparently things are different in Saudi kingdom!
keep your face in them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tajbakhsh

Sukhoi Su-24:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Avicenna

Beautiful camo!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eagle2007

Mohsen,

Sorry, been off the PDF for several days. 

And to answer your question, yes my simple Google search found that Saudi Aramco (who own and operate most of Saudi Arabia refining facilities) lists JP-8 as one of the many products in this "Domestic Sales" list, which is the standard fuel for not just F-15s but nearly all aircraft in the USAF today. 

What IS true is that back in the 1991 Gulf War, JP-8 was not produced in Saudi Arabia but at the time, there was still a hot debate within the DoD about whether they should switch to a single aviation fuel. This debate would result in JP-8 being adopted as the singular fuel for US aviation. 

So given we have THE oil refiner in Saudi Arabia listing JP-8 as a domestic sales product..
http://www.saudiaramco.com/en/home/our-business/domestic-sales/our-refined-products.html

I'd say whatever source you were talking about before has no idea what they're talking about. 

Heck, with a little more Googling, I found that even Djibouti has a refining facility (funded by a UAE company) that produces JP-8, which makes the idea that Saudi Arabia (whose only been refining oil for 70+ years now..) can't do so is beyond laughable, it's just sounds painfully stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=352806708564766









__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=628355427505351

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eagle2007

Nothing like some "fan art"....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

eagle2007 said:


> Mohsen,
> 
> Sorry, been off the PDF for several days.
> 
> And to answer your question, yes my simple Google search found that Saudi Aramco (who own and operate most of Saudi Arabia refining facilities) lists JP-8 as one of the many products in this "Domestic Sales" list, which is the standard fuel for not just F-15s but nearly all aircraft in the USAF today.
> 
> What IS true is that back in the 1991 Gulf War, JP-8 was not produced in Saudi Arabia but at the time, there was still a hot debate within the DoD about whether they should switch to a single aviation fuel. This debate would result in JP-8 being adopted as the singular fuel for US aviation.
> 
> So given we have THE oil refiner in Saudi Arabia listing JP-8 as a domestic sales product..
> http://www.saudiaramco.com/en/home/our-business/domestic-sales/our-refined-products.html
> 
> I'd say whatever source you were talking about before has no idea what they're talking about.
> 
> Heck, with a little more Googling, I found that even Djibouti has a refining facility (funded by a UAE company) that produces JP-8, which makes the idea that Saudi Arabia (whose only been refining oil for 70+ years now..) can't do so is beyond laughable, it's just sounds painfully stupid.


and what about JP8+100 which is the *mandatory *addition for JP8?! (unless random engine failures is acceptable)


----------



## Human One

eagle2007 said:


> Nothing like some "fan art"....



Yes, notice the tails slope outwards. Are they not supposed to be vertical?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eagle2007

Mohsen,

Not quite correct. JP-8+100 is not an additive but a newer version of JP-8 fuel that INCLUDES a new additive. So there is now standard JP-8 and JP-8+100. According to several documents I found, the primary users of the +100 version of the fuel are USAF fighter and trainer units, which suggests other USAF assets are using the original fuel mixture. 

So while the Saudis do produce JP-8, I couldn't find anything about them producing the additive needed to make it the +100 blend. It seems this additive, referred to by Shell as "Aeroshell Performance Additive 101" is only produced by a handful of companies. 

That doesn't necessary mean the RSAF is importing this additive for blending with their domestically produced JP-8 (much in the same way ethanol is added to unleaded gasoline at the distribution facility just before transporting to your local gas station), as they may be satisfied with the performance of the original blend for now. 

Point is, RSAF F-15s, Typhoons, and Tornadoes can use the domestically produced JP-8 just fine, they're just going to be paying for the added wear and tear on their engines in the long term. It's not as though they will simply being falling out of the sky, but it does mean they'll have more downtime for engine maintenance.


----------



## mohsen

eagle2007 said:


> Mohsen,
> 
> Not quite correct. JP-8+100 is not an additive but a newer version of JP-8 fuel that INCLUDES a new additive. So there is now standard JP-8 and JP-8+100. According to several documents I found, the primary users of the +100 version of the fuel are USAF fighter and trainer units, which suggests other USAF assets are using the original fuel mixture.
> 
> So while the Saudis do produce JP-8, I couldn't find anything about them producing the additive needed to make it the +100 blend. It seems this additive, referred to by Shell as "Aeroshell Performance Additive 101" is only produced by a handful of companies.
> 
> That doesn't necessary mean the RSAF is importing this additive for blending with their domestically produced JP-8 (much in the same way ethanol is added to unleaded gasoline at the distribution facility just before transporting to your local gas station), as they may be satisfied with the performance of the original blend for now.
> 
> Point is, RSAF F-15s, Typhoons, and Tornadoes can use the domestically produced JP-8 just fine, they're just going to be paying for the added wear and tear on their engines in the long term. It's not as though they will simply being falling out of the sky, but it does mean they'll have more downtime for engine maintenance.


so back to the beginning, we don't know what fuel Saudi F-15s are using.
but we do know that Saudis F-15 are 100% maintained by Americans (which use JP8+100) for themselves.
we do know that Saudis rely on Americans airborne refueling.

You really have no chance to challenge the words of our official who quotes our military sources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

Must watched interview

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>



You got the full footage? Or just shows the fighter starting to make moves and the Iranian pilots couldn't go after him.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Oldman1 said:


> You got the full footage? Or just shows the fighter starting to make moves and the Iranian pilots couldn't go after him.



No but what is seen in that short clip speaks volumes!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> No but what is seen in that short clip speaks volumes!



Doesn't speak volumes at all. That's like showing videos of Iranian planes and claim that speaks volumes.


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> You got the full footage? Or just shows the fighter starting to make moves and the Iranian pilots couldn't go after him.


It was posted in Theaviationist several months ago.
*Watch An Iranian F-4E Phantom Do A Roll Near A U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet During A Close Encounter*


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> It was posted in Theaviationist several months ago.
> *Watch An Iranian F-4E Phantom Do A Roll Near A U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet During A Close Encounter*



All it says they commenting what is shown in the video. F-4 doing a roll. Wow that's something. What happened after that?


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> All it says they commenting what is shown in the video. F-4 doing a roll. Wow that's something. What happened after that?


Well Iranian airforce isn't really into commenting, why you don't ask your own forces who like to make stories of F22 and F4?!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

Please discuss SU-30
Please discuss SU-30
Please discuss SU-30
Please discuss SU-30
Please discuss SU-30


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/981381186336579584

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Oldman1 said:


> All it says they commenting what is shown in the video. F-4 doing a roll. Wow that's something. What happened after that?



How did your super duper Naval aviators with Airborn early warning allow an Iranian F-4 to get in that position in the first place? Who cares what happened next, no one here is going to argue that the F-4E is better than an F-18E!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

The only SU-30’s Iran will get is toy models online.

To think that the Russia that backed off on deals for Tanks in the 90’s (w/Iran) will give Iran license production of SU-30 is laughable. 

Turkey is getting s-400 meanwhile Iran had to wait 8 years to get the S-300.

A possibility is for Iran to use Russia/Soviet Union countries to buy technology transfers or blueprints and assemble a fighter on its own.


----------



## Oldman1

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> How did your super duper Naval aviators with Airborn early warning allow an Iranian F-4 to get in that position in the first place? Who cares what happened next, no one here is going to argue that the F-4E is better than an F-18E!


What exactly you want to do? Have them shoot it down? You seen enough videos of Russian fighters next to U.S. planes. You think Russian planes just sneaked them right next to them?


----------



## mohsen

N_Al40 said:


> Please discuss SU-30
> Please discuss SU-30
> Please discuss SU-30
> Please discuss SU-30
> Please discuss SU-30
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/981381186336579584


as Poordastan said, due to sanctions we can't buy it.
so there is no point in discussing it.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/07/29/1551513/خرید-جنگنده-سوخو-30-منتفی-نیست


----------



## N_Al40

Iran can & should commence with this style of fighter, a Lightweight Fighter to be precise (if it hasn't already; insiders claim a project similar to this under the guise of S-90 is well underway).























Worth noting that the YF-17 competed with the F-16 to be the USAF primary lightweight supersonic multi-role fighter; it however lost out to the F-16. Though the YF-17 as a plane concept wasn't abounded completely, through extensive modifications, it eventually became the F/A-18 Hornet (and later Super Hornet), and is the main fighter today of the US Navy.

Iran should build off its experiences with the Saeqeh program and utilize its domestic capabilities to produce a decent airworthy fighter that can hold its own, and be equipped with a variety of weaponry for use at any given time; instead of simply adding another vertical tail and improving electronics on former F-5's and newly built Saeqeh's.


----------



## N_Al40

*BREAKING: 
*




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=356256581553112





This guy is on point 99.9% of the time with his news sources!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

N_Al40 said:


> *BREAKING:
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=356256581553112
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy is on point 99.9% of the time with his news sources!!



Their would have to be some major design modifications for this jet to be an interceptor one day, but for CAS and Naval Bombing, it can do the trick for now with J-85, but may be limited in payload.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Stryker1982 said:


> Their would have to be some major design modifications for this jet to be an interceptor one day, but for CAS and Naval Bombing, it can do the trick for now with J-85, but may be limited in payload.



True bro; but I overlooked all that when I first read the news!! I'm absolutely euphoric!!!

I've been following this guy's Facebook page for a while, and I can tell you that this won't be a let down.



Stryker1982 said:


> Their would have to be some major design modifications for this jet to be an interceptor one day, but for CAS and Naval Bombing, it can do the trick for now with J-85, but may be limited in payload.



Iran's Army Day is celebrated on the 18th April annually, so maybe we'll get an official announcement then? 

Also, Bavar-373 is now ready, and it was first unveiled on Army Day 2016...so fingers crossed we see footage or the full final system!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SubWater

N_Al40 said:


> *BREAKING:
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=356256581553112
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy is on point 99.9% of the time with his news sources!!


Good bro
many people here said this design can not fly and Q313 is fake and propaganda.
I can predict their actions after Qaher 313 fly; They would say that is weak, slow and useless fighter.
But Qaher missions are specific and maximize with this design.
I personally think the idea of building Qaher come to the mind of Iranian engineers after building Bavar series flying boats.
I hope one day see joint project b/w Iran and Iraq to build heavy fighter bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

A simple re-configuration can completely change the plane.

-Increase air intakes size to resemble a normal fighter
-remove tipped downward part of wings
-Enlarge plane by 75%-100% of mock up size

Question is will it still be aerodynamically sound?

By doing the above changes the design starts to look similar to chinese j-31


----------



## N_Al40

TheImmortal said:


> A simple re-configuration can completely change the plane.
> 
> -Increase air intakes size to resemble a normal fighter
> -remove tipped downward part of wings
> -Enlarge plane by 75%-100% of mock up size
> 
> Question is will it still be aerodynamically sound?
> 
> By doing the above changes the design starts to look similar to chinese j-31



The taxi footage we saw last year of the F-313 was a 1:2 scale version of the final jet. So it will be enlarged


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> The taxi footage we saw last year of the F-313 was a 1:2 scale version of the final jet. So it will be enlarged




Intakes should be enlarged and tipped downward wing configuration eliminated.

Ultimately that might happen if Iran wants to make this platform multi purpose (interceptor, bomber, CAS).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

SubWater said:


> Must watched interview


It's a big blow to those who wanted to justify the F14 purchases.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

mohsen said:


> It's a big blow to those who wanted to justify the F14 purchases.


Shah was corrupt and anyone around him was corrupt, poor commanders of air force wanted F 15s but Americans berifed  Shah justifying purchase of F 14 Tomcats. F 14 is good no doubt, but it didn't add on firepower of iranian armed forces. Moreover they didn't buy those jets for Iran to meet Iranian requirements, Americans shoved it into arsenal of our air force to counter Soviets. Using iran as a frontline against Soviet to choke Soviets on her own boundaries. A fuppet, what we see in Arab countries nowadays.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

mohsen said:


> It's a big blow to those who wanted to justify the F14 purchases.


F15 was better platform , but F14 had better radar and Phoenix ....

Ultimately f15 would be better choice

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

N_Al40 said:


> *BREAKING:
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=356256581553112
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy is on point 99.9% of the time with his news sources!!


Nothing is visible.


----------



## N_Al40

mohsen said:


> Nothing is visible.



What do you mean?


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> It's a big blow to those who wanted to justify the F14 purchases.





mohammad45 said:


> Shah was corrupt and anyone around him was corrupt, poor commanders of air force wanted F 15s but Americans berifed  Shah justifying purchase of F 14 Tomcats. F 14 is good no doubt, but it didn't add on firepower of iranian armed forces. Moreover they didn't buy those jets for Iran to meet Iranian requirements, Americans shoved it into arsenal of our air force to counter Soviets. Using iran as a frontline against Soviet to choke Soviets on her own boundaries. A fuppet, what we see in Arab countries nowadays.



Iranian F-14s shot down over 150 Iraqi jets and when the Iraqis were detected by American F-14s in 1991 they just turned around and ran away... What are you two talking about?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

N_Al40 said:


> What do you mean?


All I see is this:
*BREAKING: *



AmirPatriot said:


> Iranian F-14s shot down over 150 Iraqi jets and when the Iraqis were detected by American F-14s in 1991 they just turned around and ran away... What are you two talking about?


70 F14 instead of *280 *F15,
no data exchange with Iranian radars,
no ground attack capability,
no domestic support,
higher maintenance cost,
lower endurance,

the result is what we saw in Iran-Iraq war, Iraqi bombers reaching over tehran *uninterrupted*.
what's the f@cking point of having a radar and missile with 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000km range when your enemy's bombers reach above your head?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

mohsen said:


> It's a big blow to those who wanted to justify the F14 purchases.


F 14 is really better than F 15 *BUT the price and its maintenance is very very high *in compare of F 15 and that is it's significant disadvantage*.*
F 14 is flying RADAR.



mohsen said:


> All I see is this:
> *BREAKING: *
> 
> 
> 70 F14 instead of *280 *F15,
> no data exchange with Iranian radars,
> no ground attack capability,
> no domestic support,
> higher maintenance cost,
> lower endurance,
> 
> the result is what we saw in Iran-Iraq war, Iraqi bombers reaching over tehran *uninterrupted*.
> what's the f@cking point of having a radar and missile with 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000km range when your enemy's bombers reach above your head?


I read from C 130 pilot that Iraqis warplane hided behind C 130 and Iranian Radars could not find them b/c of that reason.


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> 70 F14 instead of *280 *F15



Who told you the choice was between 70 F-14s and 280 F-15s?



mohsen said:


> no data exchange with Iranian radars



Do you think we could expect that in the 1970s?



mohsen said:


> no ground attack capability



Neither did the F-15A/C.



mohsen said:


> no domestic support



Implying we were going to have an F-15 production line?



mohsen said:


> lower endurance



The F-14 had a huge combat radius and was in the air for hours because of aerial refuelling tankers.



mohsen said:


> the result is what we saw in Iran-Iraq war, Iraqi bombers reaching over tehran *uninterrupted*.
> what's the f@cking point of having a radar and missile with 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000km range when your enemy's bombers reach above your head?



Of course because we couldn't keep them operational, because if you hadn't noticed we were under an international arms embargo!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Who told you the choice was between 70 F-14s and 280 F-15s?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think we could expect that in the 1970s?
> 
> 
> 
> Neither did the F-15A/C.
> 
> 
> 
> Implying we were going to have an F-15 production line?
> 
> 
> 
> The F-14 had a huge combat radius and was in the air for hours because of aerial refuelling tankers.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course because we couldn't keep them operational, because if you hadn't noticed we were under an international arms embargo!


According to an Iranian commander and pilot, the air force commanders were interested in F 15s because of its unique similarities to F 4 phantoms in case of maintenance and sub systems hence cheaper in both price and maintenance. All of pilots of F 4 could fly F 15s with the least training for same reason. F 14s were stronger in all terms but due to lack of experience and technological inability of iranian air force, F 15s were a better choice. F 14s were designed to safeguard carriers and basically useless against ground targets. During war, all of bombing missions were given to F 4s and F 14s could only play the role of a mini AWACS nothing more, and no actual firepower was added to our air force by purchasing of F 14s. If Americans allow me to buy some jets, I would simply go for F 18 growler and super hornets instead of F 22s for obvious reasons.


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> According to an Iranian commander and pilot, the air force commanders were interested in F 15s because of its unique similarities to F 4 phantoms in case of maintenance and sub systems hence cheaper in both price and maintenance.



The F-4 and F-15 share no subsystems.



mohammad45 said:


> All of pilots of F 4 could fly F 15s with the least training for same reason.



All our first F-14 pilots were trained at the US Navy Top Gun school. Training was not an issue.



mohammad45 said:


> F 14s were designed to safeguard carriers and basically useless against ground targets.



The F-15A/C, even today, cannot carry guided weapons. Same case for the F-14A.



mohammad45 said:


> During war, all of bombing missions were given to F 4s and F 14s could only play the role of a mini AWACS nothing more



Do you know why all the bombing missions were given to the F-4? Because the F-14 was so valuable and capable that Iran didn't want to risk them in offensive operations! So they were only used to defend Iranian airspace. 

And the "mini AWACS" thing is a myth. They were used in combat and even western scholars say they got 150+ kills.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> The F-4 and F-15 share no subsystems.
> 
> 
> 
> All our first F-14


https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/844386/رشوه-28-میلیون-دلاری-برای-فروش-F-14-به-ایران-اوریون-های-گران


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/844386/رشوه-28-میلیون-دلاری-برای-فروش-F-14-به-ایران-اوریون-های-گران


Re-read my post, I accidentally clicked post and just finished editing it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Re-read my post, I accidentally clicked post and just finished editing it.


F 14 the best interceptor that we could have at that time. I don't deny bro,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> The F-4 and F-15 share no subsystems.
> 
> 
> 
> All our first F-14 pilots were trained at the US Navy Top Gun school. Training was not an issue.
> 
> 
> 
> The F-15A/C, even today, cannot carry guided weapons. Same case for the F-14A.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know why all the bombing missions were given to the F-4? Because the F-14 was so valuable and capable that Iran didn't want to risk them in offensive operations! So they were only used to defend Iranian airspace.
> 
> And the "mini AWACS" thing is a myth. They were used in combat and even western scholars say they got 150+ kills.


isreal went for F15 .. but I know we had different needs they don't have our depth.


----------



## Human One

mohammad45 said:


> F 14s were designed to safeguard carriers and basically useless against ground targets.



Not entirely. I read that Tomcats were designed with some strike ability but, this was not used until the later stage of their service. There are some photos online of Iranian Tomcats with a rocket pod and bombs. American examples were used as bombers. 



mohammad45 said:


> During war, all of bombing missions were given to F 4s and F 14s could only play the role of a mini AWACS nothing more, and no actual firepower was added to our air force by purchasing of F 14s. If Americans allow me to buy some jets, I would simply go for F 18 growler and super hornets instead of F 22s for obvious reasons.



Iranian F-14s achieved air-to-air kills in the Iran-Iraq war. That included use of Phoenix missiles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-14_Tomcat_operational_history#Iranian_service


----------



## OldTwilight

Human One said:


> Not entirely. I read that Tomcats were designed with some strike ability but, this was not used until the later stage of their service. There are some photos online of Iranian Tomcats with a rocket pod and bombs. American examples were used as bombers.
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian F-14s achieved air-to-air kills in the Iran-Iraq war. That included use of Phoenix missiles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-14_Tomcat_operational_history#Iranian_service



Iranian F14 has no air to ground ability and even couldn't use free fall bombs ... later we add this ability to F14 but never used it till today ( except bombing some bridge in Turkey) ...


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> Who told you the choice was between 70 F-14s and 280 F-15s?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think we could expect that in the 1970s?
> 
> 
> 
> Neither did the F-15A/C.
> 
> 
> 
> Implying we were going to have an F-15 production line?
> 
> 
> 
> The F-14 had a huge combat radius and was in the air for hours because of aerial refuelling tankers.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course because we couldn't keep them operational, because if you hadn't noticed we were under an international arms embargo!


clearly you didn't bother to watch the interview with general azarbarzin who was the the director of operations in the airforce, so I wont bother to answer to you either.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> clearly you didn't bother to watch the interview with general azarbarzin who was the the director of operations in the airforce, so I wont bother to answer to you either.


didn't Iran has placed order another 80 of F14 that get cancelled after revolution ? so it will be 160 vs 280 if the report was true and also the options for more.
by the way do you think how many of those 280 airplanes would have reached us ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Well lets clear one thing,f14 was selected because it outperformed f15 in every aspect,f15 was technologically far behind in that time.It was not random selection ,Iranians sow both presentation and they explore both solutions and f14 was logical choice considering Iran situation.
F15 could fire aim7 and aim9 and,both sidewinder and sparrow had better performance on f14(range and lock on perfomance).Radar on f14 is best radar ever produced, even today there si no aircraft with such perfomance.So even without Aim-54 F14 was better.If we add aim54 than it is clear choice.In terms of bvr f15 Iran could buy had almost same capabilities as f4 since they had same BVR weapons... Better radar could increase BVR capability but not that much and it was still less than F14 even withoit aim54.
Again f14 was so advance that even today there is nothing close to F14 performance.
Data link...can track 24 targets and engage 6 in same time...for comparatiom J10 can track 6-10(depending on version) and engage 2 in same time.This feature is what separate big boys from point defence fighters...when you have massive attack from air...only few f14 can engage 2 squadrons... Thus if you hide 2-4 migs behind it is scary combination..Now I didn't even mention Aim54, missle that prove itself capable at 5km and 190km range...I'm not sure everyone understand what f14 mean,it provides Iran with strategic capability at same way s-400 provides boost for air defence.
Ofcourse such complex system is expensive and f15 has own advantages but not in terms of combat performance and expecually in role it is used in Iran and primary role in Iran is air defense,for that role it is better option 3 times.
We are talking about f15 with air to air wepons same as f-4 and without multirole capability(no aim120,no smart ammunition) ...but again even by todays standard you will not find anything that will outperforme f14 air to air capabilities and in air defense role it is what is most important.
Downsides would be...price...no multirole capability which mean you have to maintain more different types of aircrafts and that is by definition very expensive...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## TheImmortal

F-14 was chosen because Iran needed a fast interceptor to stop Soviet Union MIGS from continuously violating Iranian airspace.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> F-14 was chosen because Iran needed a fast interceptor to stop Soviet Union MIGS from continuously violating Iranian airspace.



Also because the IIAF new that its ground based early warning system was insufficient in covering Iran's airspace effectively due to Iran's mountainous terrain. They liked the fact that the F-14s had a Powerful radar that aided with filling the gaps in the ground based radar coverage until a time when AWACS could be obtained.


----------



## Stryker1982

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Also because the IIAF new that its ground based early warning system was insufficient in covering Iran's airspace effectively due to Iran's mountainous terrain. They liked the fact that the F-14s had a Powerful radar that aided with filling the gaps in the ground based radar coverage until a time when AWACS could be obtained.


I think now a days, OTH radars can handle this terrain issue.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Stryker1982 said:


> I think now a days, OTH radars can handle this terrain issue.



Lets hope so because there is no AWACS planned for the IRIAF!


----------



## SubWater

TheImmortal said:


> F-14 was chosen because Iran needed a fast interceptor to stop Soviet Union MIGS from continuously violating Iranian airspace.


exact point, American chose F 14 to counter Soviet not Iran.
Iran, herself had more interest and need to F 15.


----------



## OldTwilight

SubWater said:


> exact point, American chose F 14 to counter Soviet not Iran.
> Iran, herself had more interest and need to F 15.



this discussion is pointless , we need to renew our air force but there is no sign of it ... our air force already become a joke and in next decade even flying with half of our airplane will become dangerous and costly ,,,, 
Shah died 40 years ago and good or bad , we are still operating what that so called TRAITOR obtained for us ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

OldTwilight said:


> this discussion is pointless , we need to renew our air force but there is no sign of it ... our air force already become a joke and in next decade even flying with half of our airplane will become dangerous and costly ,,,,
> Shah died 40 years ago and good or bad , we are still operating what that so called TRAITOR obtained for us ....


Funny thing is that F-14 is the best jet Iran could ever have. Anyone saying F-14 was a poor choice is utterly a fool towards Iran's need for long range air interceptors. Iran is too mountainous to have a weak air superiority force.

Out of all countries in the region Iran should actually have the most jacked air force, and the saudis would have more air defenses considering their flat terrain is easy for radar detection & lock on. Out of all countries in the world Iran most needs a powerful air force to watch over it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

Stryker1982 said:


> Funny thing is that F-14 is the best jet Iran could ever have. Anyone saying F-14 was a poor choice is utterly a fool towards Iran's need for long range air interceptors. Iran is too mountainous to have a weak air superiority force.
> 
> Out of all countries in the region Iran should actually have the most jacked air force, and the saudis would have more air defenses considering their flat terrain is easy for radar detection & lock on.





OldTwilight said:


> this discussion is pointless , we need to renew our air force but there is no sign of it ... our air force already become a joke and in next decade even flying with half of our airplane will become dangerous and costly ,,,,
> Shah died 40 years ago and good or bad , we are still operating what that so called TRAITOR obtained for us ....


come back and read my posts in two page ago
I said F14 is better than F15 and there is no doubt about it but that does not mean F14 is better choice for Iran in compare of F15.
There is no doubt American forced us to buy F14.
Israel chose F15 over F14 for the rational reason.

and American stop using F14 for more rational reason.


----------



## OldTwilight

SubWater said:


> come back and read my posts in two page ago
> I said F14 is better than F15 and there is no doubt about it but that does not mean F14 is better choice for Iran in compare of F15.
> There is no doubt American forced us to buy F14.
> Israel chose F15 over F14 for the rational reason.
> 
> and American stop using F14 for more rational reason.



even if we have F15 , after 40 years , they would become old and we have to replace them ... F14 did the job for us and now we should look at present and future not at past ... past is for learning ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SubWater said:


> exact point, American chose F 14 to counter Soviet not Iran.
> Iran, herself had more interest and need to F 15.


Wrong
If you look at what Iran Ordered at the time ,you see it was a combination of F14 and F16
Iran is a big country and we needed something to protect ourselves from anybody who attacked us , don't forget that Iran just had ended a war with Iraq over Arvand rud and Iraq was strengthening its air-force .we needed something to protect ourselves against future aggression .
Iran Airforce had two choice a multi role fighter that was jack of all trades but did not anything at best which would have been f-15 before latest generation of AIM-120. or a two fighter solution a pure interceptor and a Bomber and Iran choose the second option which I believe was a better solution .
don't forget at the time Iran was not planning to use F-5s and F-4s for another 50 year.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

f


TheImmortal said:


> F-14 was chosen because Iran needed a fast interceptor to stop Soviet Union MIGS from continuously violating Iranian airspace.


F-15 is little faster than F14...but they still chose F14, only speed is not what will help you to catch fast aircraft ,F-4 is also 2.3 mach aircraft ..problem is lock on and missile range....fast aircraft can simple escape from range.But when you have powerfull F14 with weapons system like AWG9 + AIM54 you can lock on and fire missile on enemy before they are even aware of F14 presence , thus because of fast AIM54 missile and great range aircraft almost has no chanse to escape ... So having only fast aircraft is not enoughf for big boys .When someone runaway 2+ mach than if you have aircraft with short missile and radar range than you have two problems.First problem is to aprouch in lock on range,than second problem is after you lock on and lunch....since missile has short range there is not much time for missile to catch aircraft.
F14 was not selected because of it speed, F15 max speed is little higher than F14 ..hack even F4 speed is 2.3 mach...F-4 other fly characteristics are not good as F14 and F15 but in interceptor role it doesn't need it.
Main reason is AWG9 and AIM54 ,it is simple...like I explain F-15 BVR capatibiliteswere just little better than F4.
I read article where one pilot who was part of Iranian commission in US explained selection process...He said that F-15’s demonstration was spectacular also ,main F15 adventages for Iranians were..price, easy transition for Pilots...F-4 pilots and WSO could jump in to F-15 without new training...there was only short transition course from F-4 to F15...no new weapon system for which pilots and WSO have to go through complete learning process and practice training.Also ground support and maintaince would be cheaper and easier.In short F-4 to F15 would be logical transition.
On other side F-14 had bunch of new technology and many new technologies were first time used on F14...it was not even close to what Iranians had..very complex weapons system and completely new weapon system,variable-sweep wing...pilots and WSO had go through complete training process ..ground support and maintaince also is much more expensive...in short F-15 had in start better chances.
What makes difference is AWG9+AIM54 ..it is unique war machine...


Now here is copy paste of what should be genuine decription of F14 and F15 flight presentation:

The flight demonstration was scheduled not to exceed 30 minutes from the first take off to the landing of the second aircraft.

The base was closed for that short time in which at the presence of the Shah, the two U.S. fighters had to fly their demonstration: it was decided that the USAF’s F-15, piloted by Irv Burrows (McDonnell Douglas’ test pilot), would have performed first, while Don Evans and Dennis Romano (Grumman’s test crew) with their F-14, would wait their turn after the Eagle.

While the F-15 taxied onto runway, Don and Dennis started engines of the Tomcat ahead of the schedule and burned down fuel in the warm up area during the Eagle demonstration, to reduce the difference in thrust to weight ratio between the two fighters. However F-15’s demonstration was spectacular, not only for the raw power of the aircraft but also for pilot’s skills: Burrows was a great pilot and that day, he showed all his ability.







The flight demonstration was the same for both aircraft: it consisted in a sequence of maneuvers beginning with a high performance take off followed by an Immelman turn and climb-out, then a descent to a high speed fly-by, two high-g low altitude turns followed by a slow speed fly-by in the landing configuration and last, the landing.

Since the F-15 has a higher thrust to weight ratio than the F-14A, the Eagle performed a really impressive flight profile during which it pulled an incredible 7-g 360 degree turn.

After the F-15 had finished its display, everyone was waiting for the underpowered F-14A demonstration: the Tomcat’s TF-30 engines would have not given to the aircraft the same thrust to weigh ratio of the Eagle.

However, during the F-15’s performance, Evans and Romano burned down a great quantity of fuel and now they had only 2,500 pounds of remaining gas: while this little quantity was only sufficient to accomplish their flight demonstration, 2,500 pounds was also one eight of the Tomcat’s internal fuel capacity and thanks to this fact the Tomcat had the same thrust to weight ratio of the Eagle.

At this point the F-14 had one thing that the F-15 didn’t have: variable geometry wings that would have made the difference for the grace of the flight demonstration.

Don and Dennis pushed both throttles to full zone five afterburner (which was the maximum afterburner thrust setting for TF-30 engine) and took off to perform the same demonstration of the F-15: the sequence of the maneuvers was just like the Eagle’s one, but the Tomcat’s crew, during the knife-edge pass, decided to sweep the wings from fully swept to fully forward and then they executed a turn at the maximum Tomcat’s performance, producing a large cloud of vapor off the wings due to the shock wave.







Then approaching the mid with the wings swept at 40 degrees, the Tomcat went into a full afterburner 360 degree 8 ½ g turn accelerated to 400 knots, very impressive to see. To end the demonstration, Evans and Romano added a touch-and-go landing: when the main landing gears came in touch with the runway they inserted full zone five afterburners and the Tomcat climbed in vertical. At this point, while they had almost ran out of fuel, they made a spectacular carrier landing approach and they fully stopped in one thousand feet of runway.

Once the show ended, the Shah literally ignored the Eagle and walked directly towards the Tomcat speaking for some minutes with the crew still sat in the cockpit of the fighter: he’d chosen the Tomcat, saving the Grumman and assuring a future to the F-14.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

The question is whether a 50% better radar and the AIM-54 are worth a more than 3 times smaller fleet, or to spend more than 3 times more money on it.

The F-14 paid a huge amount of money for that extra capability at the edge of technology. Much of the technology was not economic, it was not mature enough to be produced at a competitive price.

The AIM-54 was so modern and complex at that time, that the cost per round was extremely high.

So was it the right choice? Given how crappy the AIM-7 was, maybe to protection the F-14 provided was overall better than a 280 ship F-15 fleet. Maybe it avoided high losses due to bombing of expensive targets and thus "brought back" the money spend on it.

However I rather equip the F-15 with AIM-9 only and kill the enemy when I have 280 instead of 79 fighters available. Back then dogfighting was still the main way to kill an enemy. Then today those F-15s could be upgraded with SARH Sejil and ARH Fakkur-90.


----------



## sanel1412

Where did you get idea that Iran would have 280 F-15...so many aircrafts..it would require few years to deliver even more...and you would have now same or even less F15...And Iran not ordered only f14....but other orders never delivered and that is what exactlly would happen with those 280 F-15..you would get first bunch probably at same time as F-14 was delivered and rest would end up as other weapons order from Iran.considering that F-15C project was started latter it could happen that none of them would delivered..I'm not sure how many(if any) they could deliver up to '79..For 280 aircrafts even today it would require few years to deliver.
EDIT..I have finded..one seat C version was started with productionin '78 and that is version Iran would buy I suppose..so there is no way they will deliver 280 in one year...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@sanel1412 

Its about the decision.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Well I try to find how many they could produce on yearly basis and than we could calculate how many F15 Iran could get eventualy... there was also orders from Israel in that time and others..so I'm sure those 280 ,even if order would be so many aircrafts ,woul be delivered in few batches... Now when you consider how many F14 is worth F-15 ....well it depend..but again in that time Iran didn't count only on F-14 ..so..ofcourse everyone would chose 280 F15 than 80 F14

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Well I try to find how many they could produce on yearly basis and than we could calculate how many F15 Iran could get eventualy... there was also orders from Israel in that time and others..so I'm sure those 280 ,even if order would be so many aircrafts ,woul be delivered in few batches... Now when you consider how many F14 is worth F-15 ....well it depend..but again in that time Iran didn't count only on F-14 ..so..ofcourse everyone would chose 280 F15 than 80 F14


come on guys the selection was not between 79 F-14 vs 280 F-15.
Iran ordered 160 F-14 and more than 100 of F-16 (don't knew the actual number) 
if you are gonna discuss it then let discuss actual data not some fictional ones .



sanel1412 said:


> f
> F-15 is little faster than F14...but they still chose F14, only speed is not what will help you to catch fast aircraft ,F-4 is also 2.3 mach aircraft ..problem is lock on and missile range....fast aircraft can simple escape from range.But when you have powerfull F14 with weapons system like AWG9 + AIM54 you can lock on and fire missile on enemy before they are even aware of F14 presence , thus because of fast AIM54 missile and great range aircraft almost has no chanse to escape ... So having only fast aircraft is not enoughf for big boys .When someone runaway 2+ mach than if you have aircraft with short missile and radar range than you have two problems.First problem is to aprouch in lock on range,than second problem is after you lock on and lunch....since missile has short range there is not much time for missile to catch aircraft.
> F14 was not selected because of it speed, F15 max speed is little higher than F14 ..hack even F4 speed is 2.3 mach...F-4 other fly characteristics are not good as F14 and F15 but in interceptor role it doesn't need it.
> Main reason is AWG9 and AIM54 ,it is simple...like I explain F-15 BVR capatibiliteswere just little better than F4.
> I read article where one pilot who was part of Iranian commission in US explained selection process...He said that F-15’s demonstration was spectacular also ,main F15 adventages for Iranians were..price, easy transition for Pilots...F-4 pilots and WSO could jump in to F-15 without new training...there was only short transition course from F-4 to F15...no new weapon system for which pilots and WSO have to go through complete learning process and practice training.Also ground support and maintaince would be cheaper and easier.In short F-4 to F15 would be logical transition.
> On other side F-14 had bunch of new technology and many new technologies were first time used on F14...it was not even close to what Iranians had..very complex weapons system and completely new weapon system,variable-sweep wing...pilots and WSO had go through complete training process ..ground support and maintaince also is much more expensive...in short F-15 had in start better chances.
> What makes difference is AWG9+AIM54 ..it is unique war machine...
> 
> 
> Now here is copy paste of what should be genuine decription of F14 and F15 flight presentation:
> 
> The flight demonstration was scheduled not to exceed 30 minutes from the first take off to the landing of the second aircraft.
> 
> The base was closed for that short time in which at the presence of the Shah, the two U.S. fighters had to fly their demonstration: it was decided that the USAF’s F-15, piloted by Irv Burrows (McDonnell Douglas’ test pilot), would have performed first, while Don Evans and Dennis Romano (Grumman’s test crew) with their F-14, would wait their turn after the Eagle.
> 
> While the F-15 taxied onto runway, Don and Dennis started engines of the Tomcat ahead of the schedule and burned down fuel in the warm up area during the Eagle demonstration, to reduce the difference in thrust to weight ratio between the two fighters. However F-15’s demonstration was spectacular, not only for the raw power of the aircraft but also for pilot’s skills: Burrows was a great pilot and that day, he showed all his ability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The flight demonstration was the same for both aircraft: it consisted in a sequence of maneuvers beginning with a high performance take off followed by an Immelman turn and climb-out, then a descent to a high speed fly-by, two high-g low altitude turns followed by a slow speed fly-by in the landing configuration and last, the landing.
> 
> Since the F-15 has a higher thrust to weight ratio than the F-14A, the Eagle performed a really impressive flight profile during which it pulled an incredible 7-g 360 degree turn.
> 
> After the F-15 had finished its display, everyone was waiting for the underpowered F-14A demonstration: the Tomcat’s TF-30 engines would have not given to the aircraft the same thrust to weigh ratio of the Eagle.
> 
> However, during the F-15’s performance, Evans and Romano burned down a great quantity of fuel and now they had only 2,500 pounds of remaining gas: while this little quantity was only sufficient to accomplish their flight demonstration, 2,500 pounds was also one eight of the Tomcat’s internal fuel capacity and thanks to this fact the Tomcat had the same thrust to weight ratio of the Eagle.
> 
> At this point the F-14 had one thing that the F-15 didn’t have: variable geometry wings that would have made the difference for the grace of the flight demonstration.
> 
> Don and Dennis pushed both throttles to full zone five afterburner (which was the maximum afterburner thrust setting for TF-30 engine) and took off to perform the same demonstration of the F-15: the sequence of the maneuvers was just like the Eagle’s one, but the Tomcat’s crew, during the knife-edge pass, decided to sweep the wings from fully swept to fully forward and then they executed a turn at the maximum Tomcat’s performance, producing a large cloud of vapor off the wings due to the shock wave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then approaching the mid with the wings swept at 40 degrees, the Tomcat went into a full afterburner 360 degree 8 ½ g turn accelerated to 400 knots, very impressive to see. To end the demonstration, Evans and Romano added a touch-and-go landing: when the main landing gears came in touch with the runway they inserted full zone five afterburners and the Tomcat climbed in vertical. At this point, while they had almost ran out of fuel, they made a spectacular carrier landing approach and they fully stopped in one thousand feet of runway.
> 
> Once the show ended, the Shah literally ignored the Eagle and walked directly towards the Tomcat speaking for some minutes with the crew still sat in the cockpit of the fighter: he’d chosen the Tomcat, saving the Grumman and assuring a future to the F-14.


this story always made me laugh.
have you guys ever asked yourself how an airplane that was supposed to be able to fly more than 1 hours (actually combat radius of 926km means more like two hours of flight) can burn 87.5% of its fuel just by waiting on runway for 30 min even if the engine is powered up to the level of actual flight (while in reality it was only on) just yo ask yourself have you ever heard how f-14 engine sounds don't you think representative of McDonnell Douglas at the competition would have raised hell if the Grumman pilot made such stunt . don't you think US air-force personnel at the competition would have pointed at it .


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> come on guys the selection was not between 79 F-14 vs 280 F-15.
> Iran ordered 160 F-14 and more than 100 of F-16 (don't knew the actual number)
> if you are gonna discuss it then let discuss actual data not some fictional ones .



In the Book "the Eagle and the Lion: The tragedy of American Iranian relations" it was claimed that the U.S offered the Shah 160 F-16A/Bs and that the Shah wanted an additional 140 F-16s for a total of 300 aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## OldTwilight

https://defence.pk/pdf/attachments/_iran_air_force-20180417-0004-jpg.467192/

too much for "using Iranian radar on F4" ...


----------



## sanel1412

OldTwilight said:


> https://defence.pk/pdf/attachments/_iran_air_force-20180417-0004-jpg.467192/
> 
> too much for "using Iranian radar on F4" ...


Not whole F-4 fleet is modernized...also there was few different level of modernization and there was also few completly different modernization....integration of AsHM...navigation and IFF modernization..integration of new a2a missiles..etc. But not whole F-4 fllet was modernized at least it is how it seems , also we don't know how old is image...seems to me that this image was posted long time before(or it was other image similar to this).
Any way Iranian airforce are so secret about their hardware and it is hard to find anything related to air force modernization which is not too general. They were so pised on Russians when images of Iranian base were released and also they didn't allow Russians to get even close to any Iranian hardware ,they were only allowed to move in section which was asigned to them...same was in past when Russians were involved in modernization or inspection hardware they sell to Iran....


----------



## Muhammed45

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 467188
> View attachment 467189
> View attachment 467191
> View attachment 467192
> View attachment 467193
> View attachment 467194
> View attachment 467195


The only American thing remaining on this dude F14 tomcat is its airframe. All of components of radars, engines, avionics etc are replaced with Iranian made stuff. 

If government provides the required investment, we can produce a similar fighter jet. Adding ground attack capability shows that our scientists have Iranized AN AWG9 radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

mohammad45 said:


> The only American thing remaining on this dude F14 tomcat is its airframe. All of components of radars, engines, avionics etc are replaced with Iranian made stuff.
> 
> If government provides the required investment, we can produce a similar fighter jet. Adding ground attack capability shows that our scientists have Iranized AN AWG9 radar.



I totally agree with you. But we can only hope

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

sanel1412 said:


> Not whole F-4 fleet is modernized...also there was few different level of modernization and there was also few completly different modernization....integration of AsHM...navigation and IFF modernization..integration of new a2a missiles..etc. But not whole F-4 fllet was modernized at least it is how it seems , also we don't know how old is image...seems to me that this image was posted long time before(or it was other image similar to this).
> Any way Iranian airforce are so secret about their hardware and it is hard to find anything related to air force modernization which is not too general. They were so pised on Russians when images of Iranian base were released and also they didn't allow Russians to get even close to any Iranian hardware ,they were only allowed to move in section which was asigned to them...same was in past when Russians were involved in modernization or inspection hardware they sell to Iran....



Every single Iranian F-4 flying today has been modernized! 
The modernizations are no where near U.S. or Russian tech but you have to understand that today modern smartphones have greater processing power than the F-4 purchased by Iran 50 years ago!
So yea of course they have been modernized

Iranian F-4's have been flying for 50 years and the fact that they are still flying after 50 years means Iran is fully capable of maintaining them and overhauling them using Iranian made parts and one has to be delusional to think that something as high maintenance as a fighter that requires constant attention and repairs isn't going to be upgraded in a country that does the maintenance and overhaul it's self

And It's not like Iran has 1000's of fighters at best Iran has ~60 active F-4's in an Air Force equipped with only ~200 active fighters total and at best up to an additional 100 fighters in storage

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Readerdefence

Hi any learned Iranian memeber can give some info about getting su30 from Russia 
If yes 
1- what’s the status 
2- if not why not funds problem or Russia. 
Is not ready to supply the fighters 
Any input will be appreciated 
Thank you


----------



## mohsen

Readerdefence said:


> Hi any learned Iranian memeber can give some info about getting su30 from Russia
> If yes
> 1- what’s the status
> 2- if not why not funds problem or Russia.
> Is not ready to supply the fighters
> Any input will be appreciated
> Thank you


sanctions.


----------



## OldTwilight

VEVAK said:


> Every single Iranian F-4 flying today has been modernized!
> The modernizations are no where near U.S. or Russian tech but you have to understand that today modern smartphones have greater processing power than the F-4 purchased by Iran 50 years ago!
> So yea of course they have been modernized
> 
> *Iranian F-4's have been flying for 50 years and the fact that they are still flying after 50 years means Iran is fully capable of maintaining them and overhauling them using Iranian made parts and one has to be delusional to think that something as high maintenance as a fighter that requires constant attention and repairs isn't going to be upgraded in a country that does the maintenance and overhaul it's self*
> 
> And It's not like Iran has 1000's of fighters at best Iran has ~60 active F-4's in an Air Force equipped with only ~200 active fighters total and at best up to an additional 100 fighters in storage



I bet all of our F4 are still using same electronic as 50 years ago .... upgrading equipment is not in our Admins mind set ...



Readerdefence said:


> Hi any learned Iranian memeber can give some info about getting su30 from Russia
> If yes
> 1- what’s the status
> 2- if not why not funds problem or Russia.
> Is not ready to supply the fighters
> Any input will be appreciated
> Thank you



1- nothing
2- there is 3 problem :

0-> our Admins don't want to have strong air force ( because from begining of Islamic Republic , they didn't trust army and always feared coupe attempt from Army and Airforce ) so they don't want to fund the budget for this kind of purchase ....

0-> our Admins rather to spend the money for themselves and their 4500 children in UK and other western countries ....

0-> Russians don't want to sell their Su-30 to Iran with various reason ( They don't see Iran political system as an stable one , they see Iran as potential thread to them , Iran is under Arms embargo from UNSC , they don't want to lose their potential customer among Persian Gulf's southren Arabs )

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

OldTwilight said:


> I bet all of our F4 are still using same electronic as 50 years ago .... upgrading equipment is not in our Admins mind set ...
> 
> 
> 
> 1- nothing
> 2- there is 3 problem :
> 
> 0-> our Admins don't want to have strong air force ( because from begining of Islamic Republic , they didn't trust army and always feared coupe attempt from Army and Airforce ) so they don't want to fund the budget for this kind of purchase ....
> 
> 0-> our Admins rather to spend the money for themselves and this 4500 children in UK and other western countries ....
> 
> 0-> Russians don't want to sell their Su-30 to Iran with various reason ( They don't see Iran political system as an stable one , they see Iran as potential thread to them , Iran is under Arms embargo from UNSC , they don't want to lose their potential customer among Persian Gulf's southren Arabs )



This is off topic, but people are getting more and more frustrated every day and eventually, everyone's anger will explode across Iran. It is very worrying what will happen to Iran in the next two years. The IR also seems incapable of doing anything about it. No social reforms, no banking reforms, no economic reforms. Nothing. It's like they intentionally want the Islamic Republic to fail.

Either they want the IR to collapse,

or they are so delusional or so blind, that they do not see what's going on around them. At the end of the day a governments strength comes from the will of the people. If they don't adapt to the changes, expectations and demands of the people, it's clear what would happen. The state of the economy, currency devaluation, environmental crisis, banking theft and fraud, joblessness, inflation, abuse, all builds up into a volcano of anger that will probably not long from now, erupt. The IR was brought to life by the people. The admins seem incapable of understanding it can also be destroyed by the people. They must change.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Stryker1982 said:


> This is off topic, but people are getting more and more frustrated every day and eventually, everyone's anger will explode across Iran. It is very worrying what will happen to Iran in the next two years. The IR also seems incapable of doing anything about it. No social reforms, no banking reforms, no economic reforms. Nothing. It's like they intentionally want the Islamic Republic to fail.
> 
> Either they want the IR to collapse,
> 
> or they are so delusional or so blind, that they do not see what's going on around them. At the end of the day a governments strength comes from the will of the people. If they don't adapt to the changes, expectations and demands of the people, it's clear what would happen. The state of the economy, currency devaluation, environmental crisis, banking theft and fraud, joblessness, inflation, abuse, all builds up into a volcano of anger that will probably not long from now, erupt. The IR was brought to life by the people. The admins seem incapable of understanding it can also be destroyed by the people. They must change.



they are old and their average age is above 60 years and they only trust their circle and don't let anyone get close to them ....
almost all people who are around them are corrupted to the core ....

so if they want to do anything , they can't because their body doesn't have enough energy to sustain stress and fatigue this kind of mind work and the people who have to the work are corrupted ....

I wanted to buy 2 low-profile cellphone for myself and my wife but even low-profile cellphone price increased by 60-70% while my salary lost 40% of its worth in just past month !!! so , I just decide to used my old phone till it die and buy cellphone for my wife , but my company can't pay me fully ( and it just 160 $ ) because they have contract with public hospital under government care and they don't have any money to pay to us ... and while we are living like this , there comes news that Mr. x just take 100 million dollar and run out , 3 day later , Mr. Y took 50 million $ ... 

if you are familiar with Iran bureaucracy , you should know that even transferring 1 $ need so many paper work and so many people should signed the document to pay the money so who can someone took so much money and run !? 

its almost 20 years that people are warning about Water crisis in Iran and what our government did to prevent it !? 

nothing !! and what are thy doing when the farmer are protesting - cause they don't have water to farm anything , so they can't feed their family !? tag farmers with "Slave of Zions / Agent of USA ... " 


the biggest enemy of Islamic Republic of Iran is themselves ....



Stryker1982 said:


> The admins seem incapable of understanding it can also be destroyed by the people. They must change.



in past year they just exist 30 billion Dollars from Iran ... all of their children have UK/Canada/Australia nationality and almost all of our Admins have account in foreign banks .... so , they just want to steal more while they can ... this is so damn obvious ....


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> I bet all of our F4 are still using same electronic as 50 years ago .... upgrading equipment is not in our Admins mind set ...
> 
> 
> 1- nothing
> 2- there is 3 problem :
> 
> 0-> our Admins don't want to have strong air force ( because from begining of Islamic Republic , they didn't trust army and always feared coupe attempt from Army and Airforce ) so they don't want to fund the budget for this kind of purchase ....
> 
> 0-> our Admins rather to spend the money for themselves and their 4500 children in UK and other western countries ....
> 
> 0-> Russians don't want to sell their Su-30 to Iran with various reason ( They don't see Iran political system as an stable one , they see Iran as potential thread to them , Iran is under Arms embargo from UNSC , they don't want to lose their potential customer among Persian Gulf's southren Arabs )



1st off how many simple TV's from 50 years ago are still working? So aside from the absurdity of your comment according to Global Security that always underestimates Iran's capabilities at least 50 Iranian F-4's have been upgraded with Chinese radars & Avionics and the ability to carry PL-7 & PL-12's 

Fact is Iranian F-4's wouldn't be able to carry various Iranian PGM unless they were upgraded! 

As for the wealth of Iranian politicians if you have proof of wrong doing then show it or else how is that proof of anything! 
Politicians of what major power live in poverty for you to expect Iranian politicians to do the same? In fact having top politicians that live in poverty would be a security risk for Iran!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Readerdefence

mohsen said:


> sanctions.


Hi thanks for your reply alas my thoughts are it’s not related with the sanctions as you guys
Have recently received S-300 beside getting this russia is supplying you the the upgrade 
Package for mig29 
Thank you


----------



## mohsen

Readerdefence said:


> Hi thanks for your reply alas my thoughts are it’s not related with the sanctions as you guys
> Have recently received S-300 beside getting this russia is supplying you the the upgrade
> Package for mig29
> Thank you


Sanctions didn't include the S300 which is a defensive weapon. I'm not aware of any actual upgrade for Mig29.

nonetheless deputy chief commander of our army General Poordastan said purchase of Su30 was in their agenda and they reached an agreement with Russia, but 2231 resolution stopped the process.(thanks to some traitors in our negotiation team)
https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/07/29/1551513/خرید-جنگنده-سوخو-30-منتفی-نیست


----------



## Readerdefence

mohsen said:


> Sanctions didn't include the S300 which is a defensive weapon. I'm not aware of any actual upgrade for Mig29.
> 
> nonetheless deputy chief commander of our army General Poordastan said purchase of Su30 was in their agenda and they reached an agreement with Russia, but 2231 resolution stopped the process.(thanks to some traitors in our negotiation team)
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/07/29/1551513/خرید-جنگنده-سوخو-30-منتفی-نیست


Hi thx for your reply my friend though it will be nice if you can put up some English link or may be some translation will be helpful in future 
Thank you


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Someone is mention sanctions ...Iran is under sanctions limited to offensive weapons only,in 2020 Iran will be able to buy and also export any weapons since sanctions on weapons are lifted automatically 5 years after nuclear agreement is signed (was in 2015).
Sanctions related to import/export of balistic missiles with range more than 160KM will stay up to 2023 and then this will be also lifted.
Any way,problem is US...they don't implement their obligation from deal or they do it very slowly....and still ofcourse use politics of pressure on any country they have influence

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tajbakhsh

1. Seen @ the Army Day Parade

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

*Iran Army overhauls another F-4 fighter jet*

Politics
TEHRAN, Apr. 29 (MNA) – Experts and technical staff at Mehrabad’s Shahid Lashkari Air Force Base have overhauled a grounded F-4 fighter jet.
The F-4 fighter jet had been grounded for several years. The overhaul process took one year and six months and 18,000 man-hours to be fit to return to the operational phase.

The jet joined the operational fleet of the Army’s Air Force after a successful final test.

Back in February, Iran overhauled three jets including an F-14 and F-7 fighter aircraft, as well as a PC7 Turbo Trainer.

According to commander of Shahid Babaei Airbase, Mohammad Jafar Tak, the efforts put into the overhauling process of the grounded aircraft shows that the enemy’s attempts at imposing sanctions in a bid to undermine the country’s defense capabilities have been futile.

The efforts are also in line with ‘resistance economy’ and cutting down on expenses, he added.

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/133680/Iran-Army-overhauls-another-F-4-fighter-jet

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> *Iran Army overhauls another F-4 fighter jet*
> 
> Politics
> TEHRAN, Apr. 29 (MNA) – Experts and technical staff at Mehrabad’s Shahid Lashkari Air Force Base have overhauled a grounded F-4 fighter jet.
> The F-4 fighter jet had been grounded for several years. The overhaul process took one year and six months and 18,000 man-hours to be fit to return to the operational phase.
> 
> The jet joined the operational fleet of the Army’s Air Force after a successful final test.
> 
> Back in February, Iran overhauled three jets including an F-14 and F-7 fighter aircraft, as well as a PC7 Turbo Trainer.
> 
> According to commander of Shahid Babaei Airbase, Mohammad Jafar Tak, the efforts put into the overhauling process of the grounded aircraft shows that the enemy’s attempts at imposing sanctions in a bid to undermine the country’s defense capabilities have been futile.
> 
> The efforts are also in line with ‘resistance economy’ and cutting down on expenses, he added.
> 
> https://en.mehrnews.com/news/133680/Iran-Army-overhauls-another-F-4-fighter-jet



O SH*T GAMECHANGER!!!

what is israel's next move?


----------



## Parsipride

TruthHurtz said:


> O SH*T GAMECHANGER!!!
> 
> what is israel's next move?


Christ Killing Pharisees do not need to overhaul anything. They just go to the ( we are the victims)hand out window.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Human One

OldTwilight said:


> Iranian F14 has no air to ground ability and even couldn't use free fall bombs ... later we add this ability to F14 but never used it till today ( except bombing some bridge in Turkey) ...



Have you seen this?

*In the 1980s, Iran Outfitted F-14s as Heavy Bombers*

One Iranian Tomcat lobbed a 7,000-pound munition


----------



## Fafnir

Human One said:


> Have you seen this?
> 
> *In the 1980s, Iran Outfitted F-14s as Heavy Bombers*
> 
> One Iranian Tomcat lobbed a 7,000-pound munition


That "article" is complete bullsh!t,its literally full of mistakes.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Made Avionics Including : .
1_Multi Function Display (MFD)
2_Heads Up Display (HUD)
3_Radar Warning Receiver (RWR)
4_ARC-120 Airborne Radio
5_ARC-620 U/VHF Communication Radio
6_ARC-160 VHF Communication Radio
7_TACAN Radio Navigation System
8_ADC-89 Air Data Computer
9_Airborne Electro Optical System

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Human One

Fafnir said:


> That "article" is complete bullsh!t,its literally full of mistakes.



That's a surprise. I haven't read all of it.


----------



## Fafnir

Human One said:


> That's a surprise. I haven't read all of it.


You might want to read this before you do
http://zone-five.net/showpost.php?p=296820&postcount=203

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Still shocked F14 could not be copied over last 20 years
Unexplained silence in Iran's local craft production


----------



## ANDROMEDA

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Still shocked F14 could not be copied over last 20 years
> Unexplained silence in Iran's local craft production


 Because There is no benefit in copying the aircraft as its an outdated design we need more capable design . Once there was an offer to supreme leader to copy the f-14 but the supreme leader reject it and asked for a new aircraft that lead in qaher project


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

But we have not heard about the New craft introduction Steath or Conventional

7-8 Years would have been enough to copy F14 if Iran wanted with Russian Jet Engines


----------



## Fafnir

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Still shocked F14 could not be copied over last 20 years
> Unexplained silence in Iran's local craft production


The size and the cost of the program would be enormous,frankly it just would not be worth it.


----------



## OldTwilight

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Still shocked F14 could not be copied over last 20 years
> Unexplained silence in Iran's local craft production



I read somehing about this issue in one of military.ir/forums years ago ...

its look like Our Air Force asked for Iran supreme Leader permission , to work on reverse engineering F14 but he *advice *them :"Its good but you should go for new indigenous design " ...

the result of new design is nothing ... ( except so called F313 and Borhan )

Probably our Air force generals didn't want to bother themselves with a great project like Reverse Engineering F14 and just used SL advice as an excuse to forsake the project ) ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> But we have not heard about the New craft introduction Steath or Conventional
> 
> 7-8 Years would have been enough to copy F14 if Iran wanted with Russian Jet Engines


Can you imagine what would happen to an organization, if you cut 85% of their annual's budget?! it's the current situation in the defense ministry which is responsible for R&D.
The traitor Reformists don't allocate enough budget to finish the projects. our aviation and space projects all have been suspended or advance very slowly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

IRIAF rebuilding is too costly ... lives of our guys in Syria getting bombed by Jew jets are very cheap. This thread breaks my heart.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Human One

Fafnir said:


> The size and the cost of the program would be enormous,frankly it just would not be worth it.


Could some parts of it be copied?


----------



## OldTwilight

Human One said:


> Could some parts of it be copied?


We need 120-200 new fighter jet to revive IRIAF , but no one sell it to us ... copying part of F14 won't solve our problem ( which what we already did )


----------



## Nevsky

OldTwilight said:


> We need 120-200 new fighter jet to revive IRIAF , but no one sell it to us


Yes it will, just wait for the UN Sec Council sanctions to drop out. Do you really believe that if Iran go and ask to buy 120 Su - 35/30 fighters Russia will say no?


----------



## VEVAK

drmeson said:


> IRIAF rebuilding is too costly ... lives of our guys in Syria getting bombed by Jew jets are very cheap. This thread breaks my heart.



This government has not upgraded Iran's fighter fleet in 40 years!

And the cost wouldn't be too costly if the government had acted like a responsible government in the past 30 years by purchasing

4 Air Superiority fighters a year + 2 Multi Role fighters a year + 2 trainers a year + 1 Support Aircraft a year every year after the end of the Iran-Iraq war

And yes we were under sanctions but if every penny that should have gone towards purchasing those fighter had actually gone towards a domestic fighter program then we wouldn't be having this discussion today!


----------



## OldTwilight

Nevsky said:


> Yes it will, just wait for the UN Sec Council sanctions to drop out. Do you really believe that if Iran go and ask to buy 120 Su - 35/30 fighters Russia will say no?


well , they wasn't willingly to give S-300 to us , which we paid in advance and cash ... why you think Russia would sell Su-30 to Iran ....
Russia and Iran relation is getting worse day by day ... 



VEVAK said:


> This government has not upgraded Iran's fighter fleet in 40 years!


Hassan Rouhani was one of people which asked for disbanding Artesh and purging Air force after Nozeh Airbase incident .... when its come to defensive section , he is worst than all previous president of IRI .... ( although he is worst president in every damn field )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> well , they wasn't willingly to give S-300 to us , which we paid in advance and cash ... why you think Russia would sell Su-30 to Iran ....
> Russia and Iran relation is getting worse day by day ...
> 
> 
> Hassan Rouhani was one of people which asked for disbanding Artesh and purging Air force after Nozeh Airbase incident .... when its come to defensive section , he is worst than all previous president of IRI .... ( although he is worst president in every damn field )



I can't disagree with you on Rohani's absolute incompetence when it comes to defense issues and in terms of the Economy he played most people!

I personally would have rather seen Ghalibof win but he didn't have a chance because he just didn't have the guts to move away from conservatives in terms of social issues!

Fact is most people voted for Rohani for social issues which he has done NOTHING about! 

Iran reached it's peak in terms of military R&D during Khatami era with giant leaps being taken and finished products hitting production during Ahamdi and it's been down hill since Rohani took office! 

Rohani will go down in history as the WORST Iranian president EVER followed by Ahamadi!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

VEVAK said:


> I can't disagree with you on Rohani's absolute incompetence when it comes to defense issues and in terms of the Economy he played most people!
> 
> I personally would have rather seen Ghalibof win but he didn't have a chance because he just didn't have the guts to move away from conservatives in terms of social issues!
> 
> Fact is most people voted for Rohani for social issues which he has done NOTHING about!
> 
> Iran reached it's peak in terms of military R&D during Khatami era with giant leaps being taken and finished products hitting production during Ahamdi and it's been down hill since Rohani took office!
> 
> Rohani will go down in history as the WORST Iranian president EVER followed by Ahamadi!



Guardian Council just approving old people which they think are good ... 
after All , Ahmad Janati is 92 years old guy and he thinks only old guys are good ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

People forget how much the Syrian war cost Iran....conservative estimates start at 30 billion and go to 100 billion in aid and expenses.

That amount drastically reduced Iran’s ability to enhance its armed forces in many areas since the ‘civil war’ broke out 8 years ago. 

I mean in the last 3 years what major project has been unvieled? Emad warhead? Karrar Tank? There hasn’t been any major new project.

Add in the expenses that Israeli airstrikes have had on all those weapons Iran has attempted to transfer to Hezbollah and the costs could potentially mean Iran has spent years worth of its yearly military budget just to prop up and enhance its allies.


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> People forget how much the Syrian war cost Iran....conservative estimates start at *30 billion and go to 100 billion* in aid and expenses.
> 
> That amount drastically reduced Iran’s ability to enhance its armed forces in many areas since the ‘civil war’ broke out 8 years ago.
> 
> *I mean in the last 3 years what major project has been unvieled? Emad warhead? Karrar Tank? There hasn’t been any major new project.*
> 
> Add in the expenses that Israeli airstrikes have had on all those weapons Iran has attempted to transfer to Hezbollah and the costs could potentially mean Iran has spent years worth of its yearly military budget just to prop up and enhance its allies.



Those numbers are preposterous, the latter is a good fraction of Iran's GDP. There is no way that much money left Iran without there being a major effect on the economy. Obviously Iran has invested billions into Syria, but it's not as if they don't expect serious economic gains when it comes to mediterranean access and post-conflict reconstruction. Regardless, even for purely strategic purposes Syria is basically the only thing that stands between Iran and Hezbollah, no Syria = no leverage over Israel = bad times for Iran.

Those are all major projects unveiled less than a year ago, you cannot expect new shiny weapon systems just because the last one was displayed a little while ago, in fact more has been unveiled in the past 3 years than there has been in the 5 years preceding. Iran has a problem with premature announcements, weapon systems unveiled that are still in development/prototyping stages for years to come. It is likely that Iran exhausted all of it's 'major projects' in the run up to last years presidential election. There are still likely multiple 'major projects' under development atm alongside existing ones such as Bavar or Karrar, but it's just too premature to unveil them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Those numbers are preposterous, the latter is a good fraction of Iran's GDP. There is no way that much money left Iran without there being a major effect on the economy. Obviously Iran has invested billions into Syria, but it's not as if they don't expect serious economic gains when it comes to mediterranean access and post-conflict reconstruction. Regardless, even for purely strategic purposes Syria is basically the only thing that stands between Iran and Hezbollah, no Syria = no leverage over Israel = bad times for Iran.
> 
> Those are all major projects unveiled less than a year ago, you cannot expect new shiny weapon systems just because the last one was displayed a little while ago, in fact more has been unveiled in the past 3 years than there has been in the 5 years preceding. Iran has a problem with premature announcements, weapon systems unveiled that are still in development/prototyping stages for years to come. It is likely that Iran exhausted all of it's 'major projects' in the run up to last years presidential election. There are still likely multiple 'major projects' under development atm alongside existing ones such as Bavar or Karrar, but it's just too premature to unveil them.



Syrian civil war started in 2010. If we say that Iran spent 60 billion so far.

60 billion divided by 8 years of war = ~7 Billion a year in aid/war expenses.

That is hardly a “preposterous” figure given that the war was viewed by the IRGC as existential to Iran’s long term surivival.

That cost includes aid given to Syria in terms of food, oil, gas, loans, weapons. As well as military cost of IRGC personell, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias and military bases/equipment.

In the recent Syria cruise missile attack by the US spent over $100 million dollars to lob some cruise missiles at Syria.

So yes, war is expensive even at the cost of production and cheaper labor that Iran has available to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> People forget how much the Syrian war cost Iran....conservative estimates start at 30 billion and go to 100 billion in aid and expenses.
> 
> That amount drastically reduced Iran’s ability to enhance its armed forces in many areas since the ‘civil war’ broke out 8 years ago.
> 
> I mean in the last 3 years what major project has been unvieled? Emad warhead? Karrar Tank? There hasn’t been any major new project.
> 
> Add in the expenses that Israeli airstrikes have had on all those weapons Iran has attempted to transfer to Hezbollah and the costs could potentially mean Iran has spent years worth of its yearly military budget just to prop up and enhance its allies.



Those estimates are all absurdly delusional! 100 Billion Toman maybe NOT Dollars! 

The highest estimates are no more than $1 Billion USD in aid on a yearly bases! 

Iran hasn't been flying fighters jets and attacking mass targets using high cost Missiles and PGM for the price tag to go that high!

UAV's, Ordinance and missiles used by Iran in Syra are by the most part low cost domestically produced products

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KapitaanAli

ANDROMEDA said:


> Because There is no benefit in copying the aircraft as its an outdated design we need more capable design . Once there was an offer to supreme leader to copy the f-14 but the supreme leader reject it and asked for a new aircraft that lead in qaher project


A _supreme_ mistake.

Should've copied it without the swing wings and you wouldn't have to wait for the mythical beast Qaher which won't do 10% of the ancient Tomcats.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Those estimates are all absurdly delusional! 100 Billion Toman maybe NOT Dollars!
> 
> The highest estimates are no more than $1 Billion USD in aid on a yearly bases!
> 
> Iran hasn't been flying fighters jets and attacking mass targets using high cost Missiles and PGM for the price tag to go that high!
> 
> UAV's, Ordinance and missiles used by Iran in Syra are by the most part low cost domestically produced products



Your number is absurd if you think 1 Billion a year. Iran to prop up Syria war chest would have given much more than that alone let alone costs of equipment, arms, paying Hezbollah/Shiite militias soldiers salaries and benefits for martyred soldiers, cost of deployment soldiers etc.

Even if we assume just 2 billion dollars a year expense...that is still 16 billion US dollars that did not go to potentially capital intensive r&d military projects.

Irregardless of what you think, Syrian war cost Iran dearly. And Iran now has to share Syria with Russia/US/NATO.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Your number is absurd if you think 1 Billion a year. Iran to prop up Syria war chest would have given much more than that alone let alone costs of equipment, arms, paying Hezbollah/Shiite militias soldiers salaries and benefits for martyred soldiers, cost of deployment soldiers etc.
> 
> Even if we assume just 2 billion dollars a year expense...that is still 16 billion US dollars that did not go to potentially capital intensive r&d military projects.
> 
> Irregardless of what you think, Syrian war cost Iran dearly. And Iran now has to share Syria with Russia/US/NATO.



Military aspects are actually under average of $800 million a year(For the past 6 years) + Iranian aid + Loans and in total with the loans you could reach up to 16 Billion but it's not all military and it's not all handouts some are loans. 

As for funding for manpower Iranian solder would have still gotten paid even if they were back home in Iran! Yes they do get extra but the only amount you can calculate into the cost is the extra they are getting on top of their regular salaries not the entire salaries! And it really isn't that much and Iran just doesn't have that many solders there for the costs to even come close to your previous figures!

And the equipment is mostly low tech Iranian produced weapons! 

As for sharing Syria! Syria doesn't belong Iran or Russia to share! And the Russians have had a military base in Syria for a long time! 
Iran's involvement in Syria was to prevent a Saudi backed ISIS from taking over an ally NOTHING MORE! 

And Syria is one of Iran's few allies in the region so what exactly did you expect Iran to do? The government did the right thing!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Military aspects are actually under average of $800 million a year(For the past 6 years) + Iranian aid + Loans and in total with the loans you could reach up to 16 Billion but it's not all military and it's not all handouts some are loans.
> 
> As for funding for manpower Iranian solder would have still gotten paid even if they were back home in Iran! Yes they do get extra but the only amount you can calculate into the cost is the extra they are getting on top of their regular salaries not the entire salaries! And it really isn't that much and Iran just doesn't have that many solders there for the costs to even come close to your previous figures!
> 
> And the equipment is mostly low tech Iranian produced weapons!
> 
> As for sharing Syria! Syria doesn't belong Iran or Russia to share! And the Russians have had a military base in Syria for a long time!
> Iran's involvement in Syria was to prevent a Saudi backed ISIS from taking over an ally NOTHING MORE!
> 
> And Syria is one of Iran's few allies in the region so what exactly did you expect Iran to do? The government did the right thing!



wether it was handouts or loans doesn’t matter! It was money that was taken away from military projects! It explains lack of major projects! Almost all projects unvieled so far were started and almost finished prior to 2010 civil war starting!

Russia’s naval base prior to the civil war was an old broken down port hardly a naval base. It couldn’t even hold the major warships of the Russian fleet. Now Russia has an airbase and the port has been extensively upgraded.

Prior to civil war, Syria was a sovereign country now it is divided up by foreign powers (Iran included). 

Iran made the right move defending its allies. It came at a great cost and while Iran will undoubtly benefit from this civil war, it came at the expense of major military projects wether you want to admit it or not.

With 16 billion dollars Iran could have started its own (serious) fighter jet program.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> wether it was handouts or loans doesn’t matter! It was money that was taken away from military projects! It explains lack of major projects! Almost all projects unvieled so far were started and almost finished prior to 2010 civil war starting!
> 
> Russia’s naval base prior to the civil war was an old broken down port hardly a naval base. It couldn’t even hold the major warships of the Russian fleet. Now Russia has an airbase and the port has been extensively upgraded.
> 
> Prior to civil war, Syria was a sovereign country now it is divided up by foreign powers (Iran included).
> 
> Iran made the right move defending its allies. It came at a great cost and while Iran will undoubtly benefit from this civil war, it came at the expense of major military projects wether you want to admit it or not.
> 
> With 16 billion dollars Iran could have started its own (serious) fighter jet program.



How well equipped Russian bases were is not relevant the point is they had a base! You put assets where they are needed as needed so if the Russians didn't have Su-30's and Destroyers there before it's because they weren't needed there before. 

It's total effect on Iran's military budget is no more than an average of $1 Billion USD a year for the past 6 years! And under the Rohani administration I have not doubt that those loans would NOT have gone towards Military projects! And aside from loans there was a lot of construction equipment & supplies (Iran today produces more cement than it can sell)..... and large portions were donations from regular Iranians and Iranian businesses 

There is absolutely NOTHING beneficial for Iran with what's going on in Syria NOTHING AT ALL! The mess in Syria was created by the Americans with the help of the Saudi's and the only one that may benefit from it is the Americans!

Between 2004-2010 Americans were pushing Sunni Iraqi's into Syria to change the demographics in Syria and between 2010-2016 they pushed radicalized Sunni Iraqi's usually led by Saudi Wahabbi commanders into Syria to create a manufactured civil war and once that started to fail Americans went to their backup plan and used their connections with the Kurds in Iraq to slowly infiltrate and create relationships with and arm Syrian Kurds to turn them against the central government 

If it wasn't for Iran ISIS would have been in control of Iraq and Syria 
And we all know Iran is the main target the U.S. is fixated on!

Now why is the U.S. so fixated on Iran?
1.Shipping routs from ground & sea from pipelines to trains and railways Iran is strategically located and is vital for both China and India. 
About 3 Billion of the worlds 7.5 Billion population live in China, India & Pakistan 
From the Sea the Persian Gulf if vital to Iraq, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia,.... and all other countries that wish to ship products to and from these countries and controlling the routes to and from those countries is vital in controlling the markets in those countries 
2.Energy Iran is rich in both Oil and Natural Gas if you wanna control the world then you have to control what fuels their military and their country.
3.Other untapped natural resources from Gold to Copper
4.Prestige the U.S. was kicked out of Iran in 1979 and if Iran was allowed to prosper without the U.S. it would have set an example that was unacceptable for the U.S. 

So knowing how fixated the U.S. is on Iran it would be utterly delusional for Iran to stick it's head in the sand and let the U.S. have it's way in Iraq and in Syria knowing full well that your next!!!!!

And yes even $1 Billion USD a year would have negative impacts on Iran's military if you have an irresponsible government!
$1Billion a year = 1000 $1 Million USD missiles on a YEARLY bases 
So yea if you have an irresponsible government like the Rohani administration it effects us severely but that's mainly the Rohani administrations fault because that money shouldn't be coming from the military budget!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

*Khamenei Fires Air Force Chief over Israeli F-35 Deep Penetration of Iran’s Sky*
JNi.Media27 Sivan 5778 – June 9, 2018
Photo Credit: Photomontage using copyright free images


F-35 Adir over Tehran
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei fired Iranian air force commander Brigadier General Farzad Ismaili, who had been in office since 2010, because the latter had hid from him the fact that Israeli F-35 planes had penetrated Iran’s sky, the Kuwaiti daily Al Jarida reported on Saturday.

The newspaper emphasized that it was the original media source that exposed the Israeli raids, which had taken place last March. Al Jarida cited senior Iranian military who said that only following its March report did the intelligence services of the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian intelligence ministry begin to investigate the case, under direct orders from Khamenei.

According to the newspaper’s investigation, the IAF F-35 “Adir” planes penetrated Iran’s airspace, circled high above Tehran, Karajrak, Isfahan, Shiraz and Bandar Abbas – and photographed Iran’s air defense system.

One of the sources reported that Iran’s air defense system, including its Russian radar, did not detect the entry and exit of the fighter planes, and that Ismaili hid this information from the supreme leader to cover his corps’ failure. However, three weeks ago, Iranian intelligence discovered that the Israeli fighter jets had carried out this sortie as a test of the possibility of an undetected military attack on Iranian outposts and bases, during which they photographed those sensitive bases, evading the Russian S-300 missile system’s radar.

According to Al Jarida, Iranian intelligence received top secret information that the Israeli fighter planes even managed to photograph Iran’s underground bases. Khamenei, who received this information, now suspects a cooperation between Russia and Israel, and that the Russians gave Israel the secret code of the Russian radar in Iran – according to the Kuwaiti newspaper.

Khamenei fired the commander of Iran’s air defense system on May 29, replacing him with his deputy, General Alireza Sabahi-Fard.

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/mid...-35-deep-penetration-of-irans-sky/2018/06/09/


----------



## airmarshal

I dont think Iran is in any position to defend attack by Israel. Due to sanctions, Iran's air force is in a very bad shape. Its like putting bandages and tying rope around the airplane body to make them fly.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> *Khamenei Fires Air Force Chief over Israeli F-35 Deep Penetration of Iran’s Sky*
> JNi.Media27 Sivan 5778 – June 9, 2018
> Photo Credit: Photomontage using copyright free images
> 
> 
> F-35 Adir over Tehran
> Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei fired Iranian air force commander Brigadier General Farzad Ismaili, who had been in office since 2010, because the latter had hid from him the fact that Israeli F-35 planes had penetrated Iran’s sky, the Kuwaiti daily Al Jarida reported on Saturday.
> 
> The newspaper emphasized that it was the original media source that exposed the Israeli raids, which had taken place last March. Al Jarida cited senior Iranian military who said that only following its March report did the intelligence services of the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian intelligence ministry begin to investigate the case, under direct orders from Khamenei.
> 
> According to the newspaper’s investigation, the IAF F-35 “Adir” planes penetrated Iran’s airspace, circled high above Tehran, Karajrak, Isfahan, Shiraz and Bandar Abbas – and photographed Iran’s air defense system.
> 
> One of the sources reported that Iran’s air defense system, including its Russian radar, did not detect the entry and exit of the fighter planes, and that Ismaili hid this information from the supreme leader to cover his corps’ failure. However, three weeks ago, Iranian intelligence discovered that the Israeli fighter jets had carried out this sortie as a test of the possibility of an undetected military attack on Iranian outposts and bases, during which they photographed those sensitive bases, evading the Russian S-300 missile system’s radar.
> 
> According to Al Jarida, Iranian intelligence received top secret information that the Israeli fighter planes even managed to photograph Iran’s underground bases. Khamenei, who received this information, now suspects a cooperation between Russia and Israel, and that the Russians gave Israel the secret code of the Russian radar in Iran – according to the Kuwaiti newspaper.
> 
> Khamenei fired the commander of Iran’s air defense system on May 29, replacing him with his deputy, General Alireza Sabahi-Fard.
> 
> http://www.jewishpress.com/news/mid...-35-deep-penetration-of-irans-sky/2018/06/09/



Don't you have anything better to do than post Israeli Propaganda?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Parsipride

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Don't you have anything better to do than post Israeli Propaganda?



What do expect from a Hasbara troll

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> *Khamenei Fires Air Force Chief over Israeli F-35 Deep Penetration of Iran’s Sky*
> JNi.Media27 Sivan 5778 – June 9, 2018
> Photo Credit: Photomontage using copyright free images
> 
> 
> F-35 Adir over Tehran
> Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei fired Iranian air force commander Brigadier General Farzad Ismaili, who had been in office since 2010, because the latter had hid from him the fact that Israeli F-35 planes had penetrated Iran’s sky, the Kuwaiti daily Al Jarida reported on Saturday.
> 
> The newspaper emphasized that it was the original media source that exposed the Israeli raids, which had taken place last March. Al Jarida cited senior Iranian military who said that only following its March report did the intelligence services of the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian intelligence ministry begin to investigate the case, under direct orders from Khamenei.
> 
> According to the newspaper’s investigation, the IAF F-35 “Adir” planes penetrated Iran’s airspace, circled high above Tehran, Karajrak, Isfahan, Shiraz and Bandar Abbas – and photographed Iran’s air defense system.
> 
> One of the sources reported that Iran’s air defense system, including its Russian radar, did not detect the entry and exit of the fighter planes, and that Ismaili hid this information from the supreme leader to cover his corps’ failure. However, three weeks ago, Iranian intelligence discovered that the Israeli fighter jets had carried out this sortie as a test of the possibility of an undetected military attack on Iranian outposts and bases, during which they photographed those sensitive bases, evading the Russian S-300 missile system’s radar.
> 
> According to Al Jarida, Iranian intelligence received top secret information that the Israeli fighter planes even managed to photograph Iran’s underground bases. Khamenei, who received this information, now suspects a cooperation between Russia and Israel, and that the Russians gave Israel the secret code of the Russian radar in Iran – according to the Kuwaiti newspaper.
> 
> Khamenei fired the commander of Iran’s air defense system on May 29, replacing him with his deputy, General Alireza Sabahi-Fard.
> 
> http://www.jewishpress.com/news/mid...-35-deep-penetration-of-irans-sky/2018/06/09/


please decide , it's air-force chief who get sacked or air-defence commander ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> *Khamenei Fires Air Force Chief over Israeli F-35 Deep Penetration of Iran’s Sky*
> JNi.Media27 Sivan 5778 – June 9, 2018
> Photo Credit: Photomontage using copyright free images
> 
> 
> F-35 Adir over Tehran
> Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei fired Iranian air force commander Brigadier General Farzad Ismaili, who had been in office since 2010, because the latter had hid from him the fact that Israeli F-35 planes had penetrated Iran’s sky, the Kuwaiti daily Al Jarida reported on Saturday.
> 
> The newspaper emphasized that it was the original media source that exposed the Israeli raids, which had taken place last March. Al Jarida cited senior Iranian military who said that only following its March report did the intelligence services of the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian intelligence ministry begin to investigate the case, under direct orders from Khamenei.
> 
> According to the newspaper’s investigation, the IAF F-35 “Adir” planes penetrated Iran’s airspace, circled high above Tehran, Karajrak, Isfahan, Shiraz and Bandar Abbas – and photographed Iran’s air defense system.
> 
> One of the sources reported that Iran’s air defense system, including its Russian radar, did not detect the entry and exit of the fighter planes, and that Ismaili hid this information from the supreme leader to cover his corps’ failure. However, three weeks ago, Iranian intelligence discovered that the Israeli fighter jets had carried out this sortie as a test of the possibility of an undetected military attack on Iranian outposts and bases, during which they photographed those sensitive bases, evading the Russian S-300 missile system’s radar.
> 
> According to Al Jarida, Iranian intelligence received top secret information that the Israeli fighter planes even managed to photograph Iran’s underground bases. Khamenei, who received this information, now suspects a cooperation between Russia and Israel, and that the Russians gave Israel the secret code of the Russian radar in Iran – according to the Kuwaiti newspaper.
> 
> Khamenei fired the commander of Iran’s air defense system on May 29, replacing him with his deputy, General Alireza Sabahi-Fard.
> 
> http://www.jewishpress.com/news/mid...-35-deep-penetration-of-irans-sky/2018/06/09/




So now your spreading absurd Israeli Propaganda? 

Israeli's only have 9 F-35's so risking even a single one by flying it into a country that's 1000 km away just so you can create fear is ABSURD! 

Plus, Israelis can fly UCAV's that have a far smaller RCS than the F-35's into Iranian Air Space using American Tech! So why exactly would they ever risk their F-35's just to supposedly create fear? And it's not like the Israeli's have a fleet of 500 F-35's for Iran to be afraid of them they only have 9! 

Plus the Head of Iran's Air Defense Force got promoted recently! So according to you the Israeli's penetrate Iran's Air Defense and as a response Iran's supreme leader promotes the head of Iran's Air Defense Force!

Esmaili is practically being groomed to head Iran's Artesh within the next decade!










I can't tell you why Iran's Air Force commander was replaced but what I can tell you is that Iran's Air Force needs commanders smart enough to realize that Iran's Air Force needs to get up on it's own two feet which means Iran's Air Force should have had extensive R&D projects that addresses Iran's need for Jet engines, Fighter Jets, Bombers, Trainers, Support aircraft, Jet Powered UCAV's, Precision Guided Air to ground munitions,.....

Iran's Air Force has been one of the least productive branches of Iran's military! Today IRGC is building UAV's with PGM capabilities while Iran's Air Force hasn't even managed to give PGM capabilities to it's F-5's

And the fact that Iran's Air Force hasn't even attempted to build fighter bombers comparable to what the French were building in the late 50's shows that this is not about technology or human resources or tools and equipment or even funding this is about incompetent leadership



Hack-Hook said:


> please decide , it's air-force chief who get sacked or air-defence commander ?



Air Defense commander is being groomed to head Iran's Artesh within the next decade! 

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...یر-اسماعیلی-دستیار-و-مشاور-فرمانده-کل-ارتش-شد

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...نده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-معارفه-شد-سوابق

If Iran's supreme leader went around demoting people every time an enemy aircraft penetrated Iran's Air Defense our country would be in a lot of trouble because we'd run out of commanders!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> So now your spreading absurd Israeli Propaganda?



I thought it was amusing. And it is Psy ops. 

It is no different than the 100 articles published by Iran’s military saying that “X project will be completed by end of Iranian new year”


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Is my estimated about Iran air force aircraft equipment true?


----------



## VEVAK

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Is my estimated about Iran air force aircraft equipment true?



NOPE!
Only 24 F-14 (20 in storage with status unknown high estimates are that only 10 could be made flight worthy in an emergency) 
Only 24 MiG-29's
Only 24 Saegheh/Azarakhsh/Simorgh combined and most are Azarakhsh & Simorgh not Saegheh
Less than 24 Su-24's
60 F-4's 60 F-5's
20 J-7/Su-22


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> NOPE!
> Only 24 F-14 (20 in storage with status unknown high estimates are that only 10 could be made flight worthy in an emergency)
> Only 24 MiG-29's
> Only 24 Saegheh/Azarakhsh/Simorgh combined and most are Azarakhsh & Simorgh not Saegheh
> Less than 24 Su-24's
> 60 F-4's 60 F-5's
> 20 J-7/Su-22



Shows you what the IR Military industry prioritized in its 30 year life span. Rivalry, corruption, disdain for the airforce, etc lead to an airforce that rivals a 3rd world country.

Between 1980-2005 Iran had many opportunities to procure modern aircraft and technological know how. Instead you had traitors like Rafsanjani that refused to modernize certain segments of the armed forces. Him and his corrupt sons destroyed the Republic along with others. Just a large group of profiteers including the upper echelon of the IRGC today.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Shows you what the IR Military industry prioritized in its 30 year life span. Rivalry, corruption, disdain for the airforce, etc lead to an airforce that rivals a 3rd world country.
> 
> Between 1980-2005 Iran had many opportunities to procure modern aircraft and technological know how. Instead you had traitors like Rafsanjani that refused to modernize certain segments of the armed forces. Him and his corrupt sons destroyed the Republic along with others. Just a large group of profiteers including the upper echelon of the IRGC today.


Having all the top notch fighter jets in the world without the know how to produce them won't do anyone any good. Just look at Iran's war with Iraq. We probably had the best air force in western Asia then but as soon as the supply line of parts was cut, they really didn't mean much. 

A real war puts a lot of stress on your weapons and parts inventory. It is not only about maintaining the fleet and keep them flight worthy. It is also about replacing the lost fighter jets. With sanctions in place, Iran can't buy them from outside and it can't produce them locally. So it is only a limited resource that Iran need use as a last resort. Just like its F-14s that were kept away from action most of the time during Iran-Iraq war. And a wise military leader should not relay on a resource that he cannot use extensively wherever and whenever he needs them. 

Even if Iran had procured new fighters in the period you mentioned, they had probably ended up with the same problem of lack of parts supply today and again, not useful because we again have the sanctions in place and we can't produce them locally.

Iran used this lesson well and invested on weapons that it could locally support. In a theoretical war, Iran's arsenal of missiles, drones and fast attack boats would be much more beneficial than a foreign sourced air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Having all the top notch fighter jets in the world without the know how to produce them won't do anyone any good. Just look at Iran's war with Iraq. We probably had the best air force in western Asia then but as soon as the supply line of parts was cut, they really didn't mean much.
> 
> A real war puts a lot of stress on your weapons and parts inventory. It is not only about maintaining the fleet and keep them flight worthy. It is also about replacing the lost fighter jets. With sanctions in place, Iran can't buy them from outside and it can't produce them locally. So it is only a limited resource that Iran need use as a last resort. Just like its F-14s that were kept away from action most of the time during Iran-Iraq war. And a wise military leader should not relay on a resource that he cannot use extensively wherever and whenever he needs them.
> 
> Even if Iran had procured new fighters in the period you mentioned, they had probably ended up with the same problem of lack of parts supply today and again, not useful because we again have the sanctions in place and we can't produce them locally.
> 
> Iran used this lesson well and invested on weapons that it could locally support. In a theoretical war, Iran's arsenal of missiles, drones and fast attack boats would be much more beneficial than a foreign sourced air force.



Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suite I also mentioned technological know how in my post. Blueprints, tech know how transfer, lots of things were up for purchase.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, ex soviet countries and corrupt arms dealers were selling EVERYTHING to the highest bidder. Where do you think Iran got the KH-55 from to make Soumar? Russia was offering Iran warships and long range bombers, something unheard of today.

But Rafsanjani and his corrupt posse didn’t think it was worth for Iran to invest in such programs. Yet today many of Iran’s major arms program Iran owes its roots to foreign tech from the 80’s & 90’s! Shahab 3 (NK nodong), Iran’s kilo subs (purchased in 90’s), Chinese anti ship missiles (foreign transfer in 90’s), Iran’s soumar cruise missile program (KH-55), Iran’s radar program (many Russia radars).


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

VEVAK said:


> NOPE!
> Only 24 F-14 (20 in storage with status unknown high estimates are that only 10 could be made flight worthy in an emergency)
> Only 24 MiG-29's
> Only 24 Saegheh/Azarakhsh/Simorgh combined and most are Azarakhsh & Simorgh not Saegheh
> Less than 24 Su-24's
> 60 F-4's 60 F-5's
> 20 J-7/Su-22


 what about Mirage F1 @VEVAK ,are IRIAF still using it?


----------



## TheImmortal

07_SeppDietrich said:


> what about Mirage F1 @VEVAK ,are IRIAF still using it?



The Iranian military is still using Peykans. So I won’t be surprised if they still use tanks from Reza Shah era and muskets as well.


----------



## VEVAK

07_SeppDietrich said:


> what about Mirage F1 @VEVAK ,are IRIAF still using it?



Yea but only ~ 12 or so are airworthy IRGC also has a handful of Su-25's too

Main problem with Iran's Air Force is a vast verity of fighters in small numbers and when your forced to build a lot of the spare parts yourself it becomes a problem!

A country with Iran's budget should only have 1 type of Air Superiority Aircraft, 1 Type of strike aircraft that uses a lot of the same parts as your Air Superiority aircraft (Like F-15E & F-15C or Su-30 & Su-34) & 1 type of Multirole fighter & if you can afford it a separate heavily armored CAS. 

Your Air Force shouldn't have to worry about parts for 2 at best 3 different types of engines for your fighter fleet
Today if you add in IRGC handful of Su-25's Iran has to worry about at least 8 different types of engines & spare parts for it's fighter fleet alone it's absurd!



TheImmortal said:


> Shows you what the IR Military industry prioritized in its 30 year life span. Rivalry, corruption, disdain for the airforce, etc lead to an airforce that rivals a 3rd world country.
> 
> Between 1980-2005 Iran had many opportunities to procure modern aircraft and technological know how. Instead you had traitors like Rafsanjani that refused to modernize certain segments of the armed forces. Him and his corrupt sons destroyed the Republic along with others. Just a large group of profiteers including the upper echelon of the IRGC today.



NONSESE! During Khatami Iran tried to buy New MiG-29's and the U.S. went as far as purchasing those fighters so Iran doesn't get it's hands on it!

And you don't know what goes on behind closed doors! If Iran has to agree to maintenance crews from another country just to keep it's fleet active then that's unacceptable!

You talk about Shah buying fighter well Iran had the 4th most powerful Air Force in the world when Saddam attack and if Iran was truly capable of taking full advantage of it's Air Force the Iran-Iraq war should have been over in a matter of months! 

Operations like Kaman 99 should have been done on a daily or at worst on a weekly bases! And yet with all the F-4's and F-5's Iran had in it's fleet using only 100 of them to carryout attacks into Iraqi territory every other day without the Americans was NOT possible 

What does that mean? That means with all the money Iran paid for those fighter those fighters weren't in Iran to do Iran's bidding they were only sold to Iran to do America's bidding and we had to flip the bill for them!

Sadly despite what Iran's been through people like you still don't realize that!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suite I also mentioned technological know how in my post. Blueprints, tech know how transfer, lots of things were up for purchase.
> 
> After the fall of the Soviet Union, ex soviet countries and corrupt arms dealers were selling EVERYTHING to the highest bidder. Where do you think Iran got the KH-55 from to make Soumar? Russia was offering Iran warships and long range bombers, something unheard of today.
> 
> But Rafsanjani and his corrupt posse didn’t think it was worth for Iran to invest in such programs. Yet today many of Iran’s major arms program Iran owes its roots to foreign tech from the 80’s & 90’s! Shahab 3 (NK nodong), Iran’s kilo subs (purchased in 90’s), Chinese anti ship missiles (foreign transfer in 90’s), Iran’s soumar cruise missile program (KH-55), Iran’s radar program (many Russia radars).


Technology to build and support a cutting edge air fleet is not something that can be procured. You need to have the whole supply chain from the special alloys and composites to electronics. That is why only a handful of countries can do that and even then, they rely on imports from other countries for some parts that they cannot source internally. 

WWII USA is a very good example. Did you know the famous P-51 Mustang used Rolls-Royce Merlin engine simply because US didn't have a local engine as good even though it was a fully developed and industrial country back then. It took US whole 40s and best part of 50s to become fully self reliant in aviation industry.

Point is, even big guys who invented airplane, need help from outside. Now taking Iran, a developing country with its first university barely a century old, to the point to develop a credible jetfighter without any purchase from outside its borders in the short period you mentioned is impossible. 

Iran will eventually get there. But it is not going to happen overnight and the fact that it is not there yet, given the circumstances is no one's fault.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> WWII USA is a very good example. Did you know the famous P-51 Mustang used Rolls-Royce Merlin engine simply because US didn't have a local engine as good even though it was a fully developed and industrial country back then. It took US whole 40s and best part of 50s to become fully self reliant in aviation industry.



This is some revisionist history right there. Pre-WWII US military was Substandard. You can even find the army era recruitment video showing soldiers hiding in cardboard tanks and firing fake guns....yes fake guns! They didn’t even have proper equipment for a recruitment video.

The point I am trying to make is that even the US at one point had a subpar arms industry. WWII forced the US into a wartime economy and it was the capture of Nazi scientists that led to a boom in US military technology. Hypothetically those same scientists instead fled to Iran (assuming Iran was an independent country not a puppet country) then Iran could have made great strides in its military if the determination was there.

Yet after 30 years, Iran cannot even make a F-5 fighter jet. It’s not supply chain problems, it’s management and corruption problems. You are talking about a society that till 15 years ago most people were driving a 1960’s era car that had no air conditioning (Peykan).

If you think waiting another 10 years or 20 years will fix this you are mistaken. Iran could have the blueprints to a F-35 and the know how and they would struggle to put together a squadron. Mismanagement is rampant in many areas of Iran’s society let alone military. 

Outside of missiles and maybe AD systems (though the amounts existing is unknown), what large sophisticated military equipment has Iran mass produced? 

No doubt It’s simply amazing what Iran has been able to do up to this point given the problems it exerts on itself let alone sanctions and the other things foreign powers are doing. Iran first needs to get out of its own way in hindering military progress let’s not blame time here.


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Guys which version is MiG-29 operated by IRIAF (9.12A or 9.12B)?


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suite I also mentioned technological know how in my post. Blueprints, tech know how transfer, lots of things were up for purchase.
> 
> After the fall of the Soviet Union, ex soviet countries and corrupt arms dealers were selling EVERYTHING to the highest bidder. Where do you think Iran got the KH-55 from to make Soumar? Russia was offering Iran warships and long range bombers, something unheard of today.
> 
> But Rafsanjani and his corrupt posse didn’t think it was worth for Iran to invest in such programs. Yet today many of Iran’s major arms program Iran owes its roots to foreign tech from the 80’s & 90’s! Shahab 3 (NK nodong), Iran’s kilo subs (purchased in 90’s), Chinese anti ship missiles (foreign transfer in 90’s), Iran’s soumar cruise missile program (KH-55), Iran’s radar program (many Russia radars).


Russia back in the 90s- late 2000s was a very unreliable supplier that proved to be very vulnerable to us pressure,often deals were never completely fulfilled or even cancelled outright and even when equipment was delivered there were often still problems.There were lots of claims in the media about russian weapons offers to iran but in reality most of this was never offered or indeed asked for.
Personally I think that on the whole that back then iran was actually pretty lucky to get whatever it did out of russia,however I do think that owing to the current very frosty political relations between russia and the west,due to the cold war mk2 that the west has now seen fit to initiate with russia,that now would probably be an excellent time for iran to try and procure russian weapons and a lot of other things besides,sadly however because of rouhanis shortsightedness[stupidity?] the un arms embargo on iran was allowed to remain in place rather than being removed as a condition of irans acceptance of the jcpoa,so most weapons purchases are still currently verboten sadly,also one gets the distinct impression that unfortunately rouhani would still much rather try to do business with the west instead of russia,with the sukhoi superjet being an excellent example of this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Words would not matter. Calculations would not matter either. Our skies are unsafe and in case of regional conflict, IRIAF will be wiped out of skies in matter of hours. This weakened force can not even carry out point defence in Iranian skies, let alone guarding our extended regional interests.

People blame sanctions. That is because our political or diplomatic front has failed miserably at global stage. These corrupt and lustful mullahs were afraid of a strong IRIAF from the day of Nojeh coup. That ancient qom-mashad illiterate mullah league is still in power. They would be relieved to see IRIAF disband one day instead of seeing it improve. They fear this force themselves. 

Only way the IRIAF can survive is to merge it with IRGC-AF. That way it will get funds and trust of illiterate-corrupt Mullahs in power. We will see ourselves how many squadrons of Su-30SM and Su-35S will be procured then.


----------



## Arab Sword

drmeson said:


> Words would not matter. Calculations would not matter either. Our skies are unsafe and in case of regional conflict, IRIAF will be wiped out of skies in matter of hours. This weakened force can not even carry out point defence in Iranian skies, let alone guarding our extended regional interests.
> 
> People blame sanctions. That is because our political or diplomatic front has failed miserably at global stage. These corrupt and lustful mullahs were afraid of a strong IRIAF from the day of Nojeh coup. That ancient qom-mashad illiterate mullah league is still in power. They would be relieved to see IRIAF disband one day instead of seeing it improve. They fear this force themselves.
> 
> Only way the IRIAF can survive is to merge it with IRGC-AF. That way it will get funds and trust of illiterate-corrupt Mullahs in power. We will see ourselves how many squadrons of Su-30SM and Su-35S will be procured then.



Hmmm so i understand from you that the Regime wanted to stay in power so they weakened the air force to make itself dramatically more vulnerable to a US-led Regime change in Iran??? Lol

Let me correct this for you my brother : people don’t make coups by air force. Throughout history nearly all of coups are performed by ground forces, troops on the ground, even police units or even militias etc, the common thing they are all ground based. You dont need a strategist to understand that you can’t control a government buildings thousands of kilometers above, lol.

Thats why some autocratic governments have kept their airforce (and air defense) very superior while their ground forces are relatively weak. AF & AD will be the trustworthiest for many civil dictators!

Even when airforces do participate in coups, they merely do a complementary role, where even the police are playing a more important role than em.

Thats because coups historically target three buildings : the presidential palace, the parliament, and more importantly the tv broadcasting station. They seize control of these buildings, and then announce the coup thro the broadcasting station; thats what the Houthi rebels did in 2014 for example!

However, for governments facing regime-change threats from foreign states, airforces are the biggest barrier to deter this threat! Along with other long range weapons and strategic forces.

So saying Iranian gov is protecting itself by weakening airforces is a very, very inaccurate phrase, and historically inaccurate as well. With all due respect to you my friend!

Iran is weak on air (and navy) forces because these industries are very heavy and require a lot of experience, and even much more of funding. Iran’s GDP is relatively good, but its not enough at all to fund such extremely expensive projects, particularly under the sanctions. Furthermore, Iran is a third world country, a rising one indeed, but it is still like other third world lacking a lot of experience.
Thats why the more lighter and more cheaper missile technology is very much more suitable choice for the Iranian authorities, and more effective.

I understand you don’t like the gov, but only objective criticism that will bring good for all of us!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Russia back in the 90s- late 2000s was a very unreliable supplier that proved to be very vulnerable to us pressure,often deals were never completely fulfilled or even cancelled outright and even when equipment was delivered there were often still problems.There were lots of claims in the media about russian weapons offers to iran but in reality most of this was never offered or indeed asked for.
> Personally I think that on the whole that back then iran was actually pretty lucky to get whatever it did out of russia,however I do think that owing to the current very frosty political relations between russia and the west,due to the cold war mk2 that the west has now seen fit to initiate with russia,that now would probably be an excellent time for iran to try and procure russian weapons and a lot of other things besides,sadly however because of rouhanis shortsightedness[stupidity?] the un arms embargo on iran was allowed to remain in place rather than being removed as a condition of irans acceptance of the jcpoa,so most weapons purchases are still currently verboten sadly,also one gets the distinct impression that unfortunately rouhani would still much rather try to do business with the west instead of russia,with the sukhoi superjet being an excellent example of this.



Dude you talk out both sides of your mouth. On one hand you say Russia was unreliable supplier (forgetting to mention ex soviet blocs that were selling assets off left and right like the KH-55) in the 90’s.

But that they would be a reliable supplier today, but can’t because Rouhani?!

Lol you are very naive. If no arms embargo existed, Iran would still get the same “unreliable” Russia and China. Neither country is going to sell Iran advanced fighters in significant numbers. The US would put too much pressure on them.


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Dude you talk out both sides of your mouth. On one hand you say Russia was unreliable supplier (forgetting to mention ex soviet blocs that were selling assets off left and right like the KH-55) in the 90’s.
> 
> But that they would be a reliable supplier today, but can’t because Rouhani?!
> 
> Lol you are very naive. If no arms embargo existed, Iran would still get the same “unreliable” Russia and China. Neither country is going to sell Iran advanced fighters in significant numbers. The US would put too much pressure on them.



Comprehension isnt really one of your strong suites is it my friend?
The russia of yeltsin was in a very pitiful state and basically was pretty limited in both what it could do for iran and what it was willing to do for iran,it certainly wasnt going to alienate itself from the west by selling iran whatever iran wanted and indeed this attitude continued right up until fairly recently._However_ within the last decade things began to change and relations between russia and the west began to cool tho they really became very frosty with the coup in ukraine and the russians taking back crimea,in addition there was libya and the western support for the terrorists in syria as well.
The simple fact of the matter is this:at this point in time russia western relations are literally _the worst they have been since the cold war _[russias own words] while iranian russian relations are very good with the russians very interested in economic trade with iran.There has probably never been a better time to to try and acquire russian weapons and technology not to mention a host of other things,however the un arms embargo is still in place making a lot of these purchases completely impossible,now this embargo could`ve and should`ve been removed as part of the jcpoa that lifted most un sanctions but sadly it wasnt,now since this was rouhani and zarifs deal you tell me who else should be blamed for this silly "oversight",the supreme leader perhaps?.It seems pretty clear to me that for rouhani and co the military,the space program and the indigenous nuclear program all have very low priorities in his government.
Now I honestly dont know if this time round russia would be more reliable,it might not be,however it is clear at least to me that anti iranian western political influence in russia is probably at its very weakest ever right now and that this is potentially a golden opportunity...or could be,however because of either mistakes[or perhaps deliberate policies,who knows?] rouhani made ie the failure to remove the arms embargo and his continuing preoccupation with trying to do deals with the west while ignoring possible deals with russia ie the russians offering local assembly and coproduction of sukhoi superjets for instance.So sadly I suspect that by the time you might have a government in iran who would be interested in possibly doing a lot of deals with russia,by that time russian-western relations might have recovered and I honestly doubt you`ll get another opportunity like this one again in the near future.
Oh,by the way the kh55s were obtained in 2001 not the 90s,in addition these were supposedly "de-milled" examples that were in very poor condition without any documentation ie operational/service manuals and were supposed to be scrapped,not as you seem to think the very latest soviet weapons and technology all shiny and new available for just a pittance from some greedy arms dealer or corrupt official.
The vast bulk of what was on offer was in fact the older soviet era equipment that was being sold off at fire sale prices like the sa5 and sa6s or the t72s/bmp 1,2s that iran acquired.
In addition it took 14 years of work for iran to reverse/reengineer the kh55 into the soumar,and it still isnt in service yet.So that should give you some idea of the level of work involved in a project like this even if you have examples to "copy" from.


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Comprehension isnt really one of your strong suites is it my friend?
> The russia of yeltsin was in a very pitiful state and basically was pretty limited in both what it could do for iran and what it was willing to do for iran,it certainly wasnt going to alienate itself from the west by selling iran whatever iran wanted and indeed this attitude continued right up until fairly recently._However_ within the last decade things began to change and relations between russia and the west began to cool tho they really became very frosty with the coup in ukraine and the russians taking back crimea,in addition there was libya and the western support for the terrorists in syria as well.
> The simple fact of the matter is this:at this point in time russia western relations are literally _the worst they have been since the cold war _[russias own words] while iranian russian relations are very good with the russians very interested in economic trade with iran.There has probably never been a better time to to try and acquire russian weapons and technology not to mention a host of other things,however the un arms embargo is still in place making a lot of these purchases completely impossible,now this embargo could`ve and should`ve been removed as part of the jcpoa that lifted most un sanctions but sadly it wasnt,now since this was rouhani and zarifs deal you tell me who else should be blamed for this silly "oversight",the supreme leader perhaps?.It seems pretty clear to me that for rouhani and co the military,the space program and the indigenous nuclear program all have very low priorities in his government.
> Now I honestly dont know if this time round russia would be more reliable,it might not be,however it is clear at least to me that anti iranian western political influence in russia is probably at its very weakest ever right now and that this is potentially a golden opportunity...or could be,however because of either mistakes[or perhaps deliberate policies,who knows?] rouhani made ie the failure to remove the arms embargo and his continuing preoccupation with trying to do deals with the west while ignoring possible deals with russia ie the russians offering local assembly and coproduction of sukhoi superjets for instance.So sadly I suspect that by the time you might have a government in iran who would be interested in possibly doing a lot of deals with russia,by that time russian-western relations might have recovered and I honestly doubt you`ll get another opportunity like this one again in the near future.
> Oh,by the way the kh55s were obtained in 2001 not the 90s,in addition these were supposedly "de-milled" examples that were in very poor condition without any documentation ie operational/service manuals and were supposed to be scrapped,not as you seem to think the very latest soviet weapons and technology all shiny and new available for just a pittance from some greedy arms dealer or corrupt official.
> The vast bulk of what was on offer was in fact the older soviet era equipment that was being sold off at fire sale prices like the sa5 and sa6s or the t72s/bmp 1,2s that iran acquired.
> In addition it took 14 years of work for iran to reverse/reengineer the kh55 into the soumar,and it still isnt in service yet.So that should give you some idea of the level of work involved in a project like this even if you have examples to "copy" from.



Again you are basing your entire “Russia has changed policy” on an assumption and hogwash hope. It’s not logical and it’s naive. If Rouhani was naive to trust the West to honor a deal, you are just as naive to think russia will open the arms store for Iran.

Remember that Russia only cares about Russia, the second that Russia tries to sell Iran 50 or 90 SU-30’s the West will give Russia concessions NOT too. And then russia will use Iran to help Russia. This isn’t thecollapse of the Soviet Union, sanctions hurt Russia sure but they aren’t crippling Russia to the point of desperation.

Even in Syria now, Russia is trying to alienate Iran. But it can’t...why? because Iran is doing the fighting on the ground and Russia is in the air. Thus Iran has all the leverage. Yet Russi still refuses to supply its ally Syria with S-300.

Apparently the Iranian S-300 fiasco was too long ago for you to remember. So I will tell you one thing, Russia is desperate to be seen by the US as an equal partner. US knows this. Thus Russia will never sell Iran anything that can be considered “game changer” weapons unless Iran demonstrates it can build it itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Again you are basing your entire “Russia has changed policy” on an assumption and hogwash hope. It’s not logical and it’s naive. If Rouhani was naive to trust the West to honor a deal, you are just as naive to think russia will open the arms store for Iran.
> 
> Remember that Russia only cares about Russia, the second that Russia tries to sell Iran 50 or 90 SU-30’s the West will give Russia concessions NOT too. And then russia will use Iran to help Russia. This isn’t thecollapse of the Soviet Union, sanctions hurt Russia sure but they aren’t crippling Russia to the point of desperation.
> 
> Even in Syria now, Russia is trying to alienate Iran. But it can’t...why? because Iran is doing the fighting on the ground and Russia is in the air. Thus Iran has all the leverage. Yet Russi still refuses to supply its ally Syria with S-300.
> 
> Apparently the Iranian S-300 fiasco was too long ago for you to remember. So I will tell you one thing, Russia is desperate to be seen by the US as an equal partner. US knows this. Thus Russia will never sell Iran anything that can be considered “game changer” weapons unless Iran demonstrates it can build it itself.



Way too many people nowadays put stock into Russia helping Iran in some way or manner that can be considered "game-changing" when the reality just doesn't support this sort of expectation.

From my rather inconsequential point-of-view, Iran is going to have to focus inward intensely in order to weather the coming storm. But putting trust into Russia will not help.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Way too many people nowadays put stock into Russia helping Iran in some way or manner that can be considered "game-changing" when the reality just doesn't support this sort of expectation.
> 
> From my rather inconsequential point-of-view, Iran is going to have to focus inward intensely in order to weather the coming storm. But putting trust into Russia will not help.



Russia at the end of the day will do what is in their own financial interest and history has proven over and over again that they will NOT put their own political or strategic interests over their own financial interests.

And it would be absurd to think that that the Russians are going to risk loosing $100 Billion USD due to U.S. sanctions and contracts just to sell Iran $20 Billion USD worth of fighter jets in the span of a decade! 

Russia is a military power but they just don't have the financial capability to risk that! In fact the only country on the planet that could is China and they would have to be cornered to do that and Iran would have to give up far more than money for them to hand over Chinese 5th Gen fighters to Iran. At the very least they are going to want a Chinese Naval base on Iranian soil.

Best option for Iran is mass production of missiles & UAV's of all kinds to make up for the shortcomings of the military from ATGM to BM from SAM to Cruise Missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

why you are continue this discussion !? 
let me predict this , in 2025 we don't have any air force .... but my bigger predication is that IR is going to destroy Iran before 2020 ...


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> Russia at the end of the day will do what is in their own financial interest and history has proven over and over again that they will NOT put their own political or strategic interests over their own financial interests.



You`ve got that completely back to front I`m afraid.For virtually every country strategic and political considerations trump[no pun intended] financial ones,otherwise we would have witnessed russia just sitting back and doing nothing about the pro western coup in the ukraine,and they certainly wouldnt have snatched back crimea like they did or aided the seperatists.Ultimately for russia if the choice was between having nato march right up to the russian border and possibly lose their base for the black sea fleet vs the imposition of western sanctions and the resulting loss of 10s-100s billions of euros,then it was really pretty obvious which one it was going to be and it certainly wasnt the money that won out in the end,now was it?
The same would`ve been equally true for syria.Russia just would`ve just sat back and either watched it become another libya ie complete national destruction thru nato aggression/support of terrorists or it would`ve simply let iran do everything itself.
Irans nuclear program was the same thing,otherwise iran simply would`ve continued the "freeze for freeze" policy back in 2003 indefinitely.


VEVAK said:


> Best option for Iran is mass production of missiles & UAV's of all kinds to make up for the shortcomings of the military from ATGM to BM from SAM to Cruise Missiles


Missiles,sams and uavs are adjuncts to a manned airforce *not* an alternative for it.A uav *cannot* substitute for a manned aircraft,in addition without com sats irans ability to actively control a uav is limited to around 2-300kms from its borders.
The fact of the matter is that if iran wants to rebuild,or even to just replace whats left of its airforce,with new state of the art machines russia is really the only option currently going at the moment as chinas aero engine and avionics tech still lags some way behind russia and the west,tho iran could leave it for another decade and hopefully by then the chinese will have caught up in those fields,tho how much of irans airforce will still be flight worthy t that point is literally anyones guess.
The only other alternative is that instead of attempting to rebuild irans moribund airforce and armored forces,would be to follow the dprks approach and develop a viable strategic nuclear force ie compact staged thermo-nukes and road mobile irbm/icbm delivery systems to put them on.


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> The only other alternative is that instead of attempting to rebuild irans moribund airforce and armored forces,would be to follow the dprks approach and develop a viable strategic nuclear force ie compact staged thermo-nukes and road mobile irbm/icbm delivery systems to put them on.



LOL nuclear weapons are useless.

Let say if Iran has it, US will still attack if it has to and then what is iran going to do? respond with a nuclear weapon? Laughable

Saddam didn’t use chemical weapons as Baghdad fell, Assad didn’t use chemical weapons as Damascus was surrounded and West aligned forces were at his Palace walls....so what makes you think that Iran would use WMD to protect itself?

Nuclear weapons became useless after the Cold War demonstrated neither side would use it first. 

If Iran thinks nuclear weapons would guarantee regime survival, they had over 20 years to go nuclear. It’s obvious that they concluded nuclear weapons wouldn’t guarantee regime survival. 

And DPRK is hardly an example to strive for, a starving population that has no economic value to the world.


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> LOL nuclear weapons are useless.
> 
> Let say if Iran has it, US will still attack if it has to and then what is iran going to do? respond with a nuclear weapon? Laughable
> 
> Saddam didn’t use chemical weapons as Baghdad fell, Assad didn’t use chemical weapons as Damascus was surrounded and West aligned forces were at his Palace walls....so what makes you think that Iran would use WMD to protect itself?
> 
> Nuclear weapons became useless after the Cold War demonstrated neither side would use it first.
> 
> If Iran thinks nuclear weapons would guarantee regime survival, they had over 20 years to go nuclear. It’s obvious that they concluded nuclear weapons wouldn’t guarantee regime survival.
> 
> And DPRK is hardly an example to strive for, a starving population that has no economic value to the world.



If they were so useless then why do all the *veto holding members of the unsc* still continue to maintain and modernise their existing stocks of them and continue to develop new designs of weapons and delivery systems?
If iran has them do you honestly believe the us would attack iran when it knows it would only guarantee the deaths of tens of millions of its own citizens in return.*The whole point of these weapons are as a deterrent, *and honestly which do you think would be a more credible deterrent irans existing decrepit conventional forces or a nuclear deterrent?.

Are you so stupid that you cant see the difference between nuclear weapons and chemical weapons or are they all just wmd to you?.Saddam didnt use his *chemical *weapons in 2003 because he likely had virtually none left and the small number of weapons the coalition found were in a very degraded state most likely because by that time they were probably getting close to being 15-20 years old as most of them were produced back in the mid 80s.Do you think they would`ve invaded iraq if he had had a nuclear deterrent?,of course not.He would still be in power today.

Damacus was never surrounded and using *chemical* weapons would only have provided the excuse the west was looking for to attack him,which they did anyway just on the suspicion of *chemical* weapons use.Do you think they would`ve attacked him if syria had had nuclear weapons and the ability to strike western cities?

As for why iran didnt directly go for the bomb,well I suspect it probably thought a credible japan option might have been enough.

The dprks economic problems stem from the fact that it was a client of the ussr and was completely reliant on them economically and when the ussr collapsed the dprks economy went with it in large part,and I`m certainly not suggesting that iran adopt dprk juche stalinism as I`m sure you well know.But it is funny how iran gives up most of its nuclear program for a deal that never lives up to all the hype,only then for it to be torn up by trump who then despite all his tough talk goes to singapore and has an international summit with kim merely on nothing more than only the promise of denuclearisation and a dismantled test site,a very,very stark difference in treatment,wouldnt you agree?

But I`d thought I`d save the best for last,because this one is a doozy:


TheImmortal said:


> Nuclear weapons became useless after the Cold War demonstrated neither side would use it first.


Thats the whole point braniac,they are a DETERRENT!! thats the whole point of the damn things in the first place!

P.S. whats your solution then to the problem of irans rapidly aging airforce and armored forces?,I`m sure you must have some "cunning plan"..or at least a rough idea for a possible alternative....right?,so please dont keep it to yourself,oh wise one,inquiring minds want to know...mine especially....so dont keep us in suspense too long!.[LOL!]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> If they were so useless then why do all the *veto holding members of the unsc* still continue to maintain and modernise their existing stocks of them and continue to develop new designs of weapons and delivery systems?
> If iran has them do you honestly believe the us would attack iran when it knows it would only guarantee the deaths of tens of millions of its own citizens in return.*The whole point of these weapons are as a deterrent, *and honestly which do you think would be a more credible deterrent irans existing decrepit conventional forces or a nuclear deterrent?.
> 
> Are you so stupid that you cant see the difference between nuclear weapons and chemical weapons or are they all just wmd to you?.Saddam didnt use his *chemical *weapons in 2003 because he likely had virtually none left and the small number of weapons the coalition found were in a very degraded state most likely because by that time they were probably getting close to being 15-20 years old as most of them were produced back in the mid 80s.Do you think they would`ve invaded iraq if he had had a nuclear deterrent?,of course not.He would still be in power today.
> 
> Damacus was never surrounded and using *chemical* weapons would only have provided the excuse the west was looking for to attack him,which they did anyway just on the suspicion of *chemical* weapons use.Do you think they would`ve attacked him if syria had had nuclear weapons and the ability to strike western cities?
> 
> As for why iran didnt directly go for the bomb,well I suspect it probably thought a credible japan option might have been enough.
> 
> The dprks economic problems stem from the fact that it was a client of the ussr and was completely reliant on them economically and when the ussr collapsed the dprks economy went with it in large part,and I`m certainly not suggesting that iran adopt dprk juche stalinism as I`m sure you well know.But it is funny how iran gives up most of its nuclear program for a deal that never lives up to all the hype,only then for it to be torn up by trump who then despite all his tough talk goes to singapore and has an international summit with kim merely on nothing more than only the promise of denuclearisation and a dismantled test site,a very,very stark difference in treatment,wouldnt you agree?
> 
> But I`d thought I`d save the best for last,because this one is a doozy:
> 
> Thats the whole point braniac,they are a DETERRENT!! thats the whole point of the damn things in the first place!
> 
> P.S. whats your solution then to the problem of irans rapidly aging airforce and armored forces?,I`m sure you must have some "cunning plan"..or at least a rough idea for a possible alternative....right?,so please dont keep it to yourself,oh wise one,inquiring minds want to know...mine especially....so dont keep us in suspense too long!.[LOL!]



A bunch of rambling.

The VETO holding members of UNSC have voting not because they have nuclear weapons (or else by that logic India/Pakistan/Israel should also have veto power), but that they were key foreign powers that dominated the global at one time or another in history. It was made to bring balance to world order and reduce risk of another world war.

Nuclear weapons are not an deterrent to attack, they are a deterrent to occupation and regime removal. But even that is up for debate.

Russia has nuclear weapons yet NATO has encroached and crossed Russian Red lines and are sitting outside of russian territory. China has nuclear weapons yet, US routinely violates the China Sea Island bases and continues support of Taiwan. Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet. What did Russia do?

Nuclear weapons are overrated. The arms industry uses the “deterrence” argument to justify the high cost required in maintaining and renewing the program.

If they had to, US/NATO would get into skirmishes with a russia or China and nuclear weapons won’t do a damn thing!

In Iran’s case if Iran got nuclear weapons, the easiest way for the West to combat is to start a civil war similar to Syria inside Iran. What is Iran going to do then? Nuke itself?

The West has learned to combat nuclear powers by causing internal dissident in those countries.

And you are wrong about NK, If Iran would have gotten nuclear weapons they would be sanctioned by the entire world!

Russia doesn’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons, China doesn’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons. No one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons.

So yes Iran would have nuclear weapons but then with no one buying Iranian oil and Iran being cut off from the world it would slowly bleed a slow death and ultimately there would be mass unrest.

And lastly have only first strike capability is useless! All the great nuclear powers have both first strike and second strike (nuclear armed submarines) to respond to aggression. Having only first strike capability is not a significant deterrence! Again why Iran passed on nuclear weapons.


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Lol instead of Su-30,Iran should buy 10/5 squadrons of MiG-29SMT which just over 2 billion$ and over 1 billion$ instead 2 squadron of Su-35 which already over 1 billion $ and over 2 billion $ of 5 squadron, much more saving money and enough to replace IRIAF F-4,F-5,Mirage F1 and older MiG-29 (which could be upgraded to SMT)


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> A bunch of rambling.


Really!?....hmmm?....I actually thought I`d done a rather good job making some very well considered logical arguments that nicely illustrated all of the salient points....Oh well,I guess everyones a critic.[shrugs]



TheImmortal said:


> The VETO holding members of UNSC have voting not because they have nuclear weapons (or else by that logic India/Pakistan/Israel should also have veto power), but that they were key foreign powers that dominated the global at one time or another in history. It was made to bring balance to world order and reduce risk of another world war.


I never said nukes gave them voting rights,I was simply countering your original argument that nukes were useless,by noting that all the veto holding members of the unsc went to a lot of trouble and expense to acquire them and to continue to maintain and upgrade them even after the end of the cold war.
And they dominated the globe by virtue of their military power as much if not more than their political and economic power.They obviously considered these weapons to be worthwhile because they all went on to acquire them,and indeed many would consider that it was these weapons alone and the balance they brought that avoided another world war,well that and a bit of luck obviously.



TheImmortal said:


> Nuclear weapons are not an deterrent to attack, they are a deterrent to occupation and regime removal. But even that is up for debate.


Thats equally as true of any weapon tho,if someone really wants to attack you regardless of the consequences then they probably will,but the potential consequences of attacking a nws could be very severe indeed,and most rational governments and their military leaders will know this.If a nuclear arsenal prevents regime change and the destruction of the state then it has served its purpose,after all how many nws have been subjected to regime change or the destruction of their state?....thats right NONE!.



TheImmortal said:


> Russia has nuclear weapons yet NATO has encroached and crossed Russian Red lines and are sitting outside of russian territory. China has nuclear weapons yet, US routinely violates the China Sea Island bases and continues support of Taiwan. Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet. What did Russia do?


The russians acted militarily once they considered the west had gone to far and that vital russian interests were at stake.First in georgia in 08,humiliating the georgians while shakasvilli pointlessly begged the west for help that would never ever come.When it seemed the west was still pushing its luck with the ukraine,the russians intervened there as well.This time annexing the crimea and supporting the separatists.Now what exactly did the us/nato do in response to this blatant "soviet style" aggression and land grab?....thats right,they did nothing,well nothing military that is.Because when it really comes down to it neither side is going to risk a war over something like this.
As for turkey...well no weapon will protect you from someone making a stupid mistake ie some gung-ho incompetent fool who panics in the heat of the moment and does something stupid,just like the fools who shot down kal007 or iran air 855.But that doesnt mean that turkey got off scot free,or that they didnt end up regretting it because they certainly did when putin slapped them with sanctions and ultimately erdogan apologised for the incident.Russia just like iran was in syria not to start a war with turkey but to ensure the survival of the syrian state and its government.
As for china,well some of these bases are built on disputed islands claimed by other nations,and yet china didnt give a sh1t it just started building there.Now what did the us navy do about this?.....thats right,Sweet!.Fu#k!.All!,about the only thing they could do was to send their carriers into these areas under freedom of navigation to show they werent intimidated,but only a fool would fail to realise that the presence of bases like these would potentially make us/allied naval operations in that area very difficult in any future war.Once again tho neither side would risk a war over something like this.
Ahh yes,taiwan.I think its pretty clear that when it came to taiwan both the us and the prc agreed to disagree over this touchy subject,but they both agreed not to do anything that could lead to things getting out of hand.The us would limit arms sales and equipment transfers and keep political contacts fairly low key,and in return the chinese would not attack or try to invade taiwan.This arrangement seems to have worked fairly well and I imagine that it will continue to,provided the taiwanese dont do anything crazy like deciding to declare independence or something provocative like that.
This actually reminds of an old joke that I once heard about the dubious value of the concept of extended deterrence:
A chinese general goes into a bar to have a drink and bumps into an american general whos an old friend of his.The two of them sit down and order up a drink and start talking,eventually the chinese general finishes his drink and with a smile on his face he turns and says to the american general "So tell me,are you guys seriously gonna trade los angeles for taipei?"[LOL!]



TheImmortal said:


> Nuclear weapons are overrated. The arms industry uses the “deterrence” argument to justify the high cost required in maintaining and renewing the program.


That also applies equally to the rest of the military industrial complex as well.The fact of the matter is that once you have this sort of complex uber expensive military hardware,be it conventional or nuclear,you basically have no choice but to maintain it and keep it up to date despite the costs,because if you dont you risk winding up with a military equipped with obsolescent weapons of dubious value....sort of like the present iranian airforce in fact,wouldnt you agree?.



TheImmortal said:


> If they had to, US/NATO would get into skirmishes with a russia or China and nuclear weapons won’t do a damn thing!


Oh?..you mean like they did in berlin or korea or cuba or georgia or crimea or syria or...oh?!,wait a minute they DIDNT!.I guess it ultimately depends on what exactly your definition of "if they had to" means.Historically the nws went to considerable efforts to ensure that they were never ever in an "if they had to" situation,which is probably one of the reasons why there was never a ww3,well that and a bit of luck of course..You see the problem with a "skirmish" is that it can very quickly get out of hand and accelerate beyond the ability of the politicians to control it and once that happens then events can very quickly take on a life of their own,the best analogy for this is a cartoon of a snowball rolling down a hill getting bigger and bigger,faster and faster until nothing can stop it,and thats how you potentially go from a "skirmish" to a nuclear exchange and then its pretty much game over for everyone concerned.When it comes to that particular game the only winning move is not to play in the first place.



TheImmortal said:


> In Iran’s case if Iran got nuclear weapons, the easiest way for the West to combat is to start a civil war similar to Syria inside Iran. What is Iran going to do then? Nuke itself?


LOL!,Iran ISNT syria!.
In fact the last time I looked the west had been trying that sort of sh1t against iran for the past 40 odd years now with nothing more to show for all of its various efforts except a rather spectacular level of failure,yet apparently you think they`d now suddenly succeed because iran would have nukes?.If anything the reverse would likely be true as attempting to cause the collapse of a nuclear armed state could potentially be utterly catastrophic ie what would happen to those weapons?,what contingency measures would`ve been put in place to deal with this sort of event?,whose command and control would they be under?,would the safeguards and fail safes built into both the chain of command and its actual weapons keep them secure or would they just collapse leading to these weapons either being used without authorisation or perhaps just being stolen,and then of course you would have the fissile materiel stocks themselves to worry about.All very,very big risks as you can hopefully see,because if theres one state you really dont want to try and play the destabilisation game with its a nuclear armed one,because the consequences could be truly dreadful beyond belief.



TheImmortal said:


> The West has learned to combat nuclear powers by causing internal dissident in those countries.


Its done a pretty damn lousy job then,hasnt it?.I mean the last time I looked china,russia and the dprk all seemed to have a pretty good handle on law and order,probably better than in the west in fact.
If you`re talking about the soviet unions collapse that was down to gorbachev and his ill considered policies which ultimately provoked the failed coup attempt.Indeed it seems to me that it was the countries without nukes,and admittedly poor leadership,like libya and syria who were vulnerable to those sorts of dirty tricks.Of course if you`re going to try that on a nuclear armed state one of the risks you would then have to try to deal with is the potential for "loose nukes",not a very nice thought at all.



TheImmortal said:


> And you are wrong about NK, If Iran would have gotten nuclear weapons they would be sanctioned by the entire world!


Perhaps...but isnt it funny,I mean iran plays by the rules and negotiates a multi-party international deal,actually a pretty good one from the wests perspective,dismantles,destroys or freezes the bulk of its nuke program for the next 10-15+ years and....the west never lives up to its side of the deal and iran never gets many of the supposed benefits that were to come from it,and then ultimately trump comes along and tears it all up and threatens to sanction anyone who does any business with iran.
Meanwhile the dprk goes ahead and builds its own nuke force,a fairly credible one or at least the beginnings of one from the looks of it,and ultimately gets a us/dprk international summit in singapore with trump,and all of that for nothing more than a vague promise of denuclearisation and the dismantling of a single test site,which is arguably redundant now anyway because the north now has compact staged thermo-nukes and a literal sh!t load of test data from the previous 5 successful tests.It really does make one wonder who was smarter in the long run kim or rouhani.
Hmmm...what do you suppose the chances of rouhani getting a summit with trump are..?.I`m joking of course [LOL!] iran would actually need to have nukes in order to have that happen.



TheImmortal said:


> Russia doesn’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons, China doesn’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons. No one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons.


Yeeaah!,I seem to remember them not wanting iran to have the nuclear fuel cycle either,or indeed any indigenous nuclear technology or programs at all for that matter,its certainly what trump+co wants.
Last time I looked iran didnt really give two fu#ks about what any other countries wanted for iran,neither east nor west,remember?.Because ya`know thats a big part of being an independent sovereign nation,you`re not somebody elses little bitch,like saudi and the gulfies,and you actually get to make your own decisions.Altho with rouhani+co running the show who really knows anymore,right?



TheImmortal said:


> So yes Iran would have nuclear weapons but then with no one buying Iranian oil and Iran being cut off from the world it would slowly bleed a slow death and ultimately there would be mass unrest.


Um!...I really do hate to break this to you but thats already what trump and co have effectively decided they`re going to try to do to iran...I guess you must`ve missed that particular announcement,tho I`m pretty sure that it was in all the media...oh well,now you know!.



TheImmortal said:


> And lastly have only first strike capability is useless! All the great nuclear powers have both first strike and second strike (nuclear armed submarines) to respond to aggression. Having only first strike capability is not a significant deterrence! Again why Iran passed on nuclear weapons.


Which part of "road mobile" seems to be giving your poor old brain the most trouble my friend?,is it the "road" part or is it the "mobile" part?,or is it the actual combining of the two concepts into "road mobile" that seems to have left you stumped?,hey maybe you just forgot.I mean why else do you think iran developed road mobile tels for its ballistic missile forces in the first place?.....Well for the exact same reason everyone else did of course,thats right survivability,and thats why the russians,chinese and dprk did it and even the americans seriously considered it as well with their crazy old mx missile trains among other things.Now I think that if the dprk can do it,with a little chinese help admittedly,then so can iran,because when it comes down to it you dont really need a ballistic missile submarine to give you a viable second strike capability,now do you?.

Oh,by the way you never did answer my last question did you?.Well I suspect you`re probably still thinking about it,because it isnt exactly an easy one to come up with an answer for,now is it?.I mean its easy enough to shoot holes in other peoples ideas for possible options but coming up with an original idea or alternative solution of your own isnt quite so simple.....well you keep thinking about it,I`m sure if you keep working that problem something`ll pop up.....eventually.Anyhoo when it finally does dont keep us all in suspense,because like I said previously inquiring minds,mine especially in fact,really DO want to know.TaTa
Here endeth the lesson.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Lol instead of Su-30,Iran should buy 10/5 squadrons of MiG-29SMT which just over 2 billion$ and over 1 billion$ instead 2 squadron of Su-35 which already over 1 billion $ and over 2 billion $ of 5 squadron, much more saving money and enough to replace IRIAF F-4,F-5,Mirage F1 and older MiG-29 (which could be upgraded to SMT)



Russia do not want to supply. Mullahs do not want to take.


----------



## Avicenna

Russia has some sort of under the cover ties with Israel.

Iran is screwed.

To ignore the Air Force, or conventional forces in general is a foolish mistake.

Although any sort of attempt at indiginous sourcing is commendable, to not address an actual gap in capabilities is dangerous.

In regards to the IRIAF, perhaps a play on the Chinese J-10?

Something needs to be done.

F-14, F-4, F-5, MiG-29, Mirage F-1, SU-24 won’t last for ever.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Avicenna said:


> Russia has some sort of under the cover ties with Israel.
> 
> Iran is screwed.
> 
> To ignore the Air Force, or conventional forces in general is a foolish mistake.
> 
> Although any sort of attempt at indiginous sourcing is commendable, to not address an actual gap in capabilities is dangerous.
> 
> In regards to the IRIAF, perhaps a play on the Chinese J-10?
> 
> Something needs to be done.
> 
> F-14, F-4, F-5, MiG-29, Mirage F-1, SU-24 won’t last for ever.



Iran’s military officials do not consider Chinese fighters a reliable option. They have gone on record multiple times saying this. They feel they are inferior.

The only aircraft Iran should even consider from China are the J-20 and J-31.

With China trying to export their 5th gen fighters their is not a huge market for Chinese fighters, a deal for some ToT for the J-31 or localized production would make the most sense.

The J-20 is still a development aircraft and until it’s fitted with Chinese engines it relies on Russian engines and Russia may block the sale of J-20 to Iran.

I don’t see China selling to iran either way, but if Iran is seeking a boost it needs to push for J-31 and possibly j-20 at a later date when the platform is fully developed.


----------



## Avicenna

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s military officials do not consider Chinese fighters a reliable option. They have gone on record multiple times saying this. They feel they are inferior.
> 
> The only aircraft Iran should even consider from China are the J-20 and J-31.
> 
> With China trying to export their 5th gen fighters their is not a huge market for Chinese fighters, a deal for some ToT for the J-31 or localized production would make the most sense.
> 
> The J-20 is still a development aircraft and until it’s fitted with Chinese engines it relies on Russian engines and Russia may block the sale of J-20 to Iran.
> 
> I don’t see China selling to iran either way, but if Iran is seeking a boost it needs to push for J-31 and possibly j-20 at a later date when the platform is fully developed.



I doubt the J-20 will be available for export anytime soon if at all.

J-10A in the form of the FC-20 is available currently.

J-31 is being developed.

Chinese quality has reportedly improved.

Beggars can't be choosers. Surely a J-10A is better than a vintage F-4 or F-5.

Its 2018. What is the IRIAF hoping to do?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Avicenna said:


> I doubt the J-20 will be available for export anytime soon if at all.
> 
> J-10A in the form of the FC-20 is available currently.
> 
> J-31 is being developed.
> 
> Chinese quality has reportedly improved.
> 
> Beggars can't be choosers. Surely a J-10A is better than a vintage F-4 or F-5.
> 
> Its 2018. What is the IRIAF hoping to do?


The wants and hopes of the iriaf are simply completely irrelevant at this point I`m afraid,first because for rouhani&co the military in general has a very low priority and the iriaf has traditionally had the lowest priority among the various branches of the iranian military,not to mention of course that the far bigger problem is that the un arms embargo is still in effect and will remain so until at least late 2020,again thanks to rouhani&co,so there is no real chance of buying or importing any new aircraft,perhaps apart from transport planes that is,but fighters would be out of the question for at least another 2+ years minimum sadly,so there you have it.


----------



## Avicenna

Sineva said:


> The wants and hopes of the iriaf are simply completely irrelevant at this point I`m afraid,first because for rouhani&co the military in general has a very low priority and the iriaf has traditionally had the lowest priority among the various branches of the iranian military,not to mention of course that the far bigger problem is that the un arms embargo is still in effect and will remain so until at least late 2020,again thanks to rouhani&co,so there is no real chance of buying or importing any new aircraft,perhaps apart from transport planes that is,but fighters would be out of the question for at least another 2+ years minimum sadly,so there you have it.



Yea. True. 

Also, there appears to be a re-invigorated Zionist/American effort to econonimcally disable Iran in attempts to de-stabilize the regime.

Like I said, Iran is screwed. 

Unfortunately.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

A training F-4 jet of Iran's Air Force Wednesday crashed in southeastern Iran, a local official said.
http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82967784

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Avicenna said:


> I doubt the J-20 will be available for export anytime soon if at all.
> 
> J-10A in the form of the FC-20 is available currently.
> 
> J-31 is being developed.
> 
> Chinese quality has reportedly improved.
> 
> Beggars can't be choosers. Surely a J-10A is better than a vintage F-4 or F-5.
> 
> Its 2018. What is the IRIAF hoping to do?



You are applying short term thinking to a long term area.

Fighters are chosen to serve for 15+ years. You want Iran to purchase an almost obsolete fighter (which by early 2020’s at the earliest) to replace a long obsolete fighter ?

And yes China will export J-20 and J-31 they have said before that they are willing to export 5th gen fighters. If Russia is willing to export their 5th gen then so will China.

Iran’s current state the tomcats can fly till 2030’s. But Iran’s other fighters will started being retired in 2025’s.

So logically if Iran can score a favorable deal with China for J-31 such as localized production of some sort or some ToT then it can make sense to go that option.

It would take a dramatic shift in a russia-Iran relations for Russia to agree to revamp Iran’s airforce. Geopolitically Russia would need another Ukraine type of event to wake that leadership up to NATO encroachment on Russian red lines.

Iran doesn’t need 20-30 fighters, it needs a complete overhaul. Iran knows this, but it’s not rushing because there is few options available. Iran’s military officials know this. 

To those that say Iran doesn’t take its Air Force seriously, just google and you will find Iranian military attempts to procure advanced fighter engine technology. Problem is it’s not easy and unlike China, Iran’s cyber espionage is not as advanced or well funded.


----------



## Sineva

Avicenna said:


> Yea. True.
> 
> Also, there appears to be a re-invigorated Zionist/American effort to econonimcally disable Iran in attempts to de-stabilize the regime.
> 
> Like I said, Iran is screwed.
> 
> Unfortunately.


I wouldnt be quite so sure about that,for a start even during the obama regime the west was still never able to reduce irans oil exports to nothing for the simple fact that a lot of countries depend on iranian oil for a mixture of economic and strategic reasons and they were not willing to put these at risk just for the west,so I would not expect that to change.In addition the west was only able to do this via a mixture of un sanctions and a great deal of consensus building thru skilled and very time consuming diplomacy and compromise,by comparison the trump regime has virtually none of these political skills at all and tries to resort instead to blatant threats and outright thuggery at a time when it has not only angered and alienated important countries like china and russia but its own vital western allies as well,in addition its anyones guess whether trump will even get a second term,altho I have learnt never to underestimate the gullibility or even outright stupidity of the american voter sadly.
Iran also has some rather unpleasant options of its own that it could utilize,tho whether someone like rouhani would ever have the balls to do these things is pretty doubtful,still his tone has begun to change recently so perhaps he finally has come to the sad realisation that being polite and reasonable just isnt going to work with the west....so who knows?.
Ultimately its still very early days yet but I have a feeling that the iri will still be around long after chump has joined obama,bush jr,clinton,bush snr,reagan and carter in histories dustbin,and a lot of these clowns also thought that they could write off the iri as well.
For now lets just wait and see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

Sineva said:


> I wouldnt be quite so sure about that,for a start even during the obama regime the west was still never able to reduce irans oil exports to nothing for the simple fact that a lot of countries depend on iranian oil for a mixture of economic and strategic reasons and they were not willing to put these at risk just for the west,so I would not expect that to change.In addition the west was only able to do this via a mixture of un sanctions and a great deal of consensus building thru skilled and very time consuming diplomacy and compromise,by comparison the trump regime has virtually none of these political skills at all and tries to resort instead to blatant threats and outright thuggery at a time when it has not only angered and alienated important countries like china and russia but its own vital western allies as well,in addition its anyones guess whether trump will even get a second term,altho I have learnt never to underestimate the gullibility or even outright stupidity of the american voter sadly.
> Iran also has some rather unpleasant options of its own that it could utilize,tho whether someone like rouhani would ever have the balls to do these things is pretty doubtful,still his tone has begun to change recently so perhaps he finally has come to the sad realisation that being polite and reasonable just isnt going to work with the west....so who knows?.
> Ultimately its still very early days yet but I have a feeling that the iri will still be around long after chump has joined obama,bush jr,clinton,bush snr,reagan and carter in histories dustbin,and a lot of these clowns also thought that they could write off the iri as well.
> For now lets just wait and see.



I hear what your saying. 

However, my thoughts are that its a little bit different this time.

There is a window of opportunity which, the intellectual vacuum that is the Trump administration, allows the Zionist agenda to materialize its ambitions.

This is Netanyahu Et al.’s chance to do something materially to Iran.

Obama resisted for whatever reason.

Netanyahu, Bolton, etc. etc. will not allow this opportunity to pass.

You’re correct in stating Trump admins tactics are thuggery.

But tell me what are Iran’s options at this point?

So long as Trump is in office, the danger to Iran is heightened.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Avicenna said:


> I hear what your saying.
> 
> However, my thoughts are that its a little bit different this time.
> 
> There is a window of opportunity which, the intellectual vacuum that is the Trump administration, allows the Zionist agenda to materialize its ambitions.
> 
> This is Netanyahu Et al.’s chance to do something materially to Iran.
> 
> Obama resisted for whatever reason.
> 
> Netanyahu, Bolton, etc. etc. will not allow this opportunity to pass.
> 
> You’re correct in stating Trump admins tactics are thuggery.
> 
> But tell me what are Iran’s options at this point?
> 
> So long as Trump is in office, the danger to Iran is heightened.


Yes,I would agree on that point the danger of military conflict is real especially with warmongering thugs like bolton dripping poison in chumps ear,altho boltons attempts at scuttling the us-dprk summit[lol!] didnt work out,so its hard to tell.In some ways this is what makes cretins like chump so potentially dangerous,they themselves,let alone anyone else,literally have no clue what they are going to do in 5 minutes time,chump reminds me of some 3 or 4 year old with the exact same level of attention span.
I think at this point what iran badly needs is a strong leader,either that or rouhani needs to get it through his damn thick head that diplomatic politeness and bullsh!t cliches like "dialogue between civilizations" just isnt going to cut it when you`re dealing with boltonite and chumpist thugs who subscribe to the idea of a conflict between civilizations,neither is relying on the utterly unreliable euros,russians,chinese etc...for any real help.Still just as bush jr learnt the limits of american power both political and military so to will the donald,the question of course is just how much damage will he do both to the us and to others before he does.Ultimately I am coming more and more to the line of reasoning that iran may know need to strongly reconsider its nuclear options and the last time I thought like this was during bush jrs rampaging in iraq and afghanistan while also threatening syria and iran,ironically of course these turned into quagmires for the us and opportunities for iran.
Ultimately in the short term I think iran can only wait and see,after all its difficult to predict what chump is going to do next when not even chump knows what chump is going to do next[lol].But I also think rouhani needs to get serious and start spending some very serious cash on the military to hurry up and get some of those new sam systems into production and service at a minimum along with whatever else is on offer both locally and abroad because I think time may be of the essence and to much of it has sadly been wasted already.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

Sineva said:


> Yes,I would agree on that point the danger of military conflict is real especially with warmongering thugs like bolton dripping poison in chumps ear,altho boltons attempts at scuttling the us-dprk summit[lol!] didnt work out,so its hard to tell.In some ways this is what makes cretins like chump so potentially dangerous,they themselves,let alone anyone else,literally have no clue what they are going to do in 5 minutes time,chump reminds me of some 3 or 4 year old with the exact same level of attention span.
> I think at this point what iran badly needs is a strong leader,either that or rouhani needs to get it through his damn thick head that diplomatic politeness and bullsh!t cliches like "dialogue between civilizations" just isnt going to cut it when you`re dealing with boltonite and chumpist thugs who subscribe to the idea of a conflict between civilizations,neither is relying on the utterly unreliable euros,russians,chinese etc...for any real help.Still just as bush jr learnt the limits of american power both political and military so to will the donald,the question of course is just how much damage will he do both to the us and to others before he does.Ultimately I am coming more and more to the line of reasoning that iran may know need to strongly reconsider its nuclear options and the last time I thought like this was during bush jrs rampaging in iraq and afghanistan while also threatening syria and iran,ironically of course these turned into quagmires for the us and opportunities for iran.
> Ultimately in the short term I think iran can only wait and see,after all its difficult to predict what chump is going to do next when not even chump knows what chump is going to do next[lol].But I also think rouhani needs to get serious and start spending some very serious cash on the military to hurry up and get some of those new sam systems into production and service at a minimum along with whatever else is on offer both locally and abroad because I think time may be of the essence and to much of it has sadly been wasted already.



I completely agree.






I have my doubts as to the Russians.

I think Iran must entertain China as a supplier at this point.

Time is of the essence as you stated. Why not some Chinese SAM systems?

Prepare to get some stop gap J-10? The -C model would be a MAJOR upgrade to anything Iran now flies. (of course earliest delivery is post 2020) 

And then perhaps work on producing the FC-31 in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Avicenna said:


> Time is of the essence as you stated. Why not some Chinese SA



SAMs are one of the few areas we are keeping up with the latest technology. If there is one thing we don't need to import, it's SAMs.

As for the air force, I'm partially with @TheImmortal on this. We shouldn't buy fighters for the sake of buying fighters, we should buy fighters for the next 2 decades of the IRIAF. 5th Gen is a must. BUT, we should follow the same philosophy as China, Russia, and Israel (and maybe even the US), and buy a larger number of 4.5 Gen fighters to do the heavy lifting - work that doesn't require 5th Gen aircraft.

Iran is even thinking about making an enlarged, bomber RQ-170 sentinel, which would be good for destroying air defence or high value targets to make way for the heavy hitting Su-30s.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Avicenna said:


> I completely agree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have my doubts as to the Russians.
> 
> I think Iran must entertain China as a supplier at this point.
> 
> Time is of the essence as you stated. Why not some Chinese SAM systems?
> 
> Prepare to get some stop gap J-10? The -C model would be a MAJOR upgrade to anything Iran now flies. (of course earliest delivery is post 2020)
> 
> And then perhaps work on producing the FC-31 in Iran.



Russians are actively trying to dismantle the zionist lobby in russia, they are keeping the Israelis at arms length because many prominent businessmen in the russian economy are jews who have connections in israel. Notice the recent trail of assassinated or exiled politicians and oligarchs happen to have pro-zionist sympathies? Putin is trying to russify the russian economy, which is why he's playing nice with israel.

Do not fool yourself into believing that Russia will make some foreign policy paradigm shift to iran after this political and economic russification is complete, it's in russia's interest as a new player in the region to keep relations with MENA countries neutral at a minimum to maximise economic and political interest. Plus it's a hectic and unpredictable region imagine putting all your eggs in one basket only for it to be slapped out of your hold soon after?



AmirPatriot said:


> SAMs are one of the few areas we are keeping up with the latest technology. If there is one thing we don't need to import, it's SAMs.
> 
> As for the air force, I'm partially with @TheImmortal on this. We shouldn't buy fighters for the sake of buying fighters, we should buy fighters for the next 2 decades of the IRIAF. 5th Gen is a must. BUT, we should follow the same philosophy as China, Russia, and Israel (and maybe even the US), and buy a larger number of 4.5 Gen fighters to do the heavy lifting - work that doesn't require 5th Gen aircraft.
> 
> Iran is even thinking about making an enlarged, bomber RQ-170 sentinel, which would be good for destroying air defence or high value targets to make way for the heavy hitting Su-30s.



India left a vacuum after leaving the FGFA program that Russia is seeking to fill with another partner. China is also seeking partners for the FC-31 which has also recently drawn attention from the PLAAN. You may get a solid level of localisation if you commit to either program. Both Russia and especially China are known to be lenient on TOT given the right price and political climate, Russia possibly even more so nowadays considering the state of their economy.

4.5 gen fighter options are fairly obvious, either su-30 or su-35 will provide decent stopgap capabilities until 5th gen fighters are inducted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

*An Iranian F-4 Crashed in Sistan Baluchestan Province (SOUTH Eastern PART OF IRAN) *

Pilot safely ejected!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ع-حادثه-برای-یک-فروند-جنگنده-f-4-را-تایید-کرد

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> *An Iranian F-4 Crashed in Sistan Baluchestan Province (SOUTH Eastern PART OF IRAN) *
> 
> Pilot safely ejected!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ع-حادثه-برای-یک-فروند-جنگنده-f-4-را-تایید-کرد
> 
> View attachment 485827


Thanks God.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Russians are actively trying to dismantle the zionist lobby in russia, they are keeping the Israelis at arms length because many prominent businessmen in the russian economy are jews who have connections in israel. Notice the recent trail of assassinated or exiled politicians and oligarchs happen to have pro-zionist sympathies? Putin is trying to russify the russian economy, which is why he's playing nice with israel.
> 
> Do not fool yourself into believing that Russia will make some foreign policy paradigm shift to iran after this political and economic russification is complete, it's in russia's interest as a new player in the region to keep relations with MENA countries neutral at a minimum to maximise economic and political interest. Plus it's a hectic and unpredictable region imagine putting all your eggs in one basket only for it to be slapped out of your hold soon after?
> 
> 
> 
> India left a vacuum after leaving the FGFA program that Russia is seeking to fill with another partner. China is also seeking partners for the FC-31 which has also recently drawn attention from the PLAAN. You may get a solid level of localisation if you commit to either program. Both Russia and especially China are known to be lenient on TOT given the right price and political climate, Russia possibly even more so nowadays considering the state of their economy.
> 
> 4.5 gen fighter options are fairly obvious, either su-30 or su-35 will provide decent stopgap capabilities until 5th gen fighters are inducted.



Russia will not provide any 4.5 fighter to Iran or 5th gen, too risky politically and the West has to many pain points on Russia they could exploit.

The best Russia will give is small amount of SU-30 with limited to no ToT.

China is more able to fight political and geopolitical consequences and provide Iran with 4.5-5th gen technology. However, they haven’t shown any inclination in wanting to change balance of power in the Persian gulf. Furthermore, the question remains how much funding Iran could provide for J-31 project.

Iran is dire need of air superiority fighters to eventually take over F-14’s job. Then there next concern is a more all purpose fighter. 

If Iran decides to make a RQ-170 bomber like a B-2 esque it would need to have developed much better engine technology as such a bomber would need to cruise at supersonic speeds for better survivability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> If Iran decides to make a RQ-170 bomber like a B-2 esque it would need to have developed much better engine technology as such a bomber would need to cruise at



Not at all. The B-2 as well as the B-21 are subsonic designs. Provided the aircraft is stealthy enough and used properly, supersonic capability will not be required. Supersonic designs also have negative implications for stealth and maintenance, especially of the radar absorbing "skin".


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Not at all. The B-2 as well as the B-21 are subsonic designs. Provided the aircraft is stealthy enough and used properly, supersonic capability will not be required. Supersonic designs also have negative implications for stealth and maintenance, especially of the radar absorbing "skin".



B-2 hasn’t been used against the latest air defense systems/radars created. It was used against banana countries with decrepit military or cave dwelling terrorists.

It’s vulnerable in contested airspace, so please don’t use the “stealth” argument. Any country with high tech interceptors could potentially intercept it. If it manages to penetrate deep into airspace and release its payload, it will quickly find high speed interceptors chasing after it.

The US has F-22’s to protect the B-2 in enemy airspace while the B-2 flies in along with F-35 for suppressing ground targets.

And in fact the B-21 is supposed to have A SPECIFIC FIGHTER DEDICATED TO FLYING WITH IT.

Since in your plan Iran has NEITHER types of planes (5th gen air superiority and all purpose fighter) it shouldn’t create a subsonic enlarged manned RQ-170.

Hence it should go for a Supersonic design, it doesn’t need to be AS “stealthy” as B-2. But if can supercruise at supersonic speed it could easily escape in most situations.

In fact, if Iran opens an R&D project for a hypersonic glide vehicle, maybe it could transfer some of that tech to high supersonic speed bomber that operates at high altitude dropping PGMs.

Or else going for a large subsonic RQ-170 wether manned or unmanned seems a waste of resources when your main Air Force is still in the stone ages.

The concept I am thinking of is to use the bombers as deterrence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> The US has F-22’s to protect the B-2 in enemy airspace while the B-2 flies in along with F-35 for suppressing ground targets.



The B-2's large size actually makes it BETTER at evading advanced air defences using long wavelength radars to detect stealth aircraft. It is more stealthy than an F-22 or F-35. The B-2, like most bombers, uses low altitude escape paths. When escaping, the dive to low altitude allows it to get to high subsonic speed.



TheImmortal said:


> Since in your plan Iran has NEITHER types of planes (5th gen air superiority and all purpose fighter)



I very clearly said "5th Gen is a must". A number of 5th Gen aircraft as well as 4.5th gen giving a high-low mix of capability.


----------



## VEVAK

AmirPatriot said:


> Not at all. The B-2 as well as the B-21 are subsonic designs. Provided the aircraft is stealthy enough and used properly, supersonic capability will not be required. Supersonic designs also have negative implications for stealth and maintenance, especially of the radar absorbing "skin".





TheImmortal said:


> B-2 hasn’t been used against the latest air defense systems/radars created. It was used against banana countries with decrepit military or cave dwelling terrorists.
> 
> It’s vulnerable in contested airspace, so please don’t use the “stealth” argument. Any country with high tech interceptors could potentially intercept it. If it manages to penetrate deep into airspace and release its payload, it will quickly find high speed interceptors chasing after it.
> 
> The US has F-22’s to protect the B-2 in enemy airspace while the B-2 flies in along with F-35 for suppressing ground targets.
> 
> And in fact the B-21 is supposed to have A SPECIFIC FIGHTER DEDICATED TO FLYING WITH IT.
> 
> Since in your plan Iran has NEITHER types of planes (5th gen air superiority and all purpose fighter) it shouldn’t create a subsonic enlarged manned RQ-170.
> 
> Hence it should go for a Supersonic design, it doesn’t need to be AS “stealthy” as B-2. But if can supercruise at supersonic speed it could easily escape in most situations.
> 
> In fact, if Iran opens an R&D project for a hypersonic glide vehicle, maybe it could transfer some of that tech to high supersonic speed bomber that operates at high altitude dropping PGMs.
> 
> Or else going for a large subsonic RQ-170 wether manned or unmanned seems a waste of resources when your main Air Force is still in the stone ages.
> 
> The concept I am thinking of is to use the bombers as deterrence.



For a large bomber I would always take speed over stealth!!!!!!!!!! And I would equip my bombers with low rcs Air to ground missiles with ranges between 500km to 100km that would 1st go after enemy SAM sites & radar sites 1st to take away the potential threat of SAM & I would use my speed to get in drop my ordnance and get out before their fighters can catchup to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A stealth bomber would have to be relatively blind!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with no Radar or Jamming capability + against modern militaries they are not as stealthy as they used to be!!!!!!!!!!

Even the Russians didn't bother with them!!!!!!!! Low RCS yes but NOT stealth!

And so far even the U.S. doesn't have supersonic wing design large bomber so to assume that Iran would be able to build a Supersonic bomber size version of the RQ-170 is ridicules because your proposing to building something even the U.S. hasn't built yet!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

If I was Iran would attempt to build a larger armed version of the RQ-170 but not a manned bomber size! I would also build high speed decoy UAV & Hi speed UAV's equipped with jamming capability to be used as decoys to allow my bomber to get in and get out!!!!!!!!

But before all that happens for it's Air Force Iran 1st needs purchase a fleet of Air Superiority Fighters to back up it's Air Defense!

But for now Iran's 1st strike retaliatory capabilities with its missile program need to be increased to a point where no one would dare attack Iran out fear of what those missiles can do on the very 1st day of any war with Iran!!

We need our missiles production and accuracy increase to a point where we can afford to fire on & take out 100 targets at a mocked enemy airbase fired upon from 1000km away in a single military exercise using UCAV's, BM, Ground and Air launch Cruise Missiles...…

Sadly the Rohani Administration is clearly not an administration with the wits about them to do this and in terms of the *military *they are the weakest & the most pathetic Iranian administration I have seen since Bani Sadr!!!

A country like Iran due to it's geographical location and natural resources will NEVER achieve both Peace & Independence without an strong military!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the only way to achieve that is with proper investment in domestic weapons production!!!!!!!

For the next decade Iran every year at VERY LEAST needs to produce or procure 
$2Billion USD worth of Ballistic Missiles (200km-2500km) 
$2Billion USD worth of Air, Sea & Ground launched cruise missiles (100km-2000km)
$2Billion USD on UAV & UCAV's
$2Billion USD on Air Force Fighter jet production or procurement
$2Billion USD other Air force weapons & projects from Bombs, A2A Missiles, Transport Aircraft, bomber, engine & propulsion R&D and production..... 
$2Billion USD on Air Defense Radars, SAM's,.....
$2Billion USD on Infantry gear to ISW from body armor and guns to ATGM
$2Billion USD for the Naval weapons from Ships & Subs to high speed boats to smart mines....
$2Billion USD on Army ground Transport From Safir Jeeps to trucks to IFV to Tanks 
$1Billion USD on space program 
$1Billion USD on Artillery, MLRS, battel field missiles.... 5km-200km 
$1Billion On Helo's & future manned vertical takeoff & landing aircraft 
$1Billion On AI, Robotics & future ground based remotely operated intelligent weapons
$1Billion on Cyber defense of offense + computer hardware, software, networking R&D and production
$1Billion on Metallurgy, composite & Nano R&D and production
$1Billion on Chemistry, Explosives, Fuel & batteries R&D and production 
$1Billion on New bases, factories and command and control centers
$1Billion on Electronics R&D and production from Optics, Sensors, Coms, BLDC motors,....
$1Billion on Lasers + Directed energy weapons R&D and production
$1Billion on Mapping, intel gathering, target accusation
$1Billion on New tools from industrial robots to 3D printers R&D and production 

That's ~$30Billion USD + ~$10 Billion for military paychecks, weapons maintenance & upkeep, food and fuel for a total of $40 Billion USD a year for the next decade 

If Iran wants both Peace and Independence that's how you achieve it!


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> And so far even the U.S. doesn't have supersonic wing design large bomber so to assume that Iran would be able to build a Supersonic bomber size version of the RQ-170 is ridicules because your proposing to building something even the U.S. hasn't built yet!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> If I was Iran would attempt to build a larger armed version of the RQ-170 but not a manned bomber size! I would also build high speed decoy UAV & Hi speed UAV's equipped with jamming capability to be used as decoys to allow my bomber to get in and get out!!!!!!!!



It’s amazing how you manage to contradict yourself so quickly.

On one hand US doesn’t have supersonic bomber flying wing design, so Iran can’t do it. (With your logic)

Yet on the other hand US also doesn’t have “high speed” (whatever that means) UAVs with jamming capability and decoy capability, but Iran can do it?

Have you thought the reason US doesn’t have a SuperSonic flying wing design is because its military doctrine never required it?

US military doctrine is about delivering large amounts of fire power aboard against Weak countries. Hence why B-52, B-2, B-1 exist.

Against the remaining non West aligned military powers (Russia and China), US relied on nuclear deterrence and massive airforce.

And again your Sci-Fi thinking is absurd and irrational and would drive up the price of such a program by including your “decoys” along with it. While your at it why not ask for iran to develop laser based weapons, a Death Star, military bases on the moon, and fusion nuclear weapons? I mean your suggestions are just out there.

Iran’s UAV capability is limited to range of ground control stations. Where as high speed bomber needs to be able to strike anywhere in the world to be effective deterrence. Any “high speed” UAV decoy would have very limited range for reasons I won’t even mention since it obvious!

And a supersonic flying wing is in Iran’s potential if it works closley on incorporating the type of engines that HGV (hypersonic glide vehicles) use which incorporate a part of their energy from the oxygen in the atmosphere. This will require less fuel to be held on board and thus increasing range to strike anywhere in the world.

Furthermore, a supersonic flying wing design would be kept in control/piloted by computers rather than the human pilots. The human pilots would be there for other reasons much like the B-2.

The Nazi’s with the Ho 2-29 design in 1942 could have flown from Berlin to New York and back at the same speed roughly as a B-2. The Ho 2-29 even had Radar absorbing materials for its time!

The biggest mistake the Nazi war machine did was thinking like Vevak! A bunch of fanciful projects that ate up too much resources and didn’t change the battlefront.

If Nazi war machine concentrated efforts on Ho 2-29 design, nuclear weapons, and nuclear capable ballistic missiles (V-2 successor) they would have won the war by nuking every major allied country and ending WW2 victorious without wasting resources on tons of WunderWaffe projects !

Thus in 2020-2030’s Iran could surely field 4-6 engine flying wing design that would boost the aircraft into supersonic speeds. However, it would require major effort and a clear vision that Iran is committed to becoming an advanced military power.

The future is hypersonic, thus Iran needs to focus on supersonic PGMs, hypersonic engines, lasers, HGVs, and 3D printing to supplement the BM arsenal.

One day BMs will be archaic technology if they aren’t already!


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> It’s amazing how you manage to contradict yourself so quickly.
> 
> On one hand US doesn’t have supersonic bomber flying wing design, so Iran can’t do it. (With your logic)
> 
> Yet on the other hand US also doesn’t have “high speed” (whatever that means) UAVs with jamming capability and decoy capability, but Iran can do it?
> 
> Have you thought the reason US doesn’t have a SuperSonic flying wing design is because its military doctrine never required it?
> 
> US military doctrine is about delivering large amounts of fire power aboard against Weak countries. Hence why B-52, B-2, B-1 exist.
> 
> Against the remaining non West aligned military powers (Russia and China), US relied on nuclear deterrence and massive airforce.
> 
> And again your Sci-Fi thinking is absurd and irrational and would drive up the price of such a program by including your “decoys” along with it. While your at it why not ask for iran to develop laser based weapons, a Death Star, military bases on the moon, and fusion nuclear weapons? I mean your suggestions are just out there.
> 
> Iran’s UAV capability is limited to range of ground control stations. Where as high speed bomber needs to be able to strike anywhere in the world to be effective deterrence. Any “high speed” UAV decoy would have very limited range for reasons I won’t even mention since it obvious!
> 
> And a supersonic flying wing is in Iran’s potential if it works closley on incorporating the type of engines that HGV (hypersonic glide vehicles) use which incorporate a part of their energy from the oxygen in the atmosphere. This will require less fuel to be held on board and thus increasing range to strike anywhere in the world.
> 
> Furthermore, a supersonic flying wing design would be kept in control/piloted by computers rather than the human pilots. The human pilots would be there for other reasons much like the B-2.
> 
> The Nazi’s with the Ho 2-29 design in 1942 could have flown from Berlin to New York and back at the same speed roughly as a B-2. The Ho 2-29 even had Radar absorbing materials for its time!
> 
> The biggest mistake the Nazi war machine did was thinking like Vevak! A bunch of fanciful projects that ate up too much resources and didn’t change the battlefront.
> 
> If Nazi war machine concentrated efforts on Ho 2-29 design, nuclear weapons, and nuclear capable ballistic missiles (V-2 successor) they would have won the war by nuking every major allied country and ending WW2 victorious without wasting resources on tons of WunderWaffe projects !
> 
> Thus in 2020-2030’s Iran could surely field 4-6 engine flying wing design that would boost the aircraft into supersonic speeds. However, it would require major effort and a clear vision that Iran is committed to becoming an advanced military power.
> 
> The future is hypersonic, thus Iran needs to focus on supersonic PGMs, hypersonic engines, lasers, HGVs, and 3D printing to supplement the BM arsenal.
> 
> One day BMs will be archaic technology if they aren’t already!




US has used Decoy UAV's for a long time!!!!!!!!! It's nothing new! Neither is putting Jamming on decoy Aircraft and UAV's hell even the MQ-9 that went into production a decade ago has been tested with a Jamming pod! Let alone more modern UAV's! LOL!

Just because YOU haven't heard of something it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!!!!!

B-2 isn't Human controlled hell even the F-117 isn't human controlled!!!!!! They use fly by wire systems that translate digitalized commands to various moving parts of the aircraft!!!!

The reason you can't get a flying wing design to go supersonic has to do with various reasons The thickness of the wing relative to the angle of the wing ON TOP of the stability problem with the wing flexibility problem on top of the fuel storage problem!!!!

You can't stick Q-313 wings on top of an F-14 and still remain under the delusion that your going to go supersonic simply because you have powerful supersonic engines!!!!!!!

A large supersonic bomber would require large amount of fuel and in a flying Wing design fuel is distributed throughout the wings!

I'm not saying building a large supersonic bomber without stabilizers is not possible!!!!! Hell 6th gen fighter will also be without stabilizers but what I'm telling you is that a supersonic flying Wing Design that would have anything to do with the RQ-170 design is neither possible nor even practical!!!!!!!!!!

*FYI! ALL aircrafts that have jet engines use the oxygen in the atmosphere to burn!!!! That is NOTHING NEW!!!!!!!!!!*

LOL! your confusing things!!! A Hypersonic scramjet engines that uses the oxygen in the atmosphere to burn also requires another fuel source!!!!!!!!! And the only time Scramjet engines become practical is when they can achieve extremely high speeds using a short burn time!!!!!!!!!!! Yes they use oxygen to burn but that doesn't mean the oxygen in the atmosphere is their only fuel source! It just means they don't need to carry oxygen or use a compressor to compress the air in the atmosphere!!!!!!!!! LOL!

If you can maintain a average speed of 12,000kph for a 15min burn time you can achieve a range of 3000km vs an aircraft that can maintain an average speed of 2000kph for a 60min burn time which will give it a range of 2000km!!! 

So spaceships aside putting Scramjet engines on an Air Frame that tops out at 2000kph WOULD BE ABSURD!


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Russia will not provide any 4.5 fighter to Iran or 5th gen, too risky politically and the West has to many pain points on Russia they could exploit.
> 
> The best Russia will give is small amount of SU-30 with limited to no ToT.
> 
> China is more able to fight political and geopolitical consequences and provide Iran with 4.5-5th gen technology. However, they haven’t shown any inclination in wanting to change balance of power in the Persian gulf. Furthermore, the question remains how much funding Iran could provide for J-31 project.
> 
> Iran is dire need of air superiority fighters to eventually take over F-14’s job. Then there next concern is a more all purpose fighter.
> 
> If Iran decides to make a RQ-170 bomber like a B-2 esque it would need to have developed much better engine technology as such a bomber would need to cruise at supersonic speeds for better survivability.


If you wanna know Chinese, you should watch "Operation Red Sea 2018" movie, a Chinese state-backed propaganda movie against Yemeni Ansarullah and Iran, as if it has been produced by Israel itself! depicts Ansarullah as savage terrorists who kill civilians for no reason and even doesn't hesitate to put the Symbol of Iranian flag (with a minor change) on the hat of terrorists:






To secure their arms sale to Saudi Arabia the main killer of civilians in Yemen, they don't mind to show their ally as the bad guy. don't expect anything from these double face people, they will sell Iran for less than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

VEVAK said:


> For the next decade Iran every year at VERY LEAST needs to produce or procure
> $2Billion USD worth of Ballistic Missiles (200km-2500km)
> $2Billion USD worth of Air, Sea & Ground launched cruise missiles (100km-2000km)
> $2Billion USD on UAV & UCAV's
> $2Billion USD on Air Force Fighter jet production or procurement
> $2Billion USD other Air force weapons & projects from Bombs, A2A Missiles, Transport Aircraft, bomber, engine & propulsion R&D and production.....
> $2Billion USD on Air Defense Radars, SAM's,.....
> $2Billion USD on Infantry gear to ISW from body armor and guns to ATGM
> $2Billion USD for the Naval weapons from Ships & Subs to high speed boats to smart mines....
> $2Billion USD on Army ground Transport From Safir Jeeps to trucks to IFV to Tanks
> $1Billion USD on space program
> $1Billion USD on Artillery, MLRS, battel field missiles.... 5km-200km
> $1Billion On Helo's & future manned vertical takeoff & landing aircraft
> $1Billion On AI, Robotics & future ground based remotely operated intelligent weapons
> $1Billion on Cyber defense of offense + computer hardware, software, networking R&D and production
> $1Billion on Metallurgy, composite & Nano R&D and production
> $1Billion on Chemistry, Explosives, Fuel & batteries R&D and production
> $1Billion on New bases, factories and command and control centers
> $1Billion on Electronics R&D and production from Optics, Sensors, Coms, BLDC motors,....
> $1Billion on Lasers + Directed energy weapons R&D and production
> $1Billion on Mapping, intel gathering, target accusation
> $1Billion on New tools from industrial robots to 3D printers R&D and production
> 
> That's ~$30Billion USD + ~$10 Billion for military paychecks, weapons maintenance & upkeep, food and fuel for a total of $40 Billion USD a year for the next decade
> 
> If Iran wants both Peace and Independence that's how you achieve it!


From where do you suggest Iran conjure up this $40b p/a to almost triple the current military budget?


----------



## VEVAK

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> From where do you suggest Iran conjure up this $40b p/a to almost triple the current military budget?



If we want both Peace & INDEPENDANCE that's the price!!!!!!!! And the MOST Important factor is NOT Iran's military but the development of more capable and more advanced Iranian produced products!

Much like the U.S. the foundation of Iran's Technological and Industrial development needs to be through the Military Industry and as long as over 95% of the weapons are produced domestically and the weapons produce are made up of over 95% Iranian built parts and the part are made of over 95% Iranian made materials and minerals mined and produced inside the country with a focus on duel use technology then there is NO harm in spending even more because the more we spend the more we build our own economy!!!!!

If Iran's Military develops an advanced Brushless DC motors equipped with an independent processor, advanced sensors & magnets it will NOT only be Iran's Military that benefits but various civilian industries across the country.....

If Iran's Military develops lithium ion and in the future Graphene based Battery it wont only be Iran's military that benefits but every industry that produces products that require batteries 

Whether it be metallurgy or composites or trucks or helicopters or satellites or thermal imaging cameras or 3d printers or AI or Robotics or Jet engines or Naval ships.... 
The Foundation of Science, Technology and industrial development in Iran needs to come from proper funding in Iran's Domestic Military Industry!! At least if we are after true Independence & Peace then due to our geographic location and natural resources that's what needs to happen! 
And yes within the next 10-15 years we can hand many of these responsibilities over to the civilian industry and cut the budget by half but till then that responsibility should be in the Military Industry!


----------



## mohsen

2018 Aug 22
امیر حاتمی : 31 مردادماه (روز صنعت دفاعی) خبرهای خوبی درباره دستاوردهای دفاعی خواهیم داشت
یکی از خبرهای خوب در حوزه هوایی است


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> 2018 Aug 22
> امیر حاتمی : 31 مردادماه (روز صنعت دفاعی) خبرهای خوبی درباره دستاوردهای دفاعی خواهیم داشت
> یکی از خبرهای خوب در حوزه هوایی است


well it maybe strange but I hope the Good news is not about airplane , rather like it to be showing Something comparable to Aim-120c or AIM-120D.
Fakoor is good but it has its own limits. 
another good news is that 50-60kn engine they were talking about.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Hack-Hook said:


> well it maybe strange but I hope the Good news is not about airplane , rather like it to be showing Something comparable to Aim-120c or AIM-120D.
> Fakoor is good but it has its own limits.
> another good news is that 50-60kn engine they were talking about.



When and who was talking about a 50-60 kn engine?


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> When and who was talking about a 50-60 kn engine?


When they showed OWJ they talked about heavy turbofan engine in two year. And now its nearly two years from that date.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Hack-Hook said:


> When they showed OWJ they talked about heavy turbofan engine in two year. And now its nearly two years from that date.



That's about the same dry thrust of an RD-33.

But they said heavy turbojet engines, and a turbojet of that thrust is the J79, used on the F-4...


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> That's about the same dry thrust of an RD-33.
> 
> But they said heavy turbojet engines, and a turbojet of that thrust is the J79, used on the F-4...


In this farsnews article they talked about Heavy turbojet and Turbofan engine.
https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950623001151


----------



## TheImmortal

It’s possible Russia gave RD-33 technology to Iran as that engine is now older technology compared to the latest gen engines Russia is providing.

Though a J-79 could also be a possibility since that is an engine that Iran has in its inventory.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970501000508/خط-تولید-موشک-هوا-به-هوای-فکور-افتتاح-شد

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>


After 5 years of suspension and 3 unveiling, removing the 90 after the name (so nobody would notice it's actual production date)!




*Fakour* mid-range air to air missile
range: 160km
smart guidance system


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> After 5 years of suspension and 3 unveiling, removing the 90 after the name (so nobody would notice it's actual production date)!
> View attachment 488004
> 
> *Fakour* mid-range air to air missile
> range: 160km
> smart guidance system



There wasn't 3 unveilings!!! 
One is the introduction of the Fakour Project (Mocked prototype)
Then it was the Testing of a production Model 
And this is about starting the production line of the Fakour-90 ( Inauguration of the production line)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> There wasn't 3 unveilings!!!
> One is the introduction of the Fakour Project (Mocked prototype)
> Then it was the Testing of a production Model
> And this is about starting the production line of the Fakour-90 ( Inauguration of the production line)


*افتتاح دستاورد موشکی دولت دهم توسط دولت یازدهم! / «فکور ۹۰» نخستین موشک هوا به هوای ایرانی*

Project started in 1390, successfully test fired in 1391 (2013), 8 months later was unveiled in 1392 parade, went to sleep during Rouhani (Dehghan) glorious days (like everything else), then in 1396 (2017) was unveiled by Rouhani again, and now in 2018 they want to fool people again by showing a few of them!


----------



## Hack-Hook

wonder if its a middle range missile then from where that 160km come?

probably we are going a new standard in missile classification . probably our long range A2A Missile will have a range about 400-500km .

But honnestly if it only can be fired from F-14 you must ask yourself for how long we are going to use f-14?


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder if its a middle range missile then from where that 160km come?
> 
> probably we are going a new standard in missile classification . probably our long range A2A Missile will have a range about 400-500km .
> 
> But honnestly if it only can be fired from F-14 you must ask yourself for how long we are going to use f-14?



Tomcats will be in service till 2030’s


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Tomcats will be in service till 2030’s


well that's 10 years and designing a system just for 10 years ? very strange move.
well I believe this system is continuation of project Sejjil not Project Fakur 90 and the defense ministry is again playing with names to make some confusion But 





the designation name for the missile is AIM-23M
defense ministry said the missile is compatible with the rest of Iranian airplanes.
also on the engine of the missile they write M112 and that was the marking of Hawk missile family
they introduced the missile as middle range missile not long range one.
the missile rely on the Aircraft Radar to hit the target.

I believe Maqsud would be the the result of Fakour -90 project and based on AIM-54


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> *افتتاح دستاورد موشکی دولت دهم توسط دولت یازدهم! / «فکور ۹۰» نخستین موشک هوا به هوای ایرانی*
> 
> Project started in 1390, successfully test fired in 1391 (2013), 8 months later was unveiled in 1392 parade, went to sleep during Rouhani (Dehghan) glorious days (like everything else), then in 1396 (2017) was unveiled by Rouhani again, and now in 2018 they want to fool people again by showing a few of them!



So what you're saying is, Rouhani is the one who put it into production. Got it.


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> So what you're saying is, Rouhani is the one who put it into production. Got it.


No I mean it's production restarted. Got it?


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> No I mean it's production restarted. Got it?



Production hadn't started in the first place. A few prototypes =/= mass production.


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder if its a middle range missile then from where that 160km come?
> 
> probably we are going a new standard in missile classification . probably our long range A2A Missile will have a range about 400-500km .
> 
> But honnestly if it only can be fired from F-14 you must ask yourself for how long we are going to use f-14?



Iran is categorizing it as a Medium Ranged A2A missile! And most likely than not it's characteristics are much like the AiM-54.

And the MAX range of an Air to Air missile like this is more like an imaginary number that has nothing to do with Missiles Capabilities against other Fighter Jets! So 160km for it's MAX range sounds correct!

The capabilities of Air to Air Missiles such as this varies depending on the altitude & speed they are fired from and the altitude, heading and speed capabilities of their target!!!!!!



mohsen said:


> *افتتاح دستاورد موشکی دولت دهم توسط دولت یازدهم! / «فکور ۹۰» نخستین موشک هوا به هوای ایرانی*
> 
> Project started in 1390, successfully test fired in 1391 (2013), 8 months later was unveiled in 1392 parade, went to sleep during Rouhani (Dehghan) glorious days (like everything else), then in 1396 (2017) was unveiled by Rouhani again, and now in 2018 they want to fool people again by showing a few of them!



All this 1st started when Iran installed foreign made HAWK's SAM on Iranian F-14's then they moved on to upgraded Iranian made versions until they got to this point!!!!
And Iran has NEVER had a production line of the Fakour-90 for it to be restarted!!!!!!!

And of course there have been other tests because you don't start a production line by testing a missile ONCE!
They would have needed years of testing and adjustments and starting the development and testing of various components until they can start a production line!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> Production hadn't started in the first place. A few prototypes =/= mass production.


Missile was in the production stage when Rouhani ended all the funds.

1393.mehr (2014.sep)
*جنگنده‌های F14 به موشک فکور 90 مجهز شدند *


> امیر سرتیپ خلبان «علیرضا برخور» جانشین فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش در گفتوگو با خبرنگار دفاعی امنیتی دفاع پرس، با اعلام این خبر اظهار داشت: موشک فکور محصول مشترک وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح و نیروی هوایی ارتش است، که هماکنون به مرحله تولید رسیده است



It's not like we create a dedicated production line just for a missile, such a line isn't economical when you have a limited order (unless you think we have that kind of funds). there is a line, which produces multiple products based on the funds for each product.
Now whether it was zero output at that time or 6 output like today, it makes no difference, it wont change the fact that Rouhani stopped an already ready product, then 4 years later fooled people by re unveiling it and one extra year later (5 years delay in total) just started to produce six of them, as a sign of mass production!


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Missile was in the production stage when Rouhani ended all the funds.
> 
> 1393.mehr (2014.sep)
> *جنگنده‌های F14 به موشک فکور 90 مجهز شدند *
> 
> 
> It's not like we create a dedicated production line just for a missile, such a line isn't economical when you have a limited order (unless you think we have that kind of funds). there is a line, which produces multiple products based on the funds for each product.
> Now whether it was zero output at that time or 6 output like today, it makes no difference, it wont change the fact that Rouhani stopped an already ready product, then 4 years later fooled people by re unveiling it and one extra year later (5 years delay in total) just started to produce six of them, as a sign of mass production!


Fakour-90 was produced , but at the time Air force said that it needs fine tuning, its mentioned in one of the links you post in other thread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Fakour-90 was produced , but at the time Air force said that it needs fine tuning, its mentioned in one of the links you post in other thread



Don’t listen to that individual he is obsessed with Rouhani.

Most of Iran’s military is stuck with Iraq war equipment for the past 30 years, yet he thinks Rouhani is the one stunting Iran’s military progress all of a sudden?

Can’t argue with such simple minded individuals.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t listen to that individual he is obsessed with Rouhani.
> 
> Most of Iran’s military is stuck with Iraq war equipment for the past 30 years, yet he thinks Rouhani is the one stunting Iran’s military progress all of a sudden?
> 
> Can’t argue with such simple minded individuals.


he is Ahmadinejad fanboy (even though i like Ahmadinejad tho)


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> Fakour-90 was produced , but at the time Air force said that it needs fine tuning, its mentioned in one of the links you post in other thread


Three higher rank commanders said it was at production or mass production state, one lower rank commander who due to his post has lower information says something else.
You guys want to believe the single one and ignore the rest! though I suspect he has asked defense ministry why they don't deliver the products and they wanted to get ride of him by saying we are working on it!

By the way, don't change the words, he didn't say fine tuning, he said they want to increase the range, accuracy and destructive power, it sounds like a *complete *upgrade itself, nonetheless what we know today is that range hasn't increase, which is another confirmation for that three commanders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t listen to that individual he is obsessed with Rouhani.
> 
> Most of Iran’s military is stuck with Iraq war equipment for the past 30 years, yet he thinks Rouhani is the one stunting Iran’s military progress all of a sudden?
> 
> Can’t argue with such simple minded individuals.


so according to you, 85% budget reduction by Rouhani is nothing important! it's just 85% reduction (with no inflation), just 85%, what a biased person I am!

when scientists say we have lost our job during Rouhani's administration, it's not a big deal. it's just a few not important scientists and projects which Tehrani-Moghaddam thought are more important than his entire carrier! again me and Tehrani Moghaddam are both biased here!

when General Bagheri says after 9 months, just 20% of their ratified budget has been paid, he is lying too.

when a member of nation security committee of Parliament says missile production had lower to zero during Rouhani's administration and Rouhani had replied to general Bagheri that he wont pay their ratified budget, he is lying too.

when retired army personnel protest in the front of Parliament they are lying as well.

few years ago an Indian member of this forum was wondering why news about new achievements of Iranian army has become so rare, but perhaps he has been lying as well.

Fakour is completely different from what was unveiled during Ahmadinejad too, Everyone is lying, but Rouhani and his Male-kesh-ha.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Three higher rank commanders said it was at production or mass production state, one lower rank commander who due to his post has lower information says something else.
> You guys want to believe the single one and ignore the rest! though I suspect he has asked defense ministry why they don't deliver the products and they wanted to get ride of him by saying we are working on it!
> 
> By the way, don't change the words, he didn't say fine tuning, he said they want to increase the range, accuracy and destructive power, it sounds like a *complete *upgrade itself, nonetheless what we know today is that range hasn't increase, which is another confirmation for that three commanders.


Those thing means finetunning to me .
Only accuracy aspect is enough for me for to not massproduce the missile .
Also is it first time we say we mass produced something and later we see production line started at later date.

Also if fakour-90 was mass produced and it was Phoenix replacement then why in fakour we see parts of Shahin missile ?

How ever you look at it Fakour missile is development over hawk missile not Aim-54 for development over Phoenix you must wait for Maqsood.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Path-Finder

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1021980111539773440

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> so according to you, 85% budget reduction by Rouhani is nothing important! it's just 85% reduction (with no inflation), just 85%, what a biased person I am!
> 
> when scientists say we have lost our job during Rouhani's administration, it's not a big deal. it's just a few not important scientists and projects which Tehrani-Moghaddam thought are more important than his entire carrier! again me and Tehrani Moghaddam are both biased here!
> 
> when General Bagheri says after 9 months, just 20% of their ratified budget has been paid, he is lying too.
> 
> when a member of nation security committee of Parliament says missile production had lower to zero during Rouhani's administration and Rouhani had replied to general Bagheri that he wont pay their ratified budget, he is lying too.
> 
> when retired army personnel protest in the front of Parliament they are lying as well.
> 
> few years ago an Indian member of this forum was wondering why news about new achievements of Iranian army has become so rare, but perhaps he has been lying as well.
> 
> Fakour is completely different from what was unveiled during Ahmadinejad too, Everyone is lying, but Rouhani and his Male-kesh-ha.



Iranians lie, Iranian politicians lie even more, and Iranian military officials lie the most.

If Iran’s military budget was lowered by 85%, IRGC couldn’t operate in Syria! The amount of money spent in the Syrian theater is BILLIONS OF DOLLARS! Who do you think pays for that?

I don’t understand why this is so hard for you to understand.

Many officials have agenda when saying things in order to gain more leverage or cause damage to their opponents.

Furthermore, Tehrani Moghaddam died before Rouhani even came into power so your just rambling at this point.

Matters of national security are in the hands of the National security council and Supreme Leader and that includes project like ICBM program.

I am sure you also blame Rouhani for stopping nuclear weapons program which was stopped 15 years ago!

Some presidents increase military budget and arms and some presidents decrease military budget and arms. That happens in all nations.

But you are promoting propaganda here. Your beloved Ahmadinejad had to be censored by the supreme leader because of the damage and corruption he was apart of at a time when Iran had record oil revenues in its history.

You fail to grasp how geopolitics work. Iran goes through periods of unveiling weapons when it feels it is under attack (see 2008-2011) and periods of calm they don’t unveil as much projects.

Furthermore, the Syrian war affected Iran’s military procurement funds. So it’s not out of the realm of possibility that less money went into R&D and more went into the Syrian war as it was a much more pressuring concern for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Path-Finder said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1021980111539773440


Good for him. Someone there is actually thinking and calls it what it is

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

How many Iranian Su-22 btw?


----------



## PeeD

I wonder whether the glide bomb is actually powered.

The rear end is different to the Iranian JDAM as it is larger: Why go for something larger if everything already fits in a small and older system?

Same thing with the glide kit, why is it so big? Chinese LS-6 did the same thing mechanically in a much more compact way. Mechanically there would be no need for such a large high, it only increases drag. 

Those two questions have one logical answer: It is powered by a booster. The rear is cylindrical and large because it houses a booster + steering servos.
The glide kit is so high because it houses the GPS/INS plus other systems such as the batteries.
Even better, the left example seems to add a electro-optical back-up guidance to it.

The design has following benefits:
- 250kg Mk.82 is sufficient in size and not too small as the SDB.
- Guidance is 3 times redundant in the most recent version
- Powered, a slow burning sustainer motor could re-accelerate it much after mach 1 release from the aircraft. So if it reached 400km/h at lets say 60km, the motor could re accelerate it to mach 1 (it is too draggy for more). The final terminal speed (important against air defense protected targets) and the total time-to-target would improve significantly.

If it is really powered at the end, it would be a really great system: No foolish decision for a a too small SDB like warhead. No foolish decision for a glide-only PGM that reaches the target at slow, easily interceptable 300km/h. Plus, no foolish decision for something that would be too expensive.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

@PeeD how many Iranian Su-22 and what Iran air force consist of in 2018?


----------



## PeeD

@07_SeppDietrich 

Iran does not publish such numbers.

Some more: Among bombs with glide kits, this one has one of the longest relative wingspans. They made the effort to change the x-tail configuration of the Iranian JDAM to a +-tail in order to allow for longer wings.

Such long wings are only beneficial if the weapon is designed for a very high altitude launch (40k feet plus). This is the reason why I think that this is the primary weapon of the S-171 drone in its bomber variant. Two such weapons should fit in a S-171 bomber and if indeed powered and released at 40-50k feet it would likely have a stand-off range of 100km. At 100km the S-171 would have a credible safety distance to remain undetected against short-wave radars and IR systems.

The potential EO system would make it difficult to spoof, more so if it is a terrain matching system. Karrar drones are another delivery method, one that does not even need a runway. The targets for it a static structures and large objects where Sadid class small PGMs do not have sufficient firepower.
So I think that the Su-22 is not the platform for which it was mainly designed but the secret S-171 Simorgh with its high altitude capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Navigator

07_SeppDietrich said:


> How many Iranian Su-22 btw?



As far i remember overall 40 Su-22 flown to Iran from Iraq in 1991, but these jets were stored all these 20+ years and only in last years in Iran began restore and modernize their.


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> so according to you, 85% budget reduction by Rouhani is nothing important! it's just 85% reduction (with no inflation), just 85%, what a biased person I am!
> 
> when scientists say we have lost our job during Rouhani's administration, it's not a big deal. it's just a few not important scientists and projects which Tehrani-Moghaddam thought are more important than his entire carrier! again me and Tehrani Moghaddam are both biased here!
> 
> when General Bagheri says after 9 months, just 20% of their ratified budget has been paid, he is lying too.
> 
> when a member of nation security committee of Parliament says missile production had lower to zero during Rouhani's administration and Rouhani had replied to general Bagheri that he wont pay their ratified budget, he is lying too.
> 
> when retired army personnel protest in the front of Parliament they are lying as well.
> 
> few years ago an Indian member of this forum was wondering why news about new achievements of Iranian army has become so rare, but perhaps he has been lying as well.
> 
> Fakour is completely different from what was unveiled during Ahmadinejad too, Everyone is lying, but Rouhani and his Male-kesh-ha.



Do you know how delusional you sound? Do you know what cutting the defense budget by 85% even means?
It means if we were spending $20 Billion USD on the military during Ahmadi today we are spending only $3 Billion USD! LOL!

FYI that's barely enough to pay the Paychecks, food and uniforms of Iran's Military Personal let alone anything else so your talking NONSESNE! 
Do you think all the people that work for various defense companies in Iran are standing around and working for free???? or are you under the illusion that Iran's Military Personal don't need to sleep or eat and are all without families that require sustenance and shelter? 

I've gone threw this with you a dozen times!!!!!!!!!!!! Iran's Ministry of Defense budget has decreased by 85% NOT IRAN'S DEFENSE BUDGET! Iran's overall Military budget has not decreased at all!!!!!!!! And anyone that says it has is delusional! 

*IDK maybe you think repeating the same lie OVER & OVER again is going to somehow magically make it true! *

Every Administration allocates budgets differently and it's every administration right to do so. And what get's allocated under MOD budget during Rohani is clearly different that what got allocated under Ahmadi!

I'm not saying Rohani was a good president for Iran's Military NO HE IS NOT and Fact is aside from the Space Program and continuation of specific projects that started under Khatami neither was Ahmadinejad especially with $100 pb oil money!!!! Fact is most of the major achievements made during the early years of Ahmadinejad were projects from the Khatami era! But at least he funded them!
Ahmadi had $100 pb Oil money and rather than investing it in the countries future and defense industry he wasted it all by handing out chump change to the masses!!

Any person with half a brain would understand that handing out $20 USD a month to 80 Million Iranians will NOT make life any better for any Iranian and it may not sound like a lot but at the end of the it comes out to almost $20 Billion USD a year that would have made all the difference in the world for Iran if it was added to the Military Industry! But instead it was wasted in the form of chump change that went straight down the drain with nothing produced no jobs created no technologies developed no advancements made.... And the only thing it managed to create was inflation & devaluation of Iranian currency!!

Which make Ahmadi THE WORST Iranian President since Bani Sadr overall & 2nd worse when it comes to the military right after Rohani! But Rohani still has a few years left to make up for his mistakes but so far since Bani Sadr, Rohani takes 1st place in the worst of the worst for the military I can agree with that but 85% cut is nothing but fiction!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Do you know how delusional you sound? Do you know what cutting the defense budget by 85% even means?
> It means if we were spending $20 Billion USD on the military during Ahmadi today we are spending only $3 Billion USD! LOL!
> 
> FYI that's barely enough to pay the Paychecks, food and uniforms of Iran's Military Personal let alone anything else so your talking NONSESNE!
> Do you think all the people that work for various defense companies in Iran are standing around and working for free???? or are you under the illusion that Iran's Military Personal don't need to sleep or eat and are all without families that require sustenance and shelter?
> 
> I've gone threw this with you a dozen times!!!!!!!!!!!! Iran's Ministry of Defense budget has decreased by 85% NOT IRAN'S DEFENSE BUDGET! Iran's overall Military budget has not decreased at all!!!!!!!! And anyone that says it has is delusional!
> 
> *IDK maybe you think repeating the same lie OVER & OVER again is going to somehow magically make it true! *
> 
> Every Administration allocates budgets differently and it's every administration right to do so. And what get's allocated under MOD budget during Rohani is clearly different that what got allocated under Ahmadi!
> 
> I'm not saying Rohani was a good president for Iran's Military NO HE IS NOT and Fact is aside from the Space Program and continuation of specific projects that started under Khatami neither was Ahmadinejad especially with $100 pb oil money!!!! Fact is most of the major achievements made during the early years of Ahmadinejad were projects from the Khatami era! But at least he funded them!
> Ahmadi had $100 pb Oil money and rather than investing it in the countries future and defense industry he wasted it all by handing out chump change to the masses!!
> 
> Any person with half a brain would understand that handing out $20 USD a month to 80 Million Iranians will NOT make life any better for any Iranian and it may not sound like a lot but at the end of the it comes out to almost $20 Billion USD a year that would have made all the difference in the world for Iran if it was added to the Military Industry! But instead it was wasted in the form of chump change that went straight down the drain with nothing produced no jobs created no technologies developed no advancements made.... And the only thing it managed to create was inflation & devaluation of Iranian currency!!
> 
> Which make Ahmadi THE WORST Iranian President since Bani Sadr overall & 2nd worse when it comes to the military right after Rohani! But Rohani still has a few years left to make up for his mistakes but so far since Bani Sadr, Rohani takes 1st place in the worst of the worst for the military I can agree with that but 85% cut is nothing but fiction!


I don't know which one of you is more ignorant, he who acts like an expert but doesn't know what I'm talking about when I say 85% budget reduction, or you who know, but repeats his B.S!

85% reduction from defense ministry's budget in 1393 and 40% reduction from IRGC's budget in 1394.
and result is this:
*آقای روحانی در پاسخ به نامه سرلشکر باقری چه دستوری داد*
and this:
*مستند فروشنده 2*


Lower oil income is just an excuse. Rouhani's oil revenue in Rial during his 5 years is equal to 16 years of Ahmadinejad and Khatami altogether (and these statistics doesn't include recent sharp increase). it's not Ahmadinejad's fault that Rouhani likes to import fresh foreign shit (perhaps reformists enjoy it's fresh smell). it's not Ahmadinejad's fault that when oil price was still high, Rouhani repelled all customers in the hope of his shitty deal.

*مجموع درآمد‌های ریالی نفتی ۵ ساله دولت حسن روحانی نزدیک به درآمد ۱۶ ساله دولت‌های احمدی‌نژاد و خاتمی است*


----------



## Raghfarm007

Mohsen joon.... do you ever think that you might be retarded??

I mean, one really has to have sheet for brain, if they don't understand that during khatami dollar was 1000 toman, and during Antarinejand's time it was 3000 tomn, and now it's 4400 toman. So yea, if you calculate the oil income in riyal, it would be much larger now. But if you calculate it by purchasing power, you will see things ae very different.

I suggest you educate yourself before making public statements again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Raghfarm007 said:


> Mohsen joon.... do you ever think that you might be retarded??
> 
> I mean, one really has to have sheet for brain, if they don't understand that during khatami dollar was 1000 toman, and during Antarinejand's time it was 3000 tomn, and now it's 4400 toman. So yea, if you calculate the oil income in riyal, it would be much larger now. But if you calculate it by purchasing power, you will see things ae very different.
> 
> I suggest you educate yourself before making public statements again.


Mr genius, purchasing power is related to clients, not the seller which is government itself, in fact government is enjoying the 10000t (not 4400) dollar.


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD I'm not sure if it has rocket motor, but I hope it does. The GBU-39 doesn't have one but that is much lighter and more aerodynamic than what I presume is a 250 kg bomb with the guidance/glide kit.

I hope they refine the design. Glide bombs like the GBU-39 excel at hitting fragile, high value targets with great precision, their standoff range allowing a launching aircraft to stay outside the range of medium-range air defences. But they don't need the heavier firepower from 250 kg bombs. They also rely on their small size that enables them to be launched in great numbers, instead of speed, to get past air defences.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

250kg should be the minimum weight for a PGM that has a glide kit and 3 times redundant guidance. GPS can be spoofed, INS drifts, IIR image co-relation can be fooled by smoke. So if the enemy counters your PGM the last thing that can help is pure firepower guided by the INS.

For the US budget it may be no problem to drop 4 SDBs to ensure destruction. Iran can't buy as many guidance and glide kits and hence the Mk.82 bomb is a good choice. A Mk.82 can kill hardened targets within a diameter of about 20m, so even in case of counter measures this is still good.
So I hope they wont go below it, not cost effective for Iran with its potential opponents (sure SDB will always work against some terrorists).

As for powered or not: As said, the Iranian JDAM presented in 2014 already had a much more compact, JDAM-stle tail section in which the GPS-INS guidance was placed. Why go for a larger diameter tail in 2018? Logical would be that the tail is now used for a rocket motor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> I don't know which one of you is more ignorant, he who acts like an expert but doesn't know what I'm talking about when I say 85% budget reduction, or you who know, but repeats his B.S!
> 
> 85% reduction from defense ministry's budget in 1393 and 40% reduction from IRGC's budget in 1394.
> and result is this:
> *آقای روحانی در پاسخ به نامه سرلشکر باقری چه دستوری داد*
> and this:
> *مستند فروشنده 2*
> 
> 
> Lower oil income is just an excuse. Rouhani's oil revenue in Rial during his 5 years is equal to 16 years of Ahmadinejad and Khatami altogether (and these statistics doesn't include recent sharp increase). it's not Ahmadinejad's fault that Rouhani likes to import fresh foreign shit (perhaps reformists enjoy it's fresh smell). it's not Ahmadinejad's fault that when oil price was still high, Rouhani repelled all customers in the hope of his shitty deal.
> 
> *مجموع درآمد‌های ریالی نفتی ۵ ساله دولت حسن روحانی نزدیک به درآمد ۱۶ ساله دولت‌های احمدی‌نژاد و خاتمی است*




Iran's currency collapsed under Ahmadinejad that is a FACT you can't run away and hide from and more specifically it was the result of Ahmadi's policies that caused the domino collapse of Iran's currency!!!!!!!!!! By handing out chump change + absurd loans to people that clearly didn't have the capability to ever pay them back!

And Oil income is NOT an excuse! When your selling oil at $100 as appose to $50 per barrel the cost of producing that Oil has NOT reduced and if anything comparatively it had actually increased so REGALDLESS of your Gross REVENUE the NET PROFIT you get out of selling oil for $100 USD per barrel is quite different. And at the end of the day the number that really matters is your NET profit NOT your gross revenue! So the profit the government got out of $100 pb oil was more like 3-4 times more during Ahmadinejad so you had a lot more money to spend!


And those numbers you have there are BS because they are in Iranian currency value! NOT in international currency USD value!!!!!!

1 Billion Toman when dollar was 1000 toman is CLEARLY different than 1 Billion Toman when dollar is 7000 toman

Which makes those figures irrelevant even in terms of Gross Revenue let alone net profit!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

IRGC-AF shames IRIAF again with 10 Su-22 overhauled & upgraded with PGM capability & ability to data link with UAV's!!!!!!!!!! Good for them!!!!!!! 

But as for the Yaseen I have to say that one of the main reason you put a light 250lb guided bomb like the SDB on a fighter jet is to increase the number of targets your fighter can hit which is sadly a fact forgotten when they designed the Yaseen which one can hope they'll address in the future 











Even if you have to further reduce the warhead by 20% it would still be well worth the effort if a better design lower payload allows you to carry 4 200lb guided glide bombs on each Su-22 inner pylons rather just 1 Yaseen per....

At least it's a step in the right direction which future designs and upgrades can hopefully address!

Also a low cost, low payload, +200km range precision guided Air to Ground weapon would be vital for taking out enemy Air Defense Systems hopefully another capability the IRGC will address 
Building a light, low lifespan, low cost micro jet engines for Iran should be a simple task that could easily increase the range of - 500 lb Air to Ground missile with a ~100lb warhead to +200km and outside the range of most SAM missiles


At this rate the IRGC will probably end up coming up with a viable fighter prototype long before the IRIAF does!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Iran's currency collapsed under Ahmadinejad that is a FACT you can't run away and hide from and more specifically it was the result of Ahmadi's policies that caused the domino collapse of Iran's currency!!!!!!!!!! By handing out chump change + absurd loans to people that clearly didn't have the capability to ever pay them back!
> 
> And Oil income is NOT an excuse! When your selling oil at $100 as appose to $50 per barrel the cost of producing that Oil has NOT reduced and if anything comparatively it had actually increased so REGALDLESS of your Gross REVENUE the NET PROFIT you get out of selling oil for $100 USD per barrel is quite different. And at the end of the day the number that really matters is your NET profit NOT your gross revenue! So the profit the government got out of $100 pb oil was more like 3-4 times more during Ahmadinejad so you had a lot more money to spend!
> 
> 
> And those numbers you have there are BS because they are in Iranian currency value! NOT in international currency USD value!!!!!!
> 
> 1 Billion Toman when dollar was 1000 toman is CLEARLY different than 1 Billion Toman when dollar is 7000 toman
> 
> Which makes those figures irrelevant even in terms of Gross Revenue let alone net profit!


Currency rate as an excuse for decreasing of bugets which are being payed with RIAL is nothing but deception.

Government pays it's organizations' budget with Rial which even had more than previous governments so don't repeat this nonsense again.

Also it's better to check the dollar's rate at the time the 1393 budget bill was proposed, so that you would know what you said are nothing but lame excuses.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Currency rate as an excuse for decreasing of bugets which are being payed with RIAL is nothing but deception.
> 
> Government pays it's organizations' budget with Rial which even had more than previous governments so don't repeat this nonsense again.
> 
> Also it's better to check the dollar's rate at the time the 1393 budget bill was proposed, so that you would know what you said are nothing but lame excuses.



The deception is YOURS! Oil is internationally priced by USD value NOT Iranian currency Rial!
Cost of each barrel of Iranian Oil exported does not fall simply because Iran's currency value falls!

So the deception here is your! Your trying to fix the numbers in your favor and you think people are IDIOTS!

Since Oil is priced by US Dollar, the only figure that matters is how many Billion's of Dollars of Oil Iran sold during Ahamdi presidency as appose Rohani Presidency and of the Oil sold how much of it was actually net profit

You really don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that!

If each barrel of Oil cost Iran $15 to produce your profit when selling it for $50 USD is only $35 USD per barrel as appose to $85 USD of profit when your selling it for $100 USD!!!

So you see even if in USD value we sold $40 Billion USD of Oil every year during both administrations the actual profit the government got during the Ahmadi Administration would have been FAR MORE and easily more than twice as much!!!!!!!!!!!! 

And since Oil is an international commodity the ONLY number that matters is how many Billions of DOLLARS of Oil was exported during each administration vs how many barrels of oil and how much of it was actually profit!!!!!!!

And due to the instability of Iran's currency how many Billions of Rial's of Oil sold is IRELIVENT because Oil prices do NOT fluctuate on the international market based on Iranian currency value! So either your an Idiot OR you think everyone else is!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> The deception is YOURS! Oil is internationally priced by USD value NOT Iranian currency Rial!
> Cost of each barrel of Iranian Oil exported does not fall simply because Iran's currency value falls!
> 
> So the deception here is your! Your trying to fix the numbers in your favor and you think people are IDIOTS!
> 
> Since Oil is priced by US Dollar, the only figure that matters is how many Billion's of Dollars of Oil Iran sold during Ahamdi presidency as appose Rohani Presidency and of the Oil sold how much of it was actually net profit
> 
> You really don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that!
> 
> If each barrel of Oil cost Iran $15 to produce your profit when selling it for $50 USD is only $35 USD per barrel as appose to $85 USD of profit when your selling it for $100 USD!!!
> 
> So you see even if in USD value we sold $40 Billion USD of Oil every year during both administrations the actual profit the government got during the Ahmadi Administration would have been FAR MORE and easily more than twice as much!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> And since Oil is an international commodity the ONLY number that matters is how many Billions of DOLLARS of Oil was exported during each administration vs how many barrels of oil and how much of it was actually profit!!!!!!!
> 
> And due to the instability of Iran's currency how many Billions of Rial's of Oil sold is IRELIVENT because Oil prices do NOT fluctuate on the international market based on Iranian currency value! So either your an Idiot OR you think everyone else is!


First of all, oil price was more than $100 when the 1393 budget bill was proposed (jan 2014), so your whole discussion is a lie and deception from the beginning:
*Average Crude Oil Spot Price (Monthly, USD per Barrel) - YCharts*





secondly, Rouhani sold it's oil dollars to people with higher rate, that's why his Rial revenue didn't decrease, but even increased:




So if you are not a troll and still can't understand this very simple fact, then get your brain examined.


----------



## Raghfarm007

Mohsen, if you cant understand simple things in the economy....there is no poing wasting time on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> First of all, oil price was more than $100 when the 1393 budget bill was proposed (jan 2014), so your whole discussion is a lie and deception from the beginning:
> *Average Crude Oil Spot Price (Monthly, USD per Barrel) - YCharts*
> View attachment 489321
> 
> 
> secondly, Rouhani sold it's oil dollars to people with higher rate, that's why his Rial revenue didn't decrease, but even increased:
> 
> 
> 
> .



STOP posting NONSENSE!!!!! 

If your after facts go pull up the following 

1. How many Billion of *DOLLARS *of Oil Iran exported every year in the past 2 decades 
2. How many Barrels of Oil Iran exported each Year in the past 2 decades 
3. What is the average price of "Iranian" crude Oil averaged out per quarter of each year every year in the past 2 decades.

*Without all of those facts your numbers are nothing but delusional propaganda!!!!!!*!

ONLY AN IDIOT would think the idiotic chart you keep posting that's purely based how many billion of Toman (Rial) of Oil was sold during each administration has any meaning what so ever!!!!!

Clearly your oil exports when calculated in Iranian currency value is going to be far different when your currency is priced at 300 Toman per dollar as appose to 1000 toman per dollar as appose to 3000 toman per dollar or 7000 toman per dollar!!!!!

And clearly the extra money you have to spend is going to be far different when your selling your Oil for $100 PB as appose to $50 pb!

Which means your chart was specifically created to target IDIOTS and spread absurd propaganda among IDIOTS that are incapable of thinking for themselves because if the truth actually supported your delusional claims then you'd have no trouble posting the real facts rather than an absurd chart like that!

FYI governments proposed budgets are based on predictions they make and just because an Iranian administration proposes a budget based on 3500 toman USD value or $70 PB crude value doesn't mean that's how much US Dollar or crude will be valued at all throughout the coming year!!!! It's NOTHING but a prediction!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> STOP posting NONSENSE!!!!!
> 
> If your after facts go pull up the following
> 
> 1. How many Billion of *DOLLARS *of Oil Iran exported every year in the past 2 decades
> 2. How many Barrels of Oil Iran exported each Year in the past 2 decades
> 3. What is the average price of "Iranian" crude Oil averaged out per quarter of each year every year in the past 2 decades.
> 
> *Without all of those facts your numbers are nothing but delusional propaganda!!!!!!*!
> 
> ONLY AN IDIOT would think the idiotic chart you keep posting that's purely based how many billion of Toman (Rial) of Oil was sold during each administration has any meaning what so ever!!!!!
> 
> Clearly your oil exports when calculated in Iranian currency value is going to be far different when your currency is priced at 300 Toman per dollar as appose to 1000 toman per dollar as appose to 3000 toman per dollar or 7000 toman per dollar!!!!!
> 
> And clearly the extra money you have to spend is going to be far different when your selling your Oil for $100 PB as appose to $50 pb!
> 
> Which means your chart was specifically created to target IDIOTS and spread absurd propaganda among IDIOTS that are incapable of thinking for themselves because if the truth actually supported your delusional claims then you'd have no trouble posting the real facts rather than an absurd chart like that!
> 
> FYI governments proposed budgets are based on predictions they make and just because an Iranian administration proposes a budget based on 3500 toman USD value or $70 PB crude value doesn't mean that's how much US Dollar or crude will be valued at all throughout the coming year!!!! It's NOTHING but a prediction!


About your last paragraph, in 1393 budget bill, oil was predicted as $100, 5 dollar higher than previous year, and dollar's rate was defined even higher to make more rial revenue (as it has been always), so there was no excuse whatsoever to decrease the proposed budget for defense ministry by 85%.

*شش ویژگی بودجه سال93 - روزنامه دنیای اقتصاد
*
though I know you would deny the statistics, after all, baseless words are the base of trolling!


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> About your last paragraph, in 1393 budget bill, oil was predicted as $100, 5 dollar higher than previous year, and dollar's rate was defined even higher to make more rial revenue (as it has been always), so there was no excuse whatsoever to decrease the proposed budget for defense ministry by 85%.
> 
> *شش ویژگی بودجه سال93 - روزنامه دنیای اقتصاد*
> 
> though I know you would deny the statistics, after all, baseless words are the base of trolling!



My GOD! You can't take 1 fact and ignore everything else!!!!!!
If in 2014 due to U.S. sanctions Iranian Oil exports were predicted to be cut by well over 50% in terms of # barrels of Oil exported then yes even if you predict $100 PB oil you'll still have to make major cuts!!! 

And again with this 85% cut!!!!!! IRAN'S overall Military budget was not reduced at all!!!!!!!!

Which means what got allocated under Ministry of Defense budget under the Ahmadi administration was completely different than what gets allocated under the Rohani Administration!!!!!! 
For example one administration allocates troop paychecks under the Ministry of Defense budget while the other administration chooses to remove Troop paychecks from MOD budget and chooses to budget them separately and one administration chooses to budget worker paychecks & benefits that go to government workers that work for government owned defense companies under the MOD budget while another administration chooses to budget them separately one administration chooses to put the budget for ettelaati-Tabligoti under the MOD budget while another administration chooses NOT to do so (These are just examples!)

But when you have an 85% cut in the MOD budget with no actual reduction in your overall military spending it means good or bad all that's really happened is a change in the way they allocate military spending NOTHING MORE!!!!!

Clearly from the looks of it the Rohani administration wanted more control over how Iran's military spends it's money now if that's a good thing or bad thing that depends on what kind of President Iran has!

I personally think the way Rohani has allocated defense spending will ONLY be good for Iran if Iran has a President who has the foresight to see and understand that Iran's Military Industry needs to be the cornerstone of Science, Technology & Industrial development in Iran *but sadly from what I have seen from Rohani so far he is NOT that man and neither was Ahmadinejad!!!!!!!!!!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> My GOD! You can't take 1 fact and ignore everything else!!!!!!
> If in 2014 due to U.S. sanctions Iranian Oil exports were predicted to be cut by well over 50% in terms of # barrels of Oil exported then yes even if you predict $100 PB oil you'll still have to make major cuts!!!
> 
> And again with this 85% cut!!!!!! IRAN'S overall Military budget was not reduced at all!!!!!!!!
> 
> Which means what got allocated under Ministry of Defense budget under the Ahmadi administration was completely different than what gets allocated under the Rohani Administration!!!!!!
> For example one administration allocates troop paychecks under the Ministry of Defense budget while the other administration chooses to remove Troop paychecks from MOD budget and chooses to budget them separately and one administration chooses to budget worker paychecks & benefits that go to government workers that work for government owned defense companies under the MOD budget while another administration chooses to budget them separately one administration chooses to put the budget for ettelaati-Tabligoti under the MOD budget while another administration chooses NOT to do so (These are just examples!)
> 
> But when you have an 85% cut in the MOD budget with no actual reduction in your overall military spending it means good or bad all that's really happened is a change in the way they allocate military spending NOTHING MORE!!!!!
> 
> Clearly from the looks of it the Rohani administration wanted more control over how Iran's military spends it's money now if that's a good thing or bad thing that depends on what kind of President Iran has!
> 
> I personally think the way Rohani has allocated defense spending will ONLY be good for Iran if Iran has a President who has the foresight to see and understand that Iran's Military Industry needs to be the cornerstone of Science, Technology & Industrial development in Iran *but sadly from what I have seen from Rohani so far he is NOT that man and neither was Ahmadinejad!!!!!!!!!!!*


The funny thing is that I already gave the link to the reformist economic newspaper which says based on the proposed budget bill, everything is going to be better, both oil production and price, but still you talk about another preduction!

Perhaps you have lived in a parallel universe, but certainly not this one!


----------



## Sina-1

@mohsen your political agenda is very clear to all of us. Frankly 98% don’t care. At least not on a forum and especially not this one. I ask you to kindly please stop filling all the military threads with politics. The threads have specific topics so that to create order. The current situation is very chaotic and thus very disturbing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> The funny thing is that I already gave the link to the reformist economic newspaper which says based on the proposed budget bill, everything is going to be better, both oil production and price, but still you talk about another preduction!
> 
> Perhaps you have lived in a parallel universe, but certainly not this one!



Yea I live in a universe where in 2014 Iran not only sold far less oil than any year under Ahmadi but the overall average of Iranian oil was priced less than and sold for less than any year under Ahmadi!
And those are the facts in my universe and in my universe FACT are what matter not peoples predictions regardless of their political party!!!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Sina-1 said:


> @mohsen your political agenda is very clear to all of us. Frankly 98% don’t care. At least not on a forum and especially not this one. I ask you to kindly please stop filling all the military threads with politics. The threads have specific topics so that to create order. The current situation is very chaotic and thus very disturbing.


When politics is the one which funds for military projects, and the cause of delays, then you can't isolate it from your military threads. after several years, the only new news about IRIF is re unveiling of a missile, and you want to ignore the cause?!

Also, what I said here was more history facts rather than politics, but cause it's against some people's political agenda, some don't like it and some try to ridiculously alter the history!



VEVAK said:


> Yea I live in a universe where in 2014 Iran not only sold far less oil than any year under Ahmadi but the overall average of Iranian oil was priced less than and sold for less than any year under Ahmadi!
> And those are the facts in my universe and in my universe FACT are what matter not peoples predictions regardless of their political party!!!!!!!!!!


The fact is that the government reduced the defense ministry's budget before the oil crisis, so even if oil price and production would increase by 1000000000000000000000%, nothing would had changed.

Simply this government didn't wanted to allocate any money to military R&D and production, and as I said before government's Rial revenue didn't decrease.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## un4given.1991

Unveiling a new fighter on August 22 (cant post the orginal link) - telegram channel: @iranian_defensive_power

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

un4given.1991 said:


> Unveiling a new fighter on August 22 (cant post the orginal link) - telegram channel: @iranian_defensive_power



Unfortunately, it will probably just be the trainer jet they have been working on. (Kowsar).

Could also be the next prototype version of Qaher (unlikely) or a prototype of the IRGC fighter jet (also unlikely since project was announced less than 2 years ago).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

@un4given.1991

Iran's defense minister on national tv channel 1:
This fighter aircraft *will fly* on 31 Mordad (22 August ) and everyone will see it fly !


*تمرکز و اولویت ما روی قدرت موشکی است/ جنگنده جدید 31 مردادماه رونمایی خواهد شد*

امیر خاتمی درخصوص حوزه هوایی نیز گفت: یک هواپیمایی ارائه خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف را طی کرده و روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز می کند و مردم شاهد پرواز این هواپیمای جنگنده و پشتیبانی نزدیک خواهند دید که در کنارش اقلامی که برای ساخت آن استفاده شده را نیز مشاهده می‌کنند.

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970527001235/تمرکز-و-اولویت-ما-روی-قدرت-موشکی-است--جنگنده-جدید-3-مردادماه-رونمایی

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

pin gu said:


> @un4given.1991
> 
> Iran's defense minister on national tv channel 1:
> This fighter airplane *will fly* on 31 Mordad (22 August ) and everyone will see it fly !
> 
> 
> *تمرکز و اولویت ما روی قدرت موشکی است/ جنگنده جدید 31 مردادماه رونمایی خواهد شد*
> 
> امیر خاتمی درخصوص حوزه هوایی نیز گفت: یک هواپیمایی ارائه خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف را طی کرده و روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز می کند و مردم شاهد پرواز این هواپیمای جنگنده و پشتیبانی نزدیک خواهند دید که در کنارش اقلامی که برای ساخت آن استفاده شده را نیز مشاهده می‌کنند.
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970527001235/تمرکز-و-اولویت-ما-روی-قدرت-موشکی-است--جنگنده-جدید-3-مردادماه-رونمایی


With the amount of stress he made on and the people see it will fly its probably qaher . he is talking about . I doubt there is any doubt about any other other conventional designed airplane of Iran being able to fly.


----------



## pin gu

Hack-Hook said:


> With the amount of stress he made on and the people see it will fly its probably qaher . he is talking about . I doubt there is any doubt about any other other conventional designed airplane of Iran being able to fly.



In past couple of years Qaher project was in the shadow what changed all of the sudden ?

وزیر دفاع ادامه داد: انشا الله در روز 31 مرداداز هواپیمایی رونمایی خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف خود را طی کرده است و در روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز خواهد کرد و مردم شاهد یک هواپیمای جنگنده برای پشتیبانی نزدیک از نیروهای مسلح خواهند بود . هواپیمایی هم که چندی پیش شاهد تاکسی کردن آن بودیم هم مراحل پایانی آن به سرعت در حال انجام است.

It seems its not Qaher !

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ی-است-دقت-روی-رادارگریزی-و-سامانه-های-ضد-موشک


----------



## Cthulhu

pin gu said:


> In past couple of years Qaher project was in the shadow what changed all of the sudden ?
> 
> وزیر دفاع ادامه داد: انشا الله در روز 31 مرداداز هواپیمایی رونمایی خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف خود را طی کرده است و در روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز خواهد کرد و مردم شاهد یک هواپیمای جنگنده برای پشتیبانی نزدیک از نیروهای مسلح خواهند بود . هواپیمایی هم که چندی پیش شاهد تاکسی کردن آن بودیم هم مراحل پایانی آن به سرعت در حال انجام است.
> 
> It seems its not Qaher !
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/05/28/1806043/وزیر-دفاع-تمرکز-ایران-روی-ارتقای-توان-موشکی-است-دقت-روی-رادارگریزی-و-سامانه-های-ضد-موشک


Why are you saying it's not Qaher?


----------



## pin gu

@Cthulhu
These two sentences
1انشا الله در روز 31 مرداداز هواپیمایی رونمایی خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف خود را طی کرده است و در روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز خواهد کرد و مردم شاهد یک هواپیمای جنگنده برای پشتیبانی نزدیک از نیروهای مسلح خواهند بود

2هواپیمایی هم که چندی پیش شاهد تاکسی کردن آن بودیم هم مراحل پایانی آن به سرعت در حال انجام است.

number 2 is Qaher and 1 is something else ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> With the amount of stress he made on and the people see it will fly its probably qaher . he is talking about . I doubt there is any doubt about any other other conventional designed airplane of Iran being able to fly.



You seem to forget that Koswar trainer is near completion.

Iran actually has several aircraft projects:

*two fighter jets models that have shown off at multiple parades.
*Sofreh Mahi project
*RQ-170 large bomber project
*IRGC close air support project
*Heavy fighter project
*trainer project (kowsar)
*Qaher

Furthermore, we were given an update on F-313 in Jan by former DM Daghean who said the project is in fast taxi stages along with pre-flight tests he ALSO mentioned the Kowsar trainer and said that was getting ready for its first flight tests.

So since Qaher wasn’t mentioned DIRECTLY by name given how much of a high profile project it is, this points to a lesser project being unveiled.

Furthermore, if Qaher was flying it would be announced much earlier than a week before the event.

This is just a theory, but I think Qaher size will eventually have to be increase by 150-170%! 

Why? Daghean recently said it is supposed to be a CAS fighter and with its current internal bay it barely carry one LARGE ordnance. 

Thus why even have a internal bay? Why even be a CAS fighter? 

Thus the frame of that aircraft and its airtakes will have to be enlarged. Iran is developing a heavy turbojet engine, it’s possible Qaher will be equipped with those engines. (reverse engineered J-79s?)

I think the Qaher project is a ways away from reality. I said it when it first was unveiled back on IMF, that seeing the plane in final prototype stage prior to 2022 was unrealistic. 

I still think Qaher deployment prior to 2025 is unrealistic, especially with the fiscal pressures that have been on the government (funding Syrian war, expanding facilities in Syria, sanctions, etc). 

This is all speculation assuming that the military has green light the project to move further along.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

pin gu said:


> @Cthulhu
> These two sentences
> 1انشا الله در روز 31 مرداداز هواپیمایی رونمایی خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف خود را طی کرده است و در روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز خواهد کرد و مردم شاهد یک هواپیمای جنگنده برای پشتیبانی نزدیک از نیروهای مسلح خواهند بود
> 
> 2هواپیمایی هم که چندی پیش شاهد تاکسی کردن آن بودیم هم مراحل پایانی آن به سرعت در حال انجام است.
> 
> number 2 is Qaher and 1 is something else ...



It’s Koswar project, for what it’s worth even Babak T. Is saying that Kowsar is what will be unveiled. He even posted a video of it on Twitter. It is probably the most further along fighter jet project iran currently has.

Unfortunately it is nothing more than another Ashkharash, Simorgh, Saeghe I&II project which means that a handful of F-5’s will be used to create these trainers.

Iran’s obsession with F-5’s will never end apparently. Even Qaher is like a F-5 in terms of size.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

A defense ministry project which has went trough several stages.

This must be the Qaher. Kowsar is no fighter jet.

Anything else like a large fighter is very unlikely: It could be expected if it would be an IRGC SSJ project while we can't expect something like that from the IRIAF SSJ. But its a defense ministry thing here, on the defense ministry/industry day, so their own pet, the Qaher is the most likely candidate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

pin gu said:


> In past couple of years Qaher project was in the shadow what changed all of the sudden ?


Have you heard anything about any other project for example new development on radars or fateh family missile. 
by the way I wonder if anybody even had doubt that Kowsar can fly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

Hack-Hook said:


> Have you heard anything about any other project for example new development on radars or fateh family missile.
> by the way I wonder if anybody even had doubt that Kowsar can fly.



Unfortunately I'm not following news recently(about missiles and radars ) whats going on ?. this week I was little bit into watching documentaries about jet engines

@Hack-Hook @PeeD @TheImmortal @VEVAK
@Cthulhu 

Spending on which one of these two options makes more sense to you guys ? and why ?

1. low cost stealth aircraft

2. trainer/prototype of new generation of heavy aircraft


I would be glad to know your opinions here .


...
and I have a question about Kowsar too . right after our Russian partners pulled out from Kowsar project they introduced a new trainer what was that ?


----------



## Hack-Hook

pin gu said:


> Unfortunately I'm not following news recently(about missiles and radars ) whats going on ?. this week I was little bit into watching documentaries about jet engines
> 
> @Hack-Hook @PeeD @TheImmortal @VEVAK
> @Cthulhu
> 
> Spending on which one of these two options makes more sense to you guys ? and why ?
> 
> 1. low cost stealth aircraft
> 
> 2. trainer/prototype of new generation of heavy aircraft
> 
> 
> I would be glad to know your opinions here .
> 
> 
> ...
> and I have a question about Kowsar too . right after our Russian partners pulled out from Kowsar project they introduced a new trainer what was that ?


That was Shafaq not Kowsar and It was a joint project to produce m-ATF

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

So F-313 will be fly at 22nd of August?


----------



## PeeD

So its not a armed Kowsar. But it could be just a close support aircraft; probably means subsonic, no radar.
A Kowsar like Su-25? Is that a good idea in times of drones? IRGC-ASF might have pushed for something like that to replace their Su-25 given to Iraq.

So I hope not that this is what they want to show.
But as the Qaher 313 is also described as close support aircraft, there is still a slim chance. But as he said it is new, with a new name and will be unveiled... it again hints to a Su-25/Kowsar hybrid requested by the IRGC-ASF.

Lets see.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ANDROMEDA

07_SeppDietrich said:


> So F-313 will be fly at 22nd of August?


Doesn't seem so.probably kowsar training/light fighter aircraft which might be equipped with canon and some air to ground weapons.


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

ANDROMEDA said:


> Doesn't seem so.probably kowsar training/light fighter aircraft which might be equipped with canon and some air to ground weapons.


Can't wait to see it,i hope it's F-313


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> So its not a armed Kowsar. But it could be just a close support aircraft; probably means subsonic, no radar.
> A Kowsar like Su-25? Is that a good idea in times of drones? IRGC-ASF might have pushed for something like that to replace their Su-25 given to Iraq.
> 
> So I hope not that this is what they want to show.
> But as the Qaher 313 is also described as close support aircraft, there is still a slim chance. But as he said it is new, with a new name and will be unveiled... it again hints to a Su-25/Kowsar hybrid requested by the IRGC-ASF.
> 
> Lets see.


He called it a fighter and close support aircraft, so it can't be kowsar for sure.

also he said the other one is a training aircraft, if it's Qaher, then what happened to it's close support role, though calling a single seat aircraft a training aircraft is bizarre too.

If they are going to use the owj engines in this one too, then it would be an ultra ridiculous move to design another close support aircraft without a radar too, cause basically it would be just another F5, or if it has stealth characteristics another Qaher.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

mohsen said:


> He called it a fighter and close support aircraft, so it can't be kowsar for sure.
> 
> also he said the other one is a training aircraft, if it's Qaher, then what happened to it's close support role, though calling a single seat aircraft a training aircraft is bizarre too.
> 
> If they are going to use the owj engines in this one too, then it would be an ultra ridiculous move to design another close support aircraft without a radar too, cause basically it would be just another F5, or if it has stealth characteristics another Qaher.



I propose again my hypothesis (photoshop) realized in 2017, when the Kowsar was presented.
Starting from the Kowsar structure, a light attack aircraft could be extrapolated with the appropriate adaptations.










Kowsar is a low-cost and risk alternative.
Certainly for a Close Air Support (CAS), it is quick to use the normal trainer version.
If you want to make a Lightweight Strike Aircraft in a single seat version, there is certainly an additional cost for a partial rearrangement of the front including weight re-calculation, however, eliminating the posterior pilot seat, you could expand the fuel tank.
Then we should know, the number of Hardpoints and capacity of Kg / pounds, are already provided on the Trainer version, to evaluate, if considered insufficient, a possible recalculation of the wing structure to increase capacity

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> I propose again my hypothesis (photoshop) realized in 2017, when the Kowsar was presented.
> Starting from the Kowsar structure, a light attack aircraft could be extrapolated with the appropriate adaptations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar is a low-cost and risk alternative.
> Certainly for a Close Air Support (CAS), it is quick to use the normal trainer version.
> If you want to make a Lightweight Strike Aircraft in a single seat version, there is certainly an additional cost for a partial rearrangement of the front including weight re-calculation, however, eliminating the posterior pilot seat, you could expand the fuel tank.
> Then we should know, the number of Hardpoints and capacity of Kg / pounds, are already provided on the Trainer version, to evaluate, if considered insufficient, a possible recalculation of the wing structure to increase capacity



Let’s be honest this trainer is garbage, just another reincarnated F-5.

It will not get anywhere other than maybe 7-12 being made as a test squadron.

IRGC is already working on a CAS plane from experiences gained From Syrian civil war.

Neither IRGC or Iran airforce will accept this project.



mohsen said:


> He called it a fighter and close support aircraft, so it can't be kowsar for sure.



It’s Kowsar which is an DM project. It was already unveiled last year and now will make its official flight.

Expecting anything such as a completely new fighter or F-313 is unrealistic at this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parsipride

sahureka2 said:


> I propose again my hypothesis (photoshop) realized in 2017, when the Kowsar was presented.
> Starting from the Kowsar structure, a light attack aircraft could be extrapolated with the appropriate adaptations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar is a low-cost and risk alternative.
> Certainly for a Close Air Support (CAS), it is quick to use the normal trainer version.
> If you want to make a Lightweight Strike Aircraft in a single seat version, there is certainly an additional cost for a partial rearrangement of the front including weight re-calculation, however, eliminating the posterior pilot seat, you could expand the fuel tank.
> Then we should know, the number of Hardpoints and capacity of Kg / pounds, are already provided on the Trainer version, to evaluate, if considered insufficient, a possible recalculation of the wing structure to increase capacity




It will a repainted 1960's SU22 dubbed "Boomi" , and they will probably call it Majali after Ali's horse. Then a regime' mouth piece will call it logistic aircraft because he is illiterate and does not understand the real meaning of the word. He will go on and tell us about its stealth technologies and how it is one most advanced aircraft in the world and how warriors of the revolution will challenge the American Hornets.

Finally, you will have some tug portraying to be an expert tell us about the thousands of hours of man power it took to turn these flying hunks of shit into 6th generation aircraft and Iran has now joined the ranks of the top producers of fighter jets in the world.


----------



## PeeD

Its not the Kowsar, so much is sure from the interview.


----------



## sahureka2

garbage !, re-edition of the F-5!

it would still be a start in making a national plane in series.
However, up to this point, a engine of adequate power will not be available, it will not be possible to achieve something higher in terms of performance.
therefore at the moment I prefer to have something simple with honest performances (even if you call it garbage), but new and realizing all the components at home, that soon because of the aging of the airplanes have nothing.

However, August 22 is close, will surprise us with a presentation in flight, or will still be presented an aircraft that moves on the track?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Its not the Kowsar, so much is sure from the interview.



The last possible option is “Sofreh Mahi” project which dates back to 2010(possibly earlier)

By 2012 it had reached 1/7th scale mock up testing and was going to be tested at close to scale mock-up before being sent to DM for production.

People forget that this was THE leading fighter jet project in Iran R&D prior to Qaher being shown in 2013.

There has certainly been enough time to get a flying prototype of Sofreh Mahi ready since intial mock up unveiling (2010).






Lastly it could be revival of Shafagh project or Saeghe III.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

Something is going on at the air force.
https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/05/28/1806984/انتصاب-فرمانده-جدید-نیروی-هوایی-ارتش-با-حکم-فرمانده-معظم-کل-قوا


----------



## yavar




----------



## sahureka2

_whatever the new plane, Hatami in the interview states
*fighter jet flying*

“A plane, which has passed several stages, will be presented on the Defense Industry Day and people will see the fighter jet flying from a close distance as well as the equipment used for its manufacture.”
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/08/19/571595/Iran-defense-Amir-Hatami_

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

pin gu said:


> In past couple of years Qaher project was in the shadow what changed all of the sudden ?
> 
> وزیر دفاع ادامه داد: انشا الله در روز 31 مرداداز هواپیمایی رونمایی خواهد شد که مراحل مختلف خود را طی کرده است و در روز صنعت دفاعی پرواز خواهد کرد و مردم شاهد یک هواپیمای جنگنده برای پشتیبانی نزدیک از نیروهای مسلح خواهند بود . هواپیمایی هم که چندی پیش شاهد تاکسی کردن آن بودیم هم مراحل پایانی آن به سرعت در حال انجام است.
> 
> It seems its not Qaher !
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/05/28/1806043/وزیر-دفاع-تمرکز-ایران-روی-ارتقای-توان-موشکی-است-دقت-روی-رادارگریزی-و-سامانه-های-ضد-موشک









https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دیدترین-جنگنده-ایرانی-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود


It's a Close Air Support fighter!!! 

Not a stealth fighter or an Air superiority fighter or a long range bomber!!!

I personally think is a complete waist of time and money for Iran to waist time on light close Air support fighters in a country the size of Iran and Iranian military leaders should have learned that lesson in the Iran-Iraq war where what required 40 F-5's to accomplish could have been done with 10-12 F-4's



With the threat from the New U.S. administration if it was up to me I would mainly be focusing on the following

1.Increasing production of Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfagar to a mass production rate of 1000 of each per year.

2.In terms of liquid fuel Ballistic Missiles Iran should focus on wider diameter BM equipped with MIRV
For example with the right MIRV on the Khorramshar producing 50 of them per year will be equivalent to producing 200 Emad in terms of payload delivery to targets beyond 1500km so over all I may even reduce production or cancel production of some liquid fuel missiles to be replaced by more economically sound and more capable missiles 

3.In terms of Solid Fuel Iran still needs a 1.5 stage missiles with a 1st stage solid fuel booster that's heavier than the Zolfaghar but is about half the weight of the Sejil-2 built for hitting targets between 800-1700km with a cep of under 50 meters and a 800-1000lb payload (Something similar to the Pershing2)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Avicenna

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 493106
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دیدترین-جنگنده-ایرانی-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود
> 
> 
> It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!
> 
> Not a stealth fighter or an Air superiority fighter or a long range bomber!!!
> 
> I personally think is a complete waist of time and money for Iran to waist time on light close Air support fighters in a country the size of Iran and Iranian military leaders should have learned that lesson in the Iran-Iraq war where what required 40 F-5's to accomplish could have been done with 10-12 F-4's
> 
> 
> 
> With the threat from the New U.S. administration if it was up to me I would mainly be focusing on the following
> 
> 1.Increasing production of Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfagar to a mass production rate of 1000 of each per year.
> 
> 2.In terms of liquid fuel Ballistic Missiles Iran should focus on wider diameter BM equipped with MIRV
> For example with the right MIRV on the Khorramshar producing 50 of them per year will be equivalent to producing 200 Emad in terms of payload delivery to targets beyond 1500km so over all I may even reduce production or cancel production of some liquid fuel missiles to be replaced by more economically sound and more capable missiles
> 
> 3.In terms of Solid Fuel Iran still needs a 1.5 stage missiles with a 1st stage solid fuel booster that's heavier than the Zolfaghar but is about half the weight of the Sejil-2 built for hitting targets between 800-1700km with a cep of under 50 meters and a 800-1000lb payload (Something similar to the Pershing2)



Iran needs aircraft that can hope to protect Iranian air space.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 493106
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دیدترین-جنگنده-ایرانی-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود
> 
> 
> It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!
> 
> Not a stealth fighter or an Air superiority fighter or a long range bomber!!!
> 
> I personally think is a complete waist of time and money for Iran to waist time on light close Air support fighters in a country the size of Iran and Iranian military leaders should have learned that lesson in the Iran-Iraq war where what required 40 F-5's to accomplish could have been done with 10-12 F-4's
> 
> 
> 
> With the threat from the New U.S. administration if it was up to me I would mainly be focusing on the following
> 
> 1.Increasing production of Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfagar to a mass production rate of 1000 of each per year.
> 
> 2.In terms of liquid fuel Ballistic Missiles Iran should focus on wider diameter BM equipped with MIRV
> For example with the right MIRV on the Khorramshar producing 50 of them per year will be equivalent to producing 200 Emad in terms of payload delivery to targets beyond 1500km so over all I may even reduce production or cancel production of some liquid fuel missiles to be replaced by more economically sound and more capable missiles
> 
> 3.In terms of Solid Fuel Iran still needs a 1.5 stage missiles with a 1st stage solid fuel booster that's heavier than the Zolfaghar but is about half the weight of the Sejil-2 built for hitting targets between 800-1700km with a cep of under 50 meters and a 800-1000lb payload (Something similar to the Pershing2)



If it can be a naval attack fighter, it will fill a need nitch.

Iran would be attacked from some carrier group. Can these fighters can deploy antiship missiles.

50 fighters launching multiple antiship missiles at a carrier group at the same time would be a joy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 493106
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دیدترین-جنگنده-ایرانی-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود
> 
> 
> It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!
> 
> Not a stealth fighter or an Air superiority fighter or a long range bomber!!!
> 
> I personally think is a complete waist of time and money for Iran to waist time on light close Air support fighters in a country the size of Iran and Iranian military leaders should have learned that lesson in the Iran-Iraq war where what required 40 F-5's to accomplish could have been done with 10-12 F-4's
> 
> 
> 
> With the threat from the New U.S. administration if it was up to me I would mainly be focusing on the following
> 
> 1.Increasing production of Fatteh-110, Fatteh-313 & Zolfagar to a mass production rate of 1000 of each per year.
> 
> 2.In terms of liquid fuel Ballistic Missiles Iran should focus on wider diameter BM equipped with MIRV
> For example with the right MIRV on the Khorramshar producing 50 of them per year will be equivalent to producing 200 Emad in terms of payload delivery to targets beyond 1500km so over all I may even reduce production or cancel production of some liquid fuel missiles to be replaced by more economically sound and more capable missiles
> 
> 3.In terms of Solid Fuel Iran still needs a 1.5 stage missiles with a 1st stage solid fuel booster that's heavier than the Zolfaghar but is about half the weight of the Sejil-2 built for hitting targets between 800-1700km with a cep of under 50 meters and a 800-1000lb payload (Something similar to the Pershing2)



looks like everyone agreed that it must be something similar to F-5 .


*"It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!"*

UAVs can be used for this role too . they are cheaper and in long term you will save much more resource by using them so why building low cost fighter jets is approved ?

the only logical reason I can come up with is fighter jets unlike UAVs are moral boosters for your ground forces and moral crushers for enemy forces .I know its a double edge sword but as long as your enemy have same level technology or lower than yours it could be a very useful tool .



Hack-Hook said:


> That was Shafaq not Kowsar and It was a joint project to produce m-ATF



After that they unveiled Yak-130 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

People seem to forget before Koswar was unveiled there was a project called Borhan (B-92) which was a modified fighter from Shafagh project.






We expected Borhan to be unveiled at time of Kowsar (~2 yrs) ago but instead got Kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> People seem to forget before Koswar was unveiled there was a project called Borhan (B-92) which was a modified fighter from Shafagh project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We expected Borhan to be unveiled at time of Kowsar (~2 yrs) ago but instead got Kowsar.



wasnt Borhan in cooperation with Russia, but they backed out of it? (they didnt delivered the engines..)


----------



## Arminkh

yavar said:


>


I think there is a high chance it could be Qaher - 313.

Did Kosar ever taxi? because the anchor asks DM "Is this the same airplane that did taxi recently?" DM answers "No it is another airplane. The one that did taxi is a training jet which is also in the final stages of development."

Qaher is not a training jet.


----------



## zectech

pin gu said:


> looks like everyone agreed that it must be something similar to F-5 .
> 
> 
> *"It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!"*



Something like an upgraded SU-25 would be a great first real plane for mass production in Iran. Russia still produces fourth gen close air support SU-25s. They should be inexpensive at 5-10 million pound sterling per plane considering the cost of the Russian ones.

Syria would certainly be a customer needing some Iranian versions of the S-300s (Bavar-373) along with Iranian versions of the SU-25s. 

If it is supersonic and more like the SU-34 than the SU-25, capable of air superiority too, Iran is well under way in their fighter development.

Being about to produce a 4th generation fighter puts Iran in a small club of nations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

im not really expecting something "groundbreaking"
I think Iran still needs, at least, an decade to produce something complicated like an fighter
maybe there is some secret russian cooperation regarding the engines..


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> wasnt Borhan in cooperation with Russia, but they backed out of it? (they didnt delivered the engines..)



No, Borhan is what came out of that project. It was an Iranian attempt to modernize the Shafagh fighter. It was supposedly going to use J-85 engines.

Last update I believe was 2015 when it was undergoing last stages of tests before flight.



Arminkh said:


> I think there is a high chance it could be Qaher - 313.
> 
> Did Kosar ever taxi? because the anchor asks DM "Is this the same airplane that did taxi recently?" DM answers "No it is another airplane. The one that did taxi is a training jet which is also in the final stages of development."
> 
> Qaher is not a training jet.



Yes Kosar taxi’d last year. And even did full engine test while stationary on runway. In some regards it’s way ahead of Qaher project.

If it was Qaher he would mention it by name as it is a very well known project.


It is likely Borhan project that will be unveiled, we been waiting for it.



Draco.IMF said:


> im not really expecting something "groundbreaking"
> I think Iran still needs, at least, an decade to produce something complicated like an fighter
> maybe there is some secret russian cooperation regarding the engines..



A Borhan project makes sense since it would be very similar to a YAK-130. It would be an Advance Trainer + a close air support aicraft.

Thus Kosar and Borhan will fulfill the trainer roles (light and advance respectively) and Borhan will additionally be used as close air support fighter.

If Borhan like Kosar uses F-5 body then it reduces building costs even further and allows for modernization of F-5 force into something that is actually useful rather than a 1950’s era aircraft.

Eventually the entire F-5 force will fall into 3 modernization “blocks”: Kosar, Borhan, and Saeghe III/IV

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Borhan is a reasonable option. However it didn't look serious enough in terms of support and as Kowsar was ahead in development one would have to ask why they go for two different trainers.

Whether a single engine CAS aircraft is robust enough.

Maybe the IRGC witnessed the value Syrian L-39 had in Syria and pushed for something like it because Kowsar is too light for that role.
But again: Qaher was also called close support aircraft. So it is still open.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

VEVAK said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دیدترین-جنگنده-ایرانی-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود
> 
> 
> It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!
> 
> Not a stealth fighter or an Air superiority fighter or a long range bomber!!!
> 
> I personally think is a complete waist of time and money for Iran to waist time on light close Air support fighters in a country the size of Iran and Iranian military leaders should have learned that lesson in the Iran-Iraq war where what required 40 F-5's to accomplish could have been done with 10-12 F-4's





pin gu said:


> looks like everyone agreed that it must be something similar to F-5 .
> 
> 
> *"It's a Close Air Support fighter!!!"*
> 
> UAVs can be used for this role too . they are cheaper and in long term you will save much more resource by using them so why building low cost fighter jets is approved ?







https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...له-fast-taxi-آخرین-وضعیت-خرید-سوخو30-از-روسیه


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Borhan is a reasonable option. However it didn't look serious enough in terms of support and as Kowsar was ahead in development one would have to ask why they go for two different trainers.
> 
> Whether a single engine CAS aircraft is robust enough.
> 
> Maybe the IRGC witnessed the value Syrian L-39 had in Syria and pushed for something like it because Kowsar is too light for that role.
> But again: Qaher was also called close support aircraft. So it is still open.



A fully fledged Borhan would be the equivalent of a YAK-130 for Iran. That is literally one of the best CAS and advance heavy trainers available. Both Iran and syria showed interest in the fighter.

The Kosar is a LIGHT advanced trainer used to train early pilots. It’s battlefield use would be quite limited unless pressed to desperation situation (ie Syria Civil war type scenario)

The Borhan would be BOTH a heavy advanced trainer and CAS for Iran. Together with the Kosar they would fulfill Iran’s training needs and modernize the F-5 Force.

Apparently pilots in Iran, “love” the F-5. Which explains the obsession of keeping the force modernized.

Qaher is an experimental project that could eventually end up being something different or nothing at all. Furthermore, Qaher is at least another 5-7 years away (possibly longer) from intial production.

Iran needs to replace its trainers and F-5 force as well as its SU-25 Force.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Borhan is a reasonable option. However it didn't look serious enough in terms of support and as Kowsar was ahead in development one would have to ask why they go for two different trainers.
> 
> Whether a single engine CAS aircraft is robust enough.
> 
> Maybe the IRGC witnessed the value Syrian L-39 had in Syria and pushed for something like it because Kowsar is too light for that role.
> But again: Qaher was also called close support aircraft. So it is still open.


A single J-85 will never have enough power for an effective CAS airplane

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> A single J-85 will never have enough power for an effective CAS airplane



What if it’s powered by a single J-79 instead of J-85?

Iran is rumored to be working on a reverse engineered J-79.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> What if it’s powered by a single J-79 instead of J-85?
> 
> Iran is rumored to be working on a reverse engineered J-79.


well that change everything but can you fit it in a Borhan sized Airplane ? (J-85 130cm long and 45cm wide , J-79 520cm long and 98cm wide)
also I was not aware Iran is working on a Turbo jet Engine with the size and power of J-79

a Yak-130 uses two engine that each one is at least twice as powerful as J-85

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well that change everything but can you fit it in a Borhan sized Airplane ? (J-85 130cm long and 45cm wide , J-79 520cm long and 98cm wide)
> also I was not aware Iran is working on a Turbo jet Engine with the size and power of J-79
> 
> a Yak-130 uses two engine that each one is at least twice as powerful as J-85



Valid point. But you may be wrong on how powerful the yak-130 engines are truly are. I am getting that it is between a combined 42-49 knt for both engines (~22 knt each)

Iran could potentially use two afterburner variants of Owj engine which would kick combined knt to 38 (19 x 2) which would still lag behind the world class of Yak-130 dual engines. However, for a country like Iran this might be sufficientally acceptable

Iran said upon the revealing of domestic J-85 that it is working on a heavy turbo jet engine and it would be ready in 2 years.

Given how much love Iran has for western engines, the next logical step would be J-85 with a possible potential for RD-33.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Valid point. But you may be wrong on how powerful the yak-130 engines are truly are. I am getting that it is between a combined 42-49 knt for both engines (~22 knt each)
> 
> Iran could potentially use two afterburner variants of Owj engine which would kick combined knt to 38 (19 x 2) which would still lag behind the world class of Yak-130 dual engines. However, for a country like Iran this might be sufficientally acceptable
> 
> Iran said upon the revealing of domestic J-85 that it is working on a heavy turbo jet engine and it would be ready in 2 years.
> 
> Given how much love Iran has for western engines, the next logical step would be J-85 with a possible potential for RD-33.


using afterburner result in several time higher fuel consumption , you must decide your airplane fly for 1 hours or 20min
by the way each AL-122 is 24.7kn without afterburner and 41.2kn with afterburner. which is essentially two or more time more powerful than J-85.
by the way a for CAS roles the air craft must be able to fulfill some needs ,for example can stand Manpads , and for that you need two engine that are separated from each other . , you need to be able to carry at least 3-4T of weapon . you must be able to stand some amount of fire by anti aircraft guns .

look at underside of Yak-130






Su-25





A-10





look at how the engines and wings are designed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> using afterburner result in several time higher fuel consumption , you must decide your airplane fly for 1 hours or 20min
> by the way each AL-122 is 24.7kn without afterburner and 41.2kn with afterburner. which is essentially two or more time more powerful than J-85.
> by the way a for CAS roles the air craft must be able to fulfill some needs ,for example can stand Manpads , and for that you need two engine that are separated from each other . , you need to be able to carry at least 3-4T of weapon . you must be able to stand some amount of fire by anti aircraft guns .
> 
> look at underside of Yak-130
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Su-25
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A-10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> look at how the engines and wings are designed



separate engines as well as in the Kowsar


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> separate engines as well as in the Kowsar


Loss at have one problem and that's j85 . that engine is weak . if we change that engine then that airplane can be a lot more useful than just a trainer.


----------



## un4given.1991

Hack-Hook said:


> Loss at have one problem and that's j85 . that engine is weak . if we change that engine then that airplane can be a lot more useful than just a trainer.


it was clearly mentioned in video that it would be equipped with TWO TURBOFAN ENGINES.










clearly a Northrop N350 design just like AIDC AT-3 & CASA C-101 (and maybe Mikoyan MiG-AT)


----------



## Hack-Hook

un4given.1991 said:


> it was clearly mentioned in video that it would be equipped with TWO TURBOFAN ENGINES.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> clearly a Northrop N350 design just like AIDC AT-3 & CASA C-101 (and maybe Mikoyan MiG-AT)


Empty weight 4600kg Max takeoff weight 6180kg it means 1580kg of fuel and weapons

now look at 
*AIDC AT3* *Empty weight:* 3855kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7940kg or 4085kg of fuel and weapons*
Mikoyan MiG-AT Loaded weight:* 4,610 kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7,800 kg or 3190kg of additional load

now look at 
*CASA C-101EB Empty weight:* 3,800 kg* Max. takeoff weight:* 5,600 kg or 1800kg of weapon and fuels
clearly more of a trainer to something designed for CAS
you clearly cant compare first two on engine power with Kosar trainer and all these point to J-85 not the other engine in development Kosar is also comparable CASA C-101EB when it come two missions but sadly for some reasons mainly engine problem
J-85 weight Half of Garrett TFE731-2 but consume fuel twice as much and produce 3000kN less power
it means Kosar consume 4 time fuel and is 800kg heavier. and it need to carry 4 time as much fuel to stay in air the same amount of time as CASA C-101EB. you see still the engine problem

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

un4given.1991 said:


> it was clearly mentioned in video that it would be equipped with TWO TURBOFAN ENGINES.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> clearly a Northrop N350 design just like AIDC AT-3 & CASA C-101 (and maybe Mikoyan MiG-AT)


*
IF* that is the case and it is turbofan powered,and I for one think that is a rather big "*IF"*,then what could those turbofans possibly be,or what could they be based on/copies of?,about the only one that I could think of would be the Ivchenko AL-25 turbofan from the syrian af L-39,unless of course iran was able to acquire examples of other tf engines and reverse/reengineer them.
Anyone got any possible ideas on they type of turbofans?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

J-90 under development.

At the time of Owj reveal 2 years ago, Iran said there was an engine 4 TIMES MORE POWERFUL than Owj currently in testing stages.

Furthermore, they also said in 2 years Iran would unveil a HEAVY turbojet engine and turbofan engine.

Iran has also worked secertly to get its hands on the latest blueprints of cutting edge advanced jet engines. Wether they have been successful or not i am not sure.

Iran fighter projects currently in development:

*Qaher
*Unnamed heavy fighter project
*Borhan
*Kosar
*IRGC close air support fighter
*Sofreh Mahi unmanned drone
*Sofreh Mahi manned fighter
*Next-gen RQ—170
*Saeghe III

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> Empty weight 4600kg Max takeoff weight 6180kg it means 1580kg of fuel and weapons
> 
> now look at
> *AIDC AT3* *Empty weight:* 3855kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7940kg or 4085kg of fuel and weapons
> *Mikoyan MiG-AT Loaded weight:* 4,610 kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7,800 kg or 3190kg of additional load
> 
> now look at
> *CASA C-101EB Empty weight:* 3,800 kg* Max. takeoff weight:* 5,600 kg or 1800kg of weapon and fuels
> clearly more of a trainer to something designed for CAS
> you clearly cant compare first two on engine power with Kosar trainer and all these point to J-85 not the other engine in development Kosar is also comparable CASA C-101EB when it come two missions but sadly for some reasons mainly engine problem
> J-85 weight Half of Garrett TFE731-2 but consume fuel twice as much and produce 3000kN less power
> it means Kosar consume 4 time fuel and is 800kg heavier. and it need to carry 4 time as much fuel to stay in air the same amount of time as CASA C-101EB. you see still the engine problem



we are discussing engines, but if a nation does not have access to these new engines, it can not do anything but use only what is available.
Motors, at the moment it seems that only the Iranian version of the J85 is available;
will have improved the power and fuel consumption?
nothing is still certain
therefore the Iranian technicians will have to make necessity of virtue and draw around these engines the Kowsar and not just the Kowsar.
So, at the moment, making comparisons with foreign aircraft made with direct support or having free access to products of important and famous US-Russia-China-Italy-France-GB national aeronautical industries, is at least not advisable.
Probably the Iranian authorities have often exaggerated in expounding some pharaonic projects that were only on paper, but Koswar can mark the turning point of the Iranian aviation industry entering definitively the restricted club that designs and manufactures military aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## un4given.1991

Hack-Hook said:


> Empty weight 4600kg Max takeoff weight 6180kg it means 1580kg of fuel and weapons
> 
> now look at
> *AIDC AT3* *Empty weight:* 3855kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7940kg or 4085kg of fuel and weapons
> *Mikoyan MiG-AT Loaded weight:* 4,610 kg *Max. takeoff weight:* 7,800 kg or 3190kg of additional load
> 
> now look at
> *CASA C-101EB Empty weight:* 3,800 kg* Max. takeoff weight:* 5,600 kg or 1800kg of weapon and fuels
> clearly more of a trainer to something designed for CAS
> you clearly cant compare first two on engine power with Kosar trainer and all these point to J-85 not the other engine in development Kosar is also comparable CASA C-101EB when it come two missions but sadly for some reasons mainly engine problem
> J-85 weight Half of Garrett TFE731-2 but consume fuel twice as much and produce 3000kN less power
> it means Kosar consume 4 time fuel and is 800kg heavier. and it need to carry 4 time as much fuel to stay in air the same amount of time as CASA C-101EB. you see still the engine problem


i was referring to jet Design just like how Mitsubishi F-2 is derived F-16 not jet Performance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> we are discussing engines, but if a nation does not have access to these new engines, it can not do anything but use only what is available.
> Motors, at the moment it seems that only the Iranian version of the J85 is available;
> will have improved the power and fuel consumption?
> nothing is still certain
> therefore the Iranian technicians will have to make necessity of virtue and draw around these engines the Kowsar and not just the Kowsar.
> So, at the moment, making comparisons with foreign aircraft made with direct support or having free access to products of important and famous US-Russia-China-Italy-France-GB national aeronautical industries, is at least not advisable.
> Probably the Iranian authorities have often exaggerated in expounding some pharaonic projects that were only on paper, but Koswar can mark the turning point of the Iranian aviation industry entering definitively the restricted club that designs and manufactures military aircraft.


Yes,I agree up to a point,but is it really worth expending the time,money,effort and other resources when all you`re going to produce is an obsolescent design.This is basically the same problem that I have with irans blue water naval vessels.
But on the other hand I suppose you have to start somewhere.......I guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> we are discussing engines, but if a nation does not have access to these new engines, it can not do anything but use only what is available.
> Motors, at the moment it seems that only the Iranian version of the J85 is available;
> will have improved the power and fuel consumption?
> nothing is still certain
> therefore the Iranian technicians will have to make necessity of virtue and draw around these engines the Kowsar and not just the Kowsar.
> So, at the moment, making comparisons with foreign aircraft made with direct support or having free access to products of important and famous US-Russia-China-Italy-France-GB national aeronautical industries, is at least not advisable.
> Probably the Iranian authorities have often exaggerated in expounding some pharaonic projects that were only on paper, but Koswar can mark the turning point of the Iranian aviation industry entering definitively the restricted club that designs and manufactures military aircraft.


we get our hand on RQ-170 Engine that we could use as base ,it used a light Turbofan engine not 4 time as powerful as j-85 but enough powerful that a single engine could provide *CASA C-101EB *like performance for Aircraft like Borhan, using a Turbo jet engine only increase flight /hours cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

zectech said:


> If it can be a naval attack fighter, it will fill a need nitch.
> 
> Iran would be attacked from some carrier group. Can these fighters can deploy antiship missiles.
> 
> 50 fighters launching multiple antiship missiles at a carrier group at the same time would be a joy.



Iranian F-4's can barley handle carrying two 300km Iranian air launched anti ship missiles let alone light CAS fighters!





So any Air Launched anti-ship missile that could be installed on an Iranian built CAS fighter will have a max range of well under 50 knots (-90km) which means your CAS fighter will have to get within range of U.S. SAM's 

And Iranian CAS fighter armed with Anti-ship missiles will at best have a combat radius of 300km (from their Base) and current Iranian Air Launch Nasr missiles that they could potentially be armed with at best have an operational range of 50km so that's 350km from Air Force bases that can launch these fighters which means your better off just launching costal anti ship missiles and UAV's that can be deployed all across Iranian shores!!!!!!!

Also, since Iran will NEVER be the one who starts hostilities if you want your fighters to have any chance of surviving you have to build fortified bunkers and various Air Defense equipment and in that regard the price you pay for a $10 Million USD fighter as appose to a $100 Million USD fighter is the same.

so cheaper low cost CAS fighter don't always come out cheaper at the end! And they become far less useful in a country the size of Iran!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> we get our hand on RQ-170 Engine that we could use as base ,it used a light Turbofan engine not 4 time as powerful as j-85 but enough powerful that a single engine could provide *CASA C-101EB *like performance for Aircraft like Borhan, using a Turbo jet engine only increase flight /hours cost.


Yes,the consensus was that a version of the ge TF-34 was used to power the RQ-170,which is also used in the A10.This would actually have been a very good engine to use both for a ground attack machine as well as a light fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

The likely engines Iran is working on reverse engineering are:

*TF-34 (Rq-170 engine)
*J-79
*RD33/RD39
*F110 (F-14 engine)

Out of all these F110 is the only engine in its inventory that can be used on an “Heavy fighter” aka F-14, F-16, F-15 size fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar




----------



## pin gu

*نخستین جنگنده ایرانی رونمایی شد*










با تلاش متخصصان صنعت دفاعی و به دستور رئیس جمهوری نخستین هواپیمای جنگنده ایرانی به نام کوثر تولید و به پرواز در آمد.

به گزارش ایسنا، همزمان با ۳۱ مرداد سالروز صنعت دفاعی، تحقیق و تلاش متخصصان صنعت هوایی به ثمر نشست و نخستین هواپیمای بومی جنگنده پیشرفته مجهز به سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته بومی نسل ۴ با نام مبارک کوثر تولید شد.

ارتقاء توان رزم و آموزش خلبانی نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران، بومی سازی سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته نسل ۴، سامانه های مکانیکی و هیدرولیکی، موتور با به کارگیری شبکه گسترده شرکت های دانش بنیان و سازمان های صنعتی وزارت دفاع، مراکز دانشگاهی و تحقیقاتی از جمله ویژگی های این جنگنده ایرانی است.

همچنین بهره گیری از سیستم معماری یکپارچه پیشرفته اویونیک و کنترل آتش با استفاده از شبا داده دیجیتال نظامی منطبق با نسل ۴، بهره گیری از فناوری نمایشگرهای چندمنظوره تمام دیجیتال، بهره گیری از کامپیوتر محاسبات بالستیک سلاح و سامانه پیشرفته نشانه روی مقابل خلبانان (HUD) به منظور افزایش دقت اصابت سلاح و مهمات، بهره گیری از رادار پیشرفته چندمنظوره کنترل آتش جهت بالا بردن کشف اهداف و تهدیدات و بهره گیری از ناوبری دقیق به صورت رادیویی و مستقل و استفاده از سامانه نقشه متحرک هوشمند از مهمترین ویژگی ها و دستاوردهای تولید این هواپیماست.

هواپیمای کوثر یک هواپیمای جنگنده پیشرفته با ماموریت پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی است که به صورت کاملا بومی ساخته شده است و ایران را در زمره معدود کشورهای دارای فناوری طراحی و ساخت هواپیمای جنگنده با سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش نسل 4 قرار داده است.

این هواپیما در دو نوع تک کابین و دو کابین قابل تولید خواهد بود که نوع دو کابینه علاوه بر قابلیت رزمی، برای آموزش خلبانان در مرحله پیشرفته کاربرد دارد.

https://www.isna.ir/news/97053015837/نخستین-جنگنده-ایرانی-رونمایی-شد


----------



## mohsen

f@ck, unveiling of an F5, not even the Saeghe! just how low this government wants to go?!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

So it is apparently just a IRIAF SSJ project and as expected nothing groundbreaking.

After the Azarashkh in 1998, a 1:1 copy of the F-5, albeit with US made J-85 engines and the Saeghe twin tailfin in the early 2000's, they have mastered to produce a updated F-5 with now self made J-85 copies.
Probably a production line too.

Aerospace is a hard field and the F-5 a very cost effective design and getting something into serial production is difficult too. But going from a Azarakhsh to the Kowsar F-5 in 20 years is typical for the low performance of IRIAF SSJ and their budget is not the main reason for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cthulhu

pin gu said:


> *نخستین جنگنده ایرانی رونمایی شد*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> با تلاش متخصصان صنعت دفاعی و به دستور رئیس جمهوری نخستین هواپیمای جنگنده ایرانی به نام کوثر تولید و به پرواز در آمد.
> 
> به گزارش ایسنا، همزمان با ۳۱ مرداد سالروز صنعت دفاعی، تحقیق و تلاش متخصصان صنعت هوایی به ثمر نشست و نخستین هواپیمای بومی جنگنده پیشرفته مجهز به سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته بومی نسل ۴ با نام مبارک کوثر تولید شد.
> 
> ارتقاء توان رزم و آموزش خلبانی نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران، بومی سازی سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته نسل ۴، سامانه های مکانیکی و هیدرولیکی، موتور با به کارگیری شبکه گسترده شرکت های دانش بنیان و سازمان های صنعتی وزارت دفاع، مراکز دانشگاهی و تحقیقاتی از جمله ویژگی های این جنگنده ایرانی است.
> 
> همچنین بهره گیری از سیستم معماری یکپارچه پیشرفته اویونیک و کنترل آتش با استفاده از شبا داده دیجیتال نظامی منطبق با نسل ۴، بهره گیری از فناوری نمایشگرهای چندمنظوره تمام دیجیتال، بهره گیری از کامپیوتر محاسبات بالستیک سلاح و سامانه پیشرفته نشانه روی مقابل خلبانان (HUD) به منظور افزایش دقت اصابت سلاح و مهمات، بهره گیری از رادار پیشرفته چندمنظوره کنترل آتش جهت بالا بردن کشف اهداف و تهدیدات و بهره گیری از ناوبری دقیق به صورت رادیویی و مستقل و استفاده از سامانه نقشه متحرک هوشمند از مهمترین ویژگی ها و دستاوردهای تولید این هواپیماست.
> 
> هواپیمای کوثر یک هواپیمای جنگنده پیشرفته با ماموریت پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی است که به صورت کاملا بومی ساخته شده است و ایران را در زمره معدود کشورهای دارای فناوری طراحی و ساخت هواپیمای جنگنده با سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش نسل 4 قرار داده است.
> 
> این هواپیما در دو نوع تک کابین و دو کابین قابل تولید خواهد بود که نوع دو کابینه علاوه بر قابلیت رزمی، برای آموزش خلبانان در مرحله پیشرفته کاربرد دارد.
> 
> https://www.isna.ir/news/97053015837/نخستین-جنگنده-ایرانی-رونمایی-شد


LOL! Babak Taghvaee was right.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030909074945310726


----------



## pin gu

They have more than enough man power and good projects but for some reasons our military guys addicted to this type of behavior ....

I simply can't accept after 15 years of building J-85 engines our capacity in engine building is still at same level as 15 years ago .

*@Cthulhu*

I asked opinion of PDF members here and as you can see everyone here expected to see another aircraft similar to F-5


----------



## Parsipride

I was close. I said a refurb SU22. It is patched up F-5 called Kosar. They should call it Kose sher.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

pin gu said:


> *نخستین جنگنده ایرانی رونمایی شد*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> با تلاش متخصصان صنعت دفاعی و به دستور رئیس جمهوری نخستین هواپیمای جنگنده ایرانی به نام کوثر تولید و به پرواز در آمد.
> 
> به گزارش ایسنا، همزمان با ۳۱ مرداد سالروز صنعت دفاعی، تحقیق و تلاش متخصصان صنعت هوایی به ثمر نشست و نخستین هواپیمای بومی جنگنده پیشرفته مجهز به سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته بومی نسل ۴ با نام مبارک کوثر تولید شد.
> 
> ارتقاء توان رزم و آموزش خلبانی نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران، بومی سازی سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش پیشرفته نسل ۴، سامانه های مکانیکی و هیدرولیکی، موتور با به کارگیری شبکه گسترده شرکت های دانش بنیان و سازمان های صنعتی وزارت دفاع، مراکز دانشگاهی و تحقیقاتی از جمله ویژگی های این جنگنده ایرانی است.
> 
> همچنین بهره گیری از سیستم معماری یکپارچه پیشرفته اویونیک و کنترل آتش با استفاده از شبا داده دیجیتال نظامی منطبق با نسل ۴، بهره گیری از فناوری نمایشگرهای چندمنظوره تمام دیجیتال، بهره گیری از کامپیوتر محاسبات بالستیک سلاح و سامانه پیشرفته نشانه روی مقابل خلبانان (HUD) به منظور افزایش دقت اصابت سلاح و مهمات، بهره گیری از رادار پیشرفته چندمنظوره کنترل آتش جهت بالا بردن کشف اهداف و تهدیدات و بهره گیری از ناوبری دقیق به صورت رادیویی و مستقل و استفاده از سامانه نقشه متحرک هوشمند از مهمترین ویژگی ها و دستاوردهای تولید این هواپیماست.
> 
> هواپیمای کوثر یک هواپیمای جنگنده پیشرفته با ماموریت پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی است که به صورت کاملا بومی ساخته شده است و ایران را در زمره معدود کشورهای دارای فناوری طراحی و ساخت هواپیمای جنگنده با سامانه های اویونیک و کنترل آتش نسل 4 قرار داده است.
> 
> این هواپیما در دو نوع تک کابین و دو کابین قابل تولید خواهد بود که نوع دو کابینه علاوه بر قابلیت رزمی، برای آموزش خلبانان در مرحله پیشرفته کاربرد دارد.
> 
> https://www.isna.ir/news/97053015837/نخستین-جنگنده-ایرانی-رونمایی-شد


guys take this news outlet as a pinch of salt i don't think this is true


----------



## pin gu

*در ادامه این مراسم، این هواپیما با دستور حسن روحانی رئیس جمهور پرواز کرد.*
Kowsar pictures
























https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970530000067/هواپیمای-رزمی-و-آموزشی-کوثر-رونمایی-شد-مشخصات

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cthulhu

pin gu said:


> *@Cthulhu*
> 
> I asked opinion of PDF members here and as you can see everyone here expected to see another aircraft similar to F-5


I was pointing out that Babak Taghvaee was right, When it comes to IRIAF, He is a credible source.


----------



## OldTwilight

As I though and already pointed in military.ir , there is no real air plane .... F-5 with new color ....


http://www.military.ir/forums/topic/30123-قاهر-اف-313-دروازه-ورود-صنایع-هوایی-ایران-به-فناوری-نسل-پنجم-جنگنده-ها/?do=findComment&comment=517234


well , even if Iranian members go and watch harmful thing like p **o***r***n , is more useful for them than wasting their times on IRAF ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

mohsen said:


> f@ck, unveiling of an F5, not even the Saeghe! just how low this government wants to go?!



first : you should be glad that they didn't scrap our current F5 fighters to make new useless ( x generation ) advance fighter jet ( just as Babak Taghvaei said )

second : they didn't even show it cockpit and radar .... it just plain old 60 years old F5 with ugly color ....

side note : if I was in Hassan Rouhani shoes , I wouldn't attend this useless unveiling ....

side note : Rest in piece Iran Air force .... you are already dead ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

pin gu said:


> *در ادامه این مراسم، این هواپیما با دستور حسن روحانی رئیس جمهور پرواز کرد.*
> Kowsar pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970530000067/هواپیمای-رزمی-و-آموزشی-کوثر-رونمایی-شد-مشخصات




بزار برات قضیه رو روشن کنم ، بعد از رونمایی از سوخو 22 ها ، سپاه می خواد نیروی هوایی خودش رو بسازه و ارتش هم که می خواست عقب نمونه ، این افتضاح رو به بار آورد .... 
این اقدامات که باعث مسخره شدن و به سخره گرفتن شدن ما می شه ، به خاطر رقابت های درونی جمهوری اسلامی هست ..... 
سوخو 22 سپاه در برابر اف 5 ارتش .... 

کلا نام ایران و آبروی ایران برای آقایون پشیزی نمی ارزه ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

07_SeppDietrich said:


> guys take this news outlet as a pinch of salt i don't think this is true



You don't believe this because you don't know current people in power of Islamic Republic of (Iran) ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

pin gu said:


> *در ادامه این مراسم، این هواپیما با دستور حسن روحانی رئیس جمهور پرواز کرد.*
> Kowsar pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970530000067/هواپیمای-رزمی-و-آموزشی-کوثر-رونمایی-شد-مشخصات



Article indicate the Kowsar with single-seat and two-seater cabin but show the F-5 ;
this leads me to think that the author of the article did not have pictures of Kowsar and used those of the F-5 or does not have the knowledge to distinguish the two aircraft or has not yet allowed to show photos of Kowsar in two configurations.
If it is not one of these hypotheses, it would be ridiculous to simply show the F-5 / Saeghe with the different name of "Kowsar"


----------



## pin gu

OldTwilight said:


> بزار برات قضیه رو روشن کنم ، بعد از رونمایی از سوخو 22 ها ، سپاه می خواد نیروی هوایی خودش رو بسازه و ارتش هم که می خواست عقب نمونه ، این افتضاح رو به بار آورد ....
> این اقدامات که باعث مسخره شدن و به سخره گرفتن شدن ما می شه ، به خاطر رقابت های درونی جمهوری اسلامی هست .....
> سوخو 22 سپاه در برابر اف 5 ارتش ....
> 
> کلا نام ایران و آبروی ایران برای آقایون پشیزی نمی ارزه ....


Mr president wanted a new project that can fly .. then army gave him something that can fly + middle finger

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

sahureka2 said:


> Article indicate the Kowsar with single-seat and two-seater cabin but show the F-5 ;
> this leads me to think that the author of the article did not have pictures of Kowsar and used those of the F-5 or does not have the knowledge to distinguish the two aircraft or has not yet allowed to show photos of Kowsar in two configurations.
> If it is not one of these hypotheses, it would be ridiculous to simply show the F-5 / Saeghe with the different name of "Kowsar"



The author just repeat what he was told .... the fault is on IR which is don't see herself responsible to the people and shamefully is crushing Iran prestige in every damn field ....


----------



## PeeD

Ok, now all the disappointment aside, let's analyse it:

1: The IRIAF SSJ has concentrated on modern avionics subsystems in this phase after the copying of the J-85 was mastered.

2: Modern avionics is important. Next steps would be to build upon the J-85 and go for RD-33. Develop a PESA/AESA radar and then of course a new aerodynamic air frame design that can use the new engine and larger radar. Having mastered the avionics can be used almost without modifications on any higher performance aircraft such as the Qaher-313.

New avionics include: 
Glass cockpit
TACAN navigation
Laser gyro INS navigation
A SVP-24 Gefest like ballistic computer/sensor suite (very important)
Plus all the other items, the black boxes such as air data computer, RWR etc.

All that in its near-state-of-the art form is one of the foundations for any advanced aircraft project and needs to be mastered first. Of course a new radar would make the avionics package complete, but the F-5 is so small that it lacks the nose antenna space for any serious radar.

Several year long testing of the Owj J-85 and the new avionics will prepare the industry for the next steps.

I'm not a friend of conventional airpower for Iran, it's not cost effective. In hence I'm fine with their budget being put into mastering avionics for now and not wasting it on a expensive 3rd-4th gen fighter design. Either something completely asymmetrical like the Qaher-313 or just sitting and learning until a RD-33 equivalent or better is mastered.

Avionics --> engines and the radar can be mastered easily with Irans radar capabilities.

PGMs, AAMs and targeting pods have also been mastered.

If this Kowsar is 90% made in Iran and production line can be set up, it is quite an achievement or which other countries can produce aircraft fully by themselves?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

pin gu said:


> Mr president wanted a new project that can fly .. then army gave him something that can fly + middle finger



due to employing only loyal people , our Army doesn't have bright and brave people any more .... my fear is that IRAF personnel believe this kind of bullshit they are saying ( advance fighter !!! )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

PeeD said:


> Ok, now all the disappointment aside, let's analyse it:
> 
> 1: The IRIAF SSJ has concentrated on modern avionics subsystems in this phase after the copying of the J-85 was mastered.
> 
> 2: Modern avionics is important. Next steps would be to build upon the J-85 and go for RD-33. Develop a PESA/AESA radar and then of course a new aerodynamic air frame design that can use the new engine and larger radar. Having mastered the avionics can be used almost without modifications on any higher performance aircraft such as the Qaher-313.
> 
> *New avionics include:
> Glass cockpit
> TACAN navigation
> Laser gyro INS navigation
> A SVP-24 Gefest like ballistic computer/sensor suite (very important)
> Plus all the other items, the black boxes such as air data computer, RWR etc.*
> 
> All that in its near-state-of-the art form is one of the foundations for any advanced aircraft project and needs to be mastered first. Of course a new radar would make the avionics package complete, but the F-5 is so small that it lacks the nose antenna space for any serious radar.
> 
> Several year long testing of the Owj J-85 and the new avionics will prepare the industry for the next steps.
> 
> I'm not a friend of conventional airpower for Iran, it's not cost effective. In hence I'm fine with their budget being put into mastering avionics for now and not wasting it on a expensive 3rd-4th gen fighter design. Either something completely asymmetrical like the Qaher-313 or just sitting and learning until a RD-33 equivalent or better is mastered.
> 
> Avionics --> engines and the radar can be mastered easily with Irans radar capabilities.
> 
> PGMs, AAMs and targeting pods have also been mastered.
> 
> If this Kowsar is 90% made in Iran and production line can be set up, it is quite an achievement or which other countries can produce aircraft fully by themselves?



show me picture or all your claims are lies by default .... or maybe you want claim that showing a picture from this cockpit is revealing all of its super secret super advanced technology !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

sahureka2 said:


> Article indicate the Kowsar with single-seat and two-seater cabin but show the F-5 ;
> this leads me to think that the author of the article did not have pictures of Kowsar and used those of the F-5 or does not have the knowledge to distinguish the two aircraft or has not yet allowed to show photos of Kowsar in two configurations.
> If it is not one of these hypotheses, it would be ridiculous to simply show the F-5 / Saeghe with the different name of "Kowsar"



The first news I saw was published by tasnimnews with an old F-4 picture ! 

It was a little bit weird for me then they changed pics ....


----------



## Cthulhu

We should initiate a face-saving operation immediately, Our options are:

1- Pointing out that this new fighter jet just looks like a F-5, It's totally a different thing on the inside.
2- Maneuvering on our 5th gen. fighter jet, Qaher-313.
3- Blaming things on Rouhani.

If any of you guys can come up with better options, You're free to point them out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Cthulhu said:


> We should initiate a face-saving operation immediately, Our options are:
> 
> 1- Pointing out that this new fighter jet just looks like a F-5, It's totally a different thing on the inside.
> 2- Maneuvering on our 5th gen. fighter jet, Qaher-313.
> 3- Blaming things on Rouhani.
> 
> If any of you guys can come up with better options, You're free to point them out.



How many times we should repeat this process !? 

As far as I remember , one of our job is to make excuse to cover the bitterness of commanders , politicians actions ,words and claims ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

look like Kowsar project is canceled , that why they name this F-5 as KOWSAR ....


----------



## PeeD

The defense ministry and the DM is to blame.
Technically it is a important step, yes, but selling it as a new aircraft to the public as new aircraft is false and simply a lie.
Normally presenting an aircraft that has a selfmade engine, a selfmade ejection seat, a selfmade glass cockpit and a modernized airframe design would be something of great importance, but calling it a new aircraft and making a secret of it for several days is just silly.

If he would have said we will unveil a aircaft that is now fully indigenized and vastly improved. Yes that would be true but unprofessional PR and selling it as a new aircraft is wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

sahureka2 said:


> Article indicate the Kowsar with single-seat and two-seater cabin but show the F-5 ;
> this leads me to think that the author of the article did not have pictures of Kowsar and used those of the F-5 or does not have the knowledge to distinguish the two aircraft or has not yet allowed to show photos of Kowsar in two configurations.
> If it is not one of these hypotheses, it would be ridiculous to simply show the F-5 / Saeghe with the different name of "Kowsar"


There is no mistake, they put a new name on an upgraded F5.
kowsar is just an avionics upgrade, which sadly morons in this government decided to advertise as a new fighter jet to cover up their misdeeds and budget cuts in military section.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> The defense ministry and the DM is to blame.
> Technically it is a important step, yes, but selling it as a new aircraft to the public as new aircraft is false and simply a lie.
> Normally presenting an aircraft that has a selfmade engine, a selfmade ejection seat, a selfmade glass cockpit and a modernized airframe design would be something of great importance, but calling it a new aircraft and making a secret of it for several days is just silly.
> 
> If he would have said we will unveil a aircaft that is now fully indigenized and vastly improved. Yes that would be true but unprofessional PR and selling it as a new aircraft is wrong.


You have to have certain characteristics to be chosen by Rouhani as defense minister and that includes playing in his shows.


----------



## pin gu

https://www.isna.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

any cockpit picture?


----------



## pin gu

07_SeppDietrich said:


> any cockpit picture?


nope


----------



## Gold Eagle

PeeD said:


> The defense ministry and the DM is to blame.
> Technically it is a important step, yes, but selling it as a new aircraft to the public as new aircraft is false and simply a lie.
> Normally presenting an aircraft that has a selfmade engine, a selfmade ejection seat, a selfmade glass cockpit and a modernized airframe design would be something of great importance, but calling it a new aircraft and making a secret of it for several days is just silly.
> 
> If he would have said we will unveil a aircaft that is now fully indigenized and vastly improved. Yes that would be true but unprofessional PR and selling it as a new aircraft is wrong.



Exactly! They usually tend to destroy their own achievements by unnecessary exaggerations.

This is the glass cockpit of the new upgraded F-5F.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## ilia

...


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Yes,the consensus was that a version of the ge TF-34 was used to power the RQ-170,which is also used in the A10.This would actually have been a very good engine to use both for a ground attack machine as well as a light fighter.


doubt that , the engine is two big and too powerful for RQ-170


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Gold Eagle said:


> Exactly! They usually tend to destroy their own achievements by unnecessary exaggerations.
> 
> This is the glass cockpit of the new upgraded F-5F.
> 
> View attachment 493409
> View attachment 493417
> View attachment 493418
> View attachment 493419
> View attachment 493420
> View attachment 493421


Wow this upgrades really good it could be as capable as F-20 Tigershark

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Guys btw do IRIAF have plan to upgrades all of it's F-5 with these new avionics upgrade

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Gold Eagle said:


> Exactly! They usually tend to destroy their own achievements by unnecessary exaggerations.
> 
> This is the glass cockpit of the new upgraded F-5F.
> 
> View attachment 493409
> View attachment 493417
> View attachment 493418
> View attachment 493419
> View attachment 493420
> View attachment 493421


These avionics will be a pain in the arse of Babak Taqavi and his ridiculous tweets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Wow this upgrades really good it could be as capable as F-20 Tigershark


No it can't be , F-20 Tigershark used a Single General Electric F404-GE-100 Turbo fan Engine that provided 48.9kn of trust and if used Afterburner it went up to 78.7 kN
the plane could carry 6.5 tons of Weapons and Fuel and could speed up to Mach 2 wile F5 can go up to Mach 1.6
I don't knew what sort of Radar We used in this Airplane but ,F20 come with AN/APG-67 that had 150km of Range while F5 at best can detect at less than 40km of range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Gold Eagle, post: 10731009, membro: 142367"] Esattamente! Solitamente tendono a distruggere i propri risultati con inutili esagerazioni.

Questa è la cabina di comando in vetro del nuovo F-5F aggiornato.

[ATTACH = pieno] 493409 [/ ATTACH] [ATTACH = pieno] 493417 [/ ATTACH] [ATTACH = pieno] 493418 [/ ATTACH] [ATTACH = pieno] 493419 [/ ATTACH] [ATTACH = pieno] 493420 [/ ATTACH] [ATTACH = full] 493.421 [/ attach] [/ QUOTE]

if this will be the "new" airplane so much vaunted the last few days, the military authority that made the declaration should cover its face with shame.
Therefore Kowsar alias F-5?
I still hope that tomorrow, August 22, they present at least something really new in flight, it would be enough the real Kowsar we saw last year during the taxiing tests, otherwise


----------



## PeeD

The digital avionics and sensor suite will be used on the Kowsar trainer as BT said, so much is true. The effort to port it for any new fighter like the Qaher will also me much less and easier.

One step that I forgot to mention which is also necessary in the digitalizing work is to move to a FBW system, which was not announced. So still work to be done on the sofware/electronics side.

However here a summery of the critical technologies that has been mastered in this project:
Digital sensor and avionic suite, MFD, HUD, RWR
Claimed new multirole radar, not shown
Apparently Gefest like ballistic computer and sensor suite, not demonstrated
New unified data-link system
New navigation suite with TACAN, modern laser gyro INS, latter not shown.
Indigenous made landing gear
Indigenous made engine
Indigenous developed and made ejection seat

ECM pods are like a FBW system absent and a modern targeting pod was only displayed by the IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Kowsar specifications:
max speed: mach 1.2
max altitude: 45000 ft

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

Kowsar
7.5 million U.S dollar price
45000 ft max attitude
1.2 mach speed
new ejection seat
100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
72 knowledge based companies and 4000 persons worked with MOD for this project 
Source : IRNN


----------



## -------

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> 1.2 mach speed
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
> Source : IRNN



Is it a training aircraft ?


----------



## pin gu

Combat-Master said:


> Is it a training aircraft ?



They call it new aircraft that can be used for training too ( its upgraded F-5 )


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> The digital avionics and sensor suite will be used on the Kowsar trainer as BT said, so much is true. The effort to port it for any new fighter like the Qaher will also me much less and easier.
> 
> One step that I forgot to mention which is also necessary in the digitalizing work is to move to a FBW system, which was not announced. So still work to be done on the sofware/electronics side.
> 
> However here a summery of the critical technologies that has been mastered in this project:
> Digital sensor and avionic suite, MFD, HUD, RWR
> Claimed new multirole radar, not shown
> Apparently Gefest like ballistic computer and sensor suite, not demonstrated
> New unified data-link system
> New navigation suite with TACAN, modern laser gyro INS, latter not shown.
> Indigenous made landing gear
> Indigenous made engine
> Indigenous developed and made ejection seat
> 
> ECM pods are like a FBW system absent and a modern targeting pod was only displayed by the IRGC.



I wish they had utilized the Turbon fan variant. From engineering perspective, I appreciate this effort. They have integrated many complex subsystems. This itself is an achievement and a proof that Iran's industry can make complex systems. However, I am still troubled and majorly disappointed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> 1.2 mach speed
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
> Source : IRNN


therefore this umpteenth version of the F-5, has abandoned the two vertical stabilizers introduced don the Saeghe to go back to the origins ?


----------



## pin gu

sahureka2 said:


> therefore this umpteenth version of the F-5, has abandoned the two vertical stabilizers introduced don the Saeghe to go back to the origins ?



Reporter explaining in video :"Our domestic Kowsar is a 4th generation fighter jet . Kowsar is using our older models experiences like Simorq Azarakhsh Sa'eghe 1 and Sa'eghe 2 "

there is no talk about future of Sa'eghe

http://www.irinn.ir/fa/news/620484/پرواز-کوثر-در-آسمان-ایران

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

pin gu said:


> Reporter explaining in video :"Our domestic Kowsar is a 4th generation fighter jet . Kowsar is using our older models experiences like Simorq Azarakhsh Sa'eghe 1 and Sa'eghe 2 "
> 
> there is no talk about future of Sa'eghe
> 
> http://www.irinn.ir/fa/news/620484/پرواز-کوثر-در-آسمان-ایران


If it's 4th generation then what about the radar still using the older F-5 radar


----------



## un4given.1991

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )



actually its 88% made in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> doubt that , the engine is two big and too powerful for RQ-170


The general consensus was that the engine was likely either the GE TF34 or the Garrett-TFE731.Unfortunately since neither iran nor the us released any hard data on the max tow of the machine or its performance or powerplant,most of it is guess work sadly.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pin gu

un4given.1991 said:


> actually its 88% made in Iran



earlier the guy in the news said : "jangandeye kamelan boomi" which means :"100% homemade fighter " 

Thank God next year we are going to see Azarakhsh 3 or Sa'eghe 3  and that time for real its going to be "boomiii"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Guys is the radar still the same as old F-5?


----------



## pin gu

07_SeppDietrich said:


> If it's 4th generation then what about the radar still using the older F-5 radar



I don't know about F-5 radar  but it seems everything in Kowsar upgraded . (engine still same Iranian made J-85 ) .


----------



## Sineva

Once again another huge over hyped disappointment from the airforce,why oh why am I not surprised.
If only they had done these upgrades/improvements to a worthwhile machine like the f14 as part of the long aborted modernisation program,rather than something like the f5 with little further upgrade potential,short of some radical reengineering that is,and even more insultingly trying to palm it off as a "new" machine.What on earth is this seeming ongoing fixation with the f5 ffs?.
Whats the bet that like all the other programs of this type it will remain just a one off machine.The airforce really needs to get its sh!t together and the government needs to start spending some very serious cash on a full modernisation program for both it and the rest of the conventional forces,not cheap propaganda exercises like this that fool no-one .....well maybe they fool rouhani,hes a big enough fool to believe anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Guys delete @Raghfarm007 post

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

yavar said:


>


change the title, they didn't say the 4th gen fighter (and it's not), they said 4th gen avionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> 1.2 mach speed
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
> 72 knowledge based companies and 4000 persons worked with MOD for this project
> Source : IRNN


7.5 million dollar cost saving, it means if wanted to purchase it's components from outside.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

The aircraft frame was a disappointment, no doubt. Though its avionics are remarkable and do represent a serious investment by IRIAF-SSJ into producing high-quality 4th gen. avionics. Even BT seems impressed by their efforts, and he's a guy who always finds some excuse to shit on Iran's defense achievements.

I would like to point out two things however:

1.) The undercarriage of the Kowsar has a hook that I have only seen on US carrier-based aircraft. So what is it doing on the Kowsar? (Secret Aircraft Carrier project?)

2.) Last week, DM Hatami on *two *separate occasions announced that the new aircraft will be shown on National Defense Industry Day, which is marked annually on *August 22nd. *Could an actual 'new' aircraft be shown tomorrow? I think its highly unlikely, though its something to bear in mind

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

*Deep Sky test and maneuvers and more details into Cockpit:
*





*Or Here:*

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/886216/فیلم-با-جنگنده-ایرانی-کوثر-آشنا-شوید

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jauk

Hmmm, the helmet is very interesting to me. Nobody has mentioned it....seems very new as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

It's a reverse engineered & optimized F-5. I should have known. Hopefully in 2020 that deal with Russia actually goes through & Iran gets some badly needed new jets.



un4given.1991 said:


> actually its 88% made in Iran


----------



## PeeD

I'm quite happy that they claim to have developed a SVP-24 Gefest like system.

The use of this Russian system allowed high altitude bombing with dumb bombs in Syria. With 500-1000kg bombs, a reasonable ensured destruction can be achieved well outside AAA and MANPAD threat altitudes. Plus of course the fact that PGMs are much more expensive.

Whats foremost necessary for such a system is precise navigation, precise accelerometers and much testing. Fortunately navigationwise with the advanced combined INS and GPS it is already well equipped.

A close support, ground attack aircraft with a WSO that controls the weapon system, based on a cheap and low-operation cost airframe like the F-5 PLUS a SVP-24 like system would be a quite good bomb truck in terms of cost-effectiveness.
Its small planar array radar could have a SAR mode for high altitude ground attack.

The decision is not bad. They got rid of the air to air relevant second tail fin and keep it as simple and low cost as possible.
In a Syria like scenario such a bomb truck would be both sufficient and cost effective --> 50-100m CEP bombing from secure high altitude with heavy firepower, dumb Mk.83 and Mk.84 is very welcome in such scenarios.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

The fact that Iran has gained the capability of building a complete aircraft based on the F-5 with upgraded avionics goes to show how much the IRIAF values its battle tested F-5 fleet. In my opinion it is a much better strategy for the IRIAF to build upon an aircraft that it likes and has in a sizable number as apposed to building a completely new aircraft that has similar if not lower capability compared the old venerable F-5. It will be economical for Iran to upgrade its old F-5E/F fleet with the new avionics... and similar avionics... can now be built to upgrade the rest of IRIAFs combat aircraft fleets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1031896267209596928

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

It was entertaining to hear that the DM brought up the modification of 100mm KS-19 AAA guns from the 50's to a guided anti-CM AAA system.

He wanted to say: Look we upgraded a completely obsolete and useless AAA system to something effective an deadly (and it really is) and started production from scratch. Now we have upgraded the obsolete F-5 into something effective too. Deep upgrade of something very old is thus no shame...

Fair enough, but don't try to sell it as a new aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

My hope died today

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> It was entertaining to hear that the DM brought up the modification of 100mm KS-19 AAA guns from the 50's to a guided anti-CM AAA system.
> 
> He wanted to say: Look we upgraded a completely obsolete and useless AAA system to something effective an deadly (and it really is) and started production from scratch. Now we have upgraded the obsolete F-5 into something effective too. Deep upgrade of something very old is thus no shame...
> 
> Fair enough, but don't try to sell it as a new aircraft.


I don't think he meant KS-19.


----------



## Raghfarm007

mohsen said:


> 7.5 million dollar cost saving, it means if wanted to purchase it's components from outside.



Do Iranians really believe this bullcrap? Who still makes the F-5? How would they be able to buy a plane that no one makes anymore?! Where did they get th 7.5 million figure fom?!
Also, even the cheapest Chinese made fighters cost more than 7.5 million.

These are all lies by the same liers who said that they wont let the Riyal´s value to go down, then over night the value halved.


----------



## mohsen

Raghfarm007 said:


> Do Iranians really believe this bullcrap? Who still makes the F-5? How would they be able to buy a plane that no one makes anymore?! Where did they get th 7.5 million figure fom?!
> Also, even the cheapest Chinese made fighters cost more than 7.5 million.
> 
> These are all lies by the same liers who said that they wont let the Riyal´s value to go down, then over night the value halved.



U.S and European countries are still using the F5 (or it's variants), how do you think they replace the damaged components, by time machine?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> 1.2 mach speed
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
> 72 knowledge based companies and 4000 persons worked with MOD for this project
> Source : IRNN


So it is slower and fly lower than f5-E

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

*Why low rcs "Kowsar" is a great achievement for Iran's air force:


F-5 from wiki:*

According to defense analyst and prominent Pentagon fighter mafia (of F-16 fame) member Pierre Sprey, the F-5 was perhaps the most effective U.S. air-to-air fighter in the 1960s and early 1970s based on his published fighter effectiveness criteria.[23][24 ] Sprey defines the key factors of fighter effectiveness in order of importance as* 1. Ability to surprise the enemy without being surprised, 2. On a per budget basis, ability to outnumber the enemy via lower unit cost and higher sortie rates and reliability, 3. Ability to outmaneuver the enemy, and 4. Once in position to fire by either surprise or maneuver, ability to attain reliable kills (weapon system effectiveness).[25] *As a prominent example of a well implemented light fighter,[26][27] the F-5 is a close match to these criteria in the time frame before Beyond Visual Range missiles became reliable. A small visual and radar cross section size and consequent detection difficulty often conferred the F-5 the advantage of surprise.[28] *The F-5 has the smallest planform area of any fighter in common usage.[29] This is a critical practical combat advantage since historically about 80% of air to air kills do occur by surprise.[30] The aircraft is highly cost effective and reliable, allowing superior numbers in the air on a per budget basis. The aircraft also has a high sortie rate, low accident rate, high maneuverability, and is armed with an effective combination of 20mm cannon and heat seeking missiles.*

The F-5 earned a reputation for a jet that was hard to discern in the air and when one finally saw it, it was often after a missile or guns kill had already been called.

-- Singapore's former Chief of Air Force and F-5 pilot, Major General Ng Chee Khern.[31]

In 1970, Northrop won the International Fighter Aircraft (IFA) competition to replace the F-5A, with better air-to-air performance against aircraft like the Soviet MiG-21. The resultant aircraft, initially known as F-5A-21, subsequently became the F-5E. It had more powerful (5,000 lbf) General Electric J85-21 engines, and had a lengthened and enlarged fuselage, accommodating more fuel. Its wings were fitted with enlarged leading edge extensions, giving an increased wing area and improved maneuverability. The aircraft's avionics were more sophisticated, crucially including a radar (initially the Emerson Electric AN/APQ-153) (the F-5A and B had no radar). It retained the gun armament of two M39 cannon, one on either side of the nose of the F-5A. Various specific avionics fits could be accommodated at customer request, including an inertial navigation system, TACAN and ECMequipment.[39]

The first F-5E flew on 11 August 1972.[40] A two-seat combat-capable trainer, the F-5F, was offered, first flying on 25 September 1974, at Edwards Air Force Base, with a new nose, that was 3 feet longer, which, unlike the F-5B that did not mount a gun, allowed it to retain a single M39 cannon, albeit with a reduced ammunition capacity.[41] The two-seater was equipped with the Emerson AN/APQ-157 radar, which is a derivative of the AN/APQ-153 radar, with dual control and display systems to accommodate the two-men crew, and the radar has the same range of AN/APQ-153, around 10 nmi. On 6 April 1973, the 425th TFS at Williams Air Force Base, Ariz. received the first F-5E Tiger II.[42]

A reconnaissance version, the RF-5E Tigereye, with a sensor package in the nose displacing the radar and one cannon, was also offered.

The F-5E eventually received the official name Tiger II; 792 F-5Es, 146 F-5Fs and 12 RF-5Es were eventually built by Northrop.[38] More were built under license overseas: 91 F-5Es and -Fs in Switzerland,[43]68 by Korean Air in South Korea,[44] and 308 in Taiwan.[45]

The F-5E proved to be a successful combat aircraft for U.S. allies, but had no combat service with the U.S. Air Force (though the F-5A with modifications referred to as F-5C was flown by the U.S. in Vietnam[46]). The F-5E evolved into the single-engine F-5G, which was rebranded the F-20 Tigershark. It lost out on export sales to the F-16 in the 1980s.

The F-5E served with the U.S. Air Force from 1975 until 1990, in the 64th Aggressor Squadron and 65th Aggressor Squadron at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, and with the 527th Aggressor Squadron at RAF Alconbury in the UK and the 26th Aggressor Squadron at Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines. The U.S. Marines purchased used F-5s from the Air Force in 1989 to replace their F-21s, which served with VMFT-401 at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma. The U.S. Navy used the F-5E extensively at the Naval Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) when it was located at NAS Miramar, California. When TOPGUN relocated to become part of the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center at NAS Fallon, Nevada, the command divested itself of the F-5, choosing to rely on VC-13 (redesignated VFC-13 and which already used F-5s) to employ their F-5s as adversary aircraft. Former adversary squadrons such as VF-43 at NAS Oceana, VF-45 at NAS Key West, VF-126 at NAS Miramar, and VFA-127 at NAS Lemoore have also operated the F-5 along with other aircraft types in support of Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT).

The U.S. Navy F-5 fleet continues to be modernized with 36 low-hour F-5E/Fs purchased from Switzerland in 2006. These were updated as F-5N/Fs with modernized avionics and other improved systems. Currently, the only U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps units flying the F-5 are VFC-13 at NAS Fallon, Nevada, VFC-111 at NAS Key West, Florida, and VMFT-401 at MCAS Yuma, Arizona.[6] Currently, VFC-111 operates 18 Northrop F-5N/F Tiger IIs. 17 of these are single-seater F-5Ns and the last is a twin-seater F-5F "FrankenTiger", the product of grafting the older front-half fuselage of an F-5F into the back-half fuselage of a newer low-hours F-5E acquired from the Swiss Air Force. A total of three "FrankenTigers" were made.[70]

According to the FAA, there are 18 privately owned F-5s in the U.S., including Canadair CF-5Ds.[71][72]

*Iran*

After the Iranian revolution in 1979, the new Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) was partially successful at keeping Western fighters in service during the Iran–Iraq War in the 1980s and the simple F-5 had a good service readiness until late in the war. Initially Iran took spare parts from foreign sources; later it was able to have its new aircraft industry keep the aircraft flying.[85]




Iranian F-5 during the Iran–Iraq War

IRIAF F-5s were heavily involved, flying air-to-air and air-to-ground sorties. Iranian F-5s took part in air combats with Iraqi Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25, Su-20/22, Mirage F-1 and Super Etendards. The exact combat record is not known with many differing claims from Iraqi, Iranian, Western, and Russian sources. Many of the IRIAF's confirmed air-to-air kills were attributed to the Revolutionary Guards for political reasons.[_citation needed_] There are reports that an IRIAF F-5E, piloted by Major Yadollah Javadpour, shot down a MiG-25 on 6 August 1983.[86][87] Russian sources state that the first confirmed kill of a MiG-25 occurred in 1985.[88]

During the first years of service, Iranian F-5 fighter aircraft had the advantage in missile technology, using advanced versions of the IR seeking Sidewinder, later lost with deliveries of new missiles and fighters to Iraq.[89]


----------



## Aramagedon

pin gu said:


> Kowsar
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> 1.2 mach speed
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran ( entire aircraft )
> 72 knowledge based companies and 4000 persons worked with MOD for this project
> Source : IRNN


*Great* *achievement*.


----------



## PeeD

A short timeline of the whole F-5 based project:

1987, while still in war the Simorgh/Azarakhsh project was started. Probably initially because spare part stocks were getting low. Maybe something like 5% of very wear-affected spareparts that were not in the depots started already earlier than 1987 but the process of part production beyond wear replacement spare parts started then. The goal was to build enough parts at one point to build a complete airframe. This decision resulted in 30% of all parts by 2001 = 14 years.

2001-2004, it was then that the Saeghe was developed and part production increased by 6% to 36%. The Saeghe was a attempt to also improve air to air capabilities of the project which by now was given up when it comes to aerodynamic improvements that increase maneuvering performance.

2004-2007, a small batch of the Saeghe was produced, getting familiar with a fighter production line. This lead to a 20% higher parts amount in 3 years, pushing it up to 56%. Why such a sudden increase? Likely some key technologies were mastered such as the whole hydraulic and actuator suite got qualified or major air frame sections (relative simply and high number) got qualified.

2007-2012, a increase of parts production by 9% to 65% in 5 years and the unveiling of the Saeghe-2 twin seater, probably by then it was preferred to develop a ground attack twin seat aircraft instead of something for air to air. HOBS WVR missiles make dogfight maneuverability for which a twin tail would bring some limited benefits, unnecessary.

2012-2018, Switch back to single tailfin bomber, trainer and avionics testbed. Parts increase by 23% to 88%, primary due to the use of the indigenized Owj engine, the most difficult single subsystem to master.

Now what are those 12% left? If they count accurately probably the microchips, LCD panels etc. and parts that can be easily bought in open market (LED diodes, transistors etc.) or require a very high number mass production to become economical such as o-rings. I can't think of a part left that would be hard to master and explain the remaining 12% like for example a INS or radar. Maybe they push it for another 5-7% if the production/upgrading reached max. level.

A FBW system (source: RQ-170) is what is left to be developed, plus a PESA/AESA based on 3rd Khordad, Bavar experience. Mastering these will pave the way for future advanced projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Guys delete @Raghfarm007 post


why?

he is right.


----------



## scythian500

http://thesaker.is/technology-sitre...made-the-current-operation-in-syria-possible/


PeeD said:


> I'm quite happy that they claim to have developed a SVP-24 Gefest like system.
> 
> The use of this Russian system allowed high altitude bombing with dumb bombs in Syria. With 500-1000kg bombs, a reasonable ensured destruction can be achieved well outside AAA and MANPAD threat altitudes. Plus of course the fact that PGMs are much more expensive.
> 
> Whats foremost necessary for such a system is precise navigation, precise accelerometers and much testing. Fortunately navigationwise with the advanced combined INS and GPS it is already well equipped.
> 
> A close support, ground attack aircraft with a WSO that controls the weapon system, based on a cheap and low-operation cost airframe like the F-5 PLUS a SVP-24 like system would be a quite good bomb truck in terms of cost-effectiveness.
> Its small planar array radar could have a SAR mode for high altitude ground attack.
> 
> The decision is not bad. They got rid of the air to air relevant second tail fin and keep it as simple and low cost as possible.
> In a Syria like scenario such a bomb truck would be both sufficient and cost effective --> 50-100m CEP bombing from secure high altitude with heavy firepower, dumb Mk.83 and Mk.84 is very welcome in such scenarios.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> A short timeline of the whole F-5 based project:
> 
> 1987, while still in war the Simorgh/Azarakhsh project was started. Probably initially because spare part stocks were getting low. Maybe something like 5% of very wear-affected spareparts that were not in the depots started already earlier than 1987 but the process of part production beyond wear replacement spare parts started then. The goal was to build enough parts at one point to build a complete airframe. This decision resulted in 30% of all parts by 2001 = 14 years.
> 
> 2001-2004, it was then that the Saeghe was developed and part production increased by 6% to 36%. The Saeghe was a attempt to also improve air to air capabilities of the project which by now was given up when it comes to aerodynamic improvements that increase maneuvering performance.
> 
> 2004-2007, a small batch of the Saeghe was produced, getting familiar with a fighter production line. This lead to a 20% higher parts amount in 3 years, pushing it up to 56%. Why such a sudden increase? Likely some key technologies were mastered such as the whole hydraulic and actuator suite got qualified or major air frame sections (relative simply and high number) got qualified.
> 
> 2007-2012, a increase of parts production by 9% to 65% in 5 years and the unveiling of the Saeghe-2 twin seater, probably by then it was preferred to develop a ground attack twin seat aircraft instead of something for air to air. HOBS WVR missiles make dogfight maneuverability for which a twin tail would bring some limited benefits, unnecessary.
> 
> 2012-2018, Switch back to single tailfin bomber, trainer and avionics testbed. Parts increase by 23% to 88%, primary due to the use of the indigenized Owj engine, the most difficult single subsystem to master.
> 
> Now what are those 12% left? If they count accurately probably the microchips, LCD panels etc. and parts that can be easily bought in open market (LED diodes, transistors etc.) or require a very high number mass production to become economical such as o-rings. I can't think of a part left that would be hard to master and explain the remaining 12% like for example a INS or radar. Maybe they push it for another 5-7% if the production/upgrading reached max. level.
> 
> A FBW system (source: RQ-170) is what is left to be developed, plus a PESA/AESA based on 3rd Khordad, Bavar experience. Mastering these will pave the way for future advanced projects.



the radar is made in iran they show the radar. without any information or details


----------



## TheImmortal

Some of you are asking what is this obessession with F-5. You actually need to blame, Iran’s pilots NOT the government or the Air Force. Iran’s pilot LOVE I repeat LOVE the F-5, thus you see an Air Force that is catering to making sure their beloved F-5 stay battlefield relevant.

This was not the Kosar (psycho ops). This is the Saeghe III. This is in fact not a new project it was announced over 3 years ago.

I would expect a small amount 6-12 to be made (like Saeghe I & II) to test out the new features over a period of time.This is merely an optimization block for F-5. 

I would expect Saeghe IV in another ~3-5 years If another “block” of upgrades is deemed necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SQ8

I am not sure why any Iranian was expecting anything other than another F-5 modification?
It is the only aircraft Iran is capable of producing in a modified form; even with spares and long term experience it cannot do the same with the F-14 since it does not have access to required tooling and materials due to sanctions.

The true potential that the industry has in indigenous airframes was lost to sanctions& negligence in the 90’s. Add to this the disastrous usage of R&D platforms and funding for laughable propoganda that left actual useful projects starved of funds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> the radar is made in iran they show the radar. without any information or details


Do you have a picture of it ?

The Radar is one thing that decide the plane is useful or no in air combat. All those avionics if not coupled with a modern RADAR serve no porpuse at all.


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Do you have a picture of it ?
> 
> The Radar is one thing that decide the plane is useful or no in air combat. All those avionics if not coupled with a modern RADAR serve no porpuse at all.


If I get it, I will publish the photo here


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Do you have a picture of it ?
> 
> The Radar is one thing that decide the plane is useful or no in air combat. All those avionics if not coupled with a modern RADAR serve no porpuse at all.












I apologize for the low quality of the photo

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Oscar said:


> I am not sure why any Iranian was expecting anything other than another F-5 modification?
> It is the only aircraft Iran is capable of producing in a modified form; even with spares and long term experience it cannot do the same with the F-14 since it does not have access to required tooling and materials due to sanctions.
> 
> The true potential that the industry has in indigenous airframes was lost to sanctions& negligence in the 90’s. Add to this the disastrous usage of R&D platforms and funding for laughable propoganda that left actual useful projects starved of funds.



You have no idea what you are talking about. Iran has several aircraft projects in development.

The problem is people have unrealistic expectations and expect Qaher or sofreh mahi or heavy fighter to be unveiled in 2-3 years. Those projects will take 10+ years from start to finish.

The F-5 modernization program has been going on since 1990’s and Iranian pilots love the F-5. So unless you are somehow more experienced than a airforce pilot who has fought in actual war time scenarios, you can’t really call something garbage.

Furthermore, the F-5 modernization program is not a waste of funds as it keeps the fleet modern till 2030-2035 retirement and allows a platform to test its avionics and electronics suite.

Iran has been able to master flying wing design on UAV’s which is very difficult. Iran is the only country in Middle East to have flying wing UAVs.

So I don’t doubt that Iran has fighter jets in development, however, I don’t think it’s realistic to expect them before 2025. Not even Japan or Britain can bring a completely new fighter to production in under 10 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

https://eghtesadbartar.com/blog/رونمایی-از-جنگنده-تمام-ایرانی-کوثر-ف/ اطلاعات کامل از جنگنده کوثر


----------



## SQ8

TheImmortal said:


> You have no idea what you are talking about. Iran has several aircraft projects in development.
> 
> The problem is people have unrealistic expectations and expect Qaher or sofreh mahi or heavy fighter to be unveiled in 2-3 years. Those projects will take 10+ years from start to finish.
> 
> The F-5 modernization program has been going on since 1990’s and Iranian pilots love the F-5. So unless you are somehow more experienced than a airforce pilot who has fought in actual war time scenarios, you can’t really call something garbage.
> 
> Furthermore, the F-5 modernization program is not a waste of funds as it keeps the fleet modern till 2030-2035 retirement and allows a platform to test its avionics and electronics suite.
> 
> Iran has been able to master flying wing design on UAV’s which is very difficult. Iran is the only country in Middle East to have flying wing UAVs.
> 
> So I don’t doubt that Iran has fighter jets in development, however, I don’t think it’s realistic to expect them before 2025. Not even Japan or Britain can bring a completely new fighter to production in under 10 years.


I think I have an idea and am presenting it honestly, you aren’t.
The Qaher is a laughable propoganda piece using car electronics in the mockup and a RC model. In todays world of CFD and virtual systems, RC models are an obsolete method of understanding performance.

As for the rest, I do not see where I let down the F-5 modernization; just highlighting that it is the only avenue in aircraft manufacturing that Iran can pursue due to pre-existing infrastructure and general simplicity of the airframe.


----------



## Arminkh

What is this? Is this jet supposed to land on carriers?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

This are used in emergency cases to arrest to cables at the end of the runway. Not carrier connected.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Hmm.... You know I wanna be that guy who just will lambaste Iran for not making something like the F-16, F-15 or Eurofighter etc, etc. But if this jet is indeed made 100% in Iran from start to finish then truthfully speaking that is impressive given the sanctions Iran is put under.

To be candid all I would like to know is how many of these are going to made because like 12 or around there of these jets wont make much of a difference. Also what weapons is this jet going to sport? Give that modern in air confrontations will hardly ever be close in dog-fights, can this jet see far and shoot far? Is this jet just for close air missions? idk... My knowledge about air to air and air to ground combat is very limited also it's not my field of interest tbh. 

Regardless I will end by saying this. If this is real then Iran has done a sort of good job I guess, if it's fake then I truly feel sorry for the Iranian people who have been waiting for a competent aircraft to be made. 

Why are they calling it fourth generation?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

Source : Skyhawk military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## un4given.1991

Radar:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## un4given.1991



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SQ8

Arminkh said:


> What is this? Is this jet supposed to land on carriers?
> 
> View attachment 493573


Most jets have emergency aresstor hooks to stop in case of brake failure including the F-16 and F-15. They are however only for emergencies and not for repeated usage like in dedicated naval aircraft such as the FA-18.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

I hope everyone got their answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is just another modified design of the Iranian built version of the F-5! Which is a clear statement that Iranian Military leaders still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war!

The Airframe is a tad bit larger than the F-5 with a modified Iranian designed Airframe and landing gear (with a focus on the cockpit) rather than an exact copy with a far more comfortable cockpit than the F-5's sadly the fighter tops out at *Mach 1.2 (like the T-38)*

FYI for all those who don't know the twin seat F-5F maxed out at Mach 1.5 with the ability to cruise at Mach 0.98 at altitude & 0.95 for F-5B
And the F-5E's maxed out at Mach 1.65 and also had a max cruise speed without Afterburners of Mach 0.98 at altitude
Which made them a brilliant design especially with the absurdly weak and cheap engines and airframe that they had and although they couldn't fly that fast with weapons onboard at least they had the ability to runaway at high speeds after deploying their weapons.

*As I said sadly Iranian Air Force commander and some in our leadership still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war and like a bunch of fools after a decade they are still playing around with the F-5 design where by comparison the U.S. had moved on to the F-14 & F-15 ~ a decade after the F-4's and F-5's.*

At least this aircraft proves for all those who doubted it before that the Azarakhsh and Saegheh were actually built by Iran and NOT overhauled F-5's.

The Aircraft sadly has no built in IRST and no Air Refueling pod which are BOTH two major weaknesses that should have been addressed on a light CAS fighter such as this.

And even if Iran addresses those weaknesses a fighter such as this would need to be produced at a rate of 10 to 1 against a relatively more modern Air Force! Which means a country the size of Iran we would need a fleet of 2000 of these fighters!

And even if Iran could mass produce a version equipped with IRST, Fuel pod & an engine that could handle the extended flight time for $10 Million USD per fighter and producing 10 of them ends up being cheaper than buying 1 Su-35 at the end of the day the cost of maintaining, fueling, housing them, arming them & training pilots on such a large fleet over time would bankrupt Iran!


As always Iran's absurd obsessed with the F-5 is mainly due to it's cheap Airframe and the fighters low Titanium requirements which was fine when your fighter program was at it's infancy but it is NOT fine anymore.

Unlike most modern fighters producing the F-5 or the T-38 airframe doesn't require "massive" presses or massive vacuum ovens and it's titanium requirements are a fraction of fighters like the F-14, F-15 or F-22 

Some think this is about Iran's Asymmetric style warfare BUT at the end of the day the whole point of Asymmetric warfare is to combat a more expensive military force at a lower cost and on the ground you may be able to use a large number of cheaper equipment against a more expensive armored division at a much lower cost but in the Air it is completely backwards because maintaining a large fleet of cheaper manned fighter jets ends up costing a lot more over time! 

If Iran wants to be innovative and save money when it's come to it's Air Force rather than producing 40 F-5's or Saegheh or Azarakhsh or Kowsar a year it would be far better to produce 4 larger fighter a year (~10% larger than the F-14's) that can carry 10 or more 1000lb BVR Missiles or 10 or more 1000lb PGM in an internal weapons bay on a platform that has combat radius of 1200km or more that tops out at ~Mach 2 

And since Aircrafts for your Air Forcer are platforms that are spose to last you for decades even if the initial price tag for producing 4-6 Aircraft comes out to be the same as producing 40-60 Iranian F-5 variants over time the more expensive aircraft will not only pay for it's self but militarily it is a far more tactically sound decision

If Iran wants to be innovative when it come to it's Air Force then they need to build a smaller but more capable Air Force with larger fighters equipped with larger engines with a new type of jet fuel that's mainly comprised of Natural Gas on a low RCS airframe with internal weapons bay that can carry a wide array of Air to Ground weapons from missiles that can be fired from outside the range of most SAM's to smart cluster weapons to lighter bunker busters to a large number of sea and ground mines deployed from the Air to laser countermeasures that can disrupt incoming IR & thermal missiles to large powerful radars that can fry enemy radars

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

VEVAK said:


> If Iran wants to be innovative and save money when it's come to it's Air Force rather than producing 40 F-5's or Saegheh or Azarakhsh or Kowsar a year it would be far better to produce 4 larger fighter a year (~10% larger than the F-14's) that can carry 10 or more 1000lb BVR Missiles or 10 or more 1000lb PGM in an internal weapons bay on a platform that has combat radius of 1200km or more that tops out at ~Mach 2
> 
> And since Aircrafts for your Air Forcer are platforms that are spose to last you for decades even if the initial price tag for producing 4-6 Aircraft comes out to be the same as producing 40-60 Iranian F-5 variants over time the more expensive aircraft will not only pay for it's self but militarily it is a far more tactically sound decision
> 
> If Iran wants to be innovative when it come to it's Air Force then they need to build a smaller but more capable Air Force with larger fighters equipped with larger engines with a new type of jet fuel that's mainly comprised of Natural Gas on a low RCS airframe with internal weapons bay that can carry a wide array of Air to Ground weapons from missiles that can be fired from outside the range of most SAM's to smart cluster weapons to lighter bunker busters to a large number of sea and ground mines deployed from the Air to laser countermeasures that can disrupt incoming IR & thermal missiles to large powerful radars that can fry enemy radars


i mostly agree with you but iran most needs an interceptor, so why would it need to have an internal weapons bay (which has been heavily criticised on the f-35 as not being able to carry much) or be stealthy?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

VEVAK said:


> I hope everyone got their answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is just another modified design of the Iranian built version of the F-5! Which is a clear statement that Iranian Military leaders still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war!
> 
> The Airframe is a tad bit larger than the F-5 with a modified Iranian designed Airframe and landing gear (with a focus on the cockpit) rather than an exact copy with a far more comfortable cockpit than the F-5's sadly the fighter tops out at *Mach 1.2 (like the T-38)*
> 
> FYI for all those who don't know the twin seat F-5F maxed out at Mach 1.5 with the ability to cruise at Mach 0.98 at altitude & 0.95 for F-5B
> And the F-5E's maxed out at Mach 1.65 and also had a max cruise speed without Afterburners of Mach 0.98 at altitude
> Which made them a brilliant design especially with the absurdly weak and cheap engines and airframe that they had and although they couldn't fly that fast with weapons onboard at least they had the ability to runaway at high speeds after deploying their weapons.
> 
> *As I said sadly Iranian Air Force commander and some in our leadership still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war and like a bunch of fools after a decade they are still playing around with the F-5 design where by comparison the U.S. had moved on to the F-14 & F-15 ~ a decade after the F-4's and F-5's.*
> 
> At least this aircraft proves for all those who doubted it before that the Azarakhsh and Saegheh were actually built by Iran and NOT overhauled F-5's.
> 
> The Aircraft sadly has no built in IRST and no Air Refueling pod which are BOTH two major weaknesses that should have been addressed on a light CAS fighter such as this.
> 
> And even if Iran addresses those weaknesses a fighter such as this would need to be produced at a rate of 10 to 1 against a relatively more modern Air Force! Which means a country the size of Iran we would need a fleet of 2000 of these fighters!
> 
> And even if Iran could mass produce a version equipped with IRST, Fuel pod & an engine that could handle the extended flight time for $10 Million USD per fighter and producing 10 of them ends up being cheaper than buying 1 Su-35 at the end of the day the cost of maintaining, fueling, housing them, arming them & training pilots on such a large fleet over time would bankrupt Iran!
> 
> 
> As always Iran's absurd obsessed with the F-5 is mainly due to it's cheap Airframe and the fighters low Titanium requirements which was fine when your fighter program was at it's infancy but it is NOT fine anymore.
> 
> Unlike most modern fighters producing the F-5 or the T-38 airframe doesn't require "massive" presses or massive vacuum ovens and it's titanium requirements are a fraction of fighters like the F-14, F-15 or F-22
> 
> Some think this is about Iran's Asymmetric style warfare BUT at the end of the day the whole point of Asymmetric warfare is to combat a more expensive military force at a lower cost and on the ground you may be able to use a large number of cheaper equipment against a more expensive armored division at a much lower cost but in the Air it is completely backwards because maintaining a large fleet of cheaper manned fighter jets ends up costing a lot more over time!
> 
> If Iran wants to be innovative and save money when it's come to it's Air Force rather than producing 40 F-5's or Saegheh or Azarakhsh or Kowsar a year it would be far better to produce 4 larger fighter a year (~10% larger than the F-14's) that can carry 10 or more 1000lb BVR Missiles or 10 or more 1000lb PGM in an internal weapons bay on a platform that has combat radius of 1200km or more that tops out at ~Mach 2
> 
> And since Aircrafts for your Air Forcer are platforms that are spose to last you for decades even if the initial price tag for producing 4-6 Aircraft comes out to be the same as producing 40-60 Iranian F-5 variants over time the more expensive aircraft will not only pay for it's self but militarily it is a far more tactically sound decision
> 
> If Iran wants to be innovative when it come to it's Air Force then they need to build a smaller but more capable Air Force with larger fighters equipped with larger engines with a new type of jet fuel that's mainly comprised of Natural Gas on a low RCS airframe with internal weapons bay that can carry a wide array of Air to Ground weapons from missiles that can be fired from outside the range of most SAM's to smart cluster weapons to lighter bunker busters to a large number of sea and ground mines deployed from the Air to laser countermeasures that can disrupt incoming IR & thermal missiles to large powerful radars that can fry enemy radars


I think problem is lack of good engine which prevents them from going for heavier air frames.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/08/21/irans-new-fighter-jet/#6d7db3b7c15a


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

The radar possibly digitalise APQ-153


----------



## pin gu

1996 France vs 2018 Iran 
France 1996
Population : 60 million
Scientific documents: 55563
GDP ppp : 1274 billion US$
Fighter jet :
Dassault Rafale First flight *Rafale A demo: 4 July 1986 
Rafale C: 19 May 1991*





Iran 2018
Population : 82 million
Scientific documents: 54388 (at 2017)
GDP ppp : 1700 billion Us$
Fighter Jet : 
Kowsar ( improved F-5) First flight 2018





Sources :Worldbank , scimagojr , wikipedia


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

pin gu said:


> 1996 France vs 2018 Iran
> France 1996
> Population : 60 million
> Scientific documents: 55563
> GDP ppp : 1274 billion US$
> Fighter jet :
> Dassault Rafale First flight *Rafale A demo: 4 July 1986
> Rafale C: 19 May 1991*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran 2018
> Population : 82 million
> Scientific documents: 54388 (at 2017)
> GDP ppp : 1700 billion Us$
> Fighter Jet :
> Kowsar ( improved F-5) First flight 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources :Worldbank , scimagojr , wikipedia


Why you comparing both countries?


----------



## pin gu

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Why you comparing both countries?


I want to show are we are on right direction or not


----------



## Arminkh

pin gu said:


> 1996 France vs 2018 Iran
> France 1996
> Population : 60 million
> Scientific documents: 55563
> GDP ppp : 1274 billion US$
> Fighter jet :
> Dassault Rafale First flight *Rafale A demo: 4 July 1986
> Rafale C: 19 May 1991*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran 2018
> Population : 82 million
> Scientific documents: 54388 (at 2017)
> GDP ppp : 1700 billion Us$
> Fighter Jet :
> Kowsar ( improved F-5) First flight 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources :Worldbank , scimagojr , wikipedia


This is not a fair comparison. First Iranian university is a bit older than one century while France 's first university is .......

Unfortunately we spent the whole last millenia in hibernation. Given what I mentioned above, this jet is a decent achievement.

The problem is our lack of public relations skills.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

Arminkh said:


> This is not a fair comparison. First Iranian university is a bit older than one century while France 's first university is .......
> 
> Unfortunately we spent the whole last millenia in hibernation. Given what I mentioned above, this jet is a decent achievement.
> 
> The problem is our lack of public relations skills.



What about this millenia ?! 

I would like to know a good way for fair compaision . how do you define that ?


----------



## Arminkh

pin gu said:


> What about this millenia ?!
> 
> I would like to know a good way for fair compaision . how do you define that ?


I would say we are doing better in this millenia but it is too soon to say as we are only 18 years into it.

Science and technology doesn't accumulate over night and doesn't have direct relation with GDP or population. You should compare the history of modern science and industry in both. University is a good example. When Iran started its first university, France was producing mechanical engineers in its universities and its scientists working on electromagnetic principals. 

Heavy industry is another good example. I bet France has been refining and forming steel in its Mills for more than two centuries. How old is our zob ahan?


----------



## pin gu

Arminkh said:


> I would say we are doing better in this millenia but it is too soon to say as we are only 18 years into it.
> 
> Science and technology doesn't accumulate over night and doesn't have direct relation with GDP or population. You should compare the history of modern science and industry in both. University is a good example. When Iran started its first university, France was producing mechanical engineers in its universities and its scientists working on electromagnetic principals.
> 
> Heavy industry is another good example. I bet France has been refining and forming steel in its Mills for more than two centuries. How old is our zob ahan?



Zob ahan is 47 years old . Islamic republic is 40 years old I wouldn't call it "over night" .

Main point is today's Iran in some fields are much better than France 1996 but why it can't be seen on defense industry specially our topic airforce projects ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

Grifo F radar :

In iran








Iranian radar :










....
Grifo-M (internet)





Skyhawk-Goebbels (military.ir)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cthulhu

Iran is totally in the right direction, Iran will "catch up" to France very soon.
https://vip.politicsmeanspolitics.com/2018/06/12/irans-brain-drain-ranks-first-in-the-world/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

un4given.1991 said:


> Grifo F radar :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian radar :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skyhawk-Goebbels (military.ir)


Any info of it's radar range?


----------



## un4given.1991

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Any info of it's radar range?


Not yet.but I guess it would be enogh for what it was developed for in first place. The CAS missions just like M-346 FA and L-159 ALCA :

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> I hope everyone got their answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is just another modified design of the Iranian built version of the F-5! Which is a clear statement that Iranian Military leaders still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war!
> 
> The Airframe is a tad bit larger than the F-5 with a modified Iranian designed Airframe and landing gear (with a focus on the cockpit) rather than an exact copy with a far more comfortable cockpit than the F-5's sadly the fighter tops out at *Mach 1.2 (like the T-38)*
> 
> FYI for all those who don't know the twin seat F-5F maxed out at Mach 1.5 with the ability to cruise at Mach 0.98 at altitude & 0.95 for F-5B
> And the F-5E's maxed out at Mach 1.65 and also had a max cruise speed without Afterburners of Mach 0.98 at altitude
> Which made them a brilliant design especially with the absurdly weak and cheap engines and airframe that they had and although they couldn't fly that fast with weapons onboard at least they had the ability to runaway at high speeds after deploying their weapons.
> 
> *As I said sadly Iranian Air Force commander and some in our leadership still haven't learned lessons from the Iran-Iraq war and like a bunch of fools after a decade they are still playing around with the F-5 design where by comparison the U.S. had moved on to the F-14 & F-15 ~ a decade after the F-4's and F-5's.*
> 
> At least this aircraft proves for all those who doubted it before that the Azarakhsh and Saegheh were actually built by Iran and NOT overhauled F-5's.
> 
> The Aircraft sadly has no built in IRST and no Air Refueling pod which are BOTH two major weaknesses that should have been addressed on a light CAS fighter such as this.
> 
> And even if Iran addresses those weaknesses a fighter such as this would need to be produced at a rate of 10 to 1 against a relatively more modern Air Force! Which means a country the size of Iran we would need a fleet of 2000 of these fighters!
> 
> And even if Iran could mass produce a version equipped with IRST, Fuel pod & an engine that could handle the extended flight time for $10 Million USD per fighter and producing 10 of them ends up being cheaper than buying 1 Su-35 at the end of the day the cost of maintaining, fueling, housing them, arming them & training pilots on such a large fleet over time would bankrupt Iran!
> 
> 
> As always Iran's absurd obsessed with the F-5 is mainly due to it's cheap Airframe and the fighters low Titanium requirements which was fine when your fighter program was at it's infancy but it is NOT fine anymore.
> 
> Unlike most modern fighters producing the F-5 or the T-38 airframe doesn't require "massive" presses or massive vacuum ovens and it's titanium requirements are a fraction of fighters like the F-14, F-15 or F-22
> 
> Some think this is about Iran's Asymmetric style warfare BUT at the end of the day the whole point of Asymmetric warfare is to combat a more expensive military force at a lower cost and on the ground you may be able to use a large number of cheaper equipment against a more expensive armored division at a much lower cost but in the Air it is completely backwards because maintaining a large fleet of cheaper manned fighter jets ends up costing a lot more over time!
> 
> If Iran wants to be innovative and save money when it's come to it's Air Force rather than producing 40 F-5's or Saegheh or Azarakhsh or Kowsar a year it would be far better to produce 4 larger fighter a year (~10% larger than the F-14's) that can carry 10 or more 1000lb BVR Missiles or 10 or more 1000lb PGM in an internal weapons bay on a platform that has combat radius of 1200km or more that tops out at ~Mach 2
> 
> And since Aircrafts for your Air Forcer are platforms that are spose to last you for decades even if the initial price tag for producing 4-6 Aircraft comes out to be the same as producing 40-60 Iranian F-5 variants over time the more expensive aircraft will not only pay for it's self but militarily it is a far more tactically sound decision
> 
> If Iran wants to be innovative when it come to it's Air Force then they need to build a smaller but more capable Air Force with larger fighters equipped with larger engines with a new type of jet fuel that's mainly comprised of Natural Gas on a low RCS airframe with internal weapons bay that can carry a wide array of Air to Ground weapons from missiles that can be fired from outside the range of most SAM's to smart cluster weapons to lighter bunker busters to a large number of sea and ground mines deployed from the Air to laser countermeasures that can disrupt incoming IR & thermal missiles to large powerful radars that can fry enemy radars



I give you a scenario in which a F-5 makes sense and is cost effective:

- You need a CAS aircraft to support your ground forces with Mk.82 class firepower
- You operate within a IADS in high intensity warfare or else just counter insurgency
- You want to make use of swarm survivability should your IADS fail. A swarm with large HOBS IIR WVR AAM for self defense
- The concentration on CAS only and that with automated bombing system (SVP-24-like) or advanced targeting pod keeps necessary pilot kills at the very minimum. No dogfighting (HOBS for emergency), no race scenarios for pole positioning. Just high altitude bombing with a system that automatically releases the unguided bombs at the Fraktion of a second if you or the autopilot keeps course. Hence minimum pilot training.
- The CAS role in low threat environment means, max. speed is not critical

What do you get for that role?

Bear in mind *the F-5 design is so cost optimized that it has 4 times (no guessing, fact) lower maintenance effort/cost and hence lifetime cost than a F-4
*
The F-4 on the other hand has a up to 3 times higher payload. While the F-5 is at least half and up to 3 times as expensive per airframe.
Do you want a F-5 with 5 Mk.82 within 50km of your requested strike position or a F-4 with 15 Mk.82 at 150km?

Iran needs something in the F-14 class to enter BVR high altitude competition with the enemy. Anything below it makes no sense, anything below it must work in a protected niche. Anything else can on the other hand make up much of the penalty by staying in the low altitude WVR game only if it comes to a engagement. There HOBS WVR missile and numbers are king.

So for now the situation could be following: In Iraq and Syria, the IRIAF operations against ISIS were just too expensive to sustain. Russians could do it, but not Iran. Using the F-4 and Su-24 fleet to low altitude dumb bomb ISIS or even using PGMs would let attrition and costs explode. F-5 operations would may be affordable but attrition would be too high.

The key to success of Russians was the following combination: Robustness and reliability/low-maintenance of the small (~30) fleet of aircraft plus the low attrition high altitude bombing capability provided by the SVP-24 keeping the cases where PGMs were absolute necessary (mobile targets e.g) at very minimum. SVP-24 proved itself in the ability to hit large target like apartment blocks and combined with heavy bombs gave high PK.

We have to expect that Irans military learned its lessons from this campaign. Same as Russians likely learned that a armed drone like the S-129 is most cost effective when it comes to small and mobile targets.

So we want to have such a capability and the F-5 would be a ideal platform for this.

I'm quite happy the IRIAF did not present a upscale F-5, F-18 like aircaft actually. It would look cool but be inefficient.
We need to pave the ground in terms of subsystems, then move to better engines and just after that try to come up with something with serious air to air capability (capability to operate in enemy airspace).
Whether it is a brute force heavy interceptor like the Mig-31 or a smart asymmetrical solution like my Qaher-313 concept. We still need to qualify subsystems such as FBW system, HMS/HMD, airborne x-band AESA/PESA (we have it already on the ground) plus weapon systems like a heavy WVR HOBS IIR AAM, anti-radar missile, air launched compact cruise missile.

PS: A twin seat F-5 also makes a good advanced supersonic trainer. So building 100 for the counter insurgency CAS role (Russian campaign) also provides a secondary role of having 100 supersoic trainers.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> I give you a scenario in which a F-5 makes sense and is cost effective:
> 
> - You need a CAS aircraft to support your ground forces with Mk.82 class firepower
> - You operate within a IADS in high intensity warfare or else just counter insurgency
> - You want to make use of swarm survivability should your IADS fail. A swarm with large HOBS IIR WVR AAM for self defense
> - The concentration on CAS only and that with automated bombing system (SVP-24-like) or advanced targeting pod keeps necessary pilot kills at the very minimum. No dogfighting (HOBS for emergency), no race scenarios for pole positioning. Just high altitude bombing with a system that automatically releases the unguided bombs at the Fraktion of a second if you or the autopilot keeps course. Hence minimum pilot training.
> - The CAS role in low threat environment means, max. speed is not critical
> 
> What do you get for that role?
> 
> Bear in mind *the F-5 design is so cost optimized that it has 4 times (no guessing, fact) lower maintenance effort/cost and hence lifetime cost than a F-4
> *
> The F-4 on the other hand has a up to 3 times higher payload. While the F-5 is at least half and up to 3 times as expensive per airframe.
> Do you want a F-5 with 5 Mk.82 within 50km of your requested strike position or a F-4 with 15 Mk.82 at 150km?
> 
> Iran needs something in the F-14 class to enter BVR high altitude competition with the enemy. Anything below it makes no sense, anything below it must work in a protected niche. Anything else can on the other hand make up much of the penalty by staying in the low altitude WVR game only if it comes to a engagement. There HOBS WVR missile and numbers are king.
> 
> So for now the situation could be following: In Iraq and Syria, the IRIAF operations against ISIS were just too expensive to sustain. Russians could do it, but not Iran. Using the F-4 and Su-24 fleet to low altitude dumb bomb ISIS or even using PGMs would let attrition and costs explode. F-5 operations would may be affordable but attrition would be too high.
> 
> The key to success of Russians was the following combination: Robustness and reliability/low-maintenance of the small (~30) fleet of aircraft plus the low attrition high altitude bombing capability provided by the SVP-24 keeping the cases where PGMs were absolute necessary (mobile targets e.g) at very minimum. SVP-24 proved itself in the ability to hit large target like apartment blocks and combined with heavy bombs gave high PK.
> 
> We have to expect that Irans military learned its lessons from this campaign. Same as Russians likely learned that a armed drone like the S-129 is most cost effective when it comes to small and mobile targets.
> 
> So we want to have such a capability and the F-5 would be a ideal platform for this.
> 
> I'm quite happy the IRIAF did not present a upscale F-5, F-18 like aircaft actually. It would look cool but be inefficient.
> We need to pave the ground in terms of subsystems, then move to better engines and just after that try to come up with something with serious air to air capability (capability to operate in enemy airspace).
> Whether it is a brute force heavy interceptor like the Mig-31 or a smart asymmetrical solution like my Qaher-313 concept. We still need to qualify subsystems such as FBW system, HMS/HMD, airborne x-band AESA/PESA (we have it already on the ground) plus weapon systems like a heavy WVR HOBS IIR AAM, anti-radar missile, air launched compact cruise missile.
> 
> PS: A twin seat F-5 also makes a good advanced supersonic trainer. So building 100 for the counter insurgency CAS role (Russian campaign) also provides a secondary role of having 100 supersoic trainers.



@PeeD I thought we implemented FBW on Saeghe 2. Regardless, I hope they focus on RD-33 to not only to maintain Mig-29s but also to build Iranian upgraded variant and/or design and build planes in that class. Ex:

- Upgraded Mig-29 with Iranian RD-33, digital subsystems, AESA/PESA radar and expanded sensor suite for electronic warfare and advanced weapons

- Q-313 with RD-33, optimized for asymmetrical warfare and air to air combat.

- S-170 based stealth bomber

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

pin gu said:


> 1996 France vs 2018 Iran
> France 1996
> Population : 60 million
> Scientific documents: 55563
> GDP ppp : 1274 billion US$
> Fighter jet :
> Dassault Rafale First flight *Rafale A demo: 4 July 1986
> Rafale C: 19 May 1991*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran 2018
> Population : 82 million
> Scientific documents: 54388 (at 2017)
> GDP ppp : 1700 billion Us$
> Fighter Jet :
> Kowsar ( improved F-5) First flight 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources :Worldbank , scimagojr , wikipedia



Stupid point, France has been making fighter aircraft since pre-WWI while iran was a peasant country.

Seriously this board gets dumber by the day

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

After reading some of these responses, I am convinced This board is filled with children and trolls nothing more.

Somehow some of you managed to convince yourself that Iran was going to unveil some magical fighter. Forget realistic expectations, you guys built a wunderwaffe in your head. 

Get it through your thick skulls, THERE WILL NOT BE AN ADVANCED FIGHTER BEFORE 2021 (maybe much later).

This isn’t some missile, or a radar, or a car. It can’t be developed overnight. 

So stop waiting for the Qaher or F16 or SU-30 clone because it’s not coming anytime soon.

Iran didn’t go from Shah era Hawk SAM to Bavar 373 in less than 10 years, so why you would think they would go from F-5 modernization project to F-35 in less than 10 years is beyond me.

Unrealistic expectations.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

@arashkamangir 

FBW should have been tested by the IRGC SSJ with the S-171 drone. But I doubt it is implemented in the Kowsar, too many non electric controlled hydraulic actuators. I might be wrong but they probably would display such a black box with a big FBW in front of it.

The RD-33 would be the best next step if the J90 is not a somehow very powerful new design, agreed.

The Grifo radar copy which others have found is also great. Not even the Su-24 had a radar with SAR mode with integrated GMTI. With this, the Kowsar would also be useful to find targets accurately on the battlefield. Combine it with the IRGC's targeting pod and you have a ideal CAS aircraft that can securely operate from high altitude and use cheap unguided weapons with high precision.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

TheImmortal said:


> Stupid point, France has been making fighter aircraft since pre-WWI while iran was a peasant country.
> 
> Seriously this board gets dumber by the day



As far as I know during WW2 world saw first fighter jets . to be precise Germany was the first nation that used Jet fighters at second year of WW2 ( 1941 ).at 1974, 33 years after first jet German jet fighter(that used in war) , France flown her first Mirage 2000 which is superior compare our domestic Kowsar at 2018 ! France changed from a almost loser of war into giant jet builder country .

Agree with your second point !


----------



## OldTwilight

pin gu said:


> I want to show are we are on right direction or not



if our politicians keep their mouth shots , then we are in right direction but our advancing is slow .... very very slow ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

pin gu said:


> As far as I know during WW2 world saw first fighter jets . to be precise Germany was the first nation that used Jet fighters at second year of WW2 ( 1941 ).at 1974, 33 years after first jet German jet fighter(that used in war) , France flown her first Mirage 2000 which is superior compare our domestic Kowsar at 2018 ! France changed from a almost loser of war into giant jet builder country .
> 
> Agree with your second point !



You miss the point.

Iran is WORLD CLASS in UAV production to the point that Russia had to get technology transfer from Iran And Israel (separately) in order to beef up their pathetic UAVs!!

Why is that? That is because Iran has been making and using UAVs since Iran-Iraq war! It was one of the first countries to extensively use them in combat role! That is DECADES of experience.

Iran has been extensively modernizing fighter jets since ONLY 1997 and just began developing its own fighter design (Qaher) in 2010! It reverse engineered its first fighter jet engine ONLY in the last 10 years!

So suddenly everyone is of belief that under robust economic sanctions and a strict arms embargo that Iran should ALREADY have a fighter jet on par with leading world powers?

Russia and USA have have been making aircraft since before your grandfather was probably born.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> What do you get for that role?
> 
> Bear in mind *the F-5 design is so cost optimized that it has 4 times (no guessing, fact) lower maintenance effort/cost and hence lifetime cost than a F-4
> *
> The F-4 on the other hand has a up to 3 times higher payload. While the F-5 is at least half and up to 3 times as expensive per airframe.
> Do you want a F-5 with 5 Mk.82 within 50km of your requested strike position or a F-4 with 15 Mk.82 at 150km?


For that I Like to use A10 or Su-25 or even Yak-130

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Jet engine is something that restrict us .... if our turbofan jet engine program show its fruit and we become able to atleast make reliable cost-effective and optimized turbo fan engine with at least 24-30 Killo Newton dry thrust power , then we simply can design and build something like these ( light fighter jet ) :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder


with J-85 like engine , we can't build anything better and more advance ( and useful ) than F-5

but we should find a way to keep our politicians and commanders mouth close or all of our effort lose their meaning ....

become able to domestically turn 3gneration F-5 to 4th-Generation F-5 is good achievement but they ruined it ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pin gu

OldTwilight said:


> if our politicians keep their mouth shots , then we are in right direction but our advancing is slow .... very very slow ...



Today's news
*پروازهای خروجی فرودگاه مهرآباد مختل شد/نارضایتی مردم از ایرلاین‌های داخلی*

به گزارش خبرنگار اقتصادی خبرگزاری تسنیم، یکی از مسافران پرواز 964 هواپیمایی ایرتور با اشاره به افت شدید کیفیت خدمات‌رسانی شرکت‌های هواپیمایی، اظهار کرد: پرواز تهران-مشهد ایران ایرتور قرار بود ساعت 8 و 35 دقیقه امروز صبح انجام شود، اما به دلیل آنچه نقص فنی اعلام شده تا اطلاع ثانوی این پرواز با تاخیر انجام می‌شود.

وی ادامه داد: وضعیت امروز پروازهای فرودگاه مهرآباد نامناسب است چند پرواز به دلیل وضعیت جوی و نقص فنی کنسل شده یا با تاخیر نامشخص انجام خواهد شد.

وی با بیان این‌که پرواز اردبیل یکی از این پروازهاست، تصریح کرد: قیمت بلیت پروازهای داخلی نسبت به چند هفته پیش سه تا چهار برابر شده اما متاسفانه خدمات ایرلاین‌ها نه تنها افزایش نیافته بلکه به شدت افت کرده است.


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...اد-مختل-شد-نارضایتی-مردم-از-ایرلاین-های-داخلی

Okay let's blame sanctions again !!!!!


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> For that I Like to use A10 or Su-25 or even Yak-130



Why? You want to play a high attrition game by fling low with Su-25 and A-10? Damaged airplanes and lost airplanes?
We are technology wise at a point today where high altitude bombing from 10km altitude can be done sufficiently accurate. That was not the case in the days of A-10 and Su-25. Plus it requires less skill, less braveness and you of course have much better battlefield overview from 10km altitude.

Su-24, F-111, Su-25 and A-10 have their benefit when the airspace is contested or hostile and terrain masking and speed is one solution for survival.
Against enemies without radar guided large SAMs and fighters, like insurgencies, there is no need for that capability.

Su-25/A-10 instead of the F-5 is a solution, you can also fly it high and do the bombing. But which design is cheaper and cheaper to operate?
So despite the lack of supersonic fleeing capability, a Su-25 with similar avionics would maybe be better than the Kowsar, but how much does it cost compared to the internal Kowsar? How much are operation costs in comparison?

The Kowsar with its tandem glass cockpit is a good supersonic trainer for the future. With its SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system and targeting pod, it is a good CAS aircraft. With its SVP-24 like system (not fully confirmed), it can cost effectively do high altitude dumb bombing in non-contested airspace. In contested airspace it can do low level bombing at higher attrition rate and always be a good surprise for enemy aircrafts with HOBS WVR AAMs.
So I see at least two specialized roles for this aircraft and a requirement of 60-200.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

*خط تولید جنگنده کوثر راه افتاده و در حال تولید هستیم/ صرفه جویی 16 و نیم میلیون دلاری با کوثر*
به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، امیر بنی طرفی رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، شب گذشته با حضور در برنامه گفتگوی ویژه خبری، در خصوص جنگنده کوثر که روز گذشته با حضور رئیس جمهور رونمایی شد، اظهار داشت: برای تست این جنگنده 28 سورتی پرواز در نظر گرفتیم که تاکنون حدود 20 سورتی آن انجام شده و اکنون آخرین تست‌های خود را پیش از واگذاری به نیروی هوای ارتش به عنوان نیروی کاربر می گذراند.

بنی طرفی با بیان اینکه خط تولید جنگنده کوثر آماده بوده و هم اکنون نیز در حال تولید است، گفت: با تولید این جنگنده، در کل هواپیما 16 و نیم میلیون دلار و در بخش اویونیک 7 و نیم میلیون دلار صرفه جویی میشود.

وی درخصوص خمکاری با بخش خصوصی و شرکت های دانش بنین در این موضوع نیز تصریح کرد: ۷۵ درصد کار این هواپیما در بخش خصوصی صورت گرفت و ما در وزارت دفاع آن را هدایت کردیم.

رئیس سازان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع افزود: در صنعت دفاعی شاید سه چهار درصد از کشورهای خارجی استفاده کرده ایم و علی رغم تحریم ها همیشه با تلاش و توان داخلی پیشرفته ایم

بنی طرفی اضافه کرد: سرریز فناوری های صنایع دفاعی در حوزه غیر نظامی هم مورد استفاده قرار می گیرد و ما نیز بدلیل تحریم هایی که هواپیماهای غیرنظامی ما شدند در بخشهای تامین قطعات این هواپیماها به این حوزه کمک می کنیم.
https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970...راه-افتاده-و-در-حال-تولید-هستیم-صرفه-جویی-6-و


----------



## pin gu

Here another idea for you guys start using dummy bombs on F-5s and drop your dummy bombs at the same time with your actual precise bombs through UAVs during your operations .instead of upgrading F-5s to Kowsar you will save 7.5 million dollar and you can put your 62 knowledge based companies 10 universities and 4000 persons to work on something that can be useful for you I mean really useful .

what about trainer usage ? send your current F-5s just to do little bit maneuvering and break sound barrier .believe me its much better training since original F-5 can achieve higher speeds and put more pressure on your pilots  .

much more cost efficient plan with almost same result .


----------



## ilia

من انگلیسیم زیاد خوب نیست و سوتی میدم . لطفا یکی از دوستان زحمت بکشه یه تاپیک کلی از این کوثر با تیتر kowsar:modernized iranian made f5
یا یچیزی مشابه این اسم بزنه و همه عکس هارو داخل اون قرار بده


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Why? You want to play a high attrition game by fling low with Su-25 and A-10? Damaged airplanes and lost airplanes?
> We are technology wise at a point today where high altitude bombing from 10km altitude can be done sufficiently accurate. That was not the case in the days of A-10 and Su-25. Plus it requires less skill, less braveness and you of course have much better battlefield overview from 10km altitude.
> 
> Su-24, F-111, Su-25 and A-10 have their benefit when the airspace is contested or hostile and terrain masking and speed is one solution for survival.
> Against enemies without radar guided large SAMs and fighters, like insurgencies, there is no need for that capability.
> 
> Su-25/A-10 instead of the F-5 is a solution, you can also fly it high and do the bombing. But which design is cheaper and cheaper to operate?
> So despite the lack of supersonic fleeing capability, a Su-25 with similar avionics would maybe be better than the Kowsar, but how much does it cost compared to the internal Kowsar? How much are operation costs in comparison?
> 
> The Kowsar with its tandem glass cockpit is a good supersonic trainer for the future. With its SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system and targeting pod, it is a good CAS aircraft. With its SVP-24 like system (not fully confirmed), it can cost effectively do high altitude dumb bombing in non-contested airspace. In contested airspace it can do low level bombing at higher attrition rate and always be a good surprise for enemy aircrafts with HOBS WVR AAMs.
> So I see at least two specialized roles for this aircraft and a requirement of 60-200.


Kowsar have a serious flaw and that is its low payload capacity, that's the problem and SU-25 is around 11 Million$ if you want to buy a new one , but you always can built something based on it or on A10 design, To be honest I think if they have developed Burhan instead of building something based on F-5 it was better


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> Kowsar have a serious flaw and that is its low payload capacity, that's the problem and SU-25 is around 11 Million$ if you want to buy a new one , but you always can built something based on it or on A10 design, To be honest I think if they have developed Burhan instead of building something based on F-5 it was better



With 3200kg the payload of the F-5 is ok.
A Su-25 can haul more but the point is:

The F-5 was the last US "3rd World" fighter. Something that was designed to be cheap, cheap to operate and cheap to handle. Providing nations that could otherwise go into Soviet sphere of influence with a cost effective weapon was still a US goal in the 60's. After that and after the situation got stabile, weapons became just Business.
The F-16 already got a engine so complex and expensive that it went far from the idea of a efficient weapon, it was designed for US needs.

Soviets never had a "3rd world" export fighter but building fighters was not commercial business for them. They always sought a cost effective weapon instead, communist ideology.

So yes, the Su-25 might be comparable in overall costs to the F-5 and haul a ton more payload, but the IRIAF likes the F-5 for it's cost effectiveness. Alone the fleet size, infrastructure and experience make it a more favorable platform for the task.

Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).

You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> With 3200kg the payload of the F-5 is ok.
> A Su-25 can haul more but the point is:
> 
> The F-5 was the last US "3rd World" fighter. Something that was designed to be cheap, cheap to operate and cheap to handle. Providing nations that could otherwise go into Soviet sphere of influence with a cost effective weapon was still a US goal in the 60's. After that and after the situation got stabile, weapons became just Business.
> The F-16 already got a engine so complex and expensive that it went far from the idea of a efficient weapon, it was designed for US needs.
> 
> Soviets never had a "3rd world" export fighter but building fighters was not commercial business for them. They always sought a cost effective weapon instead, communist ideology.
> 
> So yes, the Su-25 might be comparable in overall costs to the F-5 and haul a ton more payload, but the IRIAF likes the F-5 for it's cost effectiveness. Alone the fleet size, infrastructure and experience make it a more favorable platform for the task.
> 
> Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
> You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).
> 
> You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
> You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
> But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.



Realistically how will the jet preform though? I know I don't speak for myself when I ask this since many who follow military related topics tend to label Iran as a maker of fake and or grossly underwhelming products when it comes to the standard big ticket item; tanks, jets, ships etc, etc. So Iran coming out and talking about this F-5 upgrade/variant I'm guessing only brings more speculation as to whether or not Iran is trying to show its legit advancement in Jet tech or just another propaganda ploy midst increasing economic hardship and regional/trans-regional tensions. how often does Iran use the F-5 currently, how many are in service, what is the real world efficacy of this rather dated aircraft.

I'm just absolutely stumped on what this F-5 variant is for exactly. Is Iran planning on finally focusing on a build up of it's air force? As well as how many Iran is willing to produce (I think this is always overlooked, given how bad a shape Irans air force is in currently).

Some one said in this thread earlier or perhaps another thread that Iran needs interceptors and I completely agree with that sentiment. Given that this plane looks rather small I'm guessing its flight range is not that big so it's for close air combat, or air-to-ground combat?

Anyways, You said that since this air craft is cost effective so one would HOPE that Iran at least produces an amicable amount of them. Personally I think Iran needs to shift away from ballistic missiles and focus more on jet production and technology. BMs are a great deterrent but the 21st war needs more than just missiles.


----------



## Raghfarm007

pin gu said:


> *خط تولید جنگنده کوثر راه افتاده و در حال تولید هستیم/ صرفه جویی 16 و نیم میلیون دلاری با کوثر*
> به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، امیر بنی طرفی رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، شب گذشته با حضور در برنامه گفتگوی ویژه خبری، در خصوص جنگنده کوثر که روز گذشته با حضور رئیس جمهور رونمایی شد، اظهار داشت: برای تست این جنگنده 28 سورتی پرواز در نظر گرفتیم که تاکنون حدود 20 سورتی آن انجام شده و اکنون آخرین تست‌های خود را پیش از واگذاری به نیروی هوای ارتش به عنوان نیروی کاربر می گذراند.
> 
> بنی طرفی با بیان اینکه خط تولید جنگنده کوثر آماده بوده و هم اکنون نیز در حال تولید است، گفت: با تولید این جنگنده، در کل هواپیما 16 و نیم میلیون دلار و در بخش اویونیک 7 و نیم میلیون دلار صرفه جویی میشود.
> 
> وی درخصوص خمکاری با بخش خصوصی و شرکت های دانش بنین در این موضوع نیز تصریح کرد: ۷۵ درصد کار این هواپیما در بخش خصوصی صورت گرفت و ما در وزارت دفاع آن را هدایت کردیم.
> 
> رئیس سازان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع افزود: در صنعت دفاعی شاید سه چهار درصد از کشورهای خارجی استفاده کرده ایم و علی رغم تحریم ها همیشه با تلاش و توان داخلی پیشرفته ایم
> 
> بنی طرفی اضافه کرد: سرریز فناوری های صنایع دفاعی در حوزه غیر نظامی هم مورد استفاده قرار می گیرد و ما نیز بدلیل تحریم هایی که هواپیماهای غیرنظامی ما شدند در بخشهای تامین قطعات این هواپیماها به این حوزه کمک می کنیم.
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970530000073/خط-تولید-جنگنده-کوثر-راه-افتاده-و-در-حال-تولید-هستیم-صرفه-جویی-6-و



What lieing scum they are.... they cant even keep thier lies the same. Yesterday they said that this piece of crap copy of F-5 was going to save them $7.5 million, today they say it will save them $16.5 million! Over night the vale of the plane went up by $9 million. What a joke this system is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Cthulhu said:


> Iran is totally in the right direction, Iran will "catch up" to France very soon.
> https://vip.politicsmeanspolitics.com/2018/06/12/irans-brain-drain-ranks-first-in-the-world/


we also don't need better water management, it will rain and lake orumieh and si o se pol will be flooding with water again

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

even if the initial project of the F-5 is very dated, I think no one doubts the goodness of this platform.
And no one would be disappointed if a nation that has been using it for decades and over time due to external causes had to implement the infrastructure to make spare parts, until it had the possibility to rebuild complete aircraft, which in fact gave birth to the industry national aviation; 

I wrote today no one would have to say if he decides to continue with this plane made thanks to the enormous amount of work done by Iranian technicians and engineers in doing the reverse enginereng and then implement the modernization to her as possible, turning it into a product that can boast of the brand - made in Iran - with which to re-arm part of its air fleet.
What is not acceptable are the bombastic declarations in presenting this plane making it perceive that it is a completely new product from the origin of the national pencil.

Honor to the new F-5 Made in Iran and to those who helped to make it happen, for me it's a beautiful airplane
Shame for the words with which they presented it, because in seeing it all a smile appeared, recognizing its true origin, behavior of the military and civil authorities that actually overshadowed the work done.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> With 3200kg the payload of the F-5 is ok.
> A Su-25 can haul more but the point is:
> 
> The F-5 was the last US "3rd World" fighter. Something that was designed to be cheap, cheap to operate and cheap to handle. Providing nations that could otherwise go into Soviet sphere of influence with a cost effective weapon was still a US goal in the 60's. After that and after the situation got stabile, weapons became just Business.
> The F-16 already got a engine so complex and expensive that it went far from the idea of a efficient weapon, it was designed for US needs.
> 
> Soviets never had a "3rd world" export fighter but building fighters was not commercial business for them. They always sought a cost effective weapon instead, communist ideology.
> 
> So yes, the Su-25 might be comparable in overall costs to the F-5 and haul a ton more payload, but the IRIAF likes the F-5 for it's cost effectiveness. Alone the fleet size, infrastructure and experience make it a more favorable platform for the task.
> 
> Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
> You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).
> 
> You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
> You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
> But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.


F-5 can carry 3200kg but Kosar according to what available online carry less . a lot less , around half that amount.
F-5 fly up to 16.5km , Kosar fly up to 15km , F5 fly as fast as 1.6mach kosar fly at 1.2mach .

all these point to two things , first for some reason structure of Kosar is much heavier than F-5 or Owj engine is considerably weaker than J85 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

OldTwilight said:


> Jet engine is something that restrict us .... if our turbofan jet engine program show its fruit and we become able to atleast make reliable cost-effective and optimized turbo fan engine with at least 24-30 Killo Newton dry thrust power , then we simply can design and build something like these ( light fighter jet ) :
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder
> 
> 
> with J-85 like engine , we can't build anything better and more advance ( and useful ) than F-5
> 
> but we should find a way to keep our politicians and commanders mouth close or all of our effort lose their meaning ....
> 
> become able to domestically turn 3gneration F-5 to 4th-Generation F-5 is good achievement but they ruined it ....


Agreed,these utterly idiotic over hyped unveilings that creates unrealistic expectations is very damaging both politically and militarily to irans credibility.Had this been handled differently,ie none of this bogus new aircraft claims crap,then I think that the results would have been both more impressive and just as importantly far,far less embarrassing.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cthulhu

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> we also don't need better water management, it will rain and lake orumieh and si o se pol will be flooding with water again


Thank God for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

pin gu said:


> Zob ahan is 47 years old . Islamic republic is 40 years old I wouldn't call it "over night" .
> 
> Main point is today's Iran in some fields are much better than France 1996 but why it can't be seen on defense industry specially our topic airforce projects ?


I think the main reason is Iran's isolation. I have a small startup here and it is so easy to access all the resources in the world to grow. You can call different companies everywhere to see if they are interested in your product or ask for investment from other side of the world.

I'm also in touch with startups in Iran in the same field that I am and life is so tough. They are limited to resources within the country.

This is a huge difference. If France wants to develope a 5th generation fighter jet, it doesn't need to source all its requirements from within its industry and 60 million population. It can go the German, British, Japanese and..... to source best of everything that it can't find in France. So they move much faster than us.

No country can ever be as resourceful as the whole world.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> F-5 can carry 3200kg but Kosar according to what available online carry less . a lot less , around half that amount.
> F-5 fly up to 16.5km , Kosar fly up to 15km , F5 fly as fast as 1.6mach kosar fly at 1.2mach .
> 
> all these point to two things , first for some reason structure of Kosar is much heavier than F-5 or Owj engine is considerably weaker than J85 engine.



Those stats are for a clean F-5E. They probably gave numbers for a typical weapon and fuel loaded Kowsar = realistic numbers.


----------



## OldTwilight

PeeD said:


> Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
> You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).
> 
> You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
> You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
> But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.




in best case , we just need to upgrade our F-5 to Kowsar Standard and use it for basic combat training for our Pilots .... not build new F-5 because those are useless anyway .... even in Iran-Iraq war , F-5 Fighters were almost useless and it was during 1980s .... 


side note : with this upgrade for F-5s , the Kowsar Project has no value .... right now we have two seat Fighter/Trainer so why should we spend more on Kowsar project !? ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Realistically how will the jet preform though? I know I don't speak for myself when I ask this since many who follow military related topics tend to label Iran as a maker of fake and or grossly underwhelming products when it comes to the standard big ticket item; tanks, jets, ships etc, etc. So Iran coming out and talking about this F-5 upgrade/variant I'm guessing only brings more speculation as to whether or not Iran is trying to show its legit advancement in Jet tech or just another propaganda ploy midst increasing economic hardship and regional/trans-regional tensions. how often does Iran use the F-5 currently, how many are in service, what is the real world efficacy of this rather dated aircraft.
> 
> I'm just absolutely stumped on what this F-5 variant is for exactly. Is Iran planning on finally focusing on a build up of it's air force? As well as how many Iran is willing to produce (I think this is always overlooked, given how bad a shape Irans air force is in currently).
> 
> Some one said in this thread earlier or perhaps another thread that Iran needs interceptors and I completely agree with that sentiment. Given that this plane looks rather small I'm guessing its flight range is not that big so it's for close air combat, or air-to-ground combat?
> 
> Anyways, You said that since this air craft is cost effective so one would HOPE that Iran at least produces an amicable amount of them. Personally I think Iran needs to shift away from ballistic missiles and focus more on jet production and technology. BMs are a great deterrent but the 21st war needs more than just missiles.




till our Government don't found for our Turbo Fan jet engine project and the project don't show real fruits , then all of Iran's Fighter jet programs are in vain .... without reliable , optimized and cost effective Jet engine , we can't built anything better than F-5 ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Arminkh said:


> I think the main reason is Iran's isolation. I have a small startup here and it is so easy to access all the resources in the world to grow. You can call different companies everywhere to see if they are interested in your product or ask for investment from other side of the world.
> 
> I'm also in touch with startups in Iran in the same field that I am and life is so tough. They are limited to resources within the country.
> 
> This is a huge difference. If France wants to develope a 5th generation fighter jet, it doesn't need to source all its requirements from within its industry and 60 million population. It can go the German, British, Japanese and..... to source best of everything that it can't find in France. So they move much faster than us.
> 
> No country can ever be as resourceful as the whole world.


Very true,however when you consider how little iran spends on its military compared to it neighbors......
Iran doesnt need to be as resourceful as the whole world,but the simple fact is that when it comes to weapons and their associated technological development if you arent willing to put up the cash and the other resources necessary in the first place then dont expect great results.
Also,if you then try and pretend that those not so great,ie mediocre,results are something much more impressive than what they really are,well then you just run the risk of winding up looking very stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

OldTwilight said:


> in best case , we just need to upgrade our F-5 to Kowsar Standard and use it for basic combat training for our Pilots .... not build new F-5 because those are useless anyway .... even in Iran-Iraq war , F-5 Fighters were almost useless and it was during 1980s ....
> 
> 
> side note : with this upgrade for F-5s , the Kowsar Project has no value .... right now we have two seat Fighter/Trainer so why should we spend more on Kowsar project !? ....



The F-5 was everything except useless during the war, it was THE short range bomber that provided CAS to the frontline.
F-4s did the fancy stuff and flew into Iraqi airspace and F-14 even fancier, intercepting Iraqi strike packages.
But avoid such statements.

Secondly: Since the mid 2000s, they have started to build F-5 airframes. Why? Why have they put a obsolete J85 engine into production?

Answer: Developing something and serial producing something are two different worlds. If you want to have a aircraft building plant you literally need generations of experiences workforce.
A serial production in which everyday production problems are experienced and solved ist of ultimate importance.
Iran just entered that phase. They must build airframes and everything to set up a working production plant that some day can receive blueprints from developers and switch production to the new design.

Yes purely money wise it would be better to use existing F-5 airframes and upgrade them to Kowsar standard. But Irans goal here is to set up a aircraft industry: A factory with hundreds of professionals making fighters.

Arminkh said something important: You would wonder how many countries have OEM suppliers from all around the world. Complete subsystems come from other countries, those who offer a better price than at home.
Irans OEMs are more or less all in Iran and if there is no OEM capable to build a part, there is no alternative than to work and invest till it can.


----------



## sahureka2

su un forum italiano un utente ha riportato una riflessione interessante
"In ogni caso vorrei menzionare la straordinaria somiglianza dei caccia da combattimento prodotti in Israele (Nesher, Kfir) con aerei francesi, i Mirage III e V
Anche gli israeliani sono partiti da un aereo straniero e lo hanno fortemente modificato in termini di motori, avionica, ecc.
Forse gli iraniani hanno fatto qualcosa del genere con questi derivati dell'F-5
Anche noi (l'Italia) per decenni siamo andati avanti con l'F-104 modificato (F-104S, ASA, ASAM) "

in all this affair it was only the language of some authorities that ruined the party of this new version of the F-5
called Kowsar


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Those stats are for a clean F-5E. They probably gave numbers for a typical weapon and fuel loaded Kowsar = realistic numbers.


Come on


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> What is this? Is this jet supposed to land on carriers?
> 
> View attachment 493573



They are also used as emergency breaks!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Kowsar project demonstrating our production capabilities ... Stop the useless nagging !

We need to pass all these steps ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

SOHEIL said:


> Kowsar project demonstrating our production capabilities ... Stop the useless nagging !
> 
> We need to pass all these steps ...


Are we near to something like RD-33 or J-79 ???????
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_RD-33
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_J79


----------



## SubWater

J-85 can not make game changer warplane for us.


----------



## SOHEIL

SubWater said:


> Are we near to something like RD-33 or J-79 ???????
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_RD-33
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_J79



RD-33 ...


----------



## SubWater

SOHEIL said:


> RD-33 ...


Good to hear that.
In west and East make warplanes base on engines but we expect our air force build engine base on warplanes.


----------



## SubWater

every body in short can explain difference and benefits of Turbo fans against Turbo jets ?????


----------



## PeeD

Turbojets are only more efficient than a turbofan in very high speed, high altitude applications.

Outside those they become inefficient, means less thrust for the amount of fuel.

At lower altitude and speed, turboprobs beat them both.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SubWater

PeeD said:


> Turbojets are only more efficient than a turbofan in very high speed, high altitude applications.
> 
> Outside those they become inefficient, means less thrust for the amount of fuel.
> 
> At lower altitude and speed, turboprobs beat them both.


Thank you bro very short informative explanation.
I appreciate it.
my question is that:
building which of them is easier and cheaper for Iran for getting around 40 KN thrust from it.


----------



## PeeD

Your welcome.

Turbofan of course and the RD-33 is the best military turbofan Iran has at hand.

and we know Iran is working on a TV3-117 turboprop copy.

Turbojet makes no sense at all in terms of efficiency (Owj, J-85), but is easier to master than a turbofan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

There is a heavy turbojet and turbofan project in the works. There is also the J-90 project which could potentially just be J-85 afterburner variant or something else.

Lastly there is a engine with 4 times the power of J-85 which is in development. That would mean >50nt engine. Two of those could power a mid size fighter.

However, eventually for a large interceptor role Iran will need to reverse engineer F110 (F-14 engine).

I don’t think Iran would spend too much time on Eastern engines as that creates even more headaches to deal with two different engine doctrines. But who knows maybe they will reverse enginer RD-33.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

OK, Here we go:
A turbojet, or "straight jet" engine, consists of the four stages of thrust generation arranged in a straight line within a tube. At the leading edge of the tube are one or more compressor fans, that compress the airstream; then, fuel injector nozzles mix atomized fuel with the compressed air; then, the fuel-air mixture is ignited from a continuous flame housed in a flame eddy; this combustion accelerates exhaust gases out the back of the tube, producing thrust. An exhaust turbine is situated behind the combustion stage; this turbine is driven by the exhaust gases, and drives the compressor fan.





A turbofan consists of a turbojet engine (the "core") surrounded by a larger tube (the "bypass"). A larger, slower fan, positioned upwind of the compressor section in the core, pushes air (relatively) slowly through both the core and the bypass. The air that makes it to the core is compressed and undergoes combustion as described above. The air that makes it to the bypass is ducted around the core, and mixes with the exhaust gases when it exits the back of the engine. Although the air in the bypass is moving slower than the exhaust gases ejected out the back of the core, it is still much faster than the ambient air that does not enter the engine at all.




As you can see, Turbofan engines have four sections: the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, and turbine. For the fan and the compressor in the fore half section, where the temperature is relatively low (600˚C or lower), A titanium alloy is mainly used. For the turbine and the combustion chamber in the rear half section where temperatures are higher (1500˚C or higher), a nickel-based alloy or iron-based alloy (a.k.a Superalloys) is used.
So, The problem of developing of aircraft engines shrinks down to the problem of developing single crystal superalloys, which is one of the hardest subjects to master on this planet.
http://www.tms.org/superalloys/10.7449/1980/Superalloys_1980_205_214.pdf

Superalloys need very specialized manufacturing processes (which afaik we don't have), They should be manufactured is a very spacial form (single crystal form), They use some of the rarest materials on earth (rhenium), Which Even Chinese were not able to purify till last year.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-aero-engine-information-thread.300409/page-44#post-9834177

So, With smart educated Iranians fleeing the country in such a high rate, We can kiss goodbye the dream of producing domestic engines, unless of course, The greatest Islamic scientists of 21st century, Dr. Hossein Ravazadeh and Prof. Ali Akbar Raefipour, Can come up with a solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

فیلم تاکسی کوثر 88 با سرعت بالا بر روی باند پرواز منتشر شد


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> I give you a scenario in which a F-5 makes sense and is cost effective:
> 
> - You need a CAS aircraft to support your ground forces with Mk.82 class firepower
> - You operate within a IADS in high intensity warfare or else just counter insurgency
> - You want to make use of swarm survivability should your IADS fail. A swarm with large HOBS IIR WVR AAM for self defense
> - The concentration on CAS only and that with automated bombing system (SVP-24-like) or advanced targeting pod keeps necessary pilot kills at the very minimum. No dogfighting (HOBS for emergency), no race scenarios for pole positioning. Just high altitude bombing with a system that automatically releases the unguided bombs at the Fraktion of a second if you or the autopilot keeps course. Hence minimum pilot training.
> - The CAS role in low threat environment means, max. speed is not critical
> 
> What do you get for that role?
> 
> Bear in mind *the F-5 design is so cost optimized that it has 4 times (no guessing, fact) lower maintenance effort/cost and hence lifetime cost than a F-4
> *
> The F-4 on the other hand has a up to 3 times higher payload. While the F-5 is at least half and up to 3 times as expensive per airframe.
> Do you want a F-5 with 5 Mk.82 within 50km of your requested strike position or a F-4 with 15 Mk.82 at 150km?
> 
> Iran needs something in the F-14 class to enter BVR high altitude competition with the enemy. Anything below it makes no sense, anything below it must work in a protected niche. Anything else can on the other hand make up much of the penalty by staying in the low altitude WVR game only if it comes to a engagement. There HOBS WVR missile and numbers are king.
> 
> So for now the situation could be following: In Iraq and Syria, the IRIAF operations against ISIS were just too expensive to sustain. Russians could do it, but not Iran. Using the F-4 and Su-24 fleet to low altitude dumb bomb ISIS or even using PGMs would let attrition and costs explode. F-5 operations would may be affordable but attrition would be too high.
> 
> The key to success of Russians was the following combination: Robustness and reliability/low-maintenance of the small (~30) fleet of aircraft plus the low attrition high altitude bombing capability provided by the SVP-24 keeping the cases where PGMs were absolute necessary (mobile targets e.g) at very minimum. SVP-24 proved itself in the ability to hit large target like apartment blocks and combined with heavy bombs gave high PK.
> 
> We have to expect that Irans military learned its lessons from this campaign. Same as Russians likely learned that a armed drone like the S-129 is most cost effective when it comes to small and mobile targets.
> 
> So we want to have such a capability and the F-5 would be a ideal platform for this.
> 
> I'm quite happy the IRIAF did not present a upscale F-5, F-18 like aircaft actually. It would look cool but be inefficient.
> We need to pave the ground in terms of subsystems, then move to better engines and just after that try to come up with something with serious air to air capability (capability to operate in enemy airspace).
> Whether it is a brute force heavy interceptor like the Mig-31 or a smart asymmetrical solution like my Qaher-313 concept. We still need to qualify subsystems such as FBW system, HMS/HMD, airborne x-band AESA/PESA (we have it already on the ground) plus weapon systems like a heavy WVR HOBS IIR AAM, anti-radar missile, air launched compact cruise missile.
> 
> PS: A twin seat F-5 also makes a good advanced supersonic trainer. So building 100 for the counter insurgency CAS role (Russian campaign) also provides a secondary role of having 100 supersoic trainers.



I would disagree with almost 50% of what you wrote here!

1st Lets talk about platforms before getting into the subsystems of platforms!

You say Iran needs CAS fighters to provide support for ground forces. Yes I could agree with that IF a threat of an invasion from a neighboring country whos Air Force wasn't that much stronger than Iran's existed Like Saddam or Saudi Arabia or Turkey! But such a threat does NOT exist so the only reason we would need CAS fighter for the immediate future would be for providing areal support for boarder areas. 
Plus, against an Airpower like the U.S. that can hit you from all sides what exactly do you think the survivability of Iranian CAS fighters placed at bases within 200km of Iranian border would be????

And I'm not questioning that Iran needs a limited amount of CAS fighters and yes in a normal situation where the U.S. is NOT the main threat Iran would need 4-6 CAS fighters deployed across 14-16 bases on active status placed at bases near the boarder(within 150km) to provide Air support for Iranian boarder guards & cost guards(IRGC) (~64 Active + 24 for Training & not including storage)
So Yes your assessment that Iran would need about 100 low cost CAS fighter/Advanced trainer in a normal situation is correct BUT how many do we already have? How many CAS fighters has Iran spent time and money on?(Shafaq, Simorgh, Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Bavar, Kowsar1&2,.....) and finally we haven't been in a normal situation for the past 40 years! 

Today we have ~ 60 active F-5/Saegheh/Azarakhsh/Simorgh + 20 Active J-7 + 10 Active Su-22 + handful of Su-25 + 40 or so Kowsar trainer/CAS fighter the Air Force has already ordered + storage.

And yes there is a need to upgrade & overhaul our current CAS fighter to increase survivability and there is a need to replace the Airframes of the older F-5's BUT there was no need to redesign the F-5 or build a new cockpit and canopy a simple upgrade would have been sufficient! 

FYI this new fighter is bigger than the F-5 and it is an upscale version of the F-5 using Iranian J-85's OWJ engines although I'm also happy that they didn't add an additional useless stabilizers especially on the 2 seater version but if they had made it any bigger than this it wouldn't have been able to go supersonic with the owj engines at all!

As for subsystems according to the Airforce this fighter cost Iran about $16.5 Million USD per Aircraft and is equipped with at least $7Million USD worth of Avionics & subsystems and yet it doesn't even have an IRST or an Air refueling pod and there is NO excuse for that especially when you have already added 7 Million USD worth of subsystems to the platform!
(FYI the American T-38 was priced at $7 Million USD in 2016)

*Don't get me wrong the various subsystems Iran has developed is astonishing BUT they are wasted on a CAS fighter such as this that doesn't have the ability to protect it's self against areal threats even within visible range nor the situational awareness and sensor capability needed to see the threats that are coming at it or the range needed to take full advantage of its advanced avionics nor the payload capacity needed to make the subsystems cost effective.....*

And in Syria one of the MAIN reason the Russians could afford dropping so many bombs was mainly due to their bombers!!!!!!!!!! Do you know how many F-5's fighter variants Iran would have needed to deploy and how many sorties they would have needed to fly and how many millions of dollars worth of Air Defense equipment would have been needed and how many maintenance crew and facilities on the ground would have been needed..... to simply drop half the ordinance the Russians dropped using their larger bombers and strike aircraft alone???
So you got that backwards my friend because using CAS fighters to accomplish even half of what the Russians did would NOT have been cost effective AT ALL! Where as if we had just 1 supersonic bomber we could have dropped a large number of low cost ordnance at least in norther Syria and gotten out before the Israelis could intercept them!!!!! 

You say the maintenance cost of an F-4 is 4 Times higher than an F-5 that is absolutely correct BUT in terms of capability 1 F-4 is worth far more than 4 F-5's!

How many Mk.82 do you think an F-5 can deliver to a target located 400km from it's base vs how many Mk.82 do you think an F-4E can deliver to that very same location??
What is the sensor capability and situational awareness of an F-4 as appose to an F-5? And which do you think has far greater survivability? 
EVEN IN TERMS OF PROVIDING cover for your ground forces on your own territory near the boarder in an all out war what exactly are the chances of an F-4 detecting an enemy F-15 on an intercept course as appose to an F-5? (And with the proliferation of 5th Gen fighter IRST become vital to increase situational awareness and knowing when to run sometimes is far more valuable than having the weapons needed for dog fights) 

As for SWARM tactics which do you think is better an Aircraft that can deploy a swarm of air launched weapons or having to pay the cost of maintaining a fleet of over 2000 manned fighter jets.....

And Iran is a relatively large country and if you were to divide the country into 20 sections each section would be about the size of the UAE or Austria and dedicating 5 CAS fighters to each section would = 100 CAS fighters 
Which means in a country the size of Iran CAS fighter will be utterly useless in an all out war and Iran doesn't really need to deploy anymore than 4-6 CAS fighter across 14-16 bases located within 150km of Iranian boarders 

FYI Ballistic calculation is the minimum requirement for advanced 3rd gen & 4th gen fighter's weapon system and yes it take years of R&D and trial and error to develop and perfect but it is nothing new and it's an absolute minimum requirement for all fighters but ballistic calculation can only take you so far you would still need an optical, laser, GPS or an advanced INS solution for precision targeting! And they are far more of a requirement on the ordnance of lower payload CAS fighters than they are on larger bombers!
Because it's utterly absurd NOT to have them when you lack payload! what you want to spend $20,000 USD on jet fuel alone to get your fighter to a target with 2-4 A2G ordnance but you don't wanna spend an additional $5,000 USD per ordnance worth of computer hardware, software, gyro and optics to increase the chances of your ordinance actually hitting the target? It's absurd especially when your capable of producing the weapons yourself on an Iranian designed weapon system and we are not talking about buying overpriced American PGM when Iran is fully capable of producing them at a fraction of the price! 


Got to go for now talk to you later....


----------



## Draco.IMF

From 2020 (UN resolution) Iran can purchase legally weapons, lets see what Irans "partner", Russia, is ready to sell
possible that Iran made order and russia is already manufacturing them, and from 2020 delivery can start..Please, SU-30

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> I think problem is lack of good engine which prevents them from going for heavier air frames.



For Iran powerplant is actually the easy part compared to a viable Airframe! At worst you can import them.... Iran's obsession with the F-5 is strictly due to Ti and raw martial requirements


Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> i mostly agree with you but iran most needs an interceptor, so why would it need to have an internal weapons bay (which has been heavily criticised on the f-35 as not being able to carry much) or be stealthy?



The main problem with the F-35 is it's price tag and it's price tag has nothing to do with it's internal weapons bay and the price tag is high because the Americans are trying to get other countries to pay the massive R&D cost of the F-35B's VTOL or STOVL capability. 

Internal Weapons bay is not just about stealth. Most pilots will tell you SPEED IS LIFE and by speed I don't mean the speed the fighter could achieve by burning out all it's fuel at once in a few minutes.

When a fighter jet gets armed with a bunch of external weapons it's cruise speed and ability to maneuver get compromised due to the added drag and weight now you may not be able to do much about the weight part when building a platform but you can address the drag with a well designed aircraft that's equipped with an internal weapons bay and even a little bit of difference in cruise speed will have wide implication in terms of range. And in that regard an F-35 can fly circles around an F-16 and F/A-18's 

Yes an unarmed F-16 if faster than an unarmed F-35 and yes even a armed F-16 could fly faster than an F-35 in terms of MAX speed but for an F-16 to accomplish that the pilot would have to completely empty it's fuel tanks and compromise it's range well beyond acceptable levels. 
Yes an F-16 is more maneuverable than an F-35 but an F-35 pilot doesn't need to point it's nose at you to take you out.

And if you were to compare the F-35 with a fully upgraded F-15 the main problem with the F-35 would be it's price tag but for the U.S. Navy the F-35 is a massive improvement on the F/A-18's due to the Hornets lack of range when fully armed. So despite what people say online the F-35 most of all makes perfect sense for the U.S. Navy! and if you have the extra cash for it, it is a good replacement for the F-16's and Harriers.


----------



## SubWater

skyshadow said:


> فیلم تاکسی کوثر 88 با سرعت بالا بر روی باند پرواز منتشر شد




        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

You are right that getting such a CAS fleet is a luxury thing for Iran as it has a enemy that can more or less stop their safe operation. But what if Iran is at a stage where it can afford this luxury? You gave the answer: Border guards, insurgencies in or outside the borders, in such low intensity warfare this capability is very welcome and we could not effectively provide it to Syria and Iraq in the past.

So are F-4 or Su-24 like the Russians uses better than a F-5? No. These are aircraft capable of interdiction strikes. You have more capability than you need and must pay for it with very sortie. Mach 2 capability, swing wing (Su-24), complicated avionics.
Plus, they are designed for heavy loads. Against insurgents a load of 5 Mk.82 on a F-5 at a range of 400km is sufficient as you will seldom encounter a larger target, most times a sortie means 2-3 bombs to do the job.
I said 100 Kowsar because its about 3 times the size of the Russian force in Syria to make up for the lower capability which brings higher availability. Higher availability is of more importance than load against insurgents.

As for ballistic computer: Russian Su-24 have one too but I'm talking about a SVP-24 like system. Something revolutionary not even 4th gen. Su-34 ballistic computer can compete with. This is the real game changer here and why Russian were successful with their small fleet. If the Kowsar has such a system as they hinted to, it would be the key to keep attrition low enough to be a cost effective weapon.

As for survivability: This fleet of 100 Kowsar would be fragile glass if attacked by US airpower. HOBS missile are the last defense and operating close to the own borders will provide it with advance information about incoming threats. But they main solution is: Drop the dumb bombs, push to afterburner and try to get back to your base at mach 1,5, it likely will be close because you are doing CAS and never fly more than ~400km away from your base. Honestly, the relative high speed fleeing capability is one of the main reasons why a F-5 airframe would make some sense in 2018, main points like easy and cheap operating costs aside (plus decent maneuverability).

I don't think they changed anything in the Kowsar that could make it any bigger. It is a 1:1 F-5 airframe. I also don't want to see an air refueling capability on the Kowsar. It is a cheap CAS fighter never operating in a hostile airspace far away. The overall system would become too expensive if you would want to get it tanker support, that's for more strategic aircraft only.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

SubWater said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



I apologize in advance if I write nonsense, but reading the translation done via the web (I hope it is as precise as possible), the Kowsar-88 will have to *training of sound speeds* .
Ok, now I am reminded of some technical data that were included in these pages with reference to the services accredited to the Kowsar (F-5) presented on August 21st:
7.5 million U.S dollar price
45000 ft max attitude
*1.2 mach speed*
new ejection seat
100% made in Iran (entire aircraft)

the speed (which could be that in flight dive) the other data listed seem to adapt in reality to the possible performance of the Kowsar-88?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

sahureka2 said:


> I apologize in advance if I write nonsense, but reading the translation done via the web (I hope it is as precise as possible), the Kowsar-88 will have to *training of sound speeds* .
> Ok, now I am reminded of some technical data that were included in these pages with reference to the services accredited to the Kowsar (F-5) presented on August 21st:
> 7.5 million U.S dollar price
> 45000 ft max attitude
> *1.2 mach speed*
> new ejection seat
> 100% made in Iran (entire aircraft)
> 
> the speed (which could be that in flight dive) the other data listed seem to adapt in reality to the possible performance of the Kowsar-88?


It says training below sound speed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Arminkh, post: 10736225, membro: 164554"] Dice allenamento sotto la velocità del suono. [/ QUOTE]
thank you, for the exact translation.
this changes my interpretation of the published technical data and the Kowsar-88

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

@sahureka2

Updated info about Kowsar( New F-5 ) unveiled at 21 august:
*2 different models/types
1- advanced trainer model of Kowsar :






2-fighter version :




*16.5 million U.S dollar Kowsar (up to dated F-5) price 
*7.5 million dollar upgrade cost from normal Iranian F-5 to Kowsar
45000 ft max attitude
1.2 mach speed
new ejection seat
*88% made in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

@sahureka2

Sub systems that have been used in Kowsar project 



un4given.1991 said:


> Source : Skyhawk military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

pin gu said:


> @sahureka2
> 
> Updated info about Kowsar( New F-5 ) unveiled at 21 august:
> *2 different models/types
> ......
> 2-fighter version :


but it's always a two-seater version!
in the article, was not a single-seater version announced ?


----------



## pin gu

sahureka2 said:


> but it's always a two-seater version!
> in the article, was not a single-seater version announced ?



https://www.mehrnews.com/news/4380661/تولید-نخستین-هواپیمای-جنگنده-ایرانی-کوثر-به-پرواز-درآمد

این هواپیما در دو نوع *تک کابین* و *دو کابین* قابل تولید خواهد بود که نوع دو کابین علاوه بر قابلیت رزمی، برای آموزش خلبانان در مرحله پیشرفته کاربرد دارد.

"There will be two models single-seater and two-seater ."

so far we only saw two-seater version till now .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Draco.IMF said:


> From 2020 (UN resolution) Iran can purchase legally weapons, lets see what Irans "partner", Russia, is ready to sell
> possible that Iran made order and russia is already manufacturing them, and from 2020 delivery can start..Please, SU-30


I wouldnt hold my breath there if I was you,not only has russia historically been very unreliable/untrustworthy when it came to any dealings with iran,even to the point of throwing away literally priceless opportunities like tu204sm deal just so as not to have any conflict with the west.As for rouhani,well he seems utterly fixated on saving his dead deal with the west to the exclusion of everything else,not to mention he has shown no interest in the military


----------



## WinterNights

I posted this in other thread but I'll post my comment here as well.

I have seen so much nagging and negativity. Iran needed to start from somewhere. Of course you would not see an F-35 like plane now. What is important is that they seem to be giving the air-force somewhat more attention and priority now. That is what is important. Yes I wish we seen these developments 10 years ago, but better late than never. At least they are now moving in the direction of development in the airforce.

I actually give respect to Iran for being pragmatic. You think Iran could not designed a new airframe? Of course it can, but it's focusing more on testing these avionics etc on a tested and proven platform before starting to design and produce its own air-frame. Once Iran has mastered the building of components, then building a newly design plane is not that far away. Heck, they're building the damned engine themselves, which is without a doubt the most difficult part.

Let the others nag and mock. They once mocked Iran's missiles, but today, they're begging Iran to sit down and negotiate over them and have annual conferences over Iran's missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> You are right that getting such a CAS fleet is a luxury thing for Iran as it has a enemy that can more or less stop their safe operation. But what if Iran is at a stage where it can afford this luxury? You gave the answer: Border guards, insurgencies in or outside the borders, in such low intensity warfare this capability is very welcome and we could not effectively provide it to Syria and Iraq in the past.
> 
> So are F-4 or Su-24 like the Russians uses better than a F-5? No. These are aircraft capable of interdiction strikes. You have more capability than you need and must pay for it with very sortie. Mach 2 capability, swing wing (Su-24), complicated avionics.
> Plus, they are designed for heavy loads. Against insurgents a load of 5 Mk.82 on a F-5 at a range of 400km is sufficient as you will seldom encounter a larger target, most times a sortie means 2-3 bombs to do the job.
> I said 100 Kowsar because its about 3 times the size of the Russian force in Syria to make up for the lower capability which brings higher availability. Higher availability is of more importance than load against insurgents.
> 
> As for ballistic computer: Russian Su-24 have one too but I'm talking about a SVP-24 like system. Something revolutionary not even 4th gen. Su-34 ballistic computer can compete with. This is the real game changer here and why Russian were successful with their small fleet. If the Kowsar has such a system as they hinted to, it would be the key to keep attrition low enough to be a cost effective weapon.
> 
> As for survivability: This fleet of 100 Kowsar would be fragile glass if attacked by US airpower. HOBS missile are the last defense and operating close to the own borders will provide it with advance information about incoming threats. But they main solution is: Drop the dumb bombs, push to afterburner and try to get back to your base at mach 1,5, it likely will be close because you are doing CAS and never fly more than ~400km away from your base. Honestly, the relative high speed fleeing capability is one of the main reasons why a F-5 airframe would make some sense in 2018, main points like easy and cheap operating costs aside (plus decent maneuverability).
> 
> I don't think they changed anything in the Kowsar that could make it any bigger. It is a 1:1 F-5 airframe. I also don't want to see an air refueling capability on the Kowsar. It is a cheap CAS fighter never operating in a hostile airspace far away. The overall system would become too expensive if you would want to get it tanker support, that's for more strategic aircraft only.



WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
Yes F-4's and Su-24's are much better than F-5's! 

In Kaman 99 operation Iran had to use over +40 F-5's flown from Dezful to just hit Al Nasiriyah Airbase in Iraq where by comparison 12 F-4 were doing the same job against other bases as +40 F-5's!

An F-5 in the best of conditions would be able to fly no more than 4 Mk.82's to a target 400km away where as an F-4 could carry 18 Mk.82 with far greater survivability

So no in an all out war F-5's or Kowsars or Saegheh or Q-313.... will be useless to Iran unless deployed in the 1000's and if deployed in the 1000's the fuel cost alone will bankrupt Iran's defense budget!
And for Iran to spend 100's of millions and decades of R&D and research to build a CAS fighter just to combat terrorist while the U.S. has been threatening us for the past 3 decades sound a bit absurd to me!

And as for boarder operation for the price of only 12 Kowsars (~$200 Million USD) placed at 3 current bases (4 Aircrafts per base) near Iran's eastern boarders Omediah, Dezful and Tabriz we could instead build 200 armed Sh-129's + pay the cost to building 50 small bases each equipped with an airstrip that's sufficient for the Sh-129 all across Iran's eastern boarder area.

So you see for the operations you have in mind where you don't really need 500lb bombs it would be cheaper and far more effective to maintain a fleet of 200 Sh-129's with 50 of them in the Air 24/7 365 days a year housed at 50 small Airstrips within 100km of Iran's eastern boarders 
And that's not including the cost of the maintenance, fuel, spare parts, training, housing, arming..... for you CAS Kowsars 

And the only reason you wouldn't put a refueling pod on the Kowsar in a country the size of Iran with the Air Force that it has would ONLY be because the engines or other parts of the aircraft wouldn't be able to handle the extended flight hours to a point where it would be worth the cost. 

As for the F-5's ability to run yes the main brilliance behind the platform is it's ability to run at almost Mach 1 (Mach 0.98) without the use of it's afterburners and other 3rd and 4th gen fighters would need to use large amounts of fuel and blast their afterburners to try to catch it which will limit their range!
But standard F-5E wouldn't know when to run due to a lack of sensor capability and without Air refueling pod blasting their afterburners after hitting a target 400km away would be as dangerous as getting intercepted. 
And at the end of the day your fighter jet is only as good as the weapons is can carry and the F-5's limited payload capacity and range makes the Kowsar not worth the cost.
When it comes to the Air Force the best way to save money, increase capability & increase survivability is with force multipliers 
With a smaller more capable force you can place them deeper inside your territory, you can build better more fortified bunkers for them, you can spend more money on more advanced Air Defense equipment per aircraft, you can spend more money on more advanced sensors per aircraft, you can have them ready to scramble at a moments notice, you can put a wider array of weapons systems on them,.... 

If it was up to me I would have forced the Air Force to shift it's focus towards trying to build a low RCS delta winged supersonic platform about the size of the Mirage IV because building even 2 of them per year to me would be far more valuable than producing 40 Kowsars a year!
Also building a larger version of the RQ-170 (At least 50% larger) should have also been a top priority for Iran's Air Force (Not just the IRGC)​


----------



## TheImmortal

Is there any evidence the airframe is not an old F-5 that has been refurbished?


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

We are talking about different things. You about a full high intensity war and I about insurgent-only.


----------



## TheImmortal

There are rumors that the Kowsar fighter jet was not ready in time and instead to save face, the avionics were put into the F-5.

As everyone knows Kowsar is a trainer jet with a somewhat unique design not a full fledged F-5.

Iran should have merely announced the “avionics package” and gave it a name and then say it can be applied to F-4, F-5, etc.

Physically the F-5 hasn’t changed at all. The two seat, 1 seat configuration has existed on other projects as well.


----------



## OldTwilight

VEVAK said:


> So no in an all out war F-5's or Kowsars or Saegheh or Q-313.... will be useless to Iran unless deployed in the 1000's and if deployed in the 1000's the fuel cost alone will bankrupt Iran's defense budget!
> And for Iran to spend 100's of millions and decades of R&D and research to build a CAS fighter just to combat terrorist while the U.S. has been threatening us for the past 3 decades sound a bit absurd to me!



They are just good for Air to Air Combat which they don't have suitable Radar , Electro optic equipment and missile to do it ,, which they don't ........ just look at this project as R&D and propaganda ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Death to the corrupt mullah regime that has no shame and doesnt mind embaressing Iran and Iranians on the gobal stage on a daily basis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Raghfarm007 said:


> Death to the corrupt mullah regime that has no shame and doesnt mind embaressing Iran and Iranians on the gobal stage on a daily basis.


Death to Lukashenko that has been make untermenschen slavic belarussian suffer in the street you must be payed troll by Lukashenko himself


----------



## SOHEIL

Raghfarm007 said:


> Death to the corrupt mullah regime that has no shame and doesnt mind embaressing Iran and Iranians on the gobal stage on a daily basis.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Death to Lukashenko that has been make unyermenschen slavic belarussian suffer in the street you must be payed troll by Lukashenko himself



He is just angry about this ... Please stay cool

Time will prove everything ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Death to Lukashenko that has been make untermenschen slavic belarussian suffer in the street you must be payed troll by Lukashenko himself





News alert, you're Slavic. Nice neo nazi flag you got there by the way, the irony is Poland was conquered by nazi with many poles slaughtered. Moron. The Slavic untermenschen were also credited for some of the largest contributions to science, mathematics, medicine, engineering and art. Almost every modern invention has its orgin from Slavs.


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

ptldM3 said:


> News alert, you're Slavic. Nice neo nazi flag you got there by the way, the irony is Poland was conquered by nazi with many poles slaughtered. Moron. The Slavic untermenschen were also credited for some of the largest contributions to science, mathematics, medicine, engineering and art. Almost every modern invention has its orgin from Slavs.


I'm not Slavic but Asians, i actually respect slavic people i say him untermenschen just because of he trolling at this forum ok

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

ptldM3 said:


> Almost every modern invention has its orgin from Slavs.



Vodka for example !

(I'm joking bro)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

VEVAK said:


> WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
> Yes F-4's and Su-24's are much better than F-5's!
> 
> In Kaman 99 operation Iran had to use over +40 F-5's flown from Dezful to just hit Al Nasiriyah Airbase in Iraq where by comparison 12 F-4 were doing the same job against other bases as +40 F-5's!
> 
> An F-5 in the best of conditions would be able to fly no more than 4 Mk.82's to a target 400km away where as an F-4 could carry 18 Mk.82 with far greater survivability
> 
> So no in an all out war F-5's or Kowsars or Saegheh or Q-313.... will be useless to Iran unless deployed in the 1000's and if deployed in the 1000's the fuel cost alone will bankrupt Iran's defense budget!
> And for Iran to spend 100's of millions and decades of R&D and research to build a CAS fighter just to combat terrorist while the U.S. has been threatening us for the past 3 decades sound a bit absurd to me!
> 
> And as for boarder operation for the price of only 12 Kowsars (~$200 Million USD) placed at 3 current bases (4 Aircrafts per base) near Iran's eastern boarders Omediah, Dezful and Tabriz we could instead build 200 armed Sh-129's + pay the cost to building 50 small bases each equipped with an airstrip that's sufficient for the Sh-129 all across Iran's eastern boarder area.
> 
> So you see for the operations you have in mind where you don't really need 500lb bombs it would be cheaper and far more effective to maintain a fleet of 200 Sh-129's with 50 of them in the Air 24/7 365 days a year housed at 50 small Airstrips within 100km of Iran's eastern boarders
> And that's not including the cost of the maintenance, fuel, spare parts, training, housing, arming..... for you CAS Kowsars
> 
> And the only reason you wouldn't put a refueling pod on the Kowsar in a country the size of Iran with the Air Force that it has would ONLY be because the engines or other parts of the aircraft wouldn't be able to handle the extended flight hours to a point where it would be worth the cost.
> 
> As for the F-5's ability to run yes the main brilliance behind the platform is it's ability to run at almost Mach 1 (Mach 0.98) without the use of it's afterburners and other 3rd and 4th gen fighters would need to use large amounts of fuel and blast their afterburners to try to catch it which will limit their range!
> But standard F-5E wouldn't know when to run due to a lack of sensor capability and without Air refueling pod blasting their afterburners after hitting a target 400km away would be as dangerous as getting intercepted.
> And at the end of the day your fighter jet is only as good as the weapons is can carry and the F-5's limited payload capacity and range makes the Kowsar not worth the cost.
> When it comes to the Air Force the best way to save money, increase capability & increase survivability is with force multipliers
> With a smaller more capable force you can place them deeper inside your territory, you can build better more fortified bunkers for them, you can spend more money on more advanced Air Defense equipment per aircraft, you can spend more money on more advanced sensors per aircraft, you can have them ready to scramble at a moments notice, you can put a wider array of weapons systems on them,....
> 
> If it was up to me I would have forced the Air Force to shift it's focus towards trying to build a low RCS delta winged supersonic platform about the size of the Mirage IV because building even 2 of them per year to me would be far more valuable than producing 40 Kowsars a year!
> Also building a larger version of the RQ-170 (At least 50% larger) should have also been a top priority for Iran's Air Force (Not just the IRGC)​




I was looking at an F-5, F-4, F-14, Mig-29 in person today. Amongst many other aircraft. People still don't seem to get it. Both F-4 and F-14, etc are far superior to the F-5 but very complicated to copy and obviously more expensive. the F-5 will never have an advantage in radar, payload or range over any of its competitors. It takes less F-4s to do the job of more F-5s. Range, payload, radar and survivability is all inferior in the F-5. Its a very simple and cheap aircraft, much easier to copy but not as effective.


----------



## raptor22

VEVAK said:


> For Iran powerplant is actually the easy part compared to a viable Airframe! At worst you can import them.... Iran's obsession with the F-5 is strictly due to Ti and raw martial requirements



I think nano-composite could do the job and we are good at it or at least with little investment and efforts we could fill the gap...

*F-35 Features Nanocomposite Structures*


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> There are rumors that the Kowsar fighter jet was not ready in time and instead to save face, the avionics were put into the F-5.
> 
> As everyone knows Kowsar is a trainer jet with a somewhat unique design not a full fledged F-5.
> 
> Iran should have merely announced the “avionics package” and gave it a name and then say it can be applied to F-4, F-5, etc.
> 
> Physically the F-5 hasn’t changed at all. The two seat, 1 seat configuration has existed on other projects as well.



A few months after the 1st Kowsar jet trainer came out Iran had announced that it was coming out with a new platform by that name aside from the Kowsar trainer they had already shown!!! Also the very 1st day Iran announced the testing of a new fighter jet Iran's defense minister made it clear that it wasn't going to be the Kowsar Jet trainer. 

Unlike most fighter jets the F-5 Airframe uses cheaper raw materials (Aluminum Ti Composites) that Iranian aluminum companies were able to manufacture using relatively small amounts of imported Titanium.... Also, unlike most fighter jets building the various parts of the Airframe do NOT require massive presses and massive vacuum ovens so building F-5 Airframes has been within Iran's capabilities for well over a decade now! So I would say the people that keep on doubting it are delusional!

As for the Kowsar trainer, the fact is it didn't make any sense for a trainer to be equipped with multiple MFD's and advanced avionics when your pilots were going to get into fighters that didn't have them after training so the fact that they plan on training pilots with them only makes sense if you plan on or have already upgrading the cockpits of other fighters as well.... 

A fighter pilots needs to be trained on and has to know exactly where each button on his aircraft is, 1st with his eyes closed before he ever takes off on that aircraft then with his eyes closed while pulling G's in a sim.... So you don't train pilots on advanced trainers that have their own digitalized mapping and then stick them into more expensive aircraft that don't!


----------



## VEVAK

ptldM3 said:


> I was looking at an F-5, F-4, F-14, Mig-29 in person today. Amongst many other aircraft. People still don't seem to get it. Both F-4 and F-14, etc are far superior to the F-5 but very complicated to copy and obviously more expensive. the F-5 will never have an advantage in radar, payload or range over any of its competitors. It takes less F-4s to do the job of more F-5s. Range, payload, radar and survivability is all inferior in the F-5. Its a very simple and cheap aircraft, much easier to copy but not as effective.



F-5's most of all are great advanced trainers and aside from that they are good for providing Air Support in and around your own border and coastal areas where you can provide cover for them and they are also good cheap platform for R&D purposes but most of all they are an Aircraft you would mostly use during peace time mostly for training pilots and they would have little use in an all out war even against Saudi Arabia let alone the U.S.! And even for standard peace time operation Iran would not need any more than ~60 CAS fighter + ~24 Advanced twin seat Supersonic Trainers and since Iran already has more than that many CAS fighter & Trainers it is utterly absurd for Iran to continue to invest in them.
But most of all it is absolute stupidity for Iran to waist it's human resources towards the development of any CAS fighter whether it be the Q-313 or the Saegheh or Shafaq or Kowsar or any other Close Air Support fighter! 

But the development of the advanced 4th generation Avionics package shown on the Kowsar project would be a necessary step towards the development of a more capable Iranian fighter in the future


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## skyshadow

*اقایون ایا این جنگنده بال متحرک اف 14 هست؟*


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> I think nano-composite could do the job and we are good at it or at least with little investment and efforts we could fill the gap...
> 
> *F-35 Features Nanocomposite Structures*



Without the ability to build a large single peace Titanium bulkhead Iran's ability to produce a viable fighter jet with sufficient thrust, range & payload capacity and will remain in doubt!

F-35 7085 bulkhead 




F-15 Ti bulkhead before and after press 




And once you develop the capability to make large Ti blocks and the tools like massive vacuumed ovens presses needed to build the bulkheads then Ti Wing tips and other Ti parts shouldn't be a problem 

FYI building the F-35 wings also require massive vacuum ovens 

And due to Sanctions NO one will EVER sell Iran massive Ti or high grade aluminum composite blocks at an affordable price due to sanctions so 1st of all to produce a viable fighter a Ti industry would be a requirement!

Iran could potentially make large Magnesium alloy blocks and cover them with Nano coating and layers of composites to build a bulkhead but we would still need large vacuumed oven presses to build the bulkheads 

Also having an internal weapons bay will reduce the requirement on the wings payload capacity.

*But none of these are a necessity for an R&D program to build your 1st working prototype! *

*For now the main problem Iran currently has is a lack of will to build a more capable fighter prototype! 
And an absolute miscalculation as to what Iranian fighter program should look like and what type of fighter program Iran needs to put it's human resources towards building!*

In the past 2 decades every fighter program Iran has put Human Resources towards has been a Light Close Air support fighter from the Shafaq(M-ATF), Azarakhsh, Simorgh, Saegheh,Q-313, Kowsar, Bavar, FB-44...…
And without exception all of them are CAS fighter that would be useless in a country the size of Iran with the security concerns Iran has! 
And when every fighter program in the past 2 decades has been of a CAS fighter then clearly this is a leadership problem! 

The French built the Mirage IV in 1960 which is a Mach 2.2 Platform with a combat radius of +1200km and ability to carry up to 16x 1000lb bombs with engines that were less powerful and less sophisticated than the J79's

So clearly this is NOT a matter of technology and if Iran wanted to and if they had spent a sufficient amount of time, human resources and money on it they could have easily built something far superior than the Mirage IV by now!
By the most part the F-4 Airframe is a poorly designed Airframe and using the J-79 engines Iran could easily build a superior Delta wing design that would be sufficient until Iran could come up with a turbofan replacement and in the future an Airframe that can handle higher G's....

The problem we have today is miscalculation made by our leadership! 

A single Mirage IV could easily do the job of 8 F-5's against targets beyond +300km of Iranian soil so if 8 Iranian Kowsars end up costing us $132 Million USD ($16.5 Million per Aircraft) rather than building 8 of them you would be far better off building a larger Iranian supersonic fighter bomber about the size of the Mirage IV with Iranian upgraded version of the J-79 at a production cost of $132 Million USD per Aircraft.

This obsession with CAS fighters is a total miss calculation from Iran's leadership and it seems that they just can't comprehend that just because an Aircraft initial purchasing prices is cheaper and just because the aircraft's operation costs, maintenance cost and fuel cost by comparison is cheaper it doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft is cost effective!

And with force multipliers you can afford to spend more money per Aircraft on building better fortified bunkers, more money per aircraft on SAM & other defensive equipment, more money on ground decoys, more money on sensor and targeting equipment, you can easily have a larger portion of your fleet ready to scramble to protect them against incoming missiles, you can afford to put laser countermeasures on each aircraft and IRST and IR missiles to take out any threat that gets within visible range of your fighter you can deploy a larger number of longer range missiles to take out enemy SAM & runways to protect your aircraft and the list goes on an on!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 494324
> 
> 
> *اقایون ایا این جنگنده بال متحرک اف 14 هست؟*



NO! Su-24


----------



## VEVAK

VEVAK said:


> NO! Su-24


----------



## WinterNights

VEVAK said:


> Without the ability to build a large single peace Titanium bulkhead Iran's ability to produce a viable fighter jet with sufficient thrust, range & payload capacity and will remain in doubt!
> 
> F-35 7085 bulkhead
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-15 Ti bulkhead before and after press
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And once you develop the capability to make large Ti blocks and the tools like massive vacuumed ovens presses needed to build the bulkheads then Ti Wing tips and other Ti parts shouldn't be a problem
> 
> FYI building the F-35 wings also require massive vacuum ovens
> 
> And due to Sanctions NO one will EVER sell Iran massive Ti or high grade aluminum composite blocks at an affordable price due to sanctions so 1st of all to produce a viable fighter a Ti industry would be a requirement!
> 
> Iran could potentially make large Magnesium alloy blocks and cover them with Nano coating and layers of composites to build a bulkhead but we would still need large vacuumed oven presses to build the bulkheads
> 
> Also having an internal weapons bay will reduce the requirement on the wings payload capacity.
> 
> *But none of these are a necessity for an R&D program to build your 1st working prototype! *
> 
> *For now the main problem Iran currently has is a lack of will to build a more capable fighter prototype!
> And an absolute miscalculation as to what Iranian fighter program should look like and what type of fighter program Iran needs to put it's human resources towards building!*
> 
> In the past 2 decades every fighter program Iran has put Human Resources towards has been a Light Close Air support fighter from the Shafaq(M-ATF), Azarakhsh, Simorgh, Saegheh,Q-313, Kowsar, Bavar, FB-44...…
> And without exception all of them are CAS fighter that would be useless in a country the size of Iran with the security concerns Iran has!
> And when every fighter program in the past 2 decades has been of a CAS fighter then clearly this is a leadership problem!
> 
> The French built the Mirage IV in 1960 which is a Mach 2.2 Platform with a combat radius of +1200km and ability to carry up to 16x 1000lb bombs with engines that were less powerful and less sophisticated than the J79's
> 
> So clearly this is NOT a matter of technology and if Iran wanted to and if they had spent a sufficient amount of time, human resources and money on it they could have easily built something far superior than the Mirage IV by now!
> By the most part the F-4 Airframe is a poorly designed Airframe and using the J-79 engines Iran could easily build a superior Delta wing design that would be sufficient until Iran could come up with a turbofan replacement and in the future an Airframe that can handle higher G's....
> 
> The problem we have today is miscalculation made by our leadership!
> 
> A single Mirage IV could easily do the job of 8 F-5's against targets beyond +300km of Iranian soil so if 8 Iranian Kowsars end up costing us $132 Million USD ($16.5 Million per Aircraft) rather than building 8 of them you would be far better off building a larger Iranian supersonic fighter bomber about the size of the Mirage IV with Iranian upgraded version of the J-79 at a production cost of $132 Million USD per Aircraft.
> 
> This obsession with CAS fighters is a total miss calculation from Iran's leadership and it seems that they just can't comprehend that just because an Aircraft initial purchasing prices is cheaper and just because the aircraft's operation costs, maintenance cost and fuel cost by comparison is cheaper it doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft is cost effective!
> 
> And with force multipliers you can afford to spend more money per Aircraft on building better fortified bunkers, more money per aircraft on SAM & other defensive equipment, more money on ground decoys, more money on sensor and targeting equipment, you can easily have a larger portion of your fleet ready to scramble to protect them against incoming missiles, you can afford to put laser countermeasures on each aircraft and IRST and IR missiles to take out any threat that gets within visible range of your fighter you can deploy a larger number of longer range missiles to take out enemy SAM & runways to protect your aircraft and the list goes on an on!



Where are you getting your figure of 16.5 mill per kowsar from? They have not stated the price. They stated in the recent interview that each aircraft will save them 17 mill (6mill of which is from avionic). Are you confusing that with the price?


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 494336



thanks


----------



## Aramagedon

VEVAK said:


> Without the ability to build a large single peace Titanium bulkhead Iran's ability to produce a viable fighter jet with sufficient thrust, range & payload capacity and will remain in doubt!
> 
> F-35 7085 bulkhead
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-15 Ti bulkhead before and after press
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And once you develop the capability to make large Ti blocks and the tools like massive vacuumed ovens presses needed to build the bulkheads then Ti Wing tips and other Ti parts shouldn't be a problem
> 
> FYI building the F-35 wings also require massive vacuum ovens
> 
> And due to Sanctions NO one will EVER sell Iran massive Ti or high grade aluminum composite blocks at an affordable price due to sanctions so 1st of all to produce a viable fighter a Ti industry would be a requirement!
> 
> Iran could potentially make large Magnesium alloy blocks and cover them with Nano coating and layers of composites to build a bulkhead but we would still need large vacuumed oven presses to build the bulkheads
> 
> Also having an internal weapons bay will reduce the requirement on the wings payload capacity.
> 
> *But none of these are a necessity for an R&D program to build your 1st working prototype! *
> 
> *For now the main problem Iran currently has is a lack of will to build a more capable fighter prototype!
> And an absolute miscalculation as to what Iranian fighter program should look like and what type of fighter program Iran needs to put it's human resources towards building!*
> 
> In the past 2 decades every fighter program Iran has put Human Resources towards has been a Light Close Air support fighter from the Shafaq(M-ATF), Azarakhsh, Simorgh, Saegheh,Q-313, Kowsar, Bavar, FB-44...…
> And without exception all of them are CAS fighter that would be useless in a country the size of Iran with the security concerns Iran has!
> And when every fighter program in the past 2 decades has been of a CAS fighter then clearly this is a leadership problem!
> 
> The French built the Mirage IV in 1960 which is a Mach 2.2 Platform with a combat radius of +1200km and ability to carry up to 16x 1000lb bombs with engines that were less powerful and less sophisticated than the J79's
> 
> So clearly this is NOT a matter of technology and if Iran wanted to and if they had spent a sufficient amount of time, human resources and money on it they could have easily built something far superior than the Mirage IV by now!
> By the most part the F-4 Airframe is a poorly designed Airframe and using the J-79 engines Iran could easily build a superior Delta wing design that would be sufficient until Iran could come up with a turbofan replacement and in the future an Airframe that can handle higher G's....
> 
> The problem we have today is miscalculation made by our leadership!
> 
> A single Mirage IV could easily do the job of 8 F-5's against targets beyond +300km of Iranian soil so if 8 Iranian Kowsars end up costing us $132 Million USD ($16.5 Million per Aircraft) rather than building 8 of them you would be far better off building a larger Iranian supersonic fighter bomber about the size of the Mirage IV with Iranian upgraded version of the J-79 at a production cost of $132 Million USD per Aircraft.
> 
> This obsession with CAS fighters is a total miss calculation from Iran's leadership and it seems that they just can't comprehend that just because an Aircraft initial purchasing prices is cheaper and just because the aircraft's operation costs, maintenance cost and fuel cost by comparison is cheaper it doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft is cost effective!
> 
> And with force multipliers you can afford to spend more money per Aircraft on building better fortified bunkers, more money per aircraft on SAM & other defensive equipment, more money on ground decoys, more money on sensor and targeting equipment, you can easily have a larger portion of your fleet ready to scramble to protect them against incoming missiles, you can afford to put laser countermeasures on each aircraft and IRST and IR missiles to take out any threat that gets within visible range of your fighter you can deploy a larger number of longer range missiles to take out enemy SAM & runways to protect your aircraft and the list goes on an on!




Have u ever sat on a fighter jet?


----------



## VEVAK

2800 said:


> Have u ever sat on a fighter jet?



many times why?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

VEVAK said:


> many times why?





2800 said:


> Have u ever sat on a fighter jet?



Never flown one if that's what you mean!


----------



## VEVAK

VEVAK said:


> Never flown one if that's what you mean!



If had 20/20 vision I would have been a fighter pilot because that's the only thing I was interested in at a very young age!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

VEVAK said:


> If had 20/20 vision I would have been a fighter pilot because that's the only thing I was interested in at a very young age!


At least you could become an aerospace engineer which seems you aren't.

*There are* *thousands of aerospace engineers in Iran* and you aren’t one of them.

And most of your posts are downright negative and frustrating and mixed with your empty guesses and calculations which seems most of them are untrue.

Furthermore I think you are wasting your time because nobody in aircraft industry read your posts especially in english.

If you were in a Persian language Iranian forum probably you could attract more audience.


----------



## VEVAK

WinterNights said:


> Where are you getting your figure of 16.5 mill per kowsar from? They have not stated the price. They stated in the recent interview that each aircraft will save them 17 mill (6mill of which is from avionic). Are you confusing that with the price?



$16.5 Million saving in Sarfehjoi e Arzi which basically means that how much they cost and that's how much Iran would of had to pay to import them if we actually could import them! 

Basically that how much they cost not how much money Iran saves!!!!!

How much do you think an Aircraft like that costs for Iran to save $16.5 Million USD per aircraft???

FYI an American T-38 was prices at $7 Million USD in 2016 so yea $17 Million USD is about how much they would be sold for to Iran's Air Force

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

2800 said:


> At least you could become an aerospace engineer which seems you aren't.
> 
> Anyway most of your posts are downright negative and frustrating and mixed with your empty guesses and calculations which seems many of them are untrue.
> 
> Furthermore I think you are wasting your time because nobody in aircraft industry read your posts.
> 
> If you were in a Persian language Iranian forum probably you could attract more audience.
> 
> Anyway I hope best wishes for you. If you are easier this way with your merely negative and longgg posts continue this way.



Which is untrue? And negative or not facts are FACT's!!!

And the upgrades, Avionics and weapons systems Iran has built are astonishing BUT the fact remains that they are wasted on the F-5 or Kowsar or any other Iranian CAS platform although they would be a necessary step in the development of a more capable fighter but the main thing that worries me is Iran's obsession with CAS fighters and looking at all of Iran's fighter programs in the past it is clear that this is a leadership problem.

If the French were able to build the Mirage IV in the late 50's early 60 then Iran is fully capable of building something far superior today and the only reason we don't is mainly due to BAD Leadership decisions!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

skyshadow said:


> thanks
> View attachment 494337


Is that F-4 or J-7?


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Which is untrue? And negative or not facts are FACT's!!!
> 
> And the upgrades, Avionics and weapons systems Iran has built are astonishing BUT the fact remains that they are wasted on the F-5 or Kowsar or any other Iranian CAS platform although they would be a necessary step in the development of a more capable fighter but the main thing that worries me is Iran's obsession with CAS fighters and looking at all of Iran's fighter programs in the past it is clear that this is a leadership problem.
> 
> If the French were able to build the Mirage IV in the late 50's early 60 then Iran is fully capable of building something far superior today and the only reason we don't is mainly due to BAD Leadership decisions!



LYou have no idea what Black projects Iran is working on or has worked on currently. So unless you have access to highly classified information stop making assumptions.

Iran needed an modern cockpit to train their new generation of fighters Koswar-1 (F-5 modernized) and Kowsar will do that. Iran’s Air Force pilots are aging! Iran needs fresh blood in order to fly the super fancy planes you want them to make or buy. Those pilots need to be trained with modern avionics unless you expect your super duper 6th gen airplane to have analog dials of a 1970’s aircraft!

Furthermore, Iran has already stated they are nearing production of an engine that has 4 times the power of J-85. That would mean an engine in the >50nt class. Again they wouldn’t be doing that IF THEY didn’t plan on making a bigger fighter. 

Iran also announced they are building a heavy turbofan and turbojet engine for a heavy fighter. Again they wouldn’t do that if they weren’t planning on another fighter design outside of F-5. 

You are right in that It’s quite clear Iran’s focus was not airforce in the last 20 years.

1) First priority was achieving credible military deterrence against enemies through ballistic missile production and cruise missiles. That took nearly 30 years to accomplish.

2) 2nd priority was upgrading and establishing a significant air defense network to protect the country. Also to cause further pain for any adversary that would want to attack it. That was accomplished and took nearly 20 years to accomplish (in some ways still ongoing with a Bavar 373 project not yet ready).

3) Iran’s 3rd priority will be to revive the airforce based on recent news in the last 5 years to upgrade the airforce. This more concentrated effort started back in 2007-2010 possibly.

So assuming another 20 year timetable, that would mean Iran has till 2030 to present its efforts in this area.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> LYou have no idea what Black projects Iran is working on or has worked on currently. So unless you have access to highly classified information stop making assumptions.
> 
> Iran needed an modern cockpit to train their new generation of fighters Koswar-1 (F-5 modernized) and Kowsar will do that. Iran’s Air Force pilots are aging! Iran needs fresh blood in order to fly the super fancy planes you want them to make or buy. Those pilots need to be trained with modern avionics unless you expect your super duper 6th gen airplane to have analog dials of a 1970’s aircraft!
> 
> Furthermore, Iran has already stated they are nearing production of an engine that has 4 times the power of J-85. That would mean an engine in the >50nt class. Again they wouldn’t be doing that IF THEY didn’t plan on making a bigger fighter.
> 
> Iran also announced they are building a heavy turbofan and turbojet engine for a heavy fighter. Again they wouldn’t do that if they weren’t planning on another fighter design outside of F-5.
> 
> You are right in that It’s quite clear Iran’s focus was not airforce in the last 20 years.
> 
> 1) First priority was achieving credible military deterrence against enemies through ballistic missile production and cruise missiles. That took nearly 30 years to accomplish.
> 
> 2) 2nd priority was upgrading and establishing a significant air defense network to protect the country. Also to cause further pain for any adversary that would want to attack it. That was accomplished and took nearly 20 years to accomplish (in some ways still ongoing with a Bavar 373 project not yet ready).
> 
> 3) Iran’s 3rd priority will be to revive the airforce based on recent news in the last 5 years to upgrade the airforce. This more concentrated effort started back in 2007-2010 possibly.
> 
> So assuming another 20 year timetable, that would mean Iran has till 2030 to present its efforts in this area.



Very nice post; Your points are quite logical.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> LYou have no idea what Black projects Iran is working on or has worked on currently. So unless you have access to highly classified information stop making assumptions.
> 
> Iran needed an modern cockpit to train their new generation of fighters Koswar-1 (F-5 modernized) and Kowsar will do that. Iran’s Air Force pilots are aging! Iran needs fresh blood in order to fly the super fancy planes you want them to make or buy. Those pilots need to be trained with modern avionics unless you expect your super duper 6th gen airplane to have analog dials of a 1970’s aircraft!
> 
> Furthermore, Iran has already stated they are nearing production of an engine that has 4 times the power of J-85. That would mean an engine in the >50nt class. Again they wouldn’t be doing that IF THEY didn’t plan on making a bigger fighter.
> 
> Iran also announced they are building a heavy turbofan and turbojet engine for a heavy fighter. Again they wouldn’t do that if they weren’t planning on another fighter design outside of F-5.
> 
> You are right in that It’s quite clear Iran’s focus was not airforce in the last 20 years.
> 
> 1) First priority was achieving credible military deterrence against enemies through ballistic missile production and cruise missiles. That took nearly 30 years to accomplish.
> 
> 2) 2nd priority was upgrading and establishing a significant air defense network to protect the country. Also to cause further pain for any adversary that would want to attack it. That was accomplished and took nearly 20 years to accomplish (in some ways still ongoing with a Bavar 373 project not yet ready).
> 
> 3) Iran’s 3rd priority will be to revive the airforce based on recent news in the last 5 years to upgrade the airforce. This more concentrated effort started back in 2007-2010 possibly.
> 
> So assuming another 20 year timetable, that would mean Iran has till 2030 to present its efforts in this area.




Indeed bro, I always find it hilarious that some people on a forum think they know better than the people in Iranian defence forces. They know what they're doing far better than we do. We're just trying to judge everything based on what we're fed through the cameras and media, who knows what's developing in Iran away from the spotlights.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Sadly one F-5 crashed in Iran, pilot dead, co-pilot wounded

https://thedefensepost.com/2018/08/26/iran-f-5-crash-pilot-killed/


----------



## skyshadow

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Is that F-4 or J-7?



I do not know . It's similar to the F-4, but it can not be the j7 because of the radar and the nose of the fighters.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> Sadly one F-5 crashed in Iran, pilot dead, co-pilot wounded
> 
> https://thedefensepost.com/2018/08/26/iran-f-5-crash-pilot-killed/


It seems the blame is on ejection seat , Northrop claimed that the ejection seat is a 0-0 ejection seat , but whenever a pilot eject at low altitude its nearly certain that he get seriously injured.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> LYou have no idea what Black projects Iran is working on or has worked on currently. So unless you have access to highly classified information stop making assumptions.
> 
> Iran needed an modern cockpit to train their new generation of fighters Koswar-1 (F-5 modernized) and Kowsar will do that. Iran’s Air Force pilots are aging! Iran needs fresh blood in order to fly the super fancy planes you want them to make or buy. Those pilots need to be trained with modern avionics unless you expect your super duper 6th gen airplane to have analog dials of a 1970’s aircraft!
> 
> Furthermore, Iran has already stated they are nearing production of an engine that has 4 times the power of J-85. That would mean an engine in the >50nt class. Again they wouldn’t be doing that IF THEY didn’t plan on making a bigger fighter.
> 
> Iran also announced they are building a heavy turbofan and turbojet engine for a heavy fighter. Again they wouldn’t do that if they weren’t planning on another fighter design outside of F-5.
> 
> You are right in that It’s quite clear Iran’s focus was not airforce in the last 20 years.
> 
> 1) First priority was achieving credible military deterrence against enemies through ballistic missile production and cruise missiles. That took nearly 30 years to accomplish.
> 
> 2) 2nd priority was upgrading and establishing a significant air defense network to protect the country. Also to cause further pain for any adversary that would want to attack it. That was accomplished and took nearly 20 years to accomplish (in some ways still ongoing with a Bavar 373 project not yet ready).
> 
> 3) Iran’s 3rd priority will be to revive the airforce based on recent news in the last 5 years to upgrade the airforce. This more concentrated effort started back in 2007-2010 possibly.
> 
> So assuming another 20 year timetable, that would mean Iran has till 2030 to present its efforts in this area.



1st off Fighter Project IS NOT the priority today nor does it need to be a priority for Iran to conduct RD project and build working prototypes and to start building the tools needed for the production of a more capable fighter in the future!

2ndly As long as U.S. keeps on threatening us the ONLY priority Iran needs to have is 1.Mass production of precision guided Solid Fuel BM 2.Bulding Larger Diameter Liquid Fuel BM equipped with MIRV 3.Mass production of cruise Missile in high number from max ranges between 50-2000km 4.Mass production of various types of UAV's & UCAVs with secure com's & or increased automation 5.mass production of various SAM systems 6.Space Program & development of land based positioning systems 7.Production of a larger more capable Iranian Sub's....

And there would be a whole list of other project that come before the production of an Iranian fighter! But that doesn't change the fact that a fighter project doesn't need to be top priority for Iran's Defense industry for Iran's Air Force to work on the right fighter project for R&D which should have been top priority for the Air Force Airframe R&D in the past decade. The Human resources you'd be wasting towards designing and building a new CAS fighter would be the same human resources in the R&D project you would need towards a larger more capable fighter!

Just after Iran got a new Defense minister our new defense minister went on TV and announced that Iran had just started the "design phase" (on Paper) of a larger more capable Iranian fighter jet!!!!!!!!!! So it is not a state secret BUT it is something Iran's Air Force should have worked on for the past decade! 

And the only Fighter engines Iran has been working on are attempts to reverse engineer the J-79 & RD-33 and license production of or co-production of the AL-222 
And NONE of them are secrete projects.

But NONE of these explains why Iran's Airforce wasn't working on a larger more capable twin engine twin seat fighter in the past decade and why they don't have a working prototype using current engines by now nor does it explain Iran's obsession with CAS fighters in a country the size of Iran! 

FYI By 2025 the Russians plan on starting serial production of a replacement for the MiG-31 that will be a high altitude Mach 4 6th gen fighter equipped with lasers which will make most SAM missiles & Air to Air Missiles useless against them and more expensive high altitude, high speed SAM that could reach them would have to be deployed in large numbers to overwhelm the lasers on these fighters 

So by 2038 (20 years from now) the type of platform Iran needs to be taking into production would be something similar to what the Russians plan on producing in the next 7 years or else there would be no point producing them at all!

Which means Iranian Air Force generals have their heads stuck in the sand because if they didn't Iran would have been testing larger working prototypes and I'm NOT talking about Production models that require large investments on the part of the Iranian government! I'm talking about the Air Force using it's own personal, tools and facilities towards building airframes using cheaper materials used in prototypes and engines they already have in stock and conducting R&D in building newer and larger diameter engines for a future fighter to be produced 20 years from now and building massive vacuum chambers that would be a necessity for fighter production in the future


----------



## WinterNights

VEVAK said:


> 1
> 
> Just after Iran got a new Defense minister our new defense minister went on TV and announced that Iran had just started the "design phase" (on Paper) of a larger more capable Iranian fighter jet!!!!!!!!!! So it is not a state secret BUT it is something Iran's Air Force should have worked on for the past decade!



Do you have a link for this? This current DM confirmed the design of a heavy fighter?


----------



## Cthulhu

This new ejection seat that they unveiled, Is there a complete video footage of it's tests?


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> 1st off Fighter Project IS NOT the priority today nor does it need to be a priority for Iran to conduct RD project and build working prototypes and to start building the tools needed for the production of a more capable fighter in the future!
> 
> 2ndly As long as U.S. keeps on threatening us the ONLY priority Iran needs to have is 1.Mass production of precision guided Solid Fuel BM 2.Bulding Larger Diameter Liquid Fuel BM equipped with MIRV 3.Mass production of cruise Missile in high number from max ranges between 50-2000km 4.Mass production of various types of UAV's & UCAVs with secure com's & or increased automation 5.mass production of various SAM systems 6.Space Program & development of land based positioning systems 7.Production of a larger more capable Iranian Sub's....
> 
> And there would be a whole list of other project that come before the production of an Iranian fighter! But that doesn't change the fact that a fighter project doesn't need to be top priority for Iran's Defense industry for Iran's Air Force to work on the right fighter project for R&D which should have been top priority for the Air Force Airframe R&D in the past decade. The Human resources you'd be wasting towards designing and building a new CAS fighter would be the same human resources in the R&D project you would need towards a larger more capable fighter!
> 
> Just after Iran got a new Defense minister our new defense minister went on TV and announced that Iran had just started the "design phase" (on Paper) of a larger more capable Iranian fighter jet!!!!!!!!!! So it is not a state secret BUT it is something Iran's Air Force should have worked on for the past decade!
> 
> And the only Fighter engines Iran has been working on are attempts to reverse engineer the J-79 & RD-33 and license production of or co-production of the AL-222
> And NONE of them are secrete projects.
> 
> But NONE of these explains why Iran's Airforce wasn't working on a larger more capable twin engine twin seat fighter in the past decade and why they don't have a working prototype using current engines by now nor does it explain Iran's obsession with CAS fighters in a country the size of Iran!
> 
> FYI By 2025 the Russians plan on starting serial production of a replacement for the MiG-31 that will be a high altitude Mach 4 6th gen fighter equipped with lasers which will make most SAM missiles & Air to Air Missiles useless against them and more expensive high altitude, high speed SAM that could reach them would have to be deployed in large numbers to overwhelm the lasers on these fighters
> 
> So by 2038 (20 years from now) the type of platform Iran needs to be taking into production would be something similar to what the Russians plan on producing in the next 7 years or else there would be no point producing them at all!
> 
> Which means Iranian Air Force generals have their heads stuck in the sand because if they didn't Iran would have been testing larger working prototypes and I'm NOT talking about Production models that require large investments on the part of the Iranian government! I'm talking about the Air Force using it's own personal, tools and facilities towards building airframes using cheaper materials used in prototypes and engines they already have in stock and conducting R&D in building newer and larger diameter engines for a future fighter to be produced 20 years from now and building massive vacuum chambers that would be a necessity for fighter production in the future



You fail to follow the trail of bread crumbs.

Nobody knew Iran was capable of building a nuclear program so vast in 2003.

Nobody knew that from 1998 Shahab 3 No dong variant that in less than a decade an 100% iranian design solid fuel Sejill missile would be developed.

Iran has shown you Sofreh Mahi manned fighter design (and a unmanned bomber design), which if you compare to US Skunkworks 6th gen fighter concept they are very similar in design.

Iran has announced a heavy fighter project. There are rumors of at least 2 other fighter projects in the past decade.

The efforts you currently see and ridicule are made to keep Iran’s current fleet of fighters viable till at least 2030.

Even iran knows that come 2030-2035, even the F-14’s will become too cumbersome to maintain, so the finish line is somewhere around there.

If you search the news, in the last 5 years you will see Iranian attempt to get their hands on F-35 engine blueprints.

You have to ask yourself, WHY?

If Iran is as backwards, stupid, naive, antiquated as you say...what would they want with the blueprints of an F-35 engine?

That would be like giving a Ferrari engine to an 18th century farmer.

So obviously Iran has a desire for that engine, for something.

The issue you fail to grasp is that Iran news is a controlled state. Iran is a vast country physically. Iran could easily test prototypes and no soul would know.

Certainly US intelligence and foreign intelligence are not diverting resources focusing on what fighters Iran is developing. Even if they found anything it would never make it to the press, as it doesn’t serve their propaganda war machine.

You just need to wait to see what Iran’s plans are in this area.

The easiest example to show you is Iran’s Air defense progression.

Circa 2000, Iran had THE WEAKEST AIR DEFENSE in the Middle East. Syria and Libya both had stronger air defenses.

Iran’s Air defense systems much like their airforce was full of 1960-1970’s Shah era systems.

There was no unified air defense network. Radar points were abysmal and blind spots were everywhere.

Iran made its first major air defense purchase in ~2005 when it bought the TOR-M1’s from Russia.

Little did most people know that was a stop gap measure. Iran had significant air defense systems in development (Talash, 3rd Khordad, etc) except they wouldn’t be ready for another 7-10 years.

Iran needed a stop gap in case war broke out over the nuclear program before then.

My point is, Iran fields some of the most advanced radars, air defense missile systems, etc. One of the few countries to have very long range EW radars and OTH radars.

Yet less than 15 years ago, Iran had the air defense system of a historical military museum collector.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> I do not know . It's similar to the F-4, but it can not be the j7 because of the radar and the nose of the fighters.


Probably one of the old mig23s from iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> You fail to follow the trail of bread crumbs.
> 
> Nobody knew Iran was capable of building a nuclear program so vast in 2003.
> 
> Nobody knew that from 1998 Shahab 3 No dong variant that in less than a decade an 100% iranian design solid fuel Sejill missile would be developed.
> 
> Iran has shown you Sofreh Mahi manned fighter design (and a unmanned bomber design), which if you compare to US Skunkworks 6th gen fighter concept they are very similar in design.
> 
> Iran has announced a heavy fighter project. There are rumors of at least 2 other fighter projects in the past decade.
> 
> The efforts you currently see and ridicule are made to keep Iran’s current fleet of fighters viable till at least 2030.
> 
> Even iran knows that come 2030-2035, even the F-14’s will become too cumbersome to maintain, so the finish line is somewhere around there.
> 
> If you search the news, in the last 5 years you will see Iranian attempt to get their hands on F-35 engine blueprints.
> 
> You have to ask yourself, WHY?
> 
> If Iran is as backwards, stupid, naive, antiquated as you say...what would they want with the blueprints of an F-35 engine?
> 
> That would be like giving a Ferrari engine to an 18th century farmer.
> 
> So obviously Iran has a desire for that engine, for something.
> 
> The issue you fail to grasp is that Iran news is a controlled state. Iran is a vast country physically. Iran could easily test prototypes and no soul would know.
> 
> Certainly US intelligence and foreign intelligence are not diverting resources focusing on what fighters Iran is developing. Even if they found anything it would never make it to the press, as it doesn’t serve their propaganda war machine.
> 
> You just need to wait to see what Iran’s plans are in this area.
> 
> The easiest example to show you is Iran’s Air defense progression.
> 
> Circa 2000, Iran had THE WEAKEST AIR DEFENSE in the Middle East. Syria and Libya both had stronger air defenses.
> 
> Iran’s Air defense systems much like their airforce was full of 1960-1970’s Shah era systems.
> 
> There was no unified air defense network. Radar points were abysmal and blind spots were everywhere.
> 
> Iran made its first major air defense purchase in ~2005 when it bought the TOR-M1’s from Russia.
> 
> Little did most people know that was a stop gap measure. Iran had significant air defense systems in development (Talash, 3rd Khordad, etc) except they wouldn’t be ready for another 7-10 years.
> 
> Iran needed a stop gap in case war broke out over the nuclear program before then.
> 
> My point is, Iran fields some of the most advanced radars, air defense missile systems, etc. One of the few countries to have very long range EW radars and OTH radars.
> 
> Yet less than 15 years ago, Iran had the air defense system of a historical military museum collector.



NONSESE!!!!!!!!!Who say's Iran's 1st major Air Defense purchase post revolution was the Tor M1?

SA-2, SA-6, SA-5, HQ-7, SA-11.... Were all purchased in the 10 Years prior to the purchasing of the Tor systems BEFORE AHMADINEJAD & DURRING Rafzanjani & Khatami presidency and they were purchased in far greater numbers! So your making up NONSESE!
The largest Air Defense purchase for Iran came mainly after the fall of the Soviet Union....
Tor's are short ranged mobile Air Defense systems nothing more!

And how does saying Iran's Air Force has been slacking when it comes to Air Frame development = to saying Iran is a backward country??? Iran's problem is NOT technology!

As I have said repeatedly Iran is FULLY capable of building a platform comparable to the Mirage IV and Iran is clearly capable of equipping such a platform with Avionics, Weapons Systems and Sensors far superior to what you see on the Kowsar.

And the Kowsar avionics pkg are one thing and making the decision to take an absurdly useless PLATFORM like the Kowsar or F-5 into production is another!

Iranian engineers have developed a modern indigenous INS system, MFD's with sensor fused technology, an advanced Iranian weapons systems, sensor and Avionics..... all digitized, all capable of handing high G's & high latitudes,.... And you wanna waist $7Million USD worth of modern upgrades on an F-5 platform who wouldn't be able to cross the Persian Gulf and hit most costal targets on the other side of the Persian Gulf with 2 1000lb bombs. 

So why would I try to fool myself and praise a "Platform" that is truly not worth the praise especially at Iran's level of technology?

Do you think Americans that criticize the F-35 hate their country or think their country is backwards? NO! Criticism when rightly deserved is healthy ESPCIALLY in a domestic defense industry! And I have no problem praising weapon systems that deserve to be praised like
Iran's Simorgh UAV, Saegheh UAV, Sh-129, Fatteh-110, Zolfaghar, Khorramsharh, Fateh sub, Talash, Sayad 3C, Bavar, the long list of ISW Iran is producing....

But if you were to compare every branch of Iran's Military, Iran's Air Force stands out as the weakest link in terms of R&D and the development of new platforms and that has NOTHING to do with priorities!

Iran's Army & IRGC Ground Forced in the past 20 years have developed a wide array of weapons and new platforms for their ground force and the list is endless!
Iran's Army Aviation even stunned the Russians when they inspected Iran's PANHA facilities (They were so stunned that they couldn't understand why Iran wasn't already mass producing +10 passenger Helos)
Iran's Air Defense accomplishments from the moment they separated from the Air Force has stunned year after year
Iran's Navy has not only reverse engineered and upgraded the most advanced warship in Iran's fleet but today Iran is building it's own subs, designing it's own ships and is by far a more capable force than they were prior to the revolution.
IRGC Aerospace forces make advancements year after year with newer more capable missiles & UAV's and rather than kicking the downed Jet powered RQ-170 to the Air Force to reverse engineer it was mainly the IRGC's R&D division that took responsibility for it's Airframe.... 

Now knowing all this why wouldn't I criticize the Air Force for coming up short again in terms of platform and powerplant development when for well over a decade they have been stuck on one of the worst supersonic fighter platforms Iran has had in it's fleet(In terms of capability)?

And lack of proper R&D in the Airforce has NOTHING to do with the Iranian governments priorities!!!!!!!!
If the Air Force had done it's job properly in the past 20 years and had Reversed Engineered an upgraded version of the F-14 and or a Supersonic Bomber which do you think would have been more of a priority for the Iranian government today 1.Building a handful of MowJ class Frigates for the Navy or 2.Producing an upgraded version of the F-14 & or bomber.

The answer is clear! And the fault is with command NOT technology!



WinterNights said:


> Do you have a link for this? This current DM confirmed the design of a heavy fighter?



If you go to YouTube and find his videos it was one of the 1st interviews he gave on Iranian TV.
I'm not sure if it's still posted but if I find it I'll post it for you....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

skyshadow said:


> I do not know . It's similar to the F-4, but it can not be the j7 because of the radar and the nose of the fighters.


Those aircraft are prepared for avio-transport or transported to that airfield recently,they have removed half wing to require less space...I would say it is J-7 since I reckognize tail and wings have delta shape ..because aircrafts have removed half a wing looks strange and misproportional
EDIT
I have correct myself,closer look shows non-delta wing and nose ..thus tail looks.like arrow only because F4 have tail fins under certain angle and this is F4s...since they removed half of the wings and aircrafts are literally under the wings of transport planes.... this fact about transportation still apply and if I remember correctly they don't even have to remove half of tje wings to load aircrafts...F4 wings can be simple switched/folded....like on most carrier fighter aircrafts

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pin gu

Here it comes  






***تسنیم: سردار حاجی زاده گفته بودند که خلبانان عراقی را برای پرواز با هواپیمای سوخو 25 طی 10 روز آموزش دادیم. برای ما بفرمایید که این کار چگونه انجام شد و شیوه استاندار این آموزش چه مدت طول می‌کشد؟*

*-سردار فرزادی پور:* خلبانان عراقی از سال 1991 عملا پرواز نکرده بودند و این فاصله زیاد و طولانی نیازمند طی یک دوره چند ماهه برای بروز رسانی خلبانان بود. اما در آن زمان حضور جنگنده‌های سوخو 25 برای مقابله با داعش یک الزام و ضرورت بود که با توجه به شرایط موجود، آموزش خلبانان عراقی برنامه ریزی و در حدود 10 روز انجام شد. می‌توانیم بگوییم این شیوه آموزش و آماده سازی در این مدت کوتاه بی‌نظیر است.





*** آیا این خلبانان بلافاصله پس از ورود به عراق کار عملیاتی انجام دادند؟*

*-سردار فرزادی پور:* بله روز دوم یا سوم بود که وسایل به عراق منتقل شده بود که این خلبانان کار عملیاتی انجام دادند و همین اقدام موجب شد تا با عملیات ترکیبی زمینی و هوایی، بغداد از محاصره داعش آزاد شود.

ما در حوزه تعمیراتی و پشتیبانی هم کمک‌های مستشاری به عراق ارائه کردیم ولی تمام پروازها و اقدامات عملیاتی در عراق را خود خلبانان عراقی انجام دادند.

* جنگنده‌های سوخو 25 به عراق واگذار شده است*

*** تسنیم:‌این جنگنده‌ها به طور کامل به عراق واگذار شدند یا هنوز تعدای از آنها در اختیار ما است؟*

*-سردار فرزادی پور:* جنگنده‌های سوخو 25 به صورت کامل به عراق واگذار شدند و این اقدام براساس قراردادهای فی ما بین ایران و عراق انجام شده و تا زمانی که نیاز داشته باشند به آنها کمک مستشاری می‌کنیم اما سیاست سپاه و جمهوری اسلامی در واگذاری تخصص‌ها است نه نگهداری آنها. ما همزمان با انتقال تجهیزات تمام تلاش‌مان را کردیم که تخصص‌ها را هم به آنها انتقال دهیم و امیدواریم در آینده نزدیک آینده این کار به صورت کامل انجام شود.

*** تسنیم: مقداری هم در خصوص اتفاقی که اخیرا در حوزه اورهال سوخو 22 افتاد بفرمایید؟*

*-سردار فرزادی پور:* اقداماتی از این دست در نیروی هوافضای سپاه به لحظه در حال اتفاق افتادن است اما به خاطر ملاحظاتی رسانه‌ای نمی‌شود. ما در بخش‌های بسیار پیچیده و متفاوت ورود پیدا می‌کنیم اما مردم خوب ما از بسیاری از آنها مطلع نمی‌شوند.

کار در حوزه جنگنده سوخو 22 کار بسیار ویژه‌ای بود. بعد از 28 سال زمینگیر بودن این جنگنده، فرماندهی عملیات هوایی پای کار آمد و این جنگنده را عملیاتی کرد. البته یک ابهامی برای بعضی‌ها وجود دارد و آن اینکه که سوخو22 یک جنگنده نسل سوم و قدیمی است و چرا ما باید روی آن سرمایه گذاری کنیم و آن را به خدمت بگیریم؟

در این باره باید بگوییم که این جنگنده قابلیت‌های خوبی برای حمل مقدار قابل توجهی از مهمات را دارد. سرعت و ارتفاع پروازی و سایر ویژگی‌های این پرنده این اجازه را به ما می‌دهد که با اتکا به دانش داخلی و توانمندی‌ نیروهای خودمان بتوانیم از این جنگنده بهره برداری موثر کنیم.

*** سوخو 22 می‌تواند 4 تُن مهمات هوشمند حمل کند
*
رویکرد ما در بکارگیری سوخو 22 استفاده از تسلیحات هوشمند و نقطه زن است ضمن آنکه این جنگنده می‌تواند 4 تن مهمات با خود حمل کند که اگر این میزان مهمات تبدیل به مهمات هوشمند و نقطه زن بشوند که شدند، کارایی این جنگنده را بسیار بالا می‌برد.

**تسنیم: تعامل شما با ارتش چگونه است؟

-سردار فرزادی‌پور: تعاملات ما با ارتش بسیار خوب است و در شهرهایی که پایگاه مشترک داریم از امکانات یکدگیر به صورت کاملا دوستانه و سازمانی استفاده می‌کنیم. در حوزه‌های تخصصی هم با عزیزان‌مان در ارتش جمهوری اسلامی همکاری‌های خوبی داریم.

انتهای پیام/


----------



## VEVAK

WinterNights said:


> Do you have a link for this? This current DM confirmed the design of a heavy fighter?


Here is one of the interviews when he 1st took office & I also believe there is another one which I can't find 





If you understand Farsi you can go 16:50m into the video if not a close enough translation would be : 
Hatami: Airpower is one of the area's we need to put considerable effort towards, practically in terms of a Heavy Fighter jet it is an area we need to put more effort towards developing, which I have put forth and planed for...
Journalist: Have we worked on such a project before that we can further expand upon? Or is it a completely new project we plan to start
Hatami: We have started preliminary "research" on the project, The fact that we need to increase our Air Power and turn it on strategic force is clear to us.... 

Preliminary research is basically doing cost/benefit annalists on the platforms powerplant requirements, platforms payload requirements, weight & size requirements, range requirements, speed requirements, avionic & sensor requirements, RCS requirements, tools and raw material requirements for the production of the Airframe and various parts,.....
Which means if the Airforce had done it's job properly in the past decade they would already had two working prototypes to choose from using engines they already have in stock with detailed designs for a serial production model of the Airframe, they would have already built at least one large vacuumed chamber equipped with an oven and big enough to fit an F-14 in, they would have already built at least one massive vacuumed oven presses needed for building large bulkheads..... Iran's Airforce using it's own personal should have conducted R&D in metallurgy and composites using it's own personal....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

VEVAK said:


> Here is one of the interviews when he 1st took office & I also believe there is another one which I can't find
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you understand Farsi you can go 16:50m into the video if not a close enough translation would be :
> Hatami: Airpower is one of the area's we need to put considerable effort towards, practically in terms of a Heavy Fighter jet it is an area we need to put more effort towards developing, which I have put forth and planed for...
> Journalist: Have we worked on such a project before that we can further expand upon? Or is it a completely new project we plan to start
> Hatami: We have started preliminary "research" on the project, The fact that we need to increase our Air Power and turn it on strategic force is clear to us....
> 
> Preliminary research is basically doing cost/benefit annalists on the platforms powerplant requirements, platforms payload requirements, weight & size requirements, range requirements, speed requirements, avionic & sensor requirements, RCS requirements, tools and raw material requirements for the production of the Airframe and various parts,.....
> Which means if the Airforce had done it's job properly in the past decade they would already had two working prototypes to choose from using engines they already have in stock with detailed designs for a serial production model of the Airframe, they would have already built at least one large vacuumed chamber equipped with an oven and big enough to fit an F-14 in, they would have already built at least one massive vacuumed oven presses needed for building large bulkheads..... Iran's Airforce using it's own personal should have conducted R&D in metallurgy and composites using it's own personal....



Thanks for finding it. I look forward to see what comes of this project. His words and tone were satisfying that they're now talking air force more seriously.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Which means if the Airforce had done it's job properly in the past decade they would already had two working prototypes to choose from using engines they already have in stock with detailed designs for a serial production model of the Airframe, they would have already built at least one large vacuumed chamber equipped with an oven and big enough to fit an F-14 in, they would have already built at least one massive vacuumed oven presses needed for building large bulkheads..... Iran's Airforce using it's own personal should have conducted R&D in metallurgy and composites using it's own personal....



Oh I am sorry Vevak, I personally forgot you visited each Iranian military installation and verified Iran has no oven.

Good thing we have you on this board and your wealth of classified knowledge.

You can’t build a heavy fighter and stick a damn J-79 in it or an Rd-33 or a J-85.

So for Iran to build a heavy fighter they would need an engine with >80nt dry >100 nt afterburner which leaves just TWO possible engines that Iran has access too F-14 engine and possibly SU-24 engine the AL-21.

Iran needs something in the AL-31 class to be able to build a heavy fighter side (SU-35, F-14, F-22).

I assume Iran spent its earlier years trying to reverse engineer a less complex engine like J-85 before moving to J-79 and higher.

There is only A FEW countries in the world that can build their own heavy jet engines. China is still years behind Russia and US and they have a lot more experience and resources in this field than Iran will ever have.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Oh I am sorry Vevak, I personally forgot you visited each Iranian military installation and verified Iran has no oven.
> 
> Good thing we have you on this board and your wealth of classified knowledge.
> 
> You can’t build a heavy fighter and stick a damn J-79 in it or an Rd-33 or a J-85.
> 
> So for Iran to build a heavy fighter they would need an engine with >80nt dry >100 nt afterburner which leaves just TWO possible engines that Iran has access too F-14 engine and possibly SU-24 engine the AL-21.
> 
> Iran needs something in the AL-31 class to be able to build a heavy fighter side (SU-35, F-14, F-22).
> 
> I assume Iran spent its earlier years trying to reverse engineer a less complex engine like J-85 before moving to J-79 and higher.
> 
> There is only A FEW countries in the world that can build their own heavy jet engines. China is still years behind Russia and US and they have a lot more experience and resources in this field than Iran will ever have.



1st off you don't know me! So don't automatically make assumption! 

2ndly You assumptions about the engines are inaccurate!
As I keep telling you Iran is FULLY capable of building an Airframe far superior than the Mirage IV and in terms of engines Iranian J79 are more powerful than the engines of the Mirage IV in terms of overall thrust so a J-79 or an RD-33 will be sufficient to accommodate Iran's needs for the next two decades! 

In terms of engines if Iran ever develops the technology to build RD-33's using domestic raw materials it would mean Iran technologically would be able to build high thrust turbines capable of withstanding temperatures higher than 2500 degrees Fahrenheit and more capable afterburners and once that happens producing a more powerful engine like the TF-30 will be a peace of cake aside from that Iran could with a few adjustments made in materials and design turn the J-79 that has a turbine inlet temp of under 1800F (Similar to J85's) into a far more powerful Turbojet engine that would NOT require fans that need to run at a much lower RPM's than the compressors 


In terms of design because the F-4 was built so it could be adjusted to takeoff from carriers and since Iran doesn't have a carrier Iran could build a far superior design (Than the F-4) using J79's(Or RD-33's) capable of carrying more fuel than the F-4 that will be sufficient for Iran for the next two decades! 

So the best platform for Iran is a large Delta Wing design about the size of the Mirage IV (In terms of length) equipped with an internal weapons bay & capable of delivering up to 16x 1000lb bombs at least 1000km away without refueling.... Allowing a modified interceptor version to carry a good number of Fakour missiles.....

Iran's advancements in Nanotechnology and composites will allow Iran to further reduce the empty weight of the aircraft compared to the F-4 or Mirage IV allowing for better thrust to weight ratio 
Iran's advancements in Laser technology will allow Iran to develop laser countermeasures if motivated to do so within the next 5 years removing the requirement for a high maneuvering platform on a +9G Airframe 

Iran's advancements in sensors and optics will allow Iran to better equip a force multiplier with various more expensive sensors, weapons systems and countermeasures because it would far more cost effective to put over $20 Million USD worth of Sensors, Avionics, com's & countermeasures on a force multiplier capable of delivering 16X 1000lb bombs to targets well over 1000km away without refueling $50 Million USD Airframe as appose to $7Million worth of Avionics on a $10 Million USD platform that could barely deliver 2 1000lb bombs to a targets less than half that range. 

Also a large enough twin seat, twin engine supersonic platform will allow Iran to focus on and put most of it's efforts and funding towards a single platform & a single powerplant allowing for increased production at reduced costs and a large enough platform could be made to meet most of the needs of Iran's Air Force allowing Iran to replace all it's supersonic fighter with a single platform


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> So the best platform for Iran is a large Delta Wing design about the size of the Mirage IV (In terms of length) equipped with an internal weapons bay & capable of delivering up to 16x 1000lb bombs at least 1000km away without refueling.... Allowing a modified interceptor version to carry a good number of Fakour missiles.....



First of all you EITHER make a ground attack fighter OR an interceptor. YOU DONT MAKE IT BOTH OR IT WONT BE GOOD AT EITHER! They are fundamentally different types of airplanes it’s like F-14 being an F-4 and vice versa.

Second if the primary intention is to carry 16 bombs and attack targets far away from home, why have an internal bay? Are you just trying to name things for you Hollywood Fighter to have so it’s sounds “advanced”? 

Furthermore isn’t the J-79 a dirty *** engine? Is that really fit for 5th gen fighter? 

Your idea of an “internal weapon” bay to reduce RCS won’t mean much when the absurd heat signature of your J-79 engines gives your plane away to any modern air defense systems. 

Not to mention a fully loaded Mirage fighter design type would have a RCS of between 9-12m2 based on info I have found. So your planes would be lighting up radars like a damn Christmas tree.

So assuming you want your fighter to penetrate heavily contested airspace (Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Arab Emirates) the plane would need ANOTHER plane to escort it through dense radar areas.

The survivability of this aircraft is in question.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

We don't have technology to produce superalloys.
No superalloys = No turbofan engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

MAPNAs Siemens turbine copies all use superalloys, even single crystal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> MAPNAs Siemens turbine copies all use superalloys, even single crystal.


guess pressure and heat in Mapna turbines are a lot less than a modern engine like what you see in F-35
producing Super alloy is a field that we need invest heavily in it.


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> guess pressure and heat in Mapna turbines are a lot less than a modern engine like what you see in F-35
> producing Super alloy is a field that we need invest heavily in it.



No, same thing in every respect.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> No, same thing in every respect.


its not my field but my guess is as F-35 engine is a lot smaller , then the pressure must be somehow higher


----------



## WinterNights

Iran is most definitely ALOT more advanced in the superalloy field than people think. Iran's MAPNA alone should give people a hint. When the OWJ was unveiled, Sorena Sattari said in an interview that this is something that should have been done decades years ago.

Anyway, remember that Iran compares it's gas turbine quality to the Germans. How many other nations have a company like MAPNA? The latent capability to produce even turbofan is there. Don't even question it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

5-6 years ago i read a story that Iran tests nano-coatings on the blades of fighterjet engines. The aim is to rise the heatrange of the blades. Also new coolings within the blades were tested. But i dont know how far this project is.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

Also remember they said 2 years ago that in 2 years they will have an engine with 4x the thrust of OWJ. So that engine is probably ready now! Iran has really no real technological barrier to start producing much more advanced planes than we think. What is needed is the political/military go ahead and funding. The real question for us to consider here is that is Iran in that much need of such planes in order to start using funding for it? I think yes, remember, if Iran starts working on such projects, they will not be ready for atleast a decade. Therefore, we need to start plating the seeds now so we can use them in the future. In the meantime, the main priority must remain in missiles (we need to also focus on hypersonic systems) airdefence and UAV's. The technologies we use in UAV can also be used in our manned systems too. We also need to get as much TOT in manned planes from likes of Russians.

I think those "seeds" I am referring to, have already been planted. We are seeing some of them come to fruition already. I am sure there is so much going on behind the scenes that we don't see.



Ich said:


> 5-6 years ago i read a story that Iran tests nano-coatings on the blades of fighterjet engines. The aim is to rise the heatrange of the blades. Also new coolings within the blades were tested. But i dont know how far this project is.



Good point. Also, people need to remember that Iran is much more advanced in sciences like nanotech compared to these nations like turkey, Pakistan etc. Yet we see them having their own project in 5th gen. Obviously these countries can't build such things themselves and are relying on foreigners e.g China and Britain. Iran could start developing these systems with much less input from outsiders.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> its not my field but my guess is as F-35 engine is a lot smaller , then the pressure must be somehow higher



Pressure ratios can be different in different engines, but the reason superalloys are used is temperature, not pressure (its isobar thermodynamically). Secondary concern is the mechanical force caused by the rotation.
A superalloy for a 150MW gasturbine will be suitable for turbofan or turbojet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Oh I am sorry Vevak, I personally forgot you visited each Iranian military installation and verified Iran has no oven.
> 
> Good thing we have you on this board and your wealth of classified knowledge.
> 
> You can’t build a heavy fighter and stick a damn J-79 in it or an Rd-33 or a J-85.
> 
> So for Iran to build a heavy fighter they would need an engine with >80nt dry >100 nt afterburner which leaves just TWO possible engines that Iran has access too F-14 engine and possibly SU-24 engine the AL-21.
> 
> Iran needs something in the AL-31 class to be able to build a heavy fighter side (SU-35, F-14, F-22).
> 
> I assume Iran spent its earlier years trying to reverse engineer a less complex engine like J-85 before moving to J-79 and higher.
> 
> There is only A FEW countries in the world that can build their own heavy jet engines. China is still years behind Russia and US and they have a lot more experience and resources in this field than Iran will ever have.


Another possible option could be the Soloviev D30 turbofan.In its afterburning version it powers the Mig31 which altho it is not a fighter is certainly no slouch in the engine performance department.The non afterburning variants powers the Tu54 and the Il76,both of which iran operates or at least did and should in theory be available for reverse/reengineering.The afterburning variants of these engines are basically in the same class as the P&W TF30,tho slightly larger and heavier but with quite a bit more power in afterburner,tho how much reengineering would be required to convert the civilian airliner/transport versions to afterburning is anyones guess


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Another possible option could be the Soloviev D30 turbofan.In its afterburning version it powers the Mig31 which altho it is not a fighter is certainly no slouch in the engine performance department.The non afterburning variants powers the Tu54 and the Il76,both of which iran operates or at least did and should in theory be available for reverse/reengineering.The afterburning variants of these engines are basically in the same class as the P&W TF30,tho slightly larger and heavier but with quite a bit more power in afterburner,tho how much reengineering would be required to convert the civilian airliner/transport versions to afterburning is anyones guess



There is no proof Iran has the TF30. In fact, subsequent models show Iran flying a RQ-170 clone using rotary engines! It flew fine!

Thus signs point to the notion that the RQ-170 flying over Iran had a fairly mundane engine. Time will tell



WinterNights said:


> Also remember they said 2 years ago that in 2 years they will have an engine with 4x the thrust of OWJ. So that engine is probably ready now! Iran has really no real technological barrier to start producing much more advanced planes than we think. What is needed is the political/military go ahead and funding. The real question for us to consider here is that is Iran in that much need of such planes in order to start using funding for it? I think yes, remember, if Iran starts working on such projects, they will not be ready for atleast a decade. Therefore, we need to start plating the seeds now so we can use them in the future. In the meantime, the main priority must remain in missiles (we need to also focus on hypersonic systems) airdefence and UAV's. The technologies we use in UAV can also be used in our manned systems too. We also need to get as much TOT in manned planes from likes of Russians.
> 
> I think those "seeds" I am referring to, have already been planted. We are seeing some of them come to fruition already. I am sure there is so much going on behind the scenes that we don't see.
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Also, people need to remember that Iran is much more advanced in sciences like nanotech compared to these nations like turkey, Pakistan etc. Yet we see them having their own project in 5th gen. Obviously these countries can't build such things themselves and are relying on foreigners e.g China and Britain. Iran could start developing these systems with much less input from outsiders.



The problem with iran is not building a low RCS design (that is just simple design engineering) or building a suitable engine (though a huge task).

It is EVERYTHING ELSE that goes into what makes a 5th gen fighter a 5th gen fighter.

*EW systems
*Counter EW systems
*targeting pod technology 
*next gen BVR missiles
*radar absorbing coating “skin”
*advanced avionics and navigation systems
*engine exhaust cooling systems to mask heat of engine
*thrust vectoring
*supercruise technology

If you saw Russian airforce in Syria you would see how their targeting pod technology is inferior to US and even Israel. Many published air strikes appeared to be missing there target locations.

So what targeting pod technology has Iran been using or going to use on a 5th gen fighter?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...-new-warplane-and-domestic-made-s-300-report/


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...-new-warplane-and-domestic-made-s-300-report/


There's already a thread for that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-...apabilities-of-ballistic-and-cruise-missiles/

New fighters are on the way.


----------



## SubWater

@VEVAK 
Delta wing project













and other designs









The problem is engine we don't have powerful engines to move for bigger platforms also F5 is good platform and we can put it as base and start point for making bigger platform.
I think they don't have plan to make new F5s they just build one to prove technology and move for another step to build bigger jet.


----------



## WinterNights

Those above projects always intrigued me, especially the one that seems to have a cockpit?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

WinterNights said:


> Those above projects always intrigued me, especially the one that seems to have a cockpit?


They halt b/c of engines.
when Iran build it's engine we can have hope to see bigger platform rather than F5 and Qaher313.
*at least* we have two yrs distance from bigger engines like RD-33.

They propabely build their RC models and test them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

SubWater said:


> They halt b/c of engines.
> when Iran build it's engine we can have hope to see bigger platform rather than F5 and Qaher313.
> *at least* we have two yrs distance from bigger engines like RD-33.



They said 2 years ago that in 2 years (i.e right now) they will have an engine with 4x the thrust of OWJ ready. If we have achieved that, then we are not that far behind something like RD-33.


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> They said 2 years ago that in 2 years (i.e right now) they will have an engine with 4x the thrust of OWJ ready. If we have achieved that, then we are not that far behind something like RD-33.



Why would Iran build the RD-33, when a 4x version of Owj would be similar to Rd-33 in terms of max thrust?

It could be that the 4xOwj project is RD-33.

There is also a heavy turbojet engine in production.

The Sofreh Mahi variants shown are probably Iran’s 6th gen fighters. The “cockpit one” resembles the United States skunk works 6th gen fighter concept.

Thus that Iran project is probably 10+ years away from production prototypes.


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> Why would Iran build the RD-33, when a 4x version of Owj would be similar to Rd-33 in terms of max thrust?
> 
> It could be that the 4xOwj project is RD-33.
> 
> There is also a heavy turbojet engine in production.
> 
> The Sofreh Mahi variants shown are probably Iran’s 6th gen fighters. The “cockpit one” resembles the United States skunk works 6th gen fighter concept.
> 
> Thus that Iran project is probably 10+ years away from production prototypes.



Because from my understanding, that 4x thrust engine is thought to be a turbojet and not a turbofan. That's the impression I got from the Dehghan's interview anyway.


----------



## sha ah

WinterNights said:


> Because from my understanding, that 4x thrust engine is thought to be a turbojet and not a turbofan. That's the impression I got from the Dehghan's interview anyway.




https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018...capacity-spite-sanctions-180901150102176.html

*Iran plans to acquire MODERN FIGHTER JETS & boost missile capacity in sp ite of sanctions*

Announced intention to strengthen Iran's defence capabilities also includes ac quiring fighter jets and submarines.

Iran is planning to increase its missile capacity and acquire modern fighter jets and submarines as part of ef forts to expand its defence capabilities, a senior official has said.

Mohammad Ahadi, Iran's deputy defence minister for international affairs, made the announcement in a speech to a group of foreign military attaches, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported on Saturday.

"Increasing ballistic and cruise missile capacity ... and the acquisition of next-generation fighters and heavy and long-range vessels and submarines with various weapons capabilities are among the new plans of this ministry," he said in the capital, Tehran.

His comments came a day after Tehran rejected a French call for negotiations on future nuclear plans, its ballistic missile arsenal and its role in ongoing regional conflicts, in the wake of a decision by the United States to withdraw from a multinational nuclear deal with Iran and reimpose sanctions against it.

Earlier this week, Iranian lawyers asked the International Court of Justice to order the US to lift the sanctions, saying the measures - which are damaging Iran's already weak economy - violate terms of a little-known 1955 friendship treaty between the two countries.

In his address, Ahadi said the sanctions had not slowed the development of the country's arms industry. 

"We have the necessary infrastructure and what we need to do is research and development, and at the same time upgrade and update the defence industry while relying on the country's very high scientific capabilities and tens of thousands of graduates in technical fields and engineering," he was quoted as saying by IRNA. 

He also defended Iran's actions in Syria and Iraq, saying they were central to defeating the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIL or ISIS) armed group.


READ MORE
*Iran unveils new domestic fighter jet*
"If Iran and its allies ... had not stopped [the] Islamic State [of Iraq and the Levant], today the map of the region would be different and the world would face a terrible challenge." 

In August, Iran unveiled a new domestic fighter jet, reportedly the first to be "100-percent indigenously made".

At the time, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the country's military strength was designed to deter enemies and create "lasting peace".

Rouhani later said that the Islamic Republic's military prowess deterred the US from attacking it.

Relations worsened between the two countries after US President Donald Trump's decision in May to pull out from the landmark nuclear deal, which was signed in 2015 between Iran and several world powers.

*War games*
In a separate announcement on Saturday, the head of the defence ministry's naval industries said a water jet propulsion system was in development and would be ready by March, according to semi-official news agency Tasnim. 

Earlier this week, Iranian state media reported the launch of military exercises involving some 150,000 volunteer Basij militia members, led by Iran's Revolutionary Guards, who vowed to protect Iran from "foreign threats".

"The motto of these war games is unity ... and to declare that, when it comes to adversity and threats from foreigners, we all join to defend the [Islamic Republic's] system," Basij commander Gholam-Hossein Gheibparvar was quoted by IRNA as saying.

The exercises come in advance of massive annual rallies planned for later this month to mark the start of the Iran-Iraq war, which raged from 1980 to 1988.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> Because from my understanding, that 4x thrust engine is thought to be a turbojet and not a turbofan. That's the impression I got from the Dehghan's interview anyway.



Um you don’t use a turbojet in a fighter aircraft you use a turbofan.

An you are probably talking about an interview a few years ago that said they are working on heavy turbojet and turbofan engine. Lastly Dehghan is no longer a DM. 

Furthermore, DMs don’t get information on ALL projects. It’s a ministry position and thus a temporary position. So many projects are withheld unless it is deemed the DM should know about it.

The DM position is overrated in my opinion.


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> Um you don’t use a turbojet in a fighter aircraft you use a turbofan.
> 
> An you are probably talking about an interview a few years ago that said they are working on heavy turbojet and turbofan engine. Lastly Dehghan is no longer a DM.
> 
> Furthermore, DMs don’t get information on ALL projects.



What do you think the OWJ is? It is a turbojet. Of course you can use a turbojet in a fighter, obviously a turbofan is more efficient/effective but turbojet is easier to make. Anyway, point was that the 4x thrust engine seemed to be a referring to a turbojet.
The fact he is not longer DM is irrelevant. When he gave the interview, he was obviously being informed on these projects. Do you seriously think the DM would not have been up to speed with all these major engine developments? Fighter jet engines ARE major developments and he would have definitely been informed.


----------



## SubWater

WinterNights said:


> They said 2 years ago that in 2 years (i.e right now) they will have an engine with 4x the thrust of OWJ ready. If we have achieved that, then we are not that far behind something like RD-33.


from where this two yrs come ????
I find exact former ministry of defense head interview in Aug 2016




in 5:35 he clearly said 3 yrs and that is speculation.
Although I think if we pour enough money and resource for this project we can hear good news soon.


----------



## sha ah

So ideally, this is what I would like for Iran's airforce in the coming years. 

I'm guessing that Iran will wait until 2020 when the UN embargoes which prevent Iran from purchasing fighter jets comes to an end. According to rumors, Russia & Iran have already signed an agreement for a large number of brand new fighter jets with technology transfers. Some say the number could be as high as 200 but realistically it will probably be 50-70 new jets ? maybe 100 ? 

In any case, I would like to see Iran get rid of their aging F-4 jets. I would also like to see Iran upgrade their F-5's to Kowsar standard & build a few squadrons of Kowsar, ideally 4, to supplement the airforce. The F-14's will probably remain but honestly they probably won't last more than another 20 years. The SU-30 & other derivatives of the SU-27 will most likely be the Iranian airforces backbone. I would also like to see Iran acquire help from Russia to upgrade their MIG-29's. Ideally I would also like to see Iran purchase a few more squadrons of the MIG-29 or perhaps a single seat derivative of the SU-27? On top of that it would be nice to see Iran buy a few squadrons of the MIG-25 for heavy bombing runs ? it would also be a dream for Iran to purchase a few squadrons of the SU-57, however I'm not sure about that. 

Aside from Iran purchasing fighter jets, Iran needs new helicopters. I want to see the Shahed 216 ? A large purchase of Russian jets with technology transfers ? 





sha ah said:


> https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018...capacity-spite-sanctions-180901150102176.html
> 
> *Iran plans to acquire MODERN FIGHTER JETS & boost missile capacity in sp ite of sanctions*
> 
> Announced intention to strengthen Iran's defence capabilities also includes ac quiring fighter jets and submarines.
> 
> Iran is planning to increase its missile capacity and acquire modern fighter jets and submarines as part of ef forts to expand its defence capabilities, a senior official has said.
> 
> Mohammad Ahadi, Iran's deputy defence minister for international affairs, made the announcement in a speech to a group of foreign military attaches, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported on Saturday.
> 
> "Increasing ballistic and cruise missile capacity ... and the acquisition of next-generation fighters and heavy and long-range vessels and submarines with various weapons capabilities are among the new plans of this ministry," he said in the capital, Tehran.
> 
> His comments came a day after Tehran rejected a French call for negotiations on future nuclear plans, its ballistic missile arsenal and its role in ongoing regional conflicts, in the wake of a decision by the United States to withdraw from a multinational nuclear deal with Iran and reimpose sanctions against it.
> 
> Earlier this week, Iranian lawyers asked the International Court of Justice to order the US to lift the sanctions, saying the measures - which are damaging Iran's already weak economy - violate terms of a little-known 1955 friendship treaty between the two countries.
> 
> In his address, Ahadi said the sanctions had not slowed the development of the country's arms industry.
> 
> "We have the necessary infrastructure and what we need to do is research and development, and at the same time upgrade and update the defence industry while relying on the country's very high scientific capabilities and tens of thousands of graduates in technical fields and engineering," he was quoted as saying by IRNA.
> 
> He also defended Iran's actions in Syria and Iraq, saying they were central to defeating the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIL or ISIS) armed group.
> 
> 
> READ MORE
> *Iran unveils new domestic fighter jet*
> "If Iran and its allies ... had not stopped [the] Islamic State [of Iraq and the Levant], today the map of the region would be different and the world would face a terrible challenge."
> 
> In August, Iran unveiled a new domestic fighter jet, reportedly the first to be "100-percent indigenously made".
> 
> At the time, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the country's military strength was designed to deter enemies and create "lasting peace".
> 
> Rouhani later said that the Islamic Republic's military prowess deterred the US from attacking it.
> 
> Relations worsened between the two countries after US President Donald Trump's decision in May to pull out from the landmark nuclear deal, which was signed in 2015 between Iran and several world powers.
> 
> *War games*
> In a separate announcement on Saturday, the head of the defence ministry's naval industries said a water jet propulsion system was in development and would be ready by March, according to semi-official news agency Tasnim.
> 
> Earlier this week, Iranian state media reported the launch of military exercises involving some 150,000 volunteer Basij militia members, led by Iran's Revolutionary Guards, who vowed to protect Iran from "foreign threats".
> 
> "The motto of these war games is unity ... and to declare that, when it comes to adversity and threats from foreigners, we all join to defend the [Islamic Republic's] system," Basij commander Gholam-Hossein Gheibparvar was quoted by IRNA as saying.
> 
> The exercises come in advance of massive annual rallies planned for later this month to mark the start of the Iran-Iraq war, which raged from 1980 to 1988.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1036038493951029249
Iran in talks with Pakistan China and Russia for new jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samparis75

BHarwana said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1036038493951029249
> Iran in talks with Pakistan China and Russia for new jets.



where do you see Pakistan China and Russia?


----------



## VEVAK

SubWater said:


> @VEVAK
> Delta wing project
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and other designs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is engine we don't have powerful engines to move for bigger platforms also F5 is good platform and we can put it as base and start point for making bigger platform.
> I think they don't have plan to make new F5s they just build one to prove technology and move for another step to build bigger jet.



Iran never claimed that the Sofreh Mahi project was anything other than a UAV project 

In terms of design they look nice (Delta wing version would need adjustments in design for a supersonic version & the other one needs better designed intakes) 
And they would be good only IF the aircraft was large enough 65ft-70ft long with large enough weapons bay & preferably with engines that had combined dry thrust of 30,000lbf or more and combined max thrust of almost 50,000lbf


If it was me I would 1st build a weapons bay capable of carrying 8 1000lb ordinance (1ft in diameter x 15ft long) and then I would design a low RCS Delta wing fighter around the weapons bay 

In terms of propulsion if in the past decade Iran had put most of it's focused on building an improved version of the J-79 or better yet the AL-21's today we wouldn't have propulsion problems at all!

In particular the J-79's that is a singe spool engine that Iran has worked with for a long time and it is an engine that has a lot of room for improvements

For example:
1.The J-79's Turbine inlet temperature is under 1800F degrees & by comparison an RD-33 runs at 2500F degrees 
So the J-79 combustion chambers leave room for upgrades allowing you to make adjustments in design and materials allowing you to reduce the size of your combustion chamber, your spool axels & you turbines... for more efficient or more powerful engines 
2.The J79 has a 3 section compressor and with simply increasing the diameters of the front compressors while reducing the length of your blades and making some design adjustments with the purpose of allowing for limited low bypass turbojet engines will further increase efficacy 
3. Designing an outer casing to allow for limited bypass over you high pressure compressors will further increase efficiency (when cold air is passed over your compressors and heated up over your combustion chamber and afterburners this will not only increase thrust by it's self but when fed to your afterburner the increase oxygen will allow you to better burn fuel with your afterburners for a more efficient and or more powerful afterburners 
4. Building far more efficient ball brings than ones produce in the late 60's by the Americans should be well within Iran's capabilities 
So if they had focused on these 4 improvements on the J-79 we would of had an engine that would have been sufficient even for our F-14's

And if Iran had made these upgrades to the twin spool AL-21's or had build a twin spool version of the J-79 we would of had an engine that would have been sufficient for decades to come!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

_Military Watch . September 01st - 2018
"F-14 Technologies On An F-5 Airframe; Could Iran’s New Kowsar Light Fighter be a Major Game Changer?" _
_https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/71077_

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

sahureka2 said:


> _Military Watch . September 01st - 2018
> "F-14 Technologies On An F-5 Airframe; Could Iran’s New Kowsar Light Fighter be a Major Game Changer?"
> https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/71077_


nice one


----------



## Sineva

SubWater said:


> Although I think if we pour enough money and resource for this project we can hear good news soon.



Yes,but the key word here,as always is *"IF"*.Because without the money and resources you probably arent going to get very far.Also the past history of the airforce when it comes to programmes like these has not been all that great,tho how much of that was due to a simple lack of resources versus a failure of project management is hard to say,but it is interesting to compare the airforces failed attempts to reactivate the su22 force with the irgcs successful reactivation program and the development of both pgms and a targeting pod for these aircraft as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Yes,but the key word here,as always is *"IF"*.Because without the money and resources you probably arent going to get very far.Also the past history of the airforce when it comes to programmes like these has not been all that great,tho how much of that was due to a simple lack of resources versus a failure of project management is hard to say,but it is interesting to compare the airforces failed attempts to reactivate the su22 force with the irgcs successful reactivation program and the development of both pgms and a targeting pod for these aircraft as well.



Air Force is getting a major focus. Over the years we have been getting steady indications, now the latest news is Iran plans to acquire “next gen fighters”. This reiteration by iran’s establishment is key. They made similar claims about air defense 10 years ago and then rahbar ordered the separation of Iran’s Air defense into its own military wing.

All the way up to rahbar, it has become clear they are going to focus on airforce now.

I think it means some airforce projects have finally shown promise for Iran to move forward with them.

BTW a next gen airforce program is not cheap. Japan estimated that a 5th gen domestic fighter program would cost it 40 BILLION DOLLARS in r&d alone (not taking production into account).

Those costs are for a country like Japan that is highly advanced in electronics and engines. Furthermore, they would likely incorporate technologies and parts from other countries in order to keep r&d/production costs lower.

Unfortunately Iran doesn’t have that luxury and would likely have to build almost all the parts and technologies itself.

I think in next 15 years there will be some
important accomplishments for Iran for its Air Force.


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> Yes,but the key word here,as always is *"IF"*.Because without the money and resources you probably arent going to get very far.Also the past history of the airforce when it comes to programmes like these has not been all that great,tho how much of that was due to a simple lack of resources versus a failure of project management is hard to say,but it is interesting to compare the airforces failed attempts to reactivate the su22 force with the irgcs successful reactivation program and the development of both pgms and a targeting pod for these aircraft as well.



supposition reactivation of the SU-22:
Triangulating spare parts
Syria Air Force after 8 years of war still uses its SU-22 (& SU-24 Mig-21, Mig-23, L-39 ) so to do so, get assistance for spare parts, from whom?
certainly from Russia, its ally in the war .

Who is another ally of Syria who came to the field with men and weapons? certainly Iran,

Iran in turn had in stock SU-22 planes that were not operational, as a thank you for Iranian aid, Syria today does not have much to send as a gift to Iran, but both countries use aircraft of Soviet origin and Syria has spare parts available.
So it is plausible that some of these spare parts arrived in the Iranian repair workshop where they were used to bring the SU-22s in flight conditions, aircraft further modernized by Iranian technicians who developed new systems.
Updates that could then be implemented also on the Syrian SU-22s.
The same situation could be activated for the IRIAF SU-24s.

note well, it's just my hypothesis

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

@AmirPatriot btw i read about World air forces 2018 and it says that Iran has about 24 F-14s and 20 MiG-29s and you claim about 40 F-14s so which one is more convincing?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

This is probably the most retarded video about IRIAF vs USAF
What do you think?


----------



## pin gu

@VEVAK 

Is he referring to turbine blades at 15:20 ?






Thanks to @yavar for video

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

pin gu said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Is he referring to turbine blades at 15:20 ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to @yavar for video



If it was something hard to produce and the Air Force had already developed it then yes it would be Turbine blades..... but how much stress and what temperature your blades can handle.....

Take a look at Turbine inlet temperature for J-79(1750F) vs TF-30's(2100F) vs F-100(2500F) vs F110(2750) there is a gradual increase in turbine inlet temp so it's vital and it's something Iran's Air Force should have worked on and put considerable effort in improving in the past 20 years

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

T-72B said:


> This is probably the most retarded video about IRIAF vs USAF
> What do you think?



It's an absurd comparison and even a more ridicules conclusion and as a response to such an absurd conclusion I would say their Air Force wasn't able to stop Iran from sinking various U.S. ships and killing over 20,000 U.S. solders in a matter of day's in their 2002 $1/4 Billion USD simulated war against Iran

And in 2002 Iran didn't have the Sub's it has today, Iran didn't have the UAV's & UCAV's it has today, or the Air Defense it has today, Iran's most accurate Ballistic Missile had a CEP of 150 meters at 150km vs today's 20 meters at 700km and Iran's yearly Ballistic Missile production rate today is greater than it's entire Iranian built BM stockpile in 2002, the longest ranged cruise missile Iran had in 2002 was the 450km Raad vs 1500km today and they are deployed in far greater numbers, the number of deployed Iranian sensors were a fraction of what they are today,.....

And since WW2 U.S. has not gone to war against a country capable of producing so many of it's own weapons so without a large scale use of Nuclear weapons the outcome of such a war can not be so easily predicted

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

T-72B said:


> This is probably the most retarded video about IRIAF vs USAF
> What do you think?



Because its true.


----------



## raptor22

T-72B said:


> This is probably the most retarded video about IRIAF vs USAF
> What do you think?


Well in order to use their air force to bring war inside of Iran first they need to protect those AC and also all air bases they would use in the region ... it's not as easy as it portrays ... plus Iran BVR capabilities put Iranian fighter jet in a better position to engage with American fighter jet and as far as presence of Iran air defense system it won't be a piece of cake though I admire American air force and its birds capabilities ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

pin gu said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Is he referring to turbine blades at 15:20 ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to @yavar for video


You know, I watched this video, I came away with 2 thoughts...first one is this video looks like a strategy meeting and it should not have been public. The second thought, the leader, is neither a diplomat nor a strategist. I hope no one really let's him dictate Iran's strategic direction because he's old and not very worldly. He should just be a spiritual leader like the Pope...not a governmental leader. I'm sorry I don't mean to offend my fellow countrymen but I just realized this just a nice likeable old man.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

Kastor said:


> You know, I watched this video, I came away with 2 thoughts...first one is this video looks like a strategy meeting and it should not have been public. The second thought, the leader, is neither a diplomat nor a strategist. I hope no one really let's him dictate Iran's strategic direction because he's old and not very worldly. He should just be a spiritual leader like the Pope...not a governmental leader. I'm sorry I don't offend my fellow countrymen but I just realized this just a nice likeable old man.



dear kastor ,Mr Khamenei might be old but he knows what he is doing  . other part that was about "turbine blades" and I checked the story timing it goes back to 1376-1384 (Mr khatami's minister 1997-2005 ) so nothing classified or extra ordinary . long before this clip MAPNA group and Air Force had this capability to produce turbine blades and they shown their products to us for me revealing timing was interesting.


----------



## mohsen

Kastor said:


> You know, I watched this video, I came away with 2 thoughts...first one is this video looks like a strategy meeting and it should not have been public. The second thought, the leader, is neither a diplomat nor a strategist. I hope no one really let's him dictate Iran's strategic direction because he's old and not very worldly. He should just be a spiritual leader like the Pope...not a governmental leader. I'm sorry I don't offend my fellow countrymen but I just realized this just a nice likeable old man.


It was a private speech for government authorities, what he said are clear and constant policies (of IRI) or guide lines which he has stated publicly in the past, they don't publish the actual meetings and discussions.

Also if he don't publicize these frameworks, Reformists wouldn't hesitate to publish their own policies (which some times are 100% against his) as his orders to avoid taking responsibility. 

He is spiritual leader, but the main policies are defined/approved by him, he is the reason that Iran wont get the fate of soviet union or Libya.

*نظرسیاستمداران جهان درباره مقام معظم رهبری *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

mohsen said:


> It was a private speech for government authorities, what he said are clear and constant policies (of IRI) or guide lines which he has stated publicly in the past, they don't publish the actual meetings and discussions.
> 
> Also if he don't publicize these frameworks, Reformists wouldn't hesitate to publish their own policies (which some times are 100% against his) as his orders to avoid taking responsibility.
> 
> He is spiritual leader, but the main policies are defined/approved by him, he is the reason that Iran wont get the fate of soviet union or Libya.
> 
> *نظرسیاستمداران جهان درباره مقام معظم رهبری *


Well all I can say is put the koolaide down, This is a clergyman, educated in the ways of Islam. He's no Henry Kissinger, if he's setting the course for the country...we're screwed.


----------



## VEVAK

Oldman1 said:


> Because its true.



Yes Iran has an old and out dated Air Force! And in Air to Air operations Iranian fighters are no match for the U.S. Air Force SO WHAT? Even if Iran had 250 new Su-30's Iran's Air Force would still be no match for the U.S. Air Force deployed in the region, mainly because aside from their 5th gen fighters U.S. 4th gen Air Superiority fighters are equipped with AESA radars that can be data linked and networked that would allow them to get 8:1 kill ratios (Which means to combat 100 US Air Superiority fighters Iran would need upwards of 800 Su-30's just to come out even) so the only way to truly combat U.S. Air Superiority capabilities over your own territory is NOT with fighters but with Jet powered UCAV's equipped with Air to Air missiles that back up your SAM and Iran could loss twin engines high subsonic jet powered UCAV's equipped with Air to Air missiles and doppler radars at a ratio of 20:1 and the financial sting of it would still be less than loosing a single Su-30 and the operational cost of them would also be far less 

And another true fact is that since WW2 U.S. has NOT gone to war with a single country that was even capable of producing it's own ATGM's domestically let alone a county capable of targeting Aircraft bunkers using solid fuel ballistic missiles from 700km away! Let alone a county that's capable of making up for the short comings of it's Air Force with large scale use of domestically built Cruise Missile + Ballistic Missiles + UAV's & UCAV's. + Special forces deployed within 20km of most US bases within 500km of Iran that will be equipped with weapons capable of targeting high value un-bunkered soft targets at those bases.....

You think you can threaten a country capable of producing it's own weapons for decades and that country is not going to build sufficient number weapons capable of targeting every base you've built in the region and that country is not going to plan for how to hit your bases using various tactics and weapons and that county is not going to plan for and build weapons to deny your ships the ability to get anywhere near your shores and that country is not going to build a sufficient number of sensors monitoring your activities and that country is not going to come up with tactics and weapons to combat a superior Air Force...



mohsen said:


> It was a private speech for government authorities, what he said are clear and constant policies (of IRI) or guide lines which he has stated publicly in the past, they don't publish the actual meetings and discussions.
> 
> Also if he don't publicize these frameworks, Reformists wouldn't hesitate to publish their own policies (which some times are 100% against his) as his orders to avoid taking responsibility.
> 
> He is spiritual leader, but the main policies are defined/approved by him, he is the reason that Iran wont get the fate of soviet union or Libya.
> 
> *نظرسیاستمداران جهان درباره مقام معظم رهبری *



The MAIN reason Iran won't get the fait of the Soviet Union or Libya or even Syria is the IRGC backed up by the Basij and NOT any one leader! Iran's Supreme Leader could pass away tomorrow and that fact wont change because the IRGC and Basij are there and they are able to arm over a million loyal volunteers instantly with millions more to back them up if need be!


----------



## WinterNights

mohsen said:


> It was a private speech for government authorities, what he said are clear and constant policies (of IRI) or guide lines which he has stated publicly in the past, they don't publish the actual meetings and discussions.
> 
> Also if he don't publicize these frameworks, Reformists wouldn't hesitate to publish their own policies (which some times are 100% against his) as his orders to avoid taking responsibility.
> 
> He is spiritual leader, but the main policies are defined/approved by him, he is the reason that Iran wont get the fate of soviet union or Libya.
> 
> *نظرسیاستمداران جهان درباره مقام معظم رهبری *



The problem is bro, these people are not putting the leader's word into action. How many times does he need to say the same thing. How many times does he need to talk about resistant economy. He needs to be more proactive and make sure these policies are being implemented, especially at these difficult times.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

raptor22 said:


> Well in order to use their air force to bring war inside of Iran first they need to protect those AC and also all air bases they would use in the region ... it's not as easy as it portrays ... plus Iran BVR capabilities put Iranian fighter jet in a better position to engage with American fighter jet and as far as presence of Iran air defense system it won't be a piece of cake though I admire American air force and its birds capabilities ...
> 
> View attachment 497407



If this was just air force vs air force only and excluding everything else. No cruise missiles, smart decoys, drones, AWACS, fuel tankers, submarines and warships, etc.


----------



## T-72B

VEVAK said:


> The MAIN reason Iran won't get the fait of the Soviet Union or Libya or even Syria is the IRGC backed up by the Basij and NOT any one leader! Iran's Supreme Leader could pass away tomorrow and that fact wont change because the IRGC and Basij are there and they are able to arm over a million loyal volunteers instantly with millions more to back them up if need be!


So what about Khamis Brigade and Revolutionary guards of Gaddafi regime?
Why they failed to secure the Gaddafi regime? Their job is similar to Basij and IRGC right?


----------



## WinterNights

Oldman1 said:


> If this was just air force vs air force only and excluding everything else. No cruise missiles, smart decoys, drones, AWACS, fuel tankers, submarines and warships, etc.



But Iran will not just go airforce vs airforce against the US so such hypothetical scenarios are meaningless.


----------



## mohsen

Kastor said:


> Well all I can say is put the koolaide down, This is a clergyman, educated in the ways of Islam. He's no Henry Kissinger, if he's setting the course for the country...we're screwed.


He is way beyond Kissinger, he and his predecessor have been setting our path, and I'm satisfied with it (regardless of the drivers' performance).
There is no soft and easy path to independence.



VEVAK said:


> The MAIN reason Iran won't get the fait of the Soviet Union or Libya or even Syria is the IRGC backed up by the Basij and NOT any one leader! Iran's Supreme Leader could pass away tomorrow and that fact wont change because the IRGC and Basij are there and they are able to arm over a million loyal volunteers instantly with millions more to back them up if need be!


The whole soviet military gear couldn't stop it's fall.

Libya didn't lack soldiers too, but these defenseless soldiers couldn't stop American's air campaign against themselves, Libya's last deterrence was it's missiles which could endanger the Israel, but stupid Qaddafi surrendered them to get friendly with Americans.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

T-72B said:


> So what about Khamis Brigade and Revolutionary guards of Gaddafi regime?
> Why they failed to secure the Gaddafi regime? Their job is similar to Basij and IRGC right?



Ghaddafi army was about to rout the rebels and had the trapped when NATO air power intervened and decimated his forces.

NATO waged a heavy air campaign on all of Gaddafi’s assets to the point panic set in. With no external backers (Russia), Libya army began unraveling and the rest is history.

Gaddafi would never have fallen were it not for NATO intervention.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

Kastor said:


> Well all I can say is put the koolaide down, This is a clergyman, educated in the ways of Islam. He's no Henry Kissinger, if he's setting the course for the country...we're screwed.



Well, if you dont know it before, let me inform you: Khamenei was at front of Irak-Iran war. He was (and today is again) head of the iranian military in Irak-Iran war. There are a lot of photos showing him there. And he was succesful doing so. And he lead Iran to a level of education, reaserch and development what is in top 20 or better in the world. And that while coming out of a long war and going through decades of sanctions.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Well, if you dont know it before, let me inform you: Khamenei was at front of Irak-Iran war. He was (and today is again) head of the iranian military in Irak-Iran war. There are a lot of photos showing him there. And he was succesful doing so. And he lead Iran to a level of education, reaserch and development what is in top 20 or better in the world. And that while coming out of a long war and going through decades of sanctions.


As I recall, In Iran - Iraq war Mr. Khomeini between 1360 to 1362 oversaw war effort, in 1362 for several month Mr. Khamenei oversaw the war effort instead of him then in the winter of 1362 he assigned Mr. Rafsanjani to oversaw the war effort and put him as the Head of Khatam-Al-Anbia Central Headquarter and Mr. Rouhani was his Deputy .
Mr. Khamenei Post was Iran President , and The Head of Supreme Council to support war effort from 1366 to the end of war he also was the Head of Supreme council of National defense from 1360 to the end of war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Kastor said:


> Well all I can say is put the koolaide down, This is a clergyman, educated in the ways of Islam. He's no Henry Kissinger, if he's setting the course for the country...we're screwed.



I'm not one to glorify Khamenei, but I think he does at the very least steer Iran towards broad objectives. Our relations with the East and West, nuclear program, nature of the economy and even some specific military items (for example I often hear Bavar-373's development was started at Khamenei's order) are his decisions. He sets directions and everyone in government sets them in motion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

T-72B said:


> So what about Khamis Brigade and Revolutionary guards of Gaddafi regime?
> Why they failed to secure the Gaddafi regime? Their job is similar to Basij and IRGC right?


Because the libyan military in fine arab fashion was a joke,much like gaddaffy himself in fact.
He trusted his enemies while turning his back on his natural allies,and the end result was oh so very predictable.


----------



## Sineva

I found another pic of the su22 forces new weapons,especially the glide bomb

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

IRIAF Chinook hard landing near karaj, all 5 crew are fine.




*یک فروند بالگرد شینوک ارتش دچار سانحه شد/سرنشینان سالم هستند+عکس*


----------



## Trango Towers

VEVAK said:


> Yes Iran has an old and out dated Air Force! And in Air to Air operations Iranian fighters are no match for the U.S. Air Force SO WHAT? Even if Iran had 250 new Su-30's Iran's Air Force would still be no match for the U.S. Air Force deployed in the region, mainly because aside from their 5th gen fighters U.S. 4th gen Air Superiority fighters are equipped with AESA radars that can be data linked and networked that would allow them to get 8:1 kill ratios (Which means to combat 100 US Air Superiority fighters Iran would need upwards of 800 Su-30's just to come out even) so the only way to truly combat U.S. Air Superiority capabilities over your own territory is NOT with fighters but with Jet powered UCAV's equipped with Air to Air missiles that back up your SAM and Iran could loss twin engines high subsonic jet powered UCAV's equipped with Air to Air missiles and doppler radars at a ratio of 20:1 and the financial sting of it would still be less than loosing a single Su-30 and the operational cost of them would also be far less
> 
> And another true fact is that since WW2 U.S. has NOT gone to war with a single country that was even capable of producing it's own ATGM's domestically let alone a county capable of targeting Aircraft bunkers using solid fuel ballistic missiles from 700km away! Let alone a county that's capable of making up for the short comings of it's Air Force with large scale use of domestically built Cruise Missile + Ballistic Missiles + UAV's & UCAV's. + Special forces deployed within 20km of most US bases within 500km of Iran that will be equipped with weapons capable of targeting high value un-bunkered soft targets at those bases.....
> 
> You think you can threaten a country capable of producing it's own weapons for decades and that country is not going to build sufficient number weapons capable of targeting every base you've built in the region and that country is not going to plan for how to hit your bases using various tactics and weapons and that county is not going to plan for and build weapons to deny your ships the ability to get anywhere near your shores and that country is not going to build a sufficient number of sensors monitoring your activities and that country is not going to come up with tactics and weapons to combat a superior Air Force...
> 
> 
> 
> The MAIN reason Iran won't get the fait of the Soviet Union or Libya or even Syria is the IRGC backed up by the Basij and NOT any one leader! Iran's Supreme Leader could pass away tomorrow and that fact wont change because the IRGC and Basij are there and they are able to arm over a million loyal volunteers instantly with millions more to back them up if need be!


If only air combat was that simple...
Iran woukd go after american bases in the region as well as aircraft carriers right from the word go. They hit one aircraft carrier it could well be a game changer


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> He is way beyond Kissinger, he and his predecessor have been setting our path, and I'm satisfied with it (regardless of the drivers' performance).
> There is no soft and easy path to independence.
> 
> 
> The whole soviet military gear couldn't stop it's fall.
> 
> Libya didn't lack soldiers too, but these defenseless soldiers couldn't stop American's air campaign against themselves, Libya's last deterrence was it's missiles which could endanger the Israel, but stupid Qaddafi surrendered them to get friendly with Americans.




As for USSR the ONLY time a Communist government could potentially work is if they stay out of people religious ideology and you practically put an end to Science & Technology by reaching the heights of what's humanly possible in every field where Robots & printers do all the labor from complex surgery to cooking and cleaning where every disease has a cure, every medicine needed is produced automatically, most advanced engines humanly possible is easily printed, gravity has been mastered and humans have colonized & mines other planets, schooling has been replaced by uploads to your brain & worst jobs on earth have been reduced to relaying commands to a robots for a few hours out of your day and most dangerous jobs are deep space explorations and wars on earth have ended so basically in 500 years if we haven't kill the planet by then a communist government could work 

As for Libya there is a difference between a country falling directly because of a leaders stupidity and saying the only reason the Islamic Republic hasn't fallen is because of a specific individual.

Also death is a certainty of life at least for now and I don't think the IRGC or the Basij would sit by and allow a few idiots to hand over our missiles and I have no doubt that even after the Supreme leader passes away any Iranian leaders that even attempt to hand over our missiles will likely be assassinated.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Another electro-optical air launched cruise missile pic


----------



## BERKEKHAN2

mohsen said:


> IRIAF Chinook hard landing near karaj, all 5 crew are fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *یک فروند بالگرد شینوک ارتش دچار سانحه شد/سرنشینان سالم هستند+عکس*


Sir how many Chinooks does Iran have .and is Iran capable of doing maintenance of these helicopters


----------



## Sineva

Storm bombardier said:


> Sir how many Chinooks does Iran have .and is Iran capable of doing maintenance of these helicopters


How do you think iran has been able to keep a large part of its western supplied air craft flying for almost 4 decades without being able to do its own maintenance?,or for that matter produce its own spares and refurbish older components as well?


----------



## BERKEKHAN2

Sineva said:


> How do you think iran has been able to keep a large part of its western supplied air craft flying for almost 4 decades without being able to do its own maintenance?,or for that matter produce its own spares and refurbish older components as well?


Hmm


----------



## Hack-Hook

Storm bombardier said:


> Sir how many Chinooks does Iran have .and is Iran capable of doing maintenance of these helicopters


If we could not do the maintenance we would have to retire the systems 38 years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> As for Libya there is a difference between a country falling directly because of a leaders stupidity and saying the only reason the Islamic Republic hasn't fallen is because of a specific individual.
> 
> Also death is a certainty of life at least for now and I don't think the IRGC or the Basij would sit by and allow a few idiots to hand over our missiles and I have no doubt that even after the Supreme leader passes away any Iranian leaders that even attempt to hand over our missiles will likely be assassinated.


Do you think our Reformists and our current president are smarter than Qaddafi? these morons saw the fate of Qaddafi and still are following the same policies, they are hundreds of times more stupid, it's khamenei who is stopping these traitors from selling our missiles out for bunch of empty promises from U.S.
what would happen if Montazeri was our leader (as it was planned)?
He would implement every suggestion of reformists and IRGC and Basij couldn't do no sh!t, the same way Soviet army and their coup couldn't. forget the missiles, now ISIS was inside Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Do you think our Reformists and our current president are smarter than Qaddafi? these morons saw the fate of Qaddafi and still are following the same policies, they are hundreds of times more stupid, it's khamenei who is stopping these traitors from selling our missiles out for bunch of empty promises from U.S.
> what would happen if Montazeri was our leader (as it was planned)?
> He would implement every suggestion of reformists and IRGC and Basij couldn't do no sh!t, the same way Soviet army and their coup couldn't. forget the missiles, now ISIS was inside Iran.



People used to say the Islamic Republic would fall after Imam passed away too! And yet here we are! And Qadaffi was stupid and no I don't believe vast majority of what you call Reformist are as stupid as him! 
Also, if the Americans believed for single second that assassinating Iran's supreme leader would lead to the fall of the Islamic Republic they would of assassinated him long ago and the reason they don't is because they know it won't make a difference because they have done detail analysis with various supercomputer simulations and they know the IRGC & Basij are there and you can't assassinate those organizations 

And you do understand that your undermining our republic by saying Montazeri was PLANNED to be our leader! FYI right after Imam's death vast majority of people inside and outside our government automatically assumed Rafzanjani was going to be the supreme leader! And you should stop assuming to know what other Iranian leaders would have done if they were in power and I mean in general! 
Today we are still trying to clean up the mess Ahmadi left over especially in terms of the economy with his ridicules yaraneh's and absurd loaning policy!
And Rohani may be a moron when it comes to the economy, military & space program in his own way but he is not as stupid as Qaddafi where he would be stupid enough to hand over our missiles at any price!!!!!!!! Today with two bit of sense understands that we can't even afford to give up our missile program for a fleet of 100 F-22's and 400 F-35's because then we would be stuck with a bunch of Fighter jet's that we wouldn't be able to maintain, arm or use without the Americans which would automatically make us a puppet state. 

And I have NO problem with Iranian leadership talking to the Americans about our missiles AS LONG AS what they say is something alone the line of this and no more:





Even if all our BM's beyond 800km had a CEP of 10km or more today the IRGC just proved the importance of producing and stocking the boosters today and that given time and funding they could turn them into precision guided weapons with a CEP of 10 meters or less just as they upgraded the CEP of Fatteh-110B's produced over a decade ago from 225metes to 10meters and looking at what happened to both Saddam and Qadaffi after they handed over their missiles it's doubtful that any Iranian leader would be that stupid and if they are, either their administration or lifespan will be very short!

And DORANEH MOSHAK TAMOOM Na khahad shod until the day comes where all wars have ended and Iran has a fleet of space ships capable of interplanetary flight that don't need rocket boosters to leave the atmosphere and short of that it's a necessity 

When have Iranians ever took to the street with demonstrations to even complain about spending money on missiles? NEVER. There is NO PUBLIC opinion behind such an absurd act on either side and no logical reason behind it so why would any administration through it's weight behind doing something that stupid? And all parties have idiots in them so don't confuse 2-3 idiot reformists or bunch of Shahi's or Monafeghs online who have NEVER voted even once in their life claiming to be reformist as reformists 

And I'm not even a reformist. Hell, I even voted for Ahmadi the 1st time around but to you anyone who say's that Hejab by force policy is a bad policy is a reformist!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

mohsen said:


> Do you think our Reformists and our current president are smarter than Qaddafi?.



Yes.... even my dog is smarter than Ghazzafi. He know to keep away from people who have kicked him before.


----------



## VEVAK

Sineva said:


> Another electro-optical air launched cruise missile pic



It's this





Iran has various elector optically guided PGM's for various ranges, payloads and warhead also I believe this currently is the ONLY Iranian electrooptically guided munition that has a turbojet engine

Other air launched cruise missiles have different type of guidance and payload's


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> People used to say the Islamic Republic would fall after Imam passed away too! And yet here we are! And Qadaffi was stupid and no I don't believe vast majority of what you call Reformist are as stupid as him!
> Also, if the Americans believed for single second that assassinating Iran's supreme leader would lead to the fall of the Islamic Republic they would of assassinated him long ago and the reason they don't is because they know it won't make a difference because they have done detail analysis with various supercomputer simulations and they know the IRGC & Basij are there and you can't assassinate those organizations
> 
> And you do understand that your undermining our republic by saying Montazeri was PLANNED to be our leader! FYI right after Imam's death vast majority of people inside and outside our government automatically assumed Rafzanjani was going to be the supreme leader! And you should stop assuming to know what other Iranian leaders would have done if they were in power and I mean in general!
> Today we are still trying to clean up the mess Ahmadi left over especially in terms of the economy with his ridicules yaraneh's and absurd loaning policy!
> And Rohani may be a moron when it comes to the economy, military & space program in his own way but he is not as stupid as Qaddafi where he would be stupid enough to hand over our missiles at any price!!!!!!!! Today with two bit of sense understands that we can't even afford to give up our missile program for a fleet of 100 F-22's and 400 F-35's because then we would be stuck with a bunch of Fighter jet's that we wouldn't be able to maintain, arm or use without the Americans which would automatically make us a puppet state.
> 
> And I have NO problem with Iranian leadership talking to the Americans about our missiles AS LONG AS what they say is something alone the line of this and no more:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if all our BM's beyond 800km had a CEP of 10km or more today the IRGC just proved the importance of producing and stocking the boosters today and that given time and funding they could turn them into precision guided weapons with a CEP of 10 meters or less just as they upgraded the CEP of Fatteh-110B's produced over a decade ago from 225metes to 10meters and looking at what happened to both Saddam and Qadaffi after they handed over their missiles it's doubtful that any Iranian leader would be that stupid and if they are, either their administration or lifespan will be very short!
> 
> And DORANEH MOSHAK TAMOOM Na khahad shod until the day comes where all wars have ended and Iran has a fleet of space ships capable of interplanetary flight that don't need rocket boosters to leave the atmosphere and short of that it's a necessity
> 
> When have Iranians ever took to the street with demonstrations to even complain about spending money on missiles? NEVER. There is NO PUBLIC opinion behind such an absurd act on either side and no logical reason behind it so why would any administration through it's weight behind doing something that stupid? And all parties have idiots in them so don't confuse 2-3 idiot reformists or bunch of Shahi's or Monafeghs online who have NEVER voted even once in their life claiming to be reformist as reformists
> 
> And I'm not even a reformist. Hell, I even voted for Ahmadi the 1st time around but to you anyone who say's that Hejab by force policy is a bad policy is a reformist!


Montazeri was the deputy Supreme leader, and this position was dedined to fill up the role of supreme leader while he was sick (or die), so if Imam Khomeini would have died two months earlier, before removing Montazeri, there was a very high chance that Montazeri would remain the next leader.

In this forum, I don't know who is conservative, reformist, or a masked zionist, there are very few genuine words among our conversations, most of them are a repeat of media, so if I say someone is a Zionist, I mean that's zionist's words, regardless of what he really is.

You say Qaddafi was more stupid, but actually dictators (not puppets) are smarter than most of regular people, that's how they reach the top, his mistake was that he trusted Americans based on the all equations which he had for himself, but Reformists are following the very same mistake (if not treason), even after they saw what U.S did to Lybia, even after they saw the fate of their shitty deal with U.S.

You say it's just few individuals among reformists, then show me one f@cking reformist media or individual who countered Hashemi's sentence (or other articles) against our missile program.

Did people chant against our nuclear program? No, quite opposite, but traitors provoked people against our nuclear energy program (it's dangerous, we don't need it, it's expensice and the rest of lies) and promised a heaven in return of shutting it down, people elected him and our nuclear program vanished.
And now *the very same persons and media* are provoking the society against irgc and it's missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

mohsen said:


> Montazeri was the deputy Supreme leader, and this position was dedined to fill up the role of supreme leader while he was sick (or die), so if Imam Khomeini would have died two months earlier, before removing Montazeri, there was a very high chance that Montazeri would remain the next leader.
> 
> In this forum, I don't know who is conservative, reformist, or a masked zionist, there are very few genuine words among our conversations, most of them are a repeat of media, so if I say someone is a Zionist, I mean that's zionist's words, regardless of what he really is.
> 
> You say Qaddafi was more stupid, but actually dictators (not puppets) are smarter than most of regular people, that's how they reach the top, his mistake was that he trusted Americans based on the all equations which he had for himself, but Reformists are following the very same mistake (if not treason), even after they saw what U.S did to Lybia, even after they saw the fate of their shitty deal with U.S.
> 
> You say it's just few individuals among reformists, then show me one f@cking reformist media or individual who countered Hashemi's sentence (or other articles) against our missile program.
> 
> Did people chant against our nuclear program? No, quite opposite, but traitors provoked people against our nuclear energy program (it's dangerous, we don't need it, it's expensice and the rest of lies) and promised a heaven in return of shutting it down, people elected him and our nuclear program vanished.
> And now *the very same persons and media* are provoking the society against irgc and it's missiles.


Well, you know where I stand when it comes to your ideology. I think you're on the IRGC payroll (so easy to see). So everything you say should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm neither a Shahi, or MEK or all the other delusional idiots holding on the past and the impossible. I'm a realist and I think your group, not so much the obtuse hardliners but the corrupt IRGC leadership that's sinking our country. When need a leader that can tell you all to go back to being good soldiers and stop trying to run our policy and our economy.....the military should be just a defence force and nothing more.
PS: In Western country's the military leadership never gives opinions or speeches against or for the civilian government policies, they do this out of of principle not that it's against the law.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## un4given.1991

Old But Gold!
مروری بر زمینه های بهسازی تامکت های نیروی هوایی ایران - صنایع هوایی- شماره 93 -اسفند 77)


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Montazeri was the deputy Supreme leader, and this position was dedined to fill up the role of supreme leader while he was sick (or die), so if Imam Khomeini would have died two months earlier, before removing Montazeri, there was a very high chance that Montazeri would remain the next leader.
> 
> In this forum, I don't know who is conservative, reformist, or a masked zionist, there are very few genuine words among our conversations, most of them are a repeat of media, so if I say someone is a Zionist, I mean that's zionist's words, regardless of what he really is.
> 
> You say Qaddafi was more stupid, but actually dictators (not puppets) are smarter than most of regular people, that's how they reach the top, his mistake was that he trusted Americans based on the all equations which he had for himself, but Reformists are following the very same mistake (if not treason), even after they saw what U.S did to Lybia, even after they saw the fate of their shitty deal with U.S.
> 
> You say it's just few individuals among reformists, then show me one f@cking reformist media or individual who countered Hashemi's sentence (or other articles) against our missile program.
> 
> Did people chant against our nuclear program? No, quite opposite, but traitors provoked people against our nuclear energy program (it's dangerous, we don't need it, it's expensice and the rest of lies) and promised a heaven in return of shutting it down, people elected him and our nuclear program vanished.
> And now *the very same persons and media* are provoking the society against irgc and it's missiles.



You are such a simpleton.

IRGC rules Iran. You simple don’t understand its immense power in the economy, political sphere, and military prowess. Every single high ranking official in Iran has significant ties to IRGC establishment.

The next mullah will not be able to run Iran without IRGC consent, it’s a simple as that.

The age of mullahs is over, the current majlis has the least amount of mullahs in IRR history.

The remaining clerical establishment is content living in Qom and away from government.

So take your fear mongering elsewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Montazeri was the deputy Supreme leader, and this position was dedined to fill up the role of supreme leader while he was sick (or die), so if Imam Khomeini would have died two months earlier, before removing Montazeri, there was a very high chance that Montazeri would remain the next leader.
> 
> In this forum, I don't know who is conservative, reformist, or a masked zionist, there are very few genuine words among our conversations, most of them are a repeat of media, so if I say someone is a Zionist, I mean that's zionist's words, regardless of what he really is.
> 
> You say Qaddafi was more stupid, but actually dictators (not puppets) are smarter than most of regular people, that's how they reach the top, his mistake was that he trusted Americans based on the all equations which he had for himself, but Reformists are following the very same mistake (if not treason), even after they saw what U.S did to Lybia, even after they saw the fate of their shitty deal with U.S.
> 
> You say it's just few individuals among reformists, then show me one f@cking reformist media or individual who countered Hashemi's sentence (or other articles) against our missile program.
> 
> Did people chant against our nuclear program? No, quite opposite, but traitors provoked people against our nuclear energy program (it's dangerous, we don't need it, it's expensice and the rest of lies) and promised a heaven in return of shutting it down, people elected him and our nuclear program vanished.
> And now *the very same persons and media* are provoking the society against irgc and it's missiles.



The only news I get is from Tasnim, Fars, PressTV & Khabar so I wouldn't really know what other site you refer to as Reformist say but not saying NOTHING vs defending such an absurd statement are two different things. 

Specially since Hashemi wasn't really a Reformist by the most part he tried to act like he was during the end maybe because he was under the illusion that it would help him get more votes in a future election but I would say only a rich guy stuck in his own bubble would think daghdagheh mardom moshak-e so if he really believed that Dorraneh Moshak Tamom shodeh then he must of been living in an alternative reality where countries didn't need rockets for their space program, Iran had a science outpost on Mars and where over 50 years have passed since the last war on earth and no country on earth is producing them anymore. So there is simply no logic behind it! 

As for the JCPOA the time tables given were practically inline with the time table needed to star mass production of IR-8's and enhanced IR-6's which are the most logical way to pursue a civilian enrichment program. 
And the main thing they gave up in that deal was the Arak reactor that would take us 3 years just to rebuild the reactor core that they destroyed and most likely than not the guy's who built it started working on nuclear propulsion which I would say is an acceptable trade off and logical if they believed the sanctions would be removed. 
SO WE DID NOT cancel our Nuclear Program and what we gave up would have been a LOGICAL trade off it the Sanctions were removed. 

Missiles are a completely different matter because Iran is a country banned from buying even civilian aircraft let alone Fighters, AWACS, Attack Helo's, PGM's, Missiles, Satellites & other advanced military gear that are a necessity for ANY country let alone a country surrounded by U.S. military bases & hostile countries that combined spend well ever $100 Billion a year on weapons who have been hostile to Iran even before we were producing missiles & terrorist in a country filled with natural resources. So there is NO LOGIC behind it! Nor a public outcry to do such an absurd act! Especially after the JCPOA where ANY deal made with any US administration can at BEST and at an absolute MAX be only trusted to the end of that administration.

And being a dictator doesn't mean your smart because if Qaddafi wasn't a moron he would have at least traded off it's missiles with other U.S. military gear over a span of 10-20 years during which time he would have made sure the Americans had a sufficient amount of investment inside his country that it wouldn't be logical for them to attack or conduct a regime change. If your handing over all the weapons that give you some sense of independence then you need to become the puppet of the U.S. or else your simply asking for it!


----------



## sha ah

T-72B said:


> So what about Khamis Brigade and Revolutionary guards of Gaddafi regime?
> Why they failed to secure the Gaddafi regime? Their job is similar to Basij and IRGC right?



Libya is a small country & really how many loyal soldiers did Gaddafi have on his side ? They had outdated weapons, no air defenses, no missiles, etc. Iran's military doctrine is based on defense. Iranian soldiers are well armed with brand new, cutting edge defensive weapons, MANPADS, ATGMs, sniper rifles with armor piercing rounds. Iran's military is well trained & well versed in guerilla & asymmetrical warfare tactics. The Basij alone number in the millions. Invading Iran, especially a ground invasion would be a suicide mission. Iran has a rugged & mountainous terrain which would make it a nightmare for any invaders.



AmirPatriot said:


> I'm not one to glorify Khamenei, but I think he does at the very least steer Iran towards broad objectives. Our relations with the East and West, nuclear program, nature of the economy and even some specific military items (for example I often hear Bavar-373's development was started at Khamenei's order) are his decisions. He sets directions and everyone in government sets them in motion.



Iran needs a free market economy & a government run by young technocrats. 

Iran's foreign policy is the problem. supporting Hezbollah is one thing but supporting Hamas is foolish because during the Iran-Iraq war they supported Saddam, so did the Palestinians. Average Iranians shouldn't suffer for the sake of people that don't give a rats @ss about them.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Libya is a small country & really how many loyal soldiers did Gaddafi have on his side ? They had outdated weapons, no air defenses, no missiles, etc. Iran's military doctrine is based on defense. Iranian soldiers are well armed with brand new, cutting edge defensive weapons, MANPADS, ATGMs, sniper rifles with armor piercing rounds. Iran's military is well trained & well versed in guerilla & asymmetrical warfare tactics. The Basij alone number in the millions. Invading Iran, especially a ground invasion would be a suicide mission. Iran has a rugged & mountainous terrain which would make it a nightmare for any invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> Iran needs a free market economy & a government run by young technocrats.
> 
> Iran's foreign policy is the problem. supporting Hezbollah is one thing but supporting Hamas is foolish because during the Iran-Iraq war they supported Saddam, so did the Palestinians. Average Iranians shouldn't suffer for the sake of people that don't give a rats @ss about them.


Which countries you are talking about , the country is 100,000 square km larger than Iran 
Libyan Army was completely loyal to Qaddafi , and who says Iran conscript and regulars are equipped with modern weapons ?
our conscripts training is so shitty that they can't hit targets as big as Bus Wheel from 50m away , and they don't knew whats is Ammo economy , they'll just ran out of Ammo in first 3 second of any clash .
I bet 90% of bases in hand of basij never cleaned and oiled their guns in last two month (I clearly recall in Sistan and Baluchistan in one visit to one of theses bases our commander wanted to operate a _DShKM _and it jammed , he dismantle it and removed about 1kg of sand from inside it and then showed us how the lack of maintenance destroyed the Gun) you think how many percent of our conscript knew how to operate a mortar or even RPG correctly if the need arises ?

and no Iran army is not well trained only some branches of Iran Army are well trained .


----------



## T-72B

Hack-Hook said:


> Which countries you are talking about , the country is 100,000 square km larger than Iran
> Libyan Army was completely loyal to Qaddafi , and who says Iran conscript and regulars are equipped with modern weapons ?
> our conscripts training is so shitty that they can't hit targets as big as Bus Wheel from 50m away , and they don't knew whats is Ammo economy , they'll just ran out of Ammo in first 3 second of any clash .
> I bet 90% of bases in hand of basij never cleaned and oiled their guns in last two month (I clearly recall in Sistan and Baluchistan in one visit to one of theses bases our commander wanted to operate a _DShKM _and it jammed , he dismantle it and removed about 1kg of sand from inside it and then showed us how the lack of maintenance destroyed the Gun) you think how many percent of our conscript knew how to operate a mortar or even RPG correctly if the need arises ?
> 
> and no Iran army is not well trained only some branches of Iran Army are well trained .





Hack-Hook said:


> Which countries you are talking about , the country is 100,000 square km larger than Iran
> Libyan Army was completely loyal to Qaddafi , and who says Iran conscript and regulars are equipped with modern weapons ?
> our conscripts training is so shitty that they can't hit targets as big as Bus Wheel from 50m away , and they don't knew whats is Ammo economy , they'll just ran out of Ammo in first 3 second of any clash .
> I bet 90% of bases in hand of basij never cleaned and oiled their guns in last two month (I clearly recall in Sistan and Baluchistan in one visit to one of theses bases our commander wanted to operate a _DShKM _and it jammed , he dismantle it and removed about 1kg of sand from inside it and then showed us how the lack of maintenance destroyed the Gun) you think how many percent of our conscript knew how to operate a mortar or even RPG correctly if the need arises ?
> 
> and no Iran army is not well trained only some branches of Iran Army are well trained .


You talking about Basij or regular army?

And btw Iranian army is still using M1 helmets from WW2 US army and also @Hack-Hook do you know average flight hours of IRIAF pilot per year?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> You talking about Basij or regular army?
> 
> And btw Iranian army is still using M1 helmets from WW2 US army and also @Hack-Hook do you know average flight hours of IRIAF pilot per year?


No but its far less than what it must be so they had to satisfy themselves with simulators.

And I'm ttalking about Basin and conscripts they are going to be the bulk of iran army in any conflict


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> It's this
> View attachment 499355
> 
> 
> Iran has various elector optically guided PGM's for various ranges, payloads and warhead also I believe this currently is the ONLY Iranian electrooptically guided munition that has a turbojet engine
> 
> Other air launched cruise missiles have different type of guidance and payload's


Yes,I knew that it was that particular weapon,but unfortunately theres virtually no detailed info about it to be had and only a handful of pictures and claims of 100km range,at least that was about all I could find.About the only thing that looks reasonably certain is that its based on the ghased 3 e/o rocket boosted air launched glide bomb,which appears to have been converted to use a turbojet.It actually reminds me of the russian kh-59[as-18].Hopefully some more data will be released at some point,tho if its a airforce project then this mockup or possibly prototype might well be all that we`ll ever see of it sadly.










KH-59m[AS-18 Kazoo]


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Sineva said:


> Yes,I knew that it was that particular weapon,but unfortunately theres virtually no detailed info about it to be had and only a handful of pictures and claims of 100km range,at least that was about all I could find.About the only thing that looks reasonably certain is that its based on the ghased 3 e/o rocket boosted air launched glide bomb,which appears to have been converted to use a turbojet.It actually reminds me of the russian kh-59[as-18].Hopre data will be released at some point,tho if its a airforce project then this mockup or possibly prototyight well be all that we`ll ever see of it sa
> 
> KH-59m[AS-18 Kazoo]



Qassed-1 was Iran's version of the GBU-15



Qassed-3 is Iran's version of the AMG-130





and these are Air launched missiles with jet engines

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

دسته گل خاتمی و قماشش:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> دسته گل خاتمی و قماشش:
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


He was lying from the first sentence to the last one.
First it was not only one that crashed it was 5 or 6 of them that crashed and 90% the same problem .
In short the engine was not suitable for Iran environment or civilian sector demands.

Second can you show me the maritime version of the airplane we built ?

And another question why he say one of the ATR we bought recently crashed in khoramAbad it was one of our old are that crashed and it was not the even th airplane problem it was human problem the flight was at lower altitude than what ordered by tower . the airfield is one of the hardest in all of Iran even middle east if you approach from that direction but it lack any radar to show exactly where the airplane are and more importantly the pilot ignored immediate colision warning .
What you expect the airplane do whack the pilot on the head make evasive maneuver and give the control of airplane to the pilot ?


And more importantly what these talk have to do with khatami.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> He was lying from the first sentence to the last one.
> First it was not only one that crashed it was 5 or 6 of them that crashed and 90% the same problem .
> In short the engine was not suitable for Iran environment or civilian sector demands.
> 
> Second can you show me the maritime version of the airplane we built ?
> 
> And another question why he say one of the ATR we bought recently crashed in khoramAbad it was one of our old are that crashed and it was not the even th airplane problem it was human problem the flight was at lower altitude than what ordered by tower . the airfield is one of the hardest in all of Iran even middle east if you approach from that direction but it lack any radar to show exactly where the airplane are and more importantly the pilot ignored immediate colision warning .
> What you expect the airplane do whack the pilot on the head make evasive maneuver and give the control of airplane to the pilot ?
> 
> 
> And more importantly what these talk have to do with khatami.



Khatami was Iran's president between 1997-2005 so most of the production of the Iran140 happened during Khatami! And now apparently it's all his fault that they stopped producing it after he was out of office! The Aircraft took it's 1st flight in Iran in 1997 and was introduced in 2002 and 3 years later Ahmadi came to power so he wants to blame the very same people that produced the Iran-140 for stopping it's production!!!

His buddy Ahmadi was in power for 8 years after Khatami! What Transport Aircraft did we start producing under his 8 years? 

Funny how memories of some are so selective and based purely on fiction!!!!!!!!! Did Ahmadi even come and invest to improve the 140's engines and Airframe? NO! He just spread propaganda! 
If Ahmadi truly wanted to improve on that program he could have invested and ordered them to reverse engineer C-130 T56 engine's and build strengthened airframe around 2 T56 engines that are stronger more powerful engines that were actually designed for Aircrafts and rough terrain landings rather than Helicopters engines converted to be used for Aircrafts and he could have done that when Oil was over $100pb yet he choose to hand out chump change to the masses! And now it's Khatami's fault! MY GOD! 

Also, a maritime patrol aircraft usually operates over the sea over a flat surface and doesn't need to fly a bunch of passengers with constant flights over Iran's rough terrain and you can spend far more hours on maintenance if forced too so even if Iran's Navy had one working for it and it was successful it's success does NOT apply for civilian use or even military use over Iran's terrain.



Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> دسته گل خاتمی و قماشش:
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



What is wrong with you??? Khatami was Iran's President between 1997-2005 
Iran 140 took it's 1st flight in 1997 and introduced in 2002! 
Ahmadi was in power in 2005-2013 Tell me what passenger Aircraft did we start producing under his presidency??

You act as if Ahmadi started the Iran-140 program when it was Rafzanjani that started the program with production under Khatami administration

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

ATR isn't suitable for Iran's climate too. after several other crashes in future, we will hear more about this and the corruption in our aviation organization which allowed it's purchases!

*آخرین خبر از سقوط هواپیمای تهران-یاسوج؛ خلبان عامل اولیه سقوط نبوده است*


> بهرام پارسایی با بیان اینکه «کمیسیون اصل نود،25 اردیبهشت نشستی را با حضور وزیر راه و مسئولین مربوطه از سازمان هواپیمایی و شرکت فرودگاه‌ها و کمیته بررسی سانحه داشت» اظهار داشت: ما یکسری مکاتباتی داشتیم که جواب مشخصی دریافت نکردیم و علی‌رغم صراحت قانون و همینطور تاکید وزیر محترم راه مبنی بر تسریع در ارسال مدارکی که کمیسیون درخواست کرده *متاسفانه با گذشت دو ماه یا جواب نگرفته‌ایم و یا تعدادی از جواب‌ها با استعلام کمیسیون غیرمرتبط است*.





قاضی شهریاری سرپرست دادسرای امور جنایی تهران:







----------------------------------------------

General Bagheri:
domestic fighter jet engine (most probably Owj) is 98% localized and very close to production.
at the unveiling of Kowsar, it was 90% localized.

*فیلم/ آخرین دستاوردهای نیروهای مسلح کشور*


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970717001004/موتور-ملی-و-ایرانی-جنگنده-در-آستانه-تولید-است
*موتور ملی و ایرانی جنگنده در آستانه تولید است*

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970...-در-نزدیکی-مرزهای-کشور-ساکت-نخواهیم-نشست-جزء-

*در برابر مقر تروریست‌ها در نزدیکی مرزهای کشور ساکت نخواهیم نشست/جزء 7 قدرت اول پهپادی جهان هستیم*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SipahSalar

Which BVR missiles does IRIAF operate other than AIM-54?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> ATR isn't suitable for Iran's climate too. after several other crashes in future, we will hear more about this and the corruption in our aviation organization which allowed it's purchases!
> 
> *آخرین خبر از سقوط هواپیمای تهران-یاسوج؛ خلبان عامل اولیه سقوط نبوده است*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> قاضی شهریاری سرپرست دادسرای امور جنایی تهران:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> General Bagheri:
> domestic fighter jet engine (most probably Owj) is 98% localized and very close to production.
> at the unveiling of Kowsar, it was 90% localized.
> 
> *فیلم/ آخرین دستاوردهای نیروهای مسلح کشور*


The air plane was old one the new ATR after several accident related with icing were equipped with de-Icing systems.
About khoramAbad incident I still wonder why pilot or copilot didn't care about collision warning ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Good to know that Bagheri is fully aware that the high cost of airpower requires asymmetric "Iranian" approaches to make sense for a country with Irans military budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Iran DM about Kowsar 88 and Kowsar
 

*Defense Minister: Iran developing homegrown jet trainer*
*Tasnim – Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the country is developing a new homegrown jet trainer, dubbed Kowsar-88.*

Addressing a conference on aerial power in Tehran on Tuesday, General Hatami said the new aircraft that will be used for training is being manufactured using local technologies and designs.

Elsewhere, he highlighted the Defense Ministry’s success in unveiling the country’s first homegrown fighter jet in August, and said the military plane has passed all tests and would be mass-produced if the project is financed.

Iranian military experts and technicians have in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of indigenous equipment, making the armed forces self-sufficient in the arms sphere.

Iranian officials have repeatedly underscored that the country will not hesitate to strengthen its military capabilities, including its missile power, which are entirely meant for defense, and that Iran’s defense capabilities will be never subject to negotiations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Elsewhere, he highlighted the Defense Ministry’s success in unveiling the country’s first homegrown fighter jet in August, and said the military plane has passed all tests and would be mass-produced *if the project is financed.*



Exactly what we suspected another useless aircraft project that the airforce will reject because it doesn’t “meet” their standards.

The best we could assume is an overhaul of existing F-5’s to extend the lifespan to 2030’s if needed.

At this point, nothing is certain.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Good to know that Bagheri is fully aware that the high cost of airpower requires asymmetric "Iranian" approaches to make sense for a country with Irans military budget.



https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-باید-بومی-باشد-و-از-تحریم-نظامی-تاثیر-نپذیرد

Read his absolutely incorrect analysis!
It's totally unfortunate that our supreme leader has people like that around him! 

For a high ranking Iranian Military official to come and make an utterly absurd analysis is not only SAD but a threat to Iran!
He say's the U.S. used a lot of bombs to get Sadam's military to surrender in 1990 but in 2003 the U.S. used far less aircraft. And the 2006 Israeli war against Lebanon is somehow proof that Fighter jets are practically useless today!






He sounds like he has been living under a rock for the past 2 decades!!!!!!!! And if that's the type of analysis being given to Iran's supreme leader then we are in BIG Trouble!

1st U.S. didn't need to use a lot of Bombers and Fighter in 2003 because they had been bombing Iraq going on for a decade between 1992-2003 with sorties flown 3-4 times a weak for over a decade using fighter jets mostly so by 2003 Iraq had almost No SAM's outside of Bagdad, No Airforce, No Navy, No Missile Force and just a bunch of Tanks, APC/IFV, Artillery & troops and to take most of them out U.S. mostly used Air launched Sensor fuzzed weapons, Cluster Warheads, Helo's & special forces on the ground with ATGM's.
And to use 2006 as an example is just flat out crazy for a whole list of reasons!

And yes Iran most definitely needs to build it's own Air Power but how far do you think we would go with that absurd mentality??

Yes Iran could make up for a large portion of Air power requirements with mass production of Missiles, UAV's & UCAV's but those equipment by themselves simply cannot make up for all of Iran's requirements

Also Iran's defense industry needs to be used as a tool not only for weapons but to advanced Iran's technological capabilities and the production of more advanced Iranian products. And when it comes to the Air Force if Iran produces a viable Fighter jet and bombers then clearly we will be able to produce Civilian Passenger Aircrafts of any kind, better communication systems, better computers & electronics,...

And when one of the top Iranian Military officials comes out and say's such things do you think Iranian kids and students get motivated to build better Jet engines or dream about designing fighters...… Clearly they do NOT!


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-باید-بومی-باشد-و-از-تحریم-نظامی-تاثیر-نپذیرد
> 
> Read his absolutely incorrect analysis!
> It's totally unfortunate that our supreme leader has people like that around him!
> 
> For a high ranking Iranian Military official to come and make an utterly absurd analysis is not only SAD but a threat to Iran!
> He say's the U.S. used a lot of bombs to get Sadam's military to surrender in 1990 but in 2003 the U.S. used far less aircraft. And the 2006 Israeli war against Lebanon is somehow proof that Fighter jets are practically useless today!
> View attachment 504291
> 
> 
> He sounds like he has been living under a rock for the past 2 decades!!!!!!!! And if that's the type of analysis being given to Iran's supreme leader then we are in BIG Trouble!
> 
> 1st U.S. didn't need to use a lot of Bombers and Fighter in 2003 because they had been bombing Iraq going on for a decade between 1992-2003 with sorties flown 3-4 times a weak for over a decade using fighter jets mostly so by 2003 Iraq had almost No SAM's outside of Bagdad, No Airforce, No Navy, No Missile Force and just a bunch of Tanks, APC/IFV, Artillery & troops and to take most of them out U.S. mostly used Air launched Sensor fuzzed weapons, Cluster Warheads, Helo's & special forces on the ground with ATGM's.
> And to use 2006 as an example is just flat out crazy for a whole list of reasons!
> 
> And yes Iran most definitely needs to build it's own Air Power but how far do you think we would go with that absurd mentality??
> 
> Yes Iran could make up for a large portion of Air power requirements with mass production of Missiles, UAV's & UCAV's but those equipment by themselves simply cannot make up for all of Iran's requirements
> 
> Also Iran's defense industry needs to be used as a tool not only for weapons but to advanced Iran's technological capabilities and the production of more advanced Iranian products. And when it comes to the Air Force if Iran produces a viable Fighter jet and bombers then clearly we will be able to produce Civilian Passenger Aircrafts of any kind, better communication systems, better computers & electronics,...
> 
> And when one of the top Iranian Military officials comes out and say's such things do you think Iranian kids and students get motivated to build better Jet engines or dream about designing fighters...… Clearly they do NOT!



Bagheri is a moron, many of the TOP IRGC are only in place because of nepotism. They were part of the Iran-Iraq war and The revolution.

The old guard needs to retire and leave.

Apparently Bagheri forgets that without Russian Air Power intervening at the request of Solemani/Putin, Syria would be Jihadistan.

The NDF/Syrian Arab army was on brink of collapse after the fall of Idlib.

Iran was hemmoragging losses fighting town by town. At the same time, Iraqi militia had to leave Syria to defend iraq from the ISIS wave leaving a huge hole in capable manpower! NDF and SAA were incompetent!

Even Hezbollah Special forces and Iran Army’s Nohed couldn’t beat the terrorist on the ground around Aleppo without massive air support.

People here don’t know this, but in early years of Syrian war, some IRGC generals believed that the Iran could not win the Syrian war through violence and had to negotiate with US/Arab states!

Just goes to show you how fractured the IRGC is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-باید-بومی-باشد-و-از-تحریم-نظامی-تاثیر-نپذیرد
> 
> Read his absolutely incorrect analysis!
> It's totally unfortunate that our supreme leader has people like that around him!
> 
> For a high ranking Iranian Military official to come and make an utterly absurd analysis is not only SAD but a threat to Iran!
> He say's the U.S. used a lot of bombs to get Sadam's military to surrender in 1990 but in 2003 the U.S. used far less aircraft. And the 2006 Israeli war against Lebanon is somehow proof that Fighter jets are practically useless today!
> View attachment 504291
> 
> 
> He sounds like he has been living under a rock for the past 2 decades!!!!!!!! And if that's the type of analysis being given to Iran's supreme leader then we are in BIG Trouble!
> 
> 1st U.S. didn't need to use a lot of Bombers and Fighter in 2003 because they had been bombing Iraq going on for a decade between 1992-2003 with sorties flown 3-4 times a weak for over a decade using fighter jets mostly so by 2003 Iraq had almost No SAM's outside of Bagdad, No Airforce, No Navy, No Missile Force and just a bunch of Tanks, APC/IFV, Artillery & troops and to take most of them out U.S. mostly used Air launched Sensor fuzzed weapons, Cluster Warheads, Helo's & special forces on the ground with ATGM's.
> And to use 2006 as an example is just flat out crazy for a whole list of reasons!
> 
> And yes Iran most definitely needs to build it's own Air Power but how far do you think we would go with that absurd mentality??
> 
> Yes Iran could make up for a large portion of Air power requirements with mass production of Missiles, UAV's & UCAV's but those equipment by themselves simply cannot make up for all of Iran's requirements
> 
> Also Iran's defense industry needs to be used as a tool not only for weapons but to advanced Iran's technological capabilities and the production of more advanced Iranian products. And when it comes to the Air Force if Iran produces a viable Fighter jet and bombers then clearly we will be able to produce Civilian Passenger Aircrafts of any kind, better communication systems, better computers & electronics,...
> 
> And when one of the top Iranian Military officials comes out and say's such things do you think Iranian kids and students get motivated to build better Jet engines or dream about designing fighters...… Clearly they do NOT!


Good thing about PDF is that smart ar§e military strategists directly stare into your eyes and say Israel won 2006 war!


----------



## PeeD

I stick with Iranian military decision makers.
They have done a good job up until now.
I agree that classical airpower is overrated.
As said, its good that Iran did not fall for this trap in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

PeeD said:


> I stick with Iranian military decision makers.
> They have done a good job up until now.
> I agree that classical airpower is overrated.
> As said, its good that Iran did not fall for this trap in the past.



Airpower is absolutely not overrated. But it's expensive!

Controlling the skies is essential and Russia in Syria has proved this. Without Russian airpower, the map of Syria would be very different right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Stryker1982 said:


> Airpower is absolutely not overrated. But it's expensive!
> 
> Controlling the skies is essential and Russia in Syria has proved this. Without Russian airpower, the map of Syria would be very different right now.



Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?



You need COMPETENT boots on the ground with any airforce m. Missing one or the other causes severe deficiencies in your chances to win battles. 

Furthermore, Houthi’s had nearly pushed the opposition out into the sea and conquered most of Yemen. Since Saudi and US intervention they have lost nearly half of the land under their control at the peak.

Just go ask the Taliban about the US attack helicopters, they were feared. They tore the Taliban apart like Swiss cheese when they attempted attacks.

So yes AirPower is very important, Iran would have lost most of Syria if not the war, if it were not for Russia airpower. But air power will never make up for competent boots on the ground or vice versa. BOTH are needed to win a war.

Anyone that says otherwise has their head in the sand.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?


Because airpower can neither take land nor hold it,and despite the claims of all the military theorists who were enamored with the idea of airpower alone winning wars,this has still not yet come to pass.Like everything else on the battlefield airpower has it uses but it is very,very expensive from both a logistics and infrastructure perspective,not to mention the cost of the aircraft itself and the cost of the hundreds of hours of training needed just to become basically proficient with the operation of the aircraft for the pilots.
Also,to put it bluntly,the quality of the saudi/gulfie military forces are basically complete utter *SH!T*.[I`m being brutally honest here as even I was shocked at how abysmally poorly they`ve performed,and thats really saying something]


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Good thing about PDF is that smart ar§e military strategists directly stare into your eyes and say Israel won 2006 war!



When did I say Israel won? I said you can't compare them because Hezbollah does NOT have a Navy to protect that has to protect vital shipping.. a Helo force to protect, large military bases to protect, vital infrastructure to protect, nor do they have a population of 80 Million ppl to feed, or an Air Space to protect or costal waters to protect, nor was Lebanon larger than U.K., France, Germany & Italy COMBINED.....

To compare Hezbullah's VICTORY as an example for Iran to follow is ABSURD and Ridicules!

And let me be as clear as I can be in 2006 Israeli's ran with their tails between their legs! And their ground forces where in utter shock as to the beating they received! BUT Iran is a country of 80 Million people and unlike Hezbullah we don't have others providing money and weapons to us and unlike Hebullah we have vital infrastructure and financial interest to protect in a country that needs to provide for 80 million people that is larger than U.K., France, Germany & Italy combined!


----------



## VEVAK

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?



1.Because they are NOT capable of producing their own weapons and no one is going to come and design weapons for them based on their needs and give it to them at reasonable prices and flying high costing F-15's over Yemen after this many years is not only overkill and unnecessary but it puts a massive unnecessary strain on Saudis financially which does more harm than good for the Saudi's.

2.Saudi lack intel on the ground, lack proper ground equipment and tactics which allows them to bomb the hell out of Yemen and create famine there but with no real victories for they are not fighting a conventional military anymore.

3.Saudi military supremacy over Yemen gives them a false sense of overall superiority which makes them think they don't need to compromise because the other side doesn't even have tanks and it's the same type of false superiority the Americans had in Vietnam.

4.Saudi's may not be winning in Yemen but at the end of the day the fight is in Yemen and it's mostly Yemen's infrastructure that has been destroyed and it's mostly their people that has been effected so at the end of the day saying lets have a military like Yemen over a military like Saudi Arabia is also absurd!
For Iran neither side is actually a good example to follow

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?


Partially it does, by imposing and constructing famine on the people of Yemen.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Bagheri is a moron, many of the TOP IRGC are only in place because of nepotism. They were part of the Iran-Iraq war and The revolution.
> 
> The old guard needs to retire and leave.
> 
> Apparently Bagheri forgets that without Russian Air Power intervening at the request of Solemani/Putin, Syria would be Jihadistan.
> 
> The NDF/Syrian Arab army was on brink of collapse after the fall of Idlib.
> 
> Iran was hemmoragging losses fighting town by town. At the same time, Iraqi militia had to leave Syria to defend iraq from the ISIS wave leaving a huge hole in capable manpower! NDF and SAA were incompetent!
> 
> Even Hezbollah Special forces and Iran Army’s Nohed couldn’t beat the terrorist on the ground around Aleppo without massive air support.
> 
> People here don’t know this, but in early years of Syrian war, some IRGC generals believed that the Iran could not win the Syrian war through violence and had to negotiate with US/Arab states!
> 
> Just goes to show you how fractured the IRGC is.



Old school IRGC commanders base their views on the Air Force on the Iran-Iraq war and especially on the performance of the Air Force after Saddam's troops were pushed out of Iranian territory and at that point the IRGC was becoming more organized as a military force but they couldn't understand why the Airforce couldn't simply just fly 40 F-4's in formation (escorted with F-14's) and drop +400 Mk82 on Saddam's front lines at least 2-3 times a week which would have allowed them to go in and pickup the peace's after! And Iran's Air Force at that time had more than enough Fighters to do that but they simply didn't have the Bombs or Spare parts needed or enough trained maintenance personal to maintain that many sorties at that time over a long period! For if Iran by 1980 only had half the Fighters but the capability to build the spare parts & weapons and sufficient number of properly trained maintenance personal and gear on the ground to maintain a large portion of a much smaller force with an Air Force with half the number of fighters bombers & CAS fighters that Iran had Saddam would have been dealt with in under 4 years.

So having a fleet of even 1000 Su-34, Su-30 & MiG-29's without being able or allowed to mass produce the spare parts , the weapons and without a sufficient number of trained personal and gear on the ground ready to maintain a large portion of them on a daily bases would practically be useless. 

Which means for a country like Iran buying an Air Force would have little use UNLESS your can and are allowed to mass produce the Spare Parts & Weapons for them and have sufficient number of highly trained personal with proper equipment needed to maintain a large portion of your fleet in the air over long periods if and when necessary! 

Iran needs a small but Smart Air Force backed by UCAV's, UAV's, SAM's & Missiles rather than a large Air Force we could barely maintain and arm that would eat up a large portion of our Defense budget just to keep pilots trained & aircrafts Air worthy! 

Which means we need military commanders that at the very least emphasis and goes around and pushes Iranian youth and scientist to conduct R&D to achieve the capability to produce at least 1 high powered Iranian platform per month that can be configured to be used as an Interceptor or Strike Aircraft (With a low RCS airframe with as much thrust as an F-15) & one CAS/Advanced trainer per month (Kowsar) with plans to produces at least one high payload supersonic bomber (B-1) every year or two and one support aircraft every year or two with Airframes built from alloys and composites mined in the country and even the tools and equipment needed to build the Airframes should be built in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> You need COMPETENT boots on the ground with any airforce m. Missing one or the other causes severe deficiencies in your chances to win battles.
> 
> Furthermore, Houthi’s had nearly pushed the opposition out into the sea and conquered most of Yemen. Since Saudi and US intervention they have lost nearly half of the land under their control at the peak.
> 
> Just go ask the Taliban about the US attack helicopters, they were feared. They tore the Taliban apart like Swiss cheese when they attempted attacks.
> 
> So yes AirPower is very important, Iran would have lost most of Syria if not the war, if it were not for Russia airpower. But air power will never make up for competent boots on the ground or vice versa. BOTH are needed to win a war.
> 
> Anyone that says otherwise has their head in the sand.


That's not just because lack of air power. They cannot replenish their ammo and weapons due to embargo


----------



## Stryker1982

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Last time i checked the Saudis and their coalition have absolute air dominance over Yemen's skies. How come their air supremacy not translate to the ground?



Their lack of efficient ground forces to take advantage and coordinate with Air power is why they can't take their air supremacy to fruition. Saudi's have only been able to attack static infrastructure. Not provide recon and CAS for their allies on the ground. Lets not play games here. Aleppo would've never been liberated without Russian airforce. We were losing ground in Syria before they intervened. Russian CAS has killed 1000's of terrorists that have saved the lives of 1000's of Syrian and Iranian-backed groups that may have died fighting on the ground.

The Houthis are also in alot of trouble in Yemen these days and if the houthis didn't have to be worried about airpower, they'd be in alot stronger strategic position right now.


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> When did I say Israel won? I said you can't compare them because Hezbollah does NOT have a Navy to protect that has to protect vital shipping.. a Helo force to protect, large military bases to protect, vital infrastructure to protect, nor do they have a population of 80 Million ppl to feed, or an Air Space to protect or costal waters to protect, nor was Lebanon larger than U.K., France, Germany & Italy COMBINED.....
> 
> To compare Hezbullah's VICTORY as an example for Iran to follow is ABSURD and Ridicules!
> 
> And let me be as clear as I can be in 2006 Israeli's ran with their tails between their legs! And their ground forces where in utter shock as to the beating they received! BUT Iran is a country of 80 Million people and unlike Hezbullah we don't have others providing money and weapons to us and unlike Hebullah we have vital infrastructure and financial interest to protect in a country that needs to provide for 80 million people that is larger than U.K., France, Germany & Italy combined!


from military point of view, Israel totally lost 2006 war. their whole airforce couldn't achieve *nothing*, while their targets were within a 70km area and with no air defense system.
(also I welcome any smart ar$e who wanna claim Israel didn't have a potent ground forces and for this reason their air force achieved nothing, the excuse which people use for Saudi's failure in Yemen.)


Yes, comparing Hezbollah with Iran is bizarre, cause unlike Hezbollah we do have a potent air defense system, unlike them we have deep strike capability which will raze all U.S bases and navy in middle east in minutes, unlike them we have a wide country with enough train to hide all of our assets in there, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> That's not just because lack of air power. They cannot replenish their ammo and weapons due to embargo



Are you kidding me? Yemen is one of the most heavily armed countries on the planet.

And arms are easily getting through the embargo. Just no large supply ships.


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> from military point of view, Israel totally lost 2006 war. their whole airforce couldn't achieve *nothing*, while their targets were within a 70km area and with no air defense system.
> (also I welcome any smart ar$e who wanna claim Israel didn't have a potent ground forces and for this reason their air force achieved nothing, the excuse which people use for Saudi's failure in Yemen.)
> 
> 
> Yes, comparing Hezbollah with Iran is bizarre, cause unlike Hezbollah we do have a potent air defense system, unlike them we have deep strike capability which will raze all U.S bases and navy in middle east in minutes, unlike them we have a wide country with enough train to hide all of our assets in there, etc.



Israeli Air Force couldn't achieve anything of worth because an Air Force by it's self simply can't win a gorilla warfare on the ground.
Hezbullah had tunnels all across southern Lebanon and a few guys would pop out tunnels engage Israeli Armored battalions and hid and they were so proficient at it that the Israelis though they were getting hit by ghosts! And Israeli Air Force couldn't do much about it so they just bombed random houses! 
So yea Israeli's lost and ran with their tails between their legs!!!!!!!!!! 

But their failure isn't proof that Air Power is useless today! Rather its just prof that you can't win a gorilla warfare on the ground with fighter jets alone!

Air Forces by the most part Defends Air Space by backing up it's SAM's or attack airspaces to achieve Air Superiority to conduct heavy strikes on Air Defense, infrastructure, financial assets, Military Bases, main weapons depots, weapons factories, Fortified bunkers, military command, long range communications, Naval capabilities, fuel depots, armored Battalions....

Most of which Hezbollah didn't have and most of which Saudi's destroyed in Yemen!!!!!!!

And the nonsense you keep on repeating means we don't need an Air Force because we should be OK with our country going into famine if attacked like Yemen simply because an Air Force by it's self simply can't win a gorilla warfare on the ground!!!!!!

Air Defense Systems without an Air Force to back them up can be overwhelmed, jammed or hit by a small teams of covert special forces on the ground.

And for Iranian missile forces to be able to achieve the number of payloads an Air Force capable of flying and arming 20 fighters (Equal too or better than an F-15E) a day over the span of a year would require a missile force Armed with 20,000 to 60,000 +250km missiles!

So NO Iran can't simply make up for a lack of Air Power with it's Missiles alone!!!!!!!! And Iran DOES NOT need a large Air Force just a smart one!!!!!
We need a single high powered Iranian built platform that can be configured for intercept and strike!!! Where the parts are Iranian and we can Arm and keep a good portion in the Air every day because the parts and weapons are produced in Iran!
And using the same engine we can build a handful of 4 engine supersonic bombers and backed by a handful of support aircraft (AWACS, UAV command and control, Air Refueling,...) to be built over a span of 10 years

Which means Iran CAN NOT go around buying aircraft because it would be 1980 again and we would have a bunch of nice Aircraft that we couldn't arm or maintain and didn't matter how nice our Air Force was because we simply couldn't get our moneys worth from them!

Which means we need Military commanders WHO DON'T go to Air Force and aerospace events and talk about how useless Air Force has become based on absurd comparisons like the 2006 war who takes the life out of a room of people who came there to get projects approved! That is boarding on treason buddy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Are you kidding me? Yemen is one of the most heavily armed countries on the planet.
> 
> And arms are easily getting through the embargo. Just no large supply ships.


Look at the map and tell me how can they get their supplies? They no longer have any land route to Oman which was one of the alleged routes for arms supply. The only way is through sea which is patrolled and monitored by KSA and US forces.
Yes, some arms may get in but it will sure not be enough for a war like this. Green are the Yemeni fighters, red and brown KSA supported groups:

https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2018/10/11/0/2361964.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Look at the map and tell me how can they get their supplies? They no longer have any land route to Oman which was one of the alleged routes for arms supply. The only way is through sea which is patrolled and monitored by KSA and US forces.
> Yes, some arms may get in but it will sure not be enough for a war like this. Green are the Yemeni fighters, red and brown KSA supported groups:
> 
> https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2018/10/11/0/2361964.jpg



Yemen was already heavily armed based on decades of war. Houthi’s took over nearly all of the Yemen army’s military supply storages and bases. East Yemen is rural and lawless mostly controlled by Al-Queda.

The Houthi’s have plenty of munitions, they don’t even take American tanks and IFVs that they recover from ambushes because they don’t need it or want it.

So this notion that Houthi’s lost that land because of lack of ammo is proposterous and shows you haven’t been following the conflict since the early days.

The PGG countries established a beachhead at Aden and pumped mercnaries, weapons, and many of their own troops along with SF. 

That in conjunction with AirPower aided by US intelligence caused the houthi’s to not be able to hold so much ground as they had no counter to air support.

So yes boots on the ground + air power is what wins wars. 

If iran doesn’t learn that, they will suffer casualties in the 100,000+ in a major ground war.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Yemen was already heavily armed based on decades of war. Houthi’s took over nearly all of the Yemen army’s military supply storages and bases. East Yemen is rural and lawless mostly controlled by Al-Queda.
> 
> The Houthi’s have plenty of munitions, they don’t even take American tanks and IFVs that they recover from ambushes because they don’t need it or want it.
> 
> So this notion that Houthi’s lost that land because of lack of ammo is proposterous and shows you haven’t been following the conflict since the early days.
> 
> The PGG countries established a beachhead at Aden and pumped mercnaries, weapons, and many of their own troops along with SF.
> 
> That in conjunction with AirPower aided by US intelligence caused the houthi’s to not be able to hold so much ground as they had no counter to air support.
> 
> So yes boots on the ground + air power is what wins wars.
> 
> If iran doesn’t learn that, they will suffer casualties in the 100,000+ in a major ground war.


You just mentioned they didn't have anything to counter air raids. I call that a group of fighters that are not properly armed. Would the war turn this way if they could have been supplied with advanced air and point defense systems? I highly doubt it.

Yes, having a competent airforce on your side is better than none. But using Yemen as an example to show what will happen to Iran in case of the war is not correct. Iran has other things that can make up for lack of air force.

Advocates of spending money on airforce in Iran like yourself are neglecting two points:

Point number one, anything that is not produced internally is useless in a war. The war we are all picturing is between Iran and US. In that case US will not allow any arms be delivered to Iran from outside. You say Yemenis are well armed. I bet they are not as well armed as Iran was when war with Iraq started. Iran depleted most of its advanced weapons within the first 2 years of war and struggled to replace them until end of the war and even today.

Point number 2: the trend is, ever since the use of airforce in war in WWI, airforce is losing ground to air defense systems. First they had to fly higher than anticipated air guns range. Then when SAMs were introduced they had to avoid entering their effective range and try to shoot at them with stand off weapons. Us lost 2197 air craft over Vietnam to Russian SAM and other weapons. Then the anti air missiles became even more accurate with higher range. Aircraft can no longer flay over them but have to stay outside their range and shoot at them. Fist at 100 km range, then 200 km, then 300 and they keep retreating while becoming more sophisticated and ridiculously expensive like F35 to be able to overcome the limitations imposed by ever increasing effectiveness of air defense systems. Extend this trend and I can see a day that aircrafts need to fire their standoff weapons from above 800km range and cost a significant portion of the carrier they took off from. Ok, why not jus use missiles instead?

Iran should invest in effective means of countering standoff weapons. If it does that, no airforce can do a damn thing to it.


----------



## VEVAK

Hovakhshatar said:


> I amnot a military guru like some of you guys and neither hate or support the current Iranian government indescreminetly; so please don’t attack me!!
> Some of you go on and on about how we need a top rated air forces and attack Baggeri is if he said otherwise; which I believe is not correct. First of all at least until sanctions are removed to country will sell Iran top rated planes. So Iran either has to wait until sanctions are removed or make its own planes. Who here can claim that they know all the behind the scene efforts that is being taken for both above options? I for one believe that our military has smartly acted so far prioritizing misels radars and tanks which are less challenging and more rewarding that making high quality fighters and what Bagheri meant was to justify the above prioritization this far. His most immportant point was the importance of being able to keep those new planes flying indefinitely with local support which would mean ToT; which again until sanctions are removed no country even Russia or China will offer Iran.
> So sit tight,be patient and don’t expect the government to reveal all secret efforts to arm Iran with suitable new fighters,domestic or foreign until the right time.



Unfortunately, Bagherri went to an Airforce Aerospace event in which the government was spose to pick the top ten aerospace projects from the projects represented there which means they were a group of the top minds of the country in aerospace and he started going on about how Air Force is practically useless today and his prof of how fighter jets are useless today were absurd and ridicules with no factual bases. 

Also the event had NOTHING to do with buying fighter jet. If his comments were restricted to how Iran shouldn't buy fighter jets and we should develop our own and if he had used Iran's own experience in 80's as prof that even if we buy the top 10 Air Forces in the world just like in the early 80's it would mean little in terms of capability without being able to produce the spare parts and weapons..... then I would be praising him today but that's NOT what he did.

What he actually did was show up among a group of people that could have potentially been responsible for developing Iran's next generation fighter and started commenting about how useless fighter jets are today just because fighter jets by themselves can't fight a gorilla warfare on the ground!! And he used that fact as prof of how useless they are altogether which is basically the same as telling them NOT to bother developing the next gen Iranian fighter jet because we won't fund it and people like him would much rather fund absurd nonsense like paying people to go out and enforce Hejab by force. So if anything his comments go against fighting sanctions using domestic development.

Aircrafts like the Mirage III & Mirage IV were built by the French in the mid to late 50's and they went from design to 1st flight within 3-4 years and back then the French had no computers or lasers or advanced cutting equipment or computer assisted wind tunnels, or advanced composites to work with or had access to general public knowledge about modern designs, materials, nanotechnology, 3D printing,..... all of which Iran has access too today and the engines of those fighters where originally designed in the late 40's so very clearly Iran's main problem IS NOT sanctions but rather the will and lack of proper motivation that originates from high ranking military officials like Bagherii! Or else designing and producing fighter jets and engines far superior to what the French were producing in the 70's is well within Iran's capabilities!


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Unfortunately, Bagherri went to an Airforce Aerospace event in which the government was spose to pick the top ten aerospace projects from the projects represented there which means they were a group of the top minds of the country in aerospace and he started going on about how Air Force is practically useless today and his prof of how fighter jets are useless today were absurd and ridicules with no factual bases.
> 
> Also the event had NOTHING to do with buying fighter jet. If his comments were restricted to how Iran shouldn't buy fighter jets and we should develop our own and if he had used Iran's own experience in 80's as prof that even if we buy the top 10 Air Forces in the world just like in the early 80's it would mean little in terms of capability without being able to produce the spare parts and weapons..... then I would be praising him today but that's NOT what he did.
> 
> What he actually did was show up among a group of people that could have potentially been responsible for developing Iran's next generation fighter and started commenting about how useless fighter jets are today just because fighter jets by themselves can't fight a gorilla warfare on the ground!! And he used that fact as prof of how useless they are altogether which is basically the same as telling them NOT to bother developing the next gen Iranian fighter jet because we won't fund it and people like him would much rather fund absurd nonsense like paying people to go out and enforce Hejab by force. So if anything his comments go against fighting sanctions using domestic development.
> 
> Aircrafts like the Mirage III & Mirage IV were built by the French in the mid to late 50's and they went from design to 1st flight within 3-4 years and back then the French had no computers or lasers or advanced cutting equipment or computer assisted wind tunnels, or advanced composites to work with or had access to general public knowledge about modern designs, materials, nanotechnology, 3D printing,..... all of which Iran has access too today and the engines of those fighters where originally designed in the late 40's so very clearly Iran's main problem IS NOT sanctions but rather the will and lack of proper motivation that originates from high ranking military officials like Bagherii! Or else designing and producing fighter jets and engines far superior to what the French were producing in the 70's is well within Iran's capabilities!



Don't be too dramatic as at the same event he said that the development of a Iranian engine has reached 98%.

This will be the foundation of any future fighter.

Iran went for very obsolete (better said old) designs with the Scud missile but for engines it won't anymore as it seems (J90).


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> You just mentioned they didn't have anything to counter air raids. I call that a group of fighters that are not properly armed. Would the war turn this way if they could have been supplied with advanced air and point defense systems? I highly doubt it.
> 
> Yes, having a competent airforce on your side is better than none. But using Yemen as an example to show what will happen to Iran in case of the war is not correct. Iran has other things that can make up for lack of air force.
> 
> Advocates of spending money on airforce in Iran like yourself are neglecting two points:
> 
> Point number one, anything that is not produced internally is useless in a war. The war we are all picturing is between Iran and US. In that case US will not allow any arms be delivered to Iran from outside. You say Yemenis are well armed. I bet they are not as well armed as Iran was when war with Iraq started. Iran depleted most of its advanced weapons within the first 2 years of war and struggled to replace them until end of the war and even today.
> 
> Point number 2: the trend is, ever since the use of airforce in war in WWI, airforce is losing ground to air defense systems. First they had to fly higher than anticipated air guns range. Then when SAMs were introduced they had to avoid entering their effective range and try to shoot at them with stand off weapons. Us lost 2197 air craft over Vietnam to Russian SAM and other weapons. Then the anti air missiles became even more accurate with higher range. Aircraft can no longer flay over them but have to stay outside their range and shoot at them. Fist at 100 km range, then 200 km, then 300 and they keep retreating while becoming more sophisticated and ridiculously expensive like F35 to be able to overcome the limitations imposed by ever increasing effectiveness of air defense systems. Extend this trend and I can see a day that aircrafts need to fire their standoff weapons from above 800km range and cost a significant portion of the carrier they took off from. Ok, why not jus use missiles instead?
> 
> Iran should invest in effective means of countering standoff weapons. If it does that, no airforce can do a damn thing to it.



Yes an Air Force that's not domestically produces is useless and it doesn't matter how big of an Air Force you buy for by 1979 Iran had purchased it's self one of the top 4 most capable Air forces in the world in Air to Air capability and easily the top 5th or 6th well equipped Air Forces in the world that on paper had some 600 supersonic fighters and trainers but two years later when the war started and U.S. gone Iran couldn't even use 200 of them in a Retaliatory response and after a year of war fielding 1/10 of them even for a mid sized monthly strikes was practically impossible. 
So buying the top 5 Air Forces in the world only gave us the power to do the bidding of the people who sold us that Air Force and nothing more! 

BUT all that said and done it DOES NOT mean an Air Force is useless and SAM's by themselves CAN NOT make up for a lack of Air Power when it comes to Air Defense nor can missiles alone deliver as many ordinances as a domestically produced Air Force can over time! 
An F-1 Mirage that's a 60's era design can deliver 14X 500lb bombs to targets 425km away so an Air Force capable of flying only 20 F-1's per day for strikes would be able to drop 280 per day and over the course of a year that would be over 100,000 500lb bombs and an F-4 can even do better!

So although having a nice Missile Force is a necessity for an initial retaliatory response and specific missions BUT missiles can not make up for a lack of Airpower and Airpower is only useful when domestically produced and only if the fighter is worth producing and fighters like the F-5 simply lack the payload capacity to be worth the cost!



PeeD said:


> Don't be too dramatic as at the same event he said that the development of a Iranian engine has reached 98%.
> 
> This will be the foundation of any future fighter.
> 
> Iran went for very obsolete (better said old) designs with the Scud missile but for engines it won't anymore as it seems (J90).



He was just referring to the OWJ or J-85! What they call the J-90 is the engine they wanna use on the Kosar 88 subsonic trainer. Clearly not an engine powerful enough for a next gen Iranian fighter!

Bejaii ke bereh begheh 50-60 sol peesh Faransavii ha chee doshtan keh shoma kam dareen…… he say some nonsense to the wrong audience clearly not meant to motivate anyone there!!

IRGC constantly improved on the designs while the Air Force wants a pat in the back for being stuck of J-85..... and they know exactly what a modern design engine should look like and still no attempt to immolate....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> BUT all that said and done it DOES NOT mean an Air Force is useless and SAM's by themselves CAN NOT make up for a lack of Air Power when it comes to Air Defense nor can missiles alone deliver as many ordinances as a domestically produced Air Force can over time!
> An F-1 Mirage that's a 60's era design can deliver 14X 500lb bombs to targets 425km away so an Air Force capable of flying only 20 F-1's per day for strikes would be able to drop 280 per day and over the course of a year that would be over 100,000 500lb bombs and an F-4 can even do better!



Vevak jan, Facing an unarmed foe like Yemenis or ISIS, by all means. Airforce is much more efficient than missiles hands down. My point is they no longer can get above their target (facing a competent AD) to deliver that many bombs.

Weapons will start to become obsolete or secondary when they can no longer serve their purpose. Battleships were the sign of glory and power of any advanced nation up to WWII. Their main purpose was to get close enough to their target to use their heavy guns on the target. However, introduction of airplanes and carriers changed that. Now the enemy could engage a battleship long before the battleship could even see its target.

What is the main use of fighter/bombers? Delivering dumb weapons with accuracy to targets at long distances. They no longer can get above their target because of modern ADs so they no longer can serve this purpose. Now they have turned into a fancy TELAR for the long range smart weapons they carry. The standoff weapons they are carrying are becoming more a more expensive because now they no longer rely on the pilot to deliver them, they need to be accurate and be able to travel a long distance. Add the up cost of these new weapons compared to those 500lb bombs, add the crazy up cost of a F-35 or F-22 compared to F-1 and add the maintenance cost of the airplane,...… at some point and when you add up all the above and risk of losing a $100M fighter/bomber due to technical problem, birds or enemy fire, then missiles start to make more and more sense. At least I feel it is going that way.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Don't be too dramatic as at the same event he said that the development of a Iranian engine has reached 98%.
> 
> This will be the foundation of any future fighter.
> 
> Iran went for very obsolete (better said old) designs with the Scud missile but for engines it won't anymore as it seems (J90).



There is no such thing as a “J90” so it’s either Iran’s denomination for a variant of J-85 or possible it’s a reverse engineer F-4 engine (J-79).

Neither of these engines are suitable for a Heavy next gen Iranian fighter. Unless Iran is going to build a 5th gen fighter and then put a 3rd gen engine into it, which makes no sense.

Maybe RD-33 or F-14 engine could work. But the best available realistic option would be AL-31 engines.

Unfortunately the worst case scenario is Iran is trying keep the F-5 and F-4 in service past 2025 and these engines are means of building refurbished airframes (ex Kowsar project) to do that.


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Vevak jan, Facing an unarmed foe like Yemenis or ISIS, by all means. Airforce is much more efficient than missiles hands down. My point is they no longer can get above their target (facing a competent AD) to deliver that many bombs.
> 
> Weapons will start to become obsolete or secondary when they can no longer serve their purpose. Battleships were the sign of glory and power of any advanced nation up to WWII. Their main purpose was to get close enough to their target to use their heavy guns on the target. However, introduction of airplanes and carriers changed that. Now the enemy could engage a battleship long before the battleship could even see its target.
> 
> What is the main use of fighter/bombers? Delivering dumb weapons with accuracy to targets at long distances. They no longer can get above their target because of modern ADs so they no longer can serve this purpose. Now they have turned into a fancy TELAR for the long range smart weapons they carry. The standoff weapons they are carrying are becoming more a more expensive because now they no longer rely on the pilot to deliver them, they need to be accurate and be able to travel a long distance. Add the up cost of these new weapons compared to those 500lb bombs, add the crazy up cost of a F-35 or F-22 compared to F-1 and add the maintenance cost of the airplane,...… at some point and when you add up all the above and risk of losing a $100M fighter/bomber due to technical problem, birds or enemy fire, then missiles start to make more and more sense. At least I feel it is going that way.



But it isn't going that way!!

If we are so confident that our missile will get through then we could easily use missile to take out any Beyond visible range AIDS in that area and then fighters can deal with the rest by using lighter Air to ground glide bombs or light air to ground missiles so it's not picking one over the other and both are a necessity and used for different uses!!!!!! 

And the future we are actually heading towards is a future where a swarm of missiles go in to take out high end systems like the S-400 and then fighters or UCAV's deliver swarms of Air launched air to ground munitions each powered by small electric engines against Air Defense systems with no more than a pound of explosives and once cleared fighters come in to do the rest! The future we are actually going towards is fleets of almost invisible unmanned ground vehicles deployed covertly within 5-10km of SAM systems that can deploy weapons against those sites upon command from 1000's of km away!!!!!!

By the most part we need a Missiles force and a UCAV force for an initial retaliatory strike and for specific missions and an domestically produced Air Force to back up our Air Defense and keep up bombardment over time.



TheImmortal said:


> There is no such thing as a “J90” so it’s either Iran’s denomination for a variant of J-85 or possible it’s a reverse engineer F-4 engine (J-79).
> 
> Neither of these engines are suitable for a Heavy next gen Iranian fighter. Unless Iran is going to build a 5th gen fighter and then put a 3rd gen engine into it, which makes no sense.
> 
> Maybe RD-33 or F-14 engine could work. But the best available realistic option would be AL-31 engines.
> 
> Unfortunately the worst case scenario is Iran is trying keep the F-5 and F-4 in service past 2025 and these engines are means of building refurbished airframes (ex Kowsar project) to do that.




J-90 is the engine of the Kowsar Jet trainer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> But it isn't going that way!!
> 
> If we are so confident that our missile will get through then we could easily use missile to take out any Beyond visible range AIDS in that area and then fighters can deal with the rest by using lighter Air to ground glide bombs or light air to ground missiles so it's not picking one over the other and both are a necessity and used for different uses!!!!!!
> 
> And the future we are actually heading towards is a future where a swarm of missiles go in to take out high end systems like the S-400 and then fighters or UCAV's deliver swarms of Air launched air to ground munitions each powered by small electric engines against Air Defense systems with no more than a pound of explosives and once cleared fighters come in to do the rest! The future we are actually going towards is fleets of almost invisible unmanned ground vehicles deployed covertly within 5-10km of SAM systems that can deploy weapons against those sites upon command from 1000's of km away!!!!!!
> 
> By the most part we need a Missiles force and a UCAV force for an initial retaliatory strike and for specific missions and an domestically produced Air Force to back up our Air Defense and keep up bombardment over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-90 is the engine of the Kowsar Jet trainer



Show me J-90, does it exist?! So unless iran built a brand new engine design from scratch (highly unlikely), it is reverse engineered western engine....which one is the question.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Show me J-90, does it exist?! So unless iran built a brand new engine design from scratch (highly unlikely), it is reverse engineered western engine....which one is the question.



Again the engines on the Kowsar jet trainer are J-90's and again this is NOT me saying it! Iranian Aerospace reps at Iran's exhibit at Russia's MAKS said it and I've provided video's of it in the past!!!!!!!!!!!

And what does it matter what engine it is based off of? In general taking a proven design and attempting to improve on it is common sense, especially if for over a decade you've been producing various parts and components that you'll be able to use on both!

But as for the Kowsar J-90 Engine it looks more like they built a low bypass subsonic turbofan engine around the Toloo mini jet engine or like the TV3 engines they used a Helicopter engine that's been converted to a subsonic low bypass Turbofan engine rather than a turboprop that's used on TV3's 


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

The Nazi Regime was working on flying wing fighter design in 1940’s including a separate reduced radar intercontinental bomber.

Iran didn’t develop flying wing till 2012-2013.

Iran cannot be a true great military power when it settles for mediocrity.

I would characterize Iran’s military efforts as “scrappy” in the sense it’s a bit remarkable what they are able to do despite all the incompetence and sanctions.

But if you took all the Nazi scientists and brainpower of 1940’s Germany and put them into Iran today with the technology available to them today, they would circles around these mafia dotards.

Problem is Iran’s society. When you compare it to hard a working resilient society like China or Japan you can see how that trickles into every corner of a country’s foundation.

This doesn’t mean Iran doesn’t have hard working people, but rather the brain drain just sucks out most of the talent and leaves little behind.

That is why Iran has an economy that should have been much much larger with the resources available to it. Yes, sanctions play a part, but after 40 years you can’t use them as the only way excuse.

Bottom line: Iran’s military lacks innovation and pushing the envelope that is synonymous with great military powers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> The Nazi Regime was working on flying wing fighter design in 1940’s including a separate reduced radar intercontinental bomber.
> 
> Iran didn’t develop flying wing till 2012-2013.
> 
> Iran cannot be a true great military power when it settles for mediocrity.
> 
> I would characterize Iran’s military efforts as “scrappy” in the sense it’s a bit remarkable what they are able to do despite all the incompetence and sanctions.
> 
> But if you took all the Nazi scientists and brainpower of 1940’s Germany and put them into Iran today with the technology available to them today, they would circles around these mafia dotards.
> 
> Problem is Iran’s society. When you compare it to hard a working resilient society like China or Japan you can see how that trickles into every corner of a country’s foundation.
> 
> This doesn’t mean Iran doesn’t have hard working people, but rather the brain drain just sucks out most of the talent and leaves little behind.
> 
> That is why Iran has an economy that should have been much much larger with the resources available to it. Yes, sanctions play a part, but after 40 years you can’t use them as the only way excuse.
> 
> Bottom line: Iran’s military lacks innovation and pushing the envelope that is synonymous with great military powers.


Any military equipment know how Iran has, has been acquired or developed since 1979 (last 40 years). Before then, the only thing that we probably knew inside and out and could produce were rifle bullets. 

Nazi Germany had the luxury of progressing shoulder to shoulder with rest of the European nations for the past 2 centuries or so before they became as capable as they were. Technology takes time to take a foothold in a country. It is not only know how. It is a culture.

Do you think Russians are any better than Iranians when it comes to work ethics or morals? But they still are very innovative when it comes to military equipment. Because they have been doing it for the past 3 centuries. 

I always tell this story to every one to give them a clue about how miserable we were when it came to producing our own arms: back in 1983 when I was an 8 year old kid and my uncle a 1st year metallurgy student, his university professors were tasked by Military's R&D to find the formula for producing regular mortar shells alloy. Let it sink in: Mortar shells! That's how hopeless we were.

Now we can send satellites to orbit, take out a conference room inside a building from 250km distance, send the first ever flying wing drone that caries arms in its internal bays on a 1200 mile round trip and perform surgical strikes and …..

In that context, Iran's achievements are extraordinary. It doesn't matter where these advances are coming from. IRGC or Military. Any of them who have been able to absorb funds and attention have performed very well. I don't see any problem with Iran's navy achievements. They are part of the military but since have been funded comparatively well, they are now building submarines and talk about 200m long destroyers.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

VEVAK said:


> Again the engines on the Kowsar jet trainer are J-90's and again this is NOT me saying it! Iranian Aerospace reps at Iran's exhibit at Russia's MAKS said it and I've provided video's of it in the past!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> And what does it matter what engine it is based off of? In general taking a proven design and attempting to improve on it is common sense, especially if for over a decade you've been producing various parts and components that you'll be able to use on both!
> 
> But as for the Kowsar J-90 Engine it looks more like they built a low bypass subsonic turbofan engine around the Toloo mini jet engine or like the TV3 engines they used a Helicopter engine that's been converted to a subsonic low bypass Turbofan engine rather than a turboprop that's used on TV3's
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



This is first time I see this fast taxy performed.......on first clip there was no this part..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Any military equipment know how Iran has, has been acquired or developed since 1979 (last 40 years). Before then, the only thing that we probably knew inside and out and could produce were rifle bullets.
> 
> Nazi Germany had the luxury of progressing shoulder to shoulder with rest of the European nations for the past 2 centuries or so before they became as capable as they were. Technology takes time to take a foothold in a country. It is not only know how. It is a culture.
> 
> Do you think Russians are any better than Iranians when it comes to work ethics or morals? But they still are very innovative when it comes to military equipment. Because they have been doing it for the past 3 centuries.
> 
> I always tell this story to every one to give them a clue about how miserable we were when it came to producing our own arms: back in 1983 when I was an 8 year old kid and my uncle a 1st year metallurgy student, his university professors were tasked by Military's R&D to find the formula for producing regular mortar shells alloy. Let it sink in: Mortar shells! That's how hopeless we were.
> 
> Now we can send satellites to orbit, take out a conference room inside a building from 250km distance, send the first ever flying wing drone that caries arms in its internal bays on a 1200 mile round trip and perform surgical strikes and …..
> 
> In that context, Iran's achievements are extraordinary. It doesn't matter where these advances are coming from. IRGC or Military. Any of them who have been able to absorb funds and attention have performed very well. I don't see any problem with Iran's navy achievements. They are part of the military but since have been funded comparatively well, they are now building submarines and talk about 200m long destroyers.





TheImmortal said:


> The Nazi Regime was working on flying wing fighter design in 1940’s including a separate reduced radar intercontinental bomber.
> 
> Iran didn’t develop flying wing till 2012-2013.
> 
> Iran cannot be a true great military power when it settles for mediocrity.
> 
> I would characterize Iran’s military efforts as “scrappy” in the sense it’s a bit remarkable what they are able to do despite all the incompetence and sanctions.
> 
> But if you took all the Nazi scientists and brainpower of 1940’s Germany and put them into Iran today with the technology available to them today, they would circles around these mafia dotards.
> 
> Problem is Iran’s society. When you compare it to hard a working resilient society like China or Japan you can see how that trickles into every corner of a country’s foundation.
> 
> This doesn’t mean Iran doesn’t have hard working people, but rather the brain drain just sucks out most of the talent and leaves little behind.
> 
> That is why Iran has an economy that should have been much much larger with the resources available to it. Yes, sanctions play a part, but after 40 years you can’t use them as the only way excuse.
> 
> Bottom line: Iran’s military lacks innovation and pushing the envelope that is synonymous with great military powers.




@TheImmortal

If the Germans were developing those weapons by 1945 it's because by 1910 they had already built themselves a fleet of some 300 Submarines!!! So the Germans didn't just simply weak up one day and achieve the level of technology they had by WW2 and your comparing a country obsessed with world domination since before WW1 with Iran.

Technological development and developing the infrastructure and the human resources needed to mass produce heavy weapons does NOT happen overnight! And in Iran's case we were unfortunately cursed with really bad leadership during the 1st 100 years of the world entering into the modern age starting with the development of industrial steel plants and electricity between 1880-1979 which means Iran had to make up for 50-100 year gap (Depending on what area) in the past 30-40 years! 

The country this Iranian government inherited was a country with only 16 universities and 16 dams that couldn't even produce a car by 1979 (FYI South Korea that some Iranians like to compare us too started producing cars in the 50's) in a country larger than France, Germany, U.K. & Italy combined! We were so behind by 1979 that since the end of the Iran-Iraq war Iran has been THE FASTEST growing country in Science & Technology and one of the main reasons for that is because we were so behind before the revolution. And the rate of progress in Iran today is the FASTEST in the world so comparatively we are moving faster than any other country in the world and because of Sanction we even have to build the infrastructure need to produce many of the alloys ourselves too which is not achievable over night

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WordsMatter

VEVAK said:


> @TheImmortal
> 
> If the Germans were developing those weapons by 1945 it's because by 1910 they had already built themselves a fleet of some 300 Submarines!!! So the Germans didn't just simply weak up one day and achieve the level of technology they had by WW2 and your comparing a country obsessed with world domination since before WW1 with Iran.
> 
> Technological development and developing the infrastructure and the human resources needed to mass produce heavy weapons does NOT happen overnight! And in Iran's case we were unfortunately cursed with really bad leadership during the 1st 100 years of the world entering into the modern age starting with the development of industrial steel plants and electricity between 1880-1979 which means Iran had to make up for 50-100 year gap (Depending on what area) in the past 30-40 years!
> 
> The country this Iranian government inherited was a country with only 16 universities and 16 dams that couldn't even produce a car by 1979 (FYI South Korea that some Iranians like to compare us too started producing cars in the 50's) in a country larger than France, Germany, U.K. & Italy combined! We were so behind by 1979 that since the end of the Iran-Iraq war Iran has been THE FASTEST growing country in Science & Technology and one of the main reasons for that is because we were so behind before the revolution.
> 
> just proves how little you people know about pre-revolution Iran. Just because you pay some publication to publish a sh!ty research paper does not make you "THE FASTEST growing country in Science & Technology".
> 
> The delusion these IRI bloggers enjoy...
> 
> And the rate of progress in Iran today is the FASTEST in the world so comparatively we are moving faster than any other country in the world
> 
> Another propaganda piece by a pro-IRI blogger. What a joke! CAPITALIZING your words don't make them true!
> 
> and because of Sanction we even have to build the infrastructure need to produce many of the alloys ourselves too which is not achievable over night
> 
> Oh the sanctions... that's why you can't built alloys. While at it the sanctions are also responsible for:
> 
> Economic mismanagement
> Falling Rial
> Capital flight
> Highest brain drain
> Ahmadinejad
> Mistreatment of religious minorities
> Mistreatment of women


----------



## sanel1412

"THE FASTEST growing rate than any country in Science & Technology" is statistic data I personally find and saw in many world publications and it is originaly published by UN and also by many US,Canada..etc data-analysis companies...it is Iranian propaganda or not something Iran published...they may use it for propaganda purposes...but that is something all governments,politiants and political parties do in whole world..they use positive data and statistics for propaganda purposes..but it doesn't mean it is not true...again...in whole world this is the case...and pre revolution Iran ,when it comes to science and technology,is really not comparable with.today's Iran...I don't see why some people's try to neglect Iranian growth...doesn't metter if you're pro IRI or not...anyone who like it's country will accept every success of his country and be proud of...I mean everywhere..there are people who support this or that...and I understand people want more wealth,economic growth,freedom....but can't understand people like Babak Taghave...who are seeking to install again military dictatorship...that is just idiotic and only has sense if you are personally close to them and have interest personally of being returned to power...And someone said many people doesn't know much about pre-IRR....he is right when say that many people actually know very little about pre-IRI..but actually I know a lot about pre-IRI and Sah policies.....Sah had imperial ideas but in same time danger ideas....and how advanced Iran was you can find in US reports about weapons transfer...Iran would probably end up in war if some of his ideas and policies were implemented...but that is other story...let's back to Iran...There are many things around Iran these days.that simply makes no sense to present except if used.as.propagandu tool..and now I'm talking about anti-Iran propaganda presented around the world..not only by media but also on social networks by many "Independent" analysist...Yesterday I responded at one such post on twiter...it is such BS..I don't know how anyone can be influenced by such BS...as examples of Iran being at edge of collapse they provide list of strikes in Iran in last 15 days...and there was 4 strikes on list....I mean...my country has 3.5 million citizens and we are.candidate for EU...but I can make list of probably 20 strikes just this month and probably would be able to make.such list for any.country in the world including most wealthy countries...it is just such BS...I mean at leat they could use some relevant statistics data to prove their claim ..like currency rate in last year,oil export...and million other things....but they don't even try any more to hide inventions...I respect everyone's opinion and political views....I mean if you sit with your family in your home you will probably have few different political views...and that is only few people with similar life path...now think about millions of completly different people with different experience,life path..etc...It is natural for us to have different views and that should be accepted by everyone but we can stick to arguments when.discussing anything and it is clear for averyone that Iran had made giant step in almost every aspect but expecually in sciense and technology and that is fact...now in my country and also neighbor Serbia and Croatia(already EU member) just this and last year there were few affairs where highest officials have plagarised their science work used for doctorate...and bunch of other...there is everywhere these examples...these end up in media only because high ranking officials are involved.
But there are many different indicators and different methods to rank countries for their science,technology..and.any other field.....These rankings about Iran sciences and technology growth and ,other fields also ,are not coming from Iran government ,instead they coming from international,UN and institutions founded by foreign governments...mostly western...so neglect something like this,coming from widely accepted sources is just stupid...like I said there are.many different indicators that can confirm it...using some data or statistic....alone will ofcourse never provide clear picture...but if anything...science and technology is something which can be seen even without looking statistics...For god sake 1979 Iran had around 100.000 students..today it is more than 1979 x 20


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> @TheImmortal
> 
> If the Germans were developing those weapons by 1945 it's because by 1910 they had already built themselves a fleet of some 300 Submarines!!! So the Germans didn't just simply weak up one day and achieve the level of technology they had by WW2 and your comparing a country obsessed with world domination since before WW1 with Iran.
> 
> Technological development and developing the infrastructure and the human resources needed to mass produce heavy weapons does NOT happen overnight! And in Iran's case we were unfortunately cursed with really bad leadership during the 1st 100 years of the world entering into the modern age starting with the development of industrial steel plants and electricity between 1880-1979 which means Iran had to make up for 50-100 year gap (Depending on what area) in the past 30-40 years!
> 
> The country this Iranian government inherited was a country with only 16 universities and 16 dams that couldn't even produce a car by 1979 (FYI South Korea that some Iranians like to compare us too started producing cars in the 50's) in a country larger than France, Germany, U.K. & Italy combined! We were so behind by 1979 that since the end of the Iran-Iraq war Iran has been THE FASTEST growing country in Science & Technology and one of the main reasons for that is because we were so behind before the revolution. And the rate of progress in Iran today is the FASTEST in the world so comparatively we are moving faster than any other country in the world and because of Sanction we even have to build the infrastructure need to produce many of the alloys ourselves too which is not achievable over night



Im comparing a country that advanced more in 50 years (1900-1950) then Iran has advanced in last 1000 years.

Furthermore, Iran having a smaller amount of universities is a FLAWED statistic and somewhat irrelevant. Back in 1950-1970 not many % of kids went to college (even in the US)! High school was considered a high education! So college is nothing but a system of supply and demand, why build many colleges if the demand isn’t there?

Furthermore, Iran growing in science and technology via papers is not the same as actual applications ie translating that information to actual real world use/application.

Iran’s society is still behind in that regard. I mean up until 10-15 years ago the 1930’s Peykan dominated the streets of Iran!

The problem is Iran’s society is broken and lacks the strong work ethic and drive of a society like Germany! Even in 2018, Germany is a major economic power! Iran’s society is riddled with corruption, fraud, and laziness.

I went to Iran and the shops close from 12-3 pm everyday for rest break! Every other week is a religious holiday! It’s amazing how that society even functions.

Iran isn’t further behind Germany just because they had a head start. At the core it comes down to the will of its society.

Iran has made some remarkable achievements, but it is far from being an economic or technological giant which is needed if Iran TRULY wants to achieve SECURITY.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Any hint or evidence of reverse engineered RD-33 came out of Iran ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

sanel1412 said:


> "THE FASTEST growing rate than any country in Science & Technology" is statistic data I personally find and saw in many world publications and it is originaly published by UN and also by many US,Canada..etc data-analysis companies...it is Iranian propaganda or not something Iran published...they may use it for propaganda purposes...but that is something all governments,politiants and political parties do in whole world..they use positive data and statistics for propaganda purposes..but it doesn't mean it is not true...again...in whole world this is the case...and pre revolution Iran ,when it comes to science and technology,is really not comparable with.today's Iran...I don't see why some people's try to neglect Iranian growth...doesn't metter if you're pro IRI or not...anyone who like it's country will accept every success of his country and be proud of...I mean everywhere..there are people who support this or that...and I understand people want more wealth,economic growth,freedom....but can't understand people like Babak Taghave...who are seeking to install again military dictatorship...that is just idiotic and only has sense if you are personally close to them and have interest personally of being returned to power...And someone said many people doesn't know much about pre-IRR....he is right when say that many people actually know very little about pre-IRI..but actually I know a lot about pre-IRI and Sah policies.....Sah had imperial ideas but in same time danger ideas....and how advanced Iran was you can find in US reports about weapons transfer...Iran would probably end up in war if some of his ideas and policies were implemented...but that is other story...let's back to Iran...There are many things around Iran these days.that simply makes no sense to present except if used.as.propagandu tool..and now I'm talking about anti-Iran propaganda presented around the world..not only by media but also on social networks by many "Independent" analysist...Yesterday I responded at one such post on twiter...it is such BS..I don't know how anyone can be influenced by such BS...as examples of Iran being at edge of collapse they provide list of strikes in Iran in last 15 days...and there was 4 strikes on list....I mean...my country has 3.5 million citizens and we are.candidate for EU...but I can make list of probably 20 strikes just this month and probably would be able to make.such list for any.country in the world including most wealthy countries...it is just such BS...I mean at leat they could use some relevant statistics data to prove their claim ..like currency rate in last year,oil export...and million other things....but they don't even try any more to hide inventions...I respect everyone's opinion and political views....I mean if you sit with your family in your home you will probably have few different political views...and that is only few people with similar life path...now think about millions of completly different people with different experience,life path..etc...It is natural for us to have different views and that should be accepted by everyone but we can stick to arguments when.discussing anything and it is clear for averyone that Iran had made giant step in almost every aspect but expecually in sciense and technology and that is fact...now in my country and also neighbor Serbia and Croatia(already EU member) just this and last year there were few affairs where highest officials have plagarised their science work used for doctorate...and bunch of other...there is everywhere these examples...these end up in media only because high ranking officials are involved.
> But there are many different indicators and different methods to rank countries for their science,technology..and.any other field.....These rankings about Iran sciences and technology growth and ,other fields also ,are not coming from Iran government ,instead they coming from international,UN and institutions founded by foreign governments...mostly western...so neglect something like this,coming from widely accepted sources is just stupid...like I said there are.many different indicators that can confirm it...using some data or statistic....alone will ofcourse never provide clear picture...but if anything...science and technology is something which can be seen even without looking statistics...For god sake 1979 Iran had around 100.000 students..today it is more than 1979 x 20



Being ranked 1st in Science & Technology growth on it's own doesn't make Iran an Advanced country!!!!!!! It just means we were so behind before that just trying to catch up in developing the human resources needed for industrial progress has made Iran the fastest growing country in Science and Tech!

Since the end of the Iran-Iraq war Iran went from a country that could NOT even design and produce even a car or build it's own dam's to a country that builds Sat Launch Vehicles, Build it's own ocean liners, is the largest car producers in the middle east, is the largest tractor producer in the region, is the largest dam and powerplant building in the region & builds dams for other countries, produces various types of Gas turbines, produces industrial robots, supercomputers,.....

So Science and Technology growth does translate into product eventually if the infrastructure and investments is there because you have developed the human resources to do it! But human resources is just one aspect and developing the infrastructure to go from dirt & rock to a finished product in every field is another that takes time especially when funding is limited and especially for a country that's under sanctions that even prohibit the sale of Titanium or high grade Nickle or other strategic alloys to Iran!

Before the Revolution Iran ONLY had 16 universities in a country larger than UK, France, Germany & Italy combined so clearly lack of human resources was severely effecting Iran's ability to build the products it wanted at home!
vs today https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Iran 
And anyone that thinks that this does not eventually translate into finished products doesn't have a clue.....

And if anyone has any doubts that being the FASTEST growing country in Science and Technology will eventually turn into products should take a good look at the country that's ranked 2nd after Iran on that list and that's China! And the reason the Chinese are growing faster than Iran when it comes to finished products is because they have the infrastructure and funding that compliments the human resources and they have been developing that infrastructure for much longer 

For example something like a computer processor is theoretically not a complicated peace of equipment but what is complicated is developing the tools needed to produces a processor worth producing today and clearly countries that have had decades of time to upgrade and upgrade and upgrade those tools has allowed them to build an infrastructure over time that's lacking in Iran and because of Sanctions Iran can't simply buy the tools to produce a relatively modern processor which would force Iran to buy very outdate equipment, reverse engineer it and upgrade it and upgrade it to try to catch up which takes time! 
Which means technologically even if Iranian products today aren't as advanced as a country that simply goes out and buys more advanced tools to build more advanced products but technologically Iran becomes more advanced because of those sanctions have forced Iran to build the tools it's self and it could take 10 years or 100 but the potential to surpass the entire world is developed!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Im comparing a country that advanced more in 50 years (1900-1950) then Iran has advanced in last 1000 years.
> 
> Furthermore, Iran having a smaller amount of universities is a FLAWED statistic and somewhat irrelevant. Back in 1950-1970 not many % of kids went to college (even in the US)! High school was considered a high education! So college is nothing but a system of supply and demand, why build many colleges if the demand isn’t there?
> 
> Furthermore, Iran growing in science and technology via papers is not the same as actual applications ie translating that information to actual real world use/application.
> 
> Iran’s society is still behind in that regard. I mean up until 10-15 years ago the 1930’s Peykan dominated the streets of Iran!
> 
> The problem is Iran’s society is broken and lacks the strong work ethic and drive of a society like Germany! Even in 2018, Germany is a major economic power! Iran’s society is riddled with corruption, fraud, and laziness.
> 
> I went to Iran and the shops close from 12-3 pm everyday for rest break! Every other week is a religious holiday! It’s amazing how that society even functions.
> 
> Iran isn’t further behind Germany just because they had a head start. At the core it comes down to the will of its society.
> 
> Iran has made some remarkable achievements, but it is far from being an economic or technological giant which is needed if Iran TRULY wants to achieve SECURITY.



EVERY country on the Planet has advanced more in the past 100 years than in the past 10,000 years before it! 
The main difference is the Germans started prior to 1880 where as Iran started in 1979! 

Germans were producing 1 Million Metric Tons of steel by 1885 & 10 Million by 1905 where as Iran couldn't get an industrial steel mill going till mid to late 1960's and not for a lack of trying and the failures of Iran's leadership was mainly due to their full reliance on others to get it online for them because the human resources needed to build our own simply wasn't there and attempts to develop the human resources was far from sufficient SO NO High School education is CLEARLY NOT ENOUGH! And if you had any understanding of management you would of understood how vital a properly educated, trained and experienced work force and human resources truly is! 

The fact that Paykan dominated Iran's streets up to a decade ago is because of 50 years of Pahlavi's where we did stupid things like buy ourselves one of the top Air Forces in the world with one of the top 3 helo forces in the world while we still couldn't produce our own freaking CAR's and only had 16 Universities in a country larger than UK, France, Germany & Italy combined! Where foreigners deceived and played with us for 40 years just to get a freaking steel mill going in Iran and morons like the Pahlavi's took it like the little foolish puppets that they were http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/steel-industry-in-iran 
And after 40 years of that the moron Pahlavi's didn't say to themselves lets start educating the masses and lets start building universities in every corner of Iran so we don't continue to get played for fools and we don't go around the world begging others to build us a freaking steel mill!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

@WordsMatter 
How many Universities Iran had before the Revolution is CLEAR public knowledge so is how many universities we have today google it!
How many Dam's Iran had before the revolution again clear public knowledge for they were all built by foreigners 
The fact that Iran couldn't even build it's own freaking car's & trucks after 50 years of the Pahlavi's is all public knowledge.
The fact that Iran didn't have it's 1st industrial steel plant till the late 60 & 70's and the 1st aluminum production company in Iran wasn't founded till 1972 is again public knowledge while by 1905 and U.S. Aluminum companies like ALCO were producing aluminum on an industrial scale while we in Iran had a leadership that went around the world begging others for 40 years to build us a freaking steel mill that's 40 years out of the 50 years the Pahlavi's were in power and those morons still didn't get it that Iran needs to educate it's people to do these things it's self!
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/steel-industry-in-iran

Those are all FACT's!!!!!!! The fact that after the revolution we got an Iranian government that gave a shit about all the people in the country at least enough to educate them country wide regardless of location is a FACT! Your free to call it Propaganda all you want but that doesn't change the FACTS! And rather than nonsense why don't you produce some facts of your own!

Iran being ranked among the top 10 countries in the world in terms of economic activity growth of Women, % of women working in industry and % of female collage graduates are all statistics given by NONE Iranian organizations some which were from the U.N. which is most defiantly not a pro Iran organization and in the west they hide those stats to give life to other stats like enforcement of Hejab, Child custody, men legally being allowed to prohibit their wife from leaving the country,.... simply to make Iran look bad and that's the true propaganda!

And NO ONE say's Iran's government is perfect because if they were they wouldn't force Hejab on people but that doesn't change the facts about other issues!

Iran had such poor leadership before the revolution that building a bunch of universities countrywide and attempting to catchup made us the FASTEST growing country in Science and technology!

Now you can cry and scream all you want but unless you have some real facts to present then SHUSH....


:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Russel

TheImmortal said:


> The Nazi Regime was working on flying wing fighter design in 1940’s including a separate reduced radar intercontinental bomber.
> 
> Iran didn’t develop flying wing till 2012-2013.
> 
> Iran cannot be a true great military power when it settles for mediocrity.
> 
> I would characterize Iran’s military efforts as “scrappy” in the sense it’s a bit remarkable what they are able to do despite all the incompetence and sanctions.
> 
> But if you took all the Nazi scientists and brainpower of 1940’s Germany and put them into Iran today with the technology available to them today, they would circles around these mafia dotards.
> 
> Problem is Iran’s society. When you compare it to hard a working resilient society like China or Japan you can see how that trickles into every corner of a country’s foundation.
> 
> This doesn’t mean Iran doesn’t have hard working people, but rather the brain drain just sucks out most of the talent and leaves little behind.
> 
> That is why Iran has an economy that should have been much much larger with the resources available to it. Yes, sanctions play a part, but after 40 years you can’t use them as the only way excuse.
> 
> Bottom line: Iran’s military lacks innovation and pushing the envelope that is synonymous with great military powers.


It’s the dumbest assessment I read. Iran is the 2nd innovative in terms of indigenous defence technology and production. Israel may be first. But considering sanctions, Iran will be first.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

yavar said:


>



I truly appreciate this. There is evidence of clear and substantial work that has been done. Progress has been made new systems have been developed and there is a realistic path for it's further development. Albeit, I am disappointed that it took them this long to get here, I wish they had not wasted time on other adventures.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

yavar said:


>


Yavar
Two other project are coming, a semi-heavy single engine and a heavy twin engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

arashkamangir said:


> I truly appreciate this. There is evidence of clear and substantial work that has been done. Progress has been made new systems have been developed and there is a realistic path for it's further development. Albeit, I am disappointed that it took them this long to get here, I wish they had not wasted time on other adventures.



Showing the production line of a viable CAS fighter like this was a good punch in the mouth of those who are still under the delusion that Iran's Kosar is nothing more than a refurbished F-5F

And your right they wasted far too much time and money on so many different CAS fighter/Trainer designs.... If some of those efforts where going towards a bigger Interceptor/Strike platform it would have been fine but it was all towards CAS fighters and at the end of the day they finally came to their senses and chose the most viable platform for an Iranian CAS fighter (better late than never) although if it was up to me I would have made minor design changes to the back part of the stabilizer, Tailoron, back of the Wings & back of the engine exhaust (with little to no disruption to current weight balance and aerodynamics )

Under this project they have addressed The Ejection Seat, Canopy & most of the electronics and Avionics that can in the future be used on transferred to an Iranian interceptor/strike platform

And now the Air Force can better concentrate on a better engine with the assistance of OWJ industries and work with HESA in R&D and design of a larger Air Frame around larger diameter engines.

Although Iran still needs more capable infrastructure for the production of a larger more capable Airframe but current infrastructure should be sufficient for R&D and building a working prototype which will allow them to build those tools and infrastructure as they perfect a design in time(If they choose to continue down that path)

But all and all I am most definitely proud of what they accomplished and I'm sure they've made a lot of patriotic Iranians happy today!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

Ray_Atek said:


> Yavar
> Two other project are coming, a semi-heavy single engine and a heavy twin engine.



What are you basing this one? In one of the videos above, the DM was asked about future projects and he only referred to future development of this same platform...which is worrying as I hoped they would be done with this airframe by now and move onto heavier projects.


----------



## VEVAK

Ray_Atek said:


> Yavar
> Two other project are coming, a semi-heavy single engine and a heavy twin engine.



As koja medoni???? And using what engine? If true really don't see the need to bother with a single engine fighter at all.... The money would be better spent building 1 twin engine fighter for every 2 single engine fighter you plan on developing.....


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> What are you basing this one? In one of the videos above, the DM was asked about future projects and he only referred to future development of this same platform...which is worrying as I hoped they would be done with this airframe by now and move onto heavier projects.



When OWJ engine was initially revealed, Iran DM mentioned a few things

*Design of Heavy fighter jet was underway
*Producrion of Heavy turbofan/turbojet engine within 3 years (should be compeleted by now).

IRGC also said in last 2 years they are designing their own CAS.

So there are at least 2 other fighter jet projects (possibly up to 5) in R&D phase.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

WinterNights said:


> What are you basing this one? In one of the videos above, the DM was asked about future projects and he only referred to future development of this same platform...which is worrying as I hoped they would be done with this airframe by now and move onto heavier projects.



The raw materials needed and many of the expensive high end tools needed to produce airframes like the F-15 & F-14 are very different than a CAS fighter like this so yea when it comes to production the current infrastructure is only good enough to work on and improve on a CAS fighter in this class and at max something the size of an F-16....

Iran's Heavy fighter jet project is relatively new and is still at it's design phase And since no one will supply Iran with viable engine to be used on an Iranian fighter until we can build a viable engine with sufficient thrust, fuel consumption, airflow and lifespan for a production of a heavier Iranian fighter for the time being we will be stuck on R&D and improving the design of bigger airframe using current engines that are available.

Although in a not so distant future modern fighter jets will be equipped with Laser countermeasures and very soon after the Guns on fighter will be replaced with lasers or some other directed energy weapon and soon after the need for within visible range Air to Air Missiles will completely be removed and optimal cruise altitude of future fighters will likely move to beyond 100,000 ft (+30,000 meters) 

Which means Iran needs to plan ahead and start working on building much larger more capable platforms today and they should be working towards a viable engine whos intakes are at least 1.6 meters in diameter or larger that uses a new fuel source that's mainly comprised of either Natural Gas which we have an ample supply of or better yet an engine with high enough thrust inlet temperature that it can handle using Oxygen and Hydrogen refined from sea water as a fuel source on a platform capable of speed of ~Mach 3 or higher with plans to equip it with laser countermeasures with the ability to carry at lest 10 or more BVR Missiles


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Since Iran lags behind in Titanium tech to build complete heavy fighter air frames from scratch, how viable would it be for the IRIAF to rebuild "new" F-14s air frames around the existing Titanium components of old F-14s? Since Titanium is the strongest material used in the air frame of aircraft I would imagine that they will have a long life span and it would be possible to build new air frames with lower RCS and modern avionics around existing Titania Parts like the wing box...This may not be a perfect solution but it may be better than building something like the F-313 with its limited air frame, if the idea behind it is feasible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Next generation of Locally built F-5 series should have following:

1) Powerful turbofan 
2) AESA Active e scanned array FCR 
3) IRST 
4) ECM pods
5) HOTAS with HMD
6) HOBS
......................

This will push this platform into 4+ generation.


----------



## Ray_Atek

More viable than f-5 planform for CAS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 10950860, membro: 184479"] [ATTACH = pieno] 520212 [/ ATTACH] Più fattibile di f-5 planform per CAS [/ QUOTE]

questo ha solo il motore um, quindi prima di costruirlo devi essere sicuro di avere a disposizione un motore con potenza adeguata per avere prestazioni CAS superiori a Kowsar / F5
Oppure fare una variante di questo progetto per installare due motori OWJ, ma alla fine non so se avrà prestazioni più elevate rispetto a Kowsar / F-5 per giustificare la spesa necessaria per essere realizzata.

photoshop 





Senza un nuovo motore, se si desidera un aeromobile per le missioni CAS, sarebbe più appropriato utilizzare una versione di Kowsar-88


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 10950860, membro: 184479"] [ATTACH = pieno] 520212 [/ ATTACH] Più fattibile di f-5 planform per CAS [/ QUOTE]
> 
> this only has um engine, so before you build it you must be sure to have available a motor with adequate power in order to have CAS performance higher than the Kowsar / F5
> Or make a variant of this project to install two OWJ engines, but in the end I do not know if it will have higher performance than the Kowsar / F-5 to justify the expense needed to be realized.
> Without a new engine, if you want an aircraft for CAS missions, it would be more appropriate to use a version of the Kowsar-88


To start this project j79 or rd33 are avalaible from beginning and finally Iranian heavy turbojet will replace them.
Kowsar-88 is better than cobra helicopter but has not self defence option but this model can carry two sidewinder and can carry more payloads with more hardpoints.


----------



## VEVAK

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Since Iran lags behind in Titanium tech to build complete heavy fighter air frames from scratch, how viable would it be for the IRIAF to rebuild "new" F-14s air frames around the existing Titanium components of old F-14s? Since Titanium is the strongest material used in the air frame of aircraft I would imagine that they will have a long life span and it would be possible to build new air frames with lower RCS and modern avionics around existing Titania Parts like the wing box...This may not be a perfect solution but it may be better than building something like the F-313 with its limited air frame, if the idea behind it is feasible.



How many F-14 Airframes do you spose we have left? I can tell you it's not that many for Iran to make a major investment in the development of an Airframe around the F-14 frames and the part your talking about are already 40 years old!

Also if there is a fighter in Iran's fleet where it's Airframe should be redesigned it's the F-4's. The F-4's have a poorly designed airframe with a large RCS, limited maneuverability on an airframe that shakes at high speeds due to it's poorly designed slanted wings and tilorones and there are just way too many faults on that airframe 

Also the J79 engines are fairly OK engines that leave a lot of room for upgrades. Iran could potentially upgrade it's combustion chamber, Iran could potentially reduce the length of it's axils and prefect the design of it's compressors and allow for limited low bypass right after the front compressors and that will potentially allow Iran to build shorter and more capable afterburners around the engine
All and all if Iran works on these changes they would be able to reduce consumption of the engines and potentially increase life span & reduce maintenance hours in time maybe even increase thrust. 
Although hands down the BEST engine to upgrade and improve upon that Iran has access too is the twin spool AL-21's belonging to Iranian Su-17's/24 because they are twin spool and have far more thrust &
Improving efficiency on either of those engines by as much as 10% would completely remove the need for Turbofan engines.

Hell building a modern low drag, high maneuvering twin engine Airframe design around 2 Al-21's will give you a platform that will be more than sufficient

But the TI will still be a necessity! Just compare the F-15 to the Su-24 the twin engine Su-24's with AL-21's have greater thrust than an F-15 BUT the empty weight of an F-15 comes in at 28,000 LB VS the Empty weight of a Su-24 that come in at just over 49,000 lb which means the F-15's empty weight is a good 75% lighter which would not be possible without the high use of Ti composites that allow weaker engines to achieve greater speed, agility & maneuverability 

Which means if Iran addresses it's Ti composite problem and develops a capable relatively light, low drag, high maneuvering airframe around outdated AL-21 engines even without upgrades to the engines or the need for turbofan engines we will have a very capable platform 
Also on the F-4's the Americans used an absurd design to both address the aircraft weight problems and at the same time give it the capability to takeoff and land on carriers now if Iran addresses weight ratio with the use of Ti and other composites even at the same thrust to weight ratio we could build an airframe with reduced drag, reduced RCS, increased maneuverability, higher agility & increased cruise speeds which will lead to improved range with the current J79's 


And that make Ti and other strategic alloys and composites and the advanced tool needed to work with those alloys the main concern. And Ti is not restricted to a fighter program. From the Paint industry, to Oil industry, to automotive industry, medical industry, naval industry,..... 
If Iran wants to produce better products then we need to produce the martials needed to improve our products

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Exact analysis of j79,f4,Al21f,... seem you are an expert in mechanical or aerospace.
Best job is to scale up j85 external diameter to 120 centimeter and adding low bypass to make heavy turbofan.
J85 has good setup as you see the f22 and f35 engine have nearer setup to j85.
Twin spool scaled up j85 based turbojet or turbofan is better than iranian upgraded j79 or Al21f.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


>



That Sofreh Mahi footage is 4 years old and also an RC toy.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> That Sofreh Mahi footage is 4 years old and also an RC toy.


Yes, but I thought the project was canceled


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> Yes, but I thought the project was canceled



Sofreh Mahi project existed prior to capture of RQ-170 before Iran had access to flying wing design.

However, after capture of RQ-170. Iran focused efforts on mastering flying wing design and creating its own flying wing UAVs.

Thus Sofreh Mahi project may have been shelved or received less attention. There are two Sofreh Mahi models: fighter jet and a bomber variant. 

What’s intresting is the fighter jet variant is similar in design to mock up designs of US 6th gen fighters. Thus the project may be a much longer term project.

That being said, the status of either project is unclear right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Sofreh Mahi project existed prior to capture of RQ-170 before Iran had access to flying wing design.
> 
> However, after capture of RQ-170. Iran focused efforts on mastering flying wing design and creating its own flying wing UAVs.
> 
> Thus Sofreh Mahi project may have been shelved or received less attention. There are two Sofreh Mahi models: fighter jet and a bomber variant.
> 
> What’s intresting is the fighter jet variant is similar in design to mock up designs of US 6th gen fighters. Thus the project may be a much longer term project.
> 
> That being said, the status of either project is unclear right now.



If this project is so big as you say and if its not dead, then I think Iran will uses the F 313 manufacturing experience to build Sofreh Mahi project very serious and more solid than F 313. Sofreh Mahi project is it from army or IRGC?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> If this project is so big as you say and if its not dead, then I think Iran will uses the F 313 manufacturing experience to build Sofreh Mahi project very serious and more solid than F 313. Sofreh Mahi project is it from army or IRGC?



Iranian airforce project.

This project is ment to be a UAV fighter jet/bomber. Up until now, China is the only country to successfully produce the first UAV fighter jet using next gen technology.

Iran’s Sofreh Mahi project is to include radar absorbing materials. Iran military officials have stated it will take a long time to finish.

The lack of information since 2011 is a bit worrying. I am not confident that the project is still active, it may have been replaced by a next gen Flying wing type design

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Ray_Atek said:


> Exact analysis of j79,f4,Al21f,... seem you are an expert in mechanical or aerospace.
> Best job is to scale up j85 external diameter to 120 centimeter and adding low bypass to make heavy turbofan.
> J85 has good setup as you see the f22 and f35 engine have nearer setup to j85.
> Twin spool scaled up j85 based turbojet or turbofan is better than iranian upgraded j79 or Al21f.



If you increase the diameter of the J-85 by that much and make it twin spool and add a fan then there are way too many things you'll have to change that you really wont be able to call it a scale up version of a J-85!

And honestly for a supersonic fighter I would worry less about a fan and more about everything else...

The difference between a J-79 & an F-15 F-100's is not simply in a fan the F-100 has a Turbine inlet temperature of over 2400 F vs the J-79's 1700 degrees Fahrenheit
And the difference in consumption is 0.75lb vs 0.87lb of fuel per pound of thrust per hour at max military thrust (without afterburners) with virtually no difference at max thrust (with afterburners)

So improving the combustion chambers and building better turbines alone will greatly impact your fuel consumption.
So will improving the design of the forward low pressure compressors and reducing the length of your axel and if you were to add low bypass right after your low pressure compressors and slightly increase your diameter (under 1inch) with the right design you'll be able to heat up air over your combustion chambers and achieve some thrust without burning oxygen and that air will not only help cool down your combustion chamber and afterburners but the unburnt oxygen will also allow you to burn any unburnt fuel inside the afterburners and if we take it one step further and make the J-79 twin spool you will greatly effect and improve service life and maybe even achieve higher RPM's with your higher pressure compressors. 

Now for me all these changes take precedent over a fan on a supersonic fighter jet because for the fans of a turbofan engine to be effective they have to run at a much lower RPM than the compressors..... and for me improving else on a J-79 to improve it's efficiency by ~10% would be sufficient enough not to bother with Fans 

And I believe if Iran wants to work on Turbofan engines whether they be low or high bypass the fans need to be powered separately from your compressors either by an advanced BLDC motor or an independent compressed air engine or a hybrid combination of the two...

Got to go now I'll write about I think is the best way to build upon the J-85's tomorrow...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian airforce project.
> 
> This project is ment to be a UAV fighter jet/bomber. Up until now, *China is the only country to successfully produce the first UAV fighter jet using next gen technology.*



What does that even mean?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> What does that even mean?



Meaning it’s a unmanned fighter jet using 5th generation technology. It’s a unmanned stealth fighter jet. Google Dark Sword UAV.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Sofreh Mahi seems to be the name of an umbrella project that is already yielding results in form of Simorgh, Saegeh UCAV's, may be Qaher if it flies oneday....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Ray_Atek said:


> Exact analysis of j79,f4,Al21f,... seem you are an expert in mechanical or aerospace.
> Best job is to scale up j85 external diameter to 120 centimeter and adding low bypass to make heavy turbofan.
> J85 has good setup as you see the f22 and f35 engine have nearer setup to j85.
> Twin spool scaled up j85 based turbojet or turbofan is better than iranian upgraded j79 or Al21f.



As for J85's a lot of people like the J-85's because they use less fuel but the truth is in terms of efficiency the J85's use up far more fuel than J-79's per each pound of thrust 
A J85 uses 0.95lb of fuel per each pound of thrust without afterburners as appose to a J-79's 0.87lb or an F-100's 0.75lb so per pound of thrust J-85's are not efficient engines at all and the only reason they use less fuel is simply because they have far less thrust so if the goal for increasing it's diameter from ~1.5ft to almost 4ft is to achieve greater thrust then there really isn't much point in choosing a scale up version over a J-79 

And I do agree with you that one of the major problems with the J-85's is it's small diameter because those engines are so small that they just don't leave much room for any effective and notable upgrades and your suggesting are all on point as to what's lacking on the J-85's

But still if I wanted to improve upon the J-85's I would 1st look towards the engines combustion chamber, Turbines, turbine inlet temperatures, ball brings and forward two compressor designs and before being able to improve those aspects I would not move toward anything else and after I achieve that I would start increasing diameter a few inches at a time (As much needed to add one fuel injector at a time) but without changing the length of the compressor blades and on the side I would try to build a separate engine to power 3 short bladed fans that are more like low pressure compressors than fans that is powered independently that uses the heat created by the engine to produce steam that is also assisted by either magnets or a BLDC motors to power my counter rotating fans 
but since these changes wont necessary make them effective supersonic engines in terms of speed I prefer slowly enhancing J-79 or better yet AL-21 over drastically changing J-85's

As to what engine may be the best upgrade for the Kowsars personally I wouldn't even bother and I would move straight towards attempting to build a 5th gen design around 2 AL-21's or J79's but if forced too I would 1st test out how the Kowsars do with 2 AL-222 with afterburners by slightly altering the size of the Aircraft for R&D and if it worked out I'd attempt to reverse engineer the AL-222's but make them slightly larger enough for one additional fuel injector and more compact designed bypass with ramjet fuel being fed to my afterburners 

As for a completely new Iranian jet engine I'd want them to work on a low bypass engine that's closer to 5ft in diameter that's capable of being powered by a new fuel scours that's mostly comprised of Natural Gas (Or Oxygen & Hydrogen) where the heat created by the engine is used to create steam in a closed chamber that's circulated via assistance of a BLDC motor to power counterrotating fans that are also assisted by magnets


----------



## Zathura

Is this a new thing or is it just old rumors?


----------



## arashkamangir

Zathura said:


> Is this a new thing or is it just old rumors?



This channel seems to pull claims out of its as$.


----------



## Sineva

Zathura said:


> Is this a new thing or is it just old rumors?


Unfortunately so long as the un arms embargo remains [good job zarif] this sort of thing is sadly impossible.
Maybe these clowns get their info from a certain babak taghvaae


----------



## sha ah

Zathura said:


> Is this a new thing or is it just old rumors?



NOPE
In a few years the UN sanctions preventing Iran from purchasing offensive weapons will come to an end. 
Iran has already signed agreements with Russia to purchase a large number of SU-30 jets with technology transfers. The jets will be assembled in Iran. 

I would like to see Iran purchase 
50 x SU-30 twin seat variants 
50 x SU-30/SU-27 single seat variant
50 x MIG-35 single seat variant plus upgrade Iran's MIG-29's to to MIG-35 standard 
That would be a dream come true

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> In a few years the UN sanctions preventing Iran from purchasing offensive weapons will come to an end.





Wow you really are naive. If the current circumstances continue, the US will probably sanction any country that sells offensive arms to Iran.

Russia has a very bad history of caving to US pressures when it comes to arm deals.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zectech

sha ah said:


> NOPE
> In a few years the UN sanctions preventing Iran from purchasing offensive weapons will come to an end.
> Iran has already signed agreements with Russia to purchase a large number of SU-30 jets with technology transfers. The jets will be assembled in Iran.
> 
> I would like to see Iran purchase
> 50 x SU-30 twin seat variants
> 50 x SU-30/SU-27 single seat variant
> 50 x MIG-35 single seat variant plus upgrade Iran's MIG-29's to to MIG-35 standard
> That would be a dream come true



That would be something like 10 billion dollars. In two years hypersonic cruise missiles will destroy any aircraft in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> NOPE
> In a few years the UN sanctions preventing Iran from purchasing offensive weapons will come to an end.
> Iran has already signed agreements with Russia to purchase a large number of SU-30 jets with technology transfers. The jets will be assembled in Iran.
> 
> I would like to see Iran purchase
> 50 x SU-30 twin seat variants
> 50 x SU-30/SU-27 single seat variant
> 50 x MIG-35 single seat variant plus upgrade Iran's MIG-29's to to MIG-35 standard
> That would be a dream come true


LOL!
The one area where the russians have been shown to be even remotely reliable is in their near total and complete unreliability,and even on the few occasions that they have delivered...well...whats russian for a day late and a dollar[ruble?] short? 
The russians are virtually worthless to iran.


----------



## sahureka2

a question
For Iran, who, or which nation can currently be considered reliable for any military aviation supply, such as complete engines or fighter aircraft supplied directly or with a construction license?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

zectech said:


> That would be something like 10 billion dollars. In two years hypersonic cruise missiles will destroy any aircraft in Iran



So what are you implying that Iran shouldn't upgrade its airforce because hypersonic missiles can destroy any aircraft ? Well then, following that school of thought, I guess no nation should bother with an airforce as long as their adversaries have hypersonic missiles ?



Sineva said:


> LOL!
> The one area where the russians have been shown to be even remotely reliable is in their near total and complete unreliability,and even on the few occasions that they have delivered...well...whats russian for a day late and a dollar[ruble?] short?
> The russians are virtually worthless to iran.



At this point in time, the Russians view Iran as a strategic partner. According to rumors, the deal for the jets & helicopters has already been signed. Pressure did not prevent them from supplying Syria with the S-300 or Iran with the S-300 or any nation with the S-400 for that matter. The US is threatening to sanction any nation that buys the S-400. Sanctions can't prevent Iran because Iran has natural resources & in this day & age, there are countless ways to send money back & force.

Trumps recent bullying behavior & gangsterism is creating alot of friction between the US & others, including Russia & China. I doubt if the Russians, who are in desperate need of funding to inject into their crumbling infrastructure, would reject a deal with Iran for a large number of fighter jets. You realize that Iran has alternatives don't you ? If not Russia, Iran can turn to China. They would gladly sell Iran a few dozen J-11's, which Iran will quickly reverse engineer. Aside from China, Iran also had other options on the table as well.



TheImmortal said:


> Wow you really are naive. If the current circumstances continue, the US will probably sanction any country that sells offensive arms to Iran.
> 
> Russia has a very bad history of caving to US pressures when it comes to arm deals.



WOW, how childish can u get ? Russia gave Iran & the Syrians the S-300 despite serious threats & warnings from Israel & the USA. The US is currently threatening to sanction any nation that buys the S-400 or other weapons from Russia. Russia has nothing to lose & everything to gain by selling a large quantity of jets & helicopters to Iran. Otherwise Iran can simply purchase a few J-11's from China & quickly reverse engineer them & mass produce them. Aside from China there are also other options. Don't worry Iran has a few tricks up its sleeve. You know what they say, always expect the unexpected.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "Sineva, post: 10960569, membro: 190049"] LOL!
> L'unica area in cui i russi hanno dimostrato di essere anche lontanamente affidabili è nel loro quasi totale e totale inaffidabilità, e anche nelle poche occasioni in cui hanno consegnato ... beh ... che cos'è il russo per un giorno di ritardo e un dollaro [ rublo?] breve?
> I russi sono praticamente inutili in Iran. [/ QUOTE]
> 
> una domanda
> Per l'Iran, chi, o quale nazione può attualmente essere considerata affidabile per qualsiasi fornitura militare aeronautica, come motori o aerei da combattimento completi forniti direttamente o con una licenza di costruzione?


Well because of the un arms embargo that sort of thing isnt really possible at the moment.But speaking hypothetically,at this point in time probably either russia or china and sadly neither of those is ideal for different reasons ie russias political and economic unreliability and china still being behind both the russians and the west in certain critical areas of military technology such as low bypass turbofans etc,tho they are getting better and will eventually catch up,hopefully within the next decade or so.In the long term I would probably go with china as there is no history of conflict or potential competition in each others spheres of influence as there is with russia.Most importantly tho ` china *NEEDS* irans oil and gas.Now this isnt just about simple economics and supply,this is about the long term *strategic supply* of energy which iran can supply,and the very big critical difference here between iran and suppliers like saudi and co is that iran,unlike saudi and co,is the only truly *independent* neutral nonaligned nation with this amount of energy riches ie it isnt a western vassal or a competitor nation.So this is one very good reason why china will not only want to stay on the best terms that it possibly can with iran but will also likely try to further enhance that relationship,for instance china taking over virtually all of europes lost trade with iran.The danger for iran of course is in it becoming too over reliant on china,so this must be avoided at all costs[vassalage is slavery!].


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

yavar said:


>




My gut feeling is telling me the real work is happening on the Qaher stealth fighter project, and whenever progress is made on that front, parts of that project is transferred to this fourth-generation fighter jet. And I come to this conclusion based on:

1) Iranians did not make a real effort to change the frame of the Kowsar fighter jet, which still has the same frame as the F5. If they were putting a lot of effort on this project, they would've increased the payload of the plane; it is very small compare to other fourth-generation fighter jets. Perhaps, it is minimized so it could fit in the asymmetric military doctrine that the Iranian military is pursuing, where they're focusing on the shortcomings of their adversaries. Only someone with details knowledge can understand the reasons behind this frame and the payload.

2) The defense minister indicated that they were giving priority to missiles over this plane - in reality he wasn't willing to reveal any further information on other fighter jet developments, and was setting the expectation that a limited number of Kowsar fighters would be built.

3) There are older videos that showed Qaher-313 going thru test flights. 

4) Nevertheless, the secrecy that surrounds this plane points to one conclusion that Iran has chosen not to reveal any information about this project; perhaps they want their adversaries to keep guessing.

In summary, Iran has made huge strides in its developing these military hardware, as only handful countries develop fourth-generation and perhaps with-generation fighter jets. People should understand that when the Iranian fighter jet developments are ridiculed, it is done so Iranians reveal more information.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Finally the first decent pic of the new air launched short ranged cruise missile.





We can see that its quite a bit shorter and more compact than the original prototype which was derived from the ghassed 3 rocket boosted smart bomb.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

sahureka2 said:


> a question
> For Iran, who, or which nation can currently be considered reliable for any military aviation supply, such as complete engines or fighter aircraft supplied directly or with a construction license?


Imo China is supplying Iran some stuff. Might not be the highest tech, or most volume, but its prolly Iran's most reliable. RUssia might be supplying some stuff on the low too. Great question though.


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

925boy said:


> Imo China is supplying Iran some stuff. Might not be the highest tech, or most volume, but its prolly Iran's most reliable. RUssia might be supplying some stuff on the low too. Great question though.



Chinese may be,


925boy said:


> Imo China is supplying Iran some stuff. Might not be the highest tech, or most volume, but its prolly Iran's most reliable. RUssia might be supplying some stuff on the low too. Great question though.



Or it could be that Iranians have put a huge effort and money into these projects, and they're eventually reaping the fruits of those efforts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## un4given.1991

F-4 Phantom new radar :






source: @defence_news telegram channel

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

un4given.1991 said:


> F-4 Phantom new radar :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source: @defence_news telegram channel


Awesome!!! I hope they upgrade the Mirage F-1s and MiG-29s as well with similar Radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Two Saeqeh at Kish show 2018





F-5 planform is a good option to work on for more development .
Two Saeqeh in Kish show 2018

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hope to be real project


----------



## Dazzler

Translation?





__ https://www.facebook.com/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Zathura said:


> Is this a new thing or is it just old rumors?



JF-17 ?
_*"Iran considers buying Pakistani-made JF-17 Thunder fighter jets"*_
https://defence-blog.com/news/iran-considers-buying-pakistani-made-jf-17-thunder-fighter-jets.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

Ray_Atek said:


> Hope to be real project
> View attachment 522623


what,s this?


----------



## Sineva

Iranian jdam being tested

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=518206088691493

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ilia



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=518206088691493


LOL....yeah,sure.
In that case why not just reactivate the ahmadinejad era deals to buy or locally build the tu204sm in iran,or take the russians up on the offer they made just after the signing of the jcpoa of co-production and local assembly of the sukhoi superjet,or even look at redesigning/reengining the iran 140.
All the time and effort wasted by rouhani and co to try and buy western aircraft that were never going to be delivered,apart from a handful of overpriced atrs that is,and no plan B of any kind in reserve

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> LOL....yeah,sure.
> In that case why not just reactivate the ahmadinejad era deals to buy or locally build the tu204sm in iran,or take the russians up on the offer they made just after the signing of the jcpoa of co-production and local assembly of the sukhoi superjet,or even look at redesigning/reengining the iran 140.
> All the time and effort wasted by rouhani and co to try and buy western aircraft that were never going to be delivered,apart from a handful of overpriced atrs that is,and no plan B of any kind in reserve


that tu-204 deal was no deal as Russia could not export the plane with an engine that made it commercially competitive.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> that tu-204 deal was no deal as Russia could not export the plane with an engine that made it commercially competitive.


That was because the russians werent willing to supply the ps-90a2,however in an attempt to potentially salvage the deal the russians reengineered the ps90a2 into the a3 model which entirely removed every western component and replaced them with russian ones while still giving performance that was up to ps-90a2 levels or slightly better.However this all took time and by then rouhani was in power and seemed to have little interest in continuing projects like this from ahmadinejads presidency,I guess he was just too busy dreaming about all those lovely western airliners he thought he was going to get from the west.After the jcpoa was signed the russians were offering licensed production of the tu204sm in iran.
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/12/26/443328/Tupolev-to-let-Iran-make-market-its-planes


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> That was because the russians werent willing to supply the ps-90a2,however in an attempt to potentially salvage the deal the russians reengineered the ps90a2 into the a3 model which entirely removed every western component and replaced them with russian ones while still giving performance that was up to ps-90a2 levels or slightly better.However this all took time and by then rouhani was in power and seemed to have little interest in continuing projects like this from ahmadinejads presidency,I guess he was just too busy dreaming about all those lovely western airliners he thought he was going to get from the west.After the jcpoa was signed the russians were offering licensed production of the tu204sm in iran.
> https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/12/26/443328/Tupolev-to-let-Iran-make-market-its-planes


I yet to see that engine in action


----------



## Maxpane

Dazzler said:


> Translation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/


Whats he saying?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> I yet to see that engine in action


http://www.pmz.ru/pr/news/1098/




Both the a2 and a3 versions were likely built in tiny amounts probably only a couple of each for testing and certification purposes,and without reasonable amounts of orders for a3 powered aircraft thats probably about all thats ever going to be built,not to mention that theres supposed to be quite a few unused ps90s still in storage dating back to soviet times that were produced for planes that never got built.So....


----------



## Ray_Atek

Iranian f20 model

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

Ray_Atek said:


> Iranian f20 model
> View attachment 523043



F**k yeah!!!


----------



## mohsen

Iran airforce plans to create it's own air display team! first demonstration in 1399.

*تیم آکروجت نهاجا تشکیل می‌شود*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> u


You see what I’m seeing,an Iranian F-22 model???? Don’t tell me that this plane will be a further development of 313

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> You see what I’m seeing,an Iranian F-22 model???? Don’t tell me that this plane will be a further development of 313


I'm not sure but look familiar Guess I have seen it in a drone competition several years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

T-72B said:


> You see what I’m seeing,an Iranian F-22 model???? Don’t tell me that this plane will be a further development of 313


These are toys!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

Ray_Atek said:


> Iranian f20 model
> View attachment 523043



This the only thing that matters to me. Iran building a Tigershark from ground up. It would be the single most important achievement for Iran's military aviation and it is potentially sustainable.


----------



## PeeD

Those are indeed toys, for/of hobby RC guys.

The important display was the new radar for the F-4:
Antenna was changed to a more advanced slotted array providing higher gain.
The display system is a air-interception mode optimized one.

First the APQ-120 subsystems were improved and digitized and as last step the antenna was changed.
Improvements could be based on the Italian Grifo series which are used in the Kowsar.
One key improvement of the Grifo is a SAR mode which requires a good, large display.

So it looks like air-interception optimized. Why doing this? Because the SARH guided Fakkur-90 would require improved range illumination range performance to be used effectively to ranges where it beats the AIM-120 range-wise.

So the story sounds like this to me:
Q: Can we improve the F-4 platform to a level where it can compete against state of the art enemy fighters?
A: Kinematically it is still potent but its BVR sensors and missiles need to be replaced to beat the AIM-120.

Q: How can we beat the AIM-120?
A: We can't beat it pound-by-pound but we can build a large missile that can beat it kinematically by outranging and out-speeding it. The F-4 platform is large and powerful enough to carry about half the AIM-120 load of enemy fighters.

Q: So we trade numbers of carried missiles to beat the AIM-120?
A: Yes, this is the only way to do it and a salvo of two missiles will provide a high PK against the enemy fighters. Achieving the first kill in the battle is very important.

Q: What else needs to be upgraded for this F-4 interceptor concept?
A: The radar needs to be improved to provide the necessary illumination range to support the Fakkur-90.

Q: Which is the most cost-effective way to achieve that?
A: The existing APQ-120 is a strong radar. With digitalized and improved subsystems as well as a higher gain antenna, the job can be done.

Q: Modern enemy fighters use PESA and AESA antennas, is a upgraded APQ-120 really sufficient?
A: It is sufficient if IADS or a modern/potent fighter (e.g F-14) in the formation provide the targets to be engaged. Enemy AESA equipped fighters just have a better situational awareness over the upgraded F-4. But the independent situational awareness and radar range will still be sufficient to search and independently attack 3rd and 4th gen enemy fighters. Like with the numbers of missiles, this is a penalty to pay in order to achieve to required task at the lowest cost.


Again a elegant solution, this time from the IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

arashkamangir said:


> This the only thing that matters to me. Iran building a Tigershark from ground up. It would be the single most important achievement for Iran's military aviation and it is potentially sustainable.


The problem is that before you could do that,you would at a minimum have to be able to reverse/reengineer the rd-33 turbofan engine,or some close equivalent,and put it into at least low rate production,otherwise you would just be repeating all of the previous mistakes iran made with prior attempts to build/reverse/reengineer fighter aircraft in iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Radars work in multiple mode..even old aircraft radars have multiple modes..today multi functional radars implement much more different modes splited in few categories like navigation(Ground mapping,Terrain avoidance..etc), Fighter mode(RWS,TWS,PRF,STT....etc),air to ground(Surveillance/tracking of ground forces/targets..weapons delivery),air to surface (ASW) ....i ..now when it comes to what we can see from display...Top menu has RWS , SRCH , VS , MAN , TWS ........tags on display are shortcuts for radar modes.......TWS is for Track While Scan mode...RWS is Range whille search..VS is velocity search......MAN shortcuts are used in multiple different controls and selectors..in same aircraft....MAN means manual..and here it probably means tthat operator has to manualy initiate program...again there is MAN on ECM control...and some other controls..SRCH is search mode control and it is used in various modes for Gain control and in particular for long range precise maping and I suppose this M in front mean Maping or Mode...rest I can't see to be honest....there is on left side but since this MFD is very similar as few i saw and use almost same symbols..I can tell few more things..on left side you can see up and down arrows and 10 between..it is air speed (in this case ground speed)and these arrows signals pilot is he going too slow or too fast in particular situation (upper will be red if aircraft for example is approaching to runway too slow or will bee yellow or green if it is too fast) ...also on left side we can see AZ 120 and it represent Azimuth and these arrows will also signaling if aircrafts is not approaching to runway(same example)with in correct path...at bottom on left side we can see Sym..probably shortcut for symbol SOI ...on right side I can't see what is written but I suppose Auto and Test ...at bottom there is EL for elevation and there are also two arrows for signaling

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Ray_Atek

Good color for two Saeqeh
One with sidewinder rail

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

PeeD said:


> Again a elegant solution, this time from the IRIAF.


VEVAK won't like that.


----------



## skyshadow

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...ets-ready-for-export-who-might-buy-the-kowsar

*Iran Showcases Domestic Fighter Jets Ready for Export; Who Might Buy the Kowsar?*

*According to General Banitarafi, Iran has already reached export agreements with China, Russia and Indonesia. While Chinese and Russian acquisitions of Iranian fighters remains extremely unlikely*






"We have already taken necessary steps to export (our) products," Abdoklarim Banitarafi, head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization, was quoted as saying by Press TV.

Iran plans to sell its trainer jets as well, he added.


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...ets-ready-for-export-who-might-buy-the-kowsar
> 
> *Iran Showcases Domestic Fighter Jets Ready for Export; Who Might Buy the Kowsar?*
> 
> *According to General Banitarafi, Iran has already reached export agreements with China, Russia and Indonesia. While Chinese and Russian acquisitions of Iranian fighters remains extremely unlikely*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "We have already taken necessary steps to export (our) products," Abdoklarim Banitarafi, head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization, was quoted as saying by Press TV.
> 
> Iran plans to sell its trainer jets as well, he added.


I think my country,Indonesia would be interested regarding the Kowsar avionics and new radar, i think it would a good addition to prolong our F-5 fleet lifespan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 523043
> Iranian f20 model
> View attachment 523043



Old display, I have seen that model from the Saeghe I days.

Only thing that would make this pitiful toy display any sadder would be the Iranian F-16 copy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> Old display, I have seen that model from the Saeghe I days.
> 
> Only thing that would make this pitiful toy display any sadder would be the Iranian F-16 copy.


Model or picture?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> I think my country,Indonesia would be interested regarding the Kowsar avionics and new radar, i think it would a good addition to prolong our F-5 fleet lifespan.


i hope that this happens

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nike

T-72B said:


> I think my country,Indonesia would be interested regarding the Kowsar avionics and new radar, i think it would a good addition to prolong our F-5 fleet lifespan.



F5 had been retired, end case. Several units even had been converted into gates statue.

With iran, cooperation in radar system is more likely

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

The only likely client is Syria as there Air Force is in desperate need of some for of modernization after years of war.

Iraq and Yemen are also potential clients. Though in the case of Yemen, I am not sure how they could pay for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

the Airshow China 2018, the brochure of a certain J-10CE - E for Export - 






was distributed for the first time by AVIC. This means that the Chinese aircraft manufacturer would have finally obtained the official permission from the Chinese authorities to export this aircraft equipped with the latest technological advances, such as an AESA antenna fire control radar and a dedicated electronic warfare suite.






J-10CE can it be a solution for Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> the Airshow China 2018, the brochure of a certain J-10CE - E for Export -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was distributed for the first time by AVIC. This means that the Chinese aircraft manufacturer would have finally obtained the official permission from the Chinese authorities to export this aircraft equipped with the latest technological advances, such as an AESA antenna fire control radar and a dedicated electronic warfare suite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-10CE can it be a solution for Iran?


Only if full license production in iran was on offer,otherwise whats the point,even then it would only be a possible mig29 replacement or augment for the existing mig fleet.In addition have the chinese finally fixed their engine problems with the later marks of the ws10 engine?.
It still wouldnt solve the problem of an f14 replacement....altho the j11 might....possibly...,however it uses russian engines.Another option could be a land based variant of the j15 carrier based machine,but the j15 has had problems,tho how much of that is related to possible compromises made to the original j11 design to get it carrier borne,and how much is due to problems with chinese engines and avionics I really couldnt say. 
The chinese have made some staggering leaps technologically in their aerospace industries compared to how backward they were in the very late 1980s.....but,they are still not at the same level yet as their western and russian aerospace equivalents,tho they are certainly catching up fast.Give it another decade and I think they`ll be there.
If I was iran I`d probably wait until they were.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Iran will unveil its Passenger plane with turboprop engines in three years.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 524670
> 
> 
> Iran will unveil its Passenger plane with turboprop engines in three years.


Let's hope so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

sahureka2 said:


> J-10CE can it be a solution for Iran?



Only if the radar is not severely downgraded, Soviet-export style, and if the engines are Chinese. If it has the AL-31 engine then Iran would be relying on both Russia and China for 1 aircraft. If we wanted to rely on Russia we'd buy Sukhois, which seems to be the plan.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

If the IRIAf wanted to build its own version of the F-20 tiger shark couldn't they just buy RD-33s from Russia or a third country?


----------



## Ray_Atek

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> If the IRIAf wanted to build its own version of the F-20 tiger shark couldn't they just buy RD-33s from Russia or a third country?


Iran bought 50 RD33 engine for Azarakhsh project at Ahmadinejad time.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/russia-iran-new-jet-engine


----------



## Sineva

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> If the IRIAf wanted to build its own version of the F-20 tiger shark couldn't they just buy RD-33s from Russia or a third country?


If the russians were reliable that might be a plan,but then if the russians were reliable you could just buy all the new fighters you needed from them instead......unfortunately the russians are not reliable.
The only way having the russians supplying the engines would work,would be if it was buying a large number in one single order and having them delivered at the same time ie 50 engines.Anther option might be license production,but that would depend on the terms,one of the problems the indians had was russian insistence on buying certain materiels ie titanium from russian suppliers at over inflated prices.
As for a third country,well there are only a handful of low bypass turbofan manufacturers in the world producing engines in this class,so if it isnt russia that only leaves china and their engines still arent quite up to the standards of the other manufacturers,for instance paks chinese designed jf17 uses russian rd33 engines rather than chinese ws10.
I suppose one other option would be having rouhani and zarif offer to perform an anilingus-fellatio double team on the euro vassals in return for their jet engines.I`m joking obviously,as everyone knows that they`re already doing that for free anyway.[LOL!]



Ray_Atek said:


> Iran bought 50 RD33 engine for Azarakhsh project at Ahmadinejad time.
> 
> https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/russia-iran-new-jet-engine


No,these were for irans existing mig29 fleet.


----------



## Ray_Atek

Sineva said:


> If the russians were reliable that might be a plan,but then if the russians were reliable you could just buy all the new fighters you needed from them instead......unfortunately the russians are not reliable.
> The only way having the russians supplying the engines would work,would be if it was buying a large number in one single order and having them delivered at the same time ie 50 engines.Anther option might be license production,but that would depend on the terms,one of the problems the indians had was russian insistence on buying certain materiels ie titanium from russian suppliers at over inflated prices.
> As for a third country,well there are only a handful of low bypass turbofan manufacturers in the world producing engines in this class,so if it isnt russia that only leaves china and their engines still arent quite up to the standards of the other manufacturers,for instance paks chinese designed jf17 uses russian rd33 engines rather than chinese ws10.
> I suppose one other option would be having rouhani and zarif offer to perform an anilingus-fellatio double team on the euro vassals in return for their jet engines.I`m joking obviously,as everyone knows that they`re already doing that for free anyway.[LOL!]
> 
> 
> No,these were for irans existing mig29 fleet.


It was front view of contract not what actually has done.


----------



## Sineva

Ray_Atek said:


> It was front view of contract not what actually has done.


It seems rather odd to order 50 engines,ie the number you would need to reengine most of irans operational mig29 fleet,when you havent even yet built a single prototype of the azaraksh powered by an rd33 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China_Eyes_J-10A_Sale_To_Iran_999.html



Sineva said:


> It seems rather odd to order 50 engines,ie the number you would need to reengine most of irans operational mig29 fleet,when you havent even yet built a single prototype of the azaraksh powered by an rd33 engine.


Other project has named Azarakhsh with 8 ton as empty weight and old Azarakhsh project which was based on f-5 renamed to kowsar.


----------



## Sineva

Ray_Atek said:


> http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China_Eyes_J-10A_Sale_To_Iran_999.html
> 
> 
> Other project has named Azarakhsh with 8 ton as empty weight and old Azarakhsh project which was based on f-5 renamed to kowsar.


That stupid proclivity for using the same names over again
Any pictures or prototypes of it by any chance?,even just a drawing or artist impression?


----------



## Ray_Atek

Sineva said:


> That stupid proclivity for using the same names over again
> Any pictures or prototypes of it by any chance?,even just a drawing or artist impression?


Look at this model






And this single engine f5


----------



## OldTwilight

Ray_Atek said:


> Look at this model
> View attachment 524807
> 
> 
> And this single engine f5
> View attachment 524808



just don't post some useless model pictures .... talk just when there is to talk about ...


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

good information about Iran's MIG-29 specifications:
*آپارات - گزارش ویدئویی تسنیم از اورهال جنگنده میگ-29*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

mohsen said:


> good information about Iran's MIG-29 specifications:
> *آپارات - گزارش ویدئویی تسنیم از اورهال جنگنده میگ-29*


Meaning please

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

T-72B said:


> Meaning please


Yes,a translation/synopsis would be nice,thanks.


----------



## VEVAK

T-72B said:


> Meaning please





Sineva said:


> Yes,a translation/synopsis would be nice,thanks.



It's just a link to a video about the MiG-29 overhaul program and they are simply explaining various simple spec of the aircraft and some of its subsystems like Radar's detection range, max targeting range and optimal targeting range, IRST range, info about ejection seat & it's parts,.....

To me by the most part it shows what's wrong with IRIAF and how it's stuck in it's old way's if IRIAF was smart they would of had teams of young and smart engineers working round the clock to improving every part, section & subsystems of the aircraft over the past decade to improve on the aircraft by make it lighter & by improving on each subsystem and all together making it far more capable so by 2018 WHAT WE SHOULD OF HEARD from these guys is how they reduced the overall weight of the aircraft by replacing low stress part with composites, who they went from a purely analog and mechanical system to a digital and how they completely replaced and redesigned Hydraulics, added an advanced Fly by wire systems with fiber optics & new sensors running thought the inside and outside of the aircraft and how the entire cockpit was digitized and replaced. how they built a new advanced Iranian built helmet mounted display, how they added a new ramjet Iranian APU to further enhance it's electrical power output capabilities allowing them to further add newer sensor, computers and electronics..... how an advance data link added allows them to share instant sensor data with other fighters and ground control.....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> who they went from a purely analog and mechanical system to a digital and how they completely replaced and redesigned Hydraulics, added an advanced Fly by wire systems with fiber optics & new sensors running thought the inside and outside of the aircraft and how the entire cockpit was digitized and replaced.


please don't mess with Mig-29 Hydraulics , it's one of the must advanced and complex in the world ,but yes if you change that you can reduce a lot from the airplanes weight ,but honestly first design a simple fly by wire then for F-5 or so and then try to tinker with Mig-29

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> It's just a link to a video about the MiG-29 overhaul program and they are simply explaining various simple spec of the aircraft and some of its subsystems like Radar's detection range, max targeting range and optimal targeting range, IRST range, info about ejection seat & it's parts,.....
> 
> To me by the most part it shows what's wrong with IRIAF and how it's stuck in it's old way's if IRIAF was smart they would of had teams of young and smart engineers working round the clock to improving every part, section & subsystems of the aircraft over the past decade to improve on the aircraft by make it lighter & by improving on each subsystem and all together making it far more capable so by 2018 WHAT WE SHOULD OF HEARD from these guys is how they reduced the overall weight of the aircraft by replacing low stress part with composites, who they went from a purely analog and mechanical system to a digital and how they completely replaced and redesigned Hydraulics, added an advanced Fly by wire systems with fiber optics & new sensors running thought the inside and outside of the aircraft and how the entire cockpit was digitized and replaced. how they built a new advanced Iranian built helmet mounted display, how they added a new ramjet Iranian APU to further enhance it's electrical power output capabilities allowing them to further add newer sensor, computers and electronics..... how an advance data link added allows them to share instant sensor data with other fighters and ground control.....


Thanks for the synopsis
In addition I also agree with virtually everything you`ve written in this post!.


----------



## Ich

Sineva said:


> It seems rather odd to order 50 engines,ie the number you would need to reengine most of irans operational mig29 fleet,when you havent even yet built a single prototype of the azaraksh powered by an rd33 engine.



Maybe 50 Engines would be needed by someone who want to develop engines in this class but hadnt builded up any research or development line for this class in the past. So crack up these 50 engines and let the parts undergo lots of tests will help to move faster forward with an own reserch and development line for this class of engines.


----------



## skyshadow

Jamarat bomb

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ali_Baba

sahureka2 said:


> the Airshow China 2018, the brochure of a certain J-10CE - E for Export -
> 
> J-10CE can it be a solution for Iran?



There would be some irony in both Iran and Israel if Iran buys the J10CE. Israel for giving the Lavi technology to China which helped create the J10 services. Iran, for buying an aircraft that its "sworn" enemy created ... lol !!!!!


----------



## drmeson

Any foreign procurement without extensive TOT will be dangerous for IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

China won’t give Iran a model toy plane of J-10 let alone actually supply it with planes.

China is weak and will bow to US pressure. China has too much US pressure on it to go through with the geopolitical havoc of an major arms deal with Iran that benefits China very little.


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> China won’t give Iran a model toy plane of J-10 let alone actually supply it with planes.
> 
> China is weak and will bow to US pressure. China has too much US pressure on it to go through with the geopolitical havoc of an major arms deal with Iran that benefits China very little.



do not think that China is weak and will submit to the US, China continues its policy and Iranian oil is important for Beijing, China continues to buy Iranian oil despite US unilateral sanctions, rather it has expanded its presence replacing the French companies that withdrew from Iran.
Therefore, if China will supply combat aircraft to Iran, it will only be if there is a China-Iran agreement, if China does not sell airplanes or other armaments, it will only be that it wants to respect the provisions of the UN agreements until 2020.
Nothing detracts from the fact that they could already evaluate deliveries after 2020, also because to avoid paying in US dollars, they could make exchange agreements: Oil x Combat aircraft or other weapon systems or components.

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## Tokhme khar

Do you have any proof of this unsubstantiated lavi/ j-10 lineage?

Most Chinese here will laugh at you if you mention this here again.



Ali_Baba said:


> There would be some irony in both Iran and Israel if Iran buys the J10CE. Israel for giving the Lavi technology to China which helped create the J10 services. Iran, for buying an aircraft that its "sworn" enemy created ... lol !!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> please don't mess with Mig-29 Hydraulics , it's one of the must advanced and complex in the world ,but yes if you change that you can reduce a lot from the airplanes weight ,but honestly first design a simple fly by wire then for F-5 or so and then try to tinker with Mig-29



MiG-29 has a complex mostly mechanical hydraulics systems and maybe one of the most complex which gave the Aircraft extreme maneuverability without fly by wire assistance and arguably the best maneuvering twin engine supersonic fighter in the world compared to it's thrust that's NOT equipped with a fly by wire system and without fear of loosing control due to high thrust to weight ratio of the aircraft cupelled with a complex enough hydraulics to support it that could even outmaneuver (NONE TVC) fly by wire assisted aircraft in it's class BUT at the end of the day it is far from a technologically advanced system compared to today even at Iran's level of tech! And as you pointed out it is oversized and overweight 

And an advanced fly by wire system is one of the key components Iran needs to work on and is one of the key components missing in the MiG-29 and especially on a single piloted highly capable fighter platform you need to do all you can to reduce the flight management and energy management responsibilities of the pilot to allow them to better focus on their combat responsibilities and one of they key components needed to do that is a fly by wire system

A fly by wire system that has the right hardware in place will allow you to program in capabilities or add on additional equipment for additional capabilities in time whether you wanna give your fighter the capability to fly at low altitudes for long period's or add fully automated landing that will allow a fighter to land at a smaller strip or add TVC engines or program in different flight characteristics for different altitudes while your pilot inside the cockpit keeps the same flight dynamics or have preprogrammed complex maneuvers or an autopilot that can navigate it's way to a destination on your nav and tell you exactly how much fuel would be spent to get there so you know exactly what you can and can't do... or allow for faster automated air to air refueling or have an automated flight control that can take control if the pilot is nocked out, or preprogram limitation to prevent structural failures or atomically fix controls due to weight imbalance or make up for a damaged control,...

My point is the added capabilities of a fly by wire system is so great that it would be absurd for Iran not to tinker with the hydraulics of the MiG-29 simply because it used to be one of the best in the world decades ago.


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> do not think that China is weak and will submit to the US, China continues its policy and Iranian oil is important for Beijing, China continues to buy Iranian oil despite US unilateral sanctions, rather it has expanded its presence replacing the French companies that withdrew from Iran.
> Therefore, if China will supply combat aircraft to Iran, it will only be if there is a China-Iran agreement, if China does not sell airplanes or other armaments, it will only be that it wants to respect the provisions of the UN agreements until 2020.
> Nothing detracts from the fact that they could already evaluate deliveries after 2020, also because to avoid paying in US dollars, they could make exchange agreements: Oil x Combat aircraft or other weapon systems or components.



Does everyone live on the planet Mars?

The Arms embargo was only a recent restriction. Look at the last 20-30 years WHEN there was WAS NO arms embargo. What did Iran WANT? What did it END UP getting?

Russia and china repeatedly screwed over Iran.

So let’s stop acting like after 2020 they are going to grow some balls and stand up to USA.

Fact is neither Russia nor China wants a powerful Iran, hence why they approved SANCTIONS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> My point is the added capabilities of a fly by wire system is so great that it would be absurd for Iran not to tinker with the hydraulics of the MiG-29 simply because it used to be one of the best in the world decades ago.


my point is we must do everything step by step ,first simple design , then more advanced ones and then use that experience for something that can outmaneuver hydraulic of Mig-29 . here the keypoint is experience and I guess till know our experience with flyby wire is limited to Simorgh and probably Saeqeh UAV. and it's right that making something like Simorgh Stable need lots of calculation but at the end it's not designed for High maneuverability we must design a flyby wire for let say a target drone which is a lot more maneuverable and then go for a plane like F-5 after that we can produce a reliable fly by wire for Mig-29 and hopefully by that time we have our own design that made changing Mig-29 not necessary .



TheImmortal said:


> Does everyone live on the planet Mars?
> 
> The Arms embargo was only a recent restriction. Look at the last 20-30 years WHEN there was WAS NO arms embargo. What did Iran WANT? What did it END UP getting?
> 
> Russia and china repeatedly screwed over Iran.
> 
> So let’s stop acting like after 2020 they are going to grow some balls and stand up to USA.
> 
> Fact is neither Russia nor China wants a powerful Iran, hence why they approved SANCTIONS.


as I said it's more likely we can get F-35 from USA than J-31 from china or SU-35 from Russia and it's only after we produced something similar . but about older generation of Airplanes I really don't knew


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> my point is we must do everything step by step ,first simple design , then more advanced ones and then use that experience for something that can outmaneuver hydraulic of Mig-29 . here the keypoint is experience and I guess till know our experience with flyby wire is limited to Simorgh and probably Saeqeh UAV. and it's right that making something like Simorgh Stable need lots of calculation but at the end it's not designed for High maneuverability we must design a flyby wire for let say a target drone which is a lot more maneuverable and then go for a plane like F-5 after that we can produce a reliable fly by wire for Mig-29 and hopefully by that time we have our own design that made changing Mig-29 not necessary .
> 
> 
> as I said it's more likely we can get F-35 from USA than J-31 from china or SU-35 from Russia and it's only after we produced something similar . but about older generation of Airplanes I really don't knew



I never said this should have been done overnight I said those are the various upgrades they should have worked on in the past 2 decades

Iran's already built a low end fly by wire system for at least one of it's Saegheh Fighters the various equipment that you need to build a fly by wire system is really not that complicated what's complicated and what takes time is the programing and upgrades to the programing so your flight control computer translates the pilot and sensor inputs into the right responses for the moving surfaces of your aircraft so a high end flight simulator for a MiG-29 will be closer to a fly by wire system than a UAV's or target drones flight controls.

In terms of hardware putting in the right hardware is well within it Iran's capabilities so what they should have done with the MiG-29's & F-4's in the past 5-10 years was added the hardware and a vast amount of sensors on a single MiG-29 and F-4 and had one of countries top pilots fly it over the past 5 years to gather vast amount of data as you routinely upgraded the programing so by now you would of had a production model with a minimum number sensors required to be installed on your MiG-29's & F-4's 

Fact is in my opinion the R&D and development of any part or subsystem of an aircraft that is highly time consuming is something the Air Force it's self should have undertaken and NOT the MOD or MOD companies or private companies and once the air force had a finished product worth producing that's when they should of handed it off to the MOD so they can figure out who should built what!


----------



## sahureka2

in 2019 the film Top Gun 2 will be in the cinema 



 from the first images also leaked a Tomcat.
Luckily they did not scrape them all out of fear of the contraband of pieces in Iran.
Or .....
I ask if the photo could be the eightieth and last F-14 Tomcat not delivered to Iran, which had remained in the US ??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

sahureka2 said:


> in 2019 the film Top Gun 2 will be in the cinema
> 
> 
> 
> from the first images also leaked a Tomcat.
> Luckily they did not scrape them all out of fear of the contraband of pieces in Iran.
> Or .....
> I ask if the photo could be the eightieth and last F-14 Tomcat not delivered to Iran, which had remained in the US ??


The could have asked Iran to lend them one!


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> in 2019 the film Top Gun 2 will be in the cinema
> 
> 
> 
> from the first images also leaked a Tomcat.
> Luckily they did not scrape them all out of fear of the contraband of pieces in Iran.
> Or .....
> I ask if the photo could be the eightieth and last F-14 Tomcat not delivered to Iran, which had remained in the US ??





Arminkh said:


> The could have asked Iran to lend them one!


It could be a mockup and the rest of the works can be generated by computer


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> It could be a mockup and the rest of the works can be generated by computer



looking at the photos it looks like a real F-14 Tomcat and, yes, the rest of the works can be generated by computer


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> looking at the photos it looks like a real F-14 Tomcat and, yes, the rest of the works can be generated by computer


Well they destroyed some critical part but you can find many airframe in museums around the USA.


----------



## ashool

sahureka2 said:


> looking at the photos it looks like a real F-14 Tomcat and, yes, the rest of the works can be generated by computer


its f15 . f14 is 2 cabin


----------



## Hack-Hook

ashool said:


> its f15 . f14 is 2 cabin


Well I see two cabin there by the way f15 have two cabin variant (f15 b, f15 d, f15 dj)

And this is f15 frontal view


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> Well I see two cabin there by the way f15 have two cabin variant (f15 b, f15 d, f15 dj)
> 
> And this is f15 frontal view



therefore in this aircraft you identify it as an F-15 ?? / !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> therefore in this aircraft you identify it as an F-15 ?? / !!


not exactly , by looking at frontal view , intakes , wing shape , I say they loaned one F-14 air-frame from somewhere


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Does everyone live on the planet Mars?
> 
> The Arms embargo was only a recent restriction. Look at the last 20-30 years WHEN there was WAS NO arms embargo. What did Iran WANT? What did it END UP getting?
> 
> Russia and china repeatedly screwed over Iran.
> 
> So let’s stop acting like after 2020 they are going to grow some balls and stand up to USA.
> 
> Fact is neither Russia nor China wants a powerful Iran, hence why they approved SANCTIONS.



Planet Mars ? no! Planet Earth !
last 20-30 years - officially
Russia
14 MiG-29 delivered in 1990 + 20 delivered in 1991 + 6 delivered again in 1993/1994.
12 SU-24 aircraft supplied by Russia in 1991
China
17 F-7N + 4 FT-7N
Switzerland
45 Pilatus PC-7
so we must add the numerous aircraft that arrived from Iraq in 1991, which may have led the government to decide to postpone direct purchases.
Then came the international sanctions that effectively closed the market

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> Planet Mars ? no! Planet Earth !
> last 20-30 years - officially
> Russia
> 14 MiG-29 delivered in 1990 + 20 delivered in 1991 + 6 delivered again in 1993/1994.
> 12 SU-24 aircraft supplied by Russia in 1991
> China
> 17 F-7N + 4 FT-7N
> Switzerland
> 45 Pilatus PC-7
> so we must add the numerous aircraft that arrived from Iraq in 1991, which may have led the government to decide to postpone direct purchases.
> Then came the international sanctions that effectively closed the market



Those were pity orders! 20 Migs? Are you kidding me? I can’t believe you are thumping your chest at such a pathetic order.

Go look at what Iran requested initially and then what it had to settle for after the West put pressure on Russia.

It’s sad that people magically think the US is going to allow Iran to build up a 300+ Aircraft of 4&5th gen. Zero incentive for US to allow that unless Iran agrees to restriction on missile programme in exchange for the ability to build up its airforce and navy.

US is in full blown containment strategy on iran, in such a strategy you try your best to prevent your adversary from becoming MORE powerful.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

TheImmortal said:


> Those were pity orders! 20 Migs? Are you kidding me? I can’t believe you are thumping your chest at such a pathetic order.
> 
> Go look at what Iran requested initially and then what it had to settle for after the West put pressure on Russia.
> 
> It’s sad that people magically think the US is going to allow Iran to build up a 300+ Aircraft of 4&5th gen. Zero incentive for US to allow that unless Iran agrees to restriction on missile programme in exchange for the ability to build up its airforce and navy.
> 
> US is in full blown containment strategy on iran, in such a strategy you try your best to prevent your adversary from becoming MORE powerful.


?
14+20+6= 40 lol where the hell you get that 20 number?


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Those were pity orders! 20 Migs? Are you kidding me? I can’t believe you are thumping your chest at such a pathetic order.
> 
> Go look at what Iran requested initially and then what it had to settle for after the West put pressure on Russia.
> 
> It’s sad that people magically think the US is going to allow Iran to build up a 300+ Aircraft of 4&5th gen. Zero incentive for US to allow that unless Iran agrees to restriction on missile programme in exchange for the ability to build up its airforce and navy.
> 
> US is in full blown containment strategy on iran, in such a strategy you try your best to prevent your adversary from becoming MORE powerful.



you have to excuse me, but you're climbing on the mirrors, because the numbers decrease, the Russian fighter planes were 52 and not 20, then you have to add the 20 Chinese aircraft and 45 Swiss training aircraft and in that short period of time, I am a large number.
So you can certainly write what you like best, but if you voluntarily indicate incorrect data and numbers, you risk losing credibility.
To conclude, yes, it is true that the Russians have stopped supplies under the solicitation of the United States, but for completeness, it should be added that at the time the president of the Russian Federation was Yeltsin, much more malleable than Putin today, but today the sanctions UN are still active, as the 5 + 1 agreement is still in force, and everyone is respecting it, minus one who has withdrawn the signature.
Everything is postponed to 2020.
The last part of your response, given the flags that follow your nickname, I can understand, but really believe that today the situation is just that .... and that Iran after 2020 could not have a direct help or indirect from China and / or Russia?
I wish a good continuation in this "technical" debate


----------



## Navigator

sahureka2 said:


> Planet Mars ? no! Planet Earth !
> last 20-30 years - officially
> Russia
> 14 MiG-29 delivered in 1990 + 20 delivered in 1991 + 6 delivered again in 1993/1994.
> 12 SU-24 aircraft supplied by Russia in 1991
> China
> 17 F-7N + 4 FT-7N
> Switzerland
> 45 Pilatus PC-7
> so we must add the numerous aircraft that arrived from Iraq in 1991, which may have led the government to decide to postpone direct purchases.
> Then came the international sanctions that effectively closed the market



+ 6 Su-25 for IRGC that were purchased in 2003-05

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> you have to excuse me, but you're climbing on the mirrors, because the numbers decrease, the Russian fighter planes were 52 and not 20, then you have to add the 20 Chinese aircraft and 45 Swiss training aircraft and in that short period of time, I am a large number.
> So you can certainly write what you like best, but if you voluntarily indicate incorrect data and numbers, you risk losing credibility.
> To conclude, yes, it is true that the Russians have stopped supplies under the solicitation of the United States, but for completeness, it should be added that at the time the president of the Russian Federation was Yeltsin, much more malleable than Putin today, but today the sanctions UN are still active, as the 5 + 1 agreement is still in force, and everyone is respecting it, minus one who has withdrawn the signature.
> Everything is postponed to 2020.
> The last part of your response, given the flags that follow your nickname, I can understand, but really believe that today the situation is just that .... and that Iran after 2020 could not have a direct help or indirect from China and / or Russia?
> I wish a good continuation in this "technical" debate



_In 1990, economic conditions had improved sufficiently for Tehran to place an order for 48 additional MiG-29s and 24 MiG-31s. However, the break-up of the Soviet Union and pressure from the USA prevented the conclusion of any of the related contracts.

In 1992, Tehran ordered 48 MiG-29s, 24 MiG-27s, 24 MiG-31s, 12 Tu-22 bombers and two A-50 radar planes. The Russians were eager to sell, but immense pressure from Washington — including an outright offer to buy the 24 MiG-31s in question at a higher price than Tehran could offer — prompted Moscow to cancel this deal.

https://warisboring.com/iran-is-too-much-of-a-mess-to-acquire-russian-weaponry/_

You blame Yeltsin for the lack of arms contrasts, but it seems you lack the capacity to recall the S-300 contract that happened under Putin? Only the threat of losing in World Court and having to pay Iran BILLIONS in breach of contract fees forced Russia to relent nearly 10 years after the contract was signed. That was for a DEFENSIVE arms order that was completely legal at the time. So you are mistaken putting your faith in russia.

So from 2000-2010 what offensive arms did Iran get from a Russia?

US is working to make sure 2020 Embargo stays in place and doesn’t expire. 

Even if by some chance Russia sells iran Su-30 (Su-35 unlikely) without production in Iran and control of spare parts production Iran will be in a similar situation post Shah era. It will be completely reliant on Russia to keep supplying Iran with what it needs to keep the planes flying.

Least not you forget that also under Putin Russia refused to modernize Iran’s kilo subs in Iran. They requested Iran deliver the subs to Moscow for modernization. Iran was so afraid that Russia would delay or never return the kilo subs that they proceeded without Russia!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> _In 1990, economic conditions had improved sufficiently for Tehran to place an order for 48 additional MiG-29s and 24 MiG-31s. However, the break-up of the Soviet Union and pressure from the USA prevented the conclusion of any of the related contracts.
> 
> In 1992, Tehran ordered 48 MiG-29s, 24 MiG-27s, 24 MiG-31s, 12 Tu-22 bombers and two A-50 radar planes. The Russians were eager to sell, but immense pressure from Washington — including an outright offer to buy the 24 MiG-31s in question at a higher price than Tehran could offer — prompted Moscow to cancel this deal.
> 
> https://warisboring.com/iran-is-too-much-of-a-mess-to-acquire-russian-weaponry/_
> 
> You blame Yeltsin for the lack of arms contrasts, but it seems you lack the capacity to recall the S-300 contract that happened under Putin? Only the threat of losing in World Court and having to pay Iran BILLIONS in breach of contract fees forced Russia to relent nearly 10 years after the contract was signed. That was for a DEFENSIVE arms order that was completely legal at the time. So you are mistaken putting your faith in russia.
> 
> So from 2000-2010 what offensive arms did Iran get from a Russia?
> 
> US is working to make sure 2020 Embargo stays in place and doesn’t expire.
> 
> Even if by some chance Russia sells iran Su-30 (Su-35 unlikely) without production in Iran and control of spare parts production Iran will be in a similar situation post Shah era. It will be completely reliant on Russia to keep supplying Iran with what it needs to keep the planes flying.
> 
> Least not you forget that also under Putin Russia refused to modernize Iran’s kilo subs in Iran. They requested Iran deliver the subs to Moscow for modernization. Iran was so afraid that Russia would delay or never return the kilo subs that they proceeded without Russia!



it is not correct to change the cards on the table, first indicate 20-30 years, now after the answers indicate from 2000-2010 !!
S-300 Russia delivered them - Yes or No?
50 engines for the Mig-29 were delivered - Yes or No?
following
SU-24 have been updated and maintained efficient, you do not agree that someone must have supplied spare parts?
10 of the 40 SU-22 after many years are back in flight conditions, miracle?, No! certainly the Iranian technicians have done a great job, but in any case someone has had to provide many important and indispensable spare parts, maybe there was something left in the Iraqi and Yemeni warehouses, or do they come from Syria? Syria, so probable, in this case only as an intermittent transit, but the material starts from another geographical place.

After 2020, the US will certainly try to block UN permits for the sale of weapon systems including fighter planes to the Iranians, and the Iranians will try to buy them or at least buy the heart of the plane to build around their aircraft.
SU-30 or Mig-35 hypothesis and future problems with the Russians as happened with the US?
the answer you gave her by remembering the indigenous repair of Kilo submarines
Embargoes, sanctions or denials to a nation with a good industry can cause temporary problems, but then urges this nation to resolve the situation at home, achieving what others do not want to provide.
Therefore, Iran will try to buy a number of new aircraft from other countries to replace some aircraft at the end of their operational life, but mindful of the past at the same time will try to develop an indigenous aircraft or cooperating with others or as a last to license it .

therefore, in repeating myself, do not change the cards on the table, otherwise you risk losing your credibility and nobody will want to answer your assertions any more.

Ciao


----------



## Oldman1

Hack-Hook said:


> not exactly , by looking at frontal view , intakes , wing shape , I say they loaned one F-14 air-frame from somewhere



Possibly private owners or from a museum. Or could get one from the boneyard.


----------



## Tokhme khar

You are wasting your time with that guy. He knows sweet fukk all. He's an MKO operative.



sahureka2 said:


> it is not correct to change the cards on the table, first indicate 20-30 years, now after the answers indicate from 2000-2010 !!
> S-300 Russia delivered them - Yes or No?
> 50 engines for the Mig-29 were delivered - Yes or No?
> following
> SU-24 have been updated and maintained efficient, you do not agree that someone must have supplied spare parts?
> 10 of the 40 SU-22 after many years are back in flight conditions, miracle?, No! certainly the Iranian technicians have done a great job, but in any case someone has had to provide many important and indispensable spare parts, maybe there was something left in the Iraqi and Yemeni warehouses, or do they come from Syria? Syria, so probable, in this case only as an intermittent transit, but the material starts from another geographical place.
> 
> After 2020, the US will certainly try to block UN permits for the sale of weapon systems including fighter planes to the Iranians, and the Iranians will try to buy them or at least buy the heart of the plane to build around their aircraft.
> SU-30 or Mig-35 hypothesis and future problems with the Russians as happened with the US?
> the answer you gave her by remembering the indigenous repair of Kilo submarines
> Embargoes, sanctions or denials to a nation with a good industry can cause temporary problems, but then urges this nation to resolve the situation at home, achieving what others do not want to provide.
> Therefore, Iran will try to buy a number of new aircraft from other countries to replace some aircraft at the end of their operational life, but mindful of the past at the same time will try to develop an indigenous aircraft or cooperating with others or as a last to license it .
> 
> therefore, in repeating myself, do not change the cards on the table, otherwise you risk losing your credibility and nobody will want to answer your assertions any more.
> 
> Ciao


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

There was resently a photo published of an IRIAA AB-214 armed a Dehlaviyeh missile. I hope both the IRIAA and the IRGC would upgrade the remaining fleet of AH-1Js to become AGTM capable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

TheImmortal said:


> The only likely client is Syria as there Air Force is in desperate need of some for of modernization after years of war.
> 
> Iraq and Yemen are also potential clients. Though in the case of Yemen, I am not sure how they could pay for it.



Actually, there would be many clients, especially in Africa, South America, and parts of Middle East and South East Asia. It all depends on the price and performance. Keep in mind many countries still have Mig-23, Mig-25, and F-5 in their air force; therefore, any plane that is much more advanced than those and still affordable money-wise is a win-win situation for them. They just need to ensure the plane is capable as Iranian military and govt officials claim.

To convince potential clients, the fighter jet should participate few air shows, that way its performance to other fourth generation fighter jets is evaluated. Iranians will need to emphasize its advanced features compare to others. Furthermore, an English, French, Swahili, and Arabic version of the below video would go a long way to give details to potential clients.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Actually, there would be many clients, especially in Africa, South America, and parts of Middle East and South East Asia. It all depends on the price and performance. Keep in mind many countries still have Mig-23, Mig-25, and F-5 in their air force; therefore, any plane that is much more advanced than those and still affordable money-wise is a win-win situation for them. They just need to ensure the plane is capable as Iranian military and govt officials claim.
> 
> To convince potential clients, the fighter jet should participate few air shows, that way its performance to other fourth generation fighter jets is evaluated. Iranians will need to emphasize its advanced features compare to others. Furthermore, an English, French, Swahili, and Arabic version of the below video would go a long way to give details to potential clients.


Well, Iran can't export a fighter jet while has kept it's radar completely classified, so all of these export talks are nothing beyond rumors.

There is an English translation to that video, if you look into its unveiling thread and dig up about 11 pages of irrelevant comments!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Actually, there would be many clients, especially in Africa, South America, and parts of Middle East and South East Asia. It all depends on the price and performance. Keep in mind many countries still have Mig-23, Mig-25, and F-5 in their air force; therefore, any plane that is much more advanced than those and still affordable money-wise is a win-win situation for them. They just need to ensure the plane is capable as Iranian military and govt officials claim.
> 
> To convince potential clients, the fighter jet should participate few air shows, that way its performance to other fourth generation fighter jets is evaluated. Iranians will need to emphasize its advanced features compare to others. Furthermore, an English, French, Swahili, and Arabic version of the below video would go a long way to give details to potential clients.





mohsen said:


> Well, Iran can't export a fighter jet while has kept it's radar completely classified, so all of these export talks are nothing beyond rumors.
> 
> There is an English translation to that video, if you look into its unveiling thread and dig up about 11 pages of irrelevant comments!



Not many governments on the planet would risk angering American corporations that practically run America by buying a reverse engineered American platform like the Kowsar fighter or the Toofan Helo not to mention the fact that Iran's production capacity is not yet enough to meet the countries own needs let alone produce enough of them for export.
In the future if Iran builds and mass produces it's own Airframe design that's powered by it's own engine design and produces enough of them and their spares to be able to provide spare parts and logistical support for a good size fleet for it's self 1st then maybe 
Fighters are a platform that require constant maintenance, spare parts & weapons and if you can't provide those parts on a regular bases the aircraft wouldn't last any more than a few months in your fleet (Up to a year or two if enough spares are sold with the fighter on the initial purchase) and every Air Force on the planet knows this so until Iran designs it's own, mass produces them and keeps a large enough fleet in it's own Air Force active for a good period to prove to any potential customer that Iran can and will provide the post sale support the Aircrafts will need and until that happens no Air Force on the planet in their right mind would ever risk buying an Iranian produced fighter platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


>


We can see that iran has upgraded the flir/eo on this attack helo to the RU-290 system.




Heres the older system

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sahureka2

today I found this article 
https://informburo.kz/stati/kak-lyo...-transportnyy-samolyot-y8f-fotoreportazh.html
about the new Shaanxi Y-8F-200 aircraft (Chinese version of the AN-12) delivered to Kazakhstan, in the article they assert that:

"The plane is in service with the Air Force in six countries. Among them are Venezuela, *Iran* and Myanmar (Burma)"..........
and..
"About six countries have them in their armed forces, in particular, *Iran*, Pakistan, Venezuela. The reviews are positive, so when choosing this aircraft, we were guided by what has already been tested over the years, has established itself."

I did not know that Iran had bought this plane, I ask if there are photographs of the Y-8F with Iranian badges
thank you


----------



## AmirPatriot

sahureka2 said:


> today I found this article
> https://informburo.kz/stati/kak-lyo...-transportnyy-samolyot-y8f-fotoreportazh.html
> about the new Shaanxi Y-8F-200 aircraft (Chinese version of the AN-12) delivered to Kazakhstan, in the article they assert that:
> 
> "The plane is in service with the Air Force in six countries. Among them are Venezuela, *Iran* and Myanmar (Burma)"..........
> and..
> "About six countries have them in their armed forces, in particular, *Iran*, Pakistan, Venezuela. The reviews are positive, so when choosing this aircraft, we were guided by what has already been tested over the years, has established itself."
> 
> I did not know that Iran had bought this plane, I ask if there are photographs of the Y-8F with Iranian badges
> thank you


Nope, we don't have the Y-8 or even the An-12. I think the only Chinese transport aircraft Iran has is the Harbin Y-12, in service with the IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

AmirPatriot said:


> Nope, we don't have the Y-8 or even the An-12. I think the only Chinese transport aircraft Iran has is the Harbin Y-12, in service with the IRGC.



yes, of the Y-12 I was aware as indicated in numerous information sites, but in the article that I had attached, they specifically indicate the Y-8 used in Iran


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sahureka2 said:


> yes, of the Y-12 I was aware as indicated in numerous information sites, but in the article that I had attached, they specifically indicate the Y-8 used in Iran


The Y-8 has never been in service with either the IRIAF or the IRGCAF. The writers of the article are mistaken.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

نمای پشت بمب هواسر جمرات

"The view behind the bomb of Hobsar Jamrat"








بمب هواسر جمرات این بمب، توسط جهاد خودکفایی نیروی زمینی سپاه پاسداران ساخته شده و قرار است روی برخی پرنده‌های این نیرو عملیاتی شود 

"The Hobs bomb of this bomb is made by the Self-Defense Jihad of the Revolutionary Guards ground force and is supposed to be operational on some bird of this force."

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Budget bill cuts is started showing itself.

15 Kowsar fighter jets will be delivered in 3 years!
one already delivered, seven airframes were on the production line, so completing each line will take 1.5 years.

It seems by announcing this news, Chief commander of airforce wanted to say don't expect anything from us!

*تحویل ۱۵ جنگنده «کوثر» به نهاجا تا ۳ سال آینده *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Budget bill cuts is started showing itself.
> 
> 15 Kowsar fighter jets will be delivered in 3 years!
> one already delivered, seven airframes were on the production line, so completing each line will take 1.5 years.
> 
> It seems by announcing this news, Chief commander of airforce wanted to say don't expect anything from us!
> 
> *تحویل ۱۵ جنگنده «کوثر» به نهاجا تا ۳ سال آینده *



If this news is true then it Seems what we all expected. Kowsar was not received well by the airforce.

Another “token” order of 15 Kowsar was placed. (Similar to smaller token orders when Saeghe variants were shown off). Which will be mostly for training purposes.

Air Force is taking a wait and see approach. No point in ordering 40-50 Kowsar in next 3 years when it MIGHT be possible to buy foreign planes (SU-30, JF-17, etc).

Besides an advanced trainer, Kowsar may end up replacing F-5’s that are no longer air worthy. At this time F-5’s should be able to fly till 2025 so no pressing need currently to replace them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Budget bill cuts is started showing itself.
> 
> 15 Kowsar fighter jets will be delivered in 3 years!
> one already delivered, seven airframes were on the production line, so completing each line will take 1.5 years.
> 
> It seems by announcing this news, Chief commander of airforce wanted to say don't expect anything from us!
> 
> *تحویل ۱۵ جنگنده «کوثر» به نهاجا تا ۳ سال آینده *


خوب اگه قرار با این جنگنده ها تیم آکروجت تشکیل بدن فکر کنم همون 15 تا هم از سرشان زیاد باشه.

به هرحال ممکن که اونها منتظر موتور جت قویتر از اوج هستن تا یک جنگنده بر پایه اون را جایگزین هواپیماهای فعلی بکنن.
البته امیدوارم تا اونمقع متالوژی ما اونقدر پیشرفت بکنه که بتونه جوابگوی تولید با حجم بالا باشه


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Budget bill cuts is started showing itself.
> 
> 15 Kowsar fighter jets will be delivered in 3 years!
> one already delivered, seven airframes were on the production line, so completing each line will take 1.5 years.
> 
> It seems by announcing this news, Chief commander of airforce wanted to say don't expect anything from us!
> 
> *تحویل ۱۵ جنگنده «کوثر» به نهاجا تا ۳ سال آینده *



This is why working on light fighter jet's or small frigates like the Mowj class simply makes no sense in a country like Iran and Iran's military needs to do a better job working on force multipliers for platforms!

If your going to be producing jet engines, radars, avionics, sections of an airframe, landing gears, hydraulics,..... and all the little pieces that make up a fighter each at rates as low as 1 per month & lower then clearly your wasting your recourses if those personal and infrastructure are being used towards such a light and insignificant fighter platform.

Now if Iran was adding for example 15 fighters comparable to the J-20 or Su-57 to it's fleet in the next 3 years now that is a significant capability and is worth having personal and equipment spend a month trying to build and assemble each of the engines, Radars,.....


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> This is why working on light fighter jet's or small frigates like the Mowj class simply makes no sense in a country like Iran and Iran's military needs to do a better job working on force multipliers for platforms!
> 
> If your going to be producing jet engines, radars, avionics, sections of an airframe, landing gears, hydraulics,..... and all the little pieces that make up a fighter each at rates as low as 1 per month & lower then clearly your wasting your recourses if those personal and infrastructure are being used towards such a light and insignificant fighter platform.
> 
> Now if Iran was adding for example 15 fighters comparable to the J-20 or Su-57 to it's fleet in the next 3 years now that is a significant capability and is worth having personal and equipment spend a month trying to build and assemble each of the engines, Radars,.....



The production line was anything but a “production line”.

It was likely a existing retrofitting/refurbishment line that was converted to make some Kowsar. Because 5 F-5’s per year is quite frankly a joke in terms of efficiency of any production.

The US could produce 160 F-16’s per yr if it chooses. So assuming Iran has even 10% production capability as the US that would translate to 15 Kowsar a year.

The actual issue could be mass production of the engines. Maybe Iran has trouble producing the engines at a rate to match production of airframe. That’s kind of hard to believe, I mean if Iran even build 1 pair of J-85 engines per MONTH. It could field 12 Kowsar a year.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Producing Kowsar in mass will not be suitable. This is an underpowered experimental platform. Next generation of Kowsar/Saeghe with domestically produced AESA radars and Turbofans can be produced though.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> The production line was anything but a “production line”.
> 
> It was likely a existing retrofitting/refurbishment line that was converted to make some Kowsar. Because 5 F-5’s per year is quite frankly a joke in terms of efficiency of any production.
> 
> The US could produce 160 F-16’s per yr if it chooses. So assuming Iran has even 10% production capability as the US that would translate to 15 Kowsar a year.
> 
> The actual issue could be mass production of the engines. Maybe Iran has trouble producing the engines at a rate to match production of airframe. That’s kind of hard to believe, I mean if Iran even build 1 pair of J-85 engines per MONTH. It could field 12 Kowsar a year.



If the engine was anything other than a J-85 then I would say yes but the J-85 is an extremely simplistic engine whos many parts and components have been produced in Iran for a very long time...

If they are producing the J-85 at a rate of 1 per month that's 36 engines after 3 years 30 of which would power the 15 Kowsar fact is the J-85 is such a simplistic engine that with a properly managed and independent production facility of it's own should be able to produce them at a rate of 1 every day or two easy.

And the pictures they showed is of an assembly line where the parts come in and they assemble them together and at the end of the day it's just a big hanger/ building and nothing really special about it and it's what goes on before the parts get there that's what matters...

With enough parts, tools, personal & proper management that single facility alone should be able to assemble 14 Kowsar's a year easy & up to 28 or more if they tried to fit more inside 

The main problem I have with it is that if they knew ahead of time that their production rates would be this low (And it's doubtful that they didn't) then they should have picked a bigger and more capable fighter to produce

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> This is why working on light fighter jet's or small frigates like the Mowj class simply makes no sense in a country like Iran and Iran's military needs to do a better job working on force multipliers for platforms!
> 
> If your going to be producing jet engines, radars, avionics, sections of an airframe, landing gears, hydraulics,..... and all the little pieces that make up a fighter each at rates as low as 1 per month & lower then clearly your wasting your recourses if those personal and infrastructure are being used towards such a light and insignificant fighter platform.
> 
> Now if Iran was adding for example 15 fighters comparable to the J-20 or Su-57 to it's fleet in the next 3 years now that is a significant capability and is worth having personal and equipment spend a month trying to build and assemble each of the engines, Radars,.....


Without the resources and just as importantly the political will,you`re not going to achieve very much......or indeed anything in fact.The other problem of course is that without the complementary programs required to build both a modern radar and a bvr missile to equip the kowsar with,then you`re basically just building a brand new obsolescent 1960s era light fighter with wvr capabilities only,which is frankly just a waste of time,effort and resources.Its not just enough to copy it,you have to modernise it too,and that means more than just a glass cockpit.Its almost like the iriaf doesnt realise this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## un4given.1991

from military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## VEVAK

drmeson said:


> Producing Kowsar in mass will not be suitable. This is an underpowered experimental platform. Next generation of Kowsar/Saeghe with domestically produced AESA radars and Turbofans can be produced though.



It's not about producing them in mass it's about producing so little in a 3 year timespan. If they only wanted 14 more kowsars then that's something they should have been able to accomplish within a year and been done with it and moved on

At current rate they are spending 1 month per engine, 2 months for each radar, 2 months on the ejection seat, 2 months for the stabilizer..... 

And if that's the average time your spending resources on each part and component then your clearly doing something wrong

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

un4given.1991 said:


> from military.ir



they look like frames taken from a video, you can find and post the complete video.
thank


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Good news from airforce drill:
Upgraded R73 missile launched from MIG29 managed to successfully intercept a missile fired from F5.

It was around 2013 that airforce talked about the successful test of an anti-missile missile, I don't know if it's the same one, or extend of the technology.

*اخبار رزمایش ارتش| سرنگونی موشک مهاجم توسط جنگنده میگ۲۹ و موشک آر۷۳ *

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

mohsen said:


> Good news from airforce drill:
> Upgraded R73 missile launched from MIG29 managed to successfully intercept a missile fired from F5.
> 
> It was around 2013 that airforce talked about the successful test of an anti-missile missile, I don't know if it's the same one, or extend of the technology.
> 
> *اخبار رزمایش ارتش| سرنگونی موشک مهاجم توسط جنگنده میگ۲۹ و موشک آر۷۳ *



Sorry to burst your bubble but this has been a regular part of the Live fire exercises held by the IRIAF for several years now. One F-5E is followed closely by a lone Mig-29. The F-5 in the lead fires an unguided rocked and quickly breaks away. The Mig-29 fires an R-73 that homes in on the rocket's heat signature.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble but this has been a regular part of the Live fire exercises held by the IRIAF for several years now. One F-5E is followed closely by a lone Mig-29. The F-5 in the lead fires an unguided rocked and quickly breaks away. The Mig-29 fires an R-73 that homes in on the rocket's heat signature.


I've seen that scene, but title says invading missile, not escaping missile!
Hope it's not a bubble!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

IRGC su22 carrying what looks to be a production yassin glide bomb

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> IRGC su22 carrying what looks to be a production yassin glide bomb


SU-22 ? 
I think it's both a FT-7N and a two-seater version of the J-7 / F-7

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> SU-22 ?
> I think it's both a FT-7N and a two-seater version of the J-7 / F-7


Yeah,you`re right.I totally forgot all about those POS [lol]
I just looked at the intake and thought su22.
Frankly I`m surprised that the IRGC would even bother with them to be honest,still you gotta start somewhere,but I`d imagine that after flying su25s and 22s the j-7 would be a real comedown,tho it is supersonic I suppose.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari




----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>


It talks about dogfight between f-14 and Mig-29 . I wished they have shown more about that.

راستی این وسط نیروی هوایی الهی یک شاخه جدید توی نیروی هوایی هستش ؟

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

معاون هماهنگ کننده نیروی هوایی ارتش همچنین از الحاق* جنگنده‌های نسل ۵ به نهاجا در آینده نزدیک خبر داد و گفت: مردم عزیزمان مطمئن باشند به حول و قوه الهی این نسل از جنگنده‌ها را به نمایش خواهیم گذاشت* و آمادگی داریم تا در ادامه راه شهدا و در راستای اجرای منویات مقام عظمای ولایت با قدرت از آسمان کشورمان دفاع کنیم.
??

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> معاون هماهنگ کننده نیروی هوایی ارتش همچنین از الحاق* جنگنده‌های نسل ۵ به نهاجا در آینده نزدیک خبر داد و گفت: مردم عزیزمان مطمئن باشند به حول و قوه الهی این نسل از جنگنده‌ها را به نمایش خواهیم گذاشت* و آمادگی داریم تا در ادامه راه شهدا و در راستای اجرای منویات مقام عظمای ولایت با قدرت از آسمان کشورمان دفاع کنیم.
> ??


????


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>




Wish they show the Qaher taking off, as that would've put may Iran doubters to sleep.


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> IRGC su22 carrying what looks to be a production yassin glide bomb


Heres another pic


----------



## T-72B

raptor22 said:


> معاون هماهنگ کننده نیروی هوایی ارتش همچنین از الحاق* جنگنده‌های نسل ۵ به نهاجا در آینده نزدیک خبر داد و گفت: مردم عزیزمان مطمئن باشند به حول و قوه الهی این نسل از جنگنده‌ها را به نمایش خواهیم گذاشت* و آمادگی داریم تا در ادامه راه شهدا و در راستای اجرای منویات مقام عظمای ولایت با قدرت از آسمان کشورمان دفاع کنیم.
> ??


In the near future? Hopefully this year, I highly bet that the 5th generation fighter is Qaher

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

raptor22 said:


> معاون هماهنگ کننده نیروی هوایی ارتش همچنین از الحاق* جنگنده‌های نسل ۵ به نهاجا در آینده نزدیک خبر داد و گفت: مردم عزیزمان مطمئن باشند به حول و قوه الهی این نسل از جنگنده‌ها را به نمایش خواهیم گذاشت* و آمادگی داریم تا در ادامه راه شهدا و در راستای اجرای منویات مقام عظمای ولایت با قدرت از آسمان کشورمان دفاع کنیم.
> ??


He's likely talking about the F-5s.


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> معاون هماهنگ کننده نیروی هوایی ارتش همچنین از الحاق* جنگنده‌های نسل ۵ به نهاجا در آینده نزدیک خبر داد و گفت: مردم عزیزمان مطمئن باشند به حول و قوه الهی این نسل از جنگنده‌ها را به نمایش خواهیم گذاشت* و آمادگی داریم تا در ادامه راه شهدا و در راستای اجرای منویات مقام عظمای ولایت با قدرت از آسمان کشورمان دفاع کنیم.
> ??



Shayad manzooreshoon hamoon ghaher e….. one can only hope that it's not


----------



## WinterNights

My hope is that they will reveal a project they have for a 5th gen fighter. There is zero chance Iran will show an actual fifth gen fighter anytime soon. However, it is past time they show a project for a fifth gen plane.

If they do show anything it will be either qaher or 5th gen avionics for next gen seaqeh etc. There is also a very slight chance they will show the shafagh or its derivatives. 

Regardless, people should not get their hopes up too high.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

As always we should wait ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran 5th gen fighter project, similar to nuclear weapons program is fractured in different pieces. What that means is there many different parts operating independent of one another in order to reach the common goal. 

The 5th gen project, as evident by the recent attempts to acquire foreign technology info including blueprints for F-35 engines is likely alive at this point.

Test bed projects like Qaher, Sofreh Mahi, Iran heavy fighter project are different elements of said project.

Iran has SOME of the necessary technologies to build a 5th gen fighter (radar absorbing skin, composite, nanotechnology, weapons) But lacks heavily in other areas (organized supply chain, development of natural resources like titanium, and proper production facilities for a 100+ aircraft order, and most important powerful engines).

Iran will likely not field a 5th gen fighter till 2030. Which means prototypes should start appearing 2020-2025 depending on how fast the effort is progressing. Right now the military focus is on air defense and BM/CM production.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

TheImmortal said:


> Iran 5th gen fighter project, similar to nuclear weapons program is fractured in different pieces. What that means is there many different parts operating independent of one another in order to reach the common goal.
> 
> The 5th gen project, as evident by the recent attempts to acquire foreign technology info including blueprints for F-35 engines is likely alive at this point.
> 
> Test bed projects like Qaher, Sofreh Mahi, Iran heavy fighter project are different elements of said project.
> 
> Iran has SOME of the necessary technologies to build a 5th gen fighter (radar absorbing skin, composite, nanotechnology, weapons) But lacks heavily in other areas (organized supply chain, development of natural resources like titanium, and proper production facilities for a 100+ aircraft order, and most important powerful engines).
> 
> Iran will likely not field a 5th gen fighter till 2030. Which means prototypes should start appearing 2020-2025 depending on how fast the effort is progressing. Right now the military focus is on air defense and BM/CM production.


let's hope that's right


----------



## Sineva

*Military cargo plane crashes in Iran, 15 killed*

*https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1P80EM*
*https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1P80EM*
DUBAI (Reuters) - A Boeing 707 military cargo plane crashed in bad weather on Monday west of the Iranian capital, killing 15 out of the 16 people on board, the Iranian army said.A flight engineer survived and was taken to hospital, the army said in a statement carried by the semi-official Fars news agency.

The plane went down near Fath airport, near Karaj in the central Iranian province of Alborz.“A Boeing cargo 707 place carrying meat from Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan had an emergency landing at Fath airport today ... the flight engineer has been dispatched to the hospital,” the army said.“It exited the runway during the landing and caught fire after hitting the wall at the end of the runway,” the army.The army’s statement came after some confusion over who owned the plane. Earlier on Monday, a spokesman for Iran’s civil aviation told had told state TV that the plane belonged to Kyrgyzstan, while a spokeswoman for Kyrgyzstan’s Manas airport said the plane belonged to Iran’s Payam Air.State TV said rescue teams had been sent to the area, between the airports of Fath and Payam. It showed footage of burning wreckage of the plane and a plume of smoke rising from the crash site.


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> *Military cargo plane crashes in Iran, 15 killed*
> 
> *https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1P80EM*
> DUBAI (Reuters) - A Boeing 707 military cargo plane crashed in bad weather on Monday west of the Iranian capital, killing 15 out of the 16 people on board, the Iranian army said.A flight engineer survived and was taken to hospital, the army said in a statement carried by the semi-official Fars news agency.
> 
> The plane went down near Fath airport, near Karaj in the central Iranian province of Alborz.“A Boeing cargo 707 place carrying meat from Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan had an emergency landing at Fath airport today ... the flight engineer has been dispatched to the hospital,” the army said.“It exited the runway during the landing and caught fire after hitting the wall at the end of the runway,” the army.The army’s statement came after some confusion over who owned the plane. Earlier on Monday, a spokesman for Iran’s civil aviation told had told state TV that the plane belonged to Kyrgyzstan, while a spokeswoman for Kyrgyzstan’s Manas airport said the plane belonged to Iran’s Payam Air.State TV said rescue teams had been sent to the area, between the airports of Fath and Payam. It showed footage of burning wreckage of the plane and a plume of smoke rising from the crash site.


Stupid pilot has landed in a wrong airport!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

mohsen said:


> Stupid pilot has landed in a wrong airport!


Maybe it was an emergency situation.(?)


----------



## Dexon




----------



## mohsen

Cthulhu said:


> Maybe it was an emergency situation.(?)


No, There were two airports in Karaj and pilot has landed in wrong airport, then he makes the second mistake and goes beyond the runway!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

There was only one mistake, but deadly. The pliot landed B-707 on small Fath airdrome with runway length of only 1311 meters instead Payam airport with runway length of only 3658m. 1311 meters too short for such big plane as B-707 therefore it goes beyond the runway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> The army’s statement came after some confusion over who owned the plane. Earlier on Monday, a spokesman for Iran’s civil aviation told had told state TV that the plane belonged to Kyrgyzstan, while a spokeswoman for Kyrgyzstan’s Manas airport said the plane belonged to Iran’s Payam Air


Did they decided whose plan it was?


----------



## scythian500

Cthulhu said:


> Maybe it was an emergency situation.(?)


It was an emergency landing.. people testified about smoke coming out of engines while approaching the airport

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> Did they decided whose plan it was?


Considering that its been reported to be a 707,I`d say its probably iranian.



mohsen said:


> No, There were two airports in Karaj and pilot has landed in wrong airport, then he makes the second mistake and goes beyond the runway!


From the sound of it there was only one mistake and that was him landing at the wrong airport,the runway there was just too short for the 707.
Hopefully in future they`ll do something to make recognition of the 2 airports easier.


----------



## VEVAK

Sineva said:


> Considering that its been reported to be a 707,I`d say its probably iranian.
> 
> 
> From the sound of it there was only one mistake and that was him landing at the wrong airport,the runway there was just too short for the 707.
> Hopefully in future they`ll do something to make recognition of the 2 airports easier.



It's just one Airport the other is a recently expended IRGC Helo Base....

Any pilot that can fly a 707 would never confuse a strip that's almost 4km in length with a 1000 meter long strip (unless he was drunk or something) and mehrabad is only seconds away (in the Air) so he had two 4km long runways at two different airports on either side and with an Aircraft that size Air control should have been monitoring it's speed, altitude, heading and it's coordinates upon approach so it doesn't add up.... Neither does transporting meat with a military cargo plane from Kyrgyzstan


----------



## Navigator

Two month ago there civillian MD-88 in last moment avoided such death mistake.

Taban Airlines flight 6225 from Mashhad to Payam, Iran, twice attempted to land at the wrong airport (Fat'h Airport). 
The aircraft, an MD-88 departed Mashhad at 10:16 local time (06:46 UTC). The flight was cleared for an approach to runway 30 at Payam Airport. However, the crew mistook the 3000 ft runway 31L of Fat'h Airport for Payam Airport. The first approach was aborted at 11:26 hours and the aircraft circled for another attempt. The second attempt. This approach was aborted at 11:29 and the aircraft continued for a safe landing at Payam Airport at 11:31. 
AAID Iran reported that the flight reached an altitude of 1 m above ground level during one of the approaches with three preceding EGPWS warnings. The aircraft also experienced 2 abnormal out of limit bank-angles before reaching 100 feet after the go-around. 
The investigators also stated that the flight crew failed to notify authorities about the incident and thus also failed to secure the Cockpit Voice Recorder. 

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=219603


----------



## scythian500

It was a technical failure as announced.. The was a fire on engines visible by people on the ground.. it is clear.. the pilot was very experienced pilot with the rank of General..so as it is logical, the airplane lost control and it was the only option ahead.. They probably did not have enough lift to take it as far as Payam... simple as that..


----------



## mohsen

scythian500 said:


> It was a technical failure as announced.. The was a fire on engines visible by people on the ground.. it is clear.. the pilot was very experienced pilot with the rank of General..so as it is logical, the airplane lost control and it was the only option ahead.. They probably did not have enough lift to take it as far as Payam... simple as that..


No malfunction.
نماینده مردم کرج در مجلس در گفت‌وگوی اختصاصی با فارس: سیستم فنی بویینگ 707 سالم بود/ علت حادثه خطای مهندس پرواز است


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> It's just one Airport the other is a recently expended IRGC Helo Base....
> 
> Any pilot that can fly a 707 would never confuse a strip that's almost 4km in length with a 1000 meter long strip (unless he was drunk or something) and mehrabad is only seconds away (in the Air) so he had two 4km long runways at two different airports on either side and with an Aircraft that size Air control should have been monitoring it's speed, altitude, heading and it's coordinates upon approach so it doesn't add up.... Neither does transporting meat with a military cargo plane from Kyrgyzstan
> 
> View attachment 532893


Part of the problem,at least according to some accounts,was that the aircraft was in trouble before it landed,so if thats the case then its likely that the pilot wanted to get it on the ground quickly which may have affected some of his judgement.The main problem tho` is that both of these airports are on virtually the same heading and very close together,and if one had no familiarity with either of these or the area itself,then it would be very,very easy to get confused and at altitude its not so easy to estimate the length of the runway.Sadly as with most of these sorts of crashes human error likely played a critical part,tho I think the layout of these two airports so close to each other was very likely a major contributing factor,perhaps even an accident waiting to happen.



Navigator said:


> Two month ago there civillian MD-88 in last moment avoided such death mistake.
> 
> Taban Airlines flight 6225 from Mashhad to Payam, Iran, twice attempted to land at the wrong airport (Fat'h Airport).
> The aircraft, an MD-88 departed Mashhad at 10:16 local time (06:46 UTC). The flight was cleared for an approach to runway 30 at Payam Airport. However, the crew mistook the 3000 ft runway 31L of Fat'h Airport for Payam Airport. The first approach was aborted at 11:26 hours and the aircraft circled for another attempt. The second attempt. This approach was aborted at 11:29 and the aircraft continued for a safe landing at Payam Airport at 11:31.
> AAID Iran reported that the flight reached an altitude of 1 m above ground level during one of the approaches with three preceding EGPWS warnings. The aircraft also experienced 2 abnormal out of limit bank-angles before reaching 100 feet after the go-around.
> The investigators also stated that the flight crew failed to notify authorities about the incident and thus also failed to secure the Cockpit Voice Recorder.
> 
> https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=219603


Like I said,an accident waiting to happen.


----------



## sanel1412

Well,as all of you could read from all news from first moment...it was IMERGENCY landing not sheduled,so something must happened in flight otherwise pilot wouldn't call imergency landing.So, even if(we can't say did it ...till investigation is finished) mistake did occur and pilot land on wrong strip ....still fact is that was imergency landing and something happened in flight... Imergency landing is something only flight crew can call and there is reason why they asked for imergency landing.So we don't know is pilot maybe decide to land there because he didn't had choice or because he made mistake and approach to wrong strip while doing imergency landing....any way what ever happened,it wouldn't happen at all if everything is ok in flight... simple because that was not landing destination and only reason they try to land there is imergency....so it is simple not posible that no malfunction occur...it did occur..otherwise pilot/copilot/engineer wouldn't call imergency state and ask for imergency landing...Well this is at least how I understand this....there was confusing news reports but all agree they were doing imergency landing...which mean it was not their destination at all...well,thank god,there is survived crew member,if he(let's hope so)recover investigators will have much better insight...even whenever and wherever military is included we can always assume some information may not be published...


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> No malfunction.
> نماینده مردم کرج در مجلس در گفت‌وگوی اختصاصی با فارس: سیستم فنی بویینگ 707 سالم بود/ علت حادثه خطای مهندس پرواز است


As far as im aware its the pilot who is responsible for decisions not flight engineer also I wonder how karaj MP could reach that conclusion before any investigation conclude anything.



scythian500 said:


> It was a technical failure as announced.. The was a fire on engines visible by people on the ground.. it is clear.. the pilot was very experienced pilot with the rank of General..so as it is logical, the airplane lost control and it was the only option ahead.. They probably did not have enough lift to take it as far as Payam... simple as that..


Rank of the pilot play no role here every body can make a mistake . but aquestion here is looking an engine is not that critical an airplane can easily fly with one of its engine and if the engine caught fire why the pilot didn't turned it off before attempting any landing.


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> As far as im aware its the pilot who is responsible for decisions not flight engineer also I wonder how karaj MP could reach that conclusion before any investigation conclude anything.
> 
> 
> Rank of the pilot play no role here every body can make a mistake . but aquestion here is looking an engine is not that critical an airplane can easily fly with one of its engine and if the engine caught fire why the pilot didn't turned it off before attempting any landing.


Pilot is responsible as long He is capable and healthy...otherwise it is copilot but in most case they will act at flight engeneer advice...you have to understand that today only few aircrafts type require flight engeneer but those who had fligjt engeneer will have divided responsibilities



Hack-Hook said:


> As far as im aware its the pilot who is responsible for decisions not flight engineer also I wonder how karaj MP could reach that conclusion before any investigation conclude anything.
> 
> 
> Rank of the pilot play no role here every body can make a mistake . but aquestion here is looking an engine is not that critical an airplane can easily fly with one of its engine and if the engine caught fire why the pilot didn't turned it off before attempting any landing.


Aircraft can fly without one engine but one thing is flying and maintaining speed and attitude and it is completely different.thing maneuvering at low.attitude without one engine...in such case you don't.have.much space for error...not saying engine is reason for this..as I say we don't know yet what happened...


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Pilot is responsible as long He is capable and healthy...otherwise it is copilot but in most case they will act at flight engeneer advice...you have to understand that today only few aircrafts type require flight engeneer but those who had fligjt engeneer will have divided responsibilities
> 
> 
> Aircraft can fly without one engine but one thing is flying and maintaining speed and attitude and it is completely different.thing maneuvering at low.attitude without one engine...in such case you don't.have.much space for error...not saying engine is reason for this..as I say we don't know yet what happened...


Let just say these even looking one engine was not much of concern and they could easily fly to mehrabad or imma Khomeini without much trouble.
That plane has 4 engine loss of one or two engine is nothing at all the plane even can land with loss of 3 engine and this is the philosophy behind the flight engineer


> The basic philosophy of a three-person flight deck in many flight operations, should an abnormality or emergency arise, is for the captain to hand over the actual flying of the aircraft to the first officer (co-pilot). The captain and FE together review and carry out the necessary actions required to contain and rectify the problem. This spreads the workload and ensures a system of cross-checking which maximizes safety. The captain is the manager and decision maker (pilot not flying, PNF), the first officer, or co-pilot, is the actual flier of the aircraft (pilot flying, PF), and the FE reads the check-lists and executes actions required under the auspices of the captain. There can be occasions when the roles of the pilots during an emergency are reversed, i.e. the copilot becomes the PNF and the captain becomes the PF; one such example was on the A300 B-Series aircraft when there was a complete loss of generator-supplied electrical power, whereupon the standby instruments that were powered were on the captain's side only, requiring the captain to be PF and the PNF and FE to resolve the issue.



Boeing 707 depend on the model need at least 1900m to 2200m for landing so you really can't blame the aircraft for the accident . 
The problem is distinguishing the two runway and mistaking the airports


----------



## scythian500

mohsen said:


> No malfunction.
> نماینده مردم کرج در مجلس در گفت‌وگوی اختصاصی با فارس: سیستم فنی بویینگ 707 سالم بود/ علت حادثه خطای مهندس پرواز است


بنابراین گزارش صبح امروز یک فروند هواپیمای باری بوئینگ ۷۰۷ متعلق به نیروی هوایی ارتش که از بیشکک عازم فرودگاه پیام کرج بود، در فرودگاه فتح کرج* فرود اضطراری* داشت که پس از برخورد به دیواره انتهای باند، دچار سانحه شد.
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/928299/هواپیما-بوئینگ-۷۰۷-چگونه-سقوط-کرد

به گزارش ایرنا، در سانحه هواپیمای بوئینگ 707 ارتش 15 نفر از سرنشینان این هواپیمای باری که از قرقیزستان به مقصد فرودگاه پیام استان البرز در حرکت بود جان خود را از دست دادند.
این هواپیما با* فرود اضطراری* در فرودگاه فتح زیبادشت استان البرز از باند فرودگاه خارج و دچار حادثه شد.


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## Hack-Hook

scythian500 said:


> بنابراین گزارش صبح امروز یک فروند هواپیمای باری بوئینگ ۷۰۷ متعلق به نیروی هوایی ارتش که از بیشکک عازم فرودگاه پیام کرج بود، در فرودگاه فتح کرج* فرود اضطراری* داشت که پس از برخورد به دیواره انتهای باند، دچار سانحه شد.
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/928299/هواپیما-بوئینگ-۷۰۷-چگونه-سقوط-کرد
> 
> به گزارش ایرنا، در سانحه هواپیمای بوئینگ 707 ارتش 15 نفر از سرنشینان این هواپیمای باری که از قرقیزستان به مقصد فرودگاه پیام استان البرز در حرکت بود جان خود را از دست دادند.
> این هواپیما با* فرود اضطراری* در فرودگاه فتح زیبادشت استان البرز از باند فرودگاه خارج و دچار حادثه شد.


حتی اگه حرف فرود اضطراری هم نبود اون هواپیما دو برابر باند برای فرود نیاز داشت بخصوص اینکه ان روزها هوا بارانی و احتمالا باند هم خیس بوده.







البته این دفعه جالب میشه وقتی که به بخش تقصیر را گردن یک نفر انداختن برسیم چون حداقل مهندس پرواز زنده مونده

its not the first time this accident happens , the previous time it was a near miss and the captain come down up to 1m from the airway in its second attempt to land before understanding there is some problem and go to Payam.
this time maybe for bad weather they didn't understand the problem in time . last time they promised they'll make some change in Fath Airport that such accident don't occur again but perhaps they didn't have against time .

more importantly there is one question for me , we ourselves can build all the equipment that is needed to monitor flight but we still build airports without those equipment it's not a valid explanation that this was a helicopter airport and no airplane was supported to land there otherwise why they put an airway there

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> more importantly there is one question for me , we ourselves can build all the equipment that is needed to monitor flight but we still build airports without those equipment it's not a valid explanation that this was a helicopter airport and no airplane was supported to land there otherwise why they put an airway there



I would imagine the runway is their for small military planes or private jets carrying high ranking military personnel. 

Also for emergency.


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

raptor22 said:


> As always we should wait ...



Iran will never show their latest indigenous fighter jets. Most of the ones which are released publicly, are for propaganda purposes. And it is understandable due to threats against them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> I would imagine the runway is their for small military planes or private jets carrying high ranking military personnel.
> 
> Also for emergency.



It's a IRGC Helo base it's not for fixed winged airplanes at all!


----------



## mohsen

Engines are fine, visibility is fine too, people are wondering why it's coming down!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1085068996439887872


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Engines are fine, visibility is fine too, people are wondering why it's coming down!
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1085068996439887872


Well ,the engines look fine ,the plane look intact the visibility seems perfect the weather is fine ,the only question is why it tried to land in Fath airport? 

I can only think of one reason ,the pilot mistake the airport and I wonder why it happened . payam airport is an international airport and probably equipped with necessary equipment to guide the airplane even in zero visibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Well ,the engines look fine ,the plane look intact the visibility seems perfect the weather is fine ,the only question is why it tried to land in Fath airport?
> 
> I can only think of one reason ,the pilot mistake the airport and I wonder why it happened . payam airport is an international airport and probably equipped with necessary equipment to guide the airplane even in zero visibility.



It's not just the pilot I would say Air control at Payam also failed to do it's job properly or was not equipped with the equipment needed to do their job properly because Payam is an Airport that is about a minute away from central Tehran so they should have done a far better job monitoring the aircraft especially if that Aircraft declared an emergency.

And I suggest for those who are interested and can operate Google earth Aircraft sim to take a fly by and see an approximation of what a 1000meter runway as appose to a 4000 meter runway would have looked like from altitude


----------



## TheImmortal

I don’t see the big deal, accidents happen. A simple search will show you Landing at wrong airport happens around the world.

Also look at US military that operates with the toughest precautions and safety regulations. A quick search will show you how many military aircraft related accidents have occurred in the last 6 months alone by US military.

Then compare that to a country like Iran that has a somewhat disregard for safety/regulations. Unfortunately militaries sometimes have to learn the lesson the hard way.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I don’t see the big deal, accidents happen. A simple search will show you Landing at wrong airport happens around the world.
> 
> Also look at US military that operates with the toughest precautions and safety regulations. A quick search will show you how many military aircraft related accidents have occurred in the last 6 months alone by US military.
> 
> Then compare that to a country like Iran that has a somewhat disregard for safety/regulations. Unfortunately militaries sometimes have to learn the lesson the hard way.


It's very big deal , this time the airplane system worked fine and they could not blame it , here some one if did his job correctly 15 people were still alive. and it was clear that the airplane could not land on that airway its a big deal because it was not the first one and previously a passenger plane nearly escaped the same fate.


> Taban Airlines flight 6225 from Mashhad to Payam, Iran, twice attempted to land at the wrong airport (Fat'h Airport).
> The aircraft, an MD-88 departed Mashhad at 10:16 local time (06:46 UTC). The flight was cleared for an approach to runway 30 at Payam Airport. However, the crew mistook the 3000 ft runway 31L of Fat'h Airport for Payam Airport. The first approach was aborted at 11:26 hours and the aircraft circled for another attempt. The second attempt. This approach was aborted at 11:29 and the aircraft continued for a safe landing at Payam Airport at 11:31.
> AAID Iran reported that the flight reached an altitude of 1 m above ground level during one of the approaches with three preceding EGPWS warnings. The aircraft also experienced 2 abnormal out of limit bank-angles before reaching 100 feet after the go-around.
> The investigators also stated that the flight crew failed to notify authorities about the incident and thus also failed to secure the Cockpit Voice Recorder.



those runways are only 10km apart and they are virtually in line , honestly that's a big mistake any plane that want to land in Payam Airport first will see fath Airport runway in the same bearing and same line under himself and if the captain is not aware of the situation he may make such fatal mistake .

to be honest , they need to do something about that runway , the least they can do is to destroy it and build another one but this time make it north south, and they have enough space there for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> It's very big deal , this time the airplane system worked fine and they could not blame it , here some one if did his job correctly 15 people were still alive. and it was clear that the airplane could not land on that airway its a big deal because it was not the first one and previously a passenger plane nearly escaped the same fate.
> 
> 
> those runways are only 10km apart and they are virtually in line , honestly that's a big mistake any plane that want to land in Payam Airport first will see fath Airport runway in the same bearing and same line under himself and if the captain is not aware of the situation he may make such fatal mistake .
> 
> to be honest , they need to do something about that runway , the least they can do is to destroy it and build another one but this time make it north south, and they have enough space there for that.



Actually the cheapest way would be to 1st have ground control warn each pilot upon approach to make sure not to confuse the two runways on every landing and they can also change the landing approach from west to east or they can make GPS a requirement on every jet aircraft that lands there....
They can also add a relatively low cost surveillance thermal imaging camera monitor each landing and approach....
And all these options put together would still be cheaper than building a new runway..

And there is no reason to destroy the runway at the IRGC Helo base when all you have to do is paint it in a way that it looks less like an Airport Runway.....


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> Actually the cheapest way would be to 1st have ground control warn each pilot upon approach to make sure not to confuse the two runways on every landing and they can also change the landing approach from west to east or they can make GPS a requirement on every jet aircraft that lands there....
> They can also add a relatively low cost surveillance thermal imaging camera monitor each landing and approach....
> And all these options put together would still be cheaper than building a new runway..
> 
> And there is no reason to destroy the runway at the IRGC Helo base when all you have to do is paint it in a way that it looks less like an Airport Runway.....


Change the approach won't help and warning the pilots seems have no effect and painting the runway to what , it will fade away under sun and rain .and asking to have GPS is useless and hilarious its an international airport and I assure you your solution mean Iranian airplanes can't land there as I wonder which other country airplane don't have GPS and I wonder which airline want to have flight to payam airport instead of Imam Khomeini airport? And thermal imaging system solve what ?

And those options together maybe cheaper but are not as effective.


----------



## VEVAK

You either remove the paint or paint it in a way that it looks less like a runway 






I would remove the strips and flashes and paint a bunch of large helo signs (Circle and H) from one end of the runway to the other and warn pilots upon approach not to confuse the Helo base with the Airport upon each landing as a matter of policy 

If air control does it's job properly GPS transponder transmitting coordinates, speed and altitude to Air Control should also help if any pilot still confuses the two

A long range thermal imaging camera would help Air control monitor each landing upon approach so once the pilot communicates that he is on approach for landing the camera operator will attempt to lock on the Aircraft feeding video back to air control so they can see that based on it's speed, altitude & heading the aircraft is a good 10km off mark and if they can't see it and lock on they again warn the pilot that they do not have a visual and to double check to make sure he doesn't confuse the two....


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> If air control does it's job properly GPS transponder transmitting coordinates, speed and altitude to Air Control should also help if any pilot still confuses the two


Boeing 707 is older than those things also MD-88 


VEVAK said:


> A long range thermal imaging camera would help Air control monitor each landing upon approach so once the pilot communicates that he is on approach for landing the camera operator will attempt to lock on the Aircraft feeding video back to air control so they can see that based on it's speed, altitude & heading the aircraft is a good 10km off mark and if they can't see it and lock on they again warn the pilot that they do not have a visual and to double check to make sure he doesn't confuse the two....


Radars already do that ,but as you saw it was not enough .



VEVAK said:


> I would remove the strips and flashes and paint a bunch of large helo signs (Circle and H) from one end of the runway to the other and warn pilots upon approach not to confuse the Helo base with the Airport upon each landing as a matter of policy


well , your solution won't change one serious flaw of that runway and that's it end up into private house , in short the genius that approved the runway and the one that has designed it even didn't put 30m between the end of it and private houses , my solution solve that problem just look at the map and you see what a disaster that runway is







and that runway is not ultra modern long runway designed for receiving A380, its a small runway designed for planes like cesna . destroying and rebuilding that runway is far far more cheaper than loosing that Boeing 707


----------



## TheImmortal

Is there any proof that, that runway does not get used at all?

For example, even though it’s a helo basis. Do high ranking military personnel land by small planes or jets ever when arriving from different cities?


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Boeing 707 is older than those things also MD-88
> 
> Radars already do that ,but as you saw it was not enough .
> 
> 
> well , your solution won't change one serious flaw of that runway and that's it end up into private house , in short the genius that approved the runway and the one that has designed it even didn't put 30m between the end of it and private houses , my solution solve that problem just look at the map and you see what a disaster that runway is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and that runway is not ultra modern long runway designed for receiving A380, its a small runway designed for planes like cesna . destroying and rebuilding that runway is far far more cheaper than loosing that Boeing 707



That is an IRGC Helo Base and yes ultra light Aircraft's and UAV's can potentially land there but again it is a HELO base and not meant for fixed winged aircraft at all especially fixed winged jet aircraft of any kind
with Jet aircraft within a minute or so in the air you have Mehrabad, Imam Khomaini & Payam so there is absolutely no reason to change that strip into what it is not!

A long range thermal imaging surveillance with a wide lens long range standard cam, laser range finder, GPS & imaging software wont cost Iran even $20,000 to install (The price of a new Toyota corolla) where as a radar that would bring the same type of accuracy needed to monitor landings would cost far more than that which would be unnecessary at a small airport like Payam

And if Air control warns a pilot twice because he couldn't pickup his approach visually and the pilot still lands at a Helo base then clearly the fault would be solely on the pilot! Especially since the airport isn't exactly on the same heading as Payam and is about a half a degree off mark

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> A long range thermal imaging surveillance with a wide lens long range standard cam, laser range finder, GPS & imaging software wont cost Iran even $20,000 to install (The price of a new Toyota corolla) where as a radar that would bring the same type of accuracy needed to monitor landings would cost far more than that which would be unnecessary at a small airport like Payam


there is no need to install those radars as its more than 40 years that they are in places.

and you have forgotten one thing , no where in the word they control the aircraft all the time , hey gave it a bearing , weather and altitude and permission to land or not and then go and check other airplanes , the accident happens in less than one minutes , the time between payam and fath airport at approaching speed for a 707 is only one minute or so, very little time for traffic control to warn the pilot and very little time for the pilot .
suggest you watch the movie sully , in it they show how long it take for pilot to make decision and how those small seconds change the fate of airplane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> there is no need to install those radars as its more than 40 years that they are in places.
> 
> and you have forgotten one thing , no where in the word they control the aircraft all the time , hey gave it a bearing , weather and altitude and permission to land or not and then go and check other airplanes , the accident happens in less than one minutes , the time between payam and fath airport at approaching speed for a 707 is only one minute or so, very little time for traffic control to warn the pilot and very little time for the pilot .
> suggest you watch the movie sully , in it they show how long it take for pilot to make decision and how those small seconds change the fate of airplane.



Landing a 707 at any airport you need to be given permission for landing and a runway number and that runway number in it has the heading you need to take for landing and with one strip runways your heading number will be your runway number FYI the heading the pilot took for landing at that strip was a degree off mark now for smaller aircraft a degree off is easily adjustable but on a 707 you need to be on the exact same heading when you attempt a landing 

Regardless once you've given permission for landing that's when you give your 1st warning and then once the pilot declares that he is coming on approach if your cam's haven't been able to pick him up yet you warn him that you either don't have a visual or that you see him and he is off mark and you warn him again to check his heading and make sure he is not going to the wrong airport.... 

Payam is a one strip runway and air control at Payam would have nothing else to do but to make sure the Aircraft lands safely because landing is the hardest part of flying and it's when most accidents happen.


----------



## OldTwilight

change thread name to :* IRIAF | RIP (Reset In Peace)*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> Landing a 707 at any airport you need to be given permission for landing and a runway number and that runway number in it has the heading you need to take for landing and with one strip runways your heading number will be your runway number FYI the heading the pilot took for landing at that strip was a degree off mark now for smaller aircraft a degree off is easily adjustable but on a 707 you need to be on the exact same heading when you attempt a landing
> 
> Regardless once you've given permission for landing that's when you give your 1st warning and then once the pilot declares that he is coming on approach if your cam's haven't been able to pick him up yet you warn him that you either don't have a visual or that you see him and he is off mark and you warn him again to check his heading and make sure he is not going to the wrong airport....


the problem is that the heading is correct , the pilot had permission for landing , the permission is granted when the aircraft is out of visual , so the pilot see an airstrip and say what why I'm so high so he think the instrument is wrong and he goes for the airport or let just say dive for the airport (what you see at the video ) so he don't miss it and the result is he approach the band even faster and that mean less time .

by the way its not tower duty to find the airport for the aircraft it's pilot duty .
the tower have other duties


> Air traffic controllers typically do the following:
> 
> 
> Issue landing and takeoff instructions to pilots
> Monitor and direct the movement of aircraft on the ground and in the air, using radar, computers, or visual references
> Control all ground traffic at airports, including baggage vehicles and airport workers
> Manage communications by transferring control of departing flights to traffic control centers and accepting control of arriving flights
> Provide information to pilots, such as weather updates, runway closures, and other critical information
> Alert airport response staff, in the event of an aircraft emergency





> *Tower controllers* direct the movement of vehicles on runways and taxiways. They check flight plans, give pilots clearance for takeoff or landing, and direct the movement of aircraft and other traffic on the runways and other parts of the airport. Most work from control towers, as they generally must be able to see the traffic they control.
> 
> *Approach and departure controllers* ensure that aircraft traveling within an airport’s airspace maintain minimum separation for safety. They give clearances to enter controlled airspace and hand off control of aircraft to en route controllers. They use radar equipment to monitor flight paths and work in buildings known as Terminal Radar Approach Control Centers (TRACONs). They also provide information to pilots, such as weather conditions and other critical notices.
> 
> *En route controllers* monitor aircraft once they leave an airport’s airspace. They work at air route traffic control centers located throughout the country, which typically are not located at airports.



and as the runways are in same path and have the same bearing , those Air traffic controllers did their job correctly , By the way Civil radars can't tell you the altitude of the aircraft co the traffic control won't know if the aircraft reduce the altitude for landing .(unless the aircraft announce it's altitude and then that is barometric altitude not actual one)
by the way I'm not sure that if Payam airport even have that radar and Fath airport don't have any RADAR.


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> the problem is that the heading is correct , the pilot had permission for landing , the permission is granted when the aircraft is out of visual , so the pilot see an airstrip and say what why I'm so high so he think the instrument is wrong and he goes for the airport or let just say dive for the airport (what you see at the video ) so he don't miss it and the result is he approach the band even faster and that mean less time .
> 
> by the way its not tower duty to find the airport for the aircraft it's pilot duty .
> the tower have other duties
> 
> 
> 
> and as the runways are in same path and have the same bearing , those Air traffic controllers did their job correctly , By the way Civil radars can't tell you the altitude of the aircraft co the traffic control won't know if the aircraft reduce the altitude for landing .(unless the aircraft announce it's altitude and then that is barometric altitude not actual one)
> by the way I'm not sure that if Payam airport even have that radar and Fath airport don't have any RADAR.



Yes you don't always pick up a visual when you give clearance for landing but again your waning the aircraft of another strip and not to confuse the two especially when he is approaching from the west 
Also when the pilot declares that he is coming in for a landing that is when you need to have a visual or something is wrong because at that point he should be visible! 
You don't just give clearance and go about your day…. 
And it also helps if the IRGC stirp has large Helo signs so it looks less like a runway..... FYI those houses were built after the strip was already there.....

I suggest you go to google earth, hit tools and enter flight simulator and attempt a landing at Payam and yes it is not an accurate picture but simply an approximation and yes a 707 has bad visibility but pay more attention to your instruments and the direction and heading you need to be on for landing at Payam and take a good look at what a 1000 meter long strip looks like


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Are engines displayed here built in Iran? 

The progress of Iran's domestic arms industry is amazing. They definitely tell Africa, Middle East, and South America what it takes to withstand the pressure and develop their defensive needs domestically. Thank God. More power to them. 



skyshadow said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Are engines displayed here built in Iran?
> 
> The progress of Iran's domestic arms industry is amazing. They definitely tell Africa, Middle East, and South America what it takes to withstand the pressure and develop their defensive needs domestically. Thank God. More power to them.



yes they are made in Iran. we have to be in this level because we want to build a passenger aircraft some time in the next 5 years.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ی-ایران-5-سال-دیگر-هواپیمای-مسافربری-می-سازیم

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Nasr

I do hope that Iran musters it's strength and implements a robust military modernization program. I do NOT support Iran's leadership, but I do wish for another Muslim country to be strong and not hamstrung to the West, other than Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*شاهین؛ کورکننده رادارها

پاد اخلالگر و فریب هواپایه شاهین که بر روی جنگنده‌های نهاجا نصب می‌شود نیز دیگر دستاوردی است که برای نخستین بار در نمایشگاه «اقتدار ۴۰» به نمایش درآمده است. این پاد پس از فعال شدن قادر است رادارها و تجهیزات الکترونیک نیروهای دشمن را در باند X دچار اخلال کند.*







*we got from here to there in less than 5 years









*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Disappointing exhibits. I can’t believe they are showing off their 1960’s Huey’s and cobras.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

skyshadow said:


>



This cruise missile is really small... how they could fit all the mechanism inside a tiny missile like this!? and is it even cost effective to have a cruise missile that small?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

scythian500 said:


> This cruise missile is really small... how they could fit all the mechanism inside a tiny missile like this!? and is it even cost effective to have a cruise missile that small?



Think its just an anti tank missile like Hellfire.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Oldman1 said:


> Think its just an anti tank missile like Hellfire.


I wonder how they managed to made the missile weight half while increase its range by factor of 4. I knew lighter weight help but to this extend ?

by the way you think how much TV guidance of this compare to laser and radar guidance of Hellfire


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I wonder how they managed to made the missile weight half while increase its range by factor of 4. I knew lighter weight help but to this extend ?
> 
> by the way you think how much TV guidance of this compare to laser and radar guidance of Hellfire



Cost of laser vs TV should be negligible. TV guidance was used in Vietnam era along side laser guidance.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Cost of laser vs TV should be negligible. TV guidance was used in Vietnam era along side laser guidance.


Well here my guess is they wanted to reduce the weight as much as possible . but what I'm interested is the efficacy of both system in war situation. 
A TV guided system is harder to get warning against but on other hand I guess you loose fire and forget.


----------



## sha ah

scythian500 said:


> This cruise missile is really small... how they could fit all the mechanism inside a tiny missile like this!? and is it even cost effective to have a cruise missile that small?



It's obviously for engaging short range targets. Pretty interesting.




TheImmortal said:


> Disappointing exhibits. I can’t believe they are showing off their 1960’s Huey’s and cobras.



It's actually incredible that they've been able to keep them air worthy after all these years. Most aviation experts didn't think they could & most technicians leaving Iran after the revolution thought that Iran's airforce would be rendered useless within a year. Those helicopters have so many upgrades that they're basically like new. Iran's isn't the only country still using these them, however it is the only country still using them that is not able to attain support or parts from the country of origin.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

scythian500 said:


> This cruise missile is really small... how they could fit all the mechanism inside a tiny missile like this!? and is it even cost effective to have a cruise missile that small?


This is the prototype and may not reach mass production at all, like Qased 3 cruise missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

skyshadow said:


> mass production at all, like Qased 3 cruise missile


https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/211050/تجهیز-جنگنده-های-ارتش-با-قاصد3

Seems they are very serious about Ghased 3 heavy weight smart bomb to me..

Imagine what such a devastating warhead can do if u can release it from 60 to 100 km away and leave the scene! Imagine Israel high value targets from Syrian air space for example.. or PGCC countries' desalination, airports, bases, power plants released from Persian Gulf space... I think in this case they need to add GPS, GLONASS option to it next to other systems already in place though


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Well here my guess is they wanted to reduce the weight as much as possible . but what I'm interested is the efficacy of both system in war situation.
> A TV guided system is harder to get warning against but on other hand I guess you loose fire and forget.



Laser is not fire and forget. Laser must be trained on target till Missile close enough to target, for fighter bomber jet that’s not a problem flying high. For a helicopter that puts it in harms way.

I believe TV guidance can eventually lock on target once at appropriate distance (center of image).

TV guidance should have greater distance, as laser beam loses effectiveness as distance passes and furthermore aerosol gas canisters can scatter beam further thus reducing its strength.

Nonetheless, no right or wrong answer. But cost shouldn’t be a factor

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Laser is not fire and forget. Laser must be trained on target till Missile close enough to target, for fighter bomber jet that’s not a problem flying high. For a helicopter that puts it in harms way.
> 
> I believe TV guidance can eventually lock on target once at appropriate distance (center of image).
> 
> TV guidance should have greater distance, as laser beam loses effectiveness as distance passes and furthermore aerosol gas canisters can scatter beam further thus reducing its strength.
> 
> Nonetheless, no right or wrong answer. But cost shouldn’t be a factor


but isn't Hellfire a fire and forgot missile ?


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> but isn't Hellfire a fire and forgot missile ?



Not laser guided versions of Hellfire.

Hellfire longbow variant is fire and forget but that uses a millimeter wave radar seeker along with inertial guidance.


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

Iranian Su-24 bombers:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Bombing by Iranian Saeqeh:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Nohed-65: 


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

I don’t know why but why Iran never touch their Fulcrums? Like has been over 20 years since they bough it but why they haven’t upgrade it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

T-72B said:


> I don’t know why but why Iran never touch their Fulcrums? Like has been over 20 years sincerely they bough it but why they haven’t upgrade it?


 I hope that in the Near future Iran will upgrade its MiG-29 fleet with a similar radar as what they are upgrading the F-4 fleet with! I hope to see Iran also develop a new medium range Air to air missile to replace its old stock of Aim-7s and R-27s!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

I would love to see Iran build atleast one squadron of the Kowsars/Saeqhehs with twin fins & a grey color scheme, much like the Bahraini, Netherland, Turkish, Swiss, Chilean, South Korean, etc. I mean the blue & traditional green/brown is alright, however I would much prefer the grey. Even repainting some of the Saeqhehs of Kowsars would be awesome in my opinion. 





Iranian twin fin Saeqheh F-5 traditional green, brown camouflage






Iranian Saeqheh blue lightning color scheme
















Bahraini single seat F-5 with grey color scheme






Swiss F-5 with grey color scheme











Korean F-5 single seat with grey color scheme






Chilean single seat F-5 with grey color scheme






Swiss again






Multiple Swiss single seat F-5's with grey color scheme






Swiss single seat F-5 gliding through a mountainous terrain backdrop






Swiss






Swiss single seat F-5 from behind, carrying one sidewinder missile


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari




----------



## sahureka2

Mig-23 in Iran !! surely it will be a former Iraqi MiG-23, but it's the first time I see it with the Iranian IRIAF insignia




observing the previous camouflage of the SU-22, the photo should have been taken a few years ago.
PS:
Some of the users know how many Iraqi Mig-23s have been transferred to Iran ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## N_Al40

Major news about military development and progress in the IRIAF is expected this Friday. No further details released.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

N_Al40 said:


> Major news about military development and progress in the IRIAF is expected this Friday. No further details released.



What's the source the bro?


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1093225070200344577

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1093225070200344577



Let's hope for some sweet news

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

F-4s+

Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
Iran source


New cell
New cockpit
New radar
New electronics

They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.

I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## T-72B

sahureka2 said:


> Mig-23 in Iran !! surely it will be a former Iraqi MiG-23, but it's the first time I see it with the Iranian IRIAF insignia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> observing the previous camouflage of the SU-22, the photo should have been taken a few years ago.
> PS:
> Some of the users know how many Iraqi Mig-23s have been transferred to Iran ?


iirc around 8 were evacuated to iraq, what a useless fleet and thankfully all of it non operational


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> iirc around 8 were evacuated to iraq, what a useless fleet and thankfully all of it non operational


Well I hope somebody don't think like su-22 it's good to fit these with modeen avionics .
At least those planes could carry enough loads and had the range.


----------



## T-72B

Hack-Hook said:


> Well I hope somebody don't think like su-22 it's good to fit these with modeen avionics .
> At least those planes could carry enough loads and had the range.


What those Su-22 has any deal with Iran MiG-23?


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> What those Su-22 has any deal with Iran MiG-23?


Iran had several su-22 in storage that we upgraded recently and gave to irgc air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

Hack-Hook said:


> Iran had several su-22 in storage that we upgraded recently and gave to irgc air force.


But still a disappointment only 10 were upgraded from 20 Su-22 fleet


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> But still a disappointment only 10 were upgraded from 20 Su-22 fleet


Hope it's more like 10 delivered, iran seriously needs more bomber.


----------



## T-72B

Hack-Hook said:


> Hope it's more like 10 delivered, iran seriously needs more bomber.


Speaking of Bombers does Iran still using SU-24? And it’s currently 24 of them still in service right?



Mr Iran Eye said:


> F-4s+
> 
> Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
> Iran source
> 
> 
> New cell
> New cockpit
> New radar
> New electronics
> 
> They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
> The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.
> 
> I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed
> 
> View attachment 537374
> View attachment 537375


I bet VEVAK reaction would be “thiz project Izz dead!111!1!


----------



## sahureka2

Mr Iran Eye said:


> F-4s+
> 
> Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
> Iran source
> 
> 
> New cell
> New cockpit
> New radar
> New electronics
> 
> They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
> The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.
> 
> I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed
> 
> View attachment 537374
> View attachment 537375



some other image or video of this F-4S under construction
thank you


----------



## T-72B

And also Specification of F4S pls like it'i radar,engine etc


----------



## Hack-Hook

T-72B said:


> Speaking of Bombers does Iran still using SU-24? And it’s currently 24 of them still in service right?


Yes we still use them and no we had some crash.


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> F-4s+
> 
> Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
> Iran source
> 
> 
> New cell
> New cockpit
> New radar
> New electronics
> 
> They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
> The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.
> 
> I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed
> 
> View attachment 537374
> View attachment 537375



Iran has so far reverse engineered and built 2 F-4's that I know of now the 1st with the old avionics and that happened some years back and I don't know much about the 2nd one but yes if all Iranian F-4's hadn't been overhauled with a lot of Iranian parts and smuggled parts none of them would be flying today! These are almost 50 year old Supersonic fighter jet that fought an 8 year long war 

As for upgraded cockpits and avionics Iran started an upgrade program for it's F-4's with Chinese radars and avionics some time back (within the last decade) and Iran's KOSAR project to further improve on that and equip them with 4th gen avionics 

That said, F-4 Airframe is a poorly designed airframe for a supersonic fighter jet and a lot of it's flaws are related to the fact that the Americans wanted a high powered supersonic fighter that could takeoff, land & fit on a carrier giving the fighter slanted foldable wings, angled high placed tailorons situated above and behind the engines to minimize ground effect and increase stability for carrier landing…. And these characteristics combined give the Aircraft poor maneuverability, cause the aircraft to shake at high speeds, increases RCS and drag higher than it should be. Making the F-4 Airframe not a suitable airframe to reverse engineer and produce

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

VEVAK said:


> Iran has so far reverse engineered and built 2 F-4's that I know of now the 1st with the old avionics and that happened some years back and I don't know much about the 2nd one but yes if all Iranian F-4's hadn't been overhauled with a lot of Iranian parts and smuggled parts none of them would be flying today! These are almost 50 year old Supersonic fighter jet that fought an 8 year long war
> 
> As for upgraded cockpits and avionics Iran started an upgrade program for it's F-4's with Chinese radars and avionics some time back (within the last decade) and Iran's KOSAR project to further improve on that and equip them with 4th gen avionics
> 
> That said, F-4 Airframe is a poorly designed airframe for a supersonic fighter jet and a lot of it's flaws are related to the fact that the Americans wanted a high powered supersonic fighter that could takeoff, land & fit on a carrier giving the fighter slanted foldable wings, angled high placed tailorons situated above and behind the engines to minimize ground effect and increase stability for carrier landing…. And these characteristics combined give the Aircraft poor maneuverability, cause the aircraft to shake at high speeds, increases RCS and drag higher than it should be. Making the F-4 Airframe not a suitable airframe to reverse engineer and produce




Between 6 and 8 would have been built and this is preparing for the new heavy plane that is already running. Iran can show you a new engine 1 year after it's in action and even more. Often when Iran makes an announcement of a mill machine, the advance can be 1 to 2 years and even more

Think about the announcement process of the Iranian army that I love because they are more advanced than they say. I suspect a ghost military budget that is not part of the public data. An F-4 S + is for me a very good surprising fighter .. You need to dissect the most recent photos and videos because there are things to discover

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> Major news about military development and progress in the IRIAF is expected this Friday. No further details released.



No news?


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

WinterNights said:


> Let's hope for some sweet news


what was the news?


----------



## skyshadow

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> what was the news?


It did not happened


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

New missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> New missile
> 
> View attachment 537886
> View attachment 537887



How is a sidewinder a new missile?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal said:


> How is a sidewinder a new missile?


Upgraded

New electronics, new radar = Missile upgrade

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mr Iran Eye said:


> New missile
> 
> View attachment 537886
> View attachment 537887



I wonder if its the Fattar-1 (AIM-9P body upgraded with R-73 type Seeker)


----------



## sahureka2

what will be installed? cameras or what? 
or did they hide the numeric code of the plane


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sahureka2 said:


> what will be installed? cameras or what?
> or did they hide the numeric code of the plane


They are just covering up its serial number. If you look at the tail above the flag you will see they have done it there as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

skyshadow said:


> It did not happened


The underground missile factories plus Hoveyze and Dezful missiles!!?

General Haji zadeh said we will have good news this Friday and he did what he promised.. it is actually the most strategically import unveiling among all others this year:




سردار حاجی زاده فرمانده نیروی هوافضای #سپاه: جمعه منتظر خبرهای مهمی در زمینه پیشرفت نظامی باشید

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

scythian500 said:


> it is actually the most strategically import unveiling among all others this year:



the Dezful missile?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

ITS HAPPENING!!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1095276104498192385


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

skyshadow said:


> It did not happened


it makes more sense if that is what they meant but they delayed it a bit? ^

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

N_Al40 said:


> ITS HAPPENING!!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1095276104498192385


At no point in the video there was an explicit mention of Q-313 or its in flight debut.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

arashkamangir said:


> At no point in the video there was an explicit mention of Q-313 or its in flight debut.



Yes but the users commentary seems to suggest so

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> it makes more sense if that is what they meant but they delayed it a bit? ^


 well we have bavar 373 and qaher 313 and ... so delays are not that important.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

N_Al40 said:


> Yes but the users commentary seems to suggest so



well im not familiar with the user hence i can't assume he has extra knowledge. I would love to see Q-313 flight video but I also don't want to get my hopes up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

arashkamangir said:


> well im not familiar with the user hence i can't assume he has extra knowledge. I would love to see Q-313 flight video but I also don't want to get my hopes up.



Look at the comment @SOHEIL made in the Qaher-313 thread...


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> Look at the comment @SOHEIL made in the Qaher-313 thread...



lol Soheil knows as much as the guy at the Corner baghali store.

I remember him from PDF days. He has zero inside scoop.


----------



## sepasgozar

TheImmortal said:


> lol Soheil knows as much as the guy at the Corner baghali store.
> 
> I remember him from PDF days. He has zero inside scoop.


I think you mean “IDF” days. I too was around those days and remember Soheil sharing quite intricate graphic designs of aerospace and missile technologies he used to construct. He is astute in his perceptions and unless you have clear cases to discredit him, I don’t think it’s fair to make generalizations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

TheImmortal said:


> lol Soheil knows as much as the guy at the Corner baghali store.
> 
> I remember him from PDF days. He has zero inside scoop.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Mr Iran Eye said:


> F-4s+
> 
> Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
> Iran source
> 
> 
> New cell
> New cockpit
> New radar
> New electronics
> 
> They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
> The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.
> 
> I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed
> 
> View attachment 537374
> View attachment 537375



And other F-4 Phantoms are subjected to extensive repair work and partially rebuilt

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Well,for long time Iran is known for restoring totaly crashed aircrafts,which means they had to literary produce all parts again and this is well known fact,recentlyI spoted also mig-29 airframe parts also completly new...now when Iran is capable to produce modern avionics and weapons for it airforce I think very soon Iran will make major braketrought which is actually hardest part,we all know ofcourse that engine is major problem...China had access to foreign technology but Iran has to do it from scratch ...I remeber very well around 1999-2000 China only BVR capable fighter was Su-27 with R-27 missile and they had it maybe 100..their complete fleet was that consisted from Mig-19 and mig-21 copies and some other aircrafts but also very old..yeah..they literary had 100 BVR capable aircraft(very limited BVR with R-27)...in same time Iran already operated most advanced aircraft and ARH guided BVR missile for 20 years..thus flyed also BVR capable Mig-29,F-4..etc...if I told anyone in that time that China will in 10 years start with j-10 production and start fifth gen. projects people would probably asking..wtf..ho is this moron,I would probably destroy all my reputation(if had any in that time ...Thing is, it is most important and hardest part to actually start produce anything at some scale.. reach industrial production level..Iran is really in hard position when it comes to this,since they had to develop everything from scratch..I suppose they succeed to get some technology transfer but still ...I mean just look..Russia..China...Russsia has experience buiding aircrafts for decades..many things they inveted literary..but look their aircrafts..AN-148 is using Intel chips...They can't sell super jet 100 to Iran because they use more than 10% parts made in USA...also their new fighter air crafts and all new modernisation include western,Korean,Japanese and Chinese components..I wouldn't even say that even their state airliner is flying boings and airbus...I'm mentioning this because even countries like Russia that can produce what ever they want gofor foreign components while in same time working on own to reach same level of quality...Iran can't unfortunalely do that...I guarantee you we woul see 4th gen aircraft long time ago if they have access to technology..I mean they would probably do like everyone else..lunch aircraft with foreign engines and latter when domestic became available switch to own engine...But,instead they have to built every shraf byitself..even if they got tech transfer..still you have to built it..built facilites..have quality people..I mean,when Yugoslavi bought t-72A license we got more than 120.000 pages of license but Russians didn't came and build facilites for US,license means only you got project and that is it...we still had to produce SUP(FCS)..engine....gun..every other part..and few first examples actually were made from imported parts..point is ,even if Iran got some project or license still without access to technology,industrial machinery,or some very rare metals..well just look where other countries are in this field..even they can buy anything they want....this is main reason I'm not fast to show how I'm disapointed or throw critics after some projects are delayed... I mean many things Iran is deveeloping now are literary first time they actually do it and you can't expect state of the art from first try...And we have to be realistic...they must do all of this without colapsing economy...if you consider they are engaged in libanon,syria,yemen,iraq..etc..I'm not sure how they succeed to found all of this under constant sanctions, threat of war constantly for 40 years is enoughf alone to throw away anyone thinking to invest money...

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

*Iran’s Aging American-Made Jets Could Fly Through the 2040s*

*The Iranian regime’s Gen X fighter jets could end up flying for more than sixty years.*

By Kyle Mizokami 
Feb 11, 2019

Iran is flying antiques.

It's not the only one. After all, we've covered the travails of America's rapidly aging Air Force, such as the fact that airmen could fly and maintain the same B-52s as their grandfathers. But at least the Pentagon has new tech and new planes in the pipeline.

The Iranian military is in a stickier predicament. Political isolation, combined with an unwillingness by many countries to sell Iran new equipment, means its fleet fighters bought in the mid-1970s—from the United States, no less—must fly on for the foreseeable future, with homegrown know-how the main thing keeping them airworthy. 

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

*Ally to Enemy*
In the 1970s, Iran was a staunch ally of the United States. Ruled by the Shah and financed by oil wealth, Iran purchased huge quantities of American equipment including 166 Northrop F-5E/F Tiger II jets. Based on the F-5A/B Freedom Fighter, the Tiger II was a single-engine fighter capable of both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. A low-cost, low-maintenance fighter designed for export to America’s allies, the Tiger II was similar to today’s F-16 Fighting Falcon. The plane is obsolete by today’s standards. 

The 1979 islamic revolution in Iran radically upset the country’s relationship with the United States. Following the overthrow of the Shan and the Iranian hostage crisis, Washington quickly went from ally to enemy.

That presented a serious problem for the country’s military. Largely using American equipment, but regarding America as an enemy, Iran’s armed forces have struggled to keep the military machine going. 

*Reverse-Engineering the Present, Cannibalizing the Past*
_




An Iranian Saegheh twin-seat F-5 variant and F-5 fly over an explosion, 2009.
GETTY IMAGESAFP
The story of Iran’s Tiger IIs may be the most telling example. According to Aviation Week & Space Technology, the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force still operates 44 F-5Es (single seat jets) and 15 F-5Fs (two seat combat-capable trainers). In the 2000s, Iran’s government instructed the military, government, and even academic world to modernize the jets to a new standard to keep them flying. As a result, today Iran can build most of the parts that make up a Tiger II, but not all of them. It appears the country still has to recycle some parts from Tiger IIs no longer flying.

AWST reports that Iran’s government coordinated a Tiger II upgrade effort that ended up involving “10 top Iranian universities, 72 privately run companies, 44 suppliers and 63 science and research foundations.” Today, the Iranian Turbine Industries Organization can build its own General Electric J85-GE-21 afterburning turbojet engines, the original engine that powers the Tiger II, making 80 percent of the parts. The remaining 20 percent of parts are American-made real General Electric parts likely predating the 1979 revolution. 

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW_

_Iran is now able to produce its own F-5F two-seater jets—mostly. The country can build almost all of the jet, with the exceptions of 5 percent of its avionics systems and 25 percent of its other components. The remaining parts are either purchased on the open market or cannibalized from non-operational Tiger IIs, of which Iran has nearly 100. 

The new, modernized F-5Fs have a weird, cobbled-together list of features. The jet uses both GPS and the Russian GLONASS system for navigation. While using GLONASS makes sense, given Iran’s hostility to the United States, the fact that the jet still has GPS is a bit puzzling. The radar set is an Iranian copy of a Chinese copy of an Italian radar. Short-range missile armament includes pre-revolution AIM-9J Sidewinders and Chinese air-to-air missiles.

Iran may some day buy new fighter jets, but until the regime’s political isolation ends, the country’s air force simply must make do. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...44/iran-fighter-jets-american-made-gen-x-f-5/_

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> *Iran’s Aging American-Made Jets Could Fly Through the 2040s*
> 
> *The Iranian regime’s Gen X fighter jets could end up flying for more than sixty years.*
> 
> By Kyle Mizokami
> Feb 11, 2019
> 
> Iran is flying antiques.
> 
> It's not the only one. After all, we've covered the travails of America's rapidly aging Air Force, such as the fact that airmen could fly and maintain the same B-52s as their grandfathers. But at least the Pentagon has new tech and new planes in the pipeline.
> 
> The Iranian military is in a stickier predicament. Political isolation, combined with an unwillingness by many countries to sell Iran new equipment, means its fleet fighters bought in the mid-1970s—from the United States, no less—must fly on for the foreseeable future, with homegrown know-how the main thing keeping them airworthy.
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW
> 
> *Ally to Enemy*
> In the 1970s, Iran was a staunch ally of the United States. Ruled by the Shah and financed by oil wealth, Iran purchased huge quantities of American equipment including 166 Northrop F-5E/F Tiger II jets. Based on the F-5A/B Freedom Fighter, the Tiger II was a single-engine fighter capable of both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. A low-cost, low-maintenance fighter designed for export to America’s allies, the Tiger II was similar to today’s F-16 Fighting Falcon. The plane is obsolete by today’s standards.
> 
> The 1979 islamic revolution in Iran radically upset the country’s relationship with the United States. Following the overthrow of the Shan and the Iranian hostage crisis, Washington quickly went from ally to enemy.
> 
> That presented a serious problem for the country’s military. Largely using American equipment, but regarding America as an enemy, Iran’s armed forces have struggled to keep the military machine going.
> 
> *Reverse-Engineering the Present, Cannibalizing the Past*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An Iranian Saegheh twin-seat F-5 variant and F-5 fly over an explosion, 2009.
> GETTY IMAGESAFP
> The story of Iran’s Tiger IIs may be the most telling example. According to Aviation Week & Space Technology, the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force still operates 44 F-5Es (single seat jets) and 15 F-5Fs (two seat combat-capable trainers). In the 2000s, Iran’s government instructed the military, government, and even academic world to modernize the jets to a new standard to keep them flying. As a result, today Iran can build most of the parts that make up a Tiger II, but not all of them. It appears the country still has to recycle some parts from Tiger IIs no longer flying.
> 
> AWST reports that Iran’s government coordinated a Tiger II upgrade effort that ended up involving “10 top Iranian universities, 72 privately run companies, 44 suppliers and 63 science and research foundations.” Today, the Iranian Turbine Industries Organization can build its own General Electric J85-GE-21 afterburning turbojet engines, the original engine that powers the Tiger II, making 80 percent of the parts. The remaining 20 percent of parts are American-made real General Electric parts likely predating the 1979 revolution.
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW_
> 
> _Iran is now able to produce its own F-5F two-seater jets—mostly. The country can build almost all of the jet, with the exceptions of 5 percent of its avionics systems and 25 percent of its other components. The remaining parts are either purchased on the open market or cannibalized from non-operational Tiger IIs, of which Iran has nearly 100.
> 
> The new, modernized F-5Fs have a weird, cobbled-together list of features. The jet uses both GPS and the Russian GLONASS system for navigation. While using GLONASS makes sense, given Iran’s hostility to the United States, the fact that the jet still has GPS is a bit puzzling. The radar set is an Iranian copy of a Chinese copy of an Italian radar. Short-range missile armament includes pre-revolution AIM-9J Sidewinders and Chinese air-to-air missiles.
> 
> Iran may some day buy new fighter jets, but until the regime’s political isolation ends, the country’s air force simply must make do.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...44/iran-fighter-jets-american-made-gen-x-f-5/_


Is "kyle mizokami" babak taghvaees new pseudonym?,because it really sounds like one of his articles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

You know what though ? Iran does need new jets. The reverse engineered F-5's are a good way of supplementing the airforce, however in the next few years the F-4's & oldest jets in Iran's inventory must go. 



Sineva said:


> Is "kyle mizokami" babak taghvaees new pseudonym?,because it really sounds like one of his articles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Sineva said:


> Is "kyle mizokami" babak taghvaees new pseudonym?,because it really sounds like one of his articles.


 This clown calls the F-5A/B a "single-engine fighter" yet wants to tell us the percentage of what component that, Iran does not build herself, when it comes to Iran's F-5E/F based ingenious aircraft. Terrible article!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-72B

Sineva said:


> Is "kyle mizokami" babak taghvaees new pseudonym?,because it really sounds like one of his articles.


Ah good old kyle he is notorious for writting about Karrar tank in his Popular Mechanics web and called what, you guess it a mere cardboard with some plastic make up propaganda 
If you want to see his face i will show you

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

I Wouldnt be surprised if Iran currently cannot build an entire F-5.

The OWJ has not been shown mass produced and every F-5 variant has been produced in very limited numbers, which points to not having a true mass production line and supply chain available.


----------



## Arminkh

T-72B said:


> Ah good old kyle he is notorious for writting about Karrar tank in his Popular Mechanics web and called what, you guess it a mere cardboard with some plastic make up propaganda
> If you want to see his face i will show you
> View attachment 539310


Yap, that is exactly who he is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "TheImmortal, post: 11171002, member: 183490"] Non sarei sorpreso se l'Iran al momento non è successo costruire un intero F-5.

L'OWJ non è stato presentato in serie e non è una linea di produzione. [/ CITAZIONE]


TheImmortal said:


> I Wouldnt be surprised if Iran currently cannot build an entire F-5.
> 
> The OWJ has not been shown mass produced and *every F-5 variant has been produced in very limited numbers, which points to not having a true mass production line and supply chain available*.



why do they have to show them?
maybe the other countries show every supply line to make their fighter planes!
there are always, in every nation, the limits in showing places, workshops or research centers, as they are considered places where only a few eyes must enter.
We can only make suppositions viewing the leaked images, from what they showed us, in that assembly workshop there were* 7 "Kowsar" fuselages *in different stages of preparation and in the vicinity the structural elements ready for assembly, and I think that are not a low number, indeed.
Only time will show us if it will be only those 7, or the number will increase exponentially.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
recent encounter between an IRIAF f-14 and RSAAF f-15 over persian gulf.
tomcat locks on eagle from 175km away and forces f15 to change course toward SA.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-72B

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> recent encounter between an IRIAF f-14 and RSAAF f-15 over persian gulf.
> tomcat locks on eagle from 175km away and forces f15 to change course toward SA.


How do you know it's F-15? And it is true from 175km away?


----------



## Mithridates

T-72B said:


> How do you know it's F-15? And it is true from 175km away?


due to the RCS specifications of the plane and words of the pilot himself.


----------



## VEVAK

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "TheImmortal, post: 11171002, member: 183490"] Non sarei sorpreso se l'Iran al momento non è successo costruire un intero F-5.
> 
> L'OWJ non è stato presentato in serie e non è una linea di produzione. [/ CITAZIONE]
> 
> 
> why do they have to show them?
> maybe the other countries show every supply line to make their fighter planes!
> there are always, in every nation, the limits in showing places, workshops or research centers, as they are considered places where only a few eyes must enter.
> We can only make suppositions viewing the leaked images, from what they showed us, in that assembly workshop there were* 7 "Kowsar" fuselages *in different stages of preparation and in the vicinity the structural elements ready for assembly, and I think that are not a low number, indeed.
> Only time will show us if it will be only those 7, or the number will increase exponentially.



What will define how many Kosar jets Iran will be able to produce is not based on what you see here because this is nothing but relatively low end assembly line with a few assembly tools that are relatively easy to build in a relatively simple hanger
But what will define how many of these aircrafts Iran will be able to produce is what goes on before the part get here and how much infrastructure Iran has to build each part, section, system and subsystem because if you had those parts you could easily expend assembly exponentially by training personal on a yearly bases by having each of your techs train one person yearly and easily take assembly to as many as 100 at a time within 5 years

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> recent encounter between an IRIAF f-14 and RSAAF f-15 over persian gulf.
> tomcat locks on eagle from 175km away and forces f15 to change course toward SA.


Good B.S.
That's a dogfight scene with the rival managing to break the lock and get behind!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> Good B.S.
> That's a dogfight scene with the rival managing to break the lock and get behind!



dude the person posted it is an IRIAF pilot also how the hell is it a dogfight if you can't see the adversary plane??


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> dude the person posted it is an IRIAF pilot also how the hell is it a dogfight if you can't see the adversary plane??


it's a dogfight because sanity and law of physic says its a dogfight , that airplane could out maneuver the f14 do you knew what speed it must have had if it was 175km away ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
iranian f-4 chasing U.S. hornet over persian gulf. after while detaches and comes back.
footage recorded by hornet's targeting pod.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

beautiful image of an upgraded AH-1 by army ya ali industries and it's fire and forget shafag missile

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

A cobra attack helo upgraded by HESA.It looks like its possibly had an ir atgm jammer fitted to it from the looks of the led boxes on the front of the nose .
*EDIT:*
Probably just led lighting panels,*NOT* an atgm jammer after all.




You can see the upgrades to the rear cockpit instrument panel






https://imgur.com/OeNHCFX

You can see the better quality vid below:
https://scontent-lga3-1.cdninstagra...n.mp4?_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.cdninstagram.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> beautiful image of an upgraded AH-1 by army ya ali industries and it's fire and forget shafag missile
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Heres a vid of the machine


https://imgur.com/WDy4Ywe

Better quality copy here:
https://scontent-lga3-1.cdninstagra...n.mp4?_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.cdninstagram.com
It looks like the shafaq missile might have a new millimetric seeker instead of the ir one we saw originally.


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Well said, @[B][URL='https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.358559/members/sanel1412.187617/']sanel1412[/URL][/B]!

Iran also managed to field a robust short, intermediate, and long-range missile programs that did break through the sanctions and restrictions placed on its air force. These missiles can virtually overwhelm the air defense of its adversaries, particularly, those countries where the missile can reach. In August 2018 when the Iranian leaders unveiled the Kowsar fighter jet, the Iranian defense minister emphasized that the bulk of their efforts will be on the missile programs. So while maintaining and upgrading those fighter jets - and developing a new derivatives from those fighter jets - is commendable on the part of Iran, it is the missile programs that really show a remarkable progress.



sanel1412 said:


> Well,for long time Iran is known for restoring totaly crashed aircrafts,which means they had to literary produce all parts again and this is well known fact,recentlyI spoted also mig-29 airframe parts also completly new...now when Iran is capable to produce modern avionics and weapons for it airforce I think very soon Iran will make major braketrought which is actually hardest part,we all know ofcourse that engine is major problem...China had access to foreign technology but Iran has to do it from scratch ...I remeber very well around 1999-2000 China only BVR capable fighter was Su-27 with R-27 missile and they had it maybe 100..their complete fleet was that consisted from Mig-19 and mig-21 copies and some other aircrafts but also very old..yeah..they literary had 100 BVR capable aircraft(very limited BVR with R-27)...in same time Iran already operated most advanced aircraft and ARH guided BVR missile for 20 years..thus flyed also BVR capable Mig-29,F-4..etc...if I told anyone in that time that China will in 10 years start with j-10 production and start fifth gen. projects people would probably asking..wtf..ho is this moron,I would probably destroy all my reputation(if had any in that time ...Thing is, it is most important and hardest part to actually start produce anything at some scale.. reach industrial production level..Iran is really in hard position when it comes to this,since they had to develop everything from scratch..I suppose they succeed to get some technology transfer but still ...I mean just look..Russia..China...Russsia has experience buiding aircrafts for decades..many things they inveted literary..but look their aircrafts..AN-148 is using Intel chips...They can't sell super jet 100 to Iran because they use more than 10% parts made in USA...also their new fighter air crafts and all new modernisation include western,Korean,Japanese and Chinese components..I wouldn't even say that even their state airliner is flying boings and airbus...I'm mentioning this because even countries like Russia that can produce what ever they want gofor foreign components while in same time working on own to reach same level of quality...Iran can't unfortunalely do that...I guarantee you we woul see 4th gen aircraft long time ago if they have access to technology..I mean they would probably do like everyone else..lunch aircraft with foreign engines and latter when domestic became available switch to own engine...But,instead they have to built every shraf byitself..even if they got tech transfer..still you have to built it..built facilites..have quality people..I mean,when Yugoslavi bought t-72A license we got more than 120.000 pages of license but Russians didn't came and build facilites for US,license means only you got project and that is it...we still had to produce SUP(FCS)..engine....gun..every other part..and few first examples actually were made from imported parts..point is ,even if Iran got some project or license still without access to technology,industrial machinery,or some very rare metals..well just look where other countries are in this field..even they can buy anything they want....this is main reason I'm not fast to show how I'm disapointed or throw critics after some projects are delayed... I mean many things Iran is deveeloping now are literary first time they actually do it and you can't expect state of the art from first try...And we have to be realistic...they must do all of this without colapsing economy...if you consider they are engaged in libanon,syria,yemen,iraq..etc..I'm not sure how they succeed to found all of this under constant sanctions, threat of war constantly for 40 years is enoughf alone to throw away anyone thinking to invest money...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
a dogfight between IRIAF f-4 and USAF super hornet F/A-18 over iraq during the anti ISIS air raid. iranian pilot successfully puts the phantum in a dominant position so the super hornets pilot tries to roll and get himself out of that position in response the iranian pilot dive's and tries to maintain the advantage he has over the adversary fighter plane.


----------



## Blue In Green

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> a dogfight between IRIAF f-4 and USAF super hornet F/A-18 over iraq during the anti ISIS air raid. iranian pilot successfully puts the phantum in a dominant position so the super hornets pilot tries to roll and get himself out of that position in response the iranian pilot dive's and tries to maintain the advantage he has over the adversary fighter plane.



This must of not gone over well with US high command lol (if true of course).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

BlueInGreen2 said:


> This must of not gone over well with US high command lol (if true of course).


be sure it comes of a credible source

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

747 CMCA:
isn't it a reliable short term solution to our badly need for an strategic bomber??
this baby has the capacity to carry 50-100 CMs as far as 5000 KMs. 
i am sure we have several of them abandoned in aircraft graveyard.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Some modifications to the new nose mounted flir/eo system,its been fitted with new led lights,both white and ir from the looks of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> 747 CMCA:
> isn't it a reliable short term solution to our badly need for an strategic bomber??
> this baby has the capacity to carry 50-100 CMs as far as 5000 KMs.
> i am sure we have several of them abandoned in aircraft graveyard.
> View attachment 541329



A plane? That is your idea? Better yet a slow big as hell plane that has zero defenses?

Even if by some miracle that plane were able to make it close to enemy airspace and release its payload, a interceptor fighter would blow it right out of the sky before it could turn around.

A strategic bomber must be at the very least supersonic, especially if it is not going to have reduced RCS. Ideally it would in the future be a Hypersonic unmanned flying wing design skipping off the upper stages of the atmosphere releasing Hypersonic payloads and other smaller attack drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> A plane? That is your idea? Better yet a slow big as hell plane that has zero defenses?
> 
> Even if by some miracle that plane were able to make it close to enemy airspace and release its payload, a interceptor fighter would blow it right out of the sky before it could turn around.
> 
> A strategic bomber must be at the very least supersonic, especially if it is not going to have reduced RCS. Ideally it would in the future be a Hypersonic unmanned flying wing design skipping off the upper stages of the atmosphere releasing Hypersonic payloads and other smaller attack drones.


boeing b-52 and tu-95 are both subsonic. a bomber always moves with escort planes not alone and also the idea of turning a 747 to a bomber does not include that it's gonna inter enemy air space it's mission is to get close to target and release the missiles.


----------



## drmeson

Mithridates said:


> boeing b-52 and tu-95 are both subsonic. a bomber always moves with escort planes not alone and also the idea of turning a 747 to a bomber does not include that it's gonna inter enemy air space it's mission is to get close to target and release the missiles.



Better would be that an F-4 sized MRCA launches ALCM instead of larger bomber.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> boeing b-52 and tu-95 are both subsonic. a bomber always moves with escort planes not alone and also the idea of turning a 747 to a bomber does not include that it's gonna inter enemy air space it's mission is to get close to target and release the missiles.



B-52 is an anti-insurgent bomber. It has been used in airspace where air superiority has been established.

The US would never use the B-52 against Russia or China because it wouldn’t survive one second.

And the blackjack bombers main mission is to be nuclear payload carriers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> B-52 is an anti-insurgent bomber. It has been used in airspace where air superiority has been established.
> 
> The US would never use the B-52 against Russia or China because it wouldn’t survive one second.
> 
> And the blackjack bombers main mission is to be nuclear payload carriers.


dude super tucano is anti insurgent not a bomber with MTOW equal to 200 tons. you have misunderstood the concept of heavy bombers and air superiority. in the H3 raid our tanker was in iraqi air space and in tens of other missions they were near of iraqi borders yet i never heard of them getting hit. one of these cruise missile carriers loaded with 100 howeizeh CMs could completely destroy emiratis air bases and air defence sites without entering their interceptors range. also for an interceptor plane there is no difference if the target is 747, tu-160 or b-1 they all are vulnerable against long range missiles.


----------



## sahureka2

Home-grown MiG-29 gearbox successfully completes operational testing
https://en.mehrnews.com/news/142829/Home-grown-MiG-29-gearbox-successfully-completes-operational

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> dude super tucano is anti insurgent not a bomber with MTOW equal to 200 tons. you have misunderstood the concept of heavy bombers and air superiority. in the H3 raid our tanker was in iraqi air space and in tens of other missions they were near of iraqi borders yet i never heard of them getting hit. one of these cruise missile carriers loaded with 100 howeizeh CMs could completely destroy emiratis air bases and air defence sites without entering their interceptors range. also for an interceptor plane there is no difference if the target is 747, tu-160 or b-1 they all are vulnerable against long range missiles.



you are comparing Iraqi radar technology and air defense systems of 1970’s to modern day SAM systems and radars of a developed world power? Lol

Iran’s CMs can already reach all major targets (Israel, SA, UAE, etc). What would the point of launching CMs further than that? Attacking Europe or US mainland is suicide and would rally the West to finish off the Republic.

Play chess not checkers mate.

The concept is just not enough of a GameChanger on the battlefield. 

You want to avoid the Nazi Germany wunderweapon syndrome. Instead of spending money on many cost heavy sci fi weapon projects, all 
Nazi germany had to due to win the war was double efforts on nuclear weapons. Ironically that was the ultimate wunderweapon and yet they thought nuclear fission was not realistically possible.

So in case of Iran, don’t waste money on projects that won’t change the outcome on the battlefield. Invest in things that will punish your enemy to its core while not inviting an even bigger response.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "TheImmortal, post: 11171002, member: 183490"] Non sarei sorpreso se l'Iran al momento non è successo costruire un intero F-5.
> 
> L'OWJ non è stato presentato in serie e non è una linea di produzione. [/ CITAZIONE]
> 
> 
> why do they have to show them?
> maybe the other countries show every supply line to make their fighter planes!
> there are always, in every nation, the limits in showing places, workshops or research centers, as they are considered places where only a few eyes must enter.
> We can only make suppositions viewing the leaked images, from what they showed us, in that assembly workshop there were* 7 "Kowsar" fuselages *in different stages of preparation and in the vicinity the structural elements ready for assembly, and I think that are not a low number, indeed.
> Only time will show us if it will be only those 7, or the number will increase exponentially.



This is basically an assembly line for Kowsar fighter jets, correct? Besides, the 7 jets are what we see on the right-hand side and not on the left side, and no one knows if there are other assembly lines in Iran. People can only entertain the official releases from the Iranian side; so the claim that some are making here that Iran doesn't have enough production capacity is just a speculation. Truth is, no one expect Iranian officials knows how much of a production capacity for those fighter jets exist in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> A plane? That is your idea? Better yet a slow big as hell plane that has zero defenses?
> 
> Even if by some miracle that plane were able to make it close to enemy airspace and release its payload, a interceptor fighter would blow it right out of the sky before it could turn around.
> 
> A strategic bomber must be at the very least supersonic, especially if it is not going to have reduced RCS. Ideally it would in the future be a Hypersonic unmanned flying wing design skipping off the upper stages of the atmosphere releasing Hypersonic payloads and other smaller attack drones.



Wrong the bomber doesn't have to be supersonic. A B-52 can do just fine launching cruise missiles from very far range and turn back around.



TheImmortal said:


> B-52 is an anti-insurgent bomber. It has been used in airspace where air superiority has been established.
> 
> The US would never use the B-52 against Russia or China because it wouldn’t survive one second.
> 
> And the blackjack bombers main mission is to be nuclear payload carriers.



No the B-52 is not an anti insurgent bomber. It has been used against conventional and unconventional forces. Against the Taliban and ISIS as well as against Vietnam and Iraq. If the enemy country has sophisticated defenses, course the B-52 would launch cruise missiles from distance. If the enemy has no air defense then it would fly over and even circle around.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Wrong the bomber doesn't have to be supersonic. A B-52 can do just fine launching cruise missiles from very far range and turn back around.
> 
> 
> 
> No the B-52 is not an anti insurgent bomber. It has been used against conventional and unconventional forces. Against the Taliban and ISIS as well as against Vietnam and Iraq. If the enemy country has sophisticated defenses, course the B-52 would launch cruise missiles from distance. If the enemy has no air defense then it would fly over and even circle around.



Vietnam US allies had air superiority
Iraq US allies had air superiority

Again your logic is flawed.

And if the CM can already hit all vital targets by itself, why would you need a bomber to carry it half the distance?

For example let’s say Iran wants to hit a target in Israel. It can launch from Syria, Iraq, Western Iran. Why would it need to have a bomber carry it From Iran and launch it over Syria airspace?

Not to mention as soon as the bomber is in the air all of your enemies air defense systems go on high alert and you lose the element of surprise that is vital for a CM.

So then Israel will just launch F-35 or F-18’s and go through Syria airspace and chase the bomber and bring it down.

With an aging airforce, Iran cannot defend a bomber.


----------



## scimitar19

sahureka2 said:


> _*Home-grown*_ MiG-29 gearbox successfully completes operational testing



Jesus Christ will you STOP saying HOMEGROWN for several reasons, one it is not a plant that gradually grows from vase or earth, two it is not a living thing it is a mechanical part and three it is rather engineered, designed built domestically not in the garage but rather by serious engineering teams!


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Vietnam US allies had air superiority
> Iraq US allies had air superiority
> 
> Again your logic is flawed.
> 
> And if the CM can already hit all vital targets by itself, why would you need a bomber to carry it half the distance?
> 
> For example let’s say Iran wants to hit a target in Israel. It can launch from Syria, Iraq, Western Iran. Why would it need to have a bomber carry it From Iran and launch it over Syria airspace?
> 
> Not to mention as soon as the bomber is in the air all of your enemies air defense systems go on high alert and you lose the element of surprise that is vital for a CM.
> 
> So then Israel will just launch F-35 or F-18’s and go through Syria airspace and chase the bomber and bring it down.
> 
> With an aging airforce, Iran cannot defend a bomber.


bro something like this would provide iran the element of suprise. obviously in wartime saudis or israelis expect an attack from iran's direction, what they don't see is comming is an attack from indian ocean or mediterranean sea just like iraqis didn't saw it because they didn't expect that. with strategic bomber we can put together an advanced attack planning our CMs can move in complex routes and confuse enemy ADs. also you forgot about the diego garcia the unsinkable aircraft carrier that would be in our range with this. 
bro look i am not tying to bring up something wunderweapon like u said before. i am just saying it's a feasible way to get an heavy bobmer for a country like iran cause we have all the things we need right now we just have to modify the old 747 bodies.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> bro something like this would provide iran the element of suprise. obviously in wartime saudis or israelis expect an attack from iran's direction, what they don't see is comming is an attack from indian ocean or mediterranean sea just like iraqis didn't saw it because they didn't expect that. with strategic bomber we can put together an advanced attack planning our CMs can move in complex routes and confuse enemy ADs. also you forgot about the diego garcia the unsinkable aircraft carrier that would be in our range with this.
> bro look i am not tying to bring up something wunderweapon like u said before. i am just saying it's a feasible way to get an heavy bobmer for a country like iran cause we have all the things we need right now we just have to modify the old 747 bodies.



My friend I don’t think you understand what I am saying.

Have you heard of flight tracker? You can track military and civilian flights flying out of any country. Civilians have been tracking Iran flights (weapon transfers) from Tehran to Damascus airport. So if a civilian can do that, what do you think a military intelligence system can do?

There would be ZERO element of surprise. As soon as the plane took off anything bearing a 747 radar signature coming out of Iran and not carrying a call sign demonstrating civilian flight (iran air, Mahan, etc) would be tracked by CENTCOM and Israeli intelligence. 

The location of these bombers will always be known wether on the ground or in the air. Thus they are a flying coffin. This is not even close to wunderweapon.

Iran has early warning radars (OTH radar) as well, it can see what takes off from Israel military airports. So it goes both ways, which is why an israeli airstrike on Iran was implausible. Iran would have hours noticed of squadrons fighters flying out of Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

TheImmortal said:


> My friend I don’t think you understand what I am saying.
> 
> Have you heard of flight tracker? You can track military and civilian flights flying out of any country. Civilians have been tracking Iran flights (weapon transfers) from Tehran to Damascus airport. So if a civilian can do that, what do you think a military intelligence system can do?
> 
> There would be ZERO element of surprise. As soon as the plane took off anything bearing a 747 radar signature coming out of Iran and not carrying a call sign demonstrating civilian flight (iran air, Mahan, etc) would be tracked by CENTCOM and Israeli intelligence.
> 
> The location of these bombers will always be known wether on the ground or in the air. Thus they are a flying coffin. This is not even close to wunderweapon.
> 
> Iran has early warning radars (OTH radar) as well, it can see what takes off from Israel military airports. So it goes both ways, which is why an israeli airstrike on Iran was implausible. Iran would have hours noticed of squadrons fighters flying out of Israel.




But I think @*Mithridates's *point is, the bombers can quickly fly from Iran into the Indian Ocean, launch the cruise missiles from there, and the run back to Iranian air space under the protection air defense system. Keep in mind they'll take into account the distance they need to travel on the Indian Ocean before they're out of range from the protection of the Iranian air defense system.

I also think people are ignoring the fact that the mini-submarines that Iran was building would be the main carriers of these cruise missiles, and will be launched under the Red Sea & Indian Ocean. In my view, these mini-subs are more potent than the bombers.

What I don't know is if air defense systems, including communication jamming, can be uploaded onto these submarines. Because if they do, they add much needed protection for these bombers.


----------



## T-72B

Is the specs about Iranian F-14AM below true?
"Glorious F-14A which has a kill ratio of (159-1)in Iranian service during Iran-Iraq war , has now been upgraded to F-14AM standard which will incorporate :

1- Digital radar : The beast AWG-9 radar with its 300km range has several weak-points which limits it's range and detection . one of them is it's old and weak CPUs . reportedly the cores in Playstation 2 is several times more capable of those in AWG-9 . according to estimations , if AWG-9 components are upgraded to a fully digital ones with more capable CPUs , its maximum range can exceed 600 KMs !!! holy cow i'd say !!
Iranian upgrades , integrates a new Iranian indigenous upgrade which is consisted on a digital AWG-9 with new state-of-the-art CPUs which maximises it's capabilities to track foreign aircraft and gives it A-G capabilities : to look down and track objects on the ground - a feature that has been traditionally unavailable in F-14A .

They say the radar is now almost similar to AN/APG-71 of F-15E Strike Eagle (here !): since this radar features the exact same upgrades on AWG-9
2-APUs : Auxillary power unites are used to increase Combat-readiness . basically your fighters are ready and their radars are warmed up all the time .

3- New Fire-control system : Giving F-14AM the capability to Carry Iranian Weapons as well :

Fakour missile : Upgraded Phoenix missile (NATO codename AIM-54A+ ) with a range of+300 km . it's range is higher than original phoenix but details are un-known .
Engines (TF-30) are currently in the process of reverse-engineering . all of them are over-hauled and combat-ready as we speak .
Maghsoud missile : ALL-NEW Iranian AWACS killer with a range of 500kms . currently in last stages of development

www.isna.ir...

4- Overhaul and Airframe refurbishment : Since these birds are received during 70s and have been used in a long war , the airframes could have micro fractures not visible to un-armed eye . X-ray is used to find those fractures and repair is performed .


the "Stall" problem in F-14 which were witness during High-G maneuvers is no longer the case"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

T-72B said:


> I
> 
> Fakour missile : Upgraded Phoenix missile (NATO codename AIM-54A+ ) with a range of+300 km . it's range is higher than original phoenix but details are un-known .



Fakour has a range of 150km not 300km. There is also other statements in the posts that are wrong. Thus take what you're reading with a bucket of salt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

WinterNights said:


> Fakour has a range of 150km not 300km. There is also other statements in the posts that are wrong. Thus take what you're reading with a bucket of salt.


Well this information about 160km range of Fakour 90 is most likely not corect,it is clearly stated many times that Fakour 90 has reduced weight,it has greater speed and 15% increased range ..so it is not likely that information about 160km range is corect.Considering today's technology this can probably be boosted even further,it ...So it is more likely Fakour range is 220-230km even this range would be posible only on F-14...considering information that new radar on F-4 has range around 180km in search mode and up to 120km in engagement mode it mean(if it is corect information)that Fakour 90 on modernized F-4 would have max. range of 160-170km..(max. engagement range of radar + active radar range on Fakour 90).But fakour on F-14 could go up to max. range without any problems.
So,I would say,most likely some news oulet from iran wrongly reported 160km range or this range was in perspective of new radars Iran developed for F-4 and Kowsar..as i said,many time it is stated by Iranian military officials that Fakour 90 max range,speed and other perfoanse is boosted in comparation with AIM-54 and even clearly give estimation of 15% greater range...160km range only makes sense if considered in combination with radars on F-4 and kowsar aircrafts since these radars also can be used with Fakour 90,F-4 has long range anti-ship capability thanks to this modernization and if i remeber corectly it goeas up to 160km(120km radar engagement range+missile terminal guidance range)...even should be mentioned that,even without upgrade F-4 have anti-ship capability but not such long range...at least not independently.now,I'm expecting very soon we will seen one more air to air missile from Iran,something in direction of PL-12/R-77 or maybe even something developed on AIM-7 design but with far greater range ...they need one missile for short to medium ranges for Bavar and also one missile like PL-12/R-77 (as I said it,may not be same design...may even follow aim-7 design)and I'm expecting to see something very soon....


----------



## Mithridates

well as i know fakour has better survivability against ECM as the test pilot stated to one of IRIAF pilots that i shared some of his instagram posts here before. also fakour has the lock on jammer mode (he didn't mentioned that, but i concluded from his statements). also he said the fakour has no escape zone of 95 KM farther that that the missile is not a danger for maneuverable targets and solely get use to target AEWACs and tankers. also he said that fakour has the top attack mode like phoenix missile and it's almost impossible to out maneuver it. also he said it's an urban legend that u can load a phoenix on f-4 and atleast now it's impossible. and it's seeker and avionics are different of the ones in phoenix, it's terminal phase has a range of 15 km versus 10 km of the older phoenix and more importantly it uses an AESA radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

First Phoenix has 22km active seeker range and second F-4 new pulse dopler radar can lunch and guide any active radar guided missile including Fakour 90 and how you think it can guide anti ship missile?It seems you confuse many things and from your post I can see you actually didn't even understand what capability new radar on F-4 and kowsar bring..from screenshots of F-4 MFD and weapons managment compunter we can see what capabilities radar has by observing radar modes...you can't load Fakour or phoenix on original F-4 radar but on upgraded F-4 and kowsar you can, because those are multi-purpose pulse dopler radars with TWS and RWS capability..same capability which allows AWG9 to lock on and engage multiple targets....again how you think it can lunch anti ship missile with 160km range which by the way is also active radar guided in terminal phase with mid curse update.....again phoenix active radar seeker has 22 km range ,you can see that in phoenix documentation and you can actually see new iranian active radar seeker here posted...it has daclered 50km range,swo why would they use one with 15km range which is lower than original...once you have digitalized components there is nothing you can't integrate,that is why these radars are multi-purpose radars,on upgraded F-4 weapons mangment computer you can see switch for a-a(air to air ),a-s(air to sea),a-g(air to ground),jamming/ew and on MFD you can see TWS(track while scan),RWS(range while scan),CW(continous wave,VS(velocity search),ground mapping..and don't remeber what else..I have made complete analysis based on these images since many things can be learned from upgraded f-4 cocpit


----------



## sanel1412

Video of IRIAF F14 armed with 4 Fakour 90/Phoenix missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sepasgozar

sanel1412 said:


> Video of IRIAF F14 armed with 4 Fakour 90/Phoenix missiles


This bad boy looks like he packs a punch. Loving the cameo on it too!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

sanel1412 said:


> Video of IRIAF F14 armed with 4 Fakour 90/Phoenix missiles



Epic!


----------



## sanel1412

It is intersting that both aircrafts f-14 and aircraft from which video is recorded(probably second f-14) are performing kulbit manuever(loop) but you have to observe backround to actually see since other aircraft is following same path

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> First Phoenix has 22km active seeker range and second F-4 new pulse dopler radar can lunch and guide any active radar guided missile including Fakour 90 and how you think it can guide anti ship missile?It seems you confuse many things and from your post I can see you actually didn't even understand what capability new radar on F-4 and kowsar bring..from screenshots of F-4 MFD and weapons managment compunter we can see what capabilities radar has by observing radar modes...you can't load Fakour or phoenix on original F-4 radar but on upgraded F-4 and kowsar you can, because those are multi-purpose pulse dopler radars with TWS and RWS capability..same capability which allows AWG9 to lock on and engage multiple targets....again how you think it can lunch anti ship missile with 160km range which by the way is also active radar guided in terminal phase with mid curse update.....again phoenix active radar seeker has 22 km range ,you can see that in phoenix documentation and you can actually see new iranian active radar seeker here posted...it has daclered 50km range,swo why would they use one with 15km range which is lower than original...once you have digitalized components there is nothing you can't integrate,that is why these radars are multi-purpose radars,on upgraded F-4 weapons mangment computer you can see switch for a-a(air to air ),a-s(air to sea),a-g(air to ground),jamming/ew and on MFD you can see TWS(track while scan),RWS(range while scan),CW(continous wave,VS(velocity search),ground mapping..and don't remeber what else..I have made complete analysis based on these images since many things can be learned from upgraded f-4 cocpit


you have a point. i didn't know anything of f-4 upgrades. 
thank you for informing me

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> you have a point. i didn't know anything of f-4 upgrades.
> thank you for informing me


I coudn't post images of F-4 cocpit and new radar since I'm not home ,by tonight I will post ,I have it on PC.From these images and Kowsar also, we can assume at least main features.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


>



This is a very interesting pic because the missiles the f4 is launching/carrying look a hell of a lot like the su24s kh58/as11 anti radiation missile.Maybe the airforce is finally making the effort to integrate all of those newer russian weapons with those older western airframes,I just hope they get around to integrating the newer a2a weapons as well because thats whats badly needed for these western airframes,otherwise its pretty much 70s era sparrows and sidewinders.
There also looks to be a targeting or possibly even ecm/eccm pod on the centerline as well.

*EDIT: Sadly after a little bit of checking the above picture appears to be from well over a decade ago,oh well.......shouldnt have got my hopes up....*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The F-4 SM is more than an improved F4, it's a new plane with a new cell. Same plane model but with a new cell, new radar, new cockpit, new electronics and more

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

a beautiful image of an f-4 with iranian maded tls-99 targeting pod

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

sanel1412 said:


> Video of IRIAF F14 armed with 4 Fakour 90/Phoenix missiles


This doesn't look real...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

AmirPatriot said:


> This doesn't look real...


Well it is real...,I don't know what makes you belive it is not...but you're welcomed to check frames yourself...it is very easy to check is video real in 2 minutes..I didn't check it just to be clear since I didn't have rason for it...since video seems genuine...Did you spot something unusual or some trace of pixel editing...I will check myself as soon I get near my PC,I have original video on PC

EDIT
You're right it is not real,I never seen this video before but seems it was already been around...my apologize for posting it,it was not intentional.I check video clips before uploading it but this really looks like genuine to me..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> This doesn't look real...


It's CGI & old.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

guys i would like to know your opinion about this:




we all know that iran will not make a heavy platform any time soon atleast for one decade. also we all know that we are able to produce f-5 tiger platform with it's engine and all the other stuff. so suddenly an idea came to my mind. what if we use the same type of wing that US put on it's f-16s?? the results and performance of f-16xl comparing to an ordinary falcon was stunnishing.
the XL was capable carrying 80% more fuel, it had 27 pylons, it was able to carry twice the ordnance of f-16 and deliver it 40% further, it's lift/drag ratio was 25% better than f-16 in supersonic and 11% in subsonic speeds, the test pilot stated that f-16XL was easy and smooth to handle compare to f-16.
so the question is: are we able to make something like that with f-5 and will we??
at the end i maded this for better visualization:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

Mithridates said:


> guys a would like to know your opinion about this:
> View attachment 544550
> 
> we all know that iran will not make a heavy platform any time soon atleast for one decade. also we all know that we are able to produce f-5 tiger platform with it's engine and all the other stuff. so suddenly an idea came to my mind. what if we use the same type of wing that US put on it's f-16s?? the results and performance of f-16xl comparing to an ordinary falcon was stunnishing.
> the XL was capable carrying 80% more fuel, it had 27 pylons, it was able to carry twice the ordnance of f-16 and deliver it 40% further, it's lift/drag ratio was 25% better than f-16 in supersonic and 11% in subsonic speeds, the test pilot stated that f-16XL was easy and smooth to handle compare to f-16.
> so the question is: are we able to make something like that with f-5 and will we??
> at the end i maded this for better visualization:
> View attachment 544559



I think to see the real benefit of a such design, Iran needs to have a more matured airframe design and manufacturing as well as more powerful engines. Youu need to be able to carry extra load fast.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

arashkamangir said:


> I think to see the real benefit of a such design, Iran needs to have a more matured airframe design and manufacturing as well as more powerful engines. Youu need to be able to carry extra load fast.


actually the point is USAF didn't change anything in the platform except of the wing. that's the reason i fund it interesting. however NASA years later put a powerfull f110 engine on that and accidentally achived supercruiser capability. also if i recall correctly MOD said the j90 turbofan engine gonna have 33% more thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Mithridates said:


> guys i would like to know your opinion about this:
> View attachment 544550
> 
> we all know that iran will not make a heavy platform any time soon atleast for one decade. also we all know that we are able to produce f-5 tiger platform with it's engine and all the other stuff. so suddenly an idea came to my mind. what if we use the same type of wing that US put on it's f-16s?? the results and performance of f-16xl comparing to an ordinary falcon was stunnishing.
> the XL was capable carrying 80% more fuel, it had 27 pylons, it was able to carry twice the ordnance of f-16 and deliver it 40% further, it's lift/drag ratio was 25% better than f-16 in supersonic and 11% in subsonic speeds, the test pilot stated that f-16XL was easy and smooth to handle compare to f-16.
> so the question is: are we able to make something like that with f-5 and will we??
> at the end i maded this for better visualization:
> View attachment 544559



interesting solution, I would use the elongated fuselage of the kowsar but with only one pilot seat

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

photoshop of models, 
Kowsar elongated fuselage & wing F-16xl

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## WinterNights

I don't think Iran will continue to play around with the F-5 platform for much longer. They may make a next gen version with 4th++/5th gen avionics (mostly just to use it use a test bed to test such systems) but what Iran really need is a semi heavy/heavy fighter jet i.e something to replace the f-14. Given how successful the f-14 was and how Iran is used to such capabilities, nothing short of such capability (but suited for modern times) will satiate our needs. F-14 was just great with its mini AWAC radar and it's long range missiles. Qaher will play the role of a small, stealthy fighter jets for antiship attacks, close air support etc and to go with that we also need a fighter jet with capabilities I mentioned earlier.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> I don't think Iran will continue to play around with the F-5 platform for much longer. They may make a next gen version with 4th++/5th gen avionics (mostly just to use it use a test bed to test such systems) but what Iran really need is a semi heavy/heavy fighter jet i.e something to replace the f-14. Given how successful the f-14 was and how Iran is used to such capabilities, nothing short of such capability (but suited for modern times) will satiate our needs. F-14 was just great with its mini AWAC radar and it's long range missiles. Qaher will play the role of a small, stealthy fighter jets for antiship attacks, close air support etc and to go with that we also need a fighter jet with capabilities I mentioned earlier.


lol actually according to some people in airforce it seems like the commanders are obsessed with this platform and considering that now we are making rd33 engine i assume our next saeqeh will be something like f-20 tigershark.
about the f-14 they upgraded it's radar and it seems like they achieved the famous theoretical maximum range of 750km but thr airforce has no plan to reverse engineering them. the next heavy fighter of iran is su-30 that's it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> lol actually according to some people in airforce it seems like the commanders are obsessed with this platform and considering that now we are making rd33 engine i assume our next saeqeh will be something like f-20 tigershark.
> about the f-14 they upgraded it's radar and it seems like they achieved the famous theoretical maximum range of 750km but thr airforce has no plan to reverse engineering them. the next heavy fighter of iran is su-30 that's it.


Su-30 is old platform like F-14 better spend money on newer designs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Su-30 is old platform like F-14 better spend money on newer designs.


they already bought the su-30 and yak-130 and this sukhois gonna replace with our old phantoms. funny thing is russians didn't gave us a production line of su-30 they offered an advanced version of su-27 and we refused. also there is a rumor that our versions gonna have su-35 engines.

IRIAF f-14 vs f-5 and mig-29 training dogfight which the mighty tomcat wins as usual

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Again on this forum, many people speculate and say anything. Iran is more advanced than you think in fighter jets. Kowsar and F-4 SM are very advanced. You underestimate the advancement of Iran in fighter planes and I think it's pretty great. The process of Iran is very clever and methodical and deceitfully deceives their detractors. For the new cell, it's not going to take a decade, you do not understand anything lollll

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> guys i would like to know your opinion about this:
> View attachment 544550
> 
> we all know that iran will not make a heavy platform any time soon atleast for one decade. also we all know that we are able to produce f-5 tiger platform with it's engine and all the other stuff. so suddenly an idea came to my mind. what if we use the same type of wing that US put on it's f-16s?? the results and performance of f-16xl comparing to an ordinary falcon was stunnishing.
> the XL was capable carrying 80% more fuel, it had 27 pylons, it was able to carry twice the ordnance of f-16 and deliver it 40% further, it's lift/drag ratio was 25% better than f-16 in supersonic and 11% in subsonic speeds, the test pilot stated that f-16XL was easy and smooth to handle compare to f-16.
> so the question is: are we able to make something like that with f-5 and will we??
> at the end i maded this for better visualization:
> View attachment 544559



The F-5 engines are too weak and because of that the negative impact of added weight on the wings far outweighs any notable increase you'll get in performance by changing the design in such a significant way... 
Also you should remember that the F-5 landing gears use the flexibility of the wings for landing allowing for a much lighter landing gears and they also fold under the fuselage so changing the wing location like that would also effect the landing gear and likely require much heavier landing gears 

And all and all I would say one of the top negative aspects of the F-5 "platform" not including the sensor pkg is lack of combat Range & payload (Range of the aircraft with sufficient amount of weapons payload) 

I personally think what Iran needs to do when it comes to it's F-5's is the Kowsar upgrades + the development of lighter PGM to go with them.

I believe when it comes to the F-5's IRIAF needs to take a good look at the targets they would wanna take out using the F-5 platform and increase the Aircrafts fire power by building the lightest PGM possible to achieve that task that's built around pylons that can carry an increase number of lighter weapons on each pylon....

For example If you wanna use the F-5 against Tanks, armored battalions, radars, or any un-bunkered military equipment then you need to build a lighter PGM with it's own jet engine built in a way where a single F-5 pylon can carry a significant amount and hit it's targets from outside the range of short to mid range SAM systems protecting them with the ability to detect, target & hit a significant number of targets as fast as possible from a manageable distance...
And that's a capability that's currently lacking in Iranian F-5's that's far more vital than the wing design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

actually i quote a pilot words and i didn't speculate. according to him we suck at jet propulsion that's why we are stuck with j85. there is no f-4sm there is the doran project which they refer as block 48. yes we can build something like f-14, as the pilot said we are able to produce 70% of its components locally but being able does not mean it would be economically accepted to really build it. we don't have the infrastructure to build heavy fighter jets again according to him not me.



VEVAK said:


> The F-5 engines are too weak


i know that wing would increase the overall weight but that point goes for the f-16 too but on the contrary it improved the lift/drag ratio which means the plane would travel faster than an ordinary f-16


VEVAK said:


> I personally think what Iran needs to do when it comes to it's F-5's is the Kowsar upgrades + the development of lighter PGM to go with them.


swear to god we need something like SDB bombs im verywell aware of that. but you know i think the kowsar is a training plane rather a fighter/bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> guys i would like to know your opinion about this:
> View attachment 544550
> 
> we all know that iran will not make a heavy platform any time soon atleast for one decade. also we all know that we are able to produce f-5 tiger platform with it's engine and all the other stuff. so suddenly an idea came to my mind. what if we use the same type of wing that US put on it's f-16s?? the results and performance of f-16xl comparing to an ordinary falcon was stunnishing.
> the XL was capable carrying 80% more fuel, it had 27 pylons, it was able to carry twice the ordnance of f-16 and deliver it 40% further, it's lift/drag ratio was 25% better than f-16 in supersonic and 11% in subsonic speeds, the test pilot stated that f-16XL was easy and smooth to handle compare to f-16.
> so the question is: are we able to make something like that with f-5 and will we??
> at the end i maded this for better visualization:
> View attachment 544559


Interestingly prior to the f16xl,the russians modified 2 mig21s to produce the mig21 analogue.This was originally done as a test bed for the wing design of the tu144 sst,but the russians found that it considerably improved some of the performance aspects of the mig21.
I wonder if it would be worth trying it out on the crappy old f7s that iran has.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> crappy old f7


thank you
nowadays we use them merely as trainers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Two-seater Kowsar (true photo)
and playing with images with photoshop
single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage of the two-seater
single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage and wing type F-16XL - however maintaining engine air intakes, as the Mithridates user had designed

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

For Iran, it’s less of a risk to just buy Russian aircraft as long as it has assurances its domestic industry can keep them flying in case of dispute with Russia.

Thus Iran airforce is unlikely to give any iran fighter jet a solid look. They want foreign fighters plain and simple.

Now IRGC could decide to back an Iranian fighter given their revolutionary philosophy. Only caveat is IRGC doesn’t place value on air support, but supposedly that changed after realities of Syrian war. I’m skeptical. 

Airforce will likely not be touched till Iran has finished modernizing other areas of the military as well as being more economically prosperous. Cost of Syrian war and resumption of sanctions have put a damper on the war chest. Airforce requires significant amounts of money.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Mr Iran Eye said:


> F-4s+
> 
> Are you wondering how is that our old F-4s are still flying ? Because these aren't American F-4s anymore these are Iranian-made F-4s ... the whole body the whole segments ... we've acquired the science of designing
> Iran source
> 
> 
> New cell
> New cockpit
> New radar
> New electronics
> 
> They would have a new engine that they would later say as usual loll. This new F-4 that we present in the face without really saying it is really funny for me.
> The announcement process of the Iranian army, I find it intelligent and misleading at the same time.
> 
> I know this forum for years and none seems to have seen this famous f-4S +. This famous f-4 would be the bridge between the new heavy combat aircraft with a new cell and new modern element. They presented it in videos, I find it very funny because nobody seems to have observed
> 
> View attachment 537374
> View attachment 537375



The F4-SM is already a reality in several copies. The new engine is already a reality but it seems that you have great difficulty understanding the announcement process about military novelty. They are almost always ahead of their military orders, that's what you need to understand

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The F4-SM is already a reality in several copies. The new engine is already a reality but it seems that you have great difficulty understanding the announcement process about military novelty. They are almost always ahead of their military orders, that's what you need to understand



You simply don’t get it.

First off the airforce doesn’t even like the F-4 that much, they like the F-5. Secondly the F-4 is a terrible platform to waste your money on into the future.

Please provide proof of your claims of “several” copies of F-4 SM outside of the usual widely known claim of Chinese assistance over 5 years ago.

Lastly there are “several” copies of Saeghe, Saeghe II, Kowsar. Doesn’t mean they are any closer to mass production of F-5s

Airforce is hedging it’s bets on 2020 embargo coming off. They don’t want junk from 1970s.

Even India “heavily” modernized its decades old MiG-21 and yet an F-16 had no trouble shooting it down.

Put as much lipstick you want on a PIG it’s still a pig.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> i know that wing would increase the overall weight but that point goes for the f-16 too but on the contrary it improved the lift/drag ratio which means the plane would travel faster than an ordinary f-16


come on look at the different of power between J-85-21b compared to F110-GE-129 or F110-GE-132


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> Two-seater Kowsar (true photo)
> and playing with images with photoshop
> single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage of the two-seater
> single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage and wing type F-16XL - however maintaining engine air intakes, as the Mithridates user had designed


I wonder why you guys combine cranked arrow delta wing with Ogival delta wing and made it complex , why not just go with the cranked arrow design ? do you guys want to make a bomber out of it ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Even India “heavily” modernized its decades old MiG-21 and yet an F-16 had no trouble shooting it down.
> 
> Put as much lipstick you want on a PIG it’s still a pig.


Well, if you ask Indians, they say their MIG21 has shot down Pakistani F16.
Though it doesn't mean mig21 has BVR capability.


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Well, if you ask Indians, they say their MIG21 has shot down Pakistani F16.
> Though it doesn't mean mig21 has BVR capability.



One side had a pilot the other side had propaganda.

Who you going to believe?


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> One side had a pilot the other side had propaganda.
> 
> Who you going to believe?


Indians had their own evidences too, from the beginning, Indians claimed they have shot down a Pakistani F16, But Pakistan denied and claimed they haven't used F16 at all (it was against their deal with U.S), Pakistani officials claimed they had captured two Indian pilots and the *second one is critically injured and is in hospital*.

Later India displayed the debris of an AIM120 missile (suggesting Pakistanis were lying), while Pakistani officials changed their word and said only one Indian pilot has been captured, confirming Indian's claim that Pakistanis have mistaken their own crashed pilot as an Indian pilot.

And I got a negative rating for reaching this conclusion on a Pakistani forum!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Indians had their own evidences too, from the beginning, Indians claimed they have shot down a Pakistani F16, But Pakistan denied and claimed they haven't used F16 at all (it was against their deal with U.S), Pakistani officials claimed they had captured two Indian pilots and the *second one is critically injured and is in hospital*.
> 
> Later India displayed the debris of an AIM120 missile (suggesting Pakistanis were lying), while Pakistani officials changed their word and said only one Indian pilot has been captured, confirming Indian's claim that Pakistanis have mistaken their own crashed pilot as an Indian pilot.
> 
> And I got a negative rating for reaching this conclusion on a Pakistani forum!



Without a pilot or wreckage of jet, India has nothing.

Again show me physical evidence.

Just like every time Syria claims to have shot down an Israeli fighter. Out of all the times only once was there evidence to back it up.

During conflict both sides come with propaganda and exaggeration of claims to inflate the capability of their armed forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> come on look at the different of power between J-85-21b compared to F110-GE-129 or F110-GE-132


i didn't said that the wing will turn f-5 to f-16xl but it surely will change it to f-5xl and will bring all the benefits that it brought to f-16.


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Without a pilot or wreckage of jet, India has nothing.
> 
> Again show me physical evidence.
> 
> Just like every time Syria claims to have shot down an Israeli fighter. Out of all the times only once was there evidence to back it up.
> 
> During conflict both sides come with propaganda and exaggeration of claims to inflate the capability of their armed forces.


You tell me where is the second hospitalized pilot, and I will show you the wreckage!


----------



## raptor22

sahureka2 said:


> interesting solution, I would use the elongated fuselage of the kowsar but with only one pilot seat


Similar to Saab 37 Viggen ...though without canard ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

In the fog of war, often times evidence cannot be attained for various reasons, however that doesn't mean that everything is black & white. 



TheImmortal said:


> Without a pilot or wreckage of jet, India has nothing.
> 
> Again show me physical evidence.
> 
> Just like every time Syria claims to have shot down an Israeli fighter. Out of all the times only once was there evidence to back it up.
> 
> During conflict both sides come with propaganda and exaggeration of claims to inflate the capability of their armed forces.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> In the fog of war, often times evidence cannot be attained for various reasons, however that doesn't mean that everything is black & white.



Fog of war? It’s been a week since the incident.

A plane doesn’t crash and conveniently no one with a phone get a picture of it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

IRIAF f-14 fully loaded with AIM-23 sedjil+AIM-54 phoenix and sidewinder missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Arminkh

sahureka2 said:


> Two-seater Kowsar (true photo)
> and playing with images with photoshop
> single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage of the two-seater
> single-seater kowsar with elongated fuselage and wing type F-16XL - however maintaining engine air intakes, as the Mithridates user had designed


You are really good at this!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

Iran develops laser shock peening (LSP) technology.






@VEVAK @PeeD

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal

It is you who do not understand Iran's scientific process and their announcement process. You are a few years late on the news. The F-4 SM is an active platform transition to the new aircraft and the new cell. This will eventually be admitted but Iran is still slow to demonstrate their technological lead.

Yet there are indications for years that Iran is still ahead of the announcement process.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-72B

I hope this is just a prank
But srsly
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...power-arm-israel-f-22s-and-b-21-bombers-46402


----------



## Beny Karachun

TheImmortal said:


> Just like every time Syria claims to have shot down an Israeli fighter. Out of all the times only once was there evidence to back it up.


And that evidence was provided by Israel


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> TheImmortal
> 
> It is you who do not understand Iran's scientific process and their announcement process. You are a few years late on the news. The F-4 SM is an active platform transition to the new aircraft and the new cell. This will eventually be admitted but Iran is still slow to demonstrate their technological lead.
> 
> Yet there are indications for years that Iran is still ahead of the announcement process.



Iran is slow to admit it upgraded its 1970s F-4 fighters? 

Yet it proudly shows off its upgrade F-14 AM? 

Yet it shows off a crude F-313 before it is even ready?

Your logic is beyond absurd.

It’s like @yavar made another account called @Mr Iran Eye

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Beny Karachun said:


> And that evidence was provided by Israel


Yeah,but that was probably just because they realised that they couldnt use that old trope of a "crash" due to "unknown causes" or a "mechanical malfunction" to explain the loss of the aircraft.


----------



## TheImmortal

T-72B said:


> I hope this is just a prank
> But srsly
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...power-arm-israel-f-22s-and-b-21-bombers-46402



National interest is the equivalent of sitting at an arm chair general convention. It’s a terrible source of information and the people that write there usually have very little knowledge on how war works or equipment in general.

F-22 production line is long gone and equipment destroyed.

People forget that F-22 is an OLD plane, its prototypes were developed in 90s and it’s production models tested in early 00’s. Technology and processing power has come a long way since then.

B-21 is susceptible to any country that has formidable air defenses. Fighting rag tag militias is one thing, going up against Hypersonic air defense missiles is another thing.

Stupid article. Israel going into any major war will draw the US anyway, so it doesn’t need these things.


----------



## Sineva

T-72B said:


> I hope this is just a prank
> But srsly
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...power-arm-israel-f-22s-and-b-21-bombers-46402


I had to double check the date to make sure it wasnt april the first[lol!]


----------



## Beny Karachun

Sineva said:


> Yeah,but that was probably just because they realised that they couldnt use that old trope of a "crash" due to "unknown causes" or a "mechanical malfunction" to explain the loss of the aircraft.


No. It's because we are honest. When our aircraft gets shot down we tell it. When Syria claims they shot down our aircraft, and Israel claims otherwise, I would trust Israel any day.


----------



## Mithridates

iranian air force innovation to counter iraqi aggression during city wars: the yasser ballistic bomb





this bomb weights almost 1 ton and has a ballistic trajectory and f-4 and f-14 are capable of carrying it


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
loading yasser on f-14 during iran-iraq war


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
an IRIAF f-14 launches a yasser bomb


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
yasser bomb displayed during a parade


yasser bomb had a bad impact on f-14 structure so the air force didn't pursued the project on it while f-4s still use it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

AIM-23 sedjil loaded on an f-14

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

Beny Karachun said:


> No. It's because we are honest. When our aircraft gets shot down we tell it. When Syria claims they shot down our aircraft, and Israel claims otherwise, I would trust Israel any day.


You claimed that crashed jet simply coz u could n't hide it... don't play nice here... Jews are historically known for great traits...!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

scythian500 said:


> You claimed that crashed jet simply coz u could n't hide it... don't play nice here... Jews are historically known for great traits...!


What differentiates between that F-16 that crashed, to the dozen jets Syria claimed they shot down during the years? They even claim they shot down an F-35. Why couldn't we hide the F-16 that crashed, but we could hide the other, allegedly shot down jets?


----------



## Draco.IMF

Beny Karachun said:


> No. It's because we are honest.



i stopped reading at that point because i got a fit of laughter

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Beny Karachun said:


> They even claim they shot down an F-35


well that was suspicious cause as they claimed, you announce a bird collides with your f-35...
but i'm sure your not lying it was a 7 ton bird

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Beny Karachun said:


> What differentiates between that F-16 that crashed, to the dozen jets Syria claimed they shot down during the years? They even claim they shot down an F-35. Why couldn't we hide the F-16 that crashed, but we could hide the other, allegedly shot down jets?



I wouldn’t say that Israel is honest, infact it’s quite the opposite. Israel is one of the few countries in the world with military blackout/censorship Ban meaning that no Israeli news entity/channel/media can say anything about Israeli military developments/news/etc without prior approval from censorship department of Israeli government.

Nonetheless, they are historically somewhat more reliable than Arab countries that engage in propaganda at the expense of credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

TheImmortal said:


> I wouldn’t say that Israel is honest, infact it’s quite the opposite. Israel is one of the few countries in the world with military blackout/censorship Ban meaning that no Israeli news entity/channel/media can say anything about Israeli military developments/news/etc without prior approval from censorship department of Israeli government.
> 
> Nonetheless, they are historically somewhat more reliable than Arab countries that engage in propaganda at the expense of credibility.


Also, the ONLY country in the world that still practices apartheid and is being investigated by the U.N. for war crimes against civilians.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal

The most seriously of the world what are you doing on this forum? You do not master your subject and you have a serious problem of comprehension. Do not worry because what I am saying is going to be confirmed and there are people on this forum who are really looking for it and are going to find out. Begin to understand Iran's announcement process and you will know that they are always more advanced than they say ..

Iran do make an excellent gradual process to make their new heavy fighter jets. You have a good Western thought to underestimate the science of others


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> TheImmortal
> 
> The most seriously of the world what are you doing on this forum? You do not master your subject and you have a serious problem of comprehension. Do not worry because what I am saying is going to be confirmed and there are people on this forum who are really looking for it and are going to find out. Begin to understand Iran's announcement process and you will know that they are always more advanced than they say ..
> 
> Iran do make an excellent gradual process to make their new heavy fighter jets. You have a good Western thought to underestimate the science of others



Listen you have zero credibility and zero proof. Imbeciles like you show up making claims and saying “just wait” are a dime a dozen. You are no different than a fortune teller using tactics to make the audience believe you have some paranormal talent.

For your information, Iran is working on a heavy fighter jet Because they ANNOUNCED it. Iran is working on heavy jet engines because they ANNOUNCED it. Iran has even tried to procure the blueprints to F-35 engines through espionage because the US ANNOUNCED it.

So you can take your F-4 SM bs and shove it up your *** because modernizing a 1970’s airplane not something top secret.

Iran is working on much bigger things than that, but the issue has always been the underfunding of the aerospace wing of its armed forces. This is due to a fundamental disalignment in philosophy between the old guard of Iran-Iraq war and the Shah era iran airforce. If you dig into the books you will see who gets the lion share of the funds each year and who has powerful connections in every major government body within the Republic power structure.

So please go disappear back into whatever hole you came out of and keep your “top secret” kos o sher to yourself.

As to the accuracy of your future predictions Mr. Fortune teller...Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## T-72B

Mr Iran eye is obsessed with F-4SM

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

TheImmortal said:


> It’s like @yavar made another account called @Mr Iran Eye



your are liar . i only have one account and it is called yavar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal 
The art of understanding anything again! I saw it already before registering on this forum that I follow since a few years. It's YOU the fool in good Westerners who does not understand how the Iranian army works. I know they are working on their new heavy fighter planes but the F-4 SM which is a reality is active platform and transition fighter planes. I showed a photos here of an F-4 SM and and pictures of a new cell that is before your blind eyes. All this will be comfirmed on forum and you will be humiliated

Iran does not wait for their new fighter to perfect their fleets. I do not need your lessons to know because I know more about you. Yes Iran is working on ambitious projects and are going further than you think.

This is not your first time criticizing you here and being called a liar because you often say anything. The F-4 SM is of generation 4 like Kowsar. Iran is doing an excellent transition work with these old models but with new cells.

Do you seriously think that Iran will wait for their new fighter jets from a new cell to make modern planes out of existing cell? Iran is strengthening its fleet through this process but your little Western brain does not understand.

Do not be afraid, it will be comfirmed soon enough on this forum.

Again, the F-4 SM in your face. New cell

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

@Mr Iran Eye 

Bro, I agree with your comment but Iran can't keep upgrading these old platforms, we need new platforms/jets. All these refurbishing and upgrading is taking so much cash out of the airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

Mr Iran Eye said:


> TheImmortal
> The art of understanding anything again! I saw it already before registering on this forum that I follow since a few years. It's YOU the fool in good Westerners who does not understand how the Iranian army works. I know they are working on their new heavy fighter planes but the F-4 SM which is a reality is active platform and transition fighter planes. I showed a photos here of an F-4 SM and and pictures of a new cell that is before your blind eyes. All this will be comfirmed on forum and you will be humiliated
> 
> Iran does not wait for their new fighter to perfect their fleets. I do not need your lessons to know because I know more about you. Yes Iran is working on ambitious projects and are going further than you think.
> 
> This is not your first time criticizing you here and being called a liar because you often say anything. The F-4 SM is of generation 4 like Kowsar. Iran is doing an excellent transition work with these old models but with new cells.
> 
> Do you seriously think that Iran will wait for their new fighter jets from a new cell to make modern planes out of existing cell? Iran is strengthening its fleet through this process but your little Western brain does not understand.
> 
> Do not be afraid, it will be comfirmed soon enough on this forum.
> 
> Again, the F-4 SM in your face. New cell
> View attachment 545549


F-4SM boi strike back

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Mr Iran Eye said:


> TheImmortal
> The art of understanding anything again! I saw it already before registering on this forum that I follow since a few years. It's YOU the fool in good Westerners who does not understand how the Iranian army works. I know they are working on their new heavy fighter planes but the F-4 SM which is a reality is active platform and transition fighter planes. I showed a photos here of an F-4 SM and and pictures of a new cell that is before your blind eyes. All this will be comfirmed on forum and you will be humiliated
> 
> Iran does not wait for their new fighter to perfect their fleets. I do not need your lessons to know because I know more about you. Yes Iran is working on ambitious projects and are going further than you think.
> 
> This is not your first time criticizing you here and being called a liar because you often say anything. The F-4 SM is of generation 4 like Kowsar. Iran is doing an excellent transition work with these old models but with new cells.
> 
> Do you seriously think that Iran will wait for their new fighter jets from a new cell to make modern planes out of existing cell? Iran is strengthening its fleet through this process but your little Western brain does not understand.
> 
> Do not be afraid, it will be comfirmed soon enough on this forum.
> 
> Again, the F-4 SM in your face. New cell
> View attachment 545549


bro i said this before we can make 70% (i guess you know whats the other 30%) of tomcat by ourselves and we can make a couple of them annualy but for two main reasons we won't:1) it would be useless and old by the time we get them 2) it will cost us more than f-22 to acquire one. the infastaracture we have regarding heavy jets are in workshop scale not production line and fully automatic factory. they are some engineers with the task to keep our tomcats and phantoms fly worthy by producing some tens of spare parts monthly. why you think we grounded more than half of our f-14?? (actually according to one of our pilots the CIA number of IRIAF grounded f-14s is true but that does not mean they will not fly in case of any conflict)
we are only able to mass produce lightweight jet like kowsar 88 and kowsar and someday qaher. this is the result of having experience with f-5 platform for more than two decades. 
according to some people in AF we are licence producing RD-33 engines. hopefully our next plane will be something like f-20 and if we put the kowsar avionics and bayenat radar on it we gonna get our first home made 4th generation semi-heavy fighter jet.
also according to the person, our AF is working on IRST systems, new targeting pod (which it's prototype exhibited on IRGC su-22s) and a heavy fighter which gonna start to mass produce in 2028. 
as that friend told to me iranians idea of air force and MOD capabilities is very far away from reality. sometimes they overestimate and sometimes underestimate it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mithridates said:


> also according to the person, our AF is working on IRST systems, new targeting pod (which it's prototype exhibited on IRGC su-22s) and a heavy fighter which gonna start to mass produce in 2028.
> .



Any other info regarding this heavy fighter jet?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> Any other info regarding this heavy fighter jet?


he does not talk about domestic projects really that much

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mithridates said:


> he does not talk about domestic projects really that much



Be nice to know more about this project. I hope it's a stealth platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> Be nice to know more about this project. I hope it's a stealth platform.


he said the radar of kowsar is griffo(without mentioning it's model) and it has nothing to do with bayenat radar as it is home grown tech(he said its really something good but i can't state it's specs because it's classified). he said we are licence producing rd-33 engines. about the deals with russia he said they only accepted to sale some su-30 and yak-130(he said our SUs gonna be more advanced than anyone else's models) and they refused to give a production line and only offered su-27 for that and MOD refused. he also said that our tls-99 pods gonna replace by more capable pods like the one showed on su-22. actually it's a funny how he openly talks about foreign procurements it seems like our enemies already know what we are going to receive. but about that plane he just said we have an ongoing project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

WinterNights said:


> @Mr Iran Eye
> 
> Bro, I agree with your comment but Iran can't keep upgrading these old platforms, we need new platforms/jets. All these refurbishing and upgrading is taking so much cash out of the airforce.





WinterNights said:


> @Mr Iran Eye
> 
> Bro, I agree with your comment but Iran can't keep upgrading these old platforms, we need new platforms/jets. All these refurbishing and upgrading is taking so much cash out of the airforce.




Building a new plane 100% takes time and money and during this time, the air force does not strengthen. Then Iran has decided to make more advanced planes through the old models. These planes become active for combat as the new aircraft takes shape.

The F-4 SM is an active platform for the construction of new mordern parts. The F-4 becomes a more modern heavy fighter. Imagine that Iran is still spending 5 years building a new aircraft without creating more modern aircraft to strengthen the existing fleet?

The reality is that the new aircraft is being built through the modernization of the F-4 SM and even the Kowsar. That's the intelligence of the Iranians. Strengthen the fleet of combat aircraft through new technology that advances the new heavy fighter.

When the new 100% Iranian plane arrives, its trial period will take less time as many of its technology would have been tested by F-4 SM, Kowsar and more. In addition, the F-4 SM and Kowsar become active to defend the country

It's not difficult to understand

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> he said the radar of kowsar is griffo(without mentioning it's model) and it has nothing to do with bayenat radar as it is home grown tech(he said its really something good but i can't state it's specs because it's classified). he said we are licence producing rd-33 engines. about the deals with russia he said they only accepted to sale some su-30 and yak-130(he said our SUs gonna be more advanced than anyone else's models) and they refused to give a production line and only offered su-27 for that and MOD refused. he also said that our tls-99 pods gonna replace by more capable pods like the one showed on su-22. actually it's a funny how he openly talks about foreign procurements it seems like our enemies already know what we are going to receive. but about that plane he just said we have an ongoing project.


The whole thing sounds pretty unlikely,I`m sure that if iran was license producing rd33s we would`ve heard about it by now as this would`ve been a much more impressive achievement than the owj project,tho I have heard that iran had reverse engineered and was producing hot sections for the rd33,which would make sense as that is the part that tends to wear out first.
I certainly cant see the iranian af wanting to buy yaks as it has its own trainer under development,not to mention that just buying some su30s,as opposed to licensed production,means all the same old problems of either having to rely on the utterly unreliable russians for spare parts and maintenance or iran having to indigenously develop the capability to produce a lot of these parts itself at a great cost both in time and money.....once again.The idea of the russians offering a license to build su27s is interesting tho,but it would entirely depend on the type,if it were something like the su27sm3 then that would certainly be worth it as it incorporates a lot of of the more impressive systems of the su35 ,such as the irbus-e radar and improved avionics and engines,its basically the new build version of the upgrades carried out on the older su27s in russian service which converts them to su27sm2 standard.However if it was just a license for the production of old su27sk types ie early 1990s vintage then its pretty much just a waste of time as by the time it was brought into service it would probably be approaching 30 years old.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> bro i said this before we can make 70% (i guess you know whats the other 30%) of tomcat by ourselves and we can make a couple of them annualy but for two main reasons we won't:1) it would be useless and old by the time we get them 2) it will cost us more than f-22 to acquire one. the infastaracture we have regarding heavy jets are in workshop scale not production line and fully automatic factory. they are some engineers with the task to keep our tomcats and phantoms fly worthy by producing some tens of spare parts monthly. why you think we grounded more than half of our f-14?? (actually according to one of our pilots the CIA number of IRIAF grounded f-14s is true but that does not mean they will not fly in case of any conflict)
> we are only able to mass produce lightweight jet like kowsar 88 and kowsar and someday qaher. this is the result of having experience with f-5 platform for more than two decades.
> according to some people in AF we are licence producing RD-33 engines. hopefully our next plane will be something like f-20 and if we put the kowsar avionics and bayenat radar on it we gonna get our first home made 4th generation semi-heavy fighter jet.
> also according to the person, our AF is working on IRST systems, new targeting pod (which it's prototype exhibited on IRGC su-22s) and a heavy fighter which gonna start to mass produce in 2028.
> as that friend told to me iranians idea of air force and MOD capabilities is very far away from reality. sometimes they overestimate and sometimes underestimate it.


Rd 33 is not a good choice it provide as much power as f404 but is several time larger on other hand an engine like f110 is roughly the same size as rd-33 but provide 60% more power 

If you invest in rd33 you can't use it in lighter jets and it take a lot of space in heavier jets . the space you could use for a lot more thongs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Imagine that Iran is still spending 5 years building a new aircraft without creating more modern aircraft to strengthen the existing fleet?



You're talking as if these "modern aircraft" you think Iran is upgrading to will be a match for even our weakest foes in the region.
Not just quality wise, quantity wise Iran is way behind and these upgrades will barely make any difference.
I don't mind Iran using old platforms to test new technologies however let's not delude ourselves to think these upgrades will truly achieve anything more than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> The whole thing sounds pretty unlikely,I`m sure that if iran was license producing rd33s we would`ve heard about it by now as this would`ve been a much more impressive achievement than the owj project,tho I have heard that iran had reverse engineered and was producing hot sections for the rd33,which would make sense as that is the part that tends to wear out first.
> I certainly cant see the iranian af wanting to buy yaks as it has its own trainer under development,not to mention that just buying some su30s,as opposed to licensed production,means all the same old problems of either having to rely on the utterly unreliable russians for spare parts and maintenance or iran having to indigenously develop the capability to produce a lot of these parts itself at a great cost both in time and money.....once again.The idea of the russians offering a license to build su27s is interesting tho,but it would entirely depend on the type,if it were something like the su27sm3 then that would certainly be worth it as it incorporates a lot of of the more impressive systems of the su35 ,such as the irbus-e radar and improved avionics and engines,its basically the new build version of the upgrades carried out on the older su27s in russian service which converts them to su27sm2 standard.However if it was just a license for the production of old su27sk types ie early 1990s vintage then its pretty much just a waste of time as by the time it was brought into service it would probably be approaching 30 years old.


lol bro you will hear of rd-33 i hope they don't reffer it as a domestic product. the trainers we have are based on western techs actually our AF is based on western standards. when we bought mig-29s there was some difficulties in riding them and even in some case we nearly lost some of them. russians have their own standard values for speed,altitude and other stuff. so a russian trainer for our russian fighters makes sense. about the su-30, seems like the goal is to replace our f-4s as a heavy multirole so we need a two seat fighter as i know su-27 is air superiority not a multirole. if the MOD rejected it there would be a good reason for that.

also rumors say our versions gonna use more powerful al-41 engines

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mithridates said:


> lol bro you will hear of rd-33 i hope they don't reffer it as a domestic product. the trainers we have are based on western techs actually our AF is based on western standards. when we bought mig-29s there was some difficulties in riding them and even in some case we nearly lost some of them. russians have their own standard values for speed,altitude and other stuff. so a russian trainer for our russian fighters makes sense. about the su-30, seems like the goal is to replace our f-4s as a heavy multirole so we need a two seat fighter as i know su-27 is air superiority not a multirole. if the MOD rejected it there would be a good reason for that.
> 
> also rumors say our versions gonna use more powerful al-41 engines



Well even the su-30 is getting old so I am not surprised they rejected su-27.

As we can see, these Russians will not give anything strategic to Iran. So I hope people are not waiting around for Russia to give us these higher end fighter jets. As usual we must do it ourselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Rd 33 is not a good choice it provide as much power as f404 but is several time larger on other hand an engine like f110 is roughly the same size as rd-33 but provide 60% more power
> 
> If you invest in rd33 you can't use it in lighter jets and it take a lot of space in heavier jets . the space you could use for a lot more thongs.


well actually rd-33 is completely similar to f-404 except the fact that it uses less fuel in similar trust number. actually i think it's a successful engine even some of europeans were interested to accuire that and china and pakistan use them in their new fighter jets



WinterNights said:


> Well even the su-30 is getting old so I am not surprised they rejected su-27.
> 
> As we can see, these Russians will not give anything strategic to Iran. So I hope people are not waiting around for Russia to give us these higher end fighter jets. As usual we must do it ourselves.


we don't know which version they gonna sell us. also i think it's the best option *available* for us while we tried to get rafale and...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> well actually rd-33 is completely similar to f-404 except the fact that it uses less fuel in similar trust number. actually i think it's a successful engine even some of europeans were interested to accuire that and china and pakistan use them in their new fighter jets


Not unless it's RD-33Mk that is used in Mig-35 and its impossible Russia agree to give us that.I have no doubt you can get WS-10 from china far easier than that


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Not unless it's RD-33Mk that is used in Mig-35 and its impossible Russia agree to give us that.I have no doubt you can get WS-10 fr





Hack-Hook said:


> Not unless it's RD-33Mk that is used in Mig-35 and its impossible Russia agree to give us that.I have no doubt you can get WS-10 from china far easier than that


i'm not sure but it could be that model. also it's not really that bad it is comparable to snecma m88 and is better than f404.don't be that pessimist bro.


----------



## skyshadow

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



 Perhaps the Iranian technicians and engineers were already working on an idea similar to the one presented here by the user Mitridate

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> Perhaps the Iranian technicians and engineers were already working on an idea similar to the one presented here by the user Mitridate



As soon as i saw this photo i remembered the same Photoshop image that you made. its looks a loooot like it but what is the point of IRIAF for doing that? its part of a Project named shahid (Martyr)

what is the end game here?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Could it be part of UCAV project?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Could it be part of UCAV project?



could be the prototype and if you are right than it will be one big UAV like X47 but it will not be stealth because it does not have any anti-radar materials. but i do not think its UAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> could be the prototype and if you are right than it will be one big UAV like X47 but it will not be stealth because it does not have any anti-radar materials. but i do not think its UAV.



Those wings are not the finished product so we can't say if they will have RAM or not.
As for size, the wings seem a little bit small to my eyes for a manned jet unless they are for something Kowsar size.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Those wings are not the finished product so we can't say if they will have RAM or not.
> As for size, the wings seem a little to my eyes for a manned jet unless they are for something Kowsar size.


i agree i think its for Kowsar size project like shafaq.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> i agree i think its for Kowsar size project like shafaq.



I'll be happy to see something new but not excited until we see a project for something semi-heavy to heavy.



skyshadow said:


>



Which jet is that?


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> I'll be happy to see something new but not excited until we see a project for something semi-heavy to heavy.
> 
> 
> 
> Which jet is that?



I do not know, but I think the cabin is made in Iran and does not belong to any other fighter. there is one prototype too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> I do not know, but I think the cabin is made in Iran and does not belong to any other fighter. there is one prototype too.



Seems to be a simulator?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Seems to be a simulator?



simulators have there own room. but it could be

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> ........
> 
> what is the end game here?



Almost all the parts of the F-5 / kowsar are now made in Iran, and Iranian technicians and engineers have deciphered each component and developed the ability to make aerodynamic changes (see saeghe), so it might be logical to try to further develop this platform to evaluate new configurations.
Having F-5 fuselages available they may have designed a version with a new type of wings even at the prototype level only; protocype to be used for evaluation and comparative purposes to ascertain whether the new configuration brings a substantial advantage over an F5 / Kowsar in the original configuration.
Using parts of the F5 / Kowsar the cost of this prototype should be more limited vs a new model completely to be built from scratch

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*what is that?*





















im not sure if its an Iranian f 5 or not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

Looks like Yak-130/Shafagh project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

WinterNights said:


> You're talking as if these "modern aircraft" you think Iran is upgrading to will be a match for even our weakest foes in the region.
> Not just quality wise, quantity wise Iran is way behind and these upgrades will barely make any difference.
> I don't mind Iran using old platforms to test new technologies however let's not delude ourselves to think these upgrades will truly achieve anything more than that.



You underestimate these planes and Iranian scientists and for me it's perfect. We will see in the future but I have the impression that you will be surprised. There are people who search and I like that. There are really spectacular advances in Iran and we are going to discover many things. It's exciting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mr Iran Eye said:


> You underestimate these planes and Iranian scientists and for me it's perfect. We will see in the future but I have the impression that you will be surprised. There are people who search and I like that. There are really spectacular advances in Iran and we are going to discover many things. It's exciting



I have been following Iran's military growth for over a decade now since the time of the old IMF forum and even before that. I don't underestimate our scientists and engineers, I was just pointing out what I considered a flaw in your thinking (I could be wrong of course).

Trust me, I love to be surprised, seeing Iran develop gives me more joy than anything else

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

WinterNights said:


> Well even the su-30 is getting old so I am not surprised they rejected su-27.
> 
> As we can see, these Russians will not give anything strategic to Iran. So I hope people are not waiting around for Russia to give us these higher end fighter jets. As usual we must do it ourselves.


Sad but true,tho it would depend on the model of su27 that was supposedly being offered,if its the old early 90s su27sk then yeah its not worth it as it would only be a 4th gen late cold war machine,basically just a bigger mig29 with some slightly better avionics and longer range.However if its the new build su27sm3 then that is a whole different machine entirely which is not only a new build but in addition utilizes some pretty potent su35 systems and that certainly would be worth building under license,not much point in just buying them tho.I agree the russians are basically worthless politically.militarily and economically,they`re just too untrustworthy to rely upon for almost anything really,its a pity tho.
The other option would be to abandon any thoughts of acquiring 4th gen+ machines and wait for the chinese to finish developing their 5th gen machines over the next decade or 2 while iran starts a massive build up of its new cruise missile forces,including turbofan powered soumars with intermediate range for naval and af use,to compliment its massive ballistic missile force,and also begins the mirving and marving of its existing ballistic missile force.In addition further building up irans air defences with a new generation of upgrades to irans new sams plus upgrading the b373 to give it s300vm like abm capability,as I suspect that the gulfies and possibly israel are finally starting to realise just how vulnerable their much vaunted air power is to irans missile power and may seek to try and develop missile forces of their own.
Devote the resources to reverse and reengineering the f14,tho frankly this would be hideously expensive and I think would be a massive undertaking for even the capabilities of the irgc let alone the ultra conservative airforce with its currently confused priorities.The big question of course is would it really be worth the huge effort when you consider just how many other capabilities iran could build for the same expenditure of resources.
The other option is of course the development of a strategic nuclear deterrent with the goal of a small modern deterrent force comprised of icbms,irbms,mrbms,srbms,slbms,and a mixture of dual use cruise missiles and tactical level weapons.One of the advantages here is that all the branches of the military would get a share of the nuclear pie,tho whether you would want to create a new military branch along the lines of the strategic rocket forces to oversee the strategic defence and control of the strategic class weapons rather than just dividing this up among the existing military branches as the us does is hard to say.
Ultimately I think iran has some hard decisions to make in the near future.


----------



## Mithridates

sahureka2 said:


> Perhaps the Iranian technicians and engineers were already working on an idea similar to the one presented here by the user Mitridate


damn i should have wished a lamborghini

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

I tried to look more carefully at this new wing, I think that in the front there is still an element missing, an element that I made with photoshop to evaluate how the new wing might look.
With this element the wing has a different configuration that I tried to reproduce in the design of the last pane

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Ray_Atek

landing gears should be redesigned and because the F-5 fuseleg has low width it will be very difficult to do that but if the wings are belong to wider planform with two 1 meter diameter engine , it will be possible and the fighter go to semi-heavy fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

So are these wings for something completely new? I can't find anything else they can be for...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> damn i should have wished a lamborghini



I wouldn't' get too excited about that! At least not on production model with J-85 engines

Especially since Iran already has experience in changing F-5 wings..... 





One of the reason Iran didn't continue to pursue the above shown project and I would say didn't even bother with the Saegheh conversion with the Kosars is because the engines of the Aircraft are so weak that such changes will negatively impact the war fighting capabilities of the Aircraft to a point that it's just not worth it because at the end of the day one of the main problems with the F-5 is payload, range with sufficient payload & to some extent it's supersonic capabilities and changing the wing design or location or adding an extra stabilizer does nothing to address the main issue that's directly related to it's engines.

I don't know what those wings are for or if they are even real and can be made operational even on a prototype or if they simply welded a few sections to an existing wing..... but they are missing their titanium slats and they are far too big and heavy for a production model of a fighter powered by J-85s and I would say that's good news because at least in a way it's showing that Iran is at least working on a larger more capable fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

In any way, if it is for the F-5 platform then: Trading maneuverability for higher speed performance (delta wings) would be a good trade-off (more so if HOBS AAMs become available).
Finally changing the two J85 in the next step to a single RD-33 would be a good final target for the F-5 platform development.

We have to see for what those wings are.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

VEVAK said:


> but they are missing their titanium slats and they are far too big and heavy for a production model of a fighter powered by J-85s and I would say that's good news because at least in a way it's showing that Iran is at least working on a larger more capable fighter



Do they really look big to you? To my eyes they are actually small.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 11270999, membro: 184479"] gli ingranaggi di atterraggio dovrebbero essere ridisegnati e poiché la fuseleg F-5 ha una larghezza ridotta sarà molto difficile farlo, ma se le ali appartengono a una forma planare più ampia con due 1 motore del diametro del metro, sarà possibile e il combattente andrà a un jet da combattimento semi-pesante. [/ QUOTE]

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Especially since Iran already has experience in changing F-5 wings.....



That’s PSd!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Iran is going to install radars on its f 7.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

VEVAK said:


> I wouldn't' get too excited about that! At least not on production model with J-85 engines
> 
> Especially since Iran already has experience in changing F-5 wings.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the reason Iran didn't continue to pursue the above shown project and I would say didn't even bother with the Saegheh conversion with the Kosars is because the engines of the Aircraft are so weak that such changes will negatively impact the war fighting capabilities of the Aircraft to a point that it's just not worth it because at the end of the day one of the main problems with the F-5 is payload, range with sufficient payload & to some extent it's supersonic capabilities and changing the wing design or location or adding an extra stabilizer does nothing to address the main issue that's directly related to it's engines.
> 
> I don't know what those wings are for or if they are even real and can be made operational even on a prototype or if they simply welded a few sections to an existing wing..... but they are missing their titanium slats and they are far too big and heavy for a production model of a fighter powered by J-85s and I would say that's good news because at least in a way it's showing that Iran is at least working on a larger more capable fighter


that photo is forged i don't know why fars published it. this wings probably are maded for our f-7:




looks identical to me. while the first scenario makes more sense but it could belong to new semi-heavy platform based on f-5:














seems like IRIAF have other projects too:













and MOD has this projects:










i'm not sure if they are wasting our resources or trying to achieve the best platform design through competition

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Yes, it seems they may be for the F-7...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> that photo is forged i don't know why fars published it. this wings probably are maded for our f-7:
> View attachment 545909
> 
> looks identical to me. while the first scenario makes more sense but it could belong to new semi-heavy platform based on f-5:
> 
> View attachment 545920
> 
> View attachment 545921
> 
> View attachment 545922
> 
> 
> seems like IRIAF have other projects too:
> 
> View attachment 545925
> 
> View attachment 545926
> View attachment 545928
> 
> 
> and MOD has this projects:
> 
> View attachment 545929
> 
> View attachment 545930
> 
> 
> i'm not sure if they are wasting our resources or trying to achieve the best platform design through competition


Competition is all fine and good,but if at the end of the day all you have to show for all of these projects is a large collection of models and not much else,then yes you are wasting resources.
Whats always baffled me is why no serious attempt seems to have been made to integrate the newer russian a2a and a2g weapons with the older us airframes,as the r27,r73,r60 would be far better performers than old 70s era sidewinders and sparrows.The irgc-af has developed a modern targeting pod and new stand off weapons but the regular airforce appears to have made no effort to acquire these even for evaluation,we also saw this same sort of thing with the unveiling of the af drones.Rather than going for something like the mohajer 6 or the combat proven shahed 129 and its control systems the airforce went and built their own rather unimpressive systems
I think part of the problem is simply that the af just doesnt seem to have any kind of coherent long term plans,or at least any actually realistic ones,and even for the ones that do seem somewhat realistic ie an af drone force,the execution seems rather poor.
I really hope that they get their sh!t together at some point,ideally the sooner the better.


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Competition is all fine and good,but if at the end of the day all you have to show for all of these projects is a large collection of models and not much else,then yes you are wasting resources.
> Whats always baffled me is why no serious attempt seems to have been made to integrate the newer russian a2a and a2g weapons with the older us airframes,as the r27,r73,r60 would be far better performers than old 70s era sidewinders and sparrows.The irgc-af has developed a modern targeting pod and new stand off weapons but the regular airforce appears to have made no effort to acquire these even for evaluation,we also saw this same sort of thing with the unveiling of the af drones.Rather than going for something like the mohajer 6 or the combat proven shahed 129 and its control systems the airforce went and built their own rather unimpressive systems
> I think part of the problem is simply that the af just doesnt seem to have any kind of coherent long term plans,or at least any actually realistic ones,and even for the ones that do seem somewhat realistic ie an af drone force,the execution seems rather poor.
> I really hope that they get their sh!t together at some point,ideally the sooner the better.


accourding to some people in AF we have the tech to make something like f-15 (did u know 80% of f-15 component are the same used in f-4?) but we lack a proper infrastructure. it seems like AF directing it's Insignificant money only to R&D. but obviously we are wasting our time and money working in parallel projects. like kowsar and kowsar88 and the zolfagar and karrar or talash and raad and even in gatling guns: nasr and muharam and like u said in kaman and shahed drone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

I found another image in which you see some more elements, however the quality of the photo is low, I tried to improve it and at the top appears a structure that appears to be a part of the fuselage.





Surely these images are screenshots taken from a video, video that I could not find on the web.
I ask if any of the users of this forum can locate it and share it here, so that they can view it carefully with the hope of being able to detect some other clue as to which plane they are working on.

thank !


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> accourding to some people in AF we have the tech to make something like f-15 (did u know 80% of f-15 component are the same used in f-4?) but we lack a proper infrastructure. it seems like AF directing it's Insignificant money only to R&D. but obviously we are wasting our time and money working in parallel projects. like kowsar and kowsar88 and the zolfagar and karrar or talash and raad and even in gatling guns: nasr and muharam and like u said in kaman and shahed drone.


Yes,that is one of the most frustrating things that I see,the waste of resources with the pointless amount of duplication of effort and reinventing of the wheel,with the drone programs being the most glaringly obvious example because the various branches of the military want THEIR own system rather than going for an excellent preexisting system because it wasnt developed by their branch.
Iran cannot afford this level of stupidity and waste.A real and serious effort must be made between the services to coordinate both the development of proposed systems with multi service potential while ensuring the multi service adoption of the best system for the job regardless of who designed or built it.The last thing iran wants to end up like is japan during ww2 where the two air services couldnt even agree to come up with a common 30mm cannon round design let alone a gun to actually fire it from.
I agree that one does get the feeling that the af would rather design paper planes and make desktop models than seriously try to upgrade the existing airfleets capabilities sadly.


----------



## Myself

Another fake or at most a duplicate project with tons of financial benefits for bunch of corrupted and useless people in the forms of bonus, overtime, promotions, etc. At the end, what they want to accomplish is called JL-9, and it has already been made by China many years ago!
It is not clear why the word “retirement” does not exist in the AF’s dictionary? The fleet of F-7s are at the end of their lives with almost 3 decades of service. Just retire those damn garbages and pump the money to renovate the fleet of other fighters! If Iran can really make Kowsar fighters with upgraded avionics and engines, just boost its production numbers! What the hell is happening in that corrupted system? Is anybody with a little bit honesty and patriotism left in that country?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> accourding to some people in AF we have the tech to make something like f-15 (did u know 80% of f-15 component are the same used in f-4?) but we lack a proper infrastructure. it seems like AF directing it's Insignificant money only to R&D. but obviously we are wasting our time and money working in parallel projects. like kowsar and kowsar88 and the zolfagar and karrar or talash and raad and even in gatling guns: nasr and muharam and like u said in kaman and shahed drone.



Being able to produce 6 planes per year vs 60 is a huge difference in cost per plane and overall program cost. It’s what is economically feasible and makes sense from cost benefit analysis.

Iran does not have the proper supply chain industries and mass production lines set up to build a major fighter jet.

Obviously Iran knows what is needed, the supply chain and production lines of BMs has demonstrated that.

For some reason and it’s likely due to funds and military politics Iran hasn’t focused fully on Air Force.

People need to know Iran is under economic siege right now, expecting Iran to spend tens of billions of dollars on building The required infrastructure for domestic fighter jet production is naive. 

The West is making Iran choose between keeping its civil sector a float or its military. If Iran focuses too much on military and let’s civil languish then it could face political unrest and then it won’t matter what type of fighter jets you have.

During 2009 Protests, Iran was in much stronger position economically and thus the protests didn’t grow beyond containable proportions. At the time Iranian toman was 1200 for every $1. Today is 13000 for every $1. People can barely afford meat due to rapid rising costs and depreciating currency.

Iran is not North Korea, the population won’t accept starvation and absolute poverty. Thus Iran has to walk a fine line right now. Certain things have to prioritized over others. The West is trying to pressure Iran into collapsing economically like Venezuela.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mithridates said:


> that photo is forged i don't know why fars published it. this wings probably are maded for our f-7:
> View attachment 545909



These F-7s are F-7PGs. IRIAF has F-7Ns that have conventional Delta wings. I highly doubt the IRIAF is spending its very limited funds to bring its near useless F-7 fleet to PG standard!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Myself

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> These F-7s are F-7PGs. IRIAF has F-7Ns that have conventional Delta wings. I highly doubt the IRIAF is spending its very limited funds to bring its near useless F-7 fleet to PG standard!


The tip of the wings in the photo taken during Sattary’s visit clearly resembles JL-9, and not F-7PG.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Myself said:


> The tip of the wings in the photo taken during Sattary’s visit clearly resembles JL-9, and not F-7PG.


Both the F-7PG and the JL-9 have similar wings! Both these aircraft are a waste of money and energy for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> I found another image in which you see some more elements, however the quality of the photo is low, I tried to improve it and at the top appears a structure that appears to be a part of the fuselage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surely these images are screenshots taken from a video, video that I could not find on the web.
> I ask if any of the users of this forum can locate it and share it here, so that they can view it carefully with the hope of being able to detect some other clue as to which plane they are working on.
> 
> thank !


Found another pic




https://www.pintaram.com/u/iranian_defensive_power/1998181202671273724_2016887485

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

The wings can belong to modified su22 also.


----------



## WinterNights

On that poster, the tail appears to be like the JL-9






If this turns out to be nothing more than a project to waste money on upgrading their J-7 then the airforce is truly the most incompetent branch in the entire Iranian army.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

looking at the model plans published by Skyshadows, the image of Sineva and the new wings that actually resemble those of F-7PG and JL-9, it seems that in reality there are technical studies for an updated and modified version of the F- 7





Always curious to see how such a version might appear, I made this photoshop




photoshop modified 14-3-2019

I wonder if there could be a small* "discreet"* help from China that has already realized, starting from the FT-7, JL-9, by modifying the wing and the front part of the fuselage by adopting side air intakes.

however it could be an option only if completely built from scratch and not for conversion of the elderly F-7 and if powered by the RD-33 or the same power class.
This version of the legendary Mig-21 / F-7, could have very similar performances to the JF-17 Thunder-

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Myself

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Both the F-7PG and the JL-9 have similar wings! Both these aircraft are a waste of money and energy for Iran.


No! They are different! Also, F-7 production line has been abondoned for years now, but the one for JL-9 not!
It is clear that Iran Air Force authorities have a comprehensive plan to enhance the capabilities of their fleet to match with other advanced world class air forces such as Sudanese Air Force!


----------



## PeeD

Without a RD-33 sized engine only the Kowsar can be produced. With nothing else produced from scratch, only upgrades can improve the fighting power.

Heavy upgrades on the other hand, train new personell, step by step a capable industry can form.

Aerodynamic design changes on the Saeghe were minimal and none was performed on the Kowsar. Then some serious work was done with the Kowsar 88 trainer.

Is it possible that the aerodynamic/airframe team of the IRIAF keep working on and improve skills by heavily modifying the F-7? That would actually make quite some sense, even if we agree that the capability increase by that F-7 upgrade would be minimal in practice.

Practical truth is that your personell in the airframe design department must keep their skills and add new skills by new projects. So this likely ist just training for a team that wants to mature their skills for something serious, once the engine guys can deliver a serious product.

Such step by step training programs worked in the avionics department and will also work for the airframe department in future. The IRIAF wants to survive and this is their only path.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

Just because we don't have the engine, it does not mean they cannot be working on the rest of the plane. They have been working on these smaller planes for decades now, so I am sure they can now at least attempt to work on something new and heavier. Once they have made it, we can use our current RD-33 engines to test the planes if they have not made their own engine by that time.

I don't buy this notion that we have to wait till we have the engine ready and then start developing the plane, that is such a waste of time.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

In nose air-intake fighters such mig21 ,f7 and su17/20/22 two problem should solved, location of landing gears and location of air-intake and optimizing these locations in redesign to minimize the fighter drag.
locating landing gears behind air-intake in side or under-bely air intake is what designers adopt as solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

Now the question is which version China has transferred the technology, and what plan Iran Air Force has:
- Basic JL-9: Air Force wants to upgrade the existing FT-7N fleet to JL-9 for advanced training? In this case what is the use of Kowsar?
- FTC-2000:Light fighter with 7 hard points to upgrade F-7N fleet of Dezful? Is t worth to do so?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

WinterNights said:


> Just because we don't have the engine, it does not mean they cannot be working on the rest of the plane. They have been working on these smaller planes for decades now, so I am sure they can now at least attempt to work on something new and heavier. Once they have made it, we can use our current RD-33 engines to test the planes if they have not made their own engine by that time.
> 
> I don't buy this notion that we have to wait till we have the engine ready and then start developing the plane, that is such a waste of time.



Design certification and serial production of a engine takes a lot of time. Once a more concrete date of availability can be set, airframe design can also set for that date. I fully agree that a prototype would use a just a mature foreign engine for testing.
However the plan is unknown to us.

- It may mean the engines serial production is still too far away, hence the aerodynamic/airframe team maintains, improves skills and trains new manpower. Imagine a scenario of delay of the engine program that delays a new fighter program and the aerodynamic/airframe team takes such a upgrade program in the meantime to be busy.

- It may mean that the aerodynamic/airframe team is not yet skilled enough to design a mach 2 fighter from scratch and does a lower risk upgrade project.

- It may mean that the the IRIAF for some strange reason believes that this upgrade adds sufficient added capability to the F-7. Hence it rather does that instead of testing a demonstrator for a new fighter. A tech. demonstrator/prototype program adds no short-term capability improvement to the existing fleet.

- It may mean that the aerodynamic/airframe team has splittet in two. A main team that does the tech. demonstrator/prototype program for a new fighter that uses a Iranian engine after testing. A small splinter group of the original team that had completed their projects in that main project and could not be keep busy, hence they moved to such a upgrade program to avoid loosing the team. This case is unlikely but such things happen in industry practice. Sometimes aerodynamic design experts are not need anymore full-time during the prototyping and testing phase. To keep them employed and trained, a new small program is started.

I would say that the serial produced engine is still some years away and design experience on a mach 2 capable airframe too low. Hence this project was started to get within the time plan of a future Iranian fighter and have a capable/mature aerodynamic/airframe team by then.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

WinterNights said:


> On that poster, the tail appears to be like the JL-9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this turns out to be nothing more than a project to waste money on upgrading their J-7 then the airforce is truly the most incompetent branch in the entire Iranian army.


If I'm not wrong those j7 are operated by IRGC.


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> If I'm not wrong those j7 are operated by IRGC.


Then it is an irgc program then?,I had wondered about that.It will be interesting to see if the irgc-af is as successful with modifying the j7 as it was with reactivating the su22 force.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> If I'm not wrong those j7 are operated by IRGC.


f-7s are air force assets


Sineva said:


> Then it is an irgc program then?,I had wondered about that.It will be interesting to see if the irgc-af is as successful with modifying the j7 as it was with reactivating the su22 force.


right now f-7s are in AF possess but i'm sure they would gladly transfer them to IRGC because the maintenance cost of air force is really high due to different platforms. this possibility makes more sense.

i really hope AF pursues the basic f-20 design and leaves others. we already are behind the saudis in air and tiger shark becuase of it's design based on f-5 would be easier to produce and hopefully fill our gaps compare to southies.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> In any way, if it is for the F-5 platform then: Trading maneuverability for higher speed performance (delta wings) would be a good trade-off (more so if HOBS AAMs become available).
> Finally changing the two J85 in the next step to a single RD-33 would be a good final target for the F-5 platform development.
> 
> We have to see for what those wings are.



Yes I also believe Delta wings to be the best solution for a future Iranian fighter especially with modern targeting capabilities, modern PGM, IRST's for dog fights & modern BVR capabilities.... but that said the F-5's engines are so weak that the added weight of much larger two peace wings that would most defiantly require heavier fuselage and heavier landing gears will greatly effect thrust to weight ratio of the Aircraft which will negate the positive impacts of delta wings

And I also believe the Kosar to be sufficient for an Iranian CAS fighter platform as long as they build the proper weapons to go with it and Iran shouldn't bother with changing it's design until the engine's are addressed and instead of playing around with CAS fighter designs should think about building larger more capable fighter platforms

I don't see it likely that Iran would have the production capacity of countries like the U.S. and the few fighters we do produce should be larger force multipliers



WinterNights said:


> Do they really look big to you? To my eyes they are actually small.



They are too big and heavy to be used for F-5 conversion with J-85 engines and not big in general especially since they are 2 peace wings(that aren't made out of composites like carbon fiber....) and would required heavier more expensive bulkheads to hold them and would naturally require new landing gears


----------



## Mithridates

guys your underestimating the kowsar it's not f-14 but it has some capabilities:





this is the kowsar radar




and this is the grifo m-346 with the following specifications:




and it's able to engage with two targets at same time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> That’s PSd!



As I said I don't know if they are real or not and even if they are not PSD for all we know it could be R&D in high end welding of airframe aluminum composites and not really meant to be wings for any specific fighter at all.....

Iran being able to weld a large section of an aluminum composite wing that requires high flexibility at various altitudes and temperatures over years of repeated flights at various G's would be a great achievement for Iran so if the pix are real they don't necessarily need to be wings of any specific fighter for it to be a capability well worth showcasing


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> As I said I don't know if they are real or not and even if they are not PSD for all we know it could be R&D in high end welding of airframe aluminum composites and not really meant to be wings for any specific fighter at all.....
> 
> Iran being able to weld a large section of an aluminum composite wing that requires high flexibility at various altitudes and temperatures over years of repeated flights at various G's would be a great achievement for Iran so if the pix are real they don't necessarily need to be wings of any specific fighter for it to be a capability well worth showcasing



I was referring to the mid wing f5 you posted as what is a proved photoshopped image. The wings posted are completely real.


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> guys your underestimating the kowsar it's not f-14 but it has some capabilities:
> 
> View attachment 546129
> 
> this is the kowsar radar
> View attachment 546130
> 
> and this is the grifo m-346 with the following specifications:
> View attachment 546131
> 
> and it's able to engage with two targets at same time.





Yup at the end of the day it's the modern weapons systems and weapons on your platform that will truly define how deadly a fighter will be in a modern battlefield 

And naturally an F-4E equipped with an AN/APG-81 (F-35 radar) and advanced weapons to go with it would naturally be a more capable war fighting machine than lets say an F-35 like platform that's only armed with for example an AN/APG-67 

And that's why I believe until Iran develops a new powerplant to power it's fighters then there is really no point in messing with the F-5 design in a significant way unless the changes reduce the aircraft's weight & drag &or reduce cost or ease of production significantly enough for it to make sense or it is an R&D project with the express purpose of building a larger more capable fighter platform around more capable engines in the future

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> guys your underestimating the kowsar it's not f-14 but it has some capabilities:
> 
> View attachment 546129
> 
> this is the kowsar radar
> View attachment 546130
> 
> and this is the grifo m-346 with the following specifications:
> View attachment 546131
> 
> and it's able to engage with two targets at same time.


But whats it going to engage them with,old 70s era sparrows perhaps?.The grifo is an ok starting point for a radar but without modern bvr weapons like the r77 or something equivalent then basically most of these improvements are just wasted.This is where the airforce just doesnt seem to have its sh!t together frankly,its not enough to build an indigenous f5 based fighter if you havent got the advanced weapons to arm it with and that means a2a like the r73 and r77.



Mithridates said:


> f-7s are air force assets
> 
> right now f-7s are in AF possess but i'm sure they would gladly transfer them to IRGC because the maintenance cost of air force is really high due to different platforms. this possibility makes more sense.


It certainly looks like this may have actually happened as we can see in this picture an f7 2 seater carrying an irgc developed yassim glide bomb

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> irgc developed yassim glide bomb


yassin and that targeting pod are AF products. the reason IRGC showed them is because they have guts to show their achievements unlike AF. otherwise IRGCAF is a new branch and uses AF assets in many aspects and no one expect them to lead the way in that short time after it funded. dude AF is super paranoid, protective and conservative regarding the domestic programs.there use to be many AF pilot accounts in instagram but HEFA take down almost all of them. in one case they forced one of them to deactivate his account because he shared a footage of newly overhauled f-4 take off at full trust.or another funny fact is that all the footages of the recent AF drill are from last year drill and are not new lol because they tested new munitions like the yassin and qassed.


Sineva said:


> But whats it going to engage them with,old 70s era sparrows perhaps


sparrow is not that bad really at least it's better than only sidewinders. also we have r-27s and maybe it's active radar guidance version. but i think a missile like sidewinder with beam riding as it's guidance mode with IR terminal guidance would be a good choice for kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

تصویر نمای نزدیک از #بمب_هدایت_شونده_یاسین
.
.
برد پرتاب از جنگنده 60 کیلومتر

برد پرتاب از پهپاد جت کرار 20 کیلومتر

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

WinterNights said:


> تصویر نمای نزدیک از #بمب_هدایت_شونده_یاسین
> .
> .
> برد پرتاب از جنگنده 60 کیلومتر
> 
> برد پرتاب از پهپاد جت کرار 20 کیلومتر
> 
> View attachment 546350



It's good news that Iran is building Glide capable PGM kits but for the fighter versions at least the design clearly needs an upgrade because the SDB should be designed with the pylons in mind 



'

Or else what would be the point of using highly accurate SDB's on a fighter if your not increasing fire power by increasing the number of targets each fighter can hit 

But for now at least for the Karrar's it's a nice system to have

Reactions: Like Like:

3


----------



## Aramagedon

The 40 anniversary of Islamic republic:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
f-5 armed with r-60 heat seeking missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> f-5 armed with r-60 heat seeking missile


Good to see,tho I wish it was also carrying the far more formidable R73 as well.
The thing I do have to wonder about is how old this picture is.We`ve seen a few other pics like this where the airforce did make some attempts to integrate the newer russian weapons with the older us airframes but as to how successful they were.....who knows?,tho something like this is probably a lot easier to pull off integration wise as it is just an ir a2a missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Good to see,tho I wish it was also carrying the far more formidable R73 as well.
> The thing I do have to wonder about is how old this picture is.We`ve seen a few other pics like this where the airforce did make some attempts to integrate the newer russian weapons with the older us airframes but as to how successful they were.....who knows?,tho something like this is probably a lot easier to pull off integration wise as it is just an ir a2a missile.


this is of an era that our sidewinders became useless so air force tried to use r-60 instead of them. seems like that issue is solved and our AIM-9s are back again.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Iran should be advanced enough in missile technology to develop its own IR guided and radar guided air to air missiles to replace their AIM-9Ps and AIM-7E2s?R-27s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Iran should be advanced enough in missile technology to develop its own IR guided and radar guided air to air missiles to replace their AIM-9Ps and AIM-7E2s?R-27s.


well we can. we have all the necessary elements we have powerful rocket engines, powerful batteries, we had experiences with thrust vectoring missiles, we made accurate radar seekers, we have designed IRI seekers and recently we introduced our own data link and so on. i really hope AF develop a radar beam riding A2A missile with IRI as terminal guidance for the kowsars.
BTW i think MOD has a plans for A2A missiles like 9th dey missile. i assume it's something like french mica missile which they use both as a air defence and A2A missile. also 9 dey missile has a compact design which makes it possible to put it in a canister or place it in weapon bay.


















considering that operational range of vl mica compare to A2A version is half, we could assume that air launched version of 9 dey would have 60km range. and with this range it's comparable to israeli derby missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

tonight I was  thinking how an F-7 (Mig-21) could appear with the front of the F-5E fuselage, and for fun I spent a little time doing photoshop.
this is the result

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

some ppl say Iran publish this poster at the Baghdad exhibition. It looks like some news is coming soon from this fifth generation fighter.







Type of plane: stealth, Close air support, training

Country of origin: IRAN

Manufacturer: Air Industry Organization

Designed by: Department of Defense

Time of introduction: 2013

Current status: Under Development

How many made: 1 prototype

Price: 45 million dollar
*



Iranian upgraded cobra in Baghdad exhibition.*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> some ppl say Iran publish this poster at the Baghdad exhibition. It looks like some news is coming soon from this fifth generation fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Iranian upgraded cobra in Baghdad exhibition.*


45 million dollars?? that's expensive

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

Mithridates said:


> 45 million dollars?? that's expensive



It's the price for the buyers...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> It's the price for the buyers...



Better be a damn good plane that’s more expensive than an SU-30, F-16, F-18, F-15, SU-27, SU-34 and around the same price as MIG-35.

Why would any buyer choose this plane over planes that have years/decades worth of testing and upgrades?

Unless Iran plans to sell to pariah countries like North Korea, that price is way too high.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> 45 million dollars?? that's expensive



yes its because of the price of dollar its 13000


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Better be a damn good plane that’s more expensive than an SU-30, F-16, F-18, F-15, SU-27, SU-34 and around the same price as MIG-35.
> 
> Why would any buyer choose this plane over planes that have years/decades worth of testing and upgrades?
> 
> Unless Iran plans to sell to pariah countries like North Korea, that price is way too high.



I think it's just a number... Also it may include services that follow as well...

Realistically, this plane has stealth capability so think of it as a F-117 plus the ability to fly low for longer distances. From my understanding this plane will likely be subsonic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Better be a damn good plane that’s more expensive than an SU-30, F-16, F-18, F-15, SU-27, SU-34 and around the same price as MIG-35.
> 
> Why would any buyer choose this plane over planes that have years/decades worth of testing and upgrades?
> 
> Unless Iran plans to sell to pariah countries like North Korea, that price is way too high.


well as you mentioned we have to see its performance first but its better be goooood. but if its truly stealth than this will gives it an edge.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> well as you mentioned we have to see its performance first but its better be goooood. but if its truly stealth than this will gives it an edge.



I think Iran needs this platform for SEAD and stand off operations to increase yields of its missile destruction.


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> yes its because of the price of dollar its 13000


bro kowsar is that loaded with new avionics that it's service ceiling and max speed decreased and still it's 7 million dollars. a single fakour missile costs 1.57 billion rial=121,000 dollars. that number does not make sense. bro are you sure that source is reliable??


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> I think Iran needs this platform for SEAD and stand off operations to increase yields of its missile destruction.



several months ago, Iran opened an material ( explosives ) production plant and they said those new materials will increase the destruction power of our missile warheads 2 to 3 times .



Mithridates said:


> bro kowsar is that loaded with new avionics that it's service ceiling and max speed decreased and still it's 7 million dollars. a single fakour missile costs 1.57 billion rial=121,000 dollars. that number does not make sense. bro are you sure that source is reliable??



im not 100% sure what Iran is showing and Iran is alot in Baghdad these days. well we do not knew about the upgrades and if they made and installed these 5 gen tech on it or maybe changing engines? i mean with these in mind we can not compare that two fighters. but sure i agree the price is high.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

This is likely Q-313 given the introduction date and one prototype.

Iran is probably gauging outside interest which is not necessarily a good sign, means the required bodies aren’t willing to extend a full mass production contract. Hence the attempt to get outside interest to push the project forward.

Also disappointing that Q-313 is only 1 prototype still and not 3-5.

Also 45 million for a CAS/advanced trainer/light fighter is absurd. A Yak-130 cost 15 million, a country could have 3 Yaks for every 1 F-313.

The cost is likely due to inability to reach mass production of scale And adequate supply chain and raw material allocation. Either that or Iran is charging a huge mark up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> This is likely Q-313 given the introduction date and one prototype.
> 
> Iran is probably gauging outside interest which is not necessarily a good sign, means the required bodies aren’t willing to extend a full mass production contract. Hence the attempt to get outside interest to push the project forward.
> 
> Also disappointing that Q-313 is only 1 prototype still and not 3-5.
> 
> Also 45 million for a CAS/advanced trainer/light fighter is absurd. A Yak-130 cost 15 million, a country could have 3 Yaks for every 1 F-313.
> 
> The cost is likely due to inability to reach mass production of scale And adequate supply chain and raw material allocation. Either that or Iran is charging a huge mark up.



the costs that mentioned seems more realistic to me

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> several months ago, Iran opened an material ( explosives ) production plant and they said those new materials will increase the destruction power of our missile warheads 2 to 3 times .
> 
> 
> 
> im not 100% sure what Iran is showing and Iran is alot in Baghdad these days. well we do not knew about the upgrades and if they made and installed these 5 gen tech on it or maybe changing engines? i mean with these in mind we can not compare that two fighters. but sure i agree the price is high.




Oh by yield I meant # of successful missiles passing through air defenses. A Q-313 would be a great platform to get close Suppress Enemy Air Defenses.



TheImmortal said:


> This is likely Q-313 given the introduction date and one prototype.
> 
> Iran is probably gauging outside interest which is not necessarily a good sign, means the required bodies aren’t willing to extend a full mass production contract. Hence the attempt to get outside interest to push the project forward.
> 
> Also disappointing that Q-313 is only 1 prototype still and not 3-5.
> 
> Also 45 million for a CAS/advanced trainer/light fighter is absurd. A Yak-130 cost 15 million, a country could have 3 Yaks for every 1 F-313.
> 
> The cost is likely due to inability to reach mass production of scale And adequate supply chain and raw material allocation. Either that or Iran is charging a huge mark up.



But then again you probably would lose 3-4 Yak-130s in operations designed for a stealth subsonic bomber/CAS like Q-313.. I am talking about suppression of enemy air defenses.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Likely just promotion for the small Borhan project of Shafagh origin. $45 mio. would then certainly not be USD.
Maybe even just fake news.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> Oh by yield I meant # of successful missiles passing through air defenses. A Q-313 would be a great platform to get close Suppress Enemy Air Defenses.
> 
> 
> 
> But then again you probably would lose 3-4 Yak-130s in operations designed for a stealth subsonic bomber/CAS like Q-313.. I am talking about suppression of enemy air defenses.



 sorry my bad. well they achieved that with khoramshahr missile with its hypersonic speed and after that US install Taad in Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> This is likely Q-313 given the introduction date and one prototype.
> 
> Iran is probably gauging outside interest which is not necessarily a good sign, means the required bodies aren’t willing to extend a full mass production contract. Hence the attempt to get outside interest to push the project forward.
> 
> Also disappointing that Q-313 is only 1 prototype still and not 3-5.
> 
> Also 45 million for a CAS/advanced trainer/light fighter is absurd. A Yak-130 cost 15 million, a country could have 3 Yaks for every 1 F-313.
> 
> The cost is likely due to inability to reach mass production of scale And adequate supply chain and raw material allocation. Either that or Iran is charging a huge mark up.



when our defense ministry made Saegeh , they offered it to IRIAF with the price tag of 200 billion toman which on those days , it was equal to 60-70 million dollars !!!

they are just like Iran Khodro and Saipa .... Iranian member knew Irank-Khodro and Saipa and understand what I'm saying ...


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Likely just promotion for the small Borhan project of Shafagh origin. $45 mio. would then certainly not be USD.
> Maybe even just fake news.



Why would Iran go to an international arms exhibition and quote the price in its own native currency?

That makes zero sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

actually that price does not make any sense with iraqi dinar either. let's hope it's marketing tactic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> some ppl say Iran publish this poster at the Baghdad exhibition. It looks like some news is coming soon from this fifth generation fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Type of plane: stealth, Close air support, training
> 
> Country of origin: IRAN
> 
> Manufacturer: Air Industry Organization
> 
> Designed by: Department of Defense
> 
> Time of introduction: 2013
> 
> Current status: Under Development
> 
> How many made: 1 prototype
> 
> Price: 45 million dollar
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian upgraded cobra in Baghdad exhibition.*



$45 Million USD for a light subsonic fighter platform made out of composites, limited high G capability, no slats and speeds no greater than a Learjet?
From what they have shown so far their fighter doesn't have multimillion USD engines nor does it have multi million USD radars hell according to them it doesn't even have a fly by wire system and it's Airframe is sure as hell not made out of large % of high end Ti & Al composites 

I'm pretty sure neither IRIAF or the IRGC AF would be stupid enough to pay that much for such a low end platform so either the Aircraft they are referring too is nothing like the one they showed or it's a simple typo and the true number is more like $4.5 Million not $45 Million which would make more sense 

1.The two engines if they are domestically produced versions of the OWJ engines shouldn't cost even as much as $500K which should also include a backup engine for each aircraft and that's only if they are the afterburner versions 
2. It's Airframe, Hydraulics, landing gear & moving surfaces with a few spares put together shouldn't cost even close to $1 Million USD especially if it's domestically produced. 
3. As for it's Electronics, Avionics, Sensor pks, cockpit & pilot gear With no HUD or Helmet mounted display or a multi million USD radar or other electronics that require high G capability at various altitudes would at max cost $2 Million USD combined.
4. At best another $1M per unit for R&D cost & other service charges.

FYI everyone should look up how much Learjet cost these days and companies making Learjet and parts & subsystems for the Learjet make a huge profit on each aircraft & part and even they have more expensive Airframes, engines, electronics & Avionics... than the Q-313 Iran has shown so far
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learjet_70/75

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> $45 Million USD for a light subsonic fighter platform made out of composites, limited high G capability, no slats and speeds no greater than a Learjet?
> From what they have shown so far their fighter doesn't have multimillion USD engines nor does it have multi million USD radars hell according to them it doesn't even have a fly by wire system and it's Airframe is sure as hell not made out of large % of high end Ti & Al composites
> 
> I'm pretty sure neither IRIAF or the IRGC AF would be stupid enough to pay that much for such a low end platform so either the Aircraft they are referring too is nothing like the one they showed or it's a simple typo and the true number is more like $4.5 Million not $45 Million which would make more sense
> 
> 1.The two engines if they are domestically produced versions of the OWJ engines shouldn't cost even as much as $500K which should also include a backup engine for each aircraft and that's only if they are the afterburner versions
> 2. It's Airframe, Hydraulics, landing gear & moving surfaces with a few spares put together shouldn't cost even close to $1 Million USD especially if it's domestically produced.
> 3. As for it's Electronics, Avionics, Sensor pks, cockpit & pilot gear With no HUD or Helmet mounted display or a multi million USD radar or other electronics that require high G capability at various altitudes would at max cost $2 Million USD combined.
> 4. At best another $1M per unit for R&D cost & other service charges.
> 
> FYI everyone should look up how much Learjet cost these days and companies making Learjet and parts & subsystems for the Learjet make a huge profit on each aircraft & part and even they have more expensive Airframes, engines, electronics & Avionics... than the Q-313 Iran has shown so far
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learjet_70/75



Or this poster was never in Baghdad exhibit but rather in Iran sometime in the past and that number is not dollars but toman. 

For Iran to make a typo on price at international arms exhibition is not only amateur, but borderline incompetent.

Seems unlikely.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> bro kowsar is that loaded with new avionics that it's service ceiling and max speed decreased and still it's 7 million dollars. a single fakour missile costs 1.57 billion rial=121,000 dollars. that number does not make sense. bro are you sure that source is reliable??


Kowsar max speed probably didn't decreased, they just probably tagged max speed on sea level ,F-5 has 1.64 mach speed at high atlitude above 30.000.At low sea level F-5 is also around 1.2 mach... When it comes to aircraft speed there is huge difference between max speed at low and high altitudes. I didn't check this but I don't see reason why F-5 max speed would be higher than Kowsar ,if everything is like they said it is logic Kowsar to be faster or at least at same level.That is why when compare speed we have to look at for what altitude they declare that speed.


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> Kowsar max speed probably didn't decreased, they just probably tagged max speed on sea level ,F-5 has 1.64 mach speed at high atlitude above 30.000.At low sea level F-5 is also around 1.2 mach... When it comes to aircraft speed there is huge difference between max speed at low and high altitudes. I didn't check this but I don't see reason why F-5 max speed would be higher than Kowsar ,if everything is like they said it is logic Kowsar to be faster or at least at same level.That is why when compare speed we have to look at for what altitude they declare that speed.


there is no reason to state the sea level max speed. i asked about this from a pilot he said if you increase the payload of a plane it's max speed and service ceiling decreases. he said every MFD in kowsar weights almost 10-20 kg consider the two sit configuration and heavy radar... seems right to me. it's like they put a mk-82 in f-5 airframe
also he said the reason AF concentrated on the basic f-5 design instead of saeqeh is the same weight issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

In kowsar jet one of guns has been removed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

IQDEX-2019 floor, Iraq
http://iqdexiraq.com/IQDEX/Floorplan.pdf


Aviation industries organization *IAIO, *the Iranian company takes part in the exhibition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Aviation_Industries_Organization


Given that Iraq is going to have an stable economy, they can have minor investments in Iran's aviation industries. 

@N_Al40 What do you think? I know that Iraq has better options such as western fighters, heck, even Chinese fighters. But can we hope for Iran-Iraq cooperation in this field? 
The stealth technology that we have developed especially after capturing of American RQ-170, can be useful for Iraq which no one would share with Iraq in case of TOT. Iran has investment issues when it comes to its aviation industries, given that our focus is on developing ballistic missiles with high accuracy. IF Iraq invests, then we would see a boom in aviation industry of Iran which would benefit Iraq at the same time. Or maybe Iraq has domestic plans? That would be better than any scenario IMO.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 11285054, membro: 184479"] In kowar jet uno di pistole è stato rimosso [/ QUOTE]

here a comparison F-5 and Kowsar, however also F-5F has only one 20mm cannon

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

the only countries for partnership are north korea and syria. all other ones have good relationship with US.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
7075 aluminum alloy


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 7075 aluminum alloy
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


For non Iranian speaker
According to a recent commander interview, the project was transferred to the Defense Department
.
If you follow the page, in the previous posts, I published the Defense Minister Amir Hatami's interview and Major General Bagheri, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, about the construction of heavy fighter jets.
.
The platform's pinnacle is heavily based on two American designs
.
# F22 and # YF23
.
It is similar, with the air inlet on the body, which may have been corrected in earlier versions of the design, and even according to the commander, the new version of the radio control was also made.
.
Since the size of the bird has not been announced, it's not possible to say something about the engine right now, but there are three possibilities.
.
Use of indigenous engine
.
RD33
.
Or, on the pretext of buying a Sukhoi fighter, which was supposed to be with technology, the use of the engine
.
AL31
.
Of course, with regard to Russian sourness, we may continue this project with China, as I said earlier, the project may have something in terms of design and technology between Pakistani Thunder and China's J-31
.
In discussing the peak in terms of the visit of the former commander to China and the conjunctions on engagement with the JDF,
.
WS10
.
We use the right models
.
Interestingly, a few years ago at the Zhou Exhibit, the Chinese introduced a replica version of the Raptor platform, which could be an excuse for collaborative collaboration (see photos)
.
This is while China has two native 5th plans
.
J20, J31
.
Developing, it seems that the peak is not far from minded by China

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

@Mithridates 

How recent is this news about Hatami meeting with Bagheri about a heavy fighter?
This is huge news!!!

Also, was it actually confirmed it will be a stealth fighter?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> @Mithridates
> 
> How recent is this news about Hatami meeting with Bagheri about a heavy fighter?
> This is huge news!!!
> 
> Also, was it actually confirmed it will be a stealth fighter?


i have no idea bro.


----------



## bsruzm

T-72B said:


> For non Iranian speaker
> According to a recent commander interview, the project was transferred to the Defense Department
> .
> If you follow the page, in the previous posts, I published the Defense Minister Amir Hatami's interview and Major General Bagheri, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, about the construction of heavy fighter jets.
> .
> The platform's pinnacle is heavily based on two American designs
> .
> # F22 and # YF23
> .
> It is similar, with the air inlet on the body, which may have been corrected in earlier versions of the design, and even according to the commander, the new version of the radio control was also made.
> .
> Since the size of the bird has not been announced, it's not possible to say something about the engine right now, but there are three possibilities.
> .
> Use of indigenous engine
> .
> RD33
> .
> Or, on the pretext of buying a Sukhoi fighter, which was supposed to be with technology, the use of the engine
> .
> AL31
> .
> Of course, with regard to Russian sourness, we may continue this project with China, as I said earlier, the project may have something in terms of design and technology between Pakistani Thunder and China's J-31
> .
> In discussing the peak in terms of the visit of the former commander to China and the conjunctions on engagement with the JDF,
> .
> WS10
> .
> We use the right models
> .
> Interestingly, a few years ago at the Zhou Exhibit, the Chinese introduced a replica version of the Raptor platform, which could be an excuse for collaborative collaboration (see photos)
> .
> This is while China has two native 5th plans
> .
> J20, J31
> .
> Developing, it seems that the peak is not far from minded by China


Interesting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Preach it brother, preach it to the choir!!



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Again on this forum, many people speculate and say anything. Iran is more advanced than you think in fighter jets. Kowsar and F-4 SM are very advanced. You underestimate the advancement of Iran in fighter planes and I think it's pretty great. The process of Iran is very clever and methodical and deceitfully deceives their detractors. For the new cell, it's not going to take a decade, you do not understand anything lollll


----------



## TheImmortal

T-72B said:


> For non Iranian speaker
> According to a recent commander interview, the project was transferred to the Defense Department
> .
> If you follow the page, in the previous posts, I published the Defense Minister Amir Hatami's interview and Major General Bagheri, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, about the construction of heavy fighter jets.
> .
> The platform's pinnacle is heavily based on two American designs
> .
> # F22 and # YF23
> .
> It is similar, with the air inlet on the body, which may have been corrected in earlier versions of the design, and even according to the commander, the new version of the radio control was also made.
> .
> Since the size of the bird has not been announced, it's not possible to say something about the engine right now, but there are three possibilities.
> .
> Use of indigenous engine
> .
> RD33
> .
> Or, on the pretext of buying a Sukhoi fighter, which was supposed to be with technology, the use of the engine
> .
> AL31
> .
> Of course, with regard to Russian sourness, we may continue this project with China, as I said earlier, the project may have something in terms of design and technology between Pakistani Thunder and China's J-31
> .
> In discussing the peak in terms of the visit of the former commander to China and the conjunctions on engagement with the JDF,
> .
> WS10
> .
> We use the right models
> .
> Interestingly, a few years ago at the Zhou Exhibit, the Chinese introduced a replica version of the Raptor platform, which could be an excuse for collaborative collaboration (see photos)
> .
> This is while China has two native 5th plans
> .
> J20, J31
> .
> Developing, it seems that the peak is not far from minded by China



Correct me if I am wrong, but the Sofreh Mahi fighter jet suffers from an intake problem just like F-313. In case of Sofreh Mahi, By having intake at the top of the plane, you restrict airflow in terms of combat maneuverability of said fighter.

I don’t see how the intake being on top is a viable design, there is a reason why no fighter jet has taken that approach in over 30 years. 

I would take this news with a grain of salt. Iran has announced work on a heavy fighter, but they also announced work on nuclear submarines. So all of this could be extremely preliminary.

I don’t expect any breakthroughs in this department for another 10 years especially if Iran remains under tight sanctions that make high capital projects too risky.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but the Sofreh Mahi fighter jet suffers from an intake problem just like F-313. In case of Sofreh Mahi, By having intake at the top of the plane, you restrict airflow in terms of combat maneuverability of said fighter.
> 
> I don’t see how the intake being on top is a viable design, there is a reason why no fighter jet has taken that approach in over 30 years.
> 
> I would take this news with a grain of salt. Iran has announced work on a heavy fighter, but they also announced work on nuclear submarines. So all of this could be extremely preliminary.
> 
> I don’t expect any breakthroughs in this department for another 10 years especially if Iran remains under tight sanctions that make high capital projects too risky.



I think Sofreh Mahi's is supposed to be a stealth UCAV for bombing missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

So why sofremahi has cockpit?


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> I think Sofreh Mahi's is supposed to be a stealth UCAV for bombing missions.



Sofreh Mahi existed prior to RQ-170 capture. The development of S-191 and similar platforms made Sofreh Mahi redundant.

The development of a separate UCAV platform is not likely as long as a next gen S-191 can do the same thing.



Ray_Atek said:


> So why sofremahi has cockpit?



Because there is two versions a manned and unmanned. The unmanned was a bomber variant that might got scrapped after RQ-170 capture.

This version is a fighter jet that is similar in design to 6th gen US fighter jet concepts.


People need to understand one thing: Iran has not demonstrated the capability to manufacture large amounts of a complex system.

Let me explain:

Iran can do the following
Submarines: because they are produced in low numbers
Warships: because they are produced in low numbers
Radars: Because they are produced in low numbers
Anti air systems: same reasoning

What Iran HASNT demonstrated the capability of

Tanks: Needed in large amounts 500+
Fighter jets: Needed in large amounts 250+
Transport helicopters: Needed in large amounts 100+
Attack helicopters: Needed in large amounts 100+

So this isn’t an engine problem or a airframe problem, this a production line/supply chain problem.

The US has taken the F-35 and passed around to many allies countries to each take a role in the production process and funding process.

The US has ample resources and a massive military budget that is likely the largest in world history. So it speaks volumes when they segment the F-35 production process.

I would be surprised to see a true Iranian fighter built in large numbers >75 jets before 2030 and maybe even 2040. Without a massive TOT for a plane like SU-30 or J-31, its hard to see how Iran can get anywhere in this field.

Furthermore, the stigma in IRGC is that Air Force is not needed nor a game changer. Which further exacerbates the problem.

The top 3 powers: US/Russia/China pump significant funds into this area that Iran simply can’t match. In case of US/Russia, they have building planes when Iran was busy riding horses into battle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Ray_Atek said:


> So why sofremahi has cockpit?





TheImmortal said:


> The development of S-191 and similar platforms made Sofreh Mahi redundant.


lol bro never anticipate the AF actions:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
i really don't know what to say. US has not this much of ongoing projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

Mithridates said:


> lol bro never anticipate the AF actions:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> i really don't know what to say. US has not this much of ongoing projects.


I remember Sofreh mahi project since before RQ170 capturing.
Secondly I think, we shouldn't look at these fighters as projects that have aim to end as main Iran fighter for air force.
first they divide aviation technologies to several smaller steps then they create several projects to reach to each step and prove local technology abilities to use on main project later.

clearly we can not reach F22 technology from zilch, first we must pass and go through steps which USA pass through last century of its aviation industry.

The first thing that we need is good and liable engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

SubWater said:


> I remember Sofreh mahi project since before RQ170 capturing.
> Secondly I think, we shouldn't look at these fighters as projects that have aim to end as main Iran fighter for air force.
> first they divide aviation technologies to several smaller steps then they create several projects to reach to each step and prove local technology abilities to use on main project later.
> 
> clearly we can not reach F22 technology from zilch, first we must pass and go through steps which USA pass through last century of its aviation industry.
> 
> The first thing that we need is good and liable engine.


bro right now air force has become only R&D and sadly they don't inform the people of results and thats depressing.


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
AIM-23 sedjil semi-active radar homming missile loaded on a IRIAF F-14. photo belongs to the iran-iraq war era. sedjil has a range of 75-90km. during the war an f-14 successfully hit an iraqi mig-29 with one sedjil missile. IRIAF still has a large stockpile of these missiles and upgraded them during past decades.


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
an amazing leaf of our AF history. this wreckage you see is an f-4 phantom that after the war due to the major damages (over 80%) it had AF considered it beyond the repair. but years later because of the force needs they tried to fix it and as you can see the succeeded in their mission. hope it settles the dispute that we are or not able to make an f-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> lol bro never anticipate the AF actions:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> i really don't know what to say. US has not this much of ongoing projects.



Is an RC plane supposed to impress me?

There are amateur RC enthusiasts who fly F-22 and F-35 RC planes. But that doesn’t mean they can build a real one in real life much less a production line.

A F-313 RC toy means nothing and the heads of IAF would probably laugh at the project. Hence why it has gone nowhere, AF refuses to even consider the F-313 for its needs. It’s in limbo, like every fighter project before it Shafagh/Borhan/Kowsar/etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Is an RC plane supposed to impress me?
> 
> There are amateur RC enthusiasts who fly F-22 and F-35 RC planes. But that doesn’t mean they can build a real one in real life much less a production line.
> 
> A F-313 RC toy means nothing and the heads of IAF would probably laugh at the project. Hence why it has gone nowhere, AF refuses to even consider the F-313 for its needs. It’s in limbo, like every fighter project before it Shafagh/Borhan/Kowsar/etc.


i don't expect you to get impressed by that rc model but anyone would get impressed by numerous projects that AF pursues. scale model flight is one of the steps to produce a fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> i don't expect you to get impressed by that rc model but anyone would get impressed by numerous projects that AF pursues. scale model flight is one of the steps to produce a fighter.



You do realize with a little money you could do the same thing? Doesn’t mean anything, other than an engineer had some time on his hands.

Shafagh project was much further along than this and still got axed. 

I was one of the few that didn’t expect F-313 to see much results until at least a decade after it was announced.

But the issue here is the way this project has been covered up and politicized, unfortunately I don’t think it’s going anywhere anymore. One prototype was made and likely to quell international embarrassment that The mock up caused. 

Iran also did this with an attack helicopter, made a poster and a prototype of it then nothing was heard of it again.

Since then every military official skirts the question of F-313 which is not good. You compare that to B-373 which at the very least commanders actually answer the question when addressed about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> there is no reason to state the sea level max speed. i asked about this from a pilot he said if you increase the payload of a plane it's max speed and service ceiling decreases. he said every MFD in kowsar weights almost 10-20 kg consider the two sit configuration and heavy radar... seems right to me. it's like they put a mk-82 in f-5 airframe
> also he said the reason AF concentrated on the basic f-5 design instead of saeqeh is the same weight issue.


There are milions examples actualy where company declare max speed on sea level,in fact that was standard testing atlitude where aircraft top speed is tested,high atlitude max speed is many time just calculated based on that data,reason for this is fact that low altitude flight is most difficult for aircraft....speed on ohter altitudes can be calculated based on that.Companies uses high altitude top speed mostly due the fact that aircraft top speed on that altitude is much higher than on sea level and as that much better for marketing..but you can always find data for sea level for any aircraft,high altitude speed is mostly tested on 30.000-36.000ft and in all cases declared along with speed.
I saw on many places that members are talking about kowsar speed but no one knows for which altitude is that speed.Aircraft max speed is never declared as x.x mach ..it is always declared x.x mach for high altiude or sea level..So,if there is somewhere data for kowsar max. speed there must be also declared at what altitude,I know only that it makes no sense for aircraft that use better and lighter materials and weights less to be slower...thus F-5 max speed on sea level match perfectly Kowsar declared top speed,F-5 max. speed at low atlitude is also 1.2 mach.
What I read was actualy quite oposite,they said Kowsar perfomance is incrased because they used better and lighter materials where they could and there is nothing new on that aircraft to add weight....gun they removed and amunition for it, weights much more than 3 radars installed in Kowsar..it is just makes no sence..it is not 50km/h ...almost 25% speed decrased.
I hope they will release more details and full specification for kowsar,at least I didn't saw full specification for it,maybe it is available...It would be interesting to see all data and than we could say more...if speed is decrased some other data must also follow it.
Again,this is just came to my mind as one of the posibilities,I don't have anything to back this theory so you may take this with reserve


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> You do realize with a little money you could do the same thing? Doesn’t mean anything, other than an engineer had some time on his hands.
> 
> Shafagh project was much further along than this and still got axed.
> 
> I was one of the few that didn’t expect F-313 to see much results until at least a decade after it was announced.
> 
> But the issue here is the way this project has been covered up and politicized, unfortunately I don’t think it’s going anywhere anymore. One prototype was made and likely to quell international embarrassment that The mock up caused.
> 
> Iran also did this with an attack helicopter, made a poster and a prototype of it then nothing was heard of it again.
> 
> Since then every military official skirts the question of F-313 which is not good. You compare that to B-373 which at the very least commanders actually answer the question when addressed about it.


unfortunately we are struggling when it comes to a proper air force. but unlike many people i'm optimist about f-313. even if the result of that project become a subsonic fighter with RCS of 0.01sqm (which is a very big number for a stealth plane) it would be a great advantage against real killer like EU typhoon as typhoon can't detect it until it's 60 km away of it. cheap stealth planes could turn the balance in favor of us. but if f-313 is a subsonic fighter then i hope the turbofan version they are going to install on it is a high bypass one so at least I could have a greater range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> unfortunately we are struggling when it comes to a proper air force. but unlike many people i'm optimist about f-313. even if the result of that project become a subsonic fighter with RCS of 0.01sqm (which is a very big number for a stealth plane) it would be a great advantage against real killer like EU typhoon as typhoon can't detect it until it's 60 km away of it. cheap stealth planes could turn the balance in favor of us. but if f-313 is a subsonic fighter then i hope the turbofan version they are going to install on it is a high bypass one so at least I could have a greater range.


Well,when it comes to avio industry,even projects that never reached far than prototype actually can boost other projects,since many technologies will be used latter.As I can see F-313 was not intended to be short range interceptor,air superiority can't be any way since it lack range,payload..etc ..so it is probably intended to be cheap attack aircraft...lower RC and design for near super sonic speed at very low altitude could make it very good for anti ship role thus it can be used for CAS missions in some cases(it is not havy protected for frontline CAS missions but still).That aircraft will not be used for any a2a role if specifications that iran officialy published are real since it can only carry short range IR a2a missile..as we all know,like all attack aircrafts(su-25,a-10..etc)it is subsonic and doesn't have radar...so it lacks both speed and armament to be short range interceptor..and air superiority role..well it can't be tha in any case...that is reserved for big boys with big guns...like Su-30...Su-27, F-15,F-14(it was used as interceptor and air superiority) with huge range,payload and both short range and bvr capability....So,F-313 to be anything more than attack aircraft needs many changes and it wouldn't be that aircraft any more...We can expect something larger as soon some more powerfull engine is available.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Well,when it comes to avio industry,even projects that never reached far than prototype actually can boost other projects,since many technologies will be used latter.As I can see F-313 was not intended to be short range interceptor,air superiority can't be any way since it lack range,payload..etc ..so it is probably intended to be cheap attack aircraft...lower RC and design for near super sonic speed at very low altitude could make it very good for anti ship role thus it can be used for CAS missions in some cases(it is not havy protected for frontline CAS missions but still).That aircraft will not be used for any a2a role if specifications that iran officialy published are real since it can only carry short range IR a2a missile..as we all know,like all attack aircrafts(su-25,a-10..etc)it is subsonic and doesn't have radar...so it lacks both speed and armament to be short range interceptor..and air superiority role..well it can't be tha in any case...that is reserved for big boys with big guns...like Su-30...Su-27, F-15,F-14(it was used as interceptor and air superiority) with huge range,payload and both short range and bvr capability....So,F-313 to be anything more than attack aircraft needs many changes and it wouldn't be that aircraft any more...We can expect something larger as soon some more powerfull engine is available.



The anti ship role was the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If your enemy knows your fighters only have a range of 250 miles then they will park their ships outside that range. 

Furthermore, building a plane to attack ships would have made since if it was the year 1935, but it’s 2019. A supersonic CM, a Hypersonic Missile, a CM, an antiship BM, etc. all will do a much more efficient job then building a damn plane for the sole purpose of attacking naval ships.

People get too caught up on the down tip wings of F-313. 

All Iran had to do was enlarge the intakes and untip the wings and enlarge the fighter by 100-200%. Then have two AL-31’s power it and you have both a interceptor fighter and multirole fighter platform. Again that is grossly oversimplifying things, but the basic premise holds true. 

The plane with some design modifications and an significant increase in size could have looked very similar to other 5th gen fighters. Add in a powerful radar, SAR capability for recon, radar absorbing skin, composite material, and you have the beginnings of at least a 4th gen fighter with stealth elements.

The ability to change the F-313 into something viable has been there. The issue is Air Force hates anything domestic, the IRGC Who has the resources to fund such a project don’t give a rats *** about stealth and air power.

The IRGC rather build from within, the Armed forces rather buy from aboard. The T-90 was a classic instance. Army commander says Iran wants to buy T-90 then later IRGC official says no need for T-90 we can make our own. Thus Army commander is embarrassed and has to save face and agree. Few weeks/months later Karrar is unveiled.

If the it was up to Iran’s armed forces by now they would have bought anything that Russia offers that they like. Armed forces have been FORCED into self sufficiency of arms industry, it is not down by choice. While Navy and Air defense force have come around to the concept. Air Force and Army are still holding out on big ticket items. 

Hence why we have had zero Iranian tanks made, Zero Iranian IFVs, Zero Iranian APCS, zero Iranian Jets, zero Iranian attack helicopters, etc. We have just had an Iranian MRAP unveiled but let’s see how much actually get PRODUCED.

Its not just due to lack of design or funds or ability. The designs and prototypes are brought forward, but the powers that be are hesitant to fund them.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## aryobarzan

Frustrating ..yes but there are some rational reasons behind just the optics...
1- Iran does not face threat of land invasion so ground forces rearmement is the lowest priority.
2-Across the board low production capabilities in the Iranian military industrial base. ( due to mentality of political elite that do not see the relevance of *Quantity *in military hardware and still live in the human wave attacks of Iran Iraq war..Iranian soldier helmets and uniforms just one simple example).
3- Lack of funding for military in the *current government* that views a full belly more important than security of the bellys!..stupid incompetent *US educated* bunch..what can you expect ..lol
Regular army and IRGC guys are not stupid and have shown their smarts by choosing the most optimum routes to achieve what has been done so far.
Importance of a capable air force is gradually sinking in the heads of fund allocators. and no doubt in the near future we will see the some evidence. Mean while all of us have to wish that eventually we will see few hundred brand new black Karar tanks in a formation coupled with some MRAPS (I counted 10 of then in a photo!).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> Well,when it comes to avio industry,even projects that never reached far than prototype actually can boost other projects,since many technologies will be used latter.As I can see F-313 was not intended to be short range interceptor,air superiority can't be any way since it lack range,payload..etc ..so it is probably intended to be cheap attack aircraft...lower RC and design for near super sonic speed at very low altitude could make it very good for anti ship role thus it can be used for CAS missions in some cases(it is not havy protected for frontline CAS missions but still).That aircraft will not be used for any a2a role if specifications that iran officialy published are real since it can only carry short range IR a2a missile..as we all know,like all attack aircrafts(su-25,a-10..etc)it is subsonic and doesn't have radar...so it lacks both speed and armament to be short range interceptor..and air superiority role..well it can't be tha in any case...that is reserved for big boys with big guns...like Su-30...Su-27, F-15,F-14(it was used as interceptor and air superiority) with huge range,payload and both short range and bvr capability....So,F-313 to be anything more than attack aircraft needs many changes and it wouldn't be that aircraft any more...We can expect something larger as soon some more powerfull engine is available.


bro don't expect it as a replacement for f-14, consider it as our new light weight fighter jet as a replacement for f-5s. i assume f-313 has enough room for two gassed-3 and two r-73 missile this much of payload is exactly the combat payload of a f-5 so regarding to this aspect f-313 is better than f-5 as it's munitions are better (gassed-3 and r-73). regarding it's air-air capabilities you should keep it in mind that we recently in unveiling ceremony of kowsar, unveiled our first IFF and datalink so if we integrate them in our f-313s, ground radar control operators can share the aggressor planes positions with it and (if it has a really reduced RCS) qaher can approach them without they notice it and hit them without having a long range radar or missile. regarding it's range, if they use owj/j85 it would have the same combat radius of f-5 or maybe a little better (duo to it's larger airframe) and something like 600-700kms but i really hope they use turbofan version of it aka j-90 engine or even they develop a high bypass version of it. high bypass engines use very insignificant fuel and produce a large thrust but they are not suitable for super sonic speeds so if f-313 is a subsonic fighter high bypass turbofans are best choices. for example GE TF-34 engine that A-10 uses produces 40 kn thrust while its fuel consumption ratio is 0.37 lb/lbf/h. that numbers mean if you use a tf-34 with it's maximum output power for one hour it will burn 1.5 tons of fuel. while our GE J85/OWJs burns similar amount of fuel (1300kg) and produce 13.8KN thrust. so just imagine we use such engines on f-313, it's combat range would increase to something like 1500km.
it would bring many benefits to our air force if it had a RSC smaller than 0.01 sqm and combat range further than 700kms specially if it comes in a cheap price. we can replace them with our f-5.

seems like our green friend is ready to fly:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

High bypass ratio turbofan has not enough acceleration to power high maneuverability fighters .
Qaher as antiship fighter need some maneuverability to scape from air superiority fighter.


----------



## Mithridates

Ray_Atek said:


> Qaher as antiship


bro this saying that qaher is anti ship is a BS. its structure shows that it's made to handle low altitude higher pressure but that does not mean it's antiship. this shows that qaher is a striker/bomber and for a bomber maneuverability is not a priority but range on the contrary is vital and with original owj/j85 you can't achieve long range. 


Ray_Atek said:


> High bypass ratio turbofan has not enough acceleration


do you mean the engine takes time to transit between thrust state?? that depends on engine design. using high bypass engine does not mean we are going to install an airliner engine on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

skyshadow said:


>



S-191's engine is visible ! *Tolou-10*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Ray_Atek

Qaher is a high drag fighter and
High drag striker/bomber may acceptable, but with powerful air superiority group fighters and Iran has not that power.

Best acceptable bypass ratio for turbofan powered fighter is arround 20 persent, increasing the bypass ratio will decrease the acceleration rate of fighter, which meaning low speed changing rate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Ray_Atek said:


> Qaher is high drag fighter


how you know that??


Ray_Atek said:


> High drag striker/bomber may acceptable, but with powerful air superiority group fighters and Iran has not that power.


sir US f-117s were freely traveling all over the iraq and serbia with out any worry. 


Ray_Atek said:


> Best acceptable bypass ratio for turbofan powered fighter is arround 20 persent, increasing the bypass ratio will decrease the acceleration rate of fighter, which meaning low speed changing rate.


we have to wait and see. bro the whole decrease you're saying would be 0.6 sec. planes are not like cars they can reach their max speed in 10-20 seconds. BTW i don't know why acceleration in fighter jet is a big deal.


----------



## Ray_Atek

Qaher front cross section is high.
Qaher has thick wings and thick stabilizers.
High altitude bobber/striker does not need air superiority group fighters but Qaher is low altitude fighter.
Acceleration is very important factor for fighters design, which make the at-all fighters manuverability .



SOHEIL said:


> S-191's engine is visible ! *Tolou-10*


Why RD33 has shown in this image?


----------



## skyshadow

SOHEIL said:


> S-191's engine is visible ! *Tolou-10*



what do they use for S_171 ?


----------



## Ray_Atek

skyshadow said:


> Iran is going to install radars on its f 7.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 545888


This is very important hunted image that you sent, may I know the source?


----------



## skyshadow

Ray_Atek said:


> This is very important hunted image that you sent, may I know the source?


sorry, I do not remember, but when I find it again, i will share it with you.

*posters from some years ago.












*





















new cockpit for Saeghe Fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

skyshadow said:


> sorry, I do not remember, but when I find it again, i will share it with you.
> 
> *posters from some years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> new cockpit for Saeghe Fighters.


Thank a lot
I remember these images from fighter design thread in irandefence net

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Ray_Atek said:


> Qaher front cross section is high.
> Qaher has thick wings and thick stabilizers.
> High altitude bobber/striker does not need air superiority group fighters but Qaher is low altitude fighter.
> Acceleration is very important factor for fighters design, which make the at-all fighters manuverability .
> 
> 
> Why RD33 has shown in this image?







as you can see the stabilizers are not thick also the canard and the wings are aligned in one line so the canard will decrease the speed of airflow so the drag will be minimum. the blue area shows the part of body that makes lift. as i know in aerospace engineering they call it chine. so you can see it has not that much drag.
who said to you that it's low altitude bomber?? this kind of assumptions belongs to the time that people confused this with a ground effect plane. it is able to rise above like any other plane.
dude why would we develop an stealth plane then send it out with bunch of nuns stealth interceptors??
i'm not sure what are you talking about and to me it seems like you are not sure either.




this is an image of turbofan engine and as you increase the fuel injected in it, it's speed gonna increase and by accelerate i don't know what you mean. i should state a point so maybe help you to realize how it works. the must workload of a jet engine is when the plane is trying to take off once it flies many resisting forces gonna vanish.
i stated this example because you saw it in real life: how much it takes a bulky airliner fly?
bro the acceleration has nothing to do with the type of engine if you have a good thrust/weight ratio you gonna increase your speed rapidly. the only problem with high bypass engines is if you try to go supersonic the fans will star to resist the airflow and cause vibration in engine and maybe finally destroy the engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran in Iraq 2019*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Ray_Atek said:


> Why RD33 has shown in this image?



Not the original RD-33 !

Reverse engineered ... But not completed !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

SOHEIL said:


> Not the original RD-33 !
> 
> Reverse engineered ... But not completed !


are there official sources, or is it a personal assumption?
I ask this because in any serious discussion it is important to give information as close as possible to reality
thanks in advance for your reply

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

SOHEIL said:


> Not the original RD-33 !
> 
> Reverse engineered ... But not completed !


J85 scaling up to 1 meter diameter can do the work.
Single spool and safe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Ray_Atek said:


> J85 scaling up to 1 meter diameter can do the work.
> Single spool and safe.



That's stupid !



sahureka2 said:


> are there official sources, or is it a personal assumption?
> I ask this because in any serious discussion it is important to give information as close as possible to reality
> thanks in advance for your reply



I can't give any source !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


> Not the original RD-33 !
> 
> Reverse engineered ... But not completed !



how much is missing?


----------



## Ray_Atek

SOHEIL said:


> That's stupid


Any reason?


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> bro don't expect it as a replacement for f-14, consider it as our new light weight fighter jet as a replacement for f-5s. i assume f-313 has enough room for two gassed-3 and two r-73 missile this much of payload is exactly the combat payload of a f-5 so regarding to this aspect f-313 is better than f-5 as it's munitions are better (gassed-3 and r-73). regarding it's air-air capabilities you should keep it in mind that we recently in unveiling ceremony of kowsar, unveiled our first IFF and datalink so if we integrate them in our f-313s, ground radar control operators can share the aggressor planes positions with it and (if it has a really reduced RCS) qaher can approach them without they notice it and hit them without having a long range radar or missile. regarding it's range, if they use owj/j85 it would have the same combat radius of f-5 or maybe a little better (duo to it's larger airframe) and something like 600-700kms but i really hope they use turbofan version of it aka j-90 engine or even they develop a high bypass version of it. high bypass engines use very insignificant fuel and produce a large thrust but they are not suitable for super sonic speeds so if f-313 is a subsonic fighter high bypass turbofans are best choices. for example GE TF-34 engine that A-10 uses produces 40 kn thrust while its fuel consumption ratio is 0.37 lb/lbf/h. that numbers mean if you use a tf-34 with it's maximum output power for one hour it will burn 1.5 tons of fuel. while our GE J85/OWJs burns similar amount of fuel (1300kg) and produce 13.8KN thrust. so just imagine we use such engines on f-313, it's combat range would increase to something like 1500km.
> it would bring many benefits to our air force if it had a RSC smaller than 0.01 sqm and combat range further than 700kms specially if it comes in a cheap price. we can replace them with our f-5.
> 
> seems like our green friend is ready to fly:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


I'm not considering f-313 f14 replacement,that is whole point...it is almost without a2a capability..... if you attach two r73 it is waste of r-73....you can't fight in a2a battle by looking throughout cockpit glass...you need radar even if you will not use radar guided missiles...Aircrafts without radar mostly carry two r60 for self defence in visual range...F-5 has radar,even without engagement mode still it is used to track and intercept aircraft... Aircraft without radar has to be guided by other aircraft or ground support... Even if Iran develop IRST that could use longer range IR missiles still aircraft without radar is near useless since it is blind ...That is why aircrafts without radar are not considered capable for any a2a role and missiles they carry are for self defence... I'm not saying Iran will not maybe develop different larger version for some a2a role..but this current version is just what they say it is...Attack aircraft probably designed for specific role,conventional designed aircrafts can't fly at near subsonic speed at extremely low altitude for long time...first there is huge resistance aircraft experience and second, noise is huge and it burns fuel like hell..pilots flying at 500ft can maybe safely go up to 1.10-1.20 on flat terrain......above water this is even worse...just look how it look when some aircraft fly few meters above sea even at low speed..these water disturbances can also be detected..I think,this aircraft is designed with that in mind..this design is very good for low altitude high speed.it can carry two small anti-ship missiles in internal bay and penetrate without been detected...very fast and at extremely low altitude, considering threat from sea and also possibility of new tanker war...it is logic to consider this.But a2a role,even many people push this,is not something I see...and least not without major changes,even you are correct regarding sharing data with f-313.But aircrafts with a2a(don't confuse self defence, even su25 carry two r60)can't depend on other aircraft or ground support as main feature...those are good additional features that is mostly used to bring aircraft in to range of own radar or to guide pilot so it can aprouch enemy without been detected by using routes outside of enemy radar detection angle..Even f5 has radar,even it doesn't use it for engagement... In any a2a role you are depending on aircraft radar...not only search and detection.l but also to ping,identity,calculate precise range...pilots don't have much time in a2a battle,especially in visual and medium ranges..of course you can use anything for a2a role in emergency but I think we will see something different in this role very soon...and for air superiority fighter,I think Iran will buy some aircraft for this role while pushing domestic projects for advanced trainer/cas role and two more projects to boost domestic avio-industry.As I see Iran can produce avionics and weapons pack but problem is good engine(well only few countries don't struggle here),and as soon they resolve this issue,which is probably related for some rare alloys and materials,rest will not be issue...But I will repeat once again,in 2000(when Iran had experience with ARH a2a missiles and advanced tech)Chinese only BVR capable aircrafts were su-27,around 100 ..and only bvr missile was r27...Their fleet muscle were MIG-19/21 derivatives and their every airforce strategy was based on usage of huge number of aircrafts...If I told anyone in that time that China will have J-10,JF17...etc projects in 8-10 years,I would be considered idiot or CEO of communist party propaganda department.. And I think I can even find some of my posts from that time about China and Iran military..even most boards of that time are gone..will try to pull some...My point is,hardest point in avio-industry is industrialization and starting industry level production... It doesn't matter products are not state of the art now..Iran is already made important brake through and we should expect much more in coming time..You can look Chinese most important projects when it comes proven and mass production ready products.. J-10,JF17,J11/15/16 ..all of them are built on industry base formed with production of old Soviet aircrafts ..and their projects were not developed fast..Just use J-10..project can be tracked 35+ years in past...it is developed using bunch of Chinese and foreign tech...but even on first look on J-10 or JF-17 Soviet MIG-21 design is clear...remove nose and air intakes and you will not be able to tell is it F-7 or J-10...Israel lavi used F-16 as base..for it design but Chinese j10 was adopted for Chinese avio-industry of that time,they could ,at this way,implement Lavi technology without radical changes in their existing production.. Well,no one any more,except Chinese them self ,know what technologies they used for it but it is mix of everything.I used these examples from China because,considering Iran position and air force position in defense strategy, we are maybe expecting more than Iran can afford... I know it can always be better but I personally still don't expect any Iranian aircraft as replacement for air force backbone fleet.Iran versions will probably enter slowly in air force but I'm expecting foreign aircrafts to be purchased next year(I believe they already made or negotiate deal) and I think Iran will use this purchase to boost domestic industry with joint production or transfer of technology...Iranians were always getting best aircrafts of that time...from getting brand new most advanced and expensive aircraft of that time F14 ,been only country which got Russian aircrafts mig-29 from Soviet air force(Iran got same mig-29 as Russian/Soviet airforce)..now also got s-300pmu2 version which is developed after s-400 and include same technology(according to Russians they did it because they want it to share same units and tech as many as it can with s400 and s500,and new pmu2 is only variant that can be upgraded to s400 without replecing any existing hrdware,with only adding new components). So,Iran is not easy customers, they have experience with best weapons systems of it's time and will seek same now,so I'm not expecting it will be (or maybe already did)easy negotiations but I'm sure they will try to get best possible one type of air superiority and multirole fighters.Iran is huge,they will always maintain one huge twin engine aircrafts fleet with huge range and payload.I think this fact will be most problematic... Russians(as most obvious option for this type) will try to not angry Israel and west by providing long range platform,but also because of their interest to curb Iranian long range offensive power projection and they would probably try to sell platform that is more dependant and less offensive capable.
Iran is neutral player and Russians are not Iran strategic ally even they share many interests, Chinese on other hand are much better for Iran when it comes to tech transfers but they have less to share .Well,I may be wrong...this is just something it looks like to me as logic path,but we should remember that for most Iranian projects we didn't know anything about till we saw it..even imported things...no one ever mentioned ra'ad air defense nor Sayyad air defense systems..and bunch of other till we saw it.So we never know what is building now..



Mithridates said:


> bro don't expect it as a replacement for f-14, consider it as our new light weight fighter jet as a replacement for f-5s. i assume f-313 has enough room for two gassed-3 and two r-73 missile this much of payload is exactly the combat payload of a f-5 so regarding to this aspect f-313 is better than f-5 as it's munitions are better (gassed-3 and r-73). regarding it's air-air capabilities you should keep it in mind that we recently in unveiling ceremony of kowsar, unveiled our first IFF and datalink so if we integrate them in our f-313s, ground radar control operators can share the aggressor planes positions with it and (if it has a really reduced RCS) qaher can approach them without they notice it and hit them without having a long range radar or missile. regarding it's range, if they use owj/j85 it would have the same combat radius of f-5 or maybe a little better (duo to it's larger airframe) and something like 600-700kms but i really hope they use turbofan version of it aka j-90 engine or even they develop a high bypass version of it. high bypass engines use very insignificant fuel and produce a large thrust but they are not suitable for super sonic speeds so if f-313 is a subsonic fighter high bypass turbofans are best choices. for example GE TF-34 engine that A-10 uses produces 40 kn thrust while its fuel consumption ratio is 0.37 lb/lbf/h. that numbers mean if you use a tf-34 with it's maximum output power for one hour it will burn 1.5 tons of fuel. while our GE J85/OWJs burns similar amount of fuel (1300kg) and produce 13.8KN thrust. so just imagine we use such engines on f-313, it's combat range would increase to something like 1500km.
> it would bring many benefits to our air force if it had a RSC smaller than 0.01 sqm and combat range further than 700kms specially if it comes in a cheap price. we can replace them with our f-5.
> 
> seems like our green friend is ready to fly:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


I'm not considering f-313 f14 replacement,that is whole point...it is almost without a2a capability..... if you attach two r73 it is waste of r-73....you can't fight in a2a battle by looking throughout cockpit glass...you need radar even if you will not use radar guided missiles...Aircrafts without radar mostly carry two r60 for self defence in visual range...F-5 has radar,even without engagement mode still it is used to track and intercept aircraft... Aircraft without radar has to be guided by other aircraft or ground support... Even if Iran develop IRST that could use longer range IR missiles still aircraft without radar is near useless since it is blind ...That is why aircrafts without radar are not considered capable for any a2a role and missiles they carry are for self defence... I'm not saying Iran will not maybe develop different larger version for some a2a role..but this current version is just what they say it is...Attack aircraft probably designed for specific role,conventional designed aircrafts can't fly at near subsonic speed at extremely low altitude for long time...first there is huge resistance aircraft experience and second, noise is huge and it burns fuel like hell..pilots flying at 500ft can maybe safely go up to 1.10-1.20 on flat terrain......above water this is even worse...just look how it look when some aircraft fly few meters above sea even at low speed..these water disturbances can also be detected..I think,this aircraft is designed with that in mind..this design is very good for low altitude high speed.it can carry two small anti-ship missiles in internal bay and penetrate without been detected...very fast and at extremely low altitude, considering threat from sea and also possibility of new tanker war...it is logic to consider this.But a2a role,even many people push this,is not something I see...and least not without major changes,even you are correct regarding sharing data with f-313.But aircrafts with a2a(don't confuse self defence, even su25 carry two r60)can't depend on other aircraft or ground support as main feature...those are good additional features that is mostly used to bring aircraft in to range of own radar or to guide pilot so it can aprouch enemy without been detected by using routes outside of enemy radar detection angle..Even f5 has radar,even it doesn't use it for engagement... In any a2a role you are depending on aircraft radar...not only search and detection.l but also to ping,identity,calculate precise range...pilots don't have much time in a2a battle,especially in visual and medium ranges..of course you can use anything for a2a role in emergency but I think we will see something different in this role very soon...and for air superiority fighter,I think Iran will buy some aircraft for this role while pushing domestic projects for advanced trainer/cas role and two more projects to boost domestic avio-industry.As I see Iran can produce avionics and weapons pack but problem is good engine(well only few countries don't struggle here),and as soon they resolve this issue,which is probably related for some rare alloys and materials,rest will not be issue...But I will repeat once again,in 2000(when Iran had experience with ARH a2a missiles and advanced tech)Chinese only BVR capable aircrafts were su-27,around 100 ..and only bvr missile was r27...Their fleet muscle were MIG-19/21 derivatives and their every airforce strategy was based on usage of huge number of aircrafts...If I told anyone in that time that China will have J-10,JF17...etc projects in 8-10 years,I would be considered idiot or CEO of communist party propaganda department.. And I think I can even find some of my posts from that time about China and Iran military..even most boards of that time are gone..will try to pull some...My point is,hardest point in avio-industry is industrialization and starting industry level production... It doesn't matter products are not state of the art now..Iran is already made important brake through and we should expect much more in coming time..You can look Chinese most important projects when it comes proven and mass production ready products.. J-10,JF17,J11/15/16 ..all of them are built on industry base formed with production of old Soviet aircrafts ..and their projects were not developed fast..Just use J-10..project can be tracked 35+ years in past...it is developed using bunch of Chinese and foreign tech...but even on first look on J-10 or JF-17 Soviet MIG-21 design is clear...remove nose and air intakes and you will not be able to tell is it F-7 or J-10...Israel lavi used F-16 as base..for it design but Chinese j10 was adopted for Chinese avio-industry of that time,they could ,at this way,implement Lavi technology without radical changes in their existing production.. Well,no one any more,except Chinese them self ,know what technologies they used for it but it is mix of everything.I used these examples from China because,considering Iran position and air force position in defense strategy, we are maybe expecting more than Iran can afford... I know it can always be better but I personally still don't expect any Iranian aircraft as replacement for air force backbone fleet.Iran versions will probably enter slowly in air force but I'm expecting foreign aircrafts to be purchased next year(I believe they already made or negotiate deal) and I think Iran will use this purchase to boost domestic industry with joint production or transfer of technology...Iranians were always getting best aircrafts of that time...from getting brand new most advanced and expensive aircraft of that time F14 ,been only country which got Russian aircrafts mig-29 from Soviet air force(Iran got same mig-29 as Russian/Soviet airforce)..now also got s-300pmu2 version which is developed after s-400 and include same technology(according to Russians they did it because they want it to share same units and tech as many as it can with s400 and s500,and new pmu2 is only variant that can be upgraded to s400 without replecing any existing hrdware,with only adding new components). So,Iran is not easy customers, they have experience with best weapons systems of it's time and will seek same now,so I'm not expecting it will be (or maybe already did)easy negotiations but I'm sure they will try to get best possible one type of air superiority and multirole fighters.Iran is huge,they will always maintain one huge twin engine aircrafts fleet with huge range and payload.I think this fact will be most problematic... Russians(as most obvious option for this type) will try to not angry Israel and west by providing long range platform,but also because of their interest to curb Iranian long range offensive power projection and they would probably try to sell platform that is more dependant and less offensive capable.
Iran is neutral player and Russians are not Iran strategic ally even they share many interests, Chinese on other hand are much better for Iran when it comes to tech transfers but they have less to share .Well,I may be wrong...this is just something it looks like to me as logic path,but we should remember that for most Iranian projects we didn't know anything about till we saw it..even imported things...no one ever mentioned ra'ad air defense nor Sayyad air defense systems..and bunch of other till we saw it.So we never know what is building now..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

SOHEIL said:


> I can't give any source !



because you don't have the source,
or why can't you absolutely reveal this source?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

sahureka2 said:


> because you don't have the source,
> or why can't you absolutely reveal this source?


I completely agree, a conclusion without the source of observation is not worth 5 cents.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ray_Atek said:


> J85 scaling up to 1 meter diameter can do the work.
> Single spool and safe.


are you for real ?



Ray_Atek said:


> Any reason?


j-85 is not efficient , you do that and you make it even less eficient

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> I'm not considering f-313 f14 replacement,that is whole point...it is almost without a2a capability..... if you attach two r73 it is waste of r-73....you can't fight in a2a battle by looking throughout cockpit glass...you need radar even if you will not use radar guided missiles...Aircrafts without radar mostly carry two r60 for self defence in visual range...F-5 has radar,even without engagement mode still it is used to track and intercept aircraft... Aircraft without radar has to be guided by other aircraft or ground support... Even if Iran develop IRST that could use longer range IR missiles still aircraft without radar is near useless since it is blind ...That is why aircrafts without radar are not considered capable for any a2a role and missiles they carry are for self defence... I'm not saying Iran will not maybe develop different larger version for some a2a role..but this current version is just what they say it is...Attack aircraft probably designed for specific role,conventional designed aircrafts can't fly at near subsonic speed at extremely low altitude for long time...first there is huge resistance aircraft experience and second, noise is huge and it burns fuel like hell..pilots flying at 500ft can maybe safely go up to 1.10-1.20 on flat terrain......above water this is even worse...just look how it look when some aircraft fly few meters above sea even at low speed..these water disturbances can also be detected..I think,this aircraft is designed with that in mind..this design is very good for low altitude high speed.it can carry two small anti-ship missiles in internal bay and penetrate without been detected...very fast and at extremely low altitude, considering threat from sea and also possibility of new tanker war...it is logic to consider this.But a2a role,even many people push this,is not something I see...and least not without major changes,even you are correct regarding sharing data with f-313.But aircrafts with a2a(don't confuse self defence, even su25 carry two r60)can't depend on other aircraft or ground support as main feature...those are good additional features that is mostly used to bring aircraft in to range of own radar or to guide pilot so it can aprouch enemy without been detected by using routes outside of enemy radar detection angle..Even f5 has radar,even it doesn't use it for engagement... In any a2a role you are depending on aircraft radar...not only search and detection.l but also to ping,identity,calculate precise range...pilots don't have much time in a2a battle,especially in visual and medium ranges..of course you can use anything for a2a role in emergency but I think we will see something different in this role very soon...and for air superiority fighter,I think Iran will buy some aircraft for this role while pushing domestic projects for advanced trainer/cas role and two more projects to boost domestic avio-industry.As I see Iran can produce avionics and weapons pack but problem is good engine(well only few countries don't struggle here),and as soon they resolve this issue,which is probably related for some rare alloys and materials,rest will not be issue...But I will repeat once again,in 2000(when Iran had experience with ARH a2a missiles and advanced tech)Chinese only BVR capable aircrafts were su-27,around 100 ..and only bvr missile was r27...Their fleet muscle were MIG-19/21 derivatives and their every airforce strategy was based on usage of huge number of aircrafts...If I told anyone in that time that China will have J-10,JF17...etc projects in 8-10 years,I would be considered idiot or CEO of communist party propaganda department.. And I think I can even find some of my posts from that time about China and Iran military..even most boards of that time are gone..will try to pull some...My point is,hardest point in avio-industry is industrialization and starting industry level production... It doesn't matter products are not state of the art now..Iran is already made important brake through and we should expect much more in coming time..You can look Chinese most important projects when it comes proven and mass production ready products.. J-10,JF17,J11/15/16 ..all of them are built on industry base formed with production of old Soviet aircrafts ..and their projects were not developed fast..Just use J-10..project can be tracked 35+ years in past...it is developed using bunch of Chinese and foreign tech...but even on first look on J-10 or JF-17 Soviet MIG-21 design is clear...remove nose and air intakes and you will not be able to tell is it F-7 or J-10...Israel lavi used F-16 as base..for it design but Chinese j10 was adopted for Chinese avio-industry of that time,they could ,at this way,implement Lavi technology without radical changes in their existing production.. Well,no one any more,except Chinese them self ,know what technologies they used for it but it is mix of everything.I used these examples from China because,considering Iran position and air force position in defense strategy, we are maybe expecting more than Iran can afford... I know it can always be better but I personally still don't expect any Iranian aircraft as replacement for air force backbone fleet.Iran versions will probably enter slowly in air force but I'm expecting foreign aircrafts to be purchased next year(I believe they already made or negotiate deal) and I think Iran will use this purchase to boost domestic industry with joint production or transfer of technology...Iranians were always getting best aircrafts of that time...from getting brand new most advanced and expensive aircraft of that time F14 ,been only country which got Russian aircrafts mig-29 from Soviet air force(Iran got same mig-29 as Russian/Soviet airforce)..now also got s-300pmu2 version which is developed after s-400 and include same technology(according to Russians they did it because they want it to share same units and tech as many as it can with s400 and s500,and new pmu2 is only variant that can be upgraded to s400 without replecing any existing hrdware,with only adding new components). So,Iran is not easy customers, they have experience with best weapons systems of it's time and will seek same now,so I'm not expecting it will be (or maybe already did)easy negotiations but I'm sure they will try to get best possible one type of air superiority and multirole fighters.Iran is huge,they will always maintain one huge twin engine aircrafts fleet with huge range and payload.I think this fact will be most problematic... Russians(as most obvious option for this type) will try to not angry Israel and west by providing long range platform,but also because of their interest to curb Iranian long range offensive power projection and they would probably try to sell platform that is more dependant and less offensive capable.
> Iran is neutral player and Russians are not Iran strategic ally even they share many interests, Chinese on other hand are much better for Iran when it comes to tech transfers but they have less to share .Well,I may be wrong...this is just something it looks like to me as logic path,but we should remember that for most Iranian projects we didn't know anything about till we saw it..even imported things...no one ever mentioned ra'ad air defense nor Sayyad air defense systems..and bunch of other till we saw it.So we never know what is building now..
> 
> 
> I'm not considering f-313 f14 replacement,that is whole point...it is almost without a2a capability..... if you attach two r73 it is waste of r-73....you can't fight in a2a battle by looking throughout cockpit glass...you need radar even if you will not use radar guided missiles...Aircrafts without radar mostly carry two r60 for self defence in visual range...F-5 has radar,even without engagement mode still it is used to track and intercept aircraft... Aircraft without radar has to be guided by other aircraft or ground support... Even if Iran develop IRST that could use longer range IR missiles still aircraft without radar is near useless since it is blind ...That is why aircrafts without radar are not considered capable for any a2a role and missiles they carry are for self defence... I'm not saying Iran will not maybe develop different larger version for some a2a role..but this current version is just what they say it is...Attack aircraft probably designed for specific role,conventional designed aircrafts can't fly at near subsonic speed at extremely low altitude for long time...first there is huge resistance aircraft experience and second, noise is huge and it burns fuel like hell..pilots flying at 500ft can maybe safely go up to 1.10-1.20 on flat terrain......above water this is even worse...just look how it look when some aircraft fly few meters above sea even at low speed..these water disturbances can also be detected..I think,this aircraft is designed with that in mind..this design is very good for low altitude high speed.it can carry two small anti-ship missiles in internal bay and penetrate without been detected...very fast and at extremely low altitude, considering threat from sea and also possibility of new tanker war...it is logic to consider this.But a2a role,even many people push this,is not something I see...and least not without major changes,even you are correct regarding sharing data with f-313.But aircrafts with a2a(don't confuse self defence, even su25 carry two r60)can't depend on other aircraft or ground support as main feature...those are good additional features that is mostly used to bring aircraft in to range of own radar or to guide pilot so it can aprouch enemy without been detected by using routes outside of enemy radar detection angle..Even f5 has radar,even it doesn't use it for engagement... In any a2a role you are depending on aircraft radar...not only search and detection.l but also to ping,identity,calculate precise range...pilots don't have much time in a2a battle,especially in visual and medium ranges..of course you can use anything for a2a role in emergency but I think we will see something different in this role very soon...and for air superiority fighter,I think Iran will buy some aircraft for this role while pushing domestic projects for advanced trainer/cas role and two more projects to boost domestic avio-industry.As I see Iran can produce avionics and weapons pack but problem is good engine(well only few countries don't struggle here),and as soon they resolve this issue,which is probably related for some rare alloys and materials,rest will not be issue...But I will repeat once again,in 2000(when Iran had experience with ARH a2a missiles and advanced tech)Chinese only BVR capable aircrafts were su-27,around 100 ..and only bvr missile was r27...Their fleet muscle were MIG-19/21 derivatives and their every airforce strategy was based on usage of huge number of aircrafts...If I told anyone in that time that China will have J-10,JF17...etc projects in 8-10 years,I would be considered idiot or CEO of communist party propaganda department.. And I think I can even find some of my posts from that time about China and Iran military..even most boards of that time are gone..will try to pull some...My point is,hardest point in avio-industry is industrialization and starting industry level production... It doesn't matter products are not state of the art now..Iran is already made important brake through and we should expect much more in coming time..You can look Chinese most important projects when it comes proven and mass production ready products.. J-10,JF17,J11/15/16 ..all of them are built on industry base formed with production of old Soviet aircrafts ..and their projects were not developed fast..Just use J-10..project can be tracked 35+ years in past...it is developed using bunch of Chinese and foreign tech...but even on first look on J-10 or JF-17 Soviet MIG-21 design is clear...remove nose and air intakes and you will not be able to tell is it F-7 or J-10...Israel lavi used F-16 as base..for it design but Chinese j10 was adopted for Chinese avio-industry of that time,they could ,at this way,implement Lavi technology without radical changes in their existing production.. Well,no one any more,except Chinese them self ,know what technologies they used for it but it is mix of everything.I used these examples from China because,considering Iran position and air force position in defense strategy, we are maybe expecting more than Iran can afford... I know it can always be better but I personally still don't expect any Iranian aircraft as replacement for air force backbone fleet.Iran versions will probably enter slowly in air force but I'm expecting foreign aircrafts to be purchased next year(I believe they already made or negotiate deal) and I think Iran will use this purchase to boost domestic industry with joint production or transfer of technology...Iranians were always getting best aircrafts of that time...from getting brand new most advanced and expensive aircraft of that time F14 ,been only country which got Russian aircrafts mig-29 from Soviet air force(Iran got same mig-29 as Russian/Soviet airforce)..now also got s-300pmu2 version which is developed after s-400 and include same technology(according to Russians they did it because they want it to share same units and tech as many as it can with s400 and s500,and new pmu2 is only variant that can be upgraded to s400 without replecing any existing hrdware,with only adding new components). So,Iran is not easy customers, they have experience with best weapons systems of it's time and will seek same now,so I'm not expecting it will be (or maybe already did)easy negotiations but I'm sure they will try to get best possible one type of air superiority and multirole fighters.Iran is huge,they will always maintain one huge twin engine aircrafts fleet with huge range and payload.I think this fact will be most problematic... Russians(as most obvious option for this type) will try to not angry Israel and west by providing long range platform,but also because of their interest to curb Iranian long range offensive power projection and they would probably try to sell platform that is more dependant and less offensive capable.
> Iran is neutral player and Russians are not Iran strategic ally even they share many interests, Chinese on other hand are much better for Iran when it comes to tech transfers but they have less to share .Well,I may be wrong...this is just something it looks like to me as logic path,but we should remember that for most Iranian projects we didn't know anything about till we saw it..even imported things...no one ever mentioned ra'ad air defense nor Sayyad air defense systems..and bunch of other till we saw it.So we never know what is building now..


bro i was speculation f-313 weaponry in an strike mission otherwise it will have radar. some upgraded mig-21s had radars with 80km range so qaher will propably has something similar.
the main issue we have in producing heavy fighters is raw material. as far as i know we only produce 7075 aluminum alloy (the main alloy that used in f-5/kowsar),titanium and carbon fiber. do you remember i said we can produce couple of f-14s in a year but it would cost us as much as an f-22?? that's because we don't have the material to produce it and we should obtain it from black market. right now the best we can do is producing light weight planes like kowsar-88 and kowsar and maybe f-313 and engines like j85 and hopefully with TOT rd-33. and if we could change j 85 to a turbofan engine by adding another spool and other stuff, with suitable bypass that would boost our productions with better range and higher speed. and in coming years we are going to receive sizeable modern russian planes.


sahureka2 said:


> because you don't have the source,
> or why can't you absolutely reveal this source?





Sina-1 said:


> I completely agree, a conclusion without the source of observation is not worth 5 cents.


some people in AF openly state that we are producing it but for official statement you should wait.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> how much is missing?



Durability !



sahureka2 said:


> because you don't have the source,
> or why can't you absolutely reveal this source?







Sina-1 said:


> I completely agree, a conclusion without the source of observation is not worth 5 cents.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

*Pratt & Whitney F135*


Hack-Hook said:


> are you for real ?
> 
> 
> j-85 is not efficient , you do that and you make it even less eficient


*compare thrust to weight ratio of J-85 and *
*Pratt & Whitney F135 which is f-35`s turbofan.*

*j-85 - Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.5 (-21), 6.6 (-5), 6.8 (-13), 7 (-15)*

*Pratt & Whitney F135 - Thrust-to-weight ratio: 5.185:1 (dry), 7.963:1 (wet/afterburning)*
*j-85 has near Thrust to weight ratio as Pratt & Whitney F135.*
*j-85 is efficient.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

View attachment 547943

These fuslege have been shown in TV some years ago.
Where they have gone?
View attachment 547943

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

SOHEIL said:


> Durability !


Look dude, I enjoy your posts, but either you don’t have a public source or you know something you either shouldn’t know or shouldn’t disclose. Doesn’t matter which and if it cannot be verified then it cannot be used as a valid premise in a statement. That simple!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Sina-1 said:


> Look dude, I enjoy your posts, but either you don’t have a public source or you know something you either shouldn’t know or shouldn’t disclose. Doesn’t matter which and if it cannot be verified then it cannot be used as a valid premise in a statement. That simple!



No problem bro ... I won't say anything !

I'm out ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ray_Atek said:


> *Pratt & Whitney F135
> compare thrust to weight ratio of J-85 and *
> *Pratt & Whitney F135 which is f-35`s turbofan.*
> 
> *j-85 - Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.5 (-21), 6.6 (-5), 6.8 (-13), 7 (-15)*
> 
> *Pratt & Whitney F135 - Thrust-to-weight ratio: 5.185:1 (dry), 7.963:1 (wet/afterburning)*
> *j-85 has near Thrust to weight ratio as Pratt & Whitney F135.*
> *j-85 is efficient.*


well my definition for efficiency is something else
J-85
*Specific fuel consumption *0.96 - 0.97 lb/(lbf·h)
F135
*Specific fuel consumption *0.7 lb/lbt/hr
*F100
Specific fuel consumption: Military thrust: (0.73 lb/(lbf·h))
RD33
Specific fuel consumption: 75 kg/(kN·h) (0.77 lb/(lbf·h))*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


> Durability !



so Iran is struggling with metallurgy/materials

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> so Iran is struggling with metallurgy/materials



Let's not discuss about it ! Some people won't like it ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> so Iran is struggling with metallurgy/materials



Most modern fighters need titanium. Iran has yet to demonstrate it has mined its vast titanium reserves much less creating the necessary production ovens/equipment to turn raw titanium material into use for airframe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hack-Hook said:


> well my definition for efficiency is something else
> J-85
> *Specific fuel consumption *0.96 - 0.97 lb/(lbf·h)
> F135
> *Specific fuel consumption *0.7 lb/lbt/hr
> *F100
> Specific fuel consumption: Military thrust: (0.73 lb/(lbf·h))
> RD33
> Specific fuel consumption: 75 kg/(kN·h) (0.77 lb/(lbf·h))*


J85 is a turbojet it can be used to act as turbofan core after that, you should compare it's fuel consumption to f100,....


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

TheImmortal said:


> Most modern fighters need titanium. Iran has yet to demonstrate it has mined its vast titanium reserves much less creating the necessary production ovens/equipment to turn raw titanium material into use for airframe.



Isn't Iran currently mining & producing Titanium ? 
Last I heard, Kahnuj Titanium mine (the largest in Iran) produces 730 metric tons a year

https://financialtribune.com/articl...d-markets/9627/200m-for-kahnooj-titanium-mine

https://www.presstv.com/detail/2016/09/17/485086/iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



sha ah said:


> Isn't Iran currently mining & producing Titanium ?
> Last I heard, Kahnuj Titanium mine (the largest in Iran) produces 730 metric tons a year
> 
> https://financialtribune.com/articl...d-markets/9627/200m-for-kahnooj-titanium-mine
> 
> https://www.presstv.com/detail/2016/09/17/485086/iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment


ordinary titanium does not used often you need alloys of it. seems like grade 5 titanium is most common alloy of ti which get used in planes structure.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ray_Atek said:


> J85 is a turbojet it can be used to act as turbofan core after that, you should compare it's fuel consumption to f100,....


I did that also don't forget if you increase the diameter then you need more fuel for reaching the same amount of trust but you can reach higher trust.


----------



## sha ah

Well if you look at the Rafale jet or the Eurofighter Typhoon for example, neither contain much Titanium at all, so really I don't understand why that would prevent Iran from building a modern & capable fighter jet. The Qaher is too small to carry any serious payload in my opinion & the Kowsar F-5 is a decent jet to supplement the airforce for now, but Iran really does require a modern & extremely capable multirole fighter jet





Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> 
> ordinary titanium does not used often you need alloys of it. seems like grade 5 titanium is most common alloy of ti which get used in planes structure.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

sha ah said:


> View attachment 548135
> View attachment 548134
> 
> Well if you look at the Rafale jet or the Eurofighter Typhoon for example, neither contain much Titanium at all, so really I don't understand why that would prevent Iran from building a modern & capable fighter jet. The Qaher is too small to carry any serious payload in my opinion & the Kowsar F-5 is a decent jet to supplement the airforce for now, but Iran really does require a modern & extremely capable multirole fighter jet


The most hard to make material is Composite material.
But you mentioned good advancing in material using in a modern fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

sha ah said:


> View attachment 548135
> View attachment 548134
> 
> Well if you look at the Rafale jet or the Eurofighter Typhoon for example, neither contain much Titanium at all, so really I don't understand why that would prevent Iran from building a modern & capable fighter jet. The Qaher is too small to carry any serious payload in my opinion & the Kowsar F-5 is a decent jet to supplement the airforce for now, but Iran really does require a modern & extremely capable multirole fighter jet


read this it will answer your questions:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Isn't Iran currently mining & producing Titanium ?
> Last I heard, Kahnuj Titanium mine (the largest in Iran) produces 730 metric tons a year
> 
> https://financialtribune.com/articl...d-markets/9627/200m-for-kahnooj-titanium-mine
> 
> https://www.presstv.com/detail/2016/09/17/485086/iran-minerals-titanium-production-investment


Most of this is used in pigment production ie titanium dioxide.


----------



## sha ah

My Farsi reading skills are pretty rusty. From what I could gather from the post, people seem to believe that it's a matter of will power & determination from the leadership ? 

Throughout the years, Iran has played around with prototypes like the Shafagh / Borhan project for example, which as derived from the Yak-130. When it was first revealed, it actually seemed like a viable option that could go into serial production at some point, however nothing ever came out of it, despite rumors that it had been tested in a wind tunnel. Who knows, perhaps that's just it. Perhaps after putting it to the test, Iranian military heads & engineers realized that mass producing an unproven prototype that did not outperform older jets in Iran's current inventory wasn't worth the cost ? 

From what I heard, the Shafagh was intended to be a light trainer / attack aircraft ? However to confuse matters more, Iran has recently come out with a decent prototype of the Kosar 88 (Not the Kowsar F-5) light, subsonic, trainer aircraft, although we haven't seen it fly yet. The Qaher adds more speculation into the mix, making a spectator like myself wonder, "WTF is going on in Iran's military?" I mean, the Qaher's latest prototype looks pretty sleek but if that prototype is at a 1:1 ratio then how can it carry a serious payload ? 

On top of all this, Iran also recently began serial production of the F-5 Kowsar. However what's confusing about this latest Iranian variant of the F-5 (aside from having the same name as the Kosar 88 trainer) is that the jet designers seem to have reverted back to the original single fin design, whereas the previous incarnation of the Iranian made F-5, the Saeqeh, featured a twin fin design? 

As you can imagine, all this is rather confusing to an enthusiast such as myself. Despite everything though, it does seem like Iran is progressing in terms of improving its capabilities in the aerospace industry & in the end even if these projects are merely stepping stones for Iran, then so be it. I just hope we see a decent, original, Iranian built multirole fighter jet. I know that Iran is capable of doing this, however I'm wondering, if funding is currently an issue with sanctions currently sucking the life out of Iran's budget? 

Anyway, I hope that in 2020 we see Iran's airforce finally acquire some new jets from Russia. Some say that even a large order of brand new SU-30's would be too little too late, however considering the lack of modern aircraft in Iran's inventory, I believe that a fresh batch of SU-30's would be a welcome relief, a breath of fresh air for Iran's aging airforce. Many of the jets in Iran's airforce, like the F-4's are way past their retirement dates, having been used for 50 yrs now they need to be retired ASAP. 

As for passenger planes, that's another issue all together, but to sum it up, Iran is in the same predicament. Many of the passenger planes in Iran's possession are past due & need to be retired & replaced ASAP. The problem is that every single model of every single civilian aircraft manufacturer in the world, even Russian & Chinese companies, are made up of atleast 10% American parts, meaning that they fall under the jurisdiction of the US treasury department. 

I believe that Iran's best bet is to buy military transport planes like the Ilyushin 76 or Xian 120 & either modify them or order a special model in large quantities ? Obviously aircrafts such as these would not be the first choice to transport civilians, however once modified, from the inside there would hardly be any indication among passengers that they were in a modified military transport plane. To some, the mere idea might be laughable, however if you think about it, the large size of these planes could allow for a very roomy interior & larger seats for passengers. Another good thing about this option for Iran is that the fuel for these planes will cost Iran very little. North Korea is has already been forced to use the IL-76, however in their case, fuel is costly & I'm guessing budgetary constraints have prevented them from completely revamping/modifying the planes for civilian use. 

I'm not saying that Iran should purchase 200 such planes however a decent number, like perhaps 40-60, can be purchased to supplement Iran's aging fleet of passenger jets until another solution can be found, with the only possible solutions being 1) the US drops its sanctions allowing Iran to preferably purchase western brands or 2) Iran produces its own passenger jet. The second options seems as if its quite some years away, especially with the memory of the Iran-140 (An-140) fiasco being fresh on the mind of Iranians. 

Currently, according to Iranian officials, Iran is in need of 500 civilian airliners. I'm guessing that number is an exaggeration, however even with a requirement of 200-300 jets, capitalism should dictate that some enterprising entity should meet that demand. With that much demand & a willingness to pay for it, at the least with natural resources, which growing, energy hungry nations like China require for the foreseeable future, it would only seem rational for China & Russia to modify an existing model to suit Iran's needs ? 



Mithridates said:


> read this it will answer your questions:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

sha ah said:


> My Farsi reading skills are pretty rusty. From what I could gather from the post, people seem to believe that it's a matter of will power & determination from the leadership ?
> 
> Throughout the years, Iran has played around with prototypes like the Shafagh / Borhan project for example, which as derived from the Yak-130. When it was first revealed, it actually seemed like a viable option that could go into serial production at some point, however nothing ever came out of it, despite rumors that it had been tested in a wind tunnel. Who knows, perhaps that's just it. Perhaps after putting it to the test, Iranian military heads & engineers realized that mass producing an unproven prototype that did not outperform older jets in Iran's current inventory wasn't worth the cost ?
> 
> From what I heard, the Shafagh was intended to be a light trainer / attack aircraft ? However to confuse matters more, Iran has recently come out with a decent prototype of the Kosar 88 (Not the Kowsar F-5) light, subsonic, trainer aircraft, although we haven't seen it fly yet. The Qaher adds more speculation into the mix, making a spectator like myself wonder, "WTF is going on in Iran's military?" I mean, the Qaher's latest prototype looks pretty sleek but if that prototype is at a 1:1 ratio then how can it carry a serious payload ?
> 
> On top of all this, Iran also recently began serial production of the F-5 Kowsar. However what's confusing about this latest Iranian variant of the F-5 (aside from having the same name as the Kosar 88 trainer) is that the jet designers seem to have reverted back to the original single fin design, whereas the previous incarnation of the Iranian made F-5, the Saeqeh, featured a twin fin design?
> 
> As you can imagine, all this is rather confusing to an enthusiast such as myself. Despite everything though, it does seem like Iran is progressing in terms of improving its capabilities in the aerospace industry & in the end even if these projects are merely stepping stones for Iran, then so be it. I just hope we see a decent, original, Iranian built multirole fighter jet. I know that Iran is capable of doing this, however I'm wondering, if funding is currently an issue with sanctions currently sucking the life out of Iran's budget?
> 
> Anyway, I hope that in 2020 we see Iran's airforce finally acquire some new jets from Russia. Some say that even a large order of brand new SU-30's would be too little too late, however considering the lack of modern aircraft in Iran's inventory, I believe that a fresh batch of SU-30's would be a welcome relief, a breath of fresh air for Iran's aging airforce. Many of the jets in Iran's airforce, like the F-4's are way past their retirement dates, having been used for 50 yrs now they need to be retired ASAP.
> 
> As for passenger planes, that's another issue all together, but to sum it up, Iran is in the same predicament. Many of the passenger planes in Iran's possession are past due & need to be retired & replaced ASAP. The problem is that every single model of every single civilian aircraft manufacturer in the world, even Russian & Chinese companies, are made up of atleast 10% American parts, meaning that they fall under the jurisdiction of the US treasury department.
> 
> I believe that Iran's best bet is to buy military transport planes like the Ilyushin 76 or Xian 120 & either modify them or order a special model in large quantities ? Obviously aircrafts such as these would not be the first choice to transport civilians, however once modified, from the inside there would hardly be any indication among passengers that they were in a modified military transport plane. To some, the mere idea might be laughable, however if you think about it, the large size of these planes could allow for a very roomy interior & larger seats for passengers. Another good thing about this option for Iran is that the fuel for these planes will cost Iran very little. North Korea is has already been forced to use the IL-76, however in their case, fuel is costly & I'm guessing budgetary constraints have prevented them from completely revamping/modifying the planes for civilian use.
> 
> I'm not saying that Iran should purchase 200 such planes however a decent number, like perhaps 40-60, can be purchased to supplement Iran's aging fleet of passenger jets until another solution can be found, with the only possible solutions being 1) the US drops its sanctions allowing Iran to preferably purchase western brands or 2) Iran produces its own passenger jet. The second options seems as if its quite some years away, especially with the memory of the Iran-140 (An-140) fiasco being fresh on the mind of Iranians.
> 
> Currently, according to Iranian officials, Iran is in need of 500 civilian airliners. I'm guessing that number is an exaggeration, however even with a requirement of 200-300 jets, capitalism should dictate that some enterprising entity should meet that demand. With that much demand & a willingness to pay for it, at the least with natural resources, which growing, energy hungry nations like China require for the foreseeable future, it would only seem rational for China & Russia to modify an existing model to suit Iran's needs ?


I buy your arguments about the military aircraft approach..many good points. However on the commercial (civilian) aircraft I have few points to add.

1- To develop a civilian aircraft requires lots of capital and external orders to make it commercially viable. Neither of those elements are in place for Iran for a foreseeable future.
2- Converting a military cargo type has some merits but I do not know if the end product is economically feasible but yes why not do some thinking on that!).
3- Why worry so much about civilian air travel in Iran...spend the money on modern rail networks and supper high ways within Iran. It is not like thousands of foreign tourists are lined up in European capital to travel to Iran. Tourists to Iran are mostly from neighbouring countries and they come via their own air carriers or by land routes. 
4- The current political climate and the sanctions on Iran will eventually be resolved. It is then that the European/American tourists will line up to visit this magnificent country. Orders your top of the line airliners by then when the real need arrives. (Rohani's *Incompetent *government ordered all those planes from AirBus and Boeing as bribes to the west to get his nuclear deal). 

5- Iran should spend the funds developing that *final capable military aircraft/aviation infrastructure* (_they have done all the right moves so far ..learning curve is hard and painful especially for a country like Iran that 40 years ago only had repair and overhaul capability and has had to fight its way through 8 years of war and 40 years of sanctions)._
6- Buy Russian or Chinese fighter aircraft as a stop-gap measure( _if pains me to say that!!! even if you have to pay out of that 99 $billion oil fund_) and keep on developing your own platform.

Having worked 35 years in Western aviation industries . I can see what a fantastic achievements Iranian engineers/managers have done so far. Morons like Trump, pompeo and Bolton and their fan boy Nata-yahoo can suck an egg! ..next 10 years will be even more amazing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

sha ah said:


> .......
> 
> Currently, according to Iranian officials, Iran is in need of 500 civilian airliners. I'm guessing that number is an exaggeration, however even with a requirement of 200-300 jets, capitalism should dictate that some enterprising entity should meet that demand. With that much demand & a willingness to pay for it, at the least with natural resources, which growing, energy hungry nations like China require for the foreseeable future, it would only seem rational for China & Russia to modify an existing model to suit Iran's needs ?




he Russians also suffered US sanctions against their new commercial aircraft; they are currently working to replace US components on the new "Irkut MS-21-Ирку́т МС-21" in the Airbus 320 and Boeing 737 category,






whose second prototype has flown the past few days, and is also designed to use the new Russian engine PD-14 in phase

and the Ilyushin Il-114-300 twin-engine turboprop engine with new Russian Klimov TV7-117SM engines was put back into production with considerable improvements.





the first prototype under construction in a photo of 30 July 2018




The Il-114-300 aircraft is intended for the carriage of passengers, cargo, mail . The flight range of the IL-114-300 is up to 4,800 km. The aircraft is designed to carry up to 64 passengers.

Remember that Ilyushin is always building an IL-112 transport aircraft that will be used to replace the AN-24-AN-26. IL-112 will be in both military and civilian versions. The turboprop engines always gift of Klimov, but in the TV7-11ST version










The first flight of the prototype IL-112 will be within the next 20 days

Certainly they are not available today, but within 4/5 years the first units will be available for sales

I forgot:
Ilyushin is working on updating the Il-96-400M quadrangle project that will take the name of IL-496, can take on board up to 390 passengers. The large-diameter fuselage provides passengers with a modern level of comfort on long flights. The passenger cabin will be equipped with a modern information and entertainment system that provides access to the Internet, television and satellite communications, convenient luggage racks, and modern buffet and kitchen equipment. It is planned to install a modern flight-navigation complex on the plane, with which the IL-96-400M will meet all ICAO requirements for aircraft of a similar dimension.
The power plant will use more powerful PS-90A1 engines, but in the future it will be equipped with the new more efficient PD-35

Shere the old version Il-96-300 which has the shortest fuselage of 9,65 meters if compared to the new IL-496 





Today Russian aircraft manufacturer Ilyushin gave a sneak peak of the new interiors for its wide-body IL-96-400 project, also known as IL-496.
https://www.aerotime.aero/ina.hladyshava/22489-russian-ilyushin-shows-il-496-interiors

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fafnir

aryobarzan said:


> I buy your arguments about the military aircraft approach..many good points. However on the commercial (civilian) aircraft I have few points to add.
> 
> 1- To develop a civilian aircraft requires lots of capital and external orders to make it commercially viable. Neither of those elements are in place for Iran for a foreseeable future.
> 2- Converting a military cargo type has some merits but I do not know if the end product is economically feasible but yes why not do some thinking on that!).
> 3- Why worry so much about civilian air travel in Iran...spend the money on modern rail networks and supper high ways within Iran. It is not like thousands of foreign tourists are lined up in European capital to travel to Iran. Tourists to Iran are mostly from neighbouring countries and they come via their own air carriers or by land routes.
> 4- The current political climate and the sanctions on Iran will eventually be resolved. It is then that the European/American tourists will line up to visit this magnificent country. Orders your top of the line airliners by then when the real need arrives. (Rohani's *Incompetent *government ordered all those planes from AirBus and Boeing as bribes to the west to get his nuclear deal).
> 
> 5- Iran should spend the funds developing that *final capable military aircraft/aviation infrastructure* (_they have done all the right moves so far ..learning curve is hard and painful especially for a country like Iran that 40 years ago only had repair and overhaul capability and has had to fight its way through 8 years of war and 40 years of sanctions)._
> 6- Buy Russian or Chinese fighter aircraft as a stop-gap measure( _if pains me to say that!!! even if you have to pay out of that 99 $billion oil fund_) and keep on developing your own platform.
> 
> Having worked 35 years in Western aviation industries . I can see what a fantastic achievements Iranian engineers/managers have done so far. Morons like Trump, pompeo and Bolton and their fan boy Nata-yahoo can suck an egg! ..next 10 years will be even more amazing.


It looked like the TU204 was a real possibility for a while back during ahmadinejads presidency,unfortunately sanctions on some of the components in the russian/us designed PS90A2 meant that they couldnt be used and the russians in typical gutless fashion didnt want to alienate their best buds,this was back before crimea[lol!],however they did redesign the PS90A2 into the A3 without any western content.Sadly tho by that time rouhani was in power and was putting all his [forlorn] hopes into the west/jcpoa,ironically even after this the russians were talking about iran license producing TU204s,which made no sense economically so it was always hard to take the russians seriously about this sort of thing.Ultimately tho the russians would have to prove that the one area where they were always the weakest ie aftermarket support had been reformed,otherwise whats the point?.


----------



## Mithridates

sha ah said:


> My Farsi reading skills are pretty rusty. From what I could gather from the post, people seem to believe that it's a matter of will power & determination from the leadership ?
> 
> Throughout the years, Iran has played around with prototypes like the Shafagh / Borhan project for example, which as derived from the Yak-130. When it was first revealed, it actually seemed like a viable option that could go into serial production at some point, however nothing ever came out of it, despite rumors that it had been tested in a wind tunnel. Who knows, perhaps that's just it. Perhaps after putting it to the test, Iranian military heads & engineers realized that mass producing an unproven prototype that did not outperform older jets in Iran's current inventory wasn't worth the cost ?
> 
> From what I heard, the Shafagh was intended to be a light trainer / attack aircraft ? However to confuse matters more, Iran has recently come out with a decent prototype of the Kosar 88 (Not the Kowsar F-5) light, subsonic, trainer aircraft, although we haven't seen it fly yet. The Qaher adds more speculation into the mix, making a spectator like myself wonder, "WTF is going on in Iran's military?" I mean, the Qaher's latest prototype looks pretty sleek but if that prototype is at a 1:1 ratio then how can it carry a serious payload ?
> 
> On top of all this, Iran also recently began serial production of the F-5 Kowsar. However what's confusing about this latest Iranian variant of the F-5 (aside from having the same name as the Kosar 88 trainer) is that the jet designers seem to have reverted back to the original single fin design, whereas the previous incarnation of the Iranian made F-5, the Saeqeh, featured a twin fin design?
> 
> As you can imagine, all this is rather confusing to an enthusiast such as myself. Despite everything though, it does seem like Iran is progressing in terms of improving its capabilities in the aerospace industry & in the end even if these projects are merely stepping stones for Iran, then so be it. I just hope we see a decent, original, Iranian built multirole fighter jet. I know that Iran is capable of doing this, however I'm wondering, if funding is currently an issue with sanctions currently sucking the life out of Iran's budget?
> 
> Anyway, I hope that in 2020 we see Iran's airforce finally acquire some new jets from Russia. Some say that even a large order of brand new SU-30's would be too little too late, however considering the lack of modern aircraft in Iran's inventory, I believe that a fresh batch of SU-30's would be a welcome relief, a breath of fresh air for Iran's aging airforce. Many of the jets in Iran's airforce, like the F-4's are way past their retirement dates, having been used for 50 yrs now they need to be retired ASAP.
> 
> As for passenger planes, that's another issue all together, but to sum it up, Iran is in the same predicament. Many of the passenger planes in Iran's possession are past due & need to be retired & replaced ASAP. The problem is that every single model of every single civilian aircraft manufacturer in the world, even Russian & Chinese companies, are made up of atleast 10% American parts, meaning that they fall under the jurisdiction of the US treasury department.
> 
> I believe that Iran's best bet is to buy military transport planes like the Ilyushin 76 or Xian 120 & either modify them or order a special model in large quantities ? Obviously aircrafts such as these would not be the first choice to transport civilians, however once modified, from the inside there would hardly be any indication among passengers that they were in a modified military transport plane. To some, the mere idea might be laughable, however if you think about it, the large size of these planes could allow for a very roomy interior & larger seats for passengers. Another good thing about this option for Iran is that the fuel for these planes will cost Iran very little. North Korea is has already been forced to use the IL-76, however in their case, fuel is costly & I'm guessing budgetary constraints have prevented them from completely revamping/modifying the planes for civilian use.
> 
> I'm not saying that Iran should purchase 200 such planes however a decent number, like perhaps 40-60, can be purchased to supplement Iran's aging fleet of passenger jets until another solution can be found, with the only possible solutions being 1) the US drops its sanctions allowing Iran to preferably purchase western brands or 2) Iran produces its own passenger jet. The second options seems as if its quite some years away, especially with the memory of the Iran-140 (An-140) fiasco being fresh on the mind of Iranians.
> 
> Currently, according to Iranian officials, Iran is in need of 500 civilian airliners. I'm guessing that number is an exaggeration, however even with a requirement of 200-300 jets, capitalism should dictate that some enterprising entity should meet that demand. With that much demand & a willingness to pay for it, at the least with natural resources, which growing, energy hungry nations like China require for the foreseeable future, it would only seem rational for China & Russia to modify an existing model to suit Iran's needs ?


lack of infrastructure (regarding needed materials), courage, management and money. especially in airliner production because you don't expect them to be maneuverable and making one is within our experience and infrastructure capabilities.
shafaq was not just a trainer it supposed to have three versions: 1-two seat trainer/light attack 2-one seat fighter 3-one seat stealth multirole. but after russia abandoned the project under US pressure we couldn't finish it.
you should compare f-313 with our f-5 and US f-117. it will have a payload weight of 2000-4000 lb and stealth and i don't think that it's inferior to f-5 because f-5s combat payload was two mark-83 and two sidewinders so we won't lose anything if we replace them with f-313.
about su-30s it seems like we will acquire sme models and in really large quantity so much that PGCC air forces combined will not pose a threat to us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Fighter jets are not easy, many countries such as Japan, Germany, etc have much higher capability to build their own fighter jets, but have passed and went with foreign fighters.

India has a much higher military budget, more experience, greater engineer base, under ZERO sanctions, full access to foreign technology and transfer of tech. Yet it’s own fighter jet Program has still struggled. And to top it all off, they are currently looking at foreign fighters to modernize their aging airforce.

In case of Pakistan they got full TOT of a Chinese fighter. But Pakistan still does not have the ability to build its own indegenious fighter jet design.

Thus Iran will likely not be able to secure TOT from Russia, at least not for the plane it wants (SU-30/SU-35).

People are over simplifying the fighter jet production process.

Iran is not in a position to build fighter jets plain and simple. Even if it wanted to, it would be cost prohibitive and with a pathetic military budget of $14 billion dollars that’s not going to do much in the way of anything.

Air Force realizes the hurdles, the bottlenecks, the set backs and rather just wait to buy foreign fighters. With foreign fighters you know what your getting and you know the performance.

Furthermore, Air Force feels comfortable that it’s engineer base can keep any foreign fighter flying even if they were to get cut off from the parent country like in 1979.

So Iran can spend 2-3 Billion and get a substantial amount of fighters or spend 1 billion to R&D a fighter that may never make it to mass production in significant numbers.

Borhan/Shafagh failed because Air Force didn’t put in any orders in for it. Kowsar is not the answer either other than a upgrade/replacement package for aging F-5’s.

In 10 years we will see where Iran has gone in this field and the results may be disappointing.

Luckily in the drone space, Iran is a top tier power and that will only help it in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

An article on China and engines. Some flaws in it, but overall it delivers the message:

https://www.inkstonenews.com/tech/i...d-commercial-aircraft-engines/article/3002672

People must understand this first. And it must be understood no working engine = no fighter. Iran is not going to buy engines.

The RD-33 can be mastered if the design is mastered. In materials one hurdle are titanium fanblades, that is a new field for Iran. In the more critical hot turbine section, MAPNA has sufficient experience with necessary superalloys to do it (RD-33 is 70's tech.).
But the biggest hurdle is mastering the design. Without that some parts will always wear-out faster than expected and cause failure.

One can only thank the people that set up MAPNA in order to be able to produce 70's level fighter turbine vanes, 20-30 years later. Strategic planning.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran built a flying wing because they captured one. You think Iran would have a flying wing design today at this point in time if it weren’t for RQ-170? The answer is a resounding no. RQ-170 jumpstarted Iran’s stealth drone program and engine tech.

So I’m sorry but waiting for a fighter to come in 10-15 years and equipping it with jet engines by that time that will be over 60 years old (RD-33) is a joke.

Without TOT of recent modern jet engine, Iran’s fighter program will go nowhere.

It’s been over 20 years and Iran’s long range BMs still use No-Dong engines from the Soviet era (minus limited production Sejil and recently introduced Khorramshahr).

So for people expecting Iran to jump from J-85 to AL-31 series engines by itself, it’s not going to happen.

China had ToT of the best soviet planes, today has one of the biggest military budgets in world history, a massive arms espionage circle that encompasses the globe, wide access to leading tech, and a decades long technological headstart on Iran. And yet it currently lags Russia/US by at least decade in engine tech.

Let’s be honest about Iran, their resiliency under sanctions is nothing short of commendable. The improvement of armed forces is also extraordinary. But there is a difference between acknowledging improvement and then there is hubris in expecting a fantasy.

Go to Iran and see the government struggle to build a highway to Shomal for decades. See how a brand new building gets demolished by a earthquake but a 30 year old one stands. Meanwhile China built cities and airports overnight.

So Let’s not act like Iran is some great technological power. It’s economy and infaatructure is largely the fault of the ineptitude of its government and that eventually extends to armed forces. Because if you can’t keep one part of your house in order then that means the whole house is not in order.

So don’t be fooled by 1970’s Mowj frigates that got demolished in Operation Praying Mantis (when they were considered leading technology) and don’t be fooled by these F-5 iterations.

When it comes to large offensive systems, Iran is still decades away from the leading powers. And tinkering with 1970’s technology is just going to keep Iran lagging behind.

Iran needs to get its hand on TOT either through deals, blackmarket, military espionage, etc. because that is the way progresses forward. Unless you want to wait for an F-22 to crash land in Iran intact.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Iran needs following things:

A "heavy" thrust class engines for its emerging drone programs and a potential manned fighter for the IRIAF to keep it alive.

That engine must deliver following:
- Certain thrust output
- Certain price
- Certain TBO
- Certain SFC

If those goals are met with a RD-33 clone then everything is fine.

That would certainly be the greatest technological hurdle and feat Iran would have achieved in technology and engineering, no matter if the origins of the RD-33 are in the 60's or not.

You can reverse engineer many things but advanced jet engines are not among them. Materials are one issue and getting a working design another. Without blueprints you basally have to re-engineer the whole engine.

Was this complicated work worth it for Iran in the past? No.
It might be now after the industry grew with the liquid fuel rocket motors and companies like MAPNA.
Now, today it might be worth to re-engineer the RD-33 with efforts that can justify it.
In the past, many other technologies are easier to master and delivered better capability.

China is building jet engines since the 60's, where Iran didn't even build a Peykan engine yet. Still they would have been the happiest people on the planet if the would have been able to copy a RD-33 by the late 2000's (heck even just a few years ago)...
This is the situation people have to understand.
Its absolutely no joke, its the highest field in engineering.

Honestly, and I know some things about this, I don't believe Iran could copy the RD-33. It's a extremely difficult thing to achieve without all the original documents of the inventors.
If they would manage it, the doors for manned fighters, drones and bombers would open up.
Two RD-33, with the electrical fan of the RQ-170 engine, could power a manned bomber variant of the RQ-170 e.g.
I rather think the path is the J90: A whole new design of lower thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

IRGCAF su-22 striker:
1- simorgh/bl 755 cluster bumb
2- yasin GPS guided bomb
3- bina semi-active laser guided missile










        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

guy this dude that i constantly share his posts, is AF pilot and what i have said till now i quoted his words. i suggest you to follow him and ask directly.

IRIAF f-5 with air refueling probe:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

mirage f-1




seems like pl-7s is our new standard short range missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Image of F-5 with PL-7 is very old..Mirage with PL-7 is newer...I remeber this F-5 with pl-7 from old IMF days and I have it in my archive for years but thanks to your post I remeber I had also this one..IRIAF F-4 full load of PL-7.
EDIT,this is better resolution (from instagram profile you post)
By US norms(Iran air force also use same convention)blue is training round but by Chinese convention orange is training round(no warhead)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

sanel1412 said:


>


corruption in army air force
A 29 years old kid who can't identity his right from left hand, has become the head of overhaul unite, as if there was no other more experienced people in this unite!
And they don't mind to abandon all of secrecy in airforce to show him off, I bet he is a relative to one of commanders.


----------



## sanel1412

mohsen said:


> corruption in army air force
> A 29 years old kid who can't identity his right from left hand, has become the head of overhaul unite, as if there was no other more experienced people in this unite!
> And they don't mind to abandon all of secrecy in airforce to show him off, I bet he is a relative to one of commanders.


Can you be more specific,do you reffer to air force officer who speak at beginning of this video?I don't know how His qualification but 29 year old person in military is not kid,soldiers can serve up to 35 years while higher officers serve more..So ...with 29 years He should have 11-12 years of service...Considering how old(or better say young) Iranian population is,it is not strange to see young officers with higher ranks and only that fact doesn't mean anything..but don't be confused..my country is built whole military by Nato standards and we are we are EU membership candidate and almost Nato candidate(already implemented all standards just waiting for politic and birocracy to approve it)but still there is much coruption and mostly political and family relation is more important than anything else.But as I said,if He is young it doesn't mean He is not good and educated(except if you know him personally and know something... that is other thing).As I see, He has 3 stars,it should be 1st lieutenant and that is higher rank...this is nothing unusual.Again,If you know him and you know something that is completly other thing,I'm just speaking generally.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> corruption in army air force
> A 29 years old kid who can't identity his right from left hand, has become the head of overhaul unite, as if there was no other more experienced people in this unite!
> And they don't mind to abandon all of secrecy in airforce to show him off, I bet he is a relative to one of commanders.


Well weren't kids as young and younger that were commander in IRGC at the time of war.
If your reservation against him is his young age I wonder a young one who believe we can wouldnt be better than an older one with we can't do it mindset.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> Well weren't kids as young and younger that were commander in IRGC at the time of war.
> If your reservation against him is his young age I wonder a young one who believe we can wouldnt be better than an older one with we can't do it mindset.


IRGC was built by those kids, it's not like they built it and then withdrew to younger ones a decade later!
And who has been overhauling these airplanes during these years, the not believers?!



sanel1412 said:


> Can you be more specific,do you reffer to air force officer who speak at beginning of this video?I don't know how His qualification but 29 year old person in military is not kid,soldiers can serve up to 35 years while higher officers serve more..So ...with 29 years He should have 11-12 years of service...Considering how old(or better say young) Iranian population is,it is not strange to see young officers with higher ranks and only that fact doesn't mean anything..but don't be confused..my country is built whole military by Nato standards and we are we are EU membership candidate and almost Nato candidate(already implemented all standards just waiting for politic and birocracy to approve it)but still there is much coruption and mostly political and family relation is more important than anything else.But as I said,if He is young it doesn't mean He is not good and educated(except if you know him personally and know something... that is other thing).As I see, He has 3 stars,it should be 1st lieutenant and that is higher rank...this is nothing unusual.Again,If you know him and you know something that is completly other thing,I'm just speaking generally.


Since they receive one promote every 4 years, and the fact that officers usually start with 2 stars, then you can see that in no way he could have served more than 7 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

mohsen said:


> IRGC was built by those kids, it's not like they built it and then withdrew to younger ones a decade later!
> And who has been overhauling these airplanes during these years, the not believers?!
> 
> 
> Since they receive one promote every 4 years, and the fact that officers usually start with 2 stars, then you can see that in no way he could have served more than 7 years.


my hypothesis, nobody is born already specialized, probably is, they are, all graduated in aeronautical engineering and it is possible that later they specialized in their own country or in some foreign country (China!?) to operate on the F-7.
Only 3 stars, therefore few years of service in the armed forces, possible, but it is also possible that he enlisted when he had already graduated or specialized and had the third star for merits in service.
therefore it is difficult to comment without knowing the situation personally.

They are all guys who are working on the F-7, but I am convinced that the old technicians are supervising the work;
In any case, the generational change must occur otherwise the entire maintenance chain would be blocked when the older ones are no longer in a position to work.

question the military with 3 stars has some ribbons on the chest, it would be interesting to know the meaning of each of them

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

mohsen said:


> corruption in army air force
> A 29 years old kid who can't identity his right from left hand, has become the head of overhaul unite, as if there was no other more experienced people in this unite!
> And they don't mind to abandon all of secrecy in airforce to show him off, I bet he is a relative to one of commanders.


You just accused a member of Iranian armed forces with Incompetence and the Air Force with nepotism . These are serious charges you are leveling against a person and an organisation. So my question to you is ...*DO YOU HAVE PROOF..* On what basis do you make these accusation...Now that you made these accusation the burden of proof is on you..looking forward to see your evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> IRGC was built by those kids, it's not like they built it and then withdrew to younger ones a decade later!
> And who has been overhauling these airplanes during these years, the not believers?!


Well that's not the point, once we trusted in younger generation and we get result . why not trust them again. Don't you think it's time that one generation give way for the newer generation. 
By the way, was he not one of the persons who did the overhaul on those airplanes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

even the elderly technicians and aeronautical engineers who operate today on IRIAF aircraft, were in 1979 young technicians and engineers.
it is impossible to block the clock of life, the wheel continues to turn inexorably, it has been possible to lengthen life prospects and the quality of life, today those who once considered themselves old can safely indicate them as middle-aged men, but always young people must be prepared who must then take over.
There is a generational change in all fields, a young man today is born in a world where technology has reached a very high level, therefore to the mind already open to receive these inputs, I instead am of the past generation that used a machine to writing, the calculations made by hand with the help of the calculator and the models made them in chalk and not with the 3D printer, I had to update myself, but I admit that I had many difficulties to do so.
Therefore yes, the experience of us elders is very important, but this experience must not die with us, but we must pour it out to the new generations that will make good use of it, the new generations, rightly, will surely add much more.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

aryobarzan said:


> You just accused a member of Iranian armed forces with Incompetence and the Air Force with nepotism . These are serious charges you are leveling against a person and an organisation. So my question to you is ...*DO YOU HAVE PROOF..* On what basis do you make these accusation...Now that you made these accusation the burden of proof is on you..looking forward to see your evidence.


Actually placing a kid in that position is the proof itself, it means the rest of elder officers in air force were all Incompetence, it's an insult to all elder officers in airforce.
Your logic is the same as the rest of good gen Aghazadeha, who claim without theme we wouldn't survive.



sahureka2 said:


> even the elderly technicians and aeronautical engineers who operate today on IRIAF aircraft, were in 1979 young technicians and engineers.
> it is impossible to block the clock of life, the wheel continues to turn inexorably, it has been possible to lengthen life prospects and the quality of life, today those who once considered themselves old can safely indicate them as middle-aged men, but always young people must be prepared who must then take over.
> There is a generational change in all fields, a young man today is born in a world where technology has reached a very high level, therefore to the mind already open to receive these inputs, I instead am of the past generation that used a machine to writing, the calculations made by hand with the help of the calculator and the models made them in chalk and not with the 3D printer, I had to update myself, but I admit that I had many difficulties to do so.
> Therefore yes, the experience of us elders is very important, but this experience must not die with us, but we must pour it out to the new generations that will make good use of it, the new generations, rightly, will surely add much more.


A retiring personnel should be replaced with someone who has served atleast for 15 or 20 years, not a newbie.
Otherwise system is flawed.


----------



## Mithridates

farzad esmaili appointed to be head of air defence force when he was mid 30 and we all know air defence capabilities growed under his command so i don't think it's big deal if one young officer is in command of an overhauling unit.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

این حرفا واقعا شنیدنیه :

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

skyshadow said:


>



Impressive, especially the production line. And since this is a predecessor of the Kowsar, the production line of the newer fighter jet could be bigger and much more advanced. It is also a proof that Iran has a solid fighter jet development program.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Impressive, especially the production line. And since this is a predecessor of the Kowsar, the production line of the newer fighter jet could be bigger and much more advanced. It is also a proof that Iran has a solid fighter jet development program.



as they said Iran started to produce aluminium 7075 for the body of Saeghe fighter jet and other fighter jets as well some 18 years ago.












*and then the world say how they are flying there 50 year old Helicopters and fighter jets, well they fly because nothing in them is American made any more, they are replaced with Iranian made parts.*

*before














after












*

*i do not know what this is, maybe an UAV ???











*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

People used to ridicule Iran when they introduced Shafagh and Saegeh fighter jets; however, with the development of Kowsar, with its digital display, new avionics, radars, and the engines that take it to a fourth-generation level, I don't think the statement that "*Iran is not in a position to build fighter jets plain and simple*" can stand up to scrutiny. They're already building fighter jets, and while they are not in a position to challenge major fighter jets producers, their announcements and documentaries clearly show an indigenous fighter jet program.

The Kowsar may look like an F-5, but if everything else is different; and with the exception of airframe, I doubt the Kowsar can be considered an F-5 fighter jet.

Through trial and practice, it allows the Iranian engineers to develop the next successor to Kowsar. And if anything can be learned from the Chinese model, persistence pays off. Thirty years ago, people used to make fun of Chinese planes. Well, look at them today. 



TheImmortal said:


> Fighter jets are not easy, many countries such as Japan, Germany, etc have much higher capability to build their own fighter jets, but have passed and went with foreign fighters.
> 
> India has a much higher military budget, more experience, greater engineer base, under ZERO sanctions, full access to foreign technology and transfer of tech. Yet it’s own fighter jet Program has still struggled. And to top it all off, they are currently looking at foreign fighters to modernize their aging airforce.
> 
> In case of Pakistan they got full TOT of a Chinese fighter. But Pakistan still does not have the ability to build its own indegenious fighter jet design.
> 
> Thus Iran will likely not be able to secure TOT from Russia, at least not for the plane it wants (SU-30/SU-35).
> 
> People are over simplifying the fighter jet production process.
> 
> Iran is not in a position to build fighter jets plain and simple. Even if it wanted to, it would be cost prohibitive and with a pathetic military budget of $14 billion dollars that’s not going to do much in the way of anything.
> 
> Air Force realizes the hurdles, the bottlenecks, the set backs and rather just wait to buy foreign fighters. With foreign fighters you know what your getting and you know the performance.
> 
> Furthermore, Air Force feels comfortable that it’s engineer base can keep any foreign fighter flying even if they were to get cut off from the parent country like in 1979.
> 
> So Iran can spend 2-3 Billion and get a substantial amount of fighters or spend 1 billion to R&D a fighter that may never make it to mass production in significant numbers.
> 
> Borhan/Shafagh failed because Air Force didn’t put in any orders in for it. Kowsar is not the answer either other than a upgrade/replacement package for aging F-5’s.
> 
> In 10 years we will see where Iran has gone in this field and the results may be disappointing.
> 
> Luckily in the drone space, Iran is a top tier power and that will only help it in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> People used to ridicule Iran when they introduced Shafagh and Saegeh fighter jets; however, with the development of Kowsar, with its digital display, new avionics, radars, and the engines that take it to a fourth-generation level, I don't think the statement that "*Iran is not in a position to build fighter jets plain and simple*" can stand up to scrutiny. They're already building fighter jets, and while they are not in a position to challenge major fighter jets producers, their announcements and documentaries clearly show an indigenous fighter jet program.
> 
> The Kowsar may look like an F-5, but if everything else is different; and with the exception of airframe, I doubt the Kowsar can be considered an F-5 fighter jet.
> 
> Through trial and practice, it allows the Iranian engineers to develop the next successor to Kowsar. And if anything can be learned from the Chinese model, persistence pays off. Thirty years ago, people used to make fun of Chinese planes. Well, look at them today.



They aren’t building Kowsar jets! Stop falling for propaganda.

According to the latest news by the Air Force less than 20 Kowsar will be built in next 10 years.

So yes this is no different than Saeghe I & II. Just another name and another limited production run.

At best Kowsar is an avionics package/test bed or a replacement for F-5’s when they need to be retired and Iran has no other options.

At worst it’s actually just the Saeghe III in a long line of F-5 iterations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Mithridates said:


> farzad esmaili appointed to be head of air defence force when he was mid 30 and we all know air defence capabilities growed under his command so i don't think it's big deal if one young officer is in command of an overhauling unit.


Esmaili was a brigadier general already.

There is a difference between routine jobs and the jobs which need genius minds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> Esmaili was a brigadier general already.
> 
> There is a difference between routine jobs and the jobs which need genius minds.


being the head of an overhauling unit does not mean you should be an specialist in maintaining planes, you should manage your unit like esmaili did to his branch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Mithridates said:


> being the head of an overhauling unit does not mean you should be an specialist in maintaining planes, you should manage your unit like esmaili did to his branch.


Mohsen has an extraordinary narrow opinion corridor. Anyone not aligning in that corridor is by default a traitor. Basically everyone not named Mahmoud and/or not having an affiliation with sepah.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> People used to ridicule Iran when they introduced Shafagh and Saegeh fighter jets; however, with the development of Kowsar, with its digital display, new avionics, radars, and the engines that take it to a fourth-generation level, I don't think the statement that "*Iran is not in a position to build fighter jets plain and simple*" can stand up to scrutiny. They're already building fighter jets, and while they are not in a position to challenge major fighter jets producers, their announcements and documentaries clearly show an indigenous fighter jet program.
> 
> The Kowsar may look like an F-5, but if everything else is different; and with the exception of airframe, I doubt the Kowsar can be considered an F-5 fighter jet.
> 
> Through trial and practice, it allows the Iranian engineers to develop the next successor to Kowsar. And if anything can be learned from the Chinese model, persistence pays off. Thirty years ago, people used to make fun of Chinese planes. Well, look at them today.



You're really right and do not pay attention to Thelmmortal's claims, he does not understand how the Iranians work. It's Western thought limited! Yes the Iranians are more advanced than they show us

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

I think we need to cut the airforce some slack. Airforce is the most difficult and expensive aspect of an army to properly develop and given the limited budget the airforce has, it's no surprise we've not see that much. Having said that, the Kowsar was still a good achievement, making a fighter jet which includes it's own jet engine is by no means an easy task.


I have seen signs that chief of staff Bagheri is serious about developing the airforce so we will hopefully see much more development.


----------



## Mithridates

iran in ahmadinejad era rented venezuelan f-16s to perform some researchers with it on our radars performance and possibly training dogfights. seems like venezuela offered us them with reasonable price but US blocked the sale.

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

a comparison between fakour and different amraam versions range that saudi and emiratis use.

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

dooran project aimed to upgrade our f-4s:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

army herculeses in syria next to russian il-76s and flankers:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> iran in ahmadinejad era rented venezuelan f-16s to perform some researchers with it on our radars performance and possibly training dogfights. seems like venezuela offered us them with reasonable price but US blocked the sale.
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> a comparison between fakour and different amraam versions range that saudi and emiratis use.
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> dooran project aimed to upgrade our f-4s:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> army herculeses in syria next to russian il-76s and flankers:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



Only issue with Fakkour is that an f-14 can carry it. 

So Iran will have to have 40 F-14’s defend against 200+ F-16/F-15. This means that the air defense have to do the bulk of the work.

It highlights the need for an air superiority fighter to accompany F-14’s, wether Chinese/Russian/or Iranian made.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Only issue with Fakkour is that an f-14 can carry it.
> 
> So Iran will have to have 40 F-14’s defend against 200+ F-16/F-15. This means that the air defense have to do the bulk of the work.
> 
> It highlights the need for an air superiority fighter to accompany F-14’s, wether Chinese/Russian/or Iranian made.




need to modify some of the passengers plane that can fly upwards of 60,000 ft to carry giant radar and sensors and equip them with 20 Fakkour-90s .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> need to modify some of the passengers plane that can fly upwards of 60,000 ft to carry giant radar and sensors and equip them with 20 Fakkour-90s .


well , congratulation , you just made all our passenger plane fair game . by the way that's war crime

you want to use Fakour on more plane , then make software on F4 compatible with it those plane also can carry the missile. even Kowsar can carry it on innermost bay if the shortened range is not important for you .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

@Ray_Atek 

Dadash, age mishe in akse photoshop ro vardar, ina alan dobarah miyan inro mizaran to newshashoon migan Iran dobareh photoshop kard. Abrumoon mire dobareh.


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> This means that the air defense have to do the bulk of the work


even during the war with iraq air defence did the bulk of work air force destroyed only 100 aircraft of 750.


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> well , congratulation , you just made all our passenger plane fair game . by the way that's war crime
> 
> you want to use Fakour on more plane , then make software on F4 compatible with it those plane also can carry the missile. even Kowsar can carry it on innermost bay if the shortened range is not important for you .



Fair point. I still think a large plane that can fly high and carry 10-20 Fakkour 90s can be a great equalizer.

Maybe a IL-76 is a better platform. Iran needs an AWACS and it was already using its Tomcats for that role. I think Iran will find it a lot easier to mount a giant AESA on the nose cone in addition to full sensor suits and electronic warfare equipment.


----------



## OldTwilight

https://www.instagram.com/donyaye_jangafzar/p/BVUZx0NntiP/


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> Fair point. I still think a large plane that can fly high and carry 10-20 Fakkour 90s can be a great equalizer.
> 
> Maybe a IL-76 is a better platform. Iran needs an AWACS and it was already using its Tomcats for that role. I think Iran will find it a lot easier to mount a giant AESA on the nose cone in addition to full sensor suits and electronic warfare equipment.


What you are talking is an armed AWACS. I wonder how good it can be , the enemy can detect it from far and they can escape from it easily .
I believe AWACS coupled with several fast interceptor are better solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> What you are talking is an armed AWACS. I wonder how good it can be , the enemy can detect it from far and they can escape from it easily .
> I believe AWACS coupled with several fast interceptor are better solution.



Well Fakkour 90 has superior in speed and range. It is possible to fire from high altitude and break away. Note that this aircraft will supplement the Airforce by acting as a force multiplier. I wonder if one could add boosters to Fakkour 90s to increase their engagement range.

Kinetic energy of the missile along with good guidance can make a world of difference. AWACS like aircraft with giant aperture radar can maintain track on multiple targets for a wide field of view and long range.

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> Well Fakkour 90 has superior in speed and range. It is possible to fire from high altitude and break away. Note that this aircraft will supplement the Airforce by acting as a force multiplier. I wonder if one could add boosters to Fakkour 90s to increase their engagement range.
> 
> Kinetic energy of the missile along with good guidance can make a world of difference. AWACS like aircraft with giant aperture radar can maintain track on multiple targets for a wide field of view and long range.


Fakoor-90 have the range, but I still doubt 90km as it uses MIM-23 engine . but let be honest you want to chase supersonic fighters with subsonic planes based on IR-140 or so . they can easily achieve 3 to 4 time your speed and turn around you before you reach them . And more importantly if you want to get result you won't fire your missile as maximum range.


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> Fakoor-90 have the range, but I still doubt 90km as it uses MIM-23 engine . but let be honest you want to chase supersonic fighters with subsonic planes based on IR-140 or so . they can easily achieve 3 to 4 time your speed and turn around you before you reach them . And more importantly if you want to get result you won't fire your missile as maximum range.



Another way of thinking about this is a mobile airborne SAM site. It's flying, it can move faster than ground based mobile air defense systems .

Also as for range and peed is concerned, I suggested adding boosters to Fakkour 90s. I still think Fakkour 90 has 100 nautical mile range which is approximately 180KM. For it to be effective, a fire solution at 90KM is still far beyond reach of AIM-120 variances available to the region. Fakkour 90 has a top speed of Mach 5 at nominal flight altitude (note that Mach speed changes as a function of altitude).


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> Another way of thinking about this is a mobile airborne SAM site. It's flying, it can move faster than ground based mobile air defense systems .
> 
> Also as for range and peed is concerned, I suggested adding boosters to Fakkour 90s. I still think Fakkour 90 has 100 nautical mile range which is approximately 180KM. For it to be effective, a fire solution at 90KM is still far beyond reach of AIM-120 variances available to the region. Fakkour 90 has a top speed of Mach 5 at nominal flight altitude (note that Mach speed changes as a function of altitude).


I assure you ,its impossible for Fakour-90 to have 180km of range everything about it scream MIM-23 ,I believe it's the end result of Sedjil project. And do you have any source for that Mach 5 speed ?


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> I assure you ,its impossible for Fakour-90 to have 180km of range everything about it scream MIM-23 ,I believe it's the end result of Sedjil project. And do you have any source for that Mach 5 speed ?



IMO Fakour is out dated heavy missiles .... its capabilitay can't be compared to modern BVR long range missiles ... at best Fakour just a replace for our F14 lost fangs ( Phoneix missiles ) .... 

if Phoneix was that damn Overpowered and awesome , USA wouldn't retired it ....

in contrast to most of Iranian members who think USA and their military decision maker are idiots , I have respect for them and I think they have some valid reason to retired both F14 and Phonix missiles ...


----------



## AmirPatriot

OldTwilight said:


> IMO Fakour is out dated heavy missiles .... its capabilitay can't be compared to modern BVR long range missiles ... at best Fakour just a replace for our F14 lost fangs ( Phoneix missiles ) ....
> 
> if Phoneix was that damn Overpowered and awesome , USA wouldn't retired it ....
> 
> in contrast to most of Iranian members who think USA and their military decision maker are idiots , I have respect for them and I think they have some valid reason to retired both F14 and Phonix missiles ...



They retired the F-14 (and the AIM-54 with it, since the Tomcat was the only platform that carried it) because after the end of the cold war they thought they no longer needed to counter the Soviet threat of long range bombers with supersonic anti-ship missiles targeting their carriers. Now the Russians are resurgent and China is more and more capable they dearly miss the Phoenix weapon system which to this day not a single US aircraft, be it F-22 or F-35 can match in range.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

AmirPatriot said:


> They retired the F-14 (and the AIM-54 with it, since the Tomcat was the only platform that carried it) because after the end of the cold war they thought they no longer needed to counter the Soviet threat of long range bombers with supersonic anti-ship missiles targeting their carriers. Now the Russians are resurgent and China is more and more capable they dearly miss the Phoenix weapon system which to this day not a single US aircraft, be it F-22 or F-35 can match in range.



The point is that they can make it again and this time the range , radar and speed would be better , so why they don't bother themselves !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> IMO Fakour is out dated heavy missiles .... its capabilitay can't be compared to modern BVR long range missiles ... at best Fakour just a replace for our F14 lost fangs ( Phoneix missiles ) ....
> 
> if Phoneix was that damn Overpowered and awesome , USA wouldn't retired it ....
> 
> in contrast to most of Iranian members who think USA and their military decision maker are idiots , I have respect for them and I think they have some valid reason to retired both F14 and Phonix missiles ...


The problem is not with phoenix . the problem is Phoenix & F-14 system . these two are inseparable. And F-14 is expensive to maintain after USA retired F-14 against the wish of the Navy there really was no reason to keep AIM-54 in service as no other airplane could use it.



OldTwilight said:


> The point is that they can make it again and this time the range , radar and speed would be better , so why they don't bother themselves !?


They are working on AIM-120 and they nearly matched its range in latest generation of AIM-120 and as I say there is no pinot using it again as it is a bundle with AN/AWG-9 and AN/APG-71aand can't be operated without them also the only platform they have that can use it without hampering the airplane capabilities is F-15 and that airplane work fine as is with AIM-120.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Fakoor-90 have the range, but I still doubt 90km as it uses MIM-23 engine


the engine you said is smaller than the one in phoenix. the pilot i mentioned before says the test pilot that launched fakour on karrar drone was satisfied of missiles performance considering drone was dispensing chaffs. according to him fakour is better than phoenix in many aspects except of the max range.


----------



## aryobarzan

OldTwilight said:


> IMO Fakour is out dated heavy missiles .... its capabilitay can't be compared to modern BVR long range missiles ... at best Fakour just a replace for our F14 lost fangs ( Phoneix missiles ) ....
> 
> if Phoneix was that damn Overpowered and awesome , USA wouldn't retired it ....
> 
> i*n contrast to most of Iranian members who think USA and their military decision maker are idiots , I have respect for them and I think they have some valid reason to retired both F14 and Phonix missiles* ...


Just a small point..
* USA and their military decision maker are corrupt to the core.* The real decision makers for the US military armaments needs work in companies like Lockheed Martin, TRW ,General Dynamics, etc.. active US military and Defence department officials all end up as the employees of these companies with very high salaries for the sole purpose of writing the requirements for the new weapon system and using their contacts (e.g. retiring perfectly good weapon systems so that more contracts can be awarded to these companies.. that is why they need $700 billion dollar defence budget ). Retirement of F-14 or the Phonix missile is in that category. Corruption is so wide spread that in the case of F-35 after spending $200 billion dollar development $$$s they are now admitting that this aircraft is not combat worthy!!!. This story is being repeated on the new aircraft carriers and so on..(a look at Russian planning strategies or the Iranian planning strategies tells you how smart thinkers plan!). By the way US ordered the destruction all existing F-14s for the fear of Iran (the only other operator of F-14) getting their hands on their part.... (what a waste of US tax payers money ).Sorry I went off topic!.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> I assure you ,its impossible for Fakour-90 to have 180km of range everything about it scream MIM-23 ,I believe it's the end result of Sedjil project. And do you have any source for that Mach 5 speed ?



I am basing all Fakkour 90s specs on AIM-54 as it is a reversed engineered missile.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> the engine you said is smaller than the one in phoenix. the pilot i mentioned before says the test pilot that launched fakour on karrar drone was satisfied of missiles performance considering drone was dispensing chaffs. according to him fakour is better than phoenix in many aspects except of the max range.


Well the pilot first must tell me how Karrar drone managed to carry Fakour missile ?
My guess he mistake fatter with Fakour and the comparison with phoenix is nonsense.



arashkamangir said:


> I am basing all Fakkour 90s specs on AIM-54 as it is a reversed engineered missile.


Well you are wrong here ,go. To the thread about Fakour and see the missile and you see the only relation with the AIM-54 is the shape of the missile otherwise it is not the same diameter , its not the same length ,it won't use the same guidance system and it won't use the same engine.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> Well the pilot first must tell me how Karrar drone managed to carry Fakour missile ?
> My guess he mistake fatter with Fakour and the comparison with phoenix is nonsense.
> 
> 
> Well you are wrong here ,go. To the thread about Fakour and see the missile and you see the only relation with the AIM-54 is the shape of the missile otherwise it is not the same diameter , its not the same length ,it won't use the same guidance system and it won't use the same engine.



He did not mean to say that the Pilot launched the Fakour missile from the Karrar drone. He wrote " launched fakour on karrar drone" meaning that the Fakour was fired against the Karrar drone!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Vegas said:


> If Iran could not make a bigger aircraft at moment, then Iran has still following option open:
> 
> 1) A manned aircraft (like F-5) should be accompanied with 2 Drones.
> 
> 2) Each of them should have specialized role, and they should have total co-ordination with each other.
> 
> 3) For example, aircraft can be used for jamming electronic signals and tactical ground strike missions, while the other two can be used for a very big RADAR, and other could be used for holding missiles and bombs.
> 
> This is totally in Iran's capability.
> 
> Iran should change the strategy and use the power of co-ordination through modern computers and thus it needs not to have all the things present in one single aircraft, but dividing it into specialized roles could at the end give much better results to Iran.


Small problem ,which drone is supposed to accompany the fighter ,the only one that come to my mind and is capable of doing so is Karrar. And it don't have that much endurance .and also it can't be used for such missions.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Well the pilot first must tell me how Karrar drone managed to carry Fakour missile ?
> My guess he mistake fatter with Fakour and the comparison with phoenix is nonsense.
> 
> 
> Well you are wrong here ,go. To the thread about Fakour and see the missile and you see the only relation with the AIM-54 is the shape of the missile otherwise it is not the same diameter , its not the same length ,it won't use the same guidance system and it won't use the same engine.


the drone carried chaffs and was dispensing them while test pilot launched it's fakour toward karrar from his f-14.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

one of my fantasies about the future of air force (x-103):
mach 5 interceptor
add AWG-9 radar and phoenix or bayyenat+fakour and let the opponents come...

however it's maded of only titanium due to extreme speed and friction, heat and other mechanical reasons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 549973
> 
> View attachment 549974
> 
> one of my fantasies about the future of air force (x-103):
> mach 5 interceptor
> add AWG-9 radar and phoenix or bayyenat+fakour and let the opponents come...
> 
> however it's maded of only titanium due to extreme speed and friction, heat and other mechanical reasons.


The XF-103 was a craazzy one alright.
One of mine would probably be the f14 reengineered to be powered by an aviadvigatel D-30F11 turbofan.Thats the thrust vectoring version of the soloviev d30f6[Mig 31 turbofan!!]
Thrust vectoring AND swing wing.


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> The XF-103 was a craazzy one alright.
> One of mine would probably be the f14 reengineered to be powered by an aviadvigatel D-30F11 turbofan.Thats the thrust vectoring version of the soloviev d30f6[Mig 31 turbofan!!]
> Thrust vectoring AND swing wing.


actually i am in love with D-30. it's a really amazing engine it's lighter and more powerful than GE F-110. if we reverse engineer it, that would be a great achievement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## Mithridates

Mithridates said:


> if we reverse engineer it, that would be a great achievement.


in the case that you guys are confused that how we are gonna reverse engineering some thing that we don't have it, will i should say that we have access to soloviev d-30 engine and unlike many other stuff we can reverse engineer them as they came onboard with iraqi IL-76 TDs so technically we didn't buy them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> in the case that you guys are confused that how we are gonna reverse engineering some thing that we don't have it, will i should say that we have access to soloviev d-30 engine and unlike many other stuff we can reverse engineer them as they came onboard with iraqi IL-76 TDs so technically we didn't buy them.
> View attachment 550438
> 
> View attachment 550439



Just because you have the engine doesn’t mean you can reverse engineer it. Or else every country in the world would just reverse engineer the latest jet engines possible like F-35 and SU-35 engines. Without the exact blueprint and TOT, it’s a very difficult process.

Reverse engineering a jet engine is not like reverse engineering a drone or tank or piece of military equipment. Everything from materials, construction, etc has to be exact followed by the software side of things. Then the engine has to survive repeated stress and achieve adequate life span without problems before reaching serial production. 

This board routinely oversimplifies the process based on Iran reverse engineering other types of equipment. 

Iran reverse engineer even a 50 year old RD-33 would be momumental task, let alone anything else.

Even in Rocket engines Iran is still using the Soviet era No-Dong to power it’s long range missiles and has just started moving towards somewhat more modern rocket engines for long range use (Khorramshahr), but is likely still 10+ years away from more advanced rocket engines. 

That should you tell you something because Iran’s experience in rocket engines is over 20 years. Plus it has a massive pool of knowledge and experience to pull from. Whereas the pool of knowledge/experience for jet engines is tiny.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> in the case that you guys are confused that how we are gonna reverse engineering some thing that we don't have it, will i should say that we have access to soloviev d-30 engine and unlike many other stuff we can reverse engineer them as they came onboard with iraqi IL-76 TDs so technically we didn't buy them.
> View attachment 550438
> 
> View attachment 550439


Probably wouldnt even need to use the d30s off of the il76 as irans old tu154m airliners use the same d-30s as the il76 does.Thats one of the other reasons that I really like the D-30,by being dual use there were quite a few of them built.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

Mithridates said:


> in the case that you guys are confused that how we are gonna reverse engineering some thing that we don't have it, will i should say that we have access to soloviev d-30 engine and unlike many other stuff we can reverse engineer them as they came onboard with iraqi IL-76 TDs so technically we didn't buy them.


Can Iran reverse engineer the RD-33 of its Mig-29's fleet ?


----------



## Mithridates

foxhoundbis said:


> Can Iran reverse engineer the RD-33 of its Mig-29's fleet ?


not until now.


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> Iran reverse engineer even a 50 year old RD-33 would be momumental task, let alone anything else.



Well , IMO we shouldn't try to reverse engineer jet engine , we should just analyse them and try to design our own , start with simple engine then go for more complex ... after all the material and process of building are the critical part here .... 

side note 50 years ago there weren't any software and software simulation and engine like RD-33 , J-85 , j-79 are belong to those era .... we should be able to desgin more simple and optimized engine than above engines ... especially J-85 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> side note 50 years ago there weren't any software and software simulation and engine like RD-33 , J-85 , j-79 are belong to those era .... we should be able to desgin more simple and optimized engine than above engines ... especially J-85 ...


come on there were software even before that
Germany built its first computer between 1936-1938 it called Z1 in 1939 they built Z2 and in 1941 they built Z3 first functional *programmable* fully automatic digital computer .
its the spec.


> Average calculation speed: addition – 0.8 seconds, multiplication – 3 seconds
> Arithmetic unit: Binary floating point, 22 bit, add, subtract, multiply, divide, square root
> Data memory: 64 words with a length of 22 bits
> Program memory: Punched celluloid tape
> Input: Decimal floating point numbers
> Output: Decimal floating point numbers
> Input and Output was facilitated by a terminal, with a special keyboard for input and a row of lamps to show results
> Elements: Around 2,000 relays (1,400 for the memory)
> Frequency: 5.3 Herts
> Power consumption: Around 4,000 watts
> Weight: Around 1 tonne (2,200 lb)



In 1943 Britain built Colossus the first Automatic Electric Digital *programmable *computer
but the cornerstone on Programing and Computing was ENIAC ,it was built in USA in 1945 and was the first *General Purpose* *Programmable *electronic computer. It was Turing-complete, digital and able to solve "a large class of numerical problems" through reprogramming. (it was used for building Hydrogen Bomb)


in 1948 *Manchester Baby* was built , it was the first computer that used stored programs and can be said used *Software* in its modern Definition it was in 1949 developed in to *Manchester Mark 1 *or *MADM *the first practical stored-program computers.
so you can say thy used software in modern term of it since 1949 and ind since 1951 we had A-0 first functional compiler that in 1953 evolved into A-2 the first free and open source Software .
by the way since 1959 we Have COBOL the oldest programing language still in use and the grand daddy of all modern programing compilers .

well there goes my concise and practically useless lecture on history of computer and programing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> come on there were software even before that
> Germany built its first computer between 1936-1938 it called Z1 in 1939 they built Z2 and in 1941 they built Z3 first functional *programmable* fully automatic digital computer .
> its the spec.
> 
> 
> In 1943 Britain built Colossus the first Automatic Electric Digital *programmable *computer
> but the cornerstone on Programing and Computing was ENIAC ,it was built in USA in 1945 and was the first *General Purpose* *Programmable *electronic computer. It was Turing-complete, digital and able to solve "a large class of numerical problems" through reprogramming. (it was used for building Hydrogen Bomb)
> 
> 
> in 1948 *Manchester Baby* was built , it was the first computer that used stored programs and can be said used *Software* in its modern Definition it was in 1949 developed in to *Manchester Mark 1 *or *MADM *the first practical stored-program computers.
> so you can say thy used software in modern term of it since 1949 and ind since 1951 we had A-0 first functional compiler that in 1953 evolved into A-2 the first free and open source Software .
> by the way since 1959 we Have COBOL the oldest programing language still in use and the grand daddy of all modern programing compilers .
> 
> well there goes my concise and practically useless lecture on history of computer and programing



I'm programer and I knew these but were anything like CAD software back then !? could they made software simulation for 3d model engine and visually see how its works !?
were fast speed video recorder which could assist them to what really going happen !?
were any heat video recorder to show them what is going in the engine !?


maybe there was these kind of things but I'm sure all of those tools could be in primitive state ....


we are simply over complicated things and put mental barrier about this kind of issue .... just put money , have open mind and good and knowledge able manager and engineers and you will get what you want , specially since jet engine are 70 years old technology and we have access to working one ....


as a programmer if I want to write OS , I won't try to reverse engineering current OS , but I will write it from scratch because it is easier ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> I'm programer and I knew these but were anything like CAD software back then !? could they made software simulation for 3d model engine and visually see how its works !?
> were fast speed video recorder which could assist them to what really going happen !?
> were any heat video recorder to show them what is going in the engine !?
> 
> 
> maybe there was these kind of things but I'm sure all of those tools could be in primitive state ....
> 
> 
> we are simply over complicated things and put mental barrier about this kind of issue .... just put money , have open mind and good and knowledge able manager and engineers and you will get what you want , specially since jet engine are 70 years old technology and we have access to working one ....


you see there were computers they were programing them but certainly they were a lot more primitive than today but consider this . Z3 from 1941 could do multiplication in 3 sec and addition in 0.8 sec then in 4 years ENIAC could perform 5000 operation per second now consider it how much faster computers have been in 1968 when they began work on RD-33 and how it help the designing process .


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> you see there were computers they were programing them but certainly they were a lot more primitive than today but consider this . Z3 from 1941 could do multiplication in 3 sec and addition in 0.8 sec then in 4 years ENIAC could perform 5000 operation per second now consider it how much faster computers have been in 1968 when they began work on RD-33 and how it help the designing process .



the point is that some times , there is not any shortcut , you have reach your goal from well-known way ... if you try to use short-cut you will just get away from your goal and lose time and motivation ....

IMO , Jet Engine are like this , you have to do actual work and you cant get short cut ....


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> the point is that some times , there is not any shortcut , you have reach your goal from well-known way ... if you try to use short-cut you will just get away from your goal and lose time and motivation ....
> 
> IMO , Jet Engine are like this , you have to do actual work and you cant get short cut ....


the problem with JET Engine is that you can't just reverse engineer it , even if its from 70 years ago. you must knew what material they exactly used and even if you knew that you must knew how they built those materials and even if you knew that you must knew in what situation they worked on those materials , it very much affect the reliability of engine , how long it work and how much you can put it under stress .
it really matter if you can heat gases up to 1400c or 1100c at the intake .


----------



## aryobarzan

Few point:
1- Composition (elements and percentages) of any material (alloys) can be precisely established if you have Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) which I believe does exits in some of the universities in Iran.
2- Basic designs are already known..detailed designs can be optimised using CAD/Simulation software packages (CAD and simulation well established in Iran by now).
3- Engine test cells (all the sensors and transducers and data analysis)..If they did J-85 they can do for any other engine)
4- Foundry and fabrication of alloys needed for combustion chambers and Turbine blades and machining them (do not know..out of my league.but MAPNA makes these for gas turbines can the process be used !!!! do not know). However Iran has tackled more complicated issues than this it is nuclear program so within Iran's capability..

So WTF..what is the hold up...(may be $$$$$$$)..

by the way.. Iran should know that buying any 4th, 5th or 6th Gen aircraft from Russia or China would have he issue of (DISABLE/KILL ) switch software implemented by these plane manufacturers. Unless they give you the source code (which no way in hell they will) you have to live with the knowledge that one day IVAN will make a deal with Israhell and suddenly your aircraft engines do not start on the tarmac or flame out while flying .. If you ever wonder why no Saudi F-15 or F-16 has been able defect to Iran or any other place ...you have the answer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

Who says Iran already has not reverse engineered RD-33 and managed to make a few "prototypes"? Obviously they will spend years testing it before starting to use the engine and unveiling it. When they revealed the OWJ, it has already gone through all its testing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

WinterNights said:


> Who says Iran already has not reverse engineered RD-33 and managed to make a few "prototypes"? Obviously they will spend years testing it before starting to use the engine and unveiling it. When they revealed the OWJ, it has already gone through all its testing.


I be happy if they already have done..as you said no reason why they should not be able to.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

aryobarzan said:


> I be happy if they already have done..as you said no reason why they should not be able to.


I asked this question above, because I heard in this forum, and in Farsnews agency more than 2 years , that Iran is able to produce "*Heavy Turbojet Engines* " 
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950623001151
I thought immediately to the RD-33 because it is the easiest task, and Iran can afford to reverse engineered, and can overcome this challenge. After all iranians succeeded by mass producing the Saeqeh. Iran is able to design its own fighter Kowsar, able to produce its own jet engine OWJ-85, able to produce its own aviionics. The Kowsar now is mass produced, then Iranian aerospace industry obtained precious experience, well why cannot they succeed by reproducing the RD-33 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

aryobarzan said:


> Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) which I believe does exits in some of the universities in Iran.


There are lots of companies in Iran building and exporting these microscopes and they produce much better ones these days... Check Made in Iran thread... lots of them there..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

foxhoundbis said:


> I asked this question above, because I heard in this forum, and in Farsnews agency more than 2 years , that Iran is able to produce "*Heavy Turbojet Engines* "
> http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950623001151
> I thought immediately to the RD-33 because it is the easiest task, and Iran can afford to reverse engineered, and can overcome this challenge. After all iranians succeeded by mass producing the Saeqeh. Iran is able to design its own fighter Kowsar, able to produce its own jet engine OWJ-85, able to produce its own aviionics. The Kowsar now is mass produced, then Iranian aerospace industry obtained precious experience, well why cannot they succeed by reproducing the RD-33 ?


I think the question that you really should asking is what would be the actual need for iran to indigenously produce the rd33.Because apart from the mig29 fleet the only other use for an rd33 would be if the iriaf was going to modernise its mirage f1 fleet to something along the lines of the south african f1az and fit a modified rd33 into the airframe,and of course theres no sign of anything like that.The only other option would be an indigenous program to produce a light fighter along the lines of a jf17 or a f20,and realistically theres no sign of that sort of thing either,apart from some desktop models that I think dated back to the early 90s when iran was supposedly working with russian design bureaus to come up with new fighter designs[that went nowhere of course].
Now I have little doubt that iran can and does produce many of the components that it needs for the rd33s that it has in service such as hot sections or compressor blades/stages,but realistically theres just no reason for iran to spend the considerable amounts of time,money and resources that would be needed to reverse/reengineer,not to mention productionising,the entire engine unless it actually has the airframes to put them in.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> 1- Composition (elements and percentages) of any material (alloys) can be precisely established if you have Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) which I believe does exits in some of the universities in Iran.
> 2- Basic designs are already known..detailed designs can be optimised using CAD/Simulation software packages (CAD and simulation well established in Iran by now).
> 3- Engine test cells (all the sensors and transducers and data analysis)..If they did J-85 they can do for any other engine)
> 4- Foundry and fabrication of alloys needed for combustion chambers and Turbine blades and machining them (do not know..out of my league.but MAPNA makes these for gas turbines can the process be used !!!! do not know). However Iran has tackled more complicated issues than this it is nuclear program so within Iran's capability..


not so easy , even if you knew the composition , you must know how to build them , exactly in what pressure the mix must be made how to cool it , in what temprature built the alloy and in what order made the mix and lots other factors.

also Mapna turbines are working in a lot lower temperature and pressure . as i said it make alot of difference if yhe Gases at the inlet of the engine or heated to 1000 Degree Celsius or 1500

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Hack-Hook said:


> not so easy , even if you knew the composition , you must know how to build them , exactly in what pressure the mix must be made how to cool it , in what temprature built the alloy and in what order made the mix and lots other factors.
> 
> also Mapna turbines are working in a lot lower temperature and pressure . as i said it make alot of difference if yhe Gases at the inlet of the engine or heated to 1000 Degree Celsius or 1500


I understand and and agree that the this knowledge is not provided to Iran on a piece of a paper, however that is the job of R&D labs to find out (which Iran has many). My point is that if you read the history of Iran nuclear development you will find out that this country solved much more complicated technical issues. Just keep in mind in nuclear Tech you work in extremely corrosive and radioactive environment with requirement for far more specialized materials (e.g. zirconium tubes) just one example (_west never imagined Iran can do Zirconium)._
Turbine blades exposed to extreme Temps is a challenge but not beyond capabilities in iran.

_Just a side note to this: I once saw a program on TV about Viking swords and why it was so superior to other swords..the reason was special steel. after doing SEM analysis on some of these sword they found out it has special type of steel not available any where in europe. so they went to next possible place..middle east ..they discovered the only place that such a steel was made was...you guessed it * PERSIA.* It was Persian steel that viking were using to make their famous swords with... just something to lighten up the mood..lol_

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

pressurizing suits for our pilots for very high altitude flights. out mig-29s and su-24s are able to fly really high to avoid getting hit by SAMs.

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> pressurizing suits for our pilots for very high altitude flights. out mig-29s and su-24s are able to fly really high to avoid getting hit by SAMs.
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Ahh,the good old Gsh6 pressure suit helmet and very probably the vkk suit to go with it,now if only iran had the mig25s to go with them[lol!]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

One good question is why the IRGC-ASF would need this high altitude pressure suite.

- For Su-22 fleet? The max. operating altitude of the Su-22 would not require this. It may have been modified to operate at higher altitude to give the new glide bombs max. possible range, or to extend the range of the new cruise missiles they are about to get. Is the effort worth the extra range?

- For something new, such as a manned S-171/RQ-170 bomber? Or fighter project?


----------



## Mithridates

PeeD said:


> IRGC-ASF


it's for army mig-29s and su-24s. the person shared the post is IRIAF pilot.
mig-29ub:









mig-29 has the ability to climb up to 74000fts.



        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Mithridates said:


> it's for army mig-29s and su-24s. the person shared the post is IRIAF pilot.
> mig-29ub:



It was shown at the IRGC exhibition, so no connection to the IRIAF yet except for that claim.


----------



## Mithridates

PeeD said:


> It was shown at the IRGC exhibition, so no connection to the IRIAF yet except for that claim.


IRGC also showed the AF targeting pod for first time. obviously IRGC has not the high altitude flying planes so make the pilot use this suit by now on other hand AF has planes like su-24 and mig-29s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
pilot of this f-5 without any RWR system and without any accompanying plane or WSO moves hundreds of kilometers inside iraqi soil and bomb predefined targets and after taking hit by an air defence missile, instead of ejecting retakes plane control and flys it back to iran and lands in a road while his hand was injured.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

*IN FACT, IRAN’S FIGHTER JETS ARE A MAJOR THREAT *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


>



Been a while since we have seen the Saeghe F-5 variant.



OldTwilight said:


> *IN FACT, IRAN’S FIGHTER JETS ARE A MAJOR THREAT *



Kowsar is not a threat, it isn’t even being mass produced.

If you knew Air Force budget you would know they don’t have funds for any major purchase. Just refrubishing old aircraft and upgrading technology test beds in hopes of one day landing an order.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Been a while since we have seen the Saeghe F-5 variant.
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar is not a threat, it isn’t even being mass produced.
> 
> If you knew Air Force budget you would know they don’t have funds for any major purchase. Just refrubishing old aircraft and upgrading technology test beds in hopes of one day landing an order.



Although I fully know Iran needs a much larger budget in order to procure more jets: the actual increase in terms of money spent per year is what alludes me. Realistically how much would Iran have to increase its own defense spending by to compensate for its poor air force and or get new Kowsars, Saeghe, etc?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> - For something new, such as a manned S-171/RQ-170 bomber? Or fighter project?



Except you would need an invention called jet engines to fly your supposed aircraft. Iran barely has a light fighter engine ready for serial production (J85), Let alone the type of engine needed to power a supersonic stealth flying wing bomber.

With a total “declared” military budget of $20 billion dollar, Iran would be one of few or maybe the first military power to be able to build heavy jet engines with such a meager budget.

To put this in perspective, Nazi Germany Wermacht budget in 1939 was 19 Billion (German currency) which equates to 72 BILLION EUROS in 2009 dollars.

If we look at Communist China, they built a licensed UK engine used in U.K. version of F-4 in 1970’s. Yet after nearly 5 decades, China still lags US/Russia in engine tech.

So if Iran reverse engineered its first jet engine in 2010’s (if we are to believe the claims), how on Earth would they have a more advanced engine built in just a few years?

Highly unlikely is all I am saying.


----------



## TheImmortal

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Although I fully know Iran needs a much larger budget in order to procure more jets: the actual increase in terms of money spent per year is what alludes me. Realistically how much would Iran have to increase its own defense spending by to compensate for its poor air force and or get new Kowsars, Saeghe, etc?



An F-5 in today’s numbers cost 20-25 million. But let’s say Iran can build a Kowsar for 10 million (hypothetically) it would likely need a military budget of $150-200 million dollars just to be able to purchase 10 Kowsar a year (100 million).

Iran’s Air Force budget might not even be $50 Million or $30 Million. The Air Force likely gets by through its aerospace refurbishment/maintenance arm. Which according to thread I posted about IRGC overshadowing Air Force it generates 200+ Million a year. That Likely goes to keeping the fleet alive, bringing back old planes, salaries, and other expenses.

Turkey has a military budget around ~20 Billion dollars. Yet it announced 160 billion modernization program, of which 45 Billion would get allocated to Air Force (source wiki).

So in Iran’s case, unless the government announces a similar separate modernization program of 10+ billion for airforce (over X amount of years) , its hard to see how Iran’s Air Force will ever become anything.

To buy 50 SU-30 will cost Iran around 2 Billion dollars plus support costs/training/parts/etc.

So a 10 Billion Air Force modernization program funded by the government will allow for a 100 fighter purchase from Russia (SU-30), plus a significant boost to R&D for Iranian domestic fighter projects plus a possible order for a next gen F-5 variant (Kowsar II or III) as an domestic advanced trainer/light attack fighter. 

This should still leave money left over for additional Air Force purchase such as military cargo planes, AWACS, etc or possible another fighter jet to compliment the SU-30.

While 10 Billion is a lot of money, if you see how much Iran has lost in corruption, fraud, theft, government excess, etc its a drop in the bucket.

Nonetheless don’t expect to see such a program when Iran is suffocating under sanctions and throwing a economic lifeline to Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> An F-5 in today’s numbers cost 20-25 million. But let’s say Iran can build a Kowsar for 10 million (hypothetically) it would likely need a military budget of $150-200 million dollars just to be able to purchase 10 Kowsar a year (100 million).
> 
> Iran’s Air Force budget might not even be $50 Million or $30 Million. The Air Force likely gets by through its aerospace refurbishment/maintenance arm. Which according to thread I posted about IRGC overshadowing Air Force it generates 200+ Million a year. That Likely goes to keeping the fleet alive, bringing back old planes, salaries, and other expenses.
> 
> Turkey has a military budget around ~20 Billion dollars. Yet it announced 160 billion modernization program, of which 45 Billion would get allocated to Air Force (source wiki).
> 
> So in Iran’s case, unless the government announces a similar separate modernization program of 10+ billion for airforce (over X amount of years) , its hard to see how Iran’s Air Force will ever become anything.
> 
> To buy 50 SU-30 will cost Iran around 2 Billion dollars plus support costs/training/parts/etc.
> 
> So a 10 Billion Air Force modernization program funded by the government will allow for a 100 fighter purchase from Russia (SU-30), plus a significant boost to R&D for Iranian domestic fighter projects plus a possible order for a next gen F-5 variant (Kowsar II or III) as an domestic advanced trainer/light attack fighter.
> 
> This should still leave money left over for additional Air Force purchase such as military cargo planes, AWACS, etc or possible another fighter jet to compliment the SU-30.
> 
> While 10 Billion is a lot of money, if you see how much Iran has lost in corruption, fraud, theft, government excess, etc its a drop in the bucket.
> 
> Nonetheless don’t expect to see such a program when Iran is suffocating under sanctions and throwing a economic lifeline to Syria.



Much appreciated for the thorough breakdown!!

Didn't know things were this bad, jesus it's a shit show...


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> An F-5 in today’s numbers cost 20-25 million. But let’s say Iran can build a Kowsar for 10 million (hypothetically) it would likely need a military budget of $150-200 million dollars just to be able to purchase 10 Kowsar a year (100 million).
> 
> Iran’s Air Force budget might not even be $50 Million or $30 Million. The Air Force likely gets by through its aerospace refurbishment/maintenance arm. Which according to thread I posted about IRGC overshadowing Air Force it generates 200+ Million a year. That Likely goes to keeping the fleet alive, bringing back old planes, salaries, and other expenses.
> 
> Turkey has a military budget around ~20 Billion dollars. Yet it announced 160 billion modernization program, of which 45 Billion would get allocated to Air Force (source wiki).
> 
> So in Iran’s case, unless the government announces a similar separate modernization program of 10+ billion for airforce (over X amount of years) , its hard to see how Iran’s Air Force will ever become anything.
> 
> To buy 50 SU-30 will cost Iran around 2 Billion dollars plus support costs/training/parts/etc.
> 
> So a 10 Billion Air Force modernization program funded by the government will allow for a 100 fighter purchase from Russia (SU-30), plus a significant boost to R&D for Iranian domestic fighter projects plus a possible order for a next gen F-5 variant (Kowsar II or III) as an domestic advanced trainer/light attack fighter.
> 
> This should still leave money left over for additional Air Force purchase such as military cargo planes, AWACS, etc or possible another fighter jet to compliment the SU-30.
> 
> While 10 Billion is a lot of money, if you see how much Iran has lost in corruption, fraud, theft, government excess, etc its a drop in the bucket.
> 
> Nonetheless don’t expect to see such a program when Iran is suffocating under sanctions and throwing a economic lifeline to Syria.



and just in this year , there was 6.6 billion euro scandal which I.R. just look away and after some weeks ordered media to not post anything about it ( I guess this because all of our new agnecies suddenly become silent about this issue ) ...

so there is money , but the money is not for Iran or Iranians ....


side note : last year there was at least more than 148 billion in bank account of I.R. high administrative families outside of Iran ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Much appreciated for the thorough breakdown!!
> 
> Didn't know things were this bad, jesus it's a shit show...


Corruption figures in Iran is subject to who is telling you the story so..we do not know the actual figures. However what we know is that Iran has something called Sovereign wealth fund (oil fund)..It has in it between (66 to 99 billion dollars depending on which western news source you read). If these sums are still available to Iran for use (not blocked by sanction). The country is well capable of funding any lavish air force modernisation program she can desire.

A single F-35 (the plane alone) costs round 142 million dollars (latest figure I read). Considering the economic differences between US and Iran(e.g wages, materials, efficiencies..etc). I would say a Kowsar build in Iran (at 95% domestic labour and material) should not cost more than 5 million dollars ( considering one dollar spent in Iran produces the same shit in the US costing 10 dollars). So hypothetically if US wanted to build a Kowsar (from the scratch) each copy would be 50 million dollars which is not far fetched looking at the F-35 price tag).

MY conclusion: We do not know whats behind the thinking of Iranian military planners but we know they have the means (both technical and financial) to have a first rate airforce if they wanted to..Gen Bagheri statement about importance of air force recently may be an indication of a shift due to performance of Russian air power in Syria)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Yes,I wouldnt put the whole blame on the government and the lack of resources,the airforce seems to have a lot of problems when it comes to focusing on what it should be spending its remaining resources on,for instance many programs are started but either go nowhere or are never completed apart from a couple of prototypes/examples,such as the f14m program of which only 2 examples were completed.Theres also the airforces seeming fixation on the f5 and the amount of resources and effort that have been expended on programs to attempt local production of it.
So I think the airforces lack of direction when it comes to r&d programs is as much of a problem as its lack of resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Sineva said:


> Yes,I wouldnt put the whole blame on the government and the lack of resources,the airforce seems to have a lot of problems when it comes to focusing on what it should be spending its remaining resources on,for instance many programs are started but either go nowhere or are never completed apart from a couple of prototypes/examples,such as the f14m program of which only 2 examples were completed.Theres also the airforces seeming fixation on the f5 and the amount of resources and effort that have been expended on programs to attempt local production of it.
> So I think the airforces lack of direction when it comes to r&d programs is as much of a problem as its lack of resources.



our air force should make a decisive desion and retire junks like F-7 , Mirage F1 ( which is useless for us ) , Mig 23/27 , Su-22 ( which they gave them to IRGC ) , Su-24 and then focus on replace out dated battle worned F-5 with Kowsar/Saegheh to reduce the maintain problem and this logistical nightmare ...
then they have to parralled plane .... upgrade current fleet ( F14 and Mig 29 and in some ext and F-4 ) and make new multi role plane to replace old plane ....

if we can buy 120 Su-30 or Mig-35 , we can keep F-4 and Mig-29 and Su-24 in reserve and focus only on upgrading F-14 and making 4++ fighter with stealth capability ...

if Russians didn't withdraw from Shafagh program , by now we could have almost 200 Shafagh and completely retire f-7 , F-5 , F-4 , Mig 29 , Mig 23/27 , Su-24 , Su 22 , Mirgage F-1 and have a lot option in front of us ....

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iran-fighter-jet-project.211400/


the funny part is back in 2012 , I said same thing 

Iran fighter jet project

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

such a shame, shafaq was a promising platform:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> such a shame, shafaq was a promising platform:
> View attachment 551298



Iran’s biggest mistake was not signing a licensing deal for RD-33. It would have put the aerospace program ahead decades.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

unbelievable
Thelmmortal still says anything and understands absolutely nothing to the Iranian army and even less to the air force. You will soon see that he says anything and that the Kowsar is a more surprising fighter than he thinks. But I love that he underestimates Iran, it's a good sign lolll

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Any update on F-313 (Qaher) fighter jet? If videos of that plane taking off and landing can be released, it would put many charges thrown at Iran fighter jet development to rest. But it is possible Iranian military leaders are tight-lipped on that project: They may want their adversaries to be second-guessing them. 



Mr Iran Eye said:


> unbelievable
> Thelmmortal still says anything and understands absolutely nothing to the Iranian army and even less to the air force. You will soon see that he says anything and that the Kowsar is a more surprising fighter than he thinks. But I love that he underestimates Iran, it's a good sign lolll

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> such a shame, shafaq was a promising platform:
> View attachment 551298


Well there is B-92 project and as I understand some Shafaq technology will be used for that project

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samparis75

sanel1412 said:


> Well there is B-92 project and as I understand some Shafaq technology will be used for that project


If i'm not wrong, the Borhan "B92" is an evolution of Shafaq project and still in development. I don't understand why some say it is "such a shame", the project hasn't been put into trash, it's still alive

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s biggest mistake was not signing a licensing deal for RD-33. It would have put the aerospace program ahead decades.


indeed. seems like they didn't expect russians to leave the project.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> unbelievable
> Thelmmortal still says anything and understands absolutely nothing to the Iranian army and even less to the air force. You will soon see that he says anything and that the Kowsar is a more surprising fighter than he thinks. But I love that he underestimates Iran, it's a good sign lolll


he is iranian too.



Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Any update on F-313 (Qaher) fighter jet? If videos of that plane taking off and landing can be released, it would put many charges thrown at Iran fighter jet development to rest. But it is possible Iranian military leaders are tight-lipped on that project: They may want their adversaries to be second-guessing them.


some people saw a black plane flying around isfahan. also during the anniversary of revolution some people in eghtedar-40 exhibition stated that f-313 has been moved to mehrabad airport for it's first official flight but as you can remember US sabotaged our two space launches so i guess f-313 not flying has something to do with those. i am not sure but it seems like there is a connection.



sanel1412 said:


> Well there is B-92 project and as I understand some Shafaq technology will be used for that project


they said that the borhan project is ready to mass production if a foreign nation accepts to finance it we will produce for them. thats the polite way to say the project failed.



samparis75 said:


> If i'm not wrong, the Borhan "B92" is an evolution of Shafaq project and still in development. I don't understand why some say it is "such a shame", the project hasn't been put into trash, it's still alive


borhan compared to shafaq is inferior. shafaq shared many components with mig-35 but borhan...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s biggest mistake was not signing a licensing deal for RD-33. It would have put the aerospace program ahead decades.


That still would`ve only given you one quarter of a fighter program tho.You would`ve still had to develop the airframe the avionics and the weapons,and honestly based on its past performance I dont think that the airforce would`ve been even remotely up to the task involved,I mean even today its still doesnt seem to be up to it even with its current attempt to indigenously produce an apparently slightly upgraded f5.


----------



## raptor22

Mithridates said:


> some people saw a black plane flying around isfahan. also during the anniversary of revolution some people in eghtedar-40 exhibition stated that f-313 has been moved to mehrabad airport for it's first official flight but as you can remember US sabotaged our two space launches so i guess f-313 not flying has something to do with those. i am not sure but it seems like there is a connection.


What sabotage? Hajizade rejected that ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

raptor22 said:


> What sabotage? Hajizade rejected that ...


he rejected the sabotage in missile production facilities and supply chain as i know.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s biggest mistake was not signing a licensing deal for RD-33. It would have put the aerospace program ahead decades.



Russian didn't accept to sell RD33 to us and you except us to forced them to sign license production with us !?


We had some plan to replace our f14 engine with engine used in su_27 but it look like Russians didn't cooperate them

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

mirage f-1 flight simulator and teacher overseeing office:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ray_Atek

Mirage f1c has good planform to take it as a base of semi heavy fighter project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> Russian didn't accept to sell RD33 to us and you except us to forced them to sign license production with us !?
> 
> 
> We had some plan to replace our f14 engine with engine used in su_27 but it look like Russians didn't cooperate them



RD-33 is 1970’s engine, after collapse of USSR many military technologies were available to the highest bidders. Chinese realized this and took advantage.

How do you think Iran got its hands on Kilo subs? It could have even gotten long range TU bombers.

So yes it was possible for Iran to get transfer of tech for engines in early to mid 90’s. By early 2000’s Russia had stable footing and was more aligned to West. Iran should never have started Shafagh without full ToT, not that the project really went anywhere besides 1 prototype.

Short sightedness by Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Why would they waste money on infra structure for 10-12 air frames of a 3rd generation fighter jet. 

IRIAF planners are literal bozo

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Why would they waste money on infra structure for 10-12 air frames of a 3rd generation fighter jet.
> 
> IRIAF planners are literal bozo



It’s called a pity order. Russia did something similar with the SU-57.

Anyone who thinks that Kowsar will mass produced must have forgotten Saegeh I and Saegeh II. 

These are test beds, small amounts get made of each “variant”.

But IRIAF will not accept a mass order for F-5 because it is neither an air superiority fighter (what Iran really needs) nor a bomber (something nice to have).

At best the Kowsar is an advanced trainer and light attack. 

IRIAF is looking for a multi role or Air superiority fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Mithridates said:


> mirage f-1 flight simulator and teacher overseeing office:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


This is six degree of freedom flight simulator for an aircraft that iran did not have formal flight manuals..... just amazing...building flight simulator is what I am very familiar with and the amount of engineering and tecknical know how that goes into these thing is beyond belief some time harder than the actual aircraft itself. Having to build it with no data even harder...all flight parameters have to formulated and put into algorithem..controls and outside environment modeled..airports modeled..graphics done..instructor in the loop implemnted..and all the mechanical actuators tied to these models.. just amazing..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Although I fully know Iran needs a much larger budget in order to procure more jets: the actual increase in terms of money spent per year is what alludes me. Realistically how much would Iran have to increase its own defense spending by to compensate for its poor air force and or get new Kowsars, Saeghe, etc?




The Iranians compensate their aging airforce by committing a huge effort on 1) ballistic missiles; 2) anti-air defense systems; 3) mini subs that can lunch cruise missiles. So it looks like while they are pursuing locally produced fighter jets, they've made huge progress on those 3 other areas.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

FLIR integrated to A-6:









FLIR intergrated to f-313 prototype:




lol i thought only iran uses FLIR this way but it seems like it's common in ground attack planes. i hope next prototype use triangular frame rather than circular one so the overall RCS decrease.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

Mithridates said:


> FLIR integrated to A-6:
> View attachment 551845
> 
> View attachment 551846
> 
> FLIR intergrated to f-313 prototype:
> View attachment 551847
> 
> lol i thought only iran uses FLIR this way but it seems like it's common in ground attack planes. i hope next prototype use triangular frame rather than circular one so the overall RCS decrease.



Didn't you spot samething on usa f35



TheImmortal said:


> It’s called a pity order. Russia did something similar with the SU-57.
> 
> Anyone who thinks that Kowsar will mass produced must have forgotten Saegeh I and Saegeh II.
> 
> These are test beds, small amounts get made of each “variant”.
> 
> But IRIAF will not accept a mass order for F-5 because it is neither an air superiority fighter (what Iran really needs) nor a bomber (something nice to have).
> 
> At best the Kowsar is an advanced trainer and light attack.
> 
> IRIAF is looking for a multi role or Air superiority fighter.


Its not pitty order , how many trainer we need !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

OldTwilight said:


> Didn't you spot samething on usa f35
> 
> 
> Its not pitty order , how many trainer we need !?


yeah i saw it but it's different than this. first one is IRST second is FLIR. US usually uses external pods for target acquisition and pointing laser toward it while soviets/russians had onboard laser designators. that's why i fond it interesting.


----------



## sha ah

Mithridates said:


> such a shame, shafaq was a promising platform:
> View attachment 551298



Initially Iran & the Russians were jointly working together on the jet. However somewhere along the line Russia backed out of the project either because of pressures from the west/Israel, nuclear/weapons related sanctions or both.

The Russians continued development on their own and if I'm not mistaken it eventually led to the YAK-130. A subsonic jet trainer at best. Iran went ahead with their own prototype & it even underwent testing in a wind tunnel however I'm guessing that it never reached the development / serial production phase because it either failed to live up to expectations or could not sufficiently outperform older jets in iran's inventory. In the end it was much cheaper for Iran to continue the development of their F-5 modernization / reverse engineering project

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Reports...japan's F35 goes missing during the flight (translation...crashes in to the sea with no trace because it is so stealth no one knows what happened.)...May be it is so good aliens abducted it..lol

American junk at 142 million dollars a copy ...and they made fun of Iran's Q313.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> Reports...japan's F35 goes missing during the flight (translation...crashes in to the sea with no trace because it is so stealth no one knows what happened.)...May be it is so good aliens abducted it..lol
> 
> American junk at 142 million dollars a copy ...and they made fun of Iran's Q313.


Maybe again some problem with oxygen .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

RIP 



*Iran media: Police helicopter crashes near border, killing 1*

*https://www.business-standard.com/a...hes-near-border-killing-1-119041000667_1.html*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Hack-Hook said:


> Maybe again some problem with oxygen .


(many reported and unreported crashes of this aircraft)They admitted themselves that F35 is not *COMBAT worthy.*now we can see this aircraft is not even *AIR worthy*...they forced it to be purchased by their client states and now the pilots of these countries are loosing their lives and acting as TEST pilots for this expensive JUNK.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Instead of laughing at their failures, we need to focus on developing our own 5th gen fighters. All new technologies go through their teething process, but ultimately they will sort out all these bugs and have very potent platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## aryobarzan

WinterNights said:


> Instead of laughing at their failures, we need to focus on developing our own 5th gen fighters. All new technologies go through their teething process, but ultimately they will sort out all these bugs and have very potent platforms.


I have seen reports they may go back and work on improved F-15's instead due to disastrous performance of these F35s. But on your point about our own 5th Gen can not agree more.

*F-35 News. Espionage from China/Russia with regard to the F-35 isn't the threat...its from other powers that are worrisome...*





Thinking a bit about that F-35 crash off the coast of Japan. The worry voiced by some is that Russia and China might be zooming to recover it.

That's not the worry.

China successfully downloaded files on the F-35 and probably sold/traded them to Russia.

The worry is what happens when others see a chance to grab it.

If the sale with Turkey falls thru and Greece buys it. You can bet Turkey will be doing its best to get its tech thru a shootdown. *I'm betting Iran would love to get ahold of a crashed Israeli example. *Brazil isn't about that type of subterfuge but they'd take advantage of the tech if it fell into their hands.

France is WELL KNOWN for their industrial espionage and if they haven't already penetrated our systems for details then you can bet that everytime an allied nation flies they'll have snooper planes up soaking every ounce of info they can from the thing.

At the end of the day when thinking about this program all that's been done is to rush the end of stealth as being dominant in aerial warfare.

If many have it then its no longer unique. The more its "out there" the more likely countermeasures will be developed to counter it.

The reality?

This version of stealth will be obsolete before they've completed Block 4 upgrades.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

aryobarzan said:


> Reports...japan's F35 goes missing during the flight (translation...crashes in to the sea with no trace because it is so stealth no one knows what happened.)...May be it is so good aliens abducted it..lol
> 
> American junk at 142 million dollars a copy ...and they made fun of Iran's Q313.


F-35 is a joke.

I hope Russians pass Americans in fighters as Russians have passed Americans in air defense systems easily with S-400.


----------



## Aramagedon

*نگاهی متفاوت به نبرد هوایی در همسایگی ایران*
*عاقبت تلخ اعتماد 25 ساله ارتش هندوستان به طراحی فرانسوی و موتور آمریکایی/ از جنگنده «تجاس» الهام بگیریم یا عبرت؟! +عکس*





با اینکه فرانسوی ها طراحی، روسیه آزمایش بخشی از تسلیحات، اسراییل رادار و غلاف هدفگیری و آمریکا موتور را در اختیار هندوستان قرار دادند اما هیچ وقت "تجاس"، جنگنده مورد اطمینان یک ارتش واقعی نشد.

*به گزارش سرویس دفاع و امنیت مشرق،* پس از بروز درگیری مرزی بین هند و* پاکستان* و نحوه مواجهه ارتش* هندوستان* برابر پاکستان چه در بحث نتایج حمله تلافی جویانه درون کشور همسایه و چه رزم هوایی بین دو طرف که در نهایت به سرنگونی میگ ۲۱ هندی و اسیر شدن خلبان آن انجامید، انتقادات زیادی نسبت به سیستم فرماندهی، استفاده از جنگنده مناسب و عدم مدرن سازی ارتش این کشور مطرح شد در حالی که کشور هندوستان از هر نظر بخصوص از جهت آمار و ارقام تجهیزات هوایی بر پاکستان برتری کامل دارد.

علی رغم موارد مهمی چون برتری هندوستان از جهت تعداد جنگنده‌ها و نیروهای رزمی، قدرت اقتصادی، روابط خارجی و جایگاه علمی و صنعتی این کشور شاهد بودیم که این بار هند بود که در بسیاری از موارد قابل مقایسه، در این رویارویی شکست خورد. ریشه یابی کامل آنکه چرا این حوادث رخ داده کاری بسیار طولانی خواهد بود اما در این مجال قصد داریم دو برنامه شبیه به هم در هند و پاکستان را با هم مقایسه کرده و به شما تصویری کلی از واقعیت‌ها را ارائه کنیم.

*تجاس؛ بیش از سه دهه تلاش بی نتیجه*

هر دو کشور درگیر در نبرد اخیر، طی سالهای گذشته سراغ پروژه تولید جنگنده در داخل کشور رفتند و بر این اساس،* جنگنده "تجاس" حاصل تلاش های هند برای توسعه یک جنگنده سبک وزن بومی بود که استارت آن به نوعی از دهه ۱۹۶۰ میلادی زده شد. مشکلات زیاد در حوزه فناوری در آن دوران، هند را از رسیدن به یک طرح جامع دور کرد. در نهایت طرح نهایی و الزامات آن در اوایل دهه ۱۹۹۰ میلادی آماده شده و پروژه موسوم به تجاس، عملاً کلید خورد*. هندی ها در ابتدا به دنبال توسعه یک جنگنده واقعاً بومی بودند و حتی در این میان به توسعه یک موتور جت هندی نیز دست زدند. این موتور در جریان آزمایش های ارتفاع بالا که با کمک روسیه انجام شد نتایج لازم را بدست نیاورده و در نهایت هم هندی ها موتور اف ۴۰۴ ساخت شرکت جنرال الکترونیک آمریکا را انتخاب کردند.

*بیشتر بخوانیم:*
*جزییات لشکرکشی بزرگ مُهاراجه‌ها به پاکستان / از آواکس تا اسکادران میراژ به میدان آمدند*

اما به دلایلی که در ادامه خواهیم پرداخت، هر مرحله که هندی ها پیش رفتند با مشکلات بیشتری رو به رو می شدند و البته* نکته تعجب برانگیز اینجاست که در این پروژه روسیه، آمریکا، فرانسه و رژیم صهیونیستی، هند را به اشکال مختلف کمک کردند*.* فرانسوی ها در بحث طراحی اولیه هندی ها را کمک کردند. روسیه در بحث آزمایش موتور و تامین بخشی از تسلیحات، اسراییلی ها رادار و غلاف هدفگیری را تامین کرده و آمریکایی ها نیز موتور را در اختیار هندوستان قرار دادند*. در حقیقت جمعی از بزرگان هوانوردی جهان در این برنامه به هند کمک کردند و جالب اینجاست که از زمان اولین پرواز این جنگنده در ژانویه ۲۰۰۱ میلادی تا به الان، با احتساب نمونه های غیر عملیاتی و پیش نمونه های آزمایشی، در کل فقط ۳۲ فروند تجاس تولید شده است!

*اسراییل در این پروژه رادار مدل EL/M-2032 و غلاف هدف گیری لایتنینگ را تامین کرده، روسیه تسلیحاتی مثل توپ GSh-23 و موشک آر ۷۳ را آورده* و کمک های فرانسه و آمریکا نیز که در بالا مشخص شده است. این جنگنده تک موتوره ۱ میلیارد دلار در بخش توسعه هزینه برده و قیمت هر فروند از آن نیز به بسته به مدل بین ۲۵ الی ۶۰ میلیون دلار برآورد می شود.






این جنگنده برای استفاده روی ناوهای هواپیمابر هندی نیز پیشنهاد داده شده بود ولی در نهایت محاسبات نشان داد که این پرنده، وزن بیشتر از حد نیاز برای عملیات از روی ناو هواپیمابر را دارد. نکته جالب اینجاست که* این جنگنده با وجود همه کمک های بین المللی در بحث طراحی و حتی قطعات اصلی، در مسئله تعمیر و نگهداری هم به نسبت برخی از هم کلاس های خود یک کابوس برای یگان های تعمیر و نگهداری محسوب می شود* چراکه یک* جنگنده تجاس به ازای هر یک ساعت پرواز، نیاز به ۲۰ ساعت اقدامات تعمیر و نگهداری دارد. این اعداد برای جنگنده سوئدی گریپن حدود ۶ ساعت و برای اف ۱۶ آمریکایی ۳.۵ ساعت است.*

تجاس در مقایسه با این دو جنگنده در بحث های دیگری مثل ماندگاری در هوا و میزان مهمات قابل حمل نیز در حد پایین تری قرار می گیرد. تجاس می تواند نزدیک به ۱ ساعت ماندگاری در هنگام پرواز داشته باشد در حالی که گریپن سوئدی ۳ و اف ۱۶ حدود ۴ ساعت است. میزان حمل مهمات نیز در این پرنده ۳ تن است در حالی که در رقیب سوئدی ۶ و رقیب آمریکایی می تواند تا ۷ تن مهمات حمل کند.

کارشناسان روی این مسئله تاکید دارند که بخشی از این نتایج سوال برانگیز، در نتیجه بوکراسی عجیب و غریب و البته فساد بسیار گسترده در نیروهای مسلح و سیستم صنایع دفاعی و وزارت دفاع این کشور نهفته است. تقریباً خرید هر نوع سلاحی در این کشور چه داخلی و چه خارجی مدتی بسیار بیشتر از حد استاندارد طول کشیده و همیشه با افزایش هزینه رو به رو بوده است. در نهایت هم این کشور با ارتشی با سلاح هایی بسیار مختلف در یک کلاس رو به رو شده که در نهایت هم در روز حادثه توان استفاده درست از آنها را ندارد.

به عنوان مثال، طرح بزرگ هند برای خرید ۱۲۶ فروند جنگنده میان وزن به بن بست رسید، اخیراً قرارداد این کشور برای خرید ۳۶ فروند جنگنده رافال فرانسوی و بحث های مربوط به رشوه خواری و عدم شفافیت درباره جزییات آن تبدیل به توپی شده که سیاسیون هندی به زمین یکدیگر پرتاب می کنند.






نکته دیگر نیز در خصوص مشخص شدن نتایج یک اعتماد نابجا به کشورهای دیگر است در حالی که در داخل کشور هندوستان، شرکت ها و متخصصان فراوانی وجود دارند که برای صنایع کشورهای مهم جهان، محصولات فناورانه و با استاندارد بالا تولید می کنند اما نگاه مسئولان دولتی و نظامی آن به خارج از مرزها بویژه غرب باعث شده تا پروژه ای همچون ساخت یک جنگنده، علی رغم گرفتن کمک از آمریکا و اروپا و اسرائیل، به نتیجه نرسد. به نظر می رسد* اروپایی ها و آمریکایی ها نیز با علم به وجود چنین مشکلاتی در طراحی و محاسبه و سپس ساخت، صرفاً به کسب درآمد از ارتش هندوستان فکر کرده اند و هم در این پروژه سود مناسبی به جیب زده و هم در نگاهی آینده نگرانه تر، هندی ها را از ساخت جنگنده پشیمان کردند تا دوباره روی به خرید محصول بیاورند و چه بازاری بزرگتر از کشور ۷۲ ملت.*

*جی اف ۱۷؛ نشانی از یک مدیریت صحیح*

اما از سوی دیگر، پروژه جی اف ۱۷ در حقیقت حاصل یک سری حوادث تاریخی بود که در نهایت باعث نزدیک شدن چین و پاکستان به هم شد. جنگنده تک سرنشین و تک موتوره JF-17 محصول مشترک صنایع نظامی چین و پاکستان بوده که به منظور جایگزینی ناوگان قدیمی جنگنده های میگ ۱۹، اف ۷ و میراژ ۳ نیروی هوایی پاکستان طراحی و ساخته شد.

تاریخچه اصلی این طرح به دهه ۱۹۸۰ میلادی باز می گردد؛ زمانی که*چین قصد داشت تا با کمک شرکت گرومن آمریکا دست به طراحی و ساخت یک جنگنده بزند اما این طرح به علت مشکلات مالی و سیاسی بین طرفین لغو شد*. در این شرایط، پاکستان به عنوان شریک جدید وارد طرح شد و قراردادی به ارزش ۳ میلیارد و ۵۰۰ میلیون دلار برای بدست آوردن ۲۵۰ فروند هواپیما برای نیروی هوایی پاکستان به امضاء رسید. مبلغ توسعه کل این برنامه نظامی ۵۰۰ میلیون دلار بوده است.






*موتور این جنگنده RD-93 روسی است که سرعتی مناسب را برای این جنگنده فراهم می کند. رادار این هواپیما یک رادار چینی مدل KLJ-7 بوده که توانایی شناسایی و تعقیب همزمان ۱۰ هدف در بردهای فراتر از میدان دید را داراست. همچنین این هواپیما با سیستم های جنگ الکترونیک ساخت چین مجهز شده است.*

JF-17 قابلیت حمل ۳۷۰۰ کیلوگرم مهمات را داراست که از جمله این مهمات می توان به موشکهای هوا به هوای چینی SD-10 و موشکهای هدایت گرمایی PL-5 و طیف وسیعی از بمبهای غیر هدایت شونده و مهمات هدایت لیزری و ماهواره ای اشاره کرد. موشک های ضد کشتی و ضد رادار نیز از جمله تسلیحات قابل نصب بر روی این هواپیما است. برد این هواپیما در حدود ۲۰۰۰ کیلومتر و سقف پروازی آن ۱۵۲۴۰ متر می باشد.* مدل موسوم به بلوک ۳ این هواپیما نیز مجهز به رادار آرایه فازی فعال و البته سیستم رهگیری و کشف هدف فروسرخ خواهد بود. بر اساس اخبار موجود توسعه مدل بلوک ۳ در حال حاضر تمام شده و چین به همراه پاکستان آماده تولید مدل جدید می شوند.*






*جی اف ۱۷ نیروی هوایی میانمار*

پاکستانی ها در دهه ۱۹۹۰ میلادی با علم به کمبود منابع مالی و البته تحریم تسلیحاتی از طرف آمریکا به دنبال یک شریک جدید رفته و یک پرنده ارزان قیمت را به سرعت با کمک چین توسعه دادند. تابستان ۱۹۹۹ میلادی زمانی بود که قرارداد بین دو طرف برای توسعه این جنگنده امضاء شد و اولین پرواز در آگوست ۲۰۰۳ میلادی به انجام رسید.* تا به امروز بالای ۱۰۰ فروند از این جنگنده تولید شده و میانمار نیز به عنوان اولین مشتری صادراتی ۱۶ پرنده از این مدل را سفارش داده* که تا به الان ۶ فروند از آن را تحویل گرفته است. نیجریه نیز ۳ فروند از این جنگنده را سفارش داده است تا سود مناسبی نیز از این شراکت به دست تولیدکنندگانش برسد. اخبار درباره عملکرد جی اف ۱۷ در جنگ اخیر بسیار مبهم و نا مشخص است ولی برخی ادعا می کنند که میگ ۲۱ هندی توسط این جنگنده ساقط شده اگر چه که احتمال قوی تر مربوط به جنگنده اف ۱۶ پاکستانی است.

البته همچنان ارتش پاکستان در برخی بخش ها، از کمک ها و مشاوره های ارتش آمریکا استفاده می کند و نباید چنین موضوعی را کتمان کرد اما* نشان داده با شناخت نیازهای خود و انتخاب شریک مطمئن تر، هم نیاز خود را تامین می کند و هم به صادرات محصول می رسد. موضوعی که هندوستان به رغم داشتن شرایط بهتر روی کاغذ، در اجرای آن ناتوان است.*

*چنین مصداقی نشان می‌دهد داشتن پول بیشتر یا دسترسی‌های بین المللی بهتر و بالاتر با وجود همه نکات مثبت درون خود، کافی نخواهد بود* تاجایی که در داخل، یک مدیریت صحیح و اجرای متعهدانه وجود نداشته باشد. تربیت نیروی انسانی و مدیرانی لایق مسئله ای است که پاکستان را با وجود مشکلات بسیار زیاد، در این عرصه موفق کرده تا بتواند در برابر همسایه بسیار قوی تر خود با قدرت ایستادگی و حتی در صحنه نظامی و بین المللی، او را وادار به سکوت و صلح کند. این نیروی انسانی و فکر درست در مواجهه با مشاوره ها و پیشنهادهای ظاهراً چشمگیر غربی بود که موفق شد با حداقل هزینه، حداکثر فایده را برای ارتش پاکستان به وجود بیاورد و آنها را تبدیل به مثال مناسب در اتخاب نوع همکاری با کشوری دیگر و تولید محصول مورد نیاز کند.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/94...5-ساله-ارتش-هندوستان-به-طراحی-فرانسوی-و-موتور

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> *نگاهی متفاوت به نبرد هوایی در همسایگی ایران*
> *عاقبت تلخ اعتماد 25 ساله ارتش هندوستان به طراحی فرانسوی و موتور آمریکایی/ از جنگنده «تجاس» الهام بگیریم یا عبرت؟! +عکس*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> با اینکه فرانسوی ها طراحی، روسیه آزمایش بخشی از تسلیحات، اسراییل رادار و غلاف هدفگیری و آمریکا موتور را در اختیار هندوستان قرار دادند اما هیچ وقت "تجاس"، جنگنده مورد اطمینان یک ارتش واقعی نشد.
> 
> *به گزارش سرویس دفاع و امنیت مشرق،* پس از بروز درگیری مرزی بین هند و* پاکستان* و نحوه مواجهه ارتش* هندوستان* برابر پاکستان چه در بحث نتایج حمله تلافی جویانه درون کشور همسایه و چه رزم هوایی بین دو طرف که در نهایت به سرنگونی میگ ۲۱ هندی و اسیر شدن خلبان آن انجامید، انتقادات زیادی نسبت به سیستم فرماندهی، استفاده از جنگنده مناسب و عدم مدرن سازی ارتش این کشور مطرح شد در حالی که کشور هندوستان از هر نظر بخصوص از جهت آمار و ارقام تجهیزات هوایی بر پاکستان برتری کامل دارد.
> 
> علی رغم موارد مهمی چون برتری هندوستان از جهت تعداد جنگنده‌ها و نیروهای رزمی، قدرت اقتصادی، روابط خارجی و جایگاه علمی و صنعتی این کشور شاهد بودیم که این بار هند بود که در بسیاری از موارد قابل مقایسه، در این رویارویی شکست خورد. ریشه یابی کامل آنکه چرا این حوادث رخ داده کاری بسیار طولانی خواهد بود اما در این مجال قصد داریم دو برنامه شبیه به هم در هند و پاکستان را با هم مقایسه کرده و به شما تصویری کلی از واقعیت‌ها را ارائه کنیم.
> 
> *تجاس؛ بیش از سه دهه تلاش بی نتیجه*
> 
> هر دو کشور درگیر در نبرد اخیر، طی سالهای گذشته سراغ پروژه تولید جنگنده در داخل کشور رفتند و بر این اساس،* جنگنده "تجاس" حاصل تلاش های هند برای توسعه یک جنگنده سبک وزن بومی بود که استارت آن به نوعی از دهه ۱۹۶۰ میلادی زده شد. مشکلات زیاد در حوزه فناوری در آن دوران، هند را از رسیدن به یک طرح جامع دور کرد. در نهایت طرح نهایی و الزامات آن در اوایل دهه ۱۹۹۰ میلادی آماده شده و پروژه موسوم به تجاس، عملاً کلید خورد*. هندی ها در ابتدا به دنبال توسعه یک جنگنده واقعاً بومی بودند و حتی در این میان به توسعه یک موتور جت هندی نیز دست زدند. این موتور در جریان آزمایش های ارتفاع بالا که با کمک روسیه انجام شد نتایج لازم را بدست نیاورده و در نهایت هم هندی ها موتور اف ۴۰۴ ساخت شرکت جنرال الکترونیک آمریکا را انتخاب کردند.
> 
> *بیشتر بخوانیم:*
> *جزییات لشکرکشی بزرگ مُهاراجه‌ها به پاکستان / از آواکس تا اسکادران میراژ به میدان آمدند*
> 
> اما به دلایلی که در ادامه خواهیم پرداخت، هر مرحله که هندی ها پیش رفتند با مشکلات بیشتری رو به رو می شدند و البته* نکته تعجب برانگیز اینجاست که در این پروژه روسیه، آمریکا، فرانسه و رژیم صهیونیستی، هند را به اشکال مختلف کمک کردند*.* فرانسوی ها در بحث طراحی اولیه هندی ها را کمک کردند. روسیه در بحث آزمایش موتور و تامین بخشی از تسلیحات، اسراییلی ها رادار و غلاف هدفگیری را تامین کرده و آمریکایی ها نیز موتور را در اختیار هندوستان قرار دادند*. در حقیقت جمعی از بزرگان هوانوردی جهان در این برنامه به هند کمک کردند و جالب اینجاست که از زمان اولین پرواز این جنگنده در ژانویه ۲۰۰۱ میلادی تا به الان، با احتساب نمونه های غیر عملیاتی و پیش نمونه های آزمایشی، در کل فقط ۳۲ فروند تجاس تولید شده است!
> 
> *اسراییل در این پروژه رادار مدل EL/M-2032 و غلاف هدف گیری لایتنینگ را تامین کرده، روسیه تسلیحاتی مثل توپ GSh-23 و موشک آر ۷۳ را آورده* و کمک های فرانسه و آمریکا نیز که در بالا مشخص شده است. این جنگنده تک موتوره ۱ میلیارد دلار در بخش توسعه هزینه برده و قیمت هر فروند از آن نیز به بسته به مدل بین ۲۵ الی ۶۰ میلیون دلار برآورد می شود.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> این جنگنده برای استفاده روی ناوهای هواپیمابر هندی نیز پیشنهاد داده شده بود ولی در نهایت محاسبات نشان داد که این پرنده، وزن بیشتر از حد نیاز برای عملیات از روی ناو هواپیمابر را دارد. نکته جالب اینجاست که* این جنگنده با وجود همه کمک های بین المللی در بحث طراحی و حتی قطعات اصلی، در مسئله تعمیر و نگهداری هم به نسبت برخی از هم کلاس های خود یک کابوس برای یگان های تعمیر و نگهداری محسوب می شود* چراکه یک* جنگنده تجاس به ازای هر یک ساعت پرواز، نیاز به ۲۰ ساعت اقدامات تعمیر و نگهداری دارد. این اعداد برای جنگنده سوئدی گریپن حدود ۶ ساعت و برای اف ۱۶ آمریکایی ۳.۵ ساعت است.*
> 
> تجاس در مقایسه با این دو جنگنده در بحث های دیگری مثل ماندگاری در هوا و میزان مهمات قابل حمل نیز در حد پایین تری قرار می گیرد. تجاس می تواند نزدیک به ۱ ساعت ماندگاری در هنگام پرواز داشته باشد در حالی که گریپن سوئدی ۳ و اف ۱۶ حدود ۴ ساعت است. میزان حمل مهمات نیز در این پرنده ۳ تن است در حالی که در رقیب سوئدی ۶ و رقیب آمریکایی می تواند تا ۷ تن مهمات حمل کند.
> 
> کارشناسان روی این مسئله تاکید دارند که بخشی از این نتایج سوال برانگیز، در نتیجه بوکراسی عجیب و غریب و البته فساد بسیار گسترده در نیروهای مسلح و سیستم صنایع دفاعی و وزارت دفاع این کشور نهفته است. تقریباً خرید هر نوع سلاحی در این کشور چه داخلی و چه خارجی مدتی بسیار بیشتر از حد استاندارد طول کشیده و همیشه با افزایش هزینه رو به رو بوده است. در نهایت هم این کشور با ارتشی با سلاح هایی بسیار مختلف در یک کلاس رو به رو شده که در نهایت هم در روز حادثه توان استفاده درست از آنها را ندارد.
> 
> به عنوان مثال، طرح بزرگ هند برای خرید ۱۲۶ فروند جنگنده میان وزن به بن بست رسید، اخیراً قرارداد این کشور برای خرید ۳۶ فروند جنگنده رافال فرانسوی و بحث های مربوط به رشوه خواری و عدم شفافیت درباره جزییات آن تبدیل به توپی شده که سیاسیون هندی به زمین یکدیگر پرتاب می کنند.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> نکته دیگر نیز در خصوص مشخص شدن نتایج یک اعتماد نابجا به کشورهای دیگر است در حالی که در داخل کشور هندوستان، شرکت ها و متخصصان فراوانی وجود دارند که برای صنایع کشورهای مهم جهان، محصولات فناورانه و با استاندارد بالا تولید می کنند اما نگاه مسئولان دولتی و نظامی آن به خارج از مرزها بویژه غرب باعث شده تا پروژه ای همچون ساخت یک جنگنده، علی رغم گرفتن کمک از آمریکا و اروپا و اسرائیل، به نتیجه نرسد. به نظر می رسد* اروپایی ها و آمریکایی ها نیز با علم به وجود چنین مشکلاتی در طراحی و محاسبه و سپس ساخت، صرفاً به کسب درآمد از ارتش هندوستان فکر کرده اند و هم در این پروژه سود مناسبی به جیب زده و هم در نگاهی آینده نگرانه تر، هندی ها را از ساخت جنگنده پشیمان کردند تا دوباره روی به خرید محصول بیاورند و چه بازاری بزرگتر از کشور ۷۲ ملت.*
> 
> *جی اف ۱۷؛ نشانی از یک مدیریت صحیح*
> 
> اما از سوی دیگر، پروژه جی اف ۱۷ در حقیقت حاصل یک سری حوادث تاریخی بود که در نهایت باعث نزدیک شدن چین و پاکستان به هم شد. جنگنده تک سرنشین و تک موتوره JF-17 محصول مشترک صنایع نظامی چین و پاکستان بوده که به منظور جایگزینی ناوگان قدیمی جنگنده های میگ ۱۹، اف ۷ و میراژ ۳ نیروی هوایی پاکستان طراحی و ساخته شد.
> 
> تاریخچه اصلی این طرح به دهه ۱۹۸۰ میلادی باز می گردد؛ زمانی که*چین قصد داشت تا با کمک شرکت گرومن آمریکا دست به طراحی و ساخت یک جنگنده بزند اما این طرح به علت مشکلات مالی و سیاسی بین طرفین لغو شد*. در این شرایط، پاکستان به عنوان شریک جدید وارد طرح شد و قراردادی به ارزش ۳ میلیارد و ۵۰۰ میلیون دلار برای بدست آوردن ۲۵۰ فروند هواپیما برای نیروی هوایی پاکستان به امضاء رسید. مبلغ توسعه کل این برنامه نظامی ۵۰۰ میلیون دلار بوده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *موتور این جنگنده RD-93 روسی است که سرعتی مناسب را برای این جنگنده فراهم می کند. رادار این هواپیما یک رادار چینی مدل KLJ-7 بوده که توانایی شناسایی و تعقیب همزمان ۱۰ هدف در بردهای فراتر از میدان دید را داراست. همچنین این هواپیما با سیستم های جنگ الکترونیک ساخت چین مجهز شده است.*
> 
> JF-17 قابلیت حمل ۳۷۰۰ کیلوگرم مهمات را داراست که از جمله این مهمات می توان به موشکهای هوا به هوای چینی SD-10 و موشکهای هدایت گرمایی PL-5 و طیف وسیعی از بمبهای غیر هدایت شونده و مهمات هدایت لیزری و ماهواره ای اشاره کرد. موشک های ضد کشتی و ضد رادار نیز از جمله تسلیحات قابل نصب بر روی این هواپیما است. برد این هواپیما در حدود ۲۰۰۰ کیلومتر و سقف پروازی آن ۱۵۲۴۰ متر می باشد.* مدل موسوم به بلوک ۳ این هواپیما نیز مجهز به رادار آرایه فازی فعال و البته سیستم رهگیری و کشف هدف فروسرخ خواهد بود. بر اساس اخبار موجود توسعه مدل بلوک ۳ در حال حاضر تمام شده و چین به همراه پاکستان آماده تولید مدل جدید می شوند.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *جی اف ۱۷ نیروی هوایی میانمار*
> 
> پاکستانی ها در دهه ۱۹۹۰ میلادی با علم به کمبود منابع مالی و البته تحریم تسلیحاتی از طرف آمریکا به دنبال یک شریک جدید رفته و یک پرنده ارزان قیمت را به سرعت با کمک چین توسعه دادند. تابستان ۱۹۹۹ میلادی زمانی بود که قرارداد بین دو طرف برای توسعه این جنگنده امضاء شد و اولین پرواز در آگوست ۲۰۰۳ میلادی به انجام رسید.* تا به امروز بالای ۱۰۰ فروند از این جنگنده تولید شده و میانمار نیز به عنوان اولین مشتری صادراتی ۱۶ پرنده از این مدل را سفارش داده* که تا به الان ۶ فروند از آن را تحویل گرفته است. نیجریه نیز ۳ فروند از این جنگنده را سفارش داده است تا سود مناسبی نیز از این شراکت به دست تولیدکنندگانش برسد. اخبار درباره عملکرد جی اف ۱۷ در جنگ اخیر بسیار مبهم و نا مشخص است ولی برخی ادعا می کنند که میگ ۲۱ هندی توسط این جنگنده ساقط شده اگر چه که احتمال قوی تر مربوط به جنگنده اف ۱۶ پاکستانی است.
> 
> البته همچنان ارتش پاکستان در برخی بخش ها، از کمک ها و مشاوره های ارتش آمریکا استفاده می کند و نباید چنین موضوعی را کتمان کرد اما* نشان داده با شناخت نیازهای خود و انتخاب شریک مطمئن تر، هم نیاز خود را تامین می کند و هم به صادرات محصول می رسد. موضوعی که هندوستان به رغم داشتن شرایط بهتر روی کاغذ، در اجرای آن ناتوان است.*
> 
> *چنین مصداقی نشان می‌دهد داشتن پول بیشتر یا دسترسی‌های بین المللی بهتر و بالاتر با وجود همه نکات مثبت درون خود، کافی نخواهد بود* تاجایی که در داخل، یک مدیریت صحیح و اجرای متعهدانه وجود نداشته باشد. تربیت نیروی انسانی و مدیرانی لایق مسئله ای است که پاکستان را با وجود مشکلات بسیار زیاد، در این عرصه موفق کرده تا بتواند در برابر همسایه بسیار قوی تر خود با قدرت ایستادگی و حتی در صحنه نظامی و بین المللی، او را وادار به سکوت و صلح کند. این نیروی انسانی و فکر درست در مواجهه با مشاوره ها و پیشنهادهای ظاهراً چشمگیر غربی بود که موفق شد با حداقل هزینه، حداکثر فایده را برای ارتش پاکستان به وجود بیاورد و آنها را تبدیل به مثال مناسب در اتخاب نوع همکاری با کشوری دیگر و تولید محصول مورد نیاز کند.
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/94...5-ساله-ارتش-هندوستان-به-طراحی-فرانسوی-و-موتور


Interesting article.
Its a great illustration of the fact that it takes more than money and access to technology to develop a viable weapons system,it also takes a lot of engineering and technical skills and just as importantly skilled managers who can keep a large engineering and development program on track.
I think where the indians really made it especially difficult for themselves was in attempting to indigenously develop not only a 4th gen airframe but also its avionics and powerplant simultaneously.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

Another option for IRIAF is modifying 44 Iraqi Su22 with removing heavy movable wings and change them with fixed delta wings added with canard.
With AL21F as engine this editing give:
more thrust to weight ratio to fighter
And deleting nose air intake to side air intake give:
more space for bigger and better radar
View attachment 553191

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Original su22

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

A single question for you .
Why waste money and resources on something you will know is bound to fail ?


Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 553192
> 
> 
> Another option for IRIAF is modifying 44 Iraqi Su22 with removing heavy movable wings and change them with fixed delta wings added with canard.
> With AL21F as engine this editing give:
> more thrust to weight ratio to fighter
> And deleting nose air intake to side air intake give:
> more space for bigger and better radar
> View attachment 553191





Ray_Atek said:


> Original su22
> View attachment 553210

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hack-Hook said:


> A single question for you .
> Why waste money and resources on something you will know is bound to fail ?


How you know it will bound to fail?
Any engineering reason?
Iran can not buy any new fighter, but can buy second hand fighters such f7 and su22.
Editing any air frame is not easy but can be an option, as you see in Indian mig21bis and pakistanian jf17 or more further in china ftc2000 and other China projects.
Su22 has some good items to work on such as:
Powerful engine and good fuslege.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hack-Hook said:


> A single question for you .
> Why waste money and resources on something you will know is bound to fail ?


to make a platform and then develop new fighters on that platform........


----------



## OldTwilight

DoubleYouSee said:


> to make a platform and then develop new fighters on that platform........


We already have our own projects ...

If we could ask Russian to co-produce Mig 35 or ask Chaina to co-production of j-10 or j-17 , it would be more helpful for us ... Because we would have opertional fighters and re new part of our air force and learn some technology in process which will help us in our own projects....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

DoubleYouSee said:


> to make a platform and then develop new fighters on that platform........


I am no airplane designer but I have heard many times that you design an aircraft around its engine....once hey have a more powerful engine besides J85 then I think the sky is the limit.

Now here is my question ....*"Q-313"*... what is the significance of "313".. another point..it is good to have *"Q"* designation for Iranian made fighters so Kowsar should be designated..... *"Q-5"*....this is one way of separating Iranian designed crafts from foreign but similar looking ones. Just a morning brain fart!!!...lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yesboss

I had no idea that sanctions have made iriaf so handicapped. It would have been better if cooperation was achieved with russia or china for a decent 4th generation fighter. I guess it remains only viable to invest more in air defense systems for now. And for those who think that an f-35 is a joke or an indigenous 5th generation aircraft is something special, aren't being very sensible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

well AF recently showed the new wing for it's f-7s, i think it's a good sign that they are working on some thing not f-5.
delta wings are easy to make and as they are stronger than strait wings you don't need to use strong metals like titanium but they have a big drawback, at lower speeds they are not maneuverable at all. the good point about the wings that we saw during sattaris visit of AF factory was that they chose compound delta over simple one. this kind of delta wings have better performance compared to the later one.
guys did you ever considered that we can buy engine from russians?? do we really need to make them inside home?? sweden imports engine from US but still there gripen is a reliable platform for themselves and their customers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon




----------



## Hack-Hook

Ray_Atek said:


> How you know it will bound to fail?
> Any engineering reason?
> Iran can not buy any new fighter, but can buy second hand fighters such f7 and su22.
> Editing any air frame is not easy but can be an option, as you see in Indian mig21bis and pakistanian jf17 or more further in china ftc2000 and other China projects.
> Su22 has some good items to work on such as:
> Powerful engine and good fuslege.


Because it already no matter how much you upgrade it will be a bomber not a fighter and what you suggest is changing all the parameter of the airplane and so it will be as expensive as designing a new fighter . so why not go and design a new one if you want .



Ray_Atek said:


> How you know it will bound to fail?
> Any engineering reason?
> Iran can not buy any new fighter, but can buy second hand fighters such f7 and su22.
> Editing any air frame is not easy but can be an option, as you see in Indian mig21bis and pakistanian jf17 or more further in china ftc2000 and other China projects.
> Su22 has some good items to work on such as:
> Powerful engine and good fuslege.


Powerful engine but fuel hungry and su22 is nothing but su17 export version .if you want to invest in an airforce that will fare like Indian mig-21 while facing other country air Force then you are welcome .
Suggesting iran buy f-7 and su-22 second hand has one problem and that's you have forgot that there is one investment more important than the airplane and that's the life of pilot .



Mithridates said:


> well AF recently showed the new wing for it's f-7s, i think it's a good sign that they are working on some thing not f-5.
> delta wings are easy to make and as they are stronger than strait wings you don't need to use strong metals like titanium but they have a big drawback, at lower speeds they are not maneuverable at all. the good point about the wings that we saw during sattaris visit of AF factory was that they chose compound delta over simple one. this kind of delta wings have better performance compared to the later one.
> guys did you ever considered that we can buy engine from russians?? do we really need to make them inside home?? sweden imports engine from US but still there gripen is a reliable platform for themselves and their customers.


I doubt Russia will sell us engines unless we can make something equal to it.
And honestly f7 is Chinese copy of mig 21 I wonder which is better kowsar or mig21

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hack-Hook said:


> Because it already no matter how much you upgrade it will be a bomber not a fighter and what you suggest is changing all the parameter of the airplane and so it will be as expensive as designing a new fighter . so why not go and design a new one if you want .


you can define new project for new fighter which its fuslege design based on fuslege of adopted fighter and change other properties of fighter, as you can look to F22 which take many exprience from other fighters.



Hack-Hook said:


> Powerful engine but fuel hungry and su22 is nothing but su17 export version .if you want to invest in an airforce that will fare like Indian mig-21 while facing other country air Force then you are welcome .
> Suggesting iran buy f-7 and su-22 second hand has one problem and that's you have forgot that there is one investment more important than the airplane and that's the life of pilot .


Ghatering the efforts and centering all on one project which hope to solve some IRIAF problem, is a solution.
Editing a planform give more experince, because in redesigning a planform you should use some advantage of in hand and other planform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> I doubt Russia will sell us engines unless we can make something equal to it.


bro most of the things people say about the russia is not true. at the s-300 issue russians were pissed off because we managed to upgrade and reverse engineering some of their stuff otherwise they don't have a problem with selling us what we want. after we sued them both sides compromised in some fields.
imagine we buy soloviev d-30 engines and make something like mig-25 with better alloys like 7075 aluminum and maybe titanium with +6-7g limits and bayyenat radar along with kowsars avionics...
about the f7s i think it's just for experimental reasons they won't do it for all of the fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 553192
> 
> 
> Another option for IRIAF is modifying 44 Iraqi Su22 with removing heavy movable wings and change them with fixed delta wings added with canard.
> With AL21F as engine this editing give:
> more thrust to weight ratio to fighter
> And deleting nose air intake to side air intake give:
> more space for bigger and better radar
> View attachment 553191


What your suggesting would give Iran an aircraft similar to but less advanced than the J-10 and it probably be better if Iran simply replaced them with J-10's

Best thing for the Su-22 is to take the AL-21's reverse engineer and upgrade them and then build a completely new twin engine delta winged Ti composite force multipliers around them 
If it was up to me I would wanna focus on a larger twin engine fighter because Iran is a large country with limited resources so any manned fighter we build should be a larger twin seat force multiplier produced at a rate of 12 or at max 24 per year (1-2 per month) and for close air support Iran should work towards building advanced supersonic UCAV's that would work in cooperation with larger force multipliers a highly advanced UCAV that can be produced at a rate of 1 per week capable of Air to Air and Air to ground operations.

I think the J-85 or OWJ is an appropriate engine for a advanced Super Sonic high maneuvering stealth UCAVs with 1or2 direction TVC that could also escort and feed sensor data into your force multipliers and be controlled by the co-pilot when needed securely from as far as 250km away 

Iran's version of the XQ-58 with less range but with superior speed and maneuvering capability 




​i
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratos_XQ-58_Valkyrie

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

VEVAK said:


> What your suggesting would give Iran an aircraft similar to but less advanced than the J-10 and it probably be better if Iran simply replaced them with J-10's


Are you sure China will give j10 to Iran?
Are you sure the su22 is in same class of j10?

Agr


VEVAK said:


> Best thing for the Su-22 is to take the AL-21's reverse engineer and upgrade them and then build a completely new twin engine delta winged Ti composite force multipliers around them
> If it was up to me I would wanna focus on a larger twin engine fighter because Iran is a large country with limited resources so any manned fighter we build should be a larger twin seat force multiplier produced at a rate of 12 or at max 24 per year (1-2 per month) and for close air support Iran should work towards building advanced supersonic UCAV's that would work in cooperation with larger force multipliers a highly advanced UCAV that can be produced at a rate of 1 per week capable of Air to Air and Air to ground operations.


Agree,but Iran can not make titanium fuslege frame for heavy fighter at now.
Forget the titanium composite, but may be carbon fiber composite do the work better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

In the event of war, if there is a communication jamming launched against Iran, how will #2 and #3 fair against those odds? Remember in 2011, Libyan government fell due to heavy jamming against its radars to the point where they became useless.



Vegas said:


> Is it necessary to make one bigger fighter jet in today's world?
> 
> I mean, if Iran could take benefit of Data Linking, then tasks could be distributed in small, but specialized drones and fighter jets.
> 
> For example, instead of buying one Su-30 from Russia, Iran could take this path too:
> 
> (1) A twin (even Owj) engine small "stealth" fighter jet, but without radar and without missiles. It should carry only the pilot and avionics, thus giving it a long range and faster speeds.
> 
> (2) And it should be companied with a stealth drone which carries only a bigger radar
> 
> (3) And 2nd stealth drone should carry only the missiles in it's belly.
> 
> 
> A pack of these 3 indigenously made jet/drones may be cheaper than one SU-30 and may be more effective than Su-30 too due to their tiny size and stealth capabilities.
> 
> I am not in favour of foreign fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> What your suggesting would give Iran an aircraft similar to but less advanced than the J-10 and it probably be better if Iran simply replaced them with J-10's
> 
> Best thing for the Su-22 is to take the AL-21's reverse engineer and upgrade them and then build a completely new twin engine delta winged Ti composite force multipliers around them
> If it was up to me I would wanna focus on a larger twin engine fighter because Iran is a large country with limited resources so any manned fighter we build should be a larger twin seat force multiplier produced at a rate of 12 or at max 24 per year (1-2 per month) and for close air support Iran should work towards building advanced supersonic UCAV's that would work in cooperation with larger force multipliers a highly advanced UCAV that can be produced at a rate of 1 per week capable of Air to Air and Air to ground operations.
> 
> I think the J-85 or OWJ is an appropriate engine for a advanced Super Sonic high maneuvering stealth UCAVs with 1or2 direction TVC that could also escort and feed sensor data into your force multipliers and be controlled by the co-pilot when needed securely from as far as 250km away
> 
> Iran's version of the XQ-58 with less range but with superior speed and maneuvering capability
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​i
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratos_XQ-58_Valkyrie



Iran has close to 0% Chance of reverse engineering AL-21 without having blueprints/TOT (either black market or directly from manufacturer) especially with its current military budget.

Plus Iran’s best and brightest military minds either go into engineering (ballistic missiles), nuclear engineering, or cyber warfare/computer programming. 

Jet engines isn’t exactly a growing field in Iran.

So Iran also needs to divert resources (minds) to the field that can achieve a breakthrough.

There isn’t even proof Iran has managed to reverse engineer RQ-170 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has close to 0% Chance of reverse engineering AL-21 without having blueprints/TOT (either black market or directly from manufacturer) especially with its current military budget.
> 
> Plus Iran’s best and brightest military minds either go into engineering (ballistic missiles), nuclear engineering, or cyber warfare/computer programming.
> 
> Jet engines isn’t exactly a growing field in Iran.
> 
> So Iran also needs to divert resources (minds) to the field that can achieve a breakthrough.
> 
> There isn’t even proof Iran has managed to reverse engineer RQ-170 engine.



AL-21's are not a very sophisticated design for the blueprints to mean much when you already have the engine especially since they are a 60's era engine built before computers even existed and yes in terms metallurgy matching the turbine inlet temperatures of the AL-21's may be a problem Iran would have to tackle but if they use materials used on the J79 it could get them close enough that an improvement on the design and maybe even new ceramic composite ball brings and a completely new type of cooling unit could potentially make a lot of difference.

Even if the end result is an engine with a max dry thrust of 15,000lbf as appose to 17,000 lbf and max thrust of 20,000lbf it would still be a better engine to work on and improve on in the long run than the J79's because they are twin spool 

But your right in terms of Iran's investment in developing it's own high thrust Jet engine because for that Iran would need upwards of 20 separate teams attempting to not only reverse engineer and develop but also improve on various aspects of the engine who are also equipped with the right tools, equipment, materials & funding to do their job properly and all that would simply be for a prototype and it would be another hell of it own to go from there to a production model now is it within Iran's technological capabilities yes it is but the funding and willingness to do so is another matter especially taking into account the fact that by the time your ready for production of an improved model to be put on a domestically built fighter jet U.S., Russia & maybe even the EU will be fielding near space combat aircrafts and that's why I think it's best to focus on a smaller number of force multipliers that can be produced at a rate of 1 per month that would accompany a massive fleet of UCAV's of all shapes and sizes while attempting to build near space UCAV's of your own


----------



## skyshadow

*Iranian Air Force to Debut New Homegrown Fighter Jet in Massive Parade*

*https://sputniknews.com/military/201904161074189310-iranian-made-jets-to-debut-in-parade/*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Iranian Air Force to Debut New Homegrown Fighter Jet in Massive Parade*
> 
> *https://sputniknews.com/military/201904161074189310-iranian-made-jets-to-debut-in-parade/*



Disappointing, they are rolling out Saeqeh and Kowsar for this air parade.

Not a single piece of news on anything else. Hopefully they surprise us with at least some updates. But this would have been the perfect time for 1st public flight of F-313, if it was actually progressing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Disappointing, they are rolling out Saeqeh and Kowsar for this air parade.
> 
> Not a single piece of news on anything else. Hopefully they surprise us with at least some updates. But this would have been the perfect time for 1st public flight of F-313, if it was actually progressing.



i hope for an surprise too, i want it to be Bavar 373 or F-313 . fingers crossed

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

Personally is prefer to save the money and resources and divert them for flood relief.

This is no time to show off gear instead relieve pressure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> *Iranian Air Force to Debut New Homegrown Fighter Jet in Massive Parade*
> 
> *https://sputniknews.com/military/201904161074189310-iranian-made-jets-to-debut-in-parade/*



Very good Iran. This small fighter plane is very powerful and a nice advance for the Iranian army.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mithridates

guys i'm back with new theories with examples of them for AF future planes:
1- MC Donnell Douglas A-12
it was a carrier based flying wing fighter/bomber concept for US navy. A-12 had two f-404 engines which are almost at the same class of rd-33. A-12 had the capability to carry 4 monitions (bombs/missiles).
so i'm wondering why we can't make a manned version of simorgh with two rd-93 engines and bayyenat radar??












2-Republic XF-103
this plane was supposed to fly at mach 5 and intercept soviet atomic bombers before they reach US soil. but the point i want to discuss is not the plane itself but it's propulsion system. this plane used a novel approach to gain more power from the engine by placing a ramjet engine in back of the torbojet engine as its after burner.




by this, xf-103 was able to produce 180 kn thrust while the wright x-67 was able to produce only 67 kn, its 2.68 times more than the dry thrust.
now lets talk about what iran maded and what we can do in future: we know that our next engine is j-90 which is turbofan version of GE j-85 and it's gonna produce almost 20 kn of dry thrust so if we produce a plane with two of this engine and put a/two of those ramjets on their back, considering that turbofan engine have more oxygen in their exhausts (so the 2.68 gonna increase to something like 3), the overall output thrust gonna be 120 kn!!!
so for a plane with 10 tons of gross weight we gonna have thrust to weight ratio equal to 1.2!!!
considering that soviets maded a mach 3 plane with only steel (mig-25) we may have a mach 3 plane as well!!!
3-dornier do-31 VTOL transporting plane




german VTOL transporting plane with capacity for 36 troops or 3.5 tons of payload. although it used more powerful engines to vertically take of but there are other ways to produce that much of thrust (8 rb-162 engines with 160 kn).
Ryan XV-5 with two GE j85 successfully produced 71 kn which is three times more than the thrust of two j-85s.








so if we had rd-93 engines we could make some thing like d-31/xv-5a hybrid VTOL transport plane. also keep in mind that two turbofan rd-93 engines burn way small amount of fuel than 10 engines, also by replacing rd-93 with that engines your plane gonna be 2.5 tons lighter so you can use that weight for more fuel or increase the cargo space.
whole this project are for ages ago and i think it's within iran's capabilities to make something like them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

that is a new missile maybe its form Ghamare bani hashem ( قمر بنی هاشم ) project.



































*kowsar*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

at least with Saegheh , we could spot them but Kowsar is just an upgrade for F5 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> that is a new missile maybe its form Ghamare bani hashem ( قمر بنی هاشم ) project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *kowsar*


Did you notice the Cobra's nose from the first picture? New radar!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

skyshadow said:


> that is a new missile maybe its form Ghamare bani hashem ( قمر بنی هاشم ) project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *kowsar*



In the 2nd and 3rd Picture we can see a Ah-1J(T) Cobra armed with 4 Delavieh(Kornet) atgms but it Cobra has not had its optics upgraded with a flir incorporating a laser designator/ range finder!



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Did you notice the Cobra's nose from the first picture? New radar!



That is not a Radar. Its a Flir( forward looking Infra red) ball with Day/Night(thermal) cameras and possible laser range finder/ designator.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> In the 2nd and 3rd Picture we can see a Ah-j(T) Cobra armed with 4 Delavieh(Kornet) atgms but it Cobra has not had its optics upgraded with a flir incorporating a laser designator/ range finder!
> 
> 
> 
> That is not a Radar. Its a Flir( forward looking Infra red) ball with Day/Night(thermal) cameras and possible laser range finder/ designator.



Look well above the nose, it's new!


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Look well above the nose, it's new!



That looks like an airspeed sensor probe. Definitly not a Radar!


----------



## skyshadow

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Did you notice the Cobra's nose from the first picture? New radar!



yes that is a upgraded cobra Iran showed new updates for cobras in Iraq exhibition this year.








Bahram Esfandiari said:


> In the 2nd and 3rd Picture we can see a Ah-1J(T) Cobra armed with 4 Delavieh(Kornet) atgms but it Cobra has not had its optics upgraded with a flir incorporating a laser designator/ range finder!
> 
> 
> 
> That is not a Radar. Its a Flir( forward looking Infra red) ball with Day/Night(thermal) cameras and possible laser range finder/ designator.



i have the same question as you, but if they are in use then maybe the project is not completed yet or they going to install new FLIR ( the same one that they showed in IRAQ maybe ) on them letter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Saegheh1,2 cockpit:
*فیلم/ غرش جنگنده‌های نهاجا بر فراز تهران*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

skyshadow said:


> yes that is a upgraded cobra Iran showed new updates for cobras in Iraq exhibition this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have the same question as you, but if they are in use then maybe the project is not completed yet or they going to install new FLIR ( the same one that they showed in IRAQ maybe ) on them letter.











I worked on TOW cobra during my young age in Iran..so here is what I see...

*1- *the first cobra has the FLIR ball and an unknown missile wrapped in Plastic..My guess Flir ball picks up the target (paints it with laser) and the missile could be a laser beam rider or guided by other means..no idea if the ball itself is actually used as a guidance device..missile could also be fire and forget type.

*2*- The second cobra (green paint) still has its original TSU (Telescopic Sight Unit) on the nose with apparently (Dehlavieh missiles!!). *TSU* is the fore father of any FLIR ball and it was an extremely complicated and *stabilized*  system of OPTICS with Low/High/IR Magnification for target tracking and also for tracking the missile during its flight (detecting the four IR modulated emitters at the tail of the TOW missile..I can describe how the detection was done but out of scope here). Electronics was all analog and the facility to calibrate this beast was bombed and destroyed (I was told!!) by Iraq (Americans gave the location vectors to Iraqis)..I highly doubt if this TSU that can seen on the second helo is operational as the original unit ..the content inside must be different. How the detection is done is also not know but can not be too different from the original set up.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raazh

Hi, is Iran currently able to import Mig29 spares from Russia like engine etc ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

raazh said:


> Hi, is Iran currently able to import Mig29 spares from Russia like engine etc ?


As far as we know , there is no deal in process for buying Mig29A spare parts from Russia ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

AIM-9J turned into A2G missile. nowadays the J model is worthless in air combat, 15 degree off boresight...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Iriaf drones








I have to admit that I am still rather baffled as to why exactly the iriaf chose this drone rather than the mohajer 6

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

kowsar fighter jet

















stand off jammer

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

تجهیزات نیروی هوایی ارتش 

خودرو فرمانده سیاری
سامانه ارتباطی وی آر سی
پست فرماندهی سیار
پدافند غیرعامل
طراحی و ساخت ایجاد متراکم دود
بمب هوشمند هدایت شونده قاصد
موشک کروز هدایت شونده الکترو اپتیکی با برد بالای ۱۰۰ کیلومتر
موشک هدایت شونده اوپتیکی قدر
موشک هدایت شونده زوبین
موشک هوا به سطح بردبلند قادر
موشک هوشمند قائم
بمب هوشمند ۲۰۰ هزار پوندی پاد لیزری
موشک لیزری عصر ۶۷
موشک هوا به هوای فکور ۹۰
موشک هوا به سطح نصر
تسلیحات هواپایه بهینه شده
سامانه سحاب
قطعات تولید شده جنگنده کوثر
پهپاد کمان ۱۲

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Mithridates said:


> AIM-9J turned into A2G missile. nowadays the J model is worthless in air combat, 15 degree off boresight...


 Can you elaborate more.. The Cobra gunship carrying TOW-H apparently performed well during the war. Its primary task was to hunt enemy tanks... fire the TOW ..change course while the TSU stays on the target (gunner in front keeps the cross hair on the tank while the helo is maneuvering for the duration of the missile flight). Now it appears that the helo is carrying Dehlavieh missile ..first question is why they changed the missile (Iran makes TOWs in large quantities so why dehlavieh!)...and second question is why they can not boresight. IEI in shiraz must be full of optics experts just look at the product line up they have now.
and the third question ....in the first picture what is that big drum hanging from the pylon to the left of the white missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

well dehlavieh has greater range i guess and better penetration compared to tow, about sidewinders i guess they are replacing A/B/J wariants with pl-7s which has better off boresight (50 degree). and that thing is hydra launcher pod, they just didn't remove the cap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

aryobarzan said:


> Can you elaborate more.. The Cobra gunship carrying TOW-H apparently performed well during the war. Its primary task was to hunt enemy tanks... fire the TOW ..change course while the TSU stays on the target (gunner in front keeps the cross hair on the tank while the helo is maneuvering for the duration of the missile flight). Now it appears that the helo is carrying Dehlavieh missile ..first question is why they changed the missile (Iran makes TOWs in large quantities so why dehlavieh!)...and second question is why they can not boresight. IEI in shiraz must be full of optics experts just look at the product line up they have now.
> and the third question ....in the first picture what is that big drum hanging from the pylon to the left of the white missile.


Dehlavieh being laser guided rather than wire guided,is a faster weapon with the missile traveling at around the speed of sound,in addition as a beam rider its also more resistant to countermeasures and the operators dont have to worry about the guidance wires getting snagged or cut on obstacles,plus its range is slightly better and iran also produces a thermobaric warhead equipped version as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 554138


I don't know about airframes but , IMO they can change kowsar to on sit fighter but , pilot sit should be on rear sit and with this we would have more space to install bihhbi radar . And reduce fighter lenght as well ...

They could just use one gun and put it above one of air intake and increase nose diameter and change air intake to aomethins like jf-17 block 2

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Sineva said:


> Dehlavieh being laser guided rather than wire guided,is a faster weapon with the missile traveling at around the speed of sound,in addition as a beam rider its also more resistant to countermeasures and the operators dont have to worry about the guidance wires getting snagged or cut on obstacles,plus its range is slightly better and iran also produces a thermobaric warhead equipped version as well.


Thanks to both of you for the info .. makes it clear now. Lets just hope they overcome this engine development hurdle which is in the way of Iran having its own designed fixed wing (other than kowsar) and rotary aircraft in various categories. This engine bottleneck is slowing the developments.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

Choose best configuration for IRIAF

First one is twin engine with horizontal stablizers
Mid one is twin engine without horizontal stablizers
Right one single engine based on su22 fuslege with delta wings and canards

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

your good at this. BTW that edges i marked at image should be parallel to improve stealth characteristics.





guys any idea which missle is this??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran is not going to waste billions in R&D to build a fighter that will not achieve parity with foreign fighters.

It makes sense for Iran to first secure a SU-30 license production or J-31 license production THEN move to creating its own domestic fighter later down the road.

If you look at China, decades ago they first started with license deals for jet engines and license deals for fighter jets. This allowed them to build the experience, knowledge and infrastructure for a domestic program.

First build a foreign jet and learn and build experience and improve it then move to a completely custom design when you are ready.

So if the decision is $5 Billion for a license production deal of SU-30 or J-31, Iran will take that over building it’s own fighter jet program for $1-2 Billion. One gives you certainly of the end result, while the other can lead to cost overruns and bottleneck issues and a plane that never lives up to expectations. 

At this point I believe any domestic fighter jet is unlikely to happen till 2030’s possibly even longer. I am more pessimistic on Iran’s ability revamping the Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 554596
> 
> your good at this. BTW that edges i marked at image should be parallel to improve stealth characteristics.
> 
> View attachment 554597
> 
> guys any idea which missle is this??


This type has no horizontal stablizers and only v-type vertical stablizers.



TheImmortal said:


> Iran is not going to waste billions in R&D to build a fighter that will not achieve parity with foreign fighters.
> 
> It makes sense for Iran to first secure a SU-30 license production or J-31 license production THEN move to creating its own domestic fighter later down the road.
> 
> If you look at China, decades ago they first started with license deals for jet engines and license deals for fighter jets. This allowed them to build the experience, knowledge and infrastructure for a domestic program.
> 
> First build a foreign jet and learn and build experience and improve it then move to a completely custom design when you are ready.
> 
> So if the decision is $5 Billion for a license production deal of SU-30 or J-31, Iran will take that over building it’s own fighter jet program for $1-2 Billion. One gives you certainly of the end result, while the other can lead to cost overruns and bottleneck issues and a plane that never lives up to expectations.
> 
> At this point I believe any domestic fighter jet is unlikely to happen till 2030’s possibly even longer. I am more pessimistic on Iran’s ability revamping the Air Force.


Russia and China would give any fighter production linelicense to Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

guys i'm sure you heard of the israeli new missile named "rampage". they basically changed an EXTRA artillery rocket to an air launched missile. we have similar rocket too, the fajr 5c. is there any possibility to make something like rampage out of fajr5??
EXTRA rocket:




Rampage missile:








fajr5C:




imagine fajr rockets loaded on an f-4 with infrared seeker for it's terminal guidance with possible mach 3-4 speed and 75-90 km range, it would be an excellent weapon to hit warships or building if you add man in loop capability to it.
i guess f-4 could carry up to 4 fajr rockets:











Mithridates said:


> View attachment 554596
> 
> your good at this. BTW that edges i marked at image should be parallel to improve stealth characteristics.
> 
> View attachment 554597
> 
> guys any idea which missle is this??


AGM-78 missile

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> This type has no horizontal stablizers and only v-type vertical stablizers.
> 
> 
> Russia and China would give any fighter production linelicense to Iran?



Didn’t Russia offer Iran SU-27 when they asked for SU-30?

China is more likely to budge on production line license as its J-31 has few buyers (most countries buy western fighters or if they aren’t western allies then they buy Russian). So China has an incentive to secure a large arms deal in this field. Now it might not be be production line of 5th gen J-31, but possibly a 4+ gen fighter and an order of J-31.

Nonethelss Iran simply doesn’t have the capability to build fighter jets in large numbers nor will they risk doing so until they have a solid foundation to do so. It’s like telling Iran in 1980’s to not buy SCUDS but instead go and build Emad Missile on their own. 

You have to first walk before you run.

Iran’s Air Force is good at keeping planes flying and building small numbers of F-5. But that’s a tall leap from building an F-16 equivalent. The industry is simply not there nor is the production line or the political willpower.

For reference Nazi Germany had a military budget equivalent to ~72 Billion euro in today’s dollars or 25% of GDP in 1939, by end of war it was ~304 Billion euro or 75% of GDP.

So consider Iran today has a military budget of 15-20 Billion of which probably 75% goes to IRGC. You are asking the Air Force to turn water not into wine, but into gold.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Vegas said:


> I think it is not only fighter jets, but China also went for Tot of air defence missiles, and many more things.
> 
> But Iran was not able to buy them, and thus compelled to make it's own projects of air defence systems like Bavar, tanks and others, and it successfully did that.
> 
> Iran has got good experience from the assembly line of Kowsar. And there were Shafaqh and many other projects too.
> 
> Also drones are giving Iran a lot of experience in case of many sub systems.



Nearly everything Iran makes is a reverse engineered system it already had in its possession.

Iran’s recent drone program came directly from crashed and captured US drones inside Iran. Prior to this Iran’s most advanced drone was Mohajer.

Bavar was a major national effort that came after experience (foundation) was set by previous radars and air defense systems (Talash, 3rd Khordad, etc).

Furthermore, Iran’s tank program is much like the Kowsar. Zulfighar exists in handful of prototypes and Karrar still hasn’t been mass produced 2 years after being unveiled.

Nonetheless comparing building a tank to a fighter jet is not even a comparison.

I am inclined to believe Iran is going NO WHERE in the field of Air Force. It’s efforts over last 20 years have shown me plenty. We will see what comes in the coming years, but I’m setting my expectations very low. They once were high, but I finally saw the writing on the wall.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> Didn’t Russia offer Iran SU-27 when they asked for SU-30?
> 
> China is more likely to budge on production line license as its J-31 has few buyers (most countries buy western fighters or if they aren’t western allies then they buy Russian). So China has an incentive to secure a large arms deal in this field. Now it might not be be production line of 5th gen J-31, but possibly a 4+ gen fighter and an order of J-31.
> 
> Nonethelss Iran simply doesn’t have the capability to build fighter jets in large numbers nor will they risk doing so until they have a solid foundation to do so. It’s like telling Iran in 1980’s to not buy SCUDS but instead go and build Emad Missile on their own.
> 
> You have to first walk before you run.
> 
> Iran’s Air Force is good at keeping planes flying and building small numbers of F-5. But that’s a tall leap from building an F-16 equivalent. The industry is simply not there nor is the production line or the political willpower.
> 
> For reference Nazi Germany had a military budget equivalent to ~72 Billion euro in today’s dollars or 25% of GDP in 1939, by end of war it was ~304 Billion euro or 75% of GDP.
> 
> So consider Iran today has a military budget of 15-20 Billion of which probably 75% goes to IRGC. You are asking the Air Force to turn water not into wine, but into gold.


Why Russia should agree with such deal !? 

They won't agree to sell su-30 to Iran in first place and you ask for Co prudcing it ?! 

They won't agree to transfer of tech without major deal ( at least 200 air craft ) and they transfer technology of critical parts like engine , radar and etc...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ray_Atek

Iran should feel air power as hardly needed item for power gaining in region firstly, to start it's homemade fighter project.
After that we can see the missile's power more efficiently.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> Iran is not going to waste billions in R&D to build a fighter that will not achieve parity with foreign fighters.
> 
> It makes sense for Iran to first secure a SU-30 license production or J-31 license production THEN move to creating its own domestic fighter later down the road.
> 
> If you look at China, decades ago they first started with license deals for jet engines and license deals for fighter jets. This allowed them to build the experience, knowledge and infrastructure for a domestic program.
> 
> First build a foreign jet and learn and build experience and improve it then move to a completely custom design when you are ready.
> 
> So if the decision is $5 Billion for a license production deal of SU-30 or J-31, Iran will take that over building it’s own fighter jet program for $1-2 Billion. One gives you certainly of the end result, while the other can lead to cost overruns and bottleneck issues and a plane that never lives up to expectations.
> 
> At this point I believe any domestic fighter jet is unlikely to happen till 2030’s possibly even longer. I am more pessimistic on Iran’s ability revamping the Air Force.


There are serious issues with your argument. On the surface, it seems reasonable enough, but the Devil lives in the details, smart fella that he is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959

The 1950 decade is a good starting point.

When an aircraft is designed, it contains essentially the most *FUNCTIONAL* pieces of technology that a country have. Not imported, meaning contracted out, but the technology that the country can sustain.

For example...You cannot have the hydraulics technology of 3000 psi without the supporting technology of petroleum, metallurgy, electronics, etc...etc...

You can buy the equipment that have hydraulics of 3000 psi, but you cannot maintain it yourself.

With the 1950s, there was virtually an explosion of fighter designs. Each design feature a prominent aerodynamic component like the unique delta wing of the F-102 and F-106, or the rocket like aerodynamics of the F-104, or the different intake locations of the F-4 and the F-8. We can assume that each design is essentially a production study of aerodynamics and full functionalities of the systems in each design. The 1950s was a crucial era in combat aircraft development.

With the 1960s and later, each decade produced considerably less designs but each design is more sophisticated in everything, from aerodynamics to electronics that produced fighters that are more versatile and higher lethality. A later design may not have the same capabilities as the older design, but would still be better in operation. For example...The F-16's top speed is lower than the F-4's, but overall, the F-16 is a much better platform.

The point here is that Iran *MUST* spend billions in R/D no matter what. Iran must explore her current technology foundation and develop an R/D base even just to maintain licensed imported fighters. Only from that R/D base can Iran gain experience in experimentation and exploration into newer designs.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sahureka2

It is legitimate to want this or that aircraft of 4 + or 5 generation, even more legitimate to discuss what would be possible for Iran, but at the present time, except for surprises, the only opportunity to have new combat aircraft is thanks to the codification almost total of the F-5 and its engine and with the implementation of new systems and radar.
Waiting for a last-generation foreign aircraft to be sold to Iran, or for a latest-generation Iranian airplane to fly ready to pass years.
Therefore the only current alternative is to continue with the Kowsar and its Owj engines, and from these extrapolate extra performing versions.
Without Kowsar, within 10 years Iran would risk remaining without air force

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> There are serious issues with your argument. On the surface, it seems reasonable enough, but the Devil lives in the details, smart fella that he is.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959
> 
> The 1950 decade is a good starting point.
> 
> When an aircraft is designed, it contains essentially the most *FUNCTIONAL* pieces of technology that a country have. Not imported, meaning contracted out, but the technology that the country can sustain.
> 
> For example...You cannot have the hydraulics technology of 3000 psi without the supporting technology of petroleum, metallurgy, electronics, etc...etc...
> 
> You can buy the equipment that have hydraulics of 3000 psi, but you cannot maintain it yourself.
> 
> With the 1950s, there was virtually an explosion of fighter designs. Each design feature a prominent aerodynamic component like the unique delta wing of the F-102 and F-106, or the rocket like aerodynamics of the F-104, or the different intake locations of the F-4 and the F-8. We can assume that each design is essentially a production study of aerodynamics and full functionalities of the systems in each design. The 1950s was a crucial era in combat aircraft development.
> 
> With the 1960s and later, each decade produced considerably less designs but each design is more sophisticated in everything, from aerodynamics to electronics that produced fighters that are more versatile and higher lethality. A later design may not have the same capabilities as the older design, but would still be better in operation. For example...The F-16's top speed is lower than the F-4's, but overall, the F-16 is a much better platform.
> 
> The point here is that Iran *MUST* spend billions in R/D no matter what. Iran must explore her current technology foundation and develop an R/D base even just to maintain licensed imported fighters. Only from that R/D base can Iran gain experience in experimentation and exploration into newer designs.



A question... Iran already mastered some of critical techs on supersonic and above speeds on both its Kowsar fighter and different types of missiles.. I know there's a difference between two.. but you know what I mean.. also, mastered some other interchangeable techs here and there in thousands of projects... being hydraulics, metallurgy, composites, etc... the question is... How far do u see Iran from designing and building its own supersonic fighter design? Let's suppose Iran has not done anything more unannounced...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> It is legitimate to want this or that aircraft of 4 + or 5 generation, even more legitimate to discuss what would be possible for Iran, but at the present time, except for surprises, the only opportunity to have new combat aircraft is thanks to the codification almost total of the F-5 and its engine and with the implementation of new systems and radar.
> Waiting for a last-generation foreign aircraft to be sold to Iran, or for a latest-generation Iranian airplane to fly ready to pass years.
> Therefore the only current alternative is to continue with the Kowsar and its Owj engines, and from these extrapolate extra performing versions.
> Without Kowsar, within 10 years Iran would risk remaining without air force


Qaher planform has more option to develope it as national fighter planform than kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> A question... Iran already mastered some of critical techs on supersonic and above speeds on both its Kowsar fighter and different types of missiles.. I know there's a difference between two.. but you know what I mean.. also, mastered some other interchangeable techs here and there in thousands of projects... being hydraulics, metallurgy, composites, etc... the question is... *How far do u see Iran from designing and building its own supersonic fighter design?* Let's suppose Iran has not done anything more unannounced...


For the highlighted question -- that is up to Iran to answer.

Am not being facetious or mysterious here. From a technology perspective, there is nothing to prevent Iran from designing a true indigenous supersonic fighter design. The main issue is always -- finance. Specifically, finance for mass production, not laboratory products.

If we take a look -- again -- at this list of US 1950s era fighters...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959

Each that does not have an 'X' prefix is the result of roughly 10 yrs of development. And this is at the time when the US was rebuilding from WW II and the economy was strong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Vegas said:


> I also believe that the era of Dog Fighting is over. When was the last time that kill was made in dog fight?
> Perhaps 99% of kills during last decade have been made through radars and missiles.
> 
> I believe that modern Drones could also hold the same Radars and same missiles, and could achieve exactly the same results. Actually, they have more benefits over manned jet when it comes to speed and turnings etc.
> 
> A Kowsar, when accompanied with many drones, could achieve good effect like SU-30. And in price of one SU-30, Iran could have Kowsar and many many drones.
> 
> I am in favour of specialized drones. For example, a drone which carries only bigger Radar and works as mini AWACS. Making such bigger drone, while using AWJ engine is possible for Iran.


sight problem drone speeds is a lot different from an airplane speed


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 11390154, membro: 184479"] La planimetria di Qaher ha più opzioni per svilupparla come planer del combattente nazionale rispetto a kowsar. [/ QUOTE]

Of course the Qader has a superior development perspective, but it still takes years, save for surprises, to bring it to the operational level, instead the Kowsar is ready and in production.
Therefore while the production of the two-seater Kowsar is continuing and I think with the same fuselage a single-seater version, we continue the development of promising aircraft, Qader or other.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Vegas said:


> I also believe that the era of Dog Fighting is over. When was the last time that kill was made in dog fight?


This is not a very good argument. For starter, as aircrafts gets more sophisticated, they get more expensive to produce and maintain. The accepted number of fighters per squadron is 12-24, with mid tens usually the case, and depending on the type of aircraft, the number can go below 10 per squadron. What this mean is that the odds of fighters meeting each other in a dogfight is very low, especially when modern fighters are more multirole than mission type dedicated like for 'air superiority'.

US airpower made a mistake post WW II when we believed that since fighters are more powerful and faster, the odds of a WW II type air combat melee is negligible. The result is the disaster that was air combat over Viet Nam that ended up with programs like 'Top Gun' for the US Navy and 'Fighter Weapons School' for the USAF. Today, it is shortened to 'Weapons School'.

Pilots are conservative for a simple reason -- it is their lives that are at stake. They want every options and advantages possible. Planning may put a pilot in superior position to make a long range 'kill' but he will still want ACM skills as a measure of last resort.



Vegas said:


> I believe that modern Drones could also hold the same Radars and same missiles, and could achieve exactly the same results. Actually, they have more benefits over manned jet when it comes to speed and turnings etc.


Currently, the ideal environment for an autonomous aircraft is -- commercial aviation.

Think about it for a moment. A city-city flight is steady state when it comes to flying, predictable in duration, and other than fuel consumption, there is no loss of cargo. Clearly, we do not jettison passengers while in flight, even though some of them may deserve it. 

A combat mission is the opposite and requires a decision maker that is in the immediate area. Not only that, the decision maker must have full information access that are inside and outside the aircraft. We call that 'situational awareness' (SA). No computer or even a remote human pilot can do that.

How do you know -- upon entering your home -- that something is odd? It could be an odor or a piece of furniture slightly misplaced or a missing sound that you are used to hearing. Sailors not being on the bridge can tell when their ship make a maneuver. Car owners know when their vehicles drives not the way they are used to. No different for experienced pilots. The progress on fully autonomous drones will continue but in the meantime, defense will continues to rest on the humans.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "Ray_Atek, post: 11390154, membro: 184479"] La planimetria di Qaher ha più opzioni per svilupparla come planer del combattente nazionale rispetto a kowsar. [/ QUOTE]
> 
> Of course the Qader has a superior development perspective, but it still takes years, save for surprises, to bring it to the operational level, instead the Kowsar is ready and in production.
> Therefore while the production of the two-seater Kowsar is continuing and I think with the same fuselage a single-seater version, we continue the development of promising aircraft, Qader or other.


Yes
And single engine kowsar same as f20 not far away from kowsar project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> There are serious issues with your argument. On the surface, it seems reasonable enough, but the Devil lives in the details, smart fella that he is.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959
> 
> The 1950 decade is a good starting point.
> 
> When an aircraft is designed, it contains essentially the most *FUNCTIONAL* pieces of technology that a country have. Not imported, meaning contracted out, but the technology that the country can sustain.
> 
> For example...You cannot have the hydraulics technology of 3000 psi without the supporting technology of petroleum, metallurgy, electronics, etc...etc...
> 
> You can buy the equipment that have hydraulics of 3000 psi, but you cannot maintain it yourself.
> 
> With the 1950s, there was virtually an explosion of fighter designs. Each design feature a prominent aerodynamic component like the unique delta wing of the F-102 and F-106, or the rocket like aerodynamics of the F-104, or the different intake locations of the F-4 and the F-8. We can assume that each design is essentially a production study of aerodynamics and full functionalities of the systems in each design. The 1950s was a crucial era in combat aircraft development.
> 
> With the 1960s and later, each decade produced considerably less designs but each design is more sophisticated in everything, from aerodynamics to electronics that produced fighters that are more versatile and higher lethality. A later design may not have the same capabilities as the older design, but would still be better in operation. For example...The F-16's top speed is lower than the F-4's, but overall, the F-16 is a much better platform.
> 
> The point here is that Iran *MUST* spend billions in R/D no matter what. Iran must explore her current technology foundation and develop an R/D base even just to maintain licensed imported fighters. Only from that R/D base can Iran gain experience in experimentation and exploration into newer designs.


our main problem is bigger engines and better material for structure, we only produce 7075 aluminum alloy and carbon fiber. our R&D is around j-85 engine and to me it's just circling around yourself, we can't expect something better than f-5 with it.













all of these planes are powered with j-85.

for me the best solution is to acquire rd-33 technology from russians and moving toward platforms with reduced RCS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> There are serious issues with your argument. On the surface, it seems reasonable enough, but the Devil lives in the details, smart fella that he is.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959
> 
> The 1950 decade is a good starting point.
> 
> When an aircraft is designed, it contains essentially the most *FUNCTIONAL* pieces of technology that a country have. Not imported, meaning contracted out, but the technology that the country can sustain.
> 
> For example...You cannot have the hydraulics technology of 3000 psi without the supporting technology of petroleum, metallurgy, electronics, etc...etc...
> 
> You can buy the equipment that have hydraulics of 3000 psi, but you cannot maintain it yourself.
> 
> With the 1950s, there was virtually an explosion of fighter designs. Each design feature a prominent aerodynamic component like the unique delta wing of the F-102 and F-106, or the rocket like aerodynamics of the F-104, or the different intake locations of the F-4 and the F-8. We can assume that each design is essentially a production study of aerodynamics and full functionalities of the systems in each design. The 1950s was a crucial era in combat aircraft development.
> 
> With the 1960s and later, each decade produced considerably less designs but each design is more sophisticated in everything, from aerodynamics to electronics that produced fighters that are more versatile and higher lethality. A later design may not have the same capabilities as the older design, but would still be better in operation. For example...The F-16's top speed is lower than the F-4's, but overall, the F-16 is a much better platform.
> 
> The point here is that Iran *MUST* spend billions in R/D no matter what. Iran must explore her current technology foundation and develop an R/D base even just to maintain licensed imported fighters. Only from that R/D base can Iran gain experience in experimentation and exploration into newer designs.



There is major problem in your assumption. That is that RD = progress. That couldn’t be farther form the truth. Assuming funding RD will lead to timely progress is flawed thinking.

Look at Iran’s nuclear program. It was IMPORTED, Iran started with a base technology (IR-1 1960’s centrifuge design) and has over 20 years improved that to current IR-6 and IR-8 prototypes that are still some years away from full production.

Iran currently DOES NOT have the basic tools to create a modern fighter. It has used the F-5 for its lack of Titanium because as @VEVAK will tell you Iran lacks Titanium Ovens among many other things.

But the issues go much further and deeper than that. Including landing gears for heavy fighter jets, radars, heavy jet engines, etc.

You can sit and pour billions into RD, doesn’t mean you will learn to build an AL-31 just because you throw money at it.

Iran needs to build a modern jet fighter via license to learn ALL the parts as you said. 

In my opinion it is still the best route for license deal. The only thing Kowsar can do is replace F-5’s that reach end of service life in 10 or so years. Obviously if Shafagh program had reached production by 2005, Iran would be much further ahead in the field of building fighter jets.

But currently Iran can only build light fighter jets powered by J-85’s which serve very limited use in actual combat.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> There is major problem in your assumption. That is that RD = progress. That couldn’t be farther form the truth. Assuming funding RD will lead to timely progress is flawed thinking.
> 
> Look at Iran’s nuclear program. It was IMPORTED, Iran started with a base technology (IR-1 1960’s centrifuge design) and has over 20 years improved that to current IR-6 and IR-8 prototypes that are still some years away from full production.
> 
> Iran currently DOES NOT have the basic tools to create a modern fighter. It has used the F-5 for its lack of Titanium because as @VEVAK will tell you Iran lacks Titanium Ovens among many other things.
> 
> But the issues go much further and deeper than that. Including landing gears for heavy fighter jets, radars, heavy jet engines, etc.
> 
> You can sit and pour billions into RD, doesn’t mean you will learn to build an AL-31 just because you throw money at it.
> 
> Iran needs to build a modern jet fighter via license to learn ALL the parts as you said.
> 
> In my opinion it is still the best route for license deal. The only thing Kowsar can do is replace F-5’s that reach end of service life in 10 or so years. Obviously if Shafagh program had reached production by 2005, Iran would be much further ahead in the field of building fighter jets.
> 
> But currently Iran can only build light fighter jets powered by J-85’s which serve very limited use in actual combat.


Problem with license production . you get a fancy assembly line but they don't tell you how to build key component like engine blades to withstand higher temprature or alloys to make your airplanes withstand higher stress and be lighter . they give you component and say you go and assemble them . or even worse they give you just parts .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> You can sit and pour billions into RD, doesn’t mean you will learn to build an AL-31 just because you throw money at it.


All developed world countries using RD for advancing and developing.
Good managed RD in turbofan field can reach more than Al31.



TheImmortal said:


> Iran needs to build a modern jet fighter via license to learn ALL the parts as you said.


Licensing does not mean know-how ( technology) transfering to targeted country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Problem with license production . you get a fancy assembly line but they don't tell you how to build key component like engine blades to withstand higher temprature or alloys to make your airplanes withstand higher stress and be lighter . they give you component and say you go and assemble them . or even worse they give you just parts .





Ray_Atek said:


> All developed world countries using RD for advancing and developing.
> Good managed RD in turbofan field can reach more than Al31.
> 
> 
> Licensing does not mean know-how ( technology) transfering to targeted country.




I should clarify my comment, by licensing, I didn’t mean simply parts installation. I ment license/TOT deal.

At the very least something like Pakistan has with China for JF-17, but preferably a full TOT transfer including license to build X amount of planes without facing legal penalties.

Now I’m not sure Russia will offer SU-30 full TOT. Maybe Iran will have to settle on lower level plane if FULL TOT including engines is provided. Or else Iran might have to turn to China.

If Russia offers FULL SU-27 TOT with engines, Iran should pay for it!





SU-27 is an air superiority fighter and while not in the same class as F-22/J-20/SU-35 it is still a deadly fighter.

Iran’s first and foremost need is an air superiority fighter for defending the skies.

While SU-30/SU-35 are preferred, Russia is unlikely to give away their prized fighters technology to Iran.

SU-27 is a nice compromise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> I should clarify my comment, by licensing, I didn’t mean simply parts installation. I ment license/TOT deal.
> 
> At the very least something like Pakistan has with China for JF-17, but preferably a full TOT transfer including license to build X amount of planes without facing legal penalties.
> 
> Now I’m not sure Russia will offer SU-30 full TOT. Maybe Iran will have to settle on lower level plane if FULL TOT including engines is provided. Or else Iran might have to turn to China.
> 
> If Russia offers FULL SU-27 TOT with engines, Iran should pay for it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SU-27 is an air superiority fighter and while not in the same class as F-22/J-20/SU-35 it is still a deadly fighter.
> 
> Iran’s first and foremost need is an air superiority fighter for defending the skies.
> 
> While SU-30/SU-35 are preferred, Russia is unlikely to give away their prized fighters technology to Iran.
> 
> SU-27 is a nice compromise.


Our problems is no country basically transfer high technology to iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CAN_TR

Chinese Aircrafts especially J-10 not an option for Iran?

JF-17 was really a success for PAK, Iran also could benefit from such a joint project with China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> Our problems is no country basically transfer high technology to iran.



I guess we have to wait and see what happens post arms embargo.

TOT of aircraft technology is tough for any country to give up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> I guess we have to wait and see what happens post arms embargo.
> 
> TOT of aircraft technology is tough for any country to give up.


Waiting give us another Bubble hope, let's to start.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

CAN_TR said:


> Chinese Aircrafts especially J-10 not an option for Iran?
> 
> JF-17 was really a success for PAK, Iran also could benefit from such a joint project with China.


unlike what every one think, russia is more reliable supplier than china, china didn't provide any support to our f-7 fleet. our f-7s were just capable of firing rockets until air force self sufficiency organization made some weapons for them.
they sold us useless pl-7 that our pilots refer it as rocket, when our air force objected them: that these stuff you sold us are shit they refused to give us newer version and when they saw we are serios about it and maybe sue them, they sold new seekers and we upgraded our pl-7 missiles by ourselves lol. they are shitty weapon supplier.





the first one of right is our version.
some people in air force saying that we bought su-30 and yak-130s from russians alongside with licence production of RD-33.



Ray_Atek said:


> Waiting give us another Bubble hope, let's to start.


the best thing we can do is making turbofan version of j-85 with 19-30 kn output thrust. we should cooperate with russians to gain new techs and build our infrastructure.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ray_Atek

Mithridates said:


> the best thing we can do is making turbofan version of j-85 with 19-30 kn output thrust. we should cooperate with russians to gain new techs and build our infrastructure.


The most important factor to start a turbofan project at now is good funding and managing.
Iran at now can build single crystal super alloy to make turbofan blade, and design, gearbox making, oil lubricating system, spool material, machining technology, blade mounting technology, Tbc making and ....
Also available and the work has started.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> There is major problem in your assumption. That is that RD = progress. That couldn’t be farther form the truth. Assuming funding RD will lead to timely progress is flawed thinking.


Research and Development *ALWAYS* = Progress.

DARPA have a %90+ failure rate of its funded projects. We consider that progress. Iran and everyone else are free to adopt your attitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> Research and Development *ALWAYS* = Progress.
> 
> DARPA have a %90+ failure rate of its funded projects. We consider that progress. Iran and everyone else are free to adopt your attitude.



Ignore that guy, he seems to just type whatever comes to his mind without even trying to think a little. R&D by definition involves progress.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

I wonder why people in this forum consider Kowsar to be F-5? Because of how the airframe looks like? Everything else seems to be different, at least how I understood. If the internal components are much different, especially radar, avionics, and the missiles that it can be equipped with, why would people consider it to be F-5?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> I wonder why people in this forum consider Kowsar to be F-5? Because of how the airframe? Everything else seems to be different, at least how I understood. If the internal components are much different, especially radar, avionics, and the missiles that it can be equipped with, why would people consider it to be F-5?


Good point. I wished they would at least use a different paint scheme just to make it to stand out as different....some American baboons (in other forums)who know nothing about what is going on with aviation industry in iran are saying that Iranians have managed to build a state of art fighter which is 50 years old...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> Research and Development *ALWAYS* = Progress.
> 
> DARPA have a %90+ failure rate of its funded projects. We consider that progress. Iran and everyone else are free to adopt your attitude.



US got their jumpstart when they took top Nazi scientists post WW2 and used them to launch the US to top military arms power and win the space race. If US didn’t have that jumpstart, it would arguably delay the process much longer and who knows if they would have even won the space race.

Iran has areas where it is pushing the limits of technology (for themselves) for example at Sharud Military base there is likely ICBM engines being tested. We are talking about solid fuel engines of 20-30+ Tons. Yet even if with the advancement in technology and computers, Iran still doesn’t have an ICBM equilavent to 1960’s Minuteman. So surely the issue can’t be money?

Air Force is not an area where significant technological development is taking place. All I am saying is that they need a foundation or a jumpstart.

The Issue for Iran goes beyond funding and “spend more in R&D”. That doesn’t mean Iran shouldn’t try or that my viewpoint is a failures attitude, it just means that Iran should consider first bringing their airforce back to 21st century THEN try to make a jump to unique designs.

Kowsar ultimately is the successor of Saeqeh which the successor to Azkharash project from late 90’s. So in 25 years Iran has managed to build an upgraded version of F-5.

The issue right now is, Iran doesn’t have another 20 years to see if F-313 works or whatever heavy fighter jet is on the drawing board. It can certainly have a parallel development program IF it’s current airforce is sufficient to provide protection. That is not the case right now.

That means Iran needs a jump. Wether that means TOT, black market dealings, espionage, what have you. In recent years, Iran has attempted at least once to get its hands on F-35 engine blueprints. So, that tells me the military is well aware of what is needed to make a jump.

When RQ-170 capture in iran, a military official claimed the engine advanced Iran’s knowledge by 20 years! They said such a thing wouldn’t be possible without this event.

What is that called? Yes a jumpstart!

So disagree if you must, in the end Iran needs such jumpstarts outside of its current situation to achieve a breakthrough in this field. Money for R&D is not the only issue. Receiving Outside technology will help propel R&D much faster then trial and error.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 554596
> 
> your good at this. BTW that edges i marked at image should be parallel to improve stealth characteristics.
> 
> View attachment 554597
> 
> guys any idea which missle is this??



This is a RIM-66 Standard SM-1 sourced from the IR Navy. This was a IRIAF project from the Iran/Iraq War to arm F-4D/E Phantoms with this SAM similar to the F-14A/Hawk SAM project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> I wonder why people in this forum consider Kowsar to be F-5? Because of how the airframe looks like? Everything else seems to be different, at least how I understood. If the internal components are much different, especially radar, avionics, and the missiles that it can be equipped with, why would people consider it to be F-5?



It’s an upgraded F-5 class fighter. Meaning it falls in the role of advanced trainer/light CAS fighter.

At the end of the day it is a upgraded F-5 similar to other F-5 upgrade programs worldwide like Brazilian F-5

Cockpit of F-5EM






At the end of the day the physics of the airframe dictate that has similar performance to its F-5 predecessor, but obviously improved in technological aspects that you mentioned.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sepasgozar

Realistically, if IRIAF were to mass produce these beefed-up F5 indigenous made fighters, then how much of a threat could a few squadrons pose to newer generation fighters like the F-16 or F-35?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> When RQ-170 capture in iran, a military official claimed the engine advanced Iran’s knowledge by 20 years! They said such a thing wouldn’t be possible without this event.


That is actually sad. Am not being mean or condescending. Just factual.

There is nothing technologically spectacular about the RQ-170. It is not 'stealth' in the sense that the program had low radar observability as primary consideration. The flying wing design was used because of its long duration and fuel economy advantages. All the electronics were typical commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS).

As far as the engine go...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_TF34
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF34

The GE F34 engine is over 20 yrs old by the time we lost that RQ-170. So either that 'military official' exaggerated the technological significance of the aircraft in order to equally exaggerate Iranian's capabilities of 'hacking' or whatever else, or truly Iran's jet engine technology is really behind.


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> That is actually sad. Am not being mean or condescending. Just factual.
> 
> There is nothing technologically spectacular about the RQ-170. It is not 'stealth' in the sense that the program had low radar observability as primary consideration. The flying wing design was used because of its long duration and fuel economy advantages. All the electronics were typical commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS).
> 
> As far as the engine go...
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_TF34
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF34
> 
> The GE F34 engine is over 20 yrs old by the time we lost that RQ-170. So either that 'military official' exaggerated the technological significance of the aircraft in order to equally exaggerate Iranian's capabilities of 'hacking' or whatever else, or truly Iran's jet engine technology is really behind.



First of all, I was talking specifically about engines. Nonetheless only 4 countries in the world have flying wing UAVs Iran, Russia, US, and China. Only Iran and US have seen actual combat, where as China and Russia are recent additions. 

Secondly OF COURSE Iran’s Jet engine technology is beyond you bafoon, what have I been telling you this whole time. Iran is reverse engineering the J-85 a 1950’s engine! People here would be happy with a reverse engineered RD-33 which is a 1970’s engine!

So of course when you get your hands on an intact Engine that is more advanced then what you have it’s going to lead to you learning a thing or two.

So I hope this makes you rethink your whole arguement that by pumping more money into R&D Iran can “magically” jump from J-85 to F-135 (F-35 engine). 

It’s not going to happen without outside assistance. China has poured tens of billions of dollars into its fighter jet programs and is still lagging the US/Russia in engine tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> That is actually sad. Am not being mean or condescending. Just factual.
> 
> There is nothing technologically spectacular about the RQ-170. It is not 'stealth' in the sense that the program had low radar observability as primary consideration. The flying wing design was used because of its long duration and fuel economy advantages. All the electronics were typical commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS).
> 
> As far as the engine go...
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_TF34
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF34
> 
> The GE F34 engine is over 20 yrs old by the time we lost that RQ-170. So either that 'military official' exaggerated the technological significance of the aircraft in order to equally exaggerate Iranian's capabilities of 'hacking' or whatever else, or truly Iran's jet engine technology is really behind.


so why your authorities said iranians can't encrypt the data stored in it or something like: iranians can't build something like it, it's too advanced. according to some people in our military we expected US air force or special forces come to destroy the wreckage but they didn't because obama was afraid. youre politicians fucked up and they are trying to save face.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sepasgozar said:


> Realistically, if IRIAF were to mass produce these beefed-up F5 indigenous made fighters, then how much of a threat could a few squadrons pose to newer generation fighters like the F-16 or F-35?



Zero threat to F-35 or F-22.

F-5 is not an air superiority fighter and it’s light weight means it’s armament is not suited for air to air combat in current environment. A F-5 could potentially take on F-16 and then it depends on both pilots skills.

But that’s all speculation as F-22’s would be flying with all squadrons and would tear apart F-5’s before they even knew what hit them. Hence why I been saying that Iran needs an air superiority fighter.

The SU-27 if given full TOT by Russia would be a formidable threat and a plane Iran could build in the 100’s.

Now while an SU-27 in neutral terroritory would likely lose to an F-22, on Iranian soil it would have the benefit of Iranian AD systems to defend it and provide ongoing information/data. 

This would make the job of the F-22 much harder as it would have to both defend from SU-27 and F-14 squadrons and AD systems.

If I was Iran I would do two things:

1) Completely saturate all cities, bases, key areas with radar coverage and AD systems. Order a large amount S-500 and Bavar-373 while also deploying short range and medium range systems against cruise missile attacks.

2) Have 300+ Air superiority fighters such as SU-27.

This would make any air invasion of Iran a living hell for anyone besides the US military. Also the US would have to accept significant losses in the air for any long sustained incursion.

Again how realistic it is to secure TOT of SU-27, I am not sure. It all depends on after the embargo how Russia reacts, which historically has not been favorable to iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sepasgozar

TheImmortal said:


> Zero threat to F-35 or F-22.
> 
> F-5 is not an air superiority fighter and it’s light weight means it’s armament is not suited for air to air combat in current environment. A F-5 could potentially take on F-16 and then it depends on both pilots skills.
> 
> But that’s all speculation as F-22’s would be flying with all squadrons and would tear apart F-5’s before they even knew what hit them. Hence why I been saying that Iran needs an air superiority fighter.
> 
> The SU-27 if given full TOT by Russia would be a formidable threat and a plane Iran could build in the 100’s.
> 
> Now while an SU-27 in neutral terroritory would likely lose to an F-22, on Iranian soil it would have the benefit of Iranian AD systems to defend it and provide ongoing information/data.
> 
> This would make the job of the F-22 much harder as it would have to both defend from SU-27 and F-14 squadrons and AD systems.
> 
> If I was Iran I would do two things:
> 
> 1) Completely saturate all cities, bases, key areas with radar coverage and AD systems. Order a large amount S-500 and Bavar-373 while also deploying short range and medium range systems against cruise missile attacks.
> 
> 2) Have 300+ Air superiority fighters such as SU-27.
> 
> This would make any air invasion of Iran a living hell for anyone besides the US military. Also the US would have to accept significant losses in the air for any long sustained incursion.
> 
> Again how realistic it is to secure TOT of SU-27, I am not sure. It all depends on after the embargo how Russia reacts, which historically has not been favorable to iran.



Interesting analysis. Thanks for your insight. 

On the last point, I think Iran had a bigger chance to get its hand on the SU-27 when the USSR fell than it does now. That was the time to go shopping

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Frankly ! Sorry to say it but TheImmortal is the most stupid of this forum and does not control his subjects. Iran does not need S-400s or S-500s that are not yet active in Russia. Bavar 373 will soon be officially released and Iran is already working on Bavar 373 II.
Bavar 373 will surprise the world, you will see

I yet ask serious people here on the forum to make efforts to find clues on the famous F-4 super modified. Iran's strategy is the best with the allocated budget. improved day by day the aciennes plaformes to better arrive at the new platform that is already running .... There would be other recent modification on the Mig-29 but Iran seems to remain discreet on that ..

With the cocktail and saturation effect, the strategy of mountains and the strategy of tunnels, Iran is a colossal power and NATO planes will have a lot of trouble in Iran. Iran is working a lot on drones jamming signals and confusion as well. Iran is in the 4 major powers in the air defense system of the world. It's not the f-22 and f-35 that scare the Iranian army ..

Iran will announce big surprise that will make some people's mouths shut up here. Iran is more advanced than people think. Iran is the most experienced army of the modern era with an extraordinary strategic intelligence. The USA will never win against Iran!

And for the new, more powerful combat aircraft engine, you're all wrong. Let Iran surprise us

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Frankly ! Sorry to say it but TheImmortal is the most stupid of this forum and does not control his subjects. Iran does not need S-400s or S-500s that are not yet active in Russia. Bavar 373 will soon be officially released and Iran is already working on Bavar 373 II.
> Bavar 373 will surprise the world, you will see
> 
> I yet ask serious people here on the forum to make efforts to find clues on the famous F-4 super modified. Iran's strategy is the best with the allocated budget. improved day by day the aciennes plaformes to better arrive at the new platform that is already running .... There would be other recent modification on the Mig-29 but Iran seems to remain discreet on that ..
> 
> With the cocktail and saturation effect, the strategy of mountains and the strategy of tunnels, Iran is a colossal power and NATO planes will have a lot of trouble in Iran. Iran is working a lot on drones jamming signals and confusion as well. Iran is in the 4 major powers in the air defense system of the world. It's not the f-22 and f-35 that scare the Iranian army ..
> 
> Iran will announce big surprise that will make some people's mouths shut up here. Iran is more advanced than people think. Iran is the most experienced army of the modern era with an extraordinary strategic intelligence. The USA will never win against Iran!
> 
> And for the new, more powerful combat aircraft engine, you're all wrong. Let Iran surprise us


I don't know why but why you still bringing some subject about that F-4SM again? It's just modified F-4 with some modern avionics it will be make into flying shrapnel once US attack
and There is no such thing as B-373II let alone about original B-373 which is i already lost patient to wait for it's unveiling and i itill doubtful wether it exist or not you must be read some rumor or something but we must wait till the B-373 original unveiling which is probably needed about a year for it to be unveil


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> As far as the engine go...
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_TF34
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF34
> 
> The GE F34 engine is over 20 yrs old by the time we lost that RQ-170. So either that 'military official' exaggerated the technological significance of the aircraft in order to equally exaggerate Iranian's capabilities of 'hacking' or whatever else, or truly Iran's jet engine technology is really behind.


Well the question is does RQ-170 have the space for that engine ?
I doubt it . the engine I believe is something else .
by the way I believe nor Iran neither USA actually said what engine the UAV use.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> Well the question is does RQ-170 have the space for that engine ?
> I doubt it . the engine I believe is something else .
> by the way I believe nor Iran neither USA actually said what engine the UAV use.


Look at this...











The core of a jet engine is much smaller than the fan structure diameter.

The top image is that of a civilian version of a jet engine.

The bottom image is that of a common military jet engine.

But as the man for size reference indicate, their cores are quite the same.

Even if the RQ-170's engine is not specified, there are no indicators that its engine is anything spectacular. Why bother to design a new engine when its mission requirements do not call for a new engine? Why not take an existing engine and modify it? We have more engines than we know what to do with them.

Am willing to go out on a limb and say that Iran did not learn from the RQ-170 -- technology wise -- as much as the Iranian government exaggerated.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> Look at this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The core of a jet engine is much smaller than the fan structure diameter.
> 
> The top image is that of a civilian version of a jet engine.
> 
> The bottom image is that of a common military jet engine.
> 
> But as the man for size reference indicate, their cores are quite the same.
> 
> Even if the RQ-170's engine is not specified, there are no indicators that its engine is anything spectacular. Why bother to design a new engine when its mission requirements do not call for a new engine? Why not take an existing engine and modify it? We have more engines than we know what to do with them.
> 
> Am willing to go out on a limb and say that Iran did not learn from the RQ-170 -- technology wise -- as much as the Iranian government exaggerated.


My question is for RQ-170 an engine with half power of TF-34 but more efficient is far more logical .
Well to be honest if it was me who designed the airplane I would have used something more in line of This one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_TFE731

Its smaller , it weight half . it consume a lot less fuel and produce more than enough power for the UAV. And my guess is the maintenance would be a lot cheaper .


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> If I was Iran I would do two things:
> 
> 1) Completely saturate all cities, bases, key areas with radar coverage and AD systems. Order a large amount S-500 and Bavar-373 while also deploying short range and medium range systems against cruise missile attacks.
> 
> 2) Have 300+ Air superiority fighters such as SU-27.
> 
> This would make any air invasion of Iran a living hell for anyone besides the US military. Also the US would have to accept significant losses in the air for any long sustained incursion.
> 
> Again how realistic it is to secure TOT of SU-27, I am not sure. It all depends on after the embargo how Russia reacts, which historically has not been favorable to iran.


And you would still lose. When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, all we knew was that a radar gap would be available for the main air force. How that gap created was -- 'classified'. It was only after the collapse of Iraqi radar net that we in the main air force found out the Army was the cause of the initial gap.

The point here is that we are not as static as you think we are. Iran's air defense is not Iraqi's, we know that. But US airpower today is also not the same as the airpower of Desert Storm. Right now, my (retired) generation would not want to go up against the crew of today. They are more flexible, precise, accurate, skilled, better trained, faster, and all factors combined -- more lethal. Today, the timing of Desert Storm would not happened. They would have planned it differently with the better tools and intelligence gathering methods of today. It would have required less ordnance but still achieved the same results.

How US airpower of today plan for Iran is anybody's guess, but the outcome would be the same as Iraq's of Desert Storm.


----------



## PeeD

The RQ-170 engine is the world first known electrofan engine.

The core, the turbine engine was almost certainly something existing but the whole system, the electrofan is something new and it's capture by Iran not easy to digest.

Endurance, heat signature and altitude are significantly increased by this technology (for subsonic platforms).

As General Hajizadeh said: It is 35 ahead of what Iran had back then (the highest tech. being the RD-33).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

Lets think outside of the box for a second...
- *Who is the enemy:
*
1- if you are talking about US and USAF then no matter how good an aircraft and how many Iran has in her inventory US will achieve to own the sky . The only question is what is the cost to them...increase the cost and they think twice about it.. what is the optimum strategy to increase the cost....answer AD.

2- If the enemy is Saudi or any one of these baboon wahhabis air forces then.... relax..they may defect while flying towards Iran..or drop their bombs and declare the mission accomplished.

3- If the enemy is Israel..They may mange to penetrate with some success and drop few bombs and missiles but they know the price they have to pay for doing that comes in other forms and from other places...so they think twice also.

Do this analysis and you know the issue of AF upgrade is not life and death issue for Iran ....critical but not not so critical..so buy some good foreign aircraft if they sell them to you but keep the bulk of your funds for : *Indigenous development via R&D and infrastructure build up*.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TruthHurtz

gambit said:


> And you would still lose. When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, all we knew was that a radar gap would be available for the main air force. How that gap created was -- 'classified'. It was only after the collapse of Iraqi radar net that we in the main air force found out the Army was the cause of the initial gap.
> 
> The point here is that we are not as static as you think we are. Iran's air defense is not Iraqi's, we know that. But US airpower today is also not the same as the airpower of Desert Storm. Right now, my (retired) generation would not want to go up against the crew of today. They are more flexible, precise, accurate, skilled, better trained, faster, and all factors combined -- more lethal. Today, the timing of Desert Storm would not happened. They would have planned it differently with the better tools and intelligence gathering methods of today. It would have required less ordnance but still achieved the same results.
> 
> How US airpower of today plan for Iran is anybody's guess, but the outcome would be the same as Iraq's of Desert Storm.



How many of your friends died for Israel? Lmao

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

TruthHurtz said:


> How many of your friends died for Israel? Lmao


None. LMAO.


----------



## Mithridates

PeeD said:


> The RQ-170 engine is the world first known electrofan engine.
> 
> The core, the turbine engine was almost certainly something existing but the whole system, the electrofan is something new and it's capture by Iran not easy to digest.
> 
> Endurance, heat signature and altitude are significantly increased by this technology (for subsonic platforms).
> 
> As General Hajizadeh said: It is 35 ahead of what Iran had back then (the highest tech. being the RD-33).


how they create heat in engines core?? hydrogen??



sepasgozar said:


> Interesting analysis. Thanks for your insight.
> 
> On the last point, I think Iran had a bigger chance to get its hand on the SU-27 when the USSR fell than it does now. That was the time to go shopping


they offered us mig-29 and mig-23 otherwise we wanted the su-27, the mig-31 and tu-22 alongside with su-27 offer is fairy tale. all the russian/soviet tech we get are from ex-soviet countries not the russia and they are not happy about it, recently they sell out our military attache in ukraine that was trying to buy and smuggle a kh-31 missile.



neosinan said:


> *Stunning new material invented in Turkey: “Metallic wood” is 5 times stronger than titanium, but lighter*
> 
> Turkish inventors have created a new building material that is five times stronger than titanium and has the density of wood planks. Most remarkably, this new “Metallic wood” is lighter than titanium and still has the chemical stability of metal for use in manufacturing applications.
> 
> https://www.newstarget.com/2019-04-19-metallic-wood-stronger-than-titanium.html
> 
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-36901-3

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> At the end of the day the physics of the airframe dictate that has similar performance to its F-5 predecessor, but obviously improved in technological aspects that you mentioned.



Total Performance does not based on physics of the airframe alonly, there are some other factors.
The shape of Kowsar is similar to F5, but are you sure Kowsar`s wing span, fighter lenght, fighter weight and height, hydrolic system power, alloy of wings and fuseleg, surface of wing and stablizers`s movable part, thrust to weight ratio, fuel internal tanks volume,... all are similar?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

gambit said:


> And you would still lose. When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, all we knew was that a radar gap would be available for the main air force. How that gap created was -- 'classified'. It was only after the collapse of Iraqi radar net that we in the main air force found out the Army was the cause of the initial gap.
> 
> The point here is that we are not as static as you think we are. Iran's air defense is not Iraqi's, we know that. But US airpower today is also not the same as the airpower of Desert Storm. Right now, my (retired) generation would not want to go up against the crew of today. They are more flexible, precise, accurate, skilled, better trained, faster, and all factors combined -- more lethal. Today, the timing of Desert Storm would not happened. They would have planned it differently with the better tools and intelligence gathering methods of today. It would have required less ordnance but still achieved the same results.
> 
> How US airpower of today plan for Iran is anybody's guess, but the outcome would be the same as Iraq's of Desert Storm.


I hope you are 100% right, because this world has already changed.


----------



## PeeD

Mithridates said:


> how they create heat in engines core?? hydrogen??



Just a normal turbine with kerosene. Difference is that a much higher amount of the thrust is produced by the "cold" fan.
Electricfan offers this possibility, the hot core thrust is mixed with the high amount of cold fan thrust. The result is a reduced heat signature that made Americans think the RQ-170 could be survivable inside Irans (back then early) IADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> And you would still lose. When I got orders to deploy to Desert Storm, all we knew was that a radar gap would be available for the main air force. How that gap created was -- 'classified'. It was only after the collapse of Iraqi radar net that we in the main air force found out the Army was the cause of the initial gap.
> 
> The point here is that we are not as static as you think we are. Iran's air defense is not Iraqi's, we know that. But US airpower today is also not the same as the airpower of Desert Storm. Right now, my (retired) generation would not want to go up against the crew of today. They are more flexible, precise, accurate, skilled, better trained, faster, and all factors combined -- more lethal. Today, the timing of Desert Storm would not happened. They would have planned it differently with the better tools and intelligence gathering methods of today. It would have required less ordnance but still achieved the same results.
> 
> How US airpower of today plan for Iran is anybody's guess, but the outcome would be the same as Iraq's of Desert Storm.


The difference between Iran and Iraq is that today your pilot friends wont even get the chance to take off, we will raze your airbases in the very first hour of war , within minutes, U.S biggest advantage will turn into it's biggest burden.
An exhausted airforce isn't game changing, though U.S airforce is already exhausted.

On the ground is another story, but it's enough to say Iran's allies (which you call proxy) wont even let you to reach Iranian borders.


Even by moving your whole armed forces from your homeland and the rest of the world, you wont mach the local fire power of Iran, we have estimated your cost as $ 52 trillion and this is a money which you don't have, so your comrades can enjoy their retirement as well!

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## scythian500

mohsen said:


> The difference between Iran and Iraq is that today your pilot friends wont even get the chance to take off, we will raze your airbases in the very first hour of war , within minutes, U.S biggest advantage will turn into it's biggest burden.
> An exhausted airforce isn't game changing, though U.S airforce is already exhausted.
> 
> On the ground is another story, but it's enough to say Iran's allies (which you call proxy) wont even let you to reach Iranian borders.
> 
> 
> Even by moving your whole armed forces from your homeland and the rest of the world, you wont mach the local fire power of Iran, we have estimated your cost as $ 52 trillion and this is a money which you don't have, so your comrades can enjoy their retirement as well!



As Iran most probably don't start any preemptive attacks, there is a good chance.. US can take out some of Iranian radar and air force at first strike.. but Iran will start an unprecedented counter strike and pay back like never seen before... thats exactly what US is afraid of... There is no way to avoid a full fledged war in whole middle east and beyond if US be that stupid...

So, definitely Iran would suffer partially but IRGC and ARMY in Iran had 30 years to prepare... and I,m telling u.. Iran's response won't be regular... that is why... I think if there is a war.. Iran can easily push the war into installment first and then bleeding them to the point they regret their dumb decision...

All this with the assumption that Iran still is on its defensive approach which theres a chance its changed into preemptive-offensive approach already since couple of years ago... If Iran start it then I,m telling u... US will be left with no option but to use unethical weapons like nukes...otherwise, they would lose before they start.. God blessed Iran with all US bases in short distance... Iranians wont have to fly that much like Japanese to strike pearl harbor.. actually, they don't even need to fly!!

but let's hope there's no war not now...not in 1000 years... but I, afraid greed is born with human beings...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Well iran already said in case of war USA mainland will be target . don't knew how but it's what iran stated several years ago at the time of Bush .


scythian500 said:


> As Iran most probably don't start any preemptive attacks, there is a good chance.. US can take out some of Iranian radar and air force at first strike.. but Iran will start an unprecedented counter strike and pay back like never seen before... thats exactly what US is afraid of... There is no way to avoid a full fledged war in whole middle east and beyond if US be that stupid...
> 
> So, definitely Iran would suffer partially but IRGC and ARMY in Iran had 30 years to prepare... and I,m telling u.. Iran's response won't be regular... that is why... I think if there is a war.. Iran can easily push the war into installment first and then bleeding them to the point they regret their dumb decision...
> 
> All this with the assumption that Iran still is on its defensive approach which theres a chance its changed into preemptive-offensive approach already since couple of years ago... If Iran start it then I,m telling u... US will be left with no option but to use unethical weapons like nukes...otherwise, they would lose before they start.. God blessed Iran with all US bases in short distance... Iranians wont have to fly that much like Japanese to strike pearl harbor.. actually, they don't even need to fly!!
> 
> but let's hope there's no war not now...not in 1000 years... but I, afraid greed is born with human beings...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> Well iran already said in case of war USA mainland will be target . don't knew how but it's what iran stated several years ago at the time of Bush .


 Source please.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

tazarv trainer plane (1999-2000)

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

Mithridates said:


> tazarv trainer plane (1999-2000)
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


First time I see this aircraft airborne..looks great.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xbat

What happen to this project after 2 crash? never heard again.


----------



## skyshadow

xbat said:


> What happen to this project after 2 crash? never heard again.



It stopped because Iran made better one's

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xbat

20 YEARS later?


----------



## SubWater

xbat said:


> 20 YEARS later?


Yes, because we are completely on own efforts. But you should consider we localized and achieved big part of aviation knowledge in past 30 years. We can use this knowledge in next fighters.
we are not part of any global alliance to get free knowledge.
Soon or later our engine will complete and we can build something like F16 in next 10 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mithridates

xbat said:


> What happen to this project after 2 crash? never heard again.


one of them crashed, the project abandoned and some of old f-5b refurbished to serve as trainer.


----------



## sahureka2

xbat said:


> 20 YEARS later?



10, 15, 20 years or even more;
when we start to undertake the production of something new without a production license, moreover in the aeronautical field that has never been done before, I think that nobody can do it in a short time, not even the nations that have a long tradition in aeronautics.
Even the Italian Aermacchi and the Russian Yakovlev have had to ally in designing the advanced Yak / AEM 130 training aircraft that then gave birth to the M-346 / YAK-130 and only the union of these two design and construction giants made it possible to fly the first prototype in 3 years, 1993/1996, but then the aircraft the first serial aircraft actually entered production: the Italian version made the first flight in 2010, instead the Russian series version one year first in 2009.
Therefore, 16 years have passed from the beginning of the design to the first series aircraft and they are not a long time back to 20 years

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mithridates said:


> one of them crashed, the project abandoned and some of old f-5b refurbished to serve as trainer.



Some (i think 5) F-5As were also rebuilt into F-5Bs under project Simorg.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

xbat said:


> 20 YEARS later?


Well to the best of my knowledge Iran is the only Islamic country capable of making fighter jet engine by its own ..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

Some good news:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


----------



## Sineva

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> Some good news:
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Whats the claimed "good news" exactly?,its not more unsubstantiated claims of iranian su30/su27s is it?
To be honest I think that at this point iran could do with some real actual "good news",as in something thats actually substantiated.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

*طراحی و ساخت ۳ موشک جدید توسط وزارت دفاع و هوانیروز ارتش*
*Three new airborne anti armor missile in final stage of development:

Qamar Bani-Hashem* air to air and air to ground missile:
fire & forget
can lock before or after launch
variety of seekers based on climate and target
Range > 8km

*Heydar *air to ground missile:
fire & forget
penetration: 1m
Range:8-12km

airborne *Dehlavieh*
Laser guidance
Range >8km
Penetration: 1.2m


Video:
https://www.aparat.com/v/fKy7k/رونمایی_از_موشک_های_دفاعی_جدید_ارتش

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

first missile is *Heydar* missile: it is an air to ground missile and its fire and forget type, with a range of more than 8 kilometers and the ability to install a variety of search systems for use in different weather conditions for anti _ armored purposes, ground equipment, and it can be used for hit crowd gathering location as an pin point missile and armor penetration power of it, is one and a half meters.
















second missile is *Ghamar'e bani hashem*: *Ghamar'e bani hashem* missile is an air-to-air missile, and air-to-ground missile with a range of more than 8 kilometers and i can make a luck on its target before and after firing. and it has the ability to install a variety of search systems for use in different weather conditions for anti _ armored purposes, ground equipment, and it can be used for hit crowd gathering location as a pin point missile.


















third missile is *airborne Dehlaviye anti-tank* missile: the missile is the air-to-ground missile with laser guidance and a range of more than 8 kilometers, and it has low weight for anti_armored purposes, it is a pin point missile with a penetration of one meter and twenty centimeters.

The Dehlaviye rocket had previously been ground-based, now its upgraded to be airborne.

















The missiles are now undergoing preliminary tests and will soon be mass-produced and installed on 209 helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

it's bore sight is almost 50-90 right?? and it is IIR seeking missile. the GBH is a really good achivement, it could be a milestone in our short range A2A missiles. it reminds me of IRIS T which is a air-air missile with air-ground capabilities. next important weapon for our fleet is sidearm type anti radar missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back


Well, commander compared the Qamar with Hellfire.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> it's bore sight is almost 50-90 right?? and it is IIR seeking missile. the GBH is a really good achivement, it could be a milestone in our short range A2A missiles. it reminds me of IRIS T which is a air-air missile with air-ground capabilities. next important weapon for our fleet is sidearm type anti radar missiles.


Another interesting thing about the seeker is its similarities to the one we saw previously on the airforces new drone launched jet powered missile




Looks like it could be a common seeker design,if so its a damn good idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Another interesting thing about the seeker is its similarities to the one we saw previously on the airforces new drone launched jet powered missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it could be a common seeker design,if so its a damn good idea.











israeli python 5 missile with EO/IIR seeker. look at the seeker
that's why i say GBH is a great achievement.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Sineva said:


> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back
> 
> 
> 
> [/QU
> 
> 
> Sineva said:
> 
> 
> 
> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sineva said:
> 
> 
> 
> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sineva said:
> 
> 
> 
> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Sineva said:


> The heydar looks like it could be related to the hellfire copy/look a like that we saw unveiled with the fotros male drone a few years back





mohsen said:


> Well, commander compared the Qamar with Hellfire.


search fotros ucav photos on the net,they have installed a hellfire copy on Fotross already

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Wow ..wow...just made my day need time to absorb all this...one thing is clear....
the explosion of products one would expect from mature tech is now under way in iran military industries....just could not be happier..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

aryobarzan said:


> Wow ..wow...just made my day need time to absorb all this...one thing is clear....
> the explosion of products one would expect from mature tech is now under way in iran military industries....just could not be happier..


yes the tech behind fire and forget is made by Iran military industries for the first time but every one is missing that

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> first missile is *Heydar* missile: it is an air to ground missile and its fire and forget type, with a range of more than 8 kilometers and the ability to install a variety of search systems for use in different weather conditions for anti _ armored purposes, ground equipment, and it can be used for hit crowd gathering location as an pin point missile and armor penetration power of it, is one and a half meters.
> 
> View attachment 555900
> View attachment 555901
> View attachment 555902
> View attachment 555903
> 
> 
> second missile is *Ghamar'e bani hashem*: *Ghamar'e bani hashem* missile is an air-to-air missile, and air-to-ground missile with a range of more than 8 kilometers and i can make a luck on its target before and after firing. and it has the ability to install a variety of search systems for use in different weather conditions for anti _ armored purposes, ground equipment, and it can be used for hit crowd gathering location as a pin point missile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 555904
> View attachment 555905
> 
> View attachment 555907
> 
> 
> third missile is *airborne Dehlaviye anti-tank* missile: the missile is the air-to-ground missile with laser guidance and a range of more than 8 kilometers, and it has low weight for anti_armored purposes, it is a pin point missile with a penetration of one meter and twenty centimeters.
> 
> The Dehlaviye rocket had previously been ground-based, now its upgraded to be airborne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The missiles are now undergoing preliminary tests and will soon be mass-produced and installed on 209 helicopters.


He said cobras could carry 8 Dehlaviyes but I've never seen such a configuration ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

aryobarzan said:


> Wow ..wow...just made my day need time to absorb all this...one thing is clear....
> the explosion of products one would expect from mature tech is now under way in iran military industries....just could not be happier..



It must be kept in mind that Iran is often further in their military technology than in their official announcement processes. I think you'll be even more excited that when he's going to present the Kowsar armament, this is to be followed ... Now, I can not wait to see the Bavar 373 coming up soon

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> He said cobras could carry 8 Dehlaviyes but I've never seen such a configuration ...


well yes he said and they could put 8 if they want too.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

skyshadow said:


> well yes he said and they could put 8 if they want too.


Just like how IRIAA Cobra's can carry a total of 8 TOW/Toophan missiles yet they mostly are seen with 4 launchers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> well yes he said and they could put 8 if they want too.


Aren't they heavier?


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> Aren't they heavier?



no they are not, actually all of cobra models can carry up to 8 tow missiles. plus 38 non-guided rockets.



























https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/بل_ای‌اچ-۱_کبرا

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

When they demonstrated Shafagh for the first time, the whole idea behind testing new A2G missiles on Iranian Cobras was announced to be increasing the firing range of them to more than 10 km, beyond short range anti aircraft systems. So, now the question is how Kornet can help in this regard?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Hellfire missile in size VS Heydar missile in size.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

upgraded Bell-214 night mode:
۹ اردیبهشت ۱۳۹۸ - ارتش - 9 اردیبهشت 1398

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *Hellfire missile in size VS Heydar missile in size.*


Heres another size comparison pic

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Heres another size comparison pic



it still is as twice as big. don't you think?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> it still is as twice as big. don't you think?


Is not far off.
When I first saw it and had assumed it to be about hellfire size I`d wondered why they`d gone for the extended baby bottle style nose for the seeker,then when I saw how big it actually was it all made sense.Its probably closer to the size of a maverick a2gm.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Is not far off.
> When I first saw it and had assumed it to be about hellfire size I`d wondered why they`d gone for the extended baby bottle style nose for the seeker,then when I saw how big it actually was it all made sense.Its probably closer to the size of a maverick a2gm.





Sineva said:


> Heres another size comparison pic





skyshadow said:


> it still is as twice as big. don't you think?


To me looks more like 50% longer and 60 to 70 percent wider .
But honestly I doubt its something in class of AGM-65 that missile is a beast with 134kg warhead with a range of more than 22km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> To me looks more like 50% longer and 60 to 70 percent wider .
> But honestly I doubt its something in class of AGM-65 that missile is a beast with 134kg warhead with a range of more than 22km.







Heres a pic that gives a fairly good relative size comparison.Based on this the heydar is probably closer to maverick size than hellfire size,certainly in terms of length anyway.
The 134kg warhead version of the maverick is the blast/frag version not the anti armor version,its warhead is only[!] 57kg

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Heres a pic that gives a fairly good relative size comparison.Based on this the heydar is probably closer to maverick size than hellfire size,certainly in terms of length anyway.
> The 134kg warhead version of the maverick is the blast/frag version not the anti armor version,its warhead is only[!] 57kg


Compare that to 9kg of helfire warhead .


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


>


Iraq has money and needs, Iran can and needs to sell. works for both. lol

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Yankee-stani

925boy said:


> Iraq has money and needs, Iran can and needs to sell. works for both. lol



Proves the Iranians are taking the CPEC route with Iraq Iran has potential to become not only major power in the Middle East but worldwide by mid century if they could play their cards right

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

OsmanAli98 said:


> Proves the Iranians are taking the CPEC route with Iraq Iran has potential to become not only major power in the Middle East but worldwide by mid century if they could play their cards right


To me it looks more like Iran is taking the anti-US sanctions+I-need-dollars-route with Iraq. Looks like Iraq has been happpy to give Iran good amt of biz. Thats what i guage it by.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Aramagedon



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

and who was saying we don't need a helicopter carrier??
the pass depicted in the image choosed inside the mountains in the way that mountains cover helicopters from all 3 directions, note that with this kind of attack we can capture ras al khaimah and it's airport even before they notice.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 559128
> 
> and who was saying we don't need a helicopter carrier??
> the pass depicted in the image choosed inside the mountains in the way that mountains cover helicopters from all 3 directions, note that with this kind of attack we can capture ras al khaimah and it's airport even before they notice.


Sir do you think they are always sitting idle? They have most modern aircrafts. Those Mountains have about 3 to 4 mil. bases please do know the region your talking about.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> Sir do you think they are always sitting idle?


you as a plan maker should know enemy power, weakness and more importantly the routhines. i always had a habit of paying attention to tabriz air base patrols, and i'm saying to you they had no 24/7 patrols. that goes for any air force. also use google map and its terrain option and look for yourself, once they enter the mountains they are invisible.


Tamiyah said:


> bases please do know the region your talking about.


that's not UAE, it's oman airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> you as a plan maker should know enemy power, weakness and more importantly the routhines. i always had a habit of paying attention to tabriz air base patrols, and i'm saying to you they had no 24/7 patrols. that goes for any air force. also use google map and its terrain option and look for yourself, once they enter the mountains they are invisible.
> 
> that's not UAE, it's oman airspace.


Maybe you are right, I dont want to start a new fuss about Air war again. And as far to Oman airspace will they allow you to enter their airspace. I do get it that mountains help alot for stealth missions but you know it can start a big war and I dont think your Armed forces will stand Two potent Air forces.Maybe im wrong but truth is truth


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> Maybe you are right, I dont want to start a new fuss about Air war again. And as far to Oman airspace will they allow you to enter their airspace. I do get it that mountains help alot for stealth missions but you know it can start a big war and I dont think your Armed forces will stand Two potent Air forces.Maybe im wrong but truth is truth


oman is friendly toward us also as i can see the lands are bare without any residents, but even if they don't cooperate there are many conings we can utilize.
they have julphar towers, rak towers and dozens of other tall buildings, so if we place some crotale, tow/tophan, grenade launcher,snipers, mortars and MG in each, we can effectively capture the city. also keep in mind that they first gonna try to evacuate people and that would give time to us to bring more troop with hovercrafts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> oman is friendly toward us also as i can see the lands are bare without any residents, but even if they don't cooperate there are many conings we can utilize.
> they have julphar towers, rak towers and dozens of other tall buildings, so if we place some crotale, tow/tophan, grenade launcher,snipers, mortars and MG in each, we can effectively capture the city. also keep in mind that they first gonna try to evacuate people and that would give time to us to bring more troop with hovercrafts.


Sir, Oman is friendly towards Israel but they cannot make a plan with Oman to take over theirs brothers country. You should know that gulf states cannot spit poison against each other.


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 559128
> 
> and who was saying we don't need a helicopter carrier??
> the pass depicted in the image choosed inside the mountains in the way that mountains cover helicopters from all 3 directions, note that with this kind of attack we can capture ras al khaimah and it's airport even before they notice.


Point is Iran doesn't intend yet to project power on other side planet,and that is what any carrier is for...it is offensive asset.And thus if Iran intend to build carrier for future, will not start building carrier before build enough destroyers,frigates,corvettes,training ships and submarines,these ships are needed to be carrier protection...Carrier is capital vessel served by 1000 or more sailors...loosing such capital vessel is not just huge lost of lives and economic disaster,it has huge impact on moral and motivation on whole military..even country in time of war.What would Iran do with helicopter carrier now if have it? If you send it to cruise than almost all your capital ships and submarines had to follows it as protection... To be exact,at least 2 destroyers...Jamaran is equipped for anti-submarine & air defense and it is fast and maneuverable to fill this role as it is Sahand but those are only two vessels in Iran navy capable to fill destroyer role ..so nothing would left except 2-3 frigates....it would require also to send 1-2 Kilo class submarines,one or two support vessel and at least one fregate and corvette or 2 frigates... Iran navy is large,I think world 7th largest, but it doesn't have many blue water capital ships and considering threat in P.Gulf it can't send all main assets....on other hand such group would not be huge threat for US...and all places where it would make sense to send fleet with carrier,like red sea,Mediterranean sea or close to US is where US navy would be enemy. On other hand If you invest billions and build carrier and keep it around your shores it wouldn't make any sense....except prestige.. Iran navy combat operation are Oman sea,Indian ocean,Red Sea....It sail worldwide but combat radius is not worldwide.I read about plans to expand combat radius and naval operation,Iran would at some point think about carrier but only after build Navy properly in roles frigate,destroyer,training vessels and corvettes....than you have foundation to expand naval operative range.Large carriers in defensive role are,when it comes to costal defense,useless because by default to fight US navy for example,you have to position navy close to shore in shallow water(and narrow if possible).I understand some logic conclusion that helicopter carrier would allow Iran to deploy larger force to red sea or Mediterranean for example but without powerful fleet to protect it...it is floating disaster...There is reason,why Iran is building ships in this size...first,destroyers, even frigates must be fast and maneuverable.. expecually destroyers because by default destroyers are first line against submarines and also fleet muscle but this primary means fast and maneuverable thus must be antisubmarine capable... Size is not important I'm terms of classification ...you can built large destroyers if you can keep them fast and maneuverable but if not than you will build smaller and just add more in fleet to have same fire power as would with larger destroyers in smaller number...also you can add more frigates and build destroyers more focused on antisubmarine role....In any way,Iran even build large commercial ships when it comes to military it is limited in terms of engines capable to keep larger speed fast...But as I see things are getting better...I just read Damavand is ready to rejoin fleet in Caspian sea,which surprise me...I taught it will take longer to repair it,since it completely sunk..but I suppose there were a lot of parts usable, I think larger part of structure was available to reuse,also engines can be repaired but still fast...Also I hear Shiraz and Dena were almost finished ,after Shiraz and Dena join Navy I expect Iran to start construction of 3-4 larger ships and after that I suppose they will have good foundations to seek some smaller VSTOL/Helicopter carrier, at that time there will be more submarines...2 Fateh class can replace 1-2 Kilo class role in Indian ocean and join this imaginary fleet  we talk about,along with 2 destroyers,2 frigates, or 1 frigate and 1 corvette and 1-2 logistic ships...This would be respectable fleet capable to protect itself on open sea...I suppose this is in line with Iran plan to have port or part of port in Syria where it could deploy one such group..but that requires many other things before...and I actually sea very clear intention from Iran to deploy navy in Mediterranean,Syria and Lebanon are strategic Allies and that is why Israel is screaming.. They were sure ,their meddling in Syria will result with government which will expel Iran,brake land line P.Gulf - Mediterranean, sign truce with puppet Syrian government where Golan would be their legally and than they could fokus on Hezbollah that would have one supporter less thus without main supply line. But Israel end up with worst scenario ever...it now has Syrian army as enemy with 8 year war experience (believe me this huge,combat experience can't be compensate with training)... Also Hezbollah and Iran rotated intentionally as much as they could troops to get combat experienced troops,now Iran has support more than ever in Syria and Iraq,PMU is integrated in regular Iraq army..Iran will also embedded troops in Syria and will have port on Mediterranean... Iranian troops on Israel border ,and these troops are connected by land with Iraq PMU and Iran...If you look from military perspective, this is disaster for Israel...they can be overrun in days from Syria,Lebanon,Gaza...at first sign of Israel blood...I can bet people of Jordan and Egypt(even if their government refuse)would join...With such shallow territory Israel doesn't space to maneuver, regroup... etc..for them 1 battle lost mean it is done

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> Point is Iran doesn't intend yet to project power on other side planet,and that is what any carrier is for...it is offensive asset.And thus if Iran intend to build carrier for future, will not start building carrier before build enough destroyers,frigates,corvettes,training ships and submarines,these ships are needed to be carrier protection...Carrier is capital vessel served by 1000 or more sailors...loosing such capital vessel is not just huge lost of lives and economic disaster,it has huge impact on moral and motivation on whole military..even country in time of war.What would Iran do with helicopter carrier now if have it? If you send it to cruise than almost all your capital ships and submarines had to follows it as protection... To be exact,at least 2 destroyers...Jamaran is equipped for anti-submarine & air defense and it is fast and maneuverable to fill this role as it is Sahand but those are only two vessels in Iran navy capable to fill destroyer role ..so nothing would left except 2-3 frigates....it would require also to send 1-2 Kilo class submarines,one or two support vessel and at least one fregate and corvette or 2 frigates... Iran navy is large,I think world 7th largest, but it doesn't have many blue water capital ships and considering threat in P.Gulf it can't send all main assets....on other hand such group would not be huge threat for US...and all places where it would make sense to send fleet with carrier,like red sea,Mediterranean sea or close to US is where US navy would be enemy. On other hand If you invest billions and build carrier and keep it around your shores it wouldn't make any sense....except prestige.. Iran navy combat operation are Oman sea,Indian ocean,Red Sea....It sail worldwide but combat radius is not worldwide.I read about plans to expand combat radius and naval operation,Iran would at some point think about carrier but only after build Navy properly in roles frigate,destroyer,training vessels and corvettes....than you have foundation to expand naval operative range.Large carriers in defensive role are,when it comes to costal defense,useless because by default to fight US navy for example,you have to position navy close to shore in shallow water(and narrow if possible).I understand some logic conclusion that helicopter carrier would allow Iran to deploy larger force to red sea or Mediterranean for example but without powerful fleet to protect it...it is floating disaster...There is reason,why Iran is building ships in this size...first,destroyers, even frigates must be fast and maneuverable.. expecually destroyers because by default destroyers are first line against submarines and also fleet muscle but this primary means fast and maneuverable thus must be antisubmarine capable... Size is not important I'm terms of classification ...you can built large destroyers if you can keep them fast and maneuverable but if not than you will build smaller and just add more in fleet to have same fire power as would with larger destroyers in smaller number...also you can add more frigates and build destroyers more focused on antisubmarine role....In any way,Iran even build large commercial ships when it comes to military it is limited in terms of engines capable to keep larger speed fast...But as I see things are getting better...I just read Damavand is ready to rejoin fleet in Caspian sea,which surprise me...I taught it will take longer to repair it,since it completely sunk..but I suppose there were a lot of parts usable, I think larger part of structure was available to reuse,also engines can be repaired but still fast...Also I hear Shiraz and Dena were almost finished ,after Shiraz and Dena join Navy I expect Iran to start construction of 3-4 larger ships and after that I suppose they will have good foundations to seek some smaller VSTOL/Helicopter carrier, at that time there will be more submarines...2 Fateh class can replace 1-2 Kilo class role in Indian ocean and join this imaginary fleet  we talk about,along with 2 destroyers,2 frigates, or 1 frigate and 1 corvette and 1-2 logistic ships...This would be respectable fleet capable to protect itself on open sea...I suppose this is in line with Iran plan to have port or part of port in Syria where it could deploy one such group..but that requires many other things before...and I actually sea very clear intention from Iran to deploy navy in Mediterranean,Syria and Lebanon are strategic Allies and that is why Israel is screaming.. They were sure ,their meddling in Syria will result with government which will expel Iran,brake land line P.Gulf - Mediterranean, sign truce with puppet Syrian government where Golan would be their legally and than they could fokus on Hezbollah that would have one supporter less thus without main supply line. But Israel end up with worst scenario ever...it now has Syrian army as enemy with 8 year war experience (believe me this huge,combat experience can't be compensate with training)... Also Hezbollah and Iran rotated intentionally as much as they could troops to get combat experienced troops,now Iran has support more than ever in Syria and Iraq,PMU is integrated in regular Iraq army..Iran will also embedded troops in Syria and will have port on Mediterranean... Iranian troops on Israel border ,and these troops are connected by land with Iraq PMU and Iran...If you look from military perspective, this is disaster for Israel...they can be overrun in days from Syria,Lebanon,Gaza...at first sign of Israel blood...I can bet people of Jordan and Egypt(even if their government refuse)would join...With such shallow territory Israel doesn't space to maneuver, regroup... etc..for them 1 battle lost mean it is done


well by HC i meant whole carrier group. BTW i guess we can still do that infiltration job with one sahand frigate, two bandar abbas class and a khark replenishment ship. one ch-53 onboard of sahand, three on khark, three ah-1j in one of bandar abbas class and two bell 214 onboard of other BA, makes a fleet of four ch-53, two 214, and three ah-1j. means we can heliborne 220 soldier into the raas al khaimah, with air support.
all we need is to station soldiers on top of their tall buildings and arm them with dehlavieh missiles, snipers and short range AD like rapier or crotale, thermal visions, mortars, grenade launchers, suicide drones and MGs. their ground force can't do shit and in meanwhile we can bring more 600 soldiers with hovercrafts, 120 with submarines or even 2000 airborne troops. their ground forces is a joke and in case of war i think we should enter their soil, they will easily fall if we do so.
if we station units on burj khalifa no tank can hit them considering the tank cannot range and elevation limits and gravity.


----------



## VEVAK

Tamiyah said:


> Maybe you are right, I dont want to start a new fuss about Air war again. And as far to Oman airspace will they allow you to enter their airspace. I do get it that mountains help alot for stealth missions but you know it can start a big war and I dont think your Armed forces will stand Two potent Air forces.Maybe im wrong but truth is truth



LOL! The Truth is that Iran can disable over 95% of the UAE Airforce in under an hour using it's Fateh Missiles alone! The truth is that if Iran wanted to go to war with the UAE we wouldn't leave them an Air Force to fight with!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Tamiyah

VEVAK said:


> LOL! The Truth is that Iran can disable over 95% of the UAE Airforce in under an hour using it's Fateh Missiles alone! The truth is that if Iran wanted to go to war with the UAE we wouldn't leave them an Air Force to fight with!


Do you think if you use your "FATEH" missiles they will not use their forces. Think again if you have fateh then their armed forces will do nothing?? And you should know that UAE have alot of USAF movements in their airbases



VEVAK said:


> LOL! The Truth is that Iran can disable over 95% of the UAE Airforce in under an hour using it's Fateh Missiles alone! The truth is that if Iran wanted to go to war with the UAE we wouldn't leave them an Air Force to fight with!


And Also Iran cannot go to war with only UAE it will be with USA and all the gulf allies


----------



## VEVAK

Tamiyah said:


> Do you think if you use your "FATEH" missiles they will not use their forces. Think again if you have fateh then their armed forces will do nothing?? And you should know that UAE have alot of USAF movements in their airbases
> 
> 
> And Also Iran cannot go to war with only UAE it will be with USA and all the gulf allies




By the time the UAE figures out what's going on and attempts to react their Air Force will be long gone! It will take Iranian missiles 5-10 minutes to reach most targets in the UAE so no they won't have time to react

And how the UAE or the U.S. or Saudi Arabia choose to respond will by the most part depend on how large, potent and effective Iran's original attack was, what Iran's target parameters were and what Iran would accept to discontinue the attacks and what they perceive Iran's capabilities to be in going after Saudi, U.S. & other UAE targets... if the were to respond

Will the U.S. risk a greater war with Iran over the UAE and risk Iran shutting down the Persian Gulf, dropping missiles on all US bases and stopping 1/4 of worlds Oil output! Oil that is mainly traded in US currency and a US economy that's already $22 Trillion USD in debt! All over the UAE?
Will the Saudi's risk Iranian attacks on their Oil facilities and fresh water facilities in a country that's mainly dependent on Oil incomes? Oil revenue that is the main reason the Saudi Government has any allies to speak of because without it people really don't like the Al Saud family or Wahhabi ideology..... 
Will the UAE risk not capitulating to Iranian demands and risk Iran widening it's target parameters to it's cities, ports, vital infrastructure & government officials & buildings....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tamiyah

VEVAK said:


> By the time the UAE figures out what's going on and attempts to react their Air Force will be long gone! It will take Iranian missiles 5-10 minutes to reach most targets in the UAE so no they won't have time to react
> 
> And how the UAE or the U.S. or Saudi Arabia choose to respond will by the most part depend on how large, potent and effective Iran's original attack was, what Iran's target parameters were and what Iran would accept to discontinue the attacks and what they perceive Iran's capabilities to be in going after Saudi, U.S. & other UAE targets... if the were to respond
> 
> Will the U.S. risk a greater war with Iran over the UAE and risk Iran shutting down the Persian Gulf, dropping missiles on all US bases and stopping 1/4 of worlds Oil output! Oil that is mainly traded in US currency and a US economy that's already $22 Trillion USD in debt! All over the UAE?
> Will the Saudi's risk Iranian attacks on their Oil facilities and fresh water facilities in a country that's mainly dependent on Oil incomes? Oil revenue that is the main reason the Saudi Government has any allies to speak of because without it people really don't like the Al Saud family or Wahhabi ideology.....
> Will the UAE risk not capitulating to Iranian demands and risk Iran widening it's target parameters to it's cities, ports, vital infrastructure & government officials & buildings....


Do you think that you will do all this and they will stay quiet and do thing quietly then you're wrong. US will start a high war with you and the whole Gulf countries will gain sympathy of whole world. Iran is not safe of all sides. Afghanistan have most US military presence.


----------



## Mithridates

guys what would happen if one of our f-4 squadrons with this load take of and enter UAE?? however you should imagine we loaded them with yasin GPS guided glide bombs with 60 km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Balaban glide bomb*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *Balaban glide bomb*


why they presented yasin glide bomb as jdam-er??
this balaban seems promising. what is the guidance, MMR??
@VEVAK bro your wish came true, we are making something similar to SDB.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> why they presented yasin glide bomb as jdam-er??
> this balaban seems promising. what is the guidance, MMR??
> @VEVAK bro your wish came true, we are making something similar to SDB.


i think these are the official names registered by the army. IRGC official name for this bomb is Yassin.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

I hope they got the production costs sufficiently down. The low destructive power of such SDBs often require several to be fired. Excluding the collateral damage issue, I would favor a larger Yasin like ammunition. It has the benefit that counter measures to degrade its precision are meet with a larger kill radius.

The Balaban is hence hopefully not a imitation of U.S financially driven military industrial complex strategy. It makes sense as an UCAV weapon system, where payload or weapon bay size (S-171) is a important constrain.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Tamiyah said:


> Do you think that you will do all this and they will stay quiet and do thing quietly then you're wrong. US will start a high war with you and the whole Gulf countries will gain sympathy of whole world. Iran is not safe of all sides. Afghanistan have most US military presence.


That is why that is last option, Iran has deep territory and it is natural bunker literary... From military perspective (trust me I know what I'm talking about),Iran position is ideal,thanks to structure of P.Gulf they can keep any Navy way out of P.Gulf even from shore....keeping navy close in range of their AD,Air force and covered with shore batteries...There is good reason why if look any serious military ranking PGGC countries can't be find anywhere ...It is because fact that their almost all installation are in P.Gulf....and very vulnerable to first strike...that is literary colapse economically and military...Iran has assets that it can destroy all PGCC assets in first wave and than...yes. US would form allies to respond but they would need long time to redeploy assets in such situation and it is also time for Iran and we know Russia,China would not be neutral...Iran to accomplish this just have to react on time,US and alliance needed more 6 month to deploy force for Iraq war in 2003,because of short shore and no navy or any other assets, Saddam had no choice than to look this deployment but Iran is different animal.They will not wait till US deploy force... Now with new dynamic strategy US is able to deploy force faster but these are not large force...in Iran case, rapid deployment of one strike group mean nothing,even people should know that this strike group is on schedule for deployment in red sea from early April,also this amphibious ship,bombers..all regular deployment.. Bolton made PR of not so big event...they are deploying ONE patriot battery and every western news outlet write about...but they withdrew 4 battery just recently.. 4 to 1...I looked US deployment in region and they are maybe lowest in decades... To attack Iran US need so much fire power and troops that they would have to risk to be exposed elsewhere..First they will be alone,no one or few countries would accept to be part of that... Only direction for attack would be P.Gulf...Pakistan already said it will not be part of any attack on Iran,and all other countries around would refuse to allow usage of their land or airspace for attacks..some would allow probably emergency landing and some operations not directly related to attack but no one would make self target...Turkey,Iraq,Pakistan and I Believe even weak Afghanistan would reject...So Iran would have pretty deep cover from all sides which leave P.Gulf,Oman sea ,Indian ocean and PGCC countries as battlefield, it is dream for any strategist, who ever don't believe me,ask any western expert...it is public secret in Pentagon ,but no one want tell it laud,that US could do nothing if Iran close straight, it doesn't even have to close it...if it attack PGCC oil installation their 90% oil production is done...straight closed for everyone except Iran..This is hypothetical... This would be option only in war but people don't understand how PGCC and US bases are vulnerable... Israel is far and they would dare to join or attack alone only in 2 cases,if they find themselfs without other choice or if they are sure they could take out most Iranian assets in surprise attack...everything else for them mean they are gone,now they are exposed like ever...Israel have 3 fronts opened where 2 fronts are connected with Iran by land ,that is why they want to force US to attack Iran,at first sign of Iranian weakness in that hypothetical war,they would attack Lebanon and maybe Syria also..Right now we have escalation but there is no big military build up ..well Iran wouldn't wait that,since they are well positioned but deployment of large force would make Iran vulnerable also.This strike group is in red sea,if they decide attack this group will wait till at least 2 more arrive ...than they would start repositioned force in Iraq,Afghanistan ...to try to minimize losses and that moment would be very hard for Iran leaders...military advisers would tell them ,this is last moment if you want take them out without many loses...while you have to consider political implications of first strike...If would Iran take them all out in surprise attack it would give it time...because they don't have much assets around Iran,and considered many would be out because of attack...so they would need some time to redeploy enough force but after attack on PGCC,situation I predict where they would be alone would be completly different...since Iran,to maximize first strike impact and to even more disable response capability and space for US redeploy, would have to follow that attack with others..I don't like even to think about this situation because I don't see end..just escalation..lets hope it will never happen,but Iran leaders right now have to consider very hard choices, even military already have many different strategies for different situation, leaders are one who will select best in that time...military will advise,explain what in every of those mean..what they recommend..very hard choices for Supreme leader and government... But I'm still optimistic.Even idiots Bolton and Pompeo war hangers..they seems in panic last days even very limited movements are seen in Lebanon,Syria Iraq and also red sea...I think they completely wrongly interpreted Iranian patience and strategy to make divisions even larger between US and Europe..they probably thought Iran is impressed with force..this was motivated for them,but now Trump is very in hard position.. Documents pop ups where people see he is one of biggest losers in economy and not payed taxes for 8 years,he won on premises of been master negotiator and businessman.. Now both sunk...N.Korea fire missiles, even short range,media outlets challenge negotiation skills of someone who didn't negotiate anything. He just push same...that is why He said "I would like to see Iranians call me".. They even give phone number to SUI embassy.I think He prey god to receive that call...while Bolton ,Pompeo probably do opposite

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 559418
> 
> guys what would happen if one of our f-4 squadrons with this load take of and enter UAE?? however you should imagine we loaded them with yasin GPS guided glide bombs with 60 km range.







What would happen is this enters IRAN territory.
Simple answer is DESTRUCTION.
You should know its 4++ Generation Aircraft.Far more lethal and destructive from an American F16.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Tamiyah said:


> What would happen is this enters IRAN territory.
> Simple answer is DESTRUCTION.
> You should know its 4++ Generation Aircraft.Far more lethal and destructive from an American F16.



Iranians easily downed stealth UAV's never mind the likes of F-16. These planes won't get anywhere near Iran. Iran's air defence would swallow them with ease.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tamiyah

WinterNights said:


> Low IQ ape, Iranians easily down stealth UAV's never mind the likes of F-16. These planes won't get anywhere near Iran. Iran's air defence would swallow them with ease.


Im sorry but which "STEALTH UAV" ?? 
And I know that Air defences of IRAN are quite potent but these are the most lethal F16 also..



WinterNights said:


> Low IQ ape, Iranians easily down stealth UAV's never mind the likes of F-16. These planes won't get anywhere near Iran. Iran's air defence would swallow them with ease.


What would your air defences do when there will a package consisting of RAFALES , F-16 ,MIRAGE 2000 with ERIEYE and A MRT TANKER??


----------



## WinterNights

Tamiyah said:


> Im sorry but which "STEALTH UAV" ??
> And I know that Air defences of IRAN are quite potent but these are the most lethal F16 also..





RQ-170 was downed with ease and it is vastly more difficult to intercept compared to anything these Persian gulf arabs have. Also, Iran downed many other UAV's.



> What would your air defences do when there will a package consisting of RAFALES , F-16 ,MIRAGE 2000 with ERIEYE and A MRT TANKER??



You're greatly overestimating the capability of the likes of UAE. Iran's airdefence has been designed to withstand an attack from the US, now tell me, do you seriously think UAE could penetrate it? Iran has many long range air defence systems that would make it extremely difficult for anyone to penetrate it's air defence. You'd have to greatly oversaturate the Iranian air defence, something which is far beyond the capability of the likes of UAE.

Also, don't forget the moment a conflict arises between Iran and these Gulf states, their airports will be decimated, rendering their airpower near useless in medium to long term.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

WinterNights said:


> RQ-170 was downed with ease and it is vastly more difficult to intercept compared to anything these Persian gulf arabs have.


No, it was not difficult.



WinterNights said:


> Iran's airdefence has been designed to withstand an attack from the US,...


Currently, there are only three countries that have experienced -- not withstand -- attack from US airpower: Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, and Iraq. And none of their air defenses survived.


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> Im sorry but which "STEALTH UAV" ??
> And I know that Air defences of IRAN are quite potent but these are the most lethal F16 also..
> 
> 
> What would your air defences do when there will a package consisting of RAFALES , F-16 ,MIRAGE 2000 with ERIEYE and A MRT TANKER??



im sure one of them will get it

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ali_Baba

Very difficult to know the effectiveness of some of these SAMS systems, but at least Iran is trying very hard. Lack of progress in this space, from Pakistan is rather shocking, esp in radar technology. Pakistan has some v.short range ground based systems and that is it. Nothing of any significance. Pakistan needs to take a leaf out of Irans books !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> No, it was not difficult.



I know it was not difficult for Iran, but you think in general it is not difficult to detect the RQ?




> Currently, there are only three countries that have experienced -- not withstand -- attack from US airpower: Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, and Iraq. And none of their air defenses survived.



Those nations, qualitatively and quantitatively cannot be compared to Iran (not by a long shot) when it comes to air defence. I'll give you one example, in electronic warfare. EW is a major factor in Iran's air defence and something they have heavily prepared for, could we say the same for these other nations? Those nations were extremely vulnerable to EW, look at Iraq for example. Good luck trying to do the same to Iran. There are many other factors I could mention too.

Now, do I think at this moment in time Iran can fully withstand a US strike? well that depends how much the US is willing to bring to the table. Lets not be naive in thinking it will be the whole of USA's airfleet vs Iran, it is only the portion the US is bringing into conflict at a time. Even forgetting Iran's offensive moves in a conflict against the sources of US airpower in the region, e.g her aircraft carriers, I highly doubt 2 aircraft carrier fleet will bring Iran's air defences down. Iran is simply too vast and it's integrated air-defence too well prepared. It's not like Iran has only started preparing for these scenarios yesterday.

Even if I conceded that US even with 2 carrier fleets can eventually take out the IRAD, but at what cost?. Modern wars are rarely battled on an all or nothing basis, it's all about cost-benefit analysis. I don't think any US general is naive enough to think at this point in time, any US-Iran conflict will be even minutely in the benefit side of their calculations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> What would happen is this enters IRAN territory.
> Simple answer is DESTRUCTION.
> You should know its 4++ Generation Aircraft.Far more lethal and destructive from an American F16.


my dude UAE is not a threat even with rafal, f-16 and mirage. our air force can shoot them down even before they can intercept us. our f-14 fleet can torn up their air force. now several points you should consider:
1- UAE is a city state
2-UAE has no natural water supply
3-their air force has a single airport
4-all of their assets gathered in beach or near of it
5-they have no ground force
6-they are less than 100 km away of our AF airport
7-look at the map, they are besieged by us




(we can target almost every single infrastructure of them with just artillery rocket lol)
8-our SBS (special boat service) units can capture dubai (every ghadir class can deliver up to 7 people near the shore and then they can get out of sub while it is submerged. a little brief on our SBS unit, they have trainings of soviet spetsnaz, german navy commandos, royal marines, US marines, royal SBS unit and israeli shayetet. they are the most badass unit in navy).
the UAE by itself is not a threat, the whole PGCC and US support of them could be a danger.
BTW just look at this pictures and you tell me what would happen if one squadron of our bandar abbas f-4s enter UAE with 24 glide bombs??








24*24=576 bombs, what whould remain of UAE??


----------



## sanel1412

Yugoslavian ,Vietnamese and Iraq air defense was joke,none of these country had modern integrated air defense..and yet some of them make hard time for US, they had very limited numbers...Yugoslavia went through 3 wars before NATO attack,and all that time under embargo..Iraq also,and these countries were not able to produce even one air defense missile..they had outdated systems without been able to upgrade it...Yugoslavian air defense was not even on alert 24/7,they sent some sa-3,sa-6 to fire positions and these literary would turn on P-12 or P-18 radars and search for period of time than turn on,change position..lets go again..that is how they shut down f-117...They turn on P-18 radar search radar and catch target...than alert SA-3 near their position...fired 2 missiles(methot 3 dots) and shut it down...I give respect to Serbian/Yugoslav army air defense,their AD was active all time but I served Yugoslavian army before 1990,I know what we have in that time..after 3/wars(NATO was 4th for Serbia)they didn't have much..first days their air force take off few mig-29 but without upgrad many times with some components not working and under havy jamming.they did what they could,one pilot with Mig-29 engage F-15 with 2 F-15 been near as reinforcements...his AC electricity generator was broken but he tried to engage,I think only one Serbian mig 29 lunched missile...they shut down many cruise missiles with AAA and some aircrafts with Air defense, that we know they hit but never verified.Even in such situation NATO was not able to even damage Yugoslavian ground force on Kosovo (that was goal)..latter they find out campaign was disaster, they hit bunch of microwaves and mock up/fake targets..they started to target bridges in Belgrade,TV building...like it is WWII..Yugoslavia accepted truce not because militart losses but because economic isolation..Russia was not strong in that time...so..they loose Kosovo while their force had it completly under control,and force not even damaged.... except small territory they control almost all everything... We can say they lost on the table ..Iraq was strong in 1990 on the paper but so it is KSA today ,it mean nothing.. but again against 47 countries...with very limited AD which in that time,was large,but static and already was well known(Israel in Syria engage both sa3-e,sa-6..)..Vietnam also didn't have integrated network...Iran would be first time they engage integrated multi layered AD with huge number of AD systems that no one know how to jamm successfully, even old systems are upgraded...With very potent air force and large(Iran air power is not potent as power projection force,but in defensive roles are)...Large navy ...You have to understand,without strategic assets, you can buy anything it will not mean much against big powers...Venezuela has million strong army,S-300VM,SU-30...but all you can hear..they can't retaliate ...if not external support...Maduro would end long time...You have to be able to transfer war to enemy..to go to source...air base,carrier..than it is different story...Vietnam did hit US but it should be said,of all mentioned only they had support from big power and supply during war..other were sanctioned and isolated..without large industry. Yugoslavian defense industry was strong before 1990 but facilities were in 6 republics...M-84 tanks were built at the way that 3 republics had to cooperate...Zrak-Sarajevo(Bosnia)produced optics..Bratstvo travnik(Bosnia)..produced some parts...In Serbia(Krusevac) there was also production of some parts and in Croatia(Djuro Dzakovic).So after 1990 defense sector were very limited...even today gross defense Industry of these 3 countries in not even close o Yugoslavian before 1990

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> Currently, there are only three countries that have experienced -- not withstand -- attack from US airpower: Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, and Iraq. And none of their air defenses survived.


are you sure Vietnam and Serbia lost their Air-Defense completely?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

gambit said:


> No, it was not difficult.
> 
> 
> Currently, there are only three countries that have experienced -- not withstand -- attack from US airpower: Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, and Iraq. And none of their air defenses survived.


 The U,S should attack countries it can actually beat like Grenada!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

The US is a powerful nation in many aspects. Not saying they can go to war with Iran without very serious consequences for them, but the last thing anyone should do is underestimate them. Never, ever underestimate the other side.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Ali_Baba said:


> Very difficult to know the effectiveness of some of these SAMS systems, but at least Iran is trying very hard. Lack of progress in this space, from Pakistan is rather shocking, esp in radar technology. Pakistan has some v.short range ground based systems and that is it. Nothing of any significance. Pakistan needs to take a leaf out of Irans books !!!



yes Pakistan really stayed back without any reason and continued to buy its SAMs from others. we did not have radars too but now we have from ~100 km up to 3000 km range radar coverage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> my dude UAE is not a threat even with rafal, f-16 and mirage. our air force can shoot them down even before they can intercept us. our f-14 fleet can torn up their air force. now several points you should consider:
> 1- UAE is a city state
> 2-UAE has no natural water supply
> 3-their air force has a single airport
> 4-all of their assets gathered in beach or near of it
> 5-they have no ground force
> 6-they are less than 100 km away of our AF airport
> 7-look at the map, they are besieged by us
> View attachment 559490
> 
> (we can target almost every single infrastructure of them with just artillery rocket lol)
> 8-our SBS (special boat service) units can capture dubai (every ghadir class can deliver up to 7 people near the shore and then they can get out of sub while it is submerged. a little brief on our SBS unit, they have trainings of soviet spetsnaz, german navy commandos, royal marines, US marines, royal SBS unit and israeli shayetet. they are the most badass unit in navy).
> the UAE by itself is not a threat, the whole PGCC and US support of them could be a danger.
> BTW just look at this pictures and you tell me what would happen if one squadron of our bandar abbas f-4s enter UAE with 24 glide bombs??
> View attachment 559491
> 
> View attachment 559492
> 
> 24*24=576 bombs, what whould remain of UAE??


In return for these strikes whole IRAN will taste the destruction of B-2 , B-52, Lancer along with centuries long sanction and whole IRAN will suffer till death. It is not that easy to bomb someone else land. You cannot underestimate someones power until you are in battle with them.If a single bomb drops on UAE you will get minimum 200 in return for that. Us and its allied are finding one reason to destroy whole IRAN and terminate its existence. You should think from the other side too.


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure Vietnam and Serbia lost their Air-Defense completely?


They lost in the sense that they could not deter, not that they were literally destroyed. Deterrence involves statistics. If an attacker continues, even though incurring losses, that means the defender was not able to deter. I learned this in Professional Military Education (PME) while active duty. When I received orders to deploy to Desert Storm, US airpower executed the math and overwhelmed Iraqi air defense at tactically useful points. Try serving in the military. You might learn a few things.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Tamiyah said:


> Do you think that you will do all this and they will stay quiet and do thing quietly then you're wrong. US will start a high war with you and the whole Gulf countries will gain sympathy of whole world. Iran is not safe of all sides. Afghanistan have most US military presence.



If the Americans see UAE as their little Sparta, a little fact the UAE should be aware and fearful of is that NO ONE came to the help of the real Spartans when Iran aka The Persian Empire wiped them out for good. And yes they may have caught the Persian Army off balance and achieved a much higher kill ratio in their last battel that lead to their deaths but at the end of the day their failure to capitulate to Iran's demands was the death of them and NO ONE came to their rescue towards the end and here we are 1000's of years later and there is nothing left of them but stories clearly blown out of proportion as all stories are, while Iran (Or what the foreigners used to call Persia) is still standing! 
So unless little Sparta AKA UAE wants to have the same fait as the real Sparta, they will capitulate! 

And at the end of the day countries like the U.S. will do what's in their own interests! So do you honestly think the UAE losing it's Air Force, Navy & Oil facilities is something Americans would risk losing 1/4 of the worlds petrodollar on knowing full well that losing petrodollar would be the very least of their worries in a war with Iran! Especially since the U.S. is already in a $22 Trillion USD debt with the Chinese economy gaining on them year after year with a much faster growing military because the Chinese don't need to pay the salaries U.S. military has to pay nor do they need to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of so many foreign military bases and most importantly they are NOT involved in so many global conflicts.... ​Now if it was Saudi Arabia with the risk of so much Oil going off market and the risk of the US loosing the Al Saud puppets then sure you'll get a big maybe from me but over the UAE HELL NO! Because the numbers simply don't add up and even someone like Trump is capable of doing the math!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

WinterNights said:


> I know it was not difficult for Iran, but you think in general it is not difficult to detect the RQ?


No, it was not. Despite what people might think the RQ UAV series was not 'stealth'. The flying wing design does have some inherent low radar obsersable traits, but that was well known since WW II. The flying wing itself was known from the 1920s when every aviation pioneer in the US, Europe, and Russia experimented with it to some degrees. Prior to the B-2, the flying wing's main advantage was range over any radar 'evading' trait.



WinterNights said:


> Those nations, qualitatively and quantitatively cannot be compared to Iran (not by a long shot) when it comes to air defence.


Neither is US airpower since then.



WinterNights said:


> I'll give you one example, in electronic warfare. EW is a major factor in Iran's air defence and something they have heavily prepared for, could we say the same for these other nations? Those nations were extremely vulnerable to EW, look at Iraq for example. Good luck trying to do the same to Iran. There are many other factors I could mention too.


We do not rely on luck. I posted on this forum many explanations on US SIGINT efforts. It has been some yrs but they are still relevant regarding general information. You can be whatever next yr's salary you have, that we have extensive knowledge of Iran's EM signatures.



WinterNights said:


> Now, do I think at this moment in time Iran can fully withstand a US strike? well that depends how much the US is willing to bring to the table.


More than most suspect. Even with 'only' two aircraft carriers.



WinterNights said:


> I highly doubt 2 aircraft carrier fleet will bring Iran's air defences down. Iran is simply *too vast* and it's integrated air-defence *too well* prepared.


We will just bypass you. And yes, we are that good. My first assignment was the F-111. When I was stationed in the UK, I learned the Soviets feared and hated the 'Vark. At every arms negotiation, the Soviets always tried to have the 'Vark removed from the country. We always told them to STFU. Post Cold War, Adolf Tolkachev confirmed to US that during the Cold War yrs, the Soviets literally had no defense against the F-111. I was reassigned to the F-16 during Desert Storm and saw how lethal the F-111 became against Iraqi tanks.

By what standards do you measured Iran's air defense as 'too'? Compared to who and with what combat experience against US? We have learned much since the F-111 and Desert Storm. That 1960s jet proved itself against opponents who were qualitatively and quantitavely higher than Iran or at least on a par with Iran. Today, we do not need to carry the heavy bombs that the F-111 carried against Iraqi tanks. Five hundred or even 250 pounders with precision guided heads will do the job. Iran will not be facing just the USN but the entirety of US airpower from CONUS. Iran have no defense against the combination of high altitude B-2s and B-52s, and low altitude penetration of the B-1. Those 'too' that you mentioned? They are meaningless to US. And I do not say with any malice, just objectivity based upon my yrs of service.

Military academies everywhere are watching this US-Iran scenario.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> In return for these strikes whole IRAN will taste the destruction of B-2 , B-52, Lancer along with centuries long sanction and whole IRAN will suffer till death. It is not that easy to bomb someone else land. You cannot underestimate someones power until you are in battle with them.If a single bomb drops on UAE you will get minimum 200 in return for that. Us and its allied are finding one reason to destroy whole IRAN and terminate its existence. You should think from the other side too.


dude iran will not start a war, and i'm just stating facts.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> They lost in the sense that they could not deter, not that they were literally destroyed. Deterrence involves statistics. If an attacker continues, even though incurring losses, that means the defender was not able to deter. I learned this in Professional Military Education (PME) while active duty. When I received orders to deploy to Desert Storm, US airpower executed the math and overwhelmed Iraqi air defense at tactically useful points. Try serving in the military. You might learn a few things.


well by that standard then it seems that Israel defense lost to Hezbollah rockets in 2006



gambit said:


> No, it was not. Despite what people might think the RQ UAV series was not 'stealth'. The flying wing design does have some inherent low radar obsersable traits, but that was well known since WW II. The flying wing itself was known from the 1920s when every aviation pioneer in the US, Europe, and Russia experimented with it to some degrees. Prior to the B-2, the flying wing's main advantage was range over any radar 'evading' trait.


so B-2 is not considered Stealth ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

US didn’t attack Iran in 1979, didn’t attack in 2003, didn’t attack in 2008, didn’t attack 2010, didn’t attack in 2012.

So why do we think they will attack in 2019?

US has been in containment strategy since 2003. 

Period of attack is over. Hence this desperate max pressure campaign by US.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> No, it was not. Despite what people might think the RQ UAV series was not 'stealth'. The flying wing design does have some inherent low radar obsersable traits, but that was well known since WW II. The flying wing itself was known from the 1920s when every aviation pioneer in the US, Europe, and Russia experimented with it to some degrees. Prior to the B-2, the flying wing's main advantage was range over any radar 'evading' trait.
> 
> 
> Neither is US airpower since then.
> 
> 
> We do not rely on luck. I posted on this forum many explanations on US SIGINT efforts. It has been some yrs but they are still relevant regarding general information. You can be whatever next yr's salary you have, that we have extensive knowledge of Iran's EM signatures.
> 
> 
> More than most suspect. Even with 'only' two aircraft carriers.
> 
> 
> We will just bypass you. And yes, we are that good. My first assignment was the F-111. When I was stationed in the UK, I learned the Soviets feared and hated the 'Vark. At every arms negotiation, the Soviets always tried to have the 'Vark removed from the country. We always told them to STFU. Post Cold War, Adolf Tolkachev confirmed to US that during the Cold War yrs, the Soviets literally had no defense against the F-111. I was reassigned to the F-16 during Desert Storm and saw how lethal the F-111 became against Iraqi tanks.
> 
> By what standards do you measured Iran's air defense as 'too'? Compared to who and with what combat experience against US? We have learned much since the F-111 and Desert Storm. That 1960s jet proved itself against opponents who were qualitatively and quantitavely higher than Iran or at least on a par with Iran. Today, we do not need to carry the heavy bombs that the F-111 carried against Iraqi tanks. Five hundred or even 250 pounders with precision guided heads will do the job. Iran will not be facing just the USN but the entirety of US airpower from CONUS. Iran have no defense against the combination of high altitude B-2s and B-52s, and low altitude penetration of the B-1. Those 'too' that you mentioned? They are meaningless to US. And I do not say with any malice, just objectivity based upon my yrs of service.
> 
> Military academies everywhere are watching this US-Iran scenario.


but you forget to enter our OTH radars into your equation, iraqis didn't had them. we can monitor your activities up to israel. also we learned how you did against iraq, all of our AD are mobile so when you once entered an area the next time you will not be sure if there is an AD or not. also i noticed in air warfare section you said during second PG war you destroyed iraqi airfields and crippled their AF, so what if iran do the same to your carriers and bases in the region?? also most of your assets in afghanistan and iraq are foot soldiers, helicopters and cargo planes, mashhad airbase which only has f-5s can take them out easily. will your gov risk those people lives?? also even if you somehow neutralize our EW assets, it's still our region we will find out you're movements either by proxies or spies. let's not forget israeli minister was our spy so no one can guarantee if we have spies in EU, arabs or even your ranks or not.
with all respects to US military, with corrent assets in region you can't contain iran that's why i think your gov is bluffing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> No, it was not. Despite what people might think the RQ UAV series was not 'stealth'. The flying wing design does have some inherent low radar obsersable traits, but that was well known since WW II. The flying wing itself was known from the 1920s when every aviation pioneer in the US, Europe, and Russia experimented with it to some degrees. Prior to the B-2, the flying wing's main advantage was range over any radar 'evading' trait.
> 
> 
> Neither is US airpower since then.
> 
> 
> We do not rely on luck. I posted on this forum many explanations on US SIGINT efforts. It has been some yrs but they are still relevant regarding general information. You can be whatever next yr's salary you have, that we have extensive knowledge of Iran's EM signatures.
> 
> 
> More than most suspect. Even with 'only' two aircraft carriers.
> 
> 
> We will just bypass you. And yes, we are that good. My first assignment was the F-111. When I was stationed in the UK, I learned the Soviets feared and hated the 'Vark. At every arms negotiation, the Soviets always tried to have the 'Vark removed from the country. We always told them to STFU. Post Cold War, Adolf Tolkachev confirmed to US that during the Cold War yrs, the Soviets literally had no defense against the F-111. I was reassigned to the F-16 during Desert Storm and saw how lethal the F-111 became against Iraqi tanks.
> 
> By what standards do you measured Iran's air defense as 'too'? Compared to who and with what combat experience against US? We have learned much since the F-111 and Desert Storm. That 1960s jet proved itself against opponents who were qualitatively and quantitavely higher than Iran or at least on a par with Iran. Today, we do not need to carry the heavy bombs that the F-111 carried against Iraqi tanks. Five hundred or even 250 pounders with precision guided heads will do the job. Iran will not be facing just the USN but the entirety of US airpower from CONUS. Iran have no defense against the combination of high altitude B-2s and B-52s, and low altitude penetration of the B-1. Those 'too' that you mentioned? They are meaningless to US. And I do not say with any malice, just objectivity based upon my yrs of service.
> 
> Military academies everywhere are watching this US-Iran scenario.



Yea and how useful were all your F-22, F-117, B-2, B-1 & B-52's during the 1st stage of your 1/4 Billion USD Millennial challenge? 

During Desert Storm all U.S. did was drive it's tanks all across Iraq really quickly to scare Saddam and get him to withdraw Iraqi armored battalion back into Iraq! 
In the early 90's stealth was relatively new and by the most part the only aircrafts going deep into protected Iraqi airspace were stealth F-117.
U.S. B-52's didn't really need to fly deep into Iraqi airspace to takeout Iraqi tanks standing in the path of coalition forces near the boarder! So don't turn Desert Storm into something that it wasn't because if the U.S. could have taken Iraq in the early 90's they would have! It took the U.S. another decade of constant bombings to clear Iraqi Air Defenses so they can send none stealth aircraft into their Air Space whenever and wherever they wanted! 
*And unlike Iran's missiles today Iraqi missiles where never really a threat to coalition forces* and with an Air Force that would even run from Iran's poorly maintained air force, Saddam had no real retaliatory capabilities!

Today it doesn't matter how nice American fighter are and they are nice and far superior in every aspect to anything Iran has! It's simply isn't going to stop the barrage of Iranian precision guided missiles flying towards bases that would be launching fighters against Iranian territory! And yes U.S. anti ballistic Missiles will likely intercept a good number of Iranian missiles but how many of these missiles is the U.S. going to deploy? 1000's? tens of 1000's I think NOT!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Frankly, it's delusion here !!!

Iraq 2003 is not comparable to Iraq 2003, there are not serious people here. Whether you like it or not with the arrival of Bavar 373 soon, Iran is the club of the 5 largest air defense of the world. The number of different radar and air defense system is hugely more powerful than Iraq 2003, no comparison possible.

Intelligent artillery like the Mesbah system will be very effective in the last seconds of riposte. Iran is very powerful in the elctronic war. Iran is the most efficient and experienced army in the world and Persians are great tacticians.

People have listened too much to American science fiction film. In the movies, the US still wins their battle against extraterrests much more powerful than them. It's a real joke.

Even the fighter jets of Iran is much more powerful than the few aircraft had Iraq 2003. And on the ground IMPOSSIBLE! Iran can mobilize in just 6 million people on the ground in a short time

And the navy, powerful and very experienced and still there, no comparison possible with Iraq 2003

Really, there are not serious people here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Very potent, layered air defense system. Iranians have done their homework. 



skyshadow said:


> im sure one of them will get it

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> well by that standard then it seems that Israel defense lost to Hezbollah rockets in 2006


I have no ties to Israel in particular or Jews in general, but I will say that if Israel wanted, Hezbollah would be gone.



Hack-Hook said:


> so B-2 is not considered Stealth ?


The B-2 is low radar observable. It took what is inherent in the flying wing design and made it better in terms of RCS reduction.



Mithridates said:


> but you forget to enter our OTH radars into your equation,...


I have explained the weaknesses of over-the-horizon (OTH) radar on this forum before. It is not and *NEVER* will be the solution to 'stealth'. Your government is misleading you.



Mithridates said:


> ...all of our AD are mobile so when you once entered an area the next time you will not be sure if there is an AD or not.


There are limits to where an air defense unit can move.

For starter, its vehicle type is one limit. Another is if the unit is in a network, it cannot move very far lest its movement create a gap. Now that you have a clue, can you think of any more limits? It is not that hard. 



Mithridates said:


> ...so what if iran do the same to your carriers and bases in the region??


You can try. As soon as the Lincoln and escorts are in the region -- take them out. Show proof.



VEVAK said:


> Yea and how useful were all your F-22, F-117, B-2, B-1 & B-52's during the 1st stage of your 1/4 Billion USD Millennial challenge?


What make you think you can replicate that exercise? From the way you talk, it is %99.999 that you have no military experience. And I say that kindly.

When you create an exercise, you must take into consideration how capable is the real potential adversary and since you can never know %100, the safety margin is to enhance the capabilities of the force that is simulating that potential adversary. Do you see where am heading here?



VEVAK said:


> During Desert Storm all U.S. did was drive it's tanks all across Iraq really quickly to scare Saddam and get him to withdraw Iraqi armored battalion back into Iraq!


If that was 'all' we did, and since it worked, you should be careful. Precisely because it worked. 



VEVAK said:


> In the early 90's stealth was relatively new and by the most part the only aircrafts going deep into protected Iraqi airspace were stealth F-117.


Buddy, the F-22 and F-35 are as revolutionary to air combat as the F-117 was. You have no idea today as the Iraqis was clueless yesterday.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

gambit said:


> I have no ties to Israel in particular or Jews in general, but I will say that if Israel wanted, Hezbollah would be gone.


They wanted but they are unable to do that


gambit said:


> The B-2 is low radar observable. It took what is inherent in the flying wing design and made it better in terms of RCS reduction.


B-2 is too expensive in compare to what it can do


gambit said:


> I have explained the weaknesses of over-the-horizon (OTH) radar on this forum before. It is not and *NEVER* will be the solution to 'stealth'. Your government is misleading you.


OTH is only one of options which its existence help Iran for pre warnings.


gambit said:


> There are limits to where an air defense unit can move.
> 
> For starter, its vehicle type is one limit. Another is if the unit is in a network, it cannot move very far lest its movement create a gap. Now that you have a clue, can you think of any more limits? It is not that hard.


clearly that Gap is for Iran not for attacking forces. mobile air defenses create big ambiguity for enemy not the gap.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> I have no ties to Israel in particular or Jews in general, but I will say that if Israel wanted, Hezbollah would be gone.
> 
> 
> The B-2 is low radar observable. It took what is inherent in the flying wing design and made it better in terms of RCS reduction.
> 
> 
> I have explained the weaknesses of over-the-horizon (OTH) radar on this forum before. It is not and *NEVER* will be the solution to 'stealth'. Your government is misleading you.
> 
> 
> There are limits to where an air defense unit can move.
> 
> For starter, its vehicle type is one limit. Another is if the unit is in a network, it cannot move very far lest its movement create a gap. Now that you have a clue, can you think of any more limits? It is not that hard.
> 
> 
> You can try. As soon as the Lincoln and escorts are in the region -- take them out. Show proof.
> 
> 
> What make you think you can replicate that exercise? From the way you talk, it is %99.999 that you have no military experience. And I say that kindly.
> 
> When you create an exercise, you must take into consideration how capable is the real potential adversary and since you can never know %100, the safety margin is to enhance the capabilities of the force that is simulating that potential adversary. Do you see where am heading here?
> 
> 
> If that was 'all' we did, and since it worked, you should be careful. Precisely because it worked.
> 
> 
> Buddy, the F-22 and F-35 are as revolutionary to air combat as the F-117 was. You have no idea today as the Iraqis was clueless yesterday.



1st off you are talking to an Iranian and for us Military service is mandatory so I and most Iranians my age have at least limited military experience because it really wasn't a freaking choice for us! 

2ndly If your under the illusion that Iran is going to try to replicate your 2002 sim then your delusional!!! Back in 2002 the most accurate Iranian BM was the Fatteh-110B with a 150 meter CEP at 150km and the rest of Iran's BM capabilities had CEP's of 700meters or greater and beyond 800km the CEP's were so inaccurate that we could barely target bases and small cities
In 2002 Iran's sensor, networking & UAV capabilities were extremely limited both in terms of quantity and quality.At that time most of our night time capabilities were by the most part limited to standard Sony digital camera's with their filters removed and a few IR LED's. Iran's Air Defense capabilities were nothing even close to what they are today and aside from a few anti ship Cruise Missiles like the Raad that required a Tank for transport and launch only Iran's Air Force was capable of PGM capability for anything beyond artillery range... 

My point is Iran capabilities today are NOTHING like the country you played your little simulation with for us to try to replicate your little exercise! Today Iranian BM capabilities of under 10 meter cep at 300km or 20m at 500km or Jet UCAV conducting missions from 500km away are battlefield proven Iranian capabilities and aren't even at the edge of Iran's max capabilities. And taking out Iran's Air Force today will no longer stop Iran's ability to launch PGM at your bases! 

And yes U.S. can nuke every City in Iran and Yes the U.S. even with a 1/3 of it's naval fleet can send Iran back to the stone ages.... but NONE of that is gong to stop Iran from launching it's missiles or from closing down the Persian Gulf or hitting Saudi Oil that fuel U.S. Petrodollar! 

The U.S. is $22 Trillion USD in debt with the Chinese economy gaining every year and an ever expanding Chinese Military and you Americans are still blinded by your absurd obsession with IRAN that's been going on for half a century!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY is it so hard for you guys to stick to your own continent or at least your own side of the globe!!
What is this convoluted obsession you people have with Iran? Iran hasn't started a war or invaded anyone in over 300 years nor are we threatening to take anyone's territory today! Iran isn't stocking Nukes for any kind of a biblical Armageddon & we even offered you a deal to ensure that we never do! We helped you when you were attacked by people with deluded Whahabbi ideology in Afghanistan & you thanked us by calling us the axis of evil! And unlike your so called allies we are not the ones murdering and chopping up Washington Post Journalists in our embassies! We don't cut off heads in the middle of streets like a bunch of terrorists as your allies do! Unlike the Israeli's we are ratified member of the NPT, CWC & BWC. 
Hell your Israeli friends since the founding of their country haven't been able to last a decade without bombing one of their neighbors and your other allies are bombing and creating famine in Yemen using your weapons & funding ISIS & you American's still don't get it!

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> 1st off you are talking to an Iranian and for us Military service is mandatory so I and most Iranians my age have at least limited military experience because it really wasn't a freaking choice for us!
> 
> 2ndly If your under the illusion that Iran is going to try to replicate your 2002 sim then your delusional!!! Back in 2002 the most accurate Iranian BM was the Fatteh-110B with a 150 meter CEP at 150km and the rest of Iran's BM capabilities had CEP's of 700meters or greater and beyond 800km the CEP's were so inaccurate that we could barely target bases and small cities
> In 2002 Iran's sensor, networking & UAV capabilities were extremely limited both in terms of quantity and quality.At that time most of our night time capabilities were by the most part limited to standard Sony digital camera's with their filters removed and a few IR LED's. Iran's Air Defense capabilities were nothing even close to what they are today and aside from a few anti ship Cruise Missiles like the Raad that required a Tank for transport and launch only Iran's Air Force was capable of PGM capability for anything beyond artillery range...
> 
> My point is Iran capabilities today are NOTHING like the country you played your little simulation with for us to try to replicate your little exercise! Today Iranian BM capabilities of under 10 meter cep at 300km or 20m at 500km or Jet UCAV conducting missions from 500km away are battlefield proven Iranian capabilities and aren't even at the edge of Iran's max capabilities. And taking out Iran's Air Force today will no longer stop Iran's ability to launch PGM at your bases!
> 
> And yes U.S. can nuke every City in Iran and Yes the U.S. even with a 1/3 of it's naval fleet can send Iran back to the stone ages.... but NONE of that is gong to stop Iran from launching it's missiles or from closing down the Persian Gulf or hitting Saudi Oil that fuel U.S. Petrodollar!
> 
> The U.S. is $22 Trillion USD in debt with the Chinese economy gaining every year and an ever expanding Chinese Military and you Americans are still blinded by your absurd obsession with IRAN that's been going on for half a century!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY is it so hard for you guys to stick to your own continent or at least your own side of the globe!!
> What is this convoluted obsession you people have with Iran? Iran hasn't started a war or invaded anyone in over 300 years nor are we threatening to take anyone's territory today! Iran isn't stocking Nukes for any kind of a biblical Armageddon & we even offered you a deal to ensure that we never do! We helped you when you were attacked by people with deluded Whahabbi ideology in Afghanistan & you thanked us by calling us the axis of evil! And unlike your so called allies we are not the ones murdering and chopping up Washington Post Journalists in our embassies! We don't cut off heads in the middle of streets like a bunch of terrorists as your allies do! Unlike the Israeli's we are ratified member of the NPT, CWC & BWC.
> Hell your Israeli friends since the founding of their country haven't been able to last a decade without bombing one of their neighbors and your other allies are bombing and creating famine in Yemen using your weapons & funding ISIS & you American's still don't get it!


Nicely said.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Iraq in 1991 and Iraq in 2003, people always forget the differences and how the US didn't enter Iraq's cities in 1991

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

SubWater said:


> They wanted but they are unable to do that


No, Israel can. There is a difference in 'unable' and 'unwilling'. Being restrained in some ways falls under 'unwilling'.



SubWater said:


> B-2 is too expensive in compare to what it can do


You leave that to US to decide. For now, you just worry on how to deal with the many options we have.



SubWater said:


> OTH is only one of options which its existence help Iran for pre warnings.


A nearly useless option.



SubWater said:


> mobile air defenses create big ambiguity for enemy not the gap.


How 'big' is that gap for US? Keep in mind that Iran have been under satellite surveillance, and it is not as if the US do not have our own air defense system.

Precisely because we do have our own air defense system and that we actually gone to combat against an enemy's air defense system, we do have a pretty good idea of the range each of your air defense unit can go. From that, it is a matter of math to calculate how to destroy each, whether that destruction comes from bombs or cruise missiles. What I said are simplified, the details no one knows. But Iran is going up against an opponent that proven combat experience in terms of wielding technologies and tactics that no one has. An analogy is that if you know about IR as a concept but do not have a practical application of IR sensor, you cannot fight an opponent who does have practical applications of IR sensor and successfully used it in warfare. Now, I expect you to focus in on the IR aspect and point out how Iran is capable of producing IR sensors, etc...etc..., but that would mean you missed the point of the analogy.

If you are a religious person and believe the gods do inject themselves into the affairs of humans, you better pray that there will not be a shooting fight between Iran and US. I understand that you are as much nationalistic as I am, you for Iran and I for US, but am talking objectively here -- Iran *WILL* lose that fight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> No, Israel can. There is a difference in 'unable' and 'unwilling'. Being restrained in some ways falls under 'unwilling'.
> 
> 
> You leave that to US to decide. For now, you just worry on how to deal with the many options we have.
> 
> 
> A nearly useless option.
> 
> 
> How 'big' is that gap for US? Keep in mind that Iran have been under satellite surveillance, and it is not as if the US do not have our own air defense system.
> 
> Precisely because we do have our own air defense system and that we actually gone to combat against an enemy's air defense system, we do have a pretty good idea of the range each of your air defense unit can go. From that, it is a matter of math to calculate how to destroy each, whether that destruction comes from bombs or cruise missiles. What I said are simplified, the details no one knows. But Iran is going up against an opponent that proven combat experience in terms of wielding technologies and tactics that no one has. An analogy is that if you know about IR as a concept but do not have a practical application of IR sensor, you cannot fight an opponent who does have practical applications of IR sensor and successfully used it in warfare. Now, I expect you to focus in on the IR aspect and point out how Iran is capable of producing IR sensors, etc...etc..., but that would mean you missed the point of the analogy.
> 
> If you are a religious person and believe the gods do inject themselves into the affairs of humans, you better pray that there will not be a shooting fight between Iran and US. I understand that you are as much nationalistic as I am, you for Iran and I for US, but am talking objectively here -- Iran *WILL* lose that fight.


but again if we neutralize carriers and your air bases around us your capabilities would fall even behind the saudis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

In this thread....Arm Chair generals on both sides talk about how they will win a hypothetical war.

What a waste of human energy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> but again if we neutralize carriers and your air bases around us your capabilities would fall even behind the saudis.


Might as well say 'if' Iran have the Death Star. That is how absurd it sounds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> Might as well say 'if' Iran have the Death Star. That is how absurd it sounds.



Do you not realize how idealistic (and woefully arrogant) you *objectively *sound? If anyone were to take your word as Gospel then any AND ALL Iranian counter-attacks or means of deterrence are meager at best according to your 'information'. Hell, why is Iran even trying? Why don't we uber American military magicians just make Iran submit militarily? We killed millions in Vietnam, millions in other wars around the world what makes Iran so different if they're so damn weak?

Get off your hollow high-horse Gambit, the Iranians obviously aren't fuking around here (this wont end well for them or us, they have the ability to drag this conflict out, our F-35 wonder bread planes wont win this for us). We need to stop being duplicitous with them and maybe *MAYBE *we can garner some well earned good will with Iranians for a change. Or just go to war, put our money where our mouth is. Seems like we can take on the whole freaking world the way your describe American military strength....



gambit said:


> No, Israel can. There is a difference in 'unable' and 'unwilling'. Being restrained in some ways falls under 'unwilling'.
> 
> 
> You leave that to US to decide. For now, you just worry on how to deal with the many options we have.
> 
> 
> A nearly useless option.
> 
> 
> How 'big' is that gap for US? Keep in mind that Iran have been under satellite surveillance, and it is not as if the US do not have our own air defense system.
> 
> Precisely because we do have our own air defense system and that we actually gone to combat against an enemy's air defense system, we do have a pretty good idea of the range each of your air defense unit can go. From that, it is a matter of math to calculate how to destroy each, whether that destruction comes from bombs or cruise missiles. What I said are simplified, the details no one knows. But Iran is going up against an opponent that proven combat experience in terms of wielding technologies and tactics that no one has. An analogy is that if you know about IR as a concept but do not have a practical application of IR sensor, you cannot fight an opponent who does have practical applications of IR sensor and successfully used it in warfare. Now, I expect you to focus in on the IR aspect and point out how Iran is capable of producing IR sensors, etc...etc..., but that would mean you missed the point of the analogy.
> 
> If you are a religious person and believe the gods do inject themselves into the affairs of humans, you better pray that there will not be a shooting fight between Iran and US. I understand that you are as much nationalistic as I am, you for Iran and I for US, but am talking objectively here -- Iran *WILL* lose that fight.



"If you are a religious person and believe the gods do inject themselves into the affairs of humans, you better pray that there will not be a shooting fight between Iran and US. I understand that you are as much nationalistic as I am, you for Iran and I for US, but am talking objectively here -- Iran *WILL* lose that fight."

Subjective not objective but you're entitled to your own realities.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

CamelGuy said:


> Iraq in 1991 and Iraq in 2003, people always forget the differences and how the US didn't enter Iraq's cities in 1991



PR and outside image is a main tool Americans use. Indeed they knew that taking on 1991 Iraq would be too costly for them. Their strategy was a show, in which they attacked Saddams "expedition" forces 91, had a 12 year long hit and run warfare and embargo to break them down that finally lead to the 2003 shock invasion (of a 13 year long hungered down opponent).
This is how they operate, they are not able to sustain higher losses.

However every child today just remembers U.S superiority over the huge Iraqi war machine, not those details... (also not U.S side confirmed 50+ coalition aircraft losses)

As a forum member just said recently: The U.S has never fought a enemy with long range weapons that can strike back. Their backbone is their air power which needs to operate within 1000-2000km to the enemy to evolve its massive firepower.

And just one fact for the talk made here in this thread: All wars the U.S fought had its opponent been equipped with weapons at least a decade older in design and export rated (Vietnam). Or 20 years (Iraq 91) or even 30 years (Serbia, Iraq 2003)

They select the opponents and look how they can handle them. Irans weapons are neither export rated/compromised nor have a 2-3 generations gap.

The day the U.S could think about attacking Iran would be when save operations from air airbases and carriers is guaranteed and they are ready to accept +25% losses of airpower assets like in WWII. Neither of the two is possible or acceptable for 2019 America.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> PR and outside image is a main tool Americans use. Indeed they knew that taking on 1991 Iraq would be too costly for them. Their strategy was a show, in which they attacked Saddams "expedition" forces 91, had a 12 year long hit and run warfare and embargo to break them down that finally lead to the 2003 shock invasion (of a 13 year long hungered down opponent).
> This is how they operate, they are not able to sustain higher losses.
> 
> However every child today just remembers U.S superiority over the huge Iraqi war machine, not those details... (also not U.S side confirmed 50+ coalition aircraft losses)
> 
> As a forum member just said recently: The U.S has never fought a enemy with long range weapons that can strike back. Their backbone is their air power which needs to operate within 1000-2000km to the enemy to evolve its massive firepower.
> 
> And just one fact for the talk made here in this thread: All wars the U.S fought had its opponent been equipped with weapons at least a decade older in design and export rated (Vietnam). Or 20 years (Iraq 91) or even 30 years (Serbia, Iraq 2003)
> 
> They select the opponents and look how they can handle them. Irans weapons are neither export rated/compromised nor have a 1, 2, 3 generations gap.
> 
> The day the U.S could think about attacking Iran would be when save operations from air airbases and carriers is guaranteed and they are ready to accept +25% losses of airpower assets like in WWII. Neither of the two is possible or acceptable fro 2019 America.



So all this recent American saber-rattling is just PR?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

BlueInGreen2 said:


> So all this recent American saber-rattling is just PR?



Realistically yes. They have not changed or introduced any significant assets. 

The Patriots that came in aren't new, they were here 6 months ago. The same goes for the air craft carrier. The only need thing is a amphebious assault ship and a few B-52s which are potatoes and only useful after Iran's Air Defenses are down. 

It's all psychical warfare and time for Trumpian negotiation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

BlueInGreen2 said:


> So all this recent American saber-rattling is just PR?



Yes. Bolton's strategy. A good one even. Deception is a integral tool in war and politics. I admit that he is playing his cards well in his game. The positive PR effect on economy for the U.S side is huge and Trump has also started his role in this game.

Ordinary people don't know those details as I said, hence this PR-campaign is a very effective and I give them credit for that.

The whole "neocon and hawks driven wars" notion is a false one: Democrat Bill Clinton had a 8 year long war campaign, not much noticed going on against Saddam with the goal to sufficiently degrade his capability.
2003 they were ready for the finishing move.
American wars are well planned and executed as they can't afford 1000 KIA on the first day, a clear constrain.
Hence it is easy to spot their PR-campaigns for the opponents and its own public's.

Bolton and Trump are professionals, they can't simply start wars on such scales. At least not against opponents with strategic-level capabilities such as NK or Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Do you not realize how idealistic (and woefully arrogant) you *objectively *sound?


Objectively -- I do. Call it 'arrogant' if you like. I do not care.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> If anyone were to take your word as Gospel then any AND ALL Iranian counter-attacks or means of deterrence are meager at best according to your 'information'.


To say 'Gospel' is to mean absolute according to a non-challengeable standard. I never said I am such a standard. Everyone should know by now that unless supported by technical information, what I, and everyone else, said are essentially opinions. Of course, some opinions are weighted more than others.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Hell, why is Iran even trying?


Iran have to. Not to resist even in rhetoric would mean loss of legitimacy worldwide, not just in Iran.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> ...our F-35 wonder bread planes wont win this for us).


Yes, it will. Not might or could. But *WILL*. I am that confident.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Seems like we can take on the whole freaking world the way your describe American military strength....


The way I describe US military strength does not come from books but from books, professional military education, and actual time in service that includes Desert Storm. So yes, we can take on the world, albeit one at a time, of course. 



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Subjective not objective but you're entitled to your own realities.


We all know the old saying 'Perception is Reality', no?



PeeD said:


> American wars are well planned and executed as they can't afford 1000 KIA on the first day, a clear constrain.


Those who say they can 'afford' to lose X KIA have no business doing wars. Kinda sounds like your mullahs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

gambit said:


> Those who say they can 'afford' to lose X KIA have no business doing wars. Kinda sounds like your mullahs.



1945 you could afford 1000 KIA a day, 2019 you can't. 1945 you won against a peer state with half of the world fighting with you, where you sacrificed 10 Sherman tanks for a single German Tiger kill.
Situations change.
Iran is not a suitable for a U.S war.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> Objectively -- I do. Call it 'arrogant' if you like. I do not care.
> 
> 
> To say 'Gospel' is to mean absolute according to a non-challengeable standard. I never said I am such a standard. Everyone should know by now that unless supported by technical information, what I, and everyone else, said are essentially opinions. Of course, some opinions are weighted more than others.
> 
> 
> Iran have to. Not to resist even in rhetoric would mean loss of legitimacy worldwide, not just in Iran.
> 
> 
> Yes, it will. Not might or could. But *WILL*. I am that confident.
> 
> 
> The way I describe US military strength does not come from books but from books, professional military education, and actual time in service that includes Desert Storm. So yes, we can take on the world, albeit one at a time, of course.
> 
> 
> We all know the old saying 'Perception is Reality', no?
> 
> 
> Those who say they can 'afford' to lose X KIA have no business doing wars. Kinda sounds like your mullahs.



Apologies if I came off as overbearing but some of your weighted opinions come off as absolute realities which leaves little to no room for debate or discussion. It's that simple "we win, you *WILL* lose" mentality I can't stand. You leave damn near no room for anyone to maneuver since it wont matter, like...Whatever we will see soon I guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

BlueInGreen2 said:


> You leave damn near no room for anyone to maneuver...


Incorrect. You are free to dispute anything and everything I said.

Lay people underestimate the military significance of Desert Storm and they do so out of nationalism, not of objective analyses, of which understandably they are not capable of doing for mostly technical reasons. You guys seems to think that what happened in DS1991 is how the US will *ALWAYS* conduct warfare. That is so wrong I cannot begin to explain where to start. You downplayed the military impact by saying the Iraqi military were 'ill trained' as if you know what is 'well trained' in the first place, twenty-something yrs after the fact. Then you reinforced your own mistaken perceptions by saying the Iraqi military hardware were 'outdated', as if you have any experience outside of changing the oil in your cars when it comes to hardware.

But you are free to maneuver any way you want. Just note that all you have is hindsight while the US military have actual combat records.



PeeD said:


> 1945 you could afford 1000 KIA a day, 2019 you can't. 1945 you won against a peer state with half of the world fighting with you, where you sacrificed 10 Sherman tanks for a single German Tiger kill.
> Situations change.
> Iran is not a suitable for a U.S war.


You missed the real point of what I said, but then, that is no surprise.

The point is that you cannot use that argument against US. The goal of war -- at the combatant level -- is to reduce casualties to your side while inflicting the maximum to the other side, and you do it any way you can. So just because we gather intelligence, spend an absurd amount of time analyzing, and prepared politically and militarily, does not mean we do these things out of the fear of casualties. You Iranians on this forum may have basic military experience out of conscription necessity, but it seems like your military severely lack professional military education (PME).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> Incorrect. You are free to dispute anything and everything I said.
> 
> Lay people underestimate the military significance of Desert Storm and they do so out of nationalism, not of objective analyses, of which understandably they are not capable of doing for mostly technical reasons. You guys seems to think that what happened in DS1991 is how the US will *ALWAYS* conduct warfare. That is so wrong I cannot begin to explain where to start. You downplayed the military impact by saying the Iraqi military were 'ill trained' as if you know what is 'well trained' in the first place, twenty-something yrs after the fact. Then you reinforced your own mistaken perceptions by saying the Iraqi military hardware were 'outdated', as if you have any experience outside of changing the oil in your cars when it comes to hardware.
> 
> But you are free to maneuver any way you want. Just note that all you have is hindsight while the US military have actual combat records.
> 
> 
> You missed the real point of what I said, but then, that is no surprise.
> 
> The point is that you cannot use that argument against US. The goal of war -- at the combatant level -- is to reduce casualties to your side while inflicting the maximum to the other side, and you do it any way you can. So just because we gather intelligence, spend an absurd amount of time analyzing, and prepared politically and militarily, does not mean we do these things out of the fear of casualties. You Iranians on this forum may have basic military experience out of conscription necessity, but it seems like your military severely lack professional military education (PME).



Sure, quote/cite military doctrine and past records all you want, don't really think this applies as soundly to Iran in way you make it out to be is what I guess I'm getting at. But hey, your faithful servitude to the US imperial war-machine is dully noted  

On a side-note to the other Iranians here, anyone of you guys have any Iranian views/perspectives on what's unfolding?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

gambit said:


> You missed the real point of what I said, but then, that is no surprise.
> 
> The point is that you cannot use that argument against US. The goal of war -- at the combatant level -- is to reduce casualties to your side while inflicting the maximum to the other side, and you do it any way you can. So just because we gather intelligence, spend an absurd amount of time analyzing, and prepared politically and militarily, does not mean we do these things out of the fear of casualties. You Iranians on this forum may have basic military experience out of conscription necessity, but it seems like your military severely lack professional military education (PME).



I didn't miss that. As I said: 
"American wars are well planned and executed as they can't afford 1000 KIA on the first day, a clear constrain."

The U.S is able to accept 1000 KIA a day if it is not a unjustified expedition on the other side of the globe. If U.S land is attacked or any other true reason, yes then this constrain does not apply. A war against Iran would be regarded as an insane adventure by a large part of the U.S public.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> No, it was not. Despite what people might think the RQ UAV series was not 'stealth'. The flying wing design does have some inherent low radar obsersable traits, but that was well known since WW II. The flying wing itself was known from the 1920s when every aviation pioneer in the US, Europe, and Russia experimented with it to some degrees. Prior to the B-2, the flying wing's main advantage was range over any radar 'evading' trait.



As far as we know, according to the those who captured the drone (Iran), there was extensive measures taken to greatly reduce the RCS of this UAV, in form of RAM and others. RQ-170 is _stealthy_ not stealth. There is nothing that is truly stealth. But I am sure you already know this.




> Neither is US airpower since then.



True, but the rate of improvement was vastly more in the case of Iran. What Iran has today is "lightyears" ahead of what it was even a decade ago.



> We do not rely on luck. I posted on this forum many explanations on US SIGINT efforts. It has been some yrs but they are still relevant regarding general information. You can be whatever next yr's salary you have, that we have extensive knowledge of Iran's EM signatures.



SIGNIT is not something that only the Americans are aware of, like I said, Iran has focused greatly on E warfare. Those "extensive" Iranian EM signature you refer to is probably only a small fraction of what information Iran is actually feeding the US. This is not just what I am saying, I am repeating the word's of IRADF itself.




> More than most suspect. Even with 'only' two aircraft carriers.



Within the context of a conflict with Iran in that region, I think you really are overestimating the ability of those carriers. We're not talking about Iran navy vs US navy in open waters, obviously US would be easily victorious there.



> We will just bypass you. And yes, we are that good.



Now this comment is based on nothing but hubris. The US could not bypass barely anyone in its military history, what makes you think you'd achieve anything close to that in the case of Iran? 




> My first assignment was the F-111. When I was stationed in the UK, I learned the Soviets feared and hated the 'Vark. At every arms negotiation, the Soviets always tried to have the 'Vark removed from the country. We always told them to STFU. Post Cold War, Adolf Tolkachev confirmed to US that during the Cold War yrs, the Soviets literally had no defense against the F-111. I was reassigned to the F-16 during Desert Storm and saw how lethal the F-111 became against Iraqi tanks.



I don't think anyone would deny the US military is a force to be reckoned with, but there is big different between that notion and one in which you'd think you will just "bypass" a nation. 




> By what standards do you measured Iran's air defense as 'too'? Compared to who and with what combat experience against US? We have learned much since the F-111 and Desert Storm. That 1960s jet proved itself against opponents who were qualitatively and quantitavely higher than Iran or at least on a par with Iran. Today, we do not need to carry the heavy bombs that the F-111 carried against Iraqi tanks. Five hundred or even 250 pounders with precision guided heads will do the job.



You'd have to have been following Iran's air defence development to see where I am coming from. I am talking about the sheer number of different air defences Iran has produced. You talk about Iraq, but like I said, the Iraqis barely had any (if any at all) EW capability. Whereas Iranians see EW (like many others do) warfare as it's own separate sector, a sector which Iran has given great attention to. And the EW is just one factor.




> Iran will not be facing just the USN but the entirety of US airpower from CONUS. Iran have no defense against the combination of high altitude B-2s and B-52s, and low altitude penetration of the B-1. Those 'too' that you mentioned? They are meaningless to US. And I do not say with any malice, just objectivity based upon my yrs of service.



On what basis are you saying Iran has no defence against B-52? Based on their altitude of flight? If so, then even Iran's medium ranges SAM have had much higher flight ceiling then those planes. And Iran has had these missile for a many years now.

Contrary to what you believe, the likes of B-52 and B-1 are easy targets for Iran. B-2 is another issue, but once again, Stealth is another area Iran has focused on. Hence why it is fielding many longer range wavelength radars (mobile and static). Iran has stated it can not only detect the likes of B-2, but can target them too. I guess we would have to see in a conflict (that no one should wish for) whether any of these claims from both side hold much substance.


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> 1st off you are talking to an Iranian and for us Military service is mandatory so I and most Iranians my age have at least limited military experience because it really wasn't a freaking choice for us!


Iran mandatory military service is 24 months. So let us break that down, shall we?

At least 2 months are spent on basic training but from what I found it is 3 months, correct? Assume there is some technical training involved, add at least another 2 months, but more like 3. Am guessing here. Then there is 4-6 months to acclimatize to the new unit, learning one's place in the hierarchy, and so forth. By now, the person have one yr left of his obligation, give or take a few weeks, and he is eager to go home.

Here is the downsize of a conscription policy: No institutional memory.

https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/institutional-memory/14802 


> ...is the collective knowledge and learned experiences of a group. As turnover occurs among group members, these concepts must be transitioned.


What it means is that -- assuming you did your minimum of 2 yrs -- you contributed nothing to the warfighting capabilities of the Iranian military. If all you did was your 2 yrs obligation, the best you did was -- to put it kindly -- being a warm body.

This is why the US did away with conscription. The best minimum term is 4-6 yrs where a person not only learned new skills, but actually practiced those skills, refined them, and pass them onto the next generation.

I did 5 yrs on the F-111. Going hard terrain (TF) radar following over the hills of Scotland was better than any roller coaster in the world. On the same sortie, we were asked if we could help the French with their new air defense radar so our flight lead said 'yes'. He was a Lt. Col so what he said -- goes. We were a four-ship flight. We split up into two two-ship flights. One 'attacked' France from the northern route, my flight 'attacked' from the south. Over the Channel, we were 20-25 meters over the surface. I was in the WSO seat and as a test, I tuned the TF radar so fine it picked up the surface waves as if they were mountains. All four jets 'bombed' France without their new radar picked us up. Then I did 5 yrs on the F-16 with Desert Storm as my coda. Not going into details there, but I can tell you that what our squadron did with LANTIRN exceeded what was originally designed to do. Iraqi mobile launchers had limited effectiveness because of our innovative uses of the LANTIRN pods.



VEVAK said:


> 2ndly If your under the illusion that Iran is going to try to replicate your 2002 sim then your delusional!!!
> 
> My point is Iran capabilities today are NOTHING like the country you played your little simulation with for us to try to replicate your little exercise!


I was under that 'delusion' because you guys kept bringing it up as if somehow Millennium Challenge or whatever became our fate. Your comments about the exercises are further confirmation that you do not understand the purpose of such exercises in the first place and that is due to your short time of service.

Am not going waste my time with the rest of your post.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

gambit said:


> I have no ties to Israel in particular or Jews in general, but I will say that if Israel wanted, Hezbollah would be gone.


 You might have military experience but I must say you don't have much historical knowledge, Israel tried to take out Hezbollah in 2006 and failed, as a matter of fact IDF got it's a ss whooped...52 Merkava tanks were hit and badly damaged (some say the estimate is much higher)....it broke the invincibility bullsh!t of the IDF. So I think you better read up on that. In a war it's not just about wining against armies, the PR and propaganda battle is a just as important. After Afghanistan and Iraq (really after Vietnam) we learned that superpowers are not invincible....



PeeD said:


> I didn't miss that. As I said:
> "American wars are well planned and executed as they can't afford 1000 KIA on the first day, a clear constrain."
> 
> The U.S is able to accept 1000 KIA a day if it is not a unjustified expedition on the other side of the globe. If U.S land is attacked or any other true reason, yes then this constrain does not apply. A war against Iran would be regarded as an insane adventure by a large part of the U.S public.


Not just the U.S. public...the house nor the senate will ever authorize such a war. The best the orange ape in chief can hope is a limited action in the gulf and that's if Iran attacks first.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.

مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی

1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.

2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.

3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).

4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.

5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.



*After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *


https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-...ی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kastor

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Sure, quote/cite military doctrine and past records all you want, don't really think this applies as soundly to Iran in way you make it out to be is what I guess I'm getting at. But hey, your faithful servitude to the US imperial war-machine is dully noted
> 
> On a side-note to the other Iranians here, anyone of you guys have any Iranian views/perspectives on what's unfolding?


Sure, I'll take a stab at it, Trump in accordance with Kushner's wishes has given rope to Bolton for now, but I'm sure he has warned him he better see results. Knowing Bolton, who punches down but kisses up, he has promised Trumpy Iran's capitulation in 6 months or less. So as long as oil prices remain steady Bolton's got time, but if the oil prices keep rising Trump will kick that human cartoon out of the white house so fast that he won't know what hit him. I think Iran is moving in the right direction, low impact, low foot print saber rattling to keep increasing oil prices. you've heard me say this before, this entire team are a team of second stringers, if they were smart, they'd be attacking one foreign policy challenge at a time. They got their Venezuela plan in flames, NK plans in flames, China trade war in flames, Cuban sanctions are also in flames, Iran's plan is starting to smoke too. Need I say more? As a matter of fact second stringers is too good of a term for this bunch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tamiyah

I dont understand it why all the IRANIANS here underestimate their enemy and overestimate their own assets.
I dont underestimate my nation's enemy and never overestimate my country's armed forces.

And how can IRAN counter F35??? 
Are those air defences so capable that it can bring down a (most) 5th generation

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> I dont understand it why all the IRANIANS here underestimate their enemy and overestimate their own assets.
> I dont underestimate my nation's enemy and never overestimate my country's armed forces.
> 
> And how can IRAN counter F35???
> Are those air defences so capable that it can bring down a (most) 5th generation



well we detected f_22 and we warned them not get close to the borders of Iran. that's one way or we can hit there base.

when a *Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile* fired it needs to see you in order to target you and you need to detect it before it hits you in order to intercept it so you need to turn your *radars on* at *all* time until interception but at the same time a *Hormuz-1 and -2 the world’s first anti-radiation ballistic missiles *are fired at you, in order to target you Hormuz 1_2 missiles needs your *radars to be on* until it hits you so if you want to neutralize them you need to turn *all* of your *radars off* so that the anti-radiation ballistic missiles can not find you but if you turn all of your radars off how you want to intercept Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile that is coming at you at the speed of at least mach 3_4 ? you need your radars on to see it and intercept it but if you do that than what are you going to do with anti-radiation ballistic missile that is coming for you at even grater speed than Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile at least mach 5_6? perfect irony.



Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile















Hormuz-1 and -2 the world’s first anti-radiation ballistic missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tamiyah

skyshadow said:


> well we detected f_22 and we warned them not get close to the borders of Iran. that's one way or we can hit there base.
> 
> when a *Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile* fired it needs to see you in order to target you and you need to detect it before it hits you in order to intercept it so you need to turn your *radars on* at *all* time until interception but at the same time a *Hormuz-1 and -2 the world’s first anti-radiation ballistic missiles *are fired at you, in order to target you Hormuz 1_2 missiles needs your *radars to be on* until it hits you so if you want to neutralize them you need to turn *all* of your *radars off* so that the anti-radiation ballistic missiles can not find you but if you turn all of your radars off how you want to intercept Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile that is coming at you at the speed of at least mach 3_4 ? you need your radars on to see it and intercept it but if you do that than what are you going to do with anti-radiation ballistic missile that is coming for you at even grater speed than Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile at least mach 5_6? perfect irony.
> 
> 
> 
> Khalij Fars anti ship ballistic missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hormuz-1 and -2 the world’s first anti-radiation ballistic missiles


You got carried away to ANTI-SHIP missiles I am talking about 5 gen air warfare, Do you got any rival to F35 which are based in middle east.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> You got carried away to ANTI-SHIP missiles I am talking about 5 gen air warfare, Do you got any rival to F35 which are based in middle east.



in terms of air force our best are upgraded F_14 with upgraded Phoenix. 













in terms of air defence our best are Bavar _ 373 and S 300 PMU 2 and Talash 2 and 3.































































in terms of radar we have all kind of radars but must powerful ones are OTH with the range of 1500 km and 3000 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Iran mandatory military service is 24 months. So let us break that down, shall we?
> 
> At least 2 months are spent on basic training but from what I found it is 3 months, correct? Assume there is some technical training involved, add at least another 2 months, but more like 3. Am guessing here. Then there is 4-6 months to acclimatize to the new unit, learning one's place in the hierarchy, and so forth. By now, the person have one yr left of his obligation, give or take a few weeks, and he is eager to go home.
> 
> Here is the downsize of a conscription policy: No institutional memory.
> 
> https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/institutional-memory/14802
> 
> What it means is that -- assuming you did your minimum of 2 yrs -- you contributed nothing to the warfighting capabilities of the Iranian military. If all you did was your 2 yrs obligation, the best you did was -- to put it kindly -- being a warm body.
> 
> This is why the US did away with conscription. The best minimum term is 4-6 yrs where a person not only learned new skills, but actually practiced those skills, refined them, and pass them onto the next generation.
> 
> I did 5 yrs on the F-111. Going hard terrain (TF) radar following over the hills of Scotland was better than any roller coaster in the world. On the same sortie, we were asked if we could help the French with their new air defense radar so our flight lead said 'yes'. He was a Lt. Col so what he said -- goes. We were a four-ship flight. We split up into two two-ship flights. One 'attacked' France from the northern route, my flight 'attacked' from the south. Over the Channel, we were 20-25 meters over the surface. I was in the WSO seat and as a test, I tuned the TF radar so fine it picked up the surface waves as if they were mountains. All four jets 'bombed' France without their new radar picked us up. Then I did 5 yrs on the F-16 with Desert Storm as my coda. Not going into details there, but I can tell you that what our squadron did with LANTIRN exceeded what was originally designed to do. Iraqi mobile launchers had limited effectiveness because of our innovative uses of the LANTIRN pods.
> 
> 
> I was under that 'delusion' because you guys kept bringing it up as if somehow Millennium Challenge or whatever became our fate. Your comments about the exercises are further confirmation that you do not understand the purpose of such exercises in the first place and that is due to your short time of service.
> 
> Am not going waste my time with the rest of your post.



LOL! I only brought up the fact that Iran has a conscript system because of the absurd comment you made about my lack of military training which is an absurd thing to say to any Iranians my age due to our conscript system vast majority of us have some military training which was the main point I was making. 

*And by the way Iran's Conscript Systems works just fine! It may not make sense to a warfighting nation whos military is on a constant killing spree but it works just fine for us because it provides real life experience to guys finishing school & it's a great motivator to stay in school and for the military and military industry it gives a first look at the new blood coming on the market.* So it works just fine for us. 

As for me not knowing the point of the exercise, well maybe you should take that complaint to your own military because if they knew the point of it, they wouldn't have stopped it and replaced the General in charge of the RED team(Iran) & restarted it with a bunch of absurd restrictions simply to get their own desired outcome. Which made it a $1/4 Billion USD rigged video game. So take that complaint to your own military buddy!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> I didn't miss that. As I said:
> "American wars are well planned and executed as they can't afford 1000 KIA on the first day, a clear constrain."
> 
> The U.S is able to accept 1000 KIA a day if it is not a unjustified expedition on the other side of the globe. If U.S land is attacked or any other true reason, yes then this constrain does not apply. A war against Iran would be regarded as an insane adventure by a large part of the U.S public.



In their current economic condition a new U.S. imposed war on any country would be idiotic let alone a country capable of effecting 1/4 of the worlds Oil supply!

U.S. with all the money they have spent in our region since George Bush declared victory (2003) could have instead colonized the moon and sent a man mission to mars and at least one other moon in our solar system with a fleet of real spaceships. 

When the Americans invaded Iraq, China's economy was only 1/10 the size of the U.S. economy (GDP nominal) where as today the Chinese have brought their economy to almost 3/4 of the US economy by US $ standards not to mention the U.S. debt that's already at 108% of their GDP at $22 trillion USD and over $1 Trillion of which they owe to China while the Chinese debt is still below 50% of their GDP with an ever expanding military because the Chinese don't need to pay the salaries the U.S. has to pay, they don't need to pay for maintaining so many foreign military bases nor are they involved in so many global conflicts and their military R&D cost come to a fraction of what the U.S. has to pay due to salaries....
I truly wonder what exactly do these Americans think will happen to the mighty Dollar when the U.S. no longer has the largest economy in the world? Do they plan on forcing everyone to use U.S. currency with their Aircraft Carriers? 
It appears to me Americans are completely clueless and are so drunk on power that they appear incapable of doing the simple math of what's happening to them and are still going around screaming Iran Iran Iran! And the biggest joke is that Iran is a country that hasn't started a war and invaded another country in centuries and is absolutely no threat of any kind to the U.S.!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

VEVAK said:


> In their current economic condition a new U.S. imposed war on any country would be idiotic let alone a country capable of effecting 1/4 of the worlds Oil supply!
> 
> U.S. with all the money they have spent in our region since George Bush declared victory (2003) could have instead colonized the moon and sent a man mission to mars and at least one other moon in our solar system with a fleet of real spaceships.
> 
> When the Americans invaded Iraq, China's economy was only 1/10 the size of the U.S. economy (GDP nominal) where as today the Chinese have brought their economy to almost 3/4 of the US economy by US $ standards not to mention the U.S. debt that's already at 108% of their GDP at $22 trillion USD and over $1 Trillion of which they owe to China while the Chinese debt is still below 50% of their GDP with an ever expanding military because the Chinese don't need to pay the salaries the U.S. has to pay, they don't need to pay for maintaining so many foreign military bases nor are they involved in so many global conflicts and their military R&D cost come to a fraction of what the U.S. has to pay due to salaries....
> I truly wonder what exactly do these Americans think will happen to the mighty Dollar when the U.S. no longer has the largest economy in the world? Do they plan on forcing everyone to use U.S. currency with their Aircraft Carriers?
> It appears to me Americans are completely clueless and are so drunk on power that they appear incapable of doing the simple math of what's happening to them and are still going around screaming Iran Iran Iran! And the biggest joke is that Iran is a country that hasn't started a war and invaded another country in centuries and is absolutely no threat of any kind to the U.S.!


A very good point.What exactly does happen to the us economy when the greenback is no longer the defacto global currency?,how will the us pay its bills when no one wants to buy greenbacks anymore?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tamiyah

skyshadow said:


> in terms of air force our best are upgraded F_14 with upgraded Phoenix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in terms of air defence our best are Bavar _ 373 and S 300 PMU 2 and Talash 2 and 3.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in terms of radar we have all kind of radars but must powerful ones are OTH with the range of 1500 km and 3000 km.




Any other than F-14 and how many of f14 are in service


----------



## xbat

Turkish Media reports recent F14 Crash in Isfahan, sorry it is Turkish

http://www.kokpit.aero/iran-f14-dustu


----------



## Mithridates

xbat said:


> Turkish Media reports recent F14 Crash in Isfahan, sorry it is Turkish
> 
> http://www.kokpit.aero/iran-f14-dustu


the pilots and plane are safe, the landing gear seems like didn't open. it will return to service in couple months.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> Any other than F-14 and how many of f14 are in service



well we had 79 f_14 but i think 50 of them are active, all the fighter jets that im going to tell you are heavily upgraded by Iran air force some of them can even carry Phoenix missiles.


F_5

F_4

F_14

F_7

MIG_29

SU_24

F_1

AZARAKHSH

SAEGHE 1 AND 2

KOWSAR

SU_25

SU_22


----------



## Tamiyah

Good 


skyshadow said:


> well we had 79 f_14 but i think 50 of them are active, all the fighter jets that im going to tell you are heavily upgraded by Iran air force some of them can even carry Phoenix missiles.
> 
> 
> F_5
> 
> F_4
> 
> F_14
> 
> F_7
> 
> MIG_29
> 
> SU_24
> 
> F_1
> 
> AZARAKHSH
> 
> SAEGHE 1 AND 2
> 
> KOWSAR
> 
> SU_25
> 
> SU_22



Good, IRIAF in depening on its own domestic made fleet instead of imported..
Well IRAN have made much progress in the last decade. Air defences . domestic made fleet of aircraft and naval ships. I think only one think left is plans for 5th generation aircraft. Well Pakistan have plans in name of Project Azm, India in AMCA , China in J-20 and probably J-31. Please dont bring QAHER-313 here I am talking about a fully matured aircraft like F-22 F35 and J-20 (its not fully matured yet but it counts as it is in service)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> well we had 79 f_14 but i think 50 of them are active, all the fighter jets that im going to tell you are heavily upgraded by Iran air force some of them can even carry Phoenix missiles.
> 
> 
> F_5
> 
> F_4
> 
> F_14
> 
> F_7
> 
> MIG_29
> 
> SU_24
> 
> F_1
> 
> AZARAKHSH
> 
> SAEGHE 1 AND 2
> 
> KOWSAR
> 
> SU_25
> 
> SU_22


More like 44 in service with 24 is fully mission/combat ready and the other 20 is partial capable, which mean it can flight but can be use in combat

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Mithridates

T-72B said:


> More like 44 in service with 24 is fully mission/combat ready and the other 20 is partial capable, which mean it can flight but can be use in combat


all remaining f-14s are fully capable IRIAF grounded half the fleet to reduce maintenance cost, unknown numbers are upgraded.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tamiyah

T-72B said:


> More like 44 in service with 24 is fully mission/combat ready
> 
> 
> Mithridates said:
> 
> 
> 
> all remaining f-14s are fully capable IRIAF grounded half the fleet to reduce maintenance cost, unknown numbers are upgraded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the other 20 is partial capable, which mean it can flight but can be use in combat
Click to expand...

 Buy those F-14 are outdated you should try something of new design like deltas and canards. Take some help from China or Russia they will help you.


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> Buy those F-14 are outdated you should try something of new design like deltas and canards. Take some help from China or Russia they will help you.



they had this uav vision


----------



## Tamiyah

skyshadow said:


> they had this uav vision


Never saw this concept of IRAN before


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> Buy those F-14 are outdated you should try something of new design like deltas and canards. Take some help from China or Russia they will help you.


our f-14s are better than US f-14c. they retired f-14 for the same reason we grounded our fleet and because they have little AG capability otherwise f-14 is the best 4th generation US made. 
we tried in the past we were developing 5th generation with russia but US pressure made them leave the project, the project name was shafagh:


----------



## Tamiyah

Mithridates said:


> our f-14s are better than US f-14c. they retired f-14 for the same reason we grounded our fleet and because they have little AG capability otherwise f-14 is the best 4th generation US made.
> we tried in the past we were developing 5th generation with russia but US pressure made them leave the project, the project name was shafagh:
> View attachment 560157
> 
> View attachment 560158
> 
> View attachment 560159
> 
> View attachment 560160


Isnt it sad that a full 5th gen project that abandoned due to fear of US sanctions


----------



## Mithridates

Tamiyah said:


> Isnt it sad that a full 5th gen project that abandoned due to fear of US sanctions


it is indeed. the plane was potent.


----------



## skyshadow

Tamiyah said:


> Never saw this concept of IRAN before



yes Iran never speak about its on going programs they never said any thing about Qaher they still refuse to show us Bavar 373 or there version of *GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast *(*MOAB*) they did not show us Kowsar fighter jet until it was finished,they do not say anything about missiles, and they are working on Passenger plane capacity of +150 ppl.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WordsMatter

What a fvcking joke... as if IRI is capable of building a needle let alone a civilian airliner. LMAO


----------



## Deino

Mithridates said:


> it is indeed. the plane was potent.




Nope, it was not. It was not a fifth generation figther, but at best a trainer similar to the Yak-130 or JL-10 and surely far from potent in any way as a fighter.

Come on guys ... do you even think before you post?


----------



## Mithridates

Deino said:


> Nope, it was not. It was not a fifth generation figther, but at best a trainer similar to the Yak-130 or JL-10 and surely far from potent in any way as a fighter.
> 
> Come on guys ... do you even think before you post?


this is trainer mockup:




final stealth multirole supposed to share many avionics and FBW with mig-35 with LEO characteristics:




this is not something that i made up, MOD authorities stated shafagh project gonna include a trainer, single seat multirole and an stealthy single seat multirole.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Mithridates said:


> this is trainer mockup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> final stealth multirole supposed to share many avionics and FBW with mig-35 with LEO characteristics:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is not something that i made up, MOD authorities stated shafagh project gonna include a trainer, single seat multirole and an stealthy single seat multirole.




It's a what if project, a fanatsy concept, a wet dream but surely never a realistic program. I know quite well what is reported in the Iranian media but we all know also how unlikely any of these fancy projects will ever be done. 

There's nothing to power them, no adequate avionics, no industrial base ... and please not again, with that lame argument, we copied certain US drones, we develop a turbofan version based on the J85 and so on ...


----------



## Mithridates

Deino said:


> It's a what if project, a fanatsy concept, a wet dream but surely never a realistic program. I know quite well what is reported in the Iranian media but we all know also how unlikely any of these fancy projects will ever be done.
> 
> There's nothing to power them, no adequate avionics, no industrial base ... and please not again, with that lame argument, we copied certain US drones, we develop a turbofan version based on the J85 and so on ...



the avionics were from mig-35 so as engines. i never said it was iranian project.


----------



## Deino

Mithridates said:


> the avionics were from mig-35 so as engines. i never said it was iranian project.



Don't get me wrong and I hope you don't take my reply as a direct reply to you in person or as an offence, but these models we know since years have unfortunately not a single change to be done.

And concerning your hint of a Russian cooperation, that makes it even less likely.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tamiyah

skyshadow said:


> yes Iran never speak about its on going programs they never said any thing about Qaher they still refuse to show us Bavar 373 or there version of *GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast *(*MOAB*) they did not show us Kowsar fighter jet until it was finished,they do not say anything about missiles, and they are working on Passenger plane capacity of +150 ppl.



Well you guys know whats cooking in your air industry. We dont know a single project that is running secretly in Air Bases or Kamra

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> our f-14s are better than US f-14c. they retired f-14 for the same reason we grounded our fleet and because they have little AG capability otherwise f-14 is the best 4th generation US made.
> we tried in the past we were developing 5th generation with russia but US pressure made them leave the project, the project name was shafagh:
> View attachment 560157
> 
> View attachment 560158
> 
> View attachment 560159
> 
> View attachment 560160


For god sake 5th generation means supercruising..AESA radar...why people all the time push F-313 and noe Shafaq as 5th generation when Iran officials clearly never would classified those airceafts as 5th generation...F-313 is subsonic and without radar as is Shafaq...There was fighter version of Shafaq but not 5th generation...today even Russia yet doesn't have 5th generation as those SU-57 yet to get super cruising with new engines

When it comes to airliner,it is mostly about development costs vs market requirements,Iran needs many 150 seat airliners so it would make sense to build it,what is with An-158 license??


----------



## xbat

where did IR AN-140 go? forum members were very happy with it.


----------



## Hack-Hook

xbat said:


> where did IR AN-140 go? forum members were very happy with it.


Because Ukraine could not provide suitable engine for iran environment the project is shelved right now until they find some engine that can operate safely in iran environment.


----------



## sanel1412

Yeah,Iran is very complex when it comes to this,airliners have to fly over high mountains with very danger weather conditions and turbo prop engines are limited when it comes to attlitude


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Yeah,Iran is very complex when it comes to this,airliners have to fly over high mountains with very danger weather conditions and turbo prop engines are limited when it comes to attlitude


Not that . the problem was the engine could not provide enough power in iran warm weather in summer n it was ok for cold weather of Ukraine.


----------



## skyshadow

Mig-29 on alert,armed with r-73 AA-11 Archer








Iran air force IRIAF F-4 E has been modernized to allow it to carry anti-ship missiles up to 160km,precise laser/eo/ir guided bombs and rockets and modern long range ARH guided a2a missiles like fakour 90(iran improved version of AIM54)













__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1128247840759799808


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1128249053664481281

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> LOL! I only brought up the fact that Iran has a conscript system because of the absurd comment you made about my lack of military training which is an absurd thing to say to any Iranians my age due to our conscript system vast majority of us have some military training which was the main point I was making.


Duration of time served is just as, if not more important. Can you dispute what I posted about the layout of your two-yrs term? Can you make any credible comparison between contributions of your two-yrs vs my ten? Not only that, in my civilian yrs, I have nearly 9 yrs in avionics, specifically radar detection, and even more specific, I designed radar field tests for detection of 'low altitude autonomous' air vehicles. So that made nearly 20 yrs of contributing to US airpower.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

WinterNights said:


> As far as we know, according to the those who captured the drone (Iran), there was extensive measures taken to greatly reduce the RCS of this UAV, in form of RAM and others. RQ-170 is _stealthy_ not stealth. There is nothing that is truly stealth. But I am sure you already know this.


Am going to give you an explanation that you will not like because it is technically sound. I expect you to dispute it. I do not post this to change your mind but this is for the benefit of the silent readers out there who want more than just what Iran says about this event.

Look at this F-16 inside an EM anechoic chamber...






Why did we bothered to put a 'non-stealth' fighter into an EM anechoic chamber?

Most people thinks that an EM anechoic chamber is *ONLY* to measure the 'stealthiness' of the F-22 and similar. That is not true. An EM anechoic chamber is usually used to test the radiation pattern of various transmitters on aircrafts and even cars. BMW tested their cars at Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF) at Edwards AFB, US.

For receivers, while an aircraft is inside the chamber, its antennas can be tested and measured to see how many directions can the antennas receive and how efficient are those receptions. In the reception process, efficiency can be a negative because that efficiency can produce interference from many signals when the intention is to focus on a narrow range of signal(s).

So when we put a 'non-stealth' fighter like an F-16 into EM isolation, we are testing the various communication methods like common HF, GPS, Link-16, and weapons guidance that can come from ground sources. We want to see which signal can interfere with what, from which direction(s), and when. In combat, these communication signals are active at various times and even at all times.

The installation of RAM on the RQ-170 is not to reduce RCS, although that is a benefit. The drone is unmanned and remotely piloted. It can also receive various communication signals from other sources. The absorber is there to primarily control interference. If there is a reduction in RCS, great. If not, we do not care. The remote pilot feature is satellite relayed so that mean the antennas for that are topside. Absorber reduce and even eliminate any interference from edge diffraction signals that came from radar or any common EM transmissions that can negatively affect those topside antennas. The transmission/reception signals for the remote pilot feature should be as absolute integrity as possible.

You will not like my explanation despite being technically and logically sound. I cannot go any more details because that would enter the INFOSEC realm. You will not like this explanation because it reduces the propaganda impact this event. It is better and important for Iranians to believe that Iran was able to detect anything 'stealth' from America.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> Am going to give you an explanation that you will not like because it is technically sound. I expect you to dispute it. I do not post this to change your mind but this is for the benefit of the silent readers out there who want more than just what Iran says about this event.
> 
> Look at this F-16 inside an EM anechoic chamber...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did we bothered to put a 'non-stealth' fighter into an EM anechoic chamber?
> 
> Most people thinks that an EM anechoic chamber is *ONLY* to measure the 'stealthiness' of the F-22 and similar. That is not true. An EM anechoic chamber is usually used to test the radiation pattern of various transmitters on aircrafts and even cars. BMW tested their cars at Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF) at Edwards AFB, US.
> 
> For receivers, while an aircraft is inside the chamber, its antennas can be tested and measured to see how many directions can the antennas receive and how efficient are those receptions. In the reception process, efficiency can be a negative because that efficiency can produce interference from many signals when the intention is to focus on a narrow range of signal(s).
> 
> So when we put a 'non-stealth' fighter like an F-16 into EM isolation, we are testing the various communication methods like common HF, GPS, Link-16, and weapons guidance that can come from ground sources. We want to see which signal can interfere with what, from which direction(s), and when. In combat, these communication signals are active at various times and even at all times.
> 
> The installation of RAM on the RQ-170 is not to reduce RCS, although that is a benefit. The drone is unmanned and remotely piloted. It can also receive various communication signals from other sources. The absorber is there to primarily control interference. If there is a reduction in RCS, great. If not, we do not care. The remote pilot feature is satellite relayed so that mean the antennas for that are topside. Absorber reduce and even eliminate any interference from edge diffraction signals that came from radar or any common EM transmissions that can negatively affect those topside antennas. The transmission/reception signals for the remote pilot feature should be as absolute integrity as possible.
> 
> You will not like my explanation despite being technically and logically sound. I cannot go any more details because that would enter the INFOSEC realm. You will not like this explanation because it reduces the propaganda impact this event. It is better and important for Iranians to believe that Iran was able to detect anything 'stealth' from America.



You appear to have a tendency to try and accuse us of not being objective and believing "propaganda" yet you're the one that is trying to push this illogical and baseless notion that this spy UAV being fielded by the CIA was not designed as a stealth platform. This makes zero sense in every possible way. This UAV was designed from the get go to be stealth and this is obvious given what is was being used for :


"The development of the RQ-170 was started by Skunk Works to meet the stealth UAV demands of the USAF."


https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rq-170-sentinel/

Your post is informative, but it does not in any way prove the point you're trying to make. You're essentially trying to say just because these other technologies have uses other than stealth then this somehow proves the sentinel was not designed to be stealth. Not a very sound deductive reasoning, is it? The core of your argument is based on no actual evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> You appear to have a tendency to try and accuse us of not being objective and believing "propaganda" yet you're the one that is trying to push this illogical and baseless notion that this spy UAV being fielded by the CIA was not designed as a stealth platform. This makes zero sense in every possible way. This UAV was designed from the get go to be stealth and this is obvious given what is was being used for :
> 
> 
> "The development of the RQ-170 was started by Skunk Works to meet the stealth UAV demands of the USAF."
> 
> 
> https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rq-170-sentinel/
> 
> Your post is informative, but it does not in any way prove the point you're trying to make. You're essentially trying to say just because these other technologies have uses other than stealth then this somehow proves the sentinel was not designed to be stealth. Not a very sound deductive reasoning, is it? The core of your argument is based on no actual evidence.



There are various levels of “stealth”. Including the highest levels which include B-2 and F-22, these are nationally restricted levels of stealth and considered state secrets banned for export.

RQ-170 was designed to be stealthy, however, due to its nature of being in combat zones and UNMANNED the order was given to make it stealthy to avoid detection by Iran given what they assumed Iran’s and regional countries detection capabilties were. However, RQ-170 was purposely made with the thought that if it were to be captured it wouldn’t jeopardize state secrets.

The most advanced areas of RQ-170 was its communication devices to monitor Iranian nuclear facilities and possibly the engine given Iran’s lack of access to jet engine technology. The flying wing design was standard and instead of radar absorbing skin it appears RQ-170 opted for less advanced composite materials to reduce radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Duration of time served is just as, if not more important. Can you dispute what I posted about the layout of your two-yrs term? Can you make any credible comparison between contributions of your two-yrs vs my ten? Not only that, in my civilian yrs, I have nearly 9 yrs in avionics, specifically radar detection, and even more specific, I designed radar field tests for detection of 'low altitude autonomous' air vehicles. So that made nearly 20 yrs of contributing to US airpower.



And you think that makes you knowledgeable about Iranian weapons, tactics & an outcome of a war between U.S. and Iran because???? 

Fact is since WW2 U.S. has not engaged in a war with a country that can sink it's ships, not just hit it's bases but hit vital assets at it's bases & cut off 1/4 of the worlds oil supply and unlike in WW2 Nukes are not some jaw dropping capability that's never been seen before and the U.S. wiping out Iran's Air Force isn't going to stop Iran from launching armed UCAV's & missiles. 

Fact is you Americans have run up a debt that's 108% of your GDP and this time around you don't have an economy that's double the size of the next country on the list & even without a war you would have to work overtime not to lose your economic supremacy to China within the next 2 decades (with it the rule of the Dollar) and doing something stupid like attacking a country that can cut off 1/4 of worlds petrodollar will do nothing but expedite your own decline so regardless of the result of the war you lose.

From the moment U.S. invaded Iraq to today the U.S. debt has gone from 50% of your GDP to 108% of your GDP & for what? You Americans where duped into spending blood and treasure in our region at a time when your economy and technology was unmatched by none and you had the technology to colonize the moon and beyond and build a fleet of real spaceships that would have ensured U.S. supremacy for the next century and by today your space technology could have made fighting over the earth's natural resources and energy pipelines seem ridicules. And the sad part is you ppl still haven't learned your lesson!

You think I don't understand that the point of the exercise was to learn what not to do so you don't repeat the same mistakes made in the sim? But the sad truth is if your own military truly understood that they wouldn't have stopped it, replaced the general playing the Red team & rigged it with a new set of rules to ensure victory!
Fact is if your own military truly understood the point of the simulation they would have gave the U.S. General playing the Red Team a medal! Because if there is a war, his actions probably saved the lives of 1000's of service men & women 
Now imagine for a second that was 1 U.S. General who spent a limited time playing Iran now imagine since the U.S. invasion of Iraq & Afghanistan how many Iranian generals from different branches of Iran's military for how many years have been thinking about, planning for & building weapons to fight off a war with the U.S.? You think Iran just watched as the U.S. built bases around it's territory and did nothing? You think Iran doesn't know it's Air Force regardless of how much money Iran spent on it still wouldn't survive against U.S. Air Power and didn't plan accordingly?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

WinterNights said:


> You appear to have a tendency to try and accuse us of not being objective and believing "propaganda" yet you're the one that is trying to push this illogical and baseless notion that this spy UAV being fielded by the CIA was not designed as a stealth platform. This makes zero sense in every possible way. This UAV was designed from the get go to be stealth and this is obvious given what is was being used for :
> 
> 
> "The development of the RQ-170 was started by Skunk Works to meet the stealth UAV demands of the USAF."
> 
> 
> https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rq-170-sentinel/
> 
> Your post is informative, but it does not in any way prove the point you're trying to make. You're essentially trying to say just because these other technologies have uses other than stealth then this somehow proves the sentinel was not designed to be stealth. Not a very sound deductive reasoning, is it? The core of your argument is based on no actual evidence.


I did say you would not like it and would dispute it. I know my post was informative. In fact, since '09, I debunked most of the 'stealth' myths that were carelessly tossed around on this forum. Today, no forum 'old timer' talk about making any jet 'stealthy' any more, thanks to me. Either the jet is designed to be 'stealthy' from paper, or it is not 'stealthy' at all. I posted the basic guidelines in designing a low radar observable body yrs ago. You are free to believe anything you like.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> I did say you would not like it and would dispute it. I know my post was informative. In fact, since '09, I debunked most of the 'stealth' myths that were carelessly tossed around on this forum. Today, no forum 'old timer' talk about making any jet 'stealthy' any more, thanks to me. Either the jet is designed to be 'stealthy' from paper, or it is not 'stealthy' at all. I posted the basic guidelines in designing a low radar observable body yrs ago. You are free to believe anything you like.


but it is possible to reduce a plane RCS even it was not designed to be stealth.
but capturing rq-170 still is a big victory even if it's not stealthy, considering EW we performed.


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> but it is possible to reduce a plane RCS even it was not designed to be stealth.


Absolutely. Nowhere have I ever said RCS reduction on an existing platform cannot be done.

Boeing did it on the F-15 Silent Eagle. The F-18 Super Hornet is another example.

The question is tactical value vs money. If it is going to cost you hundreds of millions just reduce the detection distance by 5 miles, like from 100 to only 95, then the money vs result is no good.

I will put it another way with this analogy...

- Alert 60. The pilot is allowed to be away from his jet. He can go to the gym, shopping, or even go home for a quickie with the wife. As long as he can get to his jet, suit up, and taxi in one hr.

- Alert 30. In this situation, the pilot should not be away from his jet. He can be out of his flight suit but he should be able to suit up, fire up, and taxi within 30 min.

- Alert 15. In this situation, the pilot is suit up, including his g-suit, but the jet is not running. The pilot must be within eyesight vicinity of his jet. He just need to taxi within 15 minutes.

- Alert 5. The pilot is in the jet with engines running, INS spooled up and aligned.

What 'stealth' does is put every airbase on Alert 5, if you want to defend yourself. Modifying an existing platform may reduce the enemy's status from 60 to 30 and this is being optimistic of your technical efforts. The tactical reality is that if you want to gain an advantage, the efforts must force the enemy to 'Alert 15' and stay there as long as possible.



Mithridates said:


> but capturing rq-170 still is a big victory even if it's not stealthy, considering EW we performed.


It was not a huge loss for US, technology wise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> The F-18 Super Hornet is another example


did you add RAM to the outside of structure or just modified the air inlets and get that number for RCS (0.1 sqm)?? 
also regarding the stealth and scrambles, you know that we raided iraq h-3 airport in it's western border without being detected using your f-4s, i guess that is in contrary to your alert codes.


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> did you add RAM to the outside of structure or just modified the air inlets and get that number for RCS (0.1 sqm)??


You can read some of the public reports about the F-18's RCS reduction results here...

https://www.defensenews.com/digital.../09/how-stealthy-is-boeings-new-super-hornet/



Mithridates said:


> also regarding the stealth and scrambles, you know that we raided iraq h-3 airport in it's western border without being detected using your f-4s, i guess that is in contrary to your alert codes.


Details? Or rather lack of?


----------



## sanel1412

Mithridates said:


> but it is possible to reduce a plane RCS even it was not designed to be stealth.
> but capturing rq-170 still is a big victory even if it's not stealthy, considering EW we performed.


Who ever told you it is not stealth ,is complete idiot who knows nothing,it is truth that larger fly wing design is more stealthy BUT only in 1 meter and 10 meter specter(UHF,VHF)...that clown is talking nonsense..That doesn't mean B-2 will have lower RCS on UHF/vhf spectrum than RQ-170 because it is not posible, it just mean that larger object will have better size vs rcs ratio...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

sanel1412 said:


> Who ever told you it is not stealth ,is complete idiot who knows nothing,it is truth that larger fly wing design is more stealthy BUT only in 1 meter and 10 meter specter(UHF,VHF)...that clown is talking nonsense..That doesn't mean B-2 will have lower RCS on UHF/vhf spectrum than RQ-170 because it is not posible, it just mean that larger object will have better size vs rcs ratio...


I told him that. And am willing to bet I understand radar detection principles and low radar observability better than you do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> You can read some of the public reports about the F-18's RCS reduction results here...
> 
> https://www.defensenews.com/digital.../09/how-stealthy-is-boeings-new-super-hornet/
> 
> 
> Details? Or rather lack of?


well by your classifications of alerts they should have see we are coming for 1 hour but they didn't noticed. i mean you can avoid being detected even if you are in a non stealth plane. then how is that classification relevant?? do you mean normal flights in normal altitudes?? then again that classification is not accurate.


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> well by your classifications of alerts they should have see we are coming for 1 hour but they didn't noticed. i mean you can avoid being detected even if you are in a non stealth plane. then how is that classification relevant?? do you mean normal flights in normal altitudes?? then again that classification is not accurate.


I think you missed the point of my examples.

The alert status I presented was to illustrate the posture of response independent of whether there is a detected threat or not. If the suspected threat is 'stealth', then the prudent status is Alert 5. Unfortunately, no air force base can maintain that status for long, and that was the point: That 'stealth' creates high degrees of uncertainty which inevitably increases operational tempo stress on the defense.

However you avoid detection is your business. For US, we are now using 'stealth'. Avoidance by 'non-stealth' methods does not invalidate the tactical utility and advantages of 'stealth'. Just that 'stealth' gives more options.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> I did say you would not like it and would dispute it. I know my post was informative. In fact, since '09, I debunked most of the 'stealth' myths that were carelessly tossed around on this forum. Today, no forum 'old timer' talk about making any jet 'stealthy' any more, thanks to me. Either the jet is designed to be 'stealthy' from paper, or it is not 'stealthy' at all. I posted the basic guidelines in designing a low radar observable body yrs ago. You are free to believe anything you like.



The point is not whether I like it or not, the point is the substance of your argument. Like I said, the core of your claim has no evidence backing it up. Unless you can provide actual evidence that this RQ was never designed to be a stealthy platform form it's inception, then there is not much more to discuss here.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> I did say you would not like it and would dispute it. I know my post was informative. In fact, since '09, I debunked most of the 'stealth' myths that were carelessly tossed around on this forum. Today, no forum 'old timer' talk about making any jet 'stealthy' any more, thanks to me. Either the jet is designed to be 'stealthy' from paper, or it is not 'stealthy' at all. I posted the basic guidelines in designing a low radar observable body yrs ago. You are free to believe anything you like.



Maybe you should of told that to Boeing before they spent all the money on the F-15 Silent Eagle.

So you can most defiantly reduce an Aircraft's RCS where in layman's terms people could claim it to be stealthier! But does it make it a stealth fighter, unless originally designed to be one of course not! Because your modifications would have to be so extensive that you'd probably be better off paying the cost of a completely new design.











WinterNights said:


> The point is not whether I like it or not, the point is the substance of your argument. Like I said, the core of your claim has no evidence backing it up. Unless you can provide actual evidence that this RQ was never designed to be a stealthy platform form it's inception, then there is not much more to discuss here.



It's a flying wing design UAV that was being used by the CIA! I believe that speaks for it's self as to whether it's a stealth UAV or not!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

VEVAK said:


> It's a flying wing design UAV that was being used by the CIA! I believe that speaks for it's self as to whether it's a stealth UAV or not!



I tried telling him that, but apparently this was not obvious enough for him.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

WinterNights said:


> The point is not whether I like it or not, the point is the substance of your argument.


From my debating on this forum since '09 when I was invited here, I found *USUALLY* nationalistic passions trumps logic and evidence, so from that perspective, it does matter whether you like what I presented or not.

- The flying wing design have been around since the 1920s. The first powered flight was in 1903. So we are looking at barely 20 yrs since the birth of aviation that the flying wing started being investigated as a viable flying design.

- The flying wing design have inherent reduced radar return. The first operational radar did not make its debut until WW II. The idea of an EM 'cross section' of a body did not exist.

In hindsight, we cannot reasonably associate the two facts that the flying wing design itself was the result of a deliberate intent to design a radar low observable body, so despite hindsight with improved knowledge, the usage of the flying wing design itself does not equal to a deliberate intent to avoid radar detection. Long range as an inherent character of the design is also well known since the 1920s.



WinterNights said:


> Like I said, the core of your claim has no evidence backing it up. Unless you can provide actual evidence that this RQ was never designed to be a stealthy platform form it's inception, then there is not much more to discuss here.


Regarding post 3350 back on page 224, another thing I noticed about debating on this forum is that people do not want to take the time to observe the photographic evidence they see.

What did you noticed about the F-16 in that anechoic chamber? Is it possible that the jet's wings payload are asymmetrical for a reason? If there was a technical reason why, is it possible that what I said about measurement of radiation patterns -- valid?

The 'actual evidence' you insist on does exist, but just because they do exist does not mean they are publicly available. So even if somehow I am 'in the know', I cannot reveal such evidence anyway. I care about my country as much as you care for yours, right?

So what remains are our willingness to put aside any biases, look at the list of available evidence, the chain of associations, and at least be willing to entertain reasonable assumptions of alternative conclusions, as best of conclusions as we can.

Your mind is made up. I get that. But you are not the only person who are interested in this event and its associated technical issues involved. I post not to debate your made up mind, but give the silent readers out there the alternative conclusions that do not exist in most forums, certainly not in Iranian military oriented forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Maybe you should of told that to Boeing before they spent all the money on the F-15 Silent Eagle.
> 
> So you can most defiantly reduce an Aircraft's RCS where in layman's terms people could claim it to be stealthier! But does it make it a stealth fighter, unless originally designed to be one of course not! Because your modifications would have to be so extensive that you'd probably be better off paying the cost of a completely new design.


This implies I do not know what I am talking about regarding basic radar detection principles and 'stealth'. So here goes...

There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body:

- Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators
- Control of *ARRAY* of radiators
- Control of *MODES* of radiation

While I used the world 'rules', they are more like guidelines. They are not 'rules' that you can break but guidelines that you can have degrees of obedience to them.

While rule one -- Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators -- is the first rule, it does not mean it is of higher value than the other two. All three rules are equal in importance with Rule One having the first consideration at conception.

You can take what I said above to Lockheed, Boeing, or your Iranian aviation/radar experts and *NO ONE* will dispute. I am that confident. 

So for the F-15SE, we cannot put the basic airframe under Rule One. We cannot remove any flight control structures. At best, we may reshape or even resize them, but we cannot remove any of them.

Which lead to Rule Two -- Control of *ARRAY* of radiators. Twin canted vertical stabs eliminated the 90 deg corner reflectors created by the physical relationships -- array -- between the vertical and horizontal stabs. Enclosing the weapons load also falls under Rule Two because the conformal weapons bays (CWB) eliminated completely any geometric structures from the weapons.

For Rule Three -- Control of *MODES* of radiation -- there is some application of absorber at strategic airframe locations. The curvatures of the CWB also affects radiation behaviors (modes).

So based upon the three rules, not likely the F-16 will be a candidate for any kind of RCS reduction package because the F-16's basic airframe cannot fall under rules One and Two. We cannot eliminate the single vertical stab and we cannot cant (tilt) it. We can install a V tail on the F-16 but that would make the new airframe less obedient to Rule One, but if we cant (tilt) the new twin vertical stabs to eliminate the 90 deg corner reflector structures, that would make the new airframe more obedient to Rule Two. Then we can apply absorber to make the new F-16 more obedient to Rule Three. Do you see where am heading here?

The F-15 is a larger airframe and that made it more flexible for modifications than the F-16. The F-16's basic airframe would make it difficult to modify it to have twin canted vertical stabs without having major structural reinforcement to that area. This further reduces the odds of the F-16 candidacy for any level of RCS reduction methods.

So yes, I do know what am talking about. And am willing to bet you just learned a lot more from me than from your Iranian military forums. 



VEVAK said:


> It's a flying wing design UAV that was being used by the CIA! I believe that speaks for it's self as to whether it's a stealth UAV or not!


Aaahh...So just because you inserted the initials 'CIA' into the mix, that made the RQ-170 valid in your argument?

In my opinion, the RQ-170 does have some inherent low radar observable traits but it is not 'stealthy' in the deliberateness of the F-117, F-22, F-35, and B-2.

My opinion is based upon knowledge as posted above. Your opinion is based upon three letters of the English alphabet and readers' inferences.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> In my opinion, the RQ-170 does have some inherent low radar observable traits but it is not 'stealthy' in the deliberateness of the F-117, F-22, F-35, and B-2.


i wonder if it not desigbed to be stealthy , why you guys used RAM on it , what difference it have compared to b2


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> i wonder if it not desigbed to be stealthy , why you guys used RAM on it , what difference it have compared to b2


See post 3350 page 224.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> The installation of RAM on the RQ-170 is not to reduce RCS, although that is a benefit. The drone is unmanned and remotely piloted. It can also receive various communication signals from other sources. The absorber is there to primarily control interference. If there is a reduction in RCS, great. If not, we do not care. The remote pilot feature is satellite relayed so that mean the antennas for that are topside. Absorber reduce and even eliminate any interference from edge diffraction signals that came from radar or any common EM transmissions that can negatively affect those topside antennas. The transmission/reception signals for the remote pilot feature should be as absolute integrity as possible.


That explanation can be held exactly about B2 .you just need to change remote pilot with onboard computer.
The drone was designed to work unnoticed in contested air space and behinf enemy air defence .thats also my logical and technical explanations I wonder how you refute that.

Also I still wonder why B2 is stealth but you say RQ-170 is not.while it has the design of a stealth fighter. 
Here we say if its round look like and taste like walnut then its probably walnut.


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> That explanation can be held exactly about B2 .you just need to change remote pilot with onboard computer.
> The drone was designed to work unnoticed in contested air space and behinf enemy air defence .thats also my logical and technical explanations I wonder how you refute that.


This falls under the Horten 229 appearance error. Because the Nazis explored the flying wing design and the Horten Brothers had iron fillings in the design, that mean the Nazis had first dibs on 'stealth'.

What make the B-2 different from the Ho-229 and the RQ-170 was that the B-2 was designed from concept, shaped, measured, reshaped, remeasured, and the cycle continued until we see the final product today.

The Ho-229 did not go thru that shape-reshape-measure process. The Horten Brothers did not have a continuous usage of radar to test their aircraft. Their flying wing design was chosen more for long range, which I pointed out several times already, than for its inherent low radar observability.

Same for the RQ-170. Just because the aircraft was designed in secret, it must have mean 'stealth', right? No. Its predecessors were also developed in secret and we know there is nothing 'stealthy' about propellers. The RQ-170 is designed to be *EXPENDABLE*, meaning any losses for any reason would not affect the greater tactical mission, which is primarily about providing real time intelligence. If we lose one, the local commander have another readied, and another, and another, and so on. From the B-2, we know enough about the flying wing inherent low radar observability that there is no need to make it any more 'stealthy' than it already is. Spending more technical efforts on this UAV to the extent of the B-2 would mean each UAV would reach a price point where its availability would be tactically limited.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> This falls under the Horten 229 appearance error. Because the Nazis explored the flying wing design and the Horten Brothers had iron fillings in the design, that mean the Nazis had first dibs on 'stealth'.


Horton 229 had lots of vertical stabilizers, not very good for RCS.

And do you have any evidence that RQ-170 didn't go under the tests for reducing RCS.

By the way while you guys already did all the hard work while developing B2 what's the need to reinvent the wheel . many of the calculation and concepts related to the design of B2 can be used for designing RQ-170 and that's the reason it didn't go under as rigorous test as b2.
Also who says being expendable means being not stealthy .
A question for you a U2 is less stealthy as RQ-170 is it designed to be cheap and expendable.

Being expendable mean being able to replace it easily . you can't replace a U2 easily as you must train the pilot for it and that's not easy. You can replace RQ-170 easily by ordering one out of storage.


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> Horton 229 had lots of vertical stabilizers, not very good for RCS.


But those who were/are eager to deny US the credit for 'stealth' go by appearance. Details are irrelevant.



Hack-Hook said:


> And do you have any evidence that RQ-170 didn't go under the tests for reducing RCS.


No, I do not. But that does not automatically make the opposite happened. Again, the Ho-229 have inherent low radar observability but we know it did not go thru measurement.



Hack-Hook said:


> By the way while you guys already did all the hard work while developing B2 what's the need to reinvent the wheel . many of the calculation and concepts related to the design of B2 can be used for designing RQ-170 and that's the reason it didn't go under as rigorous test as b2.


Sounds reasonable.



Hack-Hook said:


> Also who says being expendable means being not stealthy .


Never said it could not be. Again, the flying wind itself have inherent low radar observability. I can repeat that all day. 



Hack-Hook said:


> A question for you a U2 is less stealthy as RQ-170 is it designed to be cheap and expendable.


No, the U-2/TR-1 was not designed to be expendable. Its design includes mission adaptive packages, meaning different sensor for specific mission. We had the U-2 and SR-71 for different types of reconnaissance.

Whenever people use the words 'real time', they think of something from the movies where you can watch something going on immediately. While that is technically true, what is 'real time' actually have time intervals between updates of intelligence. If you are informed of something at 2 hrs apart, that is 'real time'. A car can move farther in two days than in two hrs. A U-2 can fly for 12 hrs. So within that 12 hrs, you can be informed of the car's movement every two hrs, one hrs, or one minute intervals. On the other hand, the SR-71's speed and fuel capacity enabled it to penetrate contested airspace, gain intelligence, and return home in as short a time as possible, usually within a few hrs. That is also 'real time'.

This means the U-2 was not intended to be expendable regardless of how much to produce it.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> But those who were/are eager to deny US the credit for 'stealth' go by appearance. Details are irrelevant.


I credit USA with stealth but the flying wing design is not USA design .


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> I credit USA with stealth but the flying wing design is not USA design .


Weeell,that would of course depend on your definition of "stealth".Historically the 1916 Linke Hofman r1 bomber is usually considered to be the first attempt at a "stealth" aircraft,tho the stealth in question was optical,basically making a large section of the fuselage and tail see-thru through the use of a material called cellon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Weeell,that would of course depend on your definition of "stealth".Historically the 1916 Linke Hofman r1 bomber is usually considered to be the first attempt at a "stealth" aircraft,tho the stealth in question was optical,basically making a large section of the fuselage and tail see-thru through the use of a material called cellon.


Come on . that aircraft is invisible only because the reflection of sunlight on that cleon layer made enemy gunner blind. That air craft is visible from twice the distance .


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> Come on . that aircraft is invisible only because the reflection of sunlight on that cleon layer made enemy gunner blind. That air craft is visible from twice the distance .


That turned out to be the big flaw with the theory,from certain angles the sunlight was reflected making the aircraft more visible not less,none the less this was the first recorded attempt at "stealth".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

https://sputniknews.com/us/201905151075036807-sanders-iran-war-iraq-bolton/

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/plane-no-f-35-it-could-terrorize-america’s-enemies-58552


----------



## skyshadow

Ray_Atek said:


> https://sputniknews.com/us/201905151075036807-sanders-iran-war-iraq-bolton/
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/plane-no-f-35-it-could-terrorize-america’s-enemies-58552


----------



## Arminkh

Sineva said:


> Weeell,that would of course depend on your definition of "stealth".Historically the 1916 Linke Hofman r1 bomber is usually considered to be the first attempt at a "stealth" aircraft,tho the stealth in question was optical,basically making a large section of the fuselage and tail see-thru through the use of a material called cellon.


I just can't stop admiring German engineering and their ambitious designs before they lost WWII. Wish they hadn't lost this spirit.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> This implies I do not know what I am talking about regarding basic radar detection principles and 'stealth'. So here goes...
> 
> There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body:
> 
> - Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators
> - Control of *ARRAY* of radiators
> - Control of *MODES* of radiation
> 
> While I used the world 'rules', they are more like guidelines. They are not 'rules' that you can break but guidelines that you can have degrees of obedience to them.
> 
> While rule one -- Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators -- is the first rule, it does not mean it is of higher value than the other two. All three rules are equal in importance with Rule One having the first consideration at conception.
> 
> You can take what I said above to Lockheed, Boeing, or your Iranian aviation/radar experts and *NO ONE* will dispute. I am that confident.
> 
> So for the F-15SE, we cannot put the basic airframe under Rule One. We cannot remove any flight control structures. At best, we may reshape or even resize them, but we cannot remove any of them.
> 
> Which lead to Rule Two -- Control of *ARRAY* of radiators. Twin canted vertical stabs eliminated the 90 deg corner reflectors created by the physical relationships -- array -- between the vertical and horizontal stabs. Enclosing the weapons load also falls under Rule Two because the conformal weapons bays (CWB) eliminated completely any geometric structures from the weapons.
> 
> For Rule Three -- Control of *MODES* of radiation -- there is some application of absorber at strategic airframe locations. The curvatures of the CWB also affects radiation behaviors (modes).
> 
> So based upon the three rules, not likely the F-16 will be a candidate for any kind of RCS reduction package because the F-16's basic airframe cannot fall under rules One and Two. We cannot eliminate the single vertical stab and we cannot cant (tilt) it. We can install a V tail on the F-16 but that would make the new airframe less obedient to Rule One, but if we cant (tilt) the new twin vertical stabs to eliminate the 90 deg corner reflector structures, that would make the new airframe more obedient to Rule Two. Then we can apply absorber to make the new F-16 more obedient to Rule Three. Do you see where am heading here?
> 
> The F-15 is a larger airframe and that made it more flexible for modifications than the F-16. The F-16's basic airframe would make it difficult to modify it to have twin canted vertical stabs without having major structural reinforcement to that area. This further reduces the odds of the F-16 candidacy for any level of RCS reduction methods.
> 
> So yes, I do know what am talking about. And am willing to bet you just learned a lot more from me than from your Iranian military forums.
> 
> 
> Aaahh...So just because you inserted the initials 'CIA' into the mix, that made the RQ-170 valid in your argument?
> 
> In my opinion, the RQ-170 does have some inherent low radar observable traits but it is not 'stealthy' in the deliberateness of the F-117, F-22, F-35, and B-2.
> 
> My opinion is based upon knowledge as posted above. Your opinion is based upon three letters of the English alphabet and readers' inferences.



And what part of what I said do you think your disproving??? Maybe you should learn how to read 1st!!!!!!!! I nor Boing never claimed the F-15SE to be a Stealth fighter! Simply the fact that the modification reduced it's RCS where in LAMEN's TERMS people could claim it to be stealthier than the standard strike eagle! And nothing you said changes that fact.

As for the RQ-170 unlike the F-15SE the original design is of a *flying wing design with no vertical surfaces, that uses a screened intake to further reduce radiation emissions reflecting from inside the intake *which makes the design what is referred to as a stealth designed airframe! And that is simply a layman's terminology for no known aircraft is actually stealth especially against modern software assisted radars so it's simply at what range a specific size RCS can be detected & separated from your normal clutter filter due to the objects speed, altitude,..... So the F-22 could have the RCS of a bumblebee but bumblebee's and other naturally created clutters that will be filtered do not move as speed's of +300kph. Now you can claim that the RQ-170 is not at the edges of U.S. stealth technology and that my be true but it is a stealth design just as the F-117 is a stealth design. 

And Iran can most definitely further reduces the RCS of an already low RCS design which again in laymen's terminology makes it stealthier especially Iran's Saegheh that's smaller with much thinner wings. 






That said just look at what Yemen has been able to achieve using the type of UAV's Iran was mass producing 2 decades ago! And Iran is NOT Yemen! we are talking about a country that's been mass producing a long list of UAV's & UCAV's for almost 2 decades and Iran is under no illusion of the limitation of stealth technology or it's own Air Force *so most of the funding will instead go towards mass production & mass deployment of light but highly accurate PGM's deployed off low RCS but at the same time low cost platforms so even if they are intercepted using missiles it would still count as a win for Iran. *


And I'll repeat it once more because it's the last time I wish to argue about it and you can deny it all you want but The RQ-170 is a *Flying Wing design*, whos very existence was classified & was being operated by the world leading covert spy agency so denying that it was a stealth UAV simply makes it seem as if your in denial! 












And when I say Iran is not the same country as the country you played your little sim with I sure as hell am not referring to the number of Fighter Jets, Tankers, Helo's, Tanks, Blue water naval vessels,... we operate! In that aspect Iran hasn't changed much because most of the money has gone somewhere else and UAV's are UCAV's are today a large part of that!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Arminkh said:


> I just can't stop admiring German engineering and their ambitious designs before they lost WWII. Wish they hadn't lost this spirit.


Yes,german aero-engineering and technology was incredibly advanced during both wars.A lot of people dont realise just how much effort the germans put into designing and operating large strategic bombers during ww1,some of these were very advanced designs indeed.Sadly the last vestiges of this pretty much died out in the late 60s-mid 70s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> And Iran can most definitely further reduces the RCS of an already low RCS design which again in laymen's terminology makes it stealthier especially Iran's Saegheh that's smaller with much thinner wings.


You can take this as a warning...Of sort...

Iran's UAVs, and you can call them 'stealthy' if you like, *WILL* be detected. Not just on the ground, but also from the sea and in the air. Iran can copy the RQ-170 down to the mm and it will do Iran no good. I am that confident.



VEVAK said:


> And I'll repeat it once more because it's the last time I wish to argue about it and you can deny it all you want but The RQ-170 is a *Flying Wing design*, whos very existence was classified & was being operated by the world leading covert spy agency so denying that it was a stealth UAV simply makes it seem as if your in denial!


You can repeat it all you want, but considering the fact that in a couple posts I educated you on the basics of low radar observable design, maybe it is you who are in denial in the face of technical information you never knew before.

Those intake grills? There are more to them than meets the eyes. There is no valid comparison between the intake grilles on the F-117 and the RQ-170.


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> Iran can copy the RQ-170 down to the mm and it will do Iran no good. I am that confident.


Unfortunately for you, laws of physics is not a matter of opinion. Low observability vehicles are produced by engineers following laws of physics. You maybe think Iranian engineers are incompetent to achieve the same result their American counterparts made decades ago, you att entitled to have that view. However, logically, “stealth” is not a magical or divine attribute only reserved to a few. Put in enough manpower and literally any country could figure it out. That is my opinion as an engineer and scientist.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## arashkamangir

Sina-1 said:


> Unfortunately for you, laws of physics is not a matter of opinion. Low observability vehicles are produced by engineers following laws of physics. You maybe think Iranian engineers are incompetent to achieve the same result their American counterparts made decades ago, you att entitled to have that view. However, logically, “stealth” is not a magical or divine attribute only reserved to a few. Put in enough manpower and literally any country could figure it out. That is my opinion as an engineer and scientist.



Ignore him. He has superiority complex.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> Unfortunately for you, laws of physics is not a matter of opinion. Low observability vehicles are produced by engineers following laws of physics. You maybe think Iranian engineers are incompetent to achieve the same result their American counterparts made decades ago, you att entitled to have that view. However, logically, “stealth” is not a magical or divine attribute only reserved to a few. Put in enough manpower and literally any country could figure it out. That is my opinion as an engineer and scientist.


The laws of physics are not opinions? You should have told that to your fellow Iranians.

I have more respect for engineers and scientists, no matter their national allegiance, than you think. The issue is not whether Iran can replicate the RQ-170 down to the mm. Am sure Iran's best can do so. But the issue is whether the -170 is as low radar observable to the degree of the F-117 that so many believes that it is. If it is not, and I have reasoned out why in post 3350 page 224, then that ability to copy down to the mm is moot. We will detect it.

You claim to be a scientist and engineer. I will take you at your word. You can exercise critical thinking skills and tell me where am I wrong regarding the laws of physics in post 3350 page 224, posts 3366 3367 3371 page 225. You do not need to have related experience, although that would be great if you do, but as a scientist, one level up from engineer, your cognitive and reasoning skills should compensate for any lack of relevant experience.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> You can take this as a warning...Of sort...
> 
> Iran's UAVs, and you can call them 'stealthy' if you like, *WILL* be detected. Not just on the ground, but also from the sea and in the air. Iran can copy the RQ-170 down to the mm and it will do Iran no good. I am that confident.
> 
> 
> You can repeat it all you want, but considering the fact that in a couple posts I educated you on the basics of low radar observable design, maybe it is you who are in denial in the face of technical information you never knew before.
> 
> Those intake grills? There are more to them than meets the eyes. There is no valid comparison between the intake grilles on the F-117 and the RQ-170.



As long as it's within the laws of physics sure and it wouldn't be any different if Iran was operating F-22's. 
As for U.S. sensors detecting Iranian UAV's of course if Iran was to launch them from normal military bases and air fields stealth wouldn't mean much against the U.S. since U.S. spy Sat monitoring those bases will detect their launch & would be prepared for them.... You think Iran doesn't know that and wouldn't plan accordingly?
U.S. also monitors every radio emission off every frequency it can pickup globally using sat & overt & covert assets on the ground, sea and air which again Iran is fully aware of and would again plan accordingly.

As for stealth capability against radars every radar has it's limitations & the rest is a matter of figuring out the limitation of each asset at each location and working your way around them and operating stealth or low RCS aircrafts or UAV's simply gives you an edge when your attempting to work your way around them and Iran is under no illusion that stealth somehow make Iranian UAV's untouchable. You do understand that Iran has it's own radars and produces it's own radars and is fully capable of testing it's own UAV's against all the various radars that we possess. And limitation of stealth isn't only restricted to Iran.

You Americans act as if Iran's various military branches and leadership has somehow magically been oblivious to the fact that the United States has been threatening Iran with military action and has been building up military bases around Iran for almost 2 decades and Iran's Military has somehow magically chose not to plan for and prepare for how to respond and with what to respond with if a war was to take place.

U.S. Dollar is a few decades from loosing it's global supremacy and countries like Russia and China are slowly stocking up on gold & you guys are still running around obsessing on Iran a country who doesn't have the capability to deliver a single armored battalion to U.S. shores. And rather than begging Iran to continue using USD in it's Oil transactions and increase trade with Iran your president sanctions Iran. So who do you think lives in a bigger bubble today us or you? And Donald Trump screaming the U.S. economy has never been this good isn't gong to wipe away your $22 Trillion USD debt! And once dollar loses it's supremacy a military that spends over $100 Billion of it's budget on paychecks alone is going to be in real trouble!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

So here is the conclusion of reading several last pages:
RQ-170 was not stealthy!
Electronic systems in both Saar5 were offline!
American dream is invincible, PERIOD. (The way Obama liked to say)

P.S. Later Trump said that dream is dead!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> the issue is whether the -170 is as low radar observable to the degree of the F-117 that so many believes that it is.


I have a hard time believing they went through all that hassle in regards aero-instability that is inherent in a flying wing (without vert-tail) concept AND not gaining any low radar cross-s. Seems like a waste. Would you care to explain why not using a more conventional design?



gambit said:


> If it is not, and I have reasoned out why in post 3350 page 224, then that ability to copy down to the mm is moot. We will detect it.


I do not agree with you premise in that specific post. You explain the EM chamber for f16, correctly and rationally I might add, but then you move on to say that the case is the same for the RQ. You did not really connect your premise to your conclusion, hence I do not find the argument to be true.



gambit said:


> You can exercise critical thinking skills and tell me where am I wrong regarding the laws of physics in post 3350 page 224, posts 3366 3367 3371 page 225.


Sorry I didn't have time to go through the other posts.



gambit said:


> You do not need to have related experience, although that would be great if you do,


No specific knowledge but I have a colleague doing his PhD in this field so I know a grain,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

mohsen said:


> So here is the conclusion of reading several last pages:
> RQ-170 was not stealthy!
> Electronic systems in both Saar5 were offline!
> American dream is invincible, PERIOD. (The way Obama liked to say)
> 
> P.S. Later Trump said that dream is dead!


Few general rules to observe about Americans :
A) To an American their military technology is always cutting edge and second to none..the reality is that their technology is already old ....full of bugs...extra expensive and difficult to maintain examples...performance of Patriot AD in Israel, and Saudi Arabia...F35 disaster... Zumwalt class warships..etc...(too many to mention!)..The primary reason other countries buy them is political blackmail that the US government runs on these vassal countries..(case Turkey wants S-400..Americans are forcing Patriots down their throat!!).
B) To an American they are always the good smart guys and the enemy is the evil dumb *** who wet their pants when they see an American soldier. ..The reality is exactly reverse (US sailors wetting their pants when captured by IRGC in the Persian Gulf)..

Since WWII US military has not fought a winning war:
1- Korea war (just ask kim youm youm ..lol)
2- Vietnam (we know how that ended!)
3- Afghanistan (Northern alliance entered Kabul and Americans claimed victory!..still bleeding!..now they want out honorably!).
4-Iraq ( Saddam generals all received phone calls with US visa offers in exchange for abandoning their posts..they did..US military entered Baghdad and claimed victory!!!..Iraq generals did it again in Mosul when ISIL entered..wonder how many ex Iraq generals are now in US..lol ).

Of course US military wins wars is in Hollywood battle fields..but that is another story.....

*Conclusion:* Do not get into any argument with an American about War, technology or any thing of the sort...They are the best ....the have the best.... and that is written in their minds it is called *"american exceptionalism" .*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

gambit said:


> The 'actual evidence' you insist on does exist, but just because they do exist does not mean they are publicly available. So even if somehow I am 'in the know', I cannot reveal such evidence anyway. I care about my country as much as you care for yours, right?
> 
> So what remains are our willingness to put aside any biases, look at the list of available evidence, the chain of associations, and at least be willing to entertain reasonable assumptions of alternative conclusions, as best of conclusions as we can.



Until these evidence you're keeping close to your chest are actually revealed, then going by all the available evidence, the main conclusion will lead towards what I am saying. This is not about whether I am Iranian or not. Those who know me here know that I strongly scrutinise claims coming form Iran. Despite your beliefs, we Iranians don't just buy statements coming form Iran. If you actually followed this Iranian section, you'd know some of the most strict minded people regarding Iran are Iranians themselves.



> Your mind is made up. I get that. But you are not the only person who are interested in this event and its associated technical issues involved. I post not to debate your made up mind, but give the silent readers out there the alternative conclusions that do not exist in most forums, certainly not in Iranian military oriented forums.



On the contrary, I am open minded. I don't peddle fantasies. If There truly was such strong evidence backing your side of the argument, then I'd be on your side.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

aryobarzan said:


> Few general rules to observe about Americans :
> A) To an American their military technology is always cutting edge and second to none..the reality is that their technology is already old ....full of bugs...extra expensive and difficult to maintain examples...performance of Patriot AD in Israel, and Saudi Arabia...F35 disaster... Zumwalt class warships..etc...(too many to mention!)..The primary reason other countries buy them is political blackmail that the US government runs on these vassal countries..(case Turkey wants S-400..Americans are forcing Patriots down their throat!!).
> B) To an American they are always the good smart guys and the enemy is the evil dumb *** who wet their pants when they see an American soldier. ..The reality is exactly reverse (US sailors wetting their pants when captured by IRGC in the Persian Gulf)..
> 
> Since WWII US military has not fought a winning war:
> 1- Korea war (just ask kim youm youm ..lol)
> 2- Vietnam (we know how that ended!)
> 3- Afghanistan (Northern alliance entered Kabul and Americans claimed victory!..still bleeding!..now they want out honorably!).
> 4-Iraq ( Saddam generals all received phone calls with US visa offers in exchange for abandoning their posts..they did..US military entered Baghdad and claimed victory!!!..Iraq generals did it again in Mosul when ISIL entered..wonder how many ex Iraq generals are now in US..lol ).
> 
> Of course US military wins wars is in Hollywood battle fields..but that is another story.....
> 
> *Conclusion:* Do not get into any argument with an American about War, technology or any thing of the sort...They are the best ....the have the best.... and that is written in their minds it is called *"american exceptionalism" .*


LOL, today Yemenis drone targeted Saudi Patriot system in Najran airport, yesterday their fighter jets were targeted with these drones, two days earlier, their weapons cache. 
Open space of Saudi Arabia, American style of A2/AD!

This is what General Hajizadeh meant when he said we are superior to Americans in stealth bomber drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> I have a hard time believing they went through all that hassle in regards aero-instability that is inherent in a flying wing (without vert-tail) concept AND not gaining any low radar cross-s. Seems like a waste. Would you care to explain why not using a more conventional design?


I explained on this forum -- *6 YEARS AGO* -- how we solved the problem of yaw axis stability and controls on a flying wing.

The solution was in the 1940s, but the execution was finally possible today by way of computer assist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deceleron

In sum, the B-2 uses split ailerons at the wing tips to maintain yaw axis stability and controls without the use of vertical stabilizers. In fact, given the advances in avionics, from electronics to software (flight control laws), it is actually structurally and architecturally easier to adopt the split ailerons than to have at least two vertical stabs.



Sina-1 said:


> I do not agree with you premise in that specific post. *You explain the EM chamber for f16, correctly and rationally I might add*,...


Thanks. That is all we need to know.



Sina-1 said:


> ...but then you move on to say that the case is the same for the RQ. You did not really connect your premise to your conclusion, hence I do not find the argument to be true.


As I already explained, even if I know what I said is true, I would never say it is true. INFOSEC is the reason why. Instead, in the interest of debate, the best I can do is propose to the readers *THAT* explanation. You and the readers can take it any way you wish.



aryobarzan said:


> Of course US military wins wars is in Hollywood battle fields..but that is another story.....


You mean like how Iran faked up an aircraft carrier and sunk the fake ship for your propaganda benefits?


----------



## Ray_Atek

https://news.yahoo.com/military-mystery-chinas-supersonic-stealth-010000785.html
Upper air intake same as in Sofremahi design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> I explained on this forum -- *6 YEARS AGO* -- how we solved the problem of yaw axis stability and controls on a flying wing.



Anybody with basic aerodynamic understanding knows this. This was thought in my class in 2003 and I’m sure way before that as well.



gambit said:


> The solution was in the 1940s, but the execution was finally possible today by way of computer assist.



Yes! Thanks for the history glimpse!



gambit said:


> In sum, the B-2 uses split ailerons at the wing tips to maintain yaw axis stability and controls without the use of vertical stabilizers. In fact, given the advances in avionics, from electronics to software (flight control laws), it is actually structurally and architecturally easier to adopt the split ailerons than to have at least two vertical stabs.



I haven’t made any calculations personally but even if we would to agree on the fact that a flying wing concepts are structurally more sound, they are in any case more expensive and/or complex to design and operate. My proof for that is empirical. Even today most of the uav/uvac produced are of the type fuselage-wing-tail types. This is true for both long rang and short range operations. And as you put it, the hardware/software required to stabilize these type of aircraft are available and I reckon that they are common knowledge (at least for specialists)

Hence if a flying wing concept is chosen, by the cia I might add, it raises questions to what attributes they were desiring. IMO low radar observability is the most likely reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Here is a nice video from the DCS simulator:






It's just a game but it illustrates important factors in BVR combat:

- Energy state and out bleeding of BVR missiles
- Rather realistic range performances of BVR missiles
- Impact of air density
- Impact of radar doppler filtering "beam/notch"
- Impact of ground cutter "notch" and terrain masking
- Impact of being able to force a enemy into defensive posture

This may help to get an idea what air combat looks like in reality.
Of course this is a 1:1 forced kill situation. In real operations one side would simply disengage and retreat if necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Here is a nice video from the DCS simulator:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just a game but it illustrates important factors in BVR combat:
> 
> - Energy state and out bleeding of BVR missiles
> - Rather realistic range performances of BVR missiles
> - Impact of air density
> - Impact of radar doppler filtering "beam/notch"
> - Impact of ground cutter "notch" and terrain masking
> - Impact of being able to force a enemy into defensive posture
> 
> This may help to get an idea what air combat looks like in reality.
> Of course this is a 1:1 forced kill situation. In real operations one side would simply disengage and retreat if necessary.



Yup seen this. I also recommend this channel as a whole to everyone.



arashkamangir said:


> Yup seen this. I also recommend this channel as a whole to everyone.



Also checkout this:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Upper air intake same as in SofreMahi fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Here is a nice video from the DCS simulator:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just a game but it illustrates important factors in BVR combat:
> 
> - Energy state and out bleeding of BVR missiles
> - Rather realistic range performances of BVR missiles
> - Impact of air density
> - Impact of radar doppler filtering "beam/notch"
> - Impact of ground cutter "notch" and terrain masking
> - Impact of being able to force a enemy into defensive posture
> 
> This may help to get an idea what air combat looks like in reality.
> Of course this is a 1:1 forced kill situation. In real operations one side would simply disengage and retreat if necessary.





The advanced software's that go with American AESA radars address a lot of the ground clutter and filtering problems Iranian AWG-9's would be faced with and the speed of which they can go radar on & acquire targets will easily give them so much of an edge that if you add all the other U.S. air & space deployed assets to the mix the only conclusion would be that they only way you could possibly defeat the U.S. in the Air is with sheer numbers & the only way Iran could possibly hope to do that economically is with UCAV's that can be equipped with some kind of a revolutionary com system, new type of Air to Air missile & a new high speed UCAV's that can be mass produced at an appropriate price that can be mass deployed across the country & we will have no choice but to launch a vast number of Missiles & UAV/UCAV's against the bases that are launching these aircrafts. 

The SIM also shows the requirement for high endurance, high speed & highly maneuverable platforms for Air Superiority but at the end of the day it's a sim & in a SIM they can blast their afterburners as much as they want but in real life your fuel and your ability to refuel will no doubt dictate your defensive maneuvers.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 561826
> View attachment 561825
> 
> Upper air intake same as in SofreMahi fighter jets.



Unless a UFO crashes intact in an IRGC research and development facility, Iran won’t be able to build a next gen engine to power that Sofreh Mahi concept for another 50 years, unless Iran planes to stick a J-85 in there.

Furthermore, Sofreh Mahi was pre RQ-170 capture. Since RQ-170 capture and release of Iranian flying wing designs, there has been no mention of this project. Thus it could shelved like many Iranian Air Force projects.

But yes, possible 6th gen fighter concept designs have shown top air intakes. The B-2 also has them currently, so it’s possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

TheImmortal said:


> Unless a UFO crashes intact in an IRGC research and development facility, Iran won’t be able to build a next gen engine to power that Sofreh Mahi concept for another 50 years, unless Iran planes to stick a J-85 in there.
> 
> Furthermore, Sofreh Mahi was pre RQ-170 capture. Since RQ-170 capture and release of Iranian flying wing designs, there has been no mention of this project. Thus it could shelved like many Iranian Air Force projects.
> 
> But yes, possible 6th gen fighter concept designs have shown top air intakes. The B-2 also has them currently, so it’s possible.


it isn't worth investing such project in Iran..........We'd better to make something like f-18

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> Anybody with basic aerodynamic understanding knows this. This was thought in my class in 2003 and I’m sure way before that as well.
> 
> Yes! Thanks for the history glimpse!


Not in this forum.



Sina-1 said:


> I haven’t made any calculations personally but even if we would to agree on the fact that a flying wing concepts are structurally more sound, *they are in any case more expensive and/or complex to design and operate.*


Not really.

In aviation, controls are in 3 axes -- x y z -- and there is no way to get around that.

In most aircraft designs, we have discrete flight controls structures for each axis. If we eliminate one axis of controls, the aircraft would depart from controlled flight. There is no way to get around that.

So for most designs, we have the main wings to provide lift and on the wings, we have discrete flight control structures to alter the wings' shapes. These structures are leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE) flaps, and ailerons. Each of these structures have its own mechanical actuator.

Next are the horizontal stabilizers. They provide most of the maneuverability and they come in pairs. Two mechanical actuators.

Next is/are the vertical stabilizer(s). Each have its own mechanical actuator.

For the flying wing using split ailerons method to maintain yaw axis stability and control, we physically relocate the vertical stabilizers' mechanical actuators to be logically parallel with the wing ailerons' mechanical actuators. Then via software, we move the ailerons when needed.

The concept is not new. With the F-18 Super Hornet, we eliminated the actual speedbrake structure and uses all flight control surfaces in precise coordination with each other so that all of them act as speebrake.

https://www.ausairpower.net/SuperBug.html 


> The Super Hornet has no such device, yet achieves the same effect through what can only be described as digital magic. The speedbrake function is produced by a balanced deployment of opposing flight control surfaces, generating drag without loss of flight control authority or change in aircraft pitch attitude.


With the F-18 SH, we literally eliminated the speedbrake structure and its hydraulic actuator. Two major physical components removed.

For the B-2 flying wing design, we did not eliminate the yaw axis but with software, we logically relocated the yaw axis vertical stabilizer to inside the ailerons'. It is a corollary to the F-18SH's flight controls system that eliminated the speedbrake phyiscal structure.



Sina-1 said:


> Hence if a flying wing concept is chosen, by the cia I might add, it raises questions to what attributes they were desiring. IMO low radar observability is the most likely reason.


The flying wing design have long range attribute before radar was invented. The RQ-170 was intended to exploit that attribute. Yes, the longer the RQ remains undetected, the longer it will be able to provide intelligence. But what good is an airborne intelligence asset if it cannot remain flying for distance and time?


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> The advanced software's that go with American AESA radars address a lot of the ground clutter and filtering problems Iranian AWG-9's would be faced with and the speed of which they can go radar on & acquire targets will easily give them so much of an edge that if you add all the other U.S. air & space deployed assets to the mix the only conclusion would be that they only way you could possibly defeat the U.S. in the Air is with sheer numbers & the only way Iran could possibly hope to do that economically is with UCAV's that can be equipped with some kind of a revolutionary com system, new type of Air to Air missile & a new high speed UCAV's that can be mass produced at an appropriate price that can be mass deployed across the country & we will have no choice but to launch a vast number of Missiles & UAV/UCAV's against the bases that are launching these aircrafts.
> 
> The SIM also shows the requirement for high endurance, high speed & highly maneuverable platforms for Air Superiority but at the end of the day it's a sim & in a SIM they can blast their afterburners as much as they want but in real life your fuel and your ability to refuel will no doubt dictate your defensive maneuvers.....



Range performance is indeed another major point: being able to use afterburner and have a nearby base to land is a major advantage. In a defensive campaign, the IRIAF would have this advantage, the enemy not.

As for older MSA pulse doppler radars vs. PESA/AESA: yes doppler and cutter precision and rejection is better with modern digital AESAs. Beaming and notching is more difficult.
However: the main benefit beside high gain is electronic beam steering and it's high update rate.

The AWG-9 will do it's job for long range Phoenix, Fakkur, Sedjil shots. High update rate of AESAs ist not necessary.
Notching, beaming with support of ECM is possible. We can hope for digital processing, filtering and modern algorithms to counter that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> Unless a UFO crashes intact in an IRGC research and development facility, Iran won’t be able to build a next gen engine to power that Sofreh Mahi concept for another 50 years, unless Iran planes to stick a J-85 in there.
> 
> Furthermore, Sofreh Mahi was pre RQ-170 capture. Since RQ-170 capture and release of Iranian flying wing designs, there has been no mention of this project. Thus it could shelved like many Iranian Air Force projects.
> 
> But yes, possible 6th gen fighter concept designs have shown top air intakes. The B-2 also has them currently, so it’s possible.


J79 can be used for SofreMahi startup project for validating it's concept 
SofreMahi aerodynamic design need some test and the engine preparing is it's second problem to solve.


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> Not in this forum.



I guess I have to take your word for it!



gambit said:


> Not really.
> 
> In aviation, controls are in 3 axes -- x y z -- and there is no way to get around that.
> 
> In most aircraft designs, we have discrete flight controls structures for each axis. If we eliminate one axis of controls, the aircraft would depart from controlled flight. There is no way to get around that.
> 
> So for most designs, we have the main wings to provide lift and on the wings, we have discrete flight control structures to alter the wings' shapes. These structures are leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE) flaps, and ailerons. Each of these structures have its own mechanical actuator.
> 
> Next are the horizontal stabilizers. They provide most of the maneuverability and they come in pairs. Two mechanical actuators.
> 
> Next is/are the vertical stabilizer(s). Each have its own mechanical actuator.
> 
> For the flying wing using split ailerons method to maintain yaw axis stability and control, we physically relocate the vertical stabilizers' mechanical actuators to be logically parallel with the wing ailerons' mechanical actuators. Then via software, we move the ailerons when needed.
> 
> The concept is not new. With the F-18 Super Hornet, we eliminated the actual speedbrake structure and uses all flight control surfaces in precise coordination with each other so that all of them act as speebrake.
> 
> https://www.ausairpower.net/SuperBug.html
> With the F-18 SH, we literally eliminated the speedbrake structure and its hydraulic actuator. Two major physical components removed.
> 
> For the B-2 flying wing design, we did not eliminate the yaw axis but with software, we logically relocated the yaw axis vertical stabilizer to inside the ailerons'. It is a corollary to the F-18SH's flight controls system that eliminated the speedbrake phyiscal structure.



Again, Thanks for going through the fundamentals, however you did not provide a rebuttal to the point that I made. If flying wing (without vt) is not more expensive/complex to produce/operate then how come the vast majority of UCAVs and uavs are of a more conventional design?



gambit said:


> The flying wing design have long range attribute before radar was invented. The RQ-170 was intended to exploit that attribute. Yes, the longer the RQ remains undetected, the longer it will be able to provide intelligence. But what good is an airborne intelligence asset if it cannot remain flying for distance and time?



Still doesn’t explain why other UCAVs/uavs operated where long range is the most desired attribute do not adopt a flying wing configuration. Let me give you a hint: it’s not worth it if stealth also is not a desired attribute

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> Again, Thanks for going through the fundamentals,...


Yer welcome. Unfortunately, the fundamentals are often ignored, as we have seen in this thread.



Sina-1 said:


> ..however you did not provide a rebuttal to the point that I made. If flying wing (without vt) is not more expensive/complex to produce/operate then how come the vast majority of UCAVs and uavs are of a more conventional design?


Because the 'conventional' designs are conventional in the sense that they are quicker to build. COTS -- Commercial Off The Shelf.



Sina-1 said:


> Still doesn’t explain why other UCAVs/uavs operated where long range is the most desired attribute do not adopt a flying wing configuration. Let me give you a hint: it’s not worth it if stealth also is not a desired attribute


As I said earlier -- The fundamentals are often ignored. 

There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body:

- Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators
- Control of *ARRAY* of radiators
- Control of *MODES* of radiation

So let us take a look at the B-2's and RQ-170's planform, shall we?







Voila...!!!

For the benefits of the silent readers out there who may not be familiar, the top image is the B-2 and bottom image is the RQ-170.

There are five main wing planforms:

- Rectangular
- Tapered
- Elliptical
- Swept
- Delta

Back in high school in the early '80s, I learned how to fly in the Cessna 152 -- rectangular. So by the time I entered the USAF, I was well familiar with flying in general.

The WW II era B-29 -- tapered.

The WW II era Spitfire -- elliptical.

The F-111, my first assignment -- tapered.

The F-16, my second assigment -- cropped delta.

The B-2's and the RQ's wing planforms are actually not true 'flying wing' but a blended swept+delta. However, the RQ's wing planform are more true towards the flying wing designs of the Northrop YB-49. What we call 'flying wing' designs today is more like blended because of the need for a main fuselage. We just do not see the main fuselage because of the blending of the fuselage to the wings.

Regarding the three rules in designing a low radar observable body, they are not rules that you can break but more like guidelines that you have degrees of obedience to them.

If we look at the B-2 and the RQ, we see each have two main leading edges (LE).

The B-2 have 10 trailing edges. The RQ have eight trailing edges.

Does this mean the RQ have a lower RCS than the B-2? No, it does not.

The B-2's trailing edges (TE) are in alignment with the LE. They are parallel. They are not that way by accident but by deliberateness. We do not see the same for the RQ's wing planform because we did not care.

The B-2, despite having the greater quantity of radiators, 10 vs 8 for the TEs, is more obedient than the RQ to Rule Two: Control of *ARRAY* of radiators.

That mean, given the fact that a body is a finite structure, the B-2 with its more carefully planned planform, is more likely to have a lower RCS than the physically smaller RQ.

So Iran can copy the RQ down the the mm and we will not care. The Iranian version of the RQ-170 *WILL BE DETECTED*.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Yer welcome. Unfortunately, the fundamentals are often ignored, as we have seen in this thread.
> 
> 
> Because the 'conventional' designs are conventional in the sense that they are quicker to build. COTS -- Commercial Off The Shelf.
> 
> 
> As I said earlier -- The fundamentals are often ignored.
> 
> There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body:
> 
> - Control of *QUANTITY* of radiators
> - Control of *ARRAY* of radiators
> - Control of *MODES* of radiation
> 
> So let us take a look at the B-2's and RQ-170's planform, shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voila...!!!
> 
> For the benefits of the silent readers out there who may not be familiar, the top image is the B-2 and bottom image is the RQ-170.
> 
> There are five main wing planforms:
> 
> - Rectangular
> - Tapered
> - Elliptical
> - Swept
> - Delta
> 
> Back in high school in the early '80s, I learned how to fly in the Cessna 152 -- rectangular. So by the time I entered the USAF, I was well familiar with flying in general.
> 
> The WW II era B-29 -- tapered.
> 
> The WW II era Spitfire -- elliptical.
> 
> The F-111, my first assignment -- tapered.
> 
> The F-16, my second assigment -- cropped delta.
> 
> The B-2's and the RQ's wing planforms are actually not true 'flying wing' but a blended swept+delta. However, the RQ's wing planform are more true towards the flying wing designs of the Northrop YB-49. What we call 'flying wing' designs today is more like blended because of the need for a main fuselage. We just do not see the main fuselage because of the blending of the fuselage to the wings.
> 
> Regarding the three rules in designing a low radar observable body, they are not rules that you can break but more like guidelines that you have degrees of obedience to them.
> 
> If we look at the B-2 and the RQ, we see each have two main leading edges (LE).
> 
> The B-2 have 10 trailing edges. The RQ have eight trailing edges.
> 
> Does this mean the RQ have a lower RCS than the B-2? No, it does not.
> 
> The B-2's trailing edges (TE) are in alignment with the LE. They are parallel. They are not that way by accident but by deliberateness. We do not see the same for the RQ's wing planform because we did not care.
> 
> The B-2, despite having the greater quantity of radiators, 10 vs 8 for the TEs, is more obedient than the RQ to Rule Two: Control of *ARRAY* of radiators.
> 
> That mean, given the fact that a body is a finite structure, the B-2 with its more carefully planned planform, is more likely to have a lower RCS than the physically smaller RQ.
> 
> So Iran can copy the RQ down the the mm and we will not care. The Iranian version of the RQ-170 *WILL BE DETECTED*.



It seems the fact that Iran's captured and reverse engineered the RQ-170 has really struck a nerve.

I remember quite clearly the very 1st American response to Iran's claim of capturing the aircraft was absolute denial and then after Iran showed video's of the UAV in it's possession they moved on to ridicule from the UAV malfunctioned & landed it's self to how the tech was so advanced and so far beyond Iran's capabilities that Iran wouldn't know what to do with it....

And it seems now that Iran has clearly reverse engineered and hacked the thing American talking points are turning to degrading their own tech and how the RQ wasn't stealth at all. lol!

And you can make up all the excuses that you want but the fact remains that with the U.S. RQ-170 mishap the U.S. handed Iran flying wing technology and flight management capabilities and flying wings designs due to their very nature are the MOST suited design for a low RCS (AKA Stealth) platforms. 
And Iran can take that and do with it what it will from adding twin piece flaps & ailerons to achieve greater Yaw..., to increasing or reducing the wing angle, to adding RAM coating, to making smoother and more frequency reflectable(to reflect away, trap or scatter) & or absorbable outer & inner surfaces, to the need for using stealth tactics along side stealth technology..... and the MOST funny thing of all is that you guys seem to be living in this bubble that makes you assume that Iran doesn't know these things & doesn't possess various frequency radars to test & improve on the RCS of the UAV it's producing it's self.

And you assume that Iranian version of the RQ-170's will be detected by U.S. radars from long ranges because your assuming that Iran is stupid enough to showcase it's most advanced stealth technology publicly.

And you keep repeating that the U.S. can detect Iranian RQ-170, well *IRAN CAN ALSO DETECT B-2 & F-22 Stealth Aircraft *it's simply a matter of range, altitude,.... So yea depending on the range, altitude and type of radar and platform using them, U.S. radars can in fact detect all stealth UCAV's (not just Iranian)! And it's no different with U.S. stealth aircraft. 
U.S. stealth aircraft aren't undetectable to all frequencies at all ranges, what gives for example a stealth F-22's an edge is the range in which they can be detected which allows them to approach their target using target data from AWACS and guided by them approach their target from the most optimal angle (least detectable approach from air & ground,.....), get within their BVR weapons range, go radar on with a passive AESA radars, lock on and fire on their target faster than any other fighter in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> The Iranian version of the RQ-170 *WILL BE DETECTED*


so why israel fired almost a million dollar missile (python) instead of several k$ iron dome's tamir missile?? does not that imply they couldn't intercept it with radar??
also another question, as someone who served in AF and has real time experience with LO aerial vehicles, how much do you think the RQ-170's RCS is?? because neither US nor iran said anything about it.
another question (if you don't mind answer it), is it possible for iran to make a plane with RCS of ~0.1 sqm from F5 structure or based on it with internal weapon bays??


----------



## Tamiyah

Any idea how will IRIAF counter F35

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1131926080917594112Any strategy?


----------



## Arminkh

@Sina-1 I think this back and forth about RQ-170 is pointless. US Air Force fact sheet calls it _a low observable _drone:

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104547/rq-170-sentinel/

Now what does low observable mean? If you look at B-2 factsheet, it says B-2's _low-observable, or "stealth," characteristics give it the unique ability to penetrate an enemy's most sophisticated defenses.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104482/b-2-spirit/
_
So, low-observable and stealth are the same thing in US Air Force used terminology. Now I'm sure there are levels to stealthiness. Is the smaller RQ-170 with non-aligned edges less stealthy than B-2 which is probably 10 times larger with aligned edges? It is not something anyone in this forum would know. However, one thing is certain: RQ-170 is a stealth platform and it is not easy to detect.



Tamiyah said:


> Any idea how will IRIAF counter F35
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1131926080917594112Any strategy?


Iran "counters" its airbase. Then lets them figure out how to use their F-35 from that point on.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> @Sina-1 I think this back and forth about RQ-170 is pointless


You’re right. I guess me and @gambit reached a repetitive pattern. I agree with your assessments regarding stealth. Obviously there are several layers of stealthiness, which not only depend on the physical shape of the aircraft that can be assessed visually, but other components not assessable. And as long as one does not know the entire characteristics of the aircraft then it’s futile to estimate where in the scale any given aircraft would be. 

For sure though, the rq with its flying wing (or more correctly bwb as gambit pointed out) and above wing air intake to name a few is designed with stealth requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

is this real??

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## VEVAK

Tamiyah said:


> Any idea how will IRIAF counter F35
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1131926080917594112Any strategy?



Rather simple and no differently than if it was any other American Fighter! If they start bombing Iran, we will respond and we'll respond with full force. It's not as if American F-15's can't fly low across the Persian Gulf and start releasing a far greater number of SDB's against costal targets & get out before IRIAF could do anything.... 

The U.S. has had F-22's in the region for much longer period and the F-22's are a far superior platforms than the F-35's for they are faster and capable of super cruise, are far more stealthy, have far greater range & are far more maneuverable. So compared to that the F-35 has no fear factor that would make Iran act any differently than it already has in the past 2 decades and that is removing Iran's main retaliatory capabilities from Fighter Jet to Missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> It seems the fact that Iran's captured and reverse engineered the RQ-170 has really struck a nerve.
> 
> And it seems now that Iran has clearly reverse engineered and hacked the thing American talking points are turning to degrading their own tech and how the RQ wasn't stealth at all. lol!


The real nerve that was struck here is the fact that the RQ is not as 'stealthy' as people, especially Iranians, would like to believe.

The reality is that there is not a single accepted 'standard' -- and I quoted that word to emphasize its dubiousness -- on low radar observability. *NOT ONE*. Never from Lockheed since the days of the F-117 and up to today's platforms.

In the absence of any standard, people will impute whatever values they want. You cannot deny the technical issues I presented so far. There is no 'degrading' of anything by US and from US. I speak on a technical platform that none of you have.

Admit it...You guys have learned more about low radar observability from this American than from any Iranian forums.



VEVAK said:


> ...well *IRAN CAN ALSO DETECT B-2 & F-22 Stealth Aircraft *it's simply a matter of range, altitude,....


Sure you can. I have said for yrs on this forum that radar sees all. The issue that you guys continues to dismiss is the *TACTICAL DISTANCE* of that detection.

So as I have educated you guys on 'stealth', I will educate you guys further on basic radar detection.

For starter, a radar beam is not like an arrow/line like how most illustrations have it. The real radar beam is conical, even the beam shape that is labeled as 'pencil' beam.

https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/243/ 


> In a 3-D sense, a beam of radar emission has a *cone shape*. The tip of the cone is at the radar site and the diameter of the cone gradually increases away from the radar site. As a radar beam moves further from the radar, it expands to take up a larger volume.


Because of beam spreading, a radar that has a claimed maximum distance of 100 km, for example, would have an *OPERATIONALLY USEFUL* range of between %80-90 of max. This is real physics, not Chinese physics, not Russian physics, not Indian physics, and not Iranian physics.

Inclement environment, such as weather or terrain clutter, reduces that operational useful range by another %5-10. So now out of that 100 km claimed range, it is now more like about %75 of max.

When an aircraft is deliberately designed to be low radar observable, there is a range of reduction of that remaining %75. The low end of that additional reduction will be about %50 of that remaining %75. So just in using rough figures, the least 'stealthy' body will be detected at a tactical useful distance of about 30-40 km. The F-22 and F-35 are the more 'stealthy' shapes so now the detection distance for them will be around high 10s to low 20s km. This is assuming the jet is in a steady flight state.

F-22 and F-35 pilots do not have license to be careless in an EM high environment, such as combat. When I was active duty on the F-111, F-111 crews from RAF Upper Heyford and Lakenheath routinely trains to avoid those maximum radar ranges. That is how we would penetrate Warsaw Pact radars on CONEUR. A jet can touch a radar at those maximum range without the radar triggering a target detected alert. So when a movie have a 'blip' on the radar scope, that aircraft is already well inside that %75 operationally useful range.

Whenever the environment allows, F-22 and F-35 pilots will not allow themselves to be inside that minimum 'stealthy' range of low %10-20 of operationally useful range. You will be hit without knowing where the bullet came from.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

gambit said:


> So Iran can copy the RQ down the the mm and we will not care. The Iranian version of the RQ-170 *WILL BE DETECTED*.



well , who care !? we already have *DETECED* USA RQ-170 which were using more expensive material so its understandable that others will be able to detect our cheap modified copy of this drone .... 

we have a saying in Persian : " I'm passed crying , so I'm laughing at my miserable self " ... as former American pilot which is brainwashed that his country is superior and invincible in every field , you still can not come to term with this kind of thing ...

کارم از گریه گذشته ، به خود می خندم

and funny part is that USA current practical military strategy is just like Soviet " overwhelming your enemy with more weapons" ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> so why israel fired almost a million dollar missile (python) instead of several k$ iron dome's tamir missile?? *does not that imply they couldn't intercept it with radar??*


No, it does not. In combat, you use whatever is most available.



Mithridates said:


> also another question, as someone who served in AF and has real time experience with LO aerial vehicles, *how much do you think the RQ-170's RCS is??* because neither US nor iran said anything about it.


Sorry, even if I do know -- which I do not -- I would not reveal it. I care about my country as much as you care about yours, right?

What we are debating is mostly academic. I presented technical information and logical reasoning to support my argument that the RQ-170 is not 'stealthy' to the degree that people believe it to be. Take it any way you like. The way I see it, you guys *NEED* the RQ to be 'stealthy' more than Americans do, after all, we are the world's leader in low radar observable combat systems, in the air and on the seas, so unpleasant as it maybe for you, we know what we are talking about.



Mithridates said:


> another question (if you don't mind answer it), is it possible for iran to make a plane with RCS of ~0.1 sqm from F5 structure or based on it with internal weapon bays??


Bluntly -- no.


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> No, it does not. In combat, you use whatever is most available.


well considering they always blabbing about "we will respond quickly and would risk our people lives" to me preparing an ah-64 and firing python-5 missile seems a little fishy, because it would take 5-10 min that chopper fly and by that time that drone would target anything in that compact country.


gambit said:


> Bluntly -- no.


why cause f-5's structure is limited or you think we can't?


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> why cause f-5's structure is limited or you think we can't?


Yes and yes.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> The real nerve that was struck here is the fact that the RQ is not as 'stealthy' as people, especially Iranians, would like to believe.
> 
> The reality is that there is not a single accepted 'standard' -- and I quoted that word to emphasize its dubiousness -- on low radar observability. *NOT ONE*. Never from Lockheed since the days of the F-117 and up to today's platforms.
> 
> In the absence of any standard, people will impute whatever values they want. You cannot deny the technical issues I presented so far. There is no 'degrading' of anything by US and from US. I speak on a technical platform that none of you have.
> 
> Admit it...You guys have learned more about low radar observability from this American than from any Iranian forums.
> 
> 
> Sure you can. I have said for yrs on this forum that radar sees all. The issue that you guys continues to dismiss is the *TACTICAL DISTANCE* of that detection.
> 
> So as I have educated you guys on 'stealth', I will educate you guys further on basic radar detection.
> 
> For starter, a radar beam is not like an arrow/line like how most illustrations have it. The real radar beam is conical, even the beam shape that is labeled as 'pencil' beam.
> 
> https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/243/
> 
> Because of beam spreading, a radar that has a claimed maximum distance of 100 km, for example, would have an *OPERATIONALLY USEFUL* range of between %80-90 of max. This is real physics, not Chinese physics, not Russian physics, not Indian physics, and not Iranian physics.
> 
> Inclement environment, such as weather or terrain clutter, reduces that operational useful range by another %5-10. So now out of that 100 km claimed range, it is now more like about %75 of max.
> 
> When an aircraft is deliberately designed to be low radar observable, there is a range of reduction of that remaining %75. The low end of that additional reduction will be about %50 of that remaining %75. So just in using rough figures, the least 'stealthy' body will be detected at a tactical useful distance of about 30-40 km. The F-22 and F-35 are the more 'stealthy' shapes so now the detection distance for them will be around high 10s to low 20s km. This is assuming the jet is in a steady flight state.
> 
> F-22 and F-35 pilots do not have license to be careless in an EM high environment, such as combat. When I was active duty on the F-111, F-111 crews from RAF Upper Heyford and Lakenheath routinely trains to avoid those maximum radar ranges. That is how we would penetrate Warsaw Pact radars on CONEUR. A jet can touch a radar at those maximum range without the radar triggering a target detected alert. So when a movie have a 'blip' on the radar scope, that aircraft is already well inside that %75 operationally useful range.
> 
> Whenever the environment allows, F-22 and F-35 pilots will not allow themselves to be inside that minimum 'stealthy' range of low %10-20 of operationally useful range. You will be hit without knowing where the bullet came from.



Wow so you have truly deluded yourself to a point that makes you think your schooling me on Frequency with absurd high school level comments like frequency doesn't travel in a straight line

So sorry to burst your bubble but NOTHING you have said so far about stealth tech or frequency was any news to me let alone Iranian engineers working on Iranian radars & stealth tech....

And your delusions about the RQ-170 NOT being a stealth aircraft is absolutely degrading to U.S. tech! Your claiming the Aircraft designers were absolute morons for putting it's sensor package in a hidden low signature design that limits the sensors field of view, They were morons for putting a high drag screen in front of the intake & even bigger moron for trying to hide the screws for the screens inside the body to further reduce signature,.... add to that the fact that it's a flying wing design with no vertical surfaces with a height ~2ft (Gears retracted) and you truly sound delusional to a point that your degrading your own tech. 
If anything one of the main missions of the RQ-170 in Afghanistan was likely to test the capabilities of Iranian radars against an aircraft with about the same size radar signature as American B-2's & or other US stealth fighters..... And Iran knowing this rather than try to go radar on & lock on using deployed SAM in the region choose instead to hack it. So yea Iran hacked, downed & reverse engineered an American Stealth UAV my god GET OVER IT already! ​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Wow so you have truly deluded yourself to a point that makes you think your schooling me on Frequency with absurd high school level comments like *frequency doesn't travel in a straight line*


I have said nothing to the effect of the highlighted. I you really really thought that was what I said, then you need more schooling, which I am willing to provide.



VEVAK said:


> And your delusions about the RQ-170 NOT being a stealth aircraft is absolutely degrading to U.S. tech! Your claiming the Aircraft designers were absolute morons for putting it's sensor package in a hidden low signature design that limits the sensors field of view, They were morons for putting a high drag screen in front of the intake & even bigger moron for trying to hide the screws for the screens inside the body to further reduce signature,.... add to that the fact that it's a flying wing design with no vertical surfaces with a height ~2ft (Gears retracted) and you truly sound delusional to a point that your degrading your own tech.
> If anything one of the main missions of the RQ-170 in Afghanistan was likely to test the capabilities of Iranian radars against an aircraft with about the same size radar signature as American B-2's & or other US stealth fighters..... And Iran knowing this rather than try to go radar on & lock on using deployed SAM in the region choose instead to hack it. So yea Iran hacked, downed & reverse engineered an American Stealth UAV my god GET OVER IT already! ​


What I have been saying -- or schooling -- is that we did not put as much efforts into making the RQ as 'stealthy' as you would like to believe we did. Nowhere have I said the design itself had no inherent low radar observability character. Did you not understand post 3407 page 228? Or is it likely that post 3407 made too much sense for you delusion?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

VEVAK said:


> Wow so you have truly deluded yourself to a point that makes you think your schooling me on Frequency with absurd high school level comments like frequency doesn't travel in a straight line
> 
> So sorry to burst your bubble but NOTHING you have said so far about stealth tech or frequency was any news to me let alone Iranian engineers working on Iranian radars & stealth tech....
> 
> And your delusions about the RQ-170 NOT being a stealth aircraft is absolutely degrading to U.S. tech! Your claiming the Aircraft designers were absolute morons for putting it's sensor package in a hidden low signature design that limits the sensors field of view, They were morons for putting a high drag screen in front of the intake & even bigger moron for trying to hide the screws for the screens inside the body to further reduce signature,.... add to that the fact that it's a flying wing design with no vertical surfaces with a height ~2ft (Gears retracted) and you truly sound delusional to a point that your degrading your own tech.
> If anything one of the main missions of the RQ-170 in Afghanistan was likely to test the capabilities of Iranian radars against an aircraft with about the same size radar signature as American B-2's & or other US stealth fighters..... And Iran knowing this rather than try to go radar on & lock on using deployed SAM in the region choose instead to hack it. So yea Iran hacked, downed & reverse engineered an American Stealth UAV my god GET OVER IT already! ​



Now Vavek you should be fair to Gambit. After all he used to fly F-111s so he knows a thing or two about stealth aircraft design!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Now Vavek you should be fair to Gambit. After all he used to fly F-111s so he knows a thing or two about stealth aircraft design!


F-111 is not that Low RCS


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> F-111 is not that Low RCS


I was being Sarcastic!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
@LeGenD you were asking about the pilot who dodged two RIM-66 and survived confronting two american f-14s, here you are. he survived all of them and got killed in car accident.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> @LeGenD you were asking about the pilot who dodged two RIM-66 and survived confronting two american f-14s, here you are. he survived all of them and got killed in car accident.


روحش شاد.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

seems like we gonna receive stuff for our f-1s.









bombcats.









seems like an f-5 had some affair with a yf-23.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LeGenD

VEVAK said:


> And you assume that Iranian version of the RQ-170's will be detected by U.S. radars from long ranges because your assuming that Iran is stupid enough to showcase it's most advanced stealth technology publicly.


Kindly provide evidence of this (super) RQ-170 type UAV you are alluding to.

Unfortunately, the RQ-170 type UAV which Iran dispatched to Israel was detected and shot down not far from the border, therefore not up to the task.






US is far ahead of Russia and China in developing radar systems, mind you. To give you an idea:

AN/SPY-1D(v) sensor system on-board the Arleigh Burke class destroyer can identify and track a target having an RCS of 0.0025 m^2 at ranges in excess of 165 KM on 3.3 GHz frequency (George Lewis and Theodore Postol). And in case you didn't knew, SPY-1D(v) have managed to notice and track ballistic missiles having an RCS of 0.03 m^2 at distances in excess of 1000 KM (heritage.org).

And AN/SPY-1D(v) isn't the best they have - not even close.



VEVAK said:


> And you keep repeating that the U.S. can detect Iranian RQ-170, well *IRAN CAN ALSO DETECT B-2 & F-22 Stealth Aircraft *it's simply a matter of range, altitude,....


Mind telling me which (super) radar system is this? One of the following?
















They are not up to the task.

Uniform rcs of B-2 Spirit = unknown
Uniform rcs of F-22A Raptor = 0.0001 - 0.0002 m^2 range
Uniform rcs of F-35 variants (Block 3f) = 0.0003 - 0.0004 m^2 range

Do you realize that VLO-class manned aircraft such as B-2, F-22 and F-35 absolutely deflect and/or scatter radar beams away from the surface and even suppress EO/IR seekers? These are the most advanced and expensive aircraft ever built, and one can only wonder about the level of research/sciences involved - surely not for public consumption.

Both Russian-origin and Chinese-origin defenses including S-400 and S-300 PMU-2, and radar systems in particular, spectacularly failed in Syria: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-15#post-11496823

Most funny case is of the much touted Chinese anti-stealth JY-27 class radar system being blown to bits by an F-35 during one of the raids in the first month of 2019.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1087795248762441728
*NOTE: *JY-27 highlighted in the top image.



VEVAK said:


> So yea depending on the range, altitude and type of radar and platform using them, U.S. radars can in fact detect all stealth UCAV's (not just Iranian)! And it's no different with U.S. stealth aircraft.
> U.S. stealth aircraft aren't undetectable to all frequencies at all ranges, what gives for example a stealth F-22's an edge is the range in which they can be detected which allows them to approach their target using target data from AWACS and guided by them approach their target from the most optimal angle (least detectable approach from air & ground,.....), get within their BVR weapons range, go radar on with a passive AESA radars, lock on and fire on their target faster than any other fighter in the world.







More information in this post: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-13#post-11492635

B-2 is VLO across all bands, with no peer in sight. General information in this link: https://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/how-b2-stealth-bomber-works?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1



VEVAK said:


> Wow so you have truly deluded yourself to a point that makes you think your schooling me on Frequency with absurd high school level comments like frequency doesn't travel in a straight line
> 
> So sorry to burst your bubble but NOTHING you have said so far about stealth tech or frequency was any news to me let alone Iranian engineers working on Iranian radars & stealth tech....
> 
> And your delusions about the RQ-170 NOT being a stealth aircraft is absolutely degrading to U.S. tech! Your claiming the Aircraft designers were absolute morons for putting it's sensor package in a hidden low signature design that limits the sensors field of view, They were morons for putting a high drag screen in front of the intake & even bigger moron for trying to hide the screws for the screens inside the body to further reduce signature,.... add to that the fact that it's a flying wing design with no vertical surfaces with a height ~2ft (Gears retracted) and you truly sound delusional to a point that your degrading your own tech.
> If anything one of the main missions of the RQ-170 in Afghanistan was likely to test the capabilities of Iranian radars against an aircraft with about the same size radar signature as American B-2's & or other US stealth fighters..... And Iran knowing this rather than try to go radar on & lock on using deployed SAM in the region choose instead to hack it. So yea Iran hacked, downed & reverse engineered an American Stealth UAV my god GET OVER IT already!


RQ-170 is LO class UAV at best, and Americans have developed much better over time: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-15#post-11496823

Stealth does not imply invisibility, tactics are just as important. CIA began to take Iranian defenses for granted after a while and would dispatch RQ-170 variants into Iran even in broad daylight conditions, and no wonder Iran eventually noticed.

Nevertheless, comparing RQ-170 to true VLO class manned aircraft such as B-2, F-22 and F-35 which also happen to be actual war-fighting machines, is utterly absurd. RQ-170 is suitable for limited reconnaissance missions, not among the best of even unmanned reconnaissance platforms (Avenger, Global Hawk and RQ-180 are superior by far), but a fairly advanced UAV regardless, and a good catch for Iran.



Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> @LeGenD you were asking about the pilot who dodged two RIM-66 and survived confronting two american f-14s, here you are. he survived all of them and got killed in car accident.


My condolences, sad story.

Loss of a great pilot is painful.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

LeGenD said:


> Loss of a great pilot is painful.


unfortunately he was not the only one. jalil zandi, world ACE of F-14 also died in car accident.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

Mithridates said:


> unfortunately he was not the only one. jalil zandi, world ACE of F-14 also died in car accident.


Oh dear.

Do you suspect assassination effort in these cases? Two aces falling victim to accidents on the road... strange.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> I have said nothing to the effect of the highlighted. I you really really thought that was what I said, then you need more schooling, which I am willing to provide.
> 
> 
> What I have been saying -- or schooling -- is that we did not put as much efforts into making the RQ as 'stealthy' as you would like to believe we did. Nowhere have I said the design itself had no inherent low radar observability character. Did you not understand post 3407 page 228? Or is it likely that post 3407 made too much sense for you delusion?



No one claimed that the RQ-170 was at the edge of U.S. stealth technology! If the U.S. had added the same RAM technology as the B-2 on the much smaller RQ-170 among other things then it's RCS would be much smaller than a B-2 which wouldn't give the U.S. military accurate data in regard to Iran's AIDS capabilities against aircrafts with similar RCS as a B-2 & or other larger manned American stealth aircraft. 
You think Iran doesn't know that? 
But that acknowledgment in it's vary nature means that Iran can also make it's version of they RQ-170 stealthier if it so chooses. And that is what started this whole argument. 

I think you Americans have been fighting cavemen with AK's for so long that you've deluded yourselves about the capabilities of countries like Iran who you perceive as enemies. And the fact that you (An American Air Force Pilot) think that your schooling anyone on stealth tech with relatively elementary public data regarding stealth is a testament to that fact. 

You guys live in a bubble where somehow the very country that hacked, captured & reverse engineered an entire list of American UAV's that produces it's own Radars, SAMs, PGMs, UCAV's..... is somehow incapable of testing various materials with various shapes and designs against it's own radars, is so backwards that they don't even know that if intercepted frequency transmissions can be triangulated back to the point of origin, who hasn't had access to the internet for over 2 decades to research stealth and American stealth design...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

LeGenD said:


> Oh dear.
> 
> Do you suspect assassination effort in these cases? Two aces falling victim to accidents on the road... strange.


no there was no assassination attempt, road trips in iran are not safe...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

LeGenD said:


> Kindly provide evidence of this (super) RQ-170 type UAV you are alluding to.
> 
> Unfortunately, the RQ-170 type drone which Iran dispatched to Israel was detected and shot down not far from the border, therefore not up to the task.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US is far ahead of Russia and China in developing radar systems, mind you. To give you an idea:
> 
> AN/SPY-1D(v) sensor system on-board the Arleigh Burke class destroyer can identify and track a target having an RCS of 0.0025 m^2 at ranges in excess of 165 KM on 3.3 GHz frequency (George Lewis and Theodore Postol). And in case you didn't knew, SPY-1D(v) have managed to notice and track ballistic missiles having an RCS of 0.03 m^2 at distances in excess of 1000 KM (heritage.org).
> 
> And AN/SPY-1D(v) isn't the best they have - not even close.
> 
> 
> Mind telling me which (super) radar system is this? One of the following?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are not up to the task.
> 
> Do you realize that VLO-class manned aircraft such as B-2, F-22 and F-35 absolutely deflect and/or scatter radar beams away from the surface and even suppress EO/IR seekers? These are the most advanced and expensive aircraft ever built, and one can only wonder about the level of research/sciences involved - surely not for public consumption.
> 
> Both Russian-origin and Chinese-origin defenses including S-400 and S-300 PMU-2, and radar systems in particular, spectacularly failed in Syria: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-15#post-11496823
> 
> Most funny case is of the much touted Chinese anti-stealth JY-27 class radar system being blown to bits by an F-35 during one of the raids in the first month of 2019.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1087795248762441728
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More information in this post: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-13#post-11492635
> 
> B-2 is VLO across all bands, mind you.
> 
> FYI: https://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/how-b2-stealth-bomber-works?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1
> 
> 
> RQ-170 is LO class UAV at best, and Americans have developed much better over time: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-days-against-us.619012/page-15#post-11496823
> 
> Stealth does not imply invisibility, tactics are just as important. CIA began to take Iranian defenses for granted after a while and would dispatch RQ-170 variants into Iran even in broad daylight conditions, and no wonder Iran eventually noticed.
> 
> Nevertheless, comparing RQ-170 to true VLO class manned aircraft such as B-2, F-22 and F-35 which also happen to be actual war-fighting machines, is utterly absurd. RQ-170 is suitable for limited reconnaissance missions, not among the best of even unmanned platforms (Avenger, Global Hawk and RQ-180 are superior by far), but a fairly advanced UAV regardless, and a good catch for Iran.
> 
> 
> My condolences, sad story.
> 
> Loss of a great pilot is painful.




No one is comparing the warfighting capabilities of the RQ-170 with F-22's & B-2's moron simply their RCS (Radar Cross Section) 

The fact that that the CIA is gathering intel on Iranian Radars & IADS is not a new development or a new type of operational mission for the CIA in the past CIA operated U-2 have been caught doing the very same thing against the USSR so it's nothing new for them. Add to that the requirement of human spy's within the ranks to see the capabilities of Iranian passive sensor, network capabilities,.... and it becomes clear as to why it would be a CIA op....

And despite your delusions stealth doesn't mean undetectable whether it's Iranian or American stealth technology it makes no difference and the fact that the Israeli's had to go to the trouble of deploying multiple aircrafts to intercept it shows how well the technology actually works because in war this is the type of platform Iran can deploy in vast numbers along various other assets at a relatively low cost and unlike fixed trajectory rockets they won't be so easy to intercept (It's like the U.S. deploying 1 cruise missiles against an Iranian Air Force base as appose to 100)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> No one claimed that the RQ-170 was at the edge of U.S. stealth technology!


Actually, you guys have been -- all this time. Am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that none of you have ever made even a visual comparison between the B-2 and the RQ the way I presented it back on post 3407 page 228.



VEVAK said:


> If the U.S. had added the same RAM technology as the B-2 on the much smaller RQ-170 among other things then it's RCS would be much smaller than a B-2...


No, it would not. Because the main method for RCS reduction is not absorber but with shaping. See post 3407 page 228.



VEVAK said:


> ...think that your schooling anyone on stealth tech with relatively elementary public data regarding stealth is a testament to that fact.


Buddy, since '09 when I was invited to this forum, I have cleared up just about all misconceptions about basic radar detection and RCS reduction using just those 'elementary public' info. The fact that you continues to focus on absorber means you failed to absorb -- pun intended -- what I presented and explained.



VEVAK said:


> *You guys live in a bubble* where somehow the very country that hacked, captured & reverse engineered an entire list of American UAV's that produces it's own Radars, SAMs, PGMs, UCAV's..... is somehow incapable of testing various materials with various shapes and designs against it's own radars, is so backwards that they don't even know that if intercepted frequency transmissions can be triangulated back to the point of origin, who hasn't had access to the internet for over 2 decades to research stealth and American stealth design...


No, it is you guys who have been living in a bubble, one created by Iran counting on your gullibility and nationalism.

Two items: theory and tools.

You can have all the theories you want, but if you have not the tools, what you know is for naught. See post 3407 page 228 and post 3350 page 224.

An EM anechoic chamber is a tool that you cannot avoid having, in other words, this tool is *REQUIRED*. An open environment is contaminated with other EM sources, including cosmic background radiation (CBR), that whatever shape you created will not give you accurate measurement data as to the radiation patterns, intensity, and heading of that shape.

Not only must you have an EM anechoic chamber, how do you know that what you have is of the highest quality, meaning complete isolation of a body, in the first place? In other words, you have to build a chamber, then from the inside, you measure if you detected any EM radiation, including CBR.

On post 3350 page 224, inside the US built EM anechoic chamber, there are cones built from absorber material. Although each cone is composed of absorber material, initial contact with any signal produces some reflections before absorption, that means those cones must be of precise shape and dimensions and each cone must be precisely positioned from each other based upon operating freqs, pulse characteristics, and amplitude of suspected seeking radar(s). That is what EM isolation mean, the target body is isolated from environmental noise from the outside, then from the inside, the body is isolated from any reflection from the chamber surfaces, leaving only reflected signals that came off the body.

One of your fellow Iranians on this forum -- Mr. Sina-1 -- is a claimed scientist and have not challenged my posts on the technical level. Simply put, he cannot. Not because he is stupid but because even though he may not have related experience, his critical thinking skills and higher education enabled him to examine my arguments. This is why most of the world is skeptical of Iranian claims of producing any low observable bodies -- the quickness of that production.

Bottom line is this -- without the EM anechoic chamber, there can be no 'stealth'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

gambit said:


> Actually, you guys have been -- all this time. Am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that none of you have ever made even a visual comparison between the B-2 and the RQ the way I presented it back on post 3407 page 228.
> 
> 
> No, it would not. Because the main method for RCS reduction is not absorber but with shaping. See post 3407 page 228.
> 
> 
> Buddy, since '09 when I was invited to this forum, I have cleared up just about all misconceptions about basic radar detection and RCS reduction using just those 'elementary public' info. The fact that you continues to focus on absorber means you failed to absorb -- pun intended -- what I presented and explained.
> 
> 
> No, it is you guys who have been living in a bubble, one created by Iran counting on your gullibility and nationalism.
> 
> Two items: theory and tools.
> 
> You can have all the theories you want, but if you have not the tools, what you know is for naught. See post 3407 page 228 and post 3350 page 224.
> 
> An EM anechoic chamber is a tool that you cannot avoid having, in other words, this tool is *REQUIRED*. An open environment is contaminated with other EM sources, including cosmic background radiation (CBR), that whatever shape you created will not give you accurate measurement data as to the radiation patterns, intensity, and heading of that shape.
> 
> Not only must you have an EM anechoic chamber, how do you know that what you have is of the highest quality, meaning complete isolation of a body, in the first place? In other words, you have to build a chamber, then from the inside, you measure if you detected any EM radiation, including CBR.
> 
> On post 3350 page 224, inside the US built EM anechoic chamber, there are cones built from absorber material. Although each cone is composed of absorber material, initial contact with any signal produces some reflections before absorption, that means those cones must be of precise shape and dimensions and each cone must be precisely positioned from each other based upon operating freqs, pulse characteristics, and amplitude of suspected seeking radar(s). That is what EM isolation mean, the target body is isolated from environmental noise from the outside, then from the inside, the body is isolated from any reflection from the chamber surfaces, leaving only reflected signals that came off the body.
> 
> One of your fellow Iranians on this forum -- Mr. Sina-1 -- is a claimed scientist and have not challenged my posts on the technical level. Simply put, he cannot. Not because he is stupid but because even though he may not have related experience, his critical thinking skills and higher education enabled him to examine my arguments. This is why most of the world is skeptical of Iranian claims of producing any low observable bodies -- the quickness of that production.
> 
> Bottom line is this -- without the EM anechoic chamber, there can be no 'stealth'.


maybe the definition of the stealth is the problem, for example maybe you (US) consider an object with below 0.01 sqm as stealth, while for example russians consider below 0.1 sqm is stealth...


----------



## gambit

Mithridates said:


> maybe the definition of the stealth is the problem, for example maybe you (US) consider an object with below 0.01 sqm as stealth, while for example russians consider below 0.1 sqm is stealth...


While there is not an accepted standard of 'stealth', it is common sense that the leader sets the 'official unofficial' standard. However, the problem of the lack of an 'official' standard is compounded by the needs of national security that allows practically no openness whatsoever. The result is that anyone can set his own standard and raise himself to the same level as that of the leader.


----------



## Oldman1

VEVAK said:


> I think you Americans have been fighting cavemen with AK's for so long that you've deluded yourselves about the capabilities of countries like Iran who you perceive as enemies. And the fact that you (An American Air Force Pilot) think that your schooling anyone on stealth tech with relatively elementary public data regarding stealth is a testament to that fact.
> 
> You guys live in a bubble where somehow the very country that hacked, captured & reverse engineered an entire list of American UAV's that produces it's own Radars, SAMs, PGMs, UCAV's..... is somehow incapable of testing various materials with various shapes and designs against it's own radars, is so backwards that they don't even know that if intercepted frequency transmissions can be triangulated back to the point of origin, who hasn't had access to the internet for over 2 decades to research stealth and American stealth design...



Thats the same talk from Saddam after comparing to U.S. fighting rice farmers aka Charlie in Vietnam. Can't beat the Vietcong so that means couldn't beat Iraq during Gulf War 1.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

Oldman1 said:


> Thats the same talk from Saddam after comparing to U.S. fighting rice farmers aka Charlie in Vietnam. Can't beat the Vietcong so that means couldn't beat Iraq during Gulf War 1.


right now ur president beging for talk he send his phone number .but if he send her doghter number i pesonally call her bic she is good thing to f.....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

ashool said:


> right now ur president beging for talk he send his phone number .but if he send her doghter number i pesonally call her bic she is good thing to f.....


You have to check whether his father has left anything for you!


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Actually, you guys have been -- all this time. Am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that none of you have ever made even a visual comparison between the B-2 and the RQ the way I presented it back on post 3407 page 228.
> 
> 
> No, it would not. Because the main method for RCS reduction is not absorber but with shaping. See post 3407 page 228.
> 
> 
> Buddy, since '09 when I was invited to this forum, I have cleared up just about all misconceptions about basic radar detection and RCS reduction using just those 'elementary public' info. The fact that you continues to focus on absorber means you failed to absorb -- pun intended -- what I presented and explained.
> 
> 
> No, it is you guys who have been living in a bubble, one created by Iran counting on your gullibility and nationalism.
> 
> Two items: theory and tools.
> 
> You can have all the theories you want, but if you have not the tools, what you know is for naught. See post 3407 page 228 and post 3350 page 224.
> 
> An EM anechoic chamber is a tool that you cannot avoid having, in other words, this tool is *REQUIRED*. An open environment is contaminated with other EM sources, including cosmic background radiation (CBR), that whatever shape you created will not give you accurate measurement data as to the radiation patterns, intensity, and heading of that shape.
> 
> Not only must you have an EM anechoic chamber, how do you know that what you have is of the highest quality, meaning complete isolation of a body, in the first place? In other words, you have to build a chamber, then from the inside, you measure if you detected any EM radiation, including CBR.
> 
> On post 3350 page 224, inside the US built EM anechoic chamber, there are cones built from absorber material. Although each cone is composed of absorber material, initial contact with any signal produces some reflections before absorption, that means those cones must be of precise shape and dimensions and each cone must be precisely positioned from each other based upon operating freqs, pulse characteristics, and amplitude of suspected seeking radar(s). That is what EM isolation mean, the target body is isolated from environmental noise from the outside, then from the inside, the body is isolated from any reflection from the chamber surfaces, leaving only reflected signals that came off the body.
> 
> One of your fellow Iranians on this forum -- Mr. Sina-1 -- is a claimed scientist and have not challenged my posts on the technical level. Simply put, he cannot. Not because he is stupid but because even though he may not have related experience, his critical thinking skills and higher education enabled him to examine my arguments. This is why most of the world is skeptical of Iranian claims of producing any low observable bodies -- the quickness of that production.
> 
> Bottom line is this -- without the EM anechoic chamber, there can be no 'stealth'.



1st off I said AMONG OTHER THINGS! But aside from that you can most definitely reduce the RCS of an RQ-170 by applying RAM Technology in certain parts of the airframe and shaping the reflective structure beneath in such a way that it can trap frequency attempting to bounce off various parts of your frame back to it's point of origin (like the honeycomb structure of B-2 Flaps & diagonal ribs at the leading edge) & I believe you know that & you can do it without having to reduce the angle of the wings &.... It will be a highly expensive airframe to make it flight worthy on a jet aircraft that size but most defiantly possible. Which also mean having the capability to produce RAM means nothing unless you also have the capability to make the structure underneath sound and flight worthy and at the same time capable of properly reducing the RCS or else simply applying ram on a none stealth structure would have little to no effect. Which is NOT NEWS to me or anyone else! 





2ndly Your missing the point! The RQ-170 is a lot smaller than a B-2 so if the same Tech was applied to it from head to tow it's RCS would naturally be smaller which then wouldn't help gather accurate data on Iranian IADS capabilities against manned stealth fighter/Bombers...
I believe the U.S. / CIA was under no illusions that at the very least Iran had the capability to detect them but at what range & in what locations they can be detected using what sensors and at what range and in what locations they can actually be targeted & using what systems, Iran's network capabilities, reactionary response speed,..... These are things you need human assets within the ranks spy's for which makes the CIA best suited to handle such missions. 

FYI on the very same day Iran showcased the RQ-170 I checked and compared it the B-2 & every other flying wing design I could find including the Nazi Ho229

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Oldman1 said:


> Thats the same talk from Saddam after comparing to U.S. fighting rice farmers aka Charlie in Vietnam. Can't beat the Vietcong so that means couldn't beat Iraq during Gulf War 1.



Right because Saddam had a vast stock of domestically produced precision guided missiles and ability to strike aircraft bunkers 100's of KM from his own boarders! And 85% of his Naval capabilities hadn't already been sunk by Iran and his Air Force and Helo fleet weren't fully dependent on imported parts, weapons & even foreign maintenance professionals and he wasn't living in a country where the vast majority of men within fighting age wanted him & his government gone because they were being oppressed by a minority group. 
Yea sure that sound a lot like Iran! LOL!

And lets not forget in the 1st Gulf War the U.S. didn't actually hold any significant portions of Iraq but rather carpet bombed Iraqi armored battalions near the boarder so they can simply drive their Tanks all over Iraq rather quickly to scare Saddam and get him to withdraw from Kuwait and it worked. But the actual invasion happened over a decade later and only after the U.S. spent over a decade bombing Iraqi Air Defenses, Weapons factories and depots.

Now if your asking me if I think the U.S. has the capability to drive it's Tanks a few hundred kilometers inside Iranian territory from various sides and then hull a and get out my answer to that would be of course they do but that's not really an invasion is it! AND unlike Saddam Iran has the retaliatory capabilities to strike back at Airforce bases that the U.S. would need to provide Air Support and Iran wouldn't need fighter jets to do it so disabling Iran's ability to launch fighter from every single Iranian Air Force Base would have no effect on Iran's retaliatory capabilities

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1134518909980352519

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

test video of JDAM-ER/Yassin GPS guided glide bomb:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
according to the video:
range:60 km
CEP:30 m

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

Mithridates said:


> test video of JDAM-ER/Yassin GPS guided glide bomb:
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> according to the video:
> range:60 km
> CEP:30 m


I read it @ CEP: 10 meters


----------



## Mithridates

Myself said:


> I read it @ CEP: 10 meters


most it's of targets are way larger than 30 m in diameter.


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> most it's of targets are way larger than 30 m in diameter.



750lb/30 meters (~100ft) is not sufficient for most bunkered assets but it is sufficient enough for targeting fixed un-bunkered military assets (Radars, Aircrafts at an airfield, runways,...) or for targeting infrastructures like powerplants, refineries,.... so the accuracy is sufficient enough that that it would be worth risking a pilots life and an aircraft but it's not enough to cover all targets specifically bunkered targets.

Also, GPS or even an Iranian land based version of it should only be used as a backup and their main purpose should be to simplify and speed up your targeting capability. And Iran's ability to use GPS based weapons will depend on various factors and although GPS type systems are a low cost solution (If your not the one paying for the SAT) they lack the security needed to be relied on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

imagine this load with this JDAM-ER, it would be devastating for any country. and i think pilot has minimum risk over his life for doing the job because it does not matter how high you release them so you can release them of really high and avoid ground fires.
regarding the guidance i assume we are using russian satellites.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Thats the same talk from Saddam after comparing to U.S. fighting rice farmers aka Charlie in Vietnam. Can't beat the Vietcong so that means couldn't beat Iraq during Gulf War 1.



In case of Iran, almost all war estimates by Pentagon call for land force up to 500,000-650,000 soldiers to do land invasion of Iran. I assume the planners of Pentagon know much more than you in regards to what to expect from Iran.

Let’s say a total of 750,000 soldiers for just securing Iran. That would mean all able soldiers along with reserves and even a draft.

On top of that, US would likely need another 250,000 soldiers to deploy to Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan to stem the militia attacks.

So you want to know why Iran hasn’t been attacked? Because no politician will call for draft let alone a mobilization of million man army.

And if you go the route of limited air strikes and “hope” that it doesn’t escalate then all you do is guarantee an Iran with a nuclear bomb and potentially a global economic crisis as Iran sets fire to every major oil installation in the Middle East.

So again, this is well known by Pentagon planners. There is no scenario where US enters war and exits smelling like roses. This is why there will never be war.

The US could “afford” WWI and WW2. It could afford the Cold War. It could afford Vietnam. It can not afford an Iran war, the world can not afford it. Times have changed.

Devil is in the details.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran Air co. Overhauls passenger planes report*










*Islamic Republic of Iran Army Aviation took part in Eghtedar 97 (Power 97) war games.*


*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ray_Atek

Not a real fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 563154
> 
> 
> Not a real fighter



evident photomontage

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

mohsen said:


> You have to check whether his father has left anything for you!


tanx i forget to check my e mail of course he send her num .when one jew without ball can fu ....we iranian perfectly can .and she has greatest fun in her life dont forget that


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> In case of Iran, almost all war estimates by Pentagon call for land force up to 500,000-650,000 soldiers to do land invasion of Iran. I assume the planners of Pentagon know much more than you in regards to what to expect from Iran.
> 
> Let’s say a total of 750,000 soldiers for just securing Iran. That would mean all able soldiers along with reserves and even a draft.
> 
> On top of that, US would likely need another 250,000 soldiers to deploy to Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan to stem the militia attacks.
> 
> So you want to know why Iran hasn’t been attacked? Because no politician will call for draft let alone a mobilization of million man army.
> 
> And if you go the route of limited air strikes and “hope” that it doesn’t escalate then all you do is guarantee an Iran with a nuclear bomb and potentially a global economic crisis as Iran sets fire to every major oil installation in the Middle East.
> 
> So again, this is well known by Pentagon planners. There is no scenario where US enters war and exits smelling like roses. This is why there will never be war.
> 
> The US could “afford” WWI and WW2. It could afford the Cold War. It could afford Vietnam. It can not afford an Iran war, the world can not afford it. Times have changed.
> 
> Devil is in the details.



Yeah, so Iran can't afford a war with the U.S. unless you believe Iran's claims they can wipe the U.S. carrier group with just one missile.



VEVAK said:


> Right because Saddam had a vast stock of domestically produced precision guided missiles and ability to strike aircraft bunkers 100's of KM from his own boarders! And 85% of his Naval capabilities hadn't already been sunk by Iran and his Air Force and Helo fleet weren't fully dependent on imported parts, weapons & even foreign maintenance professionals and he wasn't living in a country where the vast majority of men within fighting age wanted him & his government gone because they were being oppressed by a minority group.
> Yea sure that sound a lot like Iran! LOL!
> 
> And lets not forget in the 1st Gulf War the U.S. didn't actually hold any significant portions of Iraq but rather carpet bombed Iraqi armored battalions near the boarder so they can simply drive their Tanks all over Iraq rather quickly to scare Saddam and get him to withdraw from Kuwait and it worked. But the actual invasion happened over a decade later and only after the U.S. spent over a decade bombing Iraqi Air Defenses, Weapons factories and depots.
> 
> Now if your asking me if I think the U.S. has the capability to drive it's Tanks a few hundred kilometers inside Iranian territory from various sides and then hull a and get out my answer to that would be of course they do but that's not really an invasion is it! AND unlike Saddam Iran has the retaliatory capabilities to strike back at Airforce bases that the U.S. would need to provide Air Support and Iran wouldn't need fighter jets to do it so disabling Iran's ability to launch fighter from every single Iranian Air Force Base would have no effect on Iran's retaliatory capabilities



Saddam tried to retaliate with ballistic missiles, just similar to what Iran is trying to do. Remember that you have to fire many and I mean many missiles to take out the bases that large and considered the defenses as well as countermeasures against such missiles. You would need airplanes to defend your airspace otherwise we have air superiority over Iran. Makes it harder for Iran. You know that otherwise you wouldn't have an air force in the first place.



ashool said:


> right now ur president beging for talk he send his phone number .but if he send her doghter number i pesonally call her bic she is good thing to f.....



Your leaders are the ones who sent their phone numbers to his daughter. Not the other way around.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah, so Iran can't afford a war with the U.S. unless you believe Iran's claims they can wipe the U.S. carrier group with just one missile.
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam tried to retaliate with ballistic missiles, just similar to what Iran is trying to do. Remember that you have to fire many and I mean many missiles to take out the bases that large and considered the defenses as well as countermeasures against such missiles. You would need airplanes to defend your airspace otherwise we have air superiority over Iran. Makes it harder for Iran. You know that otherwise you wouldn't have an air force in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> Your leaders are the ones who sent their phone numbers to his daughter. Not the other way around.


 You need to change your name from Oldman to Senile!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Oldman1 said:


> Saddam tried to retaliate with ballistic missiles, just similar to what Iran is trying to do. Remember that you have to fire many and I mean many missiles to take out the bases that large and considered the defenses as well as countermeasures against such missiles. You would need airplanes to defend your airspace otherwise we have air superiority over Iran. Makes it harder for Iran. You know that otherwise you wouldn't have an air force in the first place.


How long it take to made Scud ready and how accurate it is . then compare it with the accuracy of a missile from Fateh family and how long it take to launch it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah, so Iran can't afford a war with the U.S. unless you believe Iran's claims they can wipe the U.S. carrier group with just one missile.
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam tried to retaliate with ballistic missiles, just similar to what Iran is trying to do. Remember that you have to fire many and I mean many missiles to take out the bases that large and considered the defenses as well as countermeasures against such missiles. You would need airplanes to defend your airspace otherwise we have air superiority over Iran. Makes it harder for Iran. You know that otherwise you wouldn't have an air force in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> Your leaders are the ones who sent their phone numbers to his daughter. Not the other way around.



Your the one that's deluded enough to think that a country that has more than 3 times as many large known Missile Bases than Air Force Bases can only afford to fire 1 missile or even 1 type of missile at your ships. 
And missiles aren't Iran's only means of striking at U.S. fleet as the U.S. learned in it's Millennial Challenge where it lost 16 ships in a matter of day's and that was against Iran's capabilities back in 2002 which was NOTHING compared to Iran's capabilities today. 

And comparing Saddam's Missile capabilities in the 90's with Iran's today is rather absurd! And is as absurd as me equating Saddam's Air Force with the U.S. Air Force simply because they both use fighter jets. 
So equating the two simply because they both used fighter jets with no regards to the quantity, quality, the various types and capabilities of the fighter jets...… is as absurd as equating Saddam's Missiles with Iran's Missiles simply because Iran will use missiles as a means of delivery. 

Missiles like fighter jet are simply a means of delivering ordinances and Iran is NOT Iraq! Iran has spent the better part of the past 2 decades transferring the countries main retaliatory capabilities from it's Air Force to it's Missile Forces with the express purpose of confronting the U.S. because the U.S. has spent the better part of the past 2 decades threatening Iran with military action! And unlike with the U.S. for Iran it's a matter of survival so in response to the constant U.S. threats you think a long list of Iranian military commanders, think tanks & military planners from various branches haven't spent the better part of the past 2 decades in coming with the means of fighting off the U.S. by producing various types of weapons that are within Iran's capabilities to produce and not just missiles! Or are you truly deluded enough that you think that the U.S. has been threatening Iran and building military bases around Iran for the past 2 decades & in response Iranian military planners simply decided to stand around scratching their heads? HOW DELUSIONAL ARE YOU?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*
can anyone tell me the name of this engine?





*


----------



## sahureka2

Engine IL-76?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *can anyone tell me the name of this engine?
> 
> 
> View attachment 563725
> *
> 
> View attachment 563733


Pratt & Whitney JT8D?? i'm not sure about it but it's obviously an airliner engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah, so Iran can't afford a war with the U.S. unless you believe Iran's claims they can wipe the U.S. carrier group with just one missile.
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam tried to retaliate with ballistic missiles, just similar to what Iran is trying to do. Remember that you have to fire many and I mean many missiles to take out the bases that large and considered the defenses as well as countermeasures against such missiles. You would need airplanes to defend your airspace otherwise we have air superiority over Iran. Makes it harder for Iran. You know that otherwise you wouldn't have an air force in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> Your leaders are the ones who sent their phone numbers to his daughter. Not the other way around.


lol , why dont you go and wear a MAGA cap and relax since you love Ivanca so much , no disrespect but you sound like a angry imbecile trying to justify America as the righteous Defender of the free world ,the horse sh**t you`v been fed by Uncle SAM is what you believe in and you are entitel to it , have a nice day

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> Engine IL-76?





Mithridates said:


> Pratt & Whitney JT8D?? i'm not sure about it but it's obviously an airliner engine.



i do not think these are it, i can not tell what engine is this, but thanks tho

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> i do not think these are it, i can not tell what engine is this, but thanks tho



 Marine Gas Turbine

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

sahureka2 said:


> Marine Gas Turbine


You mean the turbine used as the powerplant for ships?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Arminkh said:


> You mean the turbine used as the powerplant for ships?


Yes
but it is only as a hypothesis

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*
Iranian MiG 29 Fulcrum*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

what did Iran send to Syria? what are they?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> what did Iran send to Syria? what are they?



Vehicle origin looks Russian.

I wonder if they are Russian ECW/EW systems.

Unless those belong to the Syrian army. Then they could just be transport vehicles transferring Iranian arms from the plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> what did Iran send to Syria? what are they?


Look like oil tankers to me with access hatch on top. Maybe it is just refueling. Where did you find those?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

skyshadow said:


> what did Iran send to Syria? what are they?


Seems like Nebo radars,that exactly how it look like non-deployed but also can be many things.mm

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Look like oil tankers to me with access hatch on top. Maybe it is just refueling. Where did you find those?


T4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

imagery from Shahed Industries Center show Iran's Shahed 216 Ground Test Vehicle resuming tests after getting new main rotor blades

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

IRIAF Kosar1 cockpit

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ashool

skyshadow said:


> IRIAF Kosar1 cockpit


what is that meane?


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> IRIAF Kosar1 cockpit



looks like a refurbished F-5. I still doubt Iran’s claim Kosar is from scratch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

ashool said:


> what is that meane?



that is the cockpit of a Kowsar fighter jet



TheImmortal said:


> looks like a refurbished F-5. I still doubt Iran’s claim Kosar is from scratch.



well they showed there skeleton and structure being built so they can not be refurbished F-5 as these Kowsar jets have radars and advance electronic devices that took the space of one of the guns on right as you can see here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> that is the cockpit of a Kowsar fighter jet
> 
> 
> 
> well they showed there skeleton and structure being built so they can not be refurbished F-5 as these Kowsar jets have radars and advance electronic devices that took the space of one of the guns on right as you can see here.



The original picture you gave of Kosar you can clearly see the interior is worn, the metal is more fatigued/worn, and paint along the console is chipped and faded.

How can a “brand new” cockpit have that happen?

And that propaganda video is nice and all, but straight from Iran’s mouth via news releases is that 15 kosar will be built in next 3 or so years. Yet that propaganda video shows at least 7 in an So called “assembly line”.

So something about this program doesn’t add up.

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/431501/Iran-Air-Force-to-receive-15-Kowsar-fighter-jets


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> The original picture you gave of Kosar you can clearly see the interior is worn, the metal is more fatigued/worn, and paint along the console is chipped and faded.
> 
> How can a “brand new” cockpit have that happen?
> 
> And that propaganda video is nice and all, but straight from Iran’s mouth via news releases is that 15 kosar will be built in next 3 or so years. Yet that propaganda video shows at least 7 in an So called “assembly line”.
> 
> So something about this program doesn’t add up.
> 
> https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/431501/Iran-Air-Force-to-receive-15-Kowsar-fighter-jets







if you want to know a plane is new or old, look how much dirty it is. this kowsar image shows actually it in new because there is no dust or dirt in any of notches. if you focus particularly on f-35, you will find such things too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Well,they can upgrade F-5 to Kowsar standard easily but we can see that they build new airframes with one Gun,now upgrade process would probably require to take out one Gun from F-5,to make room for new radar and also they need new electric generators probably, new powerful radar always require more power and also there are new electronic components but only radar is heavy consumer... So,we can expect to see new airframes but also upgraded F-5 probably... We will see..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> The original picture you gave of Kosar you can clearly see the interior is worn, the metal is more fatigued/worn, and paint along the console is chipped and faded.
> 
> How can a “brand new” cockpit have that happen?
> 
> And that propaganda video is nice and all, but straight from Iran’s mouth via news releases is that 15 kosar will be built in next 3 or so years. Yet that propaganda video shows at least 7 in an So called “assembly line”.
> 
> So something about this program doesn’t add up.
> 
> https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/431501/Iran-Air-Force-to-receive-15-Kowsar-fighter-jets



i agree with you this is nothing more than an test bed for (advance electronics and radar and ....) Iran fighter jet industry they said they do not want to stay on it if its new than good for us, but if its a upgraded F_5 still it need to be almost rebuilded entirely so i will say its nothing short of building a new one but i think Kowsar is Iranian built and this one maybe looks old but its still in making so its not final maybe they clean it after its done. do not forget that it can fire Fakour 90 missile now.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

skyshadow said:


> do not forget that it can fire Fakour 90 missile now.




No, it can not ! Did you ever checked, what was the weight of the original AIM-54 (463 kg) and even if the Fakour might be lighter it is well beyond the load capability of the F-5/Kowsar ... let alone in aerial combat. Just to add, name me any fighter, besides the F-14, which was able to carry that monster?

By the way, the Kowsar does not even have a decent radar ...

So either give proof that a Kowsar can carry the Fakour 90 missile or otherwise stop posting stupid propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Deino said:


> No, it can not ! Did you ever checked, what was the weight of the original AIM-54 (463 kg) and even if the Fakour might be lighter it is well beyond the load capability of the F-5/Kowsar ... let alone in aerial combat. Just to add, name me any fighter, besides the F-14, which was able to carry that monster?
> 
> By the way, the Kowsar does not even have a decent radar ...
> 
> So either give proof that a Kowsar can carry the Fakour 90 missile or otherwise stop posting stupid propaganda.











f-4 and f-5 can carry AIM-54 but they will not in real world cause their radar range is limited.


----------



## Deino

Mithridates said:


> f-4 and f-5 can carry AIM-54 but they will not in real world cause their radar range is limited.



Show me please one single image of a F-4 or F-5 - let even a Kowsar - carrying an AIM-54! There is none, since it is impossible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Deino said:


> Show me please one single image of a F-4 or F-5 - let even a Kowsar - carrying an AIM-54! There is none, since it is impossible.


it is not impossible weight wise but yes it is not possible to use them as a BVR missile with these planes (at least without upgrading them).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Deino said:


> Show me please one single image of a F-4 or F-5 - let even a Kowsar - carrying an AIM-54! There is none, since it is impossible.


Is not impossible but there is no need for it and doesn't make sense since F5 and F4 were build for different purpose , otherwise Iran Air force has done some similar work before in the 80s ,Like fitting AGM65 Maverick From F4 which is as big and heavy as AIM54 to AH-1 SuperCobra, !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_AH-1_SuperCobra



Caspian Parsi said:


> Is not impossible but there is no need for it and doesn't make sense since F5 and F4 were build for different purpose , otherwise Iran Air force has done some similar work before in the 80s ,Like fitting AGM65 Maverick From F4 which is as big and heavy as AIM54 to AH-1 SuperCobra, !
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_AH-1_SuperCobra


Just read the section for IRAN


----------



## Hack-Hook

Deino said:


> No, it can not ! Did you ever checked, what was the weight of the original AIM-54 (463 kg) and even if the Fakour might be lighter it is well beyond the load capability of the F-5/Kowsar ... let alone in aerial combat. Just to add, name me any fighter, besides the F-14, which was able to carry that monster?
> 
> By the way, the Kowsar does not even have a decent radar ...
> 
> So either give proof that a Kowsar can carry the Fakour 90 missile or otherwise stop posting stupid propaganda.


well on F-5 pylon 3-4-5 have the capability to carry 463kg weight of Fakour , but the question is what for ? the radar don't have the range ,even the upgraded radar on Kowsar have less range than the missile.



Deino said:


> Show me please one single image of a F-4 or F-5 - let even a Kowsar - carrying an AIM-54! There is none, since it is impossible.


yes t's impossible because AIM-54 is not a missile alone , it's a missile bundled with *AN/AWG-9 *or* AN/APG-71 *. and for the record Fakour don't need those radars because the internal is different from AIM-54

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hezbollahi

Very impressive. Hopefully Iran can export these domestically made products.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Hack-Hook said:


> well on F-5 pylon 3-4-5 have the capability to carry 463kg weight of Fakour , but the question is what for ? the radar don't have the range ,even the upgraded radar on Kowsar have less range than the missile.
> 
> 
> yes t's impossible because AIM-54 is not a missile alone , it's a missile bundled with *AN/AWG-9 *or* AN/APG-71 *. and for the record Fakour don't need those radars because the internal is different from AIM-54




Exactly my points !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Deino said:


> Show me please one single image of a F-4 or F-5 - let even a Kowsar - carrying an AIM-54! There is none, since it is impossible.


Radar used to upgrade F-4 and Kowsar are very similar,one used for Kowsar is probably smaller and considering that I saw MFDs and radar on F-4 I know for sure that they can integrate Fakour and PL-12 or any other modern missile,new multipurpose radars are digital and there is no limits in terms of integration.From F-4 MFD I saw it is clear what capability radar have but unfortunately I think Kowsar would be limited to only one such heavy missile to carry under fuselage but that would mean it had to fly without external fuel tank...I didn't check,but I'm not sure can F-5 carry 500kg under wings....Total payload of F-5 is not issue,but I don't know max weight it can carry on wings...Any way, when it comes to new radar,they can integrate any missile...that is why only modernized F-4 carry anti-ship missile...like noor or qadr,these missile have similar guidance as active guided a2a missiles,active radar + mid curse correction/ins but aircraft needs multipurpose radar like we saw on upgraded F-4 and Kowsar...So,they can put one Fakour under fuselage but range would be restricted to Kowsar radar range+active seeker on missile...I'm not sure is one long range missile worth to produce adapter and external fuel tank...It is more effective to just add 2 F-14 to fly in same formation...So yes it looks like impossible for someone who doesn't know anything about...Reason why F-14 was only capable fire aim54 in that time was because F-14 was only aircraft with sami-digital radar and what AWG-9 gives capability to simultaneously fire to 6 targets is TWS ,today every multipurpose radar(including one we saw on F-4)is capable for different mode of operations, that is why we can see RWR,CV,T-Pulse ..etc in MFD of F4...and that is why these radars are multipurpose... With standardized signal processing...there are no limits...that is why you can see 3th of khordar fire Sayyad missile...and that is why old air defense systems are digitalized...for easy integration, better resistance, multi channels
I checked F-5 wing payload ,it is 650kg/sq meter so it has sufficient payload to carry 2 Fakour 90 on wings + more weapons or fuel and just because there is no picture it doesn't mean anything, we didn't see picture of Kowsar armed with anything....But there would be more effective to add PL-12...we will see,truth is Iran has F-14,MiG29,F-4,F-1 and Kowsar would be more effective for R-73,short range interception and for CAS missions

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> I checked F-5 wing payload ,it is 650kg/sq meter so it has sufficient payload to carry 2 Fakour 90 on wings + more weapons or fuel and just because there is no picture it doesn't mean anything, we didn't see picture of Kowsar armed with anything....


you see only Pylon 3-4-5 can carry that weight and those pylon are the ones that have plumbing for fuel tanks so its either missile or extra fuel for F-5 or Kowsar by the way pylon 1-2-6-7 only can carry light missiles
look at this picture and you see the difference in size on what those pylon can carry




for example those pylon 1-7 can only carry small short range heat seeking missiles or rockets

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

sanel1412 said:


> Radar used to upgrade F-4 and Kowsar are very similar,one used for Kowsar is probably smaller and considering that I saw MFDs and radar on F-4 I know for sure that they can integrate Fakour and PL-12 or any other modern missile,new multipurpose radars are digital and there is no limits in terms of integration.From F-4 MFD I saw it is clear what capability radar have but unfortunately I think Kowsar would be limited to only one such heavy missile to carry under fuselage but that would mean it had to fly without external fuel tank...I didn't check,but I'm not sure can F-5 carry 500kg under wings....Total payload of F-5 is not issue,but I don't know max weight it can carry on wings...Any way, when it comes to new radar,they can integrate any missile...that is why only modernized F-4 carry anti-ship missile...like noor or qadr,these missile have similar guidance as active guided a2a missiles,active radar + mid curse correction/ins but aircraft needs multipurpose radar like we saw on upgraded F-4 and Kowsar...So,they can put one Fakour under fuselage but range would be restricted to Kowsar radar range+active seeker on missile...I'm not sure is one long range missile worth to produce adapter and external fuel tank...It is more effective to just add 2 F-14 to fly in same formation...So yes it looks like impossible for someone who doesn't know anything about...Reason why F-14 was only capable fire aim54 in that time was because F-14 was only aircraft with sami-digital radar and what AWG-9 gives capability to simultaneously fire to 6 targets is RWR/RWS ,today every multipurpose radar(including one we saw on F-4)is capable for different mode of operations, that is why we can see RWR,CV,T-Pulse ..etc in MFD of F4...and that is why these radars are multipurpose... With standardized signal processing...there are no limits...that is why you can see 3th of khordar fire Sayyad missile...and that is why old air defense systems are digitalized...for easy integration, better resistance, multi channels
> I checked F-5 wing payload ,it is 650kg/sq meter so it has sufficient payload to carry 2 Fakour 90 on wings + more weapons or fuel and just because there is no picture it doesn't mean anything, we didn't see picture of Kowsar armed with anything....But there would be more effective to add PL-12...we will see,truth is Iran has F-14,MiG29,F-4,F-1 and Kowsar would be more effective for R-73,short range interception and for CAS missions

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> The original picture you gave of Kosar you can clearly see the interior is worn, the metal is more fatigued/worn, and paint along the console is chipped and faded.
> 
> How can a “brand new” cockpit have that happen?
> 
> And that propaganda video is nice and all, but straight from Iran’s mouth via news releases is that 15 kosar will be built in next 3 or so years. Yet that propaganda video shows at least 7 in an So called “assembly line”.
> 
> So something about this program doesn’t add up.
> 
> https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/431501/Iran-Air-Force-to-receive-15-Kowsar-fighter-jets


i found something from f-35 regarding the issue you said 





brigader general zare nedjad that in a historical event hit an iraqi mig-25 foxbat over urmia lake with his 20 mm cannons after his both AIM-9 sidewinders failed. mig-25s were most sophisticated soviet planes and in iraqi fleet and f-5 was the simplest light fighter in IRIAF inventory. according BG zare nedjad after he hit the foxbat with a burst of several rounds the aggressor plane started to flaming so he approached it and sided with it and signed the iraqi pilot to eject but he refused and crashed in iraqi soil and died.
images of mohammad reza zare nedjad: during war and present time.





images recorded by f-5E gunsight of burning mig-25.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> i found something from f-35 regarding the issue you said
> View attachment 564784


Now *THAT* is one really *SH!TTY* paint job,I `d want my money back[LOL!]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

another rare and impressive story of and incident that an IRIAA ah-1j downs an iraqi mig-21 during iran-iraq war:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
for non farsi speakers:
during valfair-8 an iranian ah-1j TOW cobra piloted by colonel ismail sehatti and his co-pilot were destroying iraqi small missile boats in arvand river that suddenly noticed unusual turbulence of water and after looking around noticed 3 mig-21 armed with rocket pods were hunting them. pilot tries to out maneuver the migs that were in CAS mission and didn't had any A2A missiles and frustrated them so they leave the TOW cobra, during this incidents pilot notices one of migs in his 12 o'clock direction and about to dive over ah-1j and hit it with it's cannon so he takes the advantage of moving turret of cobra and targets mig before he does the same. as result of several 20 mm cannon impact and G force resulted of migs dive, the plane broke into two pieces and crashes. in the mean time IRGC ADF targets another mig and the third mig aborts mission and flies back to its airbase.
the point of this story is always arm your planes with heat seeking/IIR missile to avoid the iraqi migs fate.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xbat

did iraqis confirm this story?


----------



## Mithridates

xbat said:


> did iraqis confirm this story?


no country would do that, like how US first denied iran captured rq-170 because of known reasons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xbat

but when i consider speed of jet fighter it is hard to believe. yes it is possible but hmmm...


----------



## Mithridates

xbat said:


> but when i consider speed of jet fighter it is hard to believe. yes it is possible but hmmm...







these are the best turn ratios that three US maded fighters can achieve, now look at a cobra and how much it can turn in a second. the iraqis mistake was not to arm the plane with short range missiles however we can't blame them for it the plane has limited pylons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

another rare incident recorded by an IRIAF tiseo electro optical target acquisition system and again with iraqi air force involvment. this pucture depicts an incedent after iran-iraq war during persian golf war, an iraqi mig-25 confronts two f-15c and subsequently the eagles intercept it and fire several missiles on it, the mig pilot trying to avoid the missiles turns toward iran and with it's max speed enters our airspace and rescue itself, by his bad luck there were two iranian phantoms patrolling the border and as the iraqi pilot notices f-4s and due to desperation (we never had a peace with iraq and the war stopped with a cease fire and during first phase of PG war our airspace was not open to iraqi planes) and being cornered ejects. the event recorded by f-4 tiseo system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

Caspian Parsi said:


> lol , why dont you go and wear a MAGA cap and relax since you love Ivanca so much , no disrespect but you sound like a angry imbecile trying to justify America as the righteous Defender of the free world ,the horse sh**t you`v been fed by Uncle SAM is what you believe in and you are entitel to it , have a nice day



Hey don't be mad because what your mullahs said about destroying out carrier groups with one missile.



Hack-Hook said:


> VEVAK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your the one that's deluded enough to think that a country that has more than 3 times as many large known Missile Bases than Air Force Bases can only afford to fire 1 missile or even 1 type of missile at your ships.
> And missiles aren't Iran's only means of striking at U.S. fleet as the U.S. learned in it's Millennial Challenge where it lost 16 ships in a matter of day's and that was against Iran's capabilities back in 2002 which was NOTHING compared to Iran's capabilities today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be deluded since the U.S. was trained against the Soviet Union with massive amount of bombers with hundreds of missiles at one carrier group. And not to mention the fact if you have missile bases, they will be destroyed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And comparing Saddam's Missile capabilities in the 90's with Iran's today is rather absurd! And is as absurd as me equating Saddam's Air Force with the U.S. Air Force simply because they both use fighter jets.
> So equating the two simply because they both used fighter jets with no regards to the quantity, quality, the various types and capabilities of the fighter jets...… is as absurd as equating Saddam's Missiles with Iran's Missiles simply because Iran will use missiles as a means of delivery.
> 
> Missiles like fighter jet are simply a means of delivering ordinances and Iran is NOT Iraq! Iran has spent the better part of the past 2 decades transferring the countries main retaliatory capabilities from it's Air Force to it's Missile Forces with the express purpose of confronting the U.S. because the U.S. has spent the better part of the past 2 decades threatening Iran with military action! And unlike with the U.S. for Iran it's a matter of survival so in response to the constant U.S. threats you think a long list of Iranian military commanders, think tanks & military planners from various branches haven't spent the better part of the past 2 decades in coming with the means of fighting off the U.S. by producing various types of weapons that are within Iran's capabilities to produce and not just missiles! Or are you truly deluded enough that you think that the U.S. has been threatening Iran and building military bases around Iran for the past 2 decades & in response Iranian military planners simply decided to stand around scratching their heads? HOW DELUSIONAL ARE YOU?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you don't think the U.S. military planners thought of the same thing? After all the Millennium Challenge has their attention right?
Click to expand...


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Oldman1 said:


> Hey don't be mad because what your mullahs said about destroying out carrier groups with one missile.


Mullas can bark all they want ,that what they do !!No one is doubting US capabilities, the way 


Oldman1 said:


> Hey don't be mad because what your mullahs said about destroying out carrier groups with one missile.


Mullas can bark all they want oldman , believe it when you see it ,what they say is for internal consumption,then it gets echoed by the US media and here we are ,trying to make sense of it .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Caspian Parsi said:


> Mullas can bark all they want ,that what they do !!No one is doubting US capabilities, the way
> 
> Mullas can bark all they want oldman , believe it when you see it ,what they say is for internal consumption,then it gets echoed by the US media and here we are ,trying to make sense of it .


Another one who is shaking his tails for his American master ....

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

F-14 and MiG-29

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Aramagedon

*Defense Minister: Iran to Speed up Mass-Production of Kosar Fighter Jets*






TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami announced the country's plans to increase production of the newly-manufactured supersonic Kosar fighter jet.
"Experts of the defense ministry's air industries are determined to manufacture a larger number of Kosar fighter jets in the current year and in the minimum period of time possible in full cooperation with the Islamic Republic of Iran Army's air force and support by its Commander Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh," General Hatami said in the Central city of Isfahan on Tuesday after a visit to the site where the Kosar fighter jets are being produced.

General Nasirzadeh, for his part, expressed the hope that new Kosar fighter jets will join the operational fleet of the air force soon.

Iran in November inaugurated the production line of Kosar fighter jet.

Addressing the ceremony, General Hatami underlined that the mass-production of the domestically-made fighter jet indicated that sanctions and pressures against Iran were ineffective, describing it as a milestone and a new leap in increasing the combat power of the country's Air Force.

He said that research works would continue on Kosar fighter jet, adding that the country would manufacture more advanced generations of the warplane in the future.

Iran last September unveiled Kosar which is equipped with avionics (aviation electronics) and fire-control systems.

Kosar was unveiled in a ceremony participated by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in Tehran who ordered the fighter jet to fly.

The new fighter jet uses the fourth generation of military digital network and is equipped with heads-up display (HUD) system to increase the precision-striking power of weapons, advanced and multi-purpose radar for fire-control to boost the precision to trace the targets and threats and high-precision navigation system.

Kosar can be manufactured in two types of single-cockpits and double-cockpits and the second type can be used for training pilots in addition to enjoying combat capabilities.

According to the Iranian officials, the fighter jet is a supersonic combat plane different from the training Kosar 88 plane unveiled in April 2017.

Meantime, Army Lieutenant Commander Brigadier General Mohammad Hossein Dadras announced early September that Kosar had gone on line for mass-production.

"The defense ministry, in cooperation with the Air Force, is mass-producing the fighter jet," General Dadras said.

He added that Kosar had undergone different ground and air operational tests by the Iranian Air Force experts for numerous hours.

"We have ordered this fighter jet for the Army," General Dadras said.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Aramagedon

In Urdu:










Kowsar from 19:35:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*bell 214 with Dehlavye ATM*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MastanKhan

" 
While many US officials and Navy officers still believe that this stunning show put on by Grumman test pilots influenced the Shah’s final decision to order the F-14, Iranian officers interviewed by Cooper and Bishop strongly disagree. One of the first to fly the Tomcat was Maj Ali. He had experience of the F-4, as well as having exchange tours with the USAF, Israeli Defence Force /Air Force (IDF/AF), Luftwaffe, US Navy, RAF and Pakistani Air Force to his credit. He was later to score more than five aerial victories against Iraq, and he offered a further insight into the background to the Iranian order"---:


https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-iran-loves-f-14-tomcat-and-passed-f-15-eagle-65066

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

MastanKhan said:


> "
> While many US officials and Navy officers still believe that this stunning show put on by Grumman test pilots influenced the Shah’s final decision to order the F-14, Iranian officers interviewed by Cooper and Bishop strongly disagree. One of the first to fly the Tomcat was Maj Ali. He had experience of the F-4, as well as having exchange tours with the USAF, Israeli Defence Force /Air Force (IDF/AF), Luftwaffe, US Navy, RAF and Pakistani Air Force to his credit. He was later to score more than five aerial victories against Iraq, and he offered a further insight into the background to the Iranian order"---:
> 
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-iran-loves-f-14-tomcat-and-passed-f-15-eagle-65066



? what's your point?


----------



## mohsen

MastanKhan said:


> "
> While many US officials and Navy officers still believe that this stunning show put on by Grumman test pilots influenced the Shah’s final decision to order the F-14, Iranian officers interviewed by Cooper and Bishop strongly disagree. One of the first to fly the Tomcat was Maj Ali. He had experience of the F-4, as well as having exchange tours with the USAF, Israeli Defence Force /Air Force (IDF/AF), Luftwaffe, US Navy, RAF and Pakistani Air Force to his credit. He was later to score more than five aerial victories against Iraq, and he offered a further insight into the background to the Iranian order"---:
> 
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-iran-loves-f-14-tomcat-and-passed-f-15-eagle-65066


F14 was chosen because it's company Grumman bribed Iranian negotiator general Toofanian with $ 28 million.


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> F14 was chosen because it's company Grumman bribed Iranian negotiator general Toofanian with $ 28 million.


Well at the time F-14a was better than F-15a if we bought F-15 at the time then the airplane didnt had half the capabilities of our F-14

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> Well at the time F-14a was better than F-15a if we bought F-15 at the time then the airplane didnt had half the capabilities of our F-14


Yeah, and 4 times more expensive and super hard to get the spare parts.

That's why we were fighting Iraqi jets with F5!


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Well at the time F-14a was better than F-15a if we bought F-15 at the time then the airplane didnt had half the capabilities of our F-14


actually it's still better than F-15C, also it's almost impossible to engage with a mig-25 by an f-15 armed with 40 km range sparrow. it was only option to stop migs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> F14 was chosen because it's company Grumman bribed Iranian negotiator general Toofanian with $ 28 million.


That may have been the case as well, however f14 was bought mainly to intercept mig25. To which it’s radar and Phoenix rocket were a great asset.
Also shah had also put in orders for f16 as the main work horse fighter. That would have been the backbone of Iran Air Force had the revolution happened 2-3 years later.

I don’t try to justify the massive arms purchase by shah. We all can agree that relying on other countries when it comes to military hardware is the most stupid and insane thing that a country in Irans situation could do. However, if accepting that premise, the purchase of f14 and f16 made logical sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


> F-14 and MiG-29


and some idiots on PDF will tell us "Iran has no air force"...smh.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

925boy said:


> and some idiots on PDF will tell us "Iran has no air force"...smh.


maybe against US we do not, but against any other yes we do.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Sina-1 said:


> That may have been the case as well, however f14 was bought mainly to intercept mig25. To which it’s radar and Phoenix rocket were a great asset.
> Also shah had also put in orders for f16 as the main work horse fighter. That would have been the backbone of Iran Air Force had the revolution happened 2-3 years later.
> 
> I don’t try to justify the massive arms purchase by shah. We all can agree that relying on other countries when it comes to military hardware is the most stupid and insane thing that a country in Irans situation could do. However, if accepting that premise, the purchase of f14 and f16 made logical sense.


About Mig25, during Iran-Iraq war just 3 of them were shot down (in aerial combat), two with F-14 and one with F-5, also U.S didn't sell the pressure suit which was required for our pilots to go high enough to properly intercept high flying birds.

I think it's enough to say that purchase of F14 didn't seem logical to chief commander of air force, deputy chief commander of airforce for operations and their team!


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Yeah, and 4 times more expensive and super hard to get the spare parts.
> 
> That's why we were fighting Iraqi jets with F5!


expensive yes , hard to get spare yes but the question is was getting spare Hard for Iran Army when they choose the platform , or how F-15A with its Sparrow missile would have faired against Saddam Air force ?

more importantly could F-15A intercept Mig-25 ? don't forget we bought it for that purpose and if everything went according to plan we would have fought against Saddam with 160 F-14 and more than 200 F-16 not F-5.
well you ca blame them for anything but I think the decision to buy F-16 and F-14 was sound decision.



mohsen said:


> About Mig25, during Iran-Iraq war just 3 of them were shot down (in aerial combat), two with F-14 and one with F-5, also U.S didn't sell the pressure suit which was required for our pilots to go high enough to properly intercept high flying birds.
> 
> I think it's enough to say that purchase of F14 didn't seem logical to chief commander of air force, deputy chief commander of airforce for operations and their team!


that's because Mig - 25 in Iraq war was not a priority target and our pilots preferred to go after Iraqi Bombers also we had problem with maintaining Phoenix .and no with F-14 we didn't need to fly that high to intercept those mig Pilots , it was the appeal of AIM-54 that would have done that if you have chosen Top attack as mode of engagement .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Mithridates said:


>


guys jokes aside, are we making an stealth fighter version of sofreh mahi??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

mohsen said:


> About Mig25, during Iran-Iraq war just 3 of them were shot down (in aerial combat), two with F-14 and one with F-5, also U.S didn't sell the pressure suit which was required for our pilots to go high enough to properly intercept high flying birds.
> 
> I think it's enough to say that purchase of F14 didn't seem logical to chief commander of air force, deputy chief commander of air force for operations and their team!



Hi,

What high pressure suit for air combat---? There is no such thing---. There is a pressure suit---and that should have been a part of the deal---.

Otherwise the long range BVR missiles that the F14 had---with their radar had the capability to take on any aircraft that the russians sent---.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 567895
> 
> View attachment 567894
> 
> 
> 
> guys jokes aside, are we making an stealth fighter version of sofreh mahi??



Looks like a unfinished Bavar 2 or it’s variant






If you look closely that plane in that picture has no cockpit yet nor does have it intakes for engine to get air.

Honestly is that upper left picture even taken in Iran? 

Either way Sofreh Mahi project and every fighter jet project is on hold Till iran can demonstrate a worthy engine to power them.

Even F-313 has disappeared from the news and that was going to be powered by j-85

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> ooks like a unfinished Bavar 2 or it’s variant


excuse me how old are you ?


----------



## TheImmortal

ashool said:


> excuse me how old are you ?



Old enough k madare jendato bokonam haroom zade.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Looks like a unfinished Bavar 2 or it’s variant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you look closely that plane in that picture has no cockpit yet nor does have it intakes for engine to get air.
> 
> Honestly is that upper left picture even taken in Iran?
> 
> Either way Sofreh Mahi project and every fighter jet project is on hold Till iran can demonstrate a worthy engine to power them.
> 
> Even F-313 has disappeared from the news and that was going to be powered by j-85


well I'm sure it's not bavar. it has trapezoidal wings, v tail and upper side air intake, the wing roots stretched near the cockpit and the only difference is that this plane has single engine. i'm not sure if it's Iran or not but i never saw something like this from any other nation than Iran. i give it the benefit of doubt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

ashool said:


> excuse me how old are you ?


Did you really add any value to this topic by your post? Whoever says something you and few more users do not like in this forum, is a kid in your mind?



TheImmortal said:


> Honestly is that upper left picture even taken in Iran?
> 
> Even F-313 has disappeared from the news and that was going to be powered by j-85



No it is not taken in Iran, as one guy is wearing jeans. I personally hope F-313 flys soon as a test plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> well I'm sure it's not bavar. it has trapezoidal wings, v tail and upper side air intake, the wing roots stretched near the cockpit and the only difference is that this plane has single engine. i'm not sure if it's Iran or not but i never saw something like this from any other nation than Iran. i give it the benefit of doubt.





Myself said:


> No it is not taken in Iran, as one guy is wearing jeans. I personally hope F-313 flys soon as a test plane.



Yeah it’s kind of hard to see the picture on my end. I figured it must be in Iran or else why Did the user even post this picture? Sofreh Mahi model picture has been around for a while. So if that picture isn’t in Iran nothing new was added to the conversation.

I will say that plane looks weird and material looks plastic plus why is it being lowered into the ground?

Also factory looks unclean and rusty hardly a place where someone would assemble or test a fighter jet.

Very weird indeed. Maybe someone here can shed more light on that picture.

F-313 is disturbing because of lack of “talk” by ANY military official. It hasn’t been mentioned since the Rouhani taxi unveiling which I fear may have been nothing more than a PR event for Rouhani.

Military officials have mentioned Kowsar and Kowsar-88 but haven’t mentioned a single thing about F-313 in last 12-18 months. Unless I missed an article.

I too think F-313 If enlarged in size, if intakes are enlarged, and wing tips are straightened out that it could be a decent stealth variant in the F-5 class. Cheap and easy to produce.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah it’s kind of hard to see the picture on my end. I figured it must be in Iran or else why Did the user even post this picture? Sofreh Mahi model picture has been around for a while. So if that picture isn’t in Iran nothing new was added to the conversation.
> 
> I will say that plane looks weird and material looks plastic plus why is it being lowered into the ground?
> 
> Also factory looks unclean and rusty hardly a place where someone would assemble or test a fighter jet.
> 
> Very weird indeed. Maybe someone here can shed more light on that picture.
> 
> F-313 is disturbing because of lack of “talk” by ANY military official. It hasn’t been mentioned since the Rouhani taxi unveiling which I fear may have been nothing more than a PR event for Rouhani.
> 
> Military officials have mentioned Kowsar and Kowsar-88 but haven’t mentioned a single thing about F-313 in last 12-18 months. Unless I missed an article.
> 
> I too think F-313 If enlarged in size, if intakes are enlarged, and wing tips are straightened out that it could be a decent stealth variant in the F-5 class. Cheap and easy to produce.


What about Karrar tank?


----------



## TheImmortal

T-72B said:


> What about Karrar tank?



Something doesn’t sit well with me regarding the Karrar tank.

If you look at articles prior to announcement of Karrar tank, there was a battle between IRGC vs Army. It was rather quick and most may have missed it.

A high ranking Army General said something along the lines of Iran plans to upgrade its tanks and purchase T-90 from Russia. Supposedly some Iranian militias/IRGC in Syria used T-90s in syria as a test and were impressed by it in the battlefield.

Anyway then less than week or so later an IRGC official completely exposes the commander and says Iran doesn’t need T-90 and no plans to buy it and Iran can build a tank even better.

That same Army General is rebuked and embarrassed and comes back shortly after proclaiming that Iran doesn’t need T-90 that it can make its own.

Sometime after that the Karrar project is unveiled.

My question here is, it is doubtful that an high ranking Army general would not know that Iran is working on karrar tank. Such a project doesn’t just happen overnight. So then why go out there and pubically say they will buy T-90?

Very strange. My theory is if Karrar tank sees the light of day that Russia has had a back door deal with a iran on PARTIAL tech transfer of T-90 tech. Because Karrar isn’t an exact copy of T-90 but shares a lot of similarities. Either that or Iran learned to reverse engineer most of it in the few years it was in Syrian service.

Really tough to say, just peculiar how it all played out.

Anyway with mechanized armour, Iran places a very low priority on upgrading that arsenal. It will be a last phase type thing because the threat of land invasion is so low and even if land invasion happens wether Iran has Lepoard 2 or T-72 or T-90 it won’t make much of a difference if US establishes air superiority in iranian skies. So again low priority. 

I like the Iran route of upgrading T-72 tanks to Karrar standard if possible. Why waste perfectly good tanks. Karrar is not built to be a “next gen” tank for the next 20 years. It’s a stop gap till something better is developed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

TheImmortal said:


> Something doesn’t sit well with me regarding the Karrar tank.
> 
> If you look at articles prior to announcement of Karrar tank, there was a battle between IRGC vs Army. It was rather quick and most may have missed it.
> 
> A high ranking Army General said something along the lines of Iran plans to upgrade its tanks and purchase T-90 from Russia. Supposedly some Iranian militias/IRGC in Syria used T-90s in syria as a test and were impressed by it in the battlefield.
> 
> Anyway then less than week or so later an IRGC official completely exposes the commander and says Iran doesn’t need T-90 and no plans to buy it and Iran can build a tank even better.
> 
> That same Army General is rebuked and embarrassed and comes back shortly after proclaiming that Iran doesn’t need T-90 that it can make its own.
> 
> Sometime after that the Karrar project is unveiled.
> 
> My question here is, it is doubtful that an high ranking Army general would not know that Iran is working on karrar tank. Such a project doesn’t just happen overnight. So then why go out there and pubically say they will buy T-90?
> 
> Very strange. My theory is if Karrar tank sees the light of day that Russia has had a back door deal with a iran on PARTIAL tech transfer of T-90 tech. Because Karrar isn’t an exact copy of T-90 but shares a lot of similarities. Either that or Iran learned to reverse engineer most of it in the few years it was in Syrian service.
> 
> Really tough to say, just peculiar how it all played out.
> 
> Anyway with mechanized armour, Iran places a very low priority on upgrading that arsenal. It will be a last phase type thing because the threat of land invasion is so low and even if land invasion happens wether Iran has Lepoard 2 or T-72 or T-90 it won’t make much of a difference if US establishes air superiority in iranian skies. So again low priority.
> 
> I like the Iran route of upgrading T-72 tanks to Karrar standard if possible. Why waste perfectly good tanks. Karrar is not built to be a “next gen” tank for the next 20 years. It’s a stop gap till something better is developed.


Possibly IRGC already working with Karrar in secrecy without the knowing of the Artesh high command, i don't know Why those IRGC always working in weapons project in secrecy without telling Artesh what it's working in?


----------



## mohsen

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> What high pressure suit for air combat---? There is no such thing---. There is a pressure suit---and that should have been a part of the deal---.
> 
> Otherwise the long range BVR missiles that the F14 had---with their radar had the capability to take on any aircraft that the russians sent---.


For above 50000ft, you need a pressure suite like this:





and U.S didn't sell any to Iran to allow Iranian fighter jets fly high enough to intercept the MIG25, cause if they did (sold), now people couln't argue about the necessity of F14 with 4 times higher price than F15!

And if you wanna know about the real capabilities of F14 when it's target is flying 28,000 ft higher, then look at their score during Iran-Iraq war, just 2.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> For above 50000ft, you need a pressure suite like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and U.S didn't sell any to Iran to allow Iranian fighter jets fly high enough to intercept the MIG25, cause if they did (sold), now people couln't argue about the necessity of F14 with 4 times higher price than F15!
> 
> And if you wanna know about the real capabilities of F14 when it's target is flying 28,000 ft higher, then look at their score during Iran-Iraq war, just 2.


You don't get that if we bought F-15 we would have got a system that was limited to sparrow .we would have got far inferior RADAR for ability to drop bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Myself said:


> No it is not taken in Iran, as one guy is wearing jeans


a always wear jeans.



TheImmortal said:


> I will say that plane looks weird and material looks plastic plus why is it being lowered into the ground?


wind tunnels probably. 


TheImmortal said:


> aterial looks plastic


well look closer it's structure is smooth and sleek.




maybe this help.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashool

Myself said:


> Did you really add any value to this topic by your post? Whoever says something you and few more users do not like in this forum, is a kid in your mind?


what pipi you seying 1.i dont speak to you if u dont comment we say you are dead 2 .the alive human dont need blab one 3. sofre mahi is bavar 2 what connection 4.how old are u too.i promise you are like him too plz take out great iran flag and use ur beloved one


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> For above 50000ft, you need a pressure suite like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and U.S didn't sell any to Iran to allow Iranian fighter jets fly high enough to intercept the MIG25, cause if they did (sold), now people couln't argue about the necessity of F14 with 4 times higher price than F15!
> 
> And if you wanna know about the real capabilities of F14 when it's target is flying 28,000 ft higher, then look at their score during Iran-Iraq war, just 2.


sir f-14 is not designed to high altitude flights , even US pilots didn't had pressurizing suits. if you fly that high with f-14 your cockpit would pop out. also no escape zone for a mig-25 with AIM-7 is only 18 km *if* the mother plane and target fly at same altitude. while this number for AIM-54 is 60 km.


----------



## OldTwilight

Why you wasting your time about f14 and f15 !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

mohsen said:


> For above 50000ft, you need a pressure suite like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and U.S didn't sell any to Iran to allow Iranian fighter jets fly high enough to intercept the MIG25, cause if they did (sold), now people couln't argue about the necessity of F14 with 4 times higher price than F15!
> 
> And if you wanna know about the real capabilities of F14 when it's target is flying 28,000 ft higher, then look at their score during Iran-Iraq war, just 2.



Hi,

With the BVR capability of the F14's---It could easily launch the missile from under 35000 ft at targets flying above it---. Phoenix missile had a very long range.


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> a always wear jeans.
> 
> 
> wind tunnels probably.
> 
> well look closer it's structure is smooth and sleek.
> View attachment 567990
> 
> maybe this help.


What is this? Iranian made? That tunnel looks like a full size wind tunnel to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> What is this? Iranian made? That tunnel looks like a full size wind tunnel to me.


well i don't know someone in the military.ir posted it and i was hoping someone know something about it.
but i have to say it, i never saw something like this before. it is quite similar to sofreh mahi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> well i don't know someone in the military.ir posted it and i was hoping someone know something about it.
> but i have to say it, i never saw something like this before. it is quite similar to sofreh mahi.


The one who posted it didn't know either? Just thinking out loud: the wing span is too small for subsonic flight. So it should most probably have been designed for high speed. On the other hand, it is too small to house a jet engine and fuel and armament. Could it be a kamikaze style manned supersonic cruise missiles?

They really shouldn't allow cellphones in such places. Why should this picture get out and published in the first place?

Full size wind tunnel:

https://www.nasa.gov/content/wind-tunnel-testing-a-full-sized-aircraft-tail

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> The one who posted it didn't know either? Just thinking out loud: the wing span is too small for subsonic flight. So it should most probably have been designed for high speed. On the other hand, it is too small to house a jet engine and fuel and armament. Could it be a kamikaze style manned supersonic cruise missiles?
> 
> They really shouldn't allow cellphones in such places. Why should this picture get out and published in the first place?
> 
> Full size wind tunnel:
> 
> https://www.nasa.gov/content/wind-tunnel-testing-a-full-sized-aircraft-tail



That plane is a mock up. Look at the wings they are not “sharp” enough and almost wing look inflated at some points. The angles and everything look round and not sharp.

Plus this plane when compared to people standing near it, is not that big. Look at size of F-35 and even bigger F-22 to understand how big 5th gen fighter is.

Given India failed with both its domestic fighter jet program and fighter engine, I am not optimistic we see anything from Iran without significant technology boost from Russia or China.

Right now at J-85 stage not much can be done besides F-5 class fighter jet.

If turkey ends up acquiring SU-57 from Russia, Iran should demand it as well. 75-100 SU-57 will be significant boost to Iran’s Air Force as it’s a true air superiority fighter which is what Iran first needs to support the F-14’s.

F-35 in my opinion would lose against SU-57 because it’s not designed to be a true air superiority fighter but rather multi role jack of all trades fighter jet.

Anyway, just a thought. Big obstacle is Russia honoring such a deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> That plane is a mock up. Look at the wings they are not “sharp” enough and almost wing look inflated at some points. The angles and everything look round and not sharp.
> 
> Plus this plane when compared to people standing near it, is not that big. Look at size of F-35 and even bigger F-22 to understand how big 5th gen fighter is.
> 
> Given India failed with both its domestic fighter jet program and fighter engine, I am not optimistic we see anything from Iran without significant technology boost from Russia or China.
> 
> Right now at J-85 stage not much can be done besides F-5 class fighter jet.
> 
> If turkey ends up acquiring SU-57 from Russia, Iran should demand it as well. 75-100 SU-57 will be significant boost to Iran’s Air Force as it’s a true air superiority fighter which is what Iran first needs to support the F-14’s.
> 
> F-35 in my opinion would lose against SU-57 because it’s not designed to be a true air superiority fighter but rather multi role jack of all trades fighter jet.
> 
> Anyway, just a thought. Big obstacle is Russia honoring such a deal.


75-100 su57 is only a boost to sukhoi and keep iran aviatian industry sedated for the next 30-40 years.
We must not go and buy any sort of fighter till we managed to produce a serrious light fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## xbat

TheImmortal said:


> If turkey ends up acquiring SU-57 from Russia


there is no plan to purchase and never be ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Mithridates said:


>


Wind tunnel! Not iran! Simply because it is too old and utilized.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> The one who posted it didn't know either? Just thinking out loud: the wing span is too small for subsonic flight. So it should most probably have been designed for high speed. On the other hand, it is too small to house a jet engine and fuel and armament. Could it be a kamikaze style manned supersonic cruise missiles?
> 
> They really shouldn't allow cellphones in such places. Why should this picture get out and published in the first place?
> 
> Full size wind tunnel:
> 
> https://www.nasa.gov/content/wind-tunnel-testing-a-full-sized-aircraft-tail


well I'm not a member of military.ir and they don't show conversations to guests only headings. i don't know if it's manned or not but from the first day they showed us a manned mock up and said it's a drone!!!
but I'm agree they should not allow cell phones in such places, i was doing fine before i know we have the sofreh mahi project going, right now i'm super excited.



TheImmortal said:


> That plane is a mock up. Look at the wings they are not “sharp” enough and almost wing look inflated at some points. The angles and everything look round and not sharp.
> 
> Plus this plane when compared to people standing near it, is not that big. Look at size of F-35 and even bigger F-22 to understand how big 5th gen fighter is.
> 
> Given India failed with both its domestic fighter jet program and fighter engine, I am not optimistic we see anything from Iran without significant technology boost from Russia or China.
> 
> Right now at J-85 stage not much can be done besides F-5 class fighter jet.
> 
> If turkey ends up acquiring SU-57 from Russia, Iran should demand it as well. 75-100 SU-57 will be significant boost to Iran’s Air Force as it’s a true air superiority fighter which is what Iran first needs to support the F-14’s.
> 
> F-35 in my opinion would lose against SU-57 because it’s not designed to be a true air superiority fighter but rather multi role jack of all trades fighter jet.
> 
> Anyway, just a thought. Big obstacle is Russia honoring such a deal.


we can buy engine from Russia, until we come with better one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> 75-100 su57 is only a boost to sukhoi and keep iran aviatian industry sedated for the next 30-40 years.
> We must not go and buy any sort of fighter till we managed to produce a serrious light fighter.



This is not logical.

You cannot expect a country that has a military budget of $20 billion (of which more than 60% goes to IRGC) to be able to fund a serious domestic fighter jet program (not F-5 clone). 

Plus Iran in its wildest dreams will not be able to build something in the realm of SU-57 or SU-35, so again issue remains unresolved. 

So sooner or later iran will have to address the need for a true air superiority fighter and those are the hardest things to make!

Even China with its massive domestic air force still routinely buys planes from russia.

Iran has been working on F-5 clones since the 90’s and still don’t have a mass produced fighter jet.



Mithridates said:


> well I'm not a member of military.ir and they don't show conversations to guests only headings. i don't know if it's manned or not but from the first day they showed us a manned mock up and said it's a drone!!!
> but I'm agree they should not allow cell phones in such places, i was doing fine before i know we have the sofreh mahi project going, right now i'm super excited.
> 
> 
> we can buy engine from Russia, until we come with better one.



Already attempted and Russia balked.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> That plane is a mock up. Look at the wings they are not “sharp” enough and almost wing look inflated at some points. The angles and everything look round and not sharp.
> 
> Plus this plane when compared to people standing near it, is not that big. Look at size of F-35 and even bigger F-22 to understand how big 5th gen fighter is.
> 
> Given India failed with both its domestic fighter jet program and fighter engine, I am not optimistic we see anything from Iran without significant technology boost from Russia or China.
> 
> Right now at J-85 stage not much can be done besides F-5 class fighter jet.
> 
> If turkey ends up acquiring SU-57 from Russia, Iran should demand it as well. 75-100 SU-57 will be significant boost to Iran’s Air Force as it’s a true air superiority fighter which is what Iran first needs to support the F-14’s.
> 
> F-35 in my opinion would lose against SU-57 because it’s not designed to be a true air superiority fighter but rather multi role jack of all trades fighter jet.
> 
> Anyway, just a thought. Big obstacle is Russia honoring such a deal.


You didn't read my post. That's why I asked: could it be a manned kamikaze style cruise missile? It can fly with solid fuel. That doesn't need that much space.


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> You didn't read my post. That's why I asked: could it be a manned kamikaze style cruise missile? It can fly with solid fuel. That doesn't need that much space.



That doesn’t even make sense.

Why would you create a manned cruise missile? It’s inefficient 

This isn’t WW2.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> This is not logical.
> 
> You cannot expect a country that has a military budget of $20 billion (of which more than 60% goes to IRGC) to be able to fund a serious domestic fighter jet program (not F-5 clone).
> 
> Plus Iran in its wildest dreams will not be able to build something in the realm of SU-57 or SU-35, so again issue remains unresolved.
> 
> So sooner or later iran will have to address the need for a true air superiority fighter and those are the hardest things to make!
> 
> Even China with its massive domestic air force still routinely buys planes from russia.
> 
> Iran has been working on F-5 clones since the 90’s and still don’t have a mass produced fighter jet.


nobody talked about SU-57. I said light fighter something like JF-17 , F-20.
for that we need to build an new engine and then we can modify the body of f-5 to carry more fuel something like Israel f-16.
our military leathers claiming we already work on new engine . they are working on avionic . the only remaining thing is somebody start working on 60 era methalorgy and we reinvent the wheel on that field

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> nobody talked about SU-57. I said light fighter something like JF-17 , F-20.
> for that we need to build an new engine and then we can modify the body of f-5 to carry more fuel something like Israel f-16.
> our military leathers claiming we already work on new engine . they are working on avionic . the only remaining thing is somebody start working on 60 era methalorgy and we reinvent the wheel on that field



What are you talking about. You are trying to take a light class CAS fighter and make it a modern multi role fighter. This is a big NO NO.

You can’t make an F-5 do the job of an F-16. So stop with this idea that Iran needs to turn F-5 project into something, before it should order Air superiority fighters that will save its *** come war time wether that’s in 10 years or 30 years.

Iran Air Force is not stupid. Even with all this desperation if you did one iota of research you will find they have rejected MANY Air Force projects because they don’t trust the quality or believe that it deserves funding to move to next stage . You don’t just build an engine design and throw it on a fighter jet. That engine needs tens of thousands of hours of testing before even entering prototype stage let alone serial production stage.

Ask @PeeD or anyone here who is much more knowledgeable about jet engines than me and they will tell you Iran reverse engineering even a 50 year old RD-33 is highly unlikely without significant foreign assistance.

Add that to the JOKE that is Iran Air Force budget (some put the amount at less then 100 million per year) and you sir are high on taaryak if you think Iran can supply its Air Force needs with domestic production.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> That doesn’t even make sense.
> 
> Why would you create a manned cruise missile? It’s inefficient
> 
> This isn’t WW2.


Well I don't know any AI or other computer based guidance system that could outperform human brain. It cannot be fooled or disrupted by EW means. So when it is fired, it can go towards its target in total radio silence and hit it unless it is shoot down before it reaches the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Well I don't know any AI or other computer based guidance system that could outperform human brain. It cannot be fooled or disrupted by EW means. So when it is fired, it can go towards its target in total radio silence and hit it unless it is shoot down before it reaches the target.



The best chess player is a computer.

The best Go Player (a game thought to replicate human thinking and brain power) was beaten by an AI.

Literally AI outperforms the human brain, invalidating your statement.

Lastly the thing that makes a CM so vulnerable is its slow speed and RCS hence why you have supersonic/ stealth CMs being built. 

While EW can play a part, the sheer number of CMs that get fired in attack makes it hard to battle them using EW. If you block GPS, they will switch to various onboard navigation systems and still achieve a reasonable CEP, maybe not GPS level CEP but still reasonable.

Stick a human on a CM and all you have done is send a person on a one ticket to death with a bigger RCS than a normal CM. 

The fact Iran has begun switching to unmanned suicide boats (tested by Houthis on Emirati Navy ship) should tell you all you need about future of asymmetric warfare in Iran’s eyes.

Whatever this picture is, it’s clear it’s not in iran and maybe a crude wind tunnel mock up test of some jet in early stages of r&d.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> The best chess player is a computer.
> 
> The best Go Player (a game thought to replicate human thinking and brain power) was beaten by an AI.
> 
> Literally AI outperforms the human brain, invalidating your statement.
> 
> Lastly the thing that makes a CM so vulnerable is its slow speed and RCS hence why you have supersonic/ stealth CMs being built.
> 
> While EW can play a part, the sheer number of CMs that get fired in attack makes it hard to battle them using EW. If you block GPS, they will switch to various onboard navigation systems and still achieve a reasonable CEP, maybe not GPS level CEP but still reasonable.
> 
> Stick a human on a CM and all you have done is send a person on a one ticket to death with a bigger RCS than a normal CM.
> 
> The fact Iran has begun switching to unmanned suicide boats (tested by Houthis on Emirati Navy ship) should tell you all you need about future of asymmetric warfare in Iran’s eyes.
> 
> Whatever this picture is, it’s clear it’s not in iran and maybe a crude wind tunnel mock up test of some jet in early stages of r&d.


Chess is a structured game where you can draw a decision tree for every possible move. It is not comparable to navigation.

If you like to see where AI is lacking see how well the autonomous vehicles are performing. None of the are still comparable to human brain.

I thought it might be supersonic due to very short wings. But anyways, it was just a thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Well , right know budget is directed toward air defence system , after that i think we will direct major budget to air force or drone force ....

Now. Lets do R&D in missiles , radar and uav , when we become serious about Air force , we will use our previous knowledge ....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

Mithridates said:


> well i don't know someone in the military.ir posted it and i was hoping someone know something about it.
> but i have to say it, i never saw something like this before. it is quite similar to sofreh mahi.



Any update on what that is? It looks so much like this:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> Any update on what that is? It looks so much like this:


you just have to look at the image you posted, they unveiled it as a drone and depict it as a manned plane in that poster. high likely it's an stealth drone or a manned bomber because i'm 100% sure that you can't perform intensive maneuvers with a plane that has upper side air intakes.
the delta wing one is way more cooler than this, judging by its structure it should have place for shit load of fuel=extensive combat radius.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Mithridates said:


> you just have to look at the image you posted, they unveiled it as a drone and depict it as a manned plane in that poster. high likely it's an stealth drone or a manned bomber because i'm 100% sure that you can't perform intensive maneuvers with a plane that has upper side air intakes.
> the delta wing one is way more cooler than this, judging by its structure it should have place for shit load of fuel=extensive combat radius.



Can you find out if that image was from Iran? I tried looking on the internet and I cannot see where it could it from. Given the similarities it is showing to sofreh mahi, I am tilting towards it being from Iran...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

WinterNights said:


> Can you find out if that image was from Iran? I tried looking on the internet and I cannot see where it could it from. Given the similarities it is showing to sofreh mahi, I am tilting towards it being from Iran...


first i saw it in military.ir, apart from that i never saw something similar to it from foreign countries. also it's really looks like the other model number 2 of SM project. it really decreases the possibilities to Iran. 
also seems like some one uploaded it to that forum:
http://www.military.ir/forums/topic...ن-ایران/?page=130&tab=comments#comment-450451

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Looks kind of like a early sub scale mock up of YF-23 project

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Sadly this is from the nasa SHARC/FLAC program back in the early 90s.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Sadly this is from the nasa SHARC/FLAC program back in the early 90s.



Mystery solved. 

Personally I think Sofreh Mahi project got shelved after capture of RQ-170. Iran decided to go with more modern flying wing.

Now the fighter variant of it keeps showing up in posters every once in a while. But lack of funding and IRGC pressure on not funding Air Force keeps it from reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/see-old-plane-it-killed-4-f-15s-simulated-battles-sky-65981


----------



## Ray_Atek

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/irans-sad-attempt-reverse-engineering-old-f-5f-fighter-66341


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Ray_Atek said:


> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/irans-sad-attempt-reverse-engineering-old-f-5f-fighter-66341


When Israel made a copy of Mirage 5 (with the jigs and even the engine supplied by the French) and called it the Nesher, no one called it a "sad attempt".

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kastor

That so called National Interest magazine is nothing but a blog....it's a very SAD blog too.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mithridates

training dogfight between T-38 talon (derived of F-5A) and F-22 raptor ( talon successfully locks 3 times on raptor): 

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
once i asked one of our pilots about his opinion over Indian downed SU-30 by JF-17 (at that time people thought it was a JF-17 not an F-16), he said "i wouldn't surprise if one day an F-5 beats an F-22 in air, once you flew anything is possible". 
dude had some wisdom i guess.
side note: look how fast raptor out maneuvers T-38, it's really a good shit to fly with.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Ray_Atek

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-iran-drones-idUSKCN1UC1X4

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> training dogfight between T-38 talon (derived of F-5A) and F-22 raptor ( talon successfully locks 3 times on raptor):
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> once i asked one of our pilots about his opinion over Indian downed SU-30 by JF-17 (at that time people thought it was a JF-17 not an F-16), he said "i wouldn't surprise if one day an F-5 beats an F-22 in air, once you flew anything is possible".
> dude had some wisdom i guess.
> side note: look how fast raptor out maneuvers T-38, it's really a good shit to fly with.


I don't think the T-38 is really trying to do high g maneuvers. It is turning too slow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> I don't think the T-38 is really trying to do high g maneuvers. It is turning too slow.


if you listen to the pilot voice you will notice that they put a lot g force during maneuvers. fighter jets have limited turn ratios if you manage to put yourself under their passing route (while they are maneuvering) you can see how slow they perform it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

Lmao
From Discover on Google https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...ran-more-israel-getting-f-22s-and-b-52s-67537

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/975930/واکنش-قطر-به-کشف-موشک-در-ایتالیا
maybe iran??


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/975930/واکنش-قطر-به-کشف-موشک-در-ایتالیا
> maybe iran??


what Iran has with it ,friendly country probably another Arab country , we never bought any weapon from Qatar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Hack-Hook said:


> what Iran has with it ,friendly country probably another Arab country , we never bought any weapon from Qatar



What could Qatar have what Iran does not? F-16?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> What could Qatar have what Iran does not? F-16?


the missiles Super 530f is carried by Dasault Mirage F-1 , the friendly country that Qatar sold the missiles to can be Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, or perhaps India or Iraq . I doubt it's Iraq as 25 years ago I don't think Qatar would have dared to sell any military equipment to Iraq and at that time I don't think iraq had any operational Mirage F-1.

by the way when we decided to use F1 we take from Iraq we used SideWinder with them.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

i mean come ooooooon so what now?  you are telling me that a fully loaded F_35s and i mean with bunker buster bombs loaded *can reach 4000 KM in one go???* they can not reach Tehran and go back to Israel even if they were fully empty let alone fully loaded and on top of that all they will be *fully undetected* these ppl do not even know what* stealth* means. PLS tell me if i am wrong.



* "It wasn’t lost on anyone that the extension meant Israeli Air Force pilots could use the F-35 to fly from Israel to Tehran and back without detection -- and without having to refuel at U.S. air bases in Saudi Arabia or Iraq."*


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/f-3...nd-changed-everything-in-the-middle-east.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

skyshadow said:


> i mean come ooooooon so what now?  you are telling me that a fully loaded F_35s and i mean with bunker buster bombs loaded *can reach 4000 KM in one go???* they can not reach Tehran and go back to Israel even if they were fully empty let alone fully loaded and on top of that all they will be *fully undetected* these ppl do not even know what* stealth* means. PLS tell me if i am wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> * "It wasn’t lost on anyone that the extension meant Israeli Air Force pilots could use the F-35 to fly from Israel to Tehran and back without detection -- and without having to refuel at U.S. air bases in Saudi Arabia or Iraq."*
> 
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/f-3...nd-changed-everything-in-the-middle-east.html



There is a way for the F 35s to go undetected all way to Iran without needing to refuel at least not on its way to Iran. All you need to do is disassemble number of F 35 needed for bombing missions and transport F 35s in parts to the nearby base close enough to Iran and assemble it. However this trasnport needs to be classified or at least less suspicious as a every day cargo goods. Assemble the F 35 in a closed hangars where you have F 35s close enough to Iran where you do not need to refuel. This move is very limited and only serves as first strike capability which features suprise tactic that will only serve Israelis political goals to boost their moral and under the assumption Iran will not retaliate. On its way out F 35s can from bombing missions they can refuel when making safe distance from AD. This only works if really these F35s are stealthy as western media portraits them to be.

Even Marine version of F 35 does not need a runway at all!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> what Iran has with it ,friendly country probably another Arab country , we never bought any weapon from Qatar


who knows...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

scimitar19 said:


> There is a way for the F 35s to go undetected all way to Iran without needing to refuel at least not on its way to Iran. All you need to do is disassemble number of F 35 needed for bombing missions and transport F 35s in parts to the nearby base close enough to Iran and assemble it. However this trasnport needs to be classified or at least less suspicious as a every day cargo goods. Assemble the F 35 in a closed hangars where you have F 35s close enough to Iran where you do not need to refuel. This move is very limited and only serves as first strike capability which features suprise tactic that will only serve Israelis political goals to boost their moral and under the assumption Iran will not retaliate. On its way out F 35s can from bombing missions they can refuel when making safe distance from AD. This only works if really these F35s are stealthy as western media portraits them to be.
> 
> Even Marine version of F 35 does not need a runway at all!



Disassembling F-35? Israel is incapable of doing such a thing.

F-35 is not some cheap toy that you can assemble and disassemble. There is a reason why they are delivered intact or even flown to their client location.

So please provide proof that such a thing is even possible, because I have never heard of it.

This is propaganda. Even setting issue of fuel aside, no matter how confident Israel was they would never risk flying the plane into Iran. 

That is a direct violation of US rules. If so much as mechanical failure occurred, now you are exposing top of the line technology to Iran, Russia, and China. So no way US would even allow this just so israel can thump its chest.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scimitar19

TheImmortal said:


> Disassembling F-35? Israel is incapable of doing such a thing.
> 
> F-35 is not some cheap toy that you can assemble and disassemble. There is a reason why they are delivered intact or even flown to their client location.
> 
> So please provide proof that such a thing is even possible, because I have never heard of it.


Its not like you need to disassemble F-35 to the last bolt, you just need to remove the wings and it will fit inside the cargo plane.





For a second I even thought Marine version with folded wings can be also transported in one piece in one of these cargo planes.



TheImmortal said:


> This is propaganda. Even setting issue of fuel aside, no matter how confident Israel was they would never risk flying the plane into Iran.
> 
> That is a direct violation of US rules. If so much as mechanical failure occurred, now you are exposing top of the line technology to Iran, Russia, and China. So no way US would even allow this just so israel can thump its chest.


Its not about propaganda or not. I'm talking that this is an option. RQ-170 and Global Hawk were sent with the US military consent and they never returned from their designated mission, so never say never.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scimitar19

Hmmm... I do have a question if Marine version with folded wings can fit inside the C-5M Super Galaxy cargo plane?


----------



## TheImmortal

scimitar19 said:


> Its not like you need to disassemble F-35 to the last bolt, you just need to remove the wings and it will fit inside the cargo plane.
> View attachment 569865
> 
> For a second I even thought Marine version with folded wings can be also transported in one piece in one of these cargo planes.
> 
> 
> Its not about propaganda or not. I'm talking that this is an option. RQ-170 and Global Hawk were sent with the US military consent and they never returned from their designated mission, so never say never.



RQ-170 was SPECIFICALLY designed to operate in hostile airspace and SPECIFICALLY designed with the thought in mind it may crash in said hostile airspace.

RQ-170 and Global Hawk are not in the same league as F-35. Preposterous example.

US suspended F-35 to Turkey because of fears S-400 radar will find weaknesses in F-35. But you think they would be ok with sending F-35’s into the heart of Iranian Air defense?

Beyond logical

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Perhaps the roles of two aircrafts are not the same where you have a spy drone and on the other a manned multi role jet. RQ-170 was built to spy into enemy airspace and eventually crash but not to be brought intact on the ground, hence why would Obama ask for it back. I assume you are saying F-35 was built not to crash, remain invincible and to decorate US hangars on their airfields and scare off enemy by the way they look. Other US airplanes were downed by the enemy naming few F-16, F-117 over the enemy territory. I don't see that the Americans were particularly moved by these events that it will compromise their war doctrine of having air dominance over others.

I never said it is a good idea to sent F-35 inside Iranian air defence, I'm just pointing out the versatility of options that US army has gained from this fighter jet.


----------



## Ray_Atek




----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 570105



Yeah and the Litorral Combat Ship was supposed to be a 250 million dollar ship that could engage Iranian small craft. It was supposed to have interchangeable parts to be able to submarine hunting, minesweeping, etc.

Instead the program faced massive cost overruns, the ship broke down multiple times, can survive against Iranian craft, the plug and play modules were completely disregarded after spending billions developing them.

My point: Don’t believe the propaganda that comes BEFORE the mass production.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 570105


Let's see if they can put their 5th generation fighter in good use first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*

NANO technology for Iran F4s????????????????*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*for those PPL who think only US can help you fix your plans. we have been flying those plans without US help for 40 years, for those who think Iran air force do not have any fighter jets as they are cut off from US. we build there parts our self.*




IranAir's hangar at Tehran Mehrabad Airport, featuring Boeing 747 (EP-ICD) currently undergoing a C check.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1155155943539302401

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

*Iranian fighter jet crashes near Persian Gulf*

*https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.9news.com.au/article/2555e8ca-e6a5-4348-b002-4929fea34f7e*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Some photo from crash

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Are the pilots ok?


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> Are the pilots ok?


yes they are OK, ejected safely

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Better idea than F35 but more heavier,
Twin engine F35 make more sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Borhan fighter jet, *RIP 















*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> View attachment 572730
> Better idea than F35 but more heavier,
> Twin engine F35 make more sense.



What a joke article. Turkey cannot build anything without EU and US assistance.

The issue Turkey has is engines, look at their helicopters project. It is dead in water due to engines not being supplied.

So unless someone supplies the engines, Turkish fighter is as realistic as an Iranian fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

*lran’s IRGC develops vertical take-off, landing drone – Brinkwire*

TEHRAN, Aug. 5 (Xinhua) — Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) will test take-off and landing military drone, Tasnim news agency reported on Monday.

The first vertical take-off and landing drone, produced by the IRGC’s ground force, will undergo a test in near future, IRGC commander Ali Koohestani told Tasnim.

Last month, IRGC Ground Force Commander Mohammad Pakpour said the IRGC’s drone and missile power has grown considerably compared to the past and has increased Iran’s power in the battlefield.

The Islamic Republic is now in possession of a broad range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) which can be used for both civilian and military purposes, he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/en.bri...rgc-develops-vertical-take-off-landing-drone/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*رونمایی از نسل جدید بمب‌های ایران /از موشک نقطه‌زن قائم تا بمب‌های هوشمند هدایت شونده*


*Unveiling the new generation of Iranian bombs*













https://www.khabaronline.ir/news/1287041/رونمایی-از-نسل-جدید-بمب-های-ایران-از-موشک-نقطه-زن-قائم-تا-بمب-های

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

They unveil everything except what we need most .
Miniaturized Air to Air missiles.
Fakour is too big for our airplanes we need something in size of Aim-7 with a range of at least 70km if we want to invest on kowsar jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Yassin and balaban satellite guided bombs,plus new drone launched glide bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Two of the lightest variants of the Qaem can be carried by the Ababil-3 giving that tactical widespread low tier UAV a strike capability.

Hamaeh of the DIO was also shown with Qaem PGM although not in service with Irans forces.

Plus Balaban SDB-like PGM is primarily for the Karrar jet strike drone. Yassin probably reduced its performance to much, hence the lighter Balaban.

DIO replaces the IRGC's Sadid PGM with the Qaem family.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> They unveil everything except what we need most .
> Miniaturized Air to Air missiles.
> Fakour is too big for our airplanes we need something in size of Aim-7 with a range of at least 70km if we want to invest on kowsar jet.


Theres no point in equipping the kowsar with bvr missiles unless you`re going to upgrade it with a brand new radar as well,sadly tho it doesnt look like they`re going to do that even tho its what the machine badly needs.


----------



## skyshadow

*Testing of Iranian Yasin, Balaban and Qaem Guided Bombs*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> *Testing of Iranian Yasin, Balaban and Qaem Guided Bombs*


Did I correctly saw karrar doing ground attack ?
If so its very interesting capability if we need attack someplace very fast.



Sineva said:


> Theres no point in equipping the kowsar with bvr missiles unless you`re going to upgrade it with a brand new radar as well,sadly tho it doesnt look like they`re going to do that even tho its what the machine badly needs.


Well when iran announce kowsar one of the things said about it was its new radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Did I correctly saw karrar doing ground attack ?
> If so its very interesting capability if we need attack someplace very fast.



yes it had that capability for years now it can carry Yassin and Balaban bombs and shot air ti air missiles too.



























and there is this version too, the drone has twin jet engines

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

PeeD said:


> Two of the lightest variants of the Qaem can be carried by the Ababil-3 giving that tactical widespread low tier UAV a strike capability.
> 
> Hamaeh of the DIO was also shown with Qaem PGM although not in service with Irans forces.
> 
> Plus Balaban SDB-like PGM is primarily for the Karrar jet strike drone. Yassin probably reduced its performance to much, hence the lighter Balaban.
> 
> DIO replaces the IRGC's Sadid PGM with the Qaem family.


I doubt that it would completely replace the sadid as the original flexible fin variant would still be used with the sahed 123 based ucavs with their semi recessed weapons carriage and the rq170 derived jet and prop ucavs with their internal and semi recessed weapons carriage.The fins on the qaem are quite large and we havent seen a version with folding fins so that would probably rule it out for those applications.
Both the yassin and balaban would be potential candidates for extended range versions powered with small turbojets like the air forces drone deployed stand off weapon
I think what impresses me the most in many ways was that the little ababil 3 was able to carry 2 full size glide bombs,tho I do have to wonder how much they had to reduce the payload by to achieve this.It also makes me wonder if they could do the same thing with the mohajer 3 and 4 as this would allow iran to potentially transform even more of its uav force into a ucav force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> there is this version too, the drone has twin jet engines



as far as I know this pic was exposed as Fake/Photoshop

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Sineva said:


> I doubt that it would completely replace the sadid as the original flexible fin variant would still be used with the sahed 123 based ucavs with their semi recessed weapons carriage and the rq170 derived jet and prop ucavs with their internal and semi recessed weapons carriage.The fins on the qaem are quite large and we havent seen a version with folding fins so that would probably rule it out for those applications.
> Both the yassin and balaban would be potential candidates for extended range versions powered with small turbojets like the air forces drone deployed stand off weapon



Sure yes, I should have said "outside the IRGC-ASF". Sadid series is the child of the IRGC aerospace force and will remain so. Qaem would be for all the other forces, including IRGC ground force and export.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> yes it had that capability for years now it can carry Yassin and Balaban bombs and shot air ti air missiles too.


One of the interesting things that I`ve only just noticed thanks to this series of pictures is that you can see how the cable duct on the side of the air frame has been enlarged and extended over time.In the pic with the orange drone it appears that the cables are not even covered.In the next pic you can see the conduit but it doesnt extend much past the wing,while in the last pics you can see that it extends well past the wing.



PeeD said:


> Sure yes, I should have said "outside the IRGC-ASF". Sadid series is the child of the IRGC aerospace force and will remain so. Qaem would be for all the other forces, including IRGC ground force and export.


Do you think this is going to be a multi service weapon ie irgc+regular military,or still only just an irgc only weapon?.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> yes it had that capability for years now it can carry Yassin and Balaban bombs and shot air ti air missiles too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and there is this version too, the drone has twin jet engines


There was photos of it with bombs but it's the first video of it that show it do a ground strike.and we never used it for that purpose .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Sineva said:


> Do you think this is going to be a multi service weapon ie irgc+regular military,or still only just an irgc only weapon?.



This is the DIO mini PGM which it can offer to all Iranian services. IRGC-ASF is a special case, they have their own Sadid family.
IRIAF will certainly go it's own ways with that microjet PGM but hopefully most services except aerospace force will accept the Qaem.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Iranian reverse engineered TOW cobra targeting sight:

















upgrade package for AH-1 that enables these helicopters to carry and launch up to 8 dehlavieh/kornet missiles:





















credit: Instagram/iranian_defensive_power

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> One of the interesting things that I`ve only just noticed thanks to this series of pictures is that you can see how the cable duct on the side of the air frame has been enlarged and extended over time.In the pic with the orange drone it appears that the cables are not even covered.In the next pic you can see the conduit but it doesnt extend much past the wing,while in the last pics you can see that it extends well past the wing.
> 
> 
> Do you think this is going to be a multi service weapon ie irgc+regular military,or still only just an irgc only weapon?.



you are right thanks for bring it up. well its not uncommon as Karar has 3 different models one is for Air to Ground mission and the other is for Air to Air missions and the last one is for Target practice, so the amount of technology used in them are different in each model.



Hack-Hook said:


> There was photos of it with bombs but it's the first video of it that show it do a ground strike.and we never used it for that purpose .




yes it was the first public use of it before that it was just some pics of it and nothing more to seal deal for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

I appreciate that the range values are not dream values like those of U.S MIC.
One would have to wonder how Balaban just achieves 25km range and the SDB 100+km both without propulsion, similar weight and aerodynamic layout... if it would have been 25km vs. 50km difference of 100% one could imagine some kind of technological measure...

The truth is: Balaban values are for use with the Karrar UCAV and to be released at 3000m altitude which results to 25km.
Yassin is released at around 10.000m for a range of 50km.
Speeds would be upper subsonic. 900km/h and 10.000m release is a typical value in a combat scenario: 1500km/h and 15.000m altitude release is a more special scenario value and even then one would expect no more than 80km range...

Important is also that it seems that Iran has got a mass production line of a small and cost effective "solid-state" INS up and running: Only when achieving such bottlenecks and thus avoiding import, such weapons become cost effective enough to enter serial production.
Same thing with drones: Mojaher-6 or Karrar are built completely inside the country, while the Shahed-129 needs to import its engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## un4given.1991

PeeD said:


> Same thing with drones: Mojaher-6 or Karrar are built completely inside the country, while the Shahed-129 needs to import its engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran unveils advanced guided bombs*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

skyshadow said:


> you are right thanks for bring it up. well its not uncommon as Karar has 3 different models one is for Air to Ground mission and the other is for Air to Air missions and the last one is for Target practice, so the amount of technology used in them are different in each model.
> yes it was the first public use of it before that it was just some pics of it and nothing more to seal deal for it.


The first one you think is for Air-to-Air missions can be actually carrying a Chinese or maybe Iranian (as we do not know who first came up with the idea of using the Crotale’s platform for A2S missions; while both countries produce such platform) Air-to-surface Missile. I personally think the “Interceptor Karrar” is a politically misleading name stamped on the fuselage (maybe I am mistaken though).
The one you really missed in your post is the AWACS/Tanker killer version which can be seen in Iman Merati’s report footage on Karrar jet years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/08/06/2070274/iran-unveils-new-smart-bombs

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Notice that the Yassin has ~30% longer wings than typical PGMs like this e.g JDAM-ER and Chinese variants.
It also has flaps on the wings which most other designs lack.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Here are the 3 different qaem variants












The last one looks to have a reversed layout[either that or they assembled it wrongly]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Here are the 3 different qaem variants
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last one looks to have a reversed layout[either that or they assembled it wrongly]


The last one have a plastic cap cover the optic at its tip and the frontal fins moved forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Mithridates said:


> Iranian reverse engineered TOW cobra targeting sight:
> View attachment 572846
> 
> View attachment 572847
> 
> View attachment 572848
> 
> View attachment 572849
> 
> 
> upgrade package for AH-1 that enables these helicopters to carry and launch up to 8 dehlavieh/kornet missiles:
> View attachment 572850
> 
> View attachment 572851
> 
> View attachment 572852
> 
> View attachment 572853
> 
> View attachment 572854
> 
> 
> credit: Instagram/iranian_defensive_power


I know this telescopic sight unit TSU very well (the original Versions). considering the amount of optics, IR detectors and 6 degree stabilization of the platform all in one package then there is no limit to what Iran can achieve technologically...(other than making a good car..lol). Amazing and we'll done to Iranian engineers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

With 50cm accuracy of third generation Qaem bombs, now Iran has the most accurate guided bombs in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## skyshadow

in the video the pilot said that he had a fly test with a fighter jet 2 weeks ago (probably Qaher 313 ) and that they have good news for Iranian ppl soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> in the video the pilot said that he had a fly test with a fighter jet 2 weeks ago ( Qaher 313 ) and that they have good news for Iranian ppl soon.



There was no mention of what it was, couldn't it be Kowsar 88? Don't they refer to it as a fighter jet sometimes?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> There was no mention of what it was, couldn't it be Kowsar 88? Don't they refer to it as a fighter jet sometimes?



yes some times they do call it *training / close support fighter jet* you could be right but then you said it your self he talk with secrecy there is no secret about Kowsar 88 they already unveiled it but they said we will see Qaher 313 first flight this year so it add up with Qaher 313 more i think, but again, he talked with secrecy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> yes some times they do call it *training / close support fighter jet* you could be right but then you said it your self he talk with secrecy there is no secret about Kowsar 88 they already unveiled it but they said we will see Qaher 313 first flight this year so it add up with Qaher 313 more i think, but again, he talked with secrecy.



I am merely managing my own expectation hehe. I would love to see the Q-313 flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> in the video the pilot said that he had a fly test with a fighter jet 2 weeks ago ( Qaher 313 ) and that they have good news for Iranian ppl soon.


They run a test after each overhaul.
Don't conclude anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> yes some times they do call it *training / close support fighter jet* you could be right but then you said it your self he talk with secrecy there is no secret about Kowsar 88 they already unveiled it but they said we will see Qaher 313 first flight this year so it add up with Qaher 313 more i think, but again, he talked with secrecy.


How old is the video?


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> How old is the video?



less then a 2 days ago

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Pictures of some parts of the body of the MiG 29UB and F4E fighters built by Iran Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> Pictures of some parts of the body of the MiG 29UB and F4E fighters built by Iran Air Force.



Yea it's pretty obvious that the planes that are flying right now in iran have almost no original parts fixed on them, because there is no F-4 that its parts have such a long lifetime of more than 50 years. And these iranian planes flying now just prove that Iran can handle everything by itself and doesnt need any foreign help, ofc if the government doesnt constantly reduce the military budget. But still it's a huge achievement to get while being sanctioned for 40 years, and this also means that iran has definitely upgraded the air frames with new technologies like it has done to the F-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## skyshadow

hussainb72 said:


> Yea it's pretty obvious that the planes that are flying right now in iran have almost no original parts fixed on them, because there is no F-4 that its parts have such a long lifetime of more than 50 years. And these iranian planes flying now just prove that Iran can handle everything by itself and doesnt need any foreign help, ofc if the government doesnt constantly reduce the military budget. But still it's a huge achievement to get while being sanctioned for 40 years, and this also means that iran has definitely upgraded the air frames with new technologies like it has done to the F-4.




agreed, but we have to remember there is only so much you can do for them they are old, just the engines if we can fully support them they will be good to go for another 20 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> agreed, but we have to remember there is only so much you can do for them they are old, just the engines if we can fully support them they will be good to go for another 20 years.



Most engine parts of the aircrafts iran has are being made locally, or else the planes wont fly anymore, and now that they have announced that they will soon be able to make aircraft engines means that this problem is being solved. The only thing left is to acquire new medium to long range air to air missiles to arm the F-14s, upgraded F-4s and F-5s and the kowsar plane if it ever enters mass production, and any new future fighters. If iran can gain a PL-12 or a R-77 and reverse engineer and upgrade it then that would be really good.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

hussainb72 said:


> Most engine parts of the aircrafts iran has are being made locally, or else the planes wont fly anymore, and now that they have announced that they will soon be able to make aircraft engines means that this problem is being solved. The only thing left is to acquire new medium to long range air to air missiles to arm the F-14s, upgraded F-4s and F-5s and the kowsar plane if it ever enters mass production, and any new future fighters. If iran can gain a PL-12 or a R-77 and reverse engineer and upgrade it then that would be really good.



we built long range air to air missiles to arm the F-14s, its name is Fakour_90 its range is between 200 to 300 km but for our F4s we need another one as you said and yes we need to upgrade our F5s to Kowsar level.


*Fakour_90 air ti air missile*











*Top General: Iran on Verge of Self-Sufficiency in Making Aircraft Engines*


Iran is going to become fully self-sufficient in producing aircraft engines, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri said.
*

Baqeri said development of the technical know-how to make engines began with the local production of a number of simple components, adding that Iran is now on the verge of manufacturing the engines of modern jets and helicopters and achieving full self-sufficiency in developing such systems.

*

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...f-self-sufficiency-in-making-aircraft-engines

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Nasr

I really hope that Iran buys Su-35s for it's Air Force. The IRIAF, has the talent pool of fighter pilots worthy of an aircraft such as the Su-35s. Iran needs to build it's Air Force around lethal fighters and it doesn't get more lethal than Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> we built long range air to air missiles to arm the F-14s, its name is Fakour_90 its range is between 200 to 300 km but for our F4s we need another one as you said and yes we need to upgrade our F5s to Kowsar level.
> 
> 
> *Fakour_90 air ti air missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Top General: Iran on Verge of Self-Sufficiency in Making Aircraft Engines*
> 
> 
> Iran is going to become fully self-sufficient in producing aircraft engines, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri said.
> *
> 
> Baqeri said development of the technical know-how to make engines began with the local production of a number of simple components, adding that Iran is now on the verge of manufacturing the engines of modern jets and helicopters and achieving full self-sufficiency in developing such systems.
> 
> *
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...f-self-sufficiency-in-making-aircraft-engines



Yea I knew about this missile, but the problem of it is that it can only be used by the F-14 and nothing else because it's too big. Still it's a very capable missile, but that doesnt mean that the airforce doesnt need a light weight medium to long range air to air missile, because if iran can acquire such a missile, it can lead its F-14s with even more missiles than fakours or aim 54s.



Nasr said:


> I really hope that Iran buys Su-35s for it's Air Force. The IRIAF, has the talent pool of fighter pilots worthy of an aircraft such as the Su-35s. Iran needs to build it's Air Force around lethal fighters and it doesn't get more lethal than Su-35.



Imo, iran doesnt have to buy planes, instead they should work on their own plane, they have the knowledge on how to design planes, and they have been overhauling their aircrafts and keeping them air worthy for all this time, and on top of that, they have heavily upgraded some of them. All this just means that iran is more than capable of producing it's own planes, they just need money and a little but of time and support, which the government doesnt want to give them at all. But buying a production line for an aircraft like the mig 29smt would be actually a good idea, because iran already operates mig 29s, and they are capable of keeping them air worthy and overhauling and upgrading them, so instead of buying g another aircrafts, they can buy the production line of an upgraded version of their own aircrafts and then use that extra knowledge to build a bigger and better plane. By doing that, they will just add a new fighter type to their airforce which would be the fighter they develop, instead of having 2 types added, which would be the su 30 or 35 and their own design, which would reduce costs and make the production of spare parts easier, as well as overhauling the aircrafts would be easier and less time consuming.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Nasr

hussainb72 said:


> Yea I knew about this missile, but the problem of it is that it can only be used by the F-14 and nothing else because it's too big. Still it's a very capable missile, but that doesnt mean that the airforce doesnt need a light weight medium to long range air to air missile, because if iran can acquire such a missile, it can lead its F-14s with even more missiles than fakours or aim 54s.
> 
> 
> 
> Imo, iran doesnt have to buy planes, instead they should work on their own plane, they have the knowledge on how to design planes, and they have been overhauling their aircrafts and keeping them air worthy for all this time, and on top of that, they have heavily upgraded some of them. All this just means that iran is more than capable of producing it's own planes, they just need money and a little but of time and support, which the government doesnt want to give them at all. But buying a production line for an aircraft like the mig 29smt would be actually a good idea, because iran already operates mig 29s, and they are capable of keeping them air worthy and overhauling and upgrading them, so instead of buying g another aircrafts, they can buy the production line of an upgraded version of their own aircrafts and then use that extra knowledge to build a bigger and better plane. By doing that, they will just add a new fighter type to their airforce which would be the fighter they develop, instead of having 2 types added, which would be the su 30 or 35 and their own design, which would reduce costs and make the production of spare parts easier, as well as overhauling the aircrafts would be easier and less time consuming.



I am curious to know why the Iranian government is not funding acquisition of new fighter jets? It doesn't make any sense at all. If Iran can reach an agreement the Russian Federation on a production line for MiG-35 or Su-35. Then it would make sense, since they have a strong aviation industry that is capable of absorbing ToT. Su-35s are ideally suited to Iran's strategic geographical depth.


----------



## TheImmortal

Nasr said:


> I am curious to know why the Iranian government is not funding acquisition of new fighter jets? It doesn't make any sense at all. If Iran can reach an agreement the Russian Federation on a production line for MiG-35 or Su-35. Then it would make sense, since they have a strong aviation industry that is capable of absorbing ToT. Su-35s are ideally suited to Iran's strategic geographical depth.



1) Arms Embargo

2) Russia refuses to supply SU-35

3) Iran wants partial or full transfer of tech, Russia refuses even for SU-30

4) IRGC don’t believe an air force is valuable (hold much more power over senior leadership than regular military).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

TheImmortal said:


> 1) Arms Embargo
> 
> 2) Russia refuses to supply SU-35
> 
> 3) Iran wants partial or full transfer of tech, Russia refuses even for SU-30
> 
> 4) IRGC don’t believe an air force is valuable (hold much more power over senior leadership than regular military).



Well the first 3 points are true, but I guess that the deal will happen at 2020 when some of the sanctions are lifted.
For the 4th, when i said the government I mean Rouhani, as he has reduced both IRGC and the normal military budgets significantly over the years he was in office. And the IRGC actually needs some jets but not fighters, mostly strike and cas jets to support its troops, that's why its using su 22s and UCAVs now, but they believe that air superiority should be achieved by both the regular air force and the air defences.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I said a few months ago that the new F4 ++ with a new cell, new electronics, new cockpit, new radar and a new engine is a reality. And I love as always the process of announcing Iran that deceives everyone. But they always give clues. You sincerely believe that the new engine is not in test action on some aircraft?
You sincerely believe Kowsar does not have new weapons? It is nevertheless obvious! They will eventually show us

And in my opinion, the Kowsar 88 has small engine very technological and high power. And that this plane is a testing ground to produce parts of small but high-tech aircraft. We will see well in the future. And it is an event that they reserve us suprises for the new heavy combat aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I said a few months ago that the new F4 ++ with a new cell, new electronics, new cockpit, new radar and a new engine is a reality. And I love as always the process of announcing Iran that deceives everyone. But they always give clues. You sincerely believe that the new engine is not in test action on some aircraft?



The new F-4s are either called F-4SM or F-4E block 68 if I remember correctly. And currently, these F-4s are at the level of the F-18 as it can fire cruise missiles and guide them using it's new radar, it has better engines that provide better thrust, it can carry and use different guided missiles and bombs (laser guided, IR guided, TV guided), it can be equipped with laser targeting pods, the radar should have the ability to fire ARH air to air missiles but iran isnt known to have such missiles that can fit on the F-4, that's why they should acquire such thing, and the F-4 probably has a bigger payload than the F-18 and it's faster. And there is even a chance that the aircraft is equipped with a data link system to connect to drones and other aircrafts, something like the IRGC su-22s have. And all this has greatly improved these F-4 capabilities.



> You sincerely believe Kowsar does not have new weapons? It is nevertheless obvious! They will eventually show us
> 
> And in my opinion, the Kowsar 88 has small engine very technological and high power. And that this plane is a testing ground to produce parts of small but high-tech aircraft. We will see well in the future. And it is an event that they reserve us suprises for the new heavy combat aircraft



Although the kowsar is said to be a trainer aircraft, it's actually more like the yak-130, because it has an advanced radar with air to air, air to ground, and air to surface modes. And because of its cockpit, it should be able to fire all types of IR and electro optical bombs and missiles, and can carry targeting pods, which means that it should be able to fire laser guided weapons. On top of that, the radar should be able to guide ARH air to air missiles and radar guided cruise missiles and anti ship missiles.
All this just means that it's a potent platform as a light multirole platform, and the technologies on it can be used on new future aircrafts.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

hussainb72 said:


> The new F-4s are either called F-4SM or F-4E block 68 if I remember correctly. And currently, these F-4s are at the level of the F-18 as it can fire cruise missiles and guide them using it's new radar, it has better engines that provide better thrust, it can carry and use different guided missiles and bombs (laser guided, IR guided, TV guided), it can be equipped with laser targeting pods, the radar should have the ability to fire ARH air to air missiles but iran isnt known to have such missiles that can fit on the F-4, that's why they should acquire such thing, and the F-4 probably has a bigger payload than the F-18 and it's faster. And there is even a chance that the aircraft is equipped with a data link system to connect to drones and other aircrafts, something like the IRGC su-22s have. And all this has greatly improved these F-4 capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> Although the kowsar is said to be a trainer aircraft, it's actually more like the yak-130, because it has an advanced radar with air to air, air to ground, and air to surface modes. And because of its cockpit, it should be able to fire all types of IR and electro optical bombs and missiles, and can carry targeting pods, which means that it should be able to fire laser guided weapons. On top of that, the radar should be able to guide ARH air to air missiles and radar guided cruise missiles and anti ship missiles.
> All this just means that it's a potent platform as a light multirole platform, and the technologies on it can be used on new future aircrafts.


Well I prefer YAK-130 engine a lit more . that Al-222-25 turbofan have no after burner but provide 24.5kn of thrust .
J-85 turbojet of F-5 provide 16kn without afterburner and 22kn with afterburner. 

I wonder if somebody have designed F-5 around Al-222-25 engine would it gained supercruise ability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Hack-Hook said:


> Well I prefer YAK-130 engine a lit more . that Al-222-25 turbofan have no after burner but provide 24.5kn of thrust .
> J-85 turbojet of F-5 provide 16kn without afterburner and 22kn with afterburner.
> 
> I wonder if somebody have designed F-5 around Al-222-25 engine would it gained supercruise ability.



Well I just said that they are similar in their role, but i think the kowsar is a little bit lighter than the yak-130 which means that it still can either carry a payload almost equivalent to the yak-130 or a smaller payload with a higher speed.


----------



## skyshadow

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I said a few months ago that the new F4 ++ with a new cell, new electronics, new cockpit, new radar and a new engine is a reality. And I love as always the process of announcing Iran that deceives everyone. But they always give clues. You sincerely believe that the new engine is not in test action on some aircraft?
> You sincerely believe Kowsar does not have new weapons? It is nevertheless obvious! They will eventually show us
> 
> And in my opinion, the Kowsar 88 has small engine very technological and high power. And that this plane is a testing ground to produce parts of small but high-tech aircraft. We will see well in the future. And it is an event that they reserve us suprises for the new heavy combat aircraft




well Iran said Kowsar 88 will fly at Russia air show and that is i think in 8 days. so im really excited to see it in Russia.


*کوثر 88 در ماکس 2019 پرواز می کند*

*مدیرعامل سازمان صنایع هوایی نیروهای مسلح از پرواز جت کوثر٨٨ در دور بعدی نمایشگاه هوافضای روسیه (ماکس٢٠١٩) خبر داد و گفت: امیدواریم در دوره‌های بعدی این هواپیما را برای صادرات نیز داشته باشیم.*
*

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/752816/کوثر-88-در-ماکس-2019-پرواز-می-کند*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

hussainb72 said:


> The new F-4s are either called F-4SM or F-4E block 68 if I remember correctly. And currently, these F-4s are at the level of the F-18 as it can fire cruise missiles and guide them using it's new radar, it has better engines that provide better thrust, it can carry and use different guided missiles and bombs (laser guided, IR guided, TV guided), it can be equipped with laser targeting pods, the radar should have the ability to fire ARH air to air missiles but iran isnt known to have such missiles that can fit on the F-4, that's why they should acquire such thing, and the F-4 probably has a bigger payload than the F-18 and it's faster. And there is even a chance that the aircraft is equipped with a data link system to connect to drones and other aircrafts, something like the IRGC su-22s have. And all this has greatly improved these F-4 capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> Although the kowsar is said to be a trainer aircraft, it's actually more like the yak-130, because it has an advanced radar with air to air, air to ground, and air to surface modes. And because of its cockpit, it should be able to fire all types of IR and electro optical bombs and missiles, and can carry targeting pods, which means that it should be able to fire laser guided weapons. On top of that, the radar should be able to guide ARH air to air missiles and radar guided cruise missiles and anti ship missiles.
> All this just means that it's a potent platform as a light multirole platform, and the technologies on it can be used on new future aircrafts.




Yes it's an F-4 SM, I was the first on the forum to say it months ago. It seems that this video is a test of new engine and in the future we will know it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Avicenna

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Yes it's an F-4 SM, I was the first on the forum to say it months ago. It seems that this video is a test of new engine and in the future we will know it.



No smoke!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Yes it's an F-4 SM, I was the first on the forum to say it months ago. It seems that this video is a test of new engine and in the future we will know it.



Isnt it the F-4 with a new radar and cockpit as well?
Or was the engine upgraded on it only?
And they renewed the air frame as well, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

hussainb72 said:


> Isnt it the F-4 with a new radar and cockpit as well?
> Or was the engine upgraded on it only?
> And they renewed the air frame as well, right?



That video was impressive.

That is certainly no J79 in there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

It's not so . the empty weight is somehow similar .but you knew f-5 unlike for example f-4 have very good aerodynamic and that help it to be supersonic with weaker engine compared to YAK-130 . and I think both plane can carry the same amount of weaponry


Mr Iran Eye said:


> Yes it's an F-4 SM, I was the first on the forum to say it months ago. It seems that this video is a test of new engine and in the future we will know it.


Didn't knew F-4 can do that .


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> It's not so . the empty weight is somehow similar .but you knew f-5 unlike for example f-4 have very good aerodynamic and that help it to be supersonic with weaker engine compared to YAK-130 . and I think both plane can carry the same amount of weaponry
> 
> Didn't knew F-4 can do that .



I highly doubt we can deduce anything fr that Phantom take off footage. Here is a non Iranian phantom taking off in a similar manner:





Regardless, the absence of smoke maybe due to variety of reasons and you can find footages of Iranian Phantoms taking off without visible smoke as well. In this case, you could have poor lighting or the smoke maybe more visible from a different angle or the engine hasn't skipped burning all the fuel....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> I highly doubt we can deduce anything fr that Phantom take off footage. Here is a non Iranian phantom taking off in a similar manner:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless, the absence of smoke maybe due to variety of reasons and you can find footages of Iranian Phantoms taking off without visible smoke as well. In this case, you could have poor lighting or the smoke maybe more visible from a different angle or the engine hasn't skipped burning all the fuel....


Well i think I can see some smoke in the iranian phantom but after takeoff Iranian phantom ascend with nearly 90 degree angle while the one you posted have an angle between 70-80 . I didn't knew phantom could have that attack angle just after takeoff.
If the phantom can do that wonder if it also can do Cobra maneuver ?


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> Well i think I can see some smoke in the iranian phantom but after takeoff Iranian phantom ascend with nearly 90 degree angle while the one you posted have an angle between 70-80 . I didn't knew phantom could have that attack angle just after takeoff.
> If the phantom can do that wonder if it also can do Cobra maneuver ?



Well it's hard to tell what angle it was. To be honest, I think some upgrades such as new battlefield management system, radar, navigation and overall avionics are about as much as you can get from this platform. Building new airframes and keeping them flight worthy is feasible for now but I wouldn't think they would play around with the engine except maintenance and overhaul... J-79 is an engine only used for F-4 and for what it is, it is sufficient. RD-33 should be Iran's too focus.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
this will answer the questions regarding that maneuver. this is standard procedure after overhauling a fighter jet which includes *max climb *maneuver. this demonstrates that structure is renewed and has no fractures which indicates we are producing them in home.
BTW the pilot published the video in his page forced to disable it and suspended for some time, this alone indicates many thing about army.



Avicenna said:


> No smoke!


because the after burner was on.



Hack-Hook said:


> If the phantom can do that wonder if it also can do Cobra maneuver ?


well phantom has not (1< thrust/weight) so if it stalls that's it it will crash.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*not an other F-5 i'm going to cry i swear to God *


*Commander Qureshi also referred to the initial flight tests of the new generation of Kowsar fighters, saying: "With recent flight tests, the aircraft will be unveiled in the future."*
*

https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/4389661/جزئیاتی-از-سامانه-پدافندی-باور۳۷۳--برد-باور-۳۰۰-کیلومتر-است*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *not an other F-5 i'm going to cry i swear to God *
> 
> 
> *Commander Qureshi also referred to the initial flight tests of the new generation of Kowsar fighters, saying: "With recent flight tests, the aircraft will be unveiled in the future."
> 
> 
> https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/4389661/جزئیاتی-از-سامانه-پدافندی-باور۳۷۳--برد-باور-۳۰۰-کیلومتر-است*


He said already another kawsar..so cry bro..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *not an other F-5 i'm going to cry i swear to God *
> 
> 
> *Commander Qureshi also referred to the initial flight tests of the new generation of Kowsar fighters, saying: "With recent flight tests, the aircraft will be unveiled in the future."
> 
> 
> https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/4389661/جزئیاتی-از-سامانه-پدافندی-باور۳۷۳--برد-باور-۳۰۰-کیلومتر-است*


Chill down body. Have you forgotten how Iran's auto industry started? It was Paykan, Peykan with Joshan bumper, Paykan with Peugeot engine, Peugeot with Paykan engine (RD), and finally Samand. 

They will test any possible combination and mutation of F5 to make sure they have mastered it and then when they are satisfied, they will come up with a new platform. You also need to consider the fact that out of all the divisions of military, Airforce is the most conservative one to try totally new and untested platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TruthHurtz

Arminkh said:


> Chill down body. Have you forgotten how Iran's auto industry started? It was Paykan, Peykan with Joshan bumper, Paykan with Peugeot engine, Peugeot with Paykan engine (RD), and finally Samand.
> 
> They will test any possible combination and mutation of F5 to make sure they have mastered it and then when they are satisfied, they will come up with a new platform. You also need to consider the fact that out of all the divisions of military, Airforce is the most conservative one to try totally new and untested platforms.



But this is different, you are going from F5, to F5, to slightly modified F5, to slightly more modified F5, to even more modified F5.

What happened to that Kowsar 88 with the original airframe?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Avicenna

TruthHurtz said:


> But this is different, you are going from F5, to F5, to slightly modified F5, to slightly more modified F5, to even more modified F5.
> 
> What happened to that Kowsar 88 with the original airframe?



This is all great with the F-5 evolution.

But consider putting together some J-10 or Su-30 in Iran when sanctions theoretically end in 2020.

If war comes, you don't want to be caught with your pants down.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It must be said and repeated, Iranian pilots love to fly the F-5. To improve this platform and make it more powerful and stronger in combat is a very good news

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ray_Atek

Some problem should solved in F5 such as:
1-Landing gear location
2-Radar low space
3-Mid wings instead of low wings
4-Operating range

F-20 is not a solution but jf-17 may be better.











1-More hardpoints
2-Bigger radar
3-More range
4-More space for future upgrade
5-Economical
Better than f-20 in CAS but in A2A role f-20 is better.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Oh look another F-5 project, basically just confirming Qaher is dead in water project.

No reason to continue F-5 upgrades when Qaher can be a next gen F-5 replacement.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

F-20 manufacturing is not cheap also but for A2A role is good choice.
Look at what Iriaf thinking in this maket.





Q


TheImmortal said:


> Oh look another F-5 project, basically just confirming Qaher is dead in water project.
> 
> No reason to continue F-5 upgrades when Qaher can be a next gen F-5 replacement.


Qaher is a modified F-5 with a weapon bay under it which can change landing gear location also.
Very good solution which with this Technic a Qaher can be based on F-4 also.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> *not an other F-5 i'm going to cry i swear to God *
> 
> 
> *Commander Qureshi also referred to the initial flight tests of the new generation of Kowsar fighters, saying: "With recent flight tests, the aircraft will be unveiled in the future."
> 
> 
> https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/4389661/جزئیاتی-از-سامانه-پدافندی-باور۳۷۳--برد-باور-۳۰۰-کیلومتر-است*



I would look at this in another way. We still didnt see the full capabilities of the kowsar, and we might actually see some of the weapons the plane can carry today, and maybe some other features that they still didnt show us.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Oh look another F-5 project, basically just confirming Qaher is dead in water project.
> 
> No reason to continue F-5 upgrades when Qaher can be a next gen F-5 replacement.



well he said Qaher is going as planed too but he said this new F5 is Iranian design, i do not know what he means by that.



hussainb72 said:


> I would look at this in another way. We still didnt see the full capabilities of the kowsar, and we might actually see some of the weapons the plane can carry today, and maybe some other features that they still didnt show us.


i hope soo

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

TruthHurtz said:


> But this is different, you are going from F5, to F5, to slightly modified F5, to slightly more modified F5, to even more modified F5.
> 
> What happened to that Kowsar 88 with the original airframe?


I'm just pointing out this is how Iranians do it. They come up with these mutants, some of them really don't make sense. But in this process they learn and at some point, they suddenly they come up with something that blows everyone's mind. They did similar thing with missiles too. 

The example I made were all Paykans at the end of the day too.(who would call a Peugeot body with a Paykan engine anything but Paykan for God sake?!!) 

Next step for F5 would probably be changing its engines. Or if we want to go with above example, putting F5 engines on an F4 or F14! lol



TheImmortal said:


> Oh look another F-5 project, basically just confirming Qaher is dead in water project.
> 
> No reason to continue F-5 upgrades when Qaher can be a next gen F-5 replacement.


I think Airforce never wanted Qaher. It doesn't fit in their defense doctrine. I think the most possible client for Qaher project is IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

Skyshadow user on August 18, placed at this news, 
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/752816/کوثر-88-در-ماکس-2019-پرواز-می-کند





We hope that the news will come true and that Iran will officially present Kowsar-88 and will also carry out a demonstration flight

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> Skyshadow user on August 18, placed at this news,
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/752816/کوثر-88-در-ماکس-2019-پرواز-می-کند
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We hope that the news will come true and that Iran will officially present Kowsar-88 and will also carry out a demonstration flight



we do brother weeeee do hope for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> well he said Qaher is going as planed too but he said this new F5 is Iranian design, i do not know what he means by that.
> 
> 
> i hope soo



Where did he say Qaher is going as planned?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Where did he say Qaher is going as planned?



sorry my bad, he said both qaher and kowsar have Iranian design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

folks, go to this video posted by @yavar in regards to some Q313 update:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*
J85 ????





*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *J85 ????
> 
> View attachment 575643
> *


it's nozzle actuator looks like j-85/owj but judging that it's structure shines it seems it's new.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Maybe engine of F-14


----------



## SOHEIL

skyshadow said:


> *J85 ????
> 
> View attachment 575643
> *



*NO !*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

Does anyone have a link to the telewebion footage of the jet engine? @skyshadow


----------



## SOHEIL

Ich said:


> Maybe engine of F-14



*NO !*








skyshadow said:


> *J85 ????
> 
> View attachment 575643
> *



Not even RD-33 !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

SOHEIL said:


> *NO !*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even RD-33 !


Ok, you are killing me! What is it then?


----------



## yavar

AL-41 let me make video then we can tell

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

J79

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

looks like J79 to me as well.



yavar said:


>



its way too big, also if you start your way from the nozzle and work your way to the front, you will see similarities to J-79.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

PeeD said:


> J79



Yeah ...



arashkamangir said:


> looks like J79 to me as well.
> 
> 
> 
> its way to big, also if you start your way from the nozzle and work your way to the front, you will see similarities to J-79.



For a moment i thought it's the promised jet engine !

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

SOHEIL said:


> Yeah ...
> 
> 
> 
> For a moment i thought it's the promised jet engine !



It takes time  we have waited long enough and we got rewarded so many times  Realistically, we are going to see turbo fan variant of J-85 first and sometime in the next 5 years, we will see an Iranian built RD-33. Anything beyond that is at least a decade a way especially with current climate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

J79 has 2-4x thrust of J85, so reverse engineering J79 would be a great leap forward for Iranian engineers.


----------



## arashkamangir

Battle of Waterloo said:


> J79 has 2-4x thrust of J85, so reverse engineering J79 would be a great leap forward for Iranian engineers.



Its also heavier, crappier when it comes to thrust to weight ratio. If Iran wants to put an effort into such a heavy engine, it should focus on Tomcat's TF-30 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

arashkamangir said:


> Its also heavier, crappier when it comes to thrust to weight ratio. If Iran wants to put an effort into such a heavy engine, it should focus on Tomcat's TF-30 engine.


True but still a leap forward. Perhaps there are some technologies in this they want/need to master before moving on to other engines. I am sure they have good reasons for whatever engine they decide to focus on first.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

AL-21F-3 is the modified version of J-79 with superior performance in most aspects. Also, hard to find from other markets than Russia. So, may be a plan to work on it!


----------



## PeeD

Its probably just an J79 on testbench after overhaul.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> Does anyone have a link to the telewebion footage of the jet engine? @skyshadow


https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2092650



SOHEIL said:


> *NO !*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even RD-33 !



then j 79 maybe?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "skyshadow, post: 11721652, membro: 187043"]
*J85 ????

[ATTACH = full] 575643 [/ ATTACH]* [/ QUOTE]

J-79

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

Turbine inlet temperature of Al21f3 is more than j-79 and it because of kind of Thermal barrier coating, coated on Al2qf3 turbine blade.
So increasing turbine inlet temperature of j-79 convert it to high performance engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

Ray_Atek said:


> Turbine inlet temperature of Al21f3 is more than j-79 and it because of kind of Thermal barrier coating, coated on Al2qf3 turbine blade.
> So increasing turbine inlet temperature of j-79 convert it to high performance engine.


It is not as easy as you said. All critical components have to be redesigned if more power is needed. Saving in fuel consumption is the only benefit which can be gained with minimum changes. Remember the compression ratios are also different.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

At the rate the conclusions in this thread are going, by next week, posters here will say Iran has moved on to anti gravity propulsions and space/time warp drives.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## T-72B

Mark my word
F-313 will be ready by 2022

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "T-72B, post: 11722488, membro: 191265"] Contrassegna la mia parola
F-313 will be ready by 2022 [/ QUOTE]

I think the current F313 is just a small-scale prototype to test the characteristics of what will be the real aircraft.
Reduced scale necessary as it seems that the J-85s are used.
2022, yes perhaps they could also present a prototype of F313 in the final dimensions only if the tests of the reduced version have had positive results, but also if engines of adequate power of new production will be available or, at least in the prototype, use a couple of regenerated engines already present in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

Imo, even a reverse engineered j-79 is a very important and big step towards better engines, because it shows that iran is now more capable in the field of alloys and super alloys and can make materials that can sustain higher temperatures and conditions. And if it has a better performance than the original j-79s on the f-4 then the f-4s can be upgraded with this engine, and no one should think that the f-4 is useless no matter how much its upgraded, Turkey still uses it and has heavily upgraded it, and iran is doing the same, the plane can carry a huge payload and can be used in all kinds of missions, if it can be upgraded, renewed and overhauled then there is no reason to retire it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Myself

hussainb72 said:


> Imo, even a reverse engineered j-79 is a very important and big step towards better engines, because it shows that iran is now more capable in the field of alloys and super alloys and can make materials that can sustain higher temperatures and conditions. And if it has a better performance than the original j-79s on the f-4 then the f-4s can be upgraded with this engine, and no one should think that the f-4 is useless no matter how much its upgraded, Turkey still uses it and has heavily upgraded it, and iran is doing the same, the plane can carry a huge payload and can be used in all kinds of missions, if it can be upgraded, renewed and overhauled then there is no reason to retire it.


Investing on J-79 is nothing but wasting time and resources; while the advanced version of it i.e. AL-21F3 exists in Iran hands, and in fact more needed. Iran purchased around ~ 250 Phantoms with too many spare engines. Currently, only a quarter of the fleet have survived according to many internet resources. So, there should be more than enough spare parts and engines in Iran’s inventory as well as in (even not) black market.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussainb72

Myself said:


> Investing on J-79 is nothing but wasting time and resources; while the advanced version of it i.e. AL-21F3 exists in Iran hands, and in fact more needed. Iran purchased around ~ 250 Phantoms with too many spare engines. Currently, only a quarter of the fleet have survived according to many internet resources. So, there should be more than enough spare parts and engines in Iran’s inventory as well as in (even not) black market.
> View attachment 575826



Again IMO, It's not always necessary for something to really be useful for it to be made. Sometimes, the process of making itself is more important than the engine itself because iran can gain experience working on bigger and more complex engines, and then it can use that knowledge to focus on other engines like the RD-33.
But yea, working on the AL-21F3 is the better choice here, as it has better performance.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

RD-33 is the best path for Iran.
It makes no sense to do the effort for re-engineering the J-79 if it could be done on the RD-33.
Only if Iran got all "blueprints" of the J-79 and prior to it the J-85 producing these engines makes any sense.

The re-engineering step from J-79 to RD-33 is not a big one but the result for the latter is a efficient turbofan used in 2019 5th Gen. demonstrators, while the other is a obsolete fuel thirsty turbojet.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthHurtz

Lol @ all this useless speculation

no news = no care


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> RD-33 is the best path for Iran.
> It makes no sense to do the effort for re-engineering the J-79 if it could be done on the RD-33.
> Only if Iran got all "blueprints" of the J-79 and prior to it the J-85 producing these engines makes any sense.
> 
> The re-engineering step from J-79 to RD-33 is not a big one but the result for the latter is a efficient turbofan used in 2019 5th Gen. demonstrators, while the other is a obsolete fuel thirsty turbojet.


I am not sure if the rudimentary type of RD-33 Iran possesses is effectively a turbofan, or somewhere between a turbofan or a turbojet with some kind of bypass. Up to few years ago, the early versions of RD-33 (1st series) was named turbojet even on Klimov website. Unfortunately, their website is now updated including newer versions of RD-33 entitled as Turbofan.


----------



## PeeD

There is nothing in between. It is a turbofan, look the the cut drawings.
A modern turbofan like all others.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Commander: New Home-Made Fighter Jets to Join Iranian Air Force

https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980603000387

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Radar imaging of Bandar Abbas Airport*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> *Radar imaging of Bandar Abbas Airport*



What am I looking at here?


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> What am I looking at here?



you are looking at SAR ( *Synthetic Aperture Radar )* radar. and how they can penetrate building materials so they can see what is hiding in the bunkers, but that is one military use for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

skyshadow said:


> you are looking at SAR ( *Synthetic Aperture Radar )* radar. and how they can penetrate building materials so they can see what is hiding in the bunkers, but that is one military use for them.


I recall more than a decade ago SAR was considered such an advanced topic by Western navy crowd..they were installed on Orion fixed wing maritime patrol aircraft to identify amongst other things the silohet of ships even at total darkness....did not know Iran makes SAR type radars..are they on board our MPAs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I recall more than a decade ago SAR was considered such an advanced topic by Western navy crowd..they were installed on Orion fixed wing maritime patrol aircraft to identify amongst other things the silohet of ships even at total darkness....did not know Iran makes SAR type radars..are they on board our MPAs.



Iran reverse engineered SAR a while ago from capture ScanEagle (Yasir UAV). The prize was the SAR the scan eagles carried.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Iran reverse engineered SAR a while ago from capture ScanEagle (Yasir UAV). The prize was the SAR the scan eagles carried.



Oh and the larger SAR from RQ-170

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

aryobarzan said:


> I recall more than a decade ago SAR was considered such an advanced topic by Western navy crowd..they were installed on Orion fixed wing maritime patrol aircraft to identify amongst other things the silohet of ships even at total darkness....did not know Iran makes SAR type radars..are they on board our MPAs.



yes we have been building them for years now, i do not know were they are using it but Iran said it was build to be used in UAVs and fighter jets and other platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

some good news 



Speaking to Sputnik, he said, "We will be presenting a number of *drones* *we have designed*, at the Max Expo this year. We also present a number of* helicopters we designed and built* with various *training and transportation missions* and a number of *engines we designed and built* for drones and helicopters here this year.


"We usually participate in exhibitions, especially at the Max Russia Exhibition, which is one of the largest exhibitions, and we are showing these drone achievements in this Exhibition," he said. Here we present it to everyone: We bring and deliver small planes and large planes in different years. I think air shows are one of the best places to showcase achievements. That's why we participated in the Max Expo and presented our achievements in the field of drones.


The deputy defense ministry said it was possible to sell Iranian drone products overseas: "*Yes, it is also possible to sell overseas.* And in response to the question of whether the Iranian Armed Forces Air Force has a plan to build *jet powered UAVs,*" he said. Whether equipped with a jet engine or not, he said *we had a plan and we are ready. At this year's show, UAVs and drones* equipped with jet engines *are on display.*
*


https://ir.sputniknews.com/world/20...بدون-سرنشین-ساخت-ایران-در-نمایشگاه-ماکس-2019/*

https://www.telexiran.com/ویدیو/اخبار-ویدیویی/فناوری/آغاز-به-کار-نمایشگاه-هوایی-روسیه

https://www.irna.ir/news/83454125/پهپاد-جدید-ایران-با-نام-مبین-در-روسیه-به-نمایش-درآمد

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> some good news
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking to Sputnik, he said, "We will be presenting a number of *drones* *we have designed*, at the Max Expo this year. We also present a number of* helicopters we designed and built* with various *training and transportation missions* and a number of *engines we designed and built* for drones and helicopters here this year.
> 
> 
> "We usually participate in exhibitions, especially at the Max Russia Exhibition, which is one of the largest exhibitions, and we are showing these drone achievements in this Exhibition," he said. Here we present it to everyone: We bring and deliver small planes and large planes in different years. I think air shows are one of the best places to showcase achievements. That's why we participated in the Max Expo and presented our achievements in the field of drones.
> 
> 
> The deputy defense ministry said it was possible to sell Iranian drone products overseas: "*Yes, it is also possible to sell overseas.* And in response to the question of whether the Iranian Armed Forces Air Force has a plan to build *jet powered UAVs,*" he said. Whether equipped with a jet engine or not, he said *we had a plan and we are ready. At this year's show, UAVs and drones* equipped with jet engines *are on display.
> 
> 
> 
> https://ir.sputniknews.com/world/201908275130459-نمایش-هواپیمای-بدون-سرنشین-ساخت-ایران-در-نمایشگاه-ماکس-2019/*
> 
> https://www.telexiran.com/ویدیو/اخبار-ویدیویی/فناوری/آغاز-به-کار-نمایشگاه-هوایی-روسیه
> 
> https://www.irna.ir/news/83454125/پهپاد-جدید-ایران-با-نام-مبین-در-روسیه-به-نمایش-درآمد



And the Kowsar-88 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> And the Kowsar-88 ?



she is there but it seems she will not fly this years but Iran said we will be active in air show flights next time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> she is there but it seems she will not fly this years but Iran said we will be active in air show flights next time.



So never?


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> So never?



next year

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*MAKS 2019*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> *MAKS 2019*
> ......



A question:
Is MAKS-2019 only a small-scale model of the KOWSAR-88?


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> A question:
> Is MAKS-2019 only a small-scale model of the KOWSAR-88?



yes next time Iran will bring them to Russia UAVs and jets not just mockups

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

skyshadow said:


> yes next time Iran will bring them to Russia UAVs and jets not just mockups

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> *MAKS 2019*



This still looks like Toloue 4. Me hoped that there will be a Toloue 5 at MAKS 2019.


----------



## hussainb72

WordsMatter said:


>



I see nothing funny in what he said. They usually say that whoever that laughs for no reason has lost his mind...

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

hussainb72 said:


> I see nothing funny in what he said. They usually say that whoever that laughs for no reason has lost his mind...



Best just to ignore this clown. He has nothing useful to contribute.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> This still looks like Toloue 4. Me hoped that there will be a Toloue 5 at MAKS 2019.



well Iran said we are only showing technologies that are for sell, not our top of the line technologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> well Iran said we are only showing technologies that are for sell, not our top of the line technologies.



Ah, yes, i forgot its a comercial show.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

WordsMatter said:


>


You'd better to visit a psychologist.......most likely you are suffering an unknown deasise

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

*some good news for Iran air force*


"he stated that the *Russians* and the *Chinese* have offered us *Fighter jets*, various countries are offering us fighter jets and we are discussing it, but it all depends on after the end of the sanctions."


" *Kowsar* Fighter jet / Trainer will fly at *MAKS 2020* ( next year )"


"in the field of *export* of products until now *we signed several agreements*"


"*Co-production* of training aircraft with a friend country" ( i think he means that Iran will *produce *Kowsar training aircraft in another country which means Iran is exporting Kowsar jet *production line* with *TOT* )


"Even *Russia has demanded some drones from us* we are looking to their demands to obtain the necessary permits."


"The *Kowsar fighter* is in production"



"The *Russians and the Chinese* have given us *proposals*, of course, but we have *our own proposals*, but all of that is in the negotiation stage," he said." ( in other word Iran wants *TOT and maybe production line* or some *technology transfer* )




http://defapress.ir/fa/news/359830/چین-و-روسیه-پیشنهاد-فروش-جنگنده-به-ایران-را-داده‌اند

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> *some good news for Iran air force*
> 
> 
> "he stated that the *Russians* and the *Chinese* have offered us *Fighter jets*, various countries are offering us fighter jets and we are discussing it, but it all depends on after the end of the sanctions."
> 
> 
> " *Kowsar* Fighter jet / Trainer will fly at *MAKS 2020* ( next year )"
> 
> 
> "in the field of *export* of products until now *we signed several agreements*"
> 
> 
> "*Co-production* of training aircraft with a friend country" ( i think he means that Iran will *produce *Kowsar training aircraft in another country which means Iran is exporting Kowsar jet *production line* with *TOT* )
> 
> 
> "Even *Russia has demanded some drones from us* we are looking to their demands to obtain the necessary permits."
> 
> 
> "The *Kowsar fighter* is in production"
> 
> 
> 
> "The *Russians and the Chinese* have given us *proposals*, of course, but we have *our own proposals*, but all of that is in the negotiation stage," he said." ( in other word Iran wants *TOT and maybe production line* or some *technology transfer* )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/359830/چین-و-روسیه-پیشنهاد-فروش-جنگنده-به-ایران-را-داده‌اند



Wasn't Kowsar scheduled to fly at this years MAKS?


----------



## SubWater

TruthHurtz said:


> Wasn't Kowsar scheduled to fly at this years MAKS?


Yes, and that is Kowsar-88 not Kowsar.
the Koesar already flied.

Kowsar-88





Kowsar(F5 Iranian copy)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> Wasn't Kowsar scheduled to fly at this years MAKS?


yes but it has not done all of its safety test yet, when it passes all the aspects, than it can fly anywhere it wants


----------



## PeeD

Can someone please find photos from the small engine models displayed at the Iranian MAKS-2019 stand?
I would like to analyse them, there is more than just Tolue series, possibly J90.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Can someone please find photos from the small engine models displayed at the Iranian MAKS-2019 stand?
> I would like to analyse them, there is more than just Tolue series, possibly J90.



is that what you seek?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

I need higher resolution and more views, but thanks, yes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> I need higher resolution and more views, but thanks, yes.


i just find that one i will post if i find a higher resolution one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Can someone please find photos from the small engine models displayed at the Iranian MAKS-2019 stand?
> I would like to analyse them, there is more than just Tolue series, possibly J90.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

That one is the Tolue variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

KOWSAR-88 is marketed under the name "KOSAR"
From a user with whom I have news exchanges, I received an e-mail with a leaflet attached about the jet trainer that we know as Kowsar-88 recovered at the Iranian stand at MAKS-2019, (I state that I am not authorized to publish it )
But however, from this brochure in English it can be noted that the aircraft is advertised as "KOSAR", so I think this is the name we should use in the future.

Some features listed in the brochure
is equiped wits six internal fuel tanks and one external fuel tank under the fuselage centerline
Kosar:
Legth 12,25 m
Wing span 10,04 m
Heigth 4,5 m
Wing area 24 m2
Empy weight 3900 kg
Take-of weight (clean) 5500 kg
Max take-off weigth 6600 kg

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> Some features listed in the brochure
> is equiped wits six internal fuel tanks and one external fuel tank under the fuselage centerline
> Kosar:
> Legth 12,25 m
> Wing span 10,04 m
> Heigth 4,5 m
> Wing area 24 m2
> Empy weight 3900 kg
> Take-of weight (clean) 5500 kg
> Max take-off weigth 6600 kg


shorter than f-5 but wider and having a higher height 
being lighter of f-5 y one ton these are are noy important but what worry me is that f-5 maximum take of weight is more than 11t and this one is 6.6t


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> shorter than f-5 but wider and having a higher height
> being lighter of f-5 y one ton these are are noy important but what worry me is that f-5 maximum take of weight is more than 11t and this one is 6.6t



Therefore 1100 kg of war loads suspended externally including possibly the additional tank
Example
4 x 250 kg bombs and an additional tank

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Hack-Hook said:


> shorter than f-5 but wider and having a higher height
> being lighter of f-5 y one ton these are are noy important but what worry me is that f-5 maximum take of weight is more than 11t and this one is 6.6t



It's probably that the structure of the kowsar 88 cant carry more than that, which isnt surprising at all, as it's intended for advanced training and light air to ground roles, so it doesnt have to carry that much stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

hussainb72 said:


> It's probably that the structure of the kowsar 88 cant carry more than that, which isnt surprising at all, as it's intended for advanced training and light air to ground roles, so it doesnt have to carry that much stuff.


Well I wonder what will this offer more than an f5 or something base on that.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Well I wonder what will this offer more than an f5 or something base on that.


they increased wingspan (saving fuel in high altitude), decrease the empty weight (also saving fuel) and removed the after burner. if i was to make a trainer out of what we have, the result would be the same as this kosar.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> they increased wingspan (saving fuel in high altitude), decrease the empty weight (also saving fuel) and removed the after burner. if i was to make a trainer out of what we have, the result would be the same as this kosar.


they also decreased the payload


----------



## sahureka2

This is the *2017* brochure,




as you can see some data has changed.
The wings were slightly shortened but always kept the same surface, so they should have made changes, and the weights of the aircraft have changed, the data suggests that Iranian technicians have done a slimming cure to the aircraft
2017 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2019
Legth 12.25 m. - - - - - - - Unchanged
Wing span 11.00 m. - - - - - now 10.04 m.
Heigth 4.7 m.- - - - - now 4, 5 m
Wing area 24 m2- - - - - Unchanged
Empy weight 4600 kg. - - - - now 3900 kg
Take-of weight (clean) ?? Kg. - - - - now 5500 kg
Max take-off weigth 6180 kg - - - - now 6600 kg
Who knows maybe the standard aircraft will be even more efficient

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> This is the *2017* brochure,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as you can see some data has changed.
> The wings were slightly shortened but always kept the same surface, so they should have made changes, and the weights of the aircraft have changed, the data suggests that Iranian technicians have done a slimming cure to the aircraft
> 2017 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2019
> Legth 12.25 m. - - - - - - - Unchanged
> Wing span 11.00 m. - - - - - now 10.04 m.
> Heigth 4.7 m.- - - - - now 4, 5 m
> Wing area 24 m2- - - - - Unchanged
> Empy weight 4600 kg. - - - - now 3900 kg
> Take-of weight (clean) ?? Kg. - - - - now 5500 kg
> Max take-off weigth 6180 kg - - - - now 6600 kg
> Who knows maybe the standard aircraft will be even more efficient


i wonder if the airplane can carry 1100kg of ordnance and use two owj engine while f-5 can carry 4ton of ordnance with that engine. also while the plane is lighter ,it fly 4km lower than F-5 with the same engine .

well i see why Army prefer to tinker with F-5 design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> i wonder if the airplane can carry 1100kg of ordnance and use two owj engine while f-5 can carry 4ton of ordnance with that engine. also while the plane is lighter ,it fly 4km lower than F-5 with the same engine .
> 
> well i see why Army prefer to tinker with F-5 design



You are making a major mistake the J85 installed on the F-5s are equipped with afterburning, the Kosar does not have it.
If you want to make a comparison, there is the Saab 105Ö in the Austrian version and the Cesena A-37 light attack aircraft.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> You are making a major mistake the J85 installed on the F-5s are equipped with afterburning, the Kosar does not have it.
> If you want to make a comparison, there is the Saab 105Ö in the Austrian version and the Cesena A-37 light attack aircraft.


the afterburner affect maximum speed and supersonic capabilities of the airplane , it never affect the maximum payload (in fact it reduce the maximum payload) or ferry range (Again it reduce that ferry range , In Case of F-5 its 3700km with only external tanks and the speed not exceeding 800km and if you drop empty tanks)
and are you sure they use afterburner to reach maximum altitude ?


----------



## hussainb72

Hack-Hook said:


> the afterburner affect maximum speed and supersonic capabilities of the airplane , it never affect the maximum payload (in fact it reduce the maximum payload) or ferry range (Again it reduce that ferry range , In Case of F-5 its 3700km with only external tanks and the speed not exceeding 800km and if you drop empty tanks)
> and are you sure they use afterburner to reach maximum altitude ?



Afterburner is used for lots of different stuff, one of them is when taking off with a heavy payload, and the afterburner provides lots of extra thrust which means that the plane will be able to go faster with a heavy payload. Even if the plane carries a heavy payload, it will be able to fly, but at a very low speed, so the afterburner is needed if the plane has to move to a close location and deliver the payload very fast. And it's normal for the plane's range to reduce when using afterburners, as it burns more fuel in less time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

hussainb72 said:


> Afterburner is used for lots of different stuff, one of them is when taking off with a heavy payload, and the afterburner provides lots of extra thrust which means that the plane will be able to go faster with a heavy payload. Even if the plane carries a heavy payload, it will be able to fly, but at a very low speed, so the afterburner is needed if the plane has to move to a close location and deliver the payload very fast. And it's normal for the plane's range to reduce when using afterburners, as it burns more fuel in less time.


the first time i hear such things , by the way i'm certain you cant find an airplane that need afterburner for flying , and be assured f-5 don't need afterburner for take of


----------



## aryobarzan

Hack-Hook said:


> shorter than f-5 but wider and having a higher height
> being lighter of f-5 y one ton these are are noy important but what worry me is that f-5 maximum take of weight is more than 11t and this one is 6.6t


Please look at my post in "Chill Thread" regarding the move.


----------



## hussainb72

Hack-Hook said:


> the first time i hear such things , by the way i'm certain you cant find an airplane that need afterburner for flying , and be assured f-5 don't need afterburner for take of



You dont need an afterburner to fly at all, but let's say if you have a heavy payload and full fuel, you will be able to fly, but you will be slow.
And the afterburner is usually used whenever the plane is heavy to make the takeoff easier, but ofc it has other uses as well.


----------



## PeeD

Afterburner can be used to allow takeoff with a heavy load which otherwise would not be possible with a non-afterburning engine on a given runway.

Afterburner simply adds another ~30% thrust at very bad fuel economy --> you get a stronger engine for a short period.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

You do not need afterburner for takeoff, even when fully loaded. To compensate for less thrust, you must have runway length.

When I was active duty, my first jet was the F-111, which was nearly 48,000 lbs, and my second jet was the F-16 which was nearly 21,000 lbs.

F-16 max takeoff weight: 48,000 lbs
F-111 max takeoff weight: 100,000 lbs

Runway length RAF Upper Heyford: 8300 ft
Runway length MacDill AFB: 11,400 ft

There is a technical skill set involving calculating takeoff weight, baro, elevation, and runway length that resulted in how much and how long to apply afterburner, and am not going to the details here. Suffice to say that if the mission requires a certain amount of fuel, the F-16 pilot will use as much of that MacDill's 11,400 ft length as possible, and that mean judicious use of AB on takeoff. On the other hand, the Heyford F-111 pilot, with his jet fully loaded with two external fuel tanks and two nukes, will use full AB from start to fully airborne and then air refuel shortly in order to make the flight to Moscow. Usable runway length is more important than load when it comes to AB calculation.

With extreme combat conditions, as in the base is actually under bombardment, a pilot can hold brakes with AB but this is nearly as dangerous as getting hit by enemy weapons. The brakes cannot hold the jet even at %70 power, let alone at full AB, so do that long enough and the brakes will catastrophically fail. There is no 'rolling' takeoff here. The intention is to get as fast airflow speed over the wings as possible, so once the brakes are released after X seconds of AB, the jet will literally lurch/jump forward and the takeoff speed will be twice or greater than normal.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## AmirPatriot

gambit said:


> With extreme combat conditions, as in the base is actually under bombardment, a pilot can hold brakes with AB but this is nearly as dangerous as getting hit by enemy weapons. The brakes cannot hold the jet even at %70 power, let alone at full AB



DCS pilots do this all the time - I guess it looks cool. Invariably when I go full AB in the Flanker or the Eagle, it always starts rolling forward despite the brakes. It does lurch a bit when I release them though. Luckily with the Flanker or an Eagle with drop tanks, fuel isn't too much of an issue on a standard Fighter Sweep mission.

A real example of a loaded plane needing AB to take off was the F-14A, needing to light up the TF-30s for a carrier takeoff. The F-14B/D removed this need with the GE F110s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussainb72

AmirPatriot said:


> DCS pilots do this all the time - I guess it looks cool. Invariably when I go full AB in the Flanker or the Eagle, it always starts rolling forward despite the brakes. It does lurch a bit when I release them though. Luckily with the Flanker or an Eagle with drop tanks, fuel isn't too much of an issue on a standard Fighter Sweep mission.
> 
> A real example of a loaded plane needing AB to take off was the F-14A, needing to light up the TF-30s for a carrier takeoff. The F-14B/D removed this need with the GE F110s.



I dont think the braking mechanism is correctly modules for FC-3 aircrafts in dcs, but yea it's still fun to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

hussainb72 said:


> I dont think the braking mechanism is correctly modules for FC-3 aircrafts in dcs, but yea it's still fun to do.



Well, I haven't tried the other modules yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

AmirPatriot said:


> Well, I haven't tried the other modules yet.


You should try them, most of them are fun, especially the A-10C, it's easy to learn, but hard to master.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

hussainb72 said:


> You should try them, most of them are fun, especially the A-10C.



The dream is the F-14, but I've already sunk so much cash into this sim. I need to get flying more regularly to justify it to myself...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

AmirPatriot said:


> The dream is the F-14, but I've already sunk so much cash into this sim. I need to get flying more regularly to justify it to myself...



Yea that's the problem with such sims, you have to pay to have fun.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

is it free to play with F-5E in DCS??


----------



## AmirPatriot

Mithridates said:


> is it free to play with F-5E in DCS??


Nope. Only the Su-25T and TF-51D are free. I've heard the F-5 is very good though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Mithridates said:


> is it free to play with F-5E in DCS??



Its 60 dollars, but you should never buy anything unless there is a sale going on, during the sales, everything is 50% off except for anything that is new.



AmirPatriot said:


> Nope. Only the Su-25T and TF-51D are free. I've heard the F-5 is very good though.



The F-5 has an excellent flight module, it's one of my favourites. It's very easy to learn but you have low SA so you should keep ur eyes open. The RWR hasn't been moduled correctly but there is a mod that fixes that. And you should learn how to bomb targets using charts and fixing ur speed, altitude, dive angle and some other stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

AmirPatriot said:


> DCS pilots do this all the time - I guess it looks cool. Invariably when I go full AB in the Flanker or the Eagle, it always starts rolling forward despite the brakes.


In real life, if throttle is greater than %70 mil power and brakes are holding, two things could happens...If the jet starts moving forward, which it will, either the tires are turning, or the tires are slipping.

If the tires are turning, that means the brakes are dragging, and given the power that they are resisting, the hot brakes condition rises rapidly.

If the tires are slipping, that means the brakes are holding the tires, but the engine thrust overrides the tires' grip on the runway.







Either case, it is dangerous. Hot brakes can literally explode as the red zones illustrates above. And note the firefighters' approach to the gear, either front or rear, never from the sides.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@gambit 

You would go on full AB once you are rolling to shorten necessary runway or allow start at all.

Breaks will have no problem holding the static tires they would start to slip is someone is stupid enough to hold the breaks on full AB...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Kowsar hunter equipped with new advanced equipment (General Vahedi)

According to the deputy commander of the Iranian Air Force, the capabilities of the modern-equipped Kowsar fighter, which was unveiled a year ago, are improving day by day.

Deputy Commander of the Iranian Air Force General Hamid Vahedi said:

"A year ago, the Kowsar fighter was unveiled on the occasion of the day of the RII army and we have since witnessed spectacular progress in the mass production process of this type of aircraft. . "

He added: "The entire process of manufacturing Kowsar fighter aircraft is done at the national level and by Iranian aviation specialists. "

"We dare to say that Kowsar fighter jets were made and unveiled with more modern equipment," he said.


Amir Vahedi also said that everyone had witnessed the magnificent demonstrations by Kowsar fighter pilots during the Iranian Army National Day parade. In addition, he promised the completion and launch, in the near future, of the Acrojet team consisting of Kowsar fighter jets.

On August 30, 2018, President Hassan Rohani and the Minister of Defense unveiled the Kowsar fighter jet. It is a modern combat aircraft, responsible for short missions and air support totally manufactured in Iran. It makes Iran one of the few countries in advanced technology to design and build combat aircraft equipped with avionics systems and 6th generation firing systems. The aircraft will be converted into two types of single cabins and two cabins and has the ability to participate in military operations or to be used in advanced pilot training. The national production of the Kowsar fighter saved $ 16.5 million in the overall manufacture of the aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

So, the F-35 might not be so bad after all... The Chinese have copied it and are close to signing a first export contract... with *Iran*. Imagine *Iran* getting its F-35 clone before Belgium gets its real ones. 

*Iran Participated in MAKS 2019, Moscow, Russia*

*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> So, the F-35 might not be so bad after all... The Chinese have copied it and are close to signing a first export contract... with *Iran*. Imagine *Iran* getting its F-35 clone before Belgium gets its real ones.
> 
> *Iran Participated in MAKS 2019, Moscow, Russia*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



Not the best option out there, but still a good plane.
Its price is almost double the Su 30, and its radar is weaker l, but if it comes with technology transfer, it's a good deal.

But the Su 30 should remain the priority for iran to get, and I think that the Su 35 would be a better option than the J 31.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

hussainb72 said:


> Not the best option out there, but still a good plane.
> Its price is almost double the Su 30, and its radar is weaker l, but if it comes with technology transfer, it's a good deal.
> 
> But the Su 30 should remain the priority for iran to get, and I think that the Su 35 would be a better option than the J 31.


if we get any thing from China it will be technology transfer Su 30SMs will not go anywhere

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> if we get any thing from China it will be technology transfer Su 30SMs will not go anywhere



What about the radar and the engines?
Will china give iran a license to manufacture the radar? This can help iran learn some new stuff with aircraft sized radars, and the radar on it is an X band radar, which can be copied and modified and used on the new kowsar as @PeeD suggested.

And which engine will the aircraft be equipped with, the chinese engine or a RD-33 copy? And will iran get a license to produce them?
But if iran is developing it's own turbofan engine and it's a RD-33 copy, iran can use it's own engines on the aircraft, which means that the J 31 would cost less.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

hussainb72 said:


> What about the radar and the engines?
> Will china give iran a license to manufacture the radar? This can help iran learn some new stuff with aircraft sized radars, and the radar on it is an X band radar, which can be copied and modified and used on the new kowsar as @PeeD suggested.
> 
> And which engine will the aircraft be equipped with, the chinese engine or a RD-33 copy? And will iran get a license to produce them?
> But if iran is developing it's own turbofan engine and it's a RD-33 copy, iran can use it's own engines on the aircraft, which means that the J 31 would cost less.



agreed but Iran already said we are working to build radars for fighter jets soooooo, i think Iran will go for Russian be it engines or the plans except for the technology transfer China is well ahead of Russia in stealth materials so there will be cooperation between the two as i do not think Russia would give Iran a lot in technology transfer as they are scared we will build better one's in future if Iran is like this under the sanctions what will Iran level be after all of them gone???

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

hussainb72 said:


> What about the radar and the engines?
> Will china give iran a license to manufacture the radar? This can help iran learn some new stuff with aircraft sized radars, and the radar on it is an X band radar, which can be copied and modified and used on the new kowsar as @PeeD suggested.
> 
> And which engine will the aircraft be equipped with, the chinese engine or a RD-33 copy? And will iran get a license to produce them?
> But if iran is developing it's own turbofan engine and it's a RD-33 copy, iran can use it's own engines on the aircraft, which means that the J 31 would cost less.



Pakistan refuses Chinese engines in JF-17 figther
https://chinadailymail.com/2019/09/01/pakistan-refuses-chinese-engines-in-chinas-jf-17-fighters/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran military hates Chinese Fighter jets.

Anyone who has read past articles would know this.

I doubt Iran will buy Chinese, unless it’s full TOT and manufacturing happens Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Iran military hates Chinese Fighter jets.
> 
> Anyone who has read past articles would know this.
> 
> I doubt Iran will buy Chinese, unless it’s full TOT and manufacturing happens Iran.


actually they are not that bad specially price wise, i have been reading about the j-10's fuel capacity, aerodynamics and other stuff and i should say it's good. the reason Iran wants Russian su-30 is the availability of it's spare parts and the fact that it's 100% Russian and only Russia can refuse to help or sell to us, unlike j-10. 
however i think fc-31 is worth to buy. at least against enemy 4th generation it has an edge.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

it's the mig-35 that really interests and not the S-30


Iran: Air Fleet Optimization with Russian MIG-35s

The military watch magazine's analytical website, which discusses military intelligence on the international scene, announced on Thursday 5 September the possible decision of five countries, including Iran, to buy the new Russian-made MIG-35 fighter.

"Five countries - Iran, India, Belarus and North Korea - would be important and potential customers of the new Russian MIG-35 fighter," reads the report.

The acquisition of the Russian MiG-35 would maximize its potential after several decades.

Modern air-to-air missile fighter equipment, particularly the K-77, and powerful sensors, range, and maneuverability will go a long way towards closing the current gap with other fighters deployed in the region, such as the F-1. -35 Israeli and the Saudi F-15.

The MIG-35 could replace aging American equipment, such as the F-5 and F-4 jets, which have been in use for more than 40 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

I think, that even if Iran and Russia reached some preliminary agreements, no one will divulge their details ahead of time. Any rumors can now appear on the contrary to divert attention from real agreements

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## hussainb72

Mr Iran Eye said:


> it's the mig-35 that really interests and not the S-30
> 
> 
> Iran: Air Fleet Optimization with Russian MIG-35s
> 
> The military watch magazine's analytical website, which discusses military intelligence on the international scene, announced on Thursday 5 September the possible decision of five countries, including Iran, to buy the new Russian-made MIG-35 fighter.
> 
> "Five countries - Iran, India, Belarus and North Korea - would be important and potential customers of the new Russian MIG-35 fighter," reads the report.
> 
> The acquisition of the Russian MiG-35 would maximize its potential after several decades.
> 
> Modern air-to-air missile fighter equipment, particularly the K-77, and powerful sensors, range, and maneuverability will go a long way towards closing the current gap with other fighters deployed in the region, such as the F-1. -35 Israeli and the Saudi F-15.
> 
> The MIG-35 could replace aging American equipment, such as the F-5 and F-4 jets, which have been in use for more than 40 years.



Iran shouldn't get the mig-35 as the plane still has some problems that it has inherited from the mig-29. One of them being that it has a limited range, as it can't carry that much fuel. Another thing is that it can't carry a big payload and its primary role would be interception. 

I think that the Su-30 or the J-31 are better because they can carry a bigger payload and perform better as a multirole fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Mr Iran Eye said:


> it's the mig-35 that really interests and not the S-30
> 
> 
> Iran: Air Fleet Optimization with Russian MIG-35s
> 
> The military watch magazine's analytical website, which discusses military intelligence on the international scene, announced on Thursday 5 September the possible decision of five countries, including Iran, to buy the new Russian-made MIG-35 fighter.
> 
> "Five countries - Iran, India, Belarus and North Korea - would be important and potential customers of the new Russian MIG-35 fighter," reads the report.
> 
> The acquisition of the Russian MiG-35 would maximize its potential after several decades.
> 
> Modern air-to-air missile fighter equipment, particularly the K-77, and powerful sensors, range, and maneuverability will go a long way towards closing the current gap with other fighters deployed in the region, such as the F-1. -35 Israeli and the Saudi F-15.
> 
> The MIG-35 could replace aging American equipment, such as the F-5 and F-4 jets, which have been in use for more than 40 years.


actually i asked from someone with enough knowledge regarding this matter and he said first mig-35 would not add any strategic weight to IRIAF unlike su-30 and also the only foreign operator of it currently is Egypt. on the other hand all of su-30 operators have good relationship with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran Vista Turbine co. maintenance & service Passenger planes Jet engines بازآمدسازي پيشران جت*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> actually they are not that bad specially price wise, i have been reading about the j-10's fuel capacity, aerodynamics and other stuff and i should say it's good. the reason Iran wants Russian su-30 is the availability of it's spare parts and the fact that it's 100% Russian and only Russia can refuse to help or sell to us, unlike j-10.
> however i think fc-31 is worth to buy. at least against enemy 4th generation it has an edge.



What “you” think and what a professional military like Artesh thinks are two different worlds.

Iran’s military does not like Chinese fighters, they have gone there, they have tested them they have researched them. They are not satisfied. 

Several articles have quoted Iranian officials saying as much.

Comparing Sukhoi to a Chinese jet manufacturing is a joke. It’s like comparing Mercedes to Iran Khodro. 

It doesn’t matter what level of “parity” Iran khodro could reach against Mercedes. Mercedes still wins.

So the reason why Iran wants Sukhoi is because they are one of the best and most reliable fighter jet company in the world. They literally have squaushed MiG in Russia and the world.

When you are talking about a potential 30+ billion dollar arms deal, these things matter.

Without major TOT and co-manufacturing. Iran would be stupid to buy Chinese fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> What “you” think and what a professional military like Artesh thinks are two different worlds.
> 
> Iran’s military does not like Chinese fighters, they have gone there, they have tested them they have researched them. They are not satisfied.
> 
> Several articles have quoted Iranian officials saying as much.
> 
> Comparing Sukhoi to a Chinese jet manufacturing is a joke. It’s like comparing Mercedes to Iran Khodro.
> 
> It doesn’t matter what level of “parity” Iran khodro could reach against Mercedes. Mercedes still wins.
> 
> So the reason why Iran wants Sukhoi is because they are one of the best and most reliable fighter jet company in the world. They literally have squaushed MiG in Russia and the world.
> 
> When you are talking about a potential 30+ billion dollar arms deal, these things matter.
> 
> Without major TOT and co-manufacturing. Iran would be stupid to buy Chinese fighter jets.


well I still believe what i said was true, the J-10 is not that bad plane regarding it's aerodynamics, internal fuel capacity and specially the unit price comparing to the euro canards. the only parts that it lags is the avionics and radar.
regarding what IRIAF thinks I'm sure they wouldn't acquire j-10 because as i said they are not interested in mig-35 either (I'm assuming they want a multi role with a long range and serious anti ship capability). i just wanted to clear the fact that J-10 is not that bad people think it is.
and about the fc-31 (with or with out a TOT) again i think it has a edge against 4th generations as they will not be able to detect it while it will.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I really like Mig 35 and there is some falsity here. It's an excellent multirole plane



*Range:* 2,400 km (1,500 mi, 1,300 nmi) [79]
*Combat range:* 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi)
*Ferry range:* 3,100 km (1,900 mi, 1,700 nmi) With 3 external fuel tanks
6,000 km (3,700 mi; 3,200 nmi) with aerial refuelling[80]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-35

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussainb72

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I really like Mig 35 and there is some falsity here. It's an excellent multirole plane
> 
> 
> 
> *Range:* 2,400 km (1,500 mi, 1,300 nmi) [79]
> *Combat range:* 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi)
> *Ferry range:* 3,100 km (1,900 mi, 1,700 nmi) With 3 external fuel tanks
> 6,000 km (3,700 mi; 3,200 nmi) with aerial refuelling[80]
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-35



Just focus on the combat range, the ferry range means nothing when talking about fighter planes when they are used in combat. And this combat range is almost the same as the mig-29, but other planes have longer ranges and are much better for iran because of the size of the panda they have to cover.
And the su-30 can carry a bigger payload that the mig-35, that's why I prefer the su-30.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I really like Mig 35 and there is some falsity here. It's an excellent multirole plane
> 
> 
> 
> *Range:* 2,400 km (1,500 mi, 1,300 nmi) [79]
> *Combat range:* 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi)
> *Ferry range:* 3,100 km (1,900 mi, 1,700 nmi) With 3 external fuel tanks
> 6,000 km (3,700 mi; 3,200 nmi) with aerial refuelling[80]
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-35


F-5 also provide the same ferry range with 3 drop tank but it's combat range is 120 nmi (140 mi; 220 km) with 2x Sidewinders + 5,200 lb (2,400 kg) ordnance, with 5 minutes combat at max power at sea level
that 1000km combat range of F-35 is cheating as that didn't include 20min reserve and 5min combat at full power otherwise it would have been a lot less

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> F-5 also provide the same ferry range with 3 drop tank but it's combat range is 120 nmi (140 mi; 220 km) with 2x Sidewinders + 5,200 lb (2,400 kg) ordnance, with 5 minutes combat at max power at sea level
> that 1000km combat range of F-35 is cheating as that didn't include 20min reserve and 5min combat at full power otherwise it would have been a lot less


the most important part is if you add external fuel tank to mig-35 you will lose useful payload and it means you have to fly more planes to achieve the goal and also risk your plane and pilot life. on the other hand su-30 does not have any external fuel tank because it carries almost 10 tons of fuel inside the structure and has 12 pylons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I really like Mig 35 and there is some falsity here. It's an excellent multirole plane
> 
> 
> 
> *Range:* 2,400 km (1,500 mi, 1,300 nmi) [79]
> *Combat range:* 1,000 km (620 mi, 540 nmi)
> *Ferry range:* 3,100 km (1,900 mi, 1,700 nmi) With 3 external fuel tanks
> 6,000 km (3,700 mi; 3,200 nmi) with aerial refuelling[80]
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-35


Yes,its certainly a huge improvement over the old limited mig29....However,when it comes to value for money the su30 is not much more expensive than the mig35 but its a hell of a lot more machine for the money.Ultimately when it comes down to it the mig35 is a medium weight machine while the su30 is a heavyweight.
Theres a reason why mig hasnt sold very many of these and its a simple one,the su30 just has so much more to offer for the money.Now in irans case the iriaf needs a new fighter with long range and a lot of carrying capacity,it needs something that can augment and ultimately replace the f14 fleet and about the only thing that really fits the bill is the su30,it also has the added advantage of being a genuine multirole machine as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> Yes,its certainly a huge improvement over the old limited mig29....However,when it comes to value for money the su30 is not much more expensive than the mig35 but its a hell of a lot more machine for the money.Ultimately when it comes down to it the mig35 is a medium weight machine while the su30 is a heavyweight.
> Theres a reason why mig hasnt sold very many of these and its a simple one,the su30 just has so much more to offer for the money.Now in irans case the iriaf needs a new fighter with long range and a lot of carrying capacity,it needs something that can augment and ultimately replace the f14 fleet and about the only thing that really fits the bill is the su30,it also has the added advantage of being a genuine multirole machine as well.



However, it must be pointed out that it has not sold much because it has only recently become operational


----------



## TheImmortal

MIG-35 is not worthy.Last I heard, people weren’t sastified and switched to Sukohi. So why should Iran pick it up.

Mig cannot compete with Sukohi anymore. The Mig of today is not the Mig of the Soviet era.

They still haven’t presented a valid 5th gen fighter to Russia after all these years.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173863604778610689
Turkish 5th gen fighter concept


----------



## Deino

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173863604778610689
> Turkish 5th gen fighter concept




Wrong thread??

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Su-30SME >>> 250 

Su-34 >>> 45

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


> Su-30SME >>> 250
> 
> Su-34 >>> 45


Any update or confirmation regarding that??


----------



## Deino

SOHEIL said:


> Su-30SME >>> 250
> 
> Su-34 >>> 45



Oh please ?? Any explanation or just another "I had a too-good-to-be-true-dream" last night. Russia will never break the UN arms embargo, at least not now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Deino said:


> Oh please ?? Any explanation or just another "I had a too-good-to-be-true-dream" last night. Russia will never break the UN arms embargo, at least not now.


That embargo will be lifted in 12-13 months. Russia can start delivery on the first day, you think the deals won't be reached before then?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Shams313 said:


> Any update or confirmation regarding that??



Guessing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Battle of Waterloo said:


> That embargo will be lifted in 12-13 months. Russia can start delivery on the first day, you think the deals won't be reached before then?



I am going to laugh so hard when you guys see Russia reject Iran even when their is no embargo.

To be honest these Eastern Vatanforooshes are becoming more annoying than the Western vatanforooshes.

Russia won’t do **** for Iran. Just watch.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> I am going to laugh so hard when you guys see Russia reject Iran even when their is no embargo.
> 
> To be honest these Eastern Vatanforooshes are becoming more annoying than the Western vatanforooshes.
> 
> Russia won’t do **** for Iran. Just watch.


Good! Relying on any foreign weapons system is suicide! Only way is self sufficiency.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

guys is it true that we have some of ex iraqi mig-25s??
if it's true it would be a great recon and SEAD asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*IRGC Gets 4 Homegrown Choppers*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## ashool

*وزیر دفاع: دستاوردهایی خواهیم داشت که باعث بهت دشمن است*
میر حاتمی گفت: همه چیز برای انجام کارهای بزرگ در حوزه هوایی فراهم است و من مطمئنم در آینده دستاوردهایی را خواهیم داشت.
i wish qaher-313 get ready and we see his flying and some people get bt ttt hart

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

ashool said:


> *وزیر دفاع: دستاوردهایی خواهیم داشت که باعث بهت دشمن است*
> میر حاتمی گفت: همه چیز برای انجام کارهای بزرگ در حوزه هوایی فراهم است و من مطمئنم در آینده دستاوردهایی را خواهیم داشت.
> i wish qaher-313 get ready and we see his flying and some people get bt ttt hart


Doesn't seem like he had anything to announce about it unfortunately.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mithridates said:


> guys is it true that we have some of ex iraqi mig-25s??
> if it's true it would be a great recon and SEAD asset.


One was captured by Iran during the Iran Iraq war and is at a static display somewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashool

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Doesn't seem like he had anything to announce about it unfortunately.


he said we have great achievement 
در حوزه هوایی میتوانیم کارهایی که مد نظرمان هست را بسیار بزرگتر از چیزی که دشمن فکر می‌کند، انجام دهیم. همه چیز برای انجام کارهای بزرگ در حوزه هوایی فراهم است و من مطمنئم که در آینده دستاوردهایی را خواهیم داشت که باعث بهت دشمنان خواهد شد.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

it is mean engine is ready and when engine is solved we have fighter ready to fly

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

ashool said:


> he said we have great achievement
> در حوزه هوایی میتوانیم کارهایی که مد نظرمان هست را بسیار بزرگتر از چیزی که دشمن فکر می‌کند، انجام دهیم. همه چیز برای انجام کارهای بزرگ در حوزه هوایی فراهم است و من مطمنئم که در آینده دستاوردهایی را خواهیم داشت که باعث بهت دشمنان خواهد شد.


I read that, but they say the same generic thing every few weeks...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran defense minister Gen. Hatami: Kowsar_88 training Jet ایران امیر حاتمی: جت را آموزش کوثر ۸۸*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

is not it turbofan?

its look like f35 engine

but smaller

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

tazarv, Iran's first attempts to build a military jet (rest in peace):

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Shams313

Oaw....





They should have shown the cockpit...
That clip also shows they r quit active in design cycle and R&D...

I want to see manufacturing machines they r using...

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## skyshadow

so Yassin is different than Kowsar 88?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar

*to that joker Putin and his Shafq Jet ( Yak-130 ) signed joint project which Russia took the money and violated contract

*





Iran construction processes and Flight test Yasin Training Jet

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## SubWater

congratulations guys

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DoubleYouSee

SubWater said:


> congratulations guys


No diffrences between it and kowthar......


----------



## Deino

ashool said:


> is not it turbofan?
> its look like f35 engine
> but smaller




Pardon, but you guys are sometimes funny!? Only since the surface looks at best a bit like, does not mean the whole thing looks like. IMO this tiny piece of something has simply ZERO similarity to such a monster turbofan like the F-35's F-135.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Deino said:


> Pardon, but you guys are sometimes funny!? Only since the surface looks at best a bit like, does not mean the whole thing looks like. IMO this tiny piece of something has simply ZERO similarity to such a monster turbofan like the F-35's F-135.
> 
> View attachment 584877


With that flame holder at the back I`d say that this is a ramjet not a turbojet/turbofan engine.
Just the sort of thing that you`d want for a supersonic cruise missile,something like a BrahMos or Moskit,which interestingly enough is one of the types that is currently missing from irans arsenal of missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> With that flame holder at the back I`d say that this is a ramjet not a turbojet/turbofan engine.
> Just the sort of thing that you`d want for a supersonic cruise missile,something like a BrahMos or Moskit,which interestingly enough is one of the types that is currently missing from irans arsenal of missiles.



Iran has already announced supersonic CM development.

I would expect it has already reached close to production stage, just hasn’t been unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## un4given.1991

Iranian T-90 turboprop training aircraft is partial visible in this picture :






> نخستین محصول در این عرصه، هواپیمای آموزشی T-90 است که تاکنون به طور رسمی از آن رونمایی نشده است، اما بر اساس کسب اطلاع خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، این هواپیمای آموزشی با ظاهر و مشخصاتی مشابه هواپیمای PC-7 است که در خردادماه سال جاری با حضور وزیر دفاع و فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش، چند فروند از آن تحویل نیروی هوایی ارتش شده است.
> 
> همچنین این هواپیمای آموزشی مجهز به نمایشگرهای دیجیتالی چندمنظوره (MFD) است که از این حیث در زمره پیشرفته‌ترین هواپیماهای آموزشی جهان به شمار می‌رود.
> 
> تاکنون تصویر واضحی از این هواپیمای آموزشی منتشر نشده است، اما در یکی از تصاویر مربوط به بازدید سرلشکر موسوی فرمانده کل ارتش از پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان در تیرماه سال جاری، بخشی از این هواپیما مشخص است.



هواپیمای T-90 در بازدید فرمانده کل ارتش از پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Taher 2000

image of yasin jet engine

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ali_Baba

The Yasin is a very siginificant achievement, and a feather in Irans cap for sure. Its a shame Pakistan has yet to achieve a similar milestone. Yasin is a homegrown greenfield turnkey design, and it flies. Whatever you think of Iran, you have to credit them for that achievement.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Mithridates

guys it's kinda confirmed that we have ramjet technology now. and possibly this image is the same engine that article mentioned. 
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1003878/ایران-به-فناوری-موتور-رم-جت-رسید

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

an stunnishing airplane, the Rockwell HiMAT. lets check some facts about it:
thrust/weight: 0.88 (dry), 1.23 (afterburner). all this with only a GE J-85 engine which we can produce now and 1800 kg of maximum take off weight. while for F-22 T/w ratio is: 0.8 (dry) and 1.08 (afterburner)

sustained turn ratio: the manufacturer stated it's STR is twice of F-16, depending on falcon's version it can achieve 15-21 degrees per second that means HiMAT STR could be somewhere between 30-42 DPSs. the STR (sustained turn ratio) of EF typhoon is 25 DPSs (degrees per second), MIG-29's STR is 24 DPS, F-22 and SU-35 both have 28 DPSs as their STR, F-35's STR is 18 DPS, F/A-18 has the same number as F-35 and Swedish JAS-39 has only 20 DPS. closest rivals of Himat are F-22 and SU-35 which both utilize thrust vectoring control system. if HiMAT utilize similar systems it can increase the STR even further.







HiMAT design featured a modular structure where you can change the overall shape to a delta wing, forward swept wing, variable incident wing and original design.






the structure was build mainly of titanium and aluminum but it used extensive amount of synthetic fibers including glass fiber and carbon fibers, resulting in light overall weight.






so the point of all this is: what if we can make a twin engine variant of this?? it's performance is excellent with owj/J-85 and with future J-90 it's a dream comes true. technical aspect is, if an engine can support 1800 kg so it's obvious that second engine can maintain the above mentioned features for the same weight increase. this means you have 1800 kg room for fit your radar, avionics, cannon, ejection seat, pilot weight, extra fuel and extra weight of enlarged fuselage and second engine.
grifo-346 radar weights 110 kg, k-36 ejection seat weights 103 kg, owj/J-85 maximum weight is 240 kg, a simple IRST weights 20 kg itself and 45 with it's power supply unit and each MFD weights almost 80 kg (with related avionics). this far we spend the 800 kg of original 1800 kg. now we have 1 ton for fuel and weapons and it's completely disappointing. but what if we replace the 9 percent of steel skin with titanium and 30 percent aluminum with aluminum foam?? this way we can save 500 kg more weight. this way we will have a plane with 1800 kg empty weight and 1800 kg fuel capacity. comparing with F-5 i say it worth it to take a shot. and also consider the fact that this numbers are result of calculations based on general electric J-85 performance. with J-90 we can achieve better results and ranges.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> an stunnishing airplane, the Rockwell HiMAT. lets check some facts about it:
> thrust/weight: 0.88 (dry), 1.23 (afterburner). all this with only a GE J-85 engine which we can produce now and 1800 kg of maximum take off weight. while for F-22 T/w ratio is: 0.8 (dry) and 1.08 (afterburner)
> 
> sustained turn ratio: the manufacturer stated it's STR is twice of F-16, depending on falcon's version it can achieve 15-21 degrees per second that means HiMAT STR could be somewhere between 30-42 DPSs. the STR (sustained turn ratio) of EF typhoon is 25 DPSs (degrees per second), MIG-29's STR is 24 DPS, F-22 and SU-35 both have 28 DPSs as their STR, F-35's STR is 18 DPS, F/A-18 has the same number as F-35 and Swedish JAS-39 has only 20 DPS. closest rivals of Himat are F-22 and SU-35 which both utilize thrust vectoring control system. if HiMAT utilize similar systems it can increase the STR even further.
> 
> View attachment 586336
> 
> 
> HiMAT design featured a modular structure where you can change the overall shape to a delta wing, forward swept wing, variable incident wing and original design.
> 
> View attachment 586335
> 
> 
> the structure was build mainly of titanium and aluminum but it used extensive amount of synthetic fibers including glass fiber and carbon fibers, resulting in light overall weight.
> 
> View attachment 586337
> 
> 
> so the point of all this is: what if we can make a twin engine variant of this?? it's performance is excellent with owj/J-85 and with future J-90 it's a dream comes true. technical aspect is, if an engine can support 1800 kg so it's obvious that second engine can maintain the above mentioned features for the same weight increase. this means you have 1800 kg room for fit your radar, avionics, cannon, ejection seat, pilot weight, extra fuel and extra weight of enlarged fuselage and second engine.
> grifo-346 radar weights 110 kg, k-36 ejection seat weights 103 kg, owj/J-85 maximum weight is 240 kg, a simple IRST weights 20 kg itself and 45 with it's power supply unit and each MFD weights almost 80 kg (with related avionics). this far we spend the 800 kg of original 1800 kg. now we have 1 ton for fuel and weapons and it's completely disappointing. but what if we replace the 9 percent of steel skin with titanium and 30 percent aluminum with aluminum foam?? this way we can save 500 kg more weight. this way we will have a plane with 1800 kg empty weight and 1800 kg fuel capacity. comparing with F-5 i say it worth it to take a shot. and also consider the fact that this numbers are result of calculations based on general electric J-85 performance. with J-90 we can achieve better results and ranges.
> View attachment 586341


I wanted to say except for the bottom air intake, some of the configurations are very similar to Q-313.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taher 2000



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## samparis75

Emad2000 said:


> View attachment 586754


Saeqeh 2?


----------



## Taher 2000

samparis75 said:


> Saeqeh 2?


Kosar-1

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Emad2000, post: 11865126, membro: 197100"] [ATTACH = full] 586754 [/ ATTACH] [/ QUOTE]

and single-seater with photoshop

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Taher 2000

if you watch this image carefully, the yasin jet have two pilot.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Emad2000 said:


> View attachment 588327
> 
> 
> View attachment 588328
> View attachment 588329
> 
> if you watch this image carefully, the yasin jet have two pilot.


It's been made to train a pilote,so it's not weird.....it MUST have 2 seat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Deino said:


> Oh please ?? Any explanation or just another "I had a too-good-to-be-true-dream" last night. Russia will never break the UN arms embargo, at least not now.



Is there a UN arms embargo on Iran? I thought there was a unilateral US sanctions against Iran and not a world body - backed arms embargo.

But honestly speaking, the western - backed arms sanctions were a blessing in disguise for Iran. They wouldn't have achieved these huge advancements in many fields had the sanction not been imposed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Is there a UN arms embargo on Iran? I thought there was a unilateral US sanctions against Iran and not a world body - backed arms embargo.


UNSC arms embargo against Iran is scheduled to be lifted in October 2020 pursuant to the JCPOA (unless the Europeans decide to formally kill the JCPOA and reinstate all UNSC sanctions, which could happen in January).


----------



## skyshadow

*Iranian Air Force F4E with new radar*
*




*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *Iranian Air Force F4E with new radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


it's the bayyenat, isn't it??

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> it's the bayyenat, isn't it??


yes it is

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1194653904866349057

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran will seek new fighter jets, tanks as 2020 embargo lifts*
https://norfolkdailynews.com/news/n...cle_046d1d0a-0ba7-11ea-bb51-5f39fb4c5aab.html



yes SU-35 in ...... numbers if Russia honor deal and the paper which they have signed


but remember is big if here we talking about country called Russia with big track record of which everybody knows well

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

yavar said:


> *Iran will seek new fighter jets, tanks as 2020 embargo lifts*
> https://norfolkdailynews.com/news/n...cle_046d1d0a-0ba7-11ea-bb51-5f39fb4c5aab.html
> 
> 
> 
> yes SU-35 in ...... numbers if Russia honor deal and the paper which they have signed
> 
> 
> but remember is big if here we talking about country called Russia with big track record of which everybody knows well


I’m tired of Iran’s constant repeating about Russia being unreliable on one hand and then at the same time showing signs to buy from Russian arm manufacturers.
Don’t do business with them if it’s such a inconvenience.

furthermore it would be a disgusting deal if Iran spent billions in buying hardware that would be sitting ducks the second Russia decides to halt maintenance.

defense can never be bought! Only foolish countries rely on other countries for their protection.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

Sina-1 said:


> I’m tired of Iran’s constant repeating about Russia being buy from Russian arm manufacturers.
> Don’t do business with them if it’s such a inconvenience..


we have no choice when it comes to buying,
whether we buy or we don't
there is no what so ever point to buy Chinese crap or even European. we already have their level of technology,

so if we buy it has to be Russia because of techology, and it is only aircraft the Tank and rest is propeganda

there is no point to buy T50 because we won't be able to make and understand and have infrastructure for it.

it like jumping from high school to uni

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

Sina-1 said:


> omissis......
> 
> defense can never be bought! Only foolish countries rely on other countries for their protection.


Yes, that's true, but to do this you need to have the skills to do what you need at home, or buy projects + the license and make every single bolt


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> we have no choice when it comes to buying,
> whether we buy or we don't
> there is no what so ever point to buy Chinese crap or even European. we already have their level of technology,
> 
> so if we buy it has to be Russia because of techology, and it is only aircraft the Tank and rest is propeganda
> 
> there is no point to buy T50 because we won't be able to make and understand and have infrastructure for it.
> 
> it like jumping from high school to uni



@yavar Its more than enough if Iran is on T-90 technology level (better russian version not export version)
events in Syria has shown that T-90 is a beast on the field and sufficient against NATO

Even with sanctions lifting in 2020, I dont think Iran will get SU-35 technology, pressure from Israel will be to big..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

yavar said:


> whether we buy or we don't
> there is no what so ever point to buy Chinese crap or even European. we already have their level of technology,


It doesn’t matter who we buy from or the quality of the product. The issue I have is the act of buying a finished product. From a logical point of view you can never be truly independent if you are at the mercy of others when it comes to the most essential need of your country -> defense!




sahureka2 said:


> Yes, that's true, but to do this you need to have the skills to do what you need at home, or buy projects + the license and make every single bolt



Iran has the skills! It’s called engineering dadash! However Iran will never catch up if they don’t put in the hours and years to accumulate the experience needed for some key technologies, eg jet engines. That is something that can never be truly bought. Iran has a great base with mapna. Now they should build on that. 

Hopefully Kowsar will be to the aero industry what Shahab3 was for the missile industry and enhanced Hawk was for the air defense industry. Start with baby step and then expand.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> It doesn’t matter who we buy from or the quality of the product. The issue I have is the act of buying a finished product. From a logical point of view you can never be truly independent if you are at the mercy of others when it comes to the most essential need of your country -> defense!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has the skills! It’s called engineering dadash! However Iran will never catch up if they don’t put in the hours and years to accumulate the experience needed for some key technologies, eg jet engines. That is something that can never be truly bought. Iran has a great base with mapna. Now they should build on that.
> 
> Hopefully Kowsar will be to the aero industry what Shahab3 was for the missile industry and enhanced Hawk was for the air defense industry. Start with baby step and then expand.



Kowsar is a joke. Please do not compare it to the Shahab-3.

F-5 clone is still an F-5. Modernizing a peykan still won’t make it able to compete against a Ferrari.

Also Iran needs a fast interceptor since it will be waging a defensive war. F-5 is not an interceptor.

interceptor and light attack fighter are two very different class fighters with different technological requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Kowsar is a joke


Here are some more “jokes” for you! Each one of these eventually either iterated to respected finished products or were a good starting point for what would come decades after. 
Ps. Shahab3 was actually considered a joke with terrible CEP when it first entered.
Pss. There is no way you can judge if the kowsar (the trainer) is a failed project or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> Here are some more “jokes” for you! Each one of these eventually either iterated to respected finished products or were a good starting point for what would come decades after.
> Ps. Shahab3 was actually considered a joke with terrible CEP when it first entered.
> Pss. There is no way you can judge if the kowsar (the trainer) is a failed project or not.
> 
> View attachment 591310
> 
> View attachment 591311
> 
> View attachment 591312



Dude you have no idea what you are talking about.

The first picture you use to support your argument is a special forces underwater transport pod. Has nothing to do with Iran’s submarine development program.

And no one thought S-3 was a joke considering it was based on the HIGHLY successful Soviet era SCUD design. So again what are you talking about?

Go compare how many engineers are in Iran’s missile development field to how many engineers are in Iran’s Air Force aerospace engineering field.

Iran’s missile program receives BILLIONS a year in funding. The ENTIRE Air Force budget is suspected to be less than $500 million dollars a year.

So yes Kowsar is a joke and has been a joke since 1997 when the program started. There’s literally less than 40 “clones” (probably closer to 24) developed in 20 years.

Bavar-373 was created in 10 years, 22 years after the start of the F-5 cloning program Iran is still no where close to being able to field a true 5th gen fighter or even a 4th gen heavy fighter.


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Dude you have no idea what you are talking about.



Drop the fckn douche bag attitude! My point is that if Iran really has billions to waste on foreign defense products then that money is better used in our own defense industry. And yes I am 100% confident that with the right amount support, manpower and management, Iran will kill it in the aero sector as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> Drop the fckn douche bag attitude! My point is that if Iran really has billions to waste on foreign defense products then that money is better used in our own defense industry. And yes I am 100% confident that with the right amount support, manpower and management, Iran will kill it in the aero sector as well.



Again spoken like a true ignorant nationalist.

The cost of research and development for a fighter jet is tens of billions of dollars EXCLUDING procurement cost and maintenance cost.

If you weren’t so ignorant, you would know that Iran’s Air Force is HIGHLY conservative and would rather go with a PROVEN design with DECADES of track record then throw 30 Billion into a project and GET NOTHING. (See India’s Tejas project as example)

Go look at how many fighter projects HAVE FAILED. Japan, India, Israel, even USA/Russia all come to mind. All are way more advanced than Iran in that field and all have way more money than Iran to throw at such projects.

China built its first planes from license and its first engines from license. In this day and age building a modern fighter jet with ZERO FOREIGN PARTS, is simply too cost prohibitive without a massive industrial base.

Iran has NO industrial base set up specifically for a mass production of fighter jets. Again if you bothered to do research you would know this.

So when Iran is faced with a scenario of $10 Billion dollars for a SU-30 license for 150+ aircraft or $10 billion dollars for a project that may never yield a competent fighter jet WHAT DO YOU THINK IT WILL SELECT?

I mean seriously you can’t be this kos maghz. You are expecting way too much out of a $400B dollar economy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Again spoken like a true ignorant nationalist.
> 
> The cost of research and development for a fighter jet is tens of billions of dollars EXCLUDING procurement cost and maintenance cost.
> 
> If you weren’t so ignorant, you would know that Iran’s Air Force is HIGHLY conservative and would rather go with a PROVEN design with DECADES of track record then throw 30 Billion into a project and GET NOTHING. (See India’s Tejas project as example)
> 
> Go look at how many fighter projects HAVE FAILED. Japan, India, Israel, even USA/Russia all come to mind. All are way more advanced than Iran in that field and all have way more money than Iran to throw at such projects.
> 
> China built its first planes from license and its first engines from license. In this day and age building a modern fighter jet with ZERO FOREIGN PARTS, is simply too cost prohibitive without a massive industrial base.
> 
> Iran has NO industrial base set up specifically for a mass production of fighter jets. Again if you bothered to do research you would know this.
> 
> So when Iran is faced with a scenario of $10 Billion dollars for a SU-30 license for 150+ aircraft or $10 billion dollars for a project that may never yield a competent fighter jet WHAT DO YOU THINK IT WILL SELECT?
> 
> I mean seriously you can’t be this kos maghz. You are expecting way too much out of a $400B dollar economy.


Kam avordi baz? Resorting to profanities and gibberish shows how weak minded you are! Go waste someone else’s time!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

@Sina-1 
@TheImmortal 
Both of you want the best for Iran, so keep the topic clean.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> Kam avordi baz? Resorting to profanities and gibberish shows how weak minded you are! Go waste someone else’s time!



Vaghean olaghi. How about you check who started using profanities first.

To ye dahati hasti dadash. I pointed numerous examples in my initial argument and you had no rebuttal rather than “I believe...”. No one cares what you believe. Iranian military doesn’t make their decisions on what you believe. They are a logical organization like any other entity on the planet.

This discussion is over.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Fighter Plane Supports Kowsar is a wonderful advanced technology from Iran and this plane is very far from a joke. And this plane continues to improve as the F-4 SM. I like to have 5 to 7 Kowsar as 1 su-35 for the same price! Tactical side and power, it's better.

And let Iran work their heavy combat planes. I read this week that we will soon have news of the F-313. Let's wait for more ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Fighter Plane Supports Kowsar is a wonderful advanced technology from Iran and this plane is very far from a joke. And this plane continues to improve as the F-4 SM. I like to have 5 to 7 Kowsar as 1 su-35 for the same price! Tactical side and power, it's better.
> 
> And let Iran work their heavy combat planes. I read this week that we will soon have news of the F-313. Let's wait for more ...



Kowsar is a joke because it isn't a new jet but an upgraded one from existing stockpiles. It doesn't even bear a superficial difference from the f-5 variant it's based on. Even previous designs such as Saeqeh have airframe alterations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TruthHurtz said:


> Kowsar is a joke because it isn't a new jet but an upgraded one from existing stockpiles. It doesn't even bear a superficial difference from the f-5 variant it's based on. Even previous designs such as Saeqeh have airframe alterations.




Absolutely wrong !!

The Kowsar is made of a new new cell based on the F5. The Kowsar is a great spectacular success by Iran under high sanction. New cockpit, new radar, new injectable seat, new engine made by Iran and even more

From this great achievement, Iran can improve this aircraft in constant ways. The Iranian authorities have said that for 1 year, there has been spectacular progress on this aircraft.

Yes it remains a modern aircraft of combat support. It will quickly move from generation 4 to 4+ and 4++

For the same price, I like 7 Kowsar better than a Su 35

The real joke are your comments, not the plane itself

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Absolutely wrong !!
> 
> The Kowsar is made of a new new cell based on the F5. The Kowsar is a great spectacular success by Iran under high sanction. New cockpit, new radar, new injectable seat, new engine made by Iran and even more
> 
> From this great achievement, Iran can improve this aircraft in constant ways. The Iranian authorities have said that for 1 year, there has been spectacular progress on this aircraft.
> 
> Yes it remains a modern aircraft of combat support. It will quickly move from generation 4 to 4+ and 4++
> 
> For the same price, I like 7 Kowsar better than a Su 35
> 
> The real joke are your comments, not the plane itself



Its literally just an old rusty f-5 taken from existing stockpiles and refitted with new avionics and some other things. it's not by any means a new aircraft manufactured from the bolt up like you think it is.


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Embargo will be only lifted if Russia or China is willing to veto if the #West tries to renew it. The arms embargo on Somalia was expiring. They just renewed it, with both Russia and China abstaining. So for Iran, it is better to do the work now and make sure either China or Russia or both veto it in the event that the #West tries to renew it.



yavar said:


> *Iran will seek new fighter jets, tanks as 2020 embargo lifts*
> https://norfolkdailynews.com/news/n...cle_046d1d0a-0ba7-11ea-bb51-5f39fb4c5aab.html
> 
> 
> 
> yes SU-35 in ...... numbers if Russia honor deal and the paper which they have signed
> 
> 
> but remember is big if here we talking about country called Russia with big track record of which everybody knows well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TruthHurtz = Troll  

*Iran Starts Producting Fourth-Generation Fighter Jet KOWSAR/

New cell





*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> TruthHurtz = Troll
> 
> *Iran Starts Producting Fourth-Generation Fighter Jet KOWSAR/*
> 
> *New cell*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



It’s funny they did the same “assembly line” propaganda videos with Saeghe I & II. They show you 6-8 planes in assembly line. Yet curious enough less than 12 Saeghe were ever built. 

So how come they showed that many Saeghe in a production video?

Because propaganda. Same applies to Kowsar. No proof more than 1-2 Kowsar even exist to this day.

But please continue telling us how an F-4 will compete with SU-35/F-18/F-35/F-22.

You would take 7 Kowsar over a SU-35? Lol an SU-35 could take out those Kowsar without breaking a sweat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

If you want a good laugh then read this one.Babak taghvaae himself couldnt do better....[LOL!]
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/see-picture-meet-fighter-jets-iran-wishes-it-could-buy-85356

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> It’s funny they did the same “assembly line” propaganda videos with Saeghe I & II. They show you 6-8 planes in assembly line. Yet curious enough less than 12 Saeghe were ever built.
> 
> So how come they showed that many Saeghe in a production video?
> 
> Because propaganda. Same applies to Kowsar. No proof more than 1-2 Kowsar even exist to this day.
> 
> But please continue telling us how an F-4 will compete with SU-35/F-18/F-35/F-22.
> 
> You would take 7 Kowsar over a SU-35? Lol an SU-35 could take out those Kowsar without breaking a sweat.



The problem is, training, readiness and tactics matter. Imagine a case where you have to compete against American pilots with 50-100 Su-30/35 or even better ... Unless Iran has worthy pilots, Iran wouldn't be able to utilize it's cutting edge assets to its full potential. Reality is, given the nature of recent wars, having high sortie rate deliver more bang for the buck. That is why I think we should maintain or produce cheap platforms that are simple to operate, simple to train and can increase sorties vs expensive platforms that require top of the line pilots to compete against USAF and US Navy pilots ... If Iran has money, it should of course invest in those planes and training but that is a much harder goal with current climate.

I think more comprehensive air defence systems plus cheap platforms that can launch advanced air to air missiles in addition to strikes and close air support deliver more bang for the buck given that the probability of air to air combat is lowered in the face of Iranian deterrence whereas attacking or supporting ground troops are a more likely scenario.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

arashkamangir said:


> The problem is, training, readiness and tactics matter. Imagine a case where you have to compete against American pilots with 50-100 Su-30/35 or even better ... Unless Iran has worthy pilots, Iran wouldn't be able to utilize it's cutting edge assets to its full potential. Reality is, given the nature of recent wars, having high sortie rate deliver more bang for the buck. That is why I think we should maintain or produce cheap platforms that are simple to operate, simple to train and can increase sorties vs expensive platforms that require top of the line pilots to compete against USAF and US Navy pilots ... If Iran has money, it should of course invest in those planes and training but that is a much harder goal with current climate.
> 
> I think more comprehensive air defence systems plus cheap platforms that can launch advanced air to air missiles in addition to strikes and close air support deliver more bang for the buck given that the probability of air to air combat is lowered in the face of Iranian deterrence whereas attacking or supporting ground troops are a more likely scenario.


Exactly! Avionics, EW capabilities and a potent weapons platform is much more crucial than mechanical beasts such as su35. All three of which Iran either is fielding or at least taken important steps towards.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Embargo will be only lifted if Russia or China is willing to veto if the #West tries to renew it. The arms embargo on Somalia was expiring. They just renewed it, with both Russia and China abstaining. So for Iran, it is better to do the work now and make sure either China or Russia or both veto it in the event that the #West tries to renew it.



In the case of Iranian sanction, the situation is another. On the one hand, it’s better since acc to resolution 2231 of the UNSC in support of the JCPOA, the arms sanctions should be lifted automatically on October 18, 2020. But on the other hand, in order for the sanctions to be lifted, it's imperative that the JCPOA must survives until the fall of next year. Otherwise, even Russia and China will not be able to block the return of sanctions.
In 2015, the Americans specifically enshrined the tricky condition in the text of the agreement that if one of the sides of the agreement states that JCPOA was violated and raises this question in the UNSC, then all international sanctions will be returned automatically if the UNSCl doesn't vote against return of sanctions. And the United States for sure willn't allow this if it comes to voting in the UNSC since veto power, while the veto power of Russia and China here does not mean anything
Since the United States has withdrawn from the agreement, they themselves cannot raise this issue now, Russia and China of course will not do this, but France and the United Kingdom remain the sides and the United States is now putting pressure on them.

_11. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, within 30 days of receiving a notification by a JCPOA participant State of an issue that the JCPOA participant State believes constitutes significant non-performance of commitments under the JCPOA, it shall vote on a draft resolution to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a) of this resolution, decides further that if, within 10 days of the notification referred to above, no Member of the Security Council has submitted such a draft resolution for a vote, then the President of the Security Council shall submit such a draft resolution and put it to a vote within 30 days of the notification referred to above, and expresses its intention to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue by the Advisory Board established in the JCPOA; 
12. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, if the Security Council does not adopt a resolution under paragraph 11 to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a), then effective midnight Greenwich Mean Time after the thirtieth day after the notification to the Security Council described in paragraph 11, all of the provisions of resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008), and 1929 (2010) that have been terminated pursuant to paragraph 7 (a) shall apply in the same manner as they applied before the adoption of this resolution, and the measures contained in paragraphs 7, 8 and 16 to 20 of this resolution shall be terminated, unless the Security Council decides otherwise;_
http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2231

According to some rumors, Russia and China were against this point, but Rouhani really wanted to make a deal in 2015 ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal said:


> It’s funny they did the same “assembly line” propaganda videos with Saeghe I & II. They show you 6-8 planes in assembly line. Yet curious enough less than 12 Saeghe were ever built.
> 
> So how come they showed that many Saeghe in a production video?
> 
> Because propaganda. Same applies to Kowsar. No proof more than 1-2 Kowsar even exist to this day.
> 
> But please continue telling us how an F-4 will compete with SU-35/F-18/F-35/F-22.
> 
> You would take 7 Kowsar over a SU-35? Lol an SU-35 could take out those Kowsar without breaking a sweat.




What are you sick in your head? You make demagoguery and you would make the worst army general ever known in the world. The Kowsar is indeed a new plane whatever you say. Bravo Iran for this exceptional aircraft despite the heavy penalties

A Su-35 would win on 7 Kowsar in all directions? are you crazy ??? Yes, the Su-35 is a great and very powerful plane but you do not have to take your dreams for reality. It happens to you sometimes in your life to think well and not to use so much demagogy ??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> A Su-35 would win on 7 Kowsar in all directions? are you crazy ??? Yes, the Su-35 is a great and very powerful plane but you do not have to take your dreams for reality. It happens to you sometimes in your life to think well and not to use so much demagogy ??



SU-35 Radar
It is capable of detecting an aerial target up to 400 km (250 mi; 220 nmi) away, and can track thirty airborne targets and engage *eight of them simultaneously*

F-5 Radar 
The F-5E experienced numerous upgrades in its service life, with the most significant one being adopting a new planar array radar, Emerson AN/APQ-159 *with a range of 20 nmi *to replace the original AN/APQ-153.


Apparently you are too naive to understand F-5 is advanced trainer/light attack aircraft and SU-35 is an air superiority fighter. It’s like throwing IFVs at a tank. You can send 5 IFVs at a tank and the tank will still wipe them out cleanly.

A formation of F-5’s is no match for an SU-35 let alone two of them flying together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

As a point of reference, the Gripen (similar weight class as F20, which itself is a derivative of f5), the older PS-05/A Mark 3 which was pulse Doppler radar, had a range of 120km. Mark 5 is an ASEA radar, but I couldn’t find any relevant spec on it. Highly likely that it’s far superior to the mark3.

Even if the range would be worse than super heavy fighters, it still means jack in defensive missions since the effective range is extended greatly by ground based radars through datalink.

EW is key. And I have strong reasons to believe that Iran has great card to play here (blink blink rq170 and global hawk take/shoot downs).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

TruthHurtz said:


> Its literally just an old rusty f-5 taken from existing stockpiles and refitted with new avionics and some other things. it's not by any means a new aircraft manufactured from the bolt up like you think it is.


isnt this the same crap skeptics were saying about Bavar when comparing it to S300? but we know today Bavar is almost as good OR better than the S300. 

It might look like an F5, but unless you believe like many on PDF who say Iranian upgrades are "fake"(which they arent) then you should probably lean on the side of caution and conclude that its better than it looks. 

I will say this, Iranian weapons function much better than they "look".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Avicenna

925boy said:


> isnt this the same crap skeptics were saying about Bavar when comparing it to S300? but we know today Bavar is almost as good OR better than the S300.
> 
> It might look like an F5, but unless you believe like many on PDF who say Iranian upgrades are "fake"(which they arent) then you should probably lean on the side of caution and conclude that its better than it looks.
> 
> I will say this, Iranian weapons function much better than they "look".



We don't really know how Iranian weapons function.

And hopefully we won't have to find out.

But an F-5 is an F-5.

At most with modern avionics and munitions the ceiling would be an F-20. (And even that had a modern turbofan)

Something the US had 40 years ago.

Let's be real here.

I commend Iran for the efforts.

But am also concerned at the massive conventional disparity between it and its antagonists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Navigator said:


> In the case of Iranian sanction, the situation is another. On the one hand, it’s better since acc to resolution 2231 of the UNSC in support of the JCPOA, the arms sanctions should be lifted automatically on October 18, 2020. But on the other hand, in order for the sanctions to be lifted, it's imperative that the JCPOA must survives until the fall of next year. Otherwise, even Russia and China will not be able to block the return of sanctions.
> In 2015, the Americans specifically enshrined the tricky condition in the text of the agreement that if one of the sides of the agreement states that JCPOA was violated and raises this question in the UNSC, then all international sanctions will be returned automatically if the UNSCl doesn't vote against return of sanctions. And the United States for sure willn't allow this if it comes to voting in the UNSC since veto power, while the veto power of Russia and China here does not mean anything
> Since the United States has withdrawn from the agreement, they themselves cannot raise this issue now, Russia and China of course will not do this, but France and the United Kingdom remain the sides and the United States is now putting pressure on them.
> 
> _11. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, within 30 days of receiving a notification by a JCPOA participant State of an issue that the JCPOA participant State believes constitutes significant non-performance of commitments under the JCPOA, it shall vote on a draft resolution to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a) of this resolution, decides further that if, within 10 days of the notification referred to above, no Member of the Security Council has submitted such a draft resolution for a vote, then the President of the Security Council shall submit such a draft resolution and put it to a vote within 30 days of the notification referred to above, and expresses its intention to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue by the Advisory Board established in the JCPOA;
> 12. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, if the Security Council does not adopt a resolution under paragraph 11 to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph 7 (a), then effective midnight Greenwich Mean Time after the thirtieth day after the notification to the Security Council described in paragraph 11, all of the provisions of resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008), and 1929 (2010) that have been terminated pursuant to paragraph 7 (a) shall apply in the same manner as they applied before the adoption of this resolution, and the measures contained in paragraphs 7, 8 and 16 to 20 of this resolution shall be terminated, unless the Security Council decides otherwise;_
> http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2231
> 
> According to some rumors, Russia and China were against this point, but Rouhani really wanted to make a deal in 2015 ..



In short those sanctions can ONLY be removed if the U.S. agrees to their removal and the Trump Administration is NOT going to do that. Simply put Iran's Defense industry today is too independent and that makes it too big of a threat to the U.S. & EU weapons sales. 

U.S. sells it's Humvee's for $200K- +$1 Million USD per unit 
It's Javelin ATGM for $180,000 USD 
It's RQ-7 & Scan Eagles go for anywhere between $800K-$3.5M
MQ-1's from $4M-$20Million USD 

Iran currently may not be able to produce F-22's, F-35's, Apache's and a long list of other more complex US weapons systems but there is still a rather long list of weapon systems that Iran can produce and sell at a fraction of what the American's charge. And that's just what Iran can do today and the greatest threat to them would be what would happen 10-20 years after the sanctions are removed because that opens the door for Iran to get into joint Defense projects with countries like Russia, China, Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan.... and if that happens countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt,... who currently spend over $100 Billion a year on American Weapons will most definitely look across their boarders and weak up and prefer to invest in Asian(continent) defense industries over the overpriced weapons they are currently paying for.... 

Today the Saudi's are outspending Russia and every country in Europe on weapons acquisition and yet they don't have a single Aircraft carrier or a single Helo Carrier or single +1,000 ton Submarine or a single subsonic or supersonic bomber or a single stealth aircraft or a viable space program,.... to show for it. 
If Iran had matched what the Saudis have spent over the past decade alone today Iran's military would have built and would have been equipped with it's own Helo Carrier's, a fleet of Missile Cruisers, at fleet of +1,500 ton diesel subs, would have started a production line of a fighter platform superior to the F-15 with over 200 fighter jets produced so far + plans for a real 5th gen fighter in the works, Iran would have built it's own supersonic bomber,.... hell with that much money Iran today would have even paid for it's own orbital space station.... And I'm not trying to say Iran is somehow special because if it was Turkey or Pakistan or Poland or North Korea or South Africa or Brazil or Sweden..... who had spent that much money on their own defense industry it would have been the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Absolutely wrong !!
> 
> The Kowsar is made of a new new cell based on the F5. The Kowsar is a great spectacular success by Iran under high sanction. New cockpit, new radar, new injectable seat, new engine made by Iran and even more
> 
> From this great achievement, Iran can improve this aircraft in constant ways. The Iranian authorities have said that for 1 year, there has been spectacular progress on this aircraft.
> 
> Yes it remains a modern aircraft of combat support. It will quickly move from generation 4 to 4+ and 4++
> 
> For the same price, I like 7 Kowsar better than a Su 35
> 
> The real joke are your comments, not the plane itself




It can also carry Fakour-90 air-to-air missile, according to the reports that I've seen in the Internet. If it is true, with the data link that can communicate with radars on the ground, Kowsar is a potent fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> As a point of reference, the Gripen (similar weight class as F20, which itself is a derivative of f5), the older PS-05/A Mark 3 which was pulse Doppler radar, had a range of 120km. Mark 5 is an ASEA radar, but I couldn’t find any relevant spec on it. Highly likely that it’s far superior to the mark3.
> 
> Even if the range would be worse than super heavy fighters, it still means jack in defensive missions since the effective range is extended greatly by ground based radars through datalink.
> 
> EW is key. And I have strong reasons to believe that Iran has great card to play here (blink blink rq170 and global hawk take/shoot downs).



F-5 is not ment to be sent to fight air superiority fighters. It will get torched.




925boy said:


> isnt this the same crap skeptics were saying about Bavar when comparing it to S300? but we know today Bavar is almost as good OR better than the S300.
> 
> It might look like an F5, but unless you believe like many on PDF who say Iranian upgrades are "fake"(which they arent) then you should probably lean on the side of caution and conclude that its better than it looks.
> 
> I will say this, Iranian weapons function much better than they "look".



Doubtful that Iran would be able to upgrade the F-5 past what Brazil has done with their F-5’s. So I would consider that the ceiling.



Hassan Al-Somal said:


> It can also carry Fakour-90 air-to-air missile, according to the reports that I've seen in the Internet. If it is true, with the data link that can communicate with radars on the ground, Kowsar is a potent fighter jet.



Kowsar also lights up like a Christmas tree on newer stealth detecting airborne radars that SU-35’s are being equipped with.

100 Iranian SU-35’s flying in home territory (Iran) with S-300, Bacar 373, Khordads, etc backing up will be challenging to any adversary.


----------



## TruthHurtz

925boy said:


> isnt this the same crap skeptics were saying about Bavar when comparing it to S300? but we know today Bavar is almost as good OR better than the S300.
> 
> It might look like an F5, but unless you believe like many on PDF who say Iranian upgrades are "fake"(which they arent) then you should probably lean on the side of caution and conclude that its better than it looks.
> 
> I will say this, Iranian weapons function much better than they "look".



SAM systems and fighter jets are two completely different species. There is no evidence that Kowsar is anything but an upgraded F-5, the "production line" seen in the unveiling video isn't indicative of anything because it doesn't show the process of the actual jet being manufactured from the ground up.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> It can also carry Fakour-90 air-to-air missile, according to the reports that I've seen in the Internet. If it is true, with the data link that can communicate with radars on the ground, Kowsar is a potent fighter jet.




Thank you ! it seems here that people do not know how to think, it's too hard. We can clearly see that they have made a new cell, a new cockpit and more. No country will show every stage of manufacturing in the details because you have to keep some secrets.

This is a very new rumor that people underestimate Iran. And I repeat that for 1 year, there have been spectacular advances on the plane, wait for more ...

And to say that an all-powerful Su-35 is, would be stronger than 7 Kowsar coming from all directions is a total delirium. And it is clear that the Kowsar will be equipped with new missile that will work with are new radar. The Kowsar becomes more vulnerable outside the country but to defend Iran with ground link as you say, the plane becomes powerful. at the tactical level, do not take it to the light

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> F-5 is not ment to be sent to fight air superiority fighters. It will get torched


I did not mention f5 as an alternative. My post was regarding the radar system of jas39 Gripen which is fielded as a sukhoi killer in Sweden. However not alone, but together with multiple air and ground radar assets. Gripen is an interesting concept for Iran because it is the same weight class as f20 (which is based on f5).
Saab makes the case that they can overcome any adversary by relying on numbers. Stealthier craft is for example much easier to detect by illuminating it from various angles. By datalink communication both ground and air assets can then engage the threat even though an individual air asset on paper has an inferior avionics spec.




TheImmortal said:


> Doubtful that Iran would be able to upgrade the F-5 past what Brazil has done with their F-5’s. So I would consider that the ceiling.


Maybe not upgrade. But a derivative design is interesting.


TheImmortal said:


> 100 Iranian SU-35’s flying in home territory (Iran) with S-300, Bacar 373, Khordads, etc backing up will be challenging to any adversary.


I would pick a self produced Gripen/f20 like concept in numbers of 1000-2000 any day of the week. Deadlier and more reliable.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> I did not mention f5 as an alternative. My post was regarding the radar system of jas39 Gripen which is fielded as a sukhoi killer in Sweden. However not alone, but together with multiple air and ground radar assets. Gripen is an interesting concept for Iran because it is the same weight class as f20 (which is based on f5).
> Saab makes the case that they can overcome any adversary by relying on numbers. Stealthier craft is for example much easier to detect by illuminating it from various angles. By datalink communication both ground and air assets can then engage the threat even though an individual air asset on paper has an inferior avionics spec.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe not upgrade. But a derivative design is interesting.
> 
> I would pick a self produced Gripen/f20 like concept in numbers of 1000-2000 any day of the week. Deadlier and more reliable.



If we are going to have a discussion please do not throw nonsense numbers like 1000-2000 aircraft.

Gripen
Range: 2,019 mi
Wingspan: 28′ 0″
Unit cost: 40,000,000–60,000,000 USD
Program cost: US$ 13.54 billion (2006)
Engine type: Turbofan
Manufacturers: Saab AB, BAE Systems

Even if we say fantasy wise, Iran could build this program at 50% cost of SaaB and 50% of cost per aircraft for procurement.....

To equip 1000 planes at cost of 20 million per aircraft (absurdly cheap) that’s 20 billion dollars PLUS r&d of let’s say 7-8 billion puts you at close to 30 Billion dollars without pilot training/maintenance expenses/infrastructure support which will kick it up to 40 billion dollars.

consider that Iran’s ANNUAL military budget is less than 20 billion dollars and the air force budget is less than half a billion.

Never mind that Iran can’t actually build such a plane as the Gripen is TWICE as fast as an F-5. Forget radar, armament, and titanium in this discussion.

Iran is better off securing SU-30 production license and engine license production and building its future planes off of that.


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> If we are going to have a discussion please do not throw nonsense numbers like 1000-2000 aircraft.
> 
> Gripen
> Range: 2,019 mi
> Wingspan: 28′ 0″
> Unit cost: 40,000,000–60,000,000 USD
> Program cost: US$ 13.54 billion (2006)
> Engine type: Turbofan
> Manufacturers: Saab AB, BAE Systems
> 
> Even if we say fantasy wise, Iran could build this program at 50% cost of SaaB and 50% of cost per aircraft for procurement.....
> 
> To equip 1000 planes at cost of 20 million per aircraft (absurdly cheap) that’s 20 billion dollars PLUS r&d of let’s say 7-8 billion puts you at close to 30 Billion dollars without pilot training/maintenance expenses/infrastructure support which will kick it up to 40 billion dollars.
> 
> consider that Iran’s ANNUAL military budget is less than 20 billion dollars and the air force budget is less than half a billion.
> 
> Never mind that Iran can’t actually build such a plane as the Gripen is TWICE as fast as an F-5. Forget radar, armament, and titanium in this discussion.
> 
> Iran is better off securing SU-30 production license and engine license production and building its future planes off of that.



The dreaming and fantasies in this thread have indeed approached absurdity. Lot of numbers being thrown around the no thinking.


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> If we are going to have a discussion please do not throw nonsense numbers like 1000-2000 aircraft.



Nonsense huh? Peace-time Sweden operates 200 gripens. A country with 1/10th of Irans population, in safe-heaven Europe, Sweden operates 200 and you think 1000-2000 is fantasy numbers for Iran with threats from literally all directions. Wow!



TheImmortal said:


> Unit cost: 40,000,000–60,000,000 USD



Hate to break it to you but production cost and price are totally different things. It does not cost SAAB to produce gripens at 60 000 000 USD. Far from it actually.
As a point of reference, the prices for the Patriot system's missiles are between 1-6 million USD EACH.
So do you think that Iranian A2A missiles cost 0.5-3 Million? Far from it.

For a near closed loop economy like Irans, the only thing which truly is expensive is new technology. That is the only thing which needs to be developed (time-consuming) or bought from abroad. However as long as close to 100% of a system/product is developed within the borders of Iran then the production cost is a fraction of what would be in an open market scenario. Low production costs in Iran is well proven by Irans small military budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> @yavar Its more than enough if Iran is on T-90 technology level (better russian version not export version)
> events in Syria has shown that T-90 is a beast on the field and sufficient against NATO
> .


we not buying any Tanks any way



Draco.IMF said:


> @yavar
> Even with sanctions lifting in 2020, I dont think Iran will get SU-35 technology, pressure from Israel will be to big..


we have to try , 
when it comes to engines we have tech of SU-35,
but to get to level design and characteristics, body infrastructure, avionic we have to get your hand on something good to be able to catch up fast

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

Why not go for SU-57? Russia is literally going around offering TOT with no preconditions to potential buyers. Given the push for 5th gen fighters it makes sense that Iran could get ahead of the curve with a stealth fighter rather than a 4th gen stopgap.

Russia seems pretty desperate to see some export orders, so you could use this to your advantage during negotiations to get a larger share of TOT than what is offered upfront. Like manufacturing the air frame by itself and importing critical components from Russia (like engines, avionics etc).

Once that's done you could purchase rights to produce the air frame domestically like China did with their J-11 (SU-27 derivative) and focus all your efforts into developing the critical components you used to import from Russia.

We already know that Iran can make avionics, turbojets and ejection seats so the tech barrier shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.

This is a much better alternative than the ridiculous suggestions of some users. This can be done over the course of a decade at less than 10 billion, not too unreasonable given Iran's defence budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TruthHurtz said:


> Why not go for SU-57? Russia is literally going around offering TOT with no preconditions to potential buyers. Given the push for 5th gen fighters it makes sense that Iran could get ahead of the curve with a stealth fighter rather than a 4th gen stopgap.
> 
> Russia seems pretty desperate to see some export orders, so you could use this to your advantage during negotiations to get a larger share of TOT than what is offered upfront. Like manufacturing the air frame by itself and importing critical components from Russia (like engines, avionics etc).
> 
> Once that's done you could purchase rights to produce the air frame domestically like China did with their J-11 (SU-27 derivative) and focus all your efforts into developing the critical components you used to import from Russia.
> 
> We already know that Iran can make avionics, turbojets and ejection seats so the tech barrier shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.
> 
> This is a much better alternative than the ridiculous suggestions of some users. This can be done over the course of a decade at less than 10 billion, not too unreasonable given Iran's defence budget.


The biggest problem in this regard is the unfortunate level of "reliable unreliability" of the russians,tho the cold war 2.0 that the west initiated over nato expansion does seem to offer some potential possibility of increased reliability vis a vis russia and iran,which sadly makes rouhani and zarifs failure to have the weapons embargo removed back in 2016 all the more tragic.Ultimately tho relying on the russians for after market support and backup ie spares/logistics is potentially still quite risky for iran under the circumstances which is why only complete license production makes any kind of sense and admittedly even that has risks.
I think there are really only a couple of viable options for iran,one would be *complete* license production of the su30 ie airframe,engines,avionics,weapons,every nut,bolt and fastener produced in iran.This would really only be a realistic proposal in the event that iran was going to build a lot of them tho,ie not just a few dozen only to be a replacement for the f14,but as *the new standard multirole aircraft for the airforce* doing the job of pretty much everything else except for the su24s.This would allow for the rationalization of the air fleet and the replacement of the existing mishmash of mig29,f1,f4,f5 etc...
Another option would be an indigenous iranian light fighter program along the lines of the fj17 or F-CK-1,tho this would require a considerable effort in terms of reengineering vital components like the RD-33/94 turbofan engine,the R-77 BVR missile and the indigenous development of systems such as digital fly by wire and PESA/AESA radars.The biggest problem here would be the airforce itself as its previous attempts at upgrades were pretty unsuccessful and it seems to prefer projects that may look or sound superficially impressive such as new build "improved" f5s or an airforce drone program,but the actual results were pretty disappointing.I`ve always wondered if the reasons for this was one of a lack of money and resources,a lack of trained personnel and project managers coupled with a lack of experience when it comes to successfully completing large projects or perhaps a culture of innate conservatism which is just unwilling to take risks and would instead prefer to exaggerate the scale and success of whatever projects are undertaken,such as the "new build F5s" which despite some basic improvements are still basically 1960s era guns and wvr only light fighters.I suspect its very likely a combination of all of the above sadly.
Another option may be to just wait for chinese engine technology to catch up to the west and russia and to seriously consider buying chinese 5th gen machines like the j20 or j31 in another decade or so,tho another option would be 4th gen machines such as the j10 or j11.Sadly tho these days the chinese seem to be taking the same "reliably unreliable" approach as the russians......bit of a pity that,oh well...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*well well well look who is back after couple of years, the same plane that had one RD-33 engine which could indicate Iran still wants to build it which again could indicate Iran has reverse engineered RD-33 engines. *@*TheImmortal*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *well well well look who is back after couple of years, the same plane that had one RD-33 engine which could indicate Iran still wants to build it which again could indicate Iran has reverse engineered RD-33 engines. *@*TheImmortal*



You are assuming too much from a model. It could merely be a prop to demonstrate the Air Force.

Furthermore, that design made sense somewhat about 10-15 Years ago. Today it would be a waste of resources to build given that by the time assembly and critical mass is hit it would be well into 2030’s. Taking a 4th gen design into that time period is not smart. Fighters are developed for 15-20 years of service.

Better Iran focuses on developing a 5th/6th gen design even if it takes longer. Use foreign aircraft purchases as a stop gap and R&D for your eventual next gen domestic design.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> You are assuming too much from a model. It could merely be a prop to demonstrate the Air Force.
> 
> Furthermore, that design made sense somewhat about 10-15 Years ago. Today it would be a waste of resources to build given that by the time assembly and critical mass is hit it would be well into 2030’s. Taking a 4th gen design into that time period is not smart. *Fighters are developed for 15-20 years of service.*
> Better Iran focuses on developing a 5th/6th gen design even if it takes longer. Use foreign aircraft purchases as a stop gap and R&D for your eventual next gen domestic design.



*F-16* Introduction 17 August 1978 - 41 years in service and updated will fly to many air forces for many more years

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> *F-16* Introduction 17 August 1978 - 41 years in service and updated will fly to many air forces for many more years


F16 was not a 2nd generation fighter at the era of 4th generation fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> F16 was not a 2nd generation fighter at the era of 4th generation fighters.


For my information, from what do you deduce that the aircraft in the photo is of 2nd generation, instead it could also be 4 ^ +

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> *F-16* Introduction 17 August 1978 - 41 years in service and updated will fly to many air forces for many more years



Apples and Oranges. The F-16 introduced in 1978 is nothing like the F-16 rolling off the assembly line in 2020.

Also many of those countries continuing to fly the F-16 ALREADY made the investment. Similar to how Iran is planning to fly F-14, F-5, F-4 well into the 2030’s.

Why would Iran invest in a platform that cannot reliably deal with its neighbors?

Iran’s first and foremost need is a air superiority and interceptor fighter jet. That design hardly looks like that. Iran needs at least 100-150 fighters to compliment the F-14’s and defend Iranian assets and skies while the air defense systems back them up.

Iran doesn’t need fighter jets that can fly to and bomb Saudi Arabia or Israel. That’s what Iran’s BM and CM program are for.

So again a Iranian F-16 is not a design for the future. This isn’t the Mowj series you can’t just build one of them and continuing experimenting and making design changes.

US and Europe have luxury of time to upgrade their air forces. War with Russia or China is not likely this upcoming decade. Iran on the other hand could be subjected to war at any time in the next 20 years. So do not look to what your enemies are doing.

Iran is better off acquiring SU-30 license and learning the technologies that Russians deploy on their fighter jets and incorporating that into a future Iranian fighter jet that would enter service 2035-2040.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Apples and Oranges. The F-16 introduced in 1978 is nothing like the F-16 rolling off the assembly line in 2020.
> 
> Also many of those countries continuing to fly the F-16 ALREADY made the investment. Similar to how Iran is planning to fly F-14, F-5, F-4 well into the 2030’s.
> 
> Why would Iran invest in a platform that cannot reliably deal with its neighbors?
> 
> Iran’s first and foremost need is a air superiority and interceptor fighter jet. That design hardly looks like that. Iran needs at least 100-150 fighters to compliment the F-14’s and defend Iranian assets and skies while the air defense systems back them up.
> 
> Iran doesn’t need fighter jets that can fly to and bomb Saudi Arabia or Israel. That’s what Iran’s BM and CM program are for.
> 
> So again a Iranian F-16 is not a design for the future. This isn’t the Mowj series you can’t just build one of them and continuing experimenting and making design changes.
> 
> US and Europe have luxury of time to upgrade their air forces. War with Russia or China is not likely this upcoming decade. Iran on the other hand could be subjected to war at any time in the next 20 years. So do not look to what your enemies are doing.
> 
> Iran is better off acquiring SU-30 license and learning the technologies that Russians deploy on their fighter jets and incorporating that into a future Iranian fighter jet that would enter service 2035-2040.



I did not write that Iran has to do an F-16, F-16 was just an example to show that an aircraft can still very well carry out its mission even if the original project has more than 40 years is enough to continue in the research and in the implementation of the new techniques and electronics found in new production aircraft and upgrade those already built.
Then the aircraft that appeared was not an F-16, so I was wondering how it can be said that it is 2nd generation, it could also be 4 ^ +

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> I did not write that Iran has to do an F-16, F-16 was just an example to show that an aircraft can still very well carry out its mission even if the original project has more than 40 years is enough to continue in the research and in the implementation of the new techniques and electronics found in new production aircraft and upgrade those already built.
> Then the aircraft that appeared was not an F-16, so I was wondering how it can be said that it is 2nd generation, it could also be 4 ^ +



There is no way that is a 2nd generation fighter jet. As 2nd generation fighter jets are are considered 1950’s era aircraft. Anything at the minimum Iran produces would be considered 4th generation.

SU-35 in comparison is considered 4++ gen.

Nonetheless that design is already dated, I been seeing that fighter jet for last 12-15 years. It pre-dates Qaher. It would have been a logical step after Shafagh project way back when.

Iran is limited as it has to rely on 3rd gen Engines. So RD-33 is not powerful enough for a interceptor, but still better than a J-85. Iran needs something in the AL-31 class to build a true air defense fighter.

Ideally a heavy fighter that can house a long range low RCS detecting radar equipped with advanced EW/ECW suite alongside long range A2A missiles.

Anything else like close air support and bombers can wait for when Iran has a much stronger economy. But the air defense fighter is critical in protecting the skies and the AD systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> It’s funny they did the same “assembly line” propaganda videos with Saeghe I & II. They show you 6-8 planes in assembly line. Yet curious enough less than 12 Saeghe were ever built.
> 
> So how come they showed that many Saeghe in a production video?
> 
> Because propaganda. Same applies to Kowsar. No proof more than 1-2 Kowsar even exist to this day.
> 
> But please continue telling us how an F-4 will compete with SU-35/F-18/F-35/F-22.
> 
> You would take 7 Kowsar over a SU-35? Lol an SU-35 could take out those Kowsar without breaking a sweat.


excuse me general 4 stars its night and dark i cant see your stars who the hell are you .are you cammander in chif of a irif to show you what they build?



Avicenna said:


> We don't really know how Iranian weapons function.
> 
> And hopefully we won't have to find out.
> 
> But an F-5 is an F-5.
> 
> At most with modern avionics and munitions the ceiling would be an F-20. (And even that had a modern turbofan)
> 
> Something the US had 40 years ago.
> 
> Let's be real here.
> 
> I commend Iran for the efforts.
> 
> But am also concerned at the massive conventional disparity between it and its antagonists.


lol why u writing comment usa knows f5 is best fighter in dog fight and disigen f20 and f18 0f f5 platform why you speak when you dont know any thing .u2 is from 50 years ago f18 and f16 40 years ago even f15 go read some info and then come speak

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

ashool said:


> excuse me general 4 stars its night and dark i cant see your stars who the hell are you .are you cammander in chif of a irif to show you what they build?
> 
> 
> *lol why u writing comment usa knows f5 is best fighter in dog fight and disigen f20 and f18 0f f5 platform why you speak when you dont know any thing .u2 is from 50 years ago f18 and f16 40 years ago even f15 go read some info and then come speak*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Avicenna

TruthHurtz said:


>



LOL!

Couldn't have replied better!


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

TheImmortal said:


> 100 Iranian SU-35’s flying in home territory (Iran) with S-300, Bacar 373, Khordads, etc backing up will be challenging to any adversary.



But who would guarantee in the event of a conflict that Iran finds itself in, that the computer systems of those SU-35 planes would continuously function without original makers or others sabotaging them? An indigenous Iranian fighter jet, while it is far less stealthy and less potent than the SU-35 today, at least alleviates that worry from Iranian leaders.

During the Gulf War II in 2003, for some reasons that haven't been explained, Iraqi SAMs stopped working in the 3rd week of the invasion. Who caused them to disfunction? I haven't seen any reports; however, sabotages and EW perhaps were clearly the reasons. 

Indigenous weapons have advantages that more advanced, foreign-made weapons can't guarantee you in the event of a conflict: reliability.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> But who would guarantee in the event of a conflict that Iran finds itself in, that the computer systems of those SU-35 planes would continuously function without original makers or others sabotaging them? An indigenous Iranian fighter jet, while it is far less stealthy and less potent than the SU-35 today, at least alleviates that worry from Iranian leaders.
> 
> During the Gulf War II in 2003, for some reasons that haven't been explained, Iraqi SAMs stopped working in the 3rd week of the invasion. Who caused them to disfunction? I haven't seen any reports; however, sabotages and EW perhaps were clearly the reasons.
> 
> Indigenous weapons have advantages that more advanced, foreign-made weapons can't guarantee you in the event of a conflict: reliability.



By that logic Iran’s S-300 system, Iran’s Tor-M1s, Iran’s Russian radars, Iran’s Russian systems, Iran’s Russian fighter jets are all compromised.

Give me a break, Saddam's AD system was garbage and antiquated. His AD system wouldn’t have been able to stop hundreds of cruise missile attacks.

Show me evidence that Russia compromised Saddam’s air defense systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> Give me a break, Saddam's AD system was garbage and antiquated. His AD system wouldn’t have been able to stop hundreds of cruise missile attacks.


Give me a break...And I am a DS veteran.

Back then, other than US, no one, and that includes the USSR and China, wanted to test Iraq's military. What made Iraq's air defense system failed was less technology than it was because of philosophy, organizational, and operations. In other words, it failed because it copied the Soviet/China system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> Give me a break...And I am a DS veteran.
> 
> Back then, other than US, no one, and that includes the USSR and China, wanted to test Iraq's military. What made Iraq's air defense system failed was less technology than it was because of philosophy, organizational, and operations. In other words, it failed because it copied the Soviet/China system.


It failed because for years, US was managing them, it failed because Iraqis were using NATO codes for communications.
Iraqis AD were defeated by their own foolishness to trust uncle sam.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

gambit said:


> Give me a break...And I am a DS veteran.
> 
> Back then, other than US, no one, and that includes the USSR and China, wanted to test Iraq's military. What made Iraq's air defense system failed was less technology than it was because of philosophy, organizational, and operations. In other words, it failed because it copied the Soviet/China system.



Their systems were on average 30 years older technology than what the U.S had, that was the key reason why they only shot down around 100 NATO aircraft before collapsing.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> Give me a break...And I am a DS veteran.
> 
> Back then, other than US, no one, and that includes the USSR and China, wanted to test Iraq's military. What made Iraq's air defense system failed was less technology than it was because of philosophy, organizational, and operations. In other words, it failed because it copied the Soviet/China system.





PeeD said:


> Their systems were on average 30 years older technology than what the U.S had, that was the key reason why they only shot down around 100 NATO aircraft before collapsing.



Irrelevant points by both of you as the poster was referring to Iraqi Invasion 2003 not Gulf War I.

By 2003, Iraqi military was decimated and decrepit. Russia didn’t compromise Iraqi AD systems and US to this day hasn’t found a way to hack and compromise Russian AD systems.


----------



## jack 86000

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1203204758367948800

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Could someone please give us a translation on the figures for this weapon.


----------



## Messerschmitt

Sineva said:


> Could someone please give us a translation on the figures for this weapon.


600 km/h max speed
27 kg max weight
30 km range
170 cm length
13 cm diameter
18,5 kilo thrust 
TV guidance
7 kg warhead
3,5 liters fuel weight

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> 600 km/h max speed
> 27 kg max weight
> 30 km range
> 170 cm length
> 13 cm diameter
> 18,5 kilo thrust
> TV guidance
> 7 kg warhead
> 3,5 liters fuel weight


Many thanks.

It looks like it could be powered by this little jet engine.




http://www.behotec.de/xtcommerce/index.php?page=product&info=98

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

guys is it only me or you want to see this missile:





loaded on this plane too:






or as a replacement for old sejjils:

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

For those on this board naive enough to believe Iran can build 5th gen fighter all by itself.

This is mock-ups Sukhoi was doing in 1980’s on 5th gen design


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206446730126012416

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> For those on this board naive enough to believe Iran can build 5th gen fighter all by itself.
> 
> This is mock-ups Sukhoi was doing in 1980’s on 5th gen design
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206446730126012416


WOW!!
An early look at what would ultimately become the Su-47.Most interestingly the biggest difference is that it used the same sort of flat 2D thrust vectoring nozzles as the F-22.The most obvious thing from both the Su-47 and Mig 1.42/1.44 designs is that the soviet conception of a 5th gen fighter was very different to their american counterparts,indeed when one compares these to the later russian 5th gen Pak-Fa design the difference is stark.
As for the 313,well I`m going to reserve judgement at the moment.The fact that a prototype was actually built and began taxi tests does give it a certain degree of credibility,tho the fact that nothing further has been heard since then does make one wonder.Ultimately at the present time there are still too many unknowns about the project and its ultimate goals,that for me at least its difficult to form a clear opinion either way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> guys is it only me or you want to see this missile:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loaded on this plane too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or as a replacement for old sejjils:
> 
> View attachment 593399


You mean something a bit like this......




The us Seekbat,tho interestingly this was supposedly based on the AGM-78 which was an arm,not the RIM66 sam.




Iran did play around with the rim66 back in the 80s[?] both as a land based sam and an a2a weapon,but without much success evidently.
However I`m inclined to agree with Amir that the kamin/mersad sam is actually hawk air frame based not rim66 based,so it would be longer and slightly lighter than the rim66.


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> For those on this board naive enough to believe Iran can build 5th gen fighter all by itself.
> 
> This is mock-ups Sukhoi was doing in 1980’s on 5th gen design
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206446730126012416


You mean:

For those on this board naive enough to believe Iran can't build 5th gen fighter all by itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> For those on this board naive enough to believe Iran can build 5th gen fighter all by itself.
> 
> This is mock-ups Sukhoi was doing in 1980’s on 5th gen design
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206446730126012416



Our @TheImmortal, always doubtful and negative 

who in the right mind could believed 10 years ago that Iran will develop something as powerful as the S-400 (russain version) on its own? not even myself...so lets wait a bit

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> You mean something a bit like this......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The us Seekbat,tho interestingly this was supposedly based on the AGM-78 which was an arm,not the RIM66 sam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran did play around with the rim66 back in the 80s[?] both as a land based sam and an a2a weapon,but without much success evidently.
> However I`m inclined to agree with Amir that the kamin/mersad sam is actually hawk air frame based not rim66 based,so it would be longer and slightly lighter than the rim66.


well i also believe that the shalamcheh-2 missile is the same rocket engine of MIM-23 with mersad/upgraded mersad avionics and new controlling surfaces. the interesting part is Iranian modified AIM-23 sejjil had almost 55 km range while our hawks had models had 35 km range, considering that MOD promised that new shalamcheh missile will have 60 km range by doing some math air launched shalamcheh will have 90 km range. (it's not scientifically true but if you compare air launched vs ground launched missile you will notice they have twice the max range compared to SAM versions, in sum air launched missiles have more range i maybe wrong about shalamcheh range but surely it will be more than 70 k).
also about the RIM-66 missiles, i red an article not long time ago. they said Iran first employed those missiles to it's phantom fleet to hunt down Iraqi mig-25s but it was not successful but the interesting part is according to that article IRIAF tested those RIMs as anti ship missiles and in couple of tests it did hit it's target.


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> well i also believe that the shalamcheh-2 missile is the same rocket engine of MIM-23 with mersad/upgraded mersad avionics and new controlling surfaces. the interesting part is Iranian modified AIM-23 sejjil had almost 55 km range while our hawks had models had 35 km range, considering that MOD promised that new shalamcheh missile will have 60 km range by doing some math air launched shalamcheh will have 90 km range. (it's not scientifically true but if you compare air launched vs ground launched missile you will notice they have twice the max range compared to SAM versions, in sum air launched missiles have more range i maybe wrong about shalamcheh range but surely it will be more than 70 k).
> also about the RIM-66 missiles, i red an article not long time ago. they said Iran first employed those missiles to it's phantom fleet to hunt down Iraqi mig-25s but it was not successful but the interesting part is according to that article IRIAF tested those RIMs as anti ship missiles and in couple of tests it did hit it's target.




as far as i know you are right any missile that is airborne before the launch will have 50%-70% more range then the ground base launch of the same missile and the reason is the altitude and the speed of the platform that is firing the missile you see is you fire a shalamcheh-2 missile from ground it has to get its speed tooo well lets say from 0 to mach 3 and it has to reach the altitude of 20 KM but the air launched version of the same shalamcheh-2 missile dose not have to start from these numbers you see an air launched one will start at the speed and the altitude of the fighter jet that is carrying it so if the fighter jet is going mach 1 then the missile will have a top speed of mach 4 and if the jet altitude is 10 KM then the missile top altitude will get to 30 KM and not 20 KM so when the ground launch missile is well dead at 0 speed and falling from the sky the air launched version will still have the speed of mach 1 and the altitude of 10 km to go, so it will have more range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> well i also believe that the shalamcheh-2 missile is the same rocket engine of MIM-23 with mersad/upgraded mersad avionics and new controlling surfaces. the interesting part is Iranian modified AIM-23 sejjil had almost 55 km range while our hawks had models had 35 km range, considering that MOD promised that new shalamcheh missile will have 60 km range by doing some math air launched shalamcheh will have 90 km range. (it's not scientifically true but if you compare air launched vs ground launched missile you will notice they have twice the max range compared to SAM versions, in sum air launched missiles have more range i maybe wrong about shalamcheh range but surely it will be more than 70 k).
> also about the RIM-66 missiles, i red an article not long time ago. they said Iran first employed those missiles to it's phantom fleet to hunt down Iraqi mig-25s but it was not successful but the interesting part is according to that article IRIAF tested those RIMs as anti ship missiles and in couple of tests it did hit it's target.


not strange , in praying mantis it was RIM-66 and AGM-123 that sank our ships , the harpoons on both side missed their target . and that's one of the reason why we never tried to reverse engineer or do anything with harpoon, even in Morvarid operation we didn't have good experience from Harpoon

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raghfarm007

Harpoon is crap, but the Americans also had codes to make them inopperable... just like the French Exocets in Falklands.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Mithridates said:


> well i also believe that the shalamcheh-2 missile is the same rocket engine of MIM-23 with mersad/upgraded mersad avionics and new controlling surfaces. the interesting part is Iranian modified AIM-23 sejjil had almost 55 km range while our hawks had models had 35 km range, considering that MOD promised that new shalamcheh missile will have 60 km range by doing some math air launched shalamcheh will have 90 km range. (it's not scientifically true but if you compare air launched vs ground launched missile you will notice they have twice the max range compared to SAM versions, in sum air launched missiles have more range i maybe wrong about shalamcheh range but surely it will be more than 70 k).
> also about the RIM-66 missiles, i red an article not long time ago. they said Iran first employed those missiles to it's phantom fleet to hunt down Iraqi mig-25s but it was not successful but the interesting part is according to that article IRIAF tested those RIMs as anti ship missiles and in couple of tests it did hit it's target.


But there is no point in investing on new shalamche as we have talash air defence......


----------



## Mithridates

DoubleYouSee said:


> But there is no point in investing on new shalamche as we have talash air defence......


well i'm not an expert but mersad has a radar specified for targeting low flying objects. and about shalamcheh-2 missile, you know i am kinda into it. if it's range can be some thing near 90 km (as an AIM) with the same 75 kg warhead, i would like to see an f-18 dodging it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Raghfarm007 said:


> Harpoon is crap, but the Americans also had codes to make them inopperable... just like the French Exocets in Falklands.


the problem is that even their own harpoon could not hit a crippled ship.


----------



## skyshadow

*Secretary of Defense: We have plans in the aerospace that will surprise the enemy*
*


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...وزه-هوایی-داریم-که-دشمن-را-شگفت-زده-خواهد-کرد
*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Air Force Examines F-4 Development Plan

For his part, the Air Force Commander of the Iranian Army has reviewed the development plan for the F-4 aircraft.

Brigadier General Aziz Nassirzadeh visited, Thursday, December 19, the different parts of an air base, in Tchabahar, in the south of Iran, to check the operational availability, the availability of air combat and the development plan of the F-4 aircraft.

Brigadier General Aziz Nassirzadeh, accompanied by a group of Army Air Force commanders, also visited flight brigades and the aircraft maintenance sector.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Tabriz airbase EOD team disarming an Iraq war era OFAB bomb found in Piranshahr, western azarbaijan province.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

An Iranian MiG fighter jet crashed in the northwest of the country on Wednesday, killing both pilots, the semi-official ILNA news agency reported.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-killing-two-pilots-agency-idUSKBN1YT0C4?il=0

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## viewer

RIP


----------



## Mithridates

viewer said:


> RIP


there is no official report whether he is dead or not.


sahureka2 said:


> An Iranian MiG fighter jet crashed in the northwest of the country on Wednesday, killing both pilots, the semi-official ILNA news agency reported.
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-killing-two-pilots-agency-idUSKBN1YT0C4?il=0


there were not two pilots, it was in FCF procedure after being overhauled. so even if the plane was UB version it had one pilot.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Mithridates said:


> there is no official report whether he is dead or not.
> 
> there were not two pilots, it was in FCF procedure after being overhauled. so even if the plane was UB version it had one pilot.



Hopefully the pilot is safe

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

sahureka2 said:


> Hopefully the pilot is safe


it's getting dark here i hope the rescue team find him soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*در تمام پایگاه‌های هوایی ارتش، تابلویی وجود داره که روی آن تعداد روزهایی که از آخرین سانحه گذشته هر روز درج میشه. تابلو آخرین سانحه پایگاه شهید فکوری تبریز امروز بعد از ۶۳۷۸ روز (۱۷ سال) صفر شد!'*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

skyshadow said:


> *Secretary of Defense: We have plans in the aerospace that will surprise the enemy
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/09/28/2163667/وزیر-دفاع-برنامه-هایی-در-حوزه-هوایی-داریم-که-دشمن-را-شگفت-زده-خواهد-کرد*



Qaher - 313 is in production phase or mass produced?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Qaher - 313 is in production phase or mass produced?



it could be who knows

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Qaher - 313 is in production phase or mass produced?



They created a completely new plane based on F-5. This one has blue wheels instead of black like on the Kowsar


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

TheImmortal said:


> They created a completely new plane based on F-5. This one has blue wheels instead of black like on the Kowsar



It isn't F-5 and you know it. The avionics, radars, digital display, engines, the missiles it cast carry, plus additional features that we don't know of are all different and much more advanced.

Can you share the plane that you referred to here?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> It isn't F-5 and you know it. The avionics, radars, digital display, engines, the missiles it cast carry, plus additional features that we don't know of are all different and much more advanced.
> 
> Can you share the plane that you referred to here?



The fighters frame is still an F-5 clone. So unless Iran develop technology that can defy the laws of physics. That plane will fly exactly like an F-5.

F-5’s struggled against MiG-21 during the Iran-Iraq war. But somehow with a slightly upgraded radar and avionics they will take on 4th gen fighters and 5th gen? 

fat chance, keep wishing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> That plane will fly exactly like an F-5.


Of course it doesn’t have the same flying characteristics! It’s has canards and anhedral wings. Furthermore the shape of the entire aircraft fuselage is different? Please elaborate how it “will fly *exactly* like f5”?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Sina-1 said:


> Of course it doesn’t have the same flying characteristics! It’s has canards and anhedral wings. Furthermore the shape of the entire aircraft fuselage is different? Please elaborate how it “will fly *exactly* like f5”?


I'm seeing this man's jumps in logic more and more. He assumes that since the body is the same, everything else is the same, which is incorrect. Many other things can be changed in something as complex as a fighter jet and chose to simply ignore those things exist.

His logic also doesnt work for Iranian T-72 and Karrar MBT though. We know/believe karrar is an upgraded T-72, so why doesnt he go ahead and say karrar is the same function as T-72 since it has the same body? smfh.


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> I'm seeing this man's jumps in logic more and more. He assumes that since the body is the same, everything else is the same, which is incorrect. Many other things can be changed in something as complex as a fighter jet and chose to simply ignore those things exist.
> 
> His logic also doesnt work for Iranian T-72 and Karrar MBT though. We know/believe karrar is an upgraded T-72, so why doesnt he go ahead and say karrar is the same function as T-72 since it has the same body? smfh.



So you just agreed that the body is the same?

Thanks for making my point.

Radar doesn’t change how the aircraft flies. A HUDs up display doesn’t change how fast the aircraft turns. So again thanks for making my point.

F-5 is at best an advanced trainer with some CAS capability. It’s radar even if upgraded will be very weak compared to the radars of F-22, SU-35, and other interceptors. The fact is the nose can only fit a small radar. Go look at other countries’ upgraded F-5’s radar stats they are not impressive. But I’m sure you will counter Iran created a revolutionary new micro radar that can detect low RCS objects.


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> So you just agreed that the body is the same?
> 
> Thanks for making my point.






















the body is not ”the same”. Widely different shape, configuration, number and placement of control surfaces -> widely different flying characteristics. Anybody saying otherwise needs prove otherwise.



TheImmortal said:


> That plane will fly exactly like an F-5.



Simply put: No it will not!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> View attachment 595743
> 
> View attachment 595748
> 
> 
> View attachment 595745
> 
> View attachment 595747
> 
> 
> the body is not ”the same”. Widely different shape, configuration, number and placement of control surfaces -> widely different flying characteristics. Anybody saying otherwise needs prove otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> Simply put: No it will not!



Why are you showing me pictures of F-313 when the conversation is about Kowsar?

Can the mods start requiring an IQ test on this board?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Why are you showing me pictures of F-313 when the conversation is about Kowsar?
> 
> Can the mods start requiring an IQ test on this board?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> View attachment 595757



Yes, my post was they were going to unveil another F-5 based clone like Kowsar and give it another name. The joke was this time they would change the wheel color to pass it off as a new design.

We have had Azarkarsh, Saeghe I, Saeghe II, Kowsar. 

So no where did I mention F-313. That project isn’t even worth talking about at this point since there is no news on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Yes, my post was they were going to unveil another F-5 based clone like Kowsar and give it another name. The joke was this time they would change the wheel color to pass it off as a new design.
> 
> We have had Azarkarsh, Saeghe I, Saeghe II, Kowsar.
> 
> So no where did I mention F-313. That project isn’t even worth talking about at this point since there is no news on it.



For Iran continuing a viable upgrade program on the F-5 until you can come up with something worth mass producing is most definitely a logical course of action. 

Also, Simorgh, Azarakhsh, Saegheh I/II & Kowsar regardless of all the deferent names are and have always been one project and that has always been an attempt to upgrade the F-5 into a capable fighter that could hold it's own that would be worth mass producing. And the upgreades in the Kowsar were a huge leap in Iran's domestic fighter program. 

as for the Q-313 your right other than being a nice tech demonstrator, at least in it's current configuration it's really not a platform with real world capabilities that would be worth taking into production.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> For Iran continuing a viable upgrade program on the F-5 until you can come up with something worth mass producing is most definitely a logical course of action.
> 
> Also, Simorgh, Azarakhsh, Saegheh I/II & Kowsar regardless of all the deferent names are and have always been one project and that has always been an attempt to upgrade the F-5 into a capable fighter that could hold it's own that would be worth mass producing. And the upgreades in the Kowsar were a huge leap in Iran's domestic fighter program.
> 
> as for the Q-313 your right other than being a nice tech demonstrator, at least in it's current configuration it's really not a platform with real world capabilities that would be worth taking into production.



Take a Paykan and add all the bells and whistles you want to. It doesn’t change the fact that at the end of the day it is a Paykan engineered over half a century ago.

Last I checked “advanced trainer” isn’t the pressing need of the Iranian airforce.

BTW F-5 during the Iran-Iraq war had equal deaths and kills against MiG-21s. So even back then it wasn’t that formidable of a fighter. This F-5 project is just a glorified science project.

Iran will likely still pick up Yak-130s if they are available.

Until Iran acquires modern fighters and license to build them, they aren’t going to jump from F-5 to even F-18 just from tinkering around with an F-5 design.

New fighters are needed to learn and reverse engineer.

F-5 will never be able to hold its own with a less than <80KM radar when your opponent is flying with >250+KM radars!


----------



## HAIDER

TheImmortal said:


> Take a Paykan and add all the bells and whistles you want to. It doesn’t change the fact that at the end of the day it is a Paykan engineered over half a century ago.
> 
> Last I checked “advanced trainer” isn’t the pressing need of the Iranian airforce.
> 
> BTW F-5 during the Iran-Iraq war had equal deaths and kills against MiG-21s. So even back then it wasn’t that formidable of a fighter. This F-5 project is just a glorified science project.
> 
> Iran will likely still pick up Yak-130s if they are available.
> 
> Until Iran acquires modern fighters and license to build them, they aren’t going to jump from F-5 to even F-18 just from tinkering around with an F-5 design.
> 
> New fighters are needed to learn and reverse engineer.
> 
> F-5 will never be able to hold its own with a less than <80KM radar when your opponent is flying with >250+KM radars!


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> So you just agreed that the body is the same?
> 
> Thanks for making my point.
> 
> Radar doesn’t change how the aircraft flies. A HUDs up display doesn’t change how fast the aircraft turns. So again thanks for making my point.
> 
> F-5 is at best an advanced trainer with some CAS capability. It’s radar even if upgraded will be very weak compared to the radars of F-22, SU-35, and other interceptors. The fact is the nose can only fit a small radar. Go look at other countries’ upgraded F-5’s radar stats they are not impressive. But I’m sure you will counter Iran created a revolutionary new micro radar that can detect low RCS objects.


The f5 upgrades that have been done internationally have greatly increased the all over capability of the f5,effectively they have taken a 3rd gen wvr guns and ir missile equipped light fighter and given it late 4/4.5th gen bvr capabilities,which frankly is a huge upgrade in what it could do.
Light fighters of whatever gen are always going to be at a disadvantage against heavier twin engine machines regardless of whether they are 5th gen like the f22 or 4.5 like the su35,however that doesnt mean that they are useless,far from it in fact.With the appropriate upgrades the f5 fleet could operate bvr a2a missiles like the r77 and modern wvr missiles like the r73,in addition with datalinks they would be able to make use of longer ranged radar data from the f14 and air defence radars,not to mention that many of these upgrades could also be applied across the board to the rest of irans fighter fleet which would be a literally massive force multiplier.However this would require either the indigenous development of an appropriate radar or more likely the reengineering of an existing model in irans possession like the grifo.It would also require the indigenous development of a bvr missile or acquisition of the r77/aa12 bvr missile from either the syrians or venezuelans for reengineering.So it would be a lot of work but certainly well within irans capabilities,sadly tho it seems that either the iriaf just isnt interested or perhaps is just not capable of running a program/programs of this scale.
Lastly I cant help but wonder at what the irgc-af could do if they were given some f5s to upgrade......




thailand f5 upgrades




Brazilian F-5EM with bvr derby and wvr python 4

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

lol guys you would be surprised if you know that IRIAF pilots prefer super tucano over f-5. the Northrop F-5E is a great design to be honest but nowadays it can't match any multi role fighter. there are three main factors that you have to provide in aerial warfare to achieve triumph over opponent force. 1) your planes should be better than enemy 2) your pilots should be better trained than enemy 3)you should restrict accidental events, anything should be calculated.
now with f-5 (in an aerial fight) you can only emphasis of two later factors and hope that they work for you. against a well trained air force like USAF or USNAF you can only rely of third factor (barely to be honest). you might say F-5 is a formidable dog fighter it locked on f-22 in training which is true, but the point is enemy know that too and they were the one who designed it at the first place. so they can simply don't enter a risky dogfight with that and that restricts the f-5 only to a point defense role.
now on the other hand S tucano can do all of these with less cost (f-5 fuel weight is 2 tons while tucano's is merely ~500 kg). f-5 can deliver 2.5 tons of bombs up to 250 km, tucano can do it with 1500 kg of munitions and up to 500 km. so with tucano at least you can fly with less cost and provide your ground forces better air support.
also i heard an insane thing about tucano that it's turn rate is 120 degrees per second (which is almost three times more than f-22 rate and probably is not true). but in general propeller powered planes have better turn rate than jet powered ones, like WWII era p-81 which has a turn rate equal to mig-29. in return they are low flying. my point is they have better turn rate than f-5 if you wonder.
so the description of why Iran is obsessed with f-5 in a very simple example is: all of you guys can make a chair but if you really try to make it you can notice that it was harder than what you assumed because you needed wood, nails, hammer, saw... which you didn't had before and you obtained in the processes of making chair. you didn't know and couldn't imagine that you need those stuff for making chair. the important part is when you can make chair, with that tools and experience you can make table, wooden frames and other furniture too.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Take a Paykan and add all the bells and whistles you want to. It doesn’t change the fact that at the end of the day it is a Paykan engineered over half a century ago.
> 
> Last I checked “advanced trainer” isn’t the pressing need of the Iranian airforce.
> 
> BTW F-5 during the Iran-Iraq war had equal deaths and kills against MiG-21s. So even back then it wasn’t that formidable of a fighter. This F-5 project is just a glorified science project.
> 
> Iran will likely still pick up Yak-130s if they are available.
> 
> Until Iran acquires modern fighters and license to build them, they aren’t going to jump from F-5 to even F-18 just from tinkering around with an F-5 design.
> 
> New fighters are needed to learn and reverse engineer.
> 
> F-5 will never be able to hold its own with a less than <80KM radar when your opponent is flying with >250+KM radars!




Wrong! Adding a digital internal nav sensor fused into a modern weapon system backed by a phased array SAR radar increases the Kowsar's real world capabilities far beyond anything standard F-5E could even dream of so despite the fact that it's same platform in terms of actual capabilities that matter the differences are like night and day so all the bells and whistles you speak of most definitely matter. 

And you like mentioning the fact that the platform is a 60's era platform as if the F-15, Su-30's,.... were designed yesterday! F-15's are also a 70's era platform and yet today they remain one of the deadliest fighters in the sky's all because of all the bells and whistles that were later added. 

As for the Yak-130 it would be absurd for Iran to chose that Aircraft over the Kosar especially after the very hard lessons Iran learned during the Iran-Iraq war. Especially with the Kowsar Iran now has a domestic platform that it can design various PGM's around based on our own needs and specs and that is far more valuable to Iran than any imported fighter let alone a low end CAS fighter like the Yak-130.

As for the range of the radar the F-5E's radars had a Max range of ~40km where as the Kowsar new radars at the very least have a range of 150km and F-5's or Kowsar's are CAS fighters that will mainly be operating within ~250km of their home base so they will be fed target data from the ground for better situational awareness and that will more than make up for their lack of range (comparatively) so depending on the weapons they will be carrying ~100km targeting capability would be more than sufficient to hold their own over Iranian airspace. And actually the main problems Kowsar radars will be facing compared to an AESA equipped fighter is NOT range but rather speed of detection. *Today it's a matter of how fast you can go radar on, search, detect, lock, fire & hit and go radar off again...* And that is again another vital upgrade Iran will have to address....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Wrong! Adding a digital internal nav sensor fused into a modern weapon system backed by a phased array SAR radar increases the Kowsar's real world capabilities far beyond anything standard F-5E could even dream of so despite the fact that it's same platform in terms of actual capabilities that matter the differences are like night and day so all the bells and whistles you speak of most definitely matter.
> 
> And you like mentioning the fact that the platform is a 60's era platform as if the F-15, Su-30's,.... were designed yesterday! F-15's are also a 70's era platform and yet today they remain one of the deadliest fighters in the sky's all because of all the bells and whistles that were later added.
> 
> As for the Yak-130 it would be absurd for Iran to chose that Aircraft over the Kosar especially after the very hard lessons Iran learned during the Iran-Iraq war. Especially with the Kowsar Iran now has a domestic platform that it can design various PGM's around based on our own needs and specs and that is far more valuable to Iran than any imported fighter let alone a low end CAS fighter like the Yak-130.
> 
> As for the range of the radar the F-5E's radars had a Max range of ~40km where as the Kowsar new radars at the very least have a range of 150km and F-5's or Kowsar's are CAS fighters that will mainly be operating within ~250km of their home base so they will be fed target data from the ground for better situational awareness and that will more than make up for their lack of range (comparatively) so depending on the weapons they will be carrying ~100km targeting capability would be more than sufficient to hold their own over Iranian airspace. And actually the main problems Kowsar radars will be facing compared to an AESA equipped fighter is NOT range but rather speed of detection. *Today it's a matter of how fast you can go radar on, search, detect, lock, fire & hit and go radar off again...* And that is again another vital upgrade Iran will have to address....



Show me proof that Kowsar carries a 150KM Radar that is able to detect low RCS objects. Otherwise you are spreading propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal is totally drifting towards the end of the year. I wonder if he follows the advice of his doctor for his medication? And Vevak exaggerates once again !!


I read that the radar of the Kowar version 2 place would be 90KM and the version with a pilot would be 110 KM. I ask PeeD to confirm this.

The Kowsar is a great result to defend the country and they will be supported by the F14. Mig 29 and I am convinced that the Kowsar will have tracking functions on the ground to help its performance. Outside Iran, he may be more vulnerable, but inside the country. it will be very effective. Iran is a mountainous country and this can be used for tactical operations. Authorities have said that in one year there have been major improvements to the plane so let's wait for the follow up.

I believe Iran a more powerful fighter plane to keep it secret and in operation. I believe that the Shafaq fighter plane project is more successful than we think. Iran has always said that it keeps a few weapons never secret from the public and I believe that in wartime we will have a big surprise

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

These planes aren't real ffs

kowsar, azarkash, saeqeh, simorgh its all the same damn plane with cosmetic modifications


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I believe Iran a more powerful fighter plane to keep it secret and in operation. I believe that the Shafaq fighter plane project is more successful than we think. Iran has always said that it keeps a few weapons never secret from the public and I believe that in wartime we will have a big surprise



Yes, I am sure Iran is hiding 100 super duper fighter jets in your moms basement. I mean how delusional must you be to believe that Iran is hiding “powerful” fighter jets.

Maybe you can hide a handful of top secret experimental aircraft like the US did with the SR-71 Blackbird, U-2, and B-2. But you aren’t going to magically hide 50+ fighter jets.



TruthHurtz said:


> These planes aren't real ffs
> 
> kowsar, azarkash, saeqeh, simorgh its all the same damn plane with cosmetic modifications



No point in arguing with fanboys. They do this after unveiling since the first Saeqeh. They thought Iran would build 50+ Saeqeh and they built less than 24 (maybe as low as 6). Then they said Saeqeh II is the game changer than still not a significant amount was built. Now they say Kowsar....yes Kowsar is the real game changer. 5 years from now they will say Kowsar II or Super Kowsar I is the game changer. Never ending cycle. 

Yet IRIAF still has shown no interest in this other than a modernization program.

The truth is Iran has plenty of F-5s and will try to keep them flying along with other planes well into the 2030’s. So that’s all these programs are doing is keeping the skeleton airforce supplied till the military decides to actually focus on airforce.

There have been attempts (F-35 engine blueprint stealing attempt) that demonstrate there is a desire within military leadership for high grade military aircraft tech. 

So I wouldn’t classify Iranian airforce R&D as completely dormant. But it’s not a national priority. Until something in the AL-21 class is built Iran will not be able to build heavy fighters. RD-33 would allow some medium sized fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Show me proof that Kowsar carries a 150KM Radar that is able to detect low RCS objects. Otherwise you are spreading propaganda.


A Gripen variant from a couple of generations back had a range of 120km. And that was without AESA tech!
Furthermore, low rcs is best detected when illuminated from multiple directions. Hence, it’s more effective with smaller, cheaper and multiple sources than big, expensive and few!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> A Gripen variant from a couple of generations back had a range of 120km. And that was without AESA tech!
> Furthermore, low rcs is best detected when illuminated from multiple directions. Hence, it’s more effective with smaller, cheaper and multiple sources than big, expensive and few!



You are comparing two different planes. Post proof of the radar that is all I am asking. Don’t tell me a Gripen variant carries X radar. Has nothing to do with Kowsar or the Iranian military industry.

So I will have to answer my own question:

The radar being used by Kowsar MAY be a EL/M-2032 which has been used in F-4 and F-5s and that would put the range at 100KM with a max range of 150KM, if indeed Iran is able to clone the radar.

Since the only image of the radar was the actual planar array on display and not actually hooked up to the plane, it is possibly still in development. If anyone has pictures of the radar actually in the nose cone I’d like to see it.


----------



## sha ah

TruthHurtz said:


> These planes aren't real ffs
> 
> kowsar, azarkash, saeqeh, simorgh its all the same damn plane with cosmetic modifications



I've already posted this in the Iranian Navy section but here we go again.

The basic design of the Kowsar is based on the F-5, however the Kowsar jets are manufactured in Iran from the ground up, with 80% or more of the parts being manufactured in Iran. The Kowsar is actually the culmination of a decades long program which began with maintenance and repairs and then led to optimizing, modernizing F-5's and then finally reverse engineering and building Iranian versions of the F-5. Here is the proof.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> I've already posted this in the Iranian Navy section but here we go again.
> 
> The basic design of the Kowsar is based on the F-5, however the Kowsar jets are manufactured in Iran from the ground up, with 80% or more of the parts being manufactured in Iran. The Kowsar is actually the culmination of a decades long program which began with maintenance and repairs and then led to optimizing, modernizing F-5's and then finally reverse engineering and building Iranian versions of the F-5. Here is the proof.



Until Iran builds More than 12 of them, it’s nothing more than a sideshow program.

I’ll wait in 2 years and see that there isn’t many Kowsar built. Then we will see what your excuse is.


----------



## TruthHurtz

sha ah said:


> I've already posted this in the Iranian Navy section but here we go again.
> 
> The basic design of the Kowsar is based on the F-5, however the Kowsar jets are manufactured in Iran from the ground up, with 80% or more of the parts being manufactured in Iran. The Kowsar is actually the culmination of a decades long program which began with maintenance and repairs and then led to optimizing, modernizing F-5's and then finally reverse engineering and building Iranian versions of the F-5. Here is the proof.



The basic design is exactly that of the F-5 with no design variations. It's an upgraded F-5 taken from pre-existing stocks, nothing more. Stop deluding yourself.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Until Iran builds More than 12 of them, it’s nothing more than a sideshow program.
> 
> I’ll wait in 2 years and see that there isn’t many Kowsar built. Then we will see what your excuse is.



well in that regard Army said they are opening production line not just in Tehran but in 2 other cities Isfahan and i cannot remember the second one they did not open production lines for any other jets

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> well in that regard Army said they are opening production line not just in Tehran but in 2 other cities Isfahan and i cannot remember the second one they did not open production lines for any other jets



Why would Army being opening up production lines for Airforce?

Also Iran says a lot of things. They have also been saying they are going to launch 6 satellites “soon” for last 4 years.

Let’s wait and see if any actually get built. My guess is not many get upgraded and we see another version of F-5 within next 2 years with more improvements to convince airforce to go ahead.

Still waiting to see the first Karrars roll off the assembly line.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Why would Army being opening up production lines for Airforce?
> 
> Also Iran says a lot of things. They have also been saying they are going to launch 6 satellites “soon” for last 4 years.
> 
> Let’s wait and see if any actually get built. My guess is not many get upgraded and we see another version of F-5 within next 2 years with more improvements to convince airforce to go ahead.
> 
> Still waiting to see the first Karrars roll off the assembly line.



you are right i personally can not keep up with their messed up time lines that they sometimes say

air force said we are going to see 3 Kowsar in next 3-4 month


*"Production process of Kowsar fighter in Tehran and Isfahan is proceeding with great speed."




https://www.khabaronline.ir/news/1334877/آخرین-خبرها-از-خط-تولید-جنگنده-کوثر-توسط-نیروی-هوایی-ارتش*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistan Space Agency

Are there any videos Kowser displaying a quick take off, turn rate, loop, rolls, etc?

I've only ever seen this "fighter" flying in straight line... slowly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Pakistan Space Agency said:


> Are there any videos Kowser displaying a quick take off, turn rate, loop, rolls, etc?
> 
> I've only ever seen this "fighter" flying in straight line... slowly.




in these videos you can see quick take off and turn rate and loop and one roll

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> you are right i personally can not keep up with their messed up time lines that they sometimes say
> 
> air force said we are going to see 3 Kowsar in next 3-4 month
> 
> 
> *"Production process of Kowsar fighter in Tehran and Isfahan is proceeding with great speed."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.khabaronline.ir/news/1334877/آخرین-خبرها-از-خط-تولید-جنگنده-کوثر-توسط-نیروی-هوایی-ارتش*



Yeah I think 6-12 Kowsar as a test bed similar to previous iterations. If the engines are “truly” Iranian made from scratch (owj) and not refurbished then Iran would likely only build a small number of Kowsar to observe how the owj engines perform. 

This would prevent a expensive catastrophe, if it turns out the owj engines have a bottleneck or quality control problem.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

when I look at the digital cockpit of Kowsar I get so impressed . This is because I fully understand what has been involved into making each subsystem of this cockpit. I have worked in Western military aviation all my 40 year career and if you count the number of Electronic subsystems in this aircraft you realize what a mammoth task it has been to design,build,test and airworthy qualify each of them. Now keep in mind that a Western engineer sitting in a nice desk with all the data/spc sheets of every component he wishes to use (and he has at least 6 different choices for each let say microprocessor he intends to select). Compare that to the Iranian engineer sitting on his desk and having to shoehorn his design based on what he can get in the sanctioned market of Iran and he is lucky to get a translated let say Russian or chinese data sheet. Putting all the subsystem together making them work together (integration) is another story...this is all assuming that the aircraft itself is already done all the CAD drawings in place and of course the engine and landing gear and ejection seat also done (which is a whole new story all by themselves)... now the only sin that Iranians have done is that the physical external shape of this aircraft is similar to a f**king F5 and because of that this whole project is poof!....I can understand if an idiot western military observer will try to focus on this single sin and playdown this fantastic achivement ... but for all those Iranian in this forum please do not be fooled by what you read or see in the western media ...have faith and pride in what has been done (no country has ever been able to do such a feast under these condition...the closest I can think of is north korea and they are not even close)

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Aspen

aryobarzan said:


> when I look at the digital cockpit of Kowsar I get so impressed . This is because I fully understand what has been involved into making each subsystem of this cockpit. I have worked in Western military aviation all my 40 year career and if you count the number of Electronic subsystems in this aircraft you realize what a mammoth task it has been to design,build,test and airworthy qualify each of them. Now keep in mind that a Western engineer sitting in a nice desk with all the data/spc sheets of every component he wishes to use (and he has at least 6 different choices for each let say microprocessor he intends to select). Compare that to the Iranian engineer sitting on his desk and having to shoehorn his design based on what he can get in the sanctioned market of Iran and he is lucky to get a translated let say Russian or chinese data sheet. Putting all the subsystem together making them work together (integration) is another story...this is all assuming that the aircraft itself is already done all the CAD drawings in place and of course the engine and landing gear and ejection seat also done (which is a whole new story all by themselves)... now the only sin that Iranians have done is that the physical external shape of this aircraft is similar to a f**king F5 and because of that this whole project is poof!....I can understand if an idiot western military observer will try to focus on this single sin and playdown this fantastic achivement ... but for all those Iranian in this forum please do not be fooled by what you read or see in the western media ...have faith and pride in what has been done (no country has ever been able to do such a feast under these condition...the closest I can think of is north korea and they are not even close)



I couldn't have said it better myself. Most people think that just because two planes look similar from the outside, they must also be similar from the inside. But this is completely wrong. A lot of planes look similar from the outside but what differentiates similar looking planes from the outside is a completely different set of avionics and powerplant on the inside. Iran's F-5's and F-14's look similar to American planes from the outside but they need regular maintenance to fly. Since they are flying today, it is a pretty safe conclusion that Iran has replaced US components with its own versions and does its own maintenance to keep them up to the original performance spec. The internals of a US F-14 and an Iranian F-14 would look very different today despite looking similar from the outside since many US parts would be replaced with Iranian components in the last few decades as Iran got better at reverse engineering. In Iran's case, without any kind of manual or guide, upgrading avionics or replacing the engines require them to know exactly how those avionics and engines are designed and function in order to do it on a level of technical self sufficiency. Trying to figure out how avionics or engines work while the plane is powered down on the ground is an insanely complicated, time consuming, and difficult process that few countries can do, and that's WITH a manual. It is easier to understand how the flight systems and engines work inflight but you can't open a plane's assembly while it's flying so you have to learn it all from scratch while the avionics are basically in ground mode and the engine is at low power which makes it harder to replicate flying conditions to build correct components. Iran managed to do it all from scratch without a manual and under sanctions. This is a lot more impressive and difficult than most people realize, especially given the circumstances of Iran's ability to acquire parts, and how few countries in the world can actually manage to understand the inner workings of a plane. Designing a plane from the outside is the easy part, you just look at it. It's the inside that's the hard part which is kept a secret and that's what Iran has mastered, so the technical feat Iran has managed is nothing short of remarkable whichever way you look at it. Iran didn't become a STEM powerhouse overnight, things like learning how avionics and propulsion work and then building their own systems is what got them there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sha ah

TruthHurtz said:


> The basic design is exactly that of the F-5 with no design variations. It's an upgraded F-5 taken from pre-existing stocks, nothing more. Stop deluding yourself.



How is it upgraded from pre-existing stock ? Did u even bother watching the video ? Do those jets being built look like pre-existing stock ? LOL hilarious how badly in denial you are. You see it with your own eyes but you're still in denial.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TopCat

aryobarzan said:


> when I look at the digital cockpit of Kowsar I get so impressed . This is because I fully understand what has been involved into making each subsystem of this cockpit. I have worked in Western military aviation all my 40 year career and if you count the number of Electronic subsystems in this aircraft you realize what a mammoth task it has been to design,build,test and airworthy qualify each of them. Now keep in mind that a Western engineer sitting in a nice desk with all the data/spc sheets of every component he wishes to use (and he has at least 6 different choices for each let say microprocessor he intends to select). Compare that to the Iranian engineer sitting on his desk and having to shoehorn his design based on what he can get in the sanctioned market of Iran and he is lucky to get a translated let say Russian or chinese data sheet. Putting all the subsystem together making them work together (integration) is another story...this is all assuming that the aircraft itself is already done all the CAD drawings in place and of course the engine and landing gear and ejection seat also done (which is a whole new story all by themselves)... now the only sin that Iranians have done is that the physical external shape of this aircraft is similar to a f**king F5 and because of that this whole project is poof!....I can understand if an idiot western military observer will try to focus on this single sin and playdown this fantastic achivement ... but for all those Iranian in this forum please do not be fooled by what you read or see in the western media ...have faith and pride in what has been done (no country has ever been able to do such a feast under these condition...the closest I can think of is north korea and they are not even close)


is it flying?


----------



## Mithridates

TopCat said:


> is it flying?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TopCat

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 596766


This look like the old fighter that you had for a long long time.


----------



## Mithridates

TopCat said:


> This look like the old fighter that you had for a long long time.


it is based on f-5F.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

sha ah said:


> How is it upgraded from pre-existing stock ? Did u even bother watching the video ? Do those jets being built look like pre-existing stock ? LOL hilarious how badly in denial you are. You see it with your own eyes but you're still in denial.



Yes I'm in denial that your fake fighter jet isn't built from the ground up like fanboys say it is despite every professional source and analysis saying the complete opposite.



Mithridates said:


> it is based on f-5F.



It is an f-5f.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TruthHurtz said:


> Yes I'm in denial that your fake fighter jet isn't built from the ground up like fanboys say it is despite every professional source and analysis saying the complete opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> It is an f-5f.


My recommendation is that you change your name from "TruthHurtz" to *"ButtHurtz"*. And get yourself a real flag and some real medication...Medication bought over internet do not do the job..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Only thing that is impressive (if true) is the Kowsar carrying the equivalent of EL/M-2032 radar with 150KM max range.

Though I have yet to see that new radar inside the nose cone just on a display.

Everything else is mostly superficial, (change from analog to digital cockpit doesn’t change much). Weapons are the same, targeting pods the same, RCS is the same.

So biggest change is the radar.


----------



## sahureka2

TruthHurtz said:


> It is an f-5f.


It is TU-16




And it is H-6H




The Chinese aircraft is a copy of the Russian one, but honestly, can you say that even the latest H6-H version made by the Chinese can be simply indicated for performance and electronic components, only and only a Tubolev TU-16?
The external appearance may be similar, but what is important is what is underneath the skin, it is these components that can change and expand the capabilities of an aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> Yes I'm in denial that your fake fighter jet isn't built from the ground up like fanboys say it is despite every professional source and analysis saying the complete opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> It is an f-5f.


maybe you will be satisfied when you see production line, remember that same analysis said Iran Air defense are fake then we shoot down MQ-4C at high altitude with 3th Khordad system then they said 3th Khordad system is the most advance air defense that Iran has despite of that we have that system for a decade now so do not listen to there word as they will change it as soon as they see it in action just like our air defense systems

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> maybe you will be satisfied when you see production line, remember that same analysis said Iran Air defense are fake then we shoot down MQ-4C at high altitude with 3th Khordad system then they said 3th Khordad system is the most advance air defense that Iran has despite of that we have that system for a decade now so do not listen to there word as they will change it as soon as they see it in action just like our air defense systems



So they disassembled an F-5, put yellow primer on it and suddenly it's a brand spanking new aircraft.

Try again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

TruthHurtz said:


> So they disassembled an F-5, put yellow primer on it and suddenly it's a brand spanking new aircraft.
> 
> Try again.



excuse me, but do you have evidence of what you are saying, or is it your guess?

Thanks in advance for your reply

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Rukarl

TruthHurtz said:


> So they disassembled an F-5, put yellow primer on it and suddenly it's a brand spanking new aircraft.
> 
> Try again.



did you ever saw the old F5`s of Iran ? LoL





this is a kowsar during flight







the kowsar has new avionics ,ballistic computers and smart mobile mapping systems.

Many of our pilots have flown in it and say its an huge improvement to flying those original F5`s.

Our Pilots are patriots, if it was a "fake project" it would be public 1 week later.

For first steps into producing own jets this project was good.

F5 is a capable platform and with this new upgrades its an good addition for Irans Skies.

you have to start somewhere. people expecting Iran to build F22 like planes from 0 are delusional to the core.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TruthHurtz

Rukarl said:


> did you ever saw the old F5`s of Iran ? LoL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a kowsar during flight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the kowsar has new avionics ,ballistic computers and smart mobile mapping systems.
> 
> Many of our pilots have flown in it and say its an huge improvement to flying those original F5`s.
> 
> Our Pilots are patriots, if it was a "fake project" it would be public 1 week later.
> 
> For first steps into producing own jets this project was good.
> 
> F5 is a capable platform and with this new upgrades its an good addition for Irans Skies.
> 
> you have to start somewhere. people expecting Iran to build F22 like planes from 0 are delusional to the core.



I never said they didn't upgrade the plane. Just that it's not a new plane.



sahureka2 said:


> excuse me, but do you have evidence of what you are saying, or is it your guess?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your reply



Show me the composites and alloys being cut and formed for the Kowsar instead of that "assembly line" photo with the yellow primer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Show me proof that Kowsar carries a 150KM Radar that is able to detect low RCS objects. Otherwise you are spreading propaganda.



LOL! You think 150KM is a lot??? I was being conservative! MY GOD! Kowsar's radar is Iran's version of the ELM-2032 so again worst case scenario is that Iran's version has a Air to Air detection of ~85NM or 157km ( Instead of 120NM) So that's me being extremely conservative! If anything Iran's version is an upgraded version of ELM-2032 with more enhanced capabilities....

https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2032


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> LOL! You think 150KM is a lot??? I was being conservative! MY GOD! Kowsar's radar is Iran's version of the ELM-2032 so again worst case scenario is that Iran's version has a Air to Air detection of ~85NM or 157km ( Instead of 120NM) So that's me being extremely conservative! If anything Iran's version is an upgraded version of ELM-2032 with more enhanced capabilities....
> 
> https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2032
> 
> View attachment 596901



You are like 3 days too late. I already found and discussed the radar since you couldn’t find it in time.

150KM is not much compared to the radars of F-22 and SU-35. But they are much much bigger aircraft with bigger nose cones to house more capable radars.

F-5 can’t do much with its low speed for interception against supercruise jets like F-35 and F-22. Furthermore, the later carries a radar that can detect the F-5 from much further away. And I don’t think the M-2032 was designed to detect low RCS objects either way. IRBIS-E (SU-35 latest Radar) can supposedly detect low RCS objects at 90KM. The radar before that can detect air targets with RCS = 3 m² at a distance of 350 km.

Anyway you cut it, the F-5 is not designed for what you want it to do. Once detected or locked on, the F-5 will have to drop tanks to gain speed and then the range drops even further.

So again F-5 is not designed for air defense role. It’s a light CAS fighter at best to be used on insurgent groups and keep the F-5 in service a little bit longer.


----------



## Sina-1

TruthHurtz said:


> Show me the composites and alloys being cut


First of. Alloys used in original f5 are not difficult to produce from a metallurgy point of view. Secondly when it comes to ribs and spars of the aircraft you basically need a planar laser cutters and cnc milling machines. It’s not that hard. From the CAD models they generate, it is more or less an easy process to get production code (CAM/G-code etc).
For the body of the aircraft, either mill out a negative for the composites or use press tools to form sheet metals. Again, the main source is easily generated in CAD.

producing the actual airframe is not the hard part, at least not for an f5 derivative.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Sina-1 said:


> First of. Alloys used in original f5 are not difficult to produce from a metallurgy point of view. Secondly when it comes to robs and spars of the aircraft you basically need a planar laser cutters and cnc milling machines. It’s not that hard. From the CAD models they generate, it is more or less an easy process to get production code (CAM/G-code etc).
> For the body of the aircraft, either mill out a negative for the composites or use press tools to form sheet metals. Again, the main source is easily generated in CAD.
> 
> producing the actual airframe is not the hard part, at least not for an f5 derivative.



I don't doubt Iran's ability to be able to produce an F-5 airframe. Azarkash and Saeqeh had noticeable airframe modifications which rules out the idea of them being upgraded from existing stocks. Kowsar has no differences, even superficial from the F-5F it's based on, which has lead every professional analyst to determine it's just an upgrade and not a new aircraft like fanboys think.


----------



## Sina-1

TruthHurtz said:


> I don't doubt Iran's ability to be able to produce an F-5 airframe. Azarkash and Saeqeh had noticeable airframe modifications which rules out the idea of them being upgraded from existing stocks. Kowsar has no differences, even superficial from the F-5F it's based on, which has lead every professional analyst to determine it's just an upgrade and not a new aircraft like fanboys think.


I think the question comes down to how capable this Kowsar actually is. If Iran would be able to arm it with a meteor like missiles with range between 150-200 km, then IMO the Kowsar becomes a force multiplier. IF that is the case then they will/are producing a large number of it. IF not, then it is most likely another iteration for “learning” how to design and build fighter jets, just like its predecessors.


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> I don't doubt Iran's ability to be able to produce an F-5 airframe. Azarkash and Saeqeh had noticeable airframe modifications which rules out the idea of them being upgraded from existing stocks. Kowsar has no differences, even superficial from the F-5F it's based on, which has lead every professional analyst to determine it's just an upgrade and not a new aircraft like fanboys think.



As long as the airframe of the existing F-5 has not experienced too much stress, why should Iran make a new airframe?

smarter route is to use existing stock, especially if this isn’t a mass production aircraft. Which I believe it isn’t. We will see Kowsar II in less than 2 years.


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "TruthHurtz, post: 11975941, membro: 181819"]
Show me the composites and alloys being cut and formed for the Kowsar instead of that "assembly line" photo with the yellow primer.[/QUOTE]

you don't answer with a question.
I await the answer inherent in my question, which I propose more specifically: do you have tangible evidence that the Kowsar is not a newly built aircraft?

thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Also Iran says a lot of things. They have also been saying they are going to launch 6 satellites “soon” for last 4 years.
> .


satellite launches are very much affected by political situation with US + EU. You know they find them provocative, so Iran might have satellite launches planned, but if they dont fit within the political environment/dynamics desired by the Iranian govt, they wont launch those satellites. Plus you dunno how many "launches " Iran has done via NK.



aryobarzan said:


> (no country has ever been able to do such a feast under these condition...the closest I can think of is north korea and they are not even close)


North Korea only got this far due to China and Russia's help. that is a 100% fact. broke, isolated, low populated, low resourced, North Korea cannot make Iskander and ICBM on its own except China helps them. thats the fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TruthHurtz said:


> I don't doubt Iran's ability to be able to produce an F-5 airframe. Azarkash and Saeqeh had noticeable airframe modifications which rules out the idea of them being upgraded from existing stocks. Kowsar has no differences, even superficial from the F-5F it's based on, which has lead every professional analyst to determine it's just an upgrade and not a new aircraft like fanboys think.


but twine tail Saeqeh was an upgrade and refurbishing of some f-5 we got from Ethiopia or another African country if i'm not wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Yeah they disassembled it and painted it yellow and put it back together. LOL Iran can't reverse engineer an F-5, only the west can build weapons, everything else is fake. Honestly change your name to Butthurtz because that's what you are. Next you're going to tell us that Iran can't build submarines, or rifles, or bullets or bicycles. Or better yet try telling us that Iran doesn't even produce missiles, they're all just cardboard or refurbished scuds or cgi or something. You remember the Aramco bombings ? It wasn't Iran, it was the US. They did it themselves to sell weapons. Some people are so butthurt when it comes to Iran's achievements that they actually believe things like that. So sad. 



TruthHurtz said:


> So they disassembled an F-5, put yellow primer on it and suddenly it's a brand spanking new aircraft.
> 
> Try again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sha ah said:


> Yeah they disassembled it and painted it yellow and put it back together. LOL Iran can't reverse engineer an F-5, only the west can build weapons, everything else is fake. Honestly change your name to Butthurtz because that's what you are. Next you're going to tell us that Iran can't build submarines, or rifles, or bullets or bicycles. Or better yet try telling us that Iran doesn't even produce missiles, they're all just cardboard or refurbished scuds or cgi or something. You remember the Aramco bombings ? It wasn't Iran, it was the US. They did it themselves to sell weapons. Some people are so butthurt when it comes to Iran's achievements that they actually believe things like that. So sad.



Let them live in ignorance! The less they think of Iran's capabilities the more dumb founded they will be when they actually encounter it in real life!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> but twine tail Saeqeh was an upgrade and refurbishing of some f-5 we got from Ethiopia or another African country if i'm not wrong.


saeqeh-2 was a refurbished one.


----------



## TruthHurtz

sha ah said:


> Yeah they disassembled it and painted it yellow and put it back together. LOL Iran can't reverse engineer an F-5, only the west can build weapons, everything else is fake. Honestly change your name to Butthurtz because that's what you are. Next you're going to tell us that Iran can't build submarines, or rifles, or bullets or bicycles. Or better yet try telling us that Iran doesn't even produce missiles, they're all just cardboard or refurbished scuds or cgi or something. You remember the Aramco bombings ? It wasn't Iran, it was the US. They did it themselves to sell weapons. Some people are so butthurt when it comes to Iran's achievements that they actually believe things like that. So sad.



You're the one getting rustled and emotional over a refurbished F-5 man just saying.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> You are like 3 days too late. I already found and discussed the radar since you couldn’t find it in time.
> 
> 150KM is not much compared to the radars of F-22 and SU-35. But they are much much bigger aircraft with bigger nose cones to house more capable radars.
> 
> F-5 can’t do much with its low speed for interception against supercruise jets like F-35 and F-22. Furthermore, the later carries a radar that can detect the F-5 from much further away. And I don’t think the M-2032 was designed to detect low RCS objects either way. IRBIS-E (SU-35 latest Radar) can supposedly detect low RCS objects at 90KM. The radar before that can detect air targets with RCS = 3 m² at a distance of 350 km.
> 
> Anyway you cut it, the F-5 is not designed for what you want it to do. Once detected or locked on, the F-5 will have to drop tanks to gain speed and then the range drops even further.
> 
> So again F-5 is not designed for air defense role. It’s a light CAS fighter at best to be used on insurgent groups and keep the F-5 in service a little bit longer.



Well I didn't see your post since you didn't hit the reply button.... But yes a conservative estimate for an Iranian version of the ELM-2032 worst case would be ~85NM or +150km against fighter like the F-15 which would be more than sufficient in terms of range because on top of that you'll likely be fed target info from ground sensors and early warning systems plus the Kowsars don't even carry weapons that can engage fighter size targets at even half that range. 

As I said range would not be an Issue for the Kowsars since they would mainly be operating within ~250km of their home base because the platform it's self is not built to achieve air superiority over enemy airspace because it simply does NOT have the range to do so anyway so the range of it's radar is more than sufficient for the role the aircraft is actually built to fill however the real issue against modern AESA equipped fighter jet would be speed of operation! A fleet of sensor fused F-22 & F-35's backed by AWACS can go Radar ON and in under 3 seconds have more targets on their radars than they have weapons for so by the time an Iranian Kowsar locks on and fires on it's 1st target the American fighters would have already emptied out all their ordnances and would be heading back home to re-arm.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

TruthHurtz said:


> You're the one getting rustled and emotional over a refurbished F-5 man just saying.



Your impoverished country is bankrupt and can't even produce a toilet but this doesn't mean that every country outside the western sphere is as incapable as yours. 

You're so triggered & butthurt u can't even handle the fact that Iran has reverse engineered an F-5. Tell me are Iran's missiles and drones fake as well ? Did the US bomb Aramco itself to sell more weapons to the Saudis ? What other delusions do you believe in ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

For me the F5 is one of the best testbed, if not the best testbed for to develop 4+ gen fighters. You can test nearly all components with it. So me think it is normal to build lots of variants in low numbers of it. Every variant tests an other upgrad/development, if it is avionics, airframe, materials or even engines. Me think the only puzzle piece what is left with the iranian testbeds is an engine with 30+ KN thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TruthHurtz

sha ah said:


> Your impoverished country is bankrupt and can't even produce a toilet but this doesn't mean that every country outside the western sphere is as incapable as yours.
> 
> You're so triggered & butthurt u can't even handle the fact that Iran has reverse engineered an F-5. Tell me are Iran's missiles and drones fake as well ? Did the US bomb Aramco itself to sell more weapons to the Saudis ? What other delusions do you believe in ?



This isn't about Zimbabwe fartsi, it's about Iran.

I never said Iran couldn't reproduce an F-5, that's just your emotional response to my extreme logic. I said that Kowsar is a fake last minute propaganda project to show off new avionics, not an entirely new plane. Get that in your thick head.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

The Iranian Ministry of Defense is mulling the purchase of China’s J-10 multi-role fighter jet, the Sina News Agency reported

https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2020-01-15/detail-iihnzahk4177411.d.html?from=wap

Does anyone have information to confirm this news

Because it seems to me to interpret in the translation that the J-10 is one of the aircraft models that Iran is interested in.
Therefore not yet sure that the choice will be the J-10

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

J-10? This does not make any sense. The previous defence minister said clearly they were not interested in it. I thought they were after Su-30? What happened? were the Chinese willing to give TOT etc and the Russians were not?

Why on earth is Iran going after 4th gen planes?


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> The Iranian Ministry of Defense is mulling the purchase of China’s J-10 multi-role fighter jet, the Sina News Agency reported
> 
> https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2020-01-15/detail-iihnzahk4177411.d.html?from=wap
> 
> Does anyone have information to confirm this news
> 
> Because it seems to me to interpret in the translation that the J-10 is one of the aircraft models that Iran is interested in.
> Therefore not yet sure that the choice will be the J-10


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mr Robot said:


> J-10? This does not make any sense. The previous defence minister said clearly they were not interested in it. I thought they were after Su-30? What happened? were the Chinese willing to give TOT etc and the Russians were not?
> 
> Why on earth is Iran going after 4th gen planes?



SU-30 is 4th gen anyway. If this report is true (which I doubt), it likely indicates that China is moving into 5th gen faster than anticipated and is comfortable in sharing it's older, but still capable fighter jet technology with Iran at a higher percentage TOT than what Iran got with the SU-30 offer.

There's been dozens of reports like this over the decade. None of them turn out to be true.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> SU-30 is 4th gen anyway. If this report is true (which I doubt), it likely indicates that China is moving into 5th gen faster than anticipated and is comfortable in sharing it's older, but still capable fighter jet technology with Iran at a higher percentage TOT than what Iran got with the SU-30 offer.
> 
> There's been dozens of reports like this over the decade. None of them turn out to be true.





sahureka2 said:


> The Iranian Ministry of Defense is mulling the purchase of China’s J-10 multi-role fighter jet, the Sina News Agency reported
> 
> https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2020-01-15/detail-iihnzahk4177411.d.html?from=wap
> 
> Does anyone have information to confirm this news
> 
> Because it seems to me to interpret in the translation that the J-10 is one of the aircraft models that Iran is interested in.
> Therefore not yet sure that the choice will be the J-10



This type of news has been recycled over the years.

Nonetheless, China has given J-10 Tot to Pakistan so it’s probably the ONLY jet that China is willing to share FULL ToT with Iran.

If Iran does a full ToT type deal contingent on buying 100 J-10 jets it is likely to secure the engine tech which would give a much needed leap in the field. Only reason why Iran would go after J-10 is ToT...nothing else

Local J-10 production with 50-75 J-31s is not a bad combo if Russia refuses to budge on SU-30 partial ToT (full ToT highly unlikely).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

have u guys seen this:
*J85-5 engines* on stealth fighter-size unmanned air vehicle in USA 














Sierra Technical unveils ‘faster’ and ‘more manoeuvrable’ stealth UAV
DoD Orders New Drone To Simulate Warfare With Russian And Chinese Stealth Jets
Stealthy UAS Unveiled For USAF Target, Loyal Wingman Needs
Sierra Technical Services completes major Milestone on 5GAT Drone for the Department of Defense

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

sahureka2 said:


> The Iranian Ministry of Defense is mulling the purchase of China’s J-10 multi-role fighter jet, the Sina News Agency reported
> 
> https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2020-01-15/detail-iihnzahk4177411.d.html?from=wap
> 
> Does anyone have information to confirm this news
> 
> Because it seems to me to interpret in the translation that the J-10 is one of the aircraft models that Iran is interested in.
> Therefore not yet sure that the choice will be the J-10


WHile many on PDF think and say Iran will buy Russian fighter jets, my bets are that Iran will buy Chinese fighter jets. For one, any country that sells fighter jets to Iran must have the strength to either deter or combat and handle retaliation from the west in the form of sanctions and other negative actions against national interest. China is the bigger threat to the West, has more resources to combat and handle sanctions and opposition activities against CHinese national interests, and also ability to sell good quality, well priced, strong potency military equipment with little political interference or conditions as the basis for sales to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

I've been hearing about Iran buying the J-10 since 2008. Iran has never shown interest in this plane as far as we can tell, matter of fact the previous defence minister clearly stated they are not interested in buying it.


----------



## 925boy

Mr Robot said:


> J-10? This does not make any sense. The previous defence minister said clearly they were not interested in it. I thought they were after Su-30? What happened? were the Chinese willing to give TOT etc and the Russians were not?
> 
> Why on earth is Iran going after 4th gen planes?


Russia cant and wont sell fighter jets because it cant handle the renewed pressure from EU and US for doing so. Then Iran logic now is this : If Russia cant sell fighter jets, its complete inventory of fighter jets is off the table and unavailable, so Iran must look at the next best option - China. I strongly suspect Iran and China have a secret military ToT(esp. aerospace) deal going on...I dont believe China is that opposed to selling Iran fighter jets, and China's bread and butter fighter jets are still potent(once again, those of you who think military technology is the 1 deciding factor in who wins are always proven wrong).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

925boy said:


> Russia cant and wont sell fighter jets because it cant handle the renewed pressure from EU and US for doing so. Then Iran logic now is this : If Russia cant sell fighter jets, its complete inventory of fighter jets is off the table and unavailable, so Iran must look at the next best option - China. I strongly suspect Iran and China have a secret military ToT(esp. aerospace) deal going on...I dont believe China is that opposed to selling Iran fighter jets, and China's bread and butter fighter jets are still potent(once again, those of you who think military technology is the 1 deciding factor in who wins are always proven wrong).



I would love to see TOT from china, but what Iran needs to go after is 5th gen planes. Iran should set it its airforce industry to be capable to produce such planes now. Obviously it can only do that in the near future with the help of Russia and/or China. Iran already has the technology for 4th gen planes, in terms of radars, avionics etc.


----------



## 925boy

Mr Robot said:


> I've been hearing about Iran buying the J-10 since 2008. Iran has never shown interest in this plane as far as we can tell, matter of fact the previous defence minister clearly stated they are not interested in buying it.


Talk is cheap. We can only know after the sanctions come off later this year. After that happens we can know what is real and will happen and what is hot air talk. Talking was happening since 2008 because there was nothign else to do. Iran couldnt actually buy any plane so what else to do but talk?


----------



## Philosopher

925boy said:


> Talk is cheap. We can only know after the sanctions come off later this year. After that happens we can know what is real and will happen and what is hot air talk. Talking was happening since 2008 because there was nothign else to do. Iran couldnt actually buy any plane so what else to do but talk?



Remember, Iran could have still have got the TOT from China etc and opened a manufacturing base in Iran. That would not be the same as openly buying a plane which the US could shout "it's against the UNSC resolution". Iran could have just claimed it designed it/made it itself. Plausible deniability. The real reason those nation did not supply Iran with such tech is political pressure, not the sanctions. Strong nations bypass these UN laws like they're meaningless. These laws are only to keep the weaker nations in check.


----------



## sha ah

The UN sanctions will be lifted next year and most likely, from everything I've heard, Iran will be purchasing Russian made jets with technology transfers, most likely SU-30 models. 

Both China and Russia will be willing however it has to be a large order, atleast 100-200 jets. any less than 100 and I don't see it happening, it wouldn't be worth the sanctions, reprocussions from the USA.

Iran should also make sure not to pay a penny until they receive the product. They have been let down way too many times in the past. 



925boy said:


> WHile many on PDF think and say Iran will buy Russian fighter jets, my bets are that Iran will buy Chinese fighter jets. For one, any country that sells fighter jets to Iran must have the strength to either deter or combat and handle retaliation from the west in the form of sanctions and other negative actions against national interest. China is the bigger threat to the West, has more resources to combat and handle sanctions and opposition activities against CHinese national interests, and also ability to sell good quality, well priced, strong potency military equipment with little political interference or conditions as the basis for sales to other countries.



UN sanctions are done in about a year, so they won't be a factor. Again, Iran has to purchase at the very least 100-200 jets for Russia or China to go through with the deal and be willing to deal with the harsh reaction from the USA / west. 



Mr Robot said:


> Remember, Iran could have still have got the TOT from China etc and opened a manufacturing base in Iran. That would not be the same as openly buying a plane which the US could shout "it's against the UNSC resolution". Iran could have just claimed it designed it/made it itself. Plausible deniability. The real reason those nation did not supply Iran with such tech is political pressure, not the sanctions. Strong nations bypass these UN laws like they're meaningless. These laws are only to keep the weaker nations in check.


----------



## sha ah

The UN sanctions will be lifted next year and most likely, from everything I've heard, Iran will be purchasing Russian made jets with technology transfers, most likely SU-30 models.

Both China and Russia will be willing however it has to be a large order, atleast 100-200 jets. any less than 100 and I don't see it happening, it wouldn't be worth the sanctions, reprocussions from the USA.

Iran should also make sure not to pay a penny until they receive the product. They have been let down way too many times in the past.

Honestly Iran really has way too many different kinds of jets. I understand that after the revolution, because of sanctions, that Iran had to be resourceful. I also understand that during the 1st Gulf war (not Iran-Iraq war) Iran received several jets from Iraq. However Iran REALLY needs 100-200 brand new multirole fighter jets. Yes indeed Iran really needs to get rid of some of its older jets. The F-14's, F-4's, Mirages, F-7's, SU-22s, SU-24s, SU-25s. I mean just the sheer variety of fighter jets is mind boggling and surely costs a fortune to maintain.

I would personally like to see at least 100 SU-30 jets. The SU-30 is twin seat jet, the SU-35 is a single seat derivative. Both are optimized variations of the SU-27 I believe. So perhaps 50x quantity of the SU-30, 50x quantity of the SU-35. Also 50x quantity of the SU-57's would be a nice addition as well, although I suspect that's only wishful thinking.

Iranian officials have mentioned their interest in purchasing tanks as well. Considering the Karrar program, I'm not sure what they would be referring to ? Perhaps some vital parts for the Karrar like new cannons, engines, powerpack ? I'm not sure, however I would really love to see Iran sign an agreement with Russia to acquire the T-14 Armata. If Iran were to go ahead with the plan to build 500-800 Karrar tanks and then add 200-500 Armata tanks, that would be excellent. Of course we all know that Russia needs investment in that tank since the procurement is going along slowly. Anyways, yes Iran has to get rid of its older stock of tanks, including Chieftains (which actually looked pretty good in a recent exercise, but they're much too old and have to go), M48/M60's (perhaps keep some Tiam variants around for another 10 yrs??) The T-74 Safir variants of the T-50/T-60 tanks are also over 20 yrs old, perhaps another 10 years for the best leftovers ? The Zulfiqar tanks, some sources say Iran has a dozen or so, like I said if they have a dozen of them in working order, perhaps 10 years at the most or put them into a museum ?

Helicopters, Iran needs to upgrade its fleet. I like the Toophan 2 variant however I don't think that it's ever been mass produced ? The Shahed 285 is a decent light / scout helicopter but not an option for a frontline helicopter. The Shahed 215 would be great if it were ever actually produced, however we are yet to see a prototype. Iran has a wide variety of various helicopters for various roles and most of them are aging. I've heard talk of Iran and Russia working on co-producing helicopters, however so far nothing. Russia would be a great source for purchasing large fleets of helicopters, however it's not clear whether Iran wants to purchase Russian models with technology transfers or build their own with some Russian assistance, Russian engines/ parts ? Personally I believe that Iran could build helicopters on its own, it just requires the political will and some funding. A little help from Russia would not be a bad thing either.


UN sanctions are done in about a year, so they won't be a factor. Again, Iran has to purchase at the very least 100-200 jets for Russia or China to go through with the deal and be willing to deal with the harsh reaction from the USA / west.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

sha ah said:


> The UN sanctions will be lifted next year and most likely, from everything I've heard, Iran will be purchasing Russian made jets with technology transfers, most likely SU-30 models.
> 
> Both China and Russia will be willing however it has to be a large order, atleast 100-200 jets. any less than 100 and I don't see it happening, it wouldn't be worth the sanctions, reprocussions from the USA.
> 
> Iran should also make sure not to pay a penny until they receive the product. They have been let down way too many times in the past.
> 
> Honestly Iran really has way too many different kinds of jets. I understand that after the revolution, because of sanctions, that Iran had to be resourceful. I also understand that during the 1st Gulf war (not Iran-Iraq war) Iran received several jets from Iraq. However Iran REALLY needs 100-200 brand new multirole fighter jets. Yes indeed Iran really needs to get rid of some of its older jets. The F-14's, F-4's, Mirages, F-7's, SU-22s, SU-24s, SU-25s. I mean just the sheer variety of fighter jets is mind boggling and surely costs a fortune to maintain.
> 
> I would personally like to see at least 100 SU-30 jets. The SU-30 is twin seat jet, the SU-35 is a single seat derivative. Both are optimized variations of the SU-27 I believe. So perhaps 50x quantity of the SU-30, 50x quantity of the SU-35. Also 50x quantity of the SU-57's would be a nice addition as well, although I suspect that's only wishful thinking.
> 
> Iranian officials have mentioned their interest in purchasing tanks as well. Considering the Karrar program, I'm not sure what they would be referring to ? Perhaps some vital parts for the Karrar like new cannons, engines, powerpack ? I'm not sure, however I would really love to see Iran sign an agreement with Russia to acquire the T-14 Armata. If Iran were to go ahead with the plan to build 500-800 Karrar tanks and then add 200-500 Armata tanks, that would be excellent. Of course we all know that Russia needs investment in that tank since the procurement is going along slowly. Anyways, yes Iran has to get rid of its older stock of tanks, including Chieftains (which actually looked pretty good in a recent exercise, but they're much too old and have to go), M48/M60's (perhaps keep some Tiam variants around for another 10 yrs??) The T-74 Safir variants of the T-50/T-60 tanks are also over 20 yrs old, perhaps another 10 years for the best leftovers ? The Zulfiqar tanks, some sources say Iran has a dozen or so, like I said if they have a dozen of them in working order, perhaps 10 years at the most or put them into a museum ?
> 
> Helicopters, Iran needs to upgrade its fleet. I like the Toophan 2 variant however I don't think that it's ever been mass produced ? The Shahed 285 is a decent light / scout helicopter but not an option for a frontline helicopter. The Shahed 215 would be great if it were ever actually produced, however we are yet to see a prototype. Iran has a wide variety of various helicopters for various roles and most of them are aging. I've heard talk of Iran and Russia working on co-producing helicopters, however so far nothing. Russia would be a great source for purchasing large fleets of helicopters, however it's not clear whether Iran wants to purchase Russian models with technology transfers or build their own with some Russian assistance, Russian engines/ parts ? Personally I believe that Iran could build helicopters on its own, it just requires the political will and some funding. A little help from Russia would not be a bad thing either.
> 
> 
> UN sanctions are done in about a year, so they won't be a factor. Again, Iran has to purchase at the very least 100-200 jets for Russia or China to go through with the deal and be willing to deal with the harsh reaction from the USA / west.



UN sanctions will be lifted in this year (2020) actually in 9-10 month from now

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> UN sanctions will be lifted in this year (2020) actually in 9-10 month from now


Thats only assuming that theres no "snap back" of un sanctions,and with the eurovassals triggering of the jcpoa disputes mechanism theres a very good chance that this will happen,at which point its anyones guess if the russians and chinese would continue to abide by the sanctions or not.
So I wouldnt count my chickens,or potential weapons purchases,just yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Thats only assuming that theres no "snap back" of un sanctions,and with the eurovassals triggering of the jcpoa disputes mechanism theres a very good chance that this will happen,at which point its anyones guess if the russians and chinese would continue to abide by the sanctions or not.
> So I wouldnt count my chickens,or potential weapons purchases,just yet.



well agreed but in other hand Zarif just said if Europeans go ahead with sanctions Iran will leave NPT soooo Europeans have to think about that too, i think Europeans will wait Trump out, but as you said at this point anything could happen



*Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned that the country would leave the five-decade international treaty that prevents that spread of atomic weapons if its alleged violations of the 2015 nuclear deal were brought before the United Nations Security Council. *
*


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...reaty-missile-non-proliferation-a9291696.html*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> *Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned that the country would leave the five-decade international treaty that prevents that spread of atomic weapons if its alleged violations of the 2015 nuclear deal were brought before the United Nations Security Council. *


This way Europeans can get ride of Trump!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

sha ah said:


> UN sanctions are done in about a year, so they won't be a factor. Again, Iran has to purchase at the very least 100-200 jets for Russia or China to go through with the deal and be willing to deal with the harsh reaction from the USA / west.



EU has raised the dispute mechanism, if UN sanctions are snapped back, these the arms embargo will remain I am afraid.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

mohsen said:


> This way Europeans can get ride of Trump!



Europeans are scared if they think Iran is not messing around they will then wait trump to get out of office


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> Europeans are scared if they think Iran is not messing around they will then wait trump to get out of office



Trump is not going anywhere. Even Iran knows this is.

Nobody is scared of Iran and the NPT withdrawal declaration is an empty threat worth nothing.

Only an naive fool would believe China and Russia would sacrifice their economies for a ~5B dollar arms deal with Iran. China wipes its *** with 5B, that’s nothing to China.

Man the delusional thinking on this board is beyond help.

Iran has zero leverage right now other than empty threats and harassment. That’s what happens when you gave up Fordow and Arak in the first deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

This is not empty threats...North Korea left NPT in 2003 and now look at them...If illegal pressure continues, Iran will leave NPT meaning all IAEA inspectors will have to leave Iran and then nobody will know what happens in Natanz.

Regarding arms sales to Iran...secondary US sanctions against Russian or Chinese arms sellers worth nothing because these arms sellers do not have presence in US market

And China can itself impose sanctions against US companies if it wants.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

GWXP said:


> This is not empty threats...North Korea left NPT in 2003 and now look at them...If illegal pressure continues, Iran will leave NPT meaning all IAEA inspectors will have to leave Iran and then nobody will know what happens in Natanz.
> 
> Regarding arms sales to Iran...secondary US sanctions against Russian or Chinese arms sellers worth nothing because these arms sellers do not have presence in US market
> 
> And China can itself impose sanctions against US companies if it wants.



LOL Delusional thinking by yet another naive person.

Is your prime example for NPT withdrawal literally the hermit kingdom of North Korea? The country that is diverting all of its resources to the military? The country whose population is eating grass to survive? Sorry Iran is not North Korea and no one in Iran will tolerate eating grass. Look at what a small rise in gas prices did to that country.

With China negotiating a trade deal they are not going to jeopardize their economy for the Iran. US has way more leverage over China right now as Chinese exports to US far outweigh US exports to China.

The world has been advancing and Iran is still in the corner barking at how it will tear everyone apart. Nobody is taking it seriously.

So yes US will pressure Chinese/Russian government on any arms deal with Iran just like they have in the last 30 years. Have you had your head in the sand since 1990’s? All the arms deals that fall apart and that was without SANCTIONS! Open your eyes!

Any arms leaving China or Russia has to be approved by their respective governments with an export license!

So please stop talking crazy. Russia and China are not going to help Iran in any meaningful way.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> LOL Delusional thinking by yet another naive person.
> 
> Is your prime example for NPT withdrawal literally the hermit kingdom of North Korea? The country that is diverting all of its resources to the military? The country whose population is eating grass to survive? Sorry Iran is not North Korea and no one in Iran will tolerate eating grass. Look at what a small rise in gas prices did to that country.
> 
> With China negotiating a trade deal they are not going to jeopardize their economy for the Iran. US has way more leverage over China right now as Chinese exports to US far outweigh US exports to China.
> 
> The world has been advancing and Iran is still in the corner barking at how it will tear everyone apart. Nobody is taking it seriously.
> 
> So yes US will pressure Chinese/Russian government on any arms deal with Iran just like they have in the last 30 years. Have you had your head in the sand since 1990’s? All the arms deals that fall apart and that was without SANCTIONS! Open your eyes!
> 
> Any arms leaving China or Russia has to be approved by their respective governments with an export license!
> 
> So please stop talking crazy. Russia and China are not going to help Iran in any meaningful way.


Still leaving NPT is an option if US isolates Iran the way they isolated North Korea....You can not do nothing in times when they make you nothing to lose with bringing oil exports to zero....

Leaving NPT and expelling IAEA inspectors is Iranian response to all these sanctions

I Have no idea why you think Iran will be dutiful to NPT after all this illegal pressure

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> So please stop talking crazy. Russia and China are not going to help Iran in any meaningful way.



I guess, u cant believe on them, at least not now. Unlike Europe, they won't backstab ( i hope so ) but they mean business.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> Sorry Iran is not North Korea and no one in Iran will tolerate eating grass. Look at what a small rise in gas prices did to that country.


LOL. By bringing Iranian oil exports to zero they made Iran a country that has nothing to lose just like North Korea.



> With China negotiating a trade deal they are not going to jeopardize their economy for the Iran. US has way more leverage over China right now as Chinese exports to US far outweigh US exports to China.


If so, why US failed to isolate North Korea from China (with North Korea's exports to China being 4,5bln$)

USA can't simply have more leverage over China with Chinese exports outweighing US exports, because *tariffs hurt USA as well*, since tariffs are inflationary....US consumers are dependent on Chinese goods, and when Trump imposes tariffs on China this generates inflation in USA.....
*
USA is not going to hurt its own consumers and generate inflation in USA because of some Chinese weapons sales to Iran*.....

So trade wars with China and Chinese weapon sales to Iran and Chinese trade with North Korea are two separate issues....

Never forget that US consumers are very dependent on imports from China and tariffs are very inflationary.

So hardly US has leverage over such a superpower like China when it comes to weapon sales to Iran.

Rather, China can trade weapon sales to Iran for US banning weapon sales to Taiwan



> Have you had your head in the sand since 1990’s? Open your eyes!


It is you who have to open your eyes. You are still sleeping in 1990? LOL.

In 1990 we lived in a world where USA was a global hegemon....Russia was weak and broken and Chinese economy was 14 times smaller than today.

US prevented weapon sales to Iran in 1990s. But Russia still supplied S-300 to Iran in 2010s even despite USA and Iran were about to go to war.

Maybe you didn't notice, but since 1990s, Russia invaded Georgia, annexed Crimea, entered Syrian Civil war and destabilized Ukraine--even despite US dislikes it-----and Russia itself is under heavy US sanctions today.

China turned into a superpower today and can not be pressured by USA (*trade wars hurt US consumers as well*). By 2030 China will have 4-6 aircraft carrier battle groups, 82 heavy destroyers, 37 SSN, 10 SSBN, 11 large amphibious assault ships
(compared to USA: 11 aircraft carrier, 84 cruisers and destroyers, 50 SSN and 15 SSBN, 9 large amphibious assault ships)

https://thediplomat.com/2019/02/predicting-the-chinese-navy-of-2030/

China plans it own presence in the Persian Gulf (from where it buys most of its oil) and *Iran can be seen as ally of China*



> So please stop talking crazy. Russia and China are not going to help Iran in any meaningful way.


It depends on Russian or Chinese decision. They can sell weapons to Iran and US secondary sanctions will not stop it.....

Or they can make a deal with USA: US doesn't sell weapons to Poland and Ukraine--and Russia doesn't sell weapons to Iran---------or US doesn't sell weapons to Taiwan and China doesn't sell weapons to Iran.

By the way, I don't know what kind of weapon Iran needs to buy...In this times of economic hardships, Iran might not have hard currency to buy expensive foreign weapons especially when *it produces most weapons on its own.*

*Why to spend hard currency *to buy expensive foreign weapons, when Iran can produce its own tank, can make its own APC, IFV, MRAP--- has projects for heavy attack helicopters, UAV, cruise and ballistic missiles, trainer aircraft, air defenses, submarines, destroyers and anti-ship missiles?

The only thing Iran needs to buy is fighter aircraft.....And since US will have 1500 F-35s by 2030 and Israel will have 100 F-35s by 2030---the only aircraft Iran needs to buy is J-31 which will be available from 2025 anyway.

Iran can place an order for 100 J-31 for delivery from 2025 to 2035 and as part of the offset deal (which is usually 50% of the contract) demand some technology transfer (maybe 4th generation fighter's engine and avionics technology)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cthulhu

The decision makers of Iran have managed to put us in a position that now North Korea is using our tension with the US to it's own benefit, These guys should answer for the disaster they created.


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Cthulhu said:


> The decision makers of Iran have managed to put us in a position that now North Korea is using our tension with the US to it's own benefit, These guys should answer for the disaster they created.


could you explain more;as we know US withdraw from jcpoa;all and sunderies know that US is the country who has the illegal petition in middle east and IRI can't be a slave like others.........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

They can't SNAP back the sanctions, China and Russia will both veto. 

US tried to prevent Russian weapons sales to Turkey, India, what happened ? 

In the past Iran has tried buying a small amount of jets, like 30 or 50. This upcoming deal for the purchase of 200 jets, potentially hundreds of Armata T-14 tanks and hundreds of helicopters... honestly that's too big of a deal for Russia to pass. 

US tried to prevent Russia from selling Iran S-300. What happened ? After the UN sanctions came off the sale went through. The fact that Trump has been sanctioning China, Russia won't help matters. 



Sineva said:


> Thats only assuming that theres no "snap back" of un sanctions,and with the eurovassals triggering of the jcpoa disputes mechanism theres a very good chance that this will happen,at which point its anyones guess if the russians and chinese would continue to abide by the sanctions or not.
> So I wouldnt count my chickens,or potential weapons purchases,just yet.



What do you want Iran to do ? Get rid of its missiles, get rid of its nuclear program, get invaded, end up like Iraq ? 



Cthulhu said:


> The decision makers of Iran have managed to put us in a position that now North Korea is using our tension with the US to it's own benefit, These guys should answer for the disaster they created.



The EU can't really do much since they haven't lived up to their end of the bargain. China and Russia will more than likely veto any attempt to reinstate UN sanctions on Iran. Russia and China, in their press releases, their foreign ministries have made their position crystal clear. They outright blame the EU for not having the political will to stand up to the US. 

If the EU really wanted to salvage the deal then they could expand the INSTEX program by buying Iranian oil, perhaps at a discount, and open up an exchange which could use the oil as a guarantee, like a financial institution, kind of like a bank of sorts, which could connect EU, Russian, Chinese, world markets to Iran while excluding the US. 

In that case the US couldn't really do much. What could the US really do ? Sanction the governments of EU, Russia, China and others ? The US would lose just as much as those they sanctioned. Even with China, they can only sanction certain companies doing business with Iran. In any case, there were rumors of ongoing negotiations between Iran and the EU to expand INSTEX, however the idea never materialized. I'm not sure if its because the Europeans wanted extreme discounts on the oil that they were to purchase but that could be just one reason.



Sineva said:


> Thats only assuming that theres no "snap back" of un sanctions,and with the eurovassals triggering of the jcpoa disputes mechanism theres a very good chance that this will happen,at which point its anyones guess if the russians and chinese would continue to abide by the sanctions or not.
> So I wouldnt count my chickens,or potential weapons purchases,just yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> What do you want Iran to do ? Get rid of its missiles, get rid of its nuclear program, get invaded, end up like Iraq ?


Far from it.
However it does seem to me to be a little premature,to put it mildly,to assume at this point in the proceedings that iran will be receiving any weapons from either russia or china at any point in the near future,as not only have both nations proven to be rather...shall we say..."unreliable" both politically and economically on many previous occasions,but you now also have the very real possibility of the reimposition of un sanctions thanks to the eurovassals.
Ultimately iran can really only rely upon itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

sha ah said:


> This upcoming deal for the purchase of 200 jets, potentially hundreds of Armata T-14 tanks and hundreds of helicopters... honestly that's too big of a deal for Russia to pass.


Armata T-14 is over-engineered tank and is very expensive---even Russian military itself doesn't buy Armata preferring T-90 and modernized T-72B3 instead.

Regarding helicopters---Iran can buy transport helicopters but it is better for Iran to develop Shahed-216 as domestic heavy attack helicopter instead of subsidizing foreign defense industry by purchasing their expensive attack helicopters

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

sha ah said:


> They can't SNAP back the sanctions, China and Russia will both veto.



No, you are wrong. In the case of the JCPOA, any side can unilaterally snap back sanctions. The put this in the UNSC on purpose so one country could not VETO.


----------



## samparis75

GWXP said:


> Armata T-14 is over-engineered tank and is very expensive---even Russian military itself doesn't buy Armata preferring T-90 and modernized T-72B3 instead.
> 
> Regarding helicopters---Iran can buy transport helicopters but it is better for Iran to develop Shahed-216 as domestic heavy attack helicopter instead of subsidizing foreign defense industry by purchasing their expensive attack helicopters


Any news about the Shahed 216?


----------



## Ich

Hey, take a look what i've found. I wonder what it looks like...an air war without air fields...a funny website...

https://www.aerosociety.com/news/the-iranian-air-force-unexpectedly-sharp-teeth/

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cthulhu

sha ah said:


> What do you want Iran to do ? Get rid of its missiles, get rid of its nuclear program, get invaded, end up like Iraq ?





DoubleYouSee said:


> could you explain more;as we know US withdraw from jcpoa;all and sunderies know that US is the country who has the illegal petition in middle east and IRI can't be a slave like others.........


Iran's commander in chief had the choice of building nuclear bombs, Instead he issued a bull$hit fatwa and declared nuclear weapons haram, The other sheikh handed over all of Iran's nuclear stockpile to the west practically killing the chance for Iran to be a nuclear power. Akhonds are making Iran weak, They should answer for the situation that they created.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Navigator

sha ah said:


> They can't SNAP back the sanctions, China and Russia will both veto.



Unfortunately, snap back mechanism of JCPOA was specially made in such way, that Russia and China will not be able to use the veto. If case moves from the joint commission of JCPOA to the UN Security Council, there begins the countdown to the automatic return of sanctions unless the UN Security Council voted to continue the termination of sanctions.


----------



## TheImmortal

Cthulhu said:


> Iran's commander in chief had the choice of building nuclear bombs, Instead he issued a bull$hit fatwa and declared nuclear weapons haram, The other sheikh handed over all of Iran's nuclear stockpile to the west practically killing the chance for Iran to be a nuclear power. Akhonds are making Iran weak, They should answer for the situation that they created.



The issue with people like you is you don’t see past your nose.

Iran getting nuclear weapons has already been considered multiple times by the brightest minds of Iran. At the end of the day it was decided it wouldn’t advance the survival of the government.

Right now Iran is under sanctions, getting nuclear weapons will all but guarantee Iran will stay under sanctions for the foreseeable future even Russia/China would side with the world.

So how does Iran getting nuclear weapons provide it security? It will just bargain them away for sanctions relief in the end. There is not a scenario where Iran gets to keep its nuclear weapons because then Saudi Arabia will want them, Egypt will want them, and Turkey will want them. The West knows this hence why they are teaching Iran a lesson so every other brown person in Middle East sees what will happen if you try to get nukes. 

So no, nukes will not help Iran get away from sanctions. The best course of action is one where a democratic president comes into power in the US and returns to nuclear deal. Now that could take 1 year or another 4 more years.

But nuclear weapons will not save Iran from crippling sanctions nor will it stop Israel and US from pushing back at Iranian expansion. Russia has had nukes since post WW2 and NATO has been pushing its influence back inside its borders since the collapse of Soviet Union. 

Only thing that nukes will help with is a land invasion of Iran to overthrow the regime. But the possibility of a land invasion of Iran is so remote.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

Cthulhu said:


> The other sheikh handed over all of Iran's nuclear stockpile to the west practically killing the chance for Iran to be a nuclear power.



To be honest, there everything is reversible on uranium enrichment. Iran indeed handed over most of stockpiles of enriched uranium acc to JCPOA, but instead, it received new uranium concentrates (so called Yellow cake) from Russia. Therefore, in the case of the quick installation of all old and new centrifuges, Iran after this can quickly not only restore old stocks, but also exceed them. The performance of the new Iranian centrifuges is several times greater than that of the old IR-1.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Ich said:


> Hey, take a look what i've found. I wonder what it looks like...an air war without air fields...a funny website...
> 
> https://www.aerosociety.com/news/the-iranian-air-force-unexpectedly-sharp-teeth/


I`d say the writer is still evidently fixated on the old ww2/cold war air power heavy doctrine and imagines for some strange reason that the us would attempt to employ some sort of desert storm/iraqi freedom style "shock and awe" air power campaign scenario against iran which would revolve entirely around air battles,as though irans missile forces and their recently demonstrated capabilities didnt even exist or would just sit back and allow them to do this without firing a single shot at the bases that any us air campaign would quite literally depend upon to have any hope of viability never mind actual success.Indeed rather strangely the only reference he makes to irans missile forces is that diego garcia is beyond their reach![LOL!].Personally I think that the absence of any reference to iranian missile power is actually pretty telling on his part.I did have to chuckle tho at his assertion that "Whatever success local industry might have achieved, keeping the legendary Tomcat flyable in any meaningful combat sense with no assistance from the OEM is probably impossible."....Yeah!...,sure buddy!.Whatever you say.....
To be honest my first thought when I started reading this was that it was some old article written way waaay back in the very early 2000s,so you can imagine my surprise when I realised that this was only written a little over a week ago,bizarre.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


> well agreed but in other hand Zarif just said if Europeans go ahead with sanctions Iran will leave NPT soooo Europeans have to think about that too, i think Europeans will wait Trump out, but as you said at this point anything could happen
> 
> 
> 
> *Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned that the country would leave the five-decade international treaty that prevents that spread of atomic weapons if its alleged violations of the 2015 nuclear deal were brought before the United Nations Security Council.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...reaty-missile-non-proliferation-a9291696.html*


If Iran leaves NPT, China and Russia will support sanctions because exiting NPT will make Russia and China think Iran has "gotten out of control".....literally.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

925boy said:


> If Iran leaves NPT, China and Russia will support sanctions because exiting NPT will make Russia and China think Iran has "gotten out of control".....literally.



I respectfully disagree. We can see already that despite Iran significantly reducing its commitment sto the JCPOA , Russia and China still support Iran. Why? because they know precisely why Iran is doing it. If Iran leaves the NPT, they will once again understand the reason behind it. They may make statements like "we want all parties to return to negotiations etc", but I do not see them putting sanctions on Iran. The dynamics of the world has changed from the time those two nations sanctioned Iran. Today, both Russia and China appreciate Iran's anti-American role and the importance of Iran to them. They know fully well that if Iran changed into a pro-western system, it will be hit to them. I might be wrong of course, but I have seen no hints that either of those nations is willing to go with sanctions on Iran again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Philosopher. said:


> No, you are wrong. In the case of the JCPOA, any side can unilaterally snap back sanctions. The put this in the UNSC on purpose so one country could not VETO.


But how can EU snapback sanctions due to Iranian noncompliance that was triggered in the FIRST PLACE by blockhead DUMB TRUMP's multiple violations of it?? 
Its like charging someone who kills someone else by self defense/ protecting themselves with murder? make that make sense.
US violated and neutralized the JCPOA. lets get that clear. even you @TheImmortal before you come her and start handing down sentences like a judge you have to agree that US is the main violator of the JCPOA so every destabilization of the content of that agreement US is mostly responsible for it! simple.


----------



## Philosopher

925boy said:


> But how can EU snapback sanctions due to Iranian noncompliance that was triggered in the FIRST PLACE by blockhead DUMB TRUMP's multiple violations of it??



Because both EU and the US are ultimately on the same boat when it comes to Iran. Just a game of good cop bad copt at the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Sineva said:


> I`d say the writer is still evidently fixated on the old ww2/cold war air power heavy doctrine and imagines for some strange reason that the us would attempt to employ some sort of desert storm/iraqi freedom style "shock and awe" air power campaign scenario against iran which would revolve entirely around air battles,as though irans missile forces and their recently demonstrated capabilities didnt even exist or would just sit back and allow them to do this without firing a single shot at the bases that any us air campaign would quite literally depend upon to have any hope of viability never mind actual success.Indeed rather strangely the only reference he makes to irans missile forces is that diego garcia is beyond their reach![LOL!].Personally I think that the absence of any reference to iranian missile power is actually pretty telling on his part.I did have to chuckle tho at his assertion that "Whatever success local industry might have achieved, keeping the legendary Tomcat flyable in any meaningful combat sense with no assistance from the OEM is probably impossible."....Yeah!...,sure buddy!.Whatever you say.....
> To be honest my first thought when I started reading this was that it was some old article written way waaay back in the very early 2000s,so you can imagine my surprise when I realised that this was only written a little over a week ago,bizarre.....


 Yes, same were also my thoughts while reading this...this..."Dreingabe" (sorry, dont find an englisch word for it)



Philosopher. said:


> Because both EU and the US are ultimately on the same boat when it comes to Iran. Just a game of good cop bad copt at the moment.



Better words would be "bad gangster worse gangster"

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher

Ich said:


> Better words would be "bad gangster worse gangster"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

925boy said:


> If Iran leaves NPT, China and Russia will support sanctions because exiting NPT will make Russia and China think Iran has "gotten out of control".....literally.



its good to test for short time at least they can get back to it when they make a good deal, Iran can use it as leverage if they don't do this the other party will say Iran must include missiles this way they can replace that with missiles or other things

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

General staff of Iran's armed forces said Iran's overall defense budget is less than 6 billion dollars.
It was in response to (traitor) Zarif's lies:
توضیح سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه درباره ارقام بودجه نظامی ایران- اخبار بین الملل - اخبار تسنیم - Tasnim

$6 billion and people expect them to develop, mass produce and acquire air crafts, ships, submarines, tanks, air defenses, etc and quickly!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ich

mohsen said:


> General staff of Iran's armed forces said Iran's overall defense budget is less than 6 billion dollars.
> It was in response to (traitor) Zarif's lies:
> توضیح سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه درباره ارقام بودجه نظامی ایران- اخبار بین الملل - اخبار تسنیم - Tasnim
> 
> $6 billion and people expect them to develop, mass produce and acquire air crafts, ships, submarines, tanks, air defenses, etc and quickly!



Only 6 billion?! Fantastic job!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

mohsen said:


> General staff of Iran's armed forces said Iran's overall defense budget is less than 6 billion dollars.
> It was in response to (traitor) Zarif's lies:
> توضیح سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه درباره ارقام بودجه نظامی ایران- اخبار بین الملل - اخبار تسنیم - Tasnim
> 
> $6 billion and people expect them to develop, mass produce and acquire air crafts, ships, submarines, tanks, air defenses, etc and quickly!


But 6bln$ in Iran is much more than 6bln$ in USA due to difference in prices---especially after current devaluation of rial.

There are two types of GDP: nominal GDP and GDP PPP
1)* nominal GDP* is GDP in rials divided by current currency exchange rate-------because Iranian currency has devalued so much--- Iran's nominal dollar GDP is small--- but it doesn't show the real capacity of the economy----this is simply dollar GDP calculated based on the current currency exchange rate (and exchange rate of rial has declined recently).

2) *GDP PPP* calculates GDP with assumption that prices in Iran are the same as prices in USA---if prices in Iran were the same as prices in USA----Iran's GDP PPP is 1,6trl$ American equivalent-------and now if you spend 4% of GDP for military--then defense budget is *64bln$ american equivalent. (compared to US defense budget of 640bln$)*

Nominal (dollar) GDP is important if you are importer of weapons---because you need hard currency---dollar to buy foreign made weapons at their dollar market price. (like how Saudi Arabia does)

But if you produce all weapons in Iran and you buy these weapons in rials---then GDP PPP is better

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

GWXP said:


> But 6bln$ in Iran is much more than 6bln$ in USA due to difference in prices---especially after current devaluation of rial.
> 
> There are two types of GDP: nominal GDP and GDP PPP
> 1)* nominal GDP* is GDP in rials divided by current currency exchange rate-------because Iranian currency has devalued so much--- Iran's nominal dollar GDP is small--- but it doesn't show the real capacity of the economy----this is simply dollar GDP calculated based on the current currency exchange rate (and exchange rate of rial has declined recently).
> 
> 2) *GDP PPP* calculates GDP with assumption that prices in Iran are the same as prices in USA---if prices in Iran were the same as prices in USA----Iran's GDP PPP is 1,6trl$ American equivalent-------and now if you spend 4% of GDP for military--then defense budget is *64bln$ american equivalent. (compared to US defense budget of 640bln$)*
> 
> Nominal (dollar) GDP is important if you are importer of weapons---because you need hard currency---dollar to buy foreign made weapons at their dollar market price. (like how Saudi Arabia does)
> 
> But if you produce all weapons in Iran and you buy these weapons in rials---then GDP PPP is better


Only human force is our advantage, nothing more.
Even the price of raw materials are based on the dollar value.


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> Only human force is our advantage, nothing more.
> Even the price of raw materials are based on the dollar value.


Raw material is in our ground. Cost To take it out is also more or less just labor which is cheap.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

Labor price, price of services, electricity price, gasoline price, cement price, transportation costs, domestically made metal-cutting equipment, domestic steel and aluminium.........everything is cheaper and in rials.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

I don't care how you calculate it, but Iran's military budget should be equivalent of $30 billion *minimum*.


----------



## 925boy

Philosopher. said:


> I don't care how you calculate it, but Iran's military budget should be equivalent of $30 billion *minimum*.


If we consider the possibility of a secret/not-public military budget also, it might be that.


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> General staff of Iran's armed forces said Iran's overall defense budget is less than 6 billion dollars.
> It was in response to (traitor) Zarif's lies:
> توضیح سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه درباره ارقام بودجه نظامی ایران- اخبار بین الملل - اخبار تسنیم - Tasnim
> 
> $6 billion and people expect them to develop, mass produce and acquire air crafts, ships, submarines, tanks, air defenses, etc and quickly!



I told you fanboys that the Air Force budget is less than 500 million, but you wouldn’t accept that.

That is why F-313 is a toy and will be a toy. No money for a domestic fighter jet program other Than the absurd F-5 program.

And if Artesh Budget is 6 billion then IRGC budget is 75% more so IRGC is sucking up another 15+ billion


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> I told you fanboys that the Air Force budget is less than 500 million, but you wouldn’t accept that.
> 
> That is why F-313 is a toy and will be a toy. No money for a domestic fighter jet program other Than the absurd F-5 program.
> 
> And if Artesh Budget is 6 billion then IRGC budget is 75% more so IRGC is sucking up another 15+ billion


it's overall budget, Army + IRGC.

Qaher, Fotros, airborne radar and missiles, these were real but wont advance in this traitor government.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

mohsen said:


> it's overall budget, Army + IRGC.
> 
> Qaher, Fotros, airborne radar and missiles, these were real but wont advance in this traitor government.



But we know IRGC has many means of funding itself. It's not like they're completely reliant on this budget. The Artesh on the other hand is badly effected.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Cthulhu said:


> Iran's commander in chief had the choice of building nuclear bombs, Instead he issued a bull$hit fatwa and declared nuclear weapons haram, The other sheikh handed over all of Iran's nuclear stockpile to the west practically killing the chance for Iran to be a nuclear power. Akhonds are making Iran weak, They should answer for the situation that they created.


fatwa will change due the condition and time..........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

Russian nominal GDP is 1,6 trl$ and GDP PPP is 4trln$---2,5 times bigger----meaning cost of living in Russia is 2,5 times cheaper than in USA.

And here are the dollar prices of military equipment bought by Russian ministry of defense (the price for MoD is cheaper than price for export):

T90C---2,6 mln$

BTR-82A-----0,5 mln$

BMP3--------1,3mln$

Tigr armored car-------140K$

Ka-52 attack helicopter-----15mln$

Msta-S self-propelled howitzer--------------1,5mln$

Kalibr cruise missile-----700K$

new Kilo submarine--------180mln$

new destroyer--------500mln$

*^^ These are prices in dollar for Russian ministry of defense*

Now, Iran's nominal GDP is 450bln$ and GDP PPP is 1,6trln$----3,55 times bigger--------meaning cost of living in Iran is 3,55 times cheaper than in USA

So Iran is cheaper than Russia, so we can assume that prices of Iranian made military equipment are lower than Russian prices. Based on Russian prices we can estimate *rough dollar price of Iranian made military equipment .*

Karrar tank--------2mln$

New APC-----0,4mln$

New IFV------1mln$

Raad armored car----120K$

Shahed 216-----------13mln$

Raad 2 self-propelled howitzer----1mln$

Howeyzeh cruise missile-------400K$

Fateh 313 ballistic missile----------1mln$

Iranian 3000ton submarine-------140mln$

Fateh 600 ton submarine------40mln$

7000ton destroyer---------400mln$

(+ add training, maintenance, spare parts, ammunition costs etc.)
*Note that Iranian dollar military budget in 2017 was 16bln$*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

GWXP said:


> Russian nominal GDP is 1,6 trl$ and GDP PPP is 4trln$---2,5 times bigger----meaning cost of living in Russia is 2,5 times cheaper than in USA.
> 
> And here are the dollar prices of military equipment bought by Russian ministry of defense (the price for MoD is cheaper than price for export):
> 
> T90C---2mln$
> 
> BTR-82A-----0,5 mln$
> 
> BMP3--------1,3mln$
> 
> Tigr armored car-------140K$
> 
> Ka-52 attack helicopter-----15mln$
> 
> Msta-S self-propelled howitzer--------------1,5mln$
> 
> Kalibr cruise missile-----700K$
> 
> new Kilo submarine--------180mln$
> 
> new destroyer--------500mln$
> 
> *^^ These are prices in dollar for Russian ministry of defense*
> 
> Now, Iran's nominal GDP is 450bln$ and GDP PPP is 1,6trln$----3,55 times bigger--------meaning cost of living in Iran is 3,55 times cheaper than in USA
> 
> So Iran is cheaper than Russia, so we can assume that prices of Iranian made military equipment are lower than Russian prices. Based on Russian prices we can estimate *rough dollar price of Iranian made military equipment .*
> 
> Karrar tank--------1,8mln$
> 
> New APC-----0,4mln$
> 
> New IFV------1mln$
> 
> Raad armored car----120K$
> 
> Shahed 216-----------13mln$
> 
> Raad 2 self-propelled howitzer----1mln$
> 
> Howeyzeh cruise missile-------400K$
> 
> Fateh 313 ballistic missile----------1mln$
> 
> Iranian 3000ton submarine-------140mln$
> 
> Fateh 600 ton submarine------40mln$
> 
> 7000ton destroyer---------400mln$
> 
> (+ add training, maintenance, spare parts, ammunition costs etc.)
> *Note that Iranian dollar military budget in 2017 was 16bln$*



IRGC is only able to build up that missile arsenal and underground bases because the possess all the chain. From mining to machining.

Same for Russia. They don't buy raw materials on the market. That's a path outside the capitalist system of those countries.

So when a Fateh costs $<100k it's due to that special situation.
Otherwise Iran would never have this deterrence level with such a small budget. That's also why only products that are almost entirely produced inside the Iran via this path enter mass/serial production that makes a change.
Missiles and now air defence.
Everything else lacks critical subsystems like Karrar --> engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GWXP

PeeD said:


> IRGC is only able to build up that missile arsenal and underground bases because the possess all the chain. From mining to machining.
> 
> Same for Russia. They don't buy raw materials on the market. That's a path outside the capitalist system of those countries.
> 
> So when a Fateh costs $<100k it's due to that special situation.
> Otherwise Iran would never have this deterrence level with such a small budget. That's also why only products that are almost entirely produced inside the Iran via this path enter mass/serial production that makes a change.
> Missiles and now air defence.
> Everything else lacks critical subsystems like Karrar --> engine.


I doubt that Fateh costs 100K$

I read that Iskander missile costs around 3mln$ for Russian defense ministry

Chinese missiles similar to Fateh were sold at 1.5mln$ per unit to Turkey in 2000s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

GWXP said:


> I doubt that Fateh costs 100K$
> 
> I read that Iskander missile costs around 3mln$ for Russian defense ministry
> 
> Chinese missiles similar to Fateh were sold at 1.5mln$ per unit to Turkey in 2000s


Please read his post again. Cost and money doesn’t mean anything if you own the whole chain in a self sufficient manner.


Closed loop economy doesn’t bleed, so all money spent is returned through taxes. Iran needs to apply the irgc economy on the whole country and eliminate corruption and nepotism.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GWXP

Sina-1 said:


> Please read his post again. Cost and money doesn’t mean anything if you own the whole chain in a self sufficient manner.
> 
> 
> Closed loop economy doesn’t bleed, so all money spent is returned through taxes. Iran needs to apply the irgc economy on the whole country and eliminate corruption and nepotism.


Still it doesn't mean 500km ballistic missile costs 100k$---if so----for 1bln$ you can buy 10.000 Fateh 110 which is fantastic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

GWXP said:


> Still it doesn't mean 500km ballistic missile costs 100k$---if so----for 1bln$ you can buy 10.000 Fateh 110 which is fantastic


The question of cost is connected to the question of value. It is important for global economist to talk in these terms because few countries can sustain the whole chain in a self sufficient manner. Therefore there is a need for trade and cooperation across the borders so all countries can thrive. Without the concept of money, trade becomes extremely difficult.

however the above system becomes irrelevant if ALL material and know how can be sustained in ONE country. No trade is needed and thus the concept of value, cost and money becomes irrelevant. Iran can produce millions of Fateh without loosing a sweat. If it please you, you can say it costs 10$ a piece or 10billion$ a piece. It does not matter because the production is completely closed loop.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

Sina-1 said:


> Please read his post again. Cost and money doesn’t mean anything if you own the whole chain in a self sufficient manner.
> 
> 
> Closed loop economy doesn’t bleed, so all money spent is returned through taxes. Iran needs to apply the irgc economy on the whole country and eliminate corruption and nepotism.


If it was so cheap---all countries in the world (instead of buying aircrafts ) would have armed themselves to teeth with SRBMs

More reasonable estimates from countries which also have full-cycle of production--like China and Russia---show that SRBM cost is anywhere between 1-2mln$ per unit (solid fuel, guidance, filament casing etc. in reality is probably more expensive than 100k$)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

GWXP said:


> Still it doesn't mean 500km ballistic missile costs 100k$---if so----for 1bln$ you can buy 10.000 Fateh 110 which is fantastic


Margins on advanced weapons are extremely high. Reason is they are not produced in as high the number as commercial products. That's why the weapon companies that can actually sell their products in free market all do very well financially.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar




----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> we not buying any Tanks any way
> 
> 
> we have to try ,
> when it comes to engines we have tech of SU-35,
> but to get to level design and characteristics, body infrastructure, avionic we have to get your hand on something good to be able to catch up fast



@yavar 

can Iran can get it hands on something (level design and characteristics, body infrastructure, avionic..) to reverse engineer it....maybe from venezuela, belarus, ukraine, armenia?



yavar said:


>



what is he saying about the Sepehr AIP?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

GWXP said:


> I doubt that Fateh costs 100K$
> 
> I read that Iskander missile costs around 3mln$ for Russian defense ministry
> 
> Chinese missiles similar to Fateh were sold at 1.5mln$ per unit to Turkey in 2000s



Fateh costs Iran under $100K because it's a domestically produced and the raw materials are basically free so all your really paying for is manpower that is relatively cheap in Iran and parts that make up the sub systems both domestics and imported that by themselves don't cost much.
However that wouldn't be the production costs if Iran wanted to export it!

FYI Iran's Simogh SLV costs Iran $3.5 Million with standard pricing so your numbers are way off!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Fateh costs Iran under $100K because it's a domestically produced and the raw materials are basically free so all your really paying for is manpower that is relatively cheap in Iran and parts that make up the sub systems both domestics and imported that by themselves don't cost much.
> However that wouldn't be the production costs if Iran wanted to export it!
> 
> FYI Iran's Simogh SLV costs Iran $3.5 Million with standard pricing so your numbers are way off!



Can you post proof from a Commander or publication that states 100K?

I am wondering where this number came from?


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Can you post proof from a Commander or publication that states 100K?
> 
> I am wondering where this number came from?



I can post prof that Simorgh costs 3.5M if you like!

Simorgh cost is $3.5M and that's a multi stage system with cluster engine booster equipped with TVC on all stages.... so yea 

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ی-می-شوند-به-دنبال-ماهواره-بر-سوخت-جامد-هستیم

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> I can post prof that Simorgh costs 3.5M if you like!
> 
> Simorgh cost is $3.5M and that's a multi stage system with cluster engine booster equipped with TVC on all stages.... so yea
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ی-می-شوند-به-دنبال-ماهواره-بر-سوخت-جامد-هستیم



So you pulled the 100K out of your butt? That is what you are saying?

I thought there was a commander who said a Qiam missile cost 250K or something along those lines maybe it Shahed-129 he was talking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

For me it sounds ok. I would tax Fateh at 150k-200k, but not millions.

Edit: cause of the gyro and the nav systems. The body itself cost not much. Also the solid fuel is produced in masses so it also do not cost that much.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> So you pulled the 100K out of your butt? That is what you are saying?
> 
> I thought there was a commander who said a Qiam missile cost 250K or something along those lines maybe it Shahed-129 he was talking.



The Head of Iran's Missile Forces is on record for saying that the most expensive single stage Iranian Ballistic Missiles costs under $400K (Ghadr F & Emad) so believe what you like!
As for how I got under $100K for the Fatteh-110 well you are free to believe whatever you like I really don't care!

FYI Qiam is a liquid fuel missile with a range of 700km vs Fatteh-110 that is a 300km solid fuel so they are far cheaper and use far cheaper launchers and are produced in far greater numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## GWXP

VEVAK said:


> Fateh costs Iran under $100K because it's a domestically produced and the raw materials are basically free so all your really paying for is manpower that is relatively cheap in Iran and parts that make up the sub systems both domestics and imported that by themselves don't cost much.
> However that wouldn't be the production costs if Iran wanted to export it!
> 
> FYI Iran's Simogh SLV costs Iran $3.5 Million with standard pricing so your numbers are way off!


F-35 is also domestically produced in USA with domestic raw materials and still it doesnt have a cheap costs.

Pershing 1770km ballistic missile (similar to Sejjil and being solid fuel- cheaper than Khorramshahr) was also produced domestically in USA with all the subsytems made in USA and yet it cost in 1984 was 4.4mln dollar---adjusted for inflation it is 9.5 mln dollar today.

You guys think ballistic missile is a firework?

First you need to invest billions of dollars into production facilities and their expensive equipment and infrastructure and then you have to pay it off.

Many countries in the world produce military equipment domestically with domestic raw materials...and yet they pay millions of dollars per unit....because you need to pay off billions you invest into industrial base.

For example Russia also produces Iskander missiles domestically with domestic labor and raw materials and yet I read that price per missile for Russian ministry of Defense is 3,5mln dollar per missile.

Maybe Russians need a magical advice from Iran on how to bring price per missile to 100k so they could produce them in tens of thousands???

If the price was 100k---for one billion Iran could buy 10.000 Fateh and threaten 10.000 targets in the region with precise strike and this could make Iran a superpower that doesnt need air force at all.

And yet Pentagon estimates that Iran has 2000 missiles and this number only shows how expensive missiles are.

I think Pentagon is smarter than you and they make more reasonable estimates

Even the short range ballistic missiles that are exported by China for example cost millions of dollar per unit...and I doubt that Chinese add 1000% to the original price to make profit....30%-50% adding value to the original price is more reasonable.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

Guys the Mofo @TheImmortal really doesn't worth to quote.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> The Head of Iran's Missile Forces is on record for saying that the most expensive single stage Iranian Ballistic Missiles costs under $400K (Ghadr F & Emad) so believe what you like!
> As for how I got under $100K for the Fatteh-110 well you are free to believe whatever you like I really don't care!
> 
> FYI Qiam is a liquid fuel missile with a range of 700km vs Fatteh-110 that is a 300km solid fuel so they are far cheaper and use far cheaper launchers and are produced in far greater numbers




“Iran no doubt is seeking to establish the ability to produce the underlying components and materials used to make complete missile systems and subsystems, which also means it must import associated production equipment and technology. But Iran remains dependent on importing many such components and materials, as well as their constituent subcomponents and materials.48 Key items that Iran apparently continues to seek from abroad include:
• Guidance technologies to increase missile accuracy like gyroscopes, navigational sensors, gyrocompasses, and accelerometers;49
• Ultra high-strength steels and high-grade aluminum alloy used to make lighter rocket bodies for longer-range liquid-propellant missiles;50
• Ball bearings for use in liquid-propellant rocket engines;51
• Valves, electronics, and measuring equipment suitable for use in ground testing of liquid-propellant ballistic missiles and SLVs;52
• Production equipment and feedstock material for high-quality carbon fiber and aramid fiber (kevlar),53 used to reduce weight in missile components like solid rocket motor cases (and thus increase missile range);
• Graphite cylinders that are machined to make heat-resistant lightweight missile parts like nozzle throats and re-entry vehicle nose tips (which again can help increase missile range);54
• Tungsten metal powder and tungsten-copper alloy plates used to make jet vanes for thrust vector control systems.55
Iran has obtained such items in the past, and likely will continue to do so in the future, from entities in China, North Korea, and Russia.56”

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/FP_20190321_missile_program_WEB.pdf



*Again you made a claim that Iran’s missile program is entirely self reliant on raw materials and guidance systems. That claim is without proof as well.*

Personally, I think Fateh costs are more in the range of 200-300K and the inhibitor is not in fact *cost, *but quality materials needed to “finish” each missile that Iran still imports. Or else even with a cost of $200K per missile, Iran could stockpile tens of thousands Fateh missile if the missile was entirely built FROM SCRATCH within Iran.

We know that is not the case because Iran’s space program and missile program has been tainted with defected parts/materials by US/Israel/EU in attempt to cause doubt in supply chain of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Again you made a claim that Iran’s missile program is entirely self reliant on raw materials and guidance systems. That claim is without proof as well.



If it comes to Fateh 313 i would say Iran is self reliant. The electronic, the gyro, the nav system, the body, the propellant, the warhead - all parts are produced in Iran as far as i read.

Edit:

laser gyroscop is old stuff in Iran. There are also old research at shiraz university to optimize this laser gyroscopes with new/different materials

http://ijop.ir/article-1-329-en.html

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GWXP

Iran is self-sufficient in ballistic missiles after all these decades of development.

If it was not --- US would have pressured all countries not to sell missile spare parts to Iran.

Stupid claims that Iran is not self reliant are as stupid as claims by "experts" that Iranian missiles have a CEP of 500 meters.

But still it doesn,t mean that Iranian short range ballistic missiles cost 200k, which is nonsense especially when you compare with stated prices on Chinese or Russian or old US missiles.

Claims of some magical way of production in Iran that goes against all laws of economy and brings price per unit at 100-200k are also false

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2



Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## arashkamangir

sahureka2 said:


>



its a beauty but too bad it wont likely see a day. I hope atleast out of it, something good come out for Iranian aircraft industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> “Iran no doubt is seeking to establish the ability to produce the underlying components and materials used to make complete missile systems and subsystems, which also means it must import associated production equipment and technology. But Iran remains dependent on importing many such components and materials, as well as their constituent subcomponents and materials.48 Key items that Iran apparently continues to seek from abroad include:
> • Guidance technologies to increase missile accuracy like gyroscopes, navigational sensors, gyrocompasses, and accelerometers;49
> • Ultra high-strength steels and high-grade aluminum alloy used to make lighter rocket bodies for longer-range liquid-propellant missiles;50
> • Ball bearings for use in liquid-propellant rocket engines;51
> • Valves, electronics, and measuring equipment suitable for use in ground testing of liquid-propellant ballistic missiles and SLVs;52
> • Production equipment and feedstock material for high-quality carbon fiber and aramid fiber (kevlar),53 used to reduce weight in missile components like solid rocket motor cases (and thus increase missile range);
> • Graphite cylinders that are machined to make heat-resistant lightweight missile parts like nozzle throats and re-entry vehicle nose tips (which again can help increase missile range);54
> • Tungsten metal powder and tungsten-copper alloy plates used to make jet vanes for thrust vector control systems.55
> Iran has obtained such items in the past, and likely will continue to do so in the future, from entities in China, North Korea, and Russia.56”
> 
> https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/FP_20190321_missile_program_WEB.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> *Again you made a claim that Iran’s missile program is entirely self reliant on raw materials and guidance systems. That claim is without proof as well.*
> 
> Personally, I think Fateh costs are more in the range of 200-300K and the inhibitor is not in fact *cost, *but quality materials needed to “finish” each missile that Iran still imports. Or else even with a cost of $200K per missile, Iran could stockpile tens of thousands Fateh missile if the missile was entirely built FROM SCRATCH within Iran.
> 
> We know that is not the case because Iran’s space program and missile program has been tainted with defected parts/materials by US/Israel/EU in attempt to cause doubt in supply chain of Iran.



LOL! If you were to believe the absurd nonsense coming out of Brookings institute, IISS and other such clowns on Iranian missiles then you'd have to believe morons who by 2010 still didn't even know Iran's Sejil-2 was a 2 stage missile and these are morons who get paid for being experts on Iranians missiles! 






So posting clownish American institutes as proof on Iranian missiles is the most ridiculous thing you've done so far! And I'm not saying everything they post is a lie but if you post enough layman's level BS on a single subject clearly your bond to get some things right... 

For example Iran's Tungsten production and requirements but that doesn't make everything they post true like ball brings that is the MOST absurd thing I've heard so far and again it's claims by morons that clearly didn't do their research right! 
You also have to realize that sometimes choosing to import a part as appose to producing it is more a financial decision rather than an ability to produce which is the case when it comes to hi RPM ball brings and Iran does most defiantly does produce them however they are a rather cheap part to import and currently importing them comes out cheaper then increasing production.

As for Gyro's that's just absurd because missile gyro's have been produce by Iran since the late 90's and I can easily state that well over 80% of these claims are pure fiction and easily disproven if one spends enough time researching the subject! 

As for the Fatteh-110 this is a missile produce by Iran for nearly 2 decades now and except for a few chips, processors & memory storage devices no vital part is actually imported

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> LOL! If you were to believe the absurd nonsense coming out of Brookings institute, IISS and other such clowns on Iranian missiles then you'd have to believe morons who by 2010 still didn't even know Iran's Sejil-2 was a 2 stage missile and these are morons who get paid for being experts on Iranians missiles!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So posting clownish American institutes as proof on Iranian missiles is the most ridiculous thing you've done so far! And I'm not saying everything they post is a lie but if you post enough layman's level BS on a single subject clearly your bond to get some things right...
> 
> For example Iran's Tungsten production and requirements but that doesn't make everything they post true like ball brings that is the MOST absurd thing I've heard so far and again it's claims by morons that clearly didn't do their research right!
> You also have to realize that sometimes choosing to import a part as appose to producing it is more a financial decision rather than an ability to produce which is the case when it comes to hi RPM ball brings and Iran does most defiantly does produce them however they are a rather cheap part to import and currently importing them comes out cheaper then increasing production.
> 
> As for Gyro's that's just absurd because missile gyro's have been produce by Iran since the late 90's and I can easily state that well over 80% of these claims are pure fiction and easily disproven if one spends enough time researching the subject!
> 
> As for the Fatteh-110 this is a missile produce by Iran for nearly 2 decades now and except for a few chips, processors & memory storage devices no vital part is actually imported



It is well documented Iran imports for its missile program, I don’t have the time to spoon feed you that information.

Like I said if Fateh did cost 100K per missile and there were NO BARRIERS to production (everything sourced from within) than Iran would have 10,000 Zolfghars/313/etc for a mere 10-15B dollars spread across X amount of years. and we know that IS NOT the case. So again something is holding back Iranian missile production.

logical answer is Iran still for whatever reason decides to import certain things wether it’s economic cost or inability of production who knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> It is well documented Iran imports for its missile program, I don’t have the time to spoon feed you that information.
> 
> Like I said if Fateh did cost 100K per missile and there were NO BARRIERS to production (everything sourced from within) than Iran would have 10,000 Zolfghars/313/etc for a mere 10-15B dollars spread across X amount of years. and we know that IS NOT the case. So again something is holding back Iranian missile production.
> 
> logical answer is Iran still for whatever reason decides to import certain things wether it’s economic cost or inability of production who knows.



I said Fateh-110 costs under 100K I didn't say Zolfaghar, Dezful, or even the 313 cost that much! The others are missiles Iran's produced just in the past 5 years as appose to the Fatteh-110 A-D that have been in production since 2001 and it's only been in the past decade that they have had the capability to hit targets as small as Aircraft bunkers.... Also, after almost 2 decades what makes you think Iran's stocks isn't already at well over 5,000 Fateh series (That's including all models)?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


>


Very Nice!
Where did you find that?,its probably the best one that I`ve seen.


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> I said Fateh-110 costs under 100K I didn't say Zolfaghar, Dezful, or even the 313 cost that much! The others are missiles Iran's produced just in the past 5 years as appose to the Fatteh-110 A-D that have been in production since 2001 and it's only been in the past decade that they have had the capability to hit targets as small as Aircraft bunkers.... Also, after almost 2 decades what makes you think Iran's stocks isn't already at well over 5,000 Fateh series (That's including all models)?



So now you are backtracking and saying early generations of Fateh series cost under 100K LOL! How do you know early gens are even being produced? How do you know cost? All speculation and conjecture.

And it would be highly unusual for F-110 to have 100K price tag and 313 which is a composite body smaller warhead to suddenly be 500K for example. The discrepancy wouldn’t be that large. The most expensive out of all of them would be Zolfghar as it is a newer and longer range missile.

Nonetheless If Iran did have 5,000 Fatehs they wouldn’t be firing 5-10 in a single attack (ISIS attack one, ISIS attack 2, Kurdistan attack, US attack) they would fire 30+ of the older stock at a time.

I would be shocked if Iran’s ENTIRE BM arsenal reaches 5,000. We have already had this debate so let’s not get into it again. Pentagon assessment is 2,000 BMs and I give a margin of error of +1,000 missiles so 3,000 is a conservative assessment. But even that could be rosy. No proof just speculation (just like you).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> Nonetheless If Iran did have 5,000 Fatehs they wouldn’t be firing 5-10 in a single attack (ISIS attack one, ISIS attack 2, Kurdistan attack, US attack) they would fire 30+ of the older stock at a time.



Much is about the legitimacy of such strikes, Iran is not on the disproportionate response path like th U.S and Israel.
Funnily enough they only needed a single missile for the attack on the Kurdish PJAK HQ and simply shot 5 or so other Fatehs into their open training grounds, just to deliver the capability message.

ISIS attack on the other hand required new Zolfaghars, which were significantly more expensive than F-110 and the arsenal was still low.

Friends: For those like me who track Irans arsenal via google earth, these numbers like 2000 or 5000 are a joke... F-110 is the low-end tactical strike assets of the whole IRGC, the basis of their capability. Remember the IRGC was the force that chose to omit creating their own airforce and go a novel path or replacing airpower with missile power, at a time, after the war, where nobody could dream of capabilities like today. They represent indigenous Iranian style of warfare.
Don't be confused by their 40 Su-22... they are for special requirements where air launched cruise missiles or cheap heavy bombing are required.
How important do you think their F-110 arsenal is for them?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> Very Nice!
> Where did you find that?,its probably the best one that I`ve seen.



I found it while doing a search on the web, and I immediately downloaded it, but I did not save the address and I can no longer find it


----------



## DoubleYouSee

sahureka2 said:


> I found it while doing a search on the web, and I immediately downloaded it, but I did not save the address and I can no longer find it


Use google 
https://www.google.com/imghp?hl=en&tab=wi&ogbl
upload your photo and search it.....all the sites contain that pick will pop up


----------



## sahureka2

DoubleYouSee said:


> Use google
> https://www.google.com/imghp?hl=en&tab=wi&ogbl
> upload your photo and search it.....all the sites contain that pick will pop up



Yes, thank, found it was a Twitter page

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> So now you are backtracking and saying early generations of Fateh series cost under 100K LOL! How do you know early gens are even being produced? How do you know cost? All speculation and conjecture.
> 
> And it would be highly unusual for F-110 to have 100K price tag and 313 which is a composite body smaller warhead to suddenly be 500K for example. The discrepancy wouldn’t be that large. The most expensive out of all of them would be Zolfghar as it is a newer and longer range missile.
> 
> Nonetheless If Iran did have 5,000 Fatehs they wouldn’t be firing 5-10 in a single attack (ISIS attack one, ISIS attack 2, Kurdistan attack, US attack) they would fire 30+ of the older stock at a time.
> 
> I would be shocked if Iran’s ENTIRE BM arsenal reaches 5,000. We have already had this debate so let’s not get into it again. Pentagon assessment is 2,000 BMs and I give a margin of error of +1,000 missiles so 3,000 is a conservative assessment. But even that could be rosy. No proof just speculation (just like you).



Yea because the Pentagon has been dead on when it comes to Iran every single time! LOL! Lets not forget these are the same morons that year after year over the past 3 decades kept predicting that Iran's Helo force and Air Force where a year away from being grounded and here we are 3 decades later LOL! Hell they even shredded their own F-14's and their predictions still didn't come true LOL! So if that was their intel regarding Iran's Air Force I would say their intel regarding Iran's missile forces is practically none existent if they are assessing Iran's stock at 2000. 

Iran has ~40 under ground missile bases that the U.S. is aware of so if you were to average that each of them only hold an average of 100 missiles that would be how many???? And that's at the very least! FYI unlike liquid fuel BM, Iran's solid fuel BM especially the Fateh series are much easier to hide because they don't require large facilities for fuel and can use much smaller and cheaper TEL's and launchers....

I would say more likely than not even Pentagons 2000 missile estimate is more related to the number of liquid fuel BM + the Sejil 2 and dose not include missiles like the Fateh class.

Also who said that the F-313 was $500K? I told you Iran's most expensive single stage BM costs $400K and that's just under 2000 km liquid fuel BM so where do you get $500K from?
I actually don't know how much the F-313 or Zolfagar or Dezful or even the Mobin cost.... but if I was to guess I'd put them all at under $300k depending on the model......

FYI Iran didn't stop producing 300km Fateh missile once 500km Fateh-313 or 700km Zolfaghar or 1000km Dezful's hit production just as Iran didn't stop producing Qiam missiles once 1700km Emad's hit production!

Iran like any power produces and or acquires weapons based on threat assessments and at the end of the day the vast majority of U.S. bases in the region that can pose a threat to Iran fall within ~300km of Iranian soil so it's really not that hard to do the math and understand why the Fateh series would be the most widely produced Iranian BM and why Iran's stock of them would be far greater than 2000......



PeeD said:


> Much is about the legitimacy of such strikes, Iran is not on the disproportionate response path like th U.S and Israel.
> Funnily enough they only needed a single missile for the attack on the Kurdish PJAK HQ and simply shot 5 or so other Fatehs into their open training grounds, just to deliver the capability message.
> 
> ISIS attack on the other hand required new Zolfaghars, which were significantly more expensive than F-110 and the arsenal was still low.
> 
> Friends: For those like me who track Irans arsenal via google earth, these numbers like 2000 or 5000 are a joke... F-110 is the low-end tactical strike assets of the whole IRGC, the basis of their capability. Remember the IRGC was the force that chose to omit creating their own airforce and go a novel path or replacing airpower with missile power, at a time, after the war, where nobody could dream of capabilities like today. They represent indigenous Iranian style of warfare.
> Don't be confused by their 40 Su-22... they are for special requirements where air launched cruise missiles or cheap heavy bombing are required.
> How important do you think their F-110 arsenal is for them?



Fateh class is hands down THE MOST important missile Iran produces and is ranked highest priority for the IRGC because vast majority of US bases fall within 300km of Iran so they are THE MOST widely produced Iranian BM! And I would say is hands down the MOST significant weapon produced by Iran!

O and by the way the production is so high that it's basically the only missile that Iran exports and I didn't say 5000 I said Iran's stock is well over 5000

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tarao

Sineva said:


> Very Nice!
> Where did you find that?,its probably the best one that I`ve seen.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/862677118597029889This pic was drawn by him. He hates unauthorized reproduction of his works.
you can see his works on Pixiv . The F-313 is subtlely popular with Japanese aircraft fans. https://www.pixiv.net/users/157257

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthHurtz

Tarao said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/862677118597029889This pic was drawn by him. He hates unauthorized reproduction of his works.
> you can see his works on Pixiv . The F-313 is subtlely popular with Japanese aircraft fans. https://www.pixiv.net/users/157257



Because of its goofy, anime-like design?


----------



## Sineva

Tarao said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/862677118597029889This pic was drawn by him. He hates unauthorized reproduction of his works.
> you can see his works on Pixiv . The F-313 is subtlely popular with Japanese aircraft fans. https://www.pixiv.net/users/157257


Many Thanks.


----------



## sahureka2

Tarao said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/862677118597029889
> This pic was drawn by him. He hates unauthorized reproduction of his works.
> you can see his works on Pixiv . The F-313 is subtlely popular with Japanese aircraft fans. https://www.pixiv.net/users/157257



I apologize to Mr. Zephyr, but I have not read, or translated correctly, any prohibition;
however it is evident on the drawing who created it and the date on which intellectual property always remains.


----------



## arashkamangir

Wasn't Zephyr a member here or on IMF? Sounds so familiar.


----------



## TheImmortal

For those that wonder why Iran doesn’t like Chinese fighters

*This Is the High Cost China Is Paying for Copying a Stolen Su-33 Russian Jet Fighter*

https://www.yahoo.com/news/high-cost-china-paying-copying-103000294.html


----------



## Tarao

Does anyone know of the IRIAF aircrafts exhibition that was to be held at Mehrabad Airbase? It was held last year, but not this year（today）.


----------



## skyshadow

*if i'm not wrong then this is Hidar missile and if i'm wrong then this is Sadid-1 missile both of them can play the role of TOW and Hellfire missiles*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## HAIDER

anyone know about this place.


----------



## Caspian Parsi

HAIDER said:


> anyone know about this place.


 
The name is *Naqsh-e Rostam* نقش رستم‎ in pars province near shiraz 

tombs belonging to Achaemenid kings 

*Achaemenid tombs*
Four tombs belonging to Achaemenid kings are carved out of the rock face at a considerable height above the ground. The tombs are sometimes known as the _Persian crosses_, after the shape of the facades of the tombs. The entrance to each tomb is at the center of each cross, which opens onto a small chamber, where the king lay in a sarcophagus. The horizontal beam of each of the tomb's facades is believed to be a replica of a Persepolitan entrance.

One of the tombs is explicitly identified, by an accompanying inscription (“parsa parsahya puthra ariya ariyachitra”, meaning, “a Parsi, the son of a Parsi, an Aryan, of Aryan family),[4] as the tomb of Darius I (_c._ 522-486 BC). The other three tombs are believed to be those of Xerxes I (_c._ 486-465 BC), Artaxerxes I (_c._ 465-424 BC), and Darius II (_c._ 423-404 BC) respectively. The order of the tombs in Naqsh-e Rostam follows (left to right): Darius II, Artaxerxes I, Darius I, Xerxes I. The matching of the other kings to tombs is somewhat speculative; the relief figures are not intended as individualized portraits.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *if i'm not wrong then this is Hidar missile and if i'm wrong then this is Sadid-1 missile both of them can play the role of TOW and Hellfire missiles*


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ح-شدند-تجهیز-بالگردها-به-موشک-های-جدید-ضد-زره
The translation of the above page says Sadid,tho in the pic it also appears to have long fins at the back and bares more of a resemblance to the hellfire clone shown mounted on the fotros drone of a few years back.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/11/14/2195411/بالگردهای-214-سپاه-مسلح-شدند-تجهیز-بالگردها-به-موشک-های-جدید-ضد-زره
> The translation of the above page says Sadid,tho in the pic it also appears to have long fins at the back and bares more of a resemblance to the hellfire clone shown mounted on the fotros drone of a few years back.


Name on the missile is Qaem-114

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> Name on the missile is Qaem-114











maybe Iranian version of hellfire??

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> Name on the missile is Qaem-114





Mithridates said:


> maybe Iranian version of hellfire??


Certainly looks like it,I guess they kept that program going even after fotros was halted.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah

Why was Fotros program halted and how do we know for sure ? Perhaps the Shahed platform better suits Iran's asymmetrical warfare tactics. On one hand it does seem somewhat feasible to have a larger drone which can act as a bomber of sorts but if you think about it not many countries have massive drones. There's the RQ-4 Global Hawk, the US built 30+ of them but I heard recently on a news program that only a couple are still in service ? I guess perhaps the medium drones can do the job and maybe the larger drones are too large, expensive and cumbersome ?



Sineva said:


> Certainly looks like it,I guess they kept that program going even after fotros was halted.


----------



## Aramagedon

*IRGC Choppers Equipped with New Anti-Armor Missile*
*The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Ground Force has armed its helicopters with a homegrown air-to-surface anti-armor missile.*




The images of a number of military helicopters overhauled in Iran suggest that the IRGC Ground Force’s Airborne Division has furnished its Bell 214 choppers with a new air-to-surface missile, known as the Iranian version of American AGM-114 Hellfire missile.

The weapons mounted on the IRGC’s Bell 214 helicopter, unveiled on Tuesday, are dubbed “Qaem-114” missiles, a new generation of the Qaem-class smart bombs.






An Iranian missile similar to the US-made AGM-114 Hellfire was for the first time unveiled in November 2013, when the Iranian Defense Ministry introduced the strategic homegrown drone dubbed “Fotros”.

The new Iranian anti-armor missile appears to be equipped with a dual-charge penetrating warhead, probably powerful enough to pierce through armored shells as thick as 1,000 mm.

It is not still clear how the Qaem-114 is guided, but it is probably made with optical sensors like other Qaem-class air-launched bombs.

Iranian experts have the technical know-how to manufacture the laser-guided version of such missiles, as they have already developed the Bina-1 and Bina-2 air-launched missiles.

It is very likely that the new Iranian anti-armor missile will be mounted on Cobra attack helicopters and combat drones capable of flying with heavy payloads.

The new weapon is expected to enhance the operational capabilities of the Iranian aerial units against armored ordnance.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...choppers-equipped-with-new-anti-armor-missile

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Aramagedon

Happy IRIAF Anniversary.


https://www.instagram.com/tv/B8So32QpW_-/?igshid=xvqov8rvnpc5

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Why was Fotros program halted and how do we know for sure ? Perhaps the Shahed platform better suits Iran's asymmetrical warfare tactics. On one hand it does seem somewhat feasible to have a larger drone which can act as a bomber of sorts but if you think about it not many countries have massive drones. There's the RQ-4 Global Hawk, the US built 30+ of them but I heard recently on a news program that only a couple are still in service ? I guess perhaps the medium drones can do the job and maybe the larger drones are too large, expensive and cumbersome ?



Because Fostros was just an over-sized Shahed in a way. It didn’t have the jump in sensors and electronics that such a size UAV should have (think Global Hawk). Plus I imagine it was more expensive due to engine.

Lastly IRGC had no need for a 24 hour drone. Unlike US, IRGC isn’t launching drones from hundreds of KMs away. Shahed filled almost all roles well. Iran cannot reliably used Sats and GPS during wartime so this drone was kind of useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

yavar said:


>



Unless I understood incorrectly, it seems he stated they are working on planes with stealth characteristic? He also stated they're working Radar absorption materials for planes.

He talked about Kaman-22 UAV being in development.
He also talked about linking UAVs and fighter jets together.

He also talked about a jet engine they tested on Kowsar but I am not sure if he was not talking about Owj or something newer?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> Unless I understood incorrectly, it seems he stated they are working on planes with stealth characteristic? He also stated they're working Radar absorption materials for planes.
> 
> He talked about Kaman-22 UAV being in development.
> He also talked about linking UAVs and fighter jets together.
> 
> He also talked about a jet engine they tested on Kowsar but I am not sure if he was not talking about Owj or something newer?



Radar absorption material is nothing knew. Iranian universities were running test on material over 4-5 years ago. Military is generally much further along than public sector.

End of the day, no funding for Air Force so don’t expect much. Hence why they are focused on UAVs more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher. said:


> Unless I understood incorrectly, it seems he stated they are working on planes with stealth characteristic? He also stated they're working Radar absorption materials for planes.
> 
> He talked about Kaman-22 UAV being in development.
> He also talked about linking UAVs and fighter jets together.
> 
> He also talked about a jet engine they tested on Kowsar but I am not sure if he was not talking about Owj or something newer?



Military official especially Air Force official don't really like talking about technologies that aren't already public knowledge.

He only talked about OwJ and as for stealth in terms of design he only said they are looking into it for future designs so nothing beyond paper and CAD designs and in terms of material or RAM again he said nothing new since Iran's been working on RAM for quite a while.

Bad news is that after a year they will only have 3 Kowsar jet ready and he kind of pointed to the fact that they have up to 10 airframes almost ready so clearly something is lacking or else why only 3 after a year.... So bad news indeed!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

VEVAK said:


> Military official especially Air Force official don't really like talking about technologies that aren't already public knowledge.
> 
> He only talked about OwJ and as for stealth in terms of design he only said they are looking into it for future designs so nothing beyond paper and CAD designs and in terms of material or RAM again he said nothing new since Iran's been working on RAM for quite a while.
> 
> Bad news is that after a year they will only have 3 Kowsar jet ready and he kind of pointed to the fact that they have up to 10 airframes almost ready so clearly something is lacking or else why only 3 after a year.... So bad news indeed!



Could the slow construction of the Owj engines be the cause?


----------



## VEVAK

sahureka2 said:


> Could the slow construction of the Owj engines be the cause?



It could be but the Owj or J-85 is really not that advanced of an engine for that to be the cause plus why build 2 Aircrafts (Kowsar & Yasin) the would be based off that engine if you had trouble producing it plus that's something you can simply take off current Iranian F-5's and it would still be worth it....

I really don't know what the problem is but clearly there is one!


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> Military is generally much further along than public sector.


Wrong. Generally speaking, the public sector creates the technology and the military adapt the technology to *SPECIFIC* needs.

Take low radar observable, aka 'stealth', for example. Is there a need in the civilian sector to have a civilian aircraft that is difficult to detect by radars? No, there is not. While radar avoidance is %90 a military practice, there are civilian situations where a structure needs to be radar transparent, such as a radome. It is rare that the military initiates a new technology. The current Internet came from DARPANET, a military need for robust communication. Most of what is casually called 'military technology' are just adaptations to meet military needs that have next to no civilian comparisons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

VEVAK said:


> Military official especially Air Force official don't really like talking about technologies that aren't already public knowledge.
> 
> He only talked about OwJ and as for stealth in terms of design he only said they are looking into it for future designs so nothing beyond paper and CAD designs and in terms of material or RAM again he said nothing new since Iran's been working on RAM for quite a while.
> 
> Bad news is that after a year they will only have 3 Kowsar jet ready and he kind of pointed to the fact that they have up to 10 airframes almost ready so clearly something is lacking or else why only 3 after a year.... So bad news indeed!


air force do not want f-5s, in the first place the whole rebuilding tiger clones was to achieve knowledge about forming an aviation industry. he said this too, rosub danesh!!!. the important part (for air force) is not the wooden chair or bench it's the wood crafting ability.
the satisfying part was the part that he said i myself visited euro fighter production line and ours is better equipped than that.


----------



## sahureka2

Today I found this photo on Twitter,





and it reminded me of a post I had published in March 2019



sahureka2 said:


> I found another image in which you see some more elements, however the quality of the photo is low, I tried to improve it and at the top appears a structure that appears to be a part of the fuselage.



I ask if any of the users of this forum have recent information if this "prototype" has advanced the assembly stages

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Wrong. Generally speaking, the public sector creates the technology and the military adapt the technology to *SPECIFIC* needs.
> 
> Take low radar observable, aka 'stealth', for example. Is there a need in the civilian sector to have a civilian aircraft that is difficult to detect by radars? No, there is not. While radar avoidance is %90 a military practice, there are civilian situations where a structure needs to be radar transparent, such as a radome. It is rare that the military initiates a new technology. The current Internet came from DARPANET, a military need for robust communication. Most of what is casually called 'military technology' are just adaptations to meet military needs that have next to no civilian comparisons.



Wrong! It's usually the Military and or Military industrial complex that develops and creates a technology and it's usually the civilian industry that further enhances it! 
Here are some notable examples:
1.The Internet 2.Communications starting from mores code that let to land line to wireless communications that led to what you use as cell phones today to Sat communications 3.Jet Engines 4.Long list of naval Engines 5.DC electric engines 6.Examples in Metallurgy are vast and wide 7.Computers again stared as a military project
Actually the examples are all around you if you look close enough and go back far enough!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

VEVAK said:


> Military official especially Air Force official don't really like talking about technologies that aren't already public knowledge.
> 
> He only talked about OwJ and as for stealth in terms of design he only said they are looking into it for future designs so nothing beyond paper and CAD designs and in terms of material or RAM again he said nothing new since Iran's been working on RAM for quite a while.
> 
> Bad news is that after a year they will only have 3 Kowsar jet ready and he kind of pointed to the fact that they have up to 10 airframes almost ready so clearly something is lacking or else why only 3 after a year.... So bad news indeed!



Yes, I normally wait for higher officials like Defence ministers to reveal details about air force plana. But sadly it seems the pace of airforce is still very slow. I know at some point airforce will hopefully see rapid pace of development like we've seen in other areas, but I have no idea when that will be.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> air force do not want f-5s, in the first place the whole rebuilding tiger clones was to achieve knowledge about forming an aviation industry. he said this too, rosub danesh!!!. the important part (for air force) is not the wooden chair or bench it's the wood crafting ability.
> the satisfying part was the part that he said i myself visited euro fighter production line and ours is better equipped than that.



10 Air Frames wouldn't be waiting on parts if this was about want! Plus, the fact that the Kowsar is equipped with equipment necessary to use more capable PGM's that can be released at a safer distance and is equipped with far more advanced avionics totally separates it as a platform when compared to the standard American F-5's we purchased 50 years ago.... 

Something is clearly lacking here either that or he just didn't want to give out more accurate info as to why....


----------



## Philosopher

Perhaps this is just not a plane the airforce is very interested in buying in larger numbers. Given their limited budget, they might be wanting to spend on R&D on other projects?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher. said:


> Perhaps this is just not a plane the airforce is very interested in buying in larger numbers. Given their limited budget, they might be wanting to spend on R&D on other projects?



I would also say if their production numbers are so low Iran's Electronic Industries isn't going to invest in building a separate facility to build their radars.....


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The analyzes of combat aircraft here on this forum and the technological capabilities on this subject are pathetic. Iran will surprise you and your speculations will fall into the water. I have always said here that Iran is more advanced than their announcement processes.

Surprises are coming soon:

The Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Air Force, Brigadier General Aziz Nassirzadeh, praised Iranian capabilities to manufacture "combat aircraft" despite all restrictions: "It is recognized even by our adversaries: Iran masters the details of aeronautical technology. We manufacture, ourselves, the parts of our fighters from seats to engines and avionics systems. The aircraft’s fuselage is also built by our specialists. We continue to improve our combat capabilities in the sky. In the sky, the part which aims further and which reacts more quickly, will succeed. Hence our growing interest in long-range missiles, air-to-air, air-to-surface (sea) and air-to-ground missiles and the Fakour and Qader missiles are part of it, said the Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Air Force before adding: "Our objective is now to equip our aircraft with air-to-ground cruise missiles. We have made progress and we will shortly be revealing the fruit of our efforts, especially that new radar technology accompanies our F-5, F-4 and F-14 aircraft. ” 
P

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The analyzes of combat aircraft here on this forum and the technological capabilities on this subject are pathetic. Iran will surprise you and your speculations will fall into the water. I have always said here that Iran is more advanced than their announcement processes.
> 
> Surprises are coming soon:



Now you _could be right_. But what reason do people on this forum have not to assume otherwise? The fact is, from the perspective of people here, the airforce received little funding and attention. Thus I don't think we should expect them to perform miracles. If Iranian airforce received the proper priority, then I have no doubt we will see fantastic development liked we have seen in missile, UAV, air defence etc sector.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher. said:


> Now you _could be right_. But what reason do people on this forum have not to assume otherwise? The fact is, from the perspective of people here, the airforce received little funding and attention. Thus I don't think we should expect them to perform miracles. If Iranian airforce received the proper priority, then I have no doubt we will see fantastic development liked we have seen in missile, UAV, air defence etc sector.



That's basically sums it up! According to Iran's Air Force technologically they have the capability to build anything they need so long as someone actually pay's for it's development!



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The analyzes of combat aircraft here on this forum and the technological capabilities on this subject are pathetic. Iran will surprise you and your speculations will fall into the water. I have always said here that Iran is more advanced than their announcement processes.
> 
> Surprises are coming soon:
> 
> The Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Air Force, Brigadier General Aziz Nassirzadeh, praised Iranian capabilities to manufacture "combat aircraft" despite all restrictions: "It is recognized even by our adversaries: Iran masters the details of aeronautical technology. We manufacture, ourselves, the parts of our fighters from seats to engines and avionics systems. The aircraft’s fuselage is also built by our specialists. We continue to improve our combat capabilities in the sky. In the sky, the part which aims further and which reacts more quickly, will succeed. Hence our growing interest in long-range missiles, air-to-air, air-to-surface (sea) and air-to-ground missiles and the Fakour and Qader missiles are part of it, said the Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Air Force before adding: "Our objective is now to equip our aircraft with air-to-ground cruise missiles. We have made progress and we will shortly be revealing the fruit of our efforts, especially that new radar technology accompanies our F-5, F-4 and F-14 aircraft. ”
> P



If the government is unwilling to actually invest properly in the development of a modern fighter jet then what do you expect the Air Force to do?

At the very least the Iranian government would need to invest a minimum of $1 Billion USD a year over the next decade in fighter development and production anything less and your expecting the Air Force & the MOD to perform miracles!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ IIR air-to-air missile on an overhauled Iranian AH-1J attack helicopter

Source: https://en.isna.ir/photo/98112014963/Tens-of-overhauled-helicopters-delivered-to-Army-Ground-Force



Sineva said:


> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/11/14/2195411/بالگردهای-214-سپاه-مسلح-شدند-تجهیز-بالگردها-به-موشک-های-جدید-ضد-زره
> The translation of the above page says Sadid,tho in the pic it also appears to have long fins at the back and bares more of a resemblance to the hellfire clone shown mounted on the fotros drone of a few years back.


https://21stcenturyasianarmsrace.co...ike-iran-is-making-its-own-hellfire-missiles/

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> Perhaps this is just not a plane the airforce is very interested in buying in larger numbers. Given their limited budget, they might be wanting to spend on R&D on other projects?



Iranian fighter jet needs 15-20 years of investment and billions poured in. Too steep a price for a country under massive sanctions and less than 400B dollar economy.

Better to sign licensing deal or pay billions for China/Russia to set up necessary infrastructure in Iran for a ToT deal.

Many nations more advanced than Iran have tackled the fighter jet program (Japan, Israel, India, etc) and ultimately failed or decided against it.

Fighter jet program without a stepping stone (HINT NOT F-5) and without a stepping stone engine (HINT NOT J-85) will just be an endless money pit. IRGC will not allow it.

First get a modern 4+ design (SU-27 or SU-30 or J-10) and a modern engine (AL-21 class) THEN master it. THEN branch off with domestic designs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian fighter jet needs 15-20 years of investment and billions poured in. Too steep a price for a country under massive sanctions and less than 400B dollar economy.
> 
> Better to sign licensing deal or pay billions for China/Russia to set up necessary infrastructure in Iran for a ToT deal.
> 
> Many nations more advanced than Iran have tackled the fighter jet program (Japan, Israel, India, etc) and ultimately failed or decided against it.
> 
> Fighter jet program without a stepping stone (HINT NOT F-5) and without a stepping stone engine (HINT NOT J-85) will just be an endless money pit. IRGC will not allow it.
> 
> First get a modern 4+ design (SU-27 or SU-30 or J-10) and a modern engine (AL-21 class) THEN master it. THEN branch off with domestic designs.


those are not that modern


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian fighter jet needs 15-20 years of investment and billions poured in. Too steep a price for a country under massive sanctions and less than 400B dollar economy.
> 
> Better to sign licensing deal or pay billions for China/Russia to set up necessary infrastructure in Iran for a ToT deal.
> 
> Many nations more advanced than Iran have tackled the fighter jet program (Japan, Israel, India, etc) and ultimately failed or decided against it.
> 
> Fighter jet program without a stepping stone (HINT NOT F-5) and without a stepping stone engine (HINT NOT J-85) will just be an endless money pit. IRGC will not allow it.
> 
> First get a modern 4+ design (SU-27 or SU-30 or J-10) and a modern engine (AL-21 class) THEN master it. THEN branch off with domestic designs.



they are not even serious yet just they did for their missile programe and air defense sector...

recently they showed some activities on naval systems but without any serious measure IRIAF will remain in stone age.

serious investments and dedication...all they need.. The laggings on technology and know how will be solved eventually.

Both in drone and fighter jet development, the expected activities r quit low. even though the new fighter showed some hope, but disappointed us for production and hope they have their eyes on these issues.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> those are not that modern



They are more modern than a 1960’s F-5 or a 1970’s F-4.

SU-30 is a very modern plane. If you are expecting Russia or China to hand over 5th gen tech and latest in engine tech then keep dreaming.


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian fighter jet needs 15-20 years of investment and billions poured in. Too steep a price for a country under massive sanctions and less than 400B dollar economy.
> 
> Better to sign licensing deal or pay billions for China/Russia to set up necessary infrastructure in Iran for a ToT deal.
> 
> Many nations more advanced than Iran have tackled the fighter jet program (Japan, Israel, India, etc) and ultimately failed or decided against it.
> 
> Fighter jet program without a stepping stone (HINT NOT F-5) and without a stepping stone engine (HINT NOT J-85) will just be an endless money pit. IRGC will not allow it.
> 
> First get a modern 4+ design (SU-27 or SU-30 or J-10) and a modern engine (AL-21 class) THEN master it. THEN branch off with domestic designs.


*First*---the old USSR had a GDP PPP of 2,5trln$ (in current prices), while Iran has a GDP PPP of 1,6trln$ today.

Soviets, having a 2,5trln$ GDP could build fighters, helicopters, ICBMs, nuclear subs and many more

See no reason why modern Iran with 1,6trln$ GDP can't afford indigeneous military projects

*Second*---Iran has a long-term strategy of development of military-industrial complex.

Over the last 15 years Iran unveiled many new types of weapons-- from modern cruise and ballistic missiles to advanced air defense systems of various ranges.

You see, today Iran produces virtually every type of weapon for its armed forces and we can assume that in the near future Iran will achieve *total self-sufficiency.*

Regarding the most complex project---indigeneous fighter aircraft.

Iran produces Yasin as a subsonic trainer and F-5 as a supersonic trainer for the future.

But news about Iran developing stealth fighter come from as early as 2005. It is in its 15th year of development already.

Finally by 2029---50th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution----it will be 24 years of development of indigeneous "stealth fighter"-----enough time to finish the project

We can assume that by 2029, after 24 years of development, F-313 will turn into a 5th generation fighter and will have indigeneous (reverse engineered )RD-33 engines +locally developed radar+ stealth airframe+ locally developed avionics

Instead of wasting money for buying foreign technology, Iran decided to develop indigeneous school.

By 2029----50th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, Iran will have a fully developed military industry with tanks, APCs, IFVs, artillery, attack and transport helicopters, UAVs, trainer and fighter aircrafts, cruise and ballistic missiles, air defenses, trimarans, destroyers, submarines, SLVs and ICBMs and probably nuclear weapons


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> They are more modern than a 1960’s F-5 or a 1970’s F-4.
> 
> SU-30 is a very modern plane. If you are expecting Russia or China to hand over 5th gen tech and latest in engine tech then keep dreaming.


still not modern at all, honnestly i doubt it to be as capable as old f-14 , the only modern Aircraft in that fmily is Su-35,Su-34 and proposed but not still delivered Su-30SM1/SMD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

I like Iran's approached of concentrating more on missiles and not fighter jets. You do not necessarily need fighter jets to secure your air space but SAMs. Advances in air defense make these jet vulnerable. I am not sure the f-22 is safe in a contested air space. Missiles are cheaper than jets and more difficult to intercept.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227160848755560449^ Balaban precision-guided bomb


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> still not modern at all, honnestly i doubt it to be as capable as old f-14 , the only modern Aircraft in that fmily is Su-35,Su-34 and proposed but not still delivered Su-30SM1/SMD



lol a SU-30 would win against an F-14 assuming both pilots are equally skilled. Plus SU-30 has much easier maintenance requirement. F-14 needs hours of maintenance per sortie. They will fall apart in a major air effort.

You just exposed yourself by calling a SU-35 modern and SU-30 “not modern at all”. The SU-35 is based on the SU-30.

It’s like saying S-300 is not modern, but S-400 is. Or saying F-110 is not a modern missile system, but Zolfghar is. It’s laughable.

SU-35 merely uses the latest in Russian electronics and subsystems. An SU-30 with a modernized block is perfectly fine for Iran.

SU-30 being the basis of a future Iranian interceptor is very much a better option than sitting around playing with a subsonic F-5. Iran doesn’t need bombers or CAS, it needs an interceptor and for that you need access to heavy class engines not the Owj.

You need to be able catch your opponents which is what made the F-14 so deadly in its time because it was the only fighter that could catch Soviet Migs routinely violating Iranian airspace. An F-5 will never ever be able to catch a F-35 or F-22 so stop playing around with useless toys.


----------



## aryobarzan

As long as missions defined can be achieved by ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, Drones etc..Airforce will not be able to justify the required expenditure... Ain Assad was a good example 13 targets done... no aircraft lost... no pilot captured..end of story...If I was the fund manager for Iranian military I would have told the airforce chief to come up with a mission definition that Iran needs that can not be satisfied by what is currently in the inventory (public and not so public)..If he does not get the funds it is because he has not yet come up with that magic mission !!..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

I listened to the interview with the head of the IRAF and he stated initially there was alot of resistance in the airforce when it came to the idea of using UAVs but that has now changed and they're working on UAVs, the upcoming Kaman-22 being one of them. I am rather sad to be honest, because I would have expected the air force to be the main branch in Iran pushing towards Stealth UCAVs with air to air capability. Lets hope they push for budget to develop these things. If we will not see an advanced manned plane any time soon, at least let them develop an advanced UCAV.


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> As long as missions defined can be achieved by ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, Drones etc..Airforce will not be able to justify the required expenditure... Ain Assad was a good example 13 targets done... no aircraft lost... no pilot captured..end of story...If I was the fund manager for Iranian military I would have told the airforce chief to come up with a mission definition that Iran needs that can not be satisfied by what is currently in the inventory (public and not so public)..If he does not get the funds it is because he has not yet come up with that magic mission !!..



Iran needs interceptors plain and simple. Bombers, AWACS, CAS, etc are all a luxury not needed right now. But interceptors are absolutely needed

Expecting 3 battalions of S-300 and less than 10 Battalions of Bavar-373 (optimistic guess given that Bavar-373 is not cheap) along with a hodgepodge of 3rd of Khorrdad and other similar family of medium range systems to hold back 150+ aircraft while at the same time defending against 100’s of cruise missiles is absurd.

You would put undue strain on The air defense systems. Not to mention the Tor M1 scenario showed that officers in Iran’s air defense field obviously don’t think the air defense shield is impenetrable.

If a moronic air defense officer thought a SINGLE cruise missile passed through Iran’s borders and into heart of Iran and made it ALL THE WAY TO the capital undetected then its clear there are exploitable holes if an officer could make such a deduction or he is simply moronic.



Philosopher. said:


> we will not see an advanced manned plane any time soon, at least let them develop an advanced UCAV.



It’s like saying you can’t develop a quantum computer, but let’s try to develop a dyson sphere. There is a fine line between optimism and ignorance.

If Iran cannot build a modern jet fighter what makes you think it can build a supersonic unmanned jet fighter? An unmanned jet fighter needs much more advanced sensors and avionics because it is now operating without the benefit of a live “brain” (human in the cockpit). It will need AI program as relying on human operator hundreds of KM away during war is a receipe for disaster. It works for current UAVs because they are used on insurgents and tactical strikes not in live air to air warfare.

Only country with a deployable unmanned supersonic fighter is China with its Darksword program.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

aryobarzan said:


> As long as missions defined can be achieved by ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, Drones etc..Airforce will not be able to justify the required expenditure... Ain Assad was a good example 13 targets done... no aircraft lost... no pilot captured..end of story...If I was the fund manager for Iranian military I would have told the airforce chief to come up with a mission definition that Iran needs that can not be satisfied by what is currently in the inventory (public and not so public)..If he does not get the funds it is because he has not yet come up with that magic mission !!..


close air support, suppressing enemy air defenses and air defense roles i think are the main fields that an AF is needed. the recent attack actually demonstrated that why you need an air force to, to finish off the job.


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> If Iran cannot build a modern jet fighter what makes you think it can build a supersonic unmanned jet fighter? .



Where in my comment did I say anything about *supersonic* UAVs? If you're going to quote me, don't resort to silly strawman arguments.


----------



## Shams313

Close looks....













__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1201085788936650753

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You just exposed yourself by calling a SU-35 modern and SU-30 “not modern at all”. The SU-35 is based on the SU-30.


Based on but different engine and different ,avionics and different material and different weapons and ....


TheImmortal said:


> It’s like saying S-300 is not modern, but S-400 is. Or saying F-110 is not a modern missile system, but Zolfghar is. It’s laughable.


Which version of S-300 and which iteration of S-400. And as a matter of fact yes there are different between capabilities of different missiles of fateh family



TheImmortal said:


> SU-35 merely uses the latest in Russian electronics and subsystems. An SU-30 with a modernized block is perfectly fine for Iran.


And as I said there is suggestions for that but there is not even a single working Su-30 with those upgrades.



TheImmortal said:


> SU-30 being the basis of a future Iranian interceptor is very much a better option than sitting around playing with a subsonic F-5. Iran doesn’t need bombers or CAS, it needs an interceptor and for that you need access to heavy class engines not the Owj.


Depends on what you want to do with your airforce.


TheImmortal said:


> You need to be able catch your opponents which is what made the F-14 so deadly in its time because it was the only fighter that could catch Soviet Migs routinely violating Iranian airspace. An F-5 will never ever be able to catch a F-35 or F-22 so stop playing around with useless toys.


As a matter of fact a su-30 also won't be able to do that.



TheImmortal said:


> lol a SU-30 would win against an F-14 assuming both pilots are equally skilled.


Let ask why . the same generation of fighters one is designed to be interceptor another designed as a multiple fighter.
If the mission is to bomb enemy or stay longer in the air yes . but if you are supposed to destroy enemy fighter then no . f-14 is far more maneuverable than a sukhoi .


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> If the mission is to bomb enemy or stay longer in the air yes . but if you are supposed to destroy enemy fighter then no . *f-14 is far more maneuverable than a sukhoi* .



Are you sure about this?
Don't forget that Sukhoi 30 and 35 have Thrust vectoring


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> Are you sure about this?
> Don't forget that Sukhoi 30 and 35 have Thrust vectoring


F-14 can do tighter turn than F-16 without losing speed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Hack-Hook said:


> F-14 can do tighter turn than F-16 without losing speed


There is an official update to above study

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> There is an official update to above study
> View attachment 605147


Using its trust hectoring engine to do that in an air show is something . doing that without losing speed in a realbcombat scenario something else and su-30 can't do that in real combat scenario.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Using its trust hectoring engine to do that in an air show is something . doing that without losing speed in a realbcombat scenario something else and su-30 can't do that in real combat scenario.


bro flanker family's sustained turn ratio is above 27 degrees per second...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Using its trust hectoring engine to do that in an air show is something . doing that without losing speed in a realbcombat scenario something else and su-30 can't do that in real combat scenario.



Oh thank god you showed us that then F-14 can turn a little bit faster than a F-15 and F-16, which is irrelevant since we are talking about SU-30/35. But as we know in the modern era with SU-35 picking up targets from 300KM away and BVR missiles that a battle between an F-14 and SU-30 will come down to who can turn faster to avoid cannon fire. What do you think this is WW2?

Seriously the SU-30 is far more maneuverable than the 40 year old airframe of F-14, not that it would matter since them “seeing” each other means both failed to down each other with their long range missiles.

SU-30 and SU-35 are one of the top 4th gen aircraft in the world and the amount of orders speaks for itself. There is a reason why China wanted to reverse engineer that plane.

Iran will not get its hands on anything better, and yes the SU-30MKI (India modernization block) is suitable for Iran.

There is an off chance China might offer J-31 or Russia might offer SU-57. But none of these will come with any form of tech transfer.

I think a license build for SU-30 along with 24-48 SU-57’s (ideally at least 75 SU-57’s, but Iran doesn’t have such funds laying around so 24-48 is more conservative) to compliment the F-14 interceptor fleet will be the best outcome for Iran.

If the above suggestion is done, Iran will have the #1 Air Force in the Middle East and will have a top 5 Air Force trailing only US, Russia, China, and France. Pretty good considering that 3 of those world powers have been making planes since WWI.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Oh thank god you showed us that then F-14 can turn a little bit faster than a F-15 and F-16, which is irrelevant since we are talking about SU-30/35. But as we know in the modern era with SU-35 picking up targets from 300KM away and BVR missiles that a battle between an F-14 and SU-30 will come down to who can turn faster to avoid cannon fire. What do you think this is WW2?
> 
> Seriously the SU-30 is far more maneuverable than the 40 year old airframe of F-14, not that it would matter since them “seeing” each other means both failed to down each other with their long range missiles.
> 
> SU-30 and SU-35 are one of the top 4th gen aircraft in the world and the amount of orders speaks for itself. There is a reason why China wanted to reverse engineer that plane.
> 
> Iran will not get its hands on anything better, and yes the SU-30MKI (India modernization block) is suitable for Iran.
> 
> There is an off chance China might offer J-31 or Russia might offer SU-57. But none of these will come with any form of tech transfer.
> 
> I think a license build for SU-30 along with 24-48 SU-57’s (ideally at least 75 SU-57’s, but Iran doesn’t have such funds laying around so 24-48 is more conservative) to compliment the F-14 interceptor fleet will be the best outcome for Iran.
> 
> If the above suggestion is done, Iran will have the #1 Air Force in the Middle East and will have a top 5 Air Force trailing only US, Russia, China, and France. Pretty good considering that 3 of those world powers have been making planes since WWI.



You want Iran to pay +$150 Million USD for each Su-30 while knowing that more likely than not they will come up short against any Air Superiority fighter equipped with modern AESA radars & BVR missiles be it they be F-15's or F-22's????
WHY would Iran do that? If the point is to take out the enemy fighter why choose a battlefield where they have the superiority (And that's in the Air) when you know you can takeout that aircraft while it's still on the ground at a fraction of the cost?

As for Su-35's what good is a fighter when U.S. sanctions can disable them without firing a single shot??? Unless the Russians agree to hand over access to their weapons systems software and allows us to produce a long list of parts and weapons at home they become more of an expensive liability rather than an asset!

Now the reason the F-14's remained an asset in the Iran-Iraq war even after the U.S. sanctions is because at that time the F-14's were equivalent of the F-22's of today so Iran did everything it could to keep them flying which included cannibalizing it's own fleet however today Su-35's are nowhere near that level of technology when compared to other fighters!

As for having the number 1 fleet of the region again in the Iran-Iraq war we also had the number 1 fleet of the region yet that war lasted 8 years because again U.S. sanctions were able to disable the combat readiness of our fleet because we were fully dependent on others and despite the fact that the Air Force took up a vast portion of our military budget when it came down to it and because they were a purchased fleet they couldn't repeat operations like the Kaman 99 operations even on a monthly bases let alone a weekly bases to bring a resolute end to the war quickly!

And so if you waist your money on a purchased fleet then it will be foreigners who dictate how the war ends and not you or any other regional state that has a purchased fleet!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

VEVAK said:


> You want Iran to pay +$150 Million USD for each Su-30 while knowing that more likely than not they will come up short against any Air Superiority fighter equipped with modern AESA radars & BVR missiles be it they be F-15's or F-22's????
> WHY would Iran do that? If the point is to take out the enemy fighter why choose a battlefield where they have the superiority (And that's in the Air) when you know you can takeout that aircraft while it's still on the ground at a fraction of the cost?
> 
> As for Su-35's what good is a fighter when U.S. sanctions can disable them without firing a single shot??? Unless the Russians agree to hand over access to their weapons systems software and allows us to produce a long list of parts and weapons at home they become more of an expensive liability rather than an asset!
> 
> Now the reason the F-14's remained an asset in the Iran-Iraq war even after the U.S. sanctions is because at that time the F-14's were equivalent of the F-22's of today so Iran did everything it could to keep them flying which included cannibalizing it's own fleet however today Su-35's are nowhere near that level of technology when compared to other fighters!
> 
> As for having the number 1 fleet of the region again in the Iran-Iraq war we also had the number 1 fleet of the region yet that war lasted 8 years because again U.S. sanctions were able to disable the combat readiness of our fleet because we were fully dependent on others and despite the fact that the Air Force took up a vast portion of our military budget when it came down to it and because they were a purchased fleet they couldn't repeat operations like the Kaman 99 operations even on a monthly bases let alone a weekly bases to bring a resolute end to the war quickly!
> 
> And so if you waist your money on a purchased fleet then it will be foreigners who dictate how the war ends and not you or any other regional state that has a purchased fleet!


well your points are valid but if iran wants to buy fighter jet it indicates that we changed our whole approach to an offensive one, meaning disabling enemy does not satisfy our military so we need to destroy them. also su-30s will enable us to do more efficient anti ship missions. and finally i think the most powerful encouraging factor is PGCC alliance with Israel. because with missiles we can destroy small US bases but a country...is different, you need air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> You want Iran to pay +$150 Million USD for each Su-30 while knowing that more likely than not they will come up short against any Air Superiority fighter equipped with modern AESA radars & BVR missiles be it they be F-15's or F-22's????
> WHY would Iran do that? If the point is to take out the enemy fighter why choose a battlefield where they have the superiority (And that's in the Air) when you know you can takeout that aircraft while it's still on the ground at a fraction of the cost?
> 
> As for Su-35's what good is a fighter when U.S. sanctions can disable them without firing a single shot??? Unless the Russians agree to hand over access to their weapons systems software and allows us to produce a long list of parts and weapons at home they become more of an expensive liability rather than an asset!
> 
> Now the reason the F-14's remained an asset in the Iran-Iraq war even after the U.S. sanctions is because at that time the F-14's were equivalent of the F-22's of today so Iran did everything it could to keep them flying which included cannibalizing it's own fleet however today Su-35's are nowhere near that level of technology when compared to other fighters!
> 
> As for having the number 1 fleet of the region again in the Iran-Iraq war we also had the number 1 fleet of the region yet that war lasted 8 years because again U.S. sanctions were able to disable the combat readiness of our fleet because we were fully dependent on others and despite the fact that the Air Force took up a vast portion of our military budget when it came down to it and because they were a purchased fleet they couldn't repeat operations like the Kaman 99 operations even on a monthly bases let alone a weekly bases to bring a resolute end to the war quickly!
> 
> And so if you waist your money on a purchased fleet then it will be foreigners who dictate how the war ends and not you or any other regional state that has a purchased fleet!


Completely agree! No weapons purchase is worth anything if you cannot access all parts of the technology to assure 100% independent maintenance (to the least). And neither Russia or China will ever make a fighter deal with Iran where they agree on a true ToT. The only time that will happen is if Iran is at that level of technology already. 
Just look how Russia is breaking its neck to persuade Iran to buy more S series AD systems. They know they have nothing to lose from a strategic point of view and they can make good buck out of such a deal!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> well your points are valid but if iran wants to buy fighter jet it indicates that we changed our whole approach to an offensive one, meaning disabling enemy does not satisfy our military so we need to destroy them. also su-30s will enable us to do more efficient anti ship missions. and finally i think the most powerful encouraging factor is PGCC alliance with Israel. because with missiles we can destroy small US bases but a country...is different, you need air force.



By no means am I saying we don't need an Air Force but we need one that's domestically produced or if we are purchasing one it needs to be a technology transfer where a long list of parts are produced at home!

We Iranians have no trouble spending $150 Million per Aircraft from some other country but come try to spend that money at home on a viable domestically produced fighters and see what happens! All hell will break loose! 

Again when it comes to purchasing Airliners its the same! They are willing to hand over $20Billion USD but unwilling to spend even half of that on a domestically produced version!!!! Hanooz adam nashodeem!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

VEVAK said:


> You want Iran to pay +$150 Million USD for each Su-30 while knowing that more likely than not they will come up short against any Air Superiority fighter equipped with modern AESA radars & BVR missiles be it they be F-15's or F-22's????
> WHY would Iran do that? If the point is to take out the enemy fighter why choose a battlefield where they have the superiority (And that's in the Air) when you know you can takeout that aircraft while it's still on the ground at a fraction of the cost?
> 
> As for Su-35's what good is a fighter when U.S. sanctions can disable them without firing a single shot??? Unless the Russians agree to hand over access to their weapons systems software and allows us to produce a long list of parts and weapons at home they become more of an expensive liability rather than an asset!
> 
> Now the reason the F-14's remained an asset in the Iran-Iraq war even after the U.S. sanctions is because at that time the F-14's were equivalent of the F-22's of today so Iran did everything it could to keep them flying which included cannibalizing it's own fleet however today Su-35's are nowhere near that level of technology when compared to other fighters!
> 
> As for having the number 1 fleet of the region again in the Iran-Iraq war we also had the number 1 fleet of the region yet that war lasted 8 years because again U.S. sanctions were able to disable the combat readiness of our fleet because we were fully dependent on others and despite the fact that the Air Force took up a vast portion of our military budget when it came down to it and because they were a purchased fleet they couldn't repeat operations like the Kaman 99 operations even on a monthly bases let alone a weekly bases to bring a resolute end to the war quickly!
> 
> And so if you waist your money on a purchased fleet then it will be foreigners who dictate how the war ends and not you or any other regional state that has a purchased fleet!


you raised some excellent points...thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

VEVAK said:


> Again when it comes to purchasing Airliners its the same! They are willing to hand over $20Billion USD but unwilling to spend even half of that on a domestically produced version!!!! Hanooz adam nashodeem!



And these are the same minded people that try to isolate the IRGC and complain about their "economical activities" when the IRGC is single handily putting them all to shame given what they have achieved. Is anyone here going to question the idea that if IRGC believed airforce to an important priority today we would be seeing fighter jets far above the likes of kowsar? Unfortunately, the "Ma mitavanim" is only truly put into effect by Sepah. This discrepancy needs to be removed in Iran. On one hand we have Sepah that makes things like Raad-500 and other hand there are people that have not improved Iran's automobile industry by much and kept it reliant on foreigners for decades! As long as such corruption, mismanagement and lack of self belief exist in Iran, then things would never improve with great efficiency and effectiveness.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

VEVAK said:


> By no means am I saying we don't need an Air Force but we need one that's domestically produced or if we are purchasing one it needs to be a technology transfer where a long list of parts are produced at home!
> 
> We Iranians have no trouble spending $150 Million per Aircraft from some other country but come try to spend that money at home on a viable domestically produced fighters and see what happens! All hell will break loose!
> 
> Again when it comes to purchasing Airliners its the same! They are willing to hand over $20Billion USD but unwilling to spend even half of that on a domestically produced version!!!! Hanooz adam nashodeem!


but if our best is f-5 and an air force is required to deal with enemy we do not have any other option, at least as an stop gap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Iran's main offensive capability will be its missiles for the foreseeable future. No regional airforce could come close to the damage Iran could do with its missiles in a conflict. Now consider how much these Persian Gulf puppet states have spent on their airforce! Of course an airforce also provides a very capable aerial defensive role i.e air defence and no one can deny this. But I think the main question here is this: To what extent will a modern airforce boost Iran's power? what capability will it give to Iran that it lacks today? Is that gap in capability worth a major investment? We don't really know how Iran is calculating such things but I personally believe a modern airforce is worth the investment for Iran as long as that investment does not effect other major programs!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Mithridates said:


> but if our best is f-5 and an air force is required to deal with enemy we do not have any other option, at least as an stop gap.



Our best with less than $15 Million USD per unit is the Kowsar! Not with $150 Million USD per unit!
With the cost of 20 Su-30 ($3Billion) We can get a real fighter program going and start producing a 5th Gen fighter at home for less than $50M per unit!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher. said:


> Sepah that makes things like Raad-500 and other hand there are people that have not improved Iran's automobile industry by much and kept it reliant on foreigners for decades!


Sepah thrives because they see US as their main adversary. Hence all strategic decisions are colored by the goal to defeat the US. The amazing thing with irgc is that they develop their weapons based on the strategic need they see and they always go for the most cost efficient alternative which means that they don’t care about legacy as much. That’s why they are such innovators!

our car industry on the other hand is unfortunately hampered by a protectionistic philosophy. The logic is that by not allowing foreign competition then they are helping the car industry, which couldn’t be more from the truth. Rather, such policy is exactly the reason for why that industry is so outdated and inefficient. Otherwise I am more than convinced that they would thrive on a fight or die context, just like sepah does.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher. said:


> Iran's main offensive capability will be its missiles for the foreseeable future. No regional airforce could come close to the damage Iran could do with its missiles in a conflict. Now consider how much these Persian Gulf puppet states have spent on their airforce! Of course an airforce also provides a very capable aerial defensive role i.e air defence and no one can deny this. But I think the main question here is this: To what extent will a modern airforce boost Iran's power? what capability will it give to Iran that it lacks today? Is that gap in capability worth a major investment? We don't really know how Iran is calculating such things but I personally believe a modern airforce is worth the investment for Iran as long as that investment does not effect other major programs!


bro an air force main objective is ground attack, this orientation brought interceptors to existence. most important targets in war do not fly. once you crippled enemy air force you need to degrade their assets. you need to conquer the land. for that you need to provide your troops with air cover, for that you need to suppress their air defenses. however drones can fill this gap to some extent but their payload is low.



VEVAK said:


> Our best with less than $15 Million USD per unit is the Kowsar! Not with $150 Million USD per unit!
> With the cost of 20 Su-30 ($3Billion) We can get a real fighter program going and start producing a 5th Gen fighter at home for less than $50M per unit!


the issue is not money i assume, we need TOT for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher. said:


> Iran's main offensive capability will be its missiles for the foreseeable future. No regional airforce could come close to the damage Iran could do with its missiles in a conflict. Now consider how much these Persian Gulf puppet states have spent on their airforce! Of course an airforce also provides a very capable aerial defensive role i.e air defence and no one can deny this. But I think the main question here is this: To what extent will a modern airforce boost Iran's power? what capability will it give to Iran that it lacks today? Is that gap in capability worth a major investment? We don't really know how Iran is calculating such things but I personally believe a modern airforce is worth the investment for Iran as long as that investment does not effect other major programs!



Yet another problem we Iranians have is that we wanna spend a tiny fraction on a domestically produces product and then we suddenly expect that product to somehow equate to a foreign product that cost 10 times as much!

Another example is our space program! They only fund $3.5 Million for a domestically produced SLV and then they turn around and say look this is why we need the foreigners! And when foreigners come and offer them to send a 1 ton out dated com sat to GEO for only $350 Million USD and they can pay it out for only $35M a year over 10 years total they jump on it like a hungry dog on a bone!

And no one say well if you made the Simorgh for only $3.5 Million doesn't that mean for 4 times a much ~$14M you should be able to build a booster with a cluster of 16 main engines and 16 vectoring veniers with a 2nd stage that's twice the size + 3rd stage the size of your current 2nd stage that can take a +1 ton sat into GEO...



Mithridates said:


> bro an air force main objective is ground attack, this orientation brought interceptors to existence. most important targets in war do not fly. once you crippled enemy air force you need to degrade their assets. you need to conquer the land. for that you need to provide your troops with air cover, for that you need to suppress their air defenses. however drones can fill this gap to some extent but their payload is low.
> 
> 
> the issue is not money i assume, we need TOT for that.


 
It is the unwillingness to invest at home so the issue is money just look at our space program!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> You want Iran to pay +$150 Million USD for each Su-30 while knowing that more likely than not they will come up short against any Air Superiority fighter equipped with modern AESA radars & BVR missiles be it they be F-15's or F-22's????
> WHY would Iran do that? If the point is to take out the enemy fighter why choose a battlefield where they have the superiority (And that's in the Air) when you know you can takeout that aircraft while it's still on the ground at a fraction of the cost?
> 
> As for Su-35's what good is a fighter when U.S. sanctions can disable them without firing a single shot??? Unless the Russians agree to hand over access to their weapons systems software and allows us to produce a long list of parts and weapons at home they become more of an expensive liability rather than an asset!
> 
> Now the reason the F-14's remained an asset in the Iran-Iraq war even after the U.S. sanctions is because at that time the F-14's were equivalent of the F-22's of today so Iran did everything it could to keep them flying which included cannibalizing it's own fleet however today Su-35's are nowhere near that level of technology when compared to other fighters!
> 
> As for having the number 1 fleet of the region again in the Iran-Iraq war we also had the number 1 fleet of the region yet that war lasted 8 years because again U.S. sanctions were able to disable the combat readiness of our fleet because we were fully dependent on others and despite the fact that the Air Force took up a vast portion of our military budget when it came down to it and because they were a purchased fleet they couldn't repeat operations like the Kaman 99 operations even on a monthly bases let alone a weekly bases to bring a resolute end to the war quickly!
> 
> And so if you waist your money on a purchased fleet then it will be foreigners who dictate how the war ends and not you or any other regional state that has a purchased fleet!



I can’t bother speaking to an imbecile who thinks SU-30 costs “150 million” per aircraft.

SU-30 costs 40 million and SU-35 depending on package 60 million.

And a few billion dollars is peanuts if Iran gets the ability to build SU-30 and ToT.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> I can’t bother speaking to an imbecile who thinks SU-30 costs “150 million” per aircraft.
> 
> SU-30 costs 40 million and SU-35 depending on package 60 million.
> 
> And a few billion dollars is peanuts if Iran gets the ability to build SU-30 and ToT.



LOL! Just shows how little you know!

At the end of the day the Su-30 will end up costing Iran $150Million per aircraft which would naturally including The aircraft + Spare parts from spare engines to commonly used maintenance parts like oil filters breaks.... + maintenance tools & equipment + maintenance and pilot training + Pilot Gear + limited number of weapons and training equipment and gear...

Su-30 prices you see off wiki is nothing but a fictional prices because at the end of the day the Russians aren't going to sell you just the aircraft it's just not how it works you fool! And its no different with the U.S. the last time the Saudi's purchased F-15's it cost them an average of $230 Million per aircraft you freaking MORON!

Why are you even on this form if after all this time you still don't even know the most basic facts?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> LOL! Just shows how little you know!
> 
> At the end of the day the Su-30 will end up costing Iran $150Million per aircraft which would naturally including The aircraft + Spare parts from spare engines to commonly used maintenance parts like oil filters breaks.... + maintenance tools & equipment + maintenance and pilot training + Pilot Gear + limited number of weapons and training equipment and gear...
> 
> Su-30 prices you see off wiki is nothing but a fictional prices because at the end of the day the Russians aren't going to sell you just the aircraft it's just not how it works you fool! And its no different with the U.S. the last time the Saudi's purchased F-15's it cost them an average of $230 Million per aircraft you freaking MORON!
> 
> Why are you even on this form if after all this time you still don't even know the most basic facts?



I am tired of having to reiterate myself with you because you fail to read and lack basic comprehension.

So no, a SU-30 doesn’t have 110 million per aircraft in training/maintenance/and spare parts. That is absurd. Again you pull numbers without info or citation and zero experience and you want everyone to believe your words as truth. It’s hilarious and borderline propaganda. What the US charges the Arab monarchs is extortion, Russia doesn’t operate that way!

Anyway I clearly said Iran would have to ask for SU-30 production and ToT transfer meaning the planes would be assembled in Iran and maintenance would be done by Iran. Furthermore, most weapons will be Iranian weapons because there is no point to pay for Russian PGMs when Iranian ones do the job. Maybe a stockpile of advanced Russian BVRs could be considered.

Furthermore, maintenance and spare parts is spread over life of a contract if Iran wanted Russia to do all the work (which it won’t because Iran wants to know how to do everything).

So if Iran gets full or most of SU-30 production in Iran for a few billion dollars it allows Iran to understand a modern fighter to build its own program off of. Iran won’t learn to build a SU-30 from making 100 iterations of F-5! Use your brain!

Right now Air Force has a paltry budget (some sources say as low as $250 million a year) and that is spent on overhauling/maintenance/spare parts/pilots/drones/operating expenses of air force. So Iran is literally burning money keeping vintage aircraft flying.

You expect Iran air defenses to repel both aircraft waves and cruise missile waves AT the same time. I mean that is too much strain. You overestimate the number of Bavar-373 battalions and we already know Iran only has a few S-300. So your relying on BUK like medium range systems to do most of the defense with the long range systems acting as shields until they ultimately get destroyed during massive waves.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> I am tired of having to reiterate myself with you because you fail to read and lack basic comprehension.
> 
> So no, a SU-30 doesn’t have 110 million per aircraft in training/maintenance/and spare parts. That is absurd. Again you pull numbers without info or citation and zero experience and you want everyone to believe your words as truth. It’s hilarious and borderline propaganda. What the US charges the Arab monarchs is extortion, Russia doesn’t operate that way!
> 
> Anyway I clearly said Iran would have to ask for SU-30 production and ToT transfer meaning the planes would be assembled in Iran and maintenance would be done by Iran. Furthermore, most weapons will be Iranian weapons because there is no point to pay for Russian PGMs when Iranian ones do the job. Maybe a stockpile of advanced Russian BVRs could be considered.
> 
> Furthermore, maintenance and spare parts is spread over life of a contract if Iran wanted Russia to do all the work (which it won’t because Iran wants to know how to do everything).
> 
> So if Iran gets full or most of SU-30 production in Iran for a few billion dollars it allows Iran to understand a modern fighter to build its own program off of. Iran won’t learn to build a SU-30 from making 100 iterations of F-5! Use your brain!
> 
> Right now Air Force has a paltry budget (some sources say as low as $250 million a year) and that is spent on overhauling/maintenance/spare parts/pilots/drones/operating expenses of air force. So Iran is literally burning money keeping vintage aircraft flying.
> 
> You expect Iran air defenses to repel both aircraft waves and cruise missile waves AT the same time. I mean that is too much strain. You overestimate the number of Bavar-373 battalions and we already know Iran only has a few S-300. So your relying on BUK like medium range systems to do most of the defense with the long range systems acting as shields until they ultimately get destroyed during massive waves.




Your too retarded for me to waist any more time on so i'll leave you with this just go pull up what others paid!

Venezuela $2.2 Bill for 22 Su-30Mk2 and when? back in 2006 and for MK2! And with very limited equipment....

As always you live in a delusional lala land

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Your too retarded for me to waist any more time on so i'll leave you with this just go pull up what others paid!
> 
> Venezuela $2.2 Bill for 22 Su-30Mk2 and when? back in 2006 and for MK2! And with very limited equipment....
> 
> As always you live in a delusional lala land



“waist” versus “waste”. But I am the retarded one? Yeah right

Too stupid to realize the difference between producing under license (India) vs a banana country buying from Russia and paying via selling its sovereignty (Venezuela).

here you go olagh:

_HAL produces about 12 Su-30MKI multirole fighters each year. The company is expected to complete the delivery of 272 Su-30MKI fighters by March 2020.

Each Su-30MKI is built by HAL for $70.3 million under license by Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation.

Another HAL executive said a formal request has been sent to the Indian Air Force and the Ministry for Defence that they place an additional order for *72 locally made Su-30MKI fighters for about $5 billion*, but the government has not yet made a decision_

https://www.defensenews.com/industr...s-may-shut-down-toppling-400-local-suppliers/

India produces the SU-30 at a higher cost than Russia but that’s because HAL (Indian company) goes is seeking higher profit when selling to Indian Air Force so It’s quite possible their production costs are similar with Russia if you take out profit premium. But I will let you do the math on what 72 divided by $5B comes out to....maybe ask someone intelligent for help because you will struggle.

Producing in Iran will cheaper as it is abundant in natural resources plus cheaper labor. Then Iranian maintenance/spares/missiles will be much lower as well since they will be Iranian made and supplied.

As you can see some countries get screwed in arms deals and accept it. But the higher and bigger the deal the more incentive for host country to agree to sweeten the deal (discount).

So run along and learn the difference between license production vs buying small number and asking for complete hands on help from host country.

No country is going to invest in building plants and repair hubs for 14-28 jets, because of initial costs for such a small number of jets. It’s a whole different story to do so when you plan to build 150+ And have the aircraft production license (or in case of India 270+).

And you sit here like Iranian Air Force doesn’t spend money every year keeping F-14’s flying and all its other shah era junk. Newsflash: any plane Iran builds will require maintenance/support/spare parts. Even a car you buy you cannot expect it to go its whole life without needing repairs!

I can’t believe I have to explain this to you. But you are that dense. It’s cheaper to produce via license in long run then buy at a premium from host country and have them do everything for you. I thought you would realize that by now, but apparently in your mind Iran can build missiles for 50 dollars and can’t build anything else.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> “waist” versus “waste”. But I am the retarded one? Yeah right
> 
> Too stupid to realize the difference between producing under license (India) vs a banana country buying from Russia and paying via selling its sovereignty (Venezuela).
> 
> here you go olagh:
> 
> _HAL produces about 12 Su-30MKI multirole fighters each year. The company is expected to complete the delivery of 272 Su-30MKI fighters by March 2020.
> 
> Each Su-30MKI is built by HAL for $70.3 million under license by Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation.
> 
> Another HAL executive said a formal request has been sent to the Indian Air Force and the Ministry for Defence that they place an additional order for *72 locally made Su-30MKI fighters for about $5 billion*, but the government has not yet made a decision_
> 
> https://www.defensenews.com/industr...s-may-shut-down-toppling-400-local-suppliers/
> 
> India produces the SU-30 at a higher cost than Russia but that’s because HAL (Indian company) goes is seeking higher profit when selling to Indian Air Force so It’s quite possible their production costs are similar with Russia if you take out profit premium. But I will let you do the math on what 72 divided by $5B comes out to....maybe ask someone intelligent for help because you will struggle.
> 
> Producing in Iran will cheaper as it is abundant in natural resources plus cheaper labor. Then Iranian maintenance/spares/missiles will be much lower as well since they will be Iranian made and supplied.
> 
> As you can see some countries get screwed in arms deals and accept it. But the higher and bigger the deal the more incentive for host country to agree to sweeten the deal (discount).
> 
> So run along and learn the difference between license production vs buying small number and asking for complete hands on help from host country.
> 
> No country is going to invest in building plants and repair hubs for 14-28 jets, because of initial costs for such a small number of jets. It’s a whole different story to do so when you plan to build 150+ And have the aircraft production license (or in case of India 270+).
> 
> And you sit here like Iranian Air Force doesn’t spend money every year keeping F-14’s flying and all its other shah era junk. Newsflash: any plane Iran builds will require maintenance/support/spare parts. Even a car you buy you cannot expect it to go its whole life without needing repairs!
> 
> I can’t believe I have to explain this to you. But you are that dense. It’s cheaper to produce via license in long run then buy at a premium from host country and have them do everything for you. I thought you would realize that by now, but apparently in your mind Iran can build missiles for 50 dollars and can’t build anything else.



O U got me with a typo good for you!!! LOL! I Tell you your a moron and you don't believe it!

listen fool India started its purchase in the mid to late 90's for a tech transfer of the Su-30 and with it God knows how many other promises were made and even back then they got the Russians during hard economic hardship.... and even after years of deals with it India's help in funding the Su-57 and still after years of license production they can't build a single version with no weapons! no spares! no nothing for under $70Million which doesn't include the prices of everything else the would have to be added on whether you like it or not! And that's for Su-30 deals that date back to the mid 90's and so maintenance equipment, tools, training,.... is already there and unlike in a deal with Iran wouldn't require a transfer! As for weapons for the Su-30 again same thing they have a vast stock of unused weapons in a deal that dates back decades!

YOU IDIOT!

p.s. knock your self out acting as my spell check!  Since that's all your good for anyways!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

There is a reason why Saudis and others pay high price per unit of aircraft....when you add spare parts, weapons, equipment and training price doubles or even triples.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> O U got me with a typo good for you!!! LOL! I Tell you your a moron and you don't believe it!
> 
> listen fool India started its purchase in the mid to late 90's for a tech transfer of the Su-30 and with it God knows how many other promises were made and even back then they got the Russians during hard economic hardship.... and even after years of deals with it India's help in funding the Su-57 and still after years of license production they can't build a single version with no weapons! no spares! no nothing for under $70Million which doesn't include the prices of everything else the would have to be added on whether you like it or not! And that's for Su-30 deals that date back to the mid 90's and so maintenance equipment, tools, training,.... is already there and unlike in a deal with Iran wouldn't require a transfer! As for weapons for the Su-30 again same thing they have a vast stock of unused weapons in a deal that dates back decades!
> 
> YOU IDIOT!
> 
> p.s. knock your self out acting as my spell check!  Since that's all your good for anyways!



Provide proof of your assertions or your merely saying propaganda.

Here is reason why cost of plane is higher than Russian cost:


_Future production of the Su-30MKI fighter jet is likely to be cheaper if a new order for bulk production is placed on HAL, Indian Minister of State for Defence, Subhash Bhamre has said.

Replying to parliamentarians’ queries regarding the high cost of the Su-30MKI aircraft manufactured in India as compared to Su-30 in Russia, the minister justified the increased cost on ground that the Indian jet includes equipment not available on the Russia-made aircraft and having to pay royalty to the Russian firm for technology transfer.

State-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is currently producing the Su-30MKI at a flyaway cost of around $62 million per aircraft, which is around $22 million higher than the Su-30 jet supplied by Russia. 

HAL had offered to lower the cost of manufacture if an additional order for bulk production of the Su-30 jets was placed on it.

The minister stated that the higher cost of indigenously manufactured SU-30MKI is due to following factors:-

Additional modifications are incorporated in the indigenous Su-30MKI to enhance the operational capability and to suit Indian Air Force (IAF) requirements.

Being a Transfer of Technology (ToT) programme, cost is involved towards payment of license fee to Russian side.

Owing to the low volume of production of Indian SU-30 MKI as compared to Russian SU-30, economies of scale come into play.

Import of raw materials and proprietary components from Russia involves dependency on Russian Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) for the offered kit costs, which are not proportionate with the kit contents.

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/2...han_Current_Lot__Indian_Minister#.XkZGvCROklQ_

Notice the last part about raw materials, that I stated and now provide proof (unlike you who just pulls from his armchair General years of experience in every field from aerospace, missile engineering, nuclear engineering, etc.

Iran was able to build 85% of a T-90 (karrar) just buy using them in Syria Civil War. Iran never had ToT of even T-72, they were assembly kits.

So the reason why Iran has for 20 years been trying to secure SU-30 ToT is because it KNOWS it can reverse engineer it with just a little bit data. India ordered 1,000 AL engines to just have as back ups. But if you look at reverse engineering capability of Iran vs India history has been quite clear who can do it better!

So I think the engineers and leaders in Iranian Air Force know a little bit better than you if they be trying to secure a favorable SU-30 deal since the first crappy F-5 “domestic” program. What a joke.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Provide proof of your assertions or your merely saying propaganda.
> 
> Here is reason why cost of plane is higher than Russian cost:
> 
> 
> _Future production of the Su-30MKI fighter jet is likely to be cheaper if a new order for bulk production is placed on HAL, Indian Minister of State for Defence, Subhash Bhamre has said.
> 
> Replying to parliamentarians’ queries regarding the high cost of the Su-30MKI aircraft manufactured in India as compared to Su-30 in Russia, the minister justified the increased cost on ground that the Indian jet includes equipment not available on the Russia-made aircraft and having to pay royalty to the Russian firm for technology transfer.
> 
> State-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is currently producing the Su-30MKI at a flyaway cost of around $62 million per aircraft, which is around $22 million higher than the Su-30 jet supplied by Russia.
> 
> HAL had offered to lower the cost of manufacture if an additional order for bulk production of the Su-30 jets was placed on it.
> 
> The minister stated that the higher cost of indigenously manufactured SU-30MKI is due to following factors:-
> 
> Additional modifications are incorporated in the indigenous Su-30MKI to enhance the operational capability and to suit Indian Air Force (IAF) requirements.
> 
> Being a Transfer of Technology (ToT) programme, cost is involved towards payment of license fee to Russian side.
> 
> Owing to the low volume of production of Indian SU-30 MKI as compared to Russian SU-30, economies of scale come into play.
> 
> Import of raw materials and proprietary components from Russia involves dependency on Russian Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) for the offered kit costs, which are not proportionate with the kit contents.
> 
> https://www.defenseworld.net/news/2...han_Current_Lot__Indian_Minister#.XkZGvCROklQ_
> 
> Notice the last part about raw materials, that I stated and now provide proof (unlike you who just pulls from his armchair General years of experience in every field from aerospace, missile engineering, nuclear engineering, etc.
> 
> Iran was able to build 85% of a T-90 (karrar) just buy using them in Syria Civil War. Iran never had ToT of even T-72, they were assembly kits.
> 
> So the reason why Iran has for 20 years been trying to secure SU-30 ToT is because it KNOWS it can reverse engineer it with just a little bit data. India ordered 1,000 AL engines to just have as back ups. But if you look at reverse engineering capability of Iran vs India history has been quite clear who can do it better!
> 
> So I think the engineers and leaders in Iranian Air Force know a little bit better than you if they be trying to secure a favorable SU-30 deal since the first crappy F-5 “domestic” program. What a joke.



Fine $62M semantics! It's still on paper $22M more per! And again that's just for the cost of the Aircraft MORON not all things we will naturally need to go with it! It's not like we would be buying them for show!

And It doesn't change the facts that the Indians have over 260 Su-30's so they already have an ample supply of maintenance equipment, they already have trained pilots and trained maintenance personal, they would naturally have a vast stock of unused weapons, parts, pilot gear, training equipment,..... and if we were to buy them unlike the Indian's we would need all those things! And so if you dig deep into a viable deal that goes past the simple cost of the Aircraft alone and includes all the things that Iran would naturally need you wont find one that cost that nation under $100 million on average per aircraft if not a lot more....

Plus at the end of the day and as long as the U.S. remains in our region what good are Su-30's anyways? As I told you before in the air a Su-30MK2 will easily come up short against air superiority fighters equipped with X-Band AESA radars because that part is a no brainer! So for taking out enemy fighters WHY would Iran choose a battlefield where we pay easily over $100m per aircraft and they still have the advantage? It's absurd! Especially knowing that we could instead take them out while they are on the ground being maintained at a fraction of the cost using our own domestically produced weapons! Even against the Saudi's simply for the cost of a single Su-30 against each Saudi Air Force base we can demolish that base and there wouldn't be damn thing they could do about it and at that point it really wouldn't matter that Iranian fighters are technologically no more advanced than the Kowsar Iran recently put out! 

And yes Iran tried for years to secure Su-30 Technology Transfer! So what? It's because we have experience in knowing how useless a purchased imported fleet truly is to a point that it's now Iranian law and any large purchase by law has to be a technology transfer! And I have no problem with a tech transfer so long as a large portion of required maintenance parts are domestically produced however I would much prefer to build our own! 

As for T-72 kit's most assembly lines are by the most part kit's being put together so what's your point?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> And yes Iran tried for years to secure Su-30 Technology Transfer! So what? It's because we have experience in knowing how useless a purchased imported fleet truly is to a point that it's now Iranian law and any large purchase by law has to be a technology transfer! And I have no problem with a tech transfer so long as a large portion of required maintenance parts are domestically produced however I would much prefer to build our own!
> 
> As for T-72 kit's most assembly lines are by the most part kit's being put together so what's your point?



So you prefer ToT and domestically manufactured parts? So you like to argue for sake of arguing because that is what I said but your too stupid to even be able to read the English language.

And Iran can NEVER build a SU-30 equivalent just by sitting around tinkering with 70’s era fighter jets. It doesn’t work that way or else every country would be flying their own jet designs.

SU-30 with the radar of SU-35 can detect even low RCS objects!. So you dissing and entire PLATFORM/design over something simple like Radar is a joke. Its like saying why build a Mowj vessel it has radar from 1970s it’s inferior! Well it doesn’t anymore does it? Radar can always be upgraded and so can armament. 

What is key is the design of the Heavy fighter jet and knowing how to build and maintain its engines. Tinkering around with F-5’s won’t teach you anything about heavy fighter class jets.

And Iran attempting to build its own fighter jet and fighter jet engines could easily spend BILLIONS and still get a fighter jet or engine that is not reliable! For someone so obsessed with cost you have faulty logic. Go look at India’s Tejas fighter as an example! Or any other fighter program that had ample money sunk into and never made it beyond minor production!

My point via T-72 was Iran couldn’t even build T-72 without the kits but it managed to build a T-90 by various means. So saying Iran couldn’t upgrade the SU-30 platform on its own or supply parts is not true at all. All Iran needs is the PUSH and it can handle everything else. The problem is no country has yet to agree to that PUSH because they don’t want Iran to be self sufficient in its Air Force.

Also if you think that Iran’s BMs will stop a superpower like the US from finding ways to get planes to attack Iran you are dumber than I thought. And if you think Iran’s air defense systems can handle 100+ fighters plus cruise missiles waves all its on own without any air force to take some of the burden off of it, again you are naive. 

Iran’s air defense network is no where near being saturated enough with overlap that would allow for heavy losses to its AD teams and still be able to defend the skies adequately.

Once air defense network crumbles, missiles will be much harder to fire as enemy will be constantly in Iranian air space acting with impunity


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> So you prefer ToT and domestically manufactured parts? So you like to argue for sake of arguing because that is what I said but your too stupid to even be able to read the English language.
> 
> And Iran can NEVER build a SU-30 equivalent just by sitting around tinkering with 70’s era fighter jets. It doesn’t work that way or else every country would be flying their own jet designs.
> 
> SU-30 with the radar of SU-35 can detect even low RCS objects!. So you dissing and entire PLATFORM/design over something simple like Radar is a joke. Its like saying why build a Mowj vessel it has radar from 1970s it’s inferior! Well it doesn’t anymore does it? Radar can always be upgraded and so can armament.
> 
> What is key is the design of the Heavy fighter jet and knowing how to build and maintain its engines. Tinkering around with F-5’s won’t teach you anything about heavy fighter class jets.
> 
> And Iran attempting to build its own fighter jet and fighter jet engines could easily spend BILLIONS and still get a fighter jet or engine that is not reliable! For someone so obsessed with cost you have faulty logic. Go look at India’s Tejas fighter as an example! Or any other fighter program that had ample money sunk into and never made it beyond minor production!
> 
> My point via T-72 was Iran couldn’t even build T-72 without the kits but it managed to build a T-90 by various means. So saying Iran couldn’t upgrade the SU-30 platform on its own or supply parts is not true at all. All Iran needs is the PUSH and it can handle everything else. The problem is no country has yet to agree to that PUSH because they don’t want Iran to be self sufficient in its Air Force.
> 
> Also if you think that Iran’s BMs will stop a superpower like the US from finding ways to get planes to attack Iran you are dumber than I thought. And if you think Iran’s air defense systems can handle 100+ fighters plus cruise missiles waves all its on own without any air force to take some of the burden off of it, again you are naive.
> 
> Iran’s air defense network is no where near being saturated enough with overlap that would allow for heavy losses to its AD teams and still be able to defend the skies adequately.
> 
> Once air defense network crumbles, missiles will be much harder to fire as enemy will be constantly in Iranian air space acting with impunity



Don't put words in my mouth! I would prefer Domestic Production but to be more specific I don't and wouldn't have a problem with ToT so long as
1.All the maintenance parts that require replacement within a years or so are domestically produced be it a simple washer or tiers or break pads or oil filters or anything else! (with standard flight hours per year)
2.We get access to the weapons systems to a point where we can build and use our own weapons and upgrade and add our own sensors.
3.We are allowed to open up and inspect every single part and weapon of that aircraft.

As for an Iranian heavy fighter requiring billions its the same if not more with tot with the difference being with a domestics fighter program your actually investing in real infrastructure that lasts generations and your learning to do everything yourself from the ground up while with a tot your really being spoon fed some other countries outdated tech and only to build and assemble very limited number of parts while still remaining dependent on them for a long list of other parts and weapons....

But again if it was up to me I would instead fund our guys properly to go for a fully domestically produced fighter! And I'm fully confident that for what it would actually cost us to do a ToT and build 70-100 Su-30's (With weapons, parts, training,...) we could actually fund and get our own fighter program going and produce the same number of Fighters on an airframe equipped with an internal weapons bay and lower RCS (Aircraft only) at home and in the long run that would be far more valuable and affordable when it comes to part replacement and arming them in the long run.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

> *Iran Equips Mirage Fighters with Home-Grown Radar*
> 
> http://en.farsnews.ir/newstext.aspx?nn=13981127000585



Wasnt there also new AA-missiles anounced for this airplane? With new radar and new missiles and some new instruments/bord computers - will this Mirage F1B be a good low price complement for the iranian air force? There are 24 of them.


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Wasnt there also new AA-missiles anounced for this airplane? With new radar and new missiles and some new instruments/bord computers - will this Mirage F1B be a good low price complement for the iranian air force? There are 24 of them.



They will be a good flying coffin. 

A British tornado got taken down by barefooted houthis using a Iranian designed AA.

So that should tell you the life expectancy of an Mirage fighter in war. Unless it’s going to be bombing taliban fighters, I wouldn’t want to be the pilot that gets sent in the air to defend against F-35, F-22, and F-18’s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> They will be a good flying coffin.
> 
> A British tornado got taken down by barefooted houthis using a Iranian designed AA.
> 
> So that should tell you the life expectancy of an Mirage fighter in war. Unless it’s going to be bombing taliban fighters, I wouldn’t want to be the pilot that gets sent in the air to defend against F-35, F-22, and F-18’s



Thats clear. Whereas with a new modern radar with longer range and new missiles like long range AA or even cruise missile capability or ASHM capability, me think it would not be a bad complement compared to what Iran has now.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

VEVAK said:


>



What they say about Mirage F1 and F4 Phantom?


----------



## TheImmortal

LOL the general says a missile that has a 1000KM range doesn’t matter how old the fighter jet that is launching it is, what’s important is that the missile can be launched from it.

That is the mentality of the Air Force right now. I guess survivability of the planes is not important.

Every branch has shown promise EXCEPT Air Force, even the Ground Forces (Army) has taken positive steps with new generation of MRAPs, Karrar, and APCs. 

Can’t really blame them when they get zero funding.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Ich said:


> What they say about Mirage F1 and F4 Phantom?



The F-1B has been equipped with Iranian radar and Iranian weapons... 

It also appears that there is a plan in the works for an air launched Iranian land attack cruise missile with a range of 1000km to make up the difference for Iran's ageing fleet....

But by the most part its about overhaul and upgrade program at half the cost.....



TheImmortal said:


> LOL the general says a missile that has a 1000KM range doesn’t matter how old the fighter jet that is launching it is, what’s important is that the missile can be launched from it.
> 
> That is the mentality of the Air Force right now. I guess survivability of the planes is not important.
> 
> Every branch has shown promise EXCEPT Air Force, even the Ground Forces (Army) has taken positive steps with new generation of MRAPs, Karrar, and APCs.
> 
> Can’t really blame them when they get zero funding.



As Ain al Assad proved Missiles need to be Iran's main weapon of choice to invest in! A strong Air Force is of course a necessity but as long as its not an imported one that's fully dependent! And that is a lesson Iran's already learned.
As for survivability of course being equipped with long range weapon increases the fighters survivability regardless of how old the aircraft is because at the end of the day a fighter is only as good as the weapons it carries!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The worst reviews of this forum are on Iranian fighter jets. Iran is much more powerful than the majority thinks. Iran will be able to destroy the speculations and false anlayses of this forum.

I maintain more than ever that the F-4 SM really exists that the new powerful engine is already manufactured. I maintain that there will be surprises on the Kowsar II and another surprise on a new heavy fighter aircraft. I like to decode the images, the videos of the Iranian army because there is a lot to decode in their announcement process.

We will see very soon how ridiculous the false analyzes of TheImmortal are. The F-14 with a new radar and new missile will become a very powerful and dangerous aircraft for the enemy.

Iranian scientists are geniuses and they will increasingly surprise

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

The skeptical reviews are not without reason. I love Iranian engineers and scientists as much everybody else here but when I look at airforce I don't see much that leaves me feeling overly excited *at the moment*. I praise the work that has been done, given the innate difficulty involved in the airforce sector. How many nations can produce a fighter jet engine? Iran has. And it will produce more advanced version in the future, I am sure of it. However, until we get an idea for the future plans of the airforce like we have with the likes of navy (Safineh, Besat, 7000 ton destroyer etc) then we cannot comment more. Even if Iran managed to increase the quality of its F-4s, F-14s etc, there is limit. It cannot change their platform and turned them into a stealth fighter! Also, there is also the issue of numbers. How many F-14's does Iran have?

Iran's airforce might be much more ahead with its plans than we think. So I'll always a reserve an open mind for them. But until I see something actually substantive, I will not get overly excited. Especially not until they are given proper budget and priority.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The worst reviews of this forum are on Iranian fighter jets. Iran is much more powerful than the majority thinks. Iran will be able to destroy the speculations and false anlayses of this forum.
> 
> I maintain more than ever that the F-4 SM really exists that the new powerful engine is already manufactured. I maintain that there will be surprises on the Kowsar II and another surprise on a new heavy fighter aircraft. I like to decode the images, the videos of the Iranian army because there is a lot to decode in their announcement process.
> 
> We will see very soon how ridiculous the false analyzes of TheImmortal are. The F-14 with a new radar and new missile will become a very powerful and dangerous aircraft for the enemy.
> 
> Iranian scientists are geniuses and they will increasingly surprise



Have no doubt that we will but due to budget restrictions It will take time! The problem isn't technology or our engineers! It is money and lack of funding! Same with our civilian 125 passenger aircraft program! The design and engineering has already completed but they are not funding them for the next phase!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> The skeptical reviews are not without reason. I love Iranian engineers and scientists as much everybody else here but when I look at airforce I don't see much that leaves me feeling overly excited *at the moment*. I praise the work that has been done, given the innate difficulty involved in the airforce sector. How many nations can produce a fighter jet engine? Iran has. And it will produce more advanced version in the future, I am sure of it. However, until we get an idea for the future plans of the airforce like we have with the likes of navy (Safineh, Besat, 7000 ton destroyer etc) then we cannot comment more. Even if Iran managed to increase the quality of its F-4s, F-14s etc, there is limit. It cannot change their platform and turned them into a stealth fighter! Also, there is also the issue of numbers. How many F-14's does Iran have?
> 
> Iran's airforce might be much more ahead with its plans than we think. So I'll always a reserve an open mind for them. But until I see something actually substantive, I will not get overly excited. Especially not until they are given proper budget and priority.



What none of these homers on this board want to admit is most of the Iranian Air Force cannot keep a sustained war effort.

Look at the maintenance schedule of an F-14 for each sortie flown. In 1980’s these planes were BRAND NEW. But does any rational person think that Iran’s F-5, F-4,F-14 can survive 100’s of sorties on aging and stressed airframes?

Also don’t forget PGM and AA inventory, how much does Iran have? Russia blew through a lot of its old inventory during the Syrian civil war!

Look at Syrian Air Force during the civil war and what the stress of constant missions did to its air forces.

So build all the missiles you want and update the radar, the real question is how many sorties per day can the Air Force do and for HOW LONG? How much of the Air Force is actually combat ready? Even Western Air Force suffer from these problems (see Britain and US). So imagine what the case is for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

I


VEVAK said:


> It also appears that there is a plan in the works for an air launched Iranian land attack cruise missile with a range of 1000km to make up the difference for Iran's ageing fleet....



Isn't the Ya Ali LACM already in service?



TheImmortal said:


> What none of these homers on this board want to admit is most of the Iranian Air Force cannot keep a sustained war effort.
> 
> Look at the maintenance schedule of an F-14 for each sortie flown. In 1980’s these planes were BRAND NEW. But does any rational person think that Iran’s F-5, F-4,F-14 can survive 100’s of sorties on aging and stressed airframes?
> 
> Also don’t forget PGM and AA inventory, how much does Iran have? Russia blew through a lot of its old inventory during the Syrian civil war!
> 
> Look at Syrian Air Force during the civil war and what the stress of constant missions did to its air forces.
> 
> So build all the missiles you want and update the radar, the real question is how many sorties per day can the Air Force do and for HOW LONG? How much of the Air Force is actually combat ready? Even Western Air Force suffer from these problems (see Britain and US). So imagine what the case is for Iran.



Indeed. The best example is Saudi Arabia. The third largest military spender in the world. All because of the insane cost of their air force and it's operations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

VEVAK said:


> The F-1B has been equipped with Iranian radar and Iranian weapons...
> 
> It also appears that there is a plan in the works for an air launched Iranian land attack cruise missile with a range of 1000km to make up the difference for Iran's ageing fleet....
> 
> But by the most part its about overhaul and upgrade program at half the cost.....



Thanks. Me wonder why no AShM. It is very good for. Fast mach2 and low flying 200 km and then let the AShM go another 300+ km. Like Argentina did at the Malvina Islands.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The worst reviews of this forum are on Iranian fighter jets. Iran is much more powerful than the majority thinks. Iran will be able to destroy the speculations and false anlayses of this forum.
> 
> I maintain more than ever that the F-4 SM really exists that the new powerful engine is already manufactured. I maintain that there will be surprises on the Kowsar II and another surprise on a new heavy fighter aircraft. I like to decode the images, the videos of the Iranian army because there is a lot to decode in their announcement process.
> 
> We will see very soon how ridiculous the false analyzes of TheImmortal are. The F-14 with a new radar and new missile will become a very powerful and dangerous aircraft for the enemy.
> 
> Iranian scientists are geniuses and they will increasingly surprise


more than anything f-14 needs a new engine to solve its AoA problem


----------



## Ich

Hack-Hook said:


> more than anything f-14 needs a new engine to solve its AoA problem



Haha, if Iran can build new engines for F-14, then Iran should build new fighters with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> more than anything f-14 needs a new engine to solve its AoA problem


f-14 engine stall in high AoA has nothing to do with with tf-30, it's engine inlet that causes stall.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> f-14 engine stall in high AoA has nothing to do with with tf-30, it's engine inlet that causes stall.


When they changed the engine then no stall happened


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> When they changed the engine then no stall happened


because the issue was only assassinated with A model.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> because the issue was only assassinated with A model.


the intake is same if im not wrong , the engine is different because of that only A model have the problem


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the intake is same if im not wrong , the engine is different because of that only A model have the problem



Yes first F-14’s have different engine than later F-14’s.

Iran cannot reverse engineer F-14 engine. It would be very difficult to reverse even RD-33 without the blueprints and timing mechanism of the blades.

There are 5 countries that can reliably make fighter jet engines Russia, US, France, Britain, and China.

In the West, GE, RR, Pratt and Whitney are big players.

That should give users an idea about the sheer size of effort required in building a modern jet engine.

Now Iran has a pretty big military industrial complex one of the largest in the Middle East even bigger than Israel. The real question comes down to organization, politics, and ability to build a competent supply chain.

Everyone points to Turkey development efforts, but literally nothing Turkey builds is 100% in Turkey or without license or a spare part from the West. And since Turkey is part of NATO and contributes the largest amount of soldiers to NATO it knows that it can afford such a risky strategy with limited concern.

Iran on the other hand can never rely on a massive project like fighter jet to have parts come from elsewhere. We saw with the Mowj what happened once engines were no longer supplied, led to delay till its own engines were ready.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> the intake is same if im not wrong , the engine is different because of that only A model have the problem


i'm not really familiar with that issue but i asked some one with knowledge in this regard and it seems the issue is the intake does not work with tf-30 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> i'm not really familiar with that issue but i asked some one with knowledge in this regard and it seems the issue is the intake does not work with tf-30 engine.


That's why USA in later models used f110 engine


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> That's why USA in later models used f110 engine


not really, the main reason for f-110 replacement was low thrust to weight ratio of F-14A, specially for a carrier based interceptor.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

1-Iran modernized its Mirage F1

Last week, the deputy commander of the Iranian Air Force, General Hamid Vahedi, announced the successful development of the improved version of the Mirages F1 related to these forces by incorporating a new radar of local design and a cruise missile with a range of 300 km.

Thus, the improved versions of the Dassault Mirage F1 of the Iranian Air Force can now claim better air superiority over their old models by conducting air defense missions and being used to provide support to the ground. This suggests that those deployed by the Iranian Air Force would be able to carry air-to-air missiles, which is credited with the installation of radar and air-to-ground missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StormBreaker

So any updates of Qaher 313? What happened of that ?


----------



## Ich

StormBreaker said:


> So any updates of Qaher 313? What happened of that ?



I read in an other forum that its canceled cause of a new turbofan engine what is to big for Qaher 313 and now a new plane is on scratch for it. But i have to use google translater and i dont know if its true or not so...maybe, maybe not.


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> I read in an other forum that its canceled cause of a new turbofan engine what is to big for Qaher 313 and now a new plane is on scratch for it. But i have to use google translater and i dont know if its true or not so...maybe, maybe not.



Was never more than tech demonstrator. Would need to be enlarged by 150-200% to be even worth it to build.

I mean even Military couldn’t agree on its role, one person said anti ship, one person said anti helicopter, one person said CAS, one person said air defense, one person said trainer.

Honestly the original premise was likely to take an F-5 size fighter jet (something Iran could produce with effort) and make it 5th gen worthy.

Problem is a F-5 size fighter jet is too small in today’s fighter jet world. Was decent in 1950/1960s as a cheap export fighter, but now the world has moved to medium and heavy class jet fighters for versatility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

I think the aim of F-313 was:

1) Project that allows Iran to develop indigenous industrial and scientific base to build and design advanced aircraft on its own, thus allowing Iranian engineers to gain *valuable experience for future projects*

2) prototype, based on which 5th generation can be built in the future once Iran reverse engineers RD-33

meantime:

3) build a stealthy aircraft that can fly at subsonic speeds low over the Persian Gulf and destroy enemy helicopters, while protecting speedboat;s making swarm attack

4) subsonic stealthy aircraft that can fly low over the Persian Gulf at subsonic speed while taking advantage of ground effect and attack oil tankers with anti-ship missiles

^^(note that this is at least ---- something of military value,--- because anyway, as of now, with J-85, Iran can't build a fighter that can match US fighters)

Maybe next year--year 1400 Iranian calendar, we will see it flying (4 years after it was shown making taxi tests)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

in my opinion we might be misunderstood the role of plane, the gen dehgan said it's a هواپیمای اموزشی. we translated it to trainer jet. but i guess he might be meant that this plane has educational purpose. i mean we all remember iran leased some Venezuelan f-16 (it was main US and Israeli fighter jet) to analyze them in aerial battles and against our air defenses. people would ask how different it would be compared to an mirage f-1 or other planes to compel us to lease it?? well it seems like every plane requires different approach.
now with same logic and the possibility of an strike with US or Israeli f-35 stealth fighters, we need an stealth plane to study it and it's performance against our air defenses and interceptors to develop an strategy against this kind of attacks. in the mean time with the information we get from our radars of the plane, we can improve the plane stealth characteristics as well. this stealth plane would have limited A2G capability as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Mithridates said:


> in my opinion we might be misunderstood the role of plane, the gen dehgan said it's a هواپیمای اموزشی. we translated it to trainer jet. but i guess he might be meant that this plane has educational purpose. i mean we all remember iran leased some Venezuelan f-16 (it was main US and Israeli fighter jet) to analyze them in aerial battles and against our air defenses. people would ask how different it would be compared to an mirage f-1 or other planes to compel us to lease it?? well it seems like every plane requires different approach.
> now with same logic and the possibility of an strike with US or Israeli f-35 stealth fighters, we need an stealth plane to study it and it's performance against our air defenses and interceptors to develop an strategy against this kind of attacks. in the mean time with the information we get from our radars of the plane, we can improve the plane stealth characteristics as well. this stealth plane would have limited A2G capability as well.



Yes, a testbed. Maybe meanwhile Qaher exists as 1 flying prototype to test different stealth materials and, as you wrote, to test air defence against it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

*Elon Musk tells a room full of Air Force pilots: ‘The fighter jet era has passed’*
PUBLISHED FRI, FEB 28 20204:29 PM ESTUPDATED 2 HOURS AGO

Amanda Macias@AMANDA_M_MACIAS




KEY POINTS

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk predicted Friday that the future of war would be carried out by autonomous drones and not by legacy aircraft.
“The fighter jet era has passed,” Musk said during a fireside chat with U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. John Thompson at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando.
Musk also said that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet, which is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons system, should have a competitor.






Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX, speaks with US Air Force Lieutenant General John Thompson, commander Space and Missile Systems Center commander at Space Pitch Day in San Francisco, California.
US Air Force
ORLANDO, Fla., — Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk predicted Friday that the future of war would be carried out by autonomous drones and not by legacy aircraft.

“The fighter jet era has passed,” Musk said during a fireside chat with U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. John Thompson at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Florida. *“Drone warfare is where the future will be. *It’s not that I want the future to be – it’s just, this is what the future will be,” he added.







WATCH NOW
VIDEO01:44
F-35 vs Rafale: The battle for fighter jet supremacy


Musk also said that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet, which is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons system, should have a competitor.

“The Joint Strike Fighter, there should be a competitor ... that’s a controversial subject but I don’t think it’s good to have one provider,” Musk said. He later elaborated on Twitter that the F-35 competitor should be a drone.

“The competitor should be a drone fighter plane that’s remote-controlled by a human, but with its maneuvers augmented by autonomy. The F-35 would have no chance against it,” he wrote.





A U.S. Air Force F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter approaches at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
U.S. Air Force photo by Samuel King Jr.
Throughout his discussion with Thompson, Musk warned that the United States was at risk of falling behind other nations if it did not prioritize innovation.

“This is not something that was a risk in times past but is a risk now,” Musk said. “I have zero doubt that if the United States doesn’t seek innovation in space it will be second in space.”


Musk also predicted that the Chinese economy will eventually surpass the United States’ by at least two-fold.

*Read more: **Elon Musk says Chinese economy will surpass US by 2 or 3 times: ‘The foundation of war is economics’*

“A thing that will feel pretty strange is that the Chinese economy is probably going to be at least twice as big as the United States’ economy, maybe three times,” Musk said.

“The foundation of war is economics,” Musk said. “If you have half the resources of the counterparty then you better be real innovative, if you’re not innovative, you’re going to lose.”

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

aryobarzan said:


> *Elon Musk tells a room full of Air Force pilots: ‘The fighter jet era has passed’*
> PUBLISHED FRI, FEB 28 20204:29 PM ESTUPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
> 
> Amanda Macias@AMANDA_M_MACIAS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KEY POINTS
> 
> Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk predicted Friday that the future of war would be carried out by autonomous drones and not by legacy aircraft.
> “The fighter jet era has passed,” Musk said during a fireside chat with U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. John Thompson at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando.
> Musk also said that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet, which is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons system, should have a competitor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX, speaks with US Air Force Lieutenant General John Thompson, commander Space and Missile Systems Center commander at Space Pitch Day in San Francisco, California.
> US Air Force
> ORLANDO, Fla., — Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk predicted Friday that the future of war would be carried out by autonomous drones and not by legacy aircraft.
> 
> “The fighter jet era has passed,” Musk said during a fireside chat with U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. John Thompson at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Florida. *“Drone warfare is where the future will be. *It’s not that I want the future to be – it’s just, this is what the future will be,” he added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WATCH NOW
> VIDEO01:44
> F-35 vs Rafale: The battle for fighter jet supremacy
> 
> 
> Musk also said that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet, which is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons system, should have a competitor.
> 
> “The Joint Strike Fighter, there should be a competitor ... that’s a controversial subject but I don’t think it’s good to have one provider,” Musk said. He later elaborated on Twitter that the F-35 competitor should be a drone.
> 
> “The competitor should be a drone fighter plane that’s remote-controlled by a human, but with its maneuvers augmented by autonomy. The F-35 would have no chance against it,” he wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A U.S. Air Force F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter approaches at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
> U.S. Air Force photo by Samuel King Jr.
> Throughout his discussion with Thompson, Musk warned that the United States was at risk of falling behind other nations if it did not prioritize innovation.
> 
> “This is not something that was a risk in times past but is a risk now,” Musk said. “I have zero doubt that if the United States doesn’t seek innovation in space it will be second in space.”
> 
> 
> Musk also predicted that the Chinese economy will eventually surpass the United States’ by at least two-fold.
> 
> *Read more: **Elon Musk says Chinese economy will surpass US by 2 or 3 times: ‘The foundation of war is economics’*
> 
> “A thing that will feel pretty strange is that the Chinese economy is probably going to be at least twice as big as the United States’ economy, maybe three times,” Musk said.
> 
> “The foundation of war is economics,” Musk said. “If you have half the resources of the counterparty then you better be real innovative, if you’re not innovative, you’re going to lose.”


I think this is something that many in this forum have expressed. Manned fighter jets are becoming more and more irrelevant with the implementation of cheaper and increasingly sophisticated drones and precision strike missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> I think this is something that many in this forum have expressed. Manned fighter jets are becoming more and more irrelevant with the implementation of cheaper and increasingly sophisticated drones and precision strike missiles.



What a load of baloney. Elon is used to seeing drones bomb countries and insurgents that can’t fight back.

How are drones going to defend your airspace when the enemy is jamming radio/gps signals? Or when the enemy shoots down your satellites? What happens when operator loses control of the drone? US lost connection to all its drone during the Al Assad air base attack. They were effectively blind.

If your dependent on something like drones to carry out your defense and counter attack you are screwed during war.

Manned pilots will be here for another 25-30 years at the minimum. So if Iran wants to sit around and build Shahed-129 and think that will do anything during a war with another formidable military then they will be in a major wake up call.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> I think this is something that many in this forum have expressed. Manned fighter jets are becoming more and more irrelevant with the implementation of cheaper and increasingly sophisticated drones and precision strike missiles.


I would argue that the technology is already here, however there no implementations as of yet (at least not public ones. US is probably sitting with a darpa/skunk work prototype as we speak). 
From an AI and machine learning perspective it is completely possible to have an autonomous ucav fighter/intercepter system. Wether the systems can be jammed or not is absolutely a risk but can be minimized if the implementer is well versed in EW and/or has implemented the system to be completely autonomous.

Furthermore with implementation of quantum communication it will be impossible to jam, intercept or any way disturb the signals.

Manned fighters and interceptors will be obsolete in maximum 15 years and minimum 5 years (if a working prototype exists but not yet showcased). Manned bomber is obsolete!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> What a load of baloney. Elon is used to seeing drones bomb countries and insurgents that can’t fight back.
> 
> How are drones going to defend your airspace when the enemy is jamming radio/gps signals? Or when the enemy shoots down your satellites? What happens when operator loses control of the drone? US lost connection to all its drone during the Al Assad air base attack. They were effectively blind.
> 
> If your dependent on something like drones to carry out your defense and counter attack you are screwed during war.
> 
> Manned pilots will be here for another 25-30 years at the minimum. So if Iran wants to sit around and build Shahed-129 and think that will do anything during a war with another formidable military then they will be in a major wake up call.


Would you believe 20 years ago if someone told you the days of combustion engine cars are numbered? Do you believe it now?

No country in the region could touch Al Assad with their airforce as they had to get through US jet fighters first. However Iran delivered 6 tons of high explosives to that site with precision comparable to manned bombers by pushing a few buttons and all US could do was to watch it unfold. Jet fighters were totally useless in that case.

Soon, enough intelligence can be fit in an AA missile that enables it to see and differentiate between actual target and chaff or decoys and offer more efficiency and kill rate than manned fighters same way Iran's missiles are now comparable or even better than manned bombers.

Elon is talking about "semi-autonomous" drones. Mission and kill decisions are made by a human but rest is carried out by the onboard AI. So loss of communication link will not be that important. 

Fighter jets will not disappear overnight but in 10 years they will lose more than 50% of their missions to drones and high precision missiles. That's how disruptive technologies are. You don't see them coming unless you are imaginative enough.



Sina-1 said:


> I would argue that the technology is already here, however there no implementations as of yet (at least not public ones. US is probably sitting with a darpa/skunk work prototype as we speak).
> From an AI and machine learning perspective it is completely possible to have an autonomous ucav fighter/intercepter system. Wether the systems can be jammed or not is absolutely a risk but can be minimized if the implementer is well versed in EW and/or has implemented the system to be completely autonomous.
> 
> Furthermore with implementation of quantum communication it will be impossible to jam, intercept or any way disturb the signals.
> 
> Manned fighters and interceptors will be obsolete in maximum 15 years and minimum 5 years (if a working prototype exists but not yet showcased). Manned bomber is obsolete!


Totally agree. See my reply to immortal above

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Would you believe 20 years ago if someone told you the days of combustion engine cars are numbered? Do you believe it now?
> 
> No country in the region could touch Al Assad with their airforce as they had to get through US jet fighters first. However Iran delivered 6 tons of high explosives to that site with precision comparable to manned bombers by pushing a few buttons and all US could do was to watch it unfold. Jet fighters were totally useless in that case.
> 
> Soon, enough intelligence can be fit in an AA missile that enables it to see and differentiate between actual target and chaff or decoys and offer more efficiency and kill rate than manned fighters same way Iran's missiles are now comparable or even better than manned bombers.
> 
> Elon is talking about "semi-autonomous" drones. Mission and kill decisions are made by a human but rest is carried out by the onboard AI. So loss of communication link will not be that important.
> 
> Fighter jets will not disappear overnight but in 10 years they will lose more than 50% of their missions to drones and high precision missiles. That's how disruptive technologies are. You don't see them coming unless you are imaginative enough.
> 
> 
> Totally agree. See my reply to immortal above



More rubbish. Right now almost all drones are slow and human operated. Also for war time operations the enemy is constantly moving as well for CAS.

So for AI to get to the point that it can tell 10 specks on the ground to be an enemy and not people returning from a wedding? Or civilians fleeing a combat zone? Even now Saudi Arabia and Israel with human operated fighter jets kill thousands of civilians “by accident”.

So no we are not close to “fire and forget” drones that live off of AI.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> More rubbish. Right now almost all drones are slow and human operated. Also for war time operations the enemy is constantly moving as well for CAS.
> 
> So for AI to get to the point that it can tell 10 specks on the ground to be an enemy and not people returning from a wedding? Or civilians fleeing a combat zone? Even now Saudi Arabia and Israel with human operated fighter jets kill thousands of civilians “by accident”.
> 
> So no we are not close to “fire and forget” drones that live off of AI.


Yes, extrapolation of technology trends is tough for most of people. That's why so many fortune 500 companies don't live more than a decade.

Just wait and see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Realistically the Eurofighter Typhoon and Mirage jets are also smaller jets. Obviously the technology they possess is decades more advanced than any F-5, however in terms of their size they're not large jets. 



TheImmortal said:


> Was never more than tech demonstrator. Would need to be enlarged by 150-200% to be even worth it to build.
> 
> I mean even Military couldn’t agree on its role, one person said anti ship, one person said anti helicopter, one person said CAS, one person said air defense, one person said trainer.
> 
> Honestly the original premise was likely to take an F-5 size fighter jet (something Iran could produce with effort) and make it 5th gen worthy.
> 
> Problem is a F-5 size fighter jet is too small in today’s fighter jet world. Was decent in 1950/1960s as a cheap export fighter, but now the world has moved to medium and heavy class jet fighters for versatility.


----------



## aryobarzan

Came across this photo of F 35 assembly line..hope to see something of this caliber in Iran's future aircraft production line. As much as we Iranians dislike American political attitudes we must admit that they wrote the book in aviation..

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Raghfarm007

Report on the ugrades in F14 radars:

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ربه-های-ایرانی-با-چشمان-تیزتر-می-بینند-تصاویر

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iranian radar that makes F-14s real "AWACS"

In April 2010, the Iranian Air Force announced that new optimized radars had been installed on its F-14s.

After the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) ended, the Iranian Air Force began carrying out several projects in the early 1990s to improve the operation of the radars of its combat aircraft.

These were mainly the APQ-109 radar of the F-4D fighters, the APQ-153 radar of the F-5E fighters, the APQ-120 radar of the F-4E fighters and the AWG-9 radar of the F-14 fighters. The aim of these optimization projects was above all to increase the detection range of airborne radars, to increase the area of interception, to increase the possibility of detecting objects flying at low altitude.

Over time, experts in Iran’s military industries have gained significant experience in this area. They have succeeded in recent years in designing and manufacturing active and passive ground-based radars or various types of airborne radars that have been delivered to the DCA or the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The F-14s equipped with a new Iranian radar:

In April 2010, the Iranian Air Force officially announced that new optimized radars had been installed on its Iranian F-14s. These radars had an increased range compared to the original F-14 radar, that is to say the American AWG-9 system. In fact, after several years of work, Iranian experts had succeeded in increasing the range of the AWG-9 radar (initially 200 km).

According to senior commanders of the Iranian Air Force, Iranian radars have been installed in recent years on several F-14 radars, which are more modern and more efficient than the original radars of these planes.

Thus, some experts speak of the transformation of several F-14 of the Iranian Air Force into a real AWACS, given the increase in the range of radars, and the optimization of the detection and analysis of data.

The new radar of the hunter Kowsar:

In recent years, the Iranian Air Force has installed new radars on its F-5s and their Iranian version Kowsar. Images released in 2018 showed that new flat antennas were installed on the Kowsar fighters, which indicated that these planes had been equipped with new radars compared to the original radar system (APQ-153) of the F-5E fighters.

However, the Air Force has not released any details about the new Kowsar fighter radar system, its performance and capabilities. However, the images suggest that the system has been miniaturized, which suggests that components of the new radar system are taking advantage of the benefits of new technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007

Report on upgrads of the F4 radar:

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-اشباح-ایرانی-چشم-و-پنجه-عقاب-ها-تیزتر-می-شود

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

I dont know if this models been posted before,but its a very nice piece of work whoever did it.




The twin tails were certainly a nice looking modification if nothing else.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

View attachment 614229

The twin tails were certainly a nice looking modification if nothing else.[/QUOTE]
twine tail will be meanigful if we put stronger engine inside the airplane otherwise the increased drag will make problem for the airplane .


----------



## Tarao

Two years ago I saw this at a Scale model exhibition in Tokyo. This is high quality.
[QUOTE = "Sineva、post：12151542、member：190049"]このモデルが以前に投稿されたかどうかはわかりませんが、それをやった人にとってはとても素晴らしい作品です。
[ATTACH = full] 614229 [/ ATTACH]
ツインテールは確かに見栄えの良い修正でした。[/ QUOTE]

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

Tarao said:


> Two years ago I saw this at a Scale model exhibition in Tokyo. This is high quality.
> [QUOTE = "Sineva、post：12151542、member：190049"]このモデルが以前に投稿されたかどうかはわかりませんが、それをやった人にとってはとても素晴らしい作品です。
> [ATTACH = full] 614229 [/ ATTACH]
> ツインテールは確かに見栄えの良い修正でした。[/ QUOTE]



we got a japanese here...nice to meet ya.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> I dont know if this models been posted before,but its a very nice piece of work whoever did it.
> View attachment 614229
> 
> The twin tails were certainly a nice looking modification if nothing else.


It turns out that this is an actual 1/48 scale model kit.




https://www.super-hobby.com/products/HESA-Saeqeh-80.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Heres a nice pic taken from an unusual angle,and it does a pretty good job of showing off the size differences between the 2 machines as well.




And a similar one for the mig29 and f5,it really brings home the size differences between the 3 machines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> View attachment 614358
> 
> Heres a nice pic taken from an unusual angle,and it does a pretty good job of showing off the size differences between the 2 machines as well.
> View attachment 614363
> 
> And a similar one for the mig29 and f5,it really brings home the size differences between the 3 machines.



Yes, hopefully it brings users to reality who think the F-5 can do the same job as the F-14 in the field of interceptor and air defense.

Absurd.


----------



## Messerschmitt

An interesting Iranian documentary about the IRIAF's air-to-surface and surface-to-air missile development after the revolution: https://dnws.ir/352528

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*

am i right?? or is it an fully upgraded MIG-21? 


old version *









*new version 



















*


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *
> am i right?? or is it an fully upgraded MIG-21 with radar?
> 
> 
> old version *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *new version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


it's still an f-7 with a new double delta wing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *
> 
> old version *



That is a mockup of an unknown Iranian fighter jet project. This mockup has been around for years. Nothing is known about that project in the public domain. It has nothing to do Mig-21 or any other known fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

We talked about it in March 2019 when some screenshots appeared



sahureka2 said:


> I found another image in which you see some more elements, however the quality of the photo is low, I tried to improve it and at the top appears a structure that appears to be a part of the fuselage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surely these images are screenshots taken from a video, video that I could not find on the web.
> I ask if any of the users of this forum can locate it and share it here, so that they can view it carefully with the hope of being able to detect some other clue as to which plane they are working on.
> 
> thank !







Something that could look like the Chinese JL-9, but single seater, of which I had made a photosbop of how it could be

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

sahureka2 said:


> We talked about it in March 2019 when some screenshots appeared
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something that could look like the Chinese JL-9, but single seater, of which I had made a photosbop of how it could be


This is possibly a project to upgrade the IRIAF's F-7N fleet to something like an Iranian single-seat FTC-2000(G).


----------



## OldTwilight

Messerschmitt said:


> This is possibly a project to upgrade the IRIAF's F-7N fleet to something like an Iranian single-seat FTC-2000(G).



the ultimate upgrade of F-7 is Pakistan jF-17 , so instead of these bullshits , I think we should simply ask for TOT of JF-17 with Pakistan .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

OldTwilight said:


> the ultimate upgrade of F-7 is Pakistan jF-17 , so instead of these bullshits , I think we should simply ask for TOT of JF-17 with Pakistan .



Pakistan only manufactures part of the JF-17, ultimately it's mostly produced in China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

OldTwilight said:


> the ultimate upgrade of F-7 is Pakistan jF-17 , so instead of these bullshits , I think we should simply ask for TOT of JF-17 with Pakistan .



They are two different aircraft
The JL-9 / FTC-2000 derives directly from the training version FT-7 and maintains in addition to many components also the same Chinese-made WP-13F engine.
The JF-17 instead is an almost total redesign of the F-7 and adopts the engine made in Russia RD-33

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran has promised us surprises by announcing a prototype Shafaq which will soon be tested. In fact, there is too much tendency in the West to take developments in the Iranian airline industry lightly, out of pride or even out of hand. but if we follow the course of the Iranians more closely, we must be more modest. 
The National Interest


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran has promised us surprises by announcing a prototype Shafaq which will soon be tested. In fact, there is too much tendency in the West to take developments in the Iranian airline industry lightly, out of pride or even out of hand. but if we follow the course of the Iranians more closely, we must be more modest.
> The National Interest



The National Interest is clickbait trash, not saying that analysis is necessarily off the mark but best steer clear from them.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

They are just toys.

I don’t know where you guys think Iran is magically going to find funding for a fighter jet program under sanctions and oil prices so low.

Not to mention the only engine they can make is J-85. Severely limits options to light attack fighter jet which is of zero use for Iran.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> They are just toys.
> 
> I don’t know where you guys think Iran is magically going to find funding for a fighter jet program under sanctions and oil prices so low.
> 
> Not to mention the only engine they can make is J-85. Severely limits options to light attack fighter jet which is of zero use for Iran.


does low oil price affect Iran at all?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Absolutely false for the engine, they already make a powerful engine. I can't wait for Iran to take over the world again. Shafaq arrives regardless of the media who say it or not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

if it was up to me i would buy 200 soloviev d-30 engines and make some simple fighter jets with them. engines are not weapon so no sanctions as well.


----------



## Myself

Mithridates said:


> if it was up to me i would buy 200 soloviev d-30 engines and make some simple fighter jets with them. engines are not weapon so no sanctions as well.


You don’t need to buy them, as too many TU-154s are collecting dust in Tehran and Isfahan with such engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Myself said:


> You don’t need to buy them, as too many TU-154s are collecting dust in Tehran and Isfahan with such engines.


those are different engines, their fan is bigger to increase fuel economy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> does low oil price affect Iran at all?



what kind of question is that?

Even the small amount of oil it does sell has to be given at a discount to entice buyers. So yes if you have to sell something at $20 instead of $50 then that affects your revenue! Wether it’s 1 million barrels or 1 billion barrels, it’s loss of income!


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> what kind of question is that?
> 
> Even the small amount of oil it does sell has to be given at a discount to entice buyers. So yes if you have to sell something at $20 instead of $50 then that affects your revenue! Wether it’s 1 million barrels or 1 billion barrels, it’s loss of income!


its not 1 million barrel . its around 150 thousands barrel


----------



## sha ah

Hack-Hook said:


> its not 1 million barrel . its around 150 thousands barrel



I'm not sure about the numbers at the moment, however before the Coronavirus Iran was selling atleast 700,000 barrels per day and keep in mind that number reflects the oil sales that were traceable. 
http://www.payvand.com/news/19/dec/1006.html


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> I'm not sure about the numbers at the moment, however before the Coronavirus Iran was selling atleast 700,000 barrels per day and keep in mind that number reflects the oil sales that were traceable.
> http://www.payvand.com/news/19/dec/1006.html


12/03/2019 after that the situation changed a lot


----------



## sha ah

Hack-Hook said:


> 12/03/2019 after that the situation changed a lot



Actually you never know. Since the prices are so low right now countries like China, India, Indonesia, etc are probably stockpiling cheap oil, especially since Iran's oil is high grade and is sold at a slight discount as well. 

Honestly from a business standpoint I can't imagine why countries with the means would not fill up on as much cheap oil as possible right now. Chances are Iran is selling quite a bit but at these prices is it really worth it for Iran ? I guess it's better than nothing.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Actually you never know. Since the prices are so low right now countries like China, India, Indonesia, etc are probably stockpiling cheap oil, especially since Iran's oil is high grade and is sold at a slight discount as well.
> 
> Honestly from a business standpoint I can't imagine why countries with the means would not fill up on as much cheap oil as possible right now. Chances are Iran is selling quite a bit but at these prices is it really worth it for Iran ? I guess it's better than nothing.


well probably because those countries storage facilities are already filled


----------



## sha ah

Hack-Hook said:


> well probably because those countries storage facilities are already filled



When the price is right there's always room for more. China is a very large and industrious country. They can build entire hospitals within 1 month. Storage facilities are not difficult to build. There's a good chance that oil prices will never be this low again. China and other countries with excess funds are probably hording as much cheap oil as humanly possible right now.



sha ah said:


> When the price is right there's always room for more. China is a very large and industrious country. They can build entire hospitals within 1 week. Storage facilities are not difficult to build. There's a good chance that oil prices will never be this low again. China and other countries with excess funds are probably hording as much cheap oil as humanly possible right now.


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "sahureka2, post: 12236291, membro: 175938"]






[CITAZIONE]

with Photoshop





similar to the first pictorial impressions of the Super F-7

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nomi007

What is the Future of IRAF?
Once world most advance airforce now as most useless airforce


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


>



This just reminds me we seriously need an update on Iran's helicopter development programs.

So many promising projects like Saba-248, Panha P1, Shahed-216 prototyped but not seen or heard about for years.

I think sanctions have put some of them on hiatus until domestic alternatives can be developed. Remember that Saba-248 was only 67% Iranian manufactured when it was first displayed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

That helicopters is a knockoff of a Bell 214C produced in 2011 isn't it ? 

New helicopters, jets, tanks, armored vehicles, trucks require lots of investment and funding. Research and development costs money and building quality products costs money. 

With the current price of oil and Iran's financial situation lots of projects are undoubtedly on hold. Iran's best bet right now is to focus on the fundamentals and defense, like air defenses, missiles, ATGM's. 

Honestly if Iran were to produce a quality knockoff of the HK417 with a basic scope and hand them out to the entire army, IRGC, etc that would be a good first step. However with until the economic situation improves I'm very skeptical. 



TruthHurtz said:


> This just reminds me we seriously need an update on Iran's helicopter development programs.
> 
> So many promising projects like Saba-248, Panha P1, Shahed-216 prototyped but not seen or heard about for years.
> 
> I think sanctions have put some of them on hiatus until domestic alternatives can be developed. Remember that Saba-248 was only 67% Iranian manufactured when it was first displayed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> This just reminds me we seriously need an update on Iran's helicopter development programs.
> 
> So many promising projects like Saba-248, Panha P1, Shahed-216 prototyped but not seen or heard about for years.
> 
> I think sanctions have put some of them on hiatus until domestic alternatives can be developed. Remember that Saba-248 was only 67% Iranian manufactured when it was first displayed.



like with everything related to Iran, issue is suitable engine.

Not to mention helicopters are just not a priority when Iran’s airforce is withering away and it’s tank division is operating T-72’s.

Iran still has so many helicopters, better to just upgrade them.

Iran needs heavy attack choppers and a heavy transport for the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1255806605653946368
Source: https://dnws.ir/394030

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1257200053392936960^ Cockpit footage from an Iranian Kowsar pilot

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Sina-1

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1257200053392936960^ Cockpit footage from an Iranian Kowsar pilot


Which kowsar? Trainer or f5 kowsar?


----------



## Avicenna

Sina-1 said:


> Which kowsar? Trainer or f5 kowsar?



Looking at the nose and pitot tube F-5 Kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

I have a question :
Today on a twitter I found this photo depicting an Ex MiG-23BN Iraqi Flogger in IRIAF colors. It was specified that 12 Iraqi MiG-23BN were in Iran during 1991.
Are these 12 Mig-23BN still present in Iranian deposits today?
Did the Iranian military leaders think of bringing them into operational conditions?
Did you use the R-29-300 engines to support the SU-22?

thanks.







PS:
however, it would have been an excellent opportunity for Iranian technicians to thoroughly evaluate this aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran Has Most Powerful Chopper Fleet in West Asia: Commander*
By
IFP Editorial Staff
-
May 4, 2020




A Senior Iranian commander says the Islamic Republic is in possession of the most powerful helicopter fleet in West Asia.

Commander of Islamic Republic of Iran Army Aviation, Brigadier General Yousef Qorbani, said Monday the country has the largest helicopter fleet in the West Asia which gives it an upper hand.

He went on to say that visitors from friendly and neighbouring countries, who have visited the Army Aviation facilities, have approved this claim.

“Not only in numbers, but also in combat and deterrent power we are the most powerful in this region. At the same time, with the huge helicopter fleet at our disposal, we have the fifth largest chopper fleet in the world.”

“Today, despite sanctions, we have created many opportunities in the aviation industry,” added Qorbani in an interview with Fars News Agency.

He further mentioned that Iran has upgraded the choppers firepower to suit the conditions of today’s wars, in a way that Iranian choppers will no longer fire at the enemy at close range, but they target the enemy in the form of Fire and Forget.

“Over the past few years, a great deal has been carried out in collaboration with the defence industry. We have our own weapons infrastructure in the army aviation. We have classified the ways to use these weapons; that is, the weapons and tactics we may use against a terrorist group are different from the weapons we may use in an equal or unequal battle.”

He added that today, the power of Iran’s missile systems in the Aviation Force is tremendous.

“We have a variety of guided missiles, and from very long distances we can fire our missiles to hit the enemy. On the other hand, we are combining weapons with night vision systems so that we can strengthen our combat capability at night,” he continued.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Qorbani said the Army Aviation has put the issue of self-protection on the agenda and is working on it to protect helicopters and pilots.

“We had successful tests. This is one of the necessities of our work, and thank God, we are focusing on self-protection to equip our helicopters with self-protection system.”

He underscored that at the time of natural disasters like floods, earthquakes, etc., it is the Army Aviation that creates air communication when the roads are closed.

“During the Kermanshah earthquake, we carried out 500 sorties till midday, which was unprecedented in the world. In the floods of Golestan and Lorestan, where all roads were closed, it was the Army Aviation that helped the people. That’s why we say the Army Aviation is really useful. Today, we are covering 18 provinces of the country in the form of air emergencies. In various elections, it is the Army Aviation that transfers ballot boxes to hard-to-reach areas,” concluded General Qorbani.

https://ifpnews.com/iran-has-most-powerful-chopper-fleet-in-west-asia-commander

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Heres a couple of close ups of the irgc-af developed targeting pod for the su22 force that I managed to find.









And some pics of the original short fin configuration of the bina laser guided missile 








Interestingly this original configuration does a pretty good job of debunking the claim that the basis for the bina was the maverick,as the extended maverick like fins were only added at a much later stage after the weapon had already commenced firing tests

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Shams313

That missile was one the weaponry i used to set as desktop wallpaper back in then.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

sahureka2 said:


> I have a question :
> Today on a twitter I found this photo depicting an Ex MiG-23BN Iraqi Flogger in IRIAF colors. It was specified that 12 Iraqi MiG-23BN were in Iran during 1991.
> Are these 12 Mig-23BN still present in Iranian deposits today?
> Did the Iranian military leaders think of bringing them into operational conditions?
> Did you use the R-29-300 engines to support the SU-22?
> 
> thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS:
> however, it would have been an excellent opportunity for Iranian technicians to thoroughly evaluate this aircraft


it seems there is no intention to bring them back to service, only defected jets worth it to refurbishing and use were f-1s and su-25s.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Rumours on twitter that Iran finalised a deal with Russia for Su-27/Su-35/YAK-130
The Su-30 should be produced under license in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## xbat

iran has its own war machines seagah, yasen etc , no need to get from russia.


----------



## Philosopher

xbat said:


> iran has its own war machines seagah, yasen etc , no need to get from russia.



Those planes you mentioned are not in the league of the likes of SU30/35. If Iran is showing interest in development of its airforce in a serious manner, then it needs to close the gap. Like I have written here previously, I can see Iran getting a few dozen Sukhoi in the relative short term. In the mid-long term it will certainly go for an indigenous solution. If the Russian agree for TOT and in-house manufacturing, that will greatly help Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Draco.IMF said:


> Rumours on twitter that Iran finalised a deal with Russia for Su-27/Su-35/YAK-130
> The Su-30 should be produced under license in Iran


This it to ensure Russia will fight to teeth to prevent snap back of the JCPOA. It is a smart move.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Arminkh said:


> This it to ensure Russia will fight to teeth to prevent snap back of the JCPOA. It is a smart move.



'Rumours'

Why Su-27 anyway lol


----------



## Avicenna

Draco.IMF said:


> Rumours on twitter that Iran finalised a deal with Russia for Su-27/Su-35/YAK-130
> The Su-30 should be produced under license in Iran



SU-27?


----------



## QWECXZ

TruthHurtz said:


> 'Rumours'
> 
> Why Su-27 anyway lol


Why Yak-130 when we have Yasin? lol


----------



## Mithridates

QWECXZ said:


> Why Yak-130 when we have Yasin? lol


american canopy instrument use nautical miles and other american scales, Russians use kilometres and other ISI measures. there were several cases with our mig-29s which pilot confused and were about to meet izrael himself but they manage to ditch him.


----------



## QWECXZ

Mithridates said:


> american canopy instrument use nautical miles and other american scales, Russians use kilometres and other ISI measures. there were several cases with our mig-29s which pilot confused and were about to meet izrael himself but they manage to ditch him.


And unit conversation is such a big issue for a country that claims to produce indigenous fighters?


----------



## TheImmortal

Avicenna said:


> SU-27?




Are you Really asking why Iran needs an air superiority fighter?

SU-27 is F-14/F-15 equivalent and the predecessor to SU-30.

While these are just rumors. SU-27 with full TOT would be a major boom for Iran’s domestic air force projects.

I doubt Russia gives ToT with SU-30, more likely SU-27.


----------



## Mithridates

QWECXZ said:


> And unit conversation is such a big issue for a country that claims to produce indigenous fighters?


if you want to change the numbers you should change all instruments. you think Russians would agree with that??
have you recently saw something like this:






no?? because Russians objected to that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## QWECXZ

Mithridates said:


> if you want to change the numbers you should change all instruments. you think Russians would agree with that??
> have you recently saw something like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no?? because Russians objected to that.


I think we might've misunderstood each other.
Why would they disagree with us converting units in Yasin? Isn't Yasin an indigenous fighter after all?


----------



## Mithridates

QWECXZ said:


> I think we might've misunderstood each other.
> Why would they disagree with us converting units in Yasin? Isn't Yasin an indigenous fighter after all?


Oh sorry I misunderstood. yes it's possible but I guess we are buying yak 130 as an advanced trainer for su30 and possibly su35. my knowledge boundaries ends here and if I go beyond it will be just speculations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

Mithridates said:


> Oh sorry I misunderstood. yes it's possible but I guess we are buying yak 130 as an advanced trainer for su30 and possibly su35. my knowledge boundaries ends here and if I go beyond it will be just speculations.


Actually that makes sense and you're probably right.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

TheImmortal said:


> Are you Really asking why Iran needs an air superiority fighter?
> 
> SU-27 is F-14/F-15 equivalent and the predecessor to SU-30.
> 
> While these are just rumors. SU-27 with full TOT would be a major boom for Iran’s domestic air force projects.
> 
> I doubt Russia gives ToT with SU-30, more likely SU-27.



No that wasn't my point/question.

We all know Iran needs new equipment.

My point was why SU-27 rather than SU-35?

Or SU-30 derivative?

https://su27flankerfamily.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/su-27smsm3/

From what I recall Iran was associated with the SU-27SM3 earlier (but refused).

I guess the Israelis have pull in Russia too.


----------



## sha ah

All things considered, the US is probably going to re-impose the UN arms embargo on Iran. Technically the US shouldn't be able to do this since they're no longer a part of the nuclear deal. Regardless it seems as if they're going to try their best to push through. 

However it already looks like Russia, China are firmly against the US in this regard. I have a feeling that even if the US is able to re-impose the UN sanctions on Iran, there's a good chance that Russia, China will simply label them as illegitimate and ignore them.

As we can see, Russia, China are both defying the UN arms embargo on Libya so it's possible.

In any case, what do you guys think about Iran buying Tejas jets from India ? They're priced at $30 million a piece and the Indian air force just ordered 80 I believe ?

On the other hand, it does cost Iran merely $7 million to build an F-5 knock off (Kowsar) with 4th generation avionics and radar. Would it make more sense, especially from a monetary standpoint, for Iran to build 40-60 more for F-5's with the latest upgrades ? I mean 4 Kowsars for the price of 1 Tejas... Hmmmm












Looking at the Tejas, it's a smaller jet and it has the Delta wing. Those features seem to be in style right now. Look at the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale jet, Jas 39 Gripen, etc. All Delta V wing, all small. 

Eurofighter Typhoon 





Dassault Rafale 





Saab Jas 39 Gripen

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

sha ah said:


> All things considered, the US is probably going to re-impose the UN arms embargo on Iran. Technically the US shouldn't be able to do this since they're no longer a part of the nuclear deal. Regardless it seems as if they're going to try their best to push through.
> 
> However it already looks like Russia, China are firmly against the US in this regard. I have a feeling that even if the US is able to re-impose the UN sanctions on Iran, there's a good chance that Russia, China will simply label them as illegitimate and ignore them.
> 
> As we can see, Russia, China are both defying the UN arms embargo on Libya so it's possible.
> 
> In any case, what do you guys think about Iran buying Tejas jets from India ? They're priced at $30 million a piece and the Indian air force just ordered 80 I believe ?
> 
> On the other hand, it does cost Iran merely $7 million to build an F-5 knock off (Kowsar) with 4th generation avionics and radar. Would it make more sense, especially from a monetary standpoint, for Iran to build 40-60 more for F-5's with the latest upgrades ? I mean 4 Kowsars for the price of 1 Tejas... Hmmmm
> 
> View attachment 632971
> View attachment 632973
> View attachment 632975
> 
> 
> Looking at the Tejas, it's a smaller jet and it has the Delta wing. Those features seem to be in style right now. Look at the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale jet, Jas 39 Gripen, etc. All Delta V wing, all small.
> 
> Eurofighter Typhoon
> View attachment 632978
> 
> 
> Dassault Rafale
> View attachment 632980
> 
> 
> Saab Jas 39 Gripen
> View attachment 632981


lol bro why tejas?? peanut range peanut payload no BVR...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Tejas is not far better than our Yasin/upgraded enhanced F5.

Most importantly, Yasin has an Iranian engine and Tejas does not have an Indian engine as of now.


----------



## loanranger

Shawnee said:


> Tejas does not have an Indian engine as of now.


An Indian engine is just as bad as a foreign engine. Indians will use it as a blackmail point when the time comes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bokhari

sha ah said:


> All things considered, the US is probably going to re-impose the UN arms embargo on Iran. Technically the US shouldn't be able to do this since they're no longer a part of the nuclear deal. Regardless it seems as if they're going to try their best to push through.
> 
> However it already looks like Russia, China are firmly against the US in this regard. I have a feeling that even if the US is able to re-impose the UN sanctions on Iran, there's a good chance that Russia, China will simply label them as illegitimate and ignore them.
> 
> As we can see, Russia, China are both defying the UN arms embargo on Libya so it's possible.
> 
> In any case, what do you guys think about Iran buying Tejas jets from India ? They're priced at $30 million a piece and the Indian air force just ordered 80 I believe ?
> 
> On the other hand, it does cost Iran merely $7 million to build an F-5 knock off (Kowsar) with 4th generation avionics and radar. Would it make more sense, especially from a monetary standpoint, for Iran to build 40-60 more for F-5's with the latest upgrades ? I mean 4 Kowsars for the price of 1 Tejas... Hmmmm
> 
> View attachment 632971
> View attachment 632973
> View attachment 632975
> 
> 
> Looking at the Tejas, it's a smaller jet and it has the Delta wing. Those features seem to be in style right now. Look at the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale jet, Jas 39 Gripen, etc. All Delta V wing, all small.
> 
> Eurofighter Typhoon
> View attachment 632978
> 
> 
> Dassault Rafale
> View attachment 632980
> 
> 
> Saab Jas 39 Gripen
> View attachment 632981


Technically Tejas is a crap, IAF is not willing to buy CDS is imposing due budget, best for Iran is J 10 c or Su-30 around two sands along with in phase 2 going for Su 57 or J 20.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Shawnee said:


> Tejas is not far better than our Yasin/upgraded enhanced F5.
> 
> Most importantly, Yasin has an Iranian engine and Tejas does not have an Indian engine as of now.


kowsar bro yasin is the trainer one

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Yasin ? You mean the Kosar (not Kowsar with a W) trainer jet ? Honestly Yasin is a trainer still undergoing testing as far as I know. Realistically the one video we saw of it leaves quite a bit to be desired. 

From watching the video it's painfully obvious that they haven't even perfected all the mechanisms to make it land and take off smoothly 100%. It has a long way to go until it can be compared to something like Tejas, which can actually take off and land on aircraft carriers. 

I mean yes, Yasin is a decent achievement considering the fact that Iran is under severe sanctions. It reportedly uses an Iranian made engine and realistically there aren't many countries in the world that can even build jets at all. 

I'd like to see where they've taken this project now. An update would be nice. Hopefully it looks and functions much more efficiently. Something that looks like the second jet would be nice. 














Shawnee said:


> Tejas is not far better than our Yasin/upgraded enhanced F5.
> 
> Most importantly, Yasin has an Iranian engine and Tejas does not have an Indian engine as of now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

sha ah said:


> Yasin ? You mean the Kosar (not Kowsar with a W) trainer jet ? Honestly Yasin is a trainer still undergoing testing as far as I know. Realistically the one video we saw of it leaves quite a bit to be desired.
> 
> From watching the video it's painfully obvious that they haven't even perfected all the mechanisms to make it land and take off smoothly 100%. It has a long way to go until it can be compared to something like Tejas, which can actually take off and land on aircraft carriers.
> 
> I mean yes, Yasin is a decent achievement considering the fact that Iran is under severe sanctions. It reportedly uses an Iranian made engine and realistically there aren't many countries in the world that can even build jets at all.
> 
> I'd like to see where they've taken this project now. An update would be nice. Hopefully it looks and functions much more efficiently. Something that looks like the second jet would be nice.
> 
> View attachment 632988
> 
> 
> View attachment 632989



It will take time. US and Russia have 100 years of experience. 
Even Chinese engine is not perfect yet and they depend on Russia. We have to be patient with that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Under current military circumstances, It will not be wise for Iran to invest money in IRIAF

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Under current military circumstances, It will not be wise for Iran to invest money in IRIAF


Wrong. under any circumstance in any war you need air support otherwise you loose forces and equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Well realistically it depends on whom Iran goes to war with.

Against the USA for example, Iran could have 200+ SU-30s and it won't make much of a difference. Even with SU-57, Iran might still lose against the USA in the air field, since anything Iran buys from Russia, China will be export versions, inherently inferior to what the premier powers would possess. 

On the other hand, against regional rivals or neighboring countries, yes of course the SU-30s and especially something like a SU-57 or J-10 will make a huge difference.

If you consider price and value, the optimized F-5 Iran produces for approx $7 million is still an excellent, underrated option. People underestimate it because 1) it's made by Iran under sanctions 2) it's based the a design of a jet first introduced from the 60's. What people don't really consider though is that Iran's new F-5s are a modernized, optimized variant and are extremely underrated.

At this point Iran's F-5 program is merely something that the country can fall back on but realistically Iran either needs to spent a large sum of money on R&D, which might happen if Iran has no other choice. Otherwise Iran will go for the much more cost effective option of purchasing a large number of modern jets from Russia / China, along with a batch of stealth jets and technology transfers. Either way Iran's airfroce really needs a boost to bring it up to par with regional rivals like Saudi Arabia.

Other than that Iran really needs to invest in hypersonic technology. Iran already has a good foundation but realistically hypersonic missiles are going to be the decisive weapons of the future, like what precision, guided missiles / cruise missiles / stealth technology were to the Gulf War (UN vs Iraq)




Hack-Hook said:


> Wrong. under any circumstance in any war you need air support otherwise you loose forces and equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

sha ah said:


> Against the USA for example, Iran could have 200+ SU-30s and it won't make much of a difference. Even with SU-57, Iran might still lose against the USA, since anything Iran buys from Russia, China will be export versions, inherently inferior.


bro look it this way, we have our missiles with an under equipped air force vs we have our missiles with capable air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

drmeson said:


> Under current military circumstances, It will not be wise for Iran to invest money in IRIAF


While i agree that Iran shouldnt invest heavily its its airforce, i actually think Iran has invested quite appropraitely and smartly in the IRIAF - Local upgrades make investments cheaper. Iran also has a good strategy due to good # of aircraft..their quality might not be the best, but no airforce will show up in Iranian airspace and not get attacked. I also suspect people underestimate Iran's airforce due to lack of any exchange between it and another country's airforce. Also, people tend to think that because the IRIAF is no match for the USAF it cant damage national airforces, but it can and it will. Remember that even PDF members thought Iranian missiles were fake weapons until Iran started using them on entities. Same goes for IRIAF- people will think its fake and weak until it shows itself in a real scenario. 

Airforces dont operate in a vacuum alone...Most countries with large or very good airforces are currently VERY AFRAID of losing 1 fighter jet to another nation through intentionally action. For ex, if Israel loses even 2-3 fighter jets, the morale in the IDF and IAF will drop consideratly, INSTANTLY.

Different countries have different strategies...for their unique situations..part of Irans strategy is also about "absorbing" hits...which is very valuable in military conflicts. ISrael for one cant take hits( we know this, because they are usually willing to start a war or attack someone else to prevent ISrael taking hits). So while Iran's airforce might not seem so great or ready(this is false, IRIAF is currently ready and capable and on standby for action), enemy airforces having good planes wont save them, they must enter Iran and succesfully complete 100s of bombing runs, and they wont be able o do that, Despite all their planes...this is reality...IRanian AF and AD will snag and down many planes. THere is reasons USAF only flies close to Iranian borders, but rarely in it. ONly stealth high altitude drones are sometimes used to penetrate Iranian airspace.

I'm not an Iran FANBOY, I'm an Iran FACTBOY.



Mithridates said:


> bro look it this way, we have our missiles with an under equipped air force vs we have our missiles with capable air force.


But Iran only invests in 1 because it cant in the other...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beny Karachun

925boy said:


> Airforces dont operate in a vacuum alone...Most countries with large or very good airforces are currently VERY AFRAID of losing 1 fighter jet to another nation through intentionally action. For ex, if Israel loses even 2-3 fighter jets, the morale in the IDF and IAF will drop consideratly, INSTANTLY.


First of all that's wrong and unbased.
Israeli air force had dozens of casualties in 1967 and a hundred in 1973 yet it still crushed the enemy air forces with the highest air battle kill ratios in the world.

Second of all, even if that's true, remember when we did an 85-0 against Syrian jets?
Well the technological gap between Israel and its enemies is even higher now.



925boy said:


> ISrael for one cant take hits( we know this, because they are usually willing to start a war or attack someone else to prevent ISrael taking hits)


Imagine being this retarded.
You think Israel can't take a hit because it prevents attacks against it.



925boy said:


> reality...IRanian AF and AD will snag and down many planes. THere is reasons USAF only flies close to Iranian borders, but rarely in it. ONly stealth high altitude drones are sometimes used to penetrate Iranian airspace.


Iranian air force will fall like mosquitos, and their air defense will be destroyed with barely any losses.


----------



## Shawnee

Beny Karachun said:


> First of all that's wrong and unbased.
> Israeli air force had dozens of casualties in 1967 and a hundred in 1973 yet it still crushed the enemy air forces with the highest air battle kill ratios in the world.
> 
> Second of all, even if that's true, remember when we did an 85-0 against Syrian jets?
> Well the technological gap between Israel and its enemies is even higher now.
> 
> 
> Imagine being this retarded.
> You think Israel can't take a hit because it prevents attacks against it.
> 
> 
> Iranian air force will fall like mosquitos, and their air defense will be destroyed with barely any losses.




You should be very young. I don’t even know where to start to respond to you.

1. Do you know what defines a victory? Achieving you goals. Like disarming Hizbollah, removing Assad, changing Iran’s behavior, etc.
- Not casualties. Not razing civilian houses.

2. Read more about 33-day war, Abqaiq, conventional and nonconventional weapons.

3. Be more humble.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

Shawnee said:


> You should be very young. I don’t even know where to start to respond to you.
> 
> 1. Do you know what defines a victory? Achieving you goals. Like disarming Hizbollah, removing Assad, changing Iran’s behavior, etc.
> - Not casualties. Not razing civilian houses.
> 
> 2. Read more about 33-day war, Abqaiq, conventional and nonconventional weapons.
> 
> 3. Be more humble.


U got it bro, i initially thought he is 30, and every time i saw a defective post from him, so childish one, i simply substract 1 year from 30, so far my speculation he is arround 22-25.


----------



## Mithridates

Shams313 said:


> U got it bro, i initially thought he is 30, and every time i saw a defective post from him, so childish one, i simply substract 1 year from 30, so far my speculation he is arround 22-25.


27


----------



## Beny Karachun

Shawnee said:


> You should be very young. I don’t even know where to start to respond to you.
> 
> 1. Do you know what defines a victory? Achieving you goals. Like disarming Hizbollah, removing Assad, changing Iran’s behavior, etc.
> - Not casualties. Not razing civilian houses.
> 
> 2. Read more about 33-day war, Abqaiq, conventional and nonconventional weapons.
> 
> 3. Be more humble.


How exactly is that related to what I said?


----------



## Shawnee

Beny Karachun said:


> How exactly is that related to what I said?



Your comment was a mix of excitation and rhetoric, not backed by scientific or historical evidence.

What do you want me to say? Another piece of rhetoric and emotion. Here you go:
“Our missiles will blot out the sun. You will cease to exist. You will stand no chance.”
.


----------



## ACE OF THE AIR

Mithridates said:


> lol bro why tejas?? peanut range peanut payload no BVR...


The most important factor is delivery time. 

Inreality IRIAF should procure what ever aircraft they can find in the market so that they can build numbers. They need to replace their F-4s. Here are some of the aircraft that they can easily get if sanctions are removed in considerable numbers. 

Mirage F-1
Mig-29

Some of the self aircraft that are available with reasonable quick delivery.
J-10
JF-17
J-16
JH-7

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

ACE OF THE AIR said:


> The most important factor is delivery time.
> 
> Inreality IRIAF should procure what ever aircraft they can find in the market so that they can build numbers. They need to replace their F-4s. Here are some of the aircraft that they can easily get if sanctions are removed in considerable numbers.
> 
> Mirage F-1
> Mig-29
> 
> Some of the self aircraft that are available with reasonable quick delivery.
> J-10
> JF-17
> J-16
> JH-7



The only air fighter Iran needs is an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter. Iran’s primary goal is to defend its air skies.

All the aircraft you just named wouldn’t survive against F-22 or F-35 and even if they could, their mission scope is mostly A2G rather than built for A2A.

So no Iran shouldn’t spend money on garbage 4th gen fighters that are used to primarily to bomb sandal wearing insurgents.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

ACE OF THE AIR said:


> The most important factor is delivery time.
> 
> Inreality IRIAF should procure what ever aircraft they can find in the market so that they can build numbers. They need to replace their F-4s. Here are some of the aircraft that they can easily get if sanctions are removed in considerable numbers.
> 
> Mirage F-1
> Mig-29
> 
> Some of the self aircraft that are available with reasonable quick delivery.
> J-10
> JF-17
> J-16
> JH-7


Iran really does not need to build number, just replace existing fleet. numbers going higher would be good though.
and i don't think Iran would buy those jets because the deal is already made back in ~2016(??) with Russians for yak-130 and su-30. some say even su-35. if Iran will have a window in 40 years to buy something it's better to make the best of it.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> The only air fighter Iran needs is an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter. Iran’s primary goal is to defend its air skies.
> 
> All the aircraft you just named wouldn’t survive against F-22 or F-35 and even if they could, their mission scope is mostly A2G rather than built for A2A.
> 
> So no Iran shouldn’t spend money on garbage 4th gen fighters that are used to primarily to bomb sandal wearing insurgents.



We simply can't compete with the U.S on this front. It's not even worth time and money for investment. A B-1B with 4 F-22's can probably defeat a whole squadron beyond visual range. Theirs just no chance. Main focus in aviation should really focus on logistics of equipment, intelligence gathering, rapid transportation of personnel and ground support for organizations attempting to cause harm to Iran.

If we plan on fighting a regional force than 4th gen will be bare minimum and by the time they are delivered they are already outdated and the costs has no return on investment in the future. We supply give our money away and get equipment that will fail in 10 years. It's honestly like purchasing a car.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ACE OF THE AIR

TheImmortal said:


> The only air fighter Iran needs is an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter. Iran’s primary goal is to defend its air skies.
> 
> All the aircraft you just named wouldn’t survive against F-22 or F-35 and even if they could, their mission scope is mostly A2G rather than built for A2A.
> 
> So no Iran shouldn’t spend money on garbage 4th gen fighters that are used to primarily to bomb sandal wearing insurgents.



There is something know as an asymmetric war where one uses economics to win. All the aircraft that I have mentioned can be armed with BVR missiles and are available in fraction of the cost of F-22 and F-35. These can potentially be optimised with both Iranian, eastern and western weapon systems giving them various options against adversaries. 

Moreover these aircraft can not be sanctioned by the US as they do not carry any equipment manufactured in USA.

As far as 5th generation aircraft are not available. SU-57 has only been officially started production hence its producti0n rate is not ideal. J-20 will not be sold to any country, the other Chinese stealth J-31 is only in development with 3 prototypes so far. TFX would take around 4-5 years more till they can be delivered.

What I am trying to say is SU-30 / Su-35 will be available but incase the sanctions are enforced again within the next 6-8 months Iran will have nothing but if they go for the options mentioned in my earlier post they can get these within the 6 to 8 month period and can be upgraded locally.

This would ensure IRIAF with a decent aerial deniability capability and also boost local industry by having local production. The only aircraft that will not bring in local production is the Mirage F-1 however engine production facility can be acquired.



Mithridates said:


> Iran really does not need to build number, just replace existing fleet. numbers going higher would be good though.
> and i don't think Iran would buy those jets because the deal is already made back in ~2016(??) with Russians for yak-130 and su-30. some say even su-35. if Iran will have a window in 40 years to buy something it's better to make the best of it.





Stryker1982 said:


> We simply can't compete with the U.S on this front. It's not even worth time and money for investment. A B-1B with 4 F-22's can probably defeat a whole squadron beyond visual range. Theirs just no chance. Main focus in aviation should really focus on logistics of equipment, intelligence gathering, rapid transportation of personnel and ground support for organizations attempting to cause harm to Iran.
> 
> If we plan on fighting a regional force than 4th gen will be bare minimum and by the time they are delivered they are already outdated and the costs has no return on investment in the future. We supply give our money away and get equipment that will fail in 10 years. It's honestly like purchasing a car.



IRIAF needs to get every thing but we must see what is available. The areal tankers and AWAC's need to be replaced as well along with transport aircraft not to mention the AH1 Cobra need to be replaces and modifications in regards to locally being produce Toofan2 are required. Transport and logistic aircraft can not survive if they are not given adequate fighter and EW coverage.

IRIAF should be able to do something similar to what Pakistan Air Force did on 27th Febuary 2019.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

ACE OF THE AIR said:


> The most important factor is delivery time.
> 
> Inreality IRIAF should procure what ever aircraft they can find in the market so that they can build numbers. They need to replace their F-4s. Here are some of the aircraft that they can easily get if sanctions are removed in considerable numbers.
> 
> Mirage F-1
> Mig-29
> 
> Some of the self aircraft that are available with reasonable quick delivery.
> J-10
> JF-17
> J-16
> JH-7


why we need bombers?



Mithridates said:


> Iran really does not need to build number, just replace existing fleet. numbers going higher would be good though.
> and i don't think Iran would buy those jets because the deal is already made back in ~2016(??) with Russians for yak-130 and su-30. some say even su-35. if Iran will have a window in 40 years to buy something it's better to make the best of it.


and how SU-30 and Yak-130 is supposed to last Iran for the next 40 years ?



ACE OF THE AIR said:


> What I am trying to say is SU-30 / Su-35 will be available but incase the sanctions are enforced again within the next 6-8 months Iran will have nothing but if they go for the options mentioned in my earlier post they can get these within the 6 to 8 month period and can be upgraded locally.


why we must buy something that we don't need for the sake of buying something


----------



## sha ah

Realistically there's a chance sanctions won't be re-imposed on Iran because the US is no longer a member of the nuclear deal. There's already a considerable amount of push back against their upcoming attempt. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1261661950649544705
In any case, despite this pushback, the US wields alot of power and influence so they might get their way. However even if they do, there's a good chance that countries like China, Russia won't recognize the "snap back" as legitimate.

So regardless Russia will most likely still sell fighter jets to Iran. 

Now in regards to Iran's needs and options. Really there are two choices. Build more optimized F-5s or buy a decent number of SU-30 jets. 

In my opinion, I think the SU-30, with technology transfers, along with a deal on future procurement of SU-35, SU-57 would be excellent for Iran. Iran's airforce needs an injection, a boost. 

The F-4's needs to go and just the sheer variety of jets is a logistics nightmare. 

Iran can build it's own subsonic trainers and perhaps build a few dozen more F-5's for training and as a light combat aircraft. That option paired with the SU-30 would be just what Iran needs in my opinion. 






Hack-Hook said:


> why we need bombers?
> 
> 
> and how SU-30 and Yak-130 is supposed to last Iran for the next 40 years ?
> 
> 
> why we must buy something that we don't need for the sake of buying something

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> and how SU-30 and Yak-130 is supposed to last Iran for the next 40 years ?


i meant we have a window to buy fighter jets after last 40 years, so we have to use it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> i meant we have a window to buy fighter jets after last 40 years, so we have to use it.


buying Su-30 give us no advantage , just throw away the money you can spend better and if you want to by YAK-130 why spend money on Yasin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

When we are hypothesising we have to remember there are many factors at play here, a very important one is how does actually Iran see the future of manned fighter jets? I don't think there is any question that unmanned platforms will take a considerable portion of the spotlight in the future. This is not to say they will replace manned systems anytime soon, but what they will do is reduce our quantitative need for manned fighters. I am not going to comment on Iran's UAV development because as we all know that is quite impressive. I feel the future of Iranian aerial combat will be heavily comprised of the integration of manned and unmanned systems. At a recent interview (see below video) with the airforce commander, he said IRIAF initially were not into unmanned planes but that now things have greatly changed. He said they are not linking manned and unmanned planes in airforce.

When it comes to manned systems, like I mentioned few days ago, initially I can see Iran going for a few dozen 4th generation fighters with TOT and potentially in house manufacturing. In the long run, Iran's solutions must be indigenous. One cannot imagine Iran ever spending vast billion on imports of systems again. Once you have tasted the sweetness of indigenous development in terms of cost saving, pride, less dependance etc, then you will not want to go back. That is why it crucial Iran gets as much TOT as it can, especially when it comes to the crucial technology e.g turbofan so that going forward it can run things by itself in the airforce sector.

Edit: Watch the below interview with the airforce general if you already has not. Here he not only talks about the UAV matter, but he also hinted at Iran working on stealth fighter designs:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> buying Su-30 give us no advantage , just throw away the money you can spend better and if you want to by YAK-130 why spend money on Yasin


yes we are the best shape with our f-4s, f-7s, f-1s and su-22s. yasin is a 4th generation trainer, yak-130 is 4+ and 5th generation.



Philosopher said:


> When we are hypothesising we have to remember there are many factors at play here, a very important one is how does actually Iran see the future of manned fighter jets? I don't think there is any question that unmanned platforms will take a considerable portion of the spotlight in the future. This is not to say they will replace manned systems anytime soon, but what they will do is reduce our quantitative need for manned fighters. I am not going to comment on Iran's UAV development because as we all know that is quite impressive. I feel the future of Iranian aerial combat will be heavily comprised of the integration of manned and unmanned systems. At a recent interview with the airforce commander, he said IRIAF initially were not into unmanned planes but that now things have greatly changed.
> 
> When it comes to manned systems, like I mentioned few days ago, initially I can see Iran going for a few dozen 4th gen fighters with TOT and potentially in house manufacturing. In the long run, Iran's solutions must be indigenous. One cannot imagine Iran ever spending vast billion on imports of systems again. Once you have tasted the sweetness of indigenous development in terms of cost saving, pride, less dependance etc, then you will not want to go back. That is why it crucial Iran gets as much TOT as it can, especially when it comes to the crucial technology e.g turbofan so that going forward it can run things by itself in the airforce sector.
> 
> Edit: Watch the below interview with the airforce general if you already has not. Here he not only talks about the UAVs matter, but he also hinted at Iran working on stealth fighter designs:








imagine this but with sofreh mahi instead of loyal wingman.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> yes we are the best shape with our f-4s, f-7s, f-1s and su-22s. yasin is a 4th generation trainer, yak-130 is 4+ and 5th generation.


no we are not the best shape with those , but those plane won't gave us any advantage even against KSA and UAE airforce . let not talk about USA and Israel.
and if you are worried that Yasin is 4th generation then spend some money and turn it into a 4+ or 5th generation airplane.
and as I saisd many time SU-30 is inferior to F-15 that is the backbone of out adversaries fleet.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> and if you are worried that Yasin is 4th generation then spend some money and turn it into a 4+ or 5th generation airplane.


you should build 5th generation before...


Hack-Hook said:


> and as I saisd many time SU-30 is inferior to F-15 that is the backbone of out adversaries fleet.


but f-4s are superior??


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> you should build 5th generation before...
> 
> but f-4s are superior??


we are not buying any new F-4 and if you want to replace F-4 with Su-30 go forward and do it . but don't forget Su-30 needs a separate targetting pod if it want to drop anything but Iron Bombs.

It was supposed to be equal to F-15 but it come short of it in every aspect .
at least go and invest on something like Su-27sm2 that is a lot more advance than the most advance Su-30 or go after Su-35 not Su-30 that was designed as and export version for Su-27 andbe assure Russia will never give us SU-30SM1 that is equipped with Su-35 radar and engine

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

So, about strike missions, do you think we can buy su-34s from russia? those will do nicely alongside su30s and 35s.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> we are not buying any new F-4 and if you want to replace F-4 with Su-30 go forward and do it . but don't forget Su-30 needs a separate targetting pod if it want to drop anything but Iron Bombs.
> 
> It was supposed to be equal to F-15 but it come short of it in every aspect .
> at least go and invest on something like Su-27sm2 that is a lot more advance than the most advance Su-30 or go after Su-35 not Su-30 that was designed as and export version for Su-27 andbe assure Russia will never give us SU-30SM1 that is equipped with Su-35 radar and engine


pal any fighter jet has to be equipped with targeting pod for bombing mission unless it uses the EO/GPS guided bombs, even for f-15.
it's not up to me to go and buy fighter jets. i'm sure IRIAF commanders are more aware in this regard than both of us.



makranman said:


> So, about strike missions, do you think we can buy su-34s from russia? those will do nicely alongside su30s and 35s.


if i'm not wrong Algeria signed a deal for su-34 so it's definitely is for sale.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Realistically a missile is a big hunk of metal. It hits a target once and it's done. The motor, the parts, everything gone after one strike. A jet is a big hunk of metal but you can hit targets over and over and over again. That sounds over simplified but its true. 

Missiles are great for a shock factor and for that initial strike but Iran needs a potent and modern airforce for any upcoming conflict. Yes against a power like the USA most of Iran's airforce will instantly be useless but that's true for any regional country (Pakistan, Turkey, etc). 

On the other hand against a regional rival, having an effective and more modern airforce can make the difference between victory or defeat. Imagine Iran during the Iran-Iraq war without the F-14s... Iran's situation would have been much more difficult. Of course Iran didn't have a massive arsenal of missiles and drones but still.

Iran's airforce has done a great job keeping alot of western models airworthy, mostly on its own, despite opposition from the US. However Iran has lots of jets in its inventory that are honestly in need to being replaced, especially the F-4s. 

What you see on paper is one thing but in reality there's a limit to how effective outdated jets will be for training purposes and especially a war. Remember jets tend to need maintenance, they break down constantly and need repairs. Older jets at the end of their life-cycle are even more difficult to keep airworthy. Another factor is that the large variety of jets in Iran's airforce is a logistics nightmare

I mean look at Egypts airforce as an example. Of course Egypt hasn't made any strides in developing it's own jets or technology but anyways they currently have 200+ F-16's, 24 Dassault Rafale fighter jets and 20 Mirage 2000's They've gotten rid of all of their older Soviet fighter jets like the Mig-21. They still have 44 x Mig-29s and 81 x Mirage 5's but overall that's pretty good. 

Iran should be on par or atleast close to something like that but right now, it's not even close. Look Iran has gone a long way by itself, especially under sanctions, doing what many countries haven't done and can't do to this day even without sanctions. 

Keeping a large number of western jets airworthy has even surprised many western analysts. Building it's own viable subsonic trainer like the Yasin and reverse engineering the F-5, building an optimized, modern variant and mass producing that version on a small scale are definitely commendable feats. However, despite all that, at the end of the day there's no doubt about it, Iran has fallen behind in this department and definitely needs an infusion of new jets and technology.

The SU-35, SU-34, SU-30 are all based on the same SU-27 platform.

In my opinion Iran should buy 100-200 SU-30s or other variants based on the SU-27, perhaps some SU-35s with technology transfers and make sure there's an in house building process, so the majority are built in Iran. At the same time Iran should build another 40-60 optimized F-5s for training purposes and for support roles, as a light fighter to compliment Iran's airforce. 

Iran should also sign a deal for a 5th generation fighter like the SU-57 in the future but who knows if a deal that far in the future would go through. I don't think Iran should put any money down until it receives the jets first, that's for sure. 

In any case, the jets will surely give Iran's airforce a much needed boost, but more than that the end of the logistics nightmare and morale boost will also be great for Iran's airforce. Aside from all that, with the necessary technology transfers and a decent amount of funding, I'm sure that Iran will produce impressive fighter jets in the future. 




Hack-Hook said:


> we are not buying any new F-4 and if you want to replace F-4 with Su-30 go forward and do it . but don't forget Su-30 needs a separate targetting pod if it want to drop anything but Iron Bombs.
> 
> It was supposed to be equal to F-15 but it come short of it in every aspect .
> at least go and invest on something like Su-27sm2 that is a lot more advance than the most advance Su-30 or go after Su-35 not Su-30 that was designed as and export version for Su-27 andbe assure Russia will never give us SU-30SM1 that is equipped with Su-35 radar and engine

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Egypt also acquired SU-35

https://www.menadefense.net/north-a...t-client-for-the-sukhoi-35-in-the-mea-region/


----------



## Mithridates

Armchair said:


> Why do "Iranian made" aircraft look like dinky toys? Seems apt for a one way "martyrdom mission" but not very useful otherwise. Does their ideology impinge on their ability to make rational design choices?


which one??


----------



## Philosopher

Do not feed to troll. Just ignore and report. Constructive engagement is impossible with their kind, because they're not interested in it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Do not compare Iran to banana countries like Egypt or Algeria (lol seriously Algeria?). Egypt’s Air Force is a joke first and foremost. Israel wiped out their entire air force in single day during war. That was when Egypt had the intelligence of a Chimp (Arab nationalism), now it has the intelligence of a rat (Saudi beggars).
> 
> So their Airforce should read “Nice toys please don’t touch”.
> 
> None of the countries airforce people mention here would last a day against Israel or US. Even Pakistan members on this forum giving “advice” to Iran need to wake up. Using a shoot down of a 40 year old Indian jet during a skirmish as evidence of the benefits of their airforce is not a valid example. As if Pakistan could survive 48 hours against the US airforce toe to toe. None of the countries will ever fight the US, thus they don’t have to worry about their toys and can stockpile them.
> 
> MY POINT: Iran unlike these other countries has a real chance of war against Israel or US (however unlikely) in the future. Thus if Iran can not guarantee the survival of it’s airbases in war time then what’s the point of buying a bunch of modern jets? As I mentioned earlier one needs to look at Egyptian airforce during Arab-Israeli war to see how fast an entire airforce can be destroyed.
> 
> If it doesn’t come with ToT then forget it. If it isn’t an interceptor then forget it.



It's remarkable how a unsanctioned, unrestricted Egypt has managed to have a disastrous failing economy. 

People say the Iranian Government is incompetent, but the fact that many banana countries, who not only do NOT have an sanctions or restrictions on their economy but also receive military aid show Iran is doing well considering the circumstances, and these other nations are incompetent beyond measure. How do you fail when you have no enemies or barriers erected infront of you.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sha ah

History doesn't always repeat itself. Just because Israel exploited an Egyptian weakness in the 60's and smashed their airforce within hours doesn't mean that the same thing would happen today. 

The US would destroy the airforce of any regional nation toe to toe but Israel ? I honestly don't believe that Israel would completely wipe out Egypt's airforce in this day and edge. 

Of course the Israeli's have an edge over all of their Arab neighbors. That's because the US deliberately gives the Israeli's priority when it comes to the best technology, making sure that they retain the qualitative edge. However I have to say that the Dassault Rafale jets are quite formidable and if Egypt does acquire the SU-35, that will be another huge boost for them. If I recall correctly, US officials have actually spoken out about Egypt acquiring the SU-35, saying that it could shift the balance of power between Egypt and Israel in favor of the Egyptians. 

Anyways the US aside, Iran airforce NEEDS a boost, both of modern hardware and technology. Some of the jets in Iran's airforce are now way past their life cycle and Iran's airforce is quickly turning into a large museum. If a war breaks out against a regional rival or neighbor, having a large number of modern jets can make the difference between victory or defeat. 

Iran's missiles will be devastating to any regional rival or neighbor. The US would have a much better chance destroying Iran's missile program and hitting targets deep underground but no country in the region can really put a large enough dent in Iran's missile program to stop Iran from launching atleast 20-50 missile daily. So yes Iran's missiles are great but coupled with a modern airforce and that's very destructive. 

However the older jets in Iran's inventory simply cannot be relied upon to function on a daily basis under pressure. Most analysts believe that in case of a war between Iran and Turkey or iran and Pakistan, the majority of Iran's jets would be grounded within 6 months. They're simply too old, all the upgrades and maintenance in the world will not be enough. 

Again what you see on paper is one thing and the real world capability of Iran's antiquated airforce is another. It's like driving a car that's 30-40 years old. With the proper maintenance it's possible to keep something like that on the road but then try to race that same car, keep it under pressure, driving it for long hours every single day and it will break down. 

Of course any deal that Iran signs to purchase fighter jets from Russia should include TOT but at the same time if Iran insists that the jets must be built in Iran and include technology transfers, that will greatly limit Iran's options. 
Most likely the Russians will only accept such a deal with the SU-30, but the SU-35 ? I'm not sure if they would. 

What I think is that Iran should pick a middle ground. Purchase some SU-30's outright, that way if the Russians, who have not been 100% reliable in past, pull out of the deal abruptly, Iran still has something. Then have the other half built in Iran and then also purchase more advanced models without TOT as well to give Iran that extra boost, that edge it needs.

If the Russians won't give Iran TOT on the SU-35 who cares. Iran badly needs something like the SU-35, which is a very formidable jet. I would love to see something like this. Iran purchases 100-200 SU-30s. 200 would be great but I'm not sure if Iran would do that. Anyways, half purchased outright, only paid for after the jets are already in Iran's possession of course. Then the other half build in a few years in Iran. 

On top of that Iran should purchase at the very least 20-40 SU-35's. Iran could then put alot of its older jets like the F-4 and the older Soviet models, under storage or sell them to Syria or another buyer ? Iran could keep some of the older fighter jets, perhaps the ones that are in the best shape ? Some F-14s and Mig-29's ? Perhaps the Russians could help Iran upgrade some of these older jets as well ? Then Iran could build 40-60 more optimized F-5's and use them as trainers and light attack jets. That would be great. 

In the field of helicopters, I would love to see Iran finally build the Shahed 216, perhaps with Russian cooperation and maybe some vital parts with TOT ? 

As far as tanks and armored vehicles go. I would lose to see Iran sign a deal for the Armata with TOT ? Or some vital components ? sensors ? cannons ? etc with TOT ? That would be great

Who knows, anyways only time will tell. 



TheImmortal said:


> Do not compare Iran to banana countries like Egypt or Algeria (lol seriously Algeria?). Egypt’s Air Force is a joke first and foremost. Israel wiped out their entire air force in single day during war. That was when Egypt had the intelligence of a Chimp (Arab nationalism), now it has the intelligence of a rat (Saudi beggars).
> 
> So their Airforce should read “Nice toys please don’t touch”.
> 
> None of the countries airforce people mention here would last a day against Israel or US. Even Pakistan members on this forum giving “advice” to Iran need to wake up. Using a shoot down of a 40 year old Indian jet during a skirmish as evidence of the benefits of their airforce is not a valid example. As if Pakistan could survive 48 hours against the US airforce toe to toe. None of the countries will ever fight the US, thus they don’t have to worry about their toys and can stockpile them.
> 
> MY POINT: Iran unlike these other countries has a real chance of war against Israel or US (however unlikely) in the future. Thus if Iran can not guarantee the survival of it’s airbases in war time then what’s the point of buying a bunch of modern jets? As I mentioned earlier one needs to look at Egyptian airforce during Arab-Israeli war to see how fast an entire airforce can be destroyed.
> 
> If it doesn’t come with ToT then forget it. If it isn’t an interceptor then forget it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

drmeson said:


> IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF


it already is, IRGCAF right now uses IRIAF airbase. I think this will continue if IRGC get New planes.


----------



## Messerschmitt

Iran equipped its F-14s with modified Hawk SAMs that had bombs attached to their noses: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...k-sams-that-had-bombs-attached-to-their-noses

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

*Iranian Air Force Commander Says New Homegrown Aircraft to Be Unveiled*
https://telegram.me/share/url?url=h...+Unveiled+-+Defense+news+-+Tasnim+News+Agency

Brigadier General Mohammad Zalbeigi, the commander of Shahid Lashgari Airbase in Tehran, said the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) is progressing with the same pace as other countries despite the sanctions.

*“We have had considerable progress in designing various types of aircraft, thanks to the efforts of the IRIAF personnel and knowledge-based companies,” he said in an interview, Press TV reported.

“God willing, we will witness the designing and production of aircraft built at the IRIAF in the near future, he said, vowing that the new aircraft will be unveiled soon.*

He referred to the Iranian-made fighter jet Kowsar as one of the examples of this progress.

“During the parade held last year everyone witnessed the flight of Kowsar aircraft. It is an up-to-date plane whose systems conform to the world's most advanced systems,” he noted.

In 2018, Iran launched the mass production of the fourth-generation all-indigenous interceptor jet in a major step toward the renovation of its Air Force.

The Kowsar fighter jet, which has been designed to provide logistical support for ground operations, boasts advanced maneuvering capability and can be fitted with various projectiles.

The aircraft enjoys integrated design, an avionic and fire control system linked with digital military data network, a ballistic calculations computer system, head-up display (HUD), which focuses visual data in front of the pilot’s sight, a multi-purpose radar, and an independent radio navigation system.

According to the Defense Ministry’s Public Relations Department, the production of each Kowsar jet would save the country around $16.5 million.

Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing military equipment and hardware despite facing US sanctions and Western economic pressure.

The Islamic Republic says its military power is solely for defensive purposes against enemy threats.

President Hassan Rouhani said last month that the Islamic Republic is closely watching and following the activity and movements of Americans in the region, but will never be the initiator of any tension and conflict.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...er-says-new-homegrown-aircraft-to-be-unveiled

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shams313

Philosopher said:


> *Iranian Air Force Commander Says New Homegrown Aircraft to Be Unveiled*
> 
> Brigadier General Mohammad Zalbeigi, the commander of Shahid Lashgari Airbase in Tehran, said the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) is progressing with the same pace as other countries despite the sanctions.
> 
> *“We have had considerable progress in designing various types of aircraft, thanks to the efforts of the IRIAF personnel and knowledge-based companies,” he said in an interview, Press TV reported.
> 
> “God willing, we will witness the designing and production of aircraft built at the IRIAF in the near future, he said, vowing that the new aircraft will be unveiled soon.*
> 
> He referred to the Iranian-made fighter jet Kowsar as one of the examples of this progress.
> 
> “During the parade held last year everyone witnessed the flight of Kowsar aircraft. It is an up-to-date plane whose systems conform to the world's most advanced systems,” he noted.
> 
> In 2018, Iran launched the mass production of the fourth-generation all-indigenous interceptor jet in a major step toward the renovation of its Air Force.
> 
> The Kowsar fighter jet, which has been designed to provide logistical support for ground operations, boasts advanced maneuvering capability and can be fitted with various projectiles.
> 
> The aircraft enjoys integrated design, an avionic and fire control system linked with digital military data network, a ballistic calculations computer system, head-up display (HUD), which focuses visual data in front of the pilot’s sight, a multi-purpose radar, and an independent radio navigation system.
> 
> According to the Defense Ministry’s Public Relations Department, the production of each Kowsar jet would save the country around $16.5 million.
> 
> Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing military equipment and hardware despite facing US sanctions and Western economic pressure.
> 
> The Islamic Republic says its military power is solely for defensive purposes against enemy threats.
> 
> President Hassan Rouhani said last month that the Islamic Republic is closely watching and following the activity and movements of Americans in the region, but will never be the initiator of any tension and conflict.
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...er-says-new-homegrown-aircraft-to-be-unveiled


New one, so su 30 or the photo of the aircraft available for years?...i forgot the name...


----------



## Philosopher

Shams313 said:


> New one, so su 30 or the photo of the aircraft available for years?...i forgot the name...



It could potentially be the Shafaq project. Yes, it could also be the plane the mockup of which we have seen for years. Iran has talked about developing a "semi heavy" fighter in the past so that could be it. Of course, the possibility that it is a further upgrade to the Kowsar family can not be discarded. Iranian airforce is the "quite branch" of Iran. They seem to develop in relative silence without talking much regarding their plans. Who knows, perhaps they're far more ahead than we think they are. I will never underestimate the capability of any people that can manufacture a fighter jet from scratch. Whether it is an F-5 or not does not matter to me. Once you have demonstrated the industrial capability to build fighter jets, then you can naturally progress further in this very difficult field. The other question is, how far has Iran got with its engine projects? Ex defence minister Dehghan did say a heavier jet engine than Owj was being developed, but we have yet to hear anything from it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Philosopher said:


> It could potentially be the Shafaq project. Yes, it could also be the plane the mockup of which we have seen for years. Iran has talked about developing a "semi heavy" fighter in the past so that could be it. Of course, the possibility that it is a further upgrade to the Kowsar family can not be discarded. Iranian airforce is the "quite branch" of Iran. They seem to develop in relative silence without talking much regarding their plans. Who knows, perhaps they're far more ahead than we think they are. I will never underestimate the capability of any people that can manufacture a fighter jet from scratch. Whether it is an F-5 or not does not matter to me. Once you have demonstrated the industrial capability to build fighter jets, then you can naturally progress further in this very difficult field. The other question is, how far has Iran got with its engine projects? Ex defence minister Dehghan did say a heavier jet engine than Owj was being developed, but we have yet to hear anything from it.


Even if they manage to unveil something par with jf17 or f16 its serves enough for years...in-between those time line new stealth one is most certain.
New AESA radar and homegrown armaments

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Can we please keep the discussion focused on the topic of the thread i.e "IRIAF News".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Shams313 said:


> New one, so su 30 or the photo of the aircraft available for years?...i forgot the name...


I think if anyones going to be building new aircraft it`ll probably be the irgc-af,not the iriaf.


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> *Iranian Air Force Commander Says New Homegrown Aircraft to Be Unveiled*
> 
> Brigadier General Mohammad Zalbeigi, the commander of Shahid Lashgari Airbase in Tehran, said the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) is progressing with the same pace as other countries despite the sanctions.
> 
> *“We have had considerable progress in designing various types of aircraft, thanks to the efforts of the IRIAF personnel and knowledge-based companies,” he said in an interview, Press TV reported.
> 
> “God willing, we will witness the designing and production of aircraft built at the IRIAF in the near future, he said, vowing that the new aircraft will be unveiled soon.*
> 
> He referred to the Iranian-made fighter jet Kowsar as one of the examples of this progress.
> 
> “During the parade held last year everyone witnessed the flight of Kowsar aircraft. It is an up-to-date plane whose systems conform to the world's most advanced systems,” he noted.
> 
> In 2018, Iran launched the mass production of the fourth-generation all-indigenous interceptor jet in a major step toward the renovation of its Air Force.
> 
> The Kowsar fighter jet, which has been designed to provide logistical support for ground operations, boasts advanced maneuvering capability and can be fitted with various projectiles.
> 
> The aircraft enjoys integrated design, an avionic and fire control system linked with digital military data network, a ballistic calculations computer system, head-up display (HUD), which focuses visual data in front of the pilot’s sight, a multi-purpose radar, and an independent radio navigation system.
> 
> According to the Defense Ministry’s Public Relations Department, the production of each Kowsar jet would save the country around $16.5 million.
> 
> Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing military equipment and hardware despite facing US sanctions and Western economic pressure.
> 
> The Islamic Republic says its military power is solely for defensive purposes against enemy threats.
> 
> President Hassan Rouhani said last month that the Islamic Republic is closely watching and following the activity and movements of Americans in the region, but will never be the initiator of any tension and conflict.
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...er-says-new-homegrown-aircraft-to-be-unveiled



The way he describes this without superlatives leads me to believe it isn’t a big project.

Probably the trainer that hasn’t been revealed yet (Kowsar-88 or whatever it’s name is) or another possibility is another “generation” of a modernized F-5. Small chance it is related to long dead F-313 project or Shafaq project.

Since Iran has not unveiled a new jet engine, it will have to rely on owj still which means whatever fighter it is planning on unveiling is probably in the “light fighter” class.


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> The way he describes this without superlatives leads me to believe it isn’t a big project.
> 
> Probably the trainer that hasn’t been revealed yet (Kowsar-88 or whatever it’s name is) or another possibility is another “generation” of a modernized F-5. Small chance it is related to long dead F-313 project or Shafaq project.
> 
> Since Iran has not unveiled a new jet engine, it will have to rely on owj still which means whatever fighter it is planning on unveiling is probably in the “light fighter” class.



An extrapolated single-seater starting from the fuselage of the Kowsar (F-5F) with delta wings?

Delta wing 2019 images and my interpretation

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Mithridates

sahureka2 said:


> An extrapolated single-seater starting from the fuselage of the Kowsar (F-5F) with delta wings?
> 
> Delta wing 2019 images and my interpretation


hopefully with New and powerful engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Well, I can't really comment on the how effective an Iranian made delta-wing fighter would be but as far as looks go I think it would be a genuinely nice change. 

Don't know about you guys but I was getting really sick of seeing Iran churn out another F-5 saying its new or different from the old ones blah blah blah lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> An extrapolated single-seater starting from the fuselage of the Kowsar (F-5F) with delta wings?
> 
> Delta wing 2019 images and my interpretation


It actually looks a hell of a lot like the chengdu F-7 wing to be perfectly honest.




It does make me wonder if this is to do with keeping the F-7 fleet operational rather than anything involving reengineering the F-5s,altho I had thought that the irgc now operated the F-7 fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> It actually looks a hell of a lot like the chengdu F-7 wing to be perfectly honest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does make me wonder if this is to do with keeping the F-7 fleet operational rather than anything involving reengineering the F-5s,altho I had thought that the irgc now operated the F-7 fleet.



Of course, not being able to correctly recognize the fuselage indicated above, it is possible what you say.
But from the drawings you posted it is also evident that the outer wing edge have different sizes, therefore it can also be assumed that the similarity of this delta wing can be derived from the study of that of the F-7 with some modifications to adapt it to something else project.
However in the absence of certain news we are only speculating what this "new plane" could be, having as a reference what Iran currently has in production and what can be extrapolated from published videos.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Don't know about you guys but I was getting really sick of seeing Iran churn out another F-5 saying its new or different from the old ones blah blah blah lol.



I agree that Iran should not unveil _every_ incremental development of the F-5 based platforms, but don't forget its very easy for people to sit behind their computers and simply expect great things to occur without a full appreciation of the complexities behind these endeavours. Instead of us being annoyed by the F-5 situation, we should be _utterly proud_ that Iran can actually manufacture its own combat planes (including jet engines) under such sanctions. How many nations are even close to such a thing? Iran is impressive, but lets not expect miracles.

What I have seen from Iran is exactly what I would expect from a pragmatic nation. If Iran had not started off by learning to make a relatively simple airframe and instead poured its limited airforce resources making new designs, then I would have been disappointed. There is a step by step nature to these developments. I remember back in 2009 when Iran first revealed its Shahin air defence missiles that some people were upset that it was a upgrade of the Hawk missile and not completely something new. But 11 years on, look at Iran's air defence situation now.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Philosopher said:


> I agree that Iran should not unveil _every_ incremental development of the F-5 based platforms, but don't forget its very easy for people to sit behind their computers and simply expect great things to occur without a full appreciation of the complexities behind these endeavours. Instead of us being annoyed by the F-5 situation, we should be _utterly proud_ that Iran can actually manufacture its own combat planes (including jet engines) under such sanctions. How many nations are even close to such a thing? Iran is impressive, but lets not expect miracles.
> 
> What I have seen from Iran is exactly what I would expect from a pragmatic nation. If Iran had not started off by learning to make a relatively simple airframe and instead poured its limited airforce resources making new designs, then I would have been disappointed. There is a step by step nature to these developments. I remember back in 2009 when Iran first revealed its Shahin air defence missiles that some people were upset that it was a upgrade of the Hawk missile and not completely something new. But 11 years on, look at Iran's air defence situation now.



All things considered (and I agree with you), Iran is indeed showing off an amicable display of national prowess in the production of indigenous military jets fair enough, but it does become a little bit of drag to see the same F-5 base model (with modifications) being shown off time and time again under some new name (Saeqeh, Kowsar, Azarakesh). Albeit they are upgrading the platform so there is that at-least.

Fingers crossed that we will see some sort of newly designed Iranian fighter that isn't based the F-5 platform sometime in the next 5-10 years. 

My apologies if these posts come off as a little childish (which they do lol).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

BlueInGreen2 said:


> All things considered (and I agree with you), Iran is indeed showing off an amicable display of national prowess in the production of indigenous military jets fair enough, but it does become a little bit of drag to see the same F-5 base model (with modifications) being shown off time and time again under some new name (Saeqeh, Kowsar, Azarakesh). Albeit they are upgrading the platform so there is that at-least.
> 
> Fingers crossed that we will see some sort of newly designed Iranian fighter that isn't based the F-5 platform sometime in the next 5-10 years.



The F-18 was a development of the F-5.

It's nice to see Iran think about and develop that platform as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Avicenna said:


> The F-18 was a development of the F-5.
> 
> It's nice to see Iran think about and develop that platform as well.



Well, let us hope that Iran can produce a reliably stronger engine to accommodate larger more capable combat air-craft in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

BlueInGreen2 said:


> All things considered (and I agree with you), Iran is indeed showing off an amicable display of national prowess in the production of indigenous military jets fair enough, but it does become a little bit of drag to see the same F-5 base model (with modifications) being shown off time and time again under some new name (Saeqeh, Kowsar, Azarakesh). Albeit they are upgrading the platform so there is that at-least.
> 
> Fingers crossed that we will see some sort of newly designed Iranian fighter that isn't based the F-5 platform sometime in the next 5-10 years.
> 
> My apologies if these posts come off as a little childish (which they do lol).



I understand your frustration, what I will say to you is that these days will pass and Iran will ultimately reach a point in its airforce similar to its missile, UAV, air defence et cetera programs. When that will happen is not something I could estimate, but my hope is that behind the scene, there is an increased effort to develop this sector. Like I said earlier in the thread, the airforce is the "quiet branch" in Iran. They do not really speak much regarding their plans. As far as we know, they could be far more advanced than we think.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Avicenna said:


> The F-18 was a development of the F-5.
> 
> It's nice to see Iran think about and develop that platform as well.



F-18 and F-5 are two different planes and two different classes. While they share some DNA (F-18‘s much smaller size prototype was derived from F-5), they are not as similar as say F-20 and F-5.

F-18 & F-5’s






F-15 & F-5 






F-18 is a big fighter. Iran’s problem has been the lack of large jet fighter engine and titanium requirement. Or else it’s pretty simple to enlarge a fighter design.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I said on this forum that the big engine is already built this will be confirmed soon. I mentioned the F4 SM (Super Improved) and the Iran is still more advanced than they officially say. The Kowsar remains a great success in this whole process. The sky of Iran is very well guarded with the many drones, radars, air defense system and intelligent artillery. With the arrival of new combat aircraft and the Oghab system, Iran is a fortress power. We can add the future Bavar 373 II

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kambojaric

Guys a kind reminder, stick to the topic!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jupiter2007

Something like this.....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

jupiter2007 said:


> Something like this.....
> View attachment 636087


Yes, but I would use the longer fuselage of the two-seater Kowsar, but for a single pilot, so that I could expand the capacity of the fuel tanks and the systems on board

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jupiter2007

sahureka2 said:


> Yes, but I would use the longer fuselage of the two-seater Kowsar, but for a single pilot, so that I could expand the capacity of the fuel tanks and the systems on board



*Modified Northrop F-5



*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sahureka2

continuing in the hypotheses, for this photoshop I used a delta wing very similar to that of the photo posted previously, the first using the fuselage of the F-5E, the second the fuselage of the Kowsar / F-5F but
single-seat, and in the third always the fuselage of the Kowsar f-5F but single-seat with canard wings front.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

and here the Kowsar / Delta / Canard, which flies over an Iranian territory

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher

I believe it is unlikely we will see such alterations made to the F-5 platform. Listening to General Aziz Nasirzadeh and marrying that with other sporadic information available online, I get the feeling going forward their focus will be on a heavier fighter jet. From what he said, they are even working on stealthy designs. Even other nations that have no history of developing fighters jets are working on 5th generation platform. Iran, with the adequate funding and some help from the outside is more than capable of producing a garden variety stealth fighter.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> continuing in the hypotheses, for this photoshop I used a delta wing very similar to that of the photo posted previously, the first using the fuselage of the F-5E, the second the fuselage of the Kowsar / F-5F but
> single-seat, and in the third always the fuselage of the Kowsar f-5F but single-seat with canard wings front.


poor engines , they are suffocating .
do you knew what a havoc you made in air turbulence by putting those canards just in front of the engine intake.


by the way before make those changes to the airplane at least increase the number of the engines to 4 or those two j-85 will be severely lacking for the new design

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> poor engines , they are suffocating .
> do you knew what a havoc you made in air turbulence by putting those canards just in front of the engine intake.
> ......omissis


yes, front of the engine intake, but higher


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> yes, front of the engine intake, but higher


unlike su-30mki that have under the wing inlet , f5 have over the wing inlet.
in many cases they put the cannards over the inlet at all , just look at some airplanes with cannards and you see what i say
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canard_(aeronautics)


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> unlike su-30mki that have under the wing inlet , f5 have over the wing inlet.
> in many cases they put the cannards over the inlet at all , just look at some airplanes with cannards and you see what i say
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canard_(aeronautics)


Another one was the mirage based atlas cheetah,which used fixed canards that attached to the over wing intakes:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Another one was the mirage based atlas cheetah,which used fixed canards that attached to the over wing intakes:


but if you add canard to the air intake itself and use canard, the intake structure will experience tensions which in original design it was not supposed to. 
I'm mostly in favour of a Cranked delta wing like the ones on saab drakken.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

Plz, enlighten me, what are the advantages of using delta wings on F5 ?


----------



## Mithridates

makranman said:


> Plz, enlighten me, what are the advantages of using delta wings on F5 ?


you can read this for more information:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16XL
but the most important part is this:

These changes resulted in a 25% improvement in maximum lift-to-drag ratio in supersonic flight and 11% in subsonic flight, and a plane that reportedly handled much more smoothly at high speeds and low altitudes. The enlargements increased fuel capacity by 82%. The F-16XL could carry twice the ordnance of the F-16 and deliver it 40% farther.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> but if you add canard to the air intake itself and use canard, the intake structure will experience tensions which in original design it was not supposed to.
> I'm mostly in favour of a Cranked delta wing like the ones on saab drakken.


Yes,you would most definitely have to beef up the whole front section of the intake trunking.
Personally I think that probably the most original,not to mention potentially effective,concept of the moving canard was the rear hinged integrated canard on the pak fa.Its one of those things that when you see it you cant help but think."oh yeah,now why didnt I think of that!"[lol].Plus I think its a far more elegant solution than say the intake mounted canards on the chengdu j-20 for instance




It makes me wonder if it would be possible to do something similar with the leading edge extensions on the f5

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Yes,you would most definitely have to beef up the whole front section of the intake trunking.
> Personally I think that probably the most original,not to mention potentially effective,concept of the moving canard was the rear hinged integrated canard on the pak fa.Its one of those things that when you see it you cant help but think."oh yeah,now why didnt I think of that!"[lol].Plus I think its a far more elegant solution than say the intake mounted canards on the chengdu j-20 for instance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes me wonder if it would be possible to do something similar with the leading edge extensions on the f5


i don't think that the wing extension would act as canard because it's position is in the middle of fuselage. possibly a good flap though.


----------



## TheImmortal

While it’s possible Iran could stun the world with a fighter aircraft. It’s very unlikely.

Iran lacks the sensor suite and engines need to for bigger aircraft.

Iran will likely try to modernize via Russia. Maybe it can partner with Russia on a joint fighter, even if Russia backs out, the knowledge Iran will gain will be better than nothing.

Though India had a lot of issues on the joint SU-57 project. Likely because Russians didn’t trust Indians with sensitive info that could be transferred over to USA.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> Iran lacks the sensor suite and engines need to for bigger aircraft.



i think engines should be not the problem, @yavar once mentioned, if it comes to engines, Iran has SU-35 level technology (Saturn AL-31/A-41)

however, Iran lacks in level design and characteristics, body infrastructure, avionics


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> i think engines should be not the problem, @yavar once mentioned, if it comes to engines, Iran has SU-35 level technology (Saturn AL-31/A-41)
> 
> however, Iran lacks in level design and characteristics, body infrastructure, avionics



LOL Iran does not have AL-31 technology. yavar spreads propaganda. 90% of his predictions never come true. I remember quite well from the IMF days. Don’t ruin your credibility by making such outlandish claims.

The best Iran has been able to do up to this point is J-85 engine. It’s possible in future it may get to RD-33 level, but without another country helping Iran there isn’t a snowballs chance in hell it gets to 5th gen engine level. Not even China is at that point and they have been making planes since the ‘60s.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

Advanced turbofan technology is now limited to US and Russia. Even China and France are consumers.

China could use its own engine but the quality was not as good. Iran will make something soon and it will improve over time. We have only one option. At least, we are ahead of India and Tejas.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Iranian RD33 is already done. Thelmmortal's comments on the subject of Iranian combat aircraft are pathetic. Don't worry Iran has gone further than you think in aircraft technology.


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Iran will likely try to modernize via Russia. Maybe it can partner with Russia on a joint fighter, even if Russia backs out, the knowledge Iran will gain will be better than nothing.


I seem to recall iran trying a somewhat similar route previously back in the [?]1990s,I also recall that it didnt work out very well for rather obvious reasons.....
Irans only REAL options at this point are either full license production of either the su-30 or su-27sm3 or the chinese Shenyang J-16[assuming its available for export that is]
Another option from china would be the latest version of the J-10,tho as a single engine fighter this would be limited to replacing/augmenting the mig29/mirage f1 fleet.
But anything less than FULL COMPLETE LOCAL PRODUCTION in iran is simply an unacceptable risk of ultimately ending up wasting huge amounts of time,money and effort,because sadly BOTH russia and china have shown themselves to be very unreliable in this respect and until they can prove that they are trustworthy partners in this field it would be complete utter folly to agree to anything less than full complete local production of fighter aircraft in iran.


----------



## Mithridates

I'm not trying to raise your expectations but in coming weeks we might hear some good news.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> I'm not trying to raise your expectations but in coming weeks we might hear some good news.



Come on dadash, don't leave us hanging like this. Tell me more


----------



## Shawnee

In 2013, Yavar surprised us by his observation on Qaher before it was unveiled. Most of us were waiting for a heavy aircraft.


----------



## jupiter2007

_*Iran can have a great light weight fighter plane by marrying *_*HESA Kowsar with Mirage F1. *


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> Come on dadash, don't leave us hanging like this. Tell me more


bro there are some low voices circling in military community about new stuff. 
but I can't tell what exactly. because if I do and IRIAF does not announce it I would feel like potato
so just know something is happening.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> bro there are some low voices circling in military community about new stuff.
> but I can't tell what exactly. because if I do and IRIAF does not announce it I would feel like potato
> so just know something is happening.



Lets hope we see something juicy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

Philosopher said:


> Lets hope we see something juicy.


Lets hope it's not another Qaher 313


----------



## Philosopher

Iskander said:


> Lets hope it's not another Qaher 313



They have hopefully learned their lesson when it comes to revealing a project at a very early stage, and if they do, they should do a better job at making it clear that it is a mockup et cetera. Qaher was a real military project that became a victim of politicians. One thing Iran has yet to do satisfactorily is advertising its military hardware to the world (minus its missiles). Many nations around Iran with far less indigenous capability are advertising their achievements quite well. I hope that once the arms embargo is lifted Iran will become much more proficient in advertisement of its capability and start to earn revenue by exporting. It is not just the revenue that is to be gained, when you export your technology, you start to greatly shift the world's perception toward your country's technological and industrial prowess.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Mithridates said:


> bro there are some low voices circling in military community about new stuff.
> but I can't tell what exactly. because if I do and IRIAF does not announce it I would feel like potato
> so just know something is happening.


Just clarify my one question,

The new stuff will it be brand new concept or the previous projects/ mockup/CAD we had seen so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I agree that Iran's end goal should be to acquire modern jets with technology transfers, with the jets being made in Iran. 

BUT... Iran's airforce is in danger of becoming quickly obsolete in the near future and I'm not talking about compared to the USA. Even against regional rivals Iran's airforce is barely a threat anymore. Every jet has a life span and many of Iran's fighter jets are near, at the end or even past theirs.

Assuming that Iran does get the opportunity to buy a large number of fighter jets from Russia, we have to take Russia's previous lack of commitment into consideration (S-300). With that in mind I believe that it would be in Iran's best interest to get a significant portions of the jets into Iran's possession as soon as possible, regardless of a lack of TOT and even if they're made in Russia. 

Keep in mind, setting up the necessary facilities to build 100-200 jets in Iran will take alot of time and effort. In the meanwhile the USA, Israel or others might be able to make Russia change its mind somehow. For that reason, I believe that Iran should try to get atleast 25% of the jets into the country as soon as possible.

Afterwards the rest can be built in Iran with TOT. So ideally a deal would go something like this. 60 x SU-27/30/35 variants are sent to Iran as soon as they're ready with technology transfers. Another 60-120 can be built in Iran, perhaps with 20 being built every year. Aside from the SU-27/30/34/35, Iran could also sign a deal for atleast 20-40 SU-57's. Some MIG-35s would also be a good option to compliment Iran's airforce. 

Alongside a purchase like that Iran could continue to build its F-5 variant for training and as a light fighter. I'm actually interested to see what Iran is producing in terms of this heavier, delta wing jet. However I'm not going to hold my breath or get my hopes up. Anyways only time will tell. 




Sineva said:


> I seem to recall iran trying a somewhat similar route previously back in the [?]1990s,I also recall that it didnt work out very well for rather obvious reasons.....
> Irans only REAL options at this point are either full license production of either the su-30 or su-27sm3 or the chinese Shenyang J-16[assuming its available for export that is]
> Another option from china would be the latest version of the J-10,tho as a single engine fighter this would be limited to replacing/augmenting the mig29/mirage f1 fleet.
> But anything less than FULL COMPLETE LOCAL PRODUCTION in iran is simply an unacceptable risk of ultimately ending up wasting huge amounts of time,money and effort,because sadly BOTH russia and china have shown themselves to be very unreliable in this respect and until they can prove that they are trustworthy partners in this field it would be complete utter folly to agree to anything less than full complete local production of fighter aircraft in iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Shams313 said:


> Just clarify my one question,
> 
> The new stuff will it be brand new concept or the previous projects/ mockup/CAD we had seen so far.


I guess it would depend on who exactly is doing it....and what.
If it was the iriaf then it would likely be the usual mockup or modified airframe,probably f5 based as the iriaf seems to have a huge hard-on for it for some strange reason,which will probably result in perhaps one or two examples which will no doubt be "going into production very soon",or perhaps it might be some new radar or system which only a couple of aircraft will be fitted with ie F14M program.In other words just stuff for local consumption,like their bullsh!t "drone program" for instance.
However if its the irgc-af....that might well be something real,tho so far they seem to be more interested in modernising and upgrading the strike capabilities of their su17 and f-7 fleets,so I dont really expect to see them building new aircraft to be quite honest.


----------



## Shawnee

I would not be so sure that Iran can have ToT or at least buy fighters from China and Russia very soon. It may take five years. They may start with T90 and then years after comes fighters.

It is good to have the option but do not depend on it.

Have you considered the effect of US/EU?

Are you ready to abide the nuclear deal the way they ask you?

How do you know it will not end up like S300? Late delivery after much humiliation. How much do we need S300 now? *Those days we used to believe S300 is like bread for Iran. Now what? *

Air Force is important but air power is not just Air Force and Iran has deterrence even without buying Russian planes.

I would rather fly my own fighter and keep my pride. Overtime we will improve our fighters. Yes, it will not be ideal first but it will work better in the end.

You will also have a better hand at buying fighters if you make your own fighter. It is a lot easier to buy what you already make.

Necessity is mother of all the inventions. Power come from within not outside.
........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266732952358174720

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266733794905788416

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266734975426211841^ Images captured by IRIAF RF-4E in reconnaissance operations during Iran-Iraq war

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> Air Force is important but air power is not just Air Force...


The only force that can impress to others that a country can project air power is the air force. No other.

When I was invited to this forum back in '09, I have repeated this based on my USAF yrs, F-111 Cold War then F-16 Desert Storm.

*Air Dominance*. The ability of an air force to compel other air forces to re-array themselves, usually to subordinate postures.

*Air Superiority*. The ability of an air force to repeatedly achieve control of contested air spaces, and if there are losses, those losses would not pose a statistical deterrence to that ability.

*Air Supremacy*. He flies, he dies.​
Air power is the totality of the above. Missiles cannot give that, unless each missile have a %100 kill probability regardless of situation and environment.

An air force *IS* air power.

Why does an air force need to be an independent branch? Because for the army, its opponent is usually within 48 hrs of contact. If air power remains under army control, air power will be little more than helo squadrons. A ball bearing factory may have no short term military value, but if view greater than 48 hrs, the ball bearing factory is a great strategic target.

https://ww2db.com/facility/Schweinfurt_Ball_Bearing_Factories/

The city of Schweinfurt, located in central Germany, was the center for the production of ball bearings during WW2, a characteristic that remains true until today. During the war, Schweinfurt was the host to four ball bearing manufacturing complexes which collectively produced about half of the country's total ball bearing output.​Without ball bearings, there would be no tanks, ships, and aircrafts, and for the hardware that are battle damaged, they could not be repaired. True airpower looks beyond the short term gains and continuously expands that horizon. That is why US air power advocates fought for the institutional independence of the US Army Air Corps into the US Air Force. This is not to say that army generals are stupid but only precisely because of their opponents, army generals have no choice but to think in short term gains on the battlefields. In a manner of perspective, air power can strike into the future.

Today, any military that do not have an air force *WILL* be defeated.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

I don't understand the point of unveiling the Karrar if Iran is just going to end up acquiring the T-90 ? and if Iran can't even mass produce its own tanks then how is Iran going to do mass produce modern fighter jets ? 

Hopefully Iran will only acquire some vital tank parts or components (maybe the cannon, engine, etc) but we're going to have to wait and see. In any case, many of Irans older tanks, like the M-60s and Chieftains need to be put into storage or given to proxies, the sooner the better. 

In regards to IFVs and APCs, Iran can build them by itself. Many nations are doing it, although it should be noted that some of them have access to licenses from western Europe and the US, while others build inferior products that are sufficient for their needs none the less. Again, some new components from Russia would be great to give Iran that edge, but other than that I want to see Iran build its own. 

Iran really needs a newer tracked APC/IFV since the BMPs are too old. The Czech Sakal IFV is a good example of how modern upgrades can turn an older platform into a modern, lethal weapon. Iran also needs a new 8x8 armored vehicle. The BTR vehicles in Irans possession are again too old now.

Going back to fighter jets, I understand your point about pride and self sufficiency but imagine what would have happened during the Iran-Iraq war if Iran had not acquired the F-14s. The Iraqis would have been able to hit hundreds, perhaps thousands of vital targets without much getting in their way. 

Of course back then Iran didn't have thousands of missiles but regardless, no military can depend on one weapon alone. Missiles by themselves are not going to be enough for Iran to win any prolonged conflict. 

When it comes to fighter jets, one only needs to look at a powerhouse like China to realize how difficult and time consuming it is to produce modern fighters. China, with its massive military budget, huge industrial base, over 1 billion population, is still buying essential hardware from Russia. China can produce fight jets, air defense systems and has been doing so since the 60's, but after all these years, they're still not on par with Russia. 

For Iran to be able to produce a modern fighter jet, it would require Iran to invest tens of billions in R&D and even then there would be no guarantee. The main obstacle Iran faces today is the lack of a viable platform. 

Realistically if Iran really had faith in the Kowsar for example, then they should produce a large amount, not just 20.
It's the same story with the Karrar, Zulfiqar, Shafaq and many others. Whether its rifles, tanks or jets, Iran's military often times do not mass produce weapons after presenting them to the public. Sometimes weapons do go through serial production but you never know for sure. 

In any case, looking at Iran's current inventory of jets, even just compared to regional countries, Iran is hopelessly lagging behind. Whether Iran produces its own or buys jets abroad, one way or the other, Iran's airforce is in dire need of a boost just to stay relevant.

One thing is for sure, within the next decade, something has to give. Either Iran has to acquire or produce a fleet of modern fighters or Iran will forced to go nuclear and build an ICBM. Either that or Iran must produce hypersonic weapons. 



Shawnee said:


> I would not be so sure that Iran can have ToT or at least buy fighters from China and Russia very soon. It may take five years. They may start with T90 and then years after comes fighters.
> 
> It is good to have the option but do not depend on it.
> 
> Have you considered the effect of US/EU?
> 
> Are you ready to abide the nuclear deal the way they ask you?
> 
> How do you know it will not end up like S300? Late delivery after much humiliation. How much do we need S300 now? *Those days we used to believe S300 is like bread for Iran. Now what? *
> 
> Air Force is important but air power is not just Air Force and Iran has deterrence even without buying Russian planes.
> 
> I would rather fly my own fighter and keep my pride. Overtime we will improve our fighters. Yes, it will not be ideal first but it will work better in the end.
> 
> You will also have a better hand at buying fighters if you make your own fighter. It is a lot easier to buy what you already make.
> 
> Necessity is mother of all the inventions. Power come from within not outside.
> ........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> The only force that can impress to others that a country can project air power is the air force. No other.
> 
> When I was invited to this forum back in '09, I have repeated this based on my USAF yrs, F-111 Cold War then F-16 Desert Storm.
> 
> *Air Dominance*. The ability of an air force to compel other air forces to re-array themselves, usually to subordinate postures.
> 
> *Air Superiority*. The ability of an air force to repeatedly achieve control of contested air spaces, and if there are losses, those losses would not pose a statistical deterrence to that ability.
> 
> *Air Supremacy*. He flies, he dies.​
> Air power is the totality of the above. Missiles cannot give that, unless each missile have a %100 kill probability regardless of situation and environment.
> 
> An air force *IS* air power.
> 
> Why does an air force need to be an independent branch? Because for the army, its opponent is usually within 48 hrs of contact. If air power remains under army control, air power will be little more than helo squadrons. A ball bearing factory may have no short term military value, but if view greater than 48 hrs, the ball bearing factory is a great strategic target.
> 
> https://ww2db.com/facility/Schweinfurt_Ball_Bearing_Factories/
> 
> The city of Schweinfurt, located in central Germany, was the center for the production of ball bearings during WW2, a characteristic that remains true until today. During the war, Schweinfurt was the host to four ball bearing manufacturing complexes which collectively produced about half of the country's total ball bearing output.​Without ball bearings, there would be no tanks, ships, and aircrafts, and for the hardware that are battle damaged, they could not be repaired. True airpower looks beyond the short term gains and continuously expands that horizon. That is why US air power advocates fought for the institutional independence of the US Army Air Corps into the US Air Force. This is not to say that army generals are stupid but only precisely because of their opponents, army generals have no choice but to think in short term gains on the battlefields. In a manner of perspective, air power can strike into the future.
> 
> Today, any military that do not have an air force *WILL* be defeated.



@gambit 
Hi there, It has been a while since we had a discussion. 

Last time was 8 years ago, when I spent a few pages of comments to prove to you and @500 that Shahed 129 is not photoshopped, is real and can fly. My effort was in vain. 

Yet, I have enjoyed your posts many times. 

Countries have won wars without Air Force or air power: Yemen, Hizbullah are two examples. 

KSA is the fifth air force on earth and Yemen has no Air Force. Air Force razed the civilian houses and infrastructures but failed to achieve the goal.

Air power is indeed a mix of different capabilities but it is not just Air Force. Missiles, AD, drones, etc
one example: If you ablaze the enemy ships, AC, and hangars with your missiles you have neutralized their air force.

Everything else that you mentioned in your post was correct IMHO.
.........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> Countries have won wars without Air Force or air power: Yemen, Hizbullah are two examples.


There are two components in a war: political and military.

The political goals determines the military objectives. The politician says: Defeat country A. The general says: To defeat country A, we have to mine this harbor, bomb this city, take that hill, and so on and so on. What the politician do with successful military objectives is a different matter. The politician can throw everything away -- Vietnam War -- and despite the successful military objectives, the war is lost.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> There are two components in a war: political and military.
> 
> The political goals determines the military objectives. The politician says: Defeat country A. The general says: To defeat country A, we have to mine this harbor, bomb this city, take that hill, and so on and so on. What the politician do with successful military objectives is a different matter. The politician can throw everything away -- Vietnam War -- and despite the successful military objectives, the war is lost.



- In Yemen war: Military goal was to at least capture the capital Sanaa. Military goal failed despite multiple attempts and the superior Air and ground technology. Political goal was to reach a desirable peace treaty which also failed.

-In Hizbullah-Israel war: Military goal was to advance up to Litani river which failed. Political goal was to disarm hizbollah and did not succeed.

The war with a missile/drone power would be a different ballgame though.

“F16 is not a strategy”: John Boehner.
....................

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## hussainb72

Hi guys, It's been a very long time since the last time I posted here. I got really busy for a while. I hope that everyone is doing fine these days.

I had some thoughts about the future of the IRIAF. If iran can convert its owj engine into a turbo fan engine, then it can upgrade its existing F-5 fleet to the kowsar standard with turbo fan engines. It should also convert most of them to the double seat version and use the F-5 as its supersonic trainer. It can also use the same turbofan engine for the yasin and produce it and use it as its sub sonic jet trainer. We have also seen an iranian version of the pc-7 which can be used for advanced training and the iranian version of the bonanza for the basic pilot training. This means that iran can produce it's own training aircrafts with no problems if it converts the owj into a turbofan engine.

The next step for iran would be to develop an engine in the same class as the rd-33, then it can produce it's own medium weight fighter, and I am sure iran is currently capable of such a thing and I hope we see something in this regard soon. But for the heavy fighters, it might need to buy some from russia, but only under the condition of full tot, or the transfer of some important engine and avionics related data. After gaining such experience, iran can then design it's own heavy fighter and fully become independent with its airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

sha ah said:


> I don't understand the point of unveiling the Karrar if Iran is just going to end up acquiring the T-90 ? and if Iran can't even mass produce its own tanks then how is Iran going to do mass produce modern fighter jets ?
> 
> Hopefully Iran will only acquire some vital tank parts or components (maybe the cannon, engine, etc) but we're going to have to wait and see. In any case, many of Irans older tanks, like the M-60s and Chieftains need to be put into storage or given to proxies, the sooner the better.
> 
> In regards to IFVs and APCs, Iran can build them by itself. Many nations are doing it, although it should be noted that some of them have access to licenses from western Europe and the US, while others build inferior products that are sufficient for their needs none the less. Again, some new components from Russia would be great to give Iran that edge, but other than that I want to see Iran build its own.
> 
> Iran really needs a newer tracked APC/IFV since the BMPs are too old. The Czech Sakal IFV is a good example of how modern upgrades can turn an older platform into a modern, lethal weapon. Iran also needs a new 8x8 armored vehicle. The BTR vehicles in Irans possession are again too old now.
> 
> Going back to fighter jets, I understand your point about pride and self sufficiency but imagine what would have happened during the Iran-Iraq war if Iran had not acquired the F-14s. The Iraqis would have been able to hit hundreds, perhaps thousands of vital targets without much getting in their way.
> 
> Of course back then Iran didn't have thousands of missiles but regardless, no military can depend on one weapon alone. Missiles by themselves are not going to be enough for Iran to win any prolonged conflict.
> 
> When it comes to fighter jets, one only needs to look at a powerhouse like China to realize how difficult and time consuming it is to produce modern fighters. China, with its massive military budget, huge industrial base, over 1 billion population, is still buying essential hardware from Russia. China can produce fight jets, air defense systems and has been doing so since the 60's, but after all these years, they're still not on par with Russia.
> 
> For Iran to be able to produce a modern fighter jet, it would require Iran to invest tens of billions in R&D and even then there would be no guarantee. The main obstacle Iran faces today is the lack of a viable platform.
> 
> Realistically if Iran really had faith in the Kowsar for example, then they should produce a large amount, not just 20.
> It's the same story with the Karrar, Zulfiqar, Shafaq and many others. Whether its rifles, tanks or jets, Iran's military often times do not mass produce weapons after presenting them to the public. Sometimes weapons do go through serial production but you never know for sure.
> 
> In any case, looking at Iran's current inventory of jets, even just compared to regional countries, Iran is hopelessly lagging behind. Whether Iran produces its own or buys jets abroad, one way or the other, Iran's airforce is in dire need of a boost just to stay relevant.
> 
> One thing is for sure, within the next decade, something has to give. Either Iran has to acquire or produce a fleet of modern fighters or Iran will forced to go nuclear and build an ICBM. Either that or Iran must produce hypersonic weapons.



Valid points. I do not say missiles are enough. Of course not.

The indigenous fighter is in better shape now. Even the turbofan bottleneck is in better shape.

I am fine with buying fighters or ToT. I think we both agree that you will get a better deal if you make your own fighter too, like China. *The danger is solely anchoring to a purchase that may drag on for years to be delivered.*
.............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> I don't understand the point of unveiling the Karrar if Iran is just going to end up acquiring the T-90 ? and if Iran can't even mass produce its own tanks then how is Iran going to do mass produce modern fighter jets ?
> 
> Hopefully Iran will only acquire some vital tank parts or components (maybe the cannon, engine, etc) but we're going to have to wait and see. In any case, many of Irans older tanks, like the M-60s and Chieftains need to be put into storage or given to proxies, the sooner the better.
> 
> In regards to IFVs and APCs, Iran can build them by itself. Many nations are doing it, although it should be noted that some of them have access to licenses from western Europe and the US, while others build inferior products that are sufficient for their needs none the less. Again, some new components from Russia would be great to give Iran that edge, but other than that I want to see Iran build its own.
> 
> Iran really needs a newer tracked APC/IFV since the BMPs are too old. The Czech Sakal IFV is a good example of how modern upgrades can turn an older platform into a modern, lethal weapon. Iran also needs a new 8x8 armored vehicle. The BTR vehicles in Irans possession are again too old now.
> 
> Going back to fighter jets, I understand your point about pride and self sufficiency but imagine what would have happened during the Iran-Iraq war if Iran had not acquired the F-14s. The Iraqis would have been able to hit hundreds, perhaps thousands of vital targets without much getting in their way.
> 
> Of course back then Iran didn't have thousands of missiles but regardless, no military can depend on one weapon alone. Missiles by themselves are not going to be enough for Iran to win any prolonged conflict.
> 
> When it comes to fighter jets, one only needs to look at a powerhouse like China to realize how difficult and time consuming it is to produce modern fighters. China, with its massive military budget, huge industrial base, over 1 billion population, is still buying essential hardware from Russia. China can produce fight jets, air defense systems and has been doing so since the 60's, but after all these years, they're still not on par with Russia.
> 
> For Iran to be able to produce a modern fighter jet, it would require Iran to invest tens of billions in R&D and even then there would be no guarantee. The main obstacle Iran faces today is the lack of a viable platform.
> 
> Realistically if Iran really had faith in the Kowsar for example, then they should produce a large amount, not just 20.
> It's the same story with the Karrar, Zulfiqar, Shafaq and many others. Whether its rifles, tanks or jets, Iran's military often times do not mass produce weapons after presenting them to the public. Sometimes weapons do go through serial production but you never know for sure.
> 
> In any case, looking at Iran's current inventory of jets, even just compared to regional countries, Iran is hopelessly lagging behind. Whether Iran produces its own or buys jets abroad, one way or the other, Iran's airforce is in dire need of a boost just to stay relevant.
> 
> One thing is for sure, within the next decade, something has to give. Either Iran has to acquire or produce a fleet of modern fighters or Iran will forced to go nuclear and build an ICBM. Either that or Iran must produce hypersonic weapons.



Karrar was a modernization platform for existing T-72s. It wasn’t intended to be a brand new tank like some thought here. The engine is still the same.

There is no guarantee Iran will purchase T-90, as tanks are literally the last thing Iran needs in terms of priority. Iran could wait another 10 years and acquire a next gen tank like the Armata.

Also the reason why you don’t see large amounts of certain projects is simple.....NO CONTRACT.

Iran has a vast military arms industry, but it still relies on contracts from armed forces branches to mass produce a product. Thankfully, Iran’s armed forces are conservative in the sense that they don’t throw money at EVERY project. Instead they pick projects based on need and viability of the product.

The Kowsar and Karrar are simply not impressive products when compared to existing product. Thus they never receive major contracts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> - In Yemen war: Military goal was to at least capture the capital Sanaa. Military goal failed despite multiple attempts and the superior Air and ground technology. Political goal was to reach a desirable peace treaty which also failed.
> 
> -In Hizbullah-Israel war: Military goal was to advance up to Litani river which failed. Political goal was to disarm hizbollah and did not succeed.


The details would have to be examined before judgement.

Going back to the Vietnam War. There were different political goals. The North wanted unification at all/any cost. The South wanted partition. Each goal produced different military objectives and tactics. Here is what most glossed over in their support for NVN: The NVA lost all major battles. The NVA failed to achieve its military objectives so alternate tactics had to be devised: The Viet Cong and the Ho Chi Minh supply line, which violated the borders of two neutral countries: Laos and Cambodia. For SVN that wanted partition, its military objectives stopped at the 17th parallel. Given the different political goals where SVN stopped at the 17th, there was near zero chance that the SVN/US alliance would win even though the US dominated the sky over the entire country.

That was the lesson of Viet Nam that led to a different way of war for Desert Storm where politics did not tread into the military domain until the last minute where US troops were within 100 miles of Baghdad and B41 called a stop to the Army's advances.



Shawnee said:


> The war with a missile/drone power would be a different ballgame though.


How different?



Shawnee said:


> “F16 is not a strategy”: John Boehner.


Do not care what Boehner said. When you have to cite a politician, there is no argument. The man was discharged after 8 weeks.


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> The details would have to be examined before judgement.
> 
> Going back to the Vietnam War. There were different political goals. The North wanted unification at all/any cost. The South wanted partition. Each goal produced different military objectives and tactics. Here is what most glossed over in their support for NVN: The NVA lost all major battles. The NVA failed to achieve its military objectives so alternate tactics had to be devised: The Viet Cong and the Ho Chi Minh supply line, which violated the borders of two neutral countries: Laos and Cambodia. For SVN that wanted partition, its military objectives stopped at the 17th parallel. Given the different political goals where SVN stopped at the 17th, there was near zero chance that the SVN/US alliance would win even though the US dominated the sky over the entire country.
> 
> That was the lesson of Viet Nam that led to a different way of war for Desert Storm where politics did not tread into the military domain until the last minute where US troops were within 100 miles of Baghdad and B41 called a stop to the Army's advances.
> 
> 
> How different?
> 
> 
> Do not care what Boehner said. When you have to cite a politician, there is no argument. The man was discharged after 8 weeks.



I keep the post focused on Yemen and will not sway away of the topic to Vietnam. If KSA takes over Yemeni land or at least Sana’a, you will have some room to claim a partial military win. It is far to be at that point yet.

You know KSA military too. You have served in KSA and could have fun with their girls as far as I remember from our prior discussions 

How did US win over Japan?
“The terms of peace are already defined in the battlefield”: General Eisenhower

War with a country with unlimited missiles and drones of different range is more difficult compared to Yemen.

I will give you one example: What can an AC or airbase with multiple fighters do when 100 missiles dive down to them at 8 Mach? Some missiles have cluster warhead that have diverged into submunitions 100 km above the earth. Note that the submunition still has guidance. Only one submunition sets the AC in havoc.

The missiles are launched from underneath granite mountains. They are pretty safe from a first strike.

There are factories under those granite mountains that even produce steel and ball-bearings.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> I keep the post focused on Yemen and will not sway away of the topic to Vietnam.


All wars are instructive, but some are more so than others. In military academies worldwide, the Vietnam War and Desert Storm are used to show there must be separation between the political and the military. NATO operations over Yugoslavia is what happened when that mistake is made again. In Viet Nam, there was no 'partial' win for the US military. It was total to the point that after the war, even the NVA leadership admitted it, but when they said it did not matter, it was in the context of the failure to align political goals and military objectives, unlike the way the North Vietnamese leadership did with the NVA.

In Viet Nam, air power came very close to pressuring an opponent towards capitulation. The Rolling Thunder bombing campaign compelled the NVN to plea for 'negotiations' even though all sides knew it was nothing more than a plea for respite until NVN recovered its supplies from China and the Soviets, and the NVA had a chance to replenish its ranks.

I know people everywhere love to downplay the US military at any chance they can, but they cannot overcome objective analyses.



Shawnee said:


> What can an AC or airbase with multiple fighters do when 100 missiles dive down to them at 8 Mach? Some missiles have cluster warhead that have diverged into submunitions 100 km above the earth. Note that the submunition still has guidance. Only one submunition sets the AC in havoc.


And the guidance is immune to countermeasures. Sure...


----------



## Stryker1982

gambit said:


> All wars are instructive, but some are more so than others. In military academies worldwide, the Vietnam War and Desert Storm are used to show there must be separation between the political and the military. NATO operations over Yugoslavia is what happened when that mistake is made again. In Viet Nam, there was no 'partial' win for the US military. It was total to the point that after the war, even the NVA leadership admitted it, but when they said it did not matter, it was in the context of the failure to align political goals and military objectives, unlike the way the North Vietnamese leadership did with the NVA.
> 
> In Viet Nam, air power came very close to pressuring an opponent towards capitulation. The Rolling Thunder bombing campaign compelled the NVN to plea for 'negotiations' even though all sides knew it was nothing more than a plea for respite until NVN recovered its supplies from China and the Soviets, and the NVA had a chance to replenish its ranks.
> 
> I know people everywhere love to downplay the US military at any chance they can, but they cannot overcome objective analyses.
> 
> 
> And the guidance is immune to countermeasures. Sure...


Looks like the communists are back in your country my good friend.


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> All wars are instructive, but some are more so than others. In military academies worldwide, the Vietnam War and Desert Storm are used to show there must be separation between the political and the military. NATO operations over Yugoslavia is what happened when that mistake is made again. In Viet Nam, there was no 'partial' win for the US military. It was total to the point that after the war, even the NVA leadership admitted it, but when they said it did not matter, it was in the context of the failure to align political goals and military objectives, unlike the way the North Vietnamese leadership did with the NVA.
> 
> In Viet Nam, air power came very close to pressuring an opponent towards capitulation. The Rolling Thunder bombing campaign compelled the NVN to plea for 'negotiations' even though all sides knew it was nothing more than a plea for respite until NVN recovered its supplies from China and the Soviets, and the NVA had a chance to replenish its ranks.
> 
> I know people everywhere love to downplay the US military at any chance they can, but they cannot overcome objective analyses.
> 
> 
> And the guidance is immune to countermeasures. Sure...



You hurried through the missile part and KSA war and focused on Vietnam war.

You only need one successful submunition to pass the defense line and counter-measures and wreak havoc in an AC. It will be Huge deal to lose an AC.

Regarding counter-measures:
Routine guidance is based on inertia, IR, camera, Laser, and of course radar. Routine counter-measures are based on IR artifacts, radar jamming, GPS spoof, computer vision tricks like smoke production, and Laser jamming.

If you have a novel guidance which is very possible for 2020, any countermeasure will fail. The discussion of novel techniques is beyond this topic but I am happy to discuss. You need knowledge of the guidance technique of the enemy. Will you ASSUME that the enemy uses IR homing only?
How will you trick inertia guidance which is super accurate in Iranian missiles? EMPs? 

All those IR, image based, Laser based, radar based tricks were there in Al-Assad. Iran eavesdropped and recorded the voices of the jammers in Al-Assad. They thought they will jam all the missiles. All of them. They were out of their minds.

Where were those counter-measures in Abqaiq in KSA?

Regarding Vietnam war:
While there is a lot of education in analyzing Vietnam and Iraq wars, your analysis does not show how superior Air Force of KSA did not win the Yemen war.

Your claim was “you will lose the war if you have inferior Air Force.”
....


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> Regarding counter-measures:
> Routine guidance is based on inertia, IR, camera, Laser, and of course radar. Routine counter-measures are based on IR artifacts, radar jamming, GPS spoof, computer vision tricks like smoke production, and Laser jamming.
> 
> If you have a novel guidance which is very possible for 2020, any countermeasure will fail. The discussion of novel techniques is beyond this topic but I am happy to discuss. You need knowledge of the guidance technique of the enemy. Will you ASSUME that the enemy uses IR homing only?
> How will you trick inertia guidance which is super accurate in Iranian missiles? EMPs?


First, the argument of speculation of a new type of guidance is a non-starter. Might as well plan the war on magic. So am not going to waste my time on that.

Second, I have explained plenty on the detection methods and their countermeasures on this forum since '09. Inertial guidance is not true guidance and is actually the easiest to counter. If you cannot figure that one out, it means you did not understand what is inertial 'guidance' to start.



Shawnee said:


> Your claim was “you will lose the war if you have inferior Air Force.”
> ....


And I stand by my argument. I can make it a little more detailed by specifying the military component of if, but that would be unnecessarily pedantic. Those who are actually objective would know what I mean.


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> First, the argument of speculation of a new type of guidance is a non-starter. Might as well plan the war on magic. So am not going to waste my time on that.
> 
> Second, I have explained plenty on the detection methods and their countermeasures on this forum since '09. Inertial guidance is not true guidance and is actually the easiest to counter. If you cannot figure that one out, it means you did not understand what is inertial 'guidance' to start.
> 
> 
> And I stand by my argument. I can make it a little more detailed by specifying the military component of if, but that would be unnecessarily pedantic. Those who are actually objective would know what I mean.



You run away from the topic to what you like to talk about. Vietnam war is one discussion you always favor but it is not related to the topic.

Regarding the guidance:
I purposefully mentioned that Iranian inertial guidance system has reached *sub-meter *accuracy in my previous post. Otherwise, inertia based system is known to be less accurate. It is not easy to reach that accuracy. Yes.

Are you comfortable to talk about Novel and old guidance systems based on Terahertz, UWB, multi-spectral etc. Have you talked about these on this forum before? Do you read articles on communication, pattern recognition and signal processing regularly? I should have missed a lot of your posts then.

How do you counter inertial navigation system?

Long story short, counter-measure is not something you can definitely rely on. The best defense is to attack.

Do you think the Al-Assad or Abqaiq missiles reached the target on GPS guidance? What happened to the counter measures in Al-Assad and Abqaiq?

Regarding KSA war in Yemen:
As I mentioned, the fifth Air Force on earth tried to capture Sana’a capital multiple times and failed. Military goal was not achieved. Can you counter my claim?
............


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> You run away from the topic to what you like to talk about. Vietnam war is one discussion you always favor but it is not related to the topic.


Not my fault if you failed to understand. Unless we know the details of the war in Yemen, which I doubt you understand the way I do about the Vietnam War, what you argue about air power in that arena is no better than guessing. And not even an educated guess at that.



Shawnee said:


> Regarding the guidance:
> I purposefully mentioned that Iranian inertial guidance system has reached *sub-meter *accuracy in my previous post. Otherwise, inertia based system is known to be less accurate. It is not easy to reach that accuracy. Yes.


The issue is not about how accurate inertial guidance at its end point.



Shawnee said:


> Are you comfortable to talk about Novel and old guidance systems based on Terahertz, UWB, multi-spectral etc. Have you talked about these on this forum before? Do you read articles on communication, pattern recognition and signal processing regularly? I should have missed a lot of your posts then.


You are throwing up these 'word salad'. One can only wonder if you know how each works, let alone integration with other systems.



Shawnee said:


> How do you counter inertial navigation system?


Relocation.



Shawnee said:


> Military goal was not achieved. Can you counter my claim?
> ............


If a military objective was not achieved, what is there to counter? I have no details as to the deployment of the weapons systems involved. Do you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> Not my fault if you failed to understand. Unless we know the details of the war in Yemen, which I doubt you understand the way I do about the Vietnam War, what you argue about air power in that arena is no better than guessing. And not even an educated guess at that.
> 
> 
> The issue is not about how accurate inertial guidance at its end point.
> 
> 
> You are throwing up these 'word salad'. One can only wonder if you know how each works, let alone integration with other systems.
> 
> 
> Relocation.
> 
> 
> If a military objective was not achieved, what is there to counter? I have no details as to the deployment of the weapons systems involved. Do you?



Regarding the war in Yemen:
There is not a lot of room to deny the failure of KSA. If you had followed the Yemen war, you would have noticed the efforts to capture the capital Sanaa, militarily. That is maybe why you ran away to another subject.

Regarding novel guidance systems:
I am happy to talk about it in details from sensors to signal and computer vision. I left it out because it was out of topic. If you can counter my claim through using it, proceed.

Regarding relocation
How do you relocate an airbase?

Finally
You left out why countermeasures did not work in Al-Assad and Abqaiq.
...........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Shawnee said:


> Regarding the war in Yemen:
> There is not a lot of room to deny the failure of KSA. If you had followed the Yemen war, you would have noticed the efforts to capture the capital Sanaa, militarily. That is maybe why you ran away to another subject.


In other words, you have no details regarding how an air force was employed in Yemen. But you have no problems making sweeping pronouncements based on ignorance. But that is typical.



Shawnee said:


> Regarding novel guidance systems:
> I am happy to talk about it in details at any level you want from sensors to signal and computer vision. I left it out because it was out of topic. If you can counter my claim through using it, proceed.


You made no claim other than 'novel'. How am I supposed to 'counter' that?



Shawnee said:


> Regarding relocation
> How do you relocate an airbase?


You do not strike an airbase. See if you can figure that one out.



Shawnee said:


> Finally
> You left out why countermeasures did not work in Al-Assad and Abqaiq.
> ...........


Not interested.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Houthi (Iranian?) drone shot down in central Yemen. Kind of looks like Shahed 121 ? 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266783704288026625

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Houthi (Iranian?) drone shot down in central Yemen. Kind of looks like Shahed 121 ?
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266783704288026625


It looks like a Samad,as this was the type supplied to the Houthis who then went on to modify it to increase its range.You can also see that its got the wing tip wire landing skids.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

gambit said:


> In other words, you have no details regarding how an air force was employed in Yemen. But you have no problems making sweeping pronouncements based on ignorance. But that is typical.
> 
> 
> You made no claim other than 'novel'. How am I supposed to 'counter' that?
> 
> 
> You do not strike an airbase. See if you can figure that one out.
> 
> 
> Not interested.



There are enough of available details about the Yemen war to conclude who failed to obtain its military objectives.
You cannot attribute that to Saudi incompetence in using air force.
Was Israel also incompetent in using Air Force against Hizbullah?

Regarding the countermeasures:
You started to talk about countermeasures but you chickened out of it when talking about its details. Vietnam war was a more secure and comfortable topic to talk about.
I did not agree with your analysis on Vietnam war but I do not want to change the topic far away. I don’t think you are old enough to have served in Vietnam anyway, considering you have served in KSA. Most KSA/Iraq vets I have met are less than 60.

Regarding your favorite relocation and an airbase:
That is exactly what happened in Al-Assad. Everybody relocated to one bunker and started praying. Relocation saved lives but the base was gone.
......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Sineva said:


> It looks like a Samad,as this was the type supplied to the Houthis who then went on to modify it to increase its range.You can also see that its got the wing tip wire landing skids.



Iran has so many drones it's insane.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## hussainb72

Shawnee said:


> There are enough of available details about the Yemen war to conclude who failed to obtain its military objectives.
> You cannot attribute that to Saudi incompetence in using air force.
> Was Israel also incompetent in using Air Force against Hizbullah?
> ......


The Vietnam war era is over. Iran has introduced new tactics which have changed how wars are carried out right now. Traditional wars are over and most conflicts these days are just proxy wars.
And we can clearly see how the Saudis have failed to defend themselves from a 50000 man group in Yeman and are even losing land. Their airforce is just useful at killing innocent people and kids and cant really help that much. Yemeni drones fly deep into Saudi airspace and target Saudi airports and facilities while the Saudi airforce and air defence are just sitting and watching.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shawnee

hussainb72 said:


> The Vietnam war era is over. Iran has introduced new tactics which have changed how wars are carried out right now. Traditional wars are over and most conflicts these days are just proxy wars.
> And we can clearly see how the Saudis have failed to defend themselves from a 50000 man group in Yeman and are even losing land. Their airforce is just useful at killing innocent people and kids and cant really help that much. Yemeni drones fly deep into Saudi airspace and target Saudi airports and facilities while the Saudi airforce and air defence are just sitting and watching.



Here comes the difference between Air Force and air power.
......

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## makranman

Ok, did KSA state their objectives for war before they started their operations? if they did, we can easily solve the issue of "who succeeded in this [bloody] war?"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Shawnee said:


> Here comes the difference between Air Force and air power.
> ......


The airforce, drones and the air defences are what shows the air power of a country.
If you have a modern air force, but dont have the air defences that would support it in defensive operations, then you have a weak air power. A fighter plane stationed on the ground cant really detect incoming planes when it's on the ground and needs a radar station to detect the incoming targets and direct the fighter plane to them. If the radar cant do its job, the fighters on the ground are useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267483997321510913

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267483997321510913



Cargo Will be bombed once it safely leaves the airport. 

Iran never learns.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

So far the Israeli's, Americans and allies have been trying for years to force Iran to leave Syria without much success. 



TheImmortal said:


> Cargo Will be bombed once it safely leaves the airport.
> 
> Iran never learns.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> So far the Israeli's, Americans and allies have been trying for years to force Iran to leave Syria without much success.



My point still stands. Iran has lost billions in bombed arms, bases, and personnel.

Sure for a country like US, losing billions is merely a rounding error. However, for the armed forces of Iran as well as Iran the country...it hurts a lot more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

It doesnt make any sense for iran to be sending equipment just like that for them to be destroyed.
It's just an illogical thing and tbh iranian generals are mentally disabled to do the same mistake over and over again. What I believe has been happening is that those cargo planes were mostly filled with empty containers. It might be that iran has been sending equipment in other ways, but didnt want to stop the plane cargos so that israel wouldn't investigate that much into the case and just think that's the only way iran is sending things into syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

TheImmortal said:


> My point still stands. Iran has lost billions in bombed arms, bases, and personnel.
> 
> Sure for a country like US, losing billions is merely a rounding error. However, for the armed forces of Iran as well as Iran the country...it hurts a lot more.


Bro...zoom out a little and take your head out of the sand. Iraq was a linchpin for the Neo-con ME policy...it is now firmly in Iran's pocket, Syria, that was supposed to be US's gift to Israel is no longer in play and it has now solidified it's allegiance to Iran. The Yemen war that the U.S. encouraged and bankrolled has blown up in MBS's face. The arrogant bastards S.A. and UAE for the first time are now seeking dialogue/detente with Iran. Trump/Pompeo's maximum pressure has not borne any fruit. The Nato alliance and the European relations are in tatters. China for the first time is openly flaunting anti sanctions measures by doing business in Iran....the EU is coming out with a SWIFT alternative that will circumvent the U.S. Dollar in trade.........Yep, so much winning...sure, you guys go ahead and pat yourselves on the back for bombing some trucks in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

Kastor said:


> Bro...zoom out a little and take your head out of the sand. Iraq was a linchpin for the Neo-con ME policy...it is now firmly in Iran's pocket, Syria, that was supposed to be US's gift to Israel is no longer in play and it has now solidified it's allegiance to Iran. The Yemen war that the U.S. encouraged and bankrolled has blown up in MBS's face. The arrogant bastards S.A. and UAE for the first time are now seeking dialogue/detente with Iran. Trump/Pompeo's maximum pressure has not borne any fruit. The Nato alliance and the European relations are in tatters. China for the first time is openly flaunting anti sanctions measures by doing business in Iran....the EU is coming out with a SWIFT alternative that will circumvent the U.S. Dollar in trade.........Yep, so much winning...sure, you guys go ahead and pat yourselves on the back for bombing some trucks in Syria.



You didn’t even argue my point you went on a brainless tangent because I pointed out something that doesn’t fit your “rah rah Iran is does everything great” narrative.

No one is arguing Iran’s geopolitical gains certainly not me if you even pay attention to this forum.

Iraq barely cost Iran anything. Yemen is not costing Iran much. Syria has cost Iran over 20B dollars since 2010 at the bare minimum (1-2B a year expense) this is besides the loans it made and cost of sensitive tech shipments.

But both of you users are much like the less intelligent Pakistani users of this board, when you cannot debate the topic at hand...go on a unrelated tangent.

My point still stands and if you can’t debate it get lost. Iran has lost significant amounts of resources to air strikes, that money could have gone to funding important R&D programs or future arms purchases. If you think that’s not a big deal for a country with the military budget of $20B then you are the one that needs to “zoom out”.



hussainb72 said:


> It doesnt make any sense for iran to be sending equipment just like that for them to be destroyed.
> It's just an illogical thing and tbh iranian generals are mentally disabled to do the same mistake over and over again. What I believe has been happening is that those cargo planes were mostly filled with empty containers. It might be that iran has been sending equipment in other ways, but didnt want to stop the plane cargos so that israel wouldn't investigate that much into the case and just think that's the only way iran is sending things into syria.



There’s planes coming in daily. You have to imagine in the last 10 years the amount of weapons Syria has used/lost/got destroyed. So anything from ammo to small arms to anti tank etc need to be constantly replenished and until Russia joined the fray...Iran was the only true supplier.

Beaides this is the arms designated for Hezbollah and Proxies. Like a game of cat and mouse Iran tries to hide these shipments among the ordinary weapon transfers to Syria. It’s Israel’s job to determine which is which.

Irans options are limited the land path is also limited. Fastest way is by air and even if they land in Russian protected zone upon transfer to Lebanon usually the shipments will be hit. If Iran can get arms into Gaza it can transfer arms into Lebanon, the goal from Israel’s standpoint was to limit the amount that successfully get through. At least easier surviving 50 F-110’s in the future versus 1,000 F-110s.

I have a feeling Israel does the “tap policy” when they attack shipments meaning that they first hit close to the shipment to warn the crew to escape then destroy it. 

I’m sure that Iranian lives have been lost in bombing of bases (T4 Base-Iranian drone center was hit). But it’s to Israel’s advantage to keep the blood toll low in order to not exact immediate revenge. Unless the target is a HVT (high value target) in which case we have seen the Us/Israel do not care about rules of war (General Allahadadi [Israel] and General Solemani [US]).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

TheImmortal said:


> There’s planes coming in daily. You have to imagine in the last 10 years the amount of weapons Syria has used/lost/got destroyed. So anything from ammo to small arms to anti tank etc need to be constantly replenished and until Russia joined the fray...Iran was the only true supplier.
> 
> Beaides this is the arms designated for Hezbollah and Proxies. Like a game of cat and mouse Iran tries to hide these shipments among the ordinary weapon transfers to Syria. It’s Israel’s job to determine which is which.
> 
> Irans options are limited the land path is also limited. Fastest way is by air and even if they land in Russian protected zone upon transfer to Lebanon usually the shipments will be hit. If Iran can get arms into Gaza it can transfer arms into Lebanon, the goal from Israel’s standpoint was to limit the amount that successfully get through. At least easier surviving 50 F-110’s in the future versus 1,000 F-110s.
> 
> I have a feeling Israel does the “tap policy” when they attack shipments meaning that they first hit close to the shipment to warn the crew to escape then destroy it.
> 
> I’m sure that Iranian lives have been lost in bombing of bases (T4 Base-Iranian drone center was hit). But it’s to Israel’s advantage to keep the blood toll low in order to not exact immediate revenge. Unless the target is a HVT (high value target) in which case we have seen the Us/Israel do not care about rules of war (General Allahadadi [Israel] and General Solemani [US]).



Even if there is a high demand of equipment, there are other ways for these to be delivered and not just by air. We dont know really what they are really doing, but they might even have underground tunnels that they use for transport of some equipment from iran to a base in iraq, then it's taken to syria by road.
But again, it makes no sense for iran to let israel destroy its shipments just like that. They are definitely doing something else that isnt affecting them that much.


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Kastor said:


> Bro...zoom out a little and take your head out of the sand. Iraq was a linchpin for the Neo-con ME policy...it is now firmly in Iran's pocket, Syria, that was supposed to be US's gift to Israel is no longer in play and it has now solidified it's allegiance to Iran. The Yemen war that the U.S. encouraged and bankrolled has blown up in MBS's face. The arrogant bastards S.A. and UAE for the first time are now seeking dialogue/detente with Iran. Trump/Pompeo's maximum pressure has not borne any fruit. The Nato alliance and the European relations are in tatters. China for the first time is openly flaunting anti sanctions measures by doing business in Iran....the EU is coming out with a SWIFT alternative that will circumvent the U.S. Dollar in trade.........Yep, so much winning...sure, you guys go ahead and pat yourselves on the back for bombing some trucks in Syria.


His head in not in the sand ,its in his back side ,,don't waste your time on this guy

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> My point still stands. Iran has lost billions in bombed arms, bases, and personnel.
> 
> Sure for a country like US, losing billions is merely a rounding error. However, for the armed forces of Iran as well as Iran the country...it hurts a lot more.



Do you have numbers for that? Do you even know what is being delivered? No, stop making assumptions. Israel has a habit of hitting empty warehouses or getting their missiles shot down mid flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> You didn’t even argue my point you went on a brainless tangent because I pointed out something that doesn’t fit your “rah rah Iran is does everything great” narrative.
> 
> No one is arguing Iran’s geopolitical gains certainly not me if you even pay attention to this forum.
> 
> Iraq barely cost Iran anything. Yemen is not costing Iran much. Syria has cost Iran over 20B dollars since 2010 at the bare minimum (1-2B a year expense) this is besides the loans it made and cost of sensitive tech shipments.
> 
> But both of you users are much like the less intelligent Pakistani users of this board, when you cannot debate the topic at hand...go on a unrelated tangent.
> 
> My point still stands and if you can’t debate it get lost. Iran has lost significant amounts of resources to air strikes, that money could have gone to funding important R&D programs or future arms purchases. If you think that’s not a big deal for a country with the military budget of $20B then you are the one that needs to “zoom out”.
> 
> 
> 
> There’s planes coming in daily. You have to imagine in the last 10 years the amount of weapons Syria has used/lost/got destroyed. So anything from ammo to small arms to anti tank etc need to be constantly replenished and until Russia joined the fray...Iran was the only true supplier.
> 
> Beaides this is the arms designated for Hezbollah and Proxies. Like a game of cat and mouse Iran tries to hide these shipments among the ordinary weapon transfers to Syria. It’s Israel’s job to determine which is which.
> 
> Irans options are limited the land path is also limited. Fastest way is by air and even if they land in Russian protected zone upon transfer to Lebanon usually the shipments will be hit. If Iran can get arms into Gaza it can transfer arms into Lebanon, the goal from Israel’s standpoint was to limit the amount that successfully get through. At least easier surviving 50 F-110’s in the future versus 1,000 F-110s.
> 
> I have a feeling Israel does the “tap policy” when they attack shipments meaning that they first hit close to the shipment to warn the crew to escape then destroy it.
> 
> I’m sure that Iranian lives have been lost in bombing of bases (T4 Base-Iranian drone center was hit). But it’s to Israel’s advantage to keep the blood toll low in order to not exact immediate revenge. Unless the target is a HVT (high value target) in which case we have seen the Us/Israel do not care about rules of war (General Allahadadi [Israel] and General Solemani [US]).



Then how should Iran change the way it goes about things in Syria? Not trying patronize you just wanted to know. 

Also it really should be noted that although it is true that Israel has destroyed Iranian supplied equipment in Syria, we really don't know to what extent the destruction actually is and how much of what Israeli is hitting is actually Iranian and not some empty building or other infrastructure that Israel says is Iranian. All we have to really go on is what the Israelis are telling the public and Israel isn't the best source for honest information. 

As far as I'm concerned the only thing I can really knock Iran on is its inability to strike Israel back when clearly it has/had to right to do so. And yes I do know that Israel will hit back "harder" but recent reports coming from Syria are rather enlightening as to what Iran is actively doing to counter-act Israels unabated bombardment.



TruthHurtz said:


> Do you have numbers for that? Do you even know what is being delivered? No, stop making assumptions. Israel has a habit of hitting empty warehouses or getting their missiles shot down mid flight.



The issue we should be taking here is one of principle not necessarily the physical destruction of easily replenished arms. 

Iran has allowed itself to be bombed by an enemy state (Israel) who won't stop hitting Iranian/Allied forces in Syria. How to go about changing this dynamic is beyond me since all I really see is Iran weathering the strikes and completing its objectives in spite of the bombings. 

Israel can gloat all day about their "anti-Iranian operations" in Syria but the overall picture shouldn't be lost within all the military statistical jargon as well but TheImmortal point still does stand.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

TheImmortal said:


> You didn’t even argue my point you went on a brainless tangent because I pointed out something that doesn’t fit your “rah rah Iran is does everything great” narrative.
> 
> No one is arguing Iran’s geopolitical gains certainly not me if you even pay attention to this forum.
> 
> Iraq barely cost Iran anything. Yemen is not costing Iran much. Syria has cost Iran over 20B dollars since 2010 at the bare minimum (1-2B a year expense) this is besides the loans it made and cost of sensitive tech shipments.
> 
> But both of you users are much like the less intelligent Pakistani users of this board, when you cannot debate the topic at hand...go on a unrelated tangent.
> 
> My point still stands and if you can’t debate it get lost. Iran has lost significant amounts of resources to air strikes, that money could have gone to funding important R&D programs or future arms purchases. If you think that’s not a big deal for a country with the military budget of $20B then you are the one that needs to “zoom out”.
> 
> 
> 
> There’s planes coming in daily. You have to imagine in the last 10 years the amount of weapons Syria has used/lost/got destroyed. So anything from ammo to small arms to anti tank etc need to be constantly replenished and until Russia joined the fray...Iran was the only true supplier.
> 
> Beaides this is the arms designated for Hezbollah and Proxies. Like a game of cat and mouse Iran tries to hide these shipments among the ordinary weapon transfers to Syria. It’s Israel’s job to determine which is which.
> 
> Irans options are limited the land path is also limited. Fastest way is by air and even if they land in Russian protected zone upon transfer to Lebanon usually the shipments will be hit. If Iran can get arms into Gaza it can transfer arms into Lebanon, the goal from Israel’s standpoint was to limit the amount that successfully get through. At least easier surviving 50 F-110’s in the future versus 1,000 F-110s.
> 
> I have a feeling Israel does the “tap policy” when they attack shipments meaning that they first hit close to the shipment to warn the crew to escape then destroy it.
> 
> I’m sure that Iranian lives have been lost in bombing of bases (T4 Base-Iranian drone center was hit). But it’s to Israel’s advantage to keep the blood toll low in order to not exact immediate revenge. Unless the target is a HVT (high value target) in which case we have seen the Us/Israel do not care about rules of war (General Allahadadi [Israel] and General Solemani [US]).


Well, I did answer your mostly small question.....I did it by zooming out  Sure, Iran has lost billions but look at the winnings, it's a small price to pay! War is expensive and wasteful. Good news is unlike all the flunkys in the neighborhood we make most of our arms so it's not as big of a loss as you think........regardless, did I mention it's worth it?



Kastor said:


> Bro...zoom out a little and take your head out of the sand. Iraq was a linchpin for the Neo-con ME policy...it is now firmly in Iran's pocket, Syria, that was supposed to be US's gift to Israel is no longer in play and it has now solidified it's allegiance to Iran. The Yemen war that the U.S. encouraged and bankrolled has blown up in MBS's face. The arrogant bastards S.A. and UAE for the first time are now seeking dialogue/detente with Iran. Trump/Pompeo's maximum pressure has not borne any fruit. The Nato alliance and the European relations are in tatters. China for the first time is openly flaunting anti sanctions measures by doing business in Iran....the EU is coming out with a SWIFT alternative that will circumvent the U.S. Dollar in trade.........Yep, so much winning...sure, you guys go ahead and pat yourselves on the back for bombing some trucks in Syria.



On other fronts, I saw an article in the Jerusalem Post on my Iran feed today....they basically took my post and expanded on it, Lol.....As I often said this is place is chuckful of spooks. So be careful what you spill.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> You didn’t even argue my point you went on a brainless tangent because I pointed out something that doesn’t fit your “rah rah Iran is does everything great” narrative.
> 
> No one is arguing Iran’s geopolitical gains certainly not me if you even pay attention to this forum.
> 
> Iraq barely cost Iran anything. Yemen is not costing Iran much. Syria has cost Iran over 20B dollars since 2010 at the bare minimum (1-2B a year expense) this is besides the loans it made and cost of sensitive tech shipments.
> 
> But both of you users are much like the less intelligent Pakistani users of this board, when you cannot debate the topic at hand...go on a unrelated tangent.
> 
> My point still stands and if you can’t debate it get lost. Iran has lost significant amounts of resources to air strikes, that money could have gone to funding important R&D programs or future arms purchases. If you think that’s not a big deal for a country with the military budget of $20B then you are the one that needs to “zoom out”.
> 
> 
> 
> There’s planes coming in daily. You have to imagine in the last 10 years the amount of weapons Syria has used/lost/got destroyed. So anything from ammo to small arms to anti tank etc need to be constantly replenished and until Russia joined the fray...Iran was the only true supplier.
> 
> Beaides this is the arms designated for Hezbollah and Proxies. Like a game of cat and mouse Iran tries to hide these shipments among the ordinary weapon transfers to Syria. It’s Israel’s job to determine which is which.
> 
> Irans options are limited the land path is also limited. Fastest way is by air and even if they land in Russian protected zone upon transfer to Lebanon usually the shipments will be hit. If Iran can get arms into Gaza it can transfer arms into Lebanon, the goal from Israel’s standpoint was to limit the amount that successfully get through. At least easier surviving 50 F-110’s in the future versus 1,000 F-110s.
> 
> I have a feeling Israel does the “tap policy” when they attack shipments meaning that they first hit close to the shipment to warn the crew to escape then destroy it.
> 
> I’m sure that Iranian lives have been lost in bombing of bases (T4 Base-Iranian drone center was hit). But it’s to Israel’s advantage to keep the blood toll low in order to not exact immediate revenge. Unless the target is a HVT (high value target) in which case we have seen the Us/Israel do not care about rules of war (General Allahadadi [Israel] and General Solemani [US]).










A picture is worth more than a thousand words.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah

I don't know about Iran losing "billions" ?

Iran produces weapons for pennies on the dollar and despite Israel's best efforts during the past 7 years, the vast majority of the equipment is safely making it into the hands of the intended recipients in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

Some of the Israeli missiles do get intercepted, while others hit decoy sites, while others still hit sites that are inconsequential in the long run. Of course, every so often the Israeli's hit a jackpot but their success rate is not as high as they would like you to believe.

Again looking at the big picture, they're just scratching the surface paint. I wouldn't even call it a dent. 



TheImmortal said:


> My point still stands. Iran has lost billions in bombed arms, bases, and personnel.
> 
> Sure for a country like US, losing billions is merely a rounding error. However, for the armed forces of Iran as well as Iran the country...it hurts a lot more.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> I don't know about Iran losing "billions" ?
> 
> Iran produces weapons for pennies on the dollar and despite Israel's best efforts during the past 7 years, the vast majority of the equipment is safely making it into the hands of the intended recipients in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.
> 
> Some of the Israeli missiles do get intercepted, while others hit decoy sites, while others still hit sites that are inconsequential in the long run. Of course, every so often the Israeli's hit a jackpot but their success rate is not as high as they would like you to believe.
> 
> Again looking at the big picture, they're just scratching the surface paint. I wouldn't even call it a dent.



And your post is based on what? Your dad work in Iranian intelligence? No it’s based on your opinion with nothing to be able to back it up.

Laughable for you to assume what makes it through or doesn’t it make it through. And TELS, F-110s, buildings, bunkers, storage facility,Etc do not cost “pennies on the dollar”. Iran’s cost of arms production is certainly lower than Western countries, but some delusional members of this board make it seem a F-110 cost less than a Toyota to make in Iran. Absurd.


----------



## sha ah

>And your post is based on what? Your dad work in Iranian intelligence?

What are you even talking about ?

>No it’s based on your opinion with nothing to be able to back it up.

Do I really need to show you hard evidence to prove that most of Iran's weapons shipments are getting into the hands of PMU in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, SAA in Syria and the Houthis in Yemen ?

>Laughable for you to assume what makes it through or doesn’t it make it through.

Show me evidence to prove that the majority of Iran's weapons transfers are foiled by Israeli airstrikes

>And TELS, F-110s, buildings, bunkers, storage facility,Etc do not cost “pennies on the dollar”. Iran’s cost of arms >production is certainly lower than Western countries, but some delusional members of this board make it seem a >F-110 cost less than a Toyota to make in Iran. Absurd.

Yeah weapons made in Iran, compared to western equivalents do cost pennies on the dollar. Less than half but sometimes a quarter, sometimes less.

How many airstrikes do the Israeli's even conduct ? 1 or 2 every month or 2 ? Is this supposed to be enough to destroy most of Iran's shipments ?

Are you telling me that Iran isn't taking larger items apart and sending them in components through various transport methods ?

You really believe that Iran doesn't have any decoy sites or that Iran doesn't feed the Israeli intelligence false information ?

You really believe that none of the Israeli missiles miss their targets, hit decoy sites or are shot down ?

Do I really need to show you pictures of Tomahawks which the Russians were able to collect from Syria ? I'm pretty sure that you're already well aware of all this.

War is never just one sided and for the most part Israeli strikes on Syria are just a show of force and a common method for Israeli politicians to garner support among their voter base.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

Shawnee said:


> A picture is worth more than a thousand words.


The badass Zionist troll @TheImmortal can't understand Persian.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

Aramagedon said:


> The badass Zionist troll @TheImmortal can't understand Persian.



I am afraid he can...


----------



## Ich

Any news about a new iranian fighter jet?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Ich said:


> Any news about a new iranian fighter jet?



General Mohammad Zalbeigi stated a new fighter jet will be revealed in the near future:



> “God willing, we will witness the designing and production of aircraft built at the IRIAF in the near future, he said, vowing that the new aircraft will be unveiled soon.



https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...er-says-new-homegrown-aircraft-to-be-unveiled

No further information has been given till today. There are many candidates, such the next version of the F-5 platform, Shafaq and perhaps something new all-together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

ok


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> So far the Israeli's, Americans and allies have been trying for years to force Iran to leave Syria without much success.


No lie detected. I hate to say this but i will say this again- I am very sure that the SYrian conflict and Yemen conflict are Iran's "preferred" type of warfare. Syria has been hard for Iran,but Yemen was like the typical type of warfare Iran loves- Big stakes, Top enemies available to be hit, cheap investment, low risk of backfire....it was too good to ignore. Iran has always dreamed about being at Israel's doorstep. I am 100% sure Iranian is not leaving Syria anymore. As a matter of fact, this might be Iran's BIGGEST expeditionary investment ever. Its not hard to understand why Iran hasnt left Syria though - the investment has been huge, and its an opportunity Iran didnt envision having this fast- A direct Iranian governmental face-to-face with Israel. This supports Iranian goal of push for Quds. These are just my observations by the way. I'm not supporting Israel, or Iran, or US or Canada or even India. I dont give a fuk who did what for who at the end of the day, my IQ isnt that low to waste my energy on that.



sha ah said:


> I don't know about Iran losing "billions" ?
> 
> Iran produces weapons for pennies on the dollar and despite Israel's best efforts during the past 7 years, the vast majority of the equipment is safely making it into the hands of the intended recipients in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.
> 
> Some of the Israeli missiles do get intercepted, while others hit decoy sites, while others still hit sites that are inconsequential in the long run. Of course, every so often the Israeli's hit a jackpot but their success rate is not as high as they would like you to believe.
> 
> Again looking at the big picture, they're just scratching the surface paint. I wouldn't even call it a dent.


GOod points. To top it off, Israel doesnt hit IRGC personnel most of the time. Even when ISrael did, they probably killed 10s of IRGC personnel MAX. Just like the Turks who say Assad killed a millions "SUnnis in Idlib" cant show us stats to support this, the people who said Iran lost "100s" of soldiers, well that is possible, but at most, its low 100s, MAX. Israel knows that if it kills IRGC more and more, IDF people will have to start dying soon. Thats why they are so paranoid on the border with hezbollah now,because they know payback is probably around the corner..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

According to Wikipedia Iran has sustained the following casualties in the Syrian conflict.




*Iran:* 558 [28]



*Liwa Fatemiyoun:*
2,000+ killed
8,000+ wounded[29]



*Lebanese Hezbollah* 1,800+ fighters killed[30]
*Iraqi Shia Militia:*
1,308+ militiamen killed[31]

Keep in mind, the very first source you click on (28) takes you to "The Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington" and the article is called "Fractured Iraqi Shia militias in Syria"

The second (29) is ANF news, a pro PKK/YPG/SDF outlet

The third (30) is the Jerusalem post

The fourth (31) is from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, some guy sitting in an apartment in London with Mi6 protection, probably James Bond himself watching over him.

Judging by the fact that most of these sources are extremely biased and prejudiced against Iran, I would say that it's very unlikely that the casualties could be higher than what you see here.

There's a good chance that the real casualty count is much lower although it should also be noted that most these numbers are from 2018. Regardless Iranian involvement seems to have slowed down significantly since the US sanctions were re-imposed in 2018 and since the situation for Assad has stabilized in recent years.

Therefore even if we were to assume that the numbers above are actually accurate then it's unlikely that they have fluctuated very much since 2018.





925boy said:


> No lie detected. I hate to say this but i will say this again- I am very sure that the SYrian conflict and Yemen conflict are Iran's "preferred" type of warfare. Syria has been hard for Iran,but Yemen was like the typical type of warfare Iran loves- Big stakes, Top enemies available to be hit, cheap investment, low risk of backfire....it was too good to ignore. Iran has always dreamed about being at Israel's doorstep. I am 100% sure Iranian is not leaving Syria anymore. As a matter of fact, this might be Iran's BIGGEST expeditionary investment ever. Its not hard to understand why Iran hasnt left Syria though - the investment has been huge, and its an opportunity Iran didnt envision having this fast- A direct Iranian governmental face-to-face with Israel. This supports Iranian goal of push for Quds. These are just my observations by the way. I'm not supporting Israel, or Iran, or US or Canada or even India. I dont give a fuk who did what for who at the end of the day, my IQ isnt that low to waste my energy on that.
> 
> 
> GOod points. To top it off, Israel doesnt hit IRGC personnel most of the time. Even when ISrael did, they probably killed 10s of IRGC personnel MAX. Just like the Turks who say Assad killed a millions "SUnnis in Idlib" cant show us stats to support this, the people who said Iran lost "100s" of soldiers, well that is possible, but at most, its low 100s, MAX. Israel knows that if it kills IRGC more and more, IDF people will have to start dying soon. Thats why they are so paranoid on the border with hezbollah now,because they know payback is probably around the corner..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran to mass produce Saba helicopter: official*




TEHRAN, Jun. 07 (MNA) – Second Brigadier General Afshin Khajeh Fard, head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), said that the Islamic Republic seeks to mass-produce Saba helicopter in 2020.

He made the remarks on Sunday, noting that Iran Aviation Industries is making great progress by relying on its experts and the capacity of the Armed Forces and the knowledge-based companies.

“Iran’s Helicopter Support and Renovation Company is capable to upgrade and equip all helicopters of the Armed Forces along with those utilized for firefighting and rescue operations with advance systems,” he emphasized.

He further noted that due to taking necessary measures, manufacturing spare parts for the helicopter fleet of the country currently takes less time.

Referring to the knowledge of Iranian experts on designing and upgrading aviation systems, he said, “Experts in the Iran Aviation Industries Organization are working around the clock to mass-produce Saba helicopter in the near future.”

FA/ FNA13990318000910


https://en.mehrnews.com/news/159536/Iran-to-mass-produce-Saba-helicopter-official

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## hussainb72

Philosopher said:


> *Iran to mass produce Saba helicopter: official*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Jun. 07 (MNA) – Second Brigadier General Afshin Khajeh Fard, head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), said that the Islamic Republic seeks to mass-produce Saba helicopter in 2020.
> 
> He made the remarks on Sunday, noting that Iran Aviation Industries is making great progress by relying on its experts and the capacity of the Armed Forces and the knowledge-based companies.
> 
> “Iran’s Helicopter Support and Renovation Company is capable to upgrade and equip all helicopters of the Armed Forces along with those utilized for firefighting and rescue operations with advance systems,” he emphasized.
> 
> He further noted that due to taking necessary measures, manufacturing spare parts for the helicopter fleet of the country currently takes less time.
> 
> Referring to the knowledge of Iranian experts on designing and upgrading aviation systems, he said, “Experts in the Iran Aviation Industries Organization are working around the clock to mass-produce Saba helicopter in the near future.”
> 
> FA/ FNA13990318000910
> 
> 
> https://en.mehrnews.com/news/159536/Iran-to-mass-produce-Saba-helicopter-official


That's some great news. I think iran needs to improve its attacking and front line support capabilities by upgrading it's current helicopters and producing more lighter and heavier support helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> He further noted that due to taking necessary measures, manufacturing spare parts for the helicopter fleet of the country currently takes less time.


i used to say Iran produces f-5 replicas to boost it's industrial sector, AF commander also said kowsar production line is better equipped than euro fighter production line and now this. obviously after establishing industries needed for aviation production, we will see more success.
IRGC ordering shaheed-285 production for PANHA, IRGC ordering fotrus from MoD now this. seems like we are producing our own turbo prop/shaft engines now. owj might be a weak engine for fighter jets but it will enable us to bake some bad *** engines for helicopter and transport planes/drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## foxhoundbis

sha ah said:


> ...a deal would go something like this. 60 x SU-27/30/35 variants are sent to Iran as soon as they're ready with technology transfers. Another 60-120 can be built in Iran, perhaps with 20 being built every year. Aside .... SU-27/30/34/35, Iran could also sign a deal for atleast 20-40 SU-57's. Some MIG-35s would also be a good option ...


It is not an insult friend, but in my view, U seem to be somehow naive.
Didn't you realize that the existence of Israel is not only due to the help of Western countries to the Jewish state, but *mostly thanks to Russia, and China*. I remember during the 90's and 2000's Israelis and US high responsibles rushing to Moscow to implore Russian leaders to not sell not only S-300, Pantsir, Mig-31, and SU-30 to Iran and Syria but they had been imploring Russian leaders to not equip Iran and Syria with just AK's ammunitions because Russia produces some of them able to penetrate any bulletproof, and Hummers. No use to talk you about ammunitions able to down AH-64, and F-16 like SA-14, SA-24, just as the redoubtable SSN-X-26 in order allow US fleets, to swagger along Iranian, and syrian coasts, and to allow US armored divisions to swagger across Iraqi, Lebanon, Palestinian 's streets. Do not forget that Russia, as China *agreed, complied*.

The deal U hopped is far to be obvious. Such technology's transfer means a political decision and a very hard choice for the Kremlin's leaders. If there were Brejnev, Kossygin, etc...It would not be a problem, but with this actual administration in Moscow, it would be doubtful.
If they go through this deal, what does it means? It means clearly the end of Israel. Neither IDF, nor US can sustain a such challenge. During Vietnam's war US lost more than 4.000 -fixed wings- aircraft, US's economy was at knees US were expelled out of Indochina, US's puppet regime called the government of South Vietnam disappeared and all against VPAF composed by Mig-21, Mig-17 and Mig-19, far to be the state of the art in that time. Moreover in that time, China provided North Vietnam's army, as FNL with bullets able to cripple any armored vehicles and helicopters. Hence US lost several thousands of helicopters.
Imagine the result now if Iran is equipped with these state of the arts Mig-35, SU-35? It does mean Russia and China will give up Israel, and West. In my view, it would be crazy.

I don't say a such deal is impossible, but in my views it would be doubtful. Nevertheless, North Korea can do it but has not yet the technology available at 100%. However, NK is fast progressing they are able to produce indigenous Mig-29 and its jet engines RD-33 around 80%. They are on the verge to succeed, once it will be done, undoubtedly Iran won't need absolutely Chinese or Russians' hardware.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

I said this once before and I am saying it again, iran shouldn't really import any aircrafts with the exception of very few heavy aircrafts in the class of the Su 35 to operate with the F 14s until iran has a heavy fighter ready for production.
What iran really needs to do and I think it has done some of the following is:
- To produce a turbofan version of the owj and upgrade all its F 5s to the kowsar standard and use the new engine with them.
- To design an engine in the class of the RD 33 and produce a medium fighter with the engine and mass produce it. Something in the class of the F 18 or the mig 29 with better range.
- Up scale its RD 33 design/use the knowledge to create a new engine, and also use any information it gets from the few heavy fighters it has bought to create the engine. Then it has to design and produce a heavy fighter aircraft.
- For support planes like tankers or AWACS, iran has shown it's own design of an airliner, it can convert that design for such use. Also for the engine, it can use one of the turbofan engines it has designed and convert them for the use on an airline aircraft.
Other than these additions, iran should also mass produce the bonanza and PC 7, as iran already has made local versions of them. These will be used for the turboprop training. And it can produce the Yasin for subsonic jet flight and the F 5 at the kowsar standard for supersonic training.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

hussainb72 said:


> I said this once before and I am saying it again, iran shouldn't really import any aircrafts with the exception of very few heavy aircrafts in the class of the Su 35 to operate with the F 14s until iran has a heavy fighter ready for production.
> What iran really needs to do and I think it has done some of the following is:
> - To produce a turbofan version of the owj and upgrade all its F 5s to the kowsar standard and use the new engine with them.
> - To design an engine in the class of the RD 33 and produce a medium fighter with the engine and mass produce it. Something in the class of the F 18 or the mig 29 with better range.
> - Up scale its RD 33 design/use the knowledge to create a new engine, and also use any information it gets from the few heavy fighters it has bought to create the engine. Then it has to design and produce a heavy fighter aircraft.
> - For support planes like tankers or AWACS, iran has shown it's own design of an airliner, it can convert that design for such use. Also for the engine, it can use one of the turbofan engines it has designed and convert them for the use on an airline aircraft.
> Other than these additions, iran should also mass produce the bonanza and PC 7, as iran already has made local versions of them. These will be used for the turboprop training. And it can produce the Yasin for subsonic jet flight and the F 5 at the kowsar standard for supersonic training.



Even if Iran had blueprint for RD-33, it still couldn’t replicate it.

US, Russia, and in a distant 3rd China can mass produce fighter jet engines in varying classes (light to heavy). Other countries have the capability such as European countries who personally opt to rely on US engines due to cost of production lines.

It’s almost impossible to find a foreign jet aboard made in a country that is not US/Russia/China that does not USE PARTS from one of those countries above in their engines. Pakistan uses Chinese parts, European/Indian partners use US parts.

So for Iran to build RD-33 and have every part be built in Iran (not 70% not 90% but 100%) will be very very challenging.

It can be done if Iran is willing to throw billions at it and gets a ToT boost to kickstart its industry. After all Iran was caught trying to steal F-35 jet engine blueprints. It wouldn’t risk espionage of that sort if it didn’t have a plan to use it domestically.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

hussainb72 said:


> I am afraid he can...


No the badass can't.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

*بزرگترین عملیات هوایی تاریخ ایران کمان 99 نیروی هوایی ارتش - مهمات قست 1*

https://www.aparat.com/v/i7Vjz

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mithridates

a funny thing i recently noticed about akhgar missile and qassed-3 cruise missile:










winglets and stabilizers except of being in 90 degrees positions are closer together to make more lift while compromising a little of maneuverability. it can increase the range. surprisingly new 2000 pound qased bombs utilize similar arrangement of winglet and stabilizers:




comparing to older qaseds:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Mithridates said:


> a funny thing i recently noticed about akhgar missile and qassed-3 cruise missile:
> View attachment 641244
> 
> View attachment 641247
> 
> 
> winglets and stabilizers except of being in 90 degrees positions are closer together to make more lift while compromising a little of maneuverability. it can increase the range. surprisingly new 2000 pound qased bombs utilize similar arrangement of winglet and stabilizers:
> View attachment 641258
> 
> comparing to older qaseds:
> View attachment 641259


I thought the reason was to be able to fit it under more variety of aircrafts given the low height of some of them when they are on the ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> I thought the reason was to be able to fit it under more variety of aircrafts given the low height of some of them when they are on the ground.








it was not a problem even for the older generation of qased.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

for English readers:
Iran holds the record of longest flight sortie in the world. during the Iran-Iraq war, general khalili flew for 14 hours and during so 8 times did air refueling using air force tankers.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## QWECXZ

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 641890
> 
> 
> for English readers:
> Iran holds the record of longest flight sortie in the world. during the Iran-Iraq war, general khalili flew for 12 hours and during so 8 times did air refueling using air force tankers.


14 hours.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 641890
> 
> 
> for English readers:
> Iran holds the record of longest flight sortie in the world. during the Iran-Iraq war, general khalili flew for 14 hours and during so 8 times did air refueling using air force tankers.


the most amazing part is he did it with an F-14 one of the most maintenance hungry aircraft in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

some high quality images of AF to make dear users like this:







Mithridates said:


>


in this image leading edge flaps, refueling probe, air flow pressure controlling ramp and that extendable winglets (i don't know the scientific fancy word  ) are visible.



Hack-Hook said:


> the most amazing part is he did it with an F-14 one of the most maintenance hungry aircraft in the world.


a cobra pilot was saying once that each one hour of flight exhaust pilot so badly that he have to rest at least two hours, now imagine the fighter pilot status after 14 hour of flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## hussainb72

Were any F14 external fuel tanks delivered with the F14s? I never saw an Iranian F14 equiped with external fuel tanks. Also if Iran didnt get any, did they ever think of making some by themselves or using those pylons for something else like equipping bombs or missiles?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

hussainb72 said:


> Were any F14 external fuel tanks delivered with the F14s? I never saw an Iranian F14 equiped with external fuel tanks. Also if Iran didnt get any, did they ever think of making some by themselves or using those pylons for something else like equipping bombs or missiles?








at least in one case the AF installed two fuel tanks to f-14. regarding the arming f-14 for ground attack:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## hussainb72

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 641936
> 
> 
> at least in one case the AF installed two fuel tanks to f-14. regarding the arming f-14 for ground attack:
> 
> View attachment 641929
> View attachment 641930
> View attachment 641931
> View attachment 641934


Well I knew that the Iranian F14s had the ability to carry bombs, but I was asking about the pylons under the intakes where the fuel tanks are placed. Most Iranian F14s dont use the fuel tanks, so using those pylons under the intakes for something else would make sense and would increase the payload of the tomcats.
Also thanks for the pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

Mithridates said:


> regarding the arming f-14 for ground attack


I knew they carried bombs. but do they carry smart bombs OR nothing is said about that? (Imo, they can carry all sorts of homemade stuff, at least if I were in charge, I would upgrade them to be able to do so...)


----------



## hussainb72

makranman said:


> I knew they carried bombs. but do they carry smart bombs OR nothing is said about that? (Imo, they can carry all sorts of homemade stuff, at least if I were in charge, I would upgrade them to be able to do so...)


Well they have to upgrade the electronics of the F14 first so that the sensors on the bombs or missiles can be used by the computers on board and displayed on the screens in the cockpit. I am sure some of the F14s have been upgraded to be able to carry such equipment. I also heard some have been upgraded to carry cruise missiles, but I am not sure if it has been tested or shown.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

hussainb72 said:


> Well I knew that the Iranian F14s had the ability to carry bombs, but I was asking about the pylons under the intakes where the fuel tanks are placed. Most Iranian F14s dont use the fuel tanks, so using those pylons under the intakes for something else would make sense and would increase the payload of the tomcats.
> Also thanks for the pictures.


i don't know about the pylons but US tomcats also were carrying fuel pods under the intake. at least i never saw under the pylons. it might be structural limit but i'm not sure. also f-14 was mostly interceptor and to be honest quite a long range interceptor (800 km combat radius). even right now super hornet can't reach it's combat radius while going through several upgrades. also it had aerial refueling capability and the most long range missiles in it's era. so it never required an additional fuel tank i guess.


makranman said:


> I knew they carried bombs. but do they carry smart bombs OR nothing is said about that? (Imo, they can carry all sorts of homemade stuff, at least if I were in charge, I would upgrade them to be able to do so...)


well if drones can carry satellite guided bombs then f-14 definitely can too. EO/IR guided munitions also just need an MFD to aim on and home to their targets. and if i'm not wrong, f-14 has 5 of them. laser guided bombs need pod or ground forward deployment. 
but overall i don't think AF would risk the planes and use them as bomber in a conflict except some examples which lost their radars in incidents.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

Mithridates said:


> well if drones can carry satellite guided bombs then f-14 definitely can too. EO/IR guided munitions also just need an MFD to aim on and home to their targets. and if i'm not wrong, f-14 has 5 of them. laser guided bombs need pod or ground forward deployment.
> but overall i don't think AF would risk the planes and use them as bomber in a conflict except some examples which lost their radars in incidents.


I dont think the original MFDs on the tomcat are compatible with the EO and IR seekers. Those might need to be replaced by newer RGB MFDs. Anyway I think Iran is very well capable of modernising the tomcat with completely new digital avionics and a full modernization of the radar, and I think some of them already recieved such an upgrade, but there is no evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

hussainb72 said:


> I dont think the original MFDs on the tomcat are compatible with the EO and IR seekers. Those might need to be replaced by newer RGB MFDs. Anyway I think Iran is very well capable of modernising the tomcat with completely new digital avionics and a full modernization of the radar, and I think some of them already recieved such an upgrade, but there is no evidence.


every MFD which can show images the images of missile/bomb seeker is sufficient:





most of the job is done by the missile itself, you just have to give it the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Allegedly, the second yasin prototype.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273084643810709504

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## sahureka2

It seems that the nose is larger, but it could be a consequence of some manipulations of the photo on which the presence of at least one technician has been "censored"
The white arrow indicates the legs and part of the body, but the pink arrow indicates that the rest of the body and the technician's face cannot be seen.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sahureka2

sahureka2 said:


> It seems that the nose is larger, but it could be a consequence of some manipulations of the photo on which the presence of at least one technician has been "censored"
> The white arrow indicates the legs and part of the body, but the pink arrow indicates that the rest of the body and the technician's face cannot be seen.



Sorry, my mistake, looking at a more detailed photo, one of the technicians' censorship must be excluded.
I was deceived by the angle of the first image, in this it is evident that part of the face and body cannot be seen as it is working at the jet engine propelling nozzle.




However, this aircraft shows numerous differences compared to the first prototype that flew in 2019

Inside the building it seems to see the template for making the wings

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shawnee

دوستان تحریم ها ممکنه لغو بشه یا نشه یا امر بین الامرین​
ولی یه چیزی از من گفتن​
پشت گوشتونو دیدین سوخو و میگم تو ایران میبینین​......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Interesting video

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

A picture apparently showing an IRIAF pilot sitting in front of a J-10 in a Chinese airforce Museum. I personally would not read too much into this.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274693502123806720

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> A picture apparently showing an IRIAF pilot sitting in front of a J-10 in a Chinese airforce Museum. I personally would not read too much into this.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274693502123806720


And now we really can’t read in to it 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274741813765648384

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> And now we really can’t read in to it
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274741813765648384



Yes, even the ex defence minister Dehghan had said Iran had no interest in this fighter jet. Inshallah we will see a giant leap in our air force in the near future. Just like how we're bombarded with constant good news in the air defence, missile, UAV fields, one day this will be a similar case in our airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> Yes, even the ex defence minister Dehghan had said Iran had no interest in this fighter jet. Inshallah we will see a giant leap in our air force in the near future. Just like how we're bombarded with constant good news in the air defence, missile, UAV fields, one day this will be a similar case in our airforce.


That’s a relief tbh. Personally I am one of those strongly against any type of larger defense purchase. We can build everything ourselves. Resources. Knowledge. Time. That’s all it takes. And for every year we have more of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> That’s a relief tbh. Personally I am one of those strongly against any type of larger defense purchase. We can build everything ourselves. Resources. Knowledge. Time. That’s all it takes. And for every year we have more of it.



Correct me if I am wrong, but has the Iranian parliament not barred the purchase of foreign defence hardwares? Or am I mistaken? I agree, given how cost effectively Iran is developing extremely advanced systems such as missiles, air defence and so on, I find it hard to envisage Iran dishing out billions to purchase anything. A fighter jet deal *may* be signed, but that will certainly have to involve Transfer Of Technology (TOT) and/or in house manufacturing. Again, these are the words of ex DM Dehghan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

i personally hope we can reverse engineer the Pratt and Whitney TF-30 in near future. this would be a real leap in our aviation industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> i personally hope we can reverse engineer the Pratt and Whitney TF-30 in near future. this would be a real leap in our aviation industry.



I feel Iran would have allocated various teams to start the reverse engineering studies of different type of aircraft engines years ago. I have no doubt most of these major jet engines like RD-33 have been years in the reverse engineering process. Iran has known for decades how important and of a bottle-neck jet engine technology is. We will see new engines soon. I recall few years ago Dehghan stated they are working on an engine with 4x the thrust of the OWJ. From what I recall, we have gone past the time the jet was expected to be ready, maybe it is but they have not revealed it yet. Then again given how complex this field is, delays are almost always inevitable.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> 4x the thrust of the OWJ


this match's the output thrust of tf-30.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> i personally hope we can reverse engineer the Pratt and Whitney TF-30 in near future. this would be a real leap in our aviation industry.



TF-30 is not a good engine to reverse engineer. It’s high maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> TF-30 is not a good engine to reverse engineer. It’s high maintenance.


yeah service cost and maintenance time wise it's not that good but it's fuel consumption is the same as RD-33 (the version we have on our mig-29s) while it produces more thrust. also i guess we are familiar with it after 40 years of operating it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussainb72

Mithridates said:


> yeah service cost and maintenance time wise it's not that good but it's fuel consumption is the same as RD-33 (the version we have on our mig-29s) while it produces more thrust. also i guess we are familiar with it after 40 years of operating it.


I think it's better to reverse engineer the RD-33. Iran should be able to improve the design and the fuel economy, as well as the thrust produced. Then it can be used for a medium sized fighter and upscale the engine design for a heavy aircraft. This means that Iran wont have to buy anything from anyone. They just need some time and research to develop their own fighter designs which I am sure there are a couple around, and the engines should be reverse engineered and improved. Iran already has experience when it comes to avionics, radars and optics, so they can use that in their projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

The SU-57 is powered by AL-41 an AL-31 derivative.

The interesting thing is J-10 is powered by AL-31 or Chinese version W-10. So if Iran can secure license/ToT production of W-10, it will be a *gamechanger *in the field of Iranian domestic fighter development as it will allow moderate and heavy fighters in the F-35 class to be built.

The 3 hurdles Iran needs to overcome to build a domestic fighter

1) Serialization of a powerful engine (AL-21 or AL-31 class)

2) Mass production of titanium and strong metal alloys

3) Improvement in aircraft subsystem, Radar, communication, EW/ECW, and targeting pod technology.



Mithridates said:


> yeah service cost and maintenance time wise it's not that good but it's fuel consumption is the same as RD-33 (the version we have on our mig-29s) while it produces more thrust. also i guess we are familiar with it after 40 years of operating it.



RD-33 size:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan
*Length:* 166.50 in
*Diameter:* 40.94 in

TF-30
*Length:* 241.7 in. 
*Diameter:* 48.9 in. 

They aren’t same size engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> The SU-57 is powered by AL-41 an AL-31 derivative.
> 
> The interesting thing is J-10 is powered by AL-31 or Chinese version W-10. So if Iran can secure license/ToT production of W-10, it will be a *gamechanger *in the field of Iranian domestic fighter development as it will allow moderate and heavy fighters in the F-35 class to be built.
> 
> The 3 hurdles Iran needs to overcome to build a domestic fighter
> 
> 1) Serialization of a powerful engine (AL-21 or AL-31 class)
> 
> 2) Mass production of titanium and strong metal alloys
> 
> 3) Improvement in aircraft subsystem, Radar, communication, EW/ECW, and targeting pod technology.
> 
> 
> 
> RD-33 size:
> *Length:* 166.50 in
> *Diameter:* 40.94 in
> 
> TF-30
> *Length:* 241.7 in.
> *Diameter:* 48.9 in.
> 
> They aren’t same size engines.


I know they are not in same size, compare it with mirage 2000 engine. the snecma engine is also based on tf-30 TOT.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> I know they are not in same size, compare it with mirage 2000 engine. the snecma engine is also based on tf-30 TOT.



The issue is Iranian engineers lean towards Western engine architecture versus Eastern.

Unless Iran plans to buy US aircraft in the future it should abandon Western engine architecture and embrace Russian/Chinese engine architecture.

Unfortunately with the attempt to steal F-35 engine blueprints. It doesn’t seem like Iran is giving up its Western architecture influence. The Owj engine is a testament that Iran plans to continue down that path.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

*Over 70% of Aircraft Parts Made in Iran: Defense Minister*
*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran has gained the technical know-how to manufacture more than 70 percent of airplane and helicopter components inside the country, a lawmaker quoted Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami as saying.*

In an address to the Parliament on Tuesday, General Hatami said Iran has attained self-sufficiency in producing many aircraft components, MP Abolfazl Abutorabi told Tasnim.

The defense minister said that local technicians are manufacturing more than 70 percent of the airplane and helicopter components inside the country, in such a way that Iran is not reliant on foreigners any more, the lawmaker added.

Although Iran was not a manufacturer of planes and choppers and despite the large variety of aircraft, the Islamic Republic has managed to manufacture the components for repair and overhaul of the aircraft, Abutorabi quoted the minister as saying.

The MP also noted that General Hatami gave an assurance that Iran is in perfect conditions in terms of defense capabilities and dismissed concerns about the defense industry.

Iranian military experts and technicians have in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of indigenous equipment, making the armed forces self-sufficient in the arms sphere.

Earlier this month, an Iranian Defense Ministry official unveiled plans for the mass production of homegrown helicopter Saba-248.

In February 2018, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei called for efforts to maintain and boost Iran’s defense capabilities, hitting back at the enemies for disputing the country’s missile program.

“Without a moment of hesitation, the country must move to acquire whatever is necessary for defense, even if the whole world is opposed to it,” Ayatollah Khamenei said at the time.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...-aircraft-parts-made-in-iran-defense-minister

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shawnee

Three Kowsar planes delivered so far.

https://www.farsnews.ir/isfahan/news/13990405000145/سپاه-و-ارتش-بهترین-ترکیب-دفاعی-برای-کشور-در-آینده-رویدادهای-مبارکی

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Shams313

Shawnee said:


> Three Kowsar planes delivered so far.
> 
> https://www.farsnews.ir/isfahan/news/13990405000145/سپاه-و-ارتش-بهترین-ترکیب-دفاعی-برای-کشور-در-آینده-رویدادهای-مبارکی


wheres the camouflage??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

https://www.iribnews.ir/files/fa/news/1399/4/5/4999206_156.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> The SU-57 is powered by AL-41 an AL-31 derivative.
> 
> The interesting thing is J-10 is powered by AL-31 or Chinese version W-10. So if Iran can secure license/ToT production of W-10, it will be a *gamechanger *in the field of Iranian domestic fighter development as it will allow moderate and heavy fighters in the F-35 class to be built.
> 
> The 3 hurdles Iran needs to overcome to build a domestic fighter
> 
> 1) Serialization of a powerful engine (AL-21 or AL-31 class)
> 
> 2) Mass production of titanium and strong metal alloys
> 
> 3) Improvement in aircraft subsystem, Radar, communication, EW/ECW, and targeting pod technology.
> 
> 
> 
> RD-33 size:
> *Length:* 166.50 in
> *Diameter:* 40.94 in
> 
> TF-30
> *Length:* 241.7 in.
> *Diameter:* 48.9 in.
> 
> They aren’t same size engines.



Yup! I would just say resolving the metallurgy and composite alloy problem would be the most important issue because if you resolve that fabricating engines would be far less of a problem as for the subsystems that's gonna require time and years of upgrade and doesn't necessarily have to happen all at once.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Shams313 said:


> wheres the camouflage??


they are for acrojet team.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Xerxes22

mohammad45 said:


>


Looks absolutely gorgeous from these angles.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> they are for acrojet team.



Why does acrojet team need new planes?

Iranian airforce decision making is all over the place. They are the least competent Branch after Army. But as least Army has shown off Karrar and new MRAPs. Airforce is still parading around their achievement from 15 years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xerxes22

Are we even sure if this is for the acrojet team ? I mean this is sort of a big announcement. A domestically produced fighter jet, the first of its kind for Iran being handed over to the Air Force and it goes to the acrojet team ?


----------



## TheImmortal

Xerxes22 said:


> Are we even sure if this is for the acrojet team ? I mean this is sort of a big announcement. A domestically produced fighter jet, the first of its kind for Iran being handed over to the Air Force and it goes to the acrojet team ?



This is not first versions. I think They have built at least 3-4 so far before these ones. But yes why deliver them to acrojet team. Just shows you what Air Force thinks of this plane. It’s operations are quite limited to advanced jet trainer, light close air support, and apparently pleasing crowds of civilians.

Usually they build a squadron worth every “gen” sometimes more.


----------



## scimitar19

TheImmortal said:


> Why does acrojet team need new planes?
> 
> Iranian airforce decision making is all over the place. They are the least competent Branch after Army. But as least Army has shown off Karrar and new MRAPs. Airforce is still parading around their achievement from 15 years ago.


Old habits never die!
I would say budgetary constraints and general doctrine to focus resources on ballistic missile development and production. Producing any type of planes is not easy task and involves all industries.


----------



## Philosopher

It seems two of the planes are newly built and one is a modernised version of an already existing F-5. Also, we are hearing there were a great number of private/ knowledge based companies involved in these projects. This is very good news. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1276078897730330625

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## triangle

Philosopher said:


> It seems two of the planes are newly built and one is a modernised version of an already existing F-5. Also, we are hearing there were a great number of private/ knowledge based companies involved in these projects. This is very good news.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1276078897730330625



Yes, lots of companies involved in the project. See the vid below for the numbers and figures about the kowsar development. And at $7.5 million, it's great value for money and extrapolating to $15-20 million for a possible modern(4th gen) lightweight fighter in the class of the JF-17/Gripen.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> and one is a modernised version of an already existing F-5


which one bro??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> which one bro??



The model 3-7400. The other two are newly built.













__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1276093650271973377

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Hack-Hook

It's not strange that airforce send these planes to acrobat and team and want 5o use it as an advanced trainer.
The airplane is underpowered and till we build a more powerful engine this will be the fate of any plane we build.
Well unless we manage to build the airplane a lot lighter than what it is today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xerxes22

Hack-Hook said:


> It's not strange that airforce send these planes to acrobat and team and want 5o use it as an advanced trainer.
> The airplane is underpowered and till we build a more powerful engine this will be the fate of any plane we build.
> Well unless we manage to build the airplane a lot lighter than what it is today.



Then it seems that there’s no way but to get good Russian Interceptor with ToT. That’s the best Air Force option. With the constraints that Iran is likely to bear in the future , a formidable domestic all around capable fighter may not be feasible. I think focusing on Missiles as an alternative is a logical strategy. Missiles don’t need airfields and runways, but fighter jets do. Also u can’t sent jets to ur proxies. So all around focusing on missiles is a great choice

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Still a Long way to go Brothers. This is Just the beginning of a hard way.

Currently We need 3 types of fighter jets. Maybe more but these are the ones came to my mind. 
1) close air support/Trainer. We have kowsar for that purpose. It can also be a good platform for testing new weapons and new avionics/engines.
2) Heavy bomber
3) Heavy interceptor

For the case 3, we have old but still capable F14 Tomcats. But its never enough, given the costs of keeping Tomcats airworthy.

For case 2, we have old Mirage and Phantom. Still it doesnt meet IRIAF requirements. 

Case 2 and 3 were the very reason for interests in SU-30SMs. This Russian platform can well replace Phantoms and F14 fleet at same time. Problem is, its a grave mistake to acquire Sukhoi without TOT. So the question remains, would Sukhoi Company and Russian leaders agree to a TOT deal with Iran? Possibly but without TOT i believe itd be an absolute waste of Resources and its better to develop a light bomber/interceptor locally. Goodness of a homemade fighter would be, you can build as many as you wish and at anytime you like. No worries for spare parts.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

we should reverse engineer P&W TF-30 and mirage f-1 and integrate them. mirage f-1 combat range with 3.5 tons of ammunition is 425 km. crappy snecma atar fuel consumption is 1.01 lb/lbf. for TF-30 is almost 0.7 lb/lbf. it means if we change the engine, combat radius will expand by a factor of ~1.46. the combat range will increase to 600 km... T/W ratio to 0.8... way better than f-16. but these are just speculations and wishes. we should manage to RE some of our heavy/semi heavy engines first. RD-33, TF-30 and AL-21 are good engines for that purpose.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## nomi007



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 925boy

mohammad45 said:


> Still a Long way to go Brothers. This is Just the beginning of a hard way.
> 
> Currently We need 3 types of fighter jets. Maybe more but these are the ones came to my mind.
> 1) close air support/Trainer. We have kowsar for that purpose. It can also be a good platform for testing new weapons and new avionics/engines.
> 2) Heavy bomber
> 3) Heavy interceptor
> 
> For the case 3, we have old but still capable F14 Tomcats. But its never enough, given the costs of keeping Tomcats airworthy.
> 
> For case 2, we have old Mirage and Phantom. Still it doesnt meet IRIAF requirements.
> 
> Case 2 and 3 were the very reason for interests in SU-30SMs. This Russian platform can well replace Phantoms and F14 fleet at same time. Problem is, its a grave mistake to acquire Sukhoi without TOT. So the question remains, would Sukhoi Company and Russian leaders agree to a TOT deal with Iran? Possibly but without TOT i believe itd be an absolute waste of Resources and its better to develop a light bomber/interceptor locally. Goodness of a homemade fighter would be, you can build as many as you wish and at anytime you like. No worries for spare parts.


I think Russia will agree to Sukhoi ToT transfer with Iran if Iran:
1)Orders a LARGE order of them and 
2) Makes the Sukhoi is main jets flown in the IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

What Iran needs is to develop a "garden variety" stealth fighter platform which it can continue to upgrade for the next few decades. Many nations (other than USA-China-Russia) are developing such platforms, from South Korea, Japan, India, Indonesia and so on. Iran can import the needed components and continuously replace them with indigenous solutions as they are developed. From the most recent air force commander interview, he stated they are working on stealth fighter designs, but we need to wait and see how that materialises.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

You're talking about the late 90's and early 2000's but back then Russia was trying its best to establish economic ties with the west. Now after Crimea, the anti Russian semtiments in the west, sanctions and Syria things are different. 

Of course if Iran tries to purchase fighter jets from either Russia or China, no matter which model, Israeli lobby and US lobby will try their best to stop the deal. However in recent years with Iran and Russia finding some common ground in Syria and Russia knowing that Iran is a reliable partner, if Iran purchases over 100 fighter jets with technology transfers, then it's possible. Anything less and it probably won't happen.

I keep seeing people on here saying that Iran should not purchase anything without technology transfers. I'm guessing that Iran can maybe get its hands on something like the SU-30 with technology transfers but if part of that deal includes an option to also purchase something like the SU-35 or SU-57 without technology transfers, Iran should just take it. Even a small batch of them can make a significant difference if Iran gets into a regional conflict somewhere down the line, just like the F-14's helped Iran significantly during the 1980's

Everyone has a different opinion now, during peace time, but if a war breaks out everyone will have the same opinion "we should have acquired them when we had the chance, damn it" 



foxhoundbis said:


> It is not an insult friend, but in my view, U seem to be somehow naive.
> Didn't you realize that the existence of Israel is not only due to the help of Western countries to the Jewish state, but *mostly thanks to Russia, and China*. I remember during the 90's and 2000's Israelis and US high responsibles rushing to Moscow to implore Russian leaders to not sell not only S-300, Pantsir, Mig-31, and SU-30 to Iran and Syria but they had been imploring Russian leaders to not equip Iran and Syria with just AK's ammunitions because Russia produces some of them able to penetrate any bulletproof, and Hummers. No use to talk you about ammunitions able to down AH-64, and F-16 like SA-14, SA-24, just as the redoubtable SSN-X-26 in order allow US fleets, to swagger along Iranian, and syrian coasts, and to allow US armored divisions to swagger across Iraqi, Lebanon, Palestinian 's streets. Do not forget that Russia, as China *agreed, complied*.
> 
> The deal U hopped is far to be obvious. Such technology's transfer means a political decision and a very hard choice for the Kremlin's leaders. If there were Brejnev, Kossygin, etc...It would not be a problem, but with this actual administration in Moscow, it would be doubtful.
> If they go through this deal, what does it means? It means clearly the end of Israel. Neither IDF, nor US can sustain a such challenge. During Vietnam's war US lost more than 4.000 -fixed wings- aircraft, US's economy was at knees US were expelled out of Indochina, US's puppet regime called the government of South Vietnam disappeared and all against VPAF composed by Mig-21, Mig-17 and Mig-19, far to be the state of the art in that time. Moreover in that time, China provided North Vietnam's army, as FNL with bullets able to cripple any armored vehicles and helicopters. Hence US lost several thousands of helicopters.
> Imagine the result now if Iran is equipped with these state of the arts Mig-35, SU-35? It does mean Russia and China will give up Israel, and West. In my view, it would be crazy.
> 
> I don't say a such deal is impossible, but in my views it would be doubtful. Nevertheless, North Korea can do it but has not yet the technology available at 100%. However, NK is fast progressing they are able to produce indigenous Mig-29 and its jet engines RD-33 around 80%. They are on the verge to succeed, once it will be done, undoubtedly Iran won't need absolutely Chinese or Russians' hardware.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> What Iran needs is to develop a "garden variety" stealth fighter platform which it can continue to upgrade for the next few decades. Many nations (other than USA-China-Russia) are developing such platforms, from South Korea, Japan, India, Indonesia and so on. Iran can import the needed components and continuously replace them with indigenous solutions as they are developed. From the most recent air force commander interview, he stated they are working on stealth fighter designs, but we need to wait and see how that materialises.



Building stealth airframe is not difficult, maybe back when Blackbird was developed when the most powerful computer at the time had the power of a calculator.

Somewhat challenge to build the radar absorbing “skin”, but an Iranian university demonstrated feasibility years ago.

The real challenge is in subsystems, engine, and titanium requirement. I mean what good is a stealthy airframe if it uses an ancient engine that doesn’t allow for supercruise or cool it’s exhaust trails? If it uses 1970’s era radar that cannot detect low RCS objects or illuminate targets at large enough distance? If it has inferior ECW/EW suite that cannot blind or disable enemy communications and radars? If it lacks BVR supersonic/hypersonic missiles?


The easiest thing is the airframe. It’s like copying the airframe of Lamborghini, but having the “guts” of a Peykan. What’s the point?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Philosopher said:


> It seems two of the planes are newly built and one is a modernised version of an already existing F-5. Also, we are hearing there were a great number of private/ knowledge based companies involved in these projects. This is very good news.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1276078897730330625


دم همشون گرم. تبریک هم داره

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

Philosopher said:


> The model 3-7400. The other two are newly built.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1276093650271973377



Believe it or not, none of them were new, unless they were not the very first batch of three planes. I am not sure whether this is a sign of Air Force stupidity, or they just want to keep a kind of secrecy. All three planes had been already shown to public last year and two years ago. You can easily notice that by comparing the nose of the three demonstrated planes. Some with the gun, and some without it. Interestingly, one of them shown today had inherited its ejection seats from an old RF-5s!
Literally, these officials are crazy!


----------



## Aramagedon

*Kowsar Fighters roaring in the Sky:*

























































































video:










https://media.alalamtv.net/uploads/org/2020/06/25/159307545885249100.mp4
​

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## TheImmortal

Myself said:


> Believe it or not, none of them were new, unless they were not the very first batch of three planes. I am not sure whether this is a sign of Air Force stupidity, or they just want to keep a kind of secrecy. All three planes had been already shown to public last year and two years ago. You can easily notice that by comparing the nose of the three demonstrated planes. Some with the gun, and some without it. Interestingly, one of them shown today had inherited its ejection seats from an old RF-5s!
> Literally, these officials are crazy!
> 
> View attachment 644749
> 
> 
> View attachment 644762
> 
> View attachment 644766



If this is true, then it means the airforce has given up on the Kowsar as a viable option. Basically the 3 they received they then in turn transferred to aero team. Again if what you said is true (a big IF) then that points to the project being dead. Until the next generation rolls along and we repeat this cycle all over again

Makes sense. I said time and time again Kowsar was useless for the airforce outside of an advanced trainer role.


----------



## Muhammed45

All 3 of them were newly built as defense minister said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

The best thing about IRIAF is their secrecy.


----------



## triangle

Strange, they had a whole production line running with at least 7 kowsars being worked on. I guess it's the same with the karrar tank which we also saw a production line up and running and then... silence..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

mohammad45 said:


> All 3 of them were newly built as defense minister said.


So, basically you expect me to overlook what I see by my own eyes, and believe what you say just because you think you are right!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

The defense minister said all 3 of them are newly manufactured. And i dont expect anything from self claimed Professional who thinks he knows more than Iranian defense minister.


----------



## QWECXZ

I don't understand why we are discussing and fighting over something that is so not news worthy.


----------



## Shawnee

QWECXZ said:


> I don't understand why we are discussing and fighting over something that is so not news worthy.



Delivery of three fully indigenous fighter is worth more than buying 200 Su 35, I think.
.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

Shawnee said:


> Delivery of three fully indigenous fighter is worth more than buying 200 Su 35, I think.
> .....


That's your personal opinion, but my personal opinion is that it's wrong to compare 3 Kowsar fighters with 200 Su35s.

I could've agreed with you if they had delivered 30 Kowsar jet fighters. Even if we knew for a fact that they had upgraded all of our existing F5's to a new platform, I would've understood why this is news worthy. But I can't see how the delivery of 3 Kowsar fighters after a year, that even the IRIAF admits it is based on F5, changes anything for us.

At this pace, it will take 10 years to deliver 30 Kowsar fighters. Imagine flying jet fighters looking like F5 in 2030. :|

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

mohammad45 said:


> The defense minister said all 3 of them are newly manufactured. And i dont expect anything from self claimed Professional who thinks he knows more than Iranian defense minister.



why then 2 aircraft with Russian ejection seats and 1 with u Martin Baker?





why is it written Northrop?





why the "Kowsar" with Martin Baker has the 20mm cannon, one of the 2 "Kowsar" with Russian ejection seats has the 20mm cannon and the other doesn't ?






Thanks for the reply

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

QWECXZ said:


> That's your personal opinion, but my personal opinion is that it's wrong to compare 3 Kowsar fighters with 200 Su35s.
> 
> I could've agreed with you if they had delivered 30 Kowsar jet fighters. Even if we knew for a fact that they had upgraded all of our existing F5's to a new platform, I would've understood why this is news worthy. But I can't see how the delivery of 3 Kowsar fighters after a year, that even the IRIAF admits it is based on F5, changes anything for us.
> 
> At this pace, it will take 10 years to deliver 30 Kowsar fighters. Imagine flying jet fighters looking like F5 in 2030. :|



تا حالا چن بار اف پنج ها همین جور شده
بک بار هشت تا تحویل دادند

تنها فرقش که اینها رو متمایز میکنه اینه که خامنه ای برای اولین باز گفت در تولید هواپیما کاملا خودکفا شدیم
این حرف رو در مورد اذرخش و صاعقه نزد

معمولا وقتی خودشو وارد قضایا میکنه جدی تره
نمونه دیگش موتور دریایی پنج هزار اسب بخار و ساخت جماران بود

شاید یادت نیاد ولی جمکران هم خیلییییی طول کشید والا داره میشه سبلان و دنا‌‌

من ادم ولایی و اینا نیستم ولی بر اساس تاریخچه حرفاش میگم
.......


----------



## Muhammed45

sahureka2 said:


> why then 2 aircraft with Russian ejection seats and 1 with u Martin Baker?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why is it written Northrop?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why the "Kowsar" with Martin Baker has the 20mm cannon, one of the 2 "Kowsar" with Russian ejection seats has the 20mm cannon and the other doesn't ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply


Good points sir. I didnt see them. The minister also said that these fighter jets are Iranian made by 70%. Maybe they have used the usable spare parts of old F5s or other jets and used them in these new platforms. Engines are new, no doubt. But other aparts by 30% are Foreign made and /or old parts of scrapped fighters.

Btw, nicely put. Thank you for information

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## QWECXZ

Shawnee said:


> تا حالا چن بار اف پنج ها همین جور شده
> بک بار هشت تا تحویل دادند
> 
> تنها فرقش که اینها رو متمایز میکنه اینه که خامنه ای برای اولین باز گفت در تولید هواپیما کاملا خودکفا شدیم
> این حرف رو در مورد اذرخش و صاعقه نزد
> 
> معمولا وقتی خودشو وارد قضایا میکنه جدی تره
> نمونه دیگش موتور دریایی پنج هزار اسب بخار و ساخت جمکران بود
> 
> شاید یادت نیاد ولی جمکران هم خیلییییی طول کشید والا داره میشه سبلان و دنا‌‌
> 
> من ادم ولایی و اینا نیستم ولی بر اساس تاریخچه حرفاش میگم
> .......



Sahureka's photo showing the Northrop label on the ejection seat looks very convincing that at least one of the F5s is not entirely indigenous, nor new.

Jamaran was indeed a huge achievement at the time. I don't think it's fair to compare that with this. As someone said a long time ago May God save us from SAIPA Pride and F5.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

QWECXZ said:


> Sahureka's photo showing the Northrop label on the ejection seat looks very convincing that at least one of the F5s is not entirely indigenous, nor new.
> 
> Jamaran was indeed a huge achievement at the time. I don't think it's fair to compare that with this. As someone said a long time ago May God save us from SAIPA Pride and F5.



Correct. However it will not upset me since they are easy to make and not the bottleneck. They could make those easily but they preferred to use some inexpensive readily available second hand part to cut the price.
.......


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> why then 2 aircraft with Russian ejection seats and 1 with u Martin Baker?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why is it written Northrop?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why the "Kowsar" with Martin Baker has the 20mm cannon, one of the 2 "Kowsar" with Russian ejection seats has the 20mm cannon and the other doesn't ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply


Just one little correction the "russian" ejection seat is likely an iranian designed and built one
It clearly has the same sort of telescoping horizontal stabilizer drogue chutes as the russian seats.








Nonetheless you do raise a very interesting point......

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dariush the Great

Shawnee said:


> تا حالا چن بار اف پنج ها همین جور شده
> بک بار هشت تا تحویل دادند
> 
> تنها فرقش که اینها رو متمایز میکنه اینه که خامنه ای برای اولین باز گفت در تولید هواپیما کاملا خودکفا شدیم
> این حرف رو در مورد اذرخش و صاعقه نزد
> 
> معمولا وقتی خودشو وارد قضایا میکنه جدی تره
> نمونه دیگش موتور دریایی پنج هزار اسب بخار و ساخت جماران بود
> 
> شاید یادت نیاد ولی جمکران هم خیلییییی طول کشید والا داره میشه سبلان و دنا‌‌
> 
> من ادم ولایی و اینا نیستم ولی بر اساس تاریخچه حرفاش میگم
> .......


dadash bikhial. niru havayi ma be darde laye jerze divar ham nemikhore. hade aksaresh ine ke joloye chandta ghachagchi ro negar dare sare marz ha. be nazaram bishtar roo padafande havayi bayad tamarkoz she.
har havapeymayi ke ma besazim (3ta bad az 1 sal unam copy shode technology 1960) amrica 3000tasho misaze hezar barabar behtar va bishtar.


----------



## OldTwilight

Well, the good part is that we new or renew fighters, our pilot can fill intended flight time ... 

I think there wasn't massive investment in this field except some small R&D project in this field for future use.

Maybe there are some sorts of promise to buy new fighters from China or Russia ... 
If the Arm Embargo continue or Russia and China refuse to sell fighters with fair term for us, then probably we will combine all knowledge we gained through past years and start serious fighter jet program to at least build something in JF-17...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

OldTwilight said:


> Well, the good part is that we new or renew fighters, our pilot can fill intended flight time ...
> 
> I think there wasn't massive investment in this field except some small R&D project in this field for future use.
> 
> Maybe there are some sorts of promise to buy new fighters from China or Russia ...
> If the Arm Embargo continue or Russia and China refuse to sell fighters with fair term for us, then probably we will combine all knowledge we gained through past years and start serious fighter jet program to at least build something in JF-17...


be hamin sadegiya nist dadash. unayi ke budget ro daryaft mikonan 50% ro toye jibeshun mizaran bad az akhar ham hichi az prozhe khabari nist.


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


> Just one little correction the "russian" ejection seat is likely an iranian designed and built one
> It clearly has the same sort of telescoping horizontal stabilizer drogue chutes as the russian seats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nonetheless you do raise a very interesting point......



yes, of course, I meant Russian model, it is certainly possible that they can be made in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## M.s

Myself said:


> Believe it or not, none of them were new, unless they were not the very first batch of three planes. I am not sure whether this is a sign of Air Force stupidity, or they just want to keep a kind of secrecy. All three planes had been already shown to public last year and two years ago. You can easily notice that by comparing the nose of the three demonstrated planes. Some with the gun, and some without it. Interestingly, one of them shown today had inherited its ejection seats from an old RF-5s!
> Literally, these officials are crazy!
> 
> View attachment 644749
> 
> 
> View attachment 644762
> 
> View attachment 644766


Without cannons there is more room for much powerful radar and avionics. I really hope that's the case.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M.s

There's some news about a turbofan engine. I know this much that several prototypes were built most of them failed and a few of newer ones are showing promising results. It might take several months to just test it. Maybe a year or so from fully operational one? Some of these people I met were really positive about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

M.s said:


> There's some news about a turbofan engine. I know this much that several prototypes were built most of them failed and a few of newer ones are showing promising results. It might take several months to just test it. Maybe a year or so from fully operational one? Some of these people I met were really positive about it.


first of all, welcome bro.
do you have any information about the new engines weight and max output thrust??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M.s

Mithridates said:


> first of all, welcome bro.
> do you have any information about the new engines weight and max output thrust??


Thanks. Unfortunately it was a short conversation. I forgot to ask.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

M.s said:


> Thanks. Unfortunately it was a short conversation. I forgot to ask.



Any idea what class of engine it is?

I remember Iran had a poster for what they deemed as “J-89” or something along those lines which was to be the successor to J-85 owj engine. Some suspected it was a J-85 with afterburner capability.

Anyway it is well known that Iran has been working on heavier Jet engines at least since 2010.

The issue besides building the engine, is the construction of the blades of the turbo fan and the software controlling the timing as well as the life span of such an engine before replacement. 

Furthermore, the amount of maintenance needed per sortie or per X sorties completed. Getting all these factors to optimal state is what makes jet engines some of the most difficult things to build.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## M.s

TheImmortal said:


> Any idea what class of engine it is?
> 
> I remember Iran had a poster for what they deemed as “J-89” or something along those lines which was to be the successor to J-85 owj engine. Some suspected it was a J-85 with afterburner capability.
> 
> Anyway it is well known that Iran has been working on heavier Jet engines at least since 2010.
> 
> The issue besides building the engine, is the construction of the blades of the turbo fan and the software controlling the timing as well as the life span of such an engine before replacement.
> 
> Furthermore, the amount of maintenance needed per sortie or per X sorties completed. Getting all these factors to optimal state is what makes jet engines some of the most difficult things to build.


It's medium weight. I don't have more information but the way they talked about it was like it's gonna solve most of the problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

M.s said:


> It's medium weight. I don't have more information but the way they talked about it was like it's gonna solve most of the problems.


So it's most likely in the class of the RD33. That's some good news as it means that Iran will be able to develop it's own medium weight aircraft around 2 of those engines. Something similar to the F18 is very well possible especially after all the research in the F5 design and improving and enlarging it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Myself said:


> So, basically you expect me to overlook what I see by my own eyes, and believe what you say just because you think you are right!


Northop markings dont mean anything,Iran produce kornets and Tows under original marks,it can be just way to awoid issues they had with Bell over licensing...even it has sence to include existing F-5 in Kowsar program,just Northrop markings doesnt have to mean it is not newly built...you may find bunch of Iranian made weapons with original markings...they also very often take serials from destroyed or heavily damaged aircrafts and put it on new one...it makes sence,I remeber US navy capture smuggled Kornets and TOWs produced in Iran but with original markings,also saw on chopers...Maybe it is existing example modernized but even if they put original markings on new examples it wouldnt be anything new

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

QWECXZ said:


> That's your personal opinion, but my personal opinion is that it's wrong to compare 3 Kowsar fighters with 200 Su35s.
> 
> I could've agreed with you if they had delivered 30 Kowsar jet fighters. Even if we knew for a fact that they had upgraded all of our existing F5's to a new platform, I would've understood why this is news worthy. But I can't see how the delivery of 3 Kowsar fighters after a year, that even the IRIAF admits it is based on F5, changes anything for us.
> 
> At this pace, it will take 10 years to deliver 30 Kowsar fighters. Imagine flying jet fighters looking like F5 in 2030. :|


It changes because whole industry is required to advance and take part in such project,10-15 yrs all Chinese air force was based on Mig-19/21/23 derivates + some imported SU-27,their only BVR missile was R-27 while Iran had 30 yrs experience with ARH phoenix,SARH AIM-7...R-27...now look where China is ...they produced MIG 19/21 knock offs till 10-15 years

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Northop markings dont mean anything,Iran produce kornets and Tows under original marks,it can be just way to awoid issues they had with Bell over licensing...even it has sence to include existing F-5 in Kowsar program,just Northrop markings doesnt have to mean it is not newly built...you may find bunch of Iranian made weapons with original markings...they also very often take serials from destroyed or heavily damaged aircrafts and put it on new one...it makes sence,I remeber US navy capture smuggled Kornets and TOWs produced in Iran but with original markings,also saw on chopers...Maybe it is existing example modernized but even if they put original markings on new examples it wouldnt be anything new



Your whole point is long and invalid as Iran like China is not a signatory to the UN law regarding IP protection. That is why you are able to see fake clothes using international famous brand logos without fear of legal action in Iran.

That is why neither Russia nor US has been successful in tackling China stealing of their IP. For arms deals it got so bad that Russia refused to supply China SU-35 fighter jets because they kept reverse engineering Russian tech with token arms deals. This started pissing off the Russians and their next deal their was a promise from China regarding the copying of Russian tech.

So no Bell nor Northrop can’t do anything to Iran since Iran is not a signatory to the UN international IP protection pact. 

They could file a grievance at the Hauge, but again their is no contract between two parties and Iran is under no IP protection obligation. Furthermore, Iran defense can claim that their similarities are merely superficial and that the interior and sub systems are Iranian made and substantially different.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> Your whole point is long and invalid as Iran like China is not a signatory to the UN law regarding IP protection. That is why you are able to see fake clothes using international famous brand logos without fear of legal action in Iran.
> 
> That is why neither Russia nor US has been successful in tackling China stealing of their IP. For arms deals it got so bad that Russia refused to supply China SU-35 fighter jets because they kept reverse engineering Russian tech with token arms deals. This started pissing off the Russians and their next deal their was a promise from China regarding the copying of Russian tech.
> 
> So no Bell nor Northrop can’t do anything to Iran since Iran is not a signatory to the UN international IP protection pact.
> 
> They could file a grievance at the Hauge, but again their is no contract between two parties and Iran is under no IP protection obligation. Furthermore, Iran defense can claim that their similarities are merely superficial and that the interior and sub systems are Iranian made and substantially different.



Bell actually tried to file a suit back in 96(?) I think. It actually resulted in them compensating Iran due to contract violations.

Western arms are free real estate for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

TruthHurtz said:


> Bell actually tried to file a suit back in 96(?) I think. It actually resulted in them compensating Iran due to contract violations.
> 
> Western arms are free real estate for Iran.


Northrop also objected azarakhsh.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> Northrop also objected azarakhsh.





TruthHurtz said:


> Bell actually tried to file a suit back in 96(?) I think. It actually resulted in them compensating Iran due to contract violations.
> 
> Western arms are free real estate for Iran.



And what happened? Not a damn thing. It’s hard to pursue IP stealing when the country is not a signer to the pact. I mean open your eyes and look at China guys they been stealing high level IP both in military and commercial for decades.

Best scenario would be arms dealer suing in US courts in order to get favorable outcome but Iran has no assets to steal anymore after giving it away to so called “terror” victims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Or deal about those helicopter is more like permission to build them so it's useless pursuing iran for doing anything with that design . they sold us the right to do so.


----------



## SOHEIL

sahureka2 said:


> why then 2 aircraft with Russian ejection seats and 1 with u Martin Baker?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why is it written Northrop?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why the "Kowsar" with Martin Baker has the 20mm cannon, one of the 2 "Kowsar" with Russian ejection seats has the 20mm cannon and the other doesn't ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 645466



There is no 20mm cannon


----------



## SOHEIL

sahureka2 said:


> There is no 20mm cannon



You haven't noticed the larger radome!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

SOHEIL said:


> You haven't noticed the larger radome!?


my answer was because I thought you were referring to the 20mm cannons and there was still that red arrow indicating the other side. 
However, yes, the radome seems larger, perhaps a larger radar system and therefore they had to eliminate the 20mm

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Not necessarily. Most likely they realize that the F-5 is a decent but outdated model. They're most likely using the F-5/Kowsar program as as way of supplementing Iran's airforce. That's all. 



TheImmortal said:


> If this is true, then it means the airforce has given up on the Kowsar as a viable option. Basically the 3 they received they then in turn transferred to aero team. Again if what you said is true (a big IF) then that points to the project being dead. Until the next generation rolls along and we repeat this cycle all over again
> 
> Makes sense. I said time and time again Kowsar was useless for the airforce outside of an advanced trainer role.


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Why does acrojet team need new planes?
> 
> Iranian airforce decision making is all over the place. They are the least competent Branch after Army. But as least Army has shown off Karrar and new MRAPs. Airforce is still parading around their achievement from 15 years ago.



An aerobatic acrojet team doesn't need new Fighters or even fighters equipped with radars, weapons systems,..... or even a gun! Most arojet teams will even remove such equipment to increase performance....
So a Kowsar specifically built for Aerobatics should not only cost at least 40% less but should also take far less time to produce. However since the production of various part and components have not yet reached an ideal level building new jets specifically for aerobatics currently doesn't make sense 

So my personal assessment would be that they will likely paint the Fighters blue during the 2nd phase of post production flight test then after it passes a sufficient amount of flight hours and all he little glitches are taken care of only then they will repaint it and add it to the fleet... 

Note that this was also the process the Saegheh went through so I would guess even fully overhauled F-5 would likely follow the same process.... So until we increase production, building specifically for aerobatics is not ideal


----------



## Aramagedon

IRIAF F14:

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Aramagedon

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthHurtz

Aramagedon said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



Dual seats really necessary? WSOs are kinda redundant, especially for air-to-air fighters. Might as well just have the extra fuel.


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Dual seats really necessary? WSOs are kinda redundant, especially for air-to-air fighters. Might as well just have the extra fuel.



It’s basically an advanced trainer. 

Even with extra fuel the F-5 is just not a far reaching platform.


----------



## sahureka2

Raghfarm007 published in another discussion the news the realization in Iran of the flight simulator of the Ilyushin Il-76,
https://www.aparat.com/v/1ahc6/ساخت_سامانه_شبیه&zwnj;ساز_پروازی_هواپیمای_ایلیوشین_برای_اولین_بار_در

but it seems that the Iranians have created two simulators for the IL-76, the first one in the foreground video dedicated to the driver's cabin, the second I found it in this screenshot it seems dedicated to that part of the window which is therefore considered important for its dual use.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> Raghfarm007 published in another discussion the news the realization in Iran of the flight simulator of the Ilyushin Il-76,
> https://www.aparat.com/v/1ahc6/ساخت_سامانه_شبیه&zwnj;ساز_پروازی_هواپیمای_ایلیوشین_برای_اولین_بار_در
> 
> but it seems that the Iranians have created two simulators for the IL-76, the first one in the foreground video dedicated to the driver's cabin, the second I found it in this screenshot it seems dedicated to that part of the window which is therefore considered important for its dual use.


Impressive!!
The achievements just keep coming.




















How many other nations in the region build flight simulators?

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

You guys are doing sooo much.
With barely anything.
It's quite impressive. 


Sineva said:


> Impressive!!
> The achievements just keep coming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many other nations in the region build flight simulators?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## HAIDER

what is the story of this plane .. anyone .. I know the basic , but detail please..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Commander Houshang Sedigh passed away. RIP. Helped down alot of Iraqi aircraft over Iranian airspace during the 8 year war.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Arminkh

Dariush the Great said:


> Commander Houshang Sedigh passed away. RIP. Helped down alot of Iraqi aircraft over Iranian airspace during the 8 year war.


RIP

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Dariush the Great said:


> Commander Houshang Sedigh passed away. RIP. Helped down alot of Iraqi aircraft over Iranian airspace during the 8 year war.


National Heroes. They will be remembered for their bravery.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*Iranian Army’s Airborne Unit to Get 100km-Range Missiles*

*



*


*https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...y-s-airborne-unit-to-get-100km-range-missiles*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet*

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.*
In an interview with Tasnim, Iranian Air Force Deputy Commander Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi said the process of manufacturing a homegrown heavy fighter jet has begun.

He said local experts came up with the idea of manufacturing a heavy fighter jet after the successful production of Kowsar, an Iranian jet with indigenized avionics and homegrown engines that, contrary to claims raised by critics, has nothing to do with the F-5 fighter aircraft.

The general also pointed to military projects to upgrade the radar capabilities of the Air Force’s planes, saying good progress has been made in this field.

Iran has also achieved great success in increasing the stealth capabilities of various types of aircraft, Brigadier General Vahedi said, noting that the new achievements will be unveiled after final tests.

The commander highlighted Iran’s progress in developing air-launched standoff missiles, saying local experts have extended the range of Sidewinder air-to-air missile, which is mounted on the F-5 jet, from 5 miles to 12 miles.

This enhanced range would be very effective in aerial combats, he added.

The general further pointed to the breakthrough that Iran has made in the drone industry, saying the homegrown Karrar pilotless aircraft has successfully dropped a 500-pound bomb which is going to become a weapon with pinpoint accuracy.

The Air Force has also furnished the Ababil-3 drones with rockets, Vahedi said, adding that programs are underway to equip the Ababil and Kaman UAVs with Qaem-1 and Qaem-5 smart bombs.

Iran has in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of military equipment, including air defense systems that use cutting-edge technologies.

Tehran has repeatedly stressed that its military might is defensive in nature and poses no threat to other countries.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/07/22/2312404/iran-begins-development-of-heavy-fighter-jet

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> *Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet*
> 
> *TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.*
> In an interview with Tasnim, Iranian Air Force Deputy Commander Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi said the process of manufacturing a homegrown heavy fighter jet has begun.
> 
> He said local experts came up with the idea of manufacturing a heavy fighter jet after the successful production of Kowsar, an Iranian jet with indigenized avionics and homegrown engines that, contrary to claims raised by critics, has nothing to do with the F-5 fighter aircraft.
> 
> The general also pointed to military projects to upgrade the radar capabilities of the Air Force’s planes, saying good progress has been made in this field.
> 
> Iran has also achieved great success in increasing the stealth capabilities of various types of aircraft, Brigadier General Vahedi said, noting that the new achievements will be unveiled after final tests.
> 
> The commander highlighted Iran’s progress in developing air-launched standoff missiles, saying local experts have extended the range of Sidewinder air-to-air missile, which is mounted on the F-5 jet, from 5 miles to 12 miles.
> 
> This enhanced range would be very effective in aerial combats, he added.
> 
> The general further pointed to the breakthrough that Iran has made in the drone industry, saying the homegrown Karrar pilotless aircraft has successfully dropped a 500-pound bomb which is going to become a weapon with pinpoint accuracy.
> 
> The Air Force has also furnished the Ababil-3 drones with rockets, Vahedi said, adding that programs are underway to equip the Ababil and Kaman UAVs with Qaem-1 and Qaem-5 smart bombs.
> 
> Iran has in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of military equipment, including air defense systems that use cutting-edge technologies.
> 
> Tehran has repeatedly stressed that its military might is defensive in nature and poses no threat to other countries.
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/07/22/2312404/iran-begins-development-of-heavy-fighter-jet



I wonder what this means as the term “development” has so many meanings by Iranian military.

I know at least a few years ago Iran announced working on heavy fighter jet engines for heavy fighter jet. So this news is mostly recycled. 

I wonder what stage of the R&D they are at today.


----------



## mohsen

Upgraded IRGC Helicopters.












TheImmortal said:


> I wonder what this means as the term “development” has so many meanings by Iranian military.
> 
> I know at least a few years ago Iran announced working on heavy fighter jet engines for heavy fighter jet. So this news is mostly recycled.
> 
> I wonder what stage of the R&D they are at today.


Well, A decade ago IRAF talked about arming our F1 fleet, today still they have the same plan for future!

So it doesn't really matter in which state they are.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Assuming they were/are perusing such a project vigorously, I assume the conceptual design and small scale wind-model tests have already been completed, thus by the development they could mean going after manufacturing the main systems now. If we manage to produce a 1:1 scale system in next 5 years (a very huge *if*), then it should take around another 10 years after that for the fighter jet to enter production it is passes the necessary tests. This is assuming they are given the necessary budget and things go smoothly. If this is a true Iranian design, then it is a herculean task and the time frame I gave above is kind estimation. The Chinese with their much larger defence budget and experience still had their J-20 go through 10 years of testing and it has still not entered full mass production. My personal hope is that this heavy fighter jet project is a true Iranian design and of the stealth platform nature.

I feel manned fighter jets will start to reach their limits around the time of 6th generation systems, thus as much as I love to see a 5th generation Iranian jet, my main focus is on the UCAV systems as I am of the opinion those will make up the core of a 6th generation airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Philosopher said:


> Assuming they were/are perusing such a project vigorously, I assume the conceptual design and small scale wind-model tests have already been completed, thus by the development they could mean going after manufacturing the main systems now. If we manage to produce a 1:1 scale system in next 5 years (a very huge *if*), then it should take around another 10 years after that for the fighter jet to enter production it is passes the necessary tests. This is assuming they are given the necessary budget and things go smoothly. If this is a true Iranian design, then it is a herculean task and the time frame I gave above is kind estimation. The Chinese with their much larger defence budget and experience still had their J-20 go through 10 years of testing and it has still not entered full mass production. My personal hope is that this heavy fighter jet project is a true Iranian design and of the stealth platform nature.
> 
> I feel manned fighter jets will start to reach their limits around the time of 6th generation systems, thus as much as I love to see a 5th generation Iranian jet, my main focus is on the UCAV systems as I am of the opinion those will make up the core of a 6th generation airforce.



And the Chinese still have big problems with engines designed and built by them for their fighter planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Engines are certainly the biggest obstacles, however, like China Iran can go for interim engines until it has reached the stage where it can produce its own. A country would not withhold a project and wait all its subsystems can be produced by it before starting the project. This is especially true given fighter jets nowadays can accommodate a various type of engines and you are not required to build around the engine. The fact that Iran is now openly talking about such an aircraft shows they feel confident they have mastered most of the needed technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Me think that Iran has mastered a high pressure/high temperature turbine what let Iran be able to also build modern turbofans with high thrust. The information is out in the world like a puzzle, where the puzzle pieces can be found in articles like "ramjet with temps greater 2500°" or "metal-ceramics" or "nano coatings" ect.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

The full Persian interview of the I news posted in English:

*گفتگوی تفصیلی با امیر خلبان واحدی: برد موشک‌های سایدواندر ۲برابر شد/ رونمایی از تسلیحات جدید میراژ تا پایان سال*

۰۱ مرداد ۱۳۹۹ - ۱۳:۰۶ 



*جانشین فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران گفت: توانستیم برد موشک‌های هوابه‌هوای سایدواندر را نیز از ۵ مایل به ۸ تا ۱۲ مایل افزایش دهیم.*
*گروه دفاعی خبرگزاری تسنیم ــ سید محمد طاهری: نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران در چند سال اخیر با طراحی و ساخت جنگنده گام‌های جدیدی را برای پیشرفت و ارتقای توان عملیاتی خود برداشته است. این نیرو همچنین چندسالی است که به حوزه هواپیماهای بدون سرنشین نیز ورود کرده که ساخت پهپاد کمان12 محصول همین رویکرد است.*

*برای اطلاع از چندوچون کارهای انجام‌شده طی چند سال اخیر در نهاجا با امیر سرتیپ حمید واحدی جانشین فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش به گفتگو نشستیم. امیر واحدی اهل شهر رفسنجان استان کرمان است و در سال 1363 وارد نیروی هوایی ارتش شده و جزو اولین گروه از خلبانان ارتش بوده است که تمامی دوران آموزشی خود را داخل کشور گذرانده است.*

*وی در ابتدا خلبان جنگنده اف‌ــ‌5 بوده و با ورود بمب‌افکن سوخو24 به نیروی هوایی ارتش برای خلبانی این هواپیما داوطلب شده و دوره‌های آموزشی را با موفقیت پشت‌سر گذاشته و هم‌اکنون خلبان بمب‌افکن سوخو24 است.*

*بیشتر بخوانید*

*فیلم/ پاسخ به شبهات درباره جدیدترین جت آموزشی ارتش/ چرا «یاسین» با این شکل و شمایل نشان داده شد؟*


*گزارش ویژه تسنیم|‌گام بلند ایران برای آموزش بهتر خلبانان ارتش با هواپیمای ایرانی/ جت ایرانی «یاسین» را بهتر بشناسید+ فیلم و مشخصات*


*وزارت دفاع 3 فروند جنگنده جدید کوثر را به نهاجا تحویل داد +تصاویر*

*در کارنامه خدمتی امیر واحدی مسئولیت‌هایی همچون فرماندهی پایگاه هوایی شیراز، فرماندهی پایگاه هوایی تبریز، معاونت بازرسی نیروی هوایی ارتش و یک سال هم معاونت بازرسی کل آجا دیده می‌شود.*

*وی در نهایت در شهریور ماه سال 97 با ارتقای درجه از سرتیپ‌دومی به سرتیپی به سمت جانشین نیروی هوایی ارتش منصوب شد.*

*آنچه در ادامه می‌خوانید حاصل گفتگوی خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری تسنیم با امیر واحدی است:*

** * * * **

*تسنیم: با عرض سلام و تشکر از وقتی که در اختیار ما قرار دادید. در ابتدا اگر اجازه بدهید گفتگو را با معرفی خودتان آغاز کنیم و این‌که؛ چه شد شما وارد نیروی هوایی ارتش شدید و رسته خلبانی را انتخاب کردید؟*

*امیر واحدی:* من سال 1363 وارد نیروی هوایی شدم. در آن زمان والیبالیست بودم. ما برای مسابقات استانی رفته بودیم و همزمان روزنامه کیهان آگهی استخدام نیروی هوایی زده بود و من هم دوست داشتم خلبان بشوم.

ما در دوران دانش‌آموزی کلاس حرفه‌وفن داشتیم و در آنجا باید سه گزینه برای شغل آینده انتخاب می‌کردیم که من در هر سه گزینه خلبانی را انتخاب کردم. اکثر جوانان هم با توجه به اینکه انسان ذاتاً علاقه به پرواز دارد به خلبانی علاقه دارند.

خوب زمانی که آگهی توسط یکی از بستگان به من نشان داده شد مدارک همراهم بود، برای معاینات پزشکی رفتیم و برای خلبانی پذیرفته شدم.

دوره ما اولین دوره‌ای بود که همه آموزش‌های آن در داخل کشور گذرانده شد.

آموزش خلبانی را با PC_7 شروع کردیم و جا دارد تا یادی کنیم از شهید اردستانی که آن موقع معاون عملیات نیرو بودند و به اصفهان آمده بودند، با بچه‌ها شوخی می‌کردند و می‌پرسیدند که "دوست دارید خلبان چه هواپیمایی بشوید؟"، من همان‌جا گفتم که دوست دارم خلبان اف5 بشوم.

هواپیمای اف5 تک‌نفره بود و مهارت پروازی بیشتری می‌خواست. دانشگاه تمام شد و ما هم جزو شاگردهایی بودیم که حق انتخاب داشتیم که من اف5 را انتخاب کردم و بعد هم برای گذراندن دوره به شیراز رفتیم. بعد از آنکه یک سال دوره اف5 را گذراندیم به پایگاه تبریز منتقل شدیم و در این پایگاه تمامی دوره‌های لیدری و معلمی اف5 را گذراندیم.







پس از آن، زمانی که هواپیماهای جدید سوخو24 و میگ29 خریداری شد، من داوطلب شدم تا دوره هواپیمای بمب‌افکن سوخو24 را بگذرانم که دوره خلبانی سوخو24 را در تهران گذراندیم.

بعد هم برای پرواز به شیراز رفتیم و اساتید ما همه در روسیه آموزش دیده بودند. هواپیمای سوخو24 یک بمب‌افکن تأثیرگذار در جنگ‌های امروزی است. فاصله برخی دشمنان با ما زیاد است و هواپیماهای سوخو24 هم می‌تواند مهمات زیاد و سنگین حمل کند و هم قابلیت سوختگیری هوایی سوخو به سوخو دارد.

در دوره آموزش خلبانی سوخو24 برای طی دوره شبیه‌سازی به کشور روسیه رفتیم.

من تا 29 سال و 8 ماه از خدمتم پرواز می‌کردم و حتی مدتی که در بازرسی نیرو در تهران بودیم برای پرواز به شیراز می‌رفتم تا همیشه آماده باشم. به هر حال خلبان‌ها همیشه با هم کری دارند و توانمندی‌های هواپیماهایشان را به رخ هم می‌کشند که این موضوع البته باعث نزدیک شدن هرچه بیشتر خلبانان به یکدیگر می‌شود.

*تسنیم: روزی که وارد نیروی هوایی شدید فکر می‌کردید روزی نفر دوم نیرو شوید؟ چطور شد که امیر نصیرزاده شما را برای جانشینی خود انتخاب کردند؟*

*امیر واحدی:* خیر. ما یک فرمانده گروهان در دانشکده اصفهان داشتیم و ایشان به ما علاقه داشت و به من می‌گفت "تو همین‌جور ادامه دهی موفق می‌شوی."

من چند سال تبریز بودم و چند سال شیراز و بعد هم به بازرسی نیرو آمدم و دوباره به تبریز رفتم و فرمانده پایگاه تبریز شدم. چهار سال در تبریز فرمانده بودم که جزو بهترین خاطرات زندگی من است و بهترین دوستانم هم در این شهر هستند.

بعد از فرماندهی پایگاه تبریز مدت یک سال و ده روز معاون بازرسی ارتش شدم. این یک سالی که من در بازرسی آجا بودم تجربه بالایی کسب کردم.

امیر نصیرزاده هم چند ماهی در همان ساختمانی حضور داشتند که من بودم. ایشان در طرح و برنامه بودند. یک روز با هم قدم می‌زدیم که ایشان گفتند "باید تغییراتی در سطح فرماندهی نیرو انجام شود."، بعد به من گفتند "اگر رفتیم با هم برویم."

من مرخصی بودم کاری پیش آمد و برگشتم. در مسیر برگشت امیر نصیرزاده تماس گرفتند و گفتند "هم درجه شما آمده و هم جایگاه شما به تصویب آقا رسیده است."

زمانی که می‌خواستم درجه‌ام را از آقا بگیرم استرس خاصی داشتم. ما همیشه در زمان احترام به مافوق می‌گوییم "الله اکبر جانم فدای رهبر". وقتی آنجا رفتم این جمله یادم رفت، سردار شیرازی به من گفتند "اصلاً استرس نداشته باش و هرچه دلت می‌خواهد بگو."، این را که گفتند قدری آرام شدم. خوب، این درجه‌هایی را هم که آقا به من دادند جلوی چشمم نگه می‌دارم تا یادم نرود که سرباز ایشان هستیم.






*تسنیم: با توجه به اینکه نیروی هوایی ارتش پیش از انقلاب یک نیروی هوایی قدرتمند در سطح منطقه بود که تمام نیازهای آن از خارج تأمین می‌شد، امروز نیروی هوایی ارتش با توجه به تمام این تحریم‌ها در چه جایگاهی قرار دارد؟*

*امیر واحدی:* نیروی هوایی یک نیروی تجهیزات‌محور است اما قبل از انقلاب کارکنان فنی اجازه نداشتند نزدیک هواپیما بشوند، کار دست مستشاران غربی بود و نفرات ما نهایتاً وردست آنها بودند.

وقتی انقلاب شد در بحبوحه جنگ، یکی از فرماندهان نزد امام می‌روند و می‌گویند "ما چند روز دیگر بیشتر توان پرواز نداریم"، امام فرمودند "بروید کار خودتان را بکنید."، دوره سختی بود که الحمدلله نیروی هوایی توانست با سربلندی آن را پشت‌سر بگذارد.

یک بار سردار کارگر برای من می‌گفتند "زمانی که ما در جبهه به مشکل می‌خوردیم غرش جنگنده‌های ارتش به ما روحیه می‌داد". نیروی هوایی در دفاع مقدس در پشتیبانی از نیروها و بمباران‌ها پای کار بود.

در زمان جنگ دستور تشکیل جهاد خودکفایی در نیروی هوایی توسط آقا صادر شد. شهید ستاری هم مجتمع اوج را برای بازسازی هواپیماها ایجاد کردند.

نیروی هوایی با کمک صنعت داخلی و وزارت دفاع و همچنین با استفاده از نخبگان کار را جلو برد. برخی اوقات نخبگان عزیز با هزینه بسیار کم دانش خود را در اختیار نیروی هوایی قرار دادند. گلوگاه ما در قطعات حساس بود که جهاد و صنعت پای کار آمدند و این گلوگاه‌ها را برطرف کردند و نیروی هوایی امروز بسیار سرحال‌تر از زمان جنگ است.

امروز دانش کارکنان فنی و خلبانان نیروی هوایی بسیار بالا رفته است. در حوزه اورهال، هر هواپیمایی زمان خاصی برای تعمیر اساسی دارد. این کار را در گذشته مستشاران خارجی انجام می‌دادند و امروز کلیه اورهال‌های هواپیماهای شکاری و ترابری با همکاری وزارت دفاع و متخصصان نیروی هوایی در حال انجام است، به‌خصوص در هواپیمای سی130، وزارت دفاع پروژه‌ای را تحت عنوان پروژه شهید ستاری پیاده کرده است که بسیاری از امکانات این هواپیما را بِروز کرده است.

دنیایی علم و تجربه پشت‌سر این اورهال و تعمیرات اساسی وجود دارد، نمونه آن هم تحویل‌گیری 8 فروند هواپیما بود که توسط وزارت دفاع انجام شد.

*تسنیم: کمتر نیروی هوایی در دنیا پیدا می‌شود که توأمان از ناوگان شرقی و غربی استفاده کند، نیروی هوایی ما در ناوگان خود هم هواپیماهای شرقی را دارد و هم هواپیماهای غربی که این موضوع کار آموزش و پشتیبانی از هواپیما را سخت می‌کند، چگونه با این مشکل کنار آمدید؟*

*امیر واحدی:* این موضوع مدتی مشکلی برای ما پیش آورد اما با تدبیری که شد متخصصان ما در زمینه‌های مختلف آموزش هر دو تایپ را گذراندند و مشکل ما در این حوزه حل شده است،

مثلاً هواپیماهای میگ‌ــ‌29 یک دوره اورهال 1200ساعته دارد و یک دوره اورهال 1600ساعته که زمانی که بنده در پایگاه تبریز بودم اولین اورهال 1600ساعته میگ‌ــ‌29 را قبول کردیم و با سرافرازی این کار را انجام دادیم. ایرانی‌ها توانمندی بالایی دارند، فقط باید به جوانان میدان داد.

امروز تجهیزاتی روی آر.اف.4 گذاشته شده که توان آن را 10 برابر کرده است و دوربین‌های جدید با کیفیت‌های بسیار بالا روی آن نصب شده است که در آینده برای طراحی عملیات بسیار به درد ما می‌خورد.

*تسنیم: با توجه به اینکه صنعت هوایی به‌سرعت در حال پیشرفت است نیروی هوایی ما هم باید هواپیماهای خود را متناسب با نیازهای روز ارتقا دهد، به‌خصوص در حوزه تسلیحات دورایستای سرکوب پدافند هوایی که امروز هم خیلی مطرح است. البته نیروی هوایی اخیراً به حوزه بمب‌های برد بلند مانند یاسین ورود کرده است اما به‌نظر می‌رسد این مسیر باید با سرعت بیشتری ادامه یابد، در این زمینه چه برنامه‌هایی مدنظر است؟*

*امیر واحدی:* نیروی هوایی باید با علم روز پیش رود. ما در حال ارتقای هواپیماهای نهاجا خصوصاً در حوزه راداری هستیم و در این زمینه پیشرفت بسیار خوبی کردیم.

روی اف‌ــ‌4، اف‌ــ‌5 و طرحی هم روی اف‌ــ‌14 داشتیم که الحمدلله خوب هم جواب داده است، علاوه بر این، نیروی هوایی با کمک صنعت وارد حوزه ساخت هواپیما هم شده است، هواپیماهای صاعقه که یک اسکادران آن در تبریز مستقر است نمونه‌ای از این تلاش‌ها است، علاوه بر این هواپیمای جت آموزشی یاسین را داریم که سال گذشته رونمایی شد و یک هواپیمای تماماً ایرانی است که بنا داریم این هواپیما را هم به‌عنوان هواپیمای آموزشی و هم جنگنده پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی توسعه دهیم.






اخیراً هم سه فروند جنگنده کوثر به نیروی هوایی ارتش تحویل شد که این هواپیما هم تمام سیستم اویونیک و رادارش بِروز شده است، البته این تنها شروع کار است.

یکی دیگر از کارهایی که در حال دنبال کردن آن هستیم رادارگریز شدن انواع هواپیماها است که موفقیت‌های خیلی خوبی در این حوزه داشتیم اما منتظر هستیم تا تست‌های نهایی آن انجام شود و بعد رونمایی کنیم.

در خصوص بمب و تسلیحات، صنعت ما به‌کمک نیروی هوایی پیشرفت بسیار خوبی در حوزه بمب‌های دورایستا داشته که بسیار خوب هم جواب داده است، همچنین موشک‌های بسیار خوبی در کشور در حال تولید است، برای مثال موشک سایدواندر جنگنده اف‌ــ‌5 تنها 5 مایل برد داشت که امروز برد آن را به 8 تا 12 مایل رسانده‌ایم که در درگیری‌های هوایی بسیار مؤثر است. سال گذشته رزمایشی اجرا کردیم که در آن از تجهیزات تماماً ایرانی استفاده کردیم که این مایه افتخار است.

*تسنیم: ما امروز شاهد هستیم که یکی از تکنیک‌های متداول برای سرکوب پدافند هوایی استفاده از بمب و موشک‌های دورایستا است که این امکان را فراهم می‌کند تا بدون داخل شدن هواپیما در رینگ پدافندی دشمن، تجهیزات و رادارهای پدافندی را مورد اصابت قرار دهد، در این حوزه در نهاجا کاری را دنبال کرده‌اید؟*

*امیر واحدی:* ما هم سرمایه‌گذاری سنگینی روی این موضوع کرده‌ایم که بتوانیم به‌صورت بومی به این فناوری برسیم، این کار در صنعت در حال پیگیری است تا بتوانیم هم از هوایپماهای جنگ الکترونیک بهره‌برداری کنیم و هم از تجهیزات دورایستا، البته امروز در نیروی هوایی تجهیزات بسیار پیشرفته جنگ الکترونیک روی یکی از هواپیماهای ما نصب شده است و در حال استفاده از آن هستیم.

*تسنیم: نحوه همکاری نیروهای هوایی و پدافند هوایی ارتش چگونه است؟*

*امیر واحدی:* امروز هماهنگی بین نیروی هوایی و پدافند بسیار خوب است، وقتی یک هواپیمای متخاصم وارد فضای کشور شود پدافند هوایی وظیفه مقابله با آن را به‌عهده دارد. اگر پدافند تشخیص دهد، دستور اسکرمبل صادر می‌کند، در این حالت هواپیماها به‌سرعت به پرواز در می‌آید و با سمتی که رادار به آن می‌دهد به‌سمت دشمن می‌رود و با آن درگیر می‌شود.

*تسنیم: سال 97 جنگنده کوثر رونمایی شد و از همان موقع شبهاتی درباره آن مطرح شد، چرا نیروی هوایی به‌سراغ پلت‌فرم اف‌ــ‌5 رفت و این کار روی سایر پلت‌فرم‌های موجود در نیروی هوایی صورت نگرفت؟*

*امیر واحدی:* در این باره حتی برخی افراد داخل کشور هم به ما گفتند که "شما اف‌ــ‌5 را رنگ کرده‌اید."، اما وقتی آمدند و از نزدیک دیدند متوجه شدند کوثر ربطی به اف‌ــ‌5 ندارد، در حقیقت سیستم اویونیک این هواپیما بومی‌سازی شده و موتورهای آن نیز در داخل طراحی و تولید شده است که تراست آن این‌قدر خوب است که خلبانان ما می‌گفتند "برک‌های ما باید قوی‌تر باشد."






این را که چرا روی این هواپیما کار شد حقیقتاً من تفکر صنعتگران را نمی‌دانم اما کوثر یک هواپیمای صفر تا صد ایرانی است و ما به آن افتخار می‌کنیم و این تازه آغاز راه است تا ما به نقطه مطلوب برسیم. ما باید تلاش کنیم تا تدابیر حضرت آقا مبنی بر ایجاد نیروی هوایی در تراز انقلاب اسلامی را تحقق بخشیم.

*تسنیم: آیا قرار است هواپیمای کوثر در نقش یک هواپیمای آموزشی باقی بماند یا قرار است در نقش پشتیبانی نزدیک هم عمل کند؟ اگر این‌طور است آیا این هواپیما توانمندی استفاده از انواع مهمات هدایت‌شونده را دارد؟*

*امیر واحدی:* رادار این هواپیما بسیار پیشرفته است و قرار است موشک‌های هدایت‌شونده روی این هواپیما نصب شود و تلاش می‌کنیم تا تجهیزات بومی روی کوثر نصب شود. ما به انواع هواپیماها با برد و کاربردهای مختلف احتیاج داریم که جنگنده کوثر یکی از آنها است.

*تسنیم: تیم آکروجت نیرو قرار است با کوثر تشکیل شود؟*

*امیر واحدی: *در این زمینه یکی از برنامه‌های ماست، تدابیر خوبی اندیشیده شده است.

*تسنیم: چند سالی است که نیروی هوایی در حوزه پهپادی وارد شده است، چه اهدافی از ورود به این حوزه ترسیم شده است و تاکنون چه موفقیت‌هایی داشتید؟*

*امیر واحدی:* ما به این نتیجه رسیدیم که باید از تجهیزات پهپادی هم استفاده کنیم در نتیجه یک دانشکده پهپادی تأسیس کردیم که الآن تمام آموزش پهپاد در نیروی هوایی انجام می‌شود.

با تدبیر فرمانده کل ارتش این مسئولیت به نیروی هوایی واگذار شد. ما کارهایی که با پهپاد انجام دادیم کارهای بسیار بزرگی است. ما با پهپاد کرار بمب 500پوندی شلیک کردیم و خیلی هم موفقیت‌آمیز بوده است. الآن هم در تلاشیم تا این بمب نقطه‌زن شود. پهپاد ابابیل3 را هم به راکت مجهز کردیم که تست آن هم موفقیت‌آمیز بوده است.

از طرف دیگر روی بمب‌های هوشمند قائم 1 و 5 کار می‌کنیم که از پهپادهای ابابیل و کمان شلیک می‌شوند. امروز سیستم‌های پیشرفته‌ای در حوزه هدایت و کنترل و همچنین لینک‌های ارتباطی کمان12 به‌کار گرفته‌ایم که این لینک از پرش‌های فرکانسی خیلی بالایی بهره می‌برد و قابلیت حمل محموله‌های شناسایی جنگالی و مهمات را دارد. این پهپاد با مداومت پرواز 10 ساعت برد 1500کیلومتری دارد.

یک پهپاد جدید هم به‌نام آرش را (ساخت وزارت دفاع) به‌زودی تحویل می‌گیریم که گردان آن را هم تشکیل داده‌ایم.

*تسنیم: ازجمله جنگنده‌های خوبی که در نیروی هوایی وجود دارد، میراژ اف‌ــ‌1 است، اما هیچ‌گاه این هواپیما علی‌رغم اینکه برخی اخبار از نصب تسلیحات به‌روی آن منتشر شده، ولی هیچ‌گاه مسلح دیده نشده است و همین موضوع شبهاتی را ایجاد کرده است که نیروی هوایی توان نصب سلاح روی این جنگنده را ندارد، این جنگنده از حیث توان رزم در چه وضعیتی قرار دارد؟*

*امیر واحدی:* پیشرفت‌های خوبی روی این جنگنده کرده‌ایم. ما در حوزه‌ای تا به نتیجه صددرصد نرسیم نباید اعلام کنیم. تجیهزات بسیار خوبی روی میراژ نصب کرده‌ایم که زمانی که مسئولان به نتیجه رسیدند حتماً رسانه‌ای می‌کنیم. ان‌شاءالله فکر کنم تا پایان سال مقداری از این مهمات را رونمایی و در رزمایش‌ها استفاده می‌کنیم. این هواپیما مأموریت دریایی دارد و یکی از آیتم‌های مورد استفاده آن همین مأموریت دریایی است.

*تسنیم: آیا نیروی هوایی به‌دنبال هواپیمای رادار پرنده هم هست؟*

*امیر واحدی:* هرچه در علم روز دنیا است مورد نیاز ما هم هست، روی این موضوع هم فکر شده است و باید برای این نیاز نیز کاری انجام دهیم.

*تسنیم: نیروی هوایی ازجمله نیروهایی است که بیشترین نقش را در مواقع حساسی مثل بروز حوادث طبیعی نظیر سیل و زلزله در امدادرسانی به مردم دارد که در سال‌های اخیر خصوصاً به‌وضوح مردم این را از نزدیک حس کردند.*

*به‌عنوان سؤال پایانی اگر در این زمینه هم صحبتی مدنظرتان هست بفرمایید.*

*امیر واحدی:* در این حوزه هم نیروی هوایی همیشه پای کار بوده است و دیدیم که مثلاً در سیل خوزستان و سیستان چند هزار تن بار جابه‌جا شد. در موضوع کرونا هم تمام پایگاه‌های ما تولید مواد ضدعفونی‌کننده و ماسک را انجام دادند و این اثر خیلی خوبی برای مردم و کارکنان داشته است. نیروی هوایی همان‌طور که در زمان جنگ اثرگذاری خود را نشان داد، در زمان صلح هم پای کار بوده است.

*تسنیم: و نکته پایانی...*

*امیر واحدی:* امروز در نیروی هوایی تمام بچه‌های ما پای کار هستند تا نیرویی هوایی در تراز جمهوری اسلامی ایران داشته باشیم و به مردم عزیز اطمینان می‌دهیم با تمام توان از مرزهای هوایی کشور دفاع می‌کنیم.

انتهای پیام/+

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...شد-رونمایی-از-تسلیحات-جدید-میراژ-تا-پایان-سال

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

It lines up to what user @M.s said a few pages back. That Iran had made a breakthrough in medium weight turbofan and would likely be testing it for mass production in next 12 months.

Again we know through news Iran has been developing engines for at least the last decade. 

What has always held Iran back has been lack of engines, without engines you cannot enhance the testing of aerodynamics or flight characteristics. You are limited to wind tunnel and simulations which cannot replace real world test flight.

Iran could have a prototype in less than 5 years if engine is ready and Heavy fighter platform design is ready.

By 2030 Iran needs to “show” something because by then even the Tomcats will be facing fatigue let alone the F-4s.

Personally, I hope that Iran invests in a unmanned very high altitude flying wing bomber with Mach 2-3 capability that can drop glide PGM or low RCS cruise missiles on to targets. US had such a platform way back in the 1970’s for recon so it’s def possible to build an enhanced armed version in next decade. Again key is engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ich

Me found a picture where one can see the developments for metal-ceramic and future materials of turbine blades. Me think Iran is somewhere at TBC with some research and knowhow of Silicon Carbide (SiC) based CMCs. Me also think Iran will use aluminide based alloys with thermal barrier coatings for their first prototype of a fighter jet turbofan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Philosopher said:


> The full Persian interview of the I news posted in English:
> *....... نمونه‌ای از این تلاش‌ها است، علاوه بر این هواپیمای جت آموزشی یاسین را داریم که سال گذشته رونمایی شد و یک هواپیمای تماماً ایرانی است که بنا داریم این هواپیما را هم به‌عنوان هواپیمای آموزشی و هم جنگنده پشتیبانی نزدیک هوایی توسعه دهیم......... *
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1399/05/01/2311925/گفتگوی-تفصیلی-با-امیر-خلبان-واحدی-برد-موشک-های-سایدواندر-2برابر-شد-رونمایی-از-تسلیحات-جدید-میراژ-تا-پایان-سال



An example of these efforts is the *Yassin* training jet, which was unveiled last year and is an all-Iranian aircraft that we plan to develop as both a training aircraft *and a close air support fighter*. 

My Photoshop simple configuration

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> An example of these efforts is the *Yassin* training jet, which was unveiled last year and is an all-Iranian aircraft that we plan to develop as both a training aircraft *and a close air support fighter*.
> 
> My simple configuration


Unless the final version become 1 ton lighter I say there is a problem with the material they have used.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> Unless the final version become 1 ton lighter I say there is a problem with the material they have used.



But they are prototypes, therefore it is realistic that substantial improvements are made to the serial aircraft after the relevant tests


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> It lines up to what user @M.s said a few pages back. That Iran had made a breakthrough in medium weight turbofan and would likely be testing it for mass production in next 12 months.
> 
> Again we know through news Iran has been developing engines for at least the last decade.
> 
> What has always held Iran back has been lack of engines, without engines you cannot enhance the testing of aerodynamics or flight characteristics. You are limited to wind tunnel and simulations which cannot replace real world test flight.
> 
> Iran could have a prototype in less than 5 years if engine is ready and Heavy fighter platform design is ready.
> 
> By 2030 Iran needs to “show” something because by then even the Tomcats will be facing fatigue let alone the F-4s.
> 
> Personally, I hope that Iran invests in a unmanned very high altitude flying wing bomber with Mach 2-3 capability that can drop glide PGM or low RCS cruise missiles on to targets. US had such a platform way back in the 1970’s for recon so it’s def possible to build an enhanced armed version in next decade. Again key is engines.



Best thing for Iran to do currently is to invest in mass production of larger semi autonomous UCAVs capable of firing on targets at a relatively safe distance. 

If it was up to me I'd worry more about the mass production part of it... Iranian officials should insist on the use of Industrial robots & 3D printers for both part production and assembly. 

More important than the Aircraft it's self is the design and development of new and modern tools, equipment & material

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

> He noted that the new jet will be equipped with indigenized avionics *and homegrown engines that are not the same as those of the F-5 fighter aircraft.*


https://en.mehrnews.com/news/161341/Iran-Air-Force-developing-heavy-fighter-jets-deputy-chief

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> https://en.mehrnews.com/news/161341/Iran-Air-Force-developing-heavy-fighter-jets-deputy-chief


i'm so interested to see the new engine. hopefully it's a turbofan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> i'm so interested to see the new engine. hopefully it's a turbofan.
> View attachment 653901



It is safe to say Iran is busy with a variety of different engines. Given that this is a "heavy" jet they are working on, then it will naturally be something much more capable than the J-85/OWJ. Meaning we will also have an engine to power our heavier UCAVS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

lol i was thinking about a self defense missile for fighter and transport jets but i was saying myself that possibly it's not feasible or practical to build one, so it might be a silly idea of mine...
now look at this:






miniature self defense missile for USAF. it uses passive seeker to track incoming missile and kill it (possibly with kinetic energy and impact).

they had a similar missile to defend their soldiers on the ground from artillery:





miniature hit to kill missile

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Emergency landing of an upgraded PC7 aircraft known as T90

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran Unveils Mobile Air Traffic Control Tower*

*



*

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Ministry unveiled a homegrown trailer-mounted air traffic control (ATC) tower.*
In remarks at a program held on Monday to unveil the device, Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the domestically-made mobile air traffic control system can be used for all types of flights at airports.

The mobile tower is specifically useful for airports without a stationary air traffic control tower, airports with temporary utility, in contingencies such as fires, earthquakes, floods, and wars, or in case airport infrastructures are damaged or fixed control towers are out of order, he added.

The minister said the Iranian mobile ATC tower can be installed and brought into operation immediately, and that the control system can effectively prevent disruption to air traffic in an emergency.

Hatami also noted that the new device is equipped with homegrown radio systems using VHF bands as well as recording and GPS systems, saying the mobile tower system can travel in difficult terrains and its repair and maintenance is simple.

Mobile air traffic control systems are air transportable and can be deployed in a short period of time by a small team of personnel with minimal training.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/07/27/2315402/iran-unveils-mobile-air-traffic-control-tower

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sineva

Philosopher said:


> *Iran Unveils Mobile Air Traffic Control Tower*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Ministry unveiled a homegrown trailer-mounted air traffic control (ATC) tower.*
> In remarks at a program held on Monday to unveil the device, Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the domestically-made mobile air traffic control system can be used for all types of flights at airports.
> 
> The mobile tower is specifically useful for airports without a stationary air traffic control tower, airports with temporary utility, in contingencies such as fires, earthquakes, floods, and wars, or in case airport infrastructures are damaged or fixed control towers are out of order, he added.
> 
> The minister said the Iranian mobile ATC tower can be installed and brought into operation immediately, and that the control system can effectively prevent disruption to air traffic in an emergency.
> 
> Hatami also noted that the new device is equipped with homegrown radio systems using VHF bands as well as recording and GPS systems, saying the mobile tower system can travel in difficult terrains and its repair and maintenance is simple.
> 
> Mobile air traffic control systems are air transportable and can be deployed in a short period of time by a small team of personnel with minimal training.
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/07/27/2315402/iran-unveils-mobile-air-traffic-control-tower


----------



## mohsen

Philosopher said:


> *Iran Unveils Mobile Air Traffic Control Tower*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Ministry unveiled a homegrown trailer-mounted air traffic control (ATC) tower.*
> In remarks at a program held on Monday to unveil the device, Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the domestically-made mobile air traffic control system can be used for all types of flights at airports.
> 
> The mobile tower is specifically useful for airports without a stationary air traffic control tower, airports with temporary utility, in contingencies such as fires, earthquakes, floods, and wars, or in case airport infrastructures are damaged or fixed control towers are out of order, he added.
> 
> The minister said the Iranian mobile ATC tower can be installed and brought into operation immediately, and that the control system can effectively prevent disruption to air traffic in an emergency.
> 
> Hatami also noted that the new device is equipped with homegrown radio systems using VHF bands as well as recording and GPS systems, saying the mobile tower system can travel in difficult terrains and its repair and maintenance is simple.
> 
> Mobile air traffic control systems are air transportable and can be deployed in a short period of time by a small team of personnel with minimal training.
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/07/27/2315402/iran-unveils-mobile-air-traffic-control-tower


Our defense ministry has officially become a joke!
Reunveiling of stuff which they have been demonstrating from at least 5 years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TruthHurtz

mohsen said:


> Our defense ministry has officially become a joke!
> Reunveiling of stuff which they have been demonstrating from at least 5 years ago.



This latest one looks like it's optimised for civilian use. While the one you posted looks as if it's intended for military use, civilian and military aviation have different standards.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

SU-22

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran Increases Range of Smart Missiles in Massive Wargames*

TEHRAN (FNA)- The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) fired an updated version of smart and guided Yasin missiles from its Sukhoi-22-Fitter fighter jets during massive wargames underway in Southern Iran on Wednesday.
Yasin, earlier developed by the Iranian defense ministry, is a smart missile with folding wings that can be fired from a range of 60 kilometers away from the target from a manned or unmanned aircraft but the missiles fired in the wargames today show that the *IRGC has increased the range of the guided missile up to 100km*, making it possible to strike targets outside the offensive rings.

During the Wednesday drills, the IRGC’s Sukhoi-22 fighters bombed and destroyed targets on Farour Islands with winged missiles.

Also, the IRGC fired ballistic missiles from underground platforms during the second day of the massive 'Great Prophet-14' drills in the Southern parts of the country on Wednesday.

The successful firing of ballistic missiles fully hidden in camouflage deep under the ground is an important achievement that could pose serious challenges to enemy intelligence agencies.

In the final stage of the IRGC's drills, which took place in the waters of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, the IRGC Aerospace Force’s drones attacked enemy's mock aircraft carrier and targeted its command tower and bridge.

Destroying hypothetical enemy targets designed much smaller than the actual size with a variety of smart bombs was another part of this phase of the exercises.

The IRGC Aerospace and Naval Forces' joint exercises were an important part of the drills and demonstrated surprising tactics, including establishment of the two forces' joint command systems, joint control, combined tactics and combat methods.

Successful missile combat operations were carried out by firing two surface-to-surface Hurmoz and Fateh missiles, and a ballistic missile at specific targets, as well as launching precision-striking air defense missiles.

Also, Shahed 181, Mohajer and Bavar drones successfully attacked and destroyed hypothetical enemy targets and positions at this stage of the drills.

Meantime, surface-to-surface missile operations, coast-to-sea operations, heavy artillery firing and offensive mine-laying operations to cut off enemy lines were demonstrated on the second day of the massive wargames.

Also, firing of all kinds of artillery, RPGs and light weapons by combat forces in line and around Iranian islands was part of the drills to reportedly show the firm determination of the border guards in defending the country.

The IRGC announced in a statement on Tuesday that it has started the final phase of the 'Great Prophet-14' drills in the South of the country, and added that Nour-1 Satellite, that was launched on April 22, is being used to monitor the wargames.

The drills are underway with the participation of the IRGC Navy and Aerospace forces in the Hormozgan province and extend to the depth of the Iranian soil.

IRGC Navy’s missile, ship, and drone units as well as IRGC Aerospace’s missile, drone, and radar units are due to conduct operational drills in the wargames, the statement said. 

The wargames are being monitored for the first time by the Nour-1 Satellite that was launched successfully on April 22.

The IRGC launched the satellite aboard Qassed (Carrier) satellite carrier during an operation that was staged in Dasht-e Kavir, Iran’s sprawling Central desert. The Launcher Qassed is a three-stage launcher using compound solid-liquid fuel.

The satellite was placed into the orbit 425km above Earth’s surface.

The satellite was sent to the space on the anniversary of the IRGC establishment (April 22, 1979).

Great Prophet (Payambar-e Azam) wargames are annual missile tests and exercises conducted by Iran's IRGC. The first series of the wargames began in July 2008.

In recent years, Iran has made great achievements in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing essential military equipment and systems.

The Iranian Armed Forces several times a year test their preparedness and capabilities as well as newly-manufactured weapons systems in different wargames.

Iranian Armed Forces recently test-fire different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of home-made weapons, tools and equipment, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircrafts, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.

Iranian officials have always stressed that the country's military and arms programs serve defensive purposes.

Defense analysts and military observers say that Iran's wargames and its advancements in weapons production have proved as a deterrent factor.

https://en.farsnews.ir/newstext.aspx?nn=13990508000878

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

Shahed-191 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## sahureka2

under the wings,
on the right hangs a JDAM-ER kit
but on the left indicated in white what it is

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> under the wings,
> on the right hangs a JDAM-ER kit
> but on the left indicated in white what it is


Thats a very interesting question.Its clearly not a targeting pod,nor a separate laser designator.So my own guess would be an ecm/eccm pod.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dariush the Great

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288866198340411393

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Dariush the Great said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288866198340411393


Very good modernization if you think of it, something interesting I thought about is adding a jet engine to the bomb itself which is what Denel South Africa is doing for the UAE to license. It increases range to 200km or more. It would allow the Su-22 for example to fire at even greater distances. Not sure how much modification it would need but it is certainly possible. It can use the Noor engine or something smaller.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Philip the Arab said:


> Very good modernization if you think of it, something interesting I thought about is adding a jet engine to the bomb itself which is what Denel South Africa is doing for the UAE to license. It increases range to 200km or more. It would allow the Su-22 for example to fire at even greater distances. Not sure how much modification it would need but it is certainly possible. It can use the Noor engine or something smaller.
> 
> View attachment 657201


that is a good idea but needs heavy funding though. there is a budget strain on both the IRGC and army however they have done miracles despite many setbacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Dariush the Great said:


> that is a good idea but needs heavy funding though. there is a budget strain on both the IRGC and army however they have done miracles despite many setbacks.


Yes needs heavy funding to do, but could also be applied to UAV, and helicopter even maybe as well so in the long run I think it would be worth it for IRGC and IRIAF unless there is already a cruise missile in service that can do this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> Very good modernization if you think of it, something interesting I thought about is adding a jet engine to the bomb itself which is what Denel South Africa is doing for the UAE to license. It increases range to 200km or more. It would allow the Su-22 for example to fire at even greater distances. Not sure how much modification it would need but it is certainly possible. It can use the Noor engine or something smaller.
> 
> View attachment 657201



Iran already possess jet powered Air to ground bomb:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Philosopher said:


> Iran already possess jet powered Air to ground bomb:


What is range?


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> What is range?



Original range was 100km, but it could be higher now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Philosopher said:


> Original range was 100km, but it could be higher now.


Hopefully it is higher now, even glide bomb can reach 120km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> Hopefully it is higher now, even glide bomb can reach 120km.



It seems to carry a hefty warhead. It has been around for many years, if they continue pursuing this project, range will certainly increase.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

رهبر انقلاب کدام دستاورد دفاعی را مصداق عبور از تحریم‌ها عنوان کردند؟
حضرت آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای رهبر معظم انقلاب اسلامی در سخنرانی تلوزیونی به مناسبت عید سعید قربان، جنگنده آموزشی-رزمی کوثر را یکی از مصادیق توان کشور برای عبور از تحریم‌های دشمنان برشمردند.







به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، رهبر معظم انقلاب صبح امروز در سخنرانی تلویزیونی به مناسبت عید سعید قربان در بخشی از بیانات‌شان با اشاره به تحریم‌های ثانویه دولت آمریکا علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران، خاطرنشان کردند: تحریم های ثانویه دشمن موجب شد کسانی در داخل در موارد متعدد، صدها مورد وقتی دیدند دستشان به خارج نمی رسد به فکر بیافتند و در داخل تولید کنند.

حضرت آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای بیان داشتند: ما احتیاج داشتیم به هواپیمای جت آموزشی در نیروهای مسلح و به ما نمی فروختند، ما آمدیم هواپیمای جت پیشرفته آموزشی کوثر را در داخل تولید کردیم. اگر به ما هواپیمای جت آموزشی می فروختند، ما امروز تولید جت آموزشی کوثر را در داخل نداشتیم.

جنگنده آموزشی و رزمی «کوثر» که رهبر معظم انقلاب در بیانات‌شان به آن اشاره کردند، از جمله دستاوردهای وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلحاست که ۳۰ مرداد سال ۱۳۹۷ و به مناسبت روز صنعت دفاعی رونمایی و به بهره‌برداری رسید.

این هواپیما که حاصل پژوهش و تحقیقات جمعی از مختصصان صنعت هوایی کشورمان در مجموعه‌های مختلف نیروهای مسلح و شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان همکار صنعت دفاعی است، پروژه‌ای در راستای دستیابی به دانش هواپیماهای جت مافوق صوت آموزشی و رزمی است که کلیه مراحل اجرایی خود را در مجموعه هواپیماسازی ایران (هسا) متعلق به وزرات دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح و با مشارکت نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران گذارنده است.





خط تولید جنگنده کوثر

جنگنده «کوثر» همچنین قدرت پیشرانه خود را از دو دستگاه موتور بومی با نام اوج که نخستین موتور توربوجت ملی ایران است تامین می‌کند که به آن توانایی دستیابی به سقف پرواز ۴۵۰۰۰ پا و حداکثر سرعت ۱.۵ ماخ را می دهد.





موتور توربوجت ملی اوج

موتور این جنگنده که بنا بر اعلام رسمی توانایی به پرواز در آوردن یک جنگنده تا سقف ۱۰ تن را خواهد داشت، از قدرت نزدیک به ۳۰۰۰ پوند رانش برخوردار است که برای مانوردهی و پایداری در آسمان مناسب است.
از دیگر ویژگی‌های جت آموزشی و رزمی کوثر، استفاده از نمایشگرهای دیجیتالی در کابین خلبان است. این نشانگرها که از نوع کریستال مایع است، علاوه بر نمایش پارامترهای مختلف پرواز مانند سرعت، ارتفاع، موقعیت نسبت به افق، دور موتور و... می تواند برای نشان دادن موقعیت مکانی جنگنده بر روی نقشه به صورت متحرک هوشمند و بدون نیاز به استفاده از روش های قدیمی مسیریابی همچون نقشه خوانی یا GPS دستی مورد بهره برداری قرار گیرد ضمن آنکه هواپیما در بحث ناوبری از سامانه های نسل جدید ناوبری تاکتیکی (TACAN) و ترکیبی (INS/GPS لیزری) بهره می گیرد.





نمایشگرهای دیجیتالی در کابین جنگنده کوثر

یکی دیگر از ویژگی های جت رزمی کوثر، بهره گیری از رادار پیشرفته و چندمنظوره است که به طور خاص برای این هواپیما توسعه یافته، ضمن آنکه بهره گیری از سامانه های هشدار دهنده راداری (RWR)، شناسایی دوست از دشمن جهت رهگیری هوایی (IFF)، مدیریت سلاح و پردازشگر تسلیحات، پرتابگرهای چف / فلیر، رادیو نسل جدید جهت ارتباط ایمن نیز مورد توجه قرار گرفته است که هریک به صورت بومی طراحی و توسعه پیدا کرده است.

پس از رونمایی جنگنده کوثر در مردادماه ۱۳۹۷، در ۱۲ آبان‌ماه همان سال آیین افتتاح خط تولید و تحویل نخستین فروند تولید شده به نیروی هوایی ارتش در اصفهان برگزار شد و در انتهای آبان‌ماه نیز نخستین بار این جنگنده در نمایشگاه هوایی کیش به اجرای عملیات نمایش هوایی در برابر حاضرین پرداخت و در همان زمان، امیر خلبان نصیرزاده فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش در گفتگو با فارس، از تشکیل تیم آکروجت نیروی هوایی ارتش با استفاده از جنگنده کوثر خبر داد.

کمی بعد در رژه ۲۹ فروردین ۱۳۹۸ سالروز ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران، این‌بار جنگنده کوثر در محل رژه به اجرای نمایش هوایی پرداخت که مورد توجه بسیاری از ناظران قرار گرفت.





نمایش هوایی جنگنده کوثر در رژه روز ارتش





نمایش هوایی جنگنده کوثر در رژه روز ارتش

***********************************
اما آخرین خبر از جنگنده کوثر مربوط به ابتدای تیرماه سال‌جاری است که در ۵ تیر، سه فروند جنگنده آموزشی-رزمی کوثر که در شرکت صنایع هواپیماسازی ایران (هسا) در اصفهان تولید شده بود، به نیروی هوایی ارتش تحویل داده شد

Summary
10 tone
Feet 45000
Max speed: 1.5 Mach​

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammed45

I came across an old fashion plane among British bombers on the Web called Avro Vulcan. I was just thinking, Could Iran develop something like this with more modern Design? This One has a delta shape, we could make it look like Russian white swan. Anyway the mentioned bomber :









It was a British bomber equppied with 4 turbojet engines. Iran has Owj engines for instance. 

Why we need something like this, there is an obvious reason for it. In order to destroy enemy air defense systems from Long distances also a platform for carrying air launched cruise missiles. It can have internal weapons Bay like Iranian drones carrying smart bombs inside their internal weapons Bay. In regards to manueverability it'd be a disaster but its going to be a bomber after all.

Just Wondering, could we develop something between British Vulcan and Russian white swan?


----------



## Philip the Arab

mohammad45 said:


> I came across an old fashion plane among British bombers on the Web called Avro Vulcan. I was just thinking, Could Iran develop something like this with more modern Design? This One has a delta shape, we could make it look like Russian white swan. Anyway the mentioned bomber :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a British bomber equppied with 4 turbojet engines. Iran has Owj engines for instance.
> 
> Why we need something like this, there is an obvious reason for it. In order to destroy enemy air defense systems from Long distances also a platform for carrying air launched cruise missiles. It can have internal weapons Bay like Iranian drones carrying smart bombs inside their internal weapons Bay. In regards to manueverability it'd be a disaster but its going to be a bomber after all.
> 
> Just Wondering, could we develop something between British Vulcan and Russian white swan?


No need in my opinion, too expensive and GLCM can do everything that it can.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohammad45 said:


> I came across an old fashion plane among British bombers on the Web called Avro Vulcan. I was just thinking, Could Iran develop something like this with more modern Design? This One has a delta shape, we could make it look like Russian white swan. Anyway the mentioned bomber :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a British bomber equppied with 4 turbojet engines. Iran has Owj engines for instance.
> 
> Why we need something like this, there is an obvious reason for it. In order to destroy enemy air defense systems from Long distances also a platform for carrying air launched cruise missiles. It can have internal weapons Bay like Iranian drones carrying smart bombs inside their internal weapons Bay. In regards to manueverability it'd be a disaster but its going to be a bomber after all.
> 
> Just Wondering, could we develop something between British Vulcan and Russian white swan?



Manned platforms for simple bombing missions are obsolete. Better to build a 4 engine RQ-170 high altitude bomber that can drop low RCS glide bombs or cruise missiles.

Such a platform needs to absorb radar and be fast in order to quickly penetrate airspace (Mach 2+).

That should be future of Iranian bombers

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> Manned platforms for simple bombing missions are obsolete. Better to build a 4 engine RQ-170 high altitude bomber that can drop low RCS glide bombs or cruise missiles.
> 
> Such a platform needs to absorb radar and be fast in order to quickly penetrate airspace (Mach 2+).
> 
> That should be future of Iranian bombers


Its a good idea. 

Just to add few points, drones cannot carry that much. Though they are good for penetrating enemy airspace. 
Drones can be easily jammed, especially when they enter enemy airspace. 

However, Owj engine is not enough and it rquires upgrade especially in Terms of Performance it's not powerful enough for this mission. Currently every Owj engine has a maximum thrust of 3500 lbf dry. It must be at least 12000 lbf dry in order to fulfill the mission for a bombing class of planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohammad45 said:


> Its a good idea.
> 
> Just to add few points, drones cannot carry that much. Though they are good for penetrating enemy airspace.
> Drones can be easily jammed, especially when they enter enemy airspace.
> 
> However, Owj engine is not enough and it rquires upgrade especially in Terms of Performance it's not powerful enough for this mission. Currently every Owj engine has a maximum thrust of 3500 lbf dry. It must be at least 12000 lbf dry in order to fulfill the mission for a bombing class of planes.



1) Drones can carry as much as a manned bomber it all depends on size. If US wanted they can build a pilotless B-2 bomber. 

2) Drones cannot be “easily jammed”, if that were the case countries wouldn’t build them. You have this warped notion once a plane enters a countries airspace some magical device activates that jams them. It doesn’t work like that. To jam a drone you would need the drone to enter a significantly developed EW/ECW sphere. These spheres suffer from limited range. See Russia and Iranian jamming GPS signals in Syria and Iran for examples.

A high altitude bomber dropping 200-700KM cruise missiles would never be getting within EW/ECW kill spheres. And a high altitude bomber is very hard to jam at 60,000-70,000 feet. Such a drone would be more autonomous as time passes (future iterations) and rely less on operator. 

3) You are correct OWJ engine shouldn’t be used in bombers. You need a engine that can go supersonic AND supercruise in order to escape threats. 

Knowing Iran they shy away from high tech solutions so they might build a more “disposable” version with lower cost. 

Nonetheless, a supersonic fly wing high altitude bomber even 1/4 size of B-2 would be a huge strategic asset for Iran. Employed in squadrons they can “finish” off an enemy after a BM salvo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> 1) Drones can carry as much as a manned bomber it all depends on size. If US wanted they can build a pilotless B-2 bomber.
> 
> 2) Drones cannot be “easily jammed”, if that were the case countries wouldn’t build them. You have this warped notion once a plane enters a countries airspace some magical device activates that jams them. It doesn’t work like that. To jam a drone you would need the drone to enter a significantly developed EW/ECW sphere. These spheres suffer from limited range. See Russia and Iranian jamming GPS signals in Syria and Iran for examples.
> 
> A high altitude bomber dropping 200-700KM cruise missiles would never be getting within EW/ECW kill spheres. And a high altitude bomber is very hard to jam at 60,000-70,000 feet. Such a drone would be more autonomous as time passes (future iterations) and rely less on operator.
> 
> 3) You are correct OWJ engine shouldn’t be used in bombers. You need a engine that can go supersonic AND supercruise in order to escape threats.
> 
> Knowing Iran they shy away from high tech solutions so they might build a more “disposable” version with lower cost.
> 
> Nonetheless, a supersonic fly wing high altitude bomber even 1/4 size of B-2 would be a huge strategic asset for Iran. Employed in squadrons they can “finish” off an enemy after a BM salvo.



The navy is building I believe a supersonic (or subsonic?) reconnaissance drone that may carry payloads.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Looking at the flight speed, Shahed 191 is close to being supersonic based on only Tolou engine.
No official specifications yet.
...


----------



## SoftKill

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1289611520767397889

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

TruthHurtz said:


> The navy is building I believe a supersonic (or subsonic?) reconnaissance drone that may carry payloads.


yes sejjil drone. it's speed is high subsonic and it can carry two glider munitions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1293854964712865793
خیلی روش حساب نکنین ولی
...


----------



## TheImmortal

Shawnee said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1293854964712865793
> خیلی روش حساب نکنین ولی
> ...



Could be any country really. Turkey, GCC, Asian countries, etc.


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> Could be any country really. Turkey, GCC, Asian countries, etc.



Even if it clearly says Iran, I would not hang my hat on it.
....


----------



## Mithridates

this images are taken recently (last month) in an air show in US. what fascinates me is the frontal fuselage structure. they constructed it completely vertically and in arrow or v shape and covered it by glass epoxy (to maintain mechanical features). i do not know about glass epoxy but around the world they make aircraft radomes of class fibers because first it is heat resistant and second it is transparent to radar. it means what radar sees of f-117's (actually most of the times does not see lol) is two flat surface. it means it maintains the mechanical benefits while reducing the radar reflection.














now another example of an stealth aircraft is x-47A. it is a delta flying wing. as i know US didn't even put that much of RAM on it. now look at it's RCS:









there are three point in that aircraft which have horrible radar reflection: 1- the + and - 60 degrees which in those cases the radar is perpendicular to the wings and thus the RCS is almost similar to an airliner of b-52 lol. however the vulnerable spot is very small and narrow to be a real weakness. other vulnerable spot is the engine exhaust (10 meters) which they didn't bother to make it stealthy. if we replace it with a saw tooth exhaust possibly the rearward RCS would decrease further.
the overall RCS of x-47A is around 0.01 sqm. f-117's RCS is 0.003-0.025 sqm. my point is we saw interceptor karrar. it was able to detect ababil drone (a piston engine drone) from 30 km away. so i assume it will be able to detect a fighter jet (<1000 degrees of c exhaust temperature) from farther distances. lets say 60 km. now if we manage to build an stealthy version of karrar drone and arm it with small and light weight missiles like israeli tamir missile of iron dome (40 km range ground launched and 90 kg) and program it to loiter like that unknown Iranian missile of houthis, we can solve our air superiority problem in case of conflict with US. we can add an IFF to them and enable them for swarm or even grouping against enemies.
this drone will be very cheap to make compared to fighter jets because of cheap material, cheap engines (microturbo=83k$,williams f107=190k$ and williams f112=300k$), no cockpit and no landing gear...
it's interception method will be similar to suicide karrar, it will detect enemy plane and subsequently moves toward it. if EO/IR sensor concludes that the target is getting close and the distance is decreasing (the image will get bigger), drone will launch a missile toward target. as the drone is expendable, the guidance will be the line of sight guidance (drone itself is locked on target and launches the missile and guides it simultaneously). drone locked on the target, and will continue to do so until missile's ARH or EO sensor detects the target and so the drone will disengage.
note the fact that the RCS of this drone will be around 0.01 sqm or less (if the issues i mentioned about x-47A get solved and we manage to build something like it). it means a beast of a plane like rafale (according to Thales systems detection range of 140 km for a 2.7 sqm target) will not be able to detect it until it's 35 km away!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ich

Mithridates said:


> there are three point in that aircraft which have horrible radar reflection:



I interpret it more like the radar came from the left (the direction the x-47 flys to) and the high amplitudes are the reflection of the frontal incoming radar to the side. Also the amplitude directly back to the incoming radar is very low.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Ich said:


> I interpret it more like the radar came from the left (the direction the x-47 flys to) and the high amplitudes are the reflection of the frontal incoming radar to the side. Also the amplitude directly back to the incoming radar is very low.


if i am not wrong the this figure is for mono static radars. they put the drone in anechoic chamber and record it's reflections in each direction. then draw it like this and enter the reflected energy amount respected to the angle of drone.


----------



## skyshadow

Reports confirm that Russia has agreed to sell to Iran Su-57 and Su-35 fighters, comparable to the American F-35 and F-16, as well as T-90 tanks, S- missile systems. 400 and KA52 attack helicopters.






http://french.presstv.com/Detail/2020/08/17/631961/L-ere-du-maximalisme-americain-est-revolue

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> Reports confirm that Russia has agreed to sell to Iran Su-57 and Su-35 fighters, comparable to the American F-35 and F-16, as well as T-90 tanks, S- missile systems. 400 and KA52 attack helicopters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://french.presstv.com/Detail/2020/08/17/631961/L-ere-du-maximalisme-americain-est-revolue


legit??
its press tv bro..should be.

ultra settings game mood is on....
and it will be hell to watch...anjoy..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> legit??
> its press tv bro..should be.
> 
> ultra settings game mood is on....
> and it will be hell to watch...anjoy..


agreed ,i had my doubts but as u said it was from press tv it self

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> Reports confirm that Russia has agreed to sell to Iran Su-57 and Su-35 fighters, comparable to the American F-35 and F-16, as well as T-90 tanks, S- missile systems. 400 and KA52 attack helicopters.
> http://french.presstv.com/Detail/2020/08/17/631961/L-ere-du-maximalisme-americain-est-revolue


Typical load of complete *UTTER DERP*,frankly I wouldnt be at all surprised if it turned out that our old "friend" *Babak Taghvaee wrote this bullsh!t*.




*Why-oh-why would iran even want to buy any of these things?*
The only one from this list that might be even slightly,and I mean very,very slightly,of any interest at all to iran would be the kamov and even that seems extremely unlikely to be honest.
About the only thing that I could see iran being realistically interested in as far as russian hardware goes would be the su30 or perhaps a two seater su-27sm3,tho this would likely be conditional on manufacture in iran considering the russians past chronic untrustworthiness and unreliability when it came to living up to its end of a deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Typical load of complete *UTTER DERP*,frankly I wouldnt be at all surprised if it turned out that our old "friend" *Babak Taghvaee wrote this bullsh!t*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Why-oh-why would iran even want to buy any of these things?*
> The only one from this list that might be even slightly,and I mean very,very slightly,of any interest at all to iran would be the kamov and even that seems extremely unlikely to be honest.
> About the only thing that I could see iran being realistically interested in as far as russian hardware goes would be the su30 or perhaps a two seater su-27sm3,tho this would likely be conditional on manufacture in iran considering the russians past chronic untrustworthiness and unreliability when it came to living up to its end of a deal.


Iran needs some new technology remember Army dose not cooperation with IRGC lot so they need technology to get them going, some new blood like Su-30SM and Su-35 and Su34 and T-90SM are on the top of the list and some attack helicopters as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> Reports confirm that Russia has agreed to sell to Iran Su-57 and Su-35 fighters, comparable to the American F-35 and F-16, as well as T-90 tanks, S- missile systems. 400 and KA52 attack helicopters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://french.presstv.com/Detail/2020/08/17/631961/L-ere-du-maximalisme-americain-est-revolue


Wrong translation.
It quotes an Arab journalist "Atwan" who says based on the publish reports, It *seems*...
Nothing of confirmation.

عطوان: ایران نسخه ترامپ در انتخابات را پیچید - مشرق نیوز

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

I wonder how many time we must say it , Su-30 is of no interest to Iran and why Iran want to buy air-defense from other countries when our own design suit us better?
and honestly whats the fascination of some people with Su-30
and by the way nothing is legit about the article and as I already said USA sooner give us F-35 than Russia gave us Su-57


----------



## TheImmortal

1 SU-57 costs more than the entire yearly budget of Iran airforce.

So I’m skeptical.


----------



## skyshadow

هواپیمای ارتش به فنا رفته

serious damage to army aircraft during overhaul


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> هواپیمای ارتش به فنا رفته
> 
> serious damage to army aircraft during overhaul


if the damage is that , then its nothing and is easily fixed.


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> if the damage is that , then its nothing and is easily fixed.


agreed, but how something like that happens


----------



## skyshadow

SU-35 in Iran Airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> agreed, but how something like that happens


usually trying to use shortcuts and not following the approved procedure to the smallest parts.
also a jack or something like that also may have failed and it fell

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Finally:
Iran will introduce a new airborne engine (probably a jet engine) in Aug 21. defense minister said this new engine will improve our technology for *at least* one generation.

وزیر دفاع خبر داد: افتتاح خط تولید موتور اوج و رونمایی از موتور هوایی جدید در ۳۱ مرداد | خبرگزاری فارس


He better be right!

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> Finally:
> Iran will introduce a new airborne engine (probably a jet engine) in Aug 21. defense minister said this new engine will improve our technology for *at least* one generation.
> 
> وزیر دفاع خبر داد: افتتاح خط تولید موتور اوج و رونمایی از موتور هوایی جدید در ۳۱ مرداد | خبرگزاری فارس
> 
> 
> He better be right!


The owj engine production line is no joke either. A great achievement!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> Finally:
> Iran will introduce a new airborne engine (probably a jet engine) in Aug 21. defense minister said this new engine will improve our technology for *at least* one generation.
> وزیر دفاع خبر داد: افتتاح خط تولید موتور اوج و رونمایی از موتور هوایی جدید در ۳۱ مرداد | خبرگزاری فا


I think its either the turbofan for the newly unveiled air launched soumar cm or a turboprop for the fotros or improved shahed 129 drones.It doesnt make any sense for it to be a new engine for a manned aircraft as the airforce has no new airframes to put it in

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Sina-1 said:


> The owj engine production line is no joke either. A great achievement!


Yes....,now if only the airforce actually had some new airframes to put them in......


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> I think its either the turbofan for the newly unveiled air launched soumar cm or a turboprop for the fotros or improved shahed 129 drones.It doesnt make any sense for it to be a new engine for a manned aircraft as the airforce has no new airframes to put it in


Well, it makes no sense to talk about new generation, when you haven't unveiled the previous gen. also he talked about it right after owj jet engine. so if you are right, then he is a moron!

Also we do have new airframes, both single engine Kowsar or Q313.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Hopefully an Iranian RD-33 turbofan.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

PeeD said:


> Hopefully an Iranian RD-33 turbofan.


i like P&W TF-30 more


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> i like P&W TF-30 more



Why would Iran build a high maintenance engine?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> I think its either the turbofan for the newly unveiled air launched soumar cm or a turboprop for the fotros or improved shahed 129 drones.It doesnt make any sense for it to be a new engine for a manned aircraft as the airforce has no new airframes to put it in



Iran has been working on “heavier” engines for more than a decade.

And why would you build a plane (airframe) before you have it’s engine? Makes no sense.


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Hopefully an Iranian RD-33 turbofan.



AL family Derivative would be better, but RD-33 would be still be impressive.


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Why would Iran build a high maintenance engine?


no better choice??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> AL family Derivative would be better, but RD-33 would be still be impressive.



Don't know where Iran would've got their hands on AL family engines, maybe Venezuela

RD-33 seems more likely, it would have more applications to the types of drones and aircraft Iran is developing. Would also make sense for a light-medium weight jet fighter and is readily available in Iran's inventory

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> no better choice??



The engine (or engines) Iran chooses to power its future fleet could end up being inside 300-400 next gen Iranian aircraft.

So Iran wouldn’t create a maintenance headache for itself because it has “no better choice”.

China (WS-10) and India (Tejas aircraft) represent good examples of why that logic can end up being a major headache.

The major question for Iran’s engines will be how long (hours) before they need major maintenance and how long (hours) the engines survive before needing to be replaced. Those are two major reasons China still significant lags Russia and US in engine technology despite massive military budget and extensive espionage operations on top of wide access to latest in Russian engine technology in aircraft its purchased from Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Don't know where Iran would've got their hands on AL family engines, maybe Venezuela



AL-21 is used in SU-22. Iran has SU-22.


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> AL-21 is used in SU-22. Iran has SU-22.



Thought you were referring to AL-31


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Thought you were referring to AL-31



Need to learn to walk before you learn to run.

AL-21 is better than RD-33 in thurst (dry) and afterburner, and in line in fuel consumption (I believe), as well as sporting a better thrust to weight ratio.

Iran’s biggest need is an interceptor to replace F-14. And for an interceptor you need a powerful heavy engine that can power a jet to quickly intercept adversary and stay in pursuit. So it will be interesting to see what Iran picks to fit that job. Tomcats can’t fly forever.


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has been working on “heavier” engines for more than a decade.
> 
> And why would you build a plane (airframe) before you have it’s engine? Makes no sense.


If that is true then that should`ve been plenty of time for iran to develop an airframe design,as any engine would almost certainly be a reverse/reengineering of an existing engine in irans possession,which would naturally mean that both its dimensions and performance envelope would be known well in advance and it would leave plenty of time to develop an airframe design and even a mockup.However the only remotely possible new airframe design that we have seen would be the q313,and we`ve heard nothing more back at all from that since its taxi tests of a few years ago.
But hey...,maybe you`re right and they simply decided to do things completely a$$-backwards purely for nothing more than sh!ts and giggles.I mean who knows,frankly when it comes to the iriaf literally nothing would surprise me anymore.
Altho if this is an irgc-af run program then that is potentially something far more credible.
As with most things time will tell I guess.


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Hopefully an Iranian RD-33 turbofan.


As of now, due to the grounded Fencer fleet the priority should be AL-21F3.


----------



## Sineva

Myself said:


> the grounded Fencer fleet .


When did this happen?


----------



## PeeD

AL-21 is obsolete tech.

Only Al-31 (no direct access) or RD-33 make sense for Iran.
Turbofan is a requirement, no turbojet such as AL-21 makes sense as key driver is fuel consumption.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## triangle

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1295989135581360128


> _Unveiling of turbofan engine for UAVs on Defense Industry Day
> 
> Minister of Defense: Tomorrow, the production line of the peak engine will be opened; A fourth-generation light turbofan engine for drones will also be unveiled. Two missile products will be unveiled.
> #Ministry of Defence_



Shahed-149?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

well i will be damned, its just *light turbofan engine for drones *


the production line of the *Owj engine* will be opened. an fourth-generation *light turbofan engine for drones* will also be unveiled too and two missile systems will be unveiled as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Well thats ok.

A heavy (>=RD-33) turbofan would be such a big deal that it would have its own unveiling together with the president.

A mini-turbofan with the option of a electric fan attached to it opens many possibilities for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## triangle

PeeD said:


> with the option of a electric fan attached to it



What's the purpose of that?


----------



## PeeD

triangle said:


> What's the purpose of that?



Its how the RQ-170 got its high endurance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

I mean what is it and what does an electric fan do?


----------



## PeeD

It slows down fan speed, which is desirable for efficiency.
Anyway it is no secret, google for how it works.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

i want to say maybe? but maybe not?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*He said that the light-weight turbofan engine that is used in the advanced drones will be unveiled, adding that the engine will noticeably increase Iran’s power in aviation and will upgrade the existing engines at least one generation.*


https://en.irna.ir/news/83914595/Iran-to-unveil-new-defense-industry-achievements

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

The Turbofan engine they plan on showcasing is a 4th Gen mini turbofan engine used on UAV's! 

It could be Iran's reverse engineered version of the Rq-170 engine!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> i want to say maybe? but maybe not?


Very likely I think,but obviously modified for drone use,ie a restart capability and possibly an extended lifespan by de-rating its output somewhat,conversely you could increase its output for a shorter lifespan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 662061
> 
> 
> The Turbofan engine they plan on showcasing is a 4th Gen mini turbofan engine used on UAV's!
> 
> It could be Iran's reverse engineered version of the Rq-170 engine!



That "4th gen." detail might be a giveaway that it is really the RQ-170 engine.

If true I look forward to see a 4-engine RQ-170 unmanned bomber variant that carries 6 2500km range Soumar cruise missiles.
This would create Iranian strategic/intercontinental aviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> i like P&W TF-30 more


Personally I`d prefer a supersonic capable soloviev D-30 based on the TU-154 powered variant,with a full thrust vectoring nozzle of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Very likely I think,but obviously modified for drone use,ie a restart capability and possibly an extended lifespan by de-rating its output somewhat,conversely you could increase its output for a shorter lifespan.


well its most certainly better than to Toloe 4 mini jets , ohhh lets face it we are just upset because of the whole RD33 thing.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran launches new engine for Kowsar fighters and new turbonfan engine for its drones 

The Iranian Minister of Defense announced that on Thursday, August 20, President Hassan Rouhani will inaugurate the production line of “Owj” engines designed for Kowsar fighter jets, as well as new products related to ballistic missiles. 


Brigadier General Amir Hatami said that on Wednesday (August 19) he presented a report to the Council of Ministers on the country’s defensive situation and the activities of the defense industry.

"The Owj engine prototypes designed for Kowsar fighter jets have already been successfully tested and President Rouhani will inaugurate the production line on Thursday," he added.

The Minister of Defense added that a new turbofan engine designed for drones will also be unveiled in the presence of President Rouhani. It is, according to General Hatami, a fourth-generation engine, first manufactured in Iran. He said that this engine will be installed soon on various types of also domestically made drones.

General Hatami declared that this new type of turbofan engine is installed on the most sophisticated drones in the world and that its use to equip Iranian drones would considerably increase the power and the capacities of these drones which will thus pass from the category from the third generation to that of the fourth generation.


As for the two products related to ballistic missiles, General Amir Hatami said specific information would be presented on Thursday.

As for land forces equipment, the defense minister told reporters that Iranian military industries are currently producing more than 1,700 items related to land fighting.

"In this area, we produce nearly 100% of the material needed by our land forces," he said.

"The Karrar tank production line has just been optimized and we are in the process of designing and producing new machine guns that can be installed on our military ships," he added.

The defense minister said that the defense industries had gained access to the most advanced technology in the manufacture of military equipment so that they “are perfectly able to adapt their production lines to the orders of different units of combat ”.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## triangle

So tomorrow will be a big and interesting day

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

Bamm! Maybe we get some data of the Owj engine ^^

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

How many times does Owj need to be revealed?

Rouhani is like Trump. He loves Photo Ops.

Guess it’s too soon for a 4th gen Iranian jet engine. Maybe in a couple more years.


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> How many times does Owj need to be revealed?
> 
> Rouhani is like Trump. He loves Photo Ops.
> 
> Guess it’s too soon for a 4th gen Iranian jet engine. Maybe in a couple more years.



This time it is Owj production line and also the newer engine. Apparently, Owj engine had several efficiency and longevity issues early after the first prototype.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> If true I look forward to see a 4-engine RQ-170 unmanned bomber variant that carries 6 2500km range Soumar cruise missiles.
> This would create Iranian strategic/intercontinental aviation.



What would be the speed of such a flying wing?

Me and you are on same page regarding a future long range supersonic unmanned bomber.


----------



## TheImmortal

Shawnee said:


> This time it is Owj production line and also the newer engine. Apparently, Owj engine had several efficiency and longevity issues early after the first prototype.
> ...



So then what engine is in Kowsar production models? Owj or F-5 J-85’s?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> So then what engine is in Kowsar production models? Owj or F-5 J-85’s?



Rebuilt J-85's or LRIP Owj

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> So then what engine is in Kowsar production models? Owj or F-5 J-85’s?


Very likely refurbished j-85s as it would be very foolish to risk putting a pre-production engine in a front line fighter.Then again its also quite possible that the kowsars themselves are in fact just pre-production machines used purely for testing purposes only.
Ultimately when it comes to the iriaf its hard to know what to believe.


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Very likely refurbished j-85s as it would be very foolish to risk putting a pre-production engine in a front line fighter.Then again its also quite possible that the kowsars themselves are in fact just pre-production machines used purely for testing purposes only.
> Ultimately when it comes to the iriaf its hard to know what to believe.



Becareful what you say. If you say Kowsar is a refurbished F-5, some individuals on here lose it. They been saying ever single one is a new one since Saeghe I then II then Kowsar (Saeghe III).

Maybe it’s like the Karrar....a modernization upgrade project to keep F-5’s flight worthy for another 10 years. Who knows. 

I take everything the airforce Branch says with a bucket of salt after the F-313 debacle. The fact they won’t give us the status on that project (delayed, shelved, in progress, etc) is quite frankly a joke.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

IRIAF sucks..


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> What would be the speed of such a flying wing?
> 
> Me and you are on same page regarding a future long range supersonic unmanned bomber.



Not high as far as can be estimated from the RQ-170 engine size. It must be greater than 600km/h for that proposed LO stand-off bomber.

Anyway it only adds flexibility. The platform itself is subsonic and needs a operational base to start from and its stand-off CM weapon needs a target that it vulnerable because that weapon is subsonic too.
The concept survives due to the huge endurance, stand-off range and automatic avoidance of enemy sensors.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Becareful what you say. If you say Kowsar is a refurbished F-5, some individuals on here lose it. They been saying ever single one is a new one since Saeghe I then II then Kowsar (Saeghe III).
> 
> Maybe it’s like the Karrar....a modernization upgrade project to keep F-5’s flight worthy for another 10 years. Who knows.
> 
> I take everything the airforce Branch says with a bucket of salt after the F-313 debacle. The fact they won’t give us the status on that project (delayed, shelved, in progress, etc) is quite frankly a joke.


I agree with everything you`ve said in this post...


----------



## Sina-1

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296347681078616066

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296348588440727552

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Kind of feel sorry for the turbojet Owj team. It’s obvious that the next step will be to improve and increase the size of the jahesh 700 turbofan engine which is decades ahead! Relatively quite, super efficient and 60 000 ft cruising capability!

4000 kg max take of weight aircraft is theorized for this engine. 4x of these would make a sweet bomber (16000kg) as @PeeD has speculated! Compare that with 12000kg max take of Weight of f5

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296353998069473280

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296366095021088769...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296404451318734851

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## triangle

Shawnee said:


> In a matter of second after this bottleneck breakthrough:



What do you mean by this?


----------



## triangle

What bottleneck are you referring to? I don't speak farsi btw

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

triangle said:


> What bottleneck are you referring to? I don't speak farsi btw



A turbofan with high thrust was Iran’s main bottleneck for decades.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## triangle

Shawnee said:


> A turbofan with high thrust was Iran’s main bottleneck for decades.
> 
> We would be happy with something in the range of RD-33 but it is even better.
> ...



Iran is still far away from a medium-thrust or high-thrust turbofan engine suitable for supersonic aircraft. Don't expect a modern manned fighter aircraft soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

triangle said:


> Iran is still far away from a medium-thrust or high-thrust turbofan engine suitable for supersonic aircraft. Don't expect a modern manned fighter aircraft soon.



An array of four of them can be used for heavier birds, until the next breakthrough.
...


----------



## triangle

Shawnee said:


> An array of four of them can be used for heavier birds, until the next breakthrough.
> ...



Yes in drones only but for a manned fighter aircraft you need bigger and heavier engines which take a lot of time to develop even if you have all the available technology.


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Raghfarm007, post: 12646501, member: 183634"] [MEDIA = youtube] uw11BlVEBOs [/ MEDIA] [/ QUOTE]
"Iranian manufactured turbofan jet engine with *1500lb thrust"*

but eventually not only for UAVs, to give an example of the past the Spaniards built the Saetta 220 with 2 Turbomeca Marboré VI turbojets of 4.71 kN *(1,058 lbf)* each

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## triangle

Shawnee said:


> What would be the problem of adapting Kowsar to host them? That would be a leap from F5 to F18.
> ...



You need 20 of them to match the f-18s thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Shawnee said:


> What would be the problem of adapting Kowsar to host them? That would be a leap from F5 to F18.
> ...


bro jahesh maximum output thrust is around 7 kn vs j-85 15 kn... the engine is for drones and light weight trainer possibly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

Mithridates said:


> bro jahesh maximum output thrust is around 7 kn vs j-85 15 kn... the engine is for drones aniid light weight trainer possibly.


 
I was under the impression that it is RQ170 engine. I will delete my wrong comments based on that.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran 140 is back baby with new engine it seems now its all Iranian ( even the engine ? )*













*Amir Khajehfard, head of the Ministry of Defense's aviation organization, announced the construction of a transport aircraft by the end of the year.
Iran 140 will probably return with a new engine



 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296465983637467138*

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Aryzin

triangle said:


> What bottleneck are you referring to? I don't speak farsi btw


 Questi si eccitano facilmente, probabilmente pensando che da questo motore passeranno a motori tipo F404 nel giro di un anno. Sicuramente qualche aiuto c’è stato, probabilmente da qualche paese dell’est. Anni fa sembra che abbiano comprato un motore Ucraino o Ceco.


----------



## Aryzin

skyshadow said:


> *Iran 140 is back baby with new engine it seems now its all Iranian ( even the engine ? )*
> They been using ATR 42 for some time now, they may have learned some good stuff from it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Amir Khajehfard, head of the Ministry of Defense's aviation organization, announced the construction of a transport aircraft by the end of the year.
> Iran 140 will probably return with a new engine
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296465983637467138*


----------



## scimitar19

Aryzin said:


> Questi si eccitano facilmente, probabilmente pensando che da questo motore passeranno a motori tipo F404 nel giro di un anno. Sicuramente qualche aiuto c’è stato, probabilmente da qualche paese dell’est. Anni fa sembra che abbiano comprato un motore Ucraino o Ceco.


Please can you be more specific at your language, people love to hear it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aryzin

It really wasn’t specific, just told him that people here get excited and think by next year Iranian will be making turbofan like the American F404.


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296373631476543488

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

This engine is mostly suitable for drones. It can be enlarged to some extent, but not a whole lot. So it’s poor for fighter jet application, better for drone endurance.

It could eventually make is way into the Iranian version of the Global Hawk (if iran failed to recover the engine) which I expect Iranian Global Hawk within next 3 years.

Knowledge gained will assist (indirectly) Iran to build heavier engines.

Next up is a medium weight engine that Hajizadeh alluded to 3-4 years ago, that should be revealed in next couple years at most. 3-4 years ago he said it would be ready hopefully in 3 years if I recall correctly. So we are technically overdue.. As well as heavy engine that is likely 5+ years away.


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran showed this picture and said "building heavy jet engine" ( for those who said its J-85 just look at the size of the man and the engine ) 

بلاخره ما نفهمیدیم این موتور قضیش چیه این اولین عکس با کیفیتشه درسته؟*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> *Iran showed this picture and said "building heavy jet engine" ( for those who said its J-85 just look at the size of the man and the engine )
> 
> بلاخره ما نفهمیدیم این موتور قضیش چیه این اولین عکس با کیفیتشه درسته؟*



That pic looks sus

Source?


----------



## Mamajama

TruthHurtz said:


> That pic looks sus
> 
> Source?


Look like F series engine or something.


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *Iran showed this picture and said "building heavy jet engine" ( for those who said its J-85 just look at the size of the man and the engine )
> 
> بلاخره ما نفهمیدیم این موتور قضیش چیه این اولین عکس با کیفیتشه درسته؟*


Definitely not J-85. This is huge! Where did you get this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> That pic looks sus
> 
> Source?


i posted a video of it like year ago and i posted here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> i posted a video of it like year ago and i posted here



Still looks sus

Honestly looks like a frame or still from a GE testing facility


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mamajama said:


> Look like F series engine or something.



Yeah kinda looks like an F110


----------



## TruthHurtz

Arminkh said:


> Definitely not J-85. This is huge! Where did you get this?



Reverse image search only shows other Iranian websites

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*its in Saha test tunnel*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mamajama

skyshadow said:


> *its in Saha test tunnel*
> 
> 
> View attachment 662743


Check all Iranian fighter engines maybe and compare them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

skyshadow said:


> *Iran showed this picture and said "building heavy jet engine" ( for those who said its J-85 just look at the size of the man and the engine )
> 
> بلاخره ما نفهمیدیم این موتور قضیش چیه این اولین عکس با کیفیتشه درسته؟*


That just looks like a J79 engine from the F4 aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mamajama

hussainb72 said:


> That just looks like a J79 engine from the F4 aircraft.
> View attachment 662749


Yeah it is, maybe reverse engineered?


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "Mamajama, post: 12651088, membro: 200366"]
Sì, forse il reverse engineering?
[/CITAZIONE]

Many others may say that it is the tests after the repair.
it's hard to confirm it's a new reverse engineering engine, more data and images are needed

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussainb72

Mamajama said:


> Yeah it is, maybe reverse engineered?


There is a chance it is, or that it's just an engine being tested after undergoing some repairs.

Anyway the J79 engine isnt actually a bad option for a heavy fighter, especially if Iran manages to upgrade it into a turbofan engine.
The J79-GE-17 which is installed on the F4E has about 53 kN of dry thrust and 80 kN wet.
There is the CJ805-23B which is a variant of the J79, converted into a turbofan engine. It's not an engine designed for a fighter aircraft, is shorter and wider than the J79-GE-17, and doesn't have an after burner, but its dry thrust has been increased to 71.6 kN.
If Iran manages to upgrade the J79 to a turbofan while still maintaining the same size, then the new turbofan engine will actually be an excellent choice for a heavy fighter, because then the engine's wet and dry thrusts will be increased, its specific fuel consumption will be halved, and it will increase the maximum altitude the engine can be operated at.

So using the J79 engine is possible, but it needs some work, but Iran is at the technological level to do such things, especially that we have seen the Jahesh 700 engine now. We should also expect an RD 33 engine as well for a medium weight fighter jet.

And for the light weight category, the best platform is the Kowsar aircraft, but with the turbofan version of Owj.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "yavar, post: 12651861, membro: 145498"]
[MEDIA = youtube] U8XQpnD1GP8 [/ MEDIA]
[/CITAZIONE]
A summary for those who do not understand Farsi, thank

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> [QUOTE = "Mamajama, post: 12651088, membro: 200366"]
> Sì, forse il reverse engineering?
> [/CITAZIONE]
> 
> Many others may say that it is the tests after the repair.
> it's hard to confirm it's a new reverse engineering engine, more data and images are needed


they are building all the parts from beginning

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *its in Saha test tunnel*
> 
> 
> View attachment 662743


I`d say its the jt8 low bypass turbofan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

i hate this version of the site

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> i hate this version of the site


me too. the whole point of PDF was it's background. you were able to focus on the writings and without any distractions you were able to think. that issue was the main reason i was not active in former IMF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> me too. the whole point of PDF was it's background. you were able to focus on the writings and without any distractions you were able to think. that issue was the main reason i was not active in former IMF.


right back at you, its too distracting now i cant write , cant upload without taking it like forever , i like the little threats bar on the right side of the screen it kept me updated with latest threats. now its all gone, man i hated the IMF just because these problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> i hate this version of the site



At the top menue bar there is a button "customize"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TruthHurtz said:


> Yeah kinda looks like an F110


It's bigger than F110 judging by that person standing next to it.


----------



## Ich

Arminkh said:


> It's bigger than F110 judging by that person standing next to it.



I cant believe that a person stays there while the engine test goes on full thrust. Its dangerous.


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## TheImmortal

Again I have earlier mentioned this before, but here is another source mentioning the engine path Iran should take



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297228234074005505

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Ich said:


> I cant believe that a person stays there while the engine test goes on full thrust. Its dangerous.


I was more thinking about the huge noise but I agree. I have seen many pictures like that. Apparently it's commonplace.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Again I have earlier mentioned this before, but here is another source mentioning the engine path Iran should take
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297228234074005505


Doesn't design information include the type of material? Does it mean some kind of CKD assembly in Iran?


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Doesn't design information include the type of material? Does it mean some kind of CKD assembly in Iran?



It just means the blueprints. No kits nothing. No properitary technology or techniques. Basically Iran is saying give me the blueprints and I will do the rest.

So Iran’s AL-31 will not match the quality of Russian AL-31 but even 50-75% lifespan of Russian AL-31 will be a huge boost for Iran that can be improved in subsequent generations.

AL family is basically the only route Iran can go. RD-33 is an engine that requires to much improvements for future gens.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> It just means the blueprints. No kits nothing. No properitary technology or techniques. Basically Iran is saying give me the blueprints and I will do the rest.
> 
> So Iran’s AL-31 will not match the quality of Russian AL-31 but even 50-75% lifespan of Russian AL-31 will be a huge boost for Iran that can be improved in subsequent generations.
> 
> AL family is basically the only route Iran can go. RD-33 is an engine that requires to much improvements for future gens.



Well of course also material capability specs, Iran would need to know with what material it can replace the Russian material. Only in that way you can get the same "100%" AL-31 the Russians have. 
But chances are slim anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Well of course also material capability specs, Iran would need to know with what material it can replace the Russian material. Only in that way you can get the same "100%" AL-31 the Russians have.
> But chances are slim anyway.



Yes knowing what material is used is part of blueprint. But how it is created, what techniques Russia uses, and the machines used to create such a material would not be included. Iran would have to reverse engineer how to build it. But the recent Turbofan unveiled Gives iran confidence it can do it.

I agree it would require a large purchase to compensate Russia for giving that over. It’s possible Iran can get the blueprint through China.

unlikely 1st Iranian AL-31 will be comparable to Russian AL-31 gen 1. It will take several generations to catch up to older AL-31 models. But even those engines blow away anything Iran currently has and would be a huge boon to heavy fighters.

AL-31 is the one of most efficient way Iran can move forward unless it plans to get Western Architecture engines through espionage and arms dealers.


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> Yes knowing what material is used is part of blueprint. But how it is created, what techniques Russia uses, and the machines used to create such a material would not be included. Iran would have to reverse engineer how to build it. But the recent Turbofan unveiled Gives iran confidence it can do it.



I bet the materials used in the Jahesh-700 are already superior to all 1980 grade Russian materials. So thats no problem.



TheImmortal said:


> It’s possible Iran can get the blueprint through China.



Only Russian have the blueprints.



TheImmortal said:


> unlikely 1st Iranian AL-31 will be comparable to Russian AL-31 gen 1. It will take several generations to catch up to older AL-31 models. But even those engines blow away anything Iran currently has and would be a huge boon to heavy fighters.



Its all about materials and blueprints, with both you get a Al-31, make everything according to the specs and you are fine.
Initially you will just produce some non-conform parts which you have to scrap.



TheImmortal said:


> AL-31 is the one of most efficient way Iran can move forward unless it plans to get Western Architecture engines through espionage and arms dealers.



That FJ-33 is not called a 4th gen turbofan by Iran for no reason, even that small thing has several technologies superior to those used in the 70's design Al-31.
But I love the Al-31.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> I bet the materials used in the Jahesh-700 are already superior to all 1980 grade Russian materials. So thats no problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Only Russian have the blueprints.
> 
> 
> 
> Its all about materials and blueprints, with both you get a Al-31, make everything according to the specs and you are fine.
> Initially you will just produce some non-conform parts which you have to scrap.
> 
> 
> 
> That FJ-33 is not called a 4th gen turbofan by Iran for no reason, even that small thing has several technologies superior to those used in the 70's design Al-31.
> But I love the Al-31.



I doubt Iran would be about to build Full AL-31 comparable engine in early gen. It has already struggled with Owj. Even China has struggled matching AL-31 performance with its WS-10 engine and it’s WS-15 has been in development since early 90’s.

So it should you give you roughly an idea how long it will take Iran to catch up to even China level engines if the proper investments are made.

China maybe more willing to share WS-10 blueprints with Iran then Russia sharing AL-31 blueprints. They are different engines yes, But similar performance though China still lags.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> I doubt Iran would be about to build Full AL-31 comparable engine in early gen. It has already struggled with Owj. Even China has struggled matching AL-31 performance with its WS-10 engine and it’s WS-15 has been in development since early 90’s.
> 
> So it should you give you roughly an idea how long it will take Iran to catch up to even China level engines if the proper investments are made.
> 
> China maybe more willing to share WS-10 blueprints with Iran then Russia sharing AL-31 blueprints. They are different engines yes, But similar performance though China still lags.



The times are different. Today you can do at your home pc the same for what you need a "supercomputer" in the 90s. Also most papers about nanotechnics, coatings and alloys from the 90s are open to read. The only thing what is difficult and need time is to optimize the quality of the production process.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> I doubt Iran would be about to build Full AL-31 comparable engine in early gen. It has already struggled with Owj. Even China has struggled matching AL-31 performance with its WS-10 engine and it’s WS-15 has been in development since early 90’s.
> 
> So it should you give you roughly an idea how long it will take Iran to catch up to even China level engines if the proper investments are made.
> 
> China maybe more willing to share WS-10 blueprints with Iran then Russia sharing AL-31 blueprints. They are different engines yes, But similar performance though China still lags.



WS-10 is a Chinese re-design, of course they struggle to get it running. Al-31 is ready since the 80's.

I doubt anyway that Iran could build a Al-31 in 3-5 years even if it had all blueprints and the financial will. Engines are no jokes.

They struggled with Owj exactly because they didn't have its blueprints.

Yes WS-10 would be also a option if Al-31 cant be get but also Chinese are unlikely to do that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> WS-10 is a Chinese re-design, of course they struggle to get it running. Al-31 is ready since the 80's.
> 
> I doubt anyway that Iran could build a Al-31 in 3-5 years even if it had all blueprints and the financial will. Engines are no jokes.
> 
> They struggled with Owj exactly because they didn't have its blueprints.
> 
> Yes WS-10 would be also a option if Al-31 cant be get but also Chinese are unlikely to do that.



WS-10 is based on western architecture (engine).

And Iranian heavier engine has been in development since at least 2015 if not longer. Recent engine was probably started 10 years or so.

Thus if we assume Iran start developing an Heavy engine In 2015 we should start to see some results by 2025-2030.

The next Iranian engine to be unveiled is medium engine which Hajizadeh said was about 3 years away about 3 years ago.

Heavier engine is of upmost importance since tomcats will start falling apart by 2035. Stop gaps like SU-27/SU-30/ can be used while Iranian builds domestic engines.

I expect some Iranian air force purchases as every branch is modernizing except the Air Force and I doubt Iranian military planners plan to ignore the airforce. Even the Navy and Army which have been historically weaker branches have been getting new ships and vehicles respectively.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

*1st Iranian marine, aircraft lubricant oil unveiled*





TEHRAN, Aug. 23 (MNA) – Iran's Pars Oil company unveiled the first domestically-produced oil-based lubricant to be used in the Iranian maritime and aviation industry.
The production line of the product was inaugurated in a ceremony on Sunday attended by senior officials from Iran Civil Aviation Organization, Aerospace Force of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, and Execution of Imam Khomeini's Order.
In this event, eight other similar products of the Iranian knowledge-based companies were also unveiled.
As reported, the produced lubricant has been developed with cooperation between Iranian knowledge-based firms and under the toughest US sanctions.
The projects have consumed $5 million of investments, Aref Norouzi the deputy head of Execution of Imam Khomeini's Order informed.
"The product is 73 percent cheaper than its foreign rivals and has met all the international standards," he added.
The domestically produced lubricant has been used in both civil and military aircraft in Iran but supplying it under the US sanctions was very costly.









1st Iranian marine, aircraft lubricant oil unveiled


TEHRAN, Aug. 23 (MNA) – Iran's Pars Oil company unveiled the first domestically-produced oil-based lubricant to be used in the Iranian maritime and aviation industry.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297841434117144577

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran produces homegrown amphibious aircraft for first time*

TEHRAN, Aug. 24 (MNA) – Relying on indigenous knowledge, the researchers of an Iranian knowledge-based firm have obtained the technology of designing a prototype for an amphibious aircraft for the first time in the country.

Being supported by Vice Presidency for Science and Technology, an Iranian knowledge-based firm announced that it has achieved the technology of designing a prototype for a homegrown amphibious aircraft for the first time in the country.

Researchers of this firm believe say Iran is among the top countries in the world in the field of producing amphibious aircraft which are capable of taking off and landing on sea, river, and dams as well the ground. 
According to this knowledge-based firm, approximately 70% of the amphibious aircraft is produced domestically, therefore it creates a high added value to the economy.

This aircraft can be used in the field of tourist voyages, sea and land ambulances, professional pilot training, cargo transportation, forest, border monitoring, environmental and marine pollution control as well as maritime research and rescue operations.









Iran produces homegrown amphibious aircraft for first time


TEHRAN, Aug. 24 (MNA) – Relying on indigenous knowledge, the researchers of an Iranian knowledge-based firm have obtained the technology of designing a prototype for an amphibious aircraft for the first time in the country.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*well Iran again showed J79 engine as an achievement in building variety of engines so we can be sure Iran has reverse engineered the J79*



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1298108926592868353

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> I bet the materials used in the Jahesh-700 are already superior to all 1980 grade Russian materials. So thats no problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Only Russian have the blueprints.
> 
> 
> 
> Its all about materials and blueprints, with both you get a Al-31, make everything according to the specs and you are fine.
> Initially you will just produce some non-conform parts which you have to scrap.
> 
> 
> 
> That FJ-33 is not called a 4th gen turbofan by Iran for no reason, even that small thing has several technologies superior to those used in the 70's design Al-31.
> But I love the Al-31.



The Jahesh-700 per pound of thrust should approximately have half the consumption rate of the J85 Owj (Dry Thrust)
with a consumption rate even lower than that of the Tomahawk F107 engine
And for a 20inch in diameter engine that's pretty amazing!

Aside from that, Iran just gained the technical knowhow of turbo fan engines and combining a lower RPM fan on a hi RPM turbines 

They also had a leap in metallurgy and achieved the capability of producing single crystal turbines

This the type of engine that can power Iranian UCAV for decades to come and will allow Iran to produce UCAV's that even advanced countries around the world will line up to purchase.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## triangle

There are rumors that there is a contract worth $7 billion of Su-35's for an unknown customer.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

triangle said:


> There are rumors that there is a contract worth $7 billion of Su-35's for an unknown customer.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644



Can’t be UAE as they are trying to purchase F-35. The size rules out any small countries and irrelevant Arab powers (Egypt and Saudi Arabia).

Only 3 choices: China, iran, and Turkey.

I would say 60-70% chance it’s Iran. The question is will the deal come to fruition or is Russia using this as a bargaining chip with the West.

The US may try to flood the region with F-35’s (Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Turkey) to counter Iran.

Iran at the minimum needs SU-27/SU-30 to defend its airspace. SU-35 would be a great order if it comes with the latest Russian radar used to detect low RCS objects.

Also an order for 36 SU-57 means that Iran can move to the F-14 to storage or reserve. 

This would give Iran 15-20 years to build its own domestic fighter fleet while having the LATEST in Russian technology to look at for reference.

A well worth it investment considering both the SU-35 and SU-57 will likely stay in the Iranian airforce for 25+ years.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

isn't this amazing??










they are flying at least at 300 km/h (minimum flight speed of alpha jet).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*look at the cruise missile on left wing*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299518482082443264
drones are taking the fighter jets role day by day with different concepts. imagine an Iranian drone with jahesh engine (1400-2000 kg max weight). it can perform both A2G and A2A missions.


----------



## Mithridates




----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 665266
> 
> View attachment 665267



DARPA makes a lot of things that never end up getting adopted. They are a R&D Branch.

The major problem with this concept is a C-130 is extremely vulnerable and all it takes is a hidden long range SAM or a interceptor with a long range BVR to fire on the C-130 and it’s over.

I support swarm UAV tactics. I think it fits well within Iran’s asymmetric ideology. Although I would support a version more akin to what Iran does. Drones that can launched from a pick up truck.

The problem US faces is trying to incorporate a swarm tactic when its fighting thousands of miles from its homeland. You need a “mothership” 

But a manned mothership especially one that has a HUGE RCS like a C-130 is non starter in my opinion. Way too vulnerable.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

triangle said:


> There are rumors that there is a contract worth $7 billion of Su-35's for an unknown customer.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644




confirmed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

yavar said:


> confirmed



That is a lot of money no matter how you look at it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

triangle said:


> That is a lot of money no matter how you look at it.




we have no choice

the only country which has such long range fighter with high end technology is Russia,

China is out of picture our technological manufacturing has same level but better quality than China so...

even if U.S offer us F-16 it is point less because of we need long range high altitude fighter high speed which can carry heavy payload


in another word nuclear striker, we are using SU-24 at monent as reaction force so ........

so we have no other choise

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

yavar said:


> confirmed


Iran signed a contract to buy SU-35?


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> we have no choice
> 
> the only country which has such long range fighter with high end technology is Russia,
> 
> China is out of picture our technological manufacturing has same level but better quality than China so...
> 
> even if U.S offer us F-16 it is point less because of we need long range high altitude fighter high speed which can carry heavy payload
> 
> 
> in another word nuclear striker, we are using SU-24 at monent as reaction force so ........
> 
> so we have no other choise



@yavar

How confident are you Russian will not again screw this deal like they did with the S-300?

We have learnt in history, many times, that russia is a very unraliable partner, they cheated many times on Iran

Syria is still waiting for the YAK-130 they signed with russia ~ 10 years ago

+ lets not forget the joint Russia-Iran Fighter Jet Project which russia left because of the engines

+ the pressure from Israel/USA will be imense

Lets hope that Iran will be able to reverse engineer the engine, avionics, airframe... within 10 years after delivery of the first SU-35 and we may see an better, "iranian" SU-35 in the future..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

Draco.IMF said:


> We have learnt in history, many times, that russia is a very unraliable partner, they cheated many times on Iran



That was in a different era, under different circumstances and different leaders. Now Russia and Iran are strategic partners and Iran has build enough of an independent military capability and can choose Chinese warplanes over Russian ones. Iran has the luxury now to pick and choose between at least 2 providers instead of 10+ years ago. And if the rumor is true, $7 billion dollars is something that Russia cannot afford to miss.


----------



## Shams313

67 costs 7 billion..??
or they included armaments and refueling tankers.


----------



## Mithridates

Shams313 said:


> 67 costs 7 billion..??
> or they included armaments and refueling tankers.


if I'm not wrong China bought twelve of it for two billions. so with seven we can buy 42...seems like we got some kind of discount.


----------



## PeeD

4 Su-35 squadrons are needed at the Esfahan airbase in the center of Iran.
They have the range to reach any area in Iran where IADS is under such pressure that support in necessary.

They need to fly from the central airbase with max. distance from dangerous border regions very fast to any border region. They need to have Russian air to air weapons, as well as long range BVR weapons such as the Masqood (follow on to the Fakkur).

Just take away the force from a U.S concentrated airpower attack on an IADS front sector at superior speeds and fuel reserves.

Two more squadrons for Hamedan for Tehran protection would not be bad too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> 4 Su-35 squadrons are needed at the Esfahan airbase in the center of Iran.
> They have the range to reach any area in Iran where IADS is under such pressure that support in necessary.
> 
> They need to fly from the central airbase with max. distance from dangerous border regions very fast to any border region. They need to have Russian air to air weapons, as well as long range BVR weapons such as the Masqood (follow on to the Fakkur).
> 
> Just take away the force from a U.S concentrated airpower attack on an IADS front sector at superior speeds and fuel reserves.
> 
> Two more squadrons for Hamedan for Tehran protection would not be bad too.


PEED, you have always praised the unconventional and innovative and cost efficient way sepah has achieved strategic military goals. For bombing and surveillance we have now efficiently replaced the need of manned aircraft with various types of missiles, rockets and other unmanned systems. Isn’t the best option to keep investing in domestic production and produce an unmanned multi Mach interceptor? We have all technological enablers on high TRLs. Personally I hope to never see Iran wasting billions on buying off the shelf legacy systems.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299941740997160960

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Sina-1 said:


> PEED, you have always praised the unconventional and innovative and cost efficient way sepah has achieved strategic military goals. For bombing and surveillance we have now efficiently replaced the need of manned aircraft with various types of missiles, rockets and other unmanned systems. Isn’t the best option to keep investing in domestic production and produce an unmanned multi Mach interceptor? We have all technological enablers on high TRLs. Personally I hope to never see Iran wasting billions on buying off the shelf legacy systems.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299941740997160960



We still are not there yet in terms of engines. So such a interceptor is still at least a decade away.

In the meantime F-14s are not available in sufficient numbers to generate the required interceptor sortie rate.

Its all about taking concentrated airpower pressure away from IADS weakspots. If we have this, defensive level will increase significantly. Its a investment worth it.


----------



## sha ah

Iran's technological manufacturing same level as China ? WHAT ? I'm sorry but I can't agree on that. China actually builds stealth fighter jets and aircraft carriers and has a large network of military and communication satellites in space. Iran has quite a ways to go until it gets on par with China. You could argue that Iran's issue is its limited budget but still they're way ahead. 

In any case Russia is closer to Iran and has better quality than China, so it makes sense to turn to Russia in regards to cooperation on weapons production and technology transfers.

Iran's military has come a long way in a short period of time and it is rather remarkable but still the airforce needs a large number of modern fighter jets. Iran's ground forces, Iran needs to acquire a better tank cannon, better sensors, perhaps a technology transfer on modern tank motor. Iran can produce some things but the quality is not on par with Russia, so why not cooperate with them ? 

Russia did screw around with the S-300, however that was because the of the UN restrictions. Trump has now completely failed to extend the weapons embargo against Iran and if Iran actually buys a large number of weapons, not like 20 jets or a token amount, but 100-200, Russia will not say no. Of course Iran should at the most only put down a small down payment until the fighter jets are received however I doubt there will be any issues this time.



yavar said:


> we have no choice
> 
> the only country which has such long range fighter with high end technology is Russia,
> 
> China is out of picture our technological manufacturing has same level but better quality than China so...
> 
> even if U.S offer us F-16 it is point less because of we need long range high altitude fighter high speed which can carry heavy payload
> 
> 
> in another word nuclear striker, we are using SU-24 at monent as reaction force so ........
> 
> so we have no other choise

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

UAV's will probably never completely replace pilots. A UAV can be hacked but a pilot is never going to follow instructions to bomb his own troops. 

Iran probably would have lost the war in the 80's if not for the F-14's alone. They saved Iran's skies. Iran's airforce needs an influx of fighter jets and modern technology. What is Iran going to do build F-5's while it's adversaries have access to 6th generation fighter jets in the future ? It's not fair to Iran's skilled and dedicated pilots. They deserve the best or something modern.

For decades Iran has tried to begin mass producing it's own fighter jet but the Shafaq, Qaher never made it past display models or technology demonstrators. Realistically the best Iran has been able to do is to produce 20-40 F-5 knockoffs. It's still a remarkable achievement considering the sanctions and the F-5 is a great workhorse but it cannot be a frontline fighter jet. 

Iran can build it's own jets but realistically Iran's airforce is badly in need ofan influx of modern, cutting edge technology. Fighter jets are only meant to last what 20-30 years ? 40-50 is really pushing it. Many of Iran's jets are on their last legs. Iran can either produce F-5's to supplement it's airforce or purchase a large number of SU-27's,SU-30's, with technology transfers hopefully SU-35's and if a miracle were to occur SU-57's. 

I'm still skeptical but only time will tell.



Sina-1 said:


> PEED, you have always praised the unconventional and innovative and cost efficient way sepah has achieved strategic military goals. For bombing and surveillance we have now efficiently replaced the need of manned aircraft with various types of missiles, rockets and other unmanned systems. Isn’t the best option to keep investing in domestic production and produce an unmanned multi Mach interceptor? We have all technological enablers on high TRLs. Personally I hope to never see Iran wasting billions on buying off the shelf legacy systems.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299941740997160960

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nasr

Draco.IMF said:


> @yavar
> 
> How confident are you Russian will not again screw this deal like they did with the S-300?
> 
> We have learnt in history, many times, that russia is a very unraliable partner, they cheated many times on Iran
> 
> Syria is still waiting for the YAK-130 they signed with russia ~ 10 years ago
> 
> + lets not forget the joint Russia-Iran Fighter Jet Project which russia left because of the engines
> 
> + the pressure from Israel/USA will be imense
> 
> Lets hope that Iran will be able to reverse engineer the engine, avionics, airframe... within 10 years after delivery of the first SU-35 and we may see an better, "iranian" SU-35 in the future..



Russia is not the unreliable partner, rather Russia only tried to be fair toward israel. However, as time progressed, israel showed it's nasty true self by actively supporting Georgia in the South Ossetian War. israel also showed it's nasty true self when it used clandestine means to transport weapons via Azerbaijan, through Bulgaria and into Syria, arming it's ISIS terrorists. One can liken the relationship of isis with israel, to what j@ckass evangelical-americans have with israel. And to top off its arrogance, israel used it's clandestine assets to start up a conflict between turkey and Russia, by assassinating Russia's Ambassador to turkey, in Ankara. Last but not the least, when israeli jets which conducted missile strikes in Syria, _used for cover_, a Russian Air Force reconnaissance aircraft when the Syrian Air Defenses engaged the pathetic israeli coward fighter-jets. As a consequence, the Russian reconnaissance aircraft was shot down killing 15 personnel onboard. 

A clear warning to Russia, israel is not your friend and they will backstab you the moment you let your guard down. As it has become abundantly evident. So continue to support that b@$tard-state of israel, will lead to your own detriment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

yavar said:


> China is out of picture our technological manufacturing has same level but better quality than China so...


lol no. China is 100 years ahead of Iran in terms of manufacturing&technology

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Iran can produce some things but the quality is not on par with Russia, so why not cooperate with them ?


Why not?
Well,sadly,the russians have proved on numerous occasions previously that they are neither trustworthy nor reliable,and until there is some very clear evidence of a behavior change on russias part vis-a-vis iran,well then any large purchases of this sort are a real gamble to put it mildly.....



sha ah said:


> Russia did screw around with the S-300, however that was because the of the UN restrictions.


No.That was simply the russian excuse,however the sanctions did not include defensive weapons such as sam systems.This was why iran was able to take the russians to arbitration and receive a 4 billion dollar judgement against them for breach of contract,so ultimately the russians either had to deliver the system or pay a penalty which was I think equal to almost 6 times the value of the original contract.Nonetheless they did drag their feet,first offering to supply more tors,then the s300vm tho this was called the almaz-antey 2500[LOL!].Finally when iran insisted the russians used the excuse of the jcpoa negotiations to finally supply the system almost a decade after it was first ordered.
The only bright spot in the whole s300 fiasco was that the original system that iran had ordered the pmu1 was no longer being produced so the russians had to supply a late model pmu2 with some s400 bits added.
Now personally I hope that the russians have changed,certainly the political situation vis-a-vis russia-western relations has changed dramatically in the last few years,so there is at least the potential for a more trustworthy russia as far as iran is concerned,but I think its still up to the russians to prove it,and until they do potential large purchases like this one,assuming its actually true that is,seem very,very risky in the extreme.However license production on the other hand seems a safer bet even if it takes longer to set up and may cost more in the short term,not to mention that local production would mean not having to rely on russias notoriously poor aftermarket back up and logistics support.
Personally I think iran should look at what both russia AND china have to offer and who will be willing to give the better deal.



sha ah said:


> I'm still skeptical but only time will tell.


That makes two of us...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> @yavar
> How confident are you Russian will not again screw this deal like they did with the S-300?



not very confident



Draco.IMF said:


> @yavar
> Lets hope that Iran will be able to reverse engineer the engine," SU-35 in the future..



we already can make AL-31 but not as good as Russia quality
maybe before october we test fight but there is very very low chance of that


17 Aug 2019
سرلشکر باقری اقدامات جهادی متخصصان داخلی در ارتقای صنعت دفاعی را مصداق بارز تحقق "ما می‌توانیم" عنوان و تصریح کرد: این مسیر عزتبخش از ساخت تعدادی قطعه ساده آغاز شد و امروز در حال ورود به _ساخت موتورهای هواپیماها_ و بالگردهای روز دنیا قرار داشته و به‌فضل الهی در آستانه دستیابی به خودکفایی کامل در این سامانه‌های ارزشمند هستیم.




__





سردار باقری: در آستانه خودکفایی کامل در ساخت موتور هواپیما و بالگرد هستیم- اخبار نظامی | دف - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


رئیس ستادکل نیروهای مسلح گفت: امروز در حال ورود به ساخت موتورهای هواپیماها و بالگردهای روز دنیا قرار داشته و به‌فضل الهی در آستانه دستیابی به خودکفایی کامل در این سامانه‌های ارزشمند هستیم.




tn.ai







this was first time chief staff of armed forces give way the indication


can Iranian member translate for this member thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

sha ah said:


> Iran's technological manufacturing same level as China ? WHAT ? I'm sorry but I can't agree on that.



what i meant was when it comes to making electronic warfare, avionic, radar and fighter aircraft engines. nano, metalogy, CNC machining, tools making machines ....
all to do with manufacturing fighter engine and internal pilot cockpit stuff, not actually manufacturing aircraft

i did not mean in space or telecommunication
if that make it okay

you would be surprised if you found out in some field of nuclear detonation technology Iran is head, but i don't do conspiracy tory

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## triangle

yavar said:


> you would be surprised if you found out in some field of nuclear detonation technology Iran is head, but i don't do conspiracy tory



And some people here castigate me for using open sources to guesstimate Iranian military capability 

*If yavar got it from the stoles nuclear files which Bibi made public, then his statement is regarded as open source


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 665951
> 
> 
> View attachment 665953


i'm wondering how long we should wait to see this fly...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

After the Iran 140 fiasco (An-140), hopefully Iran will find better, reliable partners, like Russia or China, to either purchase high quality parts from (preferably with TOT) or to co-produce. 

I'm not sure if Ukraine ever compensated Iran, but In my opinion Iran should have sued Ukraine for selling them faulty junk planes.



Mithridates said:


> i'm wondering how long we should wait to see this fly...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> After the Iran 140 fiasco (An-140), hopefully Iran will find better, reliable partners, like Russia or China, to either purchase high quality parts from (preferably with TOT) or to co-produce.
> 
> I'm not sure if Ukraine ever compensated Iran, but In my opinion Iran should have sued Ukraine for selling them faulty junk planes.


Ordering something virtually off the drawing board is always a very risky proposition and sadly in this case ultimately proved to be a bad idea,if even a couple of examples had been procured for testing in iran under local conditions it would`ve been quickly apparent that the aircraft was simply not suited to operations in the persian gulf/middle eastern conditions.
The biggest weakness were the engines,which performed quite well in their original helicopter turboshaft configuration,however they were obviously ill suited to a conversion into a turbo-prop.
However when one considers the not inconsiderable resources that were invested in this program tho`,its virtually criminal that serious attempts werent at least made to try and find a more suitable engine to potentially reengine the fleet with,sadly tho by that time rouhani had come to power and showed little interest,no doubt assuming that once he did his nuclear deal iran could buy all the western aircraft it wanted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran got ripped off, plain and simple. I wouldn't be surprised if the Zionists had something to do with this and if it weren't a case of pure sabotage. 

Like I said Iran needs to initiate a lawsuit in international court. Especially since now the Ukrainians are trying to take Iran to court over the shoot down of 752. But what about all the civilians that were lost due to Iran purchasing this junk that they can't even use anymore.

Of course some would argue that Iran should have conducted its own extensive testing on the vital parts of the planes before flying them, but when nations purchase such products they expect them to be safe and functional, certified, etc

Ukraine isn't exactly on par with nations like the USA, France, Germany, Russia or even China when it comes to production quality, but still planes should not be certified to fly unless they are 100% safe. 

Recently the US army asked the Ukrainians for one quantity of the BM Oplot tank for evaluation purposes however they could not even produce one single tank. 

Of course because of the recent situation with Crimea and eastern Ukraine, you could argue that the country is in a dire situation but still, 1 tank ?

Instead of purchasing these junk Ukrainian planes, Iran should have purchased reliable Russian military planes like the IL-76 for example and converted them to civilian use. In the future if the sanctions are not lifted and Iran cannot build its own, purchase civilian transport planes from the west or even Russia or China, this will probably be the most viable option. However if Iran does this, they have to go with planes which have a superb proven track record.



Sineva said:


> Ordering something virtually off the drawing board is always a very risky proposition and sadly in this case ultimately proved to be a bad idea,if even a couple of examples had been procured for testing in iran under local conditions it would`ve been quickly apparent that the aircraft was simply not suited to operations in the persian gulf/middle eastern conditions.
> The biggest weakness were the engines,which performed quite well in their original helicopter turboshaft configuration,however they were obviously ill suited to a conversion into a turbo-prop.
> However when one considers the not inconsiderable resources that were invested in this program tho`,its virtually criminal that serious attempts werent at least made to try and find a more suitable engine to potentially reengine the fleet with,sadly tho by that time rouhani had come to power and showed little interest,no doubt assuming that once he did his nuclear deal iran could buy all the western aircraft it wanted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Mc 21 is being ready....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Shams313 said:


> Mc 21 is being ready....


Almost ready with US engines, with the risk of falling into sanctions, instead it would be appropriate to acquire the MC-21-310 version with Russian PD-14 engines and for this we have to wait a little more time since only in July 2020 The first tests of connecting the PD-14 engine to the aircraft pylon were carried out




https://ircity.ru/news/48470/?utm_referrer=https://zen.yandex.com&utm_campaign=dbr

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Iran got ripped off, plain and simple. I wouldn't be surprised if the Zionists had something to do with this and if it weren't a case of pure sabotage.
> 
> Like I said Iran needs to initiate a lawsuit in international court. Especially since now the Ukrainians are trying to take Iran to court over the shoot down of 752. But what about all the civilians that were lost due to Iran purchasing this junk that they can't even use anymore.
> 
> Of course some would argue that Iran should have conducted its own extensive testing on the vital parts of the planes before flying them, but when nations purchase such products they expect them to be safe and functional, certified, etc
> 
> Ukraine isn't exactly on par with nations like the USA, France, Germany, Russia or even China when it comes to production quality, but still planes should not be certified to fly unless they are 100% safe.
> 
> Recently the US army asked the Ukrainians for one quantity of the BM Oplot tank for evaluation purposes however they could not even produce one single tank.
> 
> Of course because of the recent situation with Crimea and eastern Ukraine, you could argue that the country is in a dire situation but still, 1 tank ?
> 
> Instead of purchasing these junk Ukrainian planes, Iran should have purchased reliable Russian military planes like the IL-76 for example and converted them to civilian use. In the future if the sanctions are not lifted and Iran cannot build its own, purchase civilian transport planes from the west or even Russia or China, this will probably be the most viable option. However if Iran does this, they have to go with planes which have a superb proven track record.


I agree,screw the ukrainians when it comes to paying any compensation for the 737,it was insured and its the job of the insurer to pay the claim and then to attempt to try to recover some of the costs from the other party.Besides with the sanctions these sorts of financial transactions are very difficult if not impossible,who`d have ever thought that sanctions would`ve actually been to irans advantage,at least in this case[LOL!].
Theres virtually nothing left of the ukrainian military industrial complex these days sadly,its mostly just frankensteined bits and pieces of leftover old soviet hardware or vaporware like offering an225s or slava class hovercraft for sale which the ukrainians simply cannot build anymore.About the only thing left apart from black market sales ie rd250 to the dprk,is getting other nations to put up the cash to finish development of soviet or early post soviet weapons such as the iskander type grom 2 via saudi money in return for local production rights,tho interestingly the saudi-ukrainian attempt to build an132s fared even worse than irans efforts with the an140.
Sadly the russians fvcked their one only real chance at getting russian airliner production off of life support when they wouldnt supply the tu204 to iran with the ps90a2 engines because they didnt want to have to stand up to their new western bffs and call their bluff over the supply of the ps90a2s which had some western components,tho I`ve no doubt that aviadvigatel would never have agreed to work with pratt&whitney on the ps90a2 if they`d have known that doing so would`ve effectively given the us a veto over russian airliner sales[LOL]
I`ve no doubt that they`ve spent years regretting that one very poor decision,in fact right after the signing of the jcpoa they were trying to offer the tu204s with new redesigned ps90a3 engines and even talking about full licensed production in iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> I agree,screw the ukrainians when it comes to paying any compensation for the 737,it was insured and its the job of the insurer to pay the claim and then to attempt to try to recover some of the costs from the other party.Besides with the sanctions these sorts of financial transactions are very difficult if not impossible,who`d have ever thought that sanctions would`ve actually been to irans advantage,at least in this case[LOL!].
> Theres virtually nothing left of the ukrainian military industrial complex these days sadly,its mostly just frankensteined bits and pieces of leftover old soviet hardware or vaporware like offering an225s or slava class hovercraft for sale which the ukrainians simply cannot build anymore.About the only thing left apart from black market sales ie rd250 to the dprk,is getting other nations to put up the cash to finish development of soviet or early post soviet weapons such as the iskander type grom 2 via saudi money in return for local production rights,tho interestingly the saudi-ukrainian attempt to build an132s fared even worse than irans efforts with the an140.
> Sadly the russians fvcked their one only real chance at getting russian airliner production off of life support when they wouldnt supply the tu204 to iran with the ps90a2 engines because they didnt want to have to stand up to their new western bffs and call their bluff over the supply of the ps90a2s which had some western components,tho I`ve no doubt that aviadvigatel would never have agreed to work with pratt&whitney on the ps90a2 if they`d have known that doing so would`ve effectively given the us a veto over russian airliner sales[LOL]
> I`ve no doubt that they`ve spent years regretting that one very poor decision,in fact right after the signing of the jcpoa they were trying to offer the tu204s with new redesigned ps90a3 engines and even talking about full licensed production in iran


one of the their military product which is at the same level as world top players products, is the AI-222 engine. Chinese advanced trainers use that engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> After the Iran 140 fiasco (An-140), hopefully Iran will find better, reliable partners, like Russia or China, to either purchase high quality parts from (preferably with TOT) or to co-produce.
> 
> I'm not sure if Ukraine ever compensated Iran, but In my opinion Iran should have sued Ukraine for selling them faulty junk planes.


Looks like Ukraine is now doing its main "cooperation" with Saudi in Middle East instead of Iran...not a big loss for Iran imo..Iran is probably close to Ukraine in military tech and with the UN arms embargo about to end, Iran can go straight to the source of Ukraine's military tech - Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> one of the their military product which is at the same level as world top players products, is the AI-222 engine. Chinese advanced trainers use that engine.


Yeah,thats probably about the last remaining part of the ukrainian military industrial complex left that can actually produce something......unfortunately without the russians buying those engines anymore they`re pretty much stuck producing something that they cant really use themselves and that very few other nations want.
Rather ironic really.
Sadly for the ukrainians they made a literal sh!tload of very poor decisions thru out the last almost 30 years.
Ah well......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Iran got ripped off, plain and simple. I wouldn't be surprised if the Zionists had something to do with this and if it weren't a case of pure sabotage.
> 
> Like I said Iran needs to initiate a lawsuit in international court. Especially since now the Ukrainians are trying to take Iran to court over the shoot down of 752. But what about all the civilians that were lost due to Iran purchasing this junk that they can't even use anymore.
> 
> Of course some would argue that Iran should have conducted its own extensive testing on the vital parts of the planes before flying them, but when nations purchase such products they expect them to be safe and functional, certified, etc
> 
> Ukraine isn't exactly on par with nations like the USA, France, Germany, Russia or even China when it comes to production quality, but still planes should not be certified to fly unless they are 100% safe.
> 
> Recently the US army asked the Ukrainians for one quantity of the BM Oplot tank for evaluation purposes however they could not even produce one single tank.
> 
> Of course because of the recent situation with Crimea and eastern Ukraine, you could argue that the country is in a dire situation but still, 1 tank ?
> 
> Instead of purchasing these junk Ukrainian planes, Iran should have purchased reliable Russian military planes like the IL-76 for example and converted them to civilian use. In the future if the sanctions are not lifted and Iran cannot build its own, purchase civilian transport planes from the west or even Russia or China, this will probably be the most viable option. However if Iran does this, they have to go with planes which have a superb proven track record.



Some of the crashes were Iranian negligently using the aircraft in scenarios it shouldn’t be used. I think one where the plane crashed the plane was loaded with more baggage than acceptable putting further stress on engines.


----------



## Shams313

Beautiful systems and good level of manufacturing equipment...

Iran should invest on manufacturing technology development and machinery design...

They progressed...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> Beautiful systems and good level of manufacturing equipment...
> 
> Iran should invest on manufacy technology development and machinery design...
> 
> They progressed...



Built with mostly foreign parts (US/EU) using imported machines. How admirable.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> Built with mostly foreign parts (US/EU) using imported machines. How admirable.


Oh, u must admire them as they succeed to setup such manufacturing cycles...may be in future they have their own engine and other stuff...

I'm referring to the refinement of assembly process and good level manufacturing environment..just look at those airframes

And Which country such such machinery for aerospace and aircraft manufacturing?? Can iran have access to em??


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> Oh, u must admire them as they succeed to setup such manufacturing cycles...may be in future they have their own engine and other stuff...
> 
> I'm referring to the refinement of assembly process and good level manufacturing environment..just look at those airframes
> 
> And Which country such such machinery for aerospace and aircraft manufacturing?? Can iran have access to em??



If Iran was not under sanctions it too would have experts from all around the world helping build the project. It too would have access to latest machinery that international companies offer.

South Korea is certainly ahead of Iran in electronics and techonologies. But it’s naive to think they would be able to build a 5th gen fighter all by themself without foreign contractors/advisors/and technology sharing.

But I give them credit, their product is more domestic than let’s say Pakistan/Turkey/Japan’s future fighter projects that are heavily based on foreign technology and tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mustafa27

TheImmortal said:


> If Iran was not under sanctions it too would have experts from all around the world helping build the project. It too would have access to latest machinery that international companies offer.
> 
> South Korea is certainly ahead of Iran in electronics and techonologies. But it’s naive to think they would be able to build a 5th gen fighter all by themself without foreign contractors/advisors/and technology sharing.
> 
> But I give them credit, their product is more domestic than let’s say Pakistan/Turkey/Japan’s future fighter projects that are heavily based on foreign technology and tech.



Saying that south korea is more domestic then Turkey's future fighter is a joke and shows that you know nothing about both projects.


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran showed a honeycomb structure as DIO//AIO achievement in materials Its likely to be a radar absorbing structure for low-observable/stealth aerospace applications*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

Mustafa27 said:


> Saying that south korea is more domestic then Turkey's future fighter is a joke and shows that you know nothing about both projects.



You’re a joke. Turkey’s tank is a South Korean tank! What happened to your attack helicopter?

It is well known Turkey uses foreign parts in many of its weapons. Arguing that is simply shows your biased ignorance.

South Korea has already manufactured a successful fighter jet (T-50) and is way ahead of Turkey in that field.

But if you ask Turks they also claim they first found America not the Europeans/Vikings! So I shouldn’t spend my time debating such nonsense.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Iran showed a honeycomb structure as DIO//AIO achievement in materials Its likely to be a radar absorbing structure for low-observable/stealth aerospace applications*
> 
> 
> View attachment 666702
> 
> 
> View attachment 666705




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301823171260162048

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

shouldn't a modern airliner made in the 2000's be able to warn the pilots about excess baggage weight ? especially when it's enough weight to be a detriment to the lives of all on board ? 

It seems as if most of the An-140 planes that were ever built are now in storage. 

The Russians are actually the ones ones still flying them since they ended up making their own variant with more reliable Russian parts. 

Iran should look into working with Russia to perhaps procure some parts and possibly resurrect the ones stuck in storage. But they should only be allowed to fly after extensive testing and being fully certified safe.



TheImmortal said:


> Some of the crashes were Iranian negligently using the aircraft in scenarios it shouldn’t be used. I think one where the plane crashed the plane was loaded with more baggage than acceptable putting further stress on engines.


----------



## Mustafa27

TheImmortal said:


> You’re a joke. Turkey’s tank is a South Korean tank! What happened to your attack helicopter?
> 
> It is well known Turkey uses foreign parts in many of its weapons. Arguing that is simply shows your biased ignorance.
> 
> South Korea has already manufactured a successful fighter jet (T-50) and is way ahead of Turkey in that field.
> 
> But if you ask Turks they also claim they first found America not the Europeans/Vikings! So I shouldn’t spend my time debating such nonsense.




Well, i don't know how that is an answer to my question so i will answer it for you. The KF-X is less domestic then TF-X is due to the reason that they have no chance of embargo so they can use foreign systems and foreign engine. While, TF-X has to be all domestic so that we can't be blocked by the embargo.

The Tank was made with help with Korea, there is nothing wrong with that we got their technical help, while Armour was by roketsan, electronics by ASELSAN and Weapon by MKEK.

The Atak helicopter was produced with help from Agusta in 2009, and it has been updated since 2009 so all of its modern, and the domestic engine will enter serial production late this year or early next year as soon as its done is tests and gets its certificate.

Like in T-50, Koreans again got help from the American's for their KF-X. Korea built the T-50 with the help of America. That shows that they will succeed in KF-X, good luck for them. I still wish they would work on domestic engines tho, no matter its not good to be relying on other countries for engine like they do in T-50 and their upcoming KF-X, relationships can always change.

So thats it, i don't know why u replied like this to a question that i asked, when you could have just wrote my first paragraph and be done with it, but you had to attack turkey for some reason.

Edit: 
Wow i just checked the T-50 wiki page but damn most of is american or Israeli.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Total three part, things r pretty much detailed...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gomig-21

Mithridates said:


> i'm wondering how long we should wait to see this fly...



So what is going to be Iran's first big acquisition when the arms embargo ends soon? Are we going to see the long-awaited large order of Su-30s or will it be something else?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Gomig-21 said:


> So what is going to be Iran's first big acquisition when the arms embargo ends soon? Are we going to see the long-awaited large order of Su-30s or will it be something else?



Me is not sure cause after showing the new 700 turbofan there is a possibility that there are also bigger turbofans for fighterjets in production. So maybe only small order of SU-30/35, maybe 24-30.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Gomig-21 said:


> So what is going to be Iran's first big acquisition when the arms embargo ends soon? Are we going to see the long-awaited large order of Su-30s or will it be something else?



Either SU-27/SU-30/SU-35 derivative which ever Russia sells Iran. This is assuming Russia doesn’t screw Iran over again and not deliver a signed contract.

There is talk that an unnamed country put a large 50+ order in for SU-35 to be delivered in 2021-2022. That country could very well be Iran (maybe India).

I also suspect Iran will go for 24-36 SU-57 or similar amount of J-31 in order to build a deterrent next gen fleet. Arab countries will likely be acquiring F-35 in next decade. Pakistan will likely acquire 5th gen fighter from China on top of their own program. Turkey will either deploy their own 5th gen fighter or will acquire F-35 depending on how relations with the West continue.

This will leave Iran vulnerable as all of its neighbors will potentially be flying 5th gen fighters in the next decade. Thus a stop gap is needed before Iranian domestic fighters Become a reality (2030 and beyond).

Not to mention the F-14 May be able to kept flying to 2030-2035, but other Iranian fighters are at the end of their life span. Thus Iran will need to overhaul the airforce even if it plans to build a domestic airforce in the future that will take decades to implement and in the meantime they need an airforce that can serve them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Me is not sure cause after showing the new 700 turbofan there is a possibility that there are also bigger turbofans for fighterjets in production. So maybe only small order of SU-30/35, maybe 24-30.



There are bigger engines in production. But even if engine gets revealed in 2-3 years it will take 10-20 years for an Iranian fighter jet program to be established in large numbers.

Look at Mowj navy program, it was unveiled over a decade ago and even now they are still modifying the ship design and have only now begun pre-production of heavier warships. So it will take a long era of testing and modifications before an Iranian fighter jet is ready for mass production.

I think the best combo is a SU-30/35 + SU-57 fleet to power the Iranian airforce for next 25 years. That will give plenty of time for Iranian airforce to build their domestic projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Gomig-21 said:


> So what is going to be Iran's first big acquisition when the arms embargo ends soon? Are we going to see the long-awaited large order of Su-30s or will it be something else?


so far only su-30 officially confirmed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Xerxes22

TheImmortal said:


> Either SU-27/SU-30/SU-35 derivative which ever Russia sells Iran. This is assuming Russia doesn’t screw Iran over again and not deliver a signed contract.
> 
> There is talk that an unnamed country put a large 50+ order in for SU-35 to be delivered in 2021-2022. That country could very well be Iran (maybe India).
> 
> I also suspect Iran will go for 24-36 SU-57 or similar amount of J-31 in order to build a deterrent next gen fleet. Arab countries will likely be acquiring F-35 in next decade. Pakistan will likely acquire 5th gen fighter from China on top of their own program. Turkey will either deploy their own 5th gen fighter or will acquire F-35 depending on how relations with the West continue.
> 
> This will leave Iran vulnerable as all of its neighbors will potentially be flying 5th gen fighters in the next decade. Thus a stop gap is needed before Iranian domestic fighters Become a reality (2030 and beyond).
> 
> Not to mention the F-14 May be able to kept flying to 2030-2035, but other Iranian fighters are at the end of their life span. Thus Iran will need to overhaul the airforce even if it plans to build a domestic airforce in the future that will take decades to implement and in the meantime they need an airforce that can serve them.


Iran Definitely has an emergency situation in hand in regards to it's airforce. You made a valuable point about these countries soon acquiring 5th gen aircrafts. Iran has to have a feasible strategy in order to counter this situation. 

Personally , I love the PAK FA T50/SU 57. If Iran can get their hands on these it will be an astronomic stride forward for the AF. I do think that the unnamed country is infavt Iran. Lets see what unfolds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> There is talk that an unnamed country put a large 50+ order in for SU-35 to be delivered in 2021-2022. That country could very well be Iran (maybe India).


"rumors" are circulating. that Turkey is also interested in the SU-35 as an alternative to the F-35, but a SU-35 "T" version on which to have the possibility to install national components made also thanks to the knowledge gained during the participation in the program of the US aircraft
https://diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/5366221.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xerxes22

sahureka2 said:


> "rumors" are circulating. that Turkey is also interested in the SU-35 as an alternative to the F-35, but a SU-35 "T" version on which to have the possibility to install national components made also thanks to the knowledge gained during the participation in the program of the US aircraft
> https://diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/5366221.html


Yes but the SU 35 isnt stealth. So how wud that be an alternative to the F35 ? shudnt they go for SU 57 instead? or do they have their own stealth fighter in agenda?


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> There are bigger engines in production. But even if engine gets revealed in 2-3 years it will take 10-20 years for an Iranian fighter jet program to be established in large numbers.
> 
> Look at Mowj navy program, it was unveiled over a decade ago and even now they are still modifying the ship design and have only now begun pre-production of heavier warships. So it will take a long era of testing and modifications before an Iranian fighter jet is ready for mass production.
> 
> I think the best combo is a SU-30/35 + SU-57 fleet to power the Iranian airforce for next 25 years. That will give plenty of time for Iranian airforce to build their domestic projects.



We had this point some days ago. Me do not go conform with the propagated time span of 10-20 years AFTER having a functional turbofan. 10-20 years was at times when the computer power wasnt that great as it is today. Today one can everything simulate in a supercomputer, even earth climate or the explosion of a hydrogen bomb in the antarctic. So the only point what is time spending is the quality of the production line. And here we see the the 700 turbofan. So we can assume that the quality of the production line for bigger turbofan could already be on a better level. Maybe not high enough, but sure not far away. Also the design of the air frame and the stress points at the structure could be simulated with a supercomputer.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah

They have their own stealth program, called TF-X. It's being built by the Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) in collaboration with BAE systems. 

I'm not sure if this is a good idea in the long run for Turkey since the Saudi's are already dipping their feet into BAE. There's even talks of the Saudi's interested in purchasing shares of the company. 

Not only that but unlike Russia/China, who mostly have a non interventionist foreign policy when it comes to most nations, a country like the UK is very much politically aligned and entrenched with various global factions. 

This could easily lead to a situation where Turkey cannot acquire vital spare parts for their stealth fighter, much like how the Germans are refusing to sell Turkey spare parts for their Leopards and we all know where that has led to.



Xerxes22 said:


> Yes but the SU 35 isnt stealth. So how wud that be an alternative to the F35 ? shudnt they go for SU 57 instead? or do they have their own stealth fighter in agenda?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> We had this point some days ago. Me do not go conform with the propagated time span of 10-20 years AFTER having a functional turbofan. 10-20 years was at times when the computer power wasnt that great as it is today. Today one can everything simulate in a supercomputer, even earth climate or the explosion of a hydrogen bomb in the antarctic. So the only point what is time spending is the quality of the production line. And here we see the the 700 turbofan. So we can assume that the quality of the production line for bigger turbofan could already be on a better level. Maybe not high enough, but sure not far away. Also the design of the air frame and the stress points at the structure could be simulated with a supercomputer.



Sir please don’t say things like this. It is laughable.

US has the strongest super computers in the world, but look at the problems that emerged from F-22 and F-35 programs that took years to resolve. US has been making fighter jets since WW2.

So any Iranian fighter jet will have problems that will emerge that will need to be ironed out (see India Tejas as another example). Not to mention the supply chain and infrastructure that needs to be built to support a 200-300+ aircraft production line.

The costs to establishing such a program (infstructure, supply chain, personnel, raw materials, etc) could cost well over $50B to have the future architecture in place to manufacture large amounts of fighter jets. It’s not just cost of the program itself or the fighter jet cost, but cost of establishing the necessary infrastructure to be able to build large amounts of fighter jets.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Sir please don’t say things like this. It is laughable.
> 
> US has the strongest super computers in the world, but look at the problems that emerged from F-22 and F-35 programs that took years to resolve. US has been making fighter jets since WW2.
> 
> So any Iranian fighter jet will have problems that will emerge that will need to be ironed out (see India Tejas as another example). Not to mention the supply chain and infrastructure that needs to be built to support a 200-300+ aircraft production line.
> 
> The costs to establishing such a program (infstructure, supply chain, personnel, raw materials, etc) could cost well over $50B to have the future architecture in place to manufacture large amounts of fighter jets. It’s not just cost of the program itself or the fighter jet cost, but cost of establishing the necessary infrastructure to be able to build large amounts of fighter jets.



Well, read your post again and then ask yourself:

How could it be that the US put nearly a trillion dollar into the development and purchase of f-22 and f-35 and still does not resolve some minor flaws?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Xerxes22 said:


> Yes but the SU 35 isnt stealth. So how wud that be an alternative to the F35 ? shudnt they go for SU 57 instead? or do they have their own stealth fighter in agenda?



Hypothesis acquisition 40 SU-35 "T" aircraft strategy to fill capability gap, waiting for the national TF-X aircraft


----------



## triangle

Xerxes22 said:


> Yes but the SU 35 isnt stealth. So how wud that be an alternative to the F35 ? shudnt they go for SU 57 instead? or do they have their own stealth fighter in agenda?





sahureka2 said:


> Hypothesis acquisition 40 SU-35 "T" aircraft strategy to fill capability gap, waiting for the national TF-X aircraft



Well according to the president of the Turkish defense industries, there will be no stop-gap fighter purchase, other than a possible F-35 purchase. Focus is on the TF-X and probably most probably an indigenous F-16 upgrade.
But then again, you never know happens and circumstances might change. IMO low chance of a Russian fighter being bought because of the bad political consequences with the S-400 purchase. They might go for the eurofighter or more F-16's if the F-35 is not available.

TBH, they should've gone for the F-35 as their last fighter and use this decade (2020-2030) to build a formidable missile arsenal with precision strike capability with various ranges and association infrastructure like Iran has done for the last 30 years. Turkey is very similar to Iran in terms of geography suitable for underground missile bases and the like. They might not built an arsenal as large as the Iranians because of the higher prices, but the quality and reliability will most probably be better than the Iranian ones. Higher reliability and quality means a higher Pk.
All of this would mean shelving the TF-X program and go for an F-35+indigenous air-to-air UCAV. 150 or so F-35 with 300-450 wingman UCAV's, with MIUS, Akinci's and the like + a huge ballistic missile arsenal is a very potent, balanced and diverse precision strike capability. And the gained technology of the ballistic missiles would translate to other fields like air-defense and a space program.


----------



## Readerdefence

Hi so what’s the catch for russia & China to be head on with USA if Iran is not ready to bail out in terms of arms & ammunition which resulted in getting specific economic growth to Russians 
I believe so Iran will definitely get their hands to whatever they can get from these two countries now recently uae been confirmed with F35 and been cleared from IsraelI to get them from USA may be a downgraded version from the Israeli point of view in this case Iran will be a strong candidate for 5th generation mostly from Russian Origin as Chinese might not sell their J20 to anyone at the moment one the most demanding item from China can be type 52C/D class frigates or 54 class 
so if possible for some learned member to shed some light on my post will be appreciated 
thank you


----------



## Shawnee

triangle said:


> Well according to the president of the Turkish defense industries, there will be no stop-gap fighter purchase, other than a possible F-35 purchase. Focus is on the TF-X and probably most probably an indigenous F-16 upgrade.
> But then again, you never know happens and circumstances might change. IMO low chance of a Russian fighter being bought because of the bad political consequences with the S-400 purchase. They might go for the eurofighter or more F-16's if the F-35 is not available.
> 
> TBH, they should've gone for the F-35 as their last fighter and use this decade (2020-2030) to build a formidable missile arsenal with precision strike capability with various ranges and association infrastructure like Iran has done for the last 30 years. Turkey is very similar to Iran in terms of geography suitable for underground missile bases and the like. They might not built an arsenal as large as the Iranians because of the higher prices, but the quality and reliability will most probably be better than the Iranian ones. Higher reliability and quality means a higher Pk.
> All of this would mean shelving the TF-X program and go for an F-35+indigenous air-to-air UCAV. 150 or so F-35 with 300-450 wingman UCAV's, with MIUS, Akinci's and the like + a huge ballistic missile arsenal is a very potent, balanced and diverse precision strike capability. And the gained technology of the ballistic missiles would translate to other fields like air-defense and a space program.



Looking at Abqaiq, it is very difficult to beat the Iranian reliability and accuracy in missiles. There is little room to improve. Note that some of missiles are solely decoy or for electronic warfare.

So far I have not seen a single footage of a Turkish missile beyond 300 km range. I am not even discussing accuracy here. All I have seen about Yildrim 600 has been words and no footage. Accuracy comes after reaching the range.

I believe in Qaher more than Yildrim 600. At least Qaher is visible.

Speaking of Turkish missiles without knowing their missiles and what was done is wrong. Words are not enough. Erdogan’s promise was to have an SLV by 2020. Never happened. Even not a test. You can’t have secret testing of missiles. The world is watching it.

Also Turkey has signed missile non proliferation treaty and is bound to 300 km. Missile tests are not secret.

Finally ToT has limitations. SK had a satellite launch with Russian ToT that reached nowhere. Turkey cannot do better than SK.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Turkey is most likely not getting its hands on the F-35. As we speak many US senators are hell bent on imposing sanctions on Turkey for the S-400 purchase. This will be delayed because of US elections however they're teetering on the brink. 

Turkey's economy is currently not doing well and as a result Erdogan wants to claim natural gas fields from southern Cyprus to remedy the situation. The Europeans however are not going to stand for this and will surely impose sanctions over this issue alone, never mind other issues like Turkey building a serious missile capacity that can threaten Europe or the nuclear reactors that Russia is going to build for Turkey within the next decade. 

Turkey can always purchase jets like the SU-35 from Russia, that's on option, however the TF-X being produced by the British company BAE is what they're really looking forward to. Although like I've stated, with their current expansionist foreign policy, they might run into a situation where EU/US sanctions prevent them from acquiring vital spare parts for this jet. 

Turkey's current foreign policy has truly put them in between a rock and a hard place so to speak, No matter where they purchase their 5th generation fighter jet from they will seemingly have conflicting issues. 

Whether they choose the USA, EU/UK or Russia, their foreign policy will then be limited by the will and whims of those nations . For Turkey it would almost be better to buy from the Chinese, since China is not as involved in Turkey's immediate sphere of influence. However I doubt Turkey would purchase 5th generation fighters from China because of their opposition to the Uighur issue. 

Then there's the Korean KF-X,. At first glance that might seem like a good fit since Turkey is already cooperating with the Koreans on the Altay tank. Then again the KF-X is more than likely going to utilize a significant amount of western hardware and technology. The fact of the matter is that Korea is really nothing more than a US vassal so they're basically at square one, with the puppet strings again leading to the US.




triangle said:


> Well according to the president of the Turkish defense industries, there will be no stop-gap fighter purchase, other than a possible F-35 purchase. Focus is on the TF-X and probably most probably an indigenous F-16 upgrade.
> But then again, you never know happens and circumstances might change. IMO low chance of a Russian fighter being bought because of the bad political consequences with the S-400 purchase. They might go for the eurofighter or more F-16's if the F-35 is not available.
> 
> TBH, they should've gone for the F-35 as their last fighter and use this decade (2020-2030) to build a formidable missile arsenal with precision strike capability with various ranges and association infrastructure like Iran has done for the last 30 years. Turkey is very similar to Iran in terms of geography suitable for underground missile bases and the like. They might not built an arsenal as large as the Iranians because of the higher prices, but the quality and reliability will most probably be better than the Iranian ones. Higher reliability and quality means a higher Pk.
> All of this would mean shelving the TF-X program and go for an F-35+indigenous air-to-air UCAV. 150 or so F-35 with 300-450 wingman UCAV's, with MIUS, Akinci's and the like + a huge ballistic missile arsenal is a very potent, balanced and diverse precision strike capability. And the gained technology of the ballistic missiles would translate to other fields like air-defense and a space program.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Well, read your post again and then ask yourself:
> 
> How could it be that the US put nearly a trillion dollar into the development and purchase of f-22 and f-35 and still does not resolve some minor flaws?



It’s because the US Military industrial Complex thrives on overcost and over promise. These are publicly traded companies on stock exchange. Their loyalties lie in profit not countries.

South Korea showed that you can have a successful low cost fighter jet program. So it is possible.

But expecting Iran to build a completely NEW design 5th gen fighter and have it be ready in under decade is a wishful thinking.

Iran is at best on par with other countries in terms of rate of production and at worst significantly slower.

Iran isn’t WW2 Nazi Germany. WW2 Germany’s defense budget was 80B when adjusted for inflation. Iran’s is less than 20B. Thus one needs to have realistic timelines for sophisticated projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Very funny when people talk about Iranian fighter jets. Iran is far from being a great weakness and all of their planes are improved. Platforms like the F-5 Kowsar and the F-4 are constantly improving technology. Through these platforms and the new associated technology, Iran is building new combat aircraft.

For the purchase of Russian aircraft, I prefer the almost final version of the mig-35. We will have news of the final version soon from Russia. For the Kowsar, this is not a fighter plane to be taken lightly. And as General Hatami says:

"Whatever it looks like the F-5, the Kowsar fighter plane was designed and produced from A to Z by Iranian experts," Iranian Defense Minister reiterated, adding that four Kowsar fighter jets were already operational in the army air force. “What sets the Kowsar and the F-5 apart is that the Iranian aircraft has a very sophisticated avionics system that is in line with modern technology and our defense needs, a system that has made it a fighter jet. formidable ”, said General Hatami


----------



## triangle

sha ah said:


> Turkey is most likely not getting its hands on the F-35. As we speak many US senators are hell bent on imposing sanctions on Turkey for the S-400 purchase. This will be delayed because of US elections however they're teetering on the brink.



The sanctions have already been placed through the CAATSA. No F-35 for this moment, although they are trying to find ways around it. If I had to choose between F-35 and S-400, I would choose the F-35.



sha ah said:


> Turkey's economy is currently not doing well and as a result Erdogan wants to claim natural gas fields from southern Cyprus to remedy the situation. The Europeans however are not going to stand for this and will surely impose sanctions over this issue alone, never mind other issues like Turkey building a serious missile capacity that can threaten Europe or the nuclear reactors that Russia is going to build for Turkey within the next decade.



I'm sure it won't go that far. 



sha ah said:


> Turkey can always purchase jets like the SU-35 from Russia, that's on option, however the TF-X being produced by the British company BAE is what they're really looking forward to. Although like I've stated, with their current expansionist foreign policy, they might run into a situation where EU/US sanctions prevent them from acquiring vital spare parts for this jet.



Buying Su-35 would bring more sanctions to the table. TF-X is not produced by BAE. They are providing engineering assistance. The TF-X is going to be built indigenous by Turkey with full IP and export rights. IMO I could see the whole project shelved or cancelled before the Turks allow any foreign control to production and export to occur. 



sha ah said:


> Turkey's current foreign policy has truly put them in between a rock and a hard place so to speak, No matter where they purchase their 5th generation fighter jet from they will seemingly have conflicting issues. Whether they choose the USA, EU/UK or Russia, their foreign policy will then be limited by the will and whims of those nations . For Turkey it would almost be better to buy from the Chinese, since China is not as involved in Turkey's immediate sphere of influence. However I doubt Turkey would purchase 5th generation fighters from China because of their opposition to the Uighur issue.



There are few countries in the world that can pursue an independent foreign policy. It takes guts and ambition to do that. As an Iranian you surely do understand.




sha ah said:


> Then there's the Korean KF-X,. At first glance that might seem like a good fit since Turkey is already cooperating with the Koreans on the Altay tank. Then again the KF-X is more than likely going to utilize a significant amount of western hardware and technology. The fact of the matter is that Korea is really nothing more than a US vassal so they're basically at square one, with the puppet strings again leading to the US.



And that is what Turkey is trying to avoid, being dependent on others on these strategic issues.


IMO Turkey should pursue a large and diverse ballistic missile program instead of the TF-X.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> It’s because the US Military industrial Complex thrives on overcost and over promise. These are publicly traded companies on stock exchange. Their loyalties lie in profit not countries.



Yes. So the time frame differ with the time frame of a country which needed a solution to survive. Me is sure that the US would have build the F-35 from scratch to mass production within 5 years if the future of the country depends on it.



> South Korea showed that you can have a successful low cost fighter jet program. So it is possible.



I didnt see much in the vid. I saw robotics, a saw an air frame construction with the help of robotics, and when the vid was over, me ask myself if i saw a commercial for production robots or else.



> But expecting Iran to build a completely NEW design 5th gen fighter and have it be ready in under decade is a wishful thinking.



Ah, here is the point where we both misinterpret us. I wrote about a 4-4,5 gen Fighter (e.g. SU-30/35), you wrote about a 5 gen fighter 



> Iran is at best on par with other countries in terms of rate of production and at worst significantly slower.



With what countries?



> Iran isn’t WW2 Nazi Germany. WW2 Germany’s defense budget was 80B when adjusted for inflation. Iran’s is less than 20B. Thus one needs to have realistic timelines for sophisticated projects.



Its modern time. No one cares about a budget from ww2.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Yes. So the time frame differ with the time frame of a country which needed a solution to survive. Me is sure that the US would have build the F-35 from scratch to mass production within 5 years if the future of the country depends on it.
> 
> 
> 
> I didnt see much in the vid. I saw robotics, a saw an air frame construction with the help of robotics, and when the vid was over, me ask myself if i saw a commercial for production robots or else.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, here is the point where we both misinterpret us. I wrote about a 4-4,5 gen Fighter (e.g. SU-30/35), you wrote about a 5 gen fighter
> 
> 
> 
> With what countries?
> 
> 
> 
> Its modern time. No one cares about a budget from ww2.



F-35 in 5 years? Come on now. You need 5 years just to get to prototype testing. Let’s not say funny words now.

And I was talking about South Korea’s successful supersonic trainer the T-50. This isn’t their first rodeo.

In terms of production of military projects Iran is on par with Western/Eastern countries in terms of timetable in BEST case scenario. For you to field a fighter jet in 5 years (like you say) you would need to be ahead of Russia/China/US in R&D to production schedule which Iran is not by any means. Hence why I said best case scenario they could be on par. (Which is optimistic).

Bavar, Mowj, Fateh show you time from R&D to production in Iran for major defense projects takes time. Iran with little experience and limited infrastructure cannot hope to field a SU-30 equivalent project in 5 years.

F-313 was a possibility since it was unveiled long time ago in concept stage so by 2025 would be over 10+ years in production schedule. But I think that project was shelved since Iran rarely ever mentions the project anymore.

So only way Iran produces a fighter jet in next 5 years in mass production phase is if they have Been secretly working on a design for past 5-10 years. It’s possible, not likely but possible. I think until the Research engines reach maturity and are ready for production nothing can truly begin. But that’s my opinion.


----------



## PeeD

Shams313 said:


> Total three part, things r pretty much detailed...



Love that statement on the video: Most important and critical system of the Su-57, is the engine.

I also love this statement by Irans DM Hatami: 90% of our defense needs we meet by ourselves, the reminder 10% is not critical for our defense capability (meaning fighters and the air force)

So fist fighters are not critical and second without an Iranian engine things go nowhere.

S.Korea gets U.S engines as highly industrialized country and Turkey basically hopes for the UK to built it a engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> F-35 in 5 years? Come on now. You need 5 years just to get to prototype testing. Let’s not say funny words now.



F-35 in 5 years is my assessment of the max US military air plane development and production capability if they would go all in. 



> And I was talking about South Korea’s successful supersonic trainer the T-50. This isn’t their first rodeo.



ok



> In terms of production of military projects Iran is on par with Western/Eastern countries in terms of timetable in BEST case scenario. For you to field a fighter jet in 5 years (like you say) you would need to be ahead of Russia/China/US in R&D to production schedule which Iran is not by any means. Hence why I said best case scenario they could be on par. (Which is optimistic).
> 
> Bavar, Mowj, Fateh show you time from R&D to production in Iran for major defense projects takes time. Iran with little experience and limited infrastructure cannot hope to field a SU-30 equivalent project in 5 years.
> 
> F-313 was a possibility since it was unveiled long time ago in concept stage so by 2025 would be over 10+ years in production schedule. But I think that project was shelved since Iran rarely ever mentions the project anymore.
> 
> So only way Iran produces a fighter jet in next 5 years in mass production phase is if they have Been secretly working on a design for past 5-10 years. It’s possible, not likely but possible. I think until the Research engines reach maturity and are ready for production nothing can truly begin. But that’s my opinion.



The "5 years" from scratch to mass was ment for the US capability. For Iran me think that there are already various fighter planes virtually constructed and the building prototype phase of this planes will start when the turbofan is ready.


----------



## Shams313

PeeD said:


> Love that statement on the video: Most important and critical system of the Su-57, is the engine.
> 
> I also love this statement by Irans DM Hatami: 90% of our defense needs we meet by ourselves, the reminder 10% is not critical for our defense capability (meaning fighters and the air force)
> 
> So fist fighters are not critical and second without an Iranian engine things go nowhere.
> 
> S.Korea gets U.S engines as highly industrialized country and Turkey basically hopes for the UK to built it a engine.


but if there is a possibility to buy those birds, Iran should do it...

that brings new technology, concepts and meanwhile, Iranian engines are being ready.

Iran definitely should go for 50 su57 in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Russia almost certainly won't sell Iran the Su-57.

As said in one of my previous posts: 4-6 squadrons of Su-35 would soften the pressure on Irans IADS from a concentrated enemy airpower attack on a single sector.
But that's not a critical issue, just adds flexibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Russia almost certainly won't sell Iran the Su-57.
> 
> As said in one of my previous posts: 4-6 squadrons of Su-35 would soften the pressure on Irans IADS from a concentrated enemy airpower attack on a single sector.
> But that's not a critical issue, just adds flexibility.


Hey man, do you think iran is one of top countries by ADs and what do they miss for them to have a fully IADS? Last thing Why the Bavar-373 isn’t operational yet?!


----------



## PeeD

Saleh99 said:


> Hey man, do you think iran is one of top countries by ADs and what do they miss for them to have a fully IADS? Last thing Why the Bavar-373 isn’t operational yet?!



Haha perfect timing:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1302575252925566977

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Russia almost certainly won't sell Iran the Su-57.
> 
> As said in one of my previous posts: 4-6 squadrons of Su-35 would soften the pressure on Irans IADS from a concentrated enemy airpower attack on a single sector.
> But that's not a critical issue, just adds flexibility.



Russia has offered SU-57 to Turkey. The issue of selling SU-57 to Iran is mostly political.

Sukhoi desperately needs buyers as both India and Russia have cut back their demand for the fighter jet. At the end of the day they are a business and need to recoup the money they invested in such a project.

With most of the region fielding F-35s or 5th gen fighters, the issue becomes less controversial.

I think Iran can likely get its hands on SU-57 or J-31 as long as neither Russia or China decide to play games.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gomig-21

TheImmortal said:


> There is talk that an unnamed country put a large 50+ order in for SU-35 to be delivered in 2021-2022. That country could very well be Iran (maybe India).



Are you talking about a separate order from the Egyptian 30 aircraft? The last report of 50+ showed 30 of those (of which 10 have already been delivered) were EAF aircraft and the other 20+ were most likely Algeria. 
Or are you speaking of a different source? Can you link it?



Mithridates said:


> so far only su-30 officially confirmed.



That's what I thought and what we've been hearing for quite sometime in that the IRIAF really liked the Su-30 and was prepared to purchase a ridiculous amount of them just to instantaneously augment the air force capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Russia has offered SU-57 to Turkey. The issue of selling SU-57 to Iran is mostly political.
> 
> Sukhoi desperately needs buyers as both India and Russia have cut back their demand for the fighter jet. At the end of the day they are a business and need to recoup the money they invested in such a project.
> 
> With most of the region fielding F-35s or 5th gen fighters, the issue becomes less controversial.
> 
> I think Iran can likely get its hands on SU-57 or J-31 as long as neither Russia or China decide to play games.



lol

Why do I get the feeling that they will play games. After-all Russia did so last time and there is incentive for them to do it again this time (or at least it seems that way). We an only hope they don't treat Iran like some geo-political punching bag to be tossed around like some woeful prize piece for whatever arbitrary goal....

Sorry, I and many others were so badly spurned and disenfranchised by the S-300 debacle that it left a damn-near permanent bad mark on the Russians for me. How a nation could not give the systems Iran *bought *amidst credible threats against its infrastructure just saddens me. Playing games like that with a nation that needed (at that time) such ADs makes my blood boil....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Gomig-21 said:


> Are you talking about a separate order from the Egyptian 30 aircraft? The last report of 50+ showed 30 of those (of which 10 have already been delivered) were EAF aircraft and the other 20+ were most likely Algeria.
> Or are you speaking of a different source? Can you link it?
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I thought and what we've been hearing for quite sometime in that the IRIAF really liked the Su-30 and was prepared to purchase a ridiculous amount of them just to instantaneously augment the air force capabilities.


Iran wants to replace f-4 fleet with su-30 so yes the purchase will be a large one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gomig-21

Mithridates said:


> Iran wants to replace f-4 fleet with su-30 so yes the purchase will be a large one.



I think the count of 200 Su-30s in the rumor was a bit crazy TBH. But I still think it could easily be close to 50 aircraft which would be an amazing start anyway. Not anyone can just go out and buy 50 Su-30s. So yeah, the 200 I think was getting stretched out by rumors, but if we hear an initial order of 50, then maybe an additional order of Su-35s beyond that could take place. You have to consider Russia's ability to supply all these orders, too. That obviously has a lot to do with it also.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hormuz

Mithridates said:


> Iran wants to replace f-4 fleet with su-30 so yes the purchase will be a large one.



How many f-4 are operational? in wikipedia it says 47 from which 16 are f-4re. but i think the number is larger. is there any other reiable source teh wikipedia?


----------



## Mithridates

Hormuz said:


> How many f-4 are operational? in wikipedia it says 47 from which 16 are f-4re. but i think the number is larger. is there any other reiable source teh wikipedia?


i don't know bro. you can not find a reliable source as Iran itself does not publishes the numbers and the rest are merely speculations.


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> Russia has offered SU-57 to Turkey. The issue of selling SU-57 to Iran is mostly political.
> 
> Sukhoi desperately needs buyers as both India and Russia have cut back their demand for the fighter jet. At the end of the day they are a business and need to recoup the money they invested in such a project.
> 
> With most of the region fielding F-35s or 5th gen fighters, the issue becomes less controversial.
> 
> I think Iran can likely get its hands on SU-57 or J-31 as long as neither Russia or China decide to play games.



They are now state UAC. If it was Mig, then that free business argument could work.

Su-57 is their top product, they will sell it anyway, but not to an ambitious country like Iran.


----------



## TheImmortal

Gomig-21 said:


> Are you talking about a separate order from the Egyptian 30 aircraft? The last report of 50+ showed 30 of those (of which 10 have already been delivered) were EAF aircraft and the other 20+ were most likely Algeria.
> Or are you speaking of a different source? Can you link it?
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I thought and what we've been hearing for quite sometime in that the IRIAF really liked the Su-30 and was prepared to purchase a ridiculous amount of them just to instantaneously augment the air force capabilities.



Egyptian SU-35 are already been ordered and delivery has begun. I’m talking about different order. Here is source


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644


PeeD said:


> They are now state UAC. If it was Mig, then that free business argument could work.
> 
> Su-57 is their top product, they will sell it anyway, but not to an ambitious country like Iran.



Turkey is not an ambitious country? Turkey has much more competing spheres with Russia than Iran (Black Sea, Muslim regions of Russia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, etc)

I’m sorry I disagree with your analysis. Russia may very well use Iran as leverage to score brownie points with the West, but the SU-57 is hardly an F-22 equivalent fighter jet. It’s more a 4+++ type aircraft then true 5th gen fighter. It’s more maneuverability a la SU-35 than pure stealth based fighter.

Not to mention Russia has immense leverage on Iran who has very little experience with SU-27 derivative aircraft (tho they own some Su-22) let alone SU-57. Thus Russia could ground the fleet a la F-14 1979 scenario if things truly get hairy between the two countries (unlikely).

India wasn’t too impressed by it neither was Russian Federation regardless of what Putin says. And with MIG building their own stealth based 5th gen, they will try to take market share from Sukhoi. With China also looking to export J-31 and maybe J-20 (unlikely); the number of countries NOT in US Arms Industry pockets is very small. The number that can afford a large fleet of aircraft is even smaller. So Sukhoi will have to compete with MIG and Chinese companies to win contracts in Iran.

Iran could place the largest foreign order for fighter jets in recent history with up to 100-150 fighter jets needed to rehaul the fleet.

I brush off whatever IRGC says about not needing fighter jets. Historically IRGC has been against a strong airforce, yet they forget that airforce single handily protected Iran during the war. The Syria civil war was a final wake up call that final let the stubborn IRGC commanders realize they need to establish a CAS air squadron division. I followed the Syria civil war closely and until Russian airforce joined, Iran was at best going to be able to hold Alawite strongholds. Aleppo was a distant dream. Losses were heavy. So that conflict single handily changed IRGC perception on AirPower though they still aren’t pro large airforce.

The Tehran airline incident showed that a incompetent AD team seriously thought that a cruise missile not only broke through prototype Bavar AD rings and S-300 rings but somehow made it all the way to Tehran one of the most heavily defended spots of Iran. That should scream alarm bells about the reason why such a team would think a feat would be possible.

So me and you def disagree in the philosophy and need for superiority air fighters to take stress off the AD system network of Iran.

I simply don’t share your optimistic viewpoint that AD systems (which can be prone to EW) and a handful of F-14’s is sufficient against a large adversary fielding 5th gen fighters/BMs/CMs/stealth CMs.

Now right now that list is USA/Israel but in the future can include Pakistan/Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Egypt as well.


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran to Extend Range of Air-Launched Cruise Missiles*

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami unveiled plans to extend the range of homegrown air-launched cruise missiles beyond 1,000 kilometers.*
In an interview with Iran daily paper, the defense minister highlighted the country’s advances in the missile industry, saying Iranian naval cruise missiles are capable of hitting hostile targets at a distance of more than 1,000 kilometers.

While the range of anti-surface and naval cruise missiles has surpassed 1,000 km, the ground-launched cruise missiles can travel as far as 1,400 km, and the range of the air-launched ones is going to exceed 1,000 km too, the minister added.

He noted that Iran has developed a fully homegrown missile industry and manufactured various solid and liquid-propellant missiles, although the range of the projectiles has been restricted to 2,000 kilometers considering the country’s needs and defense policies.

The Defense Ministry has focused efforts to increase the output and boost the quality of various missiles with high maneuverability to surprise the enemy’s air defense, he added, the government’s website reported.

Brigadier General Hatami also noted that more than 90 percent of the arms demands are supplied domestically with the help of 5,700 private companies, including 655 knowledge-based firms.

Saying that the %10 dependence on imports has no significant impact on Iran’s defense power, he noted that termination of a UN arms embargo on Iran will allow the country to work with other countries.

In August, General Hatami expressed Iran’s readiness to take any opportunity to work with friendly countries to supply its technological and arms demands and to sell its products.

A UN embargo against Iran on conventional arms is due to expire on October 18 under the terms of a resolution that blessed the Iran nuclear deal, signed in July 2015 and officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).





__





Iran to Extend Range of Air-Launched Cruise Missiles - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami unveiled plans to extend the range of homegrown air-launched cruise missiles beyond 1,000 kilometers.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Haha perfect timing:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1302575252925566977


Hahahah 👌🏻👌🏻


Philosopher said:


> *Iran to Extend Range of Air-Launched Cruise Missiles*
> 
> *TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami unveiled plans to extend the range of homegrown air-launched cruise missiles beyond 1,000 kilometers.*
> In an interview with Iran daily paper, the defense minister highlighted the country’s advances in the missile industry, saying Iranian naval cruise missiles are capable of hitting hostile targets at a distance of more than 1,000 kilometers.
> 
> While the range of anti-surface and naval cruise missiles has surpassed 1,000 km, the ground-launched cruise missiles can travel as far as 1,400 km, and the range of the air-launched ones is going to exceed 1,000 km too, the minister added.
> 
> He noted that Iran has developed a fully homegrown missile industry and manufactured various solid and liquid-propellant missiles, although the range of the projectiles has been restricted to 2,000 kilometers considering the country’s needs and defense policies.
> 
> The Defense Ministry has focused efforts to increase the output and boost the quality of various missiles with high maneuverability to surprise the enemy’s air defense, he added, the government’s website reported.
> 
> Brigadier General Hatami also noted that more than 90 percent of the arms demands are supplied domestically with the help of 5,700 private companies, including 655 knowledge-based firms.
> 
> Saying that the %10 dependence on imports has no significant impact on Iran’s defense power, he noted that termination of a UN arms embargo on Iran will allow the country to work with other countries.
> 
> In August, General Hatami expressed Iran’s readiness to take any opportunity to work with friendly countries to supply its technological and arms demands and to sell its products.
> 
> A UN embargo against Iran on conventional arms is due to expire on October 18 under the terms of a resolution that blessed the Iran nuclear deal, signed in July 2015 and officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran to Extend Range of Air-Launched Cruise Missiles - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency
> 
> 
> TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami unveiled plans to extend the range of homegrown air-launched cruise missiles beyond 1,000 kilometers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com


did they unveil the air launched cruise missile? Or they mean air launched variant of soumar?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> Hahahah 👌🏻👌🏻
> 
> did they unveil the air launched cruise missile? Or they mean air launched variant of soumar?



It most certainly will be an air launched version of the Soumar family. We had a ground launched and anti-naval version, only one missing is an air launched.


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> It most certainly will be an air launched version of the Soumar family. We had a ground launched and anti-naval version, only one missing is an air launched.



The question is if theoretical range is 1400KM what is the guidance system? Has Iran shown a Middle East TERCOM system? What is the seeker system in SOUMAR? That is the unknown component.


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> It most certainly will be an air launched version of the Soumar family. We had a ground launched and anti-naval version, only one missing is an air launched.


Is there any difference between land based soumar and air launched variant in guidance? Also they’ll just remove the booster?


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> I’m sorry I disagree with your analysis. Russia may very well use Iran as leverage to score brownie points with the West, but the SU-57 is hardly an F-22 equivalent fighter jet. It’s more a 4+++ type aircraft then true 5th gen fighter. It’s more maneuverability a la SU-35 than pure stealth based fighter.



F-22's only advantage is in stealth performance. This comes at a 4-5x higher cost compared to the Su-57.

Su-57 is a balanced design, alone its kinematic performance (with its final engines) makes up for the somewhat lower LO performance. As weapon system its superior due to cost-effect.



TheImmortal said:


> Turkey is not an ambitious country? Turkey has much more competing spheres with Russia than Iran (Black Sea, Muslim regions of Russia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, etc)



Turkey is not a strategic nation. They are trying but still no problem fur Russia. Iran has clear strategic ambitions and works toward it.



TheImmortal said:


> I brush off whatever IRGC says about not needing fighter jets. Historically IRGC has been against a strong airforce, yet they forget that airforce single handily protected Iran during the war. The Syria civil war was a final wake up call that final let the stubborn IRGC commanders realize they need to establish a CAS air squadron division. I followed the Syria civil war closely and until Russian airforce joined, Iran was at best going to be able to hold Alawite strongholds. Aleppo was a distant dream. Losses were heavy. So that conflict single handily changed IRGC perception on AirPower though they still aren’t pro large airforce.



Russians have cost efficient airpower.
Iran could have sent drones and many F-5 and F-4. But that would be stupid as they are not replaceable and prone to attacks by Israel, Turkey and the U.S.
So in fact it was the low cost operation and Russias heavy strategic weight that allowed it.

Also please don't compare Iran-Iraq war to a modern war involving Iran.

Plus: How do you want to handle new U.S hypersonic stand-off weapons in future? Their main purpose is to take out the non-hardened airbases.
IRGC is dead right to view airpower as nonstarter against a power like the U.S.



TheImmortal said:


> The Tehran airline incident showed that a incompetent AD team seriously thought that a cruise missile not only broke through prototype Bavar AD rings and S-300 rings but somehow made it all the way to Tehran one of the most heavily defended spots of Iran. That should scream alarm bells about the reason why such a team would think a feat would be possible.



Come on, in modern war situation no Boing is flying around, nor is the IRIAF operation in areas were "legacy" IRGC AD systems operate.

Iran is building an automated IADS to avoid such incompetence.



TheImmortal said:


> I simply don’t share your optimistic viewpoint that AD systems (which can be prone to EW) and a handful of F-14’s is sufficient against a large adversary fielding 5th gen fighters/BMs/CMs/stealth CMs.



Me neither: Iran is not Russia, it lacks the numbers for now. What will happen is rather that stand-alone IRGC 3rd Khordad drive out of warehouses and shot at enemy airpower at opportunity.
It will create a situation where enemy airpower is not sure whether the area is secure or not.
This uncertainty will screw their planning, sortie rate and so on.
CMs will impact in Tehran deep inside the country. Only Russia level IADS and maybe Chinese can create really secure spheres.

But Iran will get there sooner or later.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## triangle

TheImmortal said:


> I brush off whatever IRGC says about not needing fighter jets. Historically IRGC has been against a strong airforce, yet they forget that airforce single handily protected Iran during the war. The Syria civil war was a final wake up call that final let the stubborn IRGC commanders realize they need to establish a CAS air squadron division. I followed the Syria civil war closely and until Russian airforce joined, Iran was at best going to be able to hold Alawite strongholds. Aleppo was a distant dream. Losses were heavy. So that conflict single handily changed IRGC perception on AirPower though they still aren’t pro large airforce.



Then why didn't the IRIAF deploy a dozen F-4 with precision strike capability to Syria?

Edit: nvm, prone to attack.


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> F-22's only advantage is in stealth performance. This comes at a 4-5x higher cost compared to the Su-57.
> 
> Su-57 is a balanced design, alone its kinematic performance (with its final engines) makes up for the somewhat lower LO performance. As weapon system its superior due to cost-effect.
> 
> 
> 
> Turkey is not a strategic nation. They are trying but still no problem fur Russia. Iran has clear strategic ambitions and works toward it.
> 
> 
> 
> Russians have cost efficient airpower.
> Iran could have sent drones and many F-5 and F-4. But that would be stupid as they are not replaceable and prone to attacks by Israel, Turkey and the U.S.
> So in fact it was the low cost operation and Russias heavy strategic weight that allowed it.
> 
> Also please don't compare Iran-Iraq war to a modern war involving Iran.
> 
> Plus: How do you want to handle new U.S hypersonic stand-off weapons in future? Their main purpose is to take out the non-hardened airbases.
> IRGC is dead right to view airpower as nonstarter against a power like the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, in modern war situation no Boing is flying around, nor is the IRIAF operation in areas were "legacy" IRGC AD systems operate.
> 
> Iran is building an automated IADS to avoid such incompetence.
> 
> 
> 
> Me neither: Iran is not Russia, it lacks the numbers for now. What will happen is rather that stand-alone IRGC 3rd Khordad drive out of warehouses and shot at enemy airpower at opportunity.
> It will create a situation where enemy airpower is not sure whether the area is secure or not.
> This uncertainty will screw their planning, sortie rate and so on.
> CMs will impact in Tehran deep inside the country. Only Russia level IADS and maybe Chinese can create really secure spheres.
> 
> But Iran will get there sooner or later.



With the now in service Khordad 15, Third of Khordad, Bavar-373 and a slew of AD/SHORAD systems: where exactly does Iran stand in a fight against regional powers? -- emphasis being on possible conflict the U.S. military.

I think we can safely say that Iran absolutely does not plan on building any sort of near-pear or even adjacent symmetrical Air force capability that rivals its neighbors toe-to-toe due to cost and the looming threat of obliteration from newer generation HGVs and the like. Iran acquiring a smaller amount of modern air-craft that are multi-role and can fulfill certain defense/offense requirements without straining the national defense budget is in my view an absolute must. 

The Aerospace missile force still caries Iran's primary means of attacking back and has proven itself (at least somewhat) to be an effective method of attack in practice although the tactical viability of the force still is in question due there not being a active conflict to test them out in full. 

We can only wait and see on how Iran wants to move forward regarding it air-power. Honestly I would be okay with a small acquisition of some sort of Multi-role air-craft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

triangle said:


> Then why didn't the IRIAF deploy a dozen F-4 with precision strike capability to Syria?



America and Israel would jump at the opportunity to attack them since they would be vulnerable against superior USAF/IAF air-power. It's too far from Iran and their just isn't sufficient enough local air-defense/air superiority to cover the F-4s.


----------



## PeeD

Blue In Green said:


> With the now in service Khordad 15, Third of Khordad, Bavar-373 and a slew of AD/SHORAD systems: where exactly does Iran stand in a fight against regional powers? -- emphasis being on possible conflict the U.S. military.
> 
> I think we can safely say that Iran absolutely does not plan on building any sort of near-pear or even adjacent symmetrical Air force capability that rivals its neighbors toe-to-toe due to cost and the looming threat of obliteration from newer generation HGVs and the like. Iran acquiring a smaller amount of modern air-craft that are multi-role and can fulfill certain defense/offense requirements without straining the national defense budget is in my view an absolute must.
> 
> The Aerospace missile force still caries Iran's primary means of attacking back and has proven itself (at least somewhat) to be an effective method of attack in practice although the tactical viability of the force still is in question due there not being a active conflict to test them out in full.
> 
> We can only wait and see on how Iran wants to move forward regarding it air-power. Honestly I would be okay with a small acquisition of some sort of Multi-role air-craft.



A fleet of 60 Su-35 would act as a catalyst for Irans IADS. At that number, real added value.

A fleet of 250 Su-57 would only drain money from missile and air defense projects.

A fleet of 300 5th Gen. Iranian fighters built from 2030-2040 could be justified and create a expeditionary force capability for Iran as well as advance the overall industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> F-22's only advantage is in stealth performance. This comes at a 4-5x higher cost compared to the Su-57.
> 
> Su-57 is a balanced design, alone its kinematic performance (with its final engines) makes up for the somewhat lower LO performance. As weapon system its superior due to cost-effect.
> 
> I agree. However, your rebuttal merely serves my point in that SU-57 is more a defense fighter jet rather than a fighter jet ment to penetrate foreign airspace and cause havoc.
> 
> 
> Turkey is not a strategic nation. They are trying but still no problem fur Russia. Iran has clear strategic ambitions and works toward it.
> 
> 
> Sir, you sell a weapon now and you don’t know when it will bite you in the ***. Did US ever think that selling F-14 to Iran in ‘79 would come to bite them for next 40 years? Did North Korea ever think selling SCUDs to Iran would lead to the biggest missile power in the Middle East?
> 
> Russians have cost efficient airpower.
> Iran could have sent drones and many F-5 and F-4. But that would be stupid as they are not replaceable and prone to attacks by Israel, Turkey and the U.S.
> 
> Iranian F-5 and F-4 cannot handle a 150-200 daily sortie rate stress on their airframes. Even assuming they wouldn’t be attacked by foreign adversaries or that it wouldn’t lead to other adversaries to bring their own airforce into Syria theater, Iran’s F-5s and F-4s are not made for heavy constant sortie counts this far into their life cycle. They are basically reserve assets to use in an all out war.
> 
> So in fact it was the low cost operation and Russias heavy strategic weight that allowed it.
> 
> Also please don't compare Iran-Iraq war to a modern war involving Iran.
> 
> Air superiority fighters will always be needed. Wether it’s 1920 1979 or 2020 or 3020.
> 
> Plus: How do you want to handle new U.S hypersonic stand-off weapons in future? Their main purpose is to take out the non-hardened airbases.
> IRGC is dead right to view airpower as nonstarter against a power like the U.S.
> 
> With such logic your AD fleet would also be toast as Hypersonic missiles would destroy major radar Installations and defense batteries that simply do not have the Kinetic energy penalty to be able to intercept a Hypersonic missile either in the atmosphere or during terminal phase. let’s not go down that rabbit hole, shall we?
> 
> But to answer your question it’s simple: mountain air bases. Iran can have 75 air superiority fighters scattered inside mountain air bases that each hold up 12-25 fighters which take off and land and are well fortified. If it can do it for BMs it can do it for airplanes.
> 
> The concept is not unheard of. Even in WW2 airplanes were stored in underground bunkers to protect against air threats.
> 
> Again Iran doesn’t need to store ALL of its 200-300 aircraft. But the air superiority ones can be well fortified to assist the AD network during the war. Again the goal of Iran airforce is to prevent complete collapse of AD network, it’s not ment to fly into other countries and do bombing runs.
> 
> 
> Come on, in modern war situation no Boing is flying around, nor is the IRIAF operation in areas were "legacy" IRGC AD systems operate.
> 
> The point remains an IRGC AD team thought a CM made it all the way to Tehran from the PG.
> 
> Iran is building an automated IADS to avoid such incompetence.
> 
> Still won’t be enough.
> 
> Me neither: Iran is not Russia, it lacks the numbers for now. What will happen is rather that stand-alone IRGC 3rd Khordad drive out of warehouses and shot at enemy airpower at opportunity.
> 
> Are there going to be warehouses in the desert, mountains and rural areas? Modern fighter jets release payloads from up to 150KM away. No fighter jet needs to fly over cities or developed areas unless absolutely required to do so. If you are relying on ADs systems hiding in warehouses to thwart the enemy you have already lost the air space.
> 
> It will create a situation where enemy airpower is not sure whether the area is secure or not.
> This uncertainty will screw their planning, sortie rate and so on.
> CMs will impact in Tehran deep inside the country. Only Russia level IADS and maybe Chinese can create really secure spheres.
> 
> But Iran will get there sooner or later.
> 
> wether Iran gets there or doesn’t is irrelevant as every major power will field manned aircraft well into the future because EW is much harder with a human inside the cockpit. So the decision you are making is to rely entirely on AD systems to hold the line. Too dangerous.
> 
> 
> 
> Now Iran maybe enemies with Israel today, but it was friends with Israel in ‘79. The world changes rapidly friends of today are enemies tomm. Iran cannot base its entire strategy on “AirPower is useless because US #1 why should we bother” with that logic why build a Navy or destroyers? US is #1 Navy power and would crush Iran Navy in heart beat. So the logic doesn’t hold. You may be inferior today but who knows where you are in 50 years. Maybe US empire has collapsed and the new adversary is China or Turkey. So you don’t make strategic decisions based on next 10 years.




My response in red


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> A fleet of 60 Su-35 would act as a catalyst for Irans IADS. At that number, real added value.
> 
> A fleet of 250 Su-57 would only drain money from missile and air defense projects.
> 
> A fleet of 300 5th Gen. Iranian fighters built from 2030-2040 could be justified and create a expeditionary force capability for Iran as well as advance the overall industry.



First you say air force is not needed and useless against #1 USA. Now you say “300 5th gen Iranian fighters can be justified”. Why because it’s “Iranian”? You are either for air power or you are against. It either fits in your over arching defense philosophy or it doesn’t. You can’t cherry pick.

300 Iranian 5th gen fighters isn’t going to magically be cheap. It will be cheaper than Russian and Chinese fighters, but the infrastructure for such a project will drain considerable resources and manpower.

In the meantime, a stop gap is needed (which I have repeatedly said) of Russian jets. I am not sure where you got 250 SU-57 from as that’s an absurd number. Nonetheless 48-60 SU-57 to cover the retiring(storage) of F-14 fleet and providing back up to SU-30 fleet would be a sound investment.

My stop gap proposal is:

60-84 SU-30/35 fighter jets (even SU-27 with ToT is better In long run for Iran then SU-30/35 buying from Russian factory)
48-60 SU-57 fighter jets

This would cover Iranian Air Force well through 2045-2050. It would give Iranian airforce plenty of time to learn and build upon the best Russian fighter jets (especially if Iran plans to unveil a AL family reverse engineered engine in the future).

I do not share your optimistic timeline for Iranian 5th gen fighter. It will likely take longer to build a decent aircraft design and mass production starting in 2030 seems optimistic given current economic conditions on Iran as well as given no breakthrough heavy engine to speak of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

> But to answer your question it’s simple: mountain air bases. Iran can have 75 air superiority fighters scattered inside mountain air bases that each hold up 12-25 fighters which take off and land and are well fortified. If it can do it for BMs it can do it for airplanes.
> 
> The concept is not unheard of. Even in WW2 airplanes were stored in underground bunkers to protect against air threats.
> 
> Again Iran doesn’t need to store ALL of its 200-300 aircraft. But the air superiority ones can be well fortified to assist the AD network during the war. Again the goal of Iran airforce is to prevent complete collapse of AD network, it’s not ment to fly into other countries and do bombing runs.



They still need large strips to take off and land and with just a handful of these underground bases, it becomes cost efficient to pulverize the strips and entrances of the bases with air launched and sub-launched cruise missiles.

Using highways like Sweden does to resupply and takeoff/land is more survivable. 
The best option is VTOL fighters that can take off and land almost everywhere.


----------



## TheImmortal

triangle said:


> They still need large strips to take off and land and with just a handful of these underground bases, it becomes cost efficient to pulverize the strips and entrances of the bases with air launched and sub-launched cruise missiles.
> 
> Using highways like Sweden does to resupply and takeoff/land is more survivable.
> The best option is VTOL fighters that can take off and land almost everywhere.



Minimum take off for Su-35 is 550 meters.

Indoor airstrip for taking off and outdoor airstrip for landing.

Airstrips can be repaired. As Syria has shown in many cases in a few hours. CMs do not have enough penetration power to cause extensive repairs as the KE they carry in comparison to say a Qiam BM is much lower due to subsonic speed.


----------



## PeeD

@TheImmortal 

" I agree. However, your rebuttal merely serves my point in that SU-57 is more a defense fighter jet rather than a fighter jet ment to penetrate foreign airspace and cause havoc. "

The F-22 can get closer to emitters, the Su-57 fly faster and farther, which one is better for penetration?
F-22 penetration of a modern IADS is questionable anyway: Stealth primarily helps it survive air to air engagements.

" Iranian F-5 and F-4 cannot handle a 150-200 daily sortie rate stress on their airframes. Even assuming they wouldn’t be attacked by foreign adversaries or that it wouldn’t lead to other adversaries to bring their own airforce into Syria theater, Iran’s F-5s and F-4s are not made for heavy constant sortie counts this far into their life cycle. They are basically reserve assets to use in an all out war. "

Basically yes, but this would only increase costs and necessary airframe numbers.
F-5 however could handle it, but its armament and speed would make it not effective nor survivable.

" With such logic your AD fleet would also be toast as Hypersonic missiles would destroy major radar Installations and defense batteries that simply do not have the Kinetic energy penalty to be able to intercept a Hypersonic missile either in the atmosphere or during terminal phase. let’s not go down that rabbit hole, shall we? "

If not Hypersonic weapons then CMs. Mobility of AD assets make them survivable, airbases not.


"But to answer your question it’s simple: mountain air bases. Iran can have 75 air superiority fighters scattered inside mountain air bases that each hold up 12-25 fighters which take off and land and are well fortified. If it can do it for BMs it can do it for airplanes.

The concept is not unheard of. Even in WW2 airplanes were stored in underground bunkers to protect against air threats.

Again Iran doesn’t need to store ALL of its 200-300 aircraft. But the air superiority ones can be well fortified to assist the AD network during the war. Again the goal of Iran airforce is to prevent complete collapse of AD network, it’s not ment to fly into other countries and do bombing runs. "

Thats a futuristic concept.
Storing a weapon is not the goal, a weapon must operate during war.
Iran was lucky that the U.S was stopped by the INF treaty, with this gone, even deep central mainbases like Esfahan are at high risk.

But ok, as long as airpower plays a siderole, we can ignore its basing vulnerability.

" The point remains an IRGC AD team thought a CM made it all the way to Tehran from the PG. "

I'm not really a fanboy hence: Yes that fear was justified.
The U.S is is country that has satellites to create a electronic battlefield map: It will find weakspots and send CM, as deep as Tehran area, even on the first night.
Soon hypersonic weapons will add to that, not only air launched but land based ones.

The enemy is not to be underestimated. Any non-hardned static weapon system is at high risk in future and airpower is just that.

" Are there going to be warehouses in the desert, mountains and rural areas? Modern fighter jets release payloads from up to 150KM away. No fighter jet needs to fly over cities or developed areas unless absolutely required to do so. If you are relying on ADs systems hiding in warehouses to thwart the enemy you have already lost the air space. "

Warehouses was and example and yes, there are enough such places all around Iran to hide such a small truck size vehicle like the 3rd Khordad.

Airspace is contested anyway, Iran is not Russia. However when enemy airpower operates at risk, it will degrade lets say 50% of its performance. Just by having 100 3rd Khordad TELARs around the country you degrade 50% of enemy airpower-firepower for the first month: A quite good deal if you ask me.

" wether Iran gets there or doesn’t is irrelevant as every major power will field manned aircraft well into the future because EW is much harder with a human inside the cockpit. So the decision you are making is to rely entirely on AD systems to hold the line. Too dangerous. "

Airpower helps if its cost-effect calculation competes against other concepts.
Iran will get its own airpower at some point for expeditionary purposes.
But is it critical at this point? No.
Even without a AD system, Irans low footprint solid BM force as well as hardened liquid BM force would inflict quite a high amount of damage to any enemy.
Just like IADS is now getting strong, airpower will also come back at some point, its just low on the priority list.



TheImmortal said:


> First you say air force is not needed and useless against #1 USA. Now you say “300 5th gen Iranian fighters can be justified”. Why because it’s “Iranian”? You are either for air power or you are against. It either fits in your over arching defense philosophy or it doesn’t. You can’t cherry pick.



No contradiction, just priorities.

In 2030-40 airframe Iran will need to project power, hence a Iranian fighter jet will be needed.
2020, 50 F-14, 20 Mig-29 and 100 F-4E will be sufficient to take the stress on the IADS away.
60 Su-35 would increase that pressure relieve to a good extend.

And yes, because its Iranian: State sponsored industrial development program that could open export markets.



TheImmortal said:


> In the meantime, a stop gap is needed (which I have repeatedly said) of Russian jets. I am not sure where you got 250 SU-57 from as that’s an absurd number. Nonetheless 48-60 SU-57 to cover the retiring(storage) of F-14 fleet and providing back up to SU-30 fleet would be a sound investment.



Such a stop gap would be good, not really needed: 300 3rd Khordad TELARs could be a better choice than 60 Su-35.

250 Su-57 was just a IRIAF revival scenario many dream of and a number that could convince the Russians to sell the Su-57.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## triangle

TheImmortal said:


> Minimum take off for Su-35 is 550 meters.
> 
> Indoor airstrip for taking off and outdoor airstrip for landing.
> 
> Airstrips can be repaired. As Syria has shown in many cases in a few hours. CMs do not have enough penetration power to cause extensive repairs as the KE they carry in comparison to say a Qiam BM is much lower due to subsonic speed.



You still need an air strip.

Modern cruise missiles can fly through small openings to target the inside of a facility. A 30 meter wide gap in a mountain side will be no problem.

It's very difficult to make an already destitute air force more destitute.

Seeing as a VTOL fighter aircraft is out of reach for Iran, temporary and flexible highway bases is the only survivable way.

Anyway, Iran's BM force will make minced meat out of any regional airpower.


----------



## TheImmortal

triangle said:


> You still need an air strip.
> 
> Modern cruise missiles can fly through small openings to target the inside of a facility. A 30 meter wide gap in a mountain side will be no problem.



Yes, that’s why I said air strip outside for landing. Indoor airstrip would be for take off and storage.

And this isn’t a Taliban cave. It’s a mountain base. I suggest you educate yourself on Iranian missile bases as they are huge and have multiple blast doors to protect from shockwaves and indoor explosions. There is no “30 foot gap” hole you speak of. Blast doors cover the entrance and through out the tunnel system.


----------



## triangle

TheImmortal said:


> Yes, that’s why I said air strip outside for landing. Indoor airstrip would be for take off and storage.
> 
> And this isn’t a Taliban cave. It’s a mountain base. I suggest you educate yourself on Iranian missile bases as they are huge and have multiple blast doors to protect from shockwaves and indoor explosions. There is no “30 foot gap” hole you speak of. Blast doors cover the entrance and through out the tunnel system.



Underground missile base =/= underground airbase

You still need a takeoff strip without any obstacles (read: blast doors) for lets say 550 meters for an Su-35 which you claim. Sure you can cover the entrance with a huge blast door, but you still need an opening which the plane flies through which exposes the runway for the entire 550 meter.

There is no way any blast door can survive and still work against multiple direct CM hits. And such a blast door is so heavy and cumbersome that it takes a long time to open and close, which will severely hinder sortie rates. Not to mention any repairs or replacement that needs to be done on such a blast door.

And you still need an exposed airstrip to land. How is that going to survive a pulverization attack by cruise missiles and a subsequent antipersonnel mine spreading cruise missile to hinder any repair.

Good luck taking off through a 30 foot gap

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

triangle said:


> You still need an air strip.
> 
> Modern cruise missiles can fly through small openings to target the inside of a facility. A 30 meter wide gap in a mountain side will be no problem.
> 
> It's very difficult to make an already destitute air force more destitute.
> 
> Seeing as a VTOL fighter aircraft is out of reach for Iran, temporary and flexible highway bases is the only survivable way.
> 
> Anyway, Iran's BM force will make minced meat out of any regional airpower.



If Iran's impressive sprawling underground missile bases are anything to go by then TheImmortal's suggestion for Iran to house its yet to be acquired air-superiority fighters in mountainous underground bases is not a bad idea, and is something that Iran has the engineering capability to do. 

Main issue here isn't capability but cost and time. Iran doesn't have the luxury to spend copious amounts of money on such a project like this given just how deep they've delved into building the one of the worlds most lethal and survivable conventional missile forces. It would take quite a bit of man-hours and money to build such hard static assets. I just don't see Iran going that way in the near future, although it is a good idea in theory.


----------



## Blue In Green

triangle said:


> Underground missile base =/= underground airbase
> 
> You still need a takeoff strip without any obstacles (read: blast doors) for lets say 550 meters for an Su-35 which you claim. Sure you can cover the entrance with a huge blast door, but you still need an opening which the plane flies through which exposes the runway for the entire 550 meter.
> 
> There is no way any blast door can survive and still work against multiple direct CM hits. And such a blast door is so heavy and cumbersome that it takes a long time to open and close, which will severely hinder sortie rates. Not to mention any repairs or replacement that needs to be done on such a blast door.
> 
> And you still need an exposed airstrip to land. How is that going to survive a pulverization attack by cruise missiles and a subsequent antipersonnel mine spreading cruise missile to hinder any repair..



Wouldn't Iran be relying more on the "covert" nature of such an air-base given its location in a mountainous area? I guess the IADS would help cover the base somewhat against CM attacks and if manages to produce/purchase a hefty amount of SHORADS/CIWS then the survivability of such a base is more?


----------



## triangle

Blue In Green said:


> Wouldn't Iran be relying more on the "covert" nature of such an air-base given its location in a mountainous area? I guess the IADS would help cover the base somewhat against CM attacks and if manages to produce/purchase a hefty amount of SHORADS/CIWS then the survivability of such a base is more?



The idea of a survivable and cost-effective underground airbase is unrealistic, especially for Iran. By the nature of such a facility there are going to be huge weakspots, much bigger than an underground missile base. Iran doesn't need such facilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

triangle said:


> The idea of a survivable and cost-effective underground airbase is unrealistic, especially for Iran. By the nature of such a facility there are going to be huge weakspots, much bigger than an underground missile base. Iran doesn't need such facilities.



Yeah, I thought as much lol.

The one thing about air-power that acts as its greatest achilles heal has nothing to do with the air-craft itself. It's everything else that's associated with it to make it run properly, that's the key weakness. Air-base, hangar, run-ways, fuel, ammunitions etc... It's just so much infrastructure that can't be adequately protected from enemy CM attacks. 

I'm with PeeD on this one as well, BMs are much more survivable than air-craft but air-craft have a place in Iran's overall military strategy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Irans missiles cities are made to be totally demolished at their entrances, yet still dig out and continue launches. No runways, no foreign object damage...

A futuristic underground airbase could get its entrance opening masked by rock formations, so that only one approach direction is possible for aircrafts and impacting weapons.

When attack vectors are restricted to a single one, defense becomes easier. Multiple CIWS could cost effectively protect the entrance against that single vector.

It would be like an automated landing on a carrier, preferably with catapult and a catching system.

Iran has the geography for this. Question is the cost efficiency.

Fully protected runway, fuel and ammunition depot, maintenance hangars.
Maybe for hypersonic 6th generation fighters, but of course this would be in a distant future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Guys, did iran manufacture Laser guided bombs like paveway series? Also targeting pods for its jets?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Guys, did iran manufacture Laser guided bombs like paveway series? Also targeting pods for its jets?


yes they called Sattar family of Laser guided bombs they have sattar 1-2-3-4

the one in red is an Sattar












*and this is an IRGC targeting pod*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Saleh99 said:


> Guys, did iran manufacture Laser guided bombs like paveway series? Also targeting pods for its jets?








the white long tube under the f-4 is tls-99 targeting pod and the bomb next to the fuel tank is sattar-4 which actually is laser guided missile. these projects are really old and date back to the early 90's.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

triangle said:


> Underground missile base =/= underground airbase
> 
> You still need a takeoff strip without any obstacles (read: blast doors) for lets say 550 meters for an Su-35 which you claim. Sure you can cover the entrance with a huge blast door, but you still need an opening which the plane flies through which exposes the runway for the entire 550 meter.
> 
> There is no way any blast door can survive and still work against multiple direct CM hits. And such a blast door is so heavy and cumbersome that it takes a long time to open and close, which will severely hinder sortie rates. Not to mention any repairs or replacement that needs to be done on such a blast door.
> 
> And you still need an exposed airstrip to land. How is that going to survive a pulverization attack by cruise missiles and a subsequent antipersonnel mine spreading cruise missile to hinder any repair.
> 
> Good luck taking off through a 30 foot gap



where are you getting this 30 foot gap from? What is your fascination with this number?
This isn’t the Death Star, there isn’t a magical 30 ft gap Achilles heel you keep referring to.

Blast doors can be hydraulic operated that come through the ground. Same way silo doors are generated.

Also a mountain is by logic above sea level. So building into a mountain is not underground.

It is quite possible to build and would operate on a similar concept as carrier concept and hyperloop concept. You would have a storage area where aircraft are kept behind in fortified chamber. Iran has a lot of experience building these chambers.

Then you have a taxi area that is located outside the fortified chamber where 3-4 fighter jets can taxi behind one another at a time. That taxi area connects to 3-4 550-700 meter parallel runaways. One blast door at the beginning of runway and one blast door at the exit of each runway.

Upon alert the doors of the blast doors of each runway open and the fighter jets move into their parallel lanes. Then Engines are ignited and they take off.

Each parallel lane would be only 1/2 a missile base lane in terms of width (see below).






As you can see 4 of these bases scattered strategically across Iran would TOTAL have minimum of 80 aircraft (air superiority fighters) to fly out plus another 40 future Iranian supersonic UAV bombers. (So that means 20 fighter jets and 10 UAVs per base).

Now these bases would be surrounded by Skyguard AAA, automated short range air defense and would also be inside a Bavar battalions “kill sphere”.

Furthermore, Iran has extensive GPS jamming technology thus any CM entering the area would be subject to EW. All US cruise missiles rely on GPS for precision guidance.

Lastly something you simply didn’t think of is strong alloy “nets” that can be raised in front of the entrances of the base. Any CM trying to attack the blast doors would be sliced into pieces and detonate early. The concept is similar to “cages” around tanks and APCs that aim to slice the warhead of an anti tank missile and force it to detonate prematurely.

These bases would be in CONJUNCTION with the the standard Air bases located across the country that would house Iran’s other 200+ aircraft. The goal here is to make sure at least 60-80 air superiority fighters survive the first few months of war so they can protect the AD rings and take stress off the AD network. The idea isn’t to SAVE every Iranian fighter jet nor is it to make Iran’s entire airforce in mountain. But merely 20-30% (assuming a 300 fleet force).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## triangle

> where are you getting this 30 foot gap from? What is your fascination with this number?
> This isn’t the Death Star, there isn’t a magical 30 ft gap Achilles heel you keep referring to.


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> where are you getting this 30 foot gap from? What is your fascination with this number?
> This isn’t the Death Star, there isn’t a magical 30 ft gap Achilles heel you keep referring to.
> 
> Blast doors can be hydraulic operated that come through the ground. Same way silo doors are generated.
> 
> Also a mountain is by logic above sea level. So building into a mountain is not underground.
> 
> It is quite possible to build and would operate on a similar concept as carrier concept and hyperloop concept. You would have a storage area where aircraft are kept behind in fortified chamber. Iran has a lot of experience building these chambers.
> 
> Then you have a taxi area that is located outside the fortified chamber where 3-4 fighter jets can taxi behind one another at a time. That taxi area connects to 3-4 550-700 meter parallel runaways. One blast door at the beginning of runway and one blast door at the exit of each runway.
> 
> Upon alert the doors of the blast doors of each runway open and the fighter jets move into their parallel lanes. Then Engines are ignited and they take off.
> 
> Each parallel lane would be only 1/2 a missile base lane in terms of width (see below).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see 4 of these bases scattered strategically across Iran would TOTAL have minimum of 80 aircraft (air superiority fighters) to fly out plus another 40 future Iranian supersonic UAV bombers. (So that means 20 fighter jets and 10 UAVs per base).
> 
> Now these bases would be surrounded by Skyguard AAA, automated short range air defense and would also be inside a Bavar battalions “kill sphere”.
> 
> Furthermore, Iran has extensive GPS jamming technology thus any CM entering the area would be subject to EW. All US cruise missiles rely on GPS for precision guidance.
> 
> Lastly something you simply didn’t think of is strong alloy “nets” that can be raised in front of the entrances of the base. Any CM trying to attack the blast doors would be sliced into pieces and detonate early. The concept is similar to “cages” around tanks and APCs that aim to slice the warhead of an anti tank missile and force it to detonate prematurely.
> 
> These bases would be in CONJUNCTION with the the standard Air bases located across the country that would house Iran’s other 200+ aircraft. The goal here is to make sure at least 60-80 air superiority fighters survive the first few months of war so they can protect the AD rings and take stress off the AD network. The idea isn’t to SAVE every Iranian fighter jet nor is it to make Iran’s entire airforce in mountain. But merely 20-30% (assuming a 300 fleet force).



Dadash this isn't Ace Combat lmao.

You literally just described the layout of a mountain base from the Japanese Arcade Jet fighting game: Ace Combat 6 to a tee (I played a mission where there are bases exactly like what you just described). Are you sure you're not being influenced by Video Game design here? (joking here obviously lol)

You know we have to take into account budget and realism not to mention the reality of Iran just seemingly not wanting to focus all that much on supporting and maintaining its air-force more than it has to currently. In what feasible reality is Iran going dig into mountains in order to store and operate air superiority fighters from? Clearly the Iranian military establishment has decided not to put their eggs into the air-power basket for now and thus far the results have been....hmm idk what to say really. We got amazing new missiles and methods of firing them along with the largest arsenal in the Middle East (possible the world if it continues like this). But to just make a U-turn and try to build up an air-force that is protected in quite expensive mountain bases (per what you described) doesn't sound like the Iran I've been following for over 11 years now.

I mean this sounds good and all but is it realistic?

Sorry man I'm not knocking you but you seem a little too ardent about all this....apologies though, I didn't offer any meaningful rebuttal to your post. What you said is great and sounds amazing but I feel like it's a bit of reach *for Iran*. My technical knowledge about all this stuff is limited so I won't be able to really say anything of worth regarding it.

All that I do know is that the next war in the Middle East will be one of missiles: he who posses and uses them the best will be the winner. The pace of destruction within the first hours of conflict will be frenetic yet with purpose. Iran's goal is to hinder and take away as much operational capability from its opponents as it can within the opening stages of a conflict. This is where such severe reliance on missiles is coming from. Iran can't not afford switch priorities now when it's just so deep into the missile path.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> where are you getting this 30 foot gap from? What is your fascination with this number?
> This isn’t the Death Star, there isn’t a magical 30 ft gap Achilles heel you keep referring to.
> 
> Blast doors can be hydraulic operated that come through the ground. Same way silo doors are generated.
> 
> Also a mountain is by logic above sea level. So building into a mountain is not underground.
> 
> It is quite possible to build and would operate on a similar concept as carrier concept and hyperloop concept. You would have a storage area where aircraft are kept behind in fortified chamber. Iran has a lot of experience building these chambers.
> 
> Then you have a taxi area that is located outside the fortified chamber where 3-4 fighter jets can taxi behind one another at a time. That taxi area connects to 3-4 550-700 meter parallel runaways. One blast door at the beginning of runway and one blast door at the exit of each runway.
> 
> Upon alert the doors of the blast doors of each runway open and the fighter jets move into their parallel lanes. Then Engines are ignited and they take off.
> 
> Each parallel lane would be only 1/2 a missile base lane in terms of width (see below).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see 4 of these bases scattered strategically across Iran would TOTAL have minimum of 80 aircraft (air superiority fighters) to fly out plus another 40 future Iranian supersonic UAV bombers. (So that means 20 fighter jets and 10 UAVs per base).
> 
> Now these bases would be surrounded by Skyguard AAA, automated short range air defense and would also be inside a Bavar battalions “kill sphere”.
> 
> Furthermore, Iran has extensive GPS jamming technology thus any CM entering the area would be subject to EW. All US cruise missiles rely on GPS for precision guidance.
> 
> Lastly something you simply didn’t think of is strong alloy “nets” that can be raised in front of the entrances of the base. Any CM trying to attack the blast doors would be sliced into pieces and detonate early. The concept is similar to “cages” around tanks and APCs that aim to slice the warhead of an anti tank missile and force it to detonate prematurely.
> 
> These bases would be in CONJUNCTION with the the standard Air bases located across the country that would house Iran’s other 200+ aircraft. The goal here is to make sure at least 60-80 air superiority fighters survive the first few months of war so they can protect the AD rings and take stress off the AD network. The idea isn’t to SAVE every Iranian fighter jet nor is it to make Iran’s entire airforce in mountain. But merely 20-30% (assuming a 300 fleet force).



Sounds good. Similar like i said it on old IMF years ago when Qaher 313 shows up and me was a bit disappointed cause it was not stol or vtol what would be perfect for fighters hidden in mountain bases.


----------



## TheImmortal

Blue In Green said:


> Dadash this isn't Ace Combat lmao.
> 
> You literally just described the layout of a mountain base from the Japanese Arcade Jet fighting game: Ace Combat 6 to a tee (I played a mission where there are bases exactly like what you just described). Are you sure you're not being influenced by Video Game design here? (joking here obviously lol)
> 
> You know we have to take into account budget and realism not to mention the reality of Iran just seemingly not wanting to focus all that much on supporting and maintaining its air-force more than it has to currently. In what feasible reality is Iran going dig into mountains in order to store and operate air superiority fighters from? Clearly the Iranian military establishment has decided not to put their eggs into the air-power basket for now and thus far the results have been....hmm idk what to say really. We got amazing new missiles and methods of firing them along with the largest arsenal in the Middle East (possible the world if it continues like this). But to just make a U-turn and try to build up an air-force that is protected in quite expensive mountain bases (per what you described) doesn't sound like the Iran I've been following for over 11 years now.
> 
> I mean this sounds good and all but is it realistic?
> 
> Sorry man I'm not knocking you but you seem a little too ardent about all this....apologies though, I didn't offer any meaningful rebuttal to your post. What you said is great and sounds amazing but I feel like it's a bit of reach *for Iran*. My technical knowledge about all this stuff is limited so I won't be able to really say anything of worth regarding it.
> 
> All that I do know is that the next war in the Middle East will be one of missiles: he who posses and uses them the best will be the winner. The pace of destruction within the first hours of conflict will be frenetic yet with purpose. Iran's goal is to hinder and take away as much operational capability from its opponents as it can within the opening stages of a conflict. This is where such severe reliance on missiles is coming from. Iran can't not afford switch priorities now when it's just so deep into the missile path.



You should probably educate yourself.

WW2 bunkers






Chinese air bases built in 50’s (more than 40 built)











Yugoslavia











So if Nazi Germany and Communist China can do this 80 years ago without advanced tunnel boring machines, then surely Iran can do it today.

How do you think Iran’s metros get built like the Tajrish one located so deep underground that you need 10 mins of stairs just to get back to surface of city?

Elon Musk wants to build tunnels across Los Angeles. I am asking Iran to build 500 meter tunnels plus some space for storage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

@TheImmortal

Runways are not ramps that one only needs to get to the end of and launch from at that point. They are the length they are for a reason. Aircraft takeoff whenever they have the lift to do so; keeping at aircraft at just under takeoff speed for too long is damaging to the landing gear and tyres, and could have catastrophic results.

The takeoff run depends on the type of aircraft and its fuel and weapons load. It is not fixed.

Airbases like Hamadan have 4000m long runways for many reasons, one of them is to accommodate transport aircraft that would be the only way to replenish an airbase (but especially one in a mountain) *quickly.*

Underground/mountain runways are a catastrophe waiting to happen if the aircraft based there have any issues at all during takeoff and landing - which they will.

Even if you only wanted to have the supporting infrastructure in a mountain, good luck finding adjacent flat land for a runway.

If you want a big engineering project for an airbase, you're better off making a "normal" super airbase.

Aircraft runways damaged by normal bombs and cruise missiles can be repaired in as little as under 24 hours. You just need to protect them from specialised anti-runway bombs that inflict longer lasting damage, and ballistic missiles if the enemy has them - currently they don't. But ABM systems, coupled with SAMs and the fighters you seek to base there should be capable of fending off these threats.

The major engineering work would be on a highly redundant number of taxiways, and heavily fortified aircraft shelters, fuel/ammo dumps, and other supporting infrastructure. Iran has good experience with fortifying structures of this size.









Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> @TheImmortal
> 
> Runways are not ramps that one only needs to get to the end of and launch from at that point. They are the length they are for a reason. Aircraft takeoff whenever they have the lift to do so; keeping at aircraft at just under takeoff speed for too long is damaging to the landing gear and tyres, and could have catastrophic results.
> 
> The takeoff run depends on the type of aircraft and its fuel and weapons load. It is not fixed.
> 
> Airbases like Hamadan have 4000m long runways for many reasons, one of them is to accommodate transport aircraft that would be the only way to replenish an airbase (but especially one in a mountain) *quickly.*
> 
> Underground/mountain runways are a catastrophe waiting to happen if the aircraft based there have any issues at all during takeoff and landing - which they will.
> 
> Even if you only wanted to have the supporting infrastructure in a mountain, good luck finding adjacent flat land for a runway.
> 
> If you want a big engineering project for an airbase, you're better off making a "normal" super airbase.
> 
> Aircraft runways damaged by normal bombs and cruise missiles can be repaired in as little as under 24 hours. You just need to protect them from specialised anti-runway bombs that inflict longer lasting damage, and ballistic missiles if the enemy has them - currently they don't. But ABM systems, coupled with SAMs and the fighters you seek to base there should be capable of fending off these threats.
> 
> The major engineering work would be on a highly redundant number of taxiways, and heavily fortified aircraft shelters, fuel/ammo dumps, and other supporting infrastructure. Iran has good experience with fortifying structures of this size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



It seems you didn’t bother to read my post.

First of all the concept is not new nor revolutionary. China built over 40 such “supporting” bases in the 1950’s when it thought nuclear war with the US was a distinct possibility. The distinct difference was they built runways outside from which the planes could take off and land.

And if China was able to find 40 suitable locations (who knows how many PLA has today) you are telling me Iran can’t find 4? Quite laughable. Building flat land for runway is not an impossible task you make it out to be. If Iran can build missile bases and move volatile solid fuel missiles in and out, it can pave ground smooth enough for fighter jets to land. If you can land planes on the old aircraft carriers (before supercarriers existed) you can land fighter jets near mountains.
I specifically said the type of aircraft that would be stored in such a base would be an air superiority fighter such as SU-35 which has a minimum take off length of 550 meters loaded. I am not sure why you bring up Hamadan runways as it’s completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. No one is building a base to store C-130s and have them take off from inside a mountain.

I also specifically said the take off portion would happen within the tunnel base not the landing portion which would happen outside. The ability to take off while the runway is under repairs is a key reason why the ability to take off from inside the base is needed and should exist.

It is neither impossible nor extraordinary expensive given the deterrence you are trying to create. The minerals recovered and jobs/industries the project creates/employs can help boost the economy as well. Often what is referred to as “shovel ready projects”.

I have the no doubt Iranian planners realize this and that any future Iranian fighter will have shorter take off and landing requirements as a necessity. If you can make the enemy hesitate or question their ability to degrade your air forces, the base has done its job.

These strategic bases are no different then strategic C&C bunkers/nuclear proof silos/ and missile bases. They serve a distinct purpose and that purpose is that even if the regular Air Force bases fall to enemy fire, there will always be contingent that is ready to respond. This will make the enemy have to work harder to win the air space war and may even prevent a war altogether due to extreme cost incurred.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Example:

Consisting of dozens of connected caves and capable of holding 200 planes, Chiashan Base, located in Huanlien County, Taiwan, is the largest underground air base of the Taiwan air force, according to news form Taiwan-based Broadcasting Corporation of China. After years of operating in secret, the base was finally made open to the media in April.

With a 2,400-meter runway through Chiashan hangar, the base has hidden taxiways connecting it to the neighboring Huanlien Base. The base is capable of withstanding conventional missiles. Construction of the base started in 1985 and lasted nearly nine years.






Taiwan's largest underground air base revealed - People's Daily Online


Consistingofdozensofconnectedcavesandcapableofholding200planes,ChiashanBase,locatedin



en.people.cn





The underground hangar has ten blast doors which exit to multiple runways and has its own hospital as well as multiple underground gas stations.

Just one example built way back in 80’s by Taiwan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

I reiterate; the use of underground runways for any portion of takeoff or landing is inherently dangerous and *WILL *result in fatalities and loss of aircraft sooner or later.

If a suitable location is found, mountain bases such as China's can be useful, but you have to stay realistic. The main advantage of such bases is their ability to keep safe those assets which are difficult to replace; namely aircraft, pilots, and wider airbase support infrastructure. Runways are very easy to repair as long as they are kept safe from specialised weapons, therefore there is no need to introduce excessive, unnecessary risks to protect them.

In fact, one of the advantages of long, wide runways with highly redundant taxiways is that the entire runway does not need to be fixed for aircraft to get back in the air. As little as 1 or 2 craters.

Better runway protection measures include patrols by high-endurance aircraft, long and short range SAM coverage, and GPS jamming.

Still, aircraft could be protected from bombs by high-performance bunkers. The question is if such a massive excavation and fortification project is more expensive than building bunkers.

If the bunkers are cheaper and the only thing that can destroy them something like a GBU-28C, then they're worth taking over the mountain base. Because a GBU-28C can only be carried by a B-2A and that can carry 2x GBU-57 MOPs that can penetrate even mountain bases.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> I reiterate; the use of underground runways for any portion of takeoff or landing is inherently dangerous and *WILL *result in fatalities and loss of aircraft sooner or later.
> 
> If a suitable location is found, mountain bases such as China's can be useful, but you have to stay realistic. The main advantage of such bases is their ability to keep safe those assets which are difficult to replace; namely aircraft, pilots, and wider airbase support infrastructure. Runways are very easy to repair as long as they are kept safe from specialised weapons, therefore there is no need to introduce excessive, unnecessary risks to protect them.
> 
> In fact, one of the advantages of long, wide runways with highly redundant taxiways is that the entire runway does not need to be fixed for aircraft to get back in the air. As little as 1 or 2 craters.
> 
> Better runway protection measures include patrols by high-endurance aircraft, long and short range SAM coverage, and GPS jamming.
> 
> Still, aircraft could be protected from bombs by high-performance bunkers. The question is if such a massive excavation and fortification project is more expensive than building bunkers.
> 
> If the bunkers are cheaper and the only thing that can destroy them something like a GBU-28C, then they're worth taking over the mountain base. Because a GBU-28C can only be carried by a B-2A and that can carry 2x GBU-57 MOPs that can penetrate even mountain bases.



More examples:






North Korea





Most “bunker busters” could destroy any bunker Iran builds out in the open. 

The goal with the indoor runway is to have the ability for the plane to take off if need be. I agree that runways can be repaired fairly quickly. The point of the underground airbase is to protect the aircraft and critical facilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## sanel1412

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 667784


Very bad work(editing),can be seen from mile it is not IRIA MiG 29,debunked ten minutes after it showed up

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## makranman

sanel1412 said:


> Very bad work(editing),can be seen from mile it is not IRIA MiG 29,debunked ten minutes after it showed up


this guy disagrees:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1303112503099097090also, you can see some of the different camos of mig 29 in here: http://www.mig.mariwoj.pl/
that camo IS for IRIAF. somebody did that. I'm afraid he is not going to get out in one piece.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sanel1412 said:


> Very bad work(editing),can be seen from mile it is not IRIA MiG 29,debunked ten minutes after it showed up


What does seem rather odd about this image,at least to me,is that whoever took it seems to have either framed or cropped the image to ensure that the most obvious identifying national symbols,ie the national flag and roundels,are just out of shot,which does rather seem to defeat the whole purpose of this exercise.
On the other hand if it isnt a fake,well I wouldnt want to be the clown responsible,as I think that if hes lucky he`ll merely just get drummed out of the airforce in disgrace......and likely get his name on certain watchlists that one really should try to avoid getting ones name placed on.
On the other hand if hes not quite so lucky then merely getting the boot from the af might just be the very least of his worries.....
Sadly tho if this is real then I think this potentially shows that even after 40 years the western created branches of irans military may still not be that politically reliable,good thing irans still got the irgc.You know maybe its time for them to look at getting some new fighters as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

Will iran unveil new weapons on September 22?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Will iran unveil new weapons on September 22?


who knows, maybe


----------



## sanel1412

Philip the Arab said:


> I think UAE will get K-FX when it reache block 2 or 3 and has LO capabilities. UAE is very close ally of South Korea and have many defense cooperation.


Problem with technology you dont produce are limitatiton that every country put when they sell it,so you cant just sold product whom ever you want,you must seek permission every time you want sell product and in most cases you cant sell it at all,because they provide it under terms....That is why Russia cant sell any of its modern airliners to Iran,since they have more than 5-10% of US technology,Russia must get licence to sell it...now they are trying to replace those parts with their parts,but in most cases those are not same quality and in some they cant replace it at all..South korean 5th gen aircraft will be havily restricted when it comes,whom they can sell it,and if they can sell it at all other than western alies.If US and UK for example denied UAE 5th gen tech,they will probably restrict every 5th gen aircraft other nation produce if incorporate their sensitive technology


----------



## Philip the Arab

sanel1412 said:


> Problem with technology you dont produce are limitatiton that every country put when they sell it,so you cant just sold product whom ever you want,you must seek permission every time you want sell product and in most cases you cant sell it at all,because they provide it under terms....That is why Russia cant sell any of its modern airliners to Iran,since they have more than 5-10% of US technology,Russia must get licence to sell it...now they are trying to replace those parts with their parts,but in most cases those are not same quality and in some they cant replace it at all..South korean 5th gen aircraft will be havily restricted when it comes,whom they can sell it,and if they can sell it at all other than western alies.If US and UK for example denied UAE 5th gen tech,they will probably restrict every 5th gen aircraft other nation produce if incorporate their sensitive technology


They will not care in my opinion, UAE is getting F-35 already 99% sure. UK and US will not block the deal most likely, and if they do there are Chinese, and Russian options that will make them think twice.


----------



## skyshadow

*nice combination*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

sanel1412 said:


> Problem with technology you dont produce are limitatiton that every country put when they sell it,so you cant just sold product whom ever you want,you must seek permission every time you want sell product and in most cases you cant sell it at all,because they provide it under terms....*That is why Russia cant sell any of its modern airliners to Iran,since they have more than 5-10% of US technology,Russia must get licence to sell it...*now they are trying to replace those parts with their parts,but in most cases those are not same quality and in some they cant replace it at all..South korean 5th gen aircraft will be havily restricted when it comes,whom they can sell it,and if they can sell it at all other than western alies.If US and UK for example denied UAE 5th gen tech,they will probably restrict every 5th gen aircraft other nation produce if incorporate their sensitive technology


Aware of the possible foreign vetoes that have materialized with the blocking of. Supplies of composite structural components for new commercial aircraft, Russia is pushing heavily on import substitution, including development of new PD14 turbines for MS-21-300 aircraft, March 2020 news that mass production has begun of these turbines. https://ria.ru/20200330/1569332215.html
Therefore, within a few years this aircraft should be marketed and free from possible vetoes from third countries.


----------



## Philosopher

Keep the thread on topic please. This thread is about Iran air force not some thread to spread Turkish propaganda. Of topic posts will be reported.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hormuz

triangle said:


> Engineering assistance =/= parts



I don't say it's the same. but having foreign companies working on design, engine etc. it's very likely that there are some parts coming from those countries. 



xbat said:


> there is only engine to discuss, BEA didnt sign engine agreement, russia is joke, prototypes will use f110 of USA , new engine works started 2 years ago and planning to ready in serial production of aircraft. it is strictly stated that there would be no export ban for third parties. engine schedule may be optimistic but we can fly with f110 in first batch. the aircraft will use large engines so ej200,f414 or rd33 types doesnt fit.
> 
> btw KFX has more foreign parts



Well if you think russia is a joke then go and check out the Saturn AL-41 and compare it to the US engines. 



Philosopher said:


> Keep the thread on topic please. This thread is about Iran air force not some thread to spread Turkish propaganda. Of topic posts will be reported.



Ok


----------



## TheImmortal

Stop feeding Turkish loving trolls.

Let them think what they want to think. Who cares. Turkey is far from an independent country as long as it relies on NATO and US for help and houses US Troops And nuclear weapons on its soil.

As for their weapons production they over exaggerate and under deliver so don’t bother with any claims until you see actual mass production.

It is quite possible in 15-20 years Turkey will be a fully independent power that can produce 80-90% of products without foreign help or parts. After all everyone has to start from somewhere before they reach full independence. It’s also possible in 15-20 years Turkey is still right where its at today.

Who knows. Who cares. If you want to debate it move to Turkish forum section.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 668444




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1303659388775944197

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Saleh99

Guys Iran managed to reverse engineer Maverick missiles right? If someone can show me a clear picture please


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Guys Iran managed to reverse engineer Maverick missiles right? If someone can show me a clear picture please



*fakour-90*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Guys Iran managed to reverse engineer Maverick missiles right? If someone can show me a clear picture please


where are you putting these pictures anyway ?


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *fakour-90*
> 
> View attachment 668704
> 
> 
> View attachment 668706
> 
> 
> View attachment 668705


Uhm that’s not agm-65 maverick😂 that’s clone of aim-54 Phoenix missiles


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Uhm that’s not agm-65 maverick😂 that’s clone of aim-54 Phoenix missiles


oh snap i thought you meant Phoenix

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> where are you putting these pictures anyway ?





skyshadow said:


> where are you putting these pictures anyway ?


On my notes... I just do some research

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Uhm that’s not agm-65 maverick😂 that’s clone of aim-54 Phoenix missiles


im not really in to air force maybe others can help you better but im not sure if air force reverse engineered agm-65 maverick i think they have built an equivalent named Zobin

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

Yep


skyshadow said:


> im not really in to air force maybe others can help you better but im not sure if air force reverse engineered agm-65 maverick i think they have built an equivalent named Zobin
> 
> View attachment 668711
> 
> 
> View attachment 668712


Yes I know, I’ll wait for someone else. Anyways Thanks brother

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Yep
> 
> Yes I know, I’ll wait for someone else. Anyways Thanks brother


sorry that i couldn't be more of help

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

triangle said:


> The sanctions have already been placed through the CAATSA. No F-35 for this moment, although they are trying to find ways around it. If I had to choose between F-35 and S-400, I would choose the F-35.
> 
> *From what I've read Turkey has not declared the S-400 officially "operational" and the US congress has so far held off from imposing harsh secondary sanctions that "could cut Turkey off from the Western military-industrial ecosystem"
> 
> One of the major issues is that "Turkey does not and will not in the foreseeable future, have any technical involvement in the primary maintenance of the Russian system... This bitter reality can be succinctly expressed; in the absence of a comprehensive technology transfer or co-production package, Turkish defense planners will never fully know what the Russian strategic SAM system is doing in Turkey, including whether it has any cyber or electronic backdoors clandestinely transferring data on NATO military assets to Moscow "
> 
> Those quotes are from a week old article found here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't Let the S-400/F-35 Challenge Ruin Relations Between Turkey and America
> 
> 
> Turkey and the United States face a strategic imperative to salvage their relationship. Neither country’s interests, however much they fail to align otherwise, would be well-served by watching a permanently weakened NATO bleed out at the hands of Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalinterest.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I'm sure it won't go that far.
> 
> *I wouldn't bet on it. Realistically Erdogan is not backing down on Turkey's claims on the natural gas fields near southern Cyprus. It's basically the only way that he can salvage Turkey's crumbling economy. At the same time nothing helps autocrats hold onto power as much as ramping up nationalist ferver. Erdogan knows this. He also knows that the Europeans will surely sanction Turkey if Turkey begins major drilling operations. Who knows, perhaps diplomacy will prevail but only time will tell. *
> 
> Buying Su-35 would bring more sanctions to the table. TF-X is not produced by BAE. They are providing engineering assistance. The TF-X is going to be built indigenous by Turkey with full IP and export rights. IMO I could see the whole project shelved or cancelled before the Turks allow any foreign control to production and export to occur.
> 
> *Almost all the weapons that Turkey currently fields are heavily dependent on vital foreign components or foreign parts. It's true that Turkey has become much more self sufficient in recent years, However Turkey tends to assemble weapons once they've acquired the vital components or in some cases knock down kits.
> 
> So far I haven't seen them build weapons from scratch the way Iran does or on the scale that Iran does. This is partly due to the fact that Turkey has had the luxury of importing sophisticated weapons, components and parts from whomever they please without having to worry about sanctions.
> 
> Of course being able to import sophisticated weapons systems with such ease comes with it's own advantages, however it's like a double edged sword. The F-35 is a perfect example of how major weapon manufacturing nations use the sale of their weapons as political leverage to control a client nations behavior. When a client nation doesn't want to play ball, well then that leads to a conflict of interest like what we see with the F-35.
> 
> Anyways the TF-X will be powered by two General Electric F-110 engines. Turkey can claim that they can build a 5th generation fighter jet from scratch but from everything I've seen and everything I know about Turkey, would imply otherwise. I recall not too long ago, when the US was threatening to kick Turkey out of the F-35 program, many Turkish fanboys were claiming that "Turkey is a partner in the F-35 program and produces vital components/parts. The US cannot kick Turkey out, blah blah blah" What happened in the end ? *
> 
> There are few countries in the world that can pursue an independent foreign policy. It takes guts and ambition to do that. As an Iranian you surely do understand.
> 
> And that is what Turkey is trying to avoid, being dependent on others on these strategic issues.
> 
> *They're trying, I'll give them that, but it's extremely difficult to avoid the major power brokers when it comes to highly sophisticated weapons like 5th generation stealth jets or top of the line air defense systems. Even China, with all the resources at their disposal are still reportedly powering their stealth fighter jets with Russian engines*
> 
> IMO Turkey should pursue a large and diverse ballistic missile program instead of the TF-X.
> 
> *With the current state of affairs in the Mediterranean, if Turkey were to build an extensive ballistic missile program (similar to Iran), I would assume that the EU would surely impose sanctions. Especially once Russia also builds those nuclear power plants for Turkey.
> 
> Of course it should be noted that Russian technicians will be in charge of the nuclear facilities and will be disposing all of the fissile material on a regular basis. However there's always the possibility of Turkey following the North Korean model, kicking out the Russians and going rogue. Again only time will tell what the future holds. *


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> *One of the major issues is that "Turkey does not and will not in the foreseeable future, have any technical involvement in the primary maintenance of the Russian system... This bitter reality can be succinctly expressed; in the absence of a comprehensive technology transfer or co-production package, Turkish defense planners will never fully know what the Russian strategic SAM system is doing in Turkey, including whether it has any cyber or electronic backdoors clandestinely transferring data on NATO military assets to Moscow "
> *



Haha, call me a conspiracy theorist, but in the end it could be that these S-400 can be remote controlled by Russia and are a planned front defence tool for to shield the southwest of Russia


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Haha, call me a conspiracy theorist, but in the end it could be that these S-400 can be remote controlled by Russia and are a planned front defence tool for to shield the southwest of Russia



Kill switch Backdoor is likely embedded so Russian Cyberwarfare team can crush the system in case of hostilities.

But also I suspect it secretly transmits radar data to Russia. Russia wants to pick up F-35 and F-22 Radar signatures.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1305899249008336896
US 6th gen fighter already in flying prototype stage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Not surprising to be honest. The F-22's first flight was over 23 years ago so it should not come as a shock that they have produced a prototype of next gen plane. I assume it will be comprised of a comibination of manned and unmanned platforms. The concept of a "6th generation" fighter is vague and not properly defined from my perspective. Normally the Americans appear to set the standard regarding what defines a particular generation so it would interesting to see what standards will be set by this fighter jet. With the arrival of 6th generation manned and unmanned swarming fighter jets and manoeuvring hypersonic systems, the air defence sectors of competing nations need to take the necessary leaps to stay in the game.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Shafaqh*

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> Not surprising to be honest. The F-22's first flight was over 23 years ago so it should not come as a shock that they have produced a prototype of next gen plane. I assume it will be comprised of a comibination of manned and unmanned platforms. The concept of a "6th generation" fighter is vague and not properly defined from my perspective. Normally the Americans appear to set the standard regarding what defines a particular generation so it would interesting to see what standards will be set by this fighter jet. With the arrival of 6th generation manned and unmanned swarming fighter jets and manoeuvring hypersonic systems, the air defence sectors of competing nations need to take the necessary leaps to stay in the game.



What makes this revolutionary is that it was computer designed/tested then a prototype built in 1 year time. That is unheard of in aircraft development where it usually takes 10 years to get to prototype stage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

The US Air Force has built and flown a mysterious full-scale prototype of its future fighter jet


Does this give the Next Generation Air Dominance program more momentum, or does it open it up to more scrutiny?




www.defensenews.com





*Over the last 50 years, the U.S. industrial base has dwindled** from 10 manufacturers capable of building an advanced fighter to only three defense companies*: Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman. *The time it takes the Air Force to move a new fighter from research and development to full-rate production has stretched from a matter of years to multiple decades*.

The result is that every fighter program becomes existential for companies, who fight to prove that they can meet technical requirements during the development and production phase at a lower cost than their competitors. The companies are finally able to turn a profit during the later years of a program, when they become locked in as sustainment providers with the technical knowledge necessary for upgrading, repairing and extending the life of their product —* often with little congressional interest or scrutiny.*

Dwindling industrial base, stretched out development times (by many years), structural conditions that inherently favor corruption: the progressive decay of US fighter jet production mirrors that entire country's steady and welcome downfall.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*95% of classified military documents from Iran-Iraq war will be unclassified in next 5 month*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## makranman

SalarHaqq said:


> *Over the last 50 years, the U.S. industrial base has dwindled** from 10 manufacturers capable of building an advanced fighter to only three defense companies*: Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman. *The time it takes the Air Force to move a new fighter from research and development to full-rate production has stretched from a matter of years to multiple decades*.


similar thing happened in the UK. many companies died in the cold war. the same thing will happen in all other countries in near future. Mikoyan is already dying, similar thing will happen to some of chinese companies in future, when they slow down their spending.
I have not read companies public statements and think tank documents about future of warfare, but it is not really strange if one of those 3 US giants are dead in 30 years.

It IS NOT indicative of bigger problems at all. instead it is a change in Technology and R&D costs. developing a new chip will run companies 100s of millions of $s. similar costs for other high tech stuff.
also not many countries have access to unlimited free workforce (Iran: with military service) OR unlimited money (US: with dollar). so they can not waste their money or workforce active time. every thing need to be counted. EVERYTHING!


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1306554924902350849

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> What makes this revolutionary is that it was computer designed/tested then a prototype built in 1 year time. That is unheard of in aircraft development where it usually takes 10 years to get to prototype stage.



But this is what i told you many times before. Today the computerpower is such great that you can design all of an airplane within the computer. Also all of the tests of the design including engine you can also do in the computer. If your programm and the computer is good enough, you even not need a wind tunnel. Also you can let the air plane fly manouvers what are in reality inpossible and check the possibilities of the design before you go to prototype.

Edit:

like here









IRIAF | News and Discussions


So what is going to be Iran's first big acquisition when the arms embargo ends soon? Are we going to see the long-awaited large order of Su-30s or will it be something else? Me is not sure cause after showing the new 700 turbofan there is a possibility that there are also bigger turbofans for...



defence.pk





And due to that also Iran can develop fighterjets faster.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Mirage F1 armed with air to air missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*A refuel pod , a Sahab electronic warfare pod, a Shahin electronic warfare pod (AN / ALQ-101) and a laser marking pod to guide bombs and laser-guided missiles.*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *A refuel pod , a Sahab electronic warfare pod, a Shahin electronic warfare pod (AN / ALQ-101) and a laser marking pod to guide bombs and laser-guided missiles.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 672691


Thats interesting.....
The laser designator used to be called the TLS-99,now its LAU-99....




There appear to have been some physical changes as well,the front section is no longer cut-off at an angle and the rear section no longer has a slight taper to it.
Perhaps theres been some upgrading of the iriafs indigenously developed laser guided weapons.Then again knowing the iriaf it could just be all purely cosmetic.....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Toofan 5 anti tank missile *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1309847121915453443

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Gives me hope that Iran will not waste billions on foreign weaponry. Especially fighter jets!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310139043699548160

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

Like I have said before, people who think Iran will be spending billions and billions importing weapons are either clueless and/or out of touch with reality. Iran will at most focus more on getting its hand on the technology, TOT etc to fuel its own large indigenous sector. Iran's entire military budget is small compared to what it could/should be and yet we've seen all these advancements. Thus, excessive purchases are not only illogical, but not needed as there is barely anything Iran needs to import. I have even seen journalists talking about Iran importing tanks and ships. They're not just clueless, but deluded.

If Iran was to make an "one time only" large purchase, it would be in the airforce sector to give that sector a major needed boost until Iran own capability to mass produce fighter jets is ready. I am not against this one time purchase.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1309847121915453443

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


>


so fakour weights almost 640 kg...it's a heavy *** missile.


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> so fakour weights almost 640 kg...it's a heavy *** missile.


Thats exactly what I thought.I would`ve expected it to be at least somewhat lighter than the aim54 thanks to its 21st century electronics,which in addition to being much more compact and lightweight wouldnt also need the cooling loop from the aircraft.It actually makes me wonder if the f14 can carry 6 of these for its combat loadout.
Whats interesting is that the firing temp stenciled on the side of the missile is -45 to 145 whereas its land based cousin which uses the same diameter of engine[if not the same engine] is only rated for a firing temp of -25 to 125............weird


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Messerschmitt said:


>



The nose of the kousar is different

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Thats exactly what I thought.I would`ve expected it to be at least somewhat lighter than the aim54 thanks to its 21st century electronics,which in addition to being much more compact and lightweight wouldnt also need the cooling loop from the aircraft.It actually makes me wonder if the f14 can carry 6 of these for its combat loadout.
> Whats interesting is that the firing temp stenciled on the side of the missile is -45 to 145 whereas its land based cousin which uses the same diameter of engine[if not the same engine] is only rated for a firing temp of -25 to 125............weird


yeah i expected it to be lighter too. i actually used to thought the same way about sayyad-2 missile. wikipedia used to say it is rim-66 REd but in reality it's 400 kg heavier than that and it's range is twice (our version which bought during shah) of standard missile.


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IranDefence

Venezuelan C130 was grounded for a while , Iranian experts did a heavy overhaul and now it's flying again

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

I hope that there is an actual ongoing development program for this weapon.


----------



## Saleh99

@skyshadow what is that new bomb?🔥


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow what is that new bomb?🔥


not an air force guy, but i do not think thats a bomb its has something to do with signals or jamming i cant remember which one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow what is that new bomb?🔥


possibly the sattar-4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> possibly the sattar-4
> 
> View attachment 675602


he means the green one on far left, the one you see is Bina guided missile


----------



## Shams313

Iranian Air Force, SAIPA Auto-Making Company to Cooperate on Manufacturing Drone Engines | Farsnews Agency

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

Shams313 said:


> Iranian Air Force, SAIPA Auto-Making Company to Cooperate on Manufacturing Drone Engines | Farsnews Agency


Now this is exciting! If Iran's auto industry joins efforts, Iran can build thousands of drones in no time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow what is that new bomb?🔥





skyshadow said:


> not an air force guy, but i do not think thats a bomb its has something to do with signals or jamming i cant remember which one.













possibly fab-100

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 675839
> 
> 
> View attachment 675843
> 
> 
> possibly fab-100


The pic i posted and the bomb in the red circle looks different, it has wings🤔


----------



## Mithridates

View attachment 675851


it does not look like a winged bomb. also the munitions are placed in a symmetrical manner to the plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 675850
> View attachment 675851
> 
> 
> it does not look like a winged bomb. also the munitions are placed in a symmetrical manner to the plane.


What is that btw?


----------



## Ich

Saleh99 said:


> What is that btw?


For me it looks like an IR Air to Air missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Saleh99 said:


> What is that btw?


aim-9 or soviet RE version of it. if i'm not wrong it's called k-13.


----------



## Mithridates

this is what Russian pilots do when they feel cockpit is too hot.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> * is approximately the same as su-35 *



Close, but not close enough. Su-35 will provide Iran with a platform which it will upgrade with its own technology going forward. Iran is not like nations such as India and Saudi Arabia that seem to purchase different fighters jets every few months. Get one good platform and then upgrade it yourself. A few dozen (at least 60) Su-35 will provide Iran with a good added capability until its own stealthy fighters and associated UCAVs are ready to be produced in next 10-15 years. If need be, more fighter jets could be purchased in the meantime but Iran needs to invest as much of its money as possible in its own industries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

T


Philosopher said:


> Close, but not close enough. Su-35 will provide Iran with a platform which it will upgrade with its own technology going forward. Iran is not like nations such as India and Saudi Arabia that seem to purchase different fighters jets every few months. Get one good platform and then upgrade it yourself. A few dozen (at least 60) Su-35 will provide Iran with a good added capability until its own stealthy fighters and associated UCAVs are ready to be produced in next 10-15 years. If need be, more fighter jets could be purchased in the meantime but Iran needs to invest as much of its money as possible in its own industries.


True. If you look at iranian air force weapons, they have a variety of missiles and guided weapons. They only need their own platform to install these weapons on it. Iran as you mentioned should buy a number of fighters, then Work on its own one and they can benefit from the advanced jets they will buy in terms of technology and other aspects. I don’t know if russia accepts a deal that includes TOT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> Close, but not close enough. Su-35 will provide Iran with a platform which it will upgrade with its own technology going forward. Iran is not like nations such as India and Saudi Arabia that seem to purchase different fighters jets every few months. Get one good platform and then upgrade it yourself. A few dozen (at least 60) Su-35 will provide Iran with a good added capability until its own stealthy fighters and associated UCAVs are ready to be produced in next 10-15 years. If need be, more fighter jets could be purchased in the meantime but Iran needs to invest as much of its money as possible in its own industries.


Also, su-30sm2 has the 2 best features su-35 has, the AL-41F1S engines and Irbis radar. Can’t iran upgrade also the su-30sm2 if they acquire it like the su-35?


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> Also, su-30sm2 has the 2 best features su-35 has, the AL-41F1S engines and Irbis radar. Can’t iran upgrade also the su-30sm2 if they acquire it like the su-35?



The idea is, Iran should just go for the overall better fighter which is the Su-35. We had said in the past that if Iran went for the Su-30 it would be because Russians would be willing to give TOT for that. Remember, as Iran has said before, it is not just looking to purchase a jet but it wants more active participation, such as in house manufacturing etc. At this stage, I think it is best to just wait and see what happens. Our theories have run their course.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313934379824164864

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IranDefence

Visiting HESA

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Iskander

IranDefence said:


> Visiting HESA


An-140 still in production ?


----------



## IranDefence

Iskander said:


> An-140 still in production ?



They announced project was resumed with a modified engine

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## shaumar

Honestly, I don't understand why people and even Pakistani praise Iran. Yes, we do have a history; but Iran has a weak airforce with old antique aircrafts, it doesn't even have a proper Navy, and its land forces are no match for U.S or any Western forces or there airforce. Isreal would annihilate Iran in Air supremacy.

The country has been declining since sanctions have been put in place. Iran has no loyal allies; it has a terrible relationship with the Middle East. It is barking at a superpower, who has powerful allies with advanced militaries.

It has a rocky relationship with Pakistan, and its people are living in misery. The so called Russian ally has not even helped Iran set up and improve the countries defence and nor real humanitarian aid provided by Russia.

Iran will become the next Syria if it does not behave.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

shaumar said:


> Honestly, I don't understand why people and even Pakistani praise Iran. Yes, we do have a history; but Iran has a weak airforce with old antique aircrafts, it doesn't even have a proper Navy, and its land forces are no match for U.S or any Western forces or there airforce. Isreal would annihilate Iran in Air supremacy.
> 
> The country has been declining since sanctions have been put in place. Iran has no loyal allies; it has a terrible relationship with the Middle East. It is barking at a superpower, who has powerful allies with advanced militaries.
> 
> It has a rocky relationship with Pakistan, and its people are living in misery. The so called Russian ally has not even helped Iran set up and improve the countries defence and nor real humanitarian aid provided by Russia.
> 
> Iran will become the next Syria if it does not behave.



Israel with its Air supremacy can not even deal effectively against Hezbollah on its own doorstep and you think they can "annihilate" Iran over 1000km distance? Get real!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "IranDefence, post: 12749069, member: 178526"]
They announced project was resumed with a modified engine
[/CITAZIONE]

Not only the engine, unlike the AN-140, the one in the picture is also designed for transport with a load from a hinged ramp at the rear of the fuselage type C-130, C-235, C-27 ect.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

shaumar said:


> Honestly, I don't understand why people and even Pakistani praise Iran. Yes, we do have a history; but Iran has a weak airforce with old antique aircrafts, it doesn't even have a proper Navy, and its land forces are no match for U.S or any Western forces or there airforce. Isreal would annihilate Iran in Air supremacy.
> 
> The country has been declining since sanctions have been put in place. Iran has no loyal allies; it has a terrible relationship with the Middle East. It is barking at a superpower, who has powerful allies with advanced militaries.
> 
> It has a rocky relationship with Pakistan, and its people are living in misery. The so called Russian ally has not even helped Iran set up and improve the countries defence and nor real humanitarian aid provided by Russia.
> 
> Iran will become the next Syria if it does not behave.



Uneducated troll

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Iskander

Is the engine domestically made or imported ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shaumar

Lol thanks

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## shaumar

Thank you, but Iran won't last two days in a war with the U.S


Mr Iran Eye said:


> Uneducated troll





Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Israel with its Air supremacy can not even deal effectively against Hezbollah on its own doorstep and you think they can "annihilate" Iran over 1000km distance? Get real!


Guerrilla warfare and air warfare are two different things.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## sepasgozar

shaumar said:


> Thank you, but Iran won't last two days in a war with the U.SGuerrilla warfare and air warfare are two different things.


War with Iran will end everything you seem to care so much about. And Pakistan will not last one day in a war with India lol

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shaumar

We have lasted for over 7 decades. Also, Pakistan would annhilate Iran any day.


sepasgozar said:


> War with Iran will end everything you seem to care so much about. And Pakistan will not last one day in a war with India lol

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## sepasgozar

shaumar said:


> We have lasted for over 7 decades. Also, Pakistan would annhilate Iran any day.


And we have lasted for over 3000 years 

Pakistan is a terrorist harbouring sh*t hole, for the most part. So don't bring Pakistan into it. Have hardly heard any foreign tourists keen to visit lol.

Also, this is no measuring up contest, but lets not forgot that Pakistan was under Persian rule and not vice versa. A pakistani hating on Iran is like a fish hating on water lol

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## shaumar

At the end your people will running to Pakistan as refugees. Bark all you want.


sepasgozar said:


> And we have lasted for over 3000 years
> 
> Pakistan is a terrorist harbouring sh*t hole, for the most part. So don't bring Pakistan into it. Have hardly heard any foreign tourists keen to visit lol


----------



## sepasgozar

shaumar said:


> At the end your people will running to Pakistan as refugees. Bark all you want.


Last place we'd want to go to bro  

Iranians are not taliban or terrorist to rush to Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## shaumar

Call us what you want, you can't deny the fact your a weak country and will always be. Only if your leadership behaves. Then you might be shown some respect. Also, the double standard won't work sending terrorist to Blochistan, Syria and Yemen. Know your place and good luck!


sepasgozar said:


> Last place we'd want to go to bro
> 
> Iranians are not taliban or terrorist to rush to Pakistan.


----------



## 925boy

shaumar said:


> Lol thanks


if you do not understand something, first ASK QUESTIONS. Your posts wreaks of insecurities. you say IRan'sairforce is weak, but tahts not true, you just lack knowledge of whats really happening. IRn has the largest helicopter fleet in the ME, and they are being upgraded. Iran has upgraded and refurbished many fighter jets, so you're just in full blown denial and if you dont wanna learn better, then just ignore this thread. If your comment that IRan is declining is true then why hasnt US attacked IRan yet??? INSTEAD, US keeps pushing its military assets near Iran farther and farther....and didnt attack despite intensifying provocations in Iraq...Pakistan is no match to Iran when it comes to regional ideology and strategy, thats what i think you havent thought about.

You actually show you do not understand IRan, which is why you already made 4-7 false accusations.


shaumar said:


> Thank you, but Iran won't last two days in a war with the U.S



You meant to say :


> Thank you, but Pakistan wont last 2 days in a war with US



If US govt agrees with you then why havent they attacked in 34+ years??? ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS!!! if u cant answer them then we have to conclude you lack knowledge and are simply trolling.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sepasgozar

shaumar said:


> Call us what you want, you can't deny the fact your a weak country and will always be. Only if your leadership behaves. Then you might be shown some respect. Also, the double standard won't work sending terrorist to Blochistan, Syria and Yemen. Know your place and good luck!




You made me have a good laugh today. 

I could post a link to compare Iran and Pakistan's GDP and economy (https://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/pakistan.iran/economy) to show you where the weaknesses lie. 

But I will just end by saying this: You will always be Indian's b*tch


925boy said:


> o say :
> 
> If US govt agrees with you then why havent they attacked in 34+ years??? ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS!!! if u cant answer them then we have to conclude you lack knowledge and are simply trolling.



He is a thirteen year old internet troll whose breath still smells of cheap pasteurized milk and he has yet to even shave his moustache for the first time. It is concluded that he has no knowledge lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

shaumar said:


> Call us what you want, you can't deny the fact your a weak country and will always be. Only if your leadership behaves. Then you might be shown some respect. Also, the double standard won't work sending terrorist to Blochistan, Syria and Yemen. Know your place and good luck!


 Go tell your U.S and Israeli masters how weak Iran is and what an absolute cakewalk it will be for them because apparently they have not figured that out on their own and they need someone smart like you to clue them in.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

sahureka2 said:


> Not onli engine, unlike the AN-140, the one in the photo is designed also to transport with loading from a hinged ramp at the rear of the fuselage like C-130, C-235, C-27 ect.


Antonov had also designed the An-140T version (Tactical Airlifter)
the An-140T is a light military transport aircraft developed on the basis of the An-140-100 turboprop airliner. The An-140T is equipped with a rear ramp for loading / unloading goods and personnel. Aircraft that had been selected by Russia to replace the AN-26, then not built due to the problems that arose in Russia / Ukraine.
Now this in the photo will be a development of the Hesa IrAn140, completely redesigned in Iran, or the continuation of the collaboration with Antonov who provided the technical co sult and the drawings of the AN-140T version or the commercial version AN-140TK, convertible transport / passengers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

I hope Iran will one day develop the AWACS version of the Ir-140.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## makranman

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I hope Iran will one day develop the AWACS version of the Ir-140.



now that i think, is it possible to have a Drone AWACS?
you know, some big drone with big radar on its sides?
are there any considerations? like advanced computers or porgraming or...?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

sepasgozar said:


> Last place we'd want to go to bro
> 
> Iranians are not taliban or terrorist to rush to Pakistan.


chill bro!!! lmaooooo

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

shaumar said:


> Isreal would annihilate Iran in Air supremacy.


Israel must first deal successfully with Hezbollah then comes Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mithridates

shaumar said:


> Pakistan would annhilate Iran any day.


i kinda expected this comment...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

makranman said:


> now that i think, is it possible to have a Drone AWACS?
> you know, some big drone with big radar on its sides?
> are there any considerations? like advanced computers or porgraming or...?


i have a crazy idea, what if we build a LO/VLO small drone with communication and data links and put some of our TICS-2 FLIR/IRST in three directions (forward and sides). or a more crazy idea, make a balloon out of kevlar/glass fibers and send it up with the aforementioned set of devices and control the air space remotely and stealthy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Crush Iran ? That's laughable.

Pakistan has lost every major war against India. India even took all of Kashmir in the 70's and later gave it back to Pakistan for the sake of peace.

The fact of the matter is that when the Indian subcontinent was divided, all of the major economic hubs were given to India. So Pakistan will always be at a disadvantage in that regard.

When it comes to military technology, both countries are more or less on par. If anything India is now edging Pakistan but India has a much larger army. So really Pakistan has no chance against India militarily.

Currently, Pakistan is economically bankrupt with no natural resources to fall back on. The literacy rate in Pakistan is 65% and that's according to their government. Pakistan isn't even under any serious sanctions regime so it all boils down to corruption and mismanagement.



Mithridates said:


> i kinda expected this comment...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

sahureka2 said:


> Antonov had also designed the An-140T version (Tactical Airlifter)
> the An-140T is a light military transport aircraft developed on the basis of the An-140-100 turboprop airliner. The An-140T is equipped with a rear ramp for loading / unloading goods and personnel. Aircraft that had been selected by Russia to replace the AN-26, then not built due to the problems that arose in Russia / Ukraine.
> Now this in the photo will be a development of the Hesa IrAn140, completely redesigned in Iran, or the continuation of the collaboration with Antonov who provided the technical co sult and the drawings of the AN-140T version or the commercial version AN-140TK, convertible transport / passengers.



YES ! ......http://news.mrud.ir/news/85884/بازدید-وزیر-راه-و-شهرسازی-از-شرکت-صنایع-هواپیماسازی-ایران-هسا

I used an automatic translator :
................................
" _During this visit, the Minister of Roads and Urban Development visited *Iran 140 Tactical Transport Aircraft*, T-90 and Kowsar ,Helicopter, Production Line, Action and Aircraft Design and Testing Center, Iran 140 Aircraft, and Firefighting and Flight Simulator at Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Company (HESA). _"

I ask the users who speak the language if the translation can be considered exact

*Iran 140 Tactical Transport Aircraft *certainly it would be a great milestone, a very important starting point for future larger projects for the Iranian aviation industry

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> YES ! ......http://news.mrud.ir/news/85884/بازدید-وزیر-راه-و-شهرسازی-از-شرکت-صنایع-هواپیماسازی-ایران-هسا
> 
> I used an automatic translator :
> ................................
> " _During this visit, the Minister of Roads and Urban Development visited *Iran 140 Tactical Transport Aircraft*, T-90 and Kowsar ,Helicopter, Production Line, Action and Aircraft Design and Testing Center, Iran 140 Aircraft, and Firefighting and Flight Simulator at Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Company (HESA). _"
> 
> I ask the users who speak the language if the translation can be considered exact
> 
> *Iran 140 Tactical Transport Aircraft *certainly it would be a great milestone, a very important starting point for future larger projects for the Iranian aviation industry


its the exact translation, but you seem surprised Iran announced that almost 5 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sha ah

Turkey’s New Akinci Drone Is Impressive, But It’s No Substitute For Modern Fighter Jets


Turkey cannot count on its new Akinci drone to serve as a substitute for its air force acquiring or developing a fifth-generation aircraft sometime in the next decade.




www.forbes.com





This new Turkish drone, Akinci, has the ability to launch cruise missiles, air to air missiles and carries a serious payload.

However these are some questions that come to mind.

Considering how many drones the Turks have lost in various theaters and the expense involved in building such a weapon, is it then prudent for a UAV to loiter in enemy airspace for such a long enough period of time to drop 6 or more bombs on various targets ? 

The UAV can launch air to air missiles but when coming face to face with a fighter jet with similar capabilities, the fighter jet is so much more maneuverable and has counter measures built in.

Does such a UAV really stand a chance against a modern fighter jet ? I highly doubt it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

skyshadow said:


> its the exact translation, but you seem surprised Iran announced that almost 5 years ago
> 
> View attachment 679771
> 
> 
> View attachment 679772
> 
> 
> View attachment 679773



surprised ! Yes 
Iran has presented in the past many drawings and models of aircraft projects, but then few have seen themselves in production, while this is becoming a reality, *yes therefore surprised, favorably surprised* by the acquired ability to turn projects into reality

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316664522472517632

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Shawnee said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316664522472517632


I have never heard of a T-90 helicopter!


----------



## TheImmortal

shaumar said:


> Honestly, I don't understand why people and even Pakistani praise Iran. Yes, we do have a history; but Iran has a weak airforce with old antique aircrafts, it doesn't even have a proper Navy, and its land forces are no match for U.S or any Western forces or there airforce. Isreal would annihilate Iran in Air supremacy.
> 
> The country has been declining since sanctions have been put in place. Iran has no loyal allies; it has a terrible relationship with the Middle East. It is barking at a superpower, who has powerful allies with advanced militaries.
> 
> It has a rocky relationship with Pakistan, and its people are living in misery. The so called Russian ally has not even helped Iran set up and improve the countries defence and nor real humanitarian aid provided by Russia.
> 
> Iran will become the next Syria if it does not behave.



You do realize Iran supplies Pakistan power via it’s electric grid and in future will supply natural gas which will power many things in Pakistan.

You shouldn’t talk so negatively about a neighbor that helps your struggling economy and energy problem.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

shaumar said:


> We have lasted for over 7 decades. Also, Pakistan would annhilate Iran any day.


If the Government in Islamabad ever lost their minds and tried to "annhilate" Iran, Pakistan would be popped like a dirty zit between Iran and India.


----------



## Ali_Baba

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> If the Government in Islamabad ever lost their minds and tried to "annhilate" Iran, Pakistan would be popped like a dirty zit between Iran and India.



Iran will be turned into a fried kebab the moment it casts its evil eye over Pakistan.

The Iranian airforce is a joke right now. 2 Squadrons of JF17s are enough to shoot down the entire IIRAF on their own.

The less that can be said about your tank force, armoured divisions, training of your people(ergo shoot down of civilian airliner), then the better...

To top it off, in the case of Iran, and Pakistan, one of these countries is a confirmed nuclear power. The other is not.. take a guess which one..

Please don't such silly things on this forum, you are starting to sound like an Indian,.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Ali_Baba said:


> Iran will be turned into a fried kebab the moment it casts its evil eye over Pakistan.
> 
> The Iranian airforce is a joke right now. 2 Squadrons of JF17s are enough to shoot down the entire IIRAF on their own.
> 
> The less that can be said about your tank force, armoured divisions, training of your people(ergo shoot down of civilian airliner), then the better...
> 
> To top it off, in the case of Iran, and Pakistan, one of these countries is a confirmed nuclear power. The other is not.. take a guess which one..
> 
> Please don't such silly things on this forum, you are starting to sound like an Indian,.



Keep dreaming!


----------



## sahureka2

Sorry, Instead of discussing who is better or stronger, it would no longer be appropriate to return to bringing contributions related to the title of this discussion.

Do you have any news about the IRIAF?

Thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

it seems Iran has reversed engineered J79 engine and plans to unveil it as *Owj - 2* engine they showed it side by side of *Owj - 1* engine 













*Iran has secretly unveiled Fakour - 2 medium range semi active air to air missile










*

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> it seems Iran has reversed engineered J79 engine and plans to unveil it as *Owj - 2* engine they showed it side by side of *Owj - 1* engine
> 
> 
> View attachment 680231
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Iran has secretly unveiled Fakour - 2 medium range semi active air to air missile
> 
> View attachment 680234
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 680235
> *


i hope it's true and we are producing j-79 but you should consider it that might be it's an overhauled preexisting engine and they are testing it's function. however it's definitely a j-79:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> i hope it's true and we are producing j-79 but you should consider it that might be it's an overhauled preexisting engine and they are testing it's function. however it's definitely a j-79:
> 
> View attachment 680244




it is true Iran never showed overhaul of its engines why would they show this 3 times ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> it is true Iran never showed overhaul of its engines why would they show this 3 times ?
> 
> 
> View attachment 680245



No point to J-79, like the J-85 it’s a 1950’s engine.

Neither can be used in a future Iranian fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> No point to J-79, like the J-85 it’s a 1950’s engine.
> 
> Neither can be used in a future Iranian fighter jet.


we cant jump just like US that built the thing we have too its a learning process doesn't mean iran is going to use it in numbers the goal is to build RD-33 turbofan for mass production


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> No point to J-79, like the J-85 it’s a 1950’s engine.
> 
> Neither can be used in a future Iranian fighter jet.



Could they possibly be used in a larger future drone platform of some type?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Blue In Green said:


> Could they possibly be used in a larger future drone platform of some type?



Exactly. Both J-85 and J-79 may be used by Iran NOT in manned fighters but in UCAV supersonic fighters.

I'm sure Iran is developing its own turbofan engines (for manned & unmanned aircrafts) but till these projects are mature and finished Iran maybe is working in these older engines for supersonic UCAVs.

The thrust-to-weight for such unmanned platforms would be far better than for a manned one (a drone does not need any human inside nor a vital cell for the health of the pilot, so the save in weight is BIG). 
And due to this loss of weight the range, speed, agility... would be better in the supersonic UCAV, related to a manned fighter with these J-85 or J-79 engines.

I'm sure Iran has followed this path years ago. The results are not public (are confidential yet) but drone tech in Iran is TOP WORLD, so...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Blue In Green said:


> Could they possibly be used in a larger future drone platform of some type?


Other options would be non aircraft related such as a marinised variant for naval use like the lm1500 or also commercial use for gas pipeline compressors.
The main military option would be a complete reengining of the entire f4 fleet with locally manufactured brand new improved j79s fitted with new technologies such as fadec,but whether the airforce would actually be capable of implementing a program like that is anyones guess.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> we cant jump just like US that built the thing we have too its a learning process doesn't mean iran is going to use it in numbers the goal is to build RD-33 turbofan for mass production



RD-33 was going to be used in 2003 Shafaq. 20 years later it’s obsolete as well.

These engines are merely to train the workforce and keep them employed till an alternative engine is able to be reverse engineered.



Blue In Green said:


> Could they possibly be used in a larger future drone platform of some type?



Unlikely as for drone that large to require a jet engine you are probably looking at a stealth frame or LO. In which case both J-79 and J-85 are not suitable for a stealth UCAV. Future stealth drones will likely be as big maybe even bigger than F-5 and F-4.

For smaller UAVs Iran already unveiled a drone jet engine that can be expanded on.

So you really aren’t solving the powerful engine problem.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

TheImmortal said:


> Unlikely as for drone that large to require a jet engine you are probably looking at a stealth frame or LO. In which case both J-79 and J-85 are not suitable for a stealth UCAV.



Stealth supersonic UCAV would be the 2nd step. The 1st step would be supersonic UCAV.

F-15, F-14, SU-30, SU-35, F-16, MIG-31...all of them are NOT stealth. And we are talking everyday in this forum (and previously in our dear and missed IMF) about Iran's needs in terms of Air Force, and purchasing SU-30 SM2, SU-35 etc etc which are NOT stealth.

So a supersonic UCAV with a J-79, with an AESA radar and armed with BVR AA missiles is not a silly thing as the 1st step to renew Iran's Air Force.

The manned fighters and/or stealth fighters would come in 2nd step.


----------



## khansaheeb

LegionnairE said:


> did it fly yet?


Only in an animation.


----------



## Sineva

Heres an oldie...





Technicians installing the guidance section on a GBU-10 Laser Guided Bomb.
Does anyone know how many of these were actually supplied or if they were used in any numbers during the iran-iraq war?.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Stealth supersonic UCAV would be the 2nd step. The 1st step would be supersonic UCAV.
> 
> F-15, F-14, SU-30, SU-35, F-16, MIG-31...all of them are NOT stealth. And we are talking everyday in this forum (and previously in our dear and missed IMF) about Iran's needs in terms of Air Force, and purchasing SU-30 SM2, SU-35 etc etc which are NOT stealth.
> 
> So a supersonic UCAV with a J-79, with an AESA radar and armed with BVR AA missiles is not a silly thing as the 1st step to renew Iran's Air Force.
> 
> The manned fighters and/or stealth fighters would come in 2nd step.



Iran is purchasing SU-30 and SU-35 to defend its airspace NOT penetrate foreign airspace. Thus stealth is a lot less important when fighting on your home turf.

A jet powered UCAV should be stealth if it’s main goal is to penetrate foreign airspace and assist with bombing missions (look at Chinese next gen drones and Russian for example).

Or else if you build a large non LO or VLO drone it’s just gonna get shot down when it approaches enemy air space. Unless your enemy is a bunch of insurgents or like Armenia operates a 1970’s air defense network.


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


>


this is second generation Saegheh - you should see its 5th generation.


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Heres an oldie...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Technicians installing the guidance section on a GBU-10 Laser Guided Bomb.
> Does anyone know how many of these were actually supplied or if they were used in any numbers during the iran-iraq war?.


as I know we just had maverick missiles which was guided. rest were unguided bombs.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mithridates said:


> as I know we just had maverick missiles which was guided. rest were unguided bombs.


IRIAF has had GBU-10 Paveway laser guided bombs and Laser designator pods for its F-4 fleet dating back to the IIAF days. Laser guided bombs were used early on in the war.


----------



## Mithridates

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> IRIAF has had GBU-10 Paveway laser guided bombs and Laser designator pods for its F-4 fleet dating back to the IIAF days. Laser guided bombs were used early on in the war.


so where are the pods now?? if you mean the tls-99 it's a RE French pod we got our hand on it when mirage f1s deficited to us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

My


Mithridates said:


> so where are the pods now?? if you mean the tls-99 it's a RE French pod we got our hand on it when mirage f1s deficited to us.


My mistake. IRIAF F-4Ds were supplied with AVG-9 Pave light Laser designator that gets installed in the backseat of the cabin and operated by the weapons system operator, not a pod.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318159099712933888🔥🇹🔥

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hashirama

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318159099712933888🔥🇹🔥


Translate please, what does it mean?


----------



## sahureka2

Hashirama said:


> Translate please, what does it mean?


With web traslate:
Defense Minister in talks with Al Jazeera: We have signed an important agreement with Russia for the development of our country's air force

Finally announced, congratulations to all

And:

https://shahraranews.ir/fa/news/47298/وزیر-دفاع-هشدار-داد-هرگونه-تهدید-اسرائیلی-از-منطقه-با-پاسخ-روشن-و-مستقیم-مواجه-خواهد-شد

Web traslate:
"In an interview with Al-Jazeera, Amir Hatami, the Minister of Defense of the Islamic Republic of Iran, stressed that the end of the arms embargo against Iran is an opportunity for us to import the weapons we need and export our weapons to others.

"We have military agreements with Russia and China for the next phase of the arms embargo," he said. We have important agreements with Russia with the aim of developing air weapons."

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

TheImmortal said:


> Iran is purchasing SU-30 and SU-35 to defend its airspace NOT penetrate foreign airspace. Thus stealth is a lot less important when fighting on your home turf.
> 
> A jet powered UCAV should be stealth if it’s main goal is to penetrate foreign airspace and assist with bombing missions (look at Chinese next gen drones and Russian for example).
> 
> Or else if you build a large non LO or VLO drone it’s just gonna get shot down when it approaches enemy air space. Unless your enemy is a bunch of insurgents or like Armenia operates a 1970’s air defense network.



So basically you are saying the same as me:

Supersonic UCAVs (not stealth) with AESA radars and BVR missiles can do well the air defence task in iranian airspace, as a 1st step.
Even with a J-85 or J-79 engines, due to the BIG weight loss for an UCAV (compared to a manned aircraft), the range, the payload, the speed, the acceleration... would be good enough for these UCAVs in order to defend iranian airspace. 

In the 2nd step: turbofan powered UCAVs and turbofan powered manned fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> So basically you are saying the same as me:
> 
> Supersonic UCAVs (not stealth) with AESA radars and BVR missiles can do well the air defence task in iranian airspace, as a 1st step.
> Even with a J-85 or J-79 engines, due to the BIG weight loss for an UCAV (compared to a manned aircraft), the range, the payload, the speed, the acceleration... would be good enough for these UCAVs in order to defend iranian airspace.
> 
> In the 2nd step: turbofan powered UCAVs and turbofan powered manned fighters.



No I am not because you are wrong.

There is no true weight loss if your building a true UCAV that is ment to be an A2A fighter. Go look at how massive China’s Dark Sword drone fighter is and tell me Iranian J-85 can power that. J-79 and J-85 are terrible engines for a interceptor role. They are not fast enough.

If Iran wants to make a “gimmick” drone that carries 2 A2A missiles and can go supersonic then by all means go ahead and do it. But that drone would be a novelty item and not a serious threat to enemy fighter jets.

China has laid the blueprint for next gen drones.


----------



## sahureka2

Answer from other discussion North Korea Defence Forum



foxhoundbis said:


> Omissis......
> The main, and dramatic fate is its Mig-29. NK is now producing its own Mig-29 models with its indigenous RD-33. It is not only fate but the seismic event that will have heavy consequences in the coming years, if not months.



If this statement were true, the problem for Iran of decoding the RD-33 would be solved, given the good relations of the past and probably the present, it should not be difficult to import this North Korean version of the RD-33, indeed better still have the possibility to have the projects and data needed to build it in IRAN.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

sahureka2 said:


> Answer from other discussion North Korea Defence Forum
> 
> 
> 
> If this statement were true, the problem for Iran of decoding the RD-33 would be solved, given the good relations of the past and probably the present, it should not be difficult to import this North Korean version of the RD-33, indeed better still have the possibility to have the projects and data needed to build it in IRAN.


Mig 29 are assembled in N. Korea for decades, but they never produced it on its own, I doubt they prodduce it now, in past many people mistakes this assembly line and claimed N. Norea produce mig 29. I may be wrong, but probably not


----------



## M.s

foxhoundbis said:


> the fates of NK did not stop only to the missile, contrary to the ugly westerner's assertions. The main, and dramatic fate is its Mig-29. NK is now producing its own Mig-29 models with its indigenous RD-33. It is not only fate but the seismic event that will have heavy consequences in the coming years, if not months.


Where is the source? I never heard of NK's rd33 project till now. Iranian project to build a viable afterburning turbofan is very old and I believe it's in final stages and possibly not even based on rd33. Iran is far ahead in this field.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

TheImmortal said:


> No I am not because you are wrong.
> 
> There is no true weight loss if your building a true UCAV that is ment to be an A2A fighter. Go look at how massive China’s Dark Sword drone fighter is and tell me Iranian J-85 can power that. J-79 and J-85 are terrible engines for a interceptor role. They are not fast enough.



Yoy are making chinese Dark Sword the ONLY choice for a supersonic UCAV. That is naive.
Supersonic UCAV will be in different forms, as manned fighters: light (F-16, MIG-29), semi-heavy, heavy (F-14, SU-35...), etc


J-79 engines power Phantom F-4 (heavy weight multirole interceptor) with top speed of Mach 2.2 and max payload > 8 tonnes. F-4 maximum takeoff weight of 28 tonnes.

Obviously, two J-79 can power a supersonic UCAV with enough speed and enough payload. Why I'm so sure? Because J-79 already powered a supersonic fighter (mach 2.2) with up to 8 tonnes of payload.

And weight of iranian UCAV would be clearly lighter than F-4 (no pilot, no co-pilot, no ejection seats, no vital human cells, no vital human systems...)
So UCAV's range would be better than F-4 (its main disadvantage).


----------



## TheImmortal

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Yoy are making chinese Dark Sword the ONLY choice for a supersonic UCAV. That is naive.
> Supersonic UCAV will be in different forms, as manned fighters: light (F-16, MIG-29), semi-heavy, heavy (F-14, SU-35...), etc
> 
> 
> J-79 engines power Phantom F-4 (heavy weight multirole interceptor) with top speed of Mach 2.2 and max payload > 8 tonnes. F-4 maximum takeoff weight of 28 tonnes.
> 
> Obviously, two J-79 can power a supersonic UCAV with enough speed and enough payload. Why I'm so sure? Because J-79 already powered a supersonic fighter (mach 2.2) with up to 8 tonnes of payload.
> 
> And weight of iranian UCAV would be clearly lighter than F-4 (no pilot, no co-pilot, no ejection seats, no vital human cells, no vital human systems...)
> So UCAV's range would be better than F-4 (its main disadvantage).



It’s clear you lack the concept of understanding how pieces work together. You can’t just put at a J-79 inside any drone. The drone needs to be built to accommodate the J-79 and it’s size. So the drone will be BIG in order to incorporate the engines and fuel tanks.

The lack of cockpit, air support system, will be replaced by a full avionics suite/radar/etc.

Also don’t give me top speed of F-4 from wiki. Give me sustainable top speed. Because a J-79 powered UCAV will be going up against F-22 and F-35 that can supercruise. This is why Chinese drone has supercruise capability.

Thus you need a drone that can actually do Mach 3+ in order to be anywhere in Iranian airspace at any given time and chase down other fast fighters. Survivability of drone is important if you make a half assed drone that’s powered by a jet engine you are throwing money away because jet engines don’t grow on trees. They take time to build and are costly.

J-79 might work for a supersonic bomber drone. But even then there would be a range problem. It won’t work for a interceptor drone. Not against 5th and 6th gen fighters which is what it would face in the next 10-20 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

sahureka2 said:


> Answer from other discussion North Korea Defence Forum
> 
> 
> 
> If this statement were true, the problem for Iran of decoding the RD-33 would be solved, given the good relations of the past and probably the present, it should not be difficult to import this North Korean version of the RD-33, indeed better still have the possibility to have the projects and data needed to build it in IRAN.



However, if this were not the case and Iran has actually decoded the J-79 (which has a power very close to the RD-33) and can already build it in series, it would be advisable to use it for the new fighter jets which appears to be on. . tables of Iranian designers and engineers, single-engine or better still twin-engine, but having the foresight that this aircraft has a fuselage configuration capable of receiving a new generation engine.
This is because if you really want to build a new completely national fighter plane that avoids any foreign sanctions or embargoes and from the very first steps you want to build both the plane and a turbofan engine from scratch, you run the risk of having to wait many years, perhaps decades. .

The J-79 is an old project = Yes
Consume a lot = Yes
is powerful = Yes
was and is a reliable engine = Yes
it is a well known engine in Iran = Yes
So, if a turbofan isn't available or won't be available in the short or medium term, why postpone a project for a new fighter plane if you have the Iranian version of the J-79 that could power it in prototypes, pre-series aircraft and even in first Tranche of series aircraft?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> However, if this were not the case and Iran has actually decoded the J-79 (which has a power very close to the RD-33) and can already build it in series, it would be advisable to use it for the new fighter jets which appears to be on. . tables of Iranian designers and engineers, single-engine or better still twin-engine, but having the foresight that this aircraft has a fuselage configuration capable of receiving a new generation engine.
> This is because if you really want to build a new completely national fighter plane that avoids any foreign sanctions or embargoes and from the very first steps you want to build both the plane and a turbofan engine from scratch, you run the risk of having to wait many years, perhaps decades. .
> 
> The J-79 is an old project = Yes
> Consume a lot = Yes
> is powerful = Yes
> was and is a reliable engine = Yes
> it is a well known engine in Iran = Yes
> So, if a turbofan isn't available or won't be available in the short or medium term, why postpone a project for a new fighter plane if you have the Iranian version of the J-79 that could power it in prototypes, pre-series aircraft and even in first Tranche of series aircraft?



Because unlike Western countries that have established supply chain and manufacturing in place to support massive amounts of jet engine creation and fighter jets. Iran does not.

The establishment will not invest in the necessary resources to establish a mass production assembly line for a fighter jet and its jet engine if It’s going to be powered by a engine from almost 75 years ago.

This is why you don’t see anything resembling large scale production for Kowsar, only small local manufacturing.

Iran refuses to make the large scale investment necessary that helped kick off Air defense And Navy branches of iran’s armed forces.


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

TheImmortal said:


> It’s clear you lack the concept of understanding how pieces work together. You can’t just put at a J-79 inside any drone. The drone needs to be built to accommodate the J-79 and it’s size. So the drone will be BIG in order to incorporate the engines and fuel tanks.



Any new jet aircraft is build around its engines. First you have the engines (or at least the engine design), and after that you build the rest. 
The opposite is not impossible but it is against good-manners engineering. Extra-cost, extra-time, extra-troubles.



TheImmortal said:


> The lack of cockpit, air support system, will be replaced by a full avionics suite/radar/etc.



I think a manned aircraft also has full avionics suite/radar/etc., hasn't it?? 
So the net weight loss for an UCAV (no pilot, no co-pilot, no cockpits, no air support systems... is BIG in any case=====> greater range.



TheImmortal said:


> Also don’t give me top speed of F-4 from wiki. Give me sustainable top speed. Because a J-79 powered UCAV will be going up against F-22 and F-35 that can supercruise. This is why Chinese drone has supercruise capability.



Supercruise capability for a F-22- F-35 etc is NOT USED in combat. Even less in combat in a contested enemy airspace (above Iran). In combat you go full climbing, full diving, full afterburning.... in order to evade any incoming missile etc etc. All these maneovers DEVOURS the fuel.
Supercruise in combat action is illusional.



TheImmortal said:


> Thus you need a drone that can actually do Mach 3+ in order to be anywhere in Iranian airspace at any given time and chase down other fast fighters.



Iran would not need hypersonic UCAVs (would they be better? Yes, but they are not compulsory) in order to be anywhere in iranian aispace at any given time. Iran would need to have enough numbers deployed
in several airbases distributed in Iran geography. 

I know having 200 SU-30/SU-35 would be a great option, even better purchasing some scuadrons of SU-57.
But Iranian budget is very limited and iranian air force's needs are in a hurry. So developing own supersonic UCAVs scuadrons, even with old J-79 technology, but with high tech avionics, AESA radar, BVR missiles... would be a tremendous force multiplier for Iran's Air Force.


----------



## Ich

Me think Iran holds an ace back and already has at least a function iranian prototype of an powerful fighterjet turbofan engine. So me dont think that Iran will buy lots of fighterjets from Russia or China. Maybe 24-30 to overcome the time till the own fighterjet with own turbofan take off.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Ich said:


> Me think Iran holds an ace back and already has at least a function iranian prototype of an powerful fighterjet turbofan engine. So me dont think that Iran will buy lots of fighterjets from Russia or China. Maybe 24-30 to overcome the time till the own fighterjet with own turbofan take off.



I think also the same: Iran has some aces hidden, *at least* one project for fighters (don´t know if manned or unmanned). So the purchases from Russia (I discard China in this area of fighters) will be limited.
Also the budget is very limited, so a BIG aircraft purchase it seems extremely complicated.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

[QUOTE = "sanel1412, post: 12756980, membro: 187617"]
I Mig 29 sono assemblati in Corea del Nord per decenni, ma non l'hanno mai prodotto da solo, dubito che lo producano ora, in passato molte persone sbagliavano questa catena di montaggio e affermavano che N. Norea produceva mig 29. Potrei sbagliarmi, ma probabilmente no
[/ CITAZIONE]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/is-north-koreas-mig-29-fleet-growing/
_
.......... With North Korea retaining the facilities needed to produce MiG-29 fighters of its own with a few minor inputs of Russian components, it remains likely that Moscow has continued to supply these inputs to keep production lines active. Without providing the country with a new class of fighter entirely, Russia can quietly assist its neighbor to expand its Fulcrum fleet and thus strengthen its aerial warfare capabilities. With no one entirely sure how many Fulcrums the North Korean Air Force actually fields, and many of the country’s airbases located underground, it is extremely difficult to prove any violations on Moscow’s part. Key components crossing the border are far easier to disguise than fighter airframes, and can therefore continue to be supplied inconspicuously without providing evidence to the United States to substantiate its accusations that Russia has violated the U.S. drafted UN sanctions regime against North Korea.

Pyongyang is well within its budgetary limits to afford modernization and a continuous manufacture of the MiG-29 — a lighter aircraft that comes at a fraction of the cost of the heavier Su-35. _

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

@*sahureka2*

I think Iranians have the know-how to build any jet engines including the RD-33, -as AL-31F, and even the F110-GE-400- *for a while*. This is what I assert, and it is not an only assertion, but a strong certitude.
However, due to the blockade initiated by the US -Israeli lobby- in fact, the entire west, western bloc, *and ....Russia and China -they are the worst-*. Iran lacked the infrastructure to do so.
Concretely Iran lacked the tools-machineries necessary to develop a fair jet engine.
There exist two solutions, either to buy them in the black market, but they are full of malware, malfunctioning hardware, malicious traps, furthermore very expensive, or to build them all from scratch.

To build this infra from scratch as you know is not an easy task, it takes decades even for a country without embargo, I leave you to imagine what about for a country like Iran.
Your government decided to build them all from scratch, this project was initiated for a long time ago, it asks money, and technicians, scientists, engineers, etc... enough qualified personnel.
But... a few years ago the NK's ally had done prowess, it means it has either build necessary tool-machineries or buy them. Recently they succeeded to replicate the RD-33.
Regarding Iran a few years ago -around 2015- you succeeded by replicating the F-5F dubbed Kowsar, notwithstanding the F-5F is an old fighter, however in order run 1 km, U must run at least 100 meters, this first 100 meters are the hardest difficult task.
Now you are producing the Kowsar, Jahesh-700, etc ... nothing can deter Iran to build its own heavy fighter -Mig-29 is not considered as a heavy fighter, your government wants a heavy fighter-.
As you can see Jewish lobby in the US failed to extend the embargo concerning weapons, because Westerners realized it is too late, Iranians have the know how and infra, thus with or without this blockade they will have sophisticated heavy fighters sooner or later.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Me think Iran holds an ace back and already has at least a function iranian prototype of an powerful fighterjet turbofan engine. So me dont think that Iran will buy lots of fighterjets from Russia or China. Maybe 24-30 to overcome the time till the own fighterjet with own turbofan take off.



Even if Iran started tomm on a fully develop fighter it would take 10+ years to reach 100 fighters given the lack of supporting infrastructure.

Iran needs to retire or semi retire ALOT of birds and make its Air Force more homogenous. Right now it has US, Russian, Chinese, Iranian, French warplanes. It’s a logistical nightmare.

I think the “deal” that Iran signed is an old deal and Iran is that mysterious unnamed buyer that was seen on the books for 75+ aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

sahureka2 said:


> https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/is-north-koreas-mig-29-fleet-growing/
> 
> _Pyongyang is well within its budgetary limits to afford modernization and a continuous manufacture of the MiG-29 — a lighter aircraft that comes at a fraction of the cost of the heavier Su-35. _



I know this article and the author.
I am here because it is nearly impossible to evaluate in an accurate way the real number of the NK's Mig-29. Even Russia, or China ignore the quantity of NK's MIg-29.
It is no uses to expect any information coming from Pyongyang, even less from western media like the Diplomat. But we can evaluate, from several situations. The NK's allies situations.
North Korea is among the very rare nations in the world able to build SLBM. Space centers, Satelittes, complex electronic hardware, hypersonic hardwares etc... The Iranian ally is able to build helicopters, aircraft fighters.
In these conditions, we can assert this country is able to build or replicate jet fighters like Mig-29 that is nearly 40 years old. The threshold was reached a few years ago.




> ... a fully develop fighter it would take 10+ years to reach 100 fighters given the lack of supporting infrastructure....


No one can know exactly.
But this image is very hopeful sign for Iranians

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

foxhoundbis said:


> I know this article and the author.
> I am here because it is nearly impossible to evaluate in an accurate way the real number of the NK's Mig-29. Even Russia, or China ignore the quantity of NK's MIg-29.
> It is no uses to expect any information coming from Pyongyang, even less from western media like the Diplomat. But we can evaluate, from several situations. The NK's allies situations.
> North Korea is among the very rare nations in the world able to build SLBM. Space centers, Satelittes, complex electronic hardware, hypersonic hardwares etc... The Iranian ally is able to build helicopters, aircraft fighters.
> In these conditions, we can assert this country is able to build or replicate jet fighters like Mig-29 that is nearly 40 years old. The threshold was reached a few years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> No one can know exactly.
> But this image is very hopeful sign for Iranians



The amount of MiG-29 NK has is overblown. People forget this country is severely cash strapped and resource strapped to the point they negotiated for food and gasoline in the past.

North Korea main industry is what exactly? Timber?

Even assuming NK diverts 95% of its cash and resources to military, the amount that would trickle to the airforce would be small as there are other areas of the military that suck up most of the funding.

Mig-29 Cost $$$ even NK doesn’t pay its engineers or workers.


----------



## Surenas

sahureka2 said:


> With web traslate:
> Defense Minister in talks with Al Jazeera: We have signed an important agreement with Russia for the development of our country's air force
> 
> Finally announced, congratulations to all
> 
> And:
> 
> https://shahraranews.ir/fa/news/47298/وزیر-دفاع-هشدار-داد-هرگونه-تهدید-اسرائیلی-از-منطقه-با-پاسخ-روشن-و-مستقیم-مواجه-خواهد-شد
> 
> Web traslate:
> "In an interview with Al-Jazeera, Amir Hatami, the Minister of Defense of the Islamic Republic of Iran, stressed that the end of the arms embargo against Iran is an opportunity for us to import the weapons we need and export our weapons to others.
> 
> "We have military agreements with Russia and China for the next phase of the arms embargo," he said. We have important agreements with Russia with the aim of developing air weapons."



According to a better translation, what Hatami refers to is an agreement with China and Russia regarding air defence systems; not the air force.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318187637845446656

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## NaCon

Surenas said:


> According to a better translation, what Hatami refers to is an agreement with China and Russia regarding air defence systems; not the air force.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318187637845446656


Actually it says the Air Force in arabic

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iskander

No, He was Talking about air force and the friend of Kian Sharifi is wrong
This is the exact translation
"وبخصوص رفع حظر التسلح عن إيران، قال "لدينا توافقات مهمة مع روسيا والصين بهدف تطوير *أنظمتنا الخاصة بسلاح الجو* لمرحلة ما بعد انتهاء حظر التسلح
Regarding the lifting of the arms embargo on Iran, he said, "We have important agreements with Russia and China with the aim of developing *our air force systems* for for the post-embargo phase. "

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## foxhoundbis

TheImmortal said:


> North Korea main industry *is what exactly? Timber?*
> 
> Mig-29 Cost $$$ even NK doesn’t pay its engineers or workers.


Sorry, U are not only uninformed about NK. but you don't want to. I cannot discuss with you, I don"t have time to lose.



sahureka2 said:


> _Pyongyang is well within .... *the heavier Su-35.* _



I heard recently that North Korea asked Russia to buy only one SU-35. If this information is true, and it seems because officials in Moscow somehow confirmed, It means NK is enough confident to replicate even the SU-35, it seems that NK does have the know-how to do so.
In the next step, U will see North Korea's Railguns, and we are not far to see hypersonics vehicles like WZ-8 drones. And when I see the Iranians progress at the same time regarding jet engine technologies, it is something that could be reasonable.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

foxhoundbis said:


> Sorry, U are not only uninformed about NK. but you don't want to. I cannot discuss with you, I don"t have time to lose.
> 
> 
> 
> I heard recently that North Korea asked Russia to buy only one SU-35. If this information is true, and it seems because officials in Moscow somehow confirmed, It means NK is enough confident to replicate even the SU-35, it seems that NK does have the know-how to do so.
> In the next step, U will see North Korea's Railguns, and we are not far to see hypersonics vehicles like WZ-8 drones. And when I see the Iranians progress at the same time regarding jet engine technologies, it is something that could be reasonable.



From what I can see (having worked with S Korea a few times), it is the tenacity of NK that has kept the West awe struck. NK takes on challenges that makes most in the West crap enough to fill up a 5 gallon container. They have a lot of guts. While others are scared of failure, NK just tries to no end. Also, they don't have a constant U turn, changing their mind every few months on a project e.g. remember NIMROD?

Good luck to N Korea and her people. They don't want to be the SLAVES of the West. What was it that Trump said about South Korea recently? Oh that's right, he said, and I quote, "South Korea is alive because we allow it".

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Fulgrim

I found this. but i don't Know if it's true.









40 days to lift the ban! Iran finalizes an order for 100 Su-30 fighters


NickJ 1972 解禁还剩40天！伊朗敲定百架苏30战机订单，美国反对也晚了 Translated by google 2020-09-05 40 days to lift the embargo! Iran finalizes an order fo...




thaimilitaryandasianregion.blogspot.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> I think the “deal” that Iran signed is an old deal and Iran is that mysterious unnamed buyer that was seen on the books for 75+ aircraft.



67 units I believe it was... of Su-35's. But now we are hearing rumors of a deal for 100 Su-30SM with local production (which had already been reported repeatdely in the past, with some versions claiming 200+ Su-30 fighters). Don't know which would be better (though I have an uninformed preference for 67 Su-35 over 100 Su-30SM).




OldTwilight said:


> we need at least 150 long range fighter such as Su-30 or F-15 and 150 lighter fighter like JF-17 Block III or J-10
> C which we should be able to produce these locally ...
> 
> For me , 100 Su-30 with 150-200 J10C is ideal ...
> 
> our main focus should be building long range weapon for fighter , such as A2G , A2A , A2C missiles , long range heavy rockets and Electronic warfare components ...
> 
> in minimum , we need something like 150 JF-17 and 80 J-10C



Pretty close to my idea of an ideal procurement operation, actually. I would say go for those 67 Su-35's to assist the F-14's in fulfilling the heavy interceptor role (bringing the total number of such fighters to around 120), in addition to 100-120 J-10C as medium-weight multirole fighters (more would be too expensive).

With this, Iran could get rid of its Mig-29's (by donating them to Syria for instance), F-4's, Mirage F-1's, as well as various older Mig- and Su-/Su-clones either purchased from China or received from Iraq in 1991 (except for the IRGCAF's recently overhauled and upgraded Su-22's, I guess). Quite the alleviation and streamlining in logistical terms, and savings on the maintenance of older aircraft.

The F-5's could be replaced by domestically built Kowsars, to be used as trainers and light fighters with modernized radars, avionics and armaments (anywhere between 40-50 to 100+). The Su-24's are still potentially useful for low altitude approach, long range interdiction strikes including against aircraft carriers - if their numbers could be brought to some 80, given their reasonable price tag, this might be a sound move.

Of course some 3 to 5 heavier AWACS aircraft as well as up to 6 or 7 locally-produced light AEW-variant Iran-140's would be helpful as well. A few early warning helicopters for the navy would be another option, these could also be designed locally. This is on top of reconnaissance and early warning drones (both radar and EO equipped), Iran-140 maritime patrol and Iran-140 anti-submarine variants to replace current old aicraft in these roles.

The airborne transportation fleet would benefit from new additions too. From Iran-140's to medium and heavy transports (here China has some good options on offer in the C-130 class, other than that the IRGC's An-74 and Il-76 fleet could be augmented by a handful of units).

The last item would be new refuelling planes, again with a dedicated Iran-140 variant and some larger aircraft as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

SalarHaqq said:


> 67 units I believe it was... of Su-35's. But now we are hearing rumors of a deal for 100 Su-30SM with local production (which had already been reported repeatdely in the past, with some versions claiming 200+ Su-30 fighters). Don't know which would be better (though I have an uninformed preference for 67 Su-35 over 100 Su-30SM).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty close to my idea of an ideal procurement operation, actually. I would say go for those 67 Su-35's to assist the F-14's in fulfilling the heavy interceptor role (bringing the total number of such fighters to around 120), in addition to 100-120 J-10C as medium multirole fighters (more would be too expensive).
> 
> With this, Iran could get rid of its Mig-29s (by donating them to Syria for instance), F-4's, Mirage F-1's, as well as various older Mig- and Su-/Su-clones either purchased from China or received from Iraq in 1991 (except for the IRGCAF's recently overhauled and upgraded Su-22's, I guess). Quite the alleviation and streamlining in logistical terms, and savings on the maintenance of older aircraft.
> 
> The F-5's could be replaced by domestically built Kowsars. The Su-24's are still potentially useful for low altitude approach, long range interdiction strikes including against aircraft carriers - if their numbers could be brought to some 80, given their reasonable price tag, this might be a good thing to do.
> 
> Of course some 3 to 5 heavier AWACS aircraft as well as up to 6 or 7 locally-produced light AEW-variant Iran-140's would be helpful as well. A few early warning helicopters for the navy would be another option, these could also be designed locally.



common people. iran is under HEAVY sanctions! we have big problems concerning Covid and medicine in the country, the economy is is shambles. and it is getting worse by the day.
anything above a say 10B$ deal is out of the question. donating planes to anyone is also out of the question.
it is miracle if russia delivers more than 50 planes to iran. let alone allowing us to assemble them inside of iran... 
IMO, russians are way more devious than the US... and the US is the big satan. so do the math yourselves...

Even if we get to upgrade our mig 29 fleet, i will be more than happy.


----------



## SalarHaqq

makranman said:


> common people. iran is under HEAVY sanctions! we have big problems concerning Covid and medicine in the country, the economy is is shambles. and it is getting worse by the day.
> anything above a say 10B$ deal is out of the question. donating planes to anyone is also out of the question.
> it is miracle if russia delivers more than 50 planes to iran. let alone allowing us to assemble them inside of iran...
> IMO, russians are way more devious than the US... and the US is the big satan. so do the math yourselves...
> 
> Even if we get to upgrade our mig 29 fleet, i will be more than happy.



So what are you arguing exactly, that Iran shouldn't purchase anything even if she could (nor donate old planes) because of economic reasons, or that Russia and China won't deliver anyway due to sanctions but that Iran should try nonetheless?

If you noticed, I spoke of an ideal scenario, meaning that I do not necessarily consider it as the most realistic one. So I'm not going to be overly disappointed either if it doesn't fully materialize.

As for economic stress, most countries are in some sort of a downward spiral right now, and COVID is affecting various nations more than Iran, yet they did not systematically stop all weapons deals. Also keep in mind this is an exceptional window of opportunity that may not repeat for the next decades, so considering threat levels, it would be justified for Iran to at least try and purchase whatever is really needed.

The only limitation, other than budgetary constraints of course (Iran's asymmetric, relatively low-cost doctrine must not be compromised), should be in terms of how these purchases might affect domestic defence industries: imports must be careful selected so as not to disincentivize local production, but complement and actually boost the latter (via reverse engineering opportunities).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## makranman

SalarHaqq said:


> So what are you arguing exactly, that Iran shouldn't purchase anything even if she could (nor donate old planes) because of economic reasons, or that Russia and China won't deliver anyway due to sanctions but that Iran should try nonetheless?
> 
> If you noticed, I spoke of an ideal scenario, meaning that I do not necessarily consider it as the most realistic one. So I'm not going to be overly disappointed either if it doesn't fully materialize.
> 
> As for economic stress, most countries are in some sort of a downward spiral right now, and COVID is affecting various nations more than Iran, yet they did not systematically stop all weapons deals. Also keep in mind this is an exceptional window of opportunity that may not repeat for the next decades, so considering threat levels, it would be justified for Iran to at least try and purchase whatever is really needed.
> 
> The only limitation, other than budgetary constraints of course (Iran's asymmetric, relatively low-cost doctrine must not be compromised), should be in terms of how these purchases might affect domestic defence industries: imports must be careful selected so as not to disincentivize local production, but complement and actually boost the latter (via reverse engineering opportunities).


1st of all, i am "نه سر پیاز، نه ته پیاز" nothing i say matters so...
all i'm saying, is iran could buy the absolute best from USSR decades ago, and we bought trash. later, they didn't even deliver those trash...
later iran bought S-300, kremlin banned us on its own. 
later, russia did not Veto our sanctions. meaning, they screwed us!
and we were not in such a bad situation as we are now. right now, a single fighter can cause unseen consequences (think F-35 for arab city states or longer range BMs or...).
so relying on "packages" from russia is not the best choice IMO. our best choice is a mixture of following:
TOT on tech we don't have.
investing on our own industry and tech.
buying small numbers of fighters etc to fill the gap (as others said before.)

and lastly, trying to change the battlefield. going unmanned, going cyber. etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318556753034940420Can anybody Translate? He said no purchase agreement but upgrade the current fleet, and other thing about easter land force fighter jets? If someone can translate better...


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318556753034940420Can anybody Translate? He said no purchase agreement but upgrade the current fleet, and other thing about easter land force fighter jets? If someone can translate better...


he is saying that i'm disappointed , i found thare is no purchase for air force yet and what DM said was that they ( Russians ) just going to upgrade there fighter jets that Iran has.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> he is saying that i'm disappointed , i found thare is no purchase for air force yet and what DM said was that they ( Russians ) just going to upgrade there fighter jets that Iran has.


So basically upgrade the su-24 and mig-29. Upgrading the mig-29 to M standard is very good, but still iran needs 2-3 squadrons of advanced fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

seems like no su-30sm, instead su 35 and 34s are coming.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> seems like no su-30sm, instead su 35 and 34s are coming.


it seems so but don't be surprised if you see some SU-27 SM2 in them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Oh for god sake, leave those tweets, they dont knkw shit like anyone else, Iranian officials gave few details but all contracts and agreements will be beld secret till last moment, simple due secondary sanctions threat from US and also Iran current situation. Iran defense minister, as IRGC and other officials told few times, after embargo Iran and Russia will need new agreements and contracts, it will include upgrade and new jets... how much, no one know, it depends from many factors... also it is confirmed China-Iran 25 years deal....it will start from November... including military side....Iran need upgrade for its existing fleet and new jets, since it is imposible to buy so many aircrafts in short time to replace whole fleet, and it doesnt work like that even if Iran vas money and Russia and China can produce so many aircraft. Russia cant even to catch own air forces orders...Upgrade for existing fleet along with new orders will make sure everything goes smooth... you cant just replace 400 aircrafts with new,and considering Russian foreign and domestic orders.... they cant deliver to much over short period, and it doesnt make sense to order 4+ gen aircrafts that will be delivered in 5-6 years when it is expecting 5th gen Russian and Chinese aircrafts will be available than. Olso it no government will throw huge sum of money in short period in situation when country is under sanctions and covid-19. So Iran will probably go for few smaller contracts over 1-2 year rather than one huge.... this olso better suits Russia and China in current situation.... There will be probably many technology transfer and boost to Iranian domestic projects, this can be done almost under table without to much pomp....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## vizier

Does your main bulk of interceptor planes have landing capability to land on highway strips?

The enemy will firstly target your airbases by cruise missiles or similar long range elements. Some countries have 100s of kms of highways with hardened concrete and about 4 lanes. If some part is damaged other parts can be used while the damaged part is repaired.

Countries like Pakistan also made those types of drills several times before. Turkey also has this capability. However the need is not a few kms of additional highway strip. these are all visible from spy satellites and a few missiles more can finish all air assets take off capability. The length of these strips should be several 100s of kms in total. It would be impossible to take out all of them at the same time giving planes to land and operate options while damaged parts are being repaired.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

vizier said:


> Does your main bulk of interceptor planes have landing capability to land on highway strips?
> 
> The enemy will firstly target your airbases by cruise missiles or similar long range elements. Some countries have 100s of kms of highways with hardened concrete and about 4 lanes. If some part is damaged other parts can be used while the damaged part is repaired.
> 
> Countries like Pakistan also made those types of drills several times before. Turkey also has this capability. However the need is not a few kms of additional highway strip. these are all visible from spy satellites and a few missiles more can finish all air assets take off capability. The length of these strips should be several 100s of kms in total. It would be impossible to take out all of them at the same time giving planes to land and operate options while damaged parts are being repaired.



The North Korean and Taiwan route of underground (mountain) airbases is much more viable than using highways and within Iranian defense doctrine.

5 mountain air bases housing 30 aircraft each can protect 150 aircraft from airstrikes. 

Throw up titanium or super alloy nets during non launch periods around the entrances and any incoming cruise missile will be sliced to shreds.


----------



## vizier

TheImmortal said:


> The North Korean and Taiwan route of underground (mountain) airbases is much more viable than using highways and within Iranian defense doctrine.
> 
> 5 mountain air bases housing 30 aircraft each can protect 150 aircraft from airstrikes.
> 
> Throw up titanium or super alloy nets during non launch periods around the entrances and any incoming cruise missile will be sliced to shreds.




That is another viable option. But why not use both. Taiwan which has relatively small size has 1000km highway for this purpose as well as mountain bases.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

The arrival of manoeuvring hypersonic systems means airfields are indeed going to be much more vulnerable going forward. Well concealed and protected airbases are a must for Iran. Iran has the expertise, it will be done.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

vizier said:


> That is another viable option. But why not use both. Taiwan which has relatively small size has 1000km highway for this purpose as well as mountain bases.



Because the fighter jet still has to make its way to the highway?

People who think of this concept completely forget this aspect. The fighter jet needs to be loaded onto a Transporter and taken to the highway. It won’t MAGICALLY teleport to the highway. During this process, fighter jet is vulnerable to attack from drones, CMs, etc.

Underground and fortified airbases with built in take off lanes should be the future of storage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vizier

TheImmortal said:


> Because the fighter jet still has to make its way to the highway?
> 
> People who think of this concept completely forget this aspect. The fighter jet needs to be loaded onto a Transporter and taken to the highway. It won’t MAGICALLY teleport to the highway. During this process, fighter jet is vulnerable to attack from drones, CMs, etc.
> 
> Underground and fortified airbases with built in take off lanes should be the future of storage.




They can use the mountain base as an initial option but although fortified it cant stand continious attacks. The gate can be damaged indirectly not with a direct hit but explosion nearby and continious explosions would render it unusable. All your eggs will be in one basket enclosed inside mountain. But during attacks the planes especially lighter stol capable ones taking off from mountain bases or well ads protected open bases can position themselves on the 1000km highway as an unsinkable aircraft carrier.


----------



## TheImmortal

vizier said:


> They can use the mountain base as an initial option but although fortified it cant stand continious attacks. The gate can be damaged indirectly not with a direct hit but explosion nearby and continious explosions would render it unusable. All your eggs will be in one basket enclosed inside mountain. But during attacks the planes especially lighter stol capable ones taking off from mountain bases or well ads protected open bases can position themselves on the 1000km highway as an unsinkable aircraft carrier.



Mountain air bases have been built to survive nuclear attack and China built over 60 of them during Cold War. I am sure China knew more about survivability than a random person on the internet.

Super alloy or titanium nets can cover the entrance when not in use thus causing early detonation when CMs attempt to attack the bases entrances. It is the same concept that tanks use with the “cage” armour. Also the entrance can be constructed with reinforced blast doors. As well as multiple blast doors throughout the facility. (Though 2 is likely sufficient)

Any damage to entrance can be quickly repaired and with CMs negated (Due to alloy netting) it would force fighter jets to get close in order to accurately target the entrance. That is when Bavar and S-300 AD systems can strike and cause the enemy substantial losses.

5-7 bases scattered across the country housing Iran’s most important interceptors and embedded within multiple air defense rings. It would be costly for opponent to target them.

Highways don’t help in regards to maintenance, refueling, re-arming, and repairs. Underground bases do.

In today’s day and age, spy satellites would monitor areas and aim to take out fighter jets when being transported to highways. retrieving the fighter jet is a hassle. Then transporting it back to a base for repairs and fuel and arms is an inefficient process.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

during the early phases of cold was europeans also concluded that their airports will not be able to hold up against Soviet attacks and they decided to pursue VTOL planes. 
might be with modern solutions we can solve the problems europeans faced those days and use that concept.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Something not talked about, but there is a possibility the fighter jets Iran gets from Russia is even more modernised than standard versions. For example, an SU-30/35 with the 5th generation technologies of the SU-57 such as its AESA radars. Iran has been in talks over Russia about these purchases since 2016 when Dehghan first mentioned the issue. I suppose at this point it's just best to wait and see what the details of the deals are instead of these continuous theorisations.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## reflecthofgeismar

Mithridates said:


> during the early phases of cold was europeans also concluded that their airports will not be able to hold up against Soviet attacks and they decided to pursue VTOL planes.
> might be with modern solutions we can solve the problems europeans faced those days and use that concept.



YOU Iranians have some great tactics regarding the asymetric fighting style which would happen if a strong force - Murricans, would fought you conventional.
The underground - CnC GLA like fortifications ...
MBTS, IFV, APC, Infantry Squads, Motorcycle AT-Squads etc.
Do the same, only longer/bigger tunnel networks with your planes lol.
BTW I really hope for SU-35 (and for best upgrades for your older Soviet/Russian planes)

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> 5-7 bases scattered across the country housing Iran’s most important interceptors and embedded within multiple air defense rings. It would be costly for opponent to target them.



For 99% of nations in the world, this would be suitable, perhaps even 100%. But because our opponent is the USA with it's formidable arsenal of weapons, constructing our defenses with them in mind would have the positive side effect of basically rendering the capabilities of other neighboring nations null. No one in the region including Pakistan's tactical nukes could destroy such a facility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> Something not talked about, but there is a possibility the fighter jets Iran gets from Russia is even more modernised than standard versions. For example, an SU-30/35 with the 5th generation technologies of the SU-57 such as its AESA radars. Iran has been in talks over Russia about these purchases since 2016 when Dehghan first mentioned the issue. I suppose at this point it's just best to wait and see what the details of the deals are instead of these continuous theorisations.



depends if Iran prefers quicker delivery than Russia might give newer SU-30s from its own stock or ones being finished for Russian armed forces.

I am not sure how long it would take Russia (sukhoi) to deliver the first batch if built from scratch.


Stryker1982 said:


> For 99% of nations in the world, this would be suitable, perhaps even 100%. But because our opponent is the USA with it's formidable arsenal of weapons, constructing our defenses with them in mind would have the positive side effect of basically rendering the capabilities of other neighboring nations null. No one in the region including Pakistan's tactical nukes could destroy such a facility.



It will be done.

China did it, NK did it, Taiwan did it.

Iran already has underground missile bases, air defense bases, Submarine bases, and command and control bases.

Only interceptors would be placed in underground Bases as they are the most important plane Iran needs to have survive in conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Only countries with nuclear power can be assure that enemy won't devastated their air base and their infrastructure in first place in near future big war .... 

so , even air force survivability is depend on having nukes ... or else even a regional power can start a war with more than 500 cruise missiles in first wave and at lease send 5-10 missiles against each air base ... super power can start war with more than 3000 cruise missiles and thousands guided air to ground missiles and bomb ... after that they will targer powerhouse and petrochemical and fuel storages ...

the only salvation is to have nuclear arsenal which you can use in all out war ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sahureka2

I have always liked this Chinese aircraft, even more so in the latest version, but it has never been exported.
If exported it would certainly cost much less than the SU-30, but probably also the Mig-35.
With the Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31 FN engine, a re-export permit from Moscow would also be needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

sahureka2 said:


> I have always liked this Chinese aircraft, even more so in the latest version, but it has never been exported.
> If exported it would certainly cost much less than the SU-30, but probably also the Mig-35.
> With the Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31 FN engine, a re-export permit from Moscow would also be needed.



Which J-10 variant is this one?


----------



## reflecthofgeismar

OldTwilight said:


> Only countries with nuclear power can be assure that enemy won't devastated their air base and their infrastructure in first place in near future big war ....
> 
> so , even air force survivability is depend on having nukes ... or else even a regional power can start a war with more than 500 cruise missiles in first wave and at lease send 5-10 missiles against each air base ... super power can start war with more than 3000 cruise missiles and thousands guided air to ground missiles and bomb ... after that they will targer powerhouse and petrochemical and fuel storages ...
> 
> the only salvation is to have nuclear arsenal which you can use in all out war ...



If Iran goes (officially) Nuclear and Trump is reelected you will hear: "Iran is a great country, I swear, we will make the best deal in the World, good, intelligent guys these iranians." 
(NO other option left except total destruction)
Look, with thicc Kimmi Boi it happened too.
Now you could say but the "Zionists".
Well, what can they do THEN? NOTHING.
The best would be THEN a FAIR (forced because of the circumstances) PEACE.
Shall prosperity and new shine come for (Shia version) of Persian Empire.
Couldn't harm the world as a counterbalance to so many others ... I like a multipolar world, in balance, rather unpleasant when ONE (and his followers) can decide how the world has to function.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NaCon

Blue In Green said:


> Which J-10 variant is this one?


J10C

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

reflecthofgeismar said:


> If Iran goes (officially) Nuclear and Trump is reelected you will hear: "Iran is a great country, I swear, we will make the best deal in the World, good, intelligent guys these iranians."
> (NO other option left except total destruction)
> Look, with thicc Kimmi Boi it happened too.
> Now you could say but the "Zionists".
> Well, what can they do THEN? NOTHING.
> The best would be THEN a FAIR (forced because of the circumstances) PEACE.
> Shall prosperity and new shine come for (Shia version) of Persian Empire.
> Couldn't harm the world as a counterbalance to so many others ... I like a multipolar world, in balance, rather unpleasant when ONE (and his followers) can decide how the world has to function.



Usa become 2nd economy of world for first time in past ww ii , they won't start war with regional nuclear power country , except they will to have accept it or having a pyhric victory which ultimately ruin them ...

in their arrogance ,they spend so much from their pocket and credit to stay on top ... but for same reason , they failed ... the moment USSR failed , USA empire fall was inevitable ... they picked Islam and Iran as their number one enemy after fall of USSR , it was wrong .... Islam is an ideology , a religion and Iran wasn't strong enough to replacing USSR , wrong choice ....

USA and whole western capitalism , in their pursuit of more wealth , make china strong enough , so the little dragon slowly but steadily grown by using western power ...

Trump , understand it , he is last America's hope for containing China , but USA has limited power and resource , they spending so much on Iran and ME .... and in fact like all other empires , USA in her decline is suffering from internal power struggle ... Democrat and Liberal Media are biting the value and certain groups which make USA a super power ... 

Their fall is inevitable , but maybe for one of last attempt to unify their people , they just start a war with one of their enemies ... China and Russia are atomic power , so the only remaining viable option for USA politicians is Iran because they can assure military victory over her ...

we should become nuclear power so the cost of war with us and uncertainty become too much for the west to attack us ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## reflecthofgeismar

OldTwilight said:


> Usa become 2nd economy of world for first time in past ww ii , they won't start war with regional nuclear power country , except they will to have accept it or having a pyhric victory which ultimately ruin them ...


Because they CAN'T anymore.
I mean, they are pushing the "liberal" narrative (which weakens in the sense of masculinity, NOT making babies anymore, become decadent/weak) and they destroy themselfs with it, Israelis too (all "Western" societies).
Even in WW2, where Murricans had modus operandi - all or nothing they couldn't have bear losses in 2 million high. And back then they were MUCH harder/tougher.
For Jews the same.
Hadn't the balls to take more losses in Lebanon 2006.
126 dead Israelis = big mimimimi, Hezbollah (as defender) 250-500.
But the "will" (spirit) isn't there anymore.
Israelis were, from the point of fighting spirit - broken in Occupation of Lebanon 1982-2000.
Today they wanna make party, live decadent lifestyle.
The religious one you can forget, only important for democratic elections with their voting voice. But in the same time these guys will ruin short lived Israel. 
Make only babies, DON'T work, no military service, cost social welfare, trying to impose their "values" on secular, hard working Israelis.
Iran is doing MUCH better than both, even there is, sadly (where is not in the world) corruption/internal fighting. Murricans and Israelis are on the path downwards.
Congrats to the Iranian nation for the hard way they went through, respect where it is due. (I would say that as an (honest) Israeli too! 


OldTwilight said:


> "...USA and whole western capitalism , in their pursuit of more wealth , make china strong enough , so the little dragon slowly but steadily grown by using western power ...
> 
> Trump , understand it , he is last USA hope for containing China , but USA has limited power and resource , they spending so much on Iran and ME .... and in fact like all other empires , USA in her decline is suffering from internal power struggle ... Democrat and Liberal Media are biting the value and certain groups which make USA a super power ... ..."


Sir, this is the best short text passage I read in a long time, I'm sorry my English has become very rusty so I can't express myself so fine tuned like you or the others but yes, ONLY here alone EVERYTHING important is called out, thank you for that. (Y)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*could this be the new Iranian airborne AESA radar?*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

J-11 at an air base in Iran with Iranian pilot standing next to it 






Source:




__ https://www.facebook.com/112461980250220/photos/a.112467523582999/198756254954125





Caption adds: Wait for very interesting news

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## EvilWesteners

sahureka2 said:


> I have always liked this Chinese aircraft, even more so in the latest version, but it has never been exported.
> If exported it would certainly cost much less than the SU-30, but probably also the Mig-35.
> With the Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31 FN engine, a re-export permit from Moscow would also be needed.



What a beauty this J10C is. If Iran had 250 of these, and license to build it, wow that would be great. Add to this 80 J11s, and now Iran has an airforce.


SalarHaqq said:


> J-11 at an air base in Iran with Iranian pilot standing next to it
> 
> View attachment 681928
> 
> 
> Source:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/112461980250220/photos/a.112467523582999/198756254954125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption adds: Wait for very interesting news



I was wondering when this was going to come out. Still it is not all done. Keep fingers crossed. Two aspects of this will make lots of you in this forum pretty unhappy. But hey, it is what it is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

SalarHaqq said:


> J-11 at an air base in Iran with Iranian pilot standing next to it
> 
> View attachment 681928
> 
> 
> Source:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/112461980250220/photos/a.112467523582999/198756254954125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption adds: Wait for very interesting news


Interesting hypothesis, but if the J-11 has an AL-31 turbofan it needs the re-export license from Russia, if it has the Chinese WS-10 turbofan it would be appropriate if it has reached an operational maturity similar to the AL-31

*But I see it's a two-seater, so it's either a J-11BS, or it's a J-16*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*i don't have alot of information on IRIAF so if some of you brothers help me it will be great.


is this Karar which was Bavar-373 target carrying fuel tank or a jamming pod ?





*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319639483814391809

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## OldTwilight

EvilWesteners said:


> What a beauty this J10C is. If Iran had 250 of these, and license to build it, wow that would be great. Add to this 80 J11s, and now Iran has an airforce.
> 
> 
> I was wondering when this was going to come out. Still it is not all done. Keep fingers crossed. Two aspects of this will make lots of you in this forum pretty unhappy. But hey, it is what it is.



250 is over kill ...

I think we can have our way with 150 J10c or 120 su 30 ... if we can upgrade our Mig 29 , Su 24 and F14 , then we can have our ways with even 100 J10c with 50 Su30 ....

after all , all these fighters are 4 gen and spending so much on 4th gen fighter is not wise ...

anyway , if I have a say , I would buy both Su-30 From Russia and J10c from China with same engine ... so in case of anything goes wrong with either country, another one could supply us ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> 250 is over kill ...
> 
> I think we can have our way with 150 J10c or 120 su 30 ... if we can upgrade our Mig 29 , Su 24 and F14 , then we can have our ways with even 100 J10c with 50 Su30 ....
> 
> after all , all these fighters are 4 gen and spending so much on 4th gen fighter is not wise ...
> 
> anyway , if I have a say , I would buy both Su-30 From Russia and J10c from China with same engine ... so in case of anything goes wrong with either country, another one could supply us ...



Other country cannot supply engine of Russian engine without re-export permit. So if Russia doesn’t allow it, it would be unlikely that they would allow China too.


----------



## sha ah

China has never cared much about permits when it comes to copying weapons, especially Russian/Soviet weapons. In any case, any jet that Iran buys has to come with technology transfer clause anyways.



TheImmortal said:


> Other country cannot supply engine of Russian engine without re-export permit. So if Russia doesn’t allow it, it would be unlikely that they would allow China too.


I've heard that even the US cannot launch more than 200-300 cruise missiles in one salvo. I might be mistaken but that's what I've heard.



OldTwilight said:


> Only countries with nuclear power can be assure that enemy won't devastated their air base and their infrastructure in first place in near future big war ....
> 
> so , even air force survivability is depend on having nukes ... or else even a regional power can start a war with more than 500 cruise missiles in first wave and at lease send 5-10 missiles against each air base ... super power can start war with more than 3000 cruise missiles and thousands guided air to ground missiles and bomb ... after that they will targer powerhouse and petrochemical and fuel storages ...
> 
> the only salvation is to have nuclear arsenal which you can use in all out war ...


The only reason Iran hasn't gone nuclear already and developed ICBMs is to attain the support of Russia and China for the JCPOA and for the procurement of various weapons systems. If the Russians and Chinese don't go through with serious weapons and economic deals, then Iran might as well go nuclear. As far as the Zionists go, they're not going to accept a nuclear Iran without raving and ranting like maniacs. If Iran were to go nuclear then they could say "See we were right all along, Iran is evil and is determined to destroy Israel, blah blah blah" Only time will tell how things will turn out.



reflecthofgeismar said:


> If Iran goes (officially) Nuclear and Trump is reelected you will hear: "Iran is a great country, I swear, we will make the best deal in the World, good, intelligent guys these iranians."
> (NO other option left except total destruction)
> Look, with thicc Kimmi Boi it happened too.
> Now you could say but the "Zionists".
> Well, what can they do THEN? NOTHING.
> The best would be THEN a FAIR (forced because of the circumstances) PEACE.
> Shall prosperity and new shine come for (Shia version) of Persian Empire.
> Couldn't harm the world as a counterbalance to so many others ... I like a multipolar world, in balance, rather unpleasant when ONE (and his followers) can decide how the world has to function.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

sha ah said:


> China has never cared much about permits when it comes to copying weapons, especially Russian/Soviet weapons. In any case, any jet that Iran buys has to come with technology transfer clause anyways.


the problem is different, the russian engines used by the chinese are supplied directly from russia and not made under license, for what the chinese try to build the WS-10 to re-power the J-11, or the WS-13 to re-power the JF -17 which currently uses the Russian RD-93 engine also supplied directly by Russia.
Therefore if you want Chinese aircraft with Russian engines, you need the Moscow permit for re-export, otherwise you have to buy Chinese aircraft with Chinese engines and this does not involve the standardization indicated if you also buy the SU-30


----------



## zectech

skyshadow said:


> he is saying that i'm disappointed , i found thare is no purchase for air force yet and what DM said was that they ( Russians ) just going to upgrade there fighter jets that Iran has.



 Iran and Russia, friends forever! 

Don't worry Iran, I am sure after Netanyahu approves the deal, Iran will be sold some SU-57s.


----------



## siegecrossbow

SalarHaqq said:


> J-11 at an air base in Iran with Iranian pilot standing next to it
> 
> View attachment 681928
> 
> 
> Source:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/112461980250220/photos/a.112467523582999/198756254954125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption adds: Wait for very interesting news



Wasn’t this in 2011 when J-11 participated in Anatolian Eagles?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

OldTwilight said:


> J10c



No way China is selling J-10s to Iran. For sale are J-11s or J-16 flankers. Or FC-31s if Iran gets lucky. The J-10s are a no-no if the Isrealis helped in their development.

These are the rumors;









China's J-10 'Vigorous Dragon': Did Israel 'Help' Build This Deadly Fighter?


We look at the evidence.




nationalinterest.org







Is the J-10 Chinese or Israeli?



If China sells then rumors are not true. Most believe they are.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> I've heard that even the US cannot launch more than 200-300 cruise missiles in one salvo. I might be mistaken but that's what I've heard.



Where you heard that from? Because that's a load of BS. 2 U.S. naval ships launched 60 cruise missiles in Syria. So imagine a whole entire battlegroup alone. Not to mention submarines and aircraft.


----------



## skyshadow

zectech said:


> Iran and Russia, friends forever!
> 
> Don't worry Iran, I am sure after Netanyahu approves the deal, Iran will be sold some SU-57s.


----------



## sha ah

I'm assuming that you're talking about the April 2018 missile strike on Syria, which was conducted jointly by the US, France and the UK. 

According to the US narrative, 105 missiles were launched by the US, UK, France, not just the US. Of course there are two diverging narratives when it comes what happened that night. 

The US claims they hit every single target with 100% accuracy. Russia claims that 71 or 103 missiles were intercepted. 

The US disputes the Russian narrative however Russia later showed off remnants of Tomahawks that had been allegedly intercepted. 

Also according to the US narrative 76 missiles hit the Barzah Research and Development Center and another 29 hit a chemical weapons storage site at Him Shinshar. 

Most military however analysts doubt the US narrative because the very next day there were pictures of Barzah released showing buildings still standing on the site with no sign that 76 missiles had hit the area. 

Also the missiles that supposedly hit the chemical weapons storage facility left absolutely no debris of any chemicals and no secondary explosions. 

I don't really want to get into a debate on this topic but the US doesn't really have very good credibility when it comes to things like this. 

Remember the WMDs in Iraq ? Or the RQ-4 which flew in international airspace yet somehow Iranian fishermen and navy salvaged the remains ? Or how Trump stated that "all was well" after the Iranian missile strike on Al Asad and then later we found out that 12, then 30, then 60, then finally over 100 US soldiers had suffered traumatic brain injuries ? 

There's a saying, in war the first casualty is the truth. And in war there's always a propaganda war simultaneously being waged by warring sides. In Vietnam the US even used weird tactics like playing the sounds of wailing restless Vietnamese ghosts to try and scare and demoralize the Vietcong.

So when it comes to things like this, you always have to take analyze diverging statements with a pinch of salt. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. 

Anyways, 200-300 cruise missiles sounds pretty reasonable for one single volley. In the entire 1991 Gulf war the US used 288 Tomahawks. If you disagree then what are you saying ? The US would launch 500 in one volley ? or 1000 ? When have we ever seen them do anything like that ?



Oldman1 said:


> Where you heard that from? Because that's a load of BS. 2 U.S. naval ships launched 60 cruise missiles in Syria. So imagine a whole entire battlegroup alone. Not to mention submarines and aircraft.


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> Anyways, 200-300 cruise missiles sounds pretty reasonable for one single volley. In the entire 1991 Gulf war the US used 288 Tomahawks. If you disagree then what are you saying ? The US would launch 500 in one volley ? or 1000 ? When have we ever seen them do anything like that ?



It is possible. Launch not only from naval, but also from air. Me think 500 at once is possible. Two waves of that also. But these would be mostly subsonic.


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> I'm assuming that you're talking about the April 2018 missile strike on Syria, which was conducted jointly by the US, France and the UK.
> 
> According to the US narrative, 105 missiles were launched by the US, UK, France, not just the US. Of course there are two diverging narratives when it comes what happened that night.
> 
> The US claims they hit every single target with 100% accuracy. Russia claims that 71 or 103 missiles were intercepted.
> 
> The US disputes the Russian narrative however Russia later showed off remnants of Tomahawks that had been allegedly intercepted.
> 
> Also according to the US narrative 76 missiles hit the Barzah Research and Development Center and another 29 hit a chemical weapons storage site at Him Shinshar.
> 
> Most military however analysts doubt the US narrative because the very next day there were pictures of Barzah released showing buildings still standing on the site with no sign that 76 missiles had hit the area.
> 
> Also the missiles that supposedly hit the chemical weapons storage facility left absolutely no debris of any chemicals and no secondary explosions.
> 
> I don't really want to get into a debate on this topic but the US doesn't really have very good credibility when it comes to things like this.
> 
> Remember the WMDs in Iraq ? Or the RQ-4 which flew in international airspace yet somehow Iranian fishermen and navy salvaged the remains ? Or how Trump stated that "all was well" after the Iranian missile strike on Al Asad and then later we found out that 12, then 30, then 60, then finally over 100 US soldiers had suffered traumatic brain injuries ?
> 
> There's a saying, in war the first casualty is the truth. And in war there's always a propaganda war simultaneously being waged by warring sides. In Vietnam the US even used weird tactics like playing the sounds of wailing restless Vietnamese ghosts to try and scare and demoralize the Vietcong.
> 
> So when it comes to things like this, you always have to take analyze diverging statements with a pinch of salt. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
> 
> Anyways, 200-300 cruise missiles sounds pretty reasonable for one single volley. In the entire 1991 Gulf war the US used 288 Tomahawks. If you disagree then what are you saying ? The US would launch 500 in one volley ? or 1000 ? When have we ever seen them do anything like that ?


Really? You based on how many were launched during Gulf War 1? So less than 300 were launched during that conflict? Okay how about during 2003 Invasion of Iraq when more than 800 missiles were launched? Or back during Operation Desert Fox in 1998 more than 400 were launched? Come on you got to do better than that. That's like saying U.S. launched a few aircraft in this so and so conflict so that must mean they can only launch a dozen aircraft. Of course the Russians would like to deny and claim they shot down this many considering in the past how much Russian equipment has been destroyed in Libya and Syria either by Israel and Turkey and so on. If there was a conflict with someone like Iran or China with that many targets, you will see something like 1000 or more being launched. All this with the SSGNs, and LRASMs that can be launched on smaller aircraft, etc. Yeah the first casualty would be the truth. Use the Iranian civilian plane being shot down and Iran saying they had nothing to do with it and admitted later they did as an example. I believe they try to sugar coat it by saying American EW was involved. Think its true?


----------



## SalarHaqq

siegecrossbow said:


> Wasn’t this in 2011 when J-11 participated in Anatolian Eagles?



What led you to this suspicion? Had you seen that same picture before?

I basically wrote down what the automated translation of the caption was saying.

Wouldn't have posted it if:

1) Reverse-image search on "Google" yielded results proving it is an older picture and that the description is faulty. In fact, the "Google" search gave no results at all, meaning that it was quite probably uploaded for the first time by the "Facebook" account where I found it.

2) The source was obviously an untrustworthy one. A rapid look at the page's other content however, did not strike me as containing disinformation.

Also, please pay attention to the circular patch on the pilot's suit: it clearly features the horizontal green-white-red colored stripes of the Iranian flag. Unless, of course, it was photoshopped, which I can't say.

Now I will admit I'm a bit unsure as to whether the picture was taken in Iran or perhaps in China in fact: the tree species outside the base, the soldier behind the aircraft and the type of camouflage on his uniform, the general layout of that section of the base and the concrete pavement, as well as the color of the barriers (green-blueish) visible in the background may look unfamiliar for an Iranian airbase... Then again it could indeed be Iran, who knows.

I'd say it's either Iran or China, due to the pilot really appearing to be Iranian. And Iran definitely never sent a pilot to participate in the Anatolian Eagles exercice.

If there's a particular reason why you mentioned the 2011 Anatolian Eagles event, I'd be interested to know.


----------



## siegecrossbow

SalarHaqq said:


> What led you to this suspicion? Had you seen that same picture before?
> 
> I basically wrote down what the automated translation of the caption was saying.
> 
> Wouldn't have posted it if:
> 
> 1) Reverse-image search on "Google" yielded results proving it is an older picture and that the description is faulty. In fact, the "Google" search gave no results at all, meaning that it was quite probably uploaded for the first time by the "Facebook" account where I found it.
> 
> 2) The source was obviously an untrustworthy one. A rapid look at the page's other content however, did not strike me as containing disinformation.
> 
> Also, please pay attention to the circular patch on the pilot's suit: it clearly features the horizontal green-white-red colored stripes of the Iranian flag. Unless, of course, it was photoshopped, which I can't say.
> 
> Now I will admit I'm a bit unsure as to whether the picture was taken in Iran or perhaps in China in fact: the tree species outside the base, the soldier behind the aircraft and the type of camouflage on his uniform, the general layout of that section of the base and the concrete pavement, as well as the color of the barriers (green-blueish) visible in the background may look unfamiliar for an Iranian airbase... Then again it could indeed be Iran, who knows.
> 
> I'd say it's either Iran or China, due to the pilot really appearing to be Iranian. And Iran definitely never sent a pilot to participate in the Anatolian Eagles exercice.
> 
> If there's a particular reason why you mentioned the 2011 Anatolian Eagles event, I'd be interested to know.



I think PLAAF flankers Made a stop in Iran entourage to the Anatolian Eagles in 2011. I haven’t heard anything from Chinese channels since.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Issue with Iran is they have a long memory and they remember the China of 80’s and 90’s.

The purchase of F-7 is still in their minds.

Even though China has gone through rapid growth in military sector. Iran still views Chinese arms as inferior reverse engineering of Soviet weapons.

Thus I will be suprised if Iran purchases any Chinese weapon system unless there is significant ToT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

siegecrossbow said:


> I think PLAAF flankers Made a stop in Iran entourage to the Anatolian Eagles in 2011. I haven’t heard anything from Chinese channels since.



That is entirely possible, in theory. Impossible for me to say though, given I found no earlier uploading of this picture on the internet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

SalarHaqq said:


> That is entirely possible, in theory. Impossible for me to say though, given I found no earlier uploading of this picture on the internet.



Maybe the photographer held onto till now.

Either way the J-11A/Su-27SK is outdated as a fighter today. It retains a twist cassegrain radar, could only engage one enemy at a time, has limited air to ground capabilities, and has relatively poor avionics and targeting. I think Iran would go for more modern Flanker variants.


----------



## sahureka2

siegecrossbow said:


> Maybe the photographer held onto till now.
> 
> Either way the J-11A/Su-27SK is outdated as a fighter today. It retains a twist cassegrain radar, could only engage one enemy at a time, has limited air to ground capabilities, and has relatively poor avionics and targeting. I think Iran would go for more modern Flanker variants.



that's a two-seater, maybe it's a J-11BSH, but I tend to be a J-11BS and this version is equipped with more modern systems

J-11BS and J-11B

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## siegecrossbow

sahureka2 said:


> that's a two-seater, maybe it's a J-11BSH, but I tend to be a J-11BS and this version is equipped with more modern systems
> 
> J-11BS and J-11B



The one in the tweet isn’t a J-11B. J-11B/BS has solid black nose cone whereas Su-27/J-11A has grey and white nose cone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

siegecrossbow said:


> The one in the tweet isn’t a J-11B. J-11B/BS has solid black nose cone whereas Su-27/J-11A has grey and white nose cone.


yes true the color of the nose cone is a feature that has escaped me, therefore it is a SU-27UB/UBK


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321124068037373952He’s right. Let’s hope so🤣

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I honestly don't believe that the US currently has the stomach to attack any nation that can actually retaliate in any meaningful way. That's just my personal opinion.

After 2003, the US had a large number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's military was not nearly as formidable as it is today. Iran had a mere sliver, a very small fraction of the air defense hardware and missile capability that it has today. The US didn't do it back then. Would they do it now ? I highly doubt it, unless the US / Trump had no other choice. For example if Iran seriously attacked them first and inflicted severe casualties.

Could the US launch 1000 missiles in one night. Yes, it's possible but we haven't seen anything like that before and such an operation would require a large amount of time to setup. Iran would see the forces being built up. Would they stand idle by and do nothing ? Or perhaps Iran would wait for the US to strike first simply for political reasons ? To be able to say the USA started the war ? Hmmm interesting prospect. Not sure what the correct answer would be.

Earlier, when I said 200-300 in one shot, that was an average number. I believe I heard it on a youtube channel talking about a contingency plan of USA attacking Turkey. I think it was Binkovs ? Yes he's a damn puppet but he does do some serious analysis and research as well, that can't be denied.

Realistically it's just an average number. I mean another thing to consider is this. After the assets launch their missiles, they're in a sense possibly vulnerable after that right ? I mean in theory they've launched missiles, so they could then be identified and targeted by a formidable enemy after that right ?

You always want to keep some reserves don't you ? In case let's say the enemy identifies and retaliates ? I mean I don't see the US military unloading everything in one shot. Think about it, what's more efficient, 1000 at once and then another week or more before another attack, considering maintenance and re acquisition of weapons, in the meantime some of your assets are now more vulnerable ?, Or would it be better to just have a constant flow of 200 every night, Constant pressure ? and constant protection for your assets ? The ability to retaliate or suddenly identify and destroy /40/60/80 targets at any given point ?

Yes undoubtedly Russian equipment has been destroyed but every weapon system has weaknesses and limitations. We saw what Iran / Houthis was able to do to Aramco that one night and the Patriots didn't even shoot down one single target.

In the case of Israel, they're using very advanced modern equipment against mostly older Soviet era gear in Syria. However there has never been a successful attack on a base housing Russian troops, defended by a Russian S-300 / S-400 battery. I believe some Turkish proxy groups or even Turkey tried to launch some assets at Hmeimim air base but allegedly the Russians shot it down.

With Turkey, they saturate the air with their drones. Yes they did destroy 10+ export Pantsir systems but they lost 20+ of their drones in the process. So was the Russian equipment useless or was it just a numbers game ?

If a SAM system has 4 missiles and you launch 8 cruise missiles at the system, we all know what the end result will be.

Of course the Pantsir is a medium range SAM. The ones in Libya were export version I might add, being operated by inexperienced people. If you had a multilayered system, so let's say Pantsirs, Tors, BUK, S-300, S-400 all working together and operated by experienced professionals, then it's a whole different ball game.

Of course let's also remember that afterwards, 3 Turkish HAWK SAM batteries were later destroyed allegedly by Egyptian / UAE Rafales at Watiya airbase. After that Turkey suddenly lost interest in expanding to Sirte.

Does that mean the HAWK is a useless system ? Of course not.

At the end of the day, it all depends on a wide range of particular circumstances and variables. Usually you don't find the truth in extremes, but for the most part somewhere in between, in the gray area.




Oldman1 said:


> Really? You based on how many were launched during Gulf War 1? So less than 300 were launched during that conflict? Okay how about during 2003 Invasion of Iraq when more than 800 missiles were launched? Or back during Operation Desert Fox in 1998 more than 400 were launched? Come on you got to do better than that. That's like saying U.S. launched a few aircraft in this so and so conflict so that must mean they can only launch a dozen aircraft. Of course the Russians would like to deny and claim they shot down this many considering in the past how much Russian equipment has been destroyed in Libya and Syria either by Israel and Turkey and so on. If there was a conflict with someone like Iran or China with that many targets, you will see something like 1000 or more being launched. All this with the SSGNs, and LRASMs that can be launched on smaller aircraft, etc. Yeah the first casualty would be the truth. Use the Iranian civilian plane being shot down and Iran saying they had nothing to do with it and admitted later they did as an example. I believe they try to sugar coat it by saying American EW was involved. Think its true?





Oldman1 said:


> Really? You based on how many were launched during Gulf War 1? So less than 300 were launched during that conflict? Okay how about during 2003 Invasion of Iraq when more than 800 missiles were launched? Or back during Operation Desert Fox in 1998 more than 400 were launched? Come on you got to do better than that. That's like saying U.S. launched a few aircraft in this so and so conflict so that must mean they can only launch a dozen aircraft. Of course the Russians would like to deny and claim they shot down this many considering in the past how much Russian equipment has been destroyed in Libya and Syria either by Israel and Turkey and so on. If there was a conflict with someone like Iran or China with that many targets, you will see something like 1000 or more being launched. All this with the SSGNs, and LRASMs that can be launched on smaller aircraft, etc. Yeah the first casualty would be the truth. Use the Iranian civilian plane being shot down and Iran saying they had nothing to do with it and admitted later they did as an example. I believe they try to sugar coat it by saying American EW was involved. Think its true?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

sha ah said:


> Could the US launch 1000 missiles in one night. Yes, it's possible but we haven't seen anything like that before and such an operation would require a large amount of time to setup. Iran would see the forces being built up. *Would they stand idle by and do nothing* ? Or perhaps Iran would wait for the US to strike first simply for political reasons ? To be able to say the USA started the war ? Hmmm interesting prospect. Not sure what the correct answer would be.



Because Khamenei is ruling Iran right know which set these rule for us to follow : 

Nukes are Haram and we won't even search on nuclear weapon in any circumstance ( which mean others are free to nuke us ) 
We wont make first move in war against USA ( so USA can be assure that even if publicly saying that they want attack Iran , then Iranian arm force is not allow to attack their position and assets till their first wave of attack hit Iranian target )


----------



## WudangMaster

OldTwilight said:


> Because Khamenei is ruling Iran right know which set these rule for us to follow :
> 
> Nukes are Haram and we won't even search on nuclear weapon in any circumstance ( which mean others are free to nuke us )
> We wont make first move in war against USA ( so USA can be assure that even if publicly saying that they want attack Iran , then Iranian arm force is not allow to attack their position and assets till their first wave of attack hit Iranian target )



Is it possible this fatwa is really taqiyya and hopefully they really building a weapon or at least the capability to assemble one quickly?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

WudangMaster said:


> Is it possible this fatwa is really taqiyya and hopefully they really building a weapon or at least the capability to assemble one quickly?


Nope ...
I really don't want engage in long discussion

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

OldTwilight said:


> We wont make first move in war against USA ( so USA can be assure that even if publicly saying that they want attack Iran , then Iranian arm force is not allow to attack their position and assets till their first wave of attack hit Iranian target )



I doubt the Supreme Leader's guideline implies passivity in such a scenario. What he means is that Iran will not be the one opting for war or initiating military aggression. If it becomes unmistakenly clear that the US will launch an aggression on Iran however, then Iran may very well strike their offensive assets beforehand. IRGC officers have suggested as much in interviews. 

I'd recommend to stay as precise as possible with semantics, for it helps to avoid misinterpretations.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## OldTwilight

SalarHaqq said:


> I doubt the Supreme Leader's guideline implies passivity in such a scenario. What he means is that Iran will not be the one opting for war or initiating military aggression. If it becomes unmistakenly clear that the US will launch an aggression on Iran however, then Iran may very well strike their offensive assets beforehand. IRGC officers have suggested as much in interviews.
> 
> I'd recommend to stay as precise as possible with semantics, for it helps to avoid misinterpretations.



well , you are sayin your interpterion ... I'm just quoting what he directly said ... He wasn't aggressive when he was young , old age make people more passive ... people tend to forget how old he is ...


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> I honestly don't believe that the US currently has the stomach to attack any nation that can actually retaliate in any meaningful way. That's just my personal opinion.
> 
> After 2003, the US had a large number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's military was not nearly as formidable as it is today. Iran had a mere sliver, a very small fraction of the air defense hardware and missile capability that it has today. The US didn't do it back then. Would they do it now ? I highly doubt it, unless the US / Trump had no other choice. For example if Iran seriously attacked them first and inflicted severe casualties.
> 
> Could the US launch 1000 missiles in one night. Yes, it's possible but we haven't seen anything like that before and such an operation would require a large amount of time to setup. Iran would see the forces being built up. Would they stand idle by and do nothing ? Or perhaps Iran would wait for the US to strike first simply for political reasons ? To be able to say the USA started the war ? Hmmm interesting prospect. Not sure what the correct answer would be.
> 
> Earlier, when I said 200-300 in one shot, that was an average number. I believe I heard it on a youtube channel talking about a contingency plan of USA attacking Turkey. I think it was Binkovs ? Yes he's a damn puppet but he does do some serious analysis and research as well, that can't be denied.
> 
> Realistically it's just an average number. I mean another thing to consider is this. After the assets launch their missiles, they're in a sense possibly vulnerable after that right ? I mean in theory they've launched missiles, so they could then be identified and targeted by a formidable enemy after that right ?
> 
> You always want to keep some reserves don't you ? In case let's say the enemy identifies and retaliates ? I mean I don't see the US military unloading everything in one shot. Think about it, what's more efficient, 1000 at once and then another week or more before another attack, considering maintenance and re acquisition of weapons, in the meantime some of your assets are now more vulnerable ?, Or would it be better to just have a constant flow of 200 every night, Constant pressure ? and constant protection for your assets ? The ability to retaliate or suddenly identify and destroy /40/60/80 targets at any given point ?
> 
> Yes undoubtedly Russian equipment has been destroyed but every weapon system has weaknesses and limitations. We saw what Iran / Houthis was able to do to Aramco that one night and the Patriots didn't even shoot down one single target.
> 
> In the case of Israel, they're using very advanced modern equipment against mostly older Soviet era gear in Syria. However there has never been a successful attack on a base housing Russian troops, defended by a Russian S-300 / S-400 battery. I believe some Turkish proxy groups or even Turkey tried to launch some assets at Hmeimim air base but allegedly the Russians shot it down.
> 
> With Turkey, they saturate the air with their drones. Yes they did destroy 10+ export Pantsir systems but they lost 20+ of their drones in the process. So was the Russian equipment useless or was it just a numbers game ?
> 
> If a SAM system has 4 missiles and you launch 8 cruise missiles at the system, we all know what the end result will be.
> 
> Of course the Pantsir is a medium range SAM. The ones in Libya were export version I might add, being operated by inexperienced people. If you had a multilayered system, so let's say Pantsirs, Tors, BUK, S-300, S-400 all working together and operated by experienced professionals, then it's a whole different ball game.
> 
> Of course let's also remember that afterwards, 3 Turkish HAWK SAM batteries were later destroyed allegedly by Egyptian / UAE Rafales at Watiya airbase. After that Turkey suddenly lost interest in expanding to Sirte.
> 
> Does that mean the HAWK is a useless system ? Of course not.
> 
> At the end of the day, it all depends on a wide range of particular circumstances and variables. Usually you don't find the truth in extremes, but for the most part somewhere in between, in the gray area.


Wow, i agree 100% with your analysis , you obviously have high situational awareness of whats happening in the MIddle east(and many cant, wont ,dont want to see it, which is not our problem).
Good job and thanks!! 

Azerbaijan should not make the mistake of testing Iran, because Iran is probably also(like CHina is) looking for a good dummy to "test"weapons on..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> I honestly don't believe that the US currently has the stomach to attack any nation that can actually retaliate in any meaningful way. That's just my personal opinion.
> 
> After 2003, the US had a large number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran's military was not nearly as formidable as it is today. Iran had a mere sliver, a very small fraction of the air defense hardware and missile capability that it has today. The US didn't do it back then. Would they do it now ? I highly doubt it, unless the US / Trump had no other choice. For example if Iran seriously attacked them first and inflicted severe casualties.



Yeah Iran should have kept attacking. Killing thousands of American troops should have been enough to force Trump to pull troops out. Why didn't you? Gave them a concussion instead. Should have giving Trump an excuse to pull troops out, not start a war eh? I mean we killed your general, the world would have backed you up. 



> Could the US launch 1000 missiles in one night. Yes, it's possible but we haven't seen anything like that before and such an operation would require a large amount of time to setup. Iran would see the forces being built up. Would they stand idle by and do nothing ? Or perhaps Iran would wait for the US to strike first simply for political reasons ? To be able to say the USA started the war ? Hmmm interesting prospect. Not sure what the correct answer would be.



Of course you haven't see anything like it. Nobody saw 400 missiles launched or 800 missiles launched so who expect 1000? You could see a build up but you don't see it til its too late. Think about the submarines that can carry more than 150 cruise missiles underwater. Or the other submarines that can at least carry a dozen each.



> Earlier, when I said 200-300 in one shot, that was an average number. I believe I heard it on a youtube channel talking about a contingency plan of USA attacking Turkey. I think it was Binkovs ? Yes he's a damn puppet but he does do some serious analysis and research as well, that can't be denied.
> 
> Realistically it's just an average number. I mean another thing to consider is this. After the assets launch their missiles, they're in a sense possibly vulnerable after that right ? I mean in theory they've launched missiles, so they could then be identified and targeted by a formidable enemy after that right ?



If a B-52 or B-1 launches cruise missiles from lets say 500km away, are you going to send jet fighters after it? Don't expect any escorts or patrols nearby? And smaller fighter jets launched their own cruise missiles, they still have their air to air missiles, so they are not vulnerable at all.



> You always want to keep some reserves don't you ? In case let's say the enemy identifies and retaliates ? I mean I don't see the US military unloading everything in one shot. Think about it, what's more efficient, 1000 at once and then another week or more before another attack, considering maintenance and re acquisition of weapons, in the meantime some of your assets are now more vulnerable ?, Or would it be better to just have a constant flow of 200 every night, Constant pressure ? and constant protection for your assets ? The ability to retaliate or suddenly identify and destroy /40/60/80 targets at any given point ?



They will unload as much as their platforms allowed. For example like the SSGN can only launch 150 missiles, they have to go back to reload it. And they will always rotate as well because not every fleet from around the world will congregate in one place.



> Yes undoubtedly Russian equipment has been destroyed but every weapon system has weaknesses and limitations. We saw what Iran / Houthis was able to do to Aramco that one night and the Patriots didn't even shoot down one single target.
> 
> In the case of Israel, they're using very advanced modern equipment against mostly older Soviet era gear in Syria. However there has never been a successful attack on a base housing Russian troops, defended by a Russian S-300 / S-400 battery. I believe some Turkish proxy groups or even Turkey tried to launch some assets at Hmeimim air base but allegedly the Russians shot it down.



I'm sure Russia and Israel have an understanding, but the Syrians probably still trying to shoot the Israelis down, so far I think Syria accidentally shot down their Russian ally aircraft by accident. But thats an accident but did prove it can shoot aircraft down.



> With Turkey, they saturate the air with their drones. Yes they did destroy 10+ export Pantsir systems but they lost 20+ of their drones in the process. So was the Russian equipment useless or was it just a numbers game ?
> 
> 
> If a SAM system has 4 missiles and you launch 8 cruise missiles at the system, we all know what the end result will be.



And bombs as well. Numbers game like you said.



> Of course the Pantsir is a medium range SAM. The ones in Libya were export version I might add, being operated by inexperienced people. If you had a multilayered system, so let's say Pantsirs, Tors, BUK, S-300, S-400 all working together and operated by experienced professionals, then it's a whole different ball game.
> 
> Of course let's also remember that afterwards, 3 Turkish HAWK SAM batteries were later destroyed allegedly by Egyptian / UAE Rafales at Watiya airbase. After that Turkey suddenly lost interest in expanding to Sirte.
> 
> Does that mean the HAWK is a useless system ? Of course not.
> 
> At the end of the day, it all depends on a wide range of particular circumstances and variables. Usually you don't find the truth in extremes, but for the most part somewhere in between, in the gray area.



Sure you can put a multilayered system, but they all can be taken out. The USAF has trained many decades for this, even practicing against Russian made systems known to be what the world considered formidable.


----------



## SalarHaqq

OldTwilight said:


> well , you are sayin your interpterion ... I'm just quoting what he directly said ...



Well, yours was an interpretation of sorts too, because you picked an ambivalent, borderline case whose very nature lends itself to and indeed calls for some interpretation.

I cited Sepah generals, who are the ones in charge of putting into practice the Leader's military guidelines and adopting them to each specific situation. Now Sepah officials made it abundantly clear that Iran will not just sit idle watching the US assemble a fully fledged invasion force against Iran.

So this doesn't really leave many doubts as to whether or not Iran would simply allow a massive US military build up to materialize against her.



> He wasn't aggressive when he was young , old age make people more passive ... people tend to forget how old he is ...



Unchecked, short-sighted aggressiveness can often lead to foolish, counter-productive decision making. Saddam offers a great example of this.

Seyyed Khamenei's highly calculated, balanced, deeply thought out and yet principled, focused and staunchly determined style of decision making however, which takes into account the long-term as much as the short- to mid-term, has had the result of effectively deterring the global superpower from military aggression against Iran, and of allowing Iran to progress on practically all fronts despite the unprecedented hostility she is facing.

Also, individual psycho-analytical assessment is not sufficient to adequately explain political realities.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Kaman -99 and Arash army's secret UCAVs are out of there nests and flying high with there bombs and missiles *

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> *Kaman -99 and Arash army's secret UCAVs are out of there nests and flying high with there bombs and missiles *



nice!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *Kaman -99 and Arash army's secret UCAVs are out of there nests and flying high with there bombs and missiles *


pics??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Shams313 said:


> pics??




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322821305826234369There is no pics. Arash and kaman-99 will be present tomorrow. Let’s hope they show us the drones with missiles🔥

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Always remember that air force drone projects are behind defense ministry drones and even more behind IRGC drones: No early capture of enemy drones, no private companies that produce critical subsystems, no heavy use of universities.

Don't expect anything even at S-129 level.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Always remember that air force drone projects are behind defense ministry drones and even more behind IRGC drones: No early capture of enemy drones, no private companies that produce critical subsystems, no heavy use of universities.
> 
> Don't expect anything even at S-129 level.


Isn’t the s-129 irans best drone?


----------



## makranman

have you guys checked the images here? my question is: are they flying the new kowsars in the war game?
mshrgh.ir/1137610
pic 1 with f5s:


https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964507.jpg


pic2 with f5s:


https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964509.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> Isn’t the s-129 irans best drone?



S-171

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Saleh99 said:


> Isn’t the s-129 irans best drone?



Early 2010 level product. 8-10 years later...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

makranman said:


> have you guys checked the images here? my question is: are they flying the new kowsars in the war game?
> mshrgh.ir/1137610
> pic 1 with f5s:
> 
> 
> https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964507.jpg
> 
> 
> pic2 with f5s:
> 
> 
> https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964509.jpg



There should be a list of the serial numbers somewhere that can be compared with the ones in the images. I remember many years ago at the old irandefence forum that there was a list of all of the tomcat serial numbers available online and many forum followers could follow their history. Some of the mig 29s and tomcats and occasionally phantoms even had their serial numbers covered during various shows and exhibitions for that same reason. This is also a way to verify a built from scratch kowsar as opposed to a refitted/upgraded preexisting F-5

Here is a list for the phantoms: http://www.f-4.nl/f4_44.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> S-171


ugh we only saw one of it and never saw it in combat operations, but I hope it’s operational.


PeeD said:


> Early 2010 level product. 8-10 years later...


That means mohajer-6 is better than shahed-129... which is not true


----------



## WudangMaster

Saleh99 said:


> ugh we only saw one of it and never saw it in combat operations, but I hope it’s operational.
> 
> That means mohajer-6 is better than shahed-129... which is not true



Not better than, but closer to it in terms of performance. The mohajer drones were inferior to 129 in every way when s-129 was first unveiled, but many years, the mohajer line has now closed the gap to match parity for the price. S-129 seems a bit stronger and longer ranged, but mohajer 6 is impressive and can give competition for the price.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> ugh we only saw one of it and never saw it in combat operations, but I hope it’s operational.
> 
> That means mohajer-6 is better than shahed-129... which is not true



Its smaller brother dropped bombs on ISIS. So yes the design has seen combat operations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> Its smaller brother dropped bombs on ISIS. So yes the design has seen combat operations.


afaik, shahed-171 is the 1:1 copy of rq-170 and shahed-191 is the 60% copy.


WudangMaster said:


> Not better than, but closer to it in terms of performance. The mohajer drones were inferior to 129 in every way when s-129 was first unveiled, but many years, the mohajer line has now closed the gap to match parity for the price. S-129 seems a bit stronger and longer ranged, but mohajer 6 is impressive and can give competition for the price.


I like mohajer-6 more because it can carry 4 PGM, way cheaper and Iran produces at a much higher rate than the shahed-129.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

OldTwilight said:


> well , you are sayin your interpterion ... I'm just quoting what he directly said ... He wasn't aggressive when he was young , old age make people more passive ... people tend to forget how old he is ...


you are saying @SalarHaqq is giving his own interpretation...but you yourself added your interpretation to the policies of Khamenei that you posted though!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Saleh99 said:


> afaik, shahed-171 is the 1:1 copy of rq-170 and shahed-191 is the 60% copy.
> 
> I like mohajer-6 more because it can carry 4 PGM, way cheaper and Iran produces at a much higher rate than the shahed-129.



The lineage has certainly come a long way and caught up to the shahed series pretty decently. There was more discussion regarding it man pages ago from a few years back when it was first unveiled.





__





Iranian UAVs | News and Discussions






defence.pk

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322596255789436928
Iranian suicide drone spotted

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

integrating rim-66 into phantom and for A2G aplication. Iran's only guided missile (maverick) was not strong enough to disable Iraqi tankers during war and even with 4 shots tankers were able to survive and continue their mission. also they were merely TV guided so no night time operations.
side note: the general bazarghan has PHD in strategic sciences (if I remember currectly) and he started the self sufficency jihad organisation/movement and it's safe to say he had a major role in what we know as iranian defense industry today.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Mithridates said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> integrating rim-66 into phantom and for A2G aplication. Iran's only guided missile (maverick) was not strong enough to disable Iraqi tankers during war and even with 4 shots tankers were able to survive and continue their mission. also they were merely TV guided so no night time operations.
> side note: the general bazarghan has PHD in strategic sciences (if I remember currectly) and he started the self sufficency jihad organisation/movement and it's safe to say he had a major role in what we know as iranian defense industry today.



I wonder how much easier or harder was this mating of the standard to the phantom compared to integrating the hawk to the tomcat radar? Was this done in parallel or after? 
Om a side note, there is an ancient image from the 80s floating around showing some standards on modified hawk launchers and some have said this was photoshop om various forums over the years but I heard in a recent interview or article a while back that this was an actual project though it didn't get far and the much later talash project instead worked on making the standard naval radars land based as well as mating to S200's radars before the najm series came along.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

mshrgh.ir/1138035

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Messerschmitt said:


> mshrgh.ir/1138035


Brief translation?


----------



## Mithridates

WudangMaster said:


> I wonder how much easier or harder was this mating of the standard to the phantom compared to integrating the hawk to the tomcat radar? Was this done in parallel or after?
> Om a side note, there is an ancient image from the 80s floating around showing some standards on modified hawk launchers and some have said this was photoshop om various forums over the years but I heard in a recent interview or article a while back that this was an actual project though it didn't get far and the much later talash project instead worked on making the standard naval radars land based as well as mating to S200's radars before the najm series came along.


seems like air force during the war used the standard missiles in MIM-23 system to hunt down two mig-25 and succeed in one case.
regarding the timing I think both projects were in use in last year of war.
sayeh (shadow), New EW plane of IRIAF:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

925boy said:


> you are saying @SalarHaqq is giving his own interpretation...but you yourself added your interpretation to the policies of Khamenei that you posted though!!



the difference is that I interpret his words close to what he said , the Salar Haqq is seeking hidden meaning in his word ... 

Khamenei said

 that Nuke is Haram and we won't research , build , keep and use these kind of weapon in any circumstance ... 
He said we won't be starter in war with USA .... 

so , what is clear message from these 2 sentence ?!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran already has nukes in the form of its geography and topography.

Nukes only help against invaders and Iran’s land is already impossible for any invader without a force of 750,000 soldiers.

Nukes do not help against proxy wars, soft wars, color revolutions, sabotage, skrimshes, short wars, etc.

Until nukes (or tactical nukes) get used in conflict and that Pandora box is opened, gaining nukes will not take the pressure off Iran or result in containment policy being broken.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

OldTwilight said:


> the difference is that I interpret his words close to what he said , the Salar Haqq is seeking hidden meaning in his word ...
> 
> Khamenei said
> 
> that Nuke is Haram and we won't research , build , keep and use these kind of weapon in any circumstance ...
> He said we won't be starter in war with USA ....
> 
> so , what is clear message from these 2 sentence ?!


But the deep truth is that Iran HAS done sensitive nuclear research...why you think Iranian govt and IAEA have been playing hide and seek with nuclear sites in Iran? Why you think Iran hid sites from IAEA until either IAEA found out or the site was of no use to Iran? Iran has completed ALL the pieces to a nuclear program, except the actual warhead....why Iran need FORDOW, which is an underground fortress if its housing legal common nuclear centrifuges????


----------



## makranman

makranman said:


> have you guys checked the images here? my question is: are they flying the new kowsars in the war game?
> mshrgh.ir/1137610
> pic 1 with f5s:
> 
> 
> https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964507.jpg
> 
> 
> pic2 with f5s:
> 
> 
> https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2020/11/01/4/2964509.jpg



OOOk... so i finally got time to check the photos. my sources are https://www.mizanonline.com/fa/news/632029/ for the 3 kowsars delivered and https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/08/12/1867954 for the first kowsar.
unfortunately the 3 kowsars do not have any serial numbers on the body. though the first one does:





i think the serial number is 3-7400. i did not see this number in the pictures from mashreghnews. also, i searched the wargames in google and checked all f5 pics i came across. I did not find the serial number.

another point: all kowsars have a logo from Hesa. i did not find this logo either.
so it is safe to assume there are no kowsars in the wargame and all kowsars are somewhere else...






p.s.: the mizanonline page had the highest quality pictures of the 3 kowsars. i took the logo from their picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

makranman said:


> OOOk... so i finally got time to check the photos. my sources are https://www.mizanonline.com/fa/news/632029/ for the 3 kowsars delivered and https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/08/12/1867954 for the first kowsar.
> unfortunately the 3 kowsars do not have any serial numbers on the body. though the first one does:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think the serial number is 3-7400. i did not see this number in the pictures from mashreghnews. also, i searched the wargames in google and checked all f5 pics i came across. I did not find the serial number.
> 
> another point: all kowsars have a logo from Hesa. i did not find this logo either.
> so it is safe to assume there are no kowsars in the wargame and all kowsars are somewhere else...
> 
> View attachment 684938
> 
> 
> p.s.: the mizanonline page had the highest quality pictures of the 3 kowsars. i took the logo from their picture.



Is it possible that once IRIAF officially took possession of them, the HESA logo would be officially removed and they only display the air force livery? 
I'm suspecting more and more that the early ones might be an upgrade program first for pre existing frames with some older components. As an example, the first planes using the owj engine only flew one paired with an older J85 because owj had not the sufficient flight hours to totally rely on it for the aircraft. I think these are major over hauls and upgrades to pre existing frames before they will bother creating a new frame from scratch, especially when they are also competing with yasin for the same resources. In fact, yasin seems more needed by IRIAF right now because of its advanced trainer features as opposed to kowsar and both are fairly capable in their armed versions. Perhaps kowsar can out maneuver dog fighting wise, but I'm purely speculating on that front. They both seem equal in CAS and COIN roles with kowsar being a better trainer to boot.


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SalarHaqq

OldTwilight said:


> the difference is that I interpret his words close to what he said , the Salar Haqq is seeking hidden meaning in his word ...



You were taking a borderline situation which his words were not meant to address.

You say what if the US declares it is going to attack Iran no matter what Iran does, while at the same time assembling a major strike force against Iran? Well guess what, that is a declaration of war, and it *is* tantamount to starting a war in international law.

So by the Supreme Leader's guidelines, Iran is *not *obliged to sit idle in such a situation, because the US would already have started the war by its declaration, even if no shots are fired yet.



> Khamenei said
> 
> that Nuke is Haram and we won't research , build , keep and use these kind of weapon in any circumstance ...
> He said we won't be starter in war with USA ....
> 
> so , what is clear message from these 2 sentence ?!



Sepah generals publicly announced Iran would not sit idle if the US conducts a major troop build up with the aim of invading Iran. They made these declarations so as to rule out any misinterpration of the Leader's guidelines. And the Leader never contradicted them.

This proves that your interpretation of Seyyed Khamenei's words does not apply.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 684949
> 
> 
> View attachment 684950
> 
> View attachment 684951
> 
> 
> View attachment 684952
> 
> 
> View attachment 684953
> 
> 
> View attachment 684954
> 
> View attachment 684955
> 
> View attachment 684956


You get the photos from the websites?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1323600070302965760Hahahaha🤣😂😂 very true

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Large-scale air exercise, Iranian F-14s make big surprises

In an article dated August 2020, Business Insider asks, "Why has the United States decided to destroy all of its old F-14 Tomcats rather than let anyone buy them?" "Before answering:" During the war of Iran against Iraq, the Iranian air force, its ultra experienced pilots showed such great competence that only one Iranian Tomcat could release sky from enemy planes without even firing a single shot.

On the other hand, from the ground most of the successful shootings of Iraqi Tomcats came from SAM batteries that Iranian operators fired copiously ... This is in essence to prevent Iran from having attached parts or even F technology. -14 that the United States ended up withdrawing their Tomcat in 2007, reducing a $ 38 million plane to a heap of junk. The idea of selling rare F-14 parts to Iran so that it does not have to overhaul its own inventories and make them worry about its adversaries since the Iranians are masters of reverse engineering, was absurd. The "Iranian" F-14 has something to surprise us ”.

And the author of the article does not think so well put. On the first day of the exercises of the Iranian Air Force, which is obviously preparing for major air combat in these times of "normalization" where the United States is selling the Emirates 50 F-35s or even giving the green light to To deliver F-22s, the flagship of the US airline industry to Israel, intense events have occurred. Indeed, the fighting began with a clear show of force of the Su-24 of the Air Force which following the principle of surprise, identical to what the Iranian armed force does on the ground "the strategic bombers Soukhoi Su-24 successfully destroyed ground targets, including fictitious enemy radars, carrying a variety of optimized, high-precision missiles weighing up to half a ton and obviously made in Iran.

This phase aimed to destroy enemy land radars, just to blind its Air Defense. Then came the turn of the F-14s, the very ones from which Business Insider starts: According to the spokesperson for the exercise, Brigadier General Goudarzi, “it was above all about reproducing a fight and we chose to place F-14 and MiG-29 in combat situation. Since the Iranian F-14s have long been "tamed", many devices are on board. The same is true of a national radar that Iranian experts talk about quite often without going so far as to explain the components or the characteristics. In Isphahan, which is home to the stupidity of the Americans the only F-14 overhall center in the world, this radar capability was therefore tested on Monday and the result was more than "satisfactory"

Since the F-22 with which the Americans hope to shoot down the Iranian F-14s is supposed to be stealthy, it is therefore a "capital capability": "The radar in question manufactured by Iranian technicians at the The effect of this aircraft specific to aerial combat has a range of several hundred kilometers. It is a radar which operates in synergy with the original radar of the F-14, again optimized by our technicians. It is a device capable of intercepting with the same power as AWACs. Especially since the analog cabin of the American F-14 has been transformed into digital here in Iran ”, said Brigadier General Farhad Goudarzi, the spokesperson for the exercise.

During the exercise the F-14s were refueled in flight by Boeing-707 tanker planes in preparation for low-altitude upper cover operations. And the last but not the least, the radar designed for the effect of the F-14 has engaged in electronic warfare, testing advanced communication systems within secure platforms connected by cable and wireless. The operation took place even as reconnaissance drones, Kaman-14, monitored the assault course and the brand new nationally-made Samat optical camera, gleaned data and wiretapped. The F-22 may be stealthy, but it would be difficult to escape the Iranian F-14, ”the general said.

“By the way, this aerial combat that we are preparing will involve a diverse fleet of aircraft. Hence the variety of planes engaged on the first day of the exercises. Saeqeh who detonated the targets with cruise missiles and extremely precise smart bombs. Some seven Iranian air bases were also involved in the preparation of these air battles, ”said the general, referring to articles that were too optimistic in US magazines and too sure of the superiority of the US Air Force against the US Army. Iranian look.

In fact, "given the intelligence of our pilots, their war experience, which the Americans lack, the first USA / Iran face-to-face in the sky could be too rich in surprises. The series of plane crashes US in recent months, including almost all range of so-called sophisticated US planes (F-18, F-35; F-22 ...) give indications in this direction. Indeed the pilots of all these devices have missed their flights while operating in combat situations and on air bases. The US aircraft command and control system appears to be too fragile to jamming and electronic suppression. Our F-14s have worked well on this weakness ".

In a recent article titled "How Iran Could Take Down an F-35 Fighter in a War," The National Interest wrote that the F-5, driven by Iranian pilots would possess the agility necessary to gain the advantage over an F -35. The same will be true of the F-14s: “Aerodynamically, the F-5 will always be what we call a category three fighter, where the F-35 and F-22 are now category five fighters. Compared to modern hunters, it is underpowered not to mention that it has no stealth other than its small size. But with just a few modifications, which the Iranians did, the F-5 is turning into a threat plane with a legitimate sting. The latest Iranian upgrades include a [scanning electronically] radar, good [radar warning] gear, chaff and flares, a jamming pod, and a helmet-mounted spotting system for IR (infrared guided missiles) ) offline. Ditto for the Iranian F-14s which could prove fatal for our F-22s, ”wrote The National Interest.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Large-scale air exercise, Iranian F-14s make big surprises
> 
> In an article dated August 2020, Business Insider asks, "Why has the United States decided to destroy all of its old F-14 Tomcats rather than let anyone buy them?" "Before answering:" During the war of Iran against Iraq, the Iranian air force, its ultra experienced pilots showed such great competence that only one Iranian Tomcat could release sky from enemy planes without even firing a single shot.
> 
> On the other hand, from the ground most of the successful shootings of Iraqi Tomcats came from SAM batteries that Iranian operators fired copiously ... This is in essence to prevent Iran from having attached parts or even F technology. -14 that the United States ended up withdrawing their Tomcat in 2007, reducing a $ 38 million plane to a heap of junk. The idea of selling rare F-14 parts to Iran so that it does not have to overhaul its own inventories and make them worry about its adversaries since the Iranians are masters of reverse engineering, was absurd. The "Iranian" F-14 has something to surprise us ”.
> 
> And the author of the article does not think so well put. On the first day of the exercises of the Iranian Air Force, which is obviously preparing for major air combat in these times of "normalization" where the United States is selling the Emirates 50 F-35s or even giving the green light to To deliver F-22s, the flagship of the US airline industry to Israel, intense events have occurred. Indeed, the fighting began with a clear show of force of the Su-24 of the Air Force which following the principle of surprise, identical to what the Iranian armed force does on the ground "the strategic bombers Soukhoi Su-24 successfully destroyed ground targets, including fictitious enemy radars, carrying a variety of optimized, high-precision missiles weighing up to half a ton and obviously made in Iran.
> 
> This phase aimed to destroy enemy land radars, just to blind its Air Defense. Then came the turn of the F-14s, the very ones from which Business Insider starts: According to the spokesperson for the exercise, Brigadier General Goudarzi, “it was above all about reproducing a fight and we chose to place F-14 and MiG-29 in combat situation. Since the Iranian F-14s have long been "tamed", many devices are on board. The same is true of a national radar that Iranian experts talk about quite often without going so far as to explain the components or the characteristics. In Isphahan, which is home to the stupidity of the Americans the only F-14 overhall center in the world, this radar capability was therefore tested on Monday and the result was more than "satisfactory"
> 
> Since the F-22 with which the Americans hope to shoot down the Iranian F-14s is supposed to be stealthy, it is therefore a "capital capability": "The radar in question manufactured by Iranian technicians at the The effect of this aircraft specific to aerial combat has a range of several hundred kilometers. It is a radar which operates in synergy with the original radar of the F-14, again optimized by our technicians. It is a device capable of intercepting with the same power as AWACs. Especially since the analog cabin of the American F-14 has been transformed into digital here in Iran ”, said Brigadier General Farhad Goudarzi, the spokesperson for the exercise.
> 
> During the exercise the F-14s were refueled in flight by Boeing-707 tanker planes in preparation for low-altitude upper cover operations. And the last but not the least, the radar designed for the effect of the F-14 has engaged in electronic warfare, testing advanced communication systems within secure platforms connected by cable and wireless. The operation took place even as reconnaissance drones, Kaman-14, monitored the assault course and the brand new nationally-made Samat optical camera, gleaned data and wiretapped. The F-22 may be stealthy, but it would be difficult to escape the Iranian F-14, ”the general said.
> 
> “By the way, this aerial combat that we are preparing will involve a diverse fleet of aircraft. Hence the variety of planes engaged on the first day of the exercises. Saeqeh who detonated the targets with cruise missiles and extremely precise smart bombs. Some seven Iranian air bases were also involved in the preparation of these air battles, ”said the general, referring to articles that were too optimistic in US magazines and too sure of the superiority of the US Air Force against the US Army. Iranian look.
> 
> In fact, "given the intelligence of our pilots, their war experience, which the Americans lack, the first USA / Iran face-to-face in the sky could be too rich in surprises. The series of plane crashes US in recent months, including almost all range of so-called sophisticated US planes (F-18, F-35; F-22 ...) give indications in this direction. Indeed the pilots of all these devices have missed their flights while operating in combat situations and on air bases. The US aircraft command and control system appears to be too fragile to jamming and electronic suppression. Our F-14s have worked well on this weakness ".
> 
> In a recent article titled "How Iran Could Take Down an F-35 Fighter in a War," The National Interest wrote that the F-5, driven by Iranian pilots would possess the agility necessary to gain the advantage over an F -35. The same will be true of the F-14s: “Aerodynamically, the F-5 will always be what we call a category three fighter, where the F-35 and F-22 are now category five fighters. Compared to modern hunters, it is underpowered not to mention that it has no stealth other than its small size. But with just a few modifications, which the Iranians did, the F-5 is turning into a threat plane with a legitimate sting. The latest Iranian upgrades include a [scanning electronically] radar, good [radar warning] gear, chaff and flares, a jamming pod, and a helmet-mounted spotting system for IR (infrared guided missiles) ) offline. Ditto for the Iranian F-14s which could prove fatal for our F-22s, ”wrote The National Interest.



I wonder if these upgrades are the AM standard that we have seen examples of in various exhibitions over the years. Also, do all the tomcats have these upgrades now or just the ones with the new asia minor camo scheme.


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


>


Now thats something I never expected to see,an irgc developed weapon on an iriaf aircraft.
Effectively this is the most modern a2g weapon that the iriaf is using,heres hoping that this isnt either just a publicity shot or a one off for the exercise

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

SalarHaqq said:


> You were taking a borderline situation which his words were not meant to address.
> 
> You say what if the US declares it is going to attack Iran no matter what Iran does, while at the same time assembling a major strike force against Iran? Well guess what, that is a declaration of war, and it *is* tantamount to starting a war in international law.
> 
> So by the Supreme Leader's guidelines, Iran is *not *obliged to sit idle in such a situation, because the US would already have started the war by its declaration, even if no shots are fired yet.
> 
> 
> 
> Sepah generals publicly announced Iran would not sit idle if the US conducts a major troop build up with the aim of invading Iran. They made these declarations so as to rule out any misinterpration of the Leader's guidelines. And the Leader never contradicted them.
> 
> This proves that your interpretation of Seyyed Khamenei's words does not apply.



Well , USA already have enough assets to make major assault against our infrastructure in region ... look at the realty


----------



## Blue In Green

OldTwilight said:


> Well , USA already have enough assets to make major assault against our infrastructure in region ... look at the realty



The assets America has in the region can be easily obliterated in several days worth of Iranian precision Ballistic Missile as well as cruise and suicide drone attacks if need be. 

Destroying their runways, ammo depots, radars, hangars, fuel stations, barracks, air-ports, logistics, regional command centers and the like are well within Iran's capability to do so. It's what happens after that first-salvo that matters the most. 

SalarHaqq is absolutely right when he says that Iran will not just sit idly by whilst America brings in men and equipment for an invasion. It would be totally inept if Iran just sat around and just did nothing about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

Blue In Green said:


> The assets America has in the region can be easily obliterated in several days worth of Iranian precision Ballistic Missile as well as cruise and suicide drone attacks if need be.
> 
> Destroying their runways, ammo depots, radars, hangars, fuel stations, barracks, air-ports, logistics, regional command centers and the like are well within Iran's capability to do so. It's what happens after that first-salvo that matters the most.
> 
> SalarHaqq is absolutely right when he says that Iran will not just sit idly by whilst America brings in men and equipment for an invasion. It would be totally inept if Iran just sat around and just did nothing about it.



I don't fool myself ... Im not that kind of people ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> You get the photos from the websites?
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1323600070302965760Hahahaha🤣😂😂 very true


sometimes

























*Iran's EW aircraft ??????*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

OldTwilight said:


> I don't fool myself ... Im not that kind of people ...



Fair enough bro lol, we all hold our different opinions and views on things i'm in no position to judge you for it.


----------



## 925boy

OldTwilight said:


> Well , USA already have enough assets to make major assault against our infrastructure in region ... look at the realty


you're not looking at reality though..you're looking at your perception of reality. I wont say much about this, but all i will say is this - the past few decades of war have proven that money and military equipment alone are overrated and wont determine the winner of any war. Iranian govt and military understand this very well. War requires ALOT of different things to be aligned and for the US, many of the important aspects arent and cant be aligned, which is why US is currently choosing resentful peace.

How dangerous is a grown lion with a broken jaw???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

OldTwilight said:


> I don't fool myself ... Im not that kind of people ...


no you are not fooling urself but u r only gharb geda the west lover so plz change our mather land flag ur flag is not like this maybe have 6 corner stars

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

So what do you think is in the rounded projection underneath the possible AEW?


----------



## Nasr

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Large-scale air exercise, Iranian F-14s make big surprises
> 
> In an article dated August 2020, Business Insider asks, "Why has the United States decided to destroy all of its old F-14 Tomcats rather than let anyone buy them?" "Before answering:" During the war of Iran against Iraq, the Iranian air force, its ultra experienced pilots showed such great competence that only one Iranian Tomcat could release sky from enemy planes without even firing a single shot.
> 
> On the other hand, from the ground most of the successful shootings of Iraqi Tomcats came from SAM batteries that Iranian operators fired copiously ... This is in essence to prevent Iran from having attached parts or even F technology. -14 that the United States ended up withdrawing their Tomcat in 2007, reducing a $ 38 million plane to a heap of junk. The idea of selling rare F-14 parts to Iran so that it does not have to overhaul its own inventories and make them worry about its adversaries since the Iranians are masters of reverse engineering, was absurd. The "Iranian" F-14 has something to surprise us ”.
> 
> And the author of the article does not think so well put. On the first day of the exercises of the Iranian Air Force, which is obviously preparing for major air combat in these times of "normalization" where the United States is selling the Emirates 50 F-35s or even giving the green light to To deliver F-22s, the flagship of the US airline industry to Israel, intense events have occurred. Indeed, the fighting began with a clear show of force of the Su-24 of the Air Force which following the principle of surprise, identical to what the Iranian armed force does on the ground "the strategic bombers Soukhoi Su-24 successfully destroyed ground targets, including fictitious enemy radars, carrying a variety of optimized, high-precision missiles weighing up to half a ton and obviously made in Iran.
> 
> This phase aimed to destroy enemy land radars, just to blind its Air Defense. Then came the turn of the F-14s, the very ones from which Business Insider starts: According to the spokesperson for the exercise, Brigadier General Goudarzi, “it was above all about reproducing a fight and we chose to place F-14 and MiG-29 in combat situation. Since the Iranian F-14s have long been "tamed", many devices are on board. The same is true of a national radar that Iranian experts talk about quite often without going so far as to explain the components or the characteristics. In Isphahan, which is home to the stupidity of the Americans the only F-14 overhall center in the world, this radar capability was therefore tested on Monday and the result was more than "satisfactory"
> 
> Since the F-22 with which the Americans hope to shoot down the Iranian F-14s is supposed to be stealthy, it is therefore a "capital capability": "The radar in question manufactured by Iranian technicians at the The effect of this aircraft specific to aerial combat has a range of several hundred kilometers. It is a radar which operates in synergy with the original radar of the F-14, again optimized by our technicians. It is a device capable of intercepting with the same power as AWACs. Especially since the analog cabin of the American F-14 has been transformed into digital here in Iran ”, said Brigadier General Farhad Goudarzi, the spokesperson for the exercise.
> 
> During the exercise the F-14s were refueled in flight by Boeing-707 tanker planes in preparation for low-altitude upper cover operations. And the last but not the least, the radar designed for the effect of the F-14 has engaged in electronic warfare, testing advanced communication systems within secure platforms connected by cable and wireless. The operation took place even as reconnaissance drones, Kaman-14, monitored the assault course and the brand new nationally-made Samat optical camera, gleaned data and wiretapped. The F-22 may be stealthy, but it would be difficult to escape the Iranian F-14, ”the general said.
> 
> “By the way, this aerial combat that we are preparing will involve a diverse fleet of aircraft. Hence the variety of planes engaged on the first day of the exercises. Saeqeh who detonated the targets with cruise missiles and extremely precise smart bombs. Some seven Iranian air bases were also involved in the preparation of these air battles, ”said the general, referring to articles that were too optimistic in US magazines and too sure of the superiority of the US Air Force against the US Army. Iranian look.
> 
> In fact, "given the intelligence of our pilots, their war experience, which the Americans lack, the first USA / Iran face-to-face in the sky could be too rich in surprises. The series of plane crashes US in recent months, including almost all range of so-called sophisticated US planes (F-18, F-35; F-22 ...) give indications in this direction. Indeed the pilots of all these devices have missed their flights while operating in combat situations and on air bases. The US aircraft command and control system appears to be too fragile to jamming and electronic suppression. Our F-14s have worked well on this weakness ".
> 
> In a recent article titled "How Iran Could Take Down an F-35 Fighter in a War," The National Interest wrote that the F-5, driven by Iranian pilots would possess the agility necessary to gain the advantage over an F -35. The same will be true of the F-14s: “Aerodynamically, the F-5 will always be what we call a category three fighter, where the F-35 and F-22 are now category five fighters. Compared to modern hunters, it is underpowered not to mention that it has no stealth other than its small size. But with just a few modifications, which the Iranians did, the F-5 is turning into a threat plane with a legitimate sting. The latest Iranian upgrades include a [scanning electronically] radar, good [radar warning] gear, chaff and flares, a jamming pod, and a helmet-mounted spotting system for IR (infrared guided missiles) ) offline. Ditto for the Iranian F-14s which could prove fatal for our F-22s, ”wrote The National Interest.



Iran has ALCMs? Is this news authentic?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Nasr said:


> Iran has ALCMs? Is this news authentic?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Nasr

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 685439
> 
> 
> View attachment 685438



ma-sha-Allah, that is a great accomplishment by Iran. 

What is the likelihood, now that the UN sanctions have been lifted, that Iran would look to modernize it's air force. And if so, which direction is it going to take? Would it be joint program with another country, to build its own fighter. Or would it go for Russian or Chinese fighter jets?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Nasr said:


> ma-sha-Allah, that is a great accomplishment by Iran.
> 
> What is the likelihood, now that the UN sanctions have been lifted, that Iran would look to modernize it's air force. And if so, which direction is it going to take? Would it be joint program with another country, to build its own fighter. Or would it go for Russian or Chinese fighter jets?


There are entire threads here dedicated to that topic and you can find them by using the search feature or even scroll back about a dozen or more pages in IRIAF thread, where the topic has been brought up many many times, especially recently with the lifting of the UN embargo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Nasr said:


> ma-sha-Allah, that is a great accomplishment by Iran.
> 
> What is the likelihood, now that the UN sanctions have been lifted, that Iran would look to modernize it's air force. And if so, which direction is it going to take? Would it be joint program with another country, to build its own fighter. Or would it go for Russian or Chinese fighter jets?


in near future : Su 30 sm3 , Su 35 and some other bombers .

in long run: its own fighter and bombers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325396201664032770

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325396201664032770



But am I wrong or we had already presented a couple of helicopter models made in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## makranman

sahureka2 said:


> But am I wrong or we had already presented a couple of helicopter models made in Iran


he means the army aviation wants its own helicopter. kinda like the army airforce and air defence building their own drones instead of using shaded shahed drones...


----------



## VEVAK

Here is one of the most detailed reporting I've ever seen come out of Iran's own media regarding Iranian variants of the AIM-54 (Maghsad, Fakour-90 AAM,...)
My props to the author! 
(Farsi)






گزارش تسنیم از تغییرات در مهمترین موشک هوابه‌هوای ایرانی/ گام‌های بلند برای پرکردن جای فینیکس- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


موشک فکور اگرچه دارای وزن بیشتری نسبت به فینیکس است، اما تولید انبوه آن در داخل و برخورداری از قابلیت‌های بالا با به‌کارگیری سامانه هدایت و جنگ الکترونیک جدید، راهکار موقتی مناسبی تا زمان توسعه نمونه بومی موشک فینیکس با نام مقصود است.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sahureka2

makranman said:


> he means the army aviation wants its own helicopter. kinda like the army airforce and air defence building their own drones instead of using shaded shahed drones...


but it does not become a waste of resources if every armed force in Iran wants to build its own helicopter, also because in the past it was advertised that they were making the Iranian an indigenous AH-1 Cobra ?

Toufan-2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> but it does not become a waste of resources if every armed force in Iran wants to build its own helicopter, also because in the past it was advertised that they were making the Iranian an indigenous AH-1 Cobra ?
> 
> Toufan-2



it’s actually beneficial to Iranian arms industry complex which has grown very large in recent years and needs more clients than just Iran in order to survive and grow.

This is the fate of all industrial complexes as they grow in size

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## jauk

The reflections regarding the ostensible 'duplication of effort' we see here and there is warranted. However, note, each customer has their own requirements as well. As such, although there is a definite need to unify the supply chain, that doesn't mean the end product should be identical. Given Iran's stage of industry this is a realistic possibility. In fact, as a layman, looking at Iran's missile aresenal, although each system has well defined requirements with often separate applications, it's clear the systems are very modular. This means they share a supply chain which reduces costs significantly. One can imagine this thinking pervades other military systems as well.
To conclude, the goal is to normalize the supply chain, not to create identical products.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1327323850435125251

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WudangMaster

I was disappointed when they mentioned shafaq and qaher and that qaher is still somehow ongoing. These resources poured into shafaq would have yielded better results than qaher in its current configuration. Mr. Azarmehr who occasionally speaks on Omid Dana's pod cast even stated that the qaher was originally an experimental air frame and certain people jumped the gun and stated it to be a major project when the mockup was unveiled in 2013 or 2014. The frame was a stepping stone, no more. 
In fact, a non stealthy but powerful and fast air craft with strong radars and bvr weapons that can rapidly scramble to hot spots and provide relief on the national air defense grid is preferable to something stealthy with low maneuverability and weak radar and weak payload capacity and no bvr to speak of. 
Even as a drone, the shahed series are better so I really don't where qaher could fit into Iran's needs, unless a more powerful engine is now available that might make the plane more capable. But if that's the case, then why not expand on shafaq with more powerful engines or even work on what we used to call the "single engine F-14" that we occasionally a model of in various shows over the years. That plane model looks to have a massive radome in comparison to qaher or shafaq.
On another note regarding the video, I noticed the chronology is a little jumbled together, as it implies that azarakhsh was attempted before shafaq whereas I believe azarakhsh and attempts at rebuilding F-5s go back to the 90s, whereas shafaq in definitely circa 2000-2002 ish.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

skyshadow said:


> it seems Iran has reversed engineered J79 engine and plans to unveil it as *Owj - 2* engine they showed it side by side of *Owj - 1* engine
> 
> *Iran has secretly unveiled Fakour - 2 medium range semi active air to air missile*


Thank you very, very much for this news.
Most of you don't realize, but it is more than a revolution, not only for Iran, but for the African continent, South, and central's America, besides too many Asian countries, including too many European countries that are fed up with US, Western orders. It is the revolution. Because nothing can stop Iran now to build or reverse engineered F-110, AL-41. In order to run 1.000 meters, U must start running 10 meters. But it is always the first 10 meters that are the most difficult task.

Around 1 year ago. I heard from a person that knows North Korea -best Iranian's ally-very well that NK built more than 100 Mig-29 on its own, including the reverse-engineered of the RD-33. North Koreans adapt it to their own needs. It could be different from the Russian RD-93. At this time I understood it is a matter of time for Iran to reach the same level as NK.
In a couple of years, surely Iran will develop a powerful, indigenous heavy fighter. It is a logical step because Iranians are people used to work hard. If you take a look at these figures








Countries ranked by Patent applications, residents






www.indexmundi.com




U can see Iran is on the 10th of this ranking, in spite of a ruthless blockage, embargo applied by the West and by Russia. What would be the result if Iran was free to buy and develop what it wants.
Iran is on a good path to develop a powerful indigenous version of AL-41F to reach the same status as the great powers, like UK, France, Russia, US etc...
It is noteworthy to add that US still rely on F-100 -F-15 series-, the F-135 is not enough mature. Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 are available in enough numbers to be engaged in a significant number. Finally, Iran now is not so far from US.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*"Qaher-313 first official flight is in the next couple of months." 


soooo excited*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> *"Qaher-313 first official flight is in the next couple of months."
> 
> 
> soooo excited*
> 
> 
> View attachment 689779



WHAT?!?!

Source?


----------



## skyshadow

Blue In Green said:


> WHAT?!?!
> 
> Source?


Iranian national TV, i am looking for it , give me couple of minutes


Blue In Green said:


> WHAT?!?!
> 
> Source?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

The video above was previously posted, the comment in the video of "it will have its flight next year" is probably old and from the Hassan Dehghan's comment during the taxi tests we saw previously. Has there been something new and officially from Iran regarding test in the next few months?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

skyshadow said:


> *"Qaher-313 first official flight is in the next couple of months."
> 
> 
> soooo excited*
> 
> 
> View attachment 689779


You should have kept this info until it is revealed publicly. Its just agonizing to watch the development of this long awaited project. I like when things are done and then showed for us to see. It is just keeping us in a state of suspension.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> The video above was previously posted, the comment in the video of "it will have its flight next year" is probably old and from the Hassan Dehghan's comment during the taxi tests we saw previously. Has there been something new and officially from Iran regarding test in the next few months?


it was from recent IRGC missile documentary "pin point strike" which is from last week , in Farsi it say it will make its first official flight in new year 1400, thats Persian year which is in 3 months *( March 20th -2021 )* therefor its from last week and not old


scimitar19 said:


> You should have kept this info until it is revealed publicly. Its just agonizing to watch the development of this long awaited project. I like when things are done and then showed for us to see. It is just keeping us in a state of suspension.


i was suspicious too but now that i heard that im sure it was not canceled

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

It's part of the same video that discussed the shafaq project. I will be surprised if the final Qaher looks like it predecessors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

WudangMaster said:


> It's part of the same video that discussed the shafaq project. I will be surprised if the final Qaher looks like it predecessors.


of course it will not look like this one, this is a prototype number 08

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *"Qaher-313 first official flight is in the next couple of months."
> 
> 
> soooo excited*
> 
> 
> View attachment 689779



very interesting. I long assumed the project got shelved because no official dared talk about it.

I need to see the changes to the new airframe. The last prototype was about 3 sizes too small. The airframe needs to be the same size as F-35/J-31 or maybe slightly smaller. Last prototype could barely carry any thing in its internal bay.

The fact that this project “suddenly” came back to life after arms embargo fell makes me wonder if it will fly with Russian engines like RD-33 or AL-31.

I won’t get my hopes up just yet. Kowsar, Karrar, and Iran attack helicopter project have shown weapons can stay in prototype stage for a long time in the Iranian military industrial complex.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> very interesting. I long assumed the project got shelved because no official dared talk about it.
> 
> I need to see the changes to the new airframe. The last prototype was about 3 sizes too small. The airframe needs to be the same size as F-35/J-31 or maybe slightly smaller. Last prototype could barely carry any thing in its internal bay.
> 
> The fact that this project “suddenly” came back to life after arms embargo fell makes me wonder if it will fly with Russian engines like RD-33 or AL-31.
> 
> I won’t get my hopes up just yet. Kowsar, Karrar, and Iran attack helicopter project have shown weapons can stay in prototype stage for a long time in the Iranian military industrial complex.


agreed, yes i think Russian engine are highly likely now.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> very interesting. I long assumed the project got shelved because no official dared talk about it.
> 
> I need to see the changes to the new airframe. The last prototype was about 3 sizes too small. The airframe needs to be the same size as F-35/J-31 or maybe slightly smaller. Last prototype could barely carry any thing in its internal bay.
> 
> The fact that this project “suddenly” came back to life after arms embargo fell makes me wonder if it will fly with Russian engines like RD-33 or AL-31.
> 
> I won’t get my hopes up just yet. Kowsar, Karrar, and Iran attack helicopter project have shown weapons can stay in prototype stage for a long time in the Iranian military industrial complex.


That current prototype, its not going to fly at all, no matter what others say. Unless they make a new clean slate or major modifications, its not going to fly.


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> That current prototype, its not going to fly at all, no matter what others say. Unless they make a new clean slate or major modifications, its not going to fly.



Current prototype was not the final product, might have been a 1/4 scale project, might have been test bed. Who knows. Wouldn’t put too much salt in it till we see the project become more serious.

The best bet is the first gen of whatever final product comes out would fly with AL-31’s till Iran gets a working engine. Designing an airframe, incorporating RAM and honeycomb structure, aren’t the hard parts as Iran has had access to the technologies on the scientific level for years.

The radar, subsystems, and engines are the hard part. With the arms embargo in a grey area, Iran might be able to acquire 35-50 Russian engines so that solves a big problem that these projects have had: lack of access to a heavy engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331110853303787520

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331224921876410369

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331110853303787520
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331224921876410369


Heres hoping that this turns out to be real and not a photoshop....🤞
If it is real then it raises the question of whether its a brand new program to integrate the newer russian a2a weapons [and possibly other russian air launched weapons I hope?] or a continuation of the much earlier [1990s era?] attempt to integrate the awg9 and r27.
Interestingly tho this appears to be the later r27r with 70+kms range not the original r27 that we saw in those first old photos.
Its not a bad start but irans airforce still desperately needs a modern active homing bvr missile in the r77/aim-120 class that can not only be fitted to the f14 fleet,but also to the mig29 fleet and any other aircraft that could be modified to carry it.This would be a huge force multiplier.


----------



## WudangMaster

Tomcats being equipped with archers and alamos was known and discussed back in the old iran defence .net forum days. What is new and a pleasant surprise about this is the impressive range of the R-27s.


----------



## Raghfarm007

Sineva said:


> Heres hoping that this turns out to be real and not a photoshop....🤞
> If it is real then it raises the question of whether its a brand new program to integrate the newer russian a2a weapons [and possibly other russian air launched weapons I hope?] or a continuation of the much earlier [1990s era?] attempt to integrate the awg9 and r27.
> Interestingly tho this appears to be the later r27r with 70+kms range not the original r27 that we saw in those first old photos.
> Its not a bad start but irans airforce still desperately needs a modern active homing bvr missile in the r77/aim-120 class that can not only be fitted to the f14 fleet,but also to the mig29 fleet and any other aircraft that could be modified to carry it.This would be a huge force multiplier.




The caption reads that the project is from 1986.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Jamarat guided bomb












now, say hello to my little friend ( its drone equipped with giant asssssss sniper rifle ) 




*

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
3


----------



## TheTallGuy

What i never understand...why did not Iran Aerospace never tried reverse engineer F-14.

I mean they should be able to manufacture after all F14 airframe is from 1960s get the Russion Engines and Radar ...get R33 & R37 and viola they would have an interceptor-Air Superiorty Fighter..

any idea why they did not persue it...after it is still better idea then shafaq or qaher ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheTallGuy said:


> What i never understand...why did not Iran Aerospace never tried reverse engineer F-14.
> 
> I mean they should be able to manufacture after all F14 airframe is from 1960s get the Russion Engines and Radar ...get R33 & R37 and viola they would have an interceptor-Air Superiorty Fighter..
> 
> any idea why they did not persue it...after it is still better idea then shafaq or qaher ....


well Iran said Qaher is going to make its first flight in couple of months let see how its going to look like

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheTallGuy

skyshadow said:


> well Iran said Qaher is going to make its first flight in couple of months let see how its going to look like



Brother, i can understand the domestic consumption..but seriously Qaher 313 which was shown was to put mildly was beyond any aerodynamic physics (aka Joke) 

if you are saying that Qaher some how changed and rebirth into a some kind of different flyable aircraft. i would wait and see..

but it still does not answer the logical question..

the philosophy of air defense of homeland based upon AAA & SAM and air space denial weapons is flawed and has backfired.

you just cant depend on SAMs for airspace defense. one would always require an interceptor or air superiority aircraft or even a strike aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheTallGuy said:


> Brother, i can understand the domestic consumption..but seriously Qaher 313 which was shown was to put mildly was beyond any aerodynamic physics (aka Joke)
> 
> if you are saying that Qaher some how changed and rebirth into a some kind of different flyable aircraft. i would wait and see..
> 
> but it still does not answer the logical question..
> 
> the philosophy of air defense of homeland based upon AAA & SAM and air space denial weapons is flawed and has backfired.
> 
> you just cant depend on SAMs for airspace defense. one would always require an interceptor or air superiority aircraft or even a strike aircraft.


agreed nothing alone can guarantee us safety, remember that Qaher was prototype number 8 brother the real thing is much batter

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## foxhoundbis

WudangMaster said:


> Tomcats being equipped with archers and alamos was known and discussed back in the old iran defence .net forum days. What is new and a pleasant surprise about this is the impressive range of the R-27s.


I don't want to disappoint you, however, the days of Iranian's F-14 fleet are counted, if not approaching the end. The US are no longer a friend for Iran, and for while. To duplicate the F-14 could be interesting for Iran, however too much expensive regarding the resources available, unless US to become an ally with Iran. As long as Israel exists it is not possible.
The only help Iran can hope, it will come from Moscow, Beijing, and a lesser extent -just for the F-14's topic- Pyongyang. All these allies have a fleet more powerful, more modern -except NK of course- than US, and they won't lose time to help for F-14. Then the likely next step for Iran is SU-30 SM, SU-35's fleets, but a far more exciting adventure is coming too. The 100% indigenous Iranian heavy fighter, including its jet engines. I guess most of you will be happy. 

Moreover, the price for Iran to leave a significant number of F-14 able to fly must be high, however, for dubious effectiveness in case of conflict. I think at this stage it must be more effective for Iran to spend money to buy, or to build another fighter. The end of the embargo will provide for Iran's industry new dawn.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

TheTallGuy said:


> What i never understand...why did not Iran Aerospace never tried reverse engineer F-14.
> 
> I mean they should be able to manufacture after all F14 airframe is from 1960s get the Russion Engines and Radar ...get R33 & R37 and viola they would have an interceptor-Air Superiorty Fighter..
> 
> any idea why they did not persue it...after it is still better idea then shafaq or qaher ....


Likely because of the enormous costs involved[to put it mildly],dont forget the f-14 was the most complex and expensive of all of the first generation of 4th gen fighters.In addition there would be no chance of trying to recoup some of the enormous costs by offering it for sale on the international arms market.
Unless iran was willing to massively increase its military budget and then to devote most of that to the indigenous production of airpower,which would still likely leave it at a huge disadvantage vis-a-vis the sheer weight of combined air power that its enemies both regional and international could throw at it.
Ultimately the western and soviet cold war era air power heavy model was never going to be a viable option for iran once it rejected western vassalage,and this was regardless of its abilities to indigenously reverse and reengineer other nations hardware.
The airforce for its part seemed more interested in pie-in-the-sky type programs that it did not have the capability to actually produce,yet when it did set its sights on something a little more reasonable like the f5 it showed little inclination to reengineer and modernise the aircraft.
There is a lot that the airforce could do to upgrade and improve the capabilities of the existing airfleet,yet for whatever reason it has not done so,at least not yet.

PS
The only area in which the russians have ever been even remotely reliable is in their near total unreliability.Effectively as reliable suppliers of military hardware the russians are literally almost worse than useless.


foxhoundbis said:


> The end of the embargo will provide for Iran's industry new dawn.


Time will tell,but sadly from past experience I for one certainly wouldnt be holding my breath on that one if I was you.....or iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iranitaakharin

TheTallGuy said:


> What i never understand...why did not Iran Aerospace never tried reverse engineer F-14.
> 
> I mean they should be able to manufacture after all F14 airframe is from 1960s get the Russion Engines and Radar ...get R33 & R37 and viola they would have an interceptor-Air Superiorty Fighter..
> 
> any idea why they did not persue it...after it is still better idea then shafaq or qaher ....



Easier said then done. Aircraft require a lot of precise, complex machines in parts manufacturing. The F-14s today are operating through a combination of ingenuity, cannibalization, and stop gap measures. The Americans destroyed their own F-14s to prevent Iran getting any spare parts and stripped the ones on display.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Iranitaakharin said:


> Easier said then done. Aircraft require a lot of precise, complex machines in parts manufacturing. The F-14s today are operating through a combination of ingenuity, cannibalization, and stop gap measures. The Americans destroyed their own F-14s to prevent Iran getting any spare parts and stripped the ones on display.


Iran has not kept its fleet of F-14s operational without support from its country of origin for 40 years through "cannibalizing" parts. That is the sort of Shit that Americans have been telling them selves and any idiot dumb enough to believe them to not have to recognize the Ingenuity of those who they consider to be beneath them. If IRIAF technicians were dumb enough to resort to Cannibalizing parts they would have run out of parts to cannibalize in the first few years of the Iran Iraq war. Have more respect for the personnel of the IRIAF for God's sake! The US are so dumb that they destroyed every single Tomcat/parts in there inventory to prevent them from reaching Iran thinking that that would force Iran to ground its F-14s but almost 15 years have gone by and we see that IRIAF f-14s are still as active as ever!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Iran has not kept its fleet of F-14s operational without support from its country of origin for 40 years through "cannibalizing" parts. That is the sort of Shit that Americans have been telling them selves and any idiot dumb enough to believe them to not have to recognize the Ingenuity of those who they consider to be beneath them. Have more respect for the personnel of the IRIAF for God's sake!


I agree that the American narrative regarding cannibalising is to paint Iran as weak and incompotent. Which is complete horse sh!t. Even though Iran has the capability to produce all the parts, especially the ones that require machining operations, it is still much more preferred to get them from black market. Simply because it is such a damn hassle to produce everything internally. The issue is not that the parts or components are too advanced for Iran. The issue is that in order to get the overall CoG correct, the size and the weight distribution of each part needs to match 100% the original part. Basically, even if Iran could for example produce a much more effective hydraulic actuator for lets say the aileron, if that actuator does not match the weight distribution of the original part exactly, then it will mess up the CoG. And it's not even advanced components that are a hassle. Even simple tubes can become a nightmare because not matching weight distribution.

Personally I have always admired the F14, but it is a completely useless design to pursue today. Even Sweden's gripen can perform the same job today and much more cost effectively.
Furthermore, I think the way to go is UCAVs. Manned aircraft is a thing of the past. They are expensive and quite possibly much less capable even with current AI-tech level.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> I agree that the American narrative regarding cannibalising is to paint Iran as weak and incompotent. Which is complete horse sh!t. Even though Iran has the capability to produce all the parts, especially the ones that require machining operations, it is still much more preferred to get them from black market. Simply because it is such a damn hassle to produce everything internally. The issue is not that the parts or components are too advanced for Iran. The issue is that in order to get the overall CoG correct, the size and the weight distribution of each part needs to match 100% the original part. Basically, even if Iran could for example produce a much more effective hydraulic actuator for lets say the aileron, if that actuator does not match the weight distribution of the original part exactly, then it will mess up the CoG. And it's not even advanced components that are a hassle. Even simple tubes can become a nightmare because not matching weight distribution.
> 
> Personally I have always admired the F14, but it is a completely useless design to pursue today. Even Sweden's gripen can perform the same job today and much more cost effectively.
> Furthermore, I think the way to go is UCAVs. Manned aircraft is a thing of the past. They are expensive and quite possibly much less capable even with current AI-tech level.



Without an advanced AI system that you can trust Fighter Jets especially Air Superiority Fighters will remain a requirement for the next 2 decades at least. 

UCAV's may be a great tool to go up against weaker enemies but just imagine if we were able to hack American stealth UAV's our UAV's aren't really going to have a chance against a country capable of building UCAV's with AI systems that can take on human pilots in dogfights.

And whether we produced manned fighter jets or not at the end of the day producing larger manned Aircrafts are a requirement and I don't think there is a single country on the planet that can produce large reliable passenger jet with all its parts and components but at the same time can't produce its own fighter....

As for the F-14 fact is if we had chosen to reverse engineer the F-14 from the start today we could have used many of the same equipment and infrastructure to produce our own 4.5 gen fighter...

If they had chosen the F-14 to reverse engineer 2 decades ago they would have been forced to invest in Ti composites they would have been forced to invest in large vacuum ovens and large oven presses.....
In terms of engine they would have been forced to invest in an engine that could have been improved on and upgraded to be used on domestic design fighter... 

As for weight distribution and center of gravity so long as your cutting down on weight it could easily be adjusted and countered however if you think you can take a Ti part and replace it with a stainless steel and call it better then of course your going to have CoG problems...

The Su-22's the IRGC overhauled where nothing but a shell and somehow they managed to refurbish them and upgrade them and equip them with PGM's meaning if Iran had chosen the F-14 to reverse engineer today the infrastructure needed to produce a more capable Iranian designed airframe instead would have been cheaper and faster 

And investing in a gharashmeesh of design like the Q-313 is most definitely not the way to resolve the issue! It is absurd to me for a country who came up with designs like the Sofreh Mahi to go ahead and chose that ridicules design to invest in. To me whomever is at fault for pushing that program should be investigated on suspension of treason... And I don't blame regular Iranian pat's that love it because it looks cool but ppl that know better should know better and call out a dumb donkey of a design for what It truly is!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

چقدر راحت اتهام خیانت میزنیم برای طراحی قاهر
ژاپن طراحی نسل پنج رو از ۲۰۰۵ شروع کرده و هنوز تاکسی نکرده
اروپا پهپاد نورون رو سالها قبل شاهد شروع کرد و الان از ما عقبه

با این بودجه بهتر اروپا و ژاپن عمل کردن
انصاف داشته باشیم

ما با همین* اف پنج* از خاک حقارت بلند میشیم
قاهر چیه
یه روزی ما سر همین پهپاد کرار توی این فروم مسخره میشدیم
روزی که کرار رونمایی شد خیلی ها میخواستن پرواز کنن از خوشحالی چون هفت سال منتظر رونمایی پهپاد کرار بودن

معادل ترکی کرار سیمسک هست و الان هشت ساله خبر درستی ازش نشنیدیم
خواهیم دید​

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheTallGuy said:


> What i never understand...why did not Iran Aerospace never tried reverse engineer F-14.


this is why Iran didn't tried to copy f-14





It's pure titanium

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Without an advanced AI system that you can trust Fighter Jets especially Air Superiority Fighters will remain a requirement for the next 2 decades at least.



We have that today! Bavar 373 acquisition radar and Iranian OTH radars together with our current UCAVs are proof of very advanced AI object identification capability.



VEVAK said:


> UCAV's may be a great tool to go up against weaker enemies but just imagine if we were able to hack American stealth UAV's our UAV's aren't really going to have a chance against a country capable of building UCAV's with AI systems that can take on human pilots in dogfights.



You are thinking in conventional terms. Future UCAVs will not approach manned aircraft like other manned aircraft would. There will be a much intricate strategy where both air based and ground based assets will completely overrun the manned aircraft. Just think of this. One JSF cost 500 million $. How many advanced and mission dedicated and different unmanned systems would you be able to build with that money. Even if one unmanned asset would cost 1 M$, which I think is too high, that would still make 500 assets versus 1.




VEVAK said:


> And whether we produced manned fighter jets or not at the end of the day producing larger manned Aircrafts are a requirement and I don't think there is a single country on the planet that can produce large reliable passenger jet with all its parts and components but at the same time can't produce its own fighter....



Agree that we need to build our own passenger jets but that's it IMO.



VEVAK said:


> As for the F-14 fact is if we had chosen to reverse engineer the F-14 from the start today we could have used many of the same equipment and infrastructure to produce our own 4.5 gen fighter...



I'm glad we didn't. A much more simple canard fighter would have solved the same requirements. Hopefully there will be no manned aircraft whatsoever.




VEVAK said:


> As for weight distribution and center of gravity so long as your cutting down on weight it could *easily* be adjusted and countered however if you think you can take a Ti part and replace it with a stainless steel and call it better then of course your going to have CoG problems...



Nothing easy about it. In worse case they need to put counter weights all over the aircraft and that is a maintenance nightmare since then they have individual schematics for each and every aircraft in the inventory.



VEVAK said:


> And investing in a gharashmeesh of design like the Q-313 is most definitely not the way to resolve the issue! It is absurd to me for a country who came up with designs like the Sofreh Mahi to go ahead and chose that ridicules design to invest in. To me whomever is at fault for pushing that program should be investigated on suspension of treason... And I don't blame regular Iranian pat's that love it because it looks cool but ppl that know better should know better and call out a dumb donkey of a design for what It truly is!



I would say I know basics when it comes to aircraft. Both in terms of design and in terms actually flying them. So in no way I would call myself an expert. However I have basic understanding. As an engineer however, there is nothing in the current configuration of the Q-313 that points to it being such a trash design that you are suggesting. It is absolutely an unconventional design. And those are inherently much more high risk. That is why they are called unconventional.
On the other hand, Iran can in no way play catch up with is advisories. We will lose in every scenario where we try to play catch up. We do not have the manpower or the resources. The only way is to go unconventional.

When the world laughed at us and said no way BM can be used to pinpoint accuracy. We went for the unconventional and totally proved everyone wrong.
Now we have forced the rest of the world to start investing in this sector as well, now that it is proven and obvious. Accurate BM is not unconventional anymore.

I am not saying that Q-313 will be our next disruptive weapon. But I am sure that Iran will make an air superiority aircraft and I am 100% sure that it will be very unconventional.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Unmanned combat platforms will not significantly replace manned systems anytime soon, but what they will do is reduce the burden on manned platforms in many ways. For one, once you have UCAVs that have meet the mission requirement, they will be used over manned jets. For example today when performing attacks against terrorists, instead of sending manned fighter jets and risking pilots, you send a UAV and do the same job but much cheaper. Once UCAVs reach the required level, they will also replace fighters in air to air roles to varying degrees. In the short to mid future, you will see manned fighter jets, surrounded by unmanned wingmans. In the long term, you may see unmanned systems replacing manned systems to a major degree, but you will never see the removal of manned systems altogether.

Another way the UCAVs will diminish the burden is they will reduce the number of manned fighter jets we have to produce. Where back in the old days you had to produce lets say 300 fighter jets, today you may have to produce only 100 and fill the gap with cheaper and easier to mass produce UCAVs. Obviously this depends on when the UCAVs will meet the necessary capabilities. The good news for us is that Iran has a very robust UAV industry and I am sure once its manned fighter jet is ready that it will have necessary UAVs to link to it.

Regarding Qaher, this has already been discussed many times. Form follows functions in engineering and this combined with the words that initially came from Iran, it was clear this platforms was a one that was suppose to be a low flying jet perhaps to be used in the Persian Gulf. I even recall a statement coming from Iran that stated the jet was going to be used to deal with helicopter in the Persian Gulf. Clearly this was not meant as an air superiority fighter in the same category as the F-22/F-35. Qaher is a very interesting design and an important learning curve for Iran but I never saw it as a major project for us to boost our airforce. It was an unique design for unconventional roles. Iran's air superiority stealth fighter jet is coming, it's just a matter of time.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> Unmanned combat platforms will not significantly replace manned systems anytime soon, but what they will do is reduce the burden on manned platforms in many ways. For one, once you have UCAVs that have meet the mission requirement, they will be used over manned jets. For example today when performing attacks against terrorists, instead of sending manned fighter jets and risking pilots, you send a UAV and do the same job but much cheaper. Once UCAVs reach the required level, they will also replace fighters in air to air roles to varying degrees. In the short to mid future, you will see manned fighter jets, surrounded by unmanned wingmans. In the long term, you may see unmanned systems replacing manned systems to a major degree, but you will never see the removal of manned systems altogether.
> 
> Another way the UCAVs will diminish the burden is they will reduce the number of manned fighter jets we have to produce. Where back in the old days you had to produce lets say 300 fighter jets, today you may have to produce only 100 and fill the gap with cheaper and easier to mass produce UCAVs. Obviously this depends on when the UCAVs will meet the necessary capabilities. The good news for us is that Iran has a very robust UAV industry and I am sure once its manned fighter jet is ready that it will have necessary UAVs to link to it.


You are depicting the western strategy. You are correct in that assessment because that is exactly what we are witnessing. However Iran cannot afford to take the same path. We need to take risks and leapfrog them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

The main bottleneck, turbofan, is resolving gradually. When we started we were back compared to Tejas and Kaveri. Now we are ahead. We used to look at Kaveri and Tejas and wish we were there just 10 years ago.

China has spent 100 billion in turbofan industry and does not use a single domestic turbofan yet.

I am happy with these results. Turbofan technology does not come overnight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> You are depicting the western strategy. You are correct in that assessment because that is exactly what we are witnessing. However Iran cannot effort to go that path. We need to take risks and leapfrog them.



UCAVs play a very important roles for Iran thus assuming the integration of them as part of its airforce is a natural conclusion and is also actually confirmed by the head of the IRIAF. I do not see what the viable alternative is. Compared to the notion of having to mass produce manned systems, the situation I outlined in my initial post is more cost effective for Iran.


----------



## Shawnee

Philosopher said:


> UCAVs play a very important roles for Iran thus assuming the integration of them as part of its airforce is a natural conclusion and is also actually confirmed by the head of the IRIAF. I do not see what the viable alternative is. Compared to the notion of having to mass produce manned systems, the situation I outlined in my initial post is more cost effective for Iran.



Lets not forget the AZ-AR was again. The country with far inferior Airforce won the war. AZ won with UCAV.

*Myth busted again:
“No country has won a war without superior airforce” Another wrong example.*

Air Force is not air power. UCAV will give you air power.

*We absolutely need a better Air Force* and we will gradually advance when our turbofan matures.

Yet, we already have a good air power.


----------



## Philosopher

Shawnee said:


> Lets not forget the AZ-AR was again. The country with far inferior Airforce won the war. AZ won with UCAV.
> 
> *Myth busted again:
> “No country has won a war without superior airforce” Another wrong example.*
> 
> Air Force is not air power. UCAV will give you air power.
> 
> *We absolutely need a better Air Force* and we will gradually advance when our turbofan matured.
> 
> Yet, we already have a good air power.



Agreed, you can also see just how Iranian allied groups such as Houthis are using their limited UAV capabilities in such an impressive way, and these are lower end of the Iranian technology being provided to them. We need to ask ourselves why airforce is needed. Iran's air-defence is already capable enough to deal with many aerial threats and our missiles capability can paralyse any nations within the 2500km range, what a capable airforce will do is greatly reduce the burden on our defence (air defence) and offence (missiles). More-so on our air-defence because our missiles today are complemented by UAVs. The obtaining of a capable airforce for Iran is absolutely inevitable and in my opinion, this will be a mixture of manned and unmanned planes. But Iran always surprises us with its ingenuity, so lets see what they will do.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> UCAVs play a very important roles for Iran thus assuming the integration of them as part of its airforce is a natural conclusion and is also actually confirmed by the head of the IRIAF. I do not see what the viable alternative is. Compared to the notion of having to mass produce manned systems, the situation I outlined in my initial post is more cost effective for Iran.


I fail to see how producing both conventional manned aircraft + unnamed vehicles is more cost effective than only producing unmanned systems!


----------



## Draco.IMF

Shawnee said:


> Lets not forget the AZ-AR was again. The country with far inferior Airforce won the war. AZ won with UCAV.



+ with help from turkey and Israel, without them i doubt AZ would have any chance

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> I fail to see how producing both conventional manned aircraft + unnamed vehicles is more cost effective than only producing unmanned systems!



Because unmanned systems are simply not at the level to significantly replace manned systems when it comes to air to air roles. Not today and not for a while. Have a read of the below article regarding this topic:

*No, Elon Musk: The Era Of The Manned Fighter Jet Won’t Be Over Anytime Soon*









No, Elon Musk: The Era Of The Manned Fighter Jet Won’t Be Over Anytime Soon


It was bold but wrong for the Tesla and SpaceX CEO to proclaim the end of manned fighter aircraft in front of U.S. Air Force officers. Here's why manned fighters will hold the competitive edge over drones and remote-piloted aircraft for decades into the future.




www.forbes.com




​This is why this is being taken at the steps of first integrating these UCAVs with the manned systems and then improve on from there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> I fail to see how producing both conventional manned aircraft + unnamed vehicles is more cost effective than only producing unmanned systems!



do you really want to base your entire Air Force on a platform that is useless if the communication link between operator and the drone is hacked/severed/manipulated?

And before you mention some Hollywood BS about a fully autonomous drone that can do target acquisition and execution by itself....that is decades away.

US would love for Iran to move to unmanned systems only. You basically might as well tattoo “massive exploitable weak link” to your a$$.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

I also have my doubts about relaying too much on any drone linked to a ground control being used in an air to air combat..US has some of the most sophisticated jamming systems next to Russia.
Drones are great when your enemy is not sophisticated...any combat with US in the air will not end well for iran..recognize your weak points and hit the enemy where they hurt the most...US weak point with Iran is their staging grounds and supply lines...hit them hard and destroy as much as you can in sea and ground before they get airborne....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## siegecrossbow

Shawnee said:


> The main bottleneck, turbofan, is resolving gradually. When we started we were back compared to Tejas and Kaveri. Now we are ahead. We used to look at Kaveri and Tejas and wish we were there just 10 years ago.
> 
> *China has spent 100 billion in turbofan industry and does not use a single domestic turbofan yet.*
> 
> I am happy with these results. Turbofan technology does not come overnight.



Sorry but this is bogus information. WS-10 has been used on J-11B and J-16s exclusively since the 2010s and they are confident enough to use them on the J-10C, a single engines fighter.






Images suggest China has begun fitting indigenous WS10 engine into J-10C fighters


China has begun fitting locally made Shenyang-Liming WS10 ‘Taihang'-series engines into its J-10 multirole fighter aircraft, images released on 2 March by state-owned broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) suggest. A screengrab from CCTV footage released on 2 March showing a J-10C multirole



www.google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I also have my doubts about relaying too much on any drone linked to a ground control being used in an air to air combat..US has some of the most sophisticated jamming systems next to Russia.
> Drones are great when your enemy is not sophisticated...any combat with US in the air will not end well for iran..recognize your weak points and hit the enemy where they hurt the most...US weak point with Iran is their staging grounds and supply lines...hit them hard and destroy as much as you can in sea and ground before they get airborne....



Ground control is simply awful, one should look at no further than the amount of Iranian drones that have crashed in its own country.

Sattelite is better but as we saw with RQ-170 it’s vulnerable. Against an Adversary like US that likely already has space based weapons (project Aurora) it is a death sentence for Iran.

I support supersonic high altitude UAV bombers that can fly pre determined bombing routes on fixed targets in abscene of operator. But that is to complement the manned Air Force and missile force. I don’t support this obsession with all unmanned Air Force. People are seriously underestimating the technology required for that to be feasible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> Because unmanned systems are simply not at the level to significantly replace manned systems when it comes to air to air roles. Not today and not for a while. Have a read of the below article regarding this topic:
> 
> *No, Elon Musk: The Era Of The Manned Fighter Jet Won’t Be Over Anytime Soon*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Elon Musk: The Era Of The Manned Fighter Jet Won’t Be Over Anytime Soon
> 
> 
> It was bold but wrong for the Tesla and SpaceX CEO to proclaim the end of manned fighter aircraft in front of U.S. Air Force officers. Here's why manned fighters will hold the competitive edge over drones and remote-piloted aircraft for decades into the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​



It's interesting you chose Elon as an example here. He leapfrogged the auto industry with Tesla and the entire rocket industry with SpaceX. He proved everybody wrong on both occasions. I trust his instincts as engineer, AI-practitioner and proven disruptive force over a legacy bound has-been pilot.




Philosopher said:


> This is why this is being taken at the steps of first integrating these UCAVs with the manned systems and then improve on from there.



That is of course one way of putting it. Another way of putting it is that legacy based organisations are slow to adapt to new solutions. We are not bound to a legacy and we should exploit that fact and not become followers of the current status quo.

Both in terms of object identification and strategic multilevel AI we are much more ahead than you would think. The following links are open source applications. The level of AI implemented in big cooperations are in fact 5 years ahead.

Object identification with Mask R-CNN;





Multiagent AI




The above is only to demonstrate the capabilities of the algorithm. For mor information se below site and paper








Emergent Tool Use from Multi-Agent Interaction


We've observed agents discovering progressively more complex tool use while playing a simple game of hide-and-seek.




openai.com






https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.07528.pdf


Here is the AI company Deepmind which has produced an algorithm that defeated Go world champion. Go has 10 to the power of 170 possible configurations and requires multilevel strategic thinking.








AlphaGo


AlphaGo is the first computer program to defeat a professional human Go player, a landmark achievement that experts believe was a decade ahead of its time.




deepmind.com





With current algorithms it is not only possible to identify eveything! The AI can strategise THOUSANDS of scenarios per SECOND! And that is today! That number is multiplies each year. How many scenarios can a pilot strategise each second? NONE! Combine that with the restricted g-force a pilot can sustain (-2 to 9 g) and the outcome should be quite clear.

For me there is no doubt whatsoever that IRGC is working on unmanned AI vehicles today. The benefits are quite obvious! Everything else is a waste of resource.


----------



## sha ah

Drones should be considered as a part of a countries airforce, rather than a separate asset altogether

it wasn't so much Azerbaijan vs Armenia as it was Azerbaijan vs Artsakh (Nagorno_Karabakh)

Most of the Armenian military stayed in their barracks. That's the truth. Artsakh has never been recognized as part of Armenia by Armenia itself. 

It's like what eastern Ukraine is to Russia, except Armenia has a population of 3 million and not nearly as much resources at its disposal.

In any case, if you take Azerbaijans airforce into consideration, then you have to consider those Israeli drones, loitering munitions, helicopters, etc along with the priceless help that Azerbaijan received from Turkish drones, not to mention the satellite intelligence Turkey provided as well.

So if you consider all that then Azerbaijan definitely had the edge over the Armenians of Artsakh (Nagorno_Karabakh) when it came to air power. 

Even if you compare Azerbaijans airforce to Armenia directly then you have to take the Israeli and Turkish drones and assets into consideration. In that case, even compared to Armenia proper, you could argue that Azerbaijan has a better airforce. 

If you just want to consider conventional fighter jets then it's a different story, but that's my point. UAVs should be considered as being a part of an airforce, rather than a separate entity.

Realistically though, in the big picture Azerbaijan and Armenia, Both nations have minuscule and relatively insignificant airforces and Azerbaijan did not significantly deploy their fighter jets simply because of the risk involved. 

The Armenians had decent air defenses. Decent enough to shoot down atleast 100+ Azeri drones, helicopters, loitering munitions and other aircraft. Armenians claim they shot down 200, but let's say we give them the Azeri side the benefit of the doubt. 

Anyways, If the Azeris would have deployed their jets, then Armenians would have probably done the same, perhaps deploying their jets and most likely deploying the S-300 against Azeri jets. Azeris claim to have destroyed an S-300 SAM but they never showed any solid evidence.

In any case, for a small country like Azerbaijan or Armenia to lose a fighter jet is a huge loss, humiliating and a massive morale boost for the other side. Look at how Syrians celebrated on the streets when that one Israeli F-16 was shot down a few years ago. 

Look at what happened a few years ago when Turkey shot down that Russian jet near the Syrian border. If that had been a Russian drone, it wouldn't have mattered nearly as much as it did.

When Iran shot down the RQ-4, Trump decided not to retaliate. If it had been a fighter jet with an American pilot or a plane with several officers, then Trump would have had no choice but to retaliate.

Anyways drones are definitely integral to any modern day conflict. Mainly because they're cheaper and if they're shot down there is no life lost, no pilot that you had to train for years, no tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars lost.

Yet at the same time, in a total war scenario, countries WILL deploy fighter jets and fighter jets have a significant advantage over drones. 

Most drones cannot launch BVR missiles and even if they can, jets can do the same but in a BVR contest, jets can deploy counter measures like flares and are highly maneuverable. Drones don't have those options. 

Perhaps in the future drones will become more maneuverable and they will be able to deploy flares and other counter measures to avoid BVR missiles, BUT, the thing about a drone is that it can be jammed, hacked, as we saw with the RQ-170. 

A drone can be hacked and then used by the enemy to destroy their own targets. However a fighter pilot is never going to follow orders to hit his own base or kill his own forces. That's the thing, having both, a hybrid airforce, is the best option.




Shawnee said:


> Lets not forget the AZ-AR was again. The country with far inferior Airforce won the war. AZ won with UCAV.
> 
> *Myth busted again:
> “No country has won a war without superior airforce” Another wrong example.*
> 
> Air Force is not air power. UCAV will give you air power.
> 
> *We absolutely need a better Air Force* and we will gradually advance when our turbofan matures.
> 
> Yet, we already have a good air power.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> We have that today! Bavar 373 acquisition radar and Iranian OTH radars together with our current UCAVs are proof of very advanced AI object identification capability.
> 
> 
> 
> You are thinking in conventional terms. Future UCAVs will not approach manned aircraft like other manned aircraft would. There will be a much intricate strategy where both air based and ground based assets will completely overrun the manned aircraft. Just think of this. One JSF cost 500 million $. How many advanced and mission dedicated and different unmanned systems would you be able to build with that money. Even if one unmanned asset would cost 1 M$, which I think is too high, that would still make 500 assets versus 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agree that we need to build our own passenger jets but that's it IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm glad we didn't. A much more simple canard fighter would have solved the same requirements. Hopefully there will be no manned aircraft whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing easy about it. In worse case they need to put counter weights all over the aircraft and that is a maintenance nightmare since then they have individual schematics for each and every aircraft in the inventory.
> 
> 
> 
> I would say I know basics when it comes to aircraft. Both in terms of design and in terms actually flying them. So in no way I would call myself an expert. However I have basic understanding. As an engineer however, there is nothing in the current configuration of the Q-313 that points to it being such a trash design that you are suggesting. It is absolutely an unconventional design. And those are inherently much more high risk. That is why they are called unconventional.
> On the other hand, Iran can in no way play catch up with is advisories. We will lose in every scenario where we try to play catch up. We do not have the manpower or the resources. The only way is to go unconventional.
> 
> When the world laughed at us and said no way BM can be used to pinpoint accuracy. We went for the unconventional and totally proved everyone wrong.
> Now we have forced the rest of the world to start investing in this sector as well, now that it is proven and obvious. Accurate BM is not unconventional anymore.
> 
> I am not saying that Q-313 will be our next disruptive weapon. But I am sure that Iran will make an air superiority aircraft and I am 100% sure that it will be very unconventional.



Iran's Bavar-373 along side 3rd of Khordad is most definitely one of Iran's greatest military achievements no doubt about it however Air Defense systems alone without fighters to back them up can and will most definitely get overwhelmed or overcome. And at the end of the day you can easily attack SAM system using various types of platforms at great distances. Where as attacking a supersonic Aircraft in the air at great distances is nearly impossible.
And clearly what we have seen happen in Syria is all the proof you need to understand the limitations of Air Defense SAM of all kinds shapes and sizes. Degheh cheghadr bayad sarremoon be sang bokhoreh to ean o befahmeem???

I fully understand the cost benefit analysis of Missiles and UCAV's over fighters jets especially ridicules imported ones that end up costing countries like Saudi Arabia upwards of $250 Million US to purchase, fly and maintain for 2 years (not including fuel costs) which would basically be equivalent to 500 Iranian Missiles... However every smart military leader and strategist knows that you can't put all your eggs in one basket and become a unidimensional military that knows nothing else but firing missiles.


As for your comment about the F-14 I would simply say it's because you don't know any better! If 2 decades ago Iran had chosen to move passed the F-5 and towards reverse engineering the F-14 with it they would have had to invest in various types of infrastructure and tools that are simply not required in the F-5 and that would have helped Iran develop any type of fighter it wanted canards or not! 


As for the Q-313... you can easily slap on 4 RPG-7 on the karrar UCAV's and call it unconventional all you want but that doesn't mean it's useful or worth the cost

Q-313 design due to the shape, size and design of it's wings and canards will lack both speed and high speed maneuverability
Which means it's ability to run away or intercept anything is extremely limited
Which means it's ability to turn to counter incoming missiles extremely limited
Q-313 light composite Airframe also makes it an easy target for AAA and CIWS which reduces your ability to use cheaper ordinances
As for it's stealth characteristics even if they correct many of the imperfections on the frame the Q-313 canopy makes it's stealth design rather useless
Also you have to realize that they have designed a twin engine fighter that only has the capability to carry 2 ordinances
And it may be early to say but I'm betting repair and maintenance will likely be far greater than what it should be compared to what it brings in terms of capability

You also have to take into account Iran's production capacity! Fact is Iran's current production capacity on the simple F-5 after years and years of development is only about 3 aircrafts a year and even if they had reverse engineered the F-14 that production capacity would have likely remained about the same
however in terms of capability adding 2-3 F-14's to your fleet a year would have had far greater effect and would have been far more valuable than adding twice as many F-5's or Kosar's or Q-313's

In fact I would take 1 F-14's over 4 Kosars or Q-313's any day!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Iran's Bavar-373 along side 3rd of Khordad is most definitely one of Iran's greatest military achievements no doubt about it however Air Defense systems alone without fighters to back them up can and will most definitely get overwhelmed or overcome. And at the end of the day you can easily attack SAM system using various types of platforms at great distances. Where as attacking a supersonic Aircraft in the air at great distances is nearly impossible.
> And clearly what we have seen happen in Syria is all the proof you need to understand the limitations of Air Defense SAM of all kinds shapes and sizes. Degheh cheghadr bayad sarremoon be sang bokhoreh to ean o befahmeem???



I only took the radars as example to prove the AI capabities we already have. I didn't say it is enough with AD.



VEVAK said:


> As for your comment about the F-14 I would simply say it's because you don't know any better! If 2 decades ago Iran had chosen to move passed the F-5 and towards reverse engineering the F-14 with it they would have had to invest in various types of infrastructure and tools that are simply not required in the F-5 and that would have helped Iran develop any type of fighter it wanted canards or not!



Fact of the matter is that a f5 sized craft (for example gripen) can do more er less the same things today that f14 could do 40-50 years ago. So if you think that f14 in its current configuration is the way to go, then we have to agree to disagree. I do not see what a swept-wing aircraft has anything to do in a modern airforce. 



VEVAK said:


> Q-313 design due to the shape, size and design of it's wings and canards will lack both speed and high speed maneuverability
> Which means it's ability to run away or intercept anything is extremely limited
> Which means it's ability to turn to counter incoming missiles extremely limited
> Q-313 light composite Airframe also makes it an easy target for AAA and CIWS which reduces your ability to use cheaper ordinances
> As for it's stealth characteristics even if they correct many of the imperfections on the frame the Q-313 canopy makes it's stealth design rather useless
> Also you have to realize that they have designed a twin engine fighter that only has the capability to carry 2 ordinances
> And it may be early to say but I'm betting repair and maintenance will likely be far greater than what it should be compared to what it brings in terms of capability



Could you please provide an engineering analysis on the claims you make above? I do not have the capability to make these conclusion just by looking at something.



VEVAK said:


> You also have to take into account Iran's production capacity! Fact is Iran's current production capacity on the simple F-5 after years and years of development is only about 3 aircrafts a year and even if they had reverse engineered the F-14 that production capacity would have likely remained about the same
> however in terms of capability adding 2-3 F-14's to your fleet a year would have had far greater effect and would have been far more valuable than adding twice as many F-5's or Kosar's or Q-313's
> 
> In fact I would take 1 F-14's over 4 Kosars or Q-313's any day!



And I am glad that those in charge in Iran have had the foresight not to throw away resources on dead-end projects. So again, we have to agree to disagree.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

siegecrossbow said:


> Sorry but this is bogus information. WS-10 has been used on J-11B and J-16s exclusively since the 2010s and they are confident enough to use them on the J-10C, a single engines fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Images suggest China has begun fitting indigenous WS10 engine into J-10C fighters
> 
> 
> China has begun fitting locally made Shenyang-Liming WS10 ‘Taihang'-series engines into its J-10 multirole fighter aircraft, images released on 2 March by state-owned broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) suggest. A screengrab from CCTV footage released on 2 March showing a J-10C multirole
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



That was a test at low g. Ws-10 was under testing as far as I remember likely from 1990s.

Yet, China is almost there. They have made a three digits engines and they are incorporating them into the platforms but so far only for tests.

Earlier Chinese engines suffered “quality” issues related to insufficient materials and early direct use of control systems from an AL-31F. Some components of the engines are Russian and Chinese components are integrated in between them, gradually increasing the Chinese part.

*Testing manoeuvres greater than 8g likely never occurred before 2013.*


----------



## siegecrossbow

Shawnee said:


> That was a test at low g. Ws-10 was under testing as far as I remember likely from 1990s.
> 
> Yet, China is almost there. They have made a three digits engines and they are incorporating them into the platforms but so far only for tests.
> 
> Earlier Chinese engines suffered “quality” issues related to insufficient materials and early direct use of control systems from an AL-31F. Some components of the engines are Russian and Chinese components are integrated in between them, gradually increasing the Chinese part.
> 
> *Testing manoeuvres greater than 8g likely never occurred before 2013.*



I'm afraid this is inaccurate news. WS-10 equipped J-11B have been conducting intercepts since 2014. If they are just "testing" the engines then they wouldn't have equipped frontline units.









China’s ‘Dangerous Intercept’ of US Spy Plane


This week a Chinese jet conducted a “dangerous” intercept of a P-8 Poseidon aircraft, the Pentagon announced on Friday.



thediplomat.com





Ditto for J-16. No J-16 has ever been seen with Russian engines and they have equipped frontline units and participated in actions along the Taiwan strait.









Taiwan scrambles jets as 18 Chinese planes buzz during U.S. visit


Taiwan scrambled fighter jets on Friday as 18 Chinese aircraft buzzed the island, crossing the sensitive midline of the Taiwan Strait, in response to a senior U.S. official holding talks in Taipei.




www.reuters.com


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> It's interesting you chose Elon as an example here. He leapfrogged the auto industry with Tesla and the entire rocket industry with SpaceX. He proved everybody wrong on both occasions. I trust his instincts as engineer, AI-practitioner and proven disruptive force over a legacy bound has-been pilot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is of course one way of putting it. Another way of putting it is that legacy based organisations are slow to adapt to new solutions. We are not bound to a legacy and we should exploit that fact and not become followers of the current status quo.
> 
> Both in terms of object identification and strategic multilevel AI we are much more ahead than you would think. The following links are open source applications. The level of AI implemented in big cooperations are in fact 5 years ahead.
> 
> Object identification with Mask R-CNN;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Multiagent AI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The above is only to demonstrate the capabilities of the algorithm. For mor information se below site and paper
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emergent Tool Use from Multi-Agent Interaction
> 
> 
> We've observed agents discovering progressively more complex tool use while playing a simple game of hide-and-seek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> openai.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.07528.pdf
> 
> 
> Here is the AI company Deepmind which has produced an algorithm that defeated Go world champion. Go has 10 to the power of 170 possible configurations and requires multilevel strategic thinking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AlphaGo
> 
> 
> AlphaGo is the first computer program to defeat a professional human Go player, a landmark achievement that experts believe was a decade ahead of its time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deepmind.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With current algorithms it is not only possible to identify eveything! The AI can strategise THOUSANDS of scenarios per SECOND! And that is today! That number is multiplies each year. How many scenarios can a pilot strategise each second? NONE! Combine that with the restricted g-force a pilot can sustain (-2 to 9 g) and the outcome should be quite clear.
> 
> For me there is no doubt whatsoever that IRGC is working on unmanned AI vehicles today. The benefits are quite obvious! Everything else is a waste of resource.



Are you seriously comparing an algo that can tell a person from a car (simple identification) to an AI system that is needed to differentiate a civilian on the ground from a military soldier at 40,000 altitude?

Like I said you are over estimating the technology. What you what is 15-20 years away. And Iran lacks the satellite network to make the data sharing even feesible. Huge risks remain relying on a satellite network during war when the enemy will seek to destroy all your satellites. Then what? Now all your fancy AI toys are useless.


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> It's interesting you chose Elon as an example here. He leapfrogged the auto industry with Tesla and the entire rocket industry with SpaceX. He proved everybody wrong on both occasions. I trust his instincts as engineer, AI-practitioner and proven disruptive force over a legacy bound has-been pilot.



You were given that article because it explains to you the reason why this notions that UAVs will replace manned platforms anytime soon, is not correct. Regarding Elon, he has indeed made some decent products, but that does not mean he knows what he is talking about when it comes to UAVs. He has also made some questionable pursuits, such as his hyperloop. But this conversation is not about him, but the technicalities behind using UAVs in an air to air roles (as one example).




> That is of course one way of putting it. Another way of putting it is that legacy based organisations are slow to adapt to new solutions. We are not bound to a legacy and we should exploit that fact and not become followers of the current status quo.
> 
> Both in terms of object identification and strategic multilevel AI we are much more ahead than you would think. The following links are open source applications. The level of AI implemented in big cooperations are in fact 5 years ahead.
> 
> With current algorithms it is not only possible to identify eveything! The AI can strategise THOUSANDS of scenarios per SECOND! And that is today! That number is multiplies each year. How many scenarios can a pilot strategise each second? NONE! Combine that with the restricted g-force a pilot can sustain (-2 to 9 g) and the outcome should be quite clear.
> 
> For me there is no doubt whatsoever that IRGC is working on unmanned AI vehicles today. The benefits are quite obvious! Everything else is a waste of resource.



These technologies are simply not comparable nor at the level to create a competent UAV platforms that could challenge a manned platforms in a military context. The issue is not whether it will happen to a significant level at some point in the future, I already said it will, but this is about short-mid term. You're greatly underestimating the level of AI needed to adequately replace a human being in a military context. The technology will come, but not anytime soon. In the meantime, like I explained, the next step will be to integrate UAVs with manned platforms. This will also greatly increase the learning process for these AI systems.


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> You were given that article because it explains to you the reason why this notions that UAVs will replace manned platforms anytime soon, is not correct. Regarding Elon, he has indeed made some decent products, but that does not mean he knows what he is talking about when it comes to UAVs. He has also made some questionable pursuits, such as his hyperloop. But this conversation is not about him, but the technicalities behind using UAVs in an air to air roles (as one example).



Lets make something clear here. There is no definitive fact here. The article is not a proof of anything. It's a matter of opinion. There are different views at play. You want to believe in the author of that article. Fine. You are free to do so. I go with Elon any day of the week. You and me can also agree to disagree.



Philosopher said:


> These technologies are simply not comparable nor at the level to create a competent UAV platforms that could challenge a manned platforms in a military context. The issue is not whether it will happen to a significant level at some point in the future, I already said it will, but this is about short-mid term. You're greatly underestimating the level of AI needed to adequately replace a human being in a military context. The technology will come, but not anytime soon. In the meantime, like I explained, the next step will be to integrate UAVs with manned platforms. This will also greatly increase the learning process for these AI systems.


Again we have to agree to disagree. Future will surely tell.
Furthermore you stance on producing both a manned and an unmanned is a matter of opinion, not a fact. It just happens to be the current outlined strategy in west and east. My take is that Iran needs to risk it and leapfrog. Could I be wrong? Absolutely! I completely agree that my way is the more risky one. However, my opinion is that it is the best alternative for Iran. That is my opinion and I stick to it.


----------



## Philosopher

Sina-1 said:


> Lets make something clear here. There is no definitive fact here. The article is not a proof of anything. It's a matter of opinion. There are different views at play. You want to believe in the author of that article. Fine. You are free to do so. I go with Elon any day of the week. You and me can also agree to disagree.
> 
> 
> Again we have to agree to disagree. Future will surely tell.
> Furthermore you stance on producing both a manned and an unmanned is a matter of opinion, not a fact. It just happens to be the current outlined strategy in west and east. My take is that Iran needs to risk it and leapfrog. Could I be wrong? Absolutely! I completely agree that my way is the more risky one. However, my opinion is that it is the best alternative for Iran. That is my opinion and I stick to it.



This is not just a western strategy, as I mentioned previously, the head of IRIAF has already stated they are moving to start integrating UAVs with their manned planes. If breakthroughs are made in AI that allows for the sort of leapfrogs you're referring to in the short term, then we will see them, however what I described will be the natural progression in terms of conventional airpower. Now having said that, we already know the IRGC follows their own unique path, hence I could certainly see them focusing solely on UAVs. Matter of fact, I expect to see this. A swarm of cheap, semi-autonomous or even autonomous UAV with "good enough" algorithms to overwhelm enemy fighter jets via sheer numbers is something I could see from the IRGC.

One thing is for sure, Iran needs to hurry up and start showing its next generation UAVs. It's been almost 10 years since Shahed-129 and we have seen nothing major since. Sejill, Ghadir will be shown soon but once again, Iran needs to show itself to be a pioneering nation in UAVs and their uses, in this case in the Air to air domain. Hopefully with the arrival of our jet engines, stealthy UCAVs will start being designed and produced by Iran in a similar way we have seen the piston ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Philosopher said:


> This is not just a western strategy, as I mentioned previously, the head of IRIAF has already stated they are moving to start integrating UAVs with their manned planes. If breakthroughs are made in AI that allows for the sort of leapfrogs you're referring to in the short term, then we will see them, however what I described will be the natural progression in terms of conventional airpower. Now having said that, we already know the IRGC follows their own unique path, hence I could certainly see them focusing solely on UAVs. Matter of fact, I expect to see this. A swarm of cheap, semi-autonomous or even autonomous UAV with "good enough" algorithms to overwhelm enemy fighter jets via sheer numbers is something I could see from the IRGC.
> 
> One thing is for sure, Iran needs to hurry up and start showing its next generation UAVs. It's been almost 10 years since Shahed-129 and we have seen nothing major since. Sejill, Ghadir will be shown soon but once again, Iran needs to show itself to be a pioneering nation in UAVs and their uses, in this case in the Air to air domain. Hopefully with the arrival of our jet engines, stealthy UCAVs will start being designed and produced by Iran in a similar way we have seen the piston ones.


We’re in agreement!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Hack-Hook said:


> this is why Iran didn't tried to copy f-14
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's pure titanium



*This is a question that will be asked many many times. Why not F14? Why F5? Why not both?*

This is my take on it. It is multifactorial. Main reason was *availability*. There are other reasons as well such as feasibility, cost and expertise.

When you want to reverse engineer an engine you want to have a good inventory of the engine to support the design process. I will make China as an example who leads us in Turbofan reverse engineering. They imported literally more than a thousand of Russian engines for different purposes. They had ample support for reverse engineering. They initially made predominantly Russian engines with only limited Chinese parts and gradually advanced the Chinese portion. Dismantling the Russian engines helped them to achieve that. They had several failures leading to losing multiple engines.
*A single failure leads to losing an engine and it means losing a few million dollars.*

When Iran started this process they had a good support for F5. We were always short of F14 support.

There are other engines going through the process such as RD33 or civilian engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> I only took the radars as example to prove the AI capabities we already have. I didn't say it is enough with AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Fact of the matter is that a f5 sized craft (for example gripen) can do more er less the same things today that f14 could do 40-50 years ago. So if you think that f14 in its current configuration is the way to go, then we have to agree to disagree. I do not see what a swept-wing aircraft has anything to do in a modern airforce.
> 
> 
> 
> Could you please provide an engineering analysis on the claims you make above? I do not have the capability to make these conclusion just by looking at something.
> 
> 
> 
> And I am glad that those in charge in Iran have had the foresight not to throw away resources on dead-end projects. So again, we have to agree to disagree.




You wanna know why the Q-313 will have trouble turning at high speeds? fine!






That area in red is the canards main elevator it is the main component that allows the aircraft to turn on it's Pitch and Roll axis

now i'm hoping I don't have to go into great detail as to why this Airframe has a comparatively limited ability to turn at high speeds because it's rather obvious
The size of your control surfaces, it's design and the degree of how they elevate and move up and down 
put up against what they have to counter (Air frame's fuselage + two main wing + 2 fixed sections of the canards + 2 stabilizers + wind and airflow resistances + Gravitational resistance)

As for the speed of the Q-313, the angle of the wings, the fixed section of the canard, the thickness of wings and lack of slats,.... all put limitations on your cruise and max speed output 

And the idea that today's upgraded F-5 kosar is even comparable to the F-14 in terms of capability is beyond absurd! F-5's shortcomings in combat range & payload capacity is NOT something you can makeup for with a bunch of new electronics

And I don't care about the F-14 wings for all I care they could have replaced them with fixed wings
And the whole point in reverse engineering the F-14 would be to develop the tools needed to produce a viable domestic fighter and NOT get stuck on an outdated American design

And investing in the Q-313 and fixating on the F-5 is literally throwing away money at dead end projects! So clearly you have got that backwards!
If they had chosen the F-14 we would of had many of the infrastructure needed to build our own Fighters, bomber, transport & passenger aircrafts!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

VEVAK said:


> I don't care about the F-14 wings for all I care they could have replaced them with fixed wings
> And the whole point in reverse engineering the F-14 would be to develop the tools needed to produce a viable domestic fighter and NOT get stuck on an outdated American design



I always speculated the model of the single engine F-14 would in fact be the final product if Iran ever went that route. Whatever the aircraft a powerful radar is as essential as powerful engines, even more so than and new jhigooli design. It is those kind of aircraft that are needed to provide fast and effective relief to any continuous pressure in hot spots that could be applied to the national air defense grid. The model of the modified tomcat floating around looks to fit those needs more so than qaher.


----------



## Ich

I still like to see a prototype of Qaher 313 flying. For me this would mean that there is such a lot of development in the background that also let other projects be not only speculation. And would show how low the information is we have today about all projects and developments going on in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

I wouldn't mind it flying either, so long as the engine source is viable and sustainable either from Russia, or China or domestic production. The engine source cannot be borrowed or temporary as this is too vital a component, same goes for radars. With these two, bvr weaponry can easily be expanded. Also, it must look considerably different with a much larger radome, better embedded irst or flir, larger size, etc. In its current configuration, it still of little use even with stronger engines.


----------



## TheImmortal

Current prototype is a joke.

Unless the plane grows 3x in size, they remove the wingtip bird of prey design, enlarge the intakes and expand the size of canards then this plane is a joke.


----------



## WudangMaster

Moving intakes downward is even better still. There was a photoshop alteration of it from around 2013 or 2014 in one of the older forums with those features in place, making the plane more sound;


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran trying to join top countries in VTOL*

*Tehran (IP) - Head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO) said the organization is making its utmost efforts to be among the top countries in the field of Vertical Take-off and Landing (VTOL) vehicles in the near future.*

Iran Press/Iran News: Speaking in the opening ceremony of the Aviation Technology Industry on Thursday, Brigadier General Afshin Khajeh Fard considered the project as a competitive environment for doing scientific work and achieving a product that can place Iran among the countries that export VTOL.

The project has been welcomed by the university professors and students, and 15 teams from the aerospace faculties of the country's universities have registered to take part in the first national competition for the design of vertical transport aircraft.

The inauguration ceremony of the Aviation Industry Technology was held on Thursday, in the presence of the head of the Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), Head of the Iranian Aerospace Association, a group of professors and students interested in participating in the competition.









Iran trying to join top countries in VTOL


Tehran (IP) - Head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO) said the organization is making its utmost efforts to be among the top countries in the field of Vertical Take-off and Landing (VTOL) vehicles in the near future.




iranpress.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> That area in red is the canards main elevator it is the main component that allows the aircraft to turn on it's Pitch and Roll axis



No that is not how it works. The control surface (the red part) changes the overall lift of the entire surface. Therefore it is not only the control surface, but the entire canard that generates the lift.

Fixed canard with moving control surface on viggen





Moving canard on gripen





Obviously, gripens moving canard is a much more efficient design and the lifting surface can be made smaller because the entire surface is moving.



VEVAK said:


> now i'm hoping I don't have to go into great detail as to why this Airframe has a comparatively limited ability to turn at high speeds because it's rather obvious



No its not really!



VEVAK said:


> The size of your control surfaces, it's design and the degree of how they elevate and move up and down
> put up against what they have to counter (Air frame's fuselage + two main wing + 2 fixed sections of the canards + 2 stabilizers + wind and airflow resistances + Gravitational resistance)



I am not sure what you are trying to say here. The force needed to create pitch is dependent on the distance between the neutral point and centre of gravity. Hence it does not really matter how the aircraft looks like when it comes this, rather what matters really is how the aircraft is trimmed (design trimmed not pilot trimmed), meaning that dependent on where the overall lift and overall weight of the aircraft is located. The smaller the distance is between CoG and NP, the less dF is needed to rotate the aircraft around the pitch axis.








VEVAK said:


> As for the speed of the Q-313, the angle of the wings, the fixed section of the canard, the thickness of wings and lack of slats,.... all put limitations on your cruise and max speed output



still not convinced. we do not even know what the requirements of this aircraft is. So how can we even judge it when we do not know the full mission spec?



VEVAK said:


> And the idea that today's upgraded F-5 kosar is even comparable to the F-14 in terms of capability is beyond absurd! F-5's shortcomings in combat range & payload capacity is NOT something you can makeup for with a bunch of new electronics



I would appreciate if you would stop miss-quoting me. I did not say F-5 or Kowsar is comparable to F-14. I said, and rightly so, that the 1970s design of F14 is completely outdated and today a small Gripen can do pretty much the same mission. If you want to argue against than then be my guest, but don't make up my arguments please.



VEVAK said:


> And I don't care about the F-14 wings for all I care they could have replaced them with fixed wings
> And the whole point in reverse engineering the F-14 would be to develop the tools needed to produce a viable domestic fighter and NOT get stuck on an outdated American design



What tools are you referring to?




VEVAK said:


> And investing in the Q-313 and fixating on the F-5 is literally throwing away money at dead end projects! So clearly you have got that backwards!



No it is not. F-5 is mainly chosen to prepare for a future industrialisation of an Iranian aircraft. In contrast to F14 it is a simple and rational design and we have an abundance of them. The managers that had the foresight to begin simple and learn the basics first are heroes, just as Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam started with simple solid rockets before moving on to more advanced designs.



VEVAK said:


> If they had chosen the F-14 we would of had many of the infrastructure needed to build our own Fighters, bomber, transport & passenger aircrafts!



If you do not have an industrial base (as Iran did not have), this is not a viable plan. It is better to chose the most simple design to actually learn, not only reverse engineer, and then build your own products based on your own requirements. It's the only viable way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*an Iranian F-14 getting ready for its Vertical takeoff and landing ( joint project between Army air force and IRGC aerospace force )*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *an Iranian F-14 getting ready for its Vertical takeoff and landing ( joint project between Army air force and IRGC aerospace force )*
> 
> 
> View attachment 692123



This picture has been around for about 20 years. It was just a small carrier to move the plane. I remember there was a joke at the time where people were calling it a "Belgium aircraft carrier".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Is this photoshop? If not, the deck seems a little too small for any margin and there if something attached to the port pylon. 
Are the tomcats in any shape for this new addition or are they a testing platform. also, what did they have to do the tomcat frame to get this ability? What had to sacrificed and is the endeavour worth the tradeoff? 
I imagine such aircraft could make the Shahid Roudaki's even more capable...
Just saw another post answering the photoshop question. I am more skeptical because it seems any plane having this capability has to sacrifice too many other abilities and seem a very cumbersome system using most of a plane's space.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> This picture has been around for about 20 years. It was just a small carrier to move the plane. I remember there was a joke at the time where people were calling it a "Belgium aircraft carrier".


its from Meraj project , matter of fact you your self posted a article about vertical takeoff and landing in Iran if im not wrong


WudangMaster said:


> Is this photoshop? If not, the deck seems a little too small for any margin and there if something attached to the port pylon.
> Are the tomcats in any shape for this new addition or are they a testing platform. also, what did they have to do the tomcat frame to get this ability? What had to sacrificed and is the endeavour worth the tradeoff?
> I imagine such aircraft could make the Shahid Roudaki's even more capable...
> Just saw another post answering the photoshop question. I am more skeptical because it seems any plane having this capability has to sacrifice too many other abilities and seem a very cumbersome system using most of a plane's space.


well Iran had to start from somewhere and sacrificing one F-14 is nothing compared to knowledge they will get


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> its from Meraj project , matter of fact you your self posted a article about vertical takeoff and landing in Iran if im not wrong



Yes, but these are not related. Here is a thread on another forum from *2005* with the same image.






La guerre (Vol 2) - Image


Mini porte-avion La guerre (Vol 2) - Image




www.koreus.com





This image has been around for even longer than that, around 20 years. Be careful with information you find online, there is alot of mis/disinformation out there, especially when it comes to Iran.

With regards to the Iranian VTOL project, do not expect a manned system. What they will probably be working on is something like this:







These VTOL systems will play an important role in future for taxis etc. In terms of military, we can use VTOL systems on our MALE UAVs. Iran does not have the funding to spend on a manned VTOL project.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> well Iran had to start from somewhere and sacrificing one F-14 is nothing compared to knowledge they will get


I meant what capabilities of the tomcat would be compromised to facilitate vtol. Will it lose fuel space, will weapons payload diminish, etc. I'm assuming this project is meant for the entire fleet or just a one off tech demonstrator for just one unit?


Philosopher said:


> In terms of military, we can use VTOL systems on our MALE UAVs. Iran does not have the funding to spend on a manned VTOL project.



Something like the pelican or other quadcopter types are well within their ability to do right now, but something like F-35 or Yakolev doesn't seem as important as other priorities for a manned fighter. Hence my surprise with this news of modifying tomcats for this purpose.


----------



## Philosopher

WudangMaster said:


> Something like the pelican or other quadcopter types are well within their ability to do right now, but something like F-35 or Yakolev doesn't seem as important as other priorities for a manned fighter. Hence my surprise with this news of modifying tomcats for this purpose.



On paper it is within their capability, however to produce a lager VTOL UAV is something that will need to be worked on, but certainly do-able for us. Priority should also be given to produce larger VTOL UAVs in the civilian sector. As for this news regarding VTOL F-14, it makes no sense. That picture is from over 20 years ago, and even if assume that is just a generic stock photo and not related to the news, to produce a VTOL F-14 it would requite extensive changed to engine and configuration. That would require a great deal of funding and what for? The F-14 is not a plane that will meet Iran's need going forward. It falls short qualitatively and quantitatively. This venture would make little sense in my opinion. Our limited budget in that sector must be used in a better way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

WudangMaster said:


> I meant what capabilities of the tomcat would be compromised to facilitate vtol. Will it lose fuel space, will weapons payload diminish, etc. I'm assuming this project is meant for the entire fleet or just a one off tech demonstrator for just one unit?
> 
> 
> Something like the pelican or other quadcopter types are well within their ability to do right now, but something like F-35 or Yakolev doesn't seem as important as other priorities for a manned fighter. Hence my surprise with this news of modifying tomcats for this purpose.


more like for Iranian fighter jet


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> No that is not how it works. The control surface (the red part) changes the overall lift of the entire surface. Therefore it is not only the control surface, but the entire canard that generates the lift.
> 
> Fixed canard with moving control surface on viggen
> View attachment 692041
> 
> Moving canard on gripen
> View attachment 692042
> 
> 
> Obviously, gripens moving canard is a much more efficient design and the lifting surface can be made smaller because the entire surface is moving.
> 
> 
> 
> No its not really!
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure what you are trying to say here. The force needed to create pitch is dependent on the distance between the neutral point and centre of gravity. Hence it does not really matter how the aircraft looks like when it comes this, rather what matters really is how the aircraft is trimmed (design trimmed not pilot trimmed), meaning that dependent on where the overall lift and overall weight of the aircraft is located. The smaller the distance is between CoG and NP, the less dF is needed to rotate the aircraft around the pitch axis.
> 
> View attachment 692046
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still not convinced. we do not even know what the requirements of this aircraft is. So how can we even judge it when we do not know the full mission spec?
> 
> 
> 
> I would appreciate if you would stop miss-quoting me. I did not say F-5 or Kowsar is comparable to F-14. I said, and rightly so, that the 1970s design of F14 is completely outdated and today a small Gripen can do pretty much the same mission. If you want to argue against than then be my guest, but don't make up my arguments please.
> 
> 
> 
> What tools are you referring to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it is not. F-5 is mainly chosen to prepare for a future industrialisation of an Iranian aircraft. In contrast to F14 it is a simple and rational design and we have an abundance of them. The managers that had the foresight to begin simple and learn the basics first are heroes, just as Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam started with simple solid rockets before moving on to more advanced designs.
> 
> 
> 
> If you do not have an industrial base (as Iran did not have), this is not a viable plan. It is better to chose the most simple design to actually learn, not only reverse engineer, and then build your own products based on your own requirements. It's the only viable way.




Wrong! Sub Viggan uses high angled delta wings so it's flight dynamics are completely different







Also the Saab 37 had a jet engine with a diameter greater 1 meter and +28,000lbf max thrust and that allowed many of the design flaws to be overcome by pure thrust the F-4 is the same way many of the design flaws get overcome by pure thrust! Q-313 does not have that!


Q-313 due to the angle of the wings and canards + the end section of the wings (Wing tips) + 2 stabilizers will have trouble turning at high speeds and high altitudes (Comparatively)

Q-313 lack of thrust and absurd design flaws will have limited speeds and limited cruise speeds.
Q-313 is built to achieve most of its lift using it's wings while modern fighter jets mostly use their engines to do the heavy lifting for them!

I very much doubt the Q-313 could even approach Mach 1 but if it did the aircraft will likely start to shake which is the last thing you want on a composite frame with likely limited flexibility and stress capability

As for pitch and roll just listen to what your saying! You can't just take a single factor and totally disregard everything else! If that was the ONLY factor in maneuverability then Aircraft designers would have to be idi0ts to design and build control surfaces any larger than your hand and the fact that the aircraft can turn is not in question!
And again let me emphasize that the limitations of it's turn radius will mainly show itself at high speeds and or high altitudes!


As for Iran's F-5 projects it's one thing to start off with a simple design and quite another to fixate on one! Tehrani Moghadam NEVER fixated and get stuck on one thing because if he had he would have still been alive and working on artillery systems and in terms of missiles in a 20 year time span he went from the Frog-7 to the Fatteh-110 then to the Sejil and then the Qaem 
And everything they worked on was better than the last and if he was to go based on your mentality he would have still been stuck on improving the Zelzal and Fateh series
And instead of looking at a 70's era Saab you should instead look at the improvements Saab made to that design and ask yourself why?


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Wrong! Sub Viggan uses high angled delta wings so it's flight dynamics are completely different



The *double* delta wing of viggen is due to lift issues much more than flight dynamics. It has nothing whatsoever to do with my points regarding basic and fundamental flight control which you simply disregarded with a rebuttal that is not on point.




VEVAK said:


> Also the Saab 37 had a jet engine with a diameter greater 1 meter and +28,000lbf max thrust and that allowed many of the design flaws to be overcome by pure thrust the F-4 is the same way many of the design flaws get overcome by pure thrust! Q-313 does not have that!



Its not about thrust. Its about thrust over weight. Viggen had higher thrust than Gripen but the overall spec was worse because of a lower t/w.



VEVAK said:


> Q-313 due to the angle of the wings and canards + the end section of the wings (Wing tips) + 2 stabilizers will have trouble turning at high speeds and high altitudes (Comparatively)



You are not understanding the basics still. The force needed depends on the distance between Np and CoG. If you introduce thrust vectoring to the equation then the aircraft can do much more with much less thrust.




VEVAK said:


> Q-313 lack of thrust and absurd design flaws will have limited speeds and limited cruise speeds.



First of all we have not seen the final production model of Q313. So we really do not know the power plants it will have. Secondly as I outlined before, it is not important how much thrust it produces. The main spec is the t/w.



VEVAK said:


> Q-313 is built to achieve most of its lift using it's wings while modern fighter jets mostly use their engines to do the heavy lifting for them!



lol NO! Seriously what are you on about? Sure many high end fighters have a t/w over 1 which in theary it means they can still generate lift even if the full airflow separation (turbulent flow - no lift), but that is only meant for small and isolated time frames. It would drain the fuel tanks if they would "mostly use their engines to do the heavy lifting for them".



VEVAK said:


> I very much doubt the Q-313 could even approach Mach 1 but if it did the aircraft will likely start to shake which is the last thing you want on a composite frame with likely limited flexibility and stress capability



Dude, are you serious right now? How do you even come up with this stuff? There is no way anyone can come to that conclusion without proper simulations. You are making things up just to prove your point!



VEVAK said:


> As for pitch and roll just listen to what your saying! You can't just take a single factor and totally disregard everything else! If that was the ONLY factor in maneuverability then Aircraft designers would have to be idi0ts to design and build control surfaces any larger than your hand and the fact that the aircraft can turn is not in question!



I did not say that the size of the control surface does not matter. I said it is not only the control surface of the canard, but the entire canard you need to take into consideration. It was a response to your "it's only the red part" comment.



VEVAK said:


> And again let me emphasize that the limitations of it's turn radius will mainly show itself at high speeds and or high altitudes!



High speed turn is easy in terms of flight mechanics because you have high rate of flow over your control surface which gives you a lot of force. However, it is challenging to the integrity of the aircraft and the electro/hydro actuators.



VEVAK said:


> As for Iran's F-5 projects it's one thing to start off with a simple design and quite another to fixate on one! Tehrani Moghadam NEVER fixated and get stuck on one thing because if he had he would have still been alive and working on artillery systems and in terms of missiles in a 20 year time span he went from the Frog-7 to the Fatteh-110 then to the Sejil and then the Qaem
> And everything they worked on was better than the last and if he was to go based on your mentality he would have still been stuck on improving the Zelzal and Fateh series
> And instead of looking at a 70's era Saab you should instead look at the improvements Saab made to that design and ask yourself why?


I don't know what to tell you. The difference of complexity between solid rocket compared to f5 is maybe 1000 folds. If that is even enough. You may not like it, but it is the pinnacle of engineering and in dire need of empiric data in order to become self sufficient. Second only to jet engines. Iran will make the same journey here as with missiles, but it will take time.
SAAB has been making aircraft since the 50s. And still they made a miserable job with Viggen. Thats why they killed it so early and made the Gripen, which is basically a Viggen 2.0 where everything is tuned just perfect.


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> The *double* delta wing of viggen is due to lift issues much more than flight dynamics. It has nothing whatsoever to do with my points regarding basic and fundamental flight control which you simply disregarded with a rebuttal that is not on point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its not about thrust. Its about thrust over weight. Viggen had higher thrust than Gripen but the overall spec was worse because of a lower t/w.
> 
> 
> 
> You are not understanding the basics still. The force needed depends on the distance between Np and CoG. If you introduce thrust vectoring to the equation then the aircraft can do much more with much less thrust.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all we have not seen the final production model of Q313. So we really do not know the power plants it will have. Secondly as I outlined before, it is not important how much thrust it produces. The main spec is the t/w.
> 
> 
> 
> lol NO! Seriously what are you on about? Sure many high end fighters have a t/w over 1 which in theary it means they can still generate lift even if the full airflow separation (turbulent flow - no lift), but that is only meant for small and isolated time frames. It would drain the fuel tanks if they would "mostly use their engines to do the heavy lifting for them".
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, are you serious right now? How do you even come up with this stuff? There is no way anyone can come to that conclusion without proper simulations. You are making things up just to prove your point!
> 
> 
> 
> I did not say that the size of the control surface does not matter. I said it is not only the control surface of the canard, but the entire canard you need to take into consideration. It was a response to your "it's only the red part" comment.
> 
> 
> 
> High speed turn is easy in terms of flight mechanics because you have high rate of flow over your control surface which gives you a lot of force. However, it is challenging to the integrity of the aircraft and the electro/hydro actuators.
> 
> 
> I don't know what to tell you. The difference of complexity between solid rocket compared to f5 is maybe 1000 folds. If that is even enough. You may not like it, but it is the pinnacle of engineering and in dire need of empiric data in order to become self sufficient. Second only to jet engines. Iran will make the same journey here as with missiles, but it will take time.
> SAAB has been making aircraft since the 50s. And still they made a miserable job with Viggen. Thats why they killed it so early and made the Gripen, which is basically a Viggen 2.0 where everything is tuned just perfect.



Wrong again! What your talking about is the reason why they raised and placed the front wings (Fixed canards) above the main wings to achieve SHORT takeoff capability with a delta winged aircraft!






(3) Saab AJS-37 Viggen thrust reverser landing and short take off. Swedish Air Force 90 years at Malmen - YouTube



Where as what i'm talking about is in regards to the flight dynamics of a delta wing aircraft vs Q-313
meaning the speed restrictions the thickness of the wings (lack slats) bring
Designing wings fully focused on achieving short takeoff (without slats) with absolute disregard to what effects that would have on flight is a mistake
Designing large wingtips to try to counter the lack of an aerodynamic fuselage to take away the requirement of a fly by wire system is a mistake. Fixed canards with elevators, mistake! Design of the intakes, mistake!
Q-313 will most definitely have cruise speed issues as well!

As for thrust to weight ratio again your taking a single factor and disregarding everything else! Plus if the Q-313 was capable of achieving near to 1:1 Thrust/Weight ratio they wouldn't of designed such thick wings for it!


Of course if you add thrust vectoring all the maneuvering issues would be solved even if it had a single directional tvc it would of had no maneuvering issues but the Q-313 has no TVC! And they wouldn't of designed such thick wings and fixed canards with elevators if they had any plans to put tvc on it!


Again modern Aircrafts mostly use their engines for lift during flight (Not take off! flight!) during takeoff they even use slats to achieve greater lift and overcome ground effect...

And high speed turn is NOT easy because what's in question is NOT the aircrafts ability to turn but how fast it turns! during high speed roll the problems may not be so evident however when you bank to the right and pull the rudder back it will most definitely cause problems(comparatively) for the Q-313 during high speed & or high altitude turns and it's true that we don't know what the production model will look like but so far what they have shown looks to be designed by a bunch of adolescent teenagers. And again the dynamics of turning and it's ability to turn is NOT in question!

As for the Viggen for a country like Sweden and a fighter designed and developed in the late 60's when there where no computers! producing a fighter like the Viggen was a masterpiece yet one with a lot of issues! And yes the Gripen is the evolution of that design and today is one of the best 4.5Gen fighters in the world and can even take on an F-35 within 30km....

Now if we wanna design and produce a fighter of our own then we need to study and learn from the mistake of others and NOT purposely try to make the same mistakes they did!


----------



## Ich

Philosopher said:


> Yes, but these are not related. Here is a thread on another forum from *2005* with the same image.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> La guerre (Vol 2) - Image
> 
> 
> Mini porte-avion La guerre (Vol 2) - Image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.koreus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This image has been around for even longer than that, around 20 years. Be careful with information you find online, there is alot of mis/disinformation out there, especially when it comes to Iran.
> 
> With regards to the Iranian VTOL project, do not expect a manned system. What they will probably be working on is something like this:
> 
> 
> View attachment 692133
> 
> 
> These VTOL systems will play an important role in future for taxis etc. In terms of military, we can use VTOL systems on our MALE UAVs. Iran does not have the funding to spend on a manned VTOL project.



Yes, this kind of VTOL is rising fast all over the world. Me prefer this one cause of hydrogen powered





__





Simple | Skai







www.skai.co


----------



## nomi007

Iranian are wasting time.
They have to induct atleast 2 squardon of SU-30 and 2 Sq of J-10C, before UN impose more sanctions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

nomi007 said:


> Iranian are wasting time.
> They have to induct atleast 2 squardon of SU-30 and 2 Sq of J-10C, before UN impose more sanctions.


And from where that magical 2 come ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

nomi007 said:


> Iranian are wasting time.
> They have to induct atleast 2 squardon of SU-30 and 2 Sq of J-10C, before UN impose more sanctions.



Who cant trust any of those countries to provide spare parts, and maintenance support when required without being blackmailed or extorted for it. We know our history well with Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## karamany98

Stryker1982 said:


> Who cant trust any of those countries to provide spare parts, and maintenance support when required without being blackmailed or extorted for it. We know our history well with Russia.



If you do not trust Russia, then why doesn't Iran get J-10C from China?? 
You just signed a 400 billion dollar deal, so your future lies with China.


----------



## WudangMaster

karamany98 said:


> If you do not trust Russia, then why doesn't Iran get J-10C from China??
> You just signed a 400 billion dollar deal, so your future lies with China.


Too light and IRIAF can make do with Kowsar for the costs of importing J-10; Iran needs something in the range of J-31 and China does not have anything to offer in that category yet until J-31 is ready and proven and I don't how far along that program is and if China plans on importing SU-57 themselves. SU-30,35 is good for kind of boosts to the national air defense grid, should areas come under heavy concentration of fire.


----------



## TheImmortal

nomi007 said:


> Iranian are wasting time.
> They have to induct atleast 2 squardon of SU-30 and 2 Sq of J-10C, before UN impose more sanctions.



Lol 2 squadron of SU-30 and J-10 is like attacking a lion with a sandal.

Iran’s airforce needs a complete overhaul.


----------



## skyshadow

*breaking news : Amir Hadian:
The purchase of aircraft is definitely on the agenda of Iran, but it is not clear what type and from which country, in addition to manufacturing and domestic production, we also need more advanced fighters to bring new technologies into the country, in line with the country's defense strategies.



The Deputy Coordinator of the Air Force of the Iranian Army says that with a wide range of medium-range weapons, our aircraft are able to destroy their targets from a distance of hundreds of kilometers .



The keyword "hundreds of kilometers" means the range of long-range weapons of the Air Force will not be announced, and this means that the equation of range of long-range weapons of Nahaja is a nightmare for the enemies. 




Thanks to the efforts of Nahaja specialists, our drones are able to stay in the sky for more than 30 hours in monitoring enemy movements, and our drones play an important role in improving combat capability. As I said, in the discussion of monitoring enemy movements and targets with the ability to stay in the sky for more than 30 hours and in electronic warfare as a rising point in the army air force and the use of smart ammunition play an important role in increasing combat capability. 











انهدام نقطه‌ای اهداف دشمن از فاصله صدها کیلومتری با سلاح‌های دورایستا/ دست‌یابی به فناوری پیچیده شبیه‌سازها در دوران تحریم


معاون هماهنگ کننده فرمانده نیروی هوایی ارتش ایران می‌گوید با در اختیار داشتن طیف مختلف سلاح‌های دورایستا متوسط هواپیماهای ما قادر هستند از فاصله به مسافت صدها کیلومتری هدف خود را منهدم کنند.




www.mashreghnews.ir




*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

nomi007 said:


> Iranian are wasting time.
> They have to induct atleast 2 squardon of SU-30 and 2 Sq of J-10C, before UN impose more sanctions.



Iran needs at least 80 but preferably 160 Air superiority fighters just to cover Iranian Airspace and another 40-60 Air superiority fighters for beyond border escort and incursion missions.
However if these fighters aren't equipped with a highly capable AESA radar or something equivalent the cost of such an imported purchase won't even be worth the price tag. So Iran would be far better off using that money at home to build it's own fighters and weapon systems.

As for multi roll fighters and attack Aircraft.... if Iran was to simply spend the same money on production than they would on import we wouldn't have an issue. Iran's problem in developing it's own fighter is that they want a domestic fighter with the same capabilities to be produced at 1/10 the cost! And for a country who still lacks many of the infrastructural requirements that's just not possible.

And in the long run it's far better for Iran if they invest 10 Billion on alloy and composite infrastructure and production
Invest 10 Billion on infrastructure and production of various types of required electronics from sensors to processors to radars...
Invest 5 Billon on modern and advanced facilities and tools for Airframe production and assembly using modern tools and equipment 
Invest 5 Billion on engine production 
Invest 6 Billon on various other required parts from Hydraulics to Canopy to Tires 

That's a total of $36 Billion USD which is what it would cost if Iran was to import 240 fighters at an average of $150 Million per Aircraft 

The difference is one option elevates your countries technological and infrastructural capabilities and a large portion of that money get's recirculated into your economy and is a long term fix for your aircraft requirements and various other requirements where as the other option may get you more capable fighters at a much faster pace and you may even get more of them during your initial investment and on paper your country may look stronger but in real life it's not a long term fix and your country becomes more dependent then before the purchase and your enemies will have access to all the weaknesses of your fleet and without constant supply of parts during a conflict most of your Air Force would be grounded well within 6 months and your Air force will only be as strong as what others allow.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## karamany98

VEVAK said:


> Iran needs at least 80 but preferably 160 Air superiority fighters just to cover Iranian Airspace and another 40-60 Air superiority fighters for beyond border escort and incursion missions.
> However if these fighters aren't equipped with a highly capable AESA radar or something equivalent the cost of such an imported purchase won't even be worth the price tag. So Iran would be far better off using that money at home to build it's own fighters and weapon systems.
> 
> As for multi roll fighters and attack Aircraft.... if Iran was to simply spend the same money on production than they would on import we wouldn't have an issue. Iran's problem in developing it's own fighter is that they want a domestic fighter with the same capabilities to be produced at 1/10 the cost! And for a country who still lacks many of the infrastructural requirements that's just not possible.
> 
> And in the long run it's far better for Iran if they invest 10 Billion on alloy and composite infrastructure and production
> Invest 10 Billion on infrastructure and production of various types of required electronics from sensors to processors to radars...
> Invest 5 Billon on modern and advanced facilities and tools for Airframe production and assembly using modern tools and equipment
> Invest 5 Billion on engine production
> Invest 6 Billon on various other required parts from Hydraulics to Canopy to Tires
> 
> That's a total of $36 Billion USD which is what it would cost if Iran was to import 240 fighters at an average of $150 Million per Aircraft
> 
> The difference is one option elevates your countries technological and infrastructural capabilities and a large portion of that money get's recirculated into your economy and is a long term fix for your aircraft requirements and various other requirements where as the other option may get you more capable fighters at a much faster pace and you may even get more of them during your initial investment and on paper your country may look stronger but in real life it's not a long term fix and your country becomes more dependent then before the purchase and your enemies will have access to all the weaknesses of your fleet and without constant supply of parts during a conflict most of your Air Force would be grounded well within 6 months and your Air force will only be as strong as what others allow.



And how long would it take Iran to field a good jet fighter(Like SU-30), with engines, RADARs..etc?
I think more than 20 years and when you have Israel and the US assassinating your generals and scientists and planning to attack your country, you don't have time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *breaking news : Amir Hadian:
> , we also need more advanced fighters to bring new technologies into the country, in line with the country's defense strategies.*




I have been saying this for years. Iran cannot jump from F-5 or SU-22 to F-35. But idiots on this board refused to listen.

Without new technologies, Iran cannot reverse Engineer and make the jump.

Iran’s drone industry was able to go from Karrar to RQ-170 through capture of RQ-170, Predator, and other Israeli/US drones. Or else Iran would still be stuck with Ababil and Moahjer drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## VEVAK

karamany98 said:


> And how long would it take Iran to field a good jet fighter(Like SU-30), with engines, RADARs..etc?
> I think more than 20 years and when you have Israel and the US assassinating your generals and scientists and planning to attack your country, you don't have time.



LOL! Who say's Iran doesn't have time? 
Fact is if Iran was running out of time the Americans & Israeli wouldn't of had to resort to assassinations! And the reason they resort to these actions is because they really don't see any other options...

Plus Iran is a country of 80 Million people this is not some Hollywood movie where you kill some mad scientist and the whole thing comes crumbling down! The infrastructure Fakhri Zadeh left behind will no doubt carry on his work and probably at a much faster pace because now they will no doubt receive more funding then ever before...

And Fighter jets are only one aspect of Iran's military capabilities and today Iran's main deterrence and retaliatory capability against a direct attack from the west is not even Air Force related. Fact is in real life 20 Iranian midget subs have far more of a deterrence factor against the West than 100 Su-30's ever could!

Probably the most important difference in developing your own fighter is the multi use nature of the tech gained so you can use the same infrastructure and technology to develop and produces various types of military and civilization parts & equipment,... where as the purchase of Su-30 would purely be about Su-30's and nothing else! 

As for how long, it would really depends on requirements and how much Iran invests. 
Between 1950-1980 (30 Years) the French produced more than a dozen different types of supersonic fighters with overall 1000's of fighters produced so how many fighters Iran can produce and how fast really depends on how much they invest and how wide spread it is and how well the program is being managed.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> I have been saying this for years. Iran cannot jump from F-5 or SU-22 to F-35. But idiots on this board refused to listen.
> 
> Without new technologies, Iran cannot reverse Engineer and make the jump.
> 
> Iran’s drone industry was able to go from Karrar to RQ-170 through capture of RQ-170, Predator, and other Israeli/US drones. Or else Iran would still be stuck with Ababil and Moahjer drones.



I can't see any sane person disagree with you on that


----------



## skyshadow

*IRGC *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> I have been saying this for years. Iran cannot jump from F-5 or SU-22 to F-35. But idiots on this board refused to listen.
> 
> Without new technologies, Iran cannot reverse Engineer and make the jump.
> 
> Iran’s drone industry was able to go from Karrar to RQ-170 through capture of RQ-170, Predator, and other Israeli/US drones. Or else Iran would still be stuck with Ababil and Moahjer drones.




No one expects a country that has yet to produce an advanced military grade processor to suddenly produce a AESA radar or go from an OwJ(J85) 5,000lbf turbo jet engine to an advanced low by pass 43,000 lbf turbofan engine.

For now the only leap Iran needs to make is to go from an F-5 type Fighter to an F-15 size fighter while using known and duel use tech in electronics to elevate it beyond the original version of the F-15.

In terms of propulsion Iran doesn't need to make the leap into low bypass turbofans just yet, they just need to build a turbojet around an Airframe whos specs are sufficient enough so 2 decades down the line (When your getting ready for mass production) those Air frames can be upgraded with those engines without any major modifications.




As for UAV's & UCAV's that's simply not the case! Iran was working on Jet power UAV's before we shot down the RQ-170 and developing UAV's isn't simply about the Aircraft you need the necessary COM's to go with it, each size aircraft has to have it's own flight computer programed based on the flight characteristics of each class of Airframe and each class would need to have their own automated system or AI to go with, if your adding a weapons bay and offensive capabilities.....

Downing the RQ-170 no doubt helped Iran in the development of highly efficient flying wing designs which no doubt allowed Iran to develop a low cost micro jet powered UCAV's but that doesn't mean Iran would have been stuck on the old Ababil &/or Mohajer without it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran Air Force, IAIO ink coop. pact*




TEHRAN, Dec. 12 (MNA) – Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force and Iran Aviation Industries Organization signed a cooperation agreement on Saturday.

The cooperation contract was signed between the managing director of the Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), a subsidiary of the Defense Ministry General, Afshin Khajeh Fard, and Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh.

General Khajeh Fard stated that "the purpose of signing this document is to expand cooperation between the two bodies and increase production in order to supply the items needed by the Air Force, especially in the field of aircraft engines."

He referred to the direct order of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei for improving infrastructure for manufacturing domestic fighters, adding that "We seek to attract the necessary financial resources for development and increasing the capacity of the national "Owj" engine production line in a bid to deliver more engines to the Army Air Force."

Commander Nasirzadeh, for his part, expressed hope that the signing of this agreement would set the bed proper for a new round of cooperation on the construction of jet engines between the IRIAF and the IAIO.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the few countries in the world that, while under sanctions, has managed to design and manufacture advanced training aircraft by relying on its most experienced and talented youth in cooperation with knowledge-based firms and private sector companies, Hatami said in the ceremony.









Iran Air Force, IAIO ink coop. pact


TEHRAN, Dec. 12 (MNA) – Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force and Iran Aviation Industries Organization signed a cooperation agreement on Saturday.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Ich

Philosopher said:


> *Iran Air Force, IAIO ink coop. pact*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Dec. 12 (MNA) – Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force and Iran Aviation Industries Organization signed a cooperation agreement on Saturday.
> 
> The cooperation contract was signed between the managing director of the Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO), a subsidiary of the Defense Ministry General, Afshin Khajeh Fard, and Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh.
> 
> General Khajeh Fard stated that "the purpose of signing this document is to expand cooperation between the two bodies and increase production in order to supply the items needed by the Air Force, especially in the field of aircraft engines."
> 
> He referred to the direct order of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei for improving infrastructure for manufacturing domestic fighters, adding that "We seek to attract the necessary financial resources for development and increasing the capacity of the national "Owj" engine production line in a bid to deliver more engines to the Army Air Force."
> 
> Commander Nasirzadeh, for his part, expressed hope that the signing of this agreement would set the bed proper for a new round of cooperation on the construction of jet engines between the IRIAF and the IAIO.
> The Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the few countries in the world that, while under sanctions, has managed to design and manufacture advanced training aircraft by relying on its most experienced and talented youth in cooperation with knowledge-based firms and private sector companies, Hatami said in the ceremony.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Air Force, IAIO ink coop. pact
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Dec. 12 (MNA) – Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force and Iran Aviation Industries Organization signed a cooperation agreement on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.mehrnews.com



Need for more Owj engines implies that there is a running air plane production line, but for what air plane? Saegeh? Qaher 313? Kowsar? Other?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

I would assume some more Iranian made F-5s. People really underestimate this plane.

With a lighter airframe made of modern, synthetic materials, modern engine, avionics and radar systems, it's still a very deadly fighter jet, especially in large numbers. I would say excellent for swarm tactics. 

It's cheap and easy to maintain. I wonder how much it costs Iran to build one ? I believe I heard something like $7 million each somewhere, however I'm not certain about that number.

Iran needs to modify them though so they can launch a cruise missile, a smaller one of course. Something like a miniaturized Phoenix/Fakour would be interesting.

You know I always thought that it would be so interesting if an F-5 had delta wings and canards.



Ich said:


> Need for more Owj engines implies that there is a running air plane production line, but for what air plane? Saegeh? Qaher 313? Kowsar? Other?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Ich said:


> Need for more Owj engines implies that there is a running air plane production line, but for what air plane? Saegeh? Qaher 313? Kowsar? Other?



There are multiple candidates this engine can be used for, including its potential use in larger UCAVs. The important point here is Iran starting the mass scale manufacturing cycle of larger sized jet engines. This is a very important development because it trains, develops and expands this very important sector. This means In the future when newer engines are developed, they can enter the mass production cycle much more quickly and seamlessly.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> I would assume some more Iranian made F-5s. People really underestimate this plane.
> 
> With a lighter airframe made of modern, synthetic materials, modern engine, avionics and radar systems, it's still a very deadly fighter jet, especially in large numbers. I would say excellent for swarm tactics.
> 
> It's cheap and easy to maintain. I wonder how much it costs Iran to build one ? I believe I heard something like $7 million each somewhere, however I'm not certain about that number.
> 
> Iran needs to modify them though so they can launch a cruise missile, a smaller one of course. Something like a miniaturized Phoenix/Fakour would be interesting.
> 
> You know I always thought that it would be so interesting if an F-5 had delta wings and canards.



Yes, like Spear 3 mini cruise missile. Me think such a mini cruise missile is essential cause one can use it with UAV, with fighter-jets and - the thing i will do first if i am chief of Bundeswehr - fired out of canister mounted on top of an APC, integrated in the radar and reconnaissance system of the lokal theater.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

I think this analysis of this Chinese pundit is interesting because it could show what will be the path of Iran's aerospace jet engine industry in the next future.
However, for Iran a thing is sure, it won't take 30 years. Because when the F-119 was designed in the early '80s there were no Supercomputers, no 3D printers. China started really the WS-15 program after 2009 when the US decided its "Pivot" politic - the name of their new geostatic stance against China-.

For Iran, honestly, I don't understand the choice of J-85 as the beginning. Because I don't think they will get western's help in foreseeable future. The only help that Iran can hope, it will come from the far east, if not from Russia.
In my view, North Korea will help Iran to design its RD-33, build, and to adapt to your Qaher. Once it will be done, Russia will rush and will ask for Royalties. At this stage, it will be reasonable to think that Russia will help Iran to design its own AL-31. Russia does not have 1000 options, either it helps Iran to design its engine, else China will be happy to help Iran.
Nowadays all Chinese fleet of J-10 and J-11 series -including J-15, and J-16 - are flying with indigenous engines, thus China has now thousands of AL-31, and they don't know what to do with. A good alternative would be to sell them to Iran. However, as Iran does have now a real industrial basis




Iranian elites will ask more in terms of technology transfer, because either they will be helped, or they will design these engines on their own. Maybe the mass production of J-85 is a demonstration and message to Russia and China. Especially if Iran intends to mass-produce the J-79 next.

I was amazed to learn Iran overhauled the SU-22, in order to launch cruise missiles. This is the absolute western nightmare. In that era even the Soviet Union was agreed with the West, not to sell state-of-the-art weapons to their client other than those belonging to Warsaw's Pact. Most of the soviet hardware was downgrade's weaponry. If Iran overhauled successfully the SU-22 in order to embed cruise missiles like the AS-X-15, it does mean Iranians succeeded to replace not only the structure but....the AL-21 too. It would mean Iran is capable to produce the AL-21?

PS- Please, need your help, can you tell me where I can find a good free youtube Chinese transcriptor. To transform Chinese youtube videos into Chinese text Thx for any help.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 697850



“Hassan take that helmet off, it’s not a toy!”

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> “Hassan take that helmet off, it’s not a toy!”


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> “Hassan take that helmet off, it’s not a toy!”


Are you Hassan's boss now? STFU!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 697850


10-year-old pics from the time when they introduced Toofan Upgrade package for Ah-1 cobra

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

sha ah said:


> I would assume some more Iranian made F-5s. People really underestimate this plane.
> 
> With a lighter airframe made of modern, synthetic materials, modern engine, avionics and radar systems, it's still a very deadly fighter jet, especially in large numbers. I would say excellent for swarm tactics.
> 
> It's cheap and easy to maintain. I wonder how much it costs Iran to build one ? I believe I heard something like $7 million each somewhere, however I'm not certain about that number.
> 
> Iran needs to modify them though so they can launch a cruise missile, a smaller one of course. Something like a miniaturized Phoenix/Fakour would be interesting.
> 
> You know I always thought that it would be so interesting if an F-5 had delta wings and canards.



Unfortunately it's Iranian leadership who is overestimating the value and capabilities of this Aircraft and they are miscalculating the cost efficiency of such a Fighter Jets compared to a more expensive more capable fighter


Fact is if your producing a fighter that you know will at best have a 1 to 10 kill ratio (meaning one 4.5Gen enemy kill for every 10 F-5 kosar losses) then that means when calculating the cost everything from the cost of the Aircraft to maintenance hours required per flight hour, to cost of storage and fueling equipment to cost of pilot training and maintenance crew training to the cost of the onboard weapons requirements all need to get multiplied by 10! So it's not as simple as saying this Fighter is 10Milltion USD and 10 of them would be $100M vs a single Su-35 that would cost me $100 million USD. (And I'm not saying that Iran should purchase fighters simply that the fighters we produce ourselves at home need to be far more expensive and more capable fighters because with manned fighters a cheaper fighter jet doesn't necessarily come out cheaper in the long run)

At the end of the day this is an Aircraft that can't even fly 300km outside Iranian Airspace with ordinance on board. 

The F-5E is a very light fighter jet with very limited thrust and range. This is a fighter jet with approximately half the empty weight of an F-16 and with those small weak engines there really isn't much thrust to leave room for any major design changes or improvements that would actually be worth the cost.
Fact is J-85 (owj) engines are NOT good engines for use on an armed manned fighter jet especially not in a country as big as Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

VEVAK said:


> Unfortunately it's Iranian leadership who is overestimating the value and capabilities of this Aircraft and they are miscalculating the cost efficiency of such a Fighter Jets compared to a more expensive more capable fighter
> 
> 
> Fact is if your producing a fighter that you know will at best have a 1 to 10 kill ratio (meaning one 4.5Gen enemy kill for every 10 F-5 kosar losses) then that means when calculating the cost everything from the cost of the Aircraft to maintenance hours required per flight hour, to cost of storage and fueling equipment to cost of pilot training and maintenance crew training to the cost of the onboard weapons requirements all need to get multiplied by 10! So it's not as simple as saying this Fighter is 10Milltion USD and 10 of them would be $100M vs a single Su-35 that would cost me $100 million USD. (And I'm not saying that Iran should purchase fighters simply that the fighters we produce ourselves at home need to be far more expensive and more capable fighters because with manned fighters a cheaper fighter jet doesn't necessarily come out cheaper in the long run)
> 
> At the end of the day this is an Aircraft that can't even fly 300km outside Iranian Airspace with ordinance on board.
> 
> The F-5E is a very light fighter jet with very limited thrust and range. This is a fighter jet with approximately half the empty weight of an F-16 and with those small weak engines there really isn't much thrust to leave room for any major design changes or improvements that would actually be worth the cost.
> Fact is J-85 (owj) engines are NOT good engines for use on an armed manned fighter jet especially not in a country as big as Iran.



Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran Air Force exercise, Qased bomb















*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?



Way to miss the entire point of his argument.


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> *Iran Air Force exercise, Qased bomb
> 
> View attachment 698274
> 
> 
> View attachment 698275
> 
> 
> View attachment 698276
> *


They seem much smaller until I see people right next to them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

TheImmortal said:


> Way to miss the entire point of his argument.


 Better not comment if you don't know the answer.


----------



## skyshadow

WudangMaster said:


> They seem much smaller until I see people right next to them.


exactly


----------



## VEVAK

thesaint said:


> Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?



Producing a fighter based on the assumption that your AIDS will not only survive but can actively engage an enemy fighter within the vicinity of your own fighter is absurd. 
And I'm not saying you can't use those type of tactics, simply that producing a fighter based on those assumptions is absurd.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> Better not comment if you don't know the answer.



Better not say retarded things if you want to come off as intelligent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

TheImmortal said:


> Better not say retarded things if you want to come off as intelligent.



I just asked a question, it is obvious who is reatarded and outright disgusting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

I let the readers decide if my question was retarded or not:

" Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?


----------



## Ich

thesaint said:


> I let the readers decide if my question was retarded or not:
> 
> " Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?



Well, in war, defending your motherland, any kill ratio is accepted as far as enemy dies.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

thesaint said:


> I let the readers decide if my question was retarded or not:
> 
> " Is that kill ratio of 1 to 10 in neutral territory or Iranian air space where they have air defense support?




Your IADS will make incursions more complex and more complicated and yes in your own Air Space you'll have the ability to fly at any altitude and will have far greater ability to go full thrust in any direction while your enemy will clearly be restricted both in terms of the amount of fuel they can use and at what altitude and what direction they can fly. So clearly you'll have an advantage over your own Air space as your enemy will have an advantage over any Air Space they have IADS systems in so they even themselves out because you can't simply factor in your advantages and discard the advantages your enemy will have and a true kill ratio gets calculated AFTER the battle is over and the dust has settled so every factor from your enemies ability to fire LACM at your bases and your ability to fire SAM's at their Aircraft and precision guided missiles at their bases will get factored in because without those factors if you were to put a single F-5(kosar) up against a single 4.5Gen fighter with same skilled pilots head to head the F-5(kosar) will lose 99% of the time.
AESA equipped Aircraft with greater BVR capability that is also equipped with an IRST with greater fuel capacity and thrust to weight ratio will no doubt win every time

And when I said they will at best have a 1-10 kill ratio that is an educated guess not a factual stat and I didn't mean that is the kill ratio they will achieve over Enemy Airspace

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

It’s not worth my time to explain to idiots why a plane built in 1960’s to be a cheap dog fighter in a dogfighting era as well as a cheap export fighter to banana countries (Iran shah being a prime example) cannot be expected to be able to fight and detect a plane made in 2000’s-2010’s (F-35, F-22).

This is without explaining the low combat radius an F-5 has, the weak radar it carries, and the lack of missile that can effectively engage an air superiority fighter.

If the Shah ordered the F-14 in the 1970’s because no Iranian fighter (including F-5) could catch up and take down the Soviet Migs that would routinely violate Iranian airspace. What makes people think an F-5 can effectively engage a 21st century air superiority fighter?

Because it had a few upgrades? Because it’s in its own airspace?

I mean seriously brain cells get lost on this board reading these absurd simulations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The worst post on the forum is this one. Intellectual slippages are major here. Iranian scientists and the Iranian military are much smarter than their critics and bogus fighter specialists. The Kowsar remains a very good fighter plane in the overall strategy of Iran which will upset the enemy.

Iranian bogus fighter specialists should take chopsticks and knit slippers. Ls F 14 and F4 will cause surprises too. And in Iran's secret weapons, I suspect Iran already has a fighter plane. The Shafaq project is very mysterious. Iran is hiding things from us and will surprise us for the required time

To your slippers the false specialists

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## foxhoundbis

Mr Iran Eye said:


> .... I suspect Iran already has a fighter plane.


So do I


Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran is hiding things from us and will surprise us for the required time


I think so *too*. However, I don't understand why Iran developed J-85. I saw the SU-22's overhauled, well does it mean Iran already produce AL-21? Iran must be developed on its own the RD-33, and the AL-31, I suspect the help of North Koreans and Chinese specialists, if not Russians. Maybe I am wrong. U know better than me.


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The worst post on the forum is this one. Intellectual slippages are major here. Iranian scientists and the Iranian military are much smarter than their critics and bogus fighter specialists. The Kowsar remains a very good fighter plane in the overall strategy of Iran which will upset the enemy.
> 
> Iranian bogus fighter specialists should take chopsticks and knit slippers. Ls F 14 and F4 will cause surprises too. And in Iran's secret weapons, I suspect Iran already has a fighter plane. The Shafaq project is very mysterious. Iran is hiding things from us and will surprise us for the required time
> 
> To your slippers the false specialists



Shafaq was originally a joint project with Russia for an advanced jet trainer that was subsequently canceled years ago. Nothing mysterious about it and even if produced it really wouldn't of been a valuable fighter due to a lack of range and thrust and until Iran address the problems it has in the production of high grade alloys and alloy composites, producing a truly capable fighter will continue to remain nothing more than a dream.

The OWJ engine is such a weak and inadequate engine that if you where to slap 8 of them on a single fighter you still wouldn't have enough thrust to match the max thrust of an F-35 and Iran current production capacity of that engine is only 6 per year!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

You don't know if Iran canceled the project. How do you know about Iran's secret projects? How can you know a secret that is secret? Iranian scientists and the Iranian military know what they are doing far more than you and the others on this forum. The Kowsar is a plane that will surprise you and your thought shows that you are not a great strategist. 4 Kowsar coming from different directions can take down an F-35 easily with all ground support and more. 

There is not just the notion of speed in a fight and in a strategy. If the Shafaq was built would it not be good enough? You know absolutely nothing about it !!! And I say that Iran already has their RD 33, we will see in the future. 

A secret is a secret but it seems that a secret is no secret to you, you are very strong!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Shafaq was originally a joint project with Russia for an advanced jet trainer that was subsequently canceled years ago. Nothing mysterious about it and even if produced it really wouldn't of been a valuable fighter due to a lack of range and thrust and until Iran address the problems it has in the production of high grade alloys and alloy composites, producing a truly capable fighter will continue to remain nothing more than a dream.
> 
> The OWJ engine is such a weak and inadequate engine that if you where to slap 8 of them on a single fighter you still wouldn't have enough thrust to match the max thrust of an F-35 and Iran current production capacity of that engine is only 6 per year!



why do you engage with idiots whose entire thesis relies on the thought “a secret is a secret”.

Iran has been experimenting on and off with F-5 since 1997, yet less than 30 various planes exist.

This isn’t a serious project and at best it’s to keep the engineers occupied until Iran makes a leap in aerospace technology. Similar to Zolfghiar project was for the Iranian tank industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hormuz



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> You don't know if Iran canceled the project. How do you know about Iran's secret projects? How can you know a secret that is secret? Iranian scientists and the Iranian military know what they are doing far more than you and the others on this forum. The Kowsar is a plane that will surprise you and your thought shows that you are not a great strategist. 4 Kowsar coming from different directions can take down an F-35 easily with all ground support and more.
> 
> There is not just the notion of speed in a fight and in a strategy. If the Shafaq was built would it not be good enough? You know absolutely nothing about it !!! And I say that Iran already has their RD 33, we will see in the future.
> 
> A secret is a secret but it seems that a secret is no secret to you, you are very strong!



RD-33's wouldn't produce enough thrust to have the payload capacity needed for a single engine maned fighter equipped with a RD-33 to be worth the cost of production as appose to the current kosar especially in a country the size Iran and based on the threats Iran faces.
Spending all that money so at the end of the day you end up with something that can't even go up against an F-16

Shafaq is a canceled program and I have no idea what has made you think that it's not!


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> You don't know if Iran canceled the project. How do you know about Iran's secret projects? How can you know a secret that is secret? Iranian scientists and the Iranian military know what they are doing far more than you and the others on this forum. The Kowsar is a plane that will surprise you and your thought shows that you are not a great strategist. 4 Kowsar coming from different directions can take down an F-35 easily with all ground support and more.
> 
> There is not just the notion of speed in a fight and in a strategy. If the Shafaq was built would it not be good enough? You know absolutely nothing about it !!! And I say that Iran already has their RD 33, we will see in the future.
> 
> A secret is a secret but it seems that a secret is no secret to you, you are very strong!



As for your illusions about Kosars capabilities let me assure you that even if 10 Kowsars from 10 different directions where to come at an F-35 in under 30 seconds the F-35 could go radar on, lock & fire killing 2-4 of them and then start heading back home without a single kosar being able to get a lock.

Even if kosars where equipped with a secret unknown BVR missile even then 4 Kosar's wouldn't be able to go up against a single AESA equipped F-16....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> why do you engage with idiots whose entire thesis relies on the thought “a secret is a secret”.
> 
> Iran has been experimenting on and off with F-5 since 1997, yet less than 30 various planes exist.
> 
> This isn’t a serious project and at best it’s to keep the engineers occupied until Iran makes a leap in aerospace technology. Similar to Zolfghiar project was for the Iranian tank industry.



Because these delusion are NOT helpful in properly assessing and addressing the weaknesses of Iranian military capabilities!

And kosar or upgraded F-5E/F are just not worth mass producing! Yes it's a great advanced supersonic jet trainer but that's all it is, a trainer!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashool

VEVAK said:


> Because these delusion are NOT helpful in properly assessing and addressing the weaknesses of Iranian military capabilities!
> 
> And kosar or upgraded F-5E/F are just not worth mass producing! Yes it's a great advanced supersonic jet trainer but that's all it is, a trainer!


WHY YOU R SO ANGRY are u see american movie too match .in dog fight something is not important is rcs and that mystery radar. go see results of f5 tiger in usa air force dog fight with f16 and even f14 see how stupid speaking of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Vevak doesn't know anything about real fighting. Ever since he listened to the American movie Top Gun with Tom Cruise, he sees American pilots and their planes as gods. He speculates but be sure that Iranian fighter jets are much better than he thinks. It is impossible that the Iranians have completely subscribed to the Shafaq project and we will see that in the future.

Iranian scientists and the military know what they really need. The ARIAF topic is really the worst topic here because a few speakers are slipping solid.

The F 35 hahahaah

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Does anyone know how the F-14AM(modernized f-14) is different than the standard one? Any details about the modernization program?


----------



## foxhoundbis

Mr Iran Eye said:


> 4 Kowsar coming from different directions can take down an F-35 easily with ....
> 
> A secret is a secret but it seems that a secret is no secret to you, you are very strong!


Friend! I am not Iranian, in fact, I am really enthusiastic about what your country is doing. No one can contest that the Kowsar is an important milestone and a real breakthrough for the Iranian aerospace industry. In my view, regarding the clues that I have, the OWJ is mass-produced.
Nevertheless, it is far to be enough to compare a Kowsar to US F-35, in fact, it is impossible to assess that a fleet of few Kowsar could be enough against F-35. It is like to say, Iran is at the same level as the US. Such an assertion is simply senseless.

Just a few facts,
Russia at the beginning of the XX° century -during Czar's era- was at the stone age. Trotsky, Ordzhonikidze, Bukharin, Lenin, etc... looked for technologies in Germany, they imported them, and they developed them. So that in 1940 the T-34 was far ahead against any german tanks. 1943 Yak 5/7/9, and Lavochkin matched with FW-190, etc... Soviet had to import western technology to match with the West.

In the 80's China regarding technology, was at the stone age too. However, China does have a huge, very disciplined, nationalist, cleaver diaspora in the West, so that at the end of the 2000s China caught up with the West in nearly all areas, except aerospace's industry. However, the WS-15 had to match with the F-135, to do that China had to create a joint venture with Russia to overcome the problems. It took 10 long years of hard work, it was far to be easy. In exchange, China offered a huge amount of money and its high tech to Russia.

Iran did significant progress, it has the human potential to catch up with Russia, no one can contest, nevertheless. U must have the technology, and at this stage, Iran does not have yet all the technologies. I talk about tool machinery, and maybe metallurgy skills to do an engine such as the F-135. And sincerely I doubt Iran does have the know-how now. The RD-33 was designed in the middle of the '60s, it could not match with AL-41, F-135, or WS-15.

No one can exclude an upset in international relations. In order to contain China, the West does absolutely needs Iran. If China wants to contain the West and to do its Silk Road project, China and Russia do need Iran.
At this stage, all could be possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Cthulhu

The guys who are in charge of things in this country have an army of devoted status quo warriors who fiercely defend every move these guys make and give them a free way out on every major fvck up, And this is how we got in this sh!t show of a situation that we are in today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Saleh99 said:


> Does anyone know how the F-14AM(modernized f-14) is different than the standard one? Any details about the modernization program?


IRIAF has upgraded the avionics, fuselage, airframes, radars and weapons systems on all remaining 50+ F-14A Persian Cats. (Iran has retained over 66 airframes out of the 79 aircraft delivered prior to 1979). 30 airframes had been put in storage and upgraded after local spares and weapons systems production was ramped up.


Noteworthy that IRIAF F-14s can carry several types of air-to-air missiles.

In fact along with the M61A1 Vulan 20mm internal cannon, AIM-54 Phoenix radar-guided long-range air-to-air missile, AIM-7 Sparrow medium-range semi-active radar homing air-to-air missile and AIM-9 Sidewinder short-range air-to-air missile, Iranian Tomcats can be loaded also with the Fakour-90 air-to-air missile, the lethal Iranian made AIM-54 BVR air to-air-missile. The *Fakour-90* is an Iranian air-to-air missile based on the AIM-54 Phoenix It is solely deployed on Iran's F-14 Tomcats.



Iranian fleet have reportedly received over 250 modifications and upgrades each, including the provision of new radars, cockpit displays, electronic warfare suites and other critical avionics.




474 × 252

The significance of a growing Iranian fleet of heavily upgraded F-14 fighters is not to be underestimated, and has considerable implications for the country’s aerial warfare capabilities. With most of the country’s Tomcats having seen well under a decade of service, some under five years, before a lack of parts placed them in storage, these airframes are essentially brand new and, with the supply of new parts, can be fielded in considerable numbers - with 40 F-14 fighters currently in active service, and some estimates putting this figure much higher. With the Fakour-90 inheriting and improving on the high precision of the AIM-54, and using a more effective fuel composite reportedly developed with Russian assistance, the missile has a range of little under 300km - slightly less than that of its Russian analogue the R-33. This gives Iranian Tomcats, with a steady supply of indigenously manufactured munitions, an engagement range approximately four times that of the American 75km range AIM-120B, the main long range air to air missile of most U.S. clients, and almost three times that of the more advanced AIM-120C. Indeed, in the event of a regional war Iranian Tomcats can safely shoot down fighters over Saudi Arabia without leaving Iranian airspace - and even target jets over Israel if crossing a little over the Iraqi border. The Fakour-90 is very likely to have inherited the Phoenix's hypersonic speed, making it both faster and longer ranged than the AIM-120 deployed by Saudi and Israeli F-15s.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

ashool said:


> WHY YOU R SO ANGRY are u see american movie too match .in dog fight something is not important is rcs and that mystery radar. go see results of f5 tiger in usa air force dog fight with f16 and even f14 see how stupid speaking of.



You'd have to be delusional to think that the Americans are stupid enough to allow an enemy Aircraft to get within dogfight range of an F-35 and even if we could get within dogfight range the notion that an IRST equipped fighter would lose to a fighter that is not equipped with an IRST in a within visible range engagement is nothing but a delusion! 
FYI in the Iran-Iraq war our F-5's have far more losses than kill against Iraqi fighters especially in a within visible range engagements using IR missiles yet now you have somehow deluded yourself into thinking that the Kosar can go up against an IRST equipped fighter? 

And Iran has 8 years of war experience with the F-5 against aircrafts far less sophisticated than F-16's or F-14's so I really don't need to go look at American dog fight results to know what an ill equipped fighter the F-5 is!

Go research Iranian Air to Air kills in the Iran-Iraq war vs Iraq's Air to Air kill in the Iran-Iraq war. Go see how many Iranian F-5's successfully shot down an Iraqi fighter jet using Air to Air Missiles and how many Iraqi Aircraft shot down Iranian F-5's then come here and tell me how good of a fighter the F-5 is! And the fact is we had far better trained pilots than Iraq did because our pilots had far more flight hours than the Iraqi Air Force. Those are the real stats you should be looking at and not some restricted one time exercise conducted by Americans! 
WHO CARES if an F-5 can beat an F-35 in a gun fight when at the end of the day the idea that you can even get close enough for a gun fight is absurd and honestly how many Iraqi fighters do you think the F-5's downed during 8 years of war with Iraq using its guns to make even assume that would even be a factor in a modern battle filed and against +4.5Gen fighters? 

And I'm not angry, however it's far better for us Iranian to face reality during peace time so we can address it than to be forced to face it if and when war starts so I'd much rather hurt the feelings of my compatriots now rather than.......

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## M.s

سلام دوستان از اول هم قرار بر این نبوده که کوثر وارد نبرد با جنگنده های نسل پنجم مثل اف۲۲ و اف۳۵ بشه. این هواپیما جهت آموزش و پشتیبانی نزدیک هستش و حداکثر اگه خیلی خوشبین باشیم برای نبرد با رقبای منطقه ای ایران که جنگنده نسل پنجم ندارن. پروژه های زیادی در کشور برای نیروی هوایی و هم سایر بخش ها تعریف شده که برداران بی وقفه در حال کار بر روی اونها هستن که بعضی از اونها حتی در تصورات دوست و دشمن نمی گنجه. اندکی صبر نتیجه کار ها در یکی دو سال آینده مشخص خواهد شد​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Vevak doesn't know anything about real fighting. Ever since he listened to the American movie Top Gun with Tom Cruise, he sees American pilots and their planes as gods. He speculates but be sure that Iranian fighter jets are much better than he thinks. It is impossible that the Iranians have completely subscribed to the Shafaq project and we will see that in the future.
> 
> Iranian scientists and the military know what they really need. The ARIAF topic is really the worst topic here because a few speakers are slipping solid.
> 
> The F 35 hahahaah



Iran has 8 years of actual WAR experience with the F-5 so I really don't need no American stats or American movies to tell me what an ill equipped fighter the F-5 is!!!!

Iranian Air-to-Air Victories 1976-1981 (archive.org) 

The stats above have both confirmed and claims 

Now tell me what exactly is it that makes you assume that the F-5 or Kosar would have any chance against an IRST equipped fighter for within visible range engagements let alone have the capability to engage a 4.5Gen fighter let alone a 5th gen fighter from beyond visible range?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Darius77 said:


> IRIAF has upgraded the avionics, fuselage, airframes, radars and weapons systems on all remaining 50+ F-14A Persian Cats. (Iran has retained over 66 airframes out of the 79 aircraft delivered prior to 1979). 30 airframes had been put in storage and upgraded after local spares and weapons systems production was ramped up.
> 
> 
> Noteworthy that IRIAF F-14s can carry several types of air-to-air missiles.
> 
> In fact along with the M61A1 Vulan 20mm internal cannon, AIM-54 Phoenix radar-guided long-range air-to-air missile, AIM-7 Sparrow medium-range semi-active radar homing air-to-air missile and AIM-9 Sidewinder short-range air-to-air missile, Iranian Tomcats can be loaded also with the Fakour-90 air-to-air missile, the lethal Iranian made AIM-54 BVR air to-air-missile. The *Fakour-90* is an Iranian air-to-air missile based on the AIM-54 Phoenix It is solely deployed on Iran's F-14 Tomcats.
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian fleet have reportedly received over 250 modifications and upgrades each, including the provision of new radars, cockpit displays, electronic warfare suites and other critical avionics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 474 × 252
> 
> The significance of a growing Iranian fleet of heavily upgraded F-14 fighters is not to be underestimated, and has considerable implications for the country’s aerial warfare capabilities. With most of the country’s Tomcats having seen well under a decade of service, some under five years, before a lack of parts placed them in storage, these airframes are essentially brand new and, with the supply of new parts, can be fielded in considerable numbers - with 40 F-14 fighters currently in active service, and some estimates putting this figure much higher. With the Fakour-90 inheriting and improving on the high precision of the AIM-54, and using a more effective fuel composite reportedly developed with Russian assistance, the missile has a range of little under 300km - slightly less than that of its Russian analogue the R-33. This gives Iranian Tomcats, with a steady supply of indigenously manufactured munitions, an engagement range approximately four times that of the American 75km range AIM-120B, the main long range air to air missile of most U.S. clients, and almost three times that of the more advanced AIM-120C. Indeed, in the event of a regional war Iranian Tomcats can safely shoot down fighters over Saudi Arabia without leaving Iranian airspace - and even target jets over Israel if crossing a little over the Iraqi border. The Fakour-90 is very likely to have inherited the Phoenix's hypersonic speed, making it both faster and longer ranged than the AIM-120 deployed by Saudi and Israeli F-15s.



I would also add the ability to launch archers and alamos one of which has had its range extended significantly. 
Many years ago a former IRIAF F5 pilot on an older forum (Yaghoot) stated that $2billion was spent in the 90s to completely overhaul/upgrade the tomcat fleet including fixing the TF-30 stall issue at high AOA. 
There was even news about a decade ago about digitalization of the communications and other control systems. 
I wonder now if the AM standard is the culmination of the endeavour started in the 90s and over time saw more success as more domestic technology became available and the goals more ambitious. Also the article does not state how many have been brought to AM standard, assuming that the new paint scheme is applied to all with the completed upgrade, then there are only 2 photographed thus far. Also regarding the Fakour 90, I think all the tomcats with a functional AWG-9 radar can probably filed the missile, even if they not reached AM upgrade. Some statements made by officials hint at Fakour even being able to interface with Phantom radars and it would be terrific if they could adapt Fakour to their SU24s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

F-5E chances increase when in defensive posture. If it defends a city via it's nearby airbase and makes use of terrain, then it can be of some use against advanced enemy fighters coming from distant locations. Terrain masking, afterburner and intact IADS.

That's the context in which such technologically inferior assets can work.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## RΛIDEN

PeeD said:


> F-5E chances increase when in defensive posture. If it defends a city via it's nearby airbase and makes use of terrain, then it can be of some use against advanced enemy fighters coming from distant locations. Terrain masking, afterburner and intact IADS.
> 
> That's the context in which such technologically inferior assets can work.



Brother Peed, is that the 'one and only' context in which such technologically inferior assets like F-5E can work?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

VEVAK said:


> Now tell me what exactly is it that makes you assume that the F-5 or Kosar would have any chance against an IRST equipped fighter for within visible range engagements let alone have the capability to engage a 4.5Gen fighter let alone a 5th gen fighter from beyond visible range?



At this stage, if Iran sends its air fleet against the US Air Force, it will be not less than suicide. 
At first, I've already mentioned in a previous post, to be effective an air raid must be done above the target, at low altitude, slow speed, with none, or at the most, a very weak resistance from the soil. If these conditions are met, then an air raid could be successful. Tell me where, and when these conditions could be met other than Hollywood's studios? Of course against the Taliban or some other defenseless militias, it could be conceivable, but they are no-state actors. Here we are talking about Iran, an industrial power.

If you go out of the tight pathway of western propaganda, you will realize -except the Israeli surprise attack between June 5 to june 11 1967, against middle-aged countries- the results of most of US air wars are at the best, mitigate, in fact, most of the time, contrary what their propaganda asserts a total failure. 
Nowadays, to avoid the humiliation of a US fighter downed, and its pilots jailed, exhibited in front of the cameras. US Air Force equipped its fighter bombers with air-ground missiles. They send waves after waves of fighter bombers to launch their missiles, without significant results. In fact, the aircraft is reduced to be a micro B-52, carrier missiles, but just called F-15 E, F-35, etc...with limited results at the best cases. And to intercept these aggressors, the attacked country scrambled its fighters to launch their BVR missiles with none result, at their turn the F-35, F-15, F-18, Typhoon, Rafale, and the F-22 launched their BVR missiles AIM 120 too with none results. 
With the modern anti-air defense US, and western fighters cannot dare to approach them. See the result of the US air campaign above Serbia. Nowadays, all the West with Israel are attacking Syria, however, they don't dare to approach Syrian's skies.

At this game isn't more cost-effective to send directly ballistic missiles from the ground?
Now you understood the choice of Iran because nowadays the air force as a tool of war is in a deep stalemate. Like the cavalry during the first world war. The cavalry and infantry were useless against cannons and machine guns. Thus, it was decided to dig trenches, after trenches. 

I am nearly sure Iran is doing all its possible to build powerful anti-aircraft guns like a railgun, or magnetized plasma anti-aircraft artilleries.








What the hell is China’s new patented 'magnetized plasma artillery'?


But Chinese scientists believe that magnetized plasma artillery will be so light and energy-efficient that it can be mounted on tanks




taskandpurpose.com




Then what will be the future of the Air Force?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

Any chance Iran will get Su-57?


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> Any chance Iran will get Su-57?



Barring a massive jump in Russian-Iranian relations, there is little chance Russia would export its 5th gen fighter to a pivotal Middle East country like Iran and upset Israel and USA.

Banana countries? Sure

Turkey? Possibly in order to poke NATO in the eyes

Iran? Unlikely, no geopolitical benefit for Russia and a lot of headaches.

That being said, if Iran can acquire 54-75 SU-57 it should absolutely do it as they can replace the F-14’s for the next 30 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

RΛIDEN said:


> Brother Peed, is that the 'one and only' context in which such technologically inferior assets like F-5E can work?



In the context of fighting air to air battles against 5th generation fighters. Of course other scenarios are still possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> Barring a massive jump in Russian-Iranian relations, there is little chance Russia would export its 5th gen fighter to a pivotal Middle East country like Iran and upset Israel and USA.
> 
> Banana countries? Sure
> 
> Turkey? Possibly in order to poke NATO in the eyes
> 
> Iran? Unlikely, no geopolitical benefit for Russia and a lot of headaches.
> 
> That being said, if Iran can acquire 54-75 SU-57 it should absolutely do it as they can replace the F-14’s for the next 30 years.


Israel is nobody in Russia's eyes---a tiny cockroach with population of 6mln Jews--why Russia should care what tiny Israel thinks?

USA can impose sanctions against Russia if it decides to sell Su-57, but Russia is already under US sanctions and now there are news that Biden plans to cut off Russia from SWIFT

If Israeli and USA sanctions were of big concern for Moscow, Russia would have never deployed air power in Syria----and yet Russia openly went against the West and provided military support to Assad

Russia's major enemy is Turkey, because it has plans to expand into Caucasus, Black Sea region and Eastern Europe.

Geopolitically, Iran serves two purposes for Russia:
*1) counterweight to Turkey
2) troublemaker for USA in the Middle East*

Strong and assertive Iran is good for Russia as it *keeps US attention and military resources busy in the Middle East* and away from Ukraine

So selling Su-57 to Iran and disturb balance of power in the Persian Gulf, thus creating more troubles for US in the ME is a good idea from Russian point of view

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

GWXP said:


> Israel is nobody in Russia's eyes---a tiny cockroach with population of 6mln Jews--why Russia should care what tiny Israel thinks?
> 
> USA can impose sanctions against Russia if it decides to sell Su-57, but Russia is already under US sanctions and now there are news that Biden plans to cut off Russia from SWIFT
> 
> If Israeli and USA sanctions were of big concern for Moscow, Russia would have never deployed air power in Syria----and yet Russia openly went against the West and provided military support to Assad
> 
> Russia's major enemy is Turkey, because it has plans to expand into Caucasus, Black Sea region and Eastern Europe.
> 
> Geopolitically, Iran serves two purposes for Russia:
> *1) counterweight to Turkey
> 2) troublemaker for USA in the Middle East*
> 
> Strong and assertive Iran is good for Russia as it *keeps US attention and military resources busy in the Middle East* and away from Ukraine
> 
> So selling Su-57 to Iran and disturb balance of power in the Persian Gulf, thus creating more troubles for US in the ME is a good idea from Russian point of view



Touche, you have a good grasp of the regional geo-political situation. So-called Israel is a nuisance like a flea and really poses no threat to either Russia or Iran. It just goads the stupid Americans into destructive conflicts with its enemies. The US has suffered immensely due the Zionist fanned wars that have bankrupted it over the past 20 years and accelerated China's rapid rise to the prime economy. Imagine what the $15 trillion lost on wars from Afghanistan to Syria would have done for the benefit of the hapless average American.

Iran is a large powerful state with huge strategic mass and indeed serves as a safe buffer for Russia in the southern tiers of Asia Minor. It is in Russia's strategic and security interest to have a stable and powerful Iranian ally. Historically, Russia and Turkey are natural enemies, dating back to Peter the Great's expansionism towards the Black Sea, Crimea and Caucasus , largely at Turkish expense. It would make sense for Russia to arm Iran to the maximum as it bogs down the US and also provides a string counter-weight to Turkey. Iran's geo-strategic influence is also on the rise from Afghanistan to Lebanon and the growing power of Shia Crescent, which also benefits Russia as events in Syria have amply demonstrated. The world is going through a rapid powershift and both Russian and Iranian alliance is a natural given.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IranDefence

GWXP said:


> Israel is nobody in Russia's eyes---a tiny cockroach with population of 6mln Jews--why Russia should care what tiny Israel thinks?
> 
> USA can impose sanctions against Russia if it decides to sell Su-57, but Russia is already under US sanctions and now there are news that Biden plans to cut off Russia from SWIFT
> 
> If Israeli and USA sanctions were of big concern for Moscow, Russia would have never deployed air power in Syria----and yet Russia openly went against the West and provided military support to Assad
> 
> Russia's major enemy is Turkey, because it has plans to expand into Caucasus, Black Sea region and Eastern Europe.
> 
> Geopolitically, Iran serves two purposes for Russia:
> *1) counterweight to Turkey
> 2) troublemaker for USA in the Middle East*
> 
> Strong and assertive Iran is good for Russia as it *keeps US attention and military resources busy in the Middle East* and away from Ukraine
> 
> So selling Su-57 to Iran and disturb balance of power in the Persian Gulf, thus creating more troubles for US in the ME is a good idea from Russian point of view



Read more about powerful and rich Russian Jews !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

thesaint said:


> Any chance Iran will get Su-57?


In a word.....NO!
Think how many ballistic,quasi-ballistic and cruise missiles iran could build for the cost of even a single su-57.
The old air power heavy model makes no sense for iran from either a military or economic perspective.For iran manned air power can only ever play a back up role in its defence strategy,so it would make no sense to buy something like a fleet of 5th gen aircraft,that in addition to being enormously expensive and extremely demanding in terms of [unreliable] foreign supplied logistics,is basically built just for one role ie a2a combat.
Iran ISNT saudi arabia,so its not going to squander vast sums buying weapons that it doesnt need and likely couldnt even use anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> F-5E chances increase when in defensive posture. If it defends a city via it's nearby airbase and makes use of terrain, then it can be of some use against advanced enemy fighters coming from distant locations. Terrain masking, afterburner and intact IADS.
> 
> That's the context in which such technologically inferior assets can work.



No doubt flying in your own Airspace increases you chances of survival that fact remains true for any fighter on the planet. 

However, in a proper cost benefit analysis you can't simply close your eyes to Iranian F-5 stats in areal engagements against the Iraqi Air Force. 


At Iran's level of technology, fixating on improving and producing the F-5 for use as anything other than a trainer as appose to even the F-4 does not make sense to me even at triple the cost it still makes no sense. With a modified F-4 your at least getting the payload capacity, range and air refueling capability to conduct strikes against various types of targets beyond your boarders.

And it's about time Iran moved away from this fixation with the F-5 and the OWJ engines....


----------



## Fulgrim

That Image i found in the Internet some years ago. I don’t Know if it's real but maybe Iran someday have some Su 57.


----------



## VEVAK

Sineva said:


> In a word.....NO!
> Think how many ballistic,quasi-ballistic and cruise missiles iran could build for the cost of even a single su-57.
> The old air power heavy model makes no sense for iran from either a military or economic perspective.For iran manned air power can only ever play a back up role in its defence strategy,so it would make no sense to buy something like a fleet of 5th gen aircraft,that in addition to being enormously expensive and extremely demanding in terms of [unreliable] foreign supplied logistics,is basically built just for one role ie a2a combat.
> Iran ISNT saudi arabia,so its not going to squander vast sums buying weapons that it doesnt need and likely couldnt even use anyway.



I would absolutely agree to the purchase of this beautiful Russian Aircraft if the Russians agree to a +80% technology transfer and access to weapons systems to allow for Iranian produced weapons to be placed on it. 

That would be a worth while investment. However without it neither this nor any other aircraft on the planet would be a worth while investment. 

Spending vast amounts of money on your defense industry to develop and produce weapons isn't specifically about weapons. So investing in a 5th gen fighter will only be a worth while investment if it brings about technological growth. 

That said, fixating on missiles alone will not only restrict Iran's defense industry and military but it restricts Iran's technological growth and makes us dependent on a wide range of industries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

I think you're underestimating the F-5 a bit. I mean Thailand recently upgraded a batch of Vietnam era F-5's with AESA capabilities and new avionics. For the cost of production and maintenance it's really worth it. The US navy still uses them. I mean you can transport 4 of them in a 737. It's not a frontline fighter but as a conventional backup fighter it's great. 

As for the SU-57, I mean Russia really needs $$$ to produce these. They're only planning on producing 76 by the end of the 2020's, so they need a few nations to seriously invest. The Indian's are being flaky lately, wanting to invest more in western aircraft, so Iran and a few other nations investing a few hundred billion in the SU-57 is really what Russia needs as a pillar for the program. 

So far, Iran hasn't shown any serious interest in major weapons purchases from Russia or China but that could just be a game of chicken. Of course by showing interest that gives away leverage. Iran's leaders and military leadership know better than that. Most likely, once the nuclear deal is re-activated, Russia and China will come to Iran and make offers rather than Iran acting needy now.



VEVAK said:


> No doubt flying in your own Airspace increases you chances of survival that fact remains true for any fighter on the planet.
> 
> However, in a proper cost benefit analysis you can't simply close your eyes to Iranian F-5 stats in areal engagements against the Iraqi Air Force.
> 
> 
> At Iran's level of technology, fixating on improving and producing the F-5 for use as anything other than a trainer as appose to even the F-4 does not make sense to me even at triple the cost it still makes no sense. With a modified F-4 your at least getting the payload capacity, range and air refueling capability to conduct strikes against various types of targets beyond your boarders.
> 
> And it's about time Iran moved away from this fixation with the F-5 and the OWJ engines....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hormuz

Fulgrim said:


> That Image i found in the Internet some years ago. I don’t Know if it's real but maybe Iran someday have some Su 57.



it was discussed in the old IMF. it's photoshop, very sadly. i would love to see this fighter with Iranian flag on it.


----------



## Shawnee

The bottleneck is still the engine. Avionics, ammunition and radars are not F5 anymore. It is already 4+ generation.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Yeah it's obvious F-5 can't be a frontline fighter for Iran, but it's a great low cost, easy maintainable trainer, and conventional light fighter with some under-rated bvr capabilities. If Iran were to purchase over 100 SU-30/35 variants with a few dozen SU-57 and build a few dozen more optimized F-5's, that would really be perfect. 

Iran has lots of options in this regard. They can even buy a SU-27 variant from China, the J-11 or perhaps a few dozen 5th generation fighters from China, all with technology transfers ofcourse. Hypersonic missiles and hardened underground aircraft barracks should also be in Iran's future.



WudangMaster said:


> No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
> One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

We need *ammunition delivery* and also *ammunition delivery rate.*

Missiles gives us the ability of *ammunition delivery rate*. Literally 1000 tones per hour is possible with missile magazines. This will annihilate infrastructures of a regional power within a day. Yes. It is simple math.

Fighters provide *gradual ammunition delivery at a lower delivery rate*, if they survive the initial first strikes. Nevertheless we absolutely need them.

*Israel needs a month to two of air strike to deliver the mass Iran delivers in one day of missile barrage.* This is only if their Air Force stays safe through the missile barrage. Missiles are more safe under granite mountains. The same cannot be done with fighters. Yet missiles are more expensive than simple ammunition. So you better finish the enemy on the first five days of missiles barrage. Fighters if protected can deliver missiles more effectively. 

Now you have to divide the budget correctly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Shawnee said:


> We need *ammunition delivery* and also *ammunition delivery rate.*
> 
> Missiles gives us the ability of *ammunition delivery rate*. Literally 1000 tones per hour is possible with missile magazines. This will annihilate infrastructures of a regional power within a day. Yes. It is simple math.
> 
> Fighters provide *gradual ammunition delivery at a lower delivery rate*, if they survive the initial first strikes. Nevertheless we absolutely need them.
> 
> *Israel needs a month to two of air strike to deliver the mass Iran delivers in one day of missile barrage.* This is only if their Air Force stays safe through the missile barrage. Missiles are more safe under granite mountains. The same cannot be done with fighters. Yet missiles are more expensive than simple ammunition. So you better finish the enemy on the first five days of missiles barrage. Fighters if protected can deliver missiles more effectively.
> 
> Now you have to divide the budget correctly.



We assume a conflict with Israel for example would be highly short term (2 weeks).

Launching 50 Ballistic Missiles /day to prevent exhausting missile inventories and deterrence for further action, not including Quasi Ballistic Missiles would deliver 700 missiles in 2 weeks.

If we assume a 600kg warhead, the amount of matter dropped on Israel would be equivalent to nearly 925 tons. The damage would be equivalent to multiple tactical nuclear weapons. That's why they hate so much.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

Stryker1982 said:


> We assume a conflict with Israel for example would be highly short term (2 weeks).
> 
> Launching 50 Ballistic Missiles /day to prevent exhausting missile inventories and deterrence for further action, not including Quasi Ballistic Missiles would deliver 700 missiles in 2 weeks.
> 
> If we assume a 600kg warhead, the amount of matter dropped on Israel would be equivalent to nearly 925 tons. The damage would be equivalent to multiple tactical nuclear weapons. That's why they hate so much.



In a war with Israel:

1. It is a waste of missile to be used from Iran in large scale. Geographic depth should be used. You can use Fajr missile, Fateh missile, and hand grenade! too.

2. 50 per day is very low rate and 1000/h is more necessary. Time will be in Israel Airforce favor. You have to 0-0-0 quickly. *Time is existence. 1000/h is possible.*

3. Israel may use nuclear strike on day 1, when it sees its infrastructures destroyed. So you have to make your deterrence and power very very very clear. You don’t want to hit them harder unless they play it stupid.

Mainland arsenal in Iran should be darn full for many regional adversaries. There, you need money.

*Now do you want 50 Su-57 or another 10000 missiles in your arsenal?*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

Any one who advocates iran should buy *(at this time)* these super expensive foreign made fighter jet of 5th,6th or 7th gen lol..is reading too many aviation magazines..

Put that little damn money that you have at what you are good at. And that is missile ,Drones..of all kinds. make it hypersonic if you can.

Be innovative with your money...Work on Super guns ..remember saddam ..he brought the tech from Canada..Israel assassinated the Canadian Engineer who was building them for IRAQ..guess why..*.because they were afraid of it*,,,

Use the rail-in/rail- out guns from the mountain sites and deliver the payload to the Arabs in the south..cheap and high rate..lol inside mountains no one can bomb them.

Buy, or steal or beg for Tech if you can but make *your own* damn Aircraft..Iran has time..no rush to have them now ..Iran is covered for now..
Have some respect for the Kowsar..for god's sake that was a "Learning curve" project....and guess what.... it is a good cheap aircraft to produce for what it is...excellent work for a country that before had "ZERO" aviation experience.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## VEVAK

sha ah said:


> I think you're underestimating the F-5 a bit. I mean Thailand recently upgraded a batch of Vietnam era F-5's with AESA capabilities and new avionics. For the cost of production and maintenance it's really worth it. The US navy still uses them. I mean you can transport 4 of them in a 737. It's not a frontline fighter but as a conventional backup fighter it's great.
> 
> As for the SU-57, I mean Russia really needs $$$ to produce these. They're only planning on producing 76 by the end of the 2020's, so they need a few nations to seriously invest. The Indian's are being flaky lately, wanting to invest more in western aircraft, so Iran and a few other nations investing a few hundred billion in the SU-57 is really what Russia needs as a pillar for the program.
> 
> So far, Iran hasn't shown any serious interest in major weapons purchases from Russia or China but that could just be a game of chicken. Of course by showing interest that gives away leverage. Iran's leaders and military leadership know better than that. Most likely, once the nuclear deal is re-activated, Russia and China will come to Iran and make offers rather than Iran acting needy now.



And the fact that Thailand operates 27 F-5's with plans to retire them and replace them with the Saab Gripens in the next 5-10 years proves what exactly? and yes 10 of them will be upgraded with AESA radars to allow them to stay in service for another decade. 
I'm guessing as soon as the Thai Airforce got it's hands on AESA radars they figured out rather quickly that it's F-5's wouldn't have a chance against an AESA equipped fighter....

And lets assume that within the next few years Iran manages to produce an airborne AESA fire control radar or something equivalent now tell me how would it make sense to equip Kosars with such a radar and the weapons to go with as appose to all the other supersonic fighters in Iran's fleet?

And if after all these years fixating on the F-5 our current production capacity of the OWJ engine is only 6 per year or 1 every 2 months then at least to me it means that the choice of the F-5 and the OWJ engine to fixate on was a MISTAKE! And to me the ONLY way producing this aircraft makes sense is if and only if it doesn't effect and take away from your capability to focus on the development and production of a more capable fighter!


As for me underestimating the capabilities of the F-5E, again, this is an aircraft Iran has 8 years of war experience with. So it's stats on within visible range engagements against less sophisticated Airforce and against less trained pilots flying 60's era fighters are known. So the idea that it's somehow going to go up against a fighter equipped with a modern IRST let alone an AESA equipped fighter is absurd!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

The Kowsar and the programs/variants that preceded it at worst were test bed programs and at best were modernization programs at keeping the F-5 flying for another 2-3 decades.

It wasn’t a serious program designed to put up an air superiority fighter. At the end of the day you cannot change physics. F-5 was designed as a cheap export light fighter/trainer for wars against Soviet fighters. Quantity over quality.

You cannot take that plane and suddenly make it an air superiority fighter anymore you can take a truck and make it a formula one car.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shawnee

*A bit of history:*
When Iran made the first Toloue engine, senior members of the time did not know whether to be happy or upset.

It was our first jet engine. However the lifespan was one hour!! Production rate was also low.
Efficiency was so low that materials would malfunction in one hour. It took years to improve it and the speed of progress is acceptable, when you compare to China and India. Main Chinese engine still has Russian controller parts per my knowledge. I hope I am wrong.

*Can TOT help Iran?*
Looks up Tejas, as the legend of TOTs. Barely an acceptable assembly job. Note that we lag India in foreign relations, money and population.
Look up Kaveri.
I hope we can have collaborations with China, and NK.

*Questions*:
Do we need a better airforce? Absolutely.
Is Kowsar a good fighter? No.
Are we on the correct path with Kowsar? We are doing OK.

*Finally*:
*Will we lose a war because of not having good fighters?*

Not having good fighters is not among the top 10 reasons of losing a war in Iran. I am more concerned of losing 20 Su-57 on day 1 of a war.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Shawnee said:


> *A bit of history:*
> When Iran made the first Toloue engine, senior members of the time did not know whether to be happy or upset.
> 
> It was our first jet engine. However the lifespan was one hour!! Production rate was also low.
> Efficiency was so low that materials would malfunction in one hour. It took years to improve it and the speed of progress is acceptable, when you compare to China and India. Main Chinese engine still has Russian controller parts per my knowledge. I hope I am wrong.
> 
> *Can TOT help Iran?*
> Looks up Tejas, as the legend of TOTs. Barely an acceptable assembly job. Note that we lag India in foreign relations, money and population.
> Look up Kaveri.
> I hope we can have collaborations with China, and NK.
> 
> *Questions*:
> Do we need a better airforce? Absolutely.
> Is Kowsar a good fighter? No.
> Are we on the correct path with Kowsar? We are doing OK.
> 
> *Finally*:
> *Will we lose a war because of not having good fighters?*
> 
> Not having good fighters is not among the top 10 reasons of losing a war in Iran. I am more concerned of losing 20 Su-57 on day 1 of a war.


Your assessment is completely correct. Some members think that Iran has wasted time with f5 and its power plant, completely forgetting the fact that Iran was engineering illiterate prior to the Iraq war. Now Iran has several organizations manufacturing turbines of various types.

Let me emphasize that. Not only Iran didn’t have a heavy industry in any shape or form before the war. We couldn’t even produce nuts and bolts. So let’s not forget our past when criticizing the hardworking engineers and managers in the defense sector.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## jauk

Sina-1 said:


> Your assessment is completely correct. Some members think that Iran has wasted time with f5 and its power plant, completely forgetting the fact that Iran was engineering illiterate prior to the Iraq war. Now Iran has several organizations manufacturing turbines of various types.
> 
> Let me emphasize that. Not only Iran didn’t have a heavy industry in any shape or form before the war. We couldn’t even produce nuts and bolts. So let’s not forget our past when criticizing the hardworking engineers and managers in the defense sector.


100%. Additionally, all the efforts we see in creating an old school and conventional 'air force' is definitely geared toward acquiring the knowledge (s) for powerplants, metallurgy, aerodynamics, weaponizatoon, guidance, electronics, etc. All of which have applications far beyond building over complex/redundant human piloted aircraft. Much like rocket and space industries, aircraft industries have multiplicative effects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

WudangMaster said:


> No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
> One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.


No radars are digital,you are mixing two different thing,radar can be digital and pulse doppler in same time,digital means that it is built using solid state tech and use modern digital processing tech...you can completly digitalise system,like Russians offer modernization for their all old systems(s-125,kub..)without actually change anything else....also Iran did digitalisation of HAWK and all other older systems without changing core arhicteture...pulse dople,continuos wave...etc..those are just radar techniques ....pulse dopler is base for SAR radar also....So,digitalization of older systems you are basicly changing analoge components with solid state tech(transistors,chips,micro controlers..etc)and you bring digital signal procesing,which for example makes integration of different components very easy,also offer better security and resistance...thus high procesing power and reducing size of device...basicly you can now produce and put radar with 160-200km range in F-5 or Mig-21/F7 very easily,with difitalization it very easy integrate any modern weapons .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> The Kowsar and the programs/variants that preceded it at worst were test bed programs and at best were modernization programs at keeping the F-5 flying for another 2-3 decades.
> 
> It wasn’t a serious program designed to put up an air superiority fighter. At the end of the day you cannot change physics. F-5 was designed as a cheap export light fighter/trainer for wars against Soviet fighters. Quantity over quality.
> 
> You cannot take that plane and suddenly make it an air superiority fighter anymore you can take a truck and make it a formula one car.



I think a better analogy would have been changing a Go-Kart into a Formula-1 

Main problem I have with Iran's F-5 program is more about Iran's refusal to move on past the program and towards something bigger with bigger more powerful engines which will force you to push boundaries of technology and industry in Iran

If your weapons industry isn't pushing the boundaries of science, industrial and technological growth in your country then it's really not doing it's job properly.

You may force yourself to start mining and producing Ti, high grade Nickel & other alloys and other composites over a fighter program but in the long run it's effects on your civilian industries will be far greater than any fighter same goes with the development of any advanced part, tools or gear you use on it or to produce it, be it an advanced data link, helmet mounted display, AI hardware and software, IRST, turbofan engines, Ti casting or 3d printing.... at the end of the day and in the long run the overall effect such a program will have on your civilian industries will be far greater than any fighter jet and that's what makes spending billons on a domestic fighter program a worth while effort. BUT it can ONLY be a worth while effort if your actually pushing the boundaries of science, technology and industry in your country. 
But if you chose a fighter that's not really pushing you to be innovate and your standing around for some other industry to produce this and that so you can shove inside or use to build your fighter with the result being a go kart of a fighter then clearly there is something fundamentally wrong with such a program....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

*Look how an Indian aviation author defends Tejas program:*

——





What Tejas program has given India:

1) *It is 75.5% (very impressive) indigenous in 2016 and this is very likely to go even higher. *It remains a great challenge and a big learning and experience process for our scientists and they have successfully crossed every hurdle.

2) *Tejas program has taken 21–22 years (very standard) to complete the first version* development (1993–2014/15).

For the interested people and people who say Tejas is 33 years old, this is the time-line for LCA program:
1984- Aeronautical Development Agency was established.
1985- IAF presented their requirements
1988-90- Design was done.
1993- Funding approved for development
1995- First Technology demonstrator
2001- First flight
2003- Sonic barrier crossed and Tejas became supersonic
2007- Limited series production started
2009- Tejas completed 1000 test flights (trials in various weather, terrain conditions and altitudes and firing different weapons were done, continuously being upgraded with 21st century technologies)
2011- certification for release to service (Initial Operation Clearance-1)
2013- Initial Operation Clearance-2
2014- Series production started
2016- Induction of first squadron into IAF

So 1988-90 and from 1993 to 2013 — 22 years to develop. From 2001 to 2013 — Evolved in this period. It's a 21st century aircraft.

3) It has literally created a *big and networked aeronautics R&D, engineering and industrial ecosystem of 50+ labs, 500+ firms, a number of universities and academic institutes etc.*

4) Tejas program is also arguably the *cheapest 4+ generation fighter development project (only 1 billion USD). [for perspective, Gripen program took 14 billion USD in similar time].*

So we can see, LCA Tejas is a big technological success and also a very important and fruitful project for India. It is one of the bests in its class in the world.
——
Kindly note that with the exception of engine and partly radar, Kowsar is a 4+ generation platform.

*Heavy engines are being developed but will not come overnight.*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Shawnee said:


> *Look how an Indian aviation author defends Tejas program:*
> 
> ——
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Tejas program has given India:
> 
> 1) *It is 75.5% (very impressive) indigenous in 2016 and this is very likely to go even higher. *It remains a great challenge and a big learning and experience process for our scientists and they have successfully crossed every hurdle.
> 
> 2) *Tejas program has taken 21–22 years (very standard) to complete the first version* development (1993–2014/15).
> 
> For the interested people and people who say Tejas is 33 years old, this is the time-line for LCA program:
> 1984- Aeronautical Development Agency was established.
> 1985- IAF presented their requirements
> 1988-90- Design was done.
> 1993- Funding approved for development
> 1995- First Technology demonstrator
> 2001- First flight
> 2003- Sonic barrier crossed and Tejas became supersonic
> 2007- Limited series production started
> 2009- Tejas completed 1000 test flights (trials in various weather, terrain conditions and altitudes and firing different weapons were done, continuously being upgraded with 21st century technologies)
> 2011- certification for release to service (Initial Operation Clearance-1)
> 2013- Initial Operation Clearance-2
> 2014- Series production started
> 2016- Induction of first squadron into IAF
> 
> So 1988-90 and from 1993 to 2013 — 22 years to develop. From 2001 to 2013 — Evolved in this period. It's a 21st century aircraft.
> 
> 3) It has literally created a *big and networked aeronautics R&D, engineering and industrial ecosystem of 50+ labs, 500+ firms, a number of universities and academic institutes etc.*
> 
> 4) Tejas program is also arguably the *cheapest 4+ generation fighter development project (only 1 billion USD). [for perspective, Gripen program took 14 billion USD in similar time].*
> 
> So we can see, LCA Tejas is a big technological success and also a very important and fruitful project for India. It is one of the bests in its class in the world.
> ——
> Kindly note that with the exception of engine and partly radar, Kowsar is a 4+ generation platform.
> 
> *Heavy engines are being developed but will not come overnight.*


IMO, Tejas is a waste in terms of a military asset. However, the tejas program, as you have pointed to, has been priceless for India. Worth every penny for Indian industry! And future fighter projects will be developed much more efficiently.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raghfarm007

I agree that Tejas has been a waste of time and money....just like Arjune tank.

India is too poor, undeveloed and corrupt for these projects to ever succeed. The tea seller that became their prime minister only made things worse....

If the indians ever were close to makin a decent weapon..... the Russians would give them the same weaons for free to kill off the project.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Shawnee said:


> *A bit of history:*
> When Iran made the first Toloue engine, senior members of the time did not know whether to be happy or upset.
> 
> It was our first jet engine. However the lifespan was one hour!! Production rate was also low.
> Efficiency was so low that materials would malfunction in one hour. It took years to improve it and the speed of progress is acceptable, when you compare to China and India. Main Chinese engine still has Russian controller parts per my knowledge. I hope I am wrong.
> 
> *Can TOT help Iran?*
> Looks up Tejas, as the legend of TOTs. Barely an acceptable assembly job. Note that we lag India in foreign relations, money and population.
> Look up Kaveri.
> I hope we can have collaborations with China, and NK.
> 
> *Questions*:
> Do we need a better airforce? Absolutely.
> Is Kowsar a good fighter? No.
> Are we on the correct path with Kowsar? We are doing OK.
> 
> *Finally*:
> *Will we lose a war because of not having good fighters?*
> 
> Not having good fighters is not among the top 10 reasons of losing a war in Iran. I am more concerned of losing 20 Su-57 on day 1 of a war.



Tolue, Owj, F-5 program are all projects started by Shahid Sattari and if he was still alive and if we were on the right track we would have moved passed these projects a decade ago. Except for the Tolue which has had upgrades and design modifications over the years and is more than sufficient for it's task...
And in terms of Mini Jet engines we are at more than acceptable level because we didn't restrict ourselves to reverse engineering and actually got involved in design and development. 

And if you wanna know if Iran is on the right track just research the history and development of Jet engines from 1940 to 1970 and compare that to what Iran has done over the past 30 years with main deference being that the vast majority of the trial and error parts of R&D and design has already been done for you. Iran needs to look at reverse engineering as training wheels and at some point those training wheels need to come off and if at some point someone doesn't yank them off you'll be stuck with them.

What needs to change?

1.Iranian leadership needs to stop looking at a fighter program as a program strictly created to develop a weapon rather than a program whos actual goal is the development of Science, Technology, Industries, Human resources,... and such a program needs to be managed and funded accordingly 

2. Iran's Air Force needs to acknowledge and accept that the R&D in mining, metallurgy & composites is their (fighter programs) responsibility as is pushing the boundaries of science, tech, human resources and industrial development in those and various other fields to the countries limits. 

3. The only way to truly get a valuable fighter program going in Iran is by starting a joint Air Force - IRGC fighter program in the defense industry because the IRGC has both the capability and is legally able to start mining and start industrial development in various fields that don't necessarily restrict it to a fighter program

4. Iran needs to set goals and limits on any fighter program based on a proper threat assessment. Small, light and limited ranged fighters with no Air refueling capability have little to no use in a country the size of Iran and Iran doesn't have the budget to build and maintain 4-5 different fighter platforms.
So you need one platform that can be modified to be used for Air Superiority, Strike, Attack, CAS, Multi Roll, Air Refueling, Recon, ECM....

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

And it continues ! The worst topic of the forum with speakers who think they are experts that they are not.

The Kowsar plane is a big step forward and according to Iranian authorities, the kowsar has improved even further since its construction. We don't know what missile and bomb are used on this new Kowsar. In addition, Iranian pilots have this aircraft.

The Kowsar in a global tactic inside the Iranian territory, is very good aircraft. We have the much improved Tomcat and the much improved f-4 SM too. Iran works miracles with a small military budget and heavy sanctions.

Well done Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> And it continues ! The worst topic of the forum with speakers who think they are experts that they are not.
> 
> The Kowsar plane is a big step forward and according to Iranian authorities, the kowsar has improved even further since its construction. We don't know what missile and bomb are used on this new Kowsar. In addition, Iranian pilots have this aircraft.
> 
> The Kowsar in a global tactic inside the Iranian territory, is very good aircraft. We have the much improved Tomcat and the much improved f-4 SM too. Iran works miracles with a small military budget and heavy sanctions.
> 
> Well done Iran



First off the fact that Iran has upgraded it's F-4's and F-14's into more capable fighters has nothing to do with the fact that the Kowsar/F-5 is not a platform worth pursuing for use as anything other than an Advanced Supersonic Trainer. 

2ndly do you honestly think Iranian authorities are going to come and say that this production line was created because the F-5 was the cheapest and easiest fighter platform to reverse engineer? Clearly NOT! 

Neither the F-5 nor the Owj engine are good choices to pursue at Iran's level of technology because at the end of the day due to their size and limitations they don't leave you room for improvements where the eventual result of such improvements will be worth the cost.
And every second Iranian engineers spend on producing the J85 is a second taken away from pursuing something that would actually have an effective on the outcome of any potential conflict and is a second taken away from them pursuing tech that pushes Iran to the edges of its scientific, tech & industrial capabilities.

Choosing the F-5 to reverse engineer in the early 90's was the right choice for Iran at that time given Iran's infrastructure, human resources and industrial capabilities of that time but it is NOT the right choice today because many aspects of that platform is well below Iran's current and potential future capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

VEVAK said:


> First off the fact that Iran has upgraded it's F-4's and F-14's into more capable fighters has nothing to do with the fact that the Kowsar/F-5 is not a platform worth pursuing for use as anything other than an Advanced Supersonic Trainer.
> 
> 2ndly do you honestly think Iranian authorities are going to come and say that this production line was created because the F-5 was the cheapest and easiest fighter platform to reverse engineer? Clearly NOT!
> 
> Neither the F-5 nor the Owj engine are good choices to pursue at Iran's level of technology because at the end of the day due to their size and limitations they don't leave you room for improvements where the eventual result of such improvements will be worth the cost.
> And every second Iranian engineers spend on producing the J85 is a second taken away from pursuing something that would actually have an effective on the outcome of any potential conflict and is a second taken away from them pursuing tech that pushes Iran to the edges of its scientific, tech & industrial capabilities.
> 
> Choosing the F-5 to reverse engineer in the early 90's was the right choice for Iran at that time given Iran's infrastructure, human resources and industrial capabilities of that time but it is NOT the right choice today because many aspects of that platform is well below Iran's current and potential future capabilities.


I agree with all your points about "_Iran should not spend much effort on F5 any more and should move on_"....My question is .....what is it that makes you think Iran is stuck on F5 and not moving past it....is it the limited production of Kowsar that gives you the idea....Why not do a limited production of Kowsar ..it is developed so why not produce a few...it can be used for what it is (trainer or CAS or ...) . No one claimed it is the end of the line.....Your points on developing aviation infrastructure is well justified but how do U know they are not doing it as we speak....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I agree with all your points about "_Iran should not spend much effort on F5 any more and should move on_"....My question is .....what is it that makes you think Iran is stuck on F5 and not moving past it....is it the limited production of Kowsar that gives you the idea....Why not do a limited production of Kowsar ..it is developed so why not produce a few...it can be used for what it is (trainer or CAS or ...) . No one claimed it is the end of the line.....Your points on developing aviation infrastructure is well justified but how do U know they are not doing it as we speak....



Because Iran has plenty of F-5’s already. I have already written that the Iranian Air Force budget is less than 1B!

Lastly Iran hasn’t been able to make a jump in tech because it hasn’t had ACCESS to 4++ fighter. People think you can magically jump from 3rd gen to 4++ without examples to learn off of. Even in age of computers this process is time consuming and costly.

Even Iran’s own officials have said they need access to modern fighters to develop their own programs. There’s only so much you can learn from technology put in a F-14, F-5, and F-4. Eventually you need new technology to learn from.

That is why Iran’s drone industry is so far ahead of its aerospace industry. It has had access to leading drone technology from Israel and USA via captured drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Because Iran has plenty of F-5’s already. I have already written that the Iranian Air Force budget is less than 1B!
> 
> Lastly Iran hasn’t been able to make a jump in tech because it hasn’t had ACCESS to 4++ fighter. People think you can magically jump from 3rd gen to 4++ without examples to learn off of. Even in age of computers this process is time consuming and costly.
> 
> Even Iran’s own officials have said they need access to modern fighters to develop their own programs. There’s only so much you can learn from technology put in a F-14, F-5, and F-4. Eventually you need new technology to learn from.
> 
> That is why Iran’s drone industry is so far ahead of its aerospace industry. It has had access to leading drone technology from Israel and USA via captured drones.


why would Iran always need "Tech" from "Others"..do those "Others" have more brain..I know they have more money but why spend billions to buy few planes to get "Tech" rather than produce your own Tech with those billions (If you had it to begin with)....Yes it would take more time but at the end it is "Iran's Tech" not borrowed "foreign Tech" ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> why would Iran always need "Tech" from "Others"..do those "Others" have more brain..I know they have more money but why spend billions to buy few planes to get "Tech" rather than produce your own Tech with those billions (If you had it to begin with)....Yes it would take more time but at the end it is "Iran's Tech" not borrowed "foreign Tech" ...


There is also a time factor as the older legacy aircraft can only be maintained for so long a proper replacement will be needed sooner than later. Consider the time from a prototype to testing to serial production and at a limited rate per year which might leave serious gaps in IRIAF. No one is advocating a giant order, but a stop gap order would not be unreasonable. 
Also, there is simply not enough resources being allocated to this endeavor and IRIAF should not even involved in the design and building anymore as entities like IAIO/HESA have proven very capable in this since after the imposed war. IRIAF should become leaner and human focused (producing top notch pilots and personnel) and let HESA take over the heavy maintenance/overhaul/upgrade of aircraft and design future aircraft. 

On a related note, I am curious now as to who is upgrading the tomcat fleet to the AM standard; is it IRIAF solely or is IAIO/HESA involved or is it a joint venture? 
Also, did IRGC-ASF upgrade the SU-22 solely or did they collaborate with IAIO/HESA? How many entities are there in the country that can do this kind of work with aircraft such as rebuild, overhaul, upgrade, & build from scratch?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> why would Iran always need "Tech" from "Others"..do those "Others" have more brain..I know they have more money but why spend billions to buy few planes to get "Tech" rather than produce your own Tech with those billions (If you had it to begin with)....Yes it would take more time but at the end it is "Iran's Tech" not borrowed "foreign Tech" ...



How are you going to build an AL-31 when you don’t even know where to start.

You could have the worlds best supercomputer and it would still struggle to build you a jet engine.

Honestly sometimes people need to use their brain on this board more. You can’t just tell a group of engineers “build me an AL-31 like engine” + throw some money and then wait x amount of time and it’s ready.

I seriously question if you think r&d works like an iPhone video game. Because that is the type of vibe your post gives off.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> How are you going to build an AL-31 when you don’t even know where to start.
> 
> You could have the worlds best supercomputer and it would still struggle to build you a jet engine.
> 
> Honestly sometimes people need to use their brain on this board more. You can’t just tell a group of engineers “build me an AL-31 like engine” + throw some money and then wait x amount of time and it’s ready.
> 
> I seriously question if you think r&d works like an iPhone video game. Because that is the type of vibe your post gives off.


may be you are correct and AL-31 was indeed built by the Aliens!...how can a human beings with primitive computers even think to build an AL-31..in the 1980's ..it must have been something that came out of Area 51.

I know Iranian engineers mastered the nuclear cycle and I suggest you read how difficult an enterprise that was..they also managed to build Missiles that entered a room 700 kilometer away..,,My friend never be afraid of the complexity of a job.....Tehrani Moghadam once told his team..*."if they can build it so can we and we have the advantage of knowing that it can be done ..they did not know that".*

My last words..."*HOW DO YOU EAT AN ELEPHANT!....ONE SPOON AT A TIME"*...

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> may be you are correct and AL-31 was indeed built by the Aliens!...how can a human beings with primitive computers even think to build an AL-31..in the 1980's ..it must have been something that came out of Area 51.
> 
> I know Iranian engineers mastered the nuclear cycle and I suggest you read how difficult an enterprise that was..they also managed to build Missiles that entered a room 700 kilometer away..,,My friend never be afraid of the complexity of a job.....Tehrani Moghadam once told his team..*."if they can build it so can we and we have the advantage of knowing that it can be done ..they did not know that".*
> 
> My last words..."*HOW DO YOU EAT AN ELEPHANT!....ONE SPOON AT A TIME"*...


There is a youtube channel called Science and Futurism with Isaac Arthur and one of his favorite quotes is: "If brute force is not working, you are not using enough of it"
If there are enough resources thrown at the problem of lack of a domestic heavy fighter, then yes Iran could build F-22/SU-57 & better but there is not enough resources being dedicated to this endeavor to produce meaningful results in the needed time frame given. Add to that the missiles and sam systems and naval assets also demand resources so it would not be a bad idea to bring in new aircraft with TOT. 
I would even advocate the occasional purchase of new radars just for the intent of copying while also building upon domestic capabilities. Iran should unapologetically and aggressively seek to acquire and copy new tech in any way possible, like China is known to do. They will always seek out what others make for further knowledge while also wisely building themselves up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


> There is a youtube channel called Science and Futurism with Isaac Arthur and one of his favorite quotes is: "If brute force is not working, you are not using enough of it"
> If there are enough resources thrown at the problem of lack of a domestic heavy fighter, then yes Iran could build F-22/SU-57 & better but there is not enough resources being dedicated to this endeavor to produce meaningful results in the needed time frame given. Add to that the missiles and sam systems and naval assets also demand resources so it would not be a bad idea to bring in new aircraft with TOT.
> I would even advocate the occasional purchase of new radars just for the intent of copying while also building upon domestic capabilities. Iran should unapologetically and aggressively seek to acquire and copy new tech in any way possible, like China is known to do. They will always seek out what others make for further knowledge while also wisely building themselves up.


Yes I agree Iran does not have the financial resources at this time considering all of the other things going on..but Iran has the time and the brains so they can take their time.... defence wise Iran is fully covered for the time being may be for a decade ..that is enough time to allow Iran to develop a solid base for its heavy aircraft industry..no disagreements there. And I fully agree the job is not for the Iranian air force to develop aircraft. They can do the requirements. Leave the development to a dedicated organization..... and while all this is going on...Buy. steal or beg for Tech if they give it to you..I doubts that but hey an Israeli Pilot can always be persuaded to fly his F-35 to Iran and receive his fat payout cheque and his citizenship (not a bad deal if you ask me..lol)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> may be you are correct and AL-31 was indeed built by the Aliens!...how can a human beings with primitive computers even think to build an AL-31..in the 1980's ..it must have been something that came out of Area 51.
> 
> I know Iranian engineers mastered the nuclear cycle and I suggest you read how difficult an enterprise that was..they also managed to build Missiles that entered a room 700 kilometer away..,,My friend never be afraid of the complexity of a job.....Tehrani Moghadam once told his team..*."if they can build it so can we and we have the advantage of knowing that it can be done ..they did not know that".*
> 
> My last words..."*HOW DO YOU EAT AN ELEPHANT!....ONE SPOON AT A TIME"*...



useless motivational quotes doesn’t change reality on the ground.

The two countries that built first jet engines were built on backs of Nazi engineers. The Nazi War Machine that had a Military budget of $80B+ in 21st century dollars easily dwarfing Iran’s military budget by a factor of 4.

US and Soviet Union spent more per year on cutting edge research and development than Iran spent during the entire Islamic Republic’s existence!

Even if Iran had the blue print to AL-31 it could not mass produce it! Iran doesn’t have the industry and supply chain in place for such an endeavor. Nor does the blue print tell you the timing firing mechanism of the engine blades (software coding) nor how to produce each blade and at what dimensions.

Iran needs massive investment in this field to reap such rewards. If Iran can unveil an RD-33 or AL-21 engine in next decade WITHOUT TOT it would be groundbreaking for Iran.

There is a reason why almost every engine in existence today has either US or Russian parts in some % or is a derivative of an established US/Russian/Soviet engine.

A jet engine needs to last hundreds of hours before overhaul and carries a live human on board each time. A missile engine needs to last a one way trip and failure means loss of a missile.

Which is more complex?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

There is ONE way to manufacture a turbofan. To make it yourself. No meaningful TOT has ever happened there. Russia turned down China with a clear NO.

You can use cheat sheets like stealing blue prints or reverse engineering it. *Yet, it is still a difficult task.*

There are a few technologies that are so sensitive that no meaningful TOT has even happened.

These people have made single crystal technology which is impressive. They are ahead of India Turkey.

Give them some time. Nagging will not make it happen. If you are unhappy with the R&D budget, donate half of your income instead of nagging.

There are rumors about RD33 and semi heavy turbofans. Patience.

The question is:
*Is Iran behind or inefficient? *I believe considering how backward we were, we are doing OK.
India has spent more money and time and is not ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## VEVAK

aryobarzan said:


> I agree with all your points about "_Iran should not spend much effort on F5 any more and should move on_"....My question is .....what is it that makes you think Iran is stuck on F5 and not moving past it....is it the limited production of Kowsar that gives you the idea....Why not do a limited production of Kowsar ..it is developed so why not produce a few...it can be used for what it is (trainer or CAS or ...) . No one claimed it is the end of the line.....Your points on developing aviation infrastructure is well justified but how do U know they are not doing it as we speak....



Iran has an active heavy fighter project that's at it's design phase and among others Iran has reverse engineered F-4's as well. So to say that Iran is stuck on the F-5's is incorrect. There is a major difference between fixating on something than being stuck.
And the F-5 is a good trainer that can potentially be armed for various types of missions and under normal circumstances & if it wasn't deluding some in Iran into thinking that it could be upgraded to a point that it would be good enough, I wouldn't have a problem with it but unfortunately that is not the case.

Point is if Iran had chosen the F-4 & J-79's to fixate on, improve & conduct design changes on we wouldn't be having this discussion & the state of Iran's fighter program would have been far beyond what it is today.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xbat

Shawnee said:


> They are ahead of India Turkey.


i dont think Turkey is behind of iran if we consider jet engine tech, check turkish engine section. before make a comment


----------



## Shams313

xbat said:


> i dont think Turkey is behind of iran if we consider jet engine tech, check turkish engine section. before make a comment


" These people have made single crystal technology which is impressive. They are ahead of India Turkey. "

He was referring to single-crystal blade development. Even so, they progressed a lot, just look at their new rq drone engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lord Of Gondor

Shawnee said:


> These people have made single crystal technology which is impressive. *They are ahead of India *.


Much respect to the Iranian scientists who are working on such a complex program (sanctions add even more complexities)
Having said that, the claim is not correct.
India has developed a working modern Turbofan engine domestically, tested it extensively and has come up short as far as meeting real world requirements are concerned.
India manufactures the RD-33 Series 3, the AL-31FP and Adour variants in house from raw materials, SCBs included.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> " These people have made single crystal technology which is impressive. They are ahead of India Turkey. "
> 
> He was referring to single-crystal blade development. Even so, they progressed a lot, just look at their new rq drone engine.



He is a Turkish troll.

Turkey couldn’t even develop a helicopter engine for its attack helicopter but will now develop its own jet engine? Laughable.

Is that why Russia is offering to supply engines, sub systems, control systems, etc for TF-X project?

You have a better chance to see a Turkish man Grow wings then a 100% Turkish engine. Its not because Turks cannot build such a endeavor, it’s more because their access to raw materials and tech from around the world (both East to west) has spoiled them and ruined their economies of scale incentive.

If iran had access to same resources it would likely do the same thing. I mean look at Iranian oil industry, its tech is still decade+ behind leading Russian and US oil drillers. Before people say sanctions, they need to know post revolution Iran had the ability to deepen ties with both East and West, but rejected the notion. I mean Halliburton (dick Cheney’s oil company) had an office in Tehran during the 90’s. Something unfamothable today.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shawnee

*Burak Bekdil is an excellent Turkish military analyst with access to some secrets. TJ300 is equal of Tolou 1 mini jet. It is unveiled 15 years later. *


*Turkey’s ‘chronic engine problem’ is harming defense projects, warn officials*
By: Burak Ege Bekdil

ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey’s inability to produce a fully indigenous engine is harming some of the country’s otherwise successful domestic defense programs, according to industry and government officials.
“We had it 15 years ago, we had it 10 years ago and we are still having it,” said a former defense industry chief. “It’s our chronic engine problem.”
A government procurement official agreed, telling Defense News that “at best the problem causes major delays, and at worst it can be an existential threat [to programs].”
The Altay, a multibillion-dollar program for the production of Turkey’s first indigenous tank, has long been delayed due to difficulties surrounding the engine and transmission used to power the new-generation tank.
BMC, a Turkish-Qatari joint venture that in 2018 won the serial production contract for the Altay, said in October 2020 that the tank would be fielded within 24 months. The original target was to have the Altay in the field this year 2020. Today, procurement officials and industry sources say even 2022 is an optimistic deadline.
Western countries with power pack technology, particularly Germany, have been reluctant to share technology or sell to Turkey for political reasons.
“Lack of a feasible power pack [engine and transmission] is depriving the program of any sensible progress,” noted an industry source.
Turkey also needs an engine for the new-generation TF-X fighter jet as well as indigenous helicopter models in the making.
At the center of these engine efforts is Tusas Engine Industries, a state-controlled engine maker.
TEI announced June 19 that it successfully tested its locally made TJ300 miniature turbojet engine, which the company produced for medium-range anti-ship missiles. The engine features a thrust rating of 1.3 kilonewtons.
Company officials say the TJ300 engine’s more advanced, future versions could power larger anti-ship cruise missiles and land-attack cruise missiles. Turkey hopes to power its anti-ship and land-attack cruise missiles with locally developed engines.
“The effort is about ending dependency on imported designs,” a TEI official said. Turkey currently imports miniature air-breathing engines from Microturbo — a unit of French company Safran — to power its domestically developed cruise missiles.
Separately, Turkey’s Kale Group is developing a larger, albeit miniature turbojet engine called the KTJ-3200. It has a 3.2-kilonewton thrust rating, and will power the Atmaca and SOM missile systems. On a much bigger scale, Kale Group has ambitions to develop an engine to power the TF-X.
In 2017, Kale Group and British company Rolls-Royce launched a joint venture to develop aircraft engines for Turkey, initially targeting the TF-X. But the £100 million (U.S. $124 million) deal was effectively put on hold due to uncertainties over technology transfer. In December, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavusoğlu said the government is keen to revive talks with Rolls-Royce.
When asked for an update on negotiations, a Rolls-Royce spokesperson told Defense News: “We submitted an engine co-development proposal to Turkey, but the customer has not elected to pursue this to date.”
A year before the Kale Group-Rolls-Royce partnership, Turkish Aerospace Industries — a sister company of TEI — signed a $125 million heads of agreement with U.K.-based firm BAE Systems to collaborate on the first development phase of the TF-X. Turkey originally planned to fly the TF-X in 2023, but aerospace officials are now eyeing 2025 at the earliest.
TEI is also developing the TS1400, a turboshaft engine it intends to power the T625 Gökbey, a utility and transport helicopter developed and built by TAI. The Gökbey currently flies with the CTS-800A turboshaft engine supplied by Light Helicopter Turbine Engine Company, a joint venture between American firm Honeywell and Rolls-Royce.
The Gökbey made its maiden flight in September. TEI says it successfully tested the “core” of its TS1400 turboshaft engine and plans to deliver the prototype to TAI in late 2020.
But analysts remain cautious. “These efforts may eventually fail to materialize without meaningful foreign know-how,” said a London-based Turkey specialist. “Or they may come at costs not viable for mass production.”

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

Lord Of Gondor said:


> Much respect to the Iranian scientists who are working on such a complex program (sanctions add even more complexities)
> Having said that, the claim is not correct.
> India has developed a working modern Turbofan engine domestically, tested it extensively and has come up short as far as meeting real world requirements are concerned.
> India manufactures the RD-33 Series 3, the AL-31FP and Adour variants in house from raw materials, SCBs included.



My respect to your space scientists.
The engines you mentioned are being assembled and the sensitive components and alloys are manufactured in Russia.

Kaveri also did reach its goal of 81kN with the afterburner but at twice the engine weight and as you mentioned with lower efficiency. It is an achievement.

This is one of my motivational images. Thanks to your great scientists. I look at this picture a lot.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

*کارخانه هواپیماسازی شهباز*


*کارخانه هواپیماسازی شهباز* به دستور رضاشاه در دوشان تپه تأسیس و سه نوع هواپیما در آن ساخته شد




دوشان تپه، کارخانه شهباز




د هاویلند تایگرمث




هاوکر آداگز




هاوکر هایند

*افتتاح کارخانه *
ایران با شروع دهه ۱۳۱۰ به منظور گسترش قوایی هوایی خود شروع به خرید هواپیماهای جنگی کرد. رضاشاه برای کاستن هزینه‌های خرید فرمان تأسیس این کارخانه را داد و مرداد ۱۳۱۲ مهندسی سوئدی بنام N.H Larsson مامور برنامه‌ریزی و ساماندهی این کارخانه شد. لوازم مورد احتیاج از کشورهای مانند فرانسه و بریتانیا و شرکت پرت اند ویتنی سفارش‌ داده شد و آبان ۱۳۱۴ ده‌ها کارگر و تکنسین کار خود را آغاز کردند.
*شهباز* به‌طور رسمی ۲۱ شهریور ۱۳۱۵ افتتاح شد و ۲ بریتانیایی، یک ایتالیایی و ۴۱ ایرانی مشغول کار در این کارخانه شدند. همچنین کاپیتان Walker به همراه Frank Knight به عنوان جایگزین N.H Larsson برای مدیریت کارخانه انتخاب شدند۲][]

*اولین هواپیماهای کارخانه *

نخستین هواپیماهای ساخته شده در کارخانه شهباز، پنج بمب افکن

دهاویلند تایگرمث

بود که در مهر ۱۳۱۶ تکمیل و زمستان همان سال توسط

خلبان افخمی

تست پرواز شدند. همچنین در بهار ۱۳۱۷ پنج فروند

هاوکر آداگز

آماده شد و تحویل

نیروی هوایی شاهنشاهی ایران

شد. رضاشاه ۳۱ خرداد ۱۳۱۷ از کارخانه بازرسی کرد و به او گفته شد تا زمستان امسال پنج فروند

دهاویلند تایگرمث

و پنج فروند

هاوکر آداگز

دیگر آماده می‌شود.

سال ۱۳۱۷ کارخانه گسترش یافت و اسفند ماه پنج فروند تایگرمث و بهار ۱۳۱۸ پنج فروند هاوکر آداگز آماده تست پرواز شد. خرداد ۱۳۱۸ قطعات بیست فروند تایگرمثبریتانیای توسط راه‌آهن وارد تهران شد تا در کارخانه هواپیماسازی شهباز مونتاژ شود. تولید بدنه هواپیما در بهمن ۱۳۱۸ آغاز شد و طرح‌هایی در دست اقدام بود برای تولید هواپیماهای جنگی
*بسته شدن کارخانه *

با شروع جنگ جهانی دوم و اشغال ایران توسط بریتانیا و شوروی، کنترل کارخانه شهباز و هواپیماهای نیروی هوایی شاهنشاهی به دست بریتانیا افتاد. پرسنل کارخانه از کار اخراج و ساخت هواپیما متوقف شد. همچنین واحد ۱۳۸ تعمیرات و نگهداری بریتانیا در طول زمان اشغال ایران، از امکانات کارخانه برای پشتیبانی نیروی هوایی بریتانیا استفاده کرد.
ده فروند هواپیمای کورتیس H-75A-9 آمریکایی که برای مونتاژ در این کارخانه تحویل ایران شده بود، در حالی که هنوز قطعات آن‌ها در جعبه بود توسط بریتانیا غارت و به هندوستان برده شد. این هواپیماها در هندوستان بنام Mohawk IV نامگذاری شد.
​

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## xbat

TheImmortal said:


> He is a Turkish troll.
> 
> Turkey couldn’t even develop a helicopter engine for its attack helicopter but will now develop its own jet engine? Laughable.
> 
> Is that why Russia is offering to supply engines, sub systems, control systems, etc for TF-X project?
> 
> You have a better chance to see a Turkish man Grow wings then a 100% Turkish engine. Its not because Turks cannot build such a endeavor, it’s more because their access to raw materials and tech from around the world (both East to west) has spoiled them and ruined their economies of scale incentive.
> 
> If iran had access to same resources it would likely do the same thing. I mean look at Iranian oil industry, its tech is still decade+ behind leading Russian and US oil drillers. Before people say sanctions, they need to know post revolution Iran had the ability to deepen ties with both East and West, but rejected the notion. I mean Halliburton (dick Cheney’s oil company) had an office in Tehran during the 90’s. Something unfamothable today.


i just replayed very politely and you called me troll LOL! whatever you believe or not, Russia offers something who cares them in turkey? they basically want to control Turkish projects thats it. TEI delivered 1400SHP turboshaft engine to TAI recently, unlike iranian ones it is genuine design.



Shawnee said:


> Burak Bekdil is an excellent Turkish military analyst with access to some secrets. TJ300 is equal of Tolou 1 mini jet. It is unveiled 15 years later.


ha ha ha, that is because of same trust tj300 has?15 years, we needed it right now and we made it, why we cares when iran copied a similar engine, tolou is french engine illegally manufactured in iran, and tj 300 has
much better t/w ratio.


----------



## VEVAK

xbat said:


> i just replayed very politely and you called me troll LOL! whatever you believe or not, Russia offers something who cares them in turkey? they basically want to control Turkish projects thats it. TEI delivered 1400SHP turboshaft engine to TAI recently, unlike iranian ones it is genuine design.
> 
> 
> ha ha ha, that is because of same trust tj300 has?15 years, we needed it right now and we made it, why we cares when iran copied a similar engine, tolou is french engine illegally manufactured in iran, and tj 300 has
> much better t/w ratio.



Turkey has a robust defense industry and in various aspects they are well ahead of Iran however if they were ahead of Iran in jet propulsion they wouldn't need to import engines or even components of an engine for the 1000km Gazgin cruise missiles yet to be produced. And it's as simple as that!

And the Idea that you needed it now so you produced it now is absurd, as if you didn't need cruise missiles yesterday. LOL!

And the fact that your comparing well over a decade old Iranian tech that's not even close to where Iran is at today with an engine that Turkey just tested for the 1st time less than a year ago speaks for it's self. 


Iranian jet propulsion technology today:
Iran unveiled 4th generation light Turbofan engine رونمایی از موتور توربوفن سبک جهش ۷۰۰ در ایران - YouTube

vs

Turkish Jet propulsion tech today:
TEI TJ300 turbojet engine test - YouTube


I think that speaks for it's self


And here is video evidence of the Toloue being produced in Iran over a decade before Turkey even tested that engine for the 1st time 
Iran Aerospace research and industries( part 2-2) Iran Jet engine industries - YouTube

And the 34kg TJ-300 has what 315lbf? vs 55.9kg Toloue at 775lbf

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

In the 1990s the Turks were saying that they produce the F-16.
In the early 2000s they were saying they make Attack helicopters.
In the mid 2000s they were saing that they make the Milgem warship.
Now they say that are making UAVs.

But the Turks coudn´t make anythig when the west got in their way.

They couldn´t make the Milgem when the Europeans stopped supplying all the vital parts. They couldn´t make the Altay tank when the Germans stopped selling them parts. They couldn´t make the Attack heicopter when the Italians stopped selling them parts. They couldn´t make UAVs when the Canadians stopped selling them parts.

Are we to believe that now they really can make a jet engine?!

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

xbat said:


> i just replayed very politely and you called me troll LOL! whatever you believe or not, Russia offers something who cares them in turkey? they basically want to control Turkish projects thats it. TEI delivered 1400SHP turboshaft engine to TAI recently, unlike iranian ones it is genuine design.
> 
> 
> ha ha ha, that is because of same trust tj300 has?15 years, we needed it right now and we made it, why we cares when iran copied a similar engine, tolou is french engine illegally manufactured in iran, and tj 300 has
> much better t/w ratio.


_
“These efforts may eventually fail to materialize without meaningful foreign know-how,” said a London-based Turkey specialist. “Or they may come at costs not viable for mass production.”_

Let me know when the engine actually gets mass produced. If it ever does...without foreign help it won’t.

Meanwhile you had to contract out to BAE systems to help you do the first stage design of TF-X project. But I am sure that is because Turkish engineers are so powerful and smart that such work is beneath them.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Raghfarm007 said:


> In the 1990s the Turks were saying that they produce the F-16.
> In the early 2000s they were saying they make Attack helicopters.
> In the mid 2000s they were saing that they make the Milgem warship.
> Now they say that are making UAVs.
> 
> But the Turks coudn´t make anythig when the west got in their way.
> 
> They couldn´t make the Milgem when the Europeans stopped supplying all the vital parts. They couldn´t make the Altay tank when the Germans stopped selling them parts. They couldn´t make the Attack heicopter when the Italians stopped selling them parts. They couldn´t make UAVs when the Canadians stopped selling them parts.
> 
> Are we to believe that now they really can make a jet engine?!



The engine he is referring to tops out at 315 lbf and is practically a toy compared to the Toloue.... And it's an engine that was tested for the 1st time in 2020 
So I wouldn't doubt their ability to produce that....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

VEVAK said:


> Iran is at today with an engine .... speaks for it's self.
> ...
> Iranian jet propulsion technology today:
> Iran unveiled 4th generation light Turbofan engine رونمایی از موتور توربوفن سبک جهش ۷۰۰ در ایران - YouTube
> ...



I suspect Iran is on the verge to display its own version of RD-33.
The mass production of the RD-33 is not far and will happen likely in a few months.
I was amazed to see Iran able to overhaul the SU-22 and SU-24's fleets. As they modified the internal structure that allows Iran to equip its SU-22 with the heaviest payload, it does mean they modified, hence they can duplicate the AL-21.
Notice I have a source that claims North Korea ally was capable to duplicate their Mig-29, including its RD-33. The actual number of North Korea's Mig-29 is over 100. It does mean logically Iran will duplicate its RD-33 next.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raghfarm007

VEVAK said:


> The engine he is referring to tops out at 315 lbf and is practically a toy compared to the Toloue.... And it's an engine that was tested for the 1st time in 2020
> So I wouldn't doubt their ability to produce that....



I am not saying that Turkey doesn´t have the capabilities to produce this simple jet engine, that Iran was producing over 20 years ago.... what I am saying is that the Turks constantly overestimate their capabilities and chose style over substance.
In the 20 plus years that I have been in these military forums...the Turks had until recently been making fun of Iran´s military products!!!! 
This was because Iran chose the hard way of attaining technology, and chose to produce every component of a weapon itself. They also often had to start off producing older and uglier weapons. The Turks decided to produce weapons in Name only.....and imported the critical components of weapons.

Today we see the results of the policy paths of each country. Iran is increasingly producing leading edge technology weapons, with no impacts from outside sanctios, while the Turks have had all their weapons programmes stopped in their tracks because they can´t get parts from their NATO "allies".

Today we see Iran making its own Bavar 373, while Turkey has to buy the export version of S400 for bilions of dollars that it cant affors to spend and get sanctioned over it.

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## VEVAK

foxhoundbis said:


> I suspect Iran is on the verge to display its own version of RD-33.
> The mass production of the RD-33 is not far and will happen likely in a few months.
> I was amazed to see Iran able to overhaul the SU-22 and SU-24's fleets. As they modified the internal structure that allows Iran to equip its SU-22 with the heaviest payload, it does mean they modified, hence they can duplicate the AL-21.
> Notice I have a source that claims North Korea ally was capable to duplicate their Mig-29, including its RD-33. The actual number of North Korea's Mig-29 is over 100. It does mean logically Iran will duplicate its RD-33 next.



Overall the standard RD-33 is NOT a suitable engine for Iran's terrain. The RD-33 was developed for use in Russia's cold temperatures and does not perform as well as it should in warmer temperatures. However future upgrades to the engine has addressed that problem but that doesn't change the fact that the engine it's self was built for colder temperatures and would require additional subsystems for use in Iran's terrain. 
This is mainly why our(Iran's) MiG-29's are stationed in the northern and colder parts of the country like Tabriz

I personally believe the choice of the RD-33 is NOT a good choice for Iran due to our terrain. I think Iran would be better off trying to either improve the AL-21 or reverse engineer the AL-31 

I'm a big fan of the Al-31 variants however if we are unable to get our hands on that engine i would go with redesigning the AL-21 Iran can redesign the compressors and reduce the number of both high pressure and low pressure compressor and come up with something more compact, Iran can potentially improve and reduce the size of the combustion chambers, improve the fuel injection system or even add a subsystem that better mixes fuel & oxygen, improve the design of the turbines, improve and reduce the size and design of the afterburners, allow for low by pass over the high pressure compressors,.... to come up with something not necessarily more powerful but more compact and fuel efficient

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## foxhoundbis

VEVAK said:


> Overall the standard RD-33 is NOT a suitable engine for Iran's terrain....The RD-33 was *developed* for use in Russia's *cold temperatures* and *does not perform as well* as it should in *warmer temperatures*.


This is the first time in my life -I am 54 y.o- I hear such things. Are U an engineer? Specialist? Could you develop more, please?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## IranDefence

foxhoundbis said:


> This is the first time in my life -I am 54 y.o- I hear such things. Are U an engineer? Specialist? Could you develop more, please?



He is right because of cold weather of Russia they use low quality alloy in their engines ... Ukrainian Antonov 140 had same problem in Iran , it had crash because of its engine ... Antonov140 and Mig 29 both have short range and where designed for Ukraine and Russia ... Mig 29 had many crashes in India even after using new engines

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

IranDefence said:


> He is right because of cold weather of Russia they *use low quality alloy in their engines* ...


Low quality of alloy!
Another Scoop! I don't know where you did find such information.



IranDefence said:


> Ukrainian Antonov 140 had same problem in Iran , it had crash because of its engine ... Antonov140 and Mig 29 both have short range ...


Wait a minute! Ukraine is not USSR first! Secundo in a previous comment I said that the Iranian AN-140's problems were a result of sabotages by your enemies. Israel and the US did all their possible to jam the engines provided by Ukraine to Iran. Moreover, Ukraine nowadays is not more than a failed country. Ukraine does have none future. Everything there is a matter of corruption. In Ukrain It is a mafia that leads this so-called country. Everything fails. All Ukraine's hardware is a failure, it is no use to mention it.



IranDefence said:


> ...Mig 29 had many crashes in *India* even after using new engines


Another problem that has nothing to see with the RD-33. India is famous around the world for its high level of fighter accidents. They lost several dozens of aircraft, what would be the explanation? Hard training? Pilots, that use their aircraft near the limit? Or near the limits of Pilots? Organizations? No one knows.

Just for information: Algeria uses several dozens Mig-29 -more than 100, if not around 200- they are more than satisfied. Egypt uses Mig-29 -they have now 50, and wants other dozens in the goals to replace their F-16's fleet-. beside others like Vietnam, Myanmar, Serbia, Yemen. Notice these last countries are not known to be in the northern hemisphere.
No use to mention North Korea with more than 100 Mig-29.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

foxhoundbis said:


> This is the first time in my life -I am 54 y.o- I hear such things. Are U an engineer? Specialist? Could you develop more, please?



Actually, VIVAK is very much correct, and I did work for quite some time at RR. We did experimentation with engine modifications and single piece front fan. AL21 can very much be improved. It won't be perfect, no - it won't and it won't be anything as good as AL-31. But heck, the AL-21 is one hell of an engine. I have done quite a bit of technical modeling experimentation on Khatchaturov R-35-300 and I am quite a fan if it. It can be modified with better blade timing, better compression management, and better fuel mixing. It can be modifed with a single piece front fan. It won't be difficult to add an electric fan (larger) in front of the engine driven by the generator of the engine. All of these are possible but need experimenting with and R&D to finish. 

VIVAK is very much accurate (theoretically) with what can be done to AL-21 to improve it and enhance it.

Again, none of these are PERFECT - but Iran needs an engine with high thrust, it is not short of fuel, and range can be addressed with dormant air bases near the Persian Gulf which are not used at the moment. So Iran can certainly make this work for it. Enough to make the West crap in its pants.


foxhoundbis said:


> Low quality of alloy!
> Another Scoop! I don't know where you did find such information.
> 
> 
> Wait a minute! Ukraine is not USSR first! Secundo in a previous comment I said that the Iranian AN-140's problems were a result of sabotages by your enemies. Israel and the US did all their possible to jam the engines provided by Ukraine to Iran. Moreover, Ukraine nowadays is not more than a failed country. Ukraine does have none future. Everything there is a matter of corruption. In Ukrain It is a mafia that leads this so-called country. Everything fails. All Ukraine's hardware is a failure, it is no use to mention it.
> 
> 
> Another problem that has nothing to see with the RD-33. India is famous around the world for its high level of fighter accidents. They lost several dozens of aircraft, what would be the explanation? Hard training? Pilots, that use their aircraft near the limit? Or near the limits of Pilots? Organizations? No one knows.
> 
> Just for information: Algeria uses several dozens Mig-29 -more than 100, if not around 200- they are more than satisfied. Egypt uses Mig-29 -they have now 50, and wants other dozens in the goals to replace their F-16's fleet-. beside others like Vietnam, Myanmar, Serbia, Yemen. Notice these last countries are not known to be in the northern hemisphere.
> No use to mention North Korea with more than 100 Mig-29.



AN140 accidents --- without a shadow of a doubt --- was sabotage. I can not discuss the evidence here. Enemies of Iran and Iranian people are relentless and well funded and they are here (no doubt). An140 accidents were SABOTAGE. Alloy mixing sabotage at source, leading to melting. 

Iranian people have to wake up and realize ... ISRAEL & U.S. are the ENEMIES OF IRANIAN PEOPLE - not IRANIAN GOVERNMENT.

Don't fall for the bull$#!t of the West. They murdered 140m native Americans and Hollywood made movies for 80 years with John Wayne and Clint Eastwood, projecting native Americans as CRAZY VIOLENT MURDERERS. They were defending their land, there rights, the White Europeans were the murderers, not the other way around.


IranDefence said:


> He is right because of cold weather of Russia they use low quality alloy in their engines ... Ukrainian Antonov 140 had same problem in Iran , it had crash because of its engine ... Antonov140 and Mig 29 both have short range and where designed for Ukraine and Russia ... Mig 29 had many crashes in India even after using new engines



Sorry with all RESPECT, cold weather blah blah is nonsense. Engines don't work like that. Cold weather does not affect the engine in a significant way. RR has been running tests for half a century and none point to this - in a significant way. There is also a bunch other factors, which I am not going to go through them here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

foxhoundbis said:


> I suspect Iran is on the verge to display its own version of RD-33.
> The mass production of the RD-33 is not far and will happen likely in a few months.
> I was amazed to see Iran able to overhaul the SU-22 and SU-24's fleets. As they modified the internal structure that allows Iran to equip its SU-22 with the heaviest payload, it does mean they modified, hence they can duplicate the AL-21.
> Notice I have a source that claims North Korea ally was capable to duplicate their Mig-29, including its RD-33. The actual number of North Korea's Mig-29 is over 100. It does mean logically Iran will duplicate its RD-33 next.



iran is not about to display its own RD-33. Fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

EvilWesteners said:


> iran is not about to display its own RD-33. Fact.



North Korea did. Iran is close.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Shawnee said:


> North Korea did. Iran is close.



You think NK with the budget of a third world country, reverse engineered RD-33, built ICBMs, built new tanks, etc?

Not even worth arguing with someone with those beliefs.

Plus @PeeD has commented on the likelihood of an Iranian RD-33. Which makes NK claims even more absurd.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> You think NK with the budget of a third world country, reverse engineered RD-33, built ICBMs, built new tanks, etc?
> 
> Not even worth arguing with someone with those beliefs.
> 
> Plus @PeeD has commented on the likelihood of an Iranian RD-33. Which makes NK claims even more absurd.


You’re saying they’re fake or china made these for them?


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> You’re saying they’re fake or china made these for them?



Someone is supplying the tech/systems to NK.

People seem to forget this is the same country that negotiated for RICE and GASOLINE from the US during negotiations in the 2000’s.

North Korea simply does not have the funds for such projects. It is absurd to suggest otherwise. Replicating jet engines and building them is easily a 10B+ project. And we think one of the poorest country’s on the earth was able to do it?

I swear...common sense is rare these days.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> Someone is supplying the tech/systems to NK.
> 
> People seem to forget this is the same country that negotiated for RICE and GASOLINE from the US during negotiations in the 2000’s.
> 
> North Korea simply does not have the funds for such projects. It is absurd to suggest otherwise. Replicating jet engines and building them is easily a 10B+ project. And we think one of the poorest country’s on the earth was able to do it?
> 
> I swear...common sense is rare these days.



who is supporting NK military development? obviously, those that are pissed off with whom that is supporting military development in ROK and Taiwan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

VEVAK said:


> Overall the standard RD-33 is NOT a suitable engine for Iran's terrain. The RD-33 was developed for use in Russia's cold temperatures and does not perform as well as it should in warmer temperatures. However future upgrades to the engine has addressed that problem but that doesn't change the fact that the engine it's self was built for colder temperatures and would require additional subsystems for use in Iran's terrain.
> This is mainly why our(Iran's) MiG-29's are stationed in the northern and colder parts of the country like Tabriz
> 
> I personally believe the choice of the RD-33 is NOT a good choice for Iran due to our terrain. I think Iran would be better off trying to either improve the AL-21 or reverse engineer the AL-31
> 
> I'm a big fan of the Al-31 variants however if we are unable to get our hands on that engine i would go with redesigning the AL-21 Iran can redesign the compressors and reduce the number of both high pressure and low pressure compressor and come up with something more compact, Iran can potentially improve and reduce the size of the combustion chambers, improve the fuel injection system or even add a subsystem that better mixes fuel & oxygen, improve the design of the turbines, improve and reduce the size and design of the afterburners, allow for low by pass over the high pressure compressors,.... to come up with something not necessarily more powerful but more compact and fuel efficient



do you know in which temperature turbo fan engine operate !? its not car engine ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Overall the standard RD-33 is NOT a suitable engine for Iran's terrain. The RD-33 was developed for use in Russia's cold temperatures and does not perform as well as it should in warmer temperatures. However future upgrades to the engine has addressed that problem but that doesn't change the fact that the engine it's self was built for colder temperatures and would require additional subsystems for use in Iran's terrain.


Am not going to research this claim...

When I was active duty, my first assignment was the F-111. First was the D model for training and familiarization for one yr, then it was 3 yrs on the E model at RAF Upper Heyford. The F model was at RAF Lakenheath. The engines for the F-111 was the TF-30. My second jet was the F-16. The F-16 had two engines: Pratt/Whitney and General Electric. The F-111D was at Cannon AFB, New Mexico. That is desert. The F-111A/E/F and EF-111A were at Idaho and the UK. The FB-111A was at Plattsburgh, New York. People can research the environments of those locations. The F-16 is all over the world. USAF war doctrine expects our combat aircrafts to operate anywhere, with the exception of the poles, of course.

Whoever is paying attention to this thread should research the claim about the RD-33 because if true, the RD-33 is either a highly specialized engine for some SR-71 like platform or a piss poor engine design. Sorry for the bluntness.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> do you know in which temperature turbo fan engine operate !? its not car engine ....




On paper the max ground temperature the RD-33 can operate at is 60 Celsius on the ground & 200 Celsius in the air! 


In various parts of southern Iran temperatures can reach as high as 52 Celsius on top of that direct sun that can create an oven around the engine add to that sand storms or high humidity in the south.... 

Why do think Iran has stationed and kept it's MiG-29's in Tabriz? 

Russian addressed the issue on the RD-33Mk variants!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Am not going to research this claim...
> 
> When I was active duty, my first assignment was the F-111. First was the D model for training and familiarization for one yr, then it was 3 yrs on the E model at RAF Upper Heyford. The F model was at RAF Lakenheath. The engines for the F-111 was the TF-30. My second jet was the F-16. The F-16 had two engines: Pratt/Whitney and General Electric. The F-111D was at Cannon AFB, New Mexico. That is desert. The F-111A/E/F and EF-111A were at Idaho and the UK. The FB-111A was at Plattsburgh, New York. People can research the environments of those locations. The F-16 is all over the world. USAF war doctrine expects our combat aircrafts to operate anywhere, with the exception of the poles, of course.
> 
> Whoever is paying attention to this thread should research the claim about the RD-33 because if true, the RD-33 is either a highly specialized engine for some SR-71 like platform or a piss poor engine design. Sorry for the bluntness.



Maybe I miss spoke didn't mean to say was developed for use in colder temperatures rather it was developed for use in standard temperatures (That's for RD-33's developed prior to RD-33Mk) 
It's actually Iran's temperature that can reach as high as 52 degrees Celsius (Southern Iran) that create performance issues! Not that the engine wouldn't work simply that it doesn't work as well as it should...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

foxhoundbis said:


> This is the first time in my life -I am 54 y.o- I hear such things. Are U an engineer? Specialist? Could you develop more, please?



Was developed for use in standard normal temperature(didn't mean to say cold temperatures) and the issue was address on the engines produced after the Rd-33Mk variants that was developed in 2001 

Just research the Rd-33Mk upgrades and read between the lines

Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33MK (archive.org) 

The Rd-33 was a genius design that has stood the test of time however for use in Iran's terrain i prefer the Al-31 and if that's not possible an Iranian attempt to improve on the more rugged Al-21 and that doesn't necessarily mean the outcome would be an engine superior to the RD-33. I believe the attempt to improve on the Al-21 technologically would be far more valuable to Iran's science and technological capabilities than reverse engineered Rd-33 ever could....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

IranDefence said:


> He is right because of cold weather of Russia they use low quality alloy in their engines ... Ukrainian Antonov 140 had same problem in Iran , it had crash because of its engine ... Antonov140 and Mig 29 both have short range and where designed for Ukraine and Russia ... Mig 29 had many crashes in India even after using new engines


if any thing in low temperature you need higher quality materials


foxhoundbis said:


> Wait a minute! Ukraine is not USSR first! Secundo in a previous comment I said that the Iranian AN-140's problems were a result of sabotages by your enemies. Israel and the US did all their possible to jam the engines provided by Ukraine to Iran. Moreover, Ukraine nowadays is not more than a failed country. Ukraine does have none future. Everything there is a matter of corruption. In Ukrain It is a mafia that leads this so-called country. Everything fails. All Ukraine's hardware is a failure, it is no use to mention it.


no jamming , no sabotage no anything all the plane that crashed had engine failure problem and it was because the engine could not provide enough power in hot climate. even the first one crasghed with a groul of Antonov engineer and executive in it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> if any thing in low temperature you need higher quality materials
> 
> no jamming , no sabotage no anything all the plane that crashed had engine failure problem and it was because the engine could not provide enough power in hot climate. even the first one crasghed with a groul of Antonov engineer and executive in it



With all RESPECT - what you have mentioned is N O T A C C U R A T E ---

I cannot give all the details here on this forum. However, there are bits and pieces of the whole story elsewhere online. The aircraft was selected by Iran because of its engine having common parts and engine utilization specs that matched Iran's needs, and Iran had experience with the engine from (Russian) helicopters (hot and high performance) that use similar engines. Iranian engineers (from what I know) understood with totally clarity that this aircraft and its specs and engines are ideal for Iran.

Iran's mistake was parts manufacturing - or better said (common parts manufacturing with Ukraine).

Few countries on earth are more poor and more corrupt that Ukraine. Which is why it is so willing to do business with Iran (out of desperation). Prior to political promises by U.S. and a very diverse range of corrupt politicians. They even transferred 12 Kh-55 to Iran and China, these were "air-launched, nuclear capable ...". Gives you an idea of that time and what Ukraine was thinking and how desperate they were.

I have been to Ukraine. They murdered an engineer I was working with for almost f**king NOTHING. REALLY nothing. I would have happily paid for him not to be murdered, leaving his wife and 1 daughter behind. I have no idea what happened to them, other than his daughter moved to Munich, Germany.

During the process (An140 TOT and manufacturing/assembly line and design ratification), MOSSAD and Dutch Intelligence that help U.S. and Israel quite a bit, decided to make sure that IRGC cannot have this aircraft (this goes back to what Israel/MOSSAD where thinking in terms of what they can/cannot do with Iran - of that time, TODAY they are far more belligerent since Iran does not respond as it use to, FAST AND HARD).

People have no idea how much Netherlands helps Israel and U.S. in these operations against Iran. Even what happened between Israel and Greece (at the expense of Turkey) ... was Netherlands. It was one of their engineers who was behind (the main culprit) StuxNet.

The engine parts were tampered with.

The details of everything else, I cannot mention as my employers would not be happy for me to divulge such details as it would cause problems for them.

It was 100% SABOTAGE.

Remember this post, so when you hear the details in 10-15 years, it will make much better sense.

--- If I can make ONE CRITICISM of the Iranian government it would be .... "DISCLOSE THESE CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST IRANIAN PEOPLE AND IRAN - and don't be afraid that Iranian people would panic or be afraid. Many of them will stand up and fight against these atrocities against Iran. There are many Iranians throughout Europe who would help Iran, ONLY if IRAN ASKED OF THEM."

Reactions: Wow Wow:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

VEVAK said:


> On paper the max ground temperature the RD-33 can operate at is 60 Celsius on the ground & 200 Celsius in the air!
> 
> 
> In various parts of southern Iran temperatures can reach as high as 52 Celsius on top of that direct sun that can create an oven around the engine add to that sand storms or high humidity in the south....
> 
> Why do think Iran has stationed and kept it's MiG-29's in Tabriz?
> 
> Russian addressed the issue on the RD-33Mk variants!



My friend VEVAK, I have a lot of RESPECT for you and your knowledge in many of your areas of knowledge.

But trust me what I say, that they temperature thing you mentioned is ... ahhhh... not accurate.

Mig 29s did wonderful in YEMEN, and in SYRIA, and in IRAQ.

No major problem to do with temperatures.

One could even say the same thing about TF-30 engines in F-14A ...

Also, don't believe everything you read online about engine performance specs. Most of them are incorrect. We use an extensive manual and still those manuals are upgraded/updated by the manufacturer on a regular basis.

Turbine engines are about HEAT. That is what really produces thrust, be it jet thrust or be it spools connected to fans for air displacement.

Turbine engines are high heat tolerant devices.

Happy New Year to you my friend.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

EvilWesteners said:


> With all RESPECT - what you have mentioned is N O T A C C U R A T E ---
> 
> I cannot give all the details here on this forum. However, there are bits and pieces of the whole story elsewhere online. The aircraft was selected by Iran because of its engine having common parts and engine utilization specs that matched Iran's needs, and Iran had experience with the engine from (Russian) helicopters (hot and high performance) that use similar engines. Iranian engineers (from what I know) understood with totally clarity that this aircraft and its specs and engines are ideal for Iran.
> 
> Iran's mistake was parts manufacturing - or better said (common parts manufacturing with Ukraine).
> 
> Few countries on earth are more poor and more corrupt that Ukraine. Which is why it is so willing to do business with Iran (out of desperation). Prior to political promises by U.S. and a very diverse range of corrupt politicians. They even transferred 12 Kh-55 to Iran and China, these were "air-launched, nuclear capable ...". Gives you an idea of that time and what Ukraine was thinking and how desperate they were.
> 
> I have been to Ukraine. They murdered an engineer I was working with for almost f**king NOTHING. REALLY nothing. I would have happily paid for him not to be murdered, leaving his wife and 1 daughter behind. I have no idea what happened to them, other than his daughter moved to Munich, Germany.
> 
> During the process (An140 TOT and manufacturing/assembly line and design ratification), MOSSAD and Dutch Intelligence that help U.S. and Israel quite a bit, decided to make sure that IRGC cannot have this aircraft (this goes back to what Israel/MOSSAD where thinking in terms of what they can/cannot do with Iran - of that time, TODAY they are far more belligerent since Iran does not respond as it use to, FAST AND HARD).
> 
> People have no idea how much Netherlands helps Israel and U.S. in these operations against Iran. Even what happened between Israel and Greece (at the expense of Turkey) ... was Netherlands. It was one of their engineers who was behind (the main culprit) StuxNet.
> 
> The engine parts were tampered with.
> 
> The details of everything else, I cannot mention as my employers would not be happy for me to divulge such details as it would cause problems for them.
> 
> It was 100% SABOTAGE.
> 
> Remember this post, so when you hear the details in 10-15 years, it will make much better sense.
> 
> --- If I can make ONE CRITICISM of the Iranian government it would be .... "DISCLOSE THESE CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST IRANIAN PEOPLE AND IRAN - and don't be afraid that Iranian people would panic or be afraid. Many of them will stand up and fight against these atrocities against Iran. There are many Iranians throughout Europe who would help Iran, ONLY if IRAN ASKED OF THEM."


nonsense .
to make the engine compatible with aircrafts they modified the fuel control system and nearly all the crash were because of failure in that subsystem
by the way a question , how many An-140 is operating or ordered by civilian sectors around the world and which engine those planes are using , let help you certainly not Motor-Sich AI-30 series 1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> nonsense .
> to make the engine compatible with aircrafts they modified the fuel control system and nearly all the crash were because of failure in that subsystem
> by the way a question , how many An-140 is operating or ordered by civilian sectors around the world and which engine those planes are using , let help you certainly not Motor-Sich AI-30 series 1



Good try, if you fishing for information and sources. Well, I am not going to bite.

You said nothing in your rebuttal that is logical or counters what I said. Even if you do in the future, my ego has been checked-out before entering this forum.

I am here to share SOME information with similar or like-minded people.

All I can inform you of are the following:

AI-30 is actually a license built "Kilmov adapted intake and exhust SBM1" (which was modeled on the VK2000-2500 hot and high)

Fuel control systems don't just melt, not with 21st century level of engine fuel system technology. Ask the people who got financial contributions in Ukraine for the DM23 project.

The aircraft was not successful with export, as its reputation was destroyed by the crashes. So, what is shit got to do with a shy horse? (regarding civilian sector use?)

Iran wanted to replace the engine with a modified LTC4B-8D but did not have ENOUGH funds to do such a project, instead the little money they could allocate was transferred to a blade-manufacturer factory, which the owner got the funds, then got offers from CIA and moved to Visalia CA, and was given a green card and lots of money for his betrayal. (Well deserved since Visalia is a SHITHOLE place to live - been through it once a long time ago and the train stopped there for an hour).

Happy New Year to you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

EvilWesteners said:


> My friend VEVAK, I have a lot of RESPECT for you and your knowledge in many of your areas of knowledge.
> 
> But trust me what I say, that they temperature thing you mentioned is ... ahhhh... not accurate.
> 
> Mig 29s did wonderful in YEMEN, and in SYRIA, and in IRAQ.
> 
> No major problem to do with temperatures.
> 
> One could even say the same thing about TF-30 engines in F-14A ...
> 
> Also, don't believe everything you read online about engine performance specs. Most of them are incorrect. We use an extensive manual and still those manuals are upgraded/updated by the manufacturer on a regular basis.
> 
> Turbine engines are about HEAT. That is what really produces thrust, be it jet thrust or be it spools connected to fans for air displacement.
> 
> Turbine engines are high heat tolerant devices.
> 
> Happy New Year to you my friend.



My comments are about what we in Iran had to do not other ppls articles and again performance issues in hot temperatures doesn't mean the engine doesn't work or has maintenance issues and blows up due to warm weather....
Performance issues means the Aircraft wont takeoff as fast as it could with the same payload in colder (Normal) temperatures, It means it's payload capacity & range will be effected as a result, it means its flight restrictions surrounding various climate conditions increases....

As I mentioned the MAX ground temperature the engine can operate at is 60 degrees Celsius. Also the Russians addressed the issue in 2001 with the Mk series


Happy New Year!


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Maybe I miss spoke didn't mean to say was developed for use in colder temperatures rather it was developed for use in standard temperatures (That's for RD-33's developed prior to RD-33Mk)
> It's actually Iran's temperature that can reach as high as 52 degrees Celsius (Southern Iran) that create performance issues! Not that the engine wouldn't work simply that it doesn't work as well as it should...


Something is wrong with your argument.

I learned to fly when I was in high school in Hawaii. Cessna 152 prop jobber. Pretty much WW I era flight controls. I used to fly over Pearl Harbor then lean the plane over to look at the sunken USS Arizona and other memorials. By the time I entered the USAF I already knew the foundations of flying and basic map/compass navigation.

In flying, hot weather equals hot air which affects takeoff/landing performance.









It's so hot in Phoenix, they can't fly planes


The extreme heat forecast for Phoenix on Tuesday has caused the cancellation of 20 American Airline flights out of Sky Harbor International Airport.



www.usatoday.com





_Extreme heat affects a plane's ability to take off. *Hot air is less dense than cold air*, and the hotter the temperature, the more speed a plane needs to lift off. A runway might not be long enough to allow a plane to achieve the necessary extra speed._​​Every student learn this fact about warmer air in ground school. Not even first orientation flight. Helos are also affected by warmer air. Avgas is not affected by normal temperature ranges and that includes Death Valley in California or Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, NV. Jet fuel such as JP4 in US military aircrafts are not affected by hot summer temperatures.

So either the RD-33 is really a shitty engine or you guys do not have enough runway for a fully laden combat aircraft to take off in the summer time.

Further, by the time I reach flight altitude of 10,000 ft or 3,000 meters, ambient air temperature is winter.



High-altitude KAP




Altitude
(feet)Pressure
(in. Hg)Temp.
(F°)Density
(%)sealevel29.9259.01002,00027.8251.994.34,00025.8444.788.86,00023.9837.683.68,00022.2230.578.610,00020.5723.373.812,00019.0216.269.314,00017.579.165.016,00016.211.960.9

Airliners cruises at 30,000 ft and ambient air temperature would be below zero.

So how is it possible that the RD-33 cannot perform for Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Something is wrong with your argument.
> 
> I learned to fly when I was in high school in Hawaii. Cessna 152 prop jobber. Pretty much WW I era flight controls. I used to fly over Pearl Harbor then lean the plane over to look at the sunken USS Arizona and other memorials. By the time I entered the USAF I already knew the foundations of flying and basic map/compass navigation.
> 
> In flying, hot weather equals hot air which affects takeoff/landing performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's so hot in Phoenix, they can't fly planes
> 
> 
> The extreme heat forecast for Phoenix on Tuesday has caused the cancellation of 20 American Airline flights out of Sky Harbor International Airport.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Extreme heat affects a plane's ability to take off. *Hot air is less dense than cold air*, and the hotter the temperature, the more speed a plane needs to lift off. A runway might not be long enough to allow a plane to achieve the necessary extra speed._​​Every student learn this fact about warmer air in ground school. Not even first orientation flight. Helos are also affected by warmer air. Avgas is not affected by normal temperature ranges and that includes Death Valley in California or Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, NV. Jet fuel such as JP4 in US military aircrafts are not affected by hot summer temperatures.
> 
> So either the RD-33 is really a shitty engine or you guys do not have enough runway for a fully laden combat aircraft to take off in the summer time.
> 
> Further, by the time I reach flight altitude of 10,000 ft or 3,000 meters, ambient air temperature is winter.
> 
> 
> 
> High-altitude KAP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Altitude
> (feet)Pressure
> (in. Hg)Temp.
> (F°)Density
> (%)sealevel29.9259.01002,00027.8251.994.34,00025.8444.788.86,00023.9837.683.68,00022.2230.578.610,00020.5723.373.812,00019.0216.269.314,00017.579.165.016,00016.211.960.9
> 
> Airliners cruises at 30,000 ft and ambient air temperature would be below zero.
> 
> So how is it possible that the RD-33 cannot perform for Iran?



You take the comment to the most extreme!

Did i say the Aircraft wont be able to take off? No! Hi heat temp reduced the takeoff performance of the original RD-33 and no matter you claim about being a pilot it's NOT going to change that fact!
And the reason Iranian MiG-29's where stationed and have been kept at Tabriz (North Western Iran) is directly due to that fact and nothing you say is gonna change that!
Also, when one factor is effecting your engines performance further contributions of other climate conditions will have a greater effect than they normally would....
And Rd-33 is neither the 1st nor the only engine that has had performance issues in Iran's climate... 

Just go read between the lines of Klimov's own statements surrounding upgrades to the Rd-33Mk....
You don't emphasize the ability to retain performance in high heat temp if previous models didn't have that problem! 
Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33MK (archive.org)


----------



## Lord Of Gondor

India(Indian Navy) being the launch customer for the "Sea Wasp" , faced a ton of maintenance issues. 
Not very different from the issues faced by the IAF which was the first international customer for the MiG-29.
But power wise no problems, MiG-29(even the heavier Izdeliye 9.20/UPG ) operate comfortably in Hot and High conditions (10000Ft+ AMSL, 25°C) with the Series-3 engines. 
The MiG-29K/KuB are even more powerful, routinely taking off from a 125m runway(Ski-Jump assisted) from the Carrier.(Summers in the Indian Ocean can be very warm >30°C)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> You take the comment to the most extreme!
> 
> Did i say the Aircraft wont be able to take off? No! Hi heat temp reduced the takeoff performance of the original RD-33 and no matter you claim about being a pilot it's NOT going to change that fact!
> And the reason Iranian MiG-29's where stationed and have been kept at Tabriz (North Western Iran) is directly due to that fact and nothing you say is gonna change that!
> Also, when one factor is effecting your engines performance further contributions of other climate conditions will have a greater effect than they normally would....
> And Rd-33 is neither the 1st nor the only engine that has had performance issues in Iran's climate...
> 
> Just go read between the lines of Klimov's own statements surrounding upgrades to the Rd-33Mk....
> You don't emphasize the ability to retain performance in high heat temp if previous models didn't have that problem!
> Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33MK (archive.org)


*Cold* temperatures for parts of a turbine of any sort is minimum 200 degrees Celsius. Meaning way above any temperatures noted in Iran or else where for that matter. *Hot* temperatures is 4 digits! Your claim is in no way, shape or form connected to reality!

Biggest factor that could affect jet engines in Iran’s climate is sand! That’s it!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Hi heat temp reduced the takeoff performance of the original RD-33...
> 
> And the reason Iranian MiG-29's where stationed and have been kept at Tabriz (North Western Iran) is directly due to that fact...
> 
> Just go read between the lines of Klimov's own statements surrounding upgrades to the Rd-33Mk....
> You don't emphasize the ability to retain performance in high heat temp if previous models didn't have that problem!
> Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33MK (archive.org)


The temperature issue is *INTERNAL* to the engine. Not external ambient. Your source provided the clue.

_"RD-33MK is the first product of major modifications of the basic engine. Its horsepower is 7% higher due to the use of *cooled blades* made of modern materials including composites."_​​What is this 'cooled blades'? 

A piston driven engine and a turbine engine are internal combustion engines. Both types of engines atomizes the fuel, mix with air, compress the mixture, then ignite the mixture. The controlled explosion is translated into mechanical actions.

The difference between the two is the temperature stability of the components. With the piston engine, temperatures have cycles of peaks and lows as the piston travels up/down. With the turbine engine, the temperature have plateaus. Precisely because of those temperature plateaus that the turbine engine is magnitude more difficult to design, engineer, and manufacture. The formulas for various alloys and assorted minimum or zero metal composites are state secrets.









Turbine Cooling - Glenn Research Center | NASA


The Jet Propulsion Static Laboratory (JPSL) transitioned to turbine work as turbine cooling became a priority in the late 1940s and 1950s. Overview By the




www1.grc.nasa.gov





_"Air cooling, which diverts excess air flow from the compressor into hollow turbine blades to carry away the heat, is the least expensive type of cooling."_​​Am not going to research on the method of blade cooling in the RD-33.

Cooling the blades allows the entire turbine unit to run at higher rpm which came from higher fuel/air mixture burn from the compressor stage. The newer RD-33MK somehow cools the blades which resulted in %7 higher thrust.

So if the RD-33 must be stationed at geographies with cooler climate it is because the available thrust matches the fully combat loaded aircraft for X runway length and air density for takeoff. Not because hot ambient air somehow negatively affect the engine itself.



https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2011/Aug/56396/FAA%20P-8740-02%20DensityAltitude[hi-res]%20branded.pdf



_"*The warmer the air, the less dense it is*. When the temperature rises above the standard temperature for a particular place, the density of the air in that location is reduced, and the density altitude increases. Therefore, *it is advisable, when performance is in question, to schedule operations during the cool hours of the day (early morning or late afternoon)* when forecast temperatures are not expected to rise above normal. *Early morning and late evening are sometimes better for both departure and arrival.*"_​
The MIG-29 with the older RD-33 (non MK) can be stationed at hot weather bases but because of the lower rated thrust, the jet will have to fly with lesser combat load. Mission planners needs this knowledge to allocate packages whether it is for air-air or air-ground for various deployments. Air-air package is physically lesser T/O weight than air-ground package.

I could be wrong about the RD-33. But I doubt it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> The temperature issue is *INTERNAL* to the engine. Not external ambient. Your source provided the clue.
> 
> _"RD-33MK is the first product of major modifications of the basic engine. Its horsepower is 7% higher due to the use of *cooled blades* made of modern materials including composites."_​​What is this 'cooled blades'?
> 
> A piston driven engine and a turbine engine are internal combustion engines. Both types of engines atomizes the fuel, mix with air, compress the mixture, then ignite the mixture. The controlled explosion is translated into mechanical actions.
> 
> The difference between the two is the temperature stability of the components. With the piston engine, temperatures have cycles of peaks and lows as the piston travels up/down. With the turbine engine, the temperature have plateaus. Precisely because of those temperature plateaus that the turbine engine is magnitude more difficult to design, engineer, and manufacture. The formulas for various alloys and assorted minimum or zero metal composites are state secrets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Turbine Cooling - Glenn Research Center | NASA
> 
> 
> The Jet Propulsion Static Laboratory (JPSL) transitioned to turbine work as turbine cooling became a priority in the late 1940s and 1950s. Overview By the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www1.grc.nasa.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"Air cooling, which diverts excess air flow from the compressor into hollow turbine blades to carry away the heat, is the least expensive type of cooling."_​​Am not going to research on the method of blade cooling in the RD-33.
> 
> Cooling the blades allows the entire turbine unit to run at higher rpm which came from higher fuel/air mixture burn from the compressor stage. The newer RD-33MK somehow cools the blades which resulted in %7 higher thrust.
> 
> So if the RD-33 must be stationed at geographies with cooler climate it is because the available thrust matches the fully combat loaded aircraft for X runway length and air density for takeoff. Not because hot ambient air somehow negatively affect the engine itself.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2011/Aug/56396/FAA%20P-8740-02%20DensityAltitude[hi-res]%20branded.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> _"*The warmer the air, the less dense it is*. When the temperature rises above the standard temperature for a particular place, the density of the air in that location is reduced, and the density altitude increases. Therefore, *it is advisable, when performance is in question, to schedule operations during the cool hours of the day (early morning or late afternoon)* when forecast temperatures are not expected to rise above normal. *Early morning and late evening are sometimes better for both departure and arrival.*"_​
> The MIG-29 with the older RD-33 (non MK) can be stationed at hot weather bases but because of the lower rated thrust, the jet will have to fly with lesser combat load. Mission planners needs this knowledge to allocate packages whether it is for air-air or air-ground for various deployments. Air-air package is physically lesser T/O weight than air-ground package.
> 
> I could be wrong about the RD-33. But I doubt it.









Thrust would effect trust to weight ratio meaning your payload capacity would increase... doesn't change the facts about hot climates






RD-33 turbofan twin-shift engine with afterburner for the duel-engine power plant for Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter with individual supersonic variable intake for each engine. (tmkb-soyuz.ru) 

so lets just agree to disagree


Sina-1 said:


> *Cold* temperatures for parts of a turbine of any sort is minimum 200 degrees Celsius. Meaning way above any temperatures noted in Iran or else where for that matter. *Hot* temperatures is 4 digits! Your claim is in no way, shape or form connected to reality!
> 
> Biggest factor that could affect jet engines in Iran’s climate is sand! That’s it!








RD-33 turbofan twin-shift engine with afterburner for the duel-engine power plant for Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter with individual supersonic variable intake for each engine. (tmkb-soyuz.ru)


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 704655
> 
> 
> Thrust would effect trust to weight ratio meaning your payload capacity would increase... doesn't change the facts about hot climates
> 
> View attachment 704656
> 
> 
> RD-33 turbofan twin-shift engine with afterburner for the duel-engine power plant for Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter with individual supersonic variable intake for each engine. (tmkb-soyuz.ru)
> 
> so lets just agree to disagree
> 
> 
> View attachment 704657
> 
> 
> RD-33 turbofan twin-shift engine with afterburner for the duel-engine power plant for Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter with individual supersonic variable intake for each engine. (tmkb-soyuz.ru)


Here is the deal...









Ansys Blog | Simulation & Engineering Articles


The Ansys blog is the premier place for engineering simulation news, insights and industry trends, as well as tips on using Ansys simulation software tools.




www.ansys.com





_...the amount of lift produced is also proportional to the density of the fluid, in this case air, that the wing is moving through. *Increase the density and you increase the lift force*. Conversely if the density of the air decreases, so does the available lift force._​​If ambient air density affects aerodynamic lift, then it stands to reason that the same density factor that affects aerodynamic lift would also affect the fuel/air mixture necessary to produce thrust. Basically, there would be a less than optimum balance of the fuel:air ratio that was designed into the engine.

Standard air is sea level with baro pressure of 29.92 (1,013.25 mb) at temperature 59F (15C).

Each engine design have its own unique fuel:air mixture ratio based upon the aircraft design. When an engine is rated at X thrust, that spec is from the ideal standard air. Then when you install the engine into its designed target aircraft(s), both aircraft and engine manufacturers essentially locked the pairing permanently. This is why you cannot simply modify one engine model from one platform then graft that engine into a different platform without extensive testing to permanently mate that engine to the new aircraft platform. Tests confirms that the new engine would not move the newly mated aircraft/engine pairing outside of its original flight performance envelope.

On the F-16, we have 'small mouth' and 'big mouth' or inlets. Early F-16s were Pratt/Whitney engine and were 'small mouth'. Later F-16s were General Electric engine and were 'big mouth'. The inlets were modified to match the engines' volumetric air requirements.

Mass (volumetric air) x Acceleration (speed of volumetric air) = Thrust

We can modify the front of the equation to have the same Thrust. That means as long as different engines produce the same Thrust, *within some margins*, there should be no problems with the jet using different engine manufacturers. However, if one engine is unable to compensate for one variable in the front of that equation, we will have a lower performance engine wherever and whenever the environment create that possibility. The result is what you said that the MIG-29 RD-33 is restricted by IranIan Air Force to specific locations.

This is actually not a good image for the MIG-29. There are plenty of articles that says how great is the MIG-29 over the F-16 in a dogfight, but if the MIG cannot be deployed on time and/or into certain situations, whereas the F-16, no matter its engine configuration, can be deployed, the F-16 will be the preferred choice. Not that Iran can get the F-16 in the first place. But the perception is made.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

There was an older documentary series called Wings of the Red Star and one episode that covered the Mi-24 Hind. The helicopter had major issues at 5000m altitude in some parts of Afghanistan in certain places and they had to take off on a short runway rather than straight vertical lift. Though this problem was altitude related rather than temperature, I think the concept of air density still applies.


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Here is the deal...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ansys Blog | Simulation & Engineering Articles
> 
> 
> The Ansys blog is the premier place for engineering simulation news, insights and industry trends, as well as tips on using Ansys simulation software tools.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ansys.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _...the amount of lift produced is also proportional to the density of the fluid, in this case air, that the wing is moving through. *Increase the density and you increase the lift force*. Conversely if the density of the air decreases, so does the available lift force._​​If ambient air density affects aerodynamic lift, then it stands to reason that the same density factor that affects aerodynamic lift would also affect the fuel/air mixture necessary to produce thrust. Basically, there would be a less than optimum balance of the fuel:air ratio that was designed into the engine.
> 
> Standard air is sea level with baro pressure of 29.92 (1,013.25 mb) at temperature 59F (15C).
> 
> Each engine design have its own unique fuel:air mixture ratio based upon the aircraft design. When an engine is rated at X thrust, that spec is from the ideal standard air. Then when you install the engine into its designed target aircraft(s), both aircraft and engine manufacturers essentially locked the pairing permanently. This is why you cannot simply modify one engine model from one platform then graft that engine into a different platform without extensive testing to permanently mate that engine to the new aircraft platform. Tests confirms that the new engine would not move the newly mated aircraft/engine pairing outside of its original flight performance envelope.
> 
> On the F-16, we have 'small mouth' and 'big mouth' or inlets. Early F-16s were Pratt/Whitney engine and were 'small mouth'. Later F-16s were General Electric engine and were 'big mouth'. The inlets were modified to match the engines' volumetric air requirements.
> 
> Mass (volumetric air) x Acceleration (speed of volumetric air) = Thrust
> 
> We can modify the front of the equation to have the same Thrust. That means as long as different engines produce the same Thrust, *within some margins*, there should be no problems with the jet using different engine manufacturers. However, if one engine is unable to compensate for one variable in the front of that equation, we will have a lower performance engine wherever and whenever the environment create that possibility. The result is what you said that the MIG-29 RD-33 is restricted by IranIan Air Force to specific locations.
> 
> This is actually not a good image for the MIG-29. There are plenty of articles that says how great is the MIG-29 over the F-16 in a dogfight, but if the MIG cannot be deployed on time and/or into certain situations, whereas the F-16, no matter its engine configuration, can be deployed, the F-16 will be the preferred choice. Not that Iran can get the F-16 in the first place. But the perception is made.



The F110 & F100 are both superior engines compared to the RD-33 that is a fact and no one is questioning that fact however that doesn't necessarily make the F-16 a superior platform....
Just as AL-21's are superior to the J79 but that doesn't necessarily make Su-22's superior to F-4












Temperature at various parts of Southern Iran hit the extremes on a yearly bases especially if you factor in humidity and direct near the equator sunlight...
so performance issues in hot climate aside your MiG-29's end up being grounded seasonally based on the manufacturers own guidelines. Due to the cost of these Aircrafts every Airforce on the planet will be conservative and will exercise caution and will cap and ground their fighters at well below the manufacturers own guidelines during peace time and due to sanctions Iran has no choice but to be a little more conservative than most so the standard RD-33's are NOT a good choice for Iran's (Southern Iran) climate.
So no doubt one can argue that the F-16 due to its engine is a better choice for Iran and preferable to any aircraft powered by RD-33's but that doesn't necessarily make one platform superior to the other....

Plus in performance both fighter are close enough that it would actually be the subsystems that would be the deciding factor

However as a matter of personal preference I much prefer twin engine fighters for use as war machines and in terms of what's best for Iran it's my belief that the technology and infrastructure gained from producing your own engines and your own fighter in the end is far more valuable than the actual fighter it's self. And even if there is a war the technology and infrastructure gained from producing a comparatively inferior Aircraft would have a far greater effect in your overall ability to win a war than any 5th gen fighter ever could. And that's coming from someone who believes that F-4's & F-14's saved Iran's behind in the Iran-Iraq war!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> The F110 & F100 are both superior engines compared to the RD-33 that is a fact and no one is questioning that fact however *that doesn't necessarily make the F-16 a superior platform....*
> 
> So no doubt one can argue that the F-16 due to its engine is a better choice for Iran and preferable to any aircraft powered by RD-33's but *that doesn't necessarily make one platform superior to the other....*
> 
> Plus in performance both fighter are close enough that it would actually be the subsystems that would be the deciding factor


A platform is the typical 'whole is greater than the sum of its parts'.

When I was on the F-111, I never understood why the US was so insistent on keeping the jet in service, then in a classified meeting, our squadron was told that in every arms reduction negotiation, the Soviets wanted the F-111 out of England. Each time our negotiators told the Soviets to STFU. At the combatant level, we accepted that but then we do not know why the Soviets wanted so. Then after the Soviets collapsed, we learned that Soviet EE/Avionics engineer Adolph Tolkachev was a CIA asset for yrs and provided technical and tactical proofs to our leadership that the Soviets had no credible response to the F-111.

You can figuratively take a jet apart and compare discrete units to other jets and found some to be better or inferior to each other. Then make pronouncements that A jet is superior to B and so on. But that is not how things work in the real world. When you compare discrete components, you are summing up the parts. But when you insert the pilot, there is synergy where the whole aircraft enable the pilot to do things that other pilot/aircraft pairing cannot do in the same situation.

What is this 'synergy'?

_the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects._

What make a 'real world' opinion why A is better than B is not by desk bound analysts but by combatant commanders who has to make decisions based on factors like weather, logistics, manpower, and war necessities. Soviet combatant commanders did that and feedback to their leadership that the F-111 has to go. There were plenty of Soviet platforms where each platform have discrete superior capabilities over the F-111. But we had defenses against theirs while the Soviets had no defense against my old F-111.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I have said on this forum that I am sure Iran has new hidden fighter jets and I am sure that will be revealed in the future. I am sure that the Shafaq project has always continued in secret. We will see in the future

And go say here on this forum that the F-5 was easy to replicate it in heavy penalties is really silly. The Kowsar in a comprehensive strategy will be very helpful. There are people here who are bad at war strategy, completely bad. Iran is full of secrets and is more advanced than you think

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> A platform is the typical 'whole is greater than the sum of its parts'.
> 
> When I was on the F-111, I never understood why the US was so insistent on keeping the jet in service, then in a classified meeting, our squadron was told that in every arms reduction negotiation, the Soviets wanted the F-111 out of England. Each time our negotiators told the Soviets to STFU. At the combatant level, we accepted that but then we do not know why the Soviets wanted so. Then after the Soviets collapsed, we learned that Soviet EE/Avionics engineer Adolph Tolkachev was a CIA asset for yrs and provided technical and tactical proofs to our leadership that the Soviets had no credible response to the F-111.
> 
> You can figuratively take a jet apart and compare discrete units to other jets and found some to be better or inferior to each other. Then make pronouncements that A jet is superior to B and so on. But that is not how things work in the real world. When you compare discrete components, you are summing up the parts. But when you insert the pilot, there is synergy where the whole aircraft enable the pilot to do things that other pilot/aircraft pairing cannot do in the same situation.
> 
> What is this 'synergy'?
> 
> _the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects._
> 
> What make a 'real world' opinion why A is better than B is not by desk bound analysts but by combatant commanders who has to make decisions based on factors like weather, logistics, manpower, and war necessities. Soviet combatant commanders did that and feedback to their leadership that the F-111 has to go. There were plenty of Soviet platforms where each platform have discrete superior capabilities over the F-111. But we had defenses against theirs while the Soviets had no defense against my old F-111.




I totally agree with all the points you made however when your generalizing two different platforms that have been produced since the 80's and over the years come in verity of variants with various upgrades the sum of the parts of each variant is as different as life and death.

Fact is in modern war it will be the subsystems that will be the deciding factor because an F-16 Block 70 equipped with an AESA radar will no doubt and rather easily out match an 80's era Fulcrum-A
Just as MiG-35 would rather easily do the same to any Block 30

And that doesn't make my statement... or your statements about them being the sum of their parts any less true.

In the Iran-Iraq war the only Iranian fighter that was out matched was the F-5E and it really didn't matter that our pilots had superior American training with far more flight hours under their belt or that the F-5 was a comparatively pilot friendly fighter the US specifically modified to go up against MiG-21. The aircraft came up short more due to a lack of "synergy" between the weapons & subsystems than anything pilot related while at the same time Iranian F-4 pilots flying the more bulky, less maneuverable, more complex, less pilot friendly with less pilot visibility (Cockpit) made target practice out of the Iraqi MiG-21's while our F-5s where getting shot down 4 out of every 5 engagements & in the end it was the weapons & subsystems and the synergy between weapons, weapons system and pilot of each aircraft that were the true deciding factor..... 

My point is if you go back and look at the type of radars, weapon & weapon system of each and compare it to the kill ratio in almost every instance (In real war not combat sim's) the Aircraft equipped with a more advanced radar, weapon and weapon system has come out on top almost every time regardless of almost all other factors and I'm guessing the main issue the Russians had with the F-111 was it's superior radar and weapons system more than anything else.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I have said on this forum that I am sure Iran has new hidden fighter jets and I am sure that will be revealed in the future. I am sure that the Shafaq project has always continued in secret. We will see in the future
> 
> And go say here on this forum that the F-5 was easy to replicate it in heavy penalties is really silly. The Kowsar in a comprehensive strategy will be very helpful. There are people here who are bad at war strategy, completely bad. Iran is full of secrets and is more advanced than you think



history Shafaq training fighter Russia contract with Iran تاریخچه قرارداد جنگنده شفق روسیه با ایران - YouTube 

For the last time, if Iran had any intention of perusing the Shafaq project we would NOT have bothered with years of R&D into upgrading the F-5 and producing the Kowsar 

What would be the point in putting resources into a fighter that would be comparatively the same? 
And you'd have to weigh in the minute differences in added capabilities across how many unknowns? 

Shafagh project may have made sense 20 years ago but it just does not make any sense today exactly because Iran today is more advanced than you think

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> I totally agree with all the points you made however when your generalizing two different platforms that have been produced since the 80's and over the years come in verity of variants with various upgrades the sum of the parts of each variant is as different as life and death.
> 
> Fact is in modern war it will be the subsystems that will be the deciding factor because an F-16 Block 70 equipped with an AESA radar will no doubt and rather easily out match an 80's era Fulcrum-A
> Just as MiG-35 would rather easily do the same to any Block 30
> 
> And that doesn't make my statement... or your statements about them being the sum of their parts any less true.
> 
> In the Iran-Iraq war the only Iranian fighter that was out matched was the F-5E and it really didn't matter that our pilots had superior American training with far more flight hours under their belt or that the F-5 was a comparatively pilot friendly fighter the US specifically modified to go up against MiG-21. The aircraft came up short more due to a lack of "synergy" between the weapons & subsystems than anything pilot related while at the same time Iranian F-4 pilots flying the more bulky, less maneuverable, more complex, less pilot friendly with less pilot visibility (Cockpit) made target practice out of the Iraqi MiG-21's while our F-5s where getting shot down 4 out of every 5 engagements & in the end it was the weapons & subsystems and the synergy between weapons, weapons system and pilot of each aircraft that were the true deciding factor.....
> 
> My point is if you go back and look at the type of radars, weapon & weapon system of each and compare it to the kill ratio in almost every instance (In real war not combat sim's) the Aircraft equipped with a more advanced radar, weapon and weapon system has come out on top almost every time regardless of almost all other factors and I'm guessing the main issue the Russians had with the F-111 was it's superior radar and weapons system more than anything else.


I said this before on this forum and I suggest you give serious thoughts. I learned this when I was active duty.

*"In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed."*​​If you have superior engine, then make it a speed fight. If you can outturn, make it a maneuvering fight. If you have longer radar, then make it a long range fight. And so on...Any advantage you have, whether it is technical or not, is a rule. If you have superior logistics, or intelligence, or numerical, factor them into how you conduct the war.

When it comes to air combat, the issues are largely technical, so the point about synergy is how and when are the technical points of the platform make the platform easier for the human to make decisions that are independent of the platform as the human operate the platform.

What it means is:

- How many decisions can the aircraft make for the pilot​- What is the quality of those decisions​- The frequency of those decisions​
For example. In flight training, you have learn how to make 'coordinated turns'...









Coordinated Turns - FLYING Magazine


When we make a turn in flight, why do we use the rudder? We all know from the books the answer is to “correct for adverse yaw” — which is just a fancy way of saying to overcome drag from the aileron. When you initiate a turn, which should you move first, the aileron with … Continued




www.flyingmag.com





We are looking at going back to the Wright Brothers level of flying. No flight school will bypass this. It does not matter how advanced is flying in general. If want to learn how to fly, whether for a military career or else, you must learn the basics of piloting at its most elemental level.

When the aircraft is able to make coordinated turns for the pilot, that leave the pilot free to make other decisions about piloting. However, if the quality of that automatic decision make the maneuver less smooth than manual, then the process is of no help to the pilot. If I have to assist the aircraft, then I might as well make the maneuver myself. Me assisting the aircraft is the opposite of technological advancement.

The ultimate assistance is when the pilot just have to make the command. Soviet era avionics are less able than Western technology at assisting the pilot. Hands-On-Throttle-And-Stick (HOTAS) is less about technology advancement than it is about cockpit task management and this is where Soviet era platforms, not exactly failed, but is inferior to Western platforms. The synergy is less effective in terms of quality. If the pilot in a fighter that have various inferior systems but have superior synergy between aircraft and pilot, odds are good that he will win the fight. That is what synergy is: increase the odds of forcing your opponent to fight under your rules.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1349788169772916745




GBU-12/Sattar-4




2 AIM-9 Sidewinders
Yasin Glide Bombs



Aresh Suicide drone




AGM-65 Maverick




AIM-7 Sparrow
AIM-9 Sidewinder

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shawnee

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1349788169772916745
> View attachment 706911
> 
> GBU-12/Sattar-4
> View attachment 706907
> 
> 2 AIM-9 Sidewinders
> Yasin Glide Bombs
> View attachment 706908
> Aresh Suicide drone
> View attachment 706909
> 
> AGM-65 Maverick
> View attachment 706910
> 
> AIM-7 Sparrow
> AIM-9 Sidewinder



The gimballed tip has the sensor and stabilizer. I like this description:






We also have a second type of Laser guided bombs for Karrar drone which is not apparently gimballed and is similar to this nosetip:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1349788169772916745
> View attachment 706911
> 
> GBU-12/Sattar-4
> View attachment 706907
> 
> 2 AIM-9 Sidewinders
> Yasin Glide Bombs
> View attachment 706908
> Aresh Suicide drone
> View attachment 706909
> 
> AGM-65 Maverick
> View attachment 706910
> 
> AIM-7 Sparrow
> AIM-9 Sidewinder


Iran produces the GBU-12 as Sattar-4 or they only have the bombs since Shah?


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1351045269417316353

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1351045269417316353


I know "vevak" is going to swear at me..lol but seeing those "Saegheh" (sorry " V " tailed F5s!) on the tarmac besides original F5"s and F14's looks good...hey I take this anyway but they better show me some of those Q-313's flying soon !.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

@VEVAK and others

I'll bring the discussion to this thread as I do not want to take the missile thread off track. There is a whole world of difference between how much it costs Iran to produce its assets and how much it would have to pay on the market for similar products. Just imagine how much Iran would have pay for something like its accurate missiles, assuming such things were even available to purchase. Therefore Iran in the long run must rely on the mass production of its own fighter jets, there is no getting away from this. My personal feeling is that Iranian airforce is probably more ahead than we think they are in terms of their work behind the scene. The airforce generally seems to be very quiet regarding their development. 

What we need to see from the airforce in the near future is the start of a stealth fighter project and a heavy UCAV. I agree that at the moment there is too many fighters jet that require different maintenances and that is sucking what little budget the airforce has and this needs to change. Hopefully in the near future IRIAF will enter the same level of development dynamics as we're seeing in others sectors. I am not one that cares much for perception, but for those people that are then when the IRIAF becomes worthy of attention in similar manner to its missiles, UAVs etc then that will completely change the perception of Iran's military capability. Most people tend to be shallow and they judge military capabilities purely by conventional means.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

Philosopher said:


> @VEVAK and others
> 
> I'll bring the discussion to this thread as I do not want to take the missile thread off track. There is a whole world of difference between how much it costs Iran to produce its assets and how much it would have to pay on the market for similar products. Just imagine how much Iran would have pay for something like its accurate missiles, assuming such things were even available to purchase. Therefore Iran in the long run must rely on the mass production of its own fighter jets, there is no getting away from this. My personal feeling is that Iranian airforce is probably more ahead than we think they are in terms of their work behind the scene. The airforce generally seems to be very quiet regarding their development.
> 
> What we need to see from the airforce in the near future is the start of a stealth fighter project and a heavy UCAV. I agree that at the moment there is too many fighters jet that require different maintenances and that is sucking what little budget the airforce has and this needs to change. Hopefully in the near future IRIAF will enter the same level of development dynamics as we're seeing in others sectors. I am not one that cares much for perception, but for those people that are then when the IRIAF becomes worthy of attention in similar manner to its missiles, UAVs etc then that will completely change the perception of Iran's military capability. Most people tend to be shallow and they judge military capabilities purely by conventional means.


I hope you are right.....we all hope you are right.....about the "perception"... it matters to those who do not understand technology and that includes the dumb as* politicians that start the wars on "perception"..and then poor military people who know better have to fight that war for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

aryobarzan said:


> I hope you are right.....we all hope you are right.....about the "perception"... it matters to those who do not understand technology and that includes the dumb as* politicians that start the wars on "perception"..and then poor military people who know better have to fight that war for them.



Exactly, sadly we live in a reality where perception is what seems to rule the mind of most people and these masses tend to overwhelm voice of reason. So you do have to learn this perception game and how to manipulate it, it's just an integral part of human life. Good news about a powerful airforce is that it ticks both boxes.

Let us wait and see what plans they have for the airforce. The good news here is that as soon as the embargo was lifted, we quickly heard news of airforce deals, so this shows they are fully aware of the airforce's shortcomings. I remember the days when we lamented Iran's air defence and today we're so impressed by it. I look forward to the day this same feeling is extended to the airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shawnee

In 1980s, several young researchers were working in a field of Iranian Ground Forces making UAVs.

They were ignored or mocked by the staff and generals there:
They were seen as “Hobbyists making toy planes.”

It even got worse. The group were trying to catch a flying UAV with a net. Somebody underestimated the power of the UAV and chahar angoshtesh ghat shod vaghti uav ro gereft.

It turned into a fiasco.

*Every success starts with disappointments and fiasco.*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Second Yasin advanced trainer built by Iranian specialists 


An expert on West Asian issues said that "in recent exercises the Iranian armed forces have demonstrated their offensive power."

Hossein Kan'ani Moqadam, Iranian expert on West Asian affairs alluding to recent maneuvers organized by the country's armed forces in the central desert noted that “recent exercises by the army of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have shown that all of our country's armed forces are in full operational coordination and in offensive power. "


"We saw that during these exercises which took place just a few days ago, the fictitious enemy's military base was targeted by ballistic missiles and drones, and the anti-missile shield of this base was destroyed. . And in the exercise that followed, the Iranian armed forces seized the same base preventing enemy forces from reaching the base from air and sea, which shows precisely that the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of 'Iran are capable of destroying and storming enemy military bases in unprecedented coordination,' the Iranian expert continued.

According to the latter, the message of these exercises, which were carried out against the actions and adventurisms of Trump in the last days of his political life, was to tell the whole world that "the Islamic Republic of Iran has excellent offensive power and defensive, and that these adventurous threats and actions will not follow. "

This series of exercises has just been completed as Iran’s air combat sector grows stronger.


The Iranian Defense Minister came to the premises of the Aviation Industry Organization and visited the construction stages of the second Yasin advanced training jet.

Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami stressed the need for effective support to the air fleet of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic and expressed the hope that by successfully building prototypes and qu 'By launching the production line of aircraft, effective steps would be taken in the direction of the fleet of advanced training aircraft "Yasin".

Referring to former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's remarks regarding new sanctions against seven entities linked to Iranian shipping and transportation lines, including the Iranian aviation industry, Brigadier General Hatami said: “Every time as enemies have tried to impose more limited conditions on us, our industries have evolved into greater self-sufficiency and greater prosperity.


Yasin is a modern Iranian trainer that was unveiled on October 17, 2019. The nationally-made trainer made its first official flight over "Shahid Nojeh" base. The length of this plane is 12 meters and its height is 4 meters.

This aircraft was designed and built by specialists of the Aircraft Industry Organization of the Armed Forces with the participation of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic. It is to be used as an advanced trainer in the training process of the nation's fighter pilots.

Iran, with the design and construction of this advanced trainer, is among the few countries with aviation technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

So with the recent developments we've seen regarding Iran's quantum systems we can start to speculate regarding the airforce. These quantum systems seem to potentially change the military scene in two major ways if they arrive. One is the development of quantum radars which will nullify current "stealthy" platforms meaning going forward, emphasis will be mostly on speed and manoeuvrability when designing combat air platforms.

The second is this un-hackable communications. This means you can create remotely piloted UCAVs. The UCAV will deliver all the surrounding information giving the pilot on the ground the situation awareness as if they were sitting in the platform but without experiencing the associated g forces. You will also add A.I to these UCAVS to further bolster them.

So *if *(big if) these quantum systems deliver in the way we think, then it seems the future will indeed be UCAVs. I believe UCAVS will in the near future become hypersonic systems powered by scramjet hybrid systems which they themselves carry ramjet/scramjet air to air missiles. Now imagine swarms of such a systems. I obviously have no access to classified information in Iran's quantum projects, but if I did and they are indeed confident they could deliver the two above scenarios, then the airforce needs to work like there is no tomorrow to first develop heavy supersonic UCAV and then beyond. This will not only allow Iran to get parity with its foes in the air domain, but surpass them.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Arminkh

Philosopher said:


> So with the recent developments we've seen regarding Iran's quantum systems we can start to speculate regarding the airforce. These quantum systems seem to potentially change the military scene in two major ways if they arrive. One is the development of quantum radars which will nullify current "stealthy" platforms meaning going forward, emphasis will be mostly on speed and manoeuvrability when designing combat air platforms.
> 
> The second is this un-hackable communications. This means you can create remotely piloted UCAVs. The UCAV will deliver all the surrounding information giving the pilot on the ground the situation awareness as if they were sitting in the platform but without experiencing the associated g forces. You will also add A.I to these UCAVS to further bolster them.
> 
> So *if *(big if) these quantum systems deliver in the way we think, then it seems the future will indeed be UCAVs. I believe UCAVS will in the near future become hypersonic systems powered by scramjet hybrid systems which they themselves carry ramjet/scramjet air to air missiles. Now imagine swarms of such a systems. I obviously have no access to classified information in Iran's quantum projects, but if I did and they are indeed confident they could deliver the two above scenarios, then the airforce needs to work like there is no tomorrow to first develop heavy supersonic UCAV and then beyond. This will not only allow Iran to get parity with its foes in the air domain, but surpass them.











ورود ایران به مسابقه بزرگ جهانی برای دستیابی به «رادار کوانتومی»/ شناسایی آسان جنگنده‌های پنهانکار با کمک ذرات نور +عکس


رادارهای کوانتومی بر خلاف رادارهای معمولی، بر اساس ذرات فوتون کار کرده و می توانند به راحتی پرنده های پنهانکار را نیز کشف کنند؛ فناوری مهمی که قدرت پدافندی کشورمان را ارتقاء ویژه‌ای خواهد داد.




www.mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher said:


> So with the recent developments we've seen regarding Iran's quantum systems we can start to speculate regarding the airforce. These quantum systems seem to potentially change the military scene in two major ways if they arrive. One is the development of quantum radars which will nullify current "stealthy" platforms meaning going forward, emphasis will be mostly on speed and manoeuvrability when designing combat air platforms.
> 
> The second is this un-hackable communications. This means you can create remotely piloted UCAVs. The UCAV will deliver all the surrounding information giving the pilot on the ground the situation awareness as if they were sitting in the platform but without experiencing the associated g forces. You will also add A.I to these UCAVS to further bolster them.
> 
> So *if *(big if) these quantum systems deliver in the way we think, then it seems the future will indeed be UCAVs. I believe UCAVS will in the near future become hypersonic systems powered by scramjet hybrid systems which they themselves carry ramjet/scramjet air to air missiles. Now imagine swarms of such a systems. I obviously have no access to classified information in Iran's quantum projects, but if I did and they are indeed confident they could deliver the two above scenarios, then the airforce needs to work like there is no tomorrow to first develop heavy supersonic UCAV and then beyond. This will not only allow Iran to get parity with its foes in the air domain, but surpass them.



Just because a new technology is being developed it doesn't mean all the old systems are going to suddenly go away! So we are a long way away from it being perfected and even longer from proliferation. 

Just look at development and proliferation of lasers and rail guns. When where they developed, how many countries have them and in what quantities?

And if you stop using stealth what's to stop your enemy from using the old system against you? 

Plus modern stealth designs automatically give a more aerodynamic and stable design to the Aircraft and sure long in the future the use of RAM coatings may be less required but for the foreseeable future weapons will have stealthier designs and maneuverability of stable stealth design will be compensated through thrust vectoring....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Just because a new technology is being developed it doesn't mean all the old systems are going to suddenly go away! So we are a long way away from it being perfected and even longer from proliferation.
> 
> Just look at development and proliferation of lasers and rail guns. When where they developed, how many countries have them and in what quantities?
> 
> And if you stop using stealth what's to stop your enemy from using the old system against you?
> 
> Plus modern stealth designs automatically give a more aerodynamic and stable design to the Aircraft and sure long in the future the use of RAM coatings may be less required but for the foreseeable future weapons will have stealthier designs and maneuverability of stable stealth design will be compensated through thrust vectoring....


When (not if, because the concept is already proven, hence it is not a theory anymore!!!) the quantum key distribution technology is rolled in military communications then all manned aircraft will be sitting ducks. Swarms of thousand cheap UCAVs with SECURE datalink will be able to locate (because of multiple illumination angles) all Fighters, stealth or not.

sitting ducks! just like the ww1battlecruisers during ww2. It’s called DISRUPTIVE for a reason. It DISRUPTS current status quo completely!


----------



## Shawnee

We have had many technology breakthroughs in the past centuries but none were like *nuclear weapons*, a complete game changer.

Just four year prior to the Hiroshima bombing, top US officials had little hope in nuclear weapon concept.

*Jews likes Oppenheimer were not allowed to work on highly sensitive tech of that time such as radar and were sent to Manhattan project.*

Who knows? Quantum communications and radar might be the next Manhattan project.


----------



## Philosopher

VEVAK said:


> Just because a new technology is being developed it doesn't mean all the old systems are going to suddenly go away! So we are a long way away from it being perfected and even longer from proliferation.



I would not go as far as saying they would go away completely, but the question is how much would they still be prioritised.



> And if you stop using stealth what's to stop your enemy from using the old system against you?
> 
> Plus modern stealth designs automatically give a more aerodynamic and stable design to the Aircraft and sure long in the future the use of RAM coatings may be less required but for the foreseeable future weapons will have stealthier designs and maneuverability of stable stealth design will be compensated through thrust vectoring....



The utility of stealth will be greatly diminished, if (and I emphasised the if) the quantum systems deliver in the way we think. Today, when nations design airframes, low RCS parameters are taken into account and you end to having to balance that with other needed qualities such as manoeuvrability (not including RAM here). This does not mean low RCS systems cannot be manoeuvrable, but clearly if you have the freedom to focus more on the latter, you'll get more of that. Now as we can see, there are nations today that are working on low RCS fighter jets and I don't see them stopping that and abandoning the projects midway. One reason for that is not many nations are working on these quantum technologies so it is not as if stealth will become totally useless immediately. It will be a while before such systems proliferate. In the case of Iran thing are different because our adversaries are on the forefront of such things.

All this hinges on whether Iran is confident these technologies can deliver the promises we're seeing, If they do, then I do not see the emphasise on manned stealthy platforms as much. More priority would need to be given to the fast, swarm UCAVs of the type I mentioned earlier. One thing is for sure, the IRGC will go down that route, its a matter of whether airforce will follow that path.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

China and Russia have claimed manufacturing of quantum radars and detection of F22 and F35 with it.

US definitely has the technology but will lose the most from it considering how much it spent on these stealth concepts.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Shawnee said:


> China and Russia have claimed manufacturing of quantum radars and detection of F22 and F35 with it.
> 
> US definitely has the technology but will lose the most from it considering how much it spent on these stealth concepts.


Exactly! It’s very much like the digital camera which was first invented by Kodak but the refused to pursue it because it would disrupt the sells of their negatives. Hence they turned an opportunity to an inevitable downfall. Legacy usually makes you take stupid decisions!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher said:


> I would not go as far as saying they would go away completely, but the question is how much would they still be prioritised.
> 
> 
> 
> The utility of stealth will be greatly diminished, if (and I emphasised the if) the quantum systems deliver in the way we think. Today, when nations design airframes, low RCS parameters are taken into account and you end to having to balance that with other needed qualities such as manoeuvrability (not including RAM here). This does not mean low RCS systems cannot be manoeuvrable, but clearly if you have the freedom to focus more on the latter, you'll get more of that. Now as we can see, there are nations today that are working on low RCS fighter jets and I don't see them stopping that and abandoning the projects midway. One reason for that is not many nations are working on these quantum technologies so it is not as if stealth will become totally useless immediately. It will be a while before such systems proliferate. In the case of Iran thing are different because our adversaries are on the forefront of such things.
> 
> All this hinges on whether Iran is confident these technologies can deliver the promises we're seeing, If they do, then I do not see the emphasise on manned stealthy platforms as much. More priority would need to be given to the fast, swarm UCAVs of the type I mentioned earlier. One thing is for sure, the IRGC will go down that route, its a matter of whether airforce will follow that path.




Again once you stop utilizing stealth your enemy will simply adapt to what you have or don't have! So for the foreseeable future stealth designs on Aircraft (Manned or not) will remain as the go to tech for incursions and I really don't see that changing anytime soon at least not within the next 3-4 decades. 

As for manned fighter jets their role will no doubt be diminished which means the need for larger UCAV's capable of carrying heavier payloads will continue to increase to be used as a replacement.

And at the end of the day 99.9% of the tech you develop and infrastructure you put down for a manned fighter jet today will simply be transferred on to either a more advanced UCAV or other manned aircraft or even space crafts.
So not investing in a heavy manned fighter today because you are predicting less of a need for one even 2 decades down the line would be a foolish mistake and if anything Iran needs to double down on heavy manned fighters today because even if we develop commercial quantum com's, radars and computers even a decade from now we would still be well behind in terms of platforms that will be required to properly utilize them.

The requirement for mining and producing various alloys and composites isn't going away neither is the requirement for the development of advanced tool, machinery, a more capable work force,......


Sina-1 said:


> When (not if, because the concept is already proven, hence it is not a theory anymore!!!) the quantum key distribution technology is rolled in military communications then all manned aircraft will be sitting ducks. Swarms of thousand cheap UCAVs with SECURE datalink will be able to locate (because of multiple illumination angles) all Fighters, stealth or not.
> 
> sitting ducks! just like the ww1battlecruisers during ww2. It’s called DISRUPTIVE for a reason. It DISRUPTS current status quo completely!



It's not that simple! Yes the role of manned fighters will change but at the end of the day that swarm that your talking about still needs to reach them and catch them! 
At what altitude and at what speeds and from what range is this swarm coming from?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

VEVAK said:


> Again once you stop utilizing stealth your enemy will simply adapt to what you have or don't have!



Sure, but this is not something I have contested with. My point was that stealth will lose its utility to a great extend, not that quantum technology will nullify all other technologies.



> So for the foreseeable future stealth designs on Aircraft (Manned or not) will remain as the go to tech for incursions and I really don't see that changing anytime soon at *least not within the next 3-4 decades.*



That depends on how quickly the quantum radars enter the scene and proliferate.



> As for manned fighter jets their role will no doubt be diminished which means the need for larger UCAV's capable of carrying heavier payloads will continue to increase to be used as a replacement.



Agreed.



> And at the end of the day 99.9% of the tech you develop and infrastructure you put down for a manned fighter jet today will simply be transferred on to either a more advanced UCAV or other manned aircraft or even space crafts.
> So not investing in a heavy manned fighter today because you are predicting less of a need for one even 2 decades down the line would be a foolish mistake and if anything Iran needs to double down on heavy manned fighters today because even if we develop commercial quantum com's, radars and computers even a decade from now we would still be well behind in terms of platforms that will be required to properly utilize them.



As I said earlier, I do not see countries that are developing stealth fighters today abandoning those projects midway. My point was not Iran should be an exception to this, what I said is they need to start working on larger UCAVs heavily with the mindset that these will be the future. To my mind, speed will be the new stealth in the coming decade, so priority needs to be given to creating the necessary materials both airframe wise and engine to be able to deliver the needed hypersonic speeds. For example, the Americans are already developing unmanned SR-72. So one way or another, this complex field of engine and material technology is something Iran needs to properly crack. Now, the question of whether Iran will chose to also develop an manned system in this interim period. That is something they need to calculate themselves and I am sure they already have made their decision. If I had to guess, I would say I do not see the airforce fully abandoning manned platforms at this stage, mostly because of historical reasons and not due to technology.



> The requirement for mining and producing various alloys and composites isn't going away neither is the requirement for the development of advanced tool, machinery, a more capable work force,......



Sure, but all of that can be developed in the process of creating heavy UCAVs. Matter of fact given the requirement for these hypersonic UCAVs, one could say the technology for term in terms of materials etc will be more even more demanding. Having said that, regardless of manned or unmanned, these technologies have to developed by Iran either way. There is no escaping it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Quantum radars will not make stealth obsolete it will just help balance the battlefield.

First of all quantum radars will be expensive and likely power intensive and few in between. Thus they are going to be one of the first targets in any war.

So this thinking that Quantum computers will make 5th gen fighters obsolete is not correct. It will make them more detectable, but planes were also detectable in WW2 thru Vietnam that didn’t mean fighter jets became obsolete.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Quantum radars will not make stealth obsolete it will just help balance the battlefield.
> 
> First of all quantum radars will be expensive and likely power intensive and few in between. Thus they are going to be one of the first targets in any war.
> 
> So this thinking that Quantum computers will make 5th gen fighters obsolete is not correct. It will make them more detectable, but planes were also detectable in WW2 thru Vietnam that didn’t mean fighter jets became obsolete.



Sorry for asking but what exactly makes all these "quantum" things 'quantum' to begin with? 

Is this just a much better form of computing that allows for better overall combat capabilities/detection?


----------



## Ich

Blue In Green said:


> Sorry for asking but what exactly makes all these "quantum" things 'quantum' to begin with?
> 
> Is this just a much better form of computing that allows for better overall combat capabilities/detection?



Faster computing. Also quantum radar cause some of the electrons in the stealth plane to influence other electrons far away to be in the same state/spin/nameit. The electrons are kinda mirrored and so the other side can make a projection where and what the electrons from they mirrored. Me think it will need some more developing time with this quantum radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Blue In Green said:


> Sorry for asking but what exactly makes all these "quantum" things 'quantum' to begin with?
> 
> Is this just a much better form of computing that allows for better overall combat capabilities/detection?


More like they take advantage of effects that occur at the Planck scale. They will be helpful in certain things.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Ich said:


> Faster computing. Also quantum radar cause some of the electrons in the stealth plane to influence other electrons far away to be in the same state/spin/nameit. The electrons are kinda mirrored and so the other side can make a projection where and what the electrons from they mirrored. Me think it will need some more developing time with this quantum radars.



Thank you for the clarification!


----------



## TheImmortal

Blue In Green said:


> Sorry for asking but what exactly makes all these "quantum" things 'quantum' to begin with?
> 
> Is this just a much better form of computing that allows for better overall combat capabilities/detection?



Again I am by no means an expert, but I have watched many documentaries on space and quantum physics as it’s one of my favorite past times and this is what I have gathered.

Modern computers use a combinations of 0 and 1s at their “atomic level” (a bit/byte) .

Quantum computers use the laws of quantum physics to develop a “qubit” or a quantum bit. Instead of a system of 0’s and 1’s the qubit can be both a 0 and 1 at the same time. This “spooky” nature is how particles work at sub atomic level (both a particle and a wave at same time). This unlocks massive power potential when no longer restricted to a definitive bi-nominal probability (0 or 1).

If you tell a modern day supercomputer to guess a password it will go through trying each combination one after another till it finds the password.

If you tell a modern day quantum computer to guess a password it will create simultaneous parallel “worlds” and find the password and bring it into this “world”.

Quantum communication relies on this as well as a thing called quantum entanglement another aspect of quantum physics which basically states if two particles are “entangled” (ie have a relationship with one another) that when you manipulate one the other reacts instantly to that manipulation as if it “knows” the other has already been manipulated.

This opens up very important doorways in communication basically quantum encryption which would make it nearly impossible for any adversary to intercept communications between two devices that are using this process.

Quantum computers and quantum technology is going to be *one of the greatest* technologies created by mankind. I cannot stress enough, how game changing it will be from accurate simulations to predicting water physics in real time, to Artificial intelligence.

A fully mastered quantum computer could hack nearly any military grade encryption device in seconds and contain a power in the millions of times greater than modern traditional computers.

It will be one of mankind’s greatest inventions

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Again I am by no means an expert, but I have watched many documentaries on space and quantum physics as it’s one of my favorite past times and this is what I have gathered.
> 
> Modern computers use a combinations of 0 and 1s at their “atomic level” (a bit/byte) .
> 
> Quantum computers use the laws of quantum physics to develop a “qubit” or a quantum bit. Instead of a system of 0’s and 1’s the qubit can be both a 0 and 1 at the same time. This “spooky” nature is how particles work at sub atomic level (both a particle and a wave at same time). This unlocks massive power potential when no longer restricted to a definitive bi-nominal probability (0 or 1).
> 
> If you tell a modern day supercomputer to guess a password it will go through trying each combination one after another till it finds the password.
> 
> If you tell a modern day quantum computer to guess a password it will create simultaneous parallel “worlds” and find the password and bring it into this “world”.
> 
> Quantum communication relies on this as well as a thing called quantum entanglement another aspect of quantum physics which basically states if two particles are “entangled” (ie have a relationship with one another) that when you manipulate one the other reacts instantly to that manipulation as if it “knows” the other has already been manipulated.
> 
> This opens up very important doorways in communication basically quantum encryption which would make it nearly impossible for any adversary to intercept communications between two devices that are using this process.
> 
> Quantum computers and quantum technology is going to be *one of the greatest* technologies created by mankind. I cannot stress enough, how game changing it will be from accurate simulations to predicting water physics in real time, to Artificial intelligence.
> 
> A fully mastered quantum computer could hack nearly any military grade encryption device in seconds and contain a power in the millions of times greater than modern traditional computers.
> 
> It will be one of mankind’s greatest inventions



Thank you so much bro!! 

Was really confused since I always hear the quantum being thrown around but never really had an idea of what it was exactly lol, much appreciated.


----------



## VEVAK

WudangMaster said:


>



Should be perfect for secure instantaneous communication needed for military equipment

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> It's not that simple! Yes the role of manned fighters will change but at the end of the day that swarm that your talking about still needs to reach them and catch them!
> At what altitude and at what speeds and from what range is this swarm coming from?



Shahed 129 which is a more than a decade old flies on a 24kft altitude with a 24 hour endurance. It is not out of realm or possibility to assume Iran fielding UCAVs with 30kft altitude with even more endurance in the upcoming years. It is also very plausible that Iran will and can develop 100km range a2a missiles for its UCAVs.

For argument sake let's say that each of these UCAVs will cost Iran 100kUSD. That's *1000 UCAVs *on each F35. Considering 100% secure datalink between the UCAVs and with the ground assets, the coordinated attacks on each enemy craft till be too overwhelming, do you not see this? Are you still of the opinion that manned fighter jets is the way to go? For me personally, the mathematics is very simple. When quantum and AI technologies are mature for military applications (2-3 years away) then manned fighters will be good for museums only.

There are so many factors that are against manned fighters. The weak link of these systems are usually human in the loop, for example the g-force limits completely dependent on the level the pilot can sustain so in a close combat situation they will be toast when going up against an asset that can tolerate many times the g-force limit!

Fact of the matter is that I have been arguing against manned fighters on this forum for years now. There is a good reason for why Iran has not invested much in this field because they have the clarity of thought to know that it is a dead end weapon.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> Shahed 129 which is a more than a decade old flies on a 24kft altitude with a 24 hour endurance. It is not out of realm or possibility to assume Iran fielding UCAVs with 30kft altitude with even more endurance in the upcoming years. It is also very plausible that Iran will and can develop 100km range a2a missiles for its UCAVs.
> 
> For argument sake let's say that each of these UCAVs will cost Iran 100kUSD. That's *1000 UCAVs *on each F35. Considering 100% secure datalink between the UCAVs and with the ground assets, the coordinated attacks on each enemy craft till be too overwhelming, do you not see this? Are you still of the opinion that manned fighter jets is the way to go? For me personally, the mathematics is very simple. When quantum and AI technologies are mature for military applications (2-3 years away) then manned fighters will be good for museums only.
> 
> There are so many factors that are against manned fighters. The weak link of these systems are usually human in the loop, for example the g-force limits completely dependent on the level the pilot can sustain so in a close combat situation they will be toast when going up against an asset that can tolerate many times the g-force limit!
> 
> Fact of the matter is that I have been arguing against manned fighters on this forum for years now. There is a good reason for why Iran has not invested much in this field because they have the clarity of thought to know that it is a dead end weapon.



Again NOT that simple!

1. Iran can absolutely build 100km A2A missiles! The problem is targeting at that range, equipment required for targeting at that range, how big and heavy would such a missile would be...
So far we haven't even managed to put a Fakkor-90 missile on our Kowsar fighters let alone....

2. Shahed-129's fly at 150 kph and max out at 24,000 ft vs F-35's that will be cruising at 45000 ft at speed of over 1000 kph.
Sh-129 can currently be armed 1 AiM-9 or at best with future upgrades 2 AiM-9's with no more then ~10km range (6km of which would be needed to make up for the altitude) and due to the vast difference in speed even with an upgraded AiM-9 with a wide aspect ratio your target window will mere seconds.
Which means although you can potentially use them to target fighter jets just as AiM-9 armed Helo's have in the past been used to down fighters however the success ratio of such a platform would be far too low to be worth investigating in

3.In terms of costs, one of the reasons Iranian UCAV are affordable is because they don't have expensive radars. If you want a UCAV capable of targeting at 100km then you clearly have to equip it with some kind of multi million dollar radar because radars capable of targeting at such a range aren't cheap! And putting multi million dollar radars on slow, easy to shoot down platform with weak frames that also lack any kind of maneuverability makes no sense either.

Anyone who claims that investing in a domestic, heavy manned fighter is not a worth while investment clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.
Investing in a fighter isn't just about a fighter!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

VEVAK said:


> Iran can absolutely build 100km A2A missiles! The problem is targeting at that range, equipment required for targeting at that range, how big and heavy would such a missile would be...
> So far we haven't even managed to put a Fakkor-90 missile on our Kowsar fighters let alone....



We could manage to do anything we want. Question is what we prioritise. My point is that anything and everything that has to do with manned fighters have been given low priority because of obvious reasons.





VEVAK said:


> Shahed-129's fly at 150 kph and max out at 24,000 ft vs F-35's that will be cruising at 45000 ft at speed of over 1000 kph.
> Sh-129 can currently be armed 1 AiM-9 or at best with future upgrades 2 AiM-9's with no more then ~10km range (6km of which would be needed to make up for the altitude) and due to the vast difference in speed even with an upgraded AiM-9 with a wide aspect ratio your target window will mere seconds.
> Which means although you can potentially use them to target fighter jets just as AiM-9 armed Helo's have in the past been used to down fighters however the success ratio of such a platform would be far too low to be worth investigating in



I only took s129 as an example of old technology. My point is that new generation of Iran UCAVs will be much more potent. The power plant will be based on jahesh engine or variants of it. Hence the ceiling will be way above 30 000 ft.




VEVAK said:


> In terms of costs, one of the reasons Iranian UCAV are affordable is because they don't have expensive radars. If you want a UCAV capable of targeting at 100km then you clearly have to equip it with some kind of multi million dollar radar because radars capable of targeting at such a range aren't cheap! And putting multi million dollar radars on slow, easy to shoot down platform with weak frames that also lack any kind of maneuverability makes no sense either.



First of, next generation Iranian UCAVs will not be slow and they will not be easy to shoot down. Also please respect the premise! The premise is WHEN quantum key distribution is rolled out in the military, then large amount of data can be transmitted in order to coordinate attacks on enemy craft. That is both command data, but also radar data. This data CANNOT be intercepted and it CANNOT be submitted to jamming. This means that distributed systems such as thousands of aerial and ground assets can completely annihilate any conventional foe. 
All you assets do not have to have radar. All assets should not even have the best radars. All your assets do not need to be SoA systems either. Just by overpopulating the battlefield with thousand of potential harm for the enemy means that you are in a strategic dominance from the get go.



VEVAK said:


> Anyone who claims that investing in a domestic, heavy manned fighter is not a worth while investment clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.
> Investing in a fighter isn't just about a fighter!


You say this because you view the world from a legacy point of view. This is the viewpoint of many branches of artesh a well (Navy excluded). Innovators such as Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, Elon Musk and Steve Jobs do not care or respect status quo, they leapfrog it!


----------



## VEVAK

Sina-1 said:


> We could manage to do anything we want. Question is what we prioritise. My point is that anything and everything that has to do with manned fighters have been given low priority because of obvious reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only took s129 as an example of old technology. My point is that new generation of Iran UCAVs will be much more potent. The power plant will be based on jahesh engine or variants of it. Hence the ceiling will be way above 30 000 ft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of, next generation Iranian UCAVs will not be slow and they will not be easy to shoot down. Also please respect the premise! The premise is WHEN quantum key distribution is rolled out in the military, then large amount of data can be transmitted in order to coordinate attacks on enemy craft. That is both command data, but also radar data. This data CANNOT be intercepted and it CANNOT be submitted to jamming. This means that distributed systems such as thousands of aerial and ground assets can completely annihilate any conventional foe.
> All you assets do not have to have radar. All assets should not even have the best radars. All your assets do not need to be SoA systems either. Just by overpopulating the battlefield with thousand of potential harm for the enemy means that you are in a strategic dominance from the get go.
> 
> 
> You say this because you view the world from a legacy point of view. This is the viewpoint of many branches of artesh a well (Navy excluded). Innovators such as Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, Elon Musk and Steve Jobs do not care or respect status quo, they leapfrog it!



That is a closed minded way of looking at a fighter project.
A true fighter project would forces Iran to seriously invest in a wide range of tools, equipment and infrastructures that would not only be used in a fighter project but also used for developing and producing viable transport aircraft, more capable missiles, more capable UCAV's, more capable helos, more capable coms be they quantum or not, more capable sensors used in a wide range of industries, development of alloys and composites used in a wide range of industries to allow Iran to develop better products for use and export,....

As for using ground based quantum com's as a replacement for areal aircraft. 1st off we are decades away from such a reality to even be feasible. 2nd having fixed locations on the ground transmit and do all you target acquisition means an enemy could potentially take out vast majority of your fleet by targeting 10-20 fixed locations on the ground and we are easily +40 years away from proliferation to an extant that each UCAV squad would have it's own dedicated quantum com and it's own ground based search, track & targeting equipment.... Finally, your assuming that no one will ever be able to build a counter to quantum com's....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

Shawnee said:


> China and Russia *have claimed manufacturing of quantum radars* and detection of F22 and F35 with it.
> US definitely has the technology ...


It is not a matter of claims, we are far from this. A Russian officer told me more than 15 years old,- before the F-22 became fully operational- The Russian Industry had been serial producing the radio photonic radar technologies. There was a legacy of USSR. Now we are from this, Russia is equipping its fighters with embedded radio photonic radars and laser weapons, besides a new generation of hypersonic air-air missiles.


----------



## TheImmortal

foxhoundbis said:


> It is not a matter of claims, we are far from this. A Russian officer told me more than 15 years old,- before the F-22 became fully operational- The Russian Industry had been serial producing the radio photonic radar technologies. There was a legacy of USSR. Now we are from this, Russia is equipping its fighters with embedded radio photonic radars and laser weapons, besides a new generation of hypersonic air-air missiles.



US and Russia deep military state like began work on quantum technologies back in 90’s. It makes sense since military is 20-30 years ahead of civilian in certain fields.

One just needs to look at spy satellites that are decommissioned and given to NASA even 20
-30 year old spy satellites are more advanced then what NASA has in its arsenal.


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran After Upgrading Fighter Jet Manufacturing Technology*

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said that his country is seriously intent to enhance fighter jets manufacturing technology.

“Iran is seeking to enhance the technology for manufacturing fighter jets,” Hatami said on the sidelines of a visit to Aero India 2021 on Wednesday, adding, “Thanks to the efforts of air industry experts, we have developed indigenous products including Kowsar light jetfighter, Yasin training jetfighter, and various prototypes of helicopters and UAVs.” 
He reiterated that all these achievements have been gained despite the imposition of illegal sanctions on the country by the US.



Iran After Upgrading Fighter Jet Manufacturing Technology | Farsnews Agency

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Oldman1

VEVAK said:


> Again NOT that simple!
> 
> 1. Iran can absolutely build 100km A2A missiles! The problem is targeting at that range, equipment required for targeting at that range, how big and heavy would such a missile would be...
> So far we haven't even managed to put a Fakkor-90 missile on our Kowsar fighters let alone....
> 
> 2. Shahed-129's fly at 150 kph and max out at 24,000 ft vs F-35's that will be cruising at 45000 ft at speed of over 1000 kph.
> Sh-129 can currently be armed 1 AiM-9 or at best with future upgrades 2 AiM-9's with no more then ~10km range (6km of which would be needed to make up for the altitude) and due to the vast difference in speed even with an upgraded AiM-9 with a wide aspect ratio your target window will mere seconds.
> Which means although you can potentially use them to target fighter jets just as AiM-9 armed Helo's have in the past been used to down fighters however the success ratio of such a platform would be far too low to be worth investigating in
> 
> 3.In terms of costs, one of the reasons Iranian UCAV are affordable is because they don't have expensive radars. If you want a UCAV capable of targeting at 100km then you clearly have to equip it with some kind of multi million dollar radar because radars capable of targeting at such a range aren't cheap! And putting multi million dollar radars on slow, easy to shoot down platform with weak frames that also lack any kind of maneuverability makes no sense either.
> 
> Anyone who claims that investing in a domestic, heavy manned fighter is not a worth while investment clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.
> Investing in a fighter isn't just about a fighter!


Building a jet fighter is more harder than building missiles or rockets. Even their mockup looks hilarious, and wouldn't fly as all even if its the real thing. And besides Iran knows their air force will be destroyed easily. The Iranian posters know that. If the RQ 170 didn't fall into Iran, they would have been decades behind in drone tech. After all the Iranians thanked us graciously for that. And you've seen most of their drones pretty much looks like it now.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Oldman1 said:


> Building a jet fighter is more harder than building missiles or rockets. Even their mockup looks hilarious, and wouldn't fly as all even if its the real thing. And besides Iran knows their air force will be destroyed easily. The Iranian posters know that. If the RQ 170 didn't fall into Iran, they would have been decades behind in drone tech. After all the Iranians thanked us graciously for that. And you've seen most of their drones pretty much looks like it now.


 Is English your first language?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Oldman1 said:


> Building a jet fighter is more harder than building missiles or rockets. Even their mockup looks hilarious, and wouldn't fly as all even if its the real thing. And besides Iran knows their air force will be destroyed easily. The Iranian posters know that. If the RQ 170 didn't fall into Iran, they would have been decades behind in drone tech. *After all the Iranians thanked us graciously for that*. And you've seen most of their drones pretty much looks like it now.



We simply trolled you guys ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Oldman1 said:


> Building a jet fighter is more harder than building missiles or rockets. Even their mockup looks hilarious, and wouldn't fly as all even if its the real thing. And besides Iran knows their air force will be destroyed easily. The Iranian posters know that. If the RQ 170 didn't fall into Iran, they would have been decades behind in drone tech. After all the Iranians thanked us graciously for that. And you've seen most of their drones pretty much looks like it now.



Wrong! The downing of the RQ-170 in terms of design gave Iran quicker access to flying wing designs and that was about it's only contribution to the Saegheh UCAV's 

As for the Simorgh 1-1 copy again main contribution so far have been in design & flight management also in the future when the Jahaesh-700 engine is successfully mass produced one could possibly claim that Iran's access to RQ-170 engine helped Iran overcome a few hurdles but in the end most of the work was done by Iran. 

You think just because someone has access to a certain aircraft that they can just simply reverse engineer and produce it? How many different type of Jet engines does Turkey have access too? and for how many years have they been trying to come up with a domestic mini jet engine of their own? so it's not that simple!

The only time having access to a weapon helps you reproduce it(especially In such a short time period), is only when you already have access to the vast majority of the tech, tools, infrastructure, materials, human resources,.... required to produce it in the 1st place. 

Unless your claiming that the US RQ-170 came down in Iran with all the blueprints of all the required infrastructure needed to produce every single component, then your statement is utter nonsense. 
Which should also tell you that Iran had a detailed, active & serious projects for the development of Jet powered UCAV's long before the RQ-170 landed in Iran 

As for U.S. having a stronger Airforce, no one doubts that! However, what Iran should have learned from the Iran-Iraq war is that just because one side has a stronger Airforce that does NOT automatically wipe out the vast damage the opposing Airforce can potentially do.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Incog_nito

Can Iran now buy Aircraft from Russia and China?

Russians have the whole fleet of their MiG-29s free which Iran can acquire with upgrades in a short span of time. Moreover, Iran can place orders of 100+ MiG-35s as well. Also, they can acquire Sukhoi Su-24 from current & past operators.

Similarly from China, IRAN can take license production of 100-150+ JF-17s. Maybe, China might sell F-7s too as stop-gap with upgrades.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Incog_nito said:


> Can Iran now buy Aircraft from Russia and China?
> 
> Russians have the whole fleet of their MiG-29s free which Iran can acquire with upgrades in a short span of time. Moreover, Iran can place orders of 100+ MiG-35s as well. Also, they can acquire Sukhoi Su-24 from current & past operators.
> 
> Similarly from China, IRAN can take license production of 100-150+ JF-17s. Maybe, China might sell F-7s too as stop-gap with upgrades.



Why should Iran waist its money on MiG-29/35,JF-17s or any other 4th generation fighter when our enemies have 5th generation fighters that would dominate them in the skies?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arash1991

Engine develp


Incog_nito said:


> Can Iran now buy Aircraft from Russia and China?


yes



Incog_nito said:


> Russians have the whole fleet of their MiG-29s free which Iran can acquire with upgrades in a short span of time. Moreover, Iran can place orders of 100+ MiG-35s as well. Also, they can acquire Sukhoi Su-24 from current & past operators.


This is not in their interest (at least at this quantities). There are several reasons for that.
1.) They learned that in a war they must be able to rely on their own ressources even if systems are underperformed. This behaviour have several big advantages:
a.) more Political independence during a conflict due to lower dependencie on third parties wich results in more room for maneuver in frame of own interests

b.)Total Control of production, output and more attention to own needs. 
c.)Long term effect: Creating very important experiences for future developments. 
d.) big part of moneyflow cycle will stay inside the country. Strenghten of domestic industry, production and economy during wartime. Many new employees will work in the own industry.
e.) Supply Routes can be cut so easily. There is no need for Iran to import end products. Importing some basic initial products is much easier, and even if no acsess , they will be easier to produce. 

Another question is: What is the main role of an Airforce? 
Air supriority, reconnaissance and other missions only serve one purpose:
to incapacitate the enemy on the ground. This goal is reached on Strategic and tactical level. 

Iran already fullfills this capacity with its precisition missiles and Drones with proof of work.
Fighter jets are for Iran more like a "Nice to have" tool but not a "must have"
Missiles and drones remember me little bit to aircraft carriers before the second world war.

during this time Aircraft carriers were seen as accessories to support the Battleships and as a still developing future technology. But after Pearl harbor attack, Midway and sinking of the most advanced Battleship at this time, the Yamato of the Imperial Japanese fleet by very outdated torpedo bombers from WW1 era , the strategic roles changed and Aircraft carriers became the Heart of the US Navy.

I believe that irans strategic orientation to use missiles and drones as primary weapons instead of fighter jets is maybe little bit early bu

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## VEVAK

Incog_nito said:


> Can Iran now buy Aircraft from Russia and China?
> 
> Russians have the whole fleet of their MiG-29s free which Iran can acquire with upgrades in a short span of time. Moreover, Iran can place orders of 100+ MiG-35s as well. Also, they can acquire Sukhoi Su-24 from current & past operators.
> 
> Similarly from China, IRAN can take license production of 100-150+ JF-17s. Maybe, China might sell F-7s too as stop-gap with upgrades.





Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why should Iran waist its money on MiG-29/35,JF-17s or any other 4th generation fighter when our enemies have 5th generation fighters that would dominate them in the skies?



A purchased Airforce is more of a leash than a capability! And a purchased Airforce, without constant supply of parts and weapons will loose the vast majority of its capability in mere months. So regardless of the Aircrafts generation, unless you have the capability to supply, maintain and arm them domestically they are just not worth the expenditure you would have to waist on them. And if you don't have the full capability to maintain them they become more of a leash than anything else. 

It's like giving a caveman king 10 armed AK-47's. Sure he may be able to use them, but take away the ammo and it's nothing more than junk metal and in the end the caveman king would have been far better off learning how to forge a sword to supply his caveman army. 

Over the past 1000 years, Iranian regimes and government before the Islamic Republic have always had trouble comprehending that truth and one can even say the only reason this Iranian government was forced to face that reality was due to the combination of US sanctions on top of the Iran-Iraq war and Iranian leaders that finally woke up and were willing to do something about it. 

So Iran is far better off learning how to forge it's own fighters regardless of the generation. 
Iran just needs to ensure that the fighter they produce has the required speed, range, payload capacity & areal refueling capability to actually be useful 

Also a fighter project isn't just about a fighter! The infrastructure you need to develop to produce a fighter will allow you to enhance & or develop a wide range of other industries so the byproducts and side effects of truly mass producing a fully domestic fighter jet go far beyond a simple fighter. 
Just as the byproduct of learning to forge a sword for the caveman would be the ability to build nails, saws, hammers... the circumstances may be different and far more complex but the analogy holds true... 
So the domestic production of a far less sophisticated fighter is far more valuable than the imported purchase of the most advanced fighter jet in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Incog_nito

Arash1991 said:


> Engine develp
> 
> yes
> 
> 
> This is not in their interest (at least at this quantities). There are several reasons for that.
> 1.) They learned that in a war they must be able to rely on their own ressources even if systems are underperformed. This behaviour have several big advantages:
> a.) more Political independence during a conflict due to lower dependencie on third parties wich results in more room for maneuver in frame of own interests
> 
> b.)Total Control of production, output and more attention to own needs.
> c.)Long term effect: Creating very important experiences for future developments.
> d.) big part of moneyflow cycle will stay inside the country. Strenghten of domestic industry, production and economy during wartime. Many new employees will work in the own industry.
> e.) Supply Routes can be cut so easily. There is no need for Iran to import end products. Importing some basic initial products is much easier, and even if no acsess , they will be easier to produce.
> 
> Another question is: What is the main role of an Airforce?
> Air supriority, reconnaissance and other missions only serve one purpose:
> to incapacitate the enemy on the ground. This goal is reached on Strategic and tactical level.
> 
> Iran already fullfills this capacity with its precisition missiles and Drones with proof of work.
> Fighter jets are for Iran more like a "Nice to have" tool but not a "must have"
> Missiles and drones remember me little bit to aircraft carriers before the second world war.
> 
> during this time Aircraft carriers were seen as accessories to support the Battleships and as a still developing future technology. But after Pearl harbor attack, Midway and sinking of the most advanced Battleship at this time, the Yamato of the Imperial Japanese fleet by very outdated torpedo bombers from WW1 era , the strategic roles changed and Aircraft carriers became the Heart of the US Navy.
> 
> I believe that irans strategic orientation to use missiles and drones as primary weapons instead of fighter jets is maybe little bit early bu



But still they need some aircraft now.


Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why should Iran waist its money on MiG-29/35,JF-17s or any other 4th generation fighter when our enemies have 5th generation fighters that would dominate them in the skies?



These are very credible platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Incog_nito said:


> But still they need some aircraft now.
> 
> 
> These are very credible platforms.


not For Iran Needs , Iran air-force rejected J-10 and that airplane is a lot more with iran Airforce need than Mig-29 or Mig-35 or JF-17.

let be honest we need something more in line with an Air superiority fighter or Interceptor than a bomber or Jack of all Ace fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> not For Iran Needs , Iran air-force rejected J-10 and that airplane is a lot more with iran Airforce need than Mig-29 or Mig-35 or JF-17.
> 
> let be honest we need something more in line with an Air superiority fighter or Interceptor than a bomber or Jack of all Ace fighter



The Su-35 , PakFa , J20 , these are only real assets which has some use for us ... our main condition of purchase is join production in Iran which for sure both Russia and China won't accept it , although we don't have money ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

As Philosopher said, you underestimated Iran's air force by many, it is clear that Iran is hiding surprises on the subject.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Interview with airforce commander:






There was nothing really discussed in terms new upcoming projects. Couple of points:

Kaman-22 UAV is going to be revealed soon.
He talked about how an Iranian private company helped develop a key electro-mechanical component for fighter jets. He did not disclose exactly what it was but stated it is almost as difficult as jet engines to produce and that it took the company 6 years to do it. It has now been successfully completed.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

VEVAK said:


> Wrong! The downing of the RQ-170 in terms of design gave Iran quicker access to flying wing designs and that was about it's only contribution to the Saegheh UCAV's



Really? So the engines and sensors and materials didn't help their UAV program in the long run because...they just needed the wings?



> As for the Simorgh 1-1 copy again main contribution so far have been in design & flight management also in the future when the Jahaesh-700 engine is successfully mass produced one could possibly claim that Iran's access to RQ-170 engine helped Iran overcome a few hurdles but in the end most of the work was done by Iran.
> 
> You think just because someone has access to a certain aircraft that they can just simply reverse engineer and produce it? How many different type of Jet engines does Turkey have access too? and for how many years have they been trying to come up with a domestic mini jet engine of their own? so it's not that simple!
> 
> The only time having access to a weapon helps you reproduce it(especially In such a short time period), is only when you already have access to the vast majority of the tech, tools, infrastructure, materials, human resources,.... required to produce it in the 1st place.
> 
> Unless your claiming that the US RQ-170 came down in Iran with all the blueprints of all the required infrastructure needed to produce every single component, then your statement is utter nonsense.
> Which should also tell you that Iran had a detailed, active & serious projects for the development of Jet powered UCAV's long before the RQ-170 landed in Iran
> 
> As for U.S. having a stronger Airforce, no one doubts that! However, what Iran should have learned from the Iran-Iraq war is that just because one side has a stronger Airforce that does NOT automatically wipe out the vast damage the opposing Airforce can potentially do.



You look at Russia's or Soviet Union's first high altitude bomber during Cold War and it was the American B-29 which they copied it after one landed in Soviet Union and didn't take that long to copy it. Did that mean they already had a future bomber planned but just decided to copy the American version cause maybe it was better? Perhaps the Iranians did the same.


OldTwilight said:


> We simply trolled you guys ....



No you really thanked us because you were behind by decades. Many of the drones are American copies. And you were proud to display it when you guys produce them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran Army Airforce Brigadier General Pilot Hamid Vahedi:Fighter Jet Kowsar Radar, MiG-29 and F-14 radar upgrade

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

[


Oldman1 said:


> Really? So the engines and sensors and materials didn't help their UAV program in the long run because...they just needed the wings?
> 
> 
> 
> You look at Russia's or Soviet Union's first high altitude bomber during Cold War and it was the American B-29 which they copied it after one landed in Soviet Union and didn't take that long to copy it. Did that mean they already had a future bomber planned but just decided to copy the American version cause maybe it was better? Perhaps the Iranians did the same.
> 
> 
> No you really thanked us because you were behind by decades. Many of the drones are American copies. And you were proud to display it when you guys produce them.




Yes again the ONLY contribution the RQ-170 gave the Saegheh UCAV's was in design only!
Having access to the RQ-170 had absolutely nothing to do with the propulsion systems of the Saegheh UCAV's
That doesn't mean Iran didn't try to reverse engineer the engine later on with the Jaheh-700 and again the infrastructure and the engineering background would have to be there in the 1st place.
It's the same with the Russian if they actually did copy the B-29 the engineering background and infrastructure to produce such an Aircraft would of had to been there in the 1st place.

I can give you a far easier example so you can comprehend better. Go see how many Boeing 747 over how many year have landed across how many counties across the globe and after so many decade how many countries across the globe have actually been able to produce anything like it.
You think Iran wouldn't reverse engineer that if we could? It's not that simple!

With UAV's Iran purposely uses American designs to piss off the U.S.! You still don't get that! The purpose behind it is to show the U.S. the costs of having their Military near Iranian territory! Or else making a UAV look a little different is not that complicated.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

yavar said:


> Iran Army Airforce Brigadier General Pilot Hamid Vahedi:Fighter Jet Kowsar Radar, MiG-29 and F-14 radar upgrade



In the video this is indicated in the arrow, which aircraft could it be?
Maybe Shafaq?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

sahureka2 said:


> Maybe Shafaq?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Fulgrim

it's a shame that the project was canceled. stupid Russians. i thought the plane was beautiful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358421747415085056

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## aryobarzan

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358421747415085056


I wonder if Ghalibaf's today trip to Russia and his special message from SL has anything to do with this..!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Shafaq project has never been canceled, it is an illusion to think so.

And congratulations to iran for improving the Yasin fighter plane. The cell is more beautiful and the wings improved. Yasin looks more like the model they presented to us. Very positive for the future


----------



## Philosopher

It is almost clear that the fighter jet they will get is the SU-30. I assume the version Iran will get will be a very modernised one, perhaps the most modern, which will include AESA radars etc. This will be quite similar to how Iran's S-300 was highly modernised and incorporated S-400 technologies. The question remains to what extend Iran could gain TOT and in-house manufacturing right.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Nasr

Which fighter is this? Is there any news on whether it will enter LRIP stage?


Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358421747415085056



So there is a real possibility that IRIAF would procure Su-30 Flankers from Russia?


----------



## sahureka2

Question:
What the video represents
1) The Yasin prototype with modifications
2) A second prototype of the Yasin
Ps
It is placed over a structure, what purpose is that structure used for?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Philosopher said:


> It is almost clear that the fighter jet they will get is the SU-30. I assume the version Iran will get will be a very modernised one, perhaps the most modern, which will include AESA radars etc. This will be quite similar to how Iran's S-300 was highly modernised and incorporated S-400 technologies. The question remains to what extend Iran could gain TOT and in-house manufacturing right.


I really hope the IRIAF pushes for the thrust vectoring engines on any future order for the Su-30.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358421747415085056


Being the anti-manned-fighter guy on this forum; obviously I am depressed by this news. On so many levels! What good will it do do against 100s American 5th and soon 6th gen fighters? What advantage will it pose on neighboring threats which our missiles can’t handle? How relevant will it even be 10 years from now when it’s rolled in? How tricky will the Russians be in the so called ToT?

Why not invest that money on alternative technologies in our country eg quantum, AI, powerplants, manufacturing equipment... literally anything homegrown is better than this. I truly hate being a client state.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I really hope the IRIAF pushes for the thrust vectoring engines on any future order for the Su-30.



Yes, I agree. That would be one of those upgrade I had in mind. 60-100 of such fighters would provide a good interim solution until Iran can focus on its long term plans for the airforce. At this point, we're wasting resources on upgrading and overhauling various platforms. Its about time a chunk of Iran's fighter retire.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

sahureka2 said:


> It is placed over a structure, what purpose is that structure used for?


I am not sure but I recall once I saw such a structure in a US plant was used to test the integrity of the wings attachment to fuselage..but that is just a wild guess here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No agreement at all!

Older fighters don't have to retire, their upgrades are very smart because these planes will support the new ones. Nothing is lost. Iran are making their new heavy planes through improvements to older planes and that is very smart.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This model is more beautiful and more modern

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

Sina-1 said:


> Being the anti-manned-fighter guy on this forum; obviously I am depressed by this news. On so many levels! What good will it do do against 100s American 5th and soon 6th gen fighters? What advantage will it pose on neighboring threats which our missiles can’t handle? How relevant will it even be 10 years from now when it’s rolled in? How tricky will the Russians be in the so called ToT?
> 
> Why not invest that money on alternative technologies in our country eg quantum, AI, powerplants, manufacturing equipment... literally anything homegrown is better than this. I truly hate being a client state.


I agree 100%. There will never be purchases that are militarily significant. They will be technologically significant if at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Mr Iran Eye said:


> This model is more beautiful and more modern
> 
> View attachment 714498


new Kowsar !?

The problem is that there is no assembly line and no industrial production ... and the assembly salon is not clean ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

OldTwilight said:


> new Kowsar !?
> 
> The problem is that there is no assembly line and no industrial production ... and the assembly salon is not clean ...



This is normal because it is a developing model


----------



## Sineva

Now where have we seen this missile before?


----------



## WudangMaster

Sineva said:


> Now where have we seen this missile before?


Archer or Alamo on a mirage?


----------



## GriffinsRule

WudangMaster said:


> Archer or Alamo on a mirage?


Just an old school AIM-9P

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

I noticed in the video they are still calling Yasin Kowsar 88 which is confusing with the Kowsar/F-5 upgrades. There is also talk of installing a radar on it and indeed the radome in the one featured in the group photo does appear bigger than before. Seems the final version might end up looking closer to the Kowsar/F-5 which makes me wonder if these are competing projects. Before I assumed Yasin would train pilots and eventually transition them to Kowsar and other planes to keep most pilots flying until a heavy fighter is available. Now it seems the 2 platforms will end up being largely the same thing so I now wonder if they are competing for a final variant advanced trainer IRIAF. On the other hand, there is supposedly a production line for Kowsar or F-5 to Kowsar conversion so there is a bit of confusion here...


----------



## Sineva

WudangMaster said:


> Archer or Alamo on a mirage?


Now that would be awesome,but sadly no.
However the missile in question might very possibly be the same,or perhaps a derivative of,the a2a missile that we saw the karrar carrying recently,as it doesnt look like this one has rollerons on the tips of the rear tail surfaces either and which you would expect to see if it was an Aim-9P sidewinder[did iran actually get any of the P model sidewinders?].

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> Building a jet fighter is more harder than building missiles or rockets. Even their mockup looks hilarious, and wouldn't fly as all even if its the real thing. And besides Iran knows their air force will be destroyed easily. The Iranian posters know that. If the RQ 170 didn't fall into Iran, they would have been decades behind in drone tech. After all the Iranians thanked us graciously for that. And you've seen most of their drones pretty much looks like it now.


Few years ago, the head of IRGC aerospace forces said we are *ahead of US* in term of stealth and bomber drones, he also said that copying RQ170 was just a response to Americans big mouth blabbering that Iran can't copy it. Yes, US is technologically more advanced but look at what's happening on the field, which one has been real stealth.

Iran didn't use RQ170 based drones to humiliate all western radars and air defenses around ARAMCO, they were just lower tire drones which had been exported to Yemenis.

Iran wont use it's air force to counter US airforce even if we had F22, that's the limitation of Iran's $10bn military budget. in a possible war between Iran and US, your pilots will find themselves *useless *and *desperate *both on the *air *and on the *ground*!

Poor people who would fall for for your propaganda:
New video shows Iranian suicide combat UAV drone. Patched together with duct tape. - The Aviationist

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

WudangMaster said:


>



Not talking about Farsi, I can't understand what they said in the video, but in any case looking at this video I have the impression that the images in some frames are enlarged, so as to make the viewer think of a modified prototype, but if you take screenshots and you try to correct the dimensions in width (also by observing the characteristics of the images of the technicians and workers present) you will realize that this prototype of the Yasin is not very different from the one seen previously.
However this remains my personal interpretation, to dispel any doubts all that remains is to wait for good quality photographs

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Just think how much we could have progressed if cowards wouldn’t have shut down the program in the first place.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360227645385035776

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> Just think how much we could have progressed if cowards wouldn’t have shut down the program in the first place.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360227645385035776


I hope they managed to build the engine themselves, if they do that it will solve many problem of our civilian and commercial fleet . and it help us to build new heavy helicopter and attack helicopters for our army
and for the record the project was not shut down , it banned from civilian use because the engines Ukraine gave us had problem and could not be used here.
by the way I wonder if we can't modify Jahesh-700 to be used in Helicopters after all each one of them can power airplanes up to 2 tons

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## WudangMaster

sahureka2 said:


> Not talking about Farsi, I can't understand what they said in the video, but in any case looking at this video I have the impression that the images in some frames are enlarged, so as to make the viewer think of a modified prototype, but if you take screenshots and you try to correct the dimensions in width (also by observing the characteristics of the images of the technicians and workers present) you will realize that this prototype of the Yasin is not very different from the one seen previously.
> However this remains my personal interpretation, to dispel any doubts all that remains is to wait for good quality photographs


It would make more sense for it to be the same design because it really would nee


Sineva said:


>


The lower left image definitely proves it hasn't changed in overall shape and the nose cone is the same size. Makes more sense to do this way as the trainer was already as good as it can get for training pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

You don't have good eyes because the shape has changed a bit

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Mr Iran Eye said:


> ........... because the shape has changed a bit


in which elements of the aircraft?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The slimmer rear wing and the shape of the front more resemble the F-5, the air intake less rounded. This second version looks more like the white model near the aircraft. Yet it is very easy to see.

In the photos of siniva on the other page, in the images right from the top, the second photos is the first model

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

After all these years I hope Iran is capable of producing the spare parts required by the F-14. I'm not aware of the reliability of the F-14 fleet. These jets can still be very reliable and useful with upgrades. 

An F-14 with BVR targeting capability would not be overlooked by an enemy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Few points from the long video about Yaseen Training jet.
Fully indigenous Iranian design and build.

Fuselage: iranian
Engines: two Iranian (Owje) turbo jet with no afterburners.Engine compartments designed bigger to accommodate future Turbo fan engines for combat version.
Landing gear: iranian
Ejection seat: Iranian
Cockpit: Iranian, fully digital
Moving surfaces: Iranian, Hydraulics

*Price : $6 million*....(the least expensive training only aircraft in the market today is from china at $ 9 million)

they plan to have a training/combat version also.
Ps: he said they used the infrastructure already in place for F16 (I am sure he said F16????????)...I knew Iran was ready to receive F16s when Revolution arrived.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> After all these years I hope Iran is capable of producing the spare parts required by the F-14. I'm not aware of the reliability of the F-14 fleet. These jets can still be very reliable and useful with upgrades.
> 
> An F-14 with BVR targeting capability would not be overlooked by an enemy.


I wonder if their radars can uplink to and liaise with the National air defense grid in certain scenarios.


aryobarzan said:


> Few points from the long video about Yaseen Training jet.
> Fully indigenous Iranian design and build.
> 
> Fuselage: iranian
> Engines: two Iranian (Owje) turbo jet with no afterburners.Engine compartments designed bigger to accommodate future Turbo fan engines for combat version.
> Landing gear: iranian
> Ejection seat: Iranian
> Cockpit: Iranian, fully digital
> Moving surfaces: Iranian, Hydraulics
> 
> *Price : $6 million*....(the least expensive training only aircraft in the market today is from china at $ 9 million)
> 
> they plan to have a training/combat version also.
> Ps: he said they used the infrastructure already in place for F16 (I am sure he said F16????????)...I knew Iran was ready to receive F16s when Revolution arrived.


I think there is also a special feature about its tail making it ideal as a trainer; something about being able to come out of a spin or something like that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


> I wonder if their radars can uplink to and liaise with the National air defense grid in certain scenarios.
> 
> I think there is also a special feature about its tail making it ideal as a trainer; something about being able to come out of a spin or something like that.


Yes it said something about full tilt..but I an not an aviation guy so I did not understand its importance may be some one who can shed some light on this..it is towards the end of the video.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> Few years ago, the head of IRGC aerospace forces said we are *ahead of US* in term of stealth and bomber drones, he also said that copying RQ170 was just a response to Americans big mouth blabbering that Iran can't copy it. Yes, US is technologically more advanced but look at what's happening on the field, which one has been real stealth.
> 
> Iran didn't use RQ170 based drones to humiliate all western radars and air defenses around ARAMCO, they were just lower tire drones which had been exported to Yemenis.



So you believe that Iran is decades ahead in stealth bombers and UCAVs even before having the copy of the RQ170?


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> So you believe that Iran is decades ahead in stealth bombers and UCAVs even before having the copy of the RQ170?


Iran is ahead of US in stealth and bomber drones, decades is a irrelevant word. but let me add this too, Iran is ahead of US in counter stealth air defenses as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> Iran is ahead of US in stealth and bomber drones, decades is a irrelevant word. but let me add this too, Iran is ahead of US in counter stealth air defenses as well.


LOL! You almost made me believe that.


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> LOL! You almost made me believe that.


It's understandable. It's the side effect of fighting with aliens!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

mohsen said:


> It's understandable. It's the side effect of fighting with aliens!


Concept of Stealth was first developed by the Germans in WWII. If I remember correctly a first German made stealth aircraft was made of wood in order not to reflect the early radars (I have seen a photo of it). Americans stole the aircraft and moved it to the US just like what they did to German rockets and German scientists... All US rocket and Stealth was German tech origin..So not hard to imagine that soon countries like Iran and China will be ahead of US in some fields...US is still far ahead on space (Mars rover) . A big part of any development is the availability of $$$ funds and seems like US can print $$$ at will while every other nation has to work for their $$$ (have not figured that out yet..lol)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

A Mirage fighter jet has been overhauled at an Iranian army base in Mashhad.

Young Iranian military experts and specialists overhauled a Mirage fighter plane in the "Martyr Habibi" base in Mashhad.
The aircraft is one of the Iranian Army’s most sophisticated air force aircraft with fourth generation technology. The Mirage's radar is able to intercept and identify land, air and sea targets.

All avionics systems and the thruster on this aircraft have been overhauled after 20,000 man hours and during a complicated engineering process and the aircraft is 100% operational.


After the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the Iranian Army Air Force developed its capabilities one after another and manufactured and unveiled several weapons and equipment, thanks to the support of the Ministry of Defense, Industry local and Iranian expert capacity.

In this straight line, the Deputy Commander of the Air Force of the Iranian Army, Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi, said that all phases of the overhaul of the transport and fighter planes had been completed by the Iranian specialists in the interior of the country whereas it was the American military advisers who did it before the victory of the Revolution.

"In addition, the spare parts that the Air Force needs are now produced by Iranian industry," Hamid Vahedi said on February 8, on the anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. “The C-130 and MiG-29 planes were recently revised by Iranian specialists,” he explained.

The Army's Deputy Air Force Commander said new cameras have been fitted to an F-4 to increase the capabilities of that aircraft. “We have had a lot of success in the promotion of our aircraft, particularly in terms of radar capabilities,” he noted.


Hamid Vahedi then referred to the Saeqeh fighter jet and the modern Yassin trainer plane, designed and manufactured from A to Z in Iran, adding that the Iranian-made Kowsar fighter plane had been enhanced by radars and a modern avionics system before being handed over to the Air Force.

“The Kowsar avionics system and engine were produced in Iran. This aircraft is equipped with a very sophisticated radar and the guided missiles will be mounted there in the future ", explained the senior Iranian officer before adding:" We try to give a stealth character to our planes of all kinds ".

He said the Iranian air force had successfully fitted the Ababil-3 drones with rockets and fired a 500-pound bomb from the Karrar drone. “These are only a small part of what we have learned. The others will be publicized after their finalization ”.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Mr Iran Eye said:


> “The Kowsar avionics system and engine were produced in Iran. This aircraft is equipped with a very sophisticated radar and the guided missiles will be mounted there in the future ", explained the senior Iranian officer before adding:" We try to give a stealth character to our planes of all kinds ".


*“The Kowsar avionics system and engine were produced in Iran"
*What about the other parts of the Kowsar?


----------



## aryobarzan

These overhauls sound great and qudos to Iranian Techs for doing them. But as many people in here have pointed out it is a nightmare to do logistics for a country that operate aircraft types from four nations (US, RUSSIA FRANCE and Iran too!).
I do not know how they do it but it sure take a lot of work to catalog, store parts, write maintenance manuals, Operating procedures, training, simulator...etc etc..

I give them more credit for doing that..lol


sahureka2 said:


> *“The Kowsar avionics system and engine were produced in Iran"*
> What about the other parts of the Kowsar?


Kowsar is 88% domestic (do not ask why 88 not 90) as per airforce.

Landing gear
Ejection seat
Radar
Cockpit (MFD, HUD, CDUs,..etc)
Missile warning system
Radar Altimeter
IFF/Transponder
Weapon racks (Pylons)
Stores management system
Cannons (does it have !!!..do not know)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## thesaint

aryobarzan said:


> These overhauls sound great and qudos to Iranian Techs for doing them. But as many people in here have pointed out it is a nightmare to do logistics for a country that operate aircraft types from four nations (US, RUSSIA FRANCE and Iran too!).
> I do not know how they do it but it sure take a lot of work to catalog, store parts, write maintenance manuals, Operating procedures, training, simulator...etc etc..
> 
> I give them more credit for doing that..lol
> 
> Kowsar is 88% domestic (do not ask why 88 not 90) as per airforce.
> 
> Landing gear
> Ejection seat
> Radar
> Cockpit (MFD, HUD, CDUs,..etc)
> Missile warning system
> Radar Altimeter
> IFF/Transponder
> Weapon racks (Pylons)
> Stores management system
> Cannons (does it have !!!..do not know)



+ engine (2 Owj)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

aryobarzan said:


> These overhauls sound great and qudos to Iranian Techs for doing them. But as many people in here have pointed out it is a nightmare to do logistics for a country that operate aircraft types from four nations (US, RUSSIA FRANCE and Iran too!).
> I do not know how they do it but it sure take a lot of work to catalog, store parts, write maintenance manuals, Operating procedures, training, simulator...etc etc..
> 
> I give them more credit for doing that..lol
> 
> Kowsar is 88% domestic (do not ask why 88 not 90) as per airforce.
> 
> Landing gear
> Ejection seat
> Radar
> Cockpit (MFD, HUD, CDUs,..etc)
> Missile warning system
> Radar Altimeter
> IFF/Transponder
> Weapon racks (Pylons)
> Stores management system
> Cannons (does it have !!!..do not know)



And fuselage, wings, tail?
Maybe the structural components of the F-5s that were out of order are recycled, repaired and reset to zero hours?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

sahureka2 said:


> And fuselage, wings, tail?
> Maybe the structural components of the F-5s that were out of order are recycled, repaired and reset to zero hours?


Very likely to be the case as there are plenty to work with before spending time & resources on building brand new airframes from scratch. It really depends on what is involved in the refurbishing of the structure and What kind of damage does it accumulate and if that damage can be reversed to 0 hours during an overhaul. 
For instance, is the airframe totally melted and reformed? Are there cracks in the airframe and if so, how are those fixed? Is there local welding taking place at the site of a crack?


----------



## aryobarzan

sahureka2 said:


> And fuselage, wings, tail?
> Maybe the structural components of the F-5s that were out of order are recycled, repaired and reset to zero hours?


Fuselage definitely..I doubt they will recycle any of the old fuselages easier just to build new ones using the CAD drawing they already have produced.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> Fuselage definitely..I doubt they will recycle any of the old fuselages easier just to build new ones using the CAD drawing they already have produced.
> View attachment 717804


So is it more likely they are actually melting and reforming the airframe and skeleton to be truly brand new? Might they also be using other alloys rather than reusing the original material? Are there any known weight difference between Kowsar and F-5?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


> So is it more likely they are actually melting and reforming the airframe and skeleton to be truly brand new? Might they also be using other alloys rather than reusing the original material? Are there any known weight difference between Kowsar and F-5?


Good questions...I have not seen anything regarding that... They may have done a SEM analysis of the old material to ensure they stay within the strength tolerances..I know Iran has an extensive honeycomb structure building ..They also might have done few changes to the structure we do not see. For example I heard the Engine room is on purpose bigger to take bigger engines (Turbo fan version)!!!.but how does that affect Aerodynamics..???

Test bed plane for fuselage and ejection seat

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

then disassemble each component of the fuselage, do a thorough check, replace the defective elements, make changes for the new elements and then reassemble the fuselage as new?
But I think the critical part is the wings, rudder and tail moving parts which are subject to heavy stress, will they be newly built or will they reuse those of the F-5 after long work?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iranian pilots love the F-5, Kowsar. Iran are going to make it more stealthy, and they will certainly add artificial intelligence to it. This platform will always improve and that's why the Kowsar should not be underestimated.

From generation 4 to 4+ to 4 ++ and after that the 5th generation. They improve the technology in a combat aircraft so the price is as low as possible. For me, this plan is awesome


----------



## WudangMaster

sahureka2 said:


> But I think the critical part is the wings, rudder and tail moving parts which are subject to heavy stress, will they be newly built or will they reuse those of the F-5 after long work?


That's what I'm wondering about too; if they melt them and reform them totally reusing the original alloy or have they moved onto different materials altogether? Is melting down parts of fuselage and reforming even a thing with aircraft?


----------



## sha ah




----------



## gambit

aryobarzan said:


> Concept of Stealth was first developed by the Germans in WWII. If I remember correctly a first German made stealth aircraft was made of wood in order not to reflect the early radars (I have seen a photo of it). Americans stole the aircraft and moved it to the US


Completely wrong. The subject of the Horten 229 have been debated before and the argument that Nazi Germany was the 'father' of 'stealth' debunked.

The US is the real 'father of stealth'. Not Nazi Germany. Not the Soviet Union. But the US. Deal with it.

To start off...

The flying wing have been experimented with since the 1920s. All the major aviation powers had their respective designs. Remember that the first powered heavier than air flight was in 1903. So it was a great leap from biplane to flying wing. The first radar was in WW II. So just on the timeline alone, that debunked the argument that the flying wing design of the Ho 229 was a 'stealth' aircraft.

It was already well known that materials produces diverse reflection behaviors of radio signals and a component of that is reduced strength of the reflected signals. So the use of wood with embedded iron particles was a crude attempt to reduce reflectivity. The Horten Brothers deserves credit for that.

But what made the US the true 'father of stealth' is that American designs were *DELIBERATE*. Not guessing and hope that something will come out like how the Horten Brothers were working. We do something, then we measure. We modify a part, then we remeasure. We removed something, then we remeasure. The modification/measurement cycles continues until we can make no more compromises.

You brought on old and debunked news.


Oldman1 said:


> So you believe that Iran is decades ahead in stealth bombers and UCAVs even before having the copy of the RQ170?


Go easy. The most he can do is spell the word 'stealth'. Other than that, there is no understanding of concepts and practical applications there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> Completely wrong. The subject of the Horten 229 have been debated before and the argument that Nazi Germany was the 'father' of 'stealth' debunked.
> 
> The US is the real 'father of stealth'. Not Nazi Germany. Not the Soviet Union. But the US. Deal with it.
> 
> To start off...
> 
> The flying wing have been experimented with since the 1920s. All the major aviation powers had their respective designs. Remember that the first powered heavier than air flight was in 1903. So it was a great leap from biplane to flying wing. The first radar was in WW II. So just on the timeline alone, that debunked the argument that the flying wing design of the Ho 229 was a 'stealth' aircraft.
> 
> It was already well known that materials produces diverse reflection behaviors of radio signals and a component of that is reduced strength of the reflected signals. So the use of wood with embedded iron particles was a crude attempt to reduce reflectivity. The Horten Brothers deserves credit for that.
> 
> But what made the US the true 'father of stealth' is that American designs were *DELIBERATE*. Not guessing and hope that something will come out like how the Horten Brothers were working. We do something, then we measure. We modify a part, then we remeasure. We removed something, then we remeasure. The modification/measurement cycles continues until we can make no more compromises.
> 
> You brought on old and debunked news.
> 
> Go easy. The most he can do is spell the word 'stealth'. Other than that, there is no understanding of concepts and practical applications there.


Completely wrong. Reimar Horten himself always argued that Horten ho 229 was indeed intended to be a stealth aircraft. 
just the fact that Northrop just happened to sit on all ho 229 IPR further strengthens that! 
many American wonder technologies are essentially copies of German ones-> rockets, jet propulsion, stealth, flying wing etc. Deal with it!

you also employed proven nazis like von Braun who were backbones to your moon landing program.

So stop taking credit for what the Germans did decades before you!

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Sina-1 said:


> So stop taking credit for what the Germans did decades before you


Even the railguns that USN has been boasting about for years also turned out to be a German invention. Even B-2 is based on the German designs. Americans have had no useful invention so far, but only global terrorism.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> Completely wrong. Reimar Horten himself always argued that Horten ho 229 was indeed intended to be a stealth aircraft.


Bring it. I want to see the full quote.



Sina-1 said:


> just the fact that Northrop just happened to sit on all ho 229 IPR further strengthens that!
> many American wonder technologies are essentially copies of German ones-> rockets, jet propulsion, stealth, flying wing etc. Deal with it!


Deal with facts instead.









Flying wing - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





If US 'stealth' designs are based upon the Ho-229, then why did the F-117 came *BEFORE* the B-2? The F-117 is *NOT* a flying wing design. Or are you looking at alternative Iranian history somewhere?

Further, the word 'stealth' is meaningless. It is too broad with too many contexts open for interpretations. A sniper is 'stealthy'. When I was active duty, my first assignment was the F-111. Heyford's and Lakenheath's F-111s routinely trained to fly low altitude and navigate around radar nets. We were technically 'stealth'.

The correct phrasing is 'low radar observable'. It is more accurate in describing the design and effects. My F-111E was 'stealthy' but was not low radar observable. In fact, England's F-111s were so lethal that thanks to Soviet EE Adolph Tolkachev we knew that the Soviets had no credible defense against the F-111.

The only conceptual DNA the Ho-229 shares with the B-2 is that both are flying wing designs. Other than that, everything else on the B-2 is all American. That is the fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran Head of Civil Aviation Organization Touraj Dehghani Zanganeh: Builds passenger jets (Plane ) with 70 to 100 seats in contract with Ministry of Defense / Iran-140 cargo plane / ongoing Construction of passenger jet engine

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Muhammed45 said:


> Americans have had no useful invention so far, but only global terrorism.



Let’s not be one dimensional like this gambit character. Of course Americans have had great inventions. Even today they have the best engineering and science in the world. That’s a fact. But it doesn’t mean that they invented everything in 21 century. Far from it. Most engineering marvels in the 21st century should be credited to Germans. Gambit is a one dimensional nationalist so he hates to admit fhat


gambit said:


> Bring it. I want to see the full quote.


here, eat you heart out. I’m looking forward to you dismissing this fact!




__





Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum






airandspace.si.edu







gambit said:


> Further, the word 'stealth' is meaningless. It is too broad with too many contexts open for interpretations. A sniper is 'stealthy'. When I was active duty, my first assignment was the F-111. Heyford's and Lakenheath's F-111s routinely trained to fly low altitude and navigate around radar nets. We were technically 'stealth'.
> 
> The correct phrasing is 'low radar observable'. It is more accurate in describing the design and effects. My F-111E was 'stealthy' but was not low radar observable. In fact, England's F-111s were so lethal that thanks to Soviet EE Adolph Tolkachev we knew that the Soviets had no credible defense against the F-111.


Fact of the matter is that you’re a douche! Plain and simple! Stop acting so superior



gambit said:


> If US 'stealth' designs are based upon the Ho-229, then why did the F-117 came *BEFORE* the B-2? The F-117 is *NOT* a flying wing design. Or are you looking at alternative Iranian history somewhere?


concept of stealth (in terms of radars) is much older than both the crafts! As I have proven above, Germans were already experimenting on it!
Also why do you bring in Iranian here? Is me arguing that you thievery of German technology of any benefit for Iran?



gambit said:


> The only conceptual DNA the Ho-229 shares with the B-2 is that both are flying wing designs. Other than that, everything else on the B-2 is all American. That is the fact.


Keep telling yourself that!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

Sina-1 said:


> Let’s not be one dimensional like this gambit character. Of course Americans have had great inventions. Even today they have the best engineering and science in the world. That’s a fact. But it doesn’t mean that they invented everything in 21 century. Far from it. Most engineering marvels in the 21st century should be credited to Germans. Gambit is a one dimensional nationalist so he hates to admit fhat
> 
> here, eat you heart out. I’m looking forward to you dismissing this fact!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airandspace.si.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fact of the matter is that you’re a douche! Plain and simple! Stop acting so superior
> 
> 
> concept of stealth (in terms of radars) is much older than both the crafts! As I have proven above, Germans were already experimenting on it!
> Also why do you bring in Iranian here? Is me arguing that you thievery of German technology of any benefit for Iran?
> 
> 
> Keep telling yourself that!


You are treating that American bigot fair mindedly. Something trolls like that fail to understand. 😁👍

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Sina-1 said:


> here, eat you heart out. I’m looking forward to you dismissing this fact!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airandspace.si.edu


Like I said before -- you brought on old news.

The Ho-229 had only *ONE* flight in 1944 and that flight was as a *GLIDER*. So explain to us all how can that make the aircraft a true low radar observable platform? What Reimar wanted is not the same thing as what the aircraft could do. I want to fly, but does that mean I can simply flap my arms and fly?

In order to be low radar observable, you need a radar to *VERIFY* that your design is actually low radar observable. The US did not need the Horten Brothers to tell them that. When Northrop *FIRST* flew his flying wing in 1942, there was nothing 'stealthy' about the N-9MB, especially with the propellers. So how did the Horten Brothers proved that with *ONLY ONE FLIGHT*?

The F-117 looks nothing like the Ho-229. So explain to us all how does the F-117 relates to the Ho-229?

If you argued that the B-2 came from the Ho-229, then provide the *TECHNICAL* details. Flight controls? I doubt the Nazis had fly-by-wire back in WW II. The Ho-229 had vertical stabs but the B-2 has none, so how does that make the B-2 came from the Ho-229? The Ho-229 was made out of wood, so are you going to tell US the B-2 was constructed out of the same?

What Reimar Horten said back in WW ii cannot be the basis for what was done today, especially when there is a chasm of technical superiority between then and now. Are you going to credit Jules Verne as being the inventor of the submarine because he wrote _10,000 Leagues Under The Sea_? Or Verne being the 'father' of rocketry because he wrote _From The Earth To The Moon_? We gave the Chinese credit for gunpowder because they actually made the mixture go 'Boom'.

Like it or not, true credit belongs to those who make the *TECHNICAL* successes.



Sina-1 said:


> Keep telling yourself that!


Really? So explain to us -- other than the flying wing -- how does the B-2 have similarities to the Ho-229?

You are a zealot for Iran. I am a zealot for the US. I was on the F-111 (Cold War) then F-16 (Desert Storm). How about you? I know what hard terrain following (TF) in the F-111 and 9g in the F-16 feels like. And you? The silent readers out there are not interested in how much you want to discredit US. They want to see who has the better arguments supported by hard evidence and sound logic. You failed on both counts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Question:
This discussion is dedicated to the IRIAF, or to historical diatribes on who did first, related to off topic issues?
Doesn't it seem to you that it is difficult to verify the real tasks performed by each of us, since we write using a fancy nick name secreting our real name and that even if it were used, it would not be verifiable anyway?
Don't you think it's more reasonable to return to the IRIAF discussion?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

History is written by the "victors"...All I said was to tell a bit of "real history" as it happened...Germans are the father of many military technologies. Americans stole these technologies and improved upon them... Chinese also invented many European technologies related to the war (crossbow, machine gun ..the famous gun powder..etc)..

The True inventor nations of these technologies will eventually re-write the history and humanity will finally have a "history" written not by the victors but by the original inventors...I am sorry that our American member was upset about his mindset getting disturbed,,it happen when our core belief turn out not to be true.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Bring it. I want to see the full quote.
> 
> 
> Deal with facts instead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flying wing - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If US 'stealth' designs are based upon the Ho-229, then why did the F-117 came *BEFORE* the B-2? The F-117 is *NOT* a flying wing design. Or are you looking at alternative Iranian history somewhere?
> 
> Further, the word 'stealth' is meaningless. It is too broad with too many contexts open for interpretations. A sniper is 'stealthy'. When I was active duty, my first assignment was the F-111. Heyford's and Lakenheath's F-111s routinely trained to fly low altitude and navigate around radar nets. We were technically 'stealth'.
> 
> The correct phrasing is 'low radar observable'. It is more accurate in describing the design and effects. My F-111E was 'stealthy' but was not low radar observable. In fact, England's F-111s were so lethal that thanks to Soviet EE Adolph Tolkachev we knew that the Soviets had no credible defense against the F-111.
> 
> The only conceptual DNA the Ho-229 shares with the B-2 is that both are flying wing designs. Other than that, everything else on the B-2 is all American. That is the fact.










Sina-1 is correct about the comments that have been made, however, it's rather obvious that the low RCS outcome was more a byproduct and happy accident of the designers attempt to build a high glide, comparatively low drag aircraft with the goal of achieving higher cruise speeds to extend the range....
regardless it's German tech

And your forgetting all the design that came before both the F-117 & B-2.....


----------



## skyshadow

*CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes*




CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes | Farsnews Agency








“We have planned to build 70- and 100-seat aircrafts inside the country, and [in this regard] we signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Ministry of Defense to be able to use the country’s existing military capabilities for the construction of commercial aircrafts,” the official explained.

According to Dehqani Zanganeh, the mentioned MOU has been in fact a trilateral document signed among the Transport and Urban Development Ministry, the CAO, and the Defense Ministry for cooperation in the manufacturing of commercial aircrafts.

Another MOU will also be signed between the CAO and the country’s Advanced Aviation and Transportation Technology Development Headquarters in order to allow the two sides’ to use each other’s capabilities and capacities for realizing the construction of the airplanes, the official said.

Stating that the project for the production of the mentioned 100-seat aircraft is at the primary studies stage, the official said: “I recently visited the production center of these aircraft; significant progress has been achieved."

*“There are a lot of knowledge-based companies established in the country that have great potentials; Mapna, and another company are currently building gas turbines, and we are helping them to build aircraft engines,” he further said.*

Deehqani Zanganeh further noted that CAO is also pursuing a project for manufacturing flight simulators inside the country which would be constructed and installed in southern Kish Island.











Iran plans to build 100-seat passenger plane


TEHRAN – Head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization (CAO) Touraj Dehqani Zanganeh has said the country is planning to establish the production line for a 100-seat commercial passenger plane, Iran’s Civil Aviation Network News reported.




www.tehrantimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes | Farsnews Agency
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “We have planned to build 70- and 100-seat aircrafts inside the country, and [in this regard] we signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Ministry of Defense to be able to use the country’s existing military capabilities for the construction of commercial aircrafts,” the official explained.
> 
> According to Dehqani Zanganeh, the mentioned MOU has been in fact a trilateral document signed among the Transport and Urban Development Ministry, the CAO, and the Defense Ministry for cooperation in the manufacturing of commercial aircrafts.
> 
> Another MOU will also be signed between the CAO and the country’s Advanced Aviation and Transportation Technology Development Headquarters in order to allow the two sides’ to use each other’s capabilities and capacities for realizing the construction of the airplanes, the official said.
> 
> Stating that the project for the production of the mentioned 100-seat aircraft is at the primary studies stage, the official said: “I recently visited the production center of these aircraft; significant progress has been achieved."
> 
> *“There are a lot of knowledge-based companies established in the country that have great potentials; Mapna, and another company are currently building gas turbines, and we are helping them to build aircraft engines,” he further said.*
> 
> Deehqani Zanganeh further noted that CAO is also pursuing a project for manufacturing flight simulators inside the country which would be constructed and installed in southern Kish Island.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran plans to build 100-seat passenger plane
> 
> 
> TEHRAN – Head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization (CAO) Touraj Dehqani Zanganeh has said the country is planning to establish the production line for a 100-seat commercial passenger plane, Iran’s Civil Aviation Network News reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tehrantimes.com


they mentioned MAPNA, i wonder after 10 years what MAPNA transform into.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> they mentioned MAPNA, i wonder after 10 years what MAPNA transform into.


they are working on the engine section of the planes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

skyshadow said:


> *CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAOI: Iran to Make 100-Seat Passenger Planes | Farsnews Agency



Good news thx for this precious information. As far as I see from Iran, since the early 2000s, in spite of this cruel blockade, Iran is still standing. In my view, I can be wrong, but I am absolutely sure and certain that in a few decades Iran will catch up with France, UK, even the US by doing its own Airbus A-340, or its own 737. The most problem that could hamper Iran's development in this area is the Iranian government or the Iranian elites' faith in Iranians.
If Iranian elites trust into Iranian youth, Iran will be able to produce what it wants. By contrast, notice the Arabs countries are still undeveloped -and they will stay undeveloped for a long time- because those who lead these countries have no confidence in their people.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

video 27 nov *2014 *

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hormuz

sahureka2 said:


> video 27 nov *2014 *



is that airplane, which was covered the prototype?


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> Like I said before -- you brought on old news.
> 
> The Ho-229 had only *ONE* flight in 1944 and that flight was as a *GLIDER*. So explain to us all how can that make the aircraft a true low radar observable platform? What Reimar wanted is not the same thing as what the aircraft could do. I want to fly, but does that mean I can simply flap my arms and fly?
> 
> In order to be low radar observable, you need a radar to *VERIFY* that your design is actually low radar observable. The US did not need the Horten Brothers to tell them that. When Northrop *FIRST* flew his flying wing in 1942, there was nothing 'stealthy' about the N-9MB, especially with the propellers. So how did the Horten Brothers proved that with *ONLY ONE FLIGHT*?
> 
> The F-117 looks nothing like the Ho-229. So explain to us all how does the F-117 relates to the Ho-229?
> 
> If you argued that the B-2 came from the Ho-229, then provide the *TECHNICAL* details. Flight controls? I doubt the Nazis had fly-by-wire back in WW II. The Ho-229 had vertical stabs but the B-2 has none, so how does that make the B-2 came from the Ho-229? The Ho-229 was made out of wood, so are you going to tell US the B-2 was constructed out of the same?
> 
> What Reimar Horten said back in WW ii cannot be the basis for what was done today, especially when there is a chasm of technical superiority between then and now. Are you going to credit Jules Verne as being the inventor of the submarine because he wrote _10,000 Leagues Under The Sea_? Or Verne being the 'father' of rocketry because he wrote _From The Earth To The Moon_? We gave the Chinese credit for gunpowder because they actually made the mixture go 'Boom'.
> 
> Like it or not, true credit belongs to those who make the *TECHNICAL* successes.
> 
> 
> Really? So explain to us -- other than the flying wing -- how does the B-2 have similarities to the Ho-229?
> 
> You are a zealot for Iran. I am a zealot for the US. I was on the F-111 (Cold War) then F-16 (Desert Storm). How about you? I know what hard terrain following (TF) in the F-111 and 9g in the F-16 feels like. And you? The silent readers out there are not interested in how much you want to discredit US. They want to see who has the better arguments supported by hard evidence and sound logic. You failed on both counts.



While the B-2 does not share many similarities with the original Nazi flying wing design (and I would hope several decades of difference between the 2 projects that it wouldn’t), the entire US arms program from 1950-1980’s was built on the backs of Nazi scientists and technological transfer. The space program was also boosted by Nazi scientists and their know how and ideas at the time.

So calling US inventions back then “American” is only technically factual. It would be like Iran capturing 1000 US weapons experts and engineers and then for next 25 years saying everything they built was Iranian and Iranian ingenuity. Technically true, but realistically completely false.

I have no doubt that US would have eventually built B-2 and other flying wing designs without Nazi aid, just as I have no doubt that if Nazi Germany won the war it would have built its version of B-2 much sooner than US would have.

Thus it’s important to not overlook the immense help that US got from Nazi scientists.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

aryobarzan said:


> Concept of Stealth was first developed by the Germans in WWII. If I remember correctly a first German made stealth aircraft was made of wood in order not to reflect the early radars (I have seen a photo of it). Americans stole the aircraft and moved it to the US just like what they did to German rockets and German scientists... All US rocket and Stealth was German tech origin..So not hard to imagine that soon countries like Iran and China will be ahead of US in some fields...US is still far ahead on space (Mars rover) . A big part of any development is the availability of $$$ funds and seems like US can print $$$ at will while every other nation has to work for their $$$ (have not figured that out yet..lol)



Common misconception, there were wing design aircraft in the U.S. besides what the Germans were making.








Northrop N-1M - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org






RoleFlying wingNational originUnited StatesManufacturerNorthrop CorporationDesignerJack NorthropFirst flight3 July 1940Retired1945StatusExperimentalNumber built1Developed fromNorthrop N-1VariantsNorthrop N-9M

So if first flight was in 1940. Then when did Horten Ho 299 flew?









Horten Ho 229 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org







RoleFighter/bomberManufacturerGothaer WaggonfabrikDesignerHorten brothersFirst flight1 March 1944 (glider)Primary userLuftwaffeNumber built3Developed intoGotha Go P.60



aryobarzan said:


> History is written by the "victors"...All I said was to tell a bit of "real history" as it happened...Germans are the father of many military technologies. Americans stole these technologies and improved upon them... Chinese also invented many European technologies related to the war (crossbow, machine gun ..the famous gun powder..etc)..
> 
> The True inventor nations of these technologies will eventually re-write the history and humanity will finally have a "history" written not by the victors but by the original inventors...I am sorry that our American member was upset about his mindset getting disturbed,,it happen when our core belief turn out not to be true.



Next thing you know, you be claiming Germans invented the submarine and our submarine design was based on war loot after defeating them.


----------



## aryobarzan

Oldman1 said:


> Common misconception, there were wing design aircraft in the U.S. besides what the Germans were making.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Northrop N-1M - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoleFlying wingNational originUnited StatesManufacturerNorthrop CorporationDesignerJack NorthropFirst flight3 July 1940Retired1945StatusExperimentalNumber built1Developed fromNorthrop N-1VariantsNorthrop N-9M
> 
> So if first flight was in 1940. Then when did Horten Ho 299 flew?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Horten Ho 229 - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoleFighter/bomberManufacturerGothaer WaggonfabrikDesignerHorten brothersFirst flight1 March 1944 (glider)Primary userLuftwaffeNumber built3Developed intoGotha Go P.60
> 
> 
> Next thing you know, you be claiming Germans invented the submarine and our submarine design was based on war loot after defeating them.


lol....I Know about "Ironclad" sub during your civil war so no disagreement there. My respect to those 6 people who did the job and never returned home.


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363926555907489797
😔


----------



## TheImmortal

Iranian Air Force unveils their predator drone like MALE UAV. Direct competition with S-129 revealed a decade ago.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364527275501355008

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hormuz

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian Air Force unveils their predator drone like MALE UAV. Direct competition with S-129 revealed a decade ago.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364527275501355008



can it fly this distance with full payload?


----------



## sha ah

No way. The Shahed-129 for example has a stated ferry range of 3400 KM without any payload. With a full payload 1700 KM. Depending on the mission, most UAVs can carry less or more payload. The more payload, the less range. 

However many believe that with radio communication the likely range is no more than 200-400. Some western pundits even doubt 200 KM. The new Shahed uses satellite communication, maybe Chinese/Russian ? or it intermittently uses American satellites to help it figure out where it is. 

Iranian UAVs also use terrain recognition software to figure out where they are. They can be pre-programmed to hit a target and return to base. Like the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding. Just look at the Aramco strikes.



Hormuz said:


> can it fly this distance with full payload?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

In this day and age most of the emphasis is placed on 5th generation, stealth fighter jets like the F-35.

In my opinion yes they are vital as frontline fighters, however every airforce also requires a cheaper and more affordable conventional fighter jet as an alternative to make up the bulk of an airforce. Something that an airforce can essentially utilize as a workhorse.

Basically for leading military powers, cutting edge technology like cruise missiles, stealth UAVs and 5th generation fighter jets lead the way on the frontlines, clearing the skies, establishing air dominance.

Afterwards there is no need to continually use extremely expensive 5th gen fighter jets to pound enemy positions. Once the skies are clear and air defenses have been effectively suppressed, any conventional, non stealth fighter jet and cheaper UAVs can easily do the job for pennies on the dollar.

The low cost of such assets also allows an airforce to easily decimate the enemy by continually saturating the air as we've seen in recent low intensity conflicts (Libya/Caucasus etc) Usually losing a fighter jet worth tens of millions and a pilot that took years and years to train, would greatly deter an enemy from continuing the campaign without hesitation. However with UAV's, there is no pilot or massive cost associated. This allows a military to succeed in situations where normally they would be forced to hesitate.

Of course 5th generation fighter jets or fighter jets in general have an advantage in that they can strike hostile air targets and use counter measures to avoid being shot down. However drone technology is already moving in that direction. In the near future the skies over battlefields will be filled with stealth UAVs that are highly maneuverable. These will be able to automatically avoid being shot down by using counter measures, for example by deploying flares, jamming technology, out maneuvering an incoming missile, etc At the same time they will able to hit ground and air targets with utmost precision.

Considering all of the above, I truly believe that Iran choosing to reverse engineer and modernize the F-5 platform is a great investment. They're easy to maintain, cheap to build, 4 of them can be transported in a 747 and with modern avionics and radar they are extremely underrated. The fact that Iran has also invested heavily in drone technology has already paid off with dividends, as we saw when against all odds, the Aramco facility was successfully targeted with pin point precision.







Above picture is from the following article. Notice the aircraft on the left and then right. Look carefully and you'll see one is a UAV, one is piloted. Interesting concept.

Canada wants to build a multirole, non-stealth, tactical aircraft









Flight of Icarus: Canadian company proposes multi-role tactical aircraft - Skies Mag


Montreal, Quebec-based Icarus Aerospace opens up about its Tactical Air Vehicle platform as it seeks government funding and market traction.




skiesmag.com





F-35 turns out to be a complete FAILURE









What about student loans, water or the homeless? Outrage follows report $1.7 trillion F-35 program is now considered a failure


A tacit admission by the US Air Force that the F-35 has failed its main mission has triggered an outpouring of outrage from Americans who think the stealth fighter’s gargantuan budget could have been better spent on other things.




www.rt.com





1.7 trillion spent on the F-35









$1.5 Trillion: Was the F-35 Stealth Fighter a Complete Waste?


A lot of money for not always the best results.




nationalinterest.org





Four F-5s fit into a 747 with room to spare









Four F-5E Tiger IIs Can Fit Inside A 747


With plenty of room to spare!




www.thedrive.com

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1366369583242899457

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## sahureka2

https://fararu.com/fa/news/478876/تصاویر-تحویل-هواپیما-و-بالگردهای-اورهال-شده-به-ارتش

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1366372015104528389

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> https://fararu.com/fa/news/478876/تصاویر-تحویل-هواپیما-و-بالگردهای-اورهال-شده-به-ارتش


honestly army needs to reduce the type of helicopters and aircraft it operate

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly army needs to reduce the type of helicopters and aircraft it operate



Helicopters? They operate US and Russian made.

Iran’s helicopter fleet is the only bright spot of its entire aviation forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly army needs to reduce the type of helicopters and aircraft it operate



They don't have any new plan , nor any will to change the situation ...


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> They don't have any new plan , nor any will to change the situation ...



Explain how to make a viable plan when you:

A) don’t have necessary aircraft engines

B) cannot buy aircraft from aboard (US pressure)

C) Have limited cash on hand (due to once in a century pandemic while being under the most severe economic sanctions any country has endured since post WWI Germany.)

???Use your brain next time.

To address my points above, currently Iran:

A) has several jet engines in prototype testing phase

B) has begun preliminary negotiations with Russia on purchasing newer fighter jets and ToT

C) With Pandemic winding down, shifting to petrochemical product revenue instead of crude oil, and potential sanctions relief, Iran should receive more funding to go to more “luxury” projects such as rebuilding airforce.

Iran’s helicopter force is one of the most capable and diverse in the Middle East. The only thing they need is a heavy attack chopper. But attack helicopters are luxury assets that will be used in defense of land invasion, thus pouring funds into this sector gets very little benefit in deterrence.

I would argue in the days of heavy Male UAV, why would Iran need more attack helicopters?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*Iranian made helicopters seen in green color 🇮🇷  *








*








*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mattigil

skyshadow said:


> *Iranian made helicopters seen in green color [emoji1130]  *
> 
> 
> View attachment 721318
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 721317
> 
> 
> View attachment 721319
> *


One of the best experiences in my life working in those green hangers for a couple of months [emoji1362][emoji1130]

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah

South Koreans are building several KF-X prototypes. 92% complete. Rollout expected in April. Very impressive. The first version is set to be a 4.5 generation fighter jet with various weapons carried on external hardpoints. The 2nd version is set to be a fully stealth 5th generation fighter jet with an internal weapons bay. However as impressive as this is, truthfully, without vital components from the United States and European nations, there's no way they would be able to do this.

Realistically 5th generation fighter jets, just like stealth bombers, are only accessible to a handful of countries that have the resources, infrastructure and funding to build such weapons. Smaller countries can build such weapons but only with the help of those select few nations.

In the future, they will also be reliant on spare parts from the US and other NATO countries. As an example, South Korea recently signed a deal to sell hundreds of tanks to Turkey. The Turks turned to South Korea since the Germans refuse to sell spare parts for the Leopard 2. However the South Koreans themselves are reliant on Germany for vital components, especially for the transmission on their tank. Therefore presently the entire Altay tank program is at a standstill.

So a technilogical monopoly of sorts exists when it comes to such advanced weapons systems. With that in mind, realistically I don't see the Qaher being a viable option for Iran because first of all Iran building a 5th generation fighter jet by itself seems unfeasible and honestly it's small size would mean that its internal weapons bay would not be large enough to carry any serious payload.

I believe that Iran's only realistic shot at acquiring a 5th generation fighter jet in the near future will be the SU-57. I'm guessing the Russians will be eager to find a serious buyer since they need revenue to build more SU-57s and other advanced weapons for themselves. Especially with the potential of upcoming sanctions related to Navalny, this would sqeeze their finances even more. The Chinese J-20 isn't absolutely out of the question either but the Iranian airforce seems eager to buy Russian. Only time will tell

Hey btw is it just me or does the KF-X and the proposed Turkish TF-X look extremely similar to the F-22 ?

The F-22 Raptor





The South Korean KAI KF-X 5th generation fighter prototype




Turkeys proposed TAI TF-X 5th generation fighter display model

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xbat

sha ah said:


> In the future, they will also be reliant on spare parts from the US and other NATO countries. They recently signed a deal to sell hundreds of tanks to Turkey. The Turks turned to South Korea since the Germans refuse to sell spare parts for the Leopard 2. However the South Koreans themselves are reliant on Germany for vital components, especially for the transmission on their tank. Therefore presently the entire Altay tank program is at a standstill.


Koreans sell tanks to Turkey? please share that deal because we didnt hear anything about that. and it looks impossible to me.


----------



## sha ah

Turkey in talks with South Korea to salvage Altay tank program


A source with knowledge of Turkey's Altay program has told Defense News that the country is negotiating with a South Korean firm in an attempt to recover the struggling project.




www.defensenews.com







xbat said:


> Koreans sell tanks to Turkey? please share that deal because we didnt hear anything about that. and it looks impossible to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

xbat said:


> Koreans sell tanks to Turkey? please share that deal because we didnt hear anything about that. and it looks impossible to me.



Are you that much of Turkish troll?

The Atlay tank is based on the South Korean K2 tank chassis. This is well known and a simply Google search will educate you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

There's no point to argue with people like this. Just show them the evidence and leave them alone. Honestly I'm just glad that he's not trying to preach about Turkish pyramids in China or the idea that Turks discovered America. I've recently come across some Turkish fanboys that honestly tried to convince me about these silly concepts.

Anyways, like I said, only a handful of countries possess the infrastructure and technical knowhow to produce cutting edge military technology. Can Turkey produce a tank by itself ? Yes, but will it be a world class tank that lives up to modern standards ? I doubt it.

The following article pretty much sums up Turkey's limitations in regards to it's military industrial complex.









Turkey’s Defense Industry Has Come A Long Way, But Ankara Still Relies Heavily On Foreign Suppliers


Turkey is not going to be able to end such dependencies by 2023, as President Erdogan has vowed, or even by the end of this decade.




www.forbes.com





Looking all across the world, I can't find any examples of small nations being able to produce world class military hardware without help from the top notch military producers of the world (USA, EU, Germany, UK, Russia, China)

I mean look at the Indians for example. 30+ years spent on producing the Arjun and they abandoned it. Their Tejas jet is also insufficient, otherwise they would not have purchased the Rafale jets.

Taiwan produced the IDF jet to counter China, however now they're purchasing F-16s from the US.

Koreans produce great tanks, but again, they buy vital components from Germany.

Iran has produced copies of the F-5 and T-90 but again, they're copies of proven platforms and there are rumors that Iran is looking to purchase components for their Karrar (T-90) tanks from Russia.

Pakistan has produced the JF-17, which has turned out to be very reliable, but that's with help from China. Now Turkey is looking to team up with Pakistan to access Chinese technology, but again China will always have the leverage.

Recently Turkey tried selling their T-129 ATAK helicopters to Pakistan but because the engines are American made they had to get approval from the US,which they had trouble acquiring.

Again, the fact of the matter is that only a handful of countries have an iron grip monopoly on advanced military hardware and smaller countries looking to produce weapons pretty much have no choice but to align themselves with one side or another.









Turkey wants to tie-up with Pakistan to make fighter jets, missiles & access Chinese tech


Turkey sees Pakistan as a strategic ally & potential partner in building its Siper long-range missile-defence project and TF-X fighter jet.




theprint.in







TheImmortal said:


> Are you that much of Turkish troll?
> 
> The Atlay tank is based on the South Korean K2 tank chassis. This is well known and a simply Google search will educate you.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## xbat

sha ah said:


> Turkey in talks with South Korea to salvage Altay tank program
> 
> 
> A source with knowledge of Turkey's Altay program has told Defense News that the country is negotiating with a South Korean firm in an attempt to recover the struggling project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defensenews.com


next time dont post news before read, news is mentioning about engine and transmission *not selling whole "TANK" *



TheImmortal said:


> Are you that much of Turkish troll?


no i am not a troll, why do call me as a troll when i correct your false claims?


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> South Koreans are building several KF-X prototypes. 92% complete. Rollout expected in April. Very impressive. The first version is set to be a 4.5 generation fighter jet with various weapons carried on external hardpoints. The 2nd version is set to be a fully stealth 5th generation fighter jet with an internal weapons bay. However as impressive as this is, truthfully, without vital components from the United States and European nations, there's no way they would be able to do this.
> 
> Realistically 5th generation fighter jets, just like stealth bombers, are only accessible to a handful of countries that have the resources, infrastructure and funding to build such weapons. Smaller countries can build such weapons but only with the help of those select few nations.
> 
> In the future, they will also be reliant on spare parts from the US and other NATO countries. As an example, South Korea recently signed a deal to sell hundreds of tanks to Turkey. The Turks turned to South Korea since the Germans refuse to sell spare parts for the Leopard 2. However the South Koreans themselves are reliant on Germany for vital components, especially for the transmission on their tank. Therefore presently the entire Altay tank program is at a standstill.
> 
> So a technilogical monopoly of sorts exists when it comes to such advanced weapons systems. With that in mind, realistically I don't see the Qaher being a viable option for Iran because first of all Iran building a 5th generation fighter jet by itself seems unfeasible and honestly it's small size would mean that its internal weapons bay would not be large enough to carry any serious payload.
> 
> I believe that Iran's only realistic shot at acquiring a 5th generation fighter jet in the near future will be the SU-57. I'm guessing the Russians will be eager to find a serious buyer since they need revenue to build more SU-57s and other advanced weapons for themselves. Especially with the potential of upcoming sanctions related to Navalny, this would sqeeze their finances even more. The Chinese J-20 isn't absolutely out of the question either but the Iranian airforce seems eager to buy Russian. Only time will tell
> 
> Hey btw is it just me or does the KF-X and the proposed Turkish TF-X look extremely similar to the F-22 ?
> 
> The F-22 Raptor
> View attachment 721442
> 
> 
> The South Korean KAI KF-X 5th generation fighter prototype
> View attachment 721440
> 
> Turkeys proposed TAI TF-X 5th generation fighter display model
> View attachment 721441


Ahh yes,the joys of finding oneself having to rely on politically unreliable suppliers,nato membership notwithstanding.... 
I think the turks are now finding this unpleasant little fact out for themselves.
If it had been me,I simply would`ve started a reverse/reengineering program to produce an indigenous copy of the aforementioned Renk transmission literally the minute that the germans said "Nein!",hell I would`ve had a back up reverse/reengineering program running quietly behind the scenes merely just in case they said "Nein!".....but then thats just me.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Sineva said:


> Ahh yes,the joys of finding oneself having to rely on politically unreliable suppliers,nato membership notwithstanding....
> I think the turks are now finding this unpleasant little fact out for themselves.
> If it had been me,I simply would`ve started a reverse/reengineering program to produce an indigenous copy of the aforementioned Renk transmission literally the minute that the germans said "Nein!",hell I would`ve had a back up reverse/reengineering program running quietly behind the scenes merely just in case they said "Nein!".....but then thats just me.


True statements..but in order to do reverse Eng ,Turks have the problem of intellectual Property (IP) rights issue. They can not copy without being sued or sanctioned... for Iran that is the second positive thing about being sanctioned to the neck...IP rights do not apply (the first positive thing is the sanctions themselves..lol).

Turkey wants a fast route to Nuclear and Aircraft Tech and they have decided that Pakistan is the source for them and that is why now they are schmoozing to Pakistan looking for Tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

The tazarve is actually not a bad looking little jet trainer,I`m surprised iran didnt take it further and build more of them.


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> They don't have any new plan , nor any will to change the situation ...


they can use their f-5 derivative instead of working on those Mirages for example, or if they like the mirages more stop working on F-5 and concentrate on the mirages . they must decide a platform and concentrate on it


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> True statements..but in order to do reverse Eng ,Turks have the problem of intellectual Property (IP) rights issue. They can not copy without being sued or sanctioned... for Iran that is the second positive thing about being sanctioned to the neck...IP rights do not apply (the first positive thing is the sanctions themselves..lol).
> 
> Turkey wants a fast route to Nuclear and Aircraft Tech and they have decided that Pakistan is the source for them and that is why now they are schmoozing to Pakistan looking for Tech.



First of all Iran is not signatory to IP protection laws in UN charter (neither is China).

Second of all, sanctions have ZERO impact on IP theft. Iran can sued by Russia (or any country) in International Court for IP theft if it wishes. Same way Iran sued Russia for breach of contract in S-300 case.

Most important of all is not to piss off a country you wish to buy more arms from in the future over IP theft issue like China did to Russia. So while Iran could get away with IP theft of US products (not like it’s going to order more US arms anytime soon) IP theft of Russian arms will need to be carefully though thru.


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> First of all Iran is not signatory to IP protection laws in UN charter (neither is China).
> 
> Second of all, sanctions have ZERO impact on IP theft. Iran can sued by Russia (or any country) in International Court for IP theft if it wishes. Same way Iran sued Russia for breach of contract in S-300 case.
> 
> Most important of all is not to piss off a country you wish to buy more arms from in the future over IP theft issue like China did to Russia. So while Iran could get away with IP theft of US products (not like it’s going to order more US arms anytime soon) IP theft of Russian arms will need to be carefully though thru.


IP is regulated through patents by every country and/or union. That’s why if you invent something and want to protect your IP, then you need to file for patent in every single country you wish to protect your IP. If you fail to do so in a specific country then that country will not protect you IP and even worse another organization may file a patent instead. Happens all the time!

basically no foreign country owns a patent inside Iran. Which means that Iran can copy whatever they want AS LONG AS it is marketed inside Iran. If Iran exports that product to another country which recognizes that IP because a patent has been filed by the inventors then the company responsible for the distribution will be sued and all products confiscated.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> IP is regulated through patents by every country and/or union. That’s why if you invent something and want to protect your IP, then you need to file for patent in every single country you wish to protect your IP. If you fail to do so in a specific country then that country will not protect you IP and even worse another organization may file a patent instead. Happens all the time!
> 
> basically no foreign country owns a patent inside Iran. Which means that Iran can copy whatever they want AS LONG AS it is marketed inside Iran. If Iran exports that product to another country which recognizes that IP because a patent has been filed by the inventors then the company responsible for the distribution will be sued and all products confiscated.


A foreign company that has an office or representative in Iran can file for its patent and those patent and trademark will be protected .
once at the time of Khatami, Kingston Technology used that and get a court ruling and police raided PC shops and gathered all fake Kingston RAMs . at the time even if police would have found a single fake ram in a shop would have confiscated all their Kingston Rams . but sadly sanctions made many companies leave Iran and then we didn't saw such move anymore but neverthless the law is still there and companies whho directly do business with Iran can use it to protect their IP and trademarks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Hack-Hook said:


> A foreign company that has an office or representative in Iran can file for its patent and those patent and trademark will be protected .
> once at the time of Khatami, Kingston Technology used that and get a court ruling and police raided PC shops and gathered all fake Kingston RAMs . at the time even if police would have found a single fake ram in a shop would have confiscated all their Kingston Rams . but sadly sanctions made many companies leave Iran and then we didn't saw such move anymore but neverthless the law is still there and companies whho directly do business with Iran can use it to protect their IP and trademarks


The example you’ve provided has nothing to do with patents and everything to do false marketing. If you rebrand something in Iran and sell it for something it is not then it is an illegal act and you will be prosecuted. Doesn’t matter if the brand owner is foreign or domestic.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> The example you’ve provided has nothing to do with patents and everything to do false marketing. If you rebrand something in Iran and sell it for something it is not then it is an illegal act and you will be prosecuted. Doesn’t matter if the brand owner is foreign or domestic.


that's protecting a trade mark. and right now the market is filled with fake Samsung and Apple, Boss, JBL and ...... accessories does anybody prevent them even the most famous Iranian digital market (Digikala) is filled with fake product and nobody care . and we also have a copyright law but you must operate inside Iran for it to protect you




__





Intellectual property in Iran - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Sina-1

Hack-Hook said:


> that's protecting a trade mark. and right now the market is filled with fake Samsung and Apple, Boss, JBL and ...... accessories does anybody prevent them even the most famous Iranian digital market (Digikala) is filled with fake product and nobody care . and we also have a copyright law but you must operate inside Iran for it to protect you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intellectual property in Iran - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Look dude, none of this is valid as long as Iran is sanctioned. If you want to uphold your patent then you must pay an annual fee. How is that done when you can’t do business with Iran? Also there are loopholes. Basically if you file from something which is already copied in Iran then it will not be covered.
I’ve derailed this thread long enough. This is my last post about this matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> once at the time of Khatami, Kingston Technology used that and get a court ruling and police raided PC shops and gathered all fake Kingston RAMs .


Every time I hear this demon's name these days, it is a series of extremely disturbing revelations that never seem to end!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

It's the chassis, the engine, transmission are going to be foreign, so I mean you can call it a Turkish protect and believe whatever you want, but the rest of the world doesn't see it that way. 

If Turkey were really as self sufficient as Erdogan wants everyone to believe, then Turkey would have been able to build the f-35 without US approval. Turkey would have been able to sell its helicopters to Pakistan without US approval. 

Turkey's TAI TF-X fighter jet, there will be mostly foreign technicians working on the project. The vital parts will be foreign, including the Rolls Royce engine. And now Turkey is seeking help from China / Pakistan to help move along the project ? However it remains to be seen how the UK and other EU/western nations will respond to such actions.

I suggest you read the second article I posted. Turkey has come a long way in become less dependent on foreign suppliers for their military hardware, yet at the same time, for the foreseeable future, Turkey still will be extremely reliant on foreign nations for vital foreign components for their weapons systems, including engines among other vital components for their drones

Even the S-400, right now Turkey is promising the USA/NATO to basically only use the system on a partial basis. Turkey is currently badly in need of spare parts for its F-16s, attack helicopters and UAVs and at this point has no options left but to bend the knee.

As for the S-400, Turkey currently does not possess the algorithms and is reliant on Russian technicians for maintaining the system on a regular basis. This will be the same thing with the several nuclear powerplants that the Russians are set to build in Turkey for several billions dollars. All of the fissile material will constantly be removed by the Russians, therefore Turkey will have ZERO chance of building a nuclear weapon.

This is one of the main reasons Iran chose to purchase the latest version of the S-300 as opposed to the S-400, since with the S-300 Iran has full access to all the codes and algorithms. Even in case of a war with Russia, Iran can use the S-300 against the Russians. Turkey won't have that option since the Russians can eaisly turn off the system as any moment. 

In conclusion, state propaganda is one thing, but reality is another.

It's the chassis, the engine, transmission, cannon are going to be foreign supplied or built under foreign license, so I mean you can call it a Turkish protect and believe whatever you want, but the rest of the world doesn't see it that way.

If Turkey were really as self sufficient as Erdogan wants everyone to believe, then Turkey would have been able to build the f-35 without US approval. Turkey would have been able to sell its helicopters to Pakistan without US approval.

Turkey's TAI TF-X fighter jet, there will be mostly foreign technicians working on the project. The vital parts will be foreign, including the Rolls Royce engine. And now Turkey is seeking help from China / Pakistan to help move along the project ? However it remains to be seen how the UK and other EU/western nations will respond to such actions.

I suggest you read the second article I posted. Turkey has come a long way in become less dependent on foreign suppliers for their military hardware, yet at the same time, for the foreseeable future, Turkey still will be extremely reliant on foreign nations for vital foreign components for their weapons systems, including engines among other vital components for their drones

Even the S-400, right now Turkey is promising the USA/NATO to basically only use the system on a partial basis. Turkey is currently badly in need of spare parts for its F-16s, attack helicopters and UAVs from the west. At this point Turkey has no options left but to bend the knee.

As for the S-400, Turkey currently does not possess the algorithms and is reliant on Russian technicians for maintaining the system on a regular basis. This will be the same thing with the several nuclear powerplantsthat the Russians are set to build in Turkey for several billions dollars. All of the fissile material will constantly be removed by the Russians, therefore Turkey will have ZERO chance of building a nuclear weapon.

This is one of the main reasons Iran chose to purchase the latest version of the S-300 as opposed to the S-400, since with the S-300 Iran has full access to all the codes and algorithms. Even in case of a war with Russia, Iran can use the S-300 against the Russians. Turkey won't have that option since the Russians can eaisly turn off the system as any moment.

In conclusion, state propaganda is one thing, but reality is another.



xbat said:


> next time dont post news before read, news is mentioning about engine and transmission *not selling whole "TANK" *
> 
> 
> no i am not a troll, why do call me as a troll when i correct your false claims?





xbat said:


> next time dont post news before read, news is mentioning about engine and transmission *not selling whole "TANK" *
> 
> 
> no i am not a troll, why do call me as a troll when i correct your false claims?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xbat

if you have some questions about turkish hardware come to turkish section, this is for iriaf

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> Every time I hear this demon's name these days, it is a series of extremely disturbing revelations that never seem to end!


its bad because they collected fake rip offs from shops ?


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> its bad because they collected fake rip offs from shops ?


If the fake rip offs are manufactured domestically, especially in sanctions times then yes it is bad to stop that while cannibal corporations outside of Iran benefit. Iran should unapologetically copy all of kingston, nvidia, amd, intel, etc as the events of the past few years have shown time and time again that these corporations are part of the threats posed to Iran. Unfortunately given that most Iranians worship foreign brand names, then Iranian entities should copy kingston, even with the company logo, (albeit at a lower price).


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> If the fake rip offs are manufactured domestically, especially in sanctions times then yes it is bad to stop that while cannibal corporations outside of Iran benefit. Iran should unapologetically copy all of kingston, nvidia, amd, intel, etc as the events of the past few years have shown time and time again that these corporations are part of the threats posed to Iran. Unfortunately given that most Iranians worship foreign brand names, then Iranian entities should copy kingston, even with the company logo, (albeit at a lower price).


the problem , we don't produce memory chips and even in sanction time those fake ripoff were bad if you think you can make a product made it in your name.
by the way mr. ahmadinejad made sure that we can't copy those companies

and you don't recall . average Iranian could not distinguish those fake products and paid the same price for them as if they pay for the originals . what was worse was the fact that those were lower tire products which were used by average people like students and small companies and they really don't have that much money to pay for the damages. they never faked the memories used for example by gamers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Caspian Parsi

تصاویری از اولین مانور امداد هوایی در تهران با حضور نیروی هوایی ارتش ، هلال احمر ، اورژانس کشور و هواناجا

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## sha ah

Hey any word on the Shahed 216 ? It's been a few years ? I'm guessing that sanctions really threw a wrench in Iran's plans for this attack helicopter ? Or perhaps Iran is waiting to purchase some components from Russia or other sources ? Any news ?


----------



## Sina-1

sha ah said:


> Hey any word on the Shahed 216 ? It's been a few years ? I'm guessing that sanctions really threw a wrench in Iran's plans for this attack helicopter ? Or perhaps Iran is waiting to purchase some components from Russia or other sources ? Any news ?
> View attachment 725247


Mission statement for attack helicopters is constantly redefined in this age of UCAVs. What would you invest in, shahed 216 or next generation jet propulsion stealth UCAVs? Priority for attack helicopters is rightfully low.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Your assessment makes sense, yet at the same time, for the foreseeable future, there will be a mix of unmanned and manned platforms. I believe that in the near future we will see the Shahed 216 come to fruition. I wouldn't be surprised if they have been working on prototypes behind closed doors. In any case its good to see that they have plans for the future.



Sina-1 said:


> Mission statement for attack helicopters is constantly redefined in this age of UCAVs. What would you invest in, shahed 216 or next generation jet propulsion stealth UCAVs? Priority for attack helicopters is rightfully low.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Your assessment makes sense, yet at the same time, for the foreseeable future, there will be a mix of unmanned and manned platforms. I believe that in the near future we will see the Shahed 216 come to fruition. I wouldn't be surprised if they have been working on prototypes behind closed doors. In any case its good to see that they have plans for the future.



explain how you build a helicopter without an engine.


----------



## Raghfarm007

TheImmortal said:


> explain how you build a helicopter without an engine.




you use this:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Raghfarm007 said:


> you use this:



Nope.


----------



## sha ah

Russia, China, technology transfers or a domestic project. It's only a matter of time.



TheImmortal said:


> explain how you build a helicopter without an engine.


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Nope.


Can you please elaborate why not..is it size, or power or weight...I am very curious to know.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Russia, China



If the Turks under zero sanctions are struggling to find an engine for their attack helicopter what makes you think Russia and China are gonna help Iran?

Right now the focus is on jet engines, micro jet engines (for UAVs and cruise missiles).

Tanks and Helicopters have zero priority. Especially all the Cobras Iran has already. Helicopters won’t survive in a war with US.


aryobarzan said:


> Can you please elaborate why not..is it size, or power or weight...I am very curious to know.



It’s that Iran cannot mass produce aeronautical engines at this point in time. Simple as that.

How many Owj engines have been made? How many Kowsar are flying? What happened to National helicopter project? Why was Iranian artesh checking out Russian choppers in Russia recently?

If Iran really could mass produce a helicopter engine or jet engine you would see them making them like hot cakes one after another. Instead efforts have been modernizing fighter Jets and modernizing helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

Well Turks aren't being sanctioned like Iran however Germany is refusing to sell them spare parts for their Leopard 2 tanks. This is why they turned to the Koreans, however the Koreans depend on the Germans for the K2s transmission, which is why the Altay tank project is stuck in the mud right now.

At the same time Turkey is trying to sell a few dozen ATAK helicopters to Pakistan but because the engine is American, they can't. Now they're considering a Ukrainian engine but I doubt if that will work out.

This is all because of the CAATSA sanctions that were imposed on Turkey because they chose to purchase the S-400 from Russia. This is also why they were refused the F-35. So yes Turkey is being sanctioned and those sanctions are preventing them from striving ahead.

Realistically much of the Iranian militaries equipment will be rendered useless in a war against the USA. That doesn't mean that Iran should completely abandon its airforce or tanks, helicopters all together.

Because aside from the USA, there is also the realistic threat of a regional war in the foreseeable future. Therefore Iran needs to purchase or produce new hardware including fighter jets, helicopters, tanks, etc.

If ambitious regional nations sense weakness and the opportunity arises, they will take full advantage and attack Iran.

In my opinion Russia or China will sell Iran military hardware including fighter jets, parts for tanks, helicopters, etc, however Iran needs to make a purchase large enough for it be worth their while.



TheImmortal said:


> If the Turks under zero sanctions are struggling to find an engine for their attack helicopter what makes you think Russia and China are gonna help Iran?
> 
> Right now the focus is on jet engines, micro jet engines (for UAVs and cruise missiles).
> 
> Tanks and Helicopters have zero priority. Especially all the Cobras Iran has already. Helicopters won’t survive in a war with US.
> 
> 
> It’s that Iran cannot mass produce aeronautical engines at this point in time. Simple as that.
> 
> How many Owj engines have been made? How many Kowsar are flying? What happened to National helicopter project? Why was Iranian artesh checking out Russian choppers in Russia recently?
> 
> If Iran really could mass produce a helicopter engine or jet engine you would see them making them like hot cakes one after another. Instead efforts have been modernizing fighter Jets and modernizing helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Well Turks aren't being sanctioned like Iran however Germany is refusing to sell them spare parts for their Leopard 2 tanks. This is why they turned to the Koreans, however the Koreans depend on the Germans for the K2s transmission, which is why the Altay tank project is stuck in the mud right now.
> 
> At the same time Turkey is trying to sell a few dozen ATAK helicopters to Pakistan but because the engine is American, they can't. Now they're considering a Ukrainian engine but I doubt if that will work out.
> 
> This is all because of the CAATSA sanctions that were imposed on Turkey because they chose to purchase the S-400 from Russia. So yes Turkey is being sanctioned and those sanctions are preventing them from striving ahead.
> 
> At the same time, much of the Iranian militaries equipment will be rendered useless in a war against the USA. That doesn't mean that Iran should completely abandon its airforce or tanks, helicopters all together.
> 
> Aside from the USA, there is also the realistic threat of a regional war in the foreseeable future. Therefore Iran needs to purchase or produce new hardware including fighter jets, helicopters, tanks, etc.
> 
> If ambitious regional nations sense weakness and the opportunity arises, they will take full advantage and attack Iran.
> 
> In my opinion Russia or China will sell Iran military hardware including fighter jets, parts for tanks, helicopters, etc, however Iran needs to make a purchase large enough for it to go through.



Manned attack helicopters are a luxury design in this day and age. They are vulnerable as well and cannot travel far. So helicopters would only be used to defend Iranian territory from a land invasion and provide close air support to Iranian soldiers.

Given the possibility of a land invasion of Iran by her neighbors (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan) is next to 0% it makes very little sense to invest in helicopters at this point in time when the cost of overcoming sanctions hurdle outweighs the benefits.

Iran should be focused on building unmanned bombers ideally that can go supersonic and attack targets in the Middle East. That would be much more of a force multiplier than attack helicopters.


----------



## sha ah

But you never know what the future holds. When Saddam attacked iran in the 80's did anyone expect it or see it coming ? Iran needs to focus on every field, not just unmanned systems. That's just my opinion.



TheImmortal said:


> Manned attack helicopters are a luxury design in this day and age. They are vulnerable as well and cannot travel far. So helicopters would only be used to defend Iranian territory from a land invasion and provide close air support to Iranian soldiers.
> 
> Given the possibility of a land invasion of Iran by her neighbors (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Pakistan) is next to 0% it makes very little sense to invest in helicopters at this point in time when the cost of overcoming sanctions hurdle outweighs the benefits.
> 
> Iran should be focused on building unmanned bombers ideally that can go supersonic and attack targets in the Middle East. That would be much more of a force multiplier than attack helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> But you never know what the future holds.



I don’t need to know the future to know common sense.

A land invasion of Iran in this day and age with the capability of the current and future Iranian military would require 750,000 soldiers for just Iran and potentially up to 1M+ to also secure Iraq/Lebanon/Syria/Yemen as well.

So no neighbor country can afford such a war or swallow the cost. Only country that can afford that war is US. And no US politician will risk his career for such a war unless it is WW3.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Is there any news of Iran buying Su-30 and JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-5?


----------



## sha ah

Iran is in no hurry really. Iran won't buy JF-17. Most likely SU-27/30 derivatives with technology transfers and in the future maybe SU-57 ?

Those are the most likely outcomes. Contrary to popular belief, Iran's airforce is actually well maintained and even the oldest fighter jets in Iran's inventory have been modified to be able to launch cruise missiles. Even if Iran buys SU-30 or SU-35 with tech transfers, Iran will continue to build trainer aircraft and the reverse engineered F-5, which is a good lightweight conventional fighter. Each F-5 costs Iran $5 million a piece with 90% of components being built inhouse now. They're cheap, reliable, easy to maintain and 4 of them can be taken apart and fit into a 737, so with all that in mind it's still worthwhile using them to supplement the airforce.

You can see several Iranian built F-5s here. Notice how these models build a few years back have two vertical tails instead of one.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1351045269417316353
The most recent variant built in Iran has 4th gen avionics and radar and its airframe is made on synthetic materials like carbon fiber.








Tai Hai Chen said:


> Is there any news of Iran buying Su-30 and JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-5?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Is there any news of Iran buying Su-30 and JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-5?



Russia and China refuse to sell Iran game changer weapons. They don’t have the balls or stomach to piss off the West.

The arms embargo was removed only in “words”.

But supposedly Sukhoi order book at a arms convention last year showed an unknown buyer with a 50-100 (can’t remember Exact #) order for fighter jets. Some theorized this was for Iran since the order was too large for any Arab nation state. Turkey and India operate mostly US airplanes now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> Russia and China refuse to sell Iran game changer weapons.



Russia and China have close relation with Israel but nevertheless I think China will sell JF-17 to Iran. Iran is very important for China strategically.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Iran is very important for China strategically.





China is a joke when it comes to Chinese-Iranian military relations. Any Iranian knows this very well. China like Russia hasnt been a reliable arms partner and in some cases is even worse, the C-802 case study is a prime example of this.

And no one wants the JF-17 in the year 2022. Iran has already written off Chinese fighters. With US already working on an 6th gen fighter, I’d rather take upgraded F-5, F-4, and Migs than adding bunch of already obsolete tech like the JF-17 that will add more chaos to the established Russian/American logistics of Iranian airforce and only a small marginal benefit. Not worth cost and maintenance. 15-20 years ago maybe...but today? No way.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> China is a joke when it comes to Chinese-Iranian military relations. Any Iranian knows this very well. China like Russia hasnt been a reliable arms partner and in some cases is even worse, the C-802 case study is a prime example of this.
> 
> And no one wants the JF-17 in the year 2022. Iran has already written off Chinese fighters. With US already working on an 6th gen fighter, I’d rather take upgraded F-5, F-4, and Migs than adding bunch of already obsolete tech like the JF-17 that will add more chaos to the established Russian/American logistics of Iranian airforce and only a small marginal benefit. Not worth cost and maintenance. 15-20 years ago maybe...but today? No way.



JF-17 is no joke. Other than J-10, J-20, F-35, there isn't another plane other than JF-17 that has DSI.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> JF-17 is no joke. Other than J-10, J-20, F-35, there isn't another plane other than JF-17 that has DSI.



JF-17 is already borderline obsolete. At best it’s a 4+ gen fighter jet. I would take an SU-35 over it any day.

Iran is buying fighter jets for next 20-30 years minimum. Why would Iran purchase JF-17 in 2022 when it is already on the border of being obsolete in next decade?

Makes zero sense. Iran isn’t Saudi Arabia with endless coffers and it isn’t Pakistan which gets weapons at severe discount for free in order to hedge China against India. Thus any major Iranian investment in fighter jets should either be 4++ or 5th gen design or come with MAJOR ToT in order to boost its own domestic projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> JF-17 is already borderline obsolete. At best it’s a 4+ gen fighter jet. I would take an SU-35 over it any day.
> 
> Iran is buying fighter jets for next 20-30 years minimum. Why would Iran purchase JF-17 in 2022 when it is already on the border of being obsolete in next decade?
> 
> Makes zero sense. Iran isn’t Saudi Arabia with endless coffers and it isn’t Pakistan which gets weapons at severe discount for free in order to hedge China against India.



JF-17 kills Su-35 any day any where. Su-35 still has obsolete PESA. JF-17 has AESA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> JF-17 kills Su-35 any day any where. Su-35 still has obsolete PESA. JF-17 has AESA.



The PESA can be replaced with a modified version of Su-57’s N036 Byelka radar system which has five AESA arrays, 3 X-band and 2 L-band.

Also AL-41’s trump any Chinese engine by a mile. China is still a decade plus behind Russia in engine technology and still uses Russian engines in its 5th fighters because its own engines aren’t yet ready.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> The PESA can be replaced with the a modified version of Su-57’s N036 Byelka radar system which has five AESA arrays, 3 X-band and 2 L-band.



Not without significant redesign. Not sure if Su-35's cooling system is sufficient for AESA.


TheImmortal said:


> Also AL-41’s trump any Chinese engine by a mile.



RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio than AL-41, not to mention more advanced FADEC.


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> China is a joke when it comes to Chinese-Iranian military relations. Any Iranian knows this very well. China like Russia hasnt been a reliable arms partner and in some cases is even worse, the C-802 case study is a prime example of this.
> 
> And no one wants the JF-17 in the year 2022. Iran has already written off Chinese fighters. With US already working on an 6th gen fighter, I’d rather take upgraded F-5, F-4, and Migs than adding bunch of already obsolete tech like the JF-17 that will add more chaos to the established Russian/American logistics of Iranian airforce and only a small marginal benefit. Not worth cost and maintenance. 15-20 years ago maybe...but today? No way.


JF-17 can never replace tomcats. China won't sell us SU27 derivatives produced in Chinese companies. At best theyd offer us J10s and JF-17s. J10s lack the range for a vast country like Iran we need hundreds of them, with this Current budget its not affordable. JF-17s are no better, we need something like SU30sm to meet the requirements. 

Not to mention that if the heavy national turbofan gets unveiled, then i would even refuse buying SU57s. Given the fact that it will not be so hard for our scientists to produce something in that calibre of an stealth platform. Too hard to catch up with f22s but easy to produce something comparable to the SU57s and J20s. 

Nothing beats the homemade stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Not without significant redesign. Not sure if Su-35's cooling system is sufficient for AESA.



I said modified version and yes it can be done.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> China is still a decade plus behind Russia in engine technology and still uses Russian engines in its 5th fighters because its own engines aren’t yet ready.



J-20B uses Chinese engine which is superior to AL-31 in all aspects.








Muhammed45 said:


> J10s lack the range for a vast country like Iran



Distance Urmia and Zahedan 1,712 km. Distance Urumqi and Fuzhou 3,467 km. Iran cannot be said to be a big country. Rather medium sized ala Turkey, Japan, Pakistan. JF-17 has 1,350+ km combat radius. More than sufficient for Iran.


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> JF-17 can never replace tomcats. China won't sell us SU27 derivatives produced in Chinese companies. At best theyd offer us J10s and JF-17s. J10s lack the range for a vast country like Iran we need hundreds of them, with this Current budget its not affordable. JF-17s are no better, we need something like SU30sm to meet the requirements.
> 
> Not to mention that if the heavy national turbofan gets unveiled, then i would even refuse buying SU57s. Given the fact that it will not be so hard for our scientists to produce something in that calibre of an stealth platform. Too hard to catch up with f22s but easy to produce something comparable to the SU57s and J20s.
> 
> Nothing beats the homemade stuff.



Iranian engine tech is currently 1970’s Level and may at best reach AL-21 level in near future.

Iranian aircraft radar tech is behind, Iran avionics and sub systems is behind, Iran EW/ECW is behind, Iran’s targeting systems are behind.

So if by design a stealth fighter you mean a low RCS fighter than yes. But it is far behind in nearly everything that goes into a fighter jet. So a substantial ToT needs to take place as it will take Iran probably another 20-25 years to reach where China is today in terms of aircraft tech.


Tai Hai Chen said:


> J-20B uses Chinese engine which is superior to AL-31 in all aspects.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Distance Urmia and Zahedan 1,712 km. Distance Urumqi and Fuzhou 3,467 km. Iran cannot be said to be a big country. Rather medium sized ala Turkey, Japan, Pakistan. JF-17 has 1,000+ km combat radius. More than sufficient for Iran.



First of all I said AL-41 and if you think China has beaten Russia in engine tech you are a bigger Chinese troll than I thought.

How many J-31 and J-20 does China have? All prototypes.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> How many J-31 and J-20 does China have? All prototypes.



China operates 100+ serial J-20. The same can't be said about Russia. Only 1 serial Su-57 has ever been built.


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> Iranian engine tech is currently 1970’s Level and may at best reach AL-21 level in near future.


Well i don't think so. The heavy turbofan is produced already going through various tests. Once defense minister pointed to it, the final test would be testing tge reliability of that engine and it takes consider able amount of time. We have produced reliable turbojet, not Mass produced but its technology is mastered already. Time is a damn Factor in this hard field.





TheImmortal said:


> Iranian aircraft radar tech is behind, Iran avionics and sub systems is behind, Iran EW/ECW is behind, Iran’s targeting systems are behind.


Nope, Iran has upgraded Tomcats radars to new standards. It was scheduled to be finished by year 2020. And im certain they have done it successfuly. Adding air to ground capability to the new radar capable of launching the Mass produced Fakour air2air missiles. The new radar is new in every aspect.



TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s targeting systems are behind.


I can't say anything about this one, since it was abandoned or maybe being developed with the lights Off. Artesh is too conservative when it comes to unveiling or breaking about their achievements.



TheImmortal said:


> So if by design a stealth fighter you mean a low RCS fighter than yes. But it is far behind in nearly everything that goes into a fighter jet. So a substantial ToT needs to take place as it will take Iran probably another 20-25 years to reach where China is today in terms of aircraft tech.


Iran has already produced stealth coating for its stealth UCAVs. You can search it among Iranian sources.

As you mentioned it is time consuming not something impossible. With the priority given to missiles program, it will be an Slow move with lights Off.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> China operates 100+ serial J-20. The same can't be said about Russia. Only 1 serial Su-57 has ever been built.



China operates probably closer to 50. And of that 50 we don’t know how many can actually operate full time without extensive maintenance on its engine.

Lots of unknowns. And Russian has several SU-57, built it just isn’t in a rush to build 5th gen fighters nor does it have the same budget that the Chinese military has.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> China operates probably closer to 50. And of that 50 we don’t know how many can actually operate full time without extensive maintenance on its engine.



China builds 50 J-20 per year. It's probably 100 if not more by now. China is not Russia, which has much smaller industrial capacity and much slower industrial output.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> China builds 50 J-20 per year. It's probably 100 if not more by now. China is not Russia, which has much smaller industrial capacity and much slower industrial output.



“probably” is not factual information. Either provide a source that says 100+ exist or don’t spread Chinese propaganda.

Russia’s military budget: $65B

China’s military budget: $175B+

Has nothing to with industrial capacity as Russia was building airplanes by the hundreds back when China was getting slaughtered by the Japanese in their own rice patties.

Please don’t spread propaganda now.


----------



## sha ah

China already supplies JF-17s to Pakistan and therefore it wouldn't really make sense for Iran, a neighboring country with whom Pakistan has shaky relations at best, to also acquire the same jets. In theory its possible but not likely. I don't think Pakistan would be happy about it either. 

Also according to most military experts, China is still 10 years behind Russia in aviation technology, specifically when it comes to jet engines. China has recently claimed that they are now no longer reliant on Russian engines for their J-20s but western experts are doubtful. At the same time, what China possesses is one thing, what it is willing to sell it Iran is quite another matter entirely.

When it comes to fighter jets Iranians are more interested in Russian fighter jets as opposed to Chinese. This has to do as much with regional geo-politics, political leverage and historical relations as it does with sheer necessity or practical application. The good old days of super friendly relations between the west and China (Obama era) are long gone. With China looking to surpass the west, western nations have recently shown quite a bit of animosity and hate towards China, pointing fingers at China in Hong Kong and XinJiang in particular. This has made China more receptive to doing business with Iran. 

However Iranians are not going to forget the fact that for a while China & Russia were working hand in hand with the western nations hypocritical & unfair policies towards Iran, specifically in the nuclear field. In regards to the nuclear issue, the western nations treatment of Iran is no different than the uneven and unfair treaties imposed on China after the Opium wars. Despite everything Iran was willing to compromise with the world but as we have clearly seen the Americans and EU do not want to negotiate. Rather they want to impose strict terms on Iran, specifically unfair and uneven terms. 

Such hypocrisy, deceit and condescending attitudes are completely unacceptable to the Iranian nation. The way things are going Iran will soon join the nuclear club unless the Americans/EU come to their senses and understand that the days of gunboat diplomacy, imperialism and colonialism are long gone. The world is changing, quickly turning into a multi-polar setting and some nations, specifically the US and UK, cannot handle losing their spots as domineering, hegemonic powers.

In the past, especially with UN weapons sanctions, it was impossible for Iran to purchase fighter jets from Russia or China. Today the situation is different but really Iran is only interested in technology transfers and because Russia and Iran have actively worked together in Syria, it seems extremely likely that Iran will be purchasing fighter jets from Russia rather than China. 

Either way, neither Russia nor China will sell Iran game changing weapons and Iran has no illusions about its airforce being able to compete with western nations, for the time being anyways. Iran mostly relies on it's missiles, air defenses, proxies, unmanned platforms and other less conventional or asymmetrical methods for deterrence. To Iran fighter jets are just a necessary addition when it comes to its overall military doctrine, which is based on defense.

However Iran isn't just interested in fighter jets. Iran needs a long list of military hardware, including parts for tanks, helicopters, air defense technology etc. For the most part Iran is looking to build its own military hardware, but either under license or with limited foreign components. Iran is currently in a transitional phase. In 20-30 years, if all things go according to plan, Iran will be more or less fully self sufficient when it comes to producing world class military hardware.



Tai Hai Chen said:


> JF-17 is no joke. Other than J-10, J-20, F-35, there isn't another plane other than JF-17 that has DSI.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> “probably” is not factual information. Either provide a source that says 100+ exist or don’t spread Chinese propaganda.
> 
> Russia’s military budget: $65B
> 
> China’s military budget: $175B+
> 
> Has nothing to with industrial capacity as Russia was building airplanes by the hundreds back when China was getting slaughtered by the Japanese in their own rice patties.
> 
> Please don’t spread propaganda now.



China has biggest industrial base in the world. It takes China 2 years to build a carrier. How long does it take Russia to build a frigate? Hell, even the US industrial output is only a small fraction of China's industrial output.


----------



## sha ah

Well the Russians surely have the know how and industrial capacity to build advanced, world class military hardware. Most experts agree that when it comes to fighter jets, China has almost caught up to Russia in terms of overall quality but still has a decade or so to go when it comes to jet engines for example. 

In some fields, like avionics and radar, I believe that the general consensus is that China is slightly ahead or on par ? Again this is according to speculation by experts/pundits,. However when it comes to the most advanced hardware, most nations are understandably secretive in this regard, so really these are guesstimations at best. Therefore such speculation should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Anyways, China has two aircraft carriers and one of them is an ex-Soviet carrier. Also China bought the S-400 from Russia and SU-35 jets, so yeah obviously China still has some ways to go. If China were truly ahead or on par with Russians, why even bother paying billions for Russian hardware ? The proof as they say is in the pudding.

Again though, what China and Russia possess for themselves is one thing. What they're willing to give Iran is another. If Iran were to buy fighter jets from China, they would be SU-27 derivatives with some interest in the J-20. Iran also plans to make purchases related to tanks, helicopters, armored personnel carriers, upgrades for some older fighter jets and more. This will include technology transfers for anything Iran purchases. All together it's going to be a lucrative deal for the supplier.

The fact that Iran is not rushing into any deal and biding its time shows that 1) Iran is confident in its own domestic capabilities when it comes to securing its territorial integrity 2) Iran wants to sign a rock solid, fair deal that's mutually beneficial for both parties involved. In other words no games or backing out due to western or Zionist pressure.



Tai Hai Chen said:


> China has biggest industrial base in the world. It takes China 2 years to build a carrier. How long does it take Russia to build a frigate? Hell, even the US industrial output is only a small fraction of China's industrial output.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

sha ah said:


> In some fields, like avionics and radar, I believe China is slightly ahead or on par ?



China has AESA in fighter jets years before Russia, which still do not. J-16 has AESA since 2016. Russia still don't have AESA operationally.


sha ah said:


> Most experts agree that China has almost caught up to Russia in terms of sheer quality but still has a decade or so to go when it comes to jet engines



WS-10A is on par with AL-31F. It's used on J-16 and J-10C.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> China has AESA in fighter jets years before Russia, which still do not. J-16 has AESA since 2016. Russia still don't have AESA operationally.



Your entire military is based on reverse engineering Russian and American designs.

So Ironic. And you sound like a parrot AESA, AESA, AESA. Russia is the world leader in radar technology if it wanted to make an AESA radar for its fighter jets it easily could.

Stop being a Chinese military Homer.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> Your entire military is based on reverse engineering Russian and American designs.
> 
> So Ironic. And you sound like a parrot AESA, AESA, AESA. Russia is the world leader in radar technology if it wanted to make an AESA radar for its fighter jets it easily could.
> 
> Stop being a Chinese military Homer.



Not just AESA but in terms of thermal imaging China is way ahead of Russia. Russian EO is subpar. To date Russia lacks EO targeting pod. On the other hand, Chinese targeting pod is top notch.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Not just AESA but in terms of thermal imaging China is way ahead of Russia. Russian EO is subpar. To date Russia lacks EO targeting pod. On the other hand, Chinese targeting pod is top notch.



Come back to me when you take Taiwan.

Last military conflict was what....Korean war? Chinese military is largely unproven. Iran has been in war since 2003. US has been in war since 1914. Russia has been in wars since about the same time.

Dont get me wrong, Chinese military will one day be on par with the US at its current trajectory. But again...largely unproven. Fancy toys don’t equal military victory. Need to see how China does in actual military conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> Come back to me when you take Taiwan.



China does not want to take Taiwan anymore than the US wants to take Cuba. China and Taiwan have peaceful relation. Taiwan is only a few miles off mainland China. Trade is good.









Taiwan's Kinmen Islands, Only a Few Miles From Mainland China


Taiwan’s Great Kinmen Island and its neighbor islets, in a harbor just east of the Chinese city of Xiamen, are practically surrounded by the People's Republic of China—in some places barely more than a mile apart. Reuters reports that the island is now "eyeing closer commercial ties with China,"...




www.theatlantic.com






TheImmortal said:


> US has been in war since 1914. Russia has been in wars since about the same time.



Yet they can't beat coronavirus which China beat within weeks with less than 5,000 deaths in total.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Yet they can't beat coronavirus which China beat within weeks with less than 5,000 deaths in total.



Chinese propaganda at work

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> Chinese propaganda at work



Chinese people are highly disciplined. Russians and Americans are nowhere compared to Chinese in terms of discipline. Heck, even Japanese lag behind Chinese in discipline. Check the coronavirus casualties. China is way on the bottom of the list. Chinese can fly to the US anytime because no Chinese tests positive. On the other hand, Americans have a hard time flying to China because so many Americans test positive.









Coronavirus Update (Live): 131,507,374 Cases and 2,861,601 Deaths from COVID-19 Virus Pandemic - Worldometer


Live statistics and coronavirus news tracking the number of confirmed cases, recovered patients, tests, and death toll due to the COVID-19 coronavirus from Wuhan, China. Coronavirus counter with new cases, deaths, and number of tests per 1 Million population. Historical data and info. Daily...




www.worldometers.info


----------



## Ich

The future of flying military combat assets are unmaned combat drones and hypersonic vehicles and flying tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Ich said:


> The future of flying military combat assets are unmaned combat drones and hypersonic vehicles and flying tanks.



Manned jets will be the core for decades to come. Iran will buy JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-4 and F-5 and MiG-29 which are very old frames and unsafe to fly.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

We won't buy Chinese fighter jets. Not because they are technologically inferior or something like that, but since they can't meet our requirement. China won't sell SU27 derivatives since it'd trigger Russians.

5 to 6 squadrons of SU30SMs would do the job. It will just buy some time for Iran's own plans in the field of developing heavy fighter jets. Actually a Fill the gap fighter jet. 

We won't buy Chinese fighters thats for sure.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Manned jets will be the core for decades to come. Iran will buy JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-4 and F-5 and MiG-29 which are very old frames and unsafe to fly.



No. Manned airplanes are limited at ~9 g and thus have no future or chance against unmanned combat drones with up to possible 15 g. Today it is already the case that the pilot in an 5th gen fighter depends very much on computer aided tools or AI. So it is only a small step to fly all without pilots in the air assets. Manned combat aircrafts will be gone till the end of next decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Manned jets will be the core for decades to come. Iran will buy JF-17 to phase out F-14 and F-4 and F-5 and MiG-29 which are very old frames and unsafe to fly.



Although the JF-17 would play a role in Iran's air-force, the prospect of Iran acquiring such an aerial combat platform is not realistic given the mission requirements that would need to be fulfilled by any such future purchase. 

IRIAF isn't looking for a JF-17 type air-craft, it is clearly in the market (with its limited budget) for a multi-purpose fighter that can also perform air-superiority roles when needed. The Russian Su-30SM (or Su-35) would be the only good candidate(s) in this regard. Anything else would be a waste of time, money and resources especially when factoring in just how monetarily strapped Iran is right now (they aren't flush with money).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Ich said:


> No. Manned airplanes are limited at ~9 g and thus have no future or chance against unmanned combat drones with up to possible 15 g. Today it is already the case that the pilot in an 5th gen fighter depends very much on computer aided tools or AI. So it is only a small step to fly all without pilots in the air assets. Manned combat aircrafts will be gone till the end of next decade.



UCAV can be jammed and AI is nowhere near man level. It takes quantum computer to achieve man like AI considering brain works on the quantum level.


Blue In Green said:


> Although the JF-17 would play a role in Iran's air-force, the prospect of Iran acquiring such an aerial combat platform is not realistic given the mission requirements that would need to be fulfilled by any such future purchase.
> 
> IRIAF isn't looking for a JF-17 type air-craft, it is clearly in the market (with its limited budget) for a multi-purpose fighter that can also perform air-superiority roles when needed. The Russian Su-30SM (or Su-35) would be the only good candidate(s) in this regard. Anything else would be a waste of time, money and resources especially when factoring in just how monetarily strapped Iran is right now (they aren't flush with money).



Su-35 is big but expensive to service. It lacks sophisticated AESA and targeting pod. As you know Russians are not very good at electronics post USSR. JF-17 Block 3 onwards has state of the art AESA and targeting pod which has high resolution FLIR. On top of that, JF-17 Block 3 powered by RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio compared to Su-35 powered by AL-41. On top of that, JF-17 has better combat radius than Su-35 1350 km compared to 1100 km due to newer fuselage design and new DSI type intake which reduces weight and improves aerodynamics. On top of that, Su-35 has way bigger RCS than JF-17, which has RCS reduction measures for example DSI type intake which effectively hide engine blades. On top of that, Russians have nothing comparable to PL-15 which is in the same class as AIM-260. It makes absolutely no point to pick Su-35 over JF-17 Block 3 other than for politics.


----------



## Ich

Tai Hai Chen said:


> UCAV can be jammed and AI is nowhere near man level. It takes quantum computer to achieve man like AI considering brain works on the quantum level.



Mh, we have the year 2021. Manned combat fighters fly around with unmanned combat drones as wing fighter. Not only with one unmanned wing fighter, but also with two or three or four ect. 

Do you really think the pilot in the manned fighter jet do manage to navigate all 4 unmanned wing fighter drones and his own airplane with 5 joysticks simultaniuosly? Where are you living? Sure not in China. In China they know that.

And this is in 2021. 

And i wrote that till the end of the next decade manned combat planes are gone. And this is easy to reach. Maybe earlier.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Ich said:


> Mh, we have the year 2021. Manned combat fighters fly around with unmanned combat drones as wing fighter. Not only with one unmanned wing fighter, but also with two or three or four ect.
> 
> Do you really think the pilot in the manned fighter jet do manage to navigate all 4 unmanned wing fighter drones and his own airplane with 5 joysticks simultaniuosly? Where are you living? Sure not in China. In China they know that.
> 
> And this is in 2021.
> 
> And i wrote that till the end of the next decade manned combat planes are gone. And this is easy to reach. Maybe earlier.



Easier said than done. Sure they can fly alongside but in combat situation it's still a long shot away.


----------



## Ich

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Easier said than done. Sure they can fly alongside but in combat situation it's still a long shot away.



Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!

US:










 (vid is over 3 years old)

Russia:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Tai Hai Chen said:


> UCAV can be jammed and AI is nowhere near man level. It takes quantum computer to achieve man like AI considering brain works on the quantum level.
> 
> 
> Su-35 is big but expensive to service. It lacks sophisticated AESA and targeting pod. As you know Russians are not very good at electronics post USSR. JF-17 Block 3 onwards has state of the art AESA and targeting pod which has high resolution FLIR. On top of that, JF-17 Block 3 powered by RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio compared to Su-35 powered by AL-41. On top of that, JF-17 has better combat radius than Su-35 1350 km compared to 1100 km due to newer fuselage design and new DSI type intake which reduces weight and improves aerodynamics. On top of that, Su-35 has way bigger RCS than JF-17, which has RCS reduction measures for example DSI type intake which effectively hide engine blades. On top of that, Russians have nothing comparable to PL-15 which is in the same class as AIM-260. It makes absolutely no point to pick Su-35 over JF-17 Block 3 other than for politics.



The JF-17 is not a specialized air-superiority fighter nor does it sport the same flight characteristics as the SU-35 which is classified as a 4.5+ generation air-craft specifically tailored to achieve air supremacy in contested zones (which Iran would be experiencing during wartime).

Su-35 specs as per Wikipedia quoting JANES:

*General characteristics*


*Crew:* 1
*Length:* 21.9 m (71 ft 10 in)
*Wingspan:* 15.3 m (50 ft 2 in)
*Height:* 5.9 m (19 ft 4 in)
*Wing area:* 62 m2 (670 sq ft)
*Airfoil:* 5%
*Empty weight:* 19,000 kg (41,888 lb) [198]
*Gross weight:* 25,300 kg (55,777 lb) with 50% internal fuel
*Max takeoff weight:* 34,500 kg (76,059 lb)
*Fuel capacity:* 11,500 kg (25,400 lb) internal
*Powerplant:* 2 × Saturn AL-41F1S afterburning turbofan engines, 86.3 kN (19,400 lbf) thrust each dry, 142 kN (32,000 lbf) with afterburner
*Performance*


*Maximum speed:* 2,400 km/h (1,500 mph, 1,300 kn) / M2.25 at altitude
1,400 km/h (870 mph; 760 kn) / M1.13 at sea level

*Cruise speed:* 1,250 km/h (780 mph, 670 kn) / M1.1+ supercruise at medium altitude[199]
*Range:* 3,600 km (2,200 mi, 1,900 nmi) at altitude
1,580 km (982 mi) at sea level

*Combat range:* 1,600 km (990 mi, 860 nmi) approx[200]
*Ferry range:* 4,500 km (2,800 mi, 2,400 nmi) with 2 external fuel tanks
*Service ceiling:* 18,000 m (59,000 ft)
*g limits:* +9
*Rate of climb:* 280 m/s (55,000 ft/min) +
*Wing loading:* 408 kg/m2 (84 lb/sq ft) With 50% fuel
500.8 kg/m2 (102.6 lb/sq ft) with full internal fuel

*Thrust/weight:* 1.13 with 50% fuel
0.92 with full internal fuel
*Armament*


*Guns:* 1 × internal 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-1 autocannon with 150 rounds
*Hardpoints:* 12 hardpoints, consisting of 2 wingtip rails, and 10 wing and fuselage stations with a capacity of 8,000 kg (17,630 lb) of ordnance,with provisions to carry combinations of:
*Rockets:* S-25
Air-to-air missiles:
8 × R-27ER/ET
R-40
R-60
6 × R-73E
12 × R-77M/P/T
6 × R-74

Air-to-surface missiles:
Kh-25ML
6 × Kh-29L/TE
3 × 3M-14AE

Anti-ship missiles:
3 × 3M-54AE1
6 × Kh-31A/AD
Kh-35U
5 × Kh-59MK
1 × Yakhont

Anti-radiation missiles:
Kh-25MP
6 × Kh-31P/PD
5 × Kh-58UShE


*Bombs:* *** 8 × KAB-500KRTV-guided bombs
8 × KAB-500L laser-guided bombs
8 × KAB-500OD guided bombs
8 × KAB-500S-E satellite-guided bombs
3 × KAB-1500KR TV-guided bombs
3 × KAB-1500L laser-guided bombs
GBU-500 laser-guided bomb
GBU-500T TV-guided bomb
GBU-1000 laser-guided bomb
GBU-1000T TV-guided bomb


*Avionics*


Irbis-E passive electronically scanned array radar
OLS-35 infra-red search and track system
L175M Khibiny-M electronic countermeasures system[42]
The Ibris-E is one of the most capable radars available to any combat air-craft today: Irbis-E can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets at one time at ranges near 350~400 kilometers, and attack up to 8. In air-to-surface mode the Irbis-E provides mapping allowing to attack four surface targets with precision-guided weapons while scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using active radar homing missiles.

It can detect a target with radar cross-section (RCS) 3m2 at up to 400 km, (towards each other, in an area of 100 square degrees) while a target with RCS 0.01m2 at up to 90 km.

It is one of the most powerful PESA radar used in an operational aircraft.

In terms of raw capabilities, the Su-35 serves Iran in all sorts of area, multi-purpose, air-superiority, interception roles etc.,. Although for economical reasons, Iran would be off opting for the SU-30SM (better variants) given its lower cost.









Sukhoi Su-35 vs JF-17 Thunder | Comparison jet Multirole specifications


Here you can compare specifications, production year, cost and pictures multirole aircraft.




armedforces.eu


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Blue In Green said:


> The JF-17 is not a specialized air-superiority fighter nor does it sport the same flight characteristics as the SU-35 which is classified as a 4.5+ generation air-craft specifically tailored to achieve air supremacy in contested zones (which Iran would be experiencing during wartime).



JF-17 Block 3 is more technologically advanced than Su-35 on all levels. Not only in fuselage design but also in terms of electronics. Su-35 to date lacks wide angle HUD which JF-17 Block 3 has. On top of that, Su-35 lacks HMD which JF-17 Block 3 has. And I'm not going to talk about the radar considering the answer is obvious. While Su-35 has TVC, it uses more fuel and reduces combat radius further. R-77 is also no match for PL-15, considering the range is only 100 km compared to 200 km. RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio compared to AL-41, not to mention more advanced FADEC which means better fuel economy.


----------



## foxhoundbis

TheImmortal said:


> Also AL-41’s trump any Chinese engine by a mile. *China is still a decade plus behind Russia* in ... technology and still uses Russian engines in its 5th fighters because its own engines aren’t yet ready.


U are wrong my friend. It was true 5 years ago, nowadays it is no longer the case. And in the incoming years, U will see how China had progressed. The reason is simple, as Russia is threatened in an existential way by the US, and the West, the leaders of Russia had helped the Chinese Aerospatiale industry to emerge. The WS-15 in terms of performance is at least equal to FW-119.

Else, let's to be clear, *no one among us is capable today*, to assert something about the performances AESA, or the PESA radar of the Russians, nor Chineses.
We can at the best, just suppose, and we suppose with information coming from most of the times dubious medias, if not malicious medias.
If you are sure that Irbis E can detect let's say an F-22 at 90 km.... Good luck! If you are happy with that ...
Just to remind you, the US stopped the production lines of the F-22, and are ending the F-35 program. UK said they will cut their F-35 orders at 60 %. I remember at the end of 90's I used to read that the US wanted at least 1.000 F-22 and thousands of F-35. After it was a matter of 700 F-22 and thousands of F-35. They are continuing with F-15, with the F-15EX, and instead of F-35, US Air Force wants a 'more simple' 4++ gen. But not a new F-16, let's say a new F-18. 
Are U still convinced by the fact that Irbis-E has shortcomings?


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. Su-35 is F-14 size. JF-17 is F-5 size. Both F-14 and F-5 need to be phased out. Iran can go for Su-35 to phase out F-14, but JF-17 for phasing out F-5 is a must considering it's more bang for the buck than any alternative.

However, considering the capabilities and combat radius of JF-17 Block 3, it can also phase out F-14 without going for Su-35. It is much less costly to purchase and service and can be built in numbers much faster.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. .... JF-17 is F-5 size. ....



With the amazing Chinese progress, and prowess in terms of technology, the JF-17 with the new WS-13, or even WS-10G, the JF-17 could be compared to Grippen. If powered by WS-10X the JF-17 would be more powerful not only than an F-16, but even more powerful than a Rafale, or maybe an EAF Typhoon.
As China masters totally the technology of jet engines, everything is possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

foxhoundbis said:


> With the amazing Chinese the JF-17 with the new WS-13, or even WS-10G. If powered by WS-10X the JF-17 would be more powerful not only than an F-16, but even more powerful than a Rafale, or maybe an EAF Typhoon.
> As China masters totally the technology of jet engines, everything is possible.



Yer. WS-10 is too big to fit in JF-17. WS-13 is a possibility. However China and Russia have a deal all export JF-17 are powered by RD-93. Only Chinese version is powered by WS-13.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No no no Iran will not abandon the Kowsar and other improvements to the F-5, quite the contrary. This platform has a lot of future and technological surprise with artificial intelligence and super technological weapons. The platform will also be improved


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Mr Iran Eye said:


> No no no Iran will not abandon the Kowsar and other improvements to the F-5, quite the contrary. This platform has a lot of future and technological surprise with artificial intelligence and super technological weapons. The platform will also be improved



With a suitable engine Iran may be able to develop an improved version of F-5 ala F-20 Tigershark. Powered by a single RD-93MA engine or WS-13 engine. However, JF-17 has far more potential to due a modern fuselage design including DSI intake. It may be more worthwhile for Iran to invest in JF-17 Block 4 rather than develop another F-5 variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Tai Hai Chen said:


> With a suitable engine Iran may be able to develop an improved version of F-5 ala F-20 Tigershark. Powered by a single RD-93MA engine or WS-13 engine. However, JF-17 has far more potential to due a modern fuselage design including DSI intake. It may be more worthwhile for Iran to invest in JF-17 Block 4 rather than develop another F-5 variant.



It's already done and constantly improving with the F4 SM.


----------



## vizier

Ich said:


> Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!
> 
> US:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (vid is over 3 years old)
> 
> Russia:



Drones seem to be a cheaper option that should not be neglected. They are also lightweight. They can even use ordinary not-hardened highways in my opinion but it should be tested. They would be less airbase dependant and can be carried arround easily if need be. Valkyrie below for example is about 2 tonnes and with an upper intake it wont have a fod problem. It seems it can takeoff-land anywhere.






There are some disadvantages as well. But these can be improved. Jamming would be much more difficult and range extends tremendously if the drone uses satcom. In Karabagh war Russian jamming systems couldnt jam out the TB-2 most of the time eventhough TB-2 didnt have satcom and it continued its operations throughout the war. Satellites are vulnurable to asat that is true but there are other means like atmospheric-pseudo satellites like high-alt balloons. They need to enter your airspace to shoot them down within that high altitudes.


Loyal wingman is high subsonic maybe low supersonic range. Although slow it can pack a punch with wvr and bvr missiles which are fast enough. It is not dogfight era. I think the weak side of these planes currently are the engines. To increase thrust to weight ratio they either need a more powerful engine such as RD-93 used in Jf-17 or 2 smaller engines like J85 of F-5 to fit in a smaller airframe like this. It would decrease interception time and also increase max-altitudes of these systems to intercept higher flying aircraft.







Further edit: Actually I see 2- J-85 f5 engines are used in these drones. They are testbed for target drones but even targeting them would be difficult in a2a mode. It says it can easily go supersonic. Also the tail seems to be makeshift not angled backwards like loyal wingman which has better stealth characteristics. They made it more targetable on purpose it seems. 









Sierra Technical unveils ‘faster’ and ‘more manoeuvrable’ stealth UAV


Sierra Technical Services recently completed several ground tests, including an engine test run, on its Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) aircraft.




www.flightglobal.com










I think next step would be removing the tail altoghether. That would reduce drag further make these easily go supersonic and much less detectable by any type of radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

It is unlikely Russia will sell Su-35 to Iran. Maybe downgraded Su-30.


Ich said:


> Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!
> 
> US:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (vid is over 3 years old)
> 
> Russia:



UCAV can be used to complement manned jets. Manned jets remain the core of air force. Not even quantum computer can replace brain.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. Su-35 is F-14 size. JF-17 is F-5 size. Both F-14 and F-5 need to be phased out. Iran can go for Su-35 to phase out F-14, but JF-17 for phasing out F-5 is a must considering it's more bang for the buck than any alternative.
> 
> However, considering the capabilities and combat radius of JF-17 Block 3, it can also phase out F-14 without going for Su-35. It is much less costly to purchase and service and can be built in numbers much faster.


Iran plan is to phase out f5 with domestic fighter that's why we play so much with the platform and use newer avionic. Our goals is to build something like tigershark or F18 out of it and that's why people tell you wait for our new engine which is being developed.
So I doubt jf17 will have a role in our doctrine on other hand when it come to a heavy interceptor we knew we can't build one in near future and sadly China only offers us j10b and that really didn't met our criteria for a heavy fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

vizier said:


> Drones seem to be a cheaper option that should not be neglected. They are also lightweight. They can even use ordinary not-hardened highways in my opinion but it should be tested. They would be less airbase dependant and can be carried arround easily if need be. Valkyrie below for example is about 2 tonnes and with an upper intake it wont have a fod problem. It seems it can takeoff-land anywhere.
> 
> View attachment 726352
> 
> 
> There are some disadvantages as well. But these can be improved. Jamming would be much more difficult and range extends tremendously if the drone uses satcom. In Karabagh war Russian jamming systems couldnt jam out the TB-2 most of the time eventhough TB-2 didnt have satcom and it continued its operations throughout the war. Satellites are vulnurable to asat that is true but there are other means like atmospheric-pseudo satellites like high-alt balloons. They need to enter your airspace to shoot them down within that high altitudes.
> 
> 
> Loyal wingman is high subsonic maybe low supersonic range. Although slow it can pack a punch with wvr and bvr missiles which are fast enough. It is not dogfight era. I think the weak side of these planes currently are the engines. To increase thrust to weight ratio they either need a more powerful engine such as RD-93 used in Jf-17 or 2 smaller engines like J85 of F-5 to fit in a smaller airframe like this. It would decrease interception time and also increase max-altitudes of these systems to intercept higher flying aircraft.
> 
> View attachment 726346
> 
> 
> 
> Further edit: Actually I see 2- J-85 f5 engines are used in these drones. They are testbed for target drones but even targeting them would be difficult in a2a mode. It says it can easily go supersonic. Also the tail seems to be makeshift not angled backwards like loyal wingman which has better stealth characteristics. They made it more targetable on purpose it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sierra Technical unveils ‘faster’ and ‘more manoeuvrable’ stealth UAV
> 
> 
> Sierra Technical Services recently completed several ground tests, including an engine test run, on its Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.flightglobal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 726395
> 
> 
> 
> I think next step would be removing the tail altoghether. That would reduce drag further make these easily go supersonic and much less detectable by any type of radar.
> 
> View attachment 726399



Yes, and that is only that what they show us. The research and developments in this field are on for more than a decade, if not two. What we see in the vids and news about this topic is, as always, old stuff.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Manned fighter jets are still useful in modern warfare. With the prevalence of UCAV which fly low, air defense is ineffective against them. Manned fighter jets are effective at eliminating UCAV by flying over them and using look down shoot down mode. That is why Iran will buy JF-17 Block 3 / 4 as its next generation fighter jet to replace aging F-14, F-4, F-5, MiG-29.


Hack-Hook said:


> Iran plan is to phase out f5 with domestic fighter that's why we play so much with the platform and use newer avionic. Our goals is to build something like tigershark or F18 out of it and that's why people tell you wait for our new engine which is being developed.
> So I doubt jf17 will have a role in our doctrine on other hand when it come to a heavy interceptor we knew we can't build one in near future and sadly China only offers us j10b and that really didn't met our criteria for a heavy fighter.



Iran is a pretty small country. Distance Khoy and Chabahar only 2,080 km. Less than half the distance Kashgar and Xiamen. Iran has no need for heavy fighter. JF-17 combat radius 1,350 km is sufficient for Iran needs.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Manned fighter jets are still useful in modern warfare. With the prevalence of UCAV which fly low, air defense is ineffective against them. Manned fighter jets are effective at eliminating UCAV by flying over them and using look down shoot down mode. That is why Iran will buy JF-17 Block 3 / 4 as its next generation fighter jet to replace aging F-14, F-4, F-5, MiG-29.Iran is a pretty small country. Distance Khoy and Chabahar only 2,080 km. Less than half the distance Kashgar and Xiamen. Iran has no need for heavy fighter. JF-17 combat radius 1,350 km is sufficient for Iran needs.


you are wrong on that . by the way the combat range is 1350km not combat radius. that will be less than half of combat range because you must add at least 10 min of combat time if you want to have a meaningful number
https://www.google.com/search?q=Combat+range&client=firefox-b-d&sxsrf=ALeKk01Xd0TYAwihP87FpISWzvhUjbi8pQ:1616358589213&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=Cch0a0f_CfgypM%2CX7ckv8sduH8JaM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kSUjOLDmdROrbT5HGic4-dBXYDRIQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjglqj8nMLvAhXMilwKHRc6CowQ9QF6BAgJEAE#imgrc=Cch0a0f_CfgypM
*Combat range* is the maximum *range* the aircraft can fly when carrying ordnance.
_*combat radius*_ in military terms, refers to the maximum distance a ship, aircraft, or vehicle can travel away from its base along a given course with normal load and return without refueling, allowing for all safety and operating factors.

so no JF-17 is not that useful for Iran . at must it can replace our F-5s and for that we want build a modernized F-5 hopefully something like F-20 or F-18

by the way are you aware that our heavy and sluggish F-14 still can outmaneuver airplanes like JF-17 and F-16 in Dogfight ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Su-30SM would be a bad choice for Iran. For starters it has inferior thrust to weight ratio compared to JF-17 Block 3 / 4. Second it lacks basic modern avionics such as MAWS which JF-17 Block 1 already has. Third, it is expensive both to buy and to service compared to JF-17. It cannot be used in numbers the way JF-17 can. On top of that, it has no missile that can go toe to toe with PL-15 which is the same class as AIM-260. The only reason Iran would go for Su-30SM instead of JF-17 Block 3 / 4 is because of politics, not because of merit.


Hack-Hook said:


> and for that we want build a modernized F-5 hopefully something like F-20 or F-18



That would take decades. In the mean time Iran can obtain JF-17 Block 3 / 4 to phase out planes that are decades old and urgently require replacement.


----------



## Blue In Green

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Su-30SM would be a bad choice for Iran. For starters it has inferior thrust to weight ratio compared to JF-17 Block 3 / 4. Second it lacks basic modern avionics such as MAWS which JF-17 Block 1 already has. Third, it is expensive both to buy and to service compared to JF-17. It cannot be used in numbers the way JF-17 can. On top of that, it has no missile that can go toe to toe with PL-15 which is the same class as AIM-260. The only reason Iran would go for Su-30SM instead of JF-17 Block 3 / 4 is because of politics, not because of merit.
> 
> 
> That would take decades. In the mean time Iran can obtain JF-17 Block 3 / 4 to phase out planes that are decades old and urgently require replacement.



Has there been any talks between Iran and China on the possible future acquisition of JF-17 Block3/4s?


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Blue In Green said:


> Has there been any talks between Iran and China on the possible future acquisition of JF-17 Block3/4s?



It is among the list in this source: https://www.thenationalnews.com/wor...st-if-the-un-arms-embargo-is-lifted-1.1041946

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Su-30SM would be a bad choice for Iran. For starters it has inferior thrust to weight ratio compared to JF-17 Block 3 / 4. Second it lacks basic modern avionics such as MAWS which JF-17 Block 1 already has. Third, it is expensive both to buy and to service compared to JF-17. It cannot be used in numbers the way JF-17 can. On top of that, it has no missile that can go toe to toe with PL-15 which is the same class as AIM-260. The only reason Iran would go for Su-30SM instead of JF-17 Block 3 / 4 is because of politics, not because of merit.
> 
> 
> That would take decades. In the mean time Iran can obtain JF-17 Block 3 / 4 to phase out planes that are decades old and urgently require replacement.



I'm pretty sure you got that backwards! If Iran purchases the JF-17 it would purely be due to politics and nothing more! It would be an utter mistake for Iran to purchase the Jf-17 and if the Chinese want a good long term relationship with Iran's Air Force then they should stop trying to Sell that Aircraft to Iran.
China should be offering J-20's to Iran not JF-17's

The idea that Iran would spend money on importing a platform less capable than F-16's and F-15's is utterly delusional. Plus, if Iran is to import a platform, that platform needs to at least have some advantages over an F-35 and the Jf-17 literally has none. 

Most importantly, you want Iran to purchase something that even the Chinese Air Force it's self wasn't willing to purchase! The fact that China it's self chose mass production of the J-10 at far greater numbers over increasing the production of the Jf-17 speaks for it's self & Iran's Air Force would have to be on crack to willingly lobby for such a purchase! 

Also, Iran requires Air Superiority fighters/Interceptors & has absolutely NO NEED to import Close Air Support fighters and can produce it's own CAS fighters at a fraction of the cost! So if Iran ever wanted to purchase CAS fighters they would simply invest in improving on and increasing the production of the Kowsar/F-5 

Countries purchase weapons based on their own threat assessments and for Iran based on the threats we face the JF-17 would bring us more of a burden than a capability!
Jf-17 wouldn't even be able to go up against UAE F-16's let alone Typhoons, F/A-18, F-15, F-35's....

So for China to even advocate such a sale would be an insult!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

VEVAK said:


> I'm pretty sure you got that backwards! If Iran purchases the JF-17 it would purely be due to politics and nothing more! It would be an utter mistake for Iran to purchase the Jf-17 and if the Chinese want a good long term relationship with Iran's Air Force then they should stop trying to Sell that Aircraft to Iran.
> China should be offering J-20's to Iran not JF-17's
> 
> The idea that Iran would spend money on importing a platform less capable than F-16's and F-15's is utterly delusional. Plus, if Iran is to import a platform, that platform needs to at least have some advantages over an F-35 and the Jf-17 literally has none.
> 
> Most importantly, you want Iran to purchase something that even the Chinese Air Force it's self wasn't willing to purchase! The fact that China it's self chose mass production of the J-10 at far greater numbers over increasing the production of the Jf-17 speaks for it's self & Iran's Air Force would have to be on crack to willingly lobby for such a purchase!
> 
> Also, Iran requires Air Superiority fighters/Interceptors & has absolutely NO NEED to import Close Air Support fighters and can produce it's own CAS fighters at a fraction of the cost! So if Iran ever wanted to purchase CAS fighters they would simply invest in improving on and increasing the production of the Kowsar/F-5
> 
> Countries purchase weapons based on their own threat assessments and for Iran based on the threats we face the JF-17 would bring us more of a burden than a capability!
> Jf-17 wouldn't even be able to go up against UAE F-16's let alone Typhoons, F/A-18, F-15, F-35's....
> 
> So for China to even advocate such a sale would be an insult!!!!



The reason China does not use JF-17 is because it does not have combat radius to meet China's needs. Distance Kashgar in west China and Xiamen in east China 4,200+ km. Iran is not such a case. Distance Maku in west Iran and Chabahar in east Iran 2,100+ km. About half as much. JF-17 has the combat radius to meet Iran's needs but not China's needs. As for Su-30, what good did it do for Armenia when Azerbaijani TB2 drones tore through Artsakh? Did they shoot down a single TB2? No. Why? Because it sucks. Russian export version Su-30SME is water downed so much it is virtually ineffective against any modern drone. Also because Russia did not allow Armenia to use Su-30 against TB2 because Azerbaijan brings more money to Russia than Armenia can. Russia is not a good partner. On the other hand, China does not export watered down version. What you buy from China is original, not watered down. Also, Russia will not allowed Iran to use Su-30 in case of war with say Israel or KSA or UAE, because Russia would rather have good relations with them than with Iran. With China you would have a dependable partner, because China does treats all fairly and equally.

This is what I'm talking about. Useless. Expensive and utterly useless. If they bought JF-17 they would not have lost Artsakh to Azerbaijan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheTallGuy

@VEVAK

What i never understand, you a believer of asymmetrical warfare..i understand that IRIAF is sitting duck against the enemy they have chosen no matter what..

But one must not think that Air DEFENCE missiles/SAM systems will survive by themselves in modern battlefield, without a credible air cover and State of the art EW/ELINT/SIGINT

Things are not Vietnam always ...even they able to muster an organic capability to mount air interceptions. i would have been much happy if IRIAF invested its own fund to create an unlicensed copy of F-4E Phantom with *AL-21F3*

A perfectly doable project which offers far more room for improvement.

After all you are operating and maintaining them for 50 Years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Tai Hai Chen said:


> The reason China does not use JF-17 is because it does not have combat radius to meet China's needs. Distance Kashgar in west China and Xiamen in east China 4,200+ km. Iran is not such a case. Distance Maku in west Iran and Chabahar in east Iran 2,100+ km. About half as much. JF-17 has the combat radius to meet Iran's needs but not China's needs. As for Su-30, what good did it do for Armenia when Azerbaijani TB2 drones tore through Artsakh? Did they shoot down a single TB2? No. Why? Because it sucks. Russian export version Su-30SME is water downed so much it is virtually ineffective against any modern drone. Also because Russia did not allow Armenia to use Su-30 against TB2 because Azerbaijan brings more money to Russia than Armenia can. Russia is not a good partner. On the other hand, China does not export watered down version. What you buy from China is original, not watered down. Also, Russia will not allowed Iran to use Su-30 in case of war with say Israel or KSA or UAE, because Russia would rather have good relations with them than with Iran. With China you would have a dependable partner, because China does treats all fairly and equally.
> 
> This is what I'm talking about. Useless. Expensive and utterly useless. If they bought JF-17 they would not have lost Artsakh to Azerbaijan.


You realize that cross border operations are also considered ? You think Iran buys fighter jets that can only patrol and defend exactly within Iran's borders ? Are you a little child ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Dariush the Great said:


> You realize that cross border operations are also considered ? You think Iran buys fighter jets that can only patrol and defend exactly within Iran's borders ? Are you a little child ?



All I'm saying is Su-30 has terrible track record. It failed to defend Artsakh from TB2 drones. That's all man. You can argue Su-30 is a super duper plane. You know what? That's great. You are entitled to your opinion.

And considering Iran has many threats, Turkey + Azerbaijan eyeing West Azerbaijan and East Azerbaijan, KSA and UAE eyeing southern Iran, Israel and America threatening to invade, if you think Su-30 can defend Iran the way Su-30 failed in Armenia then well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Tai Hai Chen said:


> That would take decades.



Come, visit us in the new year thousand! You will see things like pocket calculators with more calculating power than the supercomputers in the 80s and the early 90s....the supercomputers of the 80s and the early 90s who build F22...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fulgrim

Armenia has only 4 Su 30 and i don’t Know if they use These in the conflict. 









Armenian Air Force - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arian

Tai Hai Chen said:


> All I'm saying is Su-30 has terrible track record. It failed to defend Artsakh from TB2 drones. That's all man. You can argue Su-30 is a super duper plane. You know what? That's great. You are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> And considering Iran has many threats, Turkey + Azerbaijan eyeing West Azerbaijan and East Azerbaijan, KSA and UAE eyeing southern Iran, Israel and America threatening to invade, if you think Su-30 can defend Iran the way Su-30 failed in Armenia then well.


Man, no offense, but you sound totally clueless when you try to make the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict relevant to Iran's future wars or defense needs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheTallGuy said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> What i never understand, you a believer of asymmetrical warfare..i understand that IRIAF is sitting duck against the enemy they have chosen no matter what..
> 
> But one must not think that Air DEFENCE missiles/SAM systems will survive by themselves in modern battlefield, without a credible air cover and State of the art EW/ELINT/SIGINT
> 
> Things are not Vietnam always ...even they able to muster an organic capability to mount air interceptions. i would have been much happy if IRIAF invested its own fund to create an unlicensed copy of F-4E Phantom with *AL-21F3*
> 
> A perfectly doable project which offers far more room for improvement.
> 
> After all you are operating and maintaining them for 50 Years.





You didn't understand anything about the F-4 SM! NOTHING !
One day not far, Iran will dismantle us their group of never-before-seen combat planes and many people here on this forum will fall on their asses. Since the construction of the Saegheh fighter plane, they've built many more planes than you think and never-before-seen versions of F5s and more. Not to mention the F-4 SM and other hidden projects.

It is time for Iran to shake up this forum and especially the IRIAF topic which is the weakest point of this forum. Iran always leaves little clues to tell us that they are more advanced than we think. It's up to you to decode


----------



## AmirPatriot

We don't want the JF-17, got it? 5 pages of shilling won't change that. It's a nice cheap plane with good avionics but Iran needs air superiority fighters first and foremost, not F-5 replacements.



Tai Hai Chen said:


> All I'm saying is Su-30 has terrible track record. It failed to defend Artsakh from TB2 drones. That's all man. You can argue Su-30 is a super duper plane. You know what? That's great. You are entitled to your opinion.
> 
> And considering Iran has many threats, Turkey + Azerbaijan eyeing West Azerbaijan and East Azerbaijan, KSA and UAE eyeing southern Iran, Israel and America threatening to invade, if you think Su-30 can defend Iran the way Su-30 failed in Armenia then well.



That might have something to do with the fact that Armenia in their eternal wisdom didn't purchase any missiles for their Su-30s...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

AmirPatriot said:


> We don't want the JF-17, got it? 5 pages of shilling won't change that. It's a nice cheap plane with good avionics but Iran needs air superiority fighters first and foremost, not F-5 replacements.



No one is saying Iran shouldn't buy Su-30. Iran absolutely should. It is for politics. China bought token number of Su-35 to maintain ties with Russia. Iran should buy a squadron of Su-30 to maintain ties with Russia. That's great. But don't put all eggs in one basket. Russia is cahoots with Israel and Turkey / Azerbaijan and KSA / UAE. Iran won't be able to use Su-30 in war the same way Armenia was not able to use Su-30 to shoot down Azerbaijani TB2 drones over Artsakh after Russia betrayed Armenia in favor of Azerbaijan. The backbone of future Iran air force will be JF-17 Block 3 / 4. No doubt about that. 100 to 200 such planes are expected over the next decade.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## scimitar19

Tai Hai Chen said:


> No one is saying Iran shouldn't buy Su-30. Iran absolutely should. It is for politics. China bought token number of Su-35 to maintain ties with Russia. Iran should buy a squadron of Su-30 to maintain ties with Russia. That's great. But don't put all eggs in one basket. Russia is cahoots with Israel and Turkey / Azerbaijan and KSA / UAE. Iran won't be able to use Su-30 in war the same way Armenia was not able to use Su-30 to shoot down Azerbaijani TB2 drones over Artsakh after Russia betrayed Armenia in favor of Azerbaijan. The backbone of future Iran air force will be JF-17 Block 3 / 4. No doubt about that. 100 to 200 such planes are expected over the next decade.


 Can you tell us how much money China wants per one unit + training of crew + spare parts and maintenance?


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

scimitar19 said:


> Can you tell us how much money China wants per one unit + training of crew + spare parts and maintenance?



Should be about a quarter flyable price of Su-30. In terms of servicing, should be about an eighth as much. DSI don't need any servicing the way traditional intakes do. RD-93MA is far service friendlier than AL-31FP.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Tai Hai Chen said:


> It failed to defend Artsakh from TB2 drones.


Because ARmenia bought Su-30 WITHOUT WEAPONS!!! smfh. so stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheTallGuy said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> What i never understand, you a believer of asymmetrical warfare..i understand that IRIAF is sitting duck against the enemy they have chosen no matter what..
> 
> But one must not think that Air DEFENCE missiles/SAM systems will survive by themselves in modern battlefield, without a credible air cover and State of the art EW/ELINT/SIGINT
> 
> Things are not Vietnam always ...even they able to muster an organic capability to mount air interceptions. i would have been much happy if IRIAF invested its own fund to create an unlicensed copy of F-4E Phantom with *AL-21F3*
> 
> A perfectly doable project which offers far more room for improvement.
> 
> After all you are operating and maintaining them for 50 Years.



All of Iranian F-4 equipped with Iranian modified j79 
Which is better than Al21f . 

Modifications ,,/
Inlet temperature of turbin increased to 1100 degree centigrade

Compressor blade (shape and material) changed to inject more air 

Ignation box (insulation and nozzles,) modified to carry more temperature 

Some video clip show it's engine performance

These modification gave such results that Al21f replacement forgotted.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> Because ARmenia bought Su-30 WITHOUT WEAPONS!!! smfh. so stupid.



It wasn’t technically Armenia vs Azerbaijan war.

It was a breakaway autonomous region that aligned with Armenia vs Azerbaijan.

It’s like saying Ukraine vs breakaway region of Ukraine was a war between Ukraine and Russia.

Actually Armenia land was never threatened. Though Armenia did support the breakaway region it was far from full involvement.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> It wasn’t technically Armenia vs Azerbaijan war.
> 
> It was a breakaway autonomous region that aligned with Armenia vs Azerbaijan.
> 
> It’s like saying Ukraine vs breakaway region of Ukraine was a war between Ukraine and Russia.
> 
> Actually Armenia land was never threatened. Though Armenia did support the breakaway region it was far from full involvement.



Armenia fought on Artsakh side. They used Smerch, Tor M2K. One of their Su-25 was shot down. In total more than 4,000 Armenian soldiers and nearly 3,000 Azerbaijani soldiers were killed in a month long war.

Also, it was the Armenian prime minister who signed the peace treaty ending the war. So we can safely say it was Armenia that was at war with Azerbaijan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

I kept careful track of that conflict. Azerbaijan lost atleast 5000. There's a good reason why Aliev refused to release casualty counts until the very end. Some analysts estimate Azerbaijan even lost 7000-10,000+ but who knows. When you're dealing with an authoritarian regime you never know.

Anyways, Armenians lost that war because they failed to keep up with Azerbaijan's procurement of advanced weapons systems including upgrading their missiles systems, air defense systems & most importantly they failed to acquire UAVs. Armenians are allied with Russia but specially with Iran right beside them, they could have easily acquired all of this technology

In previous wars over that same enclave, the Azeri army was hesitant to send jets into Armenian airspace because Armenia has an airforce that's more or less on par and then there's the risk of air defenses shooting down their jets. Fighter jets, even Soviet models cost tens of millions and it takes years and millions more to train a good pilot. Sending fighter jets into a highly contested airspace was too great of a risk.

Realistically the Armenians shot down 200 aircrafts during the short conflict. Most of those were loitering munitions but they also shot down helicopters and combat drones, surveillance drones and more. See that's what really made the difference. Because drone are relatively cheap and expendable compared to fighter jets, the Azeri military had no reservations about sending swarms of them into Armenian territory, saturating the airspace, overwhelming Armenian troops.

The Armenians on the other hand couldn't respond with drones of their own on the same scale. If the Armenians had procured 20 or so Iranian Karrar drones, which is basically like a missile that can hit targets, which also carries an air to air missiles onboard, they could have shot down tons of Azeri drones. Add to that 100-200 Iranian Kamikazi drones, the same ones the Houthis have used to great success against the Saudis and honestly the Armenians would have fared MUCH better.

However it wasn't just the lack of UAV's or not upgrading missiles / SAMs that hurt the Armenians. The Armenians made the mistake of moving large convoys of troops in large columns, out in the open. Considering the real risk that Azeri drones posed, they should have moved their troops far apart from each other, through underground tunnels. The Armenians had some trenches, but they were shallow trenches, not deep ones that would ideally be connected to a network. The Armenians also failed to conceal any of their weapons. They used decoys, but on a very large scale. Far too little to make a difference.

So in essence the Armenians were fighting a war in 2021 as if they were still in the 1990's. Now they have begun to procure drones from Iran and make necessary improvements, however the issue now is that it's too little too late. Now Azerbaijan has taken vital positions and the Armenians have a daunting task ahead of them.



Tai Hai Chen said:


> Armenia fought on Artsakh side. They used Smerch, Tor M2K. One of their Su-25 was shot down. In total more than 4,000 Armenian soldiers and nearly 3,000 Azerbaijani soldiers were killed in a month long war.
> 
> Also, it was the Armenian prime minister who signed the peace treaty ending the war. So we can safely say it was Armenia that was at war with Azerbaijan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Tai Hai Chen said:


> The reason China does not use JF-17 is because it does not have combat radius to meet China's needs. Distance Kashgar in west China and Xiamen in east China 4,200+ km. Iran is not such a case. Distance Maku in west Iran and Chabahar in east Iran 2,100+ km. About half as much. JF-17 has the combat radius to meet Iran's needs but not China's needs. As for Su-30, what good did it do for Armenia when Azerbaijani TB2 drones tore through Artsakh? Did they shoot down a single TB2? No. Why? Because it sucks. Russian export version Su-30SME is water downed so much it is virtually ineffective against any modern drone. Also because Russia did not allow Armenia to use Su-30 against TB2 because Azerbaijan brings more money to Russia than Armenia can. Russia is not a good partner. On the other hand, China does not export watered down version. What you buy from China is original, not watered down. Also, Russia will not allowed Iran to use Su-30 in case of war with say Israel or KSA or UAE, because Russia would rather have good relations with them than with Iran. With China you would have a dependable partner, because China does treats all fairly and equally.
> 
> This is what I'm talking about. Useless. Expensive and utterly useless. If they bought JF-17 they would not have lost Artsakh to Azerbaijan.



Your using a few obscure facts to reach some unfounded conclusions! 

1st off risking the 4 Su-30's you have against SAM's over a few dinky drones is absurd & you do NOT know the actual reasons why they chose not to use them. And even if what you say was true then its Armenia's fault for not only agreeing to but also following the said restrictions. Iran would neither agree nor abide by such absurd restrictions!

2ndly It's one thing to possess a platform and it's quite another to have the experience, tools, weapons, equipment & Infrastructure needed to properly utilize them. If Armenia purchased 4 Su-30SM on loan for $100M in 2019 and received them in 2020 then that clearly means they did not purchase the proper Subsystems, weapons & tools needed to properly utilize them & clearly lacked the experience both in terms of pilots and command that would have been necessary to properly utilize them. 
If the Armenians had purchased any other supersonic fighter in such a manner the results would have been the same and it has NOTHING to do with the Russians. 
NO country on the planet would hand you Fighters at cost without strings attached, however, with or without strings, Armenia would not have been able to properly utilize them for a long list of reasons that had nothing to do with the Russians. 


Finally if China wants to truly be a long term and dependable partner for Iran then rather than offering Iran a platform less capable than every active American Fighter jet F-16, F/A-18, F-15, F-35,.... in almost every aspect then they should offer Iran J-20's.

If China wants a good long lasting friendship with Iran's Air Force that's what you need to do. Selling JF-17's to Iran would be a foolish shortsighted mistake and most Iranian pilots will hate you for it! 

And Iran is NOT a tiny country and range is most definitely an issue however the reason China it's self chose J-10 over the JF-17 goes far beyond range. 
The proclaimed combat range of the J-10 is 1450km vs JF-17 1352km so the choice of the J-10 over the Jf-17 has little to do with range! 

Honestly, importing a fighter platform less capable than every American fighter in every single aspect makes sense in what way? Iran has more than enough aerial combat experience to know exactly what that means!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## EvilWesteners

Ray_Atek said:


> All of Iranian F-4 equipped with Iranian modified j79
> Which is better than Al21f .
> 
> Modifications ,,/
> Inlet temperature of turbin increased to 1100 degree centigrade
> 
> Compressor blade (shape and material) changed to inject more air
> 
> Ignation box (insulation and nozzles,) modified to carry more temperature
> 
> Some video clip show it's engine performance
> 
> These modification gave such results that Al21f replacement forgotted.




First, I start by saying that I have no desire to insult you or offend you in any way, but I just have to speak based on my knowledge of engines and my decades of experience at RR.

To compare J79 to AL21F, is a total utter nonsense. The GE engine is a 2nd gen engine, the Russian engine is a 3rd gen engine. They weight the same, although GE is 17/11 and the AL is a 24/17 (afterburner vs military power). The only thing I like about the GE engine is the PCC (pre-compression cooling with distilled water and oxidizers for higher altitude flight, e.g. 80,000 ft). Other than that, it is like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford.

Ignition box temp increase ???? umm. Sorry, this does not work on me. It's armature talk.

Even if Iran added single piece frontal fan to reduce the noise, even if they used blisks (2018 implementation technology) with blade temperature reducing covering, even if they used the most advanced combustors and low turbine stage, it is still the single spool J79 is a J79 and will always be a J79, with huge limitations. This was the most advanced engine of 1960s. That's all.

Compressor blades itself (without re-engineering of flow) cannot be modified to give a huge air injection for a worthy performance increase.

I am sorry, you are talking total utter nonsense. I hate to say anything that may insult someone on this forum. Not my style, but I just have to say how ridiculous your post is, in terms of reality and engineering.

Please don't hold that against me. I am just trying to be helpful.

I personally don't think much of either engine. I much prefer R35 (in Mig 23) with a frontal fan connected to the power source of the engine to generate a flow (momentum air displacement) with variable nozzle before it enters the front of the engine, this creates air flow momentum and using bleed sensors, reduces fuel consumption (somewhat, better than .98 lb/lbforcehour) - this technique is what U.S. implements with its engines in some of its stealth aircrafts.

With respect.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tai Hai Chen said:


> It is among the list in this source: https://www.thenationalnews.com/wor...st-if-the-un-arms-embargo-is-lifted-1.1041946


thats wish list of the writer of the article not Iran


Tai Hai Chen said:


> The reason China does not use JF-17 is because it does not have combat radius to meet China's needs. Distance Kashgar in west China and Xiamen in east China 4,200+ km. Iran is not such a case. Distance Maku in west Iran and Chabahar in east Iran 2,100+ km. About half as much. JF-17 has the combat radius to meet Iran's needs but not China's needs.


why you don't get it . 1350km is the combat range of JF-17 its combat radius is more in line of 500-550km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> First, I start by saying that I have no desire to insult you or offend you in any way, but I just have to speak based on my knowledge of engines and my decades of experience at RR.
> 
> To compare J79 to AL21F, is a total utter nonsense. The GE engine is a 2nd gen engine, the Russian engine is a 3rd gen engine. They weight the same, although GE is 17/11 and the AL is a 24/17 (afterburner vs military power). The only thing I like about the GE engine is the PCC (pre-compression cooling with distilled water and oxidizers for higher altitude flight, e.g. 80,000 ft). Other than that, it is like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford.
> 
> Ignition box temp increase ???? umm. Sorry, this does not work on me. It's armature talk.
> 
> Even if Iran added single piece frontal fan to reduce the noise, even if they used blisks (2018 implementation technology) with blade temperature reducing covering, even if they used the most advanced combustors and low turbine stage, it is still the single spool J79 is a J79 and will always be a J79, with huge limitations. This was the most advanced engine of 1960s. That's all.
> 
> Compressor blades itself (without re-engineering of flow) cannot be modified to give a huge air injection for a worthy performance increase.
> 
> I am sorry, you are talking total utter nonsense. I hate to say anything that may insult someone on this forum. Not my style, but I just have to say how ridiculous your post is, in terms of reality and engineering.
> 
> Please don't hold that against me. I am just trying to be helpful.
> 
> I personally don't think much of either engine. I much prefer R35 (in Mig 23) with a frontal fan connected to the power source of the engine to generate a flow (momentum air displacement) with variable nozzle before it enters the front of the engine, this creates air flow momentum and using bleed sensors, reduces fuel consumption (somewhat, better than .98 lb/lbforcehour) - this technique is what U.S. implements with its engines in some of its stealth aircrafts.
> 
> With respect.



I have said this time and time again J-85 and J-79 are archaic engines. They are merely learning blocks for Iran.

Expecting them in any future Iranian fighter is nonsense. They may serve some role in a jet equipped large UCAV but not in any future manned fighter.

Unfortunately Iranian engine technology development has been slow and without any major ToT from China or Russia it will continue to take some time. China has taken a long time to get within reaching distance of Russian and American engines and it had the aid of massive ToT from Soviets, espionage of blueprints and sensitive tech from its intelligence arm, and a annual military budget that is currently 40x that of Iran’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheTallGuy said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> What i never understand, you a believer of asymmetrical warfare..i understand that IRIAF is sitting duck against the enemy they have chosen no matter what..
> 
> But one must not think that Air DEFENCE missiles/SAM systems will survive by themselves in modern battlefield, without a credible air cover and State of the art EW/ELINT/SIGINT
> 
> Things are not Vietnam always ...even they able to muster an organic capability to mount air interceptions. i would have been much happy if IRIAF invested its own fund to create an unlicensed copy of F-4E Phantom with *AL-21F3*
> 
> A perfectly doable project which offers far more room for improvement.
> 
> After all you are operating and maintaining them for 50 Years.









Iran's version of warfare is quite different and far more complex than the standard definition of asymmetrical warfare! 

And it's not about belief in any specific type of tactic, rather, a threat assessment of your enemies capabilities and proper cost/benefit analysis of the weapons you are capable of procuring and knowing how to take full advantage of the capabilities of those weapons and devising successful tactics around them. 

On paper against the U.S., except for maybe China & Russia the Air Forces of every other country on the planet would be a sitting duck! So what? On paper U.S. navy is also superior to all of Iran's Naval forces combined. Thankfully, wars aren't fought on paper! 

And we didn't chose the U.S. as an enemy they chose us. It's the U.S. that has been obsessed with Iran not the other way around. 

In a country the size of Iran IADS and SAM by themselves will never be sufficient and interceptor/Air Superiority fighters are most definitely required. 

As for *AL-21F3 *I personally believe that the Al-21's are great engines to reverse engineer and attempt to improve upon mainly because they are twin spool. However, I wouldn't put them on the F-4.... and although reverse engineering the F-4 air frame for R&D makes sense, taking to production does NOT. 
Unlike the F5, the F-4 airframe has too many design flaws and Iran is more than capable of coming up with a far more capable design.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

AL-21’s are great engines for Iran, sure it would
Be nice to be able to have AL-31/41, but AL-21’s domestic production would be a massive boost to Iran’s defense industry and allow for both medium and heavy fighter jets to be designed.

Once you have capable engines, radar, and armaments the rest is much easier.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## EvilWesteners

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 727515
> 
> 
> Iran's version of warfare is quite different and far more complex than the standard definition of asymmetrical warfare!
> 
> And it's not about belief in any specific type of tactic, rather, a threat assessment of your enemies capabilities and proper cost/benefit analysis of the weapons you are capable of procuring and knowing how to take full advantage of the capabilities of those weapons and devising successful tactics around them.
> 
> On paper against the U.S., except for maybe China & Russia the Air Forces of every other country on the planet would be a sitting duck! So what? On paper U.S. navy is also superior to all of Iran's Naval forces combined. Thankfully, wars aren't fought on paper!
> 
> And we didn't chose the U.S. as an enemy they chose us. It's the U.S. that has been obsessed with Iran not the other way around.
> 
> In a country the size of Iran IADS and SAM by themselves will never be sufficient and interceptor/Air Superiority fighters are most definitely required.
> 
> As for *AL-21F3 *I personally believe that the Al-21's are great engines to reverse engineer and attempt to improve upon mainly because they are twin spool. However, I wouldn't put them on the F-4.... and although reverse engineering the F-4 air frame for R&D makes sense, taking to production does NOT.
> Unlike the F5, the F-4 airframe has too many design flaws and Iran is more than capable of coming up with a far more capable design.





As usual, very good point, by Vevak.

I am not a fan of AL21, but I much prefer it than J79. It has non-afterburner thrust that is the same as the J79 afterburner thrust, hence huge "mission" capability improvement (better range with non-afterburner) and higher take-off weight (more fuel for the mission, hence range) with higher afterburner thrust. Overall AL21 has had slightly better reliability than J79. Iran knows this engine really well. They have used it for 30+ years, in Su24s, Su22.

I am more of a fan of R-35 (mig 23). I have seen this engine in Germany and talked to German engineers researching actu-table on these, and their comments about this engine and how it can be improved. They were so impressed by this engine. It is a 3rd gen engine similar as Al21, but has more thrust, shorter, and has upgrade path and in my opinion, the benefits "may be" outweighs the negatives, e.g. higher complexity and higher fuel consumption. Turbojet suits Iran as it has a lot less complexity, fewer parts, years of experience, and Iran can constantly modify it until it masters engine design and development, e.g. adding PCC, single piece fan, blisk, compression BCT, and a host of other modifications to test and play with. Since Iran is and will remain under sanctions, and it has a robust refinery capacity for jet fuel, then turbojet would be my choice of compromise for the benefits it gives Iranian AF.

The British and RR have done huge numbers of projects with regards to F4D. I heard someone say, about 60+. In fact they have a F4 with turbofan developed and used for years. They also had a few prototypes that had the tail chopped off, and converted to a delta wing. I heard they had a team working in Rugby (near Coventry, central England) in 1970s and part of 80s, working on F4 modification projects, some contributing to some of the design aspects of Eurofighter.




See attached photoshop-ed image.

As a Russian expert once said, " ... U.S. is foolish to want to pick a fight with Iran, as there is no need to make such an important country your permanent enemy considering Iranian culture of Never Forget, Never Forgive".

Israel who was behind Pompeo's drive to get Trump to assassinate Suleimani, wanted to achieve exactly that. U.S. military knew how stupid that was. CIA just loves murdering, they don't care. From 3,000+ rendition kidnapping after 9/11 (more than 2,000 were handed to Jordan and Egypt dungeon interrogation masters) and about 500+ sent to Guantanamo, and about 500ish were just interrogated and assassinated on the spot.

Iran has many enemies, within and without. Rohani (from what I hear from the inside) has been a nightmare for Iranian independence until the Trump put sanctions on Iran and his cronies couldn't export Euros into their bank accounts anymore.

Iran must trust itself as did China 30 years ago.


TheImmortal said:


> AL-21’s are great engines for Iran, sure it would
> Be nice to be able to have AL-31/41, but AL-21’s domestic production would be a massive boost to Iran’s defense industry and allow for both medium and heavy fighter jets to be designed.
> 
> Once you have capable engines, radar, and armaments the rest is much easier.



100% ... agree completely. It is just LOGICAL.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ich

VEVAK said:


> Iran's version of warfare is quite different and far more complex than the standard definition of asymmetrical warfare!



Haha, yes! Its like a persian carpet with lots of knots and colors and pictures and and and

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

EvilWesteners said:


> As a Russian expert once said, " ... U.S. is foolish to want to pick a fight with Iran, as there is no need to make such an important country your permanent enemy considering Iranian culture of Never Forget, Never Forgive".


are you sure , it seems we have forgot all about 8 year war with Iraq


----------



## Hack-Hook

well as we work on F-5 and like it and drones at least for next decade I rather instead of wasting our time on AL-21 and J-79 and such we produce something like FJ-44 and then move forward from there.


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure , it seems we have forgot all about 8 year war with Iraq



Yes, I am sure. 

Did you know Iran is "taking out" Iraqi pilots who dropped Chemical weapons on Iranian cities?

Did you know how many of them have been assassinated, so far?

No Iran does not forget or forgive. Still Iranians talk about Dr. Mossadegh after some 70 years, almost.

e.g. --- http://www.writersviews.com/article-dr-mossadegh.php --- as published by MIT publication,

No, Iran does not forget. Right now it just does not have the ability to retaliate. But it will eventually.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I rather instead of wasting our time on AL-21 and J-79 and such we produce something like FJ-44 and then move forward from there.



I also would like a Pegasus and to be the richest person in the world.

Since we are saying what we like and don’t care about reality....

Also since some of you don’t live in reality

between 1940 and 1945 US spent 5Trillion dollars (in 2019 dollars) for WW2. That is annual spending of 1 Trillion dollars or in other words *50x the current Iranian military budget.

All these toys (military build up) you guys want cost $$$$

So have realistic expectations and not pie in the sky dreams*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> well as we work on F-5 and like it and drones at least for next decade I rather instead of wasting our time on AL-21 and J-79 and such we produce something like FJ-44 and then move forward from there.



And how does production of the Fj-44 help Iran produce a high thrust interceptor? Iran's Jahesh-700 engine may be good for various applications but not that! 

If Iran wants to save currency on fuel then they should start moving towards developing a natural gas based jet fuel and a high powered jet engine to go with....

And when it comes to fighter jets maintaining a smaller force of force multipliers & backing them up with a vast fleet of UCAV's would be far cheaper than producing and maintaining a vast fleet of cheep low powered fighter jets powered by Owj or Jahesh-700 engines

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

EvilWesteners said:


> First, I start by saying that I have no desire to insult you or offend you in any way, but I just have to speak based on my knowledge of engines and my decades of experience at RR.
> 
> To compare J79 to AL21F, is a total utter nonsense. The GE engine is a 2nd gen engine, the Russian engine is a 3rd gen engine. They weight the same, although GE is 17/11 and the AL is a 24/17 (afterburner vs military power). The only thing I like about the GE engine is the PCC (pre-compression cooling with distilled water and oxidizers for higher altitude flight, e.g. 80,000 ft). Other than that, it is like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford.
> 
> Ignition box temp increase ???? umm. Sorry, this does not work on me. It's armature talk.
> 
> Even if Iran added single piece frontal fan to reduce the noise, even if they used blisks (2018 implementation technology) with blade temperature reducing covering, even if they used the most advanced combustors and low turbine stage, it is still the single spool J79 is a J79 and will always be a J79, with huge limitations. This was the most advanced engine of 1960s. That's all.
> 
> Compressor blades itself (without re-engineering of flow) cannot be modified to give a huge air injection for a worthy performance increase.
> 
> I am sorry, you are talking total utter nonsense. I hate to say anything that may insult someone on this forum. Not my style, but I just have to say how ridiculous your post is, in terms of reality and engineering.
> 
> Please don't hold that against me. I am just trying to be helpful.
> 
> I personally don't think much of either engine. I much prefer R35 (in Mig 23) with a frontal fan connected to the power source of the engine to generate a flow (momentum air displacement) with variable nozzle before it enters the front of the engine, this creates air flow momentum and using bleed sensors, reduces fuel consumption (somewhat, better than .98 lb/lbforcehour) - this technique is what U.S. implements with its engines in some of its stealth aircrafts.
> 
> With respect.



That post was not a detailed engineering discussion.
J79 has more potentional upgrading options to work on, such upgrading to twin spool 3th generation turbojet.
I don't think you are more familiar than me with what going on iran in turbojet upgrading projects.
I am ready to discuss about j79 doable upgrading possibilities with you.
First need is to understand the effects of combustion chamber temperature increasing.


----------



## VEVAK

Ray_Atek said:


> That post was not a detailed engineering discussion.
> J79 has more potentional upgrading options to work on, such upgrading to twin spool 3th generation turbojet.
> I don't think you are more familiar than me with what going on iran in turbojet upgrading projects.
> I am ready to discuss about j79 doable upgrading possibilities with you.
> First need is to understand the effects of combustion chamber temperature increasing.



AL-21's are already twin spool and you cant call turning the J-79 In to a twin spool an upgrade because that would be designing an entire new engine not an upgrade....

As for increasing the heat potential of the combination chamber and turbines that only becomes effective if you either change their design & or change the type of fuel they use to achieve greater thrust & or greater efficiency. 

Regardless both engines have a lot of room for improvement 

Without going too much into detail If I wanted to use the J-79 as a core to improve upon & create a new engine I would: 

1.Reduce the number of compressor and improve their design
2. Improve the material and design of the combustion chambers & fuel injectors 
3.Natrually reduce the length of the spool
4.Improve the material & design of the afterburners & exhaust 
5.Improve the ball brings 
6..Add sensor to the engine for better in flight monitoring.... 

Then if I wanted to improve them further to create a new engine i would experiment on the following:

1. Allow for low bypass
2.Turn them into a twin spool counter rotating....
3.Add a cooling system separated from the engine with it's own electronic compressors that pumps in cooled air through the inlet veins..... 
4.Work on coming up with a Natural Gas based Jet fuel


----------



## Ray_Atek

VEVAK said:


> AL-21's are already twin spool and you cant call turning the J-79 In to a twin spool an upgrade because that would be designing an entire new engine not an upgrade....
> 
> As for increasing the heat potential of the combination chamber and turbines that only becomes effective if you either change their design & or change the type of fuel they use to achieve greater thrust & or greater efficiency.
> 
> Regardless both engines have a lot of room for improvement
> 
> Without going too much into detail If I wanted to use the J-79 as a core to improve upon & create a new engine I would:
> 
> 1.Reduce the number of compressor and improve their design
> 2. Improve the material and design of the combustion chambers & fuel injectors
> 3.Natrually reduce the length of the spool
> 4.Improve the material & design of the afterburners & exhaust
> 5.Improve the ball brings
> 6..Add sensor to the engine for better in flight monitoring....
> 
> Then if I wanted to improve them further to create a new engine i would experiment on the following:
> 
> 1. Allow for low bypass
> 2.Turn them into a twin spool counter rotating....
> 3.Add a cooling system separated from the engine with it's own electronic compressors that pumps in cooled air through the inlet veins.....
> 4.Work on coming up with a Natural Gas based Jet fuel


Agree


----------



## Hack-Hook

EvilWesteners said:


> Yes, I am sure.
> 
> Did you know Iran is "taking out" Iraqi pilots who dropped Chemical weapons on Iranian cities?
> 
> Did you know how many of them have been assassinated, so far?
> 
> No Iran does not forget or forgive. Still Iranians talk about Dr. Mossadegh after some 70 years, almost.
> 
> e.g. --- http://www.writersviews.com/article-dr-mossadegh.php --- as published by MIT publication,
> 
> No, Iran does not forget. Right now it just does not have the ability to retaliate. But it will eventually.


More likely power struggle inside iraq power structure and some cleanup after saddam and his gang left .
And well my understanding is iranian government rather no one associate nationalization of oil industry with Dr. Mosadeq and his government .
Also they seems to prefer it be associated with Ayat-Allah Kashani while he was the one who congratulated Mohammad Reza pahlavi on the succesful coupe. 
Now tell me how many of today Iranians still remember that congratulaton for overthrowing of Mosadeq or for example you ask an student about heroes of Mashrooteh uprising and who conqured tehran .
They tell you it was Sattar khan and Baqer khan . well those two never were part of the forces that conquered tehran and overthrow mohammad ali shah qajar.
It was Sardar Asad Bakhtiari and Sepahdar Aezam Mohammad Vali Tonekaboni force who defeat Qazaq Army and conquerd tehran . tell me how many of iranian knew that Azerbaiejan force under command of Sattar khan didnt capture Tehran and they arrived latter by invitation of yeprem khan armani .
How many of iranian knew while majlis ordered disarmament of all conquror of tehran after overthrow of Mohammad alishah he and his group were the ones who refused to disarm and let the government of the law resume and wanted to continue military rule of revulutionary and it was why he was disarmed by force.
No let say we forget what happens very soon . otherwise we would have not have forgot what happened in Al-Qosair . we would not have forgot that for last 30 year every year Syria voted that three Iranian island belong to UAE .


----------



## yavar

Iran Army Air Force IRIAF Mirage F1BQ/EQs Squadron in 10th Tactical Fighter Base, Chabahar, SE

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I also would like a Pegasus and to be the richest person in the world.
> 
> Since we are saying what we like and don’t care about reality....
> 
> Also since some of you don’t live in reality
> 
> between 1940 and 1945 US spent 5Trillion dollars (in 2019 dollars) for WW2. That is annual spending of 1 Trillion dollars or in other words *50x the current Iranian military budget.
> 
> All these toys (military build up) you guys want cost $$$$
> 
> So have realistic expectations and not pie in the sky dreams*


We have access to FJ-44 or at least FJ-33 since rq-170. And do you believe Al-21 would be suitable for heavy iranian airplane that will come at least 10 to 15 year in future . we are working on f-5 size airplanes . we start production of jahesh-700 . the next step is moving from that not moving from J-85 .


VEVAK said:


> And how does production of the Fj-44 help Iran produce a high thrust interceptor? Iran's Jahesh-700 engine may be good for various applications but not that!


By puting developement money on turbofan engine not vasting it on turbojet engine.
That high trust fighter wont come sooner than 10 to 15 year in future and till then we only see airplanes in size of f-5 and big drones and engines like FJ-44 and what we can improve on it is what we need not Al-21 like engines that wont help us in developing a heavy turbo fan engine.
And we are not supposed to use Jahesh 700 in those aircraft . we are supposed to learn from it and develope it to the next step which is something like FJ-44 which is good for big UAVs and light trainer and het and then develope heavier engine in class of Al-31 or F-414 and RD-93


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

[QUOTE = "yavar, message: 13032675, membre: 145498"]
[MEDIA = youtube] g4ZysjumZmA [/ MEDIA]

Iran Army Air Force IRIAF Mirage F1BQ / EQs Squadron dans la 10e base de chasseurs tactiques, Chabahar , SE
[/CITATION]


I really like the color


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> We have access to FJ-44 or at least FJ-33 since rq-170. And do you believe Al-21 would be suitable for heavy iranian airplane that will come at least 10 to 15 year in future . we are working on f-5 size airplanes . we start production of jahesh-700 . the next step is moving from that not moving from J-85 .
> 
> By puting developement money on turbofan engine not vasting it on turbojet engine.
> That high trust fighter wont come sooner than 10 to 15 year in future and till then we only see airplanes in size of f-5 and big drones and engines like FJ-44 and what we can improve on it is what we need not Al-21 like engines that wont help us in developing a heavy turbo fan engine.
> And we are not supposed to use Jahesh 700 in those aircraft . we are supposed to learn from it and develope it to the next step which is something like FJ-44 which is good for big UAVs and light trainer and het and then develope heavier engine in class of Al-31 or F-414 and RD-93



You can’t jump from FJ-44 to AL-31, that’s like jumping from Zezal Rocket to ICBM and skipping everything in between.

So AL-21 will allow for a good class fighter medium to low heavy. After enough experience then heavy engine can also be developed for a big fighter like SU-54 class or J-20 class.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You can’t jump from FJ-44 to AL-31, that’s like jumping from Zezal Rocket to ICBM and skipping everything in between.
> 
> So AL-21 will allow for a good class fighter medium to low heavy. After enough experience then heavy engine can also be developed for a big fighter like SU-54 class or J-20 class.


Except it wont be a good engine and it need research and developement . that research and resource can be focussed on a turbofan engine. And we wont see any iranian heavy fighter in the next 15 year. In 15 year you can develope fj-44 into something in class of Rd-33 or Rd-93 . meanwhile it can replace owj in our trainer and f-5 size fighters.


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> We have access to FJ-44 or at least FJ-33 since rq-170. And do you believe Al-21 would be suitable for heavy iranian airplane that will come at least 10 to 15 year in future . we are working on f-5 size airplanes . we start production of jahesh-700 . the next step is moving from that not moving from J-85 .
> 
> By puting developement money on turbofan engine not vasting it on turbojet engine.
> That high trust fighter wont come sooner than 10 to 15 year in future and till then we only see airplanes in size of f-5 and big drones and engines like FJ-44 and what we can improve on it is what we need not Al-21 like engines that wont help us in developing a heavy turbo fan engine.
> And we are not supposed to use Jahesh 700 in those aircraft . we are supposed to learn from it and develope it to the next step which is something like FJ-44 which is good for big UAVs and light trainer and het and then develope heavier engine in class of Al-31 or F-414 and RD-93



We also not only have access to LOW BYPASS TF-30's but have years of experience working with them and know exactly where it's flaws are and what parts to try to redesign & or attempt to improve upon....

Production of Fj44 may be good for civilian use and should be taken up by civilian organization or Iran's civil aviation but it's R&D & production cost both in terms of funding and human resources most definitely should NOT be coming out of the budget of Iran's Defense Industry or Iran's Air Force.

Production of yet another weak engine for yet another light fighter/trainer does not address Iran's requirements for interceptors

Every country has limits to it's resources and the consequences of putting resources into yet another weak engine means that the time frame of 10-15years for a high thrust heavy fighter will yet again be delayed for yet another decade! 
I don't think there is a single country on the planet that has gotten as much use out of it's fleet of fighters (any fighter) than Iran's gotten out of it's F-4's & F-14 however, innallaha la yohebbul mosrifeen ham haddi darreh! It's like saying I'm gonna go barefoot so I don't waist money on shoes and end up paying 1000 times more in doctor fees as a result...

how many subsonic jet trainer designs is Iran going to waist it's limited resources on? enough is enough! 

In terms of low thrust engine the natural course of improvements and development of OWJ and Jahesh-700 engines will be sufficient to accommodate Light Fighter, Trainers & UCAV's 

As for UCAV's, j85's are comparatively easy to mass produce which makes them ideal for UCAV's and Iran can potentially design a twin engine supersonic UCAV around that engine

For the next decade the priority needs to be high trust high speed fighters to address Iran's requirements for Interceptors/Air Superiority fighters and Iranian researchers & engineer need to work on developing the tools and infrastructures needed to produce high trust engines and conducting R&D on more powerful powerplants with the goal of one day producing an engine capable of sustaining 2000kph not some low thrust engine that's never been put on anything faster than the Karrar UCAV. 

And working on improving AL-21 or TF-30 would get Iran far closer to the AL-31 than the production of the Fj44 or Jahesh700 ever could!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hashirama

Some member in this forum said that Iran had already reverse engineered AL 31 from Venezuela and They was working on heavy fighter jet. Is this info reliable?


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> In terms of low thrust engine the natural course of improvements and development of OWJ and Jahesh-700 engines will be sufficient to accommodate Light Fighter, Trainers & UCAV's


what you call sufficient use twice as much fuel and a light fighter with an engine in class of FJ-44 can have a combat radius of twice as much as the same fighter with OWJ as engine.

an interceptor with a turbojet engine instead of Turbofan Engine will look more like a Tanker than a Fighter, so no developing on Jahesh-700 is better for Iran fighter program and drone program than trying to build a heavy Turbojet engine . and Iran army knew it as when they introduced Owj they announced they were working on a Turbofan bigger engine in class of 50 kn and that will be something in class of RD-33 and RD-93 or F-404

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> Except it wont be a good engine and it need research and developement . that research and resource can be focussed on a turbofan engine. And we wont see any iranian heavy fighter in the next 15 year. In 15 year you can develope fj-44 into something in class of Rd-33 or Rd-93 . meanwhile it can replace owj in our trainer and f-5 size fighters.



- And we wont see any iranian heavy fighter in the next 15 year -


Iran is gonna make you lie a lot faster than you think


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> - And we wont see any iranian heavy fighter in the next 15 year -
> 
> 
> Iran is gonna make you lie a lot faster than you think


we won't see any plan for Iran heavy fighter by that time . are you ready bet on that

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

It started last year or before.






Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet - Defense news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> we won't see any plan for Iran heavy fighter by that time . are you ready bet on that



Absolutely, absolutely, you are going to lose your bet very, very quickly. You are not very alert on the small details but Iran will be able to surprise you powerfully. Your speculations are not real


----------



## mohsen

What a f@cker!

"contrary to claims raised by critics, has nothing to do with the F-5 fighter aircraft"

So their next plan is another "Nothing to do with ..."!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hashirama said:


> Some member in this forum said that Iran had already reverse engineered AL 31 from Venezuela and They was working on heavy fighter jet. Is this info reliable?



F-16 F-100 engines maybe but neither Iran nor Venezuela would risk relations with Russia over it... 
So unless the Russians gave their blessing it's highly unlikely. 

At best, Iran with the full blessing of the Russian borrowed or purchased 1 engine for testing., to test it's viability and use in Iranian terrain. That would be the maximum extent of it...


----------



## Messerschmitt




----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> what you call sufficient use twice as much fuel and a light fighter with an engine in class of FJ-44 can have a combat radius of twice as much as the same fighter with OWJ as engine.
> 
> an interceptor with a turbojet engine instead of Turbofan Engine will look more like a Tanker than a Fighter, so no developing on Jahesh-700 is better for Iran fighter program and drone program than trying to build a heavy Turbojet engine . and Iran army knew it as when they introduced Owj they announced they were working on a Turbofan bigger engine in class of 50 kn and that will be something in class of RD-33 and RD-93 or F-404



Fj-44 or an Iranian version of it will NEVER be sufficient for a viable supersonic fighter jet or UCAV. A viable subsonic trainer sure, but a supersonic fighter NEVER! And it's development or improvement will no more help Iran in developing a high trust supersonic engine than the Jahesh-700 has done already which is basically a smaller diameter version of the same engine.... So there is no significant leap! 

As for Owj being sufficient for UCAV's it absolutely is and Iran would be better off working on increasing range through weight & drag reduction of whatever airframe they chose to equip them with. 

OWJ engines simplistic and comparatively rugged design makes it ideal for supersonic UCAV's because it's comparatively cheap to both produce and maintain. On top of the fact that it has room for simple improvements like improving the ball brings, improving the combustion chamber & fuel injectors, improving the design of the afterburners and exhaust....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

yavar said:


>


At time index 01:40 he refers to the two planes (kowsar & yasin) as having many generic parts. Are these "generic" components off the shelf things that can be acquired from the bazaar? Does he mean wires and display panels and little subsystems?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

WudangMaster said:


> At time index 01:40 he refers to the two planes (kowsar & yasin) as having many generic parts. Are these "generic" components off the shelf things that can be acquired from the bazaar? Does he mean wires and display panels and little subsystems?



Yes he means domestically privat company

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> Fj-44 or an Iranian version of it will NEVER be sufficient for a viable supersonic fighter jet or UCAV. A viable subsonic trainer sure, but a supersonic fighter NEVER! And it's development or improvement will no more help Iran in developing a high trust supersonic engine than the Jahesh-700 has done already which is basically a smaller diameter version of the same engine.... So there is no significant leap!
> 
> As for Owj being sufficient for UCAV's it absolutely is and Iran would be better off working on increasing range through weight & drag reduction of whatever airframe they chose to equip them with.
> 
> OWJ engines simplistic and comparatively rugged design makes it ideal for supersonic UCAV's because it's comparatively cheap to both produce and maintain. On top of the fact that it has room for simple improvements like improving the ball brings, improving the combustion chamber & fuel injectors, improving the design of the afterburners and exhaust....


Owj is fuel hungry and is not sufficient for UAVs . what part of it is hard to understand . an airplane with a turbojet engine needs nearly twice as much fuel to do the job that the same airplane with simillar power Turbofan engine needs to do the same job ,
the difference will be like the difference of Mig-25 and Mig-31

going after turbo jet is waste of ressource and there is a lot difference going from Jahesh-700 to something like FJ-44


VEVAK said:


> As for Owj being sufficient for UCAV's it absolutely is and Iran would be better off working on increasing range through weight & drag reduction of whatever airframe they chose to equip them with.
> 
> OWJ engines simplistic and comparatively rugged design makes it ideal for supersonic UCAV's because it's comparatively cheap to both produce and maintain. On top of the fact that it has room for simple improvements like improving the ball brings, improving the combustion chamber & fuel injectors, improving the design of the afterburners and exhaust....


you want to waste limited fuel your uav carry on after burner. and A UAV with FJ-44 will have twice the endurance of the same UAV with owj then how you claim its absolutely sufficient for uav. your uav is not a suicide UAV so you try make it cheap .


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> Owj is fuel hungry and is not sufficient for UAVs . what part of it is hard to understand . an airplane with a turbojet engine needs nearly twice as much fuel to do the job that the same airplane with simillar power Turbofan engine needs to do the same job ,
> the difference will be like the difference of Mig-25 and Mig-31
> 
> going after turbo jet is waste of ressource and there is a lot difference going from Jahesh-700 to something like FJ-44
> 
> you want to waste limited fuel your uav carry on after burner. and A UAV with FJ-44 will have twice the endurance of the same UAV with owj then how you claim its absolutely sufficient for uav. your uav is not a suicide UAV so you try make it cheap .




Hack-Hook my friend,

VEVAK's post offers a very intelligent way for Iran to go forward.

All of us, including VEVAK (I am sure) may want Iran to build AL41F or heck, may be even PW F135-300 that is coming out in 2023 for F-35 upgrade. But it just isn't going to happen. We have to be logical and sensible.

VEVAK's point (I believe) is "logical and potentially, most practical".

Iran could add (a type of bolt-frame into F-14 engine housing like Eurofighter has) and add AL21 into its F-14s. Look at it like this (without afterburner) now, the F-14 has 2x17,000ish thrust engines instead of 2x11,000 of the TF30-414A (hence it saves fuel usage even at higher thrust range up to 17,000 without resorting to afterburner). The engines in Iran's F-14s are not the same as the TF30s that U.S. had. In fact Iran's TF30s were downgraded (not even the P-100 (F-111) that we use to work on in Lakenheath U.K. on behalf of U.S. - yes, Iran's engines are the old crap, slightly upgraded, but really crap. However, its fuel consumption is lower than what people know. It offered crazy "great" fuel efficiency, like .68 lb/lbforcehour. Not bad at all when you think most U.S. engines are much higher.

Regarding "waste of space on turbojet" ... I really don't agree with this. I have sat in a room, so many times, with people so much smarter than me, and listened to debates on using this engine vs. that engine. I think very differently than most comments in this blog. There are so many things to consider, not just published manufacturer data. My favorite strategic air combat ideology is about "the number of sorties per day". This is a very different way to think about fighter jets than engine performance. Anyways.

For Iran, nothing is as important as being "SELF-SUFFICIENT". Fuel efficiency, range, thrust performance, etc. etc. are a very distant second. What's the point if you can't get parts for your military?

Iran has (or had) more than $2b worth of parts left in the warehouse in Long Beach during 1978. It had access to almost NONE of it, except the few things they gave Iran as part of Iran-Contra.

Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.

Russians are also MORE LIKELY to help Iran with AL21 than its premium engines.

Yes, yes, yes .... you want to go all the way to the top. But Rome wasn't build in a day. You have to swallow your pride and start with baby steps.

(off the point, but in my opinion Iran needs, more than anything right now, ... training, training, training for the the pilots - including FLIR training, digital network data distribution and sharing training for complex combat scenarios). They actually know this since they tried to get Sweden to offer them such training (and it would have been a GREAT ONE), but Sweden refused. Having an aircraft available soon is MORE IMPORTANT than waiting a few years until you have a AL31 class engine. Pilots need training with the latest air combat techniques and weapons platforms.

Fuel consumption between these two engines - AL21 vs a AL31 candidate - (depending whether we are talking about take-off, mid-altitude, or high altitude - or whether we are talking about with- or without afterburner) is really no more than about 15%. Your idea of DOUBLE is wrong, unless we are ONLY thinking about J-85 and even then, it is not exactly correct. Not DOUBLE. But yes, you are right, it is high.

If you tell me about a scenario where one is better (AL21 vs. what you want Iran to build right away), I can offer you a scenario where the other has its benefits/merits too.

Owj/J85 is indeed fuel inefficient. Granted. But still it is the second best engine in its class. I have another favorite, same class, (much better engine than J-85 but most people are not familiar with it so I will not bother mentioning here or discussing it). This class of engine (J85) has its own benefits/merits. So let's not disregard it.

However, for UAV or drones, I would actually disagree with you and prefer to use FJ-44 instead of J85.

Iran is not like China or U.S. or France or Germany. It is more like Pakistan. It can only focus a chunk of its resources to one or a few projects at a time.

So be patient. Be mindful. And, don't let PERFECTION be the enemy of GOOD ENOUGH.

You know who hates Iran's strategic thinking more than anyone else? You will be surprised to hear this. I heard James Woolsey say on CSPAN, that "no one hates Iran's strategic patience and clear-thinking more than CIA".

I can understand why.

Iran fights U.S. based on Iran's strengths, not the way U.S. wants Iran to fight. Thanks to the IRGC clear thinking, or I call it "lateral thinking".

Ballistic missile strike against U.S. after Suleimani assassination was what they hated so much.

U.S. "looked" scared and incapable of defending itself.

They know they are stronger than Iran but still they sh!t in their pants when they think about war with Iran. I am from a military family. Trust me when I tell you ... military people in U.S. and Europe worry about how Iran "thinks and behaves" in a war scenario.

Just the same as why Israel hates to fight Hezbollah.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

EvilWesteners said:


> Hack-Hook my friend,
> 
> VEVAK's post offers a very intelligent way for Iran to go forward.
> 
> All of us, including VEVAK (I am sure) may want Iran to build AL41F or heck, may be even PW F135-300 that is coming out in 2023 for F-35 upgrade. But it just isn't going to happen. We have to be logical and sensible.
> 
> VEVAK's point (I believe) is "logical and potentially, most practical".
> 
> Iran could add (a type of bolt-frame into F-14 engine housing like Eurofighter has) and add AL21 into its F-14s. Look at it like this (without afterburner) now, the F-14 has 2x17,000ish thrust engines instead of 2x11,000 of the TF30-414A (hence it saves fuel usage even at higher thrust range up to 17,000 without resorting to afterburner). The engines in Iran's F-14s are not the same as the TF30s that U.S. had. In fact Iran's TF30s were downgraded (not even the P-100 (F-111) that we use to work on in Lakenheath U.K. on behalf of U.S. - yes, Iran's engines are the old crap, slightly upgraded, but really crap. However, its fuel consumption is lower than what people know. It offered crazy "great" fuel efficiency, like .68 lb/lbforcehour. Not bad at all when you think most U.S. engines are much higher.
> 
> Regarding "waste of space on turbojet" ... I really don't agree with this. I have sat in a room, so many times, with people so much smarter than me, and listened to debates on using this engine vs. that engine. I think very differently than most comments in this blog. There are so many things to consider, not just published manufacturer data. My favorite strategic air combat ideology is about "the number of sorties per day". This is a very different way to think about fighter jets than engine performance. Anyways.
> 
> For Iran, nothing is as important as being "SELF-SUFFICIENT". Fuel efficiency, range, thrust performance, etc. etc. are a very distant second. What's the point if you can't get parts for your military?
> 
> Iran has (or had) more than $2b worth of parts left in the warehouse in Long Beach during 1978. It had access to almost NONE of it, except the few things they gave Iran as part of Iran-Contra.
> 
> Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.
> 
> Russians are also MORE LIKELY to help Iran with AL21 than its premium engines.
> 
> Yes, yes, yes .... you want to go all the way to the top. But Rome wasn't build in a day. You have to swallow your pride and start with baby steps.
> 
> (off the point, but in my opinion Iran needs, more than anything right now, ... training, training, training for the the pilots - including FLIR training, digital network data distribution and sharing training for complex combat scenarios). They actually know this since they tried to get Sweden to offer them such training (and it would have been a GREAT ONE), but Sweden refused. Having an aircraft available soon is MORE IMPORTANT than waiting a few years until you have a AL31 class engine. Pilots need training with the latest air combat techniques and weapons platforms.
> 
> Fuel consumption between these two engines - AL21 vs a AL31 candidate - (depending whether we are talking about take-off, mid-altitude, or high altitude - or whether we are talking about with- or without afterburner) is really no more than about 15%. Your idea of DOUBLE is wrong, unless we are ONLY thinking about J-85 and even then, it is not exactly correct. Not DOUBLE. But yes, you are right, it is high.
> 
> If you tell me about a scenario where one is better (AL21 vs. what you want Iran to build right away), I can offer you a scenario where the other has its benefits/merits too.
> 
> Owj/J85 is indeed fuel inefficient. Granted. But still it is the second best engine in its class. I have another favorite, same class, (much better engine than J-85 but most people are not familiar with it so I will not bother mentioning here or discussing it). This class of engine (J85) has its own benefits/merits. So let's not disregard it.
> 
> However, for UAV or drones, I would actually disagree with you and prefer to use FJ-44 instead of J85.
> 
> Iran is not like China or U.S. or France or Germany. It is more like Pakistan. It can only focus a chunk of its resources to one or a few projects at a time.
> 
> So be patient. Be mindful. And, don't let PERFECTION be the enemy of GOOD ENOUGH.
> 
> You know who hates Iran's strategic thinking more than anyone else? You will be surprised to hear this. I heard James Woolsey say on CSPAN, that "no one hates Iran's strategic patience and clear-thinking more than CIA".
> 
> I can understand why.
> 
> Iran fights U.S. based on Iran's strengths, not the way U.S. wants Iran to fight. Thanks to the IRGC clear thinking, or I call it "lateral thinking".
> 
> Ballistic missile strike against U.S. after Suleimani assassination was what they hated so much.
> 
> U.S. "looked" scared and incapable of defending itself.
> 
> They know they are stronger than Iran but still they sh!t in their pants when they think about war with Iran. I am from a military family. Trust me when I tell you ... military people in U.S. and Europe worry about how Iran "thinks and behaves" in a war scenario.
> 
> Just the same as why Israel hates to fight Hezbollah.


 Would it not be easier for Iran to acquire a decent number of second hand Al-21s or Rd-33s from a friendly country either overtly or covertly for it to power new medium-heavy fighter designs until it can perfect her own engines?


----------



## EvilWesteners

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Would it not be easier for Iran to acquire a decent number of second hand Al-21s or Rd-33s from a friendly country either overtly or covertly for it to power new medium-heavy fighter designs until it can perfect her own engines?



GREAT thinking.

Yes, I know of sources in Ukraine that are willing to sell (black market) AL21s to Iran.

U.K. got a couple for testing purposes. A company in Texas bought one for testing. 

But Iran has had so many "tricks" played on it - like Hajizadeh paid for radars he never got and found out the entire thing was to trick Iran to get one of its sourcing teams. So not only Iran lost money, never got the engine, also lost a sourcing team in Georgia.

So it is more difficult that it seems.

And, I do believe Iran can build AL21 with help from Russia and if it REALLY decides to do so (political will).

Believe me BAVAR 373 is more complex of a project than AL21 engine manufacturing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> GREAT thinking.
> 
> Yes, I know of sources in Ukraine that are willing to sell (black market) AL21s to Iran.
> 
> U.K. got a couple for testing purposes. A company in Texas bought one for testing.
> 
> But Iran has had so many "tricks" played on it - like Hajizadeh paid for radars he never got and found out the entire thing was to trick Iran to get one of its sourcing teams. So not only Iran lost money, never got the engine, also lost a sourcing team in Georgia.
> 
> So it is more difficult that it seems.
> 
> And, I do believe Iran can build AL21 with help from Russia and if it REALLY decides to do so (political will).
> 
> Believe me BAVAR 373 is more complex of a project than AL21 engine manufacturing.



Iran has SU-22’s that run on AL-21’s.

It could put an SU-22 in storage and have an engine if it truly wanted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

EvilWesteners said:


> Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.


Why go after al-31 why not first start with something for our bigger drones and light fighter then go for something in class RD-33 and then go toward Al-31 and Al-41. 
I wonder how AL-21 will help us in that direction. Put our hope on Al-21 only lead to engines like GE4 and we'll you are welcome to use a big Toloue-4 (the only turbojet engine introduced in 21 century or try to go the next step which is turbofan. 
AL-21 only limit your airplane

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has SU-22’s that run on AL-21’s.
> 
> It could put an SU-22 in storage and have an engine if it truly wanted.



Yes, you are correct. But the engine has a 1,800 to a max 2,100 hour life. I am not sure what age Iran's SU22 engines are. Iraq used these quite extensively. Not sure how much juice they still have in em.

But Iran needs more engines anyways, and needs a replenishment strategy, i.e. build the engines before they actually need them and the older engines need to be replaced.

Iran needs about 200+ engines if they do what I am thinking of, for their needs in the next 5 years. 

They need a manufacturing solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> Why go after al-31 why not first start with something for our bigger drones and light fighter then go for something in class RD-33 and then go toward Al-31 and Al-41.
> I wonder how AL-21 will help us in that direction. Put our hope on Al-21 only lead to engines like GE4 and we'll you are welcome to use a big Toloue-4 (the only turbojet engine introduced in 21 century or try to go the next step which is turbofan.
> AL-21 only limit your airplane



Great question.

I have under design at least some 20+ fighter jets that I am working on in CAD/CAM. All these are great for "theoretical" purposes, but REALITY is always something totally different.

Iran needs an engine that has flexibility for different scenarios to make the investment for its development worthwhile. Ideally, or naturally based on realities, it can ONLY build one single engine for all its needs. Certainly for the next 10 years.

You can always downgrade an engine, but impossible to upgrade the thrust too much.

Look at AL41F - in REALITY it is an AL31 with advanced materials and better features (some). It was improved from 27,000 to max 32,000 (emergency) although more like 30,000 regular. That is about 10% after all this development and all the cost. They do have a new one though for the Su-57 - that one is much better though.

You can always down grade to 25,000 thrust but not the reverse.

Iran should start from an engine that has highest thrust it can start with. Then lower it if needs be for certain platforms.

RD-33 is just too low of a thrust threshold for Iran's needs. I like the engine, worked briefly with an older one should say. Not against it.

But Iran needs a 27,000 and up - level engine and it can always downgrade it (remove stages) to 24,000 or even 22,000 if needed for some platforms. But it needs to start with higher.

I know people in Iran in the Air Force, but they are low level. But I don't know anyone that has access to the decision makers. If I did, my proposal for Iran's air force command and decision makers would be:

*Start with R-35 engine (you have a dozen in the Mig 23 that Iraq moved to Iran in 1991). Contact manufacturers in Russia that can start INDEPENDENTLY (Khatchaturov R-35-300) production with technology transfer (this is how the Shah bought F-14 by bribing certain members of the U.S. congress and by giving $300m - financial assistance - to Grumman so Iran could buy F-14). Iran can do the same with this engine. Creates jobs in Russia, Iran can have technology transfer, and this engine is a good engine with 28,000/18,000 thrust (afterburner and military).*

This is a strategy that COULD WORK.

Or Iran can simply do reverse engineering. Russia won't care. Iran can also bring in consultants from Russia to help with development. It can be done within a 10 months period.

Then Iran has an engine that is high enough thrust to make Russia want to sell AL31 to Iran or have joint manufacturing TOT agreements. Leverage is what Iran needs.

Without a doubt Iran needs a higher thrust class engine. RD33 is not worth all this effort. By the end, one would say ... "ahh I wished I had done all this for something that had close to 30,000 lbs of thrust rather than 18,000 or 19,000".

Yes, R35 is not perfect.

Yes, uses a lot of fuel.

But imagine putting an R-35 non-afterburner in F-14 ??? just imagine ... (theoritically)

almost 19,000 lbs of trust without afterburner. F-14 can take off without afterburner and can go supersonic without afterburner. Over the span of a mission, it will have a higher range. This is just a VERY CRUED comparison that is not necessarily sensible. A more realistic one would be: With almost 50% higher thrust (from 20,000 to 29,000 afterburner take off thrust), the f-14 can carry more fuel, and hence more range, due to substantially higher take off weight.

Now you begin to see why I would recommend such a scenario.

Better Compromise. Not in love with this engine, but the compromise is better for Iran than anything else I see realistically at the moment that Iran AF could do.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GWXP

EvilWesteners said:


> Great question.
> 
> I have under design at least some 20+ fighter jets that I am working on in CAD/CAM. All these are great for "theoretical" purposes, but REALITY is always something totally different.
> 
> Iran needs an engine that has flexibility for different scenarios to make the investment for its development worthwhile. Ideally, or naturally based on realities, it can ONLY build one single engine for all its needs. Certainly for the next 10 years.
> 
> You can always downgrade an engine, but impossible to upgrade the thrust too much.
> 
> Look at AL41F - in REALITY it is an AL31 with advanced materials and better features (some). It was improved from 27,000 to max 32,000 (emergency) although more like 30,000 regular. That is about 10% after all this development and all the cost. They do have a new one though for the Su-57 - that one is much better though.
> 
> You can always down grade to 25,000 thrust but not the reverse.
> 
> Iran should start from an engine that has highest thrust it can start with. Then lower it if needs be for certain platforms.
> 
> RD-33 is just too low of a thrust threshold for Iran's needs. I like the engine, worked briefly with an older one should say. Not against it.
> 
> But Iran needs a 27,000 and up - level engine and it can always downgrade it (remove stages) to 24,000 or even 22,000 if needed for some platforms. But it needs to start with higher.
> 
> I know people in Iran in the Air Force, but they are low level. But I don't know anyone that has access to the decision makers. If I did, my proposal for Iran's air force command and decision makers would be:
> 
> *Start with R-35 engine (you have a dozen in the Mig 23 that Iraq moved to Iran in 1991). Contact manufacturers in Russia that can start INDEPENDENTLY (Khatchaturov R-35-300) production with technology transfer (this is how the Shah bought F-14 by bribing certain members of the U.S. congress and by giving $300m - financial assistance - to Grumman so Iran could buy F-14). Iran can do the same with this engine. Creates jobs in Russia, Iran can have technology transfer, and this engine is a good engine with 28,000/18,000 thrust (afterburner and military).*
> 
> This is a strategy that COULD WORK.
> 
> Or Iran can simply do reverse engineering. Russia won't care. Iran can also bring in consultants from Russia to help with development. It can be done within a 10 months period.
> 
> Then Iran has an engine that is high enough thrust to make Russia want to sell AL31 to Iran or have joint manufacturing TOT agreements. Leverage is what Iran needs.
> 
> Without a doubt Iran needs a higher thrust class engine. RD33 is not worth all this effort. By the end, one would say ... "ahh I wished I had done all this for something that had close to 30,000 lbs of thrust rather than 18,000 or 19,000".
> 
> Yes, R35 is not perfect.
> 
> Yes, uses a lot of fuel.
> 
> But imagine putting an R-35 non-afterburner in F-14 ??? just imagine ... (theoritically)
> 
> almost 19,000 lbs of trust without afterburner. F-14 can take off without afterburner and can go supersonic without afterburner. Over the span of a mission, it will have a higher range. This is just a VERY CRUED comparison that is not necessarily sensible. A more realistic one would be: With almost 50% higher thrust (from 20,000 to 29,000 afterburner take off thrust), the f-14 can carry more fuel, and hence more range, due to substantially higher take off weight.
> 
> Now you begin to see why I would recommend such a scenario.
> 
> Better Compromise. Not in love with this engine, but the compromise is better for Iran than anything else I see realistically at the moment that Iran AF could do.


In your opinion,--how long will it take for Iran to build a decent turbofan engine? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years?

India for example failed with their GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri engine after 30 years of development....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> Owj is fuel hungry and is not sufficient for UAVs . what part of it is hard to understand . an airplane with a turbojet engine needs nearly twice as much fuel to do the job that the same airplane with simillar power Turbofan engine needs to do the same job ,
> the difference will be like the difference of Mig-25 and Mig-31
> 
> going after turbo jet is waste of ressource and there is a lot difference going from Jahesh-700 to something like FJ-44
> 
> you want to waste limited fuel your uav carry on after burner. and A UAV with FJ-44 will have twice the endurance of the same UAV with owj then how you claim its absolutely sufficient for uav. your uav is not a suicide UAV so you try make it cheap .













So although per pond of thrust the OWJ is a fuel hungry engine, the platforms you can build around them with sufficient upgrades will at least have a chance to go toe to toe with enemy fighters at shorter ranges. 

On top of that, Owj has a lot of room for upgrades and improvements that can further increase it's potential.... 


By the most part Fj44 is just an enlarged version of the Fj33/Jahesh-700 with a few additional upgrades on the later models 













And of course they would be good engines for a high glide flying wing design or a light subsonic jet trainer but it is not now nor will it ever be ideal for a viable supersonic fighter or supersonic ucav....

If sacrificing range for speed didn't make sense no one would ever put afterburners on jet engines! 
For pilots, speed is life! 

So the priority right now needs to be high powered high thrust engines for a heavy high speed force multiplier!!!! And not yet another weak low thrust engine to power yet another trainer! 

Beh ean meghan ghaz cherooni! 

Degheh az Farancavii ha e daheh panjah aghab tar neesteem keh! 
So if this absurd path of obsession over trainers or weak platforms continues then there really needs to be an investigation into why because it's looking more and more like treason to me! 

Iranian engineer need to be pushing the boundaries of science and technology in the country not the boundaries of how not to spend money!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 729840
> 
> 
> 
> So although per pond of thrust the OWJ is a fuel hungry engine, the platforms you can build around them with sufficient upgrades will at least have a chance to go toe to toe with enemy fighters at shorter ranges.
> 
> On top of that, Owj has a lot of room for upgrades and improvements that can further increase it's potential....
> 
> 
> By the most part Fj44 is just an enlarged version of the Fj33/Jahesh-700 with a few additional upgrades on the later models
> 
> View attachment 729846
> 
> 
> View attachment 729839
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And of course they would be good engines for a high glide flying wing design or a light subsonic jet trainer but it is not now nor will it ever be ideal for a viable supersonic fighter or supersonic ucav....
> 
> If sacrificing range for speed didn't make sense no one would ever put afterburners on jet engines!
> For pilots, speed is life!
> 
> So the priority right now needs to be high powered high thrust engines for a heavy high speed force multiplier!!!! And not yet another weak low thrust engine to power yet another trainer!
> 
> Beh ean meghan ghaz cherooni!
> 
> Degheh az Farancavii ha e daheh panjah aghab tar neesteem keh!
> So if this absurd path of obsession over trainers or weak platforms continues then there really needs to be an investigation into why because it's looking more and more like treason to me!
> 
> Iranian engineer need to be pushing the boundaries of science and technology in the country not the boundaries of how not to spend money!


its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4

and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

GWXP said:


> In your opinion,--how long will it take for Iran to build a decent turbofan engine? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years?
> 
> India for example failed with their GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri engine after 30 years of development....



Honestly, I can't answer that with any degree of accuracy.

There are so many things that go into such a project.

It took RR about 17 years to develop RB.183 and that was suppose to be an upgrade of Spey.

So even organizations with huge resources fall apart just like Kaveri. India has so many challenges and issues on its plate, they really have problems. Thanks to deciding to go the "software" route like the Brits, they have an economy, if they had gone the "hardware" route, they would be f**ked today.

Ask an Indian who is familiar with what I am talking about, and they will explain it in detail about my statement above.

Iran's development of a turbofan engine of a certain quality depends on all the details and who is supporting it and TOT and a range of other things. Iran can also copy TF30-414A (although I seriously DO NOT recommend it). But it can ignore an idiot like me and go ahead and do so. It would probably take 2-3 years from when they apply POLITICAL WILL to do so and allocate funds for R&D and 
manufacturing.

Iran however, does not believe this is a sensible way to spend time, money, and resources. They are trying to be forward thinkers. Which makes a lot of sense. 

I am sorry I cannot answer your question with any degree of accuracy. I just don't know. The details are unknown. The strategies are so vast. The question regarding the engine is like a drop of water in the ocean.


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
> all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
> we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4
> 
> and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones




Good points.

I believe, possibly my error in judgment, that Iran needs to build ONE ENGINE first, and then go ahead and try to make a second one. So ideally, it would be better to build a bigger engine than a smaller one.

Iran seems to be building Owj/J85 at the moment. If they can do this, at least 100+ engines per year, then by all means, I will eat my words and fine let's stick to this and use it as a strategy for "current" Iranian AF problems.

F-5e can be upgraded (similar to Brazilian F5s) and if they can add a good PESA radar with solid state amplifiers and can add Fakour/Phoenix missiles - then fine. I will be happy.

I am not a fan of J85, and have never been. But I will live with it as long as Iran is producing, ideally, 100+ fighter jets per year in that class to catch up with training, and build once again a viable air force.

If they could replace the 750lb J85 engines with the 3rd generation GE J-97 - I would be even more happier. This engine has incredible performance, has been used in UAVs, and I just love this engine.

At 8,000lbs of thrust, Iran can build an aircraft that almost emulates a Saab Gripen C/D with a total of 16,000lbs of thrust. Okay, not with AESA but still close enough to give them an edge under certain circumstances.

However, all of these seem like a PIE IN THE SKY for Iran.

Iran issues all come down to ... TIME

They have 4 years (during Biden) to prepare for what may happen afterwards. Iran has been awfully wrong when it comes to pre-planning and forward thinking. Biden will not be in office forever. His VP is a serious Zionist and her husband is on the phone with AIPAC and FDD's Mark Dubowitz on almost daily (more accurately monthly) basis. She is best friends with Barbara Boxer, the CA Senator (serious Zionist) who said "Iranians are vicious people", even when Chris Hayes corrected her ("not all Iranian people are vicious"), she still mumbled and continued. 

Iran should be concerned with what is coming after Biden. If they are not, then AGAIN they will pay the price. Beating up on Iran is a pastime in U.S. and there is no benefit to anyone in U.S. to want to better the relationship with Iran. You would think the people of South Carolina, Texas, and Arkansas would demand their senators (Leslie Graham, Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton) to want better relationship with Iran so their people would benefit economically from Iran's purchase of Boeing airplanes, rice, and corn ... all 3 states would have a huge boom in economy. NO ... Zionists control these 3 senators to serve Israel, not American people. Huge amount of their campaign financing comes from the Zionist billionaires like Paul Singer, Maryam Adelson, and Bernard Marcus.

I would put a huge effort into building either a fixed wing F-14 or a heavily upgraded F-14 with AESA and thrust vectoring with Russian help (which they would be happy to do if they got paid with gold), or even upgrade F-4e like the last few projects which the Brits and RAF were working on, a very high end F4e.

Once Iran has 200+ of these, then it can start building a high end, Su57 or whatever it can and take its sweet time.

Iran should not WASTE TIME since 3 years under Biden will go by REALLY FAST. Go with proven platforms and cut R&D time as much as possible. Work on projects that make sense, e.g. upgrade a phoenix missile to the fuel and body structure standards of Russian R-37. Long range missiles with good no-scape-zones are the future. They should also invest in the equivalent of Meteor, or a missile with long range capability of RAMJET engine.

Instead of a Su57 with Fakour and Sayad, I rather have an upgraded F-14 with R-37 and Meteor and I don't give a damn how old looking F-14 or even F4 is.

I would rather have a $10, F5e with R-37 and Meteor, if possible, as long as Iran has 200+ of these.

Iran does not have much TIME. It needs to make decisions SMARTLY.

You may want everything, but YOU CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Seriously there! Iran should do this, Iran should do this, you're not serious

Iran has absolutely nothing to envy the F-5 Brazilians so stop delirious. On the subject of combat jets, Iran hides their game well and on the subject of engines as well. The Saeqeh was introduced in 2007 and if we count the construction of 3 planes per year with the Kowsar, that gives the figure of 42. This number is a minimum.

If we consider that Iran very much likes to diversify the technologies as in the very diversified drones then we can easily predict that there are different technologies in the F-5 that we have not seen yet. 1 years after the introduction of Kowar, Iranian authorities said there had been great improvement in a short period of time.

It is very clear that Iran is hiding fighter jets with different technologies but I am sure they will demonstrate some soon.


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
> all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
> we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4
> 
> and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones



You are correct, you can not build your entire Air Force around 1-2 type of engines. However we already have low thrust engines, We can already power lighter low payload jet UCAV's around OWJ, Jahesh 700, Tolue 5 & other engines 
We can already build light subsonic trainers and CAS fighters.... So the requirement and priority when it comes to Jet propulsion R&D needs to be heavy high trust engines 

Wheatear Iran build F-5's or a supersonic strategic bomber similar to the Mirage IV, without major investment in mass production infrastructure of various parts, our production output will remain around 1-6 Aircrafts per year.... And constantly switching between weak engines is NOT going to help the situation and instead it just gives them yet another excuse because instead of focusing on production they have to now focus on yet another engine to produce and yet another platform to take to production 

If OWJ aviation is unable to greatly increase the production of a simple engine like the OWJ or improve on it then the problem is with OWJ aviation management & or funding not the engine... 

And I'm not saying that we should never produce the Fj44 or Improve on the Jahesh700 only that we allow the natural course of development and improvement of the Jahesh700 to take it's natural course of development. 

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, when you start producing larger high thrust engines the waisted alloys and composite generated from their production can be recycled and reused in the production of smaller engines. So producing heavier high thrust engines will naturally give Iran the capability to produce more capable lighter engines at an overall reduced cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

I think people underestimate complexity of Jet engines.

You could give the best engineer group in Iran, a blueprint of AL-41 and $1B in r&d and they will fail to produce one AL-41.

It’s like asking someone to copy Coca-Cola. It’s just as much an art (timing of blades and construction of materials and its properties) as it is a science.

So for Iran to build a heavy engine it’s going to take time, luck, and a lot of development especially with its paltry military budget. People like to point to China, but China has a military budget that is 40x Iran and in 1990 it was 17B basically what Iran’s military budget is today. So let that sink in....*30 years ago China had the same military budget as Iran today *also add the fact that China had access to foreign parts and transfer of technology from fall of Soviet Union and you can see why comparing Iran to China in terms of military developments is like comparing a Honda to Ferrari.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> I think people underestimate complexity of Jet engines.
> 
> You could give the best engineer group in Iran, a blueprint of AL-41 and $1B in r&d and they will fail to produce one AL-41.
> 
> It’s like asking someone to copy Coca-Cola. It’s just as much an art (timing of blades and construction of materials and its properties) as it is a science.
> 
> So for Iran to build a heavy engine it’s going to take time, luck, and a lot of development especially with its paltry military budget. People like to point to China, but China has a military budget that is 40x Iran and in 1990 it was 17B basically what Iran’s military budget is today. So let that sink in....*30 years ago China had the same military budget as Iran today *also add the fact that China had access to foreign parts and transfer of technology from fall of Soviet Union and you can see why comparing Iran to China in terms of military developments is like comparing a Honda to Ferrari.



In the 1980s US transferred military technology to China to fight Russia. Among them advanced Jaguar tank based on Type 59.









Type 59 Jaguar Tank - Fighting-Vehicles.com


The Type 59 Jaguar Tank was an upgrade package for exported Type 59 Tanks developed by China & American Firm Cadillac Gage. It failed to secure any orders.




fighting-vehicles.com









__





Army Guide


Army Guide - information about the main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and armament of the land forces and also the information concerning other army subjects - Jaguar, Main battle tank, Armoured Vehicles



www.army-guide.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Ich said:


> No. Manned airplanes are limited at ~9 g and thus have no future or chance against unmanned combat drones with up to possible 15 g. Today it is already the case that the pilot in an 5th gen fighter depends very much on computer aided tools or AI. So it is only a small step to fly all without pilots in the air assets. Manned combat aircrafts will be gone till the end of next decade.


Am going to put a little bit of reality here.

First, am USAF veteran. F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. I know what 9 g feel like. 

Now...A fully loaded F-16 configured for strike, meaning bombs and a couple missiles for self defense, will be g-limited to less than what a trained pilot can handle, in other words, less than 9 g. If you want to maneuver in double digits g, your airframe will begin to look more and more like a missile: tubular and with less protrusions. Physics is an unforgiving b1tch.

If you design a multi-mission drone because you have limited funds, which is what most air forces in the world are, then your unmanned aircraft will have an airframe design similar to 'normal' aircrafts and your drone will have the usual flight control surfaces such as wings and fins. Like I said earlier that physics is a b1tch. Maneuvers over the battlefield to orient your weapons delivery, to track ground targets, to avoid air defense, etc...etc...centrifugal stresses on pylons that carries the ordnance, internal fuel movement (sloshes), wing flex, and other airframe related factors, will contribute to a g limit.

So ultimately, it all depends on what your unmanned drone is designed to do in the first place.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 718386
> 
> 
> 
> Sina-1 is correct about the comments that have been made, however, it's rather obvious that the low RCS outcome was more a byproduct and happy accident of the designers attempt to build a high glide, comparatively low drag aircraft with the goal of achieving higher cruise speeds to extend the range....
> regardless it's German tech
> 
> And your forgetting all the design that came before both the F-117 & B-2.....


You suffer the same malady of those who have little or no related experience and found some general information in the public domain and then failed to read your own sources.

Your source...





__





Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum






airandspace.si.edu





_"The Ho 229 leading edge has the same characteristics as the plywood [control sample] except that the frequency [do not exactly match] and have a shorter bandwidth. This indicates that the dielectric constant of the Ho 229 leading edge is higher than the plywood test sample. The similarity of the two tests indicates that the design using *the carbon black type material produced a poor absorber.*"_​
See the highlighted? Basically, they replicated what the Horten Brothers wanted to do and actually put the aircraft under radar testing and found it failed the tests.

Leonardo da Vinci had a design for the helicopter but we do not credit him for the V-22 Osprey, do we?

The Horten Brothers were working with limited resources. They could not verify their hypotheses. They were familiar enough with basic radar principles to guess what materials could behave under radar bombardment, but without verification, there is no way they could produce what the US did. The flying wing have been known and experimented by all major aviation powers before WW II, so that bit of aviation technology is not unique to Germany.

Low radar observability aka 'stealth' credit rightfully belongs to US.


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> Am going to put a little bit of reality here.
> 
> First, am USAF veteran. F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. I know what 9 g feel like.
> 
> Now...A fully loaded F-16 configured for strike, meaning bombs and a couple missiles for self defense, will be g-limited to less than what a trained pilot can handle, in other words, less than 9 g. If you want to maneuver in double digits g, your airframe will begin to look more and more like a missile: tubular and with less protrusions. Physics is an unforgiving b1tch.
> 
> If you design a multi-mission drone because you have limited funds, which is what most air forces in the world are, then your unmanned aircraft will have an airframe design similar to 'normal' aircrafts and your drone will have the usual flight control surfaces such as wings and fins. Like I said earlier that physics is a b1tch. Maneuvers over the battlefield to orient your weapons delivery, to track ground targets, to avoid air defense, etc...etc...centrifugal stresses on pylons that carries the ordnance, internal fuel movement (sloshes), wing flex, and other airframe related factors, will contribute to a g limit.
> 
> So ultimately, it all depends on what your unmanned drone is designed to do in the first place.


Your (supposed) piloting credentials mean as much to aircraft design as a person with a driver license has on car design. It's amateurish at best! The g-tolerances of airframes are IN FACT at 9g BECAUSE of the pilot being the sizing factor. If humans could withstand more g's then you can bet your *** that airframes would be designed to reach that limit.

Furthermore your assessment of drones being developed with jack of all trades is false and everything we can see in drone development today point to the exact opposite. Drones are being developed to have very specific mission statements. Just look at your own US drone program, instead of miserably trying to fit everything into one system (read: the catastrophic f35 project) many various types of drones are developed for many various types of missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> You suffer the same malady of those who have little or no related experience and found some general information in the public domain and then failed to read your own sources.
> 
> Your source...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airandspace.si.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"The Ho 229 leading edge has the same characteristics as the plywood [control sample] except that the frequency [do not exactly match] and have a shorter bandwidth. This indicates that the dielectric constant of the Ho 229 leading edge is higher than the plywood test sample. The similarity of the two tests indicates that the design using *the carbon black type material produced a poor absorber.*"_​
> See the highlighted? Basically, they replicated what the Horten Brothers wanted to do and actually put the aircraft under radar testing and found it failed the tests.
> 
> Leonardo da Vinci had a design for the helicopter but we do not credit him for the V-22 Osprey, do we?
> 
> The Horten Brothers were working with limited resources. They could not verify their hypotheses. They were familiar enough with basic radar principles to guess what materials could behave under radar bombardment, but without verification, there is no way they could produce what the US did. The flying wing have been known and experimented by all major aviation powers before WW II, so that bit of aviation technology is not unique to Germany.
> 
> Low radar observability aka 'stealth' credit rightfully belongs to US.


The question is their design was tested under what sort of Radar a 90s radar or a 40s radar ?
Just look at F-117 how stealth it can be against a Radar made after 2010 and then compare it against how it performed against RADARS designed in 1970


----------



## TheImmortal

Nazi Germany had much more theorized advanced aircraft than the Horten design, tho I think that gets the most attention due to being a flying wing.

To me the more intresting project was the Nazi Bell project. And a similar type aircraft crashed in rural Pennsylvania in the 50’s I believe.

Furthermore, on an unrelated note the “balls of light” that would follow ally bomber formations during the war was an intresting phenomenon that allied fighters thought was advanced German war fighters.

Though I believe those UFOs are more sinister in their origin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> You suffer the same malady of those who have little or no related experience and found some general information in the public domain and then failed to read your own sources.
> 
> Your source...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is It Stealth? | National Air and Space Museum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airandspace.si.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"The Ho 229 leading edge has the same characteristics as the plywood [control sample] except that the frequency [do not exactly match] and have a shorter bandwidth. This indicates that the dielectric constant of the Ho 229 leading edge is higher than the plywood test sample. The similarity of the two tests indicates that the design using *the carbon black type material produced a poor absorber.*"_​
> See the highlighted? Basically, they replicated what the Horten Brothers wanted to do and actually put the aircraft under radar testing and found it failed the tests.
> 
> Leonardo da Vinci had a design for the helicopter but we do not credit him for the V-22 Osprey, do we?
> 
> The Horten Brothers were working with limited resources. They could not verify their hypotheses. They were familiar enough with basic radar principles to guess what materials could behave under radar bombardment, but without verification, there is no way they could produce what the US did. The flying wing have been known and experimented by all major aviation powers before WW II, so that bit of aviation technology is not unique to Germany.
> 
> Low radar observability aka 'stealth' credit rightfully belongs to US.



1.Yes RAM coating belongs to the US, Yes a true science based stealth design and stealth characteristics also belongs to the U.S.! What's your point?
2.No one said the Ho229 was absorbable... It's low RCS is due to it's inherit design & its low RCS give it stealth characteristics although the Aircraft was never designed with that in mind.... That's why i call it a happy accident
3.Horton brothers fascination with flying wing designs had nothing to do with stealth! Everyone can see that! But flying wing design which has proven to be the most successful subsonic stealth designs belongs to them! 

Finally, it's one thing to sketch a drawing on paper and quite another to actually build a work prototype. So if DaVinci had actually built a flying prototype I sure as hell would have credited him for it.... But he didn't! Just as I wouldn't credit Gene Roddenberry for the development of Tablet computers, iPads & warped drives! What is wrong with you?


----------



## Ich

gambit said:


> Am going to put a little bit of reality here.
> 
> First, am USAF veteran. F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. I know what 9 g feel like.
> 
> Now...A fully loaded F-16 configured for strike, meaning bombs and a couple missiles for self defense, will be g-limited to less than what a trained pilot can handle, in other words, less than 9 g. If you want to maneuver in double digits g, your airframe will begin to look more and more like a missile: tubular and with less protrusions. Physics is an unforgiving b1tch.
> 
> If you design a multi-mission drone because you have limited funds, which is what most air forces in the world are, then your unmanned aircraft will have an airframe design similar to 'normal' aircrafts and your drone will have the usual flight control surfaces such as wings and fins. Like I said earlier that physics is a b1tch. Maneuvers over the battlefield to orient your weapons delivery, to track ground targets, to avoid air defense, etc...etc...centrifugal stresses on pylons that carries the ordnance, internal fuel movement (sloshes), wing flex, and other airframe related factors, will contribute to a g limit.
> 
> So ultimately, it all depends on what your unmanned drone is designed to do in the first place.



Yes. But if you want to set a drone vs. a manned fighter jet, then you dont need "multi mission". This drone only have one mission: Destroy manned fighter jets and other enemy airplanes.

So the design of the drone for this task is optimized in g-limit, manoeuvrebility. And thus much much better in this stats than any manned aircraft. Even could outmanoeuvre an AAM or SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

gambit said:


> Am going to put a little bit of reality here.
> 
> First, am USAF veteran. F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. I know what 9 g feel like.
> 
> Now...A fully loaded F-16 configured for strike, meaning bombs and a couple missiles for self defense, will be g-limited to less than what a trained pilot can handle, in other words, less than 9 g. If you want to maneuver in double digits g, your airframe will begin to look more and more like a missile: tubular and with less protrusions. Physics is an unforgiving b1tch.
> 
> If you design a multi-mission drone because you have limited funds, which is what most air forces in the world are, then your unmanned aircraft will have an airframe design similar to 'normal' aircrafts and your drone will have the usual flight control surfaces such as wings and fins. Like I said earlier that physics is a b1tch. Maneuvers over the battlefield to orient your weapons delivery, to track ground targets, to avoid air defense, etc...etc...centrifugal stresses on pylons that carries the ordnance, internal fuel movement (sloshes), wing flex, and other airframe related factors, will contribute to a g limit.
> 
> So ultimately, it all depends on what your unmanned drone is designed to do in the first place.



Judging by the time line in your post, if you were based in UK as an F-111 bomber pilot, then it is very likely that you and I have met. Fair to say, I am not sure I agree with everything you have suggested in your post, based on my own work experiences and what I have learnt from other pilots. But respect everyone's opinion. Loved visiting Spangdahlem. Some very cute girls. Use to drive there back-and-forward from Weisbaden. Been to Nellis also. Not a fan though of the Lake Mead blvd, East, all the way up to E. Craig - very run down and poverty stricken, WOW - looks really bad. Right next to it though is (my opinion only) the cheapest auction house in the world. You can buy anything from Casino excess stocks for next to nothing. I bought amazing leather sofas for about $10, looked brand new. Sold them for so much more before PCS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷

to me it seems the model is from air force's stealth fighter project *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> *a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷*
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 734114



Funny, looks like one crashed here, and another crashed into U.S airbase in Erbil Airport lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> Funny, looks like one crashed here, and another crashed into U.S airbase in Erbil Airport lol.


drones everywhere


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

skyshadow said:


> *a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷
> 
> to me it seems the model is from air force's stealth fighter project *
> 
> View attachment 734114



Why would they fly a model of a "Secret Iranian stealth fighter" over a population center?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why would they fly a model of a "Secret Iranian stealth fighter" over a population center?


it seems ground station has lost control of the model


----------



## TheImmortal

25 year deal working wonders /sarcasm

To China apologists on this board, *if this true* I hope you rethink your thinking that China will do anything strategic on Iran.

If Iran wants to buy J-10C and they refuse then they are same old China.









China hesitant over J-10C barter deal with cash-strapped Iran: experts


Tehran is said to be interested in buying 36 of the advanced Chinese fighter jets but finding the cash could be difficult.




www.google.com






skyshadow said:


> *a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷
> 
> to me it seems the model is from air force's stealth fighter project *
> 
> View attachment 734114



Anymore photos of incident?

Looks like a 1:25 scale mock up. Or 1:10 if its a smaller fighter.

Could also be a future MALE drone.

But if it is a fighter jet then it is still 7+ years away from mass production if it’s at this stage.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> *a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷
> 
> to me it seems the model is from air force's stealth fighter project *
> 
> View attachment 734114


That craft has the profile of one of the sofreh mahi drone models paraded many years ago and were pretty much put on the back burner when Iran acquired the Rq170. Maybe this is a civilian rc model?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382399926668185604
If HESA is behind the project then I Cant take the project seriously for now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sina-1 said:


> Your (supposed) piloting credentials mean as much to aircraft design as a person with a driver license has on car design. It's amateurish at best! The g-tolerances of airframes are IN FACT at 9g BECAUSE of the pilot being the sizing factor. If humans could withstand more g's then you can bet your *** that airframes would be designed to reach that limit.


In this instance he's correct. An F-16 normally has a g-limit of 9g which is the limit of what most pilots can take. But as soon as you add wing-mounted external fuel tanks to it (which is almost always) that drops to 7 or 7.5g (I believe). That's because the fuel tanks are obviously very heavy and could damage the wings or completely rip off at high Gs. That limit is enforced by the FBW.

But I do think that air superiority UCAVs in future would be designed to breach 9g, assuming they have relatively light air to air weapons instead of bombs and EFTs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

US Air Force released concept for their 6th gen fighter (prototype built in one year)

The need for next gen Iranian fighters grows by the day. If US fields 200 “mini B-2’s” then it doesn’t matter what air defense Iran fields...some will make it thru. Until Quantum radar becomes a reality which is still 10+ years away at least if not more.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Why was this allowed to fly over a populated area ? Just like with the accidental shooting down of that airliner, why did Iran not close off its airspace even after neighboring countries did ? Why are Iranian officials seemingly so careless when it comes to safety ?



skyshadow said:


> *a test model for secret Iranian stealth fighter jet program crashed, you learn from these setbacks  🇮🇷
> 
> to me it seems the model is from air force's stealth fighter project *
> 
> View attachment 734114


These are just rumors. Iran is only really interested in Russian fighter jets and no deal will go through with either China nor Russia unless Iran buys at the least 100 aircraft. Iran can always pay with oil so money is not really an issue. With recently new sanctions impossed on Russia and with Russia being cash strapped, it becomes even more likely that some kind of deal will eventually go through.



TheImmortal said:


> 25 year deal working wonders /sarcasm
> 
> To China apologists on this board, *if this true* I hope you rethink your thinking that China will do anything strategic on Iran.
> 
> If Iran wants to buy J-10C and they refuse then they are same old China.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China hesitant over J-10C barter deal with cash-strapped Iran: experts
> 
> 
> Tehran is said to be interested in buying 36 of the advanced Chinese fighter jets but finding the cash could be difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anymore photos of incident?
> 
> Looks like a 1:25 scale mock up. Or 1:10 if its a smaller fighter.
> 
> Could also be a future MALE drone.
> 
> But if it is a fighter jet then it is still 7+ years away from mass production if it’s at this stage.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> 25 year deal working wonders /sarcasm
> 
> To China apologists on this board, *if this true* I hope you rethink your thinking that China will do anything strategic on Iran.
> 
> If Iran wants to buy J-10C and they refuse then they are same old China.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China hesitant over J-10C barter deal with cash-strapped Iran: experts
> 
> 
> Tehran is said to be interested in buying 36 of the advanced Chinese fighter jets but finding the cash could be difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anymore photos of incident?
> 
> Looks like a 1:25 scale mock up. Or 1:10 if its a smaller fighter.
> 
> Could also be a future MALE drone.
> 
> But if it is a fighter jet then it is still 7+ years away from mass production if it’s at this stage.


again nonsense speculation about future fighter jet purchase for Iran .
wonder when they learn that Iran don't want any light fighter


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> If HESA is behind the project then I Cant take the project seriously for now.


why not they have Karrar , they have several type of suicide drones majority of drones operated by our allies are made by HESA, they have Hamaseh , also intrestingly Mohajer-6 is produced by HESA not Qods Aviation


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> why not they have Karrar , they have several type of suicide drones majority of drones operated by our allies are made by HESA, they have Hamaseh , also intrestingly Mohajer-6 is produced by HESA not Qods Aviation



Karrar isn’t mass produced. Hamaseh is non existentant.

The quality of drone projects is substantially better when IRGC is involved rather than just HESA.

HESA lost the benefit doubt long time ago with their F-5 projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> 25 year deal working wonders /sarcasm
> 
> To China apologists on this board, *if this true* I hope you rethink your thinking that China will do anything strategic on Iran.
> 
> If Iran wants to buy J-10C and they refuse then they are same old China.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China hesitant over J-10C barter deal with cash-strapped Iran: experts
> 
> 
> Tehran is said to be interested in buying 36 of the advanced Chinese fighter jets but finding the cash could be difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anymore photos of incident?
> 
> Looks like a 1:25 scale mock up. Or 1:10 if its a smaller fighter.
> 
> Could also be a future MALE drone.
> 
> But if it is a fighter jet then it is still 7+ years away from mass production if it’s at this stage.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382391413313265669


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Karrar isn’t mass produced. Hamaseh is non existentant.
> 
> The quality of drone projects is substantially better when IRGC is involved rather than just HESA.
> 
> HESA lost the benefit doubt long time ago with their F-5 projects.


are you sure its not mass produced ,





by the way are you aware that Quds aviation don't have that F-5 project, and every single aircraft and helicopter being able to fly is due to HESA


----------



## skyshadow

WudangMaster said:


> That craft has the profile of one of the sofreh mahi drone models paraded many years ago and were pretty much put on the back burner when Iran acquired the Rq170. Maybe this is a civilian rc model?


*no it was flying in restricted area of air force base and Iranian already confirmed its military project that had a accident *


TheImmortal said:


> View attachment 734309
> 
> 
> US Air Force released concept for their 6th gen fighter (prototype built in one year)
> 
> The need for next gen Iranian fighters grows by the day. If US fields 200 “mini B-2’s” then it doesn’t matter what air defense Iran fields...some will make it thru. Until Quantum radar becomes a reality which is still 10+ years away at least if not more.


Iran needs a long - endurance missile that hovers over and over again until it finds a target much like missile 358 but with a ramjet engine to reach supersonic speeds in the time of need, an flying air defense missile network

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

sha ah said:


> Why was this allowed to fly over a populated area ? Just like with the accidental shooting down of that airliner, why did Iran not close off its airspace even after neighboring countries did ? Why are Iranian officials seemingly so careless when it comes to safety ?
> 
> 
> These are just rumors. Iran is only really interested in Russian fighter jets and no deal will go through with either China nor Russia unless Iran buys at the least 100 aircraft. Iran can always pay with oil so money is not really an issue. With recently new sanctions impossed on Russia and with Russia being cash strapped, it becomes even more likely that some kind of deal will eventually go through.


the deputy governor of Shahinshahr confirmed the crash of the drone, *its military project *


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure its not mass produced ,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by the way are you aware that Quds aviation don't have that F-5 project, and every single aircraft and helicopter being able to fly is due to HESA



I thought you meant Karrar tank not Karrar drone. Karrar drone exactly proves my point it is a old target drone converted to bomber. 

Iran’s advanced UAVs are built by IRGC affiliated companies. And they don’t share tech with HESA or Air Force. Air Force just spent (wasted) money to copy predator drone.

And if IRGC affiliated companies were involved in Iran’s Air Force 20 years ago they would do a *much better job *than HESA. And F-5 project is a waste of time. Quds Aviation doesn’t waste time...HESA are like university kids working on prototypes that go no where.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

AmirPatriot said:


> In this instance he's correct. An F-16 normally has a g-limit of 9g which is the limit of what most pilots can take. But as soon as you add wing-mounted external fuel tanks to it (which is almost always) that drops to 7 or 7.5g (I believe). That's because the fuel tanks are obviously very heavy and could damage the wings or completely rip off at high Gs. That limit is enforced by the FBW.
> 
> But I do think that air superiority UCAVs in future would be designed to breach 9g, assuming they have relatively light air to air weapons instead of bombs and EFTs.



Or just do suicide against manned fighter. Which is another advantage of drones vs. manned fighterjets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Or just do suicide against manned fighter. Which is another advantage of drones vs. manned fighterjets.



No drone can catch a manned fighter. Not to mention latency issue means that a few seconds of lag and drone loses sight of fighter jet for good.

What people expect of drones is 10-15 years away maybe even decades.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> No drone can catch a manned fighter. Not to mention latency issue means that a few seconds of lag and drone loses sight of fighter jet for good.
> 
> What people expect of drones is 10-15 years away maybe even decades.



Well..."10-15 years away" seams to be your standard answer...

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Well..."10-15 years away" seams to be your standard answer...



It’s better than your Sci-Fi theories.

Right now only Chinese Dark Sword could be considered an unmanned fighter jet. But even it is not built to fight other manned fighter jets. It theoretically can since it’s a supersonic fighter jet, but it’s not its niche.

Until AI gets advanced enough, there will always be latency issue (satellite to ground control to operator) and a manned pilot only need a few seconds to create separation and destroy the drone or disappear.

So again....not a feasible idea in current circumstances. Probably won’t be feasible in 10 years either.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> It’s better than your Sci-Fi theories.
> 
> Right now only Chinese Dark Sword could be considered an unmanned fighter jet. But even it is not built to fight other manned fighter jets. It theoretically can since it’s a supersonic fighter jet, but it’s not its niche.
> 
> Until AI gets advanced enough, there will always be latency issue (satellite to ground control to operator) and a manned pilot only need a few seconds to create separation and destroy the drone or disappear.
> 
> So again....not a feasible idea in current circumstances. Probably won’t be feasible in 10 years either.


 Wow...maybe you should try the jump over the "10-15 years away" river, cause even your country has UCAVs in fighter size since years. And guess what! They are autonomous cause of computer and AI. Even the EU has its UCAV with its maiden flight in 2012.

Do the jump! Come to us!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I thought you meant Karrar tank not Karrar drone. Karrar drone exactly proves my point it is a old target drone converted to bomber.
> 
> Iran’s advanced UAVs are built by IRGC affiliated companies. And they don’t share tech with HESA or Air Force. Air Force just spent (wasted) money to copy predator drone.
> 
> And if IRGC affiliated companies were involved in Iran’s Air Force 20 years ago they would do a *much better job *than HESA. And F-5 project is a waste of time. Quds Aviation doesn’t waste time...HESA are like university kids working on prototypes that go no where.


well , after the bomber , it also converted for air to air role and now can fire sidewinder . no other drone in Iran inventory can do that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well , after the bomber , it also converted for air to air role and now can fire sidewinder . no other drone in Iran inventory can do that.



Yes and you can attach kabob to it and say no other drone in Iran inventory can do that.

Come on man, sidewinder fired from a drone that lacks radar is a joke and not a threat to a modern fighter jet maybe another drone.

IRGC drones are better quality and technology. You will see in the future the IRGC drones they are about to unveil. Then you won’t think the same about HESA/Air force any longer.



Ich said:


> Wow...maybe you should try the jump over the "10-15 years away" river, cause even your country has UCAVs in fighter size since years. And guess what! They are autonomous cause of computer and AI. Even the EU has its UCAV with its maiden flight in 2012.
> 
> Do the jump! Come to us!



Which UCAV is that? Name me a UCAV that engages manned fighter. Apparently you are confusing UCAV size for operational role. You claimed their were drones that could “suicide” into a manned fighter or drones that could engage manned fighters. When proven wrong, you have now resorted to talking about UCAV sizes and the fact they can fly without human input on a pre planned route. My $500 drone from DJI can also do that and land on its own, that’s not A.I.!

Predator/Reaper/etc are not ment to engage other fighters. And none of them have sophisticated AI to engage manned fighters please do not spread lies.

RQ-180 is a recon drone and Wingman that is under development is ment to assist manned fighters.

So again you are wrong, there is no true unmanned autonomous air to air fighter. Closest thing is Dark Sword and that is more an unmanned semi autonomous stealth fighter engaging in A2G operstions

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Which UCAV is that? Name me a UCAV that engages manned fighter. Apparently you are confusing UCAV size for operational role. You claimed their were drones that could “suicide” into a manned fighter or drones that could engage manned fighters. When proven wrong, you have now resorted to talking about UCAV sizes and the fact they can fly without human input on a pre planned route. My $500 drone from DJI can also do that and land on its own, that’s not A.I.!
> 
> Predator/Reaper/etc are not ment to engage other fighters. And none of them have sophisticated AI to engage manned fighters please do not spread lies.
> 
> RQ-180 is a recon drone and Wingman that is under development is ment to assist manned fighters.
> 
> So again you are wrong, there is no true unmanned autonomous air to air fighter. Closest thing is Dark Sword and that is more an unmanned semi autonomous stealth fighter engaging in A2G operstions



Well, you can use google. And yes, i know that google do mostly show old stuff. But meanwhile i can educate you about your own military....

"Air Force researchers are designing an autonomous aircraft that can take down a manned plane in air-to-air combat, with the goal of pitting the two against each other in July 2021."

https://www.airforcemag.com/air-force-to-test-fighter-drone-against-human-pilot/ 

AND

a fighter jet pilot needs 5-10 years and thousands of flight hours to be really good in his job. A drone dont. A serial fighter drone could be build within a month and is then combat ready. And this is another advantage of a fighter drone over a manned fighter jet. 

Please, stop boring me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Well, you can use google. And yes, i know that google do mostly show old stuff. But meanwhile i can educate you about your own military....
> 
> "Air Force researchers are designing an autonomous aircraft that can take down a manned plane in air-to-air combat, with the goal of pitting the two against each other in July 2021."
> 
> https://www.airforcemag.com/air-force-to-test-fighter-drone-against-human-pilot/
> 
> AND
> 
> a fighter jet pilot needs 5-10 years and thousands of flight hours to be really good in his job. A drone dont. A serial fighter drone could be build within a month and is then combat ready. And this is another advantage of a fighter drone over a manned fighter jet.
> 
> Please, stop boring me.



“me thinks” you didn’t even read your own article.

It’s literally in early stages R&D and would have a “test“ this year. (Which it missed btw).

So again seems like my 10-15 year argument wasn’t wrong.

Meanwhile me thinks you don’t know how to debate first you said UCAV that tackle manned fighters exist and that drones can suicide into manned fighters. (they don’t/they cant). When I ask for proof you show me an article skunkworks proof of concept article that says they are in early stages of experimenting.

The article mentions another drone I mentioned (Wingman) which is close to deployment, but still under testing as a trial to see how a support drone does with helping manned fighters side by side.

So again you didn’t bring anything new to the table and couldn’t prove my time window as wrong. First you said they already existed for “years” then backtracked and posted an article with little substance that says skunkworks is toying with the thought but hasn’t even gotten it to physical R&D stage yet.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Saeghe and Kowsar project are very far from a waste of time. General TheImmortal is still lost in his analyzes. The Kowsar is more evolved than one thinks and one day not very far, Iran will unveil surprises on this subject. Hesa is advancing rapidly in aircraft technology and we will be witnessing soon.

I have already said that the new powerful engine is already in working order and I will earn my point on the subject. Iran's announcement process had to be well analyzed because underground, the technologies are more advanced than they tell us.

Iran has undisclosed secret weapons, keep this in mind

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> “me thinks” you didn’t even read your own article.
> 
> It’s literally in early stages R&D and would have a “test“ this year. (Which it missed btw).



Ah, in "early stages R&D". Well, take a look at this, from 1998. This were the "early stages" of the article i posted



https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/98-282.pdf



Over 20 years ago. So in total you are backward these 23 years plus your "10-15 years away", makes you 35+ years out of time.

"would have a “test“ this year. (Which it missed btw)." .... how could it missed if the test is set to happen in three month, in July 2021?

I stop this "discussion" here. Its IRIAF thread, not UAV thread.


----------



## VEVAK

HESA Scaled down fighter model crashes.......

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 734592
> 
> 
> HESA Scaled down fighter model crashes.......


What do you suppose the plane looks like when in its final form? Could it be a modification to the qaher frame or is this something new or did they modify one of the sofre mahis but to what end? Is this to be a drone or piloted craft? Will there be engines for the full sized version available?
Here is the one that might be continuing, not it was alway implied this version would be piloted. It does have an awkwardly placed air intake at the top of the fuselage, making better for a drone than fighter unless their positions are changed...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Saeqeh crosses the skies of the Persian Gulf 

Shahid Sattari Aeronautical University, an institution affiliated with the Iranian military, is moving at high speed towards self-sufficiency to manufacture defense products. The construction of fighter jets, including Saeqeh and Kowsar, is a big part of his schedule.


With two J85 engines and a speed of 1.8 times the speed of sound, Saeqeh has an aerodynamic character. With the construction of the Owj engine and its imminent use in defense products such as Saeqeh fighters, parts manufacturing boomed and Iran's airline industry became independent: the Owj engine ended import.

With an operational range of 800 km, the Saeqeh drone is capable of both conducting and supporting an operation. It has a bulletproof cockpit. Weighing eight tons, it becomes an 18-ton bird after taking off.

Its second version, Saeqeh-2, is a two-cabin fighter, equipped with an electro-avionics system.

Completely Iranian made, the Kowsar fighter is equipped with technologies such as fire control using military digital data network, fully digital multipurpose screens, smart moving map system, computer ballistic weapon calculations. The most important features of Kowsar are the accuracy of detection and the ability to destroy targets.


In the sense of strengthening the defense industry, the Iranian Air Force has as its motto the motto of the late Imam Khomeini "We can", just like in the days of Sacred Defense, affirmed. the adviser to the Commander of the Iranian Air Force.

“The Iranian Ministry of Defense, the armed forces and the IRGC forces have all succeeded in implementing par excellence the motto of the late founder of the Islamic Revolution,” he said.

According to him, the construction of combat aircraft in the service of the Air Force is in accordance with advanced technologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

WudangMaster said:


> What do you suppose the plane looks like when in its final form? Could it be a modification to the qaher frame or is this something new or did they modify one of the sofre mahis but to what end? Is this to be a drone or piloted craft? Will there be engines for the full sized version available?
> Here is the one that might be continuing, not it was alway implied this version would be piloted. It does have an awkwardly placed air intake at the top of the fuselage, making better for a drone than fighter unless their positions are changed...



It's likely the Sofreh Mahi however that craft is too small to be a useful Jet powered UAV unless it's a scale down model of a UAV.... I would assume that the success of the full scale UAV version will likely determine whether they'll ho ahead and turn it into a manned fighter....

As for the Q-313 that plane was an embarrassment from the start... To me Q313 would of at best been a good Tech demonstrator of a low end Iranian Aviation University designed by a bunch of university students and developed and built using PANHA infrastructure. And NOTHING MORE! I honestly hope their developers prove me wrong however I have always seen it as a failed project and at best nothing more than a tech demonstrator...

As for the Sofreh Mahi models I think If they can add 2D TVC with strong enough engines I would go with the one that looks like this








However if TVC is no possible then the one below would be my choice however the location of the intake would need to change.....







clearly the one above is the one that crashed.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> It's likely the Sofreh Mahi however that craft is too small to be a useful Jet powered UAV unless it's a scale down model of a UAV.... I would assume that the success of the full scale UAV version will likely determine whether they'll ho ahead and turn it into a manned fighter....
> 
> As for the Q-313 that plane was an embarrassment from the start... To me Q313 would of at best been a good Tech demonstrator of a low end Iranian Aviation University designed by a bunch of university students and developed and built using PANHA infrastructure. And NOTHING MORE! I honestly hope their developers prove me wrong however I have always seen it as a failed project and at best nothing more than a tech demonstrator...
> 
> As for the Sofreh Mahi models I think If they can add 2D TVC with strong enough engines I would go with the one that looks like this
> 
> 
> View attachment 734787
> 
> 
> 
> However if TVC is no possible then the one below would be my choice however the location of the intake would need to change.....
> 
> 
> View attachment 734789
> 
> 
> clearly the one above is the one that crashed.....



If they are flying toy RCs at 1:10 full scale around, the program is basically on the drawing broad.

Even Iran’s attack helicopter project made it further than this with one prototype built.

Sofreh Mahi project is over 12 years old. To be a scale toy RC? Just embarrassing.

Like I said IRGC Aviation could run circles around HESA if they wanted to devote the resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> If they are flying toy RCs at 1:10 full scale around, the program is basically on the drawing broad.
> 
> Even Iran’s attack helicopter project made it further than this with one prototype built.
> 
> Sofreh Mahi project is over 12 years old. To be a scale toy RC? Just embarrassing.
> 
> Like I said IRGC Aviation could run circles around HESA if they wanted to devote the resources.



Yeah, I don't know what the hell is going on here, at least 10+ years and nothing to show for it?


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Come on man, sidewinder fired from a drone that lacks radar is a joke and not a threat to a modern fighter jet maybe another drone.


Radar is not the only solution to find target for a heat seeking missile and no other drone in Iran inventory can reach the speed of karrar the next ones are Arash and shahed 171 that have between half to 1/3rd the speed of karrar . so they are not that suitable for the role.

by the way if they went and installed a gun on the drone they probably think somehow they can detect aerial target and lock on them .for example infra Red. by what I see Karrar now have drone hunting capabilities something that yet to be shown by Quds aviation drones don't forget during the Zolfaqar 99 military drill in Jask, it was Karrar that had successfully tracked three American drones (types RQ-4, MQ-9, P-8) and forced them to leave the drills' public area. 

another example of HESA capabilities is Ababil drone armed with Diamond missile that make it quiet dangerous to enemy armor .
to me the only thing they are behind is low radar cross section and it seems they are working on that


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Yeah, I don't know what the hell is going on here, at least 10+ years and nothing to show for it?


whats go ing on is that in the last 1o years the drone was on a shelf and the resources were diverted to somewhere else and now some one there decided to divert some resources to the program.
in short RQ-170 happened and they stopped this project and put all the eggs on that basket but now they wan't something more and that Flying wing design shows its limitation that design is good for a strike drone or reconnaissance one but my guess is that they want to have something like "Dark Sword" and flying wing is not that suitable for that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> Sofreh Mahi project is over 12 years old. To be a scale toy RC? Just embarrassing.
> 
> Like I said IRGC Aviation could run circles around HESA if they wanted to devote the resources.



I just fully realized that the RQ-170 derivatives was completely IRGC project and that HESA or MOD or others had absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever and there doesn't seem to be any sharing going on at all in certain places, either because IRGC is holding back or a particular Artesh branch is being too arrogant to ask for help/tech. 
So all this time I assumed that sofre mahi was completely cancelled once the rq170 fell into Iran's hands; instead I fully realize now that IRGC made this own project only and that Artesh has continued to work on sofre mahi THE ENTIRE TIEME and at this rate of progress, this is quite dismal indeed! 
I assumed with the kind of sharing that happens between Artesh Air Defense Forces & Navy and IRGC that something similar might be happening with IRIAF on some level but it seems now that these two entities are as far apart as though they in foreign countries! 
So to reiterate, either IRGC does not want to share the Shahed 171 or Artesh never had the sense to cancel sofre mahi and to try to buy shahed series via MOD. I'm beginning to agree with the sometimes harsh criticisms leveled at IRIAF by some members particularly when the the Sukhoi 22s were brought to service with much greater capabilities a few years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> I just fully realized that the RQ-170 derivatives was completely IRGC project and that HESA or MOD or others had absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever and there doesn't seem to be any sharing going on at all in certain places, either because IRGC is holding back or a particular Artesh branch is being too arrogant to ask for help/tech.
> So all this time I assumed that sofre mahi was completely cancelled once the rq170 fell into Iran's hands; instead I fully realize now that IRGC made this own project only and that Artesh has continued to work on sofre mahi THE ENTIRE TIEME and at this rate of progress, this is quite dismal indeed!
> I assumed with the kind of sharing that happens between Artesh Air Defense Forces & Navy and IRGC that something similar might be happening with IRIAF on some level but it seems now that these two entities are as far apart as though they in foreign countries!
> So to reiterate, either IRGC does not want to share the Shahed 171 or Artesh never had the sense to cancel sofre mahi and to try to buy shahed series via MOD. I'm beginning to agree with the sometimes harsh criticisms leveled at IRIAF by some members particularly when the the Sukhoi 22s were brought to service with much greater capabilities a few years ago.


why cancel sofreh mahi. if Sofreh mahi get enough attention and funding it can be our Dark sword equivalent , Shahed 171 and its clone will never be able to fill such roles


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> why cancel sofreh mahi. if Sofreh mahi get enough attention and funding it can be our Dark sword equivalent , Shahed 171 and its clone will never be able to fill such roles



HESA can not built a dark sword. Only IRGC has the funding, connections, engineers, etc to build such a drone.

Look at everything HESA has done they are basically 20 years behind IRGC.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> HESA can not built a dark sword. Only IRGC has the funding, connections, engineers, etc to build such a drone.
> 
> Look at everything HESA has done they are basically 20 years behind IRGC.


I yet to see that Quds aviation build drones Half as fast as Hesa drones and the amunition of the Hesa drones are far more lethal than what Mohajer or Shahed carry and don't forget the newest Mohajer (Mohajer-6) is built by HESA not Quds Aviation and Also didn't IRGC went after Fotrus for UAVs bigger than Shahed-129 .

the advantage of Quds aviation was having Access to RQ-170 and being handed how to control a flying wing something that Hesa had to learn from scratch with Sofreh Mahi


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> the advantage of Quds aviation was having Access to RQ-170 and being handed how to control a flying wing something that Hesa had to learn from scratch with Sofreh Mahi


Since the sofre mahi was still ongoing, I would have imagined that there would have been inut from IRGC helping these projects along much further/faster but it seems that Qods aviation and HESA et al are like "knife and cheese" or oil and vinegar...


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> Since the sofre mahi was still ongoing, I would have imagined that there would have been inut from IRGC helping these projects along much further/faster but it seems that Qods aviation and HESA et al are like "knife and cheese" or oil and vinegar...


not exactly , as I said Mohajer-6 is designed by Quds Aviation but being produced by HESA
the problem is flying wing design of Shahed-171 won't necessary work for Sofreh-Mahi and they are two different design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> not exactly , as I said Mohajer-6 is designed by Quds Aviation but being produced by HESA
> the problem is flying wing design of Shahed-171 won't necessary work for Sofreh-Mahi and they are two different design


Do you think they are also working on the delta wing sofre mahi too, or just focusing on the other design that crashed? I figured for the delta wing, they could incorporate elements of the S171, although I personally I'd rather they just try to get the S171 rather than the delta sofre mahi. 
The other design is different enough, but that adds a great deal of time to flight controls, etc. The time scale does still seem a bit long, though there migt not be a meaningful budget for it either.


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> Do you think they are also working on the delta wing sofre mahi too, or just focusing on the other design that crashed? I figured for the delta wing, they could incorporate elements of the S171, although I personally I'd rather they just try to get the S171 rather than the delta sofre mahi.
> The other design is different enough, but that adds a great deal of time to flight controls, etc. The time scale does still seem a bit long, though there migt not be a meaningful budget for it either.


by considering the budgets limitation I doubt that . I even doubt this design even be a priority. to be honest I don't knew if its the same project or just one enthusiast fan tried to make the drone himself when they did not heard anything for years about the project.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I yet to see that Quds aviation build drones Half as fast as Hesa drones and the amunition of the Hesa drones are far more lethal than what Mohajer or Shahed carry and don't forget the newest Mohajer (Mohajer-6) is built by HESA not Quds Aviation and Also didn't IRGC went after Fotrus for UAVs bigger than Shahed-129 .
> 
> the advantage of Quds aviation was having Access to RQ-170 and being handed how to control a flying wing something that Hesa had to learn from scratch with Sofreh Mahi



LOL you don’t think Quds can copy a target drone from the 70’s? (Karrar)

No you are right HESA is better than Quds. Preposterous argument since mastering a flying wing design without FBW is very difficult.

Quds Aviation puts more emphasis on range rather than speed although there is a turbojet version of S-171 so I don’t know what you are talking about. Furthermore, range is reason why they Rq-170 detective was able to fly from Iran to Syria and drop PGMs on ISIS.

Stop arguing, it makes you look silly claiming HESA is more advanced than Quds Aviation in drone production.

And Shahed-129 can run circles around M-6.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> LOL you don’t think Quds can copy a target drone from the 70’s? (Karrar)


Not a copy but a modified and repurposed


TheImmortal said:


> Quds Aviation puts more emphasis on range rather than speed although there is a turbojet version of S-171 so I don’t know what you are talking about. Furthermore, range is reason why they Rq-170 detective was able to fly from Iran to Syria and drop PGMs on ISIS.


still the speed is less than half of he Karrar so not suitable for interceptor role. and by the way the longest rang of Iranian UAV's probably belong to Arash .
and also Karrar have enough range to go to Syria and come back by the way didn't AIR-Force built Kaman-12 and working on Kaman-22,don't you think those have enough range to go to Syria and come back ?


TheImmortal said:


> Stop arguing, it makes you look silly claiming HESA is more advanced than Quds Aviation in drone production.
> 
> And Shahed-129 can run circles around M-6.


probably have higher endurance the problem . how much effective was Sahed-129 against USA , UAV's like Shahed-129 are nothing but Turkey shoot against anything but ragtag militia . USA shoot it down , Pakistan shoot it down , its big , its slow , it can't defend itself. and its arsenal is not that diverse only Sadid 345


----------



## yavar

Iran Army Air Force Gen. Khajehfard: Iran-140 Plane Transportation and update

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

yavar said:


> Iran Army Air Force Gen. Khajehfard: Iran-140 Plane Transportation and update


How are the engines?


----------



## sahureka2

WudangMaster said:


> How are the engines?


question
and if to replace the Motor-Sich AI-30 , 1,838 kW (2,465 hp) that was the licensed Klimov TV3-117VMA-SBM1, using the more modern and powerful turboprop Klimov TV7-117ST, 2,610 kW (3,500 hp) that the Russians have installed on the new Ilyushin Il-112 ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_TV7-117


----------



## Ray_Atek

J10 is a delta wing canard combination fighter which can give more service than modernized f5 for IRAN AF.
NEW TECHNOLOGY BUT NOT MOST ADVANCED.

Converting Su22 to J10 can be a good project to advance Iran forward.
INSTEAD TO BUYING a J10 FOUR OR FIVE OF SU22 CAN BE CONVERTED TO J10 .
Why not?
This project give bigger J10 with under belly air intake and delta wing canard combination.


----------



## Ray_Atek

Ranesh 1
Micro turbojet
Important step in uav field






https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gwAHoECAQQAg&usg=AOvVaw0KG3mwd9Z7E26SksWU_Udn[/URL]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*drone on drone technology *

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shawnee

skyshadow said:


> *drone on drone technology *
> 
> View attachment 737431



Is it for pure demonstration or it can be released?

It appears fixed to me like sole demonstration.


----------



## WudangMaster

Shawnee said:


> Is it for pure demonstration or it can be released?
> 
> It appears fixed to me like sole demonstration.


Could that be the lead drone in the swarm of ten?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Shawnee said:


> Is it for pure demonstration or it can be released?
> 
> It appears fixed to me like sole demonstration.


there is a model of it actually flying in a test flight on the banner behind them, it has a yellow color

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Shawnee

skyshadow said:


> there is a model of it actually flying in a test flight on the banner behind them, it has a yellow color



The release latch might be under the drone and not seen.

We were waiting for mother drones since 2012. Finally happened

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shawnee said:


> The release latch might be under the drone and not seen.
> 
> We were waiting for mother drones since 2012. Finally happened


i was thinking how it gets released from mother drone as soooon as i saw it, still not as advanced of a mother drone as i hoped so, i need a RQ-170 with mini stealth drones inside its weapons bay

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> i was thinking how it gets released from mother drone as soooon as i saw it, still not as advanced of a mother drone as i hoped so, i need a RQ-170 with mini stealth drones inside its weapons bay



We saw a lot of vids where swarm drones shot out of a launcher like ToS shot out rockets and then they unfold itself and fly. This in the weapons bay.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384921308086128645

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> We saw a lot of vids where swarm drones shot out of a launcher like ToS shot out rockets and then they unfold itself and fly. This in the weapons bay.


its not rockets, its pressurized gas that pushing them out

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> its not rockets, its pressurized gas that pushing them out



Yes. I know. I can handle this lower kind of physic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> Yes. I know. I can handle this lower kind of physic.


i know brother i'm just messing with you should have seen you face it was like 😒 "i know"  , yes i agree we absolutely need this Chinese system we saw Iranian version of them only in single numbers there is pictures of them

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> i know brother i'm just messing with you should have seen you face it was like 😒 "i know"  , yes i agree we absolutely need this Chinese system we saw Iranian version of them only in single numbers there is pictures of them



Yes, 10 of them placed in the weapons bay of the iranian RQ-170. Or even 20 and more if there will be a bomber version of the iranian RQ-170 with more load. Then these stealth can sneak into airspace behind enemy lines and release the suicide drones to destroy radar positions or artillery positions and more.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Yes, 10 of them placed in the weapons bay of the iranian RQ-170. Or even 20 and more if there will be a bomber version of the iranian RQ-170 with more load. Then these stealth can sneak into airspace behind enemy lines and release the suicide drones to destroy radar positions or artillery positions and more.


Those drones are stealth themselves and depended on th model hve a range of 10 to 400km.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Those drones are stealth themselves and depended on th model hve a range of 10 to 400km.


too big they need foldable wings


----------



## Ray_Atek

Drone can be fired from a fighter

Give less action time
Longer range


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> Drone can be fired from a fighter
> 
> Give less action time
> Longer range



Truck is better. No runway needed. Iran’s drones several can launched from the bed of a pick up truck or a catapult system.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sobhan

Whats this? 🤨
Its similar to mobin cruise missile but its so big and has a little similarities with global hawk








Look at tail part of global hawk

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Sina-1

sobhan said:


> Whats this? 🤨
> Its similar too in cruise missile but its so big and has a little similarities with global hawk
> View attachment 741135
> View attachment 741136
> 
> Look at tail part of global hawk
> View attachment 741138
> View attachment 741135
> View attachment 741136
> View attachment 741138


Great find! Too big for a cruise missile. The tail part does bare resemblance to the global hawk but I think it is too small. Maybe it is scaled down version?
Another contender would navy’s sejil uav.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
3


----------



## sobhan

Sina-1 said:


> Great find! Too big for a cruise missile. The tail part does bare resemblance to the global hawk but I think it is too small. Maybe it is scaled down version?
> Another contender would navy’s sejil uav.
> View attachment 741140


Yup maybe its Sejjil drone 
Its size show that it will fly aside fighter jets or fly by AI as a group 
It would be great as an unmanned fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Sina-1 said:


> Great find! Too big for a cruise missile. The tail part does bare resemblance to the global hawk but I think it is too small. Maybe it is scaled down version?
> Another contender would navy’s sejil uav.
> View attachment 741140


The model always made me think it was going to be a smaller drone, but at the bigger size demonstrated by that craft, it is going to be something quite large and formidable in any application.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

That is incredibly huge!

It’s very thick and bulky for a cruise middle even with its low stated RCS. Theirs definitely more to this than just a CM.

And only 450km range? I have my doubt about that to be honest, but regardless I’m excited for what the application of this would be.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

I think it might be the navy's Sejjil drone; either way what engine do you suppose it uses? Owj, Jahesh, foreign made place holder engine?


----------



## TheImmortal

sobhan said:


> Whats this? 🤨
> Its similar to mobin cruise missile but its so big and has a little similarities with global hawk
> View attachment 741135
> View attachment 741136
> 
> Look at tail part of global hawk
> View attachment 741138



Other than the fact the global Hawk also uses twin tails the two are nothing a like. Global Hawk tails are thin and slanted at an angle to deflect radar waves.

Unknown Iranian UAV the tails are thick and rectangle in shape and go straight up with very little slant ness.

So not sure the comparison to global Hawk’s “tails”, other than the fact they both have twin tails which can be said for any foreign UAV (Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Turkish)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

WudangMaster said:


> I think it might be the navy's Sejjil drone; either way what engine do you suppose it uses? Owj, Jahesh, foreign made place holder engine?



Jahesh-700 has around 7 kn. I dont think one would be enough.


----------



## sobhan

TheImmortal said:


> Other than the fact the global Hawk also uses twin tails the two are nothing a like. Global Hawk tails are thin and slanted at an angle to deflect radar waves.
> 
> Unknown Iranian UAV the tails are thick and rectangle in shape and go straight up with very little slant ness.
> 
> So not sure the comparison to global Hawk’s “tails”, other than the fact they both have twin tails which can be said for any foreign UAV (Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Turkish)


Agree with that 👏

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> And only 450km range? I have my doubt about that to be honest, but regardless I’m excited for what the application of this would be.


not 450km but 450km at 10m altitude


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> not 450km but 450km at 10m altitude



Highly doubt that this CM flies at 32 feet outside of terminal stage.

Would need major AI avoidance radar and very detailed terrain mapping to not hit a bridge or building or a radio/electric tower at such altitude


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Highly doubt that this CM flies at 32 feet outside of terminal stage.
> 
> Would need major AI avoidance radar and very detailed terrain mapping to not hit a bridge or building or a radio/electric tower at such altitude


well the poster says 45 min at 10m AGL and then 450 km at 10m AGL 
also it says it have a service ceiling of 30 t0 30000 Feet and claim its speed is 900km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well the poster says 45 min at 10m AGL and then 450 km at 10m AGL
> also it says it have a service ceiling of 30 t0 30000 Feet and claim its speed is 900km



To me It just means the missile is “capable” at flying that low. Operationally not even US and Israeli CMs fly that low and they have some of the best terrain mapping in the world.

Has Iran shown off it’s terrain mapping technology? Given the lack of satellites I assume they would be buying it from Russia or China.

But to fly below 25 meters you need extremely high confidence there isn’t an unknown object along the way especially if the CM is changing its flight path routinely. Maybe the use of forward radar and avoidance Algos can help in lieu of up to date terrain mapping.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aspen

TheImmortal said:


> To me It just means the missile is “capable” at flying that low. Operationally not even US and Israeli CMs fly that low and they have some of the best terrain mapping in the world.
> 
> Has Iran shown off it’s terrain mapping technology? Given the lack of satellites I assume they would be buying it from Russia or China.
> 
> But to fly below 25 meters you need extremely high confidence there isn’t an unknown object along the way especially if the CM is changing its flight path routinely. Maybe the use of forward radar and avoidance Algos can help in lieu of up to date terrain mapping.



25m in rugged Yemeni mountains is not the same as 25m in soft hills of Saudi or Iraq. 

Chances of a mid course correction going wrong and hitting an unknown terrain boundary are significantly higher in a rugged area where 25m leaves no margin for error. The same margin of 25m may be plenty in a flat area where elevation changes are much more shallow. 

Although relatively speaking, all of this depends on how good TERCOM is and yeah 25m is still obscenely low, I would expect around 100m to clear everything while evading radar which sounds roughly around the figure somebody quoted after the Aramco strikes flew through Kuwaiti airspace.


----------



## TheImmortal

Aspen said:


> Although relatively speaking, all of this depends on how good TERCOM is and yeah 25m is still obscenely low, I would expect around 100m to clear everything while evading radar which sounds roughly around the figure somebody quoted after the Aramco strikes flew through Kuwaiti airspace.



basically repeated what I said.

And again theoretical capability on a poster and operational capability are two different things. Even when Israeli CMs and PGMs strike Syria you can see they are over 250 feet in the air when traveling out of abundance of caution.


----------



## Messerschmitt

امیر سرتیپ خواجه فرد رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی نیروهای مسلح در مصاحبه ای اخبار جدیدی از این حوزه اعلام کردند 
به گفته وی نسخه ترابری ایران ۱۴۰ طی سال جاری آماده خواهد شد.


مقدمات خط تولید هلیکوپترصبا در حال آماده سازی است و بخشی از این هلیکوپتر در شیراز تولید خواهد شد.

سه فروند جنگنده کوثر تحویل نیروی هوایی میشود تا ناوگان کوثر نهاجا به ۶ فروند برسد .


موتور جهش ۷۰۰ به صورت پروازی تست خواهد شد و سفارش های ۱۰ و ۲۰ عددی برای تولید آن وجود دارد .

نسخه تولید انبوه جت آموزشی کوثر آذر سال جاری آماده میشود. 

پهپاد فطرس با سیستم فرود و تیک اف خود کار آزمایش شده و همچنان به دنبال مشتری است.

۳ نوع پهپاد جدید آماده رونمایی است. 

برخی ویژگی های جنگنده قاهر مناسب کاربران نیست و وزارت به دنبال حل این مشکل است تا قاهر مشتری پیدا کند . 

^ from @Arteshban Telegram channel

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## makranman

Messerschmitt said:


> امیر سرتیپ خواجه فرد رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی نیروهای مسلح در مصاحبه ای اخبار جدیدی از این حوزه اعلام کردند
> به گفته وی نسخه ترابری ایران ۱۴۰ طی سال جاری آماده خواهد شد.
> 
> 
> مقدمات خط تولید هلیکوپترصبا در حال آماده سازی است و بخشی از این هلیکوپتر در شیراز تولید خواهد شد.
> 
> سه فروند جنگنده کوثر تحویل نیروی هوایی میشود تا ناوگان کوثر نهاجا به ۶ فروند برسد .
> 
> 
> موتور جهش ۷۰۰ به صورت پروازی تست خواهد شد و سفارش های ۱۰ و ۲۰ عددی برای تولید آن وجود دارد .
> 
> نسخه تولید انبوه جت آموزشی کوثر آذر سال جاری آماده میشود.
> 
> پهپاد فطرس با سیستم فرود و تیک اف خود کار آزمایش شده و همچنان به دنبال مشتری است.
> 
> ۳ نوع پهپاد جدید آماده رونمایی است.
> 
> برخی ویژگی های جنگنده قاهر مناسب کاربران نیست و وزارت به دنبال حل این مشکل است تا قاهر مشتری پیدا کند .
> 
> ^ from @Arteshban Telegram channel


یعنی تا آذر جمعا 6 تا کوثر تولید کردن؟  
فیلمی از مصاحبه هست؟ من فقط متن از باشگاه خبرنگاران می بینم...








هواپیمای ترابری نظامی ایران ۱۴۰ امسال رونمایی می‌شود/تحویل ۳ فروند جنگنده کوثر به نیروی هوایی ارتش/ سبد محصولات پهپادی ما کامل شده است


امیر سرتیپ دوم خواجه فرد رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی نیرو‌های مسلح آخرین دستاورد‌های این سازمان را تشریح کرد.




www.yjc.news


----------



## Hack-Hook

all is coming back to buyer and that come to the budget


----------



## mohsen

هواپیمای ترابری نظامی ایران ۱۴۰ امسال رونمایی می‌شود/تحویل ۳ فروند جنگنده کوثر به نیروی هوایی ارتش/ سبد محصولات پهپادی ما کامل شده است


امیر سرتیپ دوم خواجه فرد رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی نیرو‌های مسلح آخرین دستاورد‌های این سازمان را تشریح کرد.




www.yjc.news





Key point of interview:
Of the problems that occurred for the Iran-140 aircraft, 60% are related to the type of operating, not the form of flaw; ignored lower performance of this aircraft in Iran's climate. also there have been suggestions for changing one or two components including it's fuel pomp.
(still nothing has been done!)


Jahesh-700 turbofan engine is the result of studying one of enemy's products which we siezed along some domestic innovations. still we don't have a flight test platform to examine this engine in different air conditions! In the field of motor, we also have good newses for this year.

In seven months, the production version of Yasin jet trainer will be unveiled. it's size, dimensions and specifications has changed.

Fotros drone has passed it's auto take off and landing tests and currently is being evaluated by our armed forces and awaits their order for production. also 3 new drones are ready to be unveiled.


Qaher-313 was designed by our young professionals who had experience in aircraft design, it's a big project, Some parts of it have a good design and technology and some other parts currently don't match the needs of our armed forces which is natural. in a defined time period we will run some tests to introduce it's capabilities to the operators, if they approve it, we will produce the aircraft, otherwise, we will use the technical knowledge gained from this technology demonstrator product in our other projects.
(they still haven't run the tests due to lack of funds)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Qaher-313 was designed by our young professionals who had experience in aircraft design, it's a big project, Some parts of it have a good design and technology and some other parts currently don't match the needs of our armed forces which is natural. in a defined time period we will run some tests to introduce it's capabilities to the operators, if they approve it, we will produce the aircraft, otherwise, we will use the technical knowledge gained from this technology demonstrator product in our other projects.
> (they still haven't run the tests due to lack of funds)



Basically confirmation it has been shelved.


----------



## sahureka2

makranman said:


> هواپیمای ترابری نظامی ایران ۱۴۰ امسال رونمایی می‌شود/تحویل ۳ فروند جنگنده کوثر به نیروی هوایی ارتش/ سبد محصولات پهپادی ما کامل شده است
> 
> 
> امیر سرتیپ دوم خواجه فرد رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی نیرو‌های مسلح آخرین دستاورد‌های این سازمان را تشریح کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yjc.news



as written : Amir Sartip Dehghani Zanganeh, head of the Civil Aviation Organization, recently announced the change of use of the Iran 140 military transport aircraft.

but he means AN-140 in this configuration,






or in that I*ran 140 Tactical Transport Aircraft*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

What do RII Air Industries' new fighter jets and supersonic jets look like? 

The Air Industries Organization within the Armed Forces of the RII is one of the key organizations which is responsible for the planning, manufacturing and restoration of various kinds of airplanes, helicopters, drones and aircraft devices. The president of the said organization, Brigadier General Khajehfard, explains to the Club of Young Journalists (YJC) the characteristics of three important achievements of this organization.


Kowsar fighter plane

“As the Minister of Defense had planned, we will deliver at least three more Kowsar fighter jets to the Air Force during the first quarter of the current [Iranian] year [from here June 22] ”, asserted Brigadier General Khajehfard.

According to the president of the Air Industries Organization of the RII Armed Forces, the subsystems needed to make the Kowsar fighter plane are currently 100% indigenous and Iranian. “These subsystems are also used in other types of Air Force aircraft showing similarities to the Kowsar; this is a question that is often overlooked by the media, ”added the senior military official.


Yasin Supersonic Training Jet

Brigadier General Khajehfard also said the unveiling of a second Yasin training jet is scheduled for the month of Azar [November 22-December 21].

“Yasin has seen some changes in terms of dimensions and technical issues. We created and installed a special version of the still Iranian-made Owj craft on this supersonic aircraft. This means that it is by using this optimized machine that the production line of this aircraft will be launched. "


Qaher fighter plane

Brigadier General Khajehfard would like to say that he was following the news on the Qaher project even before his responsibilities at the head of the Air Industries Organization were entrusted to him, which allowed him to keep abreast of the details of the project, on its own terms.

“A number of our young technicians with experience in aircraft design have decided to plan and create a fighter jet from the ground up, and that will meet the standards of the newest generation of aircraft around the world. Thus began the Qaher project which benefits from good planning and technology. (...) We will take our time before carrying out the necessary tests and presenting the capabilities of this fighter plane. Qaher is a twin-engine, single-seat jet with two air inlets on both sides of the cockpit and two air outlets. The length of the Qaher is estimated to be less than 16 m and the distance between the two wing tips less than 11 m. This hunter is capable of carrying a large amount of state-of-the-art native ammunition and enjoys great assault power.

Qaher is capable of landing and taking off on short airstrips and most importantly the Qaher-313 is easy to maintain and restore compared to many other types of fighter jets. We also know that this Iranian fighter plane can carry up to 6 air-to-air missiles. According to former defense minister Ahmad Vahidi, this fighter plane has a very small radar equivalent area and is equipped with electro-ionic systems. Takeoff from short runways, low-level flying, and easy maintenance and catering are among the privileges of the Qaher, again according to the former defense minister. "


“Some military analysts note similarities between the Qaher-313 and the F-18 ensuring it performs well in assault missions and air wars; but we can confirm with certainty that the Qaher-313 enjoys a high operational capability in terms of low-altitude assault missions, stealth, aerial combat against enemy targets, and rapidity of action.

As for the general characteristics of this fighter plane, it remains to indicate a length of over 13m, a wing width of over 10m and a height of over 5.5m. The negative curvature of the wing tips allows the Qaher-313 to be able to maintain itself with greater stability at low speeds, an added advantage for doing high altitude patrol missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> “Some military analysts note similarities between the Qaher-313 and the F-18 ensuring it performs well in assault missions and air wars; but we can confirm with certainty that the Qaher-313 enjoys a high operational capability in terms of low-altitude assault missions, stealth, aerial combat against enemy targets, and rapidity of action.



What a load of garbage.

One plane (F-18) has existed for decades the other hasn’t even taken off the ground, but somehow already has a “high operational capability”.

Project is shelved. Nobody in Iran’s armed forces wants it.

10+ years since mock ups unveiling and they say “we are going to take our time”....what have you been doing past 10 years then?

Don’t worry @Mr Iran Eye will tell us how amazing it is based on his first hand knowledge and how Iranian F-4’s have been revamped to shoot down F-22’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

General TheImmortal is still in the field as often. Can't wait to see the next generation of Kowsar with artificial intelligence to be able to control drones?

And how long has manufacturer MiG been working on their F-35s?

Nobody wants it? It's in your head and not in the real world. Your mental tablet is an illusion

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> General TheImmortal is still in the field as often. Can't wait to see the next generation of Kowsar with artificial intelligence to be able to control drones?



You mean the whopping 3 Kowsar Iran is delivering to the Air Force in one year? Lol

Keep over hyping washed up fighters. We need fanboys like you around to laugh at.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

3 officially, but what other planes are they hiding? Did you count that ??

Through the 4th generation Kowsar, they are working scientifically to bring their future aircraft to level 4+, 4 ++ and the 5th generation. They do this at the lowest possible cost. Iran is ALWAYS more advanced than their public announcement processes.

General TheImmortal is not even aware of this evidence. Iran advances, General TheImmortal stagnates in flawed criticism


----------



## sahureka2

just a clarification, the above written by the user "Mr Iran Eye" specifically indicates:

_"Kowsar fighter plane
As the Minister of Defense had planned, we will deliver at least *three more Kowsar fighter jets to the Air Force during the first quarter of the current [Iranian] year *[from here June 22] ”, asserted Brigadier General Khajehfard"_

therefore if, as they say, it has reached mass production, the Kowsar delivered in a year, four quarters, theoretically it could be 12, which would already be an excellent result having to make every component including the engines in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> just a clarification, the above written by the user "Mr Iran Eye" specifically indicates:
> 
> _"Kowsar fighter plane
> As the Minister of Defense had planned, we will deliver at least *three more Kowsar fighter jets to the Air Force during the first quarter of the current [Iranian] year *[from here June 22] ”, asserted Brigadier General Khajehfard"_
> 
> therefore if, as they say, it has reached mass production, the Kowsar delivered in a year, four quarters, theoretically it could be 12, which would already be an excellent result having to make every component including the engines in Iran.



Kowsar is on track to produce as many “test beds” as other F-5 derivative projects dating back to Azkharash in late 1990’s which is 1-2 squadrons.

No indications that Kowsar is anything more than a test bed project to produce a limited amount (<36 fighters). And I wouldn’t be surprised if many of the airframes are re-used F-5’s similar to Karrar being a T-72 modernization project.

It’s clear from the referenced information that Iran’s declared (keyword declared) aerospace projects are suffering lack of funds. Hopefully the more serious projects (heavier engine and heavy fighter design) are progressing more fruitfully than F-313, Kowsar, and Yasir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Kowsar is on track to produce as many “test beds” as other F-5 derivative projects dating back to Azkharash in late 1990’s which is 1-2 squadrons.
> 
> No indications that Kowsar is anything more than a test bed project to produce a limited amount (<36 fighters). And I wouldn’t be surprised if many of the airframes are re-used F-5’s similar to Karrar being a T-72 modernization project.
> 
> It’s clear from the referenced information that Iran’s declared (keyword declared) aerospace projects are suffering lack of funds. Hopefully the more serious projects (heavier engine and heavy fighter design) are progressing more fruitfully than F-313, Kowsar, and Yasir.



I'm not reviewing the quality of the Kowsar, I just wanted to point out the written words.
Furthermore, if a certain model of aircraft is produced in a limited total number of specimens, they can be defined as prototopic production or test bench, if, as Mr. Theimmortal, will reach 36 copies, the definition of production changes and you can write "mass production".
however 36 newly produced Kowsar also, as you write, recycling old F-5s, which in any case I am sure that they would be only some components of them and carefully tested and regenerated, would already be a considerable achievement both for the Iranian aviation industry and for the air force.
These additional 3 Kowsar will likely be part of those that were visible on the production line in a video from the recent past, so they will be two-seaters, but they also announced a single-seater version, and I'm curious to see if it will be extrapolated from the single-seater F-5 or whether to make the car they will use, adapting the same fuselage as the two-seater Kowsar.
They could thus have additional space to use, for example also increase the capacities of the internal fuel tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

sahureka2 said:


> I'm not reviewing the quality of the Kowsar, I just wanted to point out the written words.
> Furthermore, if a certain model of aircraft is produced in a limited total number of specimens, they can be defined as prototopic production or test bench, if, as Mr. Theimmortal, will reach 36 copies, the definition of production changes and you can write "mass production".
> however 36 newly produced Kowsar also, as you write, recycling old F-5s, which in any case I am sure that they would be only some components of them and carefully tested and regenerated, would already be a considerable achievement both for the Iranian aviation industry and for the air force.
> These additional 3 Kowsar will likely be part of those that were visible on the production line in a video from the recent past, so they will be two-seaters, but they also announced a single-seater version, and I'm curious to see if it will be extrapolated from the single-seater F-5 or whether to make the car they will use, adapting the same fuselage as the two-seater Kowsar.
> They could thus have additional space to use, for example also increase the capacities of the internal fuel tanks.


I do not know why no one talks about potential of export of Kowsar ...considering that price of trainer/fighter aircraft is around $30 million (Russian yak 130 )...this aircraft at around $10 million will be so attractive as a trainer/fighter. Am I missing something here...a small export order for a country such as Iraq can do wonders to a production line..

I found this interesting.. Prices are astronomical..add to them the spare parts, maintenance ..midlife upgrade etc...who can afford these prices..








Top 10 most expensive fighter jets in 2021


Fighter jets are the most advanced, the most powerful, the most complex aircraft out there. Thy also cost a lot. But which fighter jet is the most expensive?




www.aerotime.aero

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

aryobarzan said:


> I do not know why no one talks about potential of export of Kowsar ...considering that price of trainer/fighter aircraft is around $30 million (Russian yak 130 )...this aircraft at around $10 million will be so attractive as a trainer/fighter. Am I missing something here...a small export order for a country such as Iraq can do wonders to a production line..
> 
> I found this interesting.. Prices are astronomical..add to them the spare parts, maintenance ..midlife upgrade etc...who can afford these prices..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top 10 most expensive fighter jets in 2021
> 
> 
> Fighter jets are the most advanced, the most powerful, the most complex aircraft out there. Thy also cost a lot. But which fighter jet is the most expensive?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aerotime.aero



Syria could also be interested in the Kowsar both single-seater and two-seater, possibly to replace the now old and widely used Mig-21 and Mig-21UB.
And .... the trainer Yasin in the future as a replacement for the L-39 Albatros

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> I do not know why no one talks about potential of export of Kowsar





sahureka2 said:


> Syria could also be interested in the Kowsar both single-seater and two-seater, possibly to replace the now old and widely used Mig-21 and Mig-21UB.
> And .... the trainer Yasin in the future as a replacement for the L-39 Albatros


I think the issue is the capacity for building these at industrial level as opposed to workshop level. The question for me is can Iran build more aircraft per year and just building enough to meet the limited orders from IRIAF or is this the maximum capacity of the number of units per year it can produce, regardless of if IRIAF want more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


> I think the issue is the capacity for building these at industrial level as opposed to workshop level. The question for me is can Iran build more aircraft per year and just building enough to meet the limited orders from IRIAF or is this the maximum capacity of the number of units per year it can produce, regardless of if IRIAF want more.


If they get an outside order they can justify the expense to ramp up the production which means buying and retooling...for military production ramp up you always need advanced booked orders...getting the machinery is not a big issue when funds are there even for case of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I do not know why no one talks about potential of export of Kowsar ...considering that price of trainer/fighter aircraft is around $30 million (Russian yak 130 )...this aircraft at around $10 million will be so attractive as a trainer/fighter. Am I missing something here...a small export order for a country such as Iraq can do wonders to a production line..



Because countries either integrate their military with Western products (US/European fighters) or Eastern products (Russian or Chinese knock off of Russian).

Thus the Kowsar just isn’t viable in the export market unless you are trying to sell it to Syria or maybe Iraq (firmly in Western orbit of arms dealing).

Even within Iran, Kowsar hasn’t been that warmly received. Just a few orders here and there just like Saeghe 1 & 2 and other F-5 derivative projects before it.



aryobarzan said:


> If they get an outside order they can justify the expense to ramp up the production which means buying and retooling...for military production ramp up you always need advanced booked orders...getting the machinery is not a big issue when funds are there even for case of Iran.



How is Syria, a bankrupt country that already owes Iran billions gonna pay for fighter jets?

And mass production of 200+ aircraft will make sense getting the supply chain/warehouses/engineer& worker pool to build such an aircraft, but neither Iraq nor Syria will be buying in large numbers.

You guys simply overestimate the conservative nature of Iranian Air Force. They have never taken a gamble on a domestic aerospace project and always play it conservatively. They refuse to fund F-313.

I wouldn’t waste any hope on these projects and wait for further information on medium and heavy engines being developed and their respective fighter designs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Qaher need some modification on wings and canard.


----------



## sanel1412

Kowsar trio ,at the end of first video for moment one MFDs can be seen,map loaded as I can see...seems these have different cocpit without HUD,probably second seat project everything on these MFDs,including HUD

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> You guys simply overestimate the *conservative* nature of Iranian Air Force


I think catatonic might be a better description of the current state of the air force,sadly.


----------



## Menschmaschine

sahureka2 said:


> I'm not reviewing the quality of the Kowsar, I just wanted to point out the written words.
> Furthermore, if a certain model of aircraft is produced in a limited total number of specimens, they can be defined as prototopic production or test bench, if, as Mr. Theimmortal, will reach 36 copies, the definition of production changes and you can write "mass production".
> however 36 newly produced Kowsar also, as you write, recycling old F-5s, which in any case I am sure that they would be only some components of them and carefully tested and regenerated, would already be a considerable achievement both for the Iranian aviation industry and for the air force.
> These additional 3 Kowsar will likely be part of those that were visible on the production line in a video from the recent past, so they will be two-seaters, but they also announced a single-seater version, and I'm curious to see if it will be extrapolated from the single-seater F-5 or whether to make the car they will use, adapting the same fuselage as the two-seater Kowsar.
> They could thus have additional space to use, for example also increase the capacities of the internal fuel tanks.



I think rebuilding existing F-5 to Kowsar is a very good use of resources. Iran gets a fully indigenized (including engines) advanced supersonic jet trainer which still can be used as a second line fighter/ground attack aircraft in wartime. I however don't think that a major production run of all new Kowsar aircraft would make sense.

As for new aircraft, I am somewhat puzzled that I don't see any mention of the MiG 31, which Iran after all did try to acquire several times in the past. A MiG 31 upgraded to BSM standard would still be an extremely potent asset, and at moderate cost if the Russian government agrees to transfer stored aircraft for free or a nominal price. A contract for upgrade of "more than 50" MiG 31 did run to $630 million (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014...ghter-force-to-get-630-million-upgrade-a41795), so would be about $15 million apiece.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

sanel1412 said:


> Kowsar trio ,at the end of first video for moment one MFDs can be seen,map loaded as I can see...seems these have different cocpit without HUD,probably second seat project everything on these MFDs,including HUD


I know there isn't enough money for it, but I would really love to see a couple of squadrons of Kowsars as an aerobatics team performing like the Swifts of the Russian air Force or Blue Angels or others. Whatever limitations the aircraft might have for modern long range a2a warfare, the platform seems amongst the best for tight maneuvering and the kind of actions that dazzle audiences at air shows. I remember Yaghoot from the old Iran defence .net forum who was an IRIAF F-5 pilot in the 1990s discussing how agile the plane was and its nimbleness was an asset during the imposed war.


----------



## TheImmortal

Menschmaschine said:


> I think rebuilding existing F-5 to Kowsar is a very good use of resources. Iran gets a fully indigenized (including engines) advanced supersonic jet trainer which still can be used as a second line fighter/ground attack aircraft in wartime. I however don't think that a major production run of all new Kowsar aircraft would make sense.
> 
> As for new aircraft, I am somewhat puzzled that I don't see any mention of the MiG 31, which Iran after all did try to acquire several times in the past. A MiG 31 upgraded to BSM standard would still be an extremely potent asset, and at moderate cost if the Russian government agrees to transfer stored aircraft for free or a nominal price. A contract for upgrade of "more than 50" MiG 31 did run to $630 million (https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014...ghter-force-to-get-630-million-upgrade-a41795), so would be about $15 million apiece.



Russia won’t even supply MIG-31’s to Iran.

Neither Russia nor China want to supply advanced jets. They don’t want to deal with the headache.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Menschmaschine

TheImmortal said:


> Russia won’t even supply MIG-31’s to Iran.
> 
> Neither Russia nor China want to supply advanced jets. They don’t want to deal with the headache.



How do you know? Russian officials have said that they are ready to sell the S-400 air defence system. so I don't see why fighter aircraft would be a problem. So far it seems that the lack of action is because Iran is not ordering.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Menschmaschine said:


> How do you know? Russian officials have said that they are ready to sell the S-400 air defence system. so I don't see why fighter aircraft would be a problem. So far it seems that the lack of action is because Iran is not ordering.


they offered S-400 after we fielded Bavar not before that . we build a new aircraft comparable to the airplanes they have and they gladly sell us that airplane

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Menschmaschine said:


> How do you know? Russian officials have said that they are ready to sell the S-400 air defence system. so I don't see why fighter aircraft would be a problem. So far it seems that the lack of action is because Iran is not ordering.



Because S-400 is a defensive asset used to defend ones territory. You cant use an S-400 to bomb Saudi Arabia or fire upon US ships in the PG.

Can’t believe you are comparing the two. And also Russia only offered the S-400 knowing Iran didn’t need it anymore with its Bavar system. So it offered something it knew iran would reject.

Russia will offer Mig-31 once Iran can build something in the same ballpark. That is how Russia operates.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> Because S-400 is a defensive asset used to defend ones territory. You cant use an S-400 to bomb Saudi Arabia or fire upon US ships in the PG.
> 
> Can’t believe you are comparing the two. And also Russia only offered the S-400 knowing Iran didn’t need it anymore with its Bavar system. So it offered something it knew iran would reject.
> 
> Russia will offer Mig-31 once Iran can build something in the same ballpark. That is how Russia operates.



Well said TheImmortal.

I heard the VERY same words come out of a member of parliament in UK, many years ago. There is a pub downstairs in House of Commons, and by noon MPs are plastered out of their heads, some even facing down on the ground (I swear I saw it many times), but when drunk they tell you what they think. Many times I heard them say that ..."Soviets reacts to what you can do, and how far you can go, they adapt their behavior based on that, not an ideological or calculated points of economics and gain". I use to presentations on technology that MOD was working on with RR to the MPs, for about 4 months (many years ago).

If Iran could build a upgraded F-14 with an equivalent Ibiza-E radar, with AL21 engines, the Russians would them sell Iran a Mig31 with an Ibiza-M radar and a powerful turbofan. You are very correct in the way you assess the Russian way of thinking.

Russians see other countries as FreNemies (not quite friends, and not quite enemies).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> Russia won’t even supply MIG-31’s to Iran.
> 
> Neither Russia nor China want to supply advanced jets. They don’t want to deal with the headache.



Indeed.

But Iran CAN coerce them gently.

It may be hard to believe, but there was a time around 1977-1984 when Iran had some of the smartest people in politics (like Behashtee who had been educated in Germany). Those guys were really sharp and much smarter than people at the same level in U.S. and Europe - and certainly around middle east.

Current Iranian government needs to let the best come to top and elevate the country. They have to. They have no choice. Sooner, or later.

Iran can also start trading with Gold.

Diversify Iran's leadership with younger blood and get more youth involvement.

Promote women businesses. That would not ruffle too many feathers in the male dominated country.

Have Max Blumenthal "management of savagery" book translated and published for free in Farsi and Arabic, and promoted to the youth.

Have New American Century translated and published for free in Farsi and Arabic, and promoted to the youth.

Have youth magazine called "17", where they get articles in English printed on LEFT side and the Farsi translation on the RIGHT side. These articles should included all the Conservative articles demonizing and villainizing of Iran and Arabs and Central and South Americans.

There is so much Iran gov can do BUT they are out of creativity juice, they need to get the youth take over some communication and narrative.


Sineva said:


> I think catatonic might be a better description of the current state of the air force,sadly.



Iran airforce leadership has not been a visionary for decades. It needs another Gen. Khatami. But it doesn't. He knew how politics is needed and can be massaged for the sake of better utilized, funded, and resourced for the air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Menschmaschine

TheImmortal said:


> Because S-400 is a defensive asset used to defend ones territory. You cant use an S-400 to bomb Saudi Arabia or fire upon US ships in the PG.
> 
> Can’t believe you are comparing the two. And also Russia only offered the S-400 knowing Iran didn’t need it anymore with its Bavar system. So it offered something it knew iran would reject.
> 
> Russia will offer Mig-31 once Iran can build something in the same ballpark. That is how Russia operates.



Since we have no insider information, we can only speculate. However, it is reasonable to assume that if the Iranian Government would have requested an arms purchase and the Russian side had denied it, some kind of news about it would have leaked out. The apparent complete lack of activity seems to indicate that the current Iranian Government is simply not interested in buying fighters.


----------



## Menschmaschine

EvilWesteners said:


> Well said TheImmortal.
> 
> I heard the VERY same words come out of a member of parliament in UK, many years ago. There is a pub downstairs in House of Commons, and by noon MPs are plastered out of their heads, some even facing down on the ground (I swear I saw it many times), but when drunk they tell you what they think. Many times I heard them say that ..."Soviets reacts to what you can do, and how far you can go, they adapt their behavior based on that, not an ideological or calculated points of economics and gain". I use to presentations on technology that MOD was working on with RR to the MPs, for about 4 months (many years ago).
> 
> If Iran could build a upgraded F-14 with an equivalent Ibiza-E radar, with AL21 engines, the Russians would them sell Iran a Mig31 with an Ibiza-M radar and a powerful turbofan. You are very correct in the way you assess the Russian way of thinking.
> 
> Russians see other countries as FreNemies (not quite friends, and not quite enemies).



Sorry, but this does not make sense. Russia has absolutely no problems to sell fighters and other arms to about everyone. The reason that this was not the case for Iran is, of course, US pressure. But it is reasonable to assume that given the massively ramped up US hostility against Russia the impetus to succumb to such pressure is now very much reduced.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MMCM

Did the ex-Iraqi mirage F-1s that fled to Iran back in 1991, come equipped with the Remora ECM pods? and if they're still in operational service with the current IRIAF F1 fleet?


----------



## Muhammed45

Overhauled F-4s, F-5s, F-7s, Mig-29s and F14s Sukhois Flying again.

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Menschmaschine said:


> Russia has absolutely no problems to sell fighters and other arms to about everyone.



Are you this out of the loop regarding geopolitics? The more I read your posts the more it sounds like you just argue for sake of arguing and are quite out of touch with reality.

The user @EvilWesteners who you disagreed with in the above post actually has worked on jet engines and significant military projects around the world and has extensive knowledge regarding state of Iranian affairs.

Russia sells to banana countries that pose zero threat to world powers or they sell to US allies (Turkey, PG Arabs, Asian countries) in hopes of
Getting more lucrative arm sales from them or pulling them away from Us orbit. Meaning weapons are just a means of coercion.

Iran goes against directly against Western interests and maybe is the only country in the world that goes so much against Western interest followed by China. Thus the US (and Israel) have a real interest in preventing the Iranian war machine from improving.

That is why UAE can get F-35 and Algeria can get SU-35 while Iran cannot even get a degraded SU-27 from Russia.

Banana countries have many fancy toys but pose zero threat to the king makers. Learn that and you will begin to better understand geopolitics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Are you this out of the loop regarding geopolitics? The more I read your posts the more it sounds like you just argue for sake of arguing and are quite out of touch with reality.
> 
> The user @EvilWesteners who you disagreed with in the above post actually has worked on jet engines and significant military projects around the world and has extensive knowledge regarding state of Iranian affairs.
> 
> Russia sells to banana countries that pose zero threat to world powers or they sell to US allies (Turkey, PG Arabs, Asian countries) in hopes of
> Getting more lucrative arm sales from them or pulling them away from Us orbit. Meaning weapons are just a means of coercion.
> 
> Iran goes against directly against Western interests and maybe is the only country in the world that goes so much against Western interest followed by China. Thus the US (and Israel) have a real interest in preventing the Iranian war machine from improving.
> 
> That is why UAE can get F-35 and Algeria can get SU-35 while Iran cannot even get a degraded SU-27 from Russia.
> 
> Banana countries have many fancy toys but pose zero threat to the king makers. Learn that and you will begin to better understand geopolitics.



Have you ever wondered why so many here put so much blind faith into Russia's supposed "Iranian friendship" when all indications on the ground point to the opposite? I mean supporting U.N. sanctions and refusing to sell necessary military equipment is enough to put a rather resolute stop on any sort of notion that the Russian Federation is Iran's "best pal" or whatever, or even looking out for Iranian interests.

It never fails to amaze me and it reeks of desperation/ignorance in geopolitics from those still thinking such things.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Menschmaschine

TheImmortal said:


> Are you this out of the loop regarding geopolitics? The more I read your posts the more it sounds like you just argue for sake of arguing and are quite out of touch with reality.
> 
> The user @EvilWesteners who you disagreed with in the above post actually has worked on jet engines and significant military projects around the world and has extensive knowledge regarding state of Iranian affairs.
> 
> Russia sells to banana countries that pose zero threat to world powers or they sell to US allies (Turkey, PG Arabs, Asian countries) in hopes of
> Getting more lucrative arm sales from them or pulling them away from Us orbit. Meaning weapons are just a means of coercion.
> 
> Iran goes against directly against Western interests and maybe is the only country in the world that goes so much against Western interest followed by China. Thus the US (and Israel) have a real interest in preventing the Iranian war machine from improving.
> 
> That is why UAE can get F-35 and Algeria can get SU-35 while Iran cannot even get a degraded SU-27 from Russia.
> 
> Banana countries have many fancy toys but pose zero threat to the king makers. Learn that and you will begin to better understand geopolitics.



Well, it seems that it is you that likes to argue for the sake of it since most of what you write does not really contradict my assertions. Let's go over my answers one more time:



> Since we have no insider information, we can only speculate. However, it is reasonable to assume that if the Iranian Government would have requested an arms purchase and the Russian side had denied it, some kind of news about it would have leaked out. The apparent complete lack of activity seems to indicate that the current Iranian Government is simply not interested in buying fighters.





> Russia has absolutely no problems to sell fighters and other arms to about everyone. The reason that this was not the case for Iran is, of course, US pressure. But it is reasonable to assume that given the massively ramped up US hostility against Russia the impetus to succumb to such pressure is now very much reduced.



I only say that the situation has changed since the last time that Russia has squashed arms deals with Iran. I don't deny that the abuse that the US dishes out against Russia might still not be enough to dissuade the Russian government from pandering to the US by refusing fighter sales. But we won't know until the Iranian government actually tries to place an order, something, that apparently has not happened (yet?).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

It is excessively pessimistic to say that Russia would not sell arms to Iran if a large enough order came through. The economic benefits of that would outweigh anything the west is willing to do to dissuade a sale.

Remember; arms sales not only bring in huge export revenues, but they also increase the production run and therefore decrease the cost-per-unit of each piece of equipment. Hence Russia's accommodation of India in the T-50/FGFA development which fell through. Another avenue that Iran has to look into.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> It is excessively pessimistic to say that Russia would not sell arms to Iran if a large enough order came through. The economic benefits of that would outweigh anything the west is willing to do to dissuade a sale.
> 
> Remember; arms sales not only bring in huge export revenues, but they also increase the production run and therefore decrease the cost-per-unit of each piece of equipment. Hence Russia's accommodation of India in the T-50/FGFA development which fell through. Another avenue that Iran has to look into.



This is a massive fallacy and goes against past precedent. Quite frankly it’s disappointing talk from such an knowledable member of the forum.

There is no Iranian arms contract worth pissing off the Israelis and US. Remember that they have pressure points on sensitive Russian interests as well. For years they dangled supposed “Iranian missile interceptors” in Europe as negotiating tactic to prevent Russian from helping Iran.

Past evidence is quite clear.....since 1990’s many “large” contracts were placed with a cash strapped and collapsed post Soviet Russia and most got cancelled. So when Russia was most desperate for cash they still screwed Iran.

Things are so bad that Iran *did not trust Russia to refurbish its Kilo subs*, it secretly feared that Russia (who was asking for the refurbishment to be done in Russia) would *never return the subs back. *It was one of the reasons Iran decided to do it themselves.

So again the “trust me this time is different bro”excuse is tired and worn out. A $5B or $10B contract won’t make Russia risk geopolitical fall out that could cost it 20,50, 100B in the long run. Billions don’t make Russians get out of bed, maybe Iranians, but not the Russians.

And the T-50 project *only proves my point. India complained that Russia went against contract terms. *Didn’t share ToT, repeatedly kept India in the dark, and kept raising the costs on India to fund the project. India eventually left out of frustration. That example is a prime reason where India that has ZERO problems getting weapons was still screwed by over by Russia.

Now imagine if Iran was involved in that? And that’s what your advocating? Wow seems like Shafagh project is a distant memory.

Relying on Russia for big ticket offensive items is what a fool would do.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Iran develop its own fighter jets like China did. China started off with basically nothing and now has best combat jets in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Tai Hai Chen said:


> China started off with basically nothing



That’s some serious revisionist history you believe in. China started with “nothing”? Lol most of your fighters are copied Soviet fighters some built with ToT, some built under license, and some built by yourselves.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

TheImmortal said:


> That’s some serious revisionist history you believe in. China started with “nothing”? Lol most of your fighters are copied Soviet fighters some built with ToT, some built under license, and some built by yourselves.



Nothing compared to what Iran got. F-14A in the 70s. MiG-29A in the 90s. The most China got was MiG-21 in the 60s when Russia and China became enemies and China had to make everything itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> This is a massive fallacy and goes against past precedent. Quite frankly it’s disappointing talk from such an knowledable member of the forum.
> 
> There is no Iranian arms contract worth pissing off the Israelis and US. Remember that they have pressure points on sensitive Russian interests as well. For years they dangled supposed “Iranian missile interceptors” in Europe as negotiating tactic to prevent Russian from helping Iran.
> 
> Past evidence is quite clear.....since 1990’s many “large” contracts were placed with a cash strapped and collapsed post Soviet Russia and most got cancelled. So when Russia was most desperate for cash they still screwed Iran.
> 
> Things are so bad that Iran *did not trust Russia to refurbish its Kilo subs*, it secretly feared that Russia (who was asking for the refurbishment to be done in Russia) would *never return the subs back. *It was one of the reasons Iran decided to do it themselves.
> 
> So again the “trust me this time is different bro”excuse is tired and worn out. A $5B or $10B contract won’t make Russia risk geopolitical fall out that could cost it 20,50, 100B in the long run. Billions don’t make Russians get out of bed, maybe Iranians, but not the Russians.
> 
> And the T-50 project *only proves my point. India complained that Russia went against contract terms. *Didn’t share ToT, repeatedly kept India in the dark, and kept raising the costs on India to fund the project. India eventually left out of frustration. That example is a prime reason where India that has ZERO problems getting weapons was still screwed by over by Russia.
> 
> Now imagine if Iran was involved in that? And that’s what your advocating? Wow seems like Shafagh project is a distant memory.
> 
> Relying on Russia for big ticket offensive items is what a fool would do.


The extent of Zionist control of Russia (and Putin and friends) is a subject that even Russians themselves do not agree upon its extent...But yes in any case Russia does what is good for Russia and selling game changing hardware to Iran is not good for Russia and not in the cards (your point)..unless the Price tag is way high (my guess > $50 billion) and that is far beyond what Iran is willing to put on the table (Amir's point).

I am actually happy that the end result is no purchase will happen sellers are not selling and buyer is not interested...All doors closed so lets roll up the sleeves and start the journey to a serious In-house aviation Industry ..It is doable (how do you eat and elephant!!...one spoon at a time!.)

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Menschmaschine

TheImmortal said:


> There is no Iranian arms contract worth pissing off the Israelis and US.



If you had paid any attention to the relationship between the US and Russia in the last half decade or so, you would have noted that it is already characterised by an extreme hostility of the US to Russia. It is obviously ridiculous to expect that a denial for some arms contract would change something about this. 

As for Israel, in itself it is of course of no particular importance - it is only important because of the influence it has on the US via the Jewish-Zionist lobby. Note however that while US hostility to Russia is indeed driven in large part by Jewish animosity, this is not out of a specific Zionist motivation, but mainly because of a historical grudge regarding the supposed injustices Jews according to their victim mythology had to endure by Russia after its takeover of the Pale of Settlement.

Of course, the fact that it would be futile to try to mollify the the US by a denial of an arms contract with Iran does not preclude that the Russian government still would do it. Foreign policy is often not rational. But, as I said, we won't know until Iran actually tries to place an order.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Menschmaschine

aryobarzan said:


> The extent of Zionist control of Russia (and Putin and friends) is a subject that even Russians themselves do not agree upon its extent...



I read a comment by a Russian that Russia is the only country were the Armenian lobby has more influence than the Jewish lobby (Which is obviously still not very great). 

The animosity of the US to Russia is also a clear indicator. Jews have been spoiled by their control of the US and by extension the rest of the "Western" world. Any major country, even if not adverse to Jewisch interests and Israel, that is not under their influence is therefore viewed with suspicion and hostility. You can see this play out in the aggressivene behaviour of the US against Russia and China (In the case of Russia additionally historical grudges also play a role, as I have explained in another post).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Underground the Shafaq project still exists! There are people here who lack intuition


----------



## WudangMaster

Tai Hai Chen said:


> and China had to make everything itself.


I think China did have access to Mig-21 parts when they were transiting through China enroute to North Vietnam. I heard they were transferred by rail and by the time they arrived in Hanoi, the Soviets found that components were replicated with Chinese copies and original parts were removed. This was due to Soviets refusing to transfer all ToT to China for the Mig-21, like they had promised to do. So another example of Soviets/Russians screwing over customers, but this time, China was determined to gets its rights!


TheImmortal said:


> And the T-50 project *only proves my point. India complained that Russia went against contract terms. *Didn’t share ToT, repeatedly kept India in the dark, and kept raising the costs on India to fund the project. India eventually left out of frustration. That example is a prime reason where India that has ZERO problems getting weapons was still screwed by over by Russia.


I heard similar nightmares stories for India involving their aircraft carrier purchase from Russia...


----------



## Menschmaschine

WudangMaster said:


> I think China did have access to Mig-21 parts when they were transiting through China enroute to North Vietnam. I heard they were transferred by rail and by the time they arrived in Hanoi, the Soviets found that components were replicated with Chinese copies and original parts were removed. This was due to Soviets refusing to transfer all ToT to China for the Mig-21, like they had promised to do. So another example of Soviets/Russians screwing over customers, but this time, China was determined to gets its rights!



The Soviet Union actually did deliver a great deal of stuff, including a number of complete MiG 21 aircraft both in assembled as well as in kit form. That further support was not forthcoming was due to the general breakdown of Chinese-Soviet relations, something that was mostly the fault of the Chinese leadership (In fact, the MiG-21 technology transfer was initiated by Khruchtchev as a gesture of good to bring relations back on track in the first place).


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Underground the Shafaq project still exists! There are people here who lack intuition



 This guy is a wack job, he is Iran’s “Baghdad Bob”.


Menschmaschine said:


> If you had paid any attention to the relationship between the US and Russia in the last half decade or so, you would have noted that it is already characterised by an extreme hostility of the US to Russia. It is obviously ridiculous to expect that a denial for some arms contract would change something about this.



Again with the “this time it’s different bro” excuse. Not gonna waste any time on that.

Russia has more economic interests with the West (#1 natural gas supplier to Europe) than with Iran (a direct competitor in many areas).

So whatever differences they have don’t forget Putin meets US President and Israeli prime minister several times a year and only meets Iran what? Every couple years?

Russia and Israel have arms defense contracts (UAVs) and closely coordinate their responses. That is why Israel can strike 2000 times in Syria against Iran and Russia just shrugs their shoulders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

This is all irrelevant. Iran will never acquire foreign combat craft enough to be battle relevant. Never. What amazes me is the back and forth on why Russia would sell or not. The real question is whether *Iran* will buy or not. It won't. Maybe a handful for TOT. MAYBE. Now go ahead and argue about an impossible acquisition for another 20 years.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

General TheImmortal is confused in his head and thinks that there are no other more secret projects for the Air Force. You have no intuition and it will be revealed when Iran decides to reveal their little secrets. Their new big engine and already built and tested for a long time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Mr Iran Eye said:


> General TheImmortal is confused in his head and thinks that there are no other more secret projects for the Air Force. You have no intuition and it will be revealed when Iran decides to reveal their little secrets. Their new big engine and already built and tested for a long time



With all respect, no insult intended, but I believe that you are deliberately attempting to CONFUSE yourself and not understand what TheImmortal is trying to say.

Please consider with an open mind, what is being said.

I speak with a few people in Iran IRIAF, and I assure you there are NO major projects for air force aircraft design and manufacturing other than comprehensive overhaul (quite impressive one in fact).

There are many MAPNA projects, yes of course, however no fighter jet engine, and please understand that even RR cannot do what you may associate with Iran's potential with so little budget and so little resources and so few supporting factories for aircraft design and manufacturing.

You may wish for Iran to have certain capacities, and it may hurt your feelings to know that they do not have such capacities, but the truth is the truth. People who love Iran, want to believe in Iran. I am just like you. However, we much evolve and "bare" the truth. Jews are very good at accepting the truth and uniting together to go change the truth into a new reality. That is what Iranians will eventually have to do.

In fact, we have in certain areas, and it is well demonstrated. Iran has done incredible projects building dams, tunnels, piping, etc.

Wishful thinking is not going to become reality. Reality is when we act and do. Struggle, of course, but eventually accomplish. Most often in baby steps. Let's allow the truth to strengthen us, not allow fiction to sooth our pain and keep us wishing and dreaming in a fictional world.

Here in U.S. $1,000 is not necessarily a huge amount of money, where I live, and the kind of job I have. But this money in Iran has helped 3 entire families and I am shocked how much this money has done for this 3 families in West of Tehran.

Iranian people over there are suffering. That is the truth.

Iranian government does not have the money to spend for R&D for an entire new aircraft for the IRIAF or any other military branch at the moment. Let's hope we can for the future.

However, an amazing thing about Iran and Iranians, we keep our money for the rainy day. Meaning, how do you think Iran has managed to withstand the last 3-4 years of the Trump administration?

Someone will one day write about that and people in the West will be surprised. How many other nations on earth could have withstood so much pressure?

Have a wonderful weekend my friend.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> This guy is a wack job, he is Iran’s “Baghdad Bob”.
> 
> 
> Again with the “this time it’s different bro” excuse. Not gonna waste any time on that.
> 
> Russia has more economic interests with the West (#1 natural gas supplier to Europe) than with Iran (a direct competitor in many areas).
> 
> So whatever differences they have don’t forget Putin meets US President and Israeli prime minister several times a year and only meets Iran what? Every couple years?
> 
> Russia and Israel have arms defense contracts (UAVs) and closely coordinate their responses. That is why Israel can strike 2000 times in Syria against Iran and Russia just shrugs their shoulders.



Russia, China, India, and now even all the smaller countries in Europe (Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, etc.) and even Pakistan and to fair, even Iran, are all playing or participating in the BIG GAME.

Russian indeed does not have any consideration towards supporting Iran from an ideological sense. Russia has interests not friends.

I have worked with quite a few young Russian and old Russian engineers in my time. I learned from them that they see everything Internationally through the prism of WW2 Germany signing a no-aggression act with them, and then after kicking the British *** (Montgomery) out of Belgium, and thinking that they have defeated Brits/France they turned on Russia.

Russian is actually a very new country, they see themselves with a history of about 400ish years. They have used what happened with Germany as a means of how they think of everyone else. Always waiting to be stabbed in the back.

And they are playing a game of chess with Iran being a pawn. They have enormous fear of Iran on their borders, and will never see it any other way. They know that at least 50% of Iranians have little regard for Russian, whether to do with being the Iran propaganda or be it to do with Treaty of Golestan or Turkmenchy. Whatever it may be. 

And it is somewhat true. Many Iranians are distrustful of Russia.

I am not confident that Russia would help Iran in any way regarding top level technology other than lower level things which they may think that Iran can achieve on its own anyways. They will for instance, I believe although I could be wrong, for a worthwhile contract help Iran manufacture either R35 or AL21F. 

One thing that Russia loves (from their own engineering schools motto and their tough history) is countries that have guts and rise up and are "STRONG". They loved it when Iran shot down the RQ-4A - they had a new level of respect for Iran. Then Iran sat back down and did nothing in Syria. 

Russian understand POWER PLAY and STRENGTH DISPLAY and its implications. 

Did Iran lose the opportunity? Is that why 60% of Israelis say in a survey that they support their government to use nukes against Iran. as they see Iran weak and not responding to assassinations and covert operations?

May be.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

Menschmaschine said:


> If you had paid any attention to the relationship between the US and Russia in the last half decade or so, you would have noted that it is already characterised by an extreme hostility of the US to Russia. It is obviously ridiculous to expect that a denial for some arms contract would change something about this.
> 
> As for Israel, in itself it is of course of no particular importance - it is only important because of the influence it has on the US via the Jewish-Zionist lobby. Note however that while US hostility to Russia is indeed driven in large part by Jewish animosity, this is not out of a specific Zionist motivation, but mainly because of a historical grudge regarding the supposed injustices Jews according to their victim mythology had to endure by Russia after its takeover of the Pale of Settlement.
> 
> Of course, the fact that it would be futile to try to mollify the the US by a denial of an arms contract with Iran does not preclude that the Russian government still would do it. Foreign policy is often not rational. But, as I said, we won't know until Iran actually tries to place an order.




Actually foreign policy is often very, very rational and non-emotional. That is what angers the people often.

Russia's number 1 priority right now is the Natural Gas pipeline to Germany, or as they say it, to go back to 2012-2013 when they had great relationship with Germany and they felt like 2 best friends. I was in Kata Beach Thailand in a very well known hotel for aviation engineers, mostly Russian customers, and some German, (80% to 10% respectively), and saw how Russians and Germans were talking about their perspective countries and their cooperation. They had such a great relationship and felt like best friends.

Then CIA got to Ukraine and the Crimea situation and the Germany just put their foot in their mouth and their relationship went sour.

Russia's number 1 goal is to go back to that, and see themselves again with 140B Euros in the bank.

Their second goal is to get rid of sanctions against them and put U.S. back on the wrong footing again, as U.S. was with the mortgage crisis of 2008-2010.

Russia will trade Iran's needs or wishes or anything to do with Iran, to get its way with her 2 priorities. Iran is a pawn in their negotiations with the U.S. That is all.

To be fair, so do China and India, to a lesser degree.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

aryobarzan said:


> The extent of Zionist control of Russia (and Putin and friends) is a subject that even Russians themselves do not agree upon its extent...But yes in any case Russia does what is good for Russia and selling game changing hardware to Iran is not good for Russia and not in the cards (your point)..unless the Price tag is way high (my guess > $50 billion) and that is far beyond what Iran is willing to put on the table (Amir's point).
> 
> I am actually happy that the end result is no purchase will happen sellers are not selling and buyer is not interested...All doors closed so lets roll up the sleeves and start the journey to a serious In-house aviation Industry ..It is doable (how do you eat and elephant!!...one spoon at a time!.)



hehe, I have heard that expression in the West in so many different flavors.

A giant project needs to be broken up again and again to smaller pieces, until there are single manageable tasks and then it is suddenly doable - that is what I learned from the crazy project called NIMROD MRA4 (1993-2010 RIP). yaaaeeeks.

Well said Aryobarzan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

EvilWesteners said:


> With all respect, no insult intended, but I believe that you are deliberately attempting to CONFUSE yourself and not understand what TheImmortal is trying to say.
> 
> Please consider with an open mind, what is being said.
> 
> I speak with a few people in Iran IRIAF, and I assure you there are NO major projects for air force aircraft design and manufacturing other than comprehensive overhaul (quite impressive one in fact).
> 
> There are many MAPNA projects, yes of course, however no fighter jet engine, and please understand that even RR cannot do what you may associate with Iran's potential with so little budget and so little resources and so few supporting factories for aircraft design and manufacturing.
> 
> You may wish for Iran to have certain capacities, and it may hurt your feelings to know that they do not have such capacities, but the truth is the truth. People who love Iran, want to believe in Iran. I am just like you. However, we much evolve and "bare" the truth. Jews are very good at accepting the truth and uniting together to go change the truth into a new reality. That is what Iranians will eventually have to do.
> 
> In fact, we have in certain areas, and it is well demonstrated. Iran has done incredible projects building dams, tunnels, piping, etc.
> 
> Wishful thinking is not going to become reality. Reality is when we act and do. Struggle, of course, but eventually accomplish. Most often in baby steps. Let's allow the truth to strengthen us, not allow fiction to sooth our pain and keep us wishing and dreaming in a fictional world.
> 
> Here in U.S. $1,000 is not necessarily a huge amount of money, where I live, and the kind of job I have. But this money in Iran has helped 3 entire families and I am shocked how much this money has done for this 3 families in West of Tehran.
> 
> Iranian people over there are suffering. That is the truth.
> 
> Iranian government does not have the money to spend for R&D for an entire new aircraft for the IRIAF or any other military branch at the moment. Let's hope we can for the future.
> 
> However, an amazing thing about Iran and Iranians, we keep our money for the rainy day. Meaning, how do you think Iran has managed to withstand the last 3-4 years of the Trump administration?
> 
> Someone will one day write about that and people in the West will be surprised. How many other nations on earth could have withstood so much pressure?
> 
> Have a wonderful weekend my friend.



We cannot trust you and your so called IRIAF friends at least not more than IRIAF Deputy commander:






Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet - Defense news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.




www.tasnimnews.com
















Iran has begun production of a domestic heavy fighter jet


The military-industrial complex of Iran has begun to develop heavy fighters in accordance with plans to increase the defenses of the Islamic Republic, the deputy commander of the Iranian Air Force, Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi




bulgarianmilitary.com

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Menschmaschine

TheImmortal said:


> Again with the “this time it’s different bro” excuse. Not gonna waste any time on that.



This is really getting tedious. Again, for the third time: There is a very specific reason, namely the massively increased hostility of the US against Russia, that gives reason to expect that this time it might be different.

A valid counterargument could be that there was not much of a rational justification for the Russian pandering even before the US ratcheted its hostility massively up. But your point seems to be, quite on the contrary, that it was and still would be rational and beneficial for Russia to toe the US line - an obviously nonsensical assertion.



EvilWesteners said:


> Actually foreign policy is often very, very rational and non-emotional. That is what angers the people often.
> 
> Russia's number 1 priority right now is the Natural Gas pipeline to Germany, or as they say it, to go back to 2012-2013 when they had great relationship with Germany and they felt like 2 best friends. I was in Kata Beach Thailand in a very well known hotel for aviation engineers, mostly Russian customers, and some German, (80% to 10% respectively), and saw how Russians and Germans were talking about their perspective countries and their cooperation. They had such a great relationship and felt like best friends.
> 
> Then CIA got to Ukraine and the Crimea situation and the Germany just put their foot in their mouth and their relationship went sour.
> 
> Russia's number 1 goal is to go back to that, and see themselves again with 140B Euros in the bank.
> 
> Their second goal is to get rid of sanctions against them and put U.S. back on the wrong footing again, as U.S. was with the mortgage crisis of 2008-2010.
> 
> Russia will trade Iran's needs or wishes or anything to do with Iran, to get its way with her 2 priorities. Iran is a pawn in their negotiations with the U.S. That is all.
> 
> To be fair, so do China and India, to a lesser degree.



I really wish that people would actually read what I write - I already answered those assertions. My point was precisely, that it would be completely futile and irrational for Russia to try to pander to the US. Let's assume the Russian government would deny a fighter sale to Iran. Would the US now pat the head of Russia: "Well done, now we are again BFF" 

Of course not! Russia will gain absolutely nothing; there will be no US quid for a Russian quo, as there was none in all the previous instances.

As for the Ukraine situation, it is also an excellent example of irrational government foreign policy (If we define as rational to pursue policies that are beneficial to the countries they rule). The EU supported the US engineered coup and the sanctions against Russia even though this caused significant economic damage to EU countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

EvilWesteners said:


> hehe, I have heard that expression in the West in so many different flavors.
> 
> A giant project needs to be broken up again and again to smaller pieces, until there are single manageable tasks and then it is suddenly doable - that is what I learned from the crazy project called NIMROD MRA4 (1993-2010 RIP). yaaaeeeks.
> 
> Well said Aryobarzan.


Funny I have also done projects that at day one seemed almost impossible..ask Lockheed guys in here..lol..there is a fundamental truth to that "elephant" expression that you only realize it when you see an " elephant" and manage to eat it..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Menschmaschine said:


> This is really getting tedious. Again, for the third time: There is a very specific reason, namely the massively increased hostility of the US against Russia, that gives reason to expect that this time it might be different.
> 
> A valid counterargument could be that there was not much of a rational justification for the Russian pandering even before the US ratcheted its hostility massively up. But your point seems to be, quite on the contrary, that it was and still would be rational and beneficial for Russia to toe the US line - an obviously nonsensical assertion.
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish that people would actually read what I write - I already answered those assertions. My point was precisely, that it would be completely futile and irrational for Russia to try to pander to the US. Let's assume the Russian government would deny a fighter sale to Iran. Would the US now pat the head of Russia: "Well done, now we are again BFF"
> 
> Of course not! Russia will gain absolutely nothing; there will be no US quid for a Russian quo, as there was none in all the previous instances.
> 
> As for the Ukraine situation, it is also an excellent example of irrational government foreign policy (If we define as rational to pursue policies that are beneficial to the countries they rule). The EU supported the US engineered coup and the sanctions against Russia even though this caused significant economic damage to EU countries.



I don't deny that you have a valid point. In fact, I very much hope you are correct, and I am wrong. I just look at the information I have from couple hundred sources and when I put them all together, I do NOT come up with an Iranian secret project like R. J. Mitchell Spitfire just before WW2 started. I just don't see any truthful indication of this. But again, I hope you are correct and I am totally wrong, for Iran's sake.


thesaint said:


> We cannot trust you and your so called IRIAF friends at least not more than IRIAF Deputy commander:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet - Defense news - Tasnim News Agency
> 
> 
> TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has begun production of a domestic heavy fighter jet
> 
> 
> The military-industrial complex of Iran has begun to develop heavy fighters in accordance with plans to increase the defenses of the Islamic Republic, the deputy commander of the Iranian Air Force, Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bulgarianmilitary.com



My friend, Iran has had many statements like these for years and years. In fact, these are the usual disinformation that every country uses. Do not rely on them too much. However, I hope these are correct and that I am wrong, for the sake of Iran's air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I firmly maintain that the engine is in the process of testing and I maintain even more closed than underground, they have planes that they never showed and the Shafaq project is always in action with the same name or not.

Only time will tell if I'm wrong or not and not on wind-based analyzes. Iran has always said they have secret weapons that will come out in time of war and I believe that will hurt some people's ego here. It was I who spoke about the F-4 SM and I WAS RIGHT. I had said that through the Kowsar and the improvement of other fighter jets, they got into producing technology for their new heavy and semi-heavy fighter jets.

Last week, I put the news about the Kowsar and in the article it was said that technologies from this same Kowsar were used in other planes. It's very good to analyze the process of announcing Iran and you have to have some intuition. My intuition tells me now that Iran will soon announce another seaplane much advanced than the previous ones. Iran is always more advanced underground than what they present to us on the surface

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1393965818229178369

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

Guys, anyone? 
Is this true about Kowsar fighter jet? 
"The fighter jet also comes with multiple hard-points under the fuselage section and wings that can be armed with a range of weapon systems to enhance its firepower. _*The jets are equipped with two J90 turbofan engines which have a maximum rated thrust of 5,000lb (2,268kg) each.*_"

What I saw in Kowsar wasn't a turbofan but a turbojet engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, anyone?
> Is this true about Kowsar fighter jet?
> "The fighter jet also comes with multiple hard-points under the fuselage section and wings that can be armed with a range of weapon systems to enhance its firepower. _*The jets are equipped with two J90 turbofan engines which have a maximum rated thrust of 5,000lb (2,268kg) each.*_"
> 
> What I saw in Kowsar wasn't a turbofan but a turbojet engine.



Incorrect info. owj engine is a J-85 copy.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Incorrect info. owj engine is a J-85 copy.


I'm assuming this is the new Kowsar trainer? Owj x2 engines. Glad to see it being taken seriously. The seeds have to be planted somewhere. I just hope they continue to water it.

Iran does need aircraft with a 100% Iran-based supply chain that will prevent a Syria-like situation where their Airforce only flies if Russia decides to provide them with the parts/bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> I'm assuming this is the new Kowsar trainer? Owj x2 engines. Glad to see it being taken seriously. The seeds have to be planted somewhere. I just hope they continue to water it.
> 
> Iran does need aircraft with a 100% Iran-based supply chain that will prevent a Syria-like situation where their Airforce only flies if Russia decides to provide them with the parts/bombs.



iranian engineers have been keeping Syrian planes flying.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> This is a massive fallacy and goes against past precedent. Quite frankly it’s disappointing talk from such an knowledable member of the forum.
> 
> There is no Iranian arms contract worth pissing off the Israelis and US. Remember that they have pressure points on sensitive Russian interests as well. For years they dangled supposed “Iranian missile interceptors” in Europe as negotiating tactic to prevent Russian from helping Iran.
> 
> Past evidence is quite clear.....since 1990’s many “large” contracts were placed with a cash strapped and collapsed post Soviet Russia and most got cancelled. So when Russia was most desperate for cash they still screwed Iran.
> 
> Things are so bad that Iran *did not trust Russia to refurbish its Kilo subs*, it secretly feared that Russia (who was asking for the refurbishment to be done in Russia) would *never return the subs back. *It was one of the reasons Iran decided to do it themselves.
> 
> So again the “trust me this time is different bro”excuse is tired and worn out. A $5B or $10B contract won’t make Russia risk geopolitical fall out that could cost it 20,50, 100B in the long run. Billions don’t make Russians get out of bed, maybe Iranians, but not the Russians.
> 
> And the T-50 project *only proves my point. India complained that Russia went against contract terms. *Didn’t share ToT, repeatedly kept India in the dark, and kept raising the costs on India to fund the project. India eventually left out of frustration. That example is a prime reason where India that has ZERO problems getting weapons was still screwed by over by Russia.
> 
> Now imagine if Iran was involved in that? And that’s what your advocating? Wow seems like Shafagh project is a distant memory.
> 
> Relying on Russia for big ticket offensive items is what a fool would do.



Almost everything you just described is Russia pre-2014. Pre-Crimea. If you want to make a real point then don't lecture about the past, talk about the future, because you have to look 30 years into the future for fighter jet procurement. That's political, technological, doctrinal... everything. I might cover this all in a blog post later but for now I will keep it to political.

Everything that Russia wants from the west right now (sanctions removal and Nordstream) is Crimea-dependent, not Iran-related. And actually even Nordstream is getting waivers to repair US-Europe relations after Trump. Prior to 2014 Russia was focused on improving relations with the west which is why a lot of their actions came at a cost to Iran. Since 2014 Iran got S-300 and Russia entered the Syrian war despite Western protests.

The Biden admin seems to me more focused on confronting Russia and China rather than Iran. Instead of sitting on our hands and wasting time we should use these 8 years to revamp (or at least start revamping) our air force. I don't particularly care if this is done via Russia or China but my preference is Russia as I think the Flanker is better suited to Iran's needs than the J-10. Either of them are good in the right numbers.

I don't believe Iran's aviation industry is anywhere close to fielding an air superiority fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Almost everything you just described is Russia pre-2014. Pre-Crimea. If you want to make a real point then don't lecture about the past, talk about the future



Thank god people like you don’t run Iran. Or else they would have never started a domestic arms manufacturing program because they believed the past doesn’t matter and that any day now some country will sell Iran something. Even the US screwed Iran, England screwed Iran (still hasn’t paid back the tank order deposit 40+ years later), Russia screwed Iran, and China screwed Iran.

But whoa let’s just forget everything because of Crimea. Lol again these Russian apologists grasp at straws. Will always find an “this time is different bro” excuse.

So far arms embargo has been off since October and we still haven’t heard a single rumbling about an arms deal with either Russia or China. We have an Iranian general tour Russia and look at attack helicopters....attack helicopters!

There are two obstacles one is the Russian obstacle and one is the IRGC obstacle. Neither of these groups has a strong desire to see an Iran with a potent Air Force.


major ticket items bought since 1990

kilo subs
T-72 tanks (screwed by Russia)
C-802 program (screwed by China)
Handfuls of various fighters (SU, Migs, Chinese fighters)
TOR-M1
S-300 (screwed by Russia only fulfilled due to arbitration ruling that Russia had to pay Iran $10B fine if it doesn’t enforce $800M contract).

Thats 30 years of arms history, maybe I forgot something like some Chinese ADs. But sure the past doesn’t matter because Crimea or Syria or Yemen or because Biden called Putin a dictator and hurt Putin’s feelings. This time it’s different...no for real...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> Thank god people like you don’t run Iran. Or else they would have never started a domestic arms manufacturing program because they believed the past doesn’t matter and that any day now some country will sell Iran something. Even the US screwed Iran, England screwed Iran (still hasn’t paid back the tank order deposit 40+ years later), Russia screwed Iran, and China screwed Iran.
> 
> But whoa let’s just forget everything because of Crimea. Lol again these Russian apologists grasp at straws. Will always find an “this time is different bro” excuse.
> 
> So far arms embargo has been off since October and we still haven’t heard a single rumbling about an arms deal with either Russia or China. We have an Iranian general tour Russia and look at attack helicopters....attack helicopters!
> 
> There are two obstacles one is the Russian obstacle and one is the IRGC obstacle. Neither of these groups has a strong desire to see an Iran with a potent Air Force.
> 
> 
> major ticket items bought since 1990
> 
> kilo subs
> T-72 tanks (screwed by Russia)
> C-802 program (screwed by China)
> Handfuls of various fighters (SU, Migs, Chinese fighters)
> TOR-M1
> S-300 (screwed by Russia only fulfilled due to arbitration ruling that Russia had to pay Iran $10B fine if it doesn’t enforce $800M contract).
> 
> Thats 30 years of arms history, maybe I forgot something like some Chinese ADs. But sure the past doesn’t matter because Crimea or Syria or Yemen or because Biden called Putin a dictator and hurt Putin’s feelings. This time it’s different...no for real...


You are such an incredibly angry person.

Be realistic and stop putting words into my mouth. Iran's military development in the past 30-40 years has been admirable but don't pretend it happened out of thin air. Did Iran's vaunted BM force start off with precision guided MRBMs? No, it started with licence produced North Korean copies of the Scud-B. It took 30 years for Iran to get to this point. And Iran went through dozens of iterations of several designs.

Fighter aircraft development is probably the single most difficult thing a military industrial base can do. There are so many high technological and design requirements that it takes a decade for a superpower with decades of experience and effectively unlimited financial resources+institutional backing (none of which Iran has) just to complete development of a fighter jet, let alone field it in numbers. 

Currently Iran's best effort is a modernisation of a 1950s design with little indication that proposals to go further are getting any serious backing.

So yes, I'm going to suggest buying Russian or Chinese jets because they can actually be delivered in numbers _this decade_. Iran can carry on its internal development - which would probably benefit technologically from inspecting foreign jets - in the meantime. To sit and wait for Iran's current air force to fall out of the sky on its own with no replacement is irresponsible.

As for the arms embargo, I think maybe Iran itself isn't pushing through yet because of financial pressure. Otherwise, there were certainly serious discussions in 2016 to the point that the defence minister visited Russia and was openly talking about Su-30s. But whatever, maybe you know better than him.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

AmirPatriot said:


> You are such an incredibly angry person.
> 
> Be realistic and stop putting words into my mouth. Iran's military development in the past 30-40 years has been admirable but don't pretend it happened out of thin air. Did Iran's vaunted BM force start off with precision guided MRBMs? No, it started with licence produced North Korean copies of the Scud-B. It took 30 years for Iran to get to this point. And Iran went through dozens of iterations of several designs.
> 
> Fighter aircraft development is probably the single most difficult thing a military industrial base can do. There are so many high technological and design requirements that it takes a decade for a superpower with decades of experience and effectively unlimited financial resources+institutional backing (none of which Iran has) just to complete development of a fighter jet, let alone field it in numbers.
> 
> Currently Iran's best effort is a modernisation of a 1950s design with little indication that proposals to go further are getting any serious backing.
> 
> So yes, I'm going to suggest buying Russian or Chinese jets because they can actually be delivered in numbers _this decade_. Iran can carry on its internal development - which would probably benefit technologically from inspecting foreign jets - in the meantime. To sit and wait for Iran's current air force to fall out of the sky on its own with no replacement is irresponsible.
> 
> As for the arms embargo, I think maybe Iran itself isn't pushing through yet because of financial pressure. Otherwise, there were certainly serious discussions in 2016 to the point that the defence minister visited Russia and was openly talking about Su-30s. But whatever, maybe you know better than him.


Your emphasis on the 40+ years roots of Iranian technology is misplaced. If you're looking to the future then ignore that. Otherwise why stop there and not shift another 1000 years back Maybe two? @immortal is entirely correct (albeit sharp in tone). And, again, Iran will never purchase or be able to purchase an effective air force. That boat sailed 40+ years ago. That should be clear as day for you especially if you continue to emphasize 40+ years of history.


----------



## Stryker1982

jauk said:


> Your emphasis on the 40+ years roots of Iranian technology is misplaced. If you're looking to the future then ignore that. Otherwise why stop there and not shift another 1000 years back Maybe two? @immortal is entirely correct (albeit sharp in tone). And, again, Iran will never purchase or be able to purchase an effective air force. That boat sailed 40+ years ago. That should be clear as day for you especially if you continue to emphasize 40+ years of history.



After what they dealt with during the war, I think it has deterred Iran from buying anything foreign with relation to the airforce.

It was a miracle we managed to keep air superiority in Iran during the war. I think they all remember what happened and they do not want a repeat with the Russians and I perfectly understand that. We know it will happen again


----------



## AmirPatriot

jauk said:


> Your emphasis on the 40+ years roots of Iranian technology is misplaced. If you're looking to the future then ignore that. Otherwise why stop there and not shift another 1000 years back Maybe two? @immortal is entirely correct (albeit sharp in tone). And, again, Iran will never purchase or be able to purchase an effective air force. That boat sailed 40+ years ago. That should be clear as day for you especially if you continue to emphasize 40+ years of history.



My emphasis on the roots of Iranian military tech was to demonstrate that catching up to the rest of the world in military tech is not easy nor quick. Yes, Iran should work on its domestic arms industry. But that doesn't mean abstaining from purchasing foreign arms.

I'm starting to think why some people wanted the UN Arms Embargo lifted in the first place. 



Stryker1982 said:


> do not want a repeat with the Russians and I perfectly understand that



That's probably why they were asking for TOT back in 2016.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

If anyone still thinks Iranian planners are still trying to build IRIAF conventionally, then they are fools. Considering three major factors: 

1) Politics/Sanctions
2) Money for IRIAF from def budget 
3) Changing dynamics of aerial warfare, roles of drones, non kinetic warfare.

It is safe to say that IRIAF will evolve as a heavily UCAV laden force in 2030s with probably 6-7 squadrons of 4+ generation fighters which will be procured (may be assembled in Iran) in late 2020s, may be Su-35S if Russia agrees. 

IRIAF needs to be merged with IRGC-AF IMO.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

AmirPatriot said:


> My emphasis on the roots of Iranian military tech was to demonstrate that catching up to the rest of the world in military tech is not easy nor quick. Yes, Iran should work on its domestic arms industry. But that doesn't mean abstaining from purchasing foreign arms.



Amir jan, I am fan of your twitter and blog and as a fellow Iranian thankful for the time you put on those platforms in order to inform and educate.

Having said that, I categorically disagree with you when it comes to procurement of expensive military hardware such as fighter jets or the likes of tanks, submarines, AD systems and such. Even though the later ones mentioned are not up to discussion, I wanted to make it clear that I am not only against procurement of fighter jets, rather all expensive hardware.

So I disagree with you on three accords. By buying these systems:
1. *we will lose incentive* to develop our own hardware. Hence, simply saying that we should buy and at the same time develop our own is in reality a toothless approach, because the stress and incentive fades and the sense of emergency is instead replaced with a sense of false security. This is the foremost silent killer of all incentives and domestic projects.
2. *we loose budget* for our development of our own industry.
3. *we* *strengthen the negative image *of ourselves being a client state and of inferior capability. This point is maybe the most important in my opinion because it will affect the young generation and thus in affect for decades.

Also you need to separate (real) engineering with reverse-engineering (copy engineering). Your example with the missiles taking decades to develop is a case of reverse engineering done by a work force not being expert engineers to begin with. A nation that conducts *real engineering* is able to utilise mathematical, physics, chemical, electric, electronic etc knowledge to develop a product which satisfies a very specific set of requirements. As an example Space X fielded the falcon rocket within 5 years (!!!), difference being foremost because real engineering being utilised.
Although Iran started its journey as a clear copy engineering nation, I would argue that today Iran has in many cases shown true signs of real engineering. The Air defence systems and new generation of precision missiles are a testament of this theory.
We can see the exact same development in the private sector such as with MAPNAs new gas turbine which is completely unique in its design. What does this show? It is a clear indicator that Iranian engineers *do not need* a corresponding foreign system to copy anymore. They are confident in their own product development process.

So if we could trust in Tehrani Moghaddam to kickstart our missile program *from* *absolutely zero knowledge base *with *minimal resources*, how can we turn our back to our current capabilities when it comes to satisfying the military needs in regards to airspace patrol and power projection?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Salam Sina jan. I hope you are well. I'm happy that you enjoy my contributions. Inshallah I will have something important to share in the coming weeks or months.



Sina-1 said:


> 1. *we will lose incentive* to develop our own hardware. Hence, simply saying that we should buy and at the same time develop our own is in reality a toothless approach, because the stress and incentive fades and the sense of emergency is instead replaced with a sense of false security. This is the foremost silent killer of all incentives and domestic projects.
> 
> 2. *we loose budget* for our development of our own industry.
> 
> 3. *we* *strengthen the negative image *of ourselves being a client state and of inferior capability. This point is maybe the most important in my opinion because it will affect the young generation and thus in affect for decades.



I disagree with these.

1. You are implying there is an incentive to begin with. I have not seen any strong movement by Iran towards developing an *air superiority fighter* ever. Make no mistake, that's what Iran needs to defend its airspace. What are we meant to do, wait for the establishment to make a move? I don't trust them. Given how long fighter development takes (especially for a country like Iran), IRIAF would be no more than a shell of even it's current self by the time that "urgency" appears. IRIAF should grab its chance now.

2. If IRIAF gets a major modernisation underway then it shows it has been given support. Enough support to fund strategic projects like domestic fighter designs.

3. I don't think that would happen. We have domestically produced SAMs, ships, drones, tanks, and ofc missiles. The extent of the last one is unique for a country of Iran's status.

Consider my proposal to be similar to how we bought S-300 even though we were developing Bavar-373. Foreign purchases to meet immediate needs while domestic systems finish development. I should add that as far as I have seen, Bavar is not yet operational, 3 years after S-300 delivery. I could be wrong though.



Sina-1 said:


> Also you need to separate (real) engineering with reverse-engineering (copy engineering). Your example with the missiles taking decades to develop is a case of reverse engineering done by a work force not being expert engineers to begin with. A nation that conducts *real engineering* is able to utilise mathematical, physics, chemical, electric, electronic etc knowledge to develop a product which satisfies a very specific set of requirements. As an example Space X fielded the falcon rocket within 5 years (!!!), difference being foremost because real engineering being utilised.
> Although Iran started its journey as a clear copy engineering nation, I would argue that today Iran has in many cases shown true signs of real engineering. The Air defence systems and new generation of precision missiles are a testament of this theory.
> We can see the exact same development in the private sector such as with MAPNAs new gas turbine which is completely unique in its design. What does this show? It is a clear indicator that Iranian engineers *do not need* a corresponding foreign system to copy anymore. They are confident in their own product development process.



We may be "real engineering" with our missiles but not our aviation sector. The most advanced product we have is Kowsar, which is a modernised F-5. Nowhere near a 4+ gen air superiority fighter. MAPNA's work is excellent but gas turbines =/= jet engines. They're similar but not the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## jauk

drmeson said:


> If anyone still thinks Iranian planners are still trying to build IRIAF conventionally, then they are fools. Considering three major factors:
> 
> 1) Politics/Sanctions
> 2) Money for IRIAF from def budget
> 3) Changing dynamics of aerial warfare, roles of drones, non kinetic warfare.
> 
> It is safe to say that IRIAF will evolve as a heavily UCAV laden force in 2030s with probably 6-7 squadrons of 4+ generation fighters which will be procured (may be assembled in Iran) in late 2020s, may be Su-35S if Russia agrees.
> 
> IRIAF needs to be merged with IRGC-AF IMO.



Exactly. It is so shockingly obvious. As shocking are the conversations as if this were not the case.


----------



## Sina-1

AmirPatriot said:


> 1. You are implying there is an incentive to begin with. I have not seen any strong movement by Iran towards developing an *air superiority fighter* ever. Make no mistake, that's what Iran needs to defend its airspace. What are we meant to do, wait for the establishment to make a move? I don't trust them. Given how long fighter development takes (especially for a country like Iran), IRIAF would be no more than a shell of even it's current self by the time that "urgency" appears. IRIAF should grab its chance now.



There are two things we need to clear:

Just because we do not see something doesn't necessarily make it non existent. Iran may have a program which is hidden, just like many others which were only revealed after production was already under way.
I am not even sure that air superiority fighter is the way to go anymore. UCAVs with full or semi autonomy could be one way. Another way could be wingman approach other countries have be experimenting on. Just because a specific product have fulfilled a certain mission statement does not automatically mean that it is an unchallenged platform for the mission statement for all eternity.



AmirPatriot said:


> 2. If IRIAF gets a major modernisation underway then it shows it has been given support. Enough support to fund strategic projects like domestic fighter designs.



Im not even sure that IRIAF is any longer an organisation we should rely on. Not because of mistrust or competence issues, but simply because it is an organisation which operates on a legacy which was defines 50+ years ago. We need an organisation that can think outside the box and utilise the disruptive technologies available to its advantage and not try to play catch up with the richest country in the world both in term of hardware and tactics. This is a race which we will always loose. The only winning scenario is the unconventional and disruptive one and I cannot see IRIAF being that player.



AmirPatriot said:


> 3. I don't think that would happen. We have domestically produced SAMs, ships, drones, tanks, and ofc missiles. The extent of the last one is unique for a country of Iran's status.



Yes this point has merit. I agree.



AmirPatriot said:


> Consider my proposal to be similar to how we bought S-300 even though we were developing Bavar-373. Foreign purchases to meet immediate needs while domestic systems finish development. I should add that as far as I have seen, Bavar is not yet operational, 3 years after S-300 delivery. I could be wrong though.



Of course the operational status of Bavar is something which can only be speculated since it is under such media silence. However I think it is safe to assume that the Bavar projects has boosted the confidence in an entire nation and even more important the sub systems developed and the manpower working on it have surely found the way to other air defence related projects.



AmirPatriot said:


> We may be "real engineering" with our missiles but not our aviation sector. The most advanced product we have is Kowsar, which is a modernised F-5. Nowhere near a 4+ gen air superiority fighter. MAPNA's work is excellent but gas turbines =/= jet engines. They're similar but not the same.



I completely agree. A gas turbine is not a jet engine. But the engineering teams working on domestic gas turbines is hell of a better start for developing a heavy turbofan engine compared to Tehrani Moghaddams team during the war. What we need is a charismatic visionary and fighter just like Tehrani Moghaddam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Guys !

We already have the engine... 

And the fighter jet itself!

I hope they just unveil that big *** bird soon and put an end to all these useless discussions...

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## scimitar19

SOHEIL said:


> Guys !
> 
> We already have the engine...
> 
> And the fighter jet itself!
> 
> I hope they just unveil that big *** bird soon and put an end to all these useless discussions...


Can you tell us if it is 5th gen or something higher or lower?


----------



## TheImmortal

SOHEIL said:


> Guys !
> 
> We already have the engine...
> 
> And the fighter jet itself!
> 
> I hope they just unveil that big *** bird soon and put an end to all these useless discussions...



Source: trust me bro

For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.

He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## zectech

Why can't Iran redesign the Kowsars to carry one AIM-54 & two AIM-9. Get a radar into the Kowsar that can track and hit 4th gen fighter at 150-180 km. The front nose may have to be made bigger.

Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.

Make hundreds of these improved kowsars. Use them as range hunters for air superiority. With the ability to dogfight and have auto-cannon and short range missiles for dog fighting.

At 15 million dollars a piece.

You can even hook up these slower fighters with supersonic drones to get 6th gen air warfare. Skip stealth for kowsars, or have them have radar absorbing paint. The drones carry more missiles for the kowsars and take hits for the kowsars.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> Source: trust me bro
> 
> For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.
> 
> He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.



Wait, you were on IMF? Not with this username surely?


----------



## Deino

thesaint said:


> We cannot trust you and your so called IRIAF friends at least not more than IRIAF Deputy commander:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Begins Development of Heavy Fighter Jet - Defense news - Tasnim News Agency
> 
> 
> TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran has begun production of a domestic heavy fighter jet
> 
> 
> The military-industrial complex of Iran has begun to develop heavy fighters in accordance with plans to increase the defenses of the Islamic Republic, the deputy commander of the Iranian Air Force, Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bulgarianmilitary.com




Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke  Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

zectech said:


> Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.


I don't see why IRIAF can't tap into the solid missile fuel advancements made by the DIO and produce an advanced Medium ranged Air to Air missile to replace the AIM-7 and R-27s in IRIAF service? The IRIAF's AIM-7Es can barely manage 30km when fired from high altitude at high speed.



Deino said:


> Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke  Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?


They did not call the Kowsar a "heavy fighter". Read the article more carefully. They wrote "*An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane."*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

TheImmortal said:


> Source: trust me bro
> 
> For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.
> 
> He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.



After the upcoming satellite launch if everything goes well and they announce it i will tell you the reason!


Deino said:


> Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke  Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?



You are not able to read an article correctly and doing moderation here!?

Nice

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Deino said:


> Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke  Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?


No one in official iranian circles or any one in this forum has referred to kowsar as a "heavy" fighter ..so yes a "Bulgarian" job indeed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

aryobarzan said:


> No one in official iranian circles or any one in this forum has referred to kowsar as a "heavy" fighter ..so yes a "Bulgarian" job indeed.


 Even the Bulgarians did not call it that. Our German friend needs stronger reading glasses!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

zectech said:


> Why can't Iran redesign the Kowsars to carry one AIM-54 & two AIM-9. Get a radar into the Kowsar that can track and hit 4th gen fighter at 150-180 km. The front nose may have to be made bigger.
> 
> Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.
> 
> Make hundreds of these improved kowsars. Use them as range hunters for air superiority. With the ability to dogfight and have auto-cannon and short range missiles for dog fighting.
> 
> At 15 million dollars a piece.
> 
> You can even hook up these slower fighters with supersonic drones to get 6th gen air warfare. Skip stealth for kowsars, or have them have radar absorbing paint. The drones carry more missiles for the kowsars and take hits for the kowsars.


radar limitations of the kowsar are the reason for the limited a2a missilw engagement. It might be able to field one Fakour 90/Phoenix under the fuselage if it could carry something like the AWG9 radar or equivalent.


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Wait, you were on IMF? Not with this username surely?



same or similar. Yes I was a major (frequent) member on there.


----------



## Sineva

Some new and improved satellite guided bombs

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1396517801792352265

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Some new and improved satellite guided bombs
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1396517801792352265


*its not a bomb any more* they added a *soiled fuel booster* to it and a *mini jet engine* they made it fly 210 kms its now a guided missile and a mini guided cruise missile

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> *its not a bomb any more* they added a *soiled fuel booster* to it and a *mini jet engine* they made it fly 210 kms its now a guided missile and a mini guided cruise missile


Some of these weapons are already blurring the definitions and new terminology might be called for or a repurposing of current jargon.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

One of them is most likely a ground-launched version, as there is no suspension lug/hook on it. In other words, it is not designed to attach to a fighter/UAV pylon. Interestingly, it is the one which gives the low-drag impression to us. I remember, Bina-1 laser guided missile had a land attack version too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1396749201275564034

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Iskander said:


> View attachment 747194
> 
> 
> View attachment 747195
> 
> 
> View attachment 747199
> 
> View attachment 747202
> 
> 
> View attachment 747203
> 
> 
> View attachment 747205
> 
> 
> View attachment 747206
> 
> 
> View attachment 747207


Each of these Avionic subsystems made in Iran represents years of work to develop their requirements, specs, designs, builds and qualification tests. ...Great to see that IEI has moved so far ahead..I worked for IEI in the late 70's.(logo is still the same..lol)

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> Each of these Avionic subsystems made in Iran represents years of work to develop their requirements, specs, designs, builds and qualification tests. ...Great to see that IEI has moved so far ahead..I worked for IEI in the late 70's.(logo is still the same..lol)



Did IEI even produce anything in the 70’s under the Shah or was it a banana company that assembled western supplied tech like Saudis do today?

Im curious what level of indigenous Iranian arms industry existed during Shah era of US client service.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> Did IEI even produce anything in the 70’s under the Shah or was it a banana company that assembled western supplied tech like Saudis do today?
> 
> Im curious what level of indigenous Iranian arms industry existed during Shah era of US client service.


I think there were bullets made in Parchin and there might have been some assembly but that's about it...


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Did IEI even produce anything in the 70’s under the Shah or was it a banana company that assembled western supplied tech like Saudis do today?
> 
> Im curious what level of indigenous Iranian arms industry existed during Shah era of US client service.


The main task of IEI at the time was to repair and calibrate Tow missiles launchers both the tripod and TOW cobra .The place was the first military electronics outfit in iran and may be all of middle east..we had military visitors from all the countries including....well..Israel...impressive ...there was a micro electronics outfit with it which was mostly IC packaging ..no fab...many US engineers from training departments were training iranian engineers and techs on the actual working of these systems (and I mean actual blue prints).
TOW COBRA lunch, tracking and optical/IR stabilized platform were the state of art at that time..all analog circuitry and in need of calibration every six months....the plan was to have Iran's Rapiers AD serviced there..

No inhouse design or modification was allowed..there was some design on the hand held radios but I was not involved in the Comunication section...just like HESA no original work..we tried to improve some testing by modification but immediately stopped when word got out to the Americans...But remember before IEI no iranian knew how military systems are built...they knew how to operate them..that is all....so IEI in the 70s was the seed for some of the work you see today....I am sure similar story on the aircraft side of the house too...sorry for typos I am typing on phone.

Ps: I forgot to mention the "dragon" atgm..it was there also..lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## TheImmortal

@PeeD @AmirPatriot 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397206227038478345

A hypothetical weapon attack radius of a future Iranian heavy UCAV supersonic VLO bomber (4000 KM) using a Samour, Ya Ali, or future air launched F-110 derative would have similar radius to a TU-22 bomber carrying anti ship missiles.

Such a deadly platform that Iran is missing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> @PeeD @AmirPatriot
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397206227038478345
> 
> A hypothetical weapon attack radius of a future Iranian heavy UCAV supersonic VLO bomber (4000 KM) using a Samour, Ya Ali, or future air launched F-110 derative would have similar radius to a TU-22 bomber carrying anti ship missiles.
> 
> Such a deadly platform that Iran is missing.



Iran is very very far from such a design.

Iran's best bet is mounting something like a Raad-500 derived ASBM on tactical-sized aircraft. Su-22 or possible future Su-30 come to mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

The usual problem with propulsion...

That thing has literary the strongest jet engines in the world.

I love it too, but Iran is far away. Maybe a liquid rocket engine based platform will be a alternative in the future.

Or avoid the supersonic path (enemy IR sensors) and go for a flying wing subsonic design, as the US, China and even supersonic-fanatic Russia are going for on their nextgen bombers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> go for a flying wing subsonic design, as the US, China and even supersonic-fanatic Russia are going for on their nextgen bombers.


How likely/suitable would it be to go for a 2x or possibly 4x owj rq-170 based design?


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The usual problem with propulsion...
> 
> That thing has literary the strongest jet engines in the world.
> 
> I love it too, but Iran is far away. Maybe a liquid rocket engine based platform will be a alternative in the future.
> 
> Or avoid the supersonic path (enemy IR sensors) and go for a flying wing subsonic design, as the US, China and even supersonic-fanatic Russia are going for on their nextgen bombers.


I wonder if the claims that Iran was offered them/asked for them in the 90s is true. Really potent aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Sina-1 said:


> How likely/suitable would it be to go for a 2x or possibly 4x owj rq-170 based design?



Subsonic LO bombers must excel at range performance, fly around threats from unusual directions. A turbofan is a must have in such a scenario, hence Owj is a bad choice.



AmirPatriot said:


> I wonder if the claims that Iran was offered them/asked for them in the 90s is true. Really potent aircraft.



Absolutely impossible, even for the corrupt Yelsin era

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> Subsonic LO bombers must excel at range performance, fly around threats from unusual directions. A turbofan is a must have in such a scenario, hence Owj is a bad choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely impossible, even for the corrupt Yelsin era


Then the question is basically how much they will support the jahesh project and if it becomes a product family with upscaled versions or not. If they would consider it and they would pull trough with a range of different turbofan engines... it would transform Iran offensive capabilities and strategic possibilities to new extremes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> Iran is very very far from such a design.
> 
> Iran's best bet is mounting something like a Raad-500 derived ASBM on tactical-sized aircraft. Su-22 or possible future Su-30 come to mind.



I was saying the attack radius of an Iranian UCAV bomber would be similar to TU-22, I am not saying Iran copy TU-22.



PeeD said:


> The usual problem with propulsion...
> 
> That thing has literary the strongest jet engines in the world.
> 
> I love it too, but Iran is far away. Maybe a liquid rocket engine based platform will be a alternative in the future.
> 
> Or avoid the supersonic path (enemy IR sensors) and go for a flying wing subsonic design, as the US, China and even supersonic-fanatic Russia are going for on their nextgen bombers.



I was saying a future delta wing or flying wing Iranian UCAV bomber would have similar stats. TU-22 is not something Iran can reverse engineer anytime soon and is a bomber that is Cold War era.

Subsonic flying wing does not help in theater of war. Flying to Israel in 3 hours is not game changing, flying to Israel in 30 mins is.

Like I said, such a “black project” is worth billions. And I can promise you future US bombers will be supersonic. China’s dark sword UCAV is already supersonic. Subsonic is a thing of the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> I was saying the attack radius of an Iranian UCAV bomber would be similar to TU-22, I am not saying Iran copy TU-22.


And I am saying Iran is very very far from such a design. Which would actually be even more advanced and difficult to create than a Tu-22M.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> And I am saying Iran is very very far from such a design. Which would actually be even more advanced and difficult to create than a Tu-22M.



It is actually within Iran’s realm of technology. You forget Bavar required millions of lines worth of code to function. Building a supersonic wing design that can carry 1000-2000lb payloads is not as difficult as you think.

A flying wing or delta wing has already been mastered by Iran. Enlargement is no problem. Radar absorbing paint has been demonstrated at university level years ago. Honeycomb design was recently unveiled less than 2 years ago.

The only issue is a supersonic drone engine.

The issue with your thinking (and @PeeD) is your imagining a supersonic engine that needs to last hundreds if not thousands of hours. That is true for manned fighter jets and bombers. For a supersonic drone an engine that last <100 hours is sufficient, especially in the beginning.

Thus the issue is engine and as @EvilWesteners has said. There are retired engineers in Iran who worked in the West on top of the line engines for RR and others. If the will is there, IRGC can tap a significant education base to build a supersonic drone engine.

Trust me when I say this. What you think is very very far away, is actually within reach. The will and effort is what is missing.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Subsonic LO bombers must excel at range performance, fly around threats from unusual directions. A turbofan is a must have in such a scenario, hence Owj is a bad choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely impossible, even for the corrupt Yelsin era


What’s your thoughts about a delta wing unmanned LO bomber equipped with 4 Jahesh engines able to carry 2-3 subsonic/supersonic ASMs?


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> It is actually within Iran’s realm of technology. You forget Bavar required millions of lines worth of code to function. Building a supersonic wing design that can carry 1000-2000lb payloads is not as difficult as you think.
> 
> A flying wing or delta wing has already been mastered by Iran. Enlargement is no problem. Radar absorbing paint has been demonstrated at university level years ago. Honeycomb design was recently unveiled less than 2 years ago.
> 
> The only issue is a supersonic drone engine.
> 
> The issue with your thinking (and @PeeD) is your imagining a supersonic engine that needs to last hundreds if not thousands of hours. That is true for manned fighter jets and bombers. For a supersonic drone an engine that last <100 hours is sufficient, especially in the beginning.
> 
> Thus the issue is engine and as @EvilWesteners has said. There are retired engineers in Iran who worked in the West on top of the line engines for RR and others. If the will is there, IRGC can tap a significant education base to build a supersonic drone engine.
> 
> Trust me when I say this. What you think is very very far away, is actually within reach. The will and effort is what is missing.




In my opinion, excellent points of discussion by @TheImmortal @AmirPatriot @PeeD @Sina-1 - and others who have had some very good points regarding this in the past.

Reading these scenarios and potential uses, both in fighter jets as well as potential use in supersonic UAV and future needs and potential capability, Iran needs to select ONE GOOD engine platform and use it again and again.

The benefits (so much more) out weighs the negatives. In so many ways. Standardization may have been a word from 1990s, but it is still VERY applicable for countries that are not cash rich and/or trying to catch up.

Yes, it would be ideal to have a great turbofan (believe me, I would love that for Iran, since this is what I worked on most of my career), but it is more reasonable, quicker, faster, and more probable for Iran to have only one engine and standardize on this. Hence why I had suggested something like an R35.

No I don't love this engine, and yes it does have high fuel consumption in standard configuration, although I know some German friends of mine just love this engine to death (quite a few of these engines sitting around in Germany), but it offers many different things that ARE DECEPTIVE and hence allow Iran to get to a certain point, QUICKLY.

First, lets start with the (what I can only call) racist and biased (to the point of deliberate ignorance), how the Western media and so called aviation experts regard everything Iran builds as ... "copy, or crap, or junk, or 1970s, ..." etc. etc. You all know what I am talking about.

Great. I cannot ask for more than to be underestimated. Glad they put Iran down, and regard it with little to no regard for its defense capabilities, despite having their @$$ handed to them in Ayn al-Asad, and Erbil. The CIA station chief in Netherlands quit and moved back to Spain as he had protested that killing Sulleimani will only force Iran to demonstrate what "we already know" about Iran's balastic missile, and then "you can't put that cat back into the bag again".

So, at least I am glad that Iran is underestimated.

I would much prefer Iran does not fall into the trap of Western media coordination with the U.S. military to force Iran's ego to divulge things that may not be ready to divulge so they can go after the sourcing and suppliers and distributed funding structure. But I am sure and I hope, the Iran acquisition structure is much smarter than me.

If Iran tried to build a "so-called" 1970s technology turbojet, there wouldn't be any warning lights going off. They can do this within a year (the infrastructure setup), and get help from out of work engineers in Russia, setup many factories they need. None of this would be a significant worry to anyone that may usually care.

If anything, this is somewhat deceptive as these same groups would even prefer that Iran is "investing" in old technology rather than new.

But in reality it is not true. The truth, that I was remind of, almost every single freaking meeting I ever had at RR, ... "that engine is lower cost of manufacturing vs. that other one, and it is much easier to build than this other one, and maintenance is much lower than that other one ...".

Turbojets are CHEAP to design, manufacture, and (unbeknown to many people) it is much easier to build than turbofans. Yes, aviation industry has made an ART out of manufacturing high bypass commercial airliner jet engines, BUT that is not so true with low bypass fighter jet class jet engines.

I ran into someone in a conference in Las Vegas a few years ago, and he use to work in Germany on EuroJet. He is an exceptional French engineer. He works in U.S. on the F35 engine. He was cursing in French how difficult the engine development had been in the F35 program, he was at one point, involved in it. Because they really wanted to iron out many issues that maintenance crew had to suffer through with other U.S. aircraft engines. I should know. Always barking at me, for so many things. If you ever meet someone who has worked on A4, ask them what they like about the aircraft. They would reply, the engine, the engine, the engine.

I believe there are very few engines (no matter what they seem like to the public) that are as good of a quality and reliability and performance as the EuroJet. The Americans wanted to catch up, and I think they have even surpassed the Eurojet and now Eurojet is coming up (have been working on for quite some time) that is pretty awesome on paper. Borderline thrust to weight ration of 11 with incredible fuel efficiency, lower heat signature with exhaust cooling, and some pretty good materials engineering. It's good. Really good.

Every project is about compromise, and what you can sacrifice and what you cannot.

If Iran can sacrifice fuel consumption and lower lifespan of an engine, and get in return high thrust (both afterburner and military), a reliable, self-sufficient with parts and repair and manufacturing, and a well tested (relatively) technology that it has many known knowns so they get up and running really fast, THEN (all together) Iran would be foolish to ignore and pass on this.

This level of incompetence with such an opportunity is borderline suicide and at this level, it will not suffer fools.

R35 can be standardized (if not, then Al21), and an engine with almost 30k/20k pounds of thrust is highly flexible and useful with a variety of applications, and offer single engine, twin, or even four engines for some bombing platforms.

Even a non afterburner engine can produce supersonic (supercruise) speed for relatively small aircraft, say something the size of a MAKO the project proposed by EADS before the breakup and their fighting and bickering which the Swedish picked up and ran with.

Yes, I still remember that it is a turboJET - not forgotten. But it also offers some great benefits. Iran has tested J79 platform with altitude enhancers for F4 back in 1977. It knows (I hope still) how to use distilled water and oxidizers to boost engine to go to higher altitude and still keep the engine cool. Higher altitude is what everyone use to talk about in late 1980s.

It has many benefits, one in particular, is better radar performance against stealth (bombers).

With F-14 deeply ingrained in Iran's veins now, it is not that difficult for Iran to produce something similar to F-111B or even FB-111A. I worked on that aircraft, it was not (structurally) - even avionics actually come to think of it - that much different than F-14. That is what was used to bomb Libya killing Ghadafi's baby (how people forgive Western genocide so quickly).

Iran also has had one of the best pedigrees in all the air forces in the world, when it comes to aerial refueling. I don't know what level they are now at this time, I don't have any information regarding that. But I would assume they can still hold their own, and somehow still can ramp up if needed.

TU-22M is quite impressive bomber. But I don't see how Iran needs this anytime soon, considering the size of its land, unless it starts to have bases further away.

But if Iran could build enough titanium then may be, just may be, it is possible for Iran to build a 4-engine similar weight class aircraft, if needs be.

Finally, I hope Iran knows how to implement 3 engine tricks for performance boosting. 1) distilled water with oxidizers for high altitude flight (as I mentioned before), 2) laser welding, of a particular level, like the German project as in Siemens, which Russians were blamed for espionage actives, 3) high strength cobalt manufacturing. Cobalt (which aviation media almost never talks about for whatever the reason) can be made to be 6 times stronger than titanium, (also great for landing gear since it is also non-brittle) which Iran 'HAS' all the 'THINGS' it needs to 'MANUFACTURE IT' to that level. Just needs the know how. Also a great additive. Essential additive. Practically impossible to be without the 2nd tier additive for alloy manufacturing. All other 'stuff' not a problem. Iran has many universities and those great Chem Eng graduates and metallurgic specialists can do the job.

One high thrust engine, even a reliable turbojet, that is manufactured economically at large quantities in Iran, used in multiple practical platforms, can overnight change the way Iran WOULD HAVE TO BE TREATED by the superpowers. It is almost as essential as having nukes.

One thing that all war planners have been thinking of for thousands of years: COST OF WAR.

Iran should make others THINK VERY CAREFULLY of cost of war, as they did when Iran retaliated for Sulleimani's assassination.

Iranian aviation military specialists do review this forum from time to time. But then, so do CIA and Mossad and other intelligence agencies. 

The question is: which of the top level government officials can be convinced to act and act quickly for the sake of an essential project.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

AmirPatriot said:


> And I am saying Iran is very very far from such a design. Which would actually be even more advanced and difficult to create than a Tu-22M.


 Your OSINT based knowledge is almost assuredly incorrect


----------



## makranman

jauk said:


> Your OSINT based knowledge is almost assuredly incorrect


Are there any _Open Source_ intelligence that suggests otherwise?


----------



## jauk

makranman said:


> Are there any _Open Source_ intelligence that suggests otherwise?


Skip meaningless OSINT on state projects. Streets riots maybe. Otherwise proof's in the pudding if one steps away and takes a broader look at the technological and geostrategic stance of the IRI. OSINT is just losing the forest to the trees.

Plus steer clear of commentary that strings too many 'fars' next to each other.😊


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> 1000-2000lb payloads



An aircraft with that kind of payload is too small for heavy anti-ship weapons like ASBMs and supersonic ASCMs.


jauk said:


> Skip meaningless OSINT on state projects. Streets riots maybe. Otherwise proof's in the pudding if one steps away and takes a broader look at the technological and geostrategic stance of the IRI. OSINT is just losing the forest to the trees.
> 
> Plus steer clear of commentary that strings too many 'fars' next to each other.😊



I don't think you know what OSINT is. Because if you did you'd know there is no OSINT in my post.


----------



## jauk

AmirPatriot said:


> An aircraft with that kind of payload is too small for heavy anti-ship weapons like ASBMs and supersonic ASCMs.
> 
> 
> I don't think you know what OSINT is. Because if you did you'd know there is no OSINT in my post.


😂


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> An aircraft with that kind of payload is too small for heavy anti-ship weapons like ASBMs and supersonic ASCMs..



This aircraft is ment to be bombing key installations, air defenses, radar, airbases, C&C, etc to allow better success rate for Iran’s missiles.

It can also be used to guide Iran’s next ASBMs and ASCMs via providing targeting data on a moving target from high altitude.

All it needs is a supersonic engine with <100-200 hour life that can be replicated and mass produced.

An unmanned Iranian B-2 or Iranian heavy bomber even with low cost of production in Iran VS US would still be built in limited quantities and be a wonder weapon easily able to be destroyed by allied forces. It’s what doomed the Nazi war machine focusing on low quantity wonder weapons that allies could destroy instead of building a V-3 rocket that can carry a nuke to London, Moscow, etc which would have ended the war quickly.

So in Iran’s case it needs swarm high altitude supersonic VLO bomber drones that can carry a modest payload using a replaceable supersonic engine with a short engine life. By being high altitude it can take advantage of air breathing engine technology similar to HGVs. Iran already has an arsenal of PGMs and glide bombs that can be dropped from Such a aircraft at high altitude.


----------



## sha ah

This is a little old but has anyone else seen this ? thoughts ?

The US Air Force just revealed a first look at its new 6th generation fighter jet. Here's the concept art.















US Air Force just revealed a first look at its new fighter jet - Aerospace Manufacturing


The US Air Force has revealed concept art of its new fighter jet that was designed, built and tested in secret.




www.aero-mag.com


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sha ah said:


> This is a little old but has anyone else seen this ? thoughts ?
> 
> The US Air Force just revealed a first look at its new 6th generation fighter jet. Here's the concept art.
> 
> View attachment 751374
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US Air Force just revealed a first look at its new fighter jet - Aerospace Manufacturing
> 
> 
> The US Air Force has revealed concept art of its new fighter jet that was designed, built and tested in secret.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aero-mag.com


Oh look the air intakes are mounted above the wings. Remember the ridicule that the F-313 got for having air intakes above the wings?

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Oh look the air intakes are mounted above the wings. Remember the ridicule that the F-313 got for having air intakes above the wings?




I know some people are waiting for the precise moment, and saying "some words" to David Cenciotti (The Aviationist)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xbat

the design definitely not for dogfight


----------



## Hack-Hook

xbat said:


> the design definitely not for dogfight


I'm not so sure about that


----------



## Ray_Atek

xbat said:


> the design definitely not for dogfight


Not need to be a dogfighter


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Oh look the air intakes are mounted above the wings. Remember the ridicule that the F-313 got for having air intakes above the wings?



Because it’s not a dog fighter that will be rapidly changing altitude.

B-2 also has wing intakes on top. Flying wing and delta wing designs typically do. It will fire long range stand off weapons and use lasers and EW to jam enemy attacks.

Also F-313 got rediculed because the intakes were on top and WAY to SMALL so not enough air would get to the engine causing possible stalling.

Doesn’t really matter since F-313 is basically dead at this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Also F-313 got rediculed because the intakes were on top and WAY to SMALL so not enough air would get to the engine causing possible stalling.


well Bae-Hawk is also have small intake but don't think anybody laugh at it by the way its single engine is more powerful than two j-85


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well Bae-Hawk is also have small intake but don't think anybody laugh at it by the way its single engine is more powerful than two j-85



Bae Hawk is

1) a trainer

2) it’s intake is not small probably same size of F-5

3) it’s intake is in a NORMAL position and not ON TOP

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Oh look the air intakes are mounted above the wings. Remember the ridicule that the F-313 got for having air intakes above the wings?


It’s called inferiority complex! People of color tend to accept novelty if it comes from whites but god forbids if another race proposes an unconventional design. Then it’s ridiculed instantly. 
wether or not f313 would have been successful or not, it stand for an unconventional effort in order to flip the game and not try to play catch up with the worlds most wealthy weapons developer.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Friends, Mr. Azarmehr who is a trusted guest on the Omid Dana podcasts has stated at least twice that Qaher was a tech demonstrator of sorts and meant to be a one off at most and never the thing that some officials said it was during the unveiling. This is very much along what many here suspected as well, especially in the current configuration of the aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> Friends, Mr. Azarmehr who is a trusted guest on the Omid Dana podcasts has stated at least twice that Qaher was a tech demonstrator of sorts and meant to be a one off at most and never the thing that some officials said it was during the unveiling. This is very much along what many here suspected as well, especially in the current configuration of the aircraft.



Everyone on here and on IMF thought it was real fighter jet. It took them forever to accept the reality that it was not and a ploy by Ahmadinejad as a PR stunt.

I will never forget the look on DM Daeghan face when he had to defend the project shortly after mock up unveiling. You could tell he was frustrated by the higher powers for unveiling such a project and using it for propaganda. Believe it or not there are many in IR military apparatus that take their job and image of their country seriously.

Unfortunately their is a significant amount of people who also just want to engage in propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Everyone on here and on IMF thought it was real fighter jet. It took them forever to accept the reality that it was not and a ploy by Ahmadinejad as a PR stunt.
> 
> I will never forget the look on DM Daeghan face when he had to defend the project shortly after mock up unveiling. You could tell he was frustrated by the higher powers for unveiling such a project and using it for propaganda. Believe it or not there are many in IR military apparatus that take their job and image of their country seriously.
> 
> Unfortunately their is a significant amount of people who also just want to engage in propaganda.



I would not go so far to say that the entire program is PR stunt. Ahmadinejad's early act was PR stunt but the plane is a demonstrator and a concept.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> I would not go so far to say that the entire program is PR stunt. Ahmadinejad's early act was PR stunt but the plane is a demonstrator and a concept.



The plane didn’t demonstrate anything.

They took an F-5 and tried to add stealth to it. The wheels and the engine would have been underwhelming.

The plane couldn’t be anything without a proper engine. It’s almost as if engineers were told “what type of 5th gen mock up can you make with 2 J-85’s?”


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> The plane didn’t demonstrate anything.
> 
> They took an F-5 and tried to add stealth to it. The wheels and the engine would have been underwhelming.
> 
> The plane couldn’t be anything without a proper engine. It’s almost as if engineers were told “what type of 5th gen mock up can you make with 2 J-85’s?”




The plane was a demonstrator for ground effect flight aircraft. It was likely proposed as a cheap strike plane not an air superiority. This is consistent with Iran's asymmetrical warfare doctrine.


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> The plane was a demonstrator for ground effect flight aircraft. It was likely proposed as a cheap strike plane not an air superiority. This is consistent with Iran's asymmetrical warfare doctrine.



a ground effect to carry what? It’s internal payload had less room than the Gaza UAV internal payload. It’s range was likely so small it couldn’t even leave Iranian airspace and make it back.

The so called purpose (anti ship fighter) was stupid as supersonic ASCHM and anti ship BMs and UAVs already made the fighter obsolete and were more worthy than devoting resources to such a project.

There is a reason no other major power had a ground effect prototype ever make it to mass production.

Again waste of time and resources and hurt the image of the Iranian arms industry. Notice how there has not been any “F-313” like mockery since that time. Almost everything Iran reveals now is ready and professional.


----------



## sha ah

Yeah I've always said this. The jet was too small to hold any serious internal payload. The only way it would make sense is if it were a 6/10 mock up. However it wasn't. Atleast it wasn't as bad as Salami's dowsing rods. That was the worst.



TheImmortal said:


> a ground effect to carry what? It’s internal payload had less room than the Gaza UAV internal payload. It’s range was likely so small it couldn’t even leave Iranian airspace and make it back.
> 
> The so called purpose (anti ship fighter) was stupid as supersonic ASCHM and anti ship BMs and UAVs already made the fighter obsolete and were more worthy than devoting resources to such a project.
> 
> There is a reason no other major power had a ground effect prototype ever make it to mass production.
> 
> Again waste of time and resources and hurt the image of the Iranian arms industry. Notice how there has not been any “F-313” like mockery since that time. Almost everything Iran reveals now is ready and professional.


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Everyone on here and on IMF thought it was real fighter jet. It took them forever to accept the reality that it was not and a ploy by Ahmadinejad as a PR stunt.
> 
> I will never forget the look on DM Daeghan face when he had to defend the project shortly after mock up unveiling. You could tell he was frustrated by the higher powers for unveiling such a project and using it for propaganda. Believe it or not there are many in IR military apparatus that take their job and image of their country seriously.
> 
> Unfortunately their is a significant amount of people who also just want to engage in propaganda.


First if all, Qahar was unveiled by Vahidi not Dehghan (so much of your memory!),

secondly, Qaher was the start of a progress in fighter design, as the head of project said, they may change any aspect of the design during it's development, yet each part would give us precious information, unlike when some smart arse says US doesn't have it so don't research on it!

Nonetheless design was based on the characteristics and missions which the designer had defined for it, not the wild ideas of random guys with world war II imaginations.

thirdly, even Azaraksh would have been a PR stunt, if it was supposed to be suspended by a traitor defense minister (like Dehghan) a few month later, not to mention that Zionist media even mocked the Kowsar as a refurbished F5, and to this very day they still mock Iran when it suites them, like the time their officials said Iranian missiles are photoshop!

Despite all the shortcoming of the unveiling, I'm glad it was unveiled during Ahmadinejad, otherwise traitors would have unveiled it later in their name and then suspended it, like Fotros drone (win win for themselves, and loose loose for Iran).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> a ground effect to carry what? It’s internal payload had less room than the Gaza UAV internal payload. It’s range was likely so small it couldn’t even leave Iranian airspace and make it back.
> 
> The so called purpose (anti ship fighter) was stupid as supersonic ASCHM and anti ship BMs and UAVs already made the fighter obsolete and were more worthy than devoting resources to such a project.
> 
> There is a reason no other major power had a ground effect prototype ever make it to mass production.
> 
> Again waste of time and resources and hurt the image of the Iranian arms industry. Notice how there has not been any “F-313” like mockery since that time. Almost everything Iran reveals now is ready and professional.



You assumption here is that the size was final. Rarely proof of concepts or early prototypes are 1:1.

A low observable jet (partly stealthy design, dominantly flight profile) that is relatively cheap and can carry anti ship or long range air to ground missiles may have been an asymmetrical asset. Not sure with advent of drones, it is still viable though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1402329921196802048
iran helping Venezuela with flying wing. Potentially could see a new Iranian flying wing design in near future based on this project.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
11 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nomi007

Iraf is a story of past.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> and here the Kowsar / Delta / Canard, which flies over an Iranian territory


Canard in front of air intake is a big mistake


----------



## sahureka2

Ray_Atek said:


> Canard in front of air intake is a big mistake


my old photoshop.
canard in front yes, but above the air intakes


----------



## Sina-1

sahureka2 said:


> my old photoshop.
> canard in front yes, but above the air intakes


Still problematic in positive angle of attack. Turbulent airflow will screw up the airflow in the intake.


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> my old photoshop.
> canard in front yes, but above the air intakes





Sina-1 said:


> Still problematic in positive angle of attack. Turbulent airflow will screw up the airflow in the intake.



Move them further forward closer to the nose. Problem solved.


----------



## sahureka2

thank you all for the technical contribution.


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Move them further forward closer to the nose. Problem solved.


Anything in front of the air intake (no matter the distance) that causes turbulent flow will seriously damage your powerplant performance. It could be avoided for some angles of attack but ultimately is an inherently risky design and frankly not worth it.


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> Move them further forward closer to the nose. Problem solved.


Just sides of air intakes solve the problem


----------



## sahureka2

eliminate the canards

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> eliminate the canards


You could hav added some air intake above the engine.
But in the end the design wont go anywhere without bigger and more powerful engine than j-85 and for that you need bigger intake.


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> You could hav added some air intake above the engine.
> But in the end the design wont go anywhere without bigger and more powerful engine than j-85 and for that you need bigger intake.



on 11 February 2019 I had posted this photoshop

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> on 11 February 2019 I had posted this photoshop


Same f-20


----------



## sahureka2

Ray_Atek said:


> Same f-20


but used the longer fuselage of the two-seater version


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> but used the longer fuselage of the two-seater version


Converting su22 to j10 should be considered as iriaf solution


----------



## Muhammed45

IRIAF airbase, Dezful

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Tehran, Mehrabad - IRIAF Mig-29s

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1412088256938844161

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

IRGC received Qaem-114 missile

weight: 50kg
warhead weight: 15kg
range: 10km

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

wond


mohsen said:


> IRGC received Qaem-114 missile
> 
> weight: 50kg
> warhead weight: 15kg
> range: 10km


wonder what made IRGC interested in that missile we already have higher performing missile for that role (Missile with the range of 20-30km)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Hack-Hook said:


> wond
> 
> wonder what made IRGC interested in that missile we already have higher performing missile for that role (Missile with the range of 20-30km)



Could be they still producing but haven't replaced all the missiles.


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> wond
> 
> wonder what made IRGC interested in that missile we already have higher performing missile for that role (Missile with the range of 20-30km)


I don't know any!


----------



## Stryker1982

Is the IRIAF looking to add 3 Kowsars soon?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1412737261574180866
Why not build a drone with 2x owj engines instead that can launch a range of stand off weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> I don't know any!


I mean Akhgar can deliver 7kg of warhead up to 30km away and have a speed of km/h




also we have supersonic Shafaq that have the range of 10km but fly at the speed of 2.7mach make it nearly impossible for target to make any reaction to it. 




also we have Heydar Missile with 12km of range

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> I mean Akhgar can deliver 7kg of warhead up to 30km away and have a speed of km/h
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also we have supersonic Shafaq that have the range of 10km but fly at the speed of 2.7mach make it nearly impossible for target to make any reaction to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also we have Heydar Missile with 12km of range


How would a AH-1J/Toophan-2 find a tank sized target at 30km?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> How would a AH-1J/Toophan-2 find a tank sized target at 30km?


the Ah-1j must find it and feed it to the missile then the seeker in the missile do the rest of the jobs when it come near enemy tank. don't forget AH-1w is capable of firing Maverick


----------



## Saleh99

Hack-Hook said:


> the Ah-1j must find it and feed it to the missile then the seeker in the missile do the rest of the jobs when it come near enemy tank. don't forget AH-1w is capable of firing Maverick


It can’t find it. It lacks a radar plus the EO/IR iran uses on it is limited to very short ranges.
All anti tank missiles in the world used by Helos have a 10km max range.
Except Spike NLOS, which doesn’t rely on the EO/IR used by the Helicopter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> I mean Akhgar can deliver 7kg of warhead up to 30km away and have a speed of km/h


This missile is for situations when pilot sees the tank and locks on it.
30km missile is for other situations when there are scouts, otherwise pilot has to count on *a lot* of luck!


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Why not build a drone with 2x owj engines instead that can launch a range of stand off weapons.



Because owj is not fuel efficient, which is priority for drones.

Also maintenance goes up once a jet engine is incorporated let alone 2.

Also owj is not stealth (too much heat given off) plus acoustics.

Any Iranian jet engine drone should be ultra altitude (U-2) and using upper atmosphere air as an oxidizer to reduce fuel and achieve supersonic speed much like HGV currently use.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Saleh99 said:


> It can’t find it. It lacks a radar plus the EO/IR iran uses on it is limited to very short ranges.
> All anti tank missiles in the world used by Helos have a 10km max range.
> Except Spike NLOS, which doesn’t rely on the EO/IR used by the Helicopter.


well , It come with FLIR but I'm not aware about the quality of FlIR we use on it so I can't be sure
but all these missiles come with their own seeker


mohsen said:


> This missile is for situations when pilot sees the tank and locks on it.
> 30km missile is for other situations when there are scouts, otherwise pilot has to count on *a lot* of luck!


for that we already have , different version of Toofa-n , Qamar-bani-Hashem which is an airborn Dehlavieh, Heydar which is a heavy weight 8-12km missile and Shafaq which is a fast mach 2.7 missile


----------



## Muhammed45

IRIAF fuel tanker, Mehrabad

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1415402456566095875

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Kowsar fighter's modern cockpit

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 763028
> View attachment 763029
> View attachment 763030
> View attachment 763031
> View attachment 763032
> View attachment 763033
> View attachment 763034
> View attachment 763035
> View attachment 763036


Are these pictures taken from DCS? Iranian Tomcats do not have the Television Camera sensor(TCS) mounted under the chin, the color of the AIM-54 Phoenix Missiles does not match those in service in Iran and the AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles look like the L model as opposed to the P model that are in service in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Are these pictures taken from DCS? Iranian Tomcats do not have the Television Camera sensor(TCS) mounted under the chin, the color of the AIM-54 Phoenix Missiles does not match those in service in Iran and the AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles look like the L model as opposed to the P model that are in service in Iran.


You are right. 
It has Photoshop but Beautiful at all 😁
Iran is the sole operator of this fighter jet. So I don't bother with some Random Photoshop works on the web

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari




----------



## aryobarzan

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>


Many thanks to Bahram for posting this video...The subject of "Flight simulator" and its companion "mission simulator" is probably one of the most difficult areas of technology in the aviation industry (probably 2nd to Jet engines development).. I have spent a good portion of my career in this simulation domain and after watching this video in full I can tell you this.. We Iranians put the IRIAF down a lot for not developing a bigger engine or a heavier airframe..But I can tell you as an expert in the field of simulation that IRIAF gets an* A++* from me on the subject...I gave them ++ because they have to go an additional step beyond the Western simulation engineers for developing all the "flight dynamics" and "Flight Algorithms" specific to each aircraft that they are simulating.....Westen sim experts receive these data from the aircraft manufacturers. Iranian sim experts have to develop them by themselves and that is a looooot of work..They are doing Level "D" which is the top of the line (Cabin mockup with full visual and sound effects tied to the flight and engine , 6 degree of motion ,instructor console etc)..so My hats off to all of them..they are ready to do airbus and boeing types if they decide to...remember each simulator is somewhere between 50 to 100 million dollars...

The video also mentioned about Mission simulator which means after the pilot learns how to fly now he has to face an enemy aircraft situation which in this case they have simulated F-15...those are even more expensive..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ashool

Saleh99 said:


> It can’t find it. It lacks a radar plus the EO/IR iran uses on it is limited to very short ranges.
> All anti tank missiles in the world used by Helos have a 10km max range.
> Except Spike NLOS, which doesn’t rely on the EO/IR used by the Helicopter.


they can pin it with drone like apachi and the helo only shoot the missile the drone point it lazer and do the job


----------



## sha ah



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

Iran attends 2021 MAKS air show in Moscow


TEHRAN - Iran is actively participating in the 2021 MAKS International Aviation and Space Salon in Zhukovsky, near Moscow.




www.tehrantimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Dont know if theres anything particularly new in this,but thought I`d post it anyway.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1419349225389711361

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The initial design of Saegheh III ... after saegheh i and II Iran is now using its experiences to develop a heavy 4+ generation fighter to replace its f4s
Iran Army

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

I was told 10yrs ago, by officer from IRIAF, who is not some high ranking officer, but has prooved to be informed very well... that Iran is working on heavy fighter jet based on F-4 and SU-24 but with multirole capabilities that would be capable for interceptor role and tactical bomber.. And He said that, this aircraft is actualy main goal. But from other countries experience, we can see that, once when country make brakethrough and solve main obstacles, mostly after that array of new products pop up.... Now I will not claim this information, which latter pop up on many forums also, will materialise 100% but it seems Iran is going in that direction. Probably with 2-3 other projects aside.. Unfortunately,time it is not ideal for developments generaly, in countries around the world, but hope Iran will find way to found important projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Just by looking how air intakes are designed, you can say it is designed for speed higher than 1.8 mach. At higher speed, air has to be slow down before jt reach engine.... so aircrafts faster than 1.8 have DSI or movable ramps/fins for this purpose, if we look closely, this model has same fins at begining of air intakes as Phantom, these would move inside at high speed and slower airflow before it reach engine

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

So you guys remember this dumbass claims?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/818062333264199680now check out the extended release. The footage is at least 5 years old!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1420273369635868673

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sahureka2

which model of helicopter is this indicated?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sahureka2 said:


> which model of helicopter is this indicated?


Shahed 274?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammed45

Repair, maintenance and overhauling line of F-14 fighters, Isfahan.

Reactions: Like Like:
12 | Love Love:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Muhammed45 said:


> Repair, maintenance and overhauling line of F-14 fighters, Isfahan.
> View attachment 768063
> View attachment 768064
> View attachment 768065
> View attachment 768066
> View attachment 768067
> View attachment 768068
> View attachment 768069
> View attachment 768070
> View attachment 768071
> View attachment 768072


iran has to take the f14 design and add stealth capabilities since the weapons in this plane area on the body it fits perfectly for such a redesign and iran should basically produce such a heavy fighter aircraft with stealth capabilities in the near future and what it needs to change is basically the turbines but alot of this planes design can be used on a future plane and i really dont believe there is a need of a high budget for this the only thing that is needed is the will for it and god knows rouhani admin didnt wanted iran to have any capabilities on its own in any area they wanted everything to depend on others so the defense ministry despite the lack of budget still did alot


Muhammed45 said:


> Repair, maintenance and overhauling line of F-14 fighters, Isfahan.
> View attachment 768063
> View attachment 768064
> View attachment 768065
> View attachment 768066
> View attachment 768067
> View attachment 768068
> View attachment 768069
> View attachment 768070
> View attachment 768071
> View attachment 768072


only thing needed is reverse engineer a fitting engine with enough power to do the job and get at it because iran really can do this and much more than this its capabilities are basically stalled and wasted until now in so many ways its just amazing so again i dont just believe that iran can produce upgraded f14 fighters but that iran can produce something which will rival the top of the line these days if only a little bit energy is put into actually doing it and getting through the first stages of the grind


----------



## mohsen

sahureka2 said:


> which model of helicopter is this indicated?


It's sourena

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

mohsen said:


> It's sourena


iran produces tons of choppers they fly all over the place and are loud this is really absurd to doubt something which cant really be hidden


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran just as china can pretty much reverse engineer and build whatever it wants and yes iran cant invest much sums in research and development of a whole new set of systems but that isnt really needed anyway the world has basically outdone itself in trying to destroy things in the last centuries and iran can learn from all of it and should learn from all of it if it decides how to spend its budget in the future the issue of high altitude up to near space long range and top speeds has to certainly be tackled because iran basically has everything else done quite well


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425506703265697797

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425506703265697797


the idea is to get mass production of plane designs running and while that is happening to start working on the next steps and such planes obviously have to be delivered in large numbers to the army and the defense ministry overall expects around 1000 helicopters to be produces in near future because the needs are so high for transporters stand off weapons recon fire fighting rescue etc pp nowadays since the doctrines are changed aswell

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Amin Bactria said:


> the idea is to get mass production of plane designs running and while that is happening to start working on the next steps and such planes obviously have to be delivered in large numbers to the army and the defense ministry overall expects around 1000 helicopters to be produces in near future because the needs are so high for transporters stand off weapons recon fire fighting rescue etc pp nowadays since the doctrines are changed aswell



I think you need to lay down the opium my friend if you think Iran is going to produce 1000 helicopters in near future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> I think you need to lay down the opium my friend if you think Iran is going to produce 1000 helicopters in near future.


8 years is near future and yes iran can produce around 120 choppers a year specially with the licenses it got anyways iran seeks to sell helicopters and therefore it needs a mass production anyway these things are all orders that were taken longer ago btw and why do you sound as its something impossible for iran to do when a single city moscow does the same amount of production alone and another reason why greencard people are pessimistic nay sayers and try to make everything iran wants to do look fake or photoshop its just so typical

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Amin Bactria said:


> 8 years is near future and yes iran can produce around 120 choppers a year specially with the licenses it got anyways iran seeks to sell helicopters and therefore it needs a mass production anyway these things are all orders that were taken longer ago btw and why do you sound as its something impossible for iran to do when a single city moscow does the same amount of production alone and another reason why greencard people are pessimistic nay sayers and try to make everything iran wants to do look fake or photoshop its just so typical



ببین
تو با کسایی حرف میزنی که گاهی متولد غربند
گرین کارتی نیستند
سیتیزن اند

بعضی دهه ها ایران نبودند و در فکر شغل مدیریتی ایران نیستند
اما عاشق ایرانن
میدونی
دوری از ایران عشق به ایران رو تقویت میکنه

شاید باورت نشه
اغلب اینها از خود ایرانی ها بیشتر به فکر ایرانند
من چند ماه پیش ایران بودم
و به اندازه خودت میدونم تفکرات اون ور چطوره

فرمودید سالی ۱۲۰ هلیکوپتر میسازیم
ایشالا
اگه بیست تا کوثر و چهل تا هلیکوپتر بسازیم من شخصا راضیم​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

Shawnee said:


> ​دوری از ایران عشق به ایران رو تقویت میکنه
> 
> شاید باورت نشه
> اغلب اینها از خود ایرانی ها بیشتر به فکر ایرانند



This is very true.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

Shawnee said:


> ببین
> تو با کسایی حرف میزنی که گاهی متولد غربند
> گرین کارتی نیستند
> سیتیزن اند
> 
> بعضی دهه ها ایران نبودند و در فکر شغل مدیریتی ایران نیستند
> اما عاشق ایرانن
> میدونی
> دوری از ایران عشق به ایران رو تقویت میکنه
> 
> شاید باورت نشه
> اغلب اینها از خود ایرانی ها بیشتر به فکر ایرانند
> من چند ماه پیش ایران بودم
> و به اندازه خودت میدونم تفکرات اون ور چطوره
> 
> فرمودید سالی ۱۲۰ هلیکوپتر میسازیم
> ایشالا
> اگه بیست تا کوثر و چهل تا هلیکوپتر بسازیم من شخصا راضیم​


lets say it this way iam living in sari and somebody who did see this city the last 10 years and came here would be very suprised about how the city changed because iran has demands and these demands will be filled eventually by peope 1000 choppers are a normal demand for a nation as large as iran this first of all and second i watch omid dana and i pretty much understand that alot of people outside of iran love iran but alot of them are nay sayers and even something simple like 1000 choppers which is a really necessary thing for iran will get photoshopped into being delusion or drug smoker


Stryker1982 said:


> This is very true.


americans said "yes we can" as a mantra a few years ago green card iranians were repeating it aswell in america but why cant iranians say "yes we can" is my question because we say this in iran these days while there are people who rather have chaos than allowing iran to show that it can and the outside iranians say no you cant as their mantra
iran needs 1000 helicopters in the next decade and iran will build 1000 helicopters in the next decade end of story

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Su 75 is a very excellent design
Not difficult to achieve some of its factord with what Iran has at hand now
Su22 with deleting horizontal stabilizers and adding v tail around the engine for stealthing engine thermal rays.
Adding underbelly air intake to moving the landing gears from wings to fuselage.

Fixing movable wings to lower fighter weight.
Removing nose air intake for bigger radar.

Big project but not impossible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Iran need air superity fighter jet to protect it's air defence network.
Drones can not do that but nice to recognition and interdictor role.
Editing existing fighter jet transfer technology more and reliable.
Modern avionics making not impossible in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

people now randomly throw some words as if they were at this for years...no admirable at all.


----------



## Ray_Atek

Shams313 said:


> people now randomly throw some words as if they were at this for years...no admirable at all.



Why not
Russia bring su75 idea
From merican yf23 with single engine.
Using Composite and carbon fiber in v tail stabilizers and some part of wings bring it to more admirable project, but not easy one.
The most problems are titanium , single crystal superalloy and turbine blade TBC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

if you guys are like designers can you design an f14 jet with stealth capabilities its basically the weapon loadout still at the underbelly basically which can be easily used for stealth featured f14 design iam just without talent in this area and yet i would still like to see how an f14 stealth jet would look like


Ray_Atek said:


> Iran need air superity fighter jet to protect it's air defence network.
> Drones can not do that but nice to recognition and interdictor role.
> Editing existing fighter jet transfer technology more and reliable.
> Modern avionics making not impossible in Iran.
> View attachment 769086


this is stuff one can find on the internet for example on f14 stealth fighter concept art but its just that its art

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

this brings it to a point perfectly
we need to produce a fighter more capable than the f14 but having similar features if possible all features upgraded speeds ranges long range aswell as close range capabilities and so on

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Amin Bactria said:


> this brings it to a point perfectly
> we need to produce a fighter more capable than the f14 but having similar features if possible all features upgraded speeds ranges long range aswell as close range capabilities and so on


Conclusion of 5 years of discussions on this thread for a capable Iranian aircraft can be summarized in two words:

*1- High Thrust Engine*.

*2- Production infrastructure*

show us the above and we all become converts..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

remember guys iran just needs to set it all u


aryobarzan said:


> Conclusion of 5 years of discussions on this thread for a capable Iranian aircraft can be summarized in two words:
> 
> *1- High Thrust Engine*.
> 
> *2- Production infrastructure*
> 
> show us the above and we all become converts..lol


i actually agree this is what where we come short and we need to fix it its that simple it doesnt drop from the heaven for us we need to get us the stuff ourselves


----------



## Muhammed45

Amin Bactria said:


> this brings it to a point perfectly
> we need to produce a fighter more capable than the f14 but having similar features if possible all features upgraded speeds ranges long range aswell as close range capabilities and so on


Hard task bro but not impossible.


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran needs more than the f14 engine the one is actually not fitting it already is not good and to use it on an upgraded plane would be very fast very problematic so a new engine is going to be needed with alot of power and i mean alot because this is already is super heavy fighter one can say so the engines should be very powerful to begin with
iran has to go from workshop mode into mass production and it has to get some serious designs out for engines to work the heavier equipment not just heavy fighter but also heavy transporter possibly airliner or other purose plane

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

The most problems are titanium , single crystal superalloy and turbine blade TBC.


----------



## Amin Bactria

Ray_Atek said:


> The most problems are titanium , single crystal superalloy and turbine blade TBC.


russian usually used alot of titanium we can use monocrystal thou we have the tech
monocrystal tech is in iran since iran has downed the american tech which used it and iran already reverse engineered it quite some time ago and can mass produce it but its all very expensive stuff so iran will eventually even for a big expense get 4 or so planes but if it would that would be amazing already
you need heat resistant radar shielding alloy for the complete hull which iran could produce based on nano technology there are actually possibilities already in our hands but the engine still is super expensive and that hurdle would take iran years which means iran producing such a plane will not happen in the next 5 years not a single one can be produced so soon unfortunally but the most stuff can be set up in this time


----------



## Amin Bactria

i guess 2031 around is when iran will start its mass production of stealth fighter jets nothing sooner than that unfortunally in my view but we will have 10 years of steps taken to that point infront of us and if iran gets help than this might get much much faster done actually it might take maybe 4 years with chinese help for example to get it done but i guess it will take 10 years iran will probably go the long way to have everything set up very firmly

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Ray_Atek said:


> Su 75 is a very excellent design
> Not difficult to achieve some of its factord with what Iran has at hand now
> Su22 with deleting horizontal stabilizers and adding v tail around the engine for stealthing engine thermal rays.
> Adding underbelly air intake to moving the landing gears from wings to fuselage.
> 
> Fixing movable wings to lower fighter weight.
> Removing nose air intake for bigger radar.
> 
> Big project but not impossible.
> View attachment 769077



your idea led me to remember that someone recently made this photoshop by processing the SU-75 and Mig-21, which could also be adapted with the Su-22

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Amin Bactria said:


> iran needs more than the f14 engine the one is actually not fitting it already is not good and to use it on an upgraded plane would be very fast very problematic so a new engine is going to be needed with alot of power and i mean alot because this is already is super heavy fighter one can say so the engines should be very powerful to begin with
> iran has to go from workshop mode into mass production and it has to get some serious designs out for engines to work the heavier equipment not just heavy fighter but also heavy transporter possibly airliner or other purose plane



F14 is an old design
Look at su75 design exactly

1-The engine hided from two side

2- Horizontal stabilizers and vertical one has removed to v tail with lower drug and high manuverability.

3-underbelly air intake to dislink landing gears from wings to fuselage for more weapons to carry.

4-Canards removed to decrease fighter height for lower drug.

5- Single engine for low maintenance.

6- Fighter surfaces designed for stealthing.

We can insert some of its factors to editing su22 not impossible but hard to do.

Look at normal sofremahi without horizontal stabilizers and add under belly air intakes to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran can never forget its might as airpower so it should grind and grind it that is what is needed to get on top




whatever


Ray_Atek said:


> F14 is an old design
> Look at su75 design exactly
> 
> 1-The engine hided from two side
> 
> 2- Horizontal stabilizers and vertical one has removed to v tail with lower drug and high manuverability.
> 
> 3-underbelly air intake to dislink landing gears from wings to fuselage for more weapons to carry.
> 
> 4-Canards removed to decrease fighter height for lower drug.
> 
> 5- Single engine for low maintenance.
> 
> 6- Fighter surfaces designed for stealthing.
> 
> We can insert some of its factors to editing su22 not impossible but hard to do.
> 
> Look at normal sofremahi without horizontal stabilizers and add under belly air intakes to it.
> 
> View attachment 769142
> View attachment 769142


whatever it does it should be good btw i actually prefer the chinese fighter to the russian one but again i prefer f14 to f16


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> your idea led me to remember that someone recently made this photoshop by processing the SU-75 and Mig-21, which could also be adapted with the Su-22
> View attachment 769141



Underbelly air intakes needed 
Such in f16 and su75 

Landing gear should be removed from wings pivoted to fuselage

Su22 has powerful engine and powerful airframe to carry this project.


----------



## Amin Bactria

its not hard for me to to chose really the j20 is simply the better choice
i would still rather use the russian ejection seats they are the best still
you see the problem i see?
the bigger j20 can have straight engines right beside eachother causing less spread of heat signature and generally its worked well
its a huge plane the j20 but its worked very fine and nice its really a great plane the chinese must be proud it reminds me of something the europeans would have done if they had money


----------



## Amin Bactria

the russians show off alot but the chinese actually brought up the best plane on the planet these days without a doubt the most deadly weapon out there the russians have good planes aswell with their two stealth fighter but i personally from what i hear from both russian and chinese planes the chinese put some absurd hightech piece together with this thing and they have the whole infrastructure set up which russia still is dreaming about so to this day its j20 when russia got its drone tanker unit it talks about and the other high tech stuff done it is still dreaming about than okay but to this point they are only 10 years infront of us while china is 20 years infront of us these freaks can build supercavitating submarines for their navy while the west cant even produce the produce the torpedos to this point they are rising fast and they dont show off much


----------



## Muhammed45

I prefer upgrading this fighter jet. With 2 light turbofan engines TVC capable, it can reach cruising speed. We have developed small radar for Kowsar which can be used in this plane too. It is already using stealth coating developed from American captured drone. With those mentioned features, this fighter jet would have a considerable decrease in RCS. If equipped with 2 light turbofan, we would get rid of those curved wings mostly developed for ground effect reasons.





Manufacturing of something similar to F14 is hard and costly. Expensive maintenance makes it impossible to produce. 

We mostly need a cost effective stealth platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 769158
> 
> 
> I prefer upgrading this fighter jet. With 2 light turbofan engines TVC capable, it can reach cruising speed. We have developed small radar for Kowsar which can be used in this plane too. It is already using stealth coating developed from American captured drone. With those mentioned features, this fighter jet would have a considerable decrease in RCS. If equipped with 2 light turbofan, we would get rid of those curved wings mostly developed for ground effect reasons.
> View attachment 769158
> 
> 
> Manufacturing of something similar to F14 is hard and costly. Expensive maintenance makes it impossible to produce.
> 
> We mostly need a cost effective stealth platform.


iam actually just intrested in iran getting a heavy fighter for long range operation and also for high altitude operation but most imporantly for air superiority and interception and this design was basically a low altitude fighter very light on top of it
actually thinking about it all i believe iran can produce the engine itself before 5 years of time easily why shouldnt it be able to do this the most expensive part you say are the fins for the compressor part but that can be actually done and i dont see why not we might actually get suprised by sepah as much as they suprised us with the satellite if we think it takes to much of time for them because right at the time i thought this about the satellites they did it successfully


----------



## Amin Bactria

this thing in a 20000kg class and fixed designs would be great




point really is that iran has gathered so much experience with the f14 that this will not be lost on the next plane it produces and there will be features left from the f14


----------



## Amin Bactria

we need an engine with much more thrust basically atleats 10000kg thrust would do the job easily but this f313 cant be effective it has not the power behind it anyway it needs a heavy engine and therefore it needs to be heavier all together


----------



## Amin Bactria

we need atleast double the thrust amount of our owj engines atleast to 10k but better would be 2k more 12k and we need to have a bigger housing since the engines being bigger in size therefore a bigger plane all together so the f313 is basically used as a design template in larger size only possible anyway which means that when iran builds its design it will be much bigger than the current one in size allowing it hopefully carrying some more potent missiles aswell
these boys are what we need produced enough to get through the expensive part


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran needs to produce something 15 times more thrust than this one really
jahesh 700








anyway at this point its really just a size issue iran produces the small type engines already and it can actually move towards heavier size engines having all materials

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

The future will be made up of a mix of manned and unmanned platforms, working together. In the unmanned department, Iran has made good progress. When it comes to fighter jets, most of Iran's jets are far too old and need to be replaced soon.

If facing an adversary like the US, Iran has no chance of attaining air supremacy. That's when it's missiles work as more of a deterrent than anything.

If facing a regional rival, then a large number of drones along with an airforce made up of 100+ 4th generation fighters is fine. Iranian pilots are very well trained and if they have good hardware, add to that Iran's air defense/missile capability and it's more than enough to deal with any regional threat.

Iran has messed around with a few various designs in the last 2 decades but we have never seen any serial production other than reverse engineered F-5s on a small scale. But F-5s can only supplement the airforce.

I can't blame Iran for not committing to projects like Shafaq or Qaher. Qaher for example, it's far too small to carry any serious payload. Compare the size of Qaher to the new Russian Checkmate ,which is considered a small stealth jet. It's literally huge compared to the Qaher.

The Shafaq, I'm guessing they conducted various tests and determined that it just wouldn't be good enough compared to what's out there.

Realistically Iran is probably going to diversity and purchase some jets from China, some from Russia. The Chinese have offered Iran the JF-17 but Iran is not interested. The J-10 is China's more capable export fighter. I've read that Iran is interested in purchasing 35 of those as a preliminary deal, maybe followed by another batch afterwards.

The issue is that China wants foreign currency reserves, while Iran wants to exchange oil for the fighters. However the situation in Taiwan, with the US arming Taiwan to the teeth has greatly angered China. That increases the likelihood of China selling Iran the J-10s just to anger off the US.

The Russian option is a SU-27 variant, probably the SU-30. Iran has been interested in this purchase for a while but Iran is playing it smart. Iran is showing that it is in no hurry to purchase the jets. Russia is low on funding for their own weapon systems and would hate to see Iran purchase Chinese jets rather than Russian.

However by not reaching towards Russia and then buying Chinese first, this will work in Iran's favor because it will most likely motivate the Russians to give Iran a more competitive deal on the SU-30s.

In the end by buying some Chinese and some Russian, Iran will benefit by not being dependent on any one side for its airforce. For whatever reason, if one side decides not to sell Iran parts or their foreign policy suddenly sours towards Iran, then Iran will already another option just sitting there.

Also by purchasing from both China and Russia, Iran will get exposure to both Chinese and Russian technology, which is better than only having exposure to one side.

Again we know that Russia desperately needs funding for their future weapons systems. Either the SU-57 or Checkmate would be a good 5th generation option for Iran imo, if Iran doesn't produce something by then.

Realistically designing a 5th generation fighter is not that difficult. Lots of nations have done it. However as we've seen only a handful of nations have been able to successfully build 5th generation fighters.

I'm not sure if Iran will get its hands on a 5th gen fighter until at least 2030's. That might even be a better option realistically because by then the technology will be more mature and cheaper.

If Iran purchases from either China or Russia, we will probably see some sort of joint production deal along with vital technology transfers. The thing about Iranian leadership is that they're thinking long term. They're not concerned with investing in something flashy, but rather in something functional.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

corona unfortunally makes me believe that iran will not show off a 10k thrust engine anymore this year but maybe next year iran will most probably show several new tests


sha ah said:


> The future will be made up of a mix of manned and unmanned platforms, working together. In the unmanned department, Iran has made good progress. When it comes to fighter jets, most of Iran's jets are far too old and need to be replaced soon.
> 
> If facing an adversary like the US, Iran has no chance of attaining air supremacy. That's when it's missiles work as more of a deterrent than anything.
> 
> If facing a regional rival, then a large number of drones along with an airforce made up of 100+ 4th generation fighters is fine. Iranian pilots are very well trained and if they have good hardware, add to that Iran's air defense/missile capability and it's more than enough to deal with any regional threat.
> 
> Iran has messed around with a few various designs in the last 2 decades but we have never seen any serial production other than reverse engineered F-5s on a small scale. But F-5s can only supplement the airforce.
> 
> I can't blame Iran for not committing to projects like Shafaq or Qaher. Qaher for example, it's far too small to carry any serious payload. Compare the size of Qaher to the new Russian Checkmate ,which is considered a small stealth jet. It's literally huge compared to the Qaher.
> 
> The Shafaq, I'm guessing they conducted various tests and determined that it just wouldn't be good enough compared to what's out there.
> 
> Realistically Iran is probably going to diversity and purchase some jets from China, some from Russia. The Chinese have offered Iran the JF-17 but Iran is not interested. The J-10 is China's more capable export fighter. I've read that Iran is interested in purchasing 35 of those as a preliminary deal, maybe followed by another batch afterwards.
> 
> The issue is that China wants foreign currency reserves, while Iran wants to exchange oil for the fighters. However the situation in Taiwan, with the US arming Taiwan to the teeth has greatly angered China. That increases the likelihood of China selling Iran the J-10s just to piss off the US.
> 
> The Russian option is a SU-27 variant, probably the SU-30. Iran has been interested in this purchase for a while but Iran is playing it smart. Iran is showing that it is in no hurry to purchase the jets. Russia is low on funding for their own weapon systems and would hate to see Iran purchase Chinese jets rather than Russian.
> 
> However by not reaching towards Russia and then buying Chinese first, this will work in Iran's favor because it will most likely motivate the Russians to give Iran a more competitive deal on the SU-30s.
> 
> In the end by buying some Chinese and some Russian, Iran will benefit by not being dependent on any one side for its airforce. For whatever reason, if one side decides not to sell Iran parts or their foreign policy suddenly sours towards Iran, then Iran another option just sitting there.
> 
> Also by purchasing from both China and Russia, Iran will get exposure to both Chinese and Russian technology, which is better than only having exposure to one side.
> 
> Again we know that Russia desperately needs funding for their future weapons systems. Either the SU-57 or Checkmate would be a good 5th generation option for Iran imo, if Iran doesn't produce something by then.
> 
> Realistically designing a 5th generation fighter is not that difficult. Lots of nations have done it. However as we've seen only a handful of nations have been able to actually build 5th generation fighters.
> 
> I'm not sure if Iran will get its hands on a 5th gen fighter until at least 2030's. That might even be a better option realistically because by then the technology will be more mature and cheaper.
> 
> If Iran purchases from either China or Russia, we will probably see some sort of joint production deal along with vital technology transfers. The thing about Iranian leadership is that they're thinking long term. They're not concerned with investing in something flashy, but rather in something functional.


security still means if iran is capable to produce it all at home but sure if the first steps get supported the help will be appreciated but iran still needs to be independent in the military production area


Amin Bactria said:


> corona unfortunally makes me believe that iran will not show off a 10k thrust engine anymore this year but maybe next year iran will most probably show several new tests
> 
> security still means if iran is capable to produce it all at home but sure if the first steps get supported the help will be appreciated but iran still needs to be independent in the military production area


these russian hunter drones btw are designed to work the way you mentioned as drone basically beside the airplane who is basically the commander of a squad of drones the chinese have the same concept working on both their stealth bomber and stealth fighter jets

swarm warfare will be very dominant in the next century in warfare and iran already is among the world leading in that aspect showing off swarming drones several times on air


----------



## Ray_Atek

Amin Bactria said:


> this thing in a 20000kg class and fixed designs would be great
> View attachment 769165
> 
> point really is that iran has gathered so much experience with the f14 that this will not be lost on the next plane it produces and there will be features left from the f14



Sofremahi which like YF 23 is better than Qaher f313


----------



## Muhammed45

Amin Bactria said:


> iran needs to produce something 15 times more thrust than this one really
> jahesh 700
> View attachment 769172
> 
> View attachment 769174
> 
> anyway at this point its really just a size issue iran produces the small type engines already and it can actually move towards heavier size engines having all materials


Loved Jahesh engine. It has the potential of being upgraded to a heavy/light turbofan engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Yes Iran needs to be independent but also realistic.

Look at how far the Chinese have come. How did they do it ? Mostly technology transfers honestly.

They made deals with various foreign companies, allowing them access to the Chinese market in exchange for a 50/50 partnership with Chinese firms and full technology transfers.

After a few years or even sometimes after the initial project they no longer required the partnerships. That's how they built the turbines for the 3 Gorges Dam for example.

I believe that 70% of all high speed rail in the entire world is located in mainland China. Deng Xiaoping, China's leader after Mao, was inspired after visiting Japan and boarding their high speed rail line in the 80's I believe it was.

Anyways at first they worked with various foreign firms on a few projects, but now all of their cities are connected by fast, cheap and efficient high speed rail. This while the west, especially the USA, lags far FAR behind.

In any case 5th generation fighter jets are in the realm of only a few nations. Like I said it's not that difficult to come up with a basic design but building, especially mass producing 5th generation fighter jets is extremely difficult.

Even China, with its massive military budget, still purchased SU-35s and jet engines from Russia. Even their J-10 and J-20 use Russian engines. Recently the Chinese claim that they are now using their own engines but who knows. Still look how long it took them and some analysts claim that their engines are under powered.

For Iran it's not impossible to build a 5th generation fighter but it would be much easier and more feasible to work with a larger nation like China or Russia and receive technology transfers with a joint production deal.

Btw the Indians backed out of the SU-57 deal they had signed with Russia. They were apparently not satisfied with the capabilities and features of the jet. Since then the Russians claim that they have worked out the various issues that were plaguing the Su-57 but honestly who knows. 

The Indians have now opted to purchase Rafale fighters from France. India claims that their radar can easily pick up the J-20 and that the J-20 is not truly stealth. Again who knows, but right now India is deploying Rafales to counter China's J-20s on their border region.

So in the end it's the USA, Russia, China and as far as Russia, China are concerned some claim that their 5th generation fighter jets are really not as capable.

Aside from those 3, you have BAE systems working on the Tempest, which will be used by the Europeans. Then you have Koreans (KF-X) and Japanese (Mitsubishi F-X) working on their protoypes and the Koreans are first building a non stealth variant I've heard.

And keep in mind Koreans and Japanese have full access to the US market and tech and it's even extremely difficult for them. Turkey was counting on BAE but now they're being blocked, so they're leaning on Pakistan to get access to Chinese technology, but who knows how far that will go. Many of their projects have been sidelined lately like their next gen tanks.

Basically stealth fighter jets, high end semi conductors and hypersonic missile technology. These are 3 fields which are extremely difficult to progress in and only a handful of nations have the ability to produce these products. The fact that Iran has been able to progress with missiles is a good sign, but remember Iran had to purchase missiles from Libya/North Korea in the 80's to be able to get to where it is today.

As far as semi conductors go, the most high end types, anything close to or less than 5 nanometers, require proprietary technology which costs billions and only 1 or 2 companies in the world can build the machinery required to mass produce them.

Stealth fighter jets, again can Iran pull it off by itself ? It's not impossible but it's highly unlikely and in my opinion, it's not feasible for Iran to be able to simply build a world class, competitive stealth fighter (even a prototype) out of the blue, independent from the the few countries who monopolize the technology.

It would be much more realistic, faster and easier for Iran to work with a third party to gain access to the technology. That's just my opinion but as always we can only wait and see.



Amin Bactria said:


> corona unfortunally makes me believe that iran will not show off a 10k thrust engine anymore this year but maybe next year iran will most probably show several new tests
> 
> security still means if iran is capable to produce it all at home but sure if the first steps get supported the help will be appreciated but iran still needs to be independent in the military production area
> 
> these russian hunter drones btw are designed to work the way you mentioned as drone basically beside the airplane who is basically the commander of a squad of drones the chinese have the same concept working on both their stealth bomber and stealth fighter jets
> 
> swarm warfare will be very dominant in the next century in warfare and iran already is among the world leading in that aspect showing off swarming drones several times on air

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Btw the Indians backed out of the SU-57 deal they had signed with Russia. They were apparently not satisfied with the capabilities and features of the jet. Since then the Russians claim that they have worked out the various issues that were plaguing the Su-57 but honestly who knows.



The Indians backed out of the deal because Russia once again screwed a brown people nation over its commitments.

The technology transfer never materialized and the so called joint production, was mostly India regulated to menial tasks and pumping more and more money. The Indians realized they were being swindled by the Russians and left. Russia is not going to turn over state secerts to anyone. China only got it from stealing state secrets from the Americans and probably Russians too on top of the decades of experience they had building fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

swa


TheImmortal said:


> The Indians backed out of the deal because Russia once again screwed a brown people nation over its commitments.
> 
> The technology transfer never materialized and the so called joint production, was mostly India regulated to menial tasks and pumping more and more money. The Indians realized they were being swindled by the Russians and left. Russia is not going to turn over state secerts to anyone. China only got it from stealing state secrets from the Americans and probably Russians too on top of the decades of experience they had building fighter jets.


so the russians you talk about are they trustworthy?


TheImmortal said:


> The Indians backed out of the deal because Russia once again screwed a brown people nation over its commitments.
> 
> The technology transfer never materialized and the so called joint production, was mostly India regulated to menial tasks and pumping more and more money. The Indians realized they were being swindled by the Russians and left. Russia is not going to turn over state secerts to anyone. China only got it from stealing state secrets from the Americans and probably Russians too on top of the decades of experience they had building fighter jets.


iam not saying that iran shouldnt cooperate but iranian territory isnt anyones playground neither of the russian nor anyone elses so allowing russians into iran what merit would that have for iran anyway you say technology transfer do you think iran doesnt has the intellectual capability and needs a russian to tell it what to do
iran needs things not people russians cant help iran aslong as they dont sell high tech manufacturing equipment and if they sell it than okay but what would we need russians for in iran they are utterly useless here we dont need them
the russians did enslave their own people to get what they have today this is the truth about russian advances in the last centuries not really a group of people i look up to


----------



## Amin Bactria

a point germans made about soviet union in the past and i mean normal german soldiers is that russians are centuries behind german society and they still hold serfs which in fact the 10000s who got liberated from slave camps aka factories fought the soviets instead of fighting for them unlike it was the case in china who fought the invaders but simply died and had no chance but russians fought russians because they were badly enslaved and they threw basically their gulag prisoners directly into the line of fire holding a pistol towards them telling them to run or shooting them
the heroism of iranians in iran iraq war cant be even compared to the evil of the soviets because their masses were all slaves while our masses were free men and living martyrs
i find russia immensely disgusting and i rather have not more relations with russia than iran has with for example germany


----------



## Ray_Atek

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 769158
> 
> 
> I prefer upgrading this fighter jet. With 2 light turbofan engines TVC capable, it can reach cruising speed. We have developed small radar for Kowsar which can be used in this plane too. It is already using stealth coating developed from American captured drone. With those mentioned features, this fighter jet would have a considerable decrease in RCS. If equipped with 2 light turbofan, we would get rid of those curved wings mostly developed for ground effect reasons.
> View attachment 769158
> 
> 
> Manufacturing of something similar to F14 is hard and costly. Expensive maintenance makes it impossible to produce.
> 
> We mostly need a cost effective stealth platform.



Iran DRONES out roll of the Qaher as antiship fighter jet or as attack fighter jet for exactly and stealthy attack .

When the engine can made in parallel project .
Searching a good fighter jet airframe will be ours first priority and testing it with what in hand ,s engines such Al21, Rd33 and j79.

Qaher is a good design but outdated,,

1- lower thrust to weight ratio cause of small engines

2- higher drug with composite thick wings and canards and low length of airframe 

3- No need horizontal stabilizers when using v tail

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Ray_Atek said:


> Iran DRONES out roll of the Qaher as antiship fighter jet or as attack fighter jet for exactly and stealthy attack .
> 
> When the engine can made in parallel project .
> Searching a good fighter jet airframe will be ours first priority and testing it with what in hand ,s engines such Al21, Rd33 and j79.
> 
> Qaher is a good design but outdated,,
> 
> 1- lower thrust to weight ratio cause of small engines
> 
> 2- higher drug with composite thick wings and canards and low length of airframe
> 
> 3- No need horizontal stabilizers when using v tail


i agree qaher can only be effective as high altitude air superiority fighter and for that it needs much much more thrust and size different weapons bigger room for sensors etc pp so iran simply needs to work towards building heavier engines aswell it produces alot of lighter ones already
the whole concept of a future stealth aircraft for iran cant be a low altitude low powered lowly armed qaher really this is simply not needed iran has so many drones who can do the same job that it doesnt need to waste the ressources for this specially when you consider that it doesnt even replace a job which missiles cant do it does basically the same as drones and missiles can do


----------



## Ray_Atek

Sofremahi without top air intakes

Best platform to do with.





Better than f14, f4 , f5, su24 and ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

yes i have seen that one aswell iran did put forward designs but under rouhani the focus was really more on sustaining the capabilities rather than advancing them and yes i agree sofreh mahi is good it looked good the moment they came up with it but question would be what turbine still they could use in such a plane and here they might even suprise us with something really good but who knows
important is to have all those workshops into mass production phase which would need atleast a few months to build facilities but after that iran could get the workshops ready for new projects


----------



## Stryker1982

Sofremahi is really a dream that can only come true with more investment and work in TEM company. Hopefully we will see high focus on this sector to build us economical and viable engine for serial production that can power the Sofremahi which is a design I admire alot and has potential.

But they may just opt for further drone development as a lower cost option instead.


----------



## Ray_Atek

Stryker1982 said:


> Sofremahi is really a dream that can only come true with more investment and work in TEM company. Hopefully we will see high focus on this sector to build us economical and viable engine for serial production that can power the Sofremahi which is a design I admire alot and has potential.
> 
> But they may just opt for further drone development as a lower cost option instead.


 
As I said before drones will not fill the air superiority fighter jet place in IRIAF, which needed to protect air defence network against USA axact attacks.

PARALLEL PROJECTS SHOULD START,

DEVELOPMENT OF RELIABLE AIR FRAME AND ENGINE.

FIRSTLY IS AN AIR FRAME.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Su75 designs features


----------



## Stryker1982

Ray_Atek said:


> As I said before drones will not fill the air superiority fighter jet place in IRIAF, which needed to protect air defence network against USA axact attacks.
> 
> PARALLEL PROJECTS SHOULD START,
> 
> DEVELOPMENT OF RELIABLE AIR FRAME AND ENGINE.
> 
> FIRSTLY IS AN AIR FRAME.


I'm not saying we shouldn't. I just think they will not even try, until a reliable engine is ready.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Stryker1982 said:


> I'm not saying we shouldn't. I just think they will not even try, until a reliable engine is ready.


curious if they dont have already an engine, an RD-33 or AL-31 equivalent as brother @yavar once mentioned.
im optimistc that we will see something in this current decade


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> curious if they dont have already an engine, an RD-33 or AL-31 equivalent as brother @yavar once mentioned.
> im optimistc that we will see something in this current decade


Let us hope. It would be a real game changer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Ray_Atek said:


> Su 75 is a very excellent design
> Not difficult to achieve some of its factord with what Iran has at hand now
> Su22 with deleting horizontal stabilizers and adding v tail around the engine for stealthing engine thermal rays.
> Adding underbelly air intake to moving the landing gears from wings to fuselage.
> 
> Fixing movable wings to lower fighter weight.
> Removing nose air intake for bigger radar.
> 
> Big project but not impossible.
> View attachment 769077



I don't know if the author is the same, but here another interpretation with the aircraft equipped with variable geometry wings that leads it to resemble the configuration of the SU-22

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

sahureka2 said:


> I don't know if the author is the same, but here another interpretation with the aircraft equipped with variable geometry wings that leads it to resemble the configuration of the SU-22



Do not know about it 
But movable wings increase the air frame weight. 

Su22 modification to su75 is doable and a great project to learn more about air frame design s factor's.

Some project defained about f7 and su22 upgrading in IRIAF.

They have good background air frame and good engine to do some more on them.


----------



## Amin Bactria

Ray_Atek said:


> Do not know about it
> But movable wings increase the air frame weight.
> 
> Su22 modification to su75 is doable and a great project to learn more about air frame design s factor's.
> 
> Some project defained about f7 and su22 upgrading in IRIAF.
> 
> They have good background air frame and good engine to do some more on them.


what is this?


----------



## sahureka2

Amin Bactria said:


> what is this?


a photoshop of excellent quality, a personal interpretation of a user and posted on the web.


----------



## Amin Bactria

it looks weird with the nose it looked like a mig21 but the wings were abnormal completely to what is used today and it looks amazing actually i like the designs used
actually the wings made me think of f14 unless they are fixed the nose of mig 21 which is a weird combination so i kind of was suprise this thing actually existed but it seems that it doesnt


----------



## Shawnee

sahureka2 said:


> a photoshop of excellent quality, a personal interpretation of a user and posted on the web.



A random question:
Is Sandro Pertini, your avatar, a popular figure in Italy these day?


----------



## Amin Bactria

Shawnee said:


> A random question:
> Is Sandro Pertini, your avatar, a popular figure in Italy these day?


despite the limited capabilities the islamic world has solved alot of problems thrown at it and despite the huge amount of capabilities the so called capitalist world has solved no single of its issues so we surely are okay here with islam specially islamic finance has to become a norm and usury has to got rid off but you try socialism if you think it works for you in europe
i support socialist revolution for all of europe how about that 😆

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Shawnee said:


> A random question:
> Is Sandro Pertini, your avatar, a popular figure in Italy these day?


Time passes and many young people perhaps do not even know who it was, but I am not young.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

sahureka2 said:


> Time passes and many young people perhaps do not even know who it was, but I am not young.


are you iranian?
okay you arent iranian


----------



## sahureka2

Amin Bactria said:


> despite the limited capabilities the islamic world has solved alot of problems thrown at it and despite the huge amount of capabilities the so called capitalist world has solved no single of its issues so we surely are okay here with islam specially islamic finance has to become a norm and usury has to got rid off but you try socialism if you think it works for you in europe
> i support socialist revolution for all of europe how about that 😆



Yes true Pertini was a socialist, but when he became President he returned the party card because from that moment he was President of all and not only of a part, and for his work as President of all who is considered the most loved and respected by Italians. .
I close the off-topic, as it is fair to other users who want to know about the IRIAF, and also because I never talk about politics in discussions where the main interest is weapon systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Amin Bactria said:


> are you iranian?
> okay you arent iranian



He’s a valued member of this board. His ethnicity is irrelevant.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> He’s a valued member of this board. His ethnicity is irrelevant.


just was asking because never saw iranians interested in italian socialist politicians but i figured out he isnt iranian

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Amin Bactria said:


> just was asking because never saw iranians interested in italian socialist politicians but i figured out he isnt iranian



Italy has a very interesting political history..... read on the CIA operation Gladio...they did a lot of dirty things in Italy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

*
حداکثر سرعت جنگنده کوثر، هزار و ۷۰۰ کیلومتر در ساعت معادل ۱۰ هزار و ۶۰ مایل بر ساعت (۱.۶ ماخ) و برد آن حدود هزار و ۱۰۰ کیلومتر است، این محصول به دو قبضه موشک فاطر مسلح بوده است.
به گزارش مشرق، نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهور اسلامی ایران با حرکت در مسیر راهبرد «ما می‌توانیم»، انواع جنگنده مجهز به فناوری‌های روز دنیا تولید کرده است.
ساخت جنگنده‌های مُدرن، دست بالای صنعت دفاعی ایران برای ایجاد بازدارندگی و تقویت امنیت پایدار کشور است.
جنگنده «کوثر»، یکی از این دستاوردهای مهم نیروی هوایی در ساخت جنگنده کاملاً ایرانی است، از اویونیک(تجهیزات الکترونیکی هواپیما)، رادار، جهت یابی تا موتور ملی این محصول، ساخت متخصصان جوان کشورمان است.
سیستم مانیتورینگ این جنگنده ایرانی کاملاً بومی بوده و یک دستاورد مهم است.





سامانه کنترل آتش، تجهیزات اویونیکی، رایانه مرکزی، نمایشگرها، رادار چند منظوره بروی جنگنده کوثر نصب شده است، یکی از افتخارات صنعت دفاعی کشور دست یابی به ساخت انواع موتور جنگنده بوده و موتور توربوجت ایران اوج یکی از ویژگی‌های مهم ساختاری جنگنده کوثر است که با نصب بروی این محصول بومی، اوج رسیدن متخصصین ایرانی را به فناوری‌های روز دنیا نشان می‌دهد.
جنگنده کوثر دو کابینه است، طول این محصول به ۱۴.۴۵ متر می‌رسد، ارتفای آن ۴.۸ متر است، وزن این جنگنده ایرانی در مراحل خالی، بارگیری و پروازی متغیر است، وزن خالی آن ۴.۳۴۹ کیلوگرم، وزن بارگیری ۷.۱۵۷ کیلوگرم و بیشینه وزن برخاست این جنگنده ایرانی ۹.۳۱۲ کیلوگرم تخمین زده شده است.






حداکثر سرعت جنگنده کوثر، هزار و ۷۰۰ کیلومتر در ساعت معادل ۱۰ هزار و ۶۰ مایل بر ساعت (۱.۶ ماخ) و برد آن حدود هزار و ۱۰۰ کیلومتر است، این محصول به دو قبضه موشک فاطر مسلح بوده و سقف پروازی آن ۵ هزار و ۸۰۰ متر تخمین زده شده است.




*​

As per the article, They have armed Kowsar with Fater air to air missile. It was developed from Aim-9. Great achievement

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

The progress in IRIAF and the homemade stuff of this military branch is good but its being done annoyingly slowly. 

I know that missile force is on top priority but after 40 years, i expect them arm Kowsar with longer range air to air missiles. 

The missile force of IRGC started from below zero capabilities, their airforce started from an even worse Spot but at the moment they are testing their achievements on the old platforms such as J-7s. Army shouldve done the same without expecting something on par with F22s. IRIAF has every platform to develop and test new missiles. They need to Gear up and increase their Speed of developing new missiles, from air2air to Air2ground etc. 
@PeeD is it a wrong expectation dear sir?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Muhammed45 said:


> As per the article, They have armed Kowsar with Fater air to air missile. It was developed from Aim-9. Great achievement


What great achievment!? Basically it's saying Kowthar has no BVR capability and is just the same F5 with new display monitors, it's like changing a Paykan's dashboard and then renaming it to something else!

Current Kowthar is just an unfinished project which was unveiled early for domestic consumption, that's why airforce decided to appoint the first batch to air display team, these aircrafts wont add no fighting capability to their fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

mohsen said:


> What great achievment!? Basically it's saying Kowthar has no BVR capability and is just the same F5 with new display monitors, it's like changing a Paykan's dashboard and then renaming it to something else!
> 
> Current Kowthar is just an unfinished project which was unveiled early for domestic consumption, that's why airforce decided to appoint the first batch to air display team, these aircrafts wont add no fighting capability to their fleet.


what a nonsense
any production of planes inside iran is a good step taken

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Muhammed45 said:


> The progress in IRIAF and the homemade stuff of this military branch is good but its being done annoyingly slowly.
> 
> I know that missile force is on top priority but after 40 years, i expect them arm Kowsar with longer range air to air missiles.
> 
> The missile force of IRGC started from below zero capabilities, their airforce started from an even worse Spot but at the moment they are testing their achievements on the old platforms such as J-7s. Army shouldve done the same without expecting something on par with F22s. IRIAF has every platform to develop and test new missiles. They need to Gear up and increase their Speed of developing new missiles, from air2air to Air2ground etc.
> @PeeD is it a wrong expectation dear sir?



They upgrade older platforms because there is no suitable Iranian engine for a serious fighter jet.
They are bound by the large amount of old gear they have and the maintenance and need for upgrades.

But some good work is done.

IRGC-ASK builds missile, store them and thats it for some decades. No heavy additional costs like in IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

mohsen said:


> What great achievment!? Basically it's saying Kowthar has no BVR capability and is just the same F5 with new display monitors, it's like changing a Paykan's dashboard and then renaming it to something else!
> 
> Current Kowthar is just an unfinished project which was unveiled early for domestic consumption, that's why airforce decided to appoint the first batch to air display team, these aircrafts wont add no fighting capability to their fleet.


It was really meant to be an advanced trainer for any future heavy fighter the IRIAF might acquire or develop. It should have a better radar and capabilities than F5, but at least the low flight hours make them very suitable for aerobatics and trainers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

WudangMaster said:


> It was really meant to be an advanced trainer for any future heavy fighter the IRIAF might acquire or develop. It should have a better radar and capabilities than F5, but at least the low flight hours make them very suitable for aerobatics and trainers.


Few months back, they just talked about the start of armament tests for kowthar! or fly by wire system for Owj engine and subsequently Kowthar, it's just an unfinished project.

Labeling a "Trainer" is their solution for unveiling unfinished aircrafts which can't do nothing else!


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> They upgrade older platforms because there is no suitable Iranian engine for a serious fighter jet.
> They are bound by the large amount of old gear they have and the maintenance and need for upgrades.
> 
> But some good work is done.
> 
> IRGC-ASK builds missile, store them and thats it for some decades. No heavy additional costs like in IRIAF.


IRGC after 40 years: 300km aimless rockets are turned into 1000km snipers.

IRIAF after 40 years: AIM-9 is renamed (to various names)! MIM-23 Hawk missiles refurbished as Phoenix with lower range (and of course a new name)!

IRGC commanders could have used the same excuses as well: Producing missiles is the job of defense ministry, we are just the end user!


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

it's normal that the Kowsar is unfinished as they are constantly improving on him. You speculate a lot but in fact you don't know a lot. You don't know much about the competence of the new missile.

Iran is also working on constant improvements on their F-4 SM (Super improved) New airframe, camera and cockpit with digital element, new radar 2 to 3 times bigger than that of the Kowsar and other new component. I suspect a new engine.

Iran keeps its surprises for their fighter jets and through these upgrades they are building their new heavy fighter jets. It is a logical choice, at a lower cost, to make constant improvements in their new technologies.

Unlike the majority on this forum, I do not underestimate the genius and resourcefulness of Iranian scientists. I am convinced that the USA, Israel and other countries do not underestimate the Iranian fighter planes like you do

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> IRGC after 40 years: 300km aimless rockets are turned into 1000km snipers.
> 
> IRIAF after 40 years: AIM-9 is renamed (to various names)! MIM-23 Hawk missiles refurbished as Phoenix with lower range (and of course a new name)!
> 
> IRGC commanders could have used the same excuses as well: Producing missiles is the job of defense ministry, we are just the end user!



IRIAF doesn't even have enough budget to keep all their F-14s active, let alone develop state of the art weapons for them in a reasonable time frame. They put F-14s in storage for years before they bring them out and try to make them operational again.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ray_Atek

Russia made many twin engine fighter jet before Single engine Su75.

Why we do not learn from Russians and not thinking to single engine F14 or
Single engine SofreMahi





Or cheaper one....


----------



## TheImmortal

Ray_Atek said:


> Russia made many twin engine fighter jet before Single engine Su75.
> 
> Why we do not learn from Russians and not thinking to single engine F14 or
> Single engine SofreMahi
> View attachment 770011
> 
> Or cheaper one....



You first need to develop an engine that can power such a fighter jet.

Tell me a non global power country that develops its own engine without any spare parts or technology from either from Russia, China, US.

Building 100% state of the art jet engine is more difficult than mastering the 1940’s nuclear cycle.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

TheImmortal said:


> You first need to develop an engine that can power such a fighter jet.
> 
> Tell me a non global power country that develops its own engine without any spare parts or technology from either from Russia, China, US.
> 
> Building 100% state of the art jet engine is more difficult than mastering the 1940’s nuclear cycle.



No need to mass producing an engine,
Which take time and money.

Just using existing engines such Al21, j79, Rd33
And .... With or without there's air frame.

Engine and Air frame projects should start paralleling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

mohsen said:


> IRGC after 40 years: 300km aimless rockets are turned into 1000km snipers.
> 
> IRIAF after 40 years: AIM-9 is renamed (to various names)! MIM-23 Hawk missiles refurbished as Phoenix with lower range (and of course a new name)!
> 
> IRGC commanders could have used the same excuses as well: Producing missiles is the job of defense ministry, we are just the end user!


this is exactly the point i make about irans revolutionaries they are working hard and bring merit to the discussion and now that they are in power its time to change the entire behaviors of iran from being lazy to being efficient and up to groundbreakingly so
i believe sepah will produce this plane if the project is given to them with enough finance they will have the project with the first working plane done in 5 years max this is how they work meanwhile if its up to the current defense ministry its 10 years at best


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> IRIAF doesn't even have enough budget to keep all their F-14s active, let alone develop state of the art weapons for them in a reasonable time frame. They put F-14s in storage for years before they bring them out and try to make them operational again.


Budget is a just an excuse, they just didn't have someone like tehrani moghaddam to define a world class goal for himself and then start his work in tent! or someone like Hajizadeh to put friends and foes in wonder!
that's why Isralies are mentioning his name so much these days.


IRIAF commanders still have the same shah era consumer mentality, their mental horizon is to buy something from outside (and yes, they do get the budget for that) and reverse engineer few parts. if it wasn't for IRGC and Hajizadeh, even army air defense still was playing with the HAWK system! though after their departure from air force, a young commander and critical help of IRGC and Hajizadeh they finally got in the line.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Well Iran has tried to build jets. They have come a long way but still have a long way to go. It's not easy to build a fighter jet that lives up to world standards. Only a few countries monopolize this industry.

Aside from the USA, Russia, China, the only other countries that have been able to do it have had to use their technology. Even the Chinese are still using Russian engines. It's not easy to accomplish.

Iran can get there but needs to cooperate with Russia / China to be able to actually build jets that are world class. Right now Iran's airforce needs fighter jets. Some jets are 50 years old. They won't last another 20 years.

Look I would love to see Iran build fighter jets, 4th gen and 5th gen that are world class, but without technology from outside it's not realistic. Look at Iran's drones. How did Iran go so far so quickly ? If Iran had not gotten its hands all those American drones, I can guarantee that Iran never would have been able to go so far. Look at Turkey, their drones 90% of vital parts are foreign.

It's not easy and takes time. First it begins by reverse engineering some parts, Then eventually building a copy with some domestic parts. Then building a copy with mostly domestic parts. Then eventually designing something indigenous and building the parts, assembly line, etc, that is the end goal. 

That is how the Chinese have built anything, including tanks, jets and everything else. In many cases, after 50 years the Chinese are still copying in mass. Again it's not easy and takes time.



mohsen said:


> Budget is a just an excuse, they just didn't have someone like tehrani moghaddam to define a world class goal for himself and then start his work in tent! or someone like Hajizadeh to put friends and foes in wonder!
> that's why Isralies are mentioning his name so much these days.
> 
> 
> IRIAF commanders still have the same shah era consumer mentality, their mental horizon is to buy something from outside (and yes, they do get the budget for that) and reverse engineer few parts. if it wasn't for IRGC and Hajizadeh, even army air defense still was playing with the HAWK system! though after their departure from air force, a young commander and critical help of IRGC and Hajizadeh they finally got in the line.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Ray_Atek said:


> No need to mass producing an engine,
> Which take time and money.
> 
> Just using existing engines such Al21, j79, Rd33
> And .... With or without there's air frame.
> 
> Engine and Air frame projects should start paralleling.



Gentlemen,
At the risk of, no doubt, sounding like a broken record player ... I would say, the idea of needing a STATE OF THE ART ENGINE is borderline insanity, for Iran. I can justify this.

In 1962 An engine was produced for a fast car, it was a 5.0L TI-VCT-V8, for one of my favorite cars, a Ford Mach 1. This engine still to this day, is an awe inspiring engine. Yes, it is not Eco-Engine, does not have KL-KN-teptronic engine control system, it is not integrated with a computer as is many of high stack engines for top of the line cars, however, still to this day, this twin independent camshaft timing engine without any computer or other fancy bells and whistles, is powerful and reliable and doesn't have some of the major issues (when break down) that other fancy engines have. Much more reliable, even more than the Jaguar supercharged AJ126 5.0L that has Adaptive Dynamic InControl Sequential Shaft made in (yes) Germany, although people are told that it is in Coventry, LOL.

I was in Coventry with the main project director who was a friend of mine at University and we drove to Warwick (right by the castle) and had a beer (a few actually) at the Warwick Mill pub that has the glass floor and you can see the river underneath. He said, and I quote, "I wished we just used the 5.0 Ti-VCT-V8 with a engine management control computer, instead of all this development for a crappy engine, that has been nothing but an expensive f**** nightmare of idiocy.

My point:

Having worked in the Aviation Engine industry for 3 decades, I would categorically say, IRAN DOES NOT NEED THE BEST TURBOFAN ENGINE in the world. Iran just doesn't need it. The myth of turbofan is what the Americans have used to sell expensive engines and (more important to them), get MAINTENANCE contracts from Arab countries (so CIA can go and reside there) that cannot think for themselves and ask themselves, why would they need a turbofan, if they have so much oil, and if they have aerial refueling, and such an expensive piece of equipment, that has (depends on engine of course) about 30% more parts that can go wrong?

Any of the engines mentioned by Ray_Atek would work fine - IF IRAN'S AIR COMBAT STRATEGY IS SOUND.

The West have fooled everyone about turbofan. Ask people that I have worked with over many years, who actually maintained engines, they spoke to me as the liaison for engine re-design and structural analysis, and manufacturing. They told me what they think.

Never seen so many maintenance crews (an pilots), proportionately, love an engine as much as P&W J52 turbojet, and never seen more people hate the engine TF-30 turbofans as much as the people I worked with or came across through contact at RR, or the American military base in U.K. that had FB-111.

Yes there are some good turbofan engines, .... yes, AL31 is good, etc. etc. but let's be real here.

Do not let American marketing fool you into thinking that IT HAS TO BE A TURBOFAN. Absolutely not.

I would prefer Iran spend money (instead of an engine, and hiring someone like me), to spend money to turn Fakour 90, into a R37 - more efficient missile engine, high grade composite fuel tec-sip high energy with light composite body, or AIM 120D and/or Meteor missiles.

Turbofan does not offer IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.

Once again, DOES NOT OFFER IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.

Multi-channel, multi-mode, multi-band AESA radar DOES. R37 with its incredible range and Meteor, DO.

Iran does not have enough money, nor time, to invest in turbofan of 30,000 lb class.

It cannot also buy from Russia, not in a sensible way either. Iran should, as I have bored all of you so many times, need to rely on its own and use one of the engines that Ray-Atek mentioned above. It is perfectly fine.

If IRIAF researcher are visiting this site, as I know they do, DO NOT FALL FOR THE TRAP OF AMERICANS. Take a look at the IRGC, they fight based on America's weaknesses, not strengths. U.S. would LOVE for Iran to get bugged down in engine development for the next 20 years. Don't do them a favor. Iran already spends 35% of its IRIAF budget on retirement funds, war wounded salaries and compensation, etc. Iran does not have the money to spend on such a huge mistake.

Simpler turbojet engines of late 1970s, are pretty good, for what Iran needs. Many known knowns, much quicker for Iran to develop, EVEN add todays technology to the old design (when it makes sense), e.g. blade coating, etc.

My humble opinion, of course.

Long live the wonderful, righteous nation of Iran and her brave people.


sha ah said:


> Well Iran has tried to build jets. They have come a long way but still have a long way to go. It's not easy to build a fighter jet that lives up to world standards. Only a few countries monopolize this industry.
> 
> Aside from the USA, Russia, China, the only other countries that have been able to do it have had to use their technology. Even the Chinese are still using Russian engines. It's not easy to accomplish.
> 
> Iran can get there but needs to cooperate with Russia / China to be able to actually build jets that are world class. Right now Iran's airforce needs fighter jets. Some jets are 50 years old. They won't last another 20 years.
> 
> Look I would love to see Iran build fighter jets, 4th gen and 5th gen that are world class, but without technology from outside it's not realistic. Look at Iran's drones. How did Iran go so far so quickly ? If Iran had not gotten its hands all those American drones, I can guarantee that Iran never would have been able to go so far. Look at Turkey, their drones 90% of vital parts are foreign.
> 
> It's not easy and takes time. First it begins by reverse engineering some parts, Then eventually building a copy with some domestic parts. Then building a copy with mostly domestic parts. Then eventually designing something indigenous and building the parts, assembly line, etc, that is the end goal.
> 
> That is how the Chinese have built anything, including tanks, jets and everything else. In many cases, after 50 years the Chinese are still copying in mass. Again it's not easy and takes time.



Engines manufacturing: Not just US, Russian, and China, let's not forget France, UK, and Germany. They can build good engines too, although have little incentive to do so.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

Sorry I placed EU countries under the US (NATO) umbrella for simplicity sake but yes France, UK, Germany can build fighter jets.

Whatever the leadership in Iran want to do they have to get going. If they want to build a new platform then you are right, they have to rely on proven technology, not hype.

On the other hand if they feel like they cannot build something that is sufficient then purchasing from both Russia and China is a good choice since that way Iran won't be relying on one country for vital parts.

At the same time any purchase should include technology transfers and joint production to give Iran even more leverage in this regard. In my opinion, exposure to both Chinese and Russian technology, is better than just exposure to one. The more exposure and inspiration Iranian engineers have, the more likely it is that they will be able to successuflly produce a world class product.

Russia is low on funds for its weapons programs and hates the fact that China has been taking over its market share in the weapons industry. For this reason if Iran makes a purchase from China first, Russia will probably give Iran a more favorable deal to get Iran on board. At the end of the day, money makes the world go round.




EvilWesteners said:


> Gentlemen,
> At the risk of, no doubt, sounding like a broken record player ... I would say, the idea of needing a STATE OF THE ART ENGINE is borderline insanity, for Iran. I can justify this.
> 
> In 1962 An engine was produced for a fast car, it was a 5.0L TI-VCT-V8, for one of my favorite cars, a Ford Mach 1. This engine still to this day, is an awe inspiring engine. Yes, it is not Eco-Engine, does not have KL-KN-teptronic engine control system, it is not integrated with a computer as is many of high stack engines for top of the line cars, however, still to this day, this twin independent camshaft timing engine without any computer or other fancy bells and whistles, is powerful and reliable and doesn't have some of the major issues (when break down) that other fancy engines have. Much more reliable, even more than the Jaguar supercharged AJ126 5.0L that has Adaptive Dynamic InControl Sequential Shaft made in (yes) Germany, although people are told that it is in Coventry, LOL.
> 
> I was in Coventry with the main project director who was a friend of mine at University and we drove to Warwick (right by the castle) and had a beer (a few actually) at the Warwick Mill pub that has the glass floor and you can see the river underneath. He said, and I quote, "I wished we just used the 5.0 Ti-VCT-V8 with a engine management control computer, instead of all this development for a crappy engine, that has been nothing but an expensive f**** nightmare of idiocy.
> 
> My point:
> 
> Having worked in the Aviation Engine industry for 3 decades, I would categorically say, IRAN DOES NOT NEED THE BEST TURBOFAN ENGINE in the world. Iran just doesn't need it. The myth of turbofan is what the Americans have used to sell expensive engines and (more important to them), get MAINTENANCE contracts from Arab countries (so CIA can go and reside there) that cannot think for themselves and ask themselves, why would they need a turbofan, if they have so much oil, and if they have aerial refueling, and such an expensive piece of equipment, that has (depends on engine of course) about 30% more parts that can go wrong?
> 
> Any of the engines mentioned by Ray_Atek would work fine - IF IRAN'S AIR COMBAT STRATEGY IS SOUND.
> 
> The West have fooled everyone about turbofan. Ask people that I have worked with over many years, who actually maintained engines, they spoke to me as the liaison for engine re-design and structural analysis, and manufacturing. They told me what they think.
> 
> Never seen so many maintenance crews (an pilots), proportionately, love an engine as much as P&W J52 turbojet, and never seen more people hate the engine TF-30 turbofans as much as the people I worked with or came across through contact at RR, or the American military base in U.K. that had FB-111.
> 
> Yes there are some good turbofan engines, .... yes, AL31 is good, etc. etc. but let's be real here.
> 
> Do not let American marketing fool you into thinking that IT HAS TO BE A TURBOFAN. Absolutely not.
> 
> I would prefer Iran spend money (instead of an engine, and hiring someone like me), to spend money to turn Fakour 90, into a R37 - more efficient missile engine, high grade composite fuel tec-sip high energy with light composite body, or AIM 120D and/or Meteor missiles.
> 
> Turbofan does not offer IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Once again, DOES NOT OFFER IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Multi-channel, multi-mode, multi-band AESA radar DOES. R37 with its incredible range and Meteor, DO.
> 
> Iran does not have enough money, nor time, to invest in turbofan of 30,000 lb class.
> 
> It cannot also buy from Russia, not in a sensible way either. Iran should, as I have bored all of you so many times, need to rely on its own and use one of the engines that Ray-Atek mentioned above. It is perfectly fine.
> 
> If IRIAF researcher are visiting this site, as I know they do, DO NOT FALL FOR THE TRAP OF AMERICANS. Take a look at the IRGC, they fight based on America's weaknesses, not strengths. U.S. would LOVE for Iran to get bugged down in engine development for the next 20 years. Don't do them a favor. Iran already spends 35% of its IRIAF budget on retirement funds, war wounded salaries and compensation, etc. Iran does not have the money to spend on such a huge mistake.
> 
> Simpler turbojet engines of late 1970s, are pretty good, for what Iran needs. Many known knowns, much quicker for Iran to develop, EVEN add todays technology to the old design (when it makes sense), e.g. blade coating, etc.
> 
> My humble opinion, or course.
> 
> Long live the wonderful, righteous nation of Iran and her brave people.
> 
> 
> Engines manufacturing: Not just US, Russian, and China, let's not forget France, UK, and Germany. They can build good engines too, although have little incentive to do so.


----------



## Ray_Atek

EvilWesteners said:


> Gentlemen,
> At the risk of, no doubt, sounding like a broken record player ... I would say, the idea of needing a STATE OF THE ART ENGINE is borderline insanity, for Iran. I can justify this.
> 
> In 1962 An engine was produced for a fast car, it was a 5.0L TI-VCT-V8, for one of my favorite cars, a Ford Mach 1. This engine still to this day, is an awe inspiring engine. Yes, it is not Eco-Engine, does not have KL-KN-teptronic engine control system, it is not integrated with a computer as is many of high stack engines for top of the line cars, however, still to this day, this twin independent camshaft timing engine without any computer or other fancy bells and whistles, is powerful and reliable and doesn't have some of the major issues (when break down) that other fancy engines have. Much more reliable, even more than the Jaguar supercharged AJ126 5.0L that has Adaptive Dynamic InControl Sequential Shaft made in (yes) Germany, although people are told that it is in Coventry, LOL.
> 
> I was in Coventry with the main project director who was a friend of mine at University and we drove to Warwick (right by the castle) and had a beer (a few actually) at the Warwick Mill pub that has the glass floor and you can see the river underneath. He said, and I quote, "I wished we just used the 5.0 Ti-VCT-V8 with a engine management control computer, instead of all this development for a crappy engine, that has been nothing but an expensive f**** nightmare of idiocy.
> 
> My point:
> 
> Having worked in the Aviation Engine industry for 3 decades, I would categorically say, IRAN DOES NOT NEED THE BEST TURBOFAN ENGINE in the world. Iran just doesn't need it. The myth of turbofan is what the Americans have used to sell expensive engines and (more important to them), get MAINTENANCE contracts from Arab countries (so CIA can go and reside there) that cannot think for themselves and ask themselves, why would they need a turbofan, if they have so much oil, and if they have aerial refueling, and such an expensive piece of equipment, that has (depends on engine of course) about 30% more parts that can go wrong?
> 
> Any of the engines mentioned by Ray_Atek would work fine - IF IRAN'S AIR COMBAT STRATEGY IS SOUND.
> 
> The West have fooled everyone about turbofan. Ask people that I have worked with over many years, who actually maintained engines, they spoke to me as the liaison for engine re-design and structural analysis, and manufacturing. They told me what they think.
> 
> Never seen so many maintenance crews (an pilots), proportionately, love an engine as much as P&W J52 turbojet, and never seen more people hate the engine TF-30 turbofans as much as the people I worked with or came across through contact at RR, or the American military base in U.K. that had FB-111.
> 
> Yes there are some good turbofan engines, .... yes, AL31 is good, etc. etc. but let's be real here.
> 
> Do not let American marketing fool you into thinking that IT HAS TO BE A TURBOFAN. Absolutely not.
> 
> I would prefer Iran spend money (instead of an engine, and hiring someone like me), to spend money to turn Fakour 90, into a R37 - more efficient missile engine, high grade composite fuel tec-sip high energy with light composite body, or AIM 120D and/or Meteor missiles.
> 
> Turbofan does not offer IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Once again, DOES NOT OFFER IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Multi-channel, multi-mode, multi-band AESA radar DOES. R37 with its incredible range and Meteor, DO.
> 
> Iran does not have enough money, nor time, to invest in turbofan of 30,000 lb class.
> 
> It cannot also buy from Russia, not in a sensible way either. Iran should, as I have bored all of you so many times, need to rely on its own and use one of the engines that Ray-Atek mentioned above. It is perfectly fine.
> 
> If IRIAF researcher are visiting this site, as I know they do, DO NOT FALL FOR THE TRAP OF AMERICANS. Take a look at the IRGC, they fight based on America's weaknesses, not strengths. U.S. would LOVE for Iran to get bugged down in engine development for the next 20 years. Don't do them a favor. Iran already spends 35% of its IRIAF budget on retirement funds, war wounded salaries and compensation, etc. Iran does not have the money to spend on such a huge mistake.
> 
> Simpler turbojet engines of late 1970s, are pretty good, for what Iran needs. Many known knowns, much quicker for Iran to develop, EVEN add todays technology to the old design (when it makes sense), e.g. blade coating, etc.
> 
> My humble opinion, of course.
> 
> Long live the wonderful, righteous nation of Iran and her brave people.
> 
> 
> Engines manufacturing: Not just US, Russian, and China, let's not forget France, UK, and Germany. They can build good engines too, although have little incentive to do so.



Thank you for your mentioned project management factors.

Nowadays we see many technical changes in Air frame and Avionics,
And not on engines.

Waiting to complete each part of fighter jet, is a deep time wasting management.


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> IRGC after 40 years: 300km aimless rockets are turned into 1000km snipers.
> 
> IRIAF after 40 years: AIM-9 is renamed (to various names)! MIM-23 Hawk missiles refurbished as Phoenix with lower range (and of course a new name)!
> 
> IRGC commanders could have used the same excuses as well: Producing missiles is the job of defense ministry, we are just the end user!


well , you must see fatter is compatible with which version of AIM-9 . if it turn out to be like AIM-9x then its not that bad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

sha ah said:


> Well Iran has tried to build jets. They have come a long way but still have a long way to go. It's not easy to build a fighter jet that lives up to world standards. Only a few countries monopolize this industry.
> 
> Aside from the USA, Russia, China, the only other countries that have been able to do it have had to use their technology. Even the Chinese are still using Russian engines. It's not easy to accomplish.
> 
> Iran can get there but needs to cooperate with Russia / China to be able to actually build jets that are world class. Right now Iran's airforce needs fighter jets. Some jets are 50 years old. They won't last another 20 years.
> 
> Look I would love to see Iran build fighter jets, 4th gen and 5th gen that are world class, but without technology from outside it's not realistic. Look at Iran's drones. How did Iran go so far so quickly ? If Iran had not gotten its hands all those American drones, I can guarantee that Iran never would have been able to go so far. Look at Turkey, their drones 90% of vital parts are foreign.
> 
> It's not easy and takes time. First it begins by reverse engineering some parts, Then eventually building a copy with some domestic parts. Then building a copy with mostly domestic parts. Then eventually designing something indigenous and building the parts, assembly line, etc, that is the end goal.
> 
> That is how the Chinese have built anything, including tanks, jets and everything else. In many cases, after 50 years the Chinese are still copying in mass. Again it's not easy and takes time.


Buddy, I didn't ask for a world class fighter jet at this point, but at least they should have built some good missiles by now, I specifically compared the missile advancements in two forces to show the huge gap, constant advancement in one side; and close to standstill in another! they didn't even bother to barrow some missile tech from IRGC!

Qaher should have been built by air force, not defense ministry, even by using engines and radars from existing fleet, they could have saved one or two decades of R&D in aerodynamics before we reach a proper domestic engine. but no, they are like a spoiled child, not only didn't build it themselves, even refused it by saying it doesn't meet their expectations!!! well, they can stick their expectations in their lazy fat arses!

Also if we look at Bavar373, what was done in about 10 years, surpasses decades of Chinese copycat progress.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

EvilWesteners said:


> Gentlemen,
> At the risk of, no doubt, sounding like a broken record player ... I would say, the idea of needing a STATE OF THE ART ENGINE is borderline insanity, for Iran. I can justify this.
> 
> In 1962 An engine was produced for a fast car, it was a 5.0L TI-VCT-V8, for one of my favorite cars, a Ford Mach 1. This engine still to this day, is an awe inspiring engine. Yes, it is not Eco-Engine, does not have KL-KN-teptronic engine control system, it is not integrated with a computer as is many of high stack engines for top of the line cars, however, still to this day, this twin independent camshaft timing engine without any computer or other fancy bells and whistles, is powerful and reliable and doesn't have some of the major issues (when break down) that other fancy engines have. Much more reliable, even more than the Jaguar supercharged AJ126 5.0L that has Adaptive Dynamic InControl Sequential Shaft made in (yes) Germany, although people are told that it is in Coventry, LOL.
> 
> I was in Coventry with the main project director who was a friend of mine at University and we drove to Warwick (right by the castle) and had a beer (a few actually) at the Warwick Mill pub that has the glass floor and you can see the river underneath. He said, and I quote, "I wished we just used the 5.0 Ti-VCT-V8 with a engine management control computer, instead of all this development for a crappy engine, that has been nothing but an expensive f**** nightmare of idiocy.
> 
> My point:
> 
> Having worked in the Aviation Engine industry for 3 decades, I would categorically say, IRAN DOES NOT NEED THE BEST TURBOFAN ENGINE in the world. Iran just doesn't need it. The myth of turbofan is what the Americans have used to sell expensive engines and (more important to them), get MAINTENANCE contracts from Arab countries (so CIA can go and reside there) that cannot think for themselves and ask themselves, why would they need a turbofan, if they have so much oil, and if they have aerial refueling, and such an expensive piece of equipment, that has (depends on engine of course) about 30% more parts that can go wrong?
> 
> Any of the engines mentioned by Ray_Atek would work fine - IF IRAN'S AIR COMBAT STRATEGY IS SOUND.
> 
> The West have fooled everyone about turbofan. Ask people that I have worked with over many years, who actually maintained engines, they spoke to me as the liaison for engine re-design and structural analysis, and manufacturing. They told me what they think.
> 
> Never seen so many maintenance crews (an pilots), proportionately, love an engine as much as P&W J52 turbojet, and never seen more people hate the engine TF-30 turbofans as much as the people I worked with or came across through contact at RR, or the American military base in U.K. that had FB-111.
> 
> Yes there are some good turbofan engines, .... yes, AL31 is good, etc. etc. but let's be real here.
> 
> Do not let American marketing fool you into thinking that IT HAS TO BE A TURBOFAN. Absolutely not.
> 
> I would prefer Iran spend money (instead of an engine, and hiring someone like me), to spend money to turn Fakour 90, into a R37 - more efficient missile engine, high grade composite fuel tec-sip high energy with light composite body, or AIM 120D and/or Meteor missiles.
> 
> Turbofan does not offer IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Once again, DOES NOT OFFER IRREPLACIBLE ADVANTAGE.
> 
> Multi-channel, multi-mode, multi-band AESA radar DOES. R37 with its incredible range and Meteor, DO.
> 
> Iran does not have enough money, nor time, to invest in turbofan of 30,000 lb class.
> 
> It cannot also buy from Russia, not in a sensible way either. Iran should, as I have bored all of you so many times, need to rely on its own and use one of the engines that Ray-Atek mentioned above. It is perfectly fine.
> 
> If IRIAF researcher are visiting this site, as I know they do, DO NOT FALL FOR THE TRAP OF AMERICANS. Take a look at the IRGC, they fight based on America's weaknesses, not strengths. U.S. would LOVE for Iran to get bugged down in engine development for the next 20 years. Don't do them a favor. Iran already spends 35% of its IRIAF budget on retirement funds, war wounded salaries and compensation, etc. Iran does not have the money to spend on such a huge mistake.
> 
> Simpler turbojet engines of late 1970s, are pretty good, for what Iran needs. Many known knowns, much quicker for Iran to develop, EVEN add todays technology to the old design (when it makes sense), e.g. blade coating, etc.
> 
> My humble opinion, of course.
> 
> Long live the wonderful, righteous nation of Iran and her brave people.
> 
> 
> Engines manufacturing: Not just US, Russian, and China, let's not forget France, UK, and Germany. They can build good engines too, although have little incentive to do so.


france germany and uk cant even produce a single sock if they werent ordered to by globalists so no they are not useful for themselves even let alone for others


----------



## Stryker1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1427297206822969349
Interesting thread, considering the wide range of applications it is worth serial production. Whether it;d be transport, cargo transport, firefighting, or offensive flexibility perhaps even AWACS all of it very much needed, god knows we need something like this.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1427297206822969349
> Interesting thread, considering the wide range of applications it is worth serial production. Whether it;d be transport, cargo transport, firefighting, or offensive flexibility perhaps even AWACS all of it very much needed, god knows we need something like this.


Well,I for one am very glad to see that the iran 140 program was not abandoned,as it seemed to be at the beginning of the 2010s,but had in fact continued behind the scenes with the apparent goal of redesigning it into a military transport,plus no doubt other uses as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Budget is a just an excuse


Stop acting as if IRGC magicked thousands of BMs into existence with 2 hezar toman and a couple of brilliant scientists/commanders. In 1399 IRGC alone (not counting Basij) had almost double the budget of the entire Artesh with less than half the active personnel. How do you expect any branch of Artesh to do spend on development programs in this situation?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Stop acting as if IRGC magicked thousands of BMs into existence with 2 hezar toman and a couple of brilliant scientists/commanders. In 1399 IRGC alone (not counting Basij) had almost double the budget of the entire Artesh with less than half the active personnel. How do you expect any branch of Artesh to do spend on development programs in this situation?


If i'm not wrong, IRGC budget was around 18 hezar miliard toman and artesh received 11 hezar miliard toman. 

You forget that IRGC is responsible for missions abroad, Safety of our borders and fighting against insurgency. Artesh has no role in these sectors and they don't have to pay for Safety of bordering areas such as baluchestan and kordestan. IRGC is giving tens of martyrs every year to protect the country from terrorism and border skirmishes. Add that to their Quds forces which needs a seperate budget to carry out its missions in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc. 
I am not trying to undermine artesh and their role in the security of country but they have their budget untouched and preserved. They don't have to find a way to transfer military equipment to Hezbollah and others. It is fully upto IRGC. 
And we, after 40 years, expect IRIAF to develop a capable fighter jet along with useful missiles and also up to date. That's their only job. They could do it, budget is not something that has stopped them. They mostly keep their equipment in reserve and they don't have to upgrade F14s every year. A small fraction of Artesh budget is specified to upgrading fighter jets. One cannot blame it all on fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

AmirPatriot said:


> Stop acting as if IRGC magicked thousands of BMs into existence with 2 hezar toman and a couple of brilliant scientists/commanders. In 1399 IRGC alone (not counting Basij) had almost double the budget of the entire Artesh with less than half the active personnel. How do you expect any branch of Artesh to do spend on development programs in this situation?


you speaking like child and irgc cant compared to artesh artesh activity compare to sepah like filo fenjon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Muhammed45 said:


> *حداکثر سرعت جنگنده کوثر، هزار و ۷۰۰ کیلومتر در ساعت معادل ۱۰ هزار و ۶۰ مایل بر ساعت (۱.۶ ماخ) و برد آن حدود هزار و ۱۰۰ کیلومتر است، این محصول به دو قبضه موشک فاطر مسلح بوده است.
> به گزارش مشرق، نیروی هوایی ارتش جمهور اسلامی ایران با حرکت در مسیر راهبرد «ما می‌توانیم»، انواع جنگنده مجهز به فناوری‌های روز دنیا تولید کرده است.
> ساخت جنگنده‌های مُدرن، دست بالای صنعت دفاعی ایران برای ایجاد بازدارندگی و تقویت امنیت پایدار کشور است.
> جنگنده «کوثر»، یکی از این دستاوردهای مهم نیروی هوایی در ساخت جنگنده کاملاً ایرانی است، از اویونیک(تجهیزات الکترونیکی هواپیما)، رادار، جهت یابی تا موتور ملی این محصول، ساخت متخصصان جوان کشورمان است.
> سیستم مانیتورینگ این جنگنده ایرانی کاملاً بومی بوده و یک دستاورد مهم است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> سامانه کنترل آتش، تجهیزات اویونیکی، رایانه مرکزی، نمایشگرها، رادار چند منظوره بروی جنگنده کوثر نصب شده است، یکی از افتخارات صنعت دفاعی کشور دست یابی به ساخت انواع موتور جنگنده بوده و موتور توربوجت ایران اوج یکی از ویژگی‌های مهم ساختاری جنگنده کوثر است که با نصب بروی این محصول بومی، اوج رسیدن متخصصین ایرانی را به فناوری‌های روز دنیا نشان می‌دهد.
> جنگنده کوثر دو کابینه است، طول این محصول به ۱۴.۴۵ متر می‌رسد، ارتفای آن ۴.۸ متر است، وزن این جنگنده ایرانی در مراحل خالی، بارگیری و پروازی متغیر است، وزن خالی آن ۴.۳۴۹ کیلوگرم، وزن بارگیری ۷.۱۵۷ کیلوگرم و بیشینه وزن برخاست این جنگنده ایرانی ۹.۳۱۲ کیلوگرم تخمین زده شده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> حداکثر سرعت جنگنده کوثر، هزار و ۷۰۰ کیلومتر در ساعت معادل ۱۰ هزار و ۶۰ مایل بر ساعت (۱.۶ ماخ) و برد آن حدود هزار و ۱۰۰ کیلومتر است، این محصول به دو قبضه موشک فاطر مسلح بوده و سقف پروازی آن ۵ هزار و ۸۰۰ متر تخمین زده شده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *​
> 
> As per the article, They have armed Kowsar with Fater air to air missile. It was developed from Aim-9. Great achievement


Your interpretation of this article made it look like IRIAF has only recently armed Kowsar with fatter missiles,,...It just randome article like milions other out there,nothing like news they armed kowsar with fatter missile...For god sake,even google translate do decent job...Article(editor) provide general information about kowsar,and than in array of other information like Speed 1700km/h ,flight celling,range 1100km,empty weight,full load weight...latest technology avionics,owj engines..and bunch of more..it also say it can be armed with different kind of amunition,including Iranian made Simorgh cluster bombs,Fatter missiles..atc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> Stop acting as if IRGC magicked thousands of BMs into existence with 2 hezar toman and a couple of brilliant scientists/commanders. In 1399 IRGC alone (not counting Basij) had almost double the budget of the entire Artesh with less than half the active personnel. How do you expect any branch of Artesh to do spend on development programs in this situation?


IRGC and its unregistered foreign forces are running the entire middle east. who do you think is paying for all the missiles and drones plus all other logistics in resistance axis?

Yet, I'm more than sure both forces waste enough money that R&D budget wouldn't make a difference in it!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Muhammed45 said:


> If i'm not wrong, IRGC budget was around 18 hezar miliard toman and artesh received 11 hezar miliard toman.
> 
> You forget that IRGC is responsible for missions abroad, Safety of our borders and fighting against insurgency. Artesh has no role in these sectors and they don't have to pay for Safety of bordering areas such as baluchestan and kordestan. IRGC is giving tens of martyrs every year to protect the country from terrorism and border skirmishes. Add that to their Quds forces which needs a seperate budget to carry out its missions in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc.
> I am not trying to undermine artesh and their role in the security of country but they have their budget untouched and preserved. They don't have to find a way to transfer military equipment to Hezbollah and others. It is fully upto IRGC.
> And we, after 40 years, expect IRIAF to develop a capable fighter jet along with useful missiles and also up to date. That's their only job. They could do it, budget is not something that has stopped them. They mostly keep their equipment in reserve and they don't have to upgrade F14s every year. A small fraction of Artesh budget is specified to upgrading fighter jets. One cannot blame it all on fighter jets.


Does Sepah control all borders or just the hot spot areas? 
If Sepah does secure the borders too, then what does the Artesh army do these days?


----------



## Muhammed45

WudangMaster said:


> Does Sepah control all borders or just the hot spot areas?
> If Sepah does secure the borders too, then what does the Artesh army do these days?


I have spent my military service in Artesh sir. They have no role in protecting the borders. It is mostly upto police force (نیروی انتظامی( and IRGC. IRGC is most active in those hot spots as you mentioned above. When we were in Baluchestan, an IRGC military bus was attacked right in front of our military base in Khash. I was serving as an artillery specialist. After massacring our brothers in IRGC, they announced high alert in our base, I can still Remember those sleepless nights. 

IRGC is protecting the country with her sweat and blood. Without them we had to fight against JuA inside Baluchestan. Its true that i was an Artesh soldier and i am loyal to my Unit but where is my Honor? IRGC is the only reason that Iran is the same Iran with same borders of pre Revolution times.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WudangMaster

Muhammed45 said:


> I have spent my military service in Artesh sir. They have no role in protecting the borders. It is mostly upto police force (نیروی انتظامی( and IRGC. IRGC is most active in those hot spots as you mentioned above. When we were in Baluchestan, an IRGC military bus was attacked right in front of our military base in Khash. I was serving as an artillery specialist. After massacring our brothers in IRGC, they announced high alert in our base, I can still Remember those sleepless nights.
> 
> IRGC is protecting the country with her sweat and blood. Without them we had to fight against JuA inside Baluchestan. Its true that i was an Artesh soldier and i am loyal to my Unit but where is my Honor? IRGC is the only reason that Iran is the same Iran with same borders of pre Revolution times.


So what are the day to day activities of the army? In what situations would army be deployed and is it ready for any hot and heavy fighting these days?


----------



## Muhammed45

WudangMaster said:


> what are the day to day activities of the army?


The routine Education, training and maintenance. 




WudangMaster said:


> In what situations would army be deployed and is it ready for any hot and heavy fighting these days?


When the country is invaded, attacked or is prepared for an offensive. 

Artesh is always ready for heavy fighting. They have tens of non reported exercises all over the country. They receive orders from Supreme leader and he orders them based on their readiness. 

At the moment they have nothing to do with the bordering areas unless the leader defines new missions for Artesh.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> I have spent my military service in Artesh sir. They have no role in protecting the borders. It is mostly upto police force (نیروی انتظامی( and IRGC. IRGC is most active in those hot spots as you mentioned above. When we were in Baluchestan, an IRGC military bus was attacked right in front of our military base in Khash. I was serving as an artillery specialist. After massacring our brothers in IRGC, they announced high alert in our base, I can still Remember those sleepless nights.
> 
> IRGC is protecting the country with her sweat and blood. Without them we had to fight against JuA inside Baluchestan. Its true that i was an Artesh soldier and i am loyal to my Unit but where is my Honor? IRGC is the only reason that Iran is the same Iran with same borders of pre Revolution times.


I was in Baluchistan but in police force at least at those time the border was responsibility of police force (it was at the time of Rigi Career) maybe now a days it have changed


Muhammed45 said:


> The routine Education, training and maintenance.
> 
> 
> 
> When the country is invaded, attacked or is prepared for an offensive.
> 
> Artesh is always ready for heavy fighting. They have tens of non reported exercises all over the country. They receive orders from Supreme leader and he orders them based on their readiness.
> 
> At the moment they have nothing to do with the bordering areas unless the leader defines new missions for Artesh.


well they have responsibility in our south and northern borders.


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> I was in Baluchistan but in police force at least at those time the border was responsibility of police force (it was at the time of Rigi Career) maybe now a days it have changed
> 
> well they have responsibility in our south and northern borders.


Yes. 

The coast lines are shared between two navies.


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It seems that some American sources even saw in Q4 Iranian Kowsar fighters that Iran claims to have optimized in three areas: avionics and electronic warfare, network warfare, and stand-off armaments. What exactly does this mean? This means that the Iran-made F-5s arriving in Syria could fight in synchrony with the drones against the US / Israel axis.

Some sources claim to have seen the Iranian-made hunter Kowsar there. These unofficial sources even indicate that this hunter would be able to conduct network combat and synchronize with drones. We do not know more, but we do know that before Kowsar, Iranian Sukhoi-22 planes that Syria owns many copies were able to receive and send data interconnected with drones. It is wonderful for launching joint raids, identifying the situation on the battlefield in a much larger area, like the deserts of eastern Syria and of course for monitoring threats and if necessary sacrificing the flat. - unmanned shape and keep the piloted bird intact. At the same time, this hunter-drone pair could share the so-called "dig and kill" function in terms of identifying and targeting, transporting and launching ammunition, one covering the weakness of the other. It is also said that it is Kaman 22, the Iranian Predator Q who would be assigned to the task of synchronizing with Kowsar.
Press TV

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MMCM

Hypothetical question, would Iran have been better off it also purchased the F-15A alongside the F-14 during the 70s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

MMCM said:


> Hypothetical question, would Iran have been better off it also purchased the F-15A alongside the F-14 during the 70s


Not really..
Someone else asked a similar question here a few years back,ie would iran have been better off if it had chosen the f-15?,the person who responded noted that had that been the case that iran would`ve only had the earliest f15a/b models armed with sparrows and sidewinders.
The problem here is basically twofold,the lack of new aircraft,AND just as importantly imho,the failures/inability of the iriaf to upgrade its existing ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

MMCM said:


> Hypothetical question, would Iran have been better off it also purchased the F-15A alongside the F-14 during the 70s


well , we g=could get more range on the airplane but would have lost on the every other metric , don't forget we are not talking about latest model of F-15 but the first generation.
on other hand if we get f-15 we probably instead of building spare for the airplane we would have used smuggled part from black market. (and that probably resulted in espionage and receiving faulty part as it happened with our nuclear program).
I believe the original plan of combination of F-14 + F-16 was the correct solution for our airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the original plan of combination of F-14 + F-16



+ F-18.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> + F-18.


I don't like F-18 to me it designed to be next generation F-5 and if some dumb politician didn't lobbied for it and made operating f-14 nearly impossible for USA navy , they would never have opted for it.

by the way Iran financed YF-17 not F-18 , and they developed it into F-18 years after Iran Involvement it was supposed to be a light fighter jet not develop into a big plane as big as F-15 , it was not supposed to become jack of all trades and master of none
look at the design its just a glorified F-5 air-frame





at the end it lost to the guy beside him




and some clueless politician bribed by northrop made usa navy to use it to replace its F-4 and A-7


----------



## mohsen

MMCM said:


> Hypothetical question, would Iran have been better off it also purchased the F-15A alongside the F-14 during the 70s


Our airforce chose the F15 at the time, but Grumman bribed our officials and so we bought F14.

Most of Iran's F14 were grounded during Iran-Iraq war (and still are), so Iran had use it's F4 and F5(along sidewinders) against Iraq MIG25!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MMCM

mohsen said:


> Our airforce chose the F15 at the time, but Grumman bribed our officials and so we bought F14.
> 
> Most of Iran's F14 were grounded during Iran-Iraq war (and still are), so Iran had use it's F4 and F5(along sidewinders) against Iraq MIG25!


That's seems far fetched, the Tomcat fleet did suffer during the conflict with Iraq, but the airforce still managed to keep some Tomcats airworthy.


----------



## mohsen

MMCM said:


> That's seems far fetched, the Tomcat fleet did suffer during the conflict with Iraq, but the airforce still managed to keep some Tomcats airworthy.


Yes, some were airworthy cause they didn't use them!

For example, our F5 pilot who managed to hunt one MIG25 described the situation where Iraqi MIG25s were taking regular trip and path deep inside Iran. our airforce decided to intercept it on it's return (after finishing it's mission!), and their solution was one F5 with two sidewinder missiles, now the interesting part is that this F5 actually managed to do the impossible, cause Iraqi pilot was so confident about open skies of Iran! that he didn't even fly at the safe altitude, so Iranian F5 managed to catch the MIG25, but both of its sidewinder missiles failed! so the pilots used it's cannon to shoot it down.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Yes, some were airworthy cause they didn't use them!
> 
> For example, our F5 pilot who managed to hunt one MIG25 described the situation where Iraqi MIG25s were taking regular trip and path deep inside Iran. our airforce decided to intercept it on it's return (after finishing it's mission!), and their solution was one F5 with two sidewinder missiles, now the interesting part is that this F5 actually managed to do the impossible, cause Iraqi pilot was so confident about open skies of Iran! that he didn't even fly at the safe altitude, so Iranian F5 managed to catch the MIG25, but both of its sidewinder missiles failed! so the pilots used it's cannon to shoot it down.



wrong

_Iran at first attempted to keep some 60 Tomcats in operational condition, but intensive flying and lack of qualified maintenance personnel—not the lack of spare parts, as is commonly believed—forced it to scale back the number of operational F-14s to 40 by 1984, and to 25 by 1986.t_









Persian Cats


How Iranian air crews, cut off from U.S. technical support, used the F-14 against Iraqi attackers.




www.airspacemag.com





Both Iran and Iraq tried to avoid losing aircrafts because they had no true allies to replenish them with new fighter jets. Thus their most prized fighters played defense. Iran’s F-14 usually were playing defense and protecting vital infrastructure.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Both Iran and Iraq tried to avoid losing aircrafts because they had no true allies to replenish them with new fighter jets. Thus their most prized fighters played defense. Iran’s F-14 usually were playing defense and protecting vital infrastructure.



How didn't Iraq have allies during the war, I don't understand? They ended the conflict with more and better military equipment than when they started it. Fighter jet wise, they received Super Etendards on loan and then non-downgraded top of the line French Mirage F-1EQ's during the war, including French pilots to lend them a hand. Their Mig-29's also arrived at the later stages of the conflict. All practically for free given Persian Gulf sheikhdoms financing their aggression. Is it not?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## EvilWesteners

SalarHaqq said:


> How didn't Iraq have allies during the war, I don't understand? They ended the conflict with more and better military equipment than when they started it. Fighter jet wise, they received Super Etendards on loan and then non-downgraded top of the line French Mirage F-1EQ's during the war, including French pilots to lend them a hand. Their Mig-29's also arrived at the later stages of the conflict. All practically for free given Persian Gulf sheikhdoms financing their aggression.



Those days Iran had very little, just sheer 2 dimensional army-infantry based war capabilities. No comparison to what they are capable of today. It often takes a few technology breakthroughs to make a huge difference. 

For instance, Iran's engine for LTC4B for helicopters can be used (yes I know it is heavy, fuel inefficient, but VERY reliable in Iran's hands) for Iran-140 and great engine for hot-and-high. With a single heli engine and a top thrust jet engine, Iran can transform its military to a whole lot of new pain for its adversaries. The only way to DELAY Iran is economically, certainly NOT STOP it. Which is why = sanctions !

I have worked on the closest thing to F-14A, namely the F-111 and its more powerful TF30 that was based in U.K. - boy, I have no idea how Iran could have maintained any of them in 1980s, as U.S. the manufacturer of the platform had many problems until F-14D.

Iran needs economic de-strangulation and then (hardest part) SMART military spending on infrastructure and a clear head in judgement and decision making.

Good luck to the nation of Aryan Lions and Lionesses.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 779217
> View attachment 779218


Do you have a link for these photos?


----------



## Muhammed45

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Do you have a link for these photos?


Different sources bro. This one was of Instagram






IRAN_PARTIZAN (@persian_military_iran) • Instagram photos and videos







instagram.com










Iranian Guard (@iranian.guard) • Instagram photos and videos







instagram.com










‎صفحه طرفداران نیروی هوایی‎ (@lranairforce) • Instagram photos and videos







instagram.com










Login • Instagram


Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.




instagram.com




copy_link

This link has also high quality pictures :






Aviation Photo Search | Airliners.net







www.airliners.net

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Muhammed45 said:


> Different sources bro. This one was of Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRAN_PARTIZAN (@persian_military_iran) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> instagram.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Guard (@iranian.guard) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> instagram.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‎صفحه طرفداران نیروی هوایی‎ (@lranairforce) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> instagram.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Login • Instagram
> 
> 
> Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> instagram.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> copy_link
> 
> This link has also high quality pictures :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aviation Photo Search | Airliners.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airliners.net


Thank you!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The single-seater f-5 is different here. Single-seater Kowsar? Kowsar 2?


----------



## Stryker1982

Who is this new person who is in charge of the IRIAF? (Nasirzadeh)
Any good history?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440934946940542978

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

SalarHaqq said:


> How didn't Iraq have allies during the war, I don't understand? They ended the conflict with more and better military equipment than when they started it. Fighter jet wise, they received Super Etendards on loan and then non-downgraded top of the line French Mirage F-1EQ's during the war, including French pilots to lend them a hand. Their Mig-29's also arrived at the later stages of the conflict. All practically for free given Persian Gulf sheikhdoms financing their aggression. Is it not?



Both countries were being armed based on need to keep the war ongoing. 

I still can't stress how many life's would've been saved had khomeini accepted the 1982 cease fire. 

Had Iranians not ruined their country with the 79 Revolution causing mass diaspora of everyone with a brain.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Raghfarm007

camelguy said:


> Both countries were being armed based on need to keep the war ongoing.
> 
> I still can't stress how many life's would've been saved had khomeini accepted the 1982 cease fire.
> 
> Had Iranians not ruined their country with the 79 Revolution causing mass diaspora of everyone with a brain.



Yes yes.... all Khomainis fault.... nothing to do with the retarded murderes Saddam Starting the war.
If only this and if only that......

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Raghfarm007 said:


>





Raghfarm007 said:


>


Has any one done a comparison between "simorgh" and C-130...in terms of payload ..runway requirements..endurance etc..just curious to know.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

aryobarzan said:


> Has any one done a comparison between "simorgh" and C-130...in terms of payload ..runway requirements..endurance etc..just curious to know.



probably they will be able to do it after the flight tests are finished, but in any case they are 2 aircraft of different class therefore very difficult to make a comparison.
This could be done with similar ones, such as the C-235, C-295, AN-32, Xian MA60H-500 and in the future IL-112.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Raghfarm007 said:


> Yes yes.... all Khomainis fault.... nothing to do with the retarded murderes Saddam Starting the war.
> If only this and if only that......



War could've ended in 1982.


----------



## SalarHaqq

aryobarzan said:


> Has any one done a comparison between "simorgh" and C-130...in terms of payload ..runway requirements..endurance etc..just curious to know.



As sahureka2 pointed out, these are two different classes of planes: light transport (IrAn-140 / Simorgh) vs medium transport (C-130). The C-130's payload is slightly less than 20 tons, while Simorgh's is 6 tons.

The Simorgh is meant to replace Iran's Fokker F-27, which has fulfilled that function until now with the IRIAF. Whereas the IRGCAF is using the turbofan-powered Antonov An-74 (7,5 tons of payload) in the light transport role.

When it comes to heavy transports, IRIAF is fielding Boeing B-747's and Ilyushin Il-76's. The latter is also in use with the IRGCAF.

This said, designs for other variants of the IrAn-140 were shown by Iran years ago:

* Naval patrol (could replace IRIN's F-27's, can be armed with anti-ship cruise missile)
* Anti-submarine warfare (could replace IRIN's Lockheed P-3 Orion's, although the Simorgh would have shorter range)
* Special paratrooper transport
* AEW (Airborne Early Warning) 
* Tanker (aerial refueling)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

camelguy said:


> War could've ended in 1982.


Leaving saddam still in power and able to re-arm his military for round 2.Frankly its as stupid as suggesting that the western allies should`ve made a separate peace with the nazis in 1944.
Heres a better what if for you:
How about if the arabs,the west and the soviets had simply left saddam to his own fate rather than supporting him with tens of billions of dollars of new weapons,chemical weapons,intelligence and other aid,so that by 1986/87,the iraqis would`ve had to sue for peace leading to saddams removal from power.
Just think,there would`ve been no invasion of kuwait,no desert storm,no un sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of iraqis,no us invasion and occupation,no rampant terrorism,no near civil war,no surge,no isis.
Just think of how many people would still be alive today if only one arab vassal despot had been removed.... 
It really makes you stop and think,doesnt it?.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007

camelguy said:


> War could've ended in 1982.



War would have ended??? Didnt the retard attack his best friend of Kuwait after he attacked Iran?!! That was Khomaini´s fault too......

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Leaving saddam still in power and able to re-arm his military for round 2.Frankly its as stupid as suggesting that the western allies should`ve made a separate peace with the nazis in 1944.
> Heres a better what if for you:
> How about if the arabs,the west and the soviets had simply left saddam to his own fate rather than supporting him with tens of billions of dollars of new weapons,chemical weapons,intelligence and other aid,so that by 1986/87,the iraqis would`ve had to sue for peace leading to saddams removal from power.
> Just think,there would`ve been no invasion of kuwait,no desert storm,no un sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of iraqis,no us invasion and occupation,no rampant terrorism,no near civil war,no surge,no isis.
> Just think of how many people would still be alive today if only one arab vassal despot had been removed....
> It really makes you stop and think,doesnt it?.



It is widely accepted that the decision by Khomeini to continue the war was a disastrous decision in hindsight. Hence the “poisonous cup” comment.

It allowed the West & Arabs to increase their support of Saddam and also to “punish” Iran. Iran was still reorganzing its military after the Shah purges and the extension of the war merely caused more damage to Iran’s economy as well huge increase in loss of life.

It would have been better to have a ceasefire and allow Saddam to invade Kuwait in 1984-1985 rather than try to take Karbala with the entire world supporting Saddam to prevent a Shiite crescent from rising.


----------



## Muhammed45

camelguy said:


> War could've ended in 1982.


The Takriti bastard harami hit a punch, he should have ate a punch in return. Even if it made the war a war of attrition. You should have felt the the pain of stupidity, that's why you insist that Iran should have agreed to that humiliating proposal. After the erosive war, you were left with billions of debt to tens of weapons suppliers such as Soviets, USA, France, Germany, Netherland, UK, China, Singapore and the huge Financial debt to Persian Gulf states. A fked up country was left of Iraq. Iran began to Grow and thrive, rising from the ashes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> It is widely accepted that the decision by Khomeini to continue the war was a disastrous decision in hindsight. Hence the “poisonous cup” comment.
> 
> It allowed the West & Arabs to increase their support of Saddam and also to “punish” Iran. Iran was still reorganzing its military after the Shah purges and the extension of the war merely caused more damage to Iran’s economy as well huge increase in loss of life.
> 
> It would have been better to have a ceasefire and allow Saddam to invade Kuwait in 1984-1985 rather than try to take Karbala with the entire world supporting Saddam to prevent a Shiite crescent from rising.


Are you joking? 

Even if we behaved like a little brat and signed that humiliating proposal with eyes full of tears, Saddam would have never stayed loyal to his own words/signature. You are saying that we should have allowed him to revive his pride as the father Arabs and occupied Kuwait? Are you out of your mind? 

A hostile bastard in our Neighborhood whose remnants created backbone of ISIS, could never be trusted. 

Btw, what would you do if someone punched you in your alley, tried to rape your women and invaded your house? Signed an agreement of peace right after getting punched? That is what a little brat would do.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

I think that the most important reason for continuing the war was the fact that the U.N was refusing to finger Iraq as the aggressor in the Iran Iraq war back in 1982. Every resolution that was put forth at that time called for both parties to pull back their forces and did not show any recognition of Iraq as the instigator of the conflict meaning that Iran would not be entitled to reparations for the damages incurred from Iraq's equation. There are claims going around that say that the Saudis had offered to pay Iran reparations to end the war in 82. I do not know if there is any truth to that because no one was holding Iraq accountable for starting the war at the U.N so why would the Saudis want to pay the "Mullahs in Tehran" Tens if not hundreds of billions of Dollars to end a war that they were fully behind in support to Saddam Hussain because they feared the Islamic Revolution spread throughout the region?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> It is widely accepted that the decision by Khomeini to continue the war was a disastrous decision in hindsight. Hence the “poisonous cup” comment.
> 
> It allowed the West & Arabs to increase their support of Saddam and also to “punish” Iran. Iran was still reorganzing its military after the Shah purges and the extension of the war merely caused more damage to Iran’s economy as well huge increase in loss of life.
> 
> It would have been better to have a ceasefire and allow Saddam to invade Kuwait in 1984-1985 rather than try to take Karbala with the entire world supporting Saddam to prevent a Shiite crescent from rising.


Ayatollah Khomeini's "poisonous cup" comment was made on 21 July 1988 after he had accepted U.N resolution 598 which was implemented on August 20th 1988.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Muhammed45 said:


> The Takriti bastard harami hit a punch, he should have ate a punch in return. Even if it made the war a war of attrition. You should have felt the the pain of stupidity, that's why you insist that Iran should have agreed to that humiliating proposal. After the erosive war, you were left with billions of debt to tens of weapons suppliers such as Soviets, USA, France, Germany, Netherland, UK, China, Singapore and the huge Financial debt to Persian Gulf states. A fked up country was left of Iraq. Iran began to Grow and thrive, rising from the ashes.



First of all Saddam barely suffered, he died and so will all of us.

The ones suffering were mainly your people.

Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.

Saddam would've never invaded Iran had you remained with the Shah. Not because America is up his ***, Saddam never was bright when it comes to challenging superpowers. He wouldn't give two shits about your Shah having better weapons he doesn't think that far.

Khomeini is a sob who caused a lot of death. Akhoonds deserved a nuke. Anyway our Shia retards are enjoying the Iranian *** in their face, perhaps both of you majoos will one day clean these two cunt countries.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

camelguy said:


> First of all Saddam barely suffered, he died and so will all of us.


The bastard was hanged while moaning like a bitch. Don't forget that he was hanged like a dog. 



camelguy said:


> The ones suffering were mainly your people.


Not that much. Our people wholeheartrdly supported our fighting men, mostly Basij volunteers. 



camelguy said:


> Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.


Why not? The oppressed Shias had every right to rebel and to this date we fully supported our brethren and will continue to do so despite people like you moaning and complaining. Welcome to the new Iraq 



camelguy said:


> Saddam would've never invaded Iran had you remained with the Shah. Not because America is up his ***, Saddam never was bright when it comes to challenging superpowers. He wouldn't give two shits about your Shah having better weapons he doesn't think that far.


You are talking about two puppets, the first bastard your beloved Saddam tried his chance during Shah rule and sent heavy mechanized units to Iranian borders which ended up with Foreign interference avoiding a Complete war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Muhammed45 said:


> The bastard was hanged while moaning like a bitch. Don't forget that he was hanged like a dog.
> 
> 
> Not that much. Our people wholeheartrdly supported our fighting men, mostly Basij volunteers.
> 
> 
> Why not? The oppressed Shias had every right to rebel and to this date we fully supported our brethren and will continue to do so despite people like you moaning and complaining. Welcome to the new Iraq
> 
> 
> You are talking about two puppets, the first bastard your beloved Saddam tried his chance during Shah rule and sent heavy mechanized units to Iranian borders which ended up with Foreign interference avoiding a Complete war.



Had Shah remained your passport would likely be among European levels, you'd be wealthy. A nuclear power and most likely you'd have the same levels of military industry as you have today, maybe more. 

Iraq took the same rebellious approach throwing its British slave monarchy off rule. The brainless gulf Arabs without ideology did nothing and are better off now. 

Anyway. My point here is that Khomeini decided for a lot of extra unnecessary bloodshed. Easy for you now to say it was justified, ask the ones who suffered fam losses at the time, the seniors. 

KHOMEINI was a massive dog, the revolution was a mistake.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari




----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> Are you joking?
> 
> Even if we behaved like a little brat and signed that humiliating proposal with eyes full of tears, Saddam would have never stayed loyal to his own words/signature. You are saying that we should have allowed him to revive his pride as the father Arabs and occupied Kuwait? Are you out of your mind?



If he wasn’t able to occupy Kuwait in 1991 what makes you think the West would allow him to occupy in 1984? The West would have destroyed his military just like they did in PG War I. So your point is in invalid.

And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms. So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.

Anyone that argues for more war based on pride and arrogance rather than facts on the ground is filled with childish thinking.

Khomeini had zero military credentials/experience and went against the advice of his inner circle in continuing the war.




Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Ayatollah Khomeini's "poisonous cup" comment was made on 21 July 1988 after he had accepted U.N resolution 598 which was implemented on August 20th 1988.



Yeah and it was made for the fact that Iran didn’t accept the UN ceasefire in 1982 and 6 years later was basically force to accept the reality of 88 ceasefire which was the same ceasefire from 6 years prior.

All the extension of the war did was result in much more men and civilians dead and massive damage to Iranian economy.

Anyone who argues that the extension of war was beneficial or how Iran was attacked and had to teach Saddam a “lesson” is nothing more than a keyboard warrior thinking with arrogance and pride who doesn’t understand the gravity of war.

Many Iranian men never got to live a long life because of Khomeini’s highly unwise decision to continue a war it had no chance of winning (the West and Arabs weren’t going to allow Iran to takeover Iraq).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

You'll cry cutting yourself shaving, yet here praising the decision to extend a war with 6 years whilst sipping some drink and having a shower later.

Would've been great had that been a 2 year war instead of 8.

Khomeini should've signed the cease fire, taken a bike and blown himself up somewhere to get his martyrdom. Everyone happy. Back to work.


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> If he wasn’t able to occupy Kuwait in 1991 what makes you think the West would allow him to occupy in 1984? The West would have destroyed his military just like they did in PG War I. So your point is in invalid.
> 
> And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms. So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.
> 
> Anyone that argues for more war based on pride and arrogance rather than facts on the ground is filled with childish thinking.
> 
> Khomeini had zero military credentials/experience and went against the advice of his inner circle in continuing the war


Iran completely eroded the Ba'ath army. They were left like a sitting duck. And before that point we couldn't let them go. Hope you use your brain and try to understand that. 

Btw, who was the inner circle? Hashemi and his team of cowards you mean? Without that 8 years war, Saddam could have left with power to strike again. Even when he was being hanged like a dog, he whispered two names, death to Iran, death to USA. He hadnt slightest change and with the least power, he would have striked again. 

These words coming from someone residing in USA is not a weird thing since you didn't feel the power of Ba'ath army enjoying life abroad or maybe you are too Young to know that. Without an eroded army, the Ba'athis could have waged war again having the whole western and eastern powers backing them. You seem unknown to Ba'athis of Iraq, we couldn't let them go easily. Something about national pride and dignity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> These words coming from someone residing in USA is not a weird thing since you didn't feel the power of Ba'ath army enjoying life abroad or maybe you are too Young to know that. Without an eroded army, the Ba'athis could have waged war again having the whole western and eastern powers backing them. You seem unknown to Ba'athis of Iraq, we couldn't let them go easily. Something about national pride and dignity.



Keep talking keyboard warrior.

Actually had family on the frontlines during that war. So you should watch your mouth.

Saddam attacked because he sensed an opportunity to take oil rich land on the border due to revolution. When faced with stiff resistance he offered to strike a ceasefire. 

The only reason the war continued was Khomeini’s instance on exporting the revolution to Iraq and rest of the Middle East. This false narrative your pushing that he did it to weaken Saddam from future attacks never existed. The military objectives by Iran were met (defense of its territorial integrity) instead he kept the war for 6 more years and then accepted the same ceasefire begrudgingly.

You don’t know what the future would have held if Iran accepted the ceasefire. So don’t speak for the hypothetical future as if you were certain of the events that would have unfolded...you are not God.

Not wasting anymore time on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Saddam's orders of invasion were not the cause of the start, it was an inevitable war with Khomeini's ideology.

Iraq under this ideology turned into a shithole despite the removal of Americans sanctions.

Ya hossaaaaaain!

Labbayka ya hossaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> Keep talking keyboard warrior.
> 
> Actually had family on the frontlines during that war. So you should watch your mouth.
> 
> Saddam attacked because he sensed an opportunity to take oil rich land on the border due to revolution. When faced with stiff resistance he offered to strike a ceasefire.
> 
> The only reason the war continued was Khomeini’s instance on exporting the revolution to Iraq and rest of the Middle East. This false narrative your pushing that he did it to weaken Saddam from future attacks never existed. The military objectives by Iran were met (defense of its territorial integrity) instead he kept the war for 6 more years and then accepted the same ceasefire begrudgingly.
> 
> You don’t know what the future would have held if Iran accepted the ceasefire. So don’t speak for the hypothetical future as if you were certain of the events that would have unfolded...you are not God.
> 
> Not wasting anymore time on you.


If it was upto people like you, you would have gone even further claiming that Khomeini was the one who started the war. 

I wasn't predicting the future but merely judging by Saddam's personality and the fact that no one could count on his Signature not even himself. 

Living in USA is not a sin and having family members in those front lines is a glory and i respect that. None of those facts can convince me about your loyalty to Iran. If you were a loyal person then you should have supported Iranian revenge despite western pressure on Iran to accept that ceasefire. If Saddam had his eyes on our lands, then we had every right to have our eyes on Karbala and other Shia holy sites. 

On the other hand despite your own quote, you are the one who predicted things out of thin air. How did you figure out that after signing that imposed proposal, Saddam would have attacked Kuwait? First thing you should know, his attack on Kuwait was out of desperation and he did that to revive his reputation which was met with Western reaction. 

The fact that you cannot count on a dictators promise is a sobring fact that i had to remind you.


camelguy said:


> Saddam's orders of invasion were not the cause of the start, it was an inevitable war with Khomeini's ideology.
> 
> Iraq under this ideology turned into a shithole despite the removal of Americans sanctions.
> 
> Ya hossaaaaaain!
> 
> Labbayka ya hossaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain


I see you have felt the pain my Ba'athi. 

How things changed, i don't blame you for your wonder. Respect your big brother 😁

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Seems like Iran is at major disadvantage against Israeli F35.
Iran should speed up working on Qaher 313.and pray for our azm fighter also


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Keep talking keyboard warrior.
> 
> Actually had family on the frontlines during that war. So you should watch your mouth.
> 
> Saddam attacked because he sensed an opportunity to take oil rich land on the border due to revolution. When faced with stiff resistance he offered to strike a ceasefire.
> 
> The only reason the war continued was Khomeini’s instance on exporting the revolution to Iraq and rest of the Middle East. This false narrative your pushing that he did it to weaken Saddam from future attacks never existed. The military objectives by Iran were met (defense of its territorial integrity) instead he kept the war for 6 more years and then accepted the same ceasefire begrudgingly.
> 
> You don’t know what the future would have held if Iran accepted the ceasefire. So don’t speak for the hypothetical future as if you were certain of the events that would have unfolded...you are not God.
> 
> Not wasting anymore time on you.


Imagine a few decade later, some smart arse Yemenis like yourself saying MBS wanted the peace but Houthis wanted to takeover the whole Saudi Arabia!

Demanding peace and ceasefire is a war tactic for reinforcement and gaining sympathy.

Marib battlefield in Yemen was one example.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

camelguy said:


> Saddam's orders of invasion were not the cause of the start, it was an inevitable war with Khomeini's ideology.
> 
> Iraq under this ideology turned into a shithole despite the removal of Americans sanctions.
> 
> Ya hossaaaaaain!
> 
> Labbayka ya hossaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain


Iraq had a secular government whether during Saddam, or after US invasion. pure fact.

It's not the ideology which has kept you backwarded, it's the lack of industry. all dictators are ordered to keep their people away from advancement, that's the root of US (and so puppet Saddam) grudge against Khomeini's ideology. Iran shouldn't have become a model for the people of the dictatorships.

What Zionists and morons refer to as export of revolution is nothing but being a model.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Muhammed45 said:


> Iran completely eroded the Ba'ath army. They were left like a sitting duck. And before that point we couldn't let them go. Hope you use your brain and try to understand that.
> 
> Btw, who was the inner circle? Hashemi and his team of cowards you mean? Without that 8 years war, Saddam could have left with power to strike again. Even when he was being hanged like a dog, he whispered two names, death to Iran, death to USA. He hadnt slightest change and with the least power, he would have striked again.
> 
> These words coming from someone residing in USA is not a weird thing since you didn't feel the power of Ba'ath army enjoying life abroad or maybe you are too Young to know that. Without an eroded army, the Ba'athis could have waged war again having the whole western and eastern powers backing them. You seem unknown to Ba'athis of Iraq, we couldn't let them go easily. Something about national pride and dignity.


Iran had messed up Iraqi army capabilities and memories to such a degree that Iran was freely bombing Iraq with jets and missiles up until 2002 right before Saddams collapse. Iraq was literally a playing field for Iranian intelligence, military operations. Saddam never dared to respond to the Iranian attacks ever again. So yes, the 8 years war was necessary to prove to him and the other useless Arab states that Iran as a nation will fight back, even if it takes 80 years.

Read here more about Iranian attacks on Saddam's Iraq involving jets, missiles until 2002. Saddam never dared to respond.



https://www.nonproliferation.org/wp-content/uploads/npr/82tarzi.pdf



@camelguy

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran won the war with the powerful Operation Mersad in 1988 which brought Saddam's Iraq to its knees! All the rest are lying and ignoring service speculation. Saddam has never replied to this great operation which shakes all of Iraq and the whole world.

Iran won the war whether you like it or not


----------



## Dariush the Great

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran won the war with the powerful Operation Mersad in 1988 which brought Saddam's Iraq to its knees! All the rest are lying and ignoring service speculation. Saddam has never replied to this great operation which shakes all of Iraq and the whole world.
> 
> Iran won the war whether you like it or not


There was no real military victor. Iran won in the sense that it kicked out the invading Iraqi army and shifted the battlefield to Iraqi lands for the next 6 years. Other than that, it was a waste of lives, money and resources. But it had to be done.. the 8 years war happened exactly because of a reason. Iran had to show that it will not back down and even fight the whole world if it had to when it comes to Iran's integrity and independence. It had to show that a second ''Qadisiyah'' would never happen again.. Iran stood against Iraq and all other Arab countries like a firm fortress. Not a single inch of Iranian land was up for negotiations. And today Iran is making sure that not a single Arab state, including even Egypt, can dare to be a threat to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Raghfarm007 said:


> Yes yes.... all Khomainis fault.... nothing to do with the retarded murderes Saddam Starting the war.
> If only this and if only that......


Do you think he should change his username from Camelguy to Camelbrain? just wondering.


camelguy said:


> First of all Saddam barely suffered, he died and so will all of us.
> 
> The ones suffering were mainly your people.
> 
> Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.
> 
> Saddam would've never invaded Iran had you remained with the Shah. Not because America is up his ***, Saddam never was bright when it comes to challenging superpowers. He wouldn't give two shits about your Shah having better weapons he doesn't think that far.
> 
> Khomeini is a sob who caused a lot of death. Akhoonds deserved a nuke. Anyway our Shia retards are enjoying the Iranian *** in their face, perhaps both of you majoos will one day clean these two cunt countries.


1. Your comments are disgusting and revisionist.
2. Its a disgrace you're a saddam apologist.
3. You prefer to talk about Iran and Iraq's history, because you know in current times, Iraq is a nobody and also is IRan's B*tch.

Saddam died like a Rat, and he made Iraq worse- look at IRaq today. end of story!


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> If he wasn’t able to occupy Kuwait in 1991 what makes you think the West would allow him to occupy in 1984? The West would have destroyed his military just like they did in PG War I. So your point is in invalid.
> 
> And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms. So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.
> 
> Anyone that argues for more war based on pride and arrogance rather than facts on the ground is filled with childish thinking.
> 
> Khomeini had zero military credentials/experience and went against the advice of his inner circle in continuing the war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah and it was made for the fact that Iran didn’t accept the UN ceasefire in 1982 and 6 years later was basically force to accept the reality of 88 ceasefire which was the same ceasefire from 6 years prior.
> 
> All the extension of the war did was result in much more men and civilians dead and massive damage to Iranian economy.
> 
> Anyone who argues that the extension of war was beneficial or how Iran was attacked and had to teach Saddam a “lesson” is nothing more than a keyboard warrior thinking with arrogance and pride who doesn’t understand the gravity of war.
> 
> Many Iranian men never got to live a long life because of Khomeini’s highly unwise decision to continue a war it had no chance of winning (the West and Arabs weren’t going to allow Iran to takeover Iraq).



I can't change history. I merely corrected you about when Khomeini quote was from.


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> Iran had messed up Iraqi army capabilities and memories to such a degree that Iran was freely bombing Iraq with jets and missiles up until 2002 right before Saddams collapse. Iraq was literally a playing field for Iranian intelligence, military operations. Saddam never dared to respond to the Iranian attacks ever again. So yes, the 8 years war was necessary to prove to him and the other useless Arab states that Iran as a nation will fight back, even if it takes 80 years.
> 
> Read here more about Iranian attacks on Saddam's Iraq involving jets, missiles until 2002. Saddam never dared to respond.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.nonproliferation.org/wp-content/uploads/npr/82tarzi.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> @camelguy



Lol

Iraq's military was massive in 1988. It was the Gulf war campaign of 1991 and the continuous cruise missile strikes plus no fly zones that allowed Iran to play around. 

America removed Saddam, Iran couldn't


925boy said:


> Do you think he should change his username from Camelguy to Camelbrain? just wondering.
> 
> 1. Your comments are disgusting and revisionist.
> 2. Its a disgrace you're a saddam apologist.
> 3. You prefer to talk about Iran and Iraq's history, because you know in current times, Iraq is a nobody and also is IRan's B*tch.
> 
> Saddam died like a Rat, and he made Iraq worse- look at IRaq today. end of story!



Go away Nigerian

Iran is a cancer


----------



## SalarHaqq

camelguy said:


> Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.



Imam Khomeini didn't call on Iraqis to rebel. Some people inspired and encouraged by the Victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, spontaneously rose up.

Also, no border post was attacked on orders of Imam Khomeini. Saddam viewed the post-revolutionary chaos in Iran as an opportunity, separatist grouplets in Khuzestan that where being supported by Baghdad began causing problems to Iran right after the fall of the shah. And contrary to the Iraqi government, the Iranian one had no firm grip on power yet, owing to natural post-Revolution turmoil.

- - - - -



TheImmortal said:


> And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms.



The situation was not exactly the same. In 1987, the UN Security Council for the first time passed a resolution requesting Iraq to retreat to pre-war borders ie to respect the terms of the 1975 Algiers Agreement on the Arvan Rud border delimitation; that same resolution announced the establishment of a commission to determine the aggressor. These elements were not given in 1982.



> So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.
> 
> Anyone that argues for more war based on pride and arrogance rather than facts on the ground is filled with childish thinking.
> 
> Khomeini had zero military credentials/experience and went against the advice of his inner circle in continuing the war.



The assumption that Iraq might only have sought a ceasefire in order to regroup, rearm and attack a second time was well founded. As a matter of fact, Saddam via the MKO did attack Iran again after the 1988 ceasefire. The MKO incursion, which nearly reached Kermanshah, had to be crushed in Operation Mersad. So in the early 80's, chances are that Iraq would have invaded a second time all by itself.

Also, there was no way for Iran to predict with certainty that world powers would go as far as aiding Iraq to obtain WMD and covering its widespread use of chemical weapons at the UNSC, like the US regime did by vetoing a resolution meant to condemn the attacks. Likewise, there was no evidence that Iraq's backers would supply that many weapons to Saddam as they did.

Had the terms of the ceasefire been acceptable - ie had they recognized Iraq as the aggressor and reinstituted the terms of the 1975 Algiers Agreement, then refusing it would arguably have been irrational. But given the circumstances, the decision to reject the 1982 ceasefire proposal was sound enough. Most officials in Iran did support the decision.



> Yeah and it was made for the fact that Iran didn’t accept the UN ceasefire in 1982 and 6 years later was basically force to accept the reality of 88 ceasefire which was the same ceasefire from 6 years prior.



By "cup of poison", Imam Khomeini is unlikely to have meant the terms of the ceasefire. Rather, he was referring to the very fact of acquiescing to it, given that he would have preferred to continue to resist and that politicians such as Hashemi Rafsanjani pressed him to give in.



TheImmortal said:


> The only reason the war continued was Khomeini’s instance on exporting the revolution to Iraq and rest of the Middle East. This false narrative your pushing that he did it to weaken Saddam from future attacks never existed. The military objectives by Iran were met (defense of its territorial integrity) instead he kept the war for 6 more years and then accepted the same ceasefire begrudgingly.



Iran's war effort wasn't meant to export the Revolution. After some debates in 1979-1980, it was agreed upon that exporting the Revolution should be understood as building an exemplary Islamic Republic, which would inspire other Muslim nations to overthrow puppet regimes, or other Muslim rulers to follow in Iran's footsteps. Export of the Revolution did not imply offensive intervention for regime change elsewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

camelguy said:


> Lol
> 
> Iraq's military was massive in 1988. It was the Gulf war campaign of 1991 and the continuous cruise missile strikes plus no fly zones that allowed Iran to play around.
> 
> America removed Saddam, Iran couldn't


 We are talking about Iran's deterrence after the 8 year war. Saddam did not respond to a single Iranian attack after 1988. 

About removing Saddam 
Iran had 2 major military objectives. Remove the invading Iraqi forces from its soil and bring the war to Iraq. Both objectives succeeded. Removing Saddam came later in the war and was down the list of priorities. After the defeat of Iraqi army inside Iran the war became somewhat unpopular.. the main objective was always the freeing of Iranian land from the invaders. When that was accomplished there was no real driving force anymore. Remember, majority of the war was fought inside Iraqi territory. 

And Iran is not really responsible for the low IQ and lack of political skills from Iraqi leaders. Iraqis destroyed their country with their own hands.


----------



## thesaint

I think recent discussions here are off topic. Please post Iraq-Iran war related comments in the related section.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

Michini said:


> The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.


What is it that you are so proud of...having US designed, US manufactured, US funded aircraft should make an American proud not an Israeli.. you just fly their machine and you are chest thumping in Iranian forum....go make one of your own before showing up here....you are good at making good bagels...but there is no bagel thread in PDF..may be you should start one..tell us how good you are in bagel technology..leave aviation to Goyims.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> We are talking about Iran's deterrence after the 8 year war. Saddam did not respond to a single Iranian attack after 1988.
> 
> About removing Saddam
> Iran had 2 major military objectives. Remove the invading Iraqi forces from its soil and bring the war to Iraq. Both objectives succeeded. Removing Saddam came later in the war and was down the list of priorities. After the defeat of Iraqi army inside Iran the war became somewhat unpopular.. the main objective was always the freeing of Iranian land from the invaders. When that was accomplished there was no real driving force anymore. Remember, majority of the war was fought inside Iraqi territory.
> 
> And Iran is not really responsible for the low IQ and lack of political skills from Iraqi leaders. Iraqis destroyed their country with their own hands.



Majority of the war was fought inside Iraq because that was Iraq's plan. from 1984-1987, Iraq used a defensive line strategy. Iranian human-waves stormed into Iraq and walked into killing zones of artillery. You think this is smart, it costed you a lot.

Then this was quickly changed with the 1988 Tawakul ala allah operations in which Iraq's forces regained Al-Faw and took Iranian land within short time, that was when Khomeini realized he is in deep shit and accepted the cease fire of 1982.

As for everything after 1991, that's the work of America, not Iran.

Iranians killed their most competent air force general in the 1979 revolution, human-wave assaults in Iraq are very retarded. All you had to do was not try to invade and occupy Karbala, then you could use your mountains to defend Iran and Khuzestan would allow you to dedicated a major number of your troops for it. But no, you wanted to be on the offensive. This made Iraq use artillery and gas to deal with the human-wave assaults.

As I said before, Khomeini was mentally ill and dragged this on for 6 extra years. You cry about the use of gas, but you refuse the cease fire. Gas was used in 1987 and 1988, oh image the amount of shit and death that could have been prevented if not for your monkey trying to export the revolution to us.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Iran put 2 condition for ceasefire in 1982 they were not met till 1988


camelguy said:


> Both countries were being armed based on need to keep the war ongoing.
> 
> I still can't stress how many life's would've been saved had khomeini accepted the 1982 cease fire.
> 
> Had Iranians not ruined their country with the 79 Revolution causing mass diaspora of everyone with a brain.





camelguy said:


> War could've ended in 1982.





camelguy said:


> Khomeini was instigating rebellion in Iraq and attacked border posts before the war started.


exactly with what ? proved us with proof on that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> And 1982 ceasefire and 1988 ceasefire are basically the same terms. So all that happened during that 6 years was alot more Iranians dead and damage to Iranians economy.


in 1982 there was no talk about going back to international border , it suggested cease fire then talk about going back to international border , in 1982 there was the condition of going back to international border . also in 1988 there was the condition of fact finding by un on who started the war

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Hack-Hook said:


> Iran put 2 condition for ceasefire in 1982 they were not met till 1988
> 
> 
> 
> exactly with what ? proved us with proof on that




Iranian demands were?
Saddam's removal and reparations? 

You got neither from him, Saddam was removed by the US many years later.










Iran Rejects Iraq's Call For Cease-fire (Published 1982)







www.nytimes.com





Iraq, apparently near defeat in its war with Iran and faced with Iranian demands for massive reparations and punishment of the ''aggressors,'' volunteered to stop shooting last week if its neighbor would join it in supporting Syria against Israel. Iran found it an offer easy to refuse, even before the shaky cease-fire between Syria and Israel.

''They should have done it before the Israeli invasion,'' Tehran Radio quoted military officials as saying. ''It is too late now and they have to pay for it.'' And besides, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein continued to ignore Iranian demands for his ouster as a peace condition.

*Despite Iran's rejection of their offer to withdraw, Iraqi forces on the Persian Gulf front refused to initiate hostilities during the next two days. But on Friday, the Iraqis struck back after an Iranian artillery attack; 37 Iranians were killed, it said.*

Iran realising it was doomed in 1988 gave up, had Saddam been like Khomeini he would've continued in 1988 which was a time when Iran was out of equipment having wasted this all in their offensive operations.

--


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> By "cup of poison", Imam Khomeini is unlikely to have meant the terms of the ceasefire. Rather, he was referring to the very fact of acquiescing to it, given that he would have preferred to continue to resist and that politicians such as Hashemi Rafsanjani pressured him to give in.


Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary


camelguy said:


> Iranian demands were?
> Saddam's removal and reparations?
> 
> You got neither from him, Saddam was removed by the US many years later.


going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Hack-Hook said:


> Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary
> 
> going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988



Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.

The actual reason Iran refused to comply with the cease fire, is that in 1982 Iran was winning. In 1988 Iran was losing and complied. Saddam could have continued, had he been as evil.

But Saddam was never that smart in his decision making, for instance in 1988 he could have continued grabbing Iranian lands as Iraq went on the offensive. He did not grab that chance.

He also invaded Kuwait and Khafji in Saudi Arabia which is not smart.

What if 600k Iranians could be back to life and their families didn't have to suffer because Khomeini wanted to lick Karbala's floor which he didn't get to do.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Hashemi Rafsanjani must have done the pressure 7 month earlier , he was in control of war efforts ,the war after Iraq accepted the resolution was not necessary going back to international border and recognition of the invader and both achieved in 1988



That's what the "poison cup" metaphor was referring to. If the decision was not taken with a heavy heart, this expression would not have been used by the Imam. We have historical accounts of how certain individuals in talks with the Imam kept insisting that the ceasefire should be accepted. 

- - - - - 



camelguy said:


> As I said before, Khomeini was mentally ill and dragged this on for 6 extra years. You cry about the use of gas, but you refuse the cease fire. Gas was used in 1987 and 1988, oh image the amount of shit and death that could have been prevented if not for your monkey trying to export the revolution to us.



There was no plan to export the Revolution through war. The continuation of the war was due to the fact that the ceasefire proposal wasn't satisfactory in its terms, nor fully credible politically speaking. 



camelguy said:


> Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.



But Saddam's 1982 ceasefire proposal did not recognize the border. It was important that Iraq returned to the stipulations of the Algiers Agreement, for as long as it didn't, Iran could not be convinced of Saddam's intentions and of the sincerity of his offer. 



> in 1988 he could have continued grabbing Iranian lands as Iraq went on the offensive. He did not grab that chance.



That would have caused his fortunes to reverse once more. It's one thing to grab border strips, another to hold land far from away since even a weakened Iranian military would have made this a costly endeavour.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

camelguy said:


> Iraq was already at its borders in 1982.


no it was not at western border only in south west you were back to your border

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iranitaakharin

Michini said:


> The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.



The only joke is your three posts so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Michini said:


> The Iranian air force is a joke. Their most modern aircraft is the MIG-29... LMAO! Iran’s air force in total only has 46 4th generation aircraft. In other word’s a junk air force. It has no chance against our air force. Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.



Israeli air force not a joke, cause win the war with Hezbollah,
win the war with Ghaza 
And so many war

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

camelguy said:


> Majority of the war was fought inside Iraq because that was Iraq's plan. from 1984-1987, Iraq used a defensive line strategy. Iranian human-waves stormed into Iraq and walked into killing zones of artillery. You think this is smart, it costed you a lot.
> 
> Then this was quickly changed with the 1988 Tawakul ala allah operations in which Iraq's forces regained Al-Faw and took Iranian land within short time, that was when Khomeini realized he is in deep shit and accepted the cease fire of 1982.


 Mate, i am not here to recount history with you. All of the information is available at your fingertips. Read more about your country's war. Preferably non-Baathist sources.


There was no ''Iraqi plan to bring the war to Iraqi territory''. That sounds ridiculous as the suggestion itself is. After the Iraqi army got defeated inside Iran they got pushed back all the way to Southern Iraq. Iranian forces were on the outskirts of Basra from 1982 up to the later stages of war. Iranian army literally laid a siege on the city of Basra in 1987 which forced Saddam to use Chemical weapons provided by Europe and the US. Source : http://iraniraqwar.com/about.html

Had Iraq not used chemical weapons Iranian troops would have advanced and took over Um Qasr,Basra and other southern Iraqi cities and advance towards Baghdad.

Iran was not only pushing the Iraqis on the Southern sector but North of Iraq was also taken over by Iran-friendly armed groups. Saddam had no control over Northern Iraq as Iranian-backed groups there were running amok, Southern Iraq was heavily contested. Iraq had just 3,4 large cities left remaining out of enemy's harms. Even these cities were scene of frequent bombing. Saddam was just ''ruling'' Iraq by a hanging thread through a few large cities.

Only when Iraq used chemical weapons they could do some pushback against the Iranian-backed groups in the North. Even then it was not a firm control. Iran was still funding, arming and sending weapons to keep northern Iraq out of Saddam's hands.


At the Southern sector Iraq could not handle the huge number of Iranian troops.. it's only solution was again the WMD weapons which was quite effective as Iran did not expect Iraq to use such weapons and was totally unprepared.

All the later stage ''successes'' of the Iraqi army _to free its own territory _such as Al Faw were only made possible by the use of WMD's. The war could have gone on for another 10 years, it would have had no effect on Iran as the country was busy with another mass mobilization for the year 1989-1990 and preparing for a long WMD war.



Overall, Iraq was hoping for a swift victory, telling the world it would reach Tehran in 3,4 days. Thinking that a post-revolutionary Iran was too fragile and unorganized. What happened after came as a shock to Saddam and entire Western and Arab world. Not only did the Iraqis get expelled from Iran but due to huge mass mobilization and mass attacks the Iraqis got pushed back and Iranian troops fought the Iraqi army until the end of the war on Iraqi territory.

But, again our discussion initially was the deterrence achieved by Iran after the war. Between 1988 and 2002 Saddam did not dare to respond to any Iranian attack again. In the year 2002 Iraq still had a somewhat formidable army of 400.000 troops.

Saddam even tried to befriend Iran and asked Iran's assistance to help save his air force
Source : http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0071.shtml

So the conclusion is that by 1988 Iran had achieved deterrence.


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> Mate, i am not here to recount history with you. All of the information is available at your fingertips. Read more about your country's war. Preferably non-Baathist sources.
> 
> 
> There was no ''Iraqi plan to bring the war to Iraqi territory''. That sounds ridiculous as the suggestion itself is. After the Iraqi army got defeated inside Iran they got pushed back all the way to Southern Iraq. Iranian forces were on the outskirts of Basra from 1982 up to the later stages of war. Iranian army literally laid a siege on the city of Basra in 1987 which forced Saddam to use Chemical weapons provided by Europe and the US. Source : http://iraniraqwar.com/about.html
> 
> Had Iraq not used chemical weapons Iranian troops would have advanced and took over Um Qasr,Basra and other southern Iraqi cities and advance towards Baghdad.
> 
> Iran was not only pushing the Iraqis on the Southern sector but North of Iraq was also taken over by Iran-friendly armed groups. Saddam had no control over Northern Iraq as Iranian-backed groups there were running amok, Southern Iraq was heavily contested. Iraq had just 3,4 large cities left remaining out of enemy's harms. Even these cities were scene of frequent bombing. Saddam was just ''ruling'' Iraq by a hanging thread through a few large cities.
> 
> Only when Iraq used chemical weapons they could do some pushback against the Iranian-backed groups in the North. Even then it was not a firm control. Iran was still funding, arming and sending weapons to keep northern Iraq out of Saddam's hands.
> 
> 
> At the Southern sector Iraq could not handle the huge number of Iranian troops.. it's only solution was again the WMD weapons which was quite effective as Iran did not expect Iraq to use such weapons and was totally unprepared.
> 
> All the later stage ''successes'' of the Iraqi army _to free its own territory _such as Al Faw were only made possible by the use of WMD's. The war could have gone on for another 10 years, it would have had no effect on Iran as the country was busy with another mass mobilization for the year 1989-1990 and preparing for a long WMD war.
> 
> 
> 
> Overall, Iraq was hoping for a swift victory, telling the world it would reach Tehran in 3,4 days. Thinking that a post-revolutionary Iran was too fragile and unorganized. What happened after came as a shock to Saddam and entire Western and Arab world. Not only did the Iraqis get expelled from Iran but due to huge mass mobilization and mass attacks the Iraqis got pushed back and Iranian troops fought the Iraqi army until the end of the war on Iraqi territory.
> 
> But, again our discussion initially was the deterrence achieved by Iran after the war. Between 1988 and 2002 Saddam did not dare to respond to any Iranian attack again. In the year 2002 Iraq still had a somewhat formidable army of 400.000 troops.
> 
> Saddam even tried to befriend Iran and asked Iran's assistance to help save his air force
> Source : http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0071.shtml
> 
> So the conclusion is that by 1988 Iran had achieved deterrence.



No large city was taken by Iran, not even Basra which is close by you.

Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.

Iran was not seeking deterrence, it wanted to have an Islamic Revolution in Iraq as an agressor.

Iran taking baghdad you say, yes which is evident from all the failures of Iranian military leadership against a smaller country. They would've been doomed had they continued after 1988.


----------



## Dariush the Great

camelguy said:


> No large city was taken by Iran, not even Basra which is close by you.
> 
> Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.
> 
> Iran was not seeking deterrence, it wanted to have an Islamic Revolution in Iraq as an agressor.
> 
> Iran taking baghdad you say, yes which is evident from all the failures of Iranian military leadership against a smaller country. They would've been doomed had they continued after 1988.


If it were not for WMD's and massive European and American support your inbred dictator wouldn't have seen another year. In the first 4 or 5 years there was not even a unified military command in Iran yet Iraq struggled badly against civilians armed with AK47's.

Norman Schwarzkopf was right '' As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that. ''

It takes a special kind of retard to fail against a country without a government and a disbanded army. But perhaps Iran is really unconquerable due to the bravery of its people. Something that Iraqis should learn from, i guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> If it were not for WMD's and massive European and American support your inbred dictator wouldn't have seen another year. In the first 4 or 5 years there was not even a unified military command in Iran yet Iraq struggled badly against civilians armed with AK47's.
> 
> Norman Schwarzkopf was right '' As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that. ''
> 
> It takes a special kind of retard to fail against a country without a government and a disbanded army. But perhaps Iran is really unconquerable due to the bravery of its people. Something that Iraqis should learn from, i guess.



Norman Schwarzkopf was representing the US superpower when it was in its best shape during your cold war and all the other major European powers.

They would've blown the Iranian military away so save me his quotes.

Iran failed against a smaller country, mostly Shias in Iraq and Kurds.

Be quiet arabised ajami. Attend Arabic classes and enjoy.


----------



## Iransetiz

Michini said:


> Comparing the Iranian air force to the Israeli air force is a direct insult for Israel and Israeli people.



Is that the same Israeli Airforce that can't reach Iran without getting turned to scattered marine habitat? If that's an insult then so be it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iransetiz

camelguy said:


> Norman Schwarzkopf was representing the US superpower when it was in its best shape during your cold war and all the other major European powers.
> 
> They would've blown the Iranian military away so save me his quotes.
> 
> Iran failed against a smaller country, mostly Shias in Iraq and Kurds.
> 
> Be quiet arabised ajami. Attend Arabic classes and enjoy.



But you're again proving that Iraq and Arabs in general are powerless without the entire world supporting it...and you still didnt achieve any of your objectives in that war. So I don't see how we would want to be in awe of you, especially in your present Jahiliyya 2.0 that is shamefully paraded by MBS et al. The only Arabs of worth was the Prophet (saaws) and his companions...Islam's beauty and power was in spite of Arabism, not because of it. But that's a discussion for another thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The single-seater f-5 is different here. Single-seater Kowsar? Kowsar 2?


That is our old friend RF-5A. Surprised still seeing them around intact. I was under the impression that after retirement all of them had been dismantled or cannibalizes long time ago. 
Unbelievably, most of their fleet didn’t have the ejection seats and our pilots had to bail out in a Second World War manner. This caused many fatalities/injuries in the first months of the war with Iraq; leading to early retirement of the fleet.


----------



## Dariush the Great

camelguy said:


> Norman Schwarzkopf was representing the US superpower when it was in its best shape during your cold war and all the other major European powers.
> 
> They would've blown the Iranian military away so save me his quotes.
> 
> Iran failed against a smaller country, mostly Shias in Iraq and Kurds.
> 
> Be quiet arabised ajami. Attend Arabic classes and enjoy.


Big words coming from a nobody. Your ''nation'' is nothing more than a British creation at the expense of the Ottoman and Persian empire. Once we were neighbors with classy folks such as the Greek and Roman empires and nowadays we are dealing with s.hitty Anglo-created states around us such as Iraq and a few other loser countries.

Know your place. That region you claim you are coming from has nothing to do with Arabs.. in the past it was host of a totally different culture and civilization. You are just a rape product of Arab Bedouins in that area.

Only very few preserve their cultural identity like Iran. So thank your daddy the British for your miserable existence, not Iran. Barking at the wrong tree. Next time when you visit Iraq again be sure to kiss the hands of IRGC officers over there for saving your miserable entity from falling into hands of even more backward creatures than yourself. Make sure to learn Persian, would make your communication more easier with the Iranian military in Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> Big words coming from a nobody. Your ''nation'' is nothing more than a British creation at the expense of the Ottoman and Persian empire. Once we were neighbors with classy folks such as the Greek and Roman empires and nowadays we are dealing with s.hitty Anglo-created states around us such as Iraq and a few other loser countries.
> 
> Know your place. That region you claim you are coming from has nothing to do with Arabs.. in the past it was host of a totally different culture and civilization. You are just a rape product of Arab Bedouins in that area.
> 
> Only very few preserve their cultural identity like Iran. So thank your daddy the British for your miserable existence, not Iran. Barking at the wrong tree. Next time when you visit Iraq again be sure to kiss the hands of IRGC officers over there for saving your miserable entity from falling into hands of even more backward creatures than yourself. Make sure to learn Persian, would make your communication more easier with the Iranian military in Iraq.




It's the other way around, you learn Arabic, you're influenced by Arabs.


----------



## Iransetiz

camelguy said:


> It's the other way around, you learn Arabic, you're influenced by Arabs.


 
Other than Muhammad (saaws) the Arabs taught nothing to the Persians, it was in fact the Persians who became the best of ahlul ilm amongst the early Muslim Caliphates. Even Muhammad (saaws) predicted this as recorded in Sahih Muslim 2536. As Uthman (RA) said that without Persia this Ummah would not have succeeded. We influenced you just as much as the other way round, in fact we became better Muslims than the Arabs who were busy causing fitnah and chopping heads off...

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Dariush the Great

camelguy said:


> It's the other way around, you learn Arabic, you're influenced by Arabs.


 Learning a few Quranic verses in elementary school and later forgetting those few sentences is hardly ''learning Arabic'' my uncultured camel Bedouin friend.

Persians influenced Arabs and Islam much more. Most of the brilliant Islamic era scholars in the past are of Persian origin. On top of giving life and colour to Islam as a religion the Iranians also preserved their own national identity.. keeping their language, cultural traditions etc until this date. 

In your own country, Iraq, a large part of your population, celebrate the Iranian new year Nowruz and other festivals. Who influenced who? 

Many Iraqi Arabs can speak Persian too.

Iranian culture today is present in India,Pakistan,Afghanistan,Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Azarbaijan, Iraq etc

We are getting off topic mate. Let me raise my fine Persian Shirazi wine in your honor.. you can have your camel urine. Cheers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

Dariush the Great said:


> Learning a few Quranic verses in elementary school and later forgetting those few sentences is hardly ''learning Arabic'' my uncultured camel Bedouin friend.
> 
> Persians influenced Arabs and Islam much more. Most of the brilliant Islamic era scholars in the past are of Persian origin. On top of giving life and colour to Islam as a religion the Iranians also preserved their own national identity.. keeping their language, cultural traditions etc until this date.
> 
> In your own country, Iraq, a large part of your population, celebrate the Iranian new year Nowruz and other festivals. Who influenced who?
> 
> Many Iraqi Arabs can speak Persian too.
> 
> Iranian culture today is present in India,Pakistan,Afghanistan,Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Azarbaijan, Iraq etc
> 
> We are getting off topic mate. Let me raise my fine Persian Shirazi wine in your honor.. you can have your camel urine. Cheers.



Give it a break already with this imaginary superiority complex of Persians having civilisation.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

camelguy said:


> Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.


from Saddam himself

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Iransetiz

camelguy said:


> Give it a break already with this imaginary superiority complex of Persians having civilisation.



Read Sahih Muslim 2536, if you don't and disagree with it...then I don't even know if you're Arab or Muslim.


----------



## jauk

camelguy said:


> No large city was taken by Iran, not even Basra which is close by you.
> 
> Iraq never aimed for the capture of Tehran, not sure where you got that lie from.
> 
> Iran was not seeking deterrence, it wanted to have an Islamic Revolution in Iraq as an agressor.
> 
> Iran taking baghdad you say, yes which is evident from all the failures of Iranian military leadership against a smaller country. They would've been doomed had they continued after 1988.


Camel dar khab beenad panbeh daneh, gahi lof lof khorad gah daneh daneh...😆😆

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>



REST IN PEACE, you great man.

Delightful shomali-speaking accent, he had. "Sarivee rica, Sarivee kija, bamardeshee, khane nadari baneshee?".

Lovely man of honor (in fact the medal) and courage. Everyone who knew him thought highly of him. I heard many, many, nice stories about him. He took time off for about 3 years during his time in IIAF to go do a very good deed. It cannot be discussed here. RIP a man that LOVED IRAN more than his life. Shahla va Hasan will always miss you.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

yavar
But it's the same video released a while ago, maybe only the music changes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Cold War Era

Soviet Pilot(Vladimir Kondaurov) who test flew captured F-5 against MiG-21, MiG-23 explains why the Tiger beat the Fishbed(MiG-21), Flogger(MiG-23)in every engagement.
‘Every flight ended with the same result: MiG-21 lost, although he had much higher thrust-to-weight ratio,’ Vladimir Kondaurov, Soviet pilot who tested the F-5.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Turkey spending $6 billion to buy 40 F16V and upgrade package for current ones they have..

Egypt buying 35 SU35 (I recall from memory)..

Both countries in debt ...turkey at $ 45 billion and Egypt at an eye-popping $135 billion debt 

Both negative trade balance (they spend more than they produce)

Iran at almost no debt $9 billion and POSITIVE trade balance of $15 billion.

I am dead set against buying any aircraft from outside..but I like so see more $$$ for domestic development and serial production of an indigenous engine and platform..we sure can afford it at GDP of $628 billion..(turkey GDP only slightly higher at $719 and Egypt at around $350 billion).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> Turkey spending $6 billion to buy 40 F16V and upgrade package for current ones they have..
> 
> Egypt buying 35 SU35 (I recall from memory)..
> 
> Both countries in debt ...turkey at $ 45 billion and Egypt at an eye-popping $135 billion debt
> 
> Both negative trade balance (they spend more than they produce)
> 
> Iran at almost no debt $9 billion and POSITIVE trade balance of $15 billion.
> 
> I am dead set against buying any aircraft from outside..but I like so see more $$$ for domestic development and serial production of an indigenous engine and platform..we sure can afford it at GDP of $628 billion..(turkey GDP only slightly higher at $719 and Egypt at around $350 billion).



Who Told you Iranian GDP is at 628B? It’s a highly flawed metric using the 2010 US dollar rate which hasn’t been applicable in nearly a decade.

Iran’s true GDP is sub 200B when comparing it against the CURRENT basket currency rates of main reserve currencies (Dollars, Euros, Pounds, Francs, Yen, etc)


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> Who Told you Iranian GDP is at 628B? It’s a highly flawed metric using the 2010 US dollar rate which hasn’t been applicable in nearly a decade.
> 
> Iran’s true GDP is sub 200B when comparing it against the CURRENT basket currency rates of main reserve currencies (Dollars, Euros, Pounds, Francs, Yen, etc)


You do realize that nominal GDP is, as its name suggests, "nominal". Right?
Iran's Nominal GDP is $628B based on the official exchange rate of 42,200 IRR = 1 USD, which is the correct figure.
Government conducts its trade with the official exchange rate. The unofficial market is for ordinary citizens, not the government or its affiliated entities.
Meanwhile, Iran's PPP GDP is $1.1 trillion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> You do realize that nominal GDP is, as its name suggests, "nominal". Right?
> Iran's Nominal GDP is $628B based on the official exchange rate of 42,200 IRR = 1 USD, which is the correct figure.
> Government conducts its trade with the official exchange rate. The unofficial market is for ordinary citizens, not the government or its affiliated entities.
> Meanwhile, Iran's PPP GDP is $1.1 trillion.



No. Nominal GDP is a good at final production at *current prices* whereas real gdp assumes value of good at final production adjusted for inflation.

It does not apply into your arguement with the Iranian “official currency rate”. The government rate is merely the government saying “no no no free market is wrong, our currency is actually worth a lot more.” Turkey is going thru same thing right now. Lira was 1 for 2 back in 2015 and now 1 for 9. The market says it’s 9, Turkey can say whatever it wants, but market rate is the true rate.

So Yeah sure whatever government wants to say it can say. But life doesn’t work that way, it’s based on supply and demand. Demand for rial is non existent

The government has cut down the use of that official rate for international trade to VERY few exceptions (mostly critical goods even then you need connections to get it in any significant amount). If you do any major business in Iran, you know this.

So since Iran is a socialist country itsGDP is mostly made up of private entriprises who are using the free floating market rate (bazaar rate) and not the government rate for few exceptions of vital goods.

Iran’s currency is neither 4-5 toman nor the current 27-28 toman. Both are extremes. But valuing the Iranian economy at 650B is a massive flaw and Iran’s economy is no where that big.

So one shouldn’t used a flawed number to make it the basis of their argument for major purchases.

It’s like a human having a salary on paper of 250,000 a year. But in reality that salary for last 5-7 years is worth 25,000 a year. Then person says well since I have 250,000 a year salary I am going to go buy a 1M dollar house.

Doesn’t work that way. Now you can say nominal this or nominal that (which is incorrect) to justify your use of flawed non realistic data. But at the end of the day it’s what was the purpose of the data set? The purpose was to extrapolate or infer that Iran can afford a large scale aircraft purchase using said flawed data as its justification. This should not be done.

That is all.


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> No. Nominal GDP is a good at final production at *current prices* whereas real gdp assumes value of good at final production adjusted for inflation.
> 
> It does not apply into your arguement with the Iranian “official currency rate”. The government rate is merely the government saying “no no no free market is wrong, our currency is actually worth a lot more.”
> 
> Yeah sure whatever you say bud. Life doesn’t work that way, it’s based on supply and demand. Demand for rial is non existent
> 
> The government has cut down the use of that official rate for international trade to VERY few exceptions (mostly critical goods even then you need connections to get it in any significant amount). If you do any major business in Iran, you would know this.
> 
> So since Iran is a socialist country itsGDP is mostly made up of private entriprises who are using the free floating market rate (bazaar rate) and not the government rate.


Yes, but we are not talking about inflation now, we are talking about the exchange rate. Real GDP is inflation adjusted. You're right.

The government controls the flow of dollar in the economy and it can distribute it to its own affiliated entities at a fixed price if it wants. In a country like Iran where economy is controlled mostly by semi-private countries with strong ties to the system, the official exchange rate is not as useless as you claim. Two of the largest sectors of Iran's economy are completely under the control of the government and the revolutionary guards: the energy sector and the telecommunication sector. Plus, if that's what they do for other countries, why should Iran be any different?

What do you mean that there is no demand for Rial? 85 million people are trading with it every day. Salaries are paid in Rial. Over 200 million transactions are done in IRR every day via Iran's banking system. If you mean internationally, then over 97% of the FOREX reserves of nearly all central banks in the world consists of fewer than 10 currencies (USD, Euro, Renminbi, Pounds, Yen, CAD, AUD, Swiss Francs). Does that mean there is no demand for other currencies?

Both IMF and World Bank are now reporting Iran's GDP in 2020 to be around $620B. Even World Bank has corrected its previously reported figure on Iran's economy:


> *Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been estimated at US$628 billion for the Iranian calendar year 2020/21, calculated at the official exchange rate for a population of about 84 million. *Iran’s real GDP is estimated to grow by 1.7% in 2020/21. Output loss from COVID-19 was less pronounced than in other countries, as Iran’s economy had already contracted by 12% over the previous two years. Economic recovery in Q3 and Q4-2020 was stronger than expected, both in the oil and non-oil sectors, with the non-oil sector’s rebound driven by manufacturing, as exchange rate depreciation made domestic production more competitive.


Source: World Bank

IMF gives a different estimation of around $610B. Both figures are above $600B. And this figure is consistent with Iran's GDP in previous years. So, I don't see why we should believe that Iran's GDP is below $200B.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> Both IMF and World Bank are now reporting Iran's GDP in 2020 to be around $630B. Even World Bank has corrected its figure on Iran's economy:
> 
> 
> Source: World Bank
> 
> IMF gives a different estimation of around $610B. Both figures are above $600B.



Yeah you are cherry picking data because they are using the 2010 figure for USD in a bid to “smooth” the chart of volatility for all countries.

If Iran was a normal operating developed country then this method wouldn’t be an issue. But for Iran (and Turkey) or any country going thru severe hyper inflation or severe currency weakening then this will lead to a false data set.

If you were even trading/business in Iran, you know that in 2010 $1USD to 1,200 toman. Oil revenues were at all time highs. Hardly a reasonable rate to use in 2021 when it’s $1USD equals 27,000.

Same source World bank, but using *CURRENT USD*






Seems you want to argue semantics rather then truly trying to understand the true value of the Iranian economy at this point in time.

I can’t imagine anyone seriously thinking Iranian economy is $650B at this point in time given the sanctions and COVID crisis on the economy.

To see how absurd this proposition is: if Iran’s economy was $650B USD in 2020 that means if Iran’s currency strengths back to 2010 levels than Iran’s economy with *no future growth* would be worth almost *5 TRILLION dollars*

Absolutely laughable as that would mean Iran would have the *3rd Biggest Economy in the world*.


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah you are cherry picking data because they are using the 2010 figure for USD in a bid to “smooth” the chart of volatility for all countries.
> 
> If Iran was a normal operating developed country then this method wouldn’t be an issue. But for Iran (and Turkey) or any country going thru severe hyper inflation or severe currency weakening then this will lead to a false data set.
> 
> If you were even trading/business in Iran, you know that in 2010 $1USD to 1,200 toman. Oil revenues were at all time highs. Hardly a reasonable rate to use in 2021 when it’s $1USD equals 27,000.
> 
> Same source World bank, but using *CURRENT USD*
> 
> View attachment 785336
> 
> 
> Seems you want to argue semantics rather then truly trying to understand the true value of the Iranian economy at this point in time.
> 
> I can’t imagine anyone seriously thinking Iranian economy is $650B at this point in time given the sanctions and COVID crisis on the economy.
> 
> To see how absurd this proposition is: if Iran’s economy was $650B USD in 2020 that means of Iran’s currency strengths back to 2010 levels than Iran’s economy with *no future growth* would be worth almost *15 TRILLION dollars*
> 
> Absolutely laughable as that would mean Iran’s economy would be the same size as China’s.


They are not using the 2010 figure. They are using the official exchange rate of 42,200 IRR introduced by the government in 2018. You can at least read what I cited from the World Bank's website before you repeat yourself. World Bank itself is saying that they are using the official exchange rate (introduced in 2018 and slightly modified in 2019). 

And Iran is not going through a hyper inflation. An *annual inflation rate* of 48% is not considered "hyper inflation", let alone "severe" hyper inflation. Hyper inflation is more like an inflation rate of 50% *per month*.

Oil prices are going up again. Soon they'll be close to $90 per barrel. Soon Iran's annual oil revenues will hit figures like $60 billion dollars again.

You said nominal GDP, and I showed you Iran's nominal GDP from both IMF and World Bank. You have not provided a source for that chart you have shown. Google also shows a similar chart without a valid reference. But I have provided valid references on the websites of World Bank and IMF that estimate Iran's nominal GDP to be around $610B, which makes sense from many aspects.

And I don't understand your argument about Iran's economy with previous USD rate being equal to 15 trillion dollars either. It just doesn't make any sense.

What is more laughable is that you think a country like Iran with a military budget close to $20B has a GDP that hardly reaches $200B. That's close to 10% of our GDP, even higher than Saudi Arabia. lol


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> They are not using the 2010 figure. They are using the official exchange rate of 42,200 IRR introduced by the government in 2018. You can at least read what I cited from the World Bank's website before you repeat yourself. World Bank itself is saying that they are using the official exchange rate (introduced in 2018 and slightly modified in 2019).
> 
> And Iran is not going through a hyper inflation. An *annual inflation rate* of 48% is not considered "hyper inflation", let alone "severe" hyper inflation. Hyper inflation is more like an inflation rate of 50% *per month*.
> 
> Oil prices are going up again. Soon they'll be close to $90 per barrel. Soon Iran's annual oil revenues will hit figures like $60 billion dollars again.
> 
> You said nominal GDP, and I showed you Iran's nominal GDP from both IMF and World Bank. You have not provided a source for that chart you have shown. Google also shows a similar chart without a valid reference. But I have provided valid references on the websites of World Bank and IMF that estimate Iran's nominal GDP to be around $610B, which makes sense from many aspects.
> 
> And I don't understand your argument about Iran's economy with previous USD rate being equal to 15 trillion dollars either. It just doesn't make any sense.
> 
> What is more laughable is that you think a country like Iran with a military budget close to $20B has a GDP that hardly reaches $200B. That's close to 10% of our GDP, even higher than Saudi Arabia. lol



It’s ironic for someone saying to me to “read” when you are too lazy to read. Not only I did write my source (world bank) in my rebuttals and told you it’s from the same site you pulled your data. Not only that, but you couldn’t even bother to read the chart that says the source.

But here I will force feed the information to you because I’m a nice guy.











GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. | Data


GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. from The World Bank: Data




data.worldbank.org





It’s from the *same exact source* you been preaching like gospel  you need to learn to interpret data better

Like I said you like to argue semantics I said hyperinflation *or severe *currency weakening as I’m typing my response on the go and speaking in generalities about the data method world bank was using. Again you continue to miss the over arching point to argue about minor details rather than the over arching theme.

I would say going for 1,200 rials to 27,500 rials...Aka a deprciation factor of *23 times *counts as severe currency depreciation in a decade. But who knows in your blind nationalistic bubble everything is fine.

But again the fact remains is Iran’s economy $650B? If you believe that then you are not worth arguing with.

Now if you say this chart I found says a nominal GDP based on official Iran currency rate is this then that is completely different. That’s just a chart using flawed non real world data.

But this issue is you actually believe that the Iranian economy is worth 650B, which shows you have zero grasp on the real world economy of Iran.

Regarding Iran’s military budget was reduced under Rouhani. And to this day it’s true military budget is unknown. Second a 10% spend of GDP on military is not unheard of especially during times of economic or major war or a country preparing itself for conflict. I think Iran‘s situation fits that Bill. So no, that number is not “laughable”. If you think that number is high go look at military budget of Nazi Germany (adjusted for inflation) and it blows Iran out of the water and take it as a percentage of their GDP, but I digress.

And one last thing if you bother reading what I wrote earlier I said this:

_Iran’s currency is neither 4-5 toman nor the current 27-28 toman. Both are extremes. But valuing the Iranian economy at 650B is a massive flaw and Iran’s economy is no where that big._

Valuing the Iranian economy via the propaganda rate of 4.4 when you would be hard pressed to find non government entities accessing that rate at any large amount. Especially considering for the CB of Iran to provide that a rate it is basically taking away from its own dwindling foreign cash reserves to make up the difference (market rate of 27.5 vs 4.4) which under such sanctions and pressure from COVID is not sustainable. Hence it is only used in major exceptions. I repeated this before.

Personally I view the $190B as worst case scenario assuming all transactions take place at 27.5. I have consistently thought (in my own opinion not using data) that 300-400B is a fair number, though I wouldn’t be surprised if it is lower.

Nonetheless, as I reiterated earlier $650B is way too high and not “real world” economics or real world value. But I won’t detail this thread any further.


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> It’s ironic for someone saying to me to “read” when you are too lazy to read. Not only I did write my source (world bank) in my rebuttals and told you it’s from the same site you pulled your data. Not only that, but you couldn’t even bother to read the chart that says the source.
> 
> But here I will force feed the information to you because I’m a nice guy.
> 
> View attachment 785342
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. | Data
> 
> 
> GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. from The World Bank: Data
> 
> 
> 
> 
> data.worldbank.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s from the *same exact source* you been preaching like gospel  you need to learn to interpret data better
> 
> Like I said you like to argue semantics I said hyperinflation *or severe *currency weakening as I’m typing my response on the go and speaking in generalities about the data method world bank was using. Again you continue to miss the over arching point to argue about minor details rather than the over arching theme.
> 
> I would say going for 1,200 rials to 27,500 rials...Aka a deprciation factor of *23 times *counts as severe currency depreciation in a decade. But who knows in your blind nationalistic bubble everything is fine.
> 
> But again the fact remains is Iran’s economy $650B? If you believe that then you are not worth arguing with.
> 
> Now if you say this chart I found says a nominal GDP based on official Iran currency rate is this then that is completely different. That’s just a chart using flawed non real world data.
> 
> But this issue is you actually believe that the Iranian economy is worth 650B, which shows you have zero grasp on the real world economy of Iran.
> 
> Regarding Iran’s military budget was reduced under Rouhani. And to this day it’s true military budget is unknown. Second a 10% spend of GDP on military is not unheard of especially during times of economic or major war or a country preparing itself for conflict. I think Iran‘s situation fits that Bill. So no, that number is not “laughable”. If you think that number is high go look at military budget of Nazi Germany (adjusted for inflation) and it blows Iran out of the water and take it as a percentage of their GDP, but I digress.
> 
> And one last thing if you bother reading what I wrote earlier I said this:
> 
> _Iran’s currency is neither 4-5 toman nor the current 27-28 toman. Both are extremes. But valuing the Iranian economy at 650B is a massive flaw and Iran’s economy is no where that big._
> 
> Valuing the Iranian economy via the propaganda rate of 4.4 when you would be hard pressed to find non government entities accessing that rate at any large amount. Especially considering for the CB of Iran to provide that a rate it is basically taking away from its own dwindling foreign cash reserves to make up the difference (market rate of 27.5 vs 4.4) which under such sanctions and pressure from COVID is not sustainable. Hence it is only used in major exceptions. I repeated this before.
> 
> Personally I view the $190B as worst case scenario assuming all transactions take place at 27.5. I have consistently thought (in my own opinion not using data) that 300-400B is a fair number, though I wouldn’t be surprised if it is lower.
> 
> Nonetheless, as I reiterated earlier $650B is way too high and not “real world” economics or real world value. But I won’t detail this thread any further.


I did see that the chart on Google mentioned World Bank as the source, but I opened the link and it did *NOT* *verify* the data it showed. You can't just claim something and say it is from World Bank and then send me to a web page on their website that does not claim what you have said. You must provide a link that exactly shows your claim, which was not the case for the chart you had showed earlier. Many other sources agree with that figure as well. Here is another source that measures Iran's GDP quarterly:





Iran Nominal GDP, 1988 – 2022 | CEIC Data


Iran Nominal GDP reached 393.3 USD bn in Dec 2021, compared with 426.3 USD bn in the previous quarter.




www.ceicdata.com





So, you are basically saying that Iran's economy has shrunk by 60% in 3 years. Is that what you are saying?

Definitions have nothing to do with blind nationalistic bubble.
As for the depreciation of IRR, USD/IRR exchange ratio was about 12,500 in 1390 (2011). It is now approximately 270,000. For a period of 10 years, that results in an annual inflation of 35% for the Iranian currency. That's still far from hyper inflation by any measure. Look at the histories of countries where hyper inflation actually happened. Just a simple search on Wikipedia shows: 1- Austria (1922): 1,426%; 2-Bolivia (1985): 20,000%; 3- China (1948): 5,070%; 4- Germany (1923): 29,525%; 5- Greece (1944): 30,000,000,000%!!!

Saudi Arabia has a military expenditure of 8% of its GDP with all the military weapons that it is purchasing right and left and being involved in an actual war in Yemen and you think Iran is spending 10%?

Anyway, if you think economists at IMF and World Bank are dumb, then let it be. GDP itself is not the only measure of an economy's health anyway and we are off-topic. We can continue this issue on the Iranian Chill Thread if you insist, or we can leave it here as is.


----------



## sahureka2

request:
But is this the discussion about the economy or about the IRIAF?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## aryobarzan

sahureka2 said:


> request:
> But is this the discussion about the economy or about the IRIAF?


In a sense both are related..The argument against IRIAF has always been lack of resources so thats why the GDP becomes relative..

One last word about figures I presented and I shut up..lol

I extracted all the GDP figures for the three countries from the same source (world Bank 2020 published data)...just to ensure consistency for all countries...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> l. You can't just claim something and say it is from World Bank and then send me to a web page on their website that does not claim what you have said. You must provide a link that exactly shows your claim, which was not the case for the chart you had showed earlier.
> 
> So, you are basically saying that Iran's economy has shrunk by 60% in 3 years. Is that what you are saying?



Well now I lost respect for you. Because you are lying or trolling or just plain dumb.

If you click this link






GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. | Data


GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. from The World Bank: Data




data.worldbank.org





It will show this picture below. I even kept the URL so your aghab moonde self can see it’s from the world bank website.







You keep parroting this 4.4 figure but you don’t fail to realize it’s for *importation of finished goods* not primarily used in the manufacture of value goods or export.

That is why during COVID there was a huge uproar in Iran when it was found out that some mobile phone stores were importing IPhones from Dubai using government channel of 4.4 rate when the funds were only to be used for critical necessity like food, medicine, medical devices, etc importing any of these products does not add to the chain production value of a good that goes into GDP especially if it is a finished good.

Iranian factories are not exporting goods to foreign buyers at 4.4 clip but real market Rate of 27.5 this is something you fail to grasp and keep clinging onto a nominal gdp graph that is taking in a rate of exchange that for all purposes is irrelevant and rarely seen in Iranian economy



QWECXZ said:


> So, you are basically saying that Iran's economy has shrunk by 60% in 3 years. Is that what you are saying?



You are valuing the Iranian economy GDP in *dollars, *dollars that have since *appreciated* against your *respective currency

So one reason GDP (IN DOLLARS IN DOLLARS) has gone down is because IRANIAN CURRENCY HAS DEPRECIATED SEVERELY AGAINST US DOLLAR SO IT IS NOW WORTH LESS (IN DOLLARS IN DOLLARS) than before.*

I swear it’s like explaining something to a child. And world bank chart t using current USD variable uses the latest currency rate not the fake rarely ever used government rate.

I will explain it another way that even you can understand:

I buy land in Iran let’s say land is worth 100,000 Toman and let’s say $1 USD = 1000 toman. How much is my land valued (in dollars in dollars)? It’s worth 100,000 USD

Now let’s say currency depreciates and now my $1 USD= 10,000 toman. How much is my same 100,000 land worth in dollars? It is worth $10,000 USD 

So *one* reason you are seeing the GDP crash is because the value of what you are measuring is being measured against something that is continually appreciating while your currency (ri is continually weakening.

*BUT THAT IS NOT ONLY REASON*

During Trump maximum pressure you had:

Iranian oil exports go to basically zero
World oil prices go from $90 to less than $10
A once in a century pandemic shut down the Iranian economy for a significant period of time and impact the economy already reeling from sanctions very harshly
So to answer your question the Iranian economy shrunk during this period alongside the currency upheaval. This period that was even worse for Iran economically than the Iran-Iraq war according to some officials.

How much did it shrink by? I would have to do some research, but your figure of 60% while extreme...is over 3 years and the panademic skews the data value loss because large parts of the economy were shut down due to quarantine and not entirely “lost”.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I extracted all the GDP figures for the three countries from the same source (world Bank 2020 published data)...*just to ensure consistency for all countries...*



Actually you didn’t because

Turkey based on nominal US GDP using 2010 rates is this:






*1.284T USD*

But when we use (Current $USD) to account for the drop in Lira in last decade we get this:






*$720B USD*


Curiously enough you use *current USD for Turkey,* yet *nominal GDP for Iran *to show Iranian and Turkish economy being similar in size. I respect you so I am going to say this was an error and not a blatant attempt at manipulating presentation of data.

In reality, under nominal GDP measure using non-real world numbers Turkish economy is in best case scenario 2x Iranian economy size. Thus not anywhere close like you made it seem.

* I think we can all agree there is no way in hell Turkish Erodgan economy is 1.2T USD today thus using nominal GDP based on 2010 USD rate is useless for grasping today’s values.*

So when we take the *true currency rate* of both countries as represented by the *variable Current $USD*....both countries suffer in drop in the value of their economy as both countries curriences have plummeted against the dollar and Iran suffers the most due to a much worse drop (1.2 to 27.5)

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> Well now I lost respect for you. Because you are lying trolling or just plain dumb.
> 
> If you click this link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. | Data
> 
> 
> GDP (current US$) - Iran, Islamic Rep. from The World Bank: Data
> 
> 
> 
> 
> data.worldbank.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It will show this picture below. I even kept the URL so your aghab moonde self can see it’s from the world bank website.
> 
> View attachment 785367
> 
> 
> You keep parroting this 4.4 figure but you don’t fail to realize it’s for *importation of finished goods* not primarily used in the manufacture of value goods or export.
> 
> That is why during COVID there was a huge uproar in Iran when it was found out that some mobile phone stores were importing IPhones from Dubai using government channel of 4.4 rate when the funds were only to be used for critical necessity like food, medicine, medical devices, etc importing any of these products does not add to the chain production value of a good that goes into GDP especially if it is a finished good.
> 
> Iranian factories are not exporting goods to foreign buyers at 4.4 clip but real market Rate of 27.5 this is something you fail to grasp and keep clinging onto a nominal gdp graph that is taking in a rate of exchange that for all purposes is irrelevant and rarely seen in Iranian economy
> 
> 
> 
> You are valuing the Iranian economy GDP in *dollars, *dollars that have since *appreciated* against your *respective currency
> 
> So one reason GDP (IN DOLLARS IN DOLLARS) has gone down is because IRANIAN CURRENCY HAS DEPRECIATED SEVERELY AGAINST US DOLLAR SO IT IS NOW WORTH LESS (IN DOLLARS IN DOLLARS) than before.*
> 
> I swear it’s like explaining something to a child.
> 
> I will explain it another way that even you can understand:
> 
> I buy land in Iran let’s say land is worth 100,000 Toman and let’s say $1 USD = 1000 toman. How much is my land valued (in dollars in dollars)? It’s worth 100,000 USD
> 
> Now let’s say currency depreciates and now my $1 USD= 10,000 toman. How much is my same 100,000 land worth in dollars? It is worth $10,000
> 
> So *one* reason you are seeing the GDP crash is because the value of what you are measuring is being measured against something that is continually appreciating.
> 
> *BUT THAT IS NOT ONLY REASON*
> 
> During Trump maximum pressure you had:
> 
> Iranian oil exports go to basically zero
> World oil prices go from $90 to less than $10
> A once in a century pandemic shut down the Iranian economy for a significant period of time and impact the economy already reeling from sanctions very harshly


Koskhol, your example of buying a land is quite ridiculous and out of the place in this conversation. The depreciation of Rial in the free market is not linearly proportional to Iran's nominal GDP. That's probably where your laughable and idiotic argument about Iran's nominal GDP being equal to 15 trillion dollars (with 2010 prices) came from.

In 1979, 1 USD = 70 IRR and Iran's nominal GDP was $90B. Now 1 USD ~ 270,000 IRR. Does that mean that the nominal GDP of Iran must have somehow grown by 8,140 times to cancel out the effect of depreciation of our currency for a nominal GDP (according to you) of $190B?! A 8,140 growth in 42 years requires an annual growth of 24% in average! A growth of 24% for every single year for 42 years straight. Enghadr khari?

What you are trying to say, and failing badly at it, is that Iran's real GDP, i.e. adjusted for inflation, must be way lower than $600B. If you had said that, there would be no argument. But we have been talking about Iran's *nominal* GDP since the beginning and Aryobarzan is right. Iran's nominal GDP is indeed somewhere between $600B to $630B for 2020.









List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah you are cherry picking data because they are using the 2010 figure for USD in a bid to “smooth” the chart of volatility for all countries.
> 
> If Iran was a normal operating developed country then this method wouldn’t be an issue. But for Iran (and Turkey) or any country going thru severe hyper inflation or severe currency weakening then this will lead to a false data set.
> 
> If you were even trading/business in Iran, you know that in 2010 $1USD to 1,200 toman. Oil revenues were at all time highs. Hardly a reasonable rate to use in 2021 when it’s $1USD equals 27,000.
> 
> Same source World bank, but using *CURRENT USD*
> 
> View attachment 785336
> 
> 
> Seems you want to argue semantics rather then truly trying to understand the true value of the Iranian economy at this point in time.
> 
> I can’t imagine anyone seriously thinking Iranian economy is $650B at this point in time given the sanctions and COVID crisis on the economy.
> 
> To see how absurd this proposition is: if Iran’s economy was $650B USD in 2020 that means if Iran’s currency strengths back to 2010 levels than Iran’s economy with *no future growth* would be worth almost *5 TRILLION dollars*
> 
> Absolutely laughable as that would mean Iran would have the *3rd Biggest Economy in the world*.


The recent report on millionaires in the world that said Iran has the largest # of new millionaires in the world, that suggests an economy more than $200bn. Even from Iran's technology and export numbers, Iran is over $200bn. wow, i just have to say, i think you thinking IRan's gdp is $200bn says more about you than IRan, just an fyi. lol. Iran that is expanding so many strategic industries AND inventing technologies that are exported? Especially since UN sanctions are over? Iran would be more like NIgeria tbh if its gdp was 200bn$.....thats a smaaall amount of money for a country like Iran....ARE YOU KIDDING ME? LOOOL. your belief here is fascinating....you account for the obvious and ignore the fact that the unobvious and hidden aspects could be and are probably huge and very impactful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> is that Iran's real GDP, i.e. adjusted for inflation, must be way lower than $600B. If you had said that, there would be no argument.



I see you dropped your claim that my source *was not* world bank *very quickly*. And won’t have the decency to admit you were wrong in questioning my source let alone saying my link was a lie and didn’t lead to world bank.

I have said that multiple times that Iran’s true GDP is way lower and you continued to stick to nominal GDP as an indication of Iran’s true value. And when it comes to Iran nominal GDP all I said was it was *wrong* because it uses 4.4 figure and not 27.5 figure. *The 4.4 figure has very little effect on GDP since it’s a figure used for import of finished goods. Are you going to argue this?*




QWECXZ said:


> since the beginning and Aryobarzan is right.



Wrong, he used Turkey’s *real gdp* (720B) to compare to Iran’s *nominal gdp* (650B) to say both countries are similar in size economy wise.

Yet *Turkey’s nominal GDP is 1.25T *USD and thus twice Iran’s nominal GDP using the 4.4 figure (an inaccurate currency rate but whatever).

So you weren’t even comparing apples to apples. But apples to watermelons.

So Turkey real GDP valued in dollars is a better indicator considering Erdogan is driving that country in the ground. And Iran’s real gdp using the actual widely used market rate is the better figure.

*That was the whole point of me arguing with you what is a true indicator of Iranian GDP.* I could care less what nominal GDP is, much less a nominal GDP using a currency exchange figure that 1 in 100 business transactions has access too.


----------



## Maula Jatt

Dariush the Great said:


> Learning a few Quranic verses in elementary school and later forgetting those few sentences is hardly ''learning Arabic'' my uncultured camel Bedouin friend.
> 
> Persians influenced Arabs and Islam much more. Most of the brilliant Islamic era scholars in the past are of Persian origin. On top of giving life and colour to Islam as a religion the Iranians also preserved their own national identity.. keeping their language, cultural traditions etc until this date.
> 
> In your own country, Iraq, a large part of your population, celebrate the Iranian new year Nowruz and other festivals. Who influenced who?
> 
> Many Iraqi Arabs can speak Persian too.
> 
> Iranian culture today is present in India,Pakistan,Afghanistan,Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Azarbaijan, Iraq etc
> 
> We are getting off topic mate. Let me raise my fine Persian Shirazi wine in your honor.. you can have your camel urine. Cheers.


I have no issues with arabs, a little bit with this guy but not a whole lot

but I literally lol'ed at this, this exchange was frickin hilarious

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## skyshadow

sahureka2 said:


> request:
> But is this the discussion about the economy or about the IRIAF?


economy, apparently

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## sha ah

Trump's maximum pressure campaign did have a significantly negative and detrimental effect on Iran's economy at first.However since then Iran's economy has bounced back and Iran has adjusted to the situation.

One of the reasons why Trump was able to do that was because the Rohani administration made the mistake of putting all of Iran's eggs in one basket. All hope was put into the nuclear deal, everything into relations with the west.

Not nearly enough emphasis was put onto Iran having relations with the east, at the very least as potential as a insulation / diversification strategy just incase if something were to happen with the west. That was very short sighted strategy. However in 2016 Iran did see 13% GDP growth right and at first after the deal inflation was slashed. It did work as long as the west stayed in the deal but the deal didn't hold.

Anyways now Iran's economy is steadily growing every year, not explosive growth but steady 2% and higher. Also if we consider GDP per capita it's probably more a more accurate indication for Iran. Different sources give different values, but there's no way that Iran's economy is worth 200 billion only today. That's just silly. Iran has the largest reserves of natural gas on the planet and 4th largest reserves of crude.













Right now Iran is selling 1 million barrels to China daily and that's what's admitted officially. The US asked China to cut back on Iranian crude, China outright said "NO WAY" and China just sent 2 men, one is a 50 year old general and one woman to space.

Right now China, the UK, EU, Lebanon are facing power crisis' and the winter has barely just started. Natural gas prices just passed a vital resistance point which indicates that it "could" go as high as 2008 rates. western Europe decided not to sign long term deals with Russia so they're screwed. Poland, Hungary are fine though because they locked in long term prices with Russia.

That's the thing about renewables. What happens when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine ? I mean that's rare right but that's basically what's happening. Even in 20 years from now I'm telling you fuel has to be in the mix atleast 1/3rd or 20% of consumption for any nation just in case right ?

Anyways aside from China, we know that right now Iran is supplying what Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela and this is what we know about in the media. Right now Iran's oil / energy sales are likely on par or above pre-Trump sanctions level sales.

Also in terms of Turkey economy. Remember in 2005 they slashed 6 zeros. It was 1 USD o 1.2 Lira then 1 USD to 1.5, now it's what 1 to 9 ? It's going to 10 and above. I don't even know how Erdogan can get re-elected since 80% of Istanbul is against his Canal Istanbul project. His relatives are direct beneficiaries of that project.

Another issue with Erdogan is that he keeps insisting on keeping interest rates low to lower inflation. 99% of economists suggest the opposite stating that keeping interest low leads to higher inflation. It's obvious, he doesn't want to lose his own family and friends access to cheap loans. It's that simple.

Economists suggest that since Erdogan came to power Turkey has become wealthier but the average Turk is not wealthier, so then where did the wealth go ? Who did become wealthier ? Didn't you see the report on the Aliyev family in the Pandora papers ?

Corruption exists everywhere. You think in the west it doesn't ? Look at Nancy Pelosi. She makes $200,000 per year working a government job. That's 2 million in 10 years. In 20 years that's 4 million she could accumulate assuming she had no expenses.

How does she have a fortune worth $200 million ? Apparently her husband is a professional investor but realistically Is he the best investor on earth ? Better that Buffer or Bezos ? Btw why does Bezos pay an average tax rate of 1-2% per year while high school teachers pay a higher percentage ?

It's all legal though, it's all through tax loop holes, because when you have that much money, you can "lobby" government officials through "lobby funds". Essentially you're transfer funds to people on influence through lobby groups or political donations and it's all Kosher on paper.

On paper you're not getting anything in return and it's all legal. However when people in power are passing laws that favor them financially, then in reality the wealthiest are using their wealth to fix the system so that the tax burden falls on the middle class rather than super wealthy billionaires, is it fair though ? is it right ? Is it just ? It is moral ? Is it corruption ? class favoritism ? No but it's just the way it is.

What about real estate in the west, all the money, where is it coming from ? 1/3rd of house sales are from offshore shell companies. Where did the money come from ? Many analysts believe it's corruption money funneled from China.

What do you think has been happening in China with Xi cracking down hard on various industries one after another ? Why are there so many empty ghost cities or half finished projects in China ? Who keeps the money ? Where does it go ? Ordinary people take out a loan with interest so that they can put a down payment on an apartment before it's even built.

The company then builds a shell, claims insolvency and ordinary citizens are left to pay off the loans while in reality the billions if not trillions has been funneled and entire families have moved to the west with dirty money they funneled. If companies were allowed to keep operating this bubble would have swallowed up the entire world.

Instead Xi introduced new restrictions, more regulations which level out the playing field and some CEOs and wealthy individuals are closely monitored, not allowed to leave the country. In the end, if they don't pay back the loans, they can pay with their lives. Honestly it's a more just system than unregulated capitalism. 

Unregulated capitalism without any restrictions or oversight will always lead to greed becoming too prevalent, which leads to another crash or recession/depression. Who suffer during these downturns ? Ordinary people, middle class. Who actually become wealthier during these times ? The super wealthy of course. Some Americans are so dumb they act as if they invented capitalism and they think it's the greatest think since the invention of the wheel. It's just a vicious cycle repeating itself over and over again and again.




TheImmortal said:


> Actually you didn’t because
> 
> Turkey based on nominal US GDP using 2010 rates is this:
> 
> View attachment 785375
> 
> 
> *1.284T USD*
> 
> But when we use (Current $USD) to account for the drop in Lira in last decade we get this:
> 
> View attachment 785376
> 
> 
> *$720B USD*
> 
> 
> Curiously enough you use *current USD for Turkey,* yet *nominal GDP for Iran *to show Iranian and Turkish economy being similar in size. I respect you so I am going to say this was an error and not a blatant attempt at manipulating presentation of data.
> 
> In reality, under nominal GDP measure using non-real world numbers Turkish economy is in best case scenario 2x Iranian economy size. Thus not anywhere close like you made it seem.
> 
> * I think we can all agree there is no way in hell Turkish Erodgan economy is 1.2T USD today thus using nominal GDP based on 2010 USD rate is useless for grasping today’s values.*
> 
> So when we take the *true currency rate* of both countries as represented by the *variable Current $USD*....both countries suffer in drop in the value of their economy as both countries curriences have plummeted against the dollar and Iran suffers the most due to a much worse drop (1.2 to 27.5)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449801440868843529

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Wow the beautiful color of the helicopter, really beautiful


----------



## WudangMaster

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449801440868843529


I LOVE that new camo! They almost look alive, as though they evolved their camo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1450107771970543622

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

This is interesting,according to this..upon arival in Moscov,Bagheri said that His trip is follow up of the arms deal signed with Russia after embargo is lifted in UN last year


Here is article from Tehran news
Based on UN Security Council Resolution 2231, the arms embargo against Iran ended in October 2020.


"This trip is taking place at the beginning of the thirteenth administration, and Mr. Raisi's administration has a specific look to the East and Asian countries, and also the membership of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Shanghai Pact is an important event, and certainly the cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia will be further developed in this regard," Baqeri stated.


Major General Baqeri was visiting Moscow upon invitation by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.


"We are cooperating with the Armed Forces of Russia, and in recent years this cooperation has expanded further. At this juncture, my visit is at the invitation of the Russian Minister of Defense. In addition to the bilateral military issues that we have and should pursue, the issue of Afghanistan is one of the issues that will be specifically discussed by the two sides," Baqeri said upon his arrival in Moscow.


The top general stated that the events in Afghanistan would definitely affect the countries of the region, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation, and other countries, and these issues would be raised during the trip, Fars News reported.


The Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces said Iran and Russia have been cooperating in the fields of military training, military competitions, exchange of experiences, defense industry, and joint cooperation for full security in Syria.


Baqeri’s visit to Russia took place immediately after his travel to Pakistan, where the two countries agreed to hold joint naval exercises.

Wrong article..sorry


TEHRAN – In the latest sign of activating Iran’s new policy orientation, a senior Iranian general started a regional tour that included visits to two pivotal neighbors of the country in a bid to strengthen regional ties and dispel threats emanating from recent developments in the region.


Iran’s Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Bagheri arrived in Moscow on Sunday as part of his renewed efforts to improve relations with a number of Iran’s neighbors. The visit was done at the official invitation of Russian Defense Minister General Sergei Shoigu.


In addition to Shoigu, the Iranian general also met his Russian counterpart, Valery Gerasimov. During his visit, Bagheri discussed two main things: Arms deals with Russia and regional developments, especially Afghanistan.


The Iranian embassy in Moscow said in a mid-October announcement that Bagheri will “exchange views with Russian officials on the development of cooperation and joint defense and military relations, the fight against terrorism, and reviewing regional and international changes.”


*Bagheri himself said upon his arrival in Russia that he will pursue the implementation of an arms deal for purchasing fighter jets, training jets, and combat helicopters from Russia. During a meeting with Iranian experts at the Iranian embassy in Moscow, the senior general pointed out that the deal had been signed in the aftermath of the lifting of a UN arms embargo on Iran in October last year.*


He confirmed that discussions on mutual cooperation, defense, and military relations, the latest regional and international developments, as well as the fight against terrorism, are on the agenda of his visit to Moscow.


“We need a roadmap to have strong relations with countries, especially Russia and other neighboring countries,” the general said, according to Iran’s state news agency, IRNA.


The visit to Russia came at a time when Afghanistan still has no internationally recognized government in the wake of the Taliban’s takeover of Kabul. Iran has voiced concerns over the possible rise of terrorism in Afghanistan after the Taliban overran Kabul. Recent suicide attacks against Shi’ite prayers in two mosques in Afghanistan have only exacerbated these concerns. Iran warned of sectarian sedition in Afghanistan after these attacks claimed the lives of dozens of Shi’ite Muslims.


“The Foreign Ministry also warns of plots by the enemies of the Islamic ummah to cause divisions, and stresses the need for unity and solidarity among Shias and Sunnis and for rejection of violence and extremism in the name of Islam. This heart-wrenching incident and the past tragic events including the terrorist attack in Konduz highlight more than ever before the need for beefing up security and boosting protection of Shia and Sunni worshiping places and other gatherings in Afghanistan. The Islamic Republic of Iran is confident that our Muslim brothers and sisters in Afghanistan will foil the divisive schemes of their enemies through solidarity, co-thinking and joint efforts,” the Iranian foreign ministry said in a statement earlier this week.


Bagheri said the developments in Afghanistan were an important part of his talks with the Russian officials. His visit to Russia also came on the heels of another visit to Pakistan where he met with high-ranking Pakistani military officials to discuss Afghanistan.


In Moscow, Bagheri said he succeeded in dispelling “negative mentalities” just as he did in Pakistan.


General Bagheri rarely makes foreign visits. So, his tour of Pakistan and Russia is of real importance particularly in terms of reiterating the new trend in the foreign policy of Iranian President Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi’s administration, which is based on closer cooperation and consultations with neighboring countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

sanel1412 said:


> This is interesting,according to this..upon arival in Moscov,Bagheri said that His trip is follow up of the arms deal signed with Russia after embargo is lifted in UN last year
> 
> 
> Here is article from Tehran news
> Based on UN Security Council Resolution 2231, the arms embargo against Iran ended in October 2020.
> 
> 
> "This trip is taking place at the beginning of the thirteenth administration, and Mr. Raisi's administration has a specific look to the East and Asian countries, and also the membership of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Shanghai Pact is an important event, and certainly the cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia will be further developed in this regard," Baqeri stated.
> 
> 
> Major General Baqeri was visiting Moscow upon invitation by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.
> 
> 
> "We are cooperating with the Armed Forces of Russia, and in recent years this cooperation has expanded further. At this juncture, my visit is at the invitation of the Russian Minister of Defense. In addition to the bilateral military issues that we have and should pursue, the issue of Afghanistan is one of the issues that will be specifically discussed by the two sides," Baqeri said upon his arrival in Moscow.
> 
> 
> The top general stated that the events in Afghanistan would definitely affect the countries of the region, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation, and other countries, and these issues would be raised during the trip, Fars News reported.
> 
> 
> The Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces said Iran and Russia have been cooperating in the fields of military training, military competitions, exchange of experiences, defense industry, and joint cooperation for full security in Syria.
> 
> 
> Baqeri’s visit to Russia took place immediately after his travel to Pakistan, where the two countries agreed to hold joint naval exercises.
> 
> Wrong article..sorry
> 
> 
> TEHRAN – In the latest sign of activating Iran’s new policy orientation, a senior Iranian general started a regional tour that included visits to two pivotal neighbors of the country in a bid to strengthen regional ties and dispel threats emanating from recent developments in the region.
> 
> 
> Iran’s Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Bagheri arrived in Moscow on Sunday as part of his renewed efforts to improve relations with a number of Iran’s neighbors. The visit was done at the official invitation of Russian Defense Minister General Sergei Shoigu.
> 
> 
> In addition to Shoigu, the Iranian general also met his Russian counterpart, Valery Gerasimov. During his visit, Bagheri discussed two main things: Arms deals with Russia and regional developments, especially Afghanistan.
> 
> 
> The Iranian embassy in Moscow said in a mid-October announcement that Bagheri will “exchange views with Russian officials on the development of cooperation and joint defense and military relations, the fight against terrorism, and reviewing regional and international changes.”
> 
> 
> Bagheri himself said upon his arrival in Russia that he will pursue the implementation of an arms deal for purchasing fighter jets, training jets, and combat helicopters from Russia. During a meeting with Iranian experts at the Iranian embassy in Moscow, the senior general pointed out that the deal had been signed in the aftermath of the lifting of a UN arms embargo on Iran in October last year.
> 
> 
> He confirmed that discussions on mutual cooperation, defense, and military relations, the latest regional and international developments, as well as the fight against terrorism, are on the agenda of his visit to Moscow.
> 
> 
> “We need a roadmap to have strong relations with countries, especially Russia and other neighboring countries,” the general said, according to Iran’s state news agency, IRNA.
> 
> 
> The visit to Russia came at a time when Afghanistan still has no internationally recognized government in the wake of the Taliban’s takeover of Kabul. Iran has voiced concerns over the possible rise of terrorism in Afghanistan after the Taliban overran Kabul. Recent suicide attacks against Shi’ite prayers in two mosques in Afghanistan have only exacerbated these concerns. Iran warned of sectarian sedition in Afghanistan after these attacks claimed the lives of dozens of Shi’ite Muslims.
> 
> 
> “The Foreign Ministry also warns of plots by the enemies of the Islamic ummah to cause divisions, and stresses the need for unity and solidarity among Shias and Sunnis and for rejection of violence and extremism in the name of Islam. This heart-wrenching incident and the past tragic events including the terrorist attack in Konduz highlight more than ever before the need for beefing up security and boosting protection of Shia and Sunni worshiping places and other gatherings in Afghanistan. The Islamic Republic of Iran is confident that our Muslim brothers and sisters in Afghanistan will foil the divisive schemes of their enemies through solidarity, co-thinking and joint efforts,” the Iranian foreign ministry said in a statement earlier this week.
> 
> 
> Bagheri said the developments in Afghanistan were an important part of his talks with the Russian officials. His visit to Russia also came on the heels of another visit to Pakistan where he met with high-ranking Pakistani military officials to discuss Afghanistan.
> 
> 
> In Moscow, Bagheri said he succeeded in dispelling “negative mentalities” just as he did in Pakistan.
> 
> 
> General Bagheri rarely makes foreign visits. So, his tour of Pakistan and Russia is of real importance particularly in terms of reiterating the new trend in the foreign policy of Iranian President Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi’s administration, which is based on closer cooperation and consultations with neighboring countries.



Yes, it's official. No longer a rumour or a baseless fake news as in the past. This time around Iran really ordered fighter jets, trainer aircraft and military helicopters (either ground attack choppers or naval ones) from Russia. The Tweet shared by user Messerschmitt right above your post is saying the same (hence my remark in the other thread).

I'd be interested to know what the order is composed of. Especially since there's no guarantee if and when Russia is going to fulfill the contract. I imagine two to four squadrons of Su-35's (around 48 to 50 units) as these would suit Iran's requirements better than the Su-30 in this day and age, a comparable amount of Yak-130, but I've no idea as to the helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I had suspected this for a long time about the purchase of the Yak-130. It is an aircraft that can do combat too and the recent version that I have seen is really very good. Very powerful light fighter aircraft


----------



## aryobarzan

Yak-130 trainer/fighter is one of the most expensive at 30 to 35 million a piece..That would kill the Yaseen trainer project .


----------



## sanel1412

SalarHaqq said:


> Yes, it's official. No longer a rumour or a baseless fake news as in the past. This time around Iran really ordered fighter jets, trainer aircraft and military helicopters (either ground attack choppers or naval ones) from Russia. The Tweet shared by user Messerschmitt right above your post is saying the same (hence my remark in the other thread).
> 
> I'd be interested to know what the order is composed of. Especially since there's no guarantee if and when Russia is going to fulfill the contract. I imagine two to four squadrons of Su-35's (around 48 to 50 units) as these would suit Iran's requirements better than the Su-30 in this day and age, a comparable amount of Yak-130, but I've no idea as to the helicopters.


It really depends on what Russia was willing to offer in terms of cuting long range offensive capabilties,which they will probably implement,even this will not impact Iran,since it can easily integrate own precise munition for bomber role..still it can influence choice of aircraft..For example they will probably include only defansive weapons,like air to air weapons and short to medium range air to ground missiles...will see again,but I suppose they will try not upset a lot Israel...In past it was rumor about IRIAF want larger batch of SU-30 and small batch of SU-35 but this was probably due multirole capabilities since they saw probably more for less price..but if offensive weapons would be off the shelf than they would probably go for more airt to air capable aircraft as SU-35 since Iran has lot of option for bomber role,it has also good offensive weapons..so they would probably look for SU-35..there is also very advanced mig-35 version as option as addition...I saw delegation,there is IRIAF officers..Also dont forget there is China also as option,maybe they will balance..in terms of F-14 perfomance fighter..Russia is only option,but China has J-10 with AESA radar with very good weapons and very attractive future upgrade to long range AAM. SU-35 is best option if offensive air to ground and anti ship weapons would not be available...but if Russians offer everything than I would bet on larger SU-30 batch and smaller SU-35 batch...IRIAF wiould see better fit due SU-30 wider multi role application while still they can use it as force multiplier to SU-35 if need it in A-A role..in case Russians offer only defansive weapons pack than they will probably choose strongest platform SU-35 ...and as I said it may even offer SU-35 and Mig 35 as multi role platform,since MIG-35 would not upset Israel as large SU-30 and SU-35 batch with full pack...in that case it would give Iran significant offensive boost...even this cant be avoided even if Russians just sell Iran air to air missiles...Iran can equip these platforms easily with domestic weapons for anti ship and bomber role...But I still expect Russians dont sell some weapons or at least dont do it publicly so they can navigate with US,Israel and PGCC protests..even I never understood those idiots who buy billions of most advanced weapons and than protest when enemy do the same

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zathura

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1450107771970543622



I'll believe it when I see it delivered to Iran.


----------



## thesaint

Arms embargo was lifted last october, and this october they're talking about new arms purchase. My wild guess is there was agreement about one year of silence or wait.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Natalya Shadova

aryobarzan said:


> Yak-130 trainer/fighter is one of the most expensive at 30 to 35 million a piece..That would kill the Yaseen trainer project .


Dorna project too. Yak-130 seems unnecessary

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Natalya Shadova said:


> Dorna project too. Yak-130 seems unnecessary


Yes Dorna project was the lead to the Yaseen trainer..and Yaseen was at flight test stage last year...there was even talk about export version at 6 million per aircraft..if Yak purchase is indeed true then all that effort is out the door...I wait for actual news.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

My choice is the Su-35 and especially the latest advanced version of the Mig-35


----------



## SalarHaqq

aryobarzan said:


> Yes Dorna project was the lead to the Yaseen trainer..and Yaseen was at flight test stage last year...there was even talk about export version at 6 million per aircraft..if Yak purchase is indeed true then all that effort is out the door...I wait for actual news.



Yak wasn't mentioned by name, but the term trainer aircraft was explicitly cited in the news. Personally I wouldn't know what other Russian-made trainers could have been meant here, maybe there are others. However it had been reported several times in the past that Iran expressed interest in the Yak-130; then again, these reports weren't necessarily credible. Also, Iran has two distinct air forces... could it be that some of these are intended for the IRGCAF? I'd be surprised if it were the case, just contemplating theoretical hypotheses.

- - - - -



sanel1412 said:


> It really depends on what Russia was willing to offer in terms of cuting long range offensive capabilties,which they will probably implement,even this will not impact Iran,since it can easily integrate own precise munition for bomber role..still it can influence choice of aircraft..For example they will probably include only defansive weapons,like air to air weapons and short to medium range air to ground missiles...will see again,but I suppose they will try not upset a lot Israel...In past it was rumor about IRIAF want larger batch of SU-30 and small batch of SU-35 but this was probably due multirole capabilities since they saw probably more for less price..but if offensive weapons would be off the shelf than they would probably go for more airt to air capable aircraft as SU-35 since Iran has lot of option for bomber role,it has also good offensive weapons..so they would probably look for SU-35..there is also very advanced mig-35 version as option as addition...I saw delegation,there is IRIAF officers..Also dont forget there is China also as option,maybe they will balance..in terms of F-14 perfomance fighter..Russia is only option,but China has J-10 with AESA radar with very good weapons and very attractive future upgrade to long range AAM. SU-35 is best option if offensive air to ground and anti ship weapons would not be available...but if Russians offer everything than I would bet on larger SU-30 batch and smaller SU-35 batch...IRIAF wiould see better fit due SU-30 wider multi role application while still they can use it as force multiplier to SU-35 if need it in A-A role..in case Russians offer only defansive weapons pack than they will probably choose strongest platform SU-35 ...and as I said it may even offer SU-35 and Mig 35 as multi role platform,since MIG-35 would not upset Israel as large SU-30 and SU-35 batch with full pack...in that case it would give Iran significant offensive boost...even this cant be avoided even if Russians just sell Iran air to air missiles...Iran can equip these platforms easily with domestic weapons for anti ship and bomber role...But I still expect Russians dont sell some weapons or at least dont do it publicly so they can navigate with US,Israel and PGCC protests..even I never understood those idiots who buy billions of most advanced weapons and than protest when enemy do the same



True. Now there are a couple more questions.

One, why would the Russians sign such an agreement if they don't really think of delivering the aircraft? Under such circumstances, what exactly would they stand to gain apart from disappointing the Iranians over another weapons deal? I don't think it's the money, as Iran would be naive to accept making advance payments. Would it simply be a political bargaining chip vis a vis the US or even Tel Aviv? If so, how often could Moscow possibly pull this off, also in view of the pros and cons?

Two, what can be said about Iran's future defence programs in light of this news? Apparently Iran does wish to replace or enhance parts of its fleet through imports. Unless nobody in Tehran really believed that Russia will actually proceed with the sale, and the contract was in fact signed to serve some other goal (of geo-political nature).

What are the implications for possible long term domestic fighter projects? Would Iran have succeeded in including transfer of technology, local assembly and/or production of (spare) parts into the terms of the deal?

Three, in what ways would these items complement Iran's current defence capabilities and fit into its military doctrine?


----------



## TheImmortal

Natalya Shadova said:


> Dorna project too. Yak-130 seems unnecessary





aryobarzan said:


> Yes Dorna project was the lead to the Yaseen trainer..and Yaseen was at flight test stage last year...there was even talk about export version at 6 million per aircraft..if Yak purchase is indeed true then all that effort is out the door...I wait for actual news.








SalarHaqq said:


> Yak wasn't mentioned by name, but the term trainer aircraft was explicitly evoked in the news. Personally I wouldn't know what other Russian-made trainers could have been meant here, maybe there are others. However it had been reported several times in the past that Iran expressed interest in the Yak-130; then again, these reports weren't necessarily credible. Also, Iran has two distinct air forces... could it be that some of these are intended for the IRGCAF? I'd be surprised if it were the case, just contemplating theoretical hypotheses.
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> 
> 
> True. Now there are a couple more questions.
> 
> One, why would Russia sign such an agreement if they don't really think of delivering the aircraft? Under such circumstances, what exactly would be in it for them other than disappointing the Iranians over another weapons deal? I don't think it's the money, as Iran would be naive to accept making advance payments. Would it simply be a political bargaining chip vis a vis the US or even Tel Aviv? If so, how often could Moscow possibly pull this off, also in view of the pros and cons?
> 
> Two, what can be said about Iran's future defence programs in light of this news? Apparently Iran does wish to replace or enhance parts of its ageing fleet through imports. Unless nobody in Tehran really believed that Russia will actually proceed with the sale, and the contract was in fact signed to serve some other goal (of geo-political nature).
> 
> What are the implications for possible long term domestic fighter projects? Would Iran have succeeded in including transfer of technology, local assembly and/or production of (spare) parts among the terms of the deal?
> 
> Three, in what ways would these items complement Iran's current defence capabilities and fit into its military doctrine?



I told you guys over and over about the status of Iran’s domestic production. You choose all not to listen. Anyone that thinks that Yaseen or whatever name they are calling the 20 year development program for a trainer aircraft was a “serious” project clearly is a fanboy.

I mean the last time it was freaking green with mismatching panels reminded me of Frankstein. I have gone ahead and told you all that the Iranian airforce budget is by some accounts as low as 100M and def below .5B

On top of that, IRGC does not view manned aircraft as a serious necessity over drone technology. And even on top of that, the Shah era stick up their asses in Air Force only want foreign aircraft and are super super picky about what aircraft they will choose. So they won’t blow their limited funds or one chance on a Indian Tejas-like disaster project.

So like I said no funding + picky airforce + lack of intiative from top brass to transform the force (like you saw with Missile, AD, Navy) means basically airforce is dead in water till some genius visionary scientist and his team put together a decent engine on a shoestring budget against all odds to convince brass to change their mind. Disney should direct that movie.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Fighter Plane Supports Kowsar is a wonderful advanced technology from Iran and this plane is very far from a joke. And this plane continues to improve as the F-4 SM. I like to have 5 to 7 Kowsar as 1 su-35 for the same price! Tactical side and power, it's better.
> 
> And let Iran work their heavy combat planes. I read this week that we will soon have news of the F-313. Let's wait for more ...



Here our resident Baghdad Bob *ridiculing me in 2019* saying Qaher news is around the corner and how great Kowsar is vs having SU-35.

The above was in response to when I said Qaher is likely shelved project and Kowsar is at best 3-4 aircraft a year modernization project for F-5 (think Karrar on a micro scale).

Hmmm last I checked still very little Kowsars. Guess Iran is hiding them to scare the USA during war. And still haven’t seen a single flying Qaher 2 years after his great predictions....


Now here in *2021* telling us how much he loves SU-35 and Mig-35.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> My choice is the Su-35 and especially the latest advanced version of the Mig-35




It’s always great reading his posts. Brings a smile to my face knowing delusional people are allowed to use computers in the timarestan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> I told you guys over and over about the status of Iran’s domestic production. You choose all not to listen. Anyone that thinks that Yaseen or whatever name they are calling the 20 year development program for a trainer aircraft was a “serious” project clearly is a fanboy.
> 
> I mean the last time it was freaking green with mismatching panels reminded me of Frankstein. I have gone ahead and told you all that the Iranian airforce budget is by some accounts as low as 100M and def below .5B
> 
> On top of that, IRGC does not view manned aircraft as a serious necessity over drone technology. And even on top of that, the Shah era stick up their asses in Air Force only want foreign aircraft and are super super picky about what aircraft they will choose. So they won’t blow their limited funds or one chance on a Indian Tejas-like disaster project.
> 
> So like I said no funding + picky airforce + lack of intiative from top brass to transform the force (like you saw with Missile, AD, Navy) means basically airforce is dead in water till some genius visionary scientist and his team put together a decent engine on a shoestring budget against all odds to convince brass to change their mind. Disney should direct that movie.



That Iran has signed a contract to purchase trainer aircraft from abroad doesn't necessarily imply that it won't fall back on the Yasin or further developed iterations thereof in case the Russians fail to deliver.

Apparently now Iran is pretty much willing to mobilize the necessary funds to upgrade the air force to some extent, as exemplified by these same contracts, which is something of a novelty compared to the past two to three decades. This amount of money, which will surely be in the billions of USD, would actually go a long way boosting domestic programs if allocated to the latter.

As concerns the pickiness of IRIAF's older generation commanders, shah era officers have retired or are in the process of doing so. And although there's certainly some esprit de corps and some measure of doctrinal rigidity within any branch of an armed force, these aren't feudal fiefdoms either. Reluctant or uncooperative officials can be replaced if the upper echelon of political and military decision making truly deems it necessary. Forty two years would certainly have sufficed to bring about such a change of personnel and the associated way of thinking within the air force, had this really been considered as essential. It's never too late for such an endeavor though.

In any case, present discussions are fundamentally speculative at this point. There's not too much hard evidence available to the public, nor do known facts allow for indisputable logical inference as to what Iran is going to do in future when it comes to the air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iranitaakharin

SalarHaqq said:


> What are the implications for possible long term domestic fighter projects? Would Iran have succeeded in including transfer of technology, local assembly and/or production of (spare) parts among the terms of the deal?



It should be clear by now that fighters or aircraft are not priorities...


----------



## SalarHaqq

Iranitaakharin said:


> It should be clear by now that fighters or aircraft are not priorities...



That's certainly correct and I'm very much aware of it. Nonetheless recent contracts to purchase fighters and trainers from Russia are the first of their kind in nearly three decades. What does this signal?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Mr Iran Eye said:


> My choice is the Su-35 and especially the latest advanced version of the Mig-35


Mig35 suits desperate countries like Egypt that lack the basic technologies not Iran having own plans. 

If you Ask me, it is a grave mistake to waste resources on Foreign made assets. I just wonder what general Bagheri meant by the signed contracts! And pursuing them.


----------



## sanel1412

Muhammed45 said:


> Mig35 suits desperate countries like Egypt that lack the basic technologies not Iran having own plans.
> 
> If you Ask me, it is a grave mistake to waste resources on Foreign made assets. I just wonder what general Bagheri meant by the signed contracts! And pursuing them.


Mig 35 only has sense as additional fighter to SU35 ....IRIAF first choice will probably be larger batch of SU30 + smaller batch of SU35...in case Russian offer exclude their top line of offensive weapons than IRIAF may choose only SU35...that is of course just guess,there are many factors we don't know...Iran was always very strict and they will not buy anything that will not provide real ,strategic boost in capabilities...Mig 35 or J10 for Iran has sense only as additional fighter. Iran is huge and it needs heavy long range capable air superiorisuperiority or interceptor in addition to some also long range capable tactical bomber or multirole platform. This is why larger SU30 + smaller SU35 batches looks good option for IRIAF. And Iran has also existing fleet of F4,SU24 and SU22 with good anti ship and tactical bomber capabilities...Now,I am of opinion that Iran will balance between Russia and China...so they will probably buy from China also...now,it could be something else not related to air force ,but it could also be J10,...I hope we wiĺl hear some rumours. I don't think this contract will kill Iran domestic projects, contrary I think it will speed up things...Iran strategic decisions are all directed to self sufficient military in all aspects, including air force,with this contract Iran will get access to new technologies....S300 contract did not kill Iran Bavar project...in contrary, we saw only more Iranian air defence systems after...I think this will have same impact. In China, new platforms from Russia only boosted Chinese industry since they got insight every time in new technologies with every new platform...Iran military might increase will also have good impact on economy...since military conflict will be even less considered by Iran enemies and will lead for more stable Iran...In every conflict,we saw decrease of tensions after miltary balance ..I may be wrong but I based this opinion on previous experience...Even Iran is not China,I think it will follow same trajectory when it comes military industry..maybe not in same quantity but I expect access to new technologies available on new platforms would speed up things...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

request:
part of a share of 4 ++ generation 12/24 aircraft, the contract could include the purchase of engines to be used later for the fighter jet made in Iran, that is similar to what the Chinese had done with the J-10 and JF-17 ?


----------



## Natalya Shadova

TheImmortal said:


> I told you guys over and over about the status of Iran’s domestic production. You choose all not to listen. Anyone that thinks that Yaseen or whatever name they are calling the 20 year development program for a trainer aircraft was a “serious” project clearly is a fanboy.
> 
> I mean the last time it was freaking green with mismatching panels reminded me of Frankstein. I have gone ahead and told you all that the Iranian airforce budget is by some accounts as low as 100M and def below .5B
> 
> On top of that, IRGC does not view manned aircraft as a serious necessity over drone technology. And even on top of that, the Shah era stick up their asses in Air Force only want foreign aircraft and are super super picky about what aircraft they will choose. So they won’t blow their limited funds or one chance on a Indian Tejas-like disaster project.
> 
> So like I said no funding + picky airforce + lack of intiative from top brass to transform the force (like you saw with Missile, AD, Navy) means basically airforce is dead in water till some genius visionary scientist and his team put together a decent engine on a shoestring budget against all odds to convince brass to change their mind. Disney should direct that movie.


Yasin being green makes it fake how exactly? It had a very thin coat of paint so they could see problems in the flight test while it was flying like if something fell off, also since when was it a 20 year program

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Natalya Shadova said:


> Yasin being green makes it fake how exactly? It had a very thin coat of paint so they could see problems in the flight test while it was flying like if something fell off, also since when was it a 20 year program



It shows it was never a serious project but a “hobby project”.

And much like Kowsar being the end result of Saeghe which was the end result of Azkharash (spelling).

Iran’s trainer program has it roots back around the same time just test bed project after test bed project. Never any mass production.

I know it’s hard to accept reality sometimes, but maybe seek a doctor if you cannot.


----------



## aryobarzan

@TheImmortal ..color of yaseen trainer was just right during flight tests..you should have seen the colour of Osprey when I was working in Bell..I had to look at it every morning in the hanger..as for money for IRAF..obviously they have lots of it if they wanted to spend it .The "Build inside " lobby has lost to "buy outside lobby"..if they actually have a contract.
The rest of stuff about IRIAF WESTERN inclination you are right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> That's certainly correct and I'm very much aware of it. Nonetheless recent contracts to purchase fighters and trainers from Russia are the first of their kind in nearly three decades. What does this signal?



It seems the proverbial term living under a rock suits well here, no offense.

This isn’t the first “contract in nearly 30 decades”. Iran has been seeking Russian aircraft almost religiously and being screwed or rebuffed equally.

The TOR-M1 was Russian refusal to supply MIG-31 after agreeing to it and taking Iranian money.

Iran has been seeking Russian aircraft for a while even outside of what you hear the military declare....after all it would be embarrassing for military to say they signed or talked seriously about fighter jets then nothing happens for the 100th time.

The ball is in Russian court, I’m not optimistic.

1 year after arms embargo supposedly ended and we haven’t seen a single bullet be provided to Iran, let alone an advanced arms deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> ..as for money for IRAF..obviously they have lots of it if they wanted to spend it



They do not. Fun fact IRIAF actually makes money from its reliable repair hub facilities in the Middle East for other countries and itself. The amount of money it gets from defense budget....paltry. Most of its budget goes to overhauling and maintaining the fleet along with acquiring necessary technologies to keep fleet afloat. Very little funds are left for other R&D.

Also regards to Osprey comment, you are comparing a country that has the necessary infrastructure and supply chain in place to build and assemble 100+ advanced aircraft fairly easily and seamlessly.

Iran on the other hand very little infrastructure in place and they lack basic technologies as high grade titanium ovens needed for almost any major modern fighter (F-5 has very little fun fact).

So people who think it’s just build an engine and tommorrow Iranian SU-30 is flying are delusional. Sorry to be harsh. But it’s truth. Unless Iran is prepared committed to spend $1B+ to build out the necessary modern facilities and infrastructure and align and build supply chain management to allow for a 100+ yearly production rate of fighter Jets (trainer, heavy, semi heavy, etc) ON TOP OF the necessary funds to build a true serious effort for R&D into advanced manned fighter jets then all you are going to see is test beds for next decade.

Now I will say this and I have always said this, IF and it’s a BIG IF....if Iran can acquire modern fighter jets (SU-30, SU-35, SU-57, J-31) it will go A LONG way to helping Iran learn what technologies a true next gen fighter needs and how to build them.

Only can learn so much from looking at 3rd and 4th Gen aircraft from shah era along with some degraded Migs acquired after the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> It seems the proverbial term living under a rock suits well here, no offense.
> 
> This isn’t the first “contract in nearly 30 decades”. Iran has been seeking Russian aircraft almost religiously and being screwed or rebuffed equally.
> 
> The TOR-M1 was Russian refusal to supply MIG-31 after agreeing to it and taking Iranian money.
> 
> Iran has been seeking Russian aircraft for a while even outside of what you hear the military declare....after all it would be embarrassing for military to say they signed or talked seriously about fighter jets then nothing happens for the 100th time.
> 
> The ball is in Russian court, I’m not optimistic.
> 
> 1 year after arms embargo supposedly ended and we haven’t seen a single bullet be provided to Iran, let alone an advanced arms deal.



It's the first effectively signed contract as suggested by at least one of the two sides that I'm aware of.

The Tor-M1 / Mig-31 deal, I never saw evidence for this and to my knowledge there hasn't been an official confirmation. Considering the amount of imaginary reports over the past decades about Iran ordering this or that fighter jet from Russia or China, which proved baseless, I'd take any claim not made by the actual state authorities involved with a dose of salt.

Also, earlier you were claiming the Islamic Republic's top brass which calls the shots has never been that interested in ordering fighter jets, now you're claiming Iran's been desperate to do so. Make up your mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> They do not. Fun fact IRIAF actually makes money from its reliable repair hub facilities in the Middle East for other countries and itself. The amount of money it gets from defense budget....paltry. Most of its budget goes to overhauling and maintaining the fleet along with acquiring necessary technologies to keep fleet afloat. Very little funds are left for other R&D.
> 
> Also regards to Osprey comment, you are comparing a country that has the necessary infrastructure and supply chain in place to build and assemble 100+ advanced aircraft fairly easily and seamlessly.
> 
> Iran on the other hand very little infrastructure in place and they lack basic technologies as high grade titanium ovens needed for almost any major modern fighter (F-5 has very little fun fact).
> 
> So people who think it’s just build an engine and tommorrow Iranian SU-30 is flying are delusional. Sorry to be harsh. But it’s truth. Unless Iran is prepared committed to spend $1B+ to build out the necessary modern facilities and infrastructure and align and build supply chain management to allow for a 100+ yearly production rate of fighter Jets (trainer, heavy, semi heavy, etc) ON TOP OF the necessary funds to build a true serious effort for R&D into advanced manned fighter jets then all you are going to see is test beds for next decade.
> 
> Now I will say this and I have always said this, IF and it’s a BIG IF....if Iran can acquire modern fighter jets (SU-30, SU-35, SU-57, J-31) it will go A LONG way to helping Iran learn what technologies a true next gen fighter needs and how to build them.
> 
> Only can learn so much from looking at 3rd and 4th Gen aircraft from shah era along with some degraded Migs acquired after the war.


You are mixing all issue..I OBJECTED buying a trainer when your domestic program is in flight test ...fighter aircraft is a totally different issue.

About funds: they have (I mean the country of Iran)..IRIAF was not priority then...It is now ..if they actually signed a contract..

You are a "Buy" lobby...iam a "build" lobby..I spent 35 years looking and playing with Western tech...over rated is how I describe it.

I do not write long stories but I say build build and build..IRAN can do it..glad there are guys with same attitude in Iran ..that is why Iran is now on the map of defence tech..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal said:


> Here our resident Baghdad Bob *ridiculing me in 2019* saying Qaher news is around the corner and how great Kowsar is vs having SU-35.
> 
> The above was in response to when I said Qaher is likely shelved project and Kowsar is at best 3-4 aircraft a year modernization project for F-5 (think Karrar on a micro scale).
> 
> Hmmm last I checked still very little Kowsars. Guess Iran is hiding them to scare the USA during war. And still haven’t seen a single flying Qaher 2 years after his great predictions....
> 
> 
> Now here in *2021* telling us how much he loves SU-35 and Mig-35.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s always great reading his posts. Brings a smile to my face knowing delusional people are allowed to use computers in the timarestan.





There is no more than you delirious General TheImmortal especially on the subject of fighter planes. I never said the Kowsar is more awesome than the Su-35, you're crazy!

I said that the Kowsar is a very good fighter in its class and that Iran keeps improving it. Yes Iran hides war secrets. Iran is always further ahead than their public announcement process, ALWAYS! I was not speaking of Qaher but of Shafaq and I maintain my point. Underground, Iran has been working on certain planes for a long time.

That does not prevent having other fighter planes! Take your general pill, you seem very nervous

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Within the next decade I suspect that Iran will purchase several dozen SU-30 / SU-35 fighter jets from Russia and/or several dozen J-16 / J-10's from China. Iran has 150-200 fighter jets in its inventory. Many are simply too old to be reliable or air worthy anymore. The F-4's especially must be replaced after 10 more years of service.

When it comes to China, Iran wanted to trade oil for fighter jets. China was hesitant. However now with China's declining economy and energy shortage issues lately, those variables make the deal more likely than ever before.

Along with the fighter jets, trainers and drones/stealth drones that Iran already has in its inventory, that will be sufficient to keep Iran's airforce afloat. After this decade you will see Iran purchase 5th generation aircraft in the future when they are more common.

As a side note, Turkey is negotiating with the US to purchase another 40X F-16s along with 80X upgrade packages for older F-16s. They will use the funds they deposited for the failed F-35 deal to make the purchase.

I'm not surprised to see Bagheri in Moscow. Russia has been losing a large chunk of its sales to China and in recent years they have been having issues funding their future weapons programs like the SU-57 and T-15. Neither of those have been mass produced yet.

Now with China's energy shortage issues and economic issues, this made it much more likely that the deal with China would go through for the J-10 jets. For Russia losing another client to China is simply not acceptable.

Even 30X SU-30's are worth 2 billion and will likely guarantee future purchases. So the deal is worth more than 5 billion for the immediate future. I wouldn't be surprised if those funds go directly towards producing SU-57's. Russia has to catch up to China when it comes to 5th generation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Buying anything but a heavy fighter jet is outright treason. If they spend half the money they need to spend on trainer on Yasin and kowsar then we have 20 to 30 such airplanes each year not just 3 to 4 per year.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

it slips solid here!

Russia catching up with China for the 5th generation? This is not serious because Russia is more advanced than China on engines and the miniaturization of on-board technologies. Bigger doesn't mean more technologically advanced.

The Su 57 is technologically superior to the J-20! Better skill, faster, more maneuverable, better weapons, better radar and more. The Su 30 MK detects the J-20

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1450731403495288833

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1450729983169736704

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

sha ah said:


> Iran has 150-200 fighter jets in its inventory.



Iran has significantly more than 150-200 fighter jets in its inventory, even if some might be in storage. Don't rely on western officials and analysts, whose estimates in this regard are comparable to their (often deliberately) biased statements about the size of Iran's ballistic missile arsenal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Su 57 is technologically superior to the J-20! Better skill, faster, more maneuverable, better weapons, better radar and more.


Yes you are right.


Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Su 30 MK detects the J-20


Our neighbors call it "Raptor of East" but let me tell you its just bomb truck not some truly air superiority fighter jet.Guess why India moved to Rafael instead of SU 35?

And you are saying that Su 30 can detect J20? If its radars were so superior,why India needed Rafael?


----------



## Muhammed45

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Yes you are right.
> 
> Our neighbors call it "Raptor of East" but let me tell you its just bomb truck not some truly air superiority fighter jet.Guess why India moved to Rafael instead of SU 35?
> 
> And you are saying that Su 30 can detect J20? If its radars were so superior,why India needed Rafael?


Because everything from military hardwares that Indians touched turned to dust. 

They made some parts of SU30 in India and tried to get their hands on its technology as a part of their agreement. Guess what they screwed the fighter jet. 

That's why they are begging Russians for Russian upgrade package.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Deino

Mr Iran Eye said:


> it slips solid here!
> 
> Russia catching up with China for the 5th generation? This is not serious because Russia is more advanced than China on engines and the miniaturization of on-board technologies. Bigger doesn't mean more technologically advanced.
> 
> The Su 57 is technologically superior to the J-20! Better skill, faster, more maneuverable, better weapons, better radar and more. The Su 30 MK detects the J-20




What a stupid statement! ... and indeed the Indian MKI detected the J-20 since it carrier´d RCS-enhancer in order to increase its visibility on radar. So all these Indian did was lightning up the sky with all they had on radar and they saw a J-20, which was aimed to be seen ... so in consequence the PLAAF gathered all the info on any Indian radar system for nothing!

And yes, since the Su-57 is so much superior, it is still not in service.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

A source in Iran has confirmed that Iran's new government and IRIAF have decided and completed the process to get a batch of JF-17 over the next 8 years, with upgraded engine.

Does anyone have any sources that can confirm this or has anyone else heard of this in the last 24 hours?

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

EvilWesteners said:


> A source in Iran has confirmed that Iran's new government and IRIAF have decided and completed the process to get a batch of JF-17 over the next 8 years, with upgraded engine.
> 
> Does anyone have any sources that can confirm this or has anyone else heard of this in the last 24 hours?
> 
> Thanks.


Well Bagheri was in Pakistan and made some deal with Pakistan where PAkistan will train IRIAF personel in exchange for Pakistan spec. forces trainig in Iran has F-7 only that also fly in PAF,and Iran already has pilots trained in China for F-7 and currently there are some IRIAF pilots in China... this deal make sense in case Iran order JF.17,and I already said I expect some contract with China since Iran would more likely want to balance

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

It is overall capability of whole air force and military is what is important,not independent platforms and overall capability has nothing to do with simple subtraction of individual platforms or potential capability of it..Air force is even more unique when it comes to this and most capabilities dont even depend on aircraft itself..I know people play games these days a lot but it is nothing like that in reality. If it is,KSA would be 3th worlds strongest military but no one consider it to be in top 50...and will not be even if they buy every 5th and 4++ gen aircraft available....instead they would get a lot more if they spend that money to buid militay academies,military and science related universities..etc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> A source in Iran has confirmed that Iran's new government and IRIAF have decided and completed the process to get a batch of JF-17 over the next 8 years, with upgraded engine.
> 
> Does anyone have any sources that can confirm this or has anyone else heard of this in the last 24 hours?
> 
> Thanks.



Over next 8 years? Amazing....a Iran JF-17 4th Gen fighter will be going up against America’s 6th Gen fighter, next gen B-2, and next gen B-1.

If it takes 8 years to deliver all of JF-17 it better be coming with heavy ToT or complete production in Iran.

I have my doubts over this news...Iran has never liked Chinese fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Over next 8 years? Amazing....a Iran JF-17 4th Gen fighter will be going up against America’s 6th Gen fighter, next gen B-2, and next gen B-1.
> 
> If it takes 8 years to deliver all of JF-17 it better be coming with heavy ToT or complete production in Iran.
> 
> I have my doubts over this news...Iran has never liked Chinese fighters.



ANY purchase of aircraft is a waste against any major power like the US, Russia, or China today or in 8 years. I have my concerns about the news in its entirety.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> ANY purchase of aircraft is a waste against any major power like the US, Russia, or China today or in 8 years. I have my concerns about the news in its entirety.



Not true at all, SU-35, J-31, SU-57, J-20 all have technologies that Iranian defense contractors and military complex would LOVE to see up close and understand.

It would go LIGHT YEARS in advancing Iran’s knowledge of modern cutting edge fighter jet production, just like Rq-170 advanced Iran’s drone tech by a decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

TheImmortal said:


> The only reason the war continued was Khomeini’s instance on exporting the revolution to Iraq and rest of the Middle East. This false narrative your pushing that he did it to weaken Saddam from future attacks never existed. The military objectives by Iran were met (defense of its territorial integrity) instead he kept the war for 6 more years and then accepted the same ceasefire begrudgingly.


Originally it was not Khomeini who decided to continue the war, this "the war continued because Khomeini wanted to export the revolution" is actually the false narrative.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

EvilWesteners said:


> A source in Iran has confirmed that Iran's new government and IRIAF have decided and completed the process to get a batch of JF-17 over the next 8 years, with upgraded engine.
> 
> Does anyone have any sources that can confirm this or has anyone else heard of this in the last 24 hours?
> 
> Thanks.


Considering that the pakistanis could not even build their own section of the ip pipeline out of the fear of us displeasure,and the consequences that might bring,despite the fact that the pipeline would`ve provided their economy with much badly needed energy.Frankly it seems very unlikely that they would risk that same displeasure over something like weapons sales to iran.
In addition pakistan doesnt produce some of the most critical components and systems for the jf-17,such as the engine[russian or chinese] and the weapons[chinese],plus its the chinese who produce the bulk of the avionics.
Naturally one can see just how much this would have the potential to complicate the supplies of spares and technical support and back-up.
And of course the jf17,as a single engined light fighter,still doesnt solve irans main problem,which is a replacement for the f14. 
The only way that I could see this as being somewhat possible was if it was entirely done through china,but then if that was the case,why not simply go for the j10 instead,or the j16 for that matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Thanks everyone for replying.

What TheImmortal said above, " _*Iranian defense contractors and military complex would LOVE to see up close and understand*_. ", I have actually heard this so many times in the last 5+ years from so many people whose family members are in Iran, in IRIAF or retired recently.

I guess, Iran (rightfully) feels that they have fallen behind, and hence they don't like that.Both Su35 or Su30MKI (with India's knowledge) can bring Iran much closer to the latest tech in the AF combat arena.

JF17 for Iran is a replacement, I would guess - no other way would this make any sense - for F-5s or in some cases F4s. They would NOT regard them as front line air intercept/defense but rather quick air interdiction at low cost of operation, and relatively quick adoption into service since Iran is somewhat familiar with the engine and has some background with it (RD-93).

Pakistan and the gas pipeline had nothing to do with U.S., not really. Pakistan had its own problems, and interference from Saudis, and issues with India part of the pipeline.

J10s or J16s are not a fair comparison with Jf17, not really. All of them need Russia to approve the engine sale/provision. WS-10A not available for export.

Iran will still have a few more rounds of negotiations before we find out if the source in Isfahan is correct or not.

Still believe that Iran needs to get hold of an engine of its own, and everything else it can gradually build up.

Also, of course, TheImmortal has a good point, Iran does want to take a look at a Su35/Su30 up close and personal and use it and learn from it. Hopefully not buying too many and wasting too much money. Hope they get some TOT for it also, directly.

Thanks again to all that replied.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

sanel1412 said:


> It is overall capability of whole air force and military is what is important,not independent platforms and overall capability has nothing to do with simple subtraction of individual platforms or potential capability of it..Air force is even more unique when it comes to this and most capabilities dont even depend on aircraft itself..I know people play games these days a lot but it is nothing like that in reality. If it is,KSA would be 3th worlds strongest military but no one consider it to be in top 50...and will not be even if they buy every 5th and 4++ gen aircraft available....instead they would get a lot more if they spend that money to buid militay academies,military and science related universities..etc


VERY well said. Hence why Iran needs to have a fighter jet of its own, and able to do cost effective training, further R&D development, and a competent support and training industry of its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

SalarHaqq said:


> Iran has significantly more than 150-200 fighter jets in its inventory, even if some might be in storage. Don't rely on western officials and analysts, whose estimates in this regard are comparable to their (often deliberately) biased statements about the size of Iran's ballistic missile arsenal.


Western and Zionist "intelligence" about Iranian military capabilities is as good as their rosy outlook on Afghanistan and Iraq. The reality is that Iran has developed a quite formidable defence R&D, and production infrastructure that can produce quite sophisticated weaponry. Iran has successfully overhauled and upgraded a mix of US, Russian, Chinese and French aircraft in its inventory. IRIAF has one of the highest combat readiness capability is the world at about 80% (mission capable) as Iran produces most of domestic hybrid spared for F-5, F4E, and most commendably the F-14A Persian cats whose life span has been prolonged to well over 2035. Most Iranian airframes, avionics and engines have been overhauled and upgraded. Iran also operates the largest helicopter fleet in the region. So western and Zionist disinformation is mere nonsense and should be taken with a Chinook full of salt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Wonder why people won't get tired of these stories about Iran and jf-17.
Honestly it's get really boring.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Darius77

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder why people won't get tired of these stories about Iran and jf-17.
> Honestly it's get really boring.


I don't believe any of these speculations are worthy of even a comment. Iran does not need anymore 3.5 generation planes. We are already making the lightweight KOWSAR which is better. Iran is negotiating with Russia and China for J10 or SU-35 but no firm deal yet.




770 × 513


Kowsar fighter jet is a fourth-generation fighter aircraft designed and manufactured by state-owned Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO). It is the first fighter jet developed in Iran.


The development of Kowsar fighter aircraft has gained much more significance due to an arms embargo imposed by the US.








Kowsar Fighter Jet


Kowsar fighter jet is a fourth-generation fighter aircraft designed and manufactured by state-owned Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO).




www.airforce-technology.com





Designed to upgrade and strengthen the aerial defence capabilities of Iran, the aircraft is deployed by the Iran Army and Iran Air Force. It can also be used to support the training activities of fighter pilots.


The fighter jet replaces Iran’s age-old fighter aircraft, which were imported from the US and Russia. It also reduces Iran’s dependence on foreign countries for defence imports.


Three Kowsar fighter jets were delivered to Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force in June 2020.

*Kowsar fighter jet development details*

Kowsar’s development began in 2009 and the first prototype was exhibited at the MAKS 2017 international air show held at Zhukovsky international airport, Moscow, Russia, in July 2017. It is designed to perform close air support (CAS) and light attack operations.


The fully developed version of the aircraft was officially unveiled by Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Industries Company, an affiliate of IACO in August 2018. The fighter jet demonstrated its capabilities during its maiden flight in the same month.


A new production line for the manufacturing of Kowsar has been set up at Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Industries Company. Full-scale production of the aircraft commenced with the inauguration ceremony of the production line in November 2018. The aircraft flew over Tehran during the military parade at Iran’s annual National Army Day in April 2019.


736 × 414

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1451106422146703362

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Darius77 said:


> Iran is negotiating with Russia and China for J10 or SU-35 but no firm deal yet.



May I ask whether you'd have a source for this? Since Sardar Bagheri explicitly stated that contracts had been concluded consecutive to the lifting of the arms embargo a year ago. And Russia didn't deny it. So it's safe to assume that there is a firm deal already.

Now whether or not the Russians are going to abide by it and when is another matter. But I trust the Iranian official will not be spreading outright disinformation.

When it comes to China on the other hand, there's no information from officials of either side about any talks or deals, so everything's possible.


----------



## Darius77

SalarHaqq said:


> May I ask whether you have a source for this? Because Sardar Bagheri explicitly stated that contracts had been concluded consecutive to the lifting of the arms embargo a year ago. And Russia didn't deny it. So it's safe to assume that there is a firm deal already.
> 
> Now whether or not the Russians are going to abide by it and when is another matter. But I trust the Iranian official will not be spreading outright disinformation.
> 
> When it comes to China on the other hand, there's no information from officials of either side about any talks or deals, so everything's possible.


I have not seen any official confirmation in the usual reputable sources like SIPRI, Janes etc. If there is a confirmed Iranian government announcement then it is credible. Iran acknowledged the S-300 deal officially, and so did Russia. Buying fighter jets is a very major deal and can not remain secret for too long. I hope it goes through but till then it is best to wait and see what eventuates.

Personally, I believe Iran should go for a SU-30/35 and J-10 mix and also technology transfer. Iranian technical infrastructure is now quite capable of co-producing a 4th or even 5th generation aircraft. The 40 or so upgraded SU-22 are also a good interim arrangement for ground attack capability.


1300 × 957


1000 × 679


1920 × 1080

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

SalarHaqq said:


> May I ask whether you'd have a source for this? Since Sardar Bagheri explicitly stated that contracts had been concluded consecutive to the lifting of the arms embargo a year ago. And Russia didn't deny it. So it's safe to assume that there is a firm deal already.
> 
> Now whether or not the Russians are going to abide by it and when is another matter. But I trust the Iranian official will not be spreading outright disinformation.
> 
> When it comes to China on the other hand, there's no information from officials of either side about any talks or deals, so everything's possible.


I know that Bagheri said this but the fact that there is barely any other information is already suspicious unless there is a agreement to keep quiet on the matter. Iranian media is usually quick with leaking.


Darius77 said:


> I have not seen any official confirmation in the usual reputable sources like SIPRI, Janes etc. If there is a confirmed Iranian government announcement then it is credible. Iran acknowledged the S-300 deal officially, and so did Russia. Buying fighter jets is a very major deal and can not remain secret for too long. I hope it goes through but till then it is best to wait and see what eventuates.
> 
> Personally, I believe Iran should go for a SU-30/35 and J-10 mix and also technology transfer. Iranian technical infrastructure is now quite capable of co-producing a 4th or even 5th generation aircraft. The 40 or so upgraded SU-22 are also a good interim arrangement for ground attack capability.
> 
> 
> 1300 × 957
> 
> View attachment 786619
> 1000 × 679
> 
> 
> 1920 × 1080


Anything less than Su-35S and local production lines (engine designs, information sharing etc) will be useless. This is the first major arms deal in over 30 years.. we have to make the IRIAF one of the top air forces in the world again. Having said that, i doubt that the Russians are going to risk their ties with Israel and the US to provide Iran with sensitive tech. These Russians are unreliable. Their actions have proven this.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

Dariush the Great said:


> I know that Bagheri said this but the fact that there is barely any other information is already suspicious unless there is a agreement to keep quiet on the matter. Iranian media is usually quick with leaking.
> 
> Anything less than Su-35S and local production lines (engine designs, information sharing etc) will be useless. This is the first major arms deal in over 30 years.. we have to make the IRIAF one of the top air forces in the world again. Having said that, i doubt that the Russians are going to risk their ties with Israel and the US to provide Iran with sensitive tech. These Russians are unreliable. Their actions have proven this.


Could not agree with you more. The problem with Russia is that there is fragmented government and a lot of Zionist influence. They have even wavered in Ukraine and let the US and NATO puppets turn it into a base. Secondly, the Russians are no longer a USSR type "superpower" albeit a hollow one and are afraid of growing Iranian and Turkish influence in the Caucasus, which were Turk and Persian lands anyway. However, a truncated Russia of barely 140 million diverse people should think of Iran as a steady and powerful ally and the gatekeeper of Russia's weak southern flank. The US defeat in Afghanistan has dangers for Russia as well considering their restless Muslim population. A strong moderate Iran is in Russian interest. Hopefully, Shoigu and the GRU are better strategic thinkers and will support military cooperation and deals with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Darius77 said:


> I have not seen any official confirmation in the usual reputable sources like SIPRI, Janes etc. If there is a confirmed Iranian government announcement than it is credible. Iran acknowledged the S-300 deal officially. Buying fighter jets is a very major deal and can not remain secret for too long. I hope it goes through but till then it is best to wait and see what eventuates.



There is an official Iranian statement indeed.

See here (quote from the Tehran Times news report citing general Bagheri, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces - the most senior military position barring the commander in chief ie the Supreme Leader himself):

*Bagheri himself said upon his arrival in Russia that he will pursue the implementation of an arms deal for purchasing fighter jets, training jets, and combat helicopters from Russia. During a meeting with Iranian experts at the Iranian embassy in Moscow, the senior general pointed out that the deal had been signed in the aftermath of the lifting of a UN arms embargo on Iran in October last year.*

Link: https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/466173/Iran-embarks-on-military-diplomacy



> Personally, I believe Iran should go for a SU-30/35 and J-10 mix and also technology transfer. Iranian technical infrastructure is now quite capable of co-producing a 4th or even 5th generation aircraft. The 40 or so upgraded SU-22 are also a good interim arrangement for ground attack capability.
> 
> 
> View attachment 786619



That's also what I evoked as a hypothesis in a comment a couple of months ago. Depending on numbers of fighters ordered, Su-30/-35 and J-10 could replace F-4, F-1, Mig-29 and some of the types received from Iraq. The IRGCAF isn't going to get rid of its refurbished Su-22's. Tomcats as well will surely be maintained in service for as long as they can be kept operational. I'm no expert but the Su-24 might have some characteristics that warrant continued use even in the eventuality of the cited procurements (long range interdiction strike with low altitude flight). I don't know about the F-5. Given that Iran's producing local derivatives and given its light weight and the possibility to use it as a trainer, I guess they would keep them too.

However I'm not sure huge spendings would be rational right now given economic conditions. Furthermore a major procurement of fighters would not fit into Iran's defence doctrine. Perhaps was the latter amended to some extent, or maybe a fully revived air force does actually not contradict the doctrine if employed in a specific, corresponding manner. Then there's the risk that such a move would discourage domestic efforts to develop fighter jets (notice I'm referring to large procurements in this regard, not limited numbers).

I found it interesting to put into perspective the views expressed on this subject by regular and knowledgeable Iranian users. The way I see it, it would seem that there are four types of approaches to the question (more or less):

* Skeptics who would tend to advise against any purchase of fighter jets at this point.

* Users who, while fully endorsing and commending Iran's missile-based asymmetric doctrine, would still consider a limited order - especially of heavy interceptors rather than medium weight multirole fighters, as a useful and cost-effective enough complement to Iran's remaining weaponry. Including because it would boost domestic technological advancement in the field of aircraft design, especially if ToT is included in the deal (with a special focus on engine tech, the primary "bottleneck").

* Those with a more accommodating stance towards airpower in the Iranian context, who would welcome a more consequent acquisition of fighters to replace Iran's present fleet in numbers.

* Same as above, but conditioning any such voluminous order on transfer on technology.

- - - - -



Dariush the Great said:


> I know that Bagheri said this but the fact that there is barely any other information is already suspicious unless there is a agreement to keep quiet on the matter. Iranian media is usually quick with leaking.
> 
> Anything less than Su-35S and local production lines (engine designs, information sharing etc) will be useless. This is the first major arms deal in over 30 years.. we have to make the IRIAF one of the top air forces in the world again. Having said that, i doubt that the Russians are going to risk their ties with Israel and the US to provide Iran with sensitive tech. These Russians are unreliable. Their actions have proven this.



I've concurred time and again that there's a chance the deal won't materialize, no question about that. But signed deal there definitely is. Surely Iran's highest ranking military person isn't going to issue a blatant untruth on the subject. That in itself (ie an existing, finalized deal) was dismissed as unrealistic by many observers, yet here we are.

As for what would make sense for Iran to order from Russia, and what place the air force should have considering Iran's concrete needs and requirements, a variety of views have been expressed so far. I tried to present a schematic breakdown of these standpoints above. Personally, I'm more convinced by the asymmetric approach. It has successfully preserved Iran from aggression by the sole superpower for the past decades. However, I think a limited order even of Su-30's might prove beneficial including when it comes to the domestic industry. Just my thoughts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Not true at all, SU-35, J-31, SU-57, J-20 all have technologies that Iranian defense contractors and military complex would LOVE to see up close and understand.
> 
> It would go LIGHT YEARS in advancing Iran’s knowledge of modern cutting edge fighter jet production, just like Rq-170 advanced Iran’s drone tech by a decade.



Cool. Then we will need a couple of each. Not fleets or squadrons. Regardless, what you say is not true at all, there is nothing in these the Iranians don't know about -- don't forget sensitive hardware won't be delivered by the provider. It's the tooling, machining, and manufacturization that Iran needs ...not the actual product. Perhaps the price of that means buying a dozen more craft than actually needed. My hope is the conversations do not dwell on the bells and whistles but on the ToT.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Nevsky

Dariush the Great said:


> Having said that, i doubt that the Russians are going to risk their ties with Israel and the US to provide Iran with sensitive tech. These Russians are unreliable. Their actions have proven this.


Not really, my friend, theres a difference between Russian Federation from the years before 2013 and the Russian Federation now. The illusions about some kind of a good relations with the USA are long gone, noone in the Kremlin believes in those stuff anymore. I doubt that someone in Moscow is willing to sacrifice a potential close alliance with Iran in the name of Israel or USA.



Darius77 said:


> Could not agree with you more. The problem with Russia is that there is fragmented government and a lot of Zionist influence. They have even wavered in Ukraine and let the US and NATO puppets turn it into a base. Secondly, the Russians are no longer a USSR type "superpower" albeit a hollow one and are afraid of growing Iranian and Turkish influence in the Caucasus, which were Turk and Persian lands anyway. However, a truncated Russia of barely 140 million diverse people should think of Iran as a steady and powerful ally and the gatekeeper of Russia's weak southern flank. The US defeat in Afghanistan has dangers for Russia as well considering their restless Muslim population. A strong moderate Iran is in Russian interest. Hopefully, Shoigu and the GRU are better strategic thinkers and will support military cooperation and deals with Iran.


Theres no such a thing as a government in the RF, its all about Putin, he is everything and he controls anything, theres no opposition, the so called one in the Federal Assembly is a complete joke and is doing what Putin wants it to do. The other opposition is barley surviving, almost all of its leaders were thrown away from the country in the last months, the one who refused to move out are in jail. So Im not really sure what are you talking about when you talk about Zionist influence.

There are no US or NATO troops in Ukraine at the moment, on the other hand its a base for an anti-Russian hysteria, no doubt about that. Its true that Putin abandoned the people in Odessa, Kharkov and even Donetsk and Lugansk and he did it because he was scared about the consequences for his regime. He took the risk and took Crimea, but when Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkov were about to do the same referendum, he told them to stop, the people in Kharkov gave up, the ones in Donetsk didnt and you see where they are today. Putin wants to rule the country with the economy being as stable as possible, so the people are not too upset about him and his politics and keep believing that he is the only one from the 150 millions that is fit to rule. If he actually annexed the Southeast part of Ukraine, which is around 250 000 km2 into RF no one in the world would accept that. Russian economy couldnt survive it, his regime couldnt survive it either.

I dont think that Turkey has a real influence in Caucasus. Erdogan and Aliev are friends and thats it, no one knows what will happen when one of them is gone. Few years ago Aliev said that if NATO help them on Karabakh they will join NATO, if CSTO helps them, they will join it. I dont really believe in the azeri-turks brotherhood, when their two presidents are gone they will both turn upside down.

As for Iran, I cant see a rival between Moscow and Teheran in the region, our countries have a good relation, we are both friends with Armenia. The experience and the bonds that were build in the Syrian conflict are really important and will help a lot in the future. I do agree that we can only benefit if Iran is strong, rich and stable. Neither of us cant go one on one against NATO, GCC or Israel in the region, so I think RF and Iran need each other to materialize our politics in the region...

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
2


----------



## jauk

Nevsky said:


> Not really, my friend, theres a difference between Russian Federation from the years before 2013 and the Russian Federation now. The illusions about some kind of a good relations with the USA are long gone, noone in the Kremlin believes in those stuff anymore. I doubt that someone in Moscow is willing to sacrifice a potential close alliance with Iran in the name of Israel or USA.
> 
> 
> Theres no such a thing as a government in the RF, its all about Putin, he is everything and he controls anything, theres no opposition, the so called one in the Federal Assembly is a complete joke and is doing what Putin wants it to do. The other opposition is barley surviving, almost all of its leaders were thrown away from the country in the last months, the one who refused to move out are in jail. So Im not really sure what are you talking about when you talk about Zionist influence.
> 
> There are no US or NATO troops in Ukraine at the moment, on the other hand its a base for an anti-Russian hysteria, no doubt about that. Its true that Putin abandoned the people in Odessa, Kharkov and even Donetsk and Lugansk and he did it because he was scared about the consequences for his regime. He took the risk and took Crimea, but when Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkov were about to do the same referendum, he told them to stop, the people in Kharkov gave up, the ones in Donetsk didnt and you see where they are today. Putin wants to rule the country with the economy being as stable as possible, so the people are not too upset about him and his politics and keep believing that he is the only one from the 150 millions that is fit to rule. If he actually annexed the Southeast part of Ukraine, which is around 250 000 km2 into RF no one in the world would accept that. Russian economy couldnt survive it, his regime couldnt survive it either.
> 
> I dont think that Turkey has a real influence in Caucasus. Erdogan and Aliev are friends and thats it, no one knows what will happen when one of them is gone. Few years ago Aliev said that if NATO help them on Karabakh they will join NATO, if CSTO helps them, they will join it. I dont really believe in the azeri-turks brotherhood, when their two presidents are gone they will both turn upside down.
> 
> As for Iran, I cant see a rival between Moscow in Teheran in the region, our countries have a good relation, we are both friends with Armenia. The experience and the bonds that were build in the Syrian conflict are really important and will help a lot in the future. I do agree that we can only benefit if Iran is strong, rich and stable. Neither of us cant go one on one against NATO, GCC or Israel in the region, so I think RF and Iran need each other to materialize our politics in the region...


Well said. I agree. Of course there are naysayers in both camps. However, I see a strategic partnership is mutually beneficial. What's good is that, unlike in the western camp, this partnership will be based on cold calculation rather than some spurious religio-social basis which will be neither enduring nor effective. China is part of this calculation too. Iran today is a 'peer' power--better partners than not. The question remains with Turkey...hopefully they will come to their senses.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Over next 8 years? Amazing....a Iran JF-17 4th Gen fighter will be going up against America’s 6th Gen fighter, next gen B-2, and next gen B-1.


Why should Iran worry too much when US already has so much and still got beat by rag tag taliban?

I have to warn all of you hyping up US and ISraeli "military technology"....the more tech they have, the more they lose their wars. FACT! Over reliance on military technology usually leads to losses, because that also leads to under reliance on other critical factors that affect war outcomes. 

White man is just getting more and more scared to fight and die....for something he might not even see.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

925boy said:


> military technology"....the more tech they have, the more they lose their wars.


Had the world listened to you 😹.

Man they have Russia and China to compete on world stage with their military supperiority.
Why US can sanction us every now and then.well because they have worked really hard to achieve this level.
Watch their movies level,here our movies are not passing from love stories,they are preparing their generations to rule in space.

Hell their movies are inspiring our students also.Their are many cases in Pakistan universities where students worked on some technology because of inspiration from Hollywood sci fiction movies.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Dariush the Great said:


> Anything less than Su-35S and local production lines (engine designs, information sharing etc) will be useless.




There is a greater chance that Rouhani and Zarif get married then your statement coming true.

Iran asked for small amount of SU-35 and possible limited SU-30 tech transfer and was told that not only would they not supply SU-35 or SU-30.....No ToT and the best fighter they could buy was SU-22 or SU-27. 

That a few years maybe more and it was exactly like Bagheri trip now. I remember it the Generals went to Russia and said they were interested in fighter jets and then nothing was heard of again despite the spin Iran gave afterwards. Rumors came out that Russia balked at any significant fighter jet being sold to Iran.

So if Russia even gives us the old AL-21 engine designs, blueprints, material/turbine fabrication tech, etc etc you would literally have to thank Russia for the rest of your life that’s how huge it would. So forget about AL-31 (SU-30) or AL-41 (SU-35) because there is zero chance Russia gives away its premier engine tech to some “brown” people country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This will not surprise me because it is a very powerful and advantageous aircraft

Iran acquires Russian MIG-35s?

The analytical website Military Watch Magazine, which covers military information on the international scene, announced on Thursday (September 5th) the possible decision of five countries, including Iran, to purchase the new Russian-made MIG-35 fighter.

"Five countries - Iran, India, Belarus and North Korea - are believed to be significant and potential customers of Russia's new MIG-35 fighter," the report read.

The MIG-29 is the more modern aircraft of the Iranian Air Force. Two squadrons as well as two US F-14 Tomcat make up the country's elite air force. The acquisition of the Russian MiG-35 would optimize its potential after several decades.

The modern air-to-air missile fighter's equipment, especially the K-77, and powerful sensors, range and maneuverability will go a long way in bridging the current gap with other fighters deployed in the region, such as the F -35 Israeli and the Saudi F-15.

The MIG-35 could replace aging American hardware, such as the F-5 and F-4 jets, which have been in use for more than 40 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jupiter2007

Majority of Iranian fighter jets are old and in need of replacement. I don’t think off the shelf solution will work for you Iran. 
I think Iran should ask China for Joint ventures on 4.5 generation fighter with 50% TOT and state of the art manufacturing facility in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MMCM

jupiter2007 said:


> Majority of Iranian fighter jets are old and in need of replacement. I don’t think off the shelf solution will work for you Iran.
> I think Iran should ask China for Joint ventures on 4.5 generation fighter with 50% TOT and state of the art manufacturing facility in Iran.


I think Iran should put a request (jokingly just to piss off the Zionists) to the Yanks for 100+ F-16s and 80+ F-15s ,believe me the big wigs at Boeing and Lockheed will be salivating at such a order they'll be lobbying Washington for approval


Mr Iran Eye said:


> This will not surprise me because it is a very powerful and advantageous aircraft
> 
> Iran acquires Russian MIG-35s?
> 
> The analytical website Military Watch Magazine, which covers military information on the international scene, announced on Thursday (September 5th) the possible decision of five countries, including Iran, to purchase the new Russian-made MIG-35 fighter.
> 
> "Five countries - Iran, India, Belarus and North Korea - are believed to be significant and potential customers of Russia's new MIG-35 fighter," the report read.
> 
> The MIG-29 is the more modern aircraft of the Iranian Air Force. Two squadrons as well as two US F-14 Tomcat make up the country's elite air force. The acquisition of the Russian MiG-35 would optimize its potential after several decades.
> 
> The modern air-to-air missile fighter's equipment, especially the K-77, and powerful sensors, range and maneuverability will go a long way in bridging the current gap with other fighters deployed in the region, such as the F -35 Israeli and the Saudi F-15.
> 
> The MIG-35 could replace aging American hardware, such as the F-5 and F-4 jets, which have been in use for more than 40 years.


I thought the IRIAF wasn't too impressed with the Mig-29?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Putin tells Bennett Israel needs to better coordinate Syria strikes


***




www.haaretz.com





Keep dreaming that Iran will get anything worthwhile from Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jupiter2007

TheImmortal said:


> Putin tells Bennett Israel needs to better coordinate Syria strikes
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.haaretz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep dreaming that Iran will get anything worthwhile from Russia.




Now that Chinese are able to make their own engines, they don’t have to relay on Russia. Iran’s best bet is to go with Chinese for both short and long term solution.
Iran need to decom old junk and go for 4th and 4.5 generation fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

jupiter2007 said:


> Now that Chinese are able to make their own engines, they don’t have to relay on Russia. Iran’s best bet is to go with Chinese for both short and long term solution.
> Iran need to decom old junk and go for 4th and 4.5 generation fighters.


I think you're making sense - Chinese junk fighter jet in hand is worth more than Russia "superior"fighter jet that has Iranian paint but lives long term in a Russia factory.


----------



## EvilWesteners

I have called just about everyone I could get hold of, THAT MAY KNOW, so I can get confirmation about Iran's PRECISE deal for purchase from Russia, be it Su30/35 or any other platform.

As usual, I could NOT find out anything with certainty. Iranians (most, not all) would love to say, "I know, I know, ... they are buying ...". But when you ask them for INDISPUTABLE evidence, then the story changes.

If Iran is in the process of making a AF equipment purchase, having been a part of this in the West wherever I worked, (at least at some small part of delivery or maintenance setup, etc.), I hope Iran achieves the following with this purchase:

*1. *Utilizing leverage, where it is sensible for Iran to give up a lot, BUT for a worthy gain. If it is follow-on orders leverage, or leveraging Russia-vs-China, or paying in Gold instead of commodities (crude/aluminum ingots/petrochemicals etc.) whatever it may be, it is NOT quantity that necessarily suits Iran from making a purchase, but rather QUALITY Iran needs. Iran can on its own do quantity and this would not be a worthy leverage in a purchase of this type/magnitude. Remember the F-14 purchase? Or even, the Mig29 in 1990? Catastrophes Iran can learn from today.

*2. *Iran AF should be VERY WELL aware and focused on gaining knowledge AND (not OR) acquiring top missile weapons, eg. high-end BVR and top A2A and A2S weapons. If Russia cannot deliver the R37 and China cannot deliver PL-21, then it is better to leverage time, and may be other things, until they do. Every experienced AF tactician would agree that AF needs to have a good platform (aircraft), but it is CRITICAL to have high-end A2A missiles that are the latest and most capable, specially in BVR.

*3.* With every large purchase, TIME is of essence. I may have left this to #3 on my list, but it is most important that Iran can leverage this adequately. Even if (let's say) they have agreed to purchase Su35s with manufacturing starting in 2022, and deliveries in 2023, and integration into Iran's AF in 2024 ... nothing stops Iran to purchase at least couple of older Su35s currently in Russian AF that they can sell as well so Iran can get started with testing and adoption, and also, Iran can purchase 100+ AL21F engines (old ones) for its F4s/Su22s/Su24s and make sure it can bring those aircrafts to fully ready state after overhaul and with new engines.

I can list at least 20 others things but I am hoping that Iran's AF is not feeling desperate and can hold its own in this purchase agreement. I saw what they did in 2015 with the purchase of ATR 72-600s, and I was not much impressed (not AF deal of course).

Finally, Iran has to set its sights on the most essential technology of air force and that is AESA radar. If they want to purchase Su35s with hybrid PESAs and integrated SSA, that is fine. Beggars can't be choosers. But at least have a plan for getting AESA in the near future, through China or Russia. China is a bit further ahead. Without AESA Iran is way behind in technology. It would have a serious problem mounting a worthy defense, ESPECIALLY with low quantities as they are talking about for a huge country like Iran whose enemies have coalitions that include some 5,000+ high end aircrafts and satellite communications.

AESA or as I like to think of it, radio-optical phased active antenna array radar gives you significant performance advantage including hugely increase range, resolution to jamming resistance & LPI characteristics, substantially increased pencil beam sensitivity, much much higher performing processors giving vastly superior multi-tasking, multi-mode, higher categorization and engagement accuracy, for near simultaneous Air-Air and Air-Ground operations.

AESA has to be on the target list of Iran's AF in the near future.

Iran also has to consider investing more in R&D. It just has to.

Let us all hope.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

EvilWesteners said:


> It would have a serious problem mounting a worthy defense, ESPECIALLY with low quantities as they are talking about for a huge country like Iran whose enemies have coalitions that include some 5,000+ high end aircrafts and satellite communications.


McNamara fallacy here? (overreliance on the "numbers" to make an argument when there are other important factors, SUCH AS, the fact that despite having "5000" high end aircrafts, they still arent willing to sacrifice 1 pilot's life to fight IRan, so in essence, those 5000 aircraft are as good as the ones we have in our war video games. Even when it was time to patrol the Persian gulf against Iran, Trump still went to beg europeans to build a coalition,and they could only muster 3 puny ships to enter the gulf....but you will anyone can then tell us " but these countriese economies are in the $gazillions from their combined GDP"...then why so afraid of a broke country like North Korea or Iran? just sayin!! military equipment and bravery are 2 completely different issues.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Having xx number of aircrafts on papper,and number of aircrafts they can deploy without prompting China to invade Taiwan or Russia to enter Ukraine..those are completly 2 different things..US is withrawing from Middle east to counter China,exactlly because they knew they need so many troops to fight Iran,if deployed they would loose two strategic area. Even their latest report about US capabilities,admit US can fight war with one advesaries but not two major wars..For crappy Iraq in 2003,they spent more than 6 months to build military assets to invade Iraq,I remeber like it was yesterday..they started with build up around September and entered Iraq like in April next year...Also..I suppose they need something left at home..just in case..they are deployed around the world..so their capabilities are spread ...and also their military is completly different in nature,offensive capabilities are something it is much expensive to build than defansive.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

925boy said:


> McNamara fallacy here? (overreliance on the "numbers" to make an argument when there are other important factors, SUCH AS, the fact that despite having "5000" high end aircrafts, they still arent willing to sacrifice 1 pilot's life to fight IRan, so in essence, those 5000 aircraft are as good as the ones we have in our war video games. Even when it was time to patrol the Persian gulf against Iran, Trump still went to beg europeans to build a coalition,and they could only muster 3 puny ships to enter the gulf....but you will anyone can then tell us " but these countriese economies are in the $gazillions from their combined GDP"...then why so afraid of a broke country like North Korea or Iran? just sayin!! military equipment and bravery are 2 completely different issues.



My brother, you are correct to a certain degree.

However, I have sat on a dinner table since I was about 7 years old (my early consciousness of war talk at dinner table with my family) next to individuals in the AF or Army Aviation or training for either. Yes, we can be brave, and we are brave, and I hope at the same time, we are not careless.

Two of my favorite people on this forum, which I love reading their posts and knowing their perspectives, are now BANNED. For what? For being brave and making comments against others, which may or may not have deserved it. Brave alone doesn't make a country strong. A strong country needs to make the right decisions, through crystal clarity of thinking. Can you imagine if Iran has worked with Mongols and not had cut off the heads of their ambassador and companion what Iran could have been - and still to this day?

Our adversaries have 5000+ high end fighter/bombers and STILL they are very careful how they display their power projection, and excessively plan their adventurism. Also, preparing coalitions and allies prior to a war is a very smart idea, considering what resources you MAY NEED at a later stages of the war, as it progresses.

One of my favorite books is Martin Dempsey's "Radical Inclusion". But not just this one, but many others, talk about U.S. power being effective ONLY due to its ability to use economical coercion/intimidation/seduction to BUILD AND USE ALLIES for U.S.'s needs/demands.

Remember how France & Germany asked U.S. to wait 3 month for the inspectors in Iraq to do their work in 2002, so U.S. called them OLD EUROPE, then went to Czech Republic and Poland, (and others) offered them economic packages and got them to support U.S. invasion of Iraq on March 15th, 2003. It even got the congress together in 4 hours to pass a bill to change FRENCH FRIES to FREEDOM FRIES. Why would U.S. consider having a coalition/allies as being so important when they can alone pummel Iraq?

Iran should be smart with purchasing AF equipment, not just for war preparations. Military is an insurance service, as was once said by Eric Shinseki, 4-star general that stood against a President and the entire military command backed him up. 

All these weapons are ONLY a small part of a defense doctrine. Every military chief preparing for war, FIRST asks for 2 things: 1) food supplies, and 2) ammunition supplies. Then they go down the list of all the strategies, logistics, strike missions, protection of its troops, access ways, etc. etc.

Just because Iran is brave, WE SHOULD NOT IGNORE ALL THE ESSENTIAL THINGS THAT PROTECT IRAN, NOR SHOULD WE BE CAVALIER WITH THE LIVES OF IRANIANS, ESPECIALLY THE BRAVE ONES THAT YOU MENTION. WE SHOULD ONLY EXPEND THEIR LIVES IF WE KNOW WITH A CERTAIN DEGREE OF CERTAINTY THAT THE END RESULTS WAS WORTHY OF THEIR VALOR AND SACRIFICE. 

We should not be careless with the lives of our most precious resource: our brave defenders of our land.

With respect.


sanel1412 said:


> Having xx number of aircrafts on papper,and number of aircrafts they can deploy without prompting China to invade Taiwan or Russia to enter Ukraine..those are completly 2 different things..US is withrawing from Middle east to counter China,exactlly because they knew they need so many troops to fight Iran,if deployed they would loose two strategic area. Even their latest report about US capabilities,admit US can fight war with one advesaries but not two major wars..For crappy Iraq in 2003,they spent more than 6 months to build military assets to invade Iraq,I remeber like it was yesterday..they started with build up around September and entered Iraq like in April next year...Also..I suppose they need something left at home..just in case..they are deployed around the world..so their capabilities are spread ...and also their military is completly different in nature,offensive capabilities are something it is much expensive to build than defansive.



Good point. I have suggested that before. U.S. is weary of Russia's move in Ukraine and China's move in Taiwan, in case of a U.S. war with Iran.

However, my point was that conflicts should be taken into consideration (no matter how unlikely) when making a strategic AF acquisition.

If Israel and UAE and Turkey started a war with Iran, how many aircrafts will they have at their disposal when all of NATO will be forced to come to help them? When Iran threatens the economic lifeline of the world, why will the rest of the world support?

Iran military command think about these issues very carefully, that is why it took them a few days to respond to Soleimani's assassination, and yet with very limited response.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

*EvilWesteners

Yes,sure..Iran must consider war,no matter how unlikely it is..at the end many wars were fought even no side actually wanted it...sometime it happens due miscalculations..sometimes there is 3th side..till 2015 I was always afraid Israel could start a war to force US to fight and prevent deal,*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Crimson Blue

jupiter2007 said:


> I think Iran should ask China for Joint ventures on 4.5 generation fighter with 50% TOT and state of the art manufacturing facility in Iran.




Such dreams......

China did not even agree on joint venture manufacturing of VT-4 tanks with Pakistan, when they were already collaborating on Al-Khalid tank.

Russia never ever given their data link technology to India even when they were on best of terms & India was procuring $9 billion worth of arms every year from Russia.

Russia declined to share the PAK-FA tech with India even though it was a collaboration project between India & Russia. 

Pakistan is trying to negotiate favorable terms for J-10 aircrafts for past 10 years now, not even including any TOT or local manufacturing and Chinese are not budging even on purchase price per unit.

and people think that China or Russia would just give away their 4.5 gen tech to Iran just like that..... I am just speechless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jupiter2007

Crimson Blue said:


> Such dreams......
> China did not even agree on joint venture manufacturing of VT-4 tanks with Pakistan, when they were already collaborating on Al-Khalid tank.
> 
> *Answer: First of all, did Pakistan asked for ToT for VT-4 Tank? You know that TOT is more expensive than buying something of the shelf. Why would Pakistan want TOT when we are already working on Al-Khalid 2 Tank and possibly another variant in the future?*
> 
> 
> Russia never ever given their data link technology to India even when they were on best of terms & India was procuring $9 billion worth of arms every year from Russia.
> 
> Russia declined to share the PAK-FA tech with India
> though it was a collaboration project between India & Russia.
> 
> *Answer: That’s between Russia and India. India blackout of the project. *
> 
> Pakistan is trying to negotiate favorable terms for J-10 aircrafts for past 10 years now, not even including any TOT or local manufacturing and Chinese are not budging even on purchase price per unit.
> 
> *Answer: China offered J-10 to Pakistan but due to it’s capabilities and price tag (65 million), Pakistan decided not to acquire it. Pakistan hasn’t been negotiating for Ten years. Pakistan and USA relationship started deteriorating after 2016. Pakistan started negotiations for J-10 after US confirmed that no more new F-16s.*
> 
> and people think that China or Russia would just give away their 4.5 gen tech to Iran just like that..... I am just speechless.
> 
> *Answer: Russia and China both will be more than happy and willing to share technology for the right price. It all depend on Iran and what it’s future plans are. We use the term TOT very loosely, it is never 100% TOT, it more or less 50% to 60%*



You can be speechless all you want but facts remain the same.


----------



## Crimson Blue

jupiter2007 said:


> *Answer: Russia and China both will be more than happy and willing to share technology for the right price*




Yeah sure. I'll be here on this forum. Let me know when Iran gets gen 4.5 tech at the right price.


----------



## Darius77

Nevsky said:


> Not really, my friend, theres a difference between Russian Federation from the years before 2013 and the Russian Federation now. The illusions about some kind of a good relations with the USA are long gone, noone in the Kremlin believes in those stuff anymore. I doubt that someone in Moscow is willing to sacrifice a potential close alliance with Iran in the name of Israel or USA.
> 
> 
> Theres no such a thing as a government in the RF, its all about Putin, he is everything and he controls anything, theres no opposition, the so called one in the Federal Assembly is a complete joke and is doing what Putin wants it to do. The other opposition is barley surviving, almost all of its leaders were thrown away from the country in the last months, the one who refused to move out are in jail. So Im not really sure what are you talking about when you talk about Zionist influence.
> 
> There are no US or NATO troops in Ukraine at the moment, on the other hand its a base for an anti-Russian hysteria, no doubt about that. Its true that Putin abandoned the people in Odessa, Kharkov and even Donetsk and Lugansk and he did it because he was scared about the consequences for his regime. He took the risk and took Crimea, but when Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkov were about to do the same referendum, he told them to stop, the people in Kharkov gave up, the ones in Donetsk didnt and you see where they are today. Putin wants to rule the country with the economy being as stable as possible, so the people are not too upset about him and his politics and keep believing that he is the only one from the 150 millions that is fit to rule. If he actually annexed the Southeast part of Ukraine, which is around 250 000 km2 into RF no one in the world would accept that. Russian economy couldnt survive it, his regime couldnt survive it either.
> 
> I dont think that Turkey has a real influence in Caucasus. Erdogan and Aliev are friends and thats it, no one knows what will happen when one of them is gone. Few years ago Aliev said that if NATO help them on Karabakh they will join NATO, if CSTO helps them, they will join it. I dont really believe in the azeri-turks brotherhood, when their two presidents are gone they will both turn upside down.
> 
> As for Iran, I cant see a rival between Moscow and Teheran in the region, our countries have a good relation, we are both friends with Armenia. The experience and the bonds that were build in the Syrian conflict are really important and will help a lot in the future. I do agree that we can only benefit if Iran is strong, rich and stable. Neither of us cant go one on one against NATO, GCC or Israel in the region, so I think RF and Iran need each other to materialize our politics in the region...


*Russia and Israel are connected by ‘very deep bond’ & Putin is ‘close, true friend’ of the Jewish people, says Israeli PM Bennett *


----------



## yavar

EvilWesteners said:


> A source in Iran has confirmed that Iran's new government and IRIAF have decided and completed the process to get a batch of JF-17 over the next 8 years, with upgraded engine.


What a nonsense every Iranians section in this forum has turned into trolling conquest.

The biggest BS is the JF-17 and Chinese jet purchase ,

With regard to Russia there is no Deal and I don’t think the Russians going to except Our terms of the deal so there is no Deal ,

delivery and then getting paid

I don’t know what moderators are doing in here, there is not single Iranian section that some foreign countries members have not turned into spamming and spreading nonsense

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

yavar said:


> What a nonsense every Iranians section in this forum has turned into trolling conquest.
> 
> The biggest BS is the JF-17 and Chinese jet purchase ,
> 
> With regard to Russia there is no Deal and I don’t think the Russians going to except Our terms of the deal so there is no Deal ,
> 
> delivery and then getting paid
> 
> I don’t know what moderators are doing in here, there is not single Iranian section that some foreign countries members have not turned into spamming and spreading nonsense



So Bagheri's visit was just for show? 

I mean, there must be some inkling of truth to the reports coming out no?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Blue In Green said:


> So Bagheri's visit was just for show?
> 
> I mean, there must be some inkling of truth to the reports coming out no?



Coming to think of it, the signed documents sardar Bagheri mentioned could have been something like Memoranda of Understanding, ie preliminary contracts where parties agree on something in principle but require further negotiations to reach a definitive deal.

Other theoretical possibility: Bagheri's successive references to contract(s) being signed on the one hand and to aircrafts and helicopters on the other, were in fact disjointed statements, and what was concluded was simply a routine military cooperation agreement, not a weapons deal.

Who knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

yavar said:


> What a nonsense every Iranians section in this forum has turned into trolling conquest.
> 
> The biggest BS is the JF-17 and Chinese jet purchase ,
> 
> With regard to Russia there is no Deal and I don’t think the Russians going to except Our terms of the deal so there is no Deal ,
> 
> *delivery and then getting paid*
> 
> I don’t know what moderators are doing in here, there is not single Iranian section that some foreign countries members have not turned into spamming and spreading nonsense



@yavar, Is it the key question?

One thing is a deal signed, and a very different thing is planes DELIVERED to customer.

I think Iran will NOT allow same old cases to happen again, and let again Russia eats Iran's money without fulfilling the delivering of purchases.

Maybe you are right anr Iran wants FIRST the planes in Iran, and THEN paying the money.
But that is HARD to agree for Russia!!!
IMHO, no fighter deal will be completed, and Iran will follow its own path of developing own fighter.

Having modern avionics, moders EW suite, modern radars, modern A2A missiles... this fighter, EVEN WITH A TURBOJET ENGINE! would be well capable.* 
No need to fall in the TURBOFAN trap*, designed from and for the Western-Russia-China military industrial complexes, not for countries like Iran (economics, sanctions, time to production, urgent needs for today not 20 years in future...)

@yavar, what do you think about that?
Is Iran in the advanced turbojet fighter (with AL-21 or similar engine)?
Is Iran in the turbofan trap, with RD-33 or similar engine?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dariush the Great

Crimson Blue said:


> Such dreams......
> 
> China did not even agree on joint venture manufacturing of VT-4 tanks with Pakistan, when they were already collaborating on Al-Khalid tank.
> 
> Russia never ever given their data link technology to India even when they were on best of terms & India was procuring $9 billion worth of arms every year from Russia.
> 
> Russia declined to share the PAK-FA tech with India even though it was a collaboration project between India & Russia.
> 
> Pakistan is trying to negotiate favorable terms for J-10 aircrafts for past 10 years now, not even including any TOT or local manufacturing and Chinese are not budging even on purchase price per unit.
> 
> and people think that China or Russia would just give away their 4.5 gen tech to Iran just like that..... I am just speechless.


Pakistan and India do not have the geostrategic advantage that Iran has. Nor the oil and gas resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Dariush the Great said:


> Pakistan and India do not have the geostrategic advantage that Iran has. Nor the oil and gas resources.


But Russia and China can buy Oil and gas as they have cash so they don't need to share technology.
Russia has 1,688 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of proven gas reserves as of 2017, ranking 1st in the world and accounting for about 24% of the world's total natural gas reserves in the world.so they don't need to share technology with Iran.they can just buy from you.


----------



## Sineva

SalarHaqq said:


> Coming to think of it, the signed documents sardar Bagheri mentioned could have been something like Memoranda of Understanding, ie preliminary contracts where parties agree on something in principle but require further negotiations to reach a definitive deal.
> 
> Other theoretical possibility: Bagheri's successive references to contract(s) being signed on the one hand and to aircrafts and helicopters on the other, were in fact disjointed statements, and what was concluded was simply a routine military cooperation agreement, not a weapons deal.
> 
> Who knows.


A very good point,we saw plenty of useless mou signed during rouhanis tenure that ultimately went nowhere.
*These things have no force in law,they are not the equivalent of a signed binding legal contract.*
and the russians werent particularly reliable even when it came to honoring binding legal contracts that they`d signed,ie the s300 debacle being the most well known,but not the only case sadly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> But Russia and China can buy Oil and gas as they have cash so they don't need to share technology.
> Russia has 1,688 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of proven gas reserves as of 2017, ranking 1st in the world and accounting for about 24% of the world's total natural gas reserves in the world.so they don't need to share technology with Iran.they can just buy from you.


Because Russia sees Iran as competition, at least regionally.


----------



## OldTwilight

Well , Russians want to have Iran as a card for next years , now they can make contract and negotiate with western and arabs about giving Iran anything or not ...
this time they won't make any mistake and will sign a contract that they will be able to cancel it without any consequence ( they have their lessons from S-300 contracts ) 

even if they give iran anything , they won't support these fighters or will give their downgraded version which in mean time they will negotiate with western , israeils and arabs to buy the fighters specifications ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

SalarHaqq said:


> Coming to think of it, the signed documents sardar Bagheri mentioned could have been something like Memoranda of Understanding, ie preliminary contracts where parties agree on something in principle but require further negotiations to reach a definitive deal.
> 
> Other theoretical possibility: Bagheri's successive references to contract(s) being signed on the one hand and to aircrafts and helicopters on the other, were in fact disjointed statements, and what was concluded was simply a routine military cooperation agreement, not a weapons deal.
> 
> Who knows.



Historical evidence would overwhelmingly point to this entire visit being nothing but formalities and false (misconstrued) promises, but most likely (like with other such similar occurrences). It's a fiasco that was blown out of proportion by every Tom, Dick and Harry who wanted to make a name for themselves by being the first to "leak vital information about an arms deal" regarding Iran. Not the first time such a thing happened, and it will surely not be the last.

Getting really sick of Russia (not an ally), but even more sick of misplaced Iranian optimism..... Iran is and for the foreseeable future, will be alone. So all these talks of arms embargoes, weapons contracts and acquisition of new equipment from foreign countries is a bunch of hot-air.

Please people, get a grip and get a grip fast.

If this actually happens (remote possibility), then we witnessed a rare-event not a normal transaction.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

yavar said:


> What a nonsense every Iranians section in this forum has turned into trolling conquest.
> 
> The biggest BS is the JF-17 and Chinese jet purchase ,
> 
> With regard to Russia there is no Deal and I don’t think the Russians going to except Our terms of the deal so there is no Deal ,
> 
> delivery and then getting paid
> 
> I don’t know what moderators are doing in here, there is not single Iranian section that some foreign countries members have not turned into spamming and spreading nonsense



Yavar,

Your comments above are totally uncalled for.

FIRST ... the news I heard was from a source who is in Iran, we worked together at RR, and he is known to be a great source for Iran's technical electronic documentation and archive expert, at the moment, back home. He said he had some knowledge regarding such purchase. Whether you agree or not, do pay your respect. Otherwise, you will get none for your pugnacious discourteous reply.

So, try to control your arrogance and do not insult a man like him. It was based on his contacts in Iran.

And you don't know for sure either, one way or the other. Check your ego outside before you come into this forum and instigate a verbal conflict.

SECOND, learn to *READ *and *COMPREHEND*.

I was asking to see if anyone had any sources that can CONFIRM or not. If your English is poor and you cannot *comprehend *what that is, then go ahead and ask for help so someone can translate that for you.

This reply is not about being in any way the result of your offensive behavior. You are nobody to me, nor do I have any respect for you, after your bellicose, ignorant, and arrogant reply to someone who is simply asking a question, so you can ride your high worthless ego. It simply shows your level of character.

What I am displeased with, is your utter ignorance and conceit that makes you potentially talk to anyone else in this forum in such a way.

Don't do it again.

Do not talk to anyone else here with such degree of arrogance and mindless bluster.

AND, I am not "foreign". I am an Iranian.


----------



## emotionless_teenage

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder why people won't get tired of these stories about Iran and jf-17.
> Honestly it's get really boring.



Do you even aware about which bulletin board you're posting right now? It's like posting on 4chan and complaining why people keep posting anime


----------



## Blue In Green

EvilWesteners said:


> Yavar,
> 
> Your comments above are totally uncalled for.
> 
> FIRST ... the news I heard was from a source who is in Iran, we worked together at RR, and he is known to be a great source for Iran's technical electronic documentation and archive expert, at the moment, back home. He said he had some knowledge regarding such purchase. Whether you agree or not, do pay your respect. Otherwise, you will get none for your pugnacious discourteous reply.
> 
> So, try to control your arrogance and do not insult a man like him. It was based on his contacts in Iran.
> 
> And you don't know for sure either, one way or the other. Check your ego outside before you come into this forum and instigate a verbal conflict.
> 
> SECOND, learn to *READ *and *COMPREHEND*.
> 
> I was asking to see if anyone had any sources that can CONFIRM or not. If your English is poor and you cannot *comprehend *what that is, then go ahead and ask for help so someone can translate that for you.
> 
> This reply is not about being in any way the result of your offensive behavior. You are nobody to me, nor do I have any respect for you, after your bellicose, ignorant, and arrogant reply to someone who is simply asking a question, so you can ride your high worthless ego. It simply shows your level of character.
> 
> What I am displeased with, is your utter ignorance and conceit that makes you potentially talk to anyone else in this forum in such a way.
> 
> Don't do it again.
> 
> Do not talk to anyone else here with such degree of arrogance and mindless bluster.



I think we're all better off considering the practicality of such an arrangement in the first place since getting any sort of concrete "insider" information or confirmation on such a deal is a scant possibility anyways. To be concise here, it's not in Russia's best interest for Iran to complete their conventional military stanch by having them field top-of-line Russian fighters. Maybe some gimped version but Su-35s, Su-30s, AWACS, etc... Would propel Iranian regional power to new-heights. Iran is already so strong, they'd be that much more stronger and the region/world will blame Russia for it (something they know full-well if a deal gets inked). Risking future Russian plans for diplomacy, arms deals, econ deals and the like. They want a stable Iran, not a powerful Iran.

Sorry that Yavar offended you, but I don't think that was his intention. His position (after having interacted with him for many years) has been one of utter-confidence (whether founded or not) and that leads to his posts usually coming off as rude, arrogant and condescending but I doubt it's intentionally malicious. To him, any sort of reliance on outside powers for weapons, especially vital ones, is a no go and anyone who supports such an idea just doesn't get it. This isn't the first time he has responded to someone in this manner regarding the topic of foreign weapons acquisition.

Not trying to cover for him per-say, just wanted to give my two-cents on the matter. Also English isn't his first-language so it might be best not to take what he says too seriously. You know, lost in translation and all that lol.

Idk though, Iran's Air-force has been such a point of contention for people interested in Iranian military affairs as so much pride, misconception, ignorance (amongst other things), have been caught up in the conversation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder why people won't get tired of these stories about Iran and jf-17.
> Honestly it's get really boring.



It appears, as if you are directing this regarding my post requesting any information, others may have regarding JF-17.

I cannot contemplate the mindset that finds it so disturbing that someone is *asking *if anyone has any sources or can/cannot confirm something?

Why would this ruffle any feathers? Is it sacrilegious to ask if anyone has any sources regarding a subject?

What is going on with some of the people here? 

It was a question to see if anyone has any information, or not. That's it.

simple.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Blue In Green said:


> I think we're all better off considering the practicality of such an arrangement in the first place since getting any sort of concrete "insider" information or confirmation on such a deal is a scant possibility anyways. To be concise here, it's not in Russia's interest for Iran to complete their military stanch by having them field top-of-line Russian fighters. Maybe some gimped version but Su-35s, Su-30s, AWACS, etc... Would propel Iranian regional power to new-heights. Iran is already so strong, they'd be that much more stronger and the region/world will blame Russia for it (something they know full-well if a deal gets inked).
> 
> Sorry that Yavar offended you, but I don't think that was his intention. His position (after having interacted with him for many years) has been one of utter-confidence (whether founded or not) and that leads to his posts usually coming off as rude, arrogant and condescending but I doubt it's intentionally malicious. To him, any sort of reliance on outside powers for weapons, especially vital ones, is a no go and anyone who supports such an idea just doesn't get it. This isn't the first time he has responded to someone in this manner regarding the topic of foreign weapons acquisition.
> 
> Not trying to cover for him per-say, just wanted to give my two-cents on the matter. Also English isn't his first-language so it might be best not to take what he says too seriously. You know, lost in translation and all that lol.
> 
> Idk though, Iran's Air-force has been such a point of contention for people interested in Iranian military affairs as so much pride, misconception, ignorance (amongst other things), have been caught up in the conversation.



Thank you Blue.

I am not offended personally, he does not know me, nor do I know him, nor wish to after his bluster.

I *DO NOT WANT this forum*, as little as we Iranians have to reach each other and share perspectives, to be convoluted into a mindless stage of ignorance and conceit, with ego and arrogance bashing people senselessly. Sometimes I read replies, and all I can think of is ... "_did that person read the post carefully? cause it doesn't seem to me the reply is anything to do with what the post was really trying to say_".

I would like everyone here to be respectful of each other, and come together and stand together and share knowledge and help elevate each other. Otherwise, I have much better things to do than to be part of yet another Iranian-bashing feast by anger-tantrum ADHD characters.

Regarding "utter-confidence", let me shed some light on this for you. The BETTER AND MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE someone is at what they do, the more HUMBLE they are. Arrogance is a sign of a weak character, and weak characters never develop the mental structure to grow to a height that deserves utter confidence or respect. It is what many people in the military call, FAKE CONFIDENCE PROJECTION of a flawed, weakling character.

Thanks Blue.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

EvilWesteners said:


> Thank you Blue.
> 
> I am not offended personally, he does not know me, nor do I know him, nor wish to after his bluster.
> 
> I *DO NOT WANT this forum*, as little as we Iranians have to reach each other and share perspectives, to be convoluted into a mindless stage of ignorance and conceit, with ego and arrogance bashing people senselessly. Sometimes I read replies, and all I can think of is ... "_did that person read the post carefully? cause it doesn't seem to me the reply is anything to do with what the post was really trying to say_".
> 
> I would like everyone here to be respectful of each other, and come together and stand together and share knowledge and help elevate each other. Otherwise, I have much better things to do than to be part of yet another Iranian-bashing feast by anger-tantrum ADHD characters.



Fair enough, I can commiserate with you on this aspect but then again I would be a hypocrite If i didn't admit to my own faults here on PDF in the past (just a little-bit about me incase you were curious). Truth be told (and ask anyone here) I used to be the Iranian PDF sections "attack dog" of sorts lol. Until I one-day grew up and realized "I'm an adult, arguing with nameless, faceless people on a niché forum" so I let that go and just engaged in cordial honest discussions about Iranian related affairs.

I do agree with you absolutely though. This forum needs more professional and courteous discussions without the interjection of baseless vitriol, jingoism and hostility brought on by pride, arrogance, ignorance and the like. Although given the very nature of the forum, it's almost entirely impossible to avoid it (I would know, I used to be a severe offender of this lol).

Anyways, what's your personal thoughts on the deal? To me it really does feel like a pipe-dream because the more I think about the wholistic issues, the less likely it is that it'll be followed through. Russia and Iran do not exist in a vacuum and Russia has more to lose (way more) than Iran does if they over extended their hand too much. Which would lead to any actual deal being rather....how does one say... lackluster. The consequences facing the Russian Federation range from minuscule to severe if the deal is viewed as too "Iranian forgiving". Can't imagine the Russians would willingly let go of tens-of-billions of dollars in economic deals over the sale of some 1-3 billion in jets to Iran.

Iran needs large quantities of fighters to replace its museum fleet. Acquiring meager batches and paltry numbers overall will only hamper the IRIAF as they now will have to service their older planes and the newer ones since they don't have enough new to offset the old-ones. Further compounding the already besieged air-force that is barely limping along.

Whatever this deal is or isn't, Iran needs to push for something worthwhile. Money and time is the biggest problems facing Iran when it comes to big-ticket weapon systems like this. Iran can ill-afford to spend billions of dollars, possibly stumbling into yet another S-300-esque fiasco. It would be very damaging.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Blue In Green said:


> Fair enough, I can commiserate with you on this aspect but then again I would be a hypocrite If i didn't admit to my own faults here on PDF in the past (just a little-bit about me incase you were curious). Truth be told (and ask anyone here) I used to be the Iranian PDF sections "attack dog" of sorts lol. Until I one-day grew up and realized "I'm an adult, arguing with nameless, faceless people on a niché forum" so I let that go and just engaged in cordial honest discussions about Iranian related affairs.
> 
> I do agree with you absolutely though. This forum needs more professional and courteous discussions without the interjection of baseless vitriol, jingoism and hostility brought on by pride, arrogance, ignorance and the like. Although given the very nature of the forum, it's almost entirely impossible to avoid it (I would know, I used to be a severe offender of this lol).
> 
> Anyways, what's your personal thoughts on the deal? To me it really does feel like a pipe-dream because the more I think about the wholistic issues, the less likely it is that it'll be followed through. Russia and Iran do not exist in a vacuum and Russia has more to lose (way more) than Iran does if they over extended their hand too much. Which would lead to any actual deal being rather....how does one say... lackluster. The consequences facing the Russian Federation range from minuscule to severe if the deal is viewed as too "Iranian forgiving". Can't imagine the Russians would willingly let go of tens-of-billions of dollars in economic deals over the sale of some 1-3 billion in jets to Iran.
> 
> Iran needs large quantities of fighters to replace its museum fleet. Small batches and small numbers overall will only hamper the IRIAF as they now will have to service their older planes and the newer ones since they don't have enough new to offset the old-ones. Further compounding the already besieged air-force that is barely limping along.
> 
> Whatever this deal is or isn't, Iran needs to push for something worthwhile. Money and time is the biggest problems facing Iran when it comes to big-ticket weapon systems like this. Iran can ill-afford to spend billions of dollars, possibly stumbling into yet another S-300-esque fiasco. It would be very damaging.



Great perspective Blue.

Let me just add a little to it.

I have many Jewish friends, who are in very powerful positions. When I am with them, when I listen to them, and I see the depth of their thinking, I AM QUITE BEWILDERED by their unique CLARITY of UNITY.

I can tell you countless stories of how the Jewish people I know have stood up for each other, with vast amounts of money, backed each other up, and they were relentless in supporting each other.

Yet, some Iranians still (to my horror) have not LEARNT the BASICS of UNITY. Some of us can't even talk to inspire each other, to lift each other up, to motivate, to support, to nurture the younger ones, to be the advocate. Ego is one of the most horrifying aspects of some Iranians and like a disease it infects and destroys UNITY for worthless temporary gratification. In actual reality, it is utterly worthless and inconsequential.

I aspire for Iranians to learn what has kept us down, and unite, and support, and elevate each other so we can demand our rightful place in history, or at the very least, defend and protect our rights and our home.

Hence, why I get upset when I witness the demonstration of idiocy of self-gratification of arrogance at the expense of a higher cause --- AT A TIME WHEN OUR COUNTRY NEEDS US TO STAND TOGETHER. Many of our people are suffering back home. Civilians faced with the monstrosity of sanctions against civilians for food or medicine, during a pandemic.

How could I not get angry over a worthless arrogance that results from the self esteem of a pigeon.

Regarding Iran's AF equipment ...

I believe in self-sufficiency. General Mohammad Khatami, Head of AF use to talk about it non stop in 1975, months before he died. After 4 decades, I believe in it 100%. However, If Iran is leveraging, or utilizing strategies to coarse and obtain TOT at whatever level suits it, I would be perfectly happy with that strategy too. There I stand.

Thanks Blue.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

EvilWesteners said:


> Great perspective Blue.
> 
> Let me just add a little to it.
> 
> I have many Jewish friends, who are in very powerful positions. When I am with them, when I listen to them, and I see the depth of their thinking, I AM QUITE BEWILDERED by their unique CLARITY of UNITY.
> 
> I can tell you countless stories of how the Jewish people I know have stood up for each other, with vast amounts of money, backed each other up, and they were relentless in supporting each other.
> 
> Yet, some Iranians still (to my horror) have not LEARNT the BASIC of UNITY. Some of us can't even talk to inspire each other, to lift each other up, to motivate, to support, to nurture the younger ones, to be the advocate. Ego is one of the most horrifying aspects of some Iranians and like a disease it infects and destroys UNITY for worthless temporary gratification. In actual reality, it is utterly worthless and inconsequential.
> 
> I aspire for Iranians to learn what has kept us down, and unite, and support, and elevate each other so we can demand our rightful place in history, or at the very least, defend and protect our rights and our home.
> 
> Hence, why I get upset when I witness the demonstration of idiocy of self-gratification of arrogance at the expense of a higher cause --- AT A TIME WHEN OUR COUNTRY NEEDS US TO STAND TOGETHER. Many of our people are suffering back home. Civilians faced with the monstrosity of sanctions against civilians for food or medicine, during a pandemic.
> 
> How could I not get angry over a worthless arrogance that results in self esteem of a pigeon.
> 
> Regarding Iran's AF equipment ...
> 
> I believe in self-sufficiency. General Mohammad Khatami, Head of AF use to talk about it non stop in 1975, months before he died. After 4 decades, I believe in it 100%. However, If Iran is leveraging, or utilizing strategies to coarse and obtain TOT at whatever level suits it, I would be perfectly happy with that strategy to. There I stand.
> 
> Thanks Blue.



I've been waiting for someone to put into words what I've also personally thought of general Iranian disunity but I do feel like this is a problem more endemic to diaspora Iranians although it's quite common in Iran itself, so it's still a dangerous problem no matter how you cut it.

Thank you, (sincerely) for putting it so eloquently! 100% agreed.

United we stand, divided we fall but I'm also America so my loyalties are all over the place really lol. 

Thank you again for this conversation EvilWesterners, you're a truly welcomed voice here on PDF!

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

Blue In Green said:


> I've been waiting for someone to put into words what I've also personally thought of general Iranian disunity but I do feel like this is a problem more endemic to diaspora Iranians although it's quite common in Iran itself, so it's still a dangerous problem no matter how you cut it.
> 
> Thank you, (sincerely) for putting it so eloquently! 100% agreed.
> 
> United we stand, divided we fall but I'm also America so my loyalties are all over the place really lol.
> 
> Thank you again for this conversation EvilWesterners, you're a truly welcomed voice here on PDF!



Thank you my friend. You are gentleman and a great contributor offering us all a deeper view. Thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Well this whole discussion is not based on any rumors or leaked info from un named source,discussion is based on statement Bagheri himself gave in Iranian embassy in Moscow...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nevsky

Darius77 said:


> Russia and Israel are connected by ‘very deep bond’ & Putin is ‘close, true friend’ of the Jewish people, says Israeli PM Bennett


Empty words, as always when it comes to the relations between Moscow and Tel Aviv. Have you seen them signing something or actually talk about area of a future cooperation? All of those pointless visits and messages from the Russian side are only because that there are still like 15% Russian speaking population in Israel. But as I said it wont lead to nothing, Putin knows it, Bennett knows it and Im sure that their counterparts in Teheran also knows it.




Blue In Green said:


> Can't imagine the Russians would willingly let go of tens-of-billions of dollars in economic deals over the sale of some 1-3 billion in jets to Iran.


Can you explain this a bit more? Tens of billion of deals with who? Maybe such a deal can hurt future cooperation between Riyadh and Moscow, but thats it. The relations with the USA are disastrously bad, the ones with Israel are almost non existent in terms of economy, so I cant see where these 10s of billions would come from.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

OldTwilight said:


> Well , Russians want to have Iran as a card for next years , now they can make contract and negotiate with western and arabs about giving Iran anything or not ...
> this time they won't make any mistake and will sign a contract that they will be able to cancel it without any consequence ( they have their lessons from S-300 contracts )
> 
> even if they give iran anything , they won't support these fighters or will give their downgraded version which in mean time they will negotiate with western , israeils and arabs to buy the fighters specifications ...


GOod comments brother. 

Lets accept a powerful truth here- If you are a country that RUssia and China are afraid to sell weapons to, that means you are a very powerful country, and there are few non-western countries that fall into this category. THis is a big compliment to Iranian power- its powerful enough to irk top global powers like Russia and CHina...even though it makes logical sense for them to do so! Which other country has $billions ready to spend, not on UN sanctions list, wants to buy weapons from Russia and CHina and cant? ONly western countries i can think of that fall into that category, aka sanctioned countries (by Russia and China).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

_Only big R&D projects advance Iran to edge technology, not player such Russia and China_

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> @yavar, what do you think about that?
> Is Iran in the advanced turbojet fighter (with AL-21 or similar engine)?
> Is Iran in the turbofan trap, with RD-33 or similar engine?



AL-21
Making or overcoming technological barrier it is not mean the mass production, mass production is another,
We are about 5 to 4 years from be able to produce quantity, The machinery and the speed of production, if (Big IF ) We have money,

Produce a new good engine will not necessary lead to produce of Qualitative edge Aircraft,

They are many more obstacles to overcome, even the nozzle of the engine it’s self is another steps which requires time + more ex...... steps

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

No

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Qaher 313 Aircraft test flight ?????*



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454371421925298176


----------



## Moon

skyshadow said:


> *Qaher 313 Aircraft test flight *
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454371421925298176


It's a hoax, check the comments...


----------



## skyshadow

Moon said:


> It's a hoax, check the comments...


I have, they say it is but how do they know ? am i missing something ?


----------



## Moon

skyshadow said:


> I have, they say it is but how do they know ? am i missing something ?


I think it can be because more credible Iranian observers would've reported it first.
No way can news like this go under the radar (pun intended).

It's been 2 hours since the tweet was made, would've made rounds by now. 

Secondly won't the IRIAF have known the pilot in the chase plane? He would've been in big trouble had he leaked something like this, and I'm sure he'd be well aware of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Not only is F-313 video a hoax, that whole program was a hoax by the fraudulent Ahmadinejad regime.

I will never forget the DMs face being asked questions about the plane, he was supremely embarrassed answering that during the unveiling.

10+ years later and nothing to show for the program besides a taxi run with a glorified frankstein F-5 with a body kit on it.

I gave Iran the benefit of the doubt on that program for years and in the end, I was right. It was a crude joke.

Project is shelved people need to move on. The design needs massive modifications to be a viable fighter ever worth producing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Moon said:


> I think it can be because more credible Iranian observers would've reported it first.
> No way can news like this go under the radar (pun intended).
> 
> It's been 2 hours since the tweet was made, would've made rounds by now.
> 
> Secondly won't the IRIAF have known the pilot in the chase plane? He would've been in big trouble had he leaked something like this, and I'm sure he'd be well aware of it.


agreed but it looks so real its crazy what ppl can do to videos these days

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> agreed but it looks so real its crazy what ppl can do to videos these days



Eh, if you have the PC with good components you can run Blender and Da Vinci Resolve 17 in order to make pretty decent CGI fakes at home granted you have the time and talent.

But the Qaher-313 will forever be a stain on Iran's legitimacy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Seems Russians are confirming Bagheri statement from Moscov
Igor Janvarov, researcher at the Russian Presidential Academy of Public Administration: "Bagheri's visit to Russia determined the fate of the two countries' arms deals. The agreements were signed between the two countries after the lifting of international arms embargoes on Iran. "

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## thesaint

sanel1412 said:


> Seems Russians are confirming Bagheri statement from Moscov
> Igor Janvarov, researcher at the Russian Presidential Academy of Public Administration: "Bagheri's visit to Russia determined the fate of the two countries' arms deals. The agreements were signed between the two countries after the lifting of international arms embargoes on Iran. "
> View attachment 789183
> View attachment 789184
> View attachment 789185
> View attachment 789186
> View attachment 789187
> View attachment 789188
> View attachment 789189
> View attachment 789190



Link please?


----------



## TheImmortal

@QWECXZ @aryobarzan 



Redirect Notice

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> @QWECXZ @aryobarzan
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


I hope they do it. This multiple exchange rate has been the source of corruption and previous no spine government of Rouhani did not have the balls to fix it...Raisi has promised to take the hit and do the thing which are right for Iran but possibly will not make him popular ( a sign of a good leader)..The man is a true Patriot if he means that..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I hope they do it. This multiple exchange rate has been the source of corruption and previous no spine government of Rouhani did not have the balls to fix it...Raisi has promised to take the hit and do the thing which are right for Iran but possibly will not make him popular ( a sign of a good leader)..The man is a true Patriot if he means that..



It was unrealistic rate not in line with reality that only further contributed to inflation and deletion of reserve currency of central bank of Iran.

While the 17.5 rate is much more realistic, I would set it at 200,000 and drop the zeros. So Iran adopts toman and official rate becomes $1USD equals 20 Toman

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Interesting video clip,it is about IRIAF mig 29 upgrade,but no audio unfortunately ..any way,there is little longer section(longer than I saw till now) where MIG 29UB with refueling probe is tested
EDIT: There is audio..my YT was muted


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sanel1412 said:


> Interesting video clip,it is about IRIAF mig 29 upgrade,but no audio unfortunately ..any way,there is little longer section(longer than I saw till now) where MIG 29UB with refueling probe is tested
> EDIT: There is audio..my YT was muted



The MiG-29 inflight refueling capability was designed and tested in the early 1990s. Never saw it implemented on the rest of the fleet after that unfortunately most probably due to financial restrictions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran's economy is now growing ever so slightly and Iran is selling a decent amount of crude. 

Basically at the moment Iran's economy is in recovery mode. I would not cut subsidies for staple foods such as wheat, barley, rice, etc. The lower exchange rate for such essential commodities pretty much act as a subsidy. Getting rid of the lower exchange rate rather than tackling corruption in the system would lead to massive inflation allm across the board.

If the government wants to get rid of the lower exchange rate then they should do so gradually over a long period of time, maybe even over a decade, not at once. We saw what happened when they increased the gasoline price abruptly. This will be 10x worse. Not a good idea right now and not abruptly.

In terms of introducing a new currency, slashing 4 zeros, that is not a bad idea. Also floating both currencies at once is a good idea as well so people don't get confused and understand the difference.

Right now 1 USD = 270,000 Rial so with the new currency 1 USD = 27 Toman and 1 Toman = 100 gherun. Much more convenient and efficient. 

Anything is possible as long as they do it gradually. To bring down inflation digitizing the currency and boosting interest rates is a good idea.The current interest rate is what 12 percent ? 15 might be good for Iran.

Turkey really needs an interest rate boost their economy is crashing and burning their currency is in freefall. Unfortunately Erdogan keeps lowering it






TheImmortal said:


> It was unrealistic rate not in line with reality that only further contributed to inflation and deletion of reserve currency of central bank of Iran.
> 
> While the 17.5 rate is much more realistic, I would set it at 200,000 and drop the zeros. So Iran adopts toman and official rate becomes $1USD equals 20 Toman

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Realistically I dont see Iran successfully producing its own fighter jet platform without a network of communication satellites. It's pretty much necessary for a modern, world class platform.

Iran more or less requires an injection of foreign technology to keep it's airforce capable and competitive in the region. With the current budget that's just the reality of the situation.

Qaher 313 will never fly. It's a flawed prototype at best. It's simply too small for a stealth fighter to carry a serious payload. Just compare the size of Qaher to checkmate which is a small stealth fighter. Checkmate is gigantic in comparison



TheImmortal said:


> Not only is F-313 video a hoax, that whole program was a hoax by the fraudulent Ahmadinejad regime.
> 
> I will never forget the DMs face being asked questions about the plane, he was supremely embarrassed answering that during the unveiling.
> 
> 10+ years later and nothing to show for the program besides a taxi run with a glorified frankstein F-5 with a body kit on it.
> 
> I gave Iran the benefit of the doubt on that program for years and in the end, I was right. It was a crude joke.
> 
> Project is shelved people need to move on. The design needs massive modifications to be a viable fighter ever worth producing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

sha ah said:


> In terms of introducing a new currency, slashing 4 zeros, that is not a bad idea. Also floating both currencies at once is a good idea as well so people don't get confused and understand the difference.
> 
> Anything is possible as long as they do it gradually. To bring down inflation digitizing the currency and boosting interest rates is a good idea.The current interest rate is what 12 percent ? 15 might be good for Iran.


They have done it already. If you see recent banknotes in Iran, you'll notice that it says 10 instead of 100,000 IRR almost everywhere, except for the top-right corner where it displays 4 slashed zeroes in a lighter color.




​Interest rate is 18% for loans and 16% for depositing your money in banks for long term. I think it should increase by 6 percent at least (over a span of 3 years). The problem is that if they do that, people will probably pull their money out of Tehran Stock Exchange and deposit it in banks (which is a risk-averse option) and that can make a lot of investors unhappy with the new government, particularly after the April crash. I think the central bank should prioritize controlling liquidity to bowing to public pressure or inflation will continue to remain above 20% for a long time (which will have worse side effects). If it were me, I would raise interest rates to 26% for loans and 25% for deposits over a span of 4 years.

As for the IRIAF, this could be my unpopular opinion, but I think our only viable chance of modernizing the IRIAF is to hire senior Chinese, Russian, Ukrainian, Italian and Brazilian scientists with high salaries (over $200K annually), provide them with what they need, and ask them to transfer the know-how to us; particularly in areas like metallurgy and engine design. We have maintained good relations with these countries and the people of these countries have a history of helping us in other areas.

Russia may finally deliver Su-30 or Su-35 to us, but only when it can't change the balance of power in the region significantly. So, even if the deal goes through, I wouldn't count on receiving anything game changing from Russia before 2030. By then, our major regional rivals like Israel and Saudi Arabia will be operating hundreds of F35's and tens of F22's.


----------



## aryobarzan

QWECXZ said:


> As for the IRIAF, this could be my unpopular opinion, but I think our only viable chance of modernizing the IRIAF is to hire senior Chinese, Russian, Ukrainian, Italian and Brazilian scientists with high salaries (over $200K annually), provide them with what they need, and ask them to transfer the know-how to us; particularly in areas like metallurgy and engine design.


As per @EvilWesteners posts..those people already are in Iran...just use them if not already we just do not know.

As for Interest rate..do not increase that...why..Interest money given to a deposit is like creating money without any work (labour) behind it and that will add to huge liquidity in Iran which is a problem

Money should be created by work (production) not borne in a bank ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Realistically I dont see Iran successfully producing its own fighter jet platform without a network of communication satellites. It's pretty much necessary for a modern, world class platform.



No, it’s not needed for interceptors defending Iranian territory and staying in “home field advantage”. Future quantum information exchange systems will make satellites for military grade communication obsolete.

Iran doesn’t need fighters that travel across the Middle East, it just needs fast (very fast) interceptors that can stay in the air a long time and who are equipped with BVR missiles equipped with an AESA radar. Thus local stations can provide the interceptors with update information.

One other thing about a complex satellite constellation...costs are dropping. You have private (and publicly traded) companies that in the next decade will have capability to put up constellations for themselves and clients at very affordable price.

So for Iran it should be feasible in future, much like MALE drone tech was exclusively in the hands of the West till late 2000’s. Now pretty much every major military in the world has Heavy drones and stealth drones.

However, over reliance on sats during war time is a grave mistake as US cyber command will do their best to hack/disable/jam Iranian sats and may even use space based weaponry (Aurora project) to disable Iranian satellites permanently.

Thus frequency hopping on GLONASS/BEIDOU is a better option in case of conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## QWECXZ

aryobarzan said:


> As per @EvilWesteners posts..those people already are in Iran...just use them if not already we just do not know.
> 
> As for Interest rate..do not increase that...why..Interest money given to a deposit is like creating money without any work (labour) behind it and that will add to huge liquidity in Iran which is a problem
> 
> Money should be created by work (production) not borne in a bank ..


Well, I'm keeping my fingers crossed but I don't expect much from the IRIAF. At least not any time soon (before 2035). I mean look at our progress for the sake of God. It took us 21 years (1997-2018) to move from Azarakhsh to Kowsar. Do you see why I'm skeptical about our technology?

Now @EvilWesteners is a good poster on the forum. He certainly knows what he talks about and he understands this subject a lot better than me. But seriously, does anyone think that Iran can produce turbofan engines with +100kN thrust any time soon? And by soon I mean less than 5 years because we will certainly need time to mass-produce our final product as well.

I'm not saying that we can't eventually crack the problem. But it seems that our progress is extremely slow and we need foreign expertise to speed things up. We need to speed up things to remain as the main regional power.

About interest rate, if you do not increase the interest rate, people will refrain from depositing their money in banks and the government will lose control over markets and the economy fast. Look at the last 10 years of our economy. A 34% inflation of goods with respect to our currency per each year (in average) is not something that convinces people to keep their money in banks where the interest rate for their deposits is only 16%.
In other words, if you keep a 1,000,000 IRR in your bank account, next year it will be worth about 746,000 IRR in today's value! No sane person would do that to his assets. But we're off-topic. I will mention you in the Iranian Chill Thread to explain why it's absolutely necessary to keep the interest rate within a close range of inflation and depreciation of assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

925boy said:


> Because Russia sees Iran as competition, at least regionally.


Not necessarily so. Russia today is much weaker than the USSR and its geographical boundaries are under great pressure from the US and its NATO lapdogs who are now well ensconced in Ukraine. However, there is emerging thinking in Russian strategic and military circles about the need to create defence alliances. Iran is perceived as a militarily powerful and capable state. However, the Zionist influence in Russia is still very strong. However, it is quite possible that a major weapons deal with Iran will go through. However, I would not hold my breath until I see the first Russian SU-35 in IRIAF markings at an Iranian TAB.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Darius77 said:


> Not necessarily so. Russia today is much weaker than the USSR and its geographical boundaries are under great pressure from the US and its NATO lapdogs who are now well ensconced in Ukraine. However, there is emerging thinking in Russian strategic and military circles about the need to create defence alliances. Iran is perceived as a militarily powerful and capable state. However, the Zionist influence in Russia is still very strong. However, it is quite possible that a major weapons deal with Iran will go through. However, I would not hold my breath until I see the first Russian SU-35 in IRIAF markings at an Iranian TAB.



Just research Zionist Russian Oligarchs. That will let you know the extent of Zionist

Ain’t no way they are betraying their (true) motherland for some lousy arms deals. And in no way would Iran ever intervene to save mother Russia.

Iran didn’t intervene in Syria to save Assad, it intervened to save Shiite crescent and itself. Hell some in IRGC thought Iran should let Assad fall and negotiate with West over his replacement to satisfy all parties.

This Russo-Persian Alliance will never materialize. Russian is too stubborn and Iran doesn’t see Russia as a brother. It would be a fractured alliance at best.

S-400 or S-500 and some trainers could materialize. But SU-35? It would be risky on Iran, repeating the same mistake with the F-14 tomcats. If one day Russia and Iranian relations break completely apart, can Iran keep SU-35’s flying?

Without some ToT or allowing Iran to do all maintenance vis a vi a learning program for Iranian engineers, the risk of such a deal is high for Iran.

I should add I fully support acquiring SU-30, SU-35 and SU-57 it will give massive technology injection to Iran’s domestic program just being able to touch and observe these aircraft daily (even without any ToT). I’m just skeptical if Russia would ever provide any such aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

Darius77 said:


> Not necessarily so.


hmm...lets hear why..


> Russia today is much weaker than the USSR and its geographical boundaries are under great pressure from the US and its NATO lapdogs who are now well ensconced in Ukraine.


Boom...this could be 1 Or the main reason why Russia sees Iran as competition- because Russia isnt as strong as it used to be, so that makes sense and suppots what i said that you quoted.



> However, there is emerging thinking in Russian strategic and military circles about the need to create defence alliances.


Cuz of the point you made directly above this 1!


> Iran is perceived as a militarily powerful and capable state.


They better get in line and sell some weapons fast then, talk is cheap, and Iran dont give a fuk if US mess Russia up if Russia isnt helping Iran in the relevant ways. Russia and Iran have signed multiple "strategic agreements"..well where's the results from these ghost agreements???? RUssia and CHIna are both very hesitant to sell IRan weapons..so they all have reached a new stage in their relationship...cuz if they dont sell the weapons..they wont get certain things...IYKYK.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

QWECXZ said:


> Well, I'm keeping my fingers crossed but I don't expect much from the IRIAF. At least not any time soon (before 2035). I mean look at our progress for the sake of God. It took us 21 years (1997-2018) to move from Azarakhsh to Kowsar. Do you see why I'm skeptical about our technology?
> 
> Now @EvilWesteners is a good poster on the forum. He certainly knows what he talks about and he understands this subject a lot better than me. But seriously, does anyone think that Iran can produce turbofan engines with +100kN thrust any time soon? And by soon I mean less than 5 years because we will certainly need time to mass-produce our final product as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that we can't eventually crack the problem. But it seems that our progress is extremely slow and we need foreign expertise to speed things up. We need to speed up things to remain as the main regional power.
> 
> About interest rate, if you do not increase the interest rate, people will refrain from depositing their money in banks and the government will lose control over markets and the economy fast. Look at the last 10 years of our economy. A 34% inflation of goods with respect to our currency per each year (in average) is not something that convinces people to keep their money in banks where the interest rate for their deposits is only 16%.
> In other words, if you keep a 1,000,000 IRR in your bank account, next year it will be worth about 746,000 IRR in today's value! No sane person would do that to his assets. But we're off-topic. I will mention you in the Iranian Chill Thread to explain why it's absolutely necessary to keep the interest rate within a close range of inflation and depreciation of assets.



Let me clarify what I have said before, as I am always a bit insecure in being misunderstood - and particularly careful in using my words not to misrepresent things.

When I was working at RR, I had an Iranian mentor (for about 10+ of the years I was there). He is one of the sweetest individuals I have ever met. He use to peel oranges and give them to me when I had some of the most nightmare project management positions in the company. He was loved by all the Iranians at RR (and you can imagine, Iranians can barely get along together and have their priorities right - we sometimes eat our own out of 1) fear, 2) misguided loyalties, and 3) mostly our arrogance and ignorance (really the same thing).

Still, think of it, no easy feat to be loved by 40+ Iranians, different generations, some highly educated, some not, some from prior to Iran revolution, and some after. So, now you think to yourself what a sweetheart he must be, to be loved by so many people. His poetry and proverbs are also incredible. Anyways, I love this man - he was there when I needed someone. When I had everyone fighting me, he calmed me down and reminded me that winning with style is more important than winning for egotistical bragging. I learned a lot from him at a time when I was a bowl of fire ready to rip everyone a new ARSE as the brits say.

He is in Iran, and he is retired, and he is ready to help, IF THEY ASK HIM. He also has a good reputation with Iranian authorities in this area. He has delivered for them, many things, to do with RR engines parts, and things. I cannot say too much about this.

This man has 2 things to offer an Iranian engine design and manufacturing project:

1) his technical knowledge - which is far more than anyone can imagine or I can describe without being accused of showing off. Just take my word for it. He is technically incredible.

2. his project management skills - he is loved, his approach/style is very different (than mine, which is brute force and technical showmanship) while his is far more sophisticated and smarter. I would work for him for FREE. No b.s. - that is the TRUTH.

In my estimation, he can develop an AL21 to the point of "_testing_" a new engine (READ THAT WORD CAREFULLY), within one year. May be, just may be, within 8 months, if MAPNA helps with some things, which I can't mention here.

If this man WAS put in charge, if he is given the funding he needs, if he has as much support as Bavar 373 did, THERE IS NO WAY ANYONE ON EARTH CAN CONVINCE ME THAT IRAN CANNOT BUILD AL21F within one year. No one. No one. Iran CAN. I would bet you everything I own, including my salary, and my retirement fund.

To make it faster, better, to allow Iran to also build the equivalent of a ALF 502 and/or RR Tay 650 (there is nothing he DOES NOT KNOW about T650, nothing, absolutely nothing, it was his baby when I joined after my post grad decades ago), THEN IRAN HAS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE ...

Iran has to do ONE MORE THING on top of everything else ...

Give amnesty to children whose family members have been or are still in sensitive positions outside Iran.

Iran needs those that truly LOVE Iran.

I understand it is hard to distinguish between those that love Iran and love money and serve the Western global domination for a fist fully of Dollars, often hurting IRAN as a result.

I know asswipes like M. Alinejad may piss them off, but most Iranians outside are not this charlatan getting money from Saudis protected by U.S. state dept.

But many people I know, and I have worked with, and I would work with again, who would BENEFIT IRAN, need amnesty to be able to go back to Iran. These kids did nothing wrong. It was not their fault that their family members were in certain positions in the Shah's regime. Some of the other stuff they have done, often out of anger when they were young, need to be forgiven for the sake of a bigger picture for the good of Iran and her people and their future.

Not talking about myself. I have never done anything that would concern MYSELF, but my family has a long history in the military in Iran.

If he tells me that I can go back to Iran, I would give up my cushy job, TODAY, and get on a plane tonight, and go back to Iran. But I only trust him. And many others would also trust him and go back to help Iran build engines that are stifling the AF development projects all around us, including Pakistan and India.

I know what I say here is monitored by SOME very close to my vacinity. Still, I am not afraid (not at this point of my life, don't give a s**t) to mention this openly here. I would be on the plane this evening to go back and help. Heck, I would sleep on the factory floor over there, like I use to at RR.

I only need a few hours of sleep. Iran always underestimates motivation. Westerners never do. They instead, bank on it.

But I only trust this one man. No one else there, since I don't know them.

Here are the facts from my conversations with him (and I just talked to him a few days ago regarding his house in Hamstead) so I know what he wants more than anything else on earth, now that his granddaughter has (finally) a boy ...

He wants to SERVE Iran.

Many of us do. We don't need cars or money or homes. We had it all and saw how empty all of is. Like having sex with the most pretties girls on earth. After a few times, it's no big deal. The ego trip, obsession of achievement, only lasts for 2-3 days. Love for Iran, never ends. EVER, until we are put in our graves. It's in our blood. Only stupidity and arrogance makes us forget it temporarily, until sooner or later (as my dad use to say, RIP) ... elephants will remember and want to go back home to Hindustan (Feel yadeh hindostan mikoneh). You all have heard it before.

Iranian authorities MUST FIRST MAKE A DECISION that they want an engine for their NEW to be, developed AIR FORCE.

Apparently, this decision has not been made yet, or we are not informed of it (for very good reasons, e.g. blocking parts and support from Iran's suppliers, like they did with equipment for nuclear energy in 1999-2006)

I have no knowledge whatsoever of what this potential engine development would entail. I have no knowledge of how Iranian authorities fight/win project priorities and funding between different ministries or departments. I know how the West does it, but ZERO knowledge on Iran's way/methods.

As far as I understand it (which is very little, no matter how much I research it), Iran has NOT made any decisions, or indications, of any sorts, that they release publicly, or that they want to design a platform for the military fighter jets or bombers. AGAIN, may be they don't want anyone to know yet until it is done.

Iran DOES HAVE one of the greatest aviation engineers with incredible personality (believe me it matters so much), and he can bring back to Iran about at least 30 Iranians may be as much as 40+ Iranian engineers currently living in Europe, and a few in U.S. and other places. These are SEASONED engineers who have DELIVERED results in incredible positions working for highest level aviation firms in Western hemisphere. These engineers are all millionaires,so there is a lot of money coming back too (IF, big IF, they take all their money back).

So I HOPE I was CRYSTAL CLEAR about everything and hope I did not over exaggerate or mislead anyone with any bravado or false expectations.

There are too many issues and aspects of detail involved here. Just like a project management for engine development. Someone needs to have good judgement, the necessary funds, and put it all together and make it happen. Who has the authority to START THIS RIVER WITH THE FIRST DROP OF WATER ???

God Bless Iran and her people

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Blue In Green

QWECXZ said:


> Well, I'm keeping my fingers crossed but I don't expect much from the IRIAF. At least not any time soon (before 2035). I mean look at our progress for the sake of God. It took us 21 years (1997-2018) to move from Azarakhsh to Kowsar. Do you see why I'm skeptical about our technology?
> 
> Now @EvilWesteners is a good poster on the forum. He certainly knows what he talks about and he understands this subject a lot better than me. But seriously, does anyone think that Iran can produce turbofan engines with +100kN thrust any time soon? And by soon I mean less than 5 years because we will certainly need time to mass-produce our final product as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that we can't eventually crack the problem. But it seems that our progress is extremely slow and we need foreign expertise to speed things up. We need to speed up things to remain as the main regional power.
> 
> About interest rate, if you do not increase the interest rate, people will refrain from depositing their money in banks and the government will lose control over markets and the economy fast. Look at the last 10 years of our economy. A 34% inflation of goods with respect to our currency per each year (in average) is not something that convinces people to keep their money in banks where the interest rate for their deposits is only 16%.
> In other words, if you keep a 1,000,000 IRR in your bank account, next year it will be worth about 765,600 IRR in today's value! No sane person would do that to his assets. But we're off-topic. I will mention you in the Iranian Chill Thread to explain why it's absolutely necessary to keep the interest rate within a close range of inflation and depreciation of assets.



Well said!



EvilWesteners said:


> Let me clarify what I have said before, as I am always a bit insecure in being misunderstood - and particularly careful in using my words not to misrepresent things.
> 
> When I was working at RR, I had an Iranian mentor (for about 10+ of the years I was there). He is one of the sweetest individuals I have ever met. He use to peel oranges and give them to me when I had some of the most nightmare project management positions in the company. He was loved by all the Iranians at RR (and you can imagine, Iranians can barely get along together and have their priorities right - we sometimes eat our own out of 1) fear, 2) misguided loyalties, and 3) mostly our arrogance and ignorance (really the same thing).
> 
> Still, think of it, no easy feat to be loved by 40+ Iranians, different generations, some highly educated, some not, some from prior to Iran revolution, and some after. So, now you think to yourself what a sweetheart he must be, to be loved by so many people. His poetry and proverbs are also incredible. Anyways, I love this man - he was there when I needed someone. When I had everyone fighting me, he calmed me down and reminded me that winning with style is more important than winning for egotistical bragging. I learned a lot from him at a time when I was a bowl of fire ready to rip everyone a new ARSE as the brits say.
> 
> He is in Iran, and he is retired, and he is ready to help, IF THEY ASK HIM. He also has a good reputation with Iranian authorities in this area. He has delivered for them, many things, to do with RR engines parts, and things. I cannot say too much about this.
> 
> This man has 2 things to offer an Iranian engine design and manufacturing project:
> 
> 1) his technical knowledge - which is far more than anyone can imagine or I can describe without being accused of showing off. Just take my word for it. He is technically incredible.
> 
> 2. his project management skills - he is loved, his approach/style is very different (than mine, which is brute force and technical showmanship) while his is far more sophisticated and smarter. I would work for him for FREE. No b.s. - that is the TRUTH.
> 
> In my estimation, he can develop an AL21 to the point of "_testing_" a new engine (READ THAT WORD CAREFULLY), within one year. May be, just may be, within 8 months, if MAPNA helps with some things, which I can't mention here.
> 
> If this man WAS put in charge, if he is given the funding he needs, if he has as much support as Bavar 373 did, THERE IS NO WAY ANYONE ON EARTH CAN CONVINCE ME THAT IRAN CANNOT BUILD AL21F within one year. No one. No one. Iran CAN. I would bet you everything I own, including my salary, and my retirement fund.
> 
> To make it faster, better, to allow Iran to also build the equivalent of a ALF 502 and/or RR Tay 650 (there is nothing he DOES NOT KNOW about T650, nothing, absolutely nothing, it was his baby when I joined after my post grad decades ago), THEN IRAN HAS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE ...
> 
> Iran has to do ONE MORE THING on top of everything else ...
> 
> Give amnesty to children whose family members have been or are still in sensitive positions outside Iran.
> 
> Iran needs those that truly LOVE Iran.
> 
> I understand it is hard to distinguish between those that love Iran and love money and serve the Western global domination for a fist fully of Dollars, often hurting IRAN as a result.
> 
> I know asswipes like M. Alinejad may piss them off, but most Iranians outside are not this charlatan getting money from Saudis protected by U.S. state dept.
> 
> But many people I know, and I have worked with, and I would work with again, who would BENEFIT IRAN, need amnesty to be able to go back to Iran. These kids did nothing wrong. It was not their fault that their family members were in certain positions in the Shah's regime. Some of the other stuff they have done, often out of anger when they were young, need to be forgiven for the sake of a bigger picture for the good of Iran and her people and their future.
> 
> Not talking about myself. I have never done anything that would concern MYSELF, but my family has a long history in the military in Iran.
> 
> If he tells me that I can go back to Iran, I would give up my cushy job, TODAY, and get on a plane tonight, and go back to Iran. But I only trust him. And many others would also trust him and go back to help Iran build engines that are stifling the AF development projects all around us, including Pakistan and India.
> 
> I know what I say here is monitored by SOME very close to my vacinity. Still, I am not afraid (not at this point of my life, don't give a s**t) to mention this openly here. I would be on the plane this evening to go back and help. Heck, I would sleep on the factory floor over there, like I use to at RR.
> 
> I only need a few hours of sleep. Iran always underestimates motivation. Westerners never do. They instead, bank on it.
> 
> But I only trust this one man. No one else there, since I don't know them.
> 
> Here are the facts from my conversations with him (and I just talked to him a few days ago regarding his house in Hamstead) so I know what he wants more than anything else on earth, now that his granddaughter has (finally) a boy ...
> 
> He wants to SERVE Iran.
> 
> Many of us do. We don't need cars or money or homes. We had it all and saw how empty all of is. Like having sex with the most pretties girls on earth. After a few times, it's no big deal. The ego trip, obsession of achievement, only lasts for 2-3 days. Love for Iran, never ends. EVER, until we are put in our graves. It's in our blood. Only stupidity and arrogance makes us forget it temporarily, until sooner or later (as my dad use to say, RIP) ... elephants will remember and want to go back home to Hindustan (Feel yadeh hindostan mikoneh). You all have heard it before.
> 
> Iranian authorities MUST FIRST MAKE A DECISION that they want an engine for their NEW to be, developed AIR FORCE.
> 
> Apparently, this decision has not been made yet, or we are not informed of it (for very good reasons, e.g. blocking parts and support from Iran's suppliers, like they did with equipment for nuclear energy in 1999-2006)
> 
> I have no knowledge whatsoever of what this potential engine development would entail. I have no knowledge of how Iranian authorities fight/win project priorities and funding between different ministries or departments. I know how the West does it, but ZERO knowledge on Iran's way/methods.
> 
> As far as I understand it (which is very little, no matter how much I research it), Iran has NOT made any decisions, or indications, of any sorts, that they release publicly, or that they want to design a platform for the military fighter jets or bombers. AGAIN, may be they don't want anyone to know yet until it is done.
> 
> Iran DOES HAVE one of the greatest aviation engineers with incredible personality (believe me it matters so much), and he can bring back to Iran about at least 30 Iranians may be as much as 40+ Iranian engineers currently living in Europe, and a few in U.S. and other places. These are SEASONED engineers who have DELIVERED results in incredible positions working for highest level aviation firms in Western hemisphere. These engineers are all millionaires,so there is a lot of money coming back too (IF, big IF, they take all their money back).
> 
> So I HOPE I was CRYSTAL CLEAR about everything and hope I did not over exaggerate or mislead anyone with any bravado or false expectations.
> 
> There are too many issues and aspects of detail involved here. Just like a project management for engine development. Someone needs to have good judgement, the necessary funds, and put it all together and make it happen. Who has the authority to START THIS RIVER WITH THE FIRST DROP OF WATER ???
> 
> God Bless Iran and her people



Then there is hope!!

It's all a matter of initiative then....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

I think Iranian members who are in Iran should ensure that what "EvilWesteners" is saying in his post will be heard by people in position of authority in Iran...big things sometimes start with someone talking to someone else who talks to someone .....you get the picture....lets make it happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## EvilWesteners

Blue In Green said:


> Well said!
> 
> 
> 
> _*"Then there is hope!"!*_
> 
> *It's all a matter of initiative then*....



Forgive me *Blue*, if I am ignorant and not understand what you are saying here ... BUT

to me,

HOPE is nothing. It's like, a word. In project management, in engine development, or anything of this type, HOPE, is a word, that is ... like nothing. It's like saying, STRAWBERRIES. It means nothing.

*A Matter of initiativ*e??? not sure what this means either. I have spent my life designing, building, fixing, changing, making things happen for the customer in the aviation engine industry. I do not know, nor have I ever experienced, "*initiative *...". I don't even know what this is suppose to be at a time like this for Iran.

If a country wants to build an engine --- they make a decision to do so, get the best project director they can get, pay 250,000 pounds per year, or more, Safran is paying nearly a million now, and you give the political support, the funding, more funding, more funding after funds run out, and support, and support, then more support, until it is done, they go back and make things better, fix the issues that were not addressed during feasibility study and requirements analysis, and then fix those.

I have never heard the words *HOPE *or *INITIATIVE *in all my years in my career. These words don't exist.

If Iran wants to build an engine - then they can build an engine. They have what it takes and can get the rest and get it *done*.

I swear to you, IT IS THAT EASY.

They need a project director that has the guts, the fortitude, and the experience with a clear VISION - then that project is DONE, within a time, and with funds. Some times delays, almost always lots of money wasted, and over the budget, but it gets done.

Only A4 Skyhawk project was done like a charm. Still project managers talk about it. It was an incredible project management experience.

There is no *HOPE*. No "*matter of initiative*".

I am sorry if I seem ANAL about these words. I just feel if Iran is listening, they need to S**T OR GET OFF THE POT.

Talking, and talking, and talking and saying they want to buy SU-30 or SU-35 blah blah blah blah is FREAKING STUPID, almost as bad as video of Qaher 313, and its freakin design from day one. IT WAS STUPID then, and it is stupid now.

In 1970s about a year before I left Iran, I remember as a kid I was at a bashgah, with family members, (at a TF airbase), and they were talking about 2 things while drinking dutch beer ... which was recently delivered via a 747 ...

1) how they will add a conformal tank to the bottom of F4-e
2) how they can also do the same for F-5e so it can increase its range, and may be even redesign the landing gear

This is 5 decades ago.

If Iran wants to build something - they they have proven that they *CAN*.

U.S. military NEVER IMAGINED that Iran's bistatic radar tracking lock would be as powerful and as effective as Sevom Khordad.

Iran has proven ... IT *CAN*.

So, this is not a matter of HOPE. They have to make a decision to DO or NOT TO DO.

IT really is that simple. They have devoted Iranians who would fight for that land ... they have in their blood.

It's about money allocation, political will, strategic decision making ... etc.

Not about HOPE or INITIATIVE.

Those are words one uses when our people's rights are NOT being trampled on every single day, while millions of Iranians are living in exile, watching everyday that our nation and her people have been for 120 years, and continue to be, robbed of their RIGHTS.

It's time to get things done, not procrastinate and fight each other, hope, or wait for so-called an initiative.

Iran needs to move its @$$ NOW.

With all respects, Blue.

p.s. I apologies in advance if my tone sounds a bit harsh. It is critical for all of us to know how this project CAN GET DONE and have no false expectations that feel-good words like HOPE is involved in its achievement.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

If the Iran Russia military deal get executed and implemented, specially the fighter jet section, then this current mistrust would disappear. And i hope we get rid of this unfavorable atmosphere between two countries. It is a must to stop American expansionism in middle east and east of Europe.

Iran can help Russia to overcome the proxy wars initiated by west in east of Europe politically and militarily. This strategic cooperation in Syria which aims to destroy American plots for regional powers, can expand to other areas of interest where NATO and USA are countered effectively.

It all Depends on Russian leadership, what they do, actually detemines destiny of the region. Without mutual trust, transregional powers would be able to expand into our backyards. Take Libya and Georgia as examples.

Must wait and see.


----------



## sha ah

I understand what you're saying however the inflation rate in Iran is at 20% or more while the interest rate is 16%

This means that your deposit is losing at least 4% of its buying power every year. The issue is that people want a return on their investment, not a loss.

Just to give you an idea, if the inflation rate is 20% and if the interest rate was only something like 2%, this would mean that if you were to deposit 1 million Toman, in one years time, it would cost you around 1.2 million Toman to purchase the same products, however if your deposit has barely grown then essentially your deposit is losing its buying power over time.

In approximately 3 years time your deposit could lose 50% of its buying power which is a nightmare for the middle class trying to lead a stable lifestyle. it's almost like the opposite of compound interest when your deposit / invesment is devaluing exponentially.

In such a situation who in their right mind would want to leave their savings or investment in the bank ? 

Think about it, a few years ago if you would have converted 50 million Rial to USD, right now you would be sitting on 270 million Rial. Can you blame people for doing so ?

At the same time I've heard that the government has cracked down on speculative activities, especially with the US Dollar, but then there's always the black market.

To bring down inflation rate the solution is to raise the interest rate to match or be slightly above inflation. 

With inflation in Iran at 20%, if the interest rate was 20 to 25% then people would feel safe and satisfied leaving their deposit in the bank since speculative activities are inherently risky afterall. 

If you recall a few years ago at one point the Rial went from 200,000 to 100,000 against the dollar. Many speculators lost their investment. 

So if people are offered a guaranteed, stable return or at the least they're promised that their savings won't lose buying power, millions will feel satisfied leaving their deposit in the bank.





aryobarzan said:


> As per @EvilWesteners posts..those people already are in Iran...just use them if not already we just do not know.
> 
> As for Interest rate..do not increase that...why..Interest money given to a deposit is like creating money without any work (labour) behind it and that will add to huge liquidity in Iran which is a problem
> 
> Money should be created by work (production) not borne in a bank ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

EvilWesteners said:


> Let me clarify what I have said before, as I am always a bit insecure in being misunderstood - and particularly careful in using my words not to misrepresent things.
> 
> When I was working at RR, I had an Iranian mentor (for about 10+ of the years I was there). He is one of the sweetest individuals I have ever met. He use to peel oranges and give them to me when I had some of the most nightmare project management positions in the company. He was loved by all the Iranians at RR (and you can imagine, Iranians can barely get along together and have their priorities right - we sometimes eat our own out of 1) fear, 2) misguided loyalties, and 3) mostly our arrogance and ignorance (really the same thing).
> 
> Still, think of it, no easy feat to be loved by 40+ Iranians, different generations, some highly educated, some not, some from prior to Iran revolution, and some after. So, now you think to yourself what a sweetheart he must be, to be loved by so many people. His poetry and proverbs are also incredible. Anyways, I love this man - he was there when I needed someone. When I had everyone fighting me, he calmed me down and reminded me that winning with style is more important than winning for egotistical bragging. I learned a lot from him at a time when I was a bowl of fire ready to rip everyone a new ARSE as the brits say.
> 
> He is in Iran, and he is retired, and he is ready to help, IF THEY ASK HIM. He also has a good reputation with Iranian authorities in this area. He has delivered for them, many things, to do with RR engines parts, and things. I cannot say too much about this.
> 
> This man has 2 things to offer an Iranian engine design and manufacturing project:
> 
> 1) his technical knowledge - which is far more than anyone can imagine or I can describe without being accused of showing off. Just take my word for it. He is technically incredible.
> 
> 2. his project management skills - he is loved, his approach/style is very different (than mine, which is brute force and technical showmanship) while his is far more sophisticated and smarter. I would work for him for FREE. No b.s. - that is the TRUTH.
> 
> In my estimation, he can develop an AL21 to the point of "_testing_" a new engine (READ THAT WORD CAREFULLY), within one year. May be, just may be, within 8 months, if MAPNA helps with some things, which I can't mention here.
> 
> If this man WAS put in charge, if he is given the funding he needs, if he has as much support as Bavar 373 did, THERE IS NO WAY ANYONE ON EARTH CAN CONVINCE ME THAT IRAN CANNOT BUILD AL21F within one year. No one. No one. Iran CAN. I would bet you everything I own, including my salary, and my retirement fund.
> 
> To make it faster, better, to allow Iran to also build the equivalent of a ALF 502 and/or RR Tay 650 (there is nothing he DOES NOT KNOW about T650, nothing, absolutely nothing, it was his baby when I joined after my post grad decades ago), THEN IRAN HAS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE ...
> 
> Iran has to do ONE MORE THING on top of everything else ...
> 
> Give amnesty to children whose family members have been or are still in sensitive positions outside Iran.
> 
> Iran needs those that truly LOVE Iran.
> 
> I understand it is hard to distinguish between those that love Iran and love money and serve the Western global domination for a fist fully of Dollars, often hurting IRAN as a result.
> 
> I know asswipes like M. Alinejad may piss them off, but most Iranians outside are not this charlatan getting money from Saudis protected by U.S. state dept.
> 
> But many people I know, and I have worked with, and I would work with again, who would BENEFIT IRAN, need amnesty to be able to go back to Iran. These kids did nothing wrong. It was not their fault that their family members were in certain positions in the Shah's regime. Some of the other stuff they have done, often out of anger when they were young, need to be forgiven for the sake of a bigger picture for the good of Iran and her people and their future.
> 
> Not talking about myself. I have never done anything that would concern MYSELF, but my family has a long history in the military in Iran.
> 
> If he tells me that I can go back to Iran, I would give up my cushy job, TODAY, and get on a plane tonight, and go back to Iran. But I only trust him. And many others would also trust him and go back to help Iran build engines that are stifling the AF development projects all around us, including Pakistan and India.
> 
> I know what I say here is monitored by SOME very close to my vacinity. Still, I am not afraid (not at this point of my life, don't give a s**t) to mention this openly here. I would be on the plane this evening to go back and help. Heck, I would sleep on the factory floor over there, like I use to at RR.
> 
> I only need a few hours of sleep. Iran always underestimates motivation. Westerners never do. They instead, bank on it.
> 
> But I only trust this one man. No one else there, since I don't know them.
> 
> Here are the facts from my conversations with him (and I just talked to him a few days ago regarding his house in Hamstead) so I know what he wants more than anything else on earth, now that his granddaughter has (finally) a boy ...
> 
> He wants to SERVE Iran.
> 
> Many of us do. We don't need cars or money or homes. We had it all and saw how empty all of is. Like having sex with the most pretties girls on earth. After a few times, it's no big deal. The ego trip, obsession of achievement, only lasts for 2-3 days. Love for Iran, never ends. EVER, until we are put in our graves. It's in our blood. Only stupidity and arrogance makes us forget it temporarily, until sooner or later (as my dad use to say, RIP) ... elephants will remember and want to go back home to Hindustan (Feel yadeh hindostan mikoneh). You all have heard it before.
> 
> Iranian authorities MUST FIRST MAKE A DECISION that they want an engine for their NEW to be, developed AIR FORCE.
> 
> Apparently, this decision has not been made yet, or we are not informed of it (for very good reasons, e.g. blocking parts and support from Iran's suppliers, like they did with equipment for nuclear energy in 1999-2006)
> 
> I have no knowledge whatsoever of what this potential engine development would entail. I have no knowledge of how Iranian authorities fight/win project priorities and funding between different ministries or departments. I know how the West does it, but ZERO knowledge on Iran's way/methods.
> 
> As far as I understand it (which is very little, no matter how much I research it), Iran has NOT made any decisions, or indications, of any sorts, that they release publicly, or that they want to design a platform for the military fighter jets or bombers. AGAIN, may be they don't want anyone to know yet until it is done.
> 
> Iran DOES HAVE one of the greatest aviation engineers with incredible personality (believe me it matters so much), and he can bring back to Iran about at least 30 Iranians may be as much as 40+ Iranian engineers currently living in Europe, and a few in U.S. and other places. These are SEASONED engineers who have DELIVERED results in incredible positions working for highest level aviation firms in Western hemisphere. These engineers are all millionaires,so there is a lot of money coming back too (IF, big IF, they take all their money back).
> 
> So I HOPE I was CRYSTAL CLEAR about everything and hope I did not over exaggerate or mislead anyone with any bravado or false expectations.
> 
> There are too many issues and aspects of detail involved here. Just like a project management for engine development. Someone needs to have good judgement, the necessary funds, and put it all together and make it happen. Who has the authority to START THIS RIVER WITH THE FIRST DROP OF WATER ???
> 
> God Bless Iran and her people


Zendeh bashi doost gerami

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran can but even with its tank program, they messed around with different upgrades and designs and finally went with a T-90 knockoff.

Even the sevome khordad is based on the BUK and Iran's missiles are largely based off of foreign technogy (scud)

Iran's drones saw a massive surge after Iran captured several American drones.

The fact of the matter is that Iran is a medium sized country with a limited budget. On its own there is limit to what Iran can do.

The SU-30 and all other SU-27 variants are all based on a proven and tested platform.

Chinese jets, well China has the budget and up until recently they were still buying and copying Russian tech.

Irans airforce needs an injection of foreign technology and a few dozen capable fighters to keep the airforce afloat.

Iran doesn't even have a network of communication satellites. Yes they can use terrain recognition software but what about at night or in bad weather ? 

I suppose Iran can use Glosnass or Beidou but usually access to those networks is reserved for consumers of Russian/Chinese hardware.

Just as an example look at South Korea or Japan. No sanctions, economy is booming, they have unlimited access to Western technology, yet they have yet to produce a stealth fighter. 

Right now South Korea is working on a prototype which will at first function with external weapons and they're planning an internal weapons bay afterwards. 

Can Iran produce a 4th gen fighter ? Yes but will it be world-class ? Will it be as effective as a Rafale or an f-16 or even the latest variant of the SU-30 or SU-35 ? I highly doubt it.

Did Russia mess around with the S-300 ? Yes but that backfired since now Iran is self sufficient in the air defense department Also that was when Medvedev was in charge and those were different times with Russia and China having easy going ties with the west under Obama. Those days are long gone.

Only time will tell but I do want to see Iran purchase Russian and Chinese fighters, in a way to get the best of both worlds. We will have to wait and see what happens.




EvilWesteners said:


> Forgive me *Blue*, if I am ignorant and not understand what you are saying here ... BUT
> 
> to me,
> 
> HOPE is nothing. It's like, a word. In project management, in engine development, or anything of this type, HOPE, is a word, that is ... like nothing. It's like saying, STRAWBERRIES. It means nothing.
> 
> *A Matter of initiativ*e??? not sure what this means either. I have spent my life designing, building, fixing, changing, making things happen for the customer in the aviation engine industry. I do not know, nor have I ever experienced, "*initiative *...". I don't even know what this is suppose to be at a time like this for Iran.
> 
> If a country wants to build an engine --- they make a decision to do so, get the best project director they can get, pay 250,000 pounds per year, or more, Safran is paying nearly a million now, and you give the political support, the funding, more funding, more funding after funds run out, and support, and support, then more support, until it is done, they go back and make things better, fix the issues that were not addressed during feasibility study and requirements analysis, and then fix those.
> 
> I have never heard the words *HOPE *or *INITIATIVE *in all my years in my career. These words don't exist.
> 
> If Iran wants to build an engine - then they can build an engine. They have what it takes and can get the rest and get it *done*.
> 
> I swear to you, IT IS THAT EASY.
> 
> They need a project director that has the guts, the fortitude, and the experience with a clear VISION - then that project is DONE, within a time, and with funds. Some times delays, almost always lots of money wasted, and over the budget, but it gets done.
> 
> Only A4 Skyhawk project was done like a charm. Still project managers talk about it. It was an incredible project management experience.
> 
> There is no *HOPE*. No "*matter of initiative*".
> 
> I am sorry if I seem ANAL about these words. I just feel if Iran is listening, they need to S**T OR GET OFF THE POT.
> 
> Talking, and talking, and talking and saying they want to buy SU-30 or SU-35 blah blah blah blah is FREAKING STUPID, almost as bad as video of Qaher 313, and its freakin design from day one. IT WAS STUPID then, and it is stupid now.
> 
> In 1970s about a year before I left Iran, I remember as a kid I was at a bashgah, with family members, (at a TF airbase), and they were talking about 2 things while drinking dutch beer ... which was recently delivered via a 747 ...
> 
> 1) how they will add a conformal tank to the bottom of F4-e
> 2) how they can also do the same for F-5e so it can increase its range, and may be even redesign the landing gear
> 
> This is 5 decades ago.
> 
> If Iran wants to build something - they they have proven that they *CAN*.
> 
> U.S. military NEVER IMAGINED that Iran's bistatic radar tracking lock would be as powerful and as effective as Sevom Khordad.
> 
> Iran has proven ... IT *CAN*.
> 
> So, this is not a matter of HOPE. They have to make a decision to DO or NOT TO DO.
> 
> IT really is that simple. They have devoted Iranians who would fight for that land ... they have in their blood.
> 
> It's about money allocation, political will, strategic decision making ... etc.
> 
> Not about HOPE or INITIATIVE.
> 
> Those are words one uses when our people's rights are NOT being trampled on every single day, while millions of Iranians are living in exile, watching everyday that our nation and her people have been for 120 years, and continue to be, robbed of their RIGHTS.
> 
> It's time to get things done, not procrastinate and fight each other, hope, or wait for so-called an initiative.
> 
> Iran needs to move its @$$ NOW.
> 
> With all respects, Blue.
> 
> p.s. I apologies in advance if my tone sounds a bit harsh. It is critical for all of us to know how this project CAN GET DONE and have no false expectations that feel-good words like HOPE is involved in its achievement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

WudangMaster said:


> Zendeh bashi doost gerami


Thank you my brother.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

sha ah said:


> Iran can but even with its tank program, they messed around with different upgrades and designs and finally went with a T-90 knockoff.
> 
> Even the sevome khordad is based on the BUK and Iran's missiles are largely based off of foreign technogy (scud)
> 
> Iran's drones saw a massive surge after Iran captured several American drones.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that Iran is a medium sized country with a limited budget. On its own there is limit to what Iran can do.
> 
> The SU-30 and all other SU-27 variants are all based on a proven and tested platform.
> 
> Chinese jets, well China has the budget and up until recently they were still buying and copying Russian tech.
> 
> Irans airforce needs an injection of foreign technology and a few dozen capable fighters to keep the airforce afloat.
> 
> Iran doesn't even have a network of communication satellites. Yes they can use terrain recognition software but what about at night or in bad weather ?
> 
> I suppose Iran can use Glosnass or Beidou but usually access to those networks is reserved for consumers of Russian/Chinese hardware.
> 
> Just as an example look at South Korea or Japan. No sanctions, economy is booming, they have unlimited access to Western technology, yet they have yet to produce a stealth fighter.
> 
> Right now South Korea is working on a prototype which will at first function with external weapons and they're planning an internal weapons bay afterwards.
> 
> Can Iran produce a 4th gen fighter ? Yes but will it be world-class ? Will it be as effective as a Rafale or an f-16 or even the latest variant of the SU-30 or SU-35 ? I highly doubt it.
> 
> Did Russia mess around with the S-300 ? Yes but that backfired since now Iran is self sufficient in the air defense department Also that was when Medvedev was in charge and those were different times with Russia and China having easy going ties with the west under Obama. Those days are long gone.
> 
> Only time will tell but I do want to see Iran purchase Russian and Chinese fighters, in a way to get the best of both worlds. We will have to wait and see what happens.



Does not need to be "world class". Does not need to be Rafale.

Iran needs to *copy F-14 (new airframes of course)*, a platform it knows extremely well, one of the best radius at max speed turn rate, and ample room for long range BVR missiles. Iran just needs a new engine for it, as well as a new hybrid PESA with solid state amplifiers or ideally AESA radar. Iran can also add IRST although from what someone who is an expert on the subject explained to me, IRST is not much help against a platform like F22 or F35. Not as much as people think.

Then this is a formidable aircraft, and like Su35 will last Iran another 15 years minimum.

Iran today is not Iran in 2003. It has come along long way since then.

Iran can also develop satellites with the right funding and the right individuals.

The reason other countries have problems developing technologies is not because they cannot. Again, as is the case with Iran, they have lots of different priorities and spend their money and time on many projects rather than one or few.

Iran needs a "competent" or "good enough" air force, as this adds to Iran's box of tools, creates another layer of deterrence, and allows Iran's air force to get enough training and stay within reach of the latest technologies to make sure it does not fall behind so far that it is flying antiques.

If Iran develops its own engine (say an AL21F) and a hybrid PESA radar with solid state amplifiers, and a level of avionics that is good enough, is Russia MORE LIKELY to sell Iran, say Su-57 or China sell Iran J-31? I would say yes. Not saying Iran needs it or not, but saying that their strategic perception of Iran changes.

F-14 is outdated because of its engines, and avionics, radar, and weapons integration. Not because of its air frame design. If these are brought to date, with Fakour 90 updated with ECM and better thermal batteries, better active seeker, of course (newly built F-14s) it would be better for Iran than a Su-30 or 35, IMHO.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> Does not need to be "world class". Does not need to be Rafale.
> 
> Iran needs to copy F-14, a platform it knows extremely well, one of the best radius at max speed turn rate, and ample room for long range BVR missiles. Iran just needs a new engine for it, as well as a new hybrid PESA with solid state amplifiers or ideally AESA radar. Iran can also add IRST although from what someone who is an expert on the subject explained to me, IRST is not much help against a platform like F22 or F35. Not as much as people think.
> 
> Then this is a formidable aircraft, and like Su35 will last Iran another 15 years minimum.
> 
> Iran today is not Iran in 2003. It has come along long way since then.
> 
> Iran can also develop satellites with the right funding and the right individuals.
> 
> There reason other countries have problems developing technologies is not because they cannot. Again, as is the case with Iran, they have lots of different priorities and spend their money and time on many projects rather than one or few.
> 
> Iran needs a "competent" or "good enough" air force, as this ads to Iran's box of tools, creates another layer of deterrence, and allows Iran's air force to get enough training and staying within reach of the latest technologies to make sure it does not fall behind so far that it is flying antiques.
> 
> If Iran develops its own engine (say an AL21F) and a hybrid PESA radar with solid state amplifiers, and a level of avionics that is good enough, is Russia MORE LIKELY to sell Iran, say Su-57 or China sell Iran J-31? I would say yes.
> 
> F-14 is outdated because of its engines, and avionics, radar, and weapons integration. If these are brought to date, with Fakour 90 updated with ECM and better thermal batteries, better active seeker, it would be better for Iran than a Su-30 or 35, IMHO.



There is not enough F-14 worthy of flying many combat hours. During a sustained air campaign many would break down. It’s a heavy maintenance aircraft and expensive to maintain (typical American philosophy).

Compare that to SU-30 which follows Russian philosophy of being resilient and cheap to maintain in respect to their western counterparts. F-14 reverse engineering was already brought up to SL (this much was leaked during Q-313 unveiling) and SL shut it down and pushed Iranian engineers to develop an indigenous design. That hasn’t happened yet.

Also another big issue which no one wants to address is the long term economy of Iran. You guys are recommending the same path that destroyed the Soviet Union and is destroying the US today. All this focus on military expansion and zero focus on long term sustainability of Iran’s economy and ecosystems (water, drought, poverty etc) will only cause a major systemic problem later on.

China has the economic power to build anything it wants and massively expand its military. Right now it’s naval expansion might be the biggest naval expansion in the history of mankind with the rate Chinese shipyards are pumping out warships.

Iran on the other hand is more like that one person who has a credit card (s) and is buying everything on borrowed time & money with no collateral to back it up (ie economic power).

For Iran to have a true war machine it needs an economy that can feed that war machine. Or else Iran will always be a middle tier power stuck in the sandbox of the Middle East bumping heads with Jews on one hand and Baboon Arabia on the other.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> There is not enough F-14 worthy of flying many combat hours. During a sustained air campaign many would break down. It’s a heavy maintenance aircraft and expensive to maintain (typical American philosophy).
> 
> Compare that to SU-30 which follows Russian philosophy of being resilient and cheap to maintain in respect to their western counterparts. F-14 reverse engineering was already brought up to SL (this much was leaked during Q-313 unveiling) and SL shut it down and pushed Iranian engineers to develop an indigenous design. That hasn’t happened yet.
> 
> Also another big issue which no one wants to address is the long term economy of Iran. You guys are recommending the same path that destroyed the Soviet Union and is destroying the US today. All this focus on military expansion and zero focus on long term sustainability of Iran’s economy and ecosystems (water, drought, poverty etc) will only cause a major systemic problem later on.
> 
> China has the economic power to build anything it wants and massively expand its military. Right now it’s naval expansion might be the biggest naval expansion in the history of mankind with the rate Chinese shipyards are pumping out warships.
> 
> Iran on the other hand is more like that one person who has a credit card (s) and is buying everything on borrowed time & money with no collateral to back it up (ie economic power).
> 
> For Iran to have a true war machine it needs an economy that can feed that war machine. Or else Iran will always be a middle tier power stuck in the sandbox of the Middle East bumping heads with Jews on one hand and Baboon Arabia on the other.



Good points. But you do recognize Economy is connected to Defense? right?

If Iran can secure its rights through display of defensive strength, it achieves investments that are protected, be it Russia or China or India or Malaysia or others and its economy will do substantially better.

Why do countries spend so much money on Defense? it is mostly for their economy.

If you don't have a strong military, you cannot have a strong economy IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO BE A U.S. POPPET.

Iran's economy was doing well 2007-2009, so what changed?

Lack of security made many countries pull out of investing in Iran.

You are correct, Iran needs to focus on its economy, food supply, etc. but a strong military ensures a stronger economy.

Iran can also sell defensive products and hence subsidize its defense industry, as most top defense exporters do.

Regarding F-14 ... yes it is maintenance intensive, I have worked on FB-111s in UK for years which is the closest thing to an F-14. Fixed wing Su-30 may be much better in maintenance. But among many things to consider, including whether or not Iran can even get its hands on Sukhois, F-14 would be a great alternative.

Also, my suggestion was not that Iran use old F-14 air frames in Iran's storage depot, but to build new ones, completely new air frames. After 50 years, it should be able to do that. Hence one of the reasons why I even suggest this.

Finally, Iran needs to first ACHIEVE MIDDLE TIER as you put it, before it expects to achieve a super power level TIER status. Can't run, if it can't walk first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Yes and yes..both of you..it is economy..and F-14 as start point...

Never forget Iran has world's no 1 oil and gas reserves combined so the sky is the limit...just get every one working...make things ...build things ...fu**ing rouhanni wasted 8 years of time... give me some funds and I will put a team together and make all the avionics for the new fighter...engine is evilwesterner,'s job..lol..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> Iran's economy was doing well 2007-2009, so what changed?



No, this is a fallacy. It depends what your definition of “well” is. If it is in relation today then yes it was doing “well”. But if it’s in relation to a first world economy then it was actually smoke and mirrors.

The Iranian economy in later 2000’s was being unsustainably pumped up on a period of massive oil revenues (by some estimates up to $1T dollars). Everyone and their mother was buying Iranian oil (Europe, China, Asia, South America, etc) and oil was trading above $100 dollars a barrel (and even hit $140+) before financial crisis of ‘08.

But this completely ignores Iran’s economy. This was a Baboon Arabia economy that was staying afloat completely on fossil fuel exports. Nothing worthy of praise. In the decade that followed Europe, South America, Asia, India all found other sources of oil due to sanctions. US fracking brought massive amounts of oil on to the market by making US #1 oil production country.

So nothing worthy of praise for that period. And most of the revenues I mentioned was lost to massive corruption by Ahmadinejad and the Republic as a whole instead of being invested into building a stronger national manufacturing and domestic production capability.

It doesn’t matter what weapon you build, if your foundation is corrupt and your business reform archaic....you will collapse without firing a single shot.

The biggest disaster to Iran was the policy of “neither East nor west”. By not making yourself connected to the world economy and making countries DEPENDENT on you, you lose all leverage against sanctions and economic coercion. A strong military might provide counter to invasion, but it will do nothing for foreign investment and sanctions.

You can’t force people to trade with you. If only this was written in Quran, then maybe these mullahs with no economic experience wouldn’t have built such a disastrous economic policy. Add in corruption from the so called scholars and technocrats. Add In subservient thinking to the West from the liberals and presto you got the Islamic Republic recipe.

China was smart, it led its population explode (Iran stupidly hampered it after the war) and now the world is facing a birthing shortage. I don’t need to explain to someone as smart as you what happens when you don’t have enough babies becoming working adults who spend and generate GDP in the economic engine of capitalism. The future of the world is looking pretty grim, hence why China is double downing on massive AI investments and technological advancements to build an economy of the future that relies on less humans (less being born after all).

Iran on the other hand allowed Chinese products to flood the market and kill off major Iranian manufacturing companies that couldn’t compete including companies that had been around since Shah and Reza Shah! But thank god Iran just banned imports of South Korean fridges and stoves....*rolls eyes*

I digress, back to the topic at hand. If you look at the Republic I challenge you to find

A car company that builds on the same quality as Mercedes Benz

A phone company that builds on the same quality as Apple/Samsung/Huwawei

A semi conductor/chip manufacturer on the same level as AMD/Nividia

A plane manufacture on the level of Airbus/Boeing/Bombardier

A payment services company that processes on the level of Alipay/Visa/Mastercard

These are just generic examples to illustrate the wide gap between Iran and other emerging countries that are reaching that level (India, China). This self sufficiency economy that Iran has a pipe dream of building will never happen as long as economic reform, corruption, and the brith of generation that is dedicated and filled with innovation and hard work ethic that rivals the Chinese....are not solved.

China made the West dependent on it for the supply of consumer goods its populations crave. It could have easily said margh Ba America and shunned US for last 3 decades. But Chinese were much more long term thinking. They knew how to embed themselves into the very fabric of western society. Russia though much weaker still has leverage on Europe. Just look at natural gas prices In Europe. If Russia turns off the taps, Europe freezes to death over the winter.

But Europe is building alternatives via Qatar gas line and Turkish-Azeri gas line to remove Russian blackmail, so Russia’s future also doesn’t look too god.

Iran since 1979 has built ZERO economic leverage. It relied on fossil fuel exports which is now a dying fuel source and by 2100 will likely be completely obsolete. It never thought the West could take itself off of the need for Iranian oil supply in the world and it also made the same calculation for the East. Well boy was that stupid. Iran isn’t even China’s top 3 oil supplier. To make matters worse if Iran doesn’t receive $150B in energy investment it will eventually become a net importer of gasoline and oil....how ironic.

So in conclusion, strong military doesn’t lead to strong economy in 2021. Without firing a single bullet Uncle Sam sent 50% of Iranians into poverty. Iran’s insistence of not building lasting trade relations with major western countries (or eastern countries) and instead relying on oil for much of the Republics life has led to an economic crisis that cannot be solved by JCPOA alone.

Iran could have 100 nukes, 300 F-14’s and the same economic problems would exist in Iran today, tomorrow, and in 2030. You cant force US and Europe to trade with you. Iran made itself irrelevant to the world global economy. While countries would love to take advantage of making money (after all business is business), sanctions keep them away. There is not a NEED to trade with Iran. And that is the key factor that will lead to the possible fall of the Republic, not because Iran didn’t have SU-35 or an ICBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> No, this is a fallacy. It depends what your definition of “well” is. If it is in relation today then yes it was doing “well”. But if it’s in relation to a first world economy then it was actually smoke and mirrors.
> 
> The Iranian economy in later 2000’s was being unsustainably pumped up on a period of massive oil revenues (by some estimates up to $1T dollars). Everyone and their mother was buying Iranian oil (Europe, China, Asia, South America, etc) and oil was trading above $100 dollars a barrel (and even hit $140+) before financial crisis of ‘08.
> 
> But this completely ignores Iran’s economy. This was a Baboon Arabia economy that was staying afloat completely on fossil fuel exports. Nothing worthy of praise. In the decade that followed Europe, South America, Asia, India all found other sources of oil due to sanctions. US fracking brought massive amounts of oil on to the market by making US #1 oil production country.
> 
> So nothing worthy of praise for that period. And most of the revenues I mentioned was lost to massive corruption by Ahmadinejad and the Republic as a whole.
> 
> It doesn’t matter what weapon you build, if your foundation is corrupt and your business reform archaic....you will collapse without firing a single shot.
> 
> The biggest disaster to Iran was the policy of “neither East nor west”. By not making yourself connected to the world economy and making countries DEPENDENT on you, you lose all leverage against sanctions and economic coercion. A strong military might provide counter to invasion, but it will do nothing for foreign investment and sanctions.
> 
> You can’t force people to trade with you. If only this was written in Quran, then maybe these mullahs with no economic experience wouldn’t have built such a disastrous economic policy. Add in corruption from the so called scholars and technocrats. Add In subservient thinking to the West from the liberals and presto you got the Islamic Republic recipe.
> 
> China was smart, it led its population explode (Iran stupidly hampered it after the war) and now the world is facing a birthing shortage. I don’t need to explain to someone as smart as you what happens when you don’t have enough babies becoming working adults who spend and generate GDP in the economic engine of capitalism. The future of the world is looking pretty grim, hence why China is double downing on massive AI investments and technological advancements to build an economy of the future that relies on less humans (less being born after all).
> 
> I digress, back to the topic at hand. If you look at the Republic I challenge you to find
> 
> A car company that builds on the same quality as Mercedes Benz
> 
> A phone company that builds on the same quality as Apple/Samsung/Huwawei
> 
> A semi conductor/chip manufacturer on the same level as AMD/Nividia
> 
> A plane manufacture on the level of Airbus/Boeing/Bombardier
> 
> A payment services company that processes on the level of Alipay/Visa/Mastercard
> 
> These are just generic examples to illustrate the wide gap between Iran and other emerging countries that are reaching that level (India, China). This self sufficiency economy that Iran has a pipe dream of building will never happen as long as economic reform, corruption, and the brith of generation that is dedicated and filled with innovation and hard work ethic that rivals the Chinese....are not solved.
> 
> China made the West dependent on it for the supply of consumer goods its populations crave. It could have easily said margh Ba America and shunned US for last 3 decades. But Chinese were much more long term thinking. They knew how to embed themselves into the very fabric of western society. Russia though much weaker still has leverage on Europe. Just look at natural gas prices In Europe. If Russia turns off the taps, Europe freezes to death over the winter.
> 
> Iran since 1979 has built ZERO economic leverage. It relied on fossil fuel exports which is now a dying fuel source and by 2100 will likely be completely obsolete. It never thought the West could take itself off of the need for Iranian oil supply in the world and it also made the same calculation for the East. Well boy was that stupid. Iran isn’t even China’s top 3 oil supplier. To make matters worse if Iran doesn’t receive $150B in energy investment it will eventually become a net importer of gasoline and oil....how ironic.
> 
> So in conclusion, strong military doesn’t lead to strong economy in 2021. Without firing a single bullet Uncle Sam sent 50% of Iranians into poverty. Iran’s insistence of not building lasting trade relations with major western countries (or eastern countries) and instead relying on oil for much of the Republics life has led to an economic crisis that cannot be solved by JCPOA alone.
> 
> Iran could have 100 nukes, 300 F-14’s and the same economic problems would exist in Iran today, tomorrow, and in 2030. You cant force US and Europe to trade with you. Iran made itself irrelevant to the world global economy. While countries would love to take advantage of making money (after all business is business), sanctions keep them away. There is not a NEED to trade with Iran. And that is the key factor.



My friend, most Iranians that love their country share your passion, but you cannot make statements like " Iran since 1979 has built ZERO economic leverage " ...

Inadvertently you proved my point. Just because a nation has a good economy, for a while, it does not mean anything, hence UAE, again and again, despite its many economic developments, or Egypt, or India, or even Turkey.

Iran produces 98% of its own medicine, 87% of its own cars, has advanced in so many ways ... may not be good enough to please us Iranians as our expectations are to be number 1 on the planet ...

But compare Iran to countries in region for a FAIR comparison ... like Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, even India.

You are not being fair because you love Iran and want Iran to be the greatest on earth.

Rome wasn't built in a day.

Iran has lots to yet achieve, we all know that. But your unfair comparison of what Iran should accomplish is not based on a sense of realistic accomplishments.

Iran was in the hands of U.S. up until 1979, then an 8 year war with almost the whole world, now it is growing.

China was nothing when I went there in 2003, then when I was there in 2008 it was growing, in 2016 it became what it is today.

Be fair in your analysis. I know you want Iran to be TIER ONE, but your expectations are just not real hence why you are almost always disappointed in every post you submit. I can feel your frustration with Iran. But it is your own frustration why Iran cannot be everything that you want it to be.

It is commendable that you love your country, want it so much to achieve a great deal, and are disappointed when reality sets in. Often I feel the same way. But F-14 manufacturing is something Iran can do where it is today. And yes I agree, Iran should massively work on its economy. Personally I have a thousand ideas with manufacturing, but it is not my area of expertise to make comments here.

For one, i would build a common structure electric platform for Iranian cars, as GM is working on, it is simple for Iran to do. I can touch on many other industries from water desalination to thermal solar.

But we should all be reasonable with our expectations.

Otherwise, considering my background, I would say that Iran should build an F22.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## jauk

EvilWesteners said:


> Let me clarify what I have said before, as I am always a bit insecure in being misunderstood - and particularly careful in using my words not to misrepresent things.
> 
> When I was working at RR, I had an Iranian mentor (for about 10+ of the years I was there). He is one of the sweetest individuals I have ever met. He use to peel oranges and give them to me when I had some of the most nightmare project management positions in the company. He was loved by all the Iranians at RR (and you can imagine, Iranians can barely get along together and have their priorities right - we sometimes eat our own out of 1) fear, 2) misguided loyalties, and 3) mostly our arrogance and ignorance (really the same thing).
> 
> Still, think of it, no easy feat to be loved by 40+ Iranians, different generations, some highly educated, some not, some from prior to Iran revolution, and some after. So, now you think to yourself what a sweetheart he must be, to be loved by so many people. His poetry and proverbs are also incredible. Anyways, I love this man - he was there when I needed someone. When I had everyone fighting me, he calmed me down and reminded me that winning with style is more important than winning for egotistical bragging. I learned a lot from him at a time when I was a bowl of fire ready to rip everyone a new ARSE as the brits say.
> 
> He is in Iran, and he is retired, and he is ready to help, IF THEY ASK HIM. He also has a good reputation with Iranian authorities in this area. He has delivered for them, many things, to do with RR engines parts, and things. I cannot say too much about this.
> 
> This man has 2 things to offer an Iranian engine design and manufacturing project:
> 
> 1) his technical knowledge - which is far more than anyone can imagine or I can describe without being accused of showing off. Just take my word for it. He is technically incredible.
> 
> 2. his project management skills - he is loved, his approach/style is very different (than mine, which is brute force and technical showmanship) while his is far more sophisticated and smarter. I would work for him for FREE. No b.s. - that is the TRUTH.
> 
> In my estimation, he can develop an AL21 to the point of "_testing_" a new engine (READ THAT WORD CAREFULLY), within one year. May be, just may be, within 8 months, if MAPNA helps with some things, which I can't mention here.
> 
> If this man WAS put in charge, if he is given the funding he needs, if he has as much support as Bavar 373 did, THERE IS NO WAY ANYONE ON EARTH CAN CONVINCE ME THAT IRAN CANNOT BUILD AL21F within one year. No one. No one. Iran CAN. I would bet you everything I own, including my salary, and my retirement fund.
> 
> To make it faster, better, to allow Iran to also build the equivalent of a ALF 502 and/or RR Tay 650 (there is nothing he DOES NOT KNOW about T650, nothing, absolutely nothing, it was his baby when I joined after my post grad decades ago), THEN IRAN HAS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE ...
> 
> Iran has to do ONE MORE THING on top of everything else ...
> 
> Give amnesty to children whose family members have been or are still in sensitive positions outside Iran.
> 
> Iran needs those that truly LOVE Iran.
> 
> I understand it is hard to distinguish between those that love Iran and love money and serve the Western global domination for a fist fully of Dollars, often hurting IRAN as a result.
> 
> I know asswipes like M. Alinejad may piss them off, but most Iranians outside are not this charlatan getting money from Saudis protected by U.S. state dept.
> 
> But many people I know, and I have worked with, and I would work with again, who would BENEFIT IRAN, need amnesty to be able to go back to Iran. These kids did nothing wrong. It was not their fault that their family members were in certain positions in the Shah's regime. Some of the other stuff they have done, often out of anger when they were young, need to be forgiven for the sake of a bigger picture for the good of Iran and her people and their future.
> 
> Not talking about myself. I have never done anything that would concern MYSELF, but my family has a long history in the military in Iran.
> 
> If he tells me that I can go back to Iran, I would give up my cushy job, TODAY, and get on a plane tonight, and go back to Iran. But I only trust him. And many others would also trust him and go back to help Iran build engines that are stifling the AF development projects all around us, including Pakistan and India.
> 
> I know what I say here is monitored by SOME very close to my vacinity. Still, I am not afraid (not at this point of my life, don't give a s**t) to mention this openly here. I would be on the plane this evening to go back and help. Heck, I would sleep on the factory floor over there, like I use to at RR.
> 
> I only need a few hours of sleep. Iran always underestimates motivation. Westerners never do. They instead, bank on it.
> 
> But I only trust this one man. No one else there, since I don't know them.
> 
> Here are the facts from my conversations with him (and I just talked to him a few days ago regarding his house in Hamstead) so I know what he wants more than anything else on earth, now that his granddaughter has (finally) a boy ...
> 
> He wants to SERVE Iran.
> 
> Many of us do. We don't need cars or money or homes. We had it all and saw how empty all of is. Like having sex with the most pretties girls on earth. After a few times, it's no big deal. The ego trip, obsession of achievement, only lasts for 2-3 days. Love for Iran, never ends. EVER, until we are put in our graves. It's in our blood. Only stupidity and arrogance makes us forget it temporarily, until sooner or later (as my dad use to say, RIP) ... elephants will remember and want to go back home to Hindustan (Feel yadeh hindostan mikoneh). You all have heard it before.
> 
> Iranian authorities MUST FIRST MAKE A DECISION that they want an engine for their NEW to be, developed AIR FORCE.
> 
> Apparently, this decision has not been made yet, or we are not informed of it (for very good reasons, e.g. blocking parts and support from Iran's suppliers, like they did with equipment for nuclear energy in 1999-2006)
> 
> I have no knowledge whatsoever of what this potential engine development would entail. I have no knowledge of how Iranian authorities fight/win project priorities and funding between different ministries or departments. I know how the West does it, but ZERO knowledge on Iran's way/methods.
> 
> As far as I understand it (which is very little, no matter how much I research it), Iran has NOT made any decisions, or indications, of any sorts, that they release publicly, or that they want to design a platform for the military fighter jets or bombers. AGAIN, may be they don't want anyone to know yet until it is done.
> 
> Iran DOES HAVE one of the greatest aviation engineers with incredible personality (believe me it matters so much), and he can bring back to Iran about at least 30 Iranians may be as much as 40+ Iranian engineers currently living in Europe, and a few in U.S. and other places. These are SEASONED engineers who have DELIVERED results in incredible positions working for highest level aviation firms in Western hemisphere. These engineers are all millionaires,so there is a lot of money coming back too (IF, big IF, they take all their money back).
> 
> So I HOPE I was CRYSTAL CLEAR about everything and hope I did not over exaggerate or mislead anyone with any bravado or false expectations.
> 
> There are too many issues and aspects of detail involved here. Just like a project management for engine development. Someone needs to have good judgement, the necessary funds, and put it all together and make it happen. Who has the authority to START THIS RIVER WITH THE FIRST DROP OF WATER ???
> 
> God Bless Iran and her people


Afareen. Vaghean afareen

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> Never forget Iran has world's no 1 oil and gas reserves combined so the sky is the limit...



And Afghanistan has $1T plus in mineral reserves....it’s still a ****hole.

Iran’s energy sector needs $150B (not even exploration) to stay alive, whose going to pay for that Hajizadeh? SL? Rafsanjani’s family? Maybe one of Khomeini’s grandsons?

No one is belittling Iran’s gifted energy reserves, but they need massive amounts of capital to survey, explore, drill, extract, store, and ship across the world. And you also need clients....

Ask yourself this, if tommorrow Iran didn’t exist, would the world economy suffer? The answer is a *resounding no*. If literally tommorrow Iran was wiped off the face of the earth and sunk into the ground....I would be hard pressed to see if the world economy even skips a beat. That’s just sad...considering where this country was 3000 years ago at the center of human civilization and now it could disappear tommorrow and the world Economy wouldn’t even notice.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> And Afghanistan has $1T plus in mineral reserves....it’s still a ****hole.
> 
> Iran’s energy sector needs $150B (not even exploration) to stay alive, whose going to pay for that Hajizadeh? SL? Rafsanjani’s family? Maybe one of Khomeini’s grandsons?
> 
> No one is belittling Iran’s gifted energy reserves, but they need massive amounts of capital to survey, explore, drill, extract, store, and ship across the world. And you also need clients....
> 
> Ask yourself this, if tommorrow Iran didn’t exist, would the world economy suffer? The answer is a *resounding no*. If literally tommorrow Iran was wiped off the face of the earth and sunk into the ground....I would be hard pressed to see if the world economy even skips a beat. That’s just sad...considering where this country was 3000 years ago at the center of human civilization and now it could disappear tommorrow and the world Economy wouldn’t even notice.


If Iran disappears yes nothing happens..the good news is that if US disappears it will be peaceful everywhere.. lol..ok I was kidding 

Capital is always needed to develop any thing....if you ask me where should that capital come from I would say domestic bond issue by the NIOC..give them 10 YEAR BOND at fantastic rate and Vala.. you have your capital...just an example.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> And Afghanistan has $1T plus in mineral reserves....it’s still a ****hole.
> 
> Iran’s energy sector needs $150B (not even exploration) to stay alive, whose going to pay for that Hajizadeh? SL? Rafsanjani’s family? Maybe one of Khomeini’s grandsons?
> 
> No one is belittling Iran’s gifted energy reserves, but they need massive amounts of capital to survey, explore, drill, extract, store, and ship across the world. And you also need clients....
> 
> Ask yourself this, if tommorrow Iran didn’t exist, would the world economy suffer? The answer is a *resounding no*. If literally tommorrow Iran was wiped off the face of the earth and sunk into the ground....I would be hard pressed to see if the world economy even skips a beat. That’s just sad...considering where this country was 3000 years ago at the center of human civilization and now it could disappear tommorrow and the world Economy wouldn’t even notice.



My friend, none of these matter and are all connected to your aspiration for Iran based on your love and passion for that country.

REALITY CHECK ...

Only hand full of counties on earth are even close to economically stable.

Here in U.S. there is a short term $23T debt, and a $80+T long term debt, printing money, buying $30B mortgage backed bonds every month, and $50B other bonds.

U.S. knows it will have problems long term if its money is devalued, hence its new hostility with China.

Most European countries have economic-related based on be it population or investments or natural resources, issues.

Saudi Arabia with its reserves spent $400b of its reserves in the last few years.

China has long term problems with its aging population and with its elites' western-worshiping.

India has many infrastructural, cultural, pollution, and economic problems.

Why are you comparing Iran to a MYTH, an idle aspiration that is just not REALITY?

Yes Iran does need investment, but has also consistently grown its production and oil/gas income outside of sanctions.

IMHO you are too harsh on Iran based on your own unrealistic expectations.

But I also feel your pain. I think many of us do.

Come on over and we will have a cup of tea together, and discuss how we can help Iran in our dreams.






aryobarzan said:


> If Iran disappears yes nothing happens..the good news is that if US disappears it will be peaceful everywhere.. lol..ok I was kidding
> 
> Capital is always needed to develop any thing....if you ask me where should that capital come from I would say domestic bond issue by the NIOC..give them 10 YEAR BOND at fantastic rate and Vala.. you have your capital...just an example.



That is funny ... with U.S. disappearing. But the reality is, also, there will actually be more wars.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> China was nothing when I went there in 2003, then when I was there in 2008 it was growing, in 2016 it became what it is today.



You also need to be fair in your assessment. Saying China was nothing in 2003...when it had ICBM with multiple warheads in 1970 and manufacturing capability of engines that Iran cannot even build in 2021... is not giving a country credit at all. A country the size of China and its population is much harder to bring to a first world country than a country the land size of Iran and 80M people.

Iranians are not living better today then they were in 2010 or even 2000. While it’s commendable Iran can produce some things itself, it doesn’t fix the major systemic issues at play here. At this point there is a risk that we fall into mentality of continuously looking back at our past and saying well we were servants of the west for a while, well we had war, well CIA overthrew our PM, well Qajar dynasty gave away the country. I mean Jesus Christ how far back do we need to go? Stop making excuses every country alive today was ****ed over by another country or countries. The difference is what you make moving forward and stop using that as a handicap as to why you are not pushing the envelope.

So I will just say this to not derail the thread any longer...if you keep giving excuses to the motherland and only focusing on the positives then you are feeding into the problem much like a parent who very much loves their child makes excuses and only showers it with praise only to see the child die of drug overdose 20 years later.

I will just leave you with this video, I hope you can spot the difference in Chinese government mentality Vs Iranian government mentality on its economy and the future.



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454941329671262211

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

TheImmortal said:


> You also need to be fair in your assessment. Saying China was nothing in 2003...when it had ICBM with multiple warheads in 1970 and manufacturing capability of engines that Iran cannot even build in 2021... is not giving a country credit at all. A country the size of China and its population is much harder to bring to a first world country than a country the land size of Iran and 80M people.
> 
> Iranians are not living better today then they were in 2010 or even 2000. While it’s commendable Iran can produce some things itself, it doesn’t fix the major systemic issues at play here. At this point there is a risk that we fall into mentality of continuously looking back at our past and saying well we were servants of the west for a while, well we had war, well CIA overthrew our PM, well Qajar dynasty gave away the country. I mean Jesus Christ how far back do we need to go? Stop making excuses every country alive today was ****ed over by another country or countries. The difference is what you make moving forward and stop using that as a handicap as to why you are not pushing the envelope.
> 
> So I will just say this to not derail the thread any longer...if you keep giving excuses to the motherland and only focusing on the positives then you are feeding into the problem much like a parent who very much loves their child makes excuses and only showers it with praise only to see the child die of drug overdose 20 years later.
> 
> I will just leave you with this video, I hope you can spot the difference in Chinese government mentality Vs Iranian government mentality on its economy and the future.
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1454941329671262211



There you go again ... confirming what I said all along ...

China had a strong military before it had a strong economy. I know Chinese mentality, I talk about it in conferences for an hour.

Same as Russia.

Same as U.S.

Same as Britain.

I feel your pain about CIA/Mossadegh/Qajar etc.my brother. I feel exactly what you are feeling in the pit of your stomach.

But we have to stay steadfast and keep our focus on the ball.

Elon Musk talks about what serves Elon Musk. I met him about 3 years ago in Lincoln Building in downtown Bellevue. He has not a tiny shred of decency or a sense of national pride as you do. He is a weirdo prick. Ask anyone who have met him, they would confirm that. By the way, he begs like a dog for people to invest in Tesla and his other ventures that were ideas from Paul Allen.

Not feeding positives, just REALITY.

Finally the question you should ask of yourself, is how CONSTRUCTIVELY in a REAL SENSE can Iran get to what you want it to be? You have to ponder that question, while considering the REALITIES on the ground, in IRAN, with an old traditional society, religion, and ideology. Suppose you were the project manager for it? How would you deal with all the different aspects and characters and challenges and emotions, there to achieve what you desire? Be honest, and be realistic, then put your plan together.

Regarding IRIAF, IMHO, Iran can and should build a new F-14 with upgrades if it cannot buy Su30/35 at large quantities.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sha ah

The goal is for Iran to become self sufficient in producing military aircrafts.

Buying dozens of SU-30/SU-35 's and dozens of J-10's with some technology transfers would surely help Iran reach its goal.

Iran's drone program is only where it is today because of captured US drones. 

Iran should produce its own aircrafts, for example keep upgrading the F-5, perhaps add BVR capabilities to it and upgrade F-14's like you mentioned but there's nothing wrong with acquiring foreign technology as well.

Some of Iran's jets like the F-4 or some older Soviet or French jets need to go and soon, otherwise Iran's airforce will become irrelevant. 

During the Iran-Iraq war just imagine if Iran had not acquired F-14's several years prior. Saddam could have very well attained air dominance. 

Again I hope to see Iran purchase Russian and Chinese jets with some technology transfers but only time will tell.



EvilWesteners said:


> Does not need to be "world class". Does not need to be Rafale.
> 
> Iran needs to *copy F-14 (new airframes of course)*, a platform it knows extremely well, one of the best radius at max speed turn rate, and ample room for long range BVR missiles. Iran just needs a new engine for it, as well as a new hybrid PESA with solid state amplifiers or ideally AESA radar. Iran can also add IRST although from what someone who is an expert on the subject explained to me, IRST is not much help against a platform like F22 or F35. Not as much as people think.
> 
> Then this is a formidable aircraft, and like Su35 will last Iran another 15 years minimum.
> 
> Iran today is not Iran in 2003. It has come along long way since then.
> 
> Iran can also develop satellites with the right funding and the right individuals.
> 
> The reason other countries have problems developing technologies is not because they cannot. Again, as is the case with Iran, they have lots of different priorities and spend their money and time on many projects rather than one or few.
> 
> Iran needs a "competent" or "good enough" air force, as this adds to Iran's box of tools, creates another layer of deterrence, and allows Iran's air force to get enough training and stay within reach of the latest technologies to make sure it does not fall behind so far that it is flying antiques.
> 
> If Iran develops its own engine (say an AL21F) and a hybrid PESA radar with solid state amplifiers, and a level of avionics that is good enough, is Russia MORE LIKELY to sell Iran, say Su-57 or China sell Iran J-31? I would say yes. Not saying Iran needs it or not, but saying that their strategic perception of Iran changes.
> 
> F-14 is outdated because of its engines, and avionics, radar, and weapons integration. Not because of its air frame design. If these are brought to date, with Fakour 90 updated with ECM and better thermal batteries, better active seeker, of course (newly built F-14s) it would be better for Iran than a Su-30 or 35, IMHO.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iran is facing some serious economic issues but I believe that they can be overcome with pragmatic policies.

Right now Iran's economy is growing and Iran is selling nearly as much oil as before the sanctions. 

Many nations that publicly avoid buying Iranian crude are doing so under the table and as we saw recently Iran will not allow the US to stop it's oil sales. They capture an Iranian tanker, Iran captures theirs, it's that simple. 

Decades ago the idea of Iran standing up to the USA in such a way was unthinkable, even laughable but Iran has come a long way.

Just like the Covid-19 issue, the economy is something that can be overcome. Many nations in the region are facing serious economic issues including Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan just to name a few.

Iran is blessed to be an energy superpower and a mountainous country with good water resources. 

Strengthening the military and it's capabilities should be a top priority. The resources of the world are finite but the population of the world keeps growing and growing. 

There will be wars over resources. China and India will likely go to war over the water resources of the Himalayas. There will be floods of refugees. Iran must strengthen its borders and military.

I was reading today that the world is changing from a unipolar world with one super power to tripolar world with the USA, Russia and China at the helm. I expect Russia to reacquired many of its lost territories. China will have the world's largest economy in a few years and the South China Sea will be a flashpoint.

The world is changing at a rapid pace and Iran must be ready for this change. Iran's military must be stronger and more capable than ever before. Iran's borders must be more secure than ever and Iran's leaders have to be on guard and vigilant.




TheImmortal said:


> There is not enough F-14 worthy of flying many combat hours. During a sustained air campaign many would break down. It’s a heavy maintenance aircraft and expensive to maintain (typical American philosophy).
> 
> Compare that to SU-30 which follows Russian philosophy of being resilient and cheap to maintain in respect to their western counterparts. F-14 reverse engineering was already brought up to SL (this much was leaked during Q-313 unveiling) and SL shut it down and pushed Iranian engineers to develop an indigenous design. That hasn’t happened yet.
> 
> Also another big issue which no one wants to address is the long term economy of Iran. You guys are recommending the same path that destroyed the Soviet Union and is destroying the US today. All this focus on military expansion and zero focus on long term sustainability of Iran’s economy and ecosystems (water, drought, poverty etc) will only cause a major systemic problem later on.
> 
> China has the economic power to build anything it wants and massively expand its military. Right now it’s naval expansion might be the biggest naval expansion in the history of mankind with the rate Chinese shipyards are pumping out warships.
> 
> Iran on the other hand is more like that one person who has a credit card (s) and is buying everything on borrowed time & money with no collateral to back it up (ie economic power).
> 
> For Iran to have a true war machine it needs an economy that can feed that war machine. Or else Iran will always be a middle tier power stuck in the sandbox of the Middle East bumping heads with Jews on one hand and Baboon Arabia on the other.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

EvilWesteners said:


> Regarding IRIAF, IMHO, Iran can and should build a new F-14 with upgrades if it cannot buy Su30/35 at large quantities.



Some years back in the old idf forum and in later forums, there was a pic of an IRIAF model of what we called the single engine tomcat floating around. The radome and air intakes were distinctly that of the tomcat but with a fixed wing design with single engine. If you have seen that image, would you recommend that design but as a twin engine frame?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

*Guys ... can you stick to the topic, which is the IRIAF and not US or Iranian economics or the Sino-US rivalry!*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EvilWesteners

WudangMaster said:


> Some years back in the old idf forum and in later forums, there was a pic of an IRIAF model of what we called the single engine tomcat floating around. The radome and air intakes were distinctly that of the tomcat but with a fixed wing design with single engine. If you have seen that image, would you recommend that design but as a twin engine frame?



AF of just about every country on the planet starts with a requirements analysis. They ask themselves what do they need, air superiority, airborne air defense, interdiction, multi-role, etc. So it always starts from what an AF requires. Then they look at what options they have, what are their budget constraints, who will sell them which platform, how fast the induction/adoption of the new air crafts, etc. etc.

My current recommendations for Iran, for instance, is based on Iran's circumstances. There are many different things to consider. As you can tell when any members here debate their ideas and their suggestions or recommendations, is (in each case) based on their analysis of Iran's requirements. We are all making suppositions and assumptions, of course.

My own recommendations are based on the fact that Iran needs an indigenous AF air craft as it is falling behind in realistic combat training, keeping up with the latest technologies, planning and testing platforms and tactics against a more superior AF, etc. etc. So hence I suggest that Iran needs to look at all of these, and based on GOOD JUDGMENT, get going as fast as possible and get AF up and running again.

There are also many issues outside of AF to consider for a nation's defense, not just fighter jets, or AF itself.

Whether an air craft is single engine or twin engine depends again on many, many things. First and foremost, since for years I was in charge of OEM maintenance logistics (hence my bias) with air crews from both U.S. and U.K., I look at maintenance and reliability issues. So, if a jet engine is exceptionally reliable, well tested and proven platform, and has very competent and experience maintenance crew, then I would contemplate single engine air craft (outside of other criteria such as range and weapons load).

In almost all cases, a single engine aircraft is set on a logistics BEA, which means that AFs, in the West in particular, use the engine up to 80% of its estimated TBO, and the single engine gets regular checks and regular inspections. Obviously CMA (critical mission application) single engines also have an extra predicated usage scenario such as whether it is used over land, or as a navy application, cost issues, performance requirements, etc. For instance, A4 Skyhawk is a single engine small jet with about 7 ton payload (fuel and weapons), and was used by both Navy and air forces. It was regarded as such a reliable application that it was easily integrated into U.S. Navy.

I have come across maintenance crews who worked on A4 and they say they have never worked on a masterpiece like A4 ever before or after they worked with that aircraft. A4 is an exceptional aircraft in so many way. I don't want to bore you with all the details about its design. But it was an amazing air craft.

Now about single engine F-14 ???

I don't know what overall strategy of Iran's AF is, so it is hard to say one way or the other. Can you build an F-14 with a single engine? I would say, depends.

Here's what most people often miss about air crafts? .... *aerodynamic lift to drag ratio*.

If F-14 removed its air intake nacelles and incorporated a redesign to accommodate inlet separation/distortion resulted from crosswind and high angle-of-attack operating conditions, by putting an engine on top (or even underneath still with much smaller air intake for turbojet engines instead of turbofan), it would hugely reduce drag and if the resulting performance is acceptable by the AF for the application they are considering, then it would be perfectly fine and doable.

Let me explain this in a bit more simplistic way.

*People always consider that turbofan engines are more fuel efficient (usually about 10-15% or so depending on engines and a few other things), but people hardly ever seem to consider that smaller air intake nacelles reduce drag which can result in fuel savings.*

If you have a bigger _turbojet _engine (usually above 20,000 of thrust) you can begin to consider and analyze your design based on AF requirements and the higher the engine thrust, the more likely you can have fuel savings from small air intake openings of a _turbojet _.

The Su-24 is more efficient in drag than FB-111 although they are roughly somewhat the same size. The former has low drag due to its air intake, compared to the latter's turbofan engines, not considering low flight performance/requirements compared to high altitude flight performance/requirements,

Imagine an F-14, the air intake and bottom engine housing removed, and you had a single R-35 engine on top of the air frame with adequate engine intake variable controller, altitude adjustable air intake, with FBW controls? Taken into consideration weighting coefficient to optimize total pressure loss coefficient and static pressure recovery coefficient, with the external nacelle flow redesign.

That aircraft would be one hell of an aircraft, in terms of flight performance compared to current F-14A that Iran has.

There is very little information available online about F-14A. Most of what you find is about F-14D, which was much heavier and different engines, substantially different.

The Iranian F-14A has engines that are 2 tons each, delivering 20,900/10,850 (afterburner/military) thrust. With 2 engines it delivers: 41,800/21,700 and it weights 37,000ish lbs.

F-14A redesigned as I explained above with a single R-35 would weight 30,000ish lbs, (roughly) with a 29,000/19,000ish engine, with substantially improved aerodynamic lift to drag ratio.

It can also fly at higher altitude.

Look at the numbers above carefully. With a single engine R-35, it can have almost the same non-afterburner thrust for a lighter air craft, and substantially better lift to drag ratio, lower cost of a single engine, better range, and can carry more fuel as a result of lowered weight.

So, the above are just some SAMPLE SCENARIOS AND CONFIGURATIONS that may or may not benefit the AF requirements, depending on what it is. Some AF strategists may decide to go for a single engine air craft with a second engine, so they can rotate the engines and achieve much higher sortie rates, as engines can get rotated out in about 30 minutes allowing the air craft to fly multiple sorties per day.

So the AF has to consider whether single engine or twin is ideal for their requirements, what max take off weight do they need, what weapons load the need, what range do they need, etc. and then decide on the design and configuration.

Swept back wings require more maintenance, but CAN offer (depending on design implementation) much better max take off weight (hence applications like, F-14, FB-111, Su-17/22, Su24, Mig23, Tornado, B-1, Tu22, Tu160, etc. ). It was researched heavily in 1930s by German aviation scientists. All blue prints stolen by U.S. (shared with the Brits) and Russia.







F-14 can also have fixed wing, and can be design with a single or still twin engine configuration.

Also the engine can be brought closer together for design requirements, if needs be.






The engine(s) can also be designed to be placed on top.






Engines on top need to be designed with great attention to a) Inlet flow recovery, b) Inlet flow distortion, c) Inlet Mach distribution. A few other things as well.

With every design, there are pros and cons. So AF requirements have to be near perfect in its crystal clarity, with detailed criteria analysis.

Finally, an AF has to decide with its political branch, and government, parliament, congress, etc. WHAT IS IT THAT THEY NEED AND CAN GET ... once that is clear, then choosing an air craft is much easier.

With regards to Iran, my own opinion is that they need ...

*a)* A single competent platform with long combat range, with BVR capability, long range missiles, good enough radar/avionics, aerial refueling, secure data link, and hopefully ECM/ECCM/IRCM

*b)* An air craft that does not cost a lot, is indigenous = 100% maintained and parts supplied, internally inside the country

*c)* Allows for large numbers to be built, and get our pilots up to date with training, new air combat tactics, and well trained maintenance crews (practice makes perfect)

There are a few other things I can think of, BUT considering where Iran is today, I would be happy with the above.

What platforms can Iran REALISTICALLY develop on its own to potentially deliver the above a/b/c ???

- F-14 can, if the engines are more powerful like AL21F (weighs a quarter ton less each, and has about 25% more afterburner, and 60% more non-afterburner thrust), offering a higher take off weight, more fuel to carry, reduced drag due to AL21F reduced engine air intake, and weight savings. A much better hybrid radar can be integrated with weapons systems like Fakour 90 (hopefully better missiles at the caliber of Phoenix but more modern components with ECM and better thermal batteries, etc.). Iran is already able to do the Wingbox, Swing Wing Servos, Swing Wing Actuators and Spindle. Titanium is an issue, but Iran is currently on a good track with that.

- F-4e can, may be even somewhat easier than F-14. The engines will be the easiest, since AL21F is almost same dimensions as the J79, in weight, length, width and Iran has F-4Ds, they can design radar housing with space for solid state power amplifiers, processors, coolant, oxygen generator, and can develop and integrate the under belly fuel tank. The only problem they have to solve is the weak landing gears (main).












Hope I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities.

The design and development and final platform is easy, compared to how hard it is to have a CLEAR DECISION ALONG WITH THE POLITICAL WILL AND THE CAPITAL on what Iran needs short-term to mid-term and what STRATEGIES it is meant to fulfill. Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT. I can only pray and hope it is the case.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Darius77

TheImmortal said:


> Just research Zionist Russian Oligarchs. That will let you know the extent of Zionist
> 
> Ain’t no way they are betraying their (true) motherland for some lousy arms deals. And in no way would Iran ever intervene to save mother Russia.
> 
> Iran didn’t intervene in Syria to save Assad, it intervened to save Shiite crescent and itself. Hell some in IRGC thought Iran should let Assad fall and negotiate with West over his replacement to satisfy all parties.
> 
> This Russo-Persian Alliance will never materialize. Russian is too stubborn and Iran doesn’t see Russia as a brother. It would be a fractured alliance at best.
> 
> S-400 or S-500 and some trainers could materialize. But SU-35? It would be risky on Iran, repeating the same mistake with the F-14 tomcats. If one day Russia and Iranian relations break completely apart, can Iran keep SU-35’s flying?
> 
> Without some ToT or allowing Iran to do all maintenance vis a vi a learning program for Iranian engineers, the risk of such a deal is high for Iran.
> 
> I should add I fully support acquiring SU-30, SU-35 and SU-57 it will give massive technology injection to Iran’s domestic program just being able to touch and observe these aircraft daily (even without any ToT). I’m just skeptical if Russia would ever provide any such aircraft.


As I have posted before, Russia today is very weak and if they did not have nukes, they would be Yugoslavia today and Balkanized. There is indeed strong Zionist influence, but in Russian military, especially the GRU, there is awareness of Russian need to create some alliances. The US and NATO are sitting in historical Russian heartland of Ukraine and Russia is largely impotent. However, I see a very remote chance of Russia selling Iran any sophisticated weaponry. A few military exchanges is the extent of "Russian-Iranian alliance". I personally favor a nuclear armed Iran as the best security.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

EvilWesteners said:


> AF of just about every country on the planet starts with a requirements analysis. They ask themselves what do they need, air superiority, airborne air defense, interdiction, multi-role, etc. So it always starts from what an AF requires. Then they look at what options they have, what are their budget constraints, who will sell them which platform, how fast the induction/adoption of the new air crafts, etc. etc.
> 
> My current recommendations for Iran, for instance, is based on Iran's circumstances. There are many different things to consider. As you can tell when any members here debate their ideas and their suggestions or recommendations, is (in each case) based on their analysis of Iran's requirements. We are all making suppositions and assumptions, of course.
> 
> My own recommendations are based on the fact that Iran needs an indigenous AF air craft as it is falling behind in realistic combat training, keeping up with the latest technologies, planning and testing platforms and tactics against a more superior AF, etc. etc. So hence I suggest that Iran needs to look at all of these, and based on GOOD JUDGMENT, get going as fast as possible and get AF up and running again.
> 
> There are also many issues outside of AF to consider for a nation's defense, not just fighter jets, or AF itself.
> 
> Whether an air craft is single engine or twin engine depends again on many, many things. First and foremost, since for years I was in charge of OEM maintenance logistics (hence my bias) with air crews from both U.S. and U.K., I look at maintenance and reliability issues. So, if a jet engine is exceptionally reliable, well tested and proven platform, and has very competent and experience maintenance crew, then I would contemplate single engine air craft (outside of other criteria such as range and weapons load).
> 
> In almost all cases, a single engine aircraft is set on a logistics BEA, which means that AFs, in the West in particular, use the engine up to 80% of its estimated TBO, and the single engine gets regular checks and regular inspections. Obviously CMA (critical mission application) single engines also have an extra predicated usage scenario such as whether it is used over land, or as a navy application, cost issues, performance requirements, etc. For instance, A4 Skyhawk is a single engine small jet with about 7 ton payload (fuel and weapons), and was used by both Navy and air forces. It was regarded as such a reliable application that it was easily integrated into U.S. Navy.
> 
> I have come across maintenance crews who worked on A4 and they say they have never worked on a masterpiece like A4 ever before or after they worked with that aircraft. A4 is an exceptional aircraft in so many way. I don't want to bore you with all the details about its design. But it was an amazing air craft.
> 
> Now about single engine F-14 ???
> 
> I don't know what overall strategy of Iran's AF is, so it is hard to say one way or the other. Can you build an F-14 with a single engine? I would say, depends.
> 
> Here's what most people often miss about air crafts? .... *aerodynamic lift to drag ratio*.
> 
> If F-14 removed its air intake nacelles and incorporated a redesign to accommodate inlet separation/distortion resulted from crosswind and high angle-of-attack operating conditions, by putting an engine on top (or even underneath still with much smaller air intake for turbojet engines instead of turbofan), it would hugely reduce drag and if the resulting performance is acceptable by the AF for the application they are considering, then it would be perfectly fine and doable.
> 
> Let me explain this in a bit more simplistic way.
> 
> *People always consider that turbofan engines are more fuel efficient (usually about 10-15% or so depending on engines and a few other things), but people hardly ever seem to consider that smaller air intake nacelles reduce drag which can result in fuel savings.*
> 
> If you have a bigger _turbojet _engine (usually above 20,000 of thrust) you can begin to consider and analyze your design based on AF requirements and the higher the engine thrust, the more likely you can have fuel savings from small air intake openings of a _turbojet _.
> 
> The Su-24 is more efficient in drag than FB-111 although they are roughly somewhat the same size. The former has low drag due to its air intake, compared to the latter's turbofan engines, not considering low flight performance/requirements compared to high altitude flight performance/requirements,
> 
> Imagine an F-14, the air intake and bottom engine housing removed, and you had a single R-35 engine on top of the air frame with adequate engine intake variable controller, altitude adjustable air intake, with FBW controls? Taken into consideration weighting coefficient to optimize total pressure loss coefficient and static pressure recovery coefficient, with the external nacelle flow redesign.
> 
> That aircraft would be one hell of an aircraft, in terms of flight performance compared to current F-14A that Iran has.
> 
> There is very little information available online about F-14A. Most of what you find is about F-14D, which was much heavier and different engines, substantially different.
> 
> The Iranian F-14A has engines that are 2 tons each, delivering 20,900/10,850 (afterburner/military) thrust. With 2 engines it delivers: 41,800/21,700 and it weights 37,000ish lbs.
> 
> F-14A redesigned as I explained above with a single R-35 would weight 30,000ish lbs, (roughly) with a 29,000/19,000ish engine, with substantially improved aerodynamic lift to drag ratio.
> 
> It can also fly at higher altitude.
> 
> Look at the numbers above carefully. With a single engine R-35, it can have almost the same non-afterburner thrust for a lighter air craft, and substantially better lift to drag ratio, lower cost of a single engine, better range, and can carry more fuel as a result of lowered weight.
> 
> So, the above are just some SAMPLE SCENARIOS AND CONFIGURATIONS that may or may not benefit the AF requirements, depending on what it is. Some AF strategists may decide to go for a single engine air craft with a second engine, so they can rotate the engines and achieve much higher sortie rates, as engines can get rotated out in about 30 minutes allowing the air craft to fly multiple sorties per day.
> 
> So the AF has to consider whether single engine or twin is ideal for their requirements, what max take off weight do they need, what weapons load the need, what range do they need, etc. and then decide on the design and configuration.
> 
> Swept back wings require more maintenance, but CAN offer (depending on design implementation) much better max take off weight (hence applications like, F-14, FB-111, Su-17/22, Su24, Mig23, Tornado, B-1, Tu22, Tu160, etc. ). It was researched heavily in 1930s by German aviation scientists. All blue prints stolen by U.S. (shared with the Brits) and Russia.
> 
> View attachment 790893
> 
> 
> F-14 can also have fixed wing, and can be design with a single or still twin engine configuration.
> 
> Also the engine can be brought closer together for design requirements, if needs be.
> 
> View attachment 790895
> 
> 
> The engine(s) can also be designed to be placed on top.
> 
> View attachment 790896
> 
> 
> Engines on top need to be designed with great attention to a) Inlet flow recovery, b) Inlet flow distortion, c) Inlet Mach distribution. A few other things as well.
> 
> With every design, there are pros and cons. So AF requirements have to be near perfect in its crystal clarity, with detailed criteria analysis.
> 
> Finally, an AF has to decide with its political branch, and government, parliament, congress, etc. WHAT IS IT THAT THEY NEED AND CAN GET ... once that is clear, then choosing an air craft is much easier.
> 
> With regards to Iran, my own opinion is that they need ...
> 
> *a)* A single competent platform with long combat range, with BVR capability, long range missiles, good enough radar/avionics, aerial refueling, secure data link, and hopefully ECM/ECCM/IRCM
> 
> *b)* An air craft that does not cost a lot, is indigenous = 100% maintained and parts supplied, internally inside the country
> 
> *c)* Allows for large numbers to be built, and get our pilots up to date with training, new air combat tactics, and well trained maintenance crews (practice makes perfect)
> 
> There are a few other things I can think of, BUT considering where Iran is today, I would be happy with the above.
> 
> What platforms can Iran REALISTICALLY develop on its own to potentially deliver the above a/b/c ???
> 
> - F-14 can, if the engines are more powerful like AL21F (weighs a quarter ton less each, and has about 25% more afterburner, and 60% more non-afterburner thrust), offering a higher take off weight, more fuel to carry, reduced drag due to AL21F reduced engine air intake, and weight savings. A much better hybrid radar can be integrated with weapons systems like Fakour 90 (hopefully better missiles at the caliber of Phoenix but more modern components with ECM and better thermal batteries, etc.). Iran is already able to do the Wingbox, Swing Wing Servos, Swing Wing Actuators and Spindle. Titanium is an issue, but Iran is currently on a good track with that.
> 
> - F-4e can, may be even somewhat easier than F-14. The engines will be the easiest, since AL21F is almost same dimensions as the J79, in weight, length, width and Iran has F-4Ds, they can design radar housing with space for solid state power amplifiers, processors, coolant, oxygen generator, and can develop and integrate the under belly fuel tank. The only problem they have to solve is the weak landing gears (main).
> 
> View attachment 790903
> 
> 
> View attachment 790904
> 
> 
> 
> Hope I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities.
> 
> The design and development and final platform is easy, compared to how hard it is to have a CLEAR DECISION ALONG WITH THE POLITICAL WILL AND THE CAPITAL on what Iran needs short-term to mid-term and what STRATEGIES it is meant to fulfill. Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT. I can only pray and hope it is the case.




*Could you please stop posting stupid what-if and kindergarten-ideas?   

This is a thread for IRIAF-news and discussion and not on some fan-boy's wet-dreams. To think Iran could build a F-4-alike type is beyond anything and to think a single engined F-14 with top mounted engine intakes  added by a sentence "I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities" and "Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT" show only that you have no clue on Iran's capabilities and lack of, no understanding of what the IRIAF needs and wants and even lesser on aircraft development and engineering. *

*So just plain and simple: STOP with these wet-dreams in this thread. Start a new one called "my own fancy ideas and why the IRIAF should listen to me" but here stop with this BS!*

Reactions: Angry Angry:
9


----------



## Blue In Green

Deino said:


> *Could you please stop posting stupid what-if and kindergarten-ideas?
> 
> This is a thread for IRIAF-news and discussion and not on some fan-boy's wet-dreams. To think Iran could build a F-4-alike type is beyond anything and to think a single engined F-14 with top mounted engine intakes  added by a sentence "I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities" and "Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT" show only that you have no clue on Iran's capabilities and lack of, no understanding of what the IRIAF needs and wants and even lesser on aircraft development and engineering. *
> 
> *So just plain and simple: STOP with these wet-dreams in this thread. Start a new one called "my own fancy ideas and why the IRIAF should listen to me" but here stop with this BS!*



Hmmm...... why not engage with him in a cordial exchange of thoughts instead of unjustly berating him for giving his opinion based on his background knowledge/experience?

Exactly who are you anyways and why have you acted in such an irresponsible manner?


Dariush the Great said:


> I will get banned for saying this but i don't really care so here it goes : Fck you and the horse you rode in on.
> Who the hell are you to say what Iranian users should post or not? He is well on topic offering his own ideas about the IRIAF. If you are too upset for some fked up weird reason then that is your problem.
> 
> @EvilWesteners i support you and everything you post. Continue it my brother.



This is the first time I've seen a mod act in such a bizarre way. 

What an odd post, seriously wtf was he thinking?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

Blue In Green said:


> Hmmm...... why not engage with him in a cordial exchange of thoughts instead of unjustly berating him for giving his opinion based on his background knowledge/experience?
> 
> Exactly who are you anyways and why have you acted in such an irresponsible manner?
> 
> 
> This is the first time I've seen a mod act in such a bizarre way.
> 
> What an odd post, seriously wtf was he thinking?




Sorry my friend, but if one claims, there is intelligent live on Venus and he only knows, NASA should listed since this and that it is surely not MY duty to prove the contrary, but it is HIS duty to be taken seriously to explain why he thinks there is live on Venus. And here it is the same: Let him explain, why he thinks developing a single engined F-14 is within Iran's technical skills. 

Otherwise it is nothing but hot air and wishful thinking ... again, this may be an intersting what-if discussion but NOT in the IRIAF-news thread!


----------



## aryobarzan

Blue In Green said:


> Hmmm...... why not engage with him in a cordial exchange of thoughts instead of unjustly berating him for giving his opinion based on his background knowledge/experience?
> 
> Exactly who are you anyways and why have you acted in such an irresponsible manner?
> 
> 
> This is the first time I've seen a mod act in such a bizarre way.
> 
> What an odd post, seriously wtf was he thinking?


Just flood his post with "Angry" tags and then we take it to Webmaster..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

aryobarzan said:


> What are you talking about...Who are you to tell Iranians what to think....Just because you have "International Mod" tag does not mean you control What we Iranians think...He is talking about Future Iranian Fighter ...so he is well within the Thread scope...
> 
> I would have put these words in another way but your Title stops me..strip away that title and I can talk to you the way I want..🤬
> 
> 
> 
> @TheImmortal , @Bahram Esfandiari ,@WudangMaster ,@EvilWesteners ,@Darius77 ,@SalarHaqq, and all others
> 
> I suggest we take this mod's comments to the "Webmaster".
> 
> @Blue In Green
> @QWECXZ ,@Raghfarm007



I'm just baffled, I thought these threads are meant for intellectual exchange and subsequent extrapolation of shared knowledge. To be fair, PeeD, Yavar and others also claim to have "insider" knowledge or close to it (on certain subjects) yet Evil gets called out? idk, this is just unbecoming really... 

Regardless, Deino has just rallied the Iranians on PDF against him lmao, whether intentionally or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Deino said:


> Sorry my friend, but if one claims, there is intelligent live on Venus and he only knows, NASA should listed since this and that it is surely not MY duty to prove the contrary, but it is HIS duty to be taken seriously to explain why he thinks there is live on Venus. And here it is the same: Let him explain, why he thinks developing a single engined F-14 is within Iran's technical skills.
> 
> Otherwise it is nothing but hot air and wishful thinking ... again, this may be an intersting what-if discussion but NOT in the IRIAF-news thread!



I have nothing against you at all, I'm just surprised really.

Evil's perspective is one of personal and deeply rooted experience within the field of aeronautics itself. His thoughts, opinions and suggestions on what path Iran should take presumably don't come a place of sheer ignorance but of first-hand knowledge (both practical and theoretical) about planes and their production.

Again, I would highly suggest you engage in a cordial back-and-forth with him, intellectually, of why you think Iran cannot do what he says Iran can do. Technical minutiae, nuances and highly detailed reasons why it's not possible for Iran do what Evil proposes is what we're looking for.

This is a forum (mutual exchange of thoughts) after-all, simply dismissing his claims as all folly doesn't befit neither you or the goals this forum is trying to achieve.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

Blue In Green said:


> I'm just baffled, I thought these threads are meant for intellectual exchange and subsequent extrapolation of shared knowledge. To be fair, PeeD, Yavar and others also claim to have "insider" knowledge or close to it (on certain subjects) yet Evil gets called out? idk, this is just unbecoming really...
> 
> Regardless, Deino has just rallied the Iranians on PDF against him lmao, whether intentionally or not.




The funny part on this is, that even if I was well aware this might happen - in Germany we say, it was a planned push into a wasp's nest! - I'm indeed surprised by the irrational emotions.

It was never my intention to tell any Iranian, what to think, but only to stick to the topic.

At least everyone must admit, that discussing fancy ideas are indeed more "what-if"-alike discussions than "IRIAF-related news"!

So even if my tone was - to put it mildly - "provocative" there is at least in point in my intention.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Deino said:


> The funny part on this is, that even if I was well aware this might happen - in Germany we say, it was a planned push into a wasp's nest! - I'm indeed surprised by the irrational emotions.
> 
> It was never my intention to tell any Iranian, what to think, but only to stick to the topic.
> 
> At least everyone must admit, that discussing fancy ideas are indeed more "what-if"-alike discussions than "IRIAF-related news"!
> 
> So even if my tone was - to put it mildly - "provocative" there is at least in point in my intention.


No big deal, everyone has bad hair days. Let's all stick together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

(deleted my post. I though it was the Chill thread)


----------



## Blue In Green

Deino said:


> The funny part on this is, that even if I was well aware this might happen - in Germany we say, it was a planned push into a wasp's nest! - I'm indeed surprised by the irrational emotions.
> 
> It was never my intention to tell any Iranian, what to think, but only to stick to the topic.
> 
> At least everyone must admit, that discussing fancy ideas are indeed more "what-if"-alike discussions than "IRIAF-related news"!
> 
> So even if my tone was - to put it mildly - "provocative" there is at least in point in my intention.



Oh lol, you are absolutely fine my friend. Truly I didn't think you did anything wrong. 

I was just taken aback really, didn't feel any personal slight against me nor did I view your actions as being provocative against Iran/Iranians or the Iranians on PDF (at least where I am concerned).

My days of engaging in useless banter that results in only frustration are over, I just want a positive environment that nurtures healthy discussions.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dariush the Great

Deino said:


> The funny part on this is, that even if I was well aware this might happen - in Germany we say, it was a planned push into a wasp's nest! - I'm indeed surprised by the irrational emotions.
> 
> It was never my intention to tell any Iranian, what to think, but only to stick to the topic.
> 
> At least everyone must admit, that discussing fancy ideas are indeed more "what-if"-alike discussions than "IRIAF-related news"!
> 
> So even if my tone was - to put it mildly - "provocative" there is at least in point in my intention.


You come to a thread dedicated to the IRIAF and start abusing a respected member here. What the f you thought was going to happen? Nothing in his posts is off topic. Everything he said is related to the IRIAF, its current issues and what could be done to solve them. Explain how this is not relevant to IRIAF news AND DISCUSSIONS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

Dariush the Great said:


> You come to a thread dedicated to the IRIAF and start abusing a respected member here. What the f you thought was going to happen? Nothing in his posts is off topic. Everything he said is related to the IRIAF, its current issues and what could be done to solve them. Explain how this is not relevant to IRIAF news AND DISCUSSIONS.




A claim a hypothetical single engined F-14 with top-mounted air intake de facto disqualifies anyone from being a reliable and respected member ... and NO, it is in NO WAY related to IRIAF news!

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Deino said:


> A claim a hypothetical single engined F-14 with top-mounted air intake de facto disqualifies anyone from being a reliable and respected member ... and NO, it is in NO WAY related to IRIAF news!


And who has the authority here to disqualify anyone from giving their opinions on certain aircraft configurations? The title of this thread is LITERALLY IRIAF NEWS and *DISCUSSIONS*

Discussion : the activity in which people talk about something and *tell** each other their ideas or opinions:*

You know you are wrong but you are still continuing this nonsense. Just stop it, apologize and admit you were wrong and move on. What is wrong with you?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Deino said:


> Sorry my friend, but if one claims, there is intelligent live on Venus and he only knows, NASA should listed since this and that it is surely not MY duty to prove the contrary, but it is HIS duty to be taken seriously to explain why he thinks there is live on Venus. And here it is the same: Let him explain, why he thinks developing a single engined F-14 is within Iran's technical skills.
> 
> Otherwise it is nothing but hot air and wishful thinking ... again, this may be an intersting what-if discussion but NOT in the IRIAF-news thread!





Deino said:


> Sorry my friend, but if one claims, there is intelligent live on Venus and he only knows, NASA should listed since this and that it is surely not MY duty to prove the contrary, but it is HIS duty to be taken seriously to explain why he thinks there is live on Venus. And here it is the same: Let him explain, why he thinks developing a single engined F-14 is within Iran's technical skills.
> 
> Otherwise it is nothing but hot air and wishful thinking ... again, this may be an intersting what-if discussion but NOT in the IRIAF-news thread!


The person you made fun of has


Dariush the Great said:


> And who has the authority here to disqualify anyone from giving their opinions on certain aircraft configurations? The title of this thread is LITERALLY IRIAF NEWS and *DISCUSSIONS*
> 
> Discussion : the activity in which people talk about something and *tell** each other their ideas or opinions:*
> 
> You know you are wrong but you are still continuing this nonsense. Just stop it, apologize and admit you were wrong and move on. What is wrong with you?


If this person was just an individual PDF member we would have dismissed him just another ignorant person..He is a MOD and as such he used (mis-used) his authority to insult not only "evilwesterners" but the entire Iranian nation...and he did this without any provocation...

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

aryobarzan said:


> The person you made fun of has
> 
> If this person was just an individual PDF member we would have dismissed him just another ignorant person..He is a MOD and as such he used (mis-used) his authority to insult not only "evilwesterners" but the entire Iranian nation...and he did this without any provocation...



Dadash, this could be a simple case of mistaken intentions. 

It seems that Deino's views are so staunchly opposed to Evil's, that naturally to him (that being Deino). Dismissing Evil's claims is/was the right action to take. But I don't think he meant to intentionally slight all Iranians and Iran itself, maliciously. 

Agreed though, what he said wasn't becoming of a mod. Let's see what Evil has to say in response. I mean realistically we can just ignore what Deino says lol and just move on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Blue In Green said:


> Dadash, this could be a simple case of mistaken intentions.
> 
> It seems that Deino's views are so staunchly opposed to Evil's, that naturally to him (that being Deino). Dismissing Evil's claims is/was the right action to take. But I don't think he meant to intentionally slight all Iranians and Iran itself, maliciously.
> 
> Agreed though, what he said wasn't becoming of a mod. Let's see what Evil has to say in response. I mean realistically we can just ignore what Deino says lol and just move on.


A simple apology would have gone a long way but instead he is giving negative ratings to any one who questions his behavior...do we know his real nationality...unlike of any real German..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

Deino said:


> *Could you please stop posting stupid what-if and kindergarten-ideas?
> 
> This is a thread for IRIAF-news and discussion and not on some fan-boy's wet-dreams. To think Iran could build a F-4-alike type is beyond anything and to think a single engined F-14 with top mounted engine intakes  added by a sentence "I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities" and "Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT" show only that you have no clue on Iran's capabilities and lack of, no understanding of what the IRIAF needs and wants and even lesser on aircraft development and engineering. *
> 
> *So just plain and simple: STOP with these wet-dreams in this thread. Start a new one called "my own fancy ideas and why the IRIAF should listen to me" but here stop with this BS!*


@WebMaster 

What is this guy doing here? 

I rarely mention you in my posts since i always think that you might have more important issues to deal with hence didn't decide to waste your time. 

But deino is crossing all the lines defined for a moderator, he Simply is bullying other members about what they can or cannot post, ironically in a thread related to Iran and apparently in the parallel world of deino, Iranians cannot discuss IRIAF and he is the only One that knows everything about Iranian airforce and its capabilities. 

First he was ridiculous now he is turning into a dumbf**k throwing Negative rating on every Iranian member that reminds him of his stupidity. 

Regards.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

aryobarzan said:


> A simple apology would have gone a long way but instead he is giving negative ratings to any one who questions his behavior...do we know his real nationality...unlike of any real German..



Yeah, his actions are a bit reprehensible but I don't want to get caught up in the drama brother. 

I'm just gonna excuse myself lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Deino said:


> *Could you please stop posting stupid what-if and kindergarten-ideas?
> 
> This is a thread for IRIAF-news and discussion and not on some fan-boy's wet-dreams. To think Iran could build a F-4-alike type is beyond anything and to think a single engined F-14 with top mounted engine intakes  added by a sentence "I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities" and "Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT" show only that you have no clue on Iran's capabilities and lack of, no understanding of what the IRIAF needs and wants and even lesser on aircraft development and engineering. *
> 
> *So just plain and simple: STOP with these wet-dreams in this thread. Start a new one called "my own fancy ideas and why the IRIAF should listen to me" but here stop with this BS!*




Your outburst here regarding my post is quite outrageous and uncalled for. There is no purpose to it other than a personal, egotistical, spurt of nonsense. 

You offered no proof of what IRIAF defence industry is capable of or not. They have had both of the platforms I mentioned for nearly 50 years. They have modified them and have completely rebuilt them, almost in whole (as in the case of the crashed F-4e).

I was responding to WudangMaster question, and having read my post again, before commenting here now, I still think it was appropriate and adequate and the information I provided are things well within Iran's defence industry's capabilities, given the funding and political support.

I am not offended by your insults. I now have simply no respect for you or your views, as these are based on ignorance and lack of discipline on your part.

You mentioned Germany, well EuroJet Turbo GmbH is partly owned by Rolls-Royce Holdings, where I worked for decades. I visited Hallbergmoos, more times than I can remember. I love Bavaria. I worked with many Germans over the course of my career. 

I have never thought someone living or growing up in German culture would be this ignorant and backward considering how much the German culture and society frowns upon unenlightened, repulsive public behavior.

You embarrassed yourself. Learn from it, and don't do again to anyone else ever again.

Thank you my Iranian brothers for your support.

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sina-1

@WebMaster @Deino 

Seems to be a very poor moderator judgment to attack and provoke a member for his posts, irrespective of them being based on facts or personal experience/opinion. And then to go around and hand out negative ratings when other members become provoked and call you out.
I’m sorry but may I ask what logical outcome you wished would have come out of your provoking input to this thread?

@Deino you have effectively flamed an entire section and I for one cannot make sense if it? Maybe you can educate us as to what good this has brought. Or maybe, be deserving of your moderator status, and apologize firstly to Evil and then to the rest of the community!?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Ich

Deino said:


> *Could you please stop posting stupid what-if and kindergarten-ideas?
> 
> This is a thread for IRIAF-news and discussion and not on some fan-boy's wet-dreams. To think Iran could build a F-4-alike type is beyond anything and to think a single engined F-14 with top mounted engine intakes  added by a sentence "I gave you some ideas, food for thought, potential scenarios, and possibilities" and "Hope Iran AF or AF planners and decision makers have a GREAT JUDGEMENT" show only that you have no clue on Iran's capabilities and lack of, no understanding of what the IRIAF needs and wants and even lesser on aircraft development and engineering. *
> 
> *So just plain and simple: STOP with these wet-dreams in this thread. Start a new one called "my own fancy ideas and why the IRIAF should listen to me" but here stop with this BS!*




Was ist denn mit dir los? So kennt man dich ja gar nicht. Kritik ist immer gut, ja, aber so, in dieser Art, passt gar nicht zu dir. Und so abwegig sind seine Spekulationen gar nicht. Auch wenn er auf seiner Lieblingsidee irgendwie hängen bleibt und auch in Diskussionen mit ihm davon nicht weg kommt, so ist sie dennoch im Bereich des Möglichen für den iranischen Militärflugzeugbau. Ja, wird nie so gebaut werden, stimmt schon, Aber Quatsch oder Kindergarten isses deswegen nicht.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## EvilWesteners

Ich said:


> Was ist denn mit dir los? So kennt man dich ja gar nicht. Kritik ist immer gut, ja, aber so, in dieser Art, passt gar nicht zu dir. Und so abwegig sind seine Spekulationen gar nicht. Auch wenn er auf seiner Lieblingsidee irgendwie hängen bleibt und auch in Diskussionen mit ihm davon nicht weg kommt, so ist sie dennoch im Bereich des Möglichen für den iranischen Militärflugzeugbau. Ja, wird nie so gebaut werden, stimmt schon, Aber Quatsch oder Kindergarten isses deswegen nicht.



Ich,

Vielen Dank, dass Sie Klarheit bieten. Mir wird oft vorgeworfen, zu wenig einzuschätzen, da ich realistischer als optimistisch sein möchte. Ich schätze Ihre Kommentare. Ich habe immer großen Respekt vor den Menschen und vor der deutschen Kultur. Ich war in den letzten 40 Jahren etwa 100 Mal in Deutschland. Ich liebe dieses Land und die Menschen, denen ich begegnet bin. Nochmals vielen Dank für Ihre Unterstützung.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Sina-1 said:


> @WebMaster @Deino
> 
> Seems to be a very poor moderator judgment to attack and provoke a member for his posts, irrespective of them being based on facts or personal experience/opinion. And then to go around and hand out negative ratings when other members become provoked and call you out.
> I’m sorry but may I ask what logical outcome you wished would have come out of your provoking input to this thread?
> 
> @Deino you have effectively flamed an entire section and I for one cannot make sense if it? Maybe you can educate us as to what good this has brought. Or maybe, be deserving of your moderator status, and apologize firstly to Evil and then to the rest of the community!?



My brother Sina-1,

Thank you for your kind words. But neither you or anyone else here that matters, owes me an apology. You have done nothing to me whatsoever. I was not offended, honestly, by such an amateurish outburst that offered no dispute of the facts regarding Iran's defense industry. I had my @$$ chewed by a VP in front of 20+ of my peers on a 16 million pound project, so this ego trip of one small man does not constitute an offense, in my world.

It is about time that Iranians have a forum absent of intellectual constraints or personal emotional traps, where we can all openly discuss, debate, and help elevate each other both in knowledge and professional conduct.

I am willing to fund, fully, any project that delivers a TECHNICAL FORUM for and on behalf of Iranians, so that our people can share knowledge and ideas without being held back with wasted energy on a bowl of beans that doesn't even matter.

I speak with my mouth, not my backside. I will fund fully, if a group of you come together to start such a forum on behalf of Iranians. I also have many friends within my career industry, that I can bring along to share occasional presentations and we can all get to see some FUTURE technological developments and research.

The funds that I mention, is really nothing to me. But I cannot be involved in its development, or day to day management. I am very busy at work with my own projects. I would also be happy to share software that I have access to, and conceptual research that my current employer would allow me to share with you on a new forum (although they would want the publicity for it).

The ball is in your court. You lead, and I will provide the funding.

Thank you again for your kind words and support.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## EvilWesteners

Just in case there is an assumption that engines on top of air crafts, are an impossibility, and it represents an unsurmountable engineering design problem or flaw, I would offer SAAB research for more than 20+ years.

(right from Saab's archives),

















Saab designed the original Gripen with engine intake above the air frame. They researched it and tested it for nearly 2 decades. The reason they finally chose the side air intake, was the same reasons why U.S. chose F-22 instead of YF-23 - it had nothing to do with INABILITY, INEFFICIENCY, or FAULTY design.

No it is not a CRAZY idea. It has been tested and researched for its effectiveness and viability for decades. Whether it had been selected or not, may depend on many things, as do other designs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

@EvilWesteners ,@AmirPatriot ,@Sina-1 .Amir may be able to shed some light on how to proceed...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

aryobarzan said:


> @EvilWesteners ,@AmirPatriot ,@Sina-1 .Amir may be able to shed some light on how to proceed...



my email is cscust1 at gmail.

Let's get this done.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## EvilWesteners

*Upon reflection on recent events within this forum, having seen and experienced first hand debates and outbursts that offer nothing, provide nothing, achieve nothing, but only accomplish release of anger, almost always misplaced, pointless, idiotic, and irrelevant in the real scheme of life, I have decided to end my participation within this forum. I see no point to be here, I can make no contributions, I can make no difference for Iranian people and my beloved Iran. *
_*
At heart, I am still that boy whose dream was to go and be a part of IIAF and stand proud with my family members and family friends, many of whom returned to Iran when the war started and happily gave their lives to fight for Iran, even though their wives were still in jail.

I thank you all for sharing your knowledge with me during the time I have been part of this forum, with you.

I thank you all for enriching my life with your knowledge, and making me think in ways I was not able on my own.

I thank you for your perspective. God knows there is so much to learn from others, once we are willing to have an open mind. 

It is time for me to serve my country, and the best way I know how to do it, is to start a new forum with the help of anyone who can and wishes to help.

My direct email is shown in previous post. You are all welcome to contact me.

I will not post here any more, nor will I visit this site, as it has nothing to offer me. My devotion and support will go to a new forum dedicated to my people and my country. 

If I don't do this, HOW CAN I EXPECT ANYONE ELSE TO DO IT?

God bless you all that love Iran, and god bless Iranian people who have suffered at the hands of others who now poo poo the idea of injustice unless there is anything that has been directed towards them.
*_
*Good luck with your lives and keep the love for Iran alive.

As a nation, our time will come if we don't sit still and refuse to accept their bullying. 

Long live Iran.*

Reactions: Like Like:
12 | Love Love:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Deino

*Ok, gentlemen ... after careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that my post was inappropriate and above all, a big mistake in the way I wrote. *

*I know now that I caused more damage than I feared and that I missed my actual goal of sticking to the topic "IRIAF news". So I would like to apologize in all form. I am sincerely sorry since it was never my intention to insult a whole group in this forum nor Iran as a country. I hope you accept this.

BUT, I stick to my original intention that this is a topic for "RIAF News & discussion" and yes, discussion is important as long as related to IRIAF news and not speculative what-if ideas and projects that not at least now have not any specific IRIAF reference other than being a private idea. As such it rather fits into their own topic. In the PAF thread there is also a topic "New fighter for PAF Doctrine?" so why not also here a thread "New fighter for IRIAF Doctrine - ideas, concepts & proposals?" *

*As such here, too, I stick to my point of view: To assume that Iran is currently able to develop a single-engine F-14, powered by an R-35 turbojet (by the way, what is that supposed to be?) or even to think such a design might be realistic or even feasible is simply ridiculous. Anyway, in forums one has have to accept other opinions, however, my criticism was unfounded in the way I put it forward.*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sahureka2

EvilWesteners said:


> *Upon reflection on recent events within this forum, having seen and experienced first hand debates and outbursts that offer nothing, provide nothing, achieve nothing, but only accomplish release of anger, almost always misplaced, pointless, idiotic, and irrelevant in the real scheme of life, I have decided to end my participation within this forum. I see no point to be here, I can make no contributions, I can make no difference for Iranian people and my beloved Iran. *
> 
> _*At heart, I am still that boy whose dream was to go and be a part of IIAF and stand proud with my family members and family friends, many of whom returned to Iran when the war started and happily gave their lives to fight for Iran, even though their wives were still in jail.
> 
> I thank you all for sharing your knowledge with me during the time I have been part of this forum, with you.
> 
> I thank you all for enriching my life with your knowledge, and making me think in ways I was not able on my own.
> 
> I thank you for your perspective. God knows there is so much to learn from others, once we are willing to have an open mind.
> 
> It is time for me to serve my country, and the best way I know how to do it, is to start a new forum with the help of anyone who can and wishes to help.
> 
> My direct email is shown in previous post. You are all welcome to contact me.
> 
> I will not post here any more, nor will I visit this site, as it has nothing to offer me. My devotion and support will go to a new forum dedicated to my people and my country.
> 
> If I don't do this, HOW CAN I EXPECT ANYONE ELSE TO DO IT?
> 
> God bless you all that love Iran, and god bless Iranian people who have suffered at the hands of others who now poo poo the idea of injustice unless there is anything that has been directed towards them.*_
> 
> *Good luck with your lives and keep the love for Iran alive.
> 
> As a nation, our time will come if we don't sit still and refuse to accept their bullying.
> 
> Long live Iran.*



I am not Iranian and have never made interventions in the technical discussions in this forum, but I follow them all to get a broader view from different sources, a real regret to know that I will no longer be able to read here your always interesting interventions. I hope you want to think again, in any case I wish you all the success possible for your new forum. 

PS I hope to meet the web address of your new forum when you make it.

Ciao

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Darius77

Iranian Mirage F1 EQ in naval strike color scheme. Designated as the Mirage F1EQ, they are specially modified for extended range to perform strike mission armed with a variety of Iranian made long range _air_-_launched_ version of Qader and Nasr-1 anti-ship _cruise missiles_ .


۸ 

۷ 



816 × 394


940 × 775

800 × 557

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

SalarHaqq said:


>


Its a great pity that the iriaf never considered an indigenous program to upgrade its f1 mirages to super mirage standard,as the saaf had shown this to be a viable set of upgrades waaay back in 2000.




Fitting the mirages with the r-73/aa11 acher,this alone would be a potent upgrade for any of irans western fighters and far superior to any of the old sidewinders still being used.
Why this upgrade alone has not been done years ago is truly baffling,but then I suspect that the iriaf may simply not have the necessary skills to do it.
The other big part of the upgrade was the engine,this was the rd-33 turbofan that is used in irans mig29 fleet.The results of the re-engining were pretty impressive,the new engine offered 10% more thrust, was 350kg lighter,but at the same time consumed much less fuel.Compared to the SNECMA ATAR 9K 50 (7,200 kn), the rd-33 had (8,300 kn). 
At 17,000 meters, the service ceiling was 2,000 meters higher, the range at cruising speed increased from 1,820 to 2,250 km. Top speed was voluntarily limited to Mach 1.8 (Mach 2.2 with the Atar engine). 
This also would`ve made engine maintenance much easier,as instead of 2 engines to maintain you would now only have one common engine between the 2 types.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Darius77

Sineva said:


> Its a great pity that the iriaf never considered an indigenous program to upgrade its f1 mirages to super mirage standard,as the saaf had shown this to be a viable set of upgrades waaay back in 2000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fitting the mirages with the r-73/aa11 acher,this alone would be a potent upgrade for any of irans western fighters and far superior to any of the old sidewinders still being used.
> Why this upgrade alone has not been done years ago is truly baffling,but then I suspect that the iriaf may simply not have the necessary skills to do it.
> The other big part of the upgrade was the engine,this was the rd-33 turbofan that is used in irans mig29 fleet.The results of the re-engining were pretty impressive,the new engine offered 10% more thrust, was 350kg lighter,but at the same time consumed much less fuel.Compared to the SNECMA ATAR 9K 50 (7,200 kn), the rd-33 had (8,300 kn).
> At 17,000 meters, the service ceiling was 2,000 meters higher, the range at cruising speed increased from 1,820 to 2,250 km. Top speed was voluntarily limited to Mach 1.8 (Mach 2.2 with the Atar engine).
> This also would`ve made engine maintenance much easier,as instead of 2 engines to maintain you would now only have one common engine between the 2 types.


The SNECMA ATAR are also not that reliable and prone to flame outs. They are also heavy on maintenance. Ease of maintenance and quick sortie turnaround apparently was not a priority for the design, as the engine can only be split into modules for maintenance at the depot level, limiting field maintainability. The French airforce wrote a pretty negative operational analysis of their performance. I believe Iran should take the next step to produce a high perfromance jet engine as iyt has the expertise and infrastructure. There may be a few setbacks, but eventually it will succeed, just like the good quality and reliability of Iranian drones and missiles now.


----------



## mohsen

7 Su30 has been spotted over Lahijan, en route to Dubai airshow.









۷فروند سوخو ۳۰ بر فراز آسمان ایران چه می‌کنند؟







www.mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458465987930558475

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458465987930558475


if it truly meant for Iran and not on their way for Dubai. then its show how incompetent some of the military planner are, it hover on border line treason . its not even SM2 standard with IBRIS-E and AL-41 engine, a sidestep from the old f-14 in it they ever did not tried to reduce rcs it will lit up in the sky like a Christmas three .
if only that were spending 1/10th of the money they had to spend on those on indigenous projects


----------



## Shawnee

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458465987930558475



این طرف از فتوشاپ بازی دست برنمیداره


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1453822283722764295

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> if it truly meant for Iran and not on their way for Dubai. then its show how incompetent some of the military planner are, it hover on border line treason . its not even SM2 standard with IBRIS-E and AL-41 engine, a sidestep from the old f-14 in it they ever did not tried to reduce rcs it will lit up in the sky like a Christmas three .
> if only that were spending 1/10th of the money they had to spend on those on indigenous projects



You are on opium if you think Russia is giving Iran AL-41 and IBRIS-E.

Nothing to do with the “incompetent military planners”. They would love to get even SU-57. But Russia will not hand over advanced tech. S-300 was pretty old tech when Iran placed the order (Israel had trained against Greece system for years). And TOR-M1 was a dinosaur when Iran got it in 2008.

So best Iran will get is SU-30 in my opinion. I’m skepticism Russia will even give THAT. They probably offered Iran SU-22 lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I would love to see Iran produce a world class 4th gen fighter jet, however the fact of the matter is that Iran does not have the resources or the budget.

Iran does not even have a network of communication satellites and lacks the necessary budget

Many of the jets in Iran's inventory are past their expiry date and must be replaced. For example the F-4s and Mirage F-1s among others. An airframe can only last for so long. The IRIAF is really on it's last legs.

Not to mention the fact that Iran has far too many kinds of jets in its inventory. That by itself costs Iran a small fortune in maintenance,.parts, training, procurement, etc

Iran needs to standardize it's airforce. After decades the best Iran came up with was a reverse engineered F-5 and various prototypes that never went far.

Being able to maintain and modernize the wide variety of jets in its inventory is extremely impressive but Iran desperately needs an injectuon of new fighter jets and new technology.

This is what I hope to see our of the deal

-SU-27 variants (SU-30/SU-35)
-Upgrading MIG-29s to MIG-35 standard
-Finally putting F-4 and others in storage
-Mi-24 helicopters and technology to help Iran build lighter helicopters
-Trainer aircraft and technology
-In the future, Armata tank and checkmate 5th gen fighter jet
-Various other parts and technology transfers for ifvs, APCs, etc
-S-400 but only with technology transfer. Perhaps a memorandum of understanding for the S-500 ?

Such a deal would be both beneficial for Iran and Russia.

For Iran its a much needed boost and replacement for its aging jets especially. For Russia it's much needed funding to actually mass produce the Armata tank and SU-57, as well as a victory over China, as well as funding for the checkmate.

With India and Egypt having chosen the Rafale over the SU-35 or MIG-35, and India having rejected the SU-57 outright, this is a welcome relief for Russia's weapons industry.




Hack-Hook said:


> if it truly meant for Iran and not on their way for Dubai. then its show how incompetent some of the military planner are, it hover on border line treason . its not even SM2 standard with IBRIS-E and AL-41 engine, a sidestep from the old f-14 in it they ever did not tried to reduce rcs it will lit up in the sky like a Christmas three .
> if only that were spending 1/10th of the money they had to spend on those on indigenous projects


----------



## sha ah

I understand what your saying but Iran received the latest, most advanced variant of the S-300 when the deal went through.

The C-130 Hercules has been produced since the 50s. The US is still planning on producing more of them for decades. Is it fair to compare a C-130 from 1957 to one built today ? No obviously they look very similar on the outside but the latest variant is a completely different beast.

Russia actually offered Iran the S-400 but by then Iran wanted to get the deal over with and with the S-400 Russia would not give the software codes. To this day Turkey does not have access to the S-400s software codes. Russian technicians are still required to do the vital maintenance. With the S-300 that is not an issue, Iran has the codes.

When it comes to Iran, Russia of course sees Iran as a regional rival and any country that exports weapons wants to keep an edge. That's understandable.

China is a different story. They have a veto at the UN and have 1.4 billion people. But even with China there was a time when they almost went to war with the USSR in the 70s and China could not access modern jets for years. 

After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia was desperate for cash and recently after Crimea the Ruble lost half of its value and again Russia was willing. It's all about timing and right now with US pushing Russia and China's buttons, they're willing and Iran should not pass up the opportunity.

In any case I believe that this deal will be mutually beneficial for both Iran and Russia. I will be curious to see the details as they become available and let's see what Iran does with China. China is going through an energy/economic crisis right now and tensions with the US are high so the time is right for Iran.



TheImmortal said:


> You are on opium if you think Russia is giving Iran AL-41 and IBRIS-E.
> 
> Nothing to do with the “incompetent military planners”. They would love to get even SU-57. But Russia will not hand over advanced tech. S-300 was pretty old tech when Iran placed the order (Israel had trained against Greece system for years). And TOR-M1 was a dinosaur when Iran got it in 2008.
> 
> So best Iran will get is SU-30 in my opinion. I’m skepticism Russia will even give THAT. They probably offered Iran SU-22 lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> China could not access modern jets for years.



China had ICBMs carrying multiple warheads in 1970s. They were light years ahead of Iran even at that time in many fields.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iranitaakharin

Hack-Hook said:


> if it truly meant for Iran and not on their way for Dubai. then its show how incompetent some of the military planner are, it hover on border line treason . its not even SM2 standard with IBRIS-E and AL-41 engine, a sidestep from the old f-14 in it they ever did not tried to reduce rcs it will lit up in the sky like a Christmas three .
> if only that were spending 1/10th of the money they had to spend on those on indigenous projects



it is a clear photoshop and joke...


----------



## Darius77

sha ah said:


> I understand what your saying but Iran received the latest, most advanced variant of the S-300 when the deal went through.
> 
> The C-130 Hercules has been produced since the 50s. The US is still planning on producing more of them for decades. Is it fair to compare a C-130 from 1957 to one built today ? No obviously they look very similar on the outside but the latest variant is a completely different beast.
> 
> Russia actually offered Iran the S-400 but by then Iran wanted to get the deal over with and with the S-400 Russia would not give the software codes. To this day Turkey does not have access to the S-400s software codes. Russian technicians are still required to do the vital maintenance. With the S-300 that is not an issue, Iran has the codes.
> 
> When it comes to Iran, Russia of course sees Iran as a regional rival and any country that exports weapons wants to keep an edge. That's understandable.
> 
> China is a different story. They have a veto at the UN and have 1.4 billion people. But even with China there was a time when they almost went to war with the USSR in the 70s and China could not access modern jets for years.
> 
> After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia was desperate for cash and recently after Crimea the Ruble lost half of its value and again Russia was willing. It's all about timing and right now with US pushing Russia and China's buttons, they're willing and Iran should not pass up the opportunity.
> 
> In any case I believe that this deal will be mutually beneficial for both Iran and Russia. I will be curious to see the details as they become available and let's see what Iran does with China. China is going through an energy/economic crisis right now and tensions with the US are high so the time is right for Iran.


I don't believe that Russia offered Iran any S-400 and even took a decade and court action to get the outdated and questionable S-300 which the Greeks have had since the 90's and NATO has full knowledge of their capability or lack of it as they have never been tested in combat. However, I do agree that Russia today is feeling encircled and threatened by US and NATO and may be more amenable to sell Iran some modern weaponry, perhaps the older SU-30, but I would not hold my breath. China largely operates on economic interest and is a big buyer of Saudi and other western vassal Arab states oil, so I doubt it that China will even sell the J-10 to Iran. The mullahs have also mishandled Iranian foreign and strategic policies to an art form and failed to take advantage of the post Soviet era. Iran has a pretty educated population and a very skilled diaspora, but as long as the social restrictions and stifling domestic environment continues attracting skilled Iranians to develop critical technologies remains limited. Also the economic pressure imposed by the US and EU limits Iran's capacity to obtain modern technology and resources needed for mass aircraft manufacture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Again the S-300 has been produced since the late 70's. Iran received the latest and most modern export variant. 

It's really not fair to compare Iran's S-300 batteries to those of Greece from 2 decades prior. It would be like comparing an F-16 from 1978 to one produced today. Same weapon, completely different technology behind it.

Russia is playing a careful balancing act with Iran. Of course they won't give Iran the most advanced hardware since it would make Iran powerful enough to challenge their own influence. 

Also if Russia gave Iran the most advanced technology, it might lead to the USA and EU sanctioning Russia. They want to arm Iran but still stay under the radar.

In regards to China, tensions with the US are increasing and they are currently experiencing an energy crisis, along with economic issues in the real estate sector. 

Iran wanted to trade oil for jets and considering the circumstances, such trade seems more likely than ever. Keep in mind that if China does go to war in the South China Sea they will need a large stockpile of oil and they will need Iran to have the capability to fend off military/economic pressure so that Iran can continually supply China. Therefore selling Iran the J-10 in exchange for Iranian oil makes more sense now than ever before.

I do agree that Iran would be better off by allowing more individual freedoms and by implementing a more pragmatic foreign policy. However at the moment it is what it is.



Darius77 said:


> I don't believe that Russia offered Iran any S-400 and even took a decade and court action to get the outdated and questionable S-300 which the Greeks have had since the 90's and NATO has full knowledge of their capability or lack of it as they have never been tested in combat. However, I do agree that Russia today is feeling encircled and threatened by US and NATO and may be more amenable to sell Iran some modern weaponry, perhaps the older SU-30, but I would not hold my breath. China largely operates on economic interest and is a big buyer of Saudi and other western vassal Arab states oil, so I doubt it that China will even sell the J-10 to Iran. The mullahs have also mishandled Iranian foreign and strategic policies to an art form and failed to take advantage of the post Soviet era. Iran has a pretty educated population and a very skilled diaspora, but as long as the social restrictions and stifling domestic environment continues attracting skilled Iranians to develop critical technologies remains limited. Also the economic pressure imposed by the US and EU limits Iran's capacity to obtain modern technology and resources needed for mass aircraft manufacture.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Darius77

sha ah said:


> Again the S-300 has been produced since the late 70's. Iran received the latest and most modern export variant.
> 
> It's really not fair to compare Iran's S-300 batteries to those of Greece from 2 decades prior. It would be like comparing an F-16 from 1978 to one produced today. Same weapon, completely different technology behind it.
> 
> Russia is playing a careful balancing act with Iran. Of course they won't give Iran the most advanced hardware since it would make Iran powerful enough to challenge their own influence.
> 
> Also if Russia gave Iran the most advanced technology, it might lead to the USA and EU sanctioning Russia. They want to arm Iran but still stay under the radar.
> 
> In regards to China, tensions with the US are increasing and they are currently experiencing an energy crisis, along with economic issues in the real estate sector.
> 
> Iran wanted to trade oil for jets and considering the circumstances, such trade seems more likely than ever. Keep in mind that if China does go to war in the South China Sea they will need a large stockpile of oil and they will need Iran to have the capability to fend off military/economic pressure so that Iran can continually supply China. Therefore selling Iran the J-10 in exchange for Iranian oil makes more sense now than ever before.
> 
> I do agree that Iran would be better off by allowing more individual freedoms and by implementing a more pragmatic foreign policy. However at the moment it is what it is.


Good sensible and realistic comment. Iran is quite intellectually developed with a very robust civil society, but the government needs to ease up on the social restrictions and offer more personal freedoms. As you can see from our comments, even the educated diaspora is very nationalistic and will support Iran's progress if the social conditions are right. Iranian women are very educated and will not take these stifling restrictions for long. The Persians have had a very gender enlightened history and women have even fought in all the wars, including the defence of Khorramshahr recently. The Akhoond need to recognize that.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Darius77 said:


> Good sensible and realistic comment. Iran is quite intellectually developed with a very robust civil society, but the government needs to ease up on the social restrictions and offer more personal freedoms. As you can see from our comments, even the educated diaspora is very nationalistic and will support Iran's progress if the social conditions are right. Iranian women are very educated and will not take these stifling restrictions for long. The Persians have had a very gender enlightened history and women have even fought in all the wars, including the defence of Khorramshahr recently. The Akhoond need to recognize that.



Iran has always been a paternalistic society, even in pre-Islamic times and in confirmity with sacred Tradition. The exacerbated feminist, egalitarian type of thinking represents a modernist, masonic / zionist vector of subversion meant to uproot and destroy nations. Women in essence aren't supposed to fight wars, and even if there might be a token percentage of females fit for the job, Islamic Iran has taken this into account. It's not as if the tokennumber of women who joined the frontlines at Khorramshahr (mostly in logistic roles, as nurses etc, not as combatants) did so against the will of the clergy. After all they were genuine Basijis themselves, madyune Velāyat to the core. And they loved wearing their chadors (maximum degree of Islamic hejab). But only a handful, as it should be according to Natural Law.

- - - - -



sha ah said:


> Again the S-300 has been produced since the late 70's. Iran received the latest and most modern export variant.
> 
> It's really not fair to compare Iran's S-300 batteries to those of Greece from 2 decades prior. It would be like comparing an F-16 from 1978 to one produced today. Same weapon, completely different technology behind it.
> 
> Russia is playing a careful balancing act with Iran. Of course they won't give Iran the most advanced hardware since it would make Iran powerful enough to challenge their own influence.
> 
> Also if Russia gave Iran the most advanced technology, it might lead to the USA and EU sanctioning Russia. They want to arm Iran but still stay under the radar.
> 
> In regards to China, tensions with the US are increasing and they are currently experiencing an energy crisis, along with economic issues in the real estate sector.
> 
> Iran wanted to trade oil for jets and considering the circumstances, such trade seems more likely than ever. Keep in mind that if China does go to war in the South China Sea they will need a large stockpile of oil and they will need Iran to have the capability to fend off military/economic pressure so that Iran can continually supply China. Therefore selling Iran the J-10 in exchange for Iranian oil makes more sense now than ever before.
> 
> I do agree that Iran would be better off by allowing more individual freedoms and by implementing a more pragmatic foreign policy. However at the moment it is what it is.



Of course the S-300/S-400 hybrid sold to Iran has nothing to do with earlier examples supplied to Greece. It's a welcome addition to Iran's top notch AD network.

Besides, even if NATO had the opportunity to train against it - which it didn't, so what? This by itself is far from making the system useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Veiling was common in Iran even before Islamic conquests. However today only a handful of countries enforce mandatory veiling.

Iran's women have more rights than most people in the world believe. For example there are more women in University than men.

Iran's culture is paternal oriented and had been for a long time, however the past doesn't necessarily have to define the future.

When women in Iran see women in other countries become a president or judge it makes them wonder why they can't have the same rights. Personally I believe they deserve those rights.



SalarHaqq said:


> Iran has always been a paternalistic society, even in pre-Islamic times and in confirmity with sacred Tradition. The exacerbated feminist, egalitarian type of thinking represents a modernist, masonic / zionist vector of subversion meant to uproot and destroy nations. Women in essence aren't supposed to fight wars, and even if there might be a token percentage of females fit for the role, Islamic Iran has taken this into account. It's not as if the tiny handful of women who joined the frontlines at Khorramshahr (mostly in logistics, not as fighters) did so against the will of the clergy, no, they were hardcore Basijis themselves, madyune Velāyat and dastbuse rohānyat to the core. And they loved wearing their chadors (maximum-degree of Islamic hejab). But just a handful, as said, and as it should be according to Natural Law.
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> 
> 
> Of course the S-300/S-400 hybrid sold to Iran has nothing to do with earlier examples supplied to Greece. It's a welcome addition to Iran's top notch AD network.
> 
> Besides, even if NATO had the opportunity to train against it - which it didn't, so what? This by itself doesn't make the system useless at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

sha ah said:


> Veiling was common in Iran even before Islamic conquests. However today only a handful of countries enforce mandatory veiling.
> 
> Iran's women have more rights than most people in the world believe. For example there are more women in University than men.
> 
> Iran's culture is paternal oriented and had been for a long time, however the past doesn't necessarily have to define the future.
> 
> When women in Iran see women in other countries become a president or judge it makes them wonder why they can't have the same rights. Personally I believe they deserve those rights.


I'd love to see where this exchange goes. Can we move it to Chill?


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> When women in Iran see women in other countries become a president or judge it makes them wonder why they can't have the same rights. Personally I believe they deserve those rights.


"RIght" in 1 country can be "crime " in another country. Just saying, things are relative, not fixed and static.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

For myself the question isn't why but rather why not ? Why should Iranian women not be entitled to be a president or judge ? Why because Iranian society has traditionally been paternal oriented ? 

On the other hand Iran is not the only country like this. Some oriental nations tend to favour men over women in the most prominent, leading roles insociety. Some European nations as well. It's a matter of cultural preference in some cases.



925boy said:


> "RIght" in 1 country can be "crime " in another country. Just saying, things are relative, not fixed and static.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> For myself the question isn't why but rather why not ? Why should Iranian women not be entitled to be a president or judge ? Why because Iranian society has traditionally been paternal oriented ?
> 
> On the other hand Iran is not the only country like this. Some oriental nations tend to favour men over women in the most prominent, leading roles insociety. Some European nations as well. It's a matter of cultural preference in some cases.


Duly noted. I do care about egalitarian values, and yes, IRan seems to operate statist quasi-police state, but that might've been necessary for the state's survival. Its always easy to criticize after all is said and done, but things might've also been alot worse if certain restrictions etc werent in place. Excess freedom seems to invite disorder also.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hey lets discuss "Women's Rights" in the IRIAF News and Discussion section! I mean why not, right?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457763963412877326

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Lahijan, Rasht












*¯\_(ツ)_/¯*


----------



## Hack-Hook

Did acrojet team upgraded their airplanes


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Muhammed45 said:


> Lahijan, Rasht
> 
> View attachment 792898
> View attachment 792899
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *¯\_(ツ)_/¯*


These were said to be Russian Sukhois transiting through Iranian airspace on route to the U.A.E for the Dubai Air Show.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> These were said to be Russian Sukhois transiting through Iranian airspace on route to the U.A.E for the Dubai Air Show.


many thing were said but protocol says they must be escorted by Iran airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> many thing were said but protocol says they must be escorted by Iran airforce


You make a valid point. Either the IRIAF was unable /unwilling to conduct escort missions (like we had seen them doing when they were escorting Russian bombers conducting strikes in Syria) or those aircraft are not Russian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Hack-Hook said:


> many thing were said but protocol says they must be escorted by Iran airforce


There no such protocol as there is a air space corridor agreement. Russians have been flying both military aircraft like TU-22M, SU-35 and transports across Iran quite regularly as well as their Kalibr missiles have overflown Iranian airspace to strike terrorist targets in Syria.

Iran has allowed Russian planes to use its airspace during recent operations in Syria, since 2016.

Russian aircraft for the first time used an Iranian air base in 2016 to conduct strikes in Syria. The Russian military said its fighters had completed their tasks, but left open the possibility of using the Hamadan base again if circumstances warranted.

Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s National Security Council, had back then told the semi-official news agency Fars: “Their (Russians’) use of Iran’s air space has continued because we have a fully strategic cooperation with Russia.”

“In the recent cases, Russian fighter planes have only used Iran’s airspace and have not had refueling operations,” Shamkhani added.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Darius77 said:


> There no such protocol as there is a air space corridor agreement. Russians have been flying both military aircraft like TU-22M, SU-35 and transports across Iran quite regularly as well as their Kalibr missiles have overflown Iranian airspace to strike terrorist targets in Syria.
> 
> Iran has allowed Russian planes to use its airspace during recent operations in Syria, since 2016.
> 
> Russian aircraft for the first time used an Iranian air base in 2016 to conduct strikes in Syria. The Russian military said its fighters had completed their tasks, but left open the possibility of using the Hamadan base again if circumstances warranted.
> 
> Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s National Security Council, had back then told the semi-official news agency Fars: “Their (Russians’) use of Iran’s air space has continued because we have a fully strategic cooperation with Russia.”
> 
> “In the recent cases, Russian fighter planes have only used Iran’s airspace and have not had refueling operations,” Shamkhani added.


 
IRIAF f-4Es and F-14As were photographed and filmed escorting these Russian flights over Iranian airspace. They were never allowed to fly over Iranian airspace without escorts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> IRIAF f-4Es and F-14As were photographed and filmed escorting these Russian flights over Iranian airspace. They were never allowed to fly over Iranian airspace without escorts.


In the past yes, but those photos might have been from before the recent agreements of the past few years allowing Russia access certain air corridors. I remember pics of tomcats armed with sejjils and phoenixes escorting RUAF though Iran but those pics are quite old by now. 
Also, these recent flights might very well have had an escort from the IRIAF but the planes just weren't in the frame of the pics taken.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Darius77 said:


> There no such protocol as there is a air space corridor agreement. Russians have been flying both military aircraft like TU-22M, SU-35 and transports across Iran quite regularly as well as their Kalibr missiles have overflown Iranian airspace to strike terrorist targets in Syria.
> 
> Iran has allowed Russian planes to use its airspace during recent operations in Syria, since 2016.
> 
> Russian aircraft for the first time used an Iranian air base in 2016 to conduct strikes in Syria. The Russian military said its fighters had completed their tasks, but left open the possibility of using the Hamadan base again if circumstances warranted.
> 
> Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s National Security Council, had back then told the semi-official news agency Fars: “Their (Russians’) use of Iran’s air space has continued because we have a fully strategic cooperation with Russia.”
> 
> “In the recent cases, Russian fighter planes have only used Iran’s airspace and have not had refueling operations,” Shamkhani added.


I'm not aware of such agreement and if there is it's unconstitutional . And if you recall when then photos of Russian aircraft become public they had to stop using Iran base and airspace and parliament made such an uproar and wanted to give a vote of no confidence to the government.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I'm not aware of such agreement and if there is it's unconstitutional . And if you recall when then photos of Russian aircraft become public they had to stop using Iran base and airspace and parliament made such an uproar and wanted to give a vote of no confidence to the government.



You think Khamenai and IRGC didn’t know Russia was using that base? You think the anti war and anti expansionist Rouhani made that decision?

Need to get your head checked...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Well they have hmiemin airbase now so realistically why would they even need to use Iranian airspace ?

Anyways I don't see anything wrong with it unless they're freely allowed to go anywhere without limitations. 

There are however limitations. Iran radar keeps track of them and they have to travel in a pre-determined path.

Azerbaijan's military planes also used to be able to fly over Iranian airspace to reach the enclave of Nakhchivan until recently



TheImmortal said:


> You think Khamenai and IRGC didn’t know Russia was using that base? You think the anti war and anti expansionist Rouhani made that decision?
> 
> Need to get your head checked...


----------



## SalarHaqq

It's not unconstitutional to grant overflight and airbase usage rights (as guests) on an ad hoc (= case by case) basis. Permanent contractual authorizations are a wholly different matter. Hence why I very much doubt Iran conceded such a continuous right to any country, Russia included.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You think Khamenai and IRGC didn’t know Russia was using that base? You think the anti war and anti expansionist Rouhani made that decision?
> 
> Need to get your head checked...


not important , there is a reason that there is a parliament and public news outlet , when it become public , they could not do anything. that's why Iran still is a republic ,and here the constitution barred it


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> It's not unconstitutional to grant overflight and airbase usage rights (as guests) on an ad hoc (= case by case) basis. Permanent contractual authorizations are a wholly different matter. Hence why I very much doubt Iran conceded such a continuous right to any country, Russia included.


according to article 77 of our constitution any sort of agreement with foreign countries must passed through parliament and I'm sure parliament yet to pass such agreement with Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

I insert it here as it specifies some aircraft models that Iran has been interested in, but they are statements that refer to weapon systems for all Iranian armed forces.

"Rosoboronexport" talked about military-technical cooperation with Iran

https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2021/11/14/670587/Iran-Russia-military-cooperation-arms-exporter-Rosoboronexport-Alexander-A--Mikheev-UN-arm-embargo-S- 300-air-difesa Dmitry-Shugaev

and what use would it be to modernize its only 6 SU-25UBKs (the former Iraqi ones were returned a few years ago), unless it is a typo and the author of the article wanted to point to the SU-24


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> not important , there is a reason that there is a parliament and public news outlet , when it become public , they could not do anything. that's why Iran still is a republic ,and here the constitution barred it



Iran is a pseudo Republic. As long as Khamenai exists and SL position exists, Iran will never be a true republic.

Btw even Rome had a Senate when they had a Emperor.


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> Iran is a pseudo Republic. As long as Khamenai exists and SL position exists, Iran will never be a true republic.
> 
> Btw even Rome had a Senate when they had a Emperor.


can you show some respect to superme leader .superme leader not ur boy or something like that

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Iran is a pseudo Republic. As long as Khamenai exists and SL position exists, Iran will never be a true republic.
> 
> Btw even Rome had a Senate when they had a Emperor.


not important look at how many country around the world have both parliament and king and queen and emperor and empress

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

The issue is that the supreme leader decides the foreign policy, therefore Iran is more of a theocracy rather than an authentic Republic or democracy. There are very few democracies in the world. The US is more of an oligarchy then democracy.



Hack-Hook said:


> not important look at how many country around the world have both parliament and king and queen and emperor and empress

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> The issue is that the supreme leader decides the foreign policy, therefore Iran is more of a theocracy rather than an authentic Republic or democracy. There are very few democracies in the world. The US is more of an oligarchy then democracy.


if it was theocracy in foreign affair we completely would have saw a different foreign policy

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> not important look at how many country around the world have both parliament and king and queen and emperor and empress



wrong, Most of the so called King and Queens are stripped of any mean full power in today’s Western society. They are ceremonial. Only Arabs still have kings with any power and that is just another name for dictatorship.

So Khamenai still drives the drives the ship in the republic. His picture is inside every business and government building in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Iran is a theocratic dictatorship with almost zero political plurality. I once attended a seminar by the late great President Bani-Sadr who passed away recently. He was a man of integrity and tried his best to create some sort of a hybrid inclusive political system, but was pushed out of the country. The aim of the Iranian revolution was to create an inclusive secular democratic system that ensured basic human rights. The mullahs hijacked the revolution and after 41 years now Iran is stuck in a religious time warp. I am afraid there will be a social implosion again if things don't change. Iran today is far different than in 1979 and there is a large educated class who can not be suppressed for ever.

If the Shah had not proved to be such an arrogant fool, he could have easily turned Iran into a very successful constitutional monarchy, like Juan Carlos did in Spain after Franco's dictatorship, which in now a stable democracy.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

Darius77 said:


> Iran is a theocratic dictatorship with almost zero political plurality. I once attended a seminar by the late great President Bani-Sadr who passed away recently. He was a man of integrity and tried his best to create some sort of a hybrid inclusive political system, but was pushed out of the country. The aim of the Iranian revolution was to create an inclusive secular democratic system that ensured basic human rights. The mullahs hijacked the revolution and after 41 years now Iran is stuck in a religious time warp. I am afraid there will be a social implosion again if things don't change. Iran today is far different than in 1979 and there is a large educated class who can not be suppressed for ever.
> 
> If the Shah had not proved to be such an arrogant fool, he could have easily turned Iran into a very successful constitutional monarchy, like Juan Carlos did in Spain after Franco's dictatorship, which in now a stable democracy.


Great Bani Sadr? 

That fool wanted to surrender all the F14 fleet to Americans.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## QWECXZ

Darius77 said:


> Iran is a theocratic dictatorship with almost zero political plurality. I once attended a seminar by the late great President Bani-Sadr who passed away recently. He was a man of integrity and tried his best to create some sort of a hybrid inclusive political system, but was pushed out of the country. The aim of the Iranian revolution was to create an inclusive secular democratic system that ensured basic human rights. The mullahs hijacked the revolution and after 41 years now Iran is stuck in a religious time warp. I am afraid there will be a social implosion again if things don't change. Iran today is far different than in 1979 and there is a large educated class who can not be suppressed for ever.
> 
> If the Shah had not proved to be such an arrogant fool, he could have easily turned Iran into a very successful constitutional monarchy, like Juan Carlos did in Spain after Franco's dictatorship, which in now a stable democracy.


This is satire. Right?

Edit: I am talking about the part where you call Bai-Sadr great.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> You think Khamenai and IRGC didn’t know Russia was using that base? You think the anti war and anti expansionist Rouhani made that decision?
> 
> Need to get your head checked...


Hosting foreign military who are fighting beside us isn't against the constitution, anybody who doesn't understand this needs to get his head checked.

What happened in the Russian case was that the pro-west government wanted to appease their western masters and sabotage the main policies of supreme leader *as usual* (yeah, since we are not a true democracy!) so they made a propaganda to have an excuse to expel the Russian forces. wasn't their first or last treason.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Darius77 said:


> Iran is a theocratic dictatorship with almost zero political plurality. I once attended a seminar by the late great President Bani-Sadr who passed away recently. He was a man of integrity and tried his best to create some sort of a hybrid inclusive political system, but was pushed out of the country. The aim of the Iranian revolution was to create an inclusive secular democratic system that ensured basic human rights. The mullahs hijacked the revolution and after 41 years now Iran is stuck in a religious time warp. I am afraid there will be a social implosion again if things don't change. Iran today is far different than in 1979 and there is a large educated class who can not be suppressed for ever.
> 
> If the Shah had not proved to be such an arrogant fool, he could have easily turned Iran into a very successful constitutional monarchy, like Juan Carlos did in Spain after Franco's dictatorship, which in now a stable democracy.


You mean like all those other "successful constitutional monarchies" in the mena region?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Sineva said:


> You mean like all those other "successful constitutional monarchies" in the mena region?


Since I am a FACT based person and less inclined to hyperbole like an earthquake in Iran is somehow a "nuclear test" 

There are no "constitutional monarchies" in the so-called Muslim world. Only Europe has few left like Scandinavian states, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc. All Arab and Muslim states like Brunei are absolute totalitarian family run fiefdoms, mostly imposed by foreign powers. Only Iraq, Egypt and Libya overthrew their monarchies along with Iran in 1979. Iraq and Libya are chaos while Egypt is the worst dictatorship in the non-monarchical Arab world. It is is also very obvious that any religion based theocratic regime is incompatible with either democracy or human rights. It does matter if it is Muslim or Hindu (India) or Buddhist (Thailand), a religious based government is a recipe for disaster. Just watch how the Taliban implode in Afghanistan.


----------



## sha ah

Well the economy is set to slowly improve and recover in the next few years. If this doesn't happen you will see mass protests in Iran yet again.

However as long as the military supports the government, the current ruling class are not going anywhere.

Also people in Iran have seen what has happened in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and they don't want a regime like MKO to take over.

Look at the recent sanctions FATF imposed on Turkey and Pakistan. They are also not doing well economically. Basically any genuine, sovereign Muslim country will be opposed by the west.



Darius77 said:


> Since I am a FACT based person and less inclined to hyperbole like an earthquake in Iran is somehow a "nuclear test"
> 
> There are no "constitutional monarchies" in the so-called Muslim world. Only Europe has few left like Scandinavian states, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc. All Arab and Muslim states like Brunei are absolute totalitarian family run fiefdoms, mostly imposed by foreign powers. Only Iraq, Egypt and Libya overthrew their monarchies along with Iran in 1979. Iraq and Libya are chaos while Egypt is the worst dictatorship in the non-monarchical Arab world. It is is also very obvious that any religion based theocratic regime is incompatible with either democracy or human rights. It does matter if it is Muslim or Hindu (India) or Buddhist (Thailand), a religious based government is a recipe for disaster. Just watch how the Taliban implode in Afghanistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

sha ah said:


> Well the economy is set to slowly improve and recover in the next few years. If this doesn't happen you will see mass protests in Iran yet again.
> 
> However as long as the military supports the government, the current ruling class are not going anywhere.
> 
> Also people in Iran have seen what has happened in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and they don't want a regime like MKO to take over.
> 
> Look at the recent sanctions FATF imposed on Turkey and Pakistan. They are also not doing well economically. Basically any genuine, sovereign Muslim country will be opposed by the west.


You have good grasp on reality and a sharp mind. I agree, it is not a Muslim nations progress alone that generates western hostility. The problem is that the so-called west since the 17th century ripped off the world by violent imperialism and hid behind a hollow facade of racist "superiority". Now the tables have turned and power is shifting and they using the same Neo-imperialist policies against China, and Russia to some extent, even though their economies are intertwined. The European, especially American mind is very childish and thinks of the world in terms of sports metaphor, with winners and losers, rather than accepting reality and developing a cooperative framework. All this NATO, QUAD, AUKUS nonsense, is hardly going to reverse the course of history. All empires eventually fall, ours was no different. Currently Iran is a target as it is independent and no longer America's gas station and poses a challenge to Zionist hegemony, which the Arabs easily accepted. With Islam the west has had a historical animosity so a powerful Muslim nation becomes a quick target dating back to the Crusades. Western racism, animosity and sheer inhumanity is now on open display with the appalling treatment of refugees, just because they are from Muslim countries. Even third rate states like Poland are no at the forefront of Islamophobic racism.

My personal view is that non-Arab large Muslim states like Iran, Turkey and Pakistan have a lot in common and need to close ranks and look east, and that is what they are trying to do in their own way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Fathullah Ami: The Aerospace Research Institute started designing the Aria 10 aircraft, the initial design has been completed and is now in the preliminary design stage. In order to use the country's airports, we obtained a DOA aircraft design certification from the Civil Aviation Authority. We hope that the design of this aircraft will be completed soon

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Sineva

Darius77 said:


> Since I am a FACT based person and less inclined to hyperbole like an earthquake in Iran is somehow a "nuclear test"
> 
> There are no "constitutional monarchies" in the so-called Muslim world. Only Europe has few left like Scandinavian states, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc. All Arab and Muslim states like Brunei are absolute totalitarian family run fiefdoms, mostly imposed by foreign powers. Only Iraq, Egypt and Libya overthrew their monarchies along with Iran in 1979. Iraq and Libya are chaos while Egypt is the worst dictatorship in the non-monarchical Arab world. It is is also very obvious that any religion based theocratic regime is incompatible with either democracy or human rights. It does matter if it is Muslim or Hindu (India) or Buddhist (Thailand), a religious based government is a recipe for disaster. Just watch how the Taliban implode in Afghanistan.


If you`re a "fact based person",then you might want to stop and ask yourself why there are no constitutional monarchies in the mena region,just corrupt absolute ones,you might also want to ask yourself why the west,despite its lip service to concepts like democracy etc..,supports these sorts of regimes to the hilt.
I personally tend to think that even in the very unlikely event that iran had become some sort of constitutional monarchy,that the west or the soviets would`ve ensured that either it was strangled in its cradle or that it would`ve not long survived its birth.

The iri may be far from perfect,but it does seem to do a better job,both in an independent foreign policy,something that vassals can only dream of,and also in offering at least a modicum of democratic participation for the populace,than any of the western backed regional secular dictatorships,be they republican or monarchist,that are par for the course in the mena region.
Ultimately so long as you have a weak mena region,full of weak vassal regimes,where foreign imperial powers think they have a god given right to meddle,dont expect anything like western style democracy or human rights,because they`re not in the interests of those calling the shots,unless of course its using them as a cudgel to try and score political points with.

Lastly if the government and people of afghanistan werent willing to fight for the state that the west had built [imposed?] there,then to me that says that they probably deserve the taliban.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

We recently saw a video which showed an Iran-140 plane being built from the ground up. Despite this we have yet to see that new Iran-140 transport plane fly.

Even the Antonov 140 planes purchased from Ukraine, supposedly the engine issue was resolved, but we haven't seen them being used yet.

What is the point of this design when it's so close to the Iran-140 ? Is this just a new name for Iran-140 ?

I've heard that Iran plans on building an AWACS variant of Iran-140 as well.

Only time will tell but I'll believe it when I see it.








Draco.IMF said:


> Fathullah Ami: The Aerospace Research Institute started designing the Aria 10 aircraft, the initial design has been completed and is now in the preliminary design stage. In order to use the country's airports, we obtained a DOA aircraft design certification from the Civil Aviation Authority. We hope that the design of this aircraft will be completed soon
> 
> View attachment 793434
> 
> View attachment 793435
> 
> 
> View attachment 793436

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Draco.IMF said:


> Fathullah Ami: The Aerospace Research Institute started designing the Aria 10 aircraft, the initial design has been completed and is now in the preliminary design stage. In order to use the country's airports, we obtained a DOA aircraft design certification from the Civil Aviation Authority. We hope that the design of this aircraft will be completed soon
> 
> View attachment 793434
> 
> View attachment 793435
> 
> 
> View attachment 793436



Any chance to get a link for these pictures, please?

"Google" reverse image search using URL: 0 result.
"Google" reverse image search using uploaded image capture: 0 result.
"Google" search for the introductory sentence in English: 0 result (except for your post here).
"Google" search for a Farsi translation of the text: 0 result.
"Google" search for keywords "Arya 10" and "aircraft" in Farsi: no relevant result.

Another reason why I abhor so-called "social media", it's near impossible to properly document and find posts made there.

_____



sha ah said:


> We recently saw a video which showed an Iran-140 plane being built from the ground up. Despite this we have yet to see that new Iran-140 transport plane fly.
> 
> Even the Antonov 140 planes purchased from Ukraine, supposedly the engine issue was resolved, but we haven't seen them being used yet.
> 
> What is the point of this design when it's so close to the Iran-140 ? Is this just a new name for Iran-140 ?
> 
> I've heard that Iran plans on building an AWACS variant of Iran-140 as well.
> 
> Only time will tell but I'll believe it when I see it.
> 
> View attachment 793719



That other design is of a clearly smaller plane than the IRAn-140. They're not exactly in the same class, so it's not redundant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iranian pilots have always been world class, top notch. As good as it gets. They deserve new hardware because as it stands their only chance is to fly low and hit enemy positions or stay close to Iranian Sam sites.



yavar said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raghfarm007

It seems they started working on the owj jet engine 32 years ago.... and the leader was kept well informed, and he wanted total secrecy:





__





آپارات - سرویس اشتراک ویدیو







www.aparat.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Full interview

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

A long while ago, their was chatter about configuring long range cruise missiles to be compatible with F-5's or Su-24s

Now here we are with air launched CM


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470643878827073540

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470657850137587717

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470657850137587717


Could someone translate the part of the writing thats visible on the missile in the pic?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Sineva said:


> Could someone translate the part of the writing thats visible on the missile in the pic?


برد بلند = long-range

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Could the Su-24 really carry such a long range CM, or is this a new CM that is scaled down to work with the Su-24. Like the Hoveyzeh but scaled down to a lower weight/range.


----------



## sanel1412

Stryker1982 said:


> Could the Su-24 really carry such a long range CM, or is this a new CM that is scaled down to work with the Su-24. Like the Hoveyzeh but scaled down to a lower weight/range.


Ofcourse it can,SU-24 is heavy tactical bomber with good range and payload,designed to perform excellent at low,mid and high altitude...also SU22 and F4 also can carry those CM....I repeat,SU24 and SU22 are tactical bombers,not attack aircrafts which is completly different category,people often confuse these two roles..A-10,SU25 are attack aircrafts..they are mostly subsonic,heavily armored with protected engines..and these dont have in most cases radars,instead have EO/IR devices and laser designator...These aircrafts perform CAS missions...SU24 and SU22 are different beasts,much larger..high speed tactical bombers with good payload, capable to fly at high altitude but also penetrate at low and mid altitude...these include advanced multipurpose radars ,Iran has at least 3 excellent platforms for these CM. Air lunched CM are same as ground lunched minus booster,since missile is lunched at certain speed(crusing mostly)and altitude it doesnt need initial booster

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hi
What is this?
Edited F4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Ray_Atek said:


> Hi
> What is this?
> Edited F4
> View attachment 801292


That is a poor quality F-4 model.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> That is a poor quality F-4 model.


On the contrary !! enormous potential !!


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mr Iran Eye said:


> On the contrary !! enormous potential !!


I was referring to the model seen behind the IRIAF CO. Are you referring to upgraded F-4 Phantom IIs?


----------



## Ray_Atek

The wings seem different


----------



## TheImmortal

It’s just a toy guys. You been analyzing the 
Model toys for 20 years in videos. Nothing has ever come from them.

no...there isnt a secret modified F-4 program

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

General Immortal has just told us that he knows about Iran's secret projects, a real genius!

If you want to know the secrets of Iran then address to the great and only General Immortal


----------



## sanel1412

Ray_Atek said:


> The wings seem different
> View attachment 801492


Wings looks Like F1 Mirage..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Great info about Qaher's future.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> Great info about Qaher's future.



everyone with a brain, knew that garbage design wasn’t going to be mass produced after the disaster unveiling and Rouhani’s further embarrassment

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> everyone with a brain, knew that garbage design wasn’t going to be mass produced


There is a big if to it. 

This platform will be used as a test bed for future project which is not unveiled as of yet. 

About that if, if one of IRGC or Artesh airforces places a good piece of order then it will be Mass produced, otherwise, it wouldn't be more than a test bed and a tech demonstrator.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> There is a big if to it.
> 
> This platform will be used as a test bed for future project which is not unveiled as of yet.
> 
> About that if, if one of IRGC or Artesh airforces places a good piece of order then it will be Mass produced, otherwise, it wouldn't be more than a test bed and a tech demonstrator.



In the military when they mess up royally, they try to save face by saying “test bed” or “technology demonstrator” or “we learned a lot from the project for future needs”

Its BS military talk for “we screwed up, but don’t want to get fired or punished”

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> In the military when they mess up royally, they try to save face by saying “test bed” or “technology demonstrator” or “we learned a lot from the project for future needs”
> 
> Its BS military talk for “we screwed up, but don’t want to get fired or punished”


Or when they have lost all of their budget, like space program or passenger jet program, etc and neither can complain nor can finish the project whether good or bad design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> In the military when they mess up royally, they try to save face by saying “test bed” or “technology demonstrator” or “we learned a lot from the project for future needs”
> 
> Its BS military talk for “we screwed up, but don’t want to get fired or punished”


There is a lot of truth to what you said..US military is full of such projects.."Sargent york" is one example still in my head...but it is also true that every failure makes you closer to the eventual product what ever that may be....important thing is to keep the team together to avoid "lessons learned " from disappearing...that is what was not done in case of Iran's space program...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Muhammed45 said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> Great info about Qaher's future.



It’s going to hurt the ego of some people here who said the project was stopped

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Qaher looks similar to the Boeing Bird of Prey but realistically it was too small to carry any serious payload internally. Watch this video at 2:15







TheImmortal said:


> everyone with a brain, knew that garbage design wasn’t going to be mass produced after the disaster unveiling and Rouhani’s further embarrassment

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sha ah said:


> Qaher looks similar to the Boeing Bird of Prey but realistically it was too small to carry any serious payload internally. Watch this video at 2:15


IF they convert it to something else sure, but other than that, I hate when this zombie aircraft is constantly brought back to life in social media when it was a national embarrassment for last 10 years. 


aryobarzan said:


> There is a lot of truth to what you said..US military is full of such projects.."Sargent york" is one example still in my head...but it is also true that every failure makes you closer to the eventual product what ever that may be....important thing is to keep the team together to avoid "lessons learned " from disappearing...that is what was not done in case of Iran's space program...


The problem was when they promoted it like it was the greatest thing of all time. These thing should be kept with a low profile until ready even if it was an experimental project.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Stryker1982 said:


> IF they convert it to something else sure, but other than that, I hate when this zombie aircraft is constantly brought back to life in social media when it was a national embarrassment for last 10 years.
> 
> The problem was when they promoted it like it was the greatest thing of all time. These thing should be kept with a low profile until ready even if it was an experimental project.


Qaher became an embarrassment cause it never flied, if they could continue the project, foreign media couldn't continue to mock us, but there has been plenty of espionage and sabotage in our defense ministry.
If you remember western media were mocking Iranian missiles along Qaher at the same time too. but since traitors Rouhani and Dehghan (specially this f@cker) suspended this bold project (which was going to fly soon), it became the symbol of Iranian lies.

Qaher was a clear case of sabotage when Dehghan demanded unnecessary changes in the design to waste time and resources before suspending majority of the projects (including Qaher) in the defense ministry and receiving his reward of golden coins and medal.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

mohsen said:


> Qaher became an embarrassment cause it never flied, if they could continue the project, foreign media couldn't continue to mock us, but there has been plenty of espionage and sabotage in our defense ministry.
> If you remember western media were mocking Iranian missiles along Qaher at the same time too. but since traitors Rouhani and Dehghan (specially this f@cker) suspended this bold project (which was going to fly soon), it became the symbol of Iranian lies.
> 
> Qaher was a clear case of sabotage when Dehghan demanded unnecessary changes in the design to waste time and resources before suspending majority of the projects (including Qaher) in the defense ministry and receiving his reward of golden coins and medal.


100%.

They need to finish this project to redeem themselves. It has become a symbol as you said. The symbol needs to be destroyed. Dehghan created a big mess and it needs to be cleaned up.

An unmanned version is fine as well, as long as they continue it until completion and is useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

mohsen said:


> but there has been plenty of espionage and sabotage in our defense ministry.


 bi orzeha


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

mohsen said:


> Qaher became an embarrassment cause it never flied, if they could continue the project, foreign media couldn't continue to mock us, but there has been plenty of espionage and sabotage in our defense ministry.
> If you remember western media were mocking Iranian missiles along Qaher at the same time too. but since traitors Rouhani and Dehghan (specially this f@cker) suspended this bold project (which was going to fly soon), it became the symbol of Iranian lies.
> 
> Qaher was a clear case of sabotage when Dehghan demanded unnecessary changes in the design to waste time and resources before suspending majority of the projects (including Qaher) in the defense ministry and receiving his reward of golden coins and medal.


Why exactly should they waist scares resources seeing through a failed project that would bare no fruits for the IRIAF? They did the only smart thing by cutting their loses. This project was used as a publicity stunt and it back fired and should serve as a lesson of what not to do in the future. There is nothing shameful about having failed projects if you can learn from them but it would have been a great shame had they kept sinking money into a failure just to "save face".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Qaher was too small to carry any serious internal payload. Just compare it to the new Russian checkmate, which is considered to be a small stealth jet. 

My issue is that if they were going to use it as a publicity stunt then why not showcase something viable that looked impressive as well ? 

I mean these days it doesn't take much to come up with a basic design and then build a display model along with some cgi. To me Qaher just doesn't look right. 

The issue is that Iran doesnt really have the budget or the connections to produce a fifth generation stealth fighter by itself. Even Russia is having issues mass producing its SU-57. 

Now even if Iran were to procure a few dozen stealth fighters in the future like the Checkmate in the 2030s for example, they would only act as the tip of the spear for Iran's airforce. 

Iran would still need to replace the bulk of its aging fleet with a reliable 4th gen or 4.5 gen fighter like the SU-27 variant (SU-30, SU-35) or J-10 or even J-16.



Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why exactly should they waist scares resources seeing through a failed project that would bare no fruits for the IRIAF? They did the only smart thing by cutting their loses. This project was used as a publicity stunt and it back fired and should serve as a lesson of what not to do in the future. There is nothing shameful about having failed projects if you can learn from them but it would have been a great shame had they kept sinking money into a failure just to "save face".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why exactly should they waist scares resources seeing through a failed project that would bare no fruits for the IRIAF? They did the only smart thing by cutting their loses. This project was used as a publicity stunt and it back fired and should serve as a lesson of what not to do in the future. There is nothing shameful about having failed projects if you can learn from them but it would have been a great shame had they kept sinking money into a failure just to "save face".


Was the space program a waste too? or 150 seat passenger jet? or airborne radars, or the rest of Jamaran class ships with zero advancement after 8 years?!

These projects weren't suspended because of a technical assessment (as you are suggesting), they were stopped cause traitors were saying this is the era of negotiations, not missiles! so they cut the whole military research budget, Dehghan agreed to cut 85% of the defense ministry's budget, suspend everything and in return receive his medal, and so it happened. situation was so critical that next year supreme leader used it's exclusive power to order a minimum extra budget so at least critical projects wouldn't stop.

There is no failure in research, but there has been no research, so it has been a 100% failure. Qaher wasn't supposed to be finish at this stage, it was an ongoing project, we all know there was no domestic engine, radar or missiles or even avionics, but project was stopped by this traitor Dehghan and then he said if IRIF pays for it, we will produce this half born child! and obviously IRIAF said no. Fotros and other drones had the same fate, the half finished projects (of previous government) were unveiled and said IRIF can order them! see how 8 years later still IRIAF has to order the Ababil 3 drone! this is why IRGC and Army started to develop their own drones.

so this whole excuse of mentioning no order from IRIAF is a sham by traitors to hide the end of research in defense ministry, this is the real publicity stunt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why exactly should they waist scares resources seeing through a failed project that would bare no fruits for the IRIAF? They did the only smart thing by cutting their loses. This project was used as a publicity stunt and it back fired and should serve as a lesson of what not to do in the future. There is nothing shameful about having failed projects if you can learn from them but it would have been a great shame had they kept sinking money into a failure just to "save face".


Yeah this thing became a publicity stunt when Ahmadinejad used it as one, The biggest cucks in the world are our POS politicians.


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Was the space program a waste too? or 150 seat passenger jet? or airborne radars, or the rest of Jamaran class ships with zero advancement after 8 years?!



Literally have nothing in common.

Let me act like Mohsen

“was electricity a waste too? Was heart surgery a waste too? Was a tank a waste too?”

Like you are naming things that have ACTUAL use. Even Jamaran helped replace Iran’s fleet from the 1970’s even if it wasn’t the latest naval technology or design.

Qaher was a joke. The pilot couldn’t fit. The wheels couldn’t even handle landing the plane, the plane could maybe hold 2 250lb bombs, and would stall in upper atmosphere. The plane needed to be completely redesigned.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Yes Qaher was a publicity stunt and not a good one at that. The only thing worse imo was Salami's dowsing rod incident. That was the biggest joke ever. The sad thing is that Iran actually has real capabilities so why bother with these lies and nonsense ? 

Also if you're going to promote a fake plane then why not show something that actually looks impressive. I've seen designs made up by amateurs in their spare time that look more impressive than Qaher. 

*Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’ *









Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’


The device appears to be some form of dowsing rod. Dowsing is a pseudo-scientific method of finding hidden substances or objects. Dowsing has been tested under controlled conditions and found to be a hoax.




www.polygraph.info





All of the following images are concepts drawn up by people in their spare time. However they all look more viable and more impressive than the Qaher. Again, my point is, if you're going to put out a mock up for domestic consumption, then why not something that actually looks good ? 

Interesting, an F-5 stealth concept. Compare it to the F-5











Some random concepts, all of which are better designs than the weird looking Qaher.

















TheImmortal said:


> Literally have nothing in common.
> 
> Let me act like Mohsen
> 
> “was electricity a waste too? Was heart surgery a waste too? Was a tank a waste too?”
> 
> Like you are naming things that have ACTUAL use. Even Jamaran helped replace Iran’s fleet from the 1970’s even if it wasn’t the latest naval technology or design.
> 
> Qaher was a joke. The pilot couldn’t fit. The wheels couldn’t even handle landing the plane, the plane could maybe hold 2 250lb bombs, and would stall in upper atmosphere. The plane needed to be completely redesigned.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

mohsen said:


> Was the space program a waste too? or 150 seat passenger jet? or airborne radars, or the rest of Jamaran class ships with zero advancement after 8 years?!
> 
> These projects weren't suspended because of a technical assessment (as you are suggesting), they were stopped cause traitors were saying this is the era of negotiations, not missiles! so they cut the whole military research budget, Dehghan agreed to cut 85% of the defense ministry's budget, suspend everything and in return receive his medal, and so it happened. situation was so critical that next year supreme leader used it's exclusive power to order a minimum extra budget so at least critical projects wouldn't stop.
> 
> There is no failure in research, but there has been no research, so it has been a 100% failure. Qaher wasn't supposed to be finish at this stage, it was an ongoing project, we all know there was no domestic engine, radar or missiles or even avionics, but project was stopped by this traitor Dehghan and then he said if IRIF pays for it, we will produce this half born child! and obviously IRIAF said no. Fotros and other drones had the same fate, the half finished projects (of previous government) were unveiled and said IRIF can order them! see how 8 years later still IRIAF has to order the Ababil 3 drone! this is why IRGC and Army started to develop their own drones.
> 
> so this whole excuse of mentioning no order from IRIAF is a sham by traitors to hide the end of research in defense ministry, this is the real publicity stunt.


Let me guess dear mohsen

Let's suppose Iran finishes developing light and medium turbofan engines and makes them trust vectoring and reduces its Heat signature by using cold gas in exhausts of its engines which is already possible on Qaher Concept, Then puts two of these engines into Qaher airframe which is enjoying stealth coating. It can be a brilliant Design. 

Still i am hopeful about this project, it was a simple Design which can be heavily upgraded in the future. A bigger airframe with high grade Titanium superalloy carrying a big radar with internal weapons Bay. 

Point is, it can be upgraded and/or be replaced by a better one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

sha ah said:


> Yes Qaher was a publicity stunt and not a good one at that. The only thing worse imo was Salami's dowsing rod incident. That was the biggest joke ever. The sad thing is that Iran actually has real capabilities so why bother with these lies and nonsense ?
> 
> Also if you're going to promote a fake plane then why not show something that actually looks impressive. I've seen designs made up by amateurs in their spare time that look more impressive than Qaher.
> 
> *Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’ *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’
> 
> 
> The device appears to be some form of dowsing rod. Dowsing is a pseudo-scientific method of finding hidden substances or objects. Dowsing has been tested under controlled conditions and found to be a hoax.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.polygraph.info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of the following images are concepts drawn up by people in their spare time. However they all look more viable and more impressive than the Qaher. Again, my point is, if you're going to put out a mock up for domestic consumption, then why not something that actually looks good ?
> 
> Interesting, an F-5 stealth concept. Compare it to the F-5
> 
> View attachment 802028
> 
> View attachment 802037
> 
> 
> Some random concepts, all of which are better designs than the weird looking Qaher.
> 
> View attachment 802032
> View attachment 802033
> View attachment 802034
> View attachment 802035


Dont be idiot,none of those drawns looks promising or anything else than some drawns based on someone imagination which itself is based on their life or better say child experience...+ cartoons + today US,China,Russia concepts and than you have aircraft that looks like SU 35 raped SU 50..and canards on aircraft design that doesnt need it and will never be used on such design...So..go back in reality...I suggest people look F-14,F-15,F-16..F-117 projects in early stages...F-14 went 16 or 17 different designs.....look YF-17..it looks more like F-5 than today F-18,did you see F-117 first prototype..worst than Q-313 10 times....Bottom line is,Qareh 313 was abused and used too early for political campaign...with proper funding it can became anything ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

sha ah said:


> Yes Qaher was a publicity stunt and not a good one at that. The only thing worse imo was Salami's dowsing rod incident. That was the biggest joke ever. The sad thing is that Iran actually has real capabilities so why bother with these lies and nonsense ?
> 
> Also if you're going to promote a fake plane then why not show something that actually looks impressive. I've seen designs made up by amateurs in their spare time that look more impressive than Qaher.
> 
> *Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’ *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Unveils Fake Coronavirus ‘Detector’
> 
> 
> The device appears to be some form of dowsing rod. Dowsing is a pseudo-scientific method of finding hidden substances or objects. Dowsing has been tested under controlled conditions and found to be a hoax.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.polygraph.info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of the following images are concepts drawn up by people in their spare time. However they all look more viable and more impressive than the Qaher. Again, my point is, if you're going to put out a mock up for domestic consumption, then why not something that actually looks good ?
> 
> Interesting, an F-5 stealth concept. Compare it to the F-5
> 
> View attachment 802028
> 
> View attachment 802037
> 
> 
> Some random concepts, all of which are better designs than the weird looking Qaher.
> 
> View attachment 802032
> View attachment 802033
> View attachment 802034
> View attachment 802035




These designs look like classical 5th gen. fighter design. Small surfaces of the V tail swept outwards makes the planes detectable to modern ship or ground based VHF radars. 

There should be a taillless or quasi-tailless design for a 6th gen. ucav or manned fighter aircraft to solve detectability issues for emerging radars. 

The tailless concept designs look good but we have only seen subsonic ucav variants as of today as the plane would be very unstable to control in high aoa and mach situations which is the basic requirement of a fighter aircraft 








European designers seem to solve the VHF tail detectability issue with a quasi tailless design. The surfaces are swept invards and improve the stability of aircraft to high mach-aoa conditions. and effectively concealed from the radars below by the large wing surface. This one shows rotating wingtip surfaces as rudders/ailerons. Elevators and rudder surfaces can be added to the tail section as well in my opinion.








Just an idea I wanted to add to the ongoing discussion against future already emerging threats. 5th gen. JSF / Su-50 and others are used by the producer countries to experiment on and find the flaws of it and come up with more competent 6th gen. aircraft behind the scenes while selling these merchandise to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Dont be idiot,none of those drawns looks promising or anything else than some drawns based on someone imagination which itself is based on their life or better say child experience...+ cartoons + today US,China,Russia concepts and than you have aircraft that looks like SU 35 raped SU 50..and canards on aircraft design that doesnt need it and will never be used on such design...So..go back in reality...I suggest people look F-14,F-15,F-16..F-117 projects in early stages...F-14 went 16 or 17 different designs.....look YF-17..it looks more like F-5 than today F-18,did you see F-117 first prototype..worst than Q-313 10 times....Bottom line is,Qareh 313 was abused and used too early for political campaign...with proper funding it can became anything ...



Without engines it couldn’t be ANYTHING.

Your examples are nonsense because those powers had many different engines to choose from or could even build one from scratch to power whatever design they came up with.

Iran only can reverse engineer J-79 (owj) in limited numbers. So any design would be STUCK with those engines as its platform.

Now if Iran had RD-33 or AL-21 engines reverse engineered then yes project could go thru many iterations and final design could transform to a medium heavy fighter. Cant do that with J-79’s would always be stuck as a light fighter.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Iran did not reverse engineer J79 as that is one used on F-4 Phantom II as Owj is reverse engineering of most advanced J85 that is J85-GE-21.

J85-GE-21 has compressor blades and single spool made of titanium with one extra compressor stage and some other features which makes it technologically in some regards as advanced or more than J79 while few years later FJ33 medium bypass turbofan improved upon bigger FJ44 medium to high bypass turbofan was reverse engineered with designation Jahesh-700.

Iran has technology upscale FJ33 to FJ44 hence have more efficient andmore powerful turbofan than one used in Boeing's Bird of Prey and FJ44 series was used on Lockheed Martin's Polecat hence if further development of Jahesh to match FJ44-4 then for example Yasin powered by J85-GE-21 could with FJ44-4 equivalent turbofan have more than double range such as AIDC AT-3.

J85-GE-21 is as RD-9 and Atar 09K-50 has 9 compressor stages and 2 turbines on a single spool with annular combustor. Iran has Mirage F1 that is powered by Atar 09K-50 turbojet.

Afterburner of J85-21 is longer than core engine while also being almost as heavy as core itself, for that reason there is potential for example for F-5E/F to have more powerful jet engine and that with technology used by Jahesh that could be adapted for low bypass turbofan if enough resources are invested in research and development. Afterburner of J85 series are crude when for example afterburner on AL-21 is only 20% of entire turbojet engine and for that reason it is clear that jet engine with more compressor stages and turbines can fit inside F-5E/F fighters.

As f or Qaher-313 that is seen as symbol of mockery involving Iran, that design makes more sense for limited capabilities of Iranian aerospace industry than those student projects that are nowhere as constrained by real world challenges of making this or that, such as consideration of expansion and contraction of metals as there are pressure points that can crack airframe.

Qaher-313 doesn't have any automatic cannons and its ammunition as F-5E on which it weights 600 kilograms by itself and rear landing gears are as complex as nose landing gear hence more compact that saves space and allows better integrity of airframe such as wings unlike on F-5 series that was flaw since it impact how much wings payload could those carry safely.

It is clear by design of Qaher-313 that there may not be any hardpoints on the wings and by looks of its mockup and prototype thus those wings can be made lighter along makes it clear that any armament carried by Qaher-313 would be in internal weapons bay, we saw nothing on sides while belly was never shown hence probably there for 2 air to air missiles.

Qaher-313 might be limited to subsonic speed, even if so, goal probably to have most survivable fighter jet in inventory that could get close enough for target to be in no escape zone.

If its subsonic then it might as well be powered by FJ44-4 equivalent turbofan and have range to cover entire Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Literally have nothing in common.
> 
> Let me act like Mohsen
> 
> “was electricity a waste too? Was heart surgery a waste too? Was a tank a waste too?”
> 
> Like you are naming things that have ACTUAL use. Even Jamaran helped replace Iran’s fleet from the 1970’s even if it wasn’t the latest naval technology or design.
> 
> Qaher was a joke. The pilot couldn’t fit. The wheels couldn’t even handle landing the plane, the plane could maybe hold 2 250lb bombs, and would stall in upper atmosphere. The plane needed to be completely redesigned.


No, let me act like you and the reformists in Iran:
"Oil was a nasty and smelly liquid, it was good that we gave the whole of it for free to west."
"Nuclear is dangerous and useless, it's good to give it away for nothing too."

lat time I checked there was a pilot perfectly fit inside the aircraft on taxi test.






As that f@cker Dehghan admitted, it was a multi stage development, nothing more than a trainer aircraft at this point. studying it's aerodynamics could have given us plenty of information for this or any other design, it's a necessity for a country with zero experience.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

vizier said:


> These designs look like classical 5th gen. fighter design. Small surfaces of the V tail swept outwards makes the planes detectable to modern ship or ground based VHF radars.
> 
> There should be a taillless or quasi-tailless design for a 6th gen. ucav or manned fighter aircraft to solve detectability issues for emerging radars.
> 
> The tailless concept designs look good but we have only seen subsonic ucav variants as of today as the plane would be very unstable to control in high aoa and mach situations which is the basic requirement of a fighter aircraft
> 
> 
> View attachment 802054
> 
> 
> 
> European designers seem to solve the VHF tail detectability issue with a quasi tailless design. The surfaces are swept invards and improve the stability of aircraft to high mach-aoa conditions. and effectively concealed from the radars below by the large wing surface. This one shows rotating wingtip surfaces as rudders/ailerons. Elevators and rudder surfaces can be added to the tail section as well in my opinion.
> 
> 
> View attachment 802055
> 
> 
> 
> Just an idea I wanted to add to the ongoing discussion against future already emerging threats. 5th gen. JSF / Su-50 and others are used by the producer countries to experiment on and find the flaws of it and come up with more competent 6th gen. aircraft behind the scenes while selling these merchandise to other countries.


While you are at it, let me add that Britain's future sixth gen aircraft has tails, if you have played Tom Clancy's simulated mission games then you know that in all critical missions involving penetrating into a contested zone they use very low altitude flight, and FYI even F22 is unstable at low altitude.

Now look at Yemen where their few primitive optical air defenses has forces Saudi coalition to use stand off ammunition. so the question isn't whether that tailless design is achievable but whether it has any use and worth all the investments.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## vizier

mohsen said:


> While you are at it, let me add that Britain's future sixth gen aircraft has tails, if you have played Tom Clancy's simulated mission games then you know that in all critical missions involving penetrating into a contested zone they use very low altitude flight, and FYI even F22 is unstable at low altitude.
> 
> Now look at Yemen where their few primitive optical air defenses has forces Saudi coalition to use stand off ammunition. so the question isn't whether that tailless design is achievable but whether it has any use and worth all the investments.



Yes it is costly and I agree that for a2a roles like interceptor roles especially tailless design would be an overkill and would prolong the design and procurement delaying effective defence against already proliferating 5th gen. platforms. In a2a tailed and tailless stealth would not be very different with less cost advantage of tailed design as highly heavy vhf radars would not be flying in air as of today and near future at least not with the same effectiveness that the the radars of the ships. For attack roles already flying wing body subsonic stealth uavs can paint the target and stand off ballistic missiles can be used like against ships and for interceptor roles tailed designs would be very sufficient. Tailed design would also be sufficent for stand off attacks as well not going too deep inside enemy territory or not coming very close to ships. So ongoing designs should not be neglected and produced but limitations should be calculated and missions should be planned accordingly. Future tailless variants can be planned and scheduled as well .Also if someone else procures these tailless fighters knowing its advantages would be helpful and not totally relying on vhf radars but increasing active protection and increasing air escorts against such emerging threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> As that f@cker Dehghan admitted, it was a multi stage development, nothing more than a trainer aircraft at this point. studying it's aerodynamics could have given us plenty of information for this or any other design, it's a necessity for a country with zero experience.



Wasn't even close to being the same or better than a trainer aircraft. Didn't even fly at all.


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> Wasn't even close to being the same or better than a trainer aircraft. Didn't even fly at all.


It didn't fly, our space rockets didn't launch, our centrifuges didn't spin, all thanks to the agenda of the pro-west government. (which we trashed them this year)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

Oldman1 said:


> Wasn't even close to being the same or better than a trainer aircraft. Didn't even fly at all.


Although I continue to be against investing in retrograde tech (such as manned aircraft—with all due respect to our missing contributor @evilwesterner), I believe Qaher is simply a technology demonstrator. Nothing more. The propaganda is simply botched messaging driven by politicians. We have a word for this this uniquely Iranian behavior: دم پایی بازی.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

I wouldn't call Rouhani or any of his people as pro-West as I would call it pro-economic faction since goal was to lift sanctions which they partially were successful for which Irans economy managed to grow yet when Trump came that all went down drain and Biden continues that policy. Probably one of reasons why Iran managed to acquire FJ33 and produce it as Jahesh.

Hopefully during that gap when JCPOA more or less worked that some hardware and technologies could have been acquired also due to JCPOA with those that adhere under UNSC such as Russia and China, which west now is hostile towards them are more willing to provide something even at least under the table if possible. It was mentioned that Kowsar has Grifo based radar.

Qaher-313 project should be continued as it has promise by what is shown and known publicly and perhaps design a new air to air missile for it that has performance of MICA IR.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Probably one of reasons why Iran managed to acquire FJ33 and produce it as Jahesh.



What are you smoking man?

FJ33 was captured from RQ-170 that was downed inside Iran. Iran spent a decade reverse engineering its version.

Iran didn’t “buy” FJ33 on open market because of Rouhani’s economic policy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> What are you smoking man?
> 
> FJ33 was captured from RQ-170 that was downed inside Iran. Iran spent a decade reverse engineering its version.
> 
> Iran didn’t “buy” FJ33 on open market because of Rouhani’s economic policy.


Your first sentence is ironic as you must be smoking or you're just ignorant and uneducated on the subject.

FJ33 in no way could provide enough thrust for RQ-170 to be able to lift off from runway as its predecessor 4 ton Polecat needed FJ44-3 to lift off and RQ-170 is larger than that.

Different turbofan of comparable thrust as FJ44-3 was used to provide thrust for Boeing's Bird of Prey and we know that it was 3.7 tons heavy for its full weight.

Jahesh-700 provides 7kN of thrust that is lower than FJ44-1A used on RQ-3 Darkstar that was 3.8 ton heavy at full load.

There are two speculated jet engines, one is TFE731 which FJ44-4A could match lower end of that old turbofan.

Another is TF34 that is used on A10 Thunderbolt.

if its former than maybe RQ-170 was powered by FJ44-4 and Jahesh is scaled down FJ44 or Iran imported FJ33 in some way be it by buying some light jet or some other way.


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Your first sentence is ironic as you must be smoking or you're just ignorant and uneducated on the subject.



_ According to *General Hatami*, it is “of the *same type that powered the American RQ-170 drone*” captured by Iran in 2011, but is “entirely designed in Iran.” _









Iran Flaunts New Missile and Jet Engine Technology


Although many of the recently unveiled systems are foreign copies or have unproven capabilities, they show a substantial indigenous development capacity that will only accelerate once the UN ban on weapons sales is lifted—even if past sanctions snap back into action.




www.washingtoninstitute.org





We don’t need Rouhani Shills in here spreading propaganda that Rouhani economic policy was reason for FJ33 procurement and development.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> _ According to *General Hatami*, it is “of the *same type that powered the American RQ-170 drone*” captured by Iran in 2011, but is “entirely designed in Iran.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Flaunts New Missile and Jet Engine Technology
> 
> 
> Although many of the recently unveiled systems are foreign copies or have unproven capabilities, they show a substantial indigenous development capacity that will only accelerate once the UN ban on weapons sales is lifted—even if past sanctions snap back into action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtoninstitute.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We don’t need Rouhani Shills in here spreading propaganda that Rouhani economic policy was reason for FJ33 procurement and development.


Iran doesn't need people like you that lie shamelessly as you do about me since it is clear your parents haven't taught you to not lie hence you label me Rouhani shill.

I said that it is possibility that FJ33 could have been acquired during time when JCPOA was in effect, not that it was certain as you assert hence lie.

You have no sense of shame even if hit by soles of the shoe repeatedly that you deserve you dirty kafir.

Did Iran release information on dimensions of RQ-170 they captured? If its powered by FJ33 then its dimensions should be smaller than Polecat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Iran doesn't need people like you that lie shamelessly as you do about me since it is clear your parents haven't taught you to not lie hence you label me Rouhani shill.
> 
> I said that it is possibility that FJ33 could have been acquired during time when JCPOA was in effect, not that it was certain as you assert hence lie.
> 
> You have no sense of shame even if hit by soles of the shoe repeatedly that you deserve you dirty kafir.
> 
> Did Iran release information on dimensions of RQ-170 they captured? If its powered by FJ33 then its dimensions should be smaller than Polecat.



Only a complete imbecile would think that Iran after signing JCPOA in 2015 (a deal which provided Iran with no tangible economic benefits outside of reselling oil it has been selling for decades years PRIOR to JCPOA) would then be able to not only somehow acquire FJ33, but with no ToT of the engine turn around and reverse engineer a fairly advanced engine in under 5 years. Laughable.

The thing you don’t realize is the RQ-170 that was sent over Iran was designed for Iran and was equipped with a sensor package made to detect covert nuclear activity at various sites. Thus it had to be able to drop altitude and fly for long periods of time without giving off a heat signature.

So I can either believe you that RQ-170 was not FJ33 equipped or I can believe Iranian generals.

Lastly, ridiculous timing aside, JCPOA wouldn’t have allowed Iran to access dual-use military technologies.

And Rouhani isn’t Pro-West? Months after Iranian Revolution he was one of the few establishment figures to meet with Western officials to try to get Islamic Republic to be allies with West. To this day he is one of the only Iranian officials to have ever met Zionist officials. The main is a western vessel if I have ever seen one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> Only a complete imbecile would think that Iran after signing JCPOA in 2015 (a deal which provided Iran with no tangible economic benefits outside of reselling oil it has been selling for decades years PRIOR to JCPOA) would then be able to not only somehow acquire FJ33, but with no ToT of the engine turn around and reverse engineer a fairly advanced engine in under 5 years. Laughable.


Laughable is your outright disingenuous behavior or is it outright delusion of seeing yourself as being correct...

Iran gained back access to some of its foreign reserves during JCPOA along being able to use SWIFT banking system that made trading with countries, simpler, faster, easier and cheaper than previously while also cooperation in many areas were no longer sanctioned.

Iran reverse engineered J85-GE-21 that has compressor blades and rotor made out of titanium instead of AM355 alloy, because of that some of requirements for modern up to date turbofan were fulfilled.



> The thing you don’t realize is the RQ-170 that was sent over Iran was designed for Iran and was equipped with a sensor package made to detect covert nuclear activity at various sites. Thus it had to be able to drop altitude and fly for long periods of time without giving off a heat signature.



...and? Doesn't answer in no way my question.



> So I can either believe you that RQ-170 was not FJ33 equipped or I can believe Iranian generals.



My point is that of skepticism, is RQ-170 smaller and lighter than Polecat its derived from?



> Lastly, ridiculous timing aside, JCPOA wouldn’t have allowed Iran to access dual-use military technologies.



FJ33 first and foremost is a civilian jet engine like its older bigger brother FJ44 unlike if Tri-60 series.



> And Rouhani isn’t Pro-West? Months after Iranian Revolution he was one of the few establishment figures to meet with Western officials to try to get Islamic Republic to be allies with West. To this day he is one of the only Iranian officials to have ever met Zionist officials. The main is a western vessel if I have ever seen one.


Apparently being pragmatic is pro-west instead of ardent idealist like fools of IRGC that achieve far less per rial spent than IRIAF does which showed blatantly with success of Owj.


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Apparently being pragmatic is pro-west instead of ardent idealist like fools of IRGC that achieve far less per rial spent than IRIAF does which showed blatantly with success of Owj.



It didn’t take much for me to pull out your true colors.

Iran’s most advanced technologies are developed by IRGC and IRGC backed companies and universities. IRGC is the one importing top tech and materials into the country using his massive network across the global of front companies and connections with black market middle men.

Hope other members read this post and understand what type of vatanforoosh you are. IRGC single handly saved Iran from being a Western balakanized banana country you ungrateful swine.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> It didn’t take much for me to pull out your true colors.
> 
> Iran’s most advanced technologies are developed by IRGC and IRGC backed companies and universities. IRGC is the one importing top tech and materials into the country using his massive network across the global of front companies and connections with black market middle men.
> 
> Hope other members read this post and understand what type of vatanforoosh you are. IRGC single handly saved Iran from being a Western balakanized banana country you ungrateful swine. Iran’s most advanced technologies are developed by IRGC and IRGC backed companies and universities. IRGC is the one importing top tech and materials into the country using his massive network across the global of front companies and connections with black market middle men.


Ironic that bonafide kafir labels me vatanforoosh for questioning nepotism and favoritism of IRGC that lead to monopolization and cronyism for it to take all glory and success of its ventures being assured thus ironicaly outdoing America in monopolitization and that makes former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact look like free market economy.

Because of that structure one way or another IRGC will get credit because they get preference not out of being competent as it is nepotism and cronyism for which rest of Iranian military force suffers for it. It also gives fodder for MEK then surprise when there is internal sabotage with covert support of outside forces.

Extent of IRGC integration way beyond military matters into civilian and economic that those with connections get preference, I hate it as it reminds me of my country with Croatian Democratic Community being dominating force with only reason why Social Democratic Party could ever have ruling power for four years is due to being in Europe and scrutiny. Otherwise it would have stayed a fascist and even more of a banana republic.

Sooner or later North Korea is going to be ahead of Iran technologically in every regard because of IRGCorruption is limiting potential of Iranian nation like ever growing cancer it is that is hogging resources and infecting like a capitalist virus.

What was suppose to be a hero turned into a manipulative villain when to succeed one has to be Islamist and not Iranian in order to be choosen by them and allowed to succeed or be rejected and wither away.

Anyone supporting IRGC is kafir as they defend organization that justifies its action in name of Islam thus in name of God in act of heresy when appropriating in naming Islam and Jihad as to own it as if they're Allah themselves by the way they justify themselves or give excuses to others to justify own actions to them.

Placing Islam in name of state, political party, organization as if its political ideology and not religion.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

East meets West.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> You first need to develop an engine that can power such a fighter jet.
> 
> Tell me a non global power country that develops its own engine without any spare parts or technology from either from Russia, China, US.
> 
> Building 100% state of the art jet engine is more difficult than mastering the 1940’s nuclear cycle.


Alternative is to retire two engine fighter jets and design single engine aircraft reusing those engines.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1474632276713611270

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Lord Of Gondor

Looks like the Iranian Airforce is going to get the S-35S jets from Russia!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1474658535564890112Almost a perfect fit for a big country like Iran

Congrats to IRIAF

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Lord Of Gondor said:


> Looks like the Iranian Airforce is going to get the S-35S jets from Russia!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1474658535564890112Almost a perfect fit for a big country like Iran
> 
> Congrats to IRIAF


The source you quoted is unreliable. Let's wait for official news.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Honestly I hope its not true considerind cooperation extensive between Iran and North Korea as too Iranian indigenous development efforts.

North Korea this year tested surface to air missile similar to one used by both S-350 and S-400 along anyone informed is aware that some first seen in North Korea also shows up in Iran as too some from Iran show up in North, at very least some elements of Iranian influence are to be suspected.

Honestly I prefer Mig-35 since it is direct derivative and successor to Mig-29 and Iran has experience in maintaining Mig-29 thus adoption of it would be easier while S-400 is what Iran has knowledge to produce comparable system in near future hence it would be wiser to seek license and manufacturing tools to produce RD-33 turbofan hence Iran could adapt own F-5E production line of Kowsar to standard of F-20 Tigershark performance with better avionics then AIM-23B aka Fakour-90 would be usable on it.

That is just my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

But SU-35S would be a good addition to the iriaf.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Ich said:


> But SU-35S would be a good addition to the iriaf.


So would Mig-35.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

yugocrosrb95 said:


> So would Mig-35.


Mig 35 is nothing in front of Su 35.
Su 35 is a different beast altogether.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Mig 35 is nothing in front of Su 35.
> Su 35 is a different beast altogether.


That probably costs double of Mig-35 and doesn't offer double the performance in range nor payload nor radar.

Su-35 has
25% greater payload
60% greater combat range
40% greater radar range


----------



## Ich

yugocrosrb95 said:


> So would Mig-35.



I dont like the range of MIG 35. Also the max speed is nearly the same. Also more hardpoints on SU-35S and can carry more.


----------



## aryobarzan

yugocrosrb95 said:


> That probably costs double of Mig-35 and doesn't offer double the performance in range nor payload nor radar.
> 
> Su-35 has
> 25% greater payload
> 60% greater combat range
> 40% greater radar range


Iran is not one of these countries that buy an aircraft type because it is the latest and greatest toy in the market...Air forces of serious countries have selection committees that analysis the specific operational requirements against what is out there as I am sure you all know that..

I hope such a committee in Iran recommends "No buy" as the best option for Iran..Iranian $$$ should not employee Russian or French or etc workers..Iranians have shown over and over again that if tasked and funded with a project they can deliver the best..my thoughts on the subject.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

24x SU-35s would be fine but Iran also needs something like 50-100x SU-30s just to keep its airforce functional for the next two decades. J-10's from China would also be a good hedge against Russia.

I would love to see Iran also purchase 2 dozen mig-25s in order to air launch cruise / hypersonic missiles at targets from a high altitude.

I'm guessing the deal will also include upgrades for mig-29s and other Russian Fighters in Iran's inventory. Iranian pilots need helmet mounted displays as well.

A few military satellites for Iran would be a great addition. This along with the recent boost in Iran's space budget will help Iran to become a proper military power once a network of communication satellites are launched.

I'm guessing that the deal will also include the procurement of other Russian weapon systems. Technical help from Russia along with technology transfers would give Iran the necessary boost it needs to build new helicopters. A few dozen Mi-24s would be great.

The procurement of a 5th generation fighter like the Checkmate would be excellent. Also incorporating IRST onto Iranian fighter jets would be an excellent way to counter US or Israeli stealth jets.

In terms of ground, Iran should sign a deal to build the Armata tank under license but that should be in the future. The procurement of new Russian tank engines and other vital parts for tanks, armored vehicles, helicopters is necessary for Iran.

This deal is still not guaranteed to go through since Russia and the US are set to talk in January. However it seems as if the Russians have seen the writing on the wall. Americans have shown their true colors to Russia/China.



Lord Of Gondor said:


> Looks like the Iranian Airforce is going to get the S-35S jets from Russia!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1474658535564890112Almost a perfect fit for a big country like Iran
> 
> Congrats to IRIAF

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

As long as Iran receives technology transfers it's fine. Just Imagine the Iran-Iraq war without the F-14. 

Iran has been trying to build fighter jets for decades now. The best iran could do under sanctions is a reverse engineered and modernized F-5 and prototypes like Qaher or Shafaq which never went anywhere. 

Yes it's a great achievement the fact that Iran kept its fleet airworthy but only a few nations in the world can build 5th generation fighter jets (US, China, Russia) and only a few others can build a viable modern platform (Rafale, Eurofighter, South Korea) and that only works by being interconnected with a network of nstions (NATO for example)

Iran's drone program would not be where it is today if Iran had not captured all those American UAVs. Iran's missiles and air defense industries would not be nearly as developed without the first scuds Iran received, not to mention cooperation with North Korea.

When it comes to this subject/debate, there is idealism and realism. Iran can build a 4th generation jet but will it be world class ? Will it be able to compete with today's landscape ? Iran needs a boost and honestly purchasing a few dozen Russian fighter jets along with working with Russia is not a bad option.



aryobarzan said:


> Iran is not one of these countries that buy an aircraft type because it is the latest and greatest toy in the market...Air forces of serious countries have selection committees that analysis the specific operational requirements against what is out there as I am sure you all know that..
> 
> I hope such a committee in Iran recommends "No buy" as the best option for Iran..Iranian $$$ should not employee Russian or French or etc workers..Iranians have shown over and over again that if tasked and funded with a project they can deliver the best..my thoughts on the subject.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

It is not question if Iran can or can not make it as it is question of time and resources invested along cooperation between entities in Iran instead of stifling.

If I remember correctly both Qaher and Shafaq were IRIAF lead projects that went nowhere as IRIAF doesn't have budget of IRGC.

Best IRIAF could do is doing extensive modification of F-5E/F design that would lower weight and reduce aerodynamic drag. Implement divertless supersonic inlets and make space for more modern landing gear such as Qaher-313 had hence new wings that aren't compromised as on F-5 series that housed landing gear thus could be made lighter.

Remove both revolver cannons and their ammunition and implement PESA radar with liquid cooling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Stop whining! Iran's old modern fighter jets still have 20 years of life. There is some modernization that they are not showing us yet. It is clear that the Kowsar is even better and is constantly improving. I had posted an article here months ago and it seems that Iran is already working towards 6th generation planes.

they know that other countries like China, USA and Russia are working on it. Reading the article, it looks like Iran is working on making their F-5s unmanned and that makes sense. I really like the Mig 35 but the Su-35 is a great aircraft too.

We know that Iran does not present all their weapons publicly and you very often forget that here. One day Iran is going to come out of the surprises hidden in their basements and I can't wait to see your reactions here. This does not prevent importing certain weapons to supplement their strength and increase it.

If the news is indeed true for 2 batteries of 400s it proves that Iran is increasing the power level of their new air defense system to come. Iran wants complementary technology through the S400 and having multiple battery is not necessary.

Iran doesn't need an Armata tank in my opinion!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Lord Of Gondor said:


> Looks like the Iranian Airforce is going to get the S-35S jets from Russia!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1474658535564890112Almost a perfect fit for a big country like Iran
> 
> Congrats to IRIAF



Best to wait for confirmation. I have seen this type of news for many years. But it would be nice to get those Su's that were supposed to go to Egypt.

The only time I want Babak to be right lool

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

Probably old but beautiful:


----------



## yugocrosrb95

That is IRGC. Not IRIAF.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

yugocrosrb95 said:


> That is IRGC. Not IRIAF.


Wow, did you read the title of the video?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> But SU-35S would be a good addition to the iriaf.


only 24 of them will change nothing only new headache for maintenance crew


Mr Iran Eye said:


> Stop whining! Iran's old modern fighter jets still have 20 years of life.


maybe in peace time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

There is no way that Iran would only purchase 24X SU-35s and nothing else. 24X SU-35s would perhaps be an initial older, as part of a larger purchase.



Hack-Hook said:


> only 24 of them will change nothing only new headache for maintenance crew
> 
> maybe in peace time


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> There is no way that Iran would only purchase 24X SU-35s and nothing else. 24X SU-35s would perhaps be an initial older, as part of a larger purchase.



Actually 24-36 is a normal deal in arms industry considering the costs of maintenance/supplies/spares added on top of a 4++ fighter like SU-35S. Plus Russian reluctance to do large orders with Iran.

Yes, it’s not a “over haul” the IRIAF type deal. I don’t Russia can even withstand western pressure for such a deal. Right now the West has many pain points on Russia (Ukraine, NATO acceptance of ex soviet countries, Nord stream 2 pipeline).

Anyway not saying this news is true tho, probably isn’t. Been hearing Iran is going to get Russian planes for 20 years now.

At this point the joke is wether Iran gets the bomb or a Russian fighter jet. Both have been “imminent” since the late 1990’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

Muhammed45 said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> Great info about Qaher's future.




How could that be if it not even flew once?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Dariush the Great said:


> The source you quoted is unreliable. Let's wait for official news.


"unreliable" is putting it mildly......  
This clowns infamous.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Yes I realize that a quantity of 24-36 is normal for something like the SU-35. Egypt has 17 in inventory and 35 on order and is refusing to step down despite US pressure. Indonesia on the other hand just cancelled its order for the SU-35 to avoid sanctions.

Yes the west is pressuring Russia but Russia under Putin is not stepping down either. Putin just removed something like 10,000 troops from the frontlines but realistically out of 100,000 troops, that's nothing.

The US and Russia are set to talk in January. If a deal is not reached, likely Russia will pounce on Ukraine.

As for Iran, we still have to wait and see whether the nuclear deal will go through. Regardless, in the next 2 decades Iran needs to purchase a large fleet of fighter jets to keep its airforce viable.

The UN sanctions against Iran are gone and during the Obama years the US had alot of leverage on Russia and China but after Trump all bets are off. The US has shown its true colors and its true intentions against Russia and China.

I'm guessing that sooner or later Iran will end up formally signing a large arms deal with Russia which will lead to the procurement of a wide range of weapons with technology transfers and license production deals.

Iran made the right move by not rushing to purchase weapons right after the UN sanctions were lifted. By being patient rather than showing anxiety, Iran can acquire desired weapons and technology on more favorable terms.

When bartering, patience is always an asset. Also specific weapons systems tend to become less expensive with time and in some cases, newer variants tend to be more cost effective and efficient.

We will have to wait and see but the way I look at it, Iran under the current leadership is slowly but surely modernizing the military in a very gradual and methodical manner.



TheImmortal said:


> Actually 24-36 is a normal deal in arms industry considering the costs of maintenance/supplies/spares added on top of a 4++ fighter like SU-35S. Plus Russian reluctance to do large orders with Iran.
> 
> Yes, it’s not a “over haul” the IRIAF type deal. I don’t Russia can even withstand western pressure for such a deal. Right now the West has many pain points on Russia (Ukraine, NATO acceptance of ex soviet countries, Nord stream 2 pipeline).
> 
> Anyway not saying this news is true tho, probably isn’t. Been hearing Iran is going to get Russian planes for 20 years now.
> 
> At this point the joke is wether Iran gets the bomb or a Russian fighter jet. Both have been “imminent” since the late 1990’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Deino said:


> How could that be if it not even flew once?
> 
> View attachment 803547


We don't know if it flew or not, for we all know despite being cancelled project it may have flew and is only used as test platform for technologies, design and what else it has...


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

yugocrosrb95 said:


> We don't know if it flew or not, for we all know despite being cancelled project it may have flew and is only used as test platform for technologies, design and what else it has...



Had the Qaher 313 ever flown, they would have publicized it. For the very same reason they Publicized its Taxi trials.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

For the people who says 24 to 36 aircraft is normal for airplanes such as su-35how some countries which are Iran adversary have north of 100 of F15 .and How many su 30 India have and .....


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> only 24 of them will change nothing only new headache for maintenance crew
> 
> maybe in peace time



You just have to observe the modern weapons built for the Su-22 to understand that Iran has a lot of surprises for their opponents with the other fighter planes. Iran is always more advanced in their technology than their public announcements

Iran's adversaries don't underestimate Iran's planes like you do because carelessness for them would be fatal. In my opinion, Iran should soon reveal surprises to us on Kowsar improvement and other unexpected surprises. I have been analyzing the Iranian announcement process a lot for years and the perfect timing is coming for revelations about fighter jets. We will see the news if that proves me right

Iran really likes 4-year slices to get us out of our hat rabbits

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> For the people who says 24 to 36 aircraft is normal for airplanes such as su-35how some countries which are Iran adversary have north of 100 of F15 .and How many su 30 India have and .....


India is 2x land mass as Iran and has 260 Su-30 thus Iran would need 130 to match density of Su-30 that India has.

Though India has much more to spend considering it has 20 times population of Iran and even at best times Iran's GDP per capita was only 4 or 5 times larger than India.

Most sensible option when it comes to importation of foreign aircraft is Mig-35 because of X amount of Su-35 Iran may afford it could get twice as many Mig-35.

Most economical option is for Iran to do it on their own and have an arduous march towards modern indigenous fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

The SU-35 would be like the tip of the spear, cream of the crop, while 50-100X SU-30s would be the mainstay/workhorse of the airforce. 

Perhaps Iran will receive technology transfers and build SU-30s under license while SU-35s will be purchased outright ? 

Iran should look into also purchasing the Checkmate fighter jet, S-400 and Armata tank. S-400 however should only be purchased with the software codes provided.

A few dozen Mi-24s with technology transfers would also be excellent. Helicopter parts and tech transfers for the latest tank power pack, vital helicopter components would also be a good buy for Iran. 

In the end only time will tell. Let's wait and see.



Hack-Hook said:


> For the people who says 24 to 36 aircraft is normal for airplanes such as su-35how some countries which are Iran adversary have north of 100 of F15 .and How many su 30 India have and .....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Iran doesn't have currency to afford such since west and its allies locked them out of their foreign reserves.

At minimum Iran should acquire transfer of technology and manufacturing tools for AL-222 turbofan engine with model that has afterburner then redesign F-5E to turn it into single engine fighter with AL-222 as its engine thus move rear landing gears into the main body just like Qaher-313 for which wings can be simpler and lighter as too stronger wing since not compromissed by landing gear being in the wing like world war 2 fighters.

Some performance characteristics will be sacrificed with AL-222, but clean range would be close to double hence below 1800km and above 1600km.


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> The SU-35 would be like the tip of the spear, cream of the crop, while 50-100X SU-30s would be the mainstay/workhorse of the airforce.
> 
> Perhaps Iran will receive technology transfers and build SU-30s under license while SU-35s will be purchased outright ?



That would be great.




sha ah said:


> Iran should look into also purchasing the Checkmate fighter jet, S-400 and Armata tank. S-400 however should only be purchased with the software codes provided.



I see no need for that.



sha ah said:


> A few dozen Mi-24s with technology transfers would also be excellent. Helicopter parts and tech transfers for the latest tank power pack, vital helicopter components would also be a good buy for Iran.
> 
> In the end only time will tell. Let's wait and see.



Yes.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Pakistan's interior minister announced purchase of J-10.






I don't know Urdu hence I can't comment on this, if any Pakistani sees this reply, please confirm or deny.

If true, wonder if Iran may take another look at J-10 since it was rumored that Iran at one point considered acquiring it... But wasn't satisfied.


----------



## sha ah

This is Pakistan's response to India's acquisition of the Rafales. The arms race continues.

What I've heard is that Iran is interested in the J-10 but wants to make the purchase with crude oil rather than gold or foreign currency. 

The Chinese responded by offering Iran the JF-17, which Iran refused.



yugocrosrb95 said:


> Pakistan's interior minister announced purchase of J-10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know Urdu hence I can't comment on this, if any Pakistani sees this reply, please confirm or deny.
> 
> If true, wonder if Iran may take another look at J-10 since it was rumored that Iran at one point considered acquiring it... But wasn't satisfied.


----------



## Ali_Baba

sha ah said:


> This is Pakistan's response to India's acquisition of the Rafales. The arms race continues.
> 
> What I've heard is that Iran is interested in the J-10 but wants to make the purchase with crude oil rather than gold or foreign currency.
> 
> The Chinese responded by offering Iran the JF-17, which Iran refused.


 
Chinese always play hardball when it comes to money and profit !!!!!! logically it would be better for iran to buy from china that russia given the poor performance of russian systems and the influence of Israel in russia these days.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Tom Cooper skeptical of SU-35 news

_
“I would first like to hear that the IRGC has granted permission for the IRIAF to get that kind of stuff, and then that Tehran actually has the necessary money – before making any kind of useful conclusions,” he wrote on Dec. 30._









Is Iran Really About To Buy Russian Su-35 ‘Super Flanker’ Fighter Jets?


There is renewed speculation that Iran may buy Sukhoi Su-35SE “Super Flankers” from Russia for its antiquated air force.




www.google.com


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Pakistan's interior minister announced purchase of J-10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know Urdu hence I can't comment on this, if any Pakistani sees this reply, please confirm or deny.
> 
> If true, wonder if Iran may take another look at J-10 since it was rumored that Iran at one point considered acquiring it... But wasn't satisfied.


china considered to sell j-10b Iran airforce said no , later there were talk about J-10c but not Iran nor china show interest only media, and that's understandable we need something to replace F-14 and J-10 is not that plane , right now our missiles are taking the role of F-4 in our force and we plan to replace f-5 with what we will build , so there is no place for J-10 or JF-17 in our doctrine


----------



## sha ah

The J-10 is a good aircraft but I don't think it's a match for the Rafale. India will have the edge over Pakistan when it comes to fighter jets in the near future and beyond. 

I don't think Iran will purchase anything unless the price is extremely favorable. Iran must also receive technology transfers, licensed or joint production and software codes. Time is on Iran's side in this case. Platforms don't become more expensive with time and with patience Iran will eventually receive a very favorable deal.



Hack-Hook said:


> china considered to sell j-10b Iran airforce said no , later there were talk about J-10c but not Iran nor china show interest only media, and that's understandable we need something to replace F-14 and J-10 is not that plane , right now our missiles are taking the role of F-4 in our force and we plan to replace f-5 with what we will build , so there is no place for J-10 or JF-17 in our doctrine

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> china considered to sell j-10b Iran airforce said no , later there were talk about J-10c but not Iran nor china show interest only media, and that's understandable we need something to replace F-14 and J-10 is not that plane , right now our missiles are taking the role of F-4 in our force and we plan to replace f-5 with what we will build , so there is no place for J-10 or JF-17 in our doctrine


J-10 is right in between Mig-29 and Mig-35 in range and payload.

Mig-35 is exact to F-14 in payload and range.

But J-10 has 11 hardpoints and Mig-35 has only 9.


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> J-10 is right in between Mig-29 and Mig-35 in range and payload.
> 
> Mig-35 is exact to F-14 in payload and range.
> 
> But J-10 has 11 hardpoints and Mig-35 has only 9.



Don’t compare Mig-35 to F-14.

Mig-35 is a failure; even Russian Air Force didn’t want it and reduced its order.

Anyone can look at a spec sheet, using that to compare fighter jets is just a flawed approach. Especially jets that never made it to serial production (Mig-35).

BTW If J-10 had all 11 hardpoints used, it would light up like a damn Christmas Tree on radars and be easy prey for AD systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t compare Mig-35 to F-14.


That is like saying don't compare Tiger with Apache.



> Mig-35 is a failure; even Russian Air Force didn’t want it and reduced its order.


Apparently being bought is a failure and even so that initial order was reduced, later on they ordered more of it. But I guess you have to omit that inconvenient fact or you ignorant of that?



> Anyone can look at a spec sheet, using that to compare fighter jets is just a flawed approach. Especially jets that never made it to serial production (Mig-35).


Apparently production of a squadron is not serial production, let alone more than 30.



> BTW If J-10 had all 11 hardpoints used, it would light up like a damn Christmas Tree on radars and be easy prey for AD systems.


...and the point went over your head. Idiot.


----------



## sha ah

According to this video, Raesi will visit Putin in January to sign a comprehensive 20 deal economic agreement.

This will include a 10 billion dollar defense contract which will include the procurement of 24 SU-35SE fighter jets as well as two S-400 batteries and a military satellite. Russia will also help Iran upgrade its MIG-29s and SU-24s.

Reportedly after the contract is finalized in January, Iranian pilots who have already been hand picked, will train in Russia. The SU-35s will then be delivered to Iran as early as mid 2022.

Recently Indonesia and Egypt both chose to cancel their SU-35 purchases from Russia after the US threatened to impose CAATSA sanctions on them. Egypt already has 17 SU-35s in inventory with another 30 on order. Egypt also had 500x T-90 tanks on order before the cancellation. This will be a major blow to the Russian arms industry, however it will give Iran leverage in this regard.

For Egypt the choice was simple. Either acquire 30 SU-35s and 500 T-90 tanks OR have access to 30 more Rafale jets from France (Egypt already has 24) along with spare parts for their 1300 Abrams tanks and modernization kits for their 200 F-16s. 

According to this report:
*Word is the Egyptians tested an Irbis-E radar (from the Su-35) against Rafale’s ECM-system, and the latter easily overpowered the former. *









Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran "taking them instead") - The Aviation Geek Club


Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran)




theaviationgeekclub.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

sha ah said:


> According to this video, Raesi will visit Putin in January to sign a comprehensive 20 deal economic agreement.
> 
> This will include a 10 billion dollar defense contract which will include the procurement of 24 SU-35SE fighter jets as well as two S-400 batteries and a military satellite. Russia will also help Iran upgrade its MIG-29s and SU-24s.
> 
> Reportedly after the contract is finalized in January, Iranian pilots who have already been hand picked, will train in Russia. The SU-35s will then be delivered to Iran as early as mid 2022.
> 
> Recently Indonesia and Egypt both chose to cancel their SU-35 purchases from Russia after the US threatened to impose CAATSA sanctions on them. Egypt already has 17 SU-35s in inventory with another 30 on order. Egypt also had 500x T-90 tanks on order before the cancellation. This will be a major blow to the Russian arms industry, however it will give Iran leverage in this regard.
> 
> For Egypt the choice was simple. Either acquire 30 SU-35s and 500 T-90 tanks OR have access to 30 more Rafale jets from France (Egypt already has 24) along with spare parts for their 1300 Abrams tanks and modernization kits for their 200 F-16s.
> 
> According to this report:
> *Word is the Egyptians tested an Irbis-E radar (from the Su-35) against Rafale’s ECM system, and the latter easily overpowered the former. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran "taking them instead") - The Aviation Geek Club
> 
> 
> Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theaviationgeekclub.com



It did. Multiple news reports confirm it and this indicates that Egypt will most likely increase the Rafale orders to 54 _after these deliveries_. SPECTRA is a beast of an EW that the French developed. Putin better get that AESA radar by Phazotron bumped up in specifications if he has to compete with France in exports at this point.

However, it is unlikely that France would sell to them even if they stopped their nuclear program at this point since they would risk enraging Israel and by extension, the United States.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Apparently production of a squadron is not serial production, let alone more than 30.



There have been 6 prototype test
Models built for testing purposes. Only 8 finished production models have been built for Russian airforce, not “more than 30”. But why ruin your lies.

You are comparing a plane that has never seen combat and never even be used in a major war game or simulation to the F-14. It’s quite hilarious. Everything you say is literally by looking at Wikipedia.

Who needs Generals when we have you.


sha ah said:


> The J-10 is a good aircraft but I don't think it's a match for the Rafale. India will have the edge over Pakistan when it comes to fighter jets in the near future and beyond.
> 
> I don't think Iran will purchase anything unless the price is extremely favorable. Iran must also receive technology transfers, licensed or joint production and software codes. Time is on Iran's side in this case. Platforms don't become more expensive with time and with patience Iran will eventually receive a very favorable deal.



Its another misguided purchase by a country that cannot get its internal affairs in order. Unless it’s getting these for basically free (Chinese subsidies).

_Pakistan's economy is currently in turmoil, with the country requiring gross external financing of *$51.6 billion over the next two years *(2021-2023) to meet its financial requirements.

The country has joined the top 10 nations with the largest foreign debts, according to a recent World Bank report._

They needed ANOTHER loan from Baboon Arabia (3B this time) to keep the lights on.

How is this a sustainable strategy? Can Pakistan really continue to match India in arms purchases? Of course not. India has the economy and domestic industry to pay for an arms race, Pakistan does not.

It would be like Iran trying to get into an arms race with the USA. It’s just not sustainable nor a smart strategy.

Plus how much difference is 24 J-10 gonna make? It’s like Iran having 24 SU-54’s. Wouldn’t make much difference in grand scheme of war.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Mig-35 did not see combat is not argument against it in any sense as you would have to ignore and deny fact that it utilizes what has been combat proven.

Be it armament that it can use, along being derived from Mig-29 along radar being derived and improved upon one used on Su-30MK by being AESA instead of PESA.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> J-10 is right in between Mig-29 and Mig-35 in range and payload.
> 
> Mig-35 is exact to F-14 in payload and range.
> 
> But J-10 has 11 hardpoints and Mig-35 has only 9.


How an interceptor can be compared with a multirole fighter mig 29 and mig 35 at best can be compared to f18


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> How an interceptor can be compared with a multirole fighter mig 29 and mig 35 at best can be compared to f18


F-18 C/D is even more slower and F-18 E/F is even slower than that...


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-18 C/D is even more slower and F-18 E/F is even slower than that...


The spread is just one thing and it's not that important


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> There have been 6 prototype test
> Models built for testing purposes. Only 8 finished production models have been built for Russian airforce, not “more than 30”. But why ruin your lies.
> 
> You are comparing a plane that has never seen combat and never even be used in a major war game or simulation to the F-14. It’s quite hilarious. Everything you say is literally by looking at Wikipedia.
> 
> Who needs Generals when we have you.
> 
> 
> Its another misguided purchase by a country that cannot get its internal affairs in order. Unless it’s getting these for basically free (Chinese subsidies).
> 
> _Pakistan's economy is currently in turmoil, with the country requiring gross external financing of *$51.6 billion over the next two years *(2021-2023) to meet its financial requirements.
> 
> The country has joined the top 10 nations with the largest foreign debts, according to a recent World Bank report._
> 
> They needed ANOTHER loan from Baboon Arabia (3B this time) to keep the lights on.
> 
> How is this a sustainable strategy? Can Pakistan really continue to match India in arms purchases? Of course not. India has the economy and domestic industry to pay for an arms race, Pakistan does not.
> 
> It would be like Iran trying to get into an arms race with the USA. It’s just not sustainable nor a smart strategy.
> 
> Plus how much difference is 24 J-10 gonna make? It’s like Iran having 24 SU-54’s. Wouldn’t make much difference in grand scheme of war.


Economy can be improved by time but strong air force is necessity for Pakistan. You people know nothing about Pakistan so avoid commenting about Pakistan.

We are not going to buy just 24 J10 but over 70 to fill up the place of F16.
Our future aircrafts will be
Approximately 188 JF 17
70+ J10C 
Nearly 75 F16s 
60 Mirages 3/5 for deep strike missions (mirrages are also responsible for carrying out air launched nuclear strike on India ).

Our recent defence purchases:
4 Milgem corvettes with full IP rights
4 type 054 A/P Frigates
8 yuan class AIP submarines 
LMPAs for anti submarine warfare.
Hq 9P long range air defence system
400 VT4P third Gen. Tanks 
4 OPVs from Damen.
48 wingloong 2 MALE UCAVs 
Unknown no. of CH 4 B for naval use.

And many indigenous militarily programs are under way.
Our economy had always been struggling but defence equipment is also necessary to avoid wars with India. War will be more costly for us if we will not spend money on defence equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477661637876150273


----------



## sahureka2

Question: could this be an opportunity for Iran to take over the contract and thus receive new combat aircraft very quickly?
https://www.air-cosmos.com/article/...-su-35-gyptiens-analyse-exclusive-osint-25752

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> Question: could this be an opportunity for Iran to take over the contract and thus receive new combat aircraft very quickly?
> https://www.air-cosmos.com/article/...-su-35-gyptiens-analyse-exclusive-osint-25752



Don’t see IRGC giving the green light for such a purchase.

Even for T-90 they only bought a few and took them to Syria to be battle tested and learn from them. Then Karrar was unveiled.

This tells me IRGC didn’t see value in making a long run contract with Russia over T-90 and thinks it’s domestic version can compete adequately enough.

The only good 25 SU-35’s would do Iran is allowing the F-14 fleet to rest a little and spend some time upgrading the rest of them to F-14AM standard. This might mean canabalizing some of them. Game changing wise this purchase it would hardly be a major difference.

25 SU-35’s cannot take on 200 fighter jets from Saudi Arabia let alone US or Israel.

So unless this is a “test run purchase” and “confidence building measure” for Iranian-Russian arms relations, I don’t see it happening.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t see IRGC giving the green light for such a purchase.
> 
> Even for T-90 they only bought a few and took them to Syria to be battle tested and learn from them. Then Karrar was unveiled.
> 
> This tells me IRGC didn’t see value in making a long run contract with Russia over T-90 and thinks it’s domestic version can compete adequately enough.
> 
> The only good 25 SU-35’s would do Iran is allowing the F-14 fleet to rest a little and spend some time upgrading the rest of them to F-14AM standard. This might mean canabalizing some of them. Game changing wise this purchase it would hardly be a major difference.
> 
> 25 SU-35’s cannot take on 200 fighter jets from Saudi Arabia let alone US or Israel.
> 
> So unless this is a “test run purchase” and “confidence building measure” for Iranian-Russian arms relations, I don’t see it happening.


So IRGC doesn't allow IRIAF to purchase fighter jets? Just Wondering, what is your intention for telling this joke?!! 

They took some T90s then took then to Syria and then unveiled Karrar. Man you make Babak Taghvaee look like Einstein of 2022.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sahureka2

new colors for Yassin Trainer?
perhaps we will soon see it also in flight







__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478855048931291141

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t see IRGC giving the green light for such a purchase.
> 
> Even for T-90 they only bought a few and took them to Syria to be battle tested and learn from them. Then Karrar was unveiled.
> 
> This tells me IRGC didn’t see value in making a long run contract with Russia over T-90 and thinks it’s domestic version can compete adequately enough.
> 
> The only good 25 SU-35’s would do Iran is allowing the F-14 fleet to rest a little and spend some time upgrading the rest of them to F-14AM standard. This might mean canabalizing some of them. Game changing wise this purchase it would hardly be a major difference.
> 
> 25 SU-35’s cannot take on 200 fighter jets from Saudi Arabia let alone US or Israel.
> 
> So unless this is a “test run purchase” and “confidence building measure” for Iranian-Russian arms relations, I don’t see it happening.



I can't say your assessment is accurate because we don't know the truth, but what can be said is that, such a "modernization" would come in batches, so it doesn't mean 25 would be the end of it. Naturally they can't deliver 200 all at once.

Besides that, what I am more concerned about is, if this really does happen. What they have done with the Su-35's?

I don't want to see a heavily monkey modelled version delivered like some kind of joke considering people have F-15E's and such out there. It is very much like them to do this, as we've seen in history. The American's atleast can be relied upon for providing quality products (even export versions) to their customers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> I don't want to see a heavily monkey modelled version



Well they were intended for Egypt a *MAJOR* US/NATO banana servant country.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Best option for Iran is to acquire license for transfer of technology for AL-222 turbofan with afterburner or develop a turbofan of comparable specifications. Then modify and improve design of F-5E and use some advances from Qaher-313 which is more aerodynamic landing gear at minimum. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if initial design of Qaher-313 had AL-222 in mind until Iran couldn't secure purchase of Yak-130's from Russia which may have hinged on transfer of technology for such turbofan.


----------



## Dariush the Great

Stryker1982 said:


> I can't say your assessment is accurate because we don't know the truth, but what can be said is that, such a "modernization" would come in batches, so it doesn't mean 25 would be the end of it. Naturally they can't deliver 200 all at once.
> 
> Besides that, what I am more concerned about is, if this really does happen. What they have done with the Su-35's?
> 
> I don't want to see a heavily monkey modelled version delivered like some kind of joke considering people have F-15E's and such out there. It is very much like them to do this, as we've seen in history. The American's atleast can be relied upon for providing quality products (even export versions) to their customers.


What is the use of such ''quality'' products that one wrong move you make you will get sanctioned to death? Look at those all pathetic countries buying stuff from the USA, they HAVE TO BE obedient to uncle sam otherwise all future purchases, current contract etc will get cancelled and they will face many problems. It is just not worth it. Much better to make something locally.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Best option for Iran is to acquire license for transfer of technology for AL-222 turbofan with afterburner or develop a turbofan of comparable specifications. Then modify and improve design of F-5E and use some advances from Qaher-313 which is more aerodynamic landing gear at minimum. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if initial design of Qaher-313 had AL-222 in mind until Iran couldn't secure purchase of Yak-130's from Russia which may have hinged on transfer of technology for such turbofan.



Iran has developed Kowsar 2, they haven't shown it yet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran has developed Kowsar 2, they haven't shown it yet


Then you can provide some information, unless this is just pure speculation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Even for T-90 they only bought a few and took them to Syria to be battle tested and learn from them. Then Karrar was unveiled.


comparing Iran's purchase of T-90 to Su-35 might be false equivalence, there is no evidence i've seen that IRan will handle T890 just like Su35 purchase.




> 25 SU-35’s cannot take on 200 fighter jets from Saudi Arabia


Lol, thats why Iran has the houthis, no need for Iranian jets.


yugocrosrb95 said:


> Best option for Iran is to acquire license for transfer of technology for AL-222 turbofan with afterburner or develop a turbofan of comparable specifications. Then modify and improve design of F-5E and use some advances from Qaher-313 which is more aerodynamic landing gear at minimum. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if initial design of Qaher-313 had AL-222 in mind until Iran couldn't secure purchase of Yak-130's from Russia which may have hinged on transfer of technology for such turbofan.


Iran needs jets now, war could be coming soon, and by soon, i mean sooner than all you're saying needs to happen for Iran to END UP WITH GOOD FIGHTER JETS. iran gotta just buy some/many as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

925boy said:


> Iran has the houthis


Houthis have fighter jets?🧐🧐

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> Iran needs jets now, war could be coming soon, and by soon, i mean sooner than all you're saying needs to happen for Iran to END UP WITH GOOD FIGHTER JETS. iran gotta just buy some/many as soon as the opportunity presents itself.



There is no war coming. Stop fear mongering.

Also those 25 SU-35’s would be destroyed in first week of conflict if Iran is facing the US. If it’s facing Israel then it won’t be an air to air battle after their initial strike on Iran’s facilties.

Until Iran builds “Air Force mountain cities” like China did in the 70’s or Tawian has done with their largest airbase, major aircraft purchase is a bit dumb.

I have already laid out how 5-10 major Air Force mountain cities capable of fueling and launching Iran’s interceptor fleet all from within a protected mountain bedrock can save Iran’s most valuable parts of its fleet during conflict with a power like the US.

This would be reserved for future Iranian fighters and jets like SU-35, J-10, SU-54, F-14AM, Migs etc.

Where as Iran’s F-5 and F-4 fleet would be stationed in regular airbases as they are not essential nor can you save every aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Then you can provide some information, unless this is just pure speculation.


Hey troll, it's true and it's been announced, look around. And that's the logic of things
Again the bad analysis of General TheImmortal who does not understand how a thing works. Fear not, Iran has plans that are far more sophisticated than this puppet. The SU35s will be supported by other fighter jets, drones, air defense missiles, electronic warfare and more.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

The 25 SU-35s would probably be part of a larger order and yes airstrips which lead to hardened, underground bunkers inside of mountains would be great for Iran.









China Has More Than 40 Of These Underground Air Bases And They're Nearly Impossible To Destroy







www.businessinsider.com


















TheImmortal said:


> There is no war coming. Stop fear mongering.
> 
> Also those 25 SU-35’s would be destroyed in first week of conflict if Iran is facing the US. If it’s facing Israel then it won’t be an air to air battle after their initial strike on Iran’s facilties.
> 
> Until Iran builds “Air Force mountain cities” like China did in the 70’s or Tawian has done with their largest airbase, major aircraft purchase is a bit dumb.
> 
> I have already laid out how 5-10 major Air Force mountain cities capable of fueling and launching Iran’s interceptor fleet all from within a protected mountain bedrock can save Iran’s most valuable parts of its fleet during conflict with a power like the US.
> 
> This would be reserved for future Iranian fighters and jets like SU-35, J-10, SU-54, F-14AM, Migs etc.
> 
> Where as Iran’s F-5 and F-4 fleet would be stationed in regular airbases as they are not essential nor can you save every aircraft.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> View attachment 806790



These drawing getting old. If B-2s are flying deep into Iran and dropping bombs than that means most of the air defense network has failed/destroyed. Which at that point means loss of a contestable airspace.

Also these designs assume the old shallow mountain hangers of the 70’s, technology has advanced tremendously since Cold War. And now you can have underground bases so deep you need oxygen to reach.

All Iran needs is to be able to reliably keep most of its interceptors alive for first 6 months of war. That will take immense pressure of air defense and force enemy into more conservative tactics due to dual threat of interceptor and air defense system being active vs just no Air Force and air defense having to do all the defending.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

People are still talking about delivery of SU-35's to Iran? Quite shocking actually that people are this naïve.
Zionist Putin will *never *allow Iran to get its hands on advanced offensive weapons. Even for the S-300 systems (totally defensive in nature) it took several lawsuits and a decade to receive them!
Facts matter people. Last major Russian arms delivery to Iran was in the begin 90's. 30 years ago!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Hey troll, it's true and it's been announced, look around. And that's the logic of things
> Again the bad analysis of General TheImmortal who does not understand how a thing works. Fear not, Iran has plans that are far more sophisticated than this puppet. The SU35s will be supported by other fighter jets, drones, air defense missiles, electronic warfare and more.


I mean if Kowsar 2 exists then you can provide sources to inform me.


----------



## Sineva

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Houthis have fighter jets?🧐🧐


When you`re dealing with saudi levels of military incompetence,you literally dont need fighter jets........or that much else to be honest.  🤡

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Iran has capability to produce F-5E and they have option to modify design, primary limitation is nose of F-5E which restricts size of radar antenna then at very least as temporary measure against advanced adversary it could be equipped with AIM-23B aka Fakour-90 on center line pylon until smaller lighter AAM of comparable performance get developed. Iran needs new trainer jet design that consumes far less jet fuel and Jahesh-700 is perfect candidate until maybe a larger model gets developed, two Jahesh-700 would provide thrust comparable to that of single AL-55 used on HJT-36 while providing better specific fuel consumption. New trainer jet with Jahesh-700 would need far less fuel than Yasin as SFC is nearly 1/3rd of Owj.

In consideration that Iran managed to reverse engineer FJ33 and produce derivative Jahesh-700 thus it is possible for Iran to produce a low bypass twin spool turbofan for F-5E fighter jet.

With careful considerations in design of such, Iran can develop a low bypass turbofan that has SFC half of Owj/J85-GE-21 in subsonic regime thus doubling range while fitting inside engine bay of F-5E while another option is to develop larger turbofan that is no heavier than 2 J85-GE-21 while providing 15% greater afterburner thrust and half SFC in subsonic regime.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

yugocrosrb95 said:


> I mean if Kowsar 2 exists then you can provide sources to inform me.




*Iran Starts Producing a New Variant of Kowsar Fighter Jet for its Air Force*

Iran has started production of the locally-designed, The Kowsar is produced in single and two-seater variants fighter plane for use in its air force, state television reported, as tensions mount with the United States after the reimposition of U.S. sanctions on Tehran. “Soon the needed number of this plane will be produced and put at the service of the Air Force,” Defence Minister Amir Hatami said at a ceremony on Saturday to launch the plane’s production, which was shown on television. 

Kowsar fighter jet is a fourth-generation fighter aircraft designed and manufactured by state-owned Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO). It is the first fighter jet developed in Iran. The development of Kowsar fighter aircraft has gained much more significance due to an arms embargo imposed by the US. Designed to upgrade and strengthen the aerial defence capabilities of Iran, the aircraft is deployed by the Iran Army and Iran Air Force. It can also be used to support the training activities of fighter pilots.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Sineva said:


> When you`re dealing with saudi levels of military incompetence,you literally dont need fighter jets........or that much else to be honest.  🤡


May be

But historically,Arabs are great warriors.underestimating them can be a serious mistake in military conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Mr Iran Eye said:


> *Iran Starts Producing a New Variant of Kowsar Fighter Jet for its Air Force*
> 
> Iran has started production of the locally-designed, The Kowsar is produced in single and two-seater variants fighter plane for use in its air force, state television reported, as tensions mount with the United States after the reimposition of U.S. sanctions on Tehran. “Soon the needed number of this plane will be produced and put at the service of the Air Force,” Defence Minister Amir Hatami said at a ceremony on Saturday to launch the plane’s production, which was shown on television.
> 
> Kowsar fighter jet is a fourth-generation fighter aircraft designed and manufactured by state-owned Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO). It is the first fighter jet developed in Iran. The development of Kowsar fighter aircraft has gained much more significance due to an arms embargo imposed by the US. Designed to upgrade and strengthen the aerial defence capabilities of Iran, the aircraft is deployed by the Iran Army and Iran Air Force. It can also be used to support the training activities of fighter pilots.


do U have a link to this report...


----------



## sha ah

That was due to the UN sanctions and that was under Medvedev. In any case Iran did finally receive the S-300 and the most advanced export variant at that. 

The Obama era of multilateralism is long gone. Today Russia is at odds with the west and the situation is only deteriorating with time. 

Russia can no longer sell the SU-35s to Egypt or Indonesia. So what to do with the SU-35s ? Remember Russia needs funding for its new weapons systems, including the T-14 Armata, SU-57, Checkmate project, hypersonic missiles, etc

Iran would be a perfect fit in this case and 25 SU-35s would only be an initial order.



Dariush the Great said:


> People are still talking about delivery of SU-35's to Iran? Quite shocking actually that people are this naïve.
> Zionist Putin will *never *allow Iran to get its hands on advanced offensive weapons. Even for the S-300 systems (totally defensive in nature) it took several lawsuits and a decade to receive them!
> Facts matter people. Last major Russian arms delivery to Iran was in the begin 90's. 30 years ago!!

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Russia can no longer sell the SU-35s to Egypt or Indonesia. So what to do with the SU-35s ?



Algeria, UAE, Qatar.

Putin will tell the Arabs if you don’t buy it, I’ll sell it to Iran. And they will buy it just so Iran doesn’t get it.

Or it will be retrofitted to Russian standard and added to Russian Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Algeria, UAE, Qatar.
> 
> Putin will tell the Arabs if you don’t buy it, I’ll sell it to Iran. And they will buy it just so Iran doesn’t get it.
> 
> Or it will be retrofitted to Russian standard and added to Russian Air Force.


You are right..and I have no regret if Iran does not get them...spend the money and fix the aviation infrastructure of Iran while at the same time designing your own engine and airframe ...Yes things can be done concurrently.... Buy them and you will be begging Ruskis for parts and maintenance every other day..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> May be
> 
> But historically,Arabs are great warriors.underestimating them can be a serious mistake in military conflict.


Historically that certainly was true.However,when one looks back over the last 70 years of arab military history,well frankly,there is precious little to be proud of,and this is true regardless of whether it was a soviet trained vassal military or a western trained vassal military. 
The problem is systemic,so long as one has weak despotic arab vassal regimes [yes saudi arabia and the gulf states I`m looking at you] that fear their own militaries as much,or even more,than the militaries of other nations,and as a result prefer commanders and officer corps that they consider to be politically reliable,usually to the exclusion of any and all other qualities,including military competence,well,sadly the end result is rather predictable.
On the other hand tho` we saw what a well lead,well trained,well equipped force fighting in defence of its own country could achieve back in 2006,and even more impressively this was not a national arab army but a nominal militia.
So I agree that the arabs certainly have a great deal of military potential.The current problem tho is realizing that potential,and since this would require huge change in the arab world politically,which I dont really see happening anytime soon sadly,I imagine that the arab vassal regimes will continue to squander hundreds of billions on weapons that they dont need and cant use,in the [erroneous] belief that this will give them strong and capable armies [on paper at least].


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Algeria, UAE, Qatar.
> 
> Putin will tell the Arabs if you don’t buy it, I’ll sell it to Iran. And they will buy it just so Iran doesn’t get it.
> 
> Or it will be retrofitted to Russian standard and added to Russian Air Force.


If they do give it to Iran, they'll probably replace the radar with a garbage one, downgrade the avionics, and probably add a kill switch too if they could.

No wonder IRAIF keep rejecting their offers, probably because they are offering nothing that can compete with a F-15E, or Eurofighter. Not to mention, future Rafale.

This might sound crazy, but even doing a joint project with Turkey would yield much better results, but I'm sure their access to electronics from NATO would be rejected even if they would be hypothetically interested because they don't want NATO equipment in Iranian hands, but my point essentially is that IRAIF can't trust them not to give useless aircraft for billions.


----------



## 925boy

Stryker1982 said:


> This might sound crazy, but even doing a joint project with Turkey would yield much better results, but I'm sure their access to electronics from NATO would be rejected even if they would be hypothetically interested because they don't want NATO equipment in Iranian hands, but my point essentially is that IRAIF can't trust them not to give useless aircraft for billions.


Iran would end up regretting this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

aryobarzan said:


> do U have a link to this report...


I spoke on the phone with Ayatollah Khamenei and this plane will be presented to the public soon


----------



## aryobarzan

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I spoke on the phone with Ayatollah Khamenei and this plane will be presented to the public soon


Ok...send my regards next time you talk to him and do not forget to take your pills.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> May be
> 
> But historically,Arabs are great warriors.underestimating them can be a serious mistake in military conflict.



What have Arabs achieved in last 3500 years after Iranic emergence ? They only had control over 70% of Iran for like 100 odd years that is like flash in a pan. They were under the control of the Persian and Medes Empires for literally like a Millenia and then they were colonized subjects of my kind ... the Turks ... that too for centuries. Now they act as Vassals of regional and western powers. Every war they fight they lose.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Algeria, UAE, Qatar.
> 
> Putin will tell the Arabs if you don’t buy it, I’ll sell it to Iran. And they will buy it just so Iran doesn’t get it.



Algeria has no issues with Iran. They're a major customer of up-to-date Russian defence products, however if they buy up those Su-35's, it will not be with the aim of preventing Iran from obtaining them. As for the other states mentioned, well, they're a different matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Stryker1982 said:


> If they do give it to Iran, they'll probably replace the radar with a garbage one, downgrade the avionics, and probably add a kill switch too if they could.
> 
> No wonder IRAIF keep rejecting their offers, probably because they are offering nothing that can compete with a F-15E, or Eurofighter. Not to mention, future Rafale.
> 
> This might sound crazy, but even doing a joint project with Turkey would yield much better results, but I'm sure their access to electronics from NATO would be rejected even if they would be hypothetically interested because they don't want NATO equipment in Iranian hands, but my point essentially is that IRAIF can't trust them not to give useless aircraft for billions.


 We have to make it simple for the wider audience to understand. All of these issues about the IRIAF receiving new technology or not comes down to one thing : Iran's refusal to be a puppet. All those countries around us and basically all other nations in the world except for maybe China, they are all US vassals, one has a bit more control over their policies while the other is a full sock puppet. Only way Iran can have some acces to tech is through China, in full secrecy.


----------



## sha ah

But Arabs can't buy it because of US sanctions and pressure 

Also Russia is badly in need of funds for its new weapons systems. 

Regardless it's going to depend on upcoming negotiations between Russia and NATO regarding Ukraine, which don't appear too promising.

In any case there's a good chance that Russia won't let a large multi billion dollar arms deal pass them by as Iran will not buy anything if it doesn't get everything it wants.

Keep in mind Russias arms exports are currently being squeezed. If the Arabs and countries like Indonesia can't buy from Russia and China is shifting away, then what does that leave Russia ? India ? Yes but even India is being pressured by the west and are now moving towards western options.



TheImmortal said:


> Algeria, UAE, Qatar.
> 
> Putin will tell the Arabs if you don’t buy it, I’ll sell it to Iran. And they will buy it just so Iran doesn’t get it.
> 
> Or it will be retrofitted to Russian standard and added to Russian Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

When it comes to Russian arms, the Russians have decent hardware. Allegedly a Russia SU-30 recently snuck up on a F-35 by using it's Khibiny electronic warfare suite to jam the F-35s sensors. The F-35 allegedly left the area after being confronted.

Specifically the Russians use of IR sensors actually allow a jet like the SU-30 to spot, track and target stealth jets from long distances with relative ease.






On the other hand, the Egyptians recently conducted an exercise where they had one of their SU-35s go head to head against a Rafale. The Rafales electronic warfare capabilities were too much for the SU-35

"Word is the Egyptians tested an Irbis-E radar (from the Su-35) against Rafale’s ECM-system, and the latter easily overpowered the former."









Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran "taking them instead") - The Aviation Geek Club


Here’s why Egypt will never receive Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets (and why there's no confirmation for any of reports about Algeria or Iran)




theaviationgeekclub.com





The Rafale is quite formidable though. I believe it was last year, an Egyptian Rafale snuck up on and destroyed 3 Turkish HAWK batteries at Watiya airbase, Libya. Turkey had spent millions modernizing their HAWK batteries yet they had no clue the Rafale was coming.

Anyways my point is that Russia possesses and produces good hardware. The question is what are they willing to sell on the export market ?

Regardless, Iran will not accept anything less than the best export variant Russia has to offer. They're very picky about specifics and will not accept an inferior product.

Iran is also looking for technology transfers, production license and software codes are mandatory for Iran.

This is one of the reasons why Iran said no to the S-400 when the S-300 deal finally went through. Look at how Turkey is stuck now, with Russia refusing to hand over the software codes.

Iran working with Turkey to build a jet ? I'm sorry but is this some kind of a joke ? LOL



Stryker1982 said:


> If they do give it to Iran, they'll probably replace the radar with a garbage one, downgrade the avionics, and probably add a kill switch too if they could.
> 
> No wonder IRAIF keep rejecting their offers, probably because they are offering nothing that can compete with a F-15E, or Eurofighter. Not to mention, future Rafale.
> 
> This might sound crazy, but even doing a joint project with Turkey would yield much better results, but I'm sure their access to electronics from NATO would be rejected even if they would be hypothetically interested because they don't want NATO equipment in Iranian hands, but my point essentially is that IRAIF can't trust them not to give useless aircraft for billions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

aryobarzan said:


> Ok...send my regards next time you talk to him and do not forget to take your pills.




The problem is, you are bad analysis and bad researchers and you don't understand Iran's announcement process. They are always ahead of what they present publicly. A good idea of this is the generation of the new radar count. Iran produces radars as no country has the background, we are having difficulty keeping track of their novelty counts. For the Kowsar it's the same, they also produce the single-seater version and there have been some statements on this subject.

A year after the official release of the Kowsar, they said it had technological advances. I have been following the Iranian army for years and they don't always unveil their new products and follow their own schedule. By March, April they should have new announcements on the subject. So keep your pills to yourself and learn to observe and read between the lines


----------



## Muhammed45

sha ah said:


> But Arabs can't buy it because of US sanctions and pressure
> 
> Also Russia is badly in need of funds for its new weapons systems.
> 
> Regardless it's going to depend on upcoming negotiations between Russia and NATO regarding Ukraine, which don't appear too promising.
> 
> In any case there's a good chance that Russia won't let a large multi billion dollar arms deal pass them by as Iran will not buy anything if it doesn't get everything it wants.
> 
> Keep in mind Russias arms exports are currently being squeezed. If the Arabs and countries like Indonesia can't buy from Russia and China is shifting away, then what does that leave Russia ? India ? Yes but even India is being pressured by the west and are now moving towards western options.


Arabs can surely buy it as SU-35s were present in Dubai airshow. And Russians are more than willing to sell them a dumb version of it. 

Point is, if Russia goes that way then USA would be able to put its hands on technology of downgraded Sukhois, despite that, still it worth it. Something is better than nothing and US airforce can practice against Sukhois knowing the fact that Su 27 and its latest 30,35 versions are backbone of Russian interceptors and bombers, specially in the far east. 

It makes Russians hesitant and sensitive about this issue and the possible leakage of technology. On the other hand, it allows them to play the Arab card with USA something that Chinese has also tried to do in this region with this mental background that we can separate USA's traditional allies or at the very least try to reduce the trust between traditional allies (you read USA and its regional dogs). 

So it will be done at an Slow pace and gradually with political assurance. 

On this side, we have Iran a techinlogical power compared to Arabs. Iran wants some sort of transfer of technology something like the Indian case with Su30 MKI. Iran won't buy huge number of fighter jets compared to Arabs since Iran military doctorine wants fighter jets only as an airdefense Layer not for air superiority purposes considering the fact that we have USAF threatening us in Persian Gulf. So we still have the issue of money, Arabs can offer much more than what Iran would suggest to Russians. 

I think that Iran will buy few squadrons of SU-35 to solve that issue, a complement. 

All in all, Russians seem willing to sell fighters to both Iran and Arabs under some conditions. 

The goodness of it, Iran will use them to remove techinlogical barriers, Arabs will remain Arabs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

When is president Raesi's supposed trip to Russia ?


----------



## drmeson

Despite all the discussions we used to have during IMF times or here, people need to understand something now after all these years. IRIAF is just not on the agenda of the people who actually runs Iran. You get Rouhani, Raisi or whatever faces but IRIAF is not going to go anywhere. They get less money or attention which makes sense because battleground is in constant evolution and our priority is BM/CM + UCAV strike packages for attack and SAMs for air defense. With the budget we have, we will barely get four squadrons of some totally new Russian fighter like Sukhoi-35 at best which will just be another maintenance mess unless they get it in high numbers like 7-8 squadrons replacing all the F-4E/D/RF, MF-1 EQ, F-5E, F-7N with one multirole platform performing all the duties. That is not easy considering thatwe have zero infrastructure for Sukhoi Flanker family. That is like daydreaming considering that IRIAF planners are cash-strapped dumb propagandists and nothing more. We have seen that with Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Kowsar, Qaher dramas. They give moderate levels upgrades to a 3rd generation fighter jet and start calling it new. Compare that to our naval or aerospace program. 

IRIAF's only solution is to be merged with IRGC-AF, IRGC makes things happen, they have shown that with missiles, AD programs, and unmanned aerial platforms. They will do the same with IRIAF as well. Maybe we will finally see the retirement of Shahi relics and Saddams legacies being replaced with single multi-role platforms like Su-35S. A more realistic composition of IRIAF+IRGCAF will be something like (new procurement is underlined):

*Interceptors *(72 x 4th gen)
- 4-5 squadrons x F-14 AM (3.5-4 squadrons are currently operational, 1 more can be refurbished to AM standard)
- 2 squadrons x Mig-29 SMT (5 new airframes required and rest upgraded by Mikyon itself with R-77/RVV-AE to SMT standards)

*Multirole *(108 x half 4++ and half 3.5-4.0 gen)
- 4 Squadrons x Su-35S (Some level local assembly with TOT should be procured)
- 5 Squadrons x F-4 E/D (Project "Dowran" upgraded with Chinese 4th generation combat suite upto JH-7A standards with JL-10A radars, minimum upto J-8IIM standards)

*Attack *(60 + mass produced UCAVs) 
- 3 squadrons x Su-24M2 (equipped with KH-31, domestic long range ALCM)
- 2 Squadrons x IRGC upgraded Su-22 (1 already exists, another one can be raised with domestic long range ALCM packages)
- 50 x Shahed-129/Gaza
- 50 x Simorgh Flying Wings with Naval Strike capability 
- 100 x Mohajer-6 with Naval Strike capability
- 100 x Karrars 
*
AEW*
5 x local IrAn-140 platforms with 600-800 km tracking ranges, something on lines of Israeli EITAM. 


Retirement: F-5 family (Saeghe, Kowsar), Qaher , Mirages, F-7, Su-25 

... Now this is an airforce to be feared by regional adversaries atleast and if combined with our level missile power, it can be lethal. It is realistic and may save IRIAF in less money then we would have wasted on mass producing some local F-5 copy just for the sake of having a local fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

No the Arabs, especially Gulf vassal states, are not allowed to purchase Russian arms. Under US pressure both Egypt and Indonesia have been forced to cancel their purchases.

The Americans have already gained access to flankers and fulcrums. Several former Warsaw Pact nations are now members of NATO.

The issue isn't the airframe, it's the new sensors and electronic warfare suite which makes Russian variants formidable.

I do not believe that IRGC should get a monopoly on everything. They do make things happen but look at their budget compared to other departments.

Ideally I believe that Iran should purchase 3-4 dozen SU-35s and 5-10 dozen SU-30s. Of course I'm referring to the best available variants along with the software codes, technology transfers and built under license in Iran. 

Iran has to get rid of their F-4s they're simply too outdated. 50+ years and counting. I believe Iran will still hold onto the F-5s since Iran has fully reverse engineered this model and because they're so cost effective. The F-14s yes upgrade the remaining few squadrons and keep them for a while longer.

MIG-29s should be upgraded and perhaps Iran should get some MIG-35s, maybe build some under license with technology transfers ? 

The J-7s, Mirages, SU-22s should be sidelined, theyre outdated, perhaps keep a handful, put them in storage or find a buyer ? 

The SU-24s, they're still useful for launching cruise or hypersonic missiles from high altitudes. Perhaps upgrade them or if Iran can get it's hands on some MIG-25s at a bargain rate ?



drmeson said:


> Despite all the discussions we used to have during IMF times or here, people need to understand something now after all these years. IRIAF is just not on the agenda of the people who actually runs Iran. You get Rouhani, Raisi or whatever faces but IRIAF is not going to go anywhere. They get less money or attention which makes sense because battleground is in constant evolution and our priority is BM/CM + UCAV strike packages for attack and SAMs for air defense. With the budget we have, we will barely get four squadrons of some totally new Russian fighter like Sukhoi-35 at best which will just be another maintenance mess unless they get it in high numbers like 7-8 squadrons replacing all the F-4E/D/RF, MF-1 EQ, F-5E, F-7N with one multirole platform performing all the duties. That is not easy considering thatwe have zero infrastructure for Sukhoi Flanker family. That is like daydreaming considering that IRIAF planners are cash-strapped dumb propagandists and nothing more. We have seen that with Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Kowsar, Qaher dramas. They give moderate levels upgrades to a 3rd generation fighter jet and start calling it new. Compare that to our naval or aerospace program.
> 
> IRIAF's only solution is to be merged with IRGC-AF, IRGC makes things happen, they have shown that with missiles, AD programs, and unmanned aerial platforms. They will do the same with IRIAF as well. Maybe we will finally see the retirement of Shahi relics and Saddams legacies being replaced with single multi-role platforms like Su-35S. A more realistic composition of IRIAF+IRGCAF will be something like (new procurement is underlined):
> 
> *Interceptors *(72 x 4th gen)
> - 4-5 squadrons x F-14 AM (3.5-4 squadrons are currently operational, 1 more can be refurbished to AM standard)
> - 2 squadrons x Mig-29 SMT (5 new airframes required and rest upgraded by Mikyon itself with R-77/RVV-AE to SMT standards)
> 
> *Multirole *(108 x half 4++ and half 3.5-4.0 gen)
> - 4 Squadrons x Su-35S (Some level local assembly with TOT should be procured)
> - 5 Squadrons x F-4 E/D (Project "Dowran" upgraded with Chinese 4th generation combat suite upto JH-7A standards with JL-10A radars, minimum upto J-8IIM standards)
> 
> *Attack *(60 + mass produced UCAVs)
> - 3 squadrons x Su-24M2 (equipped with KH-31, domestic long range ALCM)
> - 2 Squadrons x IRGC upgraded Su-22 (1 already exists, another one can be raised with domestic long range ALCM packages)
> - 50 x Shahed-129/Gaza
> - 50 x Simorgh Flying Wings with Naval Strike capability
> - 100 x Mohajer-6 with Naval Strike capability
> - 100 x Karrars
> *
> AEW*
> 5 x local IrAn-140 platforms with 600-800 km tracking ranges, something on lines of Israeli EITAM.
> 
> 
> Retirement: F-5 family (Saeghe, Kowsar), Qaher , Mirages, F-7, Su-25
> 
> ... Now this is an airforce to be feared by regional adversaries atleast and if combined with our level missile power, it can be lethal. It is realistic and may save IRIAF in less money then we would have wasted on mass producing some local F-5 copy just for the sake of having a local fighter.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Ideally I believe that Iran should purchase 3-4 dozen SU-35s and 5-10 dozen SU-30s. Of course I'm referring to the best available variants along with the software codes, technology transfers and built under license in Iran.



Anything else you want? Maybe the launch codes to Russian nukes? Maybe Putin’s personal account numbers with Russian Central Bank?

what world do we live in that Russia would give its most successful fighter jet...the SU-35 and SU-30 *AND* Full ToT of its “best variants” To the Eye-ranians....a bunch of brown people?

Iran should kiss the ground Russia walks on for next 25 years if they even assist on how to reverse engineer AL-21 the 1st Gen variant from decades ago. 

That’s how rare THAT would be and groundbreaking for Iranian aviation. Yet you are sitting here asking....no....demanding....for the entire kitchen, house, and 5 car garage.

You guys need to forget Russia. Set expectations low so you won’t be disappointed when another 5 years pass and nothing happens.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Iran can use its production of local F-5 to design and produce modern fighter jet.

It requires a single turbofan engine with output of two J85-GE-21 turbojets and implementing divertless supersonic inlet would make jet considerably lighter, aerodynamic and take up less space. Then landing gear of Qaher could be implemented hence wings could be made simpler and lighter or stronger to carry heavier loads.

New nose design to allow larger radar antenna along removal of autocannons and its ammunition to allow for liquid cooling to be implemented.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Despite all the discussions we used to have during IMF times or here, people need to understand something now after all these years. IRIAF is just not on the agenda of the people who actually runs Iran. You get Rouhani, Raisi or whatever faces but IRIAF is not going to go anywhere. They get less money or attention which makes sense because battleground is in constant evolution and our priority is BM/CM + UCAV strike packages for attack and SAMs for air defense. With the budget we have, we will barely get four squadrons of some totally new Russian fighter like Sukhoi-35 at best which will just be another maintenance mess unless they get it in high numbers like 7-8 squadrons replacing all the F-4E/D/RF, MF-1 EQ, F-5E, F-7N with one multirole platform performing all the duties. That is not easy considering thatwe have zero infrastructure for Sukhoi Flanker family. That is like daydreaming considering that IRIAF planners are cash-strapped dumb propagandists and nothing more. We have seen that with Azarakhsh, Saeghe, Kowsar, Qaher dramas. They give moderate levels upgrades to a 3rd generation fighter jet and start calling it new. Compare that to our naval or aerospace program.
> 
> IRIAF's only solution is to be merged with IRGC-AF, IRGC makes things happen, they have shown that with missiles, AD programs, and unmanned aerial platforms. They will do the same with IRIAF as well. Maybe we will finally see the retirement of Shahi relics and Saddams legacies being replaced with single multi-role platforms like Su-35S. A more realistic composition of IRIAF+IRGCAF will be something like (new procurement is underlined):
> 
> *Interceptors *(72 x 4th gen)
> - 4-5 squadrons x F-14 AM (3.5-4 squadrons are currently operational, 1 more can be refurbished to AM standard)
> - 2 squadrons x Mig-29 SMT (5 new airframes required and rest upgraded by Mikyon itself with R-77/RVV-AE to SMT standards)
> 
> *Multirole *(108 x half 4++ and half 3.5-4.0 gen)
> - 4 Squadrons x Su-35S (Some level local assembly with TOT should be procured)
> - 5 Squadrons x F-4 E/D (Project "Dowran" upgraded with Chinese 4th generation combat suite upto JH-7A standards with JL-10A radars, minimum upto J-8IIM standards)
> 
> *Attack *(60 + mass produced UCAVs)
> - 3 squadrons x Su-24M2 (equipped with KH-31, domestic long range ALCM)
> - 2 Squadrons x IRGC upgraded Su-22 (1 already exists, another one can be raised with domestic long range ALCM packages)
> - 50 x Shahed-129/Gaza
> - 50 x Simorgh Flying Wings with Naval Strike capability
> - 100 x Mohajer-6 with Naval Strike capability
> - 100 x Karrars
> 
> *AEW*
> 5 x local IrAn-140 platforms with 600-800 km tracking ranges, something on lines of Israeli EITAM.
> 
> 
> Retirement: F-5 family (Saeghe, Kowsar), Qaher , Mirages, F-7, Su-25
> 
> ... Now this is an airforce to be feared by regional adversaries atleast and if combined with our level missile power, it can be lethal. It is realistic and may save IRIAF in less money then we would have wasted on mass producing some local F-5 copy just for the sake of having a local fighter.


really not gonna happen , first of al if you want replace one of those airplane you mentioned then Su-30 or Su-35 or anything in that class is not your answer, you want something like Mig-35 , J-10 or F-18 or F-16 or JAS 39 Gripen 
Su-35 , Su57 , J-20 or j-31 is something that must replace F-14 and I assure you they won't sale them to Iran in near future 

by the way Qaher was not IRIAF project but rather some politician project and F-5 dravites are not wrong choice considering our technical capabilities ad the funds assigned to airforce and they are what they were designed for . Advanced trainer and CAS.

by the way i like to see what IRGC do with the budget airforce assigned 
and what you call moderate upgrade to a 3rd generation airplane i say turning a 2nd generation airplane into a 4th generation .

and in your dream that IRGC take over IRIAF , wonder what achievement IRGC have with airplanes adding a 70s tech to 60's airplane ?


----------



## Deino

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Iran can use its production of local F-5 to design and produce modern fighter jet.
> 
> It requires a single turbofan engine with output of two J85-GE-21 turbojets and implementing divertless supersonic inlet would make jet considerably lighter, aerodynamic and take up less space. Then landing gear of Qaher could be implemented hence wings could be made simpler and lighter or stronger to carry heavier loads.
> 
> New nose design to allow larger radar antenna along removal of autocannons and its ammunition to allow for liquid cooling to be implemented.




Why reinventing the wheel ... this type is already available exactly as you describe it: The JF-17








But from my understanding, the IRIAF is not interested in a small fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Deino said:


> Why reinventing the wheel ... this type is already available exactly as you describe it: The JF-17
> 
> But from my understanding, the IRIAF is not interested in a small fighter.


JF-17 is partially produced in Pakistan and another issue that China won't dare to endanger relationship with Israel nor with Saudi Arabia that it now provides ballistic missile technology.

Another is that Iran can produce own small fighter jet with domestically produced F-5E/F Tiger II from which Iran could develop a derivative with extensive redesign while reusing as much manufacturing tools and components as possible in order to reduce research and development time and cost. If Iran was to develop a turbofan that has half the specific fuel consumption as J85-GE-21 then range would be nearly double of F-5E/F and with powerful enough radar along being able to carry AIM-23B / Fakour-90 that would allow 500-550km interception radius.


----------



## TheImmortal

Russia keeps Iran waiting on advanced weapons


When Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi visits Russia this month he is expected to seek a deal for the purchase of sophisticated weapons to counter potential Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear faci…




asiatimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

The article states that Russia refused to sell Iran the S-400. In reality Russia offered the option to upgrade to the S-400. However Iran refused because, as Turkey has found out the hard way, the vital maintenance on the S-400 can only be done by Russian technicians. Russia also refuses to give Turkey the software codes and the system likely has a kill switch in place.

Only time will tell whether Iran and Russia will go ahead with a large scale military procurement deal but realistically Egypt, Algeria, Indonesia have all cancelled their weapons purchases from Russia. India is also shifting more towards western platforms. If the Russians refuse this weapons deal from Iran it will be the last nail in the coffin for them.

It remains to be seen whether Russia can broker some kind of agreement with NATO, but even if they do, can Russia trust them to keep their promises ? The Russians, if they're smart, will use this 20 year deal with Iran as a hedge against western pressure.

Iran should also purchase some hardware from China as a hedge against Russia. Putting all its eggs in one basket would be a mistake for Iran.

The fact that Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria have all cancelled their deals with Russia plays perfectly into Iran's hands. That's alot of fighter jets with no buyers.

So that's

Egypt
30 SU-35 jets cancelled

Algeria
16 SU-30 jets cancelled
atleast 12 SU-35 jets cancelled
atleast 12 SU-57 jets cancelled

Indonesia
12-24 SU-35 jets cancelled

Allegedly Russia has already produced atleast 12 SU-35 fighter jets for Egypt and now they have no buyers.

As for the part of the article which states that Israel can pressure Russia not to sell to Iran, well Israel has already betrayed Russia. According to the following article









Egypt, Algeria, Indonesia reject Su-35 fighter jet deals with Russia


Governments of Egypt, Algeria and Indonesia rejected the potential acquisition of Russian modern Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets amid economic sanctions against Russia, targeting its oil industry, defense, dual-use goods and sensitive technologies, according to people familiar with the matter. The...




defence-blog.com





“The Russian defense industry lost three large orders for its Su-35 fighters at once due to the failure to replace scanned array radar and avionics, which were previously imported from a number of European countries and Israel,” sources told Defence Blog.

So Israel, under US pressure, has left Russia out in the cold. The Russians will now have to reverse engineer various components for their export variants. This however will take some time to accomplish.

At this point the Russians need an injection of cash in order to fund their new weapons systems like SU-57, Checkmate, S-500, hypersonic missile development, Armata platform, etc and now they need even more cash to reverse engineer the parts that they can no longer obtain from Israel and various EU countries.

If you think about it, signing a $10 billion dollar deal with Iran makes perfect sense for Russia considering the circumstances. For one thing, in their current predicament, they are badly in need of the cash. Second, the Russians must be livid that Israel, EU, under US pressure are refusing to sell them radar and avionics equipment. Signing this deal with Iran is a perfect way for the Russians to access much needed funds and retalite against their rivals.

Now some have previously stated that the Israelis or Americans might buy these fighter jets so that Iran doesn't get them. Well $10 billion is not a small amount of money. If the US, Israelis are willing to spent that kind of money because of Iran, then so be it. That's a win for Iran if you ask me

Wouldn't it be funny if the Russians went ahead with that deal, selling the jets to the west and then they built more and then sold them to Iran anyways ? That would be hilarious but realistically the Russians are on thin ice with Iran after the S-300 fiasco. If they test Iran's patience, Iran will very likely turn its back on Russia just like the rest of their potential buyers already have.

Also something else to consider. If the Russians cannot acquire radar and avionics components for the export variant of the Su-35, does that mean that they will have to equip the rest of their Su-35s with domestic components in the near future ?

So 12 SU-35s have already been built. If Iran orders 24 then will the other 12 be equipped with the same radar and avionics as the Russian variants ? or perhaps they will be watered down somehow, though I doubt Iran will settle for anything inferior to the export variants already sold to Egypt.

I suppose only time will tell, but realistically this is all playing into Iran's hands quite well.





TheImmortal said:


> Russia keeps Iran waiting on advanced weapons
> 
> 
> When Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi visits Russia this month he is expected to seek a deal for the purchase of sophisticated weapons to counter potential Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear faci…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> asiatimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

The Chinese already offered Iran the JF-17 in exchange for oil. Iran however wanted to exchange oil for the J-10. China and Iran could not come to an agreement. The JF-17 is like a watered down, poor mans F-16. After all this time Iran wants something worthwhile.



yugocrosrb95 said:


> JF-17 is partially produced in Pakistan and another issue that China won't dare to endanger relationship with Israel nor with Saudi Arabia that it now provides ballistic missile technology.
> 
> Another is that Iran can produce own small fighter jet with domestically produced F-5E/F Tiger II from which Iran could develop a derivative with extensive redesign while reusing as much manufacturing tools and components as possible in order to reduce research and development time and cost. If Iran was to develop a turbofan that has half the specific fuel consumption as J85-GE-21 then range would be nearly double of F-5E/F and with powerful enough radar along being able to carry AIM-23B / Fakour-90 that would allow 500-550km interception radius.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sha ah said:


> No the Arabs, especially Gulf vassal states, are not allowed to purchase Russian arms. Under US pressure both Egypt and Indonesia have been forced to cancel their purchases.
> 
> The Americans have already gained access to flankers and fulcrums. Several former Warsaw Pact nations are now members of NATO.
> 
> The issue isn't the airframe, it's the new sensors and electronic warfare suite which makes Russian variants formidable.
> 
> I do not believe that IRGC should get a monopoly on everything. They do make things happen but look at their budget compared to other departments.
> 
> Ideally I believe that Iran should purchase 3-4 dozen SU-35s and 5-10 dozen SU-30s. Of course I'm referring to the best available variants along with the software codes, technology transfers and built under license in Iran.
> 
> Iran has to get rid of their F-4s they're simply too outdated. 50+ years and counting. I believe Iran will still hold onto the F-5s since Iran has fully reverse engineered this model and because they're so cost effective. The F-14s yes upgrade the remaining few squadrons and keep them for a while longer.
> 
> MIG-29s should be upgraded and perhaps Iran should get some MIG-35s, maybe build some under license with technology transfers ?
> 
> The J-7s, Mirages, SU-22s should be sidelined, theyre outdated, perhaps keep a handful, put them in storage or find a buyer ?
> 
> The SU-24s, they're still useful for launching cruise or hypersonic missiles from high altitudes. Perhaps upgrade them or if Iran can get it's hands on some MIG-25s at a bargain rate ?



You my friend have little idea of complex relationship Iran has with Russia. What if I tell you that Iran is more wary of Russian ambitions in the region esp in the Caucasus than US/NATO. It will be the biggest victory for Iran if it can get out a relatively smaller order of 3-4 squadrons of a 4+ generation fighter like SU-30SM let alone anything more advanced like SU-35S. 

No F-4 E/D are not useless. There is a reason that they are or were recently still in use by nations like Japan, Greece, Turkey, Korea. They are reliable attack platforms that Iran has proper infrastructure for. We already superbly maintain them (very low crash rate), upgrade them with local weaponry like C-802/3 Ghader AShCM. They are large with so much space that you can literally put any modern combat suite on them (remember Super Phantom of Israel). If you have heavily upgraded F-4E/Ds like what we heard of in the Dowran project then these are 3.5-4.0 generation platforms, which can inflict heavy damage on the enemy ground and sea targets. Dowran Project was supposed to be the integration of ... get this ... integration of KLJ-10 or JL-10A radar (JH-7A) or Type 1473H (J-10A) radars will enable these fighters to fire PL-12 like long-range BVR missiles. They already lift our local LACMs so they can form a formidable force of 6 x squadrons. This was a very ambitious project ... and few aircrafts did receive the upgrades but lack of funding and dumbness of IRIAF got in the middle of this upgrade again. They focussed on Kowsar like tiny fighter projects instead of Phantoms. While IRGC-AF brought out of commission Su-22 back to life and upgraded them up with Soumar long range LACMs, IRIAF lost the opportunity to bring the F-4 fleet to 4.0 generation. 

Mig-35 does not suit Iranian needs. Its an interceptor disguised as a multirole fighter. 



yugocrosrb95 said:


> Iran can use its production of local F-5 to design and produce modern fighter jet.
> 
> It requires a single turbofan engine with output of two J85-GE-21 turbojets and implementing divertless supersonic inlet would make jet considerably lighter, aerodynamic and take up less space. Then landing gear of Qaher could be implemented hence wings could be made simpler and lighter or stronger to carry heavier loads.
> 
> New nose design to allow larger radar antenna along removal of autocannons and its ammunition to allow for liquid cooling to be implemented.



F-5 or its local copies like Saeghe or Kowsar are not suitable for the modern requirements of IRIAF. First they are too tiny to fit any modern-day 4+ generation radars that Iran can get from China. They tried to enlarge its radome in first Saeghe prototype (cant remember its serial number) which had square intakes in Blue angels paint scheme. That destabilized the aircraft in roll performance that they had to revert the air intakes to the original C shape of F-5E. Secondly, it has tiny ranges. So you have a fighter that is small, cant lift heavy modern radars or multiple BVR missiles, you cant change its aerodynamics because that failed in Saeghe, and it has a small range so even if by miracle you drag it to some F-20 or FC-1 standard which Kowsar is supposed to be like. It will be still be nothing more, but a point defender and will require AEW datalinking support (Brazilian F-5M case) which means more $ and you are stuck ages behind your adversaries who are now operating EF-2000 and F-35 ... How is that for strategic balance? I know why IRIAF and HESA kept their view on F-5 and its J-85 but that just resulted into a waste of time, effort, and money and nothing else. HESA should have focussed on F-4 or F-14 from the start. 



Deino said:


> Why reinventing the wheel ... this type is already available exactly as you describe it: The JF-17
> 
> View attachment 807580
> 
> 
> 
> But from my understanding, the IRIAF is not interested in a small fighter.



This is a 4.0 generation light fighter, purpose-built for defense of small geography like. It does not suit Iranian needs which is defence of a large geography and PLAAF itself did not purchase it for same reason

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> really not gonna happen , first of al if you want replace one of those airplane you mentioned then Su-30 or Su-35 or anything in that class is not your answer, you want something like Mig-35 , J-10 or F-18 or F-16 or JAS 39 Gripen
> Su-35 , Su57 , J-20 or j-31 is something that must replace F-14 and I assure you they won't sale them to Iran in near future



That is not written in Quran that we need to replace interceptor with interceptor and attack with attack. Airforces in modern times are replacing old interceptors and attack fighter squadrons with single multirole platforms to save maintenance and operational costs. Israel shrunk its fleet of Mirage-3, Mirage-5 (Kfir/Nesher), F-4E, F-16, F-15, A-4 to just F-16, F-15 within a span of 15-20 years. Turkey did same, reducing to just two types of fighters. 



Hack-Hook said:


> by the way Qaher was not IRIAF project but rather some politician project and F-5 dravites are not wrong choice considering our technical capabilities ad the funds assigned to airforce and they are what they were designed for . Advanced trainer and CAS.



F-5 derivatives are strategically wrong for IRIAF. We are a large country where midget relics like F-5 serve no purpose other than just point defence which was ok in past but not anymore. Are we seeing other nations of our size in the region doing same ? Saudis, Turks, Israelis, Egyptians are all operating larger multirole fighters now and we are trying to replicate the midgetest of them all whose nose cant fit any decent radar for BVR attack. 



Hack-Hook said:


> by the way i like to see what IRGC do with the budget airforce assigned
> and what you call moderate upgrade to a 3rd generation airplane i say turning a 2nd generation airplane into a 4th generation .



moderate level upgrade for F-4 comes from China which I gave details of in the above post. It has less to do with IRGC or IRIAF but more of political will of our decision makers. IRGC is more decisive and like I said they make things do as evident from our aerospace program. The fact that they are more closer to decision makers means they can pull things off easily compared to IRIAF lazy folks. 



Hack-Hook said:


> and in your dream that IRGC take over IRIAF , wonder what achievement IRGC have with airplanes adding a 70s tech to 60's airplane ?



Imagine a world where our missile program was in hands of Artesh and UCAV program was in hands of IRIAF ... We would have been invaded ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

WTF is the point of spending a fortune on a fighter jet if a foreign country can basically turn it off on you at anytime?

Russia doesn't have to give Iran technology transfers for SU-35, however the software codes are a must for any weapons system.

For the SU-30 however, full technology transfers, software codes and local production in Iran are a must.

In any case, it's not as if the SU-35 is on par with Rafale or F-22. It's actually based on an old design. Remember the flanker was introduced almost 40 years ago. The SU-35 is merely a glorified flanker. Realistically Iran should get technology transfers now that I think about it.

Anyways Russia can either cooperate with Iran or they can sell their sh#t to Egypt, Algeria, Indonesia. Oh wait, they can't.

it's their choice. Iran won't settle for BS. If not Iran will put more money into mass producing more and more missiles and drones and buy weapons from China for much cheaper. 

India is also moving away from Russian hardware. Russia can't even mass produce SU-57 or Armata because of a lack of funds. 

Chinese are taking most of Russia's customers and the Chinese do not need to buy Russian hardware anymore. Well maybe the S-500, but that's about it.

In the end Russians can take it or leave it. Their choice.



TheImmortal said:


> Anything else you want? Maybe the launch codes to Russian nukes? Maybe Putin’s personal account numbers with Russian Central Bank?
> 
> what world do we live in that Russia would give its most successful fighter jet...the SU-35 and SU-30 *AND* Full ToT of its “best variants” To the Eye-ranians....a bunch of brown people?
> 
> Iran should kiss the ground Russia walks on for next 25 years if they even assist on how to reverse engineer AL-21 the 1st Gen variant from decades ago.
> 
> That’s how rare THAT would be and groundbreaking for Iranian aviation. Yet you are sitting here asking....no....demanding....for the entire kitchen, house, and 5 car garage.
> 
> You guys need to forget Russia. Set expectations low so you won’t be disappointed when another 5 years pass and nothing happens.


----------



## sha ah

I don't think that Iran is very weary of Russian ambitions in the Caucasus. Even if Russia expanded to the Soviet era borders, Iran wouldn't care that much. In the Caucasus the only thing Iran is concerned about is the expansion of Turkish influence because it might conflict with Iran's Azeri minority.

The Russians don't have too many choices at the moment. Algeria, Indonesia, Egypt just cancelled their deals. That's not chump change. At the same time NATO is expanding towards them steadily. India doesn't want to buy their jets anymore and is shifting away from Russian hardware all together, being heavily influenced by the Americans/French/west. China has no more need for Russian hardware other than perhaps the S-500, maybe if Russia is lucky.

All of this gives Iran quite a bit of leverage for the upcoming deal. If not Iran will simply buy from China. If not Iran will simply put more money into mass producing more advanced missiles/drones, etc.

With the Egypt/Algeria/Indonesia deals cancelled, that's at least $5-$10 billion out the window. Iran is offering Russia $10 billion dollars. That is not chump change. Aside from that Iran is a solid, reliable partner. Iran is not the US or some unreliable partner that randomly rips up deals or abandon allies, Even when Assad was in dire straits Iran never let him down

Anyways it's up to Russia. They can take it or leave it.

F-4 it's not that it's a bad platform. It's excellent, but airframes have a limit. 50 years and counting, Iran's F-4s are now long past their expiry. Perhaps one or two dozen can last another decade or two and that would be a miracle.

F-5s. with AWACS and newer avionics and radar it's excellent for Iran's assymetrical doctrine and swarm tactics. Yes it's a limited platform but Iran can produce them for a few million dollars fully loaded and at the same time 4 of them can be transported in a Boeing 737.

The MIG-35, yeah Iran doesn't need them, but if Iran upgrades their MIG-29s, adding a squadron or two of MIG-35s, if the price is right, is not a bad option. It all depends on the price.

Iran's MIG-24s should also be upgraded because they're great for launching cruise or hypersonic missiles. MIG-25s, again if the price is right 2 squadrons would be great for launching hypersonic missiles. Fully loaded that jet is a beast for BVR engagements. It's so fast that it can outrun pretty much anything.



drmeson said:


> You my friend have little idea of complex relationship Iran has with Russia. What if I tell you that Iran is more wary of Russian ambitions in the region esp in the Caucasus than US/NATO. It will be the biggest victory for Iran if it can get out a relatively smaller order of 3-4 squadrons of a 4+ generation fighter like SU-30SM let alone anything more advanced like SU-35S.
> 
> No F-4 E/D are not useless. There is a reason that they are or were recently still in use by nations like Japan, Greece, Turkey, Korea. They are reliable attack platforms that Iran has proper infrastructure for. We already superbly maintain them (very low crash rate), upgrade them with local weaponry like C-802/3 Ghader AShCM. They are large with so much space that you can literally put any modern combat suite on them (remember Super Phantom of Israel). If you have heavily upgraded F-4E/Ds like what we heard of in the Dowran project then these are 3.5-4.0 generation platforms, which can inflict heavy damage on the enemy ground and sea targets. Dowran Project was supposed to be the integration of ... get this ... integration of KLJ-10 or JL-10A radar (JH-7A) or Type 1473H (J-10A) radars will enable these fighters to fire PL-12 like long-range BVR missiles. They already lift our local LACMs so they can form a formidable force of 6 x squadrons. This was a very ambitious project ... and few aircrafts did receive the upgrades but lack of funding and dumbness of IRIAF got in the middle of this upgrade again. They focussed on Kowsar like tiny fighter projects instead of Phantoms. While IRGC-AF brought out of commission Su-22 back to life and upgraded them up with Soumar long range LACMs, IRIAF lost the opportunity to bring the F-4 fleet to 4.0 generation.
> 
> Mig-35 does not suit Iranian needs. Its an interceptor disguised as a multirole fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> F-5 or its local copies like Saeghe or Kowsar are not suitable for the modern requirements of IRIAF. First they are too tiny to fit any modern-day 4+ generation radars that Iran can get from China. They tried to enlarge its radome in first Saeghe prototype (cant remember its serial number) which had square intakes in Blue angels paint scheme. That destabilized the aircraft in roll performance that they had to revert the air intakes to the original C shape of F-5E. Secondly, it has tiny ranges. So you have a fighter that is small, cant lift heavy modern radars or multiple BVR missiles, you cant change its aerodynamics because that failed in Saeghe, and it has a small range so even if by miracle you drag it to some F-20 or FC-1 standard which Kowsar is supposed to be like. It will be still be nothing more, but a point defender and will require AEW datalinking support (Brazilian F-5M case) which means more $ and you are stuck ages behind your adversaries who are now operating EF-2000 and F-35 ... How is that for strategic balance? I know why IRIAF and HESA kept their view on F-5 and its J-85 but that just resulted into a waste of time, effort, and money and nothing else. HESA should have focussed on F-4 or F-14 from the start.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a 4.0 generation light fighter, purpose-built for defense of small geography like. It does not suit Iranian needs which is defence of a large geography and PLAAF itself did not purchase it for same reason

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> moderate level upgrade for F-4 comes from China which I gave details of in the above post. It has less to do with IRGC or IRIAF but more of political will of our decision makers. IRGC is more decisive and like I said they make things do as evident from our aerospace program. The fact that they are more closer to decision makers means they can pull things off easily compared to IRIAF lazy folks.


IRGC upgrade of su22


drmeson said:


> Imagine a world where our missile program was in hands of Artesh and UCAV program was in hands of IRIAF ... We would have been invaded ...


Imagine a world that IRGC received the same amount of budget as army . A world they like army didn't have access to their own money


drmeson said:


> That is not written in Quran that we need to replace interceptor with interceptor and attack with attack. Airforces in modern times are replacing old interceptors and attack fighter squadrons with single multirole platforms to save maintenance and operational costs. Israel shrunk its fleet of Mirage-3, Mirage-5 (Kfir/Nesher), F-4E, F-16, F-15, A-4 to just F-16, F-15 within a span of 15-20 years. Turkey did same, reducing to just two types of fighters.


They replace those plathora of airplane with 2 or 3 different airplane. 
Since age immemorial air forces needed both light fighter and heavy fighters


----------



## sha ah

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1480527994145935367


----------



## sha ah

From what I've read, Egypt has 17 SU-35s currently in inventory and 30 were on order from Russia. Obviously that order has been cancelled. 

Supposedly 12 have already been built. I'm not sure what Iran's order entails but it might actually end up being 36 SU-35s or just the 24. For some reason the 24 number keeps coming up everywhere. 

Anyways from what I've been able to gather, each SU-35 sells for $63 million a piece, whereas SU-30s are priced at around $42 million a piece.


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> The Chinese already offered Iran the JF-17 in exchange for oil. Iran however wanted to exchange oil for the J-10. China and Iran could not come to an agreement. The JF-17 is like a watered down, poor mans F-16. After all this time Iran wants something worthwhile.


Thats most likely a myth I`m afraid.
The only way that iran would`ve got the jf17 was if,just as with pakistan,it was going to be partially manufactured in iran,and pakistan certainly didnt have any excess production capacity in the late 2000s to spare for sales to iran,not to mention that by 2010 iran was subject to a un arms embargo that prevented any sales of jet fighters.
The problem with the j10 was the lack of an indigenous chinese power plant.This effectively ruled out any foreign sales as it would`ve required russian approval for the re-export of the russian al31 that powered the earlier versions of the j10,indeed its only been very recently that the indigenous chinese ws10b turbofan was considered to be up to par with the al31 and good enough to replace it as the engine for the j10c version.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

F-5 platform has future, that is an aircraft derived from it.

Successful reverse engineering of J85-GE-21 means that reverse engineering J79 is possible yet Iran managed to reverse engineer FJ33 that is twin shaft hence Iran could design a small twin spool low bypass turbofan engine for F-5E that fits inside engine bay.

F-5 is not a waste of time and resources, with careful redesign and new components it can be turned into a multirole fighter while components tested on it can be later on used for a new fighter jet design. Primary current limitation that Iran has is lack of indigenous SARH / ARH AAMs besides heavy AIM-23B / Fakour-90.

It would be waste of not develop a F-5E derivative with single turbofan engine with output that is more than two J85-GE-21.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## jauk

Come on folks...are we really discussing a Pakistani jet copied from a Chinese one? Really?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Yes recently Chinese have been replacing Russian engines and other components with Chinese.

I'm pretty sure that China would be willing to sell Iran JF-17s for oil. It's essentially a Chinese bargin bin jet, which is why the Chinese themselves don't use it. 



Sineva said:


> Thats most likely a myth I`m afraid.
> The only way that iran would`ve got the jf17 was if,just as with pakistan,it was going to be partially manufactured in iran,and pakistan certainly didnt have any excess production capacity in the late 2000s to spare for sales to iran,not to mention that by 2010 iran was subject to a un arms embargo that prevented any sales of jet fighters.
> The problem with the j10 was the lack of an indigenous chinese power plant.This effectively ruled out any foreign sales as it would`ve required russian approval for the re-export of the russian al31 that powered the earlier versions of the j10,indeed its only been very recently that the indigenous chinese ws10b turbofan was considered to be up to par with the al31 and good enough to replace it as the engine for the j10c version.


----------



## sha ah

Yes I agree the F-5 for the price is well worth it. It especially fits perfectly into Iran's doctrine of assymetrical warfare and swarm tactics. 

With AWACS support and modern components it's a great light multirole fighter. 4 of these fit into a 737 for transport. It's low cost to build, low maintenance and extremely efficient.

I believe it can be equipped with a larger radar with a relatively simple modification in the front nose section. 

However the issue is that in the end the aircraft is too light to carry a serious payload. It can however be modified to carry a Phoenix (Fakour) missile no ? 

Also we don't know if Iran has a lack of air to air missiles like the sidewinder and Phoenix. Realistically Iran's specialty is missiles so why would Iran have a shortage ? Just because they don't show it off to the world, doesn't mean they don't have it.



yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5 platform has future, that is an aircraft derived from it.
> 
> Successful reverse engineering of J85-GE-21 means that reverse engineering J79 is possible yet Iran managed to reverse engineer FJ33 that is twin shaft hence Iran could design a small twin spool low bypass turbofan engine for F-5E that fits inside engine bay.
> 
> F-5 is not a waste of time and resources, with careful redesign and new components it can be turned into a multirole fighter while components tested on it can be later on used for a new fighter jet design. Primary current limitation that Iran has is lack of indigenous SARH / ARH AAMs besides heavy AIM-23B / Fakour-90.
> 
> It would be waste of not develop a F-5E derivative with single turbofan engine with output that is more than two J85-GE-21.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

sha ah said:


> Yes I agree the F-5 for the price is well worth it. It especially fits perfectly into Iran's doctrine of assymetrical warfare and swarm tactics.
> 
> With AWACS support and modern components it's a great light multirole fighter. 4 of these fit into a 737 for transport. It's low cost to build, low maintenance and extremely efficient.
> 
> I believe it can be equipped with a larger radar with a relatively simple modification in the front nose section.
> 
> However the issue is that in the end the aircraft is too light to carry a serious payload. It can however be modified to carry a Phoenix (Fakour) missile no ?
> 
> Also we don't know if Iran has a lack of air to air missiles like the sidewinder and Phoenix. Realistically Iran's specialty is missiles so why would Iran have a shortage ? Just because they don't show it off to the world, doesn't mean they don't have it.


If AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is comparable weight to AIM-54 Phoenix then maybe it could carry three of those.

Main limitation of F-5E is lack of space for large radar antenna, but removing cannons and its ammunition would allow for more powerful processing components and liquid cooling.

Redesign of F-5E/F by introducing more modern, up to date design elements should be possible with manufacturing tools that there are.

A single turbofan engine of equal or greater output than two J85-GE-21 would take up less space and then with modification of intakes it would allow rear landing gear inside body.

Then wings could be made stronger with some capacity to carry fuel where previously two landing gears in wings would have been thus less need to use fuel drop tanks.

Also with turbofan there would not be need for small air intakes to cool the jet engine and more diverterless supersonic inlet would be viable that are more aerodynamic and lighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

yugocrosrb95 said:


> If AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is comparable weight to AIM-54 Phoenix then maybe it could carry three of those.
> 
> Main limitation of F-5E is lack of space for large radar antenna, but removing cannons and its ammunition would allow for more powerful processing components and liquid cooling.
> 
> Redesign of F-5E/F by introducing more modern, up to date design elements should be possible with manufacturing tools that there are.
> 
> A single turbofan engine of equal or greater output than two J85-GE-21 would take up less space and then with modification of intakes it would allow rear landing gear inside body.
> 
> Then wings could be made stronger with some capacity to carry fuel where previously two landing gears in wings would have been thus less need to use fuel drop tanks.
> 
> Also with turbofan there would not be need for small air intakes to cool the jet engine and more diverterless supersonic inlet would be viable that are more aerodynamic and lighter.


I doubt that an f5 could carry a single f90/aim54,and even if it could its radar would lack the capability to take advantage of the capabilities and range of either missile.
It would actually make a lot more sense,not to mention be far,far easier,to reengine the mirage f1 fleet with the mig29s rd33 turbofan,rather than attempting to virtually rebuild the f5 to take an rd33.The reengining of the f1 was actually done back in the mid 90s by the south africans and proved to be an excellent conversion,tho ultimately they didnt go ahead with converting the entire fleet on cost grounds.In addition it was also adapted to carry the excellent aa-11/r73 wvr missile,this would also make an ideal conversion for arming the rest of the older western supplied aircraft as currently they only have obsolete sidewinders and sparrows.
Another potential huge force multiplier would be upgrading the mig29 fleet to fulcrum C standard,the dprk has some numbers of fulcrum Cs in its mig29 fleet,so this would in theory allow iran to acquire an example to reverse/reegineer a local equivalent,if combined with a reverse engineered r77,which both the yemenis and venezuelans possess,so no real problems with acquiring samples,this would allow iran to effectively double the size of its bvr capable fighter force.This would obviously be a huge capability upgrade.It would also allow for the possibility of upgrading irans other fighters to be equipped with a modern bvr missile,for instance imagine an f5 with a modern radar and data link capability packing 2 r77s+2 r73s,this would be a nasty combination in anyones book,and theres no reason that you couldnt do the same sort of thing with the f1,f4,f14 etc..
The airforces two biggest problems,imho,seem to be a lack of leadership on the one hand,and with that a lack of [realistic] clear vision and set of goals for the future,and on the other hand just as critically both a lack of technology and a seeming unwillingness,or at least reluctance,to work with those who have that technology,altho one thing that does give one some small hope in that regard was the airforce effectively having no choice but to work with and acquire drones from the irgc affiliated drone producers,plus during the latest military exercises we saw the firing of an old maverick a2g missile that had been upgraded with a modern all weather flir seeker,likely donated from a drone launched munition,instead of the obsolete 1970s era seekers that the iriaf still uses.
In short theres a hell of a lot that the iriaf could do to upgrade both the existing airfleet and its weapons,sadly tho its shows little inclination to do any of these things,and I dont think you can just blame it on a lack of resources,as there were obviously resources when it came to the iriafs 15+ year long failed drone program,not to mention all of the fvcking around with the f5 that the iriaf seems so fixated on for the last 20+ years.
Honestly its pretty sad...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

yugocrosrb95 said:


> If AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is comparable weight to AIM-54 Phoenix then maybe it could carry three of those.
> 
> Main limitation of F-5E is lack of space for large radar antenna, but removing cannons and its ammunition would allow for more powerful processing components and liquid cooling.
> 
> Redesign of F-5E/F by introducing more modern, up to date design elements should be possible with manufacturing tools that there are.
> 
> A single turbofan engine of equal or greater output than two J85-GE-21 would take up less space and then with modification of intakes it would allow rear landing gear inside body.
> 
> Then wings could be made stronger with some capacity to carry fuel where previously two landing gears in wings would have been thus less need to use fuel drop tanks.
> 
> Also with turbofan there would not be need for small air intakes to cool the jet engine and more diverterless supersonic inlet would be viable that are more aerodynamic and lighter.




Oh please … to think an F-5 based airframe could carry three missiles in the class of an AIM-54 is so much ridiculous that it makes any further discussion useless.


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> If AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is comparable weight to AIM-54 Phoenix then *maybe it could carry three of those.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Serious question: what if the IRGCAF was the one to purchase Su-30's / Su-35's? What if the IRIAF were to be disbanded altogether once its ageing fleet reached its ultimate ovehauling limit? Just a thought. Could this be why sardar Bagheri of the IRGC publicly observed that Iran has signed contracts for fighter jet purchases with Russia? I mean, aren't 43 years enough to switch the center of gravity of the air force? Come on... Of course, personally I'd be all for it. Wa Allāhu 'ālam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Serious question: what if the IRGCAF was the one to purchase Su-30's / Su-35's? What if the IRIAF were to be disbanded altogether once its ageing fleet reached its ultimate ovehauling limit? Just a thought. Could this be why sardar Bagheri of the IRGC publicly observed that Iran has signed contracts for fighter jet purchases with Russia? I mean, aren't 43 years enough to switch the center of gravity of the air force? Come on... Of course, personally I'd be all for it.



Bagheri went to Artesh to create a greater unity between two military powers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Bagheri went to Artesh to create a greater unity between two military powers.



You're right. And contrary to what the enemy desires, there's no distance between the two military corpses (Army and IRGC) anyway. They are perfectly synched together, especially thanks to repeated war games. But just that the recipient of new Russian-made fighter jets, if such a thing were to materialize, could well be the IRGCAF. Who knows?


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> You're right. And there's no distance between the two military corpses (Army and IRGC) anyway. They are perfectly synched together, especially thanks to repeated war games. But just that the recipient of new Russian-made fighter jets, if such a thing were to materialize, could well be the IRGCAF. Who knows?



Last I heard IRGCAF was focused on developing a CAS fighter to support troops on frontlines based on lessons learned from Syrian war.

SU-35 is more an F-35 type fighter.

But I do think you are right and that eventually IRGC will expands its AF arm.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Chinese export variant fighter jets (JF-17 and J-10) all use Russian engines. Therefore China is not allowed to export any flanker variants.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


>





Deino said:


> Oh please … to think an F-5 based airframe could carry three missiles in the class of an AIM-54 is so much ridiculous that it makes any further discussion useless.





Sineva said:


> I doubt that an f5 could carry a single f90/aim54,and even if it could its radar would lack the capability to take advantage of the capabilities and range of either missile.
> It would actually make a lot more sense,not to mention be far,far easier,to reengine the mirage f1 fleet with the mig29s r33 turbofan,rather than attempting to virtually rebuild the f5 to take an rd33.The reengining of the f1 was actually done back in the mid 90s by the south africans and proved to be an excellent conversion,tho ultimately they didnt go ahead with converting the entire fleet on cost grounds.In addition it was also adapted to carry the excellent aa-11/r73 wvr missile,this would also make an ideal conversion for arming the rest of the older western supplied aircraft as currently they only have obsolete sidewinders and sparrows.
> Another potential huge force multiplier would be upgrading the mig29 fleet to fulcrum C standard,the dprk has some numbers of fulcrum Cs in its mig29 fleet,so this would in theory allow iran to acquire an example to reverse/reegineer a local equivalent,if combined with a reverse engineered r77,which both the yemenis and venezuelans possess,so no real problems with acquiring samples,this would allow iran to effectively double the size of its bvr capable fighter force.This would obviously be a huge capability upgrade.It would also allow for the possibility of upgrading irans other fighters to be equipped with a modern bvr missile,for instance imagine an f5 with a modern radar and data link capability packing 2 r77s+2 r73s,this would be a nasty combination in anyones book,and theres no reason that you couldnt do the same sort of thing with the f1,f4,f14 etc..
> The airforces two biggest problems,imho,seem to be a lack of leadership on the one hand,and with that a lack of [realistic] clear vision and set of goals for the future,and on the other hand just as critically both a lack of technology and a seeming unwillingness,or at least reluctance,to work with those who have that technology,altho one thing that does give one some small hope in that regard was the airforce effectively having no choice but to work with and acquire drones from the irgc affiliated drone producers,plus during the latest military exercises we saw the firing of an old maverick a2g missile that had been upgraded with a modern all weather flir seeker,likely donated from a drone launched munition,instead of the obsolete 1970s era seekers that the iriaf still uses.
> In short theres a hell of a lot that the iriaf could do to upgrade both the existing airfleet and its weapons,sadly tho its shows little inclination to do any of these things,and I dont think you can just blame it on a lack of resources,as there were obviously resources when it came to the iriafs 15+ year long failed drone program,not to mention all of the fvcking around with the f5 that the iriaf seems so fixated on for the last 20+ years.
> Honestly its pretty sad...


F-5A can carry three 1000lbs bombs, but I guess all 3 of you don't know that apparently.

Re-engine of F1 is financially not viable, let alone buying new fighter jets in current financial situation that Iran is in right now.

Iran has capability to produce F-5E/F and that can be used to develop a modernized derivative as it is possible to do so.

Single turbofan jet engine with comparable or greater output than two J85-GE-21 that would take less space width then landing gear could be implemented into the hull.

With landing gears in hull instead of being in each wing then wings structure would not be compromised as it would allow greater payload capacity that wings could carry.

Nose can be redesigned to allow larger radar, in modern day useful of cannons in air to air is non existent hence removing cannons and ammunition would allow to implement liquid cooling for radar to allow higher output power.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5A can carry three 1000lbs bombs, but I guess all 3 of you don't know that apparently.



I guess you are truly retarded.

NASA themselves only managed to be able to strap a *SINGLE* Phoenix to a plane as big as F-15 back in the day. But you claim Iran can strap 3 Fakour 90’s onto a tiny fighter like F-5.

Raisi should just fire the entire defense complex of Iran and hire you. Who needs those engineers, when they have you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

TheImmortal said:


> I guess you are truly retarded.
> 
> NASA themselves only managed to be able to strap a *SINGLE* Phoenix to a plane as big as F-15 back in the day. But you claim Iran can strap 3 Fakour 90’s onto a tiny fighter like F-5.
> 
> Raisi should just fire the entire defense complex of Iran and hire you. Who needs those engineers, when they have you.


Says the retard that thinks that it can get away with omissions.

NASA only mounted one for reason to conduct hypersonic tests hence AIM-54 was modified while F-15 only carried one in order to achieve Mach 2 then launch AIM-54 for it to reach Mach 5.








Here’s why NASA Equipped an F-15 with an AIM-54 and why USAF Never Outfitted its Eagle fleet with the mighty Phoenix - The Aviation Geek Club


Here’s why NASA Equipped an F-15 with an AIM-54 and why USAF Never Outfitted its Eagle fleet with the mighty Phoenix




theaviationgeekclub.com

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Deino

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5A can carry three 1000lbs bombs, but I guess all 3 of you don't know that apparently.
> 
> Re-engine of F1 is financially not viable, let alone buying new fighter jets in current financial situation that Iran is in right now.
> 
> Iran has capability to produce F-5E/F and that can be used to develop a modernized derivative as it is possible to do so.
> 
> Single turbofan jet engine with comparable or greater output than two J85-GE-21 that would take less space width then landing gear could be implemented into the hull.
> 
> With landing gears in hull instead of being in each wing then wings structure would not be compromised as it would allow greater payload capacity that wings could carry.
> 
> Nose can be redesigned to allow larger radar, in modern day useful of cannons in air to air is non existent hence removing cannons and ammunition would allow to implement liquid cooling for radar to allow higher output power.




Sorry my friend, and I don't know how old are you are your background, but to think this tiny dated fighter could be modified so easily to compete with other modern adversaries is plain naive.

So either do your homework, learn and check reality ... but your proposals are ridiculous.

Anyway, dreaming is nice ...


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I guess you are truly retarded.
> 
> NASA themselves only managed to be able to strap a *SINGLE* Phoenix to a plane as big as F-15 back in the day. But you claim Iran can strap 3 Fakour 90’s onto a tiny fighter like F-5.
> 
> Raisi should just fire the entire defense complex of Iran and hire you. Who needs those engineers, when they have you.


F5 actually can carry one phoenix under it's belly .
The question is what for . The missile can only be used by two radar in all the world
In case of fakour well the scenario is not as dire but well before making any judgement . I like to knew what is the exact capabilities on kowsar radar. But certainly by carrying one fakour kowsar will forfeit the use of central tankwhich is not ok at all


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Says the retard that thinks that it can get away with omissions.
> 
> NASA only mounted one for reason to conduct hypersonic tests hence AIM-54 was modified while F-15 only carried one in order to achieve Mach 2 then launch AIM-54 for it to reach Mach 5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s why NASA Equipped an F-15 with an AIM-54 and why USAF Never Outfitted its Eagle fleet with the mighty Phoenix - The Aviation Geek Club
> 
> 
> Here’s why NASA Equipped an F-15 with an AIM-54 and why USAF Never Outfitted its Eagle fleet with the mighty Phoenix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theaviationgeekclub.com



Because it can carry only one on the center pylon! That is why! Are you dense? You really think you can put a Fakour-90 on the wing pylon of a F-5? Are you crazy?

How many people have to tell you, you are wrong before you get it in your head? Stop being stubborn.

The F-5 has a **** range to begin with. If you slap a Fakour-90 on the center pylon and lose your main tank now you have an overweight Missile that cannot be properly guided with that weak *** radar and now thanks to your genius retardness the plane has no range either. This is without the joke of adding two more to the wing pylons which is never happening.

You misguided oskhols * on here need to stop trying to turn an F-5 into F-15, F-14, F-22, SU-30*.

It is literally a light CAS/advanced fighter cheap fighter made for banana countries back in the 60’s. Stop trying to modify it into a different class fighter. America has tried doing that with weapon systems in the past and failed. You can’t have a Jack of all trades aircraft.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> F5 actually can carry one phoenix under it's belly .
> The question is what for . The missile can only be used by two radar in all the world
> In case of fakour well the scenario is not as dire but well before making any judgement . I like to knew what is the exact capabilities on kowsar radar. But certainly by carrying one fakour kowsar will forfeit the use of central tankwhich is not ok at all



If you were going to slap Fakour-90 on any other fighter jet you would try the F-4 bomb truck before the F-5.

And yes one Fakour-90 was planted on center pylon of an F-5, but as we saw the idea never went anywhere because it is dumb. Even if we say Kowsar has same radar capabilities as Brazilian F-5 radar so let’s say 150KM range.... it would still be stupid because the range of F-5 would drop due to extra weight and loss of main tank.

Now you basically have to hope an F-5 comes across an adversary it could even detect which would be limited to next to nothing because F-22, F-35, F-16 would all detect the F-5 before it detected them. And since F-5 is not F-14 it would have no means of escaping or maneuverability based on speed. And since you also lost your main tank you couldn’t even escape if you did have speed.

Basically you sent the pilot on a Japanese kamikaze mission


----------



## yugocrosrb95

You mean how many people in here make non-arguments that ignore what I wrote repeatedly.

Complaining about range is non-argument.

Complaining about radar is non-argument.

Complaining about payload is non-argument.

Because it ignores what I wrote about what can address it.

Some of you talk about reality while being unrealistic.

RD-33 is keep being mentioned, Iran rejected JF-17 that is equiped with it while some say re-engine Mirage F1 with RD-33.

Iran reverse engineered J85-GE-21 with titanium compressor blades and rotor.

Iran reverse engineered FJ33 that has small core with twin spool.

Iran produces PESA and AESA radars.

It is not about upgrading current F-5E/F or Kowsar as it is to design fighter derived from it.

Single turbofan engine that has equal or greater output than two J85-GE-21 while specific fuel consumption at most is cut in half to 0.62lbs per lbf per hour in subsonic regime. Taking less space than two J85-GE-21 and adjusting intakes accordingly would allow for rear landing gears being inside hull like Qaher instead of wing that placed limitations on F-5 series and F-20 when it comes to carrying capacity of their wings.

Redesign nose to fit larger radar antenna with more transmiter receiver modules, no cannons and its ammunition in order to allow liquid cooling.

F-5E/F does not stand a chance, Kowsar with its 90km range radar has a chance and AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is ARH like AIM-54 Phoenix hence it would not need solid lock on like AIM-7 would need that is SARH and needs radar to guide it towards target during entire flight.

F-5E/F / Kowsar can carry three drop tanks hence one per wing, not just centerline.

Iran can't just build itself Su-27 ~ 35 tier fighter, Iran with what it has could in near future produce a fighter jet good enough for territorial defense.

What I propose repeatedly is to gain experience and have something to test technologies that can when proven be used for a larger fighter jet that could be used offensively.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Sineva

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5A can carry three 1000lbs bombs, but I guess all 3 of you don't know that apparently.
> 
> Re-engine of F1 is financially not viable, let alone buying new fighter jets in current financial situation that Iran is in right now.
> 
> Iran has capability to produce F-5E/F and that can be used to develop a modernized derivative as it is possible to do so.
> 
> Single turbofan jet engine with comparable or greater output than two J85-GE-21 that would take less space width then landing gear could be implemented into the hull.
> 
> With landing gears in hull instead of being in each wing then wings structure would not be compromised as it would allow greater payload capacity that wings could carry.
> 
> Nose can be redesigned to allow larger radar, in modern day useful of cannons in air to air is non existent hence removing cannons and ammunition would allow to implement liquid cooling for radar to allow higher output power.


In theory the f5 might be able to carry 3x1000lb bombs,however in reality I think you might be hard pressed to find any proof of that sort of weapons configuration in actual operational use in any of the airforces operating the type.
Again in theory the inboard hard points can carry up to a 1000ibs,however this would be totally maxing them out.Indeed the heaviest weapons that appear to have been used on the f5e wing pylons were either the gbu 12 or the agm 65,and both of these weigh quite a bit less than 1000lbs.
Heres a page from a usaf technical order detailing the legal loading configuration of the weapons for the f5e.





What you`re suggesting with the f5 is less a modernisation and more a complete and total redesign that would involve virtually every single part of the aircraft,from airframe to engine to avionics.
Frankly I dont think that the iriaf has the ability to organise and manage a program of this size and complexity,regardless of whether it would actually be worth doing in the first place.


----------



## sha ah

Well a quick look on Wikipedia will give you the following info:

Combat radius (20 min reserve): 120 nmi (140 mi; 220 km) with 2x Sidewinders + 5,200 lb (2,400 kg) ordnance, with 5 minutes combat at max power at sea level

The Phoenix weights approx 500 kg or 1000 lbs, half of what is stated above.

So with two sidewinders and a Phoenix you should get atleast 300 km and keep in mind the reverse engineered Iranian variants, their airframe is built from lighter synthetics like carbon fiber. The info from above is for 1970s 1 seat variants. So realistically the range will increase to likely 400 km or more no ?

However a Phoenix missile and modifications to the front nose cone for a larger radar may not even be necessary. Look at this tidbit from the Wikipedia F-5 page

AA-8 Aphid, AA-10 Alamo, AA-11 Archer and other Russian/Chinese AAMs (Iranian ver.)

The AA-10 Alamo has a range of 40-170 km depending on the variant.

I'm not sure which variant Iran has to mount on the F-5 but realistically the F-5 with modern radar and avionics is alot more capable than 1970s variants.

No matter what I believe that Iran should keep this platform in its inventory. Iran can build these for a few million a piece. 

They're easy and extremely cheap to maintain. 4 can fit in a 737 if taken apart. They're perfect for assymetrical or swarm tactics and honestly If nothing else stripped down variants make for a decent trainer.



Sineva said:


> In theory the f5 might be able to carry 3x1000lb bombs,however in reality I think you might be hard pressed to find any proof of that sort of weapons configuration in actual operational use in any of the airforces operating the type.
> Again in theory the inboard hard points can carry up to a 1000ibs,however this would be totally maxing them out.Indeed the heaviest weapons that appear to have been used on the f5e wing pylons were either the gbu 12 or the agm 65,and both of these weigh quite a bit less than 1000lbs.
> Heres a page from a usaf technical order detailing the legal loading configuration of the weapons for the f5e.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you`re suggesting with the f5 is less a modernisation and more a complete and total redesign that would involve virtually every single part of the aircraft,from airframe to engine to avionics.
> Frankly I dont think that the iriaf has the ability to organise and manage a program of this size and complexity,regardless of whether it would actually be worth doing in the first place.


----------



## sha ah

Honestly there's nothing special about IRGC. They just get a massive budget compared to the regular army and other agencies.

Some would argue they're more motivated and that may be true but the disparity in budgets can't be discounted. 

Recently they were able to put a satellite into space when the Iranian space agency failed. This gave the IRGC an image boost and people were saying "hey look they can get things done when others cant"

However looking into the details, the payloads of their satellite was a puny 12 to 24 kg. The Omid satellite from 2009 was around 24 kg and the space agency can has since placed 50 kg satellites into space (like the Fajr or Navid satellites for example)

The space agency has had some failures recently but they are striving to put a 350 kg payload into space and with each failure they have progressed through various stages. Last time only the final stage failed to reach the required speed.



SalarHaqq said:


> Serious question: what if the IRGCAF was the one to purchase Su-30's / Su-35's? What if the IRIAF were to be disbanded altogether once its ageing fleet reached its ultimate ovehauling limit? Just a thought. Could this be why sardar Bagheri of the IRGC publicly observed that Iran has signed contracts for fighter jet purchases with Russia? I mean, aren't 43 years enough to switch the center of gravity of the air force? Come on... Of course, personally I'd be all for it. Wa Allāhu 'ālam.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Chinese export variant fighter jets (JF-17 and J-10) all use Russian engines. Therefore China is not allowed to export any flanker variants.



J-10 latest gen uses WS-10 engine and J-17 uses WS-13 engine.

A simple search would have let you know this since Pakistan operates J-17

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

This thread is becoming junk with people asking for the purchase of Mig-25 and fitting I-Hawk on an F-5 airframe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5E/F does not stand a chance, Kowsar with its 90km range radar has a chance and AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is ARH like AIM-54 Phoenix hence it would not need solid lock on like AIM-7 would need that is SARH and needs radar to guide it towards target during entire flight.



Just stop talking.

SARH isn’t some magical radar you just shoot and forget and it finds the target by telling it “go look over there somewhere”

A Phoenix does not have unlimited fuel and if your target is traveling supersonic you need to PINPOINT where it will be when Missile intersects. That means it need guidance by a powerful radar because when your enemy is traveling 1200+ KM/HR even being wrong by a 10 seconds means KMs difference in error. So when the Phoenix does its death shot up into upper atmosphere and aims its SARH downward it will FIND NOTHING and then run out of fuel and self destruct.

This is why the SARH equipped 3rd Khordad kill of Global Hawk was so impressive because it used EO/IO to transmit to a passive radar deep in Iran which then found the target. It then fed the Missile the approximate coordinates of intercept instead of using the active radar on 3rd Khordad which would have illuminated the target and warned the Global Hawk it was being targeted. In which Global Hawk would have activated its potent ECW system and tried to jam the signals. Missile then was fired and was fed updated guidance by EO-IO and said passive radar. It activated its SARH (pictures of the ascent in upper atmosphere can be seen online) and then was able to locate the global hawk.


So no, your super F-5 would get torched by F-16, F-22, F-35, Rafael, Typhoon, etc. they would all detect your F-5 much further out than 100KM. Furthermore F-22 and F-35 wouldn’t even be detected by F-5 weak radar and F-16 could likely jam it. Since you strapped 3 Fakours to it, it would light up like a damn Christmas tree on every radar from Tehran to Dubai. You just cooked the pilot.

Lastly you never build a plane AROUND WEAPONS. You build a plane around operational need. Thus building a heavily modified brand new F-5 just so it can carry 2-3 Fakour 90’s is a violation of basic laws of military planning.

If your operational need is to defend the airspace and fight other air superiority fighters as well as bombers then you need a air superiority fighter. You do not take a light aircraft/CAS/Trainer and TURN it into an air superiority fighter.

That’s like trying to win a formula 1 tournament with a modified Peykan. There are classes of aircraft for a reason.

The MAIN reason Iran plays around with F-5 is because it’s cheap to play around with and it’s engines and avionics are 60 years old. It has little to no titanium in its frame.

Iran cannot build a modern fighter because engines are not powerful enough, avionics is way behind, and most importantly every major fighter built today and ones from the past (F-14), have high titanium airframes made to be strong and withstand the stress. Iran currently does not have the infrastructure in place to build titanium airframes. It simply has not yet invested the substantial capital required to build out a supply chain for a modern air superiority fighter.

So no you haven’t found the holy grail, there are 10+ Non world power countries (India, Pakistan, Brazil, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, Greece, Sweden, etc) that could have built a overhauled F-5 copy and no one did. There’s a reason for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> IRGC upgrade of su22



What does that mean? focus on the points I made. F-4 upgrade to 3.5-4.0 gen combat suite within the framework of Project "Dowran" was real and it somehow fell through. IRIAF is responsible because it was their need and they failed to end it. If they get less budget then whose responsibility it is to fight for the budget ? We only have physical evidence in form of pics by pro photographers that handful of few aircrafts wer upgraded, not the whole 5 squadrons as was planned. It could have built heavy strike capabilities for IRIAF with BVR engagement options on a large platform that can attack and defend itself. Imagine that you have 5 squadrons of a fast, powerful jet armed with 4 x BVR PL-12 + 4 WVR missiles, all the while same aircraft can also deliver long-range ground attack missiles. JL-10A or KLJ-7A both fit perfectly inside F-4E nose. JL-10A is more suitable for the ground attack which IRIAF has been using F-4E/D for a long time. The same radar allegedly came from the Iranian donation of AWG-9 of F-14 to China ... look at the confidence PLAAF and PLANAF have in it that they use like close 22 squadrons of JH-7A which operates the same combat suite. ..... but the project fell through, just like how F-14AM conversions, Saeghe/Kowsar fell through. 

Meanwhile, during this time, IRGC has tested dozens of accurate MaRV BM, launched an SLV, fired long range CMs, inducted UCAVs, unveiled Bavar-373 and .... inducted a whole new squadron of upgraded Su-22 which can now fire long-range Cruise missiles. They are fighting wars but still they make this stuff happen. Yes they recieve more budget because they deserve it. IRIAF merger with IRGC-AF will only benefit IRIAF, not the other way around. 



Hack-Hook said:


> Imagine a world that IRGC received the same amount of budget as army . A world they like army didn't have access to their own money



I do not have to imagine, IRGC initially had no large budget, they started as a political militia with no infrastructure of their own while artesh and other conventional branches had Shahi era structure in place. Who ended up as what is in front of us. 



Hack-Hook said:


> Since age immemorial air forces needed both light fighter and heavy fighters


 
Modern-day airforces are reducing the types of planes they operate to save maintenance and operational costs. I gave Israeli and Turkish examples. In future, we might even see powerful AF's like Russia operating only flankers (basically they are all Su-27 variants) with few Mig-31BM. IRIAF needs to do same. 

18-19 Squadrons of potent aircraft.

4 x Su-30SM or Su35S 
4-5 x F-14AM 
5 x F-4E/D (dowran upgraded to JH-7A or J-8IIM standards)
2 x Mig-29 SMT (half a dozen new airframes and rest upgraded with RVV-AE)
3 x Su-24MK (KH-31 armed)
4 x AEWs on Iran-140 (similiar to EITAM).
200 larger stike UCAVs (Mohajer-6, Shahed-129, Simorgh flying wing). 

Thats the best we can have for next 10 years. Most of this list is actually local upgradations or manufacturing in case of UCAV's. Only thing to be procured are 4 squadrons of 4+ gen platforms from Russia/China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5E/F does not stand a chance, Kowsar with its 90km range radar has a chance and AIM-23B / Fakour-90 is ARH like AIM-54 Phoenix hence it would not need solid lock on like AIM-7 would need that is SARH and needs radar to guide it towards target during entire flight.


what I saw of Fakour tell me its more like a MIM-23 in the shell of AIM-54


yugocrosrb95 said:


> F-5E/F / Kowsar can carry three drop tanks hence one per wing, not just centerline.


drop tanks under wings are smaller than the one under the body


----------



## Hack-Hook

Phoneix is a mute point , the missile have a very specific needs and only two airplane in world or exactly two RADAR in the world can guide it
*AN/AWG-9* and *AN/APG-71* .and those radars are exclusive to F11b and F-14


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> What does that mean? focus on the points I made. F-4 upgrade to 3.5-4.0 gen combat suite within the framework of Project "Dowran" was real and it somehow fell through. IRIAF is responsible because it was their need and they failed to end it. If they get less budget then whose responsibility it is to fight for the budget ? We only have physical evidence in form of pics by pro photographers that handful of few aircrafts wer upgraded, not the whole 5 squadrons as was planned. It could have built heavy strike capabilities for IRIAF with BVR engagement options on a large platform that can attack and defend itself. Imagine that you have 5 squadrons of a fast, powerful jet armed with 4 x BVR PL-12 + 4 WVR missiles, all the while same aircraft can also deliver long-range ground attack missiles. JL-10A or KLJ-7A both fit perfectly inside F-4E nose. JL-10A is more suitable for the ground attack which IRIAF has been using F-4E/D for a long time. The same radar allegedly came from the Iranian donation of AWG-9 of F-14 to China ... look at the confidence PLAAF and PLANAF have in it that they use like close 22 squadrons of JH-7A which operates the same combat suite. ..... but the project fell through, just like how F-14AM conversions, Saeghe/Kowsar fell through.


don't change the argument you claimed IRGC is better , and IRIAF must be handed over to IRGCAF , I pointed to you IRGCAF with its massive Budget Disparity compared to IRIAF actually provided less spectacular result.
you gave the money to airforce and those upgrade you want will happen . you don't gave them money and only 1 or 2 airplanes see the upgrade . and no its not airforce problem that they don't receive the needed money its the the one who write the budget ,for them airforce have very low priority , and IRGC disportionately high priority.
otherwise bavar-373 and Also Sayyad -4 missile realized after the gave enough money to defense ministry for it


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Bavar-373


not IRGC, 


drmeson said:


> launched an SLV


launched a satellite on a missile that was twice the size of the missile that civilian agency used more than 10 year ago to launch heavier satellite


drmeson said:


> fired long range CMs


again defense ministry have longer range cruise missiles


drmeson said:


> inducted UCAVs


well again defence ministry have longer range suicide uav, have UAVs with 2-3 the speed of what IRGC have and have UAV's that have 5 time the carrying capabilities of what IRGC have 



drmeson said:


> inducted a whole new squadron of upgraded Su-22 which can now fire long-range Cruise missiles.


as i said 70's technology on 60's plane ask Pakistani and Indian members and they tell you how it will fare against f-16 and JF-17


drmeson said:


> IRIAF merger with IRGC-AF will only benefit IRIAF, not the other way around.


nonsense and come from lack of knowledge


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Well a quick look on Wikipedia will give you the following info:
> 
> Combat radius (20 min reserve): 120 nmi (140 mi; 220 km) with 2x Sidewinders + 5,200 lb (2,400 kg) ordnance, with 5 minutes combat at max power at sea level
> 
> The Phoenix weights approx 500 kg or 1000 lbs, half of what is stated above.
> 
> So with two sidewinders and a Phoenix you should get atleast 300 km and keep in mind the reverse engineered Iranian variants, their airframe is built from lighter synthetics like carbon fiber. The info from above is for 1970s 1 seat variants. So realistically the range will increase to likely 400 km or more no ?
> 
> However a Phoenix missile and modifications to the front nose cone for a larger radar may not even be necessary. Look at this tidbit from the Wikipedia F-5 page
> 
> AA-8 Aphid, AA-10 Alamo, AA-11 Archer and other Russian/Chinese AAMs (Iranian ver.)
> 
> The AA-10 Alamo has a range of 40-170 km depending on the variant.
> 
> I'm not sure which variant Iran has to mount on the F-5 but realistically the F-5 with modern radar and avionics is alot more capable than 1970s variants.
> 
> No matter what I believe that Iran should keep this platform in its inventory. Iran can build these for a few million a piece.
> 
> They're easy and extremely cheap to maintain. 4 can fit in a 737 if taken apart. They're perfect for assymetrical or swarm tactics and honestly If nothing else stripped down variants make for a decent trainer.


I would respectfully advise you to take a lot of the things on wiki with a grain of salt unless these are confirmed on reputable specialist military sites,especially when it comes to unconfirmed claims about military matters such as these.Case in point being the claim of the aa10 and aa11 being operational on the f5.Now there was an attempt by the iriaf back in the 90s to integrate the aa10/r27 with the f14s awg 9,but as with most of these af "programs" one honestly doesnt know if it was a serious program that failed for lack of.......something [likely technology,but who knows?],or was it just basically a propaganda effort only?.
The only one of those missiles in the wiki entry that we know has been carried by the f5 was the r60/aa8,tho how often this was done operationally...who knows.





The aim54 was only half of the weapons system that made the f14 such a lethal machine,the other half was the awg9 radar,and unless you have something comparable to use the aim54 with,well then frankly its just a waste of time and a missile.Light fighters simply arent built to use heavy weight a2a missiles.
The only a2a missile combo that would make ANY sense [imho] on a [modernised] f5 would be the r77/r73 or the chinese sd10b/pl10.

I mean if you`re seriously going to consider aim54s on the f5 then why not simply just go the whole hog and go for the r-37m instead..........

Come on people,this is just starting to get embarrassing.Lets knock it off,eh?...please?.😩


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I do not have to imagine, IRGC initially had no large budget, they started as a political militia with no infrastructure of their own while artesh and other conventional branches had Shahi era structure in place. Who ended up as what is in front of us.


again no knowledge , from start IRGC had a ministry of its own , and many of army equipment handed to them . and in war they were good as crack forces , only could attack but when we wanted to keep a captured land they were virtually useless and we had to rely on army for that


drmeson said:


> Modern-day airforces are reducing the types of planes they operate to save maintenance and operational costs. I gave Israeli and Turkish examples. In future, we might even see powerful AF's like Russia operating only flankers (basically they are all Su-27 variants) with few Mig-31BM. IRIAF needs to do same.


show me a modern airforce that only use one airplane , do you even knew the difference on price tag when you fly 1 hour with Su-30 while flying 1 hours with Mig-35 while flying one hour with F-5.
do you knew why USA still keep A-10 operational despite no one in congress like them and tried to cut their budget ?


drmeson said:


> 4 x Su-30SM or Su35S
> 4-5 x F-14AM


Same type of airplane


drmeson said:


> 5 x F-4E/D (dowran upgraded to JH-7A or J-8IIM standards)
> 3 x Su-24MK (KH-31 armed)


again same type of mission


drmeson said:


> 2 x Mig-29 SMT (half a dozen new airframes and rest upgraded with RVV-AE)


what for ?, replace them with something that can also play the role of those F-4s perhaps J-10c
you talk about reducing aircraft type but don't do that in your ideal airforce


----------



## Natalya Shadova

TheImmortal said:


> Just stop talking.
> 
> SARH isn’t some magical radar you just shoot and forget and it finds the target by telling it “go look over there somewhere”
> 
> A Phoenix does not have unlimited fuel and if your target is traveling supersonic you need to PINPOINT where it will be when Missile intersects. That means it need guidance by a powerful radar because when your enemy is traveling 1200+ KM/HR even being wrong by a 10 seconds means KMs difference in error. So when the Phoenix does its death shot up into upper atmosphere and aims its SARH downward it will FIND NOTHING and then run out of fuel and self destruct.
> 
> This is why the SARH equipped 3rd Khordad kill of Global Hawk was so impressive because it used EO/IO to transmit to a passive radar deep in Iran which then found the target. It then fed the Missile the approximate coordinates of intercept instead of using the active radar on 3rd Khordad which would have illuminated the target and warned the Global Hawk it was being targeted. In which Global Hawk would have activated its potent ECW system and tried to jam the signals. Missile then was fired and was fed updated guidance by EO-IO and said passive radar. It activated its SARH (pictures of the ascent in upper atmosphere can be seen online) and then was able to locate the global hawk.
> 
> 
> So no, your super F-5 would get torched by F-16, F-22, F-35, Rafael, Typhoon, etc. they would all detect your F-5 much further out than 100KM. Furthermore F-22 and F-35 wouldn’t even be detected by F-5 weak radar and F-16 could likely jam it. Since you strapped 3 Fakours to it, it would light up like a damn Christmas tree on every radar from Tehran to Dubai. You just cooked the pilot.
> 
> Lastly you never build a plane AROUND WEAPONS. You build a plane around operational need. Thus building a heavily modified brand new F-5 just so it can carry 2-3 Fakour 90’s is a violation of basic laws of military planning.
> 
> If your operational need is to defend the airspace and fight other air superiority fighters as well as bombers then you need a air superiority fighter. You do not take a light aircraft/CAS/Trainer and TURN it into an air superiority fighter.
> 
> That’s like trying to win a formula 1 tournament with a modified Peykan. There are classes of aircraft for a reason.
> 
> The MAIN reason Iran plays around with F-5 is because it’s cheap to play around with and it’s engines and avionics are 60 years old. It has little to no titanium in its frame.
> 
> Iran cannot build a modern fighter because engines are not powerful enough, avionics is way behind, and most importantly every major fighter built today and ones from the past (F-14), have high titanium airframes made to be strong and withstand the stress. Iran currently does not have the infrastructure in place to build titanium airframes. It simply has not yet invested the substantial capital required to build out a supply chain for a modern air superiority fighter.
> 
> So no you haven’t found the holy grail, there are 10+ Non world power countries (India, Pakistan, Brazil, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, Greece, Sweden, etc) that could have built a overhauled F-5 copy and no one did. There’s a reason for it.


Did you miss the whole part about replacing the engines and radars


----------



## TheImmortal

Natalya Shadova said:


> Did you miss the whole part about replacing the engines and radars



Replace the engine with what? The Owj which is the engine that is in the F-5 to begin with?

Replace radar with what? Iran doesn’t produce any modern long range 4++ or 5th Gen radar.

This is SU-35 radar




This is F-22 radar




This is F-35 radar





You will not compete with these radars using a F-5 modernized radar. Not happening.

F-22/F-35/F-15 will consistently out detect an super F-5 carrying 2 tanks and 3 Fakour 90’s on its pylons.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

This is a better picture of the SU-35 radar






Yes of course against the best that the US has to offer, of course Iran can't compete. However with a modern radar and AWACS support, it's still decent. Aside from BVR, F-5s can also fly low and be used for strike missions or a stripped down version is good for training.

For the price that Iran can build the F-5, considering how reliable it is, how cheap and easy it is to maintain, it's still worth it for Iran as a secondary light multirole fighter.

This is a new radar kit for the F-5 from this website: https://duotechservices.com/aircraft-radar-system-f-5-radar-upgrade






Sure it's not comparable to what the F-35, F-22, F-16 have but I mean it's a huge improvement over this






Comparing the F-5 to the F-22 or F-35 is silly. Obviously it can't compare with those platforms and it's not a frontline fighter but for a few million a piece, it's a great trainer and secondary light multirole jet.




*Taiwan suspends F-16 fleet combat training after jet crashes into sea*









Taiwan suspends F-16 fleet combat training after jet crashes into sea | CNN


Taiwan's air force on Tuesday suspended combat training for its F-16 fleet after a recently upgraded model of the fighter jet crashed into the sea in the latest of a series of accidents.




www.cnn.com


----------



## SalarHaqq

sha ah said:


> Honestly there's nothing special about IRGC. They just get a massive budget compared to the regular army and other agencies.
> 
> Some would argue they're more motivated and that may be true but the disparity in budgets can't be discounted.
> 
> Recently they were able to put a satellite into space when the Iranian space agency failed. This gave the IRGC an image boost and people were saying "hey look they can get things done when others cant"
> 
> However looking into the details, the payloads of their satellite was a puny 12 to 24 kg. The Omid satellite from 2009 was around 24 kg and the space agency can has since placed 50 kg satellites into space (like the Fajr or Navid satellites for example)
> 
> The space agency has had some failures recently but they are striving to put a 350 kg payload into space and with each failure they have progressed through various stages. Last time only the final stage failed to reach the required speed.



It was not my intent to discuss whether there is something special or not about the IRGC, nor to engage into comparisons with other institutions. Much rather, I raised the question whether or not new fighter jet acquisitions from either Russia and/or China might in fact be intended for the IRGCAF. And if consequently, the IRIAF will be left to fade out once its legacy inventory is no longer able to be refurbished. Personally I do see several potential long term benefits in this.

One recurrent counter-argument is that of systemic institutional and doctrinal inertia which would render impossible a transfer of the center of gravity of Iran's air force from the IRIAF towards the IRGCAF. But as I observed above, institutional inertia is a reality however it can be overcome in 43 years provided minimal political will.

It's like the often peddled myth that IRIAF personnel and officers tend to be more distant vis a vis the revolutionary establishment. Again, who is naive enough to believe that in 43 years, a political system - no matter its nature, would fail to replace personnel as needed in a strategic branch of the military..? Fact is that IRIAF pilots and commanders are surely every bit as hezbollāhi and velāyatmadār as their brothers in the IRGCAF.

However, for certain organizational and other reasons, I would welcome some gradual merger or take over by the IRGCAF. One of these being, for instance, that Sepah is particularly shielded from the whims of changing governmental administrations as far as its budget is concerned. Therefore, the more areas of activity the IRGC gets involved in, the more we can count on progress in said areas independently of politicking and fluctuations in financing. The reduction of the ISA's budget and the subsequent slowing down of Iran's space program under Rohani is a good example of why and how Sepah can compensate for relative setbacks like these.

This said, to address your remark: the IRGC definitely is a unique type of a military and paramilitary corps. Actually its area of competence as per the Constitution reaches well beyond military affairs, since it is tasked with combating any threat to the Islamic Revolution, knowing that these threats are multi-pronged and located in a multitude of realms: social, demographic, cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, cyberspace, public health, soft war, social engineering and so on. Hence why the IRGC has a legal mandate to operate in all these fields simultaneously, hence its specificity. And thus the IRGC has no proper equivalent outside of Iran.

And as for how the IRGC has fared so far when compared to other institutions, the realization that Sepah appears to get things done in a particularly systematic and methodical way, that they are consistent in their mid- to long-term planning, that their procedural chain from design concepts to mass-produced items is solid, did not just dawn on people after they successfully carried out their first satellite launch - this became obvious right from the early 2000's and the astounding development of Iran's ballistic missile arsenal, one of the country's key assets of deterrence against military aggression by the zio-American empire.

Another point that makes Sepah stand out is how proficient it has shown itself to be in doctrinal and technological innovation. In thinking outside the box, adapting resources, weapons and tactics to Iran's asymmetric needs, in completely doing away with conformist thinking as well as with any attempts to try and reach a semblance of parity with Iran's powerful foes in the latters' own playing field. There's little doubt that the IRGC, more than other involved parties (whose contribution I certainly do not wish to deny) has been the central driving force behind Iran's thorough shift towards an asymmetrical type of reasoning in the military arena.

Hence why it is also the IRGC that is focused on, demonized and sanctioned the most by the existential enemies of Iran.

- - - - -



Hack-Hook said:


> launched a satellite on a missile that was twice the size of the missile that civilian agency used more than 10 year ago to launch heavier satellite



Obviously, this is to say that the IRGC's SLV is capable of placing into orbit greater payloads than what it did during that launch. Furthermore the entire operation was aimed to demonstrate technologies as much as to fire up a new satellite. Sepah's SLV with its solid fuel and thrust vectored stage(s) is also more advanced. Sepah's launching method and protocol allow for better security against potential sabotage attempts by the enemy; as a matter of fact, Trump didn't have the opportunity to parade silly satellite pictures of the IRGC-conducted SLV launch like he could do with the failed Space Agency launch.

So here the IRGC's achievement is undeniable. With regards to space launches, Sepah literally came out of the blue, surprised everyone with unsuspected capabilities and hitherto unseen technologies, succeded on their first try.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Natalya Shadova

TheImmortal said:


> Replace the engine with what? The Owj which is the engine that is in the F-5 to begin with?
> 
> Replace radar with what? Iran doesn’t produce any modern long range 4++ or 5th Gen radar.
> 
> This is SU-35 radar
> View attachment 808392
> 
> This is F-22 radar
> View attachment 808393
> 
> This is F-35 radar
> View attachment 808395
> 
> 
> You will not compete with these radars using a F-5 modernized radar. Not happening.
> 
> F-22/F-35/F-15 will consistently out detect an super F-5 carrying 2 tanks and 3 Fakour 90’s on its pylons.


For engine, Jahesh-700 as stated in this debate before. Secondly, Iran could development a radar, of if it procures SU-35S, make a radar based on it's


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Kowsar uses advanced radar!!


Radar Griffin has a range of 70-90 km for the Kowsar combat aircraft Is capable of detecting air and ground targets, as well as synchronizing with radar air-to-air missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Kowsar uses advanced radar!!
> 
> 
> Radar Griffin has a range of 70-90 km for the Kowsar combat aircraft Is capable of detecting air and ground targets, as well as synchronizing with radar air-to-air missiles
> 
> View attachment 808483




Highly likely that this radar that Kowsar was fitted with was Chinese KLJ-6F with 86+ km detection range, as it can be inside an F-5E/F cone. It can enable borderline BVR combat capability. The same company that makes KLJ-6 series also makes far better KLJ-7 with bit larger diameter which is why they tried to enlarge the nosecone of Saeghe 3-7366 to give it a better combat suite. KLJ-7 from NRIET also has an AESA version with BVR capability with PL-12. What happened with the 3-7366 redesigned nosecone is mystery because later Saeghe-II or Kowsar did not show any signs of massive nose size changes, which shows the reluctance to move forward to larger radars.






In a fantasy world where IRIAF gets serious planners, KLJ-7A AESA carrying Kowsar with all other avionics they showed will result in a 4.0 generation fighter. If armed with PL-12A and HOBS WVR weaponry like R-73M or PL-8 from China, can be a very deadly fighter but only in close quarters. Iranian geography is not suitable for these midget jets like F-5, F-7 ... They can do far better stuff on larger platforms like F-4E/D but we can not produce their airframes because of alloy problems. IRIAF is in dilemma.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Yes Sepah's first SLV attempt was a success, but looking at the big picture, the satellite they put into space weighted a measly 12-24 kg and was pretty much a small camera or webcam in space. Iran's first ever satellite, Omid from 2009 weighed 24 kgs and since then Iran has been able to successfully place 50 kg satellites into space (Fajr, Navid)

Yes the Iranian space agency has experienced some failures but you have to give them credit, they are trying to place a 350 kg payload into space. They're going forward, not backwards and the fact that they are trying to leapfrog so ambitiously to such a payload is commendable. Especially considering that Rohani slashed their budget.

Yes many of their recent launches have failed but with each successive launch, they have progressed in the various, subsequent stages. The only reason the last launch failed was because the final stage did not reach the required speed. However they did get close and previously they had issues with prior stages which they have now overcome.

Do you recall a few years ago when North Korea's missile launches were all failing one after another. At one point something like half a dozen or more failed one after another. Many in the west dismissed them and laughed. Well nobody is laughing now are they ?

Also look at how many times Space X launches have failed in the past. Recently, 4 US hypersonic tests in a row failed. Meanwhile China has already deployed hypersonic missiles on mass. Russia is close behind and North Korea keeps conducting successful tests. 

The USA, the worlds sole super power, on the other hand keeps failing. How then has China been able to successfully add hypersonic weapons to its arsenal so rapidly ? The answer is simple. It's because in the last 5 years the Chinese conducted hundreds of tests while the US only conducted 5 tests.

When it comes to rocket launches, failed attempts are a part of the game. As long as knowledge is attained from each attempt and progress is made, then in the big picture the launch is actually a success.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sepah's launching method and protocol allow for better security against potential sabotage attempts by the enemy; as a matter of fact, Trump didn't have the opportunity to parade silly satellite pictures of the IRGC-conducted SLV launch like he could do with the failed Space Agency launch.

So here the IRGC's achievement is undeniable. With regards to space launches, Sepah literally came out of the blue, surprised everyone with unsuspected capabilities and hitherto unseen technologies, succeded on their first try.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



SalarHaqq said:


> It was not my intent to discuss whether there is something special or not about the IRGC, nor to engage into comparisons with other institutions. Much rather, I raised the question whether or not new fighter jet acquisitions from either Russia and/or China might in fact be intended for the IRGCAF. And if consequently, the IRIAF will be left to fade out once its legacy inventory is no longer able to be refurbished. Personally I do see several potential long term benefits in this.
> 
> One recurrent counter-argument is that of systemic institutional and doctrinal inertia which would render impossible a transfer of the center of gravity of Iran's air force from the IRIAF towards the IRGCAF. But as I observed above, institutional inertia is a reality however it can be overcome in 43 years provided minimal political will.
> 
> It's like the often peddled myth that IRIAF personnel and officers tend to be more distant vis a vis the revolutionary establishment. Again, who is naive enough to believe that in 43 years, a political system - no matter its nature, would fail to replace personnel as needed in a strategic branch of the military..? Fact is that IRIAF pilots and commanders are surely every bit as hezbollāhi and velāyatmadār as their brothers in the IRGCAF.
> 
> However, for certain organizational and other reasons, I would welcome some gradual merger or take over by the IRGCAF. One of these being, for instance, that Sepah is particularly shielded from the whims of changing governmental administrations as far as its budget is concerned. Therefore, the more areas of activity the IRGC gets involved in, the more we can count on progress in said areas independently of politicking and fluctuations in financing. The reduction of the ISA's budget and the subsequent slowing down of Iran's space program under Rohani is a good example of why and how Sepah can compensate for relative setbacks like these.
> 
> This said, to address your remark: the IRGC definitely is a unique type of a military and paramilitary corps. Actually its area of competence as per the Constitution reaches well beyond military affairs, since it is tasked with combating any threat to the Islamic Revolution, knowing that these threats are multi-pronged and located in a multitude of realms: social, demographic, cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, cyberspace, public health, soft war, social engineering and so on. Hence why the IRGC has a legal mandate to operate in all these fields simultaneously, hence its specificity. And thus the IRGC has no proper equivalent outside of Iran.
> 
> And as for how the IRGC has fared so far when compared to other institutions, the realization that Sepah appears to get things done in a particularly systematic and methodical way, that they are consistent in their mid- to long-term planning, that their procedural chain from design concepts to mass-produced items is solid, did not just dawn on people after they successfully carried out their first satellite launch - this became obvious right from the early 2000's and the astounding development of Iran's ballistic missile arsenal, one of the country's key assets of deterrence against military aggression by the zio-American empire.
> 
> Another point that makes Sepah stand out is how proficient it has shown itself to be in doctrinal and technological innovation. In thinking outside the box, adapting resources, weapons and tactics to Iran's asymmetric needs, in completely doing away with conformist thinking as well as with any attempts to try and reach a semblance of parity with Iran's powerful foes in the latters' own playing field. There's little doubt that the IRGC, more than other involved parties (whose contribution I certainly do not wish to deny) has been the central driving force behind Iran's thorough shift towards an asymmetrical type of reasoning in the military arena.
> 
> Hence why it is also the IRGC that is focused on, demonized and sanctioned the most by the existential enemies of Iran.
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously, this is to say that the IRGC's SLV is capable of placing into orbit greater payloads than what it did during that launch. Furthermore the entire operation was aimed to demonstrate technologies as much as to fire up a new satellite. Sepah's SLV with its solid fuel and thrust vectored stage(s) is also more advanced. Sepah's launching method and protocol allow for better security against potential sabotage attempts by the enemy; as a matter of fact, Trump didn't have the opportunity to parade silly satellite pictures of the IRGC-conducted SLV launch like he could do with the failed Space Agency launch.
> 
> So here the IRGC's achievement is undeniable. With regards to space launches, Sepah literally came out of the blue, surprised everyone with unsuspected capabilities and hitherto unseen technologies, succeded on their first try.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah




----------



## SalarHaqq

sha ah said:


> Yes Sepah's first SLV attempt was a success, but looking at the big picture, the satellite they put into space weighted a measly 12-24 kg and was pretty much a small camera or webcam in space. Iran's first ever satellite, Omid from 2009 weighed 24 kgs and since then Iran has been able to successfully place 50 kg satellites into space (Fajr, Navid)
> 
> Yes the Iranian space agency has experienced some failures but you have to give them credit, they are trying to place a 350 kg payload into space. They're going forward, not backwards and the fact that they are trying to leapfrog so ambitiously to such a payload is commendable. Especially considering that Rohani slashed their budget.
> 
> Yes many of their recent launches have failed but with each successive launch, they have progressed in the various, subsequent stages. The only reason the last launch failed was because the final stage did not reach the required speed. However they did get close and previously they had issues with prior stages which they have now overcome.
> 
> Do you recall a few years ago when North Korea's missile launches were all failing one after another. At one point something like half a dozen or more failed one after another. Many in the west dismissed them and laughed. Well nobody is laughing now are they ?
> 
> Also look at how many times Space X launches have failed in the past. Recently, 4 US hypersonic tests in a row failed. Meanwhile China has already deployed hypersonic missiles on mass. Russia is close behind and North Korea keeps conducting successful tests.
> 
> The USA, the worlds sole super power, on the other hand keeps failing. How then has China been able to successfully add hypersonic weapons to its arsenal so rapidly ? The answer is simple. It's because in the last 5 years the Chinese conducted hundreds of tests while the US only conducted 5 tests.
> 
> When it comes to rocket launches, failed attempts are a part of the game. As long as knowledge is attained from each attempt and progress is made, then in the big picture the launch is actually a success.
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Sepah's launching method and protocol allow for better security against potential sabotage attempts by the enemy; as a matter of fact, Trump didn't have the opportunity to parade silly satellite pictures of the IRGC-conducted SLV launch like he could do with the failed Space Agency launch.
> 
> So here the IRGC's achievement is undeniable. With regards to space launches, Sepah literally came out of the blue, surprised everyone with unsuspected capabilities and hitherto unseen technologies, succeded on their first try.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



I was not trying to badmouth the work accomplished by the Space Agency to date, and indeed failures are a normal feature in this business. However when it comes to the weight of the satellite put into orbit by Sepah, as indicated in my previous reply, their SLV could very well have carried heavier ones considering its caracteristics. So that's not a limitation for Sepah. The aim of the launch was to demonstrate technologies and send a political message, at least as much as to launch that satellite. They demonstrated a functioning SLV, a latent road-mobile, solid fueled ICBM capability as well as carbon fiber bodied, thrust vector nozzled rocket engine with the Salman stage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Natalya Shadova said:


> For engine, Jahesh-700 as stated in this debate before. Secondly, Iran could development a radar, of if it procures SU-35S, make a radar based on it's


Not for F-5 series.

I mentioned Jahesh due to technological milestones that Iran achieved with successful reverse engineering of FJ33 that gives credence to ability of Iranian aerospace industry to produce bigger turbofan engines due to challenges that a small twin spool would have as is with FJ44 and FJ33 turbofan engines.

Jahesh could be upscaled to replace Owj turbojets inside Yasin that would increase range of Yasin trainer jet along flight time by over 2 times.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Kowsar uses advanced radar!!
> 
> 
> Radar Griffin has a range of 70-90 km for the Kowsar combat aircraft Is capable of detecting air and ground targets, as well as synchronizing with radar air-to-air missiles
> 
> View attachment 808483



A joke post by a propaganda user


F-15 with APG-63 Radar: 410 kilometers

F-16 with ABR Radar: 275 kilometers

F-22 with APG-77 Radar: 490 kilometers

F-35 with APG-81 Radar: 200KM+

And this guy is sending an F-5 on suicide mission with 70-90KM radar range that cannot detect F-22 or F-35 and will likely get jammed by F-15 or F-16 since they can detect the F-5 from 3-5x the range of the F-5’s radar.


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> A joke post by a propaganda user
> 
> 
> F-15 with APG-63 Radar: 410 kilometers
> 
> F-16 with ABR Radar: 275 kilometers
> 
> F-22 with APG-77 Radar: 490 kilometers
> 
> F-35 with APG-81 Radar: 200KM+
> 
> And this guy is sending an F-5 on suicide mission with 70-90KM radar range that cannot detect F-22 or F-35 and will likely get jammed by F-15 or F-16 since they can detect the F-5 from 3-5x the range of the F-5’s radar.


One thing for sure, there is no un-detect-able fighter jet in the world. The radar waves gives it away. When apg77 sends electro magnetic pulse to beyond 400 KM, be sure that other radars are receving its wavelengths too.


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> One thing for sure, there is no un-detect-able fighter jet in the world. The radar waves gives it away. When apg77 sends electro magnetic pulse to beyond 400 KM, be sure that other radars are receving its wavelengths too.



If your goal to detect an F-22 and F-35 is based on its radar emissions and being in the right location at right time then good luck with that strategy.

Your strategy works both ways, that same fighter that detects those radar waves will need to send waves back out to find radars exact location rather than general direction. Thus it took ends up leaking radiation everywhere.

Discussion was survivability of a F-5 or rather a super redesigned F-5 against any modern 4+ Or 5th Gen fighter that an adversary would field. And the F-5 loses in all fields (speed, maneuverability, armament, radar, cross section detection pattern).

But of course we have users who do not want to accept reality and sit around coming up with silly fantasies on how a modified 1960’s fighter that cost $5M can compete against a advanced warfighter whose radar and avionics suite alone cost more than the whole F-5. 

F-5 projects was great for building domestic knowledge and experience. Good for upgrading an aging plane and even as an advance trainer.

That’s about it. Will never be anything more than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> If your goal to detect an F-22 and F-35 is based on its radar emissions and being in the right location at right time then good luck with that strategy.
> 
> Your strategy works both ways, that same fighter that detects those radar waves will need to send waves back out to find radars exact location rather than general direction. Thus it took ends up leaking radiation everywhere.
> 
> Discussion was survivability of a F-5 or rather a super redesigned F-5 against any modern 4+ Or 5th Gen fighter that an adversary would field. And the F-5 loses in all fields (speed, maneuverability, armament, radar, cross section detection pattern).
> 
> But of course we have users who do not want to accept reality and sit around coming up with silly fantasies on how a modified 1960’s fighter that cost $5M can compete against a advanced warfighter whose radar and avionics suite alone cost more than the whole F-5.
> 
> F-5 projects was great for building domestic knowledge and experience. Good for upgrading an aging plane and even as an advance trainer.
> 
> That’s about it. Will never be anything more than that.


It gives F5 and F4 a chance to scape. That was what I was thinking about not to stand up to F22 or F35. 

USAF is completely capable of inflicting damage on our airforce, it would be silly to think that any of existing fighter jets could counter them. That's impossible. Even Chinese J20 stands no chance against it. The only platform that can resist for a couple of seconds before getting downed against F22 is SU50. 

Iranian strategy against USAF is the same area denial. Accept the possible damage and destroy their airbases immediately.


----------



## drmeson

Muhammed45 said:


> It gives F5 and F4 a chance to scape. That was what I was thinking about not to stand up to F22 or F35.
> 
> USAF is completely capable of inflicting damage on our airforce, it would be silly to think that any of existing fighter jets could counter them. That's impossible. Even Chinese J20 stands no chance against it. The only platform that can resist for a couple of seconds before getting downed against F22 is SU50.
> 
> Iranian strategy against USAF is the same area denial. Accept the possible damage and destroy their airbases immediately.


 
in current form, IRIAF will not survive against regional foes let alone some combat-ready squadrons of USAF or USN. Our biggest deterrence is our IRGC led Aerospace command, namely BM, CM, UCAVs, and naval damage that we can inflict in the Persian gulf. 


.............

For those who are advocating budget cut down for IRGC or making fun of them for being the bue eyed boy of the leadership, please read below. 

On regional levels, IRIAF can be made a proper fighting force with a budget of 8-10 billion USD and nothing less. From this, 4-5 billion straightway will go towards the procurement of 4-5 squadrons of a proper 4+ MRCA, be it Su-30SM, Su-35S or J-10C. 

1 billion towards procurement of modern A2A weaponry like RVV-AE, R-73M, PL-8, PL-12 along with A2G like KH-31 A/P for Su-24M (Iran has showed intentions for such procurements). 

Then we need heavy foreign companies led modernization of Mig-29, F-4 fleets. 

Then comes domestic up-gradation programs of F-14, Su-24. 

Last but not least, we need EITAM like 4x Iran140-AEW to cover a large area.

........... All of these 10 Billion USD will just put up IRIAF back in action to the point that we can take on any regional Airforces. This is the conventional strategy that most countries follow and they fail when going gets tough against menaces like US/NATO/Israel.

........... Give the same amount of money to Vezarate Defa/IRGC and you will see literally MaRVs on IRBM/MRBMin underground silos, long-range land-attack CM on multi-barrel launchers, powerful AShCM/AShBM, MALE UCAV fleets, long range AD ... list goes on We are already seeing this for more than a decade now. This scares our enemies, esp regional enemies more than what a conventionally armed IRIAF that I mentioned above. Arming IRIAF is necessary but does it suit our current doctrine?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sha ah

Yes IRIAF needs a huge boost in their budget and an influx of new, modern equipment. They need to upgrade their current inventory, as well the procurement of a dozen flanker squadrons, SU-35, SU-30. More importantly Iran needs to build several hardened mountain air bases similar to what China has. Especially against regional rivals, this will greatly increase the survivability of Iran's airforce.



drmeson said:


> in current form, IRIAF will not survive against regional foes let alone some combat-ready squadrons of USAF or USN. Our biggest deterrence is our IRGC led Aerospace command, namely BM, CM, UCAVs, and naval damage that we can inflict in the Persian gulf.
> 
> 
> .............
> 
> For those who are advocating budget cut down for IRGC or making fun of them for being the bue eyed boy of the leadership, please read below.
> 
> On regional levels, IRIAF can be made a proper fighting force with a budget of 8-10 billion USD and nothing less. From this, 4-5 billion straightway will go towards the procurement of 4-5 squadrons of a proper 4+ MRCA, be it Su-30SM, Su-35S or J-10C.
> 
> 1 billion towards procurement of modern A2A weaponry like RVV-AE, R-73M, PL-8, PL-12 along with A2G like KH-31 A/P for Su-24M (Iran has showed intentions for such procurements).
> 
> Then we need heavy foreign companies led modernization of Mig-29, F-4 fleets.
> 
> Then comes domestic up-gradation programs of F-14, Su-24.
> 
> Last but not least, we need EITAM like 4x Iran140-AEW to cover a large area.
> 
> ........... All of these 10 Billion USD will just put up IRIAF back in action to the point that we can take on any regional Airforces. This is the conventional strategy that most countries follow and they fail when going gets tough against menaces like US/NATO/Israel.
> 
> ........... Give the same amount of money to Vezarate Defa/IRGC and you will see literally MaRVs on IRBM/MRBMin underground silos, long-range land-attack CM on multi-barrel launchers, powerful AShCM/AShBM, MALE UCAV fleets, long range AD ... list goes on We are already seeing this for more than a decade now. This scares our enemies, esp regional enemies more than what a conventionally armed IRIAF that I mentioned above. Arming IRIAF is necessary but does it suit our current doctrine?


I've heard that the IR sensors on the Russian flankers can easily detect F-35, F-22 from long distances.



Muhammed45 said:


> One thing for sure, there is no un-detect-able fighter jet in the world. The radar waves gives it away. When apg77 sends electro magnetic pulse to beyond 400 KM, be sure that other radars are receving its wavelengths too.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

sha ah said:


> Yes IRIAF needs a huge boost in their budget and an influx of new, modern equipment. They need to upgrade their current inventory, as well the procurement of a dozen flanker squadrons, SU-35, SU-30. More importantly Iran needs to build several hardened mountain air bases similar to what China has. Especially against regional rivals, this will greatly increase the survivability of Iran's airforce.
> 
> 
> I've heard that the IR sensors on the Russian flankers can easily detect F-35, F-22 from long distances.


That's the nature of military science sir.

Americans have made a 'measure', others would try to develop the required countermeasure. Even F-18 Growler could deter F-22 through electronic warfare solutions. Remember the useless French made fighters which could make problems for IRIAF's F-14s. Pilots had their missiles locked unable to fire them. 

All in all, we can survive against the regional foes in the air by developing various countermeasures and solutions but against USAF which can easily reinforce and send back up in a couple of days an airforce that can produce as many as fighter jets when the need arise, we have to just focus on area denial capability as @drmeson mentioned above. 

Iran has own plans for 5th generation fighter jet but as of now being decades behind USAF, we have to use that tactic till developing a trustworthy platform based on any suitable paltform that we currently possess. 

The reason why IRIAF started with F-5s has a long story. Point is, it was a good step towards developing a reliable jet before preparing TVC capable Turbofan engines. Everything is ready to make a formidable indigenous fighter aircraft. I believe Iran has no technological hurdle in the way of developing a long range radar given Iranian experience with different eastern/western radars and Nano edge that Iran possesses. 

It might be time consuming, in which, the political will of governments can play as a catalyst by providing IRIAF and the defense ministry with needed budget to develop it asap.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Why not finish IRGC?
This will enable every service to recognize its responsibiliy and devise plans to do their work more appropriately even in shortage of money.

IRGC can be specialized to fight proxy wars if you don't want to finish it completely.
For example, there is space agency that is developing SLV related stuff then why is IRGC again wasting money on SLVs.It makes no sense for IRGC to produce UAVs when other institutions are already doing this stuff.

There is not a single country in the world except Iran that have IRGC like nonesense institution which is sucking budget that can be used to conduct research in some other fields.

Like:
Raising some private firms that can provide sub systems to Govt. owned assembling factories like HAL in India and HIT in Pakistan.


----------



## sha ah

Sometimes healthy competition develops results. Sometimes when you put all your eggs in one basket, without any competition, there is no incentive and no alternative, therefore an institution can stagnate and become complacent.

For example, in the US, for a long time American auto makers had no serious competition. They became complacent and produced inferior products, even got greedy and were guilty of obsolescence. Japanese automakers came and wiped the floor with them. Now because of the competition they produce better products and their standards have increased because consumers have an alternative.

IRGC is no different from a military having various branches. Like the US has the Marines and how the Navy and airforce both have their own airforces and compete for government funding.



Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Why not finish IRGC?
> This will enable every service to recognize its responsibiliy and devise plans to do their work more appropriately even in shortage of money.
> 
> IRGC can be specialized to fight proxy wars if you don't want to finish it completely.
> For example, there is space agency that is developing SLV related stuff then why is IRGC again wasting money on SLVs.It makes no sense for IRGC to produce UAVs when other institutions are already doing this stuff.
> 
> There is not a single country in the world except Iran that have IRGC like nonesense institution which is sucking budget that can be used to conduct research in some other fields.
> 
> Like:
> Raising some private firms that can provide sub systems to Govt. owned assembling factories like HAL in India and HIT in Pakistan.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Don't ask General TheImmortal to understand the art of war and large scale combat strategies, he can't understand that. The F-5s are there in attack support to defend the territory and will be linked to ground radar and other combat aircraft and drones. Enemy aircraft radars will be overloaded by combat aircraft, drones, decoys in the sky, electronic warfare, air defense systems, laser systems

It has been said that the advanced Kowsar would be related to drones by artificial intelligence. Iran is already targeting 6th generation aircraft by making the f-5 an unmanned aircraft. They know that the USA, Russia, China works for the 6th generation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Replace the engine with what? The Owj which is the engine that is in the F-5 to begin with?
> 
> Replace radar with what? Iran doesn’t produce any modern long range 4++ or 5th Gen radar.
> 
> This is SU-35 radar
> View attachment 808392
> 
> This is F-22 radar
> View attachment 808393
> 
> This is F-35 radar
> View attachment 808395
> 
> 
> You will not compete with these radars using a F-5 modernized radar. Not happening.
> 
> F-22/F-35/F-15 will consistently out detect an super F-5 carrying 2 tanks and 3 Fakour 90’s on its pylons.


The first picture is not actually the SU-35 radar.





Flanker Radars in Beyond Visual Range Air Combat


fighter radar, guided missile, sukhoi, flanker, niip, tikhomirov, phazotron



www.ausairpower.net




Raytheon APG-79 AESA (US Navy image)


----------



## Muhammed45

IRGC doesn't make parallel projects but its IRIAF that sometimes did that. For example they could operate Shahed drones instead of trying to develop same platform with same capabilities. Like the IRIN purchase of IRGC made drones. Sometimes IRIAF shocks me with wasting budget on something that currently exists in IRGC inventory. 

IRGC Space activities is not parallel to that of Space Agency either. They have focused on developing solid propellant with this mindset that we might one day turn them into ICBMs. Cost effective as much as possible, be prepared to be launched on a TEL in a couple of minutes or seconds, easy to maintain, being able to produce a huge number of them in a short span of time and with lowest possible budget. 

IRIAF has one job, be self sufficient. Avoid wasting budget on the existing drone platforms. And develop a national fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Muhammed45 said:


> IRGC doesn't make parallel projects but its IRIAF that sometimes did that. For example they could operate Shahed drones instead of trying to develop same platform with same capabilities. Like the IRIN purchase of IRGC made drones. Sometimes IRIAF shocks me with wasting budget on something that currently exists in IRGC inventory.


Sad but true,sadly.
Its actually worse than that,as the iriaf tried for around 15+ years to build a drone program virtually from scratch,essentially trying to reinvent work that the irgc drone program already did back in the 80s!!



Muhammed45 said:


> IRIAF has one job, be self sufficient. Avoid wasting budget on the existing drone platforms. And develop a national fighter jet.


Ah,if only.....
I dont think that they even remotely have that ability,to be honest.
I mean if they cant even build fvcking drones without help,well then frankly the idea of them producing a national fighter jet is quite literally a joke.
The sad irony is that there are things that they likely could do [with some help of course] that could improve the airforces capabilities markedly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sobhan

Is it new helicopter? 👀 Its not Shahed 216 
Is it toofan 3? Any information please?

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
5


----------



## sahureka2

here more pictures

https://defapress.ir/fa/news/501142/تصاویر-بازدید-وزیر-دفاع-از-دستاوردهای-شرکت-هسا

new production Kowsar assembly line?
these are *single-seaters*
PS
I counted *10* aircraft, observing the two photos better also identifies the presence of at least one two-seater

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

sahureka2 said:


> here more pictures
> 
> https://defapress.ir/fa/news/501142/تصاویر-بازدید-وزیر-دفاع-از-دستاوردهای-شرکت-هسا
> 
> new production Kowsar assembly line?
> these are *single-seaters*
> View attachment 809381
> 
> 
> View attachment 809382


I can see 8 Kowsar on the Assembly line.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> IRIAF has one job, be self sufficient. Avoid wasting budget on the existing drone platforms. And develop a national fighter jet.


You can't do that when you only get enough money to pay wages and maintain current inventory


sahureka2 said:


> here more pictures
> 
> https://defapress.ir/fa/news/501142/تصاویر-بازدید-وزیر-دفاع-از-دستاوردهای-شرکت-هسا
> 
> new production Kowsar assembly line?
> these are *single-seaters*
> View attachment 809381
> 
> 
> View attachment 809382


They really need to use another engine which use less fuel for this project.
This size of airplanes are more suited for a single engine configuration


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> You can't do that when you only get enough money to pay wages and maintain current inventory


They could do something after 40 years. Like the IRIADF that collected a budget aftet years in a saving bank and spent it on their currently existing large drone fleet. 

I know that jet technology is not comparable to drones but after all these years........ 

Look at IRGC. They started from a garage studying Libyan Scud missiles. Below Zero point. 

Unfortunately IRIAF has made it luxury, something traditional is still alive that i don't like to mention here. 

They wait for defense ministry, that's where they go wrong. It makes them dependent on the governments. 

After all these years.......
@sahureka2 sir
Is it possible that they are upgrading existing F5 fleet? Maybe changing the air frame and other parts. Maybe not the Kowsar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> They could do something after 40 years. Like the IRIADF that collected a budget aftet years in a saving bank and spent it on their currently existing large drone fleet.
> 
> I know that jet technology is not comparable to drones but after all these years........
> 
> Look at IRGC. They started from a garage studying Libyan Scud missiles. Below Zero point.
> 
> Unfortunately IRIAF has made it luxury, something traditional is still alive that i don't like to mention here.
> 
> They wait for defense ministry, that's where they go wrong. It makes them dependent on the governments.
> 
> After all these years.......


Anything meaningful need money. And IRGC got that money while iriaf didn't get it.
Also saving what money .there is no money to save there .


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> Anything meaningful need money. And IRGC got that money while iriaf didn't get it.
> Also saving what money .there is no money to save there .


You give a Manager 1 million toman per month, he will Manage his spendings to have something when the month finishes. 

You give 100 million toman to a mismanager, he will Manage to spend that money having nothing left for the next month.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> You give a Manager 1 million toman per month, he will Manage his spendings to have something when the month finishes.
> 
> You give 100 million toman to a mismanager, he will Manage to spend that money having nothing left for the next month.


The wages of personnel is clear.
The cost of maintaining the aging fleet is clear
The manager and missmaneger example here is out of place. How many commander air force have changed. How many employee after the revolution it had . Didn't one of them was a manager.


----------



## sahureka2

Muhammed45 said:


> I can see 8 Kowsar on the Assembly line.



I counted 10

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

It's not Shahed 216 ? Kind of looks like it no ? In any case it's nice to see Iran going ahead with production. There are rumors that Iran is going to purchase Russian helicopter technology with technology transfers, including motors and sensors. There are also rumors that Iran will be jointly producing helicopters with Russia. Let's wait and see.











sobhan said:


> Is it new helicopter? 👀 Its not Shahed 216
> Is it toofan 3? Any information please?
> View attachment 809346

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

Here another Kowsar / F5, with this there are 11 in different stages of construction

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Nevsky

So what do you think, my friends, how likely is to see some big deals signed this week?


----------



## Blue In Green

Nevsky said:


> So what do you think, my friends, how likely is to see some big deals signed this week?



There is a possibility that Iran and Russia might openly admit to a significant weapons contract although i think it might be best if they kept it on the down-low as to not garner too much unwanted attention.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 809438



What is the resolution rate of the camera do you think?


----------



## skyshadow

Mr Iran Eye said:


> What is the resolution rate of the camera do you think?


not a camera expert


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> not a camera expert




So what is it ? They said months ago that they would install cameras on the Kowsar and the F-4.


----------



## QWECXZ

Nevsky said:


> So what do you think, my friends, how likely is to see some big deals signed this week?


Very likely. Last time Khatami visited Russia we purchased S-300, Gamma radars and RD-33 engines. I think some upgrade packages for T-72 tanks and cooperation on a jet fighter project were discussed too; however the jet fighter project (Shafagh, if I remember correctly) was never materialized and the S-300 deal turned into a big issue between the countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## QWECXZ

Excruciatingly slow. If they want to be this slow, it's better that they don't produce Kowsar at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

QWECXZ said:


> View attachment 809462​
> Excruciatingly slow. If they want to be this slow, it's better that they don't produce Kowsar at all.


money, by the way kowsar will be a CAS and advanced trainer and after all hey need a certain amount of those airplanes . and they plan to use Yasin for advanced trainer won't help in that regard.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> It's not Shahed 216 ? Kind of looks like it no ? In any case it's nice to see Iran going ahead with production. There are rumors that Iran is going to purchase Russian helicopter technology with technology transfers, including motors and sensors. There are also rumors that Iran will be jointly producing helicopters with Russia. Let's wait and see.
> 
> View attachment 809411
> View attachment 809412


i wonder which engine they use here and is Jahesh 700 powerful enough to be used for such role


----------



## TheImmortal

QWECXZ said:


> Very likely. Last time Khatami visited Russia we purchased S-300, Gamma radars and RD-33 engines. I think some upgrade packages for T-72 tanks and cooperation on a jet fighter project were discussed too; however the jet fighter project (Shafagh, if I remember correctly) was never materialized and the S-300 deal turned into a big issue between the countries.



Khatami presidency ended in August 2005. S-300 deal was signed in late 2007.

What kind of revisionist history is this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> Khatami presidency ended in August 2005. S-300 deal was signed in late 2007.
> 
> What kind of revisionist history is this?


That's correct. My bad. It could be a false memory, but I remember I read that the idea of purchasing S300 was first considered by Khatami. Probably there were talks before finally signing the contract in 2007.


----------



## sahureka2



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sahureka2 said:


> View attachment 809670



It seems to have a slight modification of the cell, I'm not sure yet, I can't wait to see the final presentation


----------



## drmeson

sahureka2 said:


> View attachment 809670



این یک هواپیمای قدیمی است و نمی تواند به نیروی هوایی ارتش کمکی کند اما می تواند در نیروی دریایی به عنوان محافظ کشتی ها استفاده شود.


----------



## aryobarzan

Although Helicopter gunships are not a priority for Iran (UAVs will do most tasks) I hope we will see the "National Gunship" someday soon..

here is an old but beautiful photo of the Cobra gunship..notice they have changed the original Telescopic Sight Unit (TSU) for Tow Cobra on the nose with the EO ball..and a new ATGM missile

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

aryobarzan said:


> Although Helicopter gunships are not a priority for Iran (UAVs will do most tasks) I hope we will see the "National Gunship" someday soon..
> 
> here is an old but beautiful photo of the Cobra gunship..notice they have changed the original Telescopic Sight Unit (TSU) for Tow Cobra on the nose with the EO ball..and a new ATGM missile
> View attachment 811319


Theirs potential here but it all simply requires heavy investment into the industry that has not been focused on for many years.

Their will be a shift to airpower someday, perhaps sooner than we think, but not until they have met their needs for the missile and aerospace corps. 

Although their is always room for continuous improvement, the improvements become more and more marginal when it comes to land based missile power especially If Iran is going to stick with this 2000km limit, then their is a cap in how much the technology will grow.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1489674687470837769


----------



## Incog_nito

Like many others, I'm still thinking why IRAN hasn't placed an order of 150+ SU-30 MKK along with J-10Cs yet?

They need a lot of Aircraft for their Air Force.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Incog_nito said:


> Like many others, I'm still thinking why IRAN hasn't placed an order of 150+ SU-30 MKK along with J-10Cs yet?
> 
> They need a lot of Aircraft for their Air Force.


Maybe because we have no use for them .
We need airplanes that we can use after a first strike and those are not such airplanes.
It seems we have opted for asymmetrical warfare and our air force need to adopt such policy. We need a modern airplane that can be maintained by a small team of technicians and can operate even from remote roads. The airplane needs to have a capable datalink so several of them be able to share data and tasks with each other and compensate our lack of airborne Radar.

And honestly none of those airplanes can do that.

And also it most come with TOT or at least the ability to maintain them ourselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

If Iran wants to invest in the airforce then it would mainly be for potentially engaging with regional rivals in a local conflict. Against a superpower like the US I'm afraid its just thought of as a waste of money without much potential for a capacity to retaliate. 

However if Iran does decide to buy modern some flankers then they should surely build some mountain strongholds and runways that lead to some safe underground bunkers. Yeah it just feels as if with the current direction of UAVs and reusable, expandable missile systems that Iran just sees more bank for the buck with the asymmetrical missile/drone option. 

The thing with UAVs is that they're much cheaper and more expendable that fighter jets that cost tens of millions a piece with each pilot taking years to train. Nations simply aren't willing to risk their fighter jet and pilot unless they pretty much have air superiority regardless. I mean losing a piece of equipment that costs 50-100 million a piece is extremely painful. Of course for air superiority however there is no contest. Drones just aren't there yet, but even then air defenses can play a huge role in denying air access to the enemy, which is what Iran's air defense network is geared for.



Hack-Hook said:


> Maybe because we have no use for them .
> We need airplanes that we can use after a first strike and those are not such airplanes.
> It seems we have opted for asymmetrical warfare and our air force need to adopt such policy. We need a modern airplane that can be maintained by a small team of technicians and can operate even from remote roads. The airplane needs to have a capable datalink so several of them be able to share data and tasks with each other and compensate our lack of airborne Radar.
> 
> And honestly none of those airplanes can do that.
> 
> And also it most come with TOT or at least the ability to maintain them ourselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Yeah if Iran does decide to purchase flanker variants from Russia, it has to be with all the software codes and full technology transfers. Otherwise what is the point when pro NATO nations have new F-16s and Rafales ? I don't think Iran will even be interested unless it can, at the very least license produce Iranian variants on production lines inside the country.



Hack-Hook said:


> Maybe because we have no use for them .
> We need airplanes that we can use after a first strike and those are not such airplanes.
> It seems we have opted for asymmetrical warfare and our air force need to adopt such policy. We need a modern airplane that can be maintained by a small team of technicians and can operate even from remote roads. The airplane needs to have a capable datalink so several of them be able to share data and tasks with each other and compensate our lack of airborne Radar.
> 
> And honestly none of those airplanes can do that.
> 
> And also it most come with TOT or at least the ability to maintain them ourselves.


----------



## sha ah

The flanker is outdated but modern variants can still be a very useful weapon against regional revivals for Iran. This channel coincidentally just made a video on just such a topic.


----------



## sanel1412

sha ah said:


> Yeah if Iran does decide to purchase flanker variants from Russia, it has to be with all the software codes and full technology transfers. Otherwise what is the point when pro NATO nations have new F-16s and Rafales ? I don't think Iran will even be interested unless it can, at the very least license produce Iranian variants on production lines inside the country.


They have F-16 with AIM9 and AIM7...no AMRAAM...,same with Rafael...Israel must keep edge..remeber,that f-16 is not better than Iran F-4 with Aim7,PL-12 and r-73

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iran's F-14s with Fakour (Phoenix) missile is still a serious problem even with 4 of those, they're very deadly. 6 fully loaded is just ridiculous though, it's insane.



sanel1412 said:


> They have F-16 with AIM9 and AIM7...no AMRAAM...,same with Rafael...Israel must keep edge..remeber,that f-16 is not better than Iran F-4 with Aim7,PL-12 and r-73


----------



## jauk

sha ah said:


> Iran's F-14s with Fakour (Phoenix) missile is still a serious problem even with 4 of those, they're very deadly. 6 fully loaded is just ridiculous though, it's insane.


Just to repeat my refrain, building a capable air force in this technological epoch is wasteful. AI and unmanned vehicles are the game. And (unmanned) drones are the stepping stone to that time. Not retrograde thinking implemented as shiny objects like F35s. The US will suffer from the innovators syndrome in the technological adaptation lifecycle. Laggards such as Iran are presented with the opportunity to leapfrog. I.e. AI systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flotilla

I think it is a problem of funds.

Iran has not much funds for embarking in a new IRIAF combat aircraft. If they have funds, they will invest it in the most formidable weapons they are credited, BM. And after it, they invest in robust SAM to make not perfect but much better A2/AD zones in all MENA region. 

That is the key why the Islamic Republic won the respect even from Israel (two months before even the Israeli PM suggestted that they would accept a "good" JCPOA deal). This completely turn of rethorics it is because of the continuous effort of Iran to make a formidable A2/AD zone based on BM and SAM, 100% indigenous. Only Russia (not even Israel) can say something like this. Israel bought at some point Patriot for his SAM integrated system, but also receive a LOT of money for free each year to water happily their SAMs and formidable armed forces. We can say same about Algeria, where near all 100% of their equipment has been imported from abroad. 

Only 2 batteries of SAM-300PMU2 has been imported from Russia and if not reverse engineered, for sure those system has been studied to apply similar or improved solutions to the existings Bavar373 SAM and any other further improvements of medium and long range SAM systems.

After new JCPOA (I am sure it will arrive) Iran will have access to foreign currency and will have enough freedom to deal with China and Russia and even some europeans countries to import and have access to some of the new 4.5 generation aircrafts.

But they won the respect with BM and SAM systems and I think it is priority number 1.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Well honestly flankers is not suitable for Iran.
If we want to buy airplanes . I rather it be something like Grippen e/f . I also believe Sweden approach to air force is a lot more resilient to first strike than buying flanker and try to build it bases under the mountain for them.
Those Grippen are easy to maintain and can take of from normal roads and they can share data with each other even more than F35 and Sweden sell them with codes and sources . And more importantly in red flag training the only aircraft that did better than them was f22. Also they are one of the cheapest airplane to operate. 
Sadly I doubt right now Sweden sell us those planes .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> Just to repeat my refrain, building a capable air force in this technological epoch is wasteful. AI and unmanned vehicles are the game. And (unmanned) drones are the stepping stone to that time. Not retrograde thinking implemented as shiny objects like F35s. The US will suffer from the innovators syndrome in the technological adaptation lifecycle. Laggards such as Iran are presented with the opportunity to leapfrog. I.e. AI systems.



The technology needed to build a true 6th or 7th Gen AI based fighter are the same technologies that build up on 5th Gen fighters

*high end jet engine
*cutting edge sub systems/avionics 
*Powerful airborne radar

So people who think Iran can “magically” jump to 7th Gen AI based fighters aren’t living in reality. The pilot and his required sub systems aren’t what’s holding Iran back. It’s lack of investment in titanium alloys, engines, and the production chain to build a cutting edge fighter jet wether human operated or AI operated is irrelevant.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

The west will NEVER, EVER well Iran any military hardware as long as the Islamic Republic remains in place. For Iran it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10 from China. That's Iran's choice at the moment. 

Recently Iran build some more F-5s to sustain the airforce, and considering the sanctions and obstacles, Iran has done a remarkable job over the years keeping its large, diverse fleet airworthy with domestic upgrades and repairs. 

However, most of Iran's airplanes, their airframes are simply too old for sustained bombing runs or missions and realistically Iran needs something in the next 10-20 years. Analysts believe that in case of even a regional conflict, that Iran's airforce could not remain really airworthy for more than 6 months or so.

I would like to see Iran get a license production deal to produce flankers inside the country with indigenous hardware and upgrades. That and some fortified mountain runways, deep underground bunkers underneath mountain ranges, would be a good addition to Iran's military options.



Hack-Hook said:


> Well honestly flankers is not suitable for Iran.
> If we want to buy airplanes . I rather it be something like Grippen e/f . I also believe Sweden approach to air force is a lot more resilient to first strike than buying flanker and try to build it bases under the mountain for them.
> Those Grippen are easy to maintain and can take of from normal roads and they can share data with each other even more than F35 and Sweden sell them with codes and sources . And more importantly in red flag training the only aircraft that did better than them was f22. Also they are one of the cheapest airplane to operate.
> Sadly I doubt right now Sweden sell us those planes .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> The west will NEVER, EVER well Iran any military hardware as long as the Islamic Republic remains in place. For Iran it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10 from China. That's Iran's choice at the moment.
> 
> Recently Iran build some more F-5s to sustain the airforce, and considering the sanctions and obstacles, Iran has done a remarkable job over the years keeping its large, diverse fleet airworthy with domestic upgrades and repairs.
> 
> However, most of Iran's airplanes, their airframes are simply too old for sustained bombing runs or missions and realistically Iran needs something in the next 10-20 years. Analysts believe that in case of even a regional conflict, that Iran's airforce could not remain really airworthy for more than 6 months or so.
> 
> I would like to see Iran get a license production deal to produce flankers inside the country with indigenous hardware and upgrades. That and some fortified mountain runways, deep underground bunkers underneath mountain ranges, would be a good addition to Iran's military options.



Even Flankers will be hard to build in Iran without titanium ovens and massive amounts of titanium alloys.

Unless Iran just wants to assemble “kits” delivered from Russia. Which isn’t true ToT.

Iran needs to spend time mining titanium and building the necessary factories to build airframes that use significant amounts of titanium. That is why Iran experiments F-5, the airframe is small and has little to no titanium. It’s within Iran’s capability at present time and keeps the the workers busy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Well in my opinion, to start Iran should simply buy a few dozen ready made Flankers. Iran just has to make sure to get the software codes and all the blueprints. After that they can purchase some knock-down kits from Russia and put those together.

Then Iran can do some co-production. Using the technology transfers, begin building some of the components and serially produce some fighters which still incorporate Russian vital components and parts.

Eventually, as you stated, Iran can move onto creating a fully indigenous assembly line.

I've read that Iran has one Titanium mine in Kerman province and even exports Titanium so if the political will is there, then it really shouldn't be an issue.









Iran claims titanium mine progress


Producing titanium domestically would enable Iran to circumvent US sanctions




www.miningmagazine.com




Iran claims titanium mine progress​Iran has brought a major titanium mine online in the NorthWest of the country and now plans to develop processing capacity there, according to provincial officials.

Parisa Abedpour, deputy head of the Ministry of Industry, Mine and Trade in West Azerbaijan province, told the state-run _IRNA_ agency that the Qara-Aghaj mine near provincial capital Urmia is now fully operational ahead of the planned construction of a processing plant.

Qara-Aghaj is estimated to have 208 million tonnes of titanium-bearing ore, with an average grade of 8.5%, according to historic exploration data gathered by the Iranian Society of Mining and Engineering.

Iran exported only 150t of titanium last year, generating revenues of just US$390,000, according to the ministry.

The country only has one titanium slag plant in operation in Kahnuj in southeastern Kerman province, which has a production capacity of 130,000t/yr of titanium dioxide concentrate and 70,000t/yr of titanium slag.

The US in April renewed its determination from November 2019 that any sales to Iran of titanium, among other metals including chromium, nickel and 60% tungsten, were sanctionable as they are useful to Iran's nuclear, missile, and military programmes.



TheImmortal said:


> Even Flankers will be hard to build in Iran without titanium ovens and massive amounts of titanium alloys.
> 
> Unless Iran just wants to assemble “kits” delivered from Russia. Which isn’t true ToT.
> 
> Iran needs to spend time mining titanium and building the necessary factories to build airframes that use significant amounts of titanium. That is why Iran experiments F-5, the airframe is small and has little to no titanium. It’s within Iran’s capability at present time and keeps the the workers busy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Well in my opinion, to start Iran should simply buy a few dozen ready made Flankers. Iran just has to make sure to get the software codes and all the blueprints. After that they can purchase some knock-down kits from Russia and put those together.
> 
> Then Iran can do some co-production. Using the technology transfers, begin building some of the components and serially produce some fighters which still incorporate Russian vital components and parts.
> 
> Eventually, as you stated, Iran can move onto creating a fully indigenous assembly line.
> 
> I've read that Iran has one Titanium mine in Kerman province and even exports Titanium so if the political will is there, then it really shouldn't be an issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran claims titanium mine progress
> 
> 
> Producing titanium domestically would enable Iran to circumvent US sanctions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.miningmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran claims titanium mine progress​Iran has brought a major titanium mine online in the NorthWest of the country and now plans to develop processing capacity there, according to provincial officials.
> 
> Parisa Abedpour, deputy head of the Ministry of Industry, Mine and Trade in West Azerbaijan province, told the state-run _IRNA_ agency that the Qara-Aghaj mine near provincial capital Urmia is now fully operational ahead of the planned construction of a processing plant.
> 
> Qara-Aghaj is estimated to have 208 million tonnes of titanium-bearing ore, with an average grade of 8.5%, according to historic exploration data gathered by the Iranian Society of Mining and Engineering.
> 
> Iran exported only 150t of titanium last year, generating revenues of just US$390,000, according to the ministry.
> 
> The country only has one titanium slag plant in operation in Kahnuj in southeastern Kerman province, which has a production capacity of 130,000t/yr of titanium dioxide concentrate and 70,000t/yr of titanium slag.
> 
> The US in April renewed its determination from November 2019 that any sales to Iran of titanium, among other metals including chromium, nickel and 60% tungsten, were sanctionable as they are useful to Iran's nuclear, missile, and military programmes.



Is Iran producing the pure titanium used in engines and air frame? Just mining titanium ore is not enough. does it have the refining and production facilities to produce extremely high quality alloys?

That is just one part of a massive supply chain of infrastructure investment needed by Iran. You are taking north of 10B+ USD in investments alone.

I do not see Iran undertaking such a risky adventure until it is swimming in excess cash like in 2008-2011

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

TheImmortal said:


> Even Flankers will be hard to build in Iran without titanium ovens and massive amounts of titanium alloys.
> 
> Unless Iran just wants to assemble “kits” delivered from Russia. Which isn’t true ToT.
> 
> Iran needs to spend time mining titanium and building the necessary factories to build airframes that use significant amounts of titanium. That is why Iran experiments F-5, the airframe is small and has little to no titanium. It’s within Iran’s capability at present time and keeps the the workers busy.



Well, if the Kowsar can carry *beyond visual range air to air missiles*, shouldn't it at least challenge F-18s or F-16s? I don't know if it can field those missiles, but if it does, shouldn't it be capable of challenging those 4th-generation US-made fighter jets?


----------



## applesauce

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Well, if the Kowsar can carry *beyond visual range air to air missiles*, shouldn't it at least challenge F-18s or F-16s? I don't know if it can field those missiles, but if it does, shouldn't it be capable of challenging those 4th-generation US-made fighter jets?



no, they can see you first and fire first then scoot before you get into range yourself or even know they are there.

otherwise USAF, RUAF and PLAAF might as well all exclusively fly turbo-props armed with BVR missiles. But they don't because there is a very good reason to go 5th gen. same applies here, but the gap isn't as large as between 4th gens and 5th gens.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

The radar on the Kowsar F-5 is too small. It's a light fighter jet. It's only chance is to fly low and maybe use info from AWACS and ground radar stations for its mission. 

Aside from that it doesn't have a chance against F-16s or Rafales or even JF-17s in direct confrontations. They will simply see it first and fire first.



Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Well, if the Kowsar can carry *beyond visual range air to air missiles*, shouldn't it at least challenge F-18s or F-16s? I don't know if it can field those missiles, but if it does, shouldn't it be capable of challenging those 4th-generation US-made fighter jets?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Well, if the Kowsar can carry *beyond visual range air to air missiles*, shouldn't it at least challenge F-18s or F-16s? I don't know if it can field those missiles, but if it does, shouldn't it be capable of challenging those 4th-generation US-made fighter jets?


It is not abt BVR missile,only 1-3% of engagements resulted in shuting down were result of BVR,air force is complex...US has such surveilance power that it can use aircrafts without radars and still beat anyone...these DCS simulation are worthless ...in real war you fight as part of large deployment..you dont fly and wait till enemy bump on you...every take off is particular mission,supported by intelligence ,ground operators or one flying in AWACS...in 99% case when it come to A2A combat,enemy is detected by ground radar or AWACS..if enemy has better BVR missile or aircraft,than radar operator can guide you so you can get close without been seen by enemy...so it all gets to overall capability...how military is good,air force logistic.... I spoke with German pilot,he said they always have at least 80km complete insight getting from AWACS or ground radars when they fly...I mean 360 degree from 1km up to high altitude...you cant get that without logistic by ground infrastucture or AWACS...they probably put 80km minimum because that is safe zone they can run and escape even if someone lunch from more distance.

In short US can use only 4th gen aircraft and their overall capability will still be almost same,they would just compensate with other assets since,as I said,they have huge surveilance power...from space...AWACS,ships...bases everywhere


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> The technology needed to build a true 6th or 7th Gen AI based fighter are the same technologies that build up on 5th Gen fighters
> 
> *high end jet engine
> *cutting edge sub systems/avionics
> *Powerful airborne radar
> 
> So people who think Iran can “magically” jump to 7th Gen AI based fighters aren’t living in reality. The pilot and his required sub systems aren’t what’s holding Iran back. It’s lack of investment in titanium alloys, engines, and the production chain to build a cutting edge fighter jet wether human operated or AI operated is irrelevant.


There will be no '7th gen AI based fighters'. When they come they will be first generation. Ergo, leap frogging is the only option which I'm confident is why Iran's 'conventional' (4th, 5th, ...nth gen etc) air force has been de-prioritized for years. The reason is not technology...it's clear thinking.


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> There will be no '7th gen AI based fighters'. When they come they will be first generation. Ergo, leap frogging is the only option which I'm confident is why Iran's 'conventional' (4th, 5th, ...nth gen etc) air force has been de-prioritized for years. The reason is not technology...it's clear thinking.



And what are you going to put inside your super duper AI fighter when all you have been working on is owj and a F-5?

You have zero experience with titanium alloys, you cannot build the intricate blades of the turbines, you cannot build medium to heavy engines, you have zero experience building long range radars that can detect VLO aircraft. You have no infrastructure in place to mass even 50 fighter jets a year. The list continues on and on.

You clearly aren’t using logic. This isn’t an industry you “leapfrog” beyond starting at 4th Gen....which is max Iran can leapfrog before it needs to start building modern technologies.

That’s like saying I’m going to leapfrog from SLVs to warp drive spaceships and land on Mars when you cannot even launch a micro satellite with a 80% success rate.

The will and the investment has not been made. Once that happens we can talk about realistic next steps. The first basic next step is demonstrate the capability to mass produce a medium/heavy engine on par with RD-33 or AL-21. Without that you shouldn’t even think of any super duper AI fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Natalya Shadova

sha ah said:


> The flanker is outdated but modern variants can still be a very useful weapon against regional revivals for Iran. This channel coincidentally just made a video on just such a topic.


Flanker is not outdated at all lol


----------



## Natalya Shadova

Iran should and could acquire and do the following: of the next 2 years
- Modernize current MiG-29 to MiG-35 standard, acquire more MiG-35. Request Zhuk-A AESA radar
- Buy 36+ SU-35 (likely)
- Buy SU-30, request technology transfer. Also request help from Russia for setting up production and material lines. For the SU-30 variant, get SM2 or a possible future SM3 
- Develop an indigenous AIM-120 or R-77 equivalent
- Finish indigenous Loyal wingman UAV projects. Ghadir (being acquired by Venezuela) and Sejjil

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> And what are you going to put inside your super duper - <CLIP>


----------



## TheImmortal

Natalya Shadova said:


> Iran should and could acquire and do the following: of the next 2 years
> - Modernize current MiG-29 to MiG-35 standard, acquire more MiG-35. Request Zhuk-A AESA radar
> - Buy 36+ SU-35 (likely)
> - Buy SU-30, request technology transfer. Also request help from Russia for setting up production and material lines. For the SU-30 variant, get SM2 or a possible future SM3
> - Develop an indigenous AIM-120 or R-77 equivalent
> - Finish indigenous Loyal wingman UAV projects. Ghadir (being acquired by Venezuela) and Sejjil



US has a new Russian pain point —Ukraine.

The second Russia tries to sell Iran balancing altering weapons, US will invoke the Ukraine card and threaten to send weapons directly to Ukraine.

The best bet Iran can hope for is under the table ToT and selling of jet engines. Things that Russia can claim plausible deniability. For example, Iran claims that they are building AL-21 or RD-33 on their own via reverse engineering. When in reality they are receiving Russian assistance or even Russian engines sold thru an intermediary. 

This allows Iran to claim self sufficiency and allows Russia to deny ever selling Iran anything. Less likely to get US response.

But large amounts of fighter aircraft or mass production of SU-30 INSIDE Iran....US will not allow that and start going after Russian pain points. Then Russia will abandon the deal like they always do (T-72, Shafagh, etc)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

sha ah said:


> The radar on the Kowsar F-5 is too small. It's a light fighter jet. It's only chance is to fly low and maybe use info from AWACS and ground radar stations for its mission.
> 
> Aside from that it doesn't have a chance against F-16s or Rafales or even JF-17s in direct confrontations. They will simply see it first and fire first.


Flaws of Kowsar can be rectified with gradual iterations on the design as that happens with any military hardware.

Or extensive redesign while using as much of manufacturing tools as possible.

Greater restriction is Iran not having light weight BVR missiles compared to Fakour-90 / AIM-23B or AIM-54 Phoenix that are over twice as heavy as for example AIM-120.

If Iran develops and mass produces BVR ARH AAM that has weight of 180kg and range of 120km then there is potential to produce a potent subsonic partisan micro fighter jet.

Or at least something like MICA BVR IR that has lock on after launch that can be launched for interception of target to area it is expected to be.

If Iran could improve Jahesh-700 to increase output to 800kg then it is viable to do so.

2300 kilogram empty weight.
4000 kilogram maximum take off weight.
Thrust to Weight ratio at maximum weight is 0.4 that is equivalent to F-5 Tiger II with full afterburner at maximum carrying capacity.

Carry 4 BVR ARH / IR

Ejection Seat 90kg.
Theoretical Jahesh-800 x2 280kg.
Grifo-F equivalent radar 90kg.

These 3 components are 460kg.

1840kg left for rest of empty aircraft.

Fuel capacity of 1000 liters that should be 800kg.

Pilot with equipment should be 100kg in worst case.

That should leave 800kg for payload.


----------



## sha ah

The US tried everything in its power to try and stop Moscow from selling the S-400 to Turkey and the S-300 to Iran. It didn't work in the end. Flankers are not exactly cutting edge and Russia has now been prevented from selling them to Egypt, Indonesia and Algeria. You think Russia is just to going to take this without responding ?

As far as Ukraine is concerned, it's complicated but it seems as if Putin is ready to take Ukraine if the west doesn't give him security guarantees. Russian troops are highly professional, well trained and extremely well equipped. On the other hand, I saw a clip recently. The Ukrainians don't even have enough bullets for training purposes.

They're training 50 year old grannys and single moms, even handing their little children the same cardboard guns to learn how to shoot the Russians. Remember those women and civilians in Afghanistan vowing to fight off the Taliban ? This is something similar.

I'm not making this up, the situation is extremely dire for Ukraine. The disparity in military capability and capacity vs Russia is black and white. Ukraine has zero chance honestly. Even the US has stated that Russia could take Kiev within 3 days.

Ukraine's 2nd largest city is 40 km away from the Russian border. All of those weapons will likely end up in the hands of Russia. I'm guessing that Putin will turn off the heat on Ukraine. People will panic and then he will send in his troops, people will cheer the Russians and Putin will simply get rid of the NATO backed moderate neo Nazis and install a pro Moscow Ukrainian government.



TheImmortal said:


> US has a new Russian pain point —Ukraine.
> 
> The second Russia tries to sell Iran balancing altering weapons, US will invoke the Ukraine card and threaten to send weapons directly to Ukraine.
> 
> The best bet Iran can hope for is under the table ToT and selling of jet engines. Things that Russia can claim plausible deniability. For example, Iran claims that they are building AL-21 or RD-33 on their own via reverse engineering. When in reality they are receiving Russian assistance or even Russian engines sold thru an intermediary.
> 
> This allows Iran to claim self sufficiency and allows Russia to deny ever selling Iran anything. Less likely to get US response.
> 
> But large amounts of fighter aircraft or mass production of SU-30 INSIDE Iran....US will not allow that and start going after Russian pain points. Then Russia will abandon the deal like they always do (T-72, Shafagh, etc)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> . Flankers are not exactly cutting edge



Respectfully, what are you talking about?

Flankers are literally the most successful fighter jets (outside of the West). SU-30 and SU-35 are by far some of the most powerful and maneuverable fighters Iran could ever hope to have. They would change the balance of power in the region if Iran were to have a significant amount of them (75+). In Iranian territory they would be even more formidable with an air defense network protecting them while they hunted key fighters.

Also if I had $1 for every time I heard the phrase “this time it’s different, Russia is angry because of [insert reason]” I could probably buy 100 SU-35 fighters 

Lastly the S-300 deal was a defensive weapon and Russia lost to Iran in World Court. If Russia didn’t provide Iran with the S-300 it would have to pay $10B in damages....on an $800M contract. So Russia had no way out.

Can’t compare domestic fighter jet production TOT and major offensive arms purchases with air defense systems.

Chances Russia helps Iran is very very low. I’ll wait for actual evidence as history has shown being skeptical is the way to go.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

TheImmortal said:


> Flankers are literally the most successful fighter jets (outside of the West).


You will alway be "the most successful" when you're literally the only one "outside of the west" making fighter jets. Flankers are nice but elusive to purchase and not proven against western fighters, yet. Better than a kick in the head though.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1491352903512395778

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bleek

TheImmortal said:


> Respectfully, what are you talking about?
> 
> Flankers are literally the most successful fighter jets (outside of the West). SU-30 and SU-35 are by far some of the most powerful and maneuverable fighters Iran could ever hope to have. They would change the balance of power in the region if Iran were to have a significant amount of them (75+). In Iranian territory they would be even more formidable with an air defense network protecting them while they hunted key fighters.
> 
> Also if I had $1 for every time I heard the phrase “this time it’s different, Russia is angry because of [insert reason]” I could probably buy 100 SU-35 fighters
> 
> Lastly the S-300 deal was a defensive weapon and Russia lost to Iran in World Court. If Russia didn’t provide Iran with the S-300 it would have to pay $10B in damages....on an $800M contract. So Russia had no way out.
> 
> Can’t compare domestic fighter jet production TOT and major offensive arms purchases with air defense systems.
> 
> Chances Russia helps Iran is very very low. I’ll wait for actual evidence as history has shown being skeptical is the way to go.


What about Chinese jets? Is that not a viable option?

(J-10C)


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bleek said:


> What about Chinese jets? Is that not a viable option?
> 
> (J-10C)


Iran airforce rejected it , that airplane only become an option if china works a lot harder on its data link and equip it with a more efficient engine. and also its sensor package is lacking compared to other competitor, it lack FLIR manu necessay equipment must ount externally as pods instead of being fitted inside the airplane and so and the tail of the airplane can use some refinement to make better use of what power the engine provide

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Bleek said:


> What about Chinese jets? Is that not a viable option?
> 
> (J-10C)



Not viable unless J-20 or J-31 is being offered. The recent signing by Pakistan for J-20 might make it a possibility. But Pakistan-Chinese arms relations are much much stronger than Iranian-Chinese arms relations as Pakistan serves as a check on India which is a China enemy as well. Iran doesn’t have that card to play and in fact creates headaches for China who tries to balance its relations with Arab countries.

The issue is any jets purchased might have to serve in Iranian Air Force for another 30+ years. So you cannot choose a plane that is at the end of its career. At that point it would be better to just not buy anything at all then waste 5B+ on planes that cannot be competitive in a decade.

Take for example the F-14, it is STILL competitive over 40 years later as a potent air superiority fighter.

So outside of SU-35, J-20, J-31, SU-57. Iran should not sign any deals for any fighters not listed above....unless we are going to receive MASSIVE ToT that would allow our own domestic fighter programs to finally take off.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Not viable unless J-20 or J-31 is being offered. *The recent signing by Pakistan for J-20 *might make it a possibility. But Pakistan-Chinese arms relations are much much stronger than Iranian-Chinese arms relations as Pakistan serves as a check on India which is a China enemy as well. Iran doesn’t have that card to play and in fact creates headaches for China who tries to balance its relations with Arab countries.
> 
> The issue is any jets purchased might have to serve in Iranian Air Force for another 30+ years. So you cannot choose a plane that is at the end of its career. At that point it would be better to just not buy anything at all then waste 5B+ on planes that cannot be competitive in a decade.
> 
> Take for example the F-14, it is STILL competitive over 40 years later as a potent air superiority fighter.
> 
> So outside of SU-35, J-20, J-31, SU-57. Iran should not sign any deals for any fighters not listed above....unless we are going to receive MASSIVE ToT that would allow our own domestic fighter programs to finally take off.



J-20 for Pakistan?
I knew of the signature to acquire the J-10 which in the export version is designated FC-20


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> J-20 for Pakistan?
> I knew of the signature to acquire the J-10 which in the export version is designated FC-20



I should correct myself and say rumors of a signing not actual signing. Much like rumors of Iran signing a SU-35 agreement.

Since J-20 is finally using Chinese engines it will be available for export without Russian ability to veto.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> I should correct myself and say rumors of a signing not actual signing. Much like rumors of Iran signing a SU-35 agreement.
> 
> Since J-20 is finally using Chinese engines it will be available for export without Russian ability to veto.therefore what will Pakistan buy J-10 / FC-20 or J-20?



therefore what contract would Pakistan sign, for J-10 / FC-20 or J-20? ?


----------



## Bleek

sahureka2 said:


> J-20 for Pakistan?
> I knew of the signature to acquire the J-10 which in the export version is designated FC-20


I have not heard of such thing myself personally either, not sure what they are referring to.



Hack-Hook said:


> Iran airforce rejected it , that airplane only become an option if china works a lot harder on its data link and equip it with a more efficient engine. and also its sensor package is lacking compared to other competitor, it lack FLIR manu necessay equipment must ount externally as pods instead of being fitted inside the airplane and so and the tail of the airplane can use some refinement to make better use of what power the engine provide


Can you share a source for this? Was this officially said or just rumours?


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> therefore what contract would Pakistan sign, for J-10 / FC-20 or J-20? ?



If I understand what you are asking, They recently signed a contract for J-10C

Don’t confuse FC-20 with J-20. I am speaking of J-20, anything China sends out will be export versions so I don’t need to disclaim that.









Pakistan confirms Chinese ‘Firebird’ fighter acquisition


Pakistan has officially confirmed its long-speculated acquisition of the Chinese J-10C “Firebird” fighter, which will arrive in time to take part in the March 23 Pakistan Day parade.




www.defensenews.com





However, some within Pakistan were not happy with this purchase









'Not as good as Rafale': Pakistani senator opposes buying new Chinese fighters


The J-10 is a multi-role fighter that belongs to the same weight category as the F-16




www.google.com





While J-10 make up the bulk of Chinese airforce, there is widespread consensus it is not up to par with Western aircraft in several areas.

If India acquires F-35 or SU-57. I think China would sell J-31 to Pakistan.

China is likely to be willing to part with J-31 (F-35 knock off) more so than J-20 since the former is less of an air superiority fighter and less sensitive tech installed thus more willing to export to “friendly” countries.

Currently the West would love to get their hands on an J-20 to understand it’s full capabilities and radar signature.

Again J-31 or J-20 they would be dumbed down export versions either way. But I think if any country is first in line to receive them, it would be Pakistan before Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> If I understand what you are asking, They recently signed a contract for J-10C
> 
> Don’t confuse FC-20 with J-20. I am speaking of J-20, anything China sends out will be export versions so I don’t need to disclaim that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan confirms Chinese ‘Firebird’ fighter acquisition
> 
> 
> Pakistan has officially confirmed its long-speculated acquisition of the Chinese J-10C “Firebird” fighter, which will arrive in time to take part in the March 23 Pakistan Day parade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defensenews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, some within Pakistan were not happy with this purchase
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Not as good as Rafale': Pakistani senator opposes buying new Chinese fighters
> 
> 
> The J-10 is a multi-role fighter that belongs to the same weight category as the F-16
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While J-10 make up the bulk of Chinese airforce, there is widespread consensus it is not up to par with Western aircraft in several areas.
> 
> If India acquires F-35 or SU-57. I think China would sell J-31 to Pakistan.
> 
> China is likely to be willing to part with J-31 (F-35 knock off) more so than J-20 since the former is less of an air superiority fighter and less sensitive tech installed thus more willing to export to “friendly” countries.
> 
> Currently the West would love to get their hands on an J-20 to understand it’s full capabilities and radar signature.
> 
> Again J-31 or J-20 they would be dumbed down export versions either way. But I think if any country is first in line to receive them, it would be Pakistan before Iran.


Ok, so at the moment there is no contract for the J-20, so why do you write #6,798 "The recent signing by Pakistan for* J-20* might make it a possibility", it would not be appropriate to indicate what is more probable, that is the J-10 for which many confirm the signing of the contract.
J-20 and J-31 will certainly be opportunities, but to date there are no contracts.


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> Ok, so at the moment there is no contract for the J-20, so why do you write #6,798 "The recent signing by Pakistan for* J-20* might make it a possibility", it would not be appropriate to indicate what is more probable, that is the J-10 for which many confirm the signing of the contract.
> J-20 and J-31 will certainly be opportunities, but to date there are no contracts.



I corrected myself right after. 



TheImmortal said:


> I should correct myself and say rumors of a signing not actual signing. Much like rumors of Iran signing a SU-35 agreement.
> 
> Since J-20 is finally using Chinese engines it will be available for export without Russian ability to veto.


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> I corrected myself right after.


ok


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Not viable unless J-20 or J-31 is being offered. The recent signing by Pakistan for J-20 might make it a possibility. But Pakistan-Chinese arms relations are much much stronger than Iranian-Chinese arms relations as Pakistan serves as a check on India which is a China enemy as well. Iran doesn’t have that card to play and in fact creates headaches for China who tries to balance its relations with Arab countries.
> 
> The issue is any jets purchased might have to serve in Iranian Air Force for another 30+ years. So you cannot choose a plane that is at the end of its career. At that point it would be better to just not buy anything at all then waste 5B+ on planes that cannot be competitive in a decade.
> 
> Take for example the F-14, it is STILL competitive over 40 years later as a potent air superiority fighter.
> 
> So outside of SU-35, J-20, J-31, SU-57. Iran should not sign any deals for any fighters not listed above....unless we are going to receive MASSIVE ToT that would allow our own domestic fighter programs to finally take off.


About Su-35 I wonder if it will be a viable airplane 30-40 year later if it not get an engine and Radar upgrade , if its coating don't become Radar absorbent


----------



## Flotilla

TheImmortal said:


> While J-10 make up the bulk of Chinese airforce, there is widespread consensus it is not up to par with Western aircraft in several areas.



Are you sure?. It is said that J10C has been superior to some versions of the Gripen (C/D) in maneouvers with Thailand.

AESA radar + IRST and PL15 makes it even better that F16 (actually no IRST on them and range of AIM120 shorter than PL15).

Even China has been reluctant to sell those to close allies like Pakistan, at least until very recently.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

sahureka2 said:


> Ok, so at the moment there is no contract for the J-20, so why do you write #6,798 "The recent signing by Pakistan for* J-20* might make it a possibility", it would not be appropriate to indicate what is more probable, that is the J-10 for which many confirm the signing of the contract.
> J-20 and J-31 will certainly be opportunities, but to date there are no contracts.


According to serving military member of PDF,PAF will induct 5th Gen. Fighter jet post 2045.

His claim can also be confirmed by previous ACM speech where Air Cheif said Pakistan will have fifth generation fighter jet fleet by 2047.

Actually,our program for indiginous 5th gen fighter aircraft is dead so we are collaborating with another friendly country for 5th gen. fighter aircraft which will not be ready before 2045.


----------



## Abid123

Flotilla said:


> Are you sure?. It is said that J10C has been superior to some versions of the Gripen (C/D) in maneouvers with Thailand.
> 
> AESA radar + IRST and PL15 makes it even better that F16 (actually no IRST on them and range of AIM120 shorter than PL15).
> 
> Even China has been reluctant to sell those to close allies like Pakistan, at least until very recently.


Not true J-10C is among the best 4th generation aircraft out there. It even beat SU-35 in excersices. It is roughly on par with Rafale. 

He maybe talking about the earlier version? J-10A/B?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Flotilla said:


> Are you sure?. It is said that J10C has been superior to some versions of the Gripen (C/D) in maneouvers with Thailand.
> 
> AESA radar + IRST and PL15 makes it even better that F16 (actually no IRST on them and range of AIM120 shorter than PL15).
> 
> Even China has been reluctant to sell those to close allies like Pakistan, at least until very recently.


well you must compare it with Grippen E/F if you want to bring out the latest iteration
if nothing else the radar in Grippen E changed from previous Pulse/Dopler Radar to an AESA radar and gained super-cruise capability and come with IRST
and I bet J10-c Flight cost is a lot higher than 4700$/hours estimated cost for Grippen


----------



## TheImmortal

Flotilla said:


> Are you sure?. It is said that J10C has been superior to some versions of the Gripen (C/D) in maneouvers with Thailand.
> 
> AESA radar + IRST and PL15 makes it even better that F16 (actually no IRST on them and range of AIM120 shorter than PL15).
> 
> Even China has been reluctant to sell those to close allies like Pakistan, at least until very recently.



You are comparing latest J-10 block with an older Gripen block. Is this fair? Is this logical? That’s like saying J-10C is better than 1980’s F-16. I mean compare apples to apples.

The West owns the space in ECW suite, Jammer pod, and targeting pod technology. Even Russia is further behind in this field in some regards. That alone makes their fighters more lethal.

China is still behind West tech in aviation I mean even in public space Boeing and Airbus dominate the world. China is still tinkering around with passenger planes. Nonetheless it is catching up and will one day be on par in many areas. When that will be? Remains to be seen could be 10 years could be 20 years.

Anyone saying J-10C is better than latest F-16/Rafael/SU-35 is just being a homer. No non biased individual would make such claims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> You are comparing latest J-10 block with an older Gripen block. Is this fair? Is this logical? That’s like saying J-10C is better than 1980’s F-16. I mean compare apples to apples.
> 
> The West owns the space in ECW suite, Jammer pod, and targeting pod technology. Even Russia is further behind in this field in some regards. That alone makes their fighters more lethal.
> 
> China is still behind West tech in aviation I mean even in public space Boeing and Airbus dominate the world. China is still tinkering around with passenger planes. Nonetheless it is catching up and will one day be on par in many areas. When that will be? Remains to be seen could be 10 years could be 20 years.
> 
> Anyone saying J-10C is better than latest F-16/Rafael/SU-35 is just being a homer. No non biased individual would make such claims.



passenger planes dont directly correlate to military fighter planes. otherwise the soviets would have been a passenger plane giant.


but anyways, yes, at best we can say those jets ar roughly similar in performance. and i would not discount chinese ECW.

that said, china actually has the su-35 and all the reports/exercises coming out says that it's a fine plane, very maneuverable but woefully behind in terms of electronics to where the j-10C that they practiced with, consistently wins out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flotilla

applesauce said:


> passenger planes dont directly correlate to military fighter planes. otherwise the soviets would have been a passenger plane giant.
> 
> 
> but anyways, yes, at best we can say those jets ar roughly similar in performance. and i would not discount chinese ECW.
> 
> that said, china actually has the su-35 and all the reports/exercises coming out says that it's a fine plane, very maneuverable but woefully behind in terms of electronics to where the j-10C that they practiced with, consistently wins out.


I agree.

I like discussing about facts; the first fact it is that in front of the Gripen C/D, J10C won.

The second fact it is that Japan ran to build their own Meteor missile (ramjet propulsion with maneovurable nozzle, in fact they signed a contract to buy the engine of european missile, and they plan to fit it with IR guidance) because they were afraid of PL15.

And third fact it is their propulsion is based in a new version of WS10 (WS10B), passing away the AL31F. So Chinese has strong confidence in their engine.

That´s said, I think J10C it is the best or in pair of the best lighter fighter in the world. But this is not the main matter of the topic, so I won´t talk anymore about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> passenger planes dont directly correlate to military fighter planes. otherwise the soviets would have been a passenger plane giant.
> 
> 
> but anyways, yes, at best we can say those jets ar roughly similar in performance. and i would not discount chinese ECW.
> 
> that said, china actually has the su-35 and all the reports/exercises coming out says that it's a fine plane, very maneuverable but woefully behind in terms of electronics to where the j-10C that they practiced with, consistently wins out.



SU-35S powered by twin AL-41 latest variant engines, I would take that any day over a single engine WS-10 that is still brand new engine going thru growing pains. Remember $$$ cost per hour of maintenance and maintenance levels of each.

SU-35S top speed is Mach 2
J-10C top speed is Mach 1.8

ECM: SU-35 used Khibiny variant and J-10C uses KG600 pod, I’ll take Russia here if you have reasons why you believe KG600 is better I will listen.

Russia radar variant IRIS-E in L-Band over China’s AESA. Chinese SU-35 till up to 2017 didn’t have IRIS-E, I’m not sure if they have them now or a Chinese local radar. But Russia was willing to upgrade the Chinese SU-35 last I heard.

ordnance available, diversify of ordnance, and pound v pound weapons able to be deployed I’ll take SU-35S any day over J-10C

So again be fair, you are comparing J-10C CHINESE version (NOT EXPORT) to older SU-35 EXPORT version (NOT ONE RUSSIA uses).

Even F-35 is more advanced in some ways than F-22 because F-22 development started in 90’s and electronics possibly 00’s so latest F-35 blocks were more modern electronic suite than their F-22 brethren.

So you have to compare latest variants of each and not pick and choose which variant to compare to. Even US with all its money is still flying 40 year old F-18’s

Now I just want to emphasis I think J-10C is a good fighter. I don’t have any problems with it. But for Iran who doesn’t have much experience on Chinese fighters (outside of I think F-7?) and now a whole brand new engine WS-10. It creates headaches for maintenance where Iranian engineers are already split between the Russian trained ones and American experienced ones. Now adding Chinese fighters just creates a logistics nightmare.

Lastly, if China were to one day turn cold to Iran it would take a lot more work keeping a Chinese fighter in the air then a Russian one. Iran already has a deep engineer base that works on Russian helicopters, jets, submarines, and radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S powered by twin AL-41 latest variant engines, I would take that any day over a single engine WS-10 that is still brand new engine going thru growing pains. Remember $$$ cost per hour of maintenance and maintenance levels of each.
> 
> SU-35S top speed is Mach 2
> J-10C top speed is Mach 1.8
> 
> ECM: SU-35 used Khibiny variant and J-10C uses KG600 pod, I’ll take Russia here if you have reasons why you believe KG600 is better I will listen.
> 
> Russia radar variant IRIS-E in L-Band over China’s AESA. Chinese SU-35 till up to 2017 didn’t have IRIS-E, I’m not sure if they have them now or a Chinese local radar. But Russia was willing to upgrade the Chinese SU-35 last I heard.
> 
> ordnance available, diversify of ordnance, and pound v pound weapons able to be deployed I’ll take SU-35S any day over J-10C
> 
> So again be fair, you are comparing J-10C CHINESE version (NOT EXPORT) to older SU-35 EXPORT version (NOT ONE RUSSIA uses).
> 
> Even F-35 is more advanced in some ways than F-22 because F-22 development started in 90’s and electronics possibly 00’s so latest F-35 blocks were more modern electronic suite than their F-22 brethren.
> 
> So you have to compare latest variants of each and not pick and choose which variant to compare to. Even US with all its money is still flying 40 year old F-18’s
> 
> Now I just want to emphasis I think J-10C is a good fighter. I don’t have any problems with it. But for Iran who doesn’t have much experience on Chinese fighters (outside of I think F-7?) and now a whole brand new engine WS-10. It creates headaches for maintenance where Iranian engineers are already split between the Russian trained ones and American experienced ones. Now adding Chinese fighters just creates a logistics nightmare.
> 
> Lastly, if China were to one day turn cold to Iran it would take a lot more work keeping a Chinese fighter in the air then a Russian one. Iran already has a deep engineer base that works on Russian helicopters, jets, submarines, and radars.


You have not talked about their air to air weapons.A2A missiles comparison should not be ignored while comparing two fighter jets.


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> You have not talked about their air to air weapons.A2A missiles comparison should not be ignored while comparing two fighter jets.



IRIS-E L-Band can detect objects from up 400KM away. People like scream “AESA”. But even within AESA there is huge differences in capability and ability to remain undetected to other fighter jets when scanning the area. So while Chinese AESA is an AESA we need much more information on how it’s internals. This is where West excels. Not all AEsA are created equal.

*As for A2A missiles*

R-27ER with range of up to 170KM and Mach 4.5 speed
R-73 range up 40KM and Mach 2.5 speed
R-77M range up to 190KM Mach 4-5
R-74 AIM-9x or ASRAAM like equivalent

It can carry either 6 R-27, 12 R-77, or 6 R-74

I mean I don’t know what planet someone thinks a J-10C is better than a SU-35S, to me that is crazy talk.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> IRIS-E L-Band can detect objects from up 400KM away. People like scream “AESA”. But even within AESA there is huge differences in capability and ability to remain undetected to other fighter jets when scanning the area. So while Chinese AESA is an AESA we need much more information on how it’s internals. This is where West excels. Not all AEsA are created equal.
> 
> *As for A2A missiles*
> 
> R-27ER with range of up to 170KM and Mach 4.5 speed
> R-73 range up 40KM and Mach 2.5 speed
> R-77M range up to 190KM Mach 4-5
> R-74 AIM-9x or ASRAAM like equivalent
> 
> It can carry either 6 R-27, 12 R-77, or 6 R-74
> 
> I mean I don’t know what planet someone thinks a J-10C is better than a SU-35S, to me that is crazy talk.


Well,J10C will most probably see actual combat against Rafael and Su 30MKI.
And Rafael is better than Su 35. 
Then we will be able to accurately judge these war planes.
Until then,We can just argue and counter argue without reaching some solid conclusion.


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Well,J10C will most probably see actual combat against Rafael and Su 30MKI.
> And Rafael is better than Su 35.
> Then we will be able to accurately judge these war planes.
> Until then,We can just argue and counter argue without reaching some solid conclusion.



Rafael cost 2x as much as SU-35 let alone the cheaper SU-30MKI and loses in BVR to SU-35 handly. Not many fighters can compete against the SU-35 BVR arsenal and the long range radar it possesses. This isn’t even comparing the payload type & ordnance for ground targets and ship targets along with its SAR radar it can use.

As for maneuverability SU-35 with 3D thrust vectoring easily out maneuvers Rafael any day of the week. Though I will say maneuverability Rafael is also very good, just not as good as SU-35.

Lastly and most importantly, maintenance on SU-35 is magnitudes cheaper than maintenance on Rafael. Add in the fact India is getting EXPORT version Rafael and its a no brainer to me.

I would take 2 SU-35S over 1 Rafael (cost) without thinking twice.

Pilot skill also makes a difference, not sure where Indian pilots rank against world pilots, but you have to add in the factor of pilot skill as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S powered by twin AL-41 latest variant engines, I would take that any day over a single engine WS-10 that is still brand new engine going thru growing pains. Remember $$$ cost per hour of maintenance and maintenance levels of each.
> 
> SU-35S top speed is Mach 2
> J-10C top speed is Mach 1.8
> 
> ECM: SU-35 used Khibiny variant and J-10C uses KG600 pod, I’ll take Russia here if you have reasons why you believe KG600 is better I will listen.
> 
> Russia radar variant IRIS-E in L-Band over China’s AESA. Chinese SU-35 till up to 2017 didn’t have IRIS-E, I’m not sure if they have them now or a Chinese local radar. But Russia was willing to upgrade the Chinese SU-35 last I heard.
> 
> ordnance available, diversify of ordnance, and pound v pound weapons able to be deployed I’ll take SU-35S any day over J-10C
> 
> So again be fair, you are comparing J-10C CHINESE version (NOT EXPORT) to older SU-35 EXPORT version (NOT ONE RUSSIA uses).
> 
> Even F-35 is more advanced in some ways than F-22 because F-22 development started in 90’s and electronics possibly 00’s so latest F-35 blocks were more modern electronic suite than their F-22 brethren.
> 
> So you have to compare latest variants of each and not pick and choose which variant to compare to. Even US with all its money is still flying 40 year old F-18’s
> 
> Now I just want to emphasis I think J-10C is a good fighter. I don’t have any problems with it. But for Iran who doesn’t have much experience on Chinese fighters (outside of I think F-7?) and now a whole brand new engine WS-10. It creates headaches for maintenance where Iranian engineers are already split between the Russian trained ones and American experienced ones. Now adding Chinese fighters just creates a logistics nightmare.
> 
> Lastly, if China were to one day turn cold to Iran it would take a lot more work keeping a Chinese fighter in the air then a Russian one. Iran already has a deep engineer base that works on Russian helicopters, jets, submarines, and radars.



well if you read what i actually wrote, i did not disagree that the SU-35 is very maneuverable and thus good ar wvr combat, the chinese exercises point this out, in fact they pretty much state that the su-35 is more maneuverable than all of china's other flanker variants.

also the ws-10 is very much mature at this point, and is at least better than the al-31 in every way. perhaps the af-41 is better or perhaps not, we cant say.

and i also did not claim anything about specific performance of each system. only that from the chinese reports the j-10C overcomes the su-35 electronically pretty consistently in their exercises. 

that said, at this point china has had way more experience in AESA radars than russia does, with more generations of them made, and equipped.

and yes, the su-35 china has is the export variant, i didnt say it was otehrwise.

once more my one and only point was: per the chinese exercises, the su-35 is fantastic WVR, but behind china's own jets electronically and in BVR. you can disagree, but then you're not arguing with me but with a country that has both planes and flies them in exercises.


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> chinese reports



You mean the country that claims it somehow how has the LEAST amount of COVID deaths among the 5 industrial powerhouse nations despite having at least 2-3x their population? Or the country that claims the virus didn’t escape from a lab? Or the country that claims it isn’t systemically oppressing Muslims and committing large scale genocide and brainwashing? That China?

I wouldn’t trust Chinese reports worth a damn thing. If you have non bias sources actively comparing the two, I would love to hear them. But Chinese censored reports are not viable data pieces.

In real war, SU-35s would win against J-10C 9 times out of 10. Not “simulated” exercises where the parameters get changed to make the outcome more favorable for the commanders to report to their superiors.

But at this point it’s all theoretical much like most fighter jets 1 v 1 since we haven’t had modern dog fights since the Iran-Iraq war 40+ years ago. Minus some India-Pakistan skirmishes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Samar111

IRIAF should buy Tejas from India.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Samar111 said:


> IRIAF should buy Tejas from India.


let be honest , Iran airforce probably prefer to buy Super Tucanos from brasil , at least they are good for CAS role.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> You mean the country that claims it somehow how has the LEAST amount of COVID deaths among the 5 industrial powerhouse nations despite having at least 2-3x their population? Or the country that claims the virus didn’t escape from a lab? Or the country that claims it isn’t systemically oppressing Muslims and committing large scale genocide and brainwashing? That China?
> 
> I wouldn’t trust Chinese reports worth a damn thing. If you have non bias sources actively comparing the two, I would love to hear them. But Chinese censored reports are not viable data pieces.
> 
> In real war, SU-35s would win against J-10C 9 times out of 10. Not “simulated” exercises where the parameters get changed to make the outcome more favorable for the commanders to report to their superiors.
> 
> But at this point it’s all theoretical much like most fighter jets 1 v 1 since we haven’t had modern dog fights since the Iran-Iraq war 40+ years ago. Minus some India-Pakistan skirmishes.


What are the odds Iran will modernize it's airforces?


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> What are the odds Iran will modernize it's airforces?



2 factors at play:

1) IRGC doesn’t see airforce as a worthy field and some stigma still exist against the Air Force with its close ties with Shah and US armed forces.

2) Russia, Russia uses Iran as a bargaining chip. Even now with the nuclear deal, it was Russian negotiators that told Raisi negotiators to cut the **** and stop with excessive demands.

I put the odds of a SMALL purchase (20-30 fighters) at 50/50.

I put the odds of a large purchase (complete overhaul of Iranian airforce) at less than 30%

Iran just doesn’t have the available hard cash (10B+) so Russia would have to finance the deal or accept some type of oil for arms deal.

Lastly, need the political will on Russia side and the only way we get that is if Russia invades Ukraine and gets sanctioned to hell. At that point Russia won’t give a damn about supply Iran with arms.

Arms embargo has been gone for nearly 2 years and we haven’t heard of a single arms purchase, not even modern military helicopters or troop transport planes. Iran desperately needs new military arms transport planes....how long are we going to rely on ancient C-130’s?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Samar111 said:


> IRIAF should buy Tejas from India.


To sell Tejas you need permission from USA, ISrael, Russia and EU at same time. 

To sell JF-17 you need Russian and Chinese permission.

China on the other hand is hesitant to introduce its Flanker derivatives in international markets because of Russian copyright. 

Better to go for Russian fighter instead of trying to appease half of the world powers.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Muhammed45 said:


> To sell Tejas you need permission from USA, ISrael, Russia and EU at same time.
> 
> To sell JF-17 you need Russian and Chinese permission.
> 
> China on the other hand is hesitant to introduce its Flanker derivatives in international markets because of Russian copyright.
> 
> Better to go for Russian fighter instead of trying to appease half of the world powers.


Why not collaborate with Turkey for 5th gen. TFX.it will be ready until 2045.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Why not collaborate with Turkey for 5th gen. TFX.it will be ready until 2045.


Turkey is a NATO member state. They will be sanctioned severely. 

The biggest cooperation that we had with Turkey was smuggling of F-4/5 spare parts during Iran-Iraq war possibly at 10X market price. 

Russia is currently hit by CAATSA so they have no reason to avoid selling fighter jets to IRIAF. Turkey on the under hand is not. They still are hopeful to return to F-35 program and cooperation with South Korea in many fields such as an engine for Altay tank.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Muhammed45 said:


> Turkey is a NATO member state. They will be sanctioned severely.
> 
> The biggest cooperation that we had with Turkey was smuggling of F-4/5 spare parts during Iran-Iraq war possibly at 10X market price.
> 
> Russia is currently hit by CAATSA so they have no reason to avoid selling fighter jets to IRIAF. Turkey on the under hand is not. They still are hopeful to return to F-35 program and cooperation with South Korea in many fields such as an engine for Altay tank.


So you cannot collaborate with any country for conventional war weapons.

You will have to create each and every thing from scratch which is both time consuming and expensive.

In modern world, joint ventures are the way to go to keep the pace with enemies.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> If Iran wants to invest in the airforce then it would mainly be for potentially engaging with regional rivals in a local conflict. Against a superpower like the US I'm afraid its just thought of as a waste of money without much potential for a capacity to retaliate.
> 
> However if Iran does decide to buy modern some flankers then they should surely build some mountain strongholds and runways that lead to some safe underground bunkers. Yeah it just feels as if with the current direction of UAVs and reusable, expandable missile systems that Iran just sees more bank for the buck with the asymmetrical missile/drone option.
> 
> The thing with UAVs is that they're much cheaper and more expendable that fighter jets that cost tens of millions a piece with each pilot taking years to train. Nations simply aren't willing to risk their fighter jet and pilot unless they pretty much have air superiority regardless. I mean losing a piece of equipment that costs 50-100 million a piece is extremely painful. Of course for air superiority however there is no contest. Drones just aren't there yet, but even then air defenses can play a huge role in denying air access to the enemy, which is what Iran's air defense network is geared for.


I believe if Iran want to buy another aircraft it will be mainly for complementing our air defense system , for CAS it seems we have decided to go F-5 variant route , for bombing enemy we invested heavily on suicide drones and missiles and I think thats what we have decided to use for that.

for protecting our air force and keeping it operational in case of war with enemy , there is another solution that I think is more effective.

BAS-90​
But for that strategy to be applicable we need to think about larger quantity of middle sized aircraft than a small number of larger aircraft like Flankers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Natalya Shadova

Azarakhsh missile. I wonder how good the new seeker is. Hopefully Iran can make an AIM-120C/D class missile in the future


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> You mean the country that claims it somehow how has the LEAST amount of COVID deaths among the 5 industrial powerhouse nations despite having at least 2-3x their population? Or the country that claims the virus didn’t escape from a lab? Or the country that claims it isn’t systemically oppressing Muslims and committing large scale genocide and brainwashing? That China?
> 
> I wouldn’t trust Chinese reports worth a damn thing. If you have non bias sources actively comparing the two, I would love to hear them. But Chinese censored reports are not viable data pieces.
> 
> In real war, SU-35s would win against J-10C 9 times out of 10. Not “simulated” exercises where the parameters get changed to make the outcome more favorable for the commanders to report to their superiors.
> 
> But at this point it’s all theoretical much like most fighter jets 1 v 1 since we haven’t had modern dog fights since the Iran-Iraq war 40+ years ago. Minus some India-Pakistan skirmishes.



yes, the country reports the least because it has the least deaths. you know, due to the "extreme" lockdowns, westerners keep crying "human rights abuse" about? you got anti-vaxxers going to parties, 5 day quarantines for positives, while china has community watchmen guarding the village entrance against anyone without a logged and recorded negative test from the last 3 days, 
You got failing hospitals while china builds muti-thousand bed full service quarantine wards in 12 days

and lab? yea, from an american lab and released during the world military games in china by the CIA.

and your continued fakes news about xinjiang what with the "eye witnesses" who cries "genocide, murder, rape, forced labor" the same people who three years ago said they saw solitary confinement but no violence. they have not been back in chia in the mean time. and pictures of warehouses that you claim are camps.

see, facts dont give a shit about what your views on china is. facts are china has extremely little covid and virtually all are from external visitors.

And back on topic. there is every reason to believe chinese electronics are superior to the russian ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> yes, the country reports the least because it has the least deaths. you know, due to the "extreme" lockdowns, westerners keep crying "human rights abuse" about? you got anti-vaxxers going to parties, 5 day quarantines for positives, while china has community watchmen guarding the village entrance against anyone without a logged and recorded negative test from the last 3 days,
> You got failing hospitals while china builds muti-thousand bed full service quarantine wards in 12 days
> 
> and lab? yea, from an american lab and released during the world military games in china by the CIA.
> 
> and your continued fakes news about xinjiang what with the "eye witnesses" who cries "genocide, murder, rape, forced labor" the same people who three years ago said they saw solitary confinement but no violence. they have not been back in chia in the mean time. and pictures of warehouses that you claim are camps.
> 
> see, facts dont give a shit about what your views on china is. facts are china has extremely little covid and virtually all are from external visitors.
> 
> And back on topic. there is every reason to believe chinese electronics are superior to the russian ones.



Save your propaganda for someone who believes your retarded way of thinking.

_“there is every reason to believe Chinese electronics are superior to the Russian ones”_

Then proceeds to list no reasons/evidence of his claim. Trust me bro.

Sounds like a seller on AliBaba “very good. Better than original! So good! Buy now!”

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> Save your propaganda for someone who believes your retarded way of thinking.
> 
> _“there is every reason to believe Chinese electronics are superior to the Russian ones”_
> 
> Then proceeds to list no reasons/evidence of his claim. Trust me bro.
> 
> Sounds like a seller on AliBaba “very good. Better than original! So good! Buy now!”



my response was for everyone except you, because you obviously don't give two shits about any facts, but it'll at least bring everyone else laughs about how dumb you are.

and your smearing lies isnt even a bad thing for china. the more anti-chinese gremlins like you burying their heads in the sand(especially if they are in power), means the greater likelihood that no working policy against china will ever come about, because garbage in, garbage out. you just assume china can't do something because you're blinded by racism or pure hatred while ignoring or ignorant of all facts and logic pointing out that china is not only capable but actually doing it right now, then you'll never be prepared.

This is why the west predicts that china collapses every single year, but reality dont give a shit about your wet dreams and china only "collapses" upward and while you blame china for basically every bad thing that ever happened to you, you dont actually fix your own problems because your laziness isnt your fault, why fix it? its china's fault. your basic education and lower level schooling is producing bad results, but you dont have to change your system, because it just china's fault. your minorities are rioting in the streets, but why check out what they're demanding? they're just china pawns anyways. your 1% owns 80% of your nation's wealth while the middle class sinks into poverty, but thats not a systemic issues, theres nothing to fix its clearly china's fault. 
You don't have to fix anything, its all china's fault, you only need to blame china and and continue to come up with more ineffectual policies against china.

and hey, I gave exactly as much evidence as you did when you claimed "In real war, SU-35s would win against J-10C 9 times out of 10"

if you can't be bothered, why on earth should I be?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> my response was for everyone except you, because you obviously don't give two shits about any facts, but it'll at least bring everyone else laughs about how dumb you are.
> 
> and your smearing lies isnt even a bad thing for china. the more anti-chinese gremlins like you burying their heads in the sand(especially if they are in power), means the greater likelihood that no working policy against china will ever come about, because garbage in, garbage out. you just assume china can't do something because you're blinded by racism or pure hatred while ignoring or ignorant of all facts and logic pointing out that china is not only capable but actually doing it right now, then you'll never be prepared.
> 
> This is why the west predicts that china collapses every single year, but reality dont give a shit about your wet dreams and china only "collapses" upward and while you blame china for basically every bad thing that ever happened to you, you dont actually fix your own problems because your laziness isnt your fault, why fix it? its china's fault. your basic education and lower level schooling is producing bad results, but you dont have to change your system, because it just china's fault. your minorities are rioting in the streets, but why check out what they're demanding? they're just china pawns anyways. your 1% owns 80% of your nation's wealth while the middle class sinks into poverty, but thats not a systemic issues, theres nothing to fix its clearly china's fault.
> You don't have to fix anything, its all china's fault, you only need to blame china and and continue to come up with more ineffectual policies against china.
> 
> and hey, I gave exactly as much evidence as you did when you claimed "In real war, SU-35s would win against J-10C 9 times out of 10"
> 
> if you can't be bothered, why on earth should I be?



Hilarious talk from a homer fanboy. Sorry to stop your fanboy China rant short, but my family and extended family do business in China, import/export business both those in Iran and those in the states. We are familiar with China from a business standpoint.

That doesn’t mean we blindly support China (or Iran for that matter) and avoid calling a spade a spade. Or worse be caught being a cape crusader Chinese government fanboy on random Internet forums using a communist star avatar.

Quite hilarious, continue defending that government. Could careless. But don’t assume people don’t do business in China or with China especially in the west, just because they don’t have highly favorable view of Chinese government. business is business, not personal.

Lastly, certain viewpoints of Russian vs Chinese hardware is for fanboys to debates. But I went thru SU-35S and J-10C and category comparison BVR arsenal, radar, cost, engine, ECW suite etc. you must of missed that in your race to defend Xi.

Also Earlier posts I did encourage Iran to get certain Chinese aircraft if available (unlikely China supplies them but still). Then fanboys (like yourself) came in took a educational topic and decided to say J-10C is way better than SU-35S and derailed the thread into a PS5 vs Xbox level fanboy debate. Even tho Iran was never even offered J-10C or J-10. But Pakistan fanboys can only promote that aircraft on here apparently (among other Chinese ones).


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> Hilarious talk from a homer fanboy. Sorry to stop your fanboy China rant short, but my family and extended family do business in China, import/export business both those in Iran and those in the states. We are familiar with China from a business standpoint.
> 
> That doesn’t mean we blindly support China (or Iran for that matter) and avoid calling a spade a spade. Or worse be caught being a cape crusader Chinese government fanboy on random Internet forums using a communist star avatar.
> 
> Quite hilarious, continue defending that government. Could careless. But don’t assume people don’t do business in China or with China especially in the west, just because they don’t have highly favorable view of Chinese government. business is business, not personal.
> 
> Lastly, certain viewpoints of Russian vs Chinese hardware is for fanboys to debates. But I went thru SU-35S and J-10C and category comparison BVR arsenal, radar, cost, engine, ECW suite etc. you must of missed that in your race to defend Xi.
> 
> Also Earlier posts I did encourage Iran to get certain Chinese aircraft if available (unlikely China supplies them but still). Then fanboys (like yourself) came in took a educational topic and decided to say J-10C is way better than SU-35S and derailed the thread into a PS5 vs Xbox level fanboy debate. Even tho Iran was never even offered J-10C or J-10. But Pakistan fanboys can only promote that aircraft on here apparently (among other Chinese ones).



oh yea, your "family" "iran" "the states"
sure sure.
and i'm a reptilian lizard secretly controlling the world's governments. your real or not history has no impact on anything.

and you "blindly support" lol of course you don't blindly support china, i can clearly see you're blindly anti-china. I have never once claimed that the chinese government is perfect. in fact in this thread i've only said the chinese have the su-35 and have the j-10 and per their reports the su-35 is very maneuverable but is behind in electronics to the j-10c. i have never stated this as anything other than its a view from the chinese side, and i have never even said the chinese su-35 were equal to the russian ones, but if russia isnt selling those domestic versions then all anyone else should be concerned with is the export models. you're the one that started to go off a tangent about how because its chinese reports, they cant be trusted, for no other reason than only because they're chinese and then completely unrelated to anything here, crying about yours and other nation's incompetence in dealing with covid, and because nothing could possibly be wrong with your healthcare system/government, it must be because the chinese are at fault again.

and specs? lol

your listed missiles....missiles that china also literally has (R77), and china didn't find it impressive against modern chinese missiles(though at the time of the purchase they were much better than what china fielded) china has better ones, and is in fact fielding PL-15 now, even the us now warns of new chinese missiles (pleading for defence spending notwithstanding ).

Russia is known to have trouble developing aesa fighter radars, algeria literally rejected the su-35 because of this. while china is on something like the 3 gen of its aesa radars now. of course aesa is not the end all of everything, reports of early chinese digital radars indicate they were worse than late american mechanical radars. , but its an undeniable fact that AESA is a superior technology to PESA, and if they could they would be on it, every advantage they had with the PESA IRIS-E would only be amplified by a hypothetical ASEA IRIS-E and yet the fact that they cant offer this says alot. and lastly I would like russia to be strong too, it helps china if they were stronger than they are now, but facts are russia has no money and the soviet science they were left with can only sustain them for so long, and such a (relatively) small economy can only specialize to be strong in certain areas, and will fall behind in others from their soviet (relative) heights. look at the slow development pace of the su-57, look at the state of the russian navy. fact also are, that china bought some su-35, dont find them totally superior and didn't buy more, and china has no issues buying from russia if their stuff really is better, afterall russia is not going to embargo china, so there isnt any worries from that regard.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> _“there is every reason to believe Chinese electronics are superior to the Russian ones”_
> 
> Then proceeds to list no reasons/evidence of his claim. Trust me bro.


I can say one , virtually 80% or more of all electronic produced in world are produced in China



applesauce said:


> Russia is known to have trouble developing aesa fighter radars, algeria literally rejected the su-35 because of this. while china is on something like the 3 gen of its aesa radars now. of course aesa is not the end all of everything, reports of early chinese digital radars indicate they were worse than late american mechanical radars. , but its an undeniable fact that AESA is a superior technology to PESA, and if they could they would be on it, every advantage they had with the PESA IRIS-E would only be amplified by a hypothetical ASEA IRIS-E and yet the fact that they cant offer this says alot.


they have AESA for Su-57 , so it's not the question of can or Can't but more likely want and don't want.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I can say one , virtually 80% or more of all electronic produced in world are produced in China
> 
> 
> they have AESA for Su-57 , so it's not the question of can or Can't but more likely want and don't want.



Produced in China and designed are two different things. Apple chips are not “Chinese” just because they are produced in China anymore than Peugeot 206 is “Iranian” when Iran assembles it in Iran.

And the term “electronics” in our discussion is ECW/Radar suite not raw material (semiconductor chips).

Iran doesn’t produce much semiconductor chips yet has potent air defense systems like Bavar 373, Khordad 15, etc etc

So if the claim was “Chinese semiconductors are better than Russian semiconductors” then that could be a valid claim. But that wasn’t the claim he was trying to make or if it was, I missed it. But to say China’s ECW suite, targeting pod, or seeker technology is better than Russia? Conjecture


applesauce said:


> Russia is known to have trouble developing aesa fighter radars, algeria literally rejected the su-35 because of this. while china is on something like the 3 gen of its aesa radars now. of course aesa is not the end all of everything, reports of early chinese digital radars indicate they were worse than late american mechanical radars. , but its an undeniable fact that AESA is a superior technology to PESA, and if they could they would be on it, every advantage they had with the PESA IRIS-E would only be amplified by a hypothetical ASEA IRIS-E and yet the fact that they cant offer this says alot.



Not going to address the rest of your immature childish comments, but I will address this part.

The only one saying SU-35 is inferior to J-10C was.....A Chinese report...something countries claim routinely. iran also claims that Bavar-373 is on par with S-400, but let’s be real.

Again no proof of Iran or Chinese claims. That was my point. Actually at least Iran’s military systems (UAVs, Air defense systems, BMs) have been tested against western armies. China high tech arms have rarely been tested. So everything is conjecture.

It’s Predator like UAV (Loong? Forgot the name) is routinely getting shot down in Yemen by Iran’s 351 insurgency Ground to Air missile.

As for the SU-35 that China has, I told you up till 2017 it didn’t even IRIS-E. China’s SU-35 was outdated export version, russia offered to upgrade them. So again how can you say IRIS-E is inferior just based on PESA vs AESA when at least till several years ago, it wasn’t in Chinese SU-35’s?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> As for the SU-35 that China has, I told you up till 2017 it didn’t even IRIS-E. China’s SU-35 was outdated export version, russia offered to upgrade them. So again how can you say IRIS-E is inferior just based on PESA vs AESA when at least till several years ago, it wasn’t in Chinese SU-35’s?


well didn't Su-35 fail against Rafael


----------



## applesauce

Hack-Hook said:


> I can say one , virtually 80% or more of all electronic produced in world are produced in China
> 
> 
> they have AESA for Su-57 , so it's not the question of can or Can't but more likely want and don't want.



they can but the su-57 project itself is moving at a snail's pace. hardly a stunning example of engineering greatness. heck everyone expected russia to field a hundred of these before the j-20 is in full production, yet there are probably about 100 j-20s now and all of like 3? or 4? production su-57. again this comes back to having no money and unless you want to try and say the russian are somehow just plain better engineers or just smarter than everyone else(some crazy race theory), no money means you will decline especially if you are trying to keep pace with the world's best across the board and not just specializing in certain areas.

And thats really it. the russians are as good as anyone, they just have no money.


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> Not going to address the rest of your immature childish comments, but I will address this part.
> 
> The only one saying SU-35 is inferior to J-10C was.....A Chinese report...something countries claim routinely. iran also claims that Bavar-373 is on par with S-400, but let’s be real.
> 
> Again no proof of Iran or Chinese claims. That was my point. Actually at least Iran’s military systems (UAVs, Air defense systems, BMs) have been tested against western armies. China high tech arms have rarely been tested. So everything is conjecture.
> 
> It’s Predator like UAV (Loong? Forgot the name) is routinely getting shot down in Yemen by Iran’s 351 insurgency Ground to Air missile.
> 
> As for the SU-35 that China has, I told you up till 2017 it didn’t even IRIS-E. China’s SU-35 was outdated export version, russia offered to upgrade them. So again how can you say IRIS-E is inferior just based on PESA vs AESA when at least till several years ago, it wasn’t in Chinese SU-35’s?



you comparisons are ridiculous.

iran does not have the s-400, and does not have the industries nor the wealth for such a system that russia has. so of course their claims cant be trusted.

all indicators show iran likely does not have a comparable product to the s-400 at least not any time soon.


this contrasts with china, where china physically has both systems in question and can fly them against each other all day long, china is also richer than russia(and increasingly so) for nearly 30 years now, and china has a complete aerospace sector, which has already produced the j-20, multiple generations of fighter aesa radars, better missiles than what russia fields, various flanker variants. it is a proven industry and the j-10 itself is hardly the most challenging jet for the current chinese aerospace sector nor would the su-35 be consider the best jet in china even if the j10 and all the other flanker variants disappeared.


likewise, an iranian claim that their tier-2 air defence system is better than the s-400 would be far more credible if iran already has a s-500 or better equivalent, owns the s-400 to be able to directly test them and is 10 times richer than russia


and for all your talk of chinese jets being untested. what actual threat has the f-22 been "tested" against?? did it dogfight su-57s or any other jet?? all it has done is peacefully escort some russian bombers and bombed some desert guys in a $10 tent, but this supposedly proves it against a near peer?
so by your logic, the f-22's superiority is all just conjecture, the f-35 for that matter too. heck we might as well say the us nuclear triad is just all conjecture. it's never been launched against any enemies, it probably doesn't even work in a real nuclear war by your logic.

and yes, UAVs get shot down all the time. what about it? china does not claim the Wing Loong is some miracle in the sky. its a slow, cheap, easy to fly UAV that can be targeted, it definitely isnt stealth. US UAVs get shot down all the time too, like the reaper drones in the same yemen battlefield, heck iran got its hands on a intact RQ170, must mean us drones, even the advanced stealth ones are trash right?

and what do you mean china's su-35 dont have the irbis-E? it's the default radar on the su-35 since 2007. and listed as the export radar on the su-35 by tikhomirov (the maker), you literally cant get anything other than Ibris-E if you buy a su-35 (well i guess if you paid them extra you could get something different).

what russia(and tikhomirov) offered was to upgrade china's older su-30MKK and su-30 MK2 with the Ibris-E. so you're wrong on yet another point.


----------



## Hack-Hook

applesauce said:


> they can but the su-57 project itself is moving at a snail's pace. hardly a stunning example of engineering greatness. heck everyone expected russia to field a hundred of these before the j-20 is in full production, yet there are probably about 100 j-20s now and all of like 3? or 4? production su-57. again this comes back to having no money and unless you want to try and say the russian are somehow just plain better engineers or just smarter than everyone else(some crazy race theory), no money means you will decline especially if you are trying to keep pace with the world's best across the board and not just specializing in certain areas.
> 
> And thats really it. the russians are as good as anyone, they just have no money.


well Russia chronic problem is lack of funds. but if you buy the airplane i guess it wont matter much , the buyer will pay the money and i think since 2005 Russia had Zuk MA/MAE which is AESA


----------



## Hack-Hook

applesauce said:


> likewise, an iranian claim that their tier-2 air defence system is better than the s-400 would be far more credible if iran already has a s-500 or better equivalent, owns the s-400 to be able to directly test them and is 10 times richer than russia


we didn't said better than S-400 we said better than S-300 and then we said the next generation Bavar would be better than S-400 we didn't said better than S-500
is it hard to believe we already shown or 3rd of Khordad is way better than Buck M2

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> and what do you mean china's su-35 dont have the irbis-E? it's the default radar on the su-35 since 2007. and listed as the export radar on the su-35 by tikhomirov (the maker), you literally cant get anything other than Ibris-E if you buy a su-35 (well i guess if you paid them extra you could get something different).
> 
> what russia(and tikhomirov) offered was to upgrade china's older su-30MKK and su-30 MK2 with the Ibris-E*. so you're wrong on yet another point.*







__





Defense World


View News at Defense World




www.defenseworld.net





I’m convinced you are just another fanboy with zero military knowledge. Thanks for proving me right though by acting like a know it all.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Defense World
> 
> 
> View News at Defense World
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenseworld.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m convinced you are just another fanboy with zero military knowledge. Thanks for proving me right though by acting like a know it all.



and im convinced you can barely even read.
even from your own source, which literally says exactly what i said, that the chinese su-35 is using the irbis-E.
"Su-35 Jets To Get New Irbis-E Radar Control Systems"​"These fighters will receive newest Irbis-E systems"​
Hell the title of your article is literally "Chinese Su-35 Jets To Get New Irbis_E" what word in that title or the actual article suggests that chinese doesn't have the Ibris-E in its SU-35s??? its not like china got some jets on hand, then russia offered to upgrade those jets that china already has.

Wait.....

you probably can't read a calendar, i should have known. that's why you think they are offering to upgrade.

the first 4 su-35 china received was in december 2016, about a month after your source says Russia *WILL* install the Ibris-E onto the Chinese SU-35 and then they installed it, as is expected since su-35s has nothing except the Ibris-E for an radar.

If you got any evidence the chinese su-035 has anything other than the Ibris-E then show it and i will apologize,and it should be easy, if the radar is in fact different than standard then it would be newsworthy to any press that reports these kinds of military matters. but right now, you're a barely literate, conspiracy spewing, racist, waste of oxygen.

literally all sources says its the Ibris-E in those chinese su-35S, whether that is from the People's Daily or TASS.


----------



## BigMelatonin

TheImmortal said:


> Save your propaganda for someone who believes your retarded way of thinking.
> 
> _“there is every reason to believe Chinese electronics are superior to the Russian ones”_
> 
> Then proceeds to list no reasons/evidence of his claim. Trust me bro.
> 
> Sounds like a seller on AliBaba “very good. Better than original! So good! Buy now!”



Ironically, you have internalized western propaganda. You state that there is "widespread consensus" that the J-10 is worse, but by who? Western "analysts" to whom everything Chinese is a copy of something? To whom everything Chinese is a stolen design it because it looks vaguely similar to this other thing?
Just because a plane is Chinese doesn't mean it's inherently worse. People still unironically think China, a country with a massive educated population and resources, can't produce quality military products?
This whole discussion is ultimately pointless anyways. Su-35's radar was defeated by Rafale in Egyptian trials anyways, and the chance of Russia selling fighter to Iran is 0, let alone anything not worthlessly downgraded.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This forum is drifting day by day! We have reached a peak. You have to be crazy, illiterate to think that the J-10 and the Rafale are better than the S-35 SM. Terrible intellectual slippage. And I'm going to be asked for arguments to justify the madness? It's not serious!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran does produce the Bavar-373 SAM system. Iran began to conduct research on this when Russia stalled the delivery of the S-300 a few years back. Iran began producing them in 2016 and I can't say with absolute certainty how capable they are precisely. I honestly don't have expertise in this field however I recall an analyst a year or so back analysing the launch sequence videos and coming to the conclusion that it's superior to the S-300 although it's doubted if its better than the S-400. Although the Bavar-373 has never been used in a combat scenario,

Just as a note of reference, Iran used a domestically made medium range system, the 3rd of Khordad SAM system, to shoot down the RQ-4 Global Hawk in June 2019. The RQ-4 is one of the expensive ($100 million+) and advanced UAVs in the world. The US claimed that the RQ-4 was not in Iranian airspace however the proof is in the pudding as they say, in the end it was Iranians who retrieved the remains first. Now after Iran retrieved the remains of the RQ-4, it has been confirmed that it does have some stealth features, like honeycombed composites in the airframe. This is what Iran retrieved from the remains.






In any case for Iran to be able to mass-produce SAM systems superior to the S-300 is already sufficient for Iran's defense needs at this point in time. Iran's air defense network and it's fleet of 1000+ UAVs and 5000+ missiles, some mobile, some situated in underground mountain bunkers, all of that together is sufficient to ensure Iran's security at the present moment.

Iranian SAM systems, drones and weapons systems have been battle tested throughout the years and we know of their effectiveness from various engagements. When the Yemeni Houthis struck the Aramco sites in Saudi Arabia, Sept 2019, which were surrounded / protected by half a dozen Patriot SAM, some PAC-3 systems btw, the result was that half of the Saudis oil reserves were wiped out in one fell swoop.










applesauce said:


> you comparisons are ridiculous.
> 
> iran does not have the s-400, and does not have the industries nor the wealth for such a system that russia has. so of course their claims cant be trusted.
> 
> all indicators show iran likely does not have a comparable product to the s-400 at least not any time soon.
> 
> 
> this contrasts with china, where china physically has both systems in question and can fly them against each other all day long, china is also richer than russia(and increasingly so) for nearly 30 years now, and china has a complete aerospace sector, which has already produced the j-20, multiple generations of fighter aesa radars, better missiles than what russia fields, various flanker variants. it is a proven industry and the j-10 itself is hardly the most challenging jet for the current chinese aerospace sector nor would the su-35 be consider the best jet in china even if the j10 and all the other flanker variants disappeared.
> 
> 
> likewise, an iranian claim that their tier-2 air defence system is better than the s-400 would be far more credible if iran already has a s-500 or better equivalent, owns the s-400 to be able to directly test them and is 10 times richer than russia
> 
> 
> and for all your talk of chinese jets being untested. what actual threat has the f-22 been "tested" against?? did it dogfight su-57s or any other jet?? all it has done is peacefully escort some russian bombers and bombed some desert guys in a $10 tent, but this supposedly proves it against a near peer?
> so by your logic, the f-22's superiority is all just conjecture, the f-35 for that matter too. heck we might as well say the us nuclear triad is just all conjecture. it's never been launched against any enemies, it probably doesn't even work in a real nuclear war by your logic.
> 
> and yes, UAVs get shot down all the time. what about it? china does not claim the Wing Loong is some miracle in the sky. its a slow, cheap, easy to fly UAV that can be targeted, it definitely isnt stealth. US UAVs get shot down all the time too, like the reaper drones in the same yemen battlefield, heck iran got its hands on a intact RQ170, must mean us drones, even the advanced stealth ones are trash right?
> 
> and what do you mean china's su-35 dont have the irbis-E? it's the default radar on the su-35 since 2007. and listed as the export radar on the su-35 by tikhomirov (the maker), you literally cant get anything other than Ibris-E if you buy a su-35 (well i guess if you paid them extra you could get something different).
> 
> what russia(and tikhomirov) offered was to upgrade china's older su-30MKK and su-30 MK2 with the Ibris-E. so you're wrong on yet another point.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

Assuming that the stealth features of the F-35 are compromised, for example by Russian/Chinese onboard infared search and track systems, the F-35 is then what ? a large, slow, rather fat turkey that can't really maneuver ?

Lately a few of them have crashed during flights. I read a report a few years back which stated that the F-35 is basically an overpriced hot mess, designed to fatten defense contractors pockets rather than to actually outperform or engage anything.

In regards to BVR weapons systems, it's been widely reported way back that China/Russia have managed to produce systems that are faster and with more range. Supposedly the Americans are now playing catch up in this department. They just became too complacent after the fall of the Soviet Union.

In terms of the sensor package and sheer performance, honestly I would choose a Rafale over an F-35 anyday. 

Honestly though, at the end of the day though the F-35 and Rafale are both over $100 million a piece. At that price, the question is, who will even have the nerves to risk losing such an asset ? 

Honestly I personally believes that the the proliferation of cheap unmanned systems and UAVs to saturate and swarm the enemy is much more cost effective than using super cutting edge, advanced, highly expensive fighter jets along with the pilot, who is a cream of the crop candidate that takes years to train.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> This forum is drifting day by day! We have reached a peak. You have to be crazy, illiterate to think that the J-10 and the Rafale are better than the S-35 SM. Terrible intellectual slippage. And I'm going to be asked for arguments to justify the madness? It's not serious!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah




----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


>


DCS world in not exactly real life situation and the guy in flanker did many things wrong


----------



## sha ah

I know it's just posted for fun and games my friend. First of all it was a gun duel, that's never going to happen with modern weaponry. Never even in this day and age. Hell even an F-14 with 4-6 Phoenix missiles, it's extremely unlikely, especially since every new jet now costs $100 million dollars a piece. I honestly think that money is better spent saturating the airspace with cheaper UAVs.

I mean think about it, $100 million for 1 fighter jet with what even assuming 8 BVR missiles, that's 8 targets. For $100 million, you can deploy 100 cheap UAVs for $1 million a piece. The Chinese Wing Long 2 costs $2 million a piece right ? 

Now assuming you mass produce and build thousands of these smaller UAVs that can use AI, hit pre assigned targets, even if each UAV is a suicide drone, I mean won't sheer numbers,mathematical pressure overwhelm the enemy ? I mean what unless the fighter jets go around gunning them down one by one which can be a prettty tedious task. 

Now assume that with a massive swarm of UAVs you also deploy some UAVs that can deploy BVR missiles against enemy fighters with highly stealth capabilities. Would it even be worth it to risk a cream of the crop pilot, along with a piece of military hardware costing $100 million a piece to risk it ? 

I believe that future wars can and will be waged in his manner, essentially UAV, robot wars. The first nation states to successfully master and mass produce these tactics on the field can build neo empires of the future. However if you're paying way too much for your military hardware, like the Americans, then will this even be feasible ? I mean they're paying $40 million for predator type drones right so I don't know.



Hack-Hook said:


> DCS world in not exactly real life situation and the guy in flanker did many things wrong


----------



## The Eagle

Heard about crash of a fighter jet in Tabraiz. Can anyone please confirm?


----------



## sahureka2

The Eagle said:


> Heard about crash of a fighter jet in Tabraiz. Can anyone please confirm?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Eagle

sahureka2 said:


>



Crashed near a sports hall and a school? Can you share further details?
Regards,


----------



## sahureka2

The Eagle said:


> Heard about crash of a fighter jet in Tabraiz. Can anyone please confirm?




https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...litary-plane-away-from-residential-area-video




https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ان-از-یک-فاجعه-بزرگ-جلوگیری-کرد-تصاویر-و-فیلم


----------



## The Eagle

sahureka2 said:


>



One of these?
View attachment 817234


----------



## Windjammer

The Eagle said:


> Crashed near a sports hall and a school? Can you share further details?
> Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Wonder why they fly the training mission over the city


----------



## Windjammer

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder why they fly the training mission over the city


You have to be prepared for all eventualities....say if there is an enemy attack.....they are not going to just target your country side.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Windjammer said:


> You have to be prepared for all eventualities....say if there is an enemy attack.....they are not going to just target your country side.


Don't you think what you said was somehow nonsense.
What's the point of letting enemy reach cities before engaging them and by the way what's the different in fighting enemy fighters over city with fighting them over desert ?


----------



## Windjammer

Hack-Hook said:


> Don't you think what you said was somehow nonsense.
> What's the point of letting enemy reach cities before engaging them and by the way what's the different in fighting enemy fighters over city with fighting them over desert ?


Well, if you can totally stop the enemy from reaching the cities then good luck to you.....
And if anything your second part of question is what's called nonsense ...as it were you who was asking ....why do they train over the cities. 
Alas....your enemy is not exactly going to ask you to fight over the desert or the cities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bleek

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder why they fly the training mission over the city


Why not prepare for all possibilities?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Don't you think what you said was somehow nonsense.
> What's the point of letting enemy reach cities before engaging them and by the way what's the different in fighting enemy fighters over city with fighting them over desert ?


They were coming back from training mission and while approaching air force base in tabriz,something go wrong.They didnt ejected because they were not at hihg altitude so they had very short timeframe to act,they spent all available time to direct aircraft to empty(closed school) school stadium to avoid crash in to very dense residental area,literary everything around were residental buildings..so they gave their life to direct aircraft in only empty place around

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sha ah

An F-5 crashed into a school complex. The 2 pilots along with 1 civilian it seems died in the resulting crash. You can expand the tweeet to see all the videos and details. It's quite an unfortunate tragedy.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1495645586049183750

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1495647147013951488


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bleek said:


> Why not prepare for all possibilities?





Windjammer said:


> Well, if you can totally stop the enemy from reaching the cities then good luck to you.....
> And if anything your second part of question is what's called nonsense ...as it were you who was asking ....why do they train over the cities.
> Alas....your enemy is not exactly going to ask you to fight over the desert or the cities.


Exactly what is different in fighting over cities and fighting in deserts ?


sanel1412 said:


> They were coming back from training mission and while approaching air force base in tabriz,something go wrong.They didnt ejected because they were not at hihg altitude so they had very short timeframe to act,they spent all available time to direct aircraft to empty(closed school) school stadium to avoid crash in to very dense residental area,literary everything around were residental buildings..so they gave their life to direct aircraft in only empty place around


Tabriz airport is not exactly in the middle of the city by the way I can understand they need double use airports but honestly is it really wise to use them for training purpose


----------



## aryobarzan

RIP..Brave pilots could have been much worse.
photo of Tabriz airport and the city

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Exactly what is different in fighting over cities and fighting in deserts ?
> 
> Tabriz airport is not exactly in the middle of the city by the way I can understand they need double use airports but honestly is it really wise to use them for training purpose


Well,air force must fly and it really doesnt matter is it training or other kind of flight,on training mission there is always one senior pilot instructor...in this case it was pilot instructor with rank of major,and young pilot was colonel so experienced crew...I give you information that I found and saw, it was official statement and I saw video showing crash site,we can now argue about this or that..but most air force tactical bases are located outside cities but still airforce must fly over cities and it is unfortunate that 3 persons die,including two pilots..as I mentioned one major,experienced pilot instructor and second young pilot colonel..and third person was man who live near...so huge tragedy. I dont really know what to say to your question,pilot training include flights over different terrain,using ground infrastucture for navigation..orientation...so I dont know is it even possible to fly training missions just outside cities and provide pilot every possible experience it may need...I am not familiar with air force,to be honest..I served in Army ground force and closest to air force was few months I served in RVPVO which in practice was literary organization work to build and deploy one RVPVO battalion from Yugoslavian Army equipment they left in 2 garrisons,that was 4 mil 8 helicopters..plenty of AAA and few mobile short range Strela SAMs..After that I got promotion and was assigned to brigade,it was mountain maneuver brigade(maneuver means without area of responsibility)so you go where it is worst situation to do most shity jobs,mostly been used as saboteur-reconnaissance-scout task group in offensive missions. Basicly most of our missions was to go first few hours before mission,enter behind enemy lines without fight and wait morning till mission start than surprise engagemnt,brigade end up been knightly and in all ex Yugoslavian...Bosnia,Croatia and Serbian military that means it was heavily fucked up with losses ,so I dont know much about pilot training.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

The crash happened in my city.

Khoda rahmatesh kone

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

To all members:
I am trying to add aviation components that Iran builds for the aviation thread of the Iranian forum here..I have come blank about aircraft Radars....Does Iran make any aircraft radar!!!!..what is used in Kowsar..did Iran change the F-14 radar ..any info will be great..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran produces some stuff. Obviously nothing close to best in the west. Range 70-90 KM









aryobarzan said:


> To all members:
> I am trying to add aviation components that Iran builds for the aviation thread of the Iranian forum here..I have come blank about aircraft Radars....Does Iran make any aircraft radar!!!!..what is used in Kowsar..did Iran change the F-14 radar ..any info will be great..

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Iran produces some stuff. Obviously nothing close to best in the west. Range 70-90 KM
> 
> View attachment 817611



That’s the head scratcher right there, how a country that can build so many different advanced radars and air defense systems, has struggled to produce similar type radars for fighter jets.

Is it struggles with necessary raw components, miniaturization, power supply management, or just lack of funds?

Maybe @EvilWesteners can answer, but a decent PESA or even AESA should be well within Iran’s industrial base capability given its experience in air defense radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## _Nabil_

TheImmortal said:


> That’s the head scratcher right there, how a country that can build so many different advanced radars and air defense systems, has struggled to produce similar type radars for fighter jets.
> 
> Is it struggles with necessary raw components, miniaturization, power supply management, or just lack of funds?
> 
> Maybe @EvilWesteners can answer, but a decent PESA or even AESA should be well within Iran’s industrial base capability given its experience in air defense radars.


Unfortunately, @EvilWesteners left the forum uppon one mod abuse.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> That’s the head scratcher right there, how a country that can build so many different advanced radars and air defense systems, has struggled to produce similar type radars for fighter jets.
> 
> Is it struggles with necessary raw components, miniaturization, power supply management, or just lack of funds?
> 
> Maybe @EvilWesteners can answer, but a decent PESA or even AESA should be well within Iran’s industrial base capability given its experience in air defense radars.


Yes my view also..I worked in IEI in shiraz before revolution..Today's IEI is 10 times more advanced than when I was there and even then they had the potential to build most components of an aircraft radar if they wanted to with the exception of a component called TWT Tubes..Today as you mentioned they build all kinds of AD radars..so most likely funding is the issue..Iran will be behind in this field if they do not make a move on it..Any aircraft Platform that Iran builds in the future will need one..

While searching the net for Iranian radars I came across this site

Most complete catalog of all Iranian radars and spec sheets..wow.








Iranian made military radars


Ground Surveillance Radars GSR-110S Medium Range Ground Surveillance Radars GSR-110S is an advanced new generation of medium-range tactical radar which is high performance, low cost with low power of intercept. This system is man-portable and can be easily carried by two soldiers. A...




defense-arab.com





might of Iran Airforce in the old days..Would make an American proud!...we just signed the cheques ..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

According to the various interviews with Mr. Azarmehr on the Mehraein youtube channel, the tigers/kowsars, phantoms, and tomcats all have newer planar array radars or what he calls phased array radars. Not sure as to aesa vs pesa on the various aircraft but Azarmehr does answer questions posted to that channel in Farsi text if anyone wants to know more specifics. He did say that the kowsar radar is the 90km range planar array shown on this page and he also showed pictures of bayonet radars installed on IRIAF phantoms from many years back. 

I think the main difficulty for Iran is miniaturization and power output for smaller radars vs the larger truck mounted stuff for air defense systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


> According to the various interviews with Mr. Azarmehr on the Mehraein youtube channel, the tigers/kowsars, phantoms, and tomcats all have newer planar array radars or what he calls phased array radars. Not sure as to aesa vs pesa on the various aircraft but Azarmehr does answer questions posted to that channel in Farsi text if anyone wants to know more specifics. He did say that the kowsar radar is the 90km range planar array shown on this page and he also showed pictures of bayonet radars installed on IRIAF phantoms from many years back.
> 
> I think the main difficulty for Iran is miniaturization and power output for smaller radars vs the larger truck mounted stuff for air defense systems.


That is good news but why aren't they making these radars more public..I tried to get photos /specs on the net..nothing showed up...I give it another try..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> According to the various interviews with Mr. Azarmehr on the Mehraein youtube channel, the tigers/kowsars, phantoms, and tomcats all have newer planar array radars or what he calls phased array radars. Not sure as to aesa vs pesa on the various aircraft but Azarmehr does answer questions posted to that channel in Farsi text if anyone wants to know more specifics. He did say that the kowsar radar is the 90km range planar array shown on this page and he also showed pictures of bayonet radars installed on IRIAF phantoms from many years back.
> 
> I think the main difficulty for Iran is miniaturization and power output for smaller radars vs the larger truck mounted stuff for air defense systems.



I mean Grifo E (AESA with SAR/ISAR capability) is what is in Brazilian upgraded F-5’s and even Pakistan considered them for their JF-17 Block III. Max range is stated at 85 nm.

So that is probably what I expect out of Iran in a true F-5 mass production model not a 90KM radar. Not this tinkering Kowsar model they tout.


Right now Iran is just modernizing the radars, not sure they are at the point of truly creating next generation radars.

I mean the fact they haven’t reverse engineered an F-14 radar by now just for tech demonstration purposes is quite puzzling. Has to be lack of funds or worse no go ahead from upper command. In Iran, the brightest military engineer minds go either for missile development or nuclear development.

A lot of the current aerospace minds are older and retiring over the coming decade.

Iran needs to get a move on while it still has the brain talent to put together a domestic program. Maybe it’s doing that behind the scenes. But in last 10-15 years there isn’t a lot of room for optimism given utter lack of developments in this field.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> That’s the head scratcher right there, how a country that can build so many different advanced radars and air defense systems, has struggled to produce similar type radars for fighter jets.
> 
> Is it struggles with necessary raw components, miniaturization, power supply management, or just lack of funds?
> 
> Maybe @EvilWesteners can answer, but a decent PESA or even AESA should be well within Iran’s industrial base capability given its experience in air defense radars.


No focus in the air power area. I think you may already know why.


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> That is good news but why aren't they making these radars more public..I tried to get photos /specs on the net..nothing showed up...I give it another try..


I was surprised when Azarmehr talked about the extensive radar upgrades to planar array across IRIAF, though I am skeptical if every aircraft has had it radar upgraded. For instance, does every phantom in the fleet have a bayonet? Do the older F-5s have newer radars or will they get that when they get upgraded to kowsar?




TheImmortal said:


> I mean the fact they haven’t reverse engineered an F-14 radar by now just for tech demonstration purposes is quite puzzling. Has to be lack of funds or worse no go ahead from upper command. In Iran, the brightest military engineer minds go either for missile development or nuclear development.


He mentioned the tomcat radars have been upgraded though there was no further info and the picture provided is of the original. I think probably subsystems and processors might have been updated but the main array is the original awg-9.


----------



## Natalya Shadova

aryobarzan said:


> That is good news but why aren't they making these radars more public..I tried to get photos /specs on the net..nothing showed up...I give it another try..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BigMelatonin

If Kowsar really is using a radar in a similar class to Grifo E it could become an ok stop-gap plane until IRIAF can acquire 5th gen fighters, especially if Iran can acquire license production of the SD-10 or a similar missile to use alongside domestic AIM-9 derivatives. They have already shown off several types of glide bombs that could be integrated onto the platform and missiles like the Ghaem 114 could be used in a similar fashion to the Brimstone missile on the Eurofighter for ground targets. It's main weakness would be the engines at that point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

BigMelatonin said:


> If Kowsar really is using a radar in a similar class to Grifo E



It’s not. Grifo range is 80 nautical miles (150KM), Iran’s is 90 KM. Grifo had SAR/ISAR capability.

Iran should strive to get that type of radar class on its Kowsar, would make the plane somewhat helpful. Right now it’s just a modernized F-5 with digital components.


----------



## sanel1412

Now it is well known fact that Iran did figjter jet modernization,which included New radars. It is question how many aircraft were actually modernized. Last news was about New radar for F1 Mirage, there is no precise spec. about these radars, Just some general INFO provided by different Iranian military officials. But as mentioned, considering Iranian industrial Base, Advanced air defense system produced, it can be considered that Iran can produced decent radar for figjter jet. Now, producing radar for air defense system or standalone ground based radar is different Thing completly than do it for figjter jet. Power and size are main chalange, producing powerful multipurpose radar but yet been small and fit in to Limited power supply fighterjet output, fighterjets have both AC & DC generators onboard, but with everyThing else mentioned, providing new more powerful is probably required.. But I still think that This is not problem for Iran industry, at least not for some 4th or 4+ gen radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

We should keep this video for future discussions..Air power is a good complement to the missile power...Lets urge Iran leaders to bring forward the importance of manned air power and give more $$$ to IRIAF to develop in-house heavy fighter.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496820177908170753
And not to forget the importance of military transport planes.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496812048868515847

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

aryobarzan said:


> We should keep this video for future discussions..Air power is a good complement to the missile power...Lets urge Iran leaders to bring forward the importance of manned air power and give more $$$ to IRIAF to develop in-house heavy fighter.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496820177908170753
> And not to forget the importance of military transport planes.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496812048868515847


None of those videos are related to this current conflict. Be warned from using Indian media which is rife with bullshit.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Natalya Shadova

The new sanctions on Russia might be good news for the Iranian air force. Russia might sell to Iran now that their market has shrank

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Now with this Ukraine conflict and especially if the JCPOA is revived, Iran will make some major military purchases, possibly fighter jets from Russia.








Natalya Shadova said:


> The new sanctions on Russia might be good news for the Iranian air force. Russia might sell to Iran now that their market has shrank


----------



## Stryker1982

Phase two will begin tonight...........be warned.


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Zathura

Is Iran attempting or thinking of buying any SU-34s from Russia to replace the F-4s? if not, whay?


----------



## aryobarzan

WudangMaster said:


>


Any chance of getting a screen shot of this new Mohajer 10 Drone concept ...looks great.


----------



## Sineva

Zathura said:


> Is Iran attempting or thinking of buying any SU-34s from Russia to replace the F-4s? if not, whay?


Well,for a start the big question is not "will iran buy any xx-xx?",the big question is whether or not russia is now willing to become a reliable supplier of military hardware to iran,instead of its previously "reliably unreliable" reputation as a supplier,at least as far as iran was concerned.
That is whats ultimately probably going to decide if irans going to buy any big ticket items from the russians.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Zathura said:


> Is Iran attempting or thinking of buying any SU-34s from Russia to replace the F-4s? if not, whay?


You won't be getting any Su-34s for awhile...


----------



## Zathura

Oldman1 said:


> You won't be getting any Su-34s for awhile...


It seems there will be SU-35s in the deal so why not SU-34s?


----------



## Oldman1

Zathura said:


> It seems there will be SU-35s in the deal so why not SU-34s?


They need them for the war.


----------



## sha ah

The war isn't going to go on for very long. Once Mariupol falls, the rest of the dominos will fall very quickly. The Russians could have already taken Mariupol if it weren't for the Ukrainians preventing the exodus of civilians through humanitarian corridors. They know that once the civilians leave, the Russians will bomb the remaining fighters into oblivion.

Anyways Iran isn't interested in the SU-34. SU-30 and SU-35 are the only models Iran is interested in. As far as China is concerned it's the J-10, nothing else.



Oldman1 said:


> They need them for the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Anyways Iran isn't interested in the SU-34. SU-30 and SU-35 are the only models Iran is interested in. As far as China is concerned it's the J-10, nothing else.



J-10? Iran would be stupid to buy J-10.

J-31 or NOTHING from China. 

SU-34 is waste of money, it’s a bomber and Iran isn’t sending bombers to Saudi Arabia or the Arabian ocean any time soon.

Iran needs air superiority fighters SU-30/35, MIG-31, etc.

While SU-57 or J-20 would be nice, realistically the only “5th” Gen fighter I can see Iran ever getting would be J-31 if China allows it for export (which it likely will).

However, Chinese-Iranian arms relations are almost as bad as Russian-Iranian.

So not hopeful for either as I said in past.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> J-10? Iran would be stupid to buy J-10.
> 
> J-31 or NOTHING from China.
> 
> SU-34 is waste of money, it’s a bomber and Iran isn’t sending bombers to Saudi Arabia or the Arabian ocean any time soon.
> 
> Iran needs air superiority fighters SU-30/35, MIG-31, etc.
> 
> While SU-57 or J-20 would be nice, realistically the only “5th” Gen fighter I can see Iran ever getting would be J-31 if China allows it for export (which it likely will).
> 
> However, Chinese-Iranian arms relations are almost as bad as Russian-Iranian.
> 
> So not hopeful for either as I said in past.


remain the question , which is better , low end new generation air craft or high-end previous generation .
on cell phones I go with the second option , won't knew which is better when it come to aircrafts

by the way I believe the only aircrafts IRAF will get until we develop a heavy turbofan engine will be F-5 variants


----------



## Ich

Hack-Hook said:


> by the way I believe the only aircrafts IRAF will get until we develop a heavy turbofan engine will be F-5 variants



Yes, it is the old simple principle: A soon as Iran developed a heavy turbofan, they get offered 4++ Fighters at a good price. This is to stop further development of Iran 4++ (and better) fighters. Independence is not a thing that greater powers want to see in other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Yes, it is the old simple principle: A soon as Iran developed a heavy turbofan, they get offered 4++ Fighters at a good price. This is to stop further development of Iran 4++ (and better) fighters. Independence is not a thing that greater powers want to see in other countries.



It’s not developing a heavy turbofan.

It’s developing a heavy turbofan that is

1) Ability to be mass produced (25-50 engines a year)

2) Cost effective

3) Reliable life span and maintenance


That’s what make this tech so so hard. Or else I am sure Iran could develop ONE heavy turbofan engine if they really wanted to. But if any of the 3 points above are not also accomplished, it’s useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Fact that many F-4 were upgraded,is something we know already,but some F-4 got "Zero overhaul",which mean they are completely rebuilt with newly produced components, These F-4 have some indigenous new parts with some changes and some can be even spotted from close look,at landing gear,HUD..etc Also new radar on F4 has 200km range,and has the ability to detect naval and ground targets,also it has ability to track and engage multiple air to air targets simultaneously,and new air to air missiles are integrated already..This example on picture is completely destroyed in Iran - Iraq war but it is restored with all new components ,so to say only has same designation and serial number. I already give detailed observation based on radar and cocpit pictures available but website is no longer active where this was available(domain blocked by US). I had those pictures and I think I have it still,so I will reupload those and give some insight,based on images of MFDs,HUD..etc and other components inside cockpit ,it is possible to get many information..I was able to see 4 or 5 different radar modes,there was screenshots of MFDs while radar is turned on..function testing..etc..also image of new weapons computer management ...that is all gone..so it would be nice to have it

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sha ah

Remarkable. Iran's aerospace industry is much more advanced than people give it credit for.



sanel1412 said:


> Fact that many F-4 were upgraded,is something we know already,but some F-4 got "Zero overhaul",which mean they are completely rebuilt with newly produced components, These F-4 have some indigenous new parts with some changes and some can be even spotted from close look,at landing gear,HUD..etc Also new radar on F4 has 200km range,and has the ability to detect naval and ground targets,also it has ability to track and engage multiple air to air targets simultaneously,and new air to air missiles are integrated already..This example on picture is completely destroyed in Iran - Iraq war but it is restored with all new components ,so to say only has same designation and serial number. I already give detailed observation based on radar and cocpit pictures available but website is no longer active where this was available(domain blocked by US). I had those pictures and I think I have it still,so I will reupload those and give some insight,based on images of MFDs,HUD..etc and other components inside cockpit ,it is possible to get many information..I was able to see 4 or 5 different radar modes,there was screenshots of MFDs while radar is turned on..function testing..etc..also image of new weapons computer management ...that is all gone..so it would be nice to have it
> View attachment 823035

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Anyone has any info abt this image,it is said to be Iranian air base

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BigMelatonin

sanel1412 said:


> Anyone has any info abt this image,it is said to be Iranian air base
> View attachment 823164


At a distance looks like a Chinese Su-30MKK to me, usually in cases like this, they are passing through to an airshow or something.



https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ba/cc/df/baccdf95074196497416da1c8e5dcd03.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> Fact that many F-4 were upgraded,is something we know already,but some F-4 got "Zero overhaul",which mean they are completely rebuilt with newly produced components, These F-4 have some indigenous new parts with some changes and some can be even spotted from close look,at landing gear,HUD..etc Also new radar on F4 has 200km range,and has the ability to detect naval and ground targets,also it has ability to track and engage multiple air to air targets simultaneously,and new air to air missiles are integrated already..This example on picture is completely destroyed in Iran - Iraq war but it is restored with all new components ,so to say only has same designation and serial number. I already give detailed observation based on radar and cocpit pictures available but website is no longer active where this was available(domain blocked by US). I had those pictures and I think I have it still,so I will reupload those and give some insight,based on images of MFDs,HUD..etc and other components inside cockpit ,it is possible to get many information..I was able to see 4 or 5 different radar modes,there was screenshots of MFDs while radar is turned on..function testing..etc..also image of new weapons computer management ...that is all gone..so it would be nice to have it
> View attachment 823035



radar is JL-10A of JH-7A. 

IRIAF F-4E with this upgrade have practically turned into JH-7A with possible/already done integration of following 

AIM-9/R-73 for WVR
PL-12 for BVR (~100 KM)
C-803/Qader for AShCM (300 KM)
Hoveyzah for the Land attack (1350 KM)

If we can raise five such squadrons and place three of them facing the Persian Gulf forward bases of KSA, UAE can be targeted any time. Even though I am a firm believer in using BM/CM/UCAV/loitering drones for attack and aircraft for the sole purpose of interception or guarding airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Actually the radar looks similar to the radar Iran uses on their Kowsar F-5s. Obviously alot larger but it looks similar. Could it be possibly Iranian built ?

Iranian built radar for F-5






radar inside upgraded Iranian F-4






Also its incredible how long these F-4s have lasted. Both Turkey and Iran are still using them. 50 years and still going strong. Just goes to show how quality built things used to be in the US.



drmeson said:


> radar is JL-10A of JH-7A.
> 
> IRIAF F-4E with this upgrade have practically turned into JH-7A with possible/already done integration of following
> 
> AIM-9/R-73 for WVR
> PL-12 for BVR (~100 KM)
> C-803/Qader for AShCM (300 KM)
> Hoveyzah for the Land attack (1350 KM)
> 
> If we can raise five such squadrons and place three of them facing the Persian Gulf forward bases of KSA, UAE can be targeted any time. Even though I am a firm believer in using BM/CM/UCAV/loitering drones for attack and aircraft for the sole purpose of interception or guarding airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

sha ah said:


> Iranian built radar for F-5


Do you produce TRM modules for radars in home??

Asking because Pakistan has developed (still in prototype stage) ground based AESA radar (plans are there to use it on air borne assets).Now i was just wondering that Pakistan is second country in the Muslim World that can make T&R modules in home for its radars.But if Iran has built it already,then we will be on third number 😜.


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Do you produce TRM modules for radars in home??
> 
> Asking because Pakistan has developed (still in prototype stage) ground based AESA radar (plans are there to use it on air borne assets).Now i was just wondering that Pakistan is second country in the Muslim World that can make T&R modules in home for its radars.But if Iran has built it already,then we will be on third number 😜.



Yes of course.

Iran produces even OTH radars which only a handful of countries around the world produce there own (US, Russia, China, Iran, and EU).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> Yes of course.


AESA or PESA?
GaAs or GaN based?


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Do you produce TRM modules for radars in home??
> 
> Asking because Pakistan has developed (still in prototype stage) ground based AESA radar (plans are there to use it on air borne assets).Now i was just wondering that Pakistan is second country in the Muslim World that can make T&R modules in home for its radars.But if Iran has built it already,then we will be on third number 😜.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_radars_of_Iran

We make quite large ones too

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> AESA or PESA?
> GaAs or GaN based?



NAJM AESA for Sayyad Air defence system






MERAJ AESA for BAVAR Long-range air defence system







There are others too, we have a very large radar product range.



sha ah said:


> Actually the radar looks similar to the radar Iran uses on their Kowsar F-5s. Obviously alot larger but it looks similar. Could it be possibly Iranian built ?
> 
> Iranian built radar for F-5
> 
> View attachment 823229
> 
> 
> radar inside upgraded Iranian F-4
> 
> View attachment 823231
> 
> 
> Also its incredible how long these F-4s have lasted. Both Turkey and Iran are still using them. 50 years and still going strong. Just goes to show how quality built things used to be in the US.



A Chinese member in the Kowsar thread confirmed that F-4E radar is JL-10A based upon the of T/R modules count and antenna size, we did hear that the Dowran project gave F-4E long-range BVR capability. Kowsar's radar according to BT is Iranian licensed production of KLJ-6F which may turn into KLJ7/KLJ-7A in the future as they are from the same family.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

drmeson said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_radars_of_Iran
> 
> We make quite large ones too


So no AESA radar.All are PESA.Am i right??


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> AESA or PESA?
> GaAs or GaN based?



All of the above. As well as X-band and VHF band radar and electronic jammers as well.

Iran produces 10+ different radars for air survillenace. Including radars able to detect very low RCS like those on stealth CMs, F-22, B-2, and F-35

However, It’s weak in airborne radar (fighter jet radar). There it needs much more improvement.

Iran is only slightly behind China and Russia in ground based radar. In next 5-10 years that gap will be non existent.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

drmeson said:


> NAJM AESA


GaAs or GaN based?


drmeson said:


> MERAJ AESA





TheImmortal said:


> In next 5-10 years that gap will be non existent.


They will move further ahead.So let's see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> GaAs or GaN based?



Iran likes to do a mixture of PESA/AESA GaA/GAN because it allows more production of radars (and AD batteries) and cheaper operating costs.

Some radars are very expensive (even for Iran) to keep on, thus they are turned on only when critical or a certain intervals. Thus you need to take a cost effective approach. Also not all radar spots need the most expensive radar.

People think AESA vs PESA is like it is in the air for airforce and that is not true. There is way too much ground to cover and way too many air defense batteries to make everything high end expensive to operate radar.

Have to be smart and mix and match based on your needs and layer your AD rings/spheres smartly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> GaAs or GaN based?
> 
> 
> 
> They will move further ahead.So let's see.



We use PESA called Asr on our Frigates. 












and both Gallium nitride (GAN) and Arsenide (GaS) are synthesized in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sanel1412 said:


> Fact that many F-4 were upgraded,is something we know already,but some F-4 got "Zero overhaul",which mean they are completely rebuilt with newly produced components, These F-4 have some indigenous new parts with some changes and some can be even spotted from close look,at landing gear,HUD..etc Also new radar on F4 has 200km range,and has the ability to detect naval and ground targets,also it has ability to track and engage multiple air to air targets simultaneously,and new air to air missiles are integrated already..This example on picture is completely destroyed in Iran - Iraq war but it is restored with all new components ,so to say only has same designation and serial number. I already give detailed observation based on radar and cocpit pictures available but website is no longer active where this was available(domain blocked by US). I had those pictures and I think I have it still,so I will reupload those and give some insight,based on images of MFDs,HUD..etc and other components inside cockpit ,it is possible to get many information..I was able to see 4 or 5 different radar modes,there was screenshots of MFDs while radar is turned on..function testing..etc..also image of new weapons computer management ...that is all gone..so it would be nice to have it
> View attachment 823035



I have already talked about the F-4 SM (super improved) are some year here. Iran hides beautiful suprises in their combat aircraft. There will be suprises about engines too. New aircraft at the appearance of old planes is for me misleading for the enemy. It is clear that Iran must already work on AESA radar and may already be in trial mode

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I have already talked about the F-4 SM (super improved) are some year here. Iran hides beautiful suprises in their combat aircraft. There will be suprises about engines too. New aircraft at the appearance of old planes is for me misleading for the enemy. It is clear that Iran must already work on AESA radar and may already be in trial mode


well , I don't think F4 has aerodynamic capabilities for modern warfare ... if you was talking about Mig29 or F14 then , they were 4th gen fighters and could be upgraded but F4 , no ..


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> well , I don't think F4 has aerodynamic capabilities for modern warfare ... if you was talking about Mig29 or F14 then , they were 4th gen fighters and could be upgraded but F4 , no ..



If SU-25/SU-30/SU-34 is being brought down by manpads and Cold War era Buks....then imagine the fate of The F-4 “bomb truck”. 

The upgrade projects keep the highly experienced engineers/technicians occupied and from retiring. Similar to the Karrar project.

Have to give your workforce something to do, till you either build a new aircraft or acquire one.


----------



## aryobarzan

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Do you produce TRM modules for radars in home??
> 
> Asking because Pakistan has developed (still in prototype stage) ground based AESA radar (plans are there to use it on air borne assets).Now i was just wondering that Pakistan is second country in the Muslim World that can make T&R modules in home for its radars.But if Iran has built it already,then we will be on third number 😜.


To be a real TRM producer you need to be able to grow GAS or GAN single crystals and then be able to have a Semiconductor fabrication facility to turn them into Power Transistors and Integrated circuits that are based on these two substrates..you also need Surface Mount printed circuit board facility that could turn your design in to actual packable cards inside your TRM modules..If you source any of the above from outside then your in-house content for TRM will be less..just like an automobile your end product has the country's name but the domestic content will be different for each country....what % content Iran or Pakistan or Turkey have most probably is not a public info.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

OldTwilight said:


> well , I don't think F4 has aerodynamic capabilities for modern warfare ... if you was talking about Mig29 or F14 then , they were 4th gen fighters and could be upgraded but F4 , no ..




Modern wars is not a motor racing or a show. A very modern F-4 is very dangerous for any enemy. What you do not understand on this forum is that Iran manufactures their new heavy aircraft through F-5, F-4 SM and other planes at the lowest cost. The newly improved parts manufacturing experience as well as the construction of new parts made entirely in Iran are steps towards a new heavy heavy hunter.

The F-4 SM is a major asset for Iran and for a country with heavy sanction, Iran does the impossible. They have unveiled war secrets that will surprise us one day. I predict that the Shafaq project is still active behind scene. Watch how long that Russia has been working on the MIG-35, long years old.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zathura

Is this true that Egypt tested SU-35 against the Rafale fighter jets and their Rafale managed to suppress the SU-35 radars with its electronic warfare system? if so what does this mean for Iran buying su-35? 
Also I heard that Algeria passed on Su-35s because it does not have AESA. Any truth in any of this?


----------



## Muhammed45

Zathura said:


> Is this true that Egypt tested SU-35 against the Rafale fighter jets and their Rafale managed to suppress the SU-35 radars with its electronic warfare system? if so what does this mean for Iran buying su-35?
> Also I heard that Algeria passed on Su-35s because it does not have AESA. Any truth in any of this?


You want fighter jets for air warfare or area denial?


----------



## drmeson

Muhammed45 said:


> You want fighter jets for air warfare or area denial?



with the development of BM/CM and long-range UCAVs, the logical choice for IRIAF would be to guard the airspace as a primary objective. 8 squadrons of a fighter jet-like Su-35S or J-10C are enough for IRIAF to do this job along with Ground-based air defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Zathura said:


> Is this true that Egypt tested SU-35 against the Rafale fighter jets and their Rafale managed to suppress the SU-35 radars with its electronic warfare system? if so what does this mean for Iran buying su-35?
> Also I heard that Algeria passed on Su-35s because it does not have AESA. Any truth in any of this?



First remember that Rafale cost 2x the cost of an SU-35. So you can field 2 SU-35 for every 1 Rafale.

And considering the range of an SU-35 is 250KM+ there is no onboard ECW system that can jam radar for that distance, not even ground based X band jammers can. 

So the SU-35 would need to be very close (under 20KM distance) for what you said to happen. Tell me how far the SU-35 was from the Rafale when it deployed its jammer and on what band and frequency.

Anyone who doesn’t know **** about radars says “it’s it AESA? No? Ok then it’s garbage”.

Don’t listen to people who make it seem like every fighter jet in the world needs to be AESA in order to be “good”. Yes it’s true that Griffen is a PESA not an AESA.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> Don’t listen to people who make it seem like every fighter jet in the world needs to be AESA in order to be “good”. Yes it’s true that Griffen is a PESA not an AESA.


You are given two Radars:
1) most modern in its class AESA radar with 170km range 
2) Most modern PESA radar in its class with 250km range.
Which one you will prefer?
More modern technology
Or just more range

Choice is yours.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> You are given two Radars:
> 1) most modern in its class AESA radar with 170km range
> 2) Most modern PESA radar in its class with 250km range.
> Which one you will prefer?
> More modern technology
> Or just more range
> 
> Choice is yours.



I am an AESA fan for the very simple reason that the majority of top-notch fighters, Air defense systems are going for AESA now. There is a reason that Iranian planners went for the production of large AESA's for our most trusted air defense systems. We might even see domestic production of airborne AESA soon as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> You are given two Radars:
> 1) most modern in its class AESA radar with 170km range
> 2) Most modern PESA radar in its class with 250km range.
> Which one you will prefer?
> More modern technology
> Or just more range
> 
> Choice is yours.



Irrelevant.

What matters is the armament that the AESA carries and quality of radar build itself. 

Also I didn’t want to have to do this, but here we go:

SU-35 actually had 2 radars not one.

Yes IRBIS-E is a PESA, but it has 400KM range (not 250KM, I was just using that as an example range for jamming example). I already covered SU-35 armament. It would be able to easily engage your 170KM AESA fighter from a very far BVR distance.

Lastly the 2nd radars of SU-35 deploys two additional front facing radars alongside the IRBIS-E

The twin N036B-1-01 L-band radars (AESA) provide increased angular coverage, and are ideal for tracking stealth targets and for electronic warfare.


Compare this with 50% of the cost of Rafael and you can see why SU-35 is the better choice.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> Irrelevant.
> 
> What matters is the armament that the AESA carries and quality of radar build itself.
> 
> Also I didn’t want to have to do this, but here we go:
> 
> SU-35 actually had 2 radars not one.
> 
> Yes IRBIS-E is a PESA, but it has 400KM range (not 250KM, I was just using that as an example range for jamming example). I already covered SU-35 armament. It would be able to easily engage your 170KM AESA fighter from a very far BVR distance.
> 
> Lastly the 2nd radars of SU-35 deploys two additional front facing radars alongside the IRBIS-E
> 
> The twin N036B-1-01 L-band radars (AESA) provide increased angular coverage, and are ideal for tracking stealth targets and for electronic warfare.
> 
> 
> Compare this with 50% of the cost of Rafael and you can see why SU-35 is the better choice.


Ok your point is:
From cost perspective, you will go for Su 35

But what for one to one ?
Here Rafael will take the show away from Su 35.

Modern warfare is a complex game.You can not just judge the strength of fighter jet from only Radar's range point of view.What about its SEAD/DEAD capabilities?Can it jamm the enemy air defence radars for self defence?

Now compare Su 35 with Rafael from SEAD point of view also.And then decide.


Surely in military acquisitions ,cost effectiveness plays a pivotal role but cost is not the only factor involved while selecting a fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Ok your point is:
> From cost perspective, you will go for Su 35
> 
> But what for one to one ?
> Here Rafael will take the show away from Su 35.
> 
> Modern warfare is a complex game.You can not just judge the strength of fighter jet from only Radar's range point of view.What about its SEAD/DEAD capabilities?Can it jamm the enemy air defence radars for self defence?
> 
> Now compare Su 35 with Rafael from SEAD point of view also.And then decide.
> 
> 
> Surely in military acquisitions ,cost effectiveness plays a pivotal role but cost is not the only factor involved while selecting a fighter jet.


The lack of SEAD I've seen from Russia is not very confidence inducing.

I would've wholeheartedly expected the airspace of Kharkiv to be in full control of Russia.

Either I have bad misconceptions about Russia's SEAD/DEAD capability or mobile air defences (Like large amounts of BUK's and KUB's are vastly underestimated). Russia has not been flying a very large amount of sorties it seems.

You won't be able to 100% of the time prevent bombs from falling into your assets, but you can definitely create contested conditions and down aircraft every so often.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Stryker1982 said:


> Either I have bad misconceptions about Russia's SEAD/DEAD capability or mobile air defences (Like large amounts of BUK's and KUB's are vastly underestimated).



We have to calibrate our expectations according to the general factual framework.

Germany's legendary 1940 Blitzkrieg against France lasted no less than six weeks. Ukraine in 2020 is slightly more populous than France used to be (44 versus 41 million inhabitants), and its surface area slightly larger (some 600 thousand versus some 540 thousand square kilometers).

In 2003 it also took the US military three whole weeks to invade Iraq, a totally battered country and thus far weaker than Ukraine in every respect. Moreover, Ukraine is enjoying extensive NATO support (intelligence, weapons, training, propaganda and psy-ops) which Iraq didn't. And perhaps most importantly, the Russians are much more careful about avoiding collateral damage in Ukraine than the Americans were in Iraq.

So I would say Russia's campaign is going according to plan and has been very successful so far. The bear's patience has a limit, as NATO is painfully experiencing at the moment, despite their boundless propaganda backed up by extensive censorship.

Russia's miscalculation was only about the determination of Ukrainian repressive units, including far right militants, to hold hostage their own civilian populations, especially the Russian-speakers in the east, which of course is complicating and slowing down Russian operations to a certain extent. Other than that, what we're seeing is the shattering strength of the Russian steam roller. The efficacy and quality of Russia's post-Soviet military build up is under display.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> So I would say Russia's campaign is going according to plan and has been very successful so far. The bear's patience has a limit, as NATO is painfully experiencing as we speak, despite their boundless propaganda backed up by extensive censorship.



Wouldn’t say “very successful” when you lose up to 10-15% of your invading force (deaths + wounded).

If the roles were reserved and Iran had caused 7,000 US casualties and Iran had not lost a single major city (Kermanshahr would be our Mariupol and let’s Tabriz and Mashhad our Sumy and Karkhiv). I would say that would be a major win for us.

The issue isn’t wether or not Russia can take land, of course it can. It has the military power to crush Ukraine that is not in question. The question is does it have the time, because we know as conflicts rage over time stagnation happens (Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc).

If Russia doesn’t care about “costs” then this could be cateoegized as a successful military operation.

But I think even if Russia wins it will be the whole world talking about the ineptitude of the Russia war machine at doing even the “basics” they teach in military academy.

Hopefully Iran’s military establishment gleans as much information from this war as it can. I am sure it will be taught in military academy’s around the world for years on what to do and what not to do during war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Chinook with new camouflage.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Wouldn’t say “very successful” when you lose up to 10-15% of your invading force (deaths + wounded).



Wounded troops don't necessarily qualify as losses since even the slightest scuff is classified and registered as a wound. In effect most of those wounded will return to duty in a matter of minutes or hours.

As for Russian casualty figures, I wouldn't place trust in Ukrainian and western sources at all. It is obvious that these have embarked on a gigantic propaganda campaign where facts no longer matter and psychological conditioning is everything. The fact that they need to resort to such unusual degrees of censorship is further evidence of this.

To my knowledge Russia hasn't published new numbers since March 1, when it reported less than 500 KIA and less than 1600 wounded. Assuming their casualty rate has remained constant (which is not certain), the current number would be around 1500 KIA and some 5000 wounded. If estimates that the Russian invading force consists of 100.000-200.000 troops are accurate, it would mean their losses amount to between 0.75% and 1.5% killed, and about 3% to 6% killed or wounded.

Even if Russia ultimately loses 15000 men (killed) or more taking over or completely neutralizing a country the size of Ukraine with the powerful backers Kiev has, it'd remain within logical expectations.



TheImmortal said:


> If the roles were reserved and Iran had caused 7,000 US casualties and Iran had not lost a single major city (Kermanshahr would be our Mariupol and let’s Tabriz and Mashhad our Sumy and Karkhiv). I would say that would be a major win for us.



If the US regime believes it can afford the 7000 casualties, then Iran will not have made a gain. In war, win or loss is determined by whether previously defined political aims intended to be served by the military instrument are met or not. As well as the long term social and political consequences of the war effort.

The US reaching its war objectives like Russia is bound to, would spell doom for Iran. Iran cannot afford but to make any kind of game-changing military action unaffordable for the Americans and deter them effectively from such undertakings, like she has successfully been doing to date.



TheImmortal said:


> The issue isn’t wether or not Russia can take land, of course it can. It has the military power to crush Ukraine that is not in question. The question is does it have the time, because we know as conflicts rage over time stagnation happens (Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc).



It depends on the conflict, I'd say. Especially when it comes to this conflict since as mentioned, Russia has not taken the gloves off and is extremely wary of inflicting too much collateral damage (both to Ukrainian and especially Russian-speaking civilians, as well as to infrastructure) when compared to the average NATO campaign.



TheImmortal said:


> If Russia doesn’t care about “costs” then this could be cateoegized as a successful military operation.



Economic costs are one thing, but how much human costs a country can afford is a function of its own social tolerance for casualties, as well as of the objective availability of manpower. A third criterion would be whether the losses are worth it considering the underlying political goal to be achieved. Tolerance is higher in Russia than in the west, and manpower is abundant enough. Russia's performance in terms of casualties should be gauged based on its own tolerance / resource levels.

As for whether it's politically worth it for Russia, the alternative - being encircled by NATO on its western borders, might well have heavier consequences in the long term.



TheImmortal said:


> But I think even if Russia wins it will be the whole world talking about the ineptitude of the Russia war machine at doing even the “basics” they teach in military academy.



I think this will be limited to the western world and its client states. So far I haven't heard western narratives being echoed in truly independent nations, and I'm not sure that they will adopt them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> To my knowledge Russia hasn't published new casualty figures since March 1, when it reported less than 500 KIA and less than 1600 wounded. Assuming their casualty rate has remained constant (which is not certain), the current number would be around 1500 KIA and some 5000 wounded. If estimates that the Russian invading force consists of 100.000-200.000 troops are accurate, it would mean their losses amount to between 0.75% and 1.5% killed, and about 3% to 6% killed or wounded.




Based on the amount of armour and vehicle lost plus UAV footage I have seen, Russia has taken Armenia like casualties at a minimum.

Minimum would be 5,000 dead could be as high as 10,000+.

If I were to guess I would say 5,000-7,000 is a safe assumption right now.

The destruction of mechanized armour is Syrian war esque.

As for Ukraine casualties it is at least 1:1 up to 2:1 so Ukraine has probably suffered 7,000-10,000 dead at a minimum.

We won’t know till the end of the war when both sides release their “real” figures and 3rd party organizations release the “estimated range”.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Based on the amount of armour and vehicle lost plus UAV footage I have seen, Russia has taken Armenia like casualties at a minimum.
> 
> Minimum would be 5,000 dead could be as high as 10,000+.



I'm not sure if and with what sort of a ratio casualties can be safely extrapolated from armor losses. If the Ukrainian side is conducting a lot of irregular warfare with hit-and-run ambushes against vehicles, it is possible that Russia would lose relatively more armor than troops. Also, we should beware reports of lost Russian armor in western sources even with pictures added, since both armies largely operate the same types.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> I'm not sure if and with what sort of a ratio casualties can be safely extrapolated from armor losses. If the Ukrainian side is conducting a lot of irregular warfare with hit-and-run ambushes against vehicles, it is possible that Russia would lose relatively more armor than troops. Also, we should beware reports of lost Russian armor in western sources even with pictures added, since both armies largely operate the same types.



Not just armour, but complete Russian vehicles- we can talk more in the chill thread as not to derail this thread.

Casualties are high no doubt about it, mostly due to use of conscript troops.


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Based on the amount of armour and vehicle lost plus UAV footage I have seen, Russia has taken Armenia like casualties at a minimum.
> 
> Minimum would be 5,000 dead could be as high as 10,000+.
> 
> If I were to guess I would say 5,000-7,000 is a safe assumption right now.
> 
> The destruction of mechanized armour is Syrian war esque.
> 
> As for Ukraine casualties it is at least 1:1 up to 2:1 so Ukraine has probably suffered 7,000-10,000 dead at a minimum.
> 
> We won’t know till the end of the war when both sides release their “real” figures and 3rd party organizations release the “estimated range”.


Its going to be a lot. So much so that Russia hasn't even updated their 499 or something casualties. Cause it be eye popping to many including the Russian people thinking Ukrainians are welcoming them with open arms everywhere.


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Wouldn’t say “very successful” when you lose up to 10-15% of your invading force (deaths + wounded).
> 
> If the roles were reserved and Iran had caused 7,000 US casualties and Iran had not lost a single major city (Kermanshahr would be our Mariupol and let’s Tabriz and Mashhad our Sumy and Karkhiv). I would say that would be a major win for us.
> 
> The issue isn’t wether or not Russia can take land, of course it can. It has the military power to crush Ukraine that is not in question. The question is does it have the time, because we know as conflicts rage over time stagnation happens (Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc).
> 
> If Russia doesn’t care about “costs” then this could be cateoegized as a successful military operation.
> 
> But I think even if Russia wins it will be the whole world talking about the ineptitude of the Russia war machine at doing even the “basics” they teach in military academy.
> 
> Hopefully Iran’s military establishment gleans as much information from this war as it can. I am sure it will be taught in military academy’s around the world for years on what to do and what not to do during war.



Undoubtedly Iran will be learning intently from this as they did during the Nagarno-Karabakh conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/150441941643128013135°42'52.0"N 51°17'18.0"E

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

Blue In Green said:


> Undoubtedly Iran will be learning intently from this as they did during the Nagarno-Karabakh conflict.


Doubt, I don't expect them to learn shit.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Stryker1982 said:


> Doubt, I don't expect them to learn shit.



lol, how come?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/150441941643128013135°42'52.0"N 51°17'18.0"E


Interesting


----------



## Stryker1982

Blue In Green said:


> lol, how come?


We should be realistic, we got some dumb and lazy people in some positions of power. We also have good people, like people who were early adopters of UAVs.

In recent exercise their were troops operating soft-skinned technicals. I have no problem with big *** machine guns, but can they be mounted on something that can withstand a 5.56x45mm NATO round. Not a Toyota. 

If Syria wasn't enough of a lesson to learn how important APS systems on Tanks and IFVs are, I hope they pay attention to Ukraine, because this entire T-72S force is dead otherwise. As a matter of fact, the war should be a wakeup call to T-72S and BMP-2 operators. 

Aside from the airforce that only requires money to purchase, the ground forces are very neglected and are well within Iran's capability to improve drastically. Ground forces have not learned much from Syria, just look at the equipment they were sent with in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Oldman1 said:


> Its going to be a lot. So much so that Russia hasn't even updated their 499 or something casualties. Cause it be eye popping to many including the Russian people thinking Ukrainians are welcoming them with open arms everywhere.



There's no evidence for Russia losing this many forces.

Now in response to the rest of the quote and more generally to the dominant mainstream narrative, allow me to paraphrase the explanations of a well-informed analyst with military background:

This war for all practical purposes is over. The Ukrainian army is defeated and completely encircled in different cauldrons, it no longer has any strategic initiative. Its only remaining option now is what the Germans did in 1945, namely to turn every city into a fortress, which at the tactical level is absolutely useless.

Especially since the Ukrainian army is extremely worn out, even the short range offensives over about 40 kilometers used to conduct are no longer within its capabilities. During the few attempts they made as of late, their entire columns were annihilated. Russia is now the only side with strategic initiative, and part of the western elites have understood this.

As for the notion that Moscow was miscalculating Ukrainians will welcome its forces with open arms, those who believe this omnipresent contention need to understand that we're still in the operational phase of the war. To follow up on France's example during WW2 which I evoked above, before De Gaulle could march in Paris, there was a week of military operations inside the city, so naturally residents weren't leaving their homes with flowers to offer to the soldiers.

Moreover, in most of the larger Ukrainian towns, reprisal battalions are still present and they are over-represented. For the past eight years, these have been instigating a reign of terror in the entire south-east of the country, where the majority of Russian-speakers live. Therefore, people are still expectant. Nonetheless, several cities of more than 100.000 inhabitants entirely relied upon the Russians: this is the case of Melitopol, Berdyansk, Kupryansk, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dexon

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1504419416431280131

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## StarmanInSpace

Dexon said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1504419416431280131


Does anyone know which base this is?


----------



## Stryker1982

StarmanInSpace said:


> Does anyone know which base this is?


Mehrabad.


----------



## Oldman1

SalarHaqq said:


> There's no evidence for Russia losing this many forces.
> 
> Now in response to the rest of the quote and more generally to the dominant mainstream narrative, allow me to paraphrase the explanations of a well-informed analyst with military background:
> 
> This war for all practical purposes is over. The Ukrainian army is defeated and completely encircled in different cauldrons, it no longer has any strategic initiative. Its only remaining option now is what the Germans did in 1945, namely to turn every city into a fortress, which at the tactical level is absolutely useless.
> 
> Especially since the Ukrainian army is extremely worn out, even the short range offensives over about 40 kilometers used to conduct are no longer within its capabilities. During the few attempts they made as of late, their entire columns were annihilated. Russia is now the only side with strategic initiative, and part of the western elites have understood this.
> 
> As for the notion that Moscow was miscalculating Ukrainians will welcome its forces with open arms, those who believe this omnipresent contention need to understand that we're still in the operational phase of the war. To follow up on France's example during WW2 which I evoked above, before De Gaulle could march in Paris, there was a week of military operations inside the city, so naturally residents weren't leaving their homes with flowers to offer to the soldiers.
> 
> Moreover, in most of the larger Ukrainian towns, reprisal battalions are still present and they are over-represented. For the past eight years, these have been instigating a reign of terror in the entire south-east of the country, where the majority of Russian-speakers live. Therefore, people are still expectant. Nonetheless, several cities of more than 100.000 inhabitants entirely relied upon the Russians: this is the case of Melitopol, Berdyansk, Kupryansk, etc.


There is much evidence them are losing that many troops as well as wounded, enough that Russia can't even advance that far along with logistics problems. Its so bad that the Russian government hasn't updated their casualties since the previous 498 dead only so far. You are pretty delusional if you think the Ukrainian Army is defeated when we are just barely past 3 weeks of war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Oldman1 said:


> There is much evidence them are losing that many troops as well as wounded,



These numbers are based on speculation not actual proof, and the sources performing the speculation aren't neutral.



Oldman1 said:


> enough that Russia can't even advance that far along with logistics problems.



Russia hasn't stopped advancing on different fronts. To storm the inner city of Kiev isn't their priority at this time.



Oldman1 said:


> that the Russian government hasn't updated their casualties since the previous 498 dead only so far.



This can have many different reasons.



Oldman1 said:


> You are pretty delusional if you think the Ukrainian Army is defeated when we are just barely past 3 weeks of war.



The Ukrainian army has lost the strategic initiative and can no longer conduct as much as short range operations over a few dozen kilometers. It's over for them, all they can now try or rather, what the over-represented reprisal units in their midst can try, is to take the urban population hostage and like the Germans in Berlin 1945, prolong the inevitable outcome for some time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

SalarHaqq said:


> These numbers are based on speculation not actual proof, and the sources performing the speculation aren't neutral.
> 
> 
> 
> Russia hasn't stopped advancing on different fronts. To storm the inner city of Kiev isn't their priority at this time.
> 
> 
> 
> This can have many different reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> The Ukrainian army has lost the strategic initiative and can no longer conduct as much as short range operations over a few dozen kilometers. It's over for them, all they can now try or rather, what the over-represented reprisal units in their midst can try, is to take the urban population hostage and like the Germans in Berlin 1945, prolong the inevitable outcome for some time.


The Russians have been stopped on multiple fronts and could barely get far, they can't even get to Kiev or even the outer Kiev because its too strong and they don't have the manpower or supplies to make it possible to encircle the city which is too big for that size of the military presented there. 

There is no excuse for the Russian government to hide the casualties unless its really bad. Still stuck on the 498. 

LOL you think the Ukrainians need to hold their own people hostage to prevent Russian artillery strikes? The Ukrainians are holding the Russians off and are beating them in the long run. You think its inevitable but looking at the situation right now, the Russian Army is done for.


----------



## TheImmortal

A key date could be May 25th. Till then US Treasury allows Russia to use foreign reserves to pay dollar and euro denominated sovereign debt. 

Putin May need to wrap up the war by then, if not then there is doubt that the US Treasury extends waiver. Thus leading the way for Russia to default on debt for first time in a century.



Oldman1 said:


> The Ukrainians are holding the Russians off and are beating them in the long run. You think its inevitable but looking at the situation right now, the Russian Army is done for.



For Russia to “lose” relies on two things:

A) Can Russia call up reservists?

B) how long (politically) does Putin have?

If the answer is yes they can AND 6-12 months then Russia can easily win this.

If the answer is no and 3 months (or less), then things don’t look ideal entering negotiations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Yeah Russians are finished. Ukrainians are winning the war. BBC and CNN said so and therefore it must be true. The Ukrainians in this latest airstrike sure look like winners to me. 

Photos 18+: Russian Kalibr Missile Hit Ukrainian Military Facility In Mykolaiv. Dozens Of Casualties Reported​


https://southfront.org/photos-18-russian-kalibr-missile-hit-ukrainian-military-facility-in-mykolaiv-dozens-of-casualties-reported/





Oldman1 said:


> The Russians have been stopped on multiple fronts and could barely get far, they can't even get to Kiev or even the outer Kiev because its too strong and they don't have the manpower or supplies to make it possible to encircle the city which is too big for that size of the military presented there.
> 
> There is no excuse for the Russian government to hide the casualties unless its really bad. Still stuck on the 498.
> 
> LOL you think the Ukrainians need to hold their own people hostage to prevent Russian artillery strikes? The Ukrainians are holding the Russians off and are beating them in the long run. You think its inevitable but looking at the situation right now, the Russian Army is done for.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

Oldman1 said:


> The Russians have been stopped on multiple fronts and could barely get far,



Their operations have not been stopped. Where they paused, it was part of their plans.



Oldman1 said:


> they can't even get to Kiev or even the outer Kiev because its too strong and they don't have the manpower or supplies to make it possible to encircle the city which is too big for that size of the military presented there.



As said, Kiev is not the priority target. It is likely scheduled to fall last, and should probably be encircled from the south and southeast after the impending Donbass breakthrough. It was clear from the beginning that the capital will be the most densely defended spot, trying to take it first wouldn't necessarily have been the soundest strategy.



Oldman1 said:


> There is no excuse for the Russian government to hide the casualties unless its really bad. Still stuck on the 498.



As said, there can be multiple reasons for how and at what frequency states decide to publish casualty figures. That Russia is seeking to hide represents speculation rather than established fact. Besides, it is possible to dissimulate casualties simply by understating them. So Russia not having announced new figures does not imply it wants to hide anything.



Oldman1 said:


> LOL you think the Ukrainians need to hold their own people hostage to prevent Russian artillery strikes?



All kinds of strikes, and to delay inevitable Russian advances. The widespread presence of reprisal units all across eastern Ukraine has amply been documented for the past eight years.



Oldman1 said:


> The Ukrainians are holding the Russians off and are beating them in the long run. You think its inevitable but looking at the situation right now, the Russian Army is done for.



The regular Ukrainian army is hopelessly defeated, reprisal units are the only ones that matter now given how they are using urban populations as human shields to slightly slow down the steady and unstoppable Russian progression.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> Yeah Russians are finished. Ukrainians are winning the war. BBC and CNN said so and therefore it must be true. The Ukrainians in this latest airstrike sure look like winners to me.
> 
> Photos 18+: Russian Kalibr Missile Hit Ukrainian Military Facility In Mykolaiv. Dozens Of Casualties Reported​
> 
> 
> https://southfront.org/photos-18-russian-kalibr-missile-hit-ukrainian-military-facility-in-mykolaiv-dozens-of-casualties-reported/


You think you hit Ukrainian military facility that ends the war? Sorry that doesn't cut it. Losing handful of generals in 3 weeks tells you something when the generals have to do NCOs' job of pushing the troops to fight.



SalarHaqq said:


> Their operations have not been stopped. Where they paused, it was part of their plans.



Sorry its not part of their plans. Fighting for 3 weeks where you have soldiers abandoning their vehicles is not part of their plans you suppose to end the war in couple of days.



> As said, Kiev is not the priority target. It is likely scheduled to fall last, and should probably be encircled from the south and southeast after the impending Donbass breakthrough. It was clear from the beginning that the capital will be the most densely defended spot, trying to take it first wouldn't necessarily have been the soundest strategy.



It is a priority target if they want to remove the Ukrainian government from power. That was their intentions of one of their demands in the first place. They are stuck because they have face stiffed resistance and many bridges have been blown. They tried and failed to get to Kiev because many are getting killed. 



> As said, there can be multiple reasons for how and at what frequency states decide to publish casualty figures. That Russia is seeking to hide represents speculation rather than established fact. Besides, it is possible to dissimulate casualties simply by understating them. So Russia not having announced new figures does not imply it wants to hide anything.


No they are trying to hide it, its really bad




> All kinds of strikes, and to delay inevitable Russian advances. The widespread presence of reprisal units all across eastern Ukraine has amply been documented for the past eight years.



You can just look at whats going on to see the Russians can barely advance now. You look at the map and compare it to a week ago. 





> The regular Ukrainian army is hopelessly defeated, reprisal units are the only ones that matter now given how they are using urban populations as human shields to slightly slow down the steady and unstoppable Russian progression.



You can keep saying that, but the Russians is pretty much done.


----------



## sanel1412

For god sake IRIAF thread...

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## OldTwilight

sanel1412 said:


> For god sake IRIAF thread...


well , I opened mutliple tabs , and I thought Im in "Ukraine " thread ..

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Stryker1982 said:


> The lack of SEAD I've seen from Russia is not very confidence inducing.
> 
> I would've wholeheartedly expected the airspace of Kharkiv to be in full control of Russia.
> 
> Either I have bad misconceptions about Russia's SEAD/DEAD capability or mobile air defences (Like large amounts of BUK's and KUB's are vastly underestimated). Russia has not been flying a very large amount of sorties it seems.
> 
> You won't be able to 100% of the time prevent bombs from falling into your assets, but you can definitely create contested conditions and down aircraft every so often.


SEAD is quite hard when Ukraine has NATO AWACS support, which Russia won't attack



Dexon said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1504419416431280131


What are the coordinates?


----------



## TheImmortal

GrandBotBoi said:


> What are the coordinates?


35°42'52"N 51°17'18"E

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506000530199437325

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Mata Elang

To this day I'm still confused by IRIAF's thinking why they are still using the Fakour-90 joke (looks like the AIM-54 but has a MIM-23 rocket engine and a range of 45 km). 

What's with the IRIAF general's thinking? Are their eyes blind or...? Don't they see an opportunity for SAM missiles like the Zubin AD or the more powerful 9 Dey AD to be made into lightweight long-range Air-to-Air Missiles against the AIM-120. 

Or did I miss something? Something has to change the old IRIAF generals' thinking, which is like stone.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mata Elang said:


> To this day I'm still confused by IRIAF's thinking why they are still using the Fakour-90 joke (looks like the AIM-54 but has a MIM-23 rocket engine and a range of 45 km).



I haven’t seen any proof it has a MIM-23 engine, guidance system maybe.

Range is said to be at least 150KM not 45KM.


----------



## Mata Elang

TheImmortal said:


> I haven’t seen any proof it has a MIM-23 engine, guidance system maybe.
> 
> Range is said to be at least 150KM not 45KM.


Range about a maximum of 45 km - 50 km. 
Engine Aerojet general M112 (mim-23 hawk)


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478757656269631491


----------



## TheImmortal

Mata Elang said:


> Range about a maximum of 45 km - 50 km.
> Engine Aerojet general M112 (mim-23 hawk)
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478757656269631491



It seems 50KM is not physical limitation range... it’s due to F-14 secondary radar being used with the SARH and not F-14 main radar. Or else 150KM (which was original quotation of range) is easily possible with a missile that size. But it needs to be paired with the F-14 radar.
Seems more an issue where Iran is not fully unlocking the F-14A after all these years to work with Iranian based weaponry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mata Elang said:


> To this day I'm still confused by IRIAF's thinking why they are still using the Fakour-90 joke (looks like the AIM-54 but has a MIM-23 rocket engine and a range of 45 km).
> 
> What's with the IRIAF general's thinking? Are their eyes blind or...? Don't they see an opportunity for SAM missiles like the Zubin AD or the more powerful 9 Dey AD to be made into lightweight long-range Air-to-Air Missiles against the AIM-120.
> 
> Or did I miss something? Something has to change the old IRIAF generals' thinking, which is like stone.


range is 90 km from where 45km came



TheImmortal said:


> I haven’t seen any proof it has a MIM-23 engine, guidance system maybe.
> 
> Range is said to be at least 150KM not 45KM.


from the first day the engine shown to be MIM-23 engine. the range was 90km not 150km



Mata Elang said:


> Range about a maximum of 45 km - 50 km.
> Engine Aerojet general M112 (mim-23 hawk)
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478757656269631491


45km is when the missile fired from earth or more exactly i the range of Hawk airdefence , but if it get fired from an airplane the range will be a lot more


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> range is 90 km from where 45km came
> 
> 
> from the first day the engine shown to be MIM-23 engine. the range was 90km not 150km
> 
> 
> 45km is when the missile fired from earth or more exactly i the range of Hawk airdefence , but if it get fired from an airplane the range will be a lot more



Not to mention the stats are for “export” version which are usually lower stats than native


----------



## SQ8

Hack-Hook said:


> range is 90 km from where 45km came
> 
> 
> from the first day the engine shown to be MIM-23 engine. the range was 90km not 150km
> 
> 
> 45km is when the missile fired from earth or more exactly i the range of Hawk airdefence , but if it get fired from an airplane the range will be a lot more


In today’s day and age a SARH missile is like bringing a knife to a machine gun fight


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Not to mention the stats are for “export” version which are usually lower stats than native


I doubt anybody will buy it , its simply too big and heavy


SQ8 said:


> In today’s day and age a SARH missile is like bringing a knife to a machine gun fight


they have their uses, its useful specially in long range system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

I dont think most of them even Know what SARH is, ARH guided missiles have 3 at least modes of guidance, and most kills, a ove 90% is inot even in ARH fire and forget mode, since most kills actually happened at short and medijum ranges they were mostly achive in CW illumination.. SARH is bistatic radar arrangement where aircraft is transmiting signal but both aircraft and missile is reciving, those missile also have multi mode, aircraft can for example guide missile all the way, but missile also can do it itself as Long bounced signal is coming to the missile... That is why name.. Semi Active

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SQ8 said:


> In today’s day and age a SARH missile is like bringing a knife to a machine gun fight



A SARH missile is what killed The 200M USD Global Hawk without being detected by the Hawk’s EW/Jamming system

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> A SARH missile is what killed The 200M USD Global Hawk without being detected by the Hawk’s EW/Jamming system


I believe it didn't use that mode


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I believe it didn't use that mode



Of course it did.

It did not use it till the end. It was guided by EO and passive long range Iranian radar combo, once it reached near the target it did its top attack kill using the SARH

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Of course it did.
> 
> It did not use it till the end. It was guided by EO and passive long range Iranian radar combo, once it reached near the target it did its top attack kill using the SARH


but taer missiles also carry a mono-pulse radar for that top attack


----------



## SQ8

TheImmortal said:


> A SARH missile is what killed The 200M USD Global Hawk without being detected by the Hawk’s EW/Jamming system


No, what killed the global hawk was its lumbering speed and inability to pull anything more than gentle evasion.
Good luck trying that SARH against an AMRAAM equipped fighter..



Hack-Hook said:


> I doubt anybody will buy it , its simply too big and heavy
> 
> they have their uses, its useful specially in long range system


How? 
Active missiles allow the target aircraft to evade once it is in terminal mode. A Aim-120C-7 like the UAEAF has will fire around the same range or more, the aircraft will turn abeam and then once it goes active will flow cold and evade.
Meanwhile whatever IRIAF asset is out there the poor chap has to keep illuminating or his missile goes stupid so all he can do is notch and hope he survives.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

SQ8 said:


> No, what killed the global hawk was its lumbering speed and inability to pull anything more than gentle evasion.



You clearly don’t know much about the Global Hawk. It has a bit more defense than “gentle evasion”.

“_The aircraft flies high at a loiter altitude *65,000ft* which minimises exposure to surface-to-air missiles. The aircraft’s modular self-defence system includes an *AN/ALR 89 radar warning receiver, an on-board jamming system and an ALE 50 towed decoy system*.”









RQ-4A/B Global Hawk HALE Reconnaissance UAV


RQ-4A Global Hawk is a high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial reconnaissance system which provides military field commanders with high resolution, near real-time imagery of large geographic areas. The programme is funded by the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) and managed by...




www.airforce-technology.com




_
Iran’s TAER and Sayyad air defense missiles can both intercept an aerial target on the outer edge of AMRAAMs range before it can be dropped to hit its target. And Sayyad 4 has double the range of AMRAAM (210KM).

So you need to stop making generalizations about defense tech and study them further.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SQ8

TheImmortal said:


> You clearly don’t know much about the Global Hawk. It has a bit more defense than “gentle evasion”.
> 
> “_The aircraft flies high at a loiter altitude *65,000ft* which minimises exposure to surface-to-air missiles. The aircraft’s modular self-defence system includes an *AN/ALR 89 radar warning receiver, an on-board jamming system and an ALE 50 towed decoy system*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RQ-4A/B Global Hawk HALE Reconnaissance UAV
> 
> 
> RQ-4A Global Hawk is a high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial reconnaissance system which provides military field commanders with high resolution, near real-time imagery of large geographic areas. The programme is funded by the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) and managed by...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airforce-technology.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Iran’s TAER and Sayyad air defense missiles can both intercept an aerial target on the outer edge of AMRAAMs range before it can be dropped to hit its target. And Sayyad 4 has double the range of AMRAAM (210KM).
> 
> So you need to stop making generalizations about defense tech and study them further.


I know a lot about it so you need to stop throwing loghorrea at me to try and impress your way out of the discussion.

Stating that it minimizes exposure means that it is out of most LOMAD range. Doesn’t mean it cannot be taken down by other assets. RWRs are a dime a dozen on MALE UAVs now so this is a higher tier asset. Towed decoys with jamming are great except it was taken out with a BUK-M1 local copy which has a ceiling of 81000ft. Whether it was jamming or not, whether it was actually at 65000ft is unknown.

Also, stop throwing tangential arguments to try and avoid the subject. We are talking about air to air engagements and not whether the IRIAF can hide behind SAM because it cannot take any neighborhood asset head on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> but taer missiles also carry a mono-pulse radar for that top attack


I think the missile in question was a Sayyad 2 rather than taer. 

On a sperate note, what's with all the garbage jabroni trolls recently polluting the threads here (more so than usual)...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SQ8 said:


> I know a lot about it so you need to stop throwing



debatable based on the way you talk



SQ8 said:


> Towed decoys with jamming are great except it was taken out with a BUK-M1 local copy



The fact you think 3rd Khordad is a “local
Copy” of BUK-M1 shows you don’t know as much as you think you know. Completely different interceptor missile technology (more based on the USA standard missile SM body than a Russian interceptor), radar, and capability.




SQ8 said:


> Whether it was jamming or not, whether it was actually at 65000ft is unknown.


Tough to jam when operator doesn’t even know it’s being targeted. 

Iran used EO and a deeper passive long range radar to feed data to the missile. This helped avoid painting the drone using the 3rd Khordad’s AESA which would have alerted the drone operator to a potential firing. Iran was well aware of its defense mechanisms and didn’t want to avoid missing the target or having to fire 2 interceptors.

Missile made its way passively to the region drone was in and top attacked it after turning on its SARH seeker. From turn on to interception was seconds.

This same tactic can be used on a fighter jet.



SQ8 said:


> We are talking about air to air engagements and not whether the IRIAF can hide behind SAM because it cannot take any neighborhood asset head on.



You made this claim:



SQ8 said:


> In today’s day and age a SARH missile is like bringing a knife to a machine gun fight



And I merely stated this:



TheImmortal said:


> A SARH missile is what killed The 200M USD Global Hawk without being detected by the Hawk’s EW/Jamming system



So not a tangential argument at all. I directly responded to your absurd claim.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SQ8

TheImmortal said:


> debatable based on the way you talk
> 
> 
> 
> The fact you think 3rd Khordad is a “local
> Copy” of BUK-M1 shows you don’t know as much as you think you know. Completely different interceptor missile technology (more based on the USA standard missile SM body than a Russian interceptor), radar, and capability.
> 
> 
> 
> Tough to jam when operator doesn’t even know it’s being targeted.
> 
> Iran used EO and a deeper passive long range radar to feed data to the missile. This helped avoid painting the drone using the 3rd Khordad’s AESA which would have alerted the drone operator to a potential firing. Iran was well aware of its defense mechanisms and didn’t want to avoid missing the target or having to fire 2 interceptors.
> 
> Missile made its way passively to the region drone was in and top attacked it after turning on its SARH seeker. From turn on to interception was seconds.
> 
> This same tactic can be used on a fighter jet.
> 
> 
> 
> You made this claim:
> 
> 
> 
> And I merely stated this:
> 
> 
> 
> So not a tangential argument at all. I directly responded to your absurd claim.


That way you talk is information dumping that is not related so debatable whether you a SME as well.

All public sources point to it being a local copy albeit evolved of the BUK. If you have additional intel on it that is great.

You used a “passive” long range radar for tracking - But claim a SARH - Semi Active Radar Homing system was used. Homing - Radar Homing is the operative term because these missile look for a radar return from an active illumination source.

So your claim is that a passive radar using returns from ancillary radiation sources provided the guidance to a missile system(which normally relies on a AESA tracking component for terminal illumination ) that launched a missile onto that track and then the missile was constantly updated enroute via datalink from EO and this passive radar data to strike a lumbering unaware drone that may or may not have MAWS on it.

So, at no point was radar illumination required which means this was *not SARH*. So basically you don’t even know what term means.

As for absurd claims - I would love to see how the IRIAF intends to use an actual SARH profile for an air launched missile against a target equipped with an Active seeker A2A missile along with MAWS instead of you desperately searching for “Iran wins” scenarios

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

TheImmortal said:


> You clearly don’t know much about the Global Hawk. It has a bit more defense than “gentle evasion”.
> 
> “_The aircraft flies high at a loiter altitude *65,000ft* which minimises exposure to surface-to-air missiles. The aircraft’s modular self-defence system includes an *AN/ALR 89 radar warning receiver, an on-board jamming system and an ALE 50 towed decoy system*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RQ-4A/B Global Hawk HALE Reconnaissance UAV
> 
> 
> RQ-4A Global Hawk is a high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial reconnaissance system which provides military field commanders with high resolution, near real-time imagery of large geographic areas. The programme is funded by the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) and managed by...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airforce-technology.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Iran’s TAER and Sayyad air defense missiles can both intercept an aerial target on the outer edge of AMRAAMs range before it can be dropped to hit its target. And Sayyad 4 has double the range of AMRAAM (210KM).
> 
> So you need to stop making generalizations about defense tech and study them further.



There is difference between what a Global Hawk UAV is supposed to be equipped with as stated in some sources and what were the actual specifications (and mission profile) of the Global Hawk variant that was shot down by Iran.

A Global Hawk Block 10 variant (RQ-4A BAMS-D) was operating at a much lower altitude of 22,209 feet over the Persian Gulf waters when it was engaged by Iranian defenses in 2020:

_"The US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed Iran shot down an RQ-4A but stressed that the UAV never entered Iranian airspace. It supported this assertion by releasing an image apparently taken by the UAV of the incoming missile that showed it was located in international airspace at an altitude of 22,209 ft (6,769 m) over the Gulf of Oman immediately before it was hit.

A map released by CENTCOM provided the approximate location of the SAM launch on the Iranian coast some 70 km away."_






Global Hawk shootdown validates Iran's indigenous SAM capabilities


The shooting down of a US Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle on 20 June appears to have confirmed that Iran has developed highly capable surface-to-air...



www.janes.com





I have also checked a source in which Global Hawk UAV components are disclosed in detail and it does not feature AN/ALR 89 and decoys. Some variants might be equipped with said systems but not all of them. I will retrace this source if necessary.

Following source is accurate as well:









RQ-4 Global Hawk


The RQ-4 Global Hawk is a high-altitude, long-endurance, remotely piloted aircraft with an integrated sensor suite that provides global all-weather, day or night intelligence, surveillance and



www.af.mil





Global Hawk UAV type is NOT fast, maneuverable and well-equipped for warfighting like a jet fighter. It is equipped for ISR missions and its primary method of defense is to operate at very high altitudes in theory.

@SQ8

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mata Elang

It seems that those who hate Iran, do not like Iran's success in downing 2 US stealth reconnaissance UAVs. Yes the 2 US UAVs RQ-170 and RQ-4 are US advanced stealth UAVs, and they are now in Iranian hands. 

Haters say it's an ordinary US UAV that doesn't really matter, Whereas western analysts themselves say it's a very sophisticated UAV and uses stealth technology. In fact the RQ-4 UAV, in the published photos, uses 'honeycomb' stealth technology and besides that at a price of around 200 million dollars, it will certainly carry super sophisticated sensors and jamming equipment like the one in the video below. 



 Rq-170 is also a stealth UAV whose project was kept secret by the US (until it was in Iran's hands and published). 

Iranian haters once said the honeycomb technology on the RQ-4 was not for stealth but for lightening the fuselage. These Iranian haters better study before making comments, so as not to look 'embarrassing'. Below are articles on stealth technology on aircraft, missiles and honeycomb stealth technology.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
STEALTH HOW TO HIDE IN THIN AIR

By John A. Adam
May 1, 1988
TEN DAYS ago, the Air Force offered a glimpse of one of its most secret and costly projects: The Advanced Technology Bomber. Employing an unconventional boomerang shape to foil enemy sensors, the B2 is the current epitome of "stealth" anti-detection technologies.
Since the first use of radar, scientists have sought ways to veil weaponry from prying electronic eyes. During World War II, Germany coated its U-boat snorkels with radar-absorbent material. Decades of research followed on "radar echoes" -- that is, how electromagnetic beams bounce off objects of various shapes and sizes. Then in 1977, aided by supercomputer modeling and motivated by dissatisfaction with the vulnerability of American aircraft in Vietnam, research took off. By 1980, the Pentagon reported that funds for stealth had risen a hundredfold.
The goal of stealth technologies is to keep enemy radar screens dark, as if the radar beam had passed through empty space. Usually when a beam strikes an object, a portion of its energy is reflected back to the radar receiver and a blip appears on a monitor indicating the target's position. Stealth planes absorb or deflect as much of that energy as possible.

Today, these "low observable" projects eclipse even the magnitude of the Strategic Defense Initiative. Stealth techniques are being applied to Northrop's B2 bomber and General Dynamics' advanced cruise missile for the Air Force and the next generation of fighter aircraft for the Navy. Stealth surveillance aircraft and drones are reportedly in the works; ships and even tanks could benefit too. (The Army has already tested radar camouflage netting.) More than $100 billion is slated for stealth programs into the 1990s. But most members of Congress cannot even review the budgets because many of the projects are "black."
Stealth techniques are by no means foolproof. Some radars, especially those using long wavelengths, are hard to delude; and aircraft designs that give stealthiness top priority may compromise performance, range and payload.
Still, planes can be much more effective if they cannot be detected until they are close to the enemy; and a weaker radar echo also means a diminished target for radar-guided missiles. According to Northrop's calculations, if a stealth fighter were coming head on at a conventional fighter, and both had equal radar capability, the stealth plane would be able to spot and target the enemy more than 60 seconds before its reduced echo was detected by the other aircraft. At 30,000 feet, flying at nine-tenths the speed of sound, that's plenty of time to fire a typical 100-kilometer-range missile.

Shrinking Signatures
The degree of stealth depends on many factors -- mainly shape, use of absorbent structures and materials, reduction of detectable heat and employment of special avionics. Shrinking the radar signature is currently the dominant goal. Both the United States and Soviet Union rely heavily on radar because it can see airborne objects over longer distances than infrared (heat-detecting) and many other sensor techniques.
The first step is to determine what elements contribute to the echo, called the radar cross section (RCS). {See box} "The problem is far from being solved," says engineer George W. Reinhardt of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, headquarters for the B2 bomber project. "Each level of low-observable vehicle presents a unique set of problems."

Sharp angles reflect radar waves easily. So antenna windows, pilot canopy, engine inlets, radar-absorbent materials and such surface discontinuities as edges, corners, wing flaps and more must be analyzed for reflection, ideally at different flight angles and aspects. A flat metal plate of 7.5 centimeters on a side produces an RCS of 1 m
when hit by a 10 gigahertz (billion cycles per second) radar beam perpendicularly. So "it is easy to understand that much smaller objects become critical" in a stealth design, notes Bill Bahret, former chief of the Passive Electronic Countermeasures branch at Wright-Patterson.
To analyze a design, the plane's complex shapes are broken down into simple component elements -- plates, dihedrals formed by two intersecting planes, cylinders and spheres. The combined echoes from each shape make up the total RCS. (Determining the RCS of even a single jet engine requires a supercomputer.) Facilities such as Lockheed's celebrated "skunk works" in Burbank, Calif., then build detailed models and test them in chambers walled with spongy cones that absorb extraneous radar waves.

Once the main reflection problems are identified, engineers can modify the design and employ special materials at vulnerable points, using a mix of radar-absorbing structures (RAS) and materials (RAM) for minimal visibility. To foil radar waves coming head-on, RAS (laminated layers of glass fiber and plastic with carbon coating) are used on leading and trailing edges. Honeycomb sections can absorb low-frequency radar if the cells are at least one-tenth of a wavelength long. Highly conductive metallic surfaces can be coated with polyurethane loaded with tiny iron spheres. A carbon-epoxy laminate in use on the McDonnell Douglas' F/A18 wing skin is about as strong and stiff as aluminum alloys, but approximately 40 percent lighter.
Each detail must be examined at varying radar frequencies. The higher the frequency, the shorter the wavelength. At 10 MHz (thousand cycles per second) the wavelength is 30 meters; at 30 GHz, it's 1 centimeter. When the length of the wave approaches the length of a feature on the aircraft, oscillations induced on the feature can affect the wave pattern. This resonance often produces a larger radar echo. Because an aircraft is often anywhere from a few to thousands of wavelengths in size, different-sized components start to resonate at various frequencies.
Moreover, the net echo includes specular (or direct) reflections, edge diffractions, multiple reflections and creeping waves (which propagate along the body surface and emerge at an opposite edge). This tangle of variables is so complicated that researchers frequently limit themselves to assessing the head-on RCS of the aircraft -- paramount for early warning detection -- by monitoring microwave radar "backscatter," or the energy reflected from the target back to the source.

Shaping Stealth
Usually the frontal RCS can be reduced by using special aerodynamic shapes, such as delta wings, and blending them into the fuselage. For lower backscatter from ground radars, engine inlets must be placed on the upper side of the body. The plane's weapons must be carried internally and its antennas either canted downward, as in the phased array on the B1B bomber, or hidden from view behind special radomes.
In the case of microwave radar, where wavelength is minuscule compared to the size of the aircraft, shape is all-important. But reducing RCS in one aspect often enhances it at another, according to research conducted by Hsueh-Jyh Li at the University of Pennsylvania. Thus reducing the head-on radar echo might make the aircraft more vulnerable to detection from airborne or space-based radar.

Tradeoffs abound. Lt. Gen. Kelly Burke, then Air Force deputy chief of staff for research and development, said of stealth in 1980, "You don't get any desirable feature without giving up some other desirable feature." Reinhardt at Wright-Patterson agrees: "Every part of the electromagnetic spectrum has its own unique set of problems." For example, surface texture is irrelevant at microwave wavelengths; but a glinting smooth canopy is easily visible. A rough surface would prevent this but would obscure the pilot's view and hinder the aerodynamic flow. Mounting engine inlets atop a wing may create airflow problems during high angle-of-attack maneuvers. And moving everything inside the aircraft may mean fewer weapons or less fuel. It also makes system planning less flexible because an external pod cannot simply be hooked on a wing for improved nightviewing or jamming capability.
When radar frequencies are low (around 30 MHz), the plane's RCS depends less on its shape and more on its volume and electromagnetic susceptibility; in that case, engineers can employ RAM components. RAM is typically arrayed in layers, so that waves reflecting off an inner layer cancel incoming waves. Ferrites (ceramic materials such as iron oxides to which small amounts of such metals as cobalt and nickel have been added) are well-known wide-bandwidth absorbers, but usually only for frequencies below 1 gigahertz.
In 1987, researchers at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh identified a new group of absorbers. Before the Pentagon classified that research, Robert R. Birge, director of CMU's Center for Molecular Electronics, reported that these compounds appeared to absorb radio frequencies as well as or better than ferrite-based materials at about one-tenth the weight. "It should be possible," he said, to modify these substances "so that an ensemble of them could absorb over the entire RF {radio frequency} range."

Sensors and Survival
How well would stealth planes fare against enemy sensors? Simulations assess stealth targets at various altitudes and terrains. The chances of being spotted by various radar systems shining on various backgrounds can be calculated. For example, one model at the Georgia Institute of Technology predicts how the background of sea appears from sensor frequencies of 1 to 100 GHz on the basis of wind velocity and wave direction,
Any simulation's worth depends on the inputs. Georgia Tech is intimately familiar with Soviet radar parameters. One of its laboratories uses U.S. intelligence data to build and test threat sensors that are then turned over to the government, says a senior researcher there.

Some of those sensors may end up in the scraggy Nevada terrain at Nellis Air Force Base, where dozens of stealth fighters, built by Lockheed, are reportedly deployed. There, in the Air Force's "Red Flag" operation, U.S. air crews battle mock Soviet forces on both land and air. Among the special aircraft flown there are the MiG-23 fighter, backbone of the Soviet air force. Its High Lark radar has a search range of 53 miles and tracking range of 34 miles and can carry an infrared search-and-track pod beneath the cockpit. How it stacks up against the stealth fighter is not publicly known.
Experts say the Soviet Union has deployed new radar technologies at about the same rate as the United States. The Soviets employ many long-wavelength radars for their air defense system and have three over-the-horizon radars using very long wavelengths in operation, according to the Pentagon. Long wavelengths are more resistant to most stealth techniques because they are less affected by the small details of shape and absorbent structures. But how effectively such systems could "hand over" targets to shorter-wavelength sensors for precise targeting is questionable. Because of their relatively small size, radars on missiles and aircraft must use short wavelengths that stealth designs are made to foil.
The Defense Department reported in 1987 that a new Soviet surface-to-air missile system, the SA10, has "a capability against low-altitude targets with small radar cross-sections such as cruise missiles." How the B2 bomber's RCS compares with that of a small cruise missile is not known publicly.
Another possible stealth countermeasure is bistatic radar. Unlike conventional radars, the receiver is placed at some distance from the transmitter. Consequently, stealth configurations designed for deflecting energy away from the transmitter source may instead direct it to a bistatic receiver. This relatively immature technology is also desirable because only the transmitter -- not the operating crew at the receiver -- would be jeopardized by missiles fired at the source of the signal.
Increasing a radar's power or its ability to combine several faint echoes into one strong one may offer some counter to stealth. Employing moving-target indicator techniques to winnow stealth aircraft from the slower blips of birds and insect swarms may also be helpful. But experts such as Ted Postol, of the Center for International Security and Arms Control at Stanford, say that small stealthy cruise missiles, flying close to clutter from the ground or sea, could stay concealed from radar at all but the shortest distances. At that point, the human eye might be a better detector.
Even if countermeasures prove ineffective against stealth, national security would not necessarily be enhanced. For example, stealth techniques are being reexamined for use on strategic missile reentry vehicles, posing a potential problem for the final tier of an SDI system. For the first tier of a defense system, or for deterrence as it exists today, low observable craft could give war-planners headaches -- and even jittery trigger fingers. Stealth will create a "major problem for guaranteeing strategic early warning," says Postol, who has worked as a science adviser to the Navy chief of operations.
But doubts are not hindering development. As one government source notes, "Low observables are the coming thing. It's not a question of how or whether to do it, but how much is economically rational."
John A. Adam is an associate editor of IEEE Spectrum, a monthly magazine of The Institute of Electrical and Eletronics Engineers, from which this article is adapted.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

SQ8 said:


> How?
> Active missiles allow the target aircraft to evade once it is in terminal mode. A Aim-120C-7 like the UAEAF has will fire around the same range or more, the aircraft will turn abeam and then once it goes active will flow cold and evade.
> Meanwhile whatever IRIAF asset is out there the poor chap has to keep illuminating or his missile goes stupid so all he can do is notch and hope he survives.


AIM-120 has inertial guidance and active homing at the end of its flight. Mim-23b also have a mono pulse radar for terminal phase



SQ8 said:


> BUK-M1 local copy which has a ceiling of 81000ft. Whether it was jamming or not, whether it was actually at 65000ft is unknown.


Buk-m1 local copy , that's show that you don't knew much about 3rd of khordad.
just knew a Buk-M1 could not detect RQ-4 at that range let not talk about engaging it. and the decoy was not working because it didn't knew they are being targeted and it was not alone the spy plane that was flying along it also didn't knew they were being targeted

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

SQ8 said:


> All public sources point to it being a local copy albeit evolved of the BUK. If you have additional intel on it that is great.


If you believe RIM-66 is what Russians use in BUK, let not talk about the fact it uses different radar .had 4 time the range and can engage the target at the range that buk Radar is not capable detecting it and do that without turning on its RADAR



SQ8 said:


> You used a “passive” long range radar for tracking - But claim a SARH - Semi Active Radar Homing system was used. Homing - Radar Homing is the operative term because these missile look for a radar return from an active illumination source.


you think the missile only have one mean of guidance ,the missiles is ours and we can build it how w like we feed the missile data on were to go with the help of what we get from the EO system on the launcher and early warning radars we have inside our country . when it reach the target area it simply change the guidance mode It can use its mono pulse radar to dive exactly into the target or use SARH mode no matter what . it's not important the missile is just seconds away from the target at the time and the pilot don't have time for any reaction

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

SQ8 said:


> So, at no point was radar illumination required which means this was *not SARH*. So basically you don’t even know what term means.


when the missile dive toward target then it need a precise mode to position the target otherwise it miss . that's when SARH or Mono pulse radar on the missile start work
and RQ4 have all sort of warning system inside it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Hack-Hook said:


> AIM-120 has inertial guidance and active homing at the end of its flight. Mim-23b also have a *mono pulse radar for terminal phase*
> 
> 
> Buk-m1 local copy , that's show that you don't knew much about 3rd of khordad.
> just knew a Buk-M1 could not detect RQ-4 at that range let not talk about engaging it. and the decoy was not working because it didn't knew they are being targeted and it was not alone the spy plane that was flying along it also didn't knew they were being targeted


That being true it still needs the illuminator radar to derive (better) target location & closure rate along with proximity fuze activation. 
So, it is the next best thing to an active seeker but it isn’t fire and forget and requires more complex setup(although it is rumored that Iranian variants now only use solid state electronics which generate less power but are much more robust). 

You can produce and add whatever you want to the missile but it will still be limited by its base architecture of being a SARH system. 
Which is why it is surprising that Iran hasn’t yet put an active system into service especially since there were rumors of the Russians handing over R-77s including seeker architecture to put into the Hawk airframe. 




Hack-Hook said:


> when the missile dive toward target then it need a precise mode to position the target otherwise it miss . that's when SARH or Mono pulse radar on the missile start work
> and RQ4 have all sort of warning system inside it


It does but it isn’t an agile aircraft - so if the purported method of passive attack was used then the operator had very little warning to enable those defenses.


----------



## TheImmortal

SQ8 said:


> So your claim is that a passive radar using returns from ancillary radiation sources provided the guidance to a missile system(which normally relies on a AESA tracking component for terminal illumination ) that launched a missile onto that track and then the missile was constantly updated enroute via datalink from EO and this passive radar data to strike a lumbering unaware drone that may or may not have MAWS on it.



Correct so far



SQ8 said:


> So, at no point was radar illumination required which means this was *not SARH*. So basically you don’t even know what term means.



Here you are incorrect. EO + passive radar data was used to get the missile to the specific “sector” the target was in. It was not precise enough for interception.

Sayyad-2 (interceptor missile) uses a top attack profile. Thus once it entered the sector it engaged its top attack and activated its SARH and “scanned” the area for the drone. It located the drone and its onboard computer calculated the correct interception path.

The EO + passive radar allowed the missile to get to the sector without illuminating the target. By the time operator knew what even was going on it was too late. It’s debatable if Global Hawk RWR detected the SARH activation as the radar waves would be striking the Global Hawk from above. Nonetheless from detection to impact would be seconds at that point. Not enough reaction time.

This was all by design. Iran could have merely relied on its AESA radar on the 3rd Khordad to down the drone. But it wanted a quick and higher success kill probability on the first missile without alerting the operator.

It could be argued the Iranian passive method was a lot more advanced than the traditional method as it required real time data link with multiple information sources (passive radar deep in Iranian territory, EO on top of 3rd Khordad, and the interceptor itself).



SQ8 said:


> As for absurd claims - I would love to see how the IRIAF intends to use an actual SARH profile for an air launched missile against a target equipped with an Active seeker A2A missile along with MAWS instead of you desperately searching for “Iran wins” scenarios



Your absurd claim was - to summarize - that SARH missiles are useless. I countered with a real life example of how it is not useless when used correctly. Hence why your specific claim was absurd.

Your “debate” (if we can call it that) about Iran’s A2A capability against a leading superpower was with other user(s) not myself.

Don’t confuse the two.

If I have time I will post again and show you difference between BUK M-1 and 3rd Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SQ8 said:


> It does but it isn’t an agile aircraft - so if the purported method of passive attack was used then the operator had very little warning to enable those defenses.


its the point , a jet fighter also face the same problem, the SARH can also be used at the end of the flight on Fakour , when the opponent only have seconds to decide what to do


----------



## LeGenD

Mata Elang said:


> It seems that those who hate Iran, do not like Iran's success in downing 2 US stealth reconnaissance UAVs. Yes the 2 US UAVs RQ-170 and RQ-4 are US advanced stealth UAVs, and they are now in Iranian hands.
> 
> Haters say it's an ordinary US UAV that doesn't really matter, Whereas western analysts themselves say it's a very sophisticated UAV and uses stealth technology. In fact the RQ-4 UAV, in the published photos, uses 'honeycomb' stealth technology and besides that at a price of around 200 million dollars, it will certainly carry super sophisticated sensors and jamming equipment like the one in the video below.
> 
> 
> 
> Rq-170 is also a stealth UAV whose project was kept secret by the US (until it was in Iran's hands and published).
> 
> Iranian haters once said the honeycomb technology on the RQ-4 was not for stealth but for lightening the fuselage. These Iranian haters better study before making comments, so as not to look 'embarrassing'. Below are articles on stealth technology on aircraft, missiles and honeycomb stealth technology.
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/
> STEALTH HOW TO HIDE IN THIN AIR
> 
> By John A. Adam
> May 1, 1988
> TEN DAYS ago, the Air Force offered a glimpse of one of its most secret and costly projects: The Advanced Technology Bomber. Employing an unconventional boomerang shape to foil enemy sensors, the B2 is the current epitome of "stealth" anti-detection technologies.
> Since the first use of radar, scientists have sought ways to veil weaponry from prying electronic eyes. During World War II, Germany coated its U-boat snorkels with radar-absorbent material. Decades of research followed on "radar echoes" -- that is, how electromagnetic beams bounce off objects of various shapes and sizes. Then in 1977, aided by supercomputer modeling and motivated by dissatisfaction with the vulnerability of American aircraft in Vietnam, research took off. By 1980, the Pentagon reported that funds for stealth had risen a hundredfold.
> The goal of stealth technologies is to keep enemy radar screens dark, as if the radar beam had passed through empty space. Usually when a beam strikes an object, a portion of its energy is reflected back to the radar receiver and a blip appears on a monitor indicating the target's position. Stealth planes absorb or deflect as much of that energy as possible.
> 
> Today, these "low observable" projects eclipse even the magnitude of the Strategic Defense Initiative. Stealth techniques are being applied to Northrop's B2 bomber and General Dynamics' advanced cruise missile for the Air Force and the next generation of fighter aircraft for the Navy. Stealth surveillance aircraft and drones are reportedly in the works; ships and even tanks could benefit too. (The Army has already tested radar camouflage netting.) More than $100 billion is slated for stealth programs into the 1990s. But most members of Congress cannot even review the budgets because many of the projects are "black."
> Stealth techniques are by no means foolproof. Some radars, especially those using long wavelengths, are hard to delude; and aircraft designs that give stealthiness top priority may compromise performance, range and payload.
> Still, planes can be much more effective if they cannot be detected until they are close to the enemy; and a weaker radar echo also means a diminished target for radar-guided missiles. According to Northrop's calculations, if a stealth fighter were coming head on at a conventional fighter, and both had equal radar capability, the stealth plane would be able to spot and target the enemy more than 60 seconds before its reduced echo was detected by the other aircraft. At 30,000 feet, flying at nine-tenths the speed of sound, that's plenty of time to fire a typical 100-kilometer-range missile.
> 
> Shrinking Signatures
> The degree of stealth depends on many factors -- mainly shape, use of absorbent structures and materials, reduction of detectable heat and employment of special avionics. Shrinking the radar signature is currently the dominant goal. Both the United States and Soviet Union rely heavily on radar because it can see airborne objects over longer distances than infrared (heat-detecting) and many other sensor techniques.
> The first step is to determine what elements contribute to the echo, called the radar cross section (RCS). {See box} "The problem is far from being solved," says engineer George W. Reinhardt of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, headquarters for the B2 bomber project. "Each level of low-observable vehicle presents a unique set of problems."
> 
> Sharp angles reflect radar waves easily. So antenna windows, pilot canopy, engine inlets, radar-absorbent materials and such surface discontinuities as edges, corners, wing flaps and more must be analyzed for reflection, ideally at different flight angles and aspects. A flat metal plate of 7.5 centimeters on a side produces an RCS of 1 m
> when hit by a 10 gigahertz (billion cycles per second) radar beam perpendicularly. So "it is easy to understand that much smaller objects become critical" in a stealth design, notes Bill Bahret, former chief of the Passive Electronic Countermeasures branch at Wright-Patterson.
> To analyze a design, the plane's complex shapes are broken down into simple component elements -- plates, dihedrals formed by two intersecting planes, cylinders and spheres. The combined echoes from each shape make up the total RCS. (Determining the RCS of even a single jet engine requires a supercomputer.) Facilities such as Lockheed's celebrated "skunk works" in Burbank, Calif., then build detailed models and test them in chambers walled with spongy cones that absorb extraneous radar waves.
> 
> Once the main reflection problems are identified, engineers can modify the design and employ special materials at vulnerable points, using a mix of radar-absorbing structures (RAS) and materials (RAM) for minimal visibility. To foil radar waves coming head-on, RAS (laminated layers of glass fiber and plastic with carbon coating) are used on leading and trailing edges. Honeycomb sections can absorb low-frequency radar if the cells are at least one-tenth of a wavelength long. Highly conductive metallic surfaces can be coated with polyurethane loaded with tiny iron spheres. A carbon-epoxy laminate in use on the McDonnell Douglas' F/A18 wing skin is about as strong and stiff as aluminum alloys, but approximately 40 percent lighter.
> Each detail must be examined at varying radar frequencies. The higher the frequency, the shorter the wavelength. At 10 MHz (thousand cycles per second) the wavelength is 30 meters; at 30 GHz, it's 1 centimeter. When the length of the wave approaches the length of a feature on the aircraft, oscillations induced on the feature can affect the wave pattern. This resonance often produces a larger radar echo. Because an aircraft is often anywhere from a few to thousands of wavelengths in size, different-sized components start to resonate at various frequencies.
> Moreover, the net echo includes specular (or direct) reflections, edge diffractions, multiple reflections and creeping waves (which propagate along the body surface and emerge at an opposite edge). This tangle of variables is so complicated that researchers frequently limit themselves to assessing the head-on RCS of the aircraft -- paramount for early warning detection -- by monitoring microwave radar "backscatter," or the energy reflected from the target back to the source.
> 
> Shaping Stealth
> Usually the frontal RCS can be reduced by using special aerodynamic shapes, such as delta wings, and blending them into the fuselage. For lower backscatter from ground radars, engine inlets must be placed on the upper side of the body. The plane's weapons must be carried internally and its antennas either canted downward, as in the phased array on the B1B bomber, or hidden from view behind special radomes.
> In the case of microwave radar, where wavelength is minuscule compared to the size of the aircraft, shape is all-important. But reducing RCS in one aspect often enhances it at another, according to research conducted by Hsueh-Jyh Li at the University of Pennsylvania. Thus reducing the head-on radar echo might make the aircraft more vulnerable to detection from airborne or space-based radar.
> 
> Tradeoffs abound. Lt. Gen. Kelly Burke, then Air Force deputy chief of staff for research and development, said of stealth in 1980, "You don't get any desirable feature without giving up some other desirable feature." Reinhardt at Wright-Patterson agrees: "Every part of the electromagnetic spectrum has its own unique set of problems." For example, surface texture is irrelevant at microwave wavelengths; but a glinting smooth canopy is easily visible. A rough surface would prevent this but would obscure the pilot's view and hinder the aerodynamic flow. Mounting engine inlets atop a wing may create airflow problems during high angle-of-attack maneuvers. And moving everything inside the aircraft may mean fewer weapons or less fuel. It also makes system planning less flexible because an external pod cannot simply be hooked on a wing for improved nightviewing or jamming capability.
> When radar frequencies are low (around 30 MHz), the plane's RCS depends less on its shape and more on its volume and electromagnetic susceptibility; in that case, engineers can employ RAM components. RAM is typically arrayed in layers, so that waves reflecting off an inner layer cancel incoming waves. Ferrites (ceramic materials such as iron oxides to which small amounts of such metals as cobalt and nickel have been added) are well-known wide-bandwidth absorbers, but usually only for frequencies below 1 gigahertz.
> In 1987, researchers at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh identified a new group of absorbers. Before the Pentagon classified that research, Robert R. Birge, director of CMU's Center for Molecular Electronics, reported that these compounds appeared to absorb radio frequencies as well as or better than ferrite-based materials at about one-tenth the weight. "It should be possible," he said, to modify these substances "so that an ensemble of them could absorb over the entire RF {radio frequency} range."
> 
> Sensors and Survival
> How well would stealth planes fare against enemy sensors? Simulations assess stealth targets at various altitudes and terrains. The chances of being spotted by various radar systems shining on various backgrounds can be calculated. For example, one model at the Georgia Institute of Technology predicts how the background of sea appears from sensor frequencies of 1 to 100 GHz on the basis of wind velocity and wave direction,
> Any simulation's worth depends on the inputs. Georgia Tech is intimately familiar with Soviet radar parameters. One of its laboratories uses U.S. intelligence data to build and test threat sensors that are then turned over to the government, says a senior researcher there.
> 
> Some of those sensors may end up in the scraggy Nevada terrain at Nellis Air Force Base, where dozens of stealth fighters, built by Lockheed, are reportedly deployed. There, in the Air Force's "Red Flag" operation, U.S. air crews battle mock Soviet forces on both land and air. Among the special aircraft flown there are the MiG-23 fighter, backbone of the Soviet air force. Its High Lark radar has a search range of 53 miles and tracking range of 34 miles and can carry an infrared search-and-track pod beneath the cockpit. How it stacks up against the stealth fighter is not publicly known.
> Experts say the Soviet Union has deployed new radar technologies at about the same rate as the United States. The Soviets employ many long-wavelength radars for their air defense system and have three over-the-horizon radars using very long wavelengths in operation, according to the Pentagon. Long wavelengths are more resistant to most stealth techniques because they are less affected by the small details of shape and absorbent structures. But how effectively such systems could "hand over" targets to shorter-wavelength sensors for precise targeting is questionable. Because of their relatively small size, radars on missiles and aircraft must use short wavelengths that stealth designs are made to foil.
> The Defense Department reported in 1987 that a new Soviet surface-to-air missile system, the SA10, has "a capability against low-altitude targets with small radar cross-sections such as cruise missiles." How the B2 bomber's RCS compares with that of a small cruise missile is not known publicly.
> Another possible stealth countermeasure is bistatic radar. Unlike conventional radars, the receiver is placed at some distance from the transmitter. Consequently, stealth configurations designed for deflecting energy away from the transmitter source may instead direct it to a bistatic receiver. This relatively immature technology is also desirable because only the transmitter -- not the operating crew at the receiver -- would be jeopardized by missiles fired at the source of the signal.
> Increasing a radar's power or its ability to combine several faint echoes into one strong one may offer some counter to stealth. Employing moving-target indicator techniques to winnow stealth aircraft from the slower blips of birds and insect swarms may also be helpful. But experts such as Ted Postol, of the Center for International Security and Arms Control at Stanford, say that small stealthy cruise missiles, flying close to clutter from the ground or sea, could stay concealed from radar at all but the shortest distances. At that point, the human eye might be a better detector.
> Even if countermeasures prove ineffective against stealth, national security would not necessarily be enhanced. For example, stealth techniques are being reexamined for use on strategic missile reentry vehicles, posing a potential problem for the final tier of an SDI system. For the first tier of a defense system, or for deterrence as it exists today, low observable craft could give war-planners headaches -- and even jittery trigger fingers. Stealth will create a "major problem for guaranteeing strategic early warning," says Postol, who has worked as a science adviser to the Navy chief of operations.
> But doubts are not hindering development. As one government source notes, "Low observables are the coming thing. It's not a question of how or whether to do it, but how much is economically rational."
> John A. Adam is an associate editor of IEEE Spectrum, a monthly magazine of The Institute of Electrical and Eletronics Engineers, from which this article is adapted.


RQ-170 was a good catch but CIA was using this UAV in the region since 2007 - it was used to infilitrate Iran for 4 years for ISR missions. CIA was operating it in broad daytime deep inside Iran when it was caught through Electronic Warfare (EW) - this was a case of bad use. UAVs were also more vulnerable to EW capabilities back then. Credit where due but it is important to understand the bigger picture.

Global Hawk part is covered in following thread:

Thread 'Misconceptions about the Global Hawk UAV and VLO concepts' https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/misconceptions-about-the-global-hawk-uav-and-vlo-concepts.675960/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

LeGenD said:


> RQ-170 was a good catch but CIA was using this UAV in the region since 2007 - it was used to infilitrate Iran for 4 years for ISR missions. CIA was operating it in broad daytime deep inside Iran when it was caught through Electronic Warfare (EW) - this was a case of bad use. UAVs were also more vulnerable to EW capabilities back then. Credit where due but it is important to understand the bigger picture.
> 
> Global Hawk part is covered in following thread:
> 
> Thread 'Misconceptions about the Global Hawk UAV and VLO concepts' https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/misconceptions-about-the-global-hawk-uav-and-vlo-concepts.675960/


Well no matter what here it's explained why 3rd of Khordad had no business detecting RQ4 at that distance let alone destroy it








3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing


Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...




patarames.blogspot.com





Rq4 had lower rcs than what was in USA inventory maybe not as low as RQ170 or F22 or F35 but much lower than anything else it might face

By the way the Nomex honeycomb layer sandwiched between glass fibre and carbon fibre layer is radar absorbent

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mata Elang

TheImmortal said:


> Correct so far
> 
> 
> 
> Here you are incorrect. EO + passive radar data was used to get the missile to the specific “sector” the target was in. It was not precise enough for interception.
> 
> Sayyad-2 (interceptor missile) uses a top attack profile. Thus once it entered the sector it engaged its top attack and activated its SARH and “scanned” the area for the drone. It located the drone and its onboard computer calculated the correct interception path.
> 
> The EO + passive radar allowed the missile to get to the sector without illuminating the target. By the time operator knew what even was going on it was too late. It’s debatable if Global Hawk RWR detected the SARH activation as the radar waves would be striking the Global Hawk from above. Nonetheless from detection to impact would be seconds at that point. Not enough reaction time.
> 
> This was all by design. Iran could have merely relied on its AESA radar on the 3rd Khordad to down the drone. But it wanted a quick and higher success kill probability on the first missile without alerting the operator.
> 
> It could be argued the Iranian passive method was a lot more advanced than the traditional method as it required real time data link with multiple information sources (passive radar deep in Iranian territory, EO on top of 3rd Khordad, and the interceptor itself).
> 
> 
> 
> Your absurd claim was - to summarize - that SARH missiles are useless. I countered with a real life example of how it is not useless when used correctly. Hence why your specific claim was absurd.
> 
> Your “debate” (if we can call it that) about Iran’s A2A capability against a leading superpower was with other user(s) not myself.
> 
> Don’t confuse the two.
> 
> If I have time I will post again and show you difference between BUK M-1 and 3rd Khordad.


@TheImmortal Your analysis is correct. 

@SQ8 I will provide a simple analysis for you. 

-Iranian long-range early warning radars such as Ghadir or Matla ul fajr (or other types of radars) detect two flying objects entering Iran's maritime borders, one is large (poseidon) and the other has low RCS (RQ-4)

- Iranian air defense commander then gave the order to observe or see the object using the EO sensor on the 3 Khordad

- The commander then gave the order to shoot down the RQ-4 UAV (not the Poseidon, because the Iranian general still has a conscience)

- The 3 Khordad operator launched the Sayyad 2 missile but the radar on the 3 Khordad remains turned off (this is so the Poseidon and RQ-4 don't know it's being illuminated and so they don't escape before the Sayyad 2 missile approaches). The Sayyad 2 missile uses the Khordad EO 3 sensor and long-range early warning radar for its initial flight path guidance. 

- When Sayyad 2 missile approaches RQ-4 at a distance of several km or seconds, operator 3 Khordad then activates its radar and lights up RQ-4, Sayyad 2 missile approaches and destroys RQ-4 from above (even though RQ-4 has a low RCS it will still be detected if the Sayyad 2 missile is approaching at a distance of several km). 

Here we can see that the sensors and jamming on the RQ-4 are useless because the Sayyad 2 missile is too close for just a few seconds.

It doesn't matter whether he wants to move slowly or fast, the drone or fighter aircraft will still be destroyed by the Sayyad 2 missile because of this missile has a large warhead HE + fragmentation (unless drones and warplanes have hypersonic speeds over Sayyad 2 to escape). 

Missiles with SARH guidance are good for SAM because missiles can be lighter (without active radar), while missiles with active radar guidance are good for air-to-air missiles because fighter aircraft after firing missiles can quickly escape (exception for stealth targets).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SQ8

Mata Elang said:


> @TheImmortal Your analysis is correct.
> 
> @SQ8 I will provide a simple analysis for you.
> 
> -Iranian long-range early warning radars such as Ghadir or Matla ul fajr (or other types of radars) detect two flying objects entering Iran's maritime borders, one is large (poseidon) and the other has low RCS (RQ-4)
> 
> - Iranian air defense commander then gave the order to observe or see the object using the EO sensor on the 3 Khordad
> 
> - The commander then gave the order to shoot down the RQ-4 UAV (not the Poseidon, because the Iranian general still has a conscience)
> 
> - The 3 Khordad operator launched the Sayyad 2 missile but the radar on the 3 Khordad remains turned off (this is so the Poseidon and RQ-4 don't know it's being illuminated and so they don't escape before the Sayyad 2 missile approaches). The Sayyad 2 missile uses the Khordad EO 3 sensor and long-range early warning radar for its initial flight path guidance.
> 
> - When Sayyad 2 missile approaches RQ-4 at a distance of several km or seconds, operator 3 Khordad then activates its radar and lights up RQ-4, Sayyad 2 missile approaches and destroys RQ-4 from above (even though RQ-4 has a low RCS it will still be detected if the Sayyad 2 missile is approaching at a distance of several km).
> 
> Here we can see that the sensors and jamming on the RQ-4 are useless because the Sayyad 2 missile is too close for just a few seconds.
> 
> It doesn't matter whether he wants to move slowly or fast, the drone or fighter aircraft will still be destroyed by the Sayyad 2 missile because of this missile has a large warhead HE + fragmentation (unless drones and warplanes have hypersonic speeds over Sayyad 2 to escape).
> 
> Missiles with SARH guidance are good for SAM because missiles can be lighter (without active radar), while missiles with active radar guidance are good for air-to-air missiles because fighter aircraft after firing missiles can quickly escape (exception for stealth targets).


That is a much better explanation and makes a lot more sense especially with regards to the engagement and why I felt it was a misnomer to call it SARH when no mention of radar illumination was being made . 

Hence I come back to my original question as to the disadvantage Iran faces in air to air engagement when it doesn’t have active missiles(especially when it used to with AIM-54) available for its fleet.



TheImmortal said:


> Correct so far
> 
> 
> 
> Here you are incorrect. EO + passive radar data was used to get the missile to the specific “sector” the target was in. It was not precise enough for interception.
> 
> Sayyad-2 (interceptor missile) uses a top attack profile. Thus once it entered the sector it engaged its top attack and activated its SARH and “scanned” the area for the drone. It located the drone and its onboard computer calculated the correct interception path.
> 
> The EO + passive radar allowed the missile to get to the sector without illuminating the target. By the time operator knew what even was going on it was too late. It’s debatable if Global Hawk RWR detected the SARH activation as the radar waves would be striking the Global Hawk from above. Nonetheless from detection to impact would be seconds at that point. Not enough reaction time.
> 
> This was all by design. Iran could have merely relied on its AESA radar on the 3rd Khordad to down the drone. But it wanted a quick and higher success kill probability on the first missile without alerting the operator.
> 
> It could be argued the Iranian passive method was a lot more advanced than the traditional method as it required real time data link with multiple information sources (passive radar deep in Iranian territory, EO on top of 3rd Khordad, and the interceptor itself).
> 
> 
> 
> Your absurd claim was - to summarize - that SARH missiles are useless. I countered with a real life example of how it is not useless when used correctly. Hence why your specific claim was absurd.
> 
> Your “debate” (if we can call it that) about Iran’s A2A capability against a leading superpower was with other user(s) not myself.
> 
> Don’t confuse the two.
> 
> If I have time I will post again and show you difference between BUK M-1 and 3rd Khordad.


It was your absurd interpretation of my post to take it beyond A2A when it has been clarified for you thrice. Your brought in the SAM engagement in trying to show the overall air warfare tactics. 
I will continue to state that SARH Air to Air missiles in the current era are generally obsolete.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SQ8 said:


> Hence I come back to my original question as to the disadvantage Iran faces in air to air engagement when it doesn’t have active missiles(especially when it used to with AIM-54) available for its fleet.


Aim-54 is SARH in all its path to the target , only in terminal phase it will become independent

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Hack-Hook said:


> Well no matter what here it's explained why 3rd of Khordad had no business detecting RQ4 at that distance let alone destroy it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing
> 
> 
> Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patarames.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rq4 had lower rcs than what was in USA inventory maybe not as low as RQ170 or F22 or F35 but much lower than anything else it might face
> 
> By the way the Nomex honeycomb layer sandwiched between glass fibre and carbon fibre layer is radar absorbent


No it doesn't have a lower RCS than the other aircraft, its pretty much like seeing a passenger plane. Nothing radar absorbent about it.


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> No it doesn't have a lower RCS than the other aircraft, its pretty much like seeing a passenger plane. Nothing radar absorbent about it.



Incorrect.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1142016969006288902

I wouldn’t characterize Global Hawk as a true LO based on its design and its certainty not a VLO. But it does have radar absorbent materials.

It was likely intended to reduce RCS while also flying at very high altitude at a stand off distance. In unlikely case it encountered a threat it would rely on a towed decoy as well as advanced radar/seeker jammer to fend off any SAM that could reach its high altitude 60,000+.

It wasn’t ment to pentrate heavily contested airspace obviously. It’s not an RQ-170/180

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1142016969006288902
> 
> I wouldn’t characterize Global Hawk as a true LO based on its design and its certainty not a VLO. But it does have radar absorbent materials.
> 
> It was likely intended to reduce RCS while also flying at very high altitude at a stand off distance. In unlikely case it encountered a threat it would rely on a towed decoy as well as advanced radar/seeker jammer to fend off any SAM that could reach its high altitude 60,000+.
> 
> It wasn’t ment to pentrate heavily contested airspace obviously. It’s not an RQ-170/180


Uh wrong, passenger planes have this material. Are they attempting to make it LO as well? The reason they put something like this is because of lightweight materials. Thats why you have something like the Global Hawk that can fly higher or being fuel efficient. 








Review of composite sandwich structure in aeronautic applications


This paper presents a review of the issues concerning sandwich structures for aeronautical applications. The main questions raised by designers are fi…




www.sciencedirect.com


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Aim-54 is SARH in all its path to the target , only in terminal phase it will become independent


Every ARH missile works Like that, AIM 120 became active 45 KM from target, AIM 54 and AIM120 and all other ARH missiles have 3 lunching modes... AIM 54 has completly fire and forget mode used at targets at distance 20-25 Miles, same goes for other ARH missiles, maybe Just range is different.. Second mode is CW and third is at longe ranges mid course upadate and active at terminal phase... Aim 54 ais ARH and work as every ARH in world... What do you think, AIM 120 have Inside radar with range 190km?? Nope.. You cant pover such large radar even IF you design smal radar and small antena... Foukur 90 active seeker(posted in this thread) has 45km range... Mote or less same as AIM 120
SO, there is no difference when it comes to AIM 54 or any other ARH missile.. You have fire and forget mode but at Limited distance. For example F16 can lunch 2 AIM 120 simultanesly but it must wait first became active to lunch Second... F14 can throw all six aim 54 in same time.. While tracking another 18 targets in same time...And no aim 54 has nothing to do with SARH, I repeat SARH is bistatic radar arrangement, it is completly differnt tech where aircraft transmit signal but both aircraft and missile reci e it... In SARH, you have one radar(aircraft) and two recivers with 2 anntenas at different places, SO missile only recive bounced signal from target. Only Thing similar between ARH and SARH 3 characters in its name... ARH tech include independent radr within missile, while SARH not, I would point anyone interested in more to se more about bistatic radar arrangement. There is Huge misunderstanding about SARH and ARH


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Every ARH missile works Like that, AIM 120 became active 45 KM from target, AIM 54 and AIM120 and all other ARH missiles have 3 lunching modes... AIM 54 has completly fire and forget mode used at targets at distance 20-25 Miles, same goes for other ARH missiles, maybe Just range is different.. Second mode is CW and third is at longe ranges mid course upadate and active at terminal phase... Aim 54 ais ARH and work as every ARH in world... What do you think, AIM 120 have Inside radar with range 190km?? Nope.. You cant pover such large radar even IF you design smal radar and small antena... Foukur 90 active seeker(posted in this thread) has 45km range... Mote or less same as AIM 120
> SO, there is no difference when it comes to AIM 54 or any other ARH missile.. You have fire and forget mode but at Limited distance. For example F16 can lunch 2 AIM 120 simultanesly but it must wait first became active to lunch Second... F14 can throw all six aim 54 in same time.. While tracking another 18 targets in same time...And no aim 54 has nothing to do with SARH, I repeat SARH is bistatic radar arrangement, it is completly differnt tech where aircraft transmit signal but both aircraft and missile reci e it... In SARH, you have one radar(aircraft) and two recivers with 2 anntenas at different places, SO missile only recive bounced signal from target. Only Thing similar between ARH and SARH 3 characters in its name... ARH tech include independent radr within missile, while SARH not, I would point anyone interested in more to se more about bistatic radar arrangement. There is Huge misunderstanding about SARH and ARH


the difference between AIM-120 guidance and AIM-54 is AIM-54 don't have inertial guidance system and must be guided by f-14 radar , now f-14 can give the general direction to the missile or paint the target and let the missile pick it up till the missile is ready to dive and turn on its radar , it depend on which one the pilot use .
by the way this argument is moot , iran stated that fakour-90 can be launched independently from the aircraft. and look at the nose




Fakour-90




AIM-54




MIM-23

you see the nose cone is a lot more like an AIM-54 than MIM-23
what is clear about Fakour-90 is that it has a diameter of MIM-23 which is less than AIM-54 but has Control surfaces of AIM-54 , it uses engine similar to MIM-23 , while use a nose cone more in line with AIM-54 which suggest it will use a guidance system more like AIM-54, another point is the length of missile , its more in line with AIM-54 than MIM-23 which is around 1m shorter . and its not possible unless they changed the engine compartment to some extend.



Oldman1 said:


> Uh wrong, passenger planes have this material. Are they attempting to make it LO as well? The reason they put something like this is because of lightweight materials. Thats why you have something like the Global Hawk that can fly higher or being fuel efficient.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Review of composite sandwich structure in aeronautic applications
> 
> 
> This paper presents a review of the issues concerning sandwich structures for aeronautical applications. The main questions raised by designers are fi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencedirect.com


its in detail , how the sandwich is made and how much its used ,....
the component in itself is radar absorbent


----------



## Hack-Hook

about fakour-90 all that is said is about the fakour that was unveiled in 1397




but the fakour-90 that was shown in 1399 shows small difference






the first that come to mind is that the engine changed from M112 to M190
the second that come to mind the difference in firing temperature that show the missile now can be fired at higher altitude and suggest a new type of fuel

sadly still no talk about guidance system but I'm sure its wise to conclude we don't use electronic equipment of 1968 that were used in AIM-54a we received anymore and made some upgrade there and by the way photos are stolen from Military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> about fakour-90 all that is said is about the fakour that was unveiled in 1397
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but the fakour-90 that was shown in 1399 shows small difference
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the first that come to mind is that the engine changed from M112 to M190
> the second that come to mind the difference in firing temperature that show the missile now can be fired at higher altitude and suggest a new type of fuel
> 
> sadly still no talk about guidance system but I'm sure its wise to conclude we don't use electronic equipment of 1968 that were used in AIM-54a we received anymore and made some upgrade there and by the way photos are stolen from Military.ir


Aim 54 at longest range Use mid course upadate from radar, but it has nothing to do with SARH... SARH is bistatic radar arrangement, literary means one radar with two antena and two recivers... There is no SARH or anything similar on Aim54 even you May read it somewhere... As I said, it is ARH guidance as any....there are different Technology for mid course update... But forget about SARH... In SARH radar from aircraft transmit signal and bounced signal is recived by both radar on aircraft and bistatic recivers on missile, it is called semi active because missile can guide itself as Long bounced signal reach missile. With ARH, you have independent radar on missile, but all have Limited range so there is need for mid course upadate, but nothing Like SARH, where aircraft must transmit signal all the way in target direction... So bounced signal reach missile...On other hand Aim 54 mid course upadate is completly different... You load data on missile pribor lunch, than upadate missile when needed with New data till reach within range of own radar... Also aim 120 has data link and it also recive upadates from aircraft,you cant detect and get target acquisition with INS.. Still aim 120 must get those INFO from aircraft till reach within range of own radar... Because of INS it is less dependent since it calculate manythings on iits own, Like own position, velocity... Etc but My friend, aircraft must feed it with INFO abt target... You cant Use INS to guide missile while it is off range limit of its radar... As I said,they all work on same principle.. And now we dont Know what Iran made Change to Fakour 90,except I saw active seeker with 45km range... When it comes to rocket engine, I will Just say This missile has nothing similar with Hawk... Forgot about rocket engine designation, it is rocket engine designed for solid state fuel... Designation means very little,and I can elaborate if you want

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Aim 54 at longest range Use mid course upadate from radar, but it has nothing to do with SARH... SARH is bistatic radar arrangement, literary means one radar with two antena and two recivers... There is no SARH or anything similar on Aim54 even you May read it somewhere... As I said, it is ARH guidance as any....there are different Technology for mid course update... But forget about SARH... In SARH radar from aircraft transmit signal and bounced signal is recived by both radar on aircraft and bistatic recivers on missile, it is called semi active because missile can guide itself as Long bounced signal reach missile. With ARH, you have independent radar on missile, but all have Limited range so there is need for mid course upadate, but nothing Like SARH, where aircraft must transmit signal all the way in target direction... So bounced signal reach missile...On other hand Aim 54 mid course upadate is completly different... You load data on missile pribor lunch, than upadate missile when needed with New data till reach within range of own radar... Also aim 120 has data link and it also recive upadates from aircraft,you cant detect and get target acquisition with INS.. Still aim 120 must get those INFO from aircraft till reach within range of own radar... Because of INS it is less dependent since it calculate manythings on iits own, Like own position, velocity... Etc but My friend, aircraft must feed it with INFO abt target... You cant Use INS to guide missile while it is off range limit of its radar... As I said,they all work on same principle.. And now we dont Know what Iran made Change to Fakour 90,except I saw active seeker with 45km range... When it comes to rocket engine, I will Just say This missile has nothing similar with Hawk... Forgot about rocket engine designation, it is rocket engine designed for solid state fuel... Designation means very little,and I can elaborate if you want


Well less consider it what ever means the missiles use for navigating to the target be it fakour or aim-54 or aim-120 if they want to be effective at extreme range they need update in mid course and may be several time they need it. It means the aircraft in neither of these missiles can fire the missile and turn around and escape . When unless the missile is being fired at way shorter ranges .
The difference with missile like aim-7 is that even at that short distance it still need the target get painted by aircraft and made it vulnerable to heat seeking missiles like AIM-9 even if you manage to hit your target


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Well less consider it what ever means the missiles use for navigating to the target be it fakour or aim-54 or aim-120 if they want to be effective at extreme range they need update in mid course and may be several time they need it. It means the aircraft in neither of these missiles can fire the missile and turn around and escape . When unless the missile is being fired at way shorter ranges .
> The difference with missile like aim-7 is that even at that short distance it still need the target get painted by aircraft and made it vulnerable to heat seeking missiles like AIM-9 even if you manage to hit your target


I dont realy Know from where People Got INFO that AIM 54 is not fully ARH, or I see somewhere ARH/SARH term, even you cant mix these two... Missile with SARH dont have any radar in itself, it has only passive detector... So ARH is, as I said, only in name similar with SARH.. You can have for example as R27, have same missile in more versions, that is why sometimes for R27 you can see SARH/ARH, because they exist in both variant, but you cant have both on same missile.. Aim 54 is ARH, and was always... Fakour 90 May exist in both variant but I saw only active seeker with 45km range, and how they described it, it is ARH... even they May produced it in both variant... As I mention R27 exist in SARH, IR and ARH variants


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> I dont realy Know from where People Got INFO that AIM 54 is not fully ARH, or I see somewhere ARH/SARH term, even you cant mix these two... Missile with SARH dont have any radar in itself, it has only passive detector... So ARH is, as I said, only in name similar with SARH.. You can have for example as R27, have same missile in more versions, that is why sometimes for R27 you can see SARH/ARH, because they exist in both variant, but you cant have both on same missile.. Aim 54 is ARH, and was always... Fakour 90 May exist in both variant but I saw only active seeker with 45km range, and how they described it, it is ARH... even they May produced it in both variant... As I mention R27 exist in SARH, IR and ARH variants


As I said in long ranges you can't fire ARH missiles and go away . You must feed the missile data on where the target is . So the disadvantage you mentioned about SARH missiles still exist in ARH missiles .


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Uh wrong, passenger planes have this material. Are they attempting to make it LO as well? The reason they put something like this is because of lightweight materials. Thats why you have something like the Global Hawk that can fly higher or being fuel efficient.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Review of composite sandwich structure in aeronautic applications
> 
> 
> This paper presents a review of the issues concerning sandwich structures for aeronautical applications. The main questions raised by designers are fi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencedirect.com



I’m under the impression Composite material used in wings is for strength not for “light weight purposes” of the passenger plane. That is why you can see these wings take insane pressures and not break.

Composite material does indeed reduce weight, but more importantly radar against composite material reacts completely different than against metals and alloys object.

In a smaller military object (note not passenger plane) it’s use is to reduce radar reflection and at the same time reduce weight as an added benefit.


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> I’m under the impression Composite material used in wings is for strength not for “light weight purposes” of the passenger plane. That is why you can see these wings take insane pressures and not break.
> 
> Composite material does indeed reduce weight, but more importantly radar against composite material reacts completely different than against metals and alloys object.
> 
> In a smaller military object (note not passenger plane) it’s use is to reduce radar reflection and at the same time reduce weight as an added benefit.


Well thanks for correcting me, then its use for strengthening the plane. Whether you think its design for LO, you can see the Global Hawk and notice its nothing like the LO of the RQ 170 or the RQ 180 as some call for the other drone for stealth recon.















Time index: 2:20.


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> As I said in long ranges you can't fire ARH missiles and go away . You must feed the missile data on where the target is . So the disadvantage you mentioned about SARH missiles still exist in ARH missiles .


Yes, at Long ranges even ARH missile must be feed from aircraft, but only 1% air combat happened at long ranges... 99% kils is within 30-40km... So in most cases you can fire Aim54 and aim 120 in fire forget mode


----------



## sanel1412

Oldman1 said:


> Well thanks for correcting me, then its use for strengthening the plane. Whether you think its design for LO, you can see the Global Hawk and notice its nothing like the LO of the RQ 170 or the RQ 180 as some call for the other drone for stealth recon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time index: 2:20.


You can build stealth aircraft in two ways, one is stealth design and second is using NON reflecting Materials... RQ4 came in few versions, one that Iran shut down implement many stealth characteris, on images you can see NON reflecting Materials used in whole airframe, without metal above..also you can see paint is mixed with small objects(Like dust) but it is designed in special shape, third on images also you can sea they covered every Thing that produced Heat... And also, I heard myself 4 different US general confirmation This RQ4 was built with stealth characteris, now it probably has much larger RCS than aircrafts that implement both, stealth shape design and NON reflecting Materials... Rafael is considered also as aircraft with stealth features, as many other that do not implement any stealth shape design...


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Well thanks for correcting me, then its use for strengthening the plane. Whether you think its design for LO, you can see the Global Hawk and notice its nothing like the LO of the RQ 170 or the RQ 180 as some call for the other drone for stealth recon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time index: 2:20.



You seem a tad bit confused. You are confusing stealth design VLO/LO with an object that merely has radar absorbent materials. They are two very different things.

RQ-170/180 are VLO objects for use in contested airspace.

Global Hawk was designed for recon from stand off range and merely used radar minimization using composite materials. It’s design was not VLO or even LO.

Instead certain measures such as radar absorbing paint and materials were used to make it smaller on radar vs if it was a pure alloy design.

Global Hawk mostly relied on high altitude and ECW/decoy for protection. It was not ment to used in contested airspace and instead “straddle” the borders of hostile countries and use its powerful instruments to look inside for recon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> You seem a tad bit confused. You are confusing stealth design VLO/LO with an object that merely has radar absorbent materials. They are two very different things.
> 
> RQ-170/180 are VLO objects for use in contested airspace.
> 
> Global Hawk was designed for recon from stand off range and merely used radar minimization using composite materials. It’s design was not VLO or even LO.
> 
> Instead certain measures such as radar absorbing paint and materials were used to make it smaller on radar vs if it was a pure alloy design.
> 
> Global Hawk mostly relied on high altitude and ECW/decoy for protection. It was not ment to used in contested airspace and instead “straddle” the borders of hostile countries and use its powerful instruments to look inside for recon.


Doesn't passenger planes have composite materials? Intentions to make it less detected by radar then?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Doesn't passenger planes have composite materials? Intentions to make it less detected by radar then?



Any radar absorbent benefit of composite materials in the wing and tail (for strength purposes) is well off set by both the massive alloy body and the aircraft’s radar transponder, firing radiation in all directions.


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Any radar absorbent benefit of composite materials in the wing and tail (for strength purposes) is well off set by both the massive alloy body and the aircraft’s radar transponder, firing radiation in all directions.


Well its just weird to see the Global Hawk painted in radar absorbent materials but don't paint the wings.


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Well its just weird to see the Global Hawk painted in radar absorbent materials but don't paint the wings.



Hence why it’s being replaced









Global Hawk Drones: Lockheed, Northrop In 'Big Race' To Replace US Air Force’s Ageing, Obsolete UAVs?


There are speculations that US defense giants Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman could be in the race to offer a successor to US Air Force’s (USAF) Global Hawk drones. E-4B Nightwatch – US’ Doomsday Aircraft Lands On A Secret Military Base Near Area 51 With A ‘VVIP’ On Board The USAF is...




eurasiantimes.com





$200M for a drone that can be shot down by a semi competent adversary is not worth it. Might as well use a U2 at that point.


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Hence why it’s being replaced
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Global Hawk Drones: Lockheed, Northrop In 'Big Race' To Replace US Air Force’s Ageing, Obsolete UAVs?
> 
> 
> There are speculations that US defense giants Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman could be in the race to offer a successor to US Air Force’s (USAF) Global Hawk drones. E-4B Nightwatch – US’ Doomsday Aircraft Lands On A Secret Military Base Near Area 51 With A ‘VVIP’ On Board The USAF is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eurasiantimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $200M for a drone that can be shot down by a semi competent adversary is not worth it. Might as well use a U2 at that point.


Couldn't they have just paint the wings?


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> Couldn't they have just paint the wings?



If you read the article the Air Force wants a recon plane with better survivability in contested airspace. The future of war isn’t against sandal wearing terrorists it’s likely against nation states.

I told you Global Hawk is good for patrol, surveillance, and in airspace where US has full dominance. Any benefit of its RAM is outweighed when going up against Iran, China, or Russia that have SAMs and radars that can reach that altitude.

After Iran shot it down foreign buyers like PGCC countries got cold feet. There was only a handful in the US fleet to begin with.

Too expensive of a solution. Back to the drawing board it seems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> If you read the article the Air Force wants a recon plane with better survivability in contested airspace. The future of war isn’t against sandal wearing terrorists it’s likely against nation states.
> 
> I told you Global Hawk is good for patrol, surveillance, and in airspace where US has full dominance. Any benefit of its RAM is outweighed when going up against Iran, China, or Russia that have SAMs and radars that can reach that altitude.
> 
> After Iran shot it down foreign buyers like PGCC countries got cold feet. There was only a handful in the US fleet to begin with.
> 
> Too expensive of a solution. Back to the drawing board it seems.


Guess it wasn't stealthy enough.


----------



## thesaint

Oldman1 said:


> Guess it wasn't stealthy enough.


I guess RQ170 wasn't stealthy either...........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

thesaint said:


> I guess RQ170 wasn't stealthy either...........


And US was sending a so called not-stealthy U2 deep into soviet territories!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

thesaint said:


> I guess RQ170 wasn't stealthy either...........


Yeah and yet the Iranians are using it for stealthy missions.



mohsen said:


> And US was sending a so called not-stealthy U2 deep into soviet territories!


LOL! That was before the need for stealth when SAMS didn't reach that high yet.


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> LOL! That was before the need for stealth when SAMS didn't reach that high yet.


1.If spotted in radars, Soviets could use interceptor aircrafts, so that's one big BS claim
2.Their air defense shot it down to make it an extra BS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> 1.If spotted in radars, Soviets could use interceptor aircrafts, so that's one big BS claim
> 2.Their air defense shot it down to make it an extra BS


The USSR interceptor at the time could not fly as high as u2 and USA was not aware that USSR air defence could intercept the airplanes at that height . It was a shock for them that they managed to hit it.


----------



## Stryker1982

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah and yet the Iranians are using it for stealthy missions.


That's actually a good point lol.

Iran wouldn't make 4 models of this particular drone for different roles and scales if it wasn't useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> The USSR interceptor at the time could not fly as high as u2 and USA was not aware that USSR air defence could intercept the airplanes at that height . It was a shock for them that they managed to hit it.


One year earlier, Chinese had shot down a Martin RB-57D at 65000 ft altitude, so the source of American confidence wasn't the altitude.


Here is the source of their confidence:

_wikipedia__
The CIA told the president that the Soviets could not track high-altitude U-2 flights; this belief was based on studies using old Soviet radar systems and American systems that were not as effective at high altitudes as current Soviet systems, of which the U.S. was not aware. Knutson (U2 Designer) later said that "*the U-2 was really quite invisible to American radar*, but Russian radar were a little different—better, you might say"_

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> One year earlier, Chinese had shot down a Martin RB-57D at 65000 ft altitude, so the source of American confidence wasn't the altitude.
> 
> 
> Here is the source of their confidence:
> 
> _wikipedia_
> _The CIA told the president that the Soviets could not track high-altitude U-2 flights; this belief was based on studies using old Soviet radar systems and American systems that were not as effective at high altitudes as current Soviet systems, of which the U.S. was not aware. Knutson (U2 Designer) later said that "*the U-2 was really quite invisible to American radar*, but Russian radar were a little different—better, you might say"_


about the shootdown at 7 October 1959, at the time USA believed the pilot on his way back to Taiwan did a premature descend and was flying at lower altitude than 65000 feet recommended cruise altitude


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> about the shootdown at 7 October 1959, at the time USA believed the pilot on his way back to Taiwan did a premature descend and was flying at lower altitude than 65000 feet recommended cruise altitude


And they believed one RQ170 has gone missing over Afghanistan, if you believe them!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

For them it went missing ,


----------



## Readerdefence

Hi about U2 incident 
Background[edit]​In July 1958, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower requested permission from the Pakistani prime minister Feroze Khan Noon for the U.S. to establish a secret intelligence facility in Pakistan and for the U-2 spyplane to fly from Pakistan. The U-2 flew at altitudes that could not be reached by Soviet fighter jets of the era; it was believed to be beyond the reach of Soviet missiles as well. A facility established in Badaber (Peshawar Air Station), 10 miles (16 km) from Peshawar, was a cover for a major communications intercept operation run by the United States National Security Agency (NSA). Badaber was an excellent location because of its proximity to Soviet central Asia. This enabled the monitoring of missile test sites, key infrastructure and communications. The U-2 "spy-in-the-sky" was allowed to use the Pakistan Air Force section of Peshawar Airport to gain vital photo intelligence in an era before satellite observation.[4]

On 9 April 1960, a U-2C spyplane of the special CIA unit "10-10", piloted by Bob Ericson, crossed the southern national boundary of the Soviet Union in the area of Pamir Mountains and flew over four Soviet top secret military objects: the Semipalatinsk Test Site, the Dolon Air Base where Tu-95 strategic bombers were stationed, the surface-to-air missile (SAM) test site of the Soviet Air Defence Forces near Saryshagan, and the Tyuratam missile range (Baikonur Cosmodrome).[6]

The aircraft was detected by the Soviet Air Defense Forces when it had flown more than 250 kilometres (155 mi) over the Soviet national boundary and avoided several attempts at interception by a MiG-19 and a Su-9 during the flight. The U-2 left Soviet air space and landed at an Iranian airstrip at Zahedan. It was clear that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency had successfully performed an extraordinarily dangerous but productive intelligence operation. The next flight of the U-2 spyplane from Peshawar airport was planned for late April.[6]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> 1.If spotted in radars, Soviets could use interceptor aircrafts, so that's one big BS claim
> 2.Their air defense shot it down to make it an extra BS


The interceptor aircraft at the time couldn't reach that high ceiling at the time. Its no BS. Thats why they used SAMs.


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> The interceptor aircraft at the time couldn't reach that high ceiling at the time. Its no BS. Thats why they used SAMs.



Misinformed

Soviet interceptors max ceiling:

Mig-25 78,000 ft
Mig-31 82,000+ Ft
Su-15 60,000 Ft

They all had altitude to launch A2A and intercept a U2


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> Misinformed
> 
> Soviet interceptors max ceiling:
> 
> Mig-25 78,000 ft
> Mig-31 82,000+ Ft
> Su-15 60,000 Ft
> 
> They all had altitude to launch A2A and intercept a U2


LOL! MiG-25 didn't exist at the time when the U-2 was shot down. Same for the MiG-31.


----------



## TheImmortal

Oldman1 said:


> LOL! MiG-25 didn't exist at the time when the U-2 was shot down. Same for the MiG-31.



But SU-9 did and it had a service ceiling slightly less than 70,000.

So the issue was not the service ceiling. After all a fighter jet at 50,000 could hit a U2 with a powerful enough A2A in this modern era as long as its detected on radar.

The issue at the time was early A2A were laser beam guided, not radar guided. Which meant that the fighter jet would have to hold the lock, something difficult to do against a U2 (or any fighter jet that had maneuverability)


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Misinformed
> 
> Soviet interceptors max ceiling:
> 
> Mig-25 78,000 ft
> Mig-31 82,000+ Ft
> Su-15 60,000 Ft
> 
> They all had altitude to launch A2A and intercept a U2


come on , we are talking about more than 60 years ago or more exactly 1 May 1960
mig 25 first flight was 1964 and come into service in 1970
mig 31 first flight was 1975 and come into service in 1981
Su-15 first flight was 1962 and come into service in 1965

at the time USSR only had Mig-19 with 54000 feet and Su-9 with theoretical altitude of 65000 feet but only when it was empty and if you wanted to use its k5 missile you had to fire the missiles at 2km away if you wanted to intercept the airplane and as it was a new plane that introduced only several month ago , there was none in the path of the flight



TheImmortal said:


> But SU-9 did and it had a service ceiling slightly less than 70,000.
> 
> So the issue was not the service ceiling. After all a fighter jet at 50,000 could hit a U2 with a powerful enough A2A in this modern era as long as its detected on radar.


as I said Su-9 only had 65000 feet of altitude if unarmed and at the time they had only k-5 with a range of 2-5km and let say it was far from being considered powerful , those era A2A missiles were at best Meh , no matter they were from east or west and the Su-9 was introduced only for several month and there was not enough of it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> The issue at the time was early A2A were laser beam guided, not radar guided. Which meant that the fighter jet would have to hold the lock, something difficult to do against a U2 (or any fighter jet that had maneuverability)


the situation was worse , the K-5 Missile USSR was used was a form of laser guided which was as impractical as it get in shaky airplane of the time , it was Beam riding missile


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> For them it went missing ,


No, just for media and as a propaganda it went missing in Afghanistan! so they didn't have to admit their technological defeat.


In reality they knew it had landed in a specific location in Iran and even had plans to engage with Iranian forces and destroy it.


----------



## Hormuz



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Sineva

Hormuz said:


>


For once I`m actually somewhat impressed with something the airforce did,thats actually a rather neat and simple little conversion which gives the old 70s era mavericks a huge performance upgrade.
Hopefully we`ll see them do the exact same sort of upgrades to the old first gen indigenous pgms that the af developed back in the early to mid 90s,as they could certainly do with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Ich

Hormuz said:


>



Looks like "one corpus fits it all" to me. Easy change of seeker, electronics, configure as you need.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

Ich said:


> Looks like "one corpus fits it all" to me. Easy change of seeker, electronics, configure as you need.


Is is fire and forget !? 

and 16km put fighter in danger ...


----------



## Ich

OldTwilight said:


> Is is fire and forget !?
> 
> and 16km put fighter in danger ...



Well, in vid it do not look like fire and forget.


----------



## MisterSyed

My Question regarding F14 Tomcats. What type of Armament does it support? Have the engineers added any Russian Equipment capability to it and any other Upgrades to it? Considering its The A Variant and the Basic One.


----------



## OldTwilight

Ich said:


> Well, in vid it do not look like fire and forget.


if they put some work on it and use image processing on it , they can make it fire and forget ... the missile just have to follow the target which is going to get bigger ( even new cellphone can track target by their camera )

and look like it can't be fire at night ...

good upgrade but is not suitable for new conflict against any armed force .... its good for border conflict with some groups .. .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

OldTwilight said:


> if they put some work on it and use image processing on it , they can make it fire and forget ... the missile just have to follow the target which is going to get bigger ( even new cellphone can track target by their camera )
> 
> and look like it can't be fire at night ...
> 
> good upgrade but is not suitable for new conflict against any armed force .... its good for border conflict with some groups .. .



It could be possible cause of the modular approach. But has this version of the F4 the abillity to prozess optical target data to the missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BigMelatonin

MisterSyed said:


> My Question regarding F14 Tomcats. What type of Armament does it support? Have the engineers added any Russian Equipment capability to it and any other Upgrades to it? Considering its The A Variant and the Basic One.


There were attempts to integrate R-60s and R-27s but as far as I know never in active service.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1dcf0i

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

OldTwilight said:


> Is is fire and forget !?
> 
> and 16km put fighter in danger ...


The maverick was always a fire and forget weapon,once the seeker is locked onto the target it will track it automatically.
Using the new ccd seeker will have greatly improved the ranges at which a target can be spotted and the time taken to lock it up.The improvement of these 2 things reduce some of the risk to the launch aircraft.
Another thing that would improve the situation would be a modern targeting pod,as this would allow the crew to locate and select targets at longer ranges before launching the weapons.Though whether the af would put in the effort into develop something like this is anyones guess,however the irgcaf was working on one.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> For once I`m actually somewhat impressed with something the airforce did,thats actually a rather neat and simple little conversion which gives the old 70s era mavericks a huge performance upgrade.
> Hopefully we`ll see them do the exact same sort of upgrades to the old first gen indigenous pgms that the af developed back in the early to mid 90s,as they could certainly do with it.


It's still the same lazy airforce, tweaking their old stuff, instead of innovating new ones suited for today or future warfares. compare it with IRGC airforce, received 10 su22, and were already testing every kind and every range of stand-off munition which you would find in modern armies, (or even wouldn't in most of them), from linking to drones, to long ramge guided bombs to air launched ballistic missiles or cruise missiles with 1500km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> It's still the same lazy airforce, tweaking their old stuff, instead of innovating new ones suited for today or future warfares. compare it with IRGC airforce, received 10 su22, and were already testing every kind and every range of stand-off munition which you would find in modern armies, (or even wouldn't in most of them), from linking to drones, to long ramge guided bombs to air launched ballistic missiles or cruise missiles with 1500km range.


I know man,its pretty depressing sometimes,but who knows...perhaps this small step of modernising the mavericks will be the start of something bigger,I mean the af did finally start to [belatedly] take advantage of the benefits of irans huge experience in drone tech,tho it then stupidly decided to waste time and effort trying to create its own af only male class drone instead of following the navy and acquiring the combat proven shahed 129.
Unfortunately so long as you have an af that is unwilling to work with the other branches of irans military and to take full advantage of the weapons and technologies that they have developed,the iriaf will continue to be firmly stuck back in the last couple of decades of the last century trying to do things all on its own.
I honestly think that when it comes to the iriaf you kind of have to take the glass half full view,even if its actually three quarters empty.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

But defence ministry also have standoff weaponry and exactly which air launched cruise missile we are talking.

About agm-65 it's a good missile but honestly it's too bulky for my taste it may have it's uses because of it's large war head but honestly I prefer airforce focus on missiles like Azaraksh and Almas (maybe a stretched version of it with longer range) . So they can carry 4 missile instead of each agm-65


----------



## Ich

Sineva said:


> The maverick was always a fire and forget weapon,once the seeker is locked onto the target it will track it automatically.


Then why is it "spiraling" in the vid although the target doesnt move?


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Ich said:


> Then why is it "spiraling" in the vid although the target doesnt move?


Which part of the video does this "spiralling" happen in?


----------



## Ich

Sineva said:


> Which part of the video does this "spiralling" happen in?



At 3:15 and on


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Then why is it "spiraling" in the vid although the target doesnt move?


Agm-65e is laser guided which is not fire and forget model D,F&G are infrared guided which is fire and forget . The rest are electroptic which can be fire and forget but also can be guided in all the flight path.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Ich said:


> At 3:15 and on


What you`re seeing is the missile on the aircraft being pointed at the target and locking it up,you can then see the part where the weapon is released and the rocket motor fires,this release from the pylon is what probably causes the view to rock from side to side slightly [3.20],is this the "spiraling" that you`re talking about?
The seeker head has a gimbal system that keeps the ccd camera fixed onto the target even if the missile is maneuvering to some degree,thats why the target doesnt move.
You can see it in the pic below with the seekers camera turned to the left.





Whats also impressive is how quickly the target locks up,with the original tv camera based seeker it could sometimes take up to 8 seconds to lock onto the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

Sineva said:


> What you`re seeing is the missile on the aircraft being pointed at the target and locking it up,you can then see the part where the weapon is released and the rocket motor fires,this release from the pylon is what probably causes the view to rock from side to side slightly [3.20],is this the "spiraling" that you`re talking about?
> The seeker head has a gimbal system that keeps the ccd camera fixed onto the target even if the missile is maneuvering to some degree,thats why the target doesnt move.
> You can see it in the pic below with the seekers camera turned to the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whats also impressive is how quickly the target locks up,with the original tv camera based seeker it could sometimes take up to 8 seconds to lock onto the target.


Yes, this is the "spiraling" i meant. Thx for clarification.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Ich said:


> Yes, this is the "spiraling" i meant. Thx for clarification.


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Actually kind of impressed by this cockpit.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1513415910899470336

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> Actually kind of impressed by this cockpit.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1513415910899470336



Its a potent jet, but because of limitation of the size of F-5E nose cone, it can not house a larger radar than KLJ-6E/F or KLJ-7. Which means max BVR engagement options are limited to below 100 km. 

Kowsar at best is another tech demonstrator or stop gap thing. Some 7-8 Squadrons can help IRIAF defend against regional foes. 

We need larger jets with higher radar ranges and BVR options.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Actually kind of impressed by this cockpit.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1513415910899470336


if it was more like it then Id have been more impressed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1512421111774027783

People just be saying anything these days huh


----------



## Hack-Hook

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1512421111774027783
> 
> People just be saying anything these days huh


همش تقصیر برادران طالبان هستش مثل اینکه جنس ها را دارن خالص تر میفرستن اینور
as I said we sooner get Grippen, Rafale and F-35 than Russia give us the license for flanker , let not even talk about Su-57

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1512421111774027783
> 
> People just be saying anything these days huh



Iran has zero facilties in place to license build any fighter jet from scratch. Russia would have to build the entire infrastructure and supply all the equipment and train the engineers. Multi-year effort before the first jet gets produced.

It’s better to get ToT in areas Iran needs to push its domestic program ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran has zero facilties in place to license build any fighter jet from scratch said The general Thelmmortal but it's very false. Once again, it is in the total field. 
​


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has zero facilties in place to license build any fighter jet from scratch. Russia would have to build the entire infrastructure and supply all the equipment and train the engineers. Multi-year effort before the first jet gets produced.
> 
> It’s better to get ToT in areas Iran needs to push its domestic program ahead.


Zero is a bit exaggeration, isn't it? 

Iran is already producing jet engines with different uses and mini Turbofan ones, also the required superalloys. It surely needs infras to do so. Problem is, we don't have those Items Mass produced in an industrial Scale. 

Lack of will for logical reasons, lack of funding etc led to this situation.


----------



## Blue In Green

Muhammed45 said:


> Zero is a bit exaggeration, isn't it?
> 
> Iran is already producing jet engines with different uses and mini Turbofan ones, also the required superalloys. It surely needs infras to do so. Problem is, we don't have those Items Mass produced in an industrial Scale.
> 
> Lack of will for logical reasons, lack of funding etc led to this situation.



The issue is that existing facilities just don't have the proprietary equipment needed to fabricate key components from scratch and these advanced machines would need to be brought it/built on-sight with Russian supervision, taking quite some time before even one such facility goes online. Not to mention the training of facility personnel who would need to know all the _ins-and-outs. _

Jets always have always been stupid expensive in every single facet of their design and construction. The more modern the plane, the more expensive it becomes.

- Metallurgy
- Training
- Raw materials
- Time
- Skilled Labor
- Runaway costs
- Quality assurance 
- Testing

And many more, all compound into a national project that requires the utmost care and attention.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Blue In Green said:


> The issue is that existing facilities just don't have the proprietary equipment needed to fabricate key components from scratch and these advanced machines would need to be brought it/built on-sight with Russian supervision, taking quite some time before even one such facility goes online. Not to mention the training of facility personnel who would need to know all the _ins-and-outs. _
> 
> Jets always have always been stupid expensive in every single facet of their design and construction. The more modern the plane, the more expensive it becomes.
> 
> - Metallurgy
> - Training
> - Raw materials
> - Time
> - Skilled Labor
> - Runaway costs
> - Quality assurance
> - Testing
> 
> And many more, all compound into a national project that requires the utmost care and attention.


the only thing hold us back is metallurgy and quality assurance


----------



## drmeson

Our limitation with Ti Alloy and Turbofan (at least in a class of RD-33/93) will keep us down on modern fighter jet production at home. 

With Kowsars combat suite we at least know that Iran can put out a 4.0 generation radar+avionics package. Turbofan and Ti-Alloys are the problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> Zero is a bit exaggeration, isn't it?
> 
> Iran is already producing jet engines with different uses and mini Turbofan ones, also the required superalloys. It surely needs infras to do so. Problem is, we don't have those Items Mass produced in an industrial Scale.
> 
> Lack of will for logical reasons, lack of funding etc led to this situation.



No it’s zero for a mass production of a heavy fighter jet like SU-35 or SU-57. Zero facilities for production necessary for an engine like AL-31. Haven’t seen any indication of military grade titanium production facilities with ovens big enough to fit fighter size objects.

The Kowsar “production line” is quite frankly a tiny factory in aerospace terms. Right now everything Iran has is at “pilot level” facilites.


So again even if Russia tommorrow says we are granting Iran license to build SU-35, iran will need time and money to get the infrastructure in place.

It’s like if Pakistan licensed IR-2 (P-2) to Iran. Great now Iran has instructions and ToT knowledge to build P-2. But it had to then build centrifuge workshops, yellowcake facilities, enrichment plants, uranium reprocessing facilities, etc etc.




drmeson said:


> Our limitation with Ti Alloy and Turbofan (at least in a class of RD-33/93) will keep us down on modern fighter jet production at home.
> 
> With Kowsars combat suite we at least know that Iran can put out a 4.0 generation radar+avionics package. Turbofan and Ti-Alloys are the problems.



Radar sucks. Iran hasn’t shown any capacity to build a long range PESA let alone AESA radar.

Avionics? Besides a few LCD screens and digital instruments, I would hardly call that an “avionics” package. Mostly superficial.

This civilian engineer rebuilt a working replica of the F-35 cockpit with less than $50K













Doesn’t mean he is ready to build a 5th Gen “avionics” suite or anything close to the electronics performance of an F-35









Grandfather spends £30k building world's first F-35 flight simulator in his garden shed


A GRANDFATHER has spent more than £30,000 building a home-made F-35B lightning fighter jet simulator - in his garden SHED. Kenneth Mockford, 54, shut himself away "from dawn until dusk" to construct the replica aircraft from hundreds of tiny pieces.




www.google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Samar111

IRIAF in its current form would not even last long against UAE air force, let alone Egypt, Turkey or Israel.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## sha ah

That's why Iran has a combined arms doctrine which includes the use of saturation attacks using drones, missiles. Jets can't fly without facilities at airbases intact.

UAE on its own is hopeless against Iran. Iran has strategic depth. All of UAE's airbases are confined into a tiny area. Easy target

Egypt is too far from Iran. Not to mention a few missile strikes could easily cripple the Suez Canal,

Turkey is bankrupt, 60% inflation, 2/3rd of people now using Euros and USDs for cash transactions.

Israel doesn't share borders with Iran and if they could have they would have already attacked Iran. Look what Hamas did to them last time just from Gaza, saturating the airspace with short range Katushas. They don't want Iranian missiles raining down on them.

India should be worried about the upcoming war with Pakistan/China. If the Chinese manage to take the Siliguri corridor (chickens neck) which is right by the Chinese border, it's game over for India. India on the other hand has no such option against China.

The fact that your borders were drawn by the British will leave you at a strategic disadvantage forever.



Samar111 said:


> IRIAF in its current form would not even last long against UAE air force, let alone Egypt, Turkey or Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arash1991

Samar111 said:


> IRIAF in its current form would not even last long against UAE air force, let alone Egypt, Turkey or Israel.


Yeah but only if IRIAF fights isolated. But the battle will be done with combined arms. 
We have also strong Air Defence , Missiles wich can destroy any airfield , drones en Masse (cheap and low level to high level stealth) , cruise missiles and a lot of other stuff. 

Than there is motivation and morale level in the armies and in the people. The Other point is that UAE is dependent to imports. Iran can cut Saudi Arabia and UAE completely from any kind of imports, also food, medicine and and and. Iranian missiles are capable of cutting Dubai completely off, also snipping out whole electricity and water supply. Let’s see what they do when Saudi or UAE don’t have any electricity and water in the middle of 50 degree hot Summer without and kind of supply.
Think airforce is their least problem

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Samar111

sha ah said:


> India should be worried about the upcoming war with Pakistan/China.


Upcoming war? What day is it going to start?


----------



## _Nabil_

Samar111 said:


> Upcoming war? What day is it going to start?


Anytime the Indians do stupid moves like they did quite often lately .....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Samar111

_Nabil_ said:


> Anytime the Indians do stupid moves like they did quite often lately .....


Iran needs to worry about itself.

Indian Navy:




Iran Navy:




LOL

Indian air force:






Iranian air force:





Hehe


----------



## Dariush the Great

Samar111 said:


> Iran needs to worry about itself.
> 
> Indian Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Indian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehe


Dude, your entire country looks like a freaking toilet. Like literally. 
I would not even show up on this section as an Indian if i were you. 

India! LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Samar111 said:


> Iran needs to worry about itself.
> 
> Indian Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Indian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehe











Man in India dies by self-immolation after his boss asks for sex with his wife in exchange for transfer


A man in India has died by self-immolation after his boss reportedly demanded to have sex with his wife in exchange for a transfer. Gokul Prasad, a 45-year-old technical lineman, was feeling distressed after his boss, junior engineer Nagendra Kumar, offered to process Prasad’s transfer if he...




www.yahoo.com






Iran







India









Unless you managed to make your airplanes, ship, cars run on curry.....India has ZERO energy independence which means no war without its colonial masters approval. Also China on one side and Pakistan on the other.


Lastly, what would Iran even want with India? It’s like invading the Sahara.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## _Nabil_

Samar111 said:


> Iran needs to worry about itself.
> 
> Indian Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Indian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehe


Dunno why you dragged Iran in your reply??? 

"Your stupid moves" refers obviously to China (want me to post your captured and beated soldiers ?) And Pakistan (want me to post your captured pilot picture?)

So my reply to your statement (India not going to war) still stands, unless you refrain from doing stupid moves, you are not safe from war, specially lately your government was going quite stupid ....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Samar111

I made a honest comment and all the Iranian members got so triggered lol. You only look at Iran's strength and not weakness. Iran has a lot of weakness. Iran air force is the weakest in the region. Iran's navy is pathetic. 

Without air superiority, Iran's navy would be left almost totally vulnerable to air attack. The task is easy actually. Look at how the USA humiliated Iran in "Operation Praying Mantis". Dozens of Iranian frigates destroyed, many speedboats, 2 F-4 fighters and 56 sailors killed. Today would be no different. 

This is the reason Iran relies on proxies.

To Mr.TheImmortal Israel regularly bombs and kills Iranian forces in Syria. They kill your nuclear scientis inside Iran left, right and center. This is being done by a country that has a population smaller than Tehran. The USA "blasted" your most powerful general from the face of the earth. Iran did nothing but bark. I am glad India is not like this. The USA literally slaughtered 50+ your soldiers like animals in Operation Praying Mantis. You did nothing.... Do I need to say more?



_Nabil_ said:


> Dunno why you dragged Iran in your reply???


Was meant to Shah


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Man in India dies by self-immolation after his boss asks for sex with his wife in exchange for transfer
> 
> 
> A man in India has died by self-immolation after his boss reportedly demanded to have sex with his wife in exchange for a transfer. Gokul Prasad, a 45-year-old technical lineman, was feeling distressed after his boss, junior engineer Nagendra Kumar, offered to process Prasad’s transfer if he...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


You know,if it had been me,I would`ve immolated my boss for daring to make such an insulting request like that.
I certainly wouldnt have torched myself,thats just retarded....🤪

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Samar111 said:


> I made a honest comment and all the Iranian members got so triggered lol. You only look at Iran's strength and not weakness. Iran has a lot of weakness. Iran air force is the weakest in the region. Iran's navy is pathetic.
> 
> Without air superiority, Iran's navy would be left almost totally vulnerable to air attack. The task is easy actually. Look at how the USA humiliated Iran in "Operation Praying Mantis". Dozens of Iranian frigates destroyed, many speedboats, 2 F-4 fighters and 56 sailors killed. Today would be no different.
> 
> This is the reason Iran relies on proxies.
> 
> To Mr.TheImmortal Israel regularly bombs and kills Iranian forces in Syria. They kill your nuclear scientis inside Iran left, right and center. This is being done by a country that has a population smaller than Tehran. The USA "blasted" your most powerful general from the face of the earth. Iran did nothing but bark. I am glad India is not like this. The USA literally slaughtered 50+ your soldiers like animals in Operation Praying Mantis. You did nothing.... Do I need to say more?
> 
> 
> Was meant to Shah


LOL!!
"Nothing but bark"?
I think you`re mixing up america and iran there my 💩toiletless💩 friend,either that or you`ve simply forgotten the part where the trumpenfuhrer quite literally threatened war if iran dared to retaliate in ANY way for soliemanis murder.
Well guess what?,iran retaliated and trump did nothing......well apart from tweeting "all is well",oh and downplaying the traumatic brain injuries that the personnel at the ayn al asad air base suffered as mere "headaches".
The one thing that it did NOT do however was to restore deterrence in americas favor,quite the opposite in fact. 
Its funny people like yourself always seem so utterly obsessed with comparing numbers of certain types of weapons systems [on paper],while noticeably ignoring the systems that are credible analogues or equivalents of those weapons systems.The most obvious examples of these when it comes to manned air power would be the modern long range precision guided ballistic and cruise missiles,and of course drones,ranging from large armed male class ucavs all the way down to small commercial quad copters armed with small munitions.
Do you want to know whats really "pathetic" tho?,comparing the exhausted 1988 era iranian military with the 2022 iranian military.Its a bit like me claiming that the indian military of 2022 is no different to the one that got its ar$e soundly handed to it by the chinese back in 1962,altho when one considers the utter fiasco of the 2019 failed balakot strike,not to mention the mig 21 shootdown the next day,who knows I might well be right on that score.....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## OldTwilight

Samar111 said:


> Iran needs to worry about itself.
> 
> Indian Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Navy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Indian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian air force:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehe



Well , about navy ... 
putting big ship in Persian gulf against USA air force , Navy and Persian gulf arabs is wast of time and resource ... couple of air ride and anti ship missiles and all of those ships will get hit ... 


about air force .... we are sanctioned so we can't buy anything ... this is fate of countires which are not build their fighter jets ... if the western decide , they can sanction india army and I bet you can't even operate what you already have ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Just as an example, Iran's UAV industry is far more advanced than that of India. Indians can't even produce enough toilets for themselves. In general, considering the sanctions and limitations imposed over 40 years, Iran's military is much more resourceful and industrious than that of India. Indians buy most of their hardware from foreigners and even the weapons that they manage to build they wouldn't be able to built without foreign assistance and technology.



OldTwilight said:


> Well , about navy ...
> putting big ship in Persian gulf against USA air force , Navy and Persian gulf arabs is wast of time and resource ... couple of air ride and anti ship missiles and all of those ships will get hit ...
> 
> 
> about air force .... we are sanctioned so we can't buy anything ... this is fate of countires which are not build their fighter jets ... if the western decide , they can sanction india army and I bet you can't even operate what you already have ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dariush the Great

OldTwilight said:


> Well , about navy ...
> putting big ship in Persian gulf against USA air force , Navy and Persian gulf arabs is wast of time and resource ... couple of air ride and anti ship missiles and all of those ships will get hit ...
> 
> 
> about air force .... we are sanctioned so we can't buy anything ... this is fate of countires which are not build their fighter jets ... if the western decide , they can sanction india army and I bet you can't even operate what you already have ...


Dude, with full blown US political,economic, military relationship they can't even afford to build some toilets. What you think will happen to them if sanctions were imposed? African tribes would have better living conditions (perhaps even now this is the case).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Samar111

TheImmortal said:


> Lastly, what would Iran even want with India? It’s like invading the Sahara.


Iran only has a population of only 80 million no way you can invade India even if you shared a border with us. If you did try Tehran would be nuked and wiped out within minutes. We would only have to call and inform the Pakistani's that the missile would be heading towards Iran prior to launch.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Samar111 said:


> Iran only has a population of only 80 million no way you can invade India even if you shared a border with us. If you did try Tehran would be nuked and wiped out within minutes. We would only have to call and inform the Pakistani's that the missile would be heading towards Iran prior to launch.



You didn’t even answer my question you retard. What a dumb troll

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

Samar111 said:


> Iran only has a population of only 80 million no way you can invade India even if you shared a border with us. If you did try Tehran would be nuked and wiped out within minutes. We would only have to call and inform the Pakistani's that the missile would be heading towards Iran prior to launch.



Irani vs Super Power US + KSA













India vs Super power China + Pakistan







TheImmortal said:


> You didn’t even answer my question you retard. What a dumb troll



You think Poo-in-street is here for the Logic? just keep playing

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Please don't let manure eating jabroni trolls derail the threads too much; just click ignore button like I did on that lowlife insect after it's first post a few pages back. 
I can tell the trolls from the ones who have legit criticisms especially when they pop up out of no where and start spewing sewage.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

Samar111 said:


> No offence but the only retards are people like you that think Iran has got a chance against USA lmao. The US would wipe the floor with Iran. It would be a one side "gangbang" worse than the 1991 gulf war.
> 
> Regarding your question. Your energy independence would not matter as your oil and gas field would be targeted with missiles. You think we dont have enough oil for our jets and ships in case of war? We have enough. All we have to do is pull all Indian workers back to India from GCC. Indian workers contribute the most to GCC. As soon as Indian call them back, GCC will definitely suffer a lot.



You _*still*_ didn’t answer the question....are you this dumb?

*What would Iran want with India?*

You literally have nothing that Iran wants....You make up a fairy tale war in your head like a child just to compare militaries like some Xbox fanboy. It doesn’t make sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Yeah we saw how the entire NATO alliance ran away from Afghanistan like chickens with their heads cut off, but now they're going to invade Iran ? India is a sh#thole. Nobody wants it. More of a liability than an asset.



Samar111 said:


> No offence but the only retards are people like you that think Iran has got a chance against USA lmao. The US would wipe the floor with Iran. It would be a one side "gangbang" worse than the 1991 gulf war.
> 
> Regarding your question. Your energy independence would not matter as your oil and gas field would be targeted with missiles. You think we dont have enough oil for our jets and ships in case of war? We have enough. All we have to do is pull all Indian workers back to India from GCC. Indian workers contribute the most to GCC. As soon as Indian call them back, GCC will definitely suffer a lot.



Didn't the Britain rule India for 200 years when they were outnumbered 1000 to 1 by Indians ? Why was Iran never colonized ? ask yourself.



Samar111 said:


> Iran only has a population of only 80 million no way you can invade India even if you shared a border with us. If you did try Tehran would be nuked and wiped out within minutes. We would only have to call and inform the Pakistani's that the missile would be heading towards Iran prior to launch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Samar111 said:


> No offence but the only retards are people like you that think Iran has got a chance against USA lmao. The US would wipe the floor with Iran. It would be a one side "gangbang" worse than the 1991 gulf war.
> 
> Regarding your question. Your energy independence would not matter as your oil and gas field would be targeted with missiles. You think we dont have enough oil for our jets and ships in case of war? We have enough. All we have to do is pull all Indian workers back to India from GCC. Indian workers contribute the most to GCC. As soon as Indian call them back, GCC will definitely suffer a lot.


If you say so poopdog millionaire.... 💩

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Samar111

Dariush the Great said:


> Dude, with full blown US political,economic, military relationship they can't even afford to build some toilets. What you think will happen to them if sanctions were imposed? African tribes would have better living conditions (perhaps even now this is the case).


Dude, your country Iran is synonyms with terrorism and female oppresion. We are in the 21st century. Freedom and rights should be a given unless you are born a female in Iran.... Sad....

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Shams313

Samar111 said:


> Dude, your country Iran is synonyms with terrorism and female oppresion. We are in the 21st century. Freedom and rights should be a given unless you are born a female in Iran.... Sad....


Bro, India itself is hinduvata terrorist state, Batukeshwar Dutt,Bhagat Singh was terrorist who did terrorism in early 90's and now RSS, BJP, Gerua and a lot of hinduvata rapist started terrorism, even terrorism in mid-east even started a few days ago when USA invaded mid east. may be they have learned from Indian how to suicide bombing.

as for women and human right violation, the country can surpass india is india itself. a terror state for every women souls, look they even now ripping of women's hijab so they can fulfill their lust and enjoy muslim women's body..terrifying hinduvata nationalist...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Dariush the Great said:


> Says the guy whose country ranks nr.1 in rape and female assault.
> Iranian women are treated with utmost respect except a few isolated cases. Women, in your toilet-less smelly dark country are counted as second rank citizens and raped every second.
> 
> India the most dangerous country to be a woman​
> View attachment 834950
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> India the most dangerous country to be a woman, US ranks 10th in survey | CNN
> 
> 
> Nine of the 10 countries on the list were from Asia, the Middle East or Africa. At number 10 was the United States, the only Western country to be included.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Imagine how freaking desperate Indian males must be to rape ^^ these shi.t
> 
> What would you have done if your females even looked a bit normal like human?



This Samar dude is dumb as rocks... and I sincerely mean it.

He's making himself look like an idiot whilst trying in vain (like so many before him) to slander Iran/Iranians. I won't judge the entirety of India based on his actions here on PDF since it isn't new lol. We've been through this same song & dance a thousand times.

Look in the mirror, jackass. You might not like what you see.....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Luosifen

Disregarding Indian nationalist trolls derailing the thread, is the IRIAF planning on getting stealth fighters this decade, and if so would you expect FC-31, Su-75 or a domestic developed model (Qaher 313 iirc)?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> I would rather see our UCAVs getting A2A missiles for interceptions esp this one. They have highly reduced RCS and can easily carry 2 BVR and 2 WVR missiles.



1) Too slow

2) No radar to guide missile to target region so BVR won’t work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

A piloted sofre mahi might still be in development, especially if it uses knowledge from the rq170. If a strong enough engine becomes available then either Shahed 171 or one or both of the sofre mahis or a modified qaher or upscaled/modified kowsar could serve as viable air frames. 
Also, how much are turbo fans needed vs turbo jets, if the aircraft were to operate within the domestic airspace in an air defense role? Months ago Evilwesterners kept saying that turbojets could serve an airforce in a defensive posture operating within the country. How much more cost and maintenance and down time would it entail?

Also, a good airborne radar is needed but that is only a matter of time and investment to make it so. Azarmehr recently stated in one of the recent MehrAein interviews the enormous willpower and costs required in developing a manned fighter and there is not enough of it currently to make it happen any faster than it already is...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

IRIAF | News and Discussions​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

WudangMaster said:


> Azarmehr recently stated in one of the recent MehrAein interviews the enormous willpower and costs required in developing a manned fighter and there is not enough of it currently to make it happen any faster than it already is...






from 01:14:00 onwards


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> 1) Too slow
> 
> 2) No radar to guide missile to target region so BVR won’t work.



1) Almost all of the A2A engagements happen below subsonic speed. Future advancement in Jahesh Turbofan will physically enhance the performance even further.






2) We are TOT-producing KLJ-6F (93 KM, 8 targets, 60 Kg) now for Kowsar now. It can be fixed on Shahed Saegheh then the vehicle can serve the A2A role. Besides even without ARH, it can still use longer range IR guided missiles on the lines of R-77T. 








.....................

Imagine being an enemy, your airspace is suddenly invaded by 24 low RCS flying wings that can simultaneously fire some 30-40 BVR missiles at your own interceptors.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> 1) Almost all of the A2A engagements happen below subsonic speed. Future advancement in Jahesh Turbofan will physically enhance the performance even further.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2) We are TOT-producing KLJ-6F (93 KM, 8 targets, 60 Kg) now for Kowsar now. It can be fixed on Shahed Saegheh then the vehicle can serve the A2A role. Besides even without ARH, it can still use longer range IR guided missiles on the lines of R-77T.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .....................
> 
> Imagine being an enemy, your airspace is suddenly invaded by 24 low RCS flying wings that can simultaneously fire some 30-40 BVR missiles at your own interceptors.



You need something more along the lines of Lockheed D-21 design which had a top speed of 2,500 mph and range of 4000+ KM.

This can both be high altitude bomber and interceptor thus bringing down overall cost.

No engine Iran currently produces is suitable for the role you are envisioning. But it could be a good idea with further Iranian advancement in the field.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Samar111 said:


> Dude, your country Iran is synonyms with terrorism and female oppresion. We are in the 21st century. Freedom and rights should be a given unless you are born a female in Iran.... Sad....



Dude, your country India is synonyms with terrorism, oppression and female rape. We are in the 21st century. Freedom and rights should be a given unless you are born a female in India.... Sad....
the only country that elder of a village sentence female of a family to be raped because a cousin of that family eloped with a girl from another country is India , the only country that mob linch people for rumor of killing an animal is India ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I would rather see our UCAVs getting A2A missiles for interceptions esp this one. They have highly reduced RCS and can easily carry 2 BVR and 2 WVR missiles.


but last year it happened




karrar equipped with Azaraksh missile and machine gun



TheImmortal said:


> 1) Too slow
> 
> 2) No radar to guide missile to target region so BVR won’t work.


well Iran seems have plan of using karrar for such missions

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well Iran seems have plan of using karrar for such missions



Not a plan, just bored engineers. They also strapped on a manpad to Mohajer drone once.

This might be a threat against helicopters. Fighter jets, won’t do anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Not a plan, just bored engineers. They also strapped on a manpad to Mohajer drone once.
> 
> This might be a threat against helicopters. Fighter jets, won’t do anything.


usa also once tried to use stinger , it failed .this time its a missile based on AIM-9 , not the best missile out there but it is fire and forget heat seeking missile that is still a serious threat to any fighter.

they add electrooptic seeker to karrar , modified it to be compatible with A2A missile and added a machine gun to it , don't tell me its just out of boredom .

Karrar in itself have the potential of being used for such roles , what i see in last year wargame was a promising prototype , they need to work on some aspect of it and it will be a real threat to any fighter


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> usa also once tried to use stinger , it failed .this time its a missile based on AIM-9 , not the best missile out there but it is fire and forget heat seeking missile that is still a serious threat to any fighter.
> 
> they add electrooptic seeker to karrar , modified it to be compatible with A2A missile and added a machine gun to it , don't tell me its just out of boredom .
> 
> Karrar in itself have the potential of being used for such roles , what i see in last year wargame was a promising prototype , they need to work on some aspect of it and it will be a real threat to any fighter



Will never be a threat to F-16, F-18, F-35, F-22

Good luck for Karrar to try to intercept those fighters and stay in range for the AIM-9 to get a lock.

Better luck using it against Transport aircraft, AWACS, Big recon drones, B-52’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It is necessary to take for tolls the arguments of General Theimmortal on the Iranian combat aircraft, he has no intuition on the subject, Iran to anicate the beginning of the construction of heavy hunter in 2020 but when we really know the process Announcement of Iran, it must be understood that they are much more advanced than they dissect it 

Iran hides us some big surprise and I can not wait for some secrets to embarrass some people who have no intuition

The Air Air Trials of the Karrar drone is great for future drones, it's a major and powerful advance for Iran. This control of the air air launch by the Iranian drones will be very dangerous for the enemy.

I would like to see the Cockpit du Kowsar 2 monoplace. The Kowsar Monoplace version would have other progress, it is to see

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515799623444668424

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515303021164474369

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Ich

drmeson said:


> Our limitation with Ti Alloy and Turbofan (at least in a class of RD-33/93) will keep us down on modern fighter jet production at home.



Doesnt Mapna already produce Ti-alloy blades? Sure, the cooling of the blades for a military turbofan is different, but should not be such a problem.


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Doesnt Mapna already produce Ti-alloy blades? Sure, the cooling of the blades for a military turbofan is different, but should not be such a problem.



MAPNA is building under license gas turbines.

Unless you know how to manufacture the blades of an AL-21 or an RD-33 as well as the timing software then you will spend years trying to master it.

There is a reason there is very few countries in the world that build reliable military jet engines—not for lacking of trying. Even the ones that build use Western incorporated parts thus they are not 100% domestic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515910194672418823

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

Ich said:


> Doesnt Mapna already produce Ti-alloy blades? Sure, the cooling of the blades for a military turbofan is different, but should not be such a problem.



I meant in fighter jet fuselage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Will never be a threat to F-16, F-18, F-35, F-22
> 
> Good luck for Karrar to try to intercept those fighters and stay in range for the AIM-9 to get a lock.
> 
> Better luck using it against Transport aircraft, AWACS, Big recon drones, B-52’s.



You do not have the vision. You think that if something can not exist immediately then it means it will never exist in the future as well. 

We start with AIM-9/R-73 + today, we will end up on PL-12 armed Shahed Saegheh/Karrar in a few years. I seriously do not see IRIAF or IRGC-AF getting any foreign fighters from Russia or China. Low RCS A2A armed UCAV will supplement IRIAF packages of F-14AM, F-4E, Mig-29, Kowsars.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> You do not have the vision. You think that if something can not exist immediately then it means it will never exist in the future as well.
> 
> We start with AIM-9/R-73 + today, we will end up on PL-12 armed Shahed Saegheh/Karrar in a few years. I seriously do not see IRIAF or IRGC-AF getting any foreign fighters from Russia or China. Low RCS A2A armed UCAV will supplement IRIAF packages of F-14AM, F-4E, Mig-29, Kowsars.



Completely irrelevant claim.

Slapping an A2A missile on a Mohajer vs a future Low RCS unmanned fighter like China’s Dark Sword are two unrelated projects. The later requiring significant expertise in radar development, aircraft development, and engine development. All areas Iran has neglected the past 3 decades.

As for my claim, it stands true. This A2A missile on a drone is not true capability or a threat to any modern fighter. A token prokect.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Completely irrelevant claim.
> 
> Slapping an A2A missile on a Mohajer vs a future Low RCS unmanned fighter like China’s Dark Sword are two unrelated projects. The later requiring significant expertise in radar development, aircraft development, and engine development. All areas Iran has neglected the past 3 decades.
> 
> As for my claim, it stands true. This A2A missile on a drone is not true capability or a threat to any modern fighter. A token prokect.


Useful for drone on drone action though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Useful for drone on drone action though.



I think it has utility against transport aircraft, helicopters, BIG drones with an easy lock (drones are hard to lock on remember Israel missing multiple times?), AWACS, etc.

So imagine a situation where a Karrar is launched to head to an area where a military transport or recon plane is heading. It would likely he able to score an easy kill due to size of target and Karrar speed.

It can then use itself as a suicide drone and slam into one more target.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> I think it has utility against transport aircraft, helicopters, BIG drones with an easy lock (drones are hard to lock on remember Israel missing multiple times?), AWACS, etc.
> 
> So imagine a situation where a Karrar is launched to head to an area where a military transport or recon plane is heading. It would likely he able to score an easy kill due to size of target and Karrar speed.
> 
> It can then use itself as a suicide drone and slam into one more target.


That would be ideal. Incidentally, the capacity for a Karrar to lock onto a MH6 size class drone I think is very important. Their needs to be a capability to engage these UAVs without risking manned expensive assets were it is too far or too difficult for ground base AD to track it.

Notably, their was footage from a while back of a TB2 monitoring Kherson airport occupied by Russia from approx 50km out at low altitude. Very hard to engage this type of threat without a Karrar, either your AD has to be long range enough but also accurate enough to track it precisely, or you pull up a jet or a helicopter to come up close but the risk of enemy AD interception is also high.

Karrar seems to balance this risk/reward situation well. It's the only way I can think of to have a good way of dealing with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> That would be ideal. Incidentally, the capacity for a Karrar to lock onto a MH6 size class drone I think is very important. Their needs to be a capability to engage these UAVs without risking manned expensive assets were it is too far or too difficult for ground base AD to track it.
> 
> Notably, their was footage from a while back of a TB2 monitoring Kherson airport occupied by Russia from approx 50km out at low altitude. Very hard to engage this type of threat without a Karrar, either your AD has to be long range enough but also accurate enough to track it precisely, or you pull up a jet or a helicopter to come up close but the risk of enemy AD interception is also high.
> 
> Karrar seems to balance this risk/reward situation well. It's the only way I can think of to have a good way of dealing with it.


impossible to do that at low altitude and TB2 e/O don't have 50km range


----------



## Stryker1982

Hack-Hook said:


> impossible to do that at low altitude and TB2 e/O don't have 50km range


It was very blurry but sufficient to see the airport. I saw the video, where Ukraine shelled the airport.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> It was very blurry but sufficient to see the airport. I saw the video, where Ukraine shelled the airport.


that won't cut it. , they must designate targets and TB2 cant designate anything at 50km . the range is around 20km. if they say they did it at 50km , they are lying it was not TB2 but we have report of USA sharing information with Ukraine on targeting so it probably was USA satellite or other gadget there and they want to hide it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Hack-Hook said:


> that won't cut it. , they must designate targets and TB2 cant designate anything at 50km . the range is around 20km. if they say they did it at 50km , they are lying it was not TB2 but we have report of USA sharing information with Ukraine on targeting so it probably was USA satellite or other gadget there and they want to hide it


I never said designated. I said monitoring. And they were monitoring the artillery strikes against the base which used unguided munitions.


----------



## Ray_Atek

US Navy shoots down drone using all-electric laser for the first time


The US Navy has shot down its first drone representing a subsonic cruise missile using an all-electric high-energy laser. At the US Army’s High Energy Laser Systems Test Facility at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, the Lockheed Martin Layered Laser Defense (LLD) weapon disabled the engine…




newatlas.com





Iran main air power concentrated on drone or uav.

And combined laser and advanced radar based controller, bring us to zero power.

It is an important Alarm.
Is there any solution?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ray_Atek said:


> US Navy shoots down drone using all-electric laser for the first time
> 
> 
> The US Navy has shot down its first drone representing a subsonic cruise missile using an all-electric high-energy laser. At the US Army’s High Energy Laser Systems Test Facility at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, the Lockheed Martin Layered Laser Defense (LLD) weapon disabled the engine…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> newatlas.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran main air power concentrated on drone or uav.
> 
> And combined laser and advanced radar based controller, bring us to zero power.
> 
> It is an important Alarm.
> Is there any solution?


the question is at which range , the solution is to stay away and increase the range of weapons


----------



## Ray_Atek

Hack-Hook said:


> the question is at which range , the solution is to stay away and increase the range of weapons


Yes.
Ofcource the range is a solution.
The drone should fly at low altitude.
But it can limit the uav air force.


----------



## drmeson

Can somebody please edit the Wikipedia page of Kowsar? It's full of misinformation or deliberate attempts at hiding info.

It says 4 are built while photographic evidence exists for the production of at least 11-12 airframes with 3 operational already.

Owj engine pic needs to be added too.

Also the radar picture needs to be added like in most of the fighter plane wiki pages.

Avionics suit section is totally empty while tons of devices were unvieled along with Kowsar to be used in it such as RWR etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Can somebody please edit the Wikipedia page of Kowsar? It's full of misinformation or deliberate attempts at hiding info.
> 
> It says 4 are built while photographic evidence exists for the production of at least 11-12 airframes with 3 operational already.
> 
> Owj engine pic needs to be added too.
> 
> Also the radar picture needs to be added like in most of the fighter plane wiki pages.
> 
> Avionics suit section is totally empty while tons of devices were unvieled along with Kowsar to be used in it such as RWR etc.


For the Kowsar 1 and 2 it is more than 24 built. Double-seater and single-seater


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Army day 2022

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

Been gone for a while so not


WudangMaster said:


>








Nothing more than a tech demonstrator...

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> Been gone for a while so not
> 
> View attachment 837222
> 
> 
> Nothing more than a tech demonstrator...


Great to see you back Vevak!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

VEVAK said:


> Been gone for a while so not
> 
> View attachment 837222
> 
> 
> Nothing more than a tech demonstrator...


Glad to see you back; and Mr. Azarmehr has been saying this for some time in every interview on the MehrAein channel. It is a tech demonstrator and there is currently no desire for it so mass production will not happen however a great deal of knowledge and experience has been gained from the project that will be used in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Stryker1982 said:


> Great to see you back Vevak!





WudangMaster said:


> Glad to see you back; and Mr. Azarmehr has been saying this for some time in every interview on the MehrAein channel. It is a tech demonstrator and there is currently no desire for it so mass production will not happen however a great deal of knowledge and experience has been gained from the project that will be used in the future.



Thanks guy's! Good to be back! 
Heading back to Iran in a few day's but i'll try to check in as much as I can!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Been gone for a while so not
> 
> View attachment 837222
> 
> 
> Nothing more than a tech demonstrator...


Qaher313 = R&D, No Qaher313 = No R&D

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

WudangMaster said:


> Glad to see you back; and Mr. Azarmehr has been saying this for some time in every interview on the MehrAein channel. It is a tech demonstrator and there is currently no desire for it so mass production will not happen however a great deal of knowledge and experience has been gained from the project that will be used in the future.


the problem of Iranian companies is that there is not documentation process of knowledge ... we even didn't write our own history in past 2500 years and let our foes to write about us ...


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Qaher313 = R&D, No Qaher313 = No R&D



Azezam!!! I missed you too! 
In a way your right, not much research went into it's development  but I'm sure that's not what you meant! 

Iran has other fighter project that will be better than the Q-313 don't worry this is a good thing! 
I don't mind if they turn it into a UCAV but lets see how it does when it's test flights are complete.

Plus, the Kowsar is a far superior fighter jet than this Q-313 so I don't see why your so obsessed over it!

Smile Mohsen smile!


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Azezam!!! I missed you too!
> In a way your right, not much research went into it's development  but I'm sure that's not what you meant!
> 
> Iran has other fighter project that will be better than the Q-313 don't worry this is a good thing!
> I don't mind if they turn it into a UCAV but lets see how it does when it's test flights are complete.


I meant what I wrote, there is no other project, there is no other funds, these morons even unveil drones before their development is finished, so when they don't show nothing, then you can be sure there is nothing. on paper, maybe, I can draw too!



VEVAK said:


> Plus, the Kowsar is a far superior fighter jet than this Q-313 so I don't see why your so obsessed over it!


And I prefer Mohajer-4 and karrar over a fighter jet (Kowthar) which it's only weapons are fuel tank and rockets! army knows it too, that's why they sent it for aerobatic team!


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> I meant what I wrote, there is no other project, there is no other funds, these morons even unveil drones before their development is finished, so when they don't show nothing, then you can be sure there is nothing. on paper, maybe, I can draw too!
> 
> 
> And I prefer Mohajer-4 and karrar over a fighter jet (Kowthar) which it's only weapons are fuel tank and rockets! army knows it too, that's why they sent it for aerobatic team!



Simply stated that the Kowsar was better than the Q-313 not that it was a good fighter jet! 
It's a ok advanced trainer and that's about it! 
You slap 2 x 1000lb bombs on an F-5/Kowsar it wouldn't be able to go 250 km from it's base before hitting bingo fuel! So yes you'll have more strike capability with 2 Raad 500 + 2 Fateh-110's at a fraction of the cost
For CAS missions same thing your better off with a few Sh-191 + a Few Sh-136 + M6+ 358's ... 
In A2A when your radar doesn't even have the range of modern IRST's then you really don't have much of a chance.... 
All that said, it's still better than the Q313


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Simply stated that the Kowsar was better than the Q-313 not that it was a good fighter jet!
> It's a ok advanced trainer and that's about it!
> You slap 2 x 1000lb bombs on an F-5/Kowsar it wouldn't be able to go 250 km from it's base before hitting bingo fuel! So yes you'll have more strike capability with 2 Raad 500 + 2 Fateh-110's at a fraction of the cost
> For CAS missions same thing your better off with a few Sh-191 + a Few Sh-136 + M6+ 358's ...
> In A2A when your radar doesn't even have the range of modern IRST's then you really don't have much of a chance....
> All that said, it's still better than the Q313


Qaher was planned as a stealth interceptor, anything else is just the path of it's development, so basically comparing it with Kowthar at this stage is irrelevant.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Qaher was planned as a stealth interceptor



No it was not. In fact some on here were saying it was an anti ship plane. A bogus idea in the age of long range CM/AshCMs and drones equipped with PGMs.

Internal bay too small, bird of prey wings and weird intake placement ment high attitude was a death sentence. And interceptors are heavy fighters equipped with some of the most powerful engines (see F-14 of 1970’s). F-313 with 2 J-79’s was not intercepting anything.

F-313 was like someone took a F-5 then put a cheap stealth body kit on it.

The plane was too small. I thought if they could enlarge it by 200+%, fix the intakes, and forget the bird of prey niche feature then it could have a basis of being a medium fighter. But it became clear as the years went by the military was not going to sink money into the plane.

Honestly I didn’t hate the plane minus the wing tips and intake. It Just needed to be enlarged by a lot to fit proper amount of armaments, radar, and engines. But for Iran to go completely new design on its first attempt at a fighter jet that was not a F-5 was too risky. Without a AL-21/RD-33 level engine, these projects are dead on arrival. 

Makes sense to reverse engineer and mass produce an already established fighter (not F-5). I mean how many different planes did China reverse engineer and copy until it’s first all domestic design?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Qaher was planned as a stealth interceptor, anything else is just the path of it's development, so basically comparing it with Kowthar at this stage is irrelevant.



Are you making a joke?

A subsonic interceptor slower than the Karrar! no radar! horrible high speed maneuvering capability! built on a composite frame that would likely turn into dust well below 6G's! 
And the frame my be low RCS but by no definition of the word is that stealth!

Infact in terms of RCS with a little RAM coating Iran can bring down the RCS of the Kowsar down to that level (at least from a few angles they can)

Come on man! Hanooz ham!


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> No it was not. In fact some on here were saying it was an anti ship plane. A bogus idea in the age of long range CM/AshCMs and drones equipped with PGMs.
> 
> Internal bay too small, bird of prey wings and weird intake placement ment high attitude was a death sentence. And interceptors are heavy fighters equipped with some of the most powerful engines (see F-14 of 1970’s). F-313 with 2 J-79’s was not intercepting anything.
> 
> F-313 was like someone took a F-5 then put a cheap stealth body kit on it.
> 
> The plane was too small. I thought if they could enlarge it by 200+%, fix the intakes, and forget the bird of prey niche feature then it could have a basis of being a medium fighter. But it became clear as the years went by the military was not going to sink money into the plane.
> 
> Honestly I didn’t hate the plane minus the wing tips and intake. It Just needed to be enlarged by a lot to fit proper amount of armaments, radar, and engines. But for Iran to go completely new design on its first attempt at a fighter jet that was not a F-5 was too risky. Without a AL-21/RD-33 level engine, these projects are dead on arrival.
> 
> Makes sense to reverse engineer and mass produce an already established fighter (not F-5). I mean how many different planes did China reverse engineer and copy until it’s first all domestic design?


Dehghan said it was an interceptor at the final stage. But he did put F5 engines in it to bring it into a fake operational state and make some money by sell few to airforce.

There is no cheap stealth body, at least not for a fighter jet.

What people say has no value, whether the so called ridiculous anti ship role or your opinion about it's wing tip and air intake. even airforce's Sofreh-mahi concept had air intake over the body, the same with many 5th and 6th gen concepts on the internet. wing tips on F4 were upward to increase it's maneuverability, in XB-70 they were downward to increase the stability, only the designer can decide about it, not random people, even if they are experts.


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Qaher was planned as a stealth interceptor, anything else is just the path of it's development, so basically comparing it with Kowthar at this stage is irrelevant.



Tell me you at least changed your views on Ahmadi!!!

Don't tell me you are still an Ahmadi supporter!


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Are you making a joke?
> 
> A subsonic interceptor slower than the Karrar! no radar! horrible high speed maneuvering capability! built on a composite frame that would likely turn into dust well below 6G's!
> And the frame my be low RCS but by no definition of the word is that stealth!
> 
> Infact in terms of RCS with a little RAM coating Iran can bring down the RCS of the Kowsar down to that level (at least from a few angles they can)
> 
> Come on man! Hanooz ham!


An interceptor is supersonic and has radars. so when Dehghan said it's an interceptor in the final stage, it means it will get a powerful engine and radar at that stage, otherwise he would call it interceptor already.


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Tell me you at least changed your views on Ahmadi!!!
> 
> Don't tell me you are still an Ahmadi supporter!


I'm not his supporter, I always compare the performance and plans, so still Ahamadinejad is 1000 times better than Rouhani, but I would choose Raeesi and Jalili over him without any hesitation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Dehghan said it was an interceptor at the final stage. But he did put F5 engines in it to bring it into a fake operational state and make some money by sell few to airforce.
> 
> There is no cheap stealth body, at least not for a fighter jet.
> 
> What people say has no value, whether the so called ridiculous anti ship role or your opinion about it's wing tip and air intake. even airforce's Sofreh-mahi concept had air intake over the body, the same with many 5th and 6th gen concepts on the internet. wing tips on F4 were upward to increase it's maneuverability, in XB-70 they were downward to increase the stability, only the designer can decide about it, not random people, even if they are experts.



Intakes are a problem mainly because the design is wrong & will become problematic over the long run & not simply because they are over the body! Also, Airflow could become an issue! Your comparing aircrafts that will have turbofan engines and hi air flow with a tiny turbojet with no afterburners!
The major difference is turbofans create significant lift using their fans while tiny little trubojets not so much! 

Air frames are expensive but there is a massive difference in cost between the Air Frame of the F-22 vs F-15 vs F-5 vs Q313 

Stability = lower maneuverability (Unless u have TVC) that's correct and sure the Q313 will be stable because it can't go supersonic anyway so how does that make it into an interceptor? XB-70 is a delta wing bomber not a fighter that requires maneuverability & it's delta wing not the same thing! 

Building a supersonic fighter is NOT just about the engine buddy! Even if they change the engine that is simply not a supersonic design & if you try to force it the frame will either break up or best case it just wont last long! 

As for Dehghans comments "Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me" Or as GW Bush said if you fool me you can't fool me again! LOL!


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> I'm not his supporter, I always compare the performance and plans, so still Ahamadinejad is 1000 times better than Rouhani, but I would choose Raeesi and Jalili over him without any hesitation.



Rohani turned out to be an even bigger traitor! 

Raeesi yes! Ghalibof yes! 
Next election if Raeesi doesn't preform then Saeed Mohammad HELL YES! (Time for some new blood!) Although I'd like to know exactly why he was disqualified if its just about the feud between him and Ghalibof then I don't care Hell Yes Saeed Mohammad! 


Jalili hell NO! He is made of the same cloth as Ahmadi! Don't fall for the front he puts up! Yes I like what he says in terms of supporting domestic production and I love his stance on the JCPOA but in the end I know better to fall for that! And it's not mostly about him personally rather some of the ppl he has around him! Hell NO!


----------



## N_Al40

Wasn't sure where to post this so I decided here I guess 

*China’s defense minister to visit Iran*​*


Tehran, IRNA – China’s Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe is going to visit Tehran on Wednesday, heading a high-profile military delegation.

The Chinese defense minister will meet Iran’s Minister of Defense and Logistics Brigadier General Mohammad-Reza Gharaei Ashtiani.
General Fenghe will also have meetings with other high-raking Iranian officials to discuss the latest regional and international developments and the ways to enhance Iran-China bilateral ties and the interaction between the two countries’ armed forces.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

I hope it brings about something for the IRIAF in some way. 

To be honest with you guys the whole idea of IRIAF getting Sukhois has become nothing more than an urban legend to me now lol.

Plus the global optics of Iran purchasing mass armaments from Russia at this time (in light of the latter's geopolitical situation) may also be a factor for this delay and constant withering.

I read somewhere here before that IRIAF pilots went to China and examined the J-10C and apparently were not impressed which is fine. *But* we shouldn't discount China as a supplier outright because China also produces the *Shenyang J-11 *which is a SU-27 reverse engineered and which eventually gave rise to the *Shenyang J-16. *The J-16 is a twin-seat multi-role strike fighter that boasts an AESA radar and is powered by WS-10A turbofan engines. Given that it is based almost entirely on the SU-27 chassis, perhaps it would be suitable for Iran's defence needs, esp that it is a multirole strike fighter + Iran has technical experience in dealing with Russian based frames and engineering. Finally, given that it is not entirely a Chinese design and has been around for some time, perhaps China will be more willing to allow for ToT.

Just my two cents

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## N_Al40

How China made the J-16 fighter better than the Su-30 - Air Data News


Derived from the Sukhoi fighter jet, Shenyang’s aircraft has a higher capacity and is currently one of the most important assets of PLAAF




www.airdatanews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> How China made the J-16 fighter better than the Su-30 - Air Data News
> 
> 
> Derived from the Sukhoi fighter jet, Shenyang’s aircraft has a higher capacity and is currently one of the most important assets of PLAAF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airdatanews.com



_Wang Songxi, a military flight instructor, was interviewed by CCTV, where he explained that the *J-16 is superior to all the fighters* he has ever flown. “The *J-16 has no flaws*, because it is equipped with many types of weapons and can operate under all weather conditions,” said Wang_

Not biased at all

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Not biased at all



Sure. But me think before buying iranian pilots will test them anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

N_Al40 said:


> I hope it brings about something for the IRIAF in some way.
> 
> To be honest with you guys the whole idea of IRIAF getting Sukhois has become nothing more than an urban legend to me now lol.
> 
> Plus the global optics of Iran purchasing mass armaments from Russia at this time (in light of the latter's geopolitical situation) may also be a factor for this delay and constant withering.
> 
> I read somewhere here before that IRIAF pilots went to China and examined the J-10C and apparently were not impressed which is fine. *But* we shouldn't discount China as a supplier outright because China also produces the *Shenyang J-11 *which is a SU-27 reverse engineered and which eventually gave rise to the *Shenyang J-16. *The J-16 is a twin-seat multi-role strike fighter that boasts an AESA radar and is powered by WS-10A turbofan engines. Given that it is based almost entirely on the SU-27 chassis, perhaps it would be suitable for Iran's defence needs, esp that it is a multirole strike fighter + Iran has technical experience in dealing with Russian based frames and engineering. Finally, given that it is not entirely a Chinese design and has been around for some time, perhaps China will be more willing to allow for ToT.
> 
> Just my two cents


It takes big cohones to sell aircraft to Iran. I just don't think they'd do it unless its via ToT and license production. I am doubtful, I actually pin more hope to Russia considering the relations with the Western nations are probably at an all time low. I mean, they are literally using western equipment to kill their troops, I'd imagine Russia would wanna get back at them if they can, and also boost their revenues from exports or ToT purchase.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

N_Al40 said:


> How China made the J-16 fighter better than the Su-30 - Air Data News
> 
> 
> Derived from the Sukhoi fighter jet, Shenyang’s aircraft has a higher capacity and is currently one of the most important assets of PLAAF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.airdatanews.com


Really bad article. Though I do agree Chinese flanker copies are definitely better than most of the SU-30 variants, with the exceptions off the SU-30SM and SU-30SM2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Russia is slacking on radar! I'd pick it over the Su-30 or the Su-35 just for the AESA 

I very much doubt that the Raeesi Administration would purchase any fighters even if offered!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF. 

Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian airdefense forces.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF.
> 
> Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian air defense forces



fools are using Iron bombs , so they had to fly low to hit anything , guess even manpad is enough to hit su-34 when it fly so low

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Sure. But me think before buying iranian pilots will test them anyway.



Iranian is well aware of Chinese fighters.

At this point Iran knows what it wants and what Plan B is. The question is wether Russia and China will sell them? That’s a question that’s been going on for decades.




Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF.
> 
> Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian airdefense forces.



Maybe starstreak manpad by UK —3 supersonic metal rods basically that cannot be jammed. Now UK is sending the tracked armoured version to Ukraine.

Also despite what Russian’s say, some BUKs and S-300 still survive on top of whatever the West is still secretly pushing thru.

You wouldn’t be flying low unless you are trying to stay out of radar detection. The majority of videos I see they are flying very low. 

Image of Russian aviation is taking a hit now. If you are a owner of Russian fighters you are wondering about the viability against a semi decent air defense.

Not to mention like @Hack-Hook said the question remains how much PGM’s does Russia have and what is the technological prowess of them? Israel is dropping bombs from Lebanon and hitting targets as far as Syria-Iraq border, where as Russia has to go all the way to the target?

Are we saying that Israel has more stockpile and better PGMs than Russia? Likely possible from what we are seeing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 838259
> 
> View attachment 838260
> 
> 
> Russia is slacking on radar! I'd pick it over the Su-30 or the Su-35 just for the AESA
> 
> I very much doubt that the Raeesi Administration would purchase any fighters even if offered!


In your opinion, why would they refuse??

Indications from reliable source indicate that JCPOA is to be revived very soon


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519050488989245442
Hopefully more cash flow = New fighter jets


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> In your opinion, why would they refuse??
> 
> Indications from reliable source indicate that JCPOA is to be revived very soon
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519050488989245442
> Hopefully more cash flow = New fighter jets



Elijah was very good, now he’s hit or miss.

Everything coming out of negotiations is the nuclear side is agreed. But neither side will budge on IRGC terror issue.

Dems facing midterms in Nov. so they don’t want to be seen as “catering” to Iran’s demands as the Republicans will likely try to claim. Big partisan divide.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF.
> 
> Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian airdefense forces.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1518589374606286850
Another one from today (or yesterday depending on timezone)


----------



## VEVAK

N_Al40 said:


> In your opinion, why would they refuse??
> 
> Indications from reliable source indicate that JCPOA is to be revived very soon
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519050488989245442
> Hopefully more cash flow = New fighter jets



I think they would! 
It really depends on the price, the aircraft being offered, what is included in the price, the financing, if there is a tech transfer & whether or not we get access to the weapons systems so we can use our own weapons 
Unless China can come up with an attractive offer with good financing, I really don't see them purchasing a fighter jet.

Since China is buying most of our oil making a deal with them for financing would be relatively easy but the problem is that Chinese are going to want to offer us the J-10 and I wouldn't want the J-10! 
If it was me I'd rather pay more and purchase fewer Aircrafts!

How many fighters has Russia lost? And against who? and how? And how useful was Ukrainian Air Force against a technology superior adversary? If Ukraine had equipped it's self with a large fleet of jet powered UCAV's could they have been more useful? The whole world is taking notes!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

I found information that Iran has more than 20 $ bilions in China, and that is only amount China has to pay for imported oil... And when it comes to Russian weapons, if Pictures from Ukraine are really from Russian destroyed weapons...than it would makes sense few countries buy it. I saw picture from Russian newest IFVs with Bosch Electronics.. And bunch other imported parts, but that is nothing compared to see newst Cruise missiles with Electronics from 1977...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

China is not allowed to sell Iran flankers. 99% of their flanker engine are Russian. The Chinese tried making their own variants with Chinese engines but their engines ended up being extremely under powered. The Chinese themselves called the J-15 the flopping fish. 

A few years ago the Chinese began producing their own flankers without respecting the license agreement. Russia took them to international court and threatened to cease selling them parts and supporting their existing Russian weapons systems. 

Eventually the Russians and Chinese came to an agreement. China will not export flanker variants and Russia will keep supplying them with engines. 

So the only jets that Iran can purchase from China are the JF-17 and the J-10. However Iran has outright rejected the JF-17. The issue is that Iran wants to trade oil for Chinese fighter jets. The Chinese are willing to trade oil for the JF-17 but for the J-10s they want cash / gold outright. However this was news from over a year ago. Now with the soaring energy prices, who knows. I guess only time will tell.



N_Al40 said:


> I hope it brings about something for the IRIAF in some way.
> 
> To be honest with you guys the whole idea of IRIAF getting Sukhois has become nothing more than an urban legend to me now lol.
> 
> Plus the global optics of Iran purchasing mass armaments from Russia at this time (in light of the latter's geopolitical situation) may also be a factor for this delay and constant withering.
> 
> I read somewhere here before that IRIAF pilots went to China and examined the J-10C and apparently were not impressed which is fine. *But* we shouldn't discount China as a supplier outright because China also produces the *Shenyang J-11 *which is a SU-27 reverse engineered and which eventually gave rise to the *Shenyang J-16. *The J-16 is a twin-seat multi-role strike fighter that boasts an AESA radar and is powered by WS-10A turbofan engines. Given that it is based almost entirely on the SU-27 chassis, perhaps it would be suitable for Iran's defence needs, esp that it is a multirole strike fighter + Iran has technical experience in dealing with Russian based frames and engineering. Finally, given that it is not entirely a Chinese design and has been around for some time, perhaps China will be more willing to allow for ToT.
> 
> Just my two cents





GrandBotBoi said:


> Really bad article. Though I do agree Chinese flanker copies are definitely better than most of the SU-30 variants, with the exceptions off the SU-30SM and SU-30SM2



read my previous article above. China cannot export flanker variants as per an agreement with Russia.


----------



## sha ah

What you have to keep in mind is that Russia is not fighting Ukraine but rather NATO in Ukraine. BIG DIFFERENCE

Anyways I'm sure the Russians will remedy this issue just like they remedied the issue with their tank losses. Most of their tank losses were in the first few weeks of the conflict. They adapted quickly.

Yes 9 SU-34s is a devastating loss but Russia has 1000 fighter jets in active service. This won't stop the Russians.

Just as a note, according to Oryx, which btw he's not a definitive source and if you read his website/blog, he's pretty biased, refusing to document Bayraktar losses for example. But anyways, according to his site, Russia has lost 571 tanks, however, read in between the lines, 293 Russian tanks destroyed, 14 damaged, 49 abandoned, 215 captured.

Now this raises some questions, so 293 destroyed, okay, 14 damaged, does that mean they were abandoned as well or just documented as damaged ? 49 abandoned, 215 captured. So if 49 were abandoned doesn't that mean that they were captured as well ?

Okay so let's do some guesstimating. Let's say that 215 were captured, out of the 49 abandoned, let's say 20 were retrievable. That would mean 235 captured by Ukraine.

Now the T-72 is superior to any tank the Ukrainians themselves operate and the Ukrainians have been begging former Soviet block, NATO states for T-72s. So obviously the Ukrainians would operate the 235 odd T-72s if captured, or in some cases repair them for use.

Now there have been several reports that the Russians have destroyed several Ukrainian tank repair facilities and that they have been targeting Ukrainian fuel depots, which would naturally lead to fuel/lubricant shortages.

Which naturally makes one wonder, how many T-72s that the Ukrainians were attempting to repair have been destroyed ?

Also if a Ukrainian operated T-72 gets destroyed on the field, will the Ukrainians document it as a Ukrainian loss or a Russian loss ? Let's say for example 100 Ukrainian operated T-72s are destroyed, you have to wonder how many are being documented as Russian losses rather than Ukrainian losses ?

Also yesterday Immortal posted a video of a Ukrainian ATGM ambush team destroying 4 Russian tanks and 1 armored vehicle in a row, one after another without any response from the tanks. No counter measures, no attempts to flee, no suppressive fire. 

Now we know that the Russians have been targeting Ukrainian fuel supplies and fuel convoys. I'm just guessing but could it be possible that the Ukrainian ran out of fuel and decided to destroy their abandoned Russian T-72s for propaganda purposes ? I mean might as well get something out of it right ?

Currently I can't even find Ukrainian losses documented on the Oryx website anymore. Again just scroll through the Oryx website, read the titles of his articles. He's not impartial in the least, but most western MSM treat him as an official source.

Anyways just some food for thought. The fog of war is REAL and as the famous quote says "the first casualty of war is the truth"



Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF.
> 
> Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian airdefense forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sha ah

J-10s cost around $35-$60 million a piece depending on configuration. 

You mentioned that Iran has $20 billion dollars in China for oil sales

$20 billion / 35 million = 571 units of J-10s

$20 billion / 60 million = 333 units of J-10s

Now course I'm assuming that Iran would want to the best J-10 variant with all the bells and whistles, but not 300 units. Something like 70-100 units would be more realistic. 

Right now because of the oil boom, Iran's economy is surging. According to the IMF it was expected to grow by 2%-3% this year but that estimate is sure to grow. 

Just as an example, Venezuela's economy, because of oil prices is expected to grow by 20% this year, that's right, 20%.

Btw the price of natural gas just shot up another 20% because Poland has refused to pay for Russian gas in Rubles. As a result, Russia has cut off natural gas supplies to Poland. If they like they can pay 4 times more for American LNG although it still won't fullfill their supply needs. 

Keep in mind, Russia is not asking hostile nations to pay in Rubles, but rather than they pay in Euro/USD which will then be deposited to a Russian account, which will then be transferred to Rubles, at which point the transaction will be considered complete. 

More important than the currency is the Russian requirement that hostile nations who want to buy Russian energy must open bank accounts in Russia. Why ? Because recently the west froze hundreds of billions of dollars worth of Russian assets / gold / foreign currency reserves in western banks. 

Most of those assets were from the proceeds of Russian energy (Natural gas / oil / coal, etc) payments. Therefore that essentially means that the Europeans have received natural gas, Russian energy for free for the last few years. 

As Putin said in a speech recently in a dead serious tone, "We are not a charity and we are not giving anyone anything for free" 

It's time for Europe to pay up or go back to the stone ages. Already German government officials have asked people to not shower everyday and avoid hot showers. Also they have asked for people to eat Lentils instead of meat and ride bicycles / transit instead of cars. LOL







sanel1412 said:


> I found information that Iran has more than 20 $ bilions in China, and that is only amount China has to pay for imported oil... And when it comes to Russian weapons, if Pictures from Ukraine are really from Russian destroyed weapons...than it would makes sense few countries buy it. I saw picture from Russian newest IFVs with Bosch Electronics.. And bunch other imported parts, but that is nothing compared to see newst Cruise missiles with Electronics from 1977...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

sha ah said:


> China is not allowed to sell Iran flankers. 99% of their flanker engine are Russian. The Chinese tried making their own variants with Chinese engines but their engines ended up being extremely under powered. The Chinese themselves called the J-15 the flopping fish.
> 
> A few years ago the Chinese began producing their own flankers without respecting the license agreement. Russia took them to international court and threatened to cease selling them parts and supporting their existing Russian weapons systems.
> 
> Eventually the Russians and Chinese came to an agreement. China will not export flanker variants and Russia will keep supplying them with engines.
> 
> So the only jets that Iran can purchase from China are the JF-17 and the J-10. However Iran has outright rejected the JF-17. The issue is that Iran wants to trade oil for Chinese fighter jets. The Chinese are willing to trade oil for the JF-17 but for the J-10s they want cash / gold outright. However this was news from over a year ago. Now with the soaring energy prices, who knows. I guess only time will tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> read my previous article above. China cannot export flanker variants as per an agreement with Russia.


But Sir China is now producing and equipping the J-16 with its own domestically produced WS-10A engine; this bypasses the agreement made with Russia as that only pertained to the AL-31F engine that Russia was supplying to China


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> But Sir China is now producing and equipping the J-16 with its own domestically produced WS-10A engine; this bypasses the agreement made with Russia as that only pertained to the AL-31F engine that Russia was supplying to China



Correct. The other user is wrong. China can export any fighter as long as it doesn’t use Russian engines.

I still think J-31 makes more sense if we consider a 20 year shelf life for fighter jets. Ideally J-20, but I doubt China would give its superiority fighter to Iran.

I’m not sure what China is willing to offer. These speculations pop up every year and nothing happens. Almost 2 years since embargo was dropped, no major arms deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

TheImmortal said:


> Correct. The other user is wrong. China can export any fighter as long as it doesn’t use Russian engines.
> 
> I still think J-31 makes more sense if we consider a 20 year shelf life for fighter jets. Ideally J-20, but I doubt China would give its superiority fighter to Iran.
> 
> I’m not sure what China is willing to offer. These speculations pop up every year and nothing happens. Almost 2 years since embargo was dropped, no major arms deal.


The J-20 is has an imposed export prohibition by the Chinese Government due to the sensitivity of materials and technology used. Akin to the US export prohibition on the F-22. 









No Stealth for You: Why China Won't Export Its J-20 Fighter


There's a major reason why.




nationalinterest.org





The Chinese have however promoted the 'lower-end' (so to speak) FC-31 fighter jet for export





__





China to promote FC-31 for export


State-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) has established an office to actively promote foreign sales of the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC) FC-31...



www.janes.com


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> The J-20 is has an imposed export prohibition by the Chinese Government due to the sensitivity of materials and technology used. Akin to the US export prohibition on the F-22.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Stealth for You: Why China Won't Export Its J-20 Fighter
> 
> 
> There's a major reason why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalinterest.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese have however promoted the 'lower-end' (so to speak) FC-31 fighter jet for export
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China to promote FC-31 for export
> 
> 
> State-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) has established an office to actively promote foreign sales of the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC) FC-31...
> 
> 
> 
> www.janes.com



I think Iran could learn a lot more from J-31 than J-16. Not to mention you need a plane that can be semi competitive against F-35’s when they proliferate thru the region. Only matter of time before Israel gets more and the Arabs get their hands on some. Possibly the Turks as well if they reconcile with the US.

J-16 might be a great fighter, but end of the day it’s still a 4++ Gen.

But like I said, who knows if China is even offering us toy planes let alone any fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


> I think they would!
> It really depends on the price, the aircraft being offered, what is included in the price, the financing, if there is a tech transfer & whether or not we get access to the weapons systems so we can use our own weapons
> Unless China can come up with an attractive offer with good financing, I really don't see them purchasing a fighter jet.
> 
> Since China is buying most of our oil making a deal with them for financing would be relatively easy but the problem is that Chinese are going to want to offer us the J-10 and I wouldn't want the J-10!
> If it was me I'd rather pay more and purchase fewer Aircrafts!
> 
> How many fighters has Russia lost? And against who? and how? And how useful was Ukrainian Air Force against a technology superior adversary? If Ukraine had equipped it's self with a large fleet of jet powered UCAV's could they have been more useful? The whole world is taking notes!


Indeed, J-10 not suitable for Iran. Iran is a very large country in need of a heavy interceptor.

The AL-31 engine on the J-10 though... would love to have ToT and production capabilities for this engine set up so a twin AL-31 heavy interceptor. Would still have to import parts, I think the expectation that Iran can do 0-100% and build a GOOD interceptor is not reasonable.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519297446333009922
Sorry but why tf can't Iran deploy the SAM-358 in Syria against Israeli F-16s??






It's literally been used in Yemen to down an F-15, a Tornado, and countless drones. Can't fathom why the IRGC haven't used it in an ambush type style attack à la the Israeli F-16 shootdown in February 2018 - reportedly planned by Martyr Soleimani; used a Saegeh UAV as bait, then 1 of 8 F-16Is show down by a Syrian S-200 system while flying high altitude

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> Indeed, J-10 not suitable for Iran. Iran is a very large country in need of a heavy interceptor.
> 
> The AL-31 engine on the J-10 though... would love to have ToT and production capabilities for this engine set up so a twin AL-31 heavy interceptor. Would still have to import parts, I think the expectation that Iran can do 0-100% and build a GOOD interceptor is not reasonable.


I think that from a purely technological perspective iran could certainly produce a single engine light fighter like the F-CK-1 Ching-kuo or JF-17,tho the real question is whether the huge economic costs involved in doing so could be justified,especially when one considers the fact that those resources could arguably be far better utilized on the production of far more capable weapons.
The simple fact is that the airforce,regardless of however it is equipped,is still only ever going to play a back up role in irans military doctrine.
The airforce also has the problem in that it has consistently failed to further develop its own capabilities indigenously or to take advantage of new weapons technologies such as drones or aeroballistic weapons systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Sineva said:


> I think that from a purely technological perspective iran could certainly produce a single engine light fighter like the F-CK-1 Ching-kuo or JF-17,tho the real question is whether the huge economic costs involved in doing so could be justified,especially when one considers the fact that those resources could arguably be far better utilized on the production of far more capable weapons.
> The simple fact is that the airforce,regardless of however it is equipped,is still only ever going to play a back up role in irans military doctrine.
> The airforce also has the problem in that it has consistently failed to further develop its own capabilities indigenously or to take advantage of new weapons technologies such as drones or aeroballistic weapons systems.


The reality is that the costs are never justified if your opponent is the United States with near infinite financial resources and thousands of 4++ and 5th gen aircraft. You just can't compete in this arena, and more importantly, their allies are equipped with 4++ gen aircraft as well.

Dealing with them independently would be fine, but they are likely to act as a coalition, therefore it's never justified. Best not to play into their game is the logic from the IRGC.



N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519297446333009922
> Sorry but why tf can't Iran deploy the SAM-358 in Syria against Israeli F-16s??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's literally been used in Yemen to down an F-15, a Tornado, and countless drones. Can't fathom why the IRGC haven't used it in an ambush type style attack à la the Israeli F-16 shootdown in February 2018 - reportedly planned by Martyr Soleimani; used a Saegeh UAV as bait, then 1 of 8 F-16Is show down by a Syrian S-200 system while flying high altitude



The 358 SAM is not good for these turbofan aircraft, its good for slower things like UAVs and maybe a helicopter that is hovering too much. Those aircraft downing were from intelligently modified AA missiles.

Also, the key element is that Israeli aircraft never flies into Syrian airspace, they strike from far out with air launched missiles. Your only bet is to intercept the munitions which has happened many times.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## N_Al40

Stryker1982 said:


> The reality is that the costs are never justified if your opponent is the United States with near infinite financial resources and thousands of 4++ and 5th gen aircraft. You just can't compete in this arena, and more importantly, their allies are equipped with 4++ gen aircraft as well.
> 
> Dealing with them independently would be fine, but they are likely to act as a coalition, therefore it's never justified. Best not to play into their game is the logic from the IRGC.
> 
> 
> 
> The 358 SAM is not good for these turbofan aircraft, its good for slower things like UAVs and maybe a helicopter that is hovering too much. Those aircraft downing were from intelligently modified AA missiles.
> 
> Also, the key element is that Israeli aircraft never flies into Syrian airspace, they strike from far out with air launched missiles. Your only bet is to intercept the munitions which has happened many times.


Thank you for educating me, I was not aware of this!!

I'm somewhat open to Iran operating AD systems in Syria but only if they are downgraded export variants that do not contain sensitive tech that would otherwise compromise the entire AD system apparatus

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Muhammed45 said:


> Guys, Russia has lost 9 SU-34s the most advanced bomber of RuAF.
> 
> Any idea about which airdefense used to down the fullbacks? So far they have also lost 10 percent of their overall Ka-52 Choppers. I know that its because of insane Flow of MANPADs into Ukraine. But hitting 9 SU-34 is an outstanding achievement for Ukrainian airdefense forces.


Most of those 9 aren't confirmed to be SU-34, plus even if they were it'd not be 10% (it'd be 7%)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

N_Al40 said:


> Thank you for educating me, I was not aware of this!!
> 
> I'm somewhat open to Iran operating AD systems in Syria but only if they are downgraded export variants that do not contain sensitive tech that would otherwise compromise the entire AD system apparatus


It's difficult to set up a good AD defense in Syria, because their is no time to build up.

AD can't easily be transported into Syria during this time. AD network needs to build up overtime, but Israeli airstrikes make it difficult to transport these into the country and to build up a large network of them. That's kind of the main issue with defending fully against these strikes. I am not sure if they've ever transported these into Syria yet but some articles have suggested that Iran is building an AD network there and intercepting some strikes. Of course every inch of the country cannot be covered so some will get through.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519297446333009922
> Sorry but why tf can't Iran deploy the SAM-358 in Syria against Israeli F-16s??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's literally been used in Yemen to down an F-15, a Tornado, and countless drones. Can't fathom why the IRGC haven't used it in an ambush type style attack à la the Israeli F-16 shootdown in February 2018 - reportedly planned by Martyr Soleimani; used a Saegeh UAV as bait, then 1 of 8 F-16Is show down by a Syrian S-200 system while flying high altitude


When Syria left Lebanon, it lost strategic depth for air defense zone, that is because of terrain(there is Mountain chain between border), Syria now has big problems since Israel can fly all the way to mediterrain sea undetected, they Just pop up fire missile and fly back to lower atlittude... Syria would need constant presence of AWACS in Med. Sea to cover this gap or some OTH radar on the North. There is option to put some short to medijum AD systems a long the border, which Syria did at some degree, but this still is not solution for Israel aircrafts since they fire missile from long ranges, from Lebanon or Med Sea, to be honest Syrian AD has improved their time of reaction, and they shot down most of the missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I don't know, notice how they've never exported flankers. I've read that it has something to do with an agreement / settlement with Russia. Sure China produces their own engines but they still also depend on Russian engines and Russian parts, maintenance for some weapons systems. The S-400 for example, the vital maintenance must be done by Russia and who knows if Russia has given the Chinese the software codes. 

Also since the Chinese have been going on their copy cat spree during the last few years, now Russian weapons have what is called a "kill switch" (I believe) incorporated into their weapons systems. Basically if anyone tries to open up the weapons vital components without permission it renders the weapon useless until they can enter in the code. This can lead to a warranty being voided and a hefty fine as well. 

Anyways I wouldn't mind Iran buying a few dozen J-10s. Iran can easily afford them right now. Iran's yearly budget this year is based on the price of oil being $60 a barrel and Iran selling 1 million barrels a day. Iran is exceeding those numbers by nearly double if not more, so by the end of the year Iran will have a surplus on the yearly budget. Correct me if I'm mistaken but that's as I understand it.



N_Al40 said:


> But Sir China is now producing and equipping the J-16 with its own domestically produced WS-10A engine; this bypasses the agreement made with Russia as that only pertained to the AL-31F engine that Russia was supplying to China


----------



## sha ah

I personally don't understand the Syrians. Recently Israelis struck another research facility. This is confusing to me because during the civil war, the rebels dug massive tunnel networks in underground caves. Some of these being very extensive and deep underground. With Iran's experience in this field, Iran could easily extend these networks and setup vital locations, like research facilities there. Or they could be used to keep mobile launchers for air defense units. Another option is to keep Iranian drones or missiles on Russian protected sites, like Hmeimim airport. 

Iran could also transfer small scale air defense systems to Lebanon, since Israeli jet usually fly over Lebanon to launch missiles to Syria. They often fly low, then fly over the Golan Heights, unleash their missiles and then fly back to Israel. MANPAD ambush teams could easily spot the jets while they're flying low and try to shoot them down. For some reason though this never gets done.

Another thing i wonder about Libya is why they don't liberate the rest of Idlib. Their army seems capable but I guess the Turks don't want Al Qaeda militants flooding into Turkey as they flee. I suppose that with the current economic situation in Turkey, that Assad is waiting for a pristine opportunity ? 

But then there's Al Tanf and the oil fields in Deir Ezzor controlled by SDF. I don't understand why Assad doesn't unleash missiles and drones at these sites. I mean yes he's hoping that one day he can regain control and doesn't want to destroy the oil facilities but come on he should give them an ultimatum, "either give us our oil facilities back or we'll destroy them" 

On the other hand, Syria has been through so much in the last decade that they're basically just happy to be alive I guess and trying to keep their economy from completely collapsing. Can't really blame Assad considering the fact that his regime barely survived just a few years ago. 

I'm sure that Iran would be willing to help Assad retaliate everytime the Syrians launch airstrikes but if the Syrians are reluctant and unwilling, then what can you do ?



sanel1412 said:


> When Syria left Lebanon, it lost strategic depth for air defense zone, that is because of terrain(there is Mountain chain between border), Syria now has big problems since Israel can fly all the way to mediterrain sea undetected, they Just pop up fire missile and fly back to lower atlittude... Syria would need constant presence of AWACS in Med. Sea to cover this gap or some OTH radar on the North. There is option to put some short to medijum AD systems a long the border, which Syria did at some degree, but this still is not solution for Israel aircrafts since they fire missile from long ranges, from Lebanon or Med Sea, to be honest Syrian AD has improved their time of reaction, and they shot down most of the missiles.


----------



## sha ah

I'm telling you China cannot export any Flanker variant. Russia does not want competition in that field. Do you think they want China selling flankers but for less in the global market ? In that case Russia would likely stop supplying Chinese with support and spare parts for their Russian jets. At that point China could replace all of their jets that have Russian engines with Chinese engines, but are the Chinese engines as good ?

Also are the Chinese jets as cheap / cost effective since the Chinese just began producing them while the Russians have been mass producing them for decades ? Also the Chinese claim that their engines are as good if not better than Russian engines but I've heard stories about the JF-17 emitting black smoke and having various issues. When the Pakistanis complained the Chinese say "it is what it is" LOL Also the Chinese J-15 has been called the "flopping fish" by the Chinese themselves. It's under powered.

At the same time imagine China losing support from Russia for weapons systems like the S-400. The vital maintenance must be done by Russia. Chinese don't have the software codes which leaves them in a vulnerable situation. A few years ago, the Russians finally got fed up with the Chinese going on a copycat rampage of their weapons and so they began installing "kill switches" on their weapons systems. Basically if you try screwing around with the vital components the Russians will be notified (there was such a case a few years ago with the SU-35 I believe where the Russians found out) After that you will need a special code for the plane to continue to function. That code can cost a hefty fee, so is it worth it ?

The only planes the Chinese can export are JF-17 and J-10. The only issue is that Iran will not accept the JF-17 an under any circumstances and the J-10 they want to exchange for oil. The Chinese said no but now with the current soaring energy prices who knows. Iran can easily afford a few dozen if not 100 J-10s. They're $35-$60 million each depending on the configuration and Iran's economy is going to be in surplus this year. The budget was counting on oil prices being at $60 a barrel and Iran selling 1 million barrels day. Iran is set to more than double those numbers so purchasing J-10s is no issue for Iran.

Personally I believe that Iran should purchase 70-100 J-10s from China and 70-100 SU-30/SU-35s from Russia. The radar systems on the Sukhois can be upgraded if need be. Iran's military doctrine is based on defense not offense and so in a war time scenario 90% of the time Iranian jets will stay within Iran's borders anyways.



TheImmortal said:


> Correct. The other user is wrong. China can export any fighter as long as it doesn’t use Russian engines.
> 
> I still think J-31 makes more sense if we consider a 20 year shelf life for fighter jets. Ideally J-20, but I doubt China would give its superiority fighter to Iran.
> 
> I’m not sure what China is willing to offer. These speculations pop up every year and nothing happens. Almost 2 years since embargo was dropped, no major arms deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519457169535422465


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> I'm telling you China cannot export any Flanker variant. Russia does not want competition in that field. Do you think they want China selling flankers but for less in the global market ? In that case Russia would likely stop supplying Chinese with support and spare parts for their Russian jets. At that point China could replace all of their jets that have Russian engines with Chinese engines, but are the Chinese engines as good ?



What Russia wants is irrelevant. You are saying China *cannot* which implies some legal issue. If you say China *wont* because they don’t want to upset Russia and their arms relationship then that’s something completely different.

China right now has very few friends who want to spend hundreds if not billions of dollars to buy Chinese fighters. Most stick to Russian or Western fighter jets. Pakistan is one of the few and they have a special relationship.


----------



## sha ah

China "can" but the headache they have to deal with afterwards is not worth it. Therefore they won't. You can look into it yourself. They will only export JF-17s and J-10s. The J-20 is exclusively for themselves. I just wonder how the J-20 would perform against the Rafale. Indians are convinced the Rafale would tear them apart, but I'm not convinced. However dogfights are a thing of the past, BVR is about all jets will do these days since they cost way too much to risk.

Also Iranians have been so picky over the years when it comes to procuring fighter jets. Why in the world would they opt for an inferior copy of the Flanker ? The Chinese themselves call their flankers the floppy fish so why would Iran want it ? The J-10 is a much better choice. 

Honestly Iran with 70 J-10s and 70 SU-35s/SU-30s would be perfect



TheImmortal said:


> What Russia wants is irrelevant. You are saying China *cannot* which implies some legal issue. If you say China *wont* because they don’t want to upset Russia and their arms relationship then that’s something completely different.
> 
> China right now has very few friends who want to spend hundreds if not billions of dollars to buy Chinese fighters. Most stick to Russian or Western fighter jets. Pakistan is one of the few and they have a special relationship.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Also Iranians have been so picky over the years when it comes to procuring fighter jets. Why in the world would they opt for an inferior copy of the Flanker ? The Chinese themselves call their flankers the floppy fish so why would Iran want it ? The J-10 is a much better choice.
> 
> Honestly Iran with 70 J-10s and 70 SU-35s/SU-30s would be perfect


Maintenance headache , if Iran want to procure any jet , must go with something that reduce the maintenance cost. If you say Iran doctrine is defensive , then we must go for interceptors , how good SU-30 is in that role ? or J-10 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sha ah said:


> I personally don't understand the Syrians. Recently Israelis struck another research facility. This is confusing to me because during the civil war, the rebels dug massive tunnel networks in underground caves. Some of these being very extensive and deep underground. With Iran's experience in this field, Iran could easily extend these networks and setup vital locations, like research facilities there. Or they could be used to keep mobile launchers for air defense units. Another option is to keep Iranian drones or missiles on Russian protected sites, like Hmeimim airport.



These tunnels are long destroyed and eradicated. Nothing about building a tunnel network is easy. I don't know where you got this idea from. Especially if the enemy will attack it during construction and if you do not have the right equipment available considering the logistics of transporting it from Iran.



sha ah said:


> Iran could also transfer small scale air defense systems to Lebanon, since Israeli jet usually fly over Lebanon to launch missiles to Syria. They often fly low, then fly over the Golan Heights, unleash their missiles and then fly back to Israel. MANPAD ambush teams could easily spot the jets while they're flying low and try to shoot them down. For some reason though this never gets done.



A Majid type system with Passive engagement and thermal optics for viewing at night would be ideal. Not as sexy as a star-streak but still good.

What do you mean for some reason?

Hezbollah is not going to shoot down any Israeli Jet and risk a war they are clearly not interested in, especially under the current economic stances.


sha ah said:


> Another thing i wonder about Libya is why they don't liberate the rest of Idlib. Their army seems capable but I guess the Turks don't want Al Qaeda militants flooding into Turkey as they flee. I suppose that with the current economic situation in Turkey, that Assad is waiting for a pristine opportunity ?



Because they need Russian greenlight and need Russian support and they are alittle busy right now. Turkey will try to prevent and without Russia, Syria cannot do it.



sha ah said:


> But then there's Al Tanf and the oil fields in Deir Ezzor controlled by SDF. I don't understand why Assad doesn't unleash missiles and drones at these sites. I mean yes he's hoping that one day he can regain control and doesn't want to destroy the oil facilities but come on he should give them an ultimatum, "either give us our oil facilities back or we'll destroy them"



Is this a serious question? You have very childish view points. I presume the presence of Americans in Al-Tanf and the Dier Ezzor oil fields might have something to do with not "unleashing drones and missiles" at these sites. Can you explain in what position Assad is in to demand ultimatums to the US and SDF?

If you want Syria to attack American Bradley BUSK configured IFVs then good luck with that.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

sha ah said:


> Also the Chinese claim that their engines are as good if not better than Russian engines but I've heard stories about the JF-17 emitting black smoke and having various issues. When the Pakistanis complained the Chinese say "it is what it is" LOL


Dude
JF 17 uses Russian RD 93 engine that was first smoky but thanks to our engineers, we have resolved smoke issue.

Watch this video:no black smoke.


----------



## OldTwilight

Sineva said:


> I think that from a purely technological perspective iran could certainly produce a single engine light fighter like the F-CK-1 Ching-kuo or JF-17,tho the real question is whether the huge economic costs involved in doing so could be justified,especially when one considers the fact that those resources could arguably be far better utilized on the production of far more capable weapons.
> The simple fact is that the airforce,regardless of however it is equipped,is still only ever going to play a back up role in irans military doctrine.
> The airforce also has the problem in that it has consistently failed to further develop its own capabilities indigenously or to take advantage of new weapons technologies such as drones or aeroballistic weapons systems.


even Ukraine with considerable aerospace infrastructure couldn't field a worthy air force against 20% percent of Russian air force power ... 
we should have air force too keep our not friendly expansionist neighbors in check but in fact against our primary foe which is USA , even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

N_Al40 said:


> In your opinion, why would they refuse??
> 
> Indications from reliable source indicate that JCPOA is to be revived very soon
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1519050488989245442
> Hopefully more cash flow = New fighter jets



Of course stating that Elijah Magnier "was good before but is a hit and miss now" explains nothing.

An actually realistic explanation would be that Magnier joined the staff of Responsible Statecraft, the online magazine of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a Washington-based, George Soros- and Charles Koch-funded think tank which advocates realist foreign policy for the US regime.

It is led by Trita Parsi, former head of the NIAC (National Iranian-American Council). Consequently, Responsible Statecraft is plays a high-profile role in support of the JCPOA, much like the NIAC back in the day (some of the latters' figureheads are close to reformist members of the former Iranian negotiations team, in particular the "New York group" around Mohammad Javad Zarif).

Therefore it comes as no surprise that Responsible Statecraft authors will endeavor to keep alive the notion that negotiations are as good as completed - something we've kept hearing for almost a year now. These "optimistic" forecasts systematically failed to come true, which suggests that the parties emitting them (including European regime mouthpieces such as the British Reuters news agency, which published at least one piece of fake news about the negotiations so far), are doing so deliberately and for specific reasons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

OldTwilight said:


> even Ukraine with considerable aerospace infrastructure couldn't field a worthy air force against 20% percent of Russian air force power ...
> we should have air force too keep our not friendly expansionist neighbors in check but in fact against our primary foe which is USA , even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...


Iran should rather look at light multi-role fighter aircraft such as L-159 Alca to draw influence from. It would be far easier and cheaper to achieve fighter jet of that caliber than purchase hundreds of Su-30's or designing a affordable within Iranian capability a supersonic fighter jet whose only advantage would have been being supersonic.


----------



## 925boy

OldTwilight said:


> even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...


But Iran wont need 200 Su-30s IF its air defenses can shoot down xx-xxx # of US airforce planes ,simple. But if Iranian air defenses dont perform well and are effectively suppressed alot, then what you're saying will play out.


----------



## TheImmortal

This is not true that they won’t last.

I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.

It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.

It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.

So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.

Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> This is not true that they won’t last.
> 
> I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.
> 
> It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.
> 
> It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.
> 
> So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.
> 
> Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.


Never going to happen with the IRIAF, only possibility is if the IRGC takes on an interceptor project or has already worked on one and just needs to finish the propulsion. They have both the financial resources and human resources to do it. 

The scale of the project would have to be enormous though. Might be better to just expand existing bases into both missile and air bases.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Never going to happen with the IRIAF, only possibility is if the IRGC takes on an interceptor project or has already worked on one and just needs to finish the propulsion. They have both the financial resources and human resources to do it.
> 
> The scale of the project would have to be enormous though. Might be better to just expand existing bases into both missile and air bases.



It creates jobs. The burrowing of mountains is already going on (see multiple missile facilities getting extended renovations) as well as a couple nuclear faculties including the new centrifuge and enrichment workshop being built in the mountain.

The ramifications are huge. Chinese mountain airbases could reportedly withstand nuclear weapons.

And from a safety standpoint keeping missiles, jet fuel, missile fuel, and armaments in one underground area is not very wise.

Spread them out and make the enemy work harder to reduce your deterrence.

5-6 bases might cost several billion in construction costs, but the economic benefits and military benefits in the long run will outweigh the initial costs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

I was looking at older news for *heavy fighter jets*

Close to 5 years ago it was in study phase

2 years ago it went into production phase ( prototype ?) ?

after last report there is a radio silence , any news or updates ?


----------



## Abid123

sha ah said:


> They're $35-$60 million each depending on the configuration and Iran's economy is going to be in surplus this year.


PAF bought them at 50 million USD per plane to be exact.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Iran should rather look at light multi-role fighter aircraft such as L-159 Alca to draw influence from. It would be far easier and cheaper to achieve fighter jet of that caliber than purchase hundreds of Su-30's or designing a affordable within Iranian capability a supersonic fighter jet whose only advantage would have been being supersonic.


engine aside in every metric that airplane is inferior to Kowsar



925boy said:


> But Iran wont need 200 Su-30s IF its air defenses can shoot down xx-xxx # of US airforce planes ,simple. But if Iranian air defenses dont perform well and are effectively suppressed alot, then what you're saying will play out.


for what role we exactly need Su-30 ? you must first answer that .



TheImmortal said:


> This is not true that they won’t last.
> 
> I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.
> 
> It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.
> 
> It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.
> 
> So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.
> 
> Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.


well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them


----------



## sha ah

Is this a joke ? Kowsar is not comparable to J-10. It was a lightweight fighter sold to banana republics during the Vietnam era. Maybe a highly optimized variant could be considered decent by todays standards but nothing Iran has been been able to build so far is comparable to the J-10.

The Flanker is an excellent platform! What role ? I don't know multi purpose, especially the SU-35 is a highly manueverable and lethal air superiority fighter. This is why Iran has shown interest in both the SU-30 and SU-35

Please for the love of God get this Sweden idea out of your head. The west will NEVER, EVER sell Iran western fighter jets. For Iran it's either J-10 or SU-30/35. That is all, nothing else. 



Hack-Hook said:


> engine aside in every metric that airplane is inferior to Kowsar
> 
> for what role we exactly need Su-30 ? you must first answer that .
> 
> well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> The Flanker is an excellent platform? What role ? I don't know multi purpose, especially the SU-35 q very lethal fighter indeed which is why Iran has shown interest in both the SU+30 and SU-35


people tends to confuse the capabilities of Su-35 and Su-30 with each other
su-30 is a waste o money for Iran . by the way I'm not a fan a flanker and I'm biased there, several years ago I would have supported the Idea of big airplanes , but now I believe the technology and dynamic of the war have changed now I'm fan of medium sized multirole fighter like Mig-35, J10-c or Grippen and F-16 and if they have some datalink capabilities that's a lot better



sha ah said:


> Is this a joke ? Kowsar is not comparable to J-10. It was a lightweight fighter sold to banana republics during the Vietnam era. Maybe a highly optimized variant but nothing Iran has been been able to build so far is comparable to the K-10.


we were not talking about JF-17 we were talking about L-159 Alca what it have over Kowsar except that more efficient engine


sha ah said:


> Please for the love of God get this Sweden idea out of your head. The west will NEVER sell Iran western fighter jets. For Iran it's either J-10 or SU-30/35. That is all, nothing else.


who said buy Swedish airplane !? I said the strategy of a lot of airfield with small amount of equipment in each (AKA BAS-90, that's not an airplane name) instead 5-6 underground fortified fields that enemy can put out of commission in first strike for at least weeks , do we also have to buy the airfields from west ??
you very well can implement that strategy with airplanes such as J-10C, Mig-35 or even our own Kowsar.

by the way you also put the taught of Russia or china transfer some meaningful aviation technology to Iran before we ourself manage to build something of equal capabilities out of your head

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them



You think 200 small base is cheaper than 5 mountain bases?

You do realize those 200 small bases would need security, air defense systems, and supporting facilities, not to mention personnel. The Roads and nightmare of logistics of resupplying 200 bases with jet fuel and armaments. 

Building long enough runways to allow large jets to land to resupply the base with fuel and armaments.


Def not a good a idea. The mountain airbase is damn near impenetrable without high KT nuclear weapons. Makes much more logistics sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> people tends to confuse the capabilities of Su-35 and Su-30 with each other
> su-30 is a waste o money for Iran . by the way I'm not a fan a flanker and I'm biased there, several years ago I would have supported the Idea of big airplanes , but now I believe the technology and dynamic of the war have changed now I'm fan of medium sized multirole fighter like Mig-35, J10-c or Grippen and F-16 and if they have some datalink capabilities that's a lot better
> 
> 
> we were not talking about JF-17 we were talking about L-159 Alca what it have over Kowsar except that more efficient engine
> 
> who said buy Swedish airplane !? I said the strategy of a lot of airfield with small amount of equipment in each (AKA BAS-90, that's not an airplane name) instead 5-6 underground fortified fields that enemy can put out of commission in first strike for at least weeks , do we also have to buy the airfields from west ??
> you very well can implement that strategy with airplanes such as J-10C, Mig-35 or even our own Kowsar.
> 
> by the way you also put the taught of Russia or china transfer some meaningful aviation technology to Iran before we ourself manage to build something of equal capabilities out of your head


SU-30SM2 allows for SU-35 capabilities and avionics in 2 seated platform. Iran should procure SU-35s first, as Russia still has some they desperately want to sell. Than get SU-30SM2, customized with a datalink that allows it to control drones

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You think 200 small base is cheaper than 5 mountain bases?
> 
> You do realize those 200 small bases would need security, air defense systems, and supporting facilities, not to mention personnel. The Roads and nightmare of logistics of resupplying 200 bases with jet fuel and armaments.


our air defense is supposed to be distributed around our country , about logistic the amount of it won't change they need to change their distribution policy.


> Building long enough runways to allow large jets to land to resupply the base with fuel and armaments.


Not all those bases are supported to host big jets , most of them only support small and medium size jets


TheImmortal said:


> Def not a good a idea. The mountain airbase is damn near impenetrable without high KT nuclear weapons. Makes much more logistics sense.


your problem is that you think they need to destroy the base completely , not they need to destroy the outlet of the base and that don't need nukes , some bunker buster fired from 100km away . big bases are outdated and not in line with Iran asymmetrical warfare. also if we are going to have kowsar for foreseeable future , then better to distribute them around country to compensate for the lack of range , your 5 base means all those kowsar and f-5 derivate won't reach combat zone or if they reach they could not carry meaningful amount ammunition or they don't have enough fuel to participate in anything


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> SU-30SM2 allows for SU-35 capabilities and avionics in 2 seated platform. Iran should procure SU-35s first, as Russia still has some they desperately want to sell. Than get SU-30SM2, customized with a datalink that allows it to control drones


as I said I believe medium sized multirole fighters suits us better . if you want you can get some for hauling bombs to the target , but the backbone of our airforce must be something in class of J-10c or Mig-35 or if people don't jump and say west won't sell us anything f-16 i put them here to show the class of the fighter these fighters have easier maintenance are cheaper to fly and can be procured in higher number as they are cheaper to build and if linked together or ground station can even surpass larger fighters in lethality.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> engine aside in every metric that airplane is inferior to Kowsar


Your reply is doesn't make sense in anyway conceivable because the point of my suggestion is to design affordable advanced light multi-role fighter jet with L-159 Alca as being reference for specifications then adapt to the needs of IRIAF.

With success of Jahesh-700 has proven that it can in near future design much larger medium bypass turbofan for which that kind of aircraft would have nearly twice the range of Kowsar regardless of loadout with comparable carrying capacity of ordnance while overall consuming less jet fuel with new aircraft design then can avoid limitations that Kowsar has that it inherited from F-5 Tiger II with one of most notable aside jet engine being nosecone that limits size of radar antenna.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Your reply is doesn't make sense in anyway conceivable because the point of my suggestion is to design affordable advanced light multi-role fighter jet with L-159 Alca as being reference for specifications then adapt to the needs of IRIAF.
> 
> With success of Jahesh-700 has proven that it can in near future design much larger medium bypass turbofan for which that kind of aircraft would have nearly twice the range of Kowsar regardless of loadout with comparable carrying capacity of ordnance while overall consuming less jet fuel with new aircraft design then can avoid limitations that Kowsar has that it inherited from F-5 Tiger II with one of most notable aside jet engine being nosecone that limits size of radar antenna.


You can modify the kowsar fuselage to put the engine there and have the benefit of both plan just look at the design it's clear that f5 designed to be able to go supersonic while the philosophy behind Alca won't allow such things.


----------



## Stryker1982

Hack-Hook said:


> your problem is that you think they need to destroy the base completely , not they need to destroy the outlet of the base and that don't need nukes , some bunker buster fired from 100km away . big bases are outdated and not in line with Iran asymmetrical warfare. also if we are going to have kowsar for foreseeable future , then better to distribute them around country to compensate for the lack of range , your 5 base means all those kowsar and f-5 derivate won't reach combat zone or if they reach they could not carry meaningful amount ammunition or they don't have enough fuel to participate in anything


I don't understand your logic behind this. Would you like to store them above ground on the airfield waiting for the opponent to launch low RCS cruise missiles at them? Can you show a better idea to protecting your airbase from a Coalition of PG airforces who will be provided with prime intelligence and weapons or US/NATO itself?

Once your aircraft is destroyed their is no recovering them, the worse case of a mountain base is the blocking of the entrance, which can be cleared. Losing your inventory of aircraft is not replaceable, same goes with missile bases, drones bases, and anti-shipping missiles bases and tunnel networks (the same that China, Hezbollah, and Gaza strip groups use) . If you are saying all these are "not in line with Iran asymmetrical warfare" then I guess all that work they did was useless for years and building bases all over the country was wrong and we should just store them in above ground warehouse waiting to be destroyed in a first strike

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> I don't understand your logic behind this. Would you like to store them above ground on the airfield waiting for the opponent to launch low RCS cruise missiles at them? Can you show a better idea to protecting your airbase from a Coalition of PG airforces who will be provided with prime intelligence and weapons or US/NATO itself?
> 
> Once your aircraft is destroyed their is no recovering them, the worse case of a mountain base is the blocking of the entrance, which can be cleared. Losing your inventory of aircraft is not replaceable, same goes with missile bases, drones bases, and anti-shipping missiles bases and tunnel networks (the same that China, Hezbollah, and Gaza strip groups use) . If you are saying all these are "not in line with Iran asymmetrical warfare" then I guess all that work they did was useless for years and building bases all over the country was wrong and we should just store them in above ground warehouse waiting to be destroyed in a first strike


Wrong the important thing is not the aircraft themselves is the ability to mount retaliation . 

If your aircraft are in 5 deep underground bases then it's not important if they are flight worthy or not if the entrance to those bases are destroyed with 10 bunker buster that 5 enemy aircraft fired at you

In case of what I proposed enemy needs hundreds of aircraft to destroy your equipment. You can put 5 aircraft in each bases and put them separately . You can complement them with drones .
And by the way for protecting your asset always dispersing them is better than gathering them at one location .

What I suggest give you second strike capabilities by what you suggest after first strike by enemy your sky will be their turf and you only have your air defense and only short range air defense because you had nothing to protect long range and early warning radars.

And a missile base is operating a lot different than an air base and in airbase you don't store fighters you operate them


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> You can modify the kowsar fuselage to put the engine there and have the benefit of both plan just look at the design it's clear that f5 designed to be able to go supersonic while the philosophy behind Alca won't allow such things.


You are overrating ability to go supersonic as we have seen in past 30 years that it is irrelevant when fighters get loaded to maximum acting as missile and bomb trucks.

Alca type airframe would allow gliding incase of engine faliure or engine being hit and disables unlike F-5 series.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> You are overrating ability to go supersonic as we have seen in past 30 years that it is irrelevant when fighters get loaded to maximum acting as missile and bomb trucks.
> 
> Alca type airframe would allow gliding incase of engine faliure or engine being hit and disables unlike F-5 series.


if engine get hit there won't be any gliding because of the structural damage to the tail section , the gliding is applicable only in case of engine failure , the F5 can continue its flight with a single engine if one fail and its not just going supersonic , its the amount of ammunition it can carry and many other things , please tell me engine aside on what metric its superior to F5


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> if engine get hit there won't be any gliding because of the structural damage to the tail section , the gliding is applicable only in case of engine failure , the F5 can continue its flight with a single engine if one fail and its not just going supersonic , its the amount of ammunition it can carry and many other things , please tell me engine aside on what metric its superior to F5


Both engines of F-5 are next to each other, its not Su-25 nor Mig-29 nor Su-27/30/33/35 or Su-57 where there is adequate spacing that considerably reduces change of both engines being damaged if one is hit by SAM or AAM.

Even if tail is not damaged on F-5, it would fall like a rock unlike Alca.

Iran needs a decent turbofan engine that would reduce jet fuel consumption of the airforce to have more reserves in case of war or to increase flight hours of their pilots.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Both engines of F-5 are next to each other, its not Su-25 nor Mig-29 nor Su-27/30/33/35 or Su-57 where there is adequate spacing that considerably reduces change of both engines being damaged if one is hit by SAM or AAM.
> 
> Even if tail is not damaged on F-5, it would fall like a rock unlike Alca.
> 
> Iran needs a decent turbofan engine that would reduce jet fuel consumption of the airforce to have more reserves in case of war or to increase flight hours of their pilots.


as i said that glide feature only work if its engine fail not if it hit by sam .
in case of hitting by sam both airplane will fall , in case of engine failure , the remaining engine made F-5 fly home , the glide feature make Alca fly 10km away and hit the ground there .

by the way I wonder what you are insist on , we unveiled Yasin jet in 2017 and tested it in 2019 and then airforce was not impressed and decided it preferred Kowsar , it was heavier could carry less weapon and was slower






it could only carry 1100km of ammunition , Kowsar could carry twice
it could carry 1600kg of fuel, Kowsar could carry 2800kg
because it was smaller it could only house non-afterburning version of OWJ
max speed was 1000km , in case of Kowsar it was more than 1600km
range was 900km while Kowsar had a range of 1100km
ferry range was 1200km while Kowsar ferry range was 2900km
service ceiling was 11km in case of Kowsar more in line of 15km (without external fuel and weapons)

on plus side it had larger wings , larger flight control surface , all these my seems good to you but not for us as we lack suitable engines for these feature , and it only added to the resistance to air and hindered its maneuverability , that's why we had to scrap twine tail Saeqeh project our Owj engine is underpowered and until our more powerful engine become available we can't use those features . I only hope for an engine developed from Jahesh-700 in class of more powerful version of FJ-44-3 so the fuel economy become better for our light fighter and trainer program

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

A few dozen Su-35s and Su-30s would still be a great boost for Iran's aging Airforce. Su-30 is still a great, proven multirole fighter.

Yes Iran needs mountain bases for its Airforce I agree. Any other fighter other than the J-10 or Flanker platform is out of the question for Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> people tends to confuse the capabilities of Su-35 and Su-30 with each other
> su-30 is a waste o money for Iran . by the way I'm not a fan a flanker and I'm biased there, several years ago I would have supported the Idea of big airplanes , but now I believe the technology and dynamic of the war have changed now I'm fan of medium sized multirole fighter like Mig-35, J10-c or Grippen and F-16 and if they have some datalink capabilities that's a lot better
> 
> 
> we were not talking about JF-17 we were talking about L-159 Alca what it have over Kowsar except that more efficient engine
> 
> who said buy Swedish airplane !? I said the strategy of a lot of airfield with small amount of equipment in each (AKA BAS-90, that's not an airplane name) instead 5-6 underground fortified fields that enemy can put out of commission in first strike for at least weeks , do we also have to buy the airfields from west ??
> you very well can implement that strategy with airplanes such as J-10C, Mig-35 or even our own Kowsar.
> 
> by the way you also put the taught of Russia or china transfer some meaningful aviation technology to Iran before we ourself manage to build something of equal capabilities out of your head



It's still a great trainer and Iran likely builds it for peanuts..great stepping stone for Iran. If not for the rise of drone technology Iran could have probably sold these to improvised countries like Ethiopia. 



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said that glide feature only work if its engine fail not if it hit by sam .
> in case of hitting by sam both airplane will fall , in case of engine failure , the remaining engine made F-5 fly home , the glide feature make Alca fly 10km away and hit the ground there .
> 
> by the way I wonder what you are insist on , we unveiled Yasin jet in 2017 and tested it in 2019 and then airforce was not impressed and decided it preferred Kowsar , it was heavier could carry less weapon and was slower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it could only carry 1100km of ammunition , Kowsar could carry twice
> it could carry 1600kg of fuel, Kowsar could carry 2800kg
> because it was smaller it could only house non-afterburning version of OWJ
> max speed was 1000km , in case of Kowsar it was more than 1600km
> range was 900km while Kowsar had a range of 1100km
> ferry range was 1200km while Kowsar ferry range was 2900km
> service ceiling was 11km in case of Kowsar more in line of 15km (without external fuel and weapons)
> 
> on plus side it had larger wings , larger flight control surface , all these my seems good to you but not for us as we lack suitable engines for these feature , and it only added to the resistance to air and hindered its maneuverability , that's why we had to scrap twine tail Saeqeh project our Owj engine is underpowered and until our more powerful engine become available we can't use those features . I only hope for an engine developed from Jahesh-700 in class of more powerful version of FJ-44-3 so the fuel economy become better for our light fighter and trainer program

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> A few dozen Su-35s and Su-30s would still be a great boost for Iran's aging Airforce. Su-30 is still a great, proven multirole fighter.


what ever as I said , Iran don't need flankers as airplanes like J-10, F-16, Mig-35 ..... can take over their role easily and for a lot cheaper. and let say if equipped with datalink a lot better


sha ah said:


> Yes Iran needs mountain bases for its Airforce I agree. Any other fighter other than the J-10 or Flanker platform is out of the question for Iran.


no Iran don't need Mountain base as they will be make inoperable in first day of war .
they were good at 50s,60,s and probably 70s but advance in technologies and rise of satellite and guided and glide ammunition made them obsolete nobody is building them anymore.


sha ah said:


> It's still a great trainer and Iran likely builds it for peanuts..great stepping stone for Iran. If not for the rise of drone technology Iran could have probably sold these to improvised countries like Ethiopia.


why build it when a f-5 based trainer can do the same thing for you and you don't need to have two production line and more importantly if your fighters are going to fly Kowsar why not train them in two sit version of Kowsar ? you think we build the two sit version of it for what purpose ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

So underground mountain bases and airbases are useless ? Then I guess that Iran should give up building them for missiles as well ? 

How is Ukraine still flying it's helicopters and planes then ? The truth is that underground, bases, fortified with military, industrial grade concrete layers can keep assets alive. This is less true against a superpower like the USA but against regional allies they're worth building imo.

I don't know what u have against SU-30 and SU-35 but I think that they're great multirole fighters that would greatly benefit Iran. 70 J-10s, 70 SU-30s and 40 SU-35s would be a great addition to Iran Airforce.

However Iran needs to keep working on drones and missiles as well, full steam ahead, so that in case of a war, especially against a regional foe, IRAN absolutely brings its adversary to its knees within weeks if not days.



Hack-Hook said:


> what ever as I said , Iran don't need flankers as airplanes like J-10, F-16, Mig-35 ..... can take over their role easily and for a lot cheaper. and let say if equipped with datalink a lot better
> 
> no Iran don't need Mountain base as they will be make inoperable in first day of war .
> they were good at 50s,60,s and probably 70s but advance in technologies and rise of satellite and guided and glide ammunition made them obsolete nobody is building them anymore.
> 
> why build it when a f-5 based trainer can do the same thing for you and you don't need to have two production line and more importantly if your fighters are going to fly Kowsar why not train them in two sit version of Kowsar ? you think we build the two sit version of it for what purpose ?


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> So mountain bases and underground are useless ? Then I guess that Iran should give up building them for missiles as well ?


you don't get it , the fighter must come out of the mountain , at flying speed , those missiles don't need to do so . also we can fire the missile from inside the base , we don't have such luxury for aircraft , the enemy bomb the door to the base , those aircrafts are as good as Saddam buried aircraft under the ground until several day that you can clear the door and in these time enemy have air dominance and can bomb the crew who are clearing the door to the base


sha ah said:


> How is Ukraine still flying it's helicopters and planes then ? The truth is that enderground, bases, fortified with military, industrial grade concrete layers can keep assets alive. This is less true against a superpower like the UuS but against regional allies they're worth building imo.


I yet to see Ukraine flying airplane and you can hide helicopter in barns , by the way can you point me to some of these under ground Ukrainian airbases ?


sha ah said:


> industrial grade concrete layers can keep assets alive. This is less true against a superpower like the UuS but against regional allies they're worth building imo.


and you must put aircraft in shelters made of military grade concert not under tent or such nonsense but you must disperse such facility to bases around country and each base must not hold more than 5-6 aircraft also airplane shelters must be at different part of the base not lined beside each other also you must not park several airplane in in one shelter. thats the key to survivability .



sha ah said:


> I don't know what u have against SU-30 and SU-35 but I think that they're great multirole fighters that would greatly benefit Iran. 70 J-10s, 70 SU-30s and 40 SU-35s would be a great addition to Iran Airforce.


very simple when i look at wargames around the world , they are not that impressive anymore , t6heir radars are old their sensors are old . in short russia is 1-2 decade behind the rest of the world when it come to electronic . that's my problem with them and they are expensive.
and Russia downgrade its export version of the military products too much ,
for example russian air force will get its mig-35 with Zhuk A/AM radar export version will get Zhuk-m , foreign buyers of Su-30 get Baes radar , Russians version will be equipped with Ibris-E. about engine Russia will get Al-41 , the rest of the world AL-31
and as I said I believe you for example can fly two medium fighters like j-10 instead of one Su-35

a su-30mk cost you 47million a su-35 cost you 85million a j10-c is 50 million now tell me which is better j-10c or su30-mk

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

any news about buying or producing anything !? 

for God sake , its almost 15 years since I read and participate in this kind of discussion , fruitless

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> you don't get it , the fighter must come out of the mountain , at flying speed , those missiles don't need to do so . also we can fire the missile from inside the base , we don't have such luxury for aircraft , the enemy bomb the door to the base , those aircrafts are as good as Saddam buried aircraft under the ground until several day that you can clear the door and in these time enemy have air dominance and can bomb the crew who are clearing the door to the base



This isn’t the Death Star. Bombing a single point doesn’t put a billion dollar facility out of commission. Each mountain airbase has multiple exit runways. During non operation there would be special metal alloy “nets “ that extend well in front of the doors to rip and pre detonate any cruise missiles or JDAM to shreds. Similar to cage armour around tanks.

Your logic doesn’t make any sense. You’d rather park 50 million dollar planes out in the open were a off the shelf suicide drone can take it. Hell one Jericho III missile with a cluster warhead can pierce Iranian ABM shield and wipe out 500M dollars worth of aircraft in a blink of an eye. 

If Iran cannot protect a centrifuge facility/drone warehouse/centrifuge parts workshop from a simple drone attack during peace time. What do you think will happen to all your expensive fighter jets getting a nice tan out in the sun during the fog of war?

But despite all that I just said....you say mountain airbases are useless because of the off chance that a cruise missile or perfectly placed JDAM manages to evade defenses and hit a reinforced steel blast door? That can easily be repaired?

Like I said your logic makes zero sense.

Taiwan has one of the biggest underground airbases in the war. North Korea and China also have underground/mountain airbases. It’s a valid tactic against a superior opponent.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> as i said that glide feature only work if its engine fail not if it hit by sam .
> in case of hitting by sam both airplane will fall , in case of engine failure , the remaining engine made F-5 fly home , the glide feature make Alca fly 10km away and hit the ground there .
> 
> by the way I wonder what you are insist on , we unveiled Yasin jet in 2017 and tested it in 2019 and then airforce was not impressed and decided it preferred Kowsar , it was heavier could carry less weapon and was slower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it could only carry 1100km of ammunition , Kowsar could carry twice
> it could carry 1600kg of fuel, Kowsar could carry 2800kg
> because it was smaller it could only house non-afterburning version of OWJ
> max speed was 1000km , in case of Kowsar it was more than 1600km
> range was 900km while Kowsar had a range of 1100km
> ferry range was 1200km while Kowsar ferry range was 2900km
> service ceiling was 11km in case of Kowsar more in line of 15km (without external fuel and weapons)
> 
> on plus side it had larger wings , larger flight control surface , all these my seems good to you but not for us as we lack suitable engines for these feature , and it only added to the resistance to air and hindered its maneuverability , that's why we had to scrap twine tail Saeqeh project our Owj engine is underpowered and until our more powerful engine become available we can't use those features . I only hope for an engine developed from Jahesh-700 in class of more powerful version of FJ-44-3 so the fuel economy become better for our light fighter and trainer program


Who exactly told you Yasin was abandoned? It's in development rn. It's meant to be an advanced trainer and later a CAS aircraft, not a fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> This isn’t the Death Star. Bombing a single point doesn’t put a billion dollar facility out of commission. Each mountain airbase has multiple exit runways. During non operation there would be special metal alloy “nets “ that extend well in front of the doors to rip and pre detonate any cruise missiles or JDAM to shreds. Similar to cage armour around tanks.


as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.

the only feasible way of protecting your asset against first strike is distributing them in various bases around the country and its the only way for Iran to operate its air force as it gonna be mainly consisted of Kowsar and its variants in future its the only way to overcome the range problem of the fighter


TheImmortal said:


> Your logic doesn’t make any sense. You’d rather park 50 million dollar planes out in the open were a off the shelf suicide drone can take it. Hell one Jericho III missile with a cluster warhead can pierce Iranian ABM shield and wipe out 500M dollars worth of aircraft in a blink of an eye.


who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place


TheImmortal said:


> If Iran cannot protect a centrifuge facility/drone warehouse/centrifuge parts workshop from a simple drone attack during peace time. What do you think will happen to all your expensive fighter jets getting a nice tan out in the sun during the fog of war?


Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack . 
about your question first don't store your equipment in building suitable for workshops , and then as i said disperse them don't put all your egg in one basket



TheImmortal said:


> But despite all that I just said....you say mountain airbases are useless because of the off chance that a cruise missile or perfectly placed JDAM manages to evade defenses and hit a reinforced steel blast door? That can easily be repaired?


not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours 
and go fix that enterance easily if you can





and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109




or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work








TheImmortal said:


> Like I said your logic makes zero sense.
> 
> Taiwan has one of the biggest underground airbases in the war. North Korea and China also have underground/mountain airbases. It’s a valid tactic against a superior opponent.


end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built



GrandBotBoi said:


> Who exactly told you Yasin was abandoned? It's in development rn. It's meant to be an advanced trainer and later a CAS aircraft, not a fighter


if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
IRIAF decided to go with Kowsar as Yasin was underperforming compared to it and we certainly don't have nor money and neither resource to invest in two production line for two airplane that are in same class and have the exact same capabilities.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
> the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.



I did not say ALL air assets if you read I said a majority of interceptors. Iran’s most valuable asset during war time. Could care less what happens to F-5s, F-4, and other ancient aircraft.




Hack-Hook said:


> who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place



First you show video of bunker busters and MOAB then magically think a concrete shelter will save your planes? One MOAB on an airbase and it’s over.

And 100 is not possible. In your fantasy video game thinking logistics and personnel don’t exist. You think this is Sim City and you just build wherever you want without taking into account all the complex outside factors. 

Not to mention it is physically impossible for any country on the planet to protect 100 airbases with enough air defenses to stop against low flying threats. So more doesn’t mean better, I don’t know why that is hard for you to understand.



Hack-Hook said:


> not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
> and go fix that enterance easily if you can
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work



You act like the only protection would be the steal net. That is the fail safe.

It will be much easier to have 4-5 mountain airbases surrounded by a combination of TOR-M1, Mobin, a Sayyad family system, Majid, and skyguard AAA or a future Iranian C-RAM equivalent. All of this will be within a long range air defense ring of Bavar-373 or S-300 to keep bombers and B-1/B-2 at bay.

The biggest risk to these bases is B-52, B-2, and B-1 bombers that can carry a heavy enough bunker buster to do significant damage to the “doors”. Outside of a tactical nuke strike, the bases themselves are impervious.

It will not be so easy then for your JDAMs to reach the net. The net is there if all else fails.

Lastly, do not compare Iran’s domestic AD capability to Saddam 2003. Saddam 2003 and even Saddam 1991, could only dream of having the domestic capability of Bavar-373, Mobin, Mersad, Khordad family, Majid, etc etc

So any comparisons to what Saddam did is irrelevant. His was desperation because he didn’t have any way to protect his aircraft.
Iran has many ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> First you show video of bunker busters and MOAB then magically think a concrete shelter will save your planes? One MOAB on an airbase and it’s over.


no it won't save them but it made enemy have to use heavy weapon , they had to come to at most 20km away from the target ,not 100km away , it will be effective against drones and cruise missiles .and so enemy cant do attack from outside our border , it keep the assets safe from collateral damage.
as I said in war with enemy I worry most about first strike . you must keep majority of your airforce accessible after it . not like what Israel did to arab armies or what saddam did to himself. if you use limited amount of bases no matter how fortified they are enemy can attack entrance to those bases and made your airforce grounded for days even weeks if they repeat the attack


TheImmortal said:


> It will be much easier to have 4-5 mountain airbases surrounded by a combination of TOR-M1, Mobin, a Sayyad family system, Majid, and skyguard AAA or a future Iranian C-RAM equivalent. All of this will be within a long range air defense ring of Bavar-373 or S-300 to keep bombers and B-1/B-2 at bay.


your bases are mountain bases , enemy can fly low and hide from you and I doubt S-300 can keep b2 at bay and non of the systems you mentioned will be at their peak performance in mountainous areas .


TheImmortal said:


> The biggest risk to these bases is B-52, B-2, and B-1 bombers that can carry a heavy enough bunker buster to do significant damage to the “doors”. Outside of a tactical nuke strike, the bases themselves are impervious.


as i said enemy don't need to destroy the base , the entrance is enough and f-15 can carry several GBU-27 which will be more than enough to deal with the entrance of such bases.


TheImmortal said:


> Not to mention it is physically impossible for any country on the planet to protect 100 airbases with enough air defenses to stop against low flying threats. So more doesn’t mean better, I don’t know why that is hard for you to understand.


the protection will be provided with national air defense grid and some local short air defense for point defense , you can even use some CIWS for point air defense and let your integrated long and middle range sams do the defense against airplanes.


TheImmortal said:


> You act like the only protection would be the steal net. That is the fail safe.
> It will not be so easy then for your JDAMs to reach the net. The net is there if all else fails.


and it fail as it cant provide any protection at all



TheImmortal said:


> Lastly, do not compare Iran’s domestic AD capability to Saddam 2003. Saddam 2003 and even Saddam 1991, could only dream of having the domestic capability of Bavar-373, Mobin, Mersad, Khordad family, Majid, etc etc


and the attack capabilities of our enemy is a lot different from then . do you believe they stayed in 1991?


TheImmortal said:


> Iran has many ways.


so you say because Iran have many way to protect the aircraft , we must gather all of them in one place ?
no we must not make such mistake. and by the way not all the bases need to have full complement of crew so you don't need to worry about the lack of crews
BAS-90 that i mentioned was introduced by Sweden to made them be able to stand against attack by a country with stronger airforce , more airplanes and higher technological ability , they faced the same challenges as us as they were also were relied on conscripts .
read it and tell me which part of the strategy is not suitable for us








Bas 90 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org









even if you don't like it because it come from west. any strategy we apply must be based on defensive force dispersal to protect our forces against enemy


----------



## Stryker1982

Hack-Hook said:


> as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
> the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.
> 
> the only feasible way of protecting your asset against first strike is distributing them in various bases around the country and its the only way for Iran to operate its air force as it gonna be mainly consisted of Kowsar and its variants in future its the only way to overcome the range problem of the fighter
> 
> who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place
> 
> Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack .
> about your question first don't store your equipment in building suitable for workshops , and then as i said disperse them don't put all your egg in one basket
> 
> 
> not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
> and go fix that enterance easily if you can
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built
> 
> 
> if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
> IRIAF decided to go with Kowsar as Yasin was underperforming compared to it and we certainly don't have nor money and neither resource to invest in two production line for two airplane that are in same class and have the exact same capabilities.


Explain how dispersal of assets is supposed to protect a first strike of approx. 600 low RCS cruise missiles launched from Ticonderoga-class ships, B-52s, B-1B's and B-2 bombers in the first wave. Followed by dozens of F-16s armed fully with JASSM missiles, likely totalling over 1000+ missiles in less than 24 hours. 

You don't think they won't be able to find them parked in shelters on the ground?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Explain how dispersal of assets is supposed to protect a first strike of approx. 600 low RCS cruise missiles launched from Ticonderoga-class ships, B-52s, B-1B's and B-2 bombers in the first wave. Followed by dozens of F-16s armed fully with JASSM missiles, likely totalling over 1000+ missiles in less than 24 hours.
> 
> You don't think they won't be able to find them parked in shelters on the ground?


simply a cruise missile is not a penetrating weapon and is not that strong against properly sheltered aircraft and it prevent collateral damage and if enemy want to use bunkerbuster bombs they had to go as near as 20-25km away from those bases . now enemy have assets that can do that but they are limited they can go near 40-5 base but they cant do that to 50-60 bases 
and I said you disperse equipment did not remember saying showcasing them in open for everyone


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
> the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.
> 
> the only feasible way of protecting your asset against first strike is distributing them in various bases around the country and its the only way for Iran to operate its air force as it gonna be mainly consisted of Kowsar and its variants in future its the only way to overcome the range problem of the fighter
> 
> who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place
> 
> Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack .
> about your question first don't store your equipment in building suitable for workshops , and then as i said disperse them don't put all your egg in one basket
> 
> 
> not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
> and go fix that enterance easily if you can
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built
> 
> 
> if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
> IRIAF decided to go with Kowsar as Yasin was underperforming compared to it and we certainly don't have nor money and neither resource to invest in two production line for two airplane that are in same class and have the exact same capabilities.


We saw the second prototype literally a few months ago


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> We saw the second prototype literally a few months ago


we saw production line of kowsar ,yasin in correct form is waste of resource and in all metric is inferior to Kowsar. and how you are not sure its the same prototype but modified.

by the way the number on Qaher is 8 , do you suggest we have 8 Qaher prototype ?


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> we saw production line of kowsar ,yasin in correct form is waste of resource and in all metric is inferior to Kowsar. and how you are not sure its the same prototype but modified.
> 
> by the way the number on Qaher is 8 , do you suggest we have 8 Qaher prototype ?



well , it is not wast of time and effort , Kowsar was an upgrade for F5 , Yassin was a real act to try and design and build an aircraft from zero ...

Maybe Yassin has some unique value for training ... maybe cost , maybe configuration ... or maybe they just wanted low cost sub-sonic reliable aircraft for first phase of training new pilot ...

For sure Yassin has zero combat capability compare to Kowsar ( which is almost useless as well )

Yassin design is like this one








AIDC AT-3 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





although if you compare these 2 pics , you can see so many diffrence in details which mean Yassin is completely Iranian engineered product 



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/HESA_Yasin_Jet_Trainer.jpg




AIDC_AT_3


https://cdn.planespotters.net/16993/0806-taiwan-air-force-aidc-at-3_PlanespottersNet_1060165_11713c7ff4_o.jpg


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> well , it is not wast of time and effort , Kowsar was an upgrade for F5 , Yassin was a real act to try and design and build an aircraft from zero ...
> 
> Maybe Yassin has some unique value for training ... maybe cost , maybe configuration ... or maybe they just wanted low cost sub-sonic reliable aircraft for first phase of training new pilot ...
> 
> For sure Yassin has zero combat capability compare to Kowsar ( which is almost useless as well )
> 
> Yassin design is like this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIDC AT-3 - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> although if you compare these 2 pics , you can see so many diffrence in details which mean Yassin is completely Iranian engineered product
> 
> 
> 
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/HESA_Yasin_Jet_Trainer.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIDC_AT_3
> 
> 
> https://cdn.planespotters.net/16993/0806-taiwan-air-force-aidc-at-3_PlanespottersNet_1060165_11713c7ff4_o.jpg


Yasin only made one sense ,to be enlarged and redesigned into something like Su-25 and for that they need to add a lot of armor to it and here we come back to our chronic engine problem


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> Yasin only made one sense ,to be enlarged and redesigned into something like Su-25 and for that they need to add a lot of armor to it and here we come back to our chronic engine problem


see it as low cost stable training aircraft .... it design is stable in core and from the look it doesn't need flight correction by computer ... and if it is low cost , then we can increase our pilot training duration ... 

one of our biggest problem is the lack of flight duration by our pilots ... that mean our pilot are becoming bunch of amateur compare to our neighbors ... 

The truth is that due the lack of equipment and money , we didn't train any pilot in past 20 years and they are not reliable in high intensity , high stressful combat situation and they can't perform some operation like *Kaman 99* or Attack to *H3* base anymore ... 

you only look at equipment and you simply ignore the people who should operate the equipment ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> see it as low cost stable training aircraft .... it design is stable in core and from the look it doesn't need flight correction by computer ... and if it is low cost , then we can increase our pilot training duration ...


we have f5 and an army of its derivatives for that role what need we have for yasin ?


OldTwilight said:


> one of our biggest problem is the lack of flight duration by our pilots ... that mean our pilot are becoming bunch of amateur compare to our neighbors ...


if they are going to fly kowsar in future then better train them with two sit version of that aircraft 


OldTwilight said:


> The truth is that due the lack of equipment and money , we didn't train any pilot in past 20 years and they are not reliable in high intensity , high stressful combat situation and they can't perform some operation like *Kaman 99* or Attack to *H3* base anymore ...


don't answer whats the need for another trainer , we can use Kowsar and F-5 for training instead of building a production line and 20 yasin we can spend that money to produce 30 more kowsar.


OldTwilight said:


> you only look at equipment and you simply ignore the people who should operate the equipment ...


as I said the people can train in two sit version of kowsar and by doing that they become a lot more familiar with the airplan that they will fly in future than when they train with Yasin . its waste of resource .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> we have f5 and an army of its derivatives for that role what need we have for yasin ?
> 
> if they are going to fly kowsar in future then better train them with two sit version of that aircraft
> 
> don't answer whats the need for another trainer , we can use Kowsar and F-5 for training instead of building a production line and 20 yasin we can spend that money to produce 30 more kowsar.
> 
> as I said the people can train in two sit version of kowsar and by doing that they become a lot more familiar with the airplan that they will fly in future than when they train with Yasin . its waste of resource .



This is my experience from following Iran military news in daily manner and in past 15 years :

We simply can't make F5 or improve it design in 1400s ( maybe we could do this in 1370s but not now ) .... when you have corrupted political system with super corrupted management , your ability to produce anything meaningful is reduced ...

*if we could improve and produce F5 in past 20 years , we simply would do it and use them in past 20 years , retire old F5s , Mig 21 ( F7 ) , Mirage F1 , Mig 23/27 , Su-20 and reduce our cost ... 
Also Other sellers like China and Russia would agree to sell us fighter jets like J-10 or Su-30 in fear we build fighter jet in this class by ourselves ... *

I don't want to humiliate ourselves in this forum but our Kowsar fighters are nothing but repaired and repainted old F5 with some electronic spare parts from china ... for me , Kowsar program is not even qualified to be called an minor upgrade for our old F5s ...

if we could produce anything meaningful , we simply would do and operate them , like what we are doing in ADS systems ...

The lake of progress in this field can have multiple reasons :

maybe we don't have enough budget for it .
maybe we couldn't build suitable engine ( although I'm sure we could purchase RD93 from Russia if we really wanted )
We don't have any functioning Electronic Industry and we can't even produce any minor electronic spare parts like solid capacity old 30 years old IC ( so we can't build CPU or any specialized chips )
Our Industry is draining thanks to high rate of immigration from Iran ...
maybe IRGC Generals who are controlling every aspect of our military Industry and Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Industry , don't want to allow Artesh have good air force ( if you know the factionalism in Iran , then you wouldn't surprise )

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

15 year of troll.

Ridiculous commentary on the kowsar and full of demagoguery. After 15 years, it's time to retire and quickly .. what delirium here !!


----------



## OldTwilight

Mr Iran Eye said:


> 15 year of troll.
> 
> Ridiculous commentary on the kowsar and full of demagoguery. After 15 years, it's time to retire and quickly .. what delirium here !!


Saegheh was introduced in 1380 .... 21 years ago ....


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> Saegheh was introduced in 1380 .... 21 years ago ....


Saeqeh , increased the drag but didn't increase the power to compensate that, that's why it failed


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> Saeqeh , increased the drag but didn't increase the power to compensate that, that's why it failed


That doesn't change the fact that it "FAILED"








HESA Saeqeh - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Azeraksh was introduced in 1999 ...








HESA Azarakhsh - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





The problem is the outcome of all our projects from Azeraksh to Saegheh to Kowsar weren't even a standardized upgrade package for our F5s ... 

I smell serious corruption in all of these fruitless projects ... 

I'm sure the useless management even didn't bother to documented all few knowledge we gain in all these money wasting projects ...

Pakistan start JF-17 project after us and now they are testing prototype of block-3 with AESA radar ...


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> Pakistan start JF-17 project after us and now they are testing prototype of block-3 with AESA radar ...



I agree with most of your claims about F-5 test bed projects. But the Pakistan comparison is a poor one.

Pakistan was gifted the JF-17 with China supplying most (if not all) of the tech. Pakistan is basically bankrupt, you think they have the funds for a fighter jet r&d program? “Joint” project might as well be propaganda. It’s a license build basically.

No one will give Iran such tech or assistance. That’s why they are tinkering with the relatively easy F-5.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> I agree with most of your claims about F-5 test bed projects. But the Pakistan comparison is a poor one.
> 
> Pakistan was gifted the JF-17 with China supplying most (if not all) of the tech. Pakistan is basically bankrupt, you think they have the funds for a fighter jet r&d program? “Joint” project might as well be propaganda. It’s a license build basically.
> 
> No one will give Iran such tech or assistance. That’s why they are tinkering with the relatively easy F-5.


They simply really didn't want to have joint fighter jet ...

they bought various tech like radars , anti ship missiles and eyc from both China and Russia ...
they could do same for air craft ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> They simply really didn't want to have joint fighter jet ...
> 
> they bought various tech like radars , anti ship missiles and eyc from both China and Russia ...
> they could do same for air craft ...



This may be true. IRGC may be blocking a rejuvenation of the Air Force. Old stigma’s of Air Force being Shah Loyalist may remain. Or it could be the harsh sanctions draining the Republic’s coffers.

But Bagheri’s trip a few years ago made it clear Iran was interested in fighter jets. But the ones they get offered are purposely ment not to ruffle the feathers of Arabs and Israelis.


Also in case of China, it uses building up Pakistan as “mini Hezbollah” against India. So Pakistan is a much more strategic ally for China than Iran currently could ever hope for. When you are a strategic ally you get showered in weapons and tech. Also USA, Arabs, and Israeli’s don’t care if Pakistan gets shiny new weapons. Same can’t be said for Iran.

A pencil sent to Iran will be claimed to be a magical sword capable of immense damage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> This may be true. IRGC may be blocking a rejuvenation of the Air Force. Old stigma’s of Air Force being Shah Loyalist may remain. Or it could be the harsh sanctions draining the Republic’s coffers.
> 
> But Bagheri’s trip a few years ago made it clear Iran was interested in fighter jets. But the ones they get offered are purposely ment not to ruffle the feathers of Arabs and Israelis.
> 
> 
> Also in case of China, it uses building up Pakistan as “mini Hezbollah” against India. So Pakistan is a much more strategic ally for China than Iran currently could ever hope for. When you are a strategic ally you get showered in weapons and tech. Also USA, Arabs, and Israeli’s don’t care if Pakistan gets shiny new weapons. Same can’t be said for Iran.
> 
> A pencil sent to Iran will be claimed to be a magical sword capable of immense damage.


I wonder, if Bagheri would procure aircraft/helicopters for the IRGC or for the IRAIF. That's the question that makes me wonder, who will be operating any future platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> It’s a license build basically.


There was a time when we were not able to even incorporate some radio antennas in our Mirages on our own.

But with experience in JF 17 project,we are aiming for AESA radars.Not only integration but development of AESA radars in house for UAVs, JF 17 and AirBorne early warning and control aircrafts.

This project increased our structural engineering capabilities by many folds.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> There was a time when we were not able to even incorporate some radio antennas in our Mirages on our own.
> 
> But with experience in JF 17 project,we are aiming for AESA radars.Not only integration but development of AESA radars in house for UAVs, JF 17 and AirBorne early warning and control aircrafts.
> 
> This project increased our structural engineering capabilities by many folds.
> 
> View attachment 841630
> 
> 
> View attachment 841631
> View attachment 841631



You should aim to get yourself out of bankruptcy. A war machine is only as strong as its war chest, not the toys it employs.

*Pakistan has a war chest less than $15B*! Compare that Russia’s 650B in preparation for Ukraine war.

War is expensive and unless the Saudi‘s will bankroll a conventional skirmish with India, then Pakistan cannot sustain any major skirmish with 15B, it wouldn’t even last a month!

Cannot expect every war will be nuclear. Look at Russia right now, all the nukes in the world and it doesn’t mean anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

TheImmortal said:


> You should aim to get yourself out of bankruptcy. A war machine is only as strong as its war chest, not the toys it employs.
> 
> *Pakistan has a war chest less than $15B*! Compare that Russia’s 650B in preparation for Ukraine war.
> 
> War is expensive and unless the Saudi‘s will bankroll a conventional skirmish with India, then Pakistan cannot sustain any major skirmish with 15B, it wouldn’t even last a month!
> 
> Cannot expect every war will be nuclear. Look at Russia right now, all the nukes in the world and it doesn’t mean anything.


Unfortunately we suck at economy.

Actually corporate and enterpreneurship culture can give a boost to our Military industry but again military controls all major defence organizations.

Military will want to do things in shortest way (obviously due to economic constraints and inherent mindset of getting the things done quickly) but this is not always good from R&D perspective.

Again due to our ties with Turkey,we hope for some change in mindset of military leadership (that they will separate military and military industry from each other to some extent so that private and civilian owned weapons Industry can flourish.


Kamra Aviation City is the project to separate military from weapons R&D.if it succeeded,we will become another Turkey for defence production,if it failed then military will become burden on economy and hence it will directly affect our war fighting capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

A great pic of yasin glide bombs in flight




Multiple yasin launch

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2


----------



## PDF

TheImmortal said:


> You should aim to get yourself out of bankruptcy. A war machine is only as strong as its war chest, not the toys it employs.
> 
> *Pakistan has a war chest less than $15B*! Compare that Russia’s 650B in preparation for Ukraine war.
> 
> War is expensive and unless the Saudi‘s will bankroll a conventional skirmish with India, then Pakistan cannot sustain any major skirmish with 15B, it wouldn’t even last a month!
> 
> Cannot expect every war will be nuclear. Look at Russia right now, all the nukes in the world and it doesn’t mean anything.


We had just around 1 billion dollars when we tested our nuclear capability. With sanctions placed before and after it, we already had turbulent times both politically and economically. We survived before, and we shall survive In Sha Allah!

The less we have, the less we have to lose when fighting!


----------



## sha ah

That's not the way war works. Soldiers need ammunition, food, supplies. Military equipment require spare parts, fuel, etc.

Napoleon once said "The amateurs discuss tactics, the professionals discuss logistics"
He also said "An army marches on its stomach"

A demoralized, hungry soldiers, out of ammunition is very likely to surrender if he believes that the enemy will feed him, treat his wounds and if he believes that the war is lost anyways.

Without the funding to sustain a war, it's simply impossible. Luckily for Pakistan, you have China as an ally. If the Chinese can break the Indian chickens neck (Siliguri corridor), which is right by the Chinese border and no more than a dozen km wide, then the Indians are finished, the war is over.



PDF said:


> We had just around 1 billion dollars when we tested our nuclear capability. With sanctions placed before and after it, we already had turbulent times both politically and economically. We survived before, and we shall survive In Sha Allah!
> 
> The less we have, the less we have to lose when fighting!


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1525131193183784960

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Made in the USA: Iran Still Loves the F-4 Phantom Fighter Jet


Although the F-4 platform is aging, the fighter jets can successfully outperform counterparts across the Middle East.




www.19fortyfive.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1526501559332241408

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Well well well...look who's made a reappearance after a long long absence 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524834294174187521
Seen at the Iraqi defence exhibition

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

N_Al40 said:


> Well well well...look who's made a reappearance after a long long absence
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524834294174187521
> Seen at the Iraqi defence exhibition


they wanted to fill the exhibition and they found that old paper weight and said why not

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1526527215181123587

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

N_Al40 said:


> Well well well...look who's made a reappearance after a long long absence
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524834294174187521
> Seen at the Iraqi defence exhibition


The Shafaq project has never been stopped back scene and this exhibition does not surprise me. Iran reserves you surprises and you will understand why they have been talking for years of war secrets ever to show the public 

I said it a few times that this project was always walking back scene

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

N_Al40 said:


> Well well well...look who's made a reappearance after a long long absence
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524834294174187521
> Seen at the Iraqi defence exhibition



I am seeing a clear pattern in Iranian defense projects and production from the 90s. Just like in *missiles* look where we started and where it has gone. 

1) Hwasong-7 Imported in 1990s ... Shahab 1/2 => Shahab 3 developed domestically => Safir SLV/Simorgh SLV and Ghadr-H/Emad-MaRVs => 3 stages TVC SLVs/IRBMs 

2) Started with Fateh-110 and Shahroud tested solid stages during the life of Tehrani Moghaddam... Today we have Kheibar Shikan skip glide vehicles and 3 solid staged Sejjil-Salman TVC IRBM

3) Kh-55 Kent reverse engineering => Meshkat developed => Soumar tested => Hoveyzah Long range CM and Abu Mehdi long range AShCM operationalized 

*Airforce *

Project Down/Silk Route 2 upgradation of F-5E/F => Azarakhsh => Saeghe modifications (40-50% local development) => Kowsar with 4th Gen Combat suit (95% local development) => Kowsar-II with probably reduced RSC and 4+ gen combat suite (100 % local development)?

Shafagh => designed by Soviet engineer Fatidin Mukhamedov and Iranian engineers from KN Toosi University, Tehran => Kowsar-88 /Yasin trainer proptoypes = > low RCS advanced trainer with 4+ Generation avionics (probably same as fitted in Kowsar-II).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Memories of Iran-Iraq war veteran pilot: training in Pakistan was better than US

مرورخاطرات امیر محمد عتیقه‌چی، از عقابان آسمان ایران؛​آموزش در پاکستان بهتر از آمریکا بود!​

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

N_Al40 said:


> Well well well...look who's made a reappearance after a long long absence
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524834294174187521
> Seen at the Iraqi defence exhibition

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Cancerous Tumor said:


>



That design is dated. You want to fly a 2000 design in 2030’s?


----------



## PDF

TheImmortal said:


> That design is dated. You want to fly a 2000 design in 2030’s?


F-22 Raptor design started in late 1980s. It is meant to fly till 2050-60s. And we know U.S retires it's inventory earlier than other air forces.

From Mig-21 to Mirages to F-4, a lot of dated designs are still flying.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

PDF said:


> F-22 Raptor design started in late 1980s. It is meant to fly till 2050-60s. And we know U.S retires it's inventory earlier than other air forces.
> 
> From Mig-21 to Mirages to F-4, a lot of dated designs are still flying.



Completely irrelevant. F-22 was designed in 1990’s and flew by 2000’s.

Shafaq never got past a wood mock up in 2000’s. And you want to restart the whole development cycle and deploy it 20 years after it’s scheduled first flight?

F-4, Mig-21 are flying out of necessity not because any Air Force still thinks “hey we really need F-4’s as a part of our fleet”.

Iran’s need is interceptor. Not sure why people keep wanting light class fighters that can at best only be an advance trainer/light CAS role.

Shafaq is dead, move on people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PDF

TheImmortal said:


> Completely irrelevant. F-22 was designed in 1990’s and flew by 2000’s.
> 
> Shafaq never got past a wood mock up in 2000’s. And you want to restart the whole development cycle and deploy it 20 years after it’s scheduled first flight?
> 
> F-4, Mig-21 are flying out of necessity not because any Air Force still thinks “hey we really need F-4’s as a part of our fleet”.
> 
> Iran’s need is interceptor. Not sure why people keep wanting light class fighters that can at best only be an advance trainer/light CAS role.
> 
> Shafaq is dead, move on people.


Shafaq or not, I think Iran will find it useful to induct single-engine light-weight fighter aircraft in good numbers. It can be used to cover more area for CAPs etc and also less maintenance extensive.

I don't know but developing fighter jets is an expensive journey. Look at Indian Tejas.








HAL Tejas - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Iran would benefit if jointly produces aircraft. Negotiating good ToT terms is vital. Only go for Su-30/35 if you get good ToT else it will become a burden for IRIAF to have a maintenance-heavy large RCS aircraft. And don't go for two platforms, pick one.

For now, in my opinion, J10-C medium-weight aircraft is the best bet for the short to medium term while Iran works in parallel to develop indigenous technologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PDF said:


> Shafaq or not, I think Iran will find it useful to induct single-engine light-weight fighter aircraft in good numbers. It can be used to cover more area for CAPs etc and also less maintenance extensive.
> 
> I don't know but developing fighter jets is an expensive journey. Look at Indian Tejas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAL Tejas - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran would benefit if jointly produces aircraft. Negotiating good ToT terms is vital. Only go for Su-30/35 if you get good ToT else it will become a burden for IRIAF to have a maintenance-heavy large RCS aircraft. And don't go for two platforms, pick one.
> 
> For now, in my opinion, J10-C medium-weight aircraft is the best bet for the short to medium term while Iran works in parallel to develop indigenous technologies.



First of all SU-35 is not “maintenance heavy” if that is what you are implying especially in comparison to Chinese engine in the J-10.

Second Iran can already build or rehaul the F-5 via the Kowsar variant so no need to reinvent the entire wheel for an advanced trainer or light fighter when it already has a production variant ready. Even 24 Yak-130s would be better than another fruitless effort to build ANOTHER light weight fighter.

The main issue for Iran (besides AESA airborne radar and a ultra modern EW/ECW/sensor package) is the engine. Until you have a heavy engine....you are stuck. And no country in the world is turning over heavy engine tech. China had to spend decades mastering their heavy engine and they had the most access as any country in the world to the latest Russian engines and technology via espionage and other means.

So I’m tired of having this same argument every other week.

Until the engine tech is solved there is no future Iranian fighter. And no country semi friendly to Iran is turning over heavy engine tech. Look what India got in SU-30MKI and SU-75 ToT joint production deal....next to nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> First of all SU-35 is not “maintenance heavy” if that is what you are implying especially in comparison to Chinese engine in the J-10.
> 
> Second Iran can already build or rehaul the F-5 via the Kowsar variant so no need to reinvent the entire wheel for an advanced trainer or light fighter when it already has a production variant ready. Even 24 Yak-130s would be better than another fruitless effort to build ANOTHER light weight fighter.
> 
> The main issue for Iran (besides AESA airborne radar and a ultra modern EW/ECW/sensor package) is the engine. Until you have a heavy engine....you are stuck. And no country in the world is turning over heavy engine tech. China had to spend decades mastering their heavy engine and they had the most access as any country in the world to the latest Russian engines and technology via espionage and other means.
> 
> So I’m tired of having this same argument every other week.
> 
> Until the engine tech is solved there is no future Iranian fighter. And no country semi friendly to Iran is turning over heavy engine tech. Look what India got in SU-30MKI and SU-75 ToT joint production deal....next to nothing.


That's what I scream here for years.


----------



## sha ah

Light fighters / trainer aircraft Iran can do, however for a modern fighter jet to replace much of the inventory Iran's only viable options seem to be SU-27 flanker variants (SU-30/SU-35) from Russia or J-10 from China. Iran could have purchased JF-17, but the higher ups in the airforce are not interested. The Ukraine conflict has probably made it more likely than ever that Iran will get something sooner or later but we have to wait and see.

Anyways looking at the wars in Ukraine and Nagorno/Karabakh recently and seeing how important UAVs and air defenses are to modern warfare, I'm glad Iran has invested heavily in UAVs and its air defense network. UAvs can always saturate an airspace and make a huge difference but as we've seen with the limited success of the Bayraktar in Ukraine compared to Nagorno/Karabakh, against an adversary with a multi layered and dynamic air defense network, UAVs will only have limited success unless you hundreds or thousands of them.

Ukraine bought approx 4 dozen Bayraktars from Turkey. At $5 each did they get their moneys worth ? I mean yes they did do some damage to Russian troops, especially at the start, but lately we haven't seen much at all from them. It's very likely, based on Russian claims, that most of them have simply been shot down. Oh well that's $250 million down the to1let for Ukraine.

Especially if Ukraine losses access to the ocean after this war, which I believe will last another 3 months approximately, then the country will be bankrupt and basically enslaved to western institutions like the IMF and World Bank. GDP before the war was $150 billion, now it's expected to drop 50% and they have to pay $600 billion to $1 trillion just for rebuilding infrastructure. Add to that the price of weapons and interest and they're basically enslaved for 50+ years.



TheImmortal said:


> First of all SU-35 is not “maintenance heavy” if that is what you are implying especially in comparison to Chinese engine in the J-10.
> 
> Second Iran can already build or rehaul the F-5 via the Kowsar variant so no need to reinvent the entire wheel for an advanced trainer or light fighter when it already has a production variant ready. Even 24 Yak-130s would be better than another fruitless effort to build ANOTHER light weight fighter.
> 
> The main issue for Iran (besides AESA airborne radar and a ultra modern EW/ECW/sensor package) is the engine. Until you have a heavy engine....you are stuck. And no country in the world is turning over heavy engine tech. China had to spend decades mastering their heavy engine and they had the most access as any country in the world to the latest Russian engines and technology via espionage and other means.
> 
> So I’m tired of having this same argument every other week.
> 
> Until the engine tech is solved there is no future Iranian fighter. And no country semi friendly to Iran is turning over heavy engine tech. Look what India got in SU-30MKI and SU-75 ToT joint production deal....next to nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

PDF said:


> Shafaq or not, I think Iran will find it useful to induct single-engine light-weight fighter aircraft in good numbers. It can be used to cover more area for CAPs etc and also less maintenance extensive.
> 
> I don't know but developing fighter jets is an expensive journey. Look at Indian Tejas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAL Tejas - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran would benefit if jointly produces aircraft. Negotiating good ToT terms is vital. Only go for Su-30/35 if you get good ToT else it will become a burden for IRIAF to have a maintenance-heavy large RCS aircraft. And don't go for two platforms, pick one.
> 
> For now, in my opinion, J10-C medium-weight aircraft is the best bet for the short to medium term while Iran works in parallel to develop indigenous technologies.



It is always nice to research before posting. Iran already produces (from scratch) its own HESA Kowsar-I fighter which is probably the most advanced F-5E/F derivative in the world with a 4.0 Generation combat suit. It is equipped with a local newly built turbojet called OWJ and has a BVR engagement capability up to 93-94 KM (8 x target detection; 2 x simultaneous engagement). If equipped with PL-12 for WVR + R-73E/M (45-60 deg off bore) for WVR combination with HMD, this jet can take on any 4.0 generation fighter jet in the region. The problem of IRIAF is the requirement for a long-range air superiority aerial fighter. Had we acquired some 150+ F-14A instead of 79 we would not have this shortage. So unless we start domestically producing some futuristic version of F-14A or we get Mig-31BM/Su-35S this problem will sustain. We do not need strike aircraft as our missile power (BM and CM) both and UCAV fleet is enormous and combat-proven.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## OldTwilight

Look like Iran-140 project isrevived once again with name of Simorgh...









خبرگزاری فارس - هواپیمای ایرانی سیمرغ چه قابلیت‌هایی دارد؟ + فیلم


مدیر عامل صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، هواپیمای سیمرغ را پرنده‌ای با قابلیت‌های چندگانه عنوان کرد و گفت: حمل خودرو‌های سبک، امداد رسانی، حمل انواع موتور هواپیما چابکی با سرعت و شعاع پروازی مناسب از دیگر ویژگی‌های این پرنده است.



www.farsnews.ir






I'm curious if they could solve the engine and fuel injection problem or not ... i
f yes , then we can hope for vast variety of support aircraft from UAV control flying station , Small AWACS , maritime surveillance aircraft ....




https://media.farsnews.ir/Uploaded/Files/Images/1401/02/29/14010229000356_Test_PhotoN.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Completely irrelevant. F-22 was designed in 1990’s and flew by 2000’s.
> 
> Shafaq never got past a wood mock up in 2000’s. And you want to restart the whole development cycle and deploy it 20 years after it’s scheduled first flight?
> 
> F-4, Mig-21 are flying out of necessity not because any Air Force still thinks “hey we really need F-4’s as a part of our fleet”.
> 
> Iran’s need is interceptor. Not sure why people keep wanting light class fighters that can at best only be an advance trainer/light CAS role.
> 
> Shafaq is dead, move on people.



You can not put a tiny soviet midget like Mig-21 and a heavy mass murderer like F-4E in the same basket. Some versions of F-4E are deadly even today. Israeli Super Phantom project was politically killed to create an export market for F-18. 

I am not saying that if you can have the option to purchase Su-35S then abandon it in favor of up-gradation of F-4E/D. My point is, with proper up-gradation of Radar+BVR+Turbofans, long-range AShCM/Land attack CM package, an F-4E is still a massive threat.



OldTwilight said:


> Look like Iran-140 project isrevived once again with name of Simorgh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> خبرگزاری فارس - هواپیمای ایرانی سیمرغ چه قابلیت‌هایی دارد؟ + فیلم
> 
> 
> مدیر عامل صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، هواپیمای سیمرغ را پرنده‌ای با قابلیت‌های چندگانه عنوان کرد و گفت: حمل خودرو‌های سبک، امداد رسانی، حمل انواع موتور هواپیما چابکی با سرعت و شعاع پروازی مناسب از دیگر ویژگی‌های این پرنده است.
> 
> 
> 
> www.farsnews.ir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious if they could solve the engine and fuel injection problem or not ... i
> f yes , then we can hope for vast variety of support aircraft from UAV control flying station , Small AWACS , maritime surveillance aircraft ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://media.farsnews.ir/Uploaded/Files/Images/1401/02/29/14010229000356_Test_PhotoN.jpg



old news, IRan-140 Simorgh AWACS (on lines of EITAM) and OGHAAB maritime petrol have been talked of before multiple times.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

drmeson said:


> You can not put a tiny soviet midget like Mig-21 and a heavy mass murderer like F-4E in the same basket. Some versions of F-4E are deadly even today. Israeli Super Phantom project was politically killed to create an export market for F-18.
> 
> I am not saying that if you can have the option to purchase Su-35S then abandon it in favor of up-gradation of F-4E/D. My point is, with proper up-gradation of Radar+BVR+Turbofans, long-range AShCM/Land attack CM package, an F-4E is still a massive threat.
> 
> 
> 
> old news, IRan-140 Simorgh AWACS (on lines of EITAM) and OGHAAB maritime petrol have been talked of before multiple times.



The news for 1 hour earlier .... This is prbably new build one ... that why I was courius about engine ... probably they will give more info at official midday NEWS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

I always wonder why UK didn't enter regional jet market I mean didn't they share engine blue prints with both USSR and US ?

Iran needs 100s of jets for both civilian and military usage.For military airplanes it would be very hard to work with UK but for civilians co-operation is beneficial for both parties.

China went for American and French engines.
Russia still remains a mystery.
US,France,Canada and Brazil they failed.

It seems valid options are Russia and UK.


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Ukraine bought approx 4 dozen Bayraktars from Turkey. At $5 each did they get their moneys worth ? I mean yes they did do some damage to Russian troops, especially at the start, but lately we haven't seen much at all from them. It's very likely based on Russian claims that most of them have simply been shot down. Oh well that's $250 million down the to1let for Ukraine.


TB-2 does not cost $5M a drone. It cost around 1M to 2M. It’s a cheap drone, basically ababil class.






__





Cheap, lethal Turkish drones surprisingly effective at bolstering Ukraine's defenses | The Times of Israel







www.timesofisrael.com









__





The cheap TB2 drone gives Ukraine an edge against Russia


Meet the Bayraktar TB2.




qz.com

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

TheImmortal said:


> TB-2 does not cost $5M a drone. It cost around 1M to 2M. It’s a cheap drone, basically ababil class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheap, lethal Turkish drones surprisingly effective at bolstering Ukraine's defenses | The Times of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cheap TB2 drone gives Ukraine an edge against Russia
> 
> 
> Meet the Bayraktar TB2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> qz.com


It's class of Mohajer-6 or Kaman-12, not Ababil

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

The new simorgh military air transport looks to be completed and ready to begin its initial flight testing,truly great to see.
Interestingly its been exactly 7 years since iran halted construction of the original IRan-140.




https://en.mehrnews.com/news/186973/Iran-s-domestically-manufactured-Simorgh-aircraft-unveiled












It looks like its not just the tail section,but the wing as well thats been redesigned.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sahureka2

*Iranian Simorgh light transport aircraft*​*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sha ah

military today and financial times says it's $5 a piece but some sources say $1 million or under $2 million.



TheImmortal said:


> TB-2 does not cost $5M a drone. It cost around 1M to 2M. It’s a cheap drone, basically ababil class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheap, lethal Turkish drones surprisingly effective at bolstering Ukraine's defenses | The Times of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cheap TB2 drone gives Ukraine an edge against Russia
> 
> 
> Meet the Bayraktar TB2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> qz.com



Looks good but once it flies, then I'll be impressed.



Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 845384
> View attachment 845385
> View attachment 845386
> View attachment 845387
> View attachment 845388
> View attachment 845389

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> military today and financial times says it's $5 a piece but some sources say $1 million or under $2 million.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks good but once it flies, then I'll be impressed.



I believe the $1-2M tag. Looking at the drone it’s not very advanced. A propeller engine + a FLIR

def doesn’t cost Turkey $2M to produce that probably 500K-750K depending on which parts are foreign and have to be imported.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Ababil comes in a few different variants but most commonly now used as a loitering munition or for surveillance. The variant Houthis use is a kamikaze drone. The Ababil-3 is only used for surveillance and it can only cover 100km round trip and spend a few hours in the air. I believe Iran has a few of them left over and only uses them for low priority surveillance, like on the border with Afghanistan.

I think the TB2 is more comparable to the Mohajer-6 as a medium sized UAV.



TheImmortal said:


> TB-2 does not cost $5M a drone. It cost around 1M to 2M. It’s a cheap drone, basically ababil class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheap, lethal Turkish drones surprisingly effective at bolstering Ukraine's defenses | The Times of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cheap TB2 drone gives Ukraine an edge against Russia
> 
> 
> Meet the Bayraktar TB2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> qz.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Ababil comes in a few different variants but most commonly now used as a loitering munition or for surveillance. The variant Houthis use is a kamikaze drone. The Ababil-3 is only used for surveillance and it can only cover 100km round trip and spend a few hours in the air. I believe Iran has a few of them left over and only uses them for low priority surveillance, like on the border with Afghanistan.
> 
> I think the TB2 is more comparable to the Mohajer-6 as a medium sized UAV.



Ababil-5 can carry just as much armaments as TB2 maybe more

6 figure PGM layout

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

I didn't really know about the 5 variant. I wonder if it has improved range since the Ababil 3 only has 100 km total range and 4 hours flight time, which is not that great. That would mean it's limited to short range targets.

Tajikistan didn't get the 3 or the 5 variants. They seemed to have received the kamikaze / surveillance variants. I wonder how much each version costs. On the other hand, for a tiny country like Tajikistan, the short range and cheap price of the Ababil might be appealing since they only face immediate threats.



TheImmortal said:


> Ababil-5 can carry just as much armaments as TB2 maybe more
> 
> 6 figure PGM layout
> 
> View attachment 845448

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

Seems I was beaten to it but damn I am *beyond* excited to see Simorgh taking to the skies!! I wonder if the engine is now 100% domestically made


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1527253651751948289

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Light fighters / trainer aircraft Iran can do, however for a modern fighter jet to replace much of the inventory Iran's only viable options seem to be SU-27 flanker variants (SU-30/SU-35) from Russia or J-10 from China. Iran could have purchased JF-17, but the higher ups in the airforce are not interested. The Ukraine conflict has probably made it more likely than ever that Iran will get something sooner or later but we have to wait and see.


Iran could buy J-10 but army didn't want it . maybe if china at the time would have offered J-10c they would agree on buying it.

and no we don't need flanker . what we need is fighters like J-10c or Mig-35 but with more emphasis on Datalink between the planes. and with the same amount of money you want to spend in flankers you can get twice of those medium fighters.


drmeson said:


> which is probably the most advanced F-5E/F derivative in the world with a 4.0 Generation combat suit


the most advanced are considered to be the Brazilian ones


TheImmortal said:


> TB-2 does not cost $5M a drone. It cost around 1M to 2M. It’s a cheap drone, basically ababil class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheap, lethal Turkish drones surprisingly effective at bolstering Ukraine's defenses | The Times of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cheap TB2 drone gives Ukraine an edge against Russia
> 
> 
> Meet the Bayraktar TB2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> qz.com


more like in class of Mohajer-6


Sineva said:


> It looks like its not just the tail section,but the wing as well thats been redesigned.


people can decide for themselves if its a new engine or the old one 





they claim they elongated it by 1.6m and can carry up to 4-6 ton of cargo something like illushin-112, Casa CN-235 and Boeing V-22 Osprey
Wonder if its possible to add an airborne radar to it ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

N_Al40 said:


> Seems I was beaten to it but damn I am *beyond* excited to see Simorgh taking to the skies!! I wonder if the engine is now 100% domestically made
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1527253651751948289


No, it's the same engine. maybe some tweaks, nothing more.


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder if its possible to add an airborne radar to it ?


I see absolutely no reason why not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Again, you should not trust General TheImmortal comments especially on the subject of Iranian combat aircraft.

The Shafaq project has always been active in the background and this project is far from dead. Iran has weapons and secret project not revealed but people here we have a lot of difficulty understanding this.

You will see in the future that was right here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> I didn't really know about the 5 variant. I wonder if it has improved range since the Ababil 3 only has 100 km total range and 4 hours flight time, which is not that great. That would mean it's limited to short range targets.
> 
> Tajikistan didn't get the 3 or the 5 variants. They seemed to have received the kamikaze / surveillance variants. I wonder how much each version costs. On the other hand, for a tiny country like Tajikistan, the short range and cheap price of the Ababil might be appealing since they only face immediate threats.



Range is mostly due to LoS limitations since Iran lacks geo-sats. Even T-B2 has a limited range without geo stat link up.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Shafaq project has always been active in the background and this project is far from dead. Iran has weapons and secret project not revealed but people here we have a lot of difficulty understanding this.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 845384
> View attachment 845385
> View attachment 845386
> View attachment 845387
> View attachment 845388
> View attachment 845389
> View attachment 845390
> View attachment 845391
> View attachment 845392
> View attachment 845393



We make production line for this ... we redesign the structure and technically this is not AN-140 anymore ... The only question is engine and avionics which they said its better than IrAn-140 ... if true and we are able to produce it in number , then generally it would solve some of our big problems ... 

If it prove be reliable aircraft , then we can use it for our regional flight route , for example between Ahvaz and Shiraz , Shiraz And Isfahan and it will immidietly will break back bone of sanction of ban of selling airctraft to our airliners ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

mohsen said:


> No, it's the same engine. maybe some tweaks, nothing more.


sometimes , some tweak is enough to solve the problem of an engine ...

compare the An-140


https://antonov.com/media/airplanes/airplane-gallery-1100-1559655393768.jpg




with this : 


http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10284/1692158_277.jpg




I'm sure most flight characteristic of Simorgh is different from An-140 ...

Well , Simorgh is completely new aircraft , so don't compare it with An-140

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

mohsen said:


> No, it's the same engine. maybe some tweaks, nothing more.


See, this annoys me. As great as this achievement is until we get an 100% indigenous engine then there is always the chance we could be exploited. Nonetheless, Simorgh is a great leap forward for our aviation industry. 

Agha Sattari is a great manager (VP for Science & Technology since Rouhani era - Raisi kept him in his position)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

N_Al40 said:


> See, this annoys me. As great as this achievement is until we get an 100% indigenous engine then there is always the chance we could be exploited. Nonetheless, Simorgh is a great leap forward for our aviation industry.
> 
> Agha Sattari is a great manager (VP for Science & Technology since Rouhani era - Raisi kept him in his position)



Well , I doubt it would be hard to get production license of it from Russians ... although if we could create owj , then making engine for this one is not far from our reach ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

OldTwilight said:


> Well , I doubt it would be hard to get production license of it from Russians ... although if we could create owj , then making engine for this one is not far from our reach ...


Okay hold on so I'm now 50% less annoyed. Check this out 






So the engine itself is not an Iranian design BUT according to this MODAFL catalogue Iran produces the engine under license. I guess this is good, but this engine has been used on this type of bird since 2007. Let's hope our scientists and engineers find ways to improve the design and eventually evolve the engine into a more powerful design

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> I see absolutely no reason why not.


well thats a solution but don't forget it has 60 degree deadzone in front and back and only see 120 degree on each side



N_Al40 said:


> Okay hold on so I'm now 50% less annoyed. Check this out
> 
> View attachment 845508
> 
> 
> So the engine itself is not an Iranian design BUT according to this MODAFL catalogue Iran produces the engine under license. I guess this is good, but this engine has been used on this type of bird since 2007. Let's hope our scientists and engineers find ways to improve the design and eventually evolve the engine into a more powerful design


whats less annoying about it , Antonov licensed TV3-117VMA-SBM1from Klimov and rebranded it as motor-sich Al-30 series 1 and used it in An-140


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> well thats a solution but don't forget it has 60 degree deadzone in front and back and only see 120 degree on each side
> 
> 
> whats less annoying about it , Antonov licensed TV3-117VMA-SBM1from Klimov and rebranded it as motor-sich Al-30 series 1 and used it in An-140



we can ask Russians for help ...

or even Ask for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_TV7-117 which is used and going to use in









Ilyushin Il-112 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




and








Ilyushin Il-114 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





I doubt even Russia is foolish enough to make us disappointed by not helping us about this issue ...

At least they can help us to resolve TV3-117VMA-SBM1 problem in hot weather ...

Its matter of time and money and *management *for us to produce suitable engine ...


----------



## PDF

TheImmortal said:


> First of all SU-35 is not “maintenance heavy” if that is what you are implying especially in comparison to Chinese engine in the J-10.
> 
> Second Iran can already build or rehaul the F-5 via the Kowsar variant so no need to reinvent the entire wheel for an advanced trainer or light fighter when it already has a production variant ready. Even 24 Yak-130s would be better than another fruitless effort to build ANOTHER light weight fighter.
> 
> The main issue for Iran (besides AESA airborne radar and a ultra modern EW/ECW/sensor package) is the engine. Until you have a heavy engine....you are stuck. And no country in the world is turning over heavy engine tech. China had to spend decades mastering their heavy engine and they had the most access as any country in the world to the latest Russian engines and technology via espionage and other means.
> 
> So I’m tired of having this same argument every other week.
> 
> Until the engine tech is solved there is no future Iranian fighter. And no country semi friendly to Iran is turning over heavy engine tech. Look what India got in SU-30MKI and SU-75 ToT joint production deal....next to nothing.





drmeson said:


> It is always nice to research before posting. Iran already produces (from scratch) its own HESA Kowsar-I fighter which is probably the most advanced F-5E/F derivative in the world with a 4.0 Generation combat suit. It is equipped with a local newly built turbojet called OWJ and has a BVR engagement capability up to 93-94 KM (8 x target detection; 2 x simultaneous engagement). If equipped with PL-12 for WVR + R-73E/M (45-60 deg off bore) for WVR combination with HMD, this jet can take on any 4.0 generation fighter jet in the region. The problem of IRIAF is the requirement for a long-range air superiority aerial fighter. Had we acquired some 150+ F-14A instead of 79 we would not have this shortage. So unless we start domestically producing some futuristic version of F-14A or we get Mig-31BM/Su-35S this problem will sustain. We do not need strike aircraft as our missile power (BM and CM) both and UCAV fleet is enormous and combat-proven.


Su-35 heavy-weight with dual engine and PESA vs single-engine medium-weight AESA aircraft.
As for Kowsar, If you guys are happy with it, good for you, but when I talk of light-weight aircraft, I don't meant LIFT platform but rather a 4.5 Gen aircraft with composites, single-engine fully digital fly by wire, AESA radar along with good EW suite/net-centric capability. 

Of course, engine is an issue along with some other things, and that is why I suggested in my previous post to JOINTLY produce an aircraft, something like we have done with China with JF-17. You can secure those parts which can't be domestically produced yet and keep yourself equipped with latest/advanced technologies in the meantime. If you want to do it all alone, Good Luck!

What I opined is keeping in view the budget restraints too of IRIAF. Despite CM/BMs, Airpower is essential in any conflict since last century. There is no alternative to it and with Iran's enemies having/soon to induct latest variants of aircraft like Typhoons, Rafales, F-16s,F-15s, I don't think you people can ignore such threats.

Unfortunately, I observe too much arrogance from many of you guys which doesn't help you in anything at all. I will take my leave. Best of Luck to IRIAF!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> the most advanced are considered to be the Brazilian ones



Not exactly. 

*Brazilian F-5EM .... HESA Kowsar-I

Radar = *Selex Grifo-F (74 km in air-air mode).... IEI Bayyenat II/KLJ-6F (93.6 km in air-air mode)
*Airframe = *Old with new nosecone .... All modern built (with new weight distribution)
*Refueling = *IFR probe .... Not available (but was part of Silk Route-2 Project though)
*Engine =* 2 x J-85-GE-21A (10000-11000 lbf) .... 2 x Newly built OwJ (10000-11000 lbf)
*Ejection seats =* Martin Baker Mk.10LE .... new IAMI Sarir ejection seats (local K-36D)
*Cockpit =* Elbit HUD + 2 x LCD-MFD cockpit ... IEI FHUD-I-1 + 3 x LCD-MFD
*HOTAS* = Yes .... No 
*E-Warfare =* Elbit SPS-1000V-5 RWR with ventral chaff/flares .... IEI SAIRAN Modular suite (RWR/MAWS, Jammer, chaff/flare dispenser) 
*Navigation =* ELBIT INS/GPS + TACAN .... IEI FMMS-I-20 Mobile Mapper + INS/GPS + TACAN 
*Communications = *Elbit V/UHF Rohde & Schwartz M3AR .... IEI ARC-620 U/VHF system 
*IFF =* Elbit IFF ... IEI IFF 
*HMD = *Elbit binocular vision .... SAIRAN HMDS-I-3 displayed
*Encrypted Datalink =* Yes .... Yes 
*Targetting system =* Rafael Litening III .... IEI Ballistic Computer (similar to SVP-24 Targetting System ???)
*Weapons = *Python 3/4 or Piranha WVR + I-Derby BVR ... Fatter Aim-9P/J + R-73E WVR + PL-12 BVR (planned in 2015-16 to be procured for F-4E/D Dowran upgrade) 

........ They are an even match with Kowsar having better options for the very simple reason that it is still being developed while F-5EM is still an old airframe with MLU. The only current shortcoming is HOTAS which we might see in Kowsar-II (or whatever they will name it in the future).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

PDF said:


> Su-35 heavy-weight with dual engine and PESA vs single-engine medium-weight AESA aircraft.
> As for Kowsar, If you guys are happy with it, good for you, but when I talk of light-weight aircraft, I don't meant LIFT platform but rather a 4.5 Gen aircraft with composites, single-engine fully digital fly by wire, AESA radar along with good EW suite/net-centric capability.
> 
> Of course, engine is an issue along with some other things, and that is why I suggested in my previous post to JOINTLY produce an aircraft, something like we have done with China with JF-17. You can secure those parts which can't be domestically produced yet and keep yourself equipped with latest/advanced technologies in the meantime. If you want to do it all alone, Good Luck!
> 
> What I opined is keeping in view the budget restraints too of IRIAF. Despite CM/BMs, Airpower is essential in any conflict since last century. There is no alternative to it and with Iran's enemies having/soon to induct latest variants of aircraft like Typhoons, Rafales, F-16s,F-15s, I don't think you people can ignore such threats.
> 
> Unfortunately, I observe too much arrogance from many of you guys which doesn't help you in anything at all. I will take my leave. Best of Luck to IRIAF!



Your opinion is irrelevant because the entire basis of your argument is China will give you engine tech when I have just told you they have never offered us such things. They even screwed on us the C-802 deals in late 90’s.

The only one showing arrogance here is you. Coming in and telling native members what they should do, as if we are cavemen and have never thought of securing a joint project with China or Russia. Thank you for your brilliant insight.

Same argument with these PDF foreigners every month I swear. Guess Pakistan side of the forum is slow.



drmeson said:


> * .... HESA Kowsar-I
> 
> Radar = * IEI Bayyenat II/KLJ-6F (93.6 km in air-air mode)



Please post your source on this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

PDF said:


> Su-35 heavy-weight with dual engine and PESA vs single-engine medium-weight AESA aircraft.
> As for Kowsar, If you guys are happy with it, good for you, but when I talk of light-weight aircraft, I don't meant LIFT platform but rather a 4.5 Gen aircraft with composites, single-engine fully digital fly by wire, AESA radar along with good EW suite/net-centric capability.



You do realize we were under sanctions to purchase fighter jets? Stop talking nonsense. Do you seriously think that the Iranian administration that is fighting wars on 4 different soils is stupid enough not to purchase fighter jets even with an IMF-recorded GDP of 1.1 trillion USD (highest in the Islamic world) ? we did not purchase fighter jets just because we could not. When we can we will and knowing IRIAF that chose F-16A (never delivered), F-4E/D and F-14A when others were flying Sabre-jets and Mig-19, we can be sure they would not bring anything less than Su-35S to Iranian soil that too with TOT.

Kowsar is a technology demonstrator that proved that yes we inside Iran can produce a jet from scratch (with a new body, our own turbojet) with a 4.0 generation combat/avionics suite. Read my post above, I made its comparison with Brazilian F-5EM, you will be surprised. Arm it fully and it can fight on par with any other 4.0 generation fighter jet in the air. Maybe Kowsar-II will be carrying an AESA radar-like KLJ-7A if using the already demonstrated re-designed composite nosecone from Saeghe's research. It already carries KLJ-6F coming from IAMI and CATIC (China) cooperation. I am interested in the next generation of Kowsar because IRIAF is not adopting Kowsar-I very enthusiastically, they are waiting for an even more improved version. More improved Kowsar will be a machine to rely upon.



PDF said:


> Of course, engine is an issue along with some other things, and that is why I suggested in my previous post to JOINTLY produce an aircraft, something like we have done with China with JF-17. You can secure those parts which can't be domestically produced yet and keep yourself equipped with latest/advanced technologies in the meantime. If you want to do it all alone, Good Luck!



Secondly, no country gives us anything for political reasons because we are an oil-producing sanctioned nation that has been playing politics on the international stage for decades and still winning against foes regionally. Had we been political poodles or proxy banana republics we would be flying shiny toys from Russia, the US, China, and France, and who not. But we did not so nobody gives us anything. Our missile program, UCAVs, SLVs, and Air defense is thickly indigenous for the very same reason. 

JF-17/FC-1 is a 100 % Chinese plane (distantly originating from an abandoned Mikayon-33 design), not even a single bolt in it comes from any other country other than Chinese companies linked to CATIC/AVIC, the same company we started our F-5E/F production program with some 16 years ago. I can literally list its systems and the Chinese companies that produce them starting from KLJ-7 of CETC. It's a Chinese machine that got TOT'ed out. Iran does not fit into this equation. 



PDF said:


> What I opined is keeping in view the budget restraints too of IRIAF. Despite CM/BMs, Airpower is essential in any conflict since last century. There is no alternative to it and with Iran's enemies having/soon to induct latest variants of aircraft like Typhoons, Rafales, F-16s,F-15s, I don't think you people can ignore such threats.
> 
> Unfortunately, I observe too much arrogance from many of you guys which doesn't help you in anything at all. I will take my leave. Best of Luck to IRIAF!



Budget restraints on IRIAF = Will of Iranian decision-makers. Our government does not have any shortage of money for its own doctrines. Find Iran and other regional countries.







So, IRIAF has a different problem that many here would not want to accept. It's political and I will give you a keyword called "Noujeh coup" mentality, in case you want to read. 

And no IRIAF is not the deal-breaker in Iranian Defence doctrine. With our strong missile power (2-3 staged solid MRBM, Warhead separating MaRVs with CEP of less than 10 m, Skip Glide vehicles, long Range cruise missiles from Land, Air, Sea, undersea) and UCAVs (low RCS stealth wing and wide-bodied MALEs), Air defense (Read about Bavar-373, Talash, etc systems) can wreak havoc against any regional FOE. Newly formed IRIAF will be a bonus in this scheme but it is not stopping us from anything. In a decade, Air warfare will enter the unmanned arena and we are already multifold strong in UCAV R&D. So, if we get some 120 x Su-35S or J-10C then it will be amazing to compliment F-14AM, Mig-29, F-4E/D, Kowsar (Future) but if not then its not like we are defense less.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Please post your source on this.



Good old BT published a full article on key.aero.... 

"Bayyenat II Fire Control Radar, installed on 3-7400" pictured below 










Bayyenat-I is for F-4E Dowran upgrade, live example of Dowran upgraded F-4E with the nosecone removed in Bushehr.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Good old BT published a full article on key.aero....
> 
> "Bayyenat II Fire Control Radar, installed on 3-7400" pictured below
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bayyenat-I is for F-4E Dowran upgrade, live example of Dowran upgraded F-4E with the nosecone removed in Bushehr.



Nevermind, I thought you were saying F-5 had 90 nautical mile radar range. I said in what world. But I see now it was KM. It’s a plausible range.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Nevermind, I thought you were saying F-5 had 90 nautical mile radar range. I said in what world. But I see now it was KM. It’s a plausible range.



93.6 KM recorded max.

As for 90 NM range bearing radar, that will probably require redesigned nosecone like the one attempted in Saeghe's Ist demonstrator


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> 93.6 KM recorded max.
> 
> As for 90 NM range bearing radar, that will probably require redesigned nosecone like the one attempted in Saeghe's Ist demonstrator



95 nautical mile would be approaching APG-66 (original F-16 radar level)

I don’t know if that can fit inside a F-5 nose cone. Even modified.






Some miniaturization can be made due to tech advances.

This is APG-68 that has raised F-16 range to 180+’miles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

TheImmortal said:


> 95 nautical mile would be approaching APG-66 (original F-16 radar level)
> 
> I don’t know if that can fit inside a F-5 nose cone. Even modified.
> 
> View attachment 845579
> 
> 
> Some miniaturization can be made due to tech advances.
> 
> This is APG-68 that has raised F-16 range to 180+’miles
> 
> View attachment 845580


Would it fit this? APG 83 radar.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> 95 nautical mile would be approaching APG-66 (original F-16 radar level)
> 
> I don’t know if that can fit inside a F-5 nose cone. Even modified.
> 
> View attachment 845579
> 
> 
> Some miniaturization can be made due to tech advances.
> 
> This is APG-68 that has raised F-16 range to 180+’miles
> 
> View attachment 845580



If we go by the logic that F-20/F-5G nosecone shape is same/mild redesign of F-5E/F then Kowsar with Saeghe like nose can easily fit AN/APG-67 that was planned for F-20/F5G and later got into FCK-1. It has a range of 150 km I think. 





CATIC's main radar supplier is CETC which makes all the KLJ series, they produce custom systems like SELEX so if there will be the intention for a new radar system for Kowsar-II, we might even see a customized antenna KLJ-7A AESA to be fitted in whatever next-generation fighter gets churned out of this Azarakhash => Saeghe => Kowsar Lineage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

sha ah said:


> Ababil comes in a few different variants but most commonly now used as a loitering munition or for surveillance. The variant Houthis use is a kamikaze drone. The Ababil-3 is only used for surveillance and it can only cover 100km round trip and spend a few hours in the air. I believe Iran has a few of them left over and only uses them for low priority surveillance, like on the border with Afghanistan.
> 
> I think the TB2 is more comparable to the Mohajer-6 as a medium sized UAV.


Ababil-3 is still used, and 100km is only the datalink distance



Hack-Hook said:


> Iran could buy J-10 but army didn't want it . maybe if china at the time would have offered J-10c they would agree on buying it.
> 
> and no we don't need flanker . what we need is fighters like J-10c or Mig-35 but with more emphasis on Datalink between the planes. and with the same amount of money you want to spend in flankers you can get twice of those medium fighters.
> 
> the most advanced are considered to be the Brazilian ones
> 
> more like in class of Mohajer-6
> 
> people can decide for themselves if its a new engine or the old one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they claim they elongated it by 1.6m and can carry up to 4-6 ton of cargo something like illushin-112, Casa CN-235 and Boeing V-22 Osprey
> Wonder if its possible to add an airborne radar to it ?


Original plan with IrAN-140 was actually an AWACs variant


----------



## Hack-Hook

The_Username said:


> I have a question from our longterm members and Admins:
> Shahed 149 uses a 650 to 750 hp turboprop engine. A lot less than the 900 hp Honywell turboprop on the American MQ-9. What prevents Iran from building a larger drone utilizing the 2465 hp TV3-117VMA-SBM1 turboprop?
> Such a drone could easily carry a pair of supersonic LRASM and/or long range maritime surveillance in the Indian ocean.


the size and fuel consumption


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> Ababil-3 is still used, and 100km is only the datalink distance
> 
> 
> Original plan with IrAN-140 was actually an AWACs variant


the plan was a maritime patrol plane , later they produced a poster and put early warning radar there .
but as @mohsen said the only solution that come in mind is Swedish S100b Argos that is based on SAAB-340 but if you go that route you must accept its inherent limitation which is those two 60 degree dead zones in front and back , in short you must to use two airplane to cover the desired area

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> If we go by the logic that F-20/F-5G nosecone shape is same/mild redesign of F-5E/F then Kowsar with Saeghe like nose can easily fit AN/APG-67 that was planned for F-20/F5G and later got into FCK-1. It has a range of 150 km I think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CATIC's main radar supplier is CETC which makes all the KLJ series, they produce custom systems like SELEX so if there will be the intention for a new radar system for Kowsar-II, we might even see a customized antenna KLJ-7A AESA to be fitted in whatever next-generation fighter gets churned out of this Azarakhash => Saeghe => Kowsar Lineage.


another solution would be what Leonardo did with RAVEN and Vixen series of radar . it allow to put bigger radar in smaller nose while provide wider angle of view (100 degree against normal 60 degree)




here the dish rotate around its center and field of view would be like this





the Idea seems intresting compared to normal AESA radars

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> another solution would be what Leonardo did with RAVEN and Vixen series of radar . it allow to put bigger radar in smaller nose while provide wider angle of view (100 degree against normal 60 degree)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here the dish rotate around its center and field of view would be like this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the Idea seems intresting compared to normal AESA radars



Yes, these options are there but going with the rationale that Kowsar originates from the cooperation between IAMI Iran and CATIC China and the fact that the current radar for Kowsar is TOT'ed KLJ-6F from NREIT China, the highest possible chances exist that the next derivative of this series will have a KLJ series AESA to mate with PL-12 ARH. 






This can easily fit in the composite nosecone of this Saeqeh demonstrator no. 3-7370. The weight and wattage are not high either. If this nosecone is installed on Kowsar, it can house KLJ-7A AESA easily. Highly likely it will happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Yes, these options are there but going with the rationale that Kowsar originates from the cooperation between IAMI Iran and CATIC China and the fact that the current radar for Kowsar is TOT'ed KLJ-6F from NREIT China, the highest possible chances exist that the next derivative of this series will have a KLJ series AESA to mate with PL-12 ARH.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This can easily fit in the composite nosecone of this Saeqeh demonstrator no. 3-7370. The weight and wattage are not high either. If this nosecone is installed on Kowsar, it can house KLJ-7A AESA easily. Highly likely it will happen.


my guess is that they had to remove the other cannon to make room for KLJ-7A . but it has a mechanical steering plate and that take space something that f-5 lack unless you go with the one with side panels and that require even more modification to the nose section


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> my guess is that they had to remove the other cannon to make room for KLJ-7A . but it has a mechanical steering plate and that take space something that f-5 lack unless you go with the one with side panels and that require even more modification to the nose section



This is why radar companies always have a modular and flexible system to offer to potential clients. For example, Selex produced one Grifo type and kept changing its dimensions to fit in with the nosecones of Mirage, F-5, F-4, and MIG-21/23 with the almost similar performance and weight/wattage. 

Saeghe 3-7370 testbed's enlarged radome and lack of twin cannon were probably to fit in some larger NRIET KLJ radar in it and later Kowsar's unveiling confirmed NRIET origin. If CATIC and IAMI cooperation can fit KLJ-7A into that radome on Kowsar mated with PL-12 and R-73E/M, that would be a fierce machine. Kowsar's current avionics package itself is not bad for a stop-gap fighter but probably IRIAF wants something better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

drmeson said:


> Yes, these options are there but going with the rationale that Kowsar originates from the cooperation between IAMI Iran and CATIC China and the fact that the current radar for Kowsar is TOT'ed KLJ-6F from NREIT China, the highest possible chances exist that the next derivative of this series will have a KLJ series AESA to mate with PL-12 ARH.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This can easily fit in the composite nosecone of this Saeqeh demonstrator no. 3-7370. The weight and wattage are not high either. If this nosecone is installed on Kowsar, it can house KLJ-7A AESA easily. Highly likely it will happen.



The problem is that stronger radar need stronger power supply , I think J-85 cant create enough power for stronger Radar , and all new EW system ...

if you have exprience in assembling pc , you know sometimes you can't fit new Graphic card without chanhing Power supply ...

one of Kowsar main problem is landing gear , it is on the wing and make best part of wing useless for carrying any weapon ... 

If we can build Turbofan version of Owj with additional 10-20% thrush , we can revert back to Saegheh design and make some modification on it like changing landing gear , and make it nose slightly bigger , make it one sit air craft and add some Electronic sight to it and we will have our 4/4.5 fighter jet which can support our Anti Air Defense network and conduct some aerial support with help of Smart bomb and Guided missiles ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> well thats a solution but don't forget it has 60 degree deadzone in front and back and only see 120 degree on each side


According to janes its 150° and it has some detection ability in the 30° sectors fore and aft as well.
https://web.archive.org/web/2012061...ing--Control-mission-system-radar-Sweden.html

One way to deal with the lack of coverage fore and aft,would be to follow the approach of the israeli el/w-2085 .This uses 2 side facing arrays like the erieye,but also has radomes in the nose and tail.The advantage here is that it allows the possibility of using 2 different radar bands on the one platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

OldTwilight said:


> The problem is that stronger radar need stronger power supply , I think J-85 cant create enough power for stronger Radar , and all new EW system ...
> 
> if you have exprience in assembling pc , you know sometimes you can't fit new Graphic card without chanhing Power supply ...
> 
> one of Kowsar main problem is landing gear , it is on the wing and make best part of wing useless for carrying any weapon ...
> 
> If we can build Turbofan version of Owj with additional 10-20% thrush , we can revert back to Saegheh design and make some modification on it like changing landing gear , and make it nose slightly bigger , make it one sit air craft and add some Electronic sight to it and we will have our 4/4.5 fighter jet which can support our Anti Air Defense network and conduct some aerial support with help of Smart bomb and Guided missiles ...



Current Kowsar's radar weighs 85 Kg and while KLJ-7A AESA is 120-125 KG so I am not sure if they have some MASSIVE weight gap. The antenna size is 550 mm so that is quite fittable too. I am not sure what you are trying to say? in a fighter jet, a 40 kg difference does not matter much. And Radars are not powered by engines, they are powered by batteries.

Saeqeh was a testbed to test the following physical enhancements :

New elongated radome to house a larger radar (Extremely Useful)
Verticle twin stabilizers (Failed due to drag)
Squared Intakes (Failed because they were changed back in 3-7370)
Composite body parts like wings and stabilizers (Very Useful)
Experience to create the entire body of an F-5 inside Iran (Very Useful)

Saegheh has served its purpose and we moved on to Kowsar-I which itself is a tech demo. The real deal will be the next generation of Kowsar which will come later maybe in 2 years to replace the entire circus of F-7N, Mirage F1EQ, F-5E/F/Azarakhsh/Saeghe.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> PThat's what I scream here for years.





drmeson said:


> Current Kowsar's radar weighs 85 Kg and while KLJ-7A AESA is 120-125 KG so I am not sure if they have some MASSIVE weight gap. The antenna size is 550 mm so that is quite fittable too. I am not sure what you are trying to say? in a fighter jet, a 40 kg difference does not matter much. And Radars are not powered by engines, they are powered by batteries.
> 
> Saeqeh was a testbed to test the following physical enhancements :
> 
> New elongated radome to house a larger radar (Extremely Useful)
> Verticle twin stabilizers (Failed due to drag)
> Squared Intakes (Failed because they were changed back in 3-7370)
> Composite body parts like wings and stabilizers (Very Useful)
> Experience to create the entire body of an F-5 inside Iran (Very Useful)
> 
> Saegheh has served its purpose and we moved on to Kowsar-I which itself is a tech demo. The real deal will be the next generation of Kowsar which will come later maybe in 2 years to replace the entire circus of F-7N, Mirage F1EQ, F-5E/F/Azarakhsh/Saeghe.


Who told you that Radar is powered with batteries, that is not the case My friend, some missiles have batteries but not fighters, Fighter has at least two power generators, one AC and one DC, and radar is powered by generator


----------



## OldTwilight

sanel1412 said:


> Who told you that Radar is powered with batteries, that is not the case My friend, some missiles have batteries but not fighters, Fighter has at least two power generators, one AC and one DC, and *radar is powered by generator*



and generator are powered by engines ... so even for adding electronic components , you are restricted by output power of engine ... 









Electrical energy in a fighter aircraft


A car uses a car battery and an alternator powered by the engine. But where does the electrical energy for fighter aircraft comes from to maintain the onboard systems? And which voltage and freque...




electronics.stackexchange.com


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> This is why radar companies always have a modular and flexible system to offer to potential clients. For example, Selex produced one Grifo type and kept changing its dimensions to fit in with the nosecones of Mirage, F-5, F-4, and MIG-21/23 with the almost similar performance and weight/wattage.
> 
> Saeghe 3-7370 testbed's enlarged radome and lack of twin cannon were probably to fit in some larger NRIET KLJ radar in it and later Kowsar's unveiling confirmed NRIET origin. If CATIC and IAMI cooperation can fit KLJ-7A into that radome on Kowsar mated with PL-12 and R-73E/M, that would be a fierce machine. Kowsar's current avionics package itself is not bad for a stop-gap fighter but probably IRIAF wants something better.


i doubt about R-73 as we already have varius missile in that class based on Sidewinder.



Sineva said:


> According to janes its 150° and it has some detection ability in the 30° sectors fore and aft as well.
> https://web.archive.org/web/2012061...ing--Control-mission-system-radar-Sweden.html
> 
> One way to deal with the lack of coverage fore and aft,would be to follow the approach of the israeli el/w-2085 .This uses 2 side facing arrays like the erieye,but also has radomes in the nose and tail.The advantage here is that it allows the possibility of using 2 different radar bands on the one platform.


we were talking about *Argos *not its successor *Erieye*


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> And Radars are not powered by engines, they are powered by batteries.


but they are powered by engines


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Iranian army have already shown once a new radar for their combat planes, I have the image in the head. If I find it I will deposit here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> but they are powered by engines



I did not know that, I always thought the generator to power radar was independent of Engine



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Iranian army have already shown once a new radar for their combat planes, I have the image in the head. If I find it I will deposit here.



Which year was that ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I did not know that, I always thought the generator to power radar was independent of Engine
> 
> 
> 
> Which year was that ?


Some airplane have independent generators usually big ones but they don't use it to power radars. It's a backup for the time both engine fails so they don't loose hydraulic too in the time the airplane is gliding and give it a chance to land.
But that generator is powered by wind not batteries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

N_Al40 said:


> See, this annoys me. As great as this achievement is until we get an 100% indigenous engine then there is always the chance we could be exploited. Nonetheless, Simorgh is a great leap forward for our aviation industry.
> 
> Agha Sattari is a great manager (VP for Science & Technology since Rouhani era - Raisi kept him in his position)


Well, I don't consider it great in anyway, not after a decade long time frame.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

mohsen said:


> Well, I don't consider it great in anyway, not after a decade long time frame.


I would say they can try a miniature AWACS aircraft design based off this platform. If I'm not wrong, there was such a plan involving the HESA IrAn-140 before the design bombed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

+1 F-14








بازگشت جنگنده اف ۱۴ به آسمان ایران پس از ۱۸ سال


جنگنده رهگیر اف ۱۴ پس از صرف ۳۹ هزار ساعت تلاش متخصصان پایگاه هوایی شهید بابایی اصفهان به رده عملیاتی بازگشت.




www.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I don't think it was the design that bombed so much as issues with the engines. If they can resolve the engine problems or replace them then this plane can be viable since currently there are a dozen or so grounded in storage.

Anyways I'll believe it when I see the plane fly.



PersianNinja said:


> I would say they can try a miniature AWACS aircraft design based off this platform. If I'm not wrong, there was such a plan involving the HESA IrAn-140 before the design bombed.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

drmeson said:


> JF-17/FC-1 is a 100 % Chinese plane (distantly originating from an abandoned Mikayon-33 design), not even a single bolt in it comes from any other country other than Chinese companies linked to CATIC/AVIC


You do not understand Pakistani strategy for weapons development.
Al khalid tank was a joint project with China.After its complete development,we started indeginizing it.
Now its gun,FCS,thermal systems,etc. are of Pakistani origin.
https://www.dawn.com/news/621771/locally-produced-gun-delivered-to-hit-for-tanks 

The experience learned from here helped us to develop 155mm artillery gun also 

https://quwa.org/2021/08/30/pakistans-hit-develops-in-house-155-mm-artillery-gun-2/ 

Then we took our own root and developed AK-1.After it AK-2 is next in line.

Similarly,we used to import engines for our cruise Missiles but we have indiginized cruise Missiles engines also.

JF 17 is still under development project.But we 
have started indiginizing it as well.We are producing AESA radar for in home.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/...an-moves-ahead-with-domestic-aesa-radar-deve/ 

Similarly we used to produce Falco UAV under liscence
But now we can produce more advanced UCAVs in home






Similarly,we acquired Milgem corvettes under TOT with IP rights from Turkey and now we are aiming for development of Figates in home.

So all in short,JF 17 can look simple CKD assembly but its base for development of our aviation industry.
With airborne radars development,we will have in house development of AWACS also.

And the journey will continue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Officially the JF-17 and Al-Khalid may be joint projects but realistically they're Chinese products. The fact of the matter is that China can build these products without Pakistan but not the other way around.



Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> You do not understand Pakistani strategy for weapons development.
> Al khalid tank was a joint project with China.After its complete development,we started indeginizing it.
> Now its gun,FCS,thermal systems,etc. are of Pakistani origin.
> https://www.dawn.com/news/621771/locally-produced-gun-delivered-to-hit-for-tanks
> 
> The experience learned from here helped us to develop 155mm artillery gun also
> 
> https://quwa.org/2021/08/30/pakistans-hit-develops-in-house-155-mm-artillery-gun-2/
> 
> Then we took our own root and developed AK-1.After it AK-2 is next in line.
> 
> Similarly,we used to import engines for our cruise Missiles but we have indiginized cruise Missiles engines also.
> 
> JF 17 is still under development project.But we
> have started indiginizing it as well.We are producing AESA radar for in home.
> 
> https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/...an-moves-ahead-with-domestic-aesa-radar-deve/
> 
> Similarly we used to produce Falco UAV under liscence
> But now we can produce more advanced UCAVs in home
> 
> View attachment 846643
> 
> Similarly,we acquired Milgem corvettes under TOT with IP rights from Turkey and now we are aiming for development of Figates in home.
> 
> So all in short,JF 17 can look simple CKD assembly but its base for development of our aviation industry.
> With airborne radars development,we will have in house development of AWACS also.
> 
> And the journey will continue.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

sha ah said:


> Officially the JF-17 and Al-Khalid may be joint projects but realistically they're Chinese products. The fact of the matter is that China can build these products without Pakistan but not the other way around.


The fact is that we can build these on our own.
Sure components can come from china but we can integrate them into system on our own.
We acquired VT 4 tank from China but used our own main gun.
Saab builds Gripen fighter jet.Its engine is Ammerican now That does not mean Gripen is useless just because Sweden/Saab can't build Its own engines

Afterall we are not sanctioned and have global markete to buy subsystems from and then integrate them into our own system. 

Another example is south Korea their kfx uses US engine.
We do not need to make every thing in house.
If we will try to make every thing in house,we will remain technologically behind our enemies thus risking our sovereignty.


----------



## mohsen

PersianNinja said:


> I would say they can try a miniature AWACS aircraft design based off this platform. If I'm not wrong, there was such a plan involving the HESA IrAn-140 before the design bombed.


As I said, if they plan to go with this speed, spending a decade to remove the seats and add a cargo door, then building an AWACS would take a century!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

There's a huge difference between using a foreign engine for a domestically designed product because of its superior quality, like the Gripen, as opposed to purchasing a product designed from another country, especially when most of the vital components of that product come from the same nation that designed it, like for example the VT-4.

The VT-4 is a Chinese product through and through and there's no denying it. Even the JF-17, China offered it to Iran in exchange for oil. It's really a Chinese product. Even if Pakistan license builds them or buys knock down kits, it's still a product that Pakistan could not possess without China. 

I applaud Pakistan for striving towards self sufficiency in the military sector, but it's difficult for smaller nations like Pakistan or Iran, as opposed to the US or Russia or China for example, with massive military budgets and resources at their disposal. No doubt about it Pakistan has made progress but it will take time before Pakistan attains Autarky in the military sector.

On the other hand, this topic is debatable. I mean look at the new F-5 variants (Kowsar) that Iran builds. Supposedly close to 80% of the components are Iranian made, however the F-5 was of course designed by the US. So is it an Iranian or American product ? It's somewhat subjective but personally I believe that both variables have to be taken into consideration when deciding.



Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> The fact is that we can build these on our own.
> Sure components can come from china but we can integrate them into system on our own.
> We acquired VT 4 tank from China but used our own main gun.
> Saab builds Gripen fighter jet.Its engine is Ammerican now That does not mean Gripen is useless just because Sweden/Saab can't build Its own engines
> 
> Afterall we are not sanctioned and have global markete to buy subsystems from and then integrate them into our own system.
> 
> Another example is south Korea their kfx uses US engine.
> We do not need to make every thing in house.
> If we will try to make every thing in house,we will remain technologically behind our enemies thus risking our sovereignty.


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> You do not understand Pakistani strategy for weapons development.
> Al khalid tank was a joint project with China.After its complete development,we started indeginizing it.
> Now its gun,FCS,thermal systems,etc. are of Pakistani origin.
> https://www.dawn.com/news/621771/locally-produced-gun-delivered-to-hit-for-tanks
> 
> The experience learned from here helped us to develop 155mm artillery gun also
> 
> https://quwa.org/2021/08/30/pakistans-hit-develops-in-house-155-mm-artillery-gun-2/
> 
> Then we took our own root and developed AK-1.After it AK-2 is next in line.
> 
> Similarly,we used to import engines for our cruise Missiles but we have indiginized cruise Missiles engines also.
> 
> JF 17 is still under development project.But we
> have started indiginizing it as well.We are producing AESA radar for in home.
> 
> https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/...an-moves-ahead-with-domestic-aesa-radar-deve/
> 
> Similarly we used to produce Falco UAV under liscence
> But now we can produce more advanced UCAVs in home
> 
> View attachment 846643
> 
> Similarly,we acquired Milgem corvettes under TOT with IP rights from Turkey and now we are aiming for development of Figates in home.
> 
> So all in short,JF 17 can look simple CKD assembly but its base for development of our aviation industry.
> With airborne radars development,we will have in house development of AWACS also.
> 
> And the journey will continue.



so what is non-chinese (or Pakistani) in FC-1? We can go from component to component starting from Radar and Avionics and ending at controls and propulsion. Here is my claim, every single component of FC-1 is designed/patented by Chinese companies that work in consortium with CATIC. It's a Chinese plane that got TOT'ed out by CATIC.


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

drmeson said:


> so what is non-chinese (or Pakistani) in FC-1? We can go from component to component starting from Radar and Avionics and ending at controls and propulsion. Here is my claim, every single component of FC-1 is designed/patented by Chinese companies that work in consortium with CATIC. It's a Chinese plane that got TOT'ed out by CATIC.


All i said before
JF 17 is based on chinese/Russian subsystems 
But we are developing AESA radar in home to replace Chinese radars
We are also developing HMD helmet for Thunder.
Its just start,we will indeginize it to large extent like our other weapons.
JF 17 is still on going project,its not completed yet.


----------



## drmeson

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> All i said before
> JF 17 is based on chinese/Russian subsystems



Thank you for agreeing that FC-1 is an all-Chinese CATIC sub-companies consortium product that got TOT'ed out (purchased).



Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> But we are developing AESA radar in home to replace Chinese radars



Not exactly. NRIET (another sub-company of CATIC) provided KLJ-7 is fitted on current FC-1. The future version already has KLJ-7A-AESA from same NRIET. 



Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Its just start,we will indeginize it to large extent like our other weapons.
> JF 17 is still on going project,its not completed yet.



Irrelevant to the discussion.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

mohsen said:


> As I said, if they plan to go with this speed, spending a decade to remove the seats and add a cargo door, then building an AWACS would take a century!


The footage we saw from the assembly line suggests they took the design back to the drawing board. This isn't simply some conversion of old fuselage and kits.

Once the base models are ready, it gets much simpler modifying them for specialized purposes. Building an AWACS won't take that much time now - it's more a matter of how much funding is given and the defence ministry is stingy with allocation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Guys have we ever seen any pic of Azarakhsh, Saegheh, or even our F-5E/F with Refuelling probe experimentation? I know for a fact that Azrakhsh's original plan included it like F-5EM.


----------



## drmeson

pain => need => wish => thought => plan => *implementation* => solution

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## N_Al40

drmeson said:


> pain => need => wish => thought => plan => *implementation* => solution


Such a sexy design God damn

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

drmeson said:


> Thank you for agreeing that FC-1 is an all-Chinese CATIC sub-companies consortium product that got TOT'ed out (purchased).


For now
Yes Its Chinese/UK/Russian.


----------



## Hack-Hook

N_Al40 said:


> Such a sexy design God damn


the design need more powerful engine than owj to be anything but a trainer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the design need more powerful engine than owj to be anything but a trainer



Plane needs to be scaled to 200% larger (maybe more) to be formidable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Plane needs to be scaled to 200% larger (maybe more) to be formidable.


Depends, for me if it can be scaled up to the size that it would be able to carry 4xpl-12 size missile internally then it can be a dangerous foe and for that I don't think it need to be the size of F-22. I think if we manage to scale it up to the size of something like rafale that would be enough.


----------



## drmeson

N_Al40 said:


> Such a sexy design God damn



The day Jahesh single-crystal turbofan produces anything around 10000 lbf ... This thing will start flying before anyone else.

Comparision with Turkish













Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> For now
> Yes Its Chinese/UK/Russian.



By design, engine, avionics suite, navi-comm, A2A/A2G weaponry ... everything is a Chinese CATIC-consortium patented product.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> The day Jahesh single-crystal turbofan produces anything around 10000 lbf ... This thing will start flying before anyone else.
> 
> Comparision with Turkish




Take it from me - the Jahesh will not move up in scale a single notch if the funding to the IACI/HESA remains as miserable as it has currently. Iranian defence budget is abysmally low - <$10 billion is horrendous for a nation that has so many powerful enemies and surrounded by US bases.


At the very least, I would expect Iran to turn adversity into opportunity and for the next two decades to organize a heavy chunk of it's economy around manufacturing weaponry and defence projects and use this to create employment among Iranian people. That is assuming if the bureaucracy and the fucking ministers can curb their greed and resist the urge to steal the money and keep the projects running on bare minimum funds.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GrandBotBoi

PersianNinja said:


> Take it from me - the Jahesh will not move up in scale a single notch if the funding to the IACI/HESA remains as miserable as it has currently. Iranian defence budget is abysmally low - <$10 billion is horrendous for a nation that has so many powerful enemies and surrounded by US bases.
> 
> 
> At the very least, I would expect Iran to turn adversity into opportunity and for the next two decades to organize a heavy chunk of it's economy around manufacturing weaponry and defence projects and use this to create employment among Iranian people. That is assuming if the bureaucracy and the fucking ministers can curb their greed and resist the urge to steal the money and keep the projects running on bare minimum funds.


Iran's defense budget is around 30 billion USD, not 10.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

GrandBotBoi said:


> Iran's defense budget is around 30 billion USD, not 10.


There seems to be a mistake in that regard. A Swedish organization estimated Iranian military expenditure to be around $26 billion a year but General Bagheri himself has said (and it's on record) that Iranian defence spending doesn't exceed $10 billion annually.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

PersianNinja said:


> There seems to be a mistake in that regard. A Swedish organization estimated Iranian military expenditure to be around $26 billion a year but General Bagheri himself has said (and it's on record) that Iranian defence spending doesn't exceed $10 billion annually.


When did he say that? I distinctly remember reading that it was 10-20 billion in 1400 and 20-30 billion in 1401


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1528431149357404163

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

GrandBotBoi said:


> When did he say that? I distinctly remember reading that it was 10-20 billion in 1400 and 20-30 billion in 1401
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1528431149357404163


Please refer to this thread:





__





SIPRI Has Overstated Iran's Military Spending For Years


Heres a very interesting article,well worth the read.....:smart: SIPRI Has Overstated Iran's Military Spending For Years https://www.bourseandbazaar.com/articles/2022/5/3/sipri-has-overstated-irans-military-spending-for-years SIPRI—the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute—produces...



defence.pk

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

GrandBotBoi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1528431149357404163




Someone needs to destroy those toy planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

GrandBotBoi said:


> When did he say that? I distinctly remember reading that it was 10-20 billion in 1400 and 20-30 billion in 1401
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1528431149357404163



At last

They give another index of their heavy hunter which is officially under construction of then 2020. It is not a toy, it is their official model that they chose. Leave to make the negative comments here and people who do not make the difference between official public announcements and work behind scene.

Why are they working on their heavy hunters? Because their new power engine is ready and has been tested on the F-4 SM. Iran hides their games but it is enough to read in the lines and understand that they keep certain things secret for the moment

This model is an official model

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

The only model that actually matters was that F-5G/F-20 looking Kowsar model they showed hanging with a single Turbofan and long nose. 

If we can produce something in the class of RD-33/AL-31F or can get them from Russia in high numbers then that will be the eventual result of our long F-5E/F research on Azarakhsh, Saegheh, Kowsar .... Considering that Kowsar is already has a 4th generation avionics and combat suite, that next plane will have 4+ avionics with AESA+HOTAS and rest from Kowsar. Something that along with F-14 AM, MIG-29 along with new TOT'ed J-10C/SU-35S/MIG-35 can carry IRIAF into the unmanned combat aviation era.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__





Fighter Jet Crashes in Iran, Pilots Killed - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An F-7 fighter jet of the Iranian Air Force crashed near the central city of Isfahan on Tuesday, killing two pilots.




www.tasnimnews.com





One less F-7 in Iran’s inventory. Lost 2 pilots, very unfortunate.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529031411159670784

Reactions: Sad Sad:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Airforce never liked those j7 wonder why they are flying them.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

If you have them then use them, pilots have to have at least few dozen flying hours a year.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> If you have them then use them, pilots have to have at least few dozen flying hours a year.


they didn't used them for years and now that we have actual replacement they are using it , those airplanes were not IRIAF choice, they were somehow imposed on them. they have no actual use in combat , it may be possible to modify them to be bomb carrier , but i'm not aware such upgrades and modification actually happened. but they have no role as fighters and I doubt they are good trainer either .


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> they didn't used them for years and now that we have actual replacement they are using it , those airplanes were not IRIAF choice, they were somehow imposed on them. they have no actual use in combat , it may be possible to modify them to be bomb carrier , but i'm not aware such upgrades and modification actually happened. but they have no role as fighters and I doubt they are good trainer either .



F-7N or a Mirage-F1EQ can not be used for any useful role in IRIAF's strategy. F-7N with its midget radar and almost nonexistent A2A capability will be destroyed by any enemy interceptor or even by any good SAM. There is zero evidence of Mirage F1Q/EQ having any radar up-gradation or even activation post its refurbishment. Most of the time they fly without pylons yet you get shiny paint jobs on them each time like they are F-22s. Such a waste these 3rd Generation relics are. IRIAF should focus on Kowsar's next-generation because at the end of it we may have some 70-80 ... 4-4+ gen BVR combat suit wearing fighters who can at least pose challenges to the regional adversary in Iranian skies. That we can do without foreign purchases inside Iran at least. A fully upgraded and operationalized IRIAF (F-14AM, MIG-29, Kowsar-II, F-4E/D, SU-24) even without purchases is not very bad for regional defense with our top-notch Air defense and UCAVs. But even for those upgrades, money should be released.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

GrandBotBoi said:


> When did he say that? I distinctly remember reading that it was 10-20 billion in 1400 and 20-30 billion in 1401
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1528431149357404163


By the way, I love that tweet you posted...a larger Saeghah variant with an RD-33 turbofan manufactured domestically and loaded with Iranian avionics and EW suite would leapfrog the aerospace industry in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

@Hack-Hook @aryobarzan @TheImmortal 

If Kowsar gets a local A2A and A2G weaponry order, what options do we have?

A2A
PL-7C/PL-5C/Fatter Aim-9P/J/R-73E for WVR
R-27E for BVR (or procurement of PL-12 or R-77E)

A2G
Yasin and Balaban PGMs 
Zubin, Ghassed, Bina for A2G Missiles 

Shahin external Jammer Pod 

What else are the options?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> they didn't used them for years and now that we have actual replacement they are using it , those airplanes were not IRIAF choice, they were somehow imposed on them. they have no actual use in combat , it may be possible to modify them to be bomb carrier , but i'm not aware such upgrades and modification actually happened. but they have no role as fighters and I doubt they are good trainer either .


They`d likely have some value as a supersonic trainer,and they`ve also been used to carry the yasin glide bomb,so some value as a stand off weapons carrier.I imagine that the irgc-af could make okay use of them,the iriaf not so much...





In truth tho,I`m really not at all surprised that the iriaf didnt think much of them.I mean imagine going from an f4,or worse something totally state of the art like the f14,to a 1970s chinese mig 21 knock off.......that pretty much says it all right there.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Sineva said:


> They`d likely have some value as a supersonic trainer,and they`ve also been used to carry the yasin glide bomb,so some value as a stand off weapons carrier.I imagine that the irgc-af could make okay use of them,the iriaf not so much...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In truth tho,I`m really not at all surprised that the iriaf didnt think much of them.I mean imagine going from an f4,or worse something totally state of the art like the f14,to a 1970s chinese mig 21 knock off.......that pretty much says it all right there.


IRIAF should be grateful...what they're getting comes at a great cost and a lot of blood, sweat and tears. An engine and a fighter aircraft takes decades to develop and the Iranians only properly started in the 2000s.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> @Hack-Hook @aryobarzan @TheImmortal
> 
> If Kowsar gets a local A2A and A2G weaponry order, what options do we have?
> 
> A2A
> PL-7C/PL-5C/Fatter Aim-9P/J/R-73E for WVR
> R-27E for BVR (or procurement of PL-12 or R-77E)
> 
> A2G
> Yasin and Balaban PGMs
> Zubin, Ghassed, Bina for A2G Missiles
> 
> Shahin external Jammer Pod
> 
> What else are the options?



I would not rely on *ANY* foreign PGM/A2A. In a real world conflict, Iran would burn thru it’s arsenal within 2-3 months.

Thus if Iran cannot build its own, it shouldn’t order any. Too risky to assume Russia or China won’t bow to pressure and not resupply Iran during the war.

And if Iran cannot be resupply, then Kowsar becomes a worthless hunk of steel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

drmeson said:


> @Hack-Hook @aryobarzan @TheImmortal
> 
> If Kowsar gets a local A2A and A2G weaponry order, what options do we have?
> 
> A2A
> PL-7C/PL-5C/Fatter Aim-9P/J/R-73E for WVR
> R-27E for BVR (or procurement of PL-12 or R-77E)
> 
> A2G
> Yasin and Balaban PGMs
> Zubin, Ghassed, Bina for A2G Missiles
> 
> Shahin external Jammer Pod
> 
> What else are the options?


I agree with TheImmortal statement...consumables should never be foreign supplied...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> I would not rely on *ANY* foreign PGM/A2A. In a real world conflict, Iran would burn thru it’s arsenal within 2-3 months.
> 
> Thus if Iran cannot build its own, it shouldn’t order any. Too risky to assume Russia or China won’t bow to pressure and not resupply Iran during the war.
> 
> And if Iran cannot be resupply, then Kowsar becomes a worthless hunk of steel.



Ok but I was asking what local or easy procurement options do we have. 

*A2A
Foreign origin WVR: *
R-73E (All aspect HOBS) >>>> PL-5C > PL-7C
*Domestic origin WVR: *
Fatter/Azarakhsh (Iranian seeker and motor in Aim-9B body, all-aspect, 35-40 KM)
*
Foreign origin BVR: 
-*R-27E (Available)
-Possible Procurement of PL-12, R-77E
*Domestic origin BVR: 
-*Fakour (too heavy, RCS issues, Drag issues, not possible on Kowsar)
-Local LR-BVR based on Sayyad SAM (has the speed, range, and dimensions)

*A2G/PGM

Bombs*
-Yasin 
-Balaban 
*Missiles*
Zubin
Ghassed
Bina 
Recently unveiled AGM-65 with new seeker

*External Jammer*
Shahin external Jammer Pod

What else ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

PersianNinja said:


> IRIAF should be grateful...what they're getting comes at a great cost and a lot of blood, sweat and tears. An engine and a fighter aircraft takes decades to develop and the Iranians only properly started in the 2000s.


Its not a matter of the iriaf being ungrateful,the problem was that the f7 just had extremely limited capabilities and that there simply wasnt very much at all that the iriaf could really do with it operationally.
Its only very recently with the creation of modern iranian extended range air launched stand off weapons that the f7 has some sort of actual useful combat capability,and even then thats only as far as the irgc-af is concerned.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Sineva said:


> Its not a matter of the iriaf being ungrateful,the problem was that the f7 just had extremely limited capabilities and that there simply wasnt very much at all that the iriaf could really do with it operationally.
> Its only very recently with the creation of modern iranian extended range air launched stand off weapons that the f7 has some sort of actual useful combat capability,and even then thats only as far as the irgc-af is concerned.


Don't worry, fam. Things will look up - Iran has cracked the science behind manufacturing low bypass turbofan engines now. Soon enough, there'll be larger and more capable airframes that will be designed and those aircraft will be mated with powerful radars and BVR weaponry.

IRIAF will truly sprout new wings when that day comes in the not-too-distant future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> Don't worry, fam. Things will look up - Iran has cracked the science behind manufacturing low bypass turbofan engines now. Soon enough, there'll be larger and more capable airframes that will be designed and those aircraft will be mated with powerful radars and BVR weaponry.
> 
> IRIAF will truly sprout new wings when that day comes in the not-too-distant future.



Merge IRIAF with IRGC-AF (or IRGC command over IRIAF) and you will see all of that happening within 4 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Merge IRIAF with IRGC-AF (or IRGC command over IRIAF) and you will see all of that happening within 4 years.


Your word in God's ears. Insha-Allah!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> Your word in God's ears. Insha-Allah!





drmeson said:


> Merge IRIAF with IRGC-AF (or IRGC command over IRIAF) and you will see all of that happening within 4 years.


nonsense.
give IRIAF the necessary budget


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> nonsense.
> give IRIAF the necessary budget



Nonsense are the people who still think any military body inside Iran can outperform IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Nonsense are the people who still think any military body inside Iran can outperform IRGC.


Wonder what IRGC did with aircraft they poses that defence ministry and airforce didn't do years ago with the ones they poses .

It's a question I asked many times and nobody gave me a convincing answer.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Iran could develop a center line mounted pod that has radar like Russians have developed and produced for some Su-25's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

@drmeson @Hack-Hook 

Honestly, I believe IRGC servicemen should all be made to do a mandatory short-term commission in the Artesh's counterpart of whichever service branch they're under and vice versa.

I hate this needless rivalry the two sides have where the commands do their own separate things instead of working jointly on everything from operations to research & development and intelligence.

Once both sides have experienced each other's work culture and struggles, such distinctions will fade and the military machine will be more unified and honed towards tackling the challenges they've been stood up to face.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> @drmeson @Hack-Hook
> 
> Honestly, I believe IRGC servicemen should all be made to do a mandatory short-term commission in the Artesh's counterpart of whichever service branch they're under and vice versa.
> 
> I hate this needless rivalry the two sides have where the commands do their own separate things instead of working jointly on everything from operations to research & development and intelligence.
> 
> Once both sides have experienced each other's work culture and struggles, such distinctions will fade and the military machine will be more unified and honed towards tackling the challenges they've been stood up to face.



more like IRGC should appoint technical advisors/managers in every Artesh branch to get projects done. Today we have Kowsar, a 98 % domestically made airframe with avionics or combat suite of a 4.0 generation aircraft. Give this Project's command to IRGC-AF with the same IAIO/IEI companies and in 3-4 years you will see squadron after squadron coming out of F-20/YF-17 like airframe flying with AESA radar, shooting LR-BVR missiles. These people get things done. Even if they have managed to secure funds from leadership then it's their credit. And have they not produced results? I remember they asked for R&D money to improve precision of missiles for some 5 years and today we have a series of missiles with crazy accurate CEP.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sahureka2

who knows if this method of Iran-Russia trade can also be used in the aeronautical field?
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2022/05/26/682802/Iran-Russia-barter-trade-steel-Fatemi-Amin
on the other hand, Iran has enormous experience in the maintenance of commercial Boeing and Airbus aircraft, while Russia produces both excellent fighter planes and related engines, Who knows they could collaborate in the further development of the IrAn-140 commercial turboprop aircraft or the Russian project based on the Let L-610 or IL-114 , but also collaboration in tactical transport aircraft, I think the Simorgh 'and IL-112, both countries could help each other

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Still failed to answer a simple question I asked.
Only baseless claims.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Wonder what IRGC did with aircraft they poses that defence ministry and airforce didn't do years ago with the ones they poses .
> 
> It's a question I asked many times and nobody gave me a convincing answer.



IRGC's focus has never been their AF. Their real strides are in Aerospace missile forces and no one in the region can rival them when it comes to the quality of missile forces they have developed over the years. Seems like you have a personal problem with IRGC. 

When I say IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF it does not mean I am saying that because IRGC has Lockheed Martin graduates working for them. It's because they have a far far better track record of delivering on projects than IRIAF. Besides, it will tackle the noujeh coup fearing mullah problem too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Still failed to answer a simple


drmeson said:


> IRGC's focus has never been their AF. Their real strides are in Aerospace missile forces and no one in the region can rival them when it comes to the quality of missile forces they have developed over the years. Seems like you have a personal problem with IRGC.
> 
> When I say IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF it does not mean I am saying that because IRGC has Lockheed Martin graduates working for them. It's because they have a far far better track record of delivering on projects than IRIAF. Besides, it will tackle the noujeh coup fearing mullah problem too.


I yet to see anything from them in this regard. For god's sake even defence ministry have better percision guided weapon for drones


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Still failed to answer a simple
> 
> I yet to see anything from them in this regard. For god's sake even defence ministry have better percision guided weapon for drones



You have something personal against IRGC. The people who can strike a single room some 3000 KM away are less capable according to you compared to those who were calling Azarrakhsh an F-18.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> more like IRGC should appoint technical advisors/managers in every Artesh branch to get projects done. Today we have Kowsar, a 98 % domestically made airframe with avionics or combat suite of a 4.0 generation aircraft. Give this Project's command to IRGC-AF with the same IAIO/IEI companies and in 3-4 years you will see squadron after squadron coming out of F-20/YF-17 like airframe flying with AESA radar, shooting LR-BVR missiles. These people get things done. Even if they have managed to secure funds from leadership then it's their credit. And have they not produced results? I remember they asked for R&D money to improve precision of missiles for some 5 years and today we have a series of missiles with crazy accurate CEP.


It could be done but it must be done in a way that doesn't seem like the IRGC is encroaching on the Artesh's autonomy. People are naturally sensitive about their authority or personal space so it's better to work in a manner that breeds harmony, not discord.


----------



## Stryker1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530451303213809664


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> You have something personal against IRGC. The people who can strike a single room some 3000 KM away are less capable according to you compared to those who were calling Azarrakhsh an F-18.


I also can easily claim you have something personal against army .
And which IRGC weapon can hit a single room 3000km away . I knew one defense ministry drone which can do that.

By the way that was Saeqeh not Azaraksh and yet IRGC with several time budget yet to produce an Azaraksh which is second generation aircraft let not talk about one with 4th generation avionic like kowsar and you want hand over iriaf to IRGC which have shown zero interest in airforce and their interest is only limited to a bomb dropping machine


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> It could be done but it must be done in a way that doesn't seem like the IRGC is encroaching on the Artesh's autonomy. People are naturally sensitive about their authority or personal space so it's better to work in a manner that breeds harmony, not discord.


@drmeson failed to answer my simple question . As you seems to support his ideas wonder if you can answer that question ?


----------



## mohsen

Army is using underground drone manufacturing base.









خبرگزاری فارس - رئیس ستاد کل نیروهای مسلح از یک پایگاه سرّی ارتش بازدید کرد


سردار سرلشکر پاسدار محمد باقری از یکی از پایگاه‌های سری ارتش بازدید کرد.



www.farsnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> @drmeson failed to answer my simple question . As you seems to support his ideas wonder if you can answer that question ?


If I do, you must promise not to attack me or get personal, OK? I'm just giving you an educated and unbiased guess.

My belief is that most of the funds that IRGC-AF gets are routed into missile development, air defence and UAVs at present in tune with their asymmetric warfare doctrines spanning Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Yemen. Their strategy is more about creating and proliferating relatively cost effective and easier to operate platforms which paramilitaries can use and coordinating with them rather than pouring money into building manned platforms with offensive capabilities.

IRGC-AF's manned aerial operations are mostly seen in air transport.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> If I do, you must promise not to attack me or get personal, OK? I'm just giving you an educated and unbiased guess.
> 
> My belief is that most of the funds that IRGC-AF gets are routed into missile development, air defence and UAVs at present in tune with their asymmetric warfare doctrines spanning Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Yemen. Their strategy is more about creating and proliferating relatively cost effective and easier to operate platforms which paramilitaries can use and coordinating with them rather than pouring money into building manned platforms with offensive capabilities.
> 
> IRGC-AF's manned aerial operations are mostly seen in air transport.


Well you say what i say . IRGC is not interested in using airplanes as a defensive weapon . Against other airplanes. They are interested in case and transport .


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> Well you say what i say . IRGC is not interested in using airplanes as a defensive weapon . Against other airplanes. They are interested in case and transport .


I mean as long as the theaters of war in the middle east they still operate in are under rules of asymmetric engagement, you won't see them investing into platforms with traditional aerial roles. Although maybe they might build AWACS because that has a lot of potential, especially now that the Simorgh has been launched.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> I mean as long as the theaters of war in the middle east they still operate in are under rules of asymmetric engagement, you won't see them investing into platforms with traditional aerial roles. Although maybe they might build AWACS because that has a lot of potential, especially now that the Simorgh has been launched.


You see the problem is simorgh is defence ministry not IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> You see the problem is simorgh is defence ministry not IRGC.


I think the blueprints and the technical expertise can be shared with the IRGC upon request should they ever decide to tinker with the platform?


----------



## yugocrosrb95

IRGC is unnecessary apendage that adds layers of bureaucracy and overhead and complications... Its existence and purpose is to divide and conquer Iranian military.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3 | Wow Wow:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

@AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook 

What did I tell you guys?!?!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149

Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

PersianNinja said:


> Please refer to this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SIPRI Has Overstated Iran's Military Spending For Years
> 
> 
> Heres a very interesting article,well worth the read.....:smart: SIPRI Has Overstated Iran's Military Spending For Years https://www.bourseandbazaar.com/articles/2022/5/3/sipri-has-overstated-irans-military-spending-for-years SIPRI—the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute—produces...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk


While this article is correct that Sipri's number was wrong, there's no way Iran's military budget is only 4-5 billion USD when you look at everything



drmeson said:


> @Hack-Hook @aryobarzan @TheImmortal
> 
> If Kowsar gets a local A2A and A2G weaponry order, what options do we have?
> 
> A2A
> PL-7C/PL-5C/Fatter Aim-9P/J/R-73E for WVR
> R-27E for BVR (or procurement of PL-12 or R-77E)
> 
> A2G
> Yasin and Balaban PGMs
> Zubin, Ghassed, Bina for A2G Missiles
> 
> Shahin external Jammer Pod
> 
> What else are the options?


Oghab-11 targeting pod



Hack-Hook said:


> Still failed to answer a simple
> 
> I yet to see anything from them in this regard. For god's sake even defence ministry have better percision guided weapon for drones


You do realize the IRGC falls under the defense ministry?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> @AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook
> 
> What did I tell you guys?!?!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149
> 
> Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts


Yes I did think of you when I saw it...good guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> @AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook
> 
> What did I tell you guys?!?!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149
> 
> Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts



Respect owed to where it is deserved! 

It’s a super clean looking set up as well!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> @AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook
> 
> What did I tell you guys?!?!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149
> 
> Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts


This is what we thought would be great too!

Congrats to the regular IRIAF for their work here, they might not have the right aircraft they need, but setting up the infastructure to house a modernized force is great.



TheImmortal said:


>


Pretty remarkable, the base seems much large in width than a typical IRGC base.

Whats' interesting to me is the walls and roof, IRGC liked to use the original granite rock of the mountain while the Army paved them over.

And good to see Fotros again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> This is what we thought would be great too!
> 
> Congrats to the regular IRIAF for their work here, they might not have the right aircraft they need, but setting up the infastructure to house a modernized force is great.
> 
> 
> Pretty remarkable, the base seems much large in width than a typical IRGC base.
> 
> Whats' interesting to me is the walls and roof, IRGC liked to use the original granite rock of the mountain while the Army paved them over.
> 
> And good to see Fotros again.



Yes, good first step. The facility was huge. Could easily fit 24-36 or so F-35 class fighters. Very well built, wide enough to fit a full size fighter jet.

Fortos getting some stand off munitions was long over due. Hopefully they find more use for this drone.

Initially the base might be able to hold the F-14’s of Iran if the need ever arises.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

Strategically speaking, which current fighter/attack or UCAV should be housed inside?


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Strategically speaking, which current fighter/attack or UCAV should be housed inside?



F-14 and Mig-29’s are the only fighters worth defending during war time as they can defend Iran’s skies and help the air defense force.

UCAVs: the army doesn’t really have any “must have”, the best UAVs are in hands of IRGC.

So army has basically Fotros, Suicide drones, and whatever the predator clone is called. Goal should be to save as many drones as possible.


I would expand the number of bases strategically to cover Iran. At least 6 bases assuming a future expansion of Iranian Air Force.

I assume we will see an IRGC make their own version of these base if they ever decide to build out an airforce as well (rumors are they will).

The IRGC airbases could hold future IRGC UAV heavy bombers and long range strategic drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> F-14 and Mig-29’s are the only fighters worth defending during war time as they can defend Iran’s skies and help the air defense force.
> 
> UCAVs: the army doesn’t really have any “must have”, the best UAVs are in hands of IRGC.
> 
> So army has basically Fotros, Suicide drones, and whatever the predator clone is called. Goal should be to save as many drones as possible.
> 
> 
> I would expand the number of bases strategically to cover Iran. At least 6 bases assuming a future expansion of Iranian Air Force.
> 
> I assume we will see an IRGC make their own version of these base if they ever decide to build out an airforce as well (rumors are they will).
> 
> The IRGC airbases could hold future IRGC UAV heavy bombers and long range strategic drones.



I would disagree on which aircraft. IRIAF has invested heavily in the F-4E fleet with upgrades with confirmed AShCM and possible A2A weaponry. We know IRIAF loves American aircrafts.
Also if Kowsar has been fully operationalized with procured BVR in near future then it will value as much as current small MIG fleet (23 airframes; 19 operational). Air International article said that IRIAF deployed F-14AM (4), MIG-29 (3) and Kowsar (2 including 3-7401) at TAB-2 during Nagorno Karabakh war which was 2 years back. This shows which aircrafts IRIAF will use for A2A role in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Strategically speaking, which current fighter/attack or UCAV should be housed inside?


only drones and as I didn't saw the exact layout of the exit probably mohajer 6, ababil variants and Kaman-12 also Arash and Kyan and Karrar . if the exit is so that can also support safe operation like UAVs like Kaman-22 and Fotros you can also park those inside but i still have my doubts about this being suitable for safe operation of those.
about manned air vehicle . you must look at what you call strategic aircraft. traditionally bombers are called strategic aircraft , i don't have problem with putting those aircraft there that include our Su-22, Su-24 and f-4 .
our fleet of F-5, Saeqe and Kowsar don't have the necessary range while carrying traditional wartime payload so they must dispersed around the country to be near operational scenario.
now remain the case of F-14 and Mig-29 i think they also must be kept outside around the country in various airfields in war time , in peace time you can keep them inside these bases . but as defcon increase they must be send around the country .

.
all these in case of the exit of these bases designed for safe operation of such airplanes



TheImmortal said:


> Fortos getting some stand off munitions was long over due. Hopefully they find more use for this drone.


they introduced those cruise missile for UAVs , but one good use for them is putting them on F-5 it increase their survivability and operational usefulness



TheImmortal said:


> Initially the base might be able to hold the F-14’s of Iran if the need ever arises.


these base are more suitted for strategic bombers and in case of our country , the bombers include Su-22, Su-24 and F-4 and mirage-F1 if somebody decide to give them the upgrade su-22 and f-4 recieved


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> UCAVs: the army doesn’t really have any “must have”, the best UAVs are in hands of IRGC.


our must diverse UAV is Karrar which is a defense ministry UAV , and I believe if modified accordingly can fill our air force lack of equipment dealing with enemy middle sized UAVs and if used wisely even airplanes
also they have some of our best suicide UAVs and the back bone of our UAV fleet is Mohajer-6 not Shahed variant which also army poses



TheImmortal said:


> I assume we will see an IRGC make their own version of these base if they ever decide to build out an airforce as well (rumors are they will).


well these bases more suited for them as they basically had a bomber fleet



drmeson said:


> I would disagree on which aircraft. IRIAF has invested heavily in the F-4E fleet with upgrades with confirmed AShCM and possible A2A weaponry. We know IRIAF loves American aircrafts.
> Also if Kowsar has been fully operationalized with procured BVR in near future then it will value as much as current small MIG fleet (23 airframes; 19 operational). Air International article said that IRIAF deployed F-14AM (4), MIG-29 (3) and Kowsar (2 including 3-7401) at TAB-2 during Nagorno Karabakh war which was 2 years back. This shows which aircrafts IRIAF will use for A2A role in future.


the only plane that we have which can feel those rrole is F-14 and Mig-29 and now that F-5 have an actual radar you can add kowsar to that . F-1 could do that if maintained properly but it is abandoned , so only those 3 .

by the way its not the case of IRIAF like american aircraft because they are American they simply have better avionic and electronics and they are more compatible with our inventory. if you want look objectively even modern Chinese airplane have better electronic than Russian.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> I would disagree on which aircraft. IRIAF has invested heavily in the F-4E fleet with upgrades with confirmed AShCM and possible A2A weaponry. We know IRIAF loves American aircrafts.
> Also if Kowsar has been fully operationalized with procured BVR in near future then it will value as much as current small MIG fleet (23 airframes; 19 operational). Air International article said that IRIAF deployed F-14AM (4), MIG-29 (3) and Kowsar (2 including 3-7401) at TAB-2 during Nagorno Karabakh war which was 2 years back. This shows which aircrafts IRIAF will use for A2A role in future.



An F-4 ain’t even sniffing a F-16 let alone engaging it. And a civilian truck layout can fire AsHCM or an underground launcher.

If space is a priority you take F-14 and MIG-29. Literally every airforce commander would agree.

And Kowsar would fail against an F-16 and has little speed to escape. F-16 can detect it way before Kowsar can and fire BVR from much longer range.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> our fleet of F-5, Saeqe and Kowsar don't have the necessary range while carrying traditional wartime payload so they must dispersed around the country to be near operational scenario.
> now remain the case of F-14 and Mig-29 i think they also must be kept outside around the country in various airfields in war time , in peace time you can keep them inside these bases . but as defcon increase they must be send around the country .



Kowsar with 2 x WVR Fatter and 2 x BVR (let's say PL-12) + a single underbelly tank has enough range (2000+ km) to complement F-14 AM and MIGs in the air. Plus its modern avionics suite will shed off load from F-14s. 

2 x F-14AM armed with 2 x Fatter + 4 x Fakour-90 
2 x MIG-29 armed with 2 x R-73E + 4 x R-27E
4 Kowsar-I armed with 2 x Fatter + 2 x PL-12 (if they procure it)

supported by Datalinking from khatam al anbiya network of G-WACS Sepeher, Nazir, Asr and ground batteries of S-300, Bavar-373, Talaash System LORADS + TOR M1/2, Pantsir SHORADS.

That's a formidable interceptor party for any regional airforce. Air international article says IRIAF operated same way during Azeri rep. Armenian war.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> also they have some of our best suicide UAVs and the back bone of our UAV fleet is Mohajer-6 not Shahed variant which also army poses



Backbone is Shahed. It saw extensive war experience in Syria and Shaheed series as well in ISIS retribution attacks.

Mohajer-6 has just been getting delivered so not sure how it’s been the “backbone” of our fleet. Also I have seen more videos of Mohajer’s crashed inside iran/Pakistan/Iraq than actually engaging in any sort of combat.

Karrar is former target drone that has been modified. So take that for what you will.

Suicide drones are again IRGC speciality not IRIAF. The ones used in Armaco and elsewhere where IRGC. IRGC has drones that can infiltrate and operate behind enemy lines relatively undetected.

Mohajer-6 and Ababil-5 are front line drones made for engaging in front line warfare from a close distance. Thus they need dont need to be kept in mountain airbases, which would only reduce their range as these types of bases are usually not close to the border.

It’s more important to protect long range drones with stand off munitions like Fotros with 200KM CM and Predator clone (for IRIAF).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> An F-4 ain’t even sniffing a F-16 let alone engaging it. And a civilian truck layout can fire AsHCM or an underground launcher.
> 
> If space is a priority you take F-14 and MIG-29. Literally every airforce commander would agree.
> 
> And Kowsar would fail against an F-16 and has little speed to escape. F-16 can detect it way before Kowsar can and fire BVR from much longer range.



you do not have the concept of the integrated air battle approach. You think people will pit one fighter vs one fighter during war conflict which never happens. An F-16 will be seen from hundreds of km away by our radar networks and will be fired upon by probably a dozen of missiles from SHORADS and BVR engagers in the sky before it reaches near its BVR engagement range and even if it somehow does, Kowsar has an RCS of 1-2 m2 and itself a radar range of 93 KM, it's not easy to be detected considering its low RCS while it can see others with larger RCS 93 KM away while also taking data from Ground radar. Thai, Brazilians are not mad that they are still retaining this airframe while you here are canceling it.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Kowsar with 2 x WVR Fatter and 2 x BVR (let's say PL-12) + a single underbelly tank has enough range (2000+ km) to complement F-14 AM and MIGs in the air. Plus its modern avionics suite will shed off load from F-14s.
> 
> 2 x F-14AM armed with 2 x Fatter + 4 x Fakour-90
> 2 x MIG-29 armed with 2 x R-73E + 4 x R-27E
> 4 Kowsar-I armed with 2 x Fatter + 2 x PL-12 (if they procure it)
> 
> supported by Datalinking from khatam al anbiya network of G-WACS Sepeher, Nazir, Asr and ground batteries of S-300, Bavar-373, Talaash System LORADS + TOR M1/2, Pantsir SHORADS.
> 
> That's a formidable interceptor party for any regional airforce. Air international article says IRIAF operated same way during Azeri rep. Armenian war.



In that scenario, the Kowsars are “bait” while the air fighters do their work.

Same tactic was used in Iran-Iraq war to pull the enemy’s fighters and air defense focus away from the true fighter task force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Thai, Brazilians are not mad that they are still retaining this airframe while you here are canceling it.



They are retaining it due to cost and it’s Brazil. Who are they going to be fighting exactly that they need expensive top of the line fighters? Not every country can splurge on F-35’s.

Yes, I am cancelling it because people like you keep trying to make a 1960’s aircraft be something it’s not. Not because it doesn’t have value within Iran’s airforce....it does.

If it were that easy every country in the world would just fight their adversaries with their Yak-130’s and Advanced trainers. Life doesn’t work that way.

F-5 is an F-5 aerodynamically and kinetically. An F-35 has radar of 250+ KM and even Nebo isn’t detecting it till maybe 75KM more likely 50KM in a stealth loadout.

The only way F-5 survives is hanging in a air defense zone and flying low to avoid radars. It may get lucky. If it flies in a formation of Mig and F-14, then it will be used as bait to draw out the enemy in the area.



drmeson said:


> you do not have the concept of the integrated air battle approach. You think people will pit one fighter vs one fighter during war conflict which never happens.



It’s happening in Ukraine right now. So again, you are incorrect.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Kowsar with 2 x WVR Fatter and 2 x BVR (let's say PL-12) + a single underbelly tank has enough range (2000+ km) to complement F-14 AM and MIGs in the air. Plus its modern avionics suite will shed off load from F-14s.


no its not that simple , that configuration have far less combat range , that one is even more than ferry range with that configuration


these are for F-5

Range with maximum fuel -- 1387 miles.
Combat radius with maximum payload -- 195 miles
Combat radius with maximum fuel and two 530-pound bombs 558 miles.

good reading on the matter if you interested but a little lengthy









T.O. 1F-5E-1 F-5E Flight Manual


T.O. 1F-5E-1 F-5E Flight Manual



www.avialogs.com


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> no Iran don't need Mountain base as they will be make inoperable in first day of war .
> they were good at 50s,60,s and probably 70s but advance in technologies and rise of satellite and guided and glide ammunition made them obsolete nobody is building them anymore.



@Hack-Hook this was you on May 2nd discrediting the idea of mountain airbases. Many posts on and after this date telling us how Hollywood America Military will obliterate everything with pinpoint accuracy (Of course i countered the points you made including your idea of 200+ Mini airbases).

It doesn’t seem like you should now be telling us what SHOULD be inside that mountain airbase.

Thankfully Iran has sane military engineers that don’t believe in fairytales by Hollywood and push the limits of military facility structural engineering.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Backbone is Shahed. It saw extensive war experience in Syria and Shaheed series as well in ISIS retribution attacks.


they are not even 1 in 4 compared to Mohajer series



TheImmortal said:


> @Hack-Hook this was you on May 2nd discrediting the idea of mountain airbases. Many posts on and after this date telling us how Hollywood America Military will obliterate everything with pinpoint accuracy (Of course i countered the points you made including your idea of 200+ Mini airbases).
> 
> It doesn’t seem like you should now be telling us what SHOULD be inside that mountain airbase.
> 
> Thankfully Iran has sane military engineers that don’t believe in fairytales by Hollywood and push the limits of military facility structural engineering.


as i say and i still say mountain base are for drone and at most strategic bomber .
and as you see no fighter inside them. so still my point of view is more in line with IRIAF view not yours . so till you show us any evidence of Mig-29 or F-14 inside them it seems its not your place to tell us what must be kept inside them

and those sane military engineers decided to keep these bases for drones


----------



## mohsen

By the way guys, IRIB has just chosen another fucker as military reporter, who not only doesn't know any military gear, can't even report what he has been told! He called Qaem-9 bomb as a equivalent to hellfire missile! while the word Shafaq is written on the missile.


remind me of the other fucker in IRINN who was saying Qadir radar can rotate 360 degree!!!

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> they are not even 1 in 4 compared to Mohajer series
> 
> 
> as i say and i still say mountain base are for drone and at most strategic bomber .
> and as you see no fighter inside them. so still my point of view is more in line with IRIAF view not yours . so till you show us any evidence of Mig-29 or F-14 inside them it seems its not your place to tell us what must be kept inside them
> 
> and those sane military engineers decided to keep these bases for drones



1) Mohajer-6 has a range less than 130 miles. Keeping it in an mountain airbase that is at least that much away from the Iranian border is logistically not sound unless enemy is already within Iran’s borders.(highly unlikely)

2) It is not war time and thus there is no need to put F-14’s into the base when pilots need their training and hours (same goes for MIGs).

You don’t built a mountain airbase that big and wide if you don’t plane to have fighter jets in their during war time.

Expect to see more of these bases pop up. As Iran is surrounded by mountains.



mohsen said:


> By the way guys, IRIB has just chosen another fucker as military reporter, who not only doesn't know any military gear, can't even report what he has been told! He called Qaem-9 bomb as a equivalent to hellfire missile! while the word Shafaq is written on the missile.
> 
> 
> remind me of the other fucker in IRINN who was saying Qadir radar can rotate 360 degree!!!



1) he gives timing of how far the mountain base is from the airbase they took off. Add in capability of a bell helicopter you can deduce max radius of said location.

2) the video shows a fire extinguisher with the name of a nearby city within said radius. Furthermore reducing area.

OSINT now already has a rough idea of general location. I wouldn’t be surprised if we get a full location reveal in coming weeks.

So much for “secret” military base.


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> By the way guys, IRIB has just chosen another fucker as military reporter, who not only doesn't know any military gear, can't even report what he has been told! He called Qaem-9 bomb as a equivalent to hellfire missile! while the word Shafaq is written on the missile.
> 
> 
> remind me of the other fucker in IRINN who was saying Qadir radar can rotate 360 degree!!!


in the video i see both qaem series of bomb and shafaq . maybe when they edited the video the audio video just come out of sync


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Mohajer-6 has a range less than 130 miles. Keeping it in an mountain airbase that is at least that much away from the Iranian border is logistically not sound unless enemy is already within Iran’s borders.(highly unlikely)


who told you it has a range of 130km. it direct control must be around 200km away . also the same goes for shahed-129 . as like shahed-129 it has ins and gps guidance . and the range don't determine if its back bone of our uav fleet or not. the operational abilities tell you that . it has endurance and attack capabilities for that in acceptable price . its like the case of Ankay and Bayraktar for turkey

by the way go and look at it and see what you see inside it , the majority id Ababil and Mohajer and Karrar


TheImmortal said:


> It is not war time and thus there is no need to put F-14’s into the base when pilots need their training and hours (same goes for MIGs).


when they were put in those bases call me. by the way your excuses defeat your argument . we were talking about these bases
for protecting asset in case of enemy surprise first strike . by your argument these weapons must survive the first strike so they can be transferred later to these bases.


TheImmortal said:


> You don’t built a mountain airbase that big and wide if you don’t plane to have fighter jets in their during war time.


the most devastating operation of our airforce against iraq Army was attacking on H-3 and destroying their bombing fleet , not destroying their fighter and interceptor. they have less value than bombers and transport in wartime .



TheImmortal said:


> Expect to see more of these bases pop up. As Iran is surrounded by mountains.


expect them filled with UAVS



TheImmortal said:


> Karrar is former target drone that has been modified. So take that for what you will.


the same shell, different internal



TheImmortal said:


> Suicide drones are again IRGC speciality not IRIAF. The ones used in Armaco and elsewhere where IRGC. IRGC has drones that can infiltrate and operate behind enemy lines relatively undetected.


look at the base and the list of drones there . flying wing is IRGC specialty not suicide drone , defense ministry have various type of suicide and swarm drones that are AI controlled


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> 1) he gives timing of how far the mountain base is from the airbase they took off. Add in capability of a bell helicopter you can deduce max radius of said location.
> 
> 2) the video shows a fire extinguisher with the name of a nearby city within said radius. Furthermore reducing area.
> 
> OSINT now already has a rough idea of general location. I wouldn’t be surprised if we get a full location reveal in coming weeks.
> 
> So much for “secret” military base.


To be fair, a mountain facility like this should be pretty well spotted by US sats.

The construction footprint would be quite large, think of all the debris piles to be collected let alone vehicles etc...

Their would be alot of forensic evidence of construction but the intent would not be clear till now. More of a secret to civilians and less so to military intelligence of USA/Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flotilla

Hi guys;

Making a bit of OSINT in Google maps, and watching closely the Isfahan AB I found something interesting;

1.- See at least 4 F14s are out of the armored shelters. May be indicative about a certain (good in my oppinion) level of readiness.









Google Maps


Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.




www.google.com





2.- What are those small VLJ aircraft?. Those seems to be discarded or storaged. HESA Dorna?.









Google Maps


Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.




www.google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> They are retaining it due to cost and it’s Brazil. Who are they going to be fighting exactly that they need expensive top of the line fighters? Not every country can splurge on F-35’s.



No, they are retaining it because it's simple to operate, and maintain platform that can be upgraded easily. Cost is one factor but not the only one. Even if we just consider cost as the sole factor it's a huge one for IRIAF itself. 

You have some mental obsession with F-35 ... no country in Iranian surroundings operates F-35 and Israeli Adir cant reach Iran so your whole fixation on F-35 is impractical here. 



TheImmortal said:


> Yes, I am cancelling it because people like you keep trying to make a 1960’s aircraft be something it’s not. Not because it doesn’t have value within Iran’s airforce....it does.



BS post. Except for its aerodynamic shape, nothing in Kowsar resembles F-5E/F. Its radar+ avionics package, engines, combat suite hell even the wheels are just different, and whatever resembles F-5 has been built new. People like you do not understand the fact that upgradation means everything in the field of aviation. F-16 also flew in 1976, it's a 46 years old aerodynamic design. By your logic, we should start calling F-16 Blk 60 an old plane because F-16 is 46 years? even the staunchest enemies of the Iranian government like BT accept the fact that Kowsar is a 100 % different plane with a 4.0 Generation suite. Iran needs it more than it needs its F-7N, Mirages, and current F-5 fleet. I would trust the decision-makers more than I trust anyone on the internet. 



TheImmortal said:


> If it were that easy every country in the world would just fight their adversaries with their Yak-130’s and Advanced trainers. Life doesn’t work that way.



Your logic is wrong. Every country actually does operate light combat fighters in high numbers to complement their main machines. Taiwan has FCK-1 which is morphing into AIDC T-5, Iraq is getting FC-1 and T-50 not just F-16 Block 52, Thai are getting F-5T, India is replacing its 60 years old MIGs, not with SU-30 but with a 4.0 generation LCA, Pakistan has its FC-1 Blk II/II despite having a large fleet of F-16 an option to purchase more J-10C ... the list goes on. IRIAF will purchase probably Sukhois or J-10C too but they will replace F-4E/D, Su-24MK not Kowsars or whatever they will name the next generation of it. 



TheImmortal said:


> F-5 is an F-5 aerodynamically and kinetically. An F-35 has radar of 250+ KM and even Nebo isn’t detecting it till maybe 75KM more likely 50KM in a stealth loadout.



F-5aerodynamics are not bad even against legendary 4+ generation fighers.

F-5E dogfighting trials at Nellis AFB in 1977, called ACEVAL/AIMVAL, "*For the first three weeks of the test, the F-14s and F-15s were hopelessly outclassed and demoralized against F-5E carrying Aim-9L".*

Again nobody Iran might face in air combat is operating F-35 except US. 



TheImmortal said:


> The only way F-5 survives is hanging in a air defense zone and flying low to avoid radars. It may get lucky. If it flies in a formation of Mig and F-14, then it will be used as bait to draw out the enemy in the area.



wrong logic. Kowsar is not F-5E/F it has far better radar and avionics. Just on itself, a fully operationalized one will see any incoming threat from 90-95 KM and might shoot BVR missiles at the incoming attacker while from how far away any other 4-4+ generation fighter like F-16 or Mirage-2000 sees Kowsar depends upon their radars. Detecting RCS of 1-2 m^2 is not easy. 

In real battle scenarios like IRIAF operations during the 2020 war in North west. Kowsars will fly with Fakour armed F-14AM and MIGs (with their R-27E) using some datalink operated from Khatam Al Anbiya network, taking inputs from Sepeher, Qader, Nazir, Asr like G-WACS and SIGNIT behind them. Your idea of one fighter vs one fighter is not realistic at all. 



TheImmortal said:


> It’s happening in Ukraine right now. So again, you are incorrect.



Incomparable. Put Iran in place of Ukraine, IRGC would destroy the bases from where Russian fighters are coming in so the same fighters would have to use drop tanks to reach Ukrainian/Iranian skies with larger drag, enhanced RCS for LORADS + SHORADS to pick who would fire on them to disrupt the invader flight. It's a totally different scenario from Ukraine. Airforces operate in tandem with ground forces plans not alone. IRIAF being the weakest of Artesh forces will gets its job turn easy by IRGC aerospace command.



Flotilla said:


> Hi guys;
> 
> Making a bit of OSINT in Google maps, and watching closely the Isfahan AB I found something interesting;
> 
> 1.- See at least 4 F14s are out of the armored shelters. May be indicative about a certain (good in my oppinion) level of readiness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Maps
> 
> 
> Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2.- What are those small VLJ aircraft?. Those seems to be discarded or storaged. HESA Dorna?.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Maps
> 
> 
> Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



QRA at TAB-8. 

Is that usual guys ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Issue with Kowsar is that it is too compatible with F-5 Tiger II because of need to maintain original F-5 Tiger II and Kowsar is anemic when it does not have long range beyond visual range air to air missiles along turbojet engine being clone of J85-GE-21.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> no its not that simple , that configuration have far less combat range , that one is even more than ferry range with that configuration
> 
> 
> these are for F-5
> 
> Rangewith maximum fuel -- 1387 miles.
> Combat radius with maximum payload -- 195 miles
> Combat radius with maximum fuel and two 530-pound bombs 558 miles.
> 
> good reading on the matter if you interested but a little lengthy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T.O. 1F-5E-1 F-5E Flight Manual
> 
> 
> T.O. 1F-5E-1 F-5E Flight Manual
> 
> 
> 
> www.avialogs.com



it says on FAS and Glocal security that with 2 x Sidewinders and on internal fuel only (2563 ltr) F-5E can fly up to 1056 km. That means it's doing 1056/2563 = 0.41 KM/ltr with 2 x sidewinders. Now if we add an additional central fuselage tank of 1040 ltr total fuel jet will be carrying is 3603 ltr. It means 0.41 KM x 3603 ltr = 1485 km range, mind you a 1040 ltr tank of JP-1 fuel itself weighs around 830 kgs. 

Let's a Kowsar is flying with 2x Fatter + 2x PL-12 (additional 360 KG). My guess is that the range would cut down to somewhere between 1200-1300 Km which is not bad at all. It can easily supplement Gashtzan groups of F-14AM and MIGs with its modern avionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> it says on FAS and Glocal security that with 2 x Sidewinders and on internal fuel only (2563 ltr) F-5E can fly up to 1056 km. That means it's doing 1056/2563 = 0.41 KM/ltr with 2 x sidewinders. Now if we add an additional central fuselage tank of 1040 ltr total fuel jet will be carrying is 3603 ltr. It means 0.41 KM x 3603 ltr = 1485 km range, mind you a 1040 ltr tank of JP-1 fuel itself weighs around 830 kgs.
> 
> Let's a Kowsar is flying with 2x Fatter + 2x PL-12 (additional 360 KG). My guess is that the range would cut down to somewhere between 1200-1300 Km which is not bad at all. It can easily supplement Gashtzan groups of F-14AM and MIGs with its modern avionics.


that 500km flight radius or combat range . but you most reduce from that more in case you need to have several minute fighting and maneuvering also . you need consider the need to use after burner. also you want to have at least 10*15 min of reserve when you come back to the base.
all your calculation are only aplicable if you knew there won't be any fight and you want transport plan from point x to point y

also those drop tanks significantly increase drag on airplane so you must also consider those ..
the link I provided is F-5 operation manual and explained it


----------



## drmeson

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Issue with Kowsar is that it is too compatible with F-5 Tiger II because of need to maintain original F-5 Tiger II and Kowsar is anemic when it does not have long range beyond visual range air to air missiles along turbojet engine being clone of J85-GE-21.



Aerodynamically it may look like an F-5E but with figures that were shown on official slides at the time of its unveiling, its performance somewhat deviates from F-5E. It's slightly shorter in length and has much less take-off weight by almost a ton (added radar and avionics weight). 

Knowing that they played with the aerodynamics of Saeqeh with twin tails, enhanced nose length, and squared air intakes. My guess is that in the next generation in Azarakhsh, Saegheh and Kowsar .... if they retain the basic frame of a Tiger, they might go for some CFT-like solution to carry around ~3600 ltr of fuel instead of the current capacity of 2563 ltr. It will be less drag compared to an external fuel tank as well and may push the craft to provide longer-range CAPs with bigger fighters. 








Hack-Hook said:


> that 500km flight radius or combat range . but you most reduce from that more in case you need to have several minute fighting and maneuvering also . you need consider the need to use after burner. also you want to have at least 10*15 min of reserve when you come back to the base.
> all your calculation are only aplicable if you knew there won't be any fight and you want transport plan from point x to point y
> 
> also those drop tanks significantly increase drag on airplane so you must also consider those ..
> the link I provided is F-5 operation manual and explained it



That scenario of fighting, afterburner etc applies to any fighter which will reduce its range. My given figures from FAS/Global security are based on their CAP missions. 

Btw have you seen the MIG-29 range with 2 x R-73E and 2 x R-27E/R-77E ? it is not very different.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Aerodynamically it may look like an F-5E but with figures that were shown on official slides at the time of its unveiling, its performance somewhat deviates from F-5E. It's slightly shorter in length and has much less take-off weight by almost a ton (added radar and avionics weight).
> 
> Knowing that they played with the aerodynamics of Saeqeh with twin tails, enhanced nose length, and squared air intakes. My guess is that in the next generation in Azarakhsh, Saegheh and Kowsar .... if they retain the basic frame of a Tiger, they might go for some CFT-like solution to carry around ~3600 ltr of fuel instead of the current capacity of 2563 ltr. It will be less drag compared to an external fuel tank as well and may push the craft to provide longer-range CAPs with bigger fighters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That scenario of fighting, afterburner etc applies to any fighter which will reduce its range. My given figures from FAS/Global security are based on their CAP missions.
> 
> Btw have you seen the MIG-29 range with 2 x R-73E and 2 x R-27E/R-77E ? it is not very different.


mig 29 does not have that much more range when it come to ferry range but when it come to combat range because of the more efficient design has around 700km combat radious on internal fuel (i don't knew what payload it calculated on as different payload can change that in extreme cases even halve it)
interesting article on mig-29 by someone a little biassed , but he has some points








Russia's Mig-29 Fighter: Moscow's Worst Combat Jet of All-Time?


Or just misunderstood?




nationalinterest.org


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> mig 29 does not have that much more range when it come to ferry range but when it come to combat range because of the more efficient design has around 700km combat radious on internal fuel (i don't knew what payload it calculated on as different payload can change that in extreme cases even halve it)



I think 700 combat radius is based upon 2 x R-73 + 4 x R-27E/R77E which is almost equal to 600-650 KM of a Kowsar configured with 2 x Fatter + 2 x PL-12 + 1 Drop tank while both of them the MIG-29 9.12A with its relic RPLK-29 (earliest N019) and Kowsar's IEI Bayyenat-II (Grifo-346/KLJ6F) have almost similar radar ranges but here is the difference, Mig's radar weighs a booming 385 Kg while that of Kowsar weighs 85 kgs barely being of modern western Grifo or its Chinese NRIET copy and is much more sophisticated too. This family is currently powering M-346, Kowsar, F-7BG (the toughest J-7 variant ever) while its variant with more T/R module variant is onboard of FC-1 Blk 2. 

My point is if we just consider BVR armed CAP ... Kowsar and IRIAF's Mig 9.12A are not that different from each other. It will be a different story though if Iran manages to get MIG upgraded to MIG-29 M2/SMT standard with CFT installed while Kowsar gets a smaller no drag CFTs over its air intakes too (350 ltrs of JP-1A) on each side giving its combat radius a boost by 300 KM.


----------



## 925boy

Stryker1982 said:


> To be fair, a mountain facility like this should be pretty well spotted by US sats.


i wouldnt count on this that much. why do i say this? well US sats havent been that great at spotting new and secret Iranian nuclear sites historically...and nuclear sites and military sites still need similar construction needs, so how come US has only realized some Iranian nuclear sites years after they've been up and running?? Iran is so large and sats is not the issue- human has to review and study all those sat images, and Iran is a huge country...Also, juist knowing the site location isnt good enough- you will still need detailed intel on the overall structure to even be able to create a semi-feasible plan of shutting the site down - Fordow for example, realistically, even US cant effectively close it down with force- but their satellites "know" where it is. Just saying that sat alone cant save any country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> You have some mental obsession with F-35 ... no country in Iranian surroundings operates F-35 and Israeli Adir cant reach Iran so your whole fixation on F-35 is impractical here.



F-35 can reach Iran with mid air refueling. Or do you need to check global security to use basic intelligence?

And yes I use F-35/F-22 as Iran’s primary threat because the most likely war would be fought against US/Israel. It seems you are preparing for a war with Azerbaijan since that’s all you quote. 



drmeson said:


> BS post. Except for its aerodynamic shape, nothing in Kowsar resembles F-5E/F. Its radar+ avionics package, engines, combat suite hell even the wheels are just different, and whatever resembles F-5 has been built new.



Everything resembles an F-5. It’s an upgraded F-5, which in itself was a cheap light plane ment to be supplied to banana countries during the 60’s. 

Owj engine is merely reverse engineered F-5 engine. Radar has been upgraded yes, but still outclassed against radars on medium and heavy fighters.

Combat suite has been upgraded from analog to digital and incorporation of LCD screens.

You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?



drmeson said:


> Your logic is wrong. Every country actually does operate light combat fighters in high numbers to complement their main machines. Taiwan has FCK-1 which is morphing into AIDC T-5, Iraq is getting FC-1 and T-50 not just F-16 Block 52, Thai are getting F-5T, India is replacing its 60 years old MIGs, not with SU-30 but with a 4.0 generation LCA, Pakistan has its FC-1 Blk II/II despite having a large fleet of F-16 an option to purchase more J-10C ... the list goes on. IRIAF will purchase probably Sukhois or J-10C too but they will replace F-4E/D, Su-24MK not Kowsars or whatever they will name the next generation of it.



As I have said, Kowsar has its place as a light support aircraft and advanced trainer for Iran. It’s those like you who try to make it an air superiority fighter that I do not agree with it.



drmeson said:


> Again nobody Iran might face in air combat is operating F-35 except US.



Yes Israel and US. Who do you plan to go to war with? Afghanistan? UAE? Iraq?

Seriously sometimes your posts make wonder..



drmeson said:


> In real battle scenarios like IRIAF operations during the 2020 war in North west. Kowsars will fly with Fakour armed F-14AM and MIGs (with their R-27E) using some datalink operated from Khatam Al Anbiya network, taking inputs from Sepeher, Qader, Nazir, Asr like G-WACS and SIGNIT behind them. Your idea of one fighter vs one fighter is not realistic at all.



It seems all you can do is regurgitate either one single article of how Iranian Air Force positioned itself in a foreign conflict it had little chance of entering. Or going to global security and using that as your Bible of aircraft capabilities.

We quite frankly do not Iran’s data link capabilities across the unified air defense network.

Nonetheless my point is factual. F-14 and Mig-29 are Iran’s best assets right now to defend airspace. And Iran will need an air superiority like fighter in SU-30 class range to defend its airspace. Kowsar cannot be that fighter.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Nonetheless my point is factual. F-14 and Mig-29 are Iran’s best assets right now to defend airspace. And Iran will need an air superiority like fighter in SU-30 class range to defend its airspace. Kowsar cannot be that fighter.


honestly prefer J-10c over su-30 . SU-30 represent brute force approach to problems , chinese airplane use modern technology to answer those problems and it cost less than half to operate them


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly prefer J-10c over su-30 . j-10c represent brute force approach to problems , chinese airplane use modern technology to answer those problems and it cost less than half to operate them



You want to be dependent on China for spare parts? Chinese engines that Iran has zero experience with? Seems recipe for disaster. 

And I haven’t seen any credible report of China offering Iran any of its fighters let alone J-10C. I would rather have J-31 if possible. It’s more “future proof” then the 4+ J-10C.


----------



## BigMelatonin

TheImmortal said:


> You want to be dependent on China for spare parts? Chinese engines that Iran has zero experience with? Seems recipe for disaster.
> 
> And I haven’t seen any credible report of China offering Iran any of its fighters let alone J-10C. I would rather have J-31 if possible. It’s more “future proof” then the 4+ J-10C.


Where will the spare parts for Su-30s or other Russian fighters come from?


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You want to be dependent on China for spare parts? Chinese engines that Iran has zero experience with? Seems recipe for disaster.
> 
> And I haven’t seen any credible report of China offering Iran any of its fighters let alone J-10C. I would rather have J-31 if possible. It’s more “future proof” then the 4+ J-10C


we have zero experience with AL-31 or AL-41 so what we must learn about them we can learn about WS-10b also and I yet to see any evidence of russia offering Iran even upgrading our Mig-29 to SMT standard at least there is evidence that several years ago china offered original J-10 and Iran refused

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

BigMelatonin said:


> Where will the spare parts for Su-30s or other Russian fighters come from?



If (and a big IF) Russia signs a deal for SU-30 there would likely be clause for spare parts ToT. Also Russia today is in a different position than last year vis a vi severed western relations. Not that I am optimistic, but chances of getting something now are at the highest point they have been since fall of Soviet Union.

China today has no reason to assist Iran military and in fact can drop Iran at the most minor inconvenience. Their military deals in 1990’s were very telling for Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> we have zero experience with AL-31 or AL-41 so what we must learn about them we can learn about WS-10b also and I yet to see any evidence of russia offering Iran even upgrading our Mig-29 to SMT standard at least there is evidence that several years ago china offered original J-10 and Iran refused



We have experience with AL-21 which is precursor to those engines. We have knowledge of Russian parts and Russia weapons ecosystem. Iran is in process of becoming a official regional hub for the repair and modernization of Russian helicopters.

Our engineers are very in tune with Russian and American weapon systems.

Now you want to throw in an entirely new (Chinese) ecosystem? It’s a logistical nightmare.

Iran refused J-10 for reasons they know well. Most of which is lack of faith in Chinese arms procurement. C-802 debacle is still fresh in minds of Iran. Iran has mostly relied on China for raw components and a few things here and there. There must be a reason for that that our military establishment knows.

Pakistan’s relationship with China is much more strategic and iron clad than Iran’s will ever be.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> We have experience with AL-21 which is precursor to those engines. We have knowledge of Russian parts and Russia weapons ecosystem. Iran is in process of becoming a official regional hub for the repair and modernization of Russian helicopters.


turbo jet vs turbofan , how different they can be ?


TheImmortal said:


> Our engineers are very in tune with Russian and American weapon systems.


you can't find two mig-29 which are built with same equipment inside , maintaining Russian fighters is a logistic nightmare and no we are not in tune with maintaining Russian equipment


TheImmortal said:


> Now you want to throw in an entirely new (Chinese) ecosystem? It’s a logistical nightmare.


not if it replace older equipment . it streamline the maintenance


TheImmortal said:


> Iran refused J-10 for reasons they know well. Most of which is lack of faith in Chinese arms procurement. C-802 debacle is still fresh in minds of Iran. Iran has mostly relied on China for raw components and a few things here and there. There must be a reason for that that our military establishment knows.


and how reliable is Russia , can you explain that to me ? let not talk about s-300 let talk about a civilian airplane like tu-204



TheImmortal said:


> If (and a big IF) Russia signs a deal for SU-30 there would likely be clause for spare parts ToT. Also Russia today is in a different position than last year vis a vi severed western relations. Not that I am optimistic, but chances of getting something now are at the highest point they have been since fall of Soviet Union.


russia had to close two of its tank factory ,for lack of parts , it has to land its only actively produced civillian airplane for lack of parts.
it had to remove AESA radar from mig-35 because they could not produce them in numbre and you consider russia a viable source for acquiring new weapon.


----------



## Cancerous Tumor



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> @AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook
> 
> What did I tell you guys?!?!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149
> 
> Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts


Great thing about these kinds of investments is that they will last 100 years+, for basically anything that requires storage in a secure location. So you are really getting your moneys worth than an aircraft itself which would be fully outdated in about 35 years.



TheImmortal said:


>


Seems like I missed it and no one is talking about it, but it looks like a air-launched CM was shown to be UAV capable? "Haidar"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Seems like I missed it and no one is talking about it, but it looks like a air-launched CM was shown to be UAV capable? "Haidar"



Two were actually shown off.

One was a stand off CM of 200 KM range (haidar) another was a loitering CM called Haidar-2.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530501506012614656
I’m curious what the seeker is on both. I assume INS/GPS combo. But can Fotros have the ability to “change” the target? Ie update the targeting data to a new target and upload it to the CM.


----------



## N_Al40

This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...



They are put on before flight. Most of these were probably taken out of storage conditions (disassembled) for the “video”. You can see crates in a part of clip which I am assuming houses dissembled drone components.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> F-35 can reach Iran with mid air refueling. Or do you need to check global security to use basic intelligence?
> 
> And yes I use F-35/F-22 as Iran’s primary threat because the most likely war would be fought against US/Israel. It seems you are preparing for a war with Azerbaijan since that’s all you quote.



So where would this Israeli imaginary party refuel? Their 707 would be seen and blasted in the air by Syrian or Iraqi Airforce/Air defense. There goes that route. Syrian Air defense is not a bit shy of firing AD missiles at the Israeli airforce which each time they enter Syrian airspace have to maneuver around and run back after delivery of their SOWs. What would happen to their 707 over Syria or Iraq ? that route is impossible. Not to mention our own early warning system might even see such activity happening if it happens within our radar reach. Turkey and Saudi Arabia would not risk making an enemy out of Iran for nothing by allowing Israelis to fly + refuel over them to reach Iran. So tell me which way it is going to be? around the globe? If Israel is ever going to strike on Iranian nuclear sites then it will probably use UCAV's+Ballastic missiles, it has shown that intention through previous attacks.

And US operates not just F-35, it also operates F-22, B1, B2, and what not, if they want to destroy Iranian sites they would not have to rely upon a manned attack fighter like the 1950s. Instead, they have 12 different solutions none of which Iran (or any country other than China) can counter easily.



TheImmortal said:


> Everything resembles an F-5. It’s an upgraded F-5, which in itself was a cheap light plane ment to be supplied to banana countries during the 60’s.
> 
> Owj engine is merely reverse engineered F-5 engine. Radar has been upgraded yes, but still outclassed against radars on medium and heavy fighters.
> 
> Combat suite has been upgraded from analog to digital and incorporation of LCD screens.
> 
> You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?



I am glad that you have quickly changed your stance from Kowsar being 1960s F-5 to "oh now I realize few things are different and radar has been Upgraded" I think I deserve credit here.

Now let me bisect your post. You said radar has been upgraded while from (1) official unveiling pictures and footage shown (2) official information given out on slides at the time of unveiling (3) Articles written by BT ... ZERO evidence exists that radar is an upgrade of the APQ-153 (later mildly upgraded) system that IIAF was delivered with. The weight, the shape of the antenna, size, range, T/R modules count, etc all point towards the ditto of Grifo M-346 or its Chinese NRIET copy KLJ-6F. so tell me is it NEW or is it an upgrade?

And why would we need to pit a light fighter's radar against those in Su-35S or F-15E? if we go by that logic then FCK-1, T-5, F-16 Blk 40, F-20, F-5TH, FC-1, LCA, F-2, etc should not exist because they all have lesser radar ranges than SU-35S. Great logic 



TheImmortal said:


> Combat suite has been upgraded from analog to digital and incorporation of LCD screens.
> 
> You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?



So radar and avionics have been changed, the combat suite is changed, the airframe is brand new (zero life), and the engine is newly built. Comms are modern, EW-suite is there, semi FBW system is being deployed. Everything has been changed to an on par rival an FC-1 Nlk-II/FCK-1, but yeah it's all 1960s right? Iranians, Turkish, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indopaks, Thais everyone is probably mad to invest heavily in modern light combat aircrafts.



TheImmortal said:


> You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?



We do not know because the plane is not operationalized fully, its detailed specs are still coming out. 3 years back we did not even know Iranian companies were capable of atually producing a complete 4.0 generation avionics+combat suite. It came as a surprise. I have been chasing this project from days of IDF, IMF I remember how we all were disappointed to find out the Saegheh aerodynamic failures and the fact that initial batch (the famous 5) had no avionics package. From there to a 4.0 Gen combat suite which they literally unpacked and showed to the public was a great leap.

About the BVR we do not know what they will go for when the plane actually gets operationalized. They might opt for PL-12 considering that this project (key.aero, Air international articles) was a consortium with Chinese CATIC. Slim chances exist of procurement of R-77E for MIGs and they might be used for Kowsars. We don't know yet like we did not know the capability of IEI avionics manufacturing capability. Wait and see until the plane gets operationalized. 



TheImmortal said:


> As I have said, Kowsar has its place as a light support aircraft and advanced trainer for Iran. It’s those like you who try to make it an air superiority fighter that I do not agree with it.



Where did I say that its an air superiority fighter? You write on basis of what you imagine. Whenever I talk of it I call it a very good replacement for the entire circus we have of F-5E/F, MirageF-1EQ, and F-7N. Combined these are some 150-160 airframes with zero worth in modern combat. Hell, I even say that there is at least another generation of this R&D project of Azarakhsh-Saegheh-Kowsar which would be on par with F-16 block 40-52/F-18A/FC-1-III, and that plane would probably be the actual production model which would eventually replace this 150+ money for nothing fleet we have.



TheImmortal said:


> Yes Israel and US. Who do you plan to go to war with? Afghanistan? UAE? Iraq?



Israeli jets can not reach Iran unless they get bases in UAE or Saudi Arabia, which even if they do would probably be dealt with BM/CM/UCAV attacks by IRGC. 

And you can not stop the US from striking Iranian nuclear sites even if you grab some 250 Su-35S, they will launch some 2000 Tomahawks at nuclear sites, airbases, naval installations if they want to. War is a combination of politics, military tactics, and diplomacy. Iran has fought the US with all three aspects and that is how you deal with a real superpower. Not by purchasing 24x Su-35S and thinking they will counter F-35 so you can stop the menace.

In military terms threat levels are set on basis of adversary capability and from there you build up the counter. IRIAF faces threats from Azerbaijan+Turkey < KSA+UAE+Kuwait < US in region. This is why airforces make airbases and in all directions along borders, purchase both light and heavy fighter and station squadrons in accordance with what kind of threats they perceive from that border. Right now we are just not capable of dealing with regional foes let alone other larger forces. You start from somewhere and we are exactly doing that.



TheImmortal said:


> It seems all you can do is regurgitate either one single article of how Iranian Air Force positioned itself in a foreign conflict it had little chance of entering. Or going to global security and using that as your Bible of aircraft capabilities.



I do not work for HESA or IRIAF so yes I rely upon well-researched articles on the internet to know more like almost everyone else. I do not get the joke here?



TheImmortal said:


> We quite frankly do not Iran’s data link capabilities across the unified air defense network.



Quite frankly we know literally nothing except what we get from researched articles, unveilings, and words of officials. If the article says we use datalink on some fighters from G-WACS network grid then I would believe it. I do not know what would you need to convince yourself. Each to their own perhaps.



TheImmortal said:


> Nonetheless my point is factual. F-14 and Mig-29 are Iran’s best assets right now to defend airspace. And Iran will need an air superiority like fighter in SU-30 class range to defend its airspace. Kowsar cannot be that fighter.



Nobody in this forum at least, including me has ever said that Kowsar (or its next gen) is going to replace F-14AM, MIG 9.12A (61 operational fighters) that we have. I do not recall myself or anyone saying something like this, if you have seen it then please put that here for debate. Kowsars next gen will be an amazing leap in the Iranian aviation industry and it will kick out all the other tiny relics fighters we have. That has always been my point. Unless we get some 100 x Su-35S or J-10C I do not see even the F-4E/D fleet retiring.



N_Al40 said:


> This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...



I believe some are from the parade .. now guess the rest

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Nobody in this forum at least, including me has ever said that Kowsar (or its next gen) is going to replace F-14AM, *MIG 9.12A (61 operational fighters)* that we have.


well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33


> The N019 radar weighs around 385 kg in total. It is a pulse-doppler radar operating in X band around 3 cm wavelength. It uses three basic operating regimes. High PRF radar mode for optimal detection of closing targets, medium PRF mode for optimal detection of receding targets, and an interleaved high/medium PRF mode for all aspect detection. It uses a guard channel for sidelobe suppression. SARH Illumination and main channels use different frequencies within the X band, and are multiplexed in time. Individual aircraft can be preset on the ground to different frequencies to avoid mutual interference during group operations. Scanning cycle times are 2.5–5 seconds depending on mode. Beam width is 3.5º, which determines the minimum separation of two targets in azimuth. The radar beam is stabilised up to 120º in roll and +40º/-30º in pitch. N019 is a hybrid analogue/digital design, with an NII Argon Ts100 digital processing unit. The Ts100 processor can achieve 170,000 operations per second, has 8K RAM and 136k ROM, and is built using medium scale integration ICs. It is based on the proprietary POISK architecture developed at NII Argon, which allows adapting of the instruction set to control system functions by expanding the basic instruction set with microcodes inherent in specific tasks. Compared to machines using the same elements but a generic instruction set (e.g. the ES EVM architecture Argon-15A of the MiG-31) processing capability was enhanced by 1.5 to 2.5 times and the code 3 to 5 times more compact, making Ts100 much cheaper to produce. The Ts100 computer weighs 32 kg





> Mode “V” (Vstryehchya): Encounter​
> Encounter mode is the main search mode used in interception, as it gives the longest detection ranges and the least false returns. It uses a High PRF mode which can detect closing targets only in the velocity range of 230 – 2500 km/h at altitudes from 30m to 23,000m. The display is calibrated to a maximum range of 150 km. Target can be up to 10,000m above or 6,000m below the host aircraft’s own altitude. *A typical 3 sq m RCS fighter target can be detected at 50–70 km and tracked at 40–60 km.* *If the target is flying below 3,000m reduces the detection range to 40–70 km and tracking range to 30–60 km. *Two basic scan patterns are used. When the system is under direct GCI control via datalink, a 6 bar elevation raster scan is used. *This scan covers a sector of 40 degrees in azimuth at ranges up to 30 km, 30 degrees at ranges of 30–55 km, and 20 degrees above 55 km within the scan limits given above.* The distance to target and other useful information is supplied by GCI command, and the direction of the scan is automatically cued by CGI command towards the desired target. When the system is not under direct GCI control via datalink, a 4 bar raster scan mode is used to acquire a target manually. This mode scans a constant 50 degrees in azimuth, with the pilot controlling the direction of the scan. It is expected that the rough direction to the target will be given by ground control via voice commands. There is no scan pattern for full azimuth range scanning. The 130º scan area is divided into 3 sectors. Left sector is -65º to -15º, centre sector covers -25º to +25º, right sector from +15º to +65º, giving overlapping coverage of the full 130º scan limits. Individual targets can be resolved providing they are separated in azimuth and 5–6 km in range. *Range measuring error of a single target can be as high as 8 km*, which should be recalled when comparing measured target range with that supplied by GCI controller. Minimum measurable range in this mode is 5 km. Lockon and *transition to tracking mode takes 2 to 7 seconds in Encounter mode*. Note that in Encounter mode, a target that changes direction to a tail-on engagement may be lost even when in tracking mode, if it is no longer closing.


you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.


> N-019 is the USSR standard model.
> 
> N-019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks “SP” mode.
> 
> *N019EB* is an export variant for general export. More downgraded. Less capable TS100.02.06 digital processor. Lacks “SP” mode.


our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar_. _by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
> our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33
> 
> 
> you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.
> 
> our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar_. _by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz





Hack-Hook said:


> well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
> our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33
> 
> 
> you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.
> 
> our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar_. _by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz




You say: our MIG-29 has not been updated and are equipped with the original N019 radar

Prove it factually and if it was the opposite? Speculation or verifiable truth?


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
> our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33
> 
> 
> you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.
> 
> our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar_. _by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz



Well yes. Like I said before in the previous post. IRIAF MIGS are the earliest relics of the Fulcrum series. They are 9.12As carrying the weakest possible RPLK-29 FCS systems that will barely detect an F-16 sized fighter from 50-60 KM by which time The F-16 would have already shot some 4 x AIM-120 at it and left the area. Let alone anyone else if you pit them against let's say a fully operationalized Kowsar with 2 x Fatter and 2 x PL-12/R-77E. The 9.12A's 385 Kg heavy N01 Junk radar won't detect a 1-2 m2 RCS bearing Kowsar before 40-45 KM by which time Kowsar would have emptied its every pylon at the MIG to dazzle it and even if MIG gets extremely close Kowsar with HMD and All aspect Sidewinders wont be easy task for the MIG.

Actually, when they unveiled IEI products and Bayyenat-II with kowsar, I was thinking that maybe. if Russia through its Belorussian front companies (Usually how it has operated before) refused to help Iran upgrade its 2 x squadrons of MIGs in the future, why not just ditch this whole fatigued failed system of N019+R27E inside MIG and replace it with lets say the current/next variant in Bayyenat series ... We know Bayenatt-I is on F-4E (looks ditto of JL-10A of JH-7, 83 km) confirmed by pics of F-4E of on Bushehr. We know its a very capable system that enabled the Phantoms to fire long-range AShCM. We know Kowsar has Bayyenat-II with 93 KM range look-up range and merely weighs ~85 kgs. Its a Grif-346/KLJ-6F ditto, one can probably predict Bayyenat-III will be something like Grifo-E/KLJ-A AESA. Installing such a system on the MIG will suddenly get rid of excess 300 kgs and also boost the MIG capabilities which it currently lacks.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> You say: our MIG-29 has not been updated and are equipped with the original N019 radar
> 
> Prove it factually and if it was the opposite? Speculation or verifiable truth?



Visual evidence of 23x Airframes in total out of 19 are combat-capable with 17 capable of firing SARH R-27E BVR. Unlike clear evidence of F-14 AM upgradation, F-4E/D with Dowran upgrades, and F-5E/F => domestic production variants, the MIG's avionics suite has never been touched by anyone.

Some estimates say there are 44 airframes in total.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> They are put on before flight. Most of these were probably taken out of storage conditions (disassembled) for the “video”. You can see crates in a part of clip which I am assuming houses dissembled drone components.





N_Al40 said:


> This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...


I should also add, that, I am not sure if this is a storage base for UAVs and munitions or their will be direct take-offs from the base.

Either way, the UAVs already deployed on airbases/airfields would be installed, but UAVs in storage would not need EO cameras installed as they are not actively being used. It helps increase the life-span and condition of the unit if securely in airtight crates.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abid123

drmeson said:


> Unless we get some 100 x Su-35S or J-10C I do not see even the F-4E/D fleet retiring.


Go for the J-10C. SU-35 is overrated and expensive. If you want to go for a flanker J-16 is far better, but it is not for export.


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> Go for the J-10C. SU-35 is overrated and expensive. If you want to go for a flanker J-16 is far better, but it is not for export.



We need some 100 x 4.5 Gen Air Superiority interceptors like that can shoot multiple LR-BVR and provide long CAPS since we are a large country. We do not need light fighters as our Kowsar program is morphing into a 4+ Gen light BVR fighter. Similarly, we do not need strike fighters since our missile forces and UCAVs are enough to destroy the enemy far beyond. 

If it was up to me I would go for some 100 x MIG-35 that would fit rather easily within our MIG infrastructure. A force of some 60 x F-14AM + 125 x Mig-29/35/Su-35S + 200 x 4+ Kowsar-II, datalinked with networks of G-WACS and LORADS/SHORADS will be hell for regional foes to fight in the sky. This might actually happen as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> I should also add, that, I am not sure if this is a storage base for UAVs and munitions or their will be direct take-offs from the base.
> 
> Either way, the UAVs already deployed on airbases/airfields would be installed, but UAVs in storage would not need EO cameras installed as they are not actively being used. It helps increase the life-span and condition of the unit if securely in airtight crates.



The drone base location has already been spotted and it’s at an airbase. So it will leave the tunnel get on the runway and fly off. 

Personally I think they should fly out of the tunnel itself or shortly there after, but baby steps.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

Total Airframes of IRIAF/IRGCF (just the plain numbers in hangers + warehouses). Aircrafts being testbeds/techdemo are * while in production ones are tagged **

72 x F-14A
26 x MIG-29 9.12A/9.15UB) ... or 42 x Russian claim
64 x F-4 E/D/R
23 x Mirage F1EQ/BQ
81 x F-5 E/F/R/B/Azarakhsh
43 x F7-N (and FT-7N)
40 x SU-22M3/M4
35 x SU-24MK
14 x HESA Kowsar**
12 x HESA Saeqeh I/II*
2 x Yasin**

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

drmeson said:


> Total Airframes of IRIAF/IRGCF (just the plain numbers in hangers + warehouses). Aircrafts being testbeds/techdemo are * while in production ones are tagged **
> 
> 72 x F-14A
> 26 x MIG-29 9.12A/9.15UB) ... or 42 x Russian claim
> 64 x F-4 E/D/R
> 23 x Mirage F1EQ/BQ
> 81 x F-5 E/F/R/B/Azarakhsh
> 43 x F7-N (and FT-7N)
> 40 x SU-22M3/M4
> 35 x SU-24MK
> 14 x HESA Kowsar**
> 12 x HESA Saeqeh I/II*
> 2 x Yasin**


Good info and I do not question your sources..of interest to me is 2 Yasin...did Yasin finish flight tests ..is it certified yet...it has two ** on it..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

drmeson said:


> Total Airframes of IRIAF/IRGCF (just the plain numbers in hangers + warehouses). Aircrafts being testbeds/techdemo are * while in production ones are tagged **
> 
> 72 x F-14A
> 26 x MIG-29 9.12A/9.15UB) ... or 42 x Russian claim
> 64 x F-4 E/D/R
> 23 x Mirage F1EQ/BQ
> 81 x F-5 E/F/R/B/Azarakhsh
> 43 x F7-N (and FT-7N)
> 40 x SU-22M3/M4
> 35 x SU-24MK
> 14 x HESA Kowsar**
> 12 x HESA Saeqeh I/II*
> 2 x Yasin**


The numbers are too optimistic. 72 F14-A? Maybe more like 60 or 50 at most, or even fewer?
And at the current pace, it'll take almost two decades before they can produce 14x HESA Kowsar and 12x HESA Saegheh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

QWECXZ said:


> The numbers are too optimistic. 72 F14-A? Maybe more like 60 or 50 at most, or even fewer?
> And at the current pace, it'll take almost two decades before they can produce 14x HESA Kowsar and 12x HESA Saegheh.



I said total airframes like they could be in any condition. 

I researched some numbers actually. 79 were supplied, and 3 confirmed losses in war leave us with 76 airframes. 3 x recorded crashes + one mysterious explosion over Bushehr. That leaves us with 72 airframes in total. 

BT says 61 airframes are available (41-42 are currently operational). 11 further are cannibalized/stored. 



QWECXZ said:


> And at the current pace, it'll take almost two decades before they can produce 14x HESA Kowsar and 12x HESA Saegheh.



It's all money in the end. 

Saeqeh I/II were tech demonstrators and nothing else. Kowsar itself would not see any serious production. There will be another generation most probably in next 2 years that will go into serious production. By the mid-late decade, it will be inevitable for IRIAF to either reduce its fleet size by half as ~140 F-5E/F, Mirage, and F-7N circus will reach their end life or would be sitting ducks in modern combat. So IRIAF will need a more modern 4+ Gen Light combat platform and Kowsar's future Generation will be there for production.

The current Price tag of Kowsar is 9 million USD for a brand new Jet. To see something like 14 X Kowsar(Future) per year, IRIAF will need to fund the project with 140-150 Million USD yearly to get to 100 x aircraft in 6-7 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> Good info and I do not question your sources..of interest to me is 2 Yasin...did Yasin finish flight tests ..is it certified yet...it has two ** on it..



haha I have no sources, I just use well-researched articles in international magazines. I will write something on yasin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

mohsen said:


> By the way guys, IRIB has just chosen another fucker as military reporter, who not only doesn't know any military gear, can't even report what he has been told! He called Qaem-9 bomb as a equivalent to hellfire missile! while the word Shafaq is written on the missile.
> 
> 
> remind me of the other fucker in IRINN who was saying Qadir radar can rotate 360 degree!!!


Also Shafaq is equivalent to Spike NLOS lol, it's a whole different class to hellfire


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Abid123 said:


> Go for the J-10C. SU-35 is overrated and expensive. If you want to go for a flanker J-16 is far better, but it is not for export.


SU-35 isn't that expensive. And I think Iran will probably get them, as construction of export SU-35s restarted recently apparently.


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> SU-35 isn't that expensive. And I think Iran will probably get them, as construction of export SU-35s restarted recently apparently.


the plane is as expensive as rafale and nearly as expensive as f-35

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the plane is as expensive as rafale and nearly as expensive as f-35



Lol nearly as expensive as F-35? Not even close.



> For an even clearer picture of the real costs of a fully functioning F-35 and related support equipment, we can look at the F-35 contracts offered to foreign governments. The Swiss are considering purchasing 40 F-35s for approximately $6.58 billion*, or $164.5 million apiece.* This *figure accounts for the spare parts, missiles, bombs, and bullets necessary for a fully functional weapon system.*



F-35 off the lot is 100M+ using true data. Add in spares + bombs + training + everything else and it balloons to over 150M+

The $80M dollar quote figure is propaganda the military lobbyist use. It’s the “sticker” price. But it’s really a hunk of steel at that point. Need to add the “real” add on costs into it.

Read more here:









Selective Arithmetic to Hide F-35’s True Costs


F-35 boosters work hard to convince the American people and decision-makers in Washington of the program’s affordability year after year when it’s time to negotiate the next year’s contract.




www.pogo.org


----------



## _Nabil_

TheImmortal said:


> Lol nearly as expensive as F-35? Not even close.
> 
> 
> 
> F-35 off the lot is 100M+ using true data. Add in spares + bombs + training + everything else and it balloons to over 150M+
> 
> The $80M dollar quote figure is propaganda the military lobbyist use. It’s the “sticker” price. But it’s really a hunk of steel at that point. Need to add the “real” add on costs into it.
> 
> Read more here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selective Arithmetic to Hide F-35’s True Costs
> 
> 
> F-35 boosters work hard to convince the American people and decision-makers in Washington of the program’s affordability year after year when it’s time to negotiate the next year’s contract.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pogo.org


Hackhook is right









F-35 vs. Su-35 - Which Fighter Jet will Win the Battle?


Source: Grid 88 / YouTube There are now two airplanes in the world that are markedly different from all others. They are the Russian Su-35 of the fourth generation and the American F-35 of the fifth generation. If you're looking for the best, you've come to the right place. But what's the...




www.engineerine.com





Su-35 around 85m, F-35 around 100m

So prices are close ...


----------



## TheImmortal

_Nabil_ said:


> Hackhook is right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-35 vs. Su-35 - Which Fighter Jet will Win the Battle?
> 
> 
> Source: Grid 88 / YouTube There are now two airplanes in the world that are markedly different from all others. They are the Russian Su-35 of the fourth generation and the American F-35 of the fifth generation. If you're looking for the best, you've come to the right place. But what's the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.engineerine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Su-35 around 85m, F-35 around 100m
> 
> So prices are close ...



You clearly didn’t read the article I sent. Or see what USA offered Swiss army 165M per aircraft with training + munitions + parts + support teams.

$100M is just for the plane basically.

Russians don’t play those same games. Yes you have to pay for munitions and spares, but they don’t jack up the price like US military industrial complex does.


----------



## mohsen

GrandBotBoi said:


> Also Shafaq is equivalent to Spike NLOS lol, it's a whole different class to hellfire


No, that's Almas missile.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Lol nearly as expensive as F-35? Not even close.


north of 80 milion a piece . how much f-35 is sold these days



TheImmortal said:


> You clearly didn’t read the article I sent. Or see what USA offered Swiss army 165M per aircraft with training + munitions + parts + support teams.
> 
> $100M is just for the plane basically.
> 
> Russians don’t play those same games. Yes you have to pay for munitions and spares, but they don’t jack up the price like US military industrial complex does.


its not the 100m or 125m that is discussed here .its the fact about airplane prices and its capabilities that put question to the mind . su-35 is expensive , wonder for somebody who has the option to choose between both western and eastern airplane latest generation of European airplane like rafale won't make more sense. 115 for rafale with extra vs 85 for su-35 with extra

by the way do you knew how much Russians training is done , do you knew how our mig-29 pilot were trained , its done in Russians language , via shitty translator who are not even suitable for tour guides and after the course finished all their writings and notes were confiscated.

wonder how much Russia ask for su-57 if they decide to sell it or su-71and how its compared to china j-31 for example


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder how much Russia ask for su-57 if they decide to sell it or su-71and how its compared to china j-31 for example



Chinese will have a deactivation chip inside.

I wouldn’t trust the Chinese so freely. Neither Russia nor China are Iran’s strategic allies. And China plays both sides of the fence (East and West). They hate India, yet look how much trade they do with India.

So far neither Russia or China has offered Iran anything modern. China wipes it’s a$$ with billions of dollars.... so geopolitical headache of a 5B arms deal with Iran isn’t even worth it for them. Also Not even Pakistan has gotten J-31

China offered Iran older Gen junk and Russia offered even older than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

The recent most news in this regard came out in December was that of a Bagheri-Putin meeting in which 

- An initial batch of 24 x SU-35S would be provided while the rest will be assembled inside HESA (probably 48 more ??). 
- A batch of 30 IRIAF pilots of F-14A and MIG-29 was already in Russia and were being trained on them. 
- A fleet of 23 x MIG-29 9.12A and 9.15UB will be given an extensive life extension and upgrades inside a newly made upgradation center in mehrabad. Same for a fleet of some ~30 SU-24MK. Maybe they can provide a few additional airframes? just to create another squadron.

I do not understand two things here. The first SU-35S has a large RCS and it is a very expensive jet with strike capability. We all know that Iran does not need strike fighters because IRGC over the last decade has invested heavily in its Missile and UCAV programs. So why not simply go for a much cheaper MIG-35 which Russia has offered before along with SU-27SM3 and Iran refused. MIG-35 is more of an air superiority fighter and can easily integrate into the MIG infrastructure inside IRIAF. If we get its TOT assembly inside HESA we can simply replace some 150 airframes in IRIAF.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> The recent most news in this regard came out in December was that of a Bagheri-Putin meeting in which
> 
> - An initial batch of 24 x SU-35S would be provided while the rest will be assembled inside HESA (probably 48 more ??).
> - A batch of 30 IRIAF pilots of F-14A and MIG-29 was already in Russia and were being trained on them.
> - A fleet of 23 x MIG-29 9.12A and 9.15UB will be given an extensive life extension and upgrades inside a newly made upgradation center in mehrabad. Same for a fleet of some ~30 SU-24MK. Maybe they can provide a few additional airframes? just to create another squadron.
> 
> I do not understand two things here. The first SU-35S has a large RCS and it is a very expensive jet with strike capability. We all know that Iran does not need strike fighters because IRGC over the last decade has invested heavily in its Missile and UCAV programs. So why not simply go for a much cheaper MIG-35 which Russia has offered before along with SU-27SM3 and Iran refused. MIG-35 is more of an air superiority fighter and can easily integrate into the MIG infrastructure inside IRIAF. If we get its TOT assembly inside HESA we can simply replace some 150 airframes in IRIAF.


because its a wish list of some people no such agreement were made and no Iranian pilot are in Russia and Russia never offered any su-35 production or maintenance in Iran.

all wishful thinking , as I always said we have more chance making France or Sweden agree to airplane production and tot inside Iran for Rafale and Grippen than be able to successfully made Russia agree to such term about SU-35

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> because its a wish list of some people no such agreement were made and no Iranian pilot are in Russia and Russia never offered any su-35 production or maintenance in Iran.
> 
> all wishful thinking , as I always said we have more chance making France or Sweden agree to airplane production and tot inside Iran for Rafale and Grippen than be able to successfully made Russia agree to such term about SU-35



BT was the source. Despite his progressive mental problems and constant political ranting, he is never an unreliable source. Whatever he says about IRIAF comes true. 

....

totally off-topic, he has said very recently that HESA is experimenting with a JL-9 like light fighter with F-7N as a base platform with F-5E like air-intakes and double delta wings and a larger radome to fit the Bayyenat radar. If it's true, then Eff these people, is there a check and balance within HESA for wasting money on stupid projects?


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Chinese will have a deactivation chip inside.


unless you build your chips you can't be sure of that. and we don't produce them but import them from Russia and china . thanks to several president and its cabinet illiteracy .
by the way there was talk about Huawei have back door and ,,,,, inside its equipment , still nobody could prove it , but turned out Intel, AMD and Microsoft all have back door and guess on communication device who proved to be offender , yes Cisco or Linksys


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> totally off-topic, he has said very recently that HESA is experimenting with a JL-9 like light fighter with F-7N as a base platform with F-5E like air-intakes and double delta wings and a larger radome to fit the Bayyenat radar. If it's true, then Eff these people, is there a check and balance within HESA for wasting money on stupid projects?


HESA needs to get audited for what project they get interested about. they must be responsible for their project and stop wasting money on airframe and invest in basics on metallurgy and avionics if in 19s there was possible to build a radar for f-5 that was better than f-16 radar then its possible to build a better one after 25 years ,
the problem is somebody in higherup must be taught the future weapons are all about semiconductors if you cant build them its like you cant build any weapon in years to come.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> HESA needs to get audited for what project they get interested about. they must be responsible for their project and stop wasting money on airframe and invest in basics on metallurgy and avionics if in 19s there was possible to build a radar for f-5 that was better than f-16 radar then its possible to build a better one after 25 years ,
> the problem is somebody in higherup must be taught the future weapons are all about semiconductors if you cant build them its like you cant build any weapon in years to come.



An educated guess is that some people with massive egos have taken higher-up positions and they have learned how to get money out for their stupid money-for-nothing projects. We have credible evidence for that actually if we go by useless projects we have seen over the years.

- MIRAGE F1/EQ overhaul. Useless because the fleet is 23 x small, it's a third-generation fighter that failed in the Iran Iraq war against 4th generation BVR carrying fighters. We have never seen it armed with any meaningful A2A weaponry. They tried giving it local pylons, PL-7C, and tried to put on PGM on it while not considering that this plane will be a sitting duck in the sky without any protection of its own in a modern combat aviation environment. Mirage F-1 is considered a complex platform and we had zero infrastructure inside Iran for French planes yet some people successfully got the $$ out of the IAIO for this stunt. 

- F-7N/FT-7N fleet of some 43 airframes, overhaul, and re-armaments. They are short-ranged low-tier Chinese interceptors that have zero productivity in large geography like Iran. Not to mention the highest crash rate ever in IIAF/IRIAF history. They not only tried to put PGMs (Yasin Glide), Matra on them but also wasted money on creating their new wings, and integrating newer avionics. If the JL-9 story is true then that R&D money is down the drain too.

- Saeqeh tech demonstrators. Saeqeh-I 3-7600 was enough for evaluation of semi FBW with squared air intake and V-tailed design. Saeqeh-II 3-7182 evaluated the F-5F tandem seats with a modern cockpit layout. If no serious production was planned why build an additional 10 of these technology demonstrators? most of them have twin cannons (so no radars). One can probably argue that their testing leads to whatever Kowsar is or will be in the future but still companies usually do not make more than 1-2 technology demonstrators. I have a feeling that the same story will be repeated with current Kowsar until we end the ultimate end product of this project which will see serious mass production. 

- With the money saved from the above stupid projects, they could have refurbished, and overhauled some 10 more airframes of F-14A (some 20 additional are available apart from 41) in Isfahan, bringing them to F-14 AM standards at Mehrabad. Armed with Fattar and Fakour-90, that 10 x F-14 AM worth much more in IRIAF strategy than whatever a fleet of 67 x Mirages+F-7 offers.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> as I always said we have more chance making France or Sweden agree to airplane production and tot inside Iran for Rafale and Grippen than be able to successfully made Russia agree to such term about SU-35



No, France or Sweden aren't more likely to provide Iran with ToT on fighter jet production than Russia is. The opposite stays true, no matter how improbable.

It's fair to point out possible limits of Russian reliability, but to suggest that western regimes are on better terms with Iran in any important area of interest would represent an inversion of reality.

_____



drmeson said:


> BT was the source. Despite his progressive mental problems and constant political ranting, he is never an unreliable source. Whatever he says about IRIAF comes true.



Oh, I remember (quite outlandish) claims from this source which turned out wrong, unsurprisingly so. Such as Bavar-373 being a "fake" project, or Iran signing a contract for 200+ Su-27's with Russia.



drmeson said:


> - MIRAGE F1/EQ overhaul. Useless because the fleet is 23 x small, it's a third-generation fighter that failed in the Iran Iraq war against 4th generation BVR carrying fighters.



Correct me if I'm wrong but of all types flow by the Iraqi air force, didn't the F-1 have in fact the most favorable (and even a positive?) kill ratio against Iranian F-14's?

But indeed, absent proper infrastructure for equipment and upgrades, Iran should ditch them as soon as something better becomes available. Investments needed to get hold of said infrastructure aren't worth it either.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> I remember (quite outlandish) claims from this source which turned out to be wrong. Such as Bavar-373 being a "fake" project, or Iran signing a contract with Russia for 200+ Su-27's.



For IRIAF he is never wrong. For air defense, he is sometimes self-contradicting. E.g. He once claimed there is only one Bavar-373 prototype that actually exists and is being tested in a facility somewhere. Then around the same time, the guy claimed in an article on F-14AM upgrades that in 2020, Bavar 373 batteries were already deployed in Azerbaijan.

My personal guess is the guy has sources in IRIAF that give him info with projects, deployments with serial no. etc. The same is not true for other Artesh branches and esp IRGC. 

As for 200 x SU-27, I think he never said that. He said something like IRIAF wants 72 x Su-35S with TOT while Russia is offering SU-27SM3 / MIG-35S. Something like that. Around the same time he also claimed that IRIAF rejected J-10C. 



SalarHaqq said:


> I'm not sure about that. If I remember correctly, of all types flow by the Iraqi air force, it had the most favorable (and even a positive?) kill ratio against Iranian F-14's.
> 
> But indeed, absent proper infrastructure to properly equip and upgrade them, Iran should ditch them as soon as something better becomes available. The investments needed to build said infrastructure aren't worth the cost either.


Actually, it had the worst record against IRIAF. It got lucky in a sneak attack with a Matra 530 on a separate course going F-14A. That and a single F-4E. Other than that nothing. All the while it lost some 34 times in aerial combats against F-14A.



SalarHaqq said:


> But indeed, absent proper infrastructure to properly equip and upgrade them, Iran should ditch them as soon as something better becomes available. The investments needed to build said infrastructure aren't worth the cost either.



F-5E/F/R + F-7N + Mirage F1EQ + Azarakhsh + Saegheh I/II testbeds need to be retired as soon as the next generation of Kowsar shows enough promise to be put in serious mass production.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> As for 200 x SU-27, I think he never said that.



Maybe I don't remember well. But it seemed to me he had already posted some incorrect information about the IRIAF as well.



drmeson said:


> Actually, it had the worst record against IRIAF. It got lucky in a sneak attack with a Matra 530 on a separate course going F-14A. That and a single F-4E. Other than that nothing. All the while it lost some 34 times in aerial combats against F-14A.



True, don't know what I confused this with. Good to be reminded, thanks.



drmeson said:


> F-5E/F/R + F-7N + Mirage F1EQ + Azarakhsh + Saegheh I/II testbeds need to be retired as soon as the next generation of Kowsar shows enough promise to be put in serious mass production.



Agreed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No, France or Sweden aren't more likely to provide Iran with ToT on fighter jet production than Russia is. The opposite stays true, no matter how improbable.
> 
> It's fair to point to possible limits of Russian reliability, but to suggest that western regimes are on better terms with Iran in any important area would represent an inversion of reality.


Well how I see it Russia see Iran as an adversary in Middle East it is in its interest to keep Iran just strong enough but not too much strong
Europe and Iran have conflict of interest and the interests can change..
The one right now that dont see Iran as an adversary and don't have that much conflict interest is China but they are merchants and don't do anything for free or discount you must pay in full if you want anything from them.
About USA if you want get anything from them instead of going to USA you must go to their master Israel


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but of all types flow by the Iraqi air force, didn't the F-1 have in fact the most favorable (and even a positive?) kill ratio against Iranian F-14's?


Only because our pilots didn't knew France gave Iraq, matra R550 magic missile alongside the airplane. After they become aware of it they could not get any victory. That missile at the time was far more advanced than sidewinder.



drmeson said:


> the same time he also claimed that IRIAF rejected J-10C.


I think iriaf never offered J-10c it was the original J.-10 that was offered as j-10c was still in development


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Well how I see it Russia see Iran as an adversary in Middle East it is in its interest to keep Iran just strong enough but not too much strong
> Europe and Iran have conflict of interest and the interests can change..



European regimes are submissive auxiliaries to the US and zionists. As such, they qualify as enemies for Iran. Their security services actively participate in Washington and Tel Aviv's hostile agenda: from hosting and supporting opposition groups including armed terrorist ones, funding propaganda media aimed at destabilizing Iran, backing adversaries of the Resistance Axis in regional conflicts (Syria, Yemen, Palestine and so on), to perfectly toeing the US line in the nuclear negotiations, the list is long.

It would take a complete strategic decoupling of Europe from the US and Isra"el" for the former to come anywhere near Russia or China as far as their relations with Iran are concerned. And such a decoupling is going to remain an extremely remote, improbable prospect for the foreseeable future. Barring such an implausible development, there's no strategic domain where Iran will be able to count on any of the European regimes more than she can count on Russia or China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> European regimes are submissive auxiliaries to the US and zionist regimes. As such, they qualify as enemies to Iran. Their security services actively participate in Washington and Tel Aviv's hostile agenda: from hosting and supporting opposition groups including armed terrorist ones, funding propaganda media aimed at destabilizing Iran, to backing adversaries of the Resistance Axis in regional theaters of conflict (Syria, Yemen, Palestine and so on), to perfectly toeing the US line in the nuclear negotiations, the list is long.
> 
> It would require a complete strategic decoupling of Europe from the US and Isra"el" for the former to come anywhere near Russia or China as far as relations with Iran are concerned. And that's going to remain an extremely remote, improbable prospect in the foreseeable future. Barring such an implausible development, here's no strategic domain in which Iran will be able to count on any of the European regimes more than she can count on Russia or China.


As you said they are following one country, what I say conflict of interest. That can change.
With Russia its several hundred years they see us as adversary not partners. And right now we have an uneasy alliance which is on the surface. Otherwise I still doubt Israel attack on our intrests in syra is without their prior knowledge and consent


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> I think iriaf never offered J-10c it was the original J.-10 that was offered as j-10c was still in development



Could be. The point is that IRIAF rejected it. 

Now that I am realising it IRIAF has rejected the following planes in favor of SU35-S

1) J-10B/C
2) MIG-35S
3) SU-27-SM3

Why do they want this SU-35S so much I wonder?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> As you said they are following one country, what I say conflict of interest. That can change.



European regimes are not going to emancipate themselves from American and zionist overlordship anytime soon. Thence change is not in the cards in this regard, barring literal downfall of regimes in these countries.



Hack-Hook said:


> With Russia its several hundred years they see us as adversary not partners.



Here concrete change did actually occur. The USSR and Iran used to be enemies, the Russian Federation and Iran aren't. Also Russia views Iran more like a partner in certain aspects, a rival in others. But there's no hostility, as opposed to European policy vis à vis Iran, which is antagonistic through and through.



Hack-Hook said:


> And right now we have an uneasy alliance which is on the surface. Otherwise I still doubt Israel attack on our intrests in syra is without their prior knowledge and consent



And I doubt the reason they partnered with Iran against terrorism in Syria is because they consider Iran as an adversary.

At least Iran and Russia are seeing eye to eye as far as the necessity to protect the Damascus government from the zio-American sponsored insurgency is concerned. Even if they're not entirely on the same page when it comes to Resistance against the zionist regime.

Although Moscow has issues of its own with the latter including on the Syrian dossier. Indeed, while Russia may look the other way when the zionists conduct air strikes against Iranian interests in Syria, truth is that Tel Aviv has tried everything in its power to entice and/or pressure Moscow into revising its policy and completely ending any significant cooperation with Iran (especially of the strategic and military type) - a request Russia has systematically rejected.

With European regimes on the other hand, there is no common ground at all on Syria. Nor in fact on any other major regional matter because well, they unlike Russia happen to be enemies to Iran.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> And I doubt the reason they partnered with Iran against terrorism in Syria is because they consider Iran as an adversary.
> 
> At least Iran and Russia are seeing eye to eye as far as the necessity to protect the Damascus government from the zio-American sponsored insurgency is concerned.


Russia didn't care about Syria , they cared about their only remaining base in middle east , if they believed the cannibals could be trusted to leave their bases there alone , I doubt they would have entered Syria conflict. and I believe if at the time our drone programs was as advanced as now , I mean we had strike capabilities in adequate number , we would have enticed them to enter Syria

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

I mean when the source of information is a deranged bi polar man named BT then there is no point having any logical discussions.

BT is inherently biased to posting only positive information about IRIAF because he still sees them as Shah-ist branch of Iran’s military. BT is a Shahist himself.

He hates anything IRGC produced and raves about the complete inadequacy and waste of funds that IRIAF routinely engages in.

Would take anything he says with a Damavand size mountain of salt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Why do they want this SU-35S so much I wonder?


they not necessarily want , Su-35. what they are more interested in is a twine engine airplane that can be used as interceptor, Su-27 cant be used effectively in that role .Mig-35s well I don't think they ever considered it (To be honest I'd have considered it if Russia didn't decided to downgrade its AESA radar to PESA. but what I can say they have limited capabilities for producing advanced electronics)
and as for j-10 it was not J-10c they were offered it was J-10a maybe with promise of future upgrade to J10-c standard when it become ready maybe not. but one thing is clear J-10a nor can be considered as a viable interceptor neither have twine engine.

so in the situation that no western airplane was feasible the only option that remained open to IRIAF was Su-35 but that airplane is backbone of Russia air force and as i said they consider us as a competitor that they had to have an uneasy alliance with right now so they were not willing to part with it.

and honestly you must consider one small problem, can Russia deliver in number, china have the production capability , does Russia also have it?

so I believe in future the only option open to our air force is to produce its own airplane , the same way in Europe countries like France and Sweden went and succeed , the only thing is somebody focus air force and defense ministry in that directions (right now they are like perfect Gas , I mean their effort is total chaos) .
maybe produce must of it but import some parts from countries like china and Russia or even third parties . for example Italy may not be willing or able to sell us an complete aircraft , but they may be willing to sell us a radar for an aircraft we designed ourself. or Russia my not be willing to depart with su-35 but they maybe willing to sell us an aircraft engine and facilities to maintain it. or china may be willing to sell us or made a TOT on engine of pl-15

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Russia didn't care about Syria , they cared about their only remaining base in middle east , if they believed the cannibals could be trusted to leave their bases there alone , I doubt they would have entered Syria conflict. and I believe if at the time our drone programs was as advanced as now , I mean we had strike capabilities in adequate number , we would have enticed them to enter Syria



At the end of the day, what does it matter why they joined in on Syria? Fact is the potential was there and it came to pass. Whereas European regimes are enemies to Iran because they're vassals of the US and the zionists, plain and simple. With them there's no potential for deeper constructive ties especially at the geostrategic level. There's just no comparison here, really.

Besides, Russia cared more than just about their base. Had the terrorists taken over Syria, the Resistance Axis would have faced an existential threat and could have ended up getting dismantled. Which would have removed the only counterweight to the US empire in a region of such tremendous import as West Asia.

And Russia would not have considered it in its interests if the zio-American empire extended its hegemony over the entirety West Asia, straddling Russia's southern flank. Moreover, although Russia failed to stop NATO in Libya, they were highly irritated at the west's intervention there. But they lacked the resources to prevent it all alone. In Syria however they've had a partner, namely Iran and allies, hence why they dared to enter the fray.

The question whether the Syrian opposition may have allowed Russia to maintain its naval base is a non-starter, since the west, whose directives these oppositionists follow, is hostile towards Moscow. This very fact means that Iran and Russia have a major shared concern justifying rapprochement: a common existential foe. Like it or nor, geopolitical circumstances happen to bring Russia and Iran immanently closer than Iran and the EU will ever be.

So again, we can take issue with Moscow's reliability all we want, but let's not make it appear as if Russia's the enemy state while European NATO regimes aren't, for this would amount to turning reality on its head.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

Iran and Turkey should collaborate on developments of UAVs, fighter jet engines and fighter jet.. they each have lot to offer ... also they can share their joint ventures with other muslim countries who are outside of zionist influence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> also they can share their joint ventures with other muslim countries who are outside of zionist influence.



Lol Turkey outside of Zionist influence? Good joke. They are Zionist a$$ kissers just like the fake Arab monarchs.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sha ah

Chinese fighter jets have recently pulled maneuvers infront of Canadian and now Australian patrol aircraft in the South China Sea. In this incident, a Chinese J-16 went infront of an Australian P-8 and dispensed flares and chaff. The Australians are claiming that some of the chaff particles got into the P-8s engines. Canada called Chinese maneuvers alarming and Australia described them as highly risky.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Chinese fighter jets have recently pulled maneuvers infront of Canadian and now Australian patrol aircraft in the South China Sea. In this incident, a Chinese J-16 went infront of an Australian P-8 and dispensed flares and chaff. The Australians are claiming that some of the chaff particles got into the P-8s engines. Canada called Chinese maneuvers alarming and Australia described them as highly risky.



Yeah Russia did the same thing last 10 years. Now we see Russian airforce isn’t the vaunted Killing machine we once thought it was.

Childish antics like this just prove immaturity of the armed force.

I’m all for some pilots horsing around having fun with each other. Iran has done it professionally. But this game of chicken crap just shows they suffer from inferiority complex.

Meanwhile they let the west continue to violate their “zones” of sovereignty in South China Sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Well to be fair, Russia has only deployed a maximum of 200,000 troops in Ukraine. Their regular army is numbered at 1 million and they have 2 million reserves. The UN says 10,000 people have died in Ukraine. Now they're even talking about prosecuting Russia for war crimes. Meanwhile the war in Iraq killed 1 million Iraqi civilians. Afghanistan, Yemen, millions of children are currently starving but to the west they're invisible.

Russia has so far conducted 2000 missile strikes and 3000 air strikes. Compare that to the 100,000 sorties conducted by the US airforce in the 1st 6 weeks of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. 

If you remember Crimea, that's how Russia prefers to do things. Avoiding civilian casualties and taking everything intact. They tried using the same tactics in Kiev and it failed miserably. Also they were fighting on a massive front, larger than the German front against Russia in WW2. 

Also keep in mind that in the fight for Kiev, Russian troops were outnumbered likely more than 5 to 1 when they should have outnumbered the Ukrainians. Kiev is a city of 3 million and Ukraine conscripted the entire fighting aged male population. They also had some of their best units defending Kiev. 

Despite sustaining massive losses during the Kiev campaign, Russian troops still got to the outskirts of the city. They only withdrew once they were ordered to do so and despite everything they were able to withdraw most of their forces in good order and redeploy them.

Realistically Russia has 1000 fighter jets. They're not fighting at their full capacity. But anyways so far after changing their overall gameplan they have taken 20% of all Ukrainian territory with the Donbas about to collapse. If the Popasnya salient expands another 20 KM northwards, 10,000+ Ukrainian troops will be fully enveloped. 

Anyways just look at the disparity in firepower. Ukrainians are now sending raw recruits, conscripts from the territorial defense to the frontlines with only a few days or weeks of training. Giving them AK47s and WW1 era machine guns in some cases to go up against tanks, artillery, jets, missiles. 

Many Ukrainians are now refusing to fight, saying that their government is using them as cannon fodder, sending them into the "meat grinder". Basically Ukraine is exchanging lives for time in a desperate race against the clock, hoping that more weapons from the west will somehow miraculously turn the tide of the war. 








TheImmortal said:


> Yeah Russia did the same thing last 10 years. Now we see Russian airforce isn’t the vaunted Killing machine we once thought it was.
> 
> Childish antics like this just prove immaturity of the armed force.
> 
> I’m all for some pilots horsing around having fun with each other. Iran has done it professionally. But this game of chicken crap just shows they suffer from inferiority complex.
> 
> Meanwhile they let the west continue to violate their “zones” of sovereignty in South China Sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

sha ah said:


> Well to be fair, Russia has only deployed a maximum of 200,000 troops in Ukraine. Their regular army is numbered at 1 million and they have 2 million reserves. The UN says 10,000 people have died in Ukraine. Now they're even talking about prosecuting Russia for war crimes. Meanwhile the war in Iraq killed 1 million Iraqi civilians. Afghanistan, Yemen, millions of children are currently starving but to the west they're invisible.
> 
> Russia has so far conducted 2000 missile strikes and 3000 air strikes. Compare that to the 100,000 sorties conducted by the US airforce in the 1st 6 weeks of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
> 
> If you remember Crimea, that's how Russia prefers to do things. Avoiding civilian casualties and taking everything intact. They tried using the same tactics in Kiev and it failed miserably. Also they were fighting on a massive front, larger than the German front against Russia in WW2.
> 
> Also keep in mind that in the fight for Kiev, Russian troops were outnumbered likely more than 5 to 1 when they should have outnumbered the Ukrainians. Kiev is a city of 3 million and Ukraine conscripted the entire fighting aged male population. They also had some of their best units defending Kiev.
> 
> Despite sustaining massive losses during the Kiev campaign, Russian troops still got to the outskirts of the city. They only withdrew once they were ordered to do so and despite everything they were able to withdraw most of their forces in good order and redeploy them.
> 
> Realistically Russia has 1000 fighter jets. They're not fighting at their full capacity. But anyways so far after changing their overall gameplan they have taken 20% of all Ukrainian territory with the Donbas about to collapse. If the Popasnya salient expands another 20 KM northwards, 10,000+ Ukrainian troops will be fully enveloped.
> 
> Anyways just look at the disparity in firepower. Ukrainians are now sending raw recruits, conscripts from the territorial defense to the frontlines with only a few days or weeks of training. Giving them AK47s and WW1 era machine guns in some cases to go up against tanks, artillery, jets, missiles.
> 
> Many Ukrainians are now refusing to fight, saying that their government is using them as cannon fodder, sending them into the "meat grinder". Basically Ukraine is exchanging lives for time in a desperate race against the clock, hoping that more weapons from the west will somehow miraculously turn the tide of the war.
> 
> View attachment 851669



The war in Ukraine is more of a classic Russian artillery engagement. The reliance on combat aviation isn't needed as much when you have thousands of artillery emplacements doing the vast majority of work against enemy fortifications along the front. -- Cruise-missile/Ballistic-missile launches makes up essentially the entirety of Russian "deep strike" packages. Whilst the Russian air-force could conduct 1,000s of sorties in Ukraine. There really isn't any practical need to do so especially when you're winning with the current methodology being applied.

Donbass will fall to Russia pretty soon and with it goes a significant portion of Ukraine's combat fighting forces due to asinine "stand your ground orders". One side is conducting maneuver warfare, the other is desperately holding onto whatever territory it can.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Russia has so far conducted 2000 missile strikes and 3000 air strikes.



Incorrect information

True Russian sortie rates:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516276211328167936

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524067330246029312
Russia has been consistently running 200-300 sorties per day. And brief periods of high sorties rates like below in late March:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507698398144643072

*The difference here is US airforce is built for air superiority, while Russian airforce is built to deny and protect their advancing front lines from NATO air attacks*

I question if that strategy would work. Since even without much of an airforce, Ukraine was able to harass Russian front lines using helicopters, quadcopters, and drones. Imagine if it was NATO with F-35, Rafael, etc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

4 x F14 more are being inducted into the current fleet. 

The total fleet will be 45.

16 more airframes are available. With Fakour and datalink with the GWACS network, this fleet will threaten any invading party barring F-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

...............

Kowsar being evaluated at 23rd TFS, TAB-2 Tabriz

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## applesauce

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah Russia did the same thing last 10 years. Now we see Russian airforce isn’t the vaunted Killing machine we once thought it was.
> 
> Childish antics like this just prove immaturity of the armed force.
> 
> I’m all for some pilots horsing around having fun with each other. Iran has done it professionally. But this game of chicken crap just shows they suffer from inferiority complex.
> 
> Meanwhile they let the west continue to violate their “zones” of sovereignty in South China Sea.


?? while it's clear you have no love for china and is underestimating chinese capabilities and training but, china has more confidence than iran has ever had. china is playing a large and long game with the us across the world while your most important scientists continue to have "accidents" in broad daylight and your ships get outright seized on the high seas. china was at that point once too, see the yinhe incident, but its unthinkable currently. the us does all these things to you and all iran did was seize a south korean tanker, you dont ever dare to stand up directly to the master behind the strings, must be this "inferiority complex" you're talking about.

also those "zones" are adiz and economic zones, they are international space, and nations are free to overfly/sail through them, they are merely a notification that you will be watched and possibly intercepted. what is considered territory and sovereign is the 12 miles of waters from land/islands and the response there was to militarized them. in fact china said they would not militarize them unless provoked to, and they did exactly that when the US sailed by them. there has been no such close crossing by these armed islands since the constructed was largely complete. the us and its lackies want to play chicken in the international waters? well the response is china will too built towards the capabilities to do the same in their backyard, see the current trip across the pacific islands, and the various spy ships near Australia as well as the break down of the RoC and Japanese air forces under the weight of the sheer numbers of chinese flights towards and in their adiz, to the degree that they publicly announced that they will no longer escort all chinese military flights into their adiz because of air frame and pilot fatigue. 

and for the record, just because the us and its lackies find a interception by russia or china to be "unprofessional" does not make it so, and one should not think so by default unless you are a us lackie yourself and take their side in the absence of any evidence. and these interceptions work, modern chinese territorial space is one of the few places the us doesn't dare to fly drones and whatever into on a daily basis, which is much more than any country in the middle east could say.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

applesauce said:


> ?? while it's clear you have no love for china and is underestimating chinese capabilities and training but, china has more confidence than iran has ever had. china is playing a large and long game with the us across the world while your most important scientists continue to have "accidents" in broad daylight and your ships get outright seized on the high seas. china was at that point once too, see the yinhe incident, but its unthinkable currently. the us does all these things to you and all iran did was seize a south korean tanker, you dont ever dare to stand up directly to the master behind the strings, must be this "inferiority complex" you're talking about.
> 
> also those "zones" are adiz and economic zones, they are international space, and nations are free to overfly/sail through them, they are merely a notification that you will be watched and possibly intercepted. what is considered territory and sovereign is the 12 miles of waters from land/islands and the response there was to militarized them. in fact china said they would not militarize them unless provoked to, and they did exactly that when the US sailed by them. there has been no such close crossing by these armed islands since the constructed was largely complete. the us and its lackies want to play chicken in the international waters? well the response is china will too built towards the capabilities to do the same in their backyard, see the current trip across the pacific islands, and the various spy ships near Australia as well as the break down of the RoC and Japanese air forces under the weight of the sheer numbers of chinese flights towards and in their adiz, to the degree that they publicly announced that they will no longer escort all chinese military flights into their adiz because of air frame and pilot fatigue.
> 
> and for the record, just because the us and its lackies find a interception by russia or china to be "unprofessional" does not make it so, and one should not think so by default unless you are a us lackie yourself and take their side in the absence of any evidence. and these interceptions work, modern chinese territorial space is one of the few places the us doesn't dare to fly drones and whatever into on a daily basis, which is much more than any country in the middle east could say.



Iran has killed more US soldiers in last 30 years while your workers died for US consumerism. Don’t be a keyboard warrior little China man.

Playing Long game, lol sure. Play the long game, but Xi doesn’t live forever. All you need is one Yeltsin to become “chairmen” of your little tea party and it’s all over.

“One China” is a myth and US actively makes a joke of it. All Chinese government does is release strongly worded press releases and cry on Twitter.

Don’t let your economic powerhouse get to your head and make you arrogant Mr. Keybord warrior. It wasn’t even that long ago that Imperial Japan wiped the floor with China.

Now suddenly you are guys are going to defeat US + NATO + The Quad? With what allies? Bankrupt Pakistan? With what energy sources? If Putin’s dies in 10 years, Russia will be a Western Lackey state as the inner circle crumples.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

applesauce said:


> ?? while it's clear you have no love for china and is underestimating chinese capabilities and training but, china has more confidence than iran has ever had. china is playing a large and long game with the us across the world while your most important scientists continue to have "accidents" in broad daylight and your ships get outright seized on the high seas. china was at that point once too, see the yinhe incident, but its unthinkable currently. the us does all these things to you and all iran did was seize a south korean tanker, you dont ever dare to stand up directly to the master behind the strings, must be this "inferiority complex" you're talking about.
> 
> also those "zones" are adiz and economic zones, they are international space, and nations are free to overfly/sail through them, they are merely a notification that you will be watched and possibly intercepted. what is considered territory and sovereign is the 12 miles of waters from land/islands and the response there was to militarized them. in fact china said they would not militarize them unless provoked to, and they did exactly that when the US sailed by them. there has been no such close crossing by these armed islands since the constructed was largely complete. the us and its lackies want to play chicken in the international waters? well the response is china will too built towards the capabilities to do the same in their backyard, see the current trip across the pacific islands, and the various spy ships near Australia as well as the break down of the RoC and Japanese air forces under the weight of the sheer numbers of chinese flights towards and in their adiz, to the degree that they publicly announced that they will no longer escort all chinese military flights into their adiz because of air frame and pilot fatigue.
> 
> and for the record, just because the us and its lackies find a interception by russia or china to be "unprofessional" does not make it so, and one should not think so by default unless you are a us lackie yourself and take their side in the absence of any evidence. and these interceptions work, modern chinese territorial space is one of the few places the us doesn't dare to fly drones and whatever into on a daily basis, which is much more than any country in the middle east could say.


For whatever they have done, we have retaliated, they killed our scientists, we killed their scientists, they attacked our military assets, we attacked their military assets. in fact, Iran is the only country which has ever attacked a US military site. they attacked our ships, we attacked their ships and even killed their mercenary crew, they seized our tanker, we seized two tankers in return. oil in one of tankers belonged to US, not Greece. apparently your brain doesn't remember certain events! lol

In the end of the day, it's not Iran which is begging US to recognize it's sovereignty over a part of it's soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## strateger

The war in Ukraine has taught the world a few things regarding modern combat.

Air defense systems are significantly more important than air-to-air combat aircraft
Drones are essential for combat missions, and for laser/guided artillery. Drones significantly reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
Laser/guided artillery reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
Accurate ballistic missiles (like the Iskander, or the Iranian Fateh) significantly reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
Combat aircrafts biggest role is supporting ground operations and shooting cruise missiles and other guided munitions. Basically mobile cruise missile launchers.

The Russians are using SU-25's, SU-24's, and SU-34's... More than anything, 25's and 24's. The other significant piece of aviation is the KA-52 helicopter.

What that means is for Iran, is that they need 4/5 pieces of aviation. They shouldn't invest anything significant in this area. Just upgrades and the ability to manufacture. Again, this will require Russia to give Iran the build specs for the SU-22, SU-25, and the AL-21 engine. 

Kowsars (light attack)
SU-22's (bomb/missile truck)
SU-25's (ground support)
F4's (bomb/missile truck)
Toufan/Panha 2091 helicopters

It flies Mach 2.1, with a service ceiling of 50,000 feet (SU-24 is 36,000 feet... SU-34 is 56,000 feet). Can now fire precision guided bombs, cruise missiles (with 15km range), and Yasin glide bombs which have a 50km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Chinese fighter jets have recently pulled maneuvers infront of Canadian and now Australian patrol aircraft in the South China Sea. In this incident, a Chinese J-16 went infront of an Australian P-8 and dispensed flares and chaff. The Australians are claiming that some of the chaff particles got into the P-8s engines. Canada called Chinese maneuvers alarming and Australia described them as highly risky.


well , as long as they didn't release those chaff in front of p8 ,I'd say Australian had no ground for complaint but releasing chaff in front of P8 which is actually is 738-800ESR is very dangerous , if more of the particles entered the engine it could made the engine fail. and easily lead to unnecessary war



TheImmortal said:


> Yeah Russia did the same thing last 10 years. Now we see Russian airforce isn’t the vaunted Killing machine we once thought it was.
> 
> Childish antics like this just prove immaturity of the armed force.
> 
> I’m all for some pilots horsing around having fun with each other. Iran has done it professionally. But this game of chicken crap just shows they suffer from inferiority complex.
> 
> Meanwhile they let the west continue to violate their “zones” of sovereignty in South China Sea.


Russians pilots didn't release chaff in front of others , they just made some maneuvers or fly by them. I say Chinese pilot was a little too reckless

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

I believe that some of Iran's aircrafts are simply too old. Airframes can only last for so long. Recently an Iranian J-7 crashed. I mean yes it happens, recently in the Mohave desert, an F-18 crashed, but still imo Iran needs some modern flanker variants with technology transfers. Some of those older airframes are simply at the end of their lifecycles. It's a miracle they've been able to keep them going for so long already.

Iran has made the right choice investing heavily in missile technology and UAVs. In the future UAVs will become more maneuverable. Once they can fly as fast as fighter jets, dispense flares, use counter measures, they'll basically be unmanned fighter jets. The US is already working on such platforms. It's definitely the future.



strateger said:


> The war in Ukraine has taught the world a few things regarding modern combat.
> 
> Air defense systems are significantly more important than air-to-air combat aircraft
> Drones are essential for combat missions, and for laser/guided artillery. Drones significantly reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
> Laser/guided artillery reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
> Accurate ballistic missiles (like the Iskander, or the Iranian Fateh) significantly reduce the need for air-to-ground combat aircraft
> Combat aircrafts biggest role is supporting ground operations and shooting cruise missiles and other guided munitions. Basically mobile cruise missile launchers.
> 
> The Russians are using SU-25's, SU-24's, and SU-34's... More than anything, 25's and 24's. The other significant piece of aviation is the KA-52 helicopter.
> 
> What that means is for Iran, is that they need 4/5 pieces of aviation. They shouldn't invest anything significant in this area. Just upgrades and the ability to manufacture. Again, this will require Russia to give Iran the build specs for the SU-22, SU-25, and the AL-21 engine.
> 
> Kowsars (light attack)
> SU-22's (bomb/missile truck)
> SU-25's (ground support)
> F4's (bomb/missile truck)
> Toufan/Panha 2091 helicopters
> 
> It flies Mach 2.1, with a service ceiling of 50,000 feet (SU-24 is 36,000 feet... SU-34 is 56,000 feet). Can now fire precision guided bombs, cruise missiles (with 15km range), and Yasin glide bombs which have a 50km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Iran needs some modern flanker variants with technology transfers. Some of those older airframes are simply at the end of their lifecycles. It's a miracle they've been able to keep them going for so long already.


are you sure you want flankers with outdated avionics which can't even complete against F-14
.




__





Algeria Wants To Return Russian Fighter Jets


Algeria has demanded that Moscow take back several MiG fighter jets supplied under a major arms deal because of quality concerns.




www.mbtmag.com





I could not find the original report , but it say when they looked closer to the airplanes they received from Russia some of them had parts inside them which were under load at least 10-15 years

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iraqi F-16 destroys mobile ISIS ammunition depot in the desert. Several ISIS fighters killed. 



https://southfront.org/iraqi-army-shares-footage-showing-aftermath-of-strike-on-mobile-ammunition-depot-of-isis/



A Jordanian Grob G 120tp training aircraft crashed near the Syrian border killing 2 pilots


----------



## sha ah

Did you read the article ? This is just a political game. The Algerians couldn't even pay their Soviet era debts and so worked out a new deal with Russia for the MIGs. I doubt they've even paid for them yet. As they say you get what you pay for. This is likely due to pressure from the west/France. 

The flanker has a long track record and is a very reliable aircraft. Some variants are pretty advanced and avionics / radar and such can always be upgraded. So what are you saying Iran fly F-4s and J-7s for another 20 years ? Come on Iran needs a few dozen just to keep the airforce going. It's either that the J-10 or build more F-5s, but the F-5 is a light aircraft. 

Yeah the F-14, fully loaded with 6 Phoenix missiles and upgraded avionics/radar is still a jet to be reckoned with.

From the website:

Some commentators said that pressure from France, which wants to sell its Rafale jets to Algeria, could also be a factor behind Algeria's reported rejection of the MiGs.

Andrei Maslov, head of a Russian think-tank specializing in African studies, Rosafroexpertiza, said that Algeria could be tempted to purchase French jets as a complement to booming energy sales to France. ''The money spent on Rafales would be just a fraction of what it will earn by selling gas to France,'' said Maslov.



Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure you want flankers with outdated avionics which can't even complete against F-14
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Algeria Wants To Return Russian Fighter Jets
> 
> 
> Algeria has demanded that Moscow take back several MiG fighter jets supplied under a major arms deal because of quality concerns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mbtmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not find the original report , but it say when they looked closer to the airplanes they received from Russia some of them had parts inside them which were under load at least 10-15 years





Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure you want flankers with outdated avionics which can't even complete against F-14
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Algeria Wants To Return Russian Fighter Jets
> 
> 
> Algeria has demanded that Moscow take back several MiG fighter jets supplied under a major arms deal because of quality concerns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mbtmag.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

I will soon do a thread with slides on future IRIAF/IRGCF/AD/E-warfare. Evidently, Iran is moving towards an integrated defense doctrine so these forces will work in a highly connected way in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> I will soon do a thread with slides on future IRIAF/IRGCF/AD/E-warfare. Evidently, Iran is moving towards an integrated defense doctrine so these forces will work in a highly connected way in future.


It's been a long time since I say that they do it more and more

They want the kowsar to be related to drones. New Kowsar will have artificial intelligence. I had read a little news that said that scientist teams are working to make Kowsar an unmanned plane.

Iran is working hard to pass the stages and go to the 6th generation of combat aircraft. He know that China, Russians, USA works on the 6th generation so Iran will pass over the 5th generation and that will suckle and the whole world.

And for the Kowsar, a general said for 1 year that the SAEGHE and the old F-5 will have been going to KOWSAR standards. Lots of surprise to come who come and shake people from this forum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It's been a long time since I say that they do it more and more
> 
> They want the kowsar to be related to drones. New Kowsar will have artificial intelligence. I had read a little news that said that scientist teams are working to make Kowsar an unmanned plane.
> 
> Iran is working hard to pass the stages and go to the 6th generation of combat aircraft. He know that China, Russians, USA works on the 6th generation so Iran will pass over the 5th generation and that will suckle and the whole world.
> 
> And for the Kowsar, a general said for 1 year that the SAEGHE and the old F-5 will have been going to KOWSAR standards. Lots of surprise to come who come and shake people from this forum



Not sure about the rest but what has actually been confirmed in recent times in Air international is that IRIAF/IRGCAF/Airdefence have recently started using the centralized GCI (Ground Controlled Interception) strategy in which Interceptor fighters and air defense batteries are connected through datalinks from a centralized system (origin at Khatam al Anbiya base). This system takes input from a series of extra long-range radars like OTHR Sepeher, Nazir, and mobile ASR AESA etc process this information, links it to an integrated interception group. Like if there are 4 x F-14AM + 4 x Kowsar + 2 MIG-29 + 1 x S-300 + 2 x Bavar-373 in the area then they will all be working in a layered way towards dealing with the threat, like the many arms of one single brain instead of IRIAF, IRGC all playing their own games. The way they are integrating Kaman-22 and Shahed Saegheh, may be they will become part of this system too. Recently IRIAF has officially said that soon they will unveil airborne long-range radar Drones like unmanned AWACS/SIGNIT. 

also F-14AM and Kowsar both use MIL-STD-1553 Architecture. If we can churn out next generation of 4+ gen Kowsar and get more MIG-29SMT/MIG-35 airframes, this integrated interception group will be nearly invincible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Did you read the article ? This is just a political game. The Algerians couldn't even pay their Soviet era debts and so worked out a new deal with Russia for the MIGs. I doubt they've even paid for them yet. As they say you get what you pay for. This is likely due to pressure from the west/France.
> 
> The flanker has a long track record and is a very reliable aircraft. Some variants are pretty advanced and avionics / radar and such can always be upgraded. So what are you saying Iran fly F-4s and J-7s for another 20 years ? Come on Iran needs a few dozen just to keep the airforce going. It's either that the J-10 or build more F-5s, but the F-5 is a light aircraft.
> 
> Yeah the F-14, fully loaded with 6 Phoenix missiles and upgraded avionics/radar is still a jet to be reckoned with.
> 
> From the website:
> 
> Some commentators said that pressure from France, which wants to sell its Rafale jets to Algeria, could also be a factor behind Algeria's reported rejection of the MiGs.
> 
> Andrei Maslov, head of a Russian think-tank specializing in African studies, Rosafroexpertiza, said that Algeria could be tempted to purchase French jets as a complement to booming energy sales to France. ''The money spent on Rafales would be just a fraction of what it will earn by selling gas to France,'' said Maslov.


if Algeria could not pay mig-29 price how they are supposed to pay for rafale so the reason was France pressure is really strange.
and which flanker come with modern avionic except last generation of Su-35 .russia even had to downgrade Mig-35 from AESA to PESA because they could not produce enough AESA radar


----------



## SalarHaqq

applesauce said:


> ?? while it's clear you have no love for china and is underestimating chinese capabilities and training but, china has more confidence than iran has ever had. china is playing a large and long game with the us across the world while your most important scientists continue to have "accidents" in broad daylight and your ships get outright seized on the high seas. china was at that point once too, see the yinhe incident, but its unthinkable currently. the us does all these things to you and all iran did was seize a south korean tanker, you dont ever dare to stand up directly to the master behind the strings, must be this "inferiority complex" you're talking about.
> 
> also those "zones" are adiz and economic zones, they are international space, and nations are free to overfly/sail through them, they are merely a notification that you will be watched and possibly intercepted. what is considered ts to varying degreeerritory and sovereign is the 12 miles of waters from land/islands and the response there was to militarized them. in fact china said they would not militarize them unless provoked to, and they did exactly that when the US sailed by them. there has been no such close crossing by these armed islands since the constructed was largely complete. the us and its lackies want to play chicken in the international waters? well the response is china will too built towards the capabilities to do the same in their backyard, see the current trip across the pacific islands, and the various spy ships near Australia as well as the break down of the RoC and Japanese air forces under the weight of the sheer numbers of chinese flights towards and in their adiz, to the degree that they publicly announced that they will no longer escort all chinese military flights into their adiz because of air frame and pilot fatigue.
> 
> and for the record, just because the us and its lackies find a interception by russia or china to be "unprofessional" does not make it so, and one should not think so by default unless you are a us lackie yourself and take their side in the absence of any evidence. and these interceptions work, modern chinese territorial space is one of the few places the us doesn't dare to fly drones and whatever into on a daily basis, which is much more than any country in the middle east could say.



Just so you know, statements issued by currently active users here seldom reflect the standpoint of Iranian authorities, especially of the revolutionary core of the system. Apart from a few exceptions, they tend to be influenced to varying degrees by views typical of the exiled opposition or of the domestic liberal fifth column, both of which are apologetic towards the west.

What anti-imperialist would proceed to outright bashing China or Russia for not doing as much as Iran has done against the American empire? At least the former two are contributing to the cause, unlike other nations. So while constructive criticism might be deemed acceptable, aggressivity bordering on hostility certainly shouldn't.

Revolutionary-minded Iranians are not only filled with joy at every new step China takes against Washingon, but also glad to notice the strategic setback suffered by the US regime in the South China Sea as well as the fact that even to western experts, there's no winning a direct battle there for Washington, be it today let alone in years to come when Beijing's inevitably going to equal and then surpass the US in conventional firepower, whether under Xi or any potential successor.

So I'd advise against taking the bait of contrasting Iran and China in a confrontational manner. Whether or not they believe Iran has been more adamant in its struggle versus the common enemy, whether or not they are critical of Beijing on specific past dealings with Iran, revolutionaries still wholeheartedly support China in everything it does to rein in and push back the criminal US regime.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Not sure about the rest but what has actually been confirmed in recent times in Air international is that IRIAF/IRGCAF/Airdefence have recently started using the centralized GCI (Ground Controlled Interception) strategy in which Interceptor fighters and air defense batteries are connected through datalinks from a centralized system (origin at Khatam al Anbiya base). This system takes input from a series of extra long-range radars like OTHR Sepeher, Nazir, and mobile ASR AESA etc process this information, links it to an integrated interception group. Like if there are 4 x F-14AM + 4 x Kowsar + 2 MIG-29 + 1 x S-300 + 2 x Bavar-373 in the area then they will all be working in a layered way towards dealing with the threat, like the many arms of one single brain instead of IRIAF, IRGC all playing their own games. The way they are integrating Kaman-22 and Shahed Saegheh, may be they will become part of this system too. Recently IRIAF has officially said that soon they will unveil airborne long-range radar Drones like unmanned AWACS/SIGNIT.
> 
> also F-14AM and Kowsar both use MIL-STD-1553 Architecture. If we can churn out next generation of 4+ gen Kowsar and get more MIG-29SMT/MIG-35 airframes, this integrated interception group will be nearly invincible.



Iran advances very quickly in artificial intelligence and radars. Iranian scientists will go further than 4+ very quickly. We know very well that Iran is much more advanced than their public statements. We also know that Iran hides weapons never presented to the public that will be used in wartime. I can't wait to find out more about the single -seater Kowsar version

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran advances very quickly in artificial intelligence and radars. Iranian scientists will go further than 4+ very quickly. We know very well that Iran is much more advanced than their public statements. We also know that Iran hides weapons never presented to the public that will be used in wartime. I can't wait to find out more about the single -seater Kowsar version



Confirmed Airforce related tech that we have actual evidence of is following:

1) Two types of Look Down shoot down fighter jet Fire control radars have been shown
- Bayyenat-I in F-4E, similar to JL-10A of JH-7A (Kish Airshow, Bushehr Squadron)
- Bayyenat-II in Kowsar, ditto of Grifo-346
2) 4.0 Generation Avionics suite (Kowsar)
3) MIL-STD-1553 based data linking
4) GCI coordinated battle group integrated approach of Fighters/LORADS/SHORADS
5) Inputs come from Long-range OTHR Search radars that can literally detect fighters flying over Syria and Saudi Arabia. Max range is in thousands.
6) Tracking comes from Engagement radars of fighters and GCI radars like Hafez of Mersad system or Meraj-4 (both are 350-400 km for fighter size target)
7) Near future, UAV-AWACS/SIGINT will accompany this group. Probably Kaman-22 based or may be Shahid Saegheh???

What we need is to get the F-14AM numbers upto 50 to raise 4 squadrons, arm them Fakours, get MIG-29 9.12A upgraded to M2/SMT standard with R-77AE. Add Next Generation Kowsar to this layer with AESA radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

SalarHaqq said:


> Just so you know, statements issued by users here seldom reflect the standpoint of Iranian authorities, especially of the revolutionary core of the system. Apart from two or three exceptions, they tend to be influenced to varying degrees by views typical of the exiled opposition or of the domestic liberal fifth column, both of which are apologetic towards the west.
> 
> What anti-imperialist would proceed to outright bashing China or Russia for not doing as much as Iran has done against the American empire? At least the former two are contributing to the struggle, unlike other nations. So while constructive criticism might be deemed acceptable, aggressivity bordering on hostility certainly shouldn't.
> 
> Revolutionary-minded Iranians are not only filled with joy at every new step China takes against Washingon, but also glad to notice the strategic setback of the US regime in the South China Sea and the fact that even to western experts, there's no winning a direct battle there for Washington, even today let alone in the years to come when Beijing's inevitably going to equal and then surpass the US in conventional power, whether under Xi or any potential successor.
> 
> So I'd advise against taking the bait and contrasting Iran and China in a confrontational manner. Whether or not they believe Iran has been more adamant in its confrontation versus the common enemy, revolutionaries wholeheartedly support China in everything it does to rein in and push back the criminal US regime.


I agree. Good for China and Russia. Iran has its own 'Taiwanese' right here in the forum knowingly or unknowingly not only parroting the standard storyline but referencing clearly negative sources (under the dubious banner of 'straight talk'). It's hard or undesirable for them to break out of the fishbowl they're wallowing in.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

jauk said:


> I agree. Good for China and Russia. Iran has its own 'Taiwanese' right here in the forum knowingly or unknowingly not only parroting the standard storyline but referencing clearly negative sources (under the dubious banner of 'straight talk'). It's hard or undesirable for them to break out of the fishbowl they're wallowing in.



Who are you pointing towards ?


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> Who are you pointing towards ?


I don't know who he's pointing towards but people like this are common in the stock markets, always a bull but never keeping an ear open for the bear thesis. It's not good to be dismiss things you don't like simply cause you don't like them.


----------



## jauk

drmeson said:


> Who are you pointing towards ?


I’m referring to the typical Iranians who aspire to the West who are obvious here. Plus the whiners tag team of course.



Stryker1982 said:


> I don't know who he's pointing towards but people like this are common in the stock markets, always a bull but never keeping an ear open for the bear thesis. It's not good to be dismiss things you don't like simply cause you don't like them.


Shaking the tree always works! 😋

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Good news:

Fakour-90-2 or "Maghsoud" ARH LR-BVR from Babaiee Missile Industries will be tested in the coming days probably. It will have an effective range of around 180-200 KM with a powerful active radar of its own and ECM. 

Sad news:

Only F-14AM can fire them.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## drmeson

drmeson said:


> Good news:
> 
> Fakour-90-2 or "Maghsoud" ARH LR-BVR from Babaiee Missile Industries will be tested in the coming days probably. It will have an effective range of around 180-200 KM with a powerful active radar of its own and ECM.
> 
> Sad news:
> 
> Only F-14AM can fire them.



which is probably the reason they are investing more money in F-14AM upgradation and increasing the airframe count than any other fighter in the IRIAF. The current count is 43 airframes, out of which some 18-20 are F-14AM so far (modern digitalized, newer antenna AWG-9 with 370 Km range, IEI RWR+ECM+ MIL-STD-1553 Datalink from ground OTHR and AESA Engagement radars, IEI RWR).

They may bring some 7-8 more airframes in the next 1-2 years to this count which means there will be some 50+ F-14AM standard fighters armed with Fakour/Maghsoud LR-BVR supported by some 23 x MIG-29 (upgradation going on currently in ) and 70 x Kowsars. An overall BVR armed force of 140 x 4.0-4+ generation interceptors supported by UAV-AWACS/SIGINT/GWACS.

This is a good plan by IRIAF planners to rely upon actual machines then corruption-led stupid projects like JL-9 conversion of F-7N, upgradation of F-7N, or burning money on combat suite less Mirage F-1. Ideally speaking they should bargain with Russia for the supply of that old canceled order of ~48 MIG-29/MIG-35 to bring this integrated battle group interceptor force to ~200 x 4.0-4.5 generation.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## strateger

sha ah said:


> I believe that some of Iran's aircrafts are simply too old. Airframes can only last for so long. Recently an Iranian J-7 crashed. I mean yes it happens, recently in the Mohave desert, an F-18 crashed, but still imo Iran needs some modern flanker variants with technology transfers. Some of those older airframes are simply at the end of their lifecycles. It's a miracle they've been able to keep them going for so long already.
> 
> Iran has made the right choice investing heavily in missile technology and UAVs. In the future UAVs will become more maneuverable. Once they can fly as fast as fighter jets, dispense flares, use counter measures, they'll basically be unmanned fighter jets. The US is already working on such platforms. It's definitely the future.



I agree, but I think you misunderstood. I am not saying Iran should simply keep those SU-22's that they have upgraded. They should make brand new SU-22 airframes, with newly built AL-21 engines, with modern avionics, that at the minimum are competitive with the recently done IRGC upgrade package. This would go along with brand new airframes, engines, etc for Kowsars. If they can reverse-engineer the J79 engine and build new F4 airframes, that would be significant as well. But they need a new fleet, new airframes, new engines, etc for these 3 aircraft.

The manufacturing capability is far more valuable than buying jets from China/Russia.

The war in Ukraine has shown that nothing more is needed when you have drones, ballistic missiles, and laser/guided artillery.

Russia is doing incredible things (from a military perspective) with SU-25's and SU-24's, combined with the drones, missiles, and modern artillery.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It's been a long time since I say that they do it more and more
> 
> They want the kowsar to be related to drones. New Kowsar will have artificial intelligence. I had read a little news that said that scientist teams are working to make Kowsar an unmanned plane.
> 
> Iran is working hard to pass the stages and go to the 6th generation of combat aircraft. He know that China, Russians, USA works on the 6th generation so Iran will pass over the 5th generation and that will suckle and the whole world.
> 
> And for the Kowsar, a general said for 1 year that the SAEGHE and the old F-5 will have been going to KOWSAR standards. Lots of surprise to come who come and shake people from this forum


How credible is your source?


Mr Iran Eye said:


> Again, you should not trust General TheImmortal comments especially on the subject of Iranian combat aircraft.
> 
> The Shafaq project has always been active in the background and this project is far from dead. Iran has weapons and secret project not revealed but people here we have a lot of difficulty understanding this.
> 
> You will see in the future that was right here.


How far along is the project in your estimation, sir?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran advances very quickly in artificial intelligence and radars. Iranian scientists will go further than 4+ very quickly. We know very well that Iran is much more advanced than their public statements. We also know that Iran hides weapons never presented to the public that will be used in wartime. I can't wait to find out more about the single -seater Kowsar version


Yeah, I'm interested in HESA's projects as well although I HEARD from someone earlier that Shafaq was cancelled beyond all doubt.


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> Yeah, I'm interested in HESA's projects as well although I HEARD from someone earlier that Shafaq was cancelled beyond all doubt.



Itself Shafagh is dead with its designer from USSR, Dr. Fatadin Mukhamedov (from Tajik SSR). He had mad love for flying disc-like fighters. One of his designs for the Mikayon office in Dushanbe, almost defeated Yak-130 for Moscow's tender for an advanced trainer / light fighter. 

Because he worked with HESA engineers for years. Shafagh's design may have later influenced Kowsar-88/Borhan design or F-313 mockups. The day F-313's real derivative flies, we will see Mukhamedov's disc-like design in that (He passed away in 2013).


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Itself Shafagh is dead with its designer from USSR, Dr. Fatadin Mukhamedov (from Tajik SSR). He had mad love for flying disc-like fighters. One of his designs for the Mikayon office in Dushanbe, almost defeated Yak-130 for Moscow's tender for an advanced trainer / light fighter.
> 
> Because he worked with HESA engineers for years. Shafagh's design may have later influenced Kowsar-88/Borhan design or F-313 mockups. The day F-313's real derivative flies, we will see Mukhamedov's disc-like design in that (He passed away in 2013).


Have his papers and drafts been recovered? Obviously, replacing the expertise lost on his passing would be difficult but as long as some of his work can be salvaged, all is good.


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> Have his papers and drafts been recovered? Obviously, replacing the expertise lost on his passing would be difficult but as long as some of his work can be salvaged, all is good.



It was all out there on his company website, that he ran with his son. He had patents to his name for all these low RCS flying disc designs. Being ethnic Tajik, he spoke Persian fluently and visited Iran many times, his company had former MIG and Sukhoi designers, some 20 of them came to Malek Ashtar University to design this fighter and its advanced trainer version along with HESA engineers.







Shafagh itself stalled because of multiple reasons:

- lack of RD-5000 afterburners from Russia
- Iran was totally dependent at that time for Avionics and combat suite
- Mukhamedov's company went down with his declining health
- Iranian focus shifted to Missile power for strike and Air defence for interception.

But the Project laid the groundswork for the future generation of Iranian combat aviation projects. We have evidence in form of the following:

- Saegheh I/II tech demonstrators, both had the exact same YF-17/FA-18 or Shafagh's V-Tail configuration.
- I personally feel that Qaher-313 project was just some group inside HESA trying to revive whatever they worked on with Mukhamedov OKB.
- Every project that came out of Iran after that was F-5E/F + YF-17 + Shafagh. You will have Saeqeh with Shafagh's air-intakes with V-tails of YF-17. Qaher F313 was X-36 with Shafaghs V-tails.
(Northrop shared YF-17/FA-18 designs with Iran).















With engine problem being solved through Jahesh turbofan progression into a larger afterburner version or OWJ J90, along with Kowsar's quite advanced avionics suite we can probably predict that the actual end product of this 20+ years of research will yield a 4++ to 5.0 generation fighter from the labs of HESA in few years, maybe between 2025-2030 if funds are loosened. Mukhamedov OKB gave that concept years ago in form of a fighter for IRIAF called "M-ATF". Something very similar is going to fly IMO in a few years with Shafagh's advanced aerodynamics for all aspect extremely low RCS (or whatever they learned from research on X-36 like Qaher), Saegheh I/II V-tails for high angle of attacks, and Kowsar's even improved Avionics package, Bayyenat-AESA radar and FBW etc. Iranian equivalent to KF-21 which will eventually see mass production to replace everything in IRIAF/IRGC-AF except F-14AM and the newly purchased Su-35S. This is one of the reasons we never see mass induction of Saegheh I/II, Kowsar-I or any light fighter from China. Something much better is yet to come.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> It was all out there on his company website, that he ran with his son. He had patents to his name for all these low RCS flying disc designs. Being ethnic Tajik, he spoke Persian fluently and visited Iran many times, his company had former MIG and Sukhoi designers, some 20 of them came to Malek Ashtar University to design this fighter and its advanced trainer version along with HESA engineers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shafagh itself stalled because of multiple reasons:
> 
> - lack of RD-5000 afterburners from Russia
> - Iran was totally dependent at that time for Avionics and combat suite
> - Mukhamedov's company went down with his declining health
> - Iranian focus shifted to Missile power for strike and Air defence for interception.
> 
> But the Project laid the groundswork for the future generation of Iranian combat aviation projects. We have evidence in form of the following:
> 
> - Saegheh I/II tech demonstrators, both had the exact same YF-17/FA-18 or Shafagh's V-Tail configuration.
> - I personally feel that Qaher-313 project was just some group inside HESA trying to revive whatever they worked on with Mukhamedov OKB.
> - Every project that came out of Iran after that was F-5E/F + YF-17 + Shafagh. You will have Saeqeh with Shafagh's air-intakes with V-tails of YF-17. Qaher F313 was X-36 with Shafaghs V-tails.
> (Northrop shared YF-17/FA-18 designs with Iran).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With engine problem being solved through Jahesh turbofan progression into a larger afterburner version or OWJ J90, along with Kowsar's quite advanced avionics suite we can probably predict that the actual end product of this 20+ years of research will yield a 4++ to 5.0 generation fighter from the labs of HESA in few years, maybe between 2025-2030 if funds are loosened. Mukhamedov OKB gave that concept years ago in form of a fighter for IRIAF called "M-ATF". Something very similar is going to fly IMO in a few years with Shafagh's advanced aerodynamics for all aspect extremely low RCS (or whatever they learned from research on X-36 like Qaher), Saegheh I/II V-tails for high angle of attacks, and Kowsar's even improved Avionics package, Bayyenat-AESA radar and FBW etc. Iranian equivalent to KF-21 which will eventually see mass production to replace everything in IRIAF/IRGC-AF except F-14AM and the newly purchased Su-35S. This is one of the reasons we never see mass induction of Saegheh I/II, Kowsar-I or any light fighter from China. Something much better is yet to come.


This post was like an early birthday gift. Arigato, senpai! DAISUKE!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The shafaq is still alive, it is the future that will decide the question. And for the Kowsar, the upgrades, I had already posted this news here.

Challenge for you, look for the serial number of the F-4 SM (super improving) Find me the F-4 SM with new cells. And I tell you that the new engine has been testing in it for a while. You really have to look for the most recent F4s and carefully analyze these planes. They work according to their public announcements in the manufacture of a new heavy chaseur and I believe it firmly at 100%

Do you seriously think they are working on a new heavy hunters without new engine? I say they started their new heavy hunter because they have the engine in hand and they were tested on the F-4 M or SM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The shafaq is still alive, it is the future that will decide the question. And for the Kowsar, the upgrades, I had already posted this news here.
> 
> Challenge for you, look for the serial number of the F-4 SM (super improving) Find me the F-4 SM with new cells. And I tell you that the new engine has been testing in it for a while. You really have to look for the most recent F4s and carefully analyze these planes. They work according to their public announcements in the manufacture of a new heavy chaseur and I believe it firmly at 100%
> 
> Do you seriously think they are working on a new heavy hunters without new engine? I say they started their new heavy hunter because they have the engine in hand and they were tested on the F-4 M or SM.


Thanks for the heads up, agham!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

All hail the undisputed legend of the Iranian skies, F-14AM upgrade package. Underlined are known or possible/plausible upgrades with local stuff.










gathered all the info I could from Key-aero, Key-military, words of TCooper, Air international, Combat-Aviation, etc. I will keep modifying the information as it becomes more published.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> All hail the undisputed legend of the Iranian skies, F-14AM upgrade package. Underlined are known or possible/plausible upgrades with local stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gathered all the info I could from Key-aero, Key-military, words of TCooper, Air international, Combat-Aviation, etc. I will keep modifying the information as it becomes more published.


Come on if you put those hard points there it'll clash with airplane itself. By the way hydra rockets ? Are you kidding me


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Come on if you put those hard points there it'll clash with airplane itself. By the way hydra rockets ? Are you kidding me


What hardpoints, I see only original hard points on those F14, F14 can carry 8 AA missiles thus 2 external fuel tanks... In original configuration, it can carry even 10 probably without AIM 54


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Come on if you put those hard points there it'll clash with airplane itself. By the way hydra rockets ? Are you kidding me



Hydra => LAU-10 has been corrected, I used the Kowsar template so may have missed changing it.

Not sure what you are on about the hardpoints. F-14 has 10 hard points. 4 x under nacelles, 2 x wing gloves, 4 x under the fuselage. I was careful enough to limit the configuration to 6 x Fakour-90 / AIM-54+ only.

......................


For those who want to know. The current Iranian inventory for long-range LR-BVR for F-14 AM is as follows:

~40+ totally overhauled maintained AIM-54+
~100-120 x Fakour-90

Both systems are under the care of Babaei Missile Industries. Whenever Maghsoud ARH-LR-BVR will be unveiled by them, I hope it's smaller and lighter so that it can arm F-14 AM, Kowsar's future generation simultaneously. MIG-29 fleet will get newer BVR (I do not like R-27E) whenever or if they procure newer jets from Russia.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> What hardpoints, I see only original hard points on those F14, F14 can carry 8 AA missiles thus 2 external fuel tanks... In original configuration, it can carry even 10 probably without AIM 54


Only 6 two under wings and 4 under belly


----------



## sha ah

An F-14 can carry 6x Phoenix missiles but I believe Iran prefers 4x since the more payload, the less range and maneuverability.



Hack-Hook said:


> Only 6 two under wings and 4 under belly


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> An F-14 can carry 6x Phoenix missiles but I believe Iran prefers 4x since the more payload, the less range and maneuverability.


Look at underneath of the plane . I hope there is no doubt it can carry 4 under it's belly.

Now look at the wing design it has two part a short fixed part and a bigger moving part.
Simply you can't install anything on moving part . That's why it only can carry 2 missile under it's wing.

Unless you want add an adapter under wing to be able to carry 3 aim-9 instead of one aim-54 or aim-120 or aim-7 on those two pylon which is not applicable to F-14a but introduced with F-14d nontheless 
The total number of pylons remain 6


----------



## drmeson

Here is my outlook on future of Air Arms of Iranian forces.

From the looks of it, IRIAF along with IRGCAF will emerge as one of the top 10-12 air arms in the world in the unmanned combat aviation era (2030/35-onwards). We have a large functional MALE-UCAV fleet already including low RCS ones and it's constantly being evolved with the newest and modern most technologies. The deployment itself is getting more diverse with multiple UCAV dedicated bases and underground bunkered bases, forward ocean bases with launching runways. Indigenous ingredients such as single crystal turbofans, 4.0 generation avionics package, modern fire control LD-SD/SAR radars, and all-aspect slim WVR, LR-BVR missiles are there too and they are constantly getting modernized by local companies. It's just when would the companies take this A2A UCAV route is dependent upon when would the demand arise. I am no longer excited to see Shahed-171/191, Kaman-22 or Gaza even though they are better than what countries around us make. I want to see an interceptor-like stealth supersonic version of Shahed 191 powered with 2 x Jahesh-700, carrying 4 x 30-40Gs pulling BVR ARH/IR missiles in internal bays while datalinking with GWACS/AWACS and whatever manned fleet will be there to compliment such a force. The exclusively manned era will continue with these F-5E/F-20/YF-17/FCK-1/T-5/Kowsar like 4.0 to 4+ Gen light fighters and it should. But the focus in 10-12 years will be totally tilted towards this low RCS A2A unmanned fighters.

As someone who has been following Iranian weapon programs for 20-25 years, I can safely say this happened with our missile program too. In 12-15 years we went from Hwasong-7 reverse engineering to launching three staged SLV's. In further 5 years we had <5m CEP scoring MaRV's installed on Solid fueled IRBMs. Same thing is gonna repeat for our Air arms too. I personally believe it will happen for IRGC-AF earlier than IRIAF.

P.S. It is also more feasible for our UCAV infrastructure to give out an A2A dedicated UCAV than people wishing HESA to produce SU-35 equivalent inside Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

رئیس‌جمهور: صنایع هِسا هواپیمای مسافربری تولید کند​رئیس‌جمهور پس از بازدید از مجموعه‌ بالگردی و بخش‌های مختلف شرکت هِسا گفت: این شرکت مجموعه‌ای از دانایی‌ها را به توانایی تبدیل کرده و آنچه که ما از شرکت هِسا انتظار داریم ساخت هواپیمای مسافربری با رعایت تمامی استاندادر‌های لازم بین المللی است.









خبرگزاری فارس - رئیس‌جمهور: صنایع هِسا هواپیمای مسافربری تولید کند


آیت الله رئیسی پس از بازدید از بخش‌های مختلف شرکت هِسای وزارت دفاع در اصفهان از مسئولان این شرکت خواست هواپیمای مسافربری با رعایت استانداردهای بین المللی تولید کنند.



www.farsnews.ir





Mr Raisy to HESA : Build airliners

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Look at underneath of the plane . I hope there is no doubt it can carry 4 under it's belly.
> 
> Now look at the wing design it has two part a short fixed part and a bigger moving part.
> Simply you can't install anything on moving part . That's why it only can carry 2 missile under it's wing.
> 
> Unless you want add an adapter under wing to be able to carry 3 aim-9 instead of one aim-54 or aim-120 or aim-7 on those two pylon which is not applicable to F-14a but introduced with F-14d nontheless
> The total number of pylons remain 6


F14 can cary 6 AIM 54 + 2 ext fuel tanks or 8 missiles + 2 ext fueks tanks in conf 4 aim 54 +2 aim9 + 2aim 7 or 6 aim 7 + 2 aim 9... 8 missiles max + 2 fuel tanks or in case all aim 54,than 6 + 2 fuel tanks, that is original configuration

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

I dont remeber I saw these, similar to SDB 1 winglet bombs

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> I dont remeber I saw these, similar to SDB 1 winglet bombs
> View attachment 854398



These pylons are novel for Kowsar/Saegheh compared to what was tested on an F-7N testbed (below) for Yasin glide PGM's. I guess Yasin and Balaban PGMs are the standard guided strike package for Kowsar. Its Bayyenat-II Radar has SAR capability and a Ballistic computer targeting system for precision strikes.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Raisi visiting Kowsar production facillity, more Kowsar seems coming, I can see one with single cannon

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Raisi visiting Kowsar production facillity, more Kowsar seems coming, I can see one with single cannon
> View attachment 854476
> View attachment 854474
> View attachment 854473
> View attachment 854475
> 
> 
> View attachment 854480



I swear they must have prop airframes they drag out for each President to make a photo op.

We know the production rate of Kowsar is very low, yet every president takes a picture in front of like 4-6 unfinished airframes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I swear they must have prop airframes they drag out for each President to make a photo op.
> 
> We know the production rate of Kowsar is very low, yet every president takes a picture in front of like 4-6 unfinished airframes.


well, 4-6 airframe mean low production rate


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well, 4-6 airframe mean low production rate



Everytime a president walks by they are working on 6+ frames? Coincidence? Yet maybe no more than 1-2 squadrons have ever existed of each of these F-5 derative projects (Azkarash, Saeghe I, Saeghe II, Kowsar, etc)

What is production rate of Kowsar right now? 1 per month? They happen to be working on 4-6 when Raisi walks by?

Come on. It’s staged photos.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sha ah

Perhaps or perhaps they're producing half a dozen to a dozen a year ? Is it that hard to believe ?



TheImmortal said:


> Everytime a president walks by they are working on 6+ frames? Coincidence? Yet maybe no more than 1-2 squadrons have ever existed of each of these F-5 derative projects (Azkarash, Saeghe I, Saeghe II, Kowsar, etc)
> 
> What is production rate of Kowsar right now? 1 per month? They happen to be working on 4-6 when Raisi walks by?
> 
> Come on. It’s staged photos.



Is that one Antonov-140 ever going to fly ? Atleast the F-5s can fly.



sanel1412 said:


> Raisi visiting Kowsar production facillity, more Kowsar seems coming, I can see one with single cannon
> View attachment 854476
> View attachment 854474
> View attachment 854473
> View attachment 854475
> 
> 
> View attachment 854480

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537688908489793536

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

So Raisi asked HESA to build a few passenger planes. Is he talking about the Antonov-140 ? Because honestly if Iran can figure out the issues behind the engine, then all of the grounded Antonov-140 planes can be made airworthy. 

Aren't the engines for the AN-140 plane Russian ? Why can't Iran import them or license build them from Russia ? or find an alternative from China ? Because aside from the Russian engine, the AN-140 can also use a Pratt and Whitney variant as a replacement. Obviously purchasing turboprop engines from the west is out of the question but perhaps there is a Chinese alternative ?



sanel1412 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537688908489793536

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

So there will be 65 Kowsars in the end. Maybe more if IRIAF finally comes to its senses and gets rid of the toothless F-7N/Mirage F1 fleet. Considering its avionics and combat suite is truly 4.0 Generation, Some 70-80 such fighters would not be bad for the interceptor force of 73 x F-14AM + 23 MIG9.12A. A good stop-gap solution until (a) 4.5 generation MRCA comes from Russia/China (b) Kowsars next generation is unvieled .

6 + 11 + 6 airframes have been seen being worked upon during different photo sets.

Fully armed and operationalized, it can take on even our MIG 9.12A in engagement, the soviet reject has a ~400 Kg midget range radar that can't see a 1 m2 RCS target beyond 40 KM. IRIAF needs to focus on MIG fleet upgradation the same way they have focused on F-5E/F fleet and F-14A. Otherwise what's the point.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

رئیسی: دنیا حق دهد که به آمریکا بی‌اعتماد باشیم/ ساخت هواپیمای با 72 سرنشین تحقق‌پذیر است- اخبار مجلس و دولت ایران - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


رئیس‌جمهور با اشاره به تحریم‌های جدید آمریکا گفت: آمریکایی‌ها از سویی پیغام می‌فرستند که "آماده توافق و مذاکره هستیم"، اما از سوی دیگر بر تحریم‌ها می‌افزایند، دنیا باید حق بدهد که ما به این‌ها اعتماد نداریم.




www.tasnimnews.com





Mr Raisy: "I asked HESA to build 72 seat airliners."

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1537674748246769664

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

TAB-2

MIG-29 9.12A carrying 2 x R-73E HOBS + 2 x R27R1 BVR.

For fun, can anyone point out the upgradations this aircraft has received inside Iran so far ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sha ah said:


> Perhaps or perhaps they're producing half a dozen to a dozen a year ? Is it that hard to believe ?



6 Kowsars a year might be a realistic number. Mostly to replace older F-5’s that are either cannablized, lost in accidents, or put into storage due to lack of airworthy status.

We will probably see Kowsar II in next couple years. And then the whole cycle repeats itself again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sha ah said:


> Perhaps or perhaps they're producing half a dozen to a dozen a year ? Is it that hard to believe ?



depends upon the $$ inflow. Cost of a brand new (from scratch) Kowsar is 9-9.5 Million USD (quoting key aero) including new fuselage, movable parts, skin, FBW controlled actuators, engines, radar, avionics, cockpit, seats, landing gears, new wings/tails, Radom, Comms, etc). So the mean price tag for a Kowsar coming of HESA is ~8-9 Million USD.

So let's say if the ultimate goal is 90 x Kowsars they have to do it in the next 5 years. That would cost around ~140 million USD annually. IRIAF with their current forced cut budget can merely afford 40 % of it so the current rate is 6-7 aircraft per year (50-55 Million USD). Because of other projects like F-14 AM upgradation, F-4E/D "Dowran" upgrade with Bayyenat-II, MIG-29/SU-24 upgradation facilities being set up, induction of Kaman-22, and Mohajer-6 MALE UCAVs. Then you have stupid, good-for-nothing projects like maintaining ~142 x fleet of F-7N + Mirages F1Q+ F-5E/F/R/A + Saegheh tech demos. So IRIAF is strained. If they get rid of F-7N+Mirages+tech demos and SU-24 upgradation for now then they can probably focus more on just the much more important interceptor force of 150 x all 4th generation F-14AM+Kowsar+MIGs. This interceptor force has no alternative so it's a must even if we retire all the F-4 E/D and Su-24MK fleet, we have the UCAV + missile force to replace these attack aircraft for that role.

IRIAF is in hands of stupid decision-makers with huge egos apparently. Although things seem to be improving slowly in recent years with Kowsar like building capabilities, F-14AM, advanced integrated GCI battle groups etc. If they somehow upgrade MIGs to M2/SMT standards with some 20 more airframes being procured. The interceptor force will be able to take on any regional foes with ease at least. The American question will remain though.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

sha ah said:


> So Raisi asked HESA to build a few passenger planes. Is he talking about the Antonov-140 ? Because honestly if Iran can figure out the issues behind the engine, then all of the grounded Antonov-140 planes can be made airworthy.
> 
> Aren't the engines for the AN-140 plane Russian ? Why can't Iran import them or license build them from Russia ? or find an alternative from China ? Because aside from the Russian engine, the AN-140 can also use a Pratt and Whitney variant as a replacement. Obviously purchasing turboprop engines from the west is out of the question but perhaps there is a Chinese alternative ?


If I'm not mistaken Ir-140 had 52 seats and engine/design problems. recent simorgh had 6 ton capacity (6000/72=83Kg and no baggage no flight attendant) airplane passengers are a bit heavier than that with their baggage (no offense).

With average of 90Kg passenger and 25Kg of baggage you need at least 8.5 T capacity for your airliner and some slim pilots plus some skinny flight attendants 

With some food and drinks offering during flights and installing seats and fridges It could be at 10 ton range for 72 people.with this mindset 4 engines with current setup makes sense or replace current engines with more powerful ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> Raisi visiting Kowsar production facillity, more Kowsar seems coming, I can see one with single cannon
> View attachment 854476



Something very interesting is the total integration of IEI Bayyenat-II FCR on every airframe in this set. The twin cannons are gone from every airframe and the left one is showing avionics and radar components actually being placed inside. Its a serious production line.

For those who are new to this information, IEI Bayyenat-II is Iranian IEI domestic production of modern Grifo 346 or its CATIC-NREIT KLJ copies. It can track even a small-sized target from 93-94 KM and merely weighs ~85 KG so fighter has better pitch mobility. Also, it is equipped with ECM/ECCM control so it is not Jammed easily. The fact that IEI is producing it inside Iran and integrating it with so much confidence means that the next variant will be Grifo-E AESA equivalent.

IEI Bayyenat-I on F-4E/D = NRIET JL-10A
IEI Bayyenat-II on Kowsar = Grifo 346 or NRIET
IEI Bayenat-III on Kowsar-II = Grifo E AESA or NRIET KLJ-7A ????






on M-346






Data linked and BVR armed Kowsar with Bayyenat-II is a lethal package esp if it flies with F-14AM and MIG-29. These three types in one integrated group (8-10 fighters) supported by central command GCI network of GWACS+SIGINT/ELINT, Bavar-373 and S-300PMU2, TOR-M1/2 on the ground, can enforce a no-intrusion zone within 400-500 KM while IRGC aerospace command destroys enemy nests.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Skull and Bones

Does Iran produce its own version of Cobra gunship, or just upgrading the older lots?


----------



## jauk

Fortunately the two pilots ejected and are safe:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538075104298557440

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Skull and Bones said:


> Does Iran produce its own version of Cobra gunship, or just upgrading the older lots?


*TOOPHAN II*

*Function: Military Gunship helicopter*
*Status: in limited Production by PANHA.*
*Construction: Iranian airframe reverse engineered and heavily modified AH 1J airframe, digital cockpit,new bulletproof canopy design,all-new forward and rear cockpit instrument panels (pilot and gunner), a new avionics suite, revised cockpit armouring, and a nose-mounted forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera. Armament include all Iranian made weapons.*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## drmeson

Skull and Bones said:


> Does Iran produce its own version of Cobra gunship, or just upgrading the older lots?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> *TOOPHAN II*
> 
> *Function: Military Gunship helicopter*
> *Status: in limited Production by PANHA.*
> *Construction: Iranian airframe reverse engineered and heavily modified AH 1J airframe, digital cockpit,new bulletproof canopy design,all-new forward and rear cockpit instrument panels (pilot and gunner), a new avionics suite, revised cockpit armouring, and a nose-mounted forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera. Armament include all Iranian made weapons.*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



Does it make the engine or just refurbish it from an existing Cobra?

Iran’s problem in terms of building a new attack helicopter (or heavy attack helicopter) has been the engine. Even Turkey imports that 

Also what happened to the National Helicopter Project? Haven’t heard anything ever since they finally unveiled the finished prototype.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Does it make the engine or just refurbish it from an existing Cobra?
> 
> Iran’s problem in terms of building a new attack helicopter (or heavy attack helicopter) has been the engine. Even Turkey imports that
> 
> Also what happened to the National Helicopter Project? Haven’t heard anything ever since they finally unveiled the finished prototype.


Most likely refurbished engines or engines bought in black market...the importance of "gunships" is some what reduced by the more capable drones..no news on national helicopter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> Most likely refurbished engines or engines bought in black market...the importance of "gunships" is some what reduced by the more capable drones..no news on national helicopter.



Massive smuggling rings have been pointed out in the literature on Engine parts for Helicopters, RD-33, J79, and TF30 in past.

Newer literature like IISS reports have ceased to mention that anymore, pointing out that smuggling has reduced because of the emerging indigenous capability to produce these parts at home.

The earlier we get rid of the relics the better. I would rather give the money we waste on maintaining F-7N, MIRAGEF1Q, F-5E/F/A/B/R fleet (~150) to HESA to (1) produce some full combat suite wearing ~100 Kowsar (2) Design Kowsar-II with AESA, HOTAS, CF-tanks, low RCS (Shafagh/M-ATF like) to replace Shahi and Soviet-era fighters. An AF made of 300 x 4.0 to 4.5 Generation aircrafts comprising of F-14AM, MIG-29/35, Kowsar-I/II is better than a larger circus of 3rd generation Shahi/Soviet fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> Most likely refurbished engines or engines bought in black market...the importance of "gunships" is some what reduced by the more capable drones..no news on national helicopter.



I disagree, gunships are what are torching Ukrainian armour and troops and that’s with the Aligator not being properly armed by Russia, many times just firing light rockets alongside limited quantity of PGM. 

Iran’s light attack Toophan by comparison has access to an impressive PGM.

A “Iranian super cobra” with armoured body a la SU-25 and A-10 equipped with long range Iranian EO/IO and Iranian tank buster PGM plus anti personnel cluster munitions can wreck havoc during war time.

Gunships def have their place during war time just not against Iran’s biggest foe (USA).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

__





واکنش روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری به خبر دستور رئیسی برای ساخت 8 هواپیما- اخبار مجلس و دولت ایران - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


مدیر روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری خبر دستور رئیس جمهور برای ساخت 8 هواپیما را تکذیب کرد.




www.tasnimnews.com





Classic Iran🤡

Airliner was a PR move.


----------



## drmeson

Cancerous Tumor said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> واکنش روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری به خبر دستور رئیسی برای ساخت 8 هواپیما- اخبار مجلس و دولت ایران - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> مدیر روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری خبر دستور رئیس جمهور برای ساخت 8 هواپیما را تکذیب کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Classic Iran🤡
> 
> Airliner was a PR move.



I am tired of these mismanaged clowns in HESA.


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

drmeson said:


> I am tired of these mismanaged clowns in HESA.


HESA didn't choose this An-140. HESA didn't invested billions on this project it was all government decisions.

It was Mr Rafsanjani's deal then Mr Khatami approve it and continued that.I was reading a little bit about history of Iran-140, they blamed first crash on GPS that killed most of their researchers and scientists. and last one is even more fishy Ukrainan pilot left days before accident that killed ~50 people in Isfahan.

Just look at the language of office of Mr Raisy's ......

I mean dude It's not even 48 hours after your boss visit.Next time send someone that his word will remains solid more than 48 hours to talk to industry guys.

Clowns in HESA ?????

Sir, they kept helicopters and fighter jets during Iran-Iraq war and after the war in sky.I'm speechless ..........................................................................


----------



## TheImmortal

We just lost an F-14









Iran fighter jet crashes after engine fails, pilots survive


Media reports say an Iranian fighter plane crashed near the central city of Isfahan after its engine failed, but both pilots survived




abcnews.go.com

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

TheImmortal said:


> We just lost an F-14
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran fighter jet crashes after engine fails, pilots survive
> 
> 
> Media reports say an Iranian fighter plane crashed near the central city of Isfahan after its engine failed, but both pilots survived
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com


I'm glad pilots both survived and hope they recover and go back to their families soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Cancerous Tumor said:


> HESA didn't choose this An-140. HESA didn't invested billions on this project it was all government decisions.
> 
> It was Mr Rafsanjani's deal then Mr Khatami approve it and continued that.I was reading a little bit about history of Iran-140, they blamed first crash on GPS that killed most of their researchers and scientists. and last one is even more fishy Ukrainan pilot left days before accident that killed ~50 people in Isfahan.
> 
> Just look at the language of office of Mr Raisy's ......
> 
> I mean dude It's not even 48 hours after your boss visit.Next time send someone that his word will remains solid more than 48 hours to talk to industry guys.
> 
> Clowns in HESA ?????
> 
> Sir, they kept helicopters and fighter jets during Iran-Iraq war and after the war in sky.I'm speechless ..........................................................................



I well aware of the politics behind Iran-140. The plane has been renewed so comparing it with older designs is futile here. 

HESA has achieved a lot as an organization but because of some stupid people were working in it for a period of time, they made some silly claims or the underpresent the real projects. Here are some of the trophies won by IAMI:

- Azarkhash famous PS originated from within the HESA offices.
- Saeqeh = F-18 claims 
- Saegheh mass production claims
- Saegheh Export claims 
- Premature Qaher concept and mockup unveiling
- Mismanaged presentation of Kowsar which is an actual in-production 4.0 generation fighter jet. Had they presented it properly with avionics, radar, airframe design, owj, fattar separately shown with specs, it would have been a huge deal literally to create such a fighter at home. Instead they went with the same old PR stunt with Rouhani on the ground.

I can go on and on. You can not think of IRGC led organizations doing the same BS. Those men are just different. Only good thing about HESA in recent times is that the biggest clown there called Hassan Parvaneh (Qaher fame) is no longer leading the projects there.


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

drmeson said:


> I well aware of the politics behind Iran-140. The plane has been renewed so comparing it with older designs is futile here.
> 
> HESA has achieved a lot as an organization but because of some stupid people were working in it for a period of time, they made some silly claims or the underpresent the real projects. Here are some of the trophies won by IAMI:
> 
> - Azarkhash famous PS originated from within the HESA offices.
> - Saeqeh = F-18 claims
> - Saegheh mass production claims
> - Saegheh Export claims
> - Premature Qaher concept and mockup unveiling
> - Mismanaged presentation of Kowsar which is an actual in-production 4.0 generation fighter jet. Had they presented it properly with avionics, radar, airframe design, owj, fattar separately shown with specs, it would have been a huge deal literally to create such a fighter at home. Instead they went with the same old PR stunt with Rouhani on the ground.
> 
> I can go on and on. You can not think of IRGC led organizations doing the same BS. Those men are just different. Only good thing about HESA in recent times is that the biggest clown there called Hassan Parvaneh (Qaher fame) is no longer leading the projects there.


Dude these guys are doing 100 things at the same time with resources not even close to 10% of IRGC what are you talking about ???

New helicopters ? go to HESA
Repair old helicopters ? go to HESA
New fighter jets ? go to HESA
Repair old ones from ww1 era, eastern or western designs ? no problem go to HESA
Do you need trainers ? go to HESA
Need new jet engines ? go to HESA
Need civilian airplanes ? go to HESA
Oh we bought fked up design ! No problem give it to HESA
and God knows what else ..........................................

It's logistic cluster fk, pardon my french I am really mad at office guy's statement.


----------



## drmeson

Cancerous Tumor said:


> Dude these guys are doing 100 things at the same time with resources not even close to 10% of IRGC what are you talking about ???
> 
> New helicopters ? go to HESA
> Repair old helicopters ? go to HESA
> New fighter jets ? go to HESA
> Repair old ones from ww1 era, eastern or western designs ? no problem go to HESA
> Do you need trainers ? go to HESA
> Need new jet engines ? go to HESA
> Need civilian airplanes ? go to HESA
> Oh we bought fked up design ! No problem give it to HESA
> and God knows what else ..........................................
> 
> It's logistic cluster fk, pardon my french I am really mad at office guy's statement.



I guess we are talking of two different things here. You are talking of their accomplishments which I agree with. IAMI is a brilliant organization with projects like.

- A proper combat fighter jet production line
- MALE UCAV programs
- Shahed Series helis
- Trainers
- Transport Iran-140 which will turn into local SIGINT/ELINT/AWACS/Maritime petrol
- Domestic parts production + Overhaul repairs

But does that warrant clownish behavior which I question? Azarakhsh PS, Qaher stunt, Saegheh mass production, childish presentation of Kowsar. Their people are one of the reasons Iranian real combat aviation products did not get the attention for exports, and marketing that they deserve. Take Kowsar for example, they could have come up with a statement that we have a locally built new FBW laced airframe based on the aerodynamics of F-5F because they are great (low RCS, maneuverability), its radar is by IEI called Bayyenat-II, It wears SAIRAN's e-warfare suite, It has IEI built datalink capabilities. How many countries in the world outside few have achieved this? but what they did they do? they started calling it totally indigenous, putting its avionics parts on a Buffet table where the camera rolled over genuine warfare products like they mean nothing. Most of the unveiling revolved around Rouhani lurking around the cockpit. No presentation, media press release by HESA nothing ... Same goes for Qaher which is what other countries have done too, they all came up with mockups of 5th gen fighters, but how many put a pilot inside it and started calling it an in-production product with a RC model flying around? Do you know who was the head of Qaher project? The same joker from HESA who was responsible for Azarakhsh photoshop wing picture. See I am not against HESA, I am against a few stupid people that worked there in that disaster period of 2008-2018. During the same time IRGC-led organizations achieved what, I dont even need to mention. I know I get flak for saying this, but give IRIAF to IRGC today and you will see Kowsar-II in production with AESA flying around with PL-15s while MIGs airframe numbers might even start increasing. That is the way those men operate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Qaher stunt


that was all on Ahmadinejad government , just like what they did with Hamaseh drone 


drmeson said:


> Azarakhsh PS, Saegheh mass production


there was no Saeqeh mass production and they must learn from something.


drmeson said:


> Iranian real combat aviation products did not get the attention for exports, and marketing that they deserve.


blame that on sanctions


drmeson said:


> Most of the unveiling revolved around Rouhani lurking around the cockpit.


not hesa problem , the reporters were handpicked by government


drmeson said:


> During the same time IRGC-led organizations achieved what, I dont even need to mention. I know I get flak for saying this, but give IRIAF to IRGC today and you will see Kowsar-II in production with AESA flying around with PL-15s while MIGs airframe numbers might even start increasing.


let IRGC first build something then we talk , you gave IRIAF to IRGC and they turn it into IRIDF


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> I can go on and on. You can not think of IRGC led organizations doing the same BS.



IRGC has cleaned up their act. But they still do stupid things.

Who can forget the “COVID detector rod”? Or the Fotros low quality prototype painted in Iranian flag colors with the equivalent of a Rice cooker underneath it.

IRGC also still does propaganda stunts. But for the most part it’s arms industries has drastically improved the quality and presentation and professionalism of its products. The propaganda stunts are due to people like General Salami who are still within the organization. As the old guard continues to retire and move out we will see the new guard transform the image of IRGC.



Cancerous Tumor said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> واکنش روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری به خبر دستور رئیسی برای ساخت 8 هواپیما- اخبار مجلس و دولت ایران - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> مدیر روابط عمومی ریاست جمهوری خبر دستور رئیس جمهور برای ساخت 8 هواپیما را تکذیب کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Classic Iran🤡
> 
> Airliner was a PR move.





drmeson said:


> I am tired of these mismanaged clowns in HESA.



I try to tell you guys these things, but you don’t listen. You guys rather listen to Baghdad Bob telling you secret planes exist that will overwhelm the enemy during wartime. That Iran is magically hiding it’s fleet of super aircraft and not showing the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

drmeson said:


> I guess we are talking of two different things here. You are talking of their accomplishments which I agree with. IAMI is a brilliant organization with projects like.
> 
> - A proper combat fighter jet production line
> - MALE UCAV programs
> - Shahed Series helis
> - Trainers
> - Transport Iran-140 which will turn into local SIGINT/ELINT/AWACS/Maritime petrol
> - Domestic parts production + Overhaul repairs
> 
> But does that warrant clownish behavior which I question? Azarakhsh PS, Qaher stunt, Saegheh mass production, childish presentation of Kowsar. Their people are one of the reasons Iranian real combat aviation products did not get the attention for exports, and marketing that they deserve. Take Kowsar for example, they could have come up with a statement that we have a locally built new FBW laced airframe based on the aerodynamics of F-5F because they are great (low RCS, maneuverability), its radar is by IEI called Bayyenat-II, It wears SAIRAN's e-warfare suite, It has IEI built datalink capabilities. How many countries in the world outside few have achieved this? but what they did they do? they started calling it totally indigenous, putting its avionics parts on a Buffet table where the camera rolled over genuine warfare products like they mean nothing. Most of the unveiling revolved around Rouhani lurking around the cockpit. No presentation, media press release by HESA nothing ... Same goes for Qaher which is what other countries have done too, they all came up with mockups of 5th gen fighters, but how many put a pilot inside it and started calling it an in-production product with a RC model flying around? Do you know who was the head of Qaher project? The same joker from HESA who was responsible for Azarakhsh photoshop wing picture. See I am not against HESA, I am against a few stupid people that worked there in that disaster period of 2008-2018. During the same time IRGC-led organizations achieved what, I dont even need to mention. I know I get flak for saying this, but give IRIAF to IRGC today and you will see Kowsar-II in production with AESA flying around with PL-15s while MIGs airframe numbers might even start increasing. That is the way those men operate.


Failure is main part of every Innovation or accomplishment it's impossible to separate these two from each other.when it comes to HESA their success rate compared to their budget is better than good.

I don't understand this public disaster they could cancel trip to HESA or without drama apologies and say we will start such projects at proper time.

Politicians are always want something shiny that no one had something similar to it so they can put it on their vitrine of achievements and practical guys in army are always want easy path to their objectives for it I don't blame practical guys for their tactics which they have been using to get their budgets.

IRGC vs Army comparison is like comparing bag of apples to an orange.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Who can forget the “COVID detector rod”? Or the Fotros low quality prototype painted in Iranian flag colors with the equivalent of a Rice cooker underneath it.


that was hamaseh not fotros


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> that was hamaseh not fotros



Completely missed the point. Nice job.



Cancerous Tumor said:


> IRGC vs Army comparison is like comparing bag of apples to an orange.



More like Microsoft to your local computer store. Artesh just doesn’t get enough funding and also doesn’t get the best engineers and scientists like IRGC backed defense industries do.

Competition is good. Allows for innovation. Samsung pushes Apple to develop better products and vice versa.

Thus Artesh should also get enough r&d funding to be able to compete innovation wise with IRGC. Who knows maybe Artesh will make the military equivalent of an IPhone achievement. All it takes is one brilliant mind with a vision and funding to make it happen.

When you put all your eggs with one company you get stagnation of design and the stifling of ideas and less appetite to take on risk. You get a bunch of YES men who propose “safe” choices.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> IRGC has cleaned up their act. But they still do stupid things.
> 
> Who can forget the “COVID detector rod”? Or the Fotros low quality prototype painted in Iranian flag colors with the equivalent of a Rice cooker underneath it.
> 
> IRGC also still does propaganda stunts. But for the most part it’s arms industries has drastically improved the quality and presentation and professionalism of its products. The propaganda stunts are due to people like General Salami who are still within the organization. As the old guard continues to retire and move out we will see the new guard transform the image of IRGC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I try to tell you guys these things, but you don’t listen. You guys rather listen to Baghdad Bob telling you secret planes exist that will overwhelm the enemy during wartime. That Iran is magically hiding it’s fleet of super aircraft and not showing the world.



- Old IRGC generals are not their run organizations. Focus on the word "IRGC led organizations". Their engineers, procurers, and designers have churned out lists of IR/MRBMs, Qassed SLV, MaRVs for both solid and liquid missiles hitting within a CEP of 5 m. Salami or Dehghan are not their engineers and not necessarily represent the discipline their organizations have shown.

- Actually Nobody in this forum believes in any secret plane or whatever you are assuming here again. I do believe there "will be" another Kowsar generation in a few years which will be much more advanced like truly 4+ to 4.5 generation and may incorporate Shafagh experiences. I have my reasons based on R&D logic (I have 14 years of experience in pro R&D in EU, so I may know a thing or two about how projects unfold) and words of people with actual published literature including Tom cooper, Bishop, BT, IISS and others. You are free to keep believing in whatever works.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

TheImmortal said:


> Completely missed the point. Nice job.
> 
> 
> 
> More like Microsoft to your local computer store. Artesh just doesn’t get enough funding and also doesn’t get the best engineers and scientists like IRGC backed defense industries do.
> 
> Competition is good. Allows for innovation. Samsung pushes Apple to develop better products and vice versa.
> 
> Thus Artesh should also get enough r&d funding to be able to compete innovation wise with IRGC. Who knows maybe Artesh will make the military equivalent of an IPhone achievement. All it takes is one brilliant mind with a vision and funding to make it happen.
> 
> When you put all your eggs with one company you get stagnation of design and the stifling of ideas and less appetite to take on risk. You get a bunch of YES men who propose “safe” choices.


Iran bought an airplane which had new design and in it's path of delivery to Iran it got destroyed. years later they named that airplane "queen of skies" yes it was Boeing 747.I wonder if these guys were decision makers of Boeing what would they do to similar projects like 747 ?


----------



## TheImmortal

Samar111 said:


> Poor Iran still using F-14 in 2022



India uses even older fighter jets that would get rocked by an F-14 if it entered the skies. An F-14 today is still very deadly plane, yes it’s not an F-35 or F-22 but it’s on par with a SU-30 in many ways.



drmeson said:


> Actually Nobody in this forum believes in any secret plane or whatever you are assuming here again.





Mr Iran Eye said:


> Again, you should not trust General TheImmortal comments especially on the subject of Iranian combat aircraft.
> 
> The Shafaq project has always been active in the background and this project is far from dead. Iran has weapons and secret project not revealed but people here we have a lot of difficulty understanding this.
> 
> You will see in the future that was right here.



 

I believe to withhold judgment instead of being overly optimistic. Apparently that’s a sin on these forums and it’s better to be a fanboy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> India uses even older fighter jets that would get rocked by an F-14 if it entered the skies. An F-14 today is still very deadly plane, yes it’s not an F-35 or F-22 but it’s on par with a SU-30 in many ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe to withhold judgment instead of being overly optimistic. Apparently that’s a sin on these forums and it’s better to be a fanboy.



Not sure what you are trying to prove here. This is one person among some two dozen Iranian members here. And he merely said that Shafagh is not dead which in some way *"could be"* true. When professors of a research university get involved in the project as it happened in Shafagh's case (Malek Ashtar University), the project never dies but keeps on modifying because students trained by those professors take up that project and keep on evolving it for the sake of their own careers. The crop of those students are now working in Gaint IAIO which has some 11000 employees across Iran with a budget in Billions of USD. Until we see the ultimate end product of this Azarakhsh=>Saeghe=>Kowsar lineage or if Qaher ever flies, we can't be sure what Shafagh/M-ATF design from Mukhamedov OKB gave to Iranian aviation engineering minds. Read this post of mine about possibilities in the future. *https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.358559/page-495#post-13831787* 

Again, I am trained to think this way. So I may think differently from people like you who were calling Kowsar a 1960s plane without even realizing the fact that avionics and subsystems wise it is currently the most advanced aircraft we have in IRIAF (except F-14 AM) including Soviet 9.12 MIGs. Its future generation might even get rid of entire IRIAF relics and save the lives of our pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Completely missed the point. Nice job.
> 
> 
> 
> More like Microsoft to your local computer store. Artesh just doesn’t get enough funding and also doesn’t get the best engineers and scientists like IRGC backed defense industries do.
> 
> Competition is good. Allows for innovation. Samsung pushes Apple to develop better products and vice versa.
> 
> Thus Artesh should also get enough r&d funding to be able to compete innovation wise with IRGC. Who knows maybe Artesh will make the military equivalent of an IPhone achievement. All it takes is one brilliant mind with a vision and funding to make it happen.
> 
> When you put all your eggs with one company you get stagnation of design and the stifling of ideas and less appetite to take on risk. You get a bunch of YES men who propose “safe” choices.


Competition is great but not the self demolition of ideas. Please stop parroting these tired and meaningless pulp and instead present fresh and lateral ideas of your own or progressive sources.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal said:


> India uses even older fighter jets that would get rocked by an F-14 if it entered the skies. An F-14 today is still very deadly plane, yes it’s not an F-35 or F-22 but it’s on par with a SU-30 in many ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe to withhold judgment instead of being overly optimistic. Apparently that’s a sin on these forums and it’s better to be a fanboy.


Hi uncultivated, I persist and sign! He has secret programs in the Iranian army and even things in the field of fighting planes. I am waiting for what Iran reveals some secrets and people here will be ashamed as much that you are poor observers and no intuitions.
We may have a little Suprise with the single-seater Kowsar. We will see, I perceived a little a few things

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flotilla

TheImmortal said:


> A “Iranian super cobra” with armoured body a la SU-25 and A-10 equipped with long range Iranian EO/IO and Iranian tank buster PGM plus anti personnel cluster munitions can wreck havoc during war time.


I think attack helicopters are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS. Ukraine conflict has shown that thousands of MANPADs given by western countries can stop or make nearly impossible using attack helicopters in combat. UCAVs like that Mohajer 6 with 6 glide guided bombs are much more safe and less risky for all Artesh pilots. If you want to use attack helicopters against a western country or army armed by western country (assuming they would receive hundreds of MANPADs for dealing with Artesh and Sepah armies), you need to develop first a good DIRCM system and a IR/EO missile with more range that western MANPADs. Persians cobras are good for CAS in frontiers or low intensity skirmishes, but in conventional conflicts with huge military help from western countries, their utility are limited.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Flotilla said:


> I think attack helicopters are extremely vulnerable to MANPADS. Ukraine conflict has shown that thousands of MANPADs given by western countries can stop or make nearly impossible using attack helicopters in combat. UCAVs like that Mohajer 6 with 6 glide guided bombs are much more safe and less risky for all Artesh pilots. If you want to use attack helicopters against a western country or army armed by western country (assuming they would receive hundreds of MANPADs for dealing with Artesh and Sepah armies), you need to develop first a good DIRCM system and a IR/EO missile with more range that western MANPADs. Persians cobras are good for CAS in frontiers or low intensity skirmishes, but in conventional conflicts with huge military help from western countries, their utility are limited.



Russian Alligators are doing fine against manpads. In the beginning of the war they sustained some losses flying thru contested territory. But in last 2 months the amount of footage of of helicopters being shot down has dramatically dropped.

Tens of thousands of manpads were sent to Ukraine, yet how many videos of shot down aircraft/choppers do you see in last 2 months? 10? 5? 15?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flotilla

TheImmortal said:


> Russian Alligators are doing fine against manpads. In the beginning of the war they sustained some losses flying thru contested territory. But in last 2 months the amount of footage of of helicopters being shot down has dramatically dropped.
> 
> Tens of thousands of manpads were sent to Ukraine, yet how many videos of shot down aircraft/choppers do you see in last 2 months? 10? 5? 15?


In the case of the Alligators, the reason is clear. Many of them operates DIRCM systems, and moreover, they doesn´t do direct CAS missions. The videos shows how they fly and try to maintain a very high AOA just for trying to grab some hundreds meters more of range to their rockets. So, extrapolating the tactics, one can imagine how many MANPADS americans and israelis would give to persians enemies, and how IRIAA should not only build new cobras, but develop any indigenous DIRCM. Too costly IMO for it. More UCAV and some turboprop engine for more powerful UCAV would be better than expending such money in that.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="



" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Flotilla said:


> In the case of the Alligators, the reason is clear. Many of them operates DIRCM systems, and moreover, they doesn´t do direct CAS missions. The videos shows how they fly and try to maintain a very high AOA just for trying to grab some hundreds meters more of range to their rockets. So, extrapolating the tactics, one can imagine how many MANPADS americans and israelis would give to persians enemies, and how IRIAA should not only build new cobras, but develop any indigenous DIRCM. Too costly IMO for it. More UCAV and some turboprop engine for more powerful UCAV would be better than expending such money in that.
> 
> <iframe width="560" height="315" src="
> 
> 
> 
> " title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>



Not correct. The rockets I suspect is due to a dwindling PGM stockpile. We see the same issue with their drones and lack of PGMs. But we still see clips of Aligators obliterating tanks from a far using PGMs.

It is not the threat of manpads keeping alligators conservative. As the entire Russian Air Force is acting conservative. It’s the threat of medium and long range SAMs keeping them away. These systems have been imported in from the west as well as whatever survived the initial blitzkreig of the war.

BUK-2M, TOR-M2, and S-400 have obliterated Ukraine helicopters.

Manpads are an opportunity weapon target has to be in range. Soldier has to have manpad. And achieve a lock on target. Not so simple during the fog of war and heat of battle.

Lastly turboprop UAVs are slow and vulnerable. Iran needs to transition to at least have 1-2 models of bomber UAVs powered by a turbojet or even jet engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

With the rise of Air defence weapons technology, the role of helis are questionable. Drones, Missiles do an equally good job.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> that was all on Ahmadinejad government , just like what they did with Hamaseh drone
> 
> there was no Saeqeh mass production and they must learn from something.
> 
> blame that on sanctions
> 
> not hesa problem , the reporters were handpicked by government
> 
> let IRGC first build something then we talk , you gave IRIAF to IRGC and they turn it into IRIDF



- The Parvaneh guy who came up with Azarakhsh PS and the horrible presentation of Qaher did not work for Ahmadinejad Govt. He worked for IAMI.

- They announced it as being mass-produced hornet equivalent, yes HESA did. Instead of saying it's an ongoing R&D technology demonstrator project with boosted yawing, pitching, skin stress, etc tests and Saegheh II with advanced cockpits (what they actually were) but they went the political rhetoric.

- No, it's the image you create of your actual accomplishments in the end. Did not Iran supply weapons to Iraq, Syria, Ethiopia, and Venezuela during the sanctions? HESA Shahed helis or UCAVs are top-notch products mind you.

- The Buffet table presentation of such a good avionics package was not journalists' idea but HESA clowns. They failed to show the quite advanced Radar+avionics package properly and refused to even show a single All-aspect HOBS weapon it carries. No proper cockpit layout for press, and electronic actuators showing FBW were there but they did not care to talk about them. Just the same old stupid "it flies at 1.6 Mach, carries 5 missiles,1 cannon, 2 pilots, 2 wings, 1 tail" kinda presentation. Had this thing was unveiled with such level of indigenous production in our neighbourhood trust me they would have made movies on it. 

- if IRIAF under IRGC turns out like IRGC Missile forces, it will be one of the top air combat arms in the world esp in the unmanned era. It probably will in reality as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538421286589931520

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

USSR got license of DC-3 and built ~6000 home made version of it Li-2.
At best it had 4000 kg capacity.








Iran got license of An-140 and built less than 10 ? and we don't have made in Iran anything related for cargo or passengers.






In paper Iran-140 looks so fancy but in production numbers something like DC-3 is still the king .20 Vs 7000

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

On issue of fuel consumption and $110 per barrel of oil going back to turboprop era might be the solution .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lydian fall



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538904474680532992

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

Sardar330 said:


>



Something really good is happening. Seems like in the end IRIAF/IRGCF will end up with one type of avionics set by IEI for the entire fleet.

In 2030s there will be an IRIAF fleet of:

~30 x Yasin AT
~160-170 x Kowsar-I/II
~120 x SU-35 + MIG29/35 + F-14AM
~300 x HALE/MALE UCAVS including SIGINT/ELINT, PGM carrier, low RCS Air to Air Wingmen

All of these except the Russian fleet will have a local IEI SAIRAN package of Radar-NAV-COMM-eWarfare package. And training on that will start from Yasin AT. Now here is something interesting. OWJ is a small engine with a low fuel consumption rate so IRIAF pilots esp the ones who will be going from Yasin AT to Kowsar-I/II will be having something around 240+ hours of yearly training on the same Bayyenat-II in Kowsar-I/Yasin AT or future Bayyenat-III (might be AESA) in Kowsar-II + SAIRAN e-Warfare suite that some 200 planes in IRIAF will be carrying at that time. These men will train in integrated battle groups unmanned wingmen and datalinked to A/GWACS system that is already in place. All of these platforms will be local with same sub-systems. This is one of the most important things to build an air arm where commonality is the key instead of an isolated batch of 60 pilots for useless MIRAGE and then 100 more for even more Junk F-7N.

Seeing Yasin AT and Kowsar-I even western experts like David Ceniotti (I think him or someone else) said that these systems will train the entire future generation of IRIAF aviators, laying the foundation of future combat aviation of Iran.



jauk said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538904474680532992



Q: How do you keep a flying box like F-4 E/D/R in a stable flight ?

A: You dont.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> I swear they must have prop airframes they drag out for each President to make a photo op.
> 
> We know the production rate of Kowsar is very low, yet every president takes a picture in front of like 4-6 unfinished airframes.



So I did some research and I found that you are factually wrong. 

I will explain how ...

From the floor of HESA's assembly line, 4 sets of photos have come out since the time of unvieling. 

(1) Unveiling = 1 Flew (3-7400) + 6 under construction = 3-7164, 3-7180, 3-7304, 3-7330, 3-7XXX, 3-7YYY
(2) Visit by Defence Min. Ashtiani => 12 total
(3) Visit by Raisi => 6 total [5 in yellow primer and two in blue]
(4) Aerial maneuvers: 3 x (3-7400, 3-7164, and 3-7180) performed Aerial maneuvers which along with another are reported in 2020 at TAB-2 for evaluation. 

So what are we left with?

(1) Unveiling = 3 left including 3-7304 and 3-7330 that are already painted in blue carrying pylons
(2) Visit by Defence Min. Ashtiani => 11-12 total
(3) Visit by Raisi => 6 total 

Even with extreme level economical guess here that Raisi's 6 are just the ones out of Ashtiani's 12 then are at least 18 airframes that have been present on the HESA floors since the unveiling. The highest estimate could be as high as 24 if we assume that all the batches showed different ones but I will rely upon the former.

4 at TAB-2 Evaluation [3-7400, 3-7164, 3-7400, 3-7180]
2 x weapon testing (3-7304 and 3-7330)
12 airframes currently in primer

Your claim of 6 airframes was funny at best

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> So I did some research and I found that you are factually wrong.
> 
> I will explain how ...
> 
> From the floor of HESA's assembly line, 4 sets of photos have come out since the time of unvieling.
> 
> (1) Unveiling = 1 Flew (3-7400) + 6 under construction = 3-7164, 3-7180, 3-7304, 3-7330, 3-7XXX, 3-7YYY
> (2) Visit by Defence Min. Ashtiani => 12 total
> (3) Visit by Raisi => 6 total [5 in yellow primer and two in blue]
> (4) Aerial maneuvers: 3 x (3-7400, 3-7164, and 3-7180) performed Aerial maneuvers which along with another are reported in 2020 at TAB-2 for evaluation.
> 
> So what are we left with?
> 
> (1) Unveiling = 3 left including 3-7304 and 3-7330 that are already painted in blue carrying pylons
> (2) Visit by Defence Min. Ashtiani => 11-12 total
> (3) Visit by Raisi => 6 total
> 
> Even with extreme level economical guess here that Raisi's 6 are just the ones out of Ashtiani's 12 then are at least 18 airframes that have been present on the HESA floors since the unveiling. The highest estimate could be as high as 24 if we assume that all the batches showed different ones but I will rely upon the former.
> 
> 4 at TAB-2 Evaluation [3-7400, 3-7164, 3-7400, 3-7180]
> 2 x weapon testing (3-7304 and 3-7330)
> 12 airframes currently in primer
> 
> Your claim of 6 airframes was funny at best



So since 2018 Kowsar unveiling almost 4 years ago we have:

6 built Kowsars of which most (if not all) are according to you....prototype testing models to make sure the test bed is sound for various tasks.

And we have 12 still being built (primer).

So if we take your numbers then production is at a rate of either 18/4 = ~4.5 per year or if we take out the prototypes 12/4 = ~3 per year. If we only account for what is actually 100% built then the number drops even further.

Sounds pretty much in line with other earlier generations/iterations of this test bed project.

I know you are overly optimistic about this project (even going so far as to assume a Iranian BVR is being built for it), but the numbers don’t lie. Iranian Air Force is not aggressively pursuing this project.

Syria desperately needs such a plane to revitalize its Air Force. Iraq could also use such a plane along with Venezuela. Yet not a single agreement has been signed even though at unveiling (or shortly there after) they said they had agreements with other nations for export.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> So since 2018 Kowsar unveiling almost 4 years ago we have:
> 
> 6 built Kowsars of which most (if not all) are according to you....prototype testing models to make sure the test bed is sound for various tasks.
> 
> And we have 12 still being built (primer).
> 
> So if we take your numbers then production is at a rate of either 18/4 = ~4.5 per year or if we take out the prototypes 12/4 = ~3 per year. If we only account for what is actually 100% built then the number drops even further.



- These are not my numbers (I have no inside scoop or anything), this is what the math adds up to. At least 18 airframes have been on HESA floors out of which 4 have been undergoing actual evaluation.

This is based upon the "economical guess" that Raisi-visit's 6 x shown, were among the Ashtiani-visit's 12. If they were different then there have been 24 but my guess is 18 airframes so far. 



TheImmortal said:


> Sounds pretty much in line with other earlier generations/iterations of this test bed project.



Not exactly

- 6 x Azarakhash were re-built from 1997-2001. That's 6 testbeds/4 years.

- 5 x Saeqeh-I and 1 x Saeqeh-II were built between 2004 to 2015. That is 6 testbeds/9 years. 

- Kowsar-I figures are 18 Aircrafts/4 years = 4.5 aircraft per year. That's far better number.



TheImmortal said:


> I know you are overly optimistic about this project (even going so far as to assume a Iranian BVR is being built for it), but the numbers don’t lie.



I am not optimistic at all. I am optimistic for next-generation based upon the simple fact that we now know Iran can build a proper 4.0 generation light combat aircraft from scratch on its soil without outside partnerships or anything. If the next generation will be better than the current one then IRIAF's future is bright at-least for interception. That is what I am optimistic about. 

My own guess is that Kowsar-I is what F-2 was for Japan or FCK-1 for Taiwan. An odd 90-100 airframes gave birth to the indigenous fighter aircraft industry that now has given them X-2/F-X.



TheImmortal said:


> even going so far as to assume a Iranian BVR is being built for it



I NEVER said that. You are more than welcome to provide evidence otherwise.

I think you may have read my post on an ARH-guided 200 KM range-bearing BVR missile "Maghsoud" being built at Babaei Missile Industries. That is Fakour-90's 2nd generation for F-14AM or possibly Bayyenat-I carrying F-4E fleet (long shot). According to Key-aero, ~100-120 x Fakour-90 have already been built and are fully operationalized/tested to extremes (track-lock on 0.001 m2 RCS of Shahed 191) and the project has concluded. Now Maghsoud is on verge of being tested by F-14AM. Kowsar can not carry such a heavy missile.

Only Iranian A2A weapon that Kowsar-I can carry is an All-aspect IR guided Fatter from same Babaei Missile Industry. It has the aerodynamics of AIM-9P but the seeker/motor are local. This is it in its maritime SHORAD role. 





If this generation or the next one gets more operationalized then we *"may" *see PL-12/PL-15 on them because Bayyenat-II's tracking range is that long to use such BVR missiles.



TheImmortal said:


> Syria desperately needs such a plane to revitalize its Air Force. Iraq could also use such a plane along with Venezuela. Yet not a single agreement has been signed even though at unveiling (or shortly there after) they said they had agreements with other nations for export.



I have thought of the same. But these airforces have never ever used anything similar before and Syrian Arab AF's history of procurement from Moscow is better than IRIAF. Although I would want HESA to gain battle testing experiences to improve the next gen. How does its radar and ECM fare during CAPs on the border? How active is the RWR/MAWS? Can they track-lock on F-16i/15 from BVR ranges etc similar to how Qiam-1's got tested in hands of Houthis resulting in a new MaRV installation practice for Missiles forces.

As for the trade agreements, I think they specifically used the names "China and Russia". Which IMO could be the import of some combat Tech like missiles or modern ECM pod (We only have Shahin DASH ECM pod right now) which even KAMAN-22 UCAV carry. Topic for another time but I think Kaman-22 may end up as a SIGINT/ELINT platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> - 6 x Azarakhash were re-built from 1997-2001. That's 6 testbeds/4 years.
> 
> - 5 x Saeqeh-I and 1 x Saeqeh-II were built between 2004 to 2015. That is 6 testbeds/9 years.
> 
> - Kowsar-I figures are 18 Aircrafts/4 years = 4.5 aircraft per year. That's far better number.



Where do the Saeqeh numbers come from? If I recall correctly at least 1-2 squadrons were built between the two generations.

Also you just showed 25 years of tinkering with the F-5 with less than 17 total aircraft built (if your guesses are correct)

Meanwhile Turkey is already moving on to UAV jet fighter alongside their 5th Gen program.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538600873563246593
Now we know the Turks like to exaggerate and probably engage in propaganda more than any other nation in the Middle East. But one can see why IRIAF is not heavily invested in Kowsar. We can blame lack of funding (probably true) we can blame lack of mass production facilities (also true) and we can blame mentality shift of not viewing IRIAF as critical to overall defense. Nonetheless, at the end of the day when Iran puts its mind to something (Bavar-373) (RQ-170 reverse engineering) it is able to turn a project into reality on a timeline similar to Western armies.

If Kowsar ment to be some avionics suite for a future fighter, the avionics aren’t that advanced. Certainly not a 4++ in its current format. To me the project has always been “if it’s 2040 and all our planes are grounded and Russia and China refuse to sell us anything can we at least produce something to keep the skies with aircraft”. That and a F-5 modernization program similar to Karrar for Iran’s extensive amount of T-72 tanks supply. 

Now here is another idea, why not make Kowsar II a drone? The removal of the pilot section will allow for bigger radar and more fuel. The reduction of support systems will lighten the aircraft and possibly allow heavier avionics suite and weapons layout.

To me that would make a little bit more sense at this point. Personally I been calling for a delta wing or flying wing UAV bomber similar to Sofreh Mahi mixed with RQ-170. But a pilotless Kowsar would be a nice step.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Where do the Saeqeh numbers come from? If I recall correctly at least 1-2 squadrons were built between the two generations.



(I will type the reply to the rest of your post tomorrow)

Serials 

Saegheh-I (6)

3-7366 (Ist-Prototype, Squared Air-intakes, Elongated nose)
3-7367
3-7368
3-7369
3-7370
3-7371

Saegheh-II (1)

3-7182 (Ist-Prototype, Same cockpit layout as Kowsar)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

You are mistaken again

Kowsar's figure is at least 24 and +

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> ~30 x Yasin AT
> ~160-170 x Kowsar-I/II
> ~120 x SU-35 + MIG29/35 + F-14AM
> ~300 x HALE/MALE UCAVS including SIGINT/ELINT, PGM carrier, low RCS Air to Air Wingmen


honestly can't see the point of Yasin if we are going to invest in Kowsar, Kowsar in every metric is better than Yasin . if our pilots are going to fly Kowsar just make a trainer version of the damn aircraft , why build another airplane with different aerodynamic and train them with that airplane .
and I don't bet anything on Su-35 or Mig-35.
and hope along those UAVs , we are gong to send two dozen communication satellite into space

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

the only feasible use for Yasin in Iran is as the same role as Su-25 and for that they need to add armor to the airplane and a lot of it and for that they need to increase engine power several fold , otherwise the airplane don't have any meaningful purpose


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the only feasible use for Yasin in Iran is as the same role as Su-25 and for that they need to add armor to the airplane and a lot of it and for that they need to increase engine power several fold , otherwise the airplane don't have any meaningful purpose



Yasin was attempt to build Yak-130 class fighter jet. Another test bed project that couldn’t get green light by IRIAF or get proper funding (or both).


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Yasin was attempt to build Yak-130 class fighter jet. Another test bed project that couldn’t get green light by IRIAF or get proper funding (or both).


It seems IRIAF greenlighted work on F-5 and their plan is to achieve something like F-20 or F-18 . honestly with their limited budget and resources working on anything else is irrational.

For trainer they must use the same platform and For CAS, well to be honest I believe they must give that role to Army and Navy aviation and they must design some drone or helicopter for themselves

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly can't see the point of Yasin if we are going to invest in Kowsar, Kowsar in every metric is better than Yasin . if our pilots are going to fly Kowsar just make a trainer version of the damn aircraft , why build another airplane with different aerodynamic and train them with that airplane .
> and I don't bet anything on Su-35 or Mig-35.
> and hope along those UAVs , we are gong to send two dozen communication satellite into space



Umm no and I will tell you why ...

... Imagine 2030s, You have an IRIAF made of: 

- 170-200 x Kowsar-II (4++ gen if RCS <1.0 m2) + Kowsar-I (upgraded to 4+ gen avionics) 
- 200 x MALE UCAV Interceptors/wingmen (I wish Shahed-171 low RCS stealth Jets)
- 200 x HALE/MALE - SIGINT/ELINT+PGM carriers (Next Gen Shahed 171-191/Kaman-22/Fotros)
- 70 x F-14AM + MIG-29 9.12 will need IEI Bayyenat-AESA + IEI 5th generation e-warfare suites to stay relevant in combat, _provided_ if they get through an extensive MLU program [Otherwise we will need some 70 x 4++ Gen Su-35S/MIG35S or may be J-31 with TOT from China]

-This group will be supported by a network of GWACS + LORADS + SHORADS on the ground with ~400 km interception ranges + Satellite guidance/surviellance from above. 

What is common in this group? avionics, nav-comm, radars, e-warfare suites, and datalinks are all by IEI SAIRAN. So how do you train pilots/engineers/electronic warfare experts/maintenance crew for such a diverse fleet? you train them on one single small platform first before they go to combat squadrons. They fly/work on the same electronic systems that they will find in combat squadrons or in the battlefield. IRIAF still to this day maintains an average of 160-190 flight hours/year for frontline pilots in conjunction with their ground crew. The irony is that they work on different platforms ranging from AWG-9, IEI upgraded AWG-9+, Phazotron of MIG, Cyrano IV, APG-153/120, Bayenat I, Bayenaat-II, NRIET SY-80. So there is zero interoperability among pilots and crews. One pilot/technician has to get massive training on fighter-trainer versions of an aircraft before getting operational on another machine. Its a waste of time/energy/resources to have so many different platforms with different training programs for them. 

Forget the future, let's say IRIAF gets its advanced training squadron of 12 x Yasin AT with the same avionics package of Kowsar with IEI e warfare package, Bayenat-II radars with HMD slaved Fatter missiles etc. Pilots who train on them can go to ... Kowsar-I, F-4E/D (dowran upgraded at Busher), Kowsar-II in future, whichever aircraft gets IEI SAIRAN upgrade (MIG?). This happens because they have operated and trained themselves on same-origin electronics, and systems. It IMPROVES combat efficiency multifold. 

My assumption is that Yasin or its variant will get operational but may be only some 1-2 training squadrons.



TheImmortal said:


> Yasin was attempt to build Yak-130 class fighter jet. Another test bed project that couldn’t get green light by IRIAF or get proper funding (or both).



Zero evidence exists for YAK-130. 

All fingers pointed to AT-3

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> .



First of all, I find it amusing that when countered with evidence how swiftly you retreated from your initial claims e.g

- You claimed there are 6 "prop" airframes for official visits with nothing else at HESA floors but when proved with serials and pictures that there are atleast 18 (minimum guess) and highest 24 (I am myself not convinced).

- You claimed that there was some level of serial production of SaeghehI/II with 2 squadrons (like Kowsar or its future will be same) while the serials confirm some 6-7 testbeds with single and dual seater versions built over a period of 11 years.

- You also claimed that I said that Kowsar is getting local BVR package which you failed to provide evidence for. The only post I ever made was for Babaei missile industries testing Maghsoud ARH-LR-BVR for F-14AM fleet. 



TheImmortal said:


> Also you just showed 25 years of tinkering with the F-5 with less than 17 total aircraft built (if your guesses are correct)



- One can thank Shahi legacy of reliance upon imports + low IQ Akhoonds leading R&D projects in the 90s and 2000s. But this was not a loss at all. Like I said before thanks to this "tinkering with F-5" even if we get zero fighters from Russia or China, we can still manage to give IRIAF some 200 x 4.0 to 4+ generation interceptors built from scratch at home within the next 7-8 years if we throw in the money. That, without even importing a bolt. Yes they will still be relevant since nobody will be flying F-22 and SR-72 in the Iranian neighborhoods before you pull that argument. Besides, Our MALE UCAV fleet is the largest in the entire region. It will grow and evolutionise along the way.



TheImmortal said:


> Now we know the Turks like to exaggerate and probably engage in propaganda more than any other nation in the Middle East. But one can see why IRIAF is not heavily invested in Kowsar. We can blame lack of funding (probably true) we can blame lack of mass production facilities (also true) and we can blame mentality shift of not viewing IRIAF as critical to overall defense. Nonetheless, at the end of the day when Iran puts its mind to something (Bavar-373) (RQ-170 reverse engineering) it is able to turn a project into reality on a timeline similar to Western armies.



- Turkish have learned to do feel-good propaganda presentations very well. Altay after 10 years of slides and presentations cant find a market other than Qatar ensuring Turkish political support through a mini purchase order. Their own army won't replace 65 years old M60 Patton with it. Other socio-political simp countries they have, won't take it either. The same story goes for their Atak129 Helis that everyone checkout but won't order. So take this Unmanned-F-22 "Mehmet-raptor" with some grain of salt. They are working on these platforms, kudos to them, but what makes you think we are not? Keep Iranian money+R&D rankings in mind before assuming things.

- It's a simple strategy that other nations failed to read. Iranian strategists saw that even if they procure some 600 x 4th generation jets from Russia and China for 40-50 Bln USD (Combination of MIG-29SMT/35, SU-27SK/30SM/35S, J-10C) in a conflict with the US+Jewrab alliance the airbases will be gone in few days by American 2000 x Tomahawk+SOW strikes. There will be air battles in which we will create new Jalil Zandi and Abbas Dowran like heroes but to what avail when you will lose the war? Hence the money went to create the "Fangs of Iran". Today, an enemy of Iran will be seen from 2000 KM away by our OTHRs, tracked and locked on outside Iranian borders and will be taken out with layer after layer of mobile LORADS/SHORADS or growing aerial interceptor force, all the while the IRGC's underground Missile Silos will breathe fire and the enemy's own bases, infrastructure, will be gone even if its 2000-2500 KM away. Their ships won't lurk closer than 1000 KM, their bases wont be safe from loitering UCAVs. Thanks to this unconventional strategy now we can even have some 7-8 fission devices from known enriched quantities in a matter of weeks if we seek to. So we killed the chances of being attacked with this development. Could we have achieved all this had we neglected this strategy and just went for 600 4th generation aircraft for 40-50 Billion USD? take the example of the Egyptian berserk shopping spree these days. They are taking the Shahi route financed by Riyadh. If in a few years Akhwan kicks out Sisi through a revolution and goes all anti-American how long this large Misri AF will operate you think?



TheImmortal said:


> Now here is another idea, why not make Kowsar II a drone? The removal of the pilot section will allow for bigger radar and more fuel. The reduction of support systems will lighten the aircraft and possibly allow heavier avionics suite and weapons layout.
> 
> To me that would make a little bit more sense at this point. Personally I been calling for a delta wing or flying wing UAV bomber similar to Sofreh Mahi mixed with RQ-170. But a pilotless Kowsar would be a nice step.



- IRIAF's and HESA decision-making has been in hands of egomaniacs. Have you read Tom Cooper's recent detailed articles about the complicated kind of decision-making structure in Tehran? He called Khamanei quite powerless in front of other self-centered institutions which is one of the reasons the SU-35S deal has not been officially announced yet despite both sides agreeing. Yes even Cooper thinks that this deal of SU-35S (72 total) is being challenged from within Iran, probably within MoD who are calling this a waste of money against their own projects of Missiles/AD etc. The worst era was under war-hardened soldiers turned managers (wtf??) like Vahidi and Dehghan who knew nothing about defense production. All the clownery and PR stunts you find happening in Iranian projects was done under their noses during Ahamdinejad and early Rouhani years. Things improved under Hatami and his nominated Ashtiani is doing brilliant work. Its not about IRGC and Artesh its about the background education of an individual.



TheImmortal said:


> If Kowsar ment to be some avionics suite for a future fighter, the avionics aren’t that advanced. Certainly not a 4++ in its current format. To me the project has always been “if it’s 2040 and all our planes are grounded and Russia and China refuse to sell us anything can we at least produce something to keep the skies with aircraft”. That and a F-5 modernization program similar to Karrar for Iran’s extensive amount of T-72 tanks supply.



- That avionics package is likely the most advanced thing in the entire IRIAF right now. Lets compare it to our MIG fleet. So Bayynat-II is ditto of Grifo 346 which GRIFO's/NRIET's most advanced product just below Grifo-E/KLJ AESA series for 4++ or 5th gen. It's extra light, long-range A2A tracker with SAR mapping, ECM/ECCM control. It easily stomps over the ~400 kg Soviet era heavy RLPK-29 of our MIG fleet which won't even see a Kowsar-sized thing (1 m2 RCS) in the sky beyond ~50 KM by the time they will themselves be fired upon. The plane is laced with flight+weapon+navigational management computers which MIG lacks. It also has a modern Nav-comm-datalink package that MIG lacks. Last but not least it has a modern e-warfare suite from SAIRAN with a long-range RWR+ECM+Jammer that was copied/modernized from F-14A's AN/ALR-45/67. MIG uses a famous failure SPO-15 which was thrown out in 9.13 Fulcrum versions in favor R Pastel system. Some people think IRIAF MIGs lacked RWR which resulted in them being planned to have IEI RWR. Apart from this the MIG also lacks jammers, ECCM. It has no chance of getting HMD that Kowsar can get just by ordering few from SAIRAN which also produced Fatter all-aspect IR seekers, so the enslavement is easy. So this is MIG ... I won't talk of the rest of the circus. We can do a product-to-product comparison to know better. This avionics suite beats everything else we have. If MIG-29 gets an MLU, I would rather have their entire soviet era layout thrown out and be replaced with whatever Kowsar-II will have to give them some relevance in modern combat instead of being the toothless oldies that they are becoming now.



TheImmortal said:


> Now here is another idea, why not make Kowsar II a drone? The removal of the pilot section will allow for bigger radar and more fuel. The reduction of support systems will lighten the aircraft and possibly allow heavier avionics suite and weapons layout.
> 
> To me that would make a little bit more sense at this point. Personally I been calling for a delta wing or flying wing UAV bomber similar to Sofreh Mahi mixed with RQ-170. But a pilotless Kowsar would be a nice step.



- Unless we have a 1.4-2.0 mach, 45000 ft/min climbing UCAV pulling 12 G's with 100+ km tracking range for BVR attack, the manned fleet is not going anywhere. The attack aircrafts SU-24/22 or good for nothing F-7N/Mirages/F-5 will be replaced by improved KAMAN-22/Fotros and Shahed 171.

This ever-growing unmanned fleet will be doing SIGINT/ELINT, launching AShCM/LACM and A2A missiles (future) too. We already have Jet powered stealth ones with 0.001 m2 and internal bays while some carry around SAR/ECM pods can launch 200+ km ranging LACM. So we may turn from manned age to unmanned before others around us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> 200 x MALE UCAV Interceptors/wingmen (I wish Shahed-171 low RCS stealth Jets)


too slow to be any sort of wingman or interceptor


drmeson said:


> 70 x F-14AM + MIG-29 9.12 will need IEI Bayyenat-AESA + IEI 5th generation e-warfare suites to stay relevant in combat, _provided_ if they get through an extensive MLU program [Otherwise we will need some 70 x 4++ Gen Su-35S/MIG35S or may be J-31 with TOT from China]


wait to receive that, I believe it when I see it. by the way i wonder how many f-14 or Mig-29 will be flight worthy in next 8-10 years


drmeson said:


> Forget the future, let's say IRIAF gets its advanced training squadron of 12 x Yasin AT with the same avionics package of Kowsar with IEI e warfare package, Bayenat-II radars with HMD slaved Fatter missiles etc. Pilots who train on them can go to ... Kowsar-I, F-4E/D (dowran upgraded at Busher), Kowsar-II in future, whichever aircraft gets IEI SAIRAN upgrade (MIG?). This happens because they have operated and trained themselves on same-origin electronics, and systems. It IMPROVES combat efficiency multifold.


the question , why train on Yasin instead of kowsar ?


drmeson said:


> My assumption is that Yasin or its variant will get operational but may be only some 1-2 training squadrons.


that would be waste of resource , time and everything



drmeson said:


> He called Khamanei quite powerless in front of other self-centered institutions which is one of the reasons the SU-35S deal has not been officially announced yet despite both sides agreeing.


neither of side agreeing on anything , just some fanboy daydream

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> too slow to be any sort of wingman or interceptor
> 
> wait to receive that, I believe it when I see it. by the way i wonder how many f-14 or Mig-29 will be flight worthy in next 8-10 years
> 
> the question , why train on Yasin instead of kowsar ?
> 
> that would be waste of resource , time and everything
> 
> 
> neither of side agreeing on anything , just some fanboy daydream



- If they operationalize Shahid-171 as an A2A wingman then they can replace the Toloue microjet it currently uses with 2 x Jahesh-700 turbofan for speed enhancement from the current 470 km/h to ~900-1000 KM/H. With IRST it can carry some atleast 2 x Fatter IR missiles in internal bays. Imagine an enemy fighter while sparing with IRIAF fighters, not seeing anything else on the radar because of .001 m2 RCS and suddenly BAM!!! Remember IAF could not track and lock it from Air defense. They had to rush F-35s who had to get within WVR range. IRIAF would be a fool not to focus on Shahed series.

- which is why I wrote MLU. If MIG fleet doesn't get MLU'ed in next 4-5 years they might end up in storage. With MLU and radar+avionics package replaced with local IEI SAIRAN (Whatever Kowsar-II's will have) these 23 fighters (Russian sources claim they delivered 42) will come to MIG-29SMT or beyond levels. They are currently just more powerful MIG-21s with their stupid radar + no avionics. 9.12 was a joke Russia played on everyone else.

- Basic jet training is always done on a smaller light jet trainer. You cant jump from a Propeller directly to a two-seater 4th generation fighter. Almost major nations have such a platform.

- Tom C did not "report" this deal, schizo BT did. Cooper merely commented that decision-making in Tehran is a very complicated process and the supreme leader does not have one-man authority over military decisions. This is one big reason IRIAF won't get foreign jets or some projects never see anything beyond a promising prototype. This situation will improve with time as war hardened soldiers from the war times will get old and retire from top posts.


----------



## Abid123

drmeson said:


> It's a simple strategy that other nations failed to read. Iranian strategists saw that even if they procure some 600 x 4th generation jets from Russia and China for 40-50 Bln USD (Combination of MIG-29SMT/35, SU-27SK/30SM/35S, J-10C) in a conflict with the US+Jewrab alliance the airbases will be gone in few days by American 2000 x Tomahawk+SOW strikes.


If that is the case why not build underground mountain airbases like China and North Korea have? 

China's underground airbases are basically impossible to destroy. You can't destroy it even with nuclear weapons. 

IRIAF could built 5-10 underground airbases hosting IRIAF most valuable assets.


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> If that is the case why not build underground mountain airbases like China and North Korea have?
> 
> China's underground airbases are basically impossible to destroy. You can't destroy it even with nuclear weapons.
> 
> IRIAF could built 5-10 underground airbases hosting IRIAF most valuable assets.



Jews know they can not do anything anymore. They missed the bus ... one stupidity from them and we have enough HEU enriched U235 for 7-8 fission nuclear devices, from last known quantities by IAEA. The quantities may have doubled by now. 



















*Meanwhile *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Abid123

drmeson said:


> View attachment 855697
> View attachment 855699
> 
> View attachment 855700
> View attachment 855701
> View attachment 855702


Bro I meant for fighter jets. I already know Iran hosts UAV and missiles underground.

Something like this:


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> Bro I meant for fighter jets. I already know Iran hosts UAV and missiles underground.
> 
> Something like this:
> 
> View attachment 855703



I think it might pop up someday that they may already be creating something similar somewhere. IRIAF certainly won't mind its more modern light interceptors to pop out of mountains out of nowhere suddenly to mess with intruders. F-14AM+MIG29+Kowsar-I (150 fighters) are needed for FAB/TAB's around Iran. Yet to come 5-6 (60-72) squadrons of Kowsar-II with AESA can be inside these mountain tunnel bases as an axillary force. 

Btw in case of conflict with Jewarab Alliance, Airforces will play very little role. It will be more of a Missile + UCAV exchange with massive cyber attacks on each other's infra structure.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> - If they operationalize Shahid-171 as an A2A wingman then they can replace the Toloue microjet it currently uses with 2 x Jahesh-700 turbofan for speed enhancement from the current 470 km/h to ~900-1000 KM/H. With IRST it can carry some atleast 2 x Fatter IR missiles in internal bays. Imagine an enemy fighter while sparing with IRIAF fighters, not seeing anything else on the radar because of .001 m2 RCS and suddenly BAM!!! Remember IAF could not track and lock it from Air defense. They had to rush F-35s who had to get within WVR range. IRIAF would be a fool not to focus on Shahed series.


for the role of wingman , imagine if they inject enough money into the eagle ray project . that one is far more suitable for the role in design than Shahed-171 which is more suitable for long range bombing in contested skies



drmeson said:


> - which is why I wrote MLU. If MIG fleet doesn't get MLU'ed in next 4-5 years they might end up in storage. With MLU and radar+avionics package replaced with local IEI SAIRAN (Whatever Kowsar-II's will have) these 23 fighters (Russian sources claim they delivered 42) will come to MIG-29SMT or beyond levels. They are currently just more powerful MIG-21s with their stupid radar + no avionics. 9.12 was a joke Russia played on everyone else.


well I'm somehow concerned with their airframe aging.
by the way i believe right now the only advantage those Mig-29 have over kowsar is in its engine , and so i believe if we manage to fix that in kowsar , there is no necessity for doing a MLU (in these cases end of life upgrade) ion those mig-29s and we could chalk them off beside those F-7s and Mirage-f1s (god it make me angry to mention them)


drmeson said:


> - Basic jet training is always done on a smaller light jet trainer. You cant jump from a Propeller directly to a two-seater 4th generation fighter. Almost major nations have such a platform.


the problem i see is that Yasin is not lighter than kowsar , in fact its several hundred kg heavier and if also in every metric you consider inferior to kowsar. then why divert resource to it , while we can remove some weapon from kowsar and use it for a trainer which its flying characteristic is a lot more like the airplane those pilots later going to fly with.
by doing this our rate of production would be higher than we produce to different airframe . those two airplane are going to use the same engine and probably avionic the different is their airframe and kowsar airframe is more agile and swifter and maneuverable . the only advantage Yasin have is that its engine are separated from each other and that give it advantage in cas roles but look at it it don't have the necessary armor like A-10 or Su-25 so its better give that role to attack helicopters and drones and i still believe that's a role more suited for army aviation not air-force .


drmeson said:


> - Tom C did not "report" this deal, schizo BT did. Cooper merely commented that decision-making in Tehran is a very complicated process and the supreme leader does not have one-man authority over military decisions. This is one big reason IRIAF won't get foreign jets or some projects never see anything beyond a promising prototype. This situation will improve with time as war hardened soldiers from the war times will get old and retire from top posts.


you see leader always supported domestic production over import of foreign weapons and equipment. and honestly I didn't see any strong sign that air-force is interested in foreign fighters all I see is that military enthusiasts that are interested and right it in media .
and honestly I don't see Russia as a viable source for importing advanced fighters , if they give us something I'm sure we already have something better or very soon we produce it. they just see us as an competitor in middle east and it was the case since several hundred years ago



Abid123 said:


> If that is the case why not build underground mountain airbases like China and North Korea have?
> 
> China's underground airbases are basically impossible to destroy. You can't destroy it even with nuclear weapons.
> 
> IRIAF could built 5-10 underground airbases hosting IRIAF most valuable assets.


5-10 under ground base will answer survivability of the airplane but one problem remain , enemy actually don't need to destroy the aircrafts, they just need to destroy those base entrance to made those aircraft remain grounded for several day at least and then they can do that again . another problem our fighters in future probably be of lighter variants with shorter range so they need to be all around country to be able to cover all country in wartime, to me such underground bases are only useful for housing bombers and special planes like sigint airplanes


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> for the role of wingman , imagine if they inject enough money into the eagle ray project . that one is far more suitable for the role in design than Shahed-171 which is more suitable for long range bombing in contested skies



Shahed-171 has zero utility for a long-range strike. Its main weapon is its 0.001 m2 RCS which is possible because of its internal bays. Now, these internal bays are not very large and cant hold some very large PGM in them. Yes they can intrude enemy air space with ease, won't be detected and the enemy may have to use fights to track them from aspects where they can't be tracked (Which happened with the Israeli F-35). So their best utility will be in the air where they can serve as Wingmen.

Most air battles happen submach and happen at a distance of 30-50 KM. 2 x Jahesh-700 powered Shahed 171 can carry 2 x Fatter in its internal bays to help manned platforms mess with enemy intruders while they can also carry IEI jammer package to keep on jamming enemy fighters radars.



Hack-Hook said:


> well I'm somehow concerned with their airframe aging.
> by the way i believe right now the only advantage those Mig-29 have over kowsar is in its engine , and so i believe if we manage to fix that in kowsar , there is no necessity for doing a MLU (in these cases end of life upgrade) ion those mig-29s and we could chalk them off beside those F-7s and Mirage-f1s (god it make me angry to mention them)



Like I said its an eventuality. MIG-29 fleet is not very useful in modern combat. The RPLK-29 is a heavy old radar that has a small range for a Kowsar sized fighter. 9.12 model that we received either had weak SPO-15 RWR (from MIG-21/23) or lacked it along with other ECM packages that were later given to 9.13 variants.

The biggest weapon MIG has is its speed, climb rate along with the almost undodgeable R-73 so that makes them more powerful MIG-21s but that is just it. Either this fleet gets MLU'ed locally with extreme level airframe strengthening, revitalization + Receives local IEI like avionics package, otherwise their relevance will become questionable. Below is a possible route to bring MIG fleet to SMT standards.

Extensive airframe strengthening
Alloy + composites. SSJO unit in Mehrabad before has previously overhauled these airframes extensively.









IEI Fire control Radar BAYYENAT II/II
AESA version (ditto of Grifo-E or KLJ-7A) version with ~140 km Track + 180+ km detection range with SAR, ECM control, strong Air to Air mode (RWS, TWS, PRF, STT, Range and velocity search).

IEI SAIRAN E-Warfare Suite
RWR/MAWS
ECM Jammer
Chaff/flare dispenser
IFF (IEI-IFF AN/APX-95)

Cockpit
IEI FHUD-I-1 integration control panel with 3 x LCD-MFDs
HMD (SAIRAN HMDS-I-3 display)
MIL STD 1553

Navi-Comm
Navigation: IEI FMMS Mobile Map generator + INS/GPS + TACAN
Communications: IEI ARC-620/1400B U/VHF
Encrypted Datalink

Weapns and Flight management
(AMC) Avionic mission computer
(WMC) Weapons management computer
(DMG) Digital map generator

Weapons: R-77-1 + R-73 WVR

If possible Iran can get some 12 more airframes from russia to raise 3 squadrons of these interceptors.




Hack-Hook said:


> the problem i see is that Yasin is not lighter than kowsar , in fact its several hundred kg heavier and if also in every metric you consider inferior to kowsar. then why divert resource to it , while we can remove some weapon from kowsar and use it for a trainer which its flying characteristic is a lot more like the airplane those pilots later going to fly with.
> by doing this our rate of production would be higher than we produce to different airframe . those two airplane are going to use the same engine and probably avionic the different is their airframe and kowsar airframe is more agile and swifter and maneuverable . the only advantage Yasin have is that its engine are separated from each other and that give it advantage in cas roles but look at it it don't have the necessary armor like A-10 or Su-25 so its better give that role to attack helicopters and drones and i still believe that's a role more suited for army aviation not air-force .



Like I said before Yasin may serve as a basic jet trainer like AT-3 and that is about it. It has no CAS or anything else role in IRIAF. If it comes into production. A pilot may train on its OWj-90 + IEI avionics before moving to Kowsar I/II or other fighters.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Shahed-171 has zero utility for a long-range strike. Its main weapon is its 0.001 m2 RCS which is possible because of its internal bays. Now, these internal bays are not very large and cant hold some very large PGM in them. Yes they can intrude enemy air space with ease, won't be detected and the enemy may have to use fights to track them from aspects where they can't be tracked (Which happened with the Israeli F-35). So their best utility will be in the air where they can serve as Wingmen.
> 
> Most air battles happen submach and happen at a distance of 30-50 KM. 2 x Jahesh-700 powered Shahed 171 can carry 2 x Fatter in its internal bays to help manned platforms mess with enemy intruders while they can also carry IEI jammer package to keep on jamming enemy fighters radars.


shahed-171 can't carry even sidewinder in its internal bays . so its air to air weapons probably will be limited to some manpad. and also the design is not that maneuverable,but is eficient on fuel consumption and on a sidenote , the most weapon used by American aircraft is Aim-120, Pakistan hit Indian airplanes in last war by BVR missiles , I say todays most weapon used are BVR weapons.
on other hand you need one small pgm to do much damage to a workshop or an airplane parked on runway or these old shelter which is used in middle-east and only protect you from free fall bombs



drmeson said:


> Like I said before Yasin may serve as a basic jet trainer like AT-3 and that is about it. It has no CAS or anything else role in IRIAF. If it comes into production. A pilot may train on its OWj-90 + IEI avionics before moving to Kowsar I/II or other fighters.


my question is , why the pilot don't do the training on kowsar itself, then we have an extra production like for kowsar.

by the way my guess is IRIAF don't plan using Kowsar as a fighter but trainer (because of its weak engine) ,and they are waiting on a more powerful and fuel efficient engine become ready so they can produce Kowsar II and use that as a fighter and the Kowsar that already are built will be used as a trainer. that's why they are building them in two seat formation otherwise there are better use for the second pilot space in such small airframe


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> shahed-171 can't carry even sidewinder in its internal bays . so its air to air weapons probably will be limited to some manpad. and also the design is not that maneuverable,but is eficient on fuel consumption and on a sidenote , the most weapon used by American aircraft is Aim-120, Pakistan hit Indian airplanes in last war by BVR missiles , I say todays most weapon used are BVR weapons.
> on other hand you need one small pgm to do much damage to a workshop or an airplane parked on runway or these old shelter which is used in middle-east and only protect you from free fall bombs
> 
> 
> my question is , why the pilot don't do the training on kowsar itself, then we have an extra production like for kowsar.
> 
> by the way my guess is IRIAF don't plan using Kowsar as a fighter but trainer (because of its weak engine) ,and they are waiting on a more powerful and fuel efficient engine become ready so they can produce Kowsar II and use that as a fighter and the Kowsar that already are built will be used as a trainer. that's why they are building them in two seat formation otherwise there are better use for the second pilot space in such small airframe



We will continue this discussion but can you find me that 1 x Turbofan model Kowsar HESA presented in some airshow? hanging from threads.

Out of all the models we have seen, that one is pretty much the MOST plausible one for Kowsar-II.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> We will continue this discussion but can you find me that 1 x Turbofan model Kowsar HESA presented in some airshow? hanging from threads.


don't recall it


----------



## jauk

Nice report! Includes construction in HESA (Simorgh in particular) and stats on quantities.


----------



## TheImmortal

Abid123 said:


> View attachment 855703



You do realize that underground tunnel:

Is similar width and height 

To this:







Just because there is no fighter jets now doesn’t mean they can’t fit them in there. No point right now since war is not on horizon. Pilots still need to train.

Plus outside of F-14 and a few Mig’s not a lot of high value air assets exist in Iran’s airforce anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Iranitaakharin

Abid123 said:


> If that is the case why not build underground mountain airbases like China and North Korea have?
> 
> China's underground airbases are basically impossible to destroy. You can't destroy it even with nuclear weapons.
> 
> IRIAF could built 5-10 underground airbases hosting IRIAF most valuable assets.


The same preposition has come up before on here.


AmirPatriot said:


> @TheImmortal
> 
> Runways are not ramps that one only needs to get to the end of and launch from at that point. They are the length they are for a reason. Aircraft takeoff whenever they have the lift to do so; keeping at aircraft at just under takeoff speed for too long is damaging to the landing gear and tyres, and could have catastrophic results.
> 
> The takeoff run depends on the type of aircraft and its fuel and weapons load. It is not fixed.
> 
> Airbases like Hamadan have 4000m long runways for many reasons, one of them is to accommodate transport aircraft that would be the only way to replenish an airbase (but especially one in a mountain) *quickly.*
> 
> Underground/mountain runways are a catastrophe waiting to happen if the aircraft based there have any issues at all during takeoff and landing - which they will.
> 
> Even if you only wanted to have the supporting infrastructure in a mountain, good luck finding adjacent flat land for a runway.
> 
> If you want a big engineering project for an airbase, you're better off making a "normal" super airbase.
> 
> Aircraft runways damaged by normal bombs and cruise missiles can be repaired in as little as under 24 hours. You just need to protect them from specialised anti-runway bombs that inflict longer lasting damage, and ballistic missiles if the enemy has them - currently they don't. But ABM systems, coupled with SAMs and the fighters you seek to base there should be capable of fending off these threats.
> 
> The major engineering work would be on a highly redundant number of taxiways, and heavily fortified aircraft shelters, fuel/ammo dumps, and other supporting infrastructure. Iran has good experience with fortifying structures of this size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You do realize that underground tunnel:
> 
> Is similar width and height
> 
> To this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because there is no fighter jets now doesn’t mean they can’t fit them in there. No point right now since war is not on horizon. Pilots still need to train.
> 
> Plus outside of F-14 and a few Mig’s not a lot of high value air assets exist in Iran’s airforce anymore.


well , when you want to bomb enemy position , you see the most valuable would be Su-24 and F-4 of army and Su-21 of IRGC

let put it like it , for Iran air force primary target in Iraqi air force was its bombers not fighters . most daring and complex operation of our air force was H-3 airstrike. the target was Iraqi bombers not fighters
in war always enemy bombers had higher priority than its fighters army for army always destroying enemy artillery have higher priority than its tanks


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> You do realize that underground tunnel:
> 
> Is similar width and height
> 
> To this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because there is no fighter jets now doesn’t mean they can’t fit them in there. No point right now since war is not on horizon. Pilots still need to train.
> 
> Plus outside of F-14 and a few Mig’s not a lot of high value air assets exist in Iran’s airforce anymore.



With their weak radar and lack of electronic warfare suite, MIG fleet is not very valuable as you are making them to be. The same would not have been true if this was an upgraded MIG to even 9.13 standard even with a local suite from SAIRAN, but unfortunately, they are not. 

Here are the IRIAF assets in terms of Radar + electronic warfare capabilities. I have listed the detection/tracking range against an enemy fighter with a 2-3 m2 cross-section (F-16). Tracking range matters more than anything in aerial combat.

F-14AM with AWG-9+ (370/270 km, mild level e-warfare, datalink) 
Long range BVR: AIM-54+, Fakour-90 
BVR: AIM-7E-2
WVR: Fatter/AIM-9P
Ground Attack: None

Kowsar-I with Bayyenat-II/Grifo346 (112/93 km, ECM control, full e-warfare suite, datalink)
Long range BVR and BVR: Possible future procurement of PL-12/PL-15
WVR: Fatter
Ground Attack: SDB-1 variant, Glide PGMs

F-4E (upgraded ones only) with Bayyenat-I (100/80 km, no e-warfare suite, no datalink)
Long range BVR: None, key aero states that Fakour-90 as tested but reduced G's to 3
BVR: AIM-7E-2
WVR: AIM-9P/J
Ground Attack: Ghader AShCM, Possible Long-range LR-CM attack integration, multiple PGMs

MIG-29 9.12 with RLPK-29 N019 (80/40-60 km, no e-warfare suite, no datalink)
Long range BVR: None
BVR: R-27R1
WVR: R-73
Ground Attack: None

Kaman-22/Fotros UCAV with Absar SAR radar (SAR range ~80 km, slant range 30 km, external ECM, datalink)
Long-range ground attack: Heydar-1 LACM, Glide PGMs, SDB-1 variant
Short-range ground attack: Sadid, 

So which assets are of more value, we can decide for ourselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well , when you want to bomb enemy position , you see the most valuable would be Su-24 and F-4 of army and Su-21 of IRGC
> 
> let put it like it , for Iran air force primary target in Iraqi air force was its bombers not fighters . most daring and complex operation of our air force was H-3 airstrike. the target was Iraqi bombers not fighters
> in war always enemy bombers had higher priority than its fighters army for army always destroying enemy artillery have higher priority than its tanks



We don’t want to bomb enemy positions with our airforce. We are trying to defend the skies and take strain off of air defenses from doing all the work. Look at what happened in Ukraine when Russia couldn’t achieve air superiority. It increased the cost of war on the enemy.

Any war Iran is a part of (Israel or Saudi Arabia or USA) will be an air war and missile war. Nobody is doing a land invasion of Iran. The probability of such a war is very remote.

Also comparing Iran’s capabilities 40 years ago to now is absurd. Iran didn’t have accurate missiles (BM or CM) or UCAVs 40 years ago and thus had to rely on airforce. 



drmeson said:


> With their weak radar and lack of electronic warfare suite, MIG fleet is not very valuable as you are making them to be. The same would not have been true if this was an upgraded MIG to even 9.13 standard even with a local suite from SAIRAN, but unfortunately, they are not.
> 
> Here are the IRIAF assets in terms of Radar + electronic warfare capabilities. I have listed the detection/tracking range against an enemy fighter with a 2-3 m2 cross-section (F-16). Tracking range matters more than anything in aerial combat.
> 
> F-14AM with AWG-9+ (370/270 km, mild level e-warfare, datalink)
> BVR: AIM-54+, Fakour-90, AIM-7E-2
> WVR: Fatter/AIM-9P
> 
> Kowsar-I with Bayyenat-II/Grifo346 (112/93 km, ECM control, full e-warfare suite, datalink)
> BVR: Possible future procurement of PL-12/PL-15
> WVR: Fatter
> 
> F-4E (upgraded ones only) with Bayyenat-I (100/80 km, no e-warfare suite, no datalink)
> BVR: AIM-7E-2, Fakour-90 (reduces range and Gs to 3-4)
> WVR: AIM-9P/J
> 
> MIG-29 9.12 with RLPK-29 N019 (80/40-60 km, no e-warfare suite, no datalink)
> BVR: R-27R1
> WVR: R-73
> 
> Kaman-22/Fotros UCAV with Absar SAR radar (SAR range ~80 km, slant range 30 km, external ECM, datalink)
> Long-range ground attack: Heydar-1 LACM, Glide PGMs
> Short-range ground attack: Sadid
> 
> So which assets are of more value, we can decide for ourselves.



Mig is still very valuable hence why Ukraine tried to get there hands on them from NATO countries. Yes Iran’s are a bit long in the tooth, but at this point beggars can’t be choosers.

Kowsar is irrelevant as it doesn’t have a BVR at this time. Speculation and hope for a BVR is not a strategy. Thus right now it doesn’t make sense, to keep F-5’s or Kowsar in mountain airbases. It could change if it is able to get a BVR in sufficient quantity. Wouldn’t hold my breath on China giving us anything after the C-802 debacle in late 90’s.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Mig is still very valuable hence why Ukraine tried to get there hands on them from NATO countries. Yes Iran’s are a bit long in the tooth, but at this point beggars can’t be choosers.
> 
> Kowsar is irrelevant as it doesn’t have a BVR at this time. Speculation and hope for a BVR is not a strategy. Thus right now it doesn’t make sense, to keep F-5’s or Kowsar in mountain airbases. It could change if it is able to get a BVR in sufficient quantity. Wouldn’t hold my breath on China giving us anything after the C-802 debacle in late 90’s.



MIG of Ukraine is 9.13 and even better with upgrades, they are armed with ARH R-77. They have survived against SU-20SM/35S/MIG-31BM but our MIGS are 9.12 with no e-warfare suite, no datalink, they are armed with R-27R1 SARH failure missile. They would not survive easily against EF-2000 or Rafale. They wont see a 1m2 adversary before 60 km and by that time they will be jammed, tracked, fired upon, gone. You are seeing the shape of an IRIAF MIG which looks same as MIG-29M so you are thinking "oh they are great". In reality they are like MIG-21-93 at best. If IRIAF does not give them proper MLU and an extensive local upgrade with IEI package, this fleet will turn into a burden. 

As for Kowsar, I truly believe if IRIAF decides to get its underground strategy in motion, it will take them about 3-4 years to develop assets, train staff, pilots, etc. By that time Kowsar's next generation will be there to get into production which will be even better than the current one in terms of avionics package. That asset will be worth saving. Even the current one can massively help F-14AM and Airdefence a lot more compared to what a relic MIG 9.12 or the flying brick F-4E can do.

As for Iran-China cooperation, you need to read about IEI-CATIC deep cooperation from western unbiased sources. I read them, I saw the evidence too. Using logic, I have no doubt IRIAF will get its first 4+ or 4++ generation Kowsar-II in few years, even the current one was no less a miracle from IAMI floors (clowns that gave us Qaher) and there is a proper role of CATIC, China in it. My own assumption, PL-12/15 would not come to Iran. They will be made in Iran like how long-range OTHRs and Track radars, SM-2/40N6 equivalents are being made inside Iran. You walk then you run, HESA has learned to walk with Kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> MIG of Ukraine is 9.13 and even better with upgrades, they are armed with ARH R-77. They have survived against SU-20SM/35S/MIG-31BM but our MIGS are 9.12 with no e-warfare suite, no datalink, they are armed with R-27R1 SARH failure missile. They would not survive easily against EF-2000 or Rafale. They wont see a 1m2 adversary before 60 km and by that time they will be jammed, tracked, fired upon, gone. You are seeing the shape of an IRIAF MIG which looks same as MIG-29M so you are thinking "oh they are great". In reality they are like MIG-21-93 at best. If IRIAF does not give them proper MLU and an extensive local upgrade with IEI package, this fleet will turn into a burden.
> 
> As for Kowsar, I truly believe if IRIAF decides to get its underground strategy in motion, it will take them about 3-4 years to develop assets, train staff, pilots, etc. By that time Kowsar's next generation will be there to get into production which will be even better than the current one in terms of avionics package. That asset will be worth saving. Even the current one can massively help F-14AM and Airdefence a lot more compared to what a relic MIG 9.12 or the flying brick F-4E can do.
> 
> As for Iran-China cooperation, you need to read about IEI-CATIC deep cooperation from western unbiased sources. I read them, I saw the evidence too. Using logic, I have no doubt IRIAF will get its first 4+ or 4++ generation Kowsar-II in few years, even the current one was no less a miracle from IAMI floors (clowns that gave us Qaher) and there is a proper role of CATIC, China in it. My own assumption, PL-12/15 would not come to Iran. They will be made in Iran like how long-range OTHRs and Track radars, SM-2/40N6 equivalents are being made inside Iran. You walk then you run, HESA has learned to walk with Kowsar.



I wasn’t speaking about Ukrainian Migs. Many of them were destroyed while sitting in repair and overhaul facilities. I am talking about Old Migs sitting with NATO militaries. There was talk of donating them to Ukraine. These weren’t top of the line upgraded Migs, but Ukraine was still desperate to get their hands on them. In the end the deal fell thru because no NATO country wanted to be the one that physically delivered it.

Your whole strategy on Kowsar can be best summed up on “if Iran decides to invest in the platform”.

That’s a big IF. So we need to stop making your IF sound like it’s already a forgone conclusion. There is nothing out there that shows IRIAF, HESA, and Iran’s armed forces in general are willing to invest substantial capital and facilities to mass produce the number of Kowsar I or II or III that you allude to.

This saga has been ongoing for 2 decades. So I’m just going to wait for tangible results and actions rather than the same old press release talk we have been getting.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> I wasn’t speaking about Ukrainian Migs. Many of them were destroyed while sitting in repair and overhaul facilities. I am talking about Old Migs sitting with NATO militaries. There was talk of donating them to Ukraine. These weren’t top of the line upgraded Migs, but Ukraine was still desperate to get their hands on them. In the end the deal fell thru because no NATO country wanted to be the one that physically delivered it.



Future Ukrainian procurement is irrelevant to the discussion here. 

Ukrainian AF has not fought Ru-AF SU-30SM/35S with anything other than their own MIG-29 9.13 which is again ... far better than the relic IRIAF operates. 9.13 Fulcrum-C with almost twice the tracking range of N019M over RPLK-29 N019 (IRIAF), has a good IFF, RWR, and ECM package which 9.12 totally lacks. It also has semi FBW for controls and additional tandem pylons. Last but not least they have R-77 ARH BVR which we lack. You cant accept it because like I said to your mind both the IRIAF MIG 9.12 and 9.13 look the same in pics so they have equal capabilities but in reality, one is a mere MIG-21-93 and the other one is a top-tier BVR fighter that has blocked monsters like SU-35S in the air. 

Translating this to actual combat, a 9.13 can see and track a fighter at BVR ranges of 90-100 KM, can fire multiple ARH R-77, and run away from the area using the 65000 ft/min vertical linear dash because it doesn't have to guide the SARH R-27R1 then IRIAF uses. If itself is being tracked it can know this using SPO RWR, it can jam that enemy radar tracking it using ECM package. None of this can happen with a 9.12 since it lacks that package. 



TheImmortal said:


> That’s a big IF. So we need to stop making your IF sound like it’s already a forgone conclusion. There is nothing out there that shows IRIAF, HESA, and Iran’s armed forces in general are willing to invest substantial capital and facilities to mass produce the number of Kowsar I or II or III that you allude to.
> 
> This saga has been ongoing for 2 decades. So I’m just going to wait for tangible results and actions rather than the same old press release talk we have been getting.




Well, you have been shut up recently with your previous silly claim of 6 prop airframes when you were shown that at least 18 airframes have been worked upon. Have not you? No Saeqeh did not see similar production, 6 radar+avionics less aerial performance testbeds were made in 11 years. That was shown to you as well when you decided to leave the argument.

You see your problem is of holding a nontechnical and assumptious POV. You are seeing HESA fighter program as a product. I am seeing it as an achieved industrial capability. My concern is that HESA has demonstrated that they can literally raise a 4.0 generation fighter on their floors from scratch. It is the same organization that gave birth to idiots like Parvaneh who were calling the Saeqeh tech demo a F/A-18 equivalent. The modern airframe, the engines, avionics package + nav-comm + FBW control, radar all is demonstrated. Now how many can be made or will be made is upto the money. IRIAF's interests are of no concern here. This organization wasted money on overhauling and maintenance of weapon+radar less fleet of some 73 x Mirage F1EQ + F-7N like jokes. So do they even know what is good for them? They were having trouble gathering money to bringing some 40-45 x F-14A to F-14 AM standards for 1 million USD a plane but MIRAGE+F-7 trash fleet was more important for them.

and btw CATIC's cooperation with HESA is not a "press release talk". Its shown in the products we are seeing in Iran. I can post them here if you want.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Future Ukrainian procurement is irrelevant to the discussion here.
> 
> Ukrainian AF has not fought Ru-AF SU-30SM/35S with anything other than their own MIG-29 9.13 which is again ... far better than the relic IRIAF operates. 9.13 Fulcrum-C with almost twice the tracking range of N019M over RPLK-29 N019 (IRIAF), has a good IFF, RWR, and ECM package which 9.12 totally lacks. It also has semi FBW for controls and additional tandem pylons. Last but not least they have R-77 ARH BVR which we lack. You cant accept it because like I said to your mind both the IRIAF MIG 9.12 and 9.13 look the same in pics so they have equal capabilities but in reality, one is a mere MIG-21-93 and the other one is a top-tier BVR fighter that has blocked monsters like SU-35S in the air.
> 
> Translating this to actual combat, a 9.13 can see and track a fighter at BVR ranges of 90-100 KM, can fire multiple ARH R-77, and run away from the area using the 65000 ft/min vertical linear dash because it doesn't have to guide the SARH R-27R1 then IRIAF uses. If itself is being tracked it can know this using SPO RWR, it can jam that enemy radar tracking it using ECM package. None of this can happen with a 9.12 since it lacks that package.



And none of this can happen with Kowsar either since it lacks a BVR. I understand what you are saying about the lack of upgraded MIg in Iran’s inventory. But as it stands now Kowsar is in same position in terms of engaging lacking a BVR. I don’t see why you don’t address that dilemma like you do the same way with the Migs




drmeson said:


> Well, you have been shut up recently with your previous silly claim of 6 prop airframes when you were shown that at least 18 airframes have been worked upon. Have not you? No Saeqeh did not see similar production, 6 radar+avionics less aerial performance testbeds were made in 11 years. That was shown to you as well when you decided to leave the argument.



My claim wasn’t ment to be precise. It was a jest at the same presidential photos we see under each president. I said how come every time I see this prokect it’s 6-12 airframes that are sitting around giving the appearance of mass production. They did the same thing at unveiling then when got the infamous picture that showed production is not anywhere close to what they were touting at unveiling. (Can’t remember if it was ~1 per month or what. So I won’t make any claim here on the poster).

And Saeqeh not seeing even 1 or 2 squadrons production was a shock to me. I’ll take your word for it. I could have sworn that press releases said back in the day they had at least a squadron. Maybe my memory is getting fuzzy. But I don’t see how that serves your point, it actually serves mine showing you this has been test bed project since the start.

They could upgrade many current F-5’s to “Kowsar standard” and still haven’t. Why is that?



drmeson said:


> . The modern airframe, the engines, avionics package + nav-comm + FBW control, radar all is demonstrated. Now how many can be made or will be made is upto the money.



So ask yourself, if what you say is true. And the plane is 9-10M to produce (very cheap when a Turkish TB-2 cost 2-3M) then how come the flows into the project are still just at a trickle? Certainly the powers that be have access to all necessary data to make an informed decision.

I think you have to assume a typically fighter has a 20+ year lifespan. If Iran invests in Kowsar I or II. Is this plane still going to be competitive in 2035? 2040? If you produce only 12 Kowsar a year, it will take a decade just to reach 120 fighters. How many owj engines can Iran mass produce? How many radars can it mass produce?

A lot of unknown variables that Iran has never come out and described for a plane that is supposedly available for export. Has Iran even confirmed the statistics of the radar that we are all assuming is a Griffo?

The F-5 crowd was on IMF back in the day as well as was the ones who were adamant that F-313 would fly within a few years. I got roasted back then saying seeing that Qaher fly before 5 years would be unlikely. Got roasted when I joined saying here that was unlikely for years. Then got roasted saying it was likely shelved since there was next to no new information besides a Rouhani propaganda photo op of a taxi run. You can tell when Iran’s serious about a project (Bavar-373) and when it’s not (attack helicopter project, Yasin, etc)

I don’t mind if Iran spends some money to build or upgrade the current F-5’s to be competitive in today’s era. My focus is on the development of heavy engines and medium and heavy fighters they announced 5+ years ago. My focus is on what happened to Sofreh Mahi. I’m not focused on Kowsar nor do I think it’s the future of Iranian Air Force. Sure some technologies could be extrapolated into the next Iranian fighter.

There was a very very knowledgeable person by the name of @evilwesterners who wrote extensively on Iran’s aerospace with direct knowledge to the technology and expertise available to Iran. I suggest if his posts are still available you go back and read them. Unfortunately he left within last 2 years as quick as he joined.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

General TheImmortal
is very pathetic on this subject. He understands nothing to nothing and has no intuition

1 year after the introduction of Kowsar, an Iranian general declared that he had made a great advance on the Kowsar in only 1 years. Iran has a nice surprise in store for us. I read an article that said that kowsar would be in contact with drones with artificial intelligence.

I saw a new radar in a plane factory but I did not find the image. The Kowsar II is perhaps the single-seater Vesion which already built. I also read that Iran tries to make the Kowsar stealth. They do not wait for your complaints to advance

This confirms again and again that Iran is more advanced than their public ads, I have noticed this fact for years. Let's wait for the official public exit of the single -seater version to see these advances

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Kowsar equipped with Qaem, Sadid, SDB 

During the visit of the Iranian president to the installations of the Aircraft Manufacturing Company of the Ministry of Defense in the province of Ispahan, an important step was taken to equip the Kowsar hunters with remote -controlled weapons and guidance bombs of precision.

The issue of equipment that can be embarked on the National Kowsar hunter, which is one of the important projects in the Iranian defense industry, is one of the measures that have been discussed in recent years.

Iranian air defense industry experts have designed and built new equipment to install on Kowsar planes, including a bomb similar to the Small Diameter Bomb series (SDB) equipped with retractable wings which are a new generation of bombs Iranian satellite guidance.
The Iranian bomb, on which little information has been disclosed, had already been observed under the wings in Iranian drones Kaman 12 and Karar, and was designed for the first time to be installed in the Iranian hunter Kowsar.

The bomb is equipped with two pairs of wings, the first X -shaped of which is located at the bottom of the bomb and the second, is installed there.

Although the name and specifications of this bomb have not been officially revealed, according to its appearance, you could say that it is a light bomb, probably in the total weight category between 100 and 150 kg, of a range varying between 60 and 100 kilometers which was designed in the initial phase to target fixed targets.

Such a scope gives the Iranian fighter the ability to distinguish on enemy targets without being detected by many advanced air defense systems.

The light weight of the bomb also allows it to be on board not only on drones, but also in large numbers of fighter planes.

At least 8 cartridges of this bomb can be embarked on an F-4 hunter and at least 4 cartridges on an F5 or Kowsar hunter.

Press tv

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I wasn’t speaking about Ukrainian Migs. Many of them were destroyed while sitting in repair and overhaul facilities. I am talking about Old Migs sitting with NATO militaries. There was talk of donating them to Ukraine. These weren’t top of the line upgraded Migs, but Ukraine was still desperate to get their hands on them. In the end the deal fell thru because no NATO country wanted to be the one that physically delivered it.


the European Migs were probably 9.13 but even if they were 9.12 they are far better than Iran mig-29 because they were sent to Warsaw pact allies and those allies get Migs with superior component compared to non allies countries. not all mig-29 9.12 are made the same , the radar and electronics in our Migs are shit

and Ukraine wanted those Migs not because they were superior , but because their pilots were familiar with them and knew how to fly them.



TheImmortal said:


> We don’t want to bomb enemy positions with our airforce. We are trying to defend the skies and take strain off of air defenses from doing all the work. Look at what happened in Ukraine when Russia couldn’t achieve air superiority. It increased the cost of war on the enemy.


well , if you don't bomb enemy position , Radars and air defense you won't get air superiority and if you don't achieve it , well look at Ukraine


TheImmortal said:


> Any war Iran is a part of (Israel or Saudi Arabia or USA) will be an air war and missile war. Nobody is doing a land invasion of Iran. The probability of such a war is very remote.


in case of land invasion , you need CAS not bombers .


TheImmortal said:


> Also comparing Iran’s capabilities 40 years ago to now is absurd. Iran didn’t have accurate missiles (BM or CM) or UCAVs 40 years ago and thus had to rely on airforce.


the mistake of abandoning one aspect of power projection in favor of another aspect , very wrong indeed



TheImmortal said:


> Your whole strategy on Kowsar can be best summed up on “if Iran decides to invest in the platform”.


all evidence point to Iran is investing in something based in F-5 all other things come and go , this one is there from ages ago and still there


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> And none of this can happen with Kowsar either since it lacks a BVR. I understand what you are saying about the lack of upgraded MIg in Iran’s inventory. But as it stands now Kowsar is in same position in terms of engaging lacking a BVR. I don’t see why you don’t address that dilemma like you do the same way with the Migs



Wrong choice of words here by you. It does not "lack BVR" it lacks a "BVR missile". Its radar and Fire control system is equivalent to that of FCK-1, T-50, TEJAS. FC-1 Blk I/II. We literally have no idea what will they procure for it from China if the plane gets fully operationalized.

Lets have a comparision between Kowsar and MIG-29

- If they procure ARH PL-12/15 for Kowsar I/II then IRIAF can have some ~150 fighters with PL-12/15 + e-warfare/ECM suite. Based upon how much money they will put into its production. 150 will cost some 1.5-2 Billions USD (I am assuming Kowsar next gen to be atleast 15-20 Millions USD per unit if they use AESA and HOTAS).

- If they procure ARH R-77 for MIG-29 then IRIAF will have 23 fighters whose airframes are 30 years old (require MLU) and they lack entire ECM and e-warfare suites.

So tell me which option is better?



TheImmortal said:


> My claim wasn’t ment to be precise. It was a jest at the same presidential photos we see under each president. I said how come every time I see this prokect it’s 6-12 airframes that are sitting around giving the appearance of mass production. They did the same thing at unveiling then when got the infamous picture that showed production is not anywhere close to what they were touting at unveiling. (Can’t remember if it was ~1 per month or what. So I won’t make any claim here on the poster).



Well, you were very precise with the number. You said there are "6 prop airframes" only. You did not say 12 or anything. You said 6. Then I proved to you that even if we assume that Raisi's 6 were the 6 out of Ashtiani's 12 and we do know that 4 out of the initial 7 have been at TAB-2 for evaluation (1+ 3 that showed acrojet maneuvers). Then there are at least 18-19 airframes that have been worked upon in HESA. Now we can argue whether 18 units/4 years is enough or not but the 6 prop jab was just silly.



TheImmortal said:


> And Saeqeh not seeing even 1 or 2 squadrons production was a shock to me. I’ll take your word for it. I could have sworn that press releases said back in the day they had at least a squadron. Maybe my memory is getting fuzzy. But I don’t see how that serves your point, it actually serves mine showing you this has been test bed project since the start.



Saeqeh numbers are not my words Its their serials that add up to 6 airframes.

I gave the Saeqeh numbers because you were saying that Saeqeh also saw some 24 airframes (2 squadrons) so will Kowsar but I proved that Saeqeh barely got 6 airframes/11 years. They tested what they could like squared air intakes, twin tails, elongated radom, domestic made pylons, and probably some FBW components. I had a long discussion on IMF once with Eagle 2009 whether Saeqeh with V tails can even fly without FBW control. They also tested twin seat config with exact same cockpit 3 x LCDs + HUD on Saeqeh-II that we today see in Kowsar.

And then the project concluded. Kowsar's case is different.



TheImmortal said:


> They could upgrade many current F-5’s to “Kowsar standard” and still haven’t. Why is that?
> 
> So ask yourself, if what you say is true. And the plane is 9-10M to produce (very cheap when a Turkish TB-2 cost 2-3M) then how come the flows into the project are still just at a trickle? Certainly the powers that be have access to all necessary data to make an informed decision.
> 
> I think you have to assume a typically fighter has a 20+ year lifespan. If Iran invests in Kowsar I or II. Is this plane still going to be competitive in 2035? 2040? If you produce only 12 Kowsar a year, it will take a decade just to reach 120 fighters. How many owj engines can Iran mass produce? How many radars can it mass produce?



Like I said, IRIAF has no budget + management, they are a very stupid bunch except for the piloting skills which we know they massively excel at (only AF in the world to have 4th generation ace of aces).

Waste of Budget:

- 23 x Mirage-F1 that we know, do not have a single missile to fire in inventory. Let alone missile, it does not even have pylons to hang ammunitions from. I think they even lack a functioning Cyrano-IV. Why create a Mirage infrastructure? train pilots? maintain a stupid platform that lost 34:1 to F-14A during the war?

- ~44-50 F-7N. Why waste money on this stupid 3rd generation BVR-less Chinese MIG-21? It offers nothing in combat for the last 20 years. Why did they even purchase it is beyond me. They could have got J-8IIM from the same source but they instead went for this stupid fighter. Pilots, Infrastructure, overhaul centers, and training all went to waste.

- 60 x F-5E/F fleet offers nothing, they have served us well, and helped us win the air war strongly against Baathists but it's time to go. They are sitting ducks in the sky against what we might face in the air from enemies. The ones who did well in combat like shooting down MIG-25 or carrying out attacks on Iraqi oil fields can go to museums.

So IRIAF had the money for above three but they refused to make a budget plan for F-14A => F-14AM standard upgradation or even a local HESA+IEI based MIG-29 9.12 upgrade that we know is in dire need of upgradation. A HESA+IEI upgrade of F-14AM+MIG29 9.12 means you have 75 x 4+ generation top-notch interceptors that can bully and shoot any intruder in the sky from 150 km away (Fakour-90's range). But they instead went with wasting money on maintenance + overhaul of mentioned 160 x good for nothing fleet. So can we rely upon these people to make sensible financial decisions?

Bad management:

Why are they not producing Kowsar at a rate of lets say 12-14/year. I will tell you why ? because they are bad at the management of projects. They could have generated money by grounding the Mirage fleet first which offers less that what F-7N offers (F-7N at least fires PL-7C). But they did not. If 18-24 Kowsar airframes are already worked upon, Why are we not seeing squadrons of F-5 being grounded to be dismantled for useful parts in production? When I saw first 6 Kowsars I thought next year we will see one F-5E/F squadron grounded but that did not happen. Now we have seen 18-24 airframes of Kowsars and still not a single F-5E/F squadron is gone. Why would they waste money on creating Kowsar airframes from scratch when they actually can just get some useful parts from dismantled F-5E/F? F-5's only use right now is to ground them and dismantled into parts, throw away the APQ-153 radars, J-85, cockpits, canopies, skins, wings, tails, radoms, actuators, fuel lines and pumps, wirings, rugged airframe parts, landing gear assembly etc because none of it is of any use to IRIAF. Whatever will be left can create a large repository of parts that can be used for keeping the Kowsar I/II fleet of 120 fighters in a top-notch combat-ready condition. Pilots get 200+ flying hours on them yearly while you have a long tracking radar with ECM, and e-warfare suite flying in the air on a highly manuverable platform that has 1m2 RCS.



TheImmortal said:


> I think you have to assume a typically fighter has a 20+ year lifespan. If Iran invests in Kowsar I or II. Is this plane still going to be competitive in 2035? 2040? If you produce only 12 Kowsar a year, it will take a decade just to reach 120 fighters. How many owj engines can Iran mass produce? How many radars can it mass produce?



Not exactly, we have nations around us that are purchasing 4.0 generation fighters (attributes comparable to Kowsar or even below).

Turkey is designing Hurjet combat version
Iraq just recently ordered FC-1
Taiwan came up with T-5
Sweden/Australia/Serbia might induct T-7 Redhawk combat version
Pakistan flying FC-1 Blk-I/II, they also purchased a batch of used ex Egyptian Mirage-V (wtf???)
India getting its TEJAS M1 (a fighter they took 30+ years to make)

Manned 4th generation fighters will keep flying for as long as there is an unmanned substitute for them which I described in my previous post. Something that can fly at 1.5-2 Mach, pull 10+ G's, tracks enemy at 150+ km, fires at least 4 x BVR + 4 x WVR missiles, climbs at 40000-50000 feet/min, and makes its own decisions during battle. Right now even USA has no such machine in production so what are you expecting from HESA? trust me we might see Iranian air-to-air specialized UCAV before we might see something similar from Russia. We have a larger more diverse fleet of MALE UCAVs than Russia after all.

As for the Kowsar production, we know there have been 18-24 airframes at HESA. If the target is to get 60 x Kowsar-1 fighters (5 fully equipped combat squadrons) then HESA has already worked upon 1/3 of the targetted numbers. Even if they get some 6-8/year airframes done by the 2023 year (quoting BT's estimate) 2023, the project will conclude in 2027. IRIAF will have ~160 x 4.0 generation BVR interceptors (F-14AM, MIG, Kowsar) + layered L/SH/ORAD + 300 MALE UCAVs for ELINT/SIGINT, PGM, and LACM strikes. Not a bad deal I say. If they manage to get SU-35S/J-10C or even some additional numbers of MIG-29M/MIG-35 then it will be an additional force multiplier. Farewell to F-7N, MirageF1, F-5E/F.



TheImmortal said:


> A lot of unknown variables that Iran has never come out and described for a plane that is supposedly available for export. Has Iran even confirmed the statistics of the radar that we are all assuming is a Griffo?



Decide for yourself.

1) Same number of T/R elements (300 each in ditto 12 rows)- Check
2) Same no. of antenna edges (12) - Check
3) Same processing and power unit size and design, even the lifting handles are dittos - Check
4) Same tracking range - Check
5) Same configuration Tracks 8, attacks 2 targets - Check
6) Same weight
7) Even the steering platform design is a ditto









NRIET of China (a CATIC subsidiary for radars) copied some Grifo radar designs as dittos or they purchased them as TOT since Leonardo (makers of grifo) did not get their bids successful for these products sale, while CATIC already was in large contracts with rogue nations so Leonardo (Italy) technically got business through CATIC of China. Italians are tricky people. Hence:-

Grifo S becomes KLJ-7 on FC-1 Block I/II
Grifo 346 becomes KLJ-Whatever that got TOT-ed to IEI as Bayynet-II of Kowsar,
Grifo E becomes KLJ-7A AESA on FC-1 Blk III or Bayyenat-III for Kowsar-II (highly likely)

... or the Chinese stole the blueprints or copied them. We will never know.

Topic for another time but there is a ditto of Bayyenaat-I on upgraded F-4E of IRIAF in the PLAAF right now too.



TheImmortal said:


> The F-5 crowd was on IMF back in the day as well as was the ones who were adamant that F-313 would fly within a few years. I got roasted back then saying seeing that Qaher fly before 5 years would be unlikely. Got roasted when I joined saying here that was unlikely for years. Then got roasted saying it was likely shelved since there was next to no new information besides a Rouhani propaganda photo op of a taxi run. You can tell when Iran’s serious about a project (Bavar-373) and when it’s not (attack helicopter project, Yasin, etc)



Except that Kowsar is here and Qaher was Hassan Parvaneh + Ahmed Vahidi + Ahmadinejad's stupidity who decided to present a mockup concept (every other country did same) as an in-production fighter. Kowsar cant be compared to Qaher. Qaher will fly one day with modifications if the airframe design came from Shafagh's R&D between HESA and Mukhamedov OKB. If not then it won't.



TheImmortal said:


> I don’t mind if Iran spends some money to build or upgrade the current F-5’s to be competitive in today’s era. My focus is on the development of heavy engines and medium and heavy fighters they announced 5+ years ago. My focus is on what happened to Sofreh Mahi. I’m not focused on Kowsar nor do I think it’s the future of Iranian Air Force. Sure some technologies could be extrapolated into the next Iranian fighter.
> 
> There was a very very knowledgeable person by the name of @evilwesterners who wrote extensively on Iran’s aerospace with direct knowledge to the technology and expertise available to Iran. I suggest if his posts are still available you go back and read them. Unfortunately he left within last 2 years as quick as he joined.



Kowsar is not the future of IRIAF but it is ensuring there is a future. No light fighter is a future of any force like

Hurjet LCA is not the future of Turkish Hava Kuvvetleri, they want EF-2000
T-5 is not the future of Taiwanese AF, they are iducting more F-16
TEJAS is not the future for Indian AF, they are inducting Rafale @ ~130 Million USD per unit
FC-1 is not the future of Pak-AF , inducting J-10C + just purchased Mirage V for parts
T-7 is not the future of Swedish/Austrailian AF, they are chasing 5th gen
T-50 is not the future of Korean or Indonesian AF, they are chasing 5th gen

I will call anyone who thinks Kowsar is the answer to IRIAF's aging fleet a stupid person. Like I said before do not see this as a product, I see it as an achieved industrial capability that will initially give a 60-70 electronically advanced BVR capable interceptors as stop gap while we have nothing else. The same capability in 2-3 years can evolve (high likely it will) into a much better "product" that will be Kowsar-II. Even if it wont, the current capability can provide the much needed extensive upgrade to MIG Fleet or may arm the future A2A-UCAV.

I know who EvilWesterner is. I have talked to him before. I have talked to you/other members as well on IDF/IMF. IMF is gone but some of my predictions have exactly true e.g

I predicted Zoljanah (Sejjil derivative SLV) in 2012/13 when people called me silly because we only knew our tested Safir SLV. I also predicted Hawk based genuine production of a local AIM-54 and we have Fakour-90. I also predicted future IRIAF+IRGC-AF fleet of some 300-400 HALE/MALE UCAVs. We have that now.

My current predictions (based upon logic and published articles) in a few years are:

4+ or 4++ gen Kowsar-II
Sejjil based MaRV-ICBMs
Bavar 373 becomes equivalent to S-500
Stealth Shahed 171 into IRIAF
Air to Air UCAV with WVR missiles
KAMAN-22/FOTROS/GAZA with SIGINT/ELINT roles
Unveiling of Iranian possession of initially 8-10 mid to low yield Fission devices.
IRIN/IRGCN UCAV Carriers

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

With the current political tensions between Russia/China and the west, it's more likely than ever that Iran will be able to procure vital parts & components in order to upgrade its fleet of aging MIGs.

Migoyan has been struggling for some time because of a lack of exports and they were recently merged with Sukhoi so they should be eager for anything that comes their way, including upgrading Iran's MIGs. Either that or Iran can upgrade them with Chinese technology.

As for new fighters, it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10s from China from what I've read.



drmeson said:


> Wrong choice of words here by you. It does not "lack BVR" it lacks a "BVR missile". Its radar and Fire control system is equivalent to that of FCK-1, T-50, TEJAS. FC-1 Blk I/II. We literally have no idea what will they procure for it from China if the plane gets fully operationalized.
> 
> Lets have a comparision between Kowsar and MIG-29
> 
> - If they procure ARH PL-12/15 for Kowsar I/II then IRIAF can have some ~150 fighters with PL-12/15 + e-warfare/ECM suite. Based upon how much money they will put into its production. 150 will cost some 1.5-2 Billions USD (I am assuming Kowsar next gen to be atleast 15-20 Millions USD per unit if they use AESA and HOTAS).
> 
> - If they procure ARH R-77 for MIG-29 then IRIAF will have 23 fighters whose airframes are 30 years old (require MLU) and they lack entire ECM and e-warfare suites.
> 
> So tell me which option is better?
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you were very precise with the number. You said there are "6 prop airframes" only. You did not say 12 or anything. You said 6. Then I proved to you that even if we assume that Raisi's 6 were the 6 out of Ashtiani's 12 and we do know that 4 out of the initial 7 have been at TAB-2 for evaluation (1+ 3 that showed acrojet maneuvers). Then there are at least 18-19 airframes that have been worked upon in HESA. Now we can argue whether 18 units/4 years is enough or not but the 6 prop jab was just silly.
> 
> 
> 
> Saeqeh numbers are not my words Its their serials that add up to 6 airframes.
> 
> I gave the Saeqeh numbers because you were saying that Saeqeh also saw some 24 airframes (2 squadrons) so will Kowsar but I proved that Saeqeh barely got 6 airframes/11 years. They tested what they could like squared air intakes, twin tails, elongated radom, domestic made pylons, and probably some FBW components. I had a long discussion on IMF once with Eagle 2009 whether Saeqeh with V tails can even fly without FBW control. They also tested twin seat config with exact same cockpit 3 x LCDs + HUD on Saeqeh-II that we today see in Kowsar.
> 
> And then the project concluded. Kowsar's case is different.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, IRIAF has no budget + management, they are a very stupid bunch except for the piloting skills which we know they massively excel at (only AF in the world to have 4th generation ace of aces).
> 
> Waste of Budget:
> 
> - 23 x Mirage-F1 that we know, do not have a single missile to fire in inventory. Let alone missile, it does not even have pylons to hang ammunitions from. I think they even lack a functioning Cyrano-IV. Why create a Mirage infrastructure? train pilots? maintain a stupid platform that lost 34:1 to F-14A during the war?
> 
> - ~44-50 F-7N. Why waste money on this stupid 3rd generation BVR-less Chinese MIG-21? It offers nothing in combat for the last 20 years. Why did they even purchase it is beyond me. They could have got J-8IIM from the same source but they instead went for this stupid fighter. Pilots, Infrastructure, overhaul centers, and training all went to waste.
> 
> - 60 x F-5E/F fleet offers nothing, they have served us well, and helped us win the air war strongly against Baathists but it's time to go. They are sitting ducks in the sky against what we might face in the air from enemies. The ones who did well in combat like shooting down MIG-25 or carrying out attacks on Iraqi oil fields can go to museums.
> 
> So IRIAF had the money for above three but they refused to make a budget plan for F-14A => F-14AM standard upgradation or even a local HESA+IEI based MIG-29 9.12 upgrade that we know is in dire need of upgradation. A HESA+IEI upgrade of F-14AM+MIG29 9.12 means you have 75 x 4+ generation top-notch interceptors that can bully and shoot any intruder in the sky from 150 km away (Fakour-90's range). But they instead went with wasting money on maintenance + overhaul of mentioned 160 x good for nothing fleet. So can we rely upon these people to make sensible financial decisions?
> 
> Bad management:
> 
> Why are they not producing Kowsar at a rate of lets say 12-14/year. I will tell you why ? because they are bad at the management of projects. They could have generated money by grounding the Mirage fleet first which offers less that what F-7N offers (F-7N at least fires PL-7C). But they did not. If 18-24 Kowsar airframes are already worked upon, Why are we not seeing squadrons of F-5 being grounded to be dismantled for useful parts in production? When I saw first 6 Kowsars I thought next year we will see one F-5E/F squadron grounded but that did not happen. Now we have seen 18-24 airframes of Kowsars and still not a single F-5E/F squadron is gone. Why would they waste money on creating Kowsar airframes from scratch when they actually can just get some useful parts from dismantled F-5E/F? F-5's only use right now is to ground them and dismantled into parts, throw away the APQ-153 radars, J-85, cockpits, canopies, skins, wings, tails, radoms, actuators, fuel lines and pumps, wirings, rugged airframe parts, landing gear assembly etc because none of it is of any use to IRIAF. Whatever will be left can create a large repository of parts that can be used for keeping the Kowsar I/II fleet of 120 fighters in a top-notch combat-ready condition. Pilots get 200+ flying hours on them yearly while you have a long tracking radar with ECM, and e-warfare suite flying in the air on a highly manuverable platform that has 1m2 RCS.
> 
> 
> 
> Not exactly, we have nations around us that are purchasing 4.0 generation fighters (attributes comparable to Kowsar or even below).
> 
> Turkey is designing Hurjet combat version
> Iraq just recently ordered FC-1
> Taiwan came up with T-5
> Sweden/Australia/Serbia might induct T-7 Redhawk combat version
> Pakistan flying FC-1 Blk-I/II, they also purchased a batch of used ex Egyptian Mirage-V (wtf???)
> India getting its TEJAS M1 (a fighter they took 30+ years to make)
> 
> Manned 4th generation fighters will keep flying for as long as there is an unmanned substitute for them which I described in my previous post. Something that can fly at 1.5-2 Mach, pull 10+ G's, tracks enemy at 150+ km, fires at least 4 x BVR + 4 x WVR missiles, climbs at 40000-50000 feet/min, and makes its own decisions during battle. Right now even USA has no such machine in production so what are you expecting from HESA? trust me we might see Iranian air-to-air specialized UCAV before we might see something similar from Russia. We have a larger more diverse fleet of MALE UCAVs than Russia after all.
> 
> As for the Kowsar production, we know there have been 18-24 airframes at HESA. If the target is to get 60 x Kowsar-1 fighters (5 fully equipped combat squadrons) then HESA has already worked upon 1/3 of the targetted numbers. Even if they get some 6-8/year airframes done by the 2023 year (quoting BT's estimate) 2023, the project will conclude in 2027. IRIAF will have ~160 x 4.0 generation BVR interceptors (F-14AM, MIG, Kowsar) + layered L/SH/ORAD + 300 MALE UCAVs for ELINT/SIGINT, PGM, and LACM strikes. Not a bad deal I say. If they manage to get SU-35S/J-10C or even some additional numbers of MIG-29M/MIG-35 then it will be an additional force multiplier. Farewell to F-7N, MirageF1, F-5E/F.
> 
> 
> 
> Decide for yourself.
> 
> 1) Same number of T/R elements (300 each in ditto 12 rows)- Check
> 2) Same no. of antenna edges (12) - Check
> 3) Same processing and power unit size and design, even the lifting handles are dittos - Check
> 4) Same tracking range - Check
> 5) Same configuration Tracks 8, attacks 2 targets - Check
> 6) Same weight
> 7) Even the steering platform design is a ditto
> 
> View attachment 856258
> View attachment 856259
> 
> 
> NRIET of China (a CATIC subsidiary for radars) copied some Grifo radar designs as dittos or they purchased them as TOT since Leonardo (makers of grifo) did not get their bids successful for these products sale, while CATIC already was in large contracts with rogue nations so Leonardo (Italy) technically got business through CATIC of China. Italians are tricky people. Hence:-
> 
> Grifo S becomes KLJ-7 on FC-1 Block I/II
> Grifo 346 becomes KLJ-Whatever that got TOT-ed to IEI as Bayynet-II of Kowsar,
> Grifo E becomes KLJ-7A AESA on FC-1 Blk III or Bayyenat-III for Kowsar-II (highly likely)
> 
> ... or the Chinese stole the blueprints or copied them. We will never know.
> 
> Topic for another time but there is a ditto of Bayyenaat-I on upgraded F-4E of IRIAF in the PLAAF right now too.
> 
> 
> 
> Except that Kowsar is here and Qaher was Hassan Parvaneh + Ahmed Vahidi + Ahmadinejad's stupidity who decided to present a mockup concept (every other country did same) as an in-production fighter. Kowsar cant be compared to Qaher. Qaher will fly one day with modifications if the airframe design came from Shafagh's R&D between HESA and Mukhamedov OKB. If not then it won't.
> 
> 
> 
> Kowsar is not the future of IRIAF but it is ensuring there is a future. No light fighter is a future of any force like
> 
> Hurjet LCA is not the future of Turkish Hava Kuvvetleri, they want EF-2000
> T-5 is not the future of Taiwanese AF, they are iducting more F-16
> TEJAS is not the future for Indian AF, they are inducting Rafale @ ~130 Million USD per unit
> FC-1 is not the future of Pak-AF , inducting J-10C + just purchased Mirage V for parts
> T-7 is not the future of Swedish/Austrailian AF, they are chasing 5th gen
> T-50 is not the future of Korean or Indonesian AF, they are chasing 5th gen
> 
> I will call anyone who thinks Kowsar is the answer to IRIAF's aging fleet a stupid person. Like I said before do not see this as a product, I see it as an achieved industrial capability that will initially give a 60-70 electronically advanced BVR capable interceptors as stop gap while we have nothing else. The same capability in 2-3 years can evolve (high likely it will) into a much better "product" that will be Kowsar-II. Even if it wont, the current capability can provide the much needed extensive upgrade to MIG Fleet or may arm the future A2A-UCAV.
> 
> I know who EvilWesterner is. I have talked to him before. I have talked to you/other members as well on IDF/IMF. IMF is gone but some of my predictions have exactly true e.g
> 
> I predicted Zoljanah (Sejjil derivative SLV) in 2012/13 when people called me silly because we only knew our tested Safir SLV. I also predicted Hawk based genuine production of a local AIM-54 and we have Fakour-90. I also predicted future IRIAF+IRGC-AF fleet of some 300-400 HALE/MALE UCAVs. We have that now.
> 
> My current predictions (based upon logic and published articles) in a few years are:
> 
> 4+ or 4++ gen Kowsar-II
> Sejjil based MaRV-ICBMs
> Bavar 373 becomes equivalent to S-500
> Stealth Shahed 171 into IRIAF
> Air to Air UCAV with WVR missiles
> KAMAN-22/FOTROS/GAZA with SIGINT/ELINT roles
> Unveiling of Iranian possession of initially 8-10 mid to low yield Fission devices.
> IRIN/IRGCN UCAV Carriers


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I will call anyone who thinks Kowsar is the answer to IRIAF's aging fleet a stupid person. Like I said before do not see this as a product, I see it as an achieved industrial capability that will initially give a 60-70 electronically advanced BVR capable interceptors as stop gap while we have nothing else. The same capability in 2-3 years can evolve (high likely it will) into a much better "product" that will be Kowsar-II. Even if it wont, the current capability can provide the much needed extensive upgrade to MIG Fleet or may arm the future A2A-UCAV.


depend on definition of light fighter, if defense ministry invest in it and increase the size around 10% (probably its not even needed if they make it single seat just some modification to the wing) it will become in size of pretty much serious Light-Medium fighter like Gripen 
Length: 14.6876 m vs 15.2 m
Wingspan : 8.13 m vs 8.6 m
Height: 4.077 m vs 4.5 m
the plan is one of the few plane which actually can have supercruise with full load

so the size is not that important they are nearly the same , and Gripen is future of one of European country air force which didn't neglected its army and other NATO members do anything to convince them become a member.
I believe size is not the problem what you put inside the fighter is important .



sha ah said:


> Migoyan has been struggling for some time because of a lack of exports and they were recently merged with Sukhoi so they should be eager for anything that comes their way, including upgrading Iran's MIGs. Either that or Iran can upgrade them with Chinese technology.


upgrade 20-23 mig-29 for what purpose , the upgrade package available is already outdated ,what we need acquiring modern subsystem that we can't produce ,not full airplane or whipping already dead horses



sha ah said:


> As for new fighters, it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10s from China from what I've read.


its neither any one of them , it will be a domestically produced airplane with some imported component and be assured it will be light to medium in size not heavy fighter


----------



## MMCM

sha ah said:


> With the current political tensions between Russia/China and the west, it's more likely than ever that Iran will be able to procure vital parts & components in order to upgrade its fleet of aging MIGs.
> 
> Migoyan has been struggling for some time because of a lack of exports and they were recently merged with Sukhoi so they should be eager for anything that comes their way, including upgrading Iran's MIGs. Either that or Iran can upgrade them with Chinese technology.
> 
> As for new fighters, it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10s from China from what I've read.


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sha ah said:


> With the current political tensions between Russia/China and the west, it's more likely than ever that Iran will be able to procure vital parts & components in order to upgrade its fleet of aging MIGs.
> 
> Migoyan has been struggling for some time because of a lack of exports and they were recently merged with Sukhoi so they should be eager for anything that comes their way, including upgrading Iran's MIGs. Either that or Iran can upgrade them with Chinese technology.
> 
> As for new fighters, it's either Flankers from Russia or J-10s from China from what I've read.



The status of the MIG fleet is that IEI and HESA can provide a much better package to bring MIGS to MIG-29 SMT standards. But MIG comes from Moscow and I dont think Raisi's government would want to touch a Russian plane that they know they have to pay Moscow to upgrade for whatever price their front companies in Belarus/Serbia ask for. 

our MIGS have an obsolete 80s-era radar that lacks a BVR tracking range on small RCS fighters (lets say an EF-2000 or a Rafale). They also have no way of knowing a missile is coming toward them, they cant Jam adversary radar or incoming missiles radars, and cant survive jamming themselves, and cant take data from UCAVs, fighters, GWACS, etc.

HESA can give the airframe a proper MLU and IEI can install Kowsar's entire cockpit+radar+avionics package on them to give them the capability to engage 4++ fighters like Rafale and EF-2000 at BVR ranges at least. If nothing else they can at least survive which without an e-warfare suite they currently cant. 

The dire need for IRIAF is to create a 200+ KM ranging ARH BVR missile that Kowsar-I/II, MIG 9.12, F-14 AM, and future WINGMEN UCAV's can all carry. I know Maghsoud is being developed at Babaei Missile Industries but that's just Fakour-90-2, I would assume it's as heavy as Fakour-90. They need something like <300 KG weighing, 5 Mach, 20-30 Gs pulling ARH guided weapon with ECM like Fakour-90 itself has.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> depend on definition of light fighter, if defense ministry invest in it and increase the size around 10% (probably its not even needed if they make it single seat just some modification to the wing) it will become in size of pretty much serious Light-Medium fighter like Gripen
> Length: 14.6876 m vs 15.2 m
> Wingspan : 8.13 m vs 8.6 m
> Height: 4.077 m vs 4.5 m
> the plan is one of the few plane which actually can have supercruise with full load
> 
> so the size is not that important they are nearly the same , and Gripen is future of one of European country air force which didn't neglected its army and other NATO members do anything to convince them become a member.
> I believe size is not the problem what you put inside the fighter is important .
> 
> 
> upgrade 20-23 mig-29 for what purpose , the upgrade package available is already outdated ,what we need acquiring modern subsystem that we can't produce ,not full airplane or whipping already dead horses
> 
> 
> its neither any one of them , it will be a domestically produced airplane with some imported component and be assured it will be light to medium in size not heavy fighter



Physically, Kowsar-II just needs these few things. 

-OWJ needs to provide a solution, either increase the 2 x OWJ J-90 thrust to somewhere like 15000 lbs or come up with Jahesh-700 turbofan's larger afterburning version like FJ-44-4A. 

- With an increased thrust, the plane can get small dragless CFTs easily for extra internal fuel, I wrote some calculations based upon the current known consumption ltr/min at the afterburner. Easily they can enhance the range that way. 

- If Saegheh I/II truly had better Roll and Yaw (western analysts) then that's the configuration for Kowsar-II. F-5E/F airframe is not any less maneuverable but we do know its had a shortcoming in tight turns which is where improved Yawing is required. 

- The RCS (from as many aspects as possible) should be reduced to ~0.5 m2 which I believe can even be possible just by RAM coatings. An F-5E already has a fiercely small frontal RCS of ~1 m2. If they just redesign the radom and get RAM coatings it would be even less. 

- Rest is ok with this plane for a light combat fighter. Its current avionics package is good enough but with AESA, HOBS slaved HMD, HOTAS will be even more dangerous.

Even if they come up with such a plane in 2026, it will be relevant for many years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> -OWJ needs to provide a solution, either increase the 2 x OWJ J-90 thrust to somewhere like 15000 lbs or come up with Jahesh-700 turbofan's larger afterburning version like FJ-44-4A.


Fj-44-4a have a thrust just like owj but use less fuel


drmeson said:


> - The RCS (from as many aspects as possible) should be reduced to ~0.5 m2 which I believe can even be possible just by RAM coatings. An F-5E already has a fiercely small frontal RCS of ~1 m2. If they just redesign the radom and get RAM coatings it would be even less.


Ram coating alone is not elegant solution as it needs to be fixed regularly


drmeson said:


> - Rest is ok with this plane for a light combat fighter. Its current avionics package is good enough but with AESA, HOBS slaved HMD, HOTAS will be even more dangerous.


a modern light fighter jet needs a serious datalink and a good AESA radar to fix the limitation that come with a light fighter


drmeson said:


> Even if they come up with such a plane in 2026, it will be relevant for many years.


the plane certainly would be relevant as its our plane and we can do any upgrade we want to it down the road

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Fj-44-4a have a thrust just like owj but use less fuel
> 
> Ram coating alone is not elegant solution as it needs to be fixed regularly
> 
> a modern light fighter jet needs a serious datalink and a good AESA radar to fix the limitation that come with a light fighter
> 
> the plane certainly would be relevant as its our plane and we can do any upgrade we want to it down the road



- Going by the logic that usual Turbofans all over the world have 1.7 times afterburning thurst of their dry thrust, the 7200 lbs of dry thurst from two Jahesh/FJ-44-4a will produce something like 12500-1300 lbf on afterburner. Not a bad choice for single crystal turbofan that suck the least possible fuel so more range, will also give the plane supercruise capability along with 45-55K ft/min linear dash for the shoot and run tactics. The problem of slow turning of F-5E/F was solved in F-5G/F-20 with the enhancement of T/W ratio from 0.7 of Tiger to 1.06 of F-20 (full internal fuel).

Kowsar's empty weight is 4035 kg while it can carry max 2050 KG of JP jet fuel. So the otal weight with full internal fuel will be 6400 KG or 141096 lbf while the Thrust is 10000 lbf. Thats a T/W ratio of 0.71 right now. With a 12500-13000 lbf thrust it becomes 0.91-0.94 which is ideal and in line with any modern generation combat aircraft in the world.

- RAM tech is evolving very fast. I am sure maintaining a fleet of some 200 RAM-coated low RCS jets is less tedious for IRIAF than maintaining a fleet of useless 160 x F-7,MIRAGE, F-5.

- Kowsar already has a datalink with UCAVs, GWACS, and other fighters. IRIAF even deployed 3-7400 with F-14 AM on TAB-2 during the Azeri-Armeni war where they evaluated this system. Quoting Key aero and Gen. Khajehfard, its whole architecture is MIL-STD-1553 based while datalink allows it to exchange target coordinates with a central GWACS system that itself is exchanging info with UCAVs, Fighters, and tracking radars of AD batteries on the ground.

But yes AESA radar is a must in next-generation not for the domestic jets but also for upgradation of MIG fleet before we turn them into another Mirage F1EQ fleet.

- Thats the most important thing you said. We can literally design its low RCS version and from there get 400 of these if we need to produce them (better than some 60 SU-35S for which we stay reliant). Trust me if IRIAF shows like 5-6 squadrons of fully armed Kowsars with HMD, HOBS, some modern PL-12/15 like BVR. Everybody will try to sell us their modern fighters then. We got S-300 when we already had Bavar doing the TVC dance in the air. This is how this world works.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Fakour-90 is a death sentence by Range.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Abid123

TheImmortal said:


> Plus outside of F-14 and a few Mig’s not a lot of high value air assets exist in Iran’s airforce anymore.


What about those SU-35 Iran order?


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> What about those SU-35 Iran order?



Other than a Journalist who is "somewhat" credible but also has schizophrenia, nobody has confirmed this news. I myself believe it might have been discussed at some point.

Lavrov met Raisi recently, not a single word came out regarding Any military purchase. 

(We needed them 10-15 years ago but not anymore). I would rather have IRGC get 200 x Skip Glide Hypersonic Vehicles like Kheibar Shikan with CEP of 2 m and IRIAF 200 x Kowsar Fighters than 50-60 x SU-35S.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> the plane is as expensive as rafale and nearly as expensive as f-35


No it's not lol. SU-35 is 80 million USD with weapons, training, and other stuff. Export unit cost without that is probably like 40-60 million USD. Compare that to nearly 200 million USD for Rafale



mohsen said:


> No, that's Almas missile.


Almas is equivalent to Spike LR (Almas-2 comparable to Spike ER), not NLOS

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

TheImmortal said:


> Not correct. The rockets I suspect is due to a dwindling PGM stockpile. We see the same issue with their drones and lack of PGMs. But we still see clips of Aligators obliterating tanks from a far using PGMs.
> 
> It is not the threat of manpads keeping alligators conservative. As the entire Russian Air Force is acting conservative. It’s the threat of medium and long range SAMs keeping them away. These systems have been imported in from the west as well as whatever survived the initial blitzkreig of the war.
> 
> BUK-2M, TOR-M2, and S-400 have obliterated Ukraine helicopters.
> 
> Manpads are an opportunity weapon target has to be in range. Soldier has to have manpad. And achieve a lock on target. Not so simple during the fog of war and heat of battle.
> 
> Lastly turboprop UAVs are slow and vulnerable. Iran needs to transition to at least have 1-2 models of bomber UAVs powered by a turbojet or even jet engine.


Iran already has jet powered UCAVs, like Karrar or Shahed-191



TheImmortal said:


> Where do the Saeqeh numbers come from? If I recall correctly at least 1-2 squadrons were built between the two generations.
> 
> Also you just showed 25 years of tinkering with the F-5 with less than 17 total aircraft built (if your guesses are correct)
> 
> Meanwhile Turkey is already moving on to UAV jet fighter alongside their 5th Gen program.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538600873563246593
> Now we know the Turks like to exaggerate and probably engage in propaganda more than any other nation in the Middle East. But one can see why IRIAF is not heavily invested in Kowsar. We can blame lack of funding (probably true) we can blame lack of mass production facilities (also true) and we can blame mentality shift of not viewing IRIAF as critical to overall defense. Nonetheless, at the end of the day when Iran puts its mind to something (Bavar-373) (RQ-170 reverse engineering) it is able to turn a project into reality on a timeline similar to Western armies.
> 
> If Kowsar ment to be some avionics suite for a future fighter, the avionics aren’t that advanced. Certainly not a 4++ in its current format. To me the project has always been “if it’s 2040 and all our planes are grounded and Russia and China refuse to sell us anything can we at least produce something to keep the skies with aircraft”. That and a F-5 modernization program similar to Karrar for Iran’s extensive amount of T-72 tanks supply.
> 
> Now here is another idea, why not make Kowsar II a drone? The removal of the pilot section will allow for bigger radar and more fuel. The reduction of support systems will lighten the aircraft and possibly allow heavier avionics suite and weapons layout.
> 
> To me that would make a little bit more sense at this point. Personally I been calling for a delta wing or flying wing UAV bomber similar to Sofreh Mahi mixed with RQ-170. But a pilotless Kowsar would be a nice step.


Iran has Ghadir and Sejjil under development. Venezuela has actually joined the Ghadir program. They're basically large jet powered stealth UCAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GrandBotBoi

drmeson said:


> MIG of Ukraine is 9.13 and even better with upgrades, they are armed with ARH R-77. They have survived against SU-20SM/35S/MIG-31BM but our MIGS are 9.12 with no e-warfare suite, no datalink, they are armed with R-27R1 SARH failure missile. They would not survive easily against EF-2000 or Rafale. They wont see a 1m2 adversary before 60 km and by that time they will be jammed, tracked, fired upon, gone. You are seeing the shape of an IRIAF MIG which looks same as MIG-29M so you are thinking "oh they are great". In reality they are like MIG-21-93 at best. If IRIAF does not give them proper MLU and an extensive local upgrade with IEI package, this fleet will turn into a burden.
> 
> As for Kowsar, I truly believe if IRIAF decides to get its underground strategy in motion, it will take them about 3-4 years to develop assets, train staff, pilots, etc. By that time Kowsar's next generation will be there to get into production which will be even better than the current one in terms of avionics package. That asset will be worth saving. Even the current one can massively help F-14AM and Airdefence a lot more compared to what a relic MIG 9.12 or the flying brick F-4E can do.
> 
> As for Iran-China cooperation, you need to read about IEI-CATIC deep cooperation from western unbiased sources. I read them, I saw the evidence too. Using logic, I have no doubt IRIAF will get its first 4+ or 4++ generation Kowsar-II in few years, even the current one was no less a miracle from IAMI floors (clowns that gave us Qaher) and there is a proper role of CATIC, China in it. My own assumption, PL-12/15 would not come to Iran. They will be made in Iran like how long-range OTHRs and Track radars, SM-2/40N6 equivalents are being made inside Iran. You walk then you run, HESA has learned to walk with Kowsar.


Ukrainian MiG-29s don't have R-77, only R-27. Iran could easily procur more MiG-29s from a bunch of former Soviet countries or russia who's retiring their stock for cheap. Then modernize those


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Btw many think the 72 passenger airliner will be based on Simorgh, it won't be. It appears it'll be jet powered


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538993188739993600
Perhaps an AWACS could be based on it using Erieye style radar

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

GrandBotBoi said:


> Btw many think the 72 passenger airliner will be based on Simorgh, it won't be. It appears it'll be jet powered
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538993188739993600
> Perhaps an AWACS could be based on it using Erieye style radar



Unless F-14 AM retires, I see no point in IRIAF having multiple light-AWACS units (israeli EITAM like). IEI upgraded (digitalized, planar antenna etc) AWG-9+ gives a search range of almost ~370-400 km (like APG-71 of F-14D). Its also not slow prop aircraft but a very fast fighter jet that can launch LR-BVR attacks itself, and change locations easily. 

I even am not in favor of ASW/ELINT/SIGINT roles for this prop aircraft now as that should go to larger UCAVs like Kaman-22 (Jet powered) or Fotros. Something on lines of MQ-4C. Kaman-22 + Fotros in IRIAF is a problem solver for many things just like Kowsar.



GrandBotBoi said:


> Ukrainian MiG-29s don't have R-77, only R-27. Iran could easily procur more MiG-29s from a bunch of former Soviet countries or russia who's retiring their stock for cheap. Then modernize those



MIG-29 Mu1 9.13 of UkrAF >>>>> MIG-29 9.12 of IRIAF

Much better Radar
IFF
RWR
ECM
Tandem Pylon Configuration
Less fatigued Airframes

Last but not least, they have a larger fleet compared to IRIAF's 23 x odd fighters (Russian sources maintain they delivered 40 ????) who now require MLU or be grounded in the next 3 years. Post MLU they will require an extensive IEI-HESA upgrade of their avionics, cockpits, and weapon systems (even if its Kowsar's avionics package) to keep them relevant in the combat otherwise they are not going to do much in front of EF-2000/Rafale with their lack of e-warfare suites and stupid RPKL-29 FCR system from Gorbachev times. 

What you said about further MIG-29 purchases is tricky. Together Turkmen, Uzbek and Kazakh airforces have some 80-90 MIG-29. Then Belarus and Russian stored airframes are there as well. I always liked the idea of IRIAF getting around further 75 x MIG-29/MIG-35 airframes. Even if they are just empty airframes with engines, IEI and HESA have the capacity to give them local upgrades to 4+ avionics packages (Russian won't like it though, political disaster). They will fit in within the IRIAF MIG infrastructure right away. While the fleet will become like 100 x fighter strong which with 42 x F-14AM and 120 x Kowsar-I/II can be quite an interceptor package. This is what IRIAF wanted in 1990s-2000s btw. They ordered further 48 x MIG-29S (9.13) and I think 30 x Mig-31 to create a large robust interceptor force. Meanwhile the Azarakhsh/Saeqeh program was to build a local F-20/YF-17 like a fighter to complement that force.


----------



## TheImmortal

GrandBotBoi said:


> Iran already has jet powered UCAVs, like Karrar or Shahed-191



Payloads are too low on either of those platforms. Karrar lacks stealth element for deep enemy penetration.

Shahed-191 if the platform is taken and expanded (something like original Sofreh Mahi concept) with a internal payload of 2000lbs would be a very deadly platform to compliment the Missile doctrine.

High altitude Supersonic unmanned heavy bomber. It will require a more powerful engine than Iran currently makes (unless you want to slap 4 J-85’s on a single platform). But it is possible if Iran develops the “heavy engine” they have announced.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> No it's not lol. SU-35 is 80 million USD with weapons, training, and other stuff. Export unit cost without that is probably like 40-60 million USD. Compare that to nearly 200 million USD for Rafale


rafale is 85milion and monkey version of SU-35 is 80million



GrandBotBoi said:


> Ukrainian MiG-29s don't have R-77, only R-27. Iran could easily procur more MiG-29s from a bunch of former Soviet countries or russia who's retiring their stock for cheap. Then modernize those


another proponent of Iran wasting its money on outdated rusty airplanes


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> rafale is 85milion and monkey version of SU-35 is 80million
> 
> 
> another proponent of Iran wasting its money on outdated airplanes



I think Rafale costs India like 130 USD mln per unit (aircraft only) 

BTW Stealthy Rafale would eat any elephant-sized RCS-bearing Flanker for lunch esp with meteor LRBVR.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Stealthy Rafale would eat any elephant-sized RCS-bearing Flanker for lunch esp with meteor LRBVR.


even if it was not stealthy , its more advanced electronic would have given it a big edge


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> even if it was not stealthy , its more advanced electronic would have given it a big edge



Gripen-E, Rafale, and EF-2000 Tranche 4 (Captor E AESA) will all dominate SU-35S, the 85 million truck. 
This is why Iran needs to focus on its own light-med 4++ platform. We have almost all (not all) ingredients at hand now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

drmeson said:


> Unless F-14 AM retires, I see no point in IRIAF having multiple light-AWACS units (israeli EITAM like). IEI upgraded (digitalized, planar antenna etc) AWG-9+ gives a search range of almost ~370-400 km (like APG-71 of F-14D). Its also not slow prop aircraft but a very fast fighter jet that can launch LR-BVR attacks itself, and change locations easily.
> 
> I even am not in favor of ASW/ELINT/SIGINT roles for this prop aircraft now as that should go to larger UCAVs like Kaman-22 (Jet powered) or Fotros. Something on lines of MQ-4C. Kaman-22 + Fotros in IRIAF is a problem solver for many things just like Kowsar.
> 
> 
> 
> MIG-29 Mu1 9.13 of UkrAF >>>>> MIG-29 9.12 of IRIAF
> 
> Much better Radar
> IFF
> RWR
> ECM
> Tandem Pylon Configuration
> Less fatigued Airframes
> 
> Last but not least, they have a larger fleet compared to IRIAF's 23 x odd fighters (Russian sources maintain they delivered 40 ????) who now require MLU or be grounded in the next 3 years. Post MLU they will require an extensive IEI-HESA upgrade of their avionics, cockpits, and weapon systems (even if its Kowsar's avionics package) to keep them relevant in the combat otherwise they are not going to do much in front of EF-2000/Rafale with their lack of e-warfare suites and stupid RPKL-29 FCR system from Gorbachev times.
> 
> What you said about further MIG-29 purchases is tricky. Together Turkmen, Uzbek and Kazakh airforces have some 80-90 MIG-29. Then Belarus and Russian stored airframes are there as well. I always liked the idea of IRIAF getting around further 75 x MIG-29/MIG-35 airframes. Even if they are just empty airframes with engines, IEI and HESA have the capacity to give them local upgrades to 4+ avionics packages (Russian won't like it though, political disaster). They will fit in within the IRIAF MIG infrastructure right away. While the fleet will become like 100 x fighter strong which with 42 x F-14AM and 120 x Kowsar-I/II can be quite an interceptor package. This is what IRIAF wanted in 1990s-2000s btw. They ordered further 48 x MIG-29S (9.13) and I think 30 x Mig-31 to create a large robust interceptor force. Meanwhile the Azarakhsh/Saeqeh program was to build a local F-20/YF-17 like a fighter to complement that force.


AWACS serve other purposes, have 360° coverage unlike F-14AM, can coordinate forces, etc. They're a useful asset. Hell they could probably coordinate drones 

While yes Ukrainian MiGs are better, Iranian MiGs could be modernized to be comfortable to or superior to F-16/F-18 variants (F-16 being the most used aircraft by Iran's enemies). Many of those MiG-29s from former Soviet are just sitting around and could easily be bought cheaply. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if they could get some from Cuba, Chad, Sudan, or Eritrea


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> While yes Ukrainian MiGs are better, Iranian MiGs could be modernized to be comfortable to or superior to F-16/F-18 variants (F-16 being the most used aircraft by Iran's enemies). Many of those MiG-29s from former Soviet are just sitting around and could easily be bought cheaply. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if they could get some from Cuba, Chad, Sudan, or Eritrea


Iranian migs are old, modernizing them would be far more expensive than getting better airplane from china.
also it prevent us from using that money on developing our national airplane .
and those migs you want to buy are only suitable for junk yard. if we wanted to buy those junks , Venezuela f-16 were a lot better.

all aside please show me a war that mig-29 was successful ?


----------



## GrandBotBoi

TheImmortal said:


> Payloads are too low on either of those platforms. Karrar lacks stealth element for deep enemy penetration.
> 
> Shahed-191 if the platform is taken and expanded (something like original Sofreh Mahi concept) with a internal payload of 2000lbs would be a very deadly platform to compliment the Missile doctrine.
> 
> High altitude Supersonic unmanned heavy bomber. It will require a more powerful engine than Iran currently makes (unless you want to slap 4 J-85’s on a single platform). But it is possible if Iran develops the “heavy engine” they have announced.


Karrar is still useful as a UCAV and it's RCS probably isn't that bad. It's payload is quite good too

While Sofreh Mahi project died, they likely incorporated what they learned into Sejjil and Ghadir. Which fit what you're describing


----------



## drmeson

GrandBotBoi said:


> AWACS serve other purposes, have 360° coverage unlike F-14AM, can coordinate forces, etc. They're a useful asset. Hell they could probably coordinate drones
> 
> While yes Ukrainian MiGs are better, Iranian MiGs could be modernized to be comfortable to or superior to F-16/F-18 variants (F-16 being the most used aircraft by Iran's enemies). Many of those MiG-29s from former Soviet are just sitting around and could easily be bought cheaply. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if they could get some from Cuba, Chad, Sudan, or Eritrea



the Problem with the multiple AWACS strategy in IRIAF is that:

- Iran has massive geography so something like at least ~8-10 systems will be required, assuming the EITAM system Then to protect them from long-range BVR strikes of the enemy that will fly in with Meteor, AIM-120D, you need to provide layer after layer coverage with fighter jets (Take AD out of the equation for now). We do not have that leverage unless the MIG fleet grows like we are discussing (not very likely) or HESA starts giving out some 14 Kowsar-I/II per year and the plane itself gets PL-15 or R-77 like BVR (again a projection). They will become more of a burden in air for the air arm. If you keep them deep inside the Iranian territory to keep them safe from the enemy then what's the point in even having them?

- You need 3D coverage if you are being attacked from all sides. We face threats either from South East/West or North/West. That is about it. We have ground based long range 3D search and track radars too. I am not saying we dont need AWACS systems on Simorgh, I am just not sure how useful they will be in the current IRIAF setup. I would rather have IEI develop a local AWG-9/APG-71 replica (which has a max potential of 700-800 KM search range) and put it on a jet-powered Kaman-22/Fotros to accompany battle groups of F-14Am+MIG+Kowsar in future. We already have seen intention KAMAN-22 caries the DASH ECM pods and have datalinks.

- My own personal belief regarding MIG fleet is that, its all politics in the end. Iran has nothing to do with the US anymore in financial or political domains so it plays around with American products in hand without any fear. SM-1, I-Hawk, F-5E, F-14A, F-4E/D, M-60, TOW, AIM-9P, AIM-54 all have been opened, upgraded, or even copied from scratch as in the case of Kowsar's airframe. But can we do the same with Russian systems? We have never given some heavy upgrade to SU-24M, MIG-29, and Kilo class submarines on our own. Karrar tank uses some ... some tech .. from T-72/90 and you know how much coverage this tank got for those reasons from Russian experts. So the capability is there, it's the political problem that it will cause that keeps Iran from changing the Russian system. Russians demand money, they have front companies in Belarus, Serbia, Bulgaria and previously in Ukraine itself in 90s that offer spare parts, and upgradation packages for the same thing that we can do on our own. 

Even if we procure some 70-80 x SU-35S for 6 BLN USD from Moscow, they will still not let Iran produce its spare parts at home or have any decent TOT to produce more airframes. DPRK wanted domestic production for MIG-29 in 80s and 90s but USSR and later Russia provided them some 14-16 kits for assembly and fleet even to this day is dependent upon Russian supplies. A mere political dispute will end up grounding this fleet.

This is why we have the following American origin systems in IRIAF:

- F-14A upgraded to F-14AM
- Fakour-90 took birth from AIM-54
- F-4E/D (some) have been extensively upgraded with local Radars and AShCM
- F-5E/F airframe has been built from scratch in Iran
- AIM-9P is locally produced as Fatter

We do not see any similar upgradation of any Russian system

- SU-24 fleet got mild upgradations by Russian companies
- MIG-29 fleet got new engines directly from Russia
- SU-25 have been returned to Iraq
- SU-22 are anamoly in this case that they have been upgraded but one squadron

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

drmeson said:


> the Problem with the multiple AWACS strategy in IRIAF is that:
> 
> - Iran has massive geography so something like at least ~8-10 systems will be required, assuming the EITAM system Then to protect them from long-range BVR strikes of the enemy that will fly in with Meteor, AIM-120D, you need to provide layer after layer coverage with fighter jets (Take AD out of the equation for now). We do not have that leverage unless the MIG fleet grows like we are discussing (not very likely) or HESA starts giving out some 14 Kowsar-I/II per year and the plane itself gets PL-15 or R-77 like BVR (again a projection). They will become more of a burden in air for the air arm. If you keep them deep inside the Iranian territory to keep them safe from the enemy then what's the point in even having them?
> 
> - You need 3D coverage if you are being attacked from all sides. We face threats either from South East/West or North/West. That is about it. We have ground based long range 3D search and track radars too. I am not saying we dont need AWACS systems on Simorgh, I am just not sure how useful they will be in the current IRIAF setup. I would rather have IEI develop a local AWG-9/APG-71 replica (which has a max potential of 700-800 KM search range) and put it on a jet-powered Kaman-22/Fotros to accompany battle groups of F-14Am+MIG+Kowsar in future. We already have seen intention KAMAN-22 caries the DASH ECM pods and have datalinks.
> 
> - My own personal belief regarding MIG fleet is that, its all politics in the end. Iran has nothing to do with the US anymore in financial or political domains so it plays around with American products in hand without any fear. SM-1, I-Hawk, F-5E, F-14A, F-4E/D, M-60, TOW, AIM-9P, AIM-54 all have been opened, upgraded, or even copied from scratch as in the case of Kowsar's airframe. But can we do the same with Russian systems? We have never given some heavy upgrade to SU-24M, MIG-29, and Kilo class submarines on our own. Karrar tank uses some ... some tech .. from T-72/90 and you know how much coverage this tank got for those reasons from Russian experts. So the capability is there, it's the political problem that it will cause that keeps Iran from changing the Russian system. Russians demand money, they have front companies in Belarus, Serbia, Bulgaria and previously in Ukraine itself in 90s that offer spare parts, and upgradation packages for the same thing that we can do on our own.
> 
> Even if we procure some 70-80 x SU-35S for 6 BLN USD from Moscow, they will still not let Iran produce its spare parts at home or have any decent TOT to produce more airframes. DPRK wanted domestic production for MIG-29 in 80s and 90s but USSR and later Russia provided them some 14-16 kits for assembly and fleet even to this day is dependent upon Russian supplies. A mere political dispute will end up grounding this fleet.
> 
> This is why we have the following American origin systems in IRIAF:
> 
> - F-14A upgraded to F-14AM
> - Fakour-90 took birth from AIM-54
> - F-4E/D (some) have been extensively upgraded with local Radars and AShCM
> - F-5E/F airframe has been built from scratch in Iran
> - AIM-9P is locally produced as Fatter
> 
> We do not see any similar upgradation of any Russian system
> 
> - SU-24 fleet got mild upgradations by Russian companies
> - MIG-29 fleet got new engines directly from Russia
> - SU-25 have been returned to Iraq
> - SU-22 are anamoly in this case that they have been upgraded but one squadron


In combat there's no situation where AWACS fly without other aircraft in the air. Also with their radar range, they can't detect other aircraft long before they can engage with those missiles. 

Russia/CSAT no longer can be pushed around by US pressure, that's something that works well for Iran in regards to fighter jets. Russia is probably desperate to sell those SU-35S they made, and Iran can also take that to it's advantage and push for TOT

Russia let Iran build T-72S and BMP-2 (albeit no TOT for V-84 engine afaik) probably because Iran ordered an insane amount (thousands).

Russia's also looking to retire its MiG-29s, that's a fleet of hundreds of aircraft. Iran could definitely negotiate to buy some off Russia alongside engines (no need for engine TOT, buying them from Russia steadily can improve relations).


----------



## WudangMaster

There was discussion a while back about using blimps as awacs platforms, could such a thing be outfitted with enough armaments to shoot down incoming a2a missiles or is the reaction time simply make that unlikely?


----------



## drmeson

WudangMaster said:


> There was discussion a while back about using blimps as awacs platforms, could such a thing be outfitted with enough armaments to shoot down incoming a2a missiles or is the reaction time simply make that unlikely?





*https://www.iranintl.com/en/202204229123*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> We do not have that leverage unless the MIG fleet grows like we are discussing (not very likely) or HESA starts giving out some 14 Kowsar-I/II per year and the plane itself gets PL-15 or R-77 like BVR (again a projection).


well i hope the first part don't happen about the second part i doubt we get any PL-15 from china , without a major order for an airplane like JF-17 ot J-10 . but there is another possibility
AIM-120 is a development over AIM-7, we received AIM-7 wonder why we never tried to develop them farther into something like AIM-120, that would have given us a more versatile platform for BVR.



drmeson said:


> - SU-24 fleet got mild upgradations by Russian companies
> - MIG-29 fleet got new engines directly from Russia


when those happened ?



GrandBotBoi said:


> Russia/CSAT no longer can be pushed around by US pressure, that's something that works well for Iran in regards to fighter jets. Russia is probably desperate to sell those SU-35S they made, and Iran can also take that to it's advantage and push for TOT


Russia is desperate to integrate those Su-35 in its air-force , they have NATO threat in their western border, there they face F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale and Gripen every one of them of the best in its class, those airplane eat current aging Russians air-force alive and drink their air-defense system over it, you must say goodbye to any Russian airplane for foreseeable future


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> Russia let Iran build T-72S and BMP-2 (albeit no TOT for V-84 engine afaik) probably because Iran ordered an insane amount (thousands).


they let outdated products, and even for those they didn't allow production of the engine as we could use that in other products and they don't want us strong , they want us only as a nuisance for USA in middle-east


GrandBotBoi said:


> Russia's also looking to retire its MiG-29s, that's a fleet of hundreds of aircraft. Iran could definitely negotiate to buy some off Russia alongside engines (no need for engine TOT, buying them from Russia steadily can improve relations).



that would be *Treason *, buy hundreds of old mig-29 that even cant stand against UAE and KSA air-force and effectively end the path for Kowsar development ? and even don't get a TOT for an old engine like RD-33 which is not even considered a high grade engine.

are you sure what you implied by that post

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## drmeson

GrandBotBoi said:


> In combat there's no situation where AWACS fly without other aircraft in the air. Also with their radar range, they can't detect other aircraft long before they can engage with those missiles.
> 
> Russia/CSAT no longer can be pushed around by US pressure, that's something that works well for Iran in regards to fighter jets. Russia is probably desperate to sell those SU-35S they made, and Iran can also take that to it's advantage and push for TOT
> 
> Russia let Iran build T-72S and BMP-2 (albeit no TOT for V-84 engine afaik) probably because Iran ordered an insane amount (thousands).
> 
> Russia's also looking to retire its MiG-29s, that's a fleet of hundreds of aircraft. Iran could definitely negotiate to buy some off Russia alongside engines (no need for engine TOT, buying them from Russia steadily can improve relations).



- That's my point, unless IRIAF has a proper dedicated interceptor force of some 200+ 4th Generation Interceptors with LR-BVR the AWACS safety will be questionable. Right now the interceptor force is barely ~70 aircraft strong. If 100-120 Kowsar-I/II (next-gen) gets fully operationalized and they manage to arrange PL-12/15/R-77 BVR missile for it then we can afford to have local AWACS platforms on turboprops. Till then GWACS and Unmanned ELINT/SIGINT is the way to go.

- Its not about Russians conforming to American pressure, it's what Russian themselves want. They do not allow their friendly states to create local upgradation programs on Russian weaponry the way Iran has played around with American systems. Even to this day not a single MIG-29 variant exists with an upgradation program without Russian company involvement. Let alone SU-27 family or MIG-29, the MIG-21 has some 30 variants thick majority of which are of Russian upgradation programs.

- Karrar came into being after T-90SM talks failed (surprise surprise), even then Russian military experts were calling it an Iranian attempt to copy T90.

- Yes I myself am a supporter of IRIAF having some additional ~50 MIG-29 who are upgraded by Russian companies + IEI + HESA. An interceptor force of 120 x F-14Am + MIG-29M and further 120 x Kowsar-I/II means Iranian skies are secure.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> - Yes I myself am a supporter of IRIAF having some additional ~50 MIG-29 who are upgraded by Russian companies + IEI + HESA. An interceptor force of 120 x F-14Am + MIG-29M and further 120 x Kowsar-I/II means Iranian skies are secure.


congratulation not upgraded for 23m upgraded god now how much and you effectively ended kowsar program and didn't get even a ToT on a single bolt used there.
remind me of what happened to Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow and nearly happened to JAS-39 Grippen (escaped by just 5 vote) now for that disastrous decision this happened to canada


> Within two months of the project cancellation, all aircraft, engines, production tooling and technical data were ordered scrapped.[90] Officially, the reason given for the destruction order from cabinet and the chiefs of staff was to destroy classified and "secret" materials used in the Arrow and Iroquois programs.[91] The action has been attributed to Royal Canadian Mounted Police fears that a Soviet "mole" had infiltrated Avro,





> Following the cancellation of the Avro Arrow project, CF-105 chief aerodynamicist Jim Chamberlin led a team of 25 engineers to NASA's Space Task Group to become lead engineers, program managers, and heads of engineering in NASA's manned space programs—projects Mercury, Gemini and Apollo.[95] The Space Task Group team eventually grew to 32 Avro engineers and technicians, and became emblematic of what many Canadians viewed as a "brain drain" to the United States.





> Many other engineers, including Jim Floyd, found work in either the UK or the United States. Work undertaken by both Avro Canada and Floyd benefited supersonic research at Hawker Siddeley, Avro Aircraft's UK parent, and contributed to programs such as the HSA.1000 supersonic transport design studies, influential in the design of the Concorde.


and what Canada royal airforce got of the fiasco, the inferior shit


> the RCAF obtained 66 McDonnell CF-101 Voodoo aircraft, one of the American designs the RCAF originally rejected, to serve in the role originally intended for the Avro Arrow.



now look at sweden and what they got of the project 


> Developing an advanced multi-role fighter was a major undertaking for Sweden. The predecessor 37 Viggen had been criticized for occupying too much of Sweden's military budget and was branded "a cuckoo in the military nest" by critics as early as 1971. At the 1972 party congress of the Socialdemokraterna, the dominant party in Swedish politics since the 1950s, a motion was passed to stop any future projects to develop advanced military aircraft.[43] In 1982, the Gripen project passed in the Riksdag by a margin of 176 for and 167 against, with the entire Social Democratic party voting against the proposal due to demands for more studies. A new bill was introduced in 1983[44] and a final approval was given in April 1983 with the condition that the project was to have a predetermined fixed-price contract


 now they went on with their project instead of what traitorous Canadian politician did and after 35 year of work they got this







the deadliest and most advanced light fighter available there and above all one of the cheapest out there to operate by just 5800$ /hours of flight its twice for j-10c and f-16 and thrice for F-18 for rafale and Eurofighter its 4 time and for f-35 its 6time that amount.

you can decide here going Canada route , getting old Russians airplanes that never ever were successful in real war and effectively destroy all achieved in Kowsar project or go Sweden route ,invest that money on Kowsar project


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> congratulation not upgraded for 23m upgraded god now how much and you effectively ended kowsar program and didn't get even a ToT on a single bolt used there.
> remind me of what happened to Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow and nearly happened to JAS-39 Grippen (escaped by just 5 vote) now for that disastrous decision this happened to canada
> 
> 
> 
> and what Canada royal airforce got of the fiasco, the inferior shit
> 
> 
> now look at sweden and what they got of the project
> 
> now they went on with their project instead of what traitorous Canadian politician did and after 35 year of work they got this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the deadliest and most advanced light fighter available there and above all one of the cheapest out there to operate by just 5800$ /hours of flight its twice for j-10c and f-16 and thrice for F-18 for rafale and Eurofighter its 4 time and for f-35 its 6time that amount.
> 
> you can decide here going Canada route , getting old Russians airplanes that never ever were successful in real war and effectively destroy all achieved in Kowsar project or go Sweden route ,invest that money on Kowsar project


Theres one thing that you seem to be overlooking,and that is the swedes total reliance on imported western jet engine technology,indeed the swedes rather unwisely scrapped their own indigenous jet engine development program back in the 50s,preferring instead the expedient shortcut of licensed western engine tech.
Ultimately BOTH the canadians AND the swedes made stupid mistakes that cost them.
Now since sweden has officially come out of the neutral closet and expressed ts wish to become a nato vassal nation one could argue that it doesnt really matter,but in that case why even bother with an indigenous fighter program in the first place. 
The truth is that neither of these nations indigenous fighter programs serve as good examples for iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Theres one thing that you seem to be overlooking,and that is the swedes total reliance on imported western jet engine technology,indeed the swedes rather unwisely scrapped their own indigenous jet engine development program back in the 50s,preferring instead the expedient shortcut of licensed western engine tech.


wrong , the technology was western in C/D but it was made by Volvo, and in F/E they use general electric , till volvo can build something of the same caliber so they don't loose supercruise capability


Sineva said:


> Now since sweden has officially come out of the neutral closet and expressed ts wish to become a nato vassal nation one could argue that it doesnt really matter,but in that case why even bother with an indigenous fighter program in the first place.


why not , first the fighter would be designed according to your need , second you can do whatever you like with it third make jobs in your country and forth nobody can tell you what to do with it and what not to



Sineva said:


> The truth is that neither of these nations indigenous fighter programs serve as good examples for iran.


yes they serve lesson , history teach us lesson
Canadian Airforce:
98 CF-18A and 40 F/A-18B
12 F/A-18A and 6 F/A-18B
(B models are trainer)

*you see only F-18A/B*
swedish airforce
JAS 39 Gripen 71 C variant /60 E variant (the E models are being delivered) / 23 D variant (as trainer)
46 SAAB-105 as trainer
2x SAAB-340 as AEW&C

are you ready to bet which one is more potent one is the most potent light fighter ,another is outdated version of a 4th generation fighter.

what here is suggested for our air force is the Canadian route


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> congratulation not upgraded for 23m upgraded god now how much and you effectively ended kowsar program and didn't get even a ToT on a single bolt used there.
> remind me of what happened to Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow and nearly happened to JAS-39 Grippen (escaped by just 5 vote) now for that disastrous decision this happened to canada
> 
> 
> 
> and what Canada royal airforce got of the fiasco, the inferior shit
> 
> 
> now look at sweden and what they got of the project
> 
> now they went on with their project instead of what traitorous Canadian politician did and after 35 year of work they got this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the deadliest and most advanced light fighter available there and above all one of the cheapest out there to operate by just 5800$ /hours of flight its twice for j-10c and f-16 and thrice for F-18 for rafale and Eurofighter its 4 time and for f-35 its 6time that amount.
> 
> you can decide here going Canada route , getting old Russians airplanes that never ever were successful in real war and effectively destroy all achieved in Kowsar project or go Sweden route ,invest that money on Kowsar project



Kowsar program has nothing to do with MIG/SU procurement. We dont have to create any conjecture ourselves, we can rather see what IRIAF was doing itself in 90s to know better.

So Azarakhsh program started in the early to mid-90s. Plan was to synthesize from scratch, an Iranian F-5E/F derivative with fully modernized avionics (by that time, they tried using J-7G's Sy-80 radars) and also enhanced APQ-153 search range to 64 km by the antenna design change. BUT didn't IRIAF at the same time order 48 x MIG-29 + ~ 30 x MIG-31 that Yeltsin did not deliver because of American pressure ? Not only that they also tried to purchase Moldovan Fulcurum fleet. It tells us that IRIAF has two things in mind. They have a light national fighter program which got throuh a series of tech demos and now has reached some fair level production. Azarakhsh => Saegheh I => Saegheh II => Kowsar-I => Kowsar-II??, but they still want fast, higher climb rate, rapid turning, high G's pulling interceptors too which is why MIG-29 purchase was on the cards even when HESA-CATIC(China) were partnering on F-5E/F based 4th generation aircraft. Still, IRIAF ordered 72 x MIG-29 in total, out of which 24 came (Russians maintain they delivered ~40) + 4 iraqi ones. They later tried to purchase the Moldovan 28 x jets, all the while the national light combat fighter jet program continued. So if MIG fleet grows today with modern avionics, it doesnt mean Kowsar program will cease to exist. They are different things although kowsar program has more potential

(a) Built from scratch Kowsari-I with everything new costs 9-10 million 
(b) Its radar, avionics is far far better than IRIAF MIg fleet
(c) its a domestic product that can be opened up and upgraded tomorrow if we seek to
(d) can be evolved to next gen

MIG cant achieve above. Which is why I consider this to be a master stroke by IEI and HESA because IRIAF now practically can not die. Even if we have to retire entire F-14, MIG and rest of the circus fleet in next 7 years, We can still have some build a robust IRIAF around 200 x Kowsar-II + 300 UCAV's including wingmen. This program will continue regardless of whether they purchase SU-35S or MIG-29/35 or do not purchase anything at all.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> So Azarakhsh program started in the early to mid-90s. Plan was to synthesize from scratch, an Iranian F-5E/F derivative with fully modernized avionics (by that time, they tried using J-7G's Sy-80 radars) and also enhanced APQ-153 search range to 64 km by the antenna design change. BUT didn't IRIAF at the same time order 48 x MIG-29 + ~ 30 x MIG-31 that Yeltsin did not deliver because of American pressure ? Not only that they also tried to purchase Moldovan Fulcurum fleet. It tells us that IRIAF has two things in mind. They have a light national fighter program which got throuh a series of tech demos and now has reached some fair level production. Azarakhsh => Saegheh I => Saegheh II => Kowsar-I => Kowsar-II??, but they still want fast, higher climb rate, rapid turning, high G's pulling interceptors too which is why MIG-29 purchase was on the cards even when HESA-CATIC(China) were partnering on F-5E/F based 4th generation aircraft. Still, IRIAF ordered 72 x MIG-29 in total, out of which 24 came (Russians maintain they delivered ~40) + 4 iraqi ones. They later tried to purchase the Moldovan 28 x jets, all the while the national light combat fighter jet program continued. So if MIG fleet grows today with modern avionics, it doesnt mean Kowsar program will cease to exist. They are different things although kowsar program has more potential


there is small problem of we had more money at our disposal at the time.and the small problem of 30 year between then and now
mig-29 9.13 was a good airplane at the time . but now ? rather go and by a license for jf-17 from china
right now we are cash strapped , its development an airplane or buying those old mig-29.


drmeson said:


> MIG cant achieve above. Which is why I consider this to be a master stroke by IEI and HESA because IRIAF now practically can not die. Even if we have to retire entire F-14, MIG and rest of the circus fleet in next 7 years, We can still have some build a robust IRIAF around 200 x Kowsar-II + 300 UCAV's including wingmen. This program will continue regardless of whether they purchase SU-35S or MIG-29/35 or do not purchase anything at all.


considering how much money we can spend there , its either buy foreign airplane and kill domestic airplane program or go on with our own airplane and inject the money they want to spend on foreign aircraft to that program


----------



## drmeson

If anyone can find 

there was a pic of from an exhibition/airshow in which HESA presented a model of a single turbofan integrated into a Kowsar. Can anyone post it here?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> there is small problem of we had more money at our disposal at the time.and the small problem of 30 year between then and now
> mig-29 9.13 was a good airplane at the time . but now ? rather go and by a license for jf-17 from china
> right now we are cash strapped , its development an airplane or buying those old mig-29.
> 
> considering how much money we can spend there , its either buy foreign airplane and kill domestic airplane program or go on with our own airplane and inject the money they want to spend on foreign aircraft to that program



Correction, IRIAF is cash strapped, not the Iranian defense industry in general. Our entire defense budget of 25 Bln USD (SIPRI figures) goes to domestic production and maintenance. We also are fighting active wars let's not forget. We have to keep on expanding the missile forces, nuclear program, space program, naval production, UCAVs, armor, Air defense, E-warfare etc etc and IRIAF is at the bottom of that priority list because of the military doctrine. 

What you are forgetting is that MIG-29 9.12/9.13 or MIG-29M/M2, MIG-35 are excellent fighters in terms of their physical performance, they cant be dealt with in dogfights easily even by 5th generation aircraft. Only a fool would think that within WVR, an F-35 can just go on and score a kill on HMD wearing MIG-92SMT or Mig-35 easily. You have a fighter that can hit the linear dash at supersonic speeds, climb vertically at transonic speeds (65000ft/min), pull 9+ G's in small turns to get into attack positions while carrying HMD slaved HOBS like R-73/74 and IRST. MIG-29/35 are monsters in dogfights ..... BUT 

..... Ours are 9.12 with no e-warfare suites or HMD or anything. They would be massacred in the sky by a fully armed Kowsar-I let alone any future generation Kowsar-II. Just with its low RCS and Grifo-346/Bayyenat-II the Kowsar with 1m2 RCS will hardly be seen by MIG while MIG's own RPKL-29 will be facing a heavy jamming attack by SAIRAN E-Warfare suite in Kowsar. Kowsar with its datalink can also direct Kaman-22/Karrar carrying DASH ECM pods towards MIG to Jam the relic RPKL-29 Sapfir 29 N019. This is what the reality of this old fleet is. So what do we do with this fleet of 23 x MIGs that badly need MLU and upgrades? There are options:

(a) We retire them in the next 5 years when their beat-up airframes and turbofans would just be giving up already but that means all of the following will go to waste:

- Large infrastructure made for MIG fleet at Mehrabad and Shahinshahr 
- 150 R-27ER/R1BVR missiles
- 300 R-73E 
- 400 R-60MK WVR missiles
- 106 RD-33 turbofans (56 with aircraft + 50 later received in 2008)

(b) HESA-led MLU program starts up for the airframes of MIGs, and RD-33 turbofans while IEI can provide the Kowsar level avionics package of Datalinks, ECM+Jammer+RWR+IFF, HMD slaved HOBS. Keep the RPKL-29 to guide R-73E, R-27ER/R1.

(c) Russian front companies provide the MLU, full avionics upgrade to MIG-29M/SMT standards, and supply additional airframes (as many as they can from Russian storage, ~50?) at least. This option is actually easier than procurement of SU-35S, J-31whatever.






Hack-Hook said:


> considering how much money we can spend there , its either buy foreign airplane and kill domestic airplane program or go on with our own airplane and inject the money they want to spend on foreign aircraft to that program



The best way to go will be to focus 50% budget on Kowsar-I production (10-12 airframes per year), if the target is 70 aircraft and we already have seen 18-24 airframes at HESA floors, this means 35-40 % of the entire production target is already being worked upon. Kowsar-I will be concluded in 2026 by this speed. The rest of the 25% budget can go to extensive R&D for Kowsar-II (low all aspect RCS, AESA, HOTAS, Jahesh/OWJ Turbofans etc), the rest of 25 % should for F-14 AM conversions, Maghsoud LR-BVR, and MIG-29 MLU. The rest of the 160 Fuckers (F-7N, MIRAGEF1EQ, F-5E/F) can be grounded or donated to allied countries like Syria, Iraq etc. F-5E/F can be dismantled to create a repository of useable parts for Kowsar-I's.

I am not in favor of foreign procurement. We have Kowsar-I being produced, Kowsar-II is the way to go. Unless the procurement fits like a glove in the current infrastructure which is only possible if its more MIG-29/35 other than that no.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> considering how much money we can spend there , its either buy foreign airplane and kill domestic airplane program or go on with our own airplane and inject the money they want to spend on foreign aircraft to that program


I would suggest sometime much more interesting. Purchase a number of retired MiG-25s from ex-operators and reverse engineer them all part by part to work up a design that can work as a stopgap heavy interceptor alongside the F-14s for a decade or so.

MiG-25 has an airframe that is very robust and airworthy and the engines have a good dry thrust/afterburner propulsion. Any design developed from a thorough study of it and equipped with a 4+ generation avionics, ECM and datalink suite will be quite a vicious aircraft. Whatever is learned from the turbojet it uses can later be applied into the Iranian domestic turbofan program and then the new engine can be fit in to not only gain more out of the frame but it can power a new fighter altogether which might become the Iranian equivalent to the F-15E.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> I would suggest sometime much more interesting. Purchase a number of retired MiG-25s from ex-operators and reverse engineer them all part by part to work up a design that can work as a stopgap heavy interceptor alongside the F-14s for a decade or so.
> 
> MiG-25 has an airframe that is very robust and airworthy and the engines have a good dry thrust/afterburner propulsion. Any design developed from a thorough study of it and equipped with a 4+ generation avionics, ECM and datalink suite will be quite a vicious aircraft. Whatever is learned from the turbojet it uses can later be applied into the Iranian domestic turbofan program and then the new engine can be fit in to not only gain more out of the frame but it can power a new fighter altogether which might become the Iranian equivalent to the F-15E.


Nobody ever was impressed or feared of mig-25 even our f-5 was able to score against them. I bet you can't find any war that the airplane shined in it


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> Nobody ever was impressed or feared of mig-25 even our f-5 was able to score against them. I bet you can't find any war that the airplane shined in it


It kind of performed well in our war against *raq (though I'm quite angry about our pilots and aircraft lost to them).


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> It kind of performed well in our war against *raq (though I'm quite angry about our pilots and aircraft lost to them).





This cowboy Yadollah Javadpour sitting in a F-5E shot a MIG-25RB of IrAFusing gunshots and sidewinder







In today's combat MIG-25 with its large RCS, and low Gs is a flying target and nothing else. Much below than F-4E/D let alone anything else. Its most modern form is MIG-31BM (yes MIG-31 is nothing but an improved MIG-25) which has some say in the combat if armed with R-33/37 LR-BVR and Zaslon radar. But only if there are other more maneuverable fighters around to guard it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> This cowboy Yadollah Javadpour sitting in a F-5E shot a MIG-25RB of IrAFusing gunshots and sidewinder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In today's combat MIG-25 with its large RCS, and low Gs is a flying target and nothing else. Much below than F-4E/D let alone anything else. Its most modern form is MIG-31BM (yes MIG-31 is nothing but an improved MIG-25) which has some say in the combat if armed with R-33/37 LR-BVR and Zaslon radar. But only if there are other more maneuverable fighters around to guard it.


I heard the frame can pull up to 11Gs, sir. And of course, I didn't say we reverse engineer the MiG-25 from scratch - rather we study it's strengths, find out it's flaws and use the airframe as a basis to improvise on the design to create an aircraft which has the speed but also the maneuverability of the Flanker family along with the best in avionics, EW and radar technology...basically our answer to the F-15E.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> I heard the frame can pull up to 11Gs, sir. And of course, I didn't say we reverse engineer the MiG-25 from scratch - rather we study it's strengths, find out it's flaws and use the airframe as a basis to improvise on the design to create an aircraft which has the speed but also the maneuverability of the Flanker family along with the best in avionics, EW and radar technology...basically our answer to the F-15E.



_Maximum acceleration (g-load) rating was just 2.2 g with full fuel tanks, with an absolute limit of 4.5 g. One MiG-25 withstood an inadvertent 11.5 g pull during low-altitude dogfight training, but the resulting deformation damaged the airframe beyond repair._* [http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/mig-25_foxbat.pl]*

This plane has an exceptional bad record in combat against 4th generation fighters. It lost 10:0 against F-14A of IRIAF [Western unbiased research analysis]. The only western research confirmed kills came from the ace Mohammad Rayyan against F-4E/RF-4 on recce mission which could not defend itself. Rayyan himself was later blasted in the sky by our tomcat serial killer Jalil Zandi.






What you are saying is practically IRIAF getting MIG-31BM level fighters, which IRIAF itself wanted in 1990s. They placed an order of an initial 24-30 x MIG-31s which did not get through. Because of this contract's failure, further F-14A airframes were revived to increase Tomcat squadrons. In today's age of multi-role air superiority, you need maneuverable low RCS fighters with extremely good electronic warfare, navigation, and combat suite. MIG 25/31 cant fullfill this role. There is a reason you are not hearing Ru-AF deploying MIG-31 at front in Ukraine. You are seeing only SU-30SM, SU-35S, SU-34.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> _Maximum acceleration (g-load) rating was just 2.2 g with full fuel tanks, with an absolute limit of 4.5 g. One MiG-25 withstood an inadvertent 11.5 g pull during low-altitude dogfight training, but the resulting deformation damaged the airframe beyond repair._* [http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/mig-25_foxbat.pl]*
> 
> This plane has an exceptional bad record in combat against 4th generation fighters. It lost 10:0 against F-14A of IRIAF [Western unbiased research analysis]. The only western research confirmed kills came from the ace Mohammad Rayyan against F-4E/RF-4 on recce mission which could not defend itself. Rayyan himself was later blasted in the sky by our tomcat serial killer Jalil Zandi.
> 
> View attachment 857500
> 
> 
> What you are saying is practically IRIAF getting MIG-31BM level fighters, which IRIAF itself wanted in 1990s. They placed an order of an initial 24-30 x MIG-31s which did not get through. Because of this contract's failure, further F-14A airframes were revived to increase Tomcat squadrons. In today's age of multi-role air superiority, you need maneuverable low RCS fighters with extremely good electronic warfare, navigation, and combat suite. MIG 25/31 cant fullfill this role. There is a reason you are not hearing Ru-AF deploying MIG-31 at front in Ukraine. You are seeing only SU-30SM, SU-35S, SU-34.


I stand corrected, then. What should be our recourse, then? Perhaps purchase Su-27s and do the same as I outlined for the MiG-25s?


----------



## mack8

drmeson said:


> If anyone can find
> 
> there was a pic of from an exhibition/airshow in which HESA presented a model of a single turbofan integrated into a Kowsar. Can anyone post it here?


 Hi there,

Is it this one? Got couple more angles saved on my computer.





« Saegeh »: an Iranian twin-fin derivative of the F-5 fighter


Any ideas about what the hell is this? Another deep F-5 modification? Any info is welcome.




www.secretprojects.co.uk


----------



## gambit

PersianNinja said:


> I stand corrected, then. What should be our recourse, then? Perhaps purchase Su-27s and do the same as I outlined for the MiG-25s?


Do not forget that Viktor Belenko defected to the West and landed a MIG-25 on JPN. We took the jet apart before returning it to the Soviet Union. The MIG-25 was crap. That is not to say that we found nothing good about the jet. But what we admired most was the manufacturing process Soviet engineers created because they lacked the sophisticated tooling the US have. That was the best we gave to the MIG-25, not because we were adversaries during the Cold War, but our harsh assessment came from technical analyses.

When I was active duty, our squadron had a chance to an informal briefing about the MIG-25 after it was disassembled in JPN. Most about the MIG-25 is still secret, not because of the jet, but because of the intelligence methods used to gain knowledge of the jet, before and after Belenko's defection. I still remember that day. The room was packed, officers and enlisted, and this was before the internet. The brief began with Belenko's defection and US thanks to him. Then one slide after another, we saw highly technical details of the jet. It was amazing at how much photographic info we made in the short time the jet was in our possession. The jet's airframe was *THEORETICALLY* capable of nearly 7g in clean config, which was comparable to a clean F-15. But because of the lack of sophisticated manufacturing tooling, the design had to be extraordinarily assembled with greater reinforcement and they were crude which made the airframe increasingly heavier as the design progresses into its final form we see today. You have to understand that design engineers do one thing, but the manufacturing engineers have to put everything together into a functional device. The MIG-25 was shockingly crude even by 1970s standards. Then cobbled with those two near rocket engines for propulsion, airframe reinforcement killed any tactical maneuverability the original design had. The avionics are a different discussion.

The MIG-25 is a terrible choice for any air force to use as template.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> I stand corrected, then. What should be our recourse, then? Perhaps purchase Su-27s and do the same as I outlined for the MiG-25s?


it should be invested in producing domestic airplane, su-27 is outdated , come with a leash , like all our other Russians aircraft won't get upgraded , when we ask them. and they won't offer us any sort of tot even for a bolt


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> it should be invested in producing domestic airplane, su-27 is outdated , come with a leash , like all our other Russians aircraft won't get upgraded , when we ask them. and they won't offer us any sort of tot even for a bolt


Here is the deal...

You have the Science and Design Engineering groups. This is where the Aerodynamicists, Propulsion, Materials, the wind tunnel, clay modeling, and the CAD computers resides. These two groups create the 'proof of concept' for the new airplane.

Next is the Manufacturing Engineering group. Working inside are subordinate groups like Process Engineering, Finance, and Logistics. Overall, the ME group or level is responsible for the economic production of the new airplane.

All Transfer of Technology (ToT) stop at the ME level. It make sense because why would you want to re-design something? Why would you want to re-design an existing airplane to remove flaws and improve performance when in doing so, you just effectively design a new airplane? Just go ahead and start your own design from conception.

Emerging economies stop at the ME level meaning they learn just enough to remanufacture things under license or IP theft or joint ventures, whatever. Then over time, assuming the country got wealthier and smarter, the country design its native products. This is applicable whether it is the airplane, the car, or the washing machine. Look at the Saeqeh and the Tomcat for examples. So far, all Iran managed to do is maintain those designs. The most Iran can do is create production lines for them, which is ME level. If Iran demonstrate conceptual capabilities, ToT at the Science and DE level is possible and would accelerate any native design, but that would require an ally like the US-UK relationship. Otherwise, if all Iran can do is purchase and prove capable of maintenance, ToT will remain at the ME level. Again, the ME level is responsible for the *ECONOMIC * half of the product. Without wealth, all the smarts in the country will be for naught.

The harsh reality is that if all Iran can do is (re)manufacture and the national wealth do not improve to beyond the ME level, 3rd gen defense will be the only thing available for you.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> they let outdated products, and even for those they didn't allow production of the engine as we could use that in other products and they don't want us strong , they want us only as a nuisance for USA in middle-east



The T-72 kits Iran received from Russia weren't outdated but of advanced level. Every country will put a cap on weaponry it sells to partners (the only exception being US exports to the zionist entity, considering the unparalleled influence of zionists over the American establishment).



Hack-Hook said:


> and they won't offer us any sort of tot even for a bolt



Russia has transferred plenty of military technology to Iran. From numerous light weapons to technology used in OTH radars (a game changing asset) and so on.

Iran all by herself has designed and developed a massive amount of high-tech armaments and components from scratch. However, the claim that Russia never offered Iran anything is not correct.



Hack-Hook said:


> they want us only as a nuisance for USA in middle-east





> _the Russians only want to make sure Iran will be powerful enough to prevent the USA from succeeding in its aim of destroying and balkanizing Iran. _



Fixed.

_____



drmeson said:


> - Its not about Russians conforming to American pressure, it's what Russian themselves want. They do not allow their friendly states to create local upgradation programs on Russian weaponry the way Iran has played around with American systems. Even to this day not a single MIG-29 variant exists with an upgradation program without Russian company involvement. Let alone SU-27 family or MIG-29, the MIG-21 has some 30 variants thick majority of which are of Russian upgradation programs.
> 
> - Karrar came into being after T-90SM talks failed (surprise surprise), even then Russian military experts were calling it an Iranian attempt to copy T90.



What consequences did China face for copying and mass producing the Su-27? Nothing much, for all I know. Same goes for Iran's Karrar MBT, or for the Dehlavieh ATGM which Iran is said to have reverse engineered from Kornets obtained through Syria and/or Hezbollah rather than directly from Russia (whilst of course many other infantry weapons or production licenses for such weapons were indeed supplied to Iran by Moscow, from AK variants to multiple types of rocket-propelled grenade launchers and more).

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> that will have one problem, we won't have any other bomber then.
> and airforce still don't have drone that can carry heavy bombs , the heaviest is mk-82 carried by karrar.
> right now we must keep F-4 and Su-24 fleet operational, but must retire the circus airplanes airforce operate , and i believe after kowsar-2 we can retire mig-29s and after we build our own AWACS and introduction of kowsar 2 , F-14 must be retired.



Attack aircraft are a separate thing altogether. For some stupid reason they have invested heavily in the F-4E/D platforms. 

Pros
- We have its infrastructure inside Iran. J-79 can be fully overhauled with domestic parts being made by OWJ. The airframe is renewed with domestic parts as well.
- The fleet is ~70 airframes strong. 
- It can carry heavy strikes. A single sortie of 4 x F-4E (with two external tanks) can deliver as much what 20-24 x Dezful would do at same range. 
- After delivering payload, they can run away using their fast climb and dash speed.

Cons
- Plane has an Elephant sized RCS esp when armed with munitions so it is a walking target for modern fighters.
- Even if we unleash them in the AShCM role, their only choice will be to deliver Ghader/Noor from within the safety of AD or IRIAF A2A fighters otherwise over the Persian Gulf, they will have to face BVR-armed F-15D, EF-2000, Rafale, F/A-18, F-16, Mirage-2000-9. 
- What they are offering can also be achieved by firing AShCM from Mobile launchers within Iran. Zolafagahr AShBM has a range of 700 KM A-Mehdi AShCM has a range of ~1000 km, Ghader is 330 km, While the entire surface and submarine fleet fires AShCM so what is the F-4E utility here? We can fire some 100 x AShCM x 100 x AShBM at Saudi+UAE+Kuwait surface fleet simultaneously while Shahed-136 swarms and Shahed-171 can mess up their naval bases, without losing a single man. There you go, the entire enemy navy is gone. F-4E/D fleet cant do that. 

SU-24 has a different story altogether. They have no AShCM role, for upgradation they are politically reliant upon Russian companies. The fleet is barely 32 airframes strong. I see them as a burden more than I see F-4E/D as financial stress. Besides some F-4E/D are proven to be upgraded with Bayenat-I (by antenna T/R count an equivalent to JL-10A of JH-7), IEI INS/Tacan, ECM suite so they can be a force multiplier in aerial combats but SU-24 cant do that. I was happy when we heard of SU-25 and SU-22 being transferred to Iraq and Syria.


----------



## drmeson

F-4E/D getting retired from IRIAF after years of war service.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

gambit said:


> Here is the deal...
> 
> You have the Science and Design Engineering groups. This is where the Aerodynamicists, Propulsion, Materials, the wind tunnel, clay modeling, and the CAD computers resides. These two groups create the 'proof of concept' for the new airplane.
> 
> Next is the Manufacturing Engineering group. Working inside are subordinate groups like Process Engineering, Finance, and Logistics. Overall, the ME group or level is responsible for the economic production of the new airplane.
> 
> All Transfer of Technology (ToT) stop at the ME level. It make sense because why would you want to re-design something? Why would you want to re-design an existing airplane to remove flaws and improve performance when in doing so, you just effectively design a new airplane? Just go ahead and start your own design from conception.
> 
> Emerging economies stop at the ME level meaning they learn just enough to remanufacture things under license or IP theft or joint ventures, whatever. Then over time, assuming the country got wealthier and smarter, the country design its native products. This is applicable whether it is the airplane, the car, or the washing machine. Look at the Saeqeh and the Tomcat for examples. So far, all Iran managed to do is maintain those designs. The most Iran can do is create production lines for them, which is ME level. If Iran demonstrate conceptual capabilities, ToT at the Science and DE level is possible and would accelerate any native design, but that would require an ally like the US-UK relationship. Otherwise, if all Iran can do is purchase and prove capable of maintenance, ToT will remain at the ME level. Again, the ME level is responsible for the *ECONOMIC * half of the product. Without wealth, all the smarts in the country will be for naught.
> 
> The harsh reality is that if all Iran can do is (re)manufacture and the national wealth do not improve to beyond the ME level, 3rd gen defense will be the only thing available for you.


I had a bit of difficulty following you in the second half of this post but effectively you're saying that HESA's aircraft are basically an F-5 which has been reverse engineered, isn't it?

Someone had posted earlier about them in detail and it seems that the airframe itself underwent some redesign overall (cannon was removed, for example; avionics are a different discussion).

From my crude observations, it seems they're trying to master the light aircraft category first as part of a learning curve and then moving on to heavy duty platforms. Plus you know fully well the defence budget is always under $10 billion and air defence gets priority so it's likely it'll likely be another decade and a half before the final results come in.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> The T-72 kits Iran received from Russia weren't outdated but of advanced quality. Every country will put a cap on weaponry it sells to partners (the only exception being US exports to the zionist entity, considering the unparalleled influence of zionists over the American establishment).
> 
> _____



Israel never received top assets such as F-22 or B-2 or any Black Project asset created by DARPA/Skunkworks/black project company.

Even it’s OTH radar is actually US operated personnel on Israeli soil.

In fact, Iran is one (maybe the only) country in the world to get a very high tech US asset of its time (F-14) granted for export.

So Russia not giving ToT of SU-35 makes sense as it would be the equivalent of US giving ToT of F-14 back then.

I think the real negative is Russian unreliability in arms deals dating back to 1990’s. Outside of the desperate fire sale of arms to anyone with cash after fall of Soviet Union, Russia fell into Western trance of trying to be a pseudo Western country until they realized the West would never treat them as such.

Most of Iran’s reverse engineer is due to Iranian ingenuity not Russian assistance. That is not to say there has been NO Russian assistance. There certainly has, but if it was any other banana country they would have gotten a lot more Russian assistance.

Case in point, Baboon Arabia....China has helped them with build missiles. Build solid fuel production plants. The list goes on. Meanwhile, our last major China project was C-802 which we all know how much “help” China was in that regard. Since then we have used them mostly for raw materials and certain parts for radars and Missile program.

You can decide for yourself who is more friendlier to Iran...China or Russia. But both of them seem to treat Iran’s adversaries a whole lot better than they treat Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Abid123

TheImmortal said:


> You can decide for yourself who is more friendlier to Iran...China or Russia. But both of them seem to treat Iran’s adversaries a whole lot better than they treat Iran.


They seem to help North Korea a lot. It was even rumored Russia transfered hypersonic tech to North Korea.


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Israel never received top assets such as F-22 or B-2 or any Black Project asset created by DARPA/Skunkworks/black project company.



To my knowledge the zionist regime didn't make a request for those assets and in terms of military hardware hadn't had any request turned down by Washington so far.



TheImmortal said:


> So Russia not giving ToT of SU-35 makes sense as it would be the equivalent of US giving ToT of F-14 back then.



I was simply responding to the claim that Russia will "not offer Iran any sort of ToT, even for a bolt" (and similar statements suggestive of a western-apologetic / pro-western mindset). That is simply counterfactual. I wasn't commenting on the Su-35, ToT for which is less likely.



TheImmortal said:


> I think the real negative is Russian unreliability in arms deals dating back to 1990’s. Outside of the desperate fire sale of arms to anyone with cash after fall of Soviet Union, Russia fell into Western trance of trying to be a pseudo Western country until they realized the West would never treat them as such.
> 
> Most of Iran’s reverse engineer is due to Iranian ingenuity not Russian assistance. That is not to say there has been NO Russian assistance. There certainly has, but if it was any other banana country they would have gotten a lot more Russian assistance.
> 
> Case in point, Baboon Arabia....China has helped them with build missiles. Build solid fuel production plants. The list goes on. Meanwhile, our last major China project was C-802 which we all know how much “help” China was in that regard. Since then we have used them mostly for raw materials and certain parts for radars and Missile program.
> 
> You can decide for yourself who is more friendlier to Iran...China or Russia. But both of them seem to treat Iran’s adversaries a whole lot better than they treat Iran.



At the end of the day, all one needs to keep in mind is that the US and zionist regimes are existential enemies not just to the Islamic Republic but to Iran as a nation and civilization, while Russia and China are partners no matter their record in this regard. This alone should suffice to neutralize the russophobic / sinophobic propaganda spread by the exiled opposition as well as by reformists and moderates inside Iran, whose actual goal is to challenge the Islamic Republic's principled anti-imperialist stance, to trade the policy of Resistance initiated in 1979 for renewed vassalage to the zionists and Americans.

Russian military cooperation with Iran has been notable and includes a considerable list of items. In fact a thread dedicated to the subject would surely be eye-opening, as it would probably lead to a revision of certain misconceptions long held by many. Apart from the UAE's expected purchase of the Su-75, I can't think of a particularly noteworthy defence contract between Russia and the PGCC regimes. All in all, one can't say Moscow treated them a lot better than Iran when it comes to arms deals.

As for China, technological cooperation benefiting Iran's domestic arms industries is more than likely. It was recalled here with regards to the Kowsar's highly advanced radar, and it wouldn't surprise me if Iranian engineers learnt a thing or two from Chinese colleagues that came in handy for the development of the advanced domestic air defence solutions unveiled by Iran. This is just as valuable as anything China supplied to Saudi Arabia. The thing is though, that none of it has been officially acknowledged by either side, for obvious reasons.

Beijing is highly concerned about the prospect of a war in the Persian Gulf jeopardizing its energy supplies, and more generally about any instability or armed conflict along the Eurasian landmass and adjacent sea routes because China's prosperity and development model are still founded to a considerable degree on trade. Moreover, impartiality and doing business with as many parties as possible irregardless of antagonisms between them, tends to be a Chinese principle of foreign policy.

Keeping intact the balance of power in a given region might imply extending additional support to the comparatively weaker side. In the Persian Gulf, this translates into China signing a greater number of overt arms deals with PGCC states because the latter are lacking Iran's indigenous technological and industrial capabilities. This does not mean Beijing wants to help them overpower Iran, but that they need more support for the balance of power to be maintained which, so China believes, will contribute to averting the outbreak of a major armed conflict between the Iran and the PGCC.

Russians and Chinese are dealing with an Iran that has reached impressive levels of self-sufficiency in the defence industry and other sectors. Prior to the Islamic Revolution however, the US regime was arming at highly overpriced rates an Iran incapable of producing anything beyond rifles and ammunition - and making sure to perpetuate Iran's state of structural dependency. Case in point, how Iranian personnel were barred from participating in the maintenance of some of the equipment purchased from the USA, even though they were proficient enough to do so. It's logical for major powers to put limits on what they're ready to offer to fiercely independent nations with a strong and advanced defence industry.

At any rate, I was responding to the claim that Russia won't offer no ToT at all to Iran, which is contradicted by documented facts. I wasn't suggesting that Russian or Chinese assistance has played a greater role than domestic efforts in advancing Iran's defence industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> I've seen no evidence that the zionist regime requested any for those assets, and that its request was turned down by Washington.



Congress passed the prohibition of F-22 because they feared it would be sold to allies and eventually “leak” to adversaries. And the only ally that is close enough to US is Israel. They have one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington.



SalarHaqq said:


> All I need to know, is that the US regime and the zionists are existential enemies not just to the Islamic Republic but to Iran as a unified nation, while Russia and China are partners to Iran no matter their record a. This alone is enough to instantly put an end to the Russop



If your measuring stick is that anyone who doesn’t treat us like US/Israel and is remotely beneficial to us is a “partner” then yes you are correct. Although both Russia and China are very friendly with Israel.

Ironically enough it has been US foreign policy mistakes (that Iran has capitalized on) namely Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen. That has allowed to grow so powerful. Something that a “partnership” with Russia (or China) could never bring to fruition as both seek to limit the extent of Iranian influence in our region as they are also VERY friendly with Zionist entity and wealthy Sheikdoms. 

But I digress, as we both know each other’s viewpoints on the Eastern world powers well enough at this point. No need to rehash the same conversation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

PersianNinja said:


> I had a bit of difficulty following you in the second half of this post but effectively you're saying that HESA's aircraft are basically an F-5 which has been reverse engineered, isn't it?
> 
> Someone had posted earlier about them in detail and it seems that the airframe itself underwent some redesign overall (cannon was removed, for example; avionics are a different discussion).
> 
> From my crude observations, it seems they're trying to master the light aircraft category first as part of a learning curve and then moving on to heavy duty platforms. Plus you know fully well the defence budget is always under $10 billion and air defence gets priority so it's likely it'll likely be another decade and a half before the final results come in.



BS claims from him. I will dissect the post

.............................. 

IRIAF needs to get rid of this mentality of having any attack aircraft when practically IRGC can now take that role at MRBM/IRBM ranges. F-4E/D, SU-24M, SU-22 all need to be retired. They are burden with large RCS, no A2A role. Maintaince heavy machines from 1970s and 80s. 

IRGC missile forces and UCAV's can take the role of attack. They are already doing that so whats the point in keeping this army of bomb trucks.

You dont need an F-4E/D when you can do this some 2000 km away.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

PersianNinja said:


> I had a bit of difficulty following you in the second half of this post but effectively you're saying that *HESA's aircraft are basically an F-5 which has been reverse engineered, isn't it?*
> 
> Someone had posted earlier about them in detail and it seems that the airframe itself underwent some redesign overall (cannon was removed, for example; avionics are a different discussion).
> 
> From my crude observations, it seems they're trying to master the light aircraft category first as part of a learning curve and then moving on to heavy duty platforms. Plus you know fully well the defence budget is always under $10 billion and air defence gets priority so it's likely it'll likely be another decade and a half before the final results come in.


Yes. Reverse engineering falls under Manufacturing Engineering. Basically, you have the technical sophistication to take apart a complex machine such as a car or an airplane, copy its components, and assemble your own version of that machine. Repeat the process until your version have the same performance as the original. That was how post WW II JPN and SKR started. Then over time, their increasing wealth enabled each country to design their own products, anything from household appliances to a space program. Sure, in that learning process, you can modify your version of that machine to suit your needs, but essentially, you still need a functional original to serve as foundation for your reverse engineering.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> If your measuring stick is that anyone who doesn’t treat us like US/Israel and is remotely beneficial to us is a “partner” then yes you are correct. Although both Russia and China are very friendly with Israel.



It's not simply that they don't treat Iran like the USA / Isra"el", but firstly that they are not enemies to Iran and secondly that they are involved in a number of long term cooperation projects with Iran in multiple areas (diplomatic, military, economic).

Russia fits the criteria to be termed a strategic partner. It conducted a major joint military operation alongside Iran in Syria. It shares with Iran the fact that the US regime and NATO are bent on destabilizing it. So does China, which furthermore is Iran's biggest trade and investment partner. Iran, Russia and China all three aim for transition towards geopolitical multipolarity. As far as China's concerned, Iran is also a key element on one of the three routes constitutive of Beijing's paramount OBOR project.

Partnership (= one level beneath alliance) is thus the correct technical term to describe Iran-Russia and Iran-China relations.



TheImmortal said:


> Ironically enough it has been US foreign policy mistakes (that Iran has capitalized on) namely Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen. That has allowed to grow so powerful. Something that a “partnership” with Russia (or China) could never bring to fruition as both seek to limit the extent of Iranian influence in our region as they are also VERY friendly with Zionist entity and wealthy Sheikdoms.



They are interested in maintenance of the balance of power in the region. So the extent of zionist and PGCC influence is just as much of a concern to them.

In Syria, Russia and Iran are interdependent as neither could have successfully protected its interests without the other. So for both Iran and Russia the mutual strategic partnership is instrumental in ensuring the survival of their Syrian ally.

Also the partnership with Russia and China, even if it is not the main factor, contributed to Iran acquiring the military tools required to project power outside her borders when necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Russia has transferred plenty of military technology to Iran. From numerous light weapons to technology used in OTH radars (a game changing asset) and so on.
> 
> Iran all by herself has designed and developed a massive amount of high-tech armaments and components from scratch. However, the claim that Russia never offered Iran anything is not correct.


or oth , radars look like Russians but they are not the same , and have you wondered why what Russians gave us have the range restricted inside our country and what or technician managed to product have a range well beyond Europe border ?


SalarHaqq said:


> Fixed.


they don't care if Iran get balkanized unless it clash with their interest , their nearest ally in middle-east was Syria and look did they were concerned about its balkanization or the country being bombed day and night by a rouge state ?


gambit said:


> The harsh reality is that if all Iran can do is (re)manufacture and the national wealth do not improve to beyond the ME level, 3rd gen defense will be the only thing available for you.


what we invested it , we managed to design the product, for example look at our missiles or our air defense and please not with 3rd of khordad is copy of buk and bavar is copy of S-300 and 15th of khordad is a copy of PAC and missiles like sejjil is copy of Scud and Fateh and its family copy of Iskander .
our airforce is behind because we didn't invest in it enough and that hopefully changed two years ago when supreme leader Scolded armed force for neglecting the branch

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> What they are offering can also be achieved by firing AShCM from Mobile launchers within Iran. Zolafagahr AShBM has a range of 700 KM A-Mehdi AShCM has a range of ~1000 km, Ghader is 330 km


as you said , 4 of them can do the work of 24 fateh like missile , look the difference in price tag


drmeson said:


> e can fire some 100 x AShCM x 100 x AShBM at Saudi+UAE+Kuwait surface fleet simultaneously while Shahed-136 swarms and Shahed-171 can mess up their naval bases, without losing a single man. There you go, the entire enemy navy is gone. F-4E/D fleet cant do that.


if we can fire them in that number and don't deplete our inventory dangerously by the way Su-24 and F-4 can each fire two noor or Qader
so they can be used against enemy asset outside Persian gulf and sea of Oman or inside enemy land just think you practically can made the range of cruise missile like ya-ali twice and each at least can carry 4 of it


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> or oth , radars look like Russians but they are not the same ,



There is enough resemblance to suggest some degree of technical cooperation.



Hack-Hook said:


> and have you wondered why what Russians gave us have the range restricted inside our country and what or technician managed to product have a range well beyond Europe border ?



Those OTH radars' range isn't limited to Iran's borders.



Hack-Hook said:


> they don't care if Iran get balkanized unless it clash with their interest , their nearest ally in middle-east was Syria and look did they were concerned about its balkanization or the country being bombed day and night by a rouge state ?



Yes, they were hence why they joined Iran in pushing back the NATO- and zionist-backed insurgency.

As for the zionist air strikes, they don't even begin to scratch the status quo in Syria. With Russia present in Syria, the zionist cannot do what it'd take to achieve their strategic objective of replacing the current government in Damascus with an anti-Iranian one.

Iran falling will be seen as a direct existential threat by Moscow, because NATO will put russophobic elements in control of the entities resulting from Iran's break up. As they've endeavored to do in every country bordering Russia.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I was happy when we heard of SU-25 and SU-22 being transferred to Iraq and Syria.


sadly IRGC is playing with Su-22 instead of sending it back to Iraq and invest in kowsar project. such waste of resource , the must they can modernize it is as much as India did and we saw how they fared against Pakistan , first bombing some farm instead of their target , and then get blown out of the sky before even seeing enemy airplane .


TheImmortal said:


> In fact, Iran is one (maybe the only) country in the world to get a very high tech US asset of its time (F-14) granted for export.


Israel also was offered F-14 , but their threat was something different from Iran ,we wanted interceptors against Russians airplanes , they wanted Aircraft to bomb Arab countries so we choose f-14 and they choose f-15


TheImmortal said:


> So Russia not giving ToT of SU-35 makes sense as it would be the equivalent of US giving ToT of F-14 back then.


the problem is Russia even don't give it for Mig-29


SalarHaqq said:


> To my knowledge the zionist regime didn't make a request for those assets and in terms of military hardware hadn't had any request turned down by Washington so far.


they wanted F-22, their lobby in congress tried for it by they failed


SalarHaqq said:


> and similar statements suggestive of a western-apologetic / pro-western mindset


well , at least , usa transfered the technology to maintain AH-1 and F-5 to iran , i'd be happy if Russia didn't get out of the Shafaq project we had together and then produce Yak-130 on its own, our didn't deny us upgrading our mig-29 or let not talk about S-300.
whenever people talk about Russia those things will come to my mind.



SalarHaqq said:


> while Russia and China are partners no matter their record in this regard.


that's not learning from history , and repeating past mistake , russia since 400 years ago considered Iran as an adversary that had to tolerate in middle-east . they never considred us an ally or partner .



SalarHaqq said:


> In fact a thread dedicated to the subject should be eye-opening, as it would probably lead to a revision of certain misconceptions long held by many. Apart from the UAE's expected purchase of the Su-75, I can't think of a particularly noteworthy defence contract between Russia and the PGCC regimes. All in all, one can't say Moscow treated them a lot better than Iran when it comes to arms deals.


look at what Russia offered them , not what Russia managed to sale to them because they decided they like American and European equipment better


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Russia fits the criteria to be termed a strategic partner. It conducted a major joint military operation alongside Iran in Syria.


only because their naval base , they didn't care when Israel bombed Syria left and right or USA balkanized it or turkey get another chunk of north of Syria


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> well , at least , usa transfered the technology to maintain AH-1 and F-5 to iran , i'd be happy if Russia didn't get out of the Shafaq project we had together and then produce Yak-130 on its own, our didn't deny us upgrading our mig-29 or let not talk about S-300.



The US did everything to keep Iran dependent, as it does with all its allies in the global south. Under the shah regime Iran was a typical vassal state deprived of sovereignty whose king's palace was riddled with bugging devices installed by the neo-colonial masters, as indicated by Court Minister Alam in his memoirs. This is the price to pay for fancy F-14's Iran could not operate without US involvement, and for some AH-1 and F-5 maintenance facilities.

Today by contrast Iran is one of the most independent nations in the entire world.



Hack-Hook said:


> whenever people talk about Russia those things will come to my mind.



Those who have no desire for a return to vassalage will try not to have a selective memory, therefore the whole picture will come to their minds including the successful joint military operation in Syria, useful Russian weapons transfers, the standing ovations for seyyed Raisi at the Douma etc.



Hack-Hook said:


> that's not learning from history , and repeating past mistake , russia since 400 years ago considered Iran as an adversary that had to tolerate in middle-east . they never considred us an ally or partner .



By that logic the US should never have proceeded to stomping Iran from 1953 onwards. Mossadegh thought they would help Iran against the Britons based on Washington's previous record, but he was proven wrong.

Contemporary Russia is neither the Tsarist empire nor the USSR. Iran and Russia today are strategic partners unlike anytime in the past and this is a fact.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> There is enough resemblance to suggest some degree of technical cooperation.


we get some export version , then our technicians worked hard day and night to reach that , we get a 400km radar and turned it into 1000 and 3000 km real OTH radar of our design. its not because Russia gave us the design of their 3000km radar in-fact their long range oth radars are totally look different from our for example Sepehr Radar


SalarHaqq said:


> Those OTH radars' range isn't limited to Iran's borders.


you can put them at the border and say yes they have range way beyond Iran border , you are welcome to put them at central Iran and get anything of them


SalarHaqq said:


> Yes, they were hence why they joined Iran in pushing back the NATO- and zionist-backed insurgency.


as I say they did that to protect Latakia naval base, nothing else as they didn't do shit about Idlib or the areas that Kurds control. Syria effectively balkanized.


SalarHaqq said:


> As for the zionist air strikes, they don't even begin to scratch the status quo in Syria. With Russia present in Syria, the zionist cannot do what it'd take to achieve their strategic objective of replacing the current government in Damascus with an anti-Iranian one.


they effectively bomb anyplace in Syria and Russia only watch. never see a single time their air-defense get activated 


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran falling will be seen as a direct existential threat by Moscow, because NATO will put russophobic elements in control of the entities resulting from Iran's break up. As they've endeavored to do in every country bordering Russia.


but not balkanization , it mean more conflict in middle east , make way for their increased influence there . it also means one hurdle on the way of their dominance there removed


----------



## drmeson

mack8 said:


> Hi there,
> 
> Is it this one? Got couple more angles saved on my computer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> « Saegeh »: an Iranian twin-fin derivative of the F-5 fighter
> 
> 
> Any ideas about what the hell is this? Another deep F-5 modification? Any info is welcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.secretprojects.co.uk



No I meant one which was practically a Saegheh/Kowsar in Splinter camo but with the turbofan. 

It was hanging from a thread in an air show/exhibition and was presented by HESA.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> we get some export version , then our technicians worked hard day and night to reach that , we get a 400km radar and turned it into 1000 and 3000 km real OTH radar of our design.



It'd be good to know the source for this information. But in any case I wonder how much longer it would have taken Iranian engineers to come up with their own enhanced and modified iteration if Russia hadn't agreed to supply this alleged export version to serve as a basis to work on. Given that no other country would have been willing nor capable to do so. 

The very fact that Iran would purchase any version from them at all shows Iran saw some benefit in it. Otherwise Iranian decision makers are not exactly the type to squander even a rial on unnecessary imported weapons systems. And also let's not forget the Russian are meanwhile familiar enough with Iran's capabilities to be aware that the limited range radar they supplied Iran with will be massively upgraded.



Hack-Hook said:


> as I say they did that to protect Latakia naval base, nothing else as they didn't do shit about Idlib or the areas that Kurds control. Syria effectively balkanized.



No, they pushed all the way to Palmyra and Deir ez-Zour. They don't care about their base in Latakia as much as about Syria in its entirety. Stepping into Kurdish-controlled areas would have meant direct military confrontation with the US and several other NATO regimes. The cost-benefit analysis of such an escalation was negative.



Hack-Hook said:


> they effectively bomb anyplace in Syria and Russia only watch. never see a single time their air-defense get activated



It isn't relevant what the zionists do as long as it doesn't affect the status quo in Syria. Same as with their inconsequential sabotage attacks and assassinations in Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> but not balkanization , it mean more conflict in middle east , make way for their increased influence there . it also means one hurdle on the way of their dominance there removed



There will be no increased Russian influence if Iran is divided into several entities at the hands of the zionists and the Americans. The latter are not mad nor idiotic to forego placing their own lackeys into power in each one of the multiple successor states to Iran under such a scenario, and using the northern ones to destabilize Russia.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> as you said , 4 of them can do the work of 24 fateh like missile , look the difference in price tag
> 
> if we can fire them in that number and don't deplete our inventory dangerously by the way Su-24 and F-4 can each fire two noor or Qader
> so they can be used against enemy asset outside Persian gulf and sea of Oman or inside enemy land just think you practically can made the range of cruise missile like ya-ali twice and each at least can carry 4 of it



But the enemy can shoot down a 5 out of some 20 fired Zolfagahar AShBM at a carrier the rest will still hit and it's a victory. But can we call it a victory if we lose 2-3 out of 4 x F-4E in the process? The men in them die, the planes are lost in the sea. 

It's an old plane with a large RCS, we have accurate Ballistic missiles and Cruise missiles along with a 300+ strong fleet of UCAVS to do the attack job.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The US did everything to keep Iran dependent, as it does with all its allies in the global south. Under the shah regime Iran was a typical vassal state deprived of sovereignty whose king's palace was riddled with bugging devices installed by the neo-colonial masters, as indicated by Court Minister Alam in his memoirs. This is the price to pay for fancy F-14's Iran could not operate without US involvement, and for some AH-1 and F-5 maintenance facilities.
> 
> Today by contrast Iran is one of the most independent nations in the entire world.


HESA is result of that , what's the result of Russia cooperation with Iran ?
I'm baffled why you worship Russia so much? isn't revolution slogan is "no to *West*, no to *East* , only Islamic Revolution "

you call me western apologist , because i say instead of outdated Russians equipment we must to invest the money in our country in semi conductor field , and Metallurgy field so we can produce our equipment , and here what you promote is no we must not do that , we must go and hand over it to Russia and buy some monkey version of their outdated equipment .
wonder if truly I'm western apologist or you are Russia apologist .



SalarHaqq said:


> To those who have no admiration for the west nor any desire for a return to vassalage, other events will come to mind as well, such as the succesful joint military operation in Syria, the multiple weapons transfers from Russia, the standing ovations for seyyed Raisi at the Douma etc.


which weapon transfer and what successful operation ? all the weapon we got from Russia was out dated watered down version that our technician had to fix and any think we didn't fix bit us back (Like Tor Fiasco) and last time checked Syria is still three part and Russia don't care at all because Latakia is safe 


SalarHaqq said:


> By that logic the US should never have proceeded to stomping Iran from 1953 onwards. Mossadegh thought they would help Iran against the Britons based on Washington's previous record, but he was proven wrong.


what Mosaddeq must have learned , he didn't learn if he looked at history he had seen that at the time of WW2 when Russia and England attacked Iran when we announced neutrality , Iran government wrote a later to USA and asked for help and the answer they received was "to protect some freedom some sacrifice must be made"

its a lesson from history Mosaddeq failed to learn and it seems you also don't want to learn
you must rely on yourself , nobody will help you at the time of your need ,rely on yourself, stand on your foot.
some history lesson for you.
at the time of WW1 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
at the time of WW2 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
when USA and England made a coupe against our elected government who came to our help ?
after the revolution when Iraq with the backing of..... (I'm sure you are well aware of the complete list) attacked us who came to our help ?
in UN when they voted against us based on fake evidence (which are not presented to anyone till this day only one member said we get our hand on a laptop that belong to an Iran official that shows Iran is making nuke and we can't show it to you) did, Russia , China , France , England or USA or any other member said WTH, stop this circus?


that's lessons from history for you , what you learn from them is up to you



SalarHaqq said:


> It'd be good to know the source for this information. But in any case I wonder how much longer it would have taken for Iranian engineers to come up with their enhanced and modified iterations if this alleged export version hadn't been supplied by Russia to serve as a basis to work on. Given that no other country would have been willing nor capable to do so. The very fact that Iran would purchase any version from them at all shows Iran saw some benefit in it. Otherwise Iranian decision makers are not exactly the type to squander even a rial on unnecessary imported weapons systems.


name the weapon , i say what we get ands later what we turned it into .
please be specific on the weapon , not a vague category of weapons



drmeson said:


> But the enemy can shoot down a 5 out of some 20 fired Zolfagahar AShBM at a carrier the rest will still hit and it's a victory. But can we call it a victory if we lose 2-3 out of 4 x F-4E in the process? The men in them die, the planes are lost in the sea.
> 
> It's an old plane with a large RCS, we have accurate Ballistic missiles and Cruise missiles along with a 300+ strong fleet of UCAVS to do the attack job.


the F-4 can fire their missile out of the protective envelope of the enemy air defense , and is zo-alfaqar anti-ship ? I doubt that .
Persian gulf and hormoz are and they have limited range , the noor and qader fired from fast aircraft from altitude will have range way beyond 180-300km when they are fired from ground


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No, they pushed all the way to Palmyra and Deir ez-Zour. They don't care about their base in Latakia as much as about Syria in its entirety. Stepping into Kurdish-controlled areas would have meant direct military confrontation with the US and several other NATO regimes. The cost-benefit analysis of such an escalation was negative.


effectively forgetting about eastern part of the country and strategic border with Iraq
and now they are concerned about cost benefit. interestingly turkey didn't have such concerns and wonder why they also had such concerns about Idlib


SalarHaqq said:


> It isn't relevant what the zionists do as long as it doesn't affect the status quo in Syria. Same as with their inconsequential sabotage attacks and assassinations in Iran.


it cost Syria degenerate their capabilities , made a laughing stock of its government , do i need to continue .
by the way why this status que nonsense don't have retaliate against Israel attack in it , right now Syria don't fight anybody ,why it tolerate those bombings ?


SalarHaqq said:


> There will be no increased Russian influence if Iran is divided into several entities at the hands of the zionists and the Americans. The latter are not mad nor idiotic to forego placing their own lackeys into power in each one of the multiple successor states to Iran under such a scenario, and using the northern ones to destabilize Russia.


you are wrong on that


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> HESA is result of that , what's the result of Russia cooperation with Iran ?
> I'm baffled why you worship Russia so much? isn't revolution slogan is "no to *West*, no to *East* , only Islamic Revolution "
> 
> you call me western apologist , because i say instead of outdated Russians equipment we must to invest the money in our country in semi conductor field , and Metallurgy field so we can produce our equipment , and here what you promote is no we must not do that , we must go and hand over it to Russia and buy some monkey version of their outdated equipment .
> wonder if truly I'm western apologist or you are Russia apologist .
> 
> 
> which weapon transfer and what successful operation ? all the weapon we got from Russia was out dated watered down version that our technician had to fix and any think we didn't fix bit us back (Like Tor Fiasco) and last time checked Syria is still three part and Russia don't care at all because Latakia is safe
> 
> what Mosaddeq must have learned , he didn't learn if he looked at history he had seen that at the time of WW2 when Russia and England attacked Iran when we announced neutrality , Iran government wrote a later to USA and asked for help and the answer they received was "to protect some freedom some sacrifice must be made"
> 
> its a lesson from history Mosaddeq failed to learn and it seems you also don't want to learn
> you must rely on yourself , nobody will help you at the time of your need ,rely on yourself, stand on your foot.
> some history lesson for you.
> at the time of WW1 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
> at the time of WW2 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
> when USA and England made a coupe against our elected government who came to our help ?
> after the revolution when Iraq with the backing of..... (I'm sure you are well aware of the complete list) attacked us who came to our help ?
> in UN when they voted against us based on fake evidence (which are not presented to anyone till this day only one member said we get our hand on a laptop that belong to an Iran official that shows Iran is making nuke and we can't show it to you) did, Russia , China , France , England or USA or any other member said WTH, stop this circus?
> 
> 
> that's lessons from history for you , what you learn from them is up to you
> 
> 
> name the weapon , i say what we get ands later what we turned it into .
> please be specific on the weapon , not a vague category of weapons
> 
> 
> the F-4 can fire their missile out of the protective envelope of the enemy air defense , and is zo-alfaqar anti-ship ? I doubt that .
> Persian gulf and hormoz are and they have limited range , the noor and qader fired from fast aircraft from altitude will have range way beyond 180-300km when they are fired from ground



Good luck sending a 2 x AShCM carrying F-4E to face Rafale, EF-2000, F-15. Like I said, even if they score the hit, it won't be a victory because 50% will be shot. Now same goes for missiles, it will still be a victory because no man-to-man encounter happened, and no life was lost. 

Qader has a confirmed range of 300+ km (330) from truck launch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> HESA is result of that , what's the result of Russia cooperation with Iran ?



The HESA we know is a result of the Islamic Republic's focus on self-sufficiency. There was none of that under the shah regime, and none of it would have been thinkable under the political conditions prevailing at the time.

Also see, here you are crediting the US regime for Islamic Iran's achievements.



Hack-Hook said:


> I'm baffled why you worship Russia so much? isn't revolution slogan is "no to *West*, no to *East* , only Islamic Revolution "



No such thing on my part, I'm simply busy undercutting certain talking points against a strategic partner of Iran, talking points originating from quarters that long for a return to the pre-revolutionary status of subjugation to the west and the zionists.

"East" in the slogan "neither East nor West" was referencing the Soviet empire. It ceased to exist, and so will the US empire by God's grace.

Actually, Hezbollahis have always been the ones championing independence, including vis à vis Iran's strategic partners. Liberals however openly question the very concepts of independence and sovereignty, they gladly embrace vassalage, dissolution into the "universal community" and globalism.



Hack-Hook said:


> you call me western apologist ,



The statement wasn't directed at you personally.



Hack-Hook said:


> because i say instead of outdated Russians equipment we must to invest the money in our country in semi conductor field , and Metallurgy field so we can produce our equipment , and here what you promote is no we must not do that , we must go and hand over it to Russia and buy some monkey version of their outdated equipment .



Not at all. My problem isn't with this argument of yours. This should be apparent from the statements I quoted. The day you see me advocate the import of equipment from Russia_ rather than_ production of domestically developed material at home, you'll be most welcome to level this kind of accusation against me.

What I have an issue with are implicit or indirect suggestions that Iran was better off as a downtrodden vassal of north American and zionist oppressors in comparison to her present day status, namely that of a fiercely independent nation benefiting from accessory partnerships with fellow adversaries of the empire, irregardless of the latters' level of assistance.

Why not simply remind that Iran's focus should remain on autonomous weapons development, and leave it at that? Why insinuate that Russia compares unfavorably to the US as far as their relations with pre- or post-Revolution Iran are concerned? Why applaud western propaganda about Russian weapons systems being massively inferior to western ones?

From a patriotic or revolutionary perspective, there's something wrong about narratives that bash Russia and China instead of Iran's actual existential enemy ie the USA regime. Unlike China and Russia, Washington is working around the clock to bring about Iran's definitive demise, whereas Moscow and Beijing happen to be partners to Iran, be they of minor relevance, of questionable reliability and of deep imperfection. By the way, someone in Iran should point Beijing and Moscow to all the trash talk Saudi International is spewing against them in Farsi.

Also, I should add that the reason I welcome strategic cooperation between Iran and Russia is merely because we share a common rabid enemy. It's simply a matter of strategic interests, that's it. Liberal and other western-apologetic Iranians however are ideologically attracted by the west, they view the western political order (secular liberal "democracy") as the only legitimate one and are desperate to implement it in Iran. Same goes for western "lifestyles" they are admiring of. That's yet another key difference between us and them.



Hack-Hook said:


> which weapon transfer and what successful operation ? all the weapon we got from Russia was out dated watered down version that our technician had to fix and any think we didn't fix bit us back (Like Tor Fiasco) and last time checked Syria is still three part and Russia don't care at all because Latakia is safe



Multiple weapons systems or know-how obtained from Russia are of excellent quality. The T-72S MBT is an example, another is the Krasnopol laser-guided artillery round or at least samples thereof based upon which Iran is producing its own variant (Washington sanctioned a Russian firm for this), yet other examples include the Kilo submarines, AK-103 assault rifles, RPG-29's, RPO-A's, MRO-A's, and so on and so forth. The Tor-M1 is also a top of the line AD system and examples received by Iran had not been sabotaged by Russia.

If all of these proved to be such terribly catastrophic experiences, why was Iran willing to go for a repeat after the first couple of instances?

Let's put this straight:

* Does Iran owe her current military prowess to Russia? No, domestic efforts have been the single most important factor in this regard.

* Is Russia an enemy? Has it never sold Iran anything of worth? Wrong, they are a strategic partner and weapons systems they supplied Iran with have played their part, as modest as it may be, in boosting Iran's military power.

Systematic and organized blackening of Russia, characteristic of the western-apologetic reformist and moderate factions in Iran as well as of the US-backed opposition in exile is therefore decidedly disproportional and uncalled for. The agenda underlying these efforts should be plain obvious as well, I frankly don't know how there can be doubts about this.



Hack-Hook said:


> what Mosaddeq must have learned , he didn't learn if he looked at history he had seen that at the time of WW2 when Russia and England attacked Iran when we announced neutrality , Iran government wrote a later to USA and asked for help and the answer they received was "to protect some freedom some sacrifice must be made"
> 
> its a lesson from history Mosaddeq failed to learn and it seems you also don't want to learn
> you must rely on yourself , nobody will help you at the time of your need ,rely on yourself, stand on your foot.
> some history lesson for you.



I didn't claim Mossadegh was right to speculate that the US might help. But that Mossadegh shouldn't have extrapolated on whatever constructive behaviour he thought the US had shown in the past, nor should he have consider such past behaviour by Washington as a rule of thumb applicable to every period of history.



Hack-Hook said:


> at the time of WW1 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
> at the time of WW2 Iran was neutral but get attacked ,who came to our help ?
> when USA and England made a coupe against our elected government who came to our help ?
> after the revolution when Iraq with the backing of..... (I'm sure you are well aware of the complete list) attacked us who came to our help ?
> in UN when they voted against us based on fake evidence (which are not presented to anyone till this day only one member said we get our hand on a laptop that belong to an Iran official that shows Iran is making nuke and we can't show it to you) did, Russia , China , France , England or USA or any other member said WTH, stop this circus?
> 
> that's lessons from history for you , what you learn from them is up to you



As said, I am not trying to argue against self-reliance nor to suggest Iran should expect or count on decisive outside help during a major crisis situation. My point was rather that previous Russian regimes having been hostile towards Iran does not imply the same is holding true today.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> effectively forgetting about eastern part of the country and strategic border with Iraq
> and now they are concerned about cost benefit.



Look up the battle of Palmyra, where Russian forces helped in crushing "I"SIS.

You may as well suggest Iran and the Syrian government itself aren't interested in reclaiming the eastern part of Syria, but that would be just as incorrect. Obviously the reason for not directly crossing into those areas is the local presence of military contingents from NATO regimes, so it wouldn't be cost effective at the moment.



Hack-Hook said:


> interestingly turkey didn't have such concerns and wonder why they also had such concerns about Idlib



Turkey benefited from the fact that Damascus and allies had the liberation of Syria's most strategic regions on their plate.



Hack-Hook said:


> it cost Syria degenerate their capabilities , made a laughing stock of its government , do i need to continue .
> by the way why this status que nonsense don't have retaliate against Israel attack in it , right now Syria don't fight anybody ,why it tolerate those bombings ?



I addressed this already: the Syrian government is safe and sound, zionist air strikes are completely futile. Iran too has been derided by her enemies (and some Iranians influenced by enemy propaganda) as weak and passive towards zionist-orchestrated sabotage, yet we know very well how and why these narratives are missing the point.



Hack-Hook said:


> you are wrong on that



Don't think so.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Good luck sending a 2 x AShCM carrying F-4E to face Rafale, EF-2000, F-15. Like I said, even if they score the hit, it won't be a victory because 50% will be shot. Now same goes for missiles, it will still be a victory because no man-to-man encounter happened, and no life was lost.
> 
> Qader has a confirmed range of 300+ km (330) from truck launch.


well , you are not supposed to first them over the target unprotected , we are saying cruise missiles , you can protect them with something and they are supposed to release their payload 300-400km away 
that 300km from truk easily can be translated to 400-500km if released at highspeed and altitude and that's something F-4 and Su-24 can do



SalarHaqq said:


> The HESA we know is a result of the Islamic Republic's focus on self-sufficiency. There was none of that under the shah regime, and none of it would have been thinkable under the political conditions prevailing at the time.
> 
> Also see, here you are crediting the US regime for Islamic Iran's achievements.


the equipment was there before revolution . 
have you asked yourself why they tinker with American equipment but don't do anything with Russians or European ones?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the equipment was there before revolution .



The equipment to produce what HESA is producing nowadays was not there prior to the Islamic Revolution. The US never sold Iran a production line for F-5's. Moreover none of the key electronic components of the Kowsar have anything to do with those of the original F-5. And none of them are based on US-made models.



Hack-Hook said:


> have you asked yourself why they tinker with American equipment but don't do anything with Russians or European ones?



Iran did modify and upgrade Russian weaponry as well. You stated as much with regards to the long range radar. We could add examples such as the S-200 (several upgrades over the years), the SA-6 and other such systems.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The T-72S MBT is an example


did they allow us to produce engine for it ? no they want us go to them for the engine


SalarHaqq said:


> Krasnopol laser-guided artillery round or at least samples thereof based upon which Iran is producing its own variant (Washington sanctioned a Russian firm for this),


i didnt saw that round in iran and they are not that similar












SalarHaqq said:


> Kilo submarines


that they refused to upgrade and they gave us them when they were srelling anything after fall of ussr


SalarHaqq said:


> AK-103 assault rifles


that effectively stopped our indigenous rifle production , they gave that to us after we start producing our rifles


SalarHaqq said:


> The Tor-M1 is also a top of the line AD system and examples received by Iran had not been sabotaged by Russia.


they were the first versions of Tor-m1 with limited channels ,


SalarHaqq said:


> RPG-29's, RPO-A's, MRO-A's


we already got our hands on different variant from other sources and the one we get from Russia for example kronet was export version that in one case hezbollah fired 3 or 5 I don't recall exactly at an Israeli jeep and only one hit it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The equipment to produce what HESA is producing nowadays was not there prior to the Islamic Revolution. The US never sold Iran a production line for F-5's. Moreover none of the key electronic components of the Kowsar have anything to do with those of the original F-5. And none of them are based on US-made models.


the one that kept our airforce airworthy during the war were there and the rest built upon them so we see current Hesa
and the deal was there top maintain F-5 and more , have you seen usa go to any court for iran building aircraft based on it , nor the less if we build anything based on YF-17 they also can't go to any court and complain


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran did modify and upgrade Russian weaponry as well. You stated as much with regards to the long range radar. We could add examples such as the S-200 (several upgrades over the years), the SA-6 and other such systems.


not aircraft , the only one is An-140 and we got it from Ukraine not Russia
on other hand in aircraft we have shafaq that they abandoned in mid work and later produced Yak-130 or mig-29 they refused to upgrade or prov ide engine for the fleet


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> did they allow us to produce engine for it ? no they want us go to them for the engine



Because before 1979, western regimes allowed Iran to produce tank engines... not. How unforgivably scandalous of Russia that they agreed to sell Iran a top notch MBT, agreed to assembly inside Iran, but wouldn't go as far as acquiescing to engine ToT! Only a sworn enemy state would display such audacity! Marg bar Rusie, marg bar Chin! 

Honestly, Russia supplied Iran with a very useful item in the T-72S. Isn't this shifting the goal posts, the question was whether Iran received anything of worth from Russia and the answer is therefore yes.



Hack-Hook said:


> i didnt saw that round in iran and they are not that similar
> View attachment 857787



US intelligence will have sanctioned that Russian company based on some kind of data.



Hack-Hook said:


> that they refused to upgrade and they gave us them when they were srelling anything after fall of ussr



Doesn't take away from the fact that they were sold to Iran by Russia's choice and that they're an important asset in the Iranian Navy to this day.



Hack-Hook said:


> that effectively stopped our indigenous rifle production , they gave that to us after we start producing our rifles



Iran's continuing to produce certain locally designed rifles. Moreover we can't have it both ways ie complain that Russia supposedly didn't sell Iran anything to write home about, and then also complain that by selling something valuable, they will impede domestic production.



Hack-Hook said:


> they were the first versions of Tor-m1 with limited channels ,



They were still sophisticated weapons and in use by Russian armed forces. Also Iran appears to have received or locally developed certain components from the Tor-M2.



Hack-Hook said:


> we already got our hands on different variant from other sources and the one we get from Russia for example kronet was export version that in one case hezbollah fired 3 or 5 I don't recall exactly at an Israeli jeep and only one hit it



You're suggesting Russia deliberately sold Iran faulty equipment? That's absurd. Also I'd like to see evidence for Iran receiving the cited rocket-propelled grenade launchers from other sources.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the one that kept our airforce airworthy during the war were there and the rest built upon them so we see current Hesa



Iran had to resort to smuggling in spare parts and to locally manufacture tools and machinery in order to keep her fleet airworthy. The F-5 was the least instrumental of Iran's fighter jets, and I very much doubt even that could be fully maintained merely using the gear acquired under the shah.

HESA's current output wouldn't have been remotely possible with any of the equipment purchased before 1979.



Hack-Hook said:


> and the deal was there top maintain F-5 and more , have you seen usa go to any court for iran building aircraft based on it , nor the less if we build anything based on YF-17 they also can't go to any court and complain
> 
> not aircraft , the only one is An-140 and we got it from Ukraine not Russia
> on other hand in aircraft we have shafaq that they abandoned in mid work and later produced Yak-130 or mig-29 they refused to upgrade or prov ide engine for the fleet



The Iranian government was just another measly US vassal back then, it's authoritarian monarch having his palace rigged with listening devices installed by the Americans and not being authorized to conduct independent policy at the service of Iran's national interests.

This is the price to pay for an F-5 maintenance facility and other bread crumbs, but nothing like the domestic defence industry Iran is enjoying today. You can't take this fundamental variable out of the picture when comparing these things. Sorry, but for my part I will happily opt for current parameters _any day of the week_.

And by the way, Iran did upgrade her Su-22 fighters, which are of Russian origin. Didn't trigger any judicial response from Moscow.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Because western regimes allowed Iran to produce tank engines before 1979...


don't recall saying that at all. I said if we invested a quarter of what we paid Russia for those engines in producing tank engine we could built that . what i say is if instead of paying Germans design a car engine for us every 5-6 years and make a celebration for it as national engine , we give the contract to our young engineers (the ones that because they can't find adequate job here , go to Germany and get employed there ) we already have mastered the art of buildings light ands probably heavy engines by now


SalarHaqq said:


> US intelligence will have sanctioned that Russian company based on some kind of data.


don't knew but not certainly for transferring the knew how of producing those shells


SalarHaqq said:


> Doesn't take away from the fact that they were sold to Iran and that they're an important asset in the Iranian Navy.


to me the important asset is Fateh Submarine not Kilos and sadly the project seriously is in needs of investment, 


SalarHaqq said:


> Firstly Iran's continuing to produce certain locally designed rifles, secondly you can't have it both ways: complain that Russia supposedly didn't sell anything to write home about to Iran, and then complain that by selling something of worth, they impeded production of domestic types.


my complain is not they don't give us anything , my complain is they give us equipment only after we produced something of the same caliber or better
and some people in our military instead of giving the contract to Iranian company , gladly give it to foreign company as if we owe them a never ending gratitude


SalarHaqq said:


> They were still highly sophisticated weapons and still in use by Russian armed forces. Also Iran appears to have received or locally developed certain components from the Tor-M2.


no , we simply upgraded those tor-m1 ourself after facing its limitation and gladly we soon move to our own design after it become ready for being incorporated in our armed force (sadly it take several years between unveiling and being used by armed force)


SalarHaqq said:


> You're suggesting Russia deliberately sold Iran faulty equipment? Absurd contention. Also I'd like to see evidence for Iran receiving the cited rocket-propelled grenade launchers from other sources.


not faulty one , but the equipment lack consistency in hitting target , maybe its because of subpar Russians electronic , maybe its because of error in its software maybe because of something else . what i say is when they sold us them they forget to tell us that part.
and at least RPG-29 was widespread in Syria



SalarHaqq said:


> And by the way, Iran did upgrade her Su-22 fighters, which are of Russian origin.


oh those su-22 , what exactly Iran did with them ? and how we managed that?
have you wondered why the equipment we showed for it all relay on the weapon itself for hitting the target not airplane . we didn't touched the airplane that much , we just made it compatible with weapon we made for our F-4s and believe me the weapons we had or developed for our F-4s are in a different league compared to what Russia ever produced for Su-22


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> don't recall saying that at all.



True however you seemed to be insinuating Iran's defence industry owes the US regime more.



Hack-Hook said:


> I said if we invested a quarter of what we paid Russia for those engines in producing tank engine we could built that . what i say is if instead of paying Germans design a car engine for us every 5-6 years and make a celebration for it as national engine , we give the contract to our young engineers (the ones that because they can't find adequate job here , go to Germany and get employed there ) we already have mastered the art of buildings light ands probably heavy engines by now



Possible, I won't argue that. My only counter-point being the time this would have taken with regards to the urgency of acquiring a modern MBT. Still, with these T-72S kits Russia gave Iran a much better deal than anything western regimes had been willing to offer prior to the Revolution.



Hack-Hook said:


> don't knew but not certainly for transferring the knew how of producing those shells



In that case Iran may have received a good couple of laser-guided shells to study in view of technological indigenization. Russians are aware of Iranian proficiency at reverse engineering, they know full well that selling Iran only three to four examples of such items equals potential Iranian-made equivalents just a few years down the line.



Hack-Hook said:


> to me the important asset is Fateh Submarine not Kilos and sadly the project seriously is in needs of investment



Agreed, Fateh is of much greater significance but for a lengthy period the Kilos used to be Iran's only attack submarines, and some western analysts continue to view them as a potential threat to this day or did so until some time ago at least.



Hack-Hook said:


> my complain is not they don't give us anything , my complain is they give us equipment only after we produced something of the same caliber or better
> and some people in our military instead of giving the contract to Iranian company , gladly give it to foreign company as if we owe them a never ending gratitude



Much better than fielding glitzy overpriced F-14's while being deprived of sovereignty.

And frankly, I don't know of too many countries as focused as Iran on self-sufficiency, especially in the military realm. So these people won't be excessively numerous or influential.



Hack-Hook said:


> no , we simply upgraded those tor-m1 ourself after facing its limitation



An upgrade that looks suspiciously similar to the Russian original, but okay. In any case it's another item obtained from Russia which Iran could work on. How many more years would Iranian experts have had to spend on their drawing boards and on testing ranges if the 'flawed' Tor-M1 wasn't available to them?



Hack-Hook said:


> not faulty one , but the equipment lack consistency in hitting target , maybe its because of subpar Russians electronic , maybe its because of error in its software maybe because of something else . what i say is when they sold us them they forget to tell us that part



But what merchant will advertize possible shortcomings in the commodities they have on offer? Heard similar stories about western weaponry though, latest example from Ukrainians complaining about the garbage quality of much vaunted US M-777 howitzers (which western propaganda attempted to sell as a "game changer" in the war).

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> True however you seem to be insinuating Iran's defence industry owes the US regime more.


Iran defense doctrine owes to Iran the most , its true that regular army inherited many of its war doctrine from USA universities , but overall Iran defense doctrine is asymmetrical warfare and that's owed to people like Shahid Chamran not any western or eastern country.


SalarHaqq said:


> Yes possible, but then Iran would have had to spend far more time on developing the remaining parts of an indigenous MBT, wouldn't she. Still, with these T-72S kits Russia offered Iran a much better deal than anything western regimes had been willing to do prior to the Revolution.


if in last twenty years they didn't manage those parts in Zo-alfaqar project i don't knew what to say . but if you look at Iranian military project it was always propulsion that held us back and that problem owed to two things or chronic problem in producing semiconductors that nobody seems to be interested in and our problem with modern metallurgy , if we fix those two the limit will be Sky
and that needs investment in science based companies that work in those fields


SalarHaqq said:


> Fateh is of greater significance but for years the Kilos used to be Iran's only attack submarines, and some western analysts continue to view them as a potential threat to this day (or at least until some time ago).


the kilos are potential threat ,but honestly the real threat is project 636 not project 877
they are relatively silent but they lack modern equipment and design features , Iran navy needs to put them aside in favor of Fateh and our next generation submarine . just with the money we spend on maintain and overhauling them , God know how many fateh we could build or we could develop of fuel cell propulsion system for submarines to truly make them black hole .
and again don't forget when they sold those submarines to us .


SalarHaqq said:


> An upgrade that looks suspiciously similar to the Russian original, but okay.


not really , our radars on our shortrange air defense are different and a hack we made for Tor-M1 are also look different from the Russian one if you look closer


SalarHaqq said:


> What merchant will advertize possible shortcomings in the commodities they have on offer? I've heard similar stories about western weaponry, latest example from Ukrainians complaining about the garbage quality of much vaunted US M-777 howitzers (which western propaganda tried to sell as a "game changer" in the war  ).


m-777 can be a game changer(to some extent as its towed not self propelled) but not the monkey version stripped down that Ukraine got.
west don't care about Ukraine , they don't even consider them as European , they just get a golden opportunity to weaken Russia war machine , if you had found such opportunity to weaken Israel war machine would you let it pass ?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Iran defense doctrine owes to Iran the most , its true that regular army inherited many of its war doctrine from USA universities , but overall Iran defense doctrine is asymmetrical warfare and that's owed to people like Shahid Chamran not any western or eastern country.



I was talking defence industries rather than doctrine. Infrastructure-wise as well as in terms of scientific and technical expertise, Iran's defence industries owe hardly anything to the pre-Revolution period.

When it comes to weaponry sampled for reverse-engineering, some items transferred by the west before 1979 saw prominent domestic upgrades and production (like the TOW missiles), but they were sold to Iran at a time when she had no serious reverse-engineering competence. Otherwise NATO regimes would never have equipped Iran with said armaments.

The Russian Federation however made some weapons systems available to Iran all the while of being aware that they'll get disassembled, studied in minute detail and that they'll end up boosting Iran's domestic defence industries. Because meanwhile Iran had acquired solid reverse-engineering and indigenous R&D and manufacturing skills.

This shows that in the global south the US regime is looking to subdue its clients, whereas Russia is ready to establish ties on equal footing. Of course Moscow may hold back on making attractive offers but at least it will not condition bilateral relations upon vassalage, unike the zio-American empire.

Now when it comes to doctrine, indeed the Islamic Republic's conception is opposite to US thinking in practically every aspect (Iranian focus on asymmetry over hubris-laden, self-defeating race for so-called "full spectrum dominance"; reliance upon missiles, UCAV's, light submarines and so on over an expensive air force, bulky destroyers etc).



Hack-Hook said:


> just with the money we spend on maintain and overhauling them , God know how many fateh we could build or we could develop of fuel cell propulsion system for submarines to truly make them black hole .



When the Kilos were purchased Iranian naval industries hadn't matured enough to give birth to something like the Fateh or even Ghadir. Thus the Kilos offered kind of a stop gap solution in the underwater department.



Hack-Hook said:


> not really , our radars on our shortrange air defense are different and a hack we made for Tor-M1 are also look different from the Russian one if you look closer



I'm referring to a radar-like square component (don't know what it exactly is) present on Iranian Tor-M1's but similar if not identical in looks to a certain part of the Tor-M2.



Hack-Hook said:


> m-777 can be a game changer(to some extent as its towed not self propelled) but not the monkey version stripped down that Ukraine got.



I've no doubt that Russia would overcome the standard version of these howitzers as well. Ukraine would need far more than that to be able to turn the tide.



Hack-Hook said:


> west don't care about Ukraine , they don't even consider them as European , they just get a golden opportunity to weaken Russia war machine ,



Western regimes don't care about any of their so-called "allies", in fact vassals. And didn't care about Iran prior to the Revolution either (just saw Iran as one of many tools in their deterrence strategy against the USSR and as an enforcer of zio-American interests in the Persian Gulf).

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Ich

Mh, over all me have the impression that Iran developed well if i take all the circumstances in the last 40 years into account. Iran managed to hold open the door to not get bombed/nuked while developing. Me think there are some really wise men in Iran making Iran still is alive and day to day stronger.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

Ich said:


> Mh, over all me have the impression that Iran developed well if i take all the circumstances in the last 40 years into account. Iran managed to hold open the door to not get bombed/nuked while developing. Me think there are some really wise men in Iran making Iran still is alive and day to day stronger.


I’ll go further and say Iran would NOT have developed as well if not under the circumstances you alluded to. It would be close to an SA look n feel but with extremes in wealth and poverty and no tech worth mentioning. One can imagine it would be 'Turkey-like' as well. Neither good alternatives.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## strateger

Hypothetical situation. Let's say there is an airbase in Syria for Iran to work alongside Russian and Syrian forces.

Iran has the following assets in the base.

1.) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics.
2.) 24 Kowsar
3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters
4.) 12 Shahed-129 drones
5.) Fateh-110 missiles and launchers 
6.) Bavar-373 air defense systems
7.) Tor air defense systems

Same situation... but in southern Ukraine instead, given what we know about current conflict.

How lethal is this deployment? Are the modernized/new SU-22's ineffective? Get shot down? Kowsar? Etc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

strateger said:


> Hypothetical situation. Let's say there is an airbase in Syria for Iran to work alongside Russian and Syrian forces.
> 
> Iran has the following assets in the base.
> 
> 1.) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics.
> 2.) 24 Kowsar
> 3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters
> 4.) 12 Shahed-129 drones
> 5.) Fateh-110 missiles and launchers
> 6.) Bavar-373 air defense systems
> 7.) Tor air defense systems
> 
> Same situation... but in southern Ukraine instead, given what we know about current conflict.
> 
> How lethal is this deployment? Are the modernized/new SU-22's ineffective? Get shot down? Kowsar? Etc



Depends on how much PGMs you have to use. That many aircraft will burn thru hundreds of PGMs a month. If being pushed to the limit of full scale war.

Depends on knowledge of Ukraine’s radar radiation and failure as well as location of long range air defense. If either is caught in radar, high likehood of being shot down by a modern air defense system. Ukraine has shot down SU-30 and SU-34 (among other jets), but mostly SU-25’s

Right now what’s holding Russia back besides major UAVs with PGM assets is PGMs for their helicopters and fighter jets. A lot of FAB’s being dropped.

Russia is playing conservative because it doesn’t know where all Ukrainian air defense is. West keeps shipping more in. Thus long distance strikes are done by CMs and fighter jets are usually near the front line. Which again was Soviet Union doctrine anyway. They weren’t an air superiority force like USAF. There goal was to always defend the POC (point of control) on the frontline and hammer the enemy while keep enemy fighters away from the frontline as much as possible.

Thus Russia needs:

1) PGMs

2) Drones like Ababil and Shahed armed with PGMs for behind enemy lines strategic targeting

3) Iranian cobra is not as strong as Aligator, but Iranian Cobras can fly with better inventory of PGM than Alligator right now

4) SU-22/Kowsar is not better than SU-34....again issue is lack of long distance PGMs not the aircraft itself

5) F-110 is more accurate than Iskander based on limited data. But Iskanders haven’t changed the course of war and how much of an upgrade is it to use a BM over a CM when enemy air defenses are only targeting high value aircraft and choppers? 

The issue here is real time critical targeting data. You can only strike what you see or known from data gathering. So unless the target bank is filled with HVTs, F-110 won’t change the course of the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

strateger said:


> Hypothetical situation. Let's say there is an airbase in Syria for Iran to work alongside Russian and Syrian forces.
> 
> Iran has the following assets in the base.
> 
> 1.) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics.
> 2.) 24 Kowsar
> 3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters
> 4.) 12 Shahed-129 drones
> 5.) Fateh-110 missiles and launchers
> 6.) Bavar-373 air defense systems
> 7.) Tor air defense systems
> 
> Same situation... but in southern Ukraine instead, given what we know about current conflict.
> 
> How lethal is this deployment? Are the modernized/new SU-22's ineffective? Get shot down? Kowsar? Etc


that airbase i say have inadequate air defense , have wrong drones , and about Su-22s

well we modified the su-22 to be able to use weapons we developed for our f-4 those weapons and bombs have a range of 60 - 100km and the cruise missiles even more
the Russians problem is not the type of airplane but the type of ammunition it use and so in the mentioned base if we send them iron bombs , those airplanes don't have any chance for long survival or do any meaningful bombing , if we send smart bomb and glide weapons and cruise missile, they are not bad bombers.

as for missile instead of Shahed - 129 my choice would be Mohajer - 6 or Ababil - 5 thats in the case the operation area is not contested , then i prefer to use Saeqeh and Shahed -191 and variety of low rcs drone . also some suicide drones.
for the missiles instead of fateh-110 in such if the place is near enemy border , my choice is Fajr-5 if it has some distance then Fateh-110 is ok but consider the fact that Fateh-110 is old tech and i don't knew if we still had any active , but syria certainly have some missile based on it.

and for air defense one Bavar-373 and some Tor won't cut it at all , they easily get saturated . I'll send a battalion of 3rd of Khordad and some short range air defense also you need something to act as CIWs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> F-110 is more accurate than Iskander based on limited data. But Iskanders haven’t changed the course of war and how much of an upgrade is it to use a BM over a CM when enemy air defenses are only targeting high value aircraft and choppers?


fateh-110 itself is not more accurate , the next generations become more accurate , and we no longer produce it , it replaced by fath-360 Smaller, lighter , same range and more percise and each launcher carry 3-6

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

strateger said:


> Hypothetical situation. Let's say there is an airbase in Syria for Iran to work alongside Russian and Syrian forces.
> 
> Iran has the following assets in the base.
> 
> 1.) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics.
> 2.) 24 Kowsar
> 3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters
> 4.) 12 Shahed-129 drones
> 5.) Fateh-110 missiles and launchers
> 6.) Bavar-373 air defense systems
> 7.) Tor air defense systems
> 
> Same situation... but in southern Ukraine instead, given what we know about current conflict.
> 
> How lethal is this deployment? Are the modernized/new SU-22's ineffective? Get shot down? Kowsar? Etc



1) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics. They carry 
- SOW Fajr ALBM + Ya-Ali ALCM + Yasin + Balaban Glide PGMs
- ECM pods, RWR+Jammers, EO/IR Trackers.

2.) 24 Kowsar, armed with HMD slaved HOBS and a reliable BVR system like PL-12/PL-15. They fly in groups of 4-6 fighters carrying 2 x WVR + 2 x BVR (one external tank) with datalinked 2 x Shahed-Saegheh with EO/IRST and 1 x ELINT KAMAN-22 within the Airdefence envelope. 

3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters. 

4.) 20 x Shahed-171 for their low RCS + KAMAN-22, carrying ECM pods, RWR + EO/IRST, data linked with KOWSAR and Air defense batteries all the time.

5.) 20 x Raad-500 + 10 x Dezful + Hoveyzeh CM. Mobile platforms + Underground silos platforms for BMs. 

6.) 2 x Bavar-373 air defense systems. Supported by 
- One OTHR Search radar deep into the Syrian territory. Always looking into Israel, and Turkey.
- Two layers of Track radars (at least 300-400 KM range) both PESA, AESA
- ECCM stations + TAHA 1400 Jammers. 

7.) 2 x Tor-M1 air defense systems.

8.) 10 x fast Mobile cars with 4 x Misagh-2 Manpads


........... Israelis won't get near this base easily.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> 1) 42 SU-22 bombers with IRGC upgrade package and new avionics. They carry
> - SOW Fajr ALBM + Ya-Ali ALCM + Yasin + Balaban Glide PGMs
> - ECM pods, RWR+Jammers, EO/IR Trackers.
> 
> 2.) 24 Kowsar, armed with HMD slaved HOBS and a reliable BVR system like PL-12/PL-15. They fly in groups of 4-6 fighters carrying 2 x WVR + 2 x BVR (one external tank) with datalinked 2 x Shahed-Saegheh with EO/IRST and 1 x ELINT KAMAN-22 within the Airdefence envelope.
> 
> 3.) 24 Panha Toufan combat helicopters.
> 
> 4.) 20 x Shahed-171 for their low RCS + KAMAN-22, carrying ECM pods, RWR + EO/IRST, data linked with KOWSAR and Air defense batteries all the time.
> 
> 5.) 20 x Raad-500 + 10 x Dezful + Hoveyzeh CM. Mobile platforms + Underground silos platforms for BMs.
> 
> 6.) 2 x Bavar-373 air defense systems. Supported by
> - One OTHR Search radar deep into the Syrian territory. Always looking into Israel, and Turkey.
> - Two layers of Track radars (at least 300-400 KM range) both PESA, AESA
> - ECCM stations + TAHA 1400 Jammers.
> 
> 7.) 2 x Tor-M1 air defense systems.
> 
> 8.) 10 x fast Mobile cars with 4 x Misagh-2 Manpads
> 
> 
> ........... Israelis won't get near this base easily.


That will be 20 missile
I doubt that's a feasible air defense it can be saturated easily.
then those 90 aircraft and 20+ drone will be sitting dock


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> That will be 20 missile
> I doubt that's a feasible air defense it can be saturated easily.
> then those 90 aircraft and 20+ drone will be sitting dock



One Jericho missile with a cluster warhead and those aircraft are toast. Depending on distance, Israeli Fateh missile (LORA) could also be used.

If they use aircraft then Israel doesn’t need to get near the base. They will drop their bombs (CMs) over the Mediterranean.

Bavar-373 won’t be able to engage fighters due to intense air traffic in that corridor. Syria tried it and it ended up hitting a Russian SIGNIT/ELINT aircraft. Israel is known to use other aircraft as shields.

So air defense will just play defense trying to shoot down as many CMs it can. Same thing Syria does.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar-373 won’t be able to engage fighters due to intense air traffic in that corridor. Syria tried it and it ended up hitting a Russian SIGNIT/ELINT aircraft. Israel is known to use other aircraft as shields.


wasn't that S200 handiwork , I believe Bavar is more thorough in distinguishing targets compared to s200



TheImmortal said:


> One Jericho missile with a cluster warhead and those aircraft are toast. Depending on distance, Israeli Fateh missile (LORA) could also be used.


cluster warhead , are good if the base park aircraft on the runway, if they are in shelter those cluster munition are not that effective


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> One Jericho missile with a cluster warhead and those aircraft are toast. Depending on distance, Israeli Fateh missile (LORA) could also be used.



Kheibar Shikan with thermobaric munition warhead and Ramat David Airfield (from where they attack mostly) is toast?

Cluster munitions do not work on hardened sheltered aircrafts.



TheImmortal said:


> If they use aircraft then Israel doesn’t need to get near the base. They will drop their bombs (CMs) over the Mediterranean.



SU-24/22 even Kowsar with its SAR look down shoot down radar can drop SOWs over Syrian airspace to enter Israel.

Ever wondered Why SyAAF never returns fire to an Israeli jet?. Hint: The answer is strategic, not tactical. Even if we give Syria Su-57, they will still be reluctant to chase Israeli planes.



TheImmortal said:


> Bavar-373 won’t be able to engage fighters due to intense air traffic in that corridor. Syria tried it and it ended up hitting a Russian SIGNIT/ELINT aircraft. Israel is known to use other aircraft as shields.



SyAAD does not use Bavar-373. For all we know about Iran learning about aerial defence tactics from experience, Bavar-373 can filter real targets from clutter very quickly. But it is not about the Air defense missiles battery alone. Its about strategy. They have no long-range search radar, no Jammer or ECCM package, Their tracking radars are mostly stand-alone entities. They do not have the slightest network-centric AD layers that Iran uses. Even with that Israelis use SOWS and stay away from aerial conflicts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> wasn't that S200 handiwork , I believe Bavar is more thorough in distinguishing targets compared to s200



Doesn’t matter Iran will not send a missile into civilian plane corridor. The risk of miscalculation or the seeker locking on wrong target will be disastrous political consequences.



Hack-Hook said:


> cluster warhead , are good if the base park aircraft on the runway, if they are in shelter those cluster munition are not that effective


Shelters for 90 aircraft and 20+ drones? Now you are just talking fantasy.

And LORA can also use TV guidance so the operator can drop it in front of shelter and blast will immobilize the aircraft. Don’t even need to completely destroy.



drmeson said:


> Kheibar Shikan with thermobaric munition warhead and Ramat David Airfield (from where they attack mostly) is toast?



Hundreds (if not thousands) of air strikes on Iranian sites in syria including drone base at T4 that lead to deaths of IRGC and Iran never struck a single Israeli airbase in return. So yes Iran has assets to strike Israeli bases, but political reality is different story.



drmeson said:


> Cluster munitions do not work on hardened sheltered aircrafts.



You aren’t hiding all 90 aircraft + 20 drone in sheltered bases. That would be a massive airbase, most airbases don’t have nearly that many sheltered bunkers (12-36).

Most are parked in open with some distance put in between them.



drmeson said:


> SU-24/22 even Kowsar with its SAR look down shoot down radar can drop SOWs over Syrian airspace to enter Israel.



Political reality is different



drmeson said:


> Ever wondered Why SyAAF never returns fire to an Israeli jet?. Hint: The answer is strategic, not tactical. Even if we give Syria Su-57, they will still be reluctant to chase Israeli planes.



SyAAF is ancient with soviet era planes that lack basic armaments. They never even received the Yak-130’s they ordered from Russia. (Russian unreliability)

SyAAF just doesn’t have the capacity to fight F-16’s of Israeli airforce. And it’s air defense has fired many times on jets, but when S-200 and Buk-M1 are your main long range air defenses than you aren’t gonna do much. Syrian S-300 is operated under Russian leadership and they won’t allow firing on Israeli planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It is incredible delirium here on this forum. I can clearly say that you don't know much about war tactics. The Iranian army does not need your advice your half truth and erroneous perception. It's staggering to read you, I don't participate much in this forum that I have been following for years. But things are distinguished here, you go around in circles and you are very bad war tacticians.

I trust real people on the Iranian army and their tactical genius demonstrated during the Iran-Iraq war. Your living room analysis is really painful.

The new Tor Iranian system is much closer to M2 than M1. To say the opposite is completely of total demagoguery. And for the S 300 I.R, it was modified and Iran does not need Russia's permission to use it. For the moment, I have the other bullshit I read here.

And well done to Iran to keep the F-4 and especially the F-4 SM (Super improve which will be very misleading for the enemy and very useful in the integrated defense start on. The F-4 SM can-and Consider as a new heavy hunter at 50 %. Never forget who have redone the complete cell and this detail to analyze

And never forget that Iran announced the construction of a heavy hunter in 2020. The question is: how can you do a heavy hunter without new engines? I have the answer: the new engine is ready and was tested in the F4 SM and having made a new cell is far from trivial. It is rich in teaching and rational deduction. The heavy hunter of Iran was done through the tries of the F-4 SM and the new technologies devolved for the Kowsar, it is very very logical and unavoidable. It is an economic question and time saving too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It is incredible delirium here on this forum. I can clearly say that you don't know much about war tactics. The Iranian army does not need your advice your half truth and erroneous perception. It's staggering to read you, I don't participate much in this forum that I have been following for years. But things are distinguished here, you go around in circles and you are very bad war tacticians.
> 
> I trust real people on the Iranian army and their tactical genius demonstrated during the Iran-Iraq war. Your living room analysis is really painful.
> 
> The new Tor Iranian system is much closer to M2 than M1. To say the opposite is completely of total demagoguery. And for the S 300 I.R, it was modified and Iran does not need Russia's permission to use it. For the moment, I have the other bullshit I read here.
> 
> And well done to Iran to keep the F-4 and especially the F-4 SM (Super improve which will be very misleading for the enemy and very useful in the integrated defense start on. The F-4 SM can-and Consider as a new heavy hunter at 50 %. Never forget who have redone the complete cell and this detail to analyze
> 
> And never forget that Iran announced the construction of a heavy hunter in 2020. The question is: how can you do a heavy hunter without new engines? I have the answer: the new engine is ready and was tested in the F4 SM and having made a new cell is far from trivial. It is rich in teaching and rational deduction. The heavy hunter of Iran was done through the tries of the F-4 SM and the new technologies devolved for the Kowsar, it is very very logical and unavoidable. It is an economic question and time saving too.



Friend when you talk of certain "F-4SM" Do you mean these upgraded F-4E/D ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> And for the S 300 I.R, it was modified and Iran does not need Russia's permission to use it.



I was talking about *Syrian* owned S-300 *NOT* Iranian. Since your reading comprehension is so low you can’t even understand the difference you shouldn’t involve yourself in the conversation much less give your opinion.

Rest of your post is absolute nonsense like always since it has nothing to do with “hypothetical airbase scenario” we were talking about. Just your usual rants about F-4, which again we weren’t even talking about.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Doesn’t matter Iran will not send a missile into civilian plane corridor. The risk of miscalculation or the seeker locking on wrong target will be disastrous political consequences.


all systems that use Sayyad missile can distinguish civilian aircraft from from military ones , S-200 cant . and if we are confident in sending it over Persians gulf and be sure it hit the drone not spy plane or any jetliner there we are not shying about using it over Mediterranean sea



TheImmortal said:


> Shelters for 90 aircraft and 20+ drones? Now you are just talking fantasy.
> 
> And LORA can also use TV guidance so the operator can drop it in front of shelter and blast will immobilize the aircraft. Don’t even need to completely destroy.


why not, that's what shelters are and honestly that's why i say you must disperse your equipment , concentration is always bad news
and then if they throw it in front of shelter , goes the benefit of cluster warhead


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> all systems that use Sayyad missile can distinguish civilian aircraft from from military ones , S-200 cant . and if we are confident in sending it over Persians gulf and be sure it hit the drone not spy plane or any jetliner there we are not shying about using it over Mediterranean Sea



Global Hawk was engaged 75KM from Iranian shore, in Iranian water/airspace in early hours of the night.

Different story sending a missile 300KM into crowded international airspace/waters with no NOTAM.

All one needs to look at is previous Iranian actions to realize that is not part of Iranian calculus of likely actions they would take.

If you check IntelSky’s Twitter you can see how many times a day Israeli’s jets are in Mediterranean. Constantly. So you will not know which one of those trips they are dropping payloads and which ones they are merely patrolling or doing intelligence gathering or mock runs. By the time radars detect the CMs reliably there is a
chance they are back in Israeli airspace.



Hack-Hook said:


> why not, that's what shelters are and honestly that's why i say you must disperse your equipment , concentration is always bad news




We are talking about a realistic Iranian airbase in Syria. 90 shelters is not realistic. Ask yourself what is biggest airbase in Iran itself? Then ask how many reinforced shelters that base has?

And if you are gonna build such a mega airbase in Syria, you would need a lot more than 2 Bavar systems and a handful of TOR-M1.



Hack-Hook said:


> and then if they throw it in front of shelter , goes the benefit of cluster warhead



Maybe I explained poorly. I ment to say that for shelters an option is for TV guided LORA to be used (used in Armenian-Azeri war to strike a bridge) and for large scale bombardment Jericho with cluster warhead would be used. Again hypothetical. Maybe Israel decides to use its long range stand off munitions, I’m not sure.

Most reinforced shelters are open air underneath with exit and entrance exposed thus CMs and precision guided bombs try to hit the openings rather than pierce the “shell”. An aircraft is very sensitive, all it needs is some shrapnel damage to render it needing extensive maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Global Hawk was engaged 75KM from Iranian shore, in Iranian water/airspace in early hours of the night.


75km away what is the difference if it was in Iran space or out of it where it concern our discussion, and day and night is not that important , do you think at night air traffic over Persian gulf will become lighter.


TheImmortal said:


> Different story sending a missile 300KM into crowded international airspace/waters with no NOTAM.


not much different . S-200 had the problem of locking on wrong target , S-300 or Bavar or 3rd of Khordad don't have the same problem.
different missile , different guidance , different capabilities


TheImmortal said:


> If you check IntelSky’s Twitter you can see how many times a day Israeli’s jets are in Mediterranean. Constantly. So you will not know which one of those trips they are dropping payloads and which ones they are merely patrolling or doing intelligence gathering or mock runs. By the time radars detect the CMs reliably there is a
> chance they are back in Israeli airspace.


really not important , in Syria if it was up to me and I had a modern air defense system that actually could hit target , for each of their attacks , I'd have hit one the same number of patrolling jets over Mediterranean and I would have not cared if it was the jets who do the attack or not , simply , tit for tat . if they don't honor cease fire why should I honor it. instead of letting them dictate the rule of war I'd have dictated it 
Syrian problem is that they don't have the will to fight and they don't have the equipment to do so .


TheImmortal said:


> We are talking about a realistic Iranian airbase in Syria. 90 shelters is not realistic. Ask yourself what is biggest airbase in Iran itself? Then ask how many reinforced shelters that base has?
> 
> And if you are gonna build such a mega airbase in Syria, you would need a lot more than 2 Bavar systems and a handful of TOR-M1.


even for a small airbase you need more than 2 tor system and if you cant do shit to protect your asset don't concentrate them in one place disperse them so you can protect them or if one get attacked the rest can retaliate


TheImmortal said:


> Global Hawk was engaged 75KM from Iranian shore, in Iranian water/airspace in early hours of the night.
> 
> Different story sending a missile 300KM into crowded international airspace/waters with no NOTAM.
> 
> All one needs to look at is previous Iranian actions to realize that is not part of Iranian calculus of likely actions they would take.
> 
> If you check IntelSky’s Twitter you can see how many times a day Israeli’s jets are in Mediterranean. Constantly. So you will not know which one of those trips they are dropping payloads and which ones they are merely patrolling or doing intelligence gathering or mock runs. By the time radars detect the CMs reliably there is a
> chance they are back in Israeli airspace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are talking about a realistic Iranian airbase in Syria. 90 shelters is not realistic. Ask yourself what is biggest airbase in Iran itself? Then ask how many reinforced shelters that base has?
> 
> And if you are gonna build such a mega airbase in Syria, you would need a lot more than 2 Bavar systems and a handful of TOR-M1.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I explained poorly. I ment to say that for shelters an option is for TV guided LORA to be used (used in Armenian-Azeri war to strike a bridge) and for large scale bombardment Jericho with cluster warhead would be used. Again hypothetical. Maybe Israel decides to use its long range stand off munitions, I’m not sure.
> 
> Most reinforced shelters are open air underneath with exit and entrance exposed thus CMs and precision guided bombs try to hit the openings rather than pierce the “shell”. An aircraft is very sensitive, all it needs is some shrapnel damage to render it needing extensive maintenance.


modern shelters are not open in front , what you describe are relics from the free fall bomb eras

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal said:


> I was talking about *SyrianNOT* Iranian. Since your reading comprehension is so low you can’t even understand the difference you shouldn’t involve yourself in the conversation much less give your opinion.
> 
> Rest of your post is absolute nonsense like always since it has nothing to do with “hypothetical airbase scenario” we were talking about. Just your usual rants about F-4, which again we weren’t even talking about.


You are an intellectual turnip without intuition with a sense of war strategy. Stay in the garden with your colleagues, it's a lot for you. I am not talking about opinion but of facts and observation and I have been following the development of the Iranian army for several years. You don't know Iran yet is always more advanced than their public ads

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Friend when you talk of certain "F-4SM" Do you mean these upgraded F-4E/D ?
> 
> View attachment 858122
> 
> View attachment 858125
> 
> 
> View attachment 858117
> View attachment 858118
> View attachment 858120



F- 4 SM with a new cell and much more.

Iran works in gradation and logical experimentation behind scene to manufacture their heavy hunter through the Kowsar and these F4 SM. The Iranians work in the right way and their approach is very logical. The announcement of the new heavy hunter in 2020 is the logical continuation of these experimentation. And how many new F-4 SM cells have been built?

I still repeat my question: can you build a new heavy hunter without an engine? And when you know that Iran is technological advance on their announcement processes then we understand their ways of doing better.


----------



## drmeson

4 of the total 6 in the same photo.






These testbeds arguably provided the following to Kowsar program

- Electronic actuations and FBW. Without it this plane would not have flown.
- Alloy-Composite Tails, wings
- HESA built automatic landing gear system
- Knowledge of creating an entire airframe from scratch, even though these 6 themselves were rebuilt from structural parts from Vietnam, Ethiopian purchased airframes.
- Cockpit and avionics layout (not radars)
- Sarir ejection seats
- If Kowsar-II gets the V tail then it would be also from Saeqeh
- Local pylons (Kowsar used the same pylon design for SDP-1 like munition in recent pic)
- PMMU Canopies
- Elongation of nose cone for larger antenna radar accomodation (3-766)

If the aerial evaluation has been completed, its time to keep the 2 for HESA museum .. 3-7366 (first born Saeqeh-1) and 3-7182 (Only Saeqeh-II) and rest should be dismantled to create a repository of readily available parts to energize the future Kowsar-I/II fleet. Same should be done to the entire F-5E/F fleet (60 Aircrafts). IRIAF knows the value of spare parts in hand to keep the aircrafts in the air at full potential. One can have a 100 aircraft strong fleet of F/A-22 but if parts are not their the fleet is gonna be useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> F- 4 SM with a new cell and much more.
> 
> Iran works in gradation and logical experimentation behind scene to manufacture their heavy hunter through the Kowsar and these F4 SM. The Iranians work in the right way and their approach is very logical. The announcement of the new heavy hunter in 2020 is the logical continuation of these experimentation. And how many new F-4 SM cells have been built?
> 
> I still repeat my question: can you build a new heavy hunter without an engine? And when you know that Iran is technological advance on their announcement processes then we understand their ways of doing better.



Not sure what you mean by new cell?

The aircraft in your picture is a famous IACI "Dowran' upgraded F-4E (also included D) with Chinese CATIC assistance, that was shown in Kish airshow years back. This was IRIAF's attempt at having a 60-70 x strong fleet of JH-7 equivalent heavy A2G and AShCM attack fighters. I dont know if they officially called F-4SM or not but the following details came out in the Airshow and later in some aviation magazines:

- New Multimode Pulse Doppler Radar with strong resemblance to JL-10A based upon T/R element count. 150 km Search range with strong SAR mode for ground attack, what JH-7 of PLAAF fly with.

- Installation of IEI TACAN, INS, (Tacan antenna noticeable in the rib)
- Mutliple LCD
- IEI U/VHF radios
- Installation of Chaff/Flare Dispenser (Noticeable in Pics)

- New Armaments
Noor (Local C-704 TOT) Tested
Ghader AShCM (Further derivation of C-803) Tested
PL-12 (Never been seen)


































No info exists on whether this plan was for the entire fleet of 64 aircraft or just the stationed at Bandar Abbas, Bushehr, and Chabahar were upgraded. With IRGC's missiles getting more sophisticated and accurate, these attack aircraft will lose their value with time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Noor (Local C-704 TOT) Tested


thats c-802



drmeson said:


> No info exists on whether this plan was for the entire fleet of 64 aircraft or just the stationed at Bandar Abbas, Bushehr, and Chabahar were upgraded. With IRGC's missiles getting more sophisticated and accurate, these attack aircraft will lose their value with time.


I doubt that


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> thats c-802
> 
> 
> I doubt that



Nasr is C-704

and you can doubt as much as you like. This is happening, Su-25 are kicked out, Su-22 has been rejected by IRIAF, and many airframes went to Syria. F-4E/D and SU-24 will see the same fate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> and you can doubt as much as you like. This is happening, Su-25 are kicked out, Su-22 has been rejected by IRIAF, and many airframes went to Syria. F-4E/D and SU-24 will see the same fate.


sure no doubt it'll happen after IRIAF find replacement for them otherwise , they will remain there,
Su-22 and Su-25 were in IRGC hand .and Su-25 never was a strike airplane to begin with and can easily be replaced by drones



drmeson said:


> Nasr is C-704


well , maybe I'm wrong but there was nothing mentioned about Nasr in the original post, it was Noor


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Not sure what you mean by new cell?
> 
> The aircraft in your picture is a famous IACI "Dowran' upgraded F-4E (also included D) with Chinese CATIC assistance, that was shown in Kish airshow years back. This was IRIAF's attempt at having a 60-70 x strong fleet of JH-7 equivalent heavy A2G and AShCM attack fighters. I dont know if they officially called F-4SM or not but the following details came out in the Airshow and later in some aviation magazines:
> 
> - New Multimode Pulse Doppler Radar with strong resemblance to JL-10A based upon T/R element count. 150 km Search range with strong SAR mode for ground attack, what JH-7 of PLAAF fly with.
> 
> - Installation of IEI TACAN, INS, (Tacan antenna noticeable in the rib)
> - Mutliple LCD
> - IEI U/VHF radios
> - Installation of Chaff/Flare Dispenser (Noticeable in Pics)
> 
> - New Armaments
> Noor (Local C-704 TOT) Tested
> Ghader AShCM (Further derivation of C-803) Tested
> PL-12 (Never been seen)
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 858324
> View attachment 858325
> View attachment 858326
> View attachment 858327
> 
> 
> View attachment 858318
> View attachment 858320
> 
> View attachment 858319
> 
> 
> View attachment 858328
> 
> 
> No info exists on whether this plan was for the entire fleet of 64 aircraft or just the stationed at Bandar Abbas, Bushehr, and Chabahar were upgraded. With IRGC's missiles getting more sophisticated and accurate, these attack aircraft will lose their value with time.


New cell means new new cell. And you forget a few important things, the new engine, the one that will be in the new heavy hunter officially starts in 2020. This F4 SM (super improved) is a new 50 % hunter

The new cell allows Iran to experience to build cells of this size. You have not answered my question: how can we build a new heavy hunter without an engine? Why redo a new cell for the F4 SM? What does that mean ?

On which combat aircraft would have been tested the new heavy engine? And why announce the construction of a new heavy hunter if Iran does not have its engine? That does not make sense

And qader 313? He seems to be stealing my secrets for the moment. All this is exciting to discover


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Nasr is C-704
> 
> and you can doubt as much as you like. This is happening, Su-25 are kicked out, Su-22 has been rejected by IRIAF, and many airframes went to Syria. F-4E/D and SU-24 will see the same fate.


No

The F4 will stay for a long time and Iran is doing many improved while waiting for the arrival of a new heavy hunter! In a defense integrated into the sky, the F-4 becomes essential with its powerful missiles and its radar. And when the spare parts were made then it takes less time to repair them. It takes a long time to copy and redo a new room and improve the performance but when it is done, it saves time. Redoing a new part takes much more time than replaced a room with an already built room.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> And LORA can also use TV guidance so the operator can drop it in front of shelter and blast will immobilize the aircraft. Don’t even need to completely destroy.



-Raad-500/Dezful can do the same with thermobaric munition warhead at Ramat David Airfield (from where they attack mostly)? They are deadly accurate, quasi-depressed trajectory missiles that can't be intercepted because of separating GRV. Kheibar Shikan uses a glide trajectory and comes at you at ~hypersonic speed. IRGC can easily take out Ramat David. 

You are counting Israeli weaponry and discounting the Iranian side. What kind of logic is that?




TheImmortal said:


> Hundreds (if not thousands) of air strikes on Iranian sites in syria including drone base at T4 that lead to deaths of IRGC and Iran never struck a single Israeli airbase in return. So yes Iran has assets to strike Israeli bases, but political reality is different story.



Most of these airstrikes are wartime propoganda stories by Haaretz/Jpost/Jerusalem/Times of Israel and nothing else. I am not saying real strikes do not happen, they do and cause damage as well. But the damage claims and stories of how 500 men die every night in Syria because of the mighty IAF are nothing but wartime propoganda by the world's most famous ethnicity for lying and deception. I did some research on these claims. Literally, not a single non-israeli source gives the story, or even if they do the origin of the story, the damage etc comes from Tel-Aviv and nowhere else. Ask yourself this, if there have been some 300 strikes as Tel Aviv claims in which S-300, S-200, Tor, SyAAF assets, and ammunition depots, etc. are all gone, why have not FSA+ISIS just run over Assad's destroyed forces because of these strikes? Instead what we are seeing is that Assad is getting more and more entrenched in Syria with zero resistance now, and Hezbollah is receiving arms from Iran in Lebanon. Who is lying here?

There you go, find me a single non-Israeli source for these damages. They come at night, drop a bomb here or there according to them, and then within an hour they give the details of how many missile sites, airbases, and men (their names too lol) have died. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_conflict_during_the_Syrian_civil_war

It is called WAR TIME PROPOGANDA! everyone does it, Israel is no exception. They want to maintain the perception of dominance in the Levant. Useful strategy for inner politics but even according to their own former authority figures these stories are doing nothing. I can post an article here if anyone wants. One of them even accused Netanyahu's government of using these victory lies for political gains within Israel before the elections, and how real action against the Iranian alliance would literally mean Hezbollah mauling IDF again like in 2006 only they are more battle-hardened and 10 x more equipped now.

Militaries do not respond to propoganda easily. Even if one side claims that they have exploded a nuclear device over another country in which 50000 people died, the target of the propoganda military won't respond to it unless they have been "actually" challenged. Iran's goal is the entrenchment of Assad in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza. IRGC planners do not give two shits about Jpost's fake stories as long as their goals are not challenged which is actually happening. When they get challenged we know what Iran does to its enemy. It's a country that has fired more Ballistic missiles on foreign soil in the last 2 decades than anyone else including at the Bases of the world's top superpower. It's a country that is fighting proxy wars in 4-5 countries without losing ground in a single theatre. Do you think they will be scared of 2 x F-16? 

All during these very real "strikes", Iran has done the following on its foreign allied soil in the last 10 years

- Made bases in Syria
- Removed any resistance against Assad
- Armed Hezbollah with accurate BM/CM/AShCM/UCAVS. The same force that almost took the war against IDF in 2006.
- Attacked Saudis/UAE from Yemen

Who is lying here?



TheImmortal said:


> You aren’t hiding all 90 aircraft + 20 drone in sheltered bases. That would be a massive airbase, most airbases don’t have nearly that many sheltered bunkers (12-36).
> 
> Most are parked in open with some distance put in between them.



Large Military Installation : 2 x TABs (All aircrafts + UCAVS) + Airdefence/Electronic warfare compound for GWACS + 1 x Missile base 

Large military bases/installations like Incirlik have ~60 x Hardened shelters for aircraft and we know Iran's new strategy for underground bases. When there is a threat, there is a solution. If they make such a base they won't keep the aircraft in open for them to be targeted. 



TheImmortal said:


> SyAAF is ancient with soviet era planes that lack basic armaments. They never even received the Yak-130’s they ordered from Russia. (Russian unreliability)
> 
> SyAAF just doesn’t have the capacity to fight F-16’s of Israeli airforce. And it’s air defense has fired many times on jets, but when S-200 and Buk-M1 are your main long range air defenses than you aren’t gonna do much. Syrian S-300 is operated under Russian leadership and they won’t allow firing on Israeli planes.



SyAAF has 30 x MIG-29SMT strong fleet that is more than capable of engaging any F-16 or F-15 at BVR/WVR domains. These aircraft were not even used for anything in the war. 

Very long shot but in the future Iran should provide SyAAF with 50-60 x Kowsar-I/II + 15 x KAMAN-22 ELINT to replace their aging good-for-nothing fleet of MIG-21/23. A SyAAF with MIG-29M+ Kowsar-I/II + ELINT will mean a threatening air domain for intruders in which some 100 fighters can engage the enemy in BVR ranges and e-warfare while cant be defeated easily in WVR ranges. Compared to rust tubes like MIG-21/23 without anything in them, that will be a blessing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> -Raad-500/Dezful can do the same with thermobaric munition warhead at Ramat David Airfield (from where they attack mostly)? They are deadly accurate, quasi-depressed trajectory missiles that can't be intercepted because of separating GRV. Kheibar Shikan uses a glide trajectory and comes at you at ~hypersonic speed. IRGC can easily take out Ramat David.
> 
> You are counting Israeli weaponry and discounting the Iranian side. What kind of logic is that?


there is a problem with them they don't have Kheybar-Shekan reentry vehicle so they are susceptible to air defense , last time Syria fired its copy of Fateh-110 toward Israel they intercepted.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> SyAAF has 30 x MIG-29SMT strong fleet that is more than capable of engaging any F-16 or F-15 at BVR/WVR domains. These aircraft were not even used for anything in the war.


Syrian Mig-29 SMT vs Israel F-15 and F-16 , thats a no brainer specially if you consider the difference in number and existence of satellite and radars in area
mig-29 SMT upgrade more geared toward air to ground attack and longer flight time specially as I'm not aware of Syria received any R-77 but I'm sure Israel received latest variants of AIM-120
and for short range Python is a very dangerous weapon


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> there is a problem with them they don't have Kheybar-Shekan reentry vehicle so they are susceptible to air defense , last time Syria fired its copy of Fateh-110 toward Israel they intercepted.



It's a hypothetical base. They dont have Bavar-373 or Kowsar either.

I dont know of any Fateh-110 being shot down by Israeli AD.



Hack-Hook said:


> Syrian Mig-29 SMT vs Israel F-15 and F-16 , thats a no brainer specially if you consider the difference in number and existence of satellite and radars in area
> mig-29 SMT upgrade more geared toward air to ground attack and longer flight time specially as I'm not aware of Syria received any R-77 but I'm sure Israel received latest variants of AIM-120
> and for short range Python is a very dangerous weapon



The planes that breach or vector towards the Syrian airspace come with additional fuel tanks or pylons heavy with munitions, So the RCS (15 m2 in case of F-15) and the air drag compromised. Imagine a scenario of 2 x F-16i + 2 SOW loaded F-15 of IAF show the blip in long-range Search radars of SyAAF and a pair of 2 x MIG-29SMT (fully e-warfare suite) and 4 x Kowsar (Fully operationalized, HMD slaved HOBS +PL12, Data linked with ELINT+GWACS) go up for engagement. What happens?

I will tell you. It's a fight!


----------



## drmeson

Yasin's cockpit

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> It's a hypothetical base. They dont have Bavar-373 or Kowsar either.
> 
> I dont know of any Fateh-110 being shot down by Israeli AD.


two or three years ago when Israel bombed (I guess it was T4 don't recall exactly syria fired a dozen of their Fateh-110 copy) toward israel. and as the missile is slow they got intercepted.
now the long range versions of the family have 2-3 time the speed of fateh-110 when near the target and it make them harder to intercept, but they still lack the capabilities of kheybar-shekan
in evading anti missile defense


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> It's a hypothetical base. They dont have Bavar-373 or Kowsar either.
> 
> I dont know of any Fateh-110 being shot down by Israeli AD.
> 
> 
> 
> The planes that breach or vector towards the Syrian airspace come with additional fuel tanks or pylons heavy with munitions, So the RCS (15 m2 in case of F-15) and the air drag compromised. Imagine a scenario of 2 x F-16i + 2 SOW loaded F-15 of IAF show the blip in long-range Search radars of SyAAF and a pair of 2 x MIG-29SMT (fully e-warfare suite) and 4 x Kowsar (Fully operationalized, HMD slaved HOBS +PL12, Data linked with ELINT+GWACS) go up for engagement. What happens?
> 
> I will tell you. It's a fight!


i don't imagine as those Mig-29 will be toast and those kowsar sadly yet to have long range air to air missile . and israel don't use that little number of airplanes when it attack in case you forget they have 
9 x F-35
175 x F-16
100 x F-15


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Not sure what you mean by new cell?



The user is writing in French and utilizing a translator to convert posts into English. That's why instead of "fighter" their comments will feature the term "hunter", for that's how a fighter jet is called in French ("chasseur").

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> two or three years ago when Israel bombed (I guess it was T4 don't recall exactly syria fired a dozen of their Fateh-110 copy) toward israel. and as the missile is slow they got intercepted.
> now the long range versions of the family have 2-3 time the speed of fateh-110 when near the target and it make them harder to intercept, but they still lack the capabilities of kheybar-shekan
> in evading anti missile defense



Can you post a link to Fateh being fired towards Israel because I can't find it?

Fateh was a product of Late 90s R&D, retired now. Iran has extensively changed its GRV's in last two decades. Dezful or Raad-500 can easily penetrate through any air defense if fired within the Lag-time of TWS of tracking radars of AD batteries. This is why I listed them in the hypothetical base. Israeli AD has let Palestinian unguided rockets pass through so what will happen against some 20 GRV's dancing down at their airbases at supersonic speeds? 

Kheibar Shikan is a different monster.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> i don't imagine as those Mig-29 will be toast and those kowsar sadly yet to have long range air to air missile . and israel don't use that little number of airplanes when it attack in case you forget they have
> 9 x F-35
> 175 x F-16
> 100 x F-15



Syrian problem is not lack of equipment, it's the battle integration that has been their major issue. They have S-300, S-200 and BUK systems along with MIG-29SMT etc but there is zero integration of these systems. Compare that to Iranian air defense where OTHR searches + Tracking from SHORAD/LORADS + Interceptors + UCAVS all are being run by the same centralized network at Khatam-Al-Anbiya. So there are layers and a team action to deal with threats. Put Iran in place of Syria bordering Israel and then imagine 6 x F-15 and 4 x F-16 vectoring towards Iran with SOWS. You know interceptors won't even need to turn their radars on in the sky for illumination because they will be getting track data from the central network. Israel is extremely worried about Iranian designs in Syria which is why they keep on trying to disturb any Iranian supply or establishment of AD network in Syria. They know if Iran successfully integrates this layered system that it uses at its home now in Syria and Iraq, IAF dominance in those skies will be history. Instead of free rides you now have a fight at your hand. 

Best solution for Iran is to train Syrians, Iraqis inside Iran to the point that they can build these layers themselves in their countries. 

..................


Kowsar is not operationalized yet so we dont know what it will have or what it won't. I believe that current Kowsar-I production will stop at 60-70 aircraft in 2026/27. They already have shown 18-24 airframes being worked upon so around 35-40 % of production is already underway by pictorial evidence (why are 5 x F-5E/F/A not grounded already?)

Operationalization will start when at least 2 squadrons will be there. Currently, we just have four evaluation aircraft at TAB-2, while 7 may be delivered in 2023 then 7 more in 2024. That will give three strong mixed interception squadrons of F-14AM+Kowsar+ Squadron. They might test the following for full operationalization: Already confirmed activities are underlined.

- WVR Fatter All aspect attack integration
- BVR (procurement maybe???) We have heard of PL-12/15 during the Dowran upgrade and SRII project but to me _seeing is believing_ 
- SDB-1 clones, Balaban/Yasin Glide PGMs
- Maybe some ALCM like Heydar-1 or Ya-Ali
- E-warfare suite test against jamming from IRIAF Falcons and AD jammer stations (Taha-1400)
- Flying with DATAlLINK with GWACS + F-14 AM + KAMAN-22
- FBW (Aerial Manuvering)


----------



## WudangMaster

drmeson said:


> - BVR (procurement maybe???) We have heard of PL-12/15 during the Dowran upgrade and SRII project but to me _seeing is believing_


Mr. Azarmehr stated that kowsar can deploy the Fakour 90, though much of the missile's potential would be held back because of the limited radar compared to the awg9

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

WudangMaster said:


> Mr. Azarmehr stated that kowsar can deploy the Fakour 90, though much of the missile's potential would be held back because of the limited radar compared to the awg9



You are right. Utility of Fakour-90 on Kowsar is limited. Kowsar's Bayyenat-II (Grifo 346 ditto) has a search range of 110 Km and Track range of 93 KM for a small fighter (imagine a F-16). So lets say a Kowsar tracks a F-16C/D at 90-93 km, which turns back and races away using its 1.0 Mach linear dash, then Kowsar will have to chase the plane to keep illuminating it to guide the Fakour-90 being a SARH seeker. Imagine its a border incursion, if the enemy comes in to release a SOW/PGM and Kowsar goes up to intercept it at BVR ranges, the SARH guidance will force Kowsar to chase the escaping enemy which could lead it into an ambush. Case becomes different if Fakour-90 is ARH which it will be in form of Maghsoud (Fakour-90-2) which has a range of 200 KM with ARH. On the other hand, Fakour-90 on F-14AM means the SAIRAN digitalised AWG-9+ will keep illuminating the target for ~270 km so there is no easy escape for enemy. Mind you The F-14AM also carries ARH AIM-54+ (Babaei Missile Industries overhauled/upgraded 40 Units). So a pair of F-14AM can combined release 4 x Fakour-90 + 4 x AIM-54+ and climb up at 35000 ft to see the demise of enemy from distance.

But there is a bigger problem, the deployment of Fakour-90 on a Kowsar airframe is just too problematic. 

- Fakhour-90 is atleast 450-500 KG. This means that at best a kowsar is going to lift two of these under wing with one 1040 ltr tanks. Hence, plane is already lifting 2000 KG without Sidewinders. Also the diameter of the missile is almost same as AGM-65 Maverick so there will be low ground clearance as was noted in F-20 Tigershark's tests with maverick.

- The air drag will be increased to the point that plane will have low G limits, climbe rate, pitch/roll/yaw mobility.

- RCS will enhance to the point that Kowsar will lose its small sized 1m2 RCS advantage at BVR ranges. An enemy armed with Meteor or AIM-120C will see it from distance and shoot their own BVR missile at Kowsar, which will be a sitting duck with compromised manuvering.







Only solution is to either procure PL-12 + PL-15 from CATIC, China or R-77AE from Russia. *OR *work on producing a local PL-12/15 R-77AE equivalent. We have Kowsar-I, in few years there will be Kowsar-II. What ARH LR-BVR missile will arm these fighters or future UCAV wingmen ? not Fakour-90 or Maghsoud. Those are for larger fighters and I believe will be retired along with F-14 or F-4 fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## mack8

drmeson said:


> No I meant one which was practically a Saegheh/Kowsar in Splinter camo but with the turbofan.
> 
> It was hanging from a thread in an air show/exhibition and was presented by HESA.


If you or someone finds it would be interesting to see it.

Just some comments, i certainly don't agree with the over-optimism by some of you of iranian capability to build brand new F-5s and so on, but even upgrading the 60 F-5s with new avionics and airframe SLEP would be a great achievement, i see the F-5s serving primarily as LIFT and back-up for the F-14 and F-4 fleets.
Saeqeh and especially that horrible Qaher (among other such things) were nothing but pathetic propaganda attempts, with the money and time spend on putting two tails on an F-5 i'd rather add the IFR probe tested long time back, to actually increase their combat capability, so yeah whoever ordered the Saeqeh program to continue beyond the prototype was a moron.

Similarly the F-7s would serve same LIFT role for the MiG-29/Su-24/Su-22 fleets, no need to poo-poo it. Re MiG-29s, even an upgrade similar with the syrian or serbian ones, with improved radar, R-77 and Talisman ECM pods, and again perhaps the IFR probe tested years back, would be a great boost.

As to the Mirage F1, again why not but the Bayenat radar on it and new avionics, to add another valuable squadron of planes? Given Iran's situation every airframe worths it's weight in gold. I know they were trying to help when they gave the Su-25s to Iraq, i understand that, but i wouldn't even done that, i'm sure Russia could have provided some extra airframes.

I see lots of posts devoted to F-5 upgrades, but how about F-4 Dowran and F-14AM upgrades, how far are they along these days? Also any sort of hint as to an iranian copy/upgrade of AIM-7, if they put an ARH seeker on it that again would be a big boost for the F-4 and F-14 fleets, and even for a Mirage F1 upgrade.

PS : I see you've touched the F-14 upgrade above already.
PPS: A PL-12 copy/equivalent would make more sense indeed, as it could possibly be used on the F-5s as well.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Not sure what you mean by new cell?



By the way, in the context of aviation the word "cellule" (cell) in French means airframe.


----------



## drmeson

mack8 said:


> If you or someone finds it would be interesting to see it.



yeah, I have been trying to locate it. It was presented by HESA so may give us clues. The airframe was basically Kowsar with the black large radome and a turbofan at the rear end of it.



mack8 said:


> Just some comments, i certainly don't agree with the over-optimism by some of you of iranian capability to build brand new F-5s and so on, but even upgrading the 60 F-5s with new avionics and airframe SLEP would be a great achievement, i see the F-5s serving primarily as LIFT and back-up for the F-14 and F-4 fleets.
> Saeqeh and especially that horrible Qaher (among other such things) were nothing but pathetic propaganda attempts, with the money and time spend on putting two tails on an F-5 i'd rather add the IFR probe tested long time back, to actually increase their combat capability, so yeah whoever ordered the Saeqeh program to continue beyond the prototype was a moron.



Nobody is optimistic, at least I am not. I would have been more excited to see a HESA F-14 equivalent built from scratch in Iran than an F-5 but we had to start from somewhere. Iranian combat aviation has just begun to receive some attention. Still, the major fund goes to Missiles, Air defense, navy, space programs, etc. What I feel glad about is the fact that HESA + IEI have demonstrated that they can build a 4.0 generation fighter in Iran from scratch. Like even if we get zero planes from Russia or China in the future, IRIAF would not die. We have a local platform that has a modern radar(Grifo 346 built locally) + a modern e-warfare suite of ECM, Jammer, RWR, Chaff/flares + Datalink + very good aerial performance of F5/F20 family. If need be, we can have 300 of these to replace the entire aging fleet. Next-generation might have frontal reduced RCS, AESA radar with HOTAS and you have a proper modern fighter. So this has saved the future. Currently, this plane has a better avionics + e-warfare suite than F-14AM and MIG-29 in IRIAF so a 70-80 strong fleet of them is a major boost to IRIAF interceptor force at least. 

Check out this thread for details on this plane. 

*https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hesa-fighter-kowsar-program-current-and-next-generation.743327/*

The production of Kowsar is going strange if you ask me. So far 18-24 airframes have been seen worked upon inside HESA. 14-20 in primer + 4 operational prototypes. I thought of SLEP as well that they are gonna ground the F-5EF squadrons one by one to create a large repository of structural parts of the F-5E/F airframe like longerons, vertical webs, etc for Kowsar while everything else is brand new. IRIAF currently has 5 squadrons of F-5E/F (60 airframes). But that is not happening so where have the 18-24 airframes of Kowsars that we have seen on HESA floors come from? Why waste money on building airframes from scratch. They should have taken the Israeli Kfir-C route of building a new airframe with parts used from old airframes. Whatever money is saved can go to R&D for Kowsar-II. IAI did the same with Kfir-C as a stop gap solution built from parts of Mirage-V with mid-3rd generation avionics at first that have now evolved to 4+ generation avionics with AESA and HOTAS in Kfir Block 60. But HESA is known to have made some very stupid decisions before.



mack8 said:


> Just some comments, i certainly don't agree with the over-optimism by some of you of iranian capability to build brand new F-5s and so on, but even upgrading the 60 F-5s with new avionics and airframe SLEP would be a great achievement, i see the F-5s serving primarily as LIFT and back-up for the F-14 and F-4 fleets.
> Saeqeh and especially that horrible Qaher (among other such things) were nothing but pathetic propaganda attempts, with the money and time spend on putting two tails on an F-5 i'd rather add the IFR probe tested long time back, to actually increase their combat capability, so yeah whoever ordered the Saeqeh program to continue beyond the prototype was a moron.



Saeqeh was a tech demonstrator at best and nothing else. 6 were built from Vietnamese or Ethiopian F-5 airframes. The first one 3-7366 tested squared air intakes (failed), and larger radome (success). We had some detailed discussion once about whether the V-tail on an F-5E could even fly without FBW so electronic actuation for flight control seems to have been tested on them (we know Kowsar has some level FBW). The Sarir ejection seats and the landing gears too were tested on them. The last one Saeqeh-II was born with the same cockpit layout and avionics suite that Kowsar has. So that family was actual tech demos because of which some 60-80 Kowsars will Kowsar-I exist. Without them, Kowsar would not have been possible. Qaher was an R&D project that was misrepresented for political and financial gains by three stupid people, Ahmadinejad the politician + Hassan Parvaneh the fraudster from HESA + Ahmed Vahidi, the battle-hardened soldier turned politician with no knowledge of aviation. The project's blueprints may have ... may have ... come from whatever work these people did with OKB Mukhamedov on Shafagh low RCS AT. I could be wrong though. It's a different discussion though.



mack8 said:


> Similarly the F-7s would serve same LIFT role for the MiG-29/Su-24/Su-22 fleets, no need to poo-poo it. Re MiG-29s, even an upgrade similar with the syrian or serbian ones, with improved radar, R-77 and Talisman ECM pods, and again perhaps the IFR probe tested years back, would be a great boost.



MIG-29 fleet badly needs MLU and upgrades so if it happens for them then good otherwise I see them going in storage like how most of the F-14 fleet spent their life in 90s. Ironically ours are 9.12 with old RPKL-29 Radar and no e-warfare suite. They are basically MiIG-23ML in MIG-29 body with old Sapfir-29 system. According to Twitter aviation journalists, an extensive Russian-assisted MLU+Upgrade plan is being implemented for MIGS and a facility is already launched at Mehrabad for it. Not sure what to make of it. I would want them to ask Russia for more airframes. At least 50 more, as they ordered 48 more in 1990s. The current weapons package on MIGS will make them be beaten by even fully operationalized Kowsars in IRIAF let alone F-14AM. 

If they are not upgraded by Russians, I would want HESA + IEI to put even a more improved Kowsar avionics package on them to keep them relevant in modern combat. 



mack8 said:


> As to the Mirage F1, again why not but the Bayenat radar on it and new avionics, to add another valuable squadron of planes? Given Iran's situation every airframe worths it's weight in gold. I know they were trying to help when they gave the Su-25s to Iraq, i understand that, but i wouldn't even done that, i'm sure Russia could have provided some extra airframes.



Mirage F1EQ is a complicated platform with no deep infrastructure inside Iran to tackle it. What you are saying could be useful if we had some 100 airframes to create a strong fleet but we only have 23 of these. This plane has a bad reputation in IRIAF because it was beaten 34:1 at the hands of tomcat during the Iran-Iraq war (according to Tom cooper). Along with F-7N and F-5E fleet, these old relics need to go to save money and resources. They are offering nothing in IRIAF.

With Kowsar built from scratch (read about brand new prototype 3-7400), HESA can churn out as many airframes as required as long as there is cash. Which I believe is one of the reasons they got rid of entire squadrons of Su-22 and Su-25. For a 9-10 Million price tag you get a brand new Kowsar (7 million for the extensive SLEP + upgrade).



mack8 said:


> I see lots of posts devoted to F-5 upgrades, but how about F-4 Dowran and F-14AM upgrades, how far are they along these days? Also any sort of hint as to an iranian copy/upgrade of AIM-7, if they put an ARH seeker on it that again would be a big boost for the F-4 and F-14 fleets, and even for a Mirage F1 upgrade.
> 
> PS : I see you've touched the F-14 upgrade above already.
> PPS: A PL-12 copy/equivalent would make more sense indeed, as it could possibly be used on the F-5s as well.



I did a slide on F-14 AM upgrade, I will post it here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> You are right. Utility of Fakour-90 on Kowsar is limited. Kowsar's Bayyenat-II (Grifo 346 ditto) has a search range of 110 Km and Track range of 93 KM for a small fighter (imagine a F-16). So lets say a Kowsar tracks a F-16C/D at 90-93 km, which turns back and races away using its 1.0 Mach linear dash, then Kowsar will have to chase the plane to keep illuminating it to guide the Fakour-90 being a SARH seeker. Imagine its a border incursion, if the enemy comes in to release a SOW/PGM and Kowsar goes up to intercept it at BVR ranges, the SARH guidance will force Kowsar to chase the escaping enemy which could lead it into an ambush. Case becomes different if Fakour-90 is ARH which it will be in form of Maghsoud (Fakour-90-2) which has a range of 200 KM with ARH. On the other hand, Fakour-90 on F-14AM means the SAIRAN digitalised AWG-9+ will keep illuminating the target for ~270 km so there is no easy escape for enemy. Mind you The F-14AM also carries ARH AIM-54+ (Babaei Missile Industries overhauled/upgraded 40 Units). So a pair of F-14AM can combined release 4 x Fakour-90 + 4 x AIM-54+ and climb up at 35000 ft to see the demise of enemy from distance.
> 
> But there is a bigger problem, the deployment of Fakour-90 on a Kowsar airframe is just too problematic.
> 
> - Fakhour-90 is atleast 450-500 KG. This means that at best a kowsar is going to lift two of these under wing with one 1040 ltr tanks. Hence, plane is already lifting 2000 KG without Sidewinders. Also the diameter of the missile is almost same as AGM-65 Maverick so there will be low ground clearance as was noted in F-20 Tigershark's tests with maverick.
> 
> - The air drag will be increased to the point that plane will have low G limits, climbe rate, pitch/roll/yaw mobility.
> 
> - RCS will enhance to the point that Kowsar will lose its small sized 1m2 RCS advantage at BVR ranges. An enemy armed with Meteor or AIM-120C will see it from distance and shoot their own BVR missile at Kowsar, which will be a sitting duck with compromised manuvering.
> 
> View attachment 858743
> 
> 
> Only solution is to either procure PL-12 + PL-15 from CATIC, China or R-77AE from Russia. *OR *work on producing a local PL-12/15 R-77AE equivalent. We have Kowsar-I, in few years there will be Kowsar-II. What ARH LR-BVR missile will arm these fighters or future UCAV wingmen ? not Fakour-90 or Maghsoud. Those are for larger fighters and I believe will be retired along with F-14 or F-4 fleet.


another solution work on something based on AIM-7, and produce something compared to envisioned Sparrow II that failed to materialize because limitation of electronic of 60s and 70s


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> another solution work on something based on AIM-7, and produce something compared to envisioned Sparrow II that failed to materialize because limitation of electronic of 60s and 70s



Ira only got some 350-400 AIM-7E2. Out of which half survived the war. Even if the Babaei group (which deals with A2A missiles development and overhauls) puts an ARH on the AIM-7E2 ditto airframe with a replicated motor (MK52) the range will still be 45 km which is just not enough for an ARH missile when the enemy coming at you is coming in with AIM-120C/D (C7 KSA, D US/UK) and Meteor (KSA, UK, France). Fatter/AIM-9P already gives Kowsar a passive seeking range at 35-40 km from all aspects so I see no point in AIM-7E2 replicas of Iran with some 45 KM range. It was a failed missile anyways which resulted in speeding up AIM-120 development in the 80s.

What Kowsar-I/II needs or will need is a 120-160 km ranging ARH with ECM that Kowsar-I/II, future UCAV wingmen can carry. It must have a max range of 160 KM with no escape zone of at least 60-70 KM, otherwise what is the point of having a long-range tracking radar on the aircraft?.

Development of Maghsoud fits the bill except the fact no fighter in IRIAF except F-14 will carry it. Seriously speaking, Iran needs to smuggle R-77AE/SD from Syria, Yemen, Kazakhastan, Venezuela and reverse engineer their airframes + motors and with a universal seeker ARH that can be used by atleast the entire interceptor force.

OR Purchase PL-12 + PL-15 like a good boi from China or above mentioned ones from Russia.

...........................................

Btw if anybody missed this pic a year ago, this is Maghsoud LR-BVR missile (or Fakour-90-2) for F-14AM fleet, to be tested. It supposedly has a range of ~200 km with powerful ARH seeker and ECM (keyaero). Unfortunately it seems to be as large and heavy as Fakour-90. So Unless they get F-14 fleet to atleast 50 airframe strong and all upgraded to F-14AM standards. I see no utility of this missile ? F-4E/D with Bayyenat-I radar barely can pull a tracking range of 110 KM (search 150 km)? (based on T/R elements compared to JL-10A) so it wont be using this missile either.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Ira only got some 350-400 AIM-7E2. Out of which half survived the war. Even if the Babaei group (which deals with A2A missiles development and overhauls) puts an ARH on the AIM-7E2 ditto airframe with a replicated motor (MK52) the range will still be 45 km which is just not enough for an ARH missile when the enemy coming at you is coming in with AIM-120C/D (C7 KSA, D US/UK) and Meteor (KSA, UK, France). Fatter/AIM-9P already gives Kowsar a passive seeking range at 35-40 km from all aspects so I see no point in AIM-7E2 replicas of Iran with some 45 KM range. It was a failed missile anyways which resulted in speeding up AIM-120 development in the 80s.


aim-9 iran get had 10-15km range most , fatter has 40km . certainly beside electronics , engine technology also advanced much.
AIM-7 weight half of Fakour and is smaller so even if we manage to produce a 90km missile out of it, that would be a far more feasible solution for Kowsar BVR missile than anything derived from Fakour missile


drmeson said:


> Development of Maghsoud fits the bill except the fact no fighter in IRIAF except F-14 will carry it. Seriously speaking, Iran needs to smuggle R-77AE/SD from Syria, Yemen, Kazakhastan, Venezuela and reverse engineer their airframes + motors and with a universal seeker ARH that can be used by atleast the entire interceptor force.


honestly I rather we build our own missile. AIM-7 if modernized can become something comparable to PL-12 after all china built PL-12 after they mastered PL-11 which was a copy of AIM-7.



drmeson said:


> Btw if anybody missed this pic a year ago, this is Maghsoud LR-BVR missile (or Fakour-90-2) for F-14AM fleet, to be tested. It supposedly has a range of ~200 km with powerful ARH seeker and ECM (keyaero). Unfortunately it seems to be as large and heavy as Fakour-90. So Unless they get F-14 fleet to atleast 50 airframe strong and all upgraded to F-14AM standards. I see no utility of this missile ? F-4E/D with Bayyenat-I radar barely can pull a tracking range of 110 KM (search 150 km)? (based on T/R elements compared to JL-10A) so it wont be using this missile either.


well if in search mode it can detect a target 150km away then it would be a feasible missile for it as 
1- the missile can lock on target even after it flight 2/3rd of it path and even then it can change its target.
2- you usually don't fire the missile at its extremity of its range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

drmeson said:


> Ira only got some 350-400 AIM-7E2. Out of which half survived the war. Even if the Babaei group (which deals with A2A missiles development and overhauls) puts an ARH on the AIM-7E2 ditto airframe with a replicated motor (MK52) the range will still be 45 km which is just not enough for an ARH missile when the enemy coming at you is coming in with AIM-120C/D (C7 KSA, D US/UK) and Meteor (KSA, UK, France). Fatter/AIM-9P already gives Kowsar a passive seeking range at 35-40 km from all aspects so I see no point in AIM-7E2 replicas of Iran with some 45 KM range. It was a failed missile anyways which resulted in speeding up AIM-120 development in the 80s.
> 
> What Kowsar-I/II needs or will need is a 120-160 km ranging ARH with ECM that Kowsar-I/II, future UCAV wingmen can carry. It must have a max range of 160 KM with no escape zone of at least 60-70 KM, otherwise what is the point of having a long-range tracking radar on the aircraft?.
> 
> Development of Maghsoud fits the bill except the fact no fighter in IRIAF except F-14 will carry it. Seriously speaking, Iran needs to smuggle R-77AE/SD from Syria, Yemen, Kazakhastan, Venezuela and reverse engineer their airframes + motors and with a universal seeker ARH that can be used by atleast the entire interceptor force.
> 
> OR Purchase PL-12 + PL-15 like a good boi from China or above mentioned ones from Russia.
> 
> ...........................................
> 
> Btw if anybody missed this pic a year ago, this is Maghsoud LR-BVR missile (or Fakour-90-2) for F-14AM fleet, to be tested. It supposedly has a range of ~200 km with powerful ARH seeker and ECM (keyaero). Unfortunately it seems to be as large and heavy as Fakour-90. So Unless they get F-14 fleet to atleast 50 airframe strong and all upgraded to F-14AM standards. I see no utility of this missile ? F-4E/D with Bayyenat-I radar barely can pull a tracking range of 110 KM (search 150 km)? (based on T/R elements compared to JL-10A) so it wont be using this missile either.
> 
> View attachment 858795
> View attachment 858796



and ... btw Fakour-90B uses M-190 Solid motor not the M112 that was used for protoypes. The range or acceleration might have been improved. 












https://www.radareghtesad.ir/news/5659/تغییرات-در-مهمترین-موشک-هوابه-هوای-ایرانی-گام-های-بلند-برای


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> aim-9 iran get had 10-15km range most , fatter has 40km . certainly beside electronics , engine technology also advanced much.
> AIM-7 weight half of Fakour and is smaller so even if we manage to produce a 90km missile out of it, that would be a far more feasible solution for Kowsar BVR missile than anything derived from Fakour missile
> 
> honestly I rather we build our own missile. AIM-7 if modernized can become something comparable to PL-12 after all china built PL-12 after they mastered PL-11 which was a copy of AIM-7.
> 
> 
> well if in search mode it can detect a target 150km away then it would be a feasible missile for it as
> 1- the missile can lock on target even after it flight 2/3rd of it path and even then it can change its target.
> 2- you usually don't fire the missile at its extremity of its range



- AIM-9P which Fatter is based upon has a range of almost 36 KM, Probably close to 40 if fired at a higher speed. But for some reason Fatter is a healthy 3 KG heavier (88 KG vs 85 KG) than AIM-9P despite having a composite body. Extra fuel ? Better seeker ? dual seeker ? something is 3 Kg heavier in it.

You know I was reading about AIM-9X Block II/III development and the USN itself is saying that it has a range of ~60 KM (more than 60 % increase in the current 22 miles range) Just by adding more fuel to the motor.

Iran has a local Fatter program for last 10+ years. They are so confident in this missile that they have made it into a A2A All aspect WVR for Kowsar + F-14AM, Naval SHORAD, an A2G Anti-tank variant etc. As a matter of fact it is one of the most successful projects of Iranian missile combat aviation industry that never got the spot light it deserved because its just a sidewinder in the end. It doesnt get the spotlight that Fakour-90 gets. So thats a possibility that they may just add more fuel to increase the range into BVR domain like AIM-9X Block II/III has. Same company that produced Fakours did not take any risk with Shalamche M112 motors and replicated an exact copy but they later changed it to M190 which now powers Fakour-90B so I won't be too surprised if they have a similar Fatter-BVR plan up the sleeve.

if this plan is implemented then IRST and HMD are a must in Kowsar's next generation. A local IRST options for IRIAF for the next generation of fighters exists in form local Khordad system's *TIC-S-2* that can detect up to 150-300 km depending upon the signature strength. Its highly advanced focal plane array sensor provides very fast real-time image analysis. It is just 60 cm long, 26 cm wide easily integratable in a Kowsar size fighter. It can easily track even a semi-stealth low RCS fighter from distance while at around 2 x 60 - 70 KM Fatter-BVR can be released and Kowsar can leave the arena while turning its Bayyenat-II off and Sairan's Jammers on.

How do I know such a system will work? Its already happening on Karrar. 
































Iran is one of those lucky countries that it has all the ingredients just in place for future developments. All we need is proper planners and management with vision. No more Parvaneh, Vahidi, Dehghan.



Hack-Hook said:


> well if in search mode it can detect a target 150km away then it would be a feasible missile for it as
> 1- the missile can lock on target even after it flight 2/3rd of it path and even then it can change its target.
> 2- you usually don't fire the missile at its extremity of its range



According to a Fakour-90 article in an aviation magazine, they did try Fakour-90 on Dowran upgraded F-4E/D but due to the weight of the missile 3 x missiles could only be carried under-fuselage or inside pylons which means F-4E now had to fly with only internal fuel and plane was barely pulling 4 G's with them. A total disaster if you ask me. Besides, the plane will be able to barely track a target at ~110 Km so whats the point in carrying a 150 KM ranging missile ?

Fakour/Maghsoud are monster weapons if you ask me with ECM, long-range etc but they are for F-14AM and they will die with F-14 fleet's retirement which is why I think the sooner IRIAF gets a smaller LR-BVR the better. Be it PL-15 or R-37 or a local missile but thats a must.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

When I first heard of Kowsar in 2018, this model from an exhibition in 2015 came to my mind. A literal F-20. 

may be there is an intention to create this thing in future.. _but_ _seeing is believing so no hopes. _

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mack8

drmeson said:


> When I first heard of Kowsar in 2018, this model from an exhibition in 2015 came to my mind. A literal F-20.
> 
> may be there is an intention to create this thing in future.. _but_ _seeing is believing so no hopes. _
> 
> 
> View attachment 858916


Interesting but is this at a defence expo, or perhaps just a modelling expo, there's some biplane model in the backround. Perhaps it's just some what-if F-20 in iranian colours made by a modeller?

At any rate that single engine, twin tail, mid wing F-5 derivative i posted earlier actually looks like a genuinely decent project, pity it hasn't been followed through. Alongside the Mukhamedov M-ATF Shafaq they at least seem to have the potential for a genuine, competent iranian light fighter if there was the determination and leadership to carry one or the other through, but again morons and profiteers brough shame on the iranian aeronautical industry and image in general with their stunts. I can't believe it's close to 20 years since the Shafaq mock-up was shown, what a huge lost oportunity.

I say whoever is in charge of developing all these recent iranian SAM systems, which look competent, well designed and capable, put him in charge of aircraft development and double his pay!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mack8

drmeson said:


> Ira only got some 350-400 AIM-7E2. Out of which half survived the war. Even if the Babaei group (which deals with A2A missiles development and overhauls) puts an ARH on the AIM-7E2 ditto airframe with a replicated motor (MK52) the range will still be 45 km which is just not enough for an ARH missile when the enemy coming at you is coming in with AIM-120C/D (C7 KSA, D US/UK) and Meteor (KSA, UK, France). Fatter/AIM-9P already gives Kowsar a passive seeking range at 35-40 km from all aspects so I see no point in AIM-7E2 replicas of Iran with some 45 KM range. It was a failed missile anyways which resulted in speeding up AIM-120 development in the 80s.
> 
> What Kowsar-I/II needs or will need is a 120-160 km ranging ARH with ECM that Kowsar-I/II, future UCAV wingmen can carry. It must have a max range of 160 KM with no escape zone of at least 60-70 KM, otherwise what is the point of having a long-range tracking radar on the aircraft?.
> 
> Development of Maghsoud fits the bill except the fact no fighter in IRIAF except F-14 will carry it. Seriously speaking, Iran needs to smuggle R-77AE/SD from Syria, Yemen, Kazakhastan, Venezuela and reverse engineer their airframes + motors and with a universal seeker ARH that can be used by atleast the entire interceptor force.
> 
> OR Purchase PL-12 + PL-15 like a good boi from China or above mentioned ones from Russia.
> 
> ...........................................
> 
> Btw if anybody missed this pic a year ago, this is Maghsoud LR-BVR missile (or Fakour-90-2) for F-14AM fleet, to be tested. It supposedly has a range of ~200 km with powerful ARH seeker and ECM (keyaero). Unfortunately it seems to be as large and heavy as Fakour-90. So Unless they get F-14 fleet to atleast 50 airframe strong and all upgraded to F-14AM standards. I see no utility of this missile ? F-4E/D with Bayyenat-I radar barely can pull a tracking range of 110 KM (search 150 km)? (based on T/R elements compared to JL-10A) so it wont be using this missile either.
> 
> View attachment 858795
> View attachment 858796


Regarding an iranian AIM-7 copy, surely give the advances in technology and especially the experience in creating all these new SAM systems, motors, warheads, seekers etc. they can get perhaps 80-100km range out of such an up to date AIM-7 copy?

Actually that 9th Dey missile also looks like a good base for an AAM, is there info as to it's weight and size? Though i don't think it will be compatible with the recess launchers on F-4 and F-14, which probably is the main factor to consider when designing a new iranian BVR AAM.


----------



## drmeson

mack8 said:


> Interesting but is this at a defence expo, or perhaps just a modelling expo, there's some biplane model in the backround. Perhaps it's just some what-if F-20 in iranian colours made by a modeller?
> 
> At any rate that single engine, twin tail, mid wing F-5 derivative i posted earlier actually looks like a genuinely decent project, pity it hasn't been followed through. Alongside the Mukhamedov M-ATF Shafaq they at least seem to have the potential for a genuine, competent iranian light fighter if there was the determination and leadership to carry one or the other through, but again morons and profiteers brough shame on the iranian aeronautical industry and image in general with their stunts. I can't believe it's close to 20 years since the Shafaq mock-up was shown, what a huge lost oportunity.
> 
> I say whoever is in charge of developing all these recent iranian SAM systems, which look competent, well designed and capable, put him in charge of aircraft development and double his pay!



-I dont focus much on these toy models. For all we know, it could have been a startup aviation company presenting its vision through models or whatever. I was just saying that I was hoping for something like this.

-I dont agree with this thinking that changing wings 1 foot above or putting another tail will just change something drastic in a plane. This ain't the 70s when a MIG-21 was beaten every time by an F-4 because F-4 could climb faster or had more faster dash. Today's aircraft are literally flying electronic laboratories. The one that can see the enemy first, jam adversary while save itself from jamming, has better electronic awareness, and fires missiles first wins. An F-35 would be beaten by an F-14 in speed and climb but that does not matter anymore. In IRIAF a fully operationalized Kowsar can beat a MIG-29 9.12 from distance which has much better climb rate, more turning rate, and whatnot but it has a lesser avionics suite so it will be beaten from BVR, jammed, blinded, sot at etc. I have been the following IRIAF since the 2000s and I was myself very negative about it, I am still not happy but in the last 4 years things have started to pick up at a slow pace but in some ways:

-We have a national fighter now. Like I said before if nothing else, We can make some 250 of these with upgrades for 3 billion USD. Avionics, radar, nav-comm etc are comparable to any 4.0 generation light combat fighter. It was a surprise trust me. For this initial production, they may use some parts from the repository (I hope the entire benign fleet of F-5E/F is dismantled for this requirement) but we know out of the current 4 operational aircrafts one was built from scratch (37400) so an amazing capability has been demonstrated. Forget it's an F-5 copied or driven airframe, just focus on the fact that it's a fighter that has slaughtered F-14, and F-15 in mock dogfights and it has modern avionics, radar, datalink etc.

- Local Turbojet is there to equip Kowsar-I/II or any future A2A UCAV as well. No more dependency in that domain. Its not a large turbofan but it will get the vehicle airborne. Also there is a local smaller very modern turbofan that probably ... might turn into a larger one in time.

-IRIAF is seriously getting into data linking itself with a network-centric air defense that involves long-range search/track radars (a GWACS network), Jammers, UCAVS, Air defense batteries/Ambush SAMS. BT's article about IRIAF operations during the Nagorno Karabakh war confirmed the F-14AM+Kowsar being part of this system (Sadly MIGS are not). One of the Generals in charge of the Kowsar program (Afshin Khajehfard, if you want to look) confirmed the efficient datalink with UCAVs, fighters etc. So what was a dead force a few years back is now getting into a bigger scheme of air defense so it will (a) get its deserved attention (b) well serve as part of the system so its weaknesses won't be there to exploit by the enemy as it won't be the only force they are fighting in a single zone. An intruder will have to deal with detection, tracking, jamming, and shooting from the ground and air all while their bases be attacked.

-Fakour-90 came out. It's an Long-range BVR missile that is extensively tested against jamming, for track-lock on very low RCS targets, and developed after years of research on Hawk clones and AIM-54. Reportedly, its production has been concluded with ~100+ missiles and a newer ARH version with ~200 KM range is coming from same company. The downside, we dont have any platform to fire it from except F-14AM (the upgraded ones).

- Quite an extensive upgradation on F-4E/D (not sure how many airframes) "Dowran" (comparable to JH-7 of PLAAF) and fair level one F-14A to F-14AM. I would count SU-22 upgradation here too by IRGC-AF but It's a stupid aircraft to be honest and the fleet is small.

-A growing fleet of MALE UCAVS. KAMAN-22 and FOTROS have been shown with SARs, ECM pods, LACM, and glide PGMs. That hints towards use as CAS, intruders with possible ELINT roles i future. Even some sort of a wingman is being created in form of a Karrar carrying a handsome ranging WVR IR-seeking missile. whatever it will lead to, the thought is there. We know Iran has one of the largest UCAV fleet in the world (Roughly ~300-320 quite heavily armed UCAV fleet). But that was not contributing to IRIAF. Now they seem to have come into this domain with KAMAN-22, FOTROS, KAMAN-12, ABABIL-5. The low RCS flying wing fleet of SHAHED-191/171 is not part of IRIAF yet but they may adapt them in the future or even if they dont they are going to share the same airspace with integration. They are there to intrude enemy airspace without being tracked even if detected by search radars (Israel had to rush F-35 to WVR ranges to track them after air defense failed). 

-Extremely efficient Ambush SAM system ranging from SHORADS to LORADS. Separate topic but they are part of the Air space defense system. They are the biggest defender force of Iranian skies.

-Sudden rise of A2G munitions, Fajr ALBM, Glide PGMs, AL-ShCM, ALCM from attack aircraft, and UCAVS.

- Locally produced newer airborne radars + Avionics: Bayyenat-I on F-4E/D which looks similar to JL-10A, Bayyenat-II on Kowsar which is ditto of Grifo-346. Absar SAR on UCAVs, Another SAR radar that they revealed with the newer Shahed-129, can not remember its name. With all locally produced e-warfare systems, navigations etc I dont care if the origin was foreign. This is huge for a country that 10-15 years back was flying radar less Vietnamese rebuilt F-5E as a "local fighter" and used to show APQ-153's antenna change as a "big upgrade". 

Point is, things are still not there but its better than those times when stupid people were in charge oflocal "F/A-18" by welding tails to damaged F-5 airframes or presenting mockup concepts as 5th generation in-production aircraft. For a better future, all we need now is:

-MIG fleet MLU+upgradation and possible expansion if airframes can be arranged
-Kowsar-II with AESA/HOTAS, a light 4+ generation interceptor
-Local lighter BVR missile

... With proper $$$ flow + keeping Nojeh coup fearing Akhoonds away, this system will grow into a strong AD unit of some 200 x all 4.0-4+ generation interceptors + multilayered integrated AD. Again something is better than nothing.



mack8 said:


> Regarding an iranian AIM-7 copy, surely give the advances in technology and especially the experience in creating all these new SAM systems, motors, warheads, seekers etc. they can get perhaps 80-100km range out of such an up to date AIM-7 copy?
> 
> Actually that 9th Dey missile also looks like a good base for an AAM, is there info as to it's weight and size? Though i don't think it will be compatible with the recess launchers on F-4 and F-14, which probably is the main factor to consider when designing a new iranian BVR AAM.



Still not in favor of AIM-7 because we have AIM-7E2 with 45 KM range. It will be better to rather add more range to already in the production Fatter (slight heavier AIM-9P) to AIM-9X BlK II/III range.

No intention has ever been shown to adapt Taer-2B missile as AAM. Although, I remember discussions among members of it becoming a MICA replica if adapted as AAM.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> - AIM-9P which Fatter is based upon has a range of almost 36 KM, Probably close to 40 if fired at a higher speed. But for some reason Fatter is a healthy 3 KG heavier (88 KG vs 85 KG) than AIM-9P despite having a composite body. Extra fuel ? Better seeker ? dual seeker ? something is 3 Kg heavier in it.


maybe different engine
but about AIM-9p , its delivery started at 1978 are you sure we get those not the previous version that its delivery began from 1972 ?
the difference in weight maybe is because we developed it separately from AIM-9p and its not an aim-9p reverse engineered missile, so there are those changes in weight.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Iran has a local Fatter program for last 10+ years. They are so confident in this missile that they have made it into a A2A All aspect WVR for Kowsar + F-14AM, Naval SHORAD, an A2G Anti-tank variant etc.


well, what can I say , our infrared detectors are not bad at all. and the missile specially its modern versions are good. (specially if the electronics is powerful enough so they can put some fancy algorithm in it that prevent it from being fooled by flares)


drmeson said:


> As a matter of fact it is one of the most successful projects of Iranian missile combat aviation industry that never got the spot light it deserved because its just a sidewinder in the end.


only if people knew a modern sidewinder is more expensive and complex than AIM-120 to produce .


drmeson said:


> Same company that produced Fakours did not take any risk with Shalamche M112 motors and replicated an exact copy but they later changed it to M190 which now powers Fakour-90B so I won't be too surprised if they have a similar Fatter-BVR plan up the sleeve.


a possibility , but the range is limited by infrared seekewr , now if they add another type of guidance to it. for example add a mode to it so the missile in first half of its flight rely on airplane radar then turn on its seeker and lock on what the airplane point at. but this mode had both some advantage( range) and disadvantage (the airplane must keep radar on targets for some time) 


drmeson said:


> if this plan is implemented then IRST and HMD are a must in Kowsar's next generation. A local IRST options for IRIAF for the next generation of fighters exists in form local Khordad system's *TIC-S-2* that can detect up to 150-300 km depending upon the signature strength. Its highly advanced focal plane array sensor provides very fast real-time image analysis. It is just 60 cm long, 26 cm wide easily integratable in a Kowsar size fighter. It can easily track even a semi-stealth low RCS fighter from distance while at around 2 x 60 - 70 KM Fatter-BVR can be released and Kowsar can leave the arena while turning its Bayyenat-II off and Sairan's Jammers on.


Kowsar is a small airplane , if they want to put that there , they probably have to do some modification .


drmeson said:


> - Quite an extensive upgradation on F-4E/D (not sure how many airframes) "Dowran" (comparable to JH-7 of PLAAF) and fair level one F-14A to F-14AM. I would count SU-22 upgradation here too by IRGC-AF but It's a stupid aircraft to be honest and the fleet is small.


there I don't think , IRGC also made much of upgrade on it , they wanted a fast bomber that could use our range of domestic standoff weapons . they get it in those Su-22 with some modification . I'm sure they retire it when we can manage to produce our heavy engine , and turn Kowsar into something it was planned to be


drmeson said:


> -A growing fleet of MALE UCAVS. KAMAN-22 and FOTROS have been shown with SARs, ECM pods, LACM, and glide PGMs. That hints towards use as CAS, intruders with possible ELINT roles i future.


kaman-22 probably but honestly unless they put an engine like what IRGC put in Gaza let consider it as a tech demonstration.


drmeson said:


> We know Iran has one of the largest UCAV fleet in the world (Roughly ~300-320 quite heavily armed UCAV fleet). But that was not contributing to IRIAF. Now they seem to have come into this domain with KAMAN-22, FOTROS, KAMAN-12, ABABIL-5.


I still think IRIAF must leave this domain to Army Aviation. 
CAS must be done by army itself , not by Airforce. that only made logistic more complex.
air force must focus on fighters and strategic bombing of enemy target , let battlefield be managed by army aviation as it was their intended role from begin.

air force need to focus on suicide uavs , and UAVs that follow the concept of wingman. and also information gathering ones. Kaman-12 or ababil-5 must be given to Army aviation , Karrar must be developed into a Wingman and Kaman-22 must morph into something like RQ-4.
Fotros , let be honest, what for if the engine only can support it up to 7.5km altitude ?


drmeson said:


> Still not in favor of AIM-7 because we have AIM-7E2 with 45 KM range. It will be better to rather add more range to already in the production Fatter (slight heavier AIM-9P) to AIM-9X BlK II/III range.


upgraded aim-7 don't necessary mean we just add some fuel to our aim-7e2 to increase the range , it means we upgrade its electronic and software . the missile is answer for our kowsar fleet BVR problems, if properly upgraded , fakour because of its size only is applicable in our F-14s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe different engine
> but about AIM-9p , its delivery started at 1978 are you sure we get those not the previous version that its delivery began from 1972 ?
> the difference in weight maybe is because we developed it separately from AIM-9p and its not an aim-9p reverse engineered missile, so there are those changes in weight.



Here is the thing. AIM-9P/N/J have the same aerodynamic shape, weight, length etc. Only difference is an Indium antimonide (InSb) seeker for longer wavelength sensitivity + optical filter for all aspect attack. What IIAF got for F-14A was AIM-9J the pre version of AIM-9P. When Fatter was unvieled in an exhibition show in 2000s they presented it as "an All aspect heat seekin missile". Shahsafi new IRIAF Commander said that a maximgum of 40 km range during tests has been achieved (in line with AIM-9P/J). Authors related Fatter to be an AIM-9P copy because of all aspect capability which comes from an indigenous seeker that resembles none of the AIM-9 series seekers including AIM-9J that IIAF received. This seeker, whatever it is, also 3 Kg heavier than AIM-9J and AIM-9P.







Knowing the sudden rise in use of Focal Planar Array FPA Imaging IR guidance in Air defence IRSTs of Iran, I won't be too surprised if there are plans to use FPA for A2A missiles.

Turning Fatter into AIM-9X BlK II/III is well within Iranian reach and I will tell you how. We know multiple Iranian companies producing FPA (Focal planar array) seekers for AD batteries IRSTs. The above given Khordad system's *TIC-S-2* uses a long-range secondary FPA tracking. The same system of guidance is used by modern most AIM-9X Blk III that arms F-22/F-35.

So with an FPA seeker and 1.6 times the solid fuel ... You get a modern IR-seeking missile pulling 30 G's with no escape zone of 60 KM. If slaved with HMD presented above, this becomes a formidable system even for low RCS adversaries.

I will write more on this subject

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Here is the thing. AIM-9P/N/J have the same aerodynamic shape, weight, length etc. Only difference is an Indium antimonide (InSb) seeker for longer wavelength sensitivity + optical filter for all aspect attack. What IIAF got for F-14A was AIM-9J the pre version of AIM-9P. When Fatter was unvieled in an exhibition show in 2000s they presented it as "an All aspect IR seeking missiles. Shahsafi new IRIAF Commander said that a maximum of 40 km range during tests has been achieved (in line with AIM-9P/J). Authors related Fatter to be an AIM-9P copy because of all aspect capability which comes from an indigenous seeker that resembles none of the AIM-9 series seekers including AIM-9J that IIAF received. This seeker, whatever it is, also 3 Kg heavier than AIM-9J and AIM-9P.
> 
> View attachment 859227
> 
> 
> Knowing the sudden rise in use of Focal Planar Array FPA Imaging IR guidance in Air defence IRSTs of Iran, I won't be too surprised if there are plans to use FPA for A2A missiles.
> 
> Turning Fatter into AIM-9X BlK II/III is well within Iranian reach and I will tell you how. We know multiple Iranian companies producing FPA (Focal planar array) seekers for AD batteries IRSTs. The above given Khordad system's *TIC-S-2* uses a long-range secondary FPA tracking. The same system of guidance is used by modern most AIM-9X Blk III that arms F-33/F-35.
> 
> So with an FPA seeker and 1.6 times the solid fuel ... You get a modern IR-seeking missile pulling 30 G's with no escape zone of 60 KM. If slaved with HMD presented above, this becomes a formidable system even for low RCS adversaries.
> 
> I will write more on this subject


you see there is at least 5 generation of AIM-9P and as far ad i'm aware compared to AIM-9J they used a new engine in it and it use newer electronic , that new engine resulted in longer range for aim-9p compared to aim-9J





The Sidewinder Story / The Evolution of the AIM-9 Missile


AIM-9 Sidewinder missile



ausairpower.net






> *AIM-9 EARLY SUBTYPE COMPARISON TABLE*​


​
SubtypeAIM-9BAIM-9DAIM-9EAIM-9GAIM-9HServiceJointUSNUSAFUSNUSNSeeker Design Features OriginNWCAIM-9BAIM-9BAIM-9DAIM-9GDetectorPbSPbSPbSPbSPbSCoolingUncooledNitrogenPeltierNitrogenNitrogenDome WindowGlassMgF2MgF2MgF2MgF2Reticle Speed [Hz]70125100125125ModulationAMAMAMAMAMTrack Rate [deg/s]11.012.016.512.0>12.0Electronicsthermionicthermionichybridthermionicsolid stateWarheadblast/fragmentcontinuous rodblast/fragmentcontinuous rodcontinuous rodFusePassive-IR,Passive-IR/HFPassive-IRPassive-IR/HFPassive-IR/HFPowerplant Specifications ManufacturerThiokolHerculesThiokolHerculesHercules BermiteTypeMk.17Mk.36Mk.17Mk.36Mk.36 Mod 5, 6, 7LauncherAero-IIILAU-7AAero-IIILAU-7ALAU-7AMissile Dimensions[ft] Length9.289.49.849.49.4Span1.832.061.832.062.06Weight[lb]155.2195.1164.2191.8186.3



*AIM-9 LATE SUBTYPE COMPARISON TABLE*​
​
*Subtype**AIM-9J**AIM-9L**AIM-9M**AIM-9P-4/5**AIM-9R*ServiceUSAFJointJointUSAFUSNSeeker Design Features OriginAIM-9EAIM-9HAIM-9LAIM-9J/NAIM-9MDetectorPbSInSbInSbInSbFocal Plane ArrayCoolingPeltierArgonArgonArgon-Dome WindowMgF2MgF2MgF2MgF2GlassReticle Speed [Hz]100125125100Focal Plane ArrayModulationAMFMFMFMFocal Plane ArrayTrack Rate [deg/s]16.5classifiedclassified>16.5classifiedElectronicshybridsolid statesolid statesolid statesolid stateWarheadblast/fragmentionAnnular BFAnnular BFAnnular BFAnnular BFFusePassive-IRIR/LaserIR/LaserIR/LaserIR/LaserPowerplant Specifications ManufacturerHercules/AerojetHercules/BermiteMTI/HerculesHercules/AerojetMTI/HerculesTypeMk.17Mk.36 Mod.7,8Mk.36 Mod.9SR.116Mk.36 Mod.9LauncherAero-IIICommonCommonCommonCommonMissile Dimensions[ft] Length10.09.59.510.09.5Span1.92.12.11.92.1Weight[lb]170.0191.0191.0190.0191.0


by the way are you sure we get AIM-9J for our F-14 not AIM-9G/H ?
AIM-9J was an air force weapon while AIM-9G/H was a navy weapon.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> you see there is at least 5 generation of AIM-9P and as far ad i'm aware compared to AIM-9J they used a new engine in it and it use newer electronic , that new engine resulted in longer range for aim-9p compared to aim-9J
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sidewinder Story / The Evolution of the AIM-9 Missile
> 
> 
> AIM-9 Sidewinder missile
> 
> 
> 
> ausairpower.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> SubtypeAIM-9BAIM-9DAIM-9EAIM-9GAIM-9HServiceJointUSNUSAFUSNUSNSeeker Design FeaturesOriginNWCAIM-9BAIM-9BAIM-9DAIM-9GDetectorPbSPbSPbSPbSPbSCoolingUncooledNitrogenPeltierNitrogenNitrogenDome WindowGlassMgF2MgF2MgF2MgF2Reticle Speed [Hz]70125100125125ModulationAMAMAMAMAMTrack Rate [deg/s]11.012.016.512.0>12.0Electronicsthermionicthermionichybridthermionicsolid stateWarheadblast/fragmentcontinuous rodblast/fragmentcontinuous rodcontinuous rodFusePassive-IR,Passive-IR/HFPassive-IRPassive-IR/HFPassive-IR/HFPowerplant SpecificationsManufacturerThiokolHerculesThiokolHerculesHercules BermiteTypeMk.17Mk.36Mk.17Mk.36Mk.36 Mod 5, 6, 7LauncherAero-IIILAU-7AAero-IIILAU-7ALAU-7AMissile Dimensions[ft]Length9.289.49.849.49.4Span1.832.061.832.062.06Weight[lb]155.2195.1164.2191.8186.3
> 
> 
> 
> *AIM-9 LATE SUBTYPE COMPARISON TABLE*​
> ​
> *Subtype**AIM-9J**AIM-9L**AIM-9M**AIM-9P-4/5**AIM-9R*ServiceUSAFJointJointUSAFUSNSeeker Design FeaturesOriginAIM-9EAIM-9HAIM-9LAIM-9J/NAIM-9MDetectorPbSInSbInSbInSbFocal Plane ArrayCoolingPeltierArgonArgonArgon-Dome WindowMgF2MgF2MgF2MgF2GlassReticle Speed [Hz]100125125100Focal Plane ArrayModulationAMFMFMFMFocal Plane ArrayTrack Rate [deg/s]16.5classifiedclassified>16.5classifiedElectronicshybridsolid statesolid statesolid statesolid stateWarheadblast/fragmentionAnnular BFAnnular BFAnnular BFAnnular BFFusePassive-IRIR/LaserIR/LaserIR/LaserIR/LaserPowerplant SpecificationsManufacturerHercules/AerojetHercules/BermiteMTI/HerculesHercules/AerojetMTI/HerculesTypeMk.17Mk.36 Mod.7,8Mk.36 Mod.9SR.116Mk.36 Mod.9LauncherAero-IIICommonCommonCommonCommonMissile Dimensions[ft]Length10.09.59.510.09.5Span1.92.12.11.92.1Weight[lb]170.0191.0191.0190.0191.0
> 
> 
> by the way are you sure we get AIM-9J for our F-14 not AIM-9G/H ?
> AIM-9J was an air force weapon while AIM-9G/H was a navy weapon.



AIM-9J and AIM-9P have no difference in ranges. They are the same missile except for all aspects InSB seeker in AIM-9P. Dr. Carlo Kopp who ran Aussie air power says the same. Later AIM-9P4/5 versions had different motors from the same manufacturer but the range remained the same. Fatter has not much of a range enhancement either if you ask me. AIM-9J/P has an effective range of 36 KM. If fired at a higher speed may be more. So Fatter's 40 KM is well within that domain. The range change in this family only occurred in the last decade with AIM-9X Blk II/II with USN saying that range has been enhanced by 60+ % which translates to ~ 60 KM. So even if a USN F-35 or F/A-18 is flying with just Blk III sidewinders it's still capable of attacking the enemy at BVR ranges. Fatter with the same strategy of more fuel, dual (midcourse+terminal) guidance, FPA imaging IR can turn into a deadly BVR weapon for Kowsar-I/II fleet and future A2A UCAVs.

So while they are throwing in money for Fakour-90B and Maghsoud while also purchasing probably PL-12/15 from china in the future (not sure). They have all the ingredients of a dangerous BVR missile at their hands if Fatter undergoes some R&D.

Mind you AIM-9P was or still is the primary killer of NATO AF. They won the war for RAF over Argentina where slow Harriers murdered the Argentina 2 Mach+ Mirages in the air with it. AIM-9P also scored heavily on Iraqi Migs.

.....

IRIAF has never been seen with anything other than AIM-9J or its driven Fatter. Look at the canards and you find nothing but originally supplied AIM-9J or Fatters. Operational Fatters have shiny steel rollerons on tail fins while practice rounds have no rollerons and have blue markings.










Fatter/Azarakhsh Fin section is bit differently constructed from a conventional AIM-9P/J

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> AIM-9J and AIM-9P have no difference in ranges. They are the same missile except for all aspects InSB seeker in AIM-9P. Dr. Carlo Kopp who ran Aussie air power says the same. Later AIM-9P4/5 versions had different motors from the same manufacturer but the range remained the same. Fatter has not much of a range enhancement either if you ask me. AIM-9J/P has an effective range of 36 KM. If fired at a higher speed may be more. So Fatter's 40 KM is well within that domain. The range change in this family only occurred in the last decade with AIM-9X Blk II/II with USN saying that range has been enhanced by 60+ % which translates to ~ 60 KM. So even if a USN F-35 or F/A-18 is flying with just Blk III sidewinders it's still capable of attacking the enemy at BVR ranges. Fatter with the same strategy of more fuel, dual (midcourse+terminal) guidance, FPA imaging IR can turn into a deadly BVR weapon for Kowsar-I/II fleet and future A2A UCAVs.
> 
> So while they are throwing in money for Fakour-90B and Maghsoud while also purchasing probably PL-12/15 from china in the future (not sure). They have all the ingredients of a dangerous BVR missile at their hands if Fatter undergoes some R&D.
> 
> Mind you AIM-9P was or still is the primary killer of NATO AF. They won the war for RAF over Argentina where slow Harriers murdered the Argentina 2 Mach+ Mirages in the air with it. AIM-9P also scored heavily on Iraqi Migs.
> 
> .....
> 
> IRIAF has never been seen with anything other than AIM-9J or its driven Fatter. Look at the canards and you find nothing but originally supplied AIM-9J or Fatters. Operational Fatters have shiny steel rollerons on tail fins while practice rounds have no rollerons and have blue markings.
> 
> View attachment 859271
> 
> View attachment 859269
> 
> 
> Fatter/Azarakhsh Fin section is bit differently constructed from a conventional AIM-9P/J
> 
> View attachment 859272
> View attachment 859275
> View attachment 859270


about AIM-9J and AIM-9P have the same range i have my doubt ,every source i look say 9P is an Improvement over 9J and state one of the improvement is range and engagement envelop.
but honestly hear i can't be sure because very few source make any distinction between AIM-9P1 to AIM-9P5








AIM-9 Sidewinder


MissionThe AIM-9 Sidewinder is a supersonic, heat-seeking, air-to-air missile carried by fighter aircraft. It has a high-explosive warhead and an infrared heat-seeking guidance system. The Sidewinder



www.af.mil






> The AIM-9J, a conversion of the AIM-B and E models, has maneuvering capability for dogfighting, and greater speed and range, giving it greater enhanced aerial combat capability. Deliveries began in 1977 to equip the F-15 and other Sidewinder-compatible aircraft.





> The AIM-9P, an improved version of the J model, has greater engagement boundaries, enabling it to be launched farther from the target. The more maneuverable P model also incorporated improved solid-state electronics that increased reliability and maintainability. Deliveries began in 1978.
> 
> The AIM-9P-1 has an active optical target detector instead of the infrared influence fuse; the AIM-9P-2 added a reduced-smoke motor. The most recently developed version, the AIM-9P-3, combined both the active optical target detector and the reduced-smoke motor. It also has added mechanical strengthening to the warhead as well as the guidance and control section. The improved warhead uses new explosive material that is less sensitive to high temperature and has a longer shelf life.


but don't knew you may be correct , externally the missiles are nearly identical , except you can Fire AIM-9J only toward enemy tail , while AIM-9P can fired from any angle


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> about AIM-9J and AIM-9P have the same range i have my doubt ,every source i look say 9P is an Improvement over 9J and state one of the improvement is range and engagement envelop.
> but honestly hear i can't be sure because very few source make any distinction between AIM-9P1 to AIM-9P5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIM-9 Sidewinder
> 
> 
> MissionThe AIM-9 Sidewinder is a supersonic, heat-seeking, air-to-air missile carried by fighter aircraft. It has a high-explosive warhead and an infrared heat-seeking guidance system. The Sidewinder
> 
> 
> 
> www.af.mil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but don't knew you may be correct , externally the missiles are nearly identical , except you can Fire AIM-9J only toward enemy tail , while AIM-9P can fired from any angle



In your own pasted links, nowhere it is written that AIM-9P and J have different ranges. Read again the author is describing that AIM-9P versions have solid-state electronics, low smoke motor, and in P4/5 we have an InSb detector for all aspect attacks that is it. Same range, same canards, fins, weight. 

Fattar is just Iranian AIM-9P equivalent (that IIAF never received) with a slightly modified fin section. What makes it 3 Kg heavy is probably its seeker. Iranian companies love to play with seekers and motors while retaining the aerodynamics to some degree. 

Fakour-90 retained AIM-54 shape but seeker got changed
Fatter is AIM-9J/P with different seeker
Sayyad has SM-1 like shape with local seeker
Taer-2B/9 Dey = 9M317 with local seeker
Ghader is elongated C-803 with local ARH
List goes on and on

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

شنیدم میراژها به زودی با تسلیحات به نمایش در میان


----------



## drmeson

Saegheh-I 3-7369

Undernose
-TACAN
-UHF/IFF

Dorsal
-ADF antenna
-VHF

Tail
-TACAN
-IFF
-ILS






Hope they get dismantled, they have served their purpose, its time to be useful for KOWSAR fleet.


----------



## aryobarzan

drmeson said:


> Saegheh-I 3-7369
> 
> Undernose
> -TACAN
> -UHF/IFF
> 
> Dorsal
> -ADF antenna
> -VHF
> 
> Tail
> -TACAN
> -IFF
> -ILS
> 
> View attachment 859720
> 
> 
> Hope they get dismantled, they have served their purpose, its time to be useful for KOWSAR fleet.


I have a primitive question..what are the rules for colors of military fighter/bomber/ transport planes...why Iran does not use Grey color used by most fighters..are there any standards for this coloring..


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> I have a primitive question..what are the rules for colors of military fighter/bomber/ transport planes...why Iran does not use Grey color used by most fighters..are there any standards for this coloring..



I have wondered that too, I guess it has more to do with traditions? IIAAF used splinter camo on all their fighters, IRIAF carried that tradition on. Currently its like, 

Splinter for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar, F-5E/F/A/Saeghe, SU-24M, F-7N
Grey/Sky blue for F-14A, RF-4, MIG-29, Mirage F-1
White for of Simorgh F-5B, F-7N
Green for SU-22 (IRGCAF), Azarakhsh prototype
Bue angels Navy blue for Saeghe and Kowsar prototypes 

Its weird tbh to have such clownish colors on war machines, IRIAF/IRGC-AF should go all American Sky-blue with black/Grey radomes. It looks decent for aircraft and makes things look professional. It also tells us what kinds of jokers are occupying decision-making seats in IRIAF. These people are caught up in 1970s-80s when even these track-suit camos were common around the world on military planes. Fortunately, they have not done the same to the UCAV fleet which is just single-tone off-white or Grey/Light blue. 

This should be future IRIAF camo with Kowsar-I/II, MIGs, F-14AM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> I have wondered that too, I guess it has more to do with traditions? IIAAF used splinter camo on all their fighters, IRIAF carried that tradition on. Currently its like,
> 
> Splinter for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar, F-5E/F/A/Saeghe, SU-24M, F-7N
> Grey/Sky blue for F-14A, RF-4, MIG-29, Mirage F-1
> White for of Simorgh F-5B, F-7N
> Green for SU-22 (IRGCAF), Azarakhsh prototype
> Bue angels Navy blue for Saeghe and Kowsar prototypes
> 
> Its weird tbh to have such clownish colors on war machines, IRIAF/IRGC-AF should go all American Sky-blue with black/Grey radomes. It looks decent for aircraft and makes things look professional. It also tells us what kinds of jokers are occupying decision-making seats in IRIAF. These people are caught up in 1970s-80s when even these track-suit camos were common around the world on military planes. Fortunately, they have not done the same to the UCAV fleet which is just single-tone off-white or Grey/Light blue.
> 
> This should be future IRIAF camo with Kowsar-I/II, MIGs, F-14AM.
> 
> View attachment 859834
> View attachment 859835
> View attachment 859836


I fear if they follow Americans , it become the result













but about the color


> Aviation researchers, through trial and error, realized that grey color provided better ‘countershading’ for a military aircraft instead of blue or green camouflage. This countershading technique helps a military aircraft to stay visually indistinguishable from the environment, whereas if an aircraft were painted blue, it would be identifiable from afar on the ground and even in the sky.
> 
> *To have a clear idea, imagine you are looking at a bright blue fighter jet from above, against the terrain. It will be identified in a moment.* Therefore, in comparison, the grey paint is always harder to identify against the haziness of the atmosphere and provide good camouflage for military aircraft in most situations.





> Dark and Light Brown Camouflage used by Middle East Military Forces​Several militaries in the middle east area, including Israeli and Jordanian Air Forces, maintain a fleet of Light and *Dark brown camouflaged aircraft*.
> 
> Considering the terrain they operate on, which is mostly brown desert dunes or mounds, the dark and light brown camouflage enables them to dive down once detected by enemy aircraft and effectively merge with the terrain.





> Dark and Light Blue Camouflage of Russian Air Force​
> Russian Air Force maintains a fleet of Sukhoi SU-34 and MIG-29 which are covered in *Dark and Light Blue camouflage.*
> 
> The Russian Air Force has significant operational presence in the Baltic and other similar snow-covered regions to its east. *The dark and light blue camouflage may therefore be justified as they are flying on a terrain that has either glaciers or frozen white lakes.*
> 
> The Swedish Air Force also maintains a strong presence in the Baltic region but unlike the Russian Air Force, it utilizes the common grey camouflage on its military aircraft.





aryobarzan said:


> I have a primitive question..what are the rules for colors of military fighter/bomber/ transport planes...why Iran does not use Grey color used by most fighters..are there any standards for this coloring..


the idea is to avoid detection the airplane can dive and fly close to ground under the eye of Radars and meanwhile virtually become invisible to any airplane flying above

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> It also tells us what kinds of jokers are occupying decision-making seats in IRIAF. These people are caught up in 1970s-80s when even these track-suit camos were common around the world on military planes. Fortunately, they have not done the same to the UCAV fleet which is just single-tone off-white or Grey/Light blue.


UAVS are not supposed to fly near the ground to avoid detection
or maybe they are













to be honest its what I like to see our airplane painted in on top side they being painted shades of yellow and brown
above so we can use unique Midleastern terrain if we want to fly close to ground and their belly painted in shades of grey or blue to merge with sky if looked at from down.
well int plain colors , a digitalized version of the painting have a lot better effect.
and in the southern area airplanes that are supposed to fly over Persian gulf , is better painted some shades of light blue and green on top instead of yellow and brown so they can merge with Persian gulf if looked at up

just like these UAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> I fear if they follow Americans , it become the result
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but about the color
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is to avoid detection the airplane can dive and fly close to ground under the eye of Radars and meanwhile virtually become invisible to any airplane flying above



The regular camo of USAF and USN is grey/silver













Also the middle eastern airforces in splinter camo was true in 1970s and 80s. But not anymore because camos do not matter in this BVR and stealth combat aviation age. IRIAF is just run by people who have zero interest in that force or are isolated from the rest of the world. These are the fighters of all middle eastern countries around Iran. Splinter camo was a thing of past, nobody uses it anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

drmeson said:


> Saegheh-I 3-7369
> 
> Undernose
> -TACAN
> -UHF/IFF
> 
> Dorsal
> -ADF antenna
> -VHF
> 
> Tail
> -TACAN
> -IFF
> -ILS
> 
> View attachment 859720
> 
> 
> Hope they get dismantled, they have served their purpose, its time to be useful for KOWSAR fleet.


Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if they stick around for a while as they are because they are relatively new and might still be providing some info or testing something. Also I do like their unique look and think they will be historically known as the laboratories that led to the first indigenous trainer/fighter. 
Has me wondering something though, just as it seems that not all T72s are being fully converted to the karrar standard, do you suppose all the F-5s will be turned into kowsars, or will some of them receive partial refits/upgrades and not the whole conversion?



drmeson said:


> I have wondered that too, I guess it has more to do with traditions? IIAAF used splinter camo on all their fighters, IRIAF carried that tradition on. Currently its like,
> 
> Splinter for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar, F-5E/F/A/Saeghe, SU-24M, F-7N
> Grey/Sky blue for F-14A, RF-4, MIG-29, Mirage F-1
> White for of Simorgh F-5B, F-7N
> Green for SU-22 (IRGCAF), Azarakhsh prototype
> Bue angels Navy blue for Saeghe and Kowsar prototypes
> 
> Its weird tbh to have such clownish colors on war machines, IRIAF/IRGC-AF should go all American Sky-blue with black/Grey radomes. It looks decent for aircraft and makes things look professional. It also tells us what kinds of jokers are occupying decision-making seats in IRIAF. These people are caught up in 1970s-80s when even these track-suit camos were common around the world on military planes. Fortunately, they have not done the same to the UCAV fleet which is just single-tone off-white or Grey/Light blue.
> 
> This should be future IRIAF camo with Kowsar-I/II, MIGs, F-14AM.
> 
> View attachment 859834
> View attachment 859835
> View attachment 859836


I actually like the new pixelated paint scheme of the refitted cobras and the angled camo motifs of the AM tomcats. 
Had me thinking earlier that weapons of war in the older days were actually decorated and looked quite lovely so you can blur the boundaries of the two a bit. The kowsars paint also looks gorgeous. In the old idf forum I think it was gomig21 who had posted pics of a pair of F16s painted in what I called sugar and spice or fire and ice motifs and colors. So long as they don't compromise the aircraft's capabilities, why not be artistic with them like in the much older days.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> The regular camo of USAF and USN is grey/silver
> 
> View attachment 859888
> View attachment 859889
> View attachment 859890
> 
> 
> 
> Also the middle eastern airforces in splinter camo was true in 1970s and 80s. But not anymore because camos do not matter in this BVR and stealth combat aviation age. IRIAF is just run by people who have zero interest in that force or are isolated from the rest of the world. These are the fighters of all middle eastern countries around Iran. Splinter camo was a thing of past, nobody uses it anymore.
> 
> View attachment 859891
> View attachment 859894
> View attachment 859893
> View attachment 859892
> View attachment 859896
> 
> View attachment 859895
> View attachment 859897


you see in BVR it won't matter , they like that splinter cameo for when they fly at low altitude ,what's the problem with it ? is it bad to be different ?
you prefer grey , I prefer digitalized yellow or blue, they have their reasoning for the paint scheme and they are using the airplane , the color don't mean show Professionalism or anything else .





several years ago they used grey or sort or more exact grey-blue , they didn't like it.


----------



## aryobarzan

Militaries all around the world try to make everything in standard "form", "shape" "color"..etc..whenever possible..the reason being able to recognize, re-use, or swap/interchange and maintain gears in a the hectic combat situation. Nato countries are very serious about the *"Standardization"* process . *Logistics* is also a big driver of "Standardization"..imagine spare parts warehousing of five different type of weapon that basically do the same job..imagine the poor service guy who has to fix them..and all the training materials that have to prepared...
In Iranian military I notice a total freedom of style, shape, color, naming..etc which is great if you are selling commercial products but not if you are selling warmachines....how many different uniforms we have in Iranian military..how many rifles ..etc

My point...I do not care if they paint all aircraft pink..just make all of them pink...and stay with it..If you want to be recognized as a professional organization these "not so important" issues become important..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

WudangMaster said:


> Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if they stick around for a while as they are because they are relatively new and might still be providing some info or testing something. Also I do like their unique look and think they will be historically known as the laboratories that led to the first indigenous trainer/fighter.
> Has me wondering something though, just as it seems that not all T72s are being fully converted to the karrar standard, do you suppose all the F-5s will be turned into kowsars, or will some of them receive partial refits/upgrades and not the whole conversion?



You may be right about sustaining these 6 airframes as flying laboratories because whatever Kowsar-I is or the hypothetical next gen will be, is because of Azarakhsh + Saeqeh-I/II program so their significance is there. They tested many things on these Frankensteins that we are seeing in Kowsar. Yes the program got late by a healthy 7-8 years, Kowsar should have been there by the early 2010s so that HESA would have its hands free for research on next generation. But, if you consider other countries who worked on 4.0 generation light fighters they all got late from their schedules even with massive foriegn help.

As for Kowsar program or conversion, we can see the numbers of the current Tiger II fleet to judge what they are doing. So by the start of 2000, IRIAF had ~65 F-5E/F + around 11 airframes they purchased from Vietnam and Ethiopia. These 11 airframes got dismantled to produce 7 Airframes of Azarakhsh and Saegheh-I/II. This left us with the fleet of 63 F-5E/F (2 crashes) which are currently in service in 5 mixed squadrons. Flightglobal confirms at least 35-45 serial numbers through pics, 16 F-5EF + ~44 F-5E.

Azarakhsh- Kowsar-Saegheh program of Local F-5E/F derivatives to me is almost a replica of the Israeli Nesher-Kfir-Nammar program for Mirage-V. Initial Kfir-C airframes were rebuilt from French-supplied Mirage-III/V (I think ~60). Tom Cooper did some research on them and he even found some parts of airframes of Nesher/Kfir even to this day have metal tags from Dassault on them despite israeli claims of total indigenous production. But thats only the intial 60-70 airframes, 160+ further airframes Kfir-C7 and beyond were built in Israel from scratch like Kowsar-I 37400 was built from scratch as a demonstrated capability that at any time we can add as many planes as we want. 1 Billion USD means 100+ brand new Kowsar as a rough estimate.

Right now, like Kfir, the Kowsar program is a mixture of severe level extensive re-building for 7.5 Million USD + brand new airframes for 9 Million. If BT is to be believed, there will be some ~65 Kowsar-I with Bayyenat-I/Grifo 346, IEI E-warfare suites, Datalink, FBW etc. We have already seen some 18-24 airframes inside HESA out of this number while squadrons of F-5E/F + Saeqeh are not being grounded which means their production (just like Kfir) is more extensive then just conversions. My guess is that over the years, they have created a repository of indestructible parts from existing airframes (like Kfir used Dassault made Mirage V) + brand new local built parts (70 % Kfir was local airframe) and then you have a new Kowsar-I with 0 hour life status. Nothing different from a brand new Kowsar (example 3-7400). So beyond this number of 65 x Kowsar-I will come the next generation in which every single fighter will have to be built entirely from scratch because Tiger II repository by then will be exhausted already and they will need to retire beaten body fleet of 73 x MIRAGEF1 + F-7N by late 2020s so the numbers will have to be filled in otherwise we will get squadrons cut or filled with fast MALE UCAVs as force multipliers. Or worst, if MIG fleet doesnt get the required MLU+Upgradation that it badly needs then you are down by 23 x 4th Gen BVR fighter in your interceptor force. In that case, numbers will have to be made up by brand new Kowsar-I or II whichever will be available by that time.

What will be the next generation of Kowsar/Saegheh program can be judged by the fact how Kfir program unrolled. Kfir itself was turning into a competition for Mirage-2000 market in 1990s. They themselves had plan to create Nammar the next generation of Kfir which would have been 4+ by now with upgrades but with incoming F-16/15 and later F-35 program they just put the project in shelves.. The recent most Kfir-C block 60 which Israelis are trying to market as a new plane from their storage has on par avionics package to Mirage 2000-9. HESA's next fighter in IMO post 65 x Kowsar-I will similarly be 4+ generation at least in terms of radar, avionics, navigation, comm etc. If they fit a larger turbofan inside then you get better physical performance too. Will it have twin tails like Saegheh or one like Kowsar is to be decided. So IRIAF by 2026 will end up with 145 x strong fleet of Interceptors i.e. F-14AM (45-47) + MIG-29 (23) MLUed and upgraded locally + 65 x Kowsar-I. Not a bad force of 12 x 4.0 generation squadrons with LR-BVR and strong e-warfare. Kowsar-II will then start adding upto this force with some 6-8 aircrafts per year. Currently the Missile/Space program, UCAVs, and navy are taking a huge chunk. When the production of Kowsar's 65 aircraft be done by 2026-27, at least the some of the naval constructions be done too so IRIAF might receive the funds to (A) procure 4++ gen which is difficult (B) Produce Kowsar-II.

F-4E/D Dowran will stay but IMO there is a chance that SU-24M might ... might end up either in storage or long shot, in Assad's hands just like a local MLUed SU-22 squadron went there previously. SU-24M are becoming a problem for IRIAF. Not much of local infrastructure is available and the fleet is small to invest time, the money on. Without MLU or upgrade, I see them not taking off in a few years. Signs are there, the recent most IRIAF pics on spotter websites have few pics of IRIAF SU-24 being airborne and we are seeing no evidence of it receiving some new weaponry either. Compare the extensive upgradations of squadrons of F-4E/D. Shows us the priorities of IRIAF.



WudangMaster said:


> I actually like the new pixelated paint scheme of the refitted cobras and the angled camo motifs of the AM tomcats.
> Had me thinking earlier that weapons of war in the older days were actually decorated and looked quite lovely so you can blur the boundaries of the two a bit. The kowsars paint also looks gorgeous. In the old idf forum I think it was gomig21 who had posted pics of a pair of F16s painted in what I called sugar and spice or fire and ice motifs and colors. So long as they don't compromise the aircraft's capabilities, why not be artistic with them like in the much older days.



Yes 70s and 80s were all about camo'ed fighter jets. Then in 2000s things changed to metallic grey. I personally like the American way of keeping the entire fleet metallic grey for standardization. Looks robotically professional and deadly. Modern airforces around us took the same route, while isolated from the world, IRIAF refused to understand the meaning of standardization so we have splinter + Blue + Navy blue + Cream yellow + green + and what not. Except for the piloting skills, ace of aces in this force, I have zero respect for their management skills. It's like squadrons and bases are run by people with HUGE egoes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> Militaries all around the world try to make everything in standard "form", "shape" "color"..etc..whenever possible..the reason being able to recognize, re-use, or swap/interchange and maintain gears in a the hectic combat situation. Nato countries are very serious about the *"Standardization"* process . *Logistics* is also a big driver of "Standardization"..imagine spare parts warehousing of five different type of weapon that basically do the same job..imagine the poor service guy who has to fix them..and all the training materials that have to prepared...
> In Iranian military I notice a total freedom of style, shape, color, naming..etc which is great if you are selling commercial products but not if you are selling warmachines....how many different uniforms we have in Iranian military..how many rifles ..etc
> 
> My point...I do not care if they paint all aircraft pink..just make all of them pink...and stay with it..If you want to be recognized as a professional organization these "not so important" issues become important..



Great post. Professionalism starts from standardization. Its like all the Artesh branches and IRGC went one way while IRIAF went south. Can't believe this is the force of Hashem Ale-Agha, Roastami and Jalil Zandi lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Great post. Professionalism starts from standardization. Its like all the Artesh branches and IRGC went one way while IRIAF went south. Can't believe this is the force of Hashem Ale-Agha, Roastami and Jalil Zandi lol.


Since the release of MIL-STD-2161 in 1993, the US Navy's tactical aircraft use a color scheme designed to reduce visual detection that consists of shades of flat gray with exterior markings applied in a contrasting shade of gray.[10] Note that the stated purpose of this document is to standardize paint schemes and application of naval insignia and markings.

and the airforce
they have these two livery for F-35 they must be quiet unprofessional and discipline must have gone south there









and they have F-18 in two blue and grey color


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Since the release of MIL-STD-2161 in 1993, the US Navy's tactical aircraft use a color scheme designed to reduce visual detection that consists of shades of flat gray with exterior markings applied in a contrasting shade of gray.[10] Note that the stated purpose of this document is to standardize paint schemes and application of naval insignia and markings.
> 
> and the airforce
> they have these two livery for F-35 they must be quiet unprofessional and discipline must have gone south there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and they have F-18 in two blue and grey color

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


>


my favorite colorful livery


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> my favorite colorful livery



Colors never look good on professional men or military equipmet. There is a reason disciplined institutions have a strict dress code preference for black/dark blue/grey etc, same goes for machinary where standardization is a must. IIAF/IRIAF was itself just one splinter toned force when radars/BVR missiles were not that powerful and every confrontation ended up in a WVR engagement. Then this age was gone and everyone else got modern/standardized around us in 2000s, we did not.

If you want to hire a lawyer to fight for your life and you are not allowed to see their CV which one would you hire ? 



Or





Perception of your lethality in the eyes of enemy is part of warfare. With this graffiti antics we are sending out wrong message.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Colors never look good on professional men or military equipmet. There is a reason disciplined institutions have a strict dress code preference for black/dark blue/grey etc, same goes for machinary where standardization is a must.


corporate minded thinking tend to hammer everybody into same shape and kill any difference.
only kill innovation.







drmeson said:


> IIAF/IRIAF was itself just one splinter toned force when radars/BVR missiles were not that powerful and every confrontation ended up in a WVR engagement. Then this age was gone and everyone else got modern/standardized around us in 2000s, we did not.


splinter camouflage or any camouflage is not intended for normal BVR engagement scenario , for that you can fill the airplane with neon lights and it won't matter. its for low altitude flight and WVR engagement.
every airforce must look at environment it fight and decide what their environment is and act accordingly as i said Airforce tried the grey blue approach on the F-14s it didn't work they changed it again to desert camouflage , thats our environment , its not like russian army that light blue and grey-vwhite suit them or American army that have a MIL-STD-2161 that designed to make their airplanes blend in high sea and high altitude sky and grey shade suit them best
our environment is desert and Persian gulf , we must respect it, we cant fight with our environment , we must become in tone with it. i agree the splinter camouflage is old and need to be upgraded to a digital one. about the color painting airplane grey only goof for its belly side , the top side must be painted a digitalized desert cameo.

and about grey , its old news right now USA is working on a mirror camouflage




the purpose is to reduce the effectiveness of IRST on SU-35 and Su-57



drmeson said:


> If you want to hire a lawyer to fight for your life and you are not allowed to see their CV which one would you hire ?
> View attachment 860226
> Or
> View attachment 860227
> 
> 
> Perception of your lethality in the eyes of enemy is part of warfare. With this graffiti antics we are sending out wrong message.


I choose none , if it a most probably flip a coin .
but no enemy get fooled by a paint job , they look at what subsystem your aircrafts have

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


>


there is no Iranian Su-35 and Russia won't give us any by any situation and price agreeable to us .,and Russia is in no situation to give any away , they need all of them for themselves.
raisi talks was all about security and commerce , not buying weapons, by the way we don't have su-25 but who care


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546892079137177600
Qaher - 313?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546892079137177600
> Qaher - 313?



Su-30.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546892079137177600
> Qaher - 313?



You could also take a F-22 and write farsi underneath it.

That’s about as much value as that picture has.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> View attachment 861155


Very interesting this photos. What is on his belly? What kind of missile?


----------



## sanel1412

Here is video, about screenshot above

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547138592253923335
Seems Like recorded by F4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547147027179520000
This should be checked, not sure is it photoshop, but those videos seems legit, I watched 3 clips


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547147027179520000
> This should be checked, not sure is it photoshop, but those videos seems legit, I watched 3 clips

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:

1


----------



## sanel1412

drmeson said:


> View attachment 861239


Yeah, I thought so, IRGC sign behind was red flag,IRAF would be excpected


----------



## yugocrosrb95

sanel1412 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547147027179520000
> This should be checked, not sure is it photoshop, but those videos seems legit, I watched 3 clips


its same dude that made fake video of flying qaher 313...


----------



## Deino

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546892079137177600
> Qaher - 313?




You should either check your eyes or simply do your homework … that‘s clearly an IAF Su-30MKI!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

Deino said:


> You should either check your eyes or simply do your homework … that‘s clearly an IAF Su-30MKI!











Houman Sorooshnia (@aircraft.vr) • Instagram photos and videos


7,095 Followers, 316 Following, 254 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from Houman Sorooshnia (@aircraft.vr)




www.instagram.com


----------



## Deino

Messerschmitt said:


> Houman Sorooshnia (@aircraft.vr) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 
> 7,095 Followers, 316 Following, 254 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from Houman Sorooshnia (@aircraft.vr)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instagram.com




And what do you want to say with this link?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Deino said:


> And what do you want to say with this link?


That's the 3D artist who made those animations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

A Japanese gentleman makes awesome model of IRIAF aircrafts. 

This how end procuct of Saegheh-III or Kowsar-II should look like with a single Turbofan, AESA, HOTAS, FBW, HMD.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BigMelatonin

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1548804409450184706
I doubt the old 23MFs would be worth anything now but with old IqAF Su-22s modernized and put back into service, I wonder whether any similar effort will be made for the 23BNs. An interesting piece of history regardless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

sanel1412 said:


> Here is video, about screenshot above
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547138592253923335
> Seems Like recorded by F4



No, seems like simply a faked video!


----------



## Abid123

GrandBotBoi said:


> Really bad article. Though I do agree Chinese flanker copies are definitely better than most of the SU-30 variants, with the exceptions off the SU-30SM and SU-30SM2


The J-16 is superior to any Russian flanker including the SU-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Abid123 said:


> The J-16 is superior to any Russian flanker including the SU-35.


well if the engine instead of WS-10a was WS-10b


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> The J-16 is superior to any Russian flanker including the SU-35.



All flankers are more or less the same. Its the same 1970s designed airframe that keeps getting marketed under different names with mid to high levels of avionics change or mild airframe changes. If Russians had F-15 they would have been calling the F-15SE as F-40 or F-45 to milk the fighter jet market with new coating. Russians have this habit.

MIG-35 is MIG-29 9.13 => MIG-29M =>MIG-29M2.
SU-27SM gave birth to the entire SU-30, 33, 34, 35, J-11, J-15, J-16 family.
MIG-27 => MIG-23BN
SU-17 =. SU-20 = SU-22
MIG-31 is MIG-25's mature product.

Before SU-57, Russia had not unvieled a new airframe for past ~40 years.

And none of them are drastically different from each other. This airframe has an elephant-sized RCS from every aspect possible and is high priced and maintenance-heavy fighter that you can't just hide in a normal-sized hardened bunker or in underground bases. Luckily it never got in an A2A combat with light weight monsters like MIG-29M, Rafale, JAS-39E, F-16Block52, F-18E/F or we would have seen it getting shot down. I would not even be surprised if SU-35S (15+ m2, ~100-120 KM track range) by any slight chance get into IRIAF and Kowsar-I (1 m2 RCS, ~90-100 KM track range) surprises it in a A2A excersize.


----------



## Deino

drmeson said:


> ….
> SU-27SM gave birth to the entire SU-30, 33, 34, 35, J-11*, J-13*, J-15, J-16 family.
> ...



Care to explain what a J-13 is?


----------



## drmeson

Deino said:


> Care to explain what a J-13 is?



J-13 is a typo

fixed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

drmeson said:


> All flankers are more or less the same. Its the same 1970s designed airframe that keeps getting marketed under different names with mid to high levels of avionics change or mild airframe changes. If Russians had F-15 they would have been calling the F-15SE as F-40 or F-45 to milk the fighter jet market with new coating. Russians have this habit.
> 
> MIG-35 is MIG-29 9.13 => MIG-29M =>MIG-29M2.
> SU-27SM gave birth to the entire SU-30, 33, 34, 35, J-11, J-15, J-16 family.
> MIG-27 => MIG-23BN
> SU-17 =. SU-20 = SU-22
> MIG-31 is MIG-25's mature product.
> 
> Before SU-57, Russia had not unvieled a new airframe for past ~40 years.
> 
> And none of them are drastically different from each other. This airframe has an elephant-sized RCS from every aspect possible and is high priced and maintenance-heavy fighter that you can't just hide in a normal-sized hardened bunker or in underground bases. Luckily it never got in an A2A combat with light weight monsters like MIG-29M, Rafale, JAS-39E, F-16Block52, F-18E/F or we would have seen it getting shot down. I would not even be surprised if SU-35S (15+ m2, ~100-120 KM track range) by any slight chance get into IRIAF and Kowsar-I (1 m2 RCS, ~90-100 KM track range) surprises it in a A2A excersize.


SU-35S can track and engage at around 300km, not a mere 120km. That's around double to triple that of the likes of Rafale, Gripen-E, F-16, and F/A-18 Super Hornet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

GrandBotBoi said:


> SU-35S can track and engage at around 300km, not a mere 120km. That's around double to triple that of the likes of Rafale, Gripen-E, F-16, and F/A-18 Super Hornet



This was a big controversy some years back. Even in their own promotional video SU-35S with an IRBIS-E could not get an engagement track on an already detected ~1-3m2 target anywhere above 100 KM. Russian users denied this and said the target was probably <1 m2. So It is upto the person what they want to believe in. Entire globe still prefers western avionics package for a reason.

*https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-in-depth-analysis-of-why-the-sukhoi-su-35-is-the-most-overhyped-4th-generation-fighter-aircraft/*

In a head-to-head engagement between a 2 x PL-12/15 (100-150 KM) armed Kowsar-I (1m2 RCS) flying with Bayyenat-II/Grifo346 and multiple R-77E (80 KM) armed SU-35S (15-20 m2 RCS) flying with IRBIS-E, who would track the adversary and shoot its ARH BVR missiles at the other first? Mind you in the price of one SU-35S you get 8 Kowsar-I. You either get 24 SU-35S or 192 Kowsar-I. If the same avionics package of Kowsar-I is put on a physically strong fighter like MIG-29 of IRIAF then it would become a very strong platform. Modern aircrafts are like electronic laboratories flying. The age of who flies fast and rolls better wins is almost gone. People here do not appreciate the fact that HESA and IEI have hit a jackpot with domestic production of top of the line GRIFO-346 as Bayyenat-II +e-warfare suit of Kowsar-I. It can track even multiple 1m2 targets at 93 KM for BVR engagement. It is the most advanced western radar for its weight and size (80-85 KG). Most advanced in entire portfolio of Leonardo after their top product GRIFO-E (AESA). If Russia fux us again and provides no useful MIG fleet upgradation IRIAF should get its 23 x MIGS totally upgraded to Kowsar-I standards avionics wise. Some 70 x Kowsar-1 + 23 x MIGs with this package with vitalize the interception package with ~44 F-14A/AM. IRIAF's biggest agenda should be small size ARH BVR missile. Fakour-90 or future Maghsouds are long range heavy BVR missiles and will be of no use to anything other than F-14AM.

Leonardo Grifo-346






IEI Bayyenat-II






*https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/pubs/GRIFO_M346_LQ_mm07796_.pdf*


Btw key aero article mentioned that some ~43 (or 50?) x F-7N/FT-7N in IRIAF possession are getting new wings, tails, cockpits, seats and canopies along with the ditto avionics+radar package as Kowsar-I. IRIAF has a long history of squadron-based lobbyism for funding fuel ego-driven dud projects of no battle value. One of them was called "Mirage F1" and the other is "F-7N". These ego lobbyists should be fired. 23 x Mirage F1 serve as canvas for periodic new paint jobs in IRIAF and do not even have functioning pylons for A2A missiles let alone a functioning radar. Their numbers are not even high enough to think of a local upgradation, what are they even doing in IRIAF is beyond me. Them and F-7N's are burdens. F-5E/F atleast served us in the war and are being sacrificed to help create Kowsar-I's construction repository.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## RΛIDEN

drmeson said:


> J-13 is a typo
> 
> fixed



Deino reminds me of Catsoo, the moderator from IMF. Good ol days

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Abid123

Hack-Hook said:


> well if the engine instead of WS-10a was WS-10b


Agree but SU-35 has PESA radar while the J-16 has a AESA radar. Even Algeria rejected the SU-35.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> 23 x Mirage F1 serve as canvas for periodic new paint jobs in IRIAF and do not even have functioning pylons for A2A missiles let alone a functioning radar.



F-1 can fire AIM-9 and other French A2A missiles. It’s mostly used for A2G not A2A role. Wingtip pylons do exist on F-1, Cant speak for Iranian F-1.

Even if Iranian F-1 is basically a metal shell, it can be equipped with wing tip pylons and a semi-decent radar. A2A inventory will be limited since Iran bought a French plane and now has no military relations with France while the rest of its airforce is US based or Russian.

Nonetheless, capability exists to upgrade F-1 to a capable standard. At the very least is teach pilots on a supersonic plane. 

I’m not sure how many air hours are pilots are getting, but I am sure it is not nearly enough due to the stress on the airframes of our 30+ year old fleets.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Luckily it never got in an A2A combat with light weight monsters like MIG-29M, Rafale, JAS-39E, F-16Block52, F-18E/F or we would have seen it getting shot down.



Ethiopia's Su-27SK faced off in air-to-air combat against Eritrean Mig-29A's in 1999.

And the Flankers won the battle hands down. Eritrea was impressed enough to buy some examples of their own from Russia after the war.

_____
How Flankers fought Fulcrums in the skies over Africa​Jan 14 2022
Igor Rozin

https://www.rbth.com/history/334639...m/history/334639-how-flankers-fought-fulcrums
_____

I'm of the opinion Iran should ditch its Mig-29 (along with the other obsolete fighters you regularly mention) as soon as a viable replacement becomes available. To my knowledge there's no example of an impressive use of the type in war. It seems the only thing interesting about IRIAF's Fulcrums are their engines.




TheImmortal said:


> A2A inventory will be limited since Iran bought a French plane and now has no military relations with France while the rest of its airforce is US based or Russian.



Iran never bought fighter jets from France, the Mirage F-1's were received from Iraq as part of the package Saddam asked Iran to shelter during the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf war (and never got back).

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Abid123 said:


> Agree but SU-35 has PESA radar while the J-16 has a AESA radar. Even Algeria rejected the SU-35.


Because Algeria bought SU-57 and SU-30 already



drmeson said:


> This was a big controversy some years back. Even in their own promotional video SU-35S with an IRBIS-E could not get an engagement track on an already detected ~1-3m2 target anywhere above 100 KM. Russian users denied this and said the target was probably <1 m2. So It is upto the person what they want to believe in. Entire globe still prefers western avionics package for a reason.
> 
> *https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-in-depth-analysis-of-why-the-sukhoi-su-35-is-the-most-overhyped-4th-generation-fighter-aircraft/*
> 
> In a head-to-head engagement between a 2 x PL-12/15 (100-150 KM) armed Kowsar-I (1m2 RCS) flying with Bayyenat-II/Grifo346 and multiple R-77E (80 KM) armed SU-35S (15-20 m2 RCS) flying with IRBIS-E, who would track the adversary and shoot its ARH BVR missiles at the other first? Mind you in the price of one SU-35S you get 8 Kowsar-I. You either get 24 SU-35S or 192 Kowsar-I. If the same avionics package of Kowsar-I is put on a physically strong fighter like MIG-29 of IRIAF then it would become a very strong platform. Modern aircrafts are like electronic laboratories flying. The age of who flies fast and rolls better wins is almost gone. People here do not appreciate the fact that HESA and IEI have hit a jackpot with domestic production of top of the line GRIFO-346 as Bayyenat-II +e-warfare suit of Kowsar-I. It can track even multiple 1m2 targets at 93 KM for BVR engagement. It is the most advanced western radar for its weight and size (80-85 KG). Most advanced in entire portfolio of Leonardo after their top product GRIFO-E (AESA). If Russia fux us again and provides no useful MIG fleet upgradation IRIAF should get its 23 x MIGS totally upgraded to Kowsar-I standards avionics wise. Some 70 x Kowsar-1 + 23 x MIGs with this package with vitalize the interception package with ~44 F-14A/AM. IRIAF's biggest agenda should be small size ARH BVR missile. Fakour-90 or future Maghsouds are long range heavy BVR missiles and will be of no use to anything other than F-14AM.
> 
> Leonardo Grifo-346
> View attachment 863388
> 
> 
> IEI Bayyenat-II
> View attachment 863389
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/pubs/GRIFO_M346_LQ_mm07796_.pdf*
> 
> 
> Btw key aero article mentioned that some ~43 (or 50?) x F-7N/FT-7N in IRIAF possession are getting new wings, tails, cockpits, seats and canopies along with the ditto avionics+radar package as Kowsar-I. IRIAF has a long history of squadron-based lobbyism for funding fuel ego-driven dud projects of no battle value. One of them was called "Mirage F1" and the other is "F-7N". These ego lobbyists should be fired. 23 x Mirage F1 serve as canvas for periodic new paint jobs in IRIAF and do not even have functioning pylons for A2A missiles let alone a functioning radar. Their numbers are not even high enough to think of a local upgradation, what are they even doing in IRIAF is beyond me. Them and F-7N's are burdens. F-5E/F atleast served us in the war and are being sacrificed to help create Kowsar-I's construction repository.


Do you have a source for that first claim?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Iran never bought fighter jets from France, the Mirage F-1's were received from Iraq as part of the package Saddam asked Iran to shelter during the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf war (and never got back).



You are right.

However, Iran can still upgrade the plane. It won’t be an A2A fighter, but if knock on it is that it can’t fire the A2A off wingtip....it can. If the knock is it doesn’t have a capable radar...it can. Iran has plenty of A2G munitions to give it with a targeting pod on its pylon.

You never scrap a fighter jet when you don’t have alternatives. Even US with its $700B budget and several NATO nations fly older planes.

Iran doesn’t have the luxury to mothball F-1 and F-7. I’m all for Iran modernizing it’s airforce, but it’s 20 years of tinkering around with what is now Kowsar. And rumored deals with Russia or China.

Until Iran unveils it’s medium and heavy engines, that’s about the best (size) plane it can hope to produce.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> F-1 can fire AIM-9 and other French A2A missiles. It’s mostly used for A2G not A2A role. Wingtip pylons do exist on F-1, Cant speak for Iranian F-1.



IRIAF F1 can't fire anything actually. Just one picture of them ever exists flying with practice rounds of AIM-9J/P on wingtips and then apparently project got abandoned decade+ ago to arm them. Then one picture exists with practice rounds of PL-7C on the ground and that is about it.



TheImmortal said:


> Even if Iranian F-1 is basically a metal shell, it can be equipped with wing tip pylons and a semi-decent radar. A2A inventory will be limited since Iran bought a French plane and now has no military relations with France while the rest of its airforce is US based or Russian.



Iran did not purchase them ??? I am surprised you dont know this. These are ex IQAF gifts. Some of these airframes have fought against IRIAF, one of them, can't remember its serial, was the one that dodged Hashem Ale Agha's AIM-54 strike.

Their maintenance is not worth the money for two reasons.

(1) This is a complicated platform to maintain, Iranian aviation industries are not built around Mirages, they are built around F-5E/F, F-14A, and F-4E/D which is why these three have been built from scratch (F-5E/F), rebuilt (F-5E/F, F-4E/D), upgraded (F-4 E/D Dowran, F-14AM) etc. Even their armaments in form of Fakour-90, Fattar, Nasr, Ghader AShCM, Ya-Ali LACM, Glide PGMs are designed indigenously but the same can't be said about any other platform in Iran. HESA cant even pull a decent level upgrade on MIG, Sukhoi fleet let alone MirageF1. I am not sure OWJ can handle SNECMA Atar turbojets, besides zero evidence exists if Mirage F-1 fleet's Cyrano radars (obsolete) have ever been touched inside Iran. Hardly you will find a picture of them with a functioning pylon. These are circus prop planes at best who can just fly with some radio guidance or with chase planes (never seen with TACA, ILS, RWR).

(2) IRIAF initially had no plan to have them. They were supposed to have gone to trash like MIG-23/25/27 from Iraq. They were forcibly integrated into IRIAF at the behest of some Iran-Iraq war heroes in 1990s like Col. Naghdibek, RIP, who flew it and found it "western" enough for IRIAF high standards so a lobby got created in IRIAF to keep them flying without any battle value. Similar case is with F-7N Lobby that got created when a group in IRIAF lobbied for MIG-21PFM imports (Ex East Germans). Again fighter pilots made decisions instead of strategists and we lost money on this platform's maintenance. The same money could have gone to Sattari's original Azarakhsh program of an Iranian F-20+. Azarakhsh program faced severe money shortage at design board after Sattari's death which is why Kowsar-I (practically Azarakhsh II) got late by some 10 years. If IRIAF had serious planners like Sattari himself we could have had Kowsar-II (Azarakhsh III) by now. A single Turbofan powered low RCS fighter with AESA, HOTAS, LRBVR etc. Instead, the money went to stupidities like F-7N/FT-7N procurement, Saeghe test bed propoganda, Mirage F1 integration/maintenance etc.



TheImmortal said:


> Nonetheless, capability exists to upgrade F-1 to a capable standard. At the very least is teach pilots on a supersonic plane.



The best IRIAF can do is to either put IRIAF F-4E/D Dowran avionics suite on F-1 which they can not because its nosecone is tremendously small to carry Bayyenat-I radar of Dowrans upgrades of F-4E/D. It also has not much space for avionics, unlike Phantom's large airframe, nor the wing + fuselage area to get into AShCM/LACM launching role.

Or

They can put Kowsar-I's avionics suite on it with radar, e-warfare suite, and Fattar IR seeking all aspect weapons. If they do it, the plane will superbly come to French upgraded Morrocan MF-2000 standards or slightly higher since Bayyenat-II is much smaller and lighter than MF2000's RDY-3 (Mirage 2000-5 radar) to carry so additional ECCM or an IRST device can be barged in. Problem with this upgrade will be that at the end of it, IRIAF will have 23 x MF-2000 standard fighters which they can get by just extending Kowsar-I's current plan of 65-70 aircraft to 100 aircrafts. They can play around with OWJ turbojets but they can't do the same with SNECMA Atars. Kowsar-I airframe, from scratch or repository rebuilt is modern with composite use, FBW, new landing gears, cockpits, etc while MF-2000 airframe may have strain marks by now. A separate upgradation line will need to be set up. Waste of money if you ask me.



TheImmortal said:


> I’m not sure how many air hours are pilots are getting, but I am sure it is not nearly enough due to the stress on the airframes of our 30+ year old fleets.



Mirages only serve in mixed squadrons in IRIAF at Chabahar with Dowran F-4E/Ds and at Doshan Tappeh training facility (Tehran). It tells us the plane has no radar or any armament. It's either being used for mission training only or flies with other mission-capable upgraded planes like Dowran F-4E/Ds at chabahar. The best for IRIAF will be to get rid of this flying tube ASAP and put the maintenance money in Kowsar-I/II program. The same goes for F-7N and the entire fleet of F-5E/F/R/A.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Ethiopia's Su-27K faced off in air-to-air combat against Eritrean Mig-29A's in 1999.
> 
> And the Flankers won the battle hands down. Eritrea was impressed enough to buy some examples of their own from Russia after the war.
> 
> _____
> How Flankers fought Fulcrums in the skies over Africa​Jan 14 2022
> Igor Rozin
> 
> https://www.rbth.com/history/334639...m/history/334639-how-flankers-fought-fulcrums
> _____
> 
> I'm of the opinion Iran should ditch its Mig-29 (along with the other obsolete fighters you regularly mention) as soon as a viable replacement becomes available. To my knowledge there's no example of an impressive use of the type in war. It seems the only thing interesting about IRIAF's Fulcrums are their engines.


come on in this forum we are screaming for more than two month that Fulcrum-A or Mig-29 9.12b the one gave to non-Warsaw pact is a shit airplane that don't have any countermeasure and is equipped with a shitty radar that provide nearly no battle situation for pilot and cant track anything even at 40km

and by the way SU-27k or Su-33 never exported to any country Ethiopia got Su-27S, Su-27P, Su-27UB



TheImmortal said:


> You are right.
> 
> However, Iran can still upgrade the plane. It won’t be an A2A fighter, but if knock on it is that it can’t fire the A2A off wingtip....it can. If the knock is it doesn’t have a capable radar...it can. Iran has plenty of A2G munitions to give it with a targeting pod on its pylon.
> 
> You never scrap a fighter jet when you don’t have alternatives. Even US with its $700B budget and several NATO nations fly older planes.
> 
> Iran doesn’t have the luxury to mothball F-1 and F-7. I’m all for Iran modernizing it’s airforce, but it’s 20 years of tinkering around with what is now Kowsar. And rumored deals with Russia or China.
> 
> Until Iran unveils it’s medium and heavy engines, that’s about the best (size) plane it can hope to produce.


those f-1 are sinkhole for funding and have no actual use , even Taliban hit one of them several years ago


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> come on in this forum we are screaming for more than two month that Fulcrum-A or Mig-29 9.12b the one gave to non-Warsaw pact is a shit airplane that don't have any countermeasure and is equipped with a shitty radar that provide nearly no battle situation for pilot and cant track anything even at 40km



So? What's the point of quoting me to respond with the above?



Hack-Hook said:


> and by the way SU-27k or Su-33 never exported to any country Ethiopia got Su-27S, Su-27P, Su-27UB



Typo, Su-27SK I meant, as stated in the article I cited. But no, Ethiopia didn't get any Su-27S.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> And? What's your point, why are you quoting me to respond with this?


the point is defeating Mig-29 9.12b is no measure for a platform being capable


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the point is defeating Mig-29 9.12b is no measure for a platform being capable



The encounter was between the basic versions of both fighters. And the Sukhoi proved superior to the Mig. The question was how these two compare with each other.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The encounter was between the basic versions of both fighters. And the Sukhoi proved superior to the Mig. The question was how these two compare with each other.


again anything is better than mig-29 9.12b in this case R-27e of Su-27 have it an edge over mig-29 that only used R-27 (that gave Su-27 aound 20km more range) and the small matter of the fact that su-27 were flown by Russian and su-27 actualy had a basic electric warfare system even in its basic version.


but the radar in the airplane was RLPK-27


> N001 has a 1.075m antenna diameter twist-cassegrain antenna. A pulse-doppler design operating in the 3 cm band using medium and high PRFs for optimum lookdown capability, the N001 has a search range of 80–100 km against a 3m2 m RCS target in a headon engagement, 140 km against a large bomber. It can track a 3m2 target at 65 km. In a pursuit engagement, search range for a 3m2 target falls to just 40 km. Azimuth limits are ±60. Initial units had a MTBF of only 5 hours, but later type is 100 hours; MTBF was eventually brought up to 200 hours. The Su-33 used an updated SUV-33 control system, the N001 radar was largely unchanged but with sea optimised lookdown capability and support for the carrier-based GCI system.



as you see against a 3sqm target it has an engagement range of 65 and 40km (compare that to 40 and 20km of Mig-29)
in short still a shitty radar


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> Ethiopia's Su-27SK faced off in air-to-air combat against Eritrean Mig-29A's in 1999.
> 
> And the Flankers won the battle hands down. Eritrea was impressed enough to buy some examples of their own from Russia after the war.
> 
> _____
> How Flankers fought Fulcrums in the skies over Africa​Jan 14 2022
> Igor Rozin
> 
> https://www.rbth.com/history/334639...m/history/334639-how-flankers-fought-fulcrums
> _____
> 
> I'm of the opinion Iran should ditch its Mig-29 (along with the other obsolete fighters you regularly mention) as soon as a viable replacement becomes available. To my knowledge there's no example of an impressive use of the type in war. It seems the only thing interesting about IRIAF's Fulcrums are their engines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran never bought fighter jets from France, the Mirage F-1's were received from Iraq as part of the package Saddam asked Iran to shelter during the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf war (and never got back).



Actually, Flankers have a long history of mixed aerial records. 

-SU-35S and SU-30SM of Ru-AF are constantly operating in Ukrainian airspace. How many times they have even managed to break in deep into the contested territory? One can argue thats not the Russian plan from the beginning but these aircraft are constantly getting lost to SAMs which shows that they are deployed to penetrate the enemy airspace but are failing to do so. So far both sides have lost 18 Flankers during the mission (one I think was lost to bombing on ground). 

- In Syria, SU-35S and SU-30SM both have on multiple occasions failed to shoot down Israeli F-16i and F-35 that came in Syria to attack T-4 and other targets. Also, during the Turkish SDF conflict, they chased Turk F-16 Block 30/40 but failed to shoot them, Russian media maintained the word "chased and forced them to leave". That's BS, you are in a war theatre, you dont force someone, you shoot them or they shoot you back. 

-Indian SU-30MKs were attacked by Pakistan AF's F-16 Block C/D with BVR and e-warfare Jamming and Sukhois just retreated from the battle scene which resulted into Indian MIG-21 and Helicopters shot down and Indian territory getting bombed.

I am not against Flankers, to me they are like modern-day F-4E/Ds. Heavy, large RCS, high maintenance fighters. Maneuverable (Phantom was not), powerful engines and all but with weak electronics compared to western combat suites. Without proper TOT IRIAF should stay away from this aircraft. Its highly expensive and we don't need their attack capabilities as IRIAF responsibility is to defend Iranian skies in conjunction with Air defense. High numbers of MLUed MIG-29M/SMT or MIG-35E (TOT) should be on the radar of IRIAF. Much cheaper, infrastructure exists in Iran.



SalarHaqq said:


> I'm of the opinion Iran should ditch its Mig-29 (along with the other obsolete fighters you regularly mention) as soon as a viable replacement becomes available. To my knowledge there's no example of an impressive use of the type in war. It seems the only thing interesting about IRIAF's Fulcrums are their engines.



IRIAF will not ditch its MIG-29 9.12 but they will get grounded in a few years because their airframes need MLU now and their radar and avionics are at best MIG-23ML levels. They came with 9.12 RPKL-29 N019 radar which can barely track a Kowsar-I sized fighter at 45-60 KM, they lack a modern e-warfare suit for ECM, and have no jammers. The package included SPO-15 RWR of MIG-23ML (worst Russian RWR ever) but some argue IRIAF ones lack that as well. They do not have ARH BVR R-77E either and rather rely upon R-27ER1 which is SARH so they cant just shoot and run away using their fast dash speeds. Practically speaking, as menacing as they look, they are almost on verge of being irrelevant in modern combat with no e-warfare suite, no datalink, no good radar. This is a Russian plane so IRIAF won't get it touched by HESA otherwise they can get the airframes MLUed inside HESA while IEI can put its own radar + avionics package on them (Kowsar-I/II like) to get them to MIG-29M/SMT levels.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> those f-1 are sinkhole for funding and have no actual use , even Taliban hit one of them several years ago



Syria hit a Israeli F-16 with a Cold War era S-200. So I guess we should throw that plane away too.

Anyway it Depends how much it requires to upgrade the F-1 and F-7. A Kowsar is ~10M. If you can do an F-1 upgrade for ~2M then it becomes a cost effective choice considering the abysmal airforce budget.

Or sell them to a country that desperately needs fighter aircraft like Syria or Iraq or (once war ends) Yemen.

By the way South Korea just tested their 4.5 Gen fighter jet and will field 100 by 2026.

Iran has the slowest development path for a fighter jet among any nation to decide to develop its own fighter jet. Yes I know sanctions make things harder, but not 25 years harder (and counting).

We are starting to use sanctions as an excuse when we are behind in a key area.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> again anything is better than mig-29 9.12b in this case R-27e of Su-27 have it an edge over mig-29 that only used R-27 (that gave Su-27 aound 20km more range) and the small matter of the fact that su-27 were flown by Russian and su-27 actualy had a basic electric warfare system even in its basic version.
> 
> but the radar in the airplane was RLPK-27
> 
> as you see against a 3sqm target it has an engagement range of 65 and 40km (compare that to 40 and 20km of Mig-29)
> in short still a shitty radar



The Flanker series has leaped hugely since the Su-27SK - which isn't the version Iran would be purchasing anyway, if at all. If you have reason to believe Su-35S is inferior to Mig-35S, explain why. Anything else would be beside the point I was discussing.



> and the small matter of the fact that su-27 were flown by Russian



Yet another small fact is that not all Flankers were flown by Russian pilots.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> aircraft are constantly getting lost to SAMs



SU-35S aren’t constantly getting lost to SAMs in Ukraine. Where is this info coming from?

Russia is losing SU-25 which makes sense since they flow low as a CAS thus in manpad range. They have lost SU-34 bombers. Also older SU-27. Haven’t heard of them losing SU-35s if they did maybe a couple during early months of war.

SU-35 and SU-30 probably scored the most air kills against Ukraine Air Force during the dog fighting days of the war. 



drmeson said:


> - In Syria, SU-35S and SU-30SM both have on multiple occasions failed to shoot down Israeli F-16i and F-35 that came in Syria to attack T-4 and other targets.



Why would Russians who have a conflict hotline with Israel and get tipped off to Israeli air raids try to fire at Israeli aircraft? This is Babak Taghavee propaganda? Russian SU-35 trying to shoot down a Israeli F-35? The two countries were practically strong allies until the Ukraine war.

Israel doesn’t need to fly into Syria to bomb T4 (Iranian drone base) it can fly along Jordan border to Iraqi border and drop payloads or drop payloads thru North Lebanon.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> You are right.
> 
> However, Iran can still upgrade the plane. It won’t be an A2A fighter, but if knock on it is that it can’t fire the A2A off wingtip....it can. If the knock is it doesn’t have a capable radar...it can. Iran has plenty of A2G munitions to give it with a targeting pod on its pylon.
> 
> You never scrap a fighter jet when you don’t have alternatives. Even US with its $700B budget and several NATO nations fly older planes.
> 
> Iran doesn’t have the luxury to mothball F-1 and F-7. I’m all for Iran modernizing it’s airforce, but it’s 20 years of tinkering around with what is now Kowsar. And rumored deals with Russia or China.
> 
> Until Iran unveils it’s medium and heavy engines, that’s about the best (size) plane it can hope to produce.



-keeping stupid platforms like radar/missile less MF1 or midget radar (Sy-80) F-7N active is a financial burden and nothing else. In battle, they will get shot down to degrade the morale of the force. A large chunk of pilots and ground crew are being wasted on them as well. Same money can go to building more Kowsar-I that can vitalize the same squadrons. Chabahar F-4E/D Dowran's will have a proper wingman to fly with instead of blind Mirages who are just occupying bunkers right now. 

-20 years of tinkering around F-5E has given IRIAF an opportunity to re-build itself with something that can share data with Airdefence, UCAVS, fighters while tracking an F-16/F-15/Mirage-2000 at 90-100 km all the while also jamming the enemy radars. The 1970s mindset of "powerful engines", "3.0 Mach or nothing" does not work in modern combat aviation. Modern aircrafts win battles because of electronic warfare and radars, datalinking and guess who can do that all in IRIAF?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The Flanker series has leaped hugely since the Su-27SK - which isn't the version Iran would be purchasing anyway, if at all. If you have reason to believe Su-35S is inferior to Mig-35S, explain why. Anything else would be beside the point I was discussing.


i believe both of them are inferior as russia don't have the capability to produce enough AESA radar for them thats why they decided to don't equip Mig-35 with AESA and Su-35s are not AESA equipped and AESA is a must if you want to use your airplane in the next 20-30 year.



drmeson said:


> The 1970s mindset of "powerful engines", "3.0 Mach or nothing" does not work in modern combat aviation. Modern aircrafts win battles because of electronic warfare and radars, datalinking and guess who can do that all in IRIAF?


well two aircraft can do that in IRIAF. F-14 and Kowsar , problem is we have A2A missile to do that for F-14 , for kowsar our hand is somehow tied


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Actually, Flankers have a long history of mixed aerial records.



I was only meaning to address the 'Flankers versus Fulcrums' aspect.



drmeson said:


> -SU-35S and SU-30SM of Ru-AF are constantly operating in Ukrainian airspace. How many times they have even managed to break in deep into the contested territory? One can argue thats not the Russian plan from the beginning but these aircraft are constantly getting lost to SAMs which shows that they are deployed to penetrate the enemy airspace but are failing to do so. So far both sides have lost 18 Flankers during the mission (one I think was lost to bombing on ground).



Other things being equal, would Mig-35 or non-Russian jets in the same class fare better?



drmeson said:


> - In Syria, SU-35S and SU-30SM both have on multiple occasions failed to shoot down Israeli F-16i and F-35 that came in Syria to attack T-4 and other targets. Also, during the Turkish SDF conflict, they chased Turk F-16 Block 30/40 but failed to shoot them, Russian media maintained the word "chased and forced them to leave". That's BS, you are in a war theatre, you dont force someone, you shoot them or they shoot you back.



Russia didn't have the intention to down intruding Isra"el"i aircraft over Syria for sure. 



drmeson said:


> -Indian SU-30MKs were attacked by Pakistan AF's F-16 Block C/D with BVR and e-warfare Jamming and Sukhois just retreated from the battle scene which resulted into Indian MIG-21 and Helicopters shot down and Indian territory getting bombed.



Well, I'm not informed enough about this episode (nor about why it was that the Indian air force at one point chose to pull back its Su-30's), so I can't comment.



drmeson said:


> IRIAF will not ditch its MIG-29 9.12 but they will get grounded in a few years because their airframes need MLU now and their radar and avionics are at best MIG-23ML levels. They came with 9.12 RPKL-29 N019 radar which can barely track a Kowsar-I sized fighter at 45-60 KM, they lack a modern e-warfare suit for ECM, and have no jammers. The package included SPO-15 RWR of MIG-23ML (worst Russian RWR ever) but some argue IRIAF ones lack that as well. They do not have ARH BVR R-77E either and rather rely upon R-27ER1 which is SARH so they cant just shoot and run away using their fast dash speeds. Practically speaking, as menacing as they look, they are almost on verge of being irrelevant in modern combat with no e-warfare suite, no datalink, no good radar. This is a Russian plane so IRIAF won't get it touched by HESA otherwise they can get the airframes MLUed inside HESA while IEI can put its own radar + avionics package on them (Kowsar-I/II like) to get them to MIG-29M/SMT levels.





drmeson said:


> I am not against Flankers, to me they are like modern-day F-4E/Ds. Heavy, large RCS, high maintenance fighters. Maneuverable (Phantom was not), powerful engines and all but with weak electronics compared to western combat suites. Without proper TOT IRIAF should stay away from this aircraft. Its highly expensive and we don't need their attack capabilities as IRIAF responsibility is to defend Iranian skies in conjunction with Air defense. High numbers of MLUed MIG-29M/SMT or MIG-35E (TOT) should be on the radar of IRIAF. Much cheaper, infrastructure exists in Iran.



No doubt the latter two points - cost effectiveness and already existing basic infrastructure, represent a weighty argument for a modernization of the existing Mig-29 fleet over purchase of new Su-35 airframes (along with phasing out the Mig-29).

Still, to arrive to a definitive conclusion one would need to compare the capabilities of the types in the interception role and weigh it against the costs generated by these two hypothetical undertakings. Brand new Su-35 will likely be superior to upgraded IRIAF Mig-29. By how much, and would this be worth the price differential are thus the decisive questions.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Syria hit a Israeli F-16 with a Cold War era S-200. So I guess we should throw that plane away too.
> 
> Anyway it Depends how much it requires to upgrade the F-1 and F-7. A Kowsar is ~10M. If you can do an F-1 upgrade for ~2M then it becomes a cost effective choice considering the abysmal airforce budget.
> 
> Or sell them to a country that desperately needs fighter aircraft like Syria or Iraq or (once war ends) Yemen.
> 
> By the way South Korea just tested their 4.5 Gen fighter jet and will field 100 by 2026.
> 
> Iran has the slowest development path for a fighter jet among any nation to decide to develop its own fighter jet. Yes I know sanctions make things harder, but not 25 years harder (and counting).
> 
> We are starting to use sanctions as an excuse when we are behind in a key area.



-F-16 that got shot down was not shot down because it lacks radars, A2A weapons. MF1 of IRIAF lacks the basic set of attributes a fighter jet should have to be called a fighter jet.

- Kowsar-I from scratch is ~10 Million. Kowsar-I built from a repository of older structures is 7 million which tells us that majority of the budget is eaten by the e-warfare suite, datalink, radars, cockpit layout, etc. Roughly an extensive Mirage-F1 upgrade by HESA+IEI to Morccoan MF-2000 standard with Kowsar-I's suite will cost around 7-8 million USD per aircraft. I am counting in the MLU on 30-35 years old airframes and an extensive overhaul of SNECMA Atars. There would be a requirement for a separate upgradation facility, technicians, etc. For 7-8 Million USD each IRIAF will get MLUed 23 x MF-2000 and for 10 million USD each can get as many Kowsar-I as it wants from the already existing assembly line. 

- Iraq doesn't need Mirage F1. In a few years, it will have a force made of F-16C, FC-1 Block III, and T-50. They almost purchased Mirage-2000 few years back too so may be in future they may end up getting them or Rafale. 

-Nobody around Iran has developed their "own fighter". Not yet. Israel got close with Lavi program. Kfir-C, Nammar, Nesher were scratch+rebuilt Mirages.


----------



## drmeson

GrandBotBoi said:


> Because Algeria bought SU-57 and SU-30 already
> 
> 
> Do you have a source for that first claim?



if you read the aviationgeek link I provided, they discussed the video in which an SU-35's IRBIS-E radar detects and then tracks a target the size of ~F-16. The viewers of the video pointed out that IRBIS-E barely got a difficult track at around 100 KM. Detection is one thing but tracking the target to engage it is another and matters much more than detection. Russian aviation fans countered that the target being tracked is barely 0.6-0.7 m2. Even if we go by Russian claim here it means a SU-35S will track a EF-2000, Rafale, F-16 Block 60 at 100-120 km. By that time these adversaries would have in turn tracked SU-35S (~15 m2 RCS) and launched a BVR attack already with Meteor or AIM-120C/D. There goes your 85 million USD.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> By that time these adversaries would have in turn tracked SU-35S (~15 m2 RCS) and launched a BVR attack already with Meteor or AIM-120C/D. There goes your 85 million USD.



I assume you ment to say 1.5 m2 RCS and not 15 m2 RCS. RCS of SU-35S is unknown, but estimated anywhere from 1 to 3 m2 RCS with some places claiming .5 m2 RCS if RAM is used in key areas which Russians have experimented with.

I have my doubts that an F-16 could kill an SU-35S armed with its full BVR package first. It has one of the longest range BVR packages.

SU-35S has 3 radars not 1. ERBIS is its main radar and it has a smaller radar on each side of the plane. Assuming one a day the ERBIS is replaced by a next gen Iranian AESA (SU-35IR) and you will have one of the deadliest 4++ planes out there.

SU-35S would be a boon to the Iranian aviation industry. Yes, it won’t be able to compete with the stealth fighters like F-22 and F-35, but it would also be staying in Iranian air defense zones and defending the skies so survival would be greatly increased as would survival fo Iran’s air defense network.

The only better alternative would be J-31, which we don’t know Capabilities at all outside of what China says. And China hasn’t even given its satellite Pakistan J-31....so unlikely Iran could get in without a massive change in military relations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Other things being equal, would Mig-35 or non-Russian jets in the same class fare better?


what you consider in mig-35 , that's a question . certainly a plane like Rafale or Grippen or J-10c if you consider them in class of Mig-35 fare better because they simply have better electronic



SalarHaqq said:


> Well, I'm not informed enough about this episode (nor about why it was that the Indian air force at one point chose to pull back its Su-30's), so I can't comment.


well there is a several hundred page thread about that on the forum , but don't believe Pakistani claims that they shott down one or two su-30 they never provided any evidence , but yes Indian su-30 were kept away around 100km away from the border. and after that India went and purchased some Rafale


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No doubt the latter two points - cost effectiveness and already existing basic infrastructure, represent a weighty argument for a modernization of the existing Mig-29 fleet over purchase of new Su-35 airframes (along with phasing out the Mig-29).


the problem is infrastructure to modernize mig-29 fleet is somehow rudimentary , if we want to modernize them according to our current infrastructure we must rebuilt most of the subsystem a new to make them compatible with our current equipment . that's time consuming and need lots of money .
the money better spend on our Kowsar to solve its current problems for next generation of the fighter.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> if you read the aviationgeek link I provided, they discussed the video in which an SU-35's IRBIS-E radar detects and then tracks a target the size of ~F-16. The viewers of the video pointed out that IRBIS-E barely got a difficult track at around 100 KM. Detection is one thing but tracking the target to engage it is another and matters much more than detection. Russian aviation fans countered that the target being tracked is barely 0.6-0.7 m2. Even if we go by Russian claim here it means a SU-35S will track a EF-2000, Rafale, F-16 Block 60 at 100-120 km. By that time these adversaries would have in turn tracked SU-35S (~15 m2 RCS) and launched a BVR attack already with Meteor or AIM-120C/D. There goes your 85 million USD.


su-35 will track Rafale and F16 block-60+ from that distance only if the electronic warfare system were turned off , otherwise the range will probably get reduced a lot.



TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S has 3 radars not 1. ERBIS is its main radar and it has a smaller radar on each side of the plane. Assuming one a day the ERBIS is replaced by a next gen Iranian AESA (SU-35IR) and you will have one of the deadliest 4++ planes out there.
> 
> SU-35S would be a boon to the Iranian aviation industry. Yes, it won’t be able to compete with the stealth fighters like F-22 and F-35, but it would also be staying in Iranian air defense zones and defending the skies so survival would be greatly increased as would survival fo Iran’s air defense network.


the problem , Russia won't allow you modify it


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the problem , Russia won't allow you modify it



Russia allowed India to modify SU-30. anything possible if in the contract. The issue with modification is it voids possible claims against the aircraft with the maker if problems arise because of your modification. 

Or else you can modify any Russian fighter. But later if there is a problem you cannot expect Russia to foot the maintenance Bill by claiming a defect.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S aren’t constantly getting lost to SAMs in Ukraine. Where is this info coming from?
> 
> Russia is losing SU-25 which makes sense since they flow low as a CAS thus in manpad range. They have lost SU-34 bombers. Also older SU-27. Haven’t heard of them losing SU-35s if they did maybe a couple during early months of war.
> 
> SU-35 and SU-30 probably scored the most air kills against Ukraine Air Force during the dog fighting days of the war.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Russians who have a conflict hotline with Israel and get tipped off to Israeli air raids try to fire at Israeli aircraft? This is Babak Taghavee propaganda? Russian SU-35 trying to shoot down a Israeli F-35? The two countries were practically strong allies until the Ukraine war.
> 
> Israel doesn’t need to fly into Syria to bomb T4 (Iranian drone base) it can fly along Jordan border to Iraqi border and drop payloads or drop payloads thru North Lebanon.



- You should realize that the Flanker family is just one aircraft with different variants being named SU-27/30/33/35. They do not have any drastic differences from each other. Their difference from eachother is just like different versions of F-15 or F-16. Ever since the war started 18-19 Flanker versions have been shot down. Almost all or atleast thick majority by Air defense action.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#Total_losses_2*

- Israeli and Turkish AF's has encountered Russian SU-30SM/35S over Syria many times. IAF deployed F-16 or F-35 to attack T-4 AB and they were intercepted by Russian Sukhois. Russian media later claimed that they chased them back to Israeli borders. I will try to find the RT link. Similarly, they also encountered Turkish F-16 over Idlib. Both times they just failed to get a lock on these intruders.

*https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/su-35-in-action-russian-air-force-s-elite-intercept-israeli-jets-over-syria*

*https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...cept-turkish-f-16s-over-syria-s-idlib-reports*



TheImmortal said:


> I assume you ment to say 1.5 m2 RCS and not 15 m2 RCS. RCS of SU-35S is unknown, but estimated anywhere from 1 to 3 m2 RCS with some places claiming .5 m2 RCS if RAM is used in key areas which Russians have experimented with.



This is funny at best. SU-27 has a frontal RCS of 10-15 m2. SU-27/3033/35 all have the same aerodynamics or just minute difference in the frontal structure of aircraft in SU-30MK that went to India with tiny canards. So here is my question, what happened that the more marketable SU-35S suddenly became "stealthier" without having any visible difference from the basic flanker airframe? 

Some years back, a russian research group from Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow presented a RAM years back that could bring down the Flanker airframe's RCS with RAM coatings *https://www.fighter-planes.com/stealth2.htm* .They kept publishing papers for a decade on how to RAM coat the flankers and use plasma stealth (utopian idea) to turn them stealtheir. Not a single mention of actual problem in the large RCS of the airframe itself of the entire Flanker family. So again, how can we assume that an airframe that is known to have a RCS of 10-15 m2 suddenly fell down to 1.5 m2 ? it will be hilarious if someone is claiming that it happened Just with RAM? RAM is not a magic spray to reduce RCS, otherwise world would not be spending billions of USD in designing new airframes of 5th generation aircrafts. Why not just coat a heavy monster like F-4E/D or F-15 with RAM and there you go ... a fast and furious F-22 equivalent. This is not how RCS works. Flanker stays a flanker no matter how much RAM is applied on it. SU-35S is an upgraded SU-27. Its a capable platform but has weaker electronics and a huge RCS.

And besides applying RAM to a fighter to reduce its RCS is not exclusive to Flanker family. You can apply RAM to a 1 m2 RCS bearing F-5E/F or F-16 to bring it to Rafale/EF-2000 level 0.5-0.7 m2 RCS as well. 

A comaprision with a basic SU-27. Whats the different in frontal section ? 









TheImmortal said:


> I have my doubts that an F-16 could kill an SU-35S armed with its full BVR package first. It has one of the longest range BVR packages.



Wrong. AIM-120 C7/8 in service of (KSA, UAE, Israel, Turkey) have a range of 105 KM. AIM-120D has a range of 160 km (Saudis and Israelis might procure it). Meteor on Rafale and EF-2000 (KSA, Egypt) is rumored to have a range of 200+ KM. 

... and R-77-1 on SU-30SM or SU-35S has a range of ~110 KM. 



TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S has 3 radars not 1. ERBIS is its main radar and it has a smaller radar on each side of the plane. Assuming one a day the ERBIS is replaced by a next gen Iranian AESA (SU-35IR) and you will have one of the deadliest 4++ planes out there.



-I presented you the Russian test video above with a track at ~100 km. Not sure what else would convince you. IRBIS-E can not get a tracking lock on a small fighter like F-16, F-5E/F, FCK-1 before 100 KM. Even if the Russian user's claim is to be accepted that the target was 0.5-0.6 m2 then thats the RCS of a EF-2000, Rafale. These modern fighters would track and fire multiple BVR missiles on the giant 10-15 m2 bearing Flanker from 150+ km away and leave the area. Like I said before aircraft are electronic laboratories, it matters less which one has more powerful engines, speed or a menacing look. Electronics make the difference in modern combat.



TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S would be a boon to the Iranian aviation industry. Yes, it won’t be able to compete with the stealth fighters like F-22 and F-35, but it would also be staying in Iranian air defense zones and defending the skies so survival would be greatly increased as would survival fo Iran’s air defense network.



Good luck touching a Russian airplane without paying moscow and piss off your super power military ally that has a validated reputation of not allowing their modern aircrafts be opened by clients. To this day Iran has not touched their MIG's radars. The country that made an FCK-1 equivalent from scratch at home, converted its F-4E/D's into JH-7 equivalents is still flying with rusty N019 on its MIGS because of Russian mentality and you are talking about putting IEI AESA radars on backbone of RuAF itself the SU-35S. 

Any Sukhoi, MIG can not be upgraded locally without Russians making money out of it. You are not dealing with fair democratic people here that will give you their top-of-the-line product to reverse engineer or modify. Nobody in this world has ever pulled any local upgrade on Russian modern weaponry ever be it SU-27, MIG-29 or anything of that sort. Thats not because capability does not exist. Its either, you pay them heavy money to own the project like how India made an exception in SU-30MK (65 USD million per aircraft) or you involve their companies. Money either way has to reach Moscow ! 

We will see IEI's Bayyenat-AESA very soon like we have seen IEI's Bayyenat-I on F-4E/D Dowrans and IEI's Bayyenat-II on Kowsar but I assure you we will see that radar being fitted on some future generation of Kowsar/Saegheh not on anything else. Its all logical, IRIAF won't sacrifice the upgraded AWG-9+ in F-14AM that can guide Fakour-90, AIM-54+ (overhauled 30-40 units) or futue Maghsoud. The attack squadrons of F-4E/D are already flying with Bayyenat-I radar. MIG's won't get any decent indigenous upgrade. Rest of the fleet is just prop show. 



TheImmortal said:


> The only better alternative would be J-31, which we don’t know Capabilities at all outside of what China says. And China hasn’t even given its satellite Pakistan J-31....so unlikely Iran could get in without a massive change in military relations.



How about we stay realistic.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> well two aircraft can do that in IRIAF. F-14 and Kowsar , problem is we have A2A missile to do that for F-14 , for kowsar our hand is somehow tied



Yes IRIAF should get PL-15 from China or R-77-1 from Moscow for Kowsar Program and if MIG fleet gets local upgrade. This is a must. 

AND

Babaei Missile Industries, the makers of Fakour-90, Fattar sidewinders can focus on bringing the Fatter (heavier AIM-9J/P) to AIM-9X Block II/III standard range of ~60 km. That will be the game changer for IRIAF.



SalarHaqq said:


> No doubt the latter two points - cost effectiveness and already existing basic infrastructure, represent a weighty argument for a modernization of the existing Mig-29 fleet over purchase of new Su-35 airframes (along with phasing out the Mig-29).
> 
> Still, to arrive to a definitive conclusion one would need to compare the capabilities of the types in the interception role and weigh it against the costs generated by these two hypothetical undertakings. Brand new Su-35 will likely be superior to upgraded IRIAF Mig-29. By how much, and would this be worth the price differential are thus the decisive questions.



SU-35S costs around 85 Million USD. Even a small order of 24 planes will cost 2.0 Billion USD for just the fighters ... almost 3.0 Billion USD with armaments, maintenance infrastructure and training cost. IRIAF can get MLUed 80 x MIG-29M/SMT or 48 x MIG-35 for the same amount of money. Both have similar air to air capabilities (IRIAF needs that only) compared to a SU-35S all the while these hypothetical 80 MIG-29M or 48 MIG-35 can fit easily in IRIAF in the current infrastructure we have developed for MIG-29 fleet.

More realistically, even without the procurement of anything fancy, the same 2.5 billion USD can give IRIAF the following:

- 100-150 Million for 46-48 x F-14AM. Cost is 2-3 Million USD/unit, fleet gets heavy MLU, upgrade.

- 1.5 Billion for 150 Kowsar-I/II. Cost is 10 million/unit for from-scratch production and 7 million/unit for repository-built airframe + upgrade. Current capacity is 6-7 airframes per year from one assembly line. If they setup another assembly line for future improved Kowsar-II than production can be doubled. There is a need, there is a solution.

- 700 Million for 60 MIG-29M. Additional airframes from Russia/anywhere + IRIAF's 23 x MIG-29 9.12 MLU + heavy avionics upgrade with Russian help. R-74E and R-77SD gets procured with HMD package.

- 200 Million for 100 x + Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles. 

This is a proper force that if fights in small battle groups for A2/AD will not let the enemy enter the Iranian airspace easily along with Ambush SAMs on ground. 

Prop imposters like like MirageF1, F-7N, F5E/D all retire or sold to whoever wants.



Hack-Hook said:


> su-35 will track Rafale and F16 block-60+ from that distance only if the electronic warfare system were turned off , otherwise the range will probably get reduced a lot.



Any western/European fighter will deploy heavy jamming when being tracked. 

Unrelated but here is something interesting. I read that there was a talk in IRIAF of converting a few old stored/damaged F-14A airframes to dedicated mini AWACS + E-warfare platforms with datalinking. Not sure what became of that.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> This is funny at best. SU-27 has a frontal RCS of 10-15 m2. SU-27/3033/35 all have the same aerodynamics or just minute difference in the frontal structure of aircraft in SU-30MK that went to India with tiny canards. So here is my question, what happened that the more marketable SU-35S suddenly became "stealthier" without having any visible difference from the basic flanker airframe?



Your source is the wholly inconsistent globalsecurity.org pulling the SU-27 RCS. From where it pulled who knows. It also says F-15 has same RCS as a bomber the size commercial airplane.

You could completely be right, I just don’t see this number anywhere else for SU-35 besides globalsecurity everywhere else says 1-3 m2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Your source is the wholly inconsistent globalsecurity.org pulling the SU-27 RCS. From where it pulled who knows. It also says F-15 has same RCS as a bomber the size commercial airplane.
> 
> You could completely be right, I just don’t see this number anywhere else for SU-35 besides globalsecurity everywhere else says 1-3 m2



Where did I say it's global security? Sukhoi publishes patents. They did a recent one on SU-57 where they claimed 0.1 m2 for the SU-57 airframe from frontal aspect only (its downloadable). SU-27/33/30/35 figure of 10-15 m2 for frontal RCS came from them directly.

1-3 m2 for any type of flanker is anti-common sense tbh. How can anyone claim a reduction from company claimed SU-27's 10-15 m2 to 1-3 m2 only with RAM (aerodynamics do not change) is beyond me. Aerodynamically, SU-35 = SU-27 (slightly larger Rudders)


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Where did I say it's global security? Sukhoi publishes patents. They did a recent one on SU-57 where they claimed 0.1 m2 for the SU-57 airframe from frontal aspect only (its downloadable). SU-27/33/30/35 figure of 10-15 m2 for frontal RCS came from them directly.
> 
> 1-3 m2 for any type of flanker is anti-common sense tbh. How can anyone claim a reduction from company claimed SU-27's 10-15 m2 to 1-3 m2 only with RAM (aerodynamics do not change) is beyond me. Aerodynamically, SU-35 = SU-27 (slightly larger Rudders)
> 
> 
> View attachment 863973



Can you publish these _*patents*_? 

As to the RAM experiment: 

_Russian researchers have developed coatings and techniques in the stealth design *that can reduce the head-on RCS of a Sukhoi Su-35 fighter aircraft by a factor of 10, thereby halving the radar range for the target detection.* Moreover, the Su-35 aircraft consists of a treated cockpit canopy that reflects the impinging radar waves and conceals the RCS contribution from metallic components._



https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/92617/excerpt/9781107092617_excerpt.pdf




So depending on what the true RCS of a SU-35S is, you can get quite a dramatic reduction. If Iran applied this to something like a Kowsar-II I wonder what result it would get.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Yes IRIAF should get PL-15 from China or R-77-1 from Moscow for Kowsar Program and if MIG fleet gets local upgrade. This is a must.
> 
> AND
> 
> Babaei Missile Industries, the makers of Fakour-90, Fattar sidewinders can focus on bringing the Fatter (heavier AIM-9J/P) to AIM-9X Block II/III standard range of ~60 km. That will be the game changer for IRIAF.
> 
> 
> 
> SU-35S costs around 85 Million USD. Even a small order of 24 planes will cost 2.0 Billion USD for just the fighters ... almost 3.0 Billion USD with armaments, maintenance infrastructure and training cost. IRIAF can get MLUed 80 x MIG-29M/SMT or 48 x MIG-35 for the same amount of money. Both have similar air to air capabilities (IRIAF needs that only) compared to a SU-35S all the while these hypothetical 80 MIG-29M or 48 MIG-35 can fit easily in IRIAF in the current infrastructure we have developed for MIG-29 fleet.
> 
> More realistically, even without the procurement of anything fancy, the same 2.5 billion USD can give IRIAF the following:
> 
> - 100-150 Million for 46-48 x F-14AM. Cost is 2-3 Million USD/unit, fleet gets heavy MLU, upgrade.
> 
> - 1.5 Billion for 150 Kowsar-I/II. Cost is 10 million/unit for from-scratch production and 7 million/unit for repository-built airframe + upgrade. Current capacity is 6-7 airframes per year from one assembly line. If they setup another assembly line for future improved Kowsar-II than production can be doubled. There is a need, there is a solution.
> 
> - 700 Million for 60 MIG-29M. Additional airframes from Russia/anywhere + IRIAF's 23 x MIG-29 9.12 MLU + heavy avionics upgrade with Russian help. R-74E and R-77SD gets procured with HMD package.
> 
> - 200 Million for 100 x + Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles.
> 
> This is a proper force that if fights in small battle groups for A2/AD will not let the enemy enter the Iranian airspace easily along with Ambush SAMs on ground.
> 
> Prop imposters like like MirageF1, F-7N, F5E/D all retire or sold to whoever wants.
> 
> 
> 
> Any western/European fighter will deploy heavy jamming when being tracked.
> 
> Unrelated but here is something interesting. I read that there was a talk in IRIAF of converting a few old stored/damaged F-14A airframes to dedicated mini AWACS + E-warfare platforms with datalinking. Not sure what became of that.


maybe , but if they go with Simorgh/Iran-140 program and build early warning and airborne RADAR version of it that they were talking about , that plane would be a lot more capable in that regard


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> i believe both of them are inferior as russia don't have the capability to produce enough AESA radar for them thats why they decided to don't equip Mig-35 with AESA and Su-35s are not AESA equipped and AESA is a must if you want to use your airplane in the next 20-30 years.



The Russian Federation has the technical capability to produce vast quantities of AESA radars and then some, what's lacking is the economy for extravagant expenditures. Also Russian military doctrine, much like its Soviet counterpart before, were / are not focusing on air power in the way western doctrine is. Which from the economic point of view is the rational thing to do for Russia. This difference in general philosophy explains the difference in areas of focus. But it is not because of technological or industrial capability levels.



Hack-Hook said:


> what you consider in mig-35 , that's a question . certainly a plane like Rafale or Grippen or J-10c if you consider them in class of Mig-35 fare better because they simply have better electronic



Some of the electronics could be improved locally, jammers added etc.



Hack-Hook said:


> well there is a several hundred page thread about that on the forum , but don't believe Pakistani claims that they shott down one or two su-30 they never provided any evidence , but yes Indian su-30 were kept away around 100km away from the border. and after that India went and purchased some Rafale



There are various possible reasons as to why India kept its Su-30 farther away from the border, one being political unwillingness to widen the aerial skirmish and thereby risk significant overall escalation. Maybe it would have acted likewise with Rafales. At any rate, it doesn't tell us anything about the Su-30MKI's hypothetical combat performance.



Hack-Hook said:


> the problem is infrastructure to modernize mig-29 fleet is somehow rudimentary , if we want to modernize them according to our current infrastructure we must rebuilt most of the subsystem a new to make them compatible with our current equipment . that's time consuming and need lots of money .
> the money better spend on our Kowsar to solve its current problems for next generation of the fighter.



User drmeson whom I was replying to should be the better addressee for this comment. As for Kousar, it does look like a viable and possibly worthwile option to pursue, but light fighters and medium / heavy fighters aren't simply interchangeable. Transition towards an entirely light- / medium-weight fighter based air force would require a deeper doctrinal revision as well as infrastructural adaptations, which in turn would consume time and generate costs, something that would need to be taken into account.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Russia allowed India to modify SU-30. anything possible if in the contract. The issue with modification is it voids possible claims against the aircraft with the maker if problems arise because of your modification.
> 
> Or else you can modify any Russian fighter. But later if there is a problem you cannot expect Russia to foot the maintenance Bill by claiming a defect.



Russia has shown to be rather permissive in this regard. Indian modifications to the Su-30 are one example, China outright reverse-engineering and putting their own version of the Flanker into serial production with Russia not filing any lawsuits against Beijing, is another. Iran domestically upgrading its Su-22 offers a third illustration.

Beyond the air force branch, let's not even get into all the weaponry Iran has developed based on or retaining at least some aspects of original Russian platforms. As far as known, Russia never lodged any complaint in reaction to this either.




drmeson said:


> Both have similar air to air capabilities (IRIAF needs that only) compared to a SU-35S all the while these hypothetical 80 MIG-29M or 48 MIG-35 can fit easily in IRIAF in the current infrastructure we have developed for MIG-29 fleet.



This is where I'm having doubts. The commonly indicated range for the Mig-35 is of 2000 km versus 3600 km for the Su-35. Mig-29's range is put at 1430 km versus 3000 km for the Su-30.

As PeeD remarked:














Flankers also have superior maneuverability. Probably other advantages I can't think of right now.



drmeson said:


> More realistically, even without the procurement of anything fancy, the same 2.5 billion USD can give IRIAF the following:
> 
> - 100-150 Million for 46-48 x F-14AM. Cost is 2-3 Million USD/unit, fleet gets heavy MLU, upgrade.
> 
> - 1.5 Billion for 150 Kowsar-I/II. Cost is 10 million/unit for from-scratch production and 7 million/unit for repository-built airframe + upgrade. Current capacity is 6-7 airframes per year from one assembly line. If they setup another assembly line for future improved Kowsar-II than production can be doubled. There is a need, there is a solution.





drmeson said:


> - 200 Million for 100 x + Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles.
> 
> This is a proper force that if fights in small battle groups for A2/AD will not let the enemy enter the Iranian airspace easily along with Ambush SAMs on ground.
> 
> Prop imposters like like MirageF1, F-7N, F5E/D all retire or sold to whoever wants.



I was looking at the advisability of a limited Flanker procurement (Su-30 or Su-35) on top of the above (F-14AM, Kousar, additional UCAV), not instead of it.



drmeson said:


> - 700 Million for 60 MIG-29M. Additional airframes from Russia/anywhere + IRIAF's 23 x MIG-29 9.12 MLU + heavy avionics upgrade with Russian help. R-74E and R-77SD gets procured with HMD package.



Upgrading 63 Mig-29's to UPG or SMT standards cost India $964 million in March 2008. However the deal included setting up a production line and training personnel in the upgrade process. Unless such modifications were to be done in Russia, it would thus cost Iran the same or a bit more given the elapsed time.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> The Russian Federation has the technical capability to produce vast quantities of AESA radars and then some, what's lacking is the economy for extravagant expenditures. Also Russian military doctrine, much like its Soviet counterpart before, were / are not focusing on air power in way western doctrine is. Which from the economic point of view is the rational thing to do. This difference in general philosophy explains the difference in areas of focus. But it has little to do with capability.


it have many things , to do with strong and active airforce your capabilities are a lot different than being only equipped with artillery . Russian doctrine of using mass artillery is outdated if they can't secure the sky . otherwise the enemy can easily bomb the shit out of those artillery lined in front line
and bombing enemy from sky is cheaper in long run


SalarHaqq said:


> Some of the electronics can be improved locally, jammers added etc.


if we were allowed to improve the equipment on Mig-29 we are also be allowed to thinker with Mig-29 and also we will have the problem of price what you suggest is like paying twice for the aircraft.
don't forget for example electronic in Kowsar is nearly 2/3rd of the price. so why for example spend 4-5 billion on Mig-35 when with that we can build our own turbofan get in class of RD-33 and have as much as next generation of kowsar and be able to use 1-2bilion we want to use to upgrade those-mig-35 , su-35 on acquiring 80-100 more next generation of Kowsar. and also by doing so we streamline our air force and instead of 10 different airplane we will have 2-3 type of airplane that reduce the cost of operating air force a lot.
that also solve our air-force chronic problem which is lack of funds .


SalarHaqq said:


> There are plenty of possible reasons as to why India kept its Su-30 farther away from the border, one being political unwillingness to widen the aerial skirmish and thereby risk significant overall escalation. Maybe it would have acted likewise with Rafales. At any rate, it doesn't tell us anything about the Su-30MKI's hypothetical combat performance.


one can be that the bahamoot could not compete against midget JF-17 or middle weight F-16 equipped with AIM-120 or PL-12. who knew ,but still remain the fact that India air-force after the war went and bought Rafale while they could produce SU-30MKI locally (at least half of it) and again several month ago they cancelled order for 11 more Su-30MKI.
flanker had its time , but not anymore the air-forces around the world moving toward Network linked small-Medium fighter size equipped with powerful AESA radars , those airplanes rule the sky at least for the generation that is coming and Flanker is not one of them. it belong to the age how fast you can role and how good you can be at dogfight mattered . today that don't matter. all modern missiles cover 360 degree and tied to helmet mounted HUD , and most of the fights are happening at BVR ranges and if you think you can outmaneuver a modern missile you are vastly mistaken .


SalarHaqq said:


> User drmeson whom I was replying to is the better addressee for this comment. As for Kousar, it does look like a viable and possibly worthwile option to pursue, but light fighters and medium / heavy fighters aren't interchangeable and fulfill different roles. While transition towards an entirely light- / medium-weight fighter based air force would require deeper doctrinal revisions as well as infrastructural adaptation, which in turn consume time and generate costs.


you see a kowsar sized fighter with stronger air-frame and more powerful turbofan engine can carry as much or even more than an F-4 it will be a multi-role fighter so not much problem on changing the doctrine from large fighter to light to medium .
and if you are concerned about range let look at this what limited kowsar is its engine , if the proper fund is injected in production of our Turbofan engines and we build engine bigger than Tolue-14 and Jahesh-700 as we were supposed to do two years ago if the proper fund were given to the team that was building the engine. the range on Kowsar will double just by replacing two kowsar with one turbofan engine in class of 50-60kn look at it like this Owj use 35 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel and for the 32kn dry thrust it use 1120gr/s fuel 
if you use an engine like old F-404 it use 23 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel it mean for its 49kn of its maximum thrust it use 1127gr/s of fuel. first they look simillar but lets look deeper . owj at maximum with after burner can produce 22kn of thrust . it means 2x owj produce 44kn of thrust (5kn less than an old f-404 without afterburner) it means to achieve that it use 60 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel in another word 2640gr/s of fuel and still weaker than a single f-404 and wit that much fuel use the kowsar can surpass the speed of sound reach mach-1.6. thats why we say we must spend all the money people talking on buying foreign airplanes on our own kowsar . with proper engine airframe can supercrise up to mach 1.6
or more with external weapon it probably can reach to Mach-1.2 - 1.4 that is better than f-35 (it can't sustain that) and is equal to what Rafale and Grippen can achieve not to mention with after burner it probably will surpass Mach-2.
also with that added power some conformal fuel tank can be designed inside it that made its combat range as much as F-16 and Grippen and F-4 without sacrificing its external pylons for fuel and by being able to supercruise the plan very fast can reach the mission area without touching afterburner something that f-14 or Su-35 or Mig-35 had to do to reach target area.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Russia has shown to be rather permissive in this regard. Indian modifications to the Su-30 are one example, China outright reverse-engineering and putting their own version of the Flanker into serial production with Russia not filing any sort of lawsuits against Beijing, is another. Iran's domestic upgrading of the Su-22 offers a third illustration.
> 
> Beyond air forces, let's not even get into the many weapons Iran has developed based on or retaining at least certain aspects of original Russian platforms. As far as known Russia never lodged any complaint in reaction to this.


india and china paid a premium for that , the price they paid russia to be able to do that made the Su-30 nearly as expensive at Su-35n for them . in short again the money went to russia


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran's domestic upgrading of the Su-22 offers a third illustration.


one time i said exactly what we upgraded with Su-22 ? the answer is we more thinkered with the weapon rather than airplane and also consider that Su-22 is just another name for Su-17 . the last one russia produced was in 1990 or more than 30 years ago. thats why they don't care about it


SalarHaqq said:


> Flankers also have superior maneuverability. Probably other advantages I can't think of right now.


useless feature in modern warfare , as agile as they may seems they are far less agile than modern missiles and modern missiles all cover 360 degree around you and tie with helmet mounted HUD . and majorit6y of fight happen at bvr range.


SalarHaqq said:


> I was looking at the advisability of a limited Flanker procurement (Su-30 or Su-35) on top of the above (F-14AM, Kousar, additional UCAV), not instead of it.


Just think how much it made maintenance and training and logistic harder , what IRIAF must do is get rid of all the different sort of airplanes it operate and replace them with 1-2 type of airplanes to make maintemnanc3e easier and reduce cost.


----------



## Readerdefence

Hi we all are discussing Russian flankers which is not a bad idea as they are originated from Russia but why we all are not discussing Russian flankers with Chinese gadgets to upgrade these accordingly 
as we know Chinese are formidable in challenging USA and Taiwan and others in their region with these Russian clones but with lot & lot of improvements inside so in iranian scenario. All Russian except radars and missiles RWR etc Chinese 
if Iran has its own aesa to put in these planes they can do that too but flankers are not that bad except Russians are not updating them as fast as they should accordingly 
thank you


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> india and china paid a premium for that , the price they paid russia to be able to do that made the Su-30 nearly as expensive at Su-35n for them . in short again the money went to russia



1) China paid 2,5 billion USD for 200 locally produced Su-27 from kits delivered by Russia, following a 1995 contract to that effect. That's 12,5 million USD per plane, incomparably cheaper than the Su-35 price tag.

2) Then in 2004, after the hundredth Su-27 was assembled in China, Shenyang Aircraft Corporation revealed it was now manufacturing the modified J-11B with 90% indigenous components. No dime was paid to Russia for this. Nevertheless Moscow didn't file lawsuits against Beijing.









Is China's J-11 Fighter Copied From Russia's Su-27 'Flanker'?


The J-11 has been at the forefront of Chinese efforts to produce long-range fourth-generation fighters.




nationalinterest.org







Hack-Hook said:


> one time i said exactly what we upgraded with Su-22 ? the answer is we more thinkered with the weapon rather than airplane and also consider that Su-22 is just another name for Su-17 . the last one russia produced was in 1990 or more than 30 years ago. thats why they don't care about it



The new weapons require modifications to the aircraft's systems. It's an example of Russia's _relative_ permissivity for unlicensed, free-of-charge foreign upgrades to its weaponry.

Outside the air force, there are plenty of cases where Russian weapons systems were reverse engineered and upgraded by Iran. I don't know of any other major supplier (especially western ones) showing this much tolerance in this regard.



Hack-Hook said:


> Just think how much it made maintenance and training and logistic harder , what IRIAF must do is get rid of all the different sort of airplanes it operate and replace them with 1-2 type of airplanes to make maintemnanc3e easier and reduce cost.



As said, my reflection is based on the premise that all the types drmeson says should be phased out, will be phased out.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> it have many things , to do with strong and active airforce your capabilities are a lot different than being only equipped with artillery . Russian doctrine of using mass artillery is outdated if they can't secure the sky . otherwise the enemy can easily bomb the shit out of those artillery lined in front line
> and bombing enemy from sky is cheaper in long run



Iran is another country whose doctrine isn't focusing on air power. Proof is in the pudding: Islamic Iran has successfully deterred military aggression by the world's sole superpower for several decades in a row, precisely thanks to this very type of doctrinal approach.

So non-air power based doctrines aren't necessarily outdated, in fact they may be the most innovative one could think of.



Hack-Hook said:


> if we were allowed to improve the equipment on Mig-29 we are also be allowed to thinker with Mig-29 and also we will have the problem of price what you suggest is like paying twice for the aircraft.



I never talked of improving the Mig-29. And I'm not aware of evidence for the above quoted claim, it appears to be speculative in essence.



Hack-Hook said:


> don't forget for example electronic in Kowsar is nearly 2/3rd of the price. so why for example spend 4-5 billion on Mig-35 when with that we can build our own turbofan get in class of RD-33 and have as much as next generation of kowsar and be able to use 1-2bilion we want to use to upgrade those-mig-35 , su-35 on acquiring 80-100 more next generation of Kowsar. and also by doing so we streamline our air force and instead of 10 different airplane we will have 2-3 type of airplane that reduce the cost of operating air force a lot.
> that also solve our air-force chronic problem which is lack of funds .



I'd suggest to respond directly to drmeson rather than by way of citing my replies to the latter. For I did not suggest Iran should upgrade its Mig-29 nor that Iran should purchase Mig-35's, but that she ought to ditch her Fulcrums altogether in fact.

The Flanker acquisition I'm contemplating would cost Iran less than 4-5 billion USD and would represent a possible stop gap measure until an Iranian medium / heavy fighter is ready. Kousar is a light fighter, it cannot replace the latter category of jets unless the Iranian air force switches to a different type of thinking, which in turn would consume time as well as funds for infrastructural adaptation.



Hack-Hook said:


> one can be that the bahamoot could not compete against midget JF-17 or middle weight F-16 equipped with AIM-120 or PL-12. who knew ,but still remain the fact that India air-force after the war went and bought Rafale while they could produce SU-30MKI locally (at least half of it) and again several month ago they cancelled order for 11 more Su-30MKI.



This doesn't mean they consider their Su-30MKI as useless, does it. India's a huge country with a large air force, they operate numerous types and won't have enough Rafales anytime soon (if ever) to be able to afford getting rid of their Flankers.



Hack-Hook said:


> flanker had its time , but not anymore the air-forces around the world moving toward Network linked small-Medium fighter size equipped with powerful AESA radars , those airplanes rule the sky at least for the generation that is coming and Flanker is not one of them. it belong to the age how fast you can role and how good you can be at dogfight mattered . today that don't matter. all modern missiles cover 360 degree and tied to helmet mounted HUD , and most of the fights are happening at BVR ranges and if you think you can outmaneuver a modern missile you are vastly mistaken .



Iran doesn't go by what others do, i.e. NATO and developing countries trying to ape NATO. The potential enemy is too powerful for Iran to commit the fatal mistake of trying to match it in a symmetrical manner.

For now I'm quite comfortable with trusting PeeD's assessment that four to five squadrons of Su-30 or Su-35 would represent a valuable investment when it comes to taking some burden off the IADS grid in case of war.



Hack-Hook said:


> you see a kowsar sized fighter with stronger air-frame and more powerful turbofan engine can carry as much or even more than an F-4 it will be a multi-role fighter so not much problem on changing the doctrine from large fighter to light to medium .
> and if you are concerned about range let look at this what limited kowsar is its engine , if the proper fund is injected in production of our Turbofan engines and we build engine bigger than Tolue-14 and Jahesh-700 as we were supposed to do two years ago if the proper fund were given to the team that was building the engine. the range on Kowsar will double just by replacing two kowsar with one turbofan engine in class of 50-60kn look at it like this Owj use 35 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel and for the 32kn dry thrust it use 1120gr/s fuel
> if you use an engine like old F-404 it use 23 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel it mean for its 49kn of its maximum thrust it use 1127gr/s of fuel. first they look simillar but lets look deeper . owj at maximum with after burner can produce 22kn of thrust . it means 2x owj produce 44kn of thrust (5kn less than an old f-404 without afterburner) it means to achieve that it use 60 g/(kN⋅s) of fuel in another word 2640gr/s of fuel and still weaker than a single f-404 and wit that much fuel use the kowsar can surpass the speed of sound reach mach-1.6. thats why we say we must spend all the money people talking on buying foreign airplanes on our own kowsar . with proper engine airframe can supercrise up to mach 1.6
> or more with external weapon it probably can reach to Mach-1.2 - 1.4 that is better than f-35 (it can't sustain that) and is equal to what Rafale and Grippen can achieve not to mention with after burner it probably will surpass Mach-2.
> also with that added power some conformal fuel tank can be designed inside it that made its combat range as much as F-16 and Grippen and F-4 without sacrificing its external pylons for fuel and by being able to supercruise the plan very fast can reach the mission area without touching afterburner something that f-14 or Su-35 or Mig-35 had to do to reach target area.



My question isn't whether Kousar is good or not, as said it looks to me as a viable and worthwhile project, yes. What I'm pondering is a contract for 48-60 Flankers until Iran is done producing 100-200 upgraded Kousars equipped with a powerful new engine, a goal we're still years away from.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Russia has shown to be rather permissive in this regard. Indian modifications to the Su-30 are one example, China outright reverse-engineering and putting their own version of the Flanker into serial production with Russia not filing any sort of lawsuits against Beijing, is another. Iran's domestic upgrading of the Su-22 offers a third illustration.
> 
> Beyond air forces, let's not even get into the many weapons Iran has developed based on or retaining at least certain aspects of original Russian platforms. As far as known Russia never lodged any complaint in reaction to this.



I agree, the threat of lawsuits over reverse engineering or modifying a Russian weapon system is severely overblown.

When Russia wanted to sell SU-35 to China they were hesitant because they were afarid China would reverse engineer. If lawsuit was a real threat like some on here they say, Russia wouldn’t be afraid. They knew their recourse if China did go against their verbal pledge would be very little.

Iran has reverse engineered several Russian systems including TOR-M1 and Russian OTH radar and Russian supercativating torpedo and had zero problems. Iran constantly modifies or reverse engineers American fighter jets/drones/helicopters and America hasn’t filed any successful lawsuit in international court.



SalarHaqq said:


> My question isn't whether Kousar is good or not, as said it looks to be a viable and worthwhile project to me. What I'm pondering is a contract for 48-60 Flankers until Iran is done producing 100-200 upgraded Kousars equipped with a powerful new engine, something that is still years away.



Kowsar is the best Iran can produce at the current time due to whatever reason (knowledge, talent, funding, etc).

Any bigger fighter jet requires a heavier class engine which Iran has not yet unveiled to be able to produce reliably.

Also any bigger fighter jet will require use of titanium alloys and specialized infrastructure to support the development of these alloys and the airframe itself.

Thus 2 biggest impediments to a medium or heavy Iranian fighter jet is a reliable heavy engine and titanium alloys and supporting infrastructure. Until that changes expect to see continuous generations of Kowsar in a limited production amount.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Iran is another country whose doctrine isn't focusing on air power. Proof is in the pudding: Islamic Iran has successfully deterred military aggression by the world's sole superpower for several decades in a row, precisely thanks to this very type of doctrinal approach.
> 
> So non-air power based doctrines aren't necessarily outdated, in fact they may be the most innovative one could think of.


let just say in iran iraq war for example our navy boast of Morvarid operation and say we destroyed iraq navy and throw them our of persian gulf. but let see what happened there.
in the phase 1 of operation , air force suppressed iraqi airforce and army aviation protected task-force 421 they successfully managed to supress iraqi defense and let our marines destroy iraqi defence and installation on on the Iraqi oil terminals at Mina al Bakr and Khor-al-Amaya.
on the second pase of the operation navy decided to alone go and close iraqi ports of AL-Faw and Um-AlQasr . guess what happened two Iraqi Osa boat sank by Iranian boats but the situation was not good for 2 LaCombattante Ship so they asked for help from air-force they sent two F-4 armed with 6xAGM-56 each by the time they arrived Peykan was Sank after being hit by two Termit missile it made the F-4 pilots so angry that they hit any , I mean any moving iraqi target they could see and then for more F-4 from Shiraz air base joined them and bombed every port facility and air defence facility the could find in area and literally destroyed every possible activity there , then iraqi tried to send some helicopter and mig-23 to the area to protect the F-4s with the help of F-14s which were send to the area destroyed all those migs and helicopters that were sent to help but 1 mig-23 which escaped , then they went and bombed Mina-al-Bakr terminal
in that operation which is named the most successful operation of our navy Our navy lost half of the fighting force they sent to area and managed to destroy 2xOSA Boat and one Mig-23.
air force destroyed two port, 1 oil terminal , 11 boat (Osa and P6) and 6mig-23 and 1 Mig-21 and one Super ferlon Helicopter + all Iraqi air defense facilities in the area.

so how can you tell me our war doctorine is not based on air force , in every successful operation we had air force played a critical role. we may not advertise it but our army still rely on air force and recently drones which is another type of air force


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> I never talked of improving the Mig-29. And I'm not aware of evidence for the above quoted claim, it appears to be speculative in essence.


not speculative Russia don't sell you the airplane without RADARS and electronic system , it will sell you with them and ask you for their cost . then you must go and remove those and built your own electronic and put them inside . its like paying twice for the airplane subsystems.


SalarHaqq said:


> This doesn't mean they consider their Su-30MKI as useless, does it. India's a huge country with a large air force, they operate numerous types and won't have enough Rafales anytime soon (if ever) to be able to afford getting rid of their Flankers.


no but to me it looks as they phase out their mig-23s they are stopping order new Su-30 and bought Rafale and they still work on Tejas . to me it seems they plane slowly focus on rafale and thyeir own light fighter and slowly phase out russian airplanes. maybe not today , not tomorrow but certainly in the next decade we see a different type of indian air force which is equipped with more light to medium fighter 


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran doesn't go by what others do, i.e. NATO and developing countries trying to ape NATO. The potential enemy is too powerful for Iran to commit the fatal mistake of trying to match it in a symmetrical manner.
> 
> For now I'm quite comfortable with trusting PeeD's assessment that four to five squadrons of Su-30 or Su-35 would represent a valuable investment when it comes to taking some burden off the IADS grid in case of war.


its not the question of what they do , its simple physics , and biology , no pilot can stay counscios if they try to pull out the acceleration a missile can do. dogfight and agility is a thing of past yes they are awesome ,.... in movies . but in reality the fight is done at BVR and the one wins who had better electronic. even if you come in WVR fight , who care which one is more agile , now a days modern fighter pilots only turn they head toward the target and lock it and fire .its not if the target is behind them as the missile can do a 180 degree turn and engage the target from front.



TheImmortal said:


> Kowsar is the best Iran can produce at the current time due to whatever reason (knowledge, talent, funding, etc).
> 
> Any bigger fighter jet requires a heavier class engine which Iran has not yet unveiled to be able to produce reliably.
> 
> Also any bigger fighter jet will require use of titanium alloys and specialized infrastructure to support the development of these alloys and the airframe itself.
> 
> Thus 2 biggest impediments to a medium or heavy Iranian fighter jet is a reliable heavy engine and titanium alloys and supporting infrastructure. Until that changes expect to see continuous generations of Kowsar in a limited production amount.


you see , we don't need a heavy fighter , we just need a modern light to medium fighter.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> let just say in iran iraq war for example our navy boast of Morvarid operation and say we destroyed iraq navy and throw them our of persian gulf. but let see what happened there.
> in the phase 1 of operation , air force suppressed iraqi airforce and army aviation protected task-force 421 they successfully managed to supress iraqi defense and let our marines destroy iraqi defence and installation on on the Iraqi oil terminals at Mina al Bakr and Khor-al-Amaya.
> on the second pase of the operation navy decided to alone go and close iraqi ports of AL-Faw and Um-AlQasr . guess what happened two Iraqi Osa boat sank by Iranian boats but the situation was not good for 2 LaCombattante Ship so they asked for help from air-force they sent two F-4 armed with 6xAGM-56 each by the time they arrived Peykan was Sank after being hit by two Termit missile it made the F-4 pilots so angry that they hit any , I mean any moving iraqi target they could see and then for more F-4 from Shiraz air base joined them and bombed every port facility and air defence facility the could find in area and literally destroyed every possible activity there , then iraqi tried to send some helicopter and mig-23 to the area to protect the F-4s with the help of F-14s which were send to the area destroyed all those migs and helicopters that were sent to help but 1 mig-23 which escaped , then they went and bombed Mina-al-Bakr terminal
> in that operation which is named the most successful operation of our navy Our navy lost half of the fighting force they sent to area and managed to destroy 2xOSA Boat and one Mig-23.
> air force destroyed two port, 1 oil terminal , 11 boat (Osa and P6) and 6mig-23 and 1 Mig-21 and one Super ferlon Helicopter + all Iraqi air defense facilities in the area.
> 
> so how can you tell me our war doctorine is not based on air force , in every successful operation we had air force played a critical role. we may not advertise it but our army still rely on air force and recently drones which is another type of air force



During the Sacred Defence the Islamic Republic's defence doctrine had not taken shape yet. Iran had to rely on structures inherited from the former regime to a much larger extent. Today these battles would be fought very differently.

Moreover, since the 1990's-2000's the potential enemy Iran has been preparing for is not a neighbor but the USA no less. In short, Iran succeeded to make possible the impossible: namely, to deter military aggression by the USA regime.

And in this feat, Iran's air force definitely played no role. It's Iran's asymmetrical approach which made it possible. The allocation of funds to development projects in the different branches of the Iranian military is reflective of where the doctrinal focus lies. This doesn't stand to debate.



Hack-Hook said:


> not speculative Russia don't sell you the airplane without RADARS and electronic system , it will sell you with them and ask you for their cost . then you must go and remove those and built your own electronic and put them inside . its like paying twice for the airplane subsystems.



Domestic upgrades to certain electronic systems won't cost Iran as much as the entire aircraft imported from Russia.



Hack-Hook said:


> no but to me it looks as they phase out their mig-23s they are stopping order new Su-30 and bought Rafale and they still work on Tejas . to me it seems they plane slowly focus on rafale and thyeir own light fighter and slowly phase out russian airplanes. maybe not today , not tomorrow but certainly in the next decade we see a different type of indian air force which is equipped with more light to medium fighter



I don't think India will retire its Flankers long before the airframes reach their limit.



Hack-Hook said:


> its not the question of what they do , its simple physics , and biology , no pilot can stay counscios if they try to pull out the acceleration a missile can do. dogfight and agility is a thing of past yes they are awesome ,.... in movies . but in reality the fight is done at BVR and the one wins who had better electronic. even if you come in WVR fight , who care which one is more agile , now a days modern fighter pilots only turn they head toward the target and lock it and fire .its not if the target is behind them as the missile can do a 180 degree turn and engage the target from front.



I still find PeeD's assessment trustworthy, for there's no doubt he definitely took into account the above and more when he came to that conclusion.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> During the Sacred Defence Iran's defence doctrine had not taken shape yet. Iran had to rely on structures inherited from the former regime to a much larger extent. Today these battles would be fought very differently.
> 
> Moreover, since the 1990's-2000's the potential enemy Iran has been preparing for is not a neighbor but the USA no less. In short, Iran succeeded to make possible the impossible: namely, to deter military aggression by the USA regime.
> 
> And in this feat, Iran's air force definitely played no role. It's Iran's asymmetrical approach which made it possible. This doesn't stand to debate.


if so why go and buy some Russian fighter. they had no place in war doctorine



SalarHaqq said:


> Domestic upgrades to certain electronic systems won't cost Iran as much as the entire aircraft imported from Russia.


as i said 2/3rd of the price of kowsar is those domestic electronics



SalarHaqq said:


> I don't think India will retire its Flankers long before the airframes reach their limit.


many of them are past half their useful age


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

PeeD misses this forum because he's the only one I really respect in his analyzes and I know he knows more than he says here on this forum. I read ridiculous analyzes here that it becomes heavy. PeeD gives a balance here but for now it's almost total imbalance with ridiculous analysis and deduction.

I repeat a question on the F4-SM, why has a new cell been created and why shortly after Iran announces in 2020 the construction of a heavy fighter?

Can we announce the construction of a heavy fighter without having the engine that goes with it? And what would be the plane that would have tested the new engine according to you, according to the logic of things?


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Can you publish these _*patents*_?
> 
> As to the RAM experiment:
> 
> _Russian researchers have developed coatings and techniques in the stealth design *that can reduce the head-on RCS of a Sukhoi Su-35 fighter aircraft by a factor of 10, thereby halving the radar range for the target detection.* Moreover, the Su-35 aircraft consists of a treated cockpit canopy that reflects the impinging radar waves and conceals the RCS contribution from metallic components._
> 
> 
> 
> https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/92617/excerpt/9781107092617_excerpt.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So depending on what the true RCS of a SU-35S is, you can get quite a dramatic reduction. If Iran applied this to something like a Kowsar-II I wonder what result it would get.



I can publish patents? you mean I can post it here? If you can read Russian then its on WO Patents in .pdf format. These SUKHOI Patents were the talk of the town in the aviation fan circuits for years because they listed two things:

- Usual Flanker Airframe i.e. SU-27,30,33,35,37, all have 10-15 m2 RCS.
- SU-57 has an RCS of 0.1 to 1 m2 (Not that stealth compared to F-35, F-22).

The link I provided for Russian Academy of Sciences is a University research project to implement RAM coat and plasma stealth. But it turned out to be just that, a academic utopian university research project from mid 2000s without any practical implementation. We have never seen a RAM coating on any operational flanker in Ru-AF service? Some suspect chinese J-16 uses it though. Even if we say hyptothetically RuAF has some hidden RAM coated SU-35 squadron for the sake of argument, RAM is not some magic paint that can turn a 15 m2 RCS airframe into 1-3 m2. That's IMPOSSIBLE. RAM does not reduce RCS that drastically otherwise what is the point in having any newly designed airframe. IRIAF should just get their entire fleet of F-4E/D coated with RAM and there you go, they can compete with F-35 right there lol they have the "size" and "speed" that you often consider as deciding factors for which aircraft is great and which is not.

We are not discussing Kowsar-I here, we are discussing flankers and we have established proof of the following:

- Sukhoi's own Video I posted shows IRBIS-E on SU-35S can barely track a 1-2 m2 target (F-16, Kowsar-I, FCK-1, T-5, T-50 etc) at 100 km. It will track EF-2000, Rafale (0.5-0.7 m2) even below that range. That too, if the adversary is not using Jamming.

- Itself SU-27,30,33,35 airframes have 10-15 m2 RCS as per Sukhoi Patents themselves.

- Its longest-range BVR package has a range of 110 KM (R-77-1, R-77SD).

- So for 85 Million USD IRIAF will get 10-15 m2 RCS bearing heavy maintenance jet that can track an F-16 at 100 KM and fire a BVR missile at it from 110 KM range. 

So my question is this .... what is better here ? wasting 3 Billion USD to get 24 such jets or use the same 3 Billions for the following ? 

- 150 x Kowsar-I/II with IEI Bayyenat-AESA, PL-15 
- 100 x F-14AM with Fakour-90 + MIG-29M/SMT standard with R-74, R-77SD
- 100 x Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles.
- All data linked, all carrying domestic avionics

Except for some light procurement of PL-15 or R-77 or if possible some additional MIG-29 MLUed airframes, IRIAF wont need anything from abroad. 

*Above vs *24 SU-35S for 3 Billion + Avionics less toothless MIG-29 9.12 fleet dying without MLU, Few F-14 AM, Kowsar program stuck at 5-6 units per year, money being wasted for keeping prop fighters like F-7N and Mirages. What does IRIAF want here?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> if so why go and buy some Russian fighter. they had no place in war doctorine



Because we're exclusively talking a restricted number, to be used as a temporary gap filler and in an auxiliary, not in a central role. So this would be in keeping with the asymmetric doctrine. If Iran went and placed an order for a hundred fighter jets or more then yes, it'd run counter to her doctrinal framework. Also I'm not saying the air force has no place _at all_, just that it'll be a distinctly subordinate, minimal one. 

Neither am I arguing that these couple dozen Flankers are a must have. On the contrary, the point is that any larger or more costly order wouldn't be advisable. It's so to say the upper limit of what would make sense for Iran, and even that onto itself is merely an option, which may well be compensated through other means.

Truth is I think it's unlikely Iran will import any fighter jets in the coming years, and I'm even unsure about the Kousar program reaching mass production status - and not due to lacking capability. In fact domestic design and production of a heavier fighter would be feasible too in my opinion, it just doesn't square with Iran's general defence philosophy to dedicate the required funds to such a procurement. We shall see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe , but if they go with Simorgh/Iran-140 program and build early warning and airborne RADAR version of it that they were talking about , that plane would be a lot more capable in that regard



In the F-14 AM upgrade, the IR&SSJO pulled a full upgrade of AWG-9 to AWG-9+ with digitalization, new antenna change, and modern processors to bring it to APG-71 standard. That could be ~370-400 km of search range for a F-15C size RCS. A full SAIRAN e-warfare suite, Datalink, and TAC-2 like IRST can give IRIAF 8 x F-14 AWACS + e-Warfare platforms. They can accompany 8 mixed squadrons of 5 x F-14AM, 10 x KOWSAR-I and 3 x MIG-29 9.12 each along with SIGINT/ELIT UCAVs. 

I will try to search more about why the talk ended.



SalarHaqq said:


> User drmeson whom I was replying to should be the better addressee for this comment. As for Kousar, it does look like a viable and possibly worthwile option to pursue, but light fighters and medium / heavy fighters aren't simply interchangeable. Transition towards an entirely light- / medium-weight fighter based air force would require a deeper doctrinal revision as well as infrastructural adaptations, which in turn would consume time and generate costs, something that would need to be taken into account.



Modern air warfare revolves around roughly 70% electronics and 30% physical characteristics. It used t be the opposite in the 1970s and even the 80s but now it's all about electronics. You can basically put the following on any maneuverable supersonic low RCS platform (F-5?) and you can muscle down the enemy atleast in interception role in the air:

- Long tracking range radar with ECCM
- Encrypted Datalink with air and ground assets
- Navigation and Encrypted communication
- e-Warfare suite (ECM, Jammers, Chaff/Flares)
- 2 x ARH BVR + 2 x All aspect WVR missiles slaved to HMD

This future was seen by Brig. Gen. Sattari when he initiated the Azarakhsh program. Azarakhsh-I was supposed to be a F-5G/F-20 with MIG-29 9.13 equivalent with RD-33, avionics like N019 radar. Sattari died and the project got into the hands of stupid people. It flew as a rebuilt F-5E with some local structure embedded a SY-80 radar of J-7G. Azarakhsh-II is Kowsar-I with Grifo-346 with e-warfare suite, datalink, FBW. It should have been airborne in ~2012 but Ahmadinejad Government and bozos in HESA were busy doing PR stunts so the focus or money that Kowsar-I deserved in 2005-2012 went somewhere else. Azarakhsh-III will be Kowsar-II which will probably be state of the art 4+ generation fighter that IRIAF needs. Saegheh Program was an aerodynamic testbed project which was never supposed to get into production and it did not. What it will lead to, may probably not even be manned.

IMO IRIAF does not need any heavy fighters anymore for a simple reason. Our missile forces and UCAV's are evolving very fast. In case of conflict with KSA, Kuwait and UAE, would it be better to send 30-40 F-4E/D armed with Ya-Ali ALCM to attack the forward bases (4 total) *OR *sit back and relax ... and launch some 100 x Kheybar Shikans HGVs + 100 x Mobin/Hoveyzeh CM with Shahed-171 + Mohajer-6 to destroy their airforce on ground? Why risk the pilots, why risk the aircraft that can stay in Iran and guard the airspace instead? Besides our local Kowsar-I/II platform can launch SOWs from Iranian airspace to attack the mainland peninsula.

Instead of wasting 5 Billion USD on heavy 10-15 m2 RCS bearing SU-35S, we can instead bargain for TOT of some 200 x AL-31F to put them in Kowsar-II, 500 R-77M + R74 and some additional 35-50 airframes of MLUed MIG-29M to be locally upgraded by HESA and IEI along with our own MIG-29 MLU'ed. Russians won't agree to this much independence by another client country. They love dependent clients, not independent ones.

If MIG-29 was a US fighter jet, we would have its local assembly line just like what we did with F-5E/F. This is what Iranian engineers can do to a MIG-29 inside Iran without any Russian help. The only reason the plane is not getting MLUed or not receiving even the avionics of Kowsar-I is because of ... Moscow's style of dealing with clients.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> Russia has shown to be rather permissive in this regard. Indian modifications to the Su-30 are one example, China outright reverse-engineering and putting their own version of the Flanker into serial production with Russia not filing any lawsuits against Beijing, is another. Iran domestically upgrading its Su-22 offers a third illustration.
> 
> Beyond the air force branch, let's not even get into all the weaponry Iran has developed based on or retaining at least some aspects of original Russian platforms. As far as known, Russia never lodged any complaint in reaction to this either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is where I'm having doubts. The commonly indicated range for the Mig-35 is of 2000 km versus 3600 km for the Su-35. Mig-29's range is put at 1430 km versus 3000 km for the Su-30.
> 
> As PeeD remarked:
> 
> View attachment 864057
> 
> View attachment 864058
> 
> View attachment 864059
> 
> 
> Flankers also have superior maneuverability. Probably other advantages I can't think of right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was looking at the advisability of a limited Flanker procurement (Su-30 or Su-35) on top of the above (F-14AM, Kousar, additional UCAV), not instead of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Upgrading 63 Mig-29's to UPG or SMT standards cost India $964 million in March 2008. However the deal included setting up a production line and training personnel in the upgrade process. Unless such modifications were to be done in Russia, it would thus cost Iran the same or a bit more given the elapsed time.



Indian example is a bad one. They always purchase stuff at the highest possible prices because of possible bribes. SU-30MK or MKI costs India 62 million USD/unit and the entire subsystems inside, its radar, the engines, the airframes, the cockpit, the ejection seats, the A2A/A2G weaponry all are Russian so the money reaches Moscow! Indians might put a small local RWR to claim some local stuff but the fighter is Russian to the core and even recently Russia is providing CKD kits for the "local assembly". *https://fighterjetsworld.com/air/why-iaf-su-30mki-costs-almost-twice-the-russias-new-su-30sm/23497/* India also purchased Rafale from France at 240 Million/Unit. There were some massive accusations of kickbacks and bribery by Dassault to Indian officials.

- Range is not that relevant for IRIAF because our TAB's are located at perfect places for interception from possible origins of threats. IRIAF's primary job is to secure Iranian skies first jointly with Ambush and layered SAM units on the ground. It can do so by running LR-BVR armed CAP's inside Iranian skies. It also depends upon what Kowsar-II will be.
Addition of 2 x least drag small 350-400 ltr Conformal tanks on both sides above the air intakes would give the plane some additional 2563 (Internal) + 800 ltr of JP-1 = 3363 ltr total fuel. For a 2 Fatter + 2 x PL-12 configuration, 2 x OWJ turbojets (J-85-GE-21) do a 0.42 KM/Ltr which means a range of 1400 KM just on internal fuel. For a BVR CAP mission with 2 x missiles and a central 1040 ltr standard fuselage tank, we get a menacing range of 1800+ KM . Thats what CFT's can achieve and 400 ltr each is not even lots of weight or drag.

Americans did that with F-15E.







IRIAF and IAMI should seriously invest into local platform than throwing money away on 2-3 squadrons of "85 Million USD/Flanker" that will destroy rest of the fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Because we're exclusively talking a restricted number, to be used as a temporary gap filler and in an auxiliary, not in a central role. So this would be in keeping with the asymmetric doctrine. If Iran went and placed an order for a hundred fighter jets or more then yes, it'd run counter to her doctrinal framework. Also I'm not saying the air force has no place _at all_, just that it'll be a distinctly subordinate, minimal one.


so 4-5 squadron for you is restricted numbre
each Squadron is 12-24 airplane if its bomber usually 12 if its fighter then it can be 12-18 
that mean depended on your definition 48 to 90 aircraft , it may be small and limited to you but that much SU-35 is a major purchase . it better come with an assembly and maintenance facility.
and that much SU-35 means one thing . bye bye asymmetrical thinking , hello classic air force


SalarHaqq said:


> Truth is I think it's unlikely Iran will import any fighter jets in the coming years, and I'm even unsure about the Kousar program reaching mass production status - and not due to lacking capability. In fact domestic design and production of a heavier fighter would be feasible too in my opinion, it just doesn't square with Iran's general defence philosophy to dedicate the required funds to such a procurement. We shall see.


well , it match it. in my book , where ever it was possible iran used some sort of airforce , be traditional or be drones


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> In the F-14 AM upgrade, the IR&SSJO pulled a full upgrade of AWG-9 to AWG-9+ with digitalization, new antenna change, and modern processors to bring it to APG-71 standard. That could be ~370-400 km of search range for a F-15C size RCS. A full SAIRAN e-warfare suite, Datalink, and TAC-2 like IRST can give IRIAF 8 x F-14 AWACS + e-Warfare platforms. They can accompany 8 mixed squadrons of 5 x F-14AM, 10 x KOWSAR-I and 3 x MIG-29 9.12 each along with SIGINT/ELIT UCAVs.
> 
> I will try to search more about why the talk ended.


well the problem is that is
1 - in one direction.
2 - the numbers are in a place without enemy E-Warfare

on other hand let look as an example on what Iran-140 AWACS can be.
the nearest counterpart is SAAB Erieye AEW&C which is installed on SAB-340 or Embraer R-99 it can reach up to 450km in a place with dense enemy E-Warfare activity , heavy RADAR clutter and against Low altitude targets in such scenario and can cover 300 degree area.
to me that's a better choice if we manage to make something out of Iran-140/Simorgh program

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Instead of wasting 5 Billion USD on heavy 10-15 m2 RCS bearing SU-35S, we can instead bargain for TOT of some 200 x AL-31F to put them in Kowsar-II, 500 R-77M + R74 and some additional 35-50 airframes of MLUed MIG-29M to be locally upgraded by HESA and IEI along with our own MIG-29 MLU'ed. Russians won't agree to this much independence by another client country. They love dependent clients, not independent ones.


with that kind of thrust in an airplane like Kowsar you don't even need afterburner anymore , and the plane will have enough energy to cancel any benefit those mig-29 may have against it in close warfare, but I doubt Russia is willing to make a deal on AL-31F or any newer variant but on other hand you maybe more lucky with china WS-10b which is by the way a little more efficient than AL-31F


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> so 4-5 squadron for you is restricted numbre
> each Squadron is 12-24 airplane if its bomber usually 12 if its fighter then it can be 12-18
> that mean depended on your definition 48 to 90 aircraft , it may be small and limited to you but that much SU-35 is a major purchase . it better come with an assembly and maintenance facility.
> and that much SU-35 means one thing . bye bye asymmetrical thinking , hello classic air force



I repeated several times that I'm strictly considering squadrons of 12 jets each. So 48 to 60 planes as a grand maximum. And I mentioned Su-30's as well. That's no major acquisition for an otherwise largely antiquated air force. Especially considering the size of enemy air power, as well as the size of Iran's own missile and UCAV arsenal.

Also I cited PeeD, one of the staunchest proponents of asymmetry and not exactly someone to contradict himself. Definitely won't be advocating a classical air force for Iran, will he?



Hack-Hook said:


> well , it match it. in my book , where ever it was possible iran used some sort of airforce , be traditional or be drones



I do not include drones into the same category. Drones are part and parcel of Iran's asymmetrical thinking, to which they lend themselves perfectly, while much costlier, bulkier, maintenance-intensive and complex to operate manned aircraft obviously aren't.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> well the problem is that is
> 1 - in one direction.
> 2 - the numbers are in a place without enemy E-Warfare
> 
> on other hand let look as an example on what Iran-140 AWACS can be.
> the nearest counterpart is SAAB Erieye AEW&C which is installed on SAB-340 or Embraer R-99 it can reach up to 450km in a place with dense enemy E-Warfare activity , heavy RADAR clutter and against Low altitude targets in such scenario and can cover 300 degree area.
> to me that's a better choice if we manage to make something out of Iran-140/Simorgh program



Direction is not a problem since Iran has real threats from two directions only, South and NW. If we get 4 x F-14 "AWACS" Facing the Persian Gulf from high altitude providing "Search" coverage of 400 x 4 = 1600 KM that's quite enough. Similarly, the rest 2 can be deployed at TAB-2 to face NW's theatre while the rest 2 can be at Dezful or Mehrabad. If need be these planes can run away from the enemy BVR threat or defend themselves if they carry only 2 x Fatter, 1 x Fakour-90, 2 x External tank for a long Surveillance flight.

Any slow heavy AEW&C will be at mercy of long-range BVR of the enemy. BVR missiles are getting longer and longer range with time. EF-2000 or Rafale both are in the enemy arsenal and they can fire Meteor BVR that has the range and speed to be lethal to a slow AWACS even much deeper within Iranian airspace let alone into contested territory.

Its the same for the opposition too. If IRIAF get its F-14 AM equipped with Maghsoud LR-BVR in next 2 years which is supposed to be a 200+ km bearing ARH version of Fakour-90. What will happen to enemy AWACS systems?

IMO Iran should work on two systems simultaneously.

- AWACS + ELINT/SIGINIT system on both SIMORGH like Israeli EITAM system and an Unmanned large UAV (RQ-4 class)
- Few F-14 AWACS, they have already pulled an F-14AM upgraded to AWG-9+ with datalink, if they can put in additional jammers with a further improved AWG-9++. Planes will be very useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> I do not include drones into the same category. Drones are part and parcel of Iran's asymmetrical thinking, to which they lend themselves perfectly, while much costlier, bulkier, maintenance-intensive and complex to operate manned aircraft obviously aren't.


an airplane like Flanker or F-16 or F-15 or rafale, ..... so can't be considered part of asymmetrical doctrine , but something like F-5 or grippen can easily be incorporated in assymetrical thinking.
let look at it like this Grippen-C/D for example (i don't knew much about the Grippen E/F) is designed to operate from 400m long reinforced normal roads , it designed to be able to be stored in a Barn and it designed to work in bases with only 5-6 people and that base can have 5 airplane, an F-5 variant except for the need for longer runway needs lesser for maintenance (which can be fixed with more powerful engine) how you can consider such airplane contradictory with asymmetrical warfare doctrine , to me that's the definition of asymmetrical warfare .



drmeson said:


> Direction is not a problem since Iran has real threats from two directions only, South and NW. If we get 4 x F-14 "AWACS" Facing the Persian Gulf from high altitude providing "Search" coverage of 400 x 4 = 1600 KM that's quite enough. Similarly, the rest 2 can be deployed at TAB-2 to face NW's theatre while the rest 2 can be at Dezful or Mehrabad. If need be these planes can run away from the enemy BVR threat or defend themselves if they carry only 2 x Fatter, 1 x Fakour-90, 2 x External tank for a long Surveillance flight.
> 
> Any slow heavy AEW&C will be at mercy of long-range BVR of the enemy. BVR missiles are getting longer and longer range with time. EF-2000 or Rafale both are in the enemy arsenal and they can fire Meteor BVR that has the range and speed to be lethal to a slow AWACS even much deeper within Iranian airspace.
> 
> Its the same for the opposition too. If IRIAF get its F-14 AM equipped with Maghsoud LR-BVR in next 2 years which is supposed to be a 200+ km bearing ARH version of Fakour-90. What will happen to enemy AWACS systems?


still remain the problem of electrical warfare that probably reduce the range of F-14 based radars to probably as low as 100 even more
also those F-14 can't always look at the said direction and F-14 radar have a very small problem . its reduce accuracy if enemy decide to fly at very low altitude and slow speed .


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> an airplane like Flanker or F-16 or F-15 or rafale, ..... so can't be considered part of asymmetrical doctrine , but something like F-5 or grippen can easily be incorporated in assymetrical thinking.
> let look at it like this Grippen-C/D for example (i don't knew much about the Grippen E/F) is designed to operate from 400m long reinforced normal roads , it designed to be able to be stored in a Barn and it designed to work in bases with only 5-6 people and that base can have 5 airplane, an F-5 variant except for the need for longer runway needs lesser for maintenance (which can be fixed with more powerful engine) how you can consider such airplane contradictory with asymmetrical warfare doctrine , to me that's the definition of asymmetrical warfare .



I don't consider specific types of aircraft contrary or not to asymmetry so much, but rather the way they are used and what rank they occupy in the function they're supposed to fulfill. In a country the size of Iran, if you integrate some 50 Flankers or F-16 or etc as a mere secondary supplement to the IADS, whose role would solely consist in lessening the pressure on the latter to an incremental extent, you're still in an asymmetric framework. If however you acquire 200 new (and more or less expensive) jets, or if you change the mission parameters of those 50 units from a simple background support role to a more consistent one, then you're entering the symmetric domain.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> with that kind of thrust in an airplane like Kowsar you don't even need afterburner anymore , and the plane will have enough energy to cancel any benefit those mig-29 may have against it in close warfare, but I doubt Russia is willing to make a deal on AL-31F or any newer variant but on other hand you maybe more lucky with china WS-10b which is by the way a little more efficient than AL-31F



Verified sources claim that Russia supplied Iran with 50 RD-33 turbofans in 2008. Russia today needs Iran as an ally more than it needed before so I am not very doubtful that if Iranian strategists bargain it properly they can get some proper TOT out of Russia for a reliable Turbofan. AL-31F option is there, but even if its CDK kits of some 150 RD-33MK for TOT assembly then ~50 of them can go to the current MIG fleet, and the rest 100 can equip Kowsar-II which will become a proper 4+ generation fighter with it.

Iran already has an inventory of 106 RD-33 btw. Some of them might be just being used for parts.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Its the same for the opposition too. If IRIAF get its F-14 AM equipped with Maghsoud LR-BVR in next 2 years which is supposed to be a 200+ km bearing ARH version of Fakour-90. What will happen to enemy AWACS systems?


depend on how good their electric warfare is , f-14 does not really have a magnificent RCS , i'm sure enemy AWACS can detect them way beyound 400km and can deploy its own Electric Warfare suit and reduce the range of detection for F14 to 100km and so stay in safe distance while guide their own fighters.
by the way don't forget the scenario parameters those F-14 were supposed to be damaged F-14s that can't be used as interceptors (honestly don't knew why , if they are flightworthy we have the capability to make them fight worthy) so unless the f-14 decide to go close and use its vulkan cannon on enemy Awacs if they manage to detect them and if the enemy don't recall their own interceptors for help . probably nothing as the enemy have enough time to escape at around 800km/h and those f-14 as they are not supercruise capable have to use afterburner which reduce their range dramatically



drmeson said:


> Verified sources claim that Russia supplied Iran with 50 RD-33 turbofans in 2008. Russia today needs Iran as an ally more than it needed before so I am not very doubtful that if Iranian strategists bargain it properly they can get some proper TOT out of Russia for a reliable Turbofan. AL-31F option is there, but even if its CDK kits of some 150 RD-33MK for TOT assembly then ~50 of them can go to the current MIG fleet, and the rest 100 can equip Kowsar-II which will become a proper 4+ generation fighter with it.
> 
> Iran already has an inventory of 106 RD-33 btw. Some of them might be just being used for parts.


honestly if they did that we already had smokeless Mig-29 or have seen Kowsar with one engine so I doubt about validity of the claim unless for some strange reason defense ministry have stored those 50 x RD-33 somewhere in a warehouse


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Well, I was expecting such a statement in the next few days. It really means that they have even more advanced things in the bank already ready to be exposed. It goes beyond the Russian weapons that they could have because the configuration of the weapons that they will unveil will obviously be different from the Russians

IRGC Commander-in-Chief: Iran will have ultra-sophisticated weapons

Major General Hossein Salami, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said on Sunday July 24 that weapons are one of the most effective factors in winning the war hence the determination of the Iran to produce the most advanced weapons.

(((( He said that "before the infinite power of God, every power would seem as insignificant as a mosquito and this is the secret of victory in every war, because it made the forces move forward and prevented the immobility caused by their possible fear. ". )))))

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Early IRIAF experimentation with MIG-29UB test bed.

Fixed Refueling Probe






2100 Ltr extra fuel (2 x 1050 Ltr tanks of F-5E)








It shows that IRIAF had immense interest in this platform. They ordered a total 72 of these but drunk Yeltsin chickened out because of American Pressure. Later they tried to purchase 25 of the Moldovan Fleet but CIA purchased them first. There was a rumor/unconfirmed report in the 2000s (I will try to locate the source) that Iran tried to get ~100 stored airframes of MIG-29S 9.13 again from Russia at one point.

IRIAF inherited F-5E/F as its light combat aircraft which was supposed to be replaced by 160 x F-16A/B in 1980s. Because this order fell through there could have been a talk in the 1990s in IRIAF (Sattari times) to go for as many MIG-29 as possible to create a dedicated interceptor force of some 250 aircraft comprising of F-14A, Azarakhsh-I, MIG-29 9.12/9.13.

Now the MIG fleet is tiny, needs MLU, severe avionics upgrades, armaments and what not. Even today with a budget of 2.5-3.0 Billion USD, IRIAF can build a force of ~100 x MIG-29M/MIG-35. Superb infrastructure exists inside Iran for them, pilots, and technicians are familiar with them so costs of training, infrastructure that a SU-35 will need, won't be required.

@waz @Deino I can't post anything new, it keeps saying that I have ran out of my limit for posts made in 24 hours. Will you please help me? Thanks in advance

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Early IRIAF experimentation with MIG-29UB test bed
> 
> Fixed Refueling Probe
> View attachment 864995
> 
> 
> 2100 Ltr extra fuel (2 x 1050 Ltr tanks of F-5E)
> View attachment 864996
> View attachment 864998
> 
> 
> It shows that IRIAF had immense interest in this platform. They ordered a total 72 of these but drunk Yeltsin chickened out because of American Pressure. Later they tried to purchase 25 of the Moldovan Fleet but CIA purchased them first. There was a rumor/unconfirmed report in the 2000s (I will try to locate the source) that Iran tried to get ~100 stored airframes of MIG-29S 9.13 again from Russia at one point.
> 
> IRIAF inherited F-5E/F as its light combat aircraft which was supposed to be replaced by 160 x F-16A/B in 1980s. Because this order fell through there could have been a talk in the 1990s in IRIAF (Sattari times) to go for as many MIG-29 as possible to create a dedicated interceptor force of some 250 aircraft comprising of F-14A, Azarakhsh-I, MIG-29 9.12/9.13.
> 
> Now the MIG fleet is tiny, needs MLU, severe avionics upgrades, armaments and what not. Even today with a budget of 2.5-3.0 Billion USD, IRIAF can build a force of ~100 x MIG-29M/MIG-35. Superb infrastructure exists inside Iran for them, pilots, and technicians are familiar with them so costs of training, infrastructure that a SU-35 will need, won't be required.


the infrastructure for maintaining Mig-29 are very limited and IRIAF was interested in Mig-29 about 25 years ago , then it was an acceptable airplane but now after 25 years what made the airplane interesting have become more or less irrelevant in air warfare . the plane is medicure unless they completely change its electronic warfare and countermeasure systems and its radars , add a potent and modern FLIR to it, then design a helmet mounted HUD for it , and more importantly change its mechanical control by a modern fly by wire one.

all of these problem for what , an old airframe that shine on radars like a Christmas tree? easier to go and design a new airframe.
if they really want to buy foreign airplanes suggest them do themselves a service and go become a partner with russia in SU-75 program and when it become ready in 5-6 year be the first buyer


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> if they really want to buy foreign airplanes suggest them do themselves a service and go become a partner with russia in SU-75 program and when it become ready in 5-6 year be the first buyer



Yes that worked very well for India


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Yes that worked very well for India


well they get several hundred SU-30 didn't they ?
so you guys say iran go and buy 4-5 squadran of an outdated 40 years old air plane from russia , but you guys against iran go and buy a newly designed airplane from russia.

by the way if you mean SU-57 the question is that do you think SU-57 is mass produced or not? if it being mass produced who will be first reciever India or Russia

on other hand SU-75 is export airplane


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> well they get several hundred SU-30 didn't they ?
> so you guys say iran go and buy 4-5 squadran of an outdated 40 years old air plane from russia , but you guys against iran go and buy a newly designed airplane from russia.
> 
> by the way if you mean SU-57 the question is that do you think SU-57 is mass produced or not? if it being mass produced who will be first reciever India or Russia
> 
> on other hand SU-75 is export airplane



India was a “partner” on SU-57 and Russia never turned over the agreed upon ToT and kept milking India for more funds. Project kept running into delays and problems. Disagreements. Finally India left the project. Iran doesn’t have the funds that India has/had. India is economic powerhouse....Iran is economic pariah.

There is almost a 0% chance Iran gets SU-57 much less any “partnership”. Your best bet is with an older plane if you want any sort of ToT with a written agreement that Iran can modifications to the aircraft as they deem fit. Similar to MKI variant of SU-30

SU-57 isn’t even being taken seriously by Russian airforce they reduced their orders to token amounts basically Kowsar level production.

As for SU-75 who knows if it reaches production level. Who will buy it? Poor countries like Syria and Venezuela? The entire world is switching to next gen F-18’s/F-16’s or F-35s. Russia can SU-75 sell to maybe China, but they have J-31 already why they need SU-75? India is turning to Western aircraft to rebuild its Air Force.

Not a big client base for Russia to sell SU-75 so production maybe limited to Russian Air Force to replace all their soviet era aircraft.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> India was a “partner” on SU-57 and Russia never turned over the agreed upon ToT and kept milking India for more funds. Project kept running into delays and problems. Disagreements. Finally India left the project. Iran doesn’t have the funds that India has/had. India is economic powerhouse....Iran is economic pariah.
> 
> There is almost a 0% chance Iran gets SU-57 much less any “partnership”. Your best bet is with an older plane if you want any sort of ToT with a written agreement that Iran can modifications to the aircraft as they deem fit. Similar to MKI variant of SU-30
> 
> SU-57 isn’t even being taken seriously by Russian airforce they reduced their orders to token amounts basically Kowsar level production.
> 
> As for SU-75 who knows if it reaches production level. Who will buy it? Poor countries like Syria and Venezuela? The entire world is switching to next gen F-18’s/F-16’s or F-35s. Russia can SU-75 sell to maybe China, but they have J-31 already why they need SU-75? India is turning to Western aircraft to rebuild its Air Force.
> 
> Not a big client base for Russia to sell SU-75 so production maybe limited to Russian Air Force to replace all their soviet era aircraft.


so you believe 5 squadron of outdated mig-29 that can be detected by this




is better than Su-75

by the way USA didn't sell F-14 to a big client base , wonder if it was considered a bad airplane at the time

.
but this is mute , the su-75 example come to answer the people who want iran waste its money on something like old Mig 29


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> so you believe 5 squadron of outdated mig-29 that can be detected by this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is better than Su-75
> 
> by the way USA didn't sell F-14 to a big client base , wonder if it was considered a bad airplane at the time
> 
> .
> but this is mute , the su-75 example come to answer the people who want iran waste its money on something like old Mig 29



I never said to buy Mig 29. I did say to upgrade our Mig 29 to be semi lethal, that should be within Iran’s domestic capabilities.

(Realistic) wishlist of what I would like to see Iran purchase any of the following

1. J-31
2. SU-35S
3. J-10C
4. SU-30 with local license production (major ToT)

NOTE: technically J-10C could be considered more modern than SU-35S, but China is a wildcard in international relations. They largely stay out of supporting conflicts (if they occur) so having a lot of J-10C and no Chinese spare parts is Iran-Iraq war all over again.

The chances above happening are still low, but they are more realistic than ever touching SU-57 or SU-75.

Your SU-75 idea isn’t even rooted in reality. Russia hasn’t shown any indication of giving us any flankers outside of SU-27 (rumors) and now you are asking for SU-75? Why not ask for F-22? Or B-2 bomber? Since we live in fantasy land anything is possible.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> I never said to buy Mig 29. I did say to upgrade our Mig 29 to be semi lethal, that should be within Iran’s domestic capabilities.
> 
> (Realistic) wishlist of what I would like to see Iran purchase any of the following
> 
> 1. J-31
> 2. SU-35S
> 3. J-10C
> 4. SU-30 with local license production (major ToT)
> 
> NOTE: technically J-10C could be considered more modern than SU-35S, but China is a wildcard in international relations. They largely stay out of supporting conflicts (if they occur) so having a lot of J-10C and no Chinese spare parts is Iran-Iraq war all over again.
> 
> The chances above happening are still low, but they are more realistic than ever touching SU-57 or SU-75.
> 
> Your SU-75 idea isn’t even rooted in reality. Russia hasn’t shown any indication of giving us any flankers outside of SU-27 (rumors) and now you are asking for SU-75? Why not ask for F-22? Or B-2 bomber? Since we live in fantasy land anything is possible.


Russia didn't even bother approaching Iran with a sales pitch for the Su-30 let alone Su-75. They'll never give us anything that might annoy their Israeli buddies who are killing them in Ukraine


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Russia didn't even bother approaching Iran with a sales pitch for the Su-30 let alone Su-75. They'll never give us anything that might annoy their Israeli buddies who are killing them in Ukraine


then why spend money on their outdated airplane as some people here suggested.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> then why spend money on their outdated airplane as some people here suggested.



A SU-30/35 is still more than anything Iran has produced or will produce in next 10 years at this pathetic rate. I don’t blame the IRIAF too much, it comes down to high level decision making and needed funding.

Cant build without a serious effort. We wouldn’t have Bavar 373 if there wasn’t a push by the highest circles of government and military to have a long range domestic Air Defense systems.

I also wouldn’t make fun of a fighter jet when you can’t even build its *airframe* let alone its “outdated” engines. You are much more likely to get ToT on older planes than anything reliable from 5th Gen fighter “partnership”.

Unless your plan is to have a bunch of Kowsars “save” Iran’s airforce and pray that F-14 can keep flying for another 20 years. In which case, good luck.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> A SU-30/35 is still more than anything Iran has produced or will produce in next 10 years at this pathetic rate. I don’t blame the IRIAF too much, it comes down to high level decision making and needed funding.
> 
> Cant build without a serious effort. We wouldn’t have Bavar 373 if there wasn’t a push by the highest circles of government and military to have a long range domestic Air Defense systems.
> 
> I also wouldn’t make fun of a fighter jet when you can’t even build its *airframe* let alone its “outdated” engines. You are much more likely to get ToT on older planes than anything reliable from 5th Gen fighter “partnership”.
> 
> Unless your plan is to have a bunch of Kowsars “save” Iran’s airforce and pray that F-14 can keep flying for another 20 years. In which case, good luck.


out dated is out dated , its a technical matter , not you have air craft or don't have it


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> out dated is out dated , its a technical matter , not you have air craft or don't have it



With such a logic you would have told Tehrani Moghadam to not mess around with trying to replicate the SCUD in 1980’s because it was obsolete and inaccurate.

Buying SU-75 (by itself) will only stagnant the Iranian defense industry.

If you cannot copy a F-14 after 40 years, you sure as hell ain’t gonna be to make a 6th gen fighter anytime soon. So buying SU-75 will not advance directly advance Iranian aviation industry. They can learn somethings from the plane, but when you lack basic building blocks such as building a titanium airframe, how much can you truly learn? Local production of SU-30 will advance Iranian defense industry by some 20 years.

Some of you think in your mind you can jump from Kowsar to 6th gen medium-heavy fighter. No country in the world (not even China) has been able to do that. Sure if you had access to outsource different parts like Turkey you could scrap together a Frankenstein of foreign parts plane and call it “Iranian” in name only.

SU-35S purchase plus localized SU-30 production is still a low low chance of happening, but more realistic. Iran needs a heavy engine that is efficient and reliable. Without that we will be having this conversation in 2030, 2040, 2050

Israel/Saudi Arabia/Europe/Turkey/USA will nix any 5th Gen fighter jet sale to Iran (SU-57 or Su-75). Once again Iran will be bargaining chip for world powers to entice Russia to not sell game changing armaments. And Russia under such draconian sanctions will gladly use Iran again like it has in the past.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> the infrastructure for maintaining Mig-29 are very limited and IRIAF was interested in Mig-29 about 25 years ago , then it was an acceptable airplane but now after 25 years what made the airplane interesting have become more or less irrelevant in air warfare . the plane is medicure unless they completely change its electronic warfare and countermeasure systems and its radars , add a potent and modern FLIR to it, then design a helmet mounted HUD for it , and more importantly change its mechanical control by a modern fly by wire one.
> 
> all of these problem for what , an old airframe that shine on radars like a Christmas tree? easier to go and design a new airframe.
> if they really want to buy foreign airplanes suggest them do themselves a service and go become a partner with russia in SU-75 program and when it become ready in 5-6 year be the first buyer



MIG-29 has a RCS of ~3-5 m2 so it does not "shine on radars like a Christmas tree", that title goes to SU-Flankers, F-15.

MIG-29 has superb physical performance like high maneuverability, climb rate, dash, speed etc. The only problem it has is its short range which got solved with dorsal CTs in M/SMT. Now I personally think that modern combat is roughly 70+ % about electronic capabilities. This situation changed in 2000s and now its all about who has better radar, e-warfare, Nav-Comm, missiles. Hence ,if a MIG-29 airframe is combined with modern e-Warfare+Radar+HOTAS+HMD slaved all aspect weapons and ARH BVR missiles, its as dangerous in air-to-air combat as any Flanker or teen series fighter of US. Technically, this is what we are doing right now in Kowsar-I. Luckily we can build it at home from scratch and plane itself has the lowest possible RCS below 5th generation. I said in a previous post that if IRIAF had larger no. of MIG-29s like lets say 70-80 airframes, with Kowsar-I's avionics and radars it could have been a very good platform.

and SU-75 for IRIAF ? I would be surprised if we get our current MIG-29 9.12 and SU-24M fleet MLUed let along upgraded by Russia. Probably the most realistic solution is to focus on Kowsar-I/II in high numbers with domestic sub systems and those that we yet cant make should be procured like a small ARH BVR missile. Fakour-90 cant be miniaturized


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> I never said to buy Mig 29. I did say to upgrade our Mig 29 to be semi lethal, that should be within Iran’s domestic capabilities.
> 
> (Realistic) wishlist of what I would like to see Iran purchase any of the following
> 
> 1. J-31
> 2. SU-35S
> 3. J-10C
> 4. SU-30 with local license production (major ToT)
> 
> NOTE: technically J-10C could be considered more modern than SU-35S, but China is a wildcard in international relations. They largely stay out of supporting conflicts (if they occur) so having a lot of J-10C and no Chinese spare parts is Iran-Iraq war all over again.
> 
> The chances above happening are still low, but they are more realistic than ever touching SU-57 or SU-75.
> 
> Your SU-75 idea isn’t even rooted in reality. Russia hasn’t shown any indication of giving us any flankers outside of SU-27 (rumors) and now you are asking for SU-75? Why not ask for F-22? Or B-2 bomber? Since we live in fantasy land anything is possible.



-Russia does not allow their 4th generation fighters to be locally messed with by any country including India who paid 62 Million USD for SU-30MKI with CDK kits and the plane is still not the mainstay of their airforce. The same goes for their MIG-29 upgrade package which was as expensive as it can get. HESA and IEI can pull a proper MLU and avionics upgradation on MIG-29 to atleast Kowsar level with good western tech radar, e-warfare suite, and datalink but they won't, its a 4th generation Russian jet. Crappy radar and avionics and won't survive in battle but it's still Russian. 

- Nobody is giving Iran SU-35S and J-31 for god's sake. Even if SU-35S is offered or was part of the dialogue as per the report, it will be stupid to spend 3 Billion USD on 24 jets with 10-15 m2 RCS carrying a radar that tracks an F-16C at 100 KM. IRIAF can get all its 40-45 F-14A to AM standard, create a force of 150 Kowsar-1 with the entire MIG fleet MLUed and upgrade in that amount of money.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> -Russia does not allow their 4th generation fighters to be locally messed with by any country



No solid proof of this. Most of its fighters are sold to banana countries who don’t have the industrial or knowledge base to modify the planes in any significant way. 

Iran has a history of modifying or outright copying Russian weapons without license with no ramifications. It modified the export variant range restriction on TOR-M1 shortly after purchase. And now it copied the TOR-M1. It copied their torpedo. It copied their OTH design. Copied their radars. Copied their EW/ECW jammers. Just going off top of my head based on my aging memory.

But suddenly it’s fighter jets with older tech is off limits? Lol

If Bell and the power (and money) of American arms industry couldn’t do anything to Iran then Russia cannot do anything either. Even when they sold SU-35 to China they had to beg for assurances China wouldn’t reverse engineer. No recourse for Russia.

It would be one thing if Iran bought SU-35 then tried to sell that same SU-35 to Hezbollah or something. Or had license production to produce AL-31 (example) then tried to export that product to Venezuela. 

Contracts can have a clause prohibiting selling to another country. Hence why Iran ultimately couldn’t get the Sukhoi Superjet because it had parts from Boeing/Airbus. (Thank god for that decision because look at Russia now cut off from spare parts).



drmeson said:


> create a force of 150 Kowsar-1 with the entire MIG fleet MLUed and upgrade in that amount of money.



You remind me a lot of @VEVAK, when you get an idea stuck in your head you only see that idea. Except Vevak hated Kowsar. He knew the limitations of such a platform. I don’t hate it. I think it’s a good modernization program for F-5. Like Karrar is a good modernization program for Iran’s aging T-72. I wouldn’t build 5000 Karrar though. It’s a good stop gap till Iran has a truly modern Tank design. 

Anyway back to topic.... where is Iran going to build 300 owj engines from? (150 Kowsar you mentioned) To me it looks owj production capability is at workshop production level not mass factory production level. We don’t even know how many hours an owj engine lasts till it needs major work. It could be far from optimal range for all we know.



drmeson said:


> - Nobody is giving Iran SU-35S and J-31 for god's sake.



But they will give SU-57 or SU-75? Swear you guys are bi polar sometimes with your logic.

I said it’s a wishlist and still very low chance of happening. I’m skeptical getting those jets... which is why it’s laughable to talk about going after SU-57/75. 

You guys have zero plans to replace F-14. You think they will fly forever. We just lost one. As time goes on more will have to be sent to storage for fatigued airframes. Lack of titanium aerospace production facilities means you aren’t building brand new F-14 airframes like you are with a titanium-less F-5 airframe, so less flight hours on flight worthy ones. 

I mean there is only so much stress an airframe can take...no?

Unless I am missing something extending F-14’s beyond 2040 seems to be economically unviable. (Assuming they are still even remotely competitive before that time)

I’d rather get my hands on a medium-heavy engine now so that by 2040, Iran has experience building medium to heavy jet engines. So it can then realistically build an interceptor alternative. I’m not planning on war in next 10 years that’s why I don’t care for J-10C or any short term alternative, I’m planning on having a solid domestic Air Force capability by 2050. The only way you get there is having a capable heavy engine. Ask the Chinese how long it took and how much effort. 

Because as it stands now by 2040 we will have Kowsar-X and nothing else (assuming there isn’t some super secret interceptor black project Iran is working on).

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> With such a logic you would have told Tehrani Moghadam to not mess around with trying to replicate the SCUD in 1980’s because it was obsolete and inaccurate.
> 
> Buying SU-75 (by itself) will only stagnant the Iranian defense industry.
> 
> If you cannot copy a F-14 after 40 years, you sure as hell ain’t gonna be to make a 6th gen fighter anytime soon. So buying SU-75 will not advance directly advance Iranian aviation industry. They can learn somethings from the plane, but when you lack basic building blocks such as building a titanium airframe, how much can you truly learn? Local production of SU-30 will advance Iranian defense industry by some 20 years.
> 
> Some of you think in your mind you can jump from Kowsar to 6th gen medium-heavy fighter. No country in the world (not even China) has been able to do that. Sure if you had access to outsource different parts like Turkey you could scrap together a Frankenstein of foreign parts plane and call it “Iranian” in name only.
> 
> SU-35S purchase plus localized SU-30 production is still a low low chance of happening, but more realistic. Iran needs a heavy engine that is efficient and reliable. Without that we will be having this conversation in 2030, 2040, 2050
> 
> Israel/Saudi Arabia/Europe/Turkey/USA will nix any 5th Gen fighter jet sale to Iran (SU-57 or Su-75). Once again Iran will be bargaining chip for world powers to entice Russia to not sell game changing armaments. And Russia under such draconian sanctions will gladly use Iran again like it has in the past.


You are here putting word in my mouth. Everybody here knew I'm all out supporting an indigenous air plane even if the rate of production be 3 airplane per year.
Also I never mentioned su 57 you mentioned it. What I said is tdzhat it's better for us to invest in su-75 than waste money on outdated mig-29


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> MIG-29 has superb physical performance like high maneuverability, climb rate, dash, speed etc.


That can be achieved on kowsar with a single rd_33 instead of two of them mig-29 is out dated on many account. It use a hydraulic system that consist 1/3rd of airplane weidht and take out precious space inside airplane that can be used for many better things
The radar even in the most advance models is not yet AESA also the feature you mentioned by introduction of new missiles become a little old.


drmeson said:


> and SU-75 for IRIAF ? I would be surprised if we get our current MIG-29 9.12 and SU-24M fleet MLUed let along upgraded by Russia. Probably the most realistic solution is to focus on Kowsar-I/II in high numbers with domestic sub systems and those that we yet cant make should be procured like a small ARH BVR missile. Fakour-90 cant be miniaturized


That su 75 was an answer to the people who promoted mig_29 they suggest we go to the trouble of going and convince Russia to sell us mig-29 or upgrade our mig-29 I said to them if they want to go and deal with the problems that come with it better spend the time on convincing Russia about su-50



drmeson said:


> Fakour-90 cant be miniaturized


Fakour cant be miniaturized but fatter and aim-7 can be modernized



TheImmortal said:


> Bell and the power (and money) of American arms industry couldn’t do anything to Iran then Russia cannot do anything either. Even when they sold SU-35 to China they had to beg for assurances China wouldn’t reverse engineer. No recourse for Russia.


Bell and Northrop can't do anything because of the deal we had with them when acquiring those airplanes and helicopter. Northrop wanted to go to court over the matter but decided they have very little chance of winning


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> You guys have zero plans to replace F-14. You think they will fly forever. We just lost one. As time goes on more will have to be sent to storage for fatigued airframes. Lack of titanium aerospace production facilities means you aren’t building brand new F-14 airframes like you are with a titanium-less F-5 airframe, so less flight hours on flight worthy ones.


If you have read our posts you see we have already said th.e next generation kowsar with proper engine and aesa radar will be a multi role fighter that will be capable of doing what f-14 right do with brute force with modern technology.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> If you have read our posts you see we have already said th.e next generation kowsar with proper engine and aesa radar will be a multi role fighter that will be capable of doing what f-14 right do with brute force with modern technology.



No long range BVR. It’s a sitting duck. Will burn most it’s fuel just trying to intercept the target let alone engage.

Every target it would realistically go up against would have a stronger and longer range radar due size limitation. Saying “AESA” means nothing when you don’t talk about details of the radar. 

And if you have a built a “proper engine” (RD-33 or AL-31 equivalent) then why bother with F-5 airframe? Sticking a single RD-33 into a F-5 means that plane has to basically be redesigned adding more cost to the project. Sometimes you say bizarre things.

Instead redesigning Kowsar, you could build a medium fighter airframe with more modern design to reduce RCS with this “capable engine”. I don’t expect Iran to reach RCS of a Raptor or F-35, but substantial reduction via computer modeling and simulation and radar rooms (that Iran has shown off) is very much possible.

Kowsar isn’t the future of Iranian Air Force anymore than Karrar is future of Iranian Army Mechanized division.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> No long range BVR. It’s a sitting duck. Will burn most it’s fuel just trying to intercept the target let alone engage.


you still don't get what i say


TheImmortal said:


> And if you have a built a “proper engine” (RD-33 or AL-31 equivalent) then why bother with F-5 airframe? Sticking a single RD-33 into a F-5 means that plane has to basically be redesigned adding more cost to the project. Sometimes you say bizarre things.


rd-33 is equivalent to f-404 in size , guess what airplane used a single F404


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> A SU-30/35 is still more than anything Iran has produced or will produce in next 10 years at this pathetic rate. I don’t blame the IRIAF too much, it comes down to high level decision making and needed funding.
> 
> Cant build without a serious effort. We wouldn’t have Bavar 373 if there wasn’t a push by the highest circles of government and military to have a long range domestic Air Defense systems.
> 
> I also wouldn’t make fun of a fighter jet when you can’t even build its *airframe* let alone its “outdated” engines. You are much more likely to get ToT on older planes than anything reliable from 5th Gen fighter “partnership”.
> 
> Unless your plan is to have a bunch of Kowsars “save” Iran’s airforce and pray that F-14 can keep flying for another 20 years. In which case, good luck.



We had this conversation before but you apparently do not even read other persons post and just go on and on with your own assumptions. Flanker family (SU-27,30,33,35) has weak avionics for their price or competitors in west, I posted their official video of tracking a fighter with IRBIS-E barely at 100 km and they all have massive RCS in 10-15 m2 range (same airframe, no evidence of RAM). An invading party of low RCS western planes like Rafale, EF-2000, F-16D, F-18E/F (0.5-3 m2) will track these elephants from ~150 KM and fire multiple LR-BVR at them. That if they would not be jamming Sukhoi's soviet PESA radars first. IRIAF instead of using such a heavy jet for gaurding Iranian space will end up gaurding them themselves for they would have cost the force a fortune. Their attack capabilities for IRIAF are of little use, so what exactly is the point in spending 85 Million USD for something that offers nothing that we actually need?

"Bunch of Kowsars" have an RCS of 1-2 m2, can track a 1 m2 enemy at 93 KM (search range beyond 110 km for same RCS). They can jam adversary radars from distance, they can save themselves from jamming using ECCM, and exchange data with the entire battle field. These systems on them are not assumptions, they literally showed these devices during unveiling. You off course did not look at them. They can get overhauled, repaired, get new engines, armaments, upgrades, and modifications all at home. In the price of 24 SU-35S, you can get 200 of them. Nobody cares in the battlefield if they do not look menacing enough for your eyes or if they fly on turbojets instead of turbofans. Its the electronics that count more than anything in the modern aerial battlefield, even physically performance wise they are maneuverable supersonic fighters.

Which deal sounds better to you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

TheImmortal said:


> SU-35S aren’t constantly getting lost to SAMs in Ukraine. Where is this info coming from?
> 
> Russia is losing SU-25 which makes sense since they flow low as a CAS thus in manpad range. They have lost SU-34 bombers. Also older SU-27. Haven’t heard of them losing SU-35s if they did maybe a couple during early months of war.
> 
> SU-35 and SU-30 probably scored the most air kills against Ukraine Air Force during the dog fighting days of the war.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Russians who have a conflict hotline with Israel and get tipped off to Israeli air raids try to fire at Israeli aircraft? This is Babak Taghavee propaganda? Russian SU-35 trying to shoot down a Israeli F-35? The two countries were practically strong allies until the Ukraine war.
> 
> Israel doesn’t need to fly into Syria to bomb T4 (Iranian drone base) it can fly along Jordan border to Iraqi border and drop payloads or drop payloads thru North Lebanon.


1 SU-35 and 3 SU-30SM have been shot down, not bad. All were to SAMs. Also at least 3 of the 10 "proven" SU-34 losses might not even be SU-34 or real. One's a claimed intercepted communication (easy to fake), one you can't even see what plane it is (could be UA SU-27), and one could easily be wreckage of another plane

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GrandBotBoi

drmeson said:


> if you read the aviationgeek link I provided, they discussed the video in which an SU-35's IRBIS-E radar detects and then tracks a target the size of ~F-16. The viewers of the video pointed out that IRBIS-E barely got a difficult track at around 100 KM. Detection is one thing but tracking the target to engage it is another and matters much more than detection. Russian aviation fans countered that the target being tracked is barely 0.6-0.7 m2. Even if we go by Russian claim here it means a SU-35S will track a EF-2000, Rafale, F-16 Block 60 at 100-120 km. By that time these adversaries would have in turn tracked SU-35S (~15 m2 RCS) and launched a BVR attack already with Meteor or AIM-120C/D. There goes your 85 million USD.


Ah that video, still yet too see how exactly exactly was RCS determined by anyone as the video does not state it 

Also SU-35 average RCS is not 15 m2, that's around what SU-27/30 has. Estimates I find for 35 RCS range from under 1 m2 to 3 m2 for SU-35

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> 1 SU-35 and 3 SU-30SM have been shot down, not bad. All were to SAMs. Also at least 3 of the 10 "proven" SU-34 losses might not even be SU-34 or real. One's a claimed intercepted communication (easy to fake), one you can't even see what plane it is (could be UA SU-27), and one could easily be wreckage of another plane


Against what, other swiet Era aircrafts of far much lower quality.
Against man pads, against lower tire air defense


----------



## sanel1412

*Iran and Russia have signed an agreement on the supply of Iranian equipment, repair and maintenance services and technical support for Russian aircraft.*

According to Iranian _Mehr _news agency, this was announced by the representative of the Civil Aviation Administration of Iran, Mirakbar Razavi

*Read more:* https://asiaplustj.info/en/news/world/20220727/iran-will-help-russia-with-aircraft-maintenance

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> *Iran and Russia have signed an agreement on the supply of Iranian equipment, repair and maintenance services and technical support for Russian aircraft.*
> 
> According to Iranian _Mehr _news agency, this was announced by the representative of the Civil Aviation Administration of Iran, Mirakbar Razavi
> 
> *Read more:* https://asiaplustj.info/en/news/world/20220727/iran-will-help-russia-with-aircraft-maintenance


You'd have to be on some hardcore drugs if you said this would happen 2 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> You'd have to be on some hardcore drugs if you said this would happen 2 years ago


I guess thats the beauty of reality,its impossible to predict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

maybe old news

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Ich said:


> View attachment 865674
> 
> 
> maybe old news


This pic on the left is originally from the great prophet 17 exercise at the end of last year
We can see that the new targeting pod looks a little different to the one in the pic on the right which dates back to 2017[?],it could be the same pod,but its clearly had an extension added to it at the rear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> No solid proof of this. Most of its fighters are sold to banana countries who don’t have the industrial or knowledge base to modify the planes in any significant way.



India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt, China, Iran, Poland, Algeria, Vietnam etc are all Banana republics to you? You are welcome to provide evidence that any single country except for China (too big, too powerful) has ever upgraded or modified any fourth-generation fighter jet of Soviet/Russian origin without the help of Russia directly or indirectly? Some of these countries I mentioned above have the proven aviation-based industrial baseline but they still pay Moscow for upgradations. India can build their own Tejas which is a 4.0 generation aircraft but still have to pay 62 Million/CDK kit for SU-30 MKI to Russia or get their MIG-29 upgraded for a large amount. Iran can build a F-5E/F from and scratch with local turbojet, FBW, Grifo-346 Radar, modern e-Warfare, datalink all inside Iran, but can't carry out an extensive upgrade on a 40 years old MIG-29 9.12 airframe to save its dying Fulcrum fleet?

Chinese example is worst here. Its a superpower that Russia can not dictate in any domain. Although it somewhat has annoyed or even threatened China before by heavily arming India with lethal strategic weapons. But still China is too big or powerful for Russia to politically dominate. We can not say the same about Iran, India, Egypt, Algeria, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia who purchased Russian fighters but cant touch them locally.



TheImmortal said:


> Iran has a history of modifying or outright copying Russian weapons without license with no ramifications. It modified the export variant range restriction on TOR-M1 shortly after purchase. And now it copied the TOR-M1. It copied their torpedo. It copied their OTH design. Copied their radars. Copied their EW/ECW jammers. Just going off top of my head based on my aging memory.
> 
> But suddenly it’s fighter jets with older tech is off limits? Lol



I think you have no idea of how Chinese or Russian companies operate. Most of these systems you are mentioning here are semi-official or under the table TOT's, Iran did not just go around and "fooled" Russians and Chinese with reverse engineering. Tom Cooper recently did an excellent piece *https://www.keymilitary.com/article/threat-analysis-iranian-air-defence-systems* on how, with not-so-official cooperation of Chinese Poly Group Corporation (CPGC) with IEI (Iran), transformed Iranian Air defence from an obsolete branch in 2000s to a multi layered menace of search and track radars, jammers, ambush SHORADS and LORAD/HIMAD TVC SAMs today. I am not even talking about official imports like S-200, S-300PMU2 here but Russian companies providing secret help in Iranian SAMs is not a new thing, you should read about old deals like SA-6, BUK, Rozonans, Avtobaza, Kornet, Shkval that were not even announced officially. It's a simple rule with Russia and China, you need their hardware to be developed inside your territory? you pay them in one way or other. They are not gonna let you copy their stuff for free easily. For a country like Iran with no other option other than Moscow or Beijing for sophisticated tech procurement, they can dictate us as they like unless we develop indigenous capability.



TheImmortal said:


> If Bell and the power (and money) of American arms industry couldn’t do anything to Iran then Russia cannot do anything either. Even when they sold SU-35 to China they had to beg for assurances China wouldn’t reverse engineer. No recourse for Russia.
> 
> It would be one thing if Iran bought SU-35 then tried to sell that same SU-35 to Hezbollah or something. Or had license production to produce AL-31 (example) then tried to export that product to Venezuela.
> 
> Contracts can have a clause prohibiting selling to another country. Hence why Iran ultimately couldn’t get the Sukhoi Superjet because it had parts from Boeing/Airbus. (Thank god for that decision because look at Russia now cut off from spare parts).



You are talking like an American here giving too much value to "contracts" and "courts". Eastern defense markets/mafias of Russia and China do not operate this way. Russian and Chinese under-the-table cooperation with Iran is larger then their official deals. How can Iran "sue" somebody over a secret deal when the whole transfer is through an unofficial agreement involving black markets that Iran can not use in claim like with S-300 before? Read the Tom Cooper's work above.



TheImmortal said:


> You remind me a lot of @VEVAK, when you get an idea stuck in your head you only see that idea. Except Vevak hated Kowsar. He knew the limitations of such a platform. I don’t hate it. I think it’s a good modernization program for F-5. Like Karrar is a good modernization program for Iran’s aging T-72. I wouldn’t build 5000 Karrar though. It’s a good stop gap till Iran has a truly modern Tank design.



And you remind me of you yourself from IMF days with the same nontechnical assumption-based negative posts regardless of what technical details are. I have told you before and others here agree with me that modern combat aviation is all about electronics. A modern aircraft needs sharp Radars that can track small RCS enemies from BVR ranges. In addition to that, it needs strong self-defense with RWR/MAWS, and ECM/ECCM suite. Strong navigation+communication, and Datalinking with other systems on the battlefield like fighters, UCAVS, GWACS/AWACS networks are a must. Kowsar-I fits this more than any aircrafts in the entire IRIAF right now. Nobody is saying this is the end or epitome of Iranian aviation industries. Its a start, right now this program's job is to add a reliable layer to IRIAF's interception capability, in near future, it will transform the way Sayyad-2 transformed to Sayyad-4 or Ghadir class enlargement became Fateh Class. This is how industrial engineering R&D works, I can tell you that from 16 years of experience in the west.



TheImmortal said:


> Anyway back to topic.... where is Iran going to build 300 owj engines from? (150 Kowsar you mentioned) To me it looks owj production capability is at workshop production level not mass factory production level. We don’t even know how many hours an owj engine lasts till it needs major work. It could be far from optimal range for all we know.



I do not think they owe you or anybody a tour inside Turbine Engineering Manufacturing (TEM) to convince you of their mass production capabilities. You have claimed same baseless stuff before like "6 prop airframes" of Kowsar. I had to give you serials with details to prove that atleast 18-24 airframes are being worked upon. Now, according to you if they have no mass production of OWJ turbojets at their hands, are they this stupid to waste money and manpower on those 18-24 airframes when they do not have 36-48 OWJ turbojets in their hands?



TheImmortal said:


> But they will give SU-57 or SU-75? Swear you guys are bi polar sometimes with your logic.
> 
> I said it’s a wishlist and still very low chance of happening. I’m skeptical getting those jets... which is why it’s laughable to talk about going after SU-57/75.



Stop putting your own words in my mouth. You need to read the thread again, I never claimed or wished for any J-31 or SU-75 purchase. Actually it came out of you yourself with SU-75 and J-31 purchases, read below your own direct quote.



TheImmortal said:


> The only better alternative would be J-31, which we don’t know Capabilities at all outside of what China says. And China hasn’t even given its satellite Pakistan J-31....so unlikely Iran could get in without a massive change in military relations.



So who started this talk? not me for sure.

Nobody here including me thinks Iran is getting SU-35S or anything. I am not even in favor of these 5 billions USD worth of purchases which would add nothing or little to Iranian aerial defence capabilities. Heavy cost and maintenance, large RCS, weak radars, what are we getting here? with the same amount of money, IRIAF can arm the tomcat fleet to teeth with F-14AM upgradations, MLU+upgradation of fulcrum fleet to MIG-29M standard and building a large force of Kowsar-I/II with a large fleet of jet-powered UCAVs for SIGINT/ELINT, datalinked AWACS role, PGM strikes. A force that can defend skies and bite back hard. 85 Million USD/aircraft SU-35S won't give us that.



TheImmortal said:


> You guys have zero plans to replace F-14. You think they will fly forever. We just lost one. As time goes on more will have to be sent to storage for fatigued airframes. Lack of titanium aerospace production facilities means you aren’t building brand new F-14 airframes like you are with a titanium-less F-5 airframe, so less flight hours on flight worthy ones.
> 
> I mean there is only so much stress an airframe can take...no?
> 
> Unless I am missing something extending F-14’s beyond 2040 seems to be economically unviable. (Assuming they are still even remotely competitive before that time)



And you somehow think a SU-30SM or a SU-35S can do the job of F-14A/AM in IRIAF? They will come with R-77-1 with a range of ~100 KM. No way IRIAF is going to replace F-14 that can fire 6 x AIM-54 or Fakour-90 to 150+ KM with a 105 KM ranging BVR carrying Sukhoi. There is no need to retire F-14 for now for this reason. F-14's worth as a front-line fighter in IRIAF ends the day we get a modern low-weight LR-BVR missile like PL-15 (PLAAF version not the export) or R-77M procured or produced inside Iran. In recent years, we have seen IEI making some very good strides in radar manufacturing inside Iran with Bayyenat-I on F-4E (similar to JL-10 of JH-7) or Bayyenat-II (ditto of Grifo-346) on Kowsar-I. With those systems in hand, seems like IEI might be capable of producing modern AESA radars in near future in class of Grifo-E or KLJA-7A. Until that happens along with production/procurement of R-77M like weapon, F-14A/AM will keep flying with Fakour-90 and future Maghsoud LR-BVRs. They just can not be replaced by anything unless Iran gets some 60 x MIG-31BM with R-37 (impossible).



TheImmortal said:


> I’d rather get my hands on a medium-heavy engine now so that by 2040, Iran has experience building medium to heavy jet engines. So it can then realistically build an interceptor alternative. I’m not planning on war in next 10 years that’s why I don’t care for J-10C or any short term alternative, I’m planning on having a solid domestic Air Force capability by 2050. The only way you get there is having a capable heavy engine. Ask the Chinese how long it took and how much effort.
> 
> Because as it stands now by 2040 we will have Kowsar-X and nothing else (assuming there isn’t some super secret interceptor black project Iran is working on).



For the "nth" time, modern combat aviation is not about powerful engines and speeds. For some silly reason you just can't get over the fact that no modern manufacturer cares about some massive physical parameters of fighter jets anymore otherwise US would still be flying F-14D, SR-71 and Russia would be taking out MIG-25 from its storages. Modern combat aviation revolves around having lowest possible RCS on compact airframes, longest possible ranged AESA radars, e-warfare suites, encrypted data exchanges. This why EF-2000, Rafale, JAS-39, F-35 are finding markets. Even if this "Kowsar-X" you are mentioning here is a single fold upgrade over the avionics of Kowsar-I then we get a 4+ generation fighter with 1-2 m2 frontal RCS with AESA radar, HOTAS, HMD slaved missiles because just one stage below this standard is what already exists as Kowsar-I. Iranian aviation industry has just begun to breath again with some unveilings like modern radars, turbojets, LR-BVR and WVR missiles, avionics, from-scratch airframes etc. Do not expect it to start giving you F-22 the next year. It will give out 60-70 x F-5G/F-20 equivalent first (Kowsar-I) then 100 or so YF-17/F-18 equivalents (Kowsar-II) then something beyond. This is much better than a foreign spare parts-dependent fleet of some 24 x SU-35S for 3 Billion USD.





aryobarzan said:


> Yes...yes...the magic is in what electronics you are carrying...aircraft itself is just a taxi delivering your potent passenger...



well yes. It is like this in modern days. But the "Taxi" should be fairly maneuverable, supersonic with good climb, pitch, roll, yaw, and capabilities. Majority of not all controlled by FBW. Kowsar or F-5E/F modernized airframe fits the bill for now.

In next generation, dry thrust in excess of 14000-16000 lbf is a must in addition to some changes to made to the frontal aspect to bring the RCS below <1.0 m2.




WudangMaster said:


> Still ongoing? Can you message me? I think my profile settings should allow it.



I cant post anything, I contacted @WebMaster and mods but most are not online. May be they will sort it out on weekends.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Yes...yes...the magic is in what electronics you are carrying...aircraft itself is just a taxi delivering your potent passenger...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

No point arguing with the Kowsar fanboys.

2010 IMF all over again with Yavar telling us F-313 will have a test flight within 2 years of its unveiling and every one blinded by fanboyism believing him.

It’s 2022, The F-5 project is now named Kowsar and people are telling us how it’s going to be mass produced.

Guess USA and China are so stupid for spending all their time building medium fighters (F-35/J-31 class) or heavy class (F-22/J-20) when they could have just built an F-5 with an AESA with 100km BVR. 

But I am the “naive” one sure.

Once Iran unveils its medium-heavy engine I’ll be vindicated when Kowsar is still at workshop production level. Don’t be surprised if that medium heavy engine is a copy of a Russian engine.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Kowsar-I then we get a 4+ generation fighter with 1-2 m2 frontal RCS with




Please stop saying nonsensical things. It does not have such a RCS. Provide your reputable source for such a claim as here is mine:

Frontal: 15.20 lateral: 33.10 rear 30.5





Source: Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management

Read this research paper from Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management in Brazil regarding simulation experimentation on a F-5 to reduce its RCS via various RAM application scenarios on the jet









Analysis of Radar Cross Section Reduction of Fighter Aircraft by Means of Computer Simulation


ABSTRACT: This paper presents a preliminary study of the Radar Cross Section (RCS) reduction on...




www.scielo.br





Look at the various simulation
Software done on uncoated F-5 and various RAM scenarios added to F-5.

F-5 airframe aircraft UNCOATED can be detected from the frontal by average radar at around 222km , 500Km+ from lateral and 226km from rear
(NOTE: for comparison a 5m2 object can be detected at 165km for comparison)

This is their conclusion:

_After the application of RAM with a theoretical attenuation of 22.6 dB at 11.1 GHz, for Scenario 1, the average of frontal RCS presented around 10 dB of attenuation. While the maximum range of the radar detection fell from 222 km to 116 km, i.e. the aircraft fighter could get 48% closer to the target before executing the mission. For Scenario 2, whose differences are only changing by the exhaust turbine and the application of RAM for metal, the average of frontal RCS presented around 7dB of attenuation. While radar reach fell from 222 km to 169.8 km, i.e. the aircraft fighter could get 25% closer to the target before executing the mission. For Scenarios 3 and 4, the application of RAM proved to be inefficient for frontal RCS reduction.

Nowadays, for an aircraft to be considered stealth, it shouldn't be detected in less than 20 km of distance. However, this value can vary considerably depending on the technological advancement of radar detection systems and stealth technology. It is impossible to make much progress attempting to retrofit stealth onto a conventional aircraft because if the shape is wrong, no amount of material absorber treatments will reduce the RCS. Consideration must be given to any part of an aircraft to which a radar wave can reach to, in order to develop a low observable aircraft. On the other hand, the first critical factor to consider in the design process is the shape of the aircraft. This element has been designed into the aircraft from the beginning._


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> Once Iran unveils its medium-heavy engine I’ll be vindicated when Kowsar is still at workshop production level. Don’t be surprised if that medium heavy engine is a copy of a Russian engine.


In all fairness, they'll attempt to replicate the TF-30 engine the F-14 uses and build up on that. Two reasons: (A) there is no way the united states could bring a lawsuit given zero ties exist and (B) it's a much more familiar platform for which they have existing infrastructure to maintain. There's already that interview @WudangMaster posted where the IRIAF official was discussing them testing out a domestic engine on an F-14 airframe.

Agha, the current light fighter seems to be a limited production testbed, just like the Mowj-class frigates are. I'd say this is more for the learning curve than something that will provide experience when building a heavier platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

PersianNinja said:


> In all fairness, they'll attempt to replicate the TF-30 engine the F-14 uses and build up on that. Two reasons: (A) there is no way the united states could bring a lawsuit given zero ties exist and (B) it's a much more familiar platform for which they have existing infrastructure to maintain. There's already that interview @WudangMaster posted where the IRIAF official was discussing them testing out a domestic engine on an F-14 airframe.
> 
> Agha, the current light fighter seems to be a limited production testbed, just like the Mowj-class frigates are. I'd say this is more for the learning curve than something that will provide experience when building a heavier platform.


Same thing with the zulfiqar vs karrar tanks as well; in another interview Mr. Azarmehr discussed how one evolved into the next.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

PersianNinja said:


> In all fairness, they'll attempt to replicate the TF-30 engine the F-14 uses and build up on that. Two reasons: (A) there is no way the united states could bring a lawsuit given zero ties exist and (B) it's a much more familiar platform for which they have existing infrastructure to maintain. There's already that interview @WudangMaster posted where the IRIAF official was discussing them testing out a domestic engine on an F-14 airframe.
> 
> Agha, the current light fighter seems to be a limited production testbed, just like the Mowj-class frigates are. I'd say this is more for the learning curve than something that will provide experience when building a heavier platform.


Dude, I'd be grateful if you could reupload that video yourself with subtitles. I'd watch the whole thing in one sitting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> In all fairness, they'll attempt to replicate the TF-30 engine the F-14 uses and build up on that. Two reasons: (A) there is no way the united states could bring a lawsuit given zero ties exist and (B) it's a much more familiar platform for which they have existing infrastructure to maintain. There's already that interview @WudangMaster posted where the IRIAF official was discussing them testing out a domestic engine on an F-14 airframe.
> 
> Agha, the current light fighter seems to be a limited production testbed, just like the Mowj-class frigates are. I'd say this is more for the learning curve than something that will provide experience when building a heavier platform.


i doubt they exactly go for TF-30 , its a big engine , too big to be used in a light / medium fighter , around two meter longer than rd-33 or F-404.
if they want an engine without afterburner then the length would be around twice of those engines


----------



## TheImmortal

PersianNinja said:


> In all fairness, they'll attempt to replicate the TF-30 engine the F-14 uses and build up on that. Two reasons: (A) there is no way the united states could bring a lawsuit given zero ties exist and (B) it's a much more familiar platform for which they have existing infrastructure to maintain. There's already that interview @WudangMaster posted where the IRIAF official was discussing them testing out a domestic engine on an F-14 airframe.
> 
> Agha, the current light fighter seems to be a limited production testbed, just like the Mowj-class frigates are. I'd say this is more for the learning curve than something that will provide experience when building a heavier platform.



I’m skeptical if the video implicates an Iranian built TF-30 or a TF-30 overhauled to zero hours condition. 

Replicating the software that regulates the engine function is daunting task. 

Based on rumors and Iranian declarations they are working on medium engine and heavy engines. The issue they are running into is building a reliable engine that can get many hours before overhaul that is not maintenance heavy.

I’m not sure if TF-30 fits that Bill, but would be a massive jump for Iranian defense industry if they were able to build a reliable working TF-30 based engine.



Hack-Hook said:


> i doubt they exactly go for TF-30 , its a big engine , too big to be used in a light / medium fighter ,



Iran isn’t building a light fighter. They have already said they are attempting to build a medium-heavy fighter.

TF-30 could also be used in UAV industry for a future heavy Iranian bomber based on RQ-170.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> I’m skeptical if the video implicates an Iranian built TF-30 or a TF-30 overhauled to zero hours condition.
> 
> Replicating the software that regulates the engine function is daunting task.
> 
> Based on rumors and Iranian declarations they are working on medium engine and heavy engines. The issue they are running into is building a reliable engine that can get many hours before overhaul that is not maintenance heavy.


Wouldn't the recent development of the Owj turbojet have helped advance the designing software and simulation programs to help apply it in subsequent aerospace projects?

Also, an initial iteration that even works for 400 hours before requiring maintenance is a good starting point. Thereafter, it can be slowly worked up to 800 hours, 1500 hours and so on.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Again General TheImmortal the Poor General Says Anything! The Kowsar is a combat aircraft with great tactical and technological potential and it is an asset for Iran. This general of the poor has no sense of combat, none of the tactics of war and no intuition. The Kowsar is a very effective combat weapon, especially for defending the territory.
In a unified national defense, the kowsar becomes important. It has links with drones and will work with ground radar and a little later with drones which will have the function of mini Awacs.

I believe that Iran is working with future missiles and radar that will have surface-to-air launch capability. The Kowsar and other future combat aircraft will be able to fly very low and launch their missiles with precision towards the target higher up.

We also know that IRIAF is working on special paint to make the Kowsar more stealthy. Iran is also working a lot on carbon fiber to make it into a combat aircraft cell.

You can never win a war with General The Immortal of this world, not smart enough and no sense of war tactics

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Again General TheImmortal the Poor General Says Anything! The Kowsar is a combat aircraft with great tactical and technological potential and it is an asset for Iran. This general of the poor has no sense of combat, none of the tactics of war and no intuition. The Kowsar is a very effective combat weapon, especially for defending the territory.
> In a unified national defense, the kowsar becomes important. It has links with drones and will work with ground radar and a little later with drones which will have the function of mini Awacs.
> 
> I believe that Iran is working with future missiles and radar that will have surface-to-air launch capability. The Kowsar and other future combat aircraft will be able to fly very low and launch their missiles with precision towards the target higher up.
> 
> We also know that IRIAF is working on special paint to make the Kowsar more stealthy. Iran is also working a lot on carbon fiber to make it into a combat aircraft cell.
> 
> You can never win a war with General The Immortal of this world, not smart enough and no sense of war tactics


To be fair I agree about the datalink to UAVs in order to create a 360 degree field of situational awareness because it's been one of the selling points of this platform. However, I don't think that at any point, it will go into mass-production but rather be used to test technologies that will be integrated on future, more robust airframes.

Despite the fact that modern air force doctrines are more about AESA radars, EW and BVR engagements, they'll need powerful engines and speed nonetheless to deal with more tricky platforms in case of a large aerial offensive since many planes will get through nonetheless and it will result in a dogfight. Fox 1 and Fox 2 missiles will be needed to deal with the intruding bandits. That is where a light aircraft just cannot suffice.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Iran isn’t building a light fighter. They have already said they are attempting to build a medium-heavy fighter.
> 
> TF-30 could also be used in UAV industry for a future heavy Iranian bomber based on RQ-170.


for that heavy uav bomber , two FJ-44 size engine is more than enough.
also as I said if they want to build anything smaller than F-14 then TF-30 with its more than 6m long size is too big. and that engine is old tech and have left bad taste in the mouth of our air-force , nobody there like it much. 
and Iran is building light/medium fighter . we want those airplanes to defend ourselves our plan is not to build an aircraft for bombing enemy


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> for that heavy uav bomber , two FJ-44 size engine is more than enough.


Not even close. They want a powerful unmanned bomber model of the Shahed-191? They'll need a beast of a turbofan to pull something like that off.

Ditto if they want to consider a UAV used for aerial refuelling purposes.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> To be fair I agree about the datalink to UAVs in order to create a 360 degree field of situational awareness because it's been one of the selling points of this platform. However, I don't think that at any point, it will go into mass-production but rather be used to test technologies that will be integrated on future, more robust airframes.
> 
> Despite the fact that modern air force doctrines are more about AESA radars, EW and BVR engagements, they'll need powerful engines and speed nonetheless to deal with more tricky platforms in case of a large aerial offensive since many planes will get through nonetheless and it will result in a dogfight. Fox 1 and Fox 2 missiles will be needed to deal with the intruding bandits. That is where a light aircraft just cannot suffice.


that's where a light aircraft shine more . and even then its a helmet mounted HUD and missile that can cover 360 degree like AIM-9x or Python-6 will help a lot and maneuverability is less of concern , the pilot of a modern fighter jet now a days don't need to fire its missile toward the tail of enemy aircraft or have the enemy in front of its fighter to get a lock


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> Not even close. They want a powerful unmanned bomber model of the Shahed-191? They'll need a beast of a turbofan to pull something like that off.
> 
> Ditto if they want to consider a UAV used for aerial refuelling purposes.


two fj-44 can carry a more than 10 ton aircraft , unless they want to go supersonic in which case i don't recommend anything produced by Shahed industries for that . they need a new design ,
and the role of aerial refueling probably will fall to airplane like simorgh and Iran-140 not a drone. even then as i said shahed-191 if even be 3 ton(which is not , then two FJ-44 like engine can be used to carry 7t more cargo with it


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> two fj-44 can carry a more than 10 ton aircraft , unless they want to go supersonic in which case i don't recommend anything produced by Shahed industries for that . they need a new design ,
> and the role of aerial refueling probably will fall to airplane like simorgh and Iran-140 not a drone. even then as i said shahed-191 if even be 3 ton(which is not , then two FJ-44 like engine can be used to carry 7t more cargo with it


The F-117 Nighthawk was powered by 2 x GE-F404-F1D2 turbofan engines with 40.2 kN thrust each. It was a dedicated stealth bomber weighing 13,381 kg (empty weight) and 23,814 kg with a full loadout.

FJ-44-3 gives a 16 kN dry thrust and that's nowhere near what is needed. Even the RQ-170 Sentinel which was captured from the CIA was outfitted with a Garrett TFE731 with 15.6–21.1 kN thrust or a TF34-GE-400A with 41 kN thrust. To mate anything less powerful with an airframe of that size would just be underperforming.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> The F-117 Nighthawk was powered by 2 x GE-F404-F1D2 turbofan engines with 40.2 kN thrust each. It was a dedicated stealth bomber weighing 13,381 kg (empty weight) and 23,814 kg with a full loadout.
> 
> FJ-44-3 gives a 16 kN dry thrust and that's nowhere near what is needed. Even the RQ-170 Sentinel which was captured from the CIA was outfitted with a Garrett TFE731 with 15.6–21.1 kN thrust or a TF34-GE-400A with 41 kN thrust. To mate anything less powerful with an airframe of that size would just be underperforming.


F-117 aerodynamic needed that much power a flying wing need a lot less to stay in the air.
also it was a manned aircraft not unmanned.
and it was more than 13t empty it could carry 2x bomb up to 1t each the rest was for fuel
an f-5 can fly with 6t of fuel and ammunition have an engine equivalent to fj-44 in power and use an airframe that produce a lot less lift than for example a shahed-171 and have to carry those extra 4t of bombs on outside pilon which make a lot of drag


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> that's where a light aircraft shine more . and even then its a helmet mounted HUD and missile that can cover 360 degree like AIM-9x or Python-6 will help a lot and maneuverability is less of concern , the pilot of a modern fighter jet now a days don't need to fire its missile toward the tail of enemy aircraft or have the enemy in front of its fighter to get a lock


I mean why rely on a light aircraft to fill in the gaps based on a doctrine which allows the enemy to get in close in the first place? It would be far better to have a heavy interceptor which is a missile truck bearing a whole array of short, medium and long-range missiles and an added 20 mm autocannon if it comes to in-close fighting.

In other words, a swift interception and engagement with BVR and then they swoop in on the enemy and engage them with Fox-1s and Fox-2s one after the other, forcing them to exhaust themselves or break off and flee.

Unless of course you want a shootdown where the enemy aircraft falls into Iranian territory and so does the pilot which frankly would be quite nice.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PersianNinja said:


> I mean why rely on a light aircraft to fill in the gaps based on a doctrine which allows the enemy to get in close in the first place? It would be far better to have a heavy interceptor which is a missile truck bearing a whole array of short, medium and long-range missiles and an added 20 mm autocannon if it comes to in-close fighting.
> 
> In other words, a swift interception and engagement with BVR and then they swoop in on the enemy and engage them with Fox-1s and Fox-2s one after the other, forcing them to exhaust themselves or break off and flee.
> 
> Unless of course you want a shootdown where the enemy aircraft falls into Iranian territory and so does the pilot which frankly would be quite nice.


that interceptor probably need 40000$ per hour of flight and light aircraft need 5000-6000$ per hour of light .
you can build that light aircraft for as cheap as 1/3rd of the price of that interceptor. and that interceptor even don't carry much more ammunition .
and the radar is not even that much stronger.
now you decide you want to send one interceptor that can use after burner and reach enemy at 2500km/h but ran out of fuel . or send three light/medium multirole fighter that can data link with each other and have better battle situation awareness and combined carry 2-3 time more weapon .and their maintenance is a lot cheaper and easier

let see the case for example F-15 and JAS-39
speed :
F-15 : can't supercrise but can reach up to 3000km/h but then the engine will need hours of hours and thousands of Dollar maintenance otherwise 2650km/h
JAS-39: can supercruise at 1.22mach , max speed 2450km/h and too reach that the engine won't toast itself

engine : 
F15: 2 × Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 afterburning turbofans, 14,590 lbf (64.9 kN) thrust each dry, 23,770 lbf (105.7 kN) with afterburner
Jas-39: 1 × General Electric RM16 (F414-GE-39E) afterburning turbofan engine, 61.83 kN (13,900 lbf) thrust dry, 98 kN (22,000 lbf) with afterburner

weapon load
F-15: 10t on 9 hardpoint plus 1 gun 
JAS-39: 7.2t on 10 hardpoint and one gun

combat range
F-15:1900km
JAS-39: 1500km

sevice ceiling
F-15: 20km
JAS-39: 16km

g-limit 
F-15: +9
JAS-39: +9 -3

weapon
F-15: 8x AIM-120
JAS-39: 7x Meteor + 2x IRIS-T or 2x AIM-9x

RADAR
F-15: AN/APG-63(V1-V3) depend on the model
JAS-39: Selex ES-05 Raven AESA radar


its up to you to decide which one is better 1x F-15 or 2-3 x Jas-39 for your scenario


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> for that heavy uav bomber , two FJ-44 size engine is more than enough.
> also as I said if they want to build anything smaller than F-14 then TF-30 with its more than 6m long size is too big. and that engine is old tech and have left bad taste in the mouth of our air-force , nobody there like it much.
> and Iran is building light/medium fighter . we want those airplanes to defend ourselves our plan is not to build an aircraft for bombing enemy



Not for a high altitude supersonic bomber. High altitude makes most air defenses obsolete in terms of interception.

I have pointed to the 1960’s D-21 drone

Cruise speed Mach 3.3
Altitude 90,000
Operational range: 5600 KM







If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.

It is my wide belief that such a drone if able to cost effectively produced would make the Iranian war machine nearly unstoppable when combined with the lower cost Missile philosophy.

But missiles alone cannot be relied on to do all damage as we saw in Ukraine war. In a future major war Iran could fire/lose up to thousands of ballistic missiles per month. Ballistic Missile supply is not infinite, there needs to be a compliment.

I also believe we will see 6th Gen fighter bombers adopt this philosophy high altitude - high supersonic cruise speed - VLO design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.


Yeah I am hoping for some sort of next generation Karrar that can perform missions but operate as a low RCS supersonic bomber.


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Yeah I am hoping for some sort of next generation Karrar that can perform missions but operate as a low RCS supersonic bomber.



Think about it, a bomber that flies at 90,000 altitude could theoretically only be shot down by a THAAD from the ground.

Patriot taps out at 70,000.

There is very few THAADs in the world vs defense sites that need protecting. Add in the fact that you are traveling at Mach 3.3 and you are pretty much untouchable unless an F-22 can get in the air fast enough and reach its max altitude and fire a A2A missile at you. Even then F-22 Max altitude is 60,000. So I’m not sure what A2A missiles can even reach that high, many need to be fired at much lower altitude to be effective.

The only issue for the bomber would be to devise bombs that can still be pretty accurate (5-10M cep) when dropped from that altitude.

But in the Middle East, Iran would be untouchable. Could bomb any HVT in the Middle East pretty much at will. During a war with Israel, Israeli skies would be unprotected against these bombers add in the fact Iran’s also firing missiles and you have developed on of the most lethal 1-2 combos in modern military history.

With the mountain airbases to protect these bombers, you can afford to spend a little higher on cost per bomber since they are likely to survive a great length of time.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Not for a high altitude supersonic bomber. High altitude makes most air defenses obsolete in terms of interception.


that flying wing design provide a lot of lift , the drone can go high , but certainly can't go super sonic . on the other hand , show me a supersonic flying wing, the design is not for supersonic speed


TheImmortal said:


> I have pointed to the 1960’s D-21 drone
> 
> Cruise speed Mach 3.3
> Altitude 90,000
> Operational range: 5600 KM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.


that design is the must useless design ever , that only good as a several million Dollar suicide shit that can't carry any sensor , any ordnance . and that ramjet eat fuel like crazy, have no internal capacity , a single camera , that later would be released and then the drone self destruct
in short a one way winged engine with zero carrying capacity
some photo to show what that drone actually is and how it reach that speed











TheImmortal said:


> Think about it, a bomber that flies at 90,000 altitude could theoretically only be shot down by a THAAD from the ground.
> 
> Patriot taps out at 70,000.
> 
> There is very few THAADs in the world vs defense sites that need protecting. Add in the fact that you are traveling at Mach 3.3 and you are pretty much untouchable unless an F-22 can get in the air fast enough and reach its max altitude and fire a A2A missile at you. Even then F-22 Max altitude is 60,000. So I’m not sure what A2A missiles can even reach that high, many need to be fired at much lower altitude to be effective.
> 
> The only issue for the bomber would be to devise bombs that can still be pretty accurate (5-10M cep) when dropped from that altitude.
> 
> But in the Middle East, Iran would be untouchable. Could bomb any HVT in the Middle East pretty much at will. During a war with Israel, Israeli skies would be unprotected against these bombers add in the fact Iran’s also firing missiles and you have developed on of the most lethal 1-2 combos in modern military history.
> 
> With the mountain airbases to protect these bombers, you can afford to spend a little higher on cost per bomber since they are likely to survive a great length of time.


your bomber is a one way bomber that can only carry a single camera, on other hand it can fly high.
if you strap that ramjet engine to Karrar it can also fly that high and fast , it would be cheaper and it can carry mor bomb

now that i think about that , the warhead of Kheybarshekan can be modified to be a damn good bomber


----------



## mohsen

Blurred pictures 



https://president.ir/fa/138408


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

mohsen said:


> Blurred pictures
> 
> 
> 
> https://president.ir/fa/138408



What exactly is that component?


----------



## mohsen

PersianNinja said:


> What exactly is that component?


Something which they unveiled (for themselves) !


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

mohsen said:


> Something which they unveiled (for themselves) !



Any guesses what it could be?!


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554556522600009729

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554556522600009729


Finally some actual good news.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Finally some actual good news.


not good news at all



TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554556522600009729


hope one part of it remain rumor as it was the case for such news in last 20 years.
poutdated airplane that don't even have AESA radar and is as bad as F-14 on maintenance cost.

there is hope it come from unofficial unnamed source , AKA fanboys.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> not good news at all


Why not?! Why is it when there is some good news for Iran, Iransetiz people like you crawl out of the wood work to rain on the parade. Explain yourself, Iransetiz!



Hack-Hook said:


> not good news at all
> 
> 
> hope one part of it remain rumor as it was the case for such news in last 20 years.
> poutdated airplane that don't even have AESA radar and is as bad as F-14 on maintenance cost.
> 
> there is hope it come from unofficial unnamed source , AKA fanboys.


Think before typing! Realistically, is Iran likely to get spare parts or new upgrades on its F-14s from US or is it likely get that for potential Su-35 with Russia? Is there an alternative other than bending over and becoming a vassal to US...again?

You cant be this illogical.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why not?! Why is it when there is some good news for Iran, Iransetiz people like you crawl out of the wood work to rain on the parade. Explain yourself, Iransetiz!


iransetiz are people who want to repeat the mistake of the past , the people who in every step belittle our achievement and think because the product is foreign made its better than what we can make ourselves. go and instead of dreaming of wasting our limited resource on outdated equipment which are fossils of an bygone era look at our capabilities. the airplane light all modern radars , have no modern radar, have no useful datalink , and only excel in metrics that don't matter anymore.

by the way that alone show who is iran setiz, people can decide me or the ones that become glad with such news


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Think before typing! Realistically, is Iran likely to get spare parts or new upgrades on its F-14s from US or is it likely get that for potential Su-35 with Russia? Is there an alternative other than bending over and becoming a vassal to US...again?
> 
> You cant be this illogical.


think realistically , do Iran need spare for its F-14.
do we need outdated airplane like Su-35 that could not bring air superiority to russia in ukraine and no one in the world want. be assuured russia can't sell a single SU-35 to anybody anymore after its outdated specs compared to light/Medium fighters like J-10 and Grippen or F-16 and their hillarious performance over Ukraine
and you call such news good news , an expensive to buy , expensive to maintain, low performing in metric that matter , outdated airplane . that's how you can describe flankers the electronic inside the airplane is at least two generation old and those electronics are what really matter in new aircrafts

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> iransetiz are people who want to repeat the mistake of the past , the people who in every step belittle our achievement and think because the product is foreign made its better than what we can make ourselves. go and instead of dreaming of wasting our limited resource on outdated equipment which are fossils of an bygone era look at our capabilities. the airplane light all modern radars , have no modern radar, have no useful datalink , and only excel in metrics that don't matter anymore.
> 
> by the way that alone show who is iran setiz, people can decide me or the ones that become glad with such news


Oh the waffle machine has unleashed his ramblings. Here we go:

Use your brain! How can Iran reinvent the wheel when there is an ally who is happy to trade with us what we want? I suppose, to use your maghz pook logic, NATO is also weak because they rely on US weapon?! Yes the Su-35 is a million times better than what we can produce in the next 50-100 years. So what do you propose we do, sit and do nothing thus being weak in the face of our western enemy (you'd like that, wouldn't you, gharbzadeye Iransetiz)?

OR

Should we at least have a few modern, upgradable, aircraft to keep out airforce in some sort of shape until we can make out own? 

You complain about us relying on foreign weapons, then you bring J10 and F16 as an example. So not only are you Iransetiz, you're also a hypocrite who contradicts himself. Maybe China and US dont want to sell to us for obvious reasons, then what choice do we have other than Russian?

Only one Su35 got shot down in Ukraine and Russia has air superiority, what's your point? Do you have realtime data of clashes between Su35 vs F16 vs j10 vs grippen...or did you pull that out of your arse? Your point is moot when all we can purchase is one of those. 

In conclusion, Su-35 is the best we can buy now and it's disgraceful that gharbzade Iran setiz like you demand us to purchase western planes when we are under sanctions. This is how ahmagh you are!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh the waffle machine has unleashed his ramblings. Here we go:
> 
> Use your brain! How can Iran reinvent the wheel when there is an ally who is happy to trade with us what we want? I suppose, to use your maghz pook logic, NATO is also weak because they rely on US weapon?! Yes the Su-35 is a million times better than what we can produce in the next 50-100 years. So what do you propose we do, sit and do nothing thus being weak in the face of our western enemy (you'd like that, wouldn't you, gharbzadeye Iransetiz)?
> 
> OR
> 
> Should we at least have a few modern, upgradable, aircraft to keep out airforce in some sort of shape until we can make out own?
> 
> You complain about us relying on foreign weapons, then you bring J10 and F16 as an example. So not only are you Iransetiz, you're also a hypocrite who contradicts himself. Maybe China and US dont want to sell to us for obvious reasons, then what choice do we have other than Russian?
> 
> Only one Su35 got shot down in Ukraine and Russia has air superiority, what's your point? Do you have realtime data of clashes between Su35 vs F16 vs j10 vs grippen...or did you pull that out of your arse? Your point is moot when all we can purchase is one of those.
> 
> In conclusion, Su-35 is the best we can buy now and it's disgraceful that gharbzade Iran setiz like you demand us to purchase western planes when we are under sanctions. This is how ahmagh you are!


بی ادب .
خوب که توانستی تربیت خانوادگی خودت را به خوبی نشان بدی.
این شما وطن فروش ها هستید که همیشه جلوی توانایی های جوانهای کشور را گرفتید چون عاشق مارکهای غربی و شرقی هستید . تو حتی فرق تواناییهای رادار این پرنده ها را نمیدونی ولی میایی نظر میدی. در ضمن اگر به خودت زحمت میدادی و چند صفحه قبل را میخوندی میدیدی که ما در مورد توانایی این هواپیما حتی در برابر کوثر صحیت کردیم

البته میدونم برای یک وطن فروش تنها این مهم هست که بشنوه بجای یک تولید ملی از جنسهای 30 سال قبل شرقی و غربی استفاده شده.
آخر سر در مورد بحث غرب زده بودن. من به راحتی ده ها پست از تو میتونم بیارم که نشان میده چقدر از خرید اجناس از دور خارج شده روسی اظهار خوشحالی میکنی . تو اگر مردی یک پست بیار که من تبلیغ برای خرید یک جنس غربی بیار
در ضمن اگر روسیه دوست ما بود به تعهداتش عمل میکرد .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> بی ادب .
> خوب که توانستی تربیت خانوادگی خودت را به خوبی نشان بدی.
> این شما وطن فروش ها هستید که همیشه جلوی توانایی های جوانهای کشور را گرفتید چون عاشق مارکهای غربی و شرقی هستید . تو حتی فرق تواناییهای رادار این پرنده ها را نمیدونی ولی میایی نظر میدی. در ضمن اگر به خودت زحمت میدادی و چند صفحه قبل را میخوندی میدیدی که ما در مورد توانایی این هواپیما حتی در برابر کوثر صحیت کردیم
> 
> البته میدونم برای یک وطن فروش تنها این مهم هست که بشنوه بجای یک تولید ملی از جنسهای 30 سال قبل شرقی و غربی استفاده شده.
> آخر سر در مورد بحث غرب زده بودن. من به راحتی ده ها پست از تو میتونم بیارم که نشان میده چقدر از خرید اجناس از دور خارج شده روسی اظهار خوشحالی میکنی . تو اگر مردی یک پست بیار که من تبلیغ برای خرید یک جنس غربی بیار
> در ضمن اگر روسیه دوست ما بود به تعهداتش عمل میکرد .


To ham ahmaghiyate nanato neshoon dadee be tamame memberhaye een site har vaghti ye pasokhi midee. Khak too saret.

Beharhal, to ye gharbzadaye vatan foroosh fekr mikoni be gharb koon dadan yejoorayee ma ba esteghlal mishim? To koja boodi in 60 saal e akheer? Mardom e Iran system e Liberal e gharbiro nemikhan...fagahad ye edeye kami gharbzadehaye kesafat mesle khaar ar ar mikonan.

In nazare faghad to hast ke Su-35 mesle Kowsar e, ke man arzesh e pokham roosh nemizaram. Ba's inja darbaraye tavanehaye Su-35 vs xyz havapeyma nist...man migam tanha rahi ke chandta havapaymaye jangi betoonim begirim Su-35 hast, past yani sobat e tavanayee nesbat be jangandehaye dige bedard e ammat mikhore.

Rasti, man harja delam mikhad nazar midam va to hagh nadaree begee koja mitoonam pasokh bedan. Ya javab midee ya na.

To hameen alan daree mesale F-16 o Grippen miyaree...yani daree migee yejoorayee ma bayad ba gharb nazdeektar besheem ke inaro begirim. Chon man bayeed midoonam to enghadr tork bashee ke entezar dashete bashee Iran 50-100 saal vayse ke che ye rooz shayad ye fighter jet e mashdi beterekoone...ta oon moghe Iran shode Arabestan. Chareye ma che hast? Kheyli bihaali, dadash.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Finally some actual good news.


Note, this can be read differently (albeit unlikely): Iranians are training Russians on Su 35 integration with Iranian drones...which if true is amazing too. 

On this subject, what integration does Iran have between its drone and craft arsenals?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554556522600009729




But how realistic are such „news“? IMO they are not …


----------



## TheImmortal

Deino said:


> But how realistic are such „news“? IMO they are not …



Mehdi is a pretty reliable source. So there is some credence to what he says versus random Twitter guys.

That being said, I’ll believe it when I see it in regards to SU-35.

As for people saying J-10C would be a better fit. China isn’t going to give Iran anything worthwhile because it is close to Saudi Arabia and doesn’t want a geopolitical headache that is a major arms deal with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flotilla

After Pelosi´s visit TW, everything is possible.

The better armed Iran, the more resources US must employ to deal with. And nowadays J10C is not the top nocht fighter of China fighters, it is not J16 or J20. It is still a bit behind F15QA and F2000 of RSAF, at least cinematically.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Flotilla said:


> After Pelosi´s visit TW, everything is possible.
> 
> The better armed Iran, the more resources US must employ to deal with. And nowadays J10C is not the top nocht fighter of China fighters, it is not J16 or J20. It is still a bit behind F15QA and F2000 of RSAF, at least cinematically.



According to opponents of a Su-35 deal (minor in numbers) on here, kinetic energy counts for peanuts in modern air warfare.


----------



## TheImmortal

Flotilla said:


> After Pelosi´s visit TW, everything is possible.
> 
> The better armed Iran, the more resources US must employ to deal with. And nowadays J10C is not the top nocht fighter of China fighters, it is not J16 or J20. It is still a bit behind F15QA and F2000 of RSAF, at least cinematically.



Pelosi’s visit highlighted what I have been saying all along. US openly mocks One China Policy and all China does is some strongly worded diplomatic protests. Much like Israeli nukes, Taiwan being a pseudo Independent country is basically an open secret. All that we wait for is official recognition by the West.

China under Xi is very risk averse to any iota of confrontation. Some war games, some strongly worded protests, and some movement of military equipment. Basically what North Korea does every time US and South Korea make it angry.

As for fighter jets: J-20 is China’s air superiority fighter and will likely never be exported to anyone much less Iran.

J-35 is China’s version of F-35 and maybe exported to super friendly countries such as Pakistan. Iran unlikely.

J-10C and J-35 would be a boon to Iranian Air Force. But baring a complete reversal in Chinese philosophy and a massive increase in relations they are slim.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> According to opponents of a Su-35 deal (minor in numbers) on here, kinetic energy counts for peanuts in modern air warfare.


when you brought me a fighter which is more agile than , a modern missile i believe you are right . its the electronic that count , not how maneuverable is your airplane


Daylamite Warrior said:


> To ham ahmaghiyate nanato neshoon dadee be tamame memberhaye een site har vaghti ye pasokhi midee. Khak too saret.
> 
> Beharhal, to ye gharbzadaye vatan foroosh fekr mikoni be gharb koon dadan yejoorayee ma ba esteghlal mishim? To koja boodi in 60 saal e akheer? Mardom e Iran system e Liberal e gharbiro nemikhan...fagahad ye edeye kami gharbzadehaye kesafat mesle khaar ar ar mikonan.
> 
> In nazare faghad to hast ke Su-35 mesle Kowsar e, ke man arzesh e pokham roosh nemizaram. Ba's inja darbaraye tavanehaye Su-35 vs xyz havapeyma nist...man migam tanha rahi ke chandta havapaymaye jangi betoonim begirim Su-35 hast, past yani sobat e tavanayee nesbat be jangandehaye dige bedard e ammat mikhore.
> 
> Rasti, man harja delam mikhad nazar midam va to hagh nadaree begee koja mitoonam pasokh bedan. Ya javab midee ya na.
> 
> To hameen alan daree mesale F-16 o Grippen miyaree...yani daree migee yejoorayee ma bayad ba gharb nazdeektar besheem ke inaro begirim. Chon man bayeed midoonam to enghadr tork bashee ke entezar dashete bashee Iran 50-100 saal vayse ke che ye rooz shayad ye fighter jet e mashdi beterekoone...ta oon moghe Iran shode Arabestan. Chareye ma che hast? Kheyli bihaali, dadash.


in fact kowsar can do things that Su-35 can't for example it has data-link .
by the way show me a country that didn't cancel its SU-35 order, even Russia itself don't order it anymore

and as I said وطن فروش بی ادب که فکر میکنی چون خارجی هست بهتر هست

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> when you brought me a fighter which is more agile than , a modern missile i believe you are right . its the electronic that count , not how maneuverable is your airplane



Because 20 years ago fighter jets used to be more agile than air to air missiles perhaps? Also kinematics do not only boil down to maneuverability, do they? Then there's also range, payload and a host of other criteria.

But let me put it this way: I trust PeeD's assessment, because this is the area of competence he specializes (and possibly works) in, and to me his expertise is quite unparalleled among forum users in addition to having proven correct oftentimes in the past.

So unless the world of combat aviation has experienced a complete revolution over the past one or two years since PeeD last commented on the topic, or unless some other major development in or around Iran rendered previous assessments obsolete, for me personally his statement will still stand. I know for a fact that whatever objection users may come up with, he was aware of and had taken them into account when he opined that three or four twelver squadrons of Su-30 or Su-35 would qualify as an acceptable investment for the IRIAF.

And this is an analyst who has been most outspoken against wasting money on armament imports, who consistently placed faith in domestic capabilities even at times when few observers would have been as confident. This is why no counter-argument may convince me for the time being.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> in fact kowsar can do things that Su-35 can't for example it has data-link .



“AESA “Data Link” you are a walking buzz word. Data link is irrelevant when your systems are jammed to hell against more capable fighters who have no trouble finding you. 

We have zero knowledge of how Iranian avionics would do against the full force of EW/ECW of US airforce or Israeli airforce. I guess if your opponent is Azerbaijan things like that don’t matter.

One of you tried to claim Kowsar has 1-2 m2 cross section. Before I clearly showed that not possible via Brazilian research paper on the matter. A 1950’s designed aircraft frame! That means if it were true, in 60’s with that eras Radar tech the F-5 was basically invisible. 

China operates the SU-35 and SU-30. In fact rumors are that China used it’s Su-35’s to penetrate Taiwan airspace yesterday.

Iran isn’t going to go all out for Kowsar, just like it didn’t go all out for Karrar nearly 7 years after unveiling. 

While we wait for the unveiling of Iranian medium/heavy engine, SU-35 is the most realistic stop gap. Chinese fighters are not coming to the rescue. China is not going to create trouble for itself. If it wanted to create trouble, it would help Russia much more overtly vis a vi Ukraine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Iran is selling oil and gas in volume and in price...so although I am 100% supporter of in-house development..I think Iran now can have both options...Russian craft as a stop gap as theimmortal said and CONCURRENT development of Iran's next gen fighter..

Sometimes you can have your cake and eat it too..
By the way @Hack-Hook is a patriot and very informed individual and a good physician also so please do not interpert his criticizem as being unpatriotic..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> when you brought me a fighter which is more agile than , a modern missile i believe you are right . its the electronic that count , not how maneuverable is your airplane
> 
> in fact kowsar can do things that Su-35 can't for example it has data-link .
> by the way show me a country that didn't cancel its SU-35 order, even Russia itself don't order it anymore
> 
> and as I said وطن فروش بی ادب که فکر میکنی چون خارجی هست بهتر هست


Dadash, the only reason why they were cancelled was purely to do with US pressure. You could say Russia's production rate is poor and needs cash injection. But that still doesn't mean the SU-35 is a sub par aircraft, considering the limited options. Dont you think Russians couldn't just upgrade the su-34 with data link?

Avalinke man ye Irani hastam, ajdadam Iranihastan va kesi ke vatanesho doost dashtebashe nemizare intori niroo havayee ma zarbe bekhore.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554343582533828609
Look at those flankers in Chinese video 

Someone should let China know that @Hack-Hook does not approve.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> One of you tried to claim Kowsar has 1-2 m2 cross section. Before I clearly showed that not possible via Brazilian research paper on the matter. A 1950’s designed aircraft frame! That means if it were true, in 60’s with that eras Radar tech the F-5 was basically invisible.



You have a habit of claiming baseless things (yes there is a list) and when someone proves your claim as wrong you run away from the thread without replying or even addressing the points made by others, which I am sure you will do after this post as well. I replied to your funny RCS post but I could not post it because me and few other people in Iranian sections were incapable of posting at that time due to bot attack (fixed now by mod WAZ).

Anyways, here goes:

Your posted paper presented a simulated RCS by software which by no means can be equated to real world RCS value. *Nowhere in the article, the Brazilian authors mention that their values are equivalent to real experimental RCS values.*

This is how real RCS is measured by actual pro-labs who spend tens and hundreds of millions on the establishment of such facilities, which according to your logic is a waste of time, all they can do is download the freeware software these Brazilian students had and Tadaaaa! they can have the RCS. You should contact the fools in Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Sukhoi, and BAE who have been wasting their decades and millions on these labs. All they needed was the .... free software.













........................

How science of simulation and experimental results work? I will explain here. I know you would not read it beyond this point so .... I am addressing other members. The simulated and experimental values are relative to each other by a factor (let's call it *Z*) which can be a coefficient or addition/subtraction factor to the simulated values, like this:

*Z* x RCS (Simulated) = RCS (Experimental)

_OR _

*Z +/-* RCS (Simulated) = RCS (Experimental)

The same simulation that is putting a needle-like tiny airframe of F-5 at 15-16 m2 may also put a Flanker airframe at 45+ m2 for all we can predict here, so we may know that the Z = ~3 for this software. Did the Brazilian paper measure the RCS of another airframe that we have actual RCS values of to know this relative factor Z ? no they did not because they are not even remotely claiming that the RCS they measured is a real one. They simulated the RCS in their software at 15-16 m2 and then they put the RAM on and measured the RCS again in the same simulation to prove that simulated RCS values dropped. They are claiming the "drop" in RCS vs RAM coat plot. If the software is super accurate, the ratio of simulated RCS without RAM / RCS+RAM could be close to the actual experiment ratio RCS without RAM / RCS+RAM but BY NO MEANS THE SIMULATED RCS alone CAN BE EQUAL TO ACTUAL RCS. Otherwise everyone in the entire combat aviation field is a fool, they should all just download softwares and design 6th generation stealth planes from their bedrooms.

Relative factors between simulations and experimental values work like this in the entire plethora of scientific fields where both simulated and experimental measurements are possible. We first measure values in a simulated environment over a range, then we find them experimentally to get this relative factor "Z" so next time we can get a good idea from the simulation of what the actual values would be. No one gets the simulation done only and starts claiming oh that is it, I won't take it to the lab. Which is why in modern world we have a theoretical physicist, biologist, chemist and an experimental physicist, biologist, chemist. They work in tandem on projects, and can't replace each other.



TheImmortal said:


> That means if it were true, in 60’s with that eras Radar tech the F-5 was basically invisible.



Era has nothing to do with it. F-16, F/A-18, Mig-21, and Mirage-2000 all are from the 1960s and 70s yet their RCS values are below 5 m2. F-15 and Flanker family is from the 1970s yet they have enormous RCS values. FA/18 itself has a USN claimed RCS of 3m2 (1999) and the airframe is a modified version of F-5E/F, but larger and edgy, Do you really want us to believe that F/A-18 is 3 M2 but the tiny needle like F-5 is 16 m2 somehow?









F-5 was and is quite hard to track in aerial combat which is why its base design (N-156) was chosen to be driven into F/A-18 which became the premier USN fighter for decades and still is. Even the modern US aviators call an upgraded F-5N a small low observable platform that you can not just defeat easily in the sky. *https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42507/first-navy-f-5-aggressor-begins-upgrade-that-will-make-the-entire-fleet-far-more-potent*

We have a logical base as well. In the Iran-Iraq war, the thickest possible majority of F-5E was downed by SAM fire which tracks the aircraft from the aspect of lower body. Even an F-22 will have a hard time hiding its lower body RCS. Barely ~8 confirmed air-to-air kills of F-5E were recorded during combat with MIG-25PD, MIG-23ML and all by WVR engagement. None killed at distance during BVR attack which Iraqis used to launch like maniacs with R-40 BVR missile from MIG-25PD. They once even got an F-14A of Hashem Ale-Agha but none ever got an F-5E despite being fired upon multiple times by an R-40. It tells us how difficult it is to track such a small airframe and kill it with ARH/SARH missiles. *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Iraqi_aerial_victories_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war*

Sattari was no fool to start a dometic F-20 equivalent program. HESA today is not either, that they will let go of this project. The day we procure larger turbofans or produce a larger version of Jahesh-700, and HESA works on the frontal part of the plane to reduce the RCS to the levels of EF-2000 or rafale (<1.0m2) we will have a tiny monster in the sky. We already have a superb avionics and controls package for it along with a from-scratch production facility for Kowsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Dadash, the only reason why they were cancelled was purely to do with US pressure. You could say Russia's production rate is poor and needs cash injection. But that still doesn't mean the SU-35 is a sub par aircraft, considering the limited options. Dont you think Russians couldn't just upgrade the su-34 with data link?
> 
> Avalinke man ye Irani hastam, ajdadam Iranihastan va kesi ke vatanesho doost dashtebashe nemizare intori niroo havayee ma zarbe bekhore.


they didn't buy from usa , they replaced them with Rafale , and fun fact india no longer order any SU-30MKI while they are produced in India , instead guess what they are ordering rafale .
Russia , could do that , but they did not , because they don't think its necessary just like when they did not taught drones are necessary in modern war-fares. also don't forget the fact that in electronic russia is 1-2 decade behind , usa , europe and china



TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554343582533828609
> Look at those flankers in Chinese video
> 
> Someone should let China know that @Hack-Hook does not approve.


how many are this year order , and how many 10 year ago order
by the way you import J-16 from china and i won't be that much against it as unlike a certain airplane .
it has actual useful RADAR, It carry actual useful BVR weapon
It has modern and strong E-Warfare suit
the body material is modified to lower RCS
more importantly ,they have the capability to produce the airplane in number and deliver it , certain country lost that capability 20 years ago

oh, and they come with SEAD capability









Why China’s Latest Jets Are Surpassing Russia’s Top Fighters


Since the consolidation of Communist party rule over mainland China in 1949, China’s military aviation sector has owed a tremendous debt to the Russian Bear. However, according to a new study, the apprentice may have surpassed the master as Chinese jets lead in radar, weapons and stealth technology.




www.forbes.com









Military Watch Magazine







militarywatchmagazine.com


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Dadash, the only reason why they were cancelled was purely to do with US pressure. You could say Russia's production rate is poor and needs cash injection. But that still doesn't mean the SU-35 is a sub par aircraft, considering the limited options. Dont you think Russians couldn't just upgrade the su-34 with data link?
> 
> Avalinke man ye Irani hastam, ajdadam Iranihastan va kesi ke vatanesho doost dashtebashe nemizare intori niroo havayee ma zarbe bekhore.



SU-35 has the following weaknesses in IRIAF doctrine:

1) It's a SU-27 with an avionics upgrade. Sukhoi itself patented 10-15 m2 RCS for SU-27 airframe so it means SU-35S has the same large RCS values. It will be tracked by Saudi, Emirati EF-2000, Rafale, Mirage 2000-9 from ~150 km who will launch a BVR attack in its direction with Meteor BVR-AAM. It will have no option but to just leave the battle arena.

2) Its radar IRBIS-E is not AESA so it's easy to jam for the adversary.

3) Its radar IRBIS-E has been shown by its maker (scroll few pages back) in a video that shows it barely tracking a fighter at 100 KM. By that time an EF-2000, Rafale, F-18EF will already have tracked and launched a BVR attack at it.

4) It's longest-range BVR missile is R-77-1 which has a range of ~105 KM. The adversaries it's gonna face have packages like AIM-120D and Meteor BVRAAM with ranges in excess of 160+ KM. This means that it will have to fly along with Fakour-90 armed F-14AM all the time so that F-14AM can do the heavy lifting of tracking and attacking the enemy from 150 KM away, while Su-35S can supplement the BVR attack option. Same can be done with upgraded MIG-29 or Kowsar.

5) Its price tag is 85 million USD and Iran has no infrastructure in place for it. This means that for a price of 4-5 Billion USD we will have a token force of 30-40 aircraft with just maintenance infrastructure. With the same amount of money IRIAF can have the following:

- 45 x F-14AM. 200-300 Million USD. Highly modernized, MLUed
-150 Kowsar-I/II. Cost is 10 million/unit for from-scratch production and 7 million/unit for repository-built airframe + upgrade. The current capacity is 6-7 airframes per year from one assembly line. If they setup another assembly line for future improved Kowsar-II than production can be doubled. Kowsar-II gets AESA, HOTAS, HMD and reduced RCS frontal.
- 70 MIG-29M. Additional airframes from Russia + IRIAF's MIG-29 9.12 MLUed + heavy avionics upgrade with Russian help. R-74E and R-77SD get procured with HMD package.
- 200 x + Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles.

*Or* we can have 30-40 SU-35S with benign force of obsolete avionics carrying MIG-29, Few F-14AM and Kowsars who are isolated from the rest of the fleet. Read about Nagorno Karabakh IRIAF operation in which F-14AM and Kowsar were put forward by IRIAF with ambsuh SAM on ground (all datalinked) while they did not even trust the rest of the fleet including MIG-29s. The rest of the prop fleet of Mirage F-1Q/EQ, F-7N, F-5E/F does not deserve to be mentioned.

6) SU-35S has a role in IRIAF or IRGC-AF as a heavy attack aircraft along with F-4E/D and SU-24M/SU-22M4. It can provide multi-role assistance to attack aircraft and UCAVs like it can fly along with them with A2A and A2G packages to guard them against enemy aircraft while also supplementing them in the strike.

7) Russians do not like their aircraft to be touched so Iran can kiss the idea of using local systems on SU-35 goodbye. It won't have the datalink that IRIAF uses for Kowsar, F-14AM and UCAVs (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard). It would have an isolated battle environment cut off from the entire IRIAF fleet. There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients. Indians, Iran, Vietnam, Egypt all have local industrial baseline esp India and Iran but India is paying 62 Million USD/Su-30MK CDK kit to this day to Moscow and Iran's MIG-29 fleet is dying without MLU and avionics upgrade but we cant touch it either. If Russia refuses spare parts supply or upgrades in future SU-35S will become mothballed storage items for IRIAF in few years.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> SU-35 has the following weaknesses in IRIAF doctrine:
> 
> 1) It's a SU-27 with an avionics upgrade. Sukhoi itself patented 10-15 m2 RCS for SU-27 airframe so it means SU-35S has the same large RCS values. It will be tracked by Saudi, Emirati EF-2000, Rafale, Mirage 2000-9 from ~150 km who will launch a BVR attack in its direction with Meteor BVR-AAM. It will have no option but to just leave the battle arena.
> 
> 2) Its radar IRBIS-E is not AESA so it's easy to jam for the adversary.
> 
> 3) Its radar IRBIS-E has been shown by its maker (scroll few pages back) in a video that shows it barely tracking a fighter at 100 KM. By that time an EF-2000, Rafale, F-18EF will already have tracked and launched a BVR attack at it.
> 
> 4) It's longest-range BVR missile is R-77-1 which has a range of ~105 KM. The adversaries it's gonna face have packages like AIM-120D and Meteor BVRAAM with ranges in excess of 160+ KM. This means that it will have to fly along with Fakour-90 armed F-14AM all the time so that F-14AM can do the heavy lifting of tracking and attacking the enemy from 150 KM away, while Su-35S can supplement the BVR attack option. Same can be done with upgraded MIG-29 or Kowsar.
> 
> 5) Its price tag is 85 million USD and Iran has no infrastructure in place for it. This means that for a price of 4-5 Billion USD we will have a token force of 30-40 aircraft with just maintenance infrastructure. With the same amount of money IRIAF can have the following:
> 
> - 45 x F-14AM. 200-300 Million USD. Highly modernized, MLUed
> -150 Kowsar-I/II. Cost is 10 million/unit for from-scratch production and 7 million/unit for repository-built airframe + upgrade. The current capacity is 6-7 airframes per year from one assembly line. If they setup another assembly line for future improved Kowsar-II than production can be doubled. Kowsar-II gets AESA, HOTAS, HMD and reduced RCS frontal.
> - 70 MIG-29M. Additional airframes from Russia + IRIAF's MIG-29 9.12 MLUed + heavy avionics upgrade with Russian help. R-74E and R-77SD get procured with HMD package.
> - 200 x + Shahed-171 and KAMAN-22 in ELINT/SIGINT and PGM strike roles.
> 
> *Or* we can have 30-40 SU-35S with benign force of obsolete avionics carrying MIG-29, Few F-14AM and Kowsars who are isolated from the rest of the fleet. Read about Nagorno Karabakh IRIAF operation in which F-14AM and Kowsar were put forward by IRIAF with ambsuh SAM on ground (all datalinked) while they did not even trust the rest of the fleet including MIG-29s. The rest of the prop fleet of Mirage F-1Q/EQ, F-7N, F-5E/F does not deserve to be mentioned.
> 
> 6) SU-35S has a role in IRIAF or IRGC-AF as a heavy attack aircraft along with F-4E/D and SU-24M/SU-22M4. It can provide multi-role assistance to attack aircraft and UCAVs like it can fly along with them with A2A and A2G packages to guard them against enemy aircraft while also supplementing them in the strike.
> 
> 7) Russians do not like their aircraft to be touched so Iran can kiss the idea of using local systems on SU-35 goodbye. It won't have the datalink that IRIAF uses for Kowsar, F-14AM and UCAVs (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard). It would have an isolated battle environment cut off from the entire IRIAF fleet. There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients. Indians, Iran, Vietnam, Egypt all have local industrial baseline esp India and Iran but India is paying 62 Million USD/Su-30MK CDK kit to this day to Moscow and Iran's MIG-29 fleet is dying without MLU and avionics upgrade but we cant touch it either. If Russia refuses spare parts supply or upgrades in future SU-35S will become mothballed storage items for IRIAF in few years.


Thank you for the technical reasoning and information. I dont disagree that there are better planes in the world than the su-35. I also dont see why Iran still can't make plenty of Kowsars alongside the fleet of 30-40 su-35s it has because I'd personally go for option 2. Iran should stick to putting their tech on the Kowsar instead of any foreign planes. Building a plane around your own parts and technology is better than making a frankenstein, which Iran only does out of desperation. Question, with regards to the radar issues of the su-35 in the face of its foreign competitors, are the Iranian radar systems used on Kowsar going to be better equipped to deal with these challenges? 

I honestly don't see Russia realigning with the west and against Iranian interests for a very long time, maybe even ever...to fear otherwise is irrational, especially if youre keeping a watch of whats going on in the world right now especially to Russia and China. 

Also, despite the comprehensive reply, you haven't really meanioned any other alternatives to the Su-35 except for purely indegenous and more inferior mig-29...we dont want false economy in the airforce. So when it comes to planes sourced abroad, the Su-35 is the better option.



Hack-Hook said:


> they didn't buy from usa , they replaced them with Rafale , and fun fact india no longer order any SU-30MKI while they are produced in India , instead guess what they are ordering rafale .
> Russia , could do that , but they did not , because they don't think its necessary just like when they did not taught drones are necessary in modern war-fares. also don't forget the fact that in electronic russia is 1-2 decade behind , usa , europe and china


Doesn't matter if they bought Rafale, it's still a western NATO state and had to be approved by US and their allies in the EU. Also it's ridiculous to think Russia should buy western tech for its airforce. I also doubt their electronic is that bad especially with allies like Iran and China. You must be going by some old propagandised data.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Deino

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554556522600009729




what about the internal rivalry with the IRGC? Will it accept the IRIAF to operate such a capable asset?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Doesn't matter if they bought Rafale, it's still a western NATO state and had to be approved by US and their allies in the EU. Also it's ridiculous to think Russia should buy western tech for its airforce. I also doubt their electronic is that bad especially with allies like Iran and China. You must be going by some old propagandised data.


their electronics are bad, if they want some advanced electronic in their systems they had to import it from china and Europe

and it matter they ordered rafale , because the SU-30MKI would have been assembled and many part would have built inside India and bought from Europe and Israel . but what after the clash with Pakistan , they stop order for more of them and then later cancelled the already placed orders .

Flanker-e without any serious upgrade have no future . its RADAR can't compete with any other modern 4-4++ generation or 5th generation fighters , its jamming capabilities and e-Warfare is limited.
what it have is a good engine and fairly agile design plus long range. those were decisive factors 30 years ago , but today with advance in missile technologies , radars and e-warfare those things lost their importance a-lot .
the only thing flanker-e have that still matter is its FLIR which is not extraordinary for today but get a pass compared to others in its class



Deino said:


> what about the internal rivalry with the IRGC? Will it accept the IRIAF to operate such a capable asset?


which capable asset we are talking here


----------



## Deino

Hack-Hook said:


> …
> which capable asset we are talking here




The Su-35


----------



## Hack-Hook

Deino said:


> The Su-35


come on , what is potent about it , in what role you want to use it , even chinese copy of SU-27 are more potent and dangerous than that airplane even their light /medium fighter j-10c is more frightening

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## drmeson

Deino said:


> what about the internal rivalry with the IRGC? Will it accept the IRIAF to operate such a capable asset?



Not just the IRGC, within IRIAF itself there are factions that put forward their own projects/plans. There are very proper examples. Squadrons that operate Mirage F1 (Chabahar and Tehran, Doshan Teppeh) pushed for funding to arm Mirage F1 despite the fact their radars are not working and IRIAF never had any real plan to integrate them. The plane is never been seen actually firing a weapon, rarely even seen with pylons let alone with A2A missile. One flight some 20 years ago happened with AIM-9P/J or Fatter missile. But still politics won and Mirage F1 for some odd reason is still eating money for maintenance. The plane itself was never liked by IRIAF because it lost 34 times to F-14AM during the war.

Another reported Project Erfanian is going on, orchestrated by Squadrons of F-7N to start a local JL-9 equivalent construction based upon F-7N airframe and Kowsar-I's avionics package (Grifo 346, RWR/MAWS, some level FBW, Datalink, Ballistic computer). Pictures of double delta wings and modified vertical stabilizers have been seen. The plane is hated by IRIAF btw but politics won.

Then we have Azaraksh-Saegheh-Kowsar lobbyist group. This group lobby's for anything related to F-5. They are Brig. Gen Sattari's left overs who loved this plane. They kept on pushing local F-5 production for years and years.

We also have an F-14AM upgradation program that has some joint thing going on using IRGC assets because apparently, F-14AM standard needs black market imports and who better in Iran knows how to pull such smuggling stunts.

Meanwhile, IRGC have its own SU-22M4 program.

List goes on and on. So if an SU-35S lobby group gains momentum in IRIAF and they have links with higher ups like Supreme leader, Bagheri or Raisi, then they will get the money for the procurement. Things happen in Iran when you have links otherwise nobody will move a muscle let alone give you money.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Thank you for the technical reasoning and information. I dont disagree that there are better planes in the world than the su-35. I also dont see why Iran still can't make plenty of Kowsars alongside the fleet of 30-40 su-35s it has because I'd personally go for option 2. Iran should stick to putting their tech on the Kowsar instead of any foreign planes. Building a plane around your own parts and technology is better than making a frankenstein, which Iran only does out of desperation. Question, with regards to the radar issues of the su-35 in the face of its foreign competitors, are the Iranian radar systems used on Kowsar going to be better equipped to deal with these challenges?
> 
> I honestly don't see Russia realigning with the west and against Iranian interests for a very long time, maybe even ever...to fear otherwise is irrational, especially if youre keeping a watch of whats going on in the world right now especially to Russia and China.
> 
> Also, despite the comprehensive reply, you haven't really meanioned any other alternatives to the Su-35 except for purely indegenous and more inferior mig-29...we dont want false economy in the airforce. So when it comes to planes sourced abroad, the Su-35 is the better option.
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter if they bought Rafale, it's still a western NATO state and had to be approved by US and their allies in the EU. Also it's ridiculous to think Russia should buy western tech for its airforce. I also doubt their electronic is that bad especially with allies like Iran and China. You must be going by some old propagandised data.



- It all depends upon what kind of doctrine you follow. Airforces traditionally are supposed to attack the enemy surface, aerial assets and defend your airspace. Having an assymetric doctrine our need for attacking the enemy through aircrafts is getting reduced with time. We now have a force of CM, ~HGV/MARV-MRBMs and worlds third largest fleet of loitering and MALE UCAVs for carrying out the attack task. The moment conflict starts IRGC will fire barrages of Missiles at forward FAB's bases of enemy (KSA+UAE+Kuwait+Israel and possibly against Turkey) countries to destroy their aerial fleets at ground. Whatever will be left will be the IADS (integrated air defence) and IRIAF's task to defend the airspace from. So the focus is on developing that A2A capable platforms that can integrate through datalink with the GWACs network on ground, Ambush Short range and long range SAMS. This system is something that got demonstrated recently and centered at Khatamal Anbiya base, thanks to Farzad Esmaeli.

To create such a force with strong interception capabilities you need fighters with following characterstics:


-Low RCS to make it harder for the enemy to get a track and force them to come closer for SAMs.
-Long-range radars with look up and look down/SAR capability. They also need to have ECM controls to save themselves from Jamming
-Avionics package of RWR/MAWS slaved chaff/flares, ECM Jammers
-Datalinking with other fighters, UCAVs, Air-defence network
-Longest possible ranged BVR missiles and all aspect WVR missiles 
-Good to High maneuverability for putting up a fight with intruders
-Economical to operate/maintain with a large repository of spare parts. 
- Low cost to bulk up numbers in case conflict gets elongated (Iran-Iraq war experience)

SU-35S or any Flanker like SU-27SM, or SU-30SM have the following characteristics.

-10-15 m2 RCS 
-IRBIS-E PESA radar that tracks fighters at 100 m2
-Avionics package of RWR/MAWS slaved chaff/flares, ECM Jammers
-No Data linking 
-100 KM bearing BVR missiles
-Super maneuverability, Multiaxis FBW
-Heavy maintenance with no infrastructure inside Iran
-Extremely costly at 85 million USD. What if enemy missile strike+Crashes takes out 10-15 of them during initial phase of conflict then you are left with 20-25 fighters.

Let's compare two platforms or options for IRIAF in the same framework, 

MIG-29M2/MIG-35

- ~5 m2 RCS 
- Zhuk-ME tracks fighter sized target at ~100 KM, Option for Zhuk AESA exists.
-Avionics package of RWR/MAWS slaved chaff/flares, ECM Jammers
-No Data linking 
-100 KM bearing BVR missiles, Allaspect WVR
-Good maneuverability, Multiaxis FBW
-Infrastructure inside Iran
-Costs around 25-40 million USD. IRIAF already operates 23 airframes so an additional force of 50-55 will give a very sound boost to interception options.

Kowsar-I

- 1-3 m2 RCS 
-IEI Bayyenat-II locally produced Grifo-346 tracks fighter sized target at 93 KM, has SAR, and ECCM control. 
-Avionics package of RWR/MAWS slaved chaff/flares, ECM Jammers
-Data linking with UCAVS, Fighters, IADS 
-Can integrate BVR, Allaspect WVR 
-Good maneuverability, Customized FBW
-Local production and maintainance infrastructure from scratch exists inside Iran
-Costs 10 million USD. There will be 60-70 fighters.

Kowsar-I (Hypothetical radar and engine upgrade)

- 1-3 m2 RCS 
-IEI Bayyenat-III locally produced Grifo-E equivalent AESA radar. Cant be jammed easily and tracks a fighter-sized target at 140 KM, with ECCM control. 
-Avionics package of RWR/MAWS slaved chaff/flares, ECM/ECCM Jammers
-Data linking with UCAVs, Fighters, IADS 
-PL-15/R-77 BVR, Allaspect WVR 
-modern Turbofan with high maneuverability, multiaxis FBW
-Local production and maintenance infrastructure from scratch exists in Iran
-Costs 16-18 million USD. 

So alternative to spending 5 billion on a token force of 40 SU-35S, IRIAF can get the following from Russia for 5 Billion USD: 

- 23 MIG-29 of IRIAF MLued, upgraded to MIG-29SMT standard
- 50 MIG-29M2 airframes
- 300 R-77-1 + 300 R-74 for MIG and Kowsar fleet
- 200 RD-33M Turbofans for Kowsar-II 

+ Sign (just sign) the future TOT of any fifth-generation fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

Pilots safe. SU-22 crash land in Shiraz.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> You have a habit of claiming baseless things (yes there is a list) and when someone proves your claim as wrong you run away from the thread without replying or even addressing the points made by others, which I am sure you will do after this post as well. I replied to your funny RCS post but I could not post it because me and few other people in Iranian sections were incapable of posting at that time due to bot attack (fixed now by mod WAZ).
> 
> Anyways, here goes:
> 
> Your posted paper presented a simulated RCS by software which by no means can be equated to real world RCS value. *Nowhere in the article, the Brazilian authors mention that their values are equivalent to real experimental RCS values.*
> 
> This is how real RCS is measured by actual pro-labs who spend tens and hundreds of millions on the establishment of such facilities, which according to your logic is a waste of time, all they can do is download the freeware software these Brazilian students had and Tadaaaa! they can have the RCS. You should contact the fools in Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Sukhoi, and BAE who have been wasting their decades and millions on these labs. All they needed was the .... free software.
> 
> View attachment 867690
> View attachment 867691
> View attachment 867692
> 
> 
> ........................
> 
> How science of simulation and experimental results work? I will explain here. I know you would not read it beyond this point so .... I am addressing other members. The simulated and experimental values are relative to each other by a factor (let's call it *Z*) which can be a coefficient or addition/subtraction factor to the simulated values, like this:
> 
> *Z* x RCS (Simulated) = RCS (Experimental)
> 
> _OR _
> 
> *Z +/-* RCS (Simulated) = RCS (Experimental)
> 
> The same simulation that is putting a needle-like tiny airframe of F-5 at 15-16 m2 may also put a Flanker airframe at 45+ m2 for all we can predict here, so we may know that the Z = ~3 for this software. Did the Brazilian paper measure the RCS of another airframe that we have actual RCS values of to know this relative factor Z ? no they did not because they are not even remotely claiming that the RCS they measured is a real one. They simulated the RCS in their software at 15-16 m2 and then they put the RAM on and measured the RCS again in the same simulation to prove that simulated RCS values dropped. They are claiming the "drop" in RCS vs RAM coat plot. If the software is super accurate, the ratio of simulated RCS without RAM / RCS+RAM could be close to the actual experiment ratio RCS without RAM / RCS+RAM but BY NO MEANS THE SIMULATED RCS alone CAN BE EQUAL TO ACTUAL RCS. Otherwise everyone in the entire combat aviation field is a fool, they should all just download softwares and design 6th generation stealth planes from their bedrooms.
> 
> Relative factors between simulations and experimental values work like this in the entire plethora of scientific fields where both simulated and experimental measurements are possible. We first measure values in a simulated environment over a range, then we find them experimentally to get this relative factor "Z" so next time we can get a good idea from the simulation of what the actual values would be. No one gets the simulation done only and starts claiming oh that is it, I won't take it to the lab. Which is why in modern world we have a theoretical physicist, biologist, chemist and an experimental physicist, biologist, chemist. They work in tandem on projects, and can't replace each other.
> 
> 
> 
> Era has nothing to do with it. F-16, F/A-18, Mig-21, and Mirage-2000 all are from the 1960s and 70s yet their RCS values are below 5 m2. F-15 and Flanker family is from the 1970s yet they have enormous RCS values. FA/18 itself has a USN claimed RCS of 3m2 (1999) and the airframe is a modified version of F-5E/F, but larger and edgy, Do you really want us to believe that F/A-18 is 3 M2 but the tiny needle like F-5 is 16 m2 somehow?
> 
> View attachment 867694
> View attachment 867695
> 
> 
> F-5 was and is quite hard to track in aerial combat which is why its base design (N-156) was chosen to be driven into F/A-18 which became the premier USN fighter for decades and still is. Even the modern US aviators call an upgraded F-5N a small low observable platform that you can not just defeat easily in the sky. *https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42507/first-navy-f-5-aggressor-begins-upgrade-that-will-make-the-entire-fleet-far-more-potent*
> 
> We have a logical base as well. In the Iran-Iraq war, the thickest possible majority of F-5E was downed by SAM fire which tracks the aircraft from the aspect of lower body. Even an F-22 will have a hard time hiding its lower body RCS. Barely ~8 confirmed air-to-air kills of F-5E were recorded during combat with MIG-25PD, MIG-23ML and all by WVR engagement. None killed at distance during BVR attack which Iraqis used to launch like maniacs with R-40 BVR missile from MIG-25PD. They once even got an F-14A of Hashem Ale-Agha but none ever got an F-5E despite being fired upon multiple times by an R-40. It tells us how difficult it is to track such a small airframe and kill it with ARH/SARH missiles. *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Iraqi_aerial_victories_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war*
> 
> Sattari was no fool to start a dometic F-20 equivalent program. HESA today is not either, that they will let go of this project. The day we procure larger turbofans or produce a larger version of Jahesh-700, and HESA works on the frontal part of the plane to reduce the RCS to the levels of EF-2000 or rafale (<1.0m2) we will have a tiny monster in the sky. We already have a superb avionics and controls package for it along with a from-scratch production facility for Kowsar.



All this talk and *zero* reputable evidence provided that F-5 has a 1-3 M2 radar cross section. Just conjecture on your part. You excel at talking a lot while providing no evidence. As if your opinion is fact alone.

But yes my research paper from an reputable aeronautical and technology journal from Brazil (a major F-5 operator) is not a valid source of information.

RCS on F-5 from the lateral and rear is quite large and in an pseudo air defense role enemy radars would be be bombarded from various sources of radar waves (AWACS, F-35, F-16, F-18, F-22 etc) from different directions. So let’s also take that into account and not just frontal RCS in a vacuum.

Once you demonstrate a valid source showing 1-3m2 (frontal) I will happily admit I’m wrong. I love being wrong. But until then your claims are borderline propaganda. The obsession you have for F-5 derivative projects is admirable from a patriotic standpoint, but causes biases in your mind to think rationally.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Just gonna put this out there cause it's making me cringe - idk where this idea came from that Su-35 does not have datalink. Flanker series have had datalink since the first version in the 80s. Of course the Su-35 has datalink.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> Just gonna put this out there cause it's making me cringe - idk where this idea came from that Su-35 does not have datalink. Flanker series have had datalink since the first version in the 80s. Of course the Su-35 has datalink.



Not the encryption we use on F-14AM or Kowsar. 

Would the Russians allow Iranian engineers to mess with their top of the line fighter's electronics? Russian habits of not letting 4th generation planes be touched by clients suggest they won't. Otherwise, what is stopping IRIAF to get the same datalink they use on F-14AM, Kowsar or IRGC uses on their SU-22 to be put on MIG-29 9.12 fleet?


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> All this talk and *zero* reputable evidence provided that F-5 has a 1-3 M2 radar cross section. Just conjecture on your part. You excel at talking a lot while providing no evidence. As if your opinion is fact alone.



"All this talk" was a technical discussion that you purposefully neglected to address because it proved you WRONG.* Like, I predicted in my previous post, you will always run away from the technical discussion and resort to trash talk.* No matter what technical points, equations, routines and practices of R&D world, anyone posts, they do not matter to you because you probably have no technical intellect.

For serious posters who do appreciate technical details, here are the points I made:

- Software Simulated RCS =/= Real RCS, we dont know what coefficient/relative factor simulated RCS will need, to be equated to RCS. No simulation in the entire world of science can ever be equated to real world values. There is always a coefficient. No simulation in the entire world of science can ever be equated to real world values without relative factor Z which needs to be x or + or - from the simulated RCS to make it equal to actual lab tested value. We dont know that because paper was not about that.

- Even the authors in your "trophy" paper you posted, are nowhere claiming that their simulated RCS = Real RCS. They are not doing it because they are technical people, unlike you promoting their article for false things they did not even claim. I wonder how would they feel being misqouted for the hardwork they put in the paper. Scientist hate being misqouted.

- RCS is measured by multimillion USD facilities not on freeware softwares by actual professional scientists, who according to your stupid logic are just fools wasting their years of lives, millions of USD on lab work. They can just download freeware and design the next generation of F-22 from their bedrooms.

- US aviators themselves are claiming that their F-5N is hard to track/observe even from an F-18E of F-35. Would they say it about an airframe which you hilariously are claiming to be having an RCS of 16 m2?

- F-5 has never been shot by a BVR missile. We have known history of MIG-25PD, MIG-23ML shooting R-40, R-23 BVR missiles and bringing down F-4E, F-14A but never an F-5. That happened because they failed to track such a small airframe at distance, "hard to observe" like the US aviators are saying. Even the larger N-156/F-5 airframe derivative F/A-18 with 3 m2 was hard to track by a MIG-25PD who had to wait till 30 KM to get a lock on F/A-18. What does it tell us about the even smaller F-5 which during the entire 8 years war never was shot down by any BVR missile.

- My basis for 1-3 m2 RCS is F/A-18 which is just an enlarged F-5/N-156 airframe but is much more edgier with larger airintakes, still USN STATED its 3m2 FRONTAL RCS. Does this imply that a much smaller, less edgy with tiny air-intakes F-5/N-156 could be 16 m2 like you were claiming?

.............3 m2 by USN ................vs.............. 16 m2 claim by you...........












TheImmortal said:


> But yes my research paper from an reputable aeronautical and technology journal from Brazil (a major F-5 operator) is not a valid source of information.



Your "paper" is a simulated RCS from a freeware software WHICH IS NOT REAL RCS. Nowhere it is written in the entire paper you posted as some gold mine of knowledge here that their RCS (Simulation) = RCS (Real world). Poor students did a low impact factor paper on use of software and you think entire world of aviation is stupid that they invest millions on establishing RCS data labs. Like I said you should write an email to CEOs of Sukhoi, Lockheed, Boeing, BAE etc and inform them of your discovery that they are all fools to use giant RCS labs. You have cracked the code with a freeware.



TheImmortal said:


> RCS on F-5 from the lateral and rear is quite large



Provide me with evidence that the real RCS (not the software simulated) of an F-5 airframe is "quite large". Your previous posted link is a bogus software simulation that even the authors themselves are not claiming to be equivalent to real-world RCS. So provide us with the "evidence" please that F-5 has a large RCS.

*My claim exists that the largest, edgiest most member of N-156 family of airframes F/A-18 has a USN reported frontal RCS of 3m2. The smaller F-5, YF-17, F-20, Kowsar, Saegheh-I/II, FCK-1 logically will have either similar or smaller RCS. *

Prove me wrong? and again, please dont quote the simulated RCS.



TheImmortal said:


> Once you demonstrate a valid source showing 1-3m2 (frontal) I will happily admit I’m wrong. I love being wrong. But until then your claims are borderline propaganda. The obsession you have for F-5 derivative projects is admirable from a patriotic standpoint, but causes biases in your mind to think rationally.



I dont care what makes you happy. Like I said before, you have a habit of:

1) Claiming baseless things without evidence.
2) When countered with technical counter-points you just run away from the discussion and resort to tangential trash talking.

I told you, there is a list of claims from you where you have been proven wrong, I am publishing it here for future reference.

- *Your claim *There have been two dozen plus Saegheh built. *Reality *Serial numbers proved there have just been 6.

- *Your claim *Kowsar is a 1960s fighter plane. *Reality* Its radar, avionics, communications, FBW system, datalink is as modern as a Mirage-2005, F-16 Block 30. Easily more advanced than anything in IRIAF.

- *Your claim *Mirage-F1 were purchased from France *Reality* They are Saddams gifts. How come an Iranian does not know this is beyond me?

- *Your claim *There are only "6 prop airframes" of Kowsar in HESA from the same 2018 unveiling that they show each time some official visit the facility *Reality *With serial numbers, it was proven that there are 4 aircraft that are operational and there are 18-24 further airframes in primer/being worked upon inside HESA.

- *Your claim *SU-35S has an RCS of 1-3 m2* Reality *There is a "ZERO" difference between the frontal section of SU-27 and SU-35 so how come SU-27 having a company patented 10-15 m2 RCS suddenly became 1-3 m2 in SU-35? Is there any evidence for that? let alone evidence is this even logical to assume that same airframe reduced some 12 m2 of RCS just because of avioncis upgrade ? wtf

- *Your claim *SU-35 has the longest BVR package* Reality *The officially released Russian video shows IRBIS-E radar tracking a fighter sized target at ~100 KM and the attacking option at best is R-77-1 with a range of 105 KM.

- *Your claim *Software simulated RCS are real RCS *Reality *No they are not, Entire world of scientists will laugh on you for claiming that simulation value = real value without any coefficient/relative factor between them.

- *Your claim *1960s era designed airframes can't have low RCS *Reality* Era has nothing to do with RCS. MIG-21, F-5, F-16 are all from 1960s-1970s generation yet their RCS values are below 5m2.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

jauk said:


> Pilots safe. SU-22 crash land in Shiraz.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1554905878205267971

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> - My basis for 1-3 m2 RCS is F/A-18 which is just an enlarged F-5/N-156 airframe but is much more edgier with larger airintakes, still USN STATED its 3m2 FRONTAL RCS. Does this imply that a much smaller, less edgy with tiny air-intakes F-5/N-156 could be 16 m2 like you were claiming?
> 
> .............3 m2 by USN ................vs.............. 16 m2 claim by you...........



Which F-18 are you referring to? They have different RCSs depending on which version or Block.

You truly believe size is everything when it comes to RCS? With such logic the RQ-170 has a smaller RCS than B-2 since they are both flying wing designs but one is smaller. Yet in flying wing design the smaller the design the HIGHER probability of the the RCS increasing due to less surface area for radar to be scattered or absorbed vs reflected.

Size does play a role not to say there is NO ROLE, but shape and design plays a much bigger role if not majority. Hence why the Zumwalt destroyer has the RCS of a small fishing boat despite being the size of a mammoth destroyer.

Another point using your own F-18 example






Guess which version has the lower RCS? Shocker the F-18E. Guess which version of F-18E has the lowest RCS of any F-18? Block III also know as the stealthy F-18 being marketed around the world currently to friendly western countries looking to avoid the expensive F-35 while staying in the US military aerospace ecosystem .

But according to you smaller = lower RCS is more important factor. Not actually the surface/shape/design of the aircraft and how it respondes to radar waves in your expensive radar rooms.

But it’s good to know that your 1-2M2 claim comes from you “extrapolating” in your opinion the RCS of a F-18 to the F-5/Kowsar. Now I couldn’t find the USN source for your 3m2 claim, sources I found said ~1m2 claim for the standard F-18.



drmeson said:


> - *Your claim *SU-35S has an RCS of 1-3 m2* Reality *There is a "ZERO" difference between the frontal section of SU-27 and SU-35 so how come SU-27 having a company patented 10-15 m2 RCS suddenly became 1-3 m2 in SU-35? Is there any evidence for that? let alone evidence is this even logical to assume that same airframe reduced some 12 m2 of RCS just because of avioncis upgrade ? wtf



And yet many (if not majority) of online sources say RCS of SU-35 is 1-3M2. If you don’t believe me, simply search for yourself.



drmeson said:


> - *Your claim *SU-35 has the longest BVR package* Reality *The officially released Russian video shows IRBIS-E radar tracking a fighter sized target at ~100 KM and the attacking option at best is R-77-1 with a range of 105 KM.



SU-35 carries the hypersonic R-37 BVR with max range of ~ 400KM also carries R-77M with ~200KM and R-27 130-170KM

But who cares about that right? I forgot super duper top secret data links are only for the F-14AM or Kowsar. SU-35 is too old and outdated to possibly be able to communicate with other sources of radar. Which even @AmirPatriot who rarely posts here anymore had a urge to rebuke.

As for what outside sources think about SU-35






Another talking point that is being missed about SU-35 being “outdated”







No one here talks about the OLS-35 IRST as a means to be competitive against low RCS fighters let alone 4th Gen fighters such as F-18/F-16. Easy to just sit around and say the IRBIS is not an AESA so the plane is trash rather than taking its other avionics into account the other electronics that work together with the passive radar to combat enemy aircraft.



drmeson said:


> Your "paper" is a simulated RCS from a freeware software WHICH IS NOT REAL RCS. Nowhere it is written in the entire paper you posted as some gold mine of knowledge here that their RCS (Simulation) = RCS (Real world).



The paper looks at what ramifications of adding to RAM to an F-5 body aircraft would do in regards to reduction of RCS. The results are quite clear and the paper makes a definitive conclusion that may have flown over your head, so read again.

Yes, a simulation has a margin of error that cannot be matched perfectly with a radar room worth millions or tens of millions of dollars. But with such logic, simulations in academia/medical field/science field/etc should never be conducted because they cannot hope to compete with ultra expensive real world data gathering. Which again is propostreous conclusion. Many discoveries were first discovered via simulations that quite accurately predicted the final result within the margin of error. Simulations exist to get very close to real life data gathering in the absence of using such expensive methods.

Fighter jets Initial and prototype designs are built via simulations and refined via radar rooms. Obviously when it comes to building the final version of a military product, it makes sense to devote resources to pinpoint the margin of error to as low as possible via the radar rooms mentioned.

But disparaging simulations as simply inaccurate or “garbage” makes zero sense. Nuclear weapons are no longer physically tested because simulations can accurately predict if the design works and provide accurate projection of the yield.



drmeson said:


> Your previous posted link is a bogus software simulation



So now the software is “bogus” according to you. Good to know.

Quite hilarious you talk about Iranians being arrogant and ignorant and love to argue. Yet conveniently miss your own behavior in all this.

Like I said your biases toward the F-5 project just completely blind you to considering alternatives. Doesn’t look like Iran has the same enthusiasm as you with regards to the project.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> fun fact india no longer order any SU-30MKI while they are produced in India ,



What a misleading statement. How many do you want them to build?

Fun fact: they built *270* of them.

What a garbage plane 




drmeson said:


> Russians do not like their aircraft to be touched so Iran can kiss the idea of using local systems on SU-35 goodbye.



Lol more lies.

Research SU-30MKK/MK2 the plane was literally built to Chinese specifications including its entire avionics was built to Chinese specifications and implanted an open architecture system. The plane was ground breaking in its release as it implemented the latest in Russian tech in several avionic area.

_Russian sources have claimed that the electronic warfare systems of Su-30MKK utilizes the latest technologies available in Russia and the radar warning receivers are so effective that the information provided by RWR alone would be enough to provide targeting information for Kh-31P anti-radiation missile without using other detection systems on board, though information can also be provided by L-150 ELINT system, which can be used in conjunction with Kh-31P. _​
So a Future Iranian Su-35 could be built to whatever Iran needs and be open architecture thus allowing semi or full synergy with ground based radar and other fighter aircraft.



drmeson said:


> It won't have the datalink that IRIAF uses for Kowsar, F-14AM and UCAVs (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard). It would have an isolated battle environment cut off from the entire IRIAF fleet.




_Su-30MKK is the first of Flanker family to be equipped with TKS-2 C3 system, which is capable of simultaneously commanding and controlling up to 15 aircraft with such system, and the air-to-air missileslaunched by these aircraft. According to the developer of the system, Russkaya Avionika JSC, the encrypted two-way communication Command, control, and communications system can be either commanded or controlled by ground stations, or act as the command/control center for other aircraft._​​_The new system is also the first among Russian system that is capable of forming a local area network like similar system on American Grumman F-14 Tomcat._​
_Range: The encrypted VHF/UHF communication radio of Su-30MKK has a maximum range in excess of 400 km, while the encrypted HF communication radio of Su-30MKK has a maximum range in excess of 1,500 km, and all can be used for both air-to-air or air-to-ground two-way communications_



drmeson said:


> There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients.


Domestic Chinese electronic warfare systems including BM/KG300G and KZ900 can also be carried after modification of onboard system, but such modification was *neither part of the original deal nor the upgrade deal with Russians, instead, this was implemented indigenously by Chinese themselves during the incremental upgrades*.

The fly by wire (FBW) control with quadruple redundancy designed by Russkaya Avionika is the same system used for the Su-30MKI. *Russian sources have confirmed the claims of domestic Chinese sources that an indigenous Chinese system developed is near its completion and it will be used to replace the original Russian system*.

The original ASP-PVD-21 series helmet mounted sight (HMS) with only limited field of view (FoV) was replaced by more advanced Sura-K HMS system, but Chinese have been replacing the Russian HMS with more advanced domestic system. *Publicized photos and video clips from the official Chinese governmental sources such as CCTV-7 in 2007 and PLA pictorial magazine have confirmed the western claims of Chinese is replacing the original Russian helmet mounted sights (HMS) with more capable domestic ones.*


Shall I continue? Btw *these upgrades were done over 15 years ago*.

*Will you retract what you said? Doubtful *

Now imagine an Iranian SU-35-S-IR variant built specifically for Iranian specifications this includes replacing it with an “AESA” to satisfy some of you buzzword guys. Later on Iran can upgrade whatever it wants on the plane if it develops a better alternative. So these claims that Russia doesn’t allow it, is bogus as I have repeated many times. China did it and still was allowed to buy the SU-35 without ramifications afterwards.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> What a misleading statement. How many do you want them to build?
> 
> Fun fact: they built *270* of them.
> 
> What a garbage plane


but cancelled last eleven order and went and bought rafale



TheImmortal said:


> Now imagine an Iranian SU-35-S-IR variant built specifically for Iranian specifications this includes replacing it with an “AESA” to satisfy some of you buzzword guys. Later on Iran can upgrade whatever it wants on the plane if it develops a better alternative. So these claims that Russia doesn’t allow it, is bogus as I have repeated many times. China did it and still was allowed to buy the SU-35 without ramifications afterwards.


dream on it , will never happen. and j-16 eat that su-whatever mkk , why because russian electronics are outdated


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> But who cares about that right? I forgot super duper top secret data links are only for the F-14AM or Kowsar. SU-35 is too old and outdated to possibly be able to communicate with other sources of radar. Which even @AmirPatriot who rarely posts here anymore had a urge to rebuke.
> 
> As for what outside sources think about SU-35


are you aware those are applicable if the incoming fighter turn of all e-Warfare system ? fat chance that happen and detecting is useless tracking is more important.
by the way how much you are willing to bet Su-35 cant detect an f-15c/d od F15-SA with AN/APG-63(V)3 from 50km away let alone 600km away that's hilarious



TheImmortal said:


> Another talking point that is being missed about SU-35 being “outdated”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one here talks about the OLS-35 IRST as a means to be competitive against low RCS fighters let alone 4th Gen fighters such as F-18/F-16. Easy to just sit around and say the IRBIS is not an AESA so the plane is trash rather than taking its other avionics into account the other electronics that work together with the passive radar to combat enemy aircraft.


even Russia rated that for a range of 35-40km enemy way before that has tracked Su-35

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> but cancelled last eleven order and went and bought rafale



Completely irrelevant. Why does 11 planes matter when they had 270? You are twisting story in an absurd way. As if those 11 planes would have made any difference to the overall defense of India. 

India has to revamp its Air Force of all the other older planes in its fleet outside of the SU-30. Hence they put out a contract and listened to proposals.

It was likely they were going to go with a Western ecosystem aircraft because they are now firmly in Western orbit via “The Quad” against China. In fact it would have been more of a suprise if they *DIDN'T* select a western fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> by the way how much you are willing to bet Su-35 cant detect an f-15c/d od F15-SA with AN/APG-63(V)3 from 50km away let alone 600km away that's hilarious



More irrelevance - back in 2000’s China was already experimenting with putting an AESA into the SU-30 either with Russia or on its own.

So your gripe about the radar of SU-35 is not enough to not buy the plane. (If available)



Hack-Hook said:


> dream on it , will never happen. and j-16 eat that su-whatever mkk , why because russian electronics are outdated



You claim there is no datalink on SU-35 and I showed you MKK variant of SU-30 had Datalink and local area since 2000’s.

Then you go into your typical China rant.
Are you incapable of understanding the J-16 or any Chinese aircraft is not an option right now? Why do you keep going to China to back your argument? Makes zero sense. You keep acting like China is offering us J-10C or J-16 and we are saying no go with SU-35.

*China is not an option*.

The fact you dismiss the SU-30MKK variant so nonchalantly when you and the other guy been crying Russia doesn’t allow modification of its aircraft when I literally showed they have for years.

If Iran orders SU-35 it’s likely going to be a variant tailored to Iranian needs. If IRGC and the top brass approves dropping billions on an airforce deal they will make sure it’s worth it or they won’t bother and say we will use the money to build more missiles. It’s really that simple.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555226346435104772

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555229044861554697


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Completely irrelevant. Why does 11 planes matter when they had 270? You are twisting story in an absurd way. As if those 11 planes would have made any difference to the overall defense of India.
> 
> India has to revamp its Air Force of all the other older planes in its fleet outside of the SU-30. Hence they put out a contract and listened to proposals.
> 
> It was likely they were going to go with a Western ecosystem aircraft because they are now firmly in Western orbit via “The Quad” against China. In fact it would have been more of a suprise if they *DIDN'T* select a western fighter jet.


because show India no longer think the airplane relevant and seeks future of its air-force some where else
you have become like sukhoi sale person .and only want to sale the outdated platform . if it was a good plane they would have built more sukhoi instead of ordering rafale .
answer it does anybody actually order flanker anymore

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> More irrelevance - back in 2000’s China was already experimenting with putting an AESA into the SU-30 either with Russia or on its own.
> 
> So your gripe about the radar of SU-35 is not enough to not buy the plane. (If available)


its , as the china didn't put radar on its sukhoi but on its drivate built in china AKA the Latest J11 and J16 and those two plane are superior to any flanker you show me


TheImmortal said:


> You claim there is no datalink on SU-35 and I showed you MKK variant of SU-30 had Datalink and local area since 2000’s.


i claimed its rudimentary compare to other competitors and still remain the problem of IBRIS-E


TheImmortal said:


> Are you incapable of understanding the J-16 or any Chinese aircraft is not an option right now? Why do you keep going to China to back your argument? Makes zero sense. You keep acting like China is offering us J-10C or J-16 and we are saying no go with SU-35.


do I promote them from china . as i recall i always promoted light/Medium fighter not something as big as flanker or F-15
also i always promoted Iranian aircraft not one bought from abroad , i put J-16 there to show you how lacking SU-35 is in electronic department .


TheImmortal said:


> The fact you dismiss the SU-30MKK variant so nonchalantly when you and the other guy been crying Russia doesn’t allow modification of its aircraft when I literally showed they have for years.


SU30-MKK at beast will be like Su-35 in reality between su-30 and su-35 in short inferior to Su-27 knock offs like J-11 and J-16
with su-30mkk Russian at last managed to achieve what Americans did 30 year sooner in F-14 (a rudimentary networked mission control) its useless in modern warfare you knew why . because it incorporate the best available to Russia according to Russian themselves and guess what , probably Brazil have better than Russia when it come to electronic


TheImmortal said:


> If Iran orders SU-35 it’s likely going to be a variant tailored to Iranian needs. If IRGC and the top brass approves dropping billions on an airforce deal they will make sure it’s worth it or they won’t bother and say we will use the money to build more missiles. It’s really that simple.


and be assured airforce don't want any flanker, all point to they want something built in iran


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> because show India no longer think the airplane relevant and seeks future of its air-force some where else
> you have become like sukhoi sale person .and only want to sale the outdated platform . if it was a good plane they would have built more sukhoi instead of ordering rafale .
> answer it does anybody actually order flanker anymore


I dont know how many times people have to tell you this, but India, as well as others, did not stop procurement of Russian jets on technical grounds, it was* PURELY POLITICAL!*

ay kash Pikachu yedoone azoon chakaro mizad dare gooshet

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555229044861554697


magnificent lock on Su-25 in high altitude from 77km away . really is that what you guys praising



Daylamite Warrior said:


> I dont know how many times people have to tell you this, but India, as well as others, did not stop procurement of Russian jets on technical grounds, it was* PURELY POLITICAL!*


even china no longer buy the craps was it also a political decision , even russian airforce no longer order su-35 and if they get any will be those 24 that remain on their hand from Egypt sale.
how hard its to understand it failed against a modern fighter like rafale in all aspect as the design is based on philosophy belong to cold war era,and has not seen a meaningful upgrade as Russia air force still stuck in those era

stop being a salesman for sukhoi , if flanker is so fantastic why India didn't sent them against Pakistan F-16s and JF-17s


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> Not the encryption we use on F-14AM or Kowsar.
> 
> Would the Russians allow Iranian engineers to mess with their top of the line fighter's electronics? Russian habits of not letting 4th generation planes be touched by clients suggest they won't. Otherwise, what is stopping IRIAF to get the same datalink they use on F-14AM, Kowsar or IRGC uses on their SU-22 to be put on MIG-29 9.12 fleet?



I'd like to see some kind of proof that these datalinks you talk about actually exist, because I'm not aware of any. Fun fact, one of the few features missing from Iran's F-14As at purchase was... the Link-4 datalink, which enabled seeing radar contacts from an AWACS aircraft *or* sharing radar data with other F-14s.

In any case, datalinks are most useful with AWACS aircraft which can see targets at much lower altitudes than ground-based radars. Iran doesn't have any AWACS, which is part of the reason why I think these Datalink systems you speak of don't exist. 

In the scenario that Iran purchases Su-35s, it would be wise to also purchase A-50/100 AWACS aircraft to give them information. Btw, modern Russian export aircraft and systems use digital data buses that adhere to international standards, which means data could probably exchanged among Russian and Iranian systems. One example is India mating their own Astra AAM and Israel's I-Derby AAM to the Russian radar in their Su-30MKIs.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> even china no longer buy the craps was it also a political decision , even russian airforce no longer order su-35 and if they get any will be those 24 that remain on their hand from Egypt sale.
> how hard its to understand it failed against a modern fighter like rafale in all aspect as the design is based on philosophy belong to cold war era,and has not seen a meaningful upgrade as Russia air force still stuck in those era
> 
> stop being a salesman for sukhoi , if flanker is so fantastic why India didn't sent them against Pakistan F-16s and JF-17s


Why would china buy new Su-35s when it is already a manufacturer of fighter jets as well as making knock off SU27s which it can modify to its own doctrine? Why would Russia buy more SU-35s when it has Su-57s on order?! Egypt didnt want them because they werent allowed to have them. I dont know why India didnt use them, maybe because theyre so good the Indians didnt want to endanger them over a border skirmish? I haven't ever come accross a direct military conflict involving Rafale vs Su-35, are these simulations? Because wars aren't fought in simulators. 

Stop being a salesman for our enemies and their technology, gharbzade!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> Against what, other swiet Era aircrafts of far much lower quality.
> Against man pads, against lower tire air defense


Literally hundreds of Buks and S-300s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555571025991139328

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why would Russia buy more SU-35s when it has Su-57s on order?! Egypt didnt want them because they werent allowed to have them.


are you kidding me? you think how many su-57 Russia managed to produce since this day?
let make it easier for you , only 6 do you knew whats their production rate ? again let me make it easy for you
1-2 per year


Daylamite Warrior said:


> ay kash Pikachu yedoone azoon chakaro mizad dare gooshet


good at least you knew who it is


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Egypt didnt want them because they werent allowed to have them. I dont know why India didnt use them,


no because they were inferior to rafale , if it was for USA threat , be assured they would have bought F-16 not rafale . if you don't knew let me make one thing clear for you if usa could it would have dismantled any airplane produced by european , just like what they did with Canada, Japan or Israel or what they tried to do with Sweden .



Daylamite Warrior said:


> I dont know why India didnt use them, maybe because theyre so good the Indians didnt want to endanger them over a border skirmish?


simply they were so bad they didn't trust them against F-16 or JF-17. honestly what sort of joke this argument of yours is?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> I haven't ever come accross a direct military conflict involving Rafale vs Su-35, are these simulations? Because wars aren't fought in simulators.


simulation , not . evaluation yes.at least in case of egypt they pit two fighter in front of each other before make a decision . by the way the only countries that i knew made political decision not to buy from Russia are Philippine and Indonesia and guess from whom they bought replacement , yes uncle SAM not an European country



GrandBotBoi said:


> Literally hundreds of Buks and S-300s


fun fact there is no hundreds of BUKs and S-300 in Ukraine



thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555571025991139328


the only thing i see is they put it outside the hanger in a remote place to dust. they made promise about it but never shown any advancement after that taxi test, after the showman (ahmadi-nejad) they said Qaher is just a test bed for produing next generation airplane sub system not final product as in its current form it only can have a very narrow mission definition


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> are you kidding me? you think how many su-57 Russia managed to produce since this day?
> let make it easier for you , *only 6* do you knew whats their production rate ? again let me make it easy for you



Stop spreading lies, you are ruining any remaining credibility you once had. *They built 16*. 10 are test variants that can fly sorties if absolutely needed. It’s funny you count those test planes for project Kowsar and ignore them for SU-57 project. 

SU-57 is an ongoing project testing new modifications to the plane or avionics that you call “garbage”. But routinely praise Iranian electronics that have zero stats provided outside of one or two pictures of the actual product.

If you bothered even looking up the project you will realize they have moved to a new variant SU-57M. They are testing that variant before they reach a final mass production variant.

The SU-57 is an ever evolving project. US showed what happens when you rush a fighter jet too soon to market (F-22) and end up with outdated electronics after mass production and no “enemies” to use it on.

Unlike China, Russia doesn’t need to rush 5th Gen fighter to the frontlines. 5th Gen VLO fighters are not major part of a over arching Russo-Soviet Military doctrine. Wether that is right or wrong is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

*Your logic is all over the place. You chastise the SU-57 production rate. And yet in other posts earlier you say that Iran should go after SU-75 when it’s not even close to a production prototype.*

Between that and flip flopping talking about going after Chinese planes. You are just throwing spaghetti at the wall and opening something sticks.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Stop spreading lies, you are ruining any remaining credibility you once had. *They built 16*. 10 are test variants that can fly sorties if absolutely needed. It’s funny you count those test planes for project Kowsar and ignore them for SU-57 project.


the point is from those 16 airplane 10 are prototype and only 6 serially produced . by the way don't you think you mistaking me with somebody else , can't recall i ever mentioned any thing about the number of produced kowsars


TheImmortal said:


> SU-57 is an ongoing project testing new modifications to the plane or avionics that you call “garbage”. But routinely praise Iranian electronics that have zero stats provided outside of one or two pictures of the actual product.


well you want me to talk about su-57 , OK since now I have been talking about flankers but as you want to talk about
SU-57 ok. flankers subsystem outside its AL-41 engine and Infrared system are outdated about SU-57 they have modernized the systems but they lack the ability to produce those modernized system . thats why they had to cancel AESA radar on Mig-35 and use those produced radars in su-57 and only manage to produce 1-2 airplane / year . their rate of producing SU-57 can be compared by our rate of producing kowsar . both Iran and Russia need to invest more in this regard if they want it to fruit.


TheImmortal said:


> If you bothered even looking up the project you will realize they have moved to a new variant SU-57M. They are testing that variant before they reach a final mass production variant.


nice try , su-57m is not even a flying prototype , they not even completely roughed out all aspect of its engine , so you must wait to see a flying version of it and by the pace they are walking,......


TheImmortal said:


> The SU-57 is an ever evolving project. US showed what happens when you rush a fighter jet too soon to market (F-22) and end up with outdated electronics after mass production and no “enemies” to use it on.


that outdated airplane even today have best stealth features and best Radar.
yes its not electronically advance as F-35 but in those two regard will surpass it


TheImmortal said:


> Unlike China, Russia doesn’t need to rush 5th Gen fighter to the frontlines. 5th Gen VLO fighters are not major part of a over arching Russo-Soviet Military doctrine. Wether that is right or wrong is irrelevant to the topic at hand.


The problem is outside those 6 SU-57 russia don't have a fighter with AESA radar to show


TheImmortal said:


> Your logic is all over the place. You chastise the SU-57 production rate. And yet in other posts earlier you say that Iran should go after SU-75 when it’s not even close to a production prototype.


nonsense , why you don't read my posts correctly , i Chastise Su-35 not Su-57 , I have doubt on the Russia ability to mass produce it , i never made a post about Su-57 capabilities.
and go read my post about Su-75 again and try to see the context it was made and understand what i meant by it.


TheImmortal said:


> Between that and flip flopping talking about going after Chinese planes. You are just throwing spaghetti at the wall and opening something sticks.


did i say we go after chinese airplanes . no again you missunderstood me. those post was to show russian airplane fanboys that if they want to get foreign airplanes there are othewr providers whio produce better airplanes and there are airplanes out there that are cheaper , have at least the same performance in a fight against flanker and are easier and cheaper to maintain and come with better weapons


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> are you kidding me? you think how many su-57 Russia managed to produce since this day?
> let make it easier for you , only 6 do you knew whats their production rate ? again let me make it easy for you
> 1-2 per year


Who cares, they have enough Su-35, 30 27s and Migs that they dont need to invest in more su-35s. None of that proves that the su-35 or su-57 is poor, rather Russia doesnt have the same funds as say US. You cant pull the wool over my eyes.



Hack-Hook said:


> good at least you knew who it is



I live in the west so obviously I know who Pikachu is, vali moondam toee ke az posht e fil oftadee chejoori midooni, tavajo kardee?



Hack-Hook said:


> no because they were inferior to rafale , if it was for USA threat , be assured they would have bought F-16 not rafale . if you don't knew let me make one thing clear for you if usa could it would have dismantled any airplane produced by european , just like what they did with Canada, Japan or Israel or what they tried to do with Sweden .



Why would US jeaprodise relations with Egypt and France by making restrictions amongst allies? Yes buying Russian planes is not allowed, but purchase of WESTERN planes are allowed since it's inkeeping with the rules of free trade. Not because rafale is better or any other khialbaf excuse you may have.



Hack-Hook said:


> simply they were so bad they didn't trust them against F-16 or JF-17. honestly what sort of joke this argument of yours is?




Why would egypt pay triple the money for something that is no way 3 times as better as Su-35, other than as a result of western pressure? Western planes are inflated in price without doubt.



Hack-Hook said:


> simulation , not . evaluation yes.at least in case of egypt they pit two fighter in front of each other before make a decision .



Lol so your data isnt even a simulation. Just an "evaluation"...by who? Biased pro-western youtubers, or actual independent academic research?



Hack-Hook said:


> by the way the only countries that i knew made political decision not to buy from Russia are Philippine and Indonesia and guess from whom they bought replacement , yes uncle SAM not an European country



Omg well yeah, when the only choices allowed are European or American then obviously American is the one to choose! Kheyli torki! That doesnt mean Russian system is necessarily inferior to their doctrine, especially considering how cost effective it would have been for those countries. Purely political and they were forced to buy from western countries.



Hack-Hook said:


> the only thing i see is they put it outside the hanger in a remote place to dust. they made promise about it but never shown any advancement after that taxi test, after the showman (ahmadi-nejad) they said Qaher is just a test bed for produing next generation airplane sub system not final product as in its current form it only can have a very narrow mission definition



Yes the propaganda regarding the Qaher was a little embarrassing, but Iran was under threat of regime change back in Ahmadinejads time, so they had to chest beat and resort to gondegoozi. However, one minute you demand Iran produces indegenously, then the next minute you are mocking all of Iran's attempt at trying to bring this into fruition. Like I said, cant win with you unless Iran becomes a vassal state...which will never happen again, by Allah!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why would US jeaprodise relations with Egypt and France by making restrictions amongst allies? Yes buying Russian planes is not allowed, but purchase of WESTERN planes are allowed since it's inkeeping with the rules of free trade. Not because rafale is better or any other khialbaf excuse you may have.


Interestingly they don't have much problem doing so in submarine deal with Australia. 
They don't need to ban that they just need to make some mentions behind the closed door that it's better to buy F16 instead of rafale 



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why would egypt pay triple the money for something that is no way 3 times as better as Su-35, other than as a result of western pressure? Western planes are inflated in price without doubt.


Even 50 percent better mean your airplanes can do shit against it. 



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Lol so your data isnt even a simulation. Just an "evaluation"...by who? Biased pro-western youtubers, or actual independent academic research?


Biassed Egyptian army. Wonder who gave you the idea that a YouTuber can evaluate any airplane



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Omg well yeah, when the only choices allowed are European or American then obviously American is the one to choose! Kheyli torki! That doesnt mean Russian system is necessarily inferior to their doctrine, especially considering how cost effective it would have been for those countries. Purely political and they were forced to buy from western countries


As I said those two countries did it for political reason. 
India stopped ordering it without any outside pressure as they were made in India and Egypt decided not to buy them after evaluation. 



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes the propaganda regarding the Qaher was a little embarrassing, but Iran was under threat of regime change back in Ahmadinejads time, so they had to cheat beat and resort to gondegoozi. However, one minute you demand Iran produces indegenously, then the next minute you are mocking all of Iran's attempt at trying to bring this into fruition. Like I said, cant win with you unless Iran becomes a vassal state...which will never happen again, by Allah!


Nobody was afraid those nonsense like Hamaseh drone or how they presented qaher. For God sake they had to connect it to power line to turn on the Lights. And instead a communication system they put a car record player there. Perhaps for the pilot to listen to 🎶 
I demand to produce indegenously not be a showman. Ahmadinejad was our version of zelensky by the way I don't knew who is worse


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> Interestingly they don't have much problem doing so in submarine deal with Australia.
> They don't need to ban that they just need to make some mentions behind the closed door that it's better to buy F16 instead of rafale



Well US is a better submarine maker than Europe. Still dont see why would US ban an ally from purchasing from abother ally? Yes from time to time US does back stab allies or try to aggressively sell their products, but ultimately Australia could have stuck by French submarines and nothing would have happened. You are clearly an infant when it comes to politics...best stick to technical reasoning to avoid looking like a fool.



Hack-Hook said:


> Even 50 percent better mean your airplanes can do shit against it.
> 
> 
> Biassed Egyptian army. Wonder who gave you the idea that a YouTuber can evaluate any airplane
> 
> 
> As I said those two countries did it for political reason.
> India stopped ordering it without any outside pressure as they were made in India and Egypt decided not to buy them after evaluation.
> 
> 
> Nobody was afraid those nonsense like Hamaseh drone or how they presented qaher. For God sake they had to connect it to power line to turn on the Lights. And instead a communication system they put a car record player there. Perhaps for the pilot to listen to 🎶
> I demand to produce indegenously not be a showman. Ahmadinejad was our version of zelensky by the way I don't knew who is worse



Well considering we have little data on Su-35 vs F16 combat you can't make that claim. So why is it that when Iran wants to buy a better more expensive plane, like su-35, it's bad. But when Egypt opts for something better, despite the price tag, it is a great bit of business. One only needs to deduce that the only thing bothering you is why Iran isnt buying western junk instead of Russian, but there is little to no technical justification. 

Why can't a youtuber give an evaluation? Im just saying that a simulation would be a better data to go by than an biased evaluation. When US forcing the Egyptians to be biased, what choice do they have?

India has couple hundreds of su-30s already in their inventory. They dont need more, maybe that's why but seeing as they are part of the new anti-China alliance, i am certain it was a political decision to move to western planes. Also they have only a small number of rafale because they are overpriced. 

Why are you living in the past and bringing up Ahmadinejad and Qaher. Politics is all about show and making yourself bigger than you are. Eitherway, Iran was trying to showcase their ability at making prototypes and have the desire to think big. It was to demonstrate that they are not like the Arabs and Afghanis who rely on hand outs or live in caves. You took it too literally and only saw the bad in what he was trying to do...this is a sort of Iransetizi.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

It is nice to see that after getting massacred over your failed attempt to pass simulated RCS (without relative factor) as Real RCS, you now seem to have shutup about it now like many times you have chosen to do the same when countered with fact. Now remember the lesson learned:

- Do not quote scientists for things they do not claim in their papers (Brazilians never claimed simulation values = real values)
- Never try to pass simulation values as real values without relative factors
- Read the source before posting something because people will catch you pants down spreading misinfo.



TheImmortal said:


> Which F-18 are you referring to? They have different RCSs depending on which version or Block.
> 
> You truly believe size is everything when it comes to RCS? With such logic the RQ-170 has a smaller RCS than B-2 since they are both flying wing designs but one is smaller. Yet in flying wing design the smaller the design the HIGHER probability of the the RCS increasing due to less surface area for radar to be scattered or absorbed vs reflected.
> 
> Size does play a role not to say there is NO ROLE, but shape and design plays a much bigger role if not majority. Hence why the Zumwalt destroyer has the RCS of a small fishing boat despite being the size of a mammoth destroyer.
> 
> Another point using your own F-18 example
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guess which version has the lower RCS? Shocker the F-18E. Guess which version of F-18E has the lowest RCS of any F-18? Block III also know as the stealthy F-18 being marketed around the world currently to friendly western countries looking to avoid the expensive F-35 while staying in the US military aerospace ecosystem .
> 
> But according to you smaller = lower RCS is more important factor. Not actually the surface/shape/design of the aircraft and how it respondes to radar waves in your expensive radar rooms.



Your logic is imbecile like always (I provided the list of absurd claims from you, it is growing).

When we are comparing two airframes and no RAM are involved, the smaller and less edgy airframe => has low RCS if the basic shape of the airframe is related. F-18 and F-5 are all from the same family of airframes called N-156 from which came the T-38, F-5E/F, YF-17, F/A-18, F/A-18EF/G, Saeqeh-I/II, Kowsar, F-20, and FCK-1. The relationship between RCS and size without RAM sustains if the basic airframe design is related. Can we say that about your BS analogy of Zumwalt and a boat? If USN claimed F/A-18 to stand at 1-3 m2 then please explain how come the smaller version of it, the N-156 with fewer edges and smaller air-intakes becomes 16 m2 like you have been parading about for a week now.

Even if I assume that F-5 airframe has higher RCS that F-18 which is claimed to be 1.2 m2 (F/A-18CD) then is it even possible that it will be 16 m2 ?



TheImmortal said:


> _*RCS on F-5 from the lateral and rear is quite large and in an pseudo air defense role enemy radars would be be bombarded from various sources*_​


​You have claimed that F-5E/F has a real RCS of 15-16 m2 without any remote evidence of F-5 airframe ever been tested for F-5. You tried to pass the simulated values as real ones, I bet you did not even know someone will notice, but someone did . In your quest to be right, you may have googled "F-5 RCS", the first paper showed up and you decided to post it as "Real RCS of F-5" here without even reading the abstract. *Reality: *You got caught pants down trying to pass simulated RCS as real RCS which even the authors are not claiming in their paper! Two crimes, lying and misquoting the authors! 



TheImmortal said:


> And yet many (if not majority) of online sources say RCS of SU-35 is 1-3M2. If you don’t believe me, simply search for yourself.



*Provide us the source which says SU-35 has 1-3m2 RCS?* Dont try to run away from your claim by saying "sEaRcH YoUrSelF". You know there is no actual literary source which is why you are saying this.

The fact remains, SU-35 = SU-27M ... literally the same airframe with an avionics upgrade. Except for mild verticle stabilizer modification, the entire SU-35 is just a re-marketed SU-27M which flew some 35 years ago (first flight 1987). They tested canards and reverted them back to the non-canard design of SU-27.

So if nothing changes in the airframe of SU-27 to become SU-35 except for an avionics upgrade. How come SU-27's 10-15 m2 RCS turned 1-3 m2 suddenly? I have yet to see any official claim for this 1-3 m2 anyways. Some Sukhoi paper or from some RuAF official, but no one has said that except for a few internet fanbois. Sukhoi renamed a fighter from 47 years ago (SU-27 first flight) because of an avionics upgrade and you here started claiming it has got reduced RCS by 12 m2?






Literally, this is your logic:

The plane on left, SU-27 has a RCS of 10-15m2 (company patented) and the right one, SU-35 has an RCS of 1-3 m2???? They do not even have an inch of difference.









While the planes on right and left have RCS in 1-3 m2 range but the middle one somehow has the RCS of 16 m2 because simulated RCS without relative factor for real RCS said so? 















TheImmortal said:


> SU-35 carries the hypersonic R-37 BVR with max range of ~ 400KM also carries R-77M with ~200KM and R-27 130-170KM
> 
> But who cares about that right? I forgot super duper top secret data links are only for the F-14AM or Kowsar. SU-35 is too old and outdated to possibly be able to communicate with other sources of radar. Which even @AmirPatriot who rarely posts here anymore had a urge to rebuke.



R-37 is not part of any SU-35 export deal. I would expect only a fool like you to believe that Russia will provide their golden weapon R-37 to anyone let alone a politically dangerous client like Iran. Same Russia that resisted to provide or did not at all to Iran with following:

- Signed/ordered MIG-29 9.13
- R-77
- RD-33
- S-300

.... will somehow provide Iran with its deep killer R-37? Let along R-37 which is an exclusive thing for RuAF, they will not even share 40 years old now obsolete R-33 with anyone during their money-for-anything poverty days. Among the R-77 family, only R-77-1 is for export with ~100 km range which Iran may get with SU-35 if it ever lands in Iran for billions of USD. R-77M is again an exclusive weapon for SU-57. If you want to talk about SU-35 with BVR package in Iranian hands consider it with R-77-1 at best and nothing else. Even the R-77T is not exported. Why do you think China had to resort to development of PL-12 in late 90s ? 

And Yes Flanker (SU-27/30/33/35) has

- High RCS, 10-15 m2 admitted by Sukhoi.
- IRBIS-E tracks a modern fighter at 100 km range
- Extremely high price of 85 Million USD.



TheImmortal said:


>



This is the Detection range by "Claim of the manufacturer". Reverse search the image and you will find that even the quotation below it is saying the same. Not even the manufacturer is claiming it as a tracking range (I am hoping you know the difference). To analyze the actual performance of IRBIS-E there is nothing better than their manufacturer's officially released video which shows the ~250 km away detected target, only to be tracked at barely 100 KM. It tells us that SU-35 with IRBIS-E at best can serve as a Mini-AWACS like F-14A using its radar for search/detection. While F-14AM in IRIAF can fire Fakour-90 or AIM-54 at the target from 150+ km away the SU-35S will have to wait for ~100 km to get a lock with R-77-1. Such a massive advantage it is providing at only 85 million USD per piece.





 


TheImmortal said:


> The paper looks at what ramifications of adding to RAM to an F-5 body aircraft would do in regards to reduction of RCS. The results are quite clear and the paper makes a definitive conclusion that may have flown over your head, so read again.



Just answer troll, Where did the authors say the simulated RCS is real? *NOWHERE THE AUTHORS ARE MENTIONING THAT THE SIMULATED RCS THEY MEASURED IS EQUAL REAL RCS.* So please provide us the justification for your 10 days of constant lying and misquoting the authors, trying to pass simulated RCS without *relative factor* to real RCS, as a real RCS value.

Here is a list of your failures:

*- Software Simulated RCS =/= Real RCS. *No simulation in the entire world of science can ever be equated to real-world values without relative factor Z which needs to be x or + or - from the simulated RCS to make it equal to the actual lab tested value. We dont know that because the paper was not about that.

- Even the *authors in your "trophy" paper you posted, are nowhere claiming that their simulated RCS = Real RCS.* They are not doing it because they are scientists. While you being a troll are constantly misqouting their hard work they put in the paper. Scientists hate being misquoted but you are committing the crime of using them to support your lie.

- *Actual RCS is measured by multimillion USD facilities, not on freeware software* by actual professional scientists, who according to your stupid logic are just fools wasting their years of lives, millions of USD on lab work. They can just download freeware and design the next generation of F-22 from their bedrooms.

- *US aviators themselves are claiming that their F-5N is hard to track/observe even from an F-18E of F-35*. Would they say it about an airframe that you are claiming to be having an RCS of 16 m2?

- *F-5E/F during the war has never been shot by a BVR missile*. MIG-25PD and MIG-23ML shot F-4E and F-14A with R-40, and R-23 BVR missiles but failed to track "16 m2 F-5". Iraqi MIG-25PD later had to wait till 30 KM to get a lock on US F/A-18. N-156 family has small RCS no matter which member we take.



TheImmortal said:


> Yes, a simulation has a margin of error that cannot be matched perfectly with a radar room worth millions or tens of millions of dollars. But with such logic, simulations in academia/medical field/science field/etc should never be conducted because they cannot hope to compete with ultra expensive real world data gathering. Which again is propostreous conclusion. Many discoveries were first discovered via simulations that quite accurately predicted the final result within the margin of error. Simulations exist to get very close to real life data gathering in the absence of using such expensive methods.



More BS from a nontechnical troll. Where did I say that simulations are not to be conducted? I guess you are not even mentally capable of handling technical discussions.

This is my post before,* now tell me where did I say simulations are not to be conducted?*



> Relative factors between simulations and experimental values work like this in the entire plethora of scientific fields where both simulated and experimental measurements are possible. We first measure values in a simulated environment over a range, then we find them experimentally to get this relative factor "Z" so next time we can get a good idea from the simulation of what the actual values would be. No one gets the simulation done only and starts claiming oh that is it, I won't take it to the lab. Which is why in modern world we have a theoretical physicist, biologist, chemist and an experimental physicist, biologist, chemist. They work in tandem on projects, and can't replace each other.



_Simulations are done before actual experimentations._ _They are not substitutive ways of measurement but one leads to the other. _They are done in sequences and are related to each other through relative factors between simulations and experimental values. We first measure values in a simulated environment over a range, then we find them experimentally to get this relative factor "Z" so next time we can get a good idea from the simulation of what the actual values would be. This is how projects are created and they win millions of USD in grant money from scientists.

Simulations values =/= Real world values
Simulations with relative factor Z = Real World values

And btw, If you say BS like "Simulation has error" you will get bitchslapped by its makers/users. Error in a plot is the deviation of slope from the origin point, compared to another plot where deviation does not happen from the same origin point. Both cases have the same origin point, if two particles A and B go from Point 1 to Point 2, and particle B by the end of their journey has deviated from the path by 5 degrees then we have an *"error *in the flight path of particle B compared to A" because the origin point 1 was same for both particles A and B. In the case of simulation vs real-world values, the origin points are different because the measurements have VASTLY different origin points. Radar oscillators throwing EMR at an airframe in an actual world inside a multi-million USD lab can have some 50 factors that affect the resultant values. Simulations do not even address all these factors.

*ERROR =/= Relative factor*



> So now the software is “bogus” according to you. Good to know.
> 
> Quite hilarious you talk about Iranians being arrogant and ignorant and love to argue. Yet conveniently miss your own behavior in all this.
> 
> Like I said your biases toward the F-5 project just completely blind you to considering alternatives. Doesn’t look like Iran has the same enthusiasm as you with regards to the project.



Software values are bogus unless we have actual real-world values to compare. You can parade around naked with a poster above your head saying I found the RCS of F-5 from a paper as 15-16 m2, but it won't change the fact that

- You lied to us here and tried to pass simulated values as real ones
- You misquoted the authors for things they did not even claim.

and btw 70 % of my posts roughly amount to missiles, in the IRIAF section I mostly talk about avionics, armaments, and radars, but thanks for following me around.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Well considering we have little data on Su-35 vs F16 combat you can't make that claim. So why is it that when Iran wants to buy a better more expensive plane, like su-35, it's bad. But when Egypt opts for something better, despite the price tag, it is a great bit of business. One only needs to deduce that the only thing bothering you is why Iran isnt buying western junk instead of Russian, but there is little to no technical justification.


We say it's male, you say milk it .
Let bring one other reason more than the fact that SU-35 is inferior. Egypt don't have a domestic aircraft program, Iran has one. 



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why can't a youtuber give an evaluation? Im just saying that a simulation would be a better data to go by than an biased evaluation. When US forcing the Egyptians to be biased, what choice do they have?


Because when you evaluate an airplane, you actually fly it and pit it against the competitor. I'm not aware of any YouTube who can do that. Just like when Iran choose F14 over F15



Daylamite Warrior said:


> India has couple hundreds of su-30s already in their inventory. They dont need more, maybe that's why but seeing as they are part of the new anti-China alliance, i am certain it was a political decision to move to western planes. Also they have only a small number of rafale because they are overpriced.


They needed eleven to replace the ones that lost. They canceled order after they saw rafale capabilities. 
By the way India from cold War Era was part of the front against China. It's not something new.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why are you living in the past and bringing up Ahmadinejad and Qaher. Politics is all about show and making yourself bigger than you are. Eitherway, Iran was trying to showcase their ability at making prototypes and have the desire to think big. It was to demonstrate that they are not like the Arabs and Afghanis who rely on hand outs or live in caves. You took it too literally and only saw the bad in what he was trying to do...this is a sort of Iransetizi.


I didn't bring up those Era somebody else did and I answered it and do you really believe anybody beside some fanboy took those things serious. If anything they showed Iran don't have anything credible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hypothetical scenario 1:

IRIAF takes 24 X SU-35S from Russia at 85 million USD/piece. They will come for atleast 4 billion USD including the infrastructure. After spending this 4 Billion USD, by 2030 this will be an operational interception IRIAF fleet:

- 24 x SU-35S
- 20-22 x F-14A/AM. Rest will be grounded and cannibalized
- 30 Kowsar-I and ~1-2 Prototypes of Kowsar- II
- 8-10 x MIG-29 9.12. The rest fleet will be grounded without MLU. Severely obsolete avionics.

If IRIAF puts a further 4 billion USD by 2026 and abandons the Kowsar/Saeghe program, MIG Fleet dies a MLU-less obsolete death

for 8 Billion USD by 2030:

- 72 x SU-35S
- 20-22 x F-14A/AM. Rest will be grounded and cannablised

*OR*

Hypothetical scenario 2:

IRIAF spends same 4 billion USD on following:

1) 400 x ARH R-77-1
2) 400 x R-74
3) 200 x R-33MK Turbofans (with TOT)
4) 50 x MIG-29M and IRIAF MIG-29 fleet gets MLUed and upgraded

By 2030, this will be the IRIAF fleet for the interception

- 44 x F-14AM (Weapons: Fakour-90, Maghsoud with ARH upto 200 km)
- 73 x MIG-29M2 (R-77-1, R-74)
- 100 x Kowsar- I/II (AESA radar, e-warfare, multiaxis FBW, R-33M Turbofan, R-77-1, HMD-R74)

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> I'd like to see some kind of proof that these datalinks you talk about actually exist, because I'm not aware of any.



According to head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO) Lieutenant Brigadier General Afshin Khajeh Fard, IRIAF Kowsar (Like IRGCAF SU-22M4) feature datalink with network of other aircrafts such unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) for exchange of target information. 

*LINK*

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> - You lied to us here



The only person who has lied here is you:




drmeson said:


> It won't have the datalink that IRIAF uses for Kowsar, F-14AM and UCAVs (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard). It would have an isolated battle environment cut off from the entire IRIAF fleet.


Lie. SU-30MKK had data link back in 2000’s as I said in my post earlier with stats provided but you ignored.



drmeson said:


> There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients.



More lies and I provided *several* examples of Chinese local upgrades outside of contract on their SU-30’s back in 2000’s. Russians did not care one bit. Again you ignored more evidence of your lies.

Like I said you call out people for behavior that you yourself emulate.

As for your F-5 claims, you never produced a single strand of evidence that F-5 has a 1-2m2 frontal cross section.

You literally want everyone to believe you based on F-18 has 3m2 (no citation provided other than your claim that USN said so which I couldn’t find) so F-5 will have 1-2m2 because it’s a “smaller”. That’s ultimately where your claim comes from....yourself. Which is fine, but you tried to pass it off as FACT.

Official RCS data on modern fighters is very hard to find if not classified by most countries. Simulations out there are what make it to web. Same simulations you berated.

Several actual technical people with experience in the field of aeronautics like Evilwesterners and Peed have commended the flankers and suggested that Iran purchase the plane for defense purposes if at all possible.

You just regurgitate stats that is all,
while never providing citation of various claims and then when someone asks for citation you belittle and provide your opinion in form of pictures and random rants. You pass your opinion as fact. It doesn’t carry more weight than anyone else’s opinion here.

As for your latest F-5 “rebuttal” (if I can call it that) it was merely you repeating what you said prior regarding the paper. ‘the paper didn’t say it’s real life values’ (you might have said that 5+ times in a single post!) You introduced bold font and underlining font plus some new pictures. Nothing new added by you other than maybe your blood pressure rising rapidly.

So at this point it’s like going in motions like Tom and Jerry with you. You won’t accept Kowsar for what it is. Barely information on its “datalink”, “radar” by the military themselves. No long range BVR or if it’s coming. But you assume it’s better than Russian electronics or what Russia can provide Iran as a stop gap.


Here is the paper in PDF format if you actually want to read and understand it without having a stroke



https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3094/309430921008.pdf



I have concluded you are too far down the rabbit hole regarding Project Kowsar to consider viable stop gap alternatives. It would be counter productive to try to make you see the light. You made it clear you rather sit in fanboy darkness clutching on to false hopes.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555584606891565056

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555584606891565056


what credible sources
The Institute for the Study of War is a policy research organization focused on U.S. national security.
and Forbes
and the wording , that *May *part show how credible their source is , in short they pull it out of their asses

and look at forbes article, what strong words


> The latest *speculation *about the future of Russia-Iran defense relations is that Tehran *might *procure Russian Su-35 Flanker fighter jets in return for supplying Moscow with various types of its indigenously-produced drones.





> On Aug. 2, an open-source intelligence Twitter account *cited unofficial sources* claiming that “Iran has sent the first batch of UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) to Russia for field testing.”
> 
> 
> 
> “Also Iranian pilots and technicians sent to Russia for training on Su-35,” the tweet added.
> *While it could not independently verify this claim*


now we are in the realm of may, might and unnamed Unofficial sources

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> According to head of Iran Aviation Industries Organization (IAIO) Lieutenant Brigadier General Afshin Khajeh Fard, IRIAF Kowsar (Like IRGCAF SU-22M4) feature datalink with network of other aircrafts such unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) for exchange of target information.
> 
> *LINK*


This link explains that Kowsar and Su-22 are able to send and receive target information from UAVs. Given the capabilities of Iran's UAVs, I expect this is likely target coordinates and maybe images. No mention of F-14AM.

However that is not the type of datalink I am talking about. Datalinks like Link4 and Link16, and their Russian counterparts, share real time radar data from an AWACS or ground radar (or even other tactical aircraft) with the aircraft, and vice versa. That data is then displayed on the tactical aircraft's display in real time showing the enemy aircraft's position, speed, altitude, even type... 

There are 2 main benefits to this:

1. It grants 360 degree, all-altitude situational awareness to the tactical aircraft, not just restricted to its own ~60 degree, front-sector only radar cone. That is such a huge huge thing. Situational awareness is the number one foundation of BVR combat. Without good SA, anything can sneak up on you.

2. It allows the tactical aircraft to keep its radar off but still have situational awareness. This way it won't show up on enemies' RWR, making it easier to surprise enemy aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> This link explains that Kowsar and Su-22 are able to send and receive target information from UAVs. Given the capabilities of Iran's UAVs, I expect this is likely target coordinates and maybe images. No mention of F-14AM.
> 
> However that is not the type of datalink I am talking about. Datalinks like Link4 and Link16, and their Russian counterparts, share real time radar data from an AWACS or ground radar (or even other tactical aircraft) with the aircraft, and vice versa. That data is then displayed on the tactical aircraft's display in real time showing the enemy aircraft's position, speed, altitude, even type...
> 
> There are 2 main benefits to this:
> 
> 1. It grants 360 degree, all-altitude situational awareness to the tactical aircraft, not just restricted to its own ~60 degree, front-sector only radar cone. That is such a huge huge thing. Situational awareness is the number one foundation of BVR combat. Without good SA, anything can sneak up on you.
> 
> 2. It allows the tactical aircraft to keep its radar off but still have situational awareness. This way it won't show up on enemies' RWR, making it easier to surprise enemy aircraft.



What Khajeh Fard is describing is a "Full Duplex Tactical Datalink" between Kowsar<---->UCAVs in IRIAF and SU-22M4<---->UCAVs IRGCAF. If the two-way information being exchanged is made of tracked mobile target coordinates from radar that is enabling other vehicles to use them to launch weapons then it means the exchange is very much real time radar tracked data and not just limited to some rudimentary cues or image exchanges. He specifically mentions the attack part otherwise he could have just said that its a cueing information system. I see no reason to disbelieve him. We know Kowsar uses MIL-STD-1553 serial multiplex data bus. May be so does KAMAN-22, and SU-22M4, other UCAVs.

As for F-14AM. BT wrote an article in AirInternational on IRIAF operational CAPs in which he specifically mentions few F-14AMs and 1 x Kowsar-1 (3-7400) operating under the GWACS network command of Khatam Al-Anbiya Air defence base. The network itself is made of dozens of Search and Track radars. He did not specify it further because he is getting more deranged with his political ranting but it hints towards some sort of TDL on F-14AM. Could be anything. 

Russian AF are themselves, late comers, to the data linking strategy in combat aviation. They used some retro tactical Radio system R846 on TU-128 Fiddler which none of the other aircraft could use so the Fiddler continued serving till 1990 until MIG-31B came with "Spektr". I literally have no idea what the Flanker family uses because in recent times they have made obnoxious claims related to their fighters:

-NIIP IRBIS-E, claiming it to be tracking targets at 250+ KM but then their own videos show that radar can barely track a fighter at ~100 KM. The 250 KM range is actually for cued-search.
-They called SU-57 a fifth-generation stealth fighter at the time of unvieling but then in their patent the RCS of Felon is reported to be 0.1 m2 which makes the plane "Low observable" at best, kinda like EF-2000 or Rafale.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

....................................

BTW some news and rumors I wanted to post but because of traveling I could not

- BT claimed that SU-35 deal is ruined because IRIAF could not gather ~4 Billion USD or whatever amount they needed for a few squadrons and that Khayyam Sattelite's launch is only payment for UCAVs gone to Russia. Sounds illogical.

- BT is also claiming that OWJ Industrial has reverse engineered an entire F-14 Airframe inside their facilities with IACI TEM providing parts for TF30-P414 Turbofans. IRIAF is facing severe budget cuts so they may not be unvieled. All ongoing programs such as SU-35 Procurement, Kowsar-I/II, F-14AM upgradation, Kaman-22 UCAV induction, KC747 tankers being grounded are being hindered by budget cuts. 

- Kowsar-I acrojet team apparently received IEI Bayyenat-II radars and avionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Iran's UAVs don't have radars for a datalink to transmit their data from. There have been some SARs seen but no evidence they are operational. Moreover, this is purely in the Air-to-ground role, whereas I am talking of the air-to-air role. Anyway, the article had no mention of a datalink utilising radar returns.

Flankers have had the TKS-2 DL since the early days and that has been fitted to other aircraft. It's comparable to Link-4. Su-35 has some newer one called S-107/108 which is comparable to Link-16. Russia is also developing/fielding something called OSNOD which is for the Su-57 and apparently some of the other modern flankers. Best to ask a Russian user about these things.

I think we don't need to discuss BT's ramblings here. A waste of time.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> Iran's UAVs don't have radars for a datalink to transmit their data from. There have been some SARs seen but no evidence they are operational.



There is no evidence that SARs they have shown (three in total so far I think) have not been deployed either. It does not make sense to keep showing systems and not use them even if on few vehicles. For all we can speculate here, Khajeh Fard could be talking about few UCAVS with SARs, DL'ing with fighter jets, not the entire fleet. This is the head of IAIO, a Brig. General claiming something operatioal, not some random journalist with "inside scoop".



AmirPatriot said:


> Moreover, this is purely in the Air-to-ground role, whereas I am talking of the air-to-air role. Anyway, the article had no mention of a datalink utilising radar returns.



If the tracked target information exchange is real-time then what can work for A2G targets between Fighters-UCAVs can also be modified to work for A2A targets between Fighters-Fighters. Besides, AirInternational article I qouted before mentions GWACS using GCI command through data to IRIAF during CAP Patrols. 



AmirPatriot said:


> Anyway, the article had no mention of a datalink utilising radar returns.



How do you track a target without radar from a fighter jet? Lets say Kowsar with its shown avionics.



AmirPatriot said:


> Flankers have had the TKS-2 DL since the early days and that has been fitted to other aircraft. It's comparable to Link-4. Su-35 has some newer one called S-107/108 which is comparable to Link-16. Russia is also developing/fielding something called OSNOD which is for the Su-57 and apparently some of the other modern flankers. Best to ask a Russian user about these things.
> 
> I think we don't need to discuss BT's ramblings here. A waste of time.



Umm no. SU-27/30 never came with any inherent datalink. TKS-2/098 came much later as an "upgrade package" for SU-30M, first time used in 2004. Also TKS-2 is a intra Flanker family DL that is limited to Sukhoi Flanker fighters. It does not connect Flankers with even the Russian A-50 AWACS (uses 5U15K-11 datalink) and Spektr of MiG-31BM. So if Russian Sukhoi, Mikoyan, and Beriev DL's are not connecting with each other directly, how can we assume SU-35 will just fit in with Iranian GWACS or TDL which "could be" something entirely different? 

*





Sukhoi Flankers - The Shifting Balance of Regional Air Power


Technical Report APA-TR-2007-0101; Title: Sukhoi Flankers - The Shifting Balance of Regional Air Power ; Abstract: Technical profile and strategic analysis of Sukhoi fighter proliferation in the Asia-Pacific-indian region. Analysis includes discussion of Sukhoi variants, T-10 evolution and...



www.ausairpower.net




*
If Iran purchases SU-35S will they have to modify the entire GWACS, UCAVS, Fighters to connect with SU-35 or vice versa? or Flanker's DL will use the current Iranian DL system to operate? I am genuinely asking. 



AmirPatriot said:


> I think we don't need to discuss BT's ramblings here. A waste of time.



I would not discount him on basis of his political ranting or schizophrenia (if he is one person???) Roughly 5-6/10 times his claims about IRIAF come true.

I wish Iranian media was more trained to cover defense exhibitions and unveilings with stats. They mess up their coverage of events and we have to rely upon these politically biased sources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## sanel1412

You dont need radar for data link, data link is Integrated as separete devices, in fact attack aircrafts dont have radar at all, yet some of those have datalink, fighter Jet share data over datalink but they dont Use radar for Communications, they Just share data from radar and that is Reason why datalink is Integrated with radar(in case of fighter jets with radar. UAVs already have datalink, how do you think they stream video... Video streaming need 100 times more bandwith than Just sharing of data...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> There is no evidence that SARs they have shown (three in total so far I think) have not been deployed either. It does not make sense to keep showing systems and not use them even if on few vehicles. For all we can speculate here, Khajeh Fard could be talking about few UCAVS with SARs, DL'ing with fighter jets, not the entire fleet. This is the head of IAIO, a Brig. General claiming something operatioal, not some random journalist with "inside scoop"


Bottom line is that at no point did the head of IAIO mention radar at all.


drmeson said:


> If the tracked target information exchange is real-time then what can work for A2G targets between Fighters-UCAVs can also be modified to work for A2A targets between Fighters-Fighters.


That entirely depends on the technical aspects of the datalink system. I don't think a simple modification is good enough - the information required on air targets is much different to that of ground targets.


drmeson said:


> Besides, AirInternational article I qouted before mentions GWACS using GCI command through data to IRIAF during CAP Patrols


Aka the GCI operator vectoring the pilot over radio as the IRIAF/IIAF has been doing for over half a century.

Unfortunately F-14AM doesn't have any cockpit upgrades over the F-14A to facilitate the kind of datalink seen on modern 4.5th and 5th gen fighters. The cockpit you see below is exactly the same as in the F-14A.








drmeson said:


> How do you track a target without radar from a fighter jet? Lets say Kowsar with its shown avionics.


Simple coordinates that show up as a waypoint or stationary ground target on the aircraft's digital map. Most Iranian UAVs have sensor balls that could pick up simple coordinates in that fashion.


drmeson said:


> Umm no. SU-27/30 never came with any inherent datalink. TKS-2/098 came much later as an "upgrade package" for SU-30M, first time used in 2004. Also TKS-2 is a intra Flanker family DL that is limited to Sukhoi Flanker fighters. It does not connect Flankers with even the Russian A-50 AWACS (uses 5U15K-11 datalink) and Spektr of MiG-31BM. So if Russian Sukhoi, Mikoyan, and Beriev DL's are not connecting with each other directly, how can we assume SU-35 will just fit in with Iranian GWACS or TDL which "could be" something entirely different?


The article you linked did not say it does not connect, but that it is not known whether they connect. We can say this is an area where we lack sufficient information. Though I'd be surprised if the A-50 datalink couldn't connect to the Su-27's, given they were developed at a similar point in time.

Nevertheless, it is well established that modern Russian fighters (Su-30SM, Su-35S) have modern datalinks which was my original point.


drmeson said:


> If Iran purchases SU-35S will they have to modify the entire GWACS, UCAVS, Fighters to connect with SU-35 or vice versa? or Flanker's DL will use the current Iranian DL system to operate? I am genuinely asking.


Quite possibly. It shouldn't be too difficult given systems on both sides are digital. Iran could use Russian or even Chinese (they also have had to integrate Russian tech into their military) help.

I'd hope any Su-35 purchase comes with AWACS purchases such as the new Beriev A-100.


drmeson said:


> schizophrenia

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> You dont need radar for data link, data link is Integrated as separete devices, in fact attack aircrafts dont have radar at all, yet some of those have datalink, fighter Jet share data over datalink but they dont Use radar for Communications, they Just share data from radar and that is Reason why datalink is Integrated with radar(in case of fighter jets with radar. UAVs already have datalink, how do you think they stream video... Video streaming need 100 times more bandwith than Just sharing of data...



Not exactly true. You are confusing the ability to send *video* data with the ability to send *targeting* data two different things. UAV cannot magically get targeting data on a fighter jet without using some type of radar.

Use of datalink to send *targeting data* in airspace where F-35/F-22 are operating is ill advised as they both will pick up on the emissions unless the data link has LPI DL as both F-35/F-22 use forms of this to accurately (and more importantly passively) transmit accurate targeting data with minimal radar usage to hide emissions .

Neither SU-57 nor J-20 at this time incorporate this, so I doubt Iranian fighters do. They will be leaking emissions sharing target data with each other thus compromising their radar signature.

So DL are a double edged sword against US 5th Gen fighters in your airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> Bottom line is that at no point did the head of IAIO mention radar at all.



Other than radar, Kowsar-I platform has no other means of tracking a target so how it will track a target and provide data to a UCAV for attack? 



AmirPatriot said:


> That entirely depends on the technical aspects of the datalink system. I don't think a simple modification is good enough - the information required on air targets is much different to that of ground targets.



The data packets of a tracked mobile ground target is not different from aerial target. What matters is the fact that the channel can handle real time radar track data transfer and is Double Duplex (two way exchange). Aerial target only moves more faster but is easier to handle because:

- No Surface/ground clutter
- No terrain hiding advantage 

Once tracked, an aerial target has no counter-strategy other than to resort to ECM/Jamming the tracking device.



AmirPatriot said:


> Aka the GCI operator vectoring the pilot over radio as the IRIAF/IIAF has been doing for over half a century.



What you are talking about is "Cueing" which is the first step, not the only one. GWACS network of Iran now has three new tools:

1) Long range Search radars that generate Cues for track radars + Fighters for location of target
2) Long-range track radars provide the lock and transfer the data to SAM batteries + Fighter jets (through TDL)
3) SAMs + Fighters can deploy weapons.

Focus on the words of the article that despite upgraded AWG-9 having a search range in excess of ~300+ KM, the radars were kept off. How did they look for targets then during border CAPS? just radio operator was Cueing them ?



AmirPatriot said:


> Unfortunately F-14AM doesn't have any cockpit upgrades over the F-14A to facilitate the kind of datalink seen on modern 4.5th and 5th gen fighters. The cockpit you see below is exactly the same as in the F-14A.
> 
> View attachment 869260



Having additional MFD's has nothing to do with TDL. Installation of DL includes incorporation of an antenna and an added connection to the processing unit of the radar. The same screen which shows aircraft's self searched-tracked targets shows the data received targets too. 

Besides, this fighter with confirmed Tactical DL was also deployed. I am sure it was not taking radio cues.








AmirPatriot said:


> Simple coordinates that show up as a waypoint or stationary ground target on the aircraft's digital map. Most Iranian UAVs have sensor balls that could pick up simple coordinates in that fashion.



That makes no sense. Why do you need datalink between Fighter-UCAV if you already have information of the "waypoint or stationary target" ? whichever vehicle has ammunition can go there on its own and attack the target without needing any data from another vehicle. 

Thing is, Kowsar fighter has no other target tracking option then its own radar, an exact ditto of Grifo-346 which itself is a top of the line modern radar for light fighters with strong SAR resolution. If Head of IAIO says that Kowsar can "exchange" (double duplex) target info with UCAVs there is only one way it possesses this info in the first place and that's its own radar.

Why is this significant ? It means the channel for data packets this Datalink is using, can handle real time radar data between Fighter(Grifo-346) <------> UCAV(SAR, Sensors). 



AmirPatriot said:


> The article you linked did not say it does not connect, but that it is not known whether they connect. We can say this is an area where we lack sufficient information. Though I'd be surprised if the A-50 datalink couldn't connect to the Su-27's, given they were developed at a similar point in time.
> 
> Nevertheless, it is well established that modern Russian fighters (Su-30SM, Su-35S) have modern datalinks which was my original point.



We have no reason to dispute information coming from Dr. Carlo Kopp of Aussie Air power, he was a legendary aviation author with solid knowledge. 

*"Upgrades available for Su-27/30 include the encrypted TKS-2/R-098 (Tipovyi Kompleks Svyazi) Intra Flight Data Link (IFDL) which permits the networking of up to 16 Sukhoi fighters. It is not known whether the 5U15K-11 datalink designed for networking the A-50 AWACS and MiG-31 has been adapted to the Su-27/30, or whether a unique equivalent design is used. The TKS-2 was used effectively during the 2004 Cope India exercise against US F-15Cs"*

So Dr. Carlo is saying this:

- SU-27/SU-30 never had any inherent DL, TKS-2 came as upgrades much later after Flanker family was already serving for decade+
- TKS-2 is Flanker exclusive, isolated system 
- MIG-31BM, A-50 use different DL systems which were not compatible with Sukhois at the time Carlo wrote this article some 10 years ago. He is speculating that may be MIG-31BM and A-50 will get the same DL system that Sukhoi uses but have we seen that happening? No

Nobody including me disputed Ru-AF using datalinks. What my initial point has been, is the fact that Flanker's DL does not exist for Iran! If Russian fighters of Sukhoi, Mikoyan origin themselves could not exchange data how are we assuming that they will just do that with the Iranian network? Will Russia allow Iranian engineers to mess with their frontline fighter's sensitive electronics? The same Russia, whose clients like Iran, India, Egypt, and Vietnam have never changed a screw on Russian 4th Generation fighters (Chinese case is different, its too powerful, too valuable a client) without paying Russia first. 



AmirPatriot said:


> Quite possibly. It shouldn't be too difficult given systems on both sides are digital. Iran could use Russian or even Chinese (they also have had to integrate Russian tech into their military) help.
> 
> I'd hope any Su-35 purchase comes with AWACS purchases such as the new Beriev A-100.



There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients. Indians, Iran, Vietnam, Egypt all have local industrial baseline esp India and Iran but India is paying 62 Million USD/Su-30MK CDK kit to this day to Moscow and Iran's MIG-29 fleet is dying without MLU and avionics upgrade but we cant touch it either. Iran has built a F-5F from scratch with 4.0 Generation avionics, gave some of its F-4E/Ds a complete radar, avionics, armament upgrade, and carried out fair level upgradation of F-14A as well but what is the reason that IRIAF's MIG-29 9.12 fleet is still flying with without MLU and with obsolete most avionics of 400 KG heavy RPKL-29 N019 (MIG-23ML level) with no e-warfare suite? I mean they can atleast put Kowsar's avionics on MIG-29 to give it some relevance in modern combat which it currently lacks. Russians and Chinese do not like their clients pulling upgrades or modifications on their supplied stuff easily without them recieveing huge chunks of money. For 85 Million USD Iran will get a fighter SU-27M = SU-35S with: 

- RCS of 10-15 m2 
- IRBIS-E PESA radar (jammable) with tracking range of 100 KM 
- R-77-1 BVR with a range of 100 KM
- No DL with Iranian network ???

In that price, Iran can get 3 x MIG-29M or 2 x MIG-35S. They have what Flanker has too and they fit in the local MIG infrastructure. My fear is that if this SU-35S deal ever become reality, it will suck life out of IRIAF's every other asset financially. If Nojeh Coup Mullahs ever allow, IRIAF should go for following:

- 50-60 MIG-29M/MIG-35 
- 23 x MIG-29 9.12 of IRIAF recieving MLU+upgrade to SMT standard
- 200 RD-33M Turbofans for Kowsar-II
- 400 R-77-1 and 400 R-74

This will save IRIAF, or we can spend 12 Billion USD to create a 120 x SU-35S strong IRIAF by the end of this decade and retire everything else.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## sanel1412

F14A already have datalink, Just Iranian F14 came without it integrated,any way there is not need for cockpit ugrade or any Change, to install datalink...expecually for aircraft as F14,that already have it but came without it instaled...lot of old aircrafts, helicopters..etc Got ugrade to datalink without going over major Changes... Datalink module is not big...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> Other than radar, Kowsar-I platform has no other means of tracking a target so how it will track a target and provide data to a UCAV for attack?


It would likely work the other way around, UAVs providing Kowsar with information on targets to attack. The data transmission capabilities of Kowsar could still be held in reserve in case it receives a targeting pod in future, or there are plans to control drones from the air.


drmeson said:


> The data packets of a tracked mobile ground target is not different from aerial target. What matters is the fact that the channel can handle real time radar track data transfer and is Double Duplex (two way exchange). Aerial target only moves more faster but is easier to handle because:
> 
> - No Surface/ground clutter
> - No terrain hiding advantage
> 
> Once tracked, an aerial target has no counter-strategy other than to resort to ECM/Jamming the tracking device.


Fighters use datalinks in BVR combat to gain SA (Situational Awareness). This is as much a defensive tool as it is an offensive one, perhaps more the former than the latter - very useful for defending airspace. This is why I say their use would differ significantly from that of ground targets, which pose much less of a threat to fighters than aerial targets - unless they are SAMs, which is a whole other topic (RWR is mainly used in that case).

For the same reasons above, the information required of a ground target is significantly different, which is why I say technical aspects would come into play. For example, most older datalinks have no or very basic functions for ground targets. Such capability is only in the latest systems.


drmeson said:


> the radars were kept off. How did they look for targets then during border CAPS? just radio operator was Cueing them ?


CAP = Combat Air Patrol 
A patrol of a designated area. In peacetime, the radar does not need to be on all the time. Cueing via radio operators is sufficient.


drmeson said:


> Having additional MFD's has nothing to do with TDL. Installation of DL includes incorporation of an antenna and an added connection to the processing unit of the radar. The same screen which shows aircraft's self searched-tracked targets shows the data received targets too.





sanel1412 said:


> F14A already have datalink, Just Iranian F14 came without it integrated,any way there is not need for cockpit ugrade or any Change, to install datalink...expecually for aircraft as F14,that already have it but came without it instale


You are both mostly right. However the F-14A is a very old aircraft without significant use of digital electronics and interfaces. The fact that the cockpit shows no signs of upgrades (in ANY sense, not even the HUD or simple instruments) tells me that the upgrade has not been particularly extensive. It would be non-feasible/non-trivial to mate a modern digital datalink system with those old systems. The F-14A was designed to work with Link-4. It wasn't until the F-14D (a very significant upgrade in electronics, just look at the cockpits) that Link-16 was added.

Note how past attempts to non-American weapons onto Iran's F-14A such as R-73 and R-27 have failed, whereas efforts to fit for example, Indian AAMs onto Su-30s have succeeded. It's because 2000s electronics are a lot easier to adapt to each other than 60s/70s electronics.


drmeson said:


> That makes no sense. Why do you need datalink between Fighter-UCAV if you already have information of the "waypoint or stationary target" ? whichever vehicle has ammunition can go there on its own and attack the target without needing any data from another vehicle.


The idea is that an unarmed reconnaissance UAV - which are much more numerous than UCAVs - would find a target, and then feed that information to the nearest aircraft carrying weapons. The aircraft would then launch weapons on the coordinates of a stationary target or vector towards the target to engage it with bombs or other closer-range munitions.


drmeson said:


> It is not known whether the 5U15K-11 datalink designed for networking the A-50 AWACS and MiG-31 has been adapted to the Su-27/30, or whether a unique equivalent design is used.


Quote from Kopp. He has not ruled out A-50 networking with early flankers. Hence my point there is not sufficient information.


drmeson said:


> There is not a single example where Russian 4th generation combat planes have ever received any local upgrade by their clients. Indians


Aside from the obvious Chinese example, India has done so much with their Flankers. They've integrated their own weapons into them, have had domestic and foreign upgrades on them for HMDs and MFDs. And from the point of manufacture their Su-30s were customised with French and Israeli equipment installed instead of Russian equipment. When you want to make a big order, the supplier isn't going to put obstacles in your way.

I am not going to discuss the other claims you made such as those on the limitations of the Irbis' capability, which are way out of proportion considering the capabilities of that system.


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> It would likely work the other way around, UAVs providing Kowsar with information on targets to attack. The data transmission capabilities of Kowsar could still be held in reserve in case it receives a targeting pod in future, or there are plans to control drones from the air.



I am afraid that's not true if we go by the head of IAIO's words. It would have been true if he would have pointed out that the data link is just one way. He did not say that. In fact, he is very specifically saying that it's a two-way system i.e. One of the two vehicles tracks and transfers data to another and the other fires the weapon. He never said it's like only Kowsar tracks and gives it to UCAVS or vice versa. I would trust that he very well knows the difference between Single Duplex or Double Duplex transfer of information. Like I said before, this is head of IAIO, a Brig general with high education.



AmirPatriot said:


> Fighters use datalinks in BVR combat to gain SA (Situational Awareness). This is as much a defensive tool as it is an offensive one, perhaps more the former than the latter - very useful for defending airspace. This is why I say their use would differ significantly from that of ground targets, which pose much less of a threat to fighters than aerial targets - unless they are SAMs, which is a whole other topic (RWR is mainly used in that case).
> 
> For the same reasons above, the information required of a ground target is significantly different, which is why I say technical aspects would come into play. For example, most older datalinks have no or very basic functions for ground targets. Such capability is only in the latest systems.



Any fighter with a Search and Track radar with SAR capabilities, does not need any external pod to track a surface target (mobile or stationary). Yes its a bonus if you add EO/IR track capabilities to a fighter but without them a multimode radar with SAR capability can still do a very good job of tracking ground targets. The radar they showed in HESA facilities upon Kowsar's unvieling and in Dezful airshow is a exact replica of Grifo-346 (Shape of antenna, T/R modules, track range etc all match) which has 1m resolution bearing SAR capability (equivalent to to F-16) and this is Kowsar's only way of tracking a ground target. The SDB-1 repica they showed on its pylons is also going to be fired using this SAR track info from radar. 

This shows that the DL can handle Real Time Radar Data.



AmirPatriot said:


> For the same reasons above, the information required of a ground target is significantly different, which is why I say technical aspects would come into play. For example, most older datalinks have no or very basic functions for ground targets. Such capability is only in the latest systems.



Surface targets need more data size because of background Terrain+Clutter while aerial targets do not have that. If ground target imagery is involved than it would need even more larger data size. TDL that Khajeh Fard is talking about can hold for Real time Radar data from Fighter(SAR)<----->UCAV(SAR/EO/IR), it will also hold for Fighter(TWS,SAR)<----->Fighter(TWS,SAR). Will need work for sure but its not some mountainous task that cant happen in Iran. 



AmirPatriot said:


> A patrol of a designated area. In peacetime, the radar does not need to be on all the time. Cueing via radio operators is sufficient.



Cueing on the radio can not substitute radar information. If Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) or CAP dedicated fighters have turned off their radars, this by no means implies that they are doing it because someone is radioing them from HQ. That is just illogical. At best cueing is about rudimentary mission guidance during intercept. Radar being turned off means they had a better alternative to their own radars. 



AmirPatriot said:


> You are both mostly right. However the F-14A is a very old aircraft without significant use of digital electronics and interfaces. The fact that the cockpit shows no signs of upgrades (in ANY sense, not even the HUD or simple instruments) tells me that the upgrade has not been particularly extensive. It would be non-feasible/non-trivial to mate a modern digital datalink system with those old systems. The F-14A was designed to work with Link-4. It wasn't until the F-14D (a very significant upgrade in electronics, just look at the cockpits) that Link-16 was added.



Again, cockpit upgradation or having shiny MFD's have nothing to do with the installation of Datalink. It only needs a T/R antenna and a plugin into the Processing unit of AWG-9 which will show its own Search-track targets and also the data received on the same old screen. You need no new MFD for that.

F-14AM's known upgrades are as follows: 

(a) Thorough overhaul of airframe with 843 locally built parts
(b) New improved hydraulic and pneumatic system
(c) Complete overhaul of TF30-P414 Turbofans
(e) New Navigation and mission control system 
(d) AWG-9 receiving lighter newly built parts, digitalization of signals, modern processors 
(e) Fakour-90 LR-BVR Integration

By 2018 there were 8 x F-14AM's. I have not researched how many have received upgrades in last 5 years. Could be 7-10 more I guess.



AmirPatriot said:


> Note how past attempts to non-American weapons onto Iran's F-14A such as R-73 and R-27 have failed, whereas efforts to fit for example, Indian AAMs onto Su-30s have succeeded. It's because 2000s electronics are a lot easier to adapt to each other than 60s/70s electronics.



It had nothing to do with era of electronics. R-73 was not pursued on F-14 because of the simple reason that IRIAF's F-14A do not have IRST to track heat signature of target unlike the MIG-29. R-73 would had to use its own tracker which reduces range and renders the All-aspect advantage of R-73 useless. 

R-27R1 made little sense as well because its an SARH missile with bad record. Why risk an F-14A to stay in the hot zone to guide this missile while the same F-14 can fire AIM-54 or now Fakour-90 at much larger range? Besides there is another more important reason, IRIAF barely has a stock of 130-140 R-27R1 that are now 30+ years old. Its like not even enough for fleet of 23 x MIG-29 9.12. The Project was abandoned in favor of Fakour-90 which has much longer range with far better electronics and ECM.



AmirPatriot said:


> The idea is that an unarmed reconnaissance UAV - which are much more numerous than UCAVs - would find a target, and then feed that information to the nearest aircraft carrying weapons. The aircraft would then launch weapons on the coordinates of a stationary target or vector towards the target to engage it with bombs or other closer-range munitions.



Khajeh Fard did not even remotely hinted towards use of one way/half duplex datalink between Fighter-UAV. He pointed towards a two way Tactical Datalink of Fighter-UCAV both of which can track targets and attack them. 



AmirPatriot said:


> Quote from Kopp. He has not ruled out A-50 networking with early flankers. Hence my point there is not sufficient information.



By the time Dr. Carlo wrote this article (10-12 years ago?) TKS-2 TDL was barely 6-7 years old upgrade on SU-30 and was isolated system to Flankers only. He is hoping in the article that MIG-31Bm and A-50 might adapt to Flankers TDL to gain universal DLing in future but have seen that? 

The point i was making by posting Dr. Carlo's article was: 

- The Flankers never had any inherent TDL
- The ones they got some 20 years ago was an Upgrade. 
- The TDL was isolated to Flanker family only, not even working with MIG-31BM or A-50 who used their own isolated systems. 



AmirPatriot said:


> Aside from the obvious Chinese example, India has done so much with their Flankers. They've integrated their own weapons into them, have had domestic and foreign upgrades on them for HMDs and MFDs. And from the point of manufacture their Su-30s were customised with French and Israeli equipment installed instead of Russian equipment. When you want to make a big order, the supplier isn't going to put obstacles in your way.



Look behind the smoke screen and you will find Indians still paying 62 Million for USD/CKD kits of SU-30MK to Russia for "domestic production". Rosoboronexport of Russia (Defence export ministry) is even a partner in Indian local upgradation program of SU-30MKI including new Turbofans (~5 Billion USD) .... "_Money should reach Moscow"_

*https://www.financialexpress.com/defence/russia-to-supply-more-ckd-kits-for-sukhoi-30mki/2582410/*
*https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/india-s-su-30mki-costs-almost-twice-as-much-as-russia-s-new-su-30sm-here-s-why*. 
*https://www.defensemirror.com/news/32069/India_Allocates__9_8B_for_Corvettes__Su_30MKI_Engines*

Iran can also pull an "India" here and pay Russia some 20-25 Million USD per MIG-29 to carry out MLU and local upgrades on the dying and obsolete fleet. Russians as always will use front companies in Belgrade, Sofia, Minsk etc and spare parts, systems will start arriving in Iran. Iranian problem is internal though, country does not want an AF.



AmirPatriot said:


> I am not going to discuss the other claims you made such as those on the limitations of the Irbis' capability, which are way out of proportion considering the capabilities of that system.



This is their own video, target barely got tracked at ~100 KM. Some Russian users defended this by saying that the target had an RCS of 0.6 m2 ... Even if we agree with them, then this means that SU-35 can track a F-18EF/Rafale/EF-2000 at 100 KM by that time they would all have unloaded their AIM-120C/D, Meteor BVRAAMs at 10-15 m2 RCS of the Flanker which they would track at 150+ KM.


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1557149846431272961


----------



## Stryker1982

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1557149846431272961


Don't, just don't give hope lol.


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1557149846431272961



If they were going to Iran, they would be getting repurposed to be modified according to Iranian specifications.

I find it hard to believe Iran would buy based on whatever specifications Egypt had set out in the contract.

But if Iran is desperate enough to get any modern jet, then I suppose it’s possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

drmeson said:


> I am afraid that's not true if we go by the head of IAIO's words. It would have been true if he would have pointed out that the data link is just one way. He did not say that. In fact, he is very specifically saying that it's a two-way system i.e. One of the two vehicles tracks and transfers data to another and the other fires the weapon. He never said it's like only Kowsar tracks and gives it to UCAVS or vice versa. I would trust that he very well knows the difference between Single Duplex or Double Duplex transfer of information. Like I said before, this is head of IAIO, a Brig general with high education.


I didn't say it's a one-way system, I said in this application with reconnaissance UAVs the transmission would mainly be one-way. Doesn't mean the DL system itself isn't capable of two-way transfer.


drmeson said:


> Any fighter with a Search and Track radar with SAR capabilities, does not need any external pod to track a surface target (mobile or stationary). Yes its a bonus if you add EO/IR track capabilities to a fighter but without them a multimode radar with SAR capability can still do a very good job of tracking ground targets. The radar they showed in HESA facilities upon Kowsar's unvieling and in Dezful airshow is a exact replica of Grifo-346 (Shape of antenna, T/R modules, track range etc all match) which has 1m resolution bearing SAR capability (equivalent to to F-16) and this is Kowsar's only way of tracking a ground target. The SDB-1 repica they showed on its pylons is also going to be fired using this SAR track info from radar.
> 
> This shows that the DL can handle Real Time Radar Data.
> 
> Surface targets need more data size because of background Terrain+Clutter while aerial targets do not have that. If ground target imagery is involved than it would need even more larger data size. TDL that Khajeh Fard is talking about can hold for Real time Radar data from Fighter(SAR)<----->UCAV(SAR/EO/IR), it will also hold for Fighter(TWS,SAR)<----->Fighter(TWS,SAR). Will need work for sure but its not some mountainous task that cant happen in Iran.


This paragraph is based on far too much speculation/interpolation/assumptions compared to the short segment in the article. I'm not going to discuss it like this.


drmeson said:


> Cueing on the radio can not substitute radar information. If Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) or CAP dedicated fighters have turned off their radars, this by no means implies that they are doing it because someone is radioing them from HQ. That is just illogical. At best cueing is about rudimentary mission guidance during intercept. Radar being turned off means they had a better alternative to their own radars.


Radio calls are certainly not a good substitute for DL information on a display, but that's the level I think Iran's F-14s are at.


drmeson said:


> Again, cockpit upgradation or having shiny MFD's have nothing to do with the installation of Datalink. It only needs a T/R antenna and a plugin into the Processing unit of AWG-9 which will show its own Search-track targets and also the data received on the same old screen. You need no new MFD for that.
> 
> F-14AM's known upgrades are as follows:
> 
> (a) Thorough overhaul of airframe with 843 locally built parts
> (b) New improved hydraulic and pneumatic system
> (c) Complete overhaul of TF30-P414 Turbofans
> (e) New Navigation and mission control system
> (d) AWG-9 receiving lighter newly built parts, digitalization of signals, modern processors
> (e) Fakour-90 LR-BVR Integration
> 
> By 2018 there were 8 x F-14AM's. I have not researched how many have received upgrades in last 5 years. Could be 7-10 more I guess.


Once again, there is no evidence or even claims that F-14AM has datalink apart from your interpretations of BT talking about CAPs. Also, I reiterate my opinion that the F-14AM upgrade is much less extensive than many people think.


drmeson said:


> It had nothing to do with era of electronics. R-73 was not pursued on F-14 because of the simple reason that IRIAF's F-14A do not have IRST to track heat signature of target unlike the MIG-29. R-73 would had to use its own tracker which reduces range and renders the All-aspect advantage of R-73 useless.
> 
> R-27R1 made little sense as well because its an SARH missile with bad record. Why risk an F-14A to stay in the hot zone to guide this missile while the same F-14 can fire AIM-54 or now Fakour-90 at much larger range? Besides there is another more important reason, IRIAF barely has a stock of 130-140 R-27R1 that are now 30+ years old. Its like not even enough for fleet of 23 x MIG-29 9.12. The Project was abandoned in favor of Fakour-90 which has much longer range with far better electronics and ECM.


IRIAF has such a small remaining stock of AIM-54s (and this is well documented) that you only see the Tomcats flying with AIM-7s and AIM-9s nowadays. That's why they developed the Fakour and are supposedly working on Maghsoud.

R-27 would probably still be an upgrade over the AIM-7.


drmeson said:


> By the time Dr. Carlo wrote this article (10-12 years ago?) TKS-2 TDL was barely 6-7 years old upgrade on SU-30 and was isolated system to Flankers only. He is hoping in the article that MIG-31Bm and A-50 might adapt to Flankers TDL to gain universal DLing in future but have seen that?
> 
> The point i was making by posting Dr. Carlo's article was:
> 
> - The Flankers never had any inherent TDL
> - The ones they got some 20 years ago was an Upgrade.
> - The TDL was isolated to Flanker family only, not even working with MIG-31BM or A-50 who used their own isolated systems.


We're going in circles now.


drmeson said:


> This is their own video, target barely got tracked at ~100 KM. Some Russian users defended this by saying that the target had an RCS of 0.6 m2 ... Even if we agree with them, then this means that SU-35 can track a F-18EF/Rafale/EF-2000 at 100 KM by that time they would all have unloaded their AIM-120C/D, Meteor BVRAAMs at 10-15 m2 RCS of the Flanker which they would track at 150+ KM.


That video is atrocious. There is no indication in what the change on symbology on the target is. It could be anything - IFF, launch authorisation, being "hooked" by the pilot... Can't make any conclusions based on that alone.

Btw, Su-35 is reported to have a reduced radar signature to 1-3m^2 using RAM coating in specific areas.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> I didn't say it's a one-way system, I said in this application with reconnaissance UAVs the transmission would mainly be one-way. Doesn't mean the DL system itself isn't capable of two-way transfer.



Head of IAIO is describing a dual duplex Tactical Datalink between Fighter(s)-UCAV(s), nowhere he is saying it will be used one way from UAV/UCAV to Fighter. We can argue how it will be used but we were discussing the maximum capability of the system which in this case is a Non-Isolated, Real Time Radar Data Handling, Double Duplex Tactical Datalink for ground attack. 



AmirPatriot said:


> This paragraph is based on far too much speculation/interpolation/assumptions compared to the short segment in the article. I'm not going to discuss it like this.



Short verion then .... How would a Fighter with only a SAR capable radar track a ground target ? to send it to a UCAV.



AmirPatriot said:


> Radio calls are certainly not a good substitute for DL information on a display, but that's the level I think Iran's F-14s are at.



That is not the point of discussion. You were showing picture of cockpit of F-14AM as evidence of no TDL. My point was that TDL installation has nothing to do with glass cockpit of MFDs installations as it will just require a T/R antenna and a module into the processing unit of AWG-9. Thats the point I was making.



AmirPatriot said:


> IRIAF has such a small remaining stock of AIM-54s (and this is well documented) that you only see the Tomcats flying with AIM-7s and AIM-9s nowadays. That's why they developed the Fakour and are supposedly working on Maghsoud.



The point you made before was that F-14 cant accept new weapons, avionics upgradations which is why R-27 and R-73 failed on F-14 and I explained that they were reportedly failed not because of electronics but because R-73 needs IRST that F-14 lacks and R-27 is SARH and Iran barely has the stock for token fleet of MIG-29 9.12. 

F-14 is recently seen with Fakour-90 (only F-14AM) and AIM-54+ (Babaei Missile Industries upgraded 30 units) as well. Reportedly (I can post link) they have 30 AIM-54+ deeply overhauled units and 100 Fakour-90 for Long range Engagement. AIM-7E2 is a Failure missile with bottom level kill probability. 



AmirPatriot said:


> We're going in circles now.



Your initial point => Flankers always had Datalink. My counter (Dr. Carlo Kopp report) => No they did not, TKS-2 came as an upgrade package for SU-30M after some ~24 years of birth of Flanker family and until ~2010 was an Isolated system to Flanker family.

Few extremely stupid Iranian posters here and on twitter (not you) think that SU-35 avionics are some Godly package while in reality they are hardly 4.0-4+ generation that you can get on a MIG-29M/MIG-35 easily for 1/3 the price. Or something that probably Iran itself can get at home if $$ is provided. I can discuss this more system by system. IRIAF problem is more deep as Tom Cooper explained recently in his article. Tangential discussion. 



AmirPatriot said:


> That video is atrocious. There is no indication in what the change on symbology on the target is. It could be anything - IFF, launch authorisation, being "hooked" by the pilot... Can't make any conclusions based on that alone.


 
You should see video again. The target is detected at ~260 KM (Left) and is tracked for the first time at 1:21 at around ~100 KM (Right).







This is not the only thing that aviation followers were astonished to find about weakness of IRBIS-E. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) resolution of IRBIS-E according to the NIIP (its manufacturer) is 3 m, comparable to APG-70 radar from 1970-80s. 







SAR resolution is proportional to a radar’s bandwidth, which in turn is related to jamming-resistance (ECCMs) and LPI. In comparison, the Grifo-346 (replica that HESA has been parading around since 2017 at shows and unveilings) has a SAR capability of 1 m. 

Western Avionics >>> Soviet/Russian Avionics



AmirPatriot said:


> Btw, Su-35 is reported to have a reduced radar signature to 1-3m^2 using RAM coating in specific areas.



There is no evidence by any source for atrocious 1-3 m2 figures. If you have any actual evidence (company Document, some Ru-AF, PLAAF official etc) then I am open to changing my mind. Besides it makes no sense either. I will explain how:-

SU-35S = SU-27SM + avionics upgrade with no shape change on the airframe. There is mild change in the vertical stabilizer but nothing else. They are literally same thing.














Sukhoi itself published Flanker patent lists 10-15 m2 RCS of SU-27, 30 so how did the same airframe with avionics upgrade and re-branded as SU-35S suddenly became 1-3 m2 from 10-15 m2? that is just impossible wihtout radical restructuring of airframe. 

There was a plan to put RAM on SU-35 some 15 years ago that involved Russian academy of sciences but we did not see any RAM application on it. *https://www.fighter-planes.com/stealth2.htm* Even if for the sake of argument we say that yes RAM were applied, they won't reduce a 10-15 m2 RCS to 1 m2 otherwise what is stopping the entire world to apply the same RAM to any small RCS 3rd generation fighter like Mirage V, F-5, MIG-21 to make them stealth? RAM coats do not reduce RCS like magic, they help but the actual RCS reduction comes from reshaping the airframe from attack aspects like frontal (engagement mode) which did not happen in the SU-35 case. So the figure of 1-3 m2 is a fanboi imagination that some people on internet have. 

Western fighters always had low RCS compared to Soviet designs. According to USAF/USN released figures none of their fighters (except for F-15) exceeds 1-3 m2 RCS. This is USN historian/author Mr. Peter Grining's report on american fighter's recorded RCS values. 

*http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Articles/PG/PGSA.htm*

I should clarify that I am not against SU-35 acquisition. I just feel that even to create a token force of 2-3 squadrons, rest of the IRIAF and domestic production of light fighter, upgradations all will cease to exist. And for 5 billions we will have a 30-40 x 10-15 m2 RCS bearing Bomb Trucks with ~100 km A2A IRBIS-E tracking range and 105 KM BVR engagement capability with export model R-77-1. Not to mention no local TOT. Same amount of money can do wonders for IRIAF from Russia otherwise if focus of purchase is kept on MIG-29M/35, upgradations of current bengin MIG fleet, new turbofans for Kowsar-II and BVR, all aspect WVR missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Head of IAIO is describing a dual duplex Tactical Datalink between Fighter(s)-UCAV(s), nowhere he is saying it will be used one way from UAV/UCAV to Fighter. We can argue how it will be used but we were discussing the maximum capability of the system which in this case is a Non-Isolated, Real Time Radar Data Handling, Double Duplex Tactical Datalink for ground attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Short verion then .... How would a Fighter with only a SAR capable radar track a ground target ? to send it to a UCAV.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not the point of discussion. You were showing picture of cockpit of F-14AM as evidence of no TDL. My point was that TDL installation has nothing to do with glass cockpit of MFDs installations as it will just require a T/R antenna and a module into the processing unit of AWG-9. Thats the point I was making.
> 
> 
> 
> The point you made before was that F-14 cant accept new weapons, avionics upgradations which is why R-27 and R-73 failed on F-14 and I explained that they were reportedly failed not because of electronics but because R-73 needs IRST that F-14 lacks and R-27 is SARH and Iran barely has the stock for token fleet of MIG-29 9.12.
> 
> F-14 is recently seen with Fakour-90 (only F-14AM) and AIM-54+ (Babaei Missile Industries upgraded 30 units) as well. Reportedly (I can post link) they have 30 AIM-54+ deeply overhauled units and 100 Fakour-90 for Long range Engagement. AIM-7E2 is a Failure missile with bottom level kill probability.
> 
> 
> 
> Your initial point => Flankers always had Datalink. My counter (Dr. Carlo Kopp report) => No they did not, TKS-2 came as an upgrade package for SU-30M after some ~24 years of birth of Flanker family and until ~2010 was an Isolated system to Flanker family.
> 
> Few extremely stupid Iranian posters here and on twitter (not you) think that SU-35 avionics are some Godly package while in reality they are hardly 4.0-4+ generation that you can get on a MIG-29M/MIG-35 easily for 1/3 the price. Or something that probably Iran itself can get at home if $$ is provided. I can discuss this more system by system. IRIAF problem is more deep as Tom Cooper explained recently in his article. Tangential discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> You should see video again. The target is detected at ~260 KM (Left) and is tracked for the first time at 1:21 at around ~100 KM (Right).
> 
> View attachment 869773
> 
> 
> This is not the only thing that aviation followers were astonished to find about weakness of IRBIS-E. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) resolution of IRBIS-E according to the NIIP (its manufacturer) is 3 m, comparable to APG-70 radar from 1970-80s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SAR resolution is proportional to a radar’s bandwidth, which in turn is related to jamming-resistance (ECCMs) and LPI. In comparison, the Grifo-346 (replica that HESA has been parading around since 2017 at shows and unveilings) has a SAR capability of 1 m.
> 
> Western Avionics >>> Soviet/Russian Avionics
> 
> 
> 
> There is no evidence by any source for atrocious 1-3 m2 figures. If you have any actual evidence (company Document, some Ru-AF, PLAAF official etc) then I am open to changing my mind. Besides it makes no sense either. I will explain how:-
> 
> SU-35S = SU-27SM + avionics upgrade with no shape change on the airframe. There is mild change in the vertical stabilizer but nothing else. They are literally same thing.
> 
> View attachment 869811
> 
> 
> View attachment 869812
> View attachment 869813
> 
> 
> Sukhoi itself published Flanker patent lists 10-15 m2 RCS of SU-27, 30 so how did the same airframe with avionics upgrade and re-branded as SU-35S suddenly became 1-3 m2 from 10-15 m2? that is just impossible wihtout radical restructuring of airframe.
> 
> There was a plan to put RAM on SU-35 some 15 years ago that involved Russian academy of sciences but we did not see any RAM application on it. *https://www.fighter-planes.com/stealth2.htm* Even if for the sake of argument we say that yes RAM were applied, they won't reduce a 10-15 m2 RCS to 1 m2 otherwise what is stopping the entire world to apply the same RAM to any small RCS 3rd generation fighter like Mirage V, F-5, MIG-21 to make them stealth? RAM coats do not reduce RCS like magic, they help but the actual RCS reduction comes from reshaping the airframe from attack aspects like frontal (engagement mode) which did not happen in the SU-35 case. So the figure of 1-3 m2 is a fanboi imagination that some people on internet have.
> 
> Western fighters always had low RCS compared to Soviet designs. According to USAF/USN released figures none of their fighters (except for F-15) exceeds 1-3 m2 RCS. This is USN historian/author Mr. Peter Grining's report on american fighter's recorded RCS values.
> 
> *http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Articles/PG/PGSA.htm*
> 
> I should clarify that I am not against SU-35 acquisition. I just feel that even to create a token force of 2-3 squadrons, rest of the IRIAF and domestic production of light fighter, upgradations all will cease to exist. And for 5 billions we will have a 30-40 x 10-15 m2 RCS bearing Bomb Trucks with ~100 km A2A IRBIS-E tracking range and 105 KM BVR engagement capability with export model R-77-1. Not to mention no local TOT. Same amount of money can do wonders for IRIAF from Russia otherwise if focus of purchase is kept on MIG-29M/35, upgradations of current bengin MIG fleet, new turbofans for Kowsar-II and BVR, all aspect WVR missiles.


@drmeson I for my own part am not very in favour of a purchase of Su-35s but isn't it better to obtain 2 squadrons just to have a platform against which the performance of future indigenous aircraft can be measured in flag exercises and to be able to study the sleek Flanker airframe design?


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @drmeson I for my own part am not very in favour of a purchase of Su-35s but isn't it better to obtain 2 squadrons just to have a platform against which the performance of future indigenous aircraft can be measured in flag exercises and to be able to study the sleek Flanker airframe design?


not at all. you want to test the capabilities of future airplanes . test them against f-14 . those f14 probably are more capable , test their capabilities over Persian gulf against some neighboring country aircraft

and why you want to study flanker design . you are too interested in it go study Mig-29 that follow the same philosophy in design why spend several billion on such thing

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @drmeson I for my own part am not very in favour of a purchase of Su-35s but isn't it better to obtain 2 squadrons just to have a platform against which the performance of future indigenous aircraft can be measured in flag exercises and to be able to study the sleek Flanker airframe design?



IRIAF does not need any aggressor squadron. 

SU-35S totally fits into IRIAF as heavy attack aircraft, a role that is currently filled by F-4E/D, SU-24M (some ~100 aircrafts). And also as an interceptor to replace MIG-29 9.12 (23 aircrafts). If IRIAF wants to get this aircrafts they will need 3 squadrons at Bushehr, Chabahar, Bandar Abbas. Then another 2 at Tehran and Tabriz. This will require some 60 aircrafts (replacing 123) fighters for 6 Billion USD. 

SU-35S can't replace F-14A/AM which has a BVR package stretching to 150-200 KM. Russia does not export any other BVR missile than R-77-1 which has a range of ~105 KM. If leadership wants to build a brand new IRIAF they will have to spend some 13-14 Billion USD over 6-8 years to procure some 120 x SU-35S with 500 x R-77-1, 500 x R-74, PGMs, LACM, AShCM etc. Not gonna happen but thats what math adds up to.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> IRIAF does not need any aggressor squadron.
> 
> SU-35S totally fits into IRIAF as heavy attack aircraft, a role that is currently filled by F-4E/D, SU-24M (some ~100 aircrafts). And also as an interceptor to replace MIG-29 9.12 (23 aircrafts).


You don't see a role for it acting in the Syrian theater of war? Just curious - an aircraft like that could help assert dominance in the north and patrol airspace to deter enemy airstrikes, at the very least.


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> You don't see a role for it acting in the Syrian theater of war? Just curious - an aircraft like that could help assert dominance in the north and patrol airspace to deter enemy airstrikes, at the very least.


in Syrian theater even mig-29 would have did the job , to be honest a su-25 probably would have done that job.
if at the time our UAVs, had strike capabilities and we didn't have problem with Sadid-1 . those were far more than enough to do the job in that scenario


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> if at the time our UAVs, had strike capabilities and we didn't have problem with Sadid-1 . those were far more than enough to do the job in that scenario



Our UAVs did have strike abilities. Iran released a video back in the day of drone strikes. Too lazy to find it. S-129 montage of strikes. It just wasn’t bragged about a lot.

_The IRGC used the Shahed-129 for combat and surveillance missions throughout the Syrian civil war, beginning around 2014. The IRGC used the Shahed-129 to strike unidentified targets in Iraq and Syria—the first ever known Iranian drone strikes in wartime—sometime in 2015-16._









Technical specifications and historic usage of Iranian drones possibly provided to Russia


Iran has used the drone models that Russia may acquire—the Shahed-129 and Shahed-191—extensively throughout the Middle East, including in...




www.criticalthreats.org





Also later in the war flying wing derivative drones did there attacks on ISIS in Deir Ez Zoe that one was well documented.


But a simple F-5/Saeqeh could have done wonders for CAS. But Iran felt that would lead to a no fly zone or Saudi Arabia joining the war.

Also even 50 drones isn’t going to do much when rebels+ terrorists + ISIS numbered in 100,000+ troops who are operating in asymmetrical warfare. Syrian airforce was running 100-200 sorties a day throughout the war. Didnt do much.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Our UAVs did have strike abilities. Iran released a video back in the day of drone strikes. Too lazy to find it. S-129 montage of strikes. It just wasn’t bragged about a lot.


they had problem with their main weapon of Shahed-129 which was Sadid-1 and Qaem bomb was only good against stationary target.


TheImmortal said:


> _The IRGC used the Shahed-129 for combat and surveillance missions throughout the Syrian civil war, beginning around 2014. The IRGC used the Shahed-129 to strike unidentified targets in Iraq and Syria—the first ever known Iranian drone strikes in wartime—sometime in 2015-16._


only qaem was working and it was not designed to work against moving targets
shahed-129 was mainly used for surveillance at the time


TheImmortal said:


> Also later in the war flying wing derivative drones did there attacks on ISIS in Deir Ez Zoe that one was well documented.


when ? 2018- 2019 russia entered into war in 2015


TheImmortal said:


> Also even 50 drones isn’t going to do much when rebels+ terrorists + ISIS numbered in 100,000+ troops who are operating in asymmetrical warfare. Syrian airforce was running 100-200 sorties a day throughout the war. Didnt do much.


that's the scenario that drones shine


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> they had problem with their main weapon of Shahed-129 which was Sadid-1 and Qaem bomb was only good against stationary target.



Go find the video. They were using it on rebels moving. Not stationary building. You know farsi you can find the video. I remember it vividly. I think it was one of the few official videos Iran ever published from Syrian operations.



Hack-Hook said:


> only qaem was working and it was not designed to work against moving targets
> shahed-129 was mainly used for surveillance at the time



If you find the video you will see the strikes it montage. And I believe Iran (or the official) claimed they did tens if not 100+ strikes with drones (going off memory forgive me). Video was released several years ago if that helps def 2019 or earlier showing drone strike operations during the war.



Hack-Hook said:


> when ? 2018- 2019 russia entered into war in 2015



After 1st ISIS terrorist attack in Iran. Video shows them taking off from Iran. Internal weapons bay RQ-170 variant (don’t know what they call it these days).



Hack-Hook said:


> that's the scenario that drones shine



No. Drones don’t shine against asymmetrical troops movements and when your enemy does human wave tactics and uses trucks as massive bombs. Or else US would have defeated Taliban years ago.

Against Asymmetrical and symmetrical warfare you need real time intelligence which Iran didn’t have in Syria. S-129 range due to ground control limitation wasnt amazing. And the number of airfields it could take off from was limited. (Most were captured early in the war and S-129 is slow prop drone....another reason Iran needs a heavy bomber drone that is jet powered and fast arrival to battlefield).

All of Ukraine’s intelligence targeting was provided by NATO or else they couldn’t find a tank if it was right in front of them.

I followed Syrian warfare hour by hour at some points. Iran simply lacked enough firepower back then. They were reluctant to bring heavy weaponary let alone air based weapons to Syria.

It would need F-4’s and F-5’s running 200-300 sorties a day alongside Syrian Airforce running same amount to turn around the tide. Only Russia could provide that sortie rate fast enough. Solemani knew the state of Iranian Air Force more than any of us on here. Plus risk of Saudi Arabia joining the air war or US doing no fly zone.

How long do you think IRIAF could run 200-300 sorties per day bombing campaign without its planes falling apart from wear and tear?

Asking a genuine question.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Also even 50 drones isn’t going to do much when rebels+ terrorists + ISIS numbered in 100,000+ troops who are operating in asymmetrical warfare.


Certainly helps


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Go find the video. They were using it on rebels moving. Not stationary building. You know farsi you can find the video. I remember it vividly. I think it was one of the few official videos Iran ever published from Syrian operations.


the video showed a car was parking in front of a building ,if i recall correctly


TheImmortal said:


> If you find the video you will see the strikes it montage. And I believe Iran (or the official) claimed they did tens if not 100+ strikes with drones (going off memory forgive me). Video was released several years ago if that helps def 2019 or earlier showing drone strike operations during the war.


in 2017 they introduced sadid-345 that solved the problem , later in 2018 or 2019 sadid-1 problem solved. but Russia entered in 2015


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> After 1st ISIS terrorist attack in Iran. Video shows them taking off from Iran. Internal weapons bay RQ-170 variant (don’t know what they call it these days).


that was saeqeh or shahed-191 and it happened in 2018 by the time Sadid-1 problem were solved


TheImmortal said:


> No. Drones don’t shine against asymmetrical troops movements and when your enemy does human wave tactics and uses trucks as massive bombs. Or else US would have defeated Taliban years ago.


they did , Taliban didn't did any massive attack , whenever they tried to do that they were destroyed . it was later after they reached an agreement with usa it was they did such operations. and with drones you target those pickups and attack their shelters . that can seriously hamper their operation capabilities .


TheImmortal said:


> All of Ukraine’s intelligence targeting was provided by NATO or else they couldn’t find a tank if it was right in front of them.


that's arguable


TheImmortal said:


> It would need F-4’s and F-5’s running 200-300 sorties a day alongside Syrian Airforce running same amount to turn around the tide. Only Russia could provide that sortie rate fast enough. Solemani knew the state of Iranian Air Force more than any of us on here. Plus risk of Saudi Arabia joining the air war or US doing no fly zone.


it need 20-30 male uav to turn the tide of war. you just need to made it unsafe for terrorists .


TheImmortal said:


> How long do you think IRIAF could run 200-300 sorties per day bombing campaign without its planes falling apart from wear and tear?
> 
> Asking a genuine question.


if its running , kaman and mohajer and shahed-129 drones well my guess is very long time . and i have always said i'm not in favor of giving CAS role to air force , that's the role of army aviation

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> that was saeqeh or shahed-191 and it happened in 2018 by the time Sadid-1 problem were solved
> 
> they did , Taliban didn't did any massive attack , whenever they tried to do that they were destroyed . it was later after they reached an agreement with usa it was they did such operations. and with drones you target those pickups and attack their shelters . that can seriously hamper their operation capabilities .
> 
> that's arguable
> 
> it need 20-30 male uav to turn the tide of war. you just need to made it unsafe for terrorists .
> 
> if its running , kaman and mohajer and shahed-129 drones well my guess is very long time . and i have always said i'm not in favor of giving CAS role to air force , that's the role of army aviation


The likely main limiting factor for the drones from a logistics perspective would be the available stocks of drone launched pgms,and how quickly these could be replenished,as without those you would then be limited to using unguided weapons,which due to the low payload capabilities of the drones would greatly limit the amounts that could be carried.This would then leave only secondary capabilities such as target designation for precision guided artillery rounds or artillery rockets,also target spotting for loitering munitions and manned airstrikes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558388849075785728

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> they did , Taliban didn't did any massive attack , whenever they tried to do that they were destroyed . it was later after they reached an agreement with usa it was they did such operations. and with drones you target those pickups and attack their shelters . that can seriously hamper their operation capabilities .



Doesn’t work that. Look at Battle of Kobane. ISIS lost some 10,000 fighters and US had to end up leveling the city during CAS. That was with constant air support and hundreds of strikes. Iran’s drones didn’t have that reach or fire power.

Look at Battle of Kindi Hospital, human wave after human wave. Al-Sishani was famous for using people like meat grinders to take an objective. 

A few drone strikes during a battle wasnt changing the calculus of these groups.



Hack-Hook said:


> that's arguable
> 
> it need 20-30 male uav to turn the tide of war. you just need to made it unsafe for terrorists .



You weren’t turning the tide of a war with 20-30 drones when 70% of Syria was in terrorist hands. Lay down the Hollywood action hero thinking.



Hack-Hook said:


> if its running , kaman and mohajer and shahed-129 drones well my guess is very long time . and i have always said i'm not in favor of giving CAS role to air force , that's the role of army aviation



No drones. Just fighter jets. That’s issue with Iranian airforce. They can’t run a sustained sortie campaign without losing aircraft to wear and tear.



Hack-Hook said:


> the video showed a car was parking in front of a building ,if i recall correctly



No this video came before that one. It was a montage video of Syrian drone strikes (maybe some artillery lasered included strikes as well). There was at least 10+ strikes in the video.

Impossible to find now since it was so long ago.


----------



## GrandBotBoi

AmirPatriot said:


> I didn't say it's a one-way system, I said in this application with reconnaissance UAVs the transmission would mainly be one-way. Doesn't mean the DL system itself isn't capable of two-way transfer.
> 
> This paragraph is based on far too much speculation/interpolation/assumptions compared to the short segment in the article. I'm not going to discuss it like this.
> 
> Radio calls are certainly not a good substitute for DL information on a display, but that's the level I think Iran's F-14s are at.
> 
> Once again, there is no evidence or even claims that F-14AM has datalink apart from your interpretations of BT talking about CAPs. Also, I reiterate my opinion that the F-14AM upgrade is much less extensive than many people think.
> 
> IRIAF has such a small remaining stock of AIM-54s (and this is well documented) that you only see the Tomcats flying with AIM-7s and AIM-9s nowadays. That's why they developed the Fakour and are supposedly working on Maghsoud.
> 
> R-27 would probably still be an upgrade over the AIM-7.
> 
> We're going in circles now.
> 
> That video is atrocious. There is no indication in what the change on symbology on the target is. It could be anything - IFF, launch authorisation, being "hooked" by the pilot... Can't make any conclusions based on that alone.
> 
> Btw, Su-35 is reported to have a reduced radar signature to 1-3m^2 using RAM coating in specific areas.


1-3m² RCS on SU-35 is without RAM coating afaik, with RAM coating it's down to like 0.5m²

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> in Syrian theater even mig-29 would have did the job , to be honest a su-25 probably would have done that job.
> if at the time our UAVs, had strike capabilities and we didn't have problem with Sadid-1 . those were far more than enough to do the job in that scenario


Erm Shahed-129 regularly carried out strikes in Syria, and their weren't significant issues with Sadid-1 that's a myth. When they didn't have Sadids available they were used to guide precision artillery



Hack-Hook said:


> they had problem with their main weapon of Shahed-129 which was Sadid-1 and Qaem bomb was only good against stationary target.
> 
> only qaem was working and it was not designed to work against moving targets
> shahed-129 was mainly used for surveillance at the time
> 
> when ? 2018- 2019 russia entered into war in 2015
> 
> that's the scenario that drones shine


Uhm no. Shahed-191 has never been seen with Qaem, and Qaem can't easily engage moving targets. Shahed-129 uses Sadid-1 as it's main rocket powered munition, and Sadid-345 as it's glide munitions. The claims about Sadid-1 problems are debunked BS from Babak Taghavae

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Doesn’t work that. Look at Battle of Kobane. ISIS lost some 10,000 fighters and US had to end up leveling the city during CAS. That was with constant air support and hundreds of strikes. Iran’s drones didn’t have that reach or fire power.
> 
> Look at Battle of Kindi Hospital, human wave after human wave. Al-Sishani was famous for using people like meat grinders to take an objective.
> 
> A few drone strikes during a battle wasnt changing the calculus of these groups.


the human wave of al shishani was not the problem the suicide wan and trucks were the problem those drones coulddeal with them . let the defender grind the cannonfoders . do you knew in kurdistan what our solfdiers were using against human wave attacks of Komoleh ?








TheImmortal said:


> You weren’t turning the tide of a war with 20-30 drones when 70% of Syria was in terrorist hands. Lay down the Hollywood action hero thinking.


ok 40-50 mohajer-6
in syria , surian were not aware of isis movement that was part of the problem . those drones were solving the problem and could make mince meat out of their toyotas , and without those the terrorists would have reduced to rag tag terrorist with ak-47 with limited mobility and every move exposed



TheImmortal said:


> No this video came before that one. It was a montage video of Syrian drone strikes (maybe some artillery lasered included strikes as well). There was at least 10+ strikes in the video.
> 
> Impossible to find now since it was so long ago.


don't recall it but i knew we had problem with sadid-1 and were using only Qaem



GrandBotBoi said:


> 1-3m² RCS on SU-35 is without RAM coating afaik, with RAM coating it's down to like 0.5m²


still won\t answer its outdated radar that would be picked up by any modern jet from far away and could be countered with any half decent aesa radar.


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> Erm Shahed-129 regularly carried out strikes in Syria, and their weren't significant issues with Sadid-1 that's a myth. When they didn't have Sadids available they were used to guide precision artillery


they were using qaem , and until sadid 345 shahed-129 didnt have anny weapon suitable for engaging fast moving targets . I think later it was in 2018 that sadid-1 problem solved



GrandBotBoi said:


> Erm Shahed-129 regularly carried out strikes in Syria, and their weren't significant issues with Sadid-1 that's a myth. When they didn't have Sadids available they were used to guide precision artillery
> 
> 
> Uhm no. Shahed-191 has never been seen with Qaem, and Qaem can't easily engage moving targets. Shahed-129 uses Sadid-1 as it's main rocket powered munition, and Sadid-345 as it's glide munitions. The claims about Sadid-1 problems are debunked BS from Babak Taghavae


show me photo of shahed -129 with sadid-1 from those eras


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558356064873201665

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558356064873201665


waste of resources, all the resources must go into kowsar , we don't have enough resource to have a production line for Yasin

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> waste of resources, all the resources must go into kowsar , we don't have enough resource to have a production line for Yasin


You must have subsonic Advanced trainer for pilot training, Yasin or Something based on F 5 ... Advanced training Jet also can fill CAS role...so it is dual purpose.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> You must have subsonic Advanced trainer for pilot training, Yasin or Something based on F 5 ... Advanced training Jet also can fill CAS role...so it is dual purpose.


you see why invest on yasin while kowsar can fulfill that role a lot better . just answer that to me


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> you see why invest on yasin while kowsar can fulfill that role a lot better . just answer that to me


From what I observe, Yasin was built by a separate team from the one that designed Kowsar.

Not a bad platform but nowhere in the same class as the latter, so I believe it won't enter mass production but they'll implement the design and technology that went into it in subsequent projects.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> SU-30MKK had data link back in 2000’s as I said in my post earlier with stats provided but you ignored.





TheImmortal said:


> I provided *several* examples of Chinese local upgrades outside of contract on their SU-30’s back in 2000’s. Russians did not care one bit. Again you ignored more evidence of your lies.



Stop misqouting me, I said any TDL in Sukhoi does not exist for IRIAF. Here is my direct qoute:



> _It won't have the datalink that IRIAF uses for Kowsar, F-14AM and UCAVs (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard). It would have an isolated battle environment cut off from the entire IRIAF fleet. _



Dr. Carlo Kopp of AussieAirpower is saying the same thing that it's an isolated system for Flankers so yes any Flanker won't have the TDL for IRIAF *http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html*

- The first TDL (TKS-2) on any flanker came as an upgrade not an inherent package after some 24 years of birth of the Flanker family.
- It is an isolated system limited to Flankers, and does not even work with RuAF MIG-31BM or A-50 AWACS of Ru-AF so good luck fitting in with Iranian GWACS, UCAVS or local avionics package on Kowsar.

Any Flanker procurement won't have the universal TDL (confirmed by IAI head, Gen. Afshin Khajeh Fard) that will just start working with IRIAF, IRGCAF's double duplex Fighter-Fighter Fighter-UCAV TDL. Iranian engineers will have to integrate this 85 Million USD 15 m2 RCS elephant into the current TDL network. Would Russia allow Iran to touch their front-line fighter? Their history with Iran, India, Egypt, and Vietnam tells us that whenever these countries operated a 4th generation Russian fighter, they had to pay Russia for upgrades despite having local industrial base to carry out the work themselves. I have explained multiple times that the Chinese case is different, it's a superpower with 20+ Trillion USD GDP economy that Russians are lucky to still have as clients. China can dictate its terms with Russia that Iran, India, Vietnam, and Egypt can't even think of. This is why every one of these countries are trying to get rid of Russian dependence. India despite having a for-show token domestic production of Flankers is still paying Russia 62 USD/ Su-30MKI CDK kits. They are opting for their Rafale as their front-line Air superiority fighter while their own Tejas as their light platform. They did not go for SU-35 or MIG-35. Rosoboronexport of Russia (under Umbrella Defence ministry) is a partner in Indian local upgradation program of SU-30MKI including new Turbofans (~5 Billion USD)

*https://www.financialexpress.com/defence/russia-to-supply-more-ckd-kits-for-sukhoi-30mki/2582410/*
*https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/india-s-su-30mki-costs-almost-twice-as-much-as-russia-s-new-su-30sm-here-s-why*.
*https://www.defensemirror.com/news/32069/India_Allocates__9_8B_for_Corvettes__Su_30MKI_Engines*

So your "Let's trap them in a contract" rant does not work with Russia or China. No significant clients of Russia among Iran, India, Egypt, or Vietnam (all have industrial bases) has ever changed a screw on 4th generation Russian jets without paying Russia, directly or indirectly. India even today with their "domestic program" is paying Russia heavy money for Flankers.



TheImmortal said:


> As for your F-5 claims, you never produced a single strand of evidence that F-5 has a 1-2m2 frontal cross section.
> 
> You literally want everyone to believe you based on F-18 has 3m2 (no citation provided other than your claim that USN said so which I couldn’t find) so F-5 will have 1-2m2 because it’s a “smaller”. That’s ultimately where your claim comes from....yourself. Which is fine, but you tried to pass it off as FACT.
> 
> Official RCS data on modern fighters is very hard to find if not classified by most countries. Simulations out there are what make it to web. Same simulations you berated.



Like I said above, you either have dementia or you deliberately misquote people for trolling purposes. Here is my direct quote on F-5's RCS before, my basis for F-5 have 1-3 m2 RCS has always stemmed from a family of airframes N-156 having officially known RCS of ~1-3 m2. Your claim of 16 m2 is laughable at best which fits your past record of claiming BS.



> _"FA/18 itself has a USN claimed RCS of 3m2 (1999) and the airframe is a modified version of F-5E/F, but larger and edgy, Do you really want us to believe that F/A-18 is 3 M2 but the tiny needle like F-5 is 16 m2 somehow?
> 
> F-5 was and is quite hard to track in aerial combat which is why its base design (N-156) was chosen to be driven into F/A-18 which became the premier USN fighter for decades and still is. Even the modern US aviators call an upgraded F-5N a small low observable platform that you can not just defeat easily in the sky. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...at-will-make-the-entire-fleet-far-more-potent
> 
> We have a logical base as well. In the Iran-Iraq war, the thickest possible majority of F-5E was downed by SAM fire which tracks the aircraft from the aspect of lower body. Even an F-22 will have a hard time hiding its lower body RCS. Barely ~8 confirmed air-to-air kills of F-5E were recorded during combat with MIG-25PD, MIG-23ML and all by WVR engagement. None killed at distance during BVR attack which Iraqis used to launch like maniacs with R-40 BVR missile from MIG-25PD. They once even got an F-14A of Hashem Ale-Agha but none ever got an F-5E despite being fired upon multiple times by an R-40. It tells us how difficult it is to track such a small airframe and kill it with ARH/SARH missiles. *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Iraqi_aerial_victories_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war**"*_



My claim for F-5's RCS being 1-3 m2 (which I firmly stand on) has always stemmed from the fact that its driven F/A-18 has a 1-3 m2 RCS, actually 1.2 m2 if I may qoute USN Aviation historian/Author Mr. Peter Grining. F/A-18, F-5E/F/Kowsar, F-20, Saeqeh-I/II, FCK-1 are all driven from N-156 airframe and have mild difference from each other. If the edgiest/largest member of this family airframes has a RCS of 1.2 m2 (USN) then how come the less edgy and smaller version of same airframe suddenly become 16 m2 according to your troll logic? Unlike you, I would not use the software a simulated RCS value here. I would rather USN naval aviation author himself Mr. Peter Grining, for F/A-18 RCS values of 1.2 m2 RCS and 0.75 m2 for F/A-18EF.

*http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/Articles/PG/PGSA.htm*

 

According to you, Dr. Carlo Kopp is wrong, USN's author Mr. Peter Grining is wrong, US aviators are wrong, IAIO's Afshin Khajeh Fard is wrong, Sukhoi OKB .... who else is wrong?



TheImmortal said:


> Several actual technical people with experience in the field of aeronautics like Evilwesterners and Peed have commended the flankers and suggested that Iran purchase the plane for defense purposes if at all possible.



Spare me from your ***-kissing of other posters here but I believe in numbers published by companies and officials. Sukhoi or any official related to Ru-AF, Russian aviation source never ever claimed that SU-35 (SU-27SM with avionic upgrade) has an RCS of 1-3 m2 that you claimed is true. Let along Su-35, Sukhoi never actually claimed in their patent for SU-57 to be stealth, its low observatory at best with 0.1 m2 value they published, close to Rafale. They are not stupid that they will allow their company to be ridiculed by claiming SU-27SM suddenly became 1-3 m2 from 10-15 m2.



TheImmortal said:


> Barely information on its “datalink”, “radar” by the military themselves.



Head of IAIO, Brig General Afshin Khajeh Fard confirmed a two way, Double Duplex Tactical Datalink between Fighter(Radar data)<---------->UCAV(SAR Data+EO/IR data)

*Link* 



TheImmortal said:


> “radar” by the military themselves.



_ISWNEWS quoting official figures:_ Radar: Griffo-Leonardo (or its Chinese NREIT copy) produced domestically, Range: 93 KM, can attack two Targets. *Link* 

_Visually:_ an "exact" replica of Grifo-346 with the same antenna shape, arrays, T/R count, processing units, tracking range, and engagement specs.

_Key Aero, AirInternational: _IEI Bayyenat-II locally produced multimode X band Fire Control Radar of NRIET Chinese and Italian Leonardo origin.

_Officially presented: _HESA floors, Dezful Airshow

You may be living under a rock and yet you dare to claim BS here but others are not. And no they do not owe you any explanation on how they got this system in their hands, being produced domestically now.








TheImmortal said:


> No long range BVR or if it’s coming.



BVR capability =/= BVR posession

Before Fakour-90 test and few AIM-54 being overhauled, F-14A were flying without BVR does this mean F-14 suddenly become BVR less fighter ? was it a BVR-capable fighter who at that moment had no missile to use at BVR ranges? Your logic is stupid at best.



TheImmortal said:


> But you assume it’s better than Russian electronics



Where did I say that Iranian local electronics are better than Russian electronics? provide evidence.



TheImmortal said:


> Here is the paper in PDF format if you actually want to read and understand it without having a stroke
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3094/309430921008.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> I have concluded you are too far down the rabbit hole regarding Project Kowsar to consider viable stop gap alternatives. It would be counter productive to try to make you see the light. You made it clear you rather sit in fanboy darkness clutching on to false hopes.



Posting the same paper, again and again, would not make your troll claim true. I read this entire paper the first time you tried to use it for your stupid claim. Nowhere I found the authors claiming the RCS as real. As a matter of fact they did not even utter the words of real RCS, because their paper's ONLY objective is to show that whatever simulated value of RCS their software is showing drops when RAM coating is applied (with incremental width). Their paper is about the DROP of RCS in simulation and nothing to verify the RAM's performance in simulation. You tried to lie to the entire IRIAF section here but were caught pants down . Lesson for you: Stop misquoting the authors! Researchers hate that, you are a troll, they are not.

Here is a list of your failures related to this bogus claim of yours:

*- Software Simulated RCS =/= Real RCS. *No simulation in the entire world of science can ever be equated to real-world values without a relative factor which needs to be x or + or - from the simulated RCS to make it equal to the actual lab tested value. We don't know this relative factor because the paper was not about the real RCS. The paper was about simulated drop in RCS by RAM.

*- The authors in your "trophy" paper you posted, are nowhere claiming that their simulated RCS = Real RCS.* They are not doing it because they are scientists. While you being a troll are constantly misquoting their work. Scientists hate being misquoted.

- *Actual RCS is measured by multimillion USD facilities, not on freeware software* by actual professional scientists, who according to your stupid logic are just fools wasting their years of lives, millions of USD on establishing laboratories. They can just download freeware and design the next generation of F-35 and F-22 from their bedrooms.

- *US aviators themselves are claiming that their F-5N is hard to track/observe even from an F-18E of F-35*. Would they say it about an airframe that you are claiming to be having an RCS of 16 m2? They can just track it from 150 KM away and destroy it, why an experienced US aviator will call the airframe hard to track if it has larger than an F-4/F-15's RCS value?

- *F-5E/F during the war has never been shot by a BVR missile*. MIG-25PD and MIG-23ML shot F-4E and F-14A with R-40, and R-23 BVR missiles but failed to track "16 m2 F-5". Iraqi MIG-25PD later had to wait till 30 KM to get a lock on US F/A-18. N-156 family has small RCS no matter which member we take. USN themselves released F/A-18 and F/A-18EF to be 0.75 to 1.2 m2, how come the same N-156 airframe with fewer edges and smaller size suddenly becomes 16 m2 according to your logic?

Now please provide us the citation for your following claims:

1) F-5 has a RCS of 16 m2 and it will be attacked from all sides (real RCS not simulation)
2) SU-35S has a RCS of 1-3 m2

I don't think anybody takes you seriously anymore, like I said before many times, you have a habit of claiming baseless things and when someone counters that with facts you will either go shut up about it or try to deviate the subject with trash talking, which you did in this post. Here is an updated list of your troll claims that have been smashed right away and you do not address them anymore:

- *Your claim *There have been two dozen plus Saegheh built. *Reality *Serial numbers proved there have just been 6.

- *Your claim *Kowsar is a 1960s fighter plane. *Reality* Its radar (Shown at the unveiling, ditto of Grifo-346), avionics (Shown at unveiling), communications (Shown by unveiling), FBW system (BT), Tactical datalink (IAIO head) rivals Mirage-2005, F-16 Block 30. Easily more advanced than anything in IRIAF.

- *Your claim *Mirage-F1 were purchased from France *Reality* They are Saddams gifts. How come an Iranian does not know this is beyond me?

- *Your claim *There are only "6 prop airframes" of Kowsar in HESA from the same 2018 unveiling that they show each time some official visit the facility *Reality *With serial numbers, it was proven that there are 4 aircraft that are operational and there are 18-24 further airframes in primer/being worked upon inside HESA.

- *Your claim *SU-35S has an RCS of 1-3 m2* Reality *There is a "ZERO" difference between the frontal section of SU-27 and SU-35 so how come SU-27 having a company patented 10-15 m2 RCS suddenly became 1-3 m2 in SU-35? Is there any evidence for that? let alone evidence is this even logical to assume that same airframe reduced some 12 m2 of RCS just because of avioncis upgrade ?

- *Your claim *SU-35 has the longest BVR package* Reality *The officially released Russian video shows IRBIS-E radar tracking a fighter sized target at ~100 KM.

- *Your claim *Software simulated RCS are real RCS *Reality *No they are not, Simulated values with relative factors = Real values. Entire world of scientists will laugh on you for claiming that simulation value = real value without any coefficient/relative factor between them.

- *Your claim *1960s era designed airframes can't have low RCS *Reality* MIG-21, F-5, F-16, F/A-18 are all from 1960s-1970s generation airframes yet their RCS values are below 5m2.

*- Your claim *F-5 airframe has a RCS of 16 m2 and will be attacked from front and lateral sides *Reality * You failed to produce a single document of REAL RCS values of F-5 instead tried to pass simulated RCS values without any relative factor, misqouting the authors for things they did not even claim. You neglect the fact that the largest, most edgiest airframe of the N-156 family (F-5, F-18, F-17, Saeghe-I/II, FCK-1) has a USN released RCS of 1-3 m2. USN combat aviators call it hard to observe/track fighter which obviously they wont call a 16 m2 RCS bearing airframe. You neglect the fact that despite being in aerial combat for a decade long war, Iraqi MIG-25PD, MIG-23ML failed to shoot IRIAF F-5E at BVR ranges while same fighters scored victories on F-4E/D and F-14A with R-40D and R-23 BVR missiles.

According to you:

- USN serving naval aviators are wrong to call F-5 hard to track. They should have read your "SImUlatEd RCS oF 16m2" so that they can question themselves.

- History of Iran-Iraq war of F-5 never been shot with a BVR missile is wrong

- USN and their aviation historian/authors like Peter Grining is wrong for publishing N-156 family airframes having 0.75-1.2 m2 RCS

- IACI head Brig. General Afshin Khajeh Fard is wrong for talking about Full Duplex Tactical Datalink in use of IRIAF and IRGCAF.

- Photos of HESA floors for Kowsar-I production are wrong "because 6 PRoP AirFRaMES"

- Aviation photographers who counted Saegheh Numbers are wrong

- Sukhoi Company is wrong to publish their flanker airframe having an RCS values as 10-15 m2 in their patents.

- NIIP is wrong to release videos of IRBIS-E tracking range at 100 KM.

Please tell us what your next claim is so that this list can grow.


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> You don't see a role for it acting in the Syrian theater of war? Just curious - an aircraft like that could help assert dominance in the north and patrol airspace to deter enemy airstrikes, at the very least.



If you park 2 squadrons of 24 x SU-35S in Syria, IAF will try its best to destroy them on ground. They have the means to do so and they wont let Syria develop any useful IADS either. Syria does not have the air power or missile strike capability to deal with Israel for now. The country came out of an elongated civil war and it can not open another theatre with a globally supported enemy that receives Multibillions of USD in defence aid and tech. Only way to strengthen Syria is to do the following:

- Interoperatbility with Hezbollah 
- IADS of layers of long range Search/Track radars datalinked with ambush SHORADS, HIMADS, Interceptor aircraft (with long range BVR) pretty much like what Iran is developing at home.
- Missile power to attack airbases of Israel from where these jets fly
- $$$
- Political support of powers to keep Turkey out of the Northern, Western borders.

Syria has none of the above for now. 

Btw, Israeli Airstrikes in Syria happen but magnitude of them are mostly just Jew cooked stories who are 10/10 times reported by their own news channels where they make mathematically atrocious claims like 50 died, airbases destroyed etc. Misinformation is a weapon in war that they very profoundly use.



sanel1412 said:


> You must have subsonic Advanced trainer for pilot training, Yasin or Something based on F 5 ... Advanced training Jet also can fill CAS role...so it is dual purpose.



Yasin is most likely an ego project of some team in HESA and IRIAF who pushed for funds and we have this AT flying now. Like wasting buttload of money on MirageF1, F-7N, this project has no worth except that probably the pilots can be trained on 1 x squadron of Yasin with same IEI avionics, radar package that Kowsar-I, Upgraded F-4E/D have. Same can be done with Kowsar or Saeghe-I/II Trainer version.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Here :

- Syria does not have the air power or missile strike capability to deal with Israel for now. -

It's false false all false!

There was no direct war with Israel in their basements, Syria has a lot of Attack missile. You have to pay attention to appearances. Assad, Syria and company are patient. In a direct war against Israel, things would be different. Syria has released a lot of territory for 3 years and their defense is better now

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Here :
> 
> - Syria does not have the air power or missile strike capability to deal with Israel for now. -
> 
> It's false false all false!
> 
> There was no direct war with Israel in their basements, Syria has a lot of Attack missile. You have to pay attention to appearances. Assad, Syria and company are patient. In a direct war against Israel, things would be different. Syria has released a lot of territory for 3 years and their defense is better now



- Syrian-AAF does not have any assets except for 2 squadrons of MIG-29M that can fire R-77-1 to deal with hundreds of 300+ 4.0 to 5.0 generation fighters of IAF.
- Syrian AD is not IADS. IRGC tried or probably still are trying to create an IADS like system there but so far we have not seen any evidence of that functioning. 
- Syria does have SRBM force to target the Israeli ground bases but can Syria coming out of a bloody civil war take the heat of retaliation from the globally sponsored military of Israel? I dont think so.

Iran needs to ensure few things strategically: 

- Ensure that SAA of Assad does not get into any direct confrontation with Israel so that Iran can buy enough time to create IADS in Syria.
- Politically, keep Russia in Syria
- Ensure that incoming turmoil in Hashemite Jordan tilts in favor of Iran which it will.


----------



## TheImmortal

GrandBotBoi said:


> The claims about Sadid-1 problems are debunked BS from Babak Taghavae



BT is a Shahist who loves anything the IRIAF does and routinely disparages anything related to IRGC aka the revolutionaries. The IRIAF could make a paper airplane and BT would praise it as a ground breaking invention.



AmirPatriot said:


> I didn't say it's a one-way system, I said in this application with reconnaissance UAVs the transmission would mainly be one-way. Doesn't mean the DL system itself isn't capable of two-way transfer.
> 
> This paragraph is based on far too much speculation/interpolation/assumptions compared to the short segment in the article. I'm not going to discuss it like this.
> 
> Radio calls are certainly not a good substitute for DL information on a display, but that's the level I think Iran's F-14s are at.
> 
> Once again, there is no evidence or even claims that F-14AM has datalink apart from your interpretations of BT talking about CAPs. Also, I reiterate my opinion that the F-14AM upgrade is much less extensive than many people think.
> 
> IRIAF has such a small remaining stock of AIM-54s (and this is well documented) that you only see the Tomcats flying with AIM-7s and AIM-9s nowadays. That's why they developed the Fakour and are supposedly working on Maghsoud.
> 
> R-27 would probably still be an upgrade over the AIM-7.
> 
> We're going in circles now.
> 
> That video is atrocious. There is no indication in what the change on symbology on the target is. It could be anything - IFF, launch authorisation, being "hooked" by the pilot... Can't make any conclusions based on that alone.
> 
> Btw, Su-35 is reported to have a reduced radar signature to 1-3m^2 using RAM coating in specific areas.



Looks like Mehdi picked up your F-14 analysis or maybe the timing was a coincidence 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558837157325934592


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559132753697857542

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559132753697857542



Seems like Yasin AT's Lobby is gaining ground. Iranian combat aviation's biggest problem is inner politics and people with HUGE egoes. Money and resources are being wasted on parallel projects with mismanagement, PR stunts that add no actual value and are hurting actual projects that can do something for the IRIAF.

-MirageF1 Lobby (Naghdi Bek group)
-F-7N Lobby (Erfanian group)
-F-5E/F Azarakhsh, Saegheh-I/II, Kowsar-I/II Lobby (Sattari leftovers)
-Yasin AT Lobby 

Unfortunately, it seems we have no lobby group for:

-MIG-29 MLU/Upgradation or even fleet expansion
-Procurement/TOT of Turbofans for the next generation of Saegheh/Kowsar program
-Procurement of much-needed lightweight ARH BVR missiles for the entire fleet
-AWACS
-Fast jet-powered UCAV (what happened to Sejjil UCAV ???)
-Serial modernization and production of Fattar A2A missiles
-AESA airborne radar and modern most avionics suite.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Unfortunately, it seems we have no lobby group for:
> 
> -MIG-29 MLU/Upgradation or even fleet expansion
> -Procurement/TOT of Turbofans for next generation of Saegheh/Kowsar program
> -Procurement of much-needed ARH BVR missiles for the entire fleet
> -AWACS
> -Fast jet-powered UCAV (what happened to Sejjil UCAV ???)
> -Serial modernisation and production of Fattar A2A missiles


1) I think they do want to include indigenous upgrades on the Mig-29s but more likely than not, russians are blocking it.

2) Russia will never give ToT for the RD-33, not even the old one which belches smoke. These have to be manufactured at home and I believe they're working on an F-404 clone.

3) Maghsoud seems to be in the process of development, although likely will take another 5 years.

4) This will probably evolve out of the Simorgh aircraft.

5) Depends entirely on how soon a viable domestic turbofan is ready.

6) I admit I don't know.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Fast jet-powered UCAV (what happened to Sejjil UCAV ???)


i still say that was not a UAV , it was a modern cruse missile



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Maghsoud seems to be in the process of development, although likely will take another 5 years.


Not light weight at all



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> 5) Depends entirely on how soon a viable domestic turbofan is ready.


we have two turbofan engine Jahesh-700 and Tolue-14 . they are suitable for such uav but nobody is designing such UAV



drmeson said:


> -Procurement/TOT of Turbofans for the next generation of Saegheh/Kowsar program


well they claim they are working on it



drmeson said:


> -Procurement/TOT of Turbofans for the next generation of Saegheh/Kowsar program


well they claim they are working on it



drmeson said:


> -AWACS


hope simorgh lead to that. but i think that also is waiting for engine


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> -Serial modernization and production of Fattar A2A missiles


are you sure its not produced serially , after all its very old news


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> 1) I think they do want to include indigenous upgrades on the Mig-29s but more likely than not, russians are blocking it.
> 
> 2) Russia will never give ToT for the RD-33, not even the old one which belches smoke. These have to be manufactured at home and I believe they're working on an F-404 clone.
> 
> 3) Maghsoud seems to be in the process of development, although likely will take another 5 years.
> 
> 4) This will probably evolve out of the Simorgh aircraft.
> 
> 5) Depends entirely on how soon a viable domestic turbofan is ready.
> 
> 6) I admit I don't know.



1) I will be careful blaming any external factor here when we have actual logical evidence in hand of groups pushing their own projects for funding. We know Russians provide upgrades then what has stopped Iran for years getting the benign MIG lfeet upgraded? Even if we had to pay some 10 Million per aircraft for MLU+Upgrade to Russia ... 2 solid interceptor squadrons could have been raised for 250 Million USD with MIG-29M package of Zhuk-ME, new IRST, e-warfare suite and R-74, R-77-1. Instead we are flying MIG-29 9.12 with MIG-23ML's boosted radar RPKL-29 N019 which barely tracks modern fighters at ~50-60 KM. The plane lacks an e-warfare suite. Its main armament is SARH BVR missiles (30 years old and 150 in total). Only thing useful in it is a semimodern IRST and R-73E combination at WVR ranges. Why was not such an attempt made instead of wasting money on maintaining MiragesF1, F-7N, F-5E/F? We know Iran chased the MIG for years in 1990s, how come they suddenly just gave up on it is beyond me. No extensive upgradation evidence or plan for it.

2) Possible route of Iranian Turbofans are either we convert Jahesh-700 (FJ-33) into FJ44-4A with afterburner which will provide some ~6500-7000 lbf or we get R-33MK or WS-13E TOT. Any of such production and installation on Saegheh/Kowsar airframe will put the plane in proper 4+ generation fighter because they have already fullfilled the rest of the criterias.

3) Maghsoud is another generation of Fakour-90 for F-14AM. Equally heavy and large in size so only useful for F-14AM (~16-18 fighters right now??). To arm MIG-29, Kowsar with BVR we need a lighter Active radar homing BVR missile with a range exceeding 100+ KM like R-77-1 or Pl-12/15.

4) AWACS is a money-eating gamble and the problem is the will of the leadership. Leadership has been deceived for a long time with PR stunts like utopian academic project Qaher being shown as in production fighter or radar less Mirages, Saegheh test-beds being presented as F/A-18 equivalents for funding. Raisi's administration is bit different, they are more active people so things may change a bit. If we choose another stupid government again we will see the death of IRIAF altogether.

5) 2 x Jahesh-700 can power a large and fast UCAV that will have the MTOW to accommodate A2G, future A2A armaments along with modular avionics suite. We have unfortunately seen nothing in this regard except for few models of a so-called Sejjil UCAV that looked like Valkyrie. Some people attributed Mobin UAV/Cruise missile to be some form of it. 

6) In short, Iran started a local refurbishment project of old AIM-9J (delivered in 1971-77) in the 1990s. Then the project turned into some level of local manufacturing with the local seeker and motor inside AIM-9J's body called "Fatter". The newest shown models have IIR seeker which puts the missile in the category of AIM-9P with a max range of 40 KM. In modern times some countries have used the WVR IR seeking missile platforms to develop deadly maneuverable BVR missiles like the Israeli Derby-IR or AIM-9X BlockII/III that are all elongated WVR missiles turned into no escape BVR missiles. With funding, Iran can easily do the same to provide a deadly weapon to F-14AM, Kowsar-I, F-4E/D and future UCAV-wingmen.


----------



## Nevsky

"(We) are ready to offer our allies the most modern types of weapons, from small arms to armored vehicles and artillery to combat aviation and unmanned aerial vehicles," President Putin said at the opening ceremony of the "Army-2022" forum near Moscow.









Russia Is Ready To Arm Its Allies With Modern Weapons: Vladimir Putin


Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday that Moscow values its ties with countries in Latin American, Asia and Africa and that it is ready to offer modern weapons to its allies.




www.ndtv.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> are you sure its not produced serially , after all its very old news



It was announced by Hassan Shahsafi so it's not that old news. Only recently we have seen its Imaging IR seekers and fins on the Azarakhsh version which confirmed for the first time that there is actual production of new missiles. F-4E/D and F-14A/F-14AM have only been seen with old AIM-9J so far.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> It was announced by Hassan Shahsafi so it's not that old news. Only recently we have seen its Imaging IR seekers and fins on the Azarakhsh version which confirmed for the first time that there is actual production of new missiles. F-4E/D and F-14A/F-14AM have only been seen with old AIM-9J so far.


they are talking about it since 2008 , they announced it in 2009


Fars News Agency :: Iran to Mass-Produce Air-to-Air Heat-Seeking Missiles


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> they are talking about it since 2008 , they announced it in 2009
> 
> 
> Fars News Agency :: Iran to Mass-Produce Air-to-Air Heat-Seeking Missiles



Thats exactly the time of Hassan Shahsafi who announced the production 2009 before that some models were shown in exhibitions along with older pics showing test firing from ground. I posted extensive info on it in the Aviation products thread. Only recently we have been able to see its seekers, Fins etc.


----------



## Abid123

Is IRIAF going to replace the old SU-24 with SU-34?

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## sahureka2

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559132753697857542


apparently the trainer Yasin is continually proposed ,suggests that they strongly believe in this project


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> apparently the trainer Yasin is continually proposed ,suggests that they strongly believe in this project
> View attachment 870961



Just like National helicopter project they are likely looking for a partner nation for tech cooperation or a major order.

The story of Yasin is a microcosm of what has plagued IRIAF projects.

I am curious where IRGC is with their CAS project they announced a while back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> Looks like Mehdi picked up your F-14 analysis or maybe the timing was a coincidence


By the watermark, it first got picked up by a telegram channel, then Mehdi took it from there xD. I found the original on Instagram.

Btw I still had more to say regarding the discussion with drmeson but I could tell it was just going to be too long.


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> you see why invest on yasin while kowsar can fulfill that role a lot better . just answer that to me


Kowsar is supersonic fighter Jet... Yes It is used for pilot training but not for what you think.. It is used for pilots already trained and serve,Yasin would be used in Flight school for pilots that finish basic training...you need Something Like Yasin ,also subsonic aircrafts with lower minimal speed better fit CAS role, and Yasin is single engine cheap aircraft, hour of Flight cost less, maintaince also...Kowsar is completely different level

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

AmirPatriot said:


> By the watermark, it first got picked up by a telegram channel, then Mehdi took it from there xD. I found the original on Instagram.
> 
> Btw I still had more to say regarding the discussion with drmeson but I could tell it was just going to be too long.



The pic is quite old. I first saw it on a Insta channel.

Offcourse, we can have our discussion continue any time. When I return home tonight, I will try to re-read some of the information on F-14AM upgradations again. I will post it here.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> Kowsar is supersonic fighter Jet... Yes It is used for pilot training but not for what you think.. It is used for pilots already trained and serve,Yasin would be used in Flight school for pilots that finish basic training...you need Something Like Yasin ,also subsonic aircrafts with lower minimal speed better fit CAS role, and Yasin is single engine cheap aircraft, hour of Flight cost less, maintaince also...Kowsar is completely different level



What will be the difference between flying a Kowsar-I and Yasin AT? Apparently, both use the same OWJ turbojets except Yasin has non-afterburning ones. Kowsar has an FBW system and is a proven airframe while Yasin is a novel design that can be anything.

................

Unrelated but I am gonna write it here, Currently IRIAF has the following resources in the Tiger fleet, I was thinking about how can they be utilized to the max.

1 x Azarakhsh
5 x Saegheh-I
1 x Saegheh-II
4 x Kowsar-I + additional 14-20 seen in HESA (total 18-24)
35 x F-5E
14 x F-5F
14 x F-5B Simorgh

So that brings us to a total of 80 airframes among which 4 are built from scratch inside Iran. If all of the F-5BSimorgh + A/R/E/F models + Azarakhsh are dismantled to create a repository of parts for a new assembly, this can be a very useful stopgap fleet until (a) Some foreign 4++ fighter is procured (b) Saegheh III / Kowsar II / Azarakhsh III emerges

Something like this can be formed:

12 x Kowsar-I Trainers replacing the current Simorghs, Yasin project (waste of $)
6 x Saeghe-I/II E-warfare platforms with Radars, ECM/ECCM+Jammers, RWRs, Tactical DL 
62 x Kowsar-I Fighters with FBW, Radars+ECCM, RWR, Tactical DL

These 68 fighters can form 7-8 fully armed mixed squadrons with F-14AM, MIG-29 9.12 (if upgraded). A total of 130 x 4th generation aircraft.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## sanel1412

drmeson said:


> What will be the difference between flying a Kowsar-I and Yasin AT? Apparently, both use the same OWJ turbojets except Yasin has non-afterburning ones. Kowsar has an FBW system and is a proven airframe while Yasin is a novel design that can be anything.
> 
> ................
> 
> Unrelated but I am gonna write it here, Currently IRIAF has the following resources in the Tiger fleet, I was thinking about how can they be utilized to the max.
> 
> 1 x Azarakhsh
> 5 x Saegheh-I
> 1 x Saegheh-II
> 4 x Kowsar-I + additional 14-20 seen in HESA (total 18-24)
> 35 x F-5E
> 14 x F-5F
> 14 x F-5B Simorgh
> 
> So that brings us to a total of 80 airframes among which 4 are built from scratch inside Iran. If all of the F-5BSimorgh + A/R/E/F models + Azarakhsh are dismantled to create a repository of parts for a new assembly, this can be a very useful stopgap fleet until (a) Some foreign 4++ fighter is procured (b) Saegheh III / Kowsar II / Azarakhsh III emerges
> 
> Something like this can be formed:
> 
> 12 x Kowsar-I Trainers replacing the current Simorghs, Yasin project (waste of $)
> 6 x Saeghe-I/II E-warfare platforms with Radars, ECM/ECCM+Jammers, RWRs, Tactical DL
> 62 x Kowsar-I Fighters with FBW, Radars+ECCM, RWR, Tactical DL
> 
> These 68 fighters can form 7-8 fully armed mixed squadrons with F-14AM, MIG-29 9.12 (if upgraded). A total of 130 x 4th generation aircraft.


Cruising speed of F5 and Kowsar is higher than F18 while Yasin is probably half..
Than Price... You must make difference between transition trainers Like Kowsar, FT-7 or Mig 29UB and Advance training aircrafts....it is not even close, you dont put pilot from PC 7 in to supersonic fighter Jet... Yasin Will fill role between

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

drmeson said:


> The pic is quite old. I first saw it on a Insta channel.
> 
> Offcourse, we can have our discussion continue any time. When I return home tonight, I will try to re-read some of the information on F-14AM upgradations again. I will post it here.


Don’t you think we should start a separate thread on this F-14AM and eventual Su-35 discussion since it is a topic on its own and not really IRIAF news related

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Kowsar is supersonic fighter Jet... Yes It is used for pilot training but not for what you think.. It is used for pilots already trained and serve,Yasin would be used in Flight school for pilots that finish basic training...you need Something Like Yasin ,also subsonic aircrafts with lower minimal speed better fit CAS role, and Yasin is single engine cheap aircraft, hour of Flight cost less, maintaince also...Kowsar is completely different level


Yasin is dual engine owj.
the difference is the owj that is used in Yasin don't have afterburner installed . so you want subsonic ,use that kowsar , just don't push afterburner switch , or on two sit version of kowsar use not after burning version of owj.

by the way how slow you want to fly ? F-5 stall speed is let just say less than 200km and it actually do the initial flight and climb at speed less than 220km . which is the same as Yasin. 

and for training at low speed you have Cessna. an advance trainer needs to be agile
Yasin only in one role is superior to kowsarand that is CAS. because the engine are not adjacent to each other. and guess what , that role can be done far better by army aviation and drones


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Cruising speed of F5 and Kowsar is higher than F18 while Yasin is probably half..
> Than Price... You must make difference between transition trainers Like Kowsar, FT-7 or Mig 29UB and Advance training aircrafts....it is not even close, you dont put pilot from PC 7 in to supersonic fighter Jet... Yasin Will fill role between


as i said , the cruising speed of F-5 at 36000 feet is 1050km/h that's the highest altitude yasin can reach.
by the way who say Yasin has lower cruise speed , it just can't go supersonic because of its engine . you can install non-after burning version of OWJ on Kowsar-trainer and it also don't go supersonic.



drmeson said:


> What will be the difference between flying a Kowsar-I and Yasin AT? Apparently, both use the same OWJ turbojets except Yasin has non-afterburning ones. Kowsar has an FBW system and is a proven airframe while Yasin is a novel design that can be anything.
> 
> ................
> 
> Unrelated but I am gonna write it here, Currently IRIAF has the following resources in the Tiger fleet, I was thinking about how can they be utilized to the max.
> 
> 1 x Azarakhsh
> 5 x Saegheh-I
> 1 x Saegheh-II
> 4 x Kowsar-I + additional 14-20 seen in HESA (total 18-24)
> 35 x F-5E
> 14 x F-5F
> 14 x F-5B Simorgh
> 
> So that brings us to a total of 80 airframes among which 4 are built from scratch inside Iran. If all of the F-5BSimorgh + A/R/E/F models + Azarakhsh are dismantled to create a repository of parts for a new assembly, this can be a very useful stopgap fleet until (a) Some foreign 4++ fighter is procured (b) Saegheh III / Kowsar II / Azarakhsh III emerges
> 
> Something like this can be formed:
> 
> 12 x Kowsar-I Trainers replacing the current Simorghs, Yasin project (waste of $)
> 6 x Saeghe-I/II E-warfare platforms with Radars, ECM/ECCM+Jammers, RWRs, Tactical DL
> 62 x Kowsar-I Fighters with FBW, Radars+ECCM, RWR, Tactical DL
> 
> These 68 fighters can form 7-8 fully armed mixed squadrons with F-14AM, MIG-29 9.12 (if upgraded). A total of 130 x 4th generation aircraft.


i guess F-5b is shorter than F5-f and have weaker engine. wonder if it worth touching them ?


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> Cruising speed of F5 and Kowsar is higher than F18 while Yasin is probably half..
> Than Price... You must make difference between transition trainers Like Kowsar, FT-7 or Mig 29UB and Advance training aircrafts....it is not even close, you dont put pilot from PC 7 in to supersonic fighter Jet... Yasin Will fill role between



You have an instructor and a student in the cockpit, what does speed has to do with it? I would assume a Mirage F1BQ with its 46000 ft/min climb is faster than most of the fighter jets on planet yet IRIAF is using it as a trainer at Doshan Tappeh Training School. Many airforces have no intermediate subsonic AT jet for trainers. This is a rather newer approach with LIFT+CAS aircrafts emerging around the world like Yak-130, T-7 Red hawk, M-346, JL-10 etc. IRIAF currently itself has no LIFT or AT jet either. They use PC-7 and then pilots go to F5-B Simorgh, FT-7N, Mirage F1BQ etc for jet training. 

Yasin AT's "Forced" utility can be in a form advanced training squadron of 12 x Yasin AT with the same avionics package of IEI, Bayenat-II radars, e-warfare suite, Fatter missiles etc that was shown at HESA. Pilots who train on them can go to ... Kowsar-I, Kowsar-II (future), F-4E/D Dowran. This can happen because they have operated and trained themselves on same-origin electronics, and systems. Maybe only 1 training squadron at best can be made. A single squadron of two seated Kowsar-T can do the same for a fleet of 150 aircrafts. 

Here is something about the cost:

From scratch Kowsar-I or Saegheh I/II or = 10 Million USD per unit
Upgradation of F-5E/F to Kowsar standards = 7.5 Million USD (FBW, Landing gears, Radar, Avionics, e-warfare, seats, glass cockpits, wings, tails, V stabilizer, new skin, new or extensively overhauled turbojets) 

This shows that the major amount goes to the internal systems of the aircraft instead of the airframe. I personally believe that Yasin's unit cost with radars and avionics will be no less than than 7-9 Million itself. It's an indigenous design (AT-3 copy with Kowsar avionics) so they are trying to market it around otherwise its a waste of money project. 


....................

Anybody saw OWJ Tazarve being operational ?



Deino said:


> Don’t you think we should start a separate thread on this F-14AM and eventual Su-35 discussion since it is a topic on its own and not really IRIAF news related



I will post the F-14AM thread. 

I dont think we should have an SU-35 thread since there has been no official word on purchase, there are just twitter rumors so far.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> i guess F-5b is shorter than F5-f and have weaker engine. wonder if it worth touching them ?



Yes, the nosecone I guess is smaller by 1.5 feet. They are not supposed to contain radars.

Then we have actual evidence that HESA has reconstructed nose cones for Saeghe-I 3-7366 and Kowsar-1 3-7400 so it would be easy for them to give F-5B a larger radar carriage space.


Saeqeh-I 3-7366







Kowsar-I 3-7400







Both these aircrafts at unveiling had larger radomes.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

................ 

*I want to ask everyone a question:*

1) Is the leadership of Iran deliberately trying to kill IRIAF? We know the Nojeh coup mentality existed for a long time that resulted in purges. We saw how elements in Turkish-AF tried to muscle out AKP's government in the coup attempt. Is leadership still not trusting the IRIAF? so biased appointments of trusted officers and budget cuts are actually deliberate attempts at the ultimate murder of IRIAF. 

2) Competition with IRGC who have themselves got multiple branches including an AF and see IRIAF as a competition for $$$. They have had massive control over MoD for budgets which saw them gaining strides while IRIAF degradation happened over the years.

3) Strategists of Iran saw Saddam's fourth largest AF in the world being destroyed by US and its allies so they see IRIAF providing no strategic deterrence even if they purchase some 300 SU-35S. We are seeing the Missile forces and Space programs making strides. We are seeing the UCAV fleet growing larger and technology-wise evolving. We are seeing naval developments at a fast pace. The radars, the SAMs are all growing fast yet IRIAF is being left behind because Syrian theatre, Saudi Failure in Yemen, Ukraine war is teaching Iran that a large Airforce is not gonna win you wars. RuAF has done little in Ukrainian war so far, US with its large air muscle could not end Afghan and Iraqi militancy either. May be they see DPRK's model of massive missile power with CBRN warheads as a more successful deterent model than keeping a large Airforce (Shahi model against USSR). For airdefence they are investing heavily in radars and Ambush SAMs in all categories. 

4) What is the future of IRIAF then? 

There are no sanctions on Iran to purchase Chinese or Russian Jets with TOT
Nothing is stopping Iran from pulling an extensive local upgrade program on MIG fleet 
Why there are two assemblies for ~150 Saegheh-I/II/ or Kowsar-I/II production
Why there is no work being done on local AESA radars, larger turbofans, and light wt. BVRs?

With the same trend continuing we will see IRIAF dying around 2030 while IRGC will be flying around their HGVs at ~ICBM ranges and sailing their low RCS Command ships. We may see Iranian HIMADS reaching 500 KM with TVC control at that time and Jet powered large UCAVs with AI deploying weaponry from internal bays as well but IRIAF will be gone altogether. 

Sensible people please discuss it !

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

drmeson said:


> ................
> 
> *I want to ask everyone a question:*
> 
> 1) Is the leadership of Iran deliberately trying to kill IRIAF? We know the Nojeh coup mentality existed for a long time that resulted in purges. We saw how elements in Turkish-AF tried to muscle out AKP's government in the coup attempt. Is leadership still not trusting the IRIAF? so biased appointments of trusted officers and budget cuts are actually deliberate attempts at the ultimate murder of IRIAF.
> 
> 2) Competition with IRGC who have themselves got multiple branches including an AF and see IRIAF as a competition for $$$. They have had massive control over MoD for budgets which saw them gaining strides while IRIAF degradation happened over the years.
> 
> 3) Strategists of Iran saw Saddam's fourth largest AF in the world being destroyed by US and its allies so they see IRIAF providing no strategic deterrence even if they purchase some 300 SU-35S. We are seeing the Missile forces and Space programs making strides. We are seeing the UCAV fleet growing larger and technology-wise evolving. We are seeing naval developments at a fast pace. The radars, the SAMs are all growing fast yet IRIAF is being left behind because Syrian theatre, Saudi Failure in Yemen, Ukraine war is teaching Iran that a large Airforce is not gonna win you wars. RuAF has done little in Ukrainian war so far, US with its large air muscle could not end Afghan and Iraqi militancy either. May be they see DPRK's model of massive missile power with CBRN warheads as a more successful deterent model than keeping a large Airforce (Shahi model against USSR). For airdefence they are investing heavily in radars and Ambush SAMs in all categories.
> 
> 4) What is the future of IRIAF then?
> 
> There are no sanctions on Iran to purchase Chinese or Russian Jets with TOT
> Nothing is stopping Iran from pulling an extensive local upgrade program on MIG fleet
> Why there are two assemblies for ~150 Saegheh-I/II/ or Kowsar-I/II production
> Why there is no work being done on local AESA radars, larger turbofans, and light wt. BVRs?
> 
> With the same trend continuing we will see IRIAF dying around 2030 while IRGC will be flying around their HGVs at ~ICBM ranges and sailing their low RCS Command ships. We may see Iranian HIMADS reaching 500 KM with TVC control at that time and Jet powered large UCAVs with AI deploying weaponry from internal bays as well but IRIAF will be gone altogether.
> 
> Sensible people please discuss it !


You have answered your own question..Iran's threat environement is better served with a missile centric approach . ..I can not disagree with such approach...
Iran should spend the money on nuclear, space,drone and missiles...if you have nuclear and missiles to deliver them no one of any significance will dare to touch you...but we also need our Nuclear Triad..so that is why we need those bigger subs and naval expenditure.


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> You have answered your own question..Iran's threat environement is better served with a missile centric approach . ..I can not disagree with such approach...
> Iran should spend the money on nuclear, space,drone and missiles...if you have nuclear and missiles to deliver them no one of any significance will dare to touch you...but we also need our Nuclear Triad..so that is why we need those bigger subs and naval expenditure.


how many time India and Pakistan went to war. did nukes stop Ukraine from standing against Russia .
without proper air force you can have as much missile as you like , when you give sky to enemy ,it's like you have tied one hand and want to get a wrestling medal

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Hack-Hook said:


> how many time India and Pakistan went to war. did nukes stop Ukraine from standing against Russia .
> without proper air force you can have as much missile as you like , when you give sky to enemy ,it's like you have tied one hand and want to get a wrestling medal


Key word is "threat environement"..who is our enemy...US/ISRAEL...they will have our skys no mater what... stop them from thinking about touching us in the first place...for every ones else from the south....hit their water supply....they get the message.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> Key word is "threat environement"..who is our enemy...US/ISRAEL...they will have our skys no mater what... stop them from thinking about touching us in the first place...for every ones else from the south....hit their water supply....they get the message.


if Israel also can have our sky , then what are you guys fighting for. بهتره بریم پی کار خودمان
by the way ,right now look at all our neighbor , beside two country the rest probably have better air force.
you talk about hitting water supplies you think they cant hit back 10 time fold if you don't have air force , you think they can't hit dams , water treatment planes . communication center. specially since you guys plan give the sky to the enemy

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

A rumor says that the Jet Yasin is much more advanced technology than people think. So imagine that Iranian engineers would try an artificial intelligence placed in the 2nd cockpit to replace the rear driver. A human pilot at the front and an artificial intelligence behind

But it's a rumor

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

@drmeson ..you asked for it...we need a thread for " iranian military doctrine"...this subject goes way beyond airforce or nuclear..and guess what...you are the MAN ..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> A rumor says that the Jet Yasin is much more advanced technology than people think. So imagine that Iranian engineers would try an artificial intelligence placed in the 2nd cockpit to replace the rear driver. A human pilot at the front and an artificial intelligence behind
> 
> But it's a rumor


you said it, rumor .

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> You have answered your own question..Iran's threat environement is better served with a missile centric approach . ..I can not disagree with such approach...
> Iran should spend the money on nuclear, space,drone and missiles...if you have nuclear and missiles to deliver them no one of any significance will dare to touch you...but we also need our Nuclear Triad..so that is why we need those bigger subs and naval expenditure.



I feel such a unidimensional doctrine that revolves around Missile power, Airdefence and UCAVs is very risky. Dont you agree?



Hack-Hook said:


> how many time India and Pakistan went to war. did nukes stop Ukraine from standing against Russia .
> without proper air force you can have as much missile as you like , when you give sky to enemy ,it's like you have tied one hand and want to get a wrestling medal



IADS can take care of the aerial invasion from PGCC + Israel but they will be under extreme stress. If KSA+Kuwait+UAE launches some 100 jets to strike deep inside Iran ... F-15, EF-2000, F-16, Mirage-2000, how many will return and more importantly will the bases that launched them be there on their return, courtesy IRGC's return strike? the Iranian doctrine works without IRIAF too but it is extremely risky because SOWS can be delivered from outside the range of Iranian HIMADS. Besides without aerial assets on CAP flight, Iranian IADS will not be able to decide if the incoming invasion party will act hostile or not? tricky situation for them unless they have fighters in the sky to challenge the incoming party without firing missiles. Aircraft in interceptor role always has more options and tricks up its sleeve then a SAM.

IRIAF needs to survive at all costs and be given an interceptor role in the IADS with ~250 light fighters with who can take off quickly, provide CAPs. They must have low RCS, modern avionics, data linking, Long range BVR.

The problem is leadership has just given up on this force altogether. They are not interested in foreign procurement or domestic production. Politically we can not have a more favorable time to procure Russian jets then right now. Russia is vulnerable and can provide IRIAF not just their own fighters like MIG-29/35, SU-35 but also stuff to help Iran with domestic production. RD-33MK turbofan TOT, lightweight ARH BVR like R-77-1 can take Saegheh/Kowsar program to 4+ generation planes that I described above. But seems like leadership is just not interested at all. Meanwhile, they are over-equipping some other branches such as Missile forces or UCAVs which is resulting into mismanagement. Why two similar glide vehicles Haj Qassem and Kheybar Shikan were unvieled simultaneously? When we have Khorramshahr-II and Emad-II, why do we need Ghadr? Why Qiam-II when Dezful is a better platform? why Shahed-129, Shahed-149, Fotros, Kaman-22 are being built simultaneously? money being wasted, mismanagement all around ... Karrar vs Zolfaghar-III ... little cult-like groups pushing their own projects for funding.

My idea why is it happening is something many people here would not like to hear.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> A rumor says that the Jet Yasin is much more advanced technology than people think. So imagine that Iranian engineers would try an artificial intelligence placed in the 2nd cockpit to replace the rear driver. A human pilot at the front and an artificial intelligence behind
> 
> But it's a rumor



where did you hear this rumor?



aryobarzan said:


> @drmeson ..you asked for it...we need a thread for " iranian military doctrine"...this subject goes way beyond airforce or nuclear..and guess what...you are the MAN ..lol



Hehe ... I was very busy the past few days with travel. I will try my best to be less busy so that I can finish slides on missile forces (Emad-II in missile cities, Fateh family left) and then I will post a topic on Iranian military doctrine.

Defense doctrine:
- Parts and future of Iranian IADS (SAMs, GWACS network, Satellites, IRIAF)
- Naval assets

Offense doctrine:
- Attack manned and unmanned aircraft
- BM/CM
- Conventional and unconventional strike capability

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Regarding the rumor of the intelligent cockpit of the Jet Yasin, I keep that for myself. I sometimes launch assertions on this forum without telling you the source. The time will confirm whether or not certain facts are true. According to Iranian logic and the rapid development of artificial intelligence in Iran, this rumor of Yasin's cockpit is very interesting and fascinating and even very logical. There are already Kowsar drone links with artificial intelligence so that makes you think. Human pilot and co-pilot makes artificial inlligence, very very interesting. I will follow it closely because there is a logic behind this rumor

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

aryobarzan said:


> Key word is "threat environement"..who is our enemy...US/ISRAEL...they will have our skys no mater what... stop them from thinking about touching us in the first place...for every ones else from the south....hit their water supply....they get the message.



As I stressed before: in light of the fact that proof's in the pudding i.e. that the enemy has consistently stopped short of subjecting Islamic Iran to major forms of military aggression - while doing so to adversaries which never came to close to the IR in terms of challenging and damaging zio-American interests, the sole rhetoric subterfuge left for those claiming that Iran's defence doctrine has failed to generate solid deterrence, is either the ridiculous theory of a "secret under the table alliance" with the US / zionists, the equally comical and illogical theory of Iran being deliberately left unharmed so as to serve as a "bogeyman" thanks to which imperial powers will milk PGCC monarchies via overpriced arms sales, or other faulty narratives that try to minimize or even deny Washington and Tel Aviv's rabid, existential enmity against the Iranian nation.

Quite simply put, had Iran's strategic planners and decision-makers fundamentally erred in their thinking as some armchair generals love to imagine, then a country by the name Iran would've no longer existed for us to sit and talk about. End of story.

Any extravagant air force build up is more than unlikely. And, this is precisely what will keep guaranteeing Islamic Iran's security.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> As I stressed before: in light of the fact that proof's in the pudding i.e. that the enemy has consistently stopped short of subjecting Islamic Iran to major forms of military aggression - while doing so to adversaries which never came to close to the IR in terms of challenging and damaging zio-American interests, the sole rhetoric subterfuge left for those claiming that Iran's defence doctrine has failed to generate rock solid deterrence, is either the ridiculous theory of a "secret under the table alliance" between with the US / zionists, the equally comical and illogical theory of Iran being left unharmed so as to serve as a "bogeyman" that allows imperial powers to milk PGCC monarchies via overpriced arms sales, or other faulty narratives clumsily trying to minimize or even deny Washington and Tel Aviv's rabid, existential enmity against the Iranian nation.
> 
> Quite simply put, had Iran's strategic planners and decision-makers fundamentally erred in their thinking as some armchair generals love to imagine, then a country by the name Iran would've no longer existed by now for us to sit and talk about. End of story.
> 
> Any extravagant air force build up is more than unlikely. And, this is precisely what will keep guaranteeing Islamic Iran's security.


While I broadly agree, the lack of combat aviation hamstrings the Iranian bloc badly.

At least 500 new aircraft are required, chiefly fighter jets but also transporters, AWACS, ground attack aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers.

As for your assertion that a large enemy air force build-up is unlikely, I am pessimistic they'll neglect playing to that particular strength. Especially when all their client states are locked and loaded with F-15s and F-16s (in isnotreal's case, F-35s).

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

Some big claims by BT

- OWJ and IAIO have jointly produced a local F-14 airframe or some variant of it 
- Completely indigenous TF30-P414 Turbofan copy has been built by OWJ
- Is it a new fighter jet to be unvieled or just some tesbed he did not eloborate. 
- AIM-9X equivalent all aspect (90 degrees boresight) CCD seeking "Azarakhsh" sidewinder being tested with four motors controlling canards.
- Fakour-90's next generation Maghsoud with ARH seeker and longer range (180-200 KM) is going into testing/production in mid-2022
- There are total 34 x F-14A/AM airworthy of which 8 are F-14AM
- F-14A/AM costs 3 Million USD per 24 months of routine service. 

F-14AM's known upgrades

- Overhaul of airframe with 843 locally built parts
- New improved hydraulic and pneumatic system
- Complete overhaul of TF30-P414 Turbofans
- New Navigation and mission control system
- AWG-9 receiving lighter newly built parts, digitalization of signals, modern processors
- Fakour-90 LR-BVR Integration








Remove AWG-9 and LR-BVR from thr F-14 and its a becoming a burden on IRIAF

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Some big claims by BT
> 
> - OWJ and IAIO have jointly produced a local F-14 airframe or some variant of it
> - Completely indigenous TF30-P414 Turbofan copy has been built by OWJ
> - Is it a new fighter jet to be unvieled or just some tesbed he did not eloborate.
> - AIM-9X equivalent all aspect (90 degrees boresight) CCD seeking "Azarakhsh" sidewinder being tested with four motors controlling canards.
> - Fakour-90's next generation Maghsoud with ARH seeker and longer range (180-200 KM) is going into testing/production in mid-2022
> - There are total 34 x F-14A/AM airworthy of which 8 are F-14AM
> - F-14A/AM costs 3 Million USD per 24 months of routine service.
> 
> F-14AM's known upgrades
> 
> - Overhaul of airframe with 843 locally built parts
> - New improved hydraulic and pneumatic system
> - Complete overhaul of TF30-P414 Turbofans
> - New Navigation and mission control system
> - AWG-9 receiving lighter newly built parts, digitalization of signals, modern processors
> - Fakour-90 LR-BVR Integration
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remove AWG-9 and LR-BVR from thr F-14 and its a becoming a burden on IRIAF


@Mr Iran Eye @WudangMaster Your predictions seem to be on the right track, brothers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> While I broadly agree, the lack of combat aviation hamstrings the Iranian bloc badly.
> 
> At least 500 new aircraft are required, chiefly fighter jets but also transporters, AWACS, ground attack aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers.
> 
> As for your assertion that a large enemy air force build-up is unlikely, I am pessimistic they'll neglect playing to that particular strength. Especially when all their client states are locked and loaded with F-15s and F-16s (in isnotreal's case, F-35s).



Switching to a symmetrical defence doctrine, which the above suggestion essentially implies - considering the colossal cost associated with this sort of a procurement and the associated budget cuts it would suppose in key areas of weapons development, would invite aggression rather than deterring it.

It's precisely because Iran categorically rejected symmetrical thinking that she is still alive today. Imperial client states of the region are no match for Iran, a country capable enough to go up against the USA regime let alone its vassals.

Given the relative characteristics of Iran and her enemy, it's reassuring to know there are no signs for a change of course on Iran's part.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> Switching to a symmetrical defence doctrine, which the above suggestion essentially implies - especially considering the colossal cost associated with this sort of a procurement and the associated budget cuts it would suppose in key areas of weapons development, would invite aggression rather than deterring it.
> 
> It's precisely because Iran categorically rejected symmetrical thinking that she is still alive today. Imperial client states of the region are no match for Iran, which is capable enough to go up against the USA regime let alone its vassals.
> 
> Given the relative characteristics of Iran and her enemy, it's reassuring to know there are no signs of Iran preparing to change course.


Again, I don't disagree. But strengthening symmetrical warfare capabilities over a 10 year period wouldn't suddenly shift the sands.

Besides, the Iranian IADS is not easy to overwhelm and destroy plus the Iranians have a massive arsenal of missiles for retaliatory strikes the moment hostilities begin.

In light of this, a defence budget expansion and rearmament is warranted for the purpose of deterrence, at the very least, although I would make a case for intervention in Syria.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Some big claims by BT
> 
> - OWJ and IAIO have jointly produced a local F-14 airframe or some variant of it
> - Completely indigenous TF30-P414 Turbofan copy has been built by OWJ
> - Is it a new fighter jet to be unvieled or just some tesbed he did not eloborate.
> - AIM-9X equivalent all aspect (90 degrees boresight) CCD seeking "Azarakhsh" sidewinder being tested with four motors controlling canards.
> - Fakour-90's next generation Maghsoud with ARH seeker and longer range (180-200 KM) is going into testing/production in mid-2022
> - There are total 34 x F-14A/AM airworthy of which 8 are F-14AM
> - F-14A/AM costs 3 Million USD per 24 months of routine service.
> 
> F-14AM's known upgrades
> 
> - Overhaul of airframe with 843 locally built parts
> - New improved hydraulic and pneumatic system
> - Complete overhaul of TF30-P414 Turbofans
> - New Navigation and mission control system
> - AWG-9 receiving lighter newly built parts, digitalization of signals, modern processors
> - Fakour-90 LR-BVR Integration
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remove AWG-9 and LR-BVR from thr F-14 and its a becoming a burden on IRIAF


I hope they increased the thrust (both dry and afterburner) in the indigenous design.

Next step would be to work on thrust-vectoring control in order to make the domestic F-14 more agile.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @Mr Iran Eye @WudangMaster Your predictions seem to be on the right track, brothers.


I truly hope Mr. Azarmehr's assertions about the native TF30 is true, but I just don't understand why it would not have been made known publicly, unless the project and the engines are not yet mature enough? Maybe they are workshop level production instead of industrial churn out, but that still be worth bragging about.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

WudangMaster said:


> I truly hope Mr. Azarmehr's assertions about the native TF30 is true, but I just don't understand why it would not have been made known publicly, unless the project and the engines are not yet mature enough? Maybe they are workshop level production instead of industrial churn out, but that still be worth bragging about.


Who is Mr. Azarmehr, exactly? I don't speak Persian unfortunately and you can imagine my frustration every time you post a video and I can't understand heads or tails of what's being said.


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Yasin is dual engine owj.
> the difference is the owj that is used in Yasin don't have afterburner installed . so you want subsonic ,use that kowsar , just don't push afterburner switch , or on two sit version of kowsar use not after burning version of owj.
> 
> by the way how slow you want to fly ? F-5 stall speed is let just say less than 200km and it actually do the initial flight and climb at speed less than 220km . which is the same as Yasin.
> 
> and for training at low speed you have Cessna. an advance trainer needs to be agile
> Yasin only in one role is superior to kowsarand that is CAS. because the engine are not adjacent to each other. and guess what , that role can be done far better by army aviation and drones


I wont argue with you abt Yasin vs Kowsar, I told you difference between Advanced trainers and transitional training fighter jets, F5 and so Kowsar cruising speed is almost mach 1.. ,F 5 has one of the highest cruising speed(without after burner) , higher than F18... Also other performance is impresivne.. It is due design,also minimal speed of aircraft before it stall and optimal min speed it can Cruise are two different Things, expecually at low atlitude, I guarantee you that Yasin cruising speed much lower than F5... . There is Reason attack aircrafts and Advanced trainers are designed way they are.. CAS role require aircraft to Cruise at low speed and low atlitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Who is Mr. Azarmehr, exactly? I don't speak Persian unfortunately and you can imagine my frustration every time you post a video and I can't understand heads or tails of what's being said.


He holds rank in Artesh but only discusses OSINT matters. One of his insightful videos on MehrAein was regarding zulfiqar tank eventually evolved into the karra, when the engine was available domestically. Much of what is discussed here is what he talks about and I personally enjoy hearing the discussion and terminology in Farsi as it improves my own a lot.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> IADS can take care of the aerial invasion from PGCC + Israel but they will be under extreme stress. If KSA+Kuwait+UAE launches some 100 jets to strike deep inside Iran ... F-15, EF-2000, F-16, Mirage-2000, how many will return and more importantly will the bases that launched them be there on their return, courtesy IRGC's return strike?


depend , how fast IRGC can respond ? 15 min ? 1 hours ? 1 day?
and how many of air defence remain in place after the strike . by the way if it become absolutely necessary those airplane just can find a free way and land there , they can even do that with roads as we did that with F-4 and not a completely working F-4 , a damaged F-4
it won\t be worse than this, will it be?




the aircraft lost its wing but at last managed to land on the carrier 


drmeson said:


> The problem is leadership has just given up on this force altogether. They are not interested in foreign procurement or domestic production. Politically we can not have a more favorable time to procure Russian jets then right now.


Russia can\t produce them in enough number for itself so i say its nearly impossible to get new Russian jet


SalarHaqq said:


> Switching to a symmetrical defence doctrine, which the above suggestion essentially implies - especially considering the colossal cost associated with this sort of a procurement and the associated budget cuts it would suppose in key areas of weapons development, would invite aggression rather than deterring it.
> 
> It's precisely because Iran categorically rejected symmetrical thinking that she is still alive today. Imperial client states of the region are no match for Iran, which is capable enough to go up against the USA regime let alone its vassals.
> 
> Given the relative characteristics of Iran and her enemy, it's reassuring to know there are no signs of Iran preparing to change course.


the problem is you think , air-force by default mean symmetrical. while several time i pointed out to you no , its wrong assumption . its up to you to decide how to use it . it can act as a symmetrical force , it can act as asymmetrical force , it can be something in between.
you support asymmetrical warfare on land , you support asymmetrical warfare in seas . but when it come to the sky no we don't want asymmetrical warfare in the sky .


by the way what you call Iran missile cities ? Asymmetrical or Symmetrical ?
as far as I'm aware underground missile bases are as symmetrical as missile forces can be .



WudangMaster said:


> He holds rank in Artesh but only discusses OSINT matters. One of his insightful videos on MehrAein was regarding zulfiqar tank eventually evolved into the karra, when the engine was available domestically. Much of what is discussed here is what he talks about and I personally enjoy hearing the discussion and terminology in Farsi as it improves my own a lot.


what rank , i'm interested as Kad-ban is no rank in Iranian military . it simply mean Sir in old Persian language.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

landing on roads
















and this for the people who think air-force can't be asymmetric.














In pictures: Belarusian fighter jets land on public roads during military exercise







www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @Mr Iran Eye @WudangMaster Your predictions seem to be on the right track, brothers.



Mind you this journalist is an extreme level anti-Iran man who kisses Israeli and American azz day and night. Majority of the time, he is right about IRIAF (only) as he claims to be an ex-engineer in the force who got disgruntled because he saw petty politics and stupid people being made decision-makers to destroy the force deliberately. He is very detailed in his articles about serials and even the hangar numbers. 

These unbelievable claims he is making now in his recent articles regarding F-14 are astonishing to me. He is dropping these sentences like "a whole new airframe of F-14A has been built inside OWJ industrial complex" ... "Local TF-30-P414 Turbofan has been built by OWJ" ... "AWG-9 is being built inside IRSSJO complex with 843 local parts with 300+ search range". "Azarakhsh missile with CCD seeker like AIM-9X", "Maghsoud ARH with 200 KM"

My question is ... if he is right and and he is usually right about IRIAF atleast, then what is stopping Iran to come up with a local "OWJ F-14" ? even if that machine is like 60-70% indigenous it will be like a game changer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## drmeson

WudangMaster said:


> I truly hope Mr. Azarmehr's assertions about the native TF30 is true, but I just don't understand why it would not have been made known publicly, unless the project and the engines are not yet mature enough? Maybe they are workshop level production instead of industrial churn out, but that still be worth bragging about.



yes exactly my own question as well.

At best I feel this could be an OWJ version of F-14 as HESA Azarakhsh/Saegheh/Kowsar are versions of F-5E/F with a growing level of indigenous content with every generation.

F-14AM according to BT is already using thousands of locally built parts. Hundreds of Companies are established inside Iran to build these local parts of airframe, turbofan and avionics/radars to keep the cat in the sky with improved performance in some aspects like radar (his claim in AirInternational, Key Aero). The main weapon of Aircraft is already locally built and soon the entire weapon choices will be local with Azaraksh/Fattar for WVR and Fakour-90, Maghsoud for LR-BVR attack.

This means that F-5E-Azarakhsh stage is already achieved with F-14AM which I guess was 30-40 % indigenous. Next stage could be Saegheh level indigenousisation (50-70+ %) then Kowsar (90+%) and we will have our own Gorbe for 25 Million USD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> Mind you this journalist is an extreme level anti-Iran man who kisses Israeli and American azz day and night. Majority of the time, he is right about IRIAF (only) as he claims to be an ex-engineer in the force who got disgruntled because he saw petty politics and stupid people being made decision-makers to destroy the force deliberately. He is very detailed in his articles about serials and even the hangar numbers.
> 
> These unbelievable claims he is making now in his recent articles regarding F-14 are astonishing to me. He is dropping these sentences like "a whole new airframe of F-14A has been built inside OWJ industrial complex" ... "Local TF-30-P414 Turbofan has been built by OWJ" ... "AWG-9 is being built inside IRSSJO complex with 843 local parts with 300+ search range". "Azarakhsh missile with CCD seeker like AIM-9X", "Maghsoud ARH with 200 KM"
> 
> My question is ... if he is right and and he is usually right about IRIAF atleast, then what is stopping Iran to come up with a local "OWJ F-14" ? even if that machine is like 60-70% indigenous it will be like a game changer.


I have to say, a few months ago he also predicted that Iran is sending pilots and technicians to Russia to be trained for the Su-35 and that Iran is building huge hangars to accommodate dozens of new Russian aircraft it plans to buy.

The contract has yet to materialize but indeed, I'm noticing massive expansion of airfields across Iran on a scale that makes me take a closer look...those shelters aren't merely for UAVs.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the problem is you think , air-force by default mean symmetrical. while several time i pointed out to you no , its wrong assumption . its up to you to decide how to use it . it can act as a symmetrical force , it can act as asymmetrical force , it can be something in between.
> you support asymmetrical warfare on land , you support asymmetrical warfare in seas . but when it come to the sky no we don't want asymmetrical warfare in the sky .



I'm not under wrong assumptions when it comes to the meaning of asymmetry or what it implies with regards to the air force in the Iranian context. Asymmetrical employment of the IRIAF against Iran's potential enemy would not require the sort of massive procurement envisaged in the comment I was addressing.

Then there's also the cost-efficiency factor, which clearly favors other types of assets. Cost-efficiency is a fundamental pillar of asymmetry in Iran's establishment of deterrence against the zio-American empire.

As for missile bases, no, the way in which Iran is making use of her conventional missile arsenal is part and parcel of an asymmetric A2/AD approach against an air power-focused, much more resourceful enemy. There's no equivalent to the Iranian BM force in the opposing camp for there to be symmetry. Generally speaking, massive missile cities are uncommon and relatively innovative; more limited silo infrastructure is the norm, and that's used by nuclear powers to field nuclear-tipped long-range ballistic missiles for unconventional warfare.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> depend , how fast IRGC can respond ? 15 min ? 1 hours ? 1 day?
> and how many of air defence remain in place after the strike . by the way if it become absolutely necessary those airplane just can find a free way and land there , they can even do that with roads as we did that with F-4 and not a completely working F-4 , a damaged F-4
> it won\t be worse than this, will it be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the aircraft lost its wing but at last managed to land on the carrier
> 
> Russia can\t produce them in enough number for itself so i say its nearly impossible to get new Russian jet
> 
> the problem is you think , air-force by default mean symmetrical. while several time i pointed out to you no , its wrong assumption . its up to you to decide how to use it . it can act as a symmetrical force , it can act as asymmetrical force , it can be something in between.
> you support asymmetrical warfare on land , you support asymmetrical warfare in seas . but when it come to the sky no we don't want asymmetrical warfare in the sky .
> 
> 
> by the way what you call Iran missile cities ? Asymmetrical or Symmetrical ?
> as far as I'm aware underground missile bases are as symmetrical as missile forces can be .
> 
> 
> what rank , i'm interested as Kad-ban is no rank in Iranian military . it simply mean Sir in old Persian language.



Countries with long-range Search radars like Iran are constantly monitoring the Air activity of neighboring countries which is why we have them. If UAE, KSA, Israel, and Kuwait want to launch a joint airstrike with some 100-150 jets then they will have to move men, material assets which is Red marker level 1 for observers of activity. If they see such thing happening, the attack and defense assets are alerted prior. I would safely say that IRGC can respond within 30 mins with Solid Fueled depressed trajectory weapons combined with liquid-fueled ballistic trajectory weapons to mess with SAMs. That is how they have operated so far in their four cross-border strikes. 

There are four FABs in PGCC with just one in Kuwait and UAE. How many will be left operational if IRGC decides to launch 30 x Qiam-II, Khaybar Shikan, Dezful, Hoveyzeh CM at each of them targetting runways, hangars, and radar sites, towers etc? Yes the fighter after launching SOWs can return and land on highways but their FABs will be ruined. Iranian SAMs can still crawl out and operate. The IRGC launcher from underground bases and mobile TEL will still be able to target the enemy ground. If the goal of the enemy will be to destroy Iranian near-coast or southern military installations then they will achieve ~40-50% of that goal for 100 % of their own attack capability gone in retaliation. Some of their SOW deliverers will be taken out by HIMADS as well. Iran will take the blows too but that will not cut the Iranian attack options. The enemy will just lose the attack arm. So this strategy is not bad. It will work but IADS will be extremely stressed out. Equation just changes drastically against Iran if US gets involved with stealth jets and Tomahawks.

I am a huge supporter of the maintenance of a proper IRIAF interceptor force as part of grand IADS (Search and track ground radars, Ambush SHORADS+HIMADS, Interceptor fighters). My initial concern was that the way leadership is acting with budget cuts, they might end up just killing IRIAF by 2030 altogether while Missiles forces, UCAVs fleet, Navy etc will be topnotch forces at global stage. IRIAF's foreign procurements are dud, local production is slow, there are no meaningful unveilings for years (last was Kowsar some 4 years ago or Fakour-90). Raisi revived the space program I wonder if he has a say in front of strategists, in favor IRIAF. He has visited HESA adn saw Kowsar, Yasin, helis production, saw old F-4E at Nojeh base, met Putin but still not a single word about IRIAF's dying force with 200 million USD per year budget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Again, I don't disagree. But strengthening symmetrical warfare capabilities over a 10 year period wouldn't suddenly shift the sands.
> 
> Besides, the Iranian IADS is not easy to overwhelm and destroy plus the Iranians have a massive arsenal of missiles for retaliatory strikes the moment hostilities begin.
> 
> In light of this, a defence budget expansion and rearmament is warranted for the purpose of deterrence, at the very least, although I would make a case for intervention in Syria.



Every single rial invested in the missile, air defence and drone forces will, pound-for-pound, contribute more to Iran's deterrence power than if the same rial went into the air force. Cost-effectiveness is key against an enemy with virtually unlimited financial means like the USA regime.

Acquiring a large and brand new air force will not be possible, even over a 10-year period, without significant budgetary cuts to higher priority defence sectors. Either that, or it would have to be done at the expense of the civilian budget, which in turn would suppose Korean-style social control.

Also, the assets which make up Iran's asymmetric defense infrastructure aren't static or frozen in time. Even under an asymmetrical operating doctrine, Iran cannot rest on her laurels. The missile, UAV, air defence and naval forces are in constant need of upgrades, much like continuous R&D and innovation is necessary to neutralize the enemy's own technological developments as well as their latest counter-(counter-)measures.

It's a permanent dynamic effort. Only that this whole process will be magnitudes cheaper with current types of weaponry as compared to fighter jets or other aircraft, which are more expensive to procure, more expensive to maintain and operate, on top of being less survivable in case of a war.

And then there's numbers. Here no ceiling exists, any expansion will only strengthen Iran and worsen the enemy's prospects: the more missiles, the more radars, the more AD batteries, the more electronic warfare units and jammers, the merrier. Especially since all of these are so much cheaper to operate than additional modern fighter jets would be.

Last but not least once funds are secured for these tasks, any surplus would rather be used to update the equipment of the ground forces and speed up the construction of the huge list of naval vessels Iran is projecting to add to the IRIN and IRGCN. At that point there won't be enough left for an ambitious air force build-up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> With the same trend continuing we will see IRIAF dying around 2030 while IRGC will be flying around their HGVs at ~ICBM ranges and sailing their low RCS Command ships. We may see Iranian HIMADS reaching 500 KM with TVC control at that time and Jet powered large UCAVs with AI deploying weaponry from internal bays as well but IRIAF will be gone altogether.


They seem to be fully entrusted with UAVs, but unless those BT claims about the F-14 are true, then the IRAIF will continue to die as a conventional fighter jet force. And turn into a UAV centric force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> They seem to be fully entrusted with UAVs, but unless those BT claims about the F-14 are true, then the IRAIF will continue to die as a conventional fighter jet force. And turn into a UAV centric force.



Cant be a UAV centric force when you rely on ground relay stations for communications. Those are prone to jamming and EW/ECW. 

Need sat com capability and even that we saw with Al Assad attack a single missile hitting near underground the network cables/drone stations knocks out the drones for the base.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Cant be a UAV centric force when you rely on ground relay stations for communications. Those are prone to jamming and EW/ECW.
> 
> Need sat com capability and even that we saw with Al Assad attack a single missile hitting near underground the network cables/drone stations knocks out the drones for the base.


Again, just look at the state of the IRIAF, it's not like it wants to be that UAV centric force, it will just naturally trend to that course if the neglect continues, As you've stated before, IRIAF cannot reliably run even a small sortie rate without the aircrafts failing from wear and tear.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Stryker1982 said:


> Again, just look at the state of the IRIAF, it's not like it wants to be that UAV centric force, it will just naturally trend to that course if the neglect continues, As you've stated before, IRIAF cannot reliably run even a small sortie rate without the aircrafts failing from wear and tear.


It's more likely we'll see a mass replacement in a huge clean sweep where both light and heavy aircraft get replaced along with the infrastructure at the same time.

The pace of development seems to indicate as much.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> There are four FABs in PGCC with just one in Kuwait and UAE. How many will be left operational if IRGC decides to launch 30 x Qiam-II, Khaybar Shikan, Dezful, Hoveyzeh CM at each of them targetting runways, hangars, and radar sites, towers etc? Yes the fighter after launching SOWs can return and land on highways but their FABs will be ruined. Iranian SAMs can still crawl out and operate. The IRGC launcher from underground bases and mobile TEL will still be able to target the enemy ground. If the goal of the enemy will be to destroy Iranian near-coast or southern military installations then they will achieve ~40-50% of that goal for 100 % of their own attack capability


completely wrong assumption .first GCC also have missiles of its own , there is one difference . GCC have anti basaltic missile capabilities , we somehow lack on that department.
2nd those F-15 can operate well outside the range of those missiles you mentioned.
the attack capabilities won't be destroyed completely . it'll be there if you hit the bases it would be harder to operate . and about underground bases . if you knew their position its not hard to deal with them and i many time mentioned how.
and you can clear an airfield fairly fast but clearing those underground bases won't be as fast.


drmeson said:


> Countries with long-range Search radars like Iran are constantly monitoring the Air activity of neighboring countries which is why we have them.


problem with long range search radar and OTH radars . you can't hide them and you can't move them as fast. they are the primary target for a first strike


drmeson said:


> I would safely say that IRGC can respond within 30 mins with Solid Fueled depressed trajectory


can do that but not in number and can sustain that

the notion of a uav centric airforce that have so much popularity between some people seems not based on the fact how successful were bayraktar in Ukraine conflict.

UAVs are suitable for army aviation not air force.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> Also, the assets which make up Iran's asymmetric defense infrastructure aren't static or frozen in time. Even under an asymmetrical operating doctrine, Iran cannot rest on her laurels. The missile, UAV, air defence and naval forces are in constant need of upgrades, much like continuous R&D and innovation is necessary to neutralize the enemy's own technological developments as well as their latest counter-(counter-)measures.
> 
> It's a permanent dynamic effort. Only that this whole process will be magnitudes cheaper with current types of weaponry as compared to fighter jets or other aircraft, which are more expensive to procure, more expensive to maintain and operate, on top of being less survivable in case of a war.
> 
> And then there's numbers. Here no ceiling exists, any expansion will only strengthen Iran and worsen the enemy's prospects: the more missiles, the more radars, the more AD batteries, the more electronic warfare units and jammers, the merrier. Especially since all of these are so much cheaper to operate than additional modern fighter jets would be.


So you want to hand over control of the skies to the enemy and effectively let them roam in our airspace at will while you scramble to somehow counter it? Enemy aircraft will come in waves repeatedly and saturate radars. Air defence batteries can only acquire so many targets at a time and even fewer can be engaged with no guarantee all bandits will be intercepted.

Plus even successfully hitting enemy airfields, hangars and runways is no guarantee they're down for the count - even extensive damage to these can be repaired within 6 weeks at most. And there needs to be an infinite number of such missiles to sustain such action, which one cannot manufacture enough of even in peacetime, let alone war.

Air defence isn't some end-all, be-all - it's used in conjunction with the air force which intercepts and engages where AA systems fail. IRIAF has few aircraft to dedicate to such a role and can't maintain enough sorties when hostilities begin because within weeks, all these planes will be grounded due to wear and tear and maintenance issues.


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> So you want to hand over control of the skies to the enemy and effectively let them roam in our airspace at will while you scramble to somehow counter it? Enemy aircraft will come in waves repeatedly and saturate radars. Air defence batteries can only acquire so many targets at a time and even fewer can be engaged with no guarantee all bandits will be intercepted.
> 
> Plus even successfully hitting enemy airfields, hangars and runways is no guarantee they're down for the count - even extensive damage to these can be repaired within 6 weeks at most. And there needs to be an infinite number of such missiles to sustain such action, which one cannot manufacture enough of even in peacetime, let alone war.
> 
> Air defence isn't some end-all, be-all - it's used in conjunction with the air force which intercepts and engages where AA systems fail. IRIAF has few aircraft to dedicate to such a role and can't maintain enough sorties when hostilities begin because within weeks, all these planes will be grounded due to wear and tear and maintenance issues.


a runway damage can be fixed in 2-3 hours max


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> Acquiring a large and brand new air force will not be possible, even over a 10-year period, without significant budgetary cuts to higher priority defence sectors. Either that, or it would have to be done at the expense of the civilian budget, which in turn would suppose Korean-style social control.


GOOD! A North Korean style system which regulates you is exactly what is needed, at least temporarily. Iranian self-centeredness, greed and selfishness is unparalleled - I observe it in my own family, although in Iran's case, it's being done on a level with far-reaching generational consequences.

Most of you are stuck in the mentality of screaming "EY VAI!" when the slightest thing goes wrong and hamesheh giryeh mikooni, wailing non-stop about trivialities. Were you to spend even 6 months in india in analogous conditions to how you lived in Iran, you would probably kill yourselves out of depression.

Curb your corruption and boost your defence budget little by little as the GDP grows - there'll be enough money for rebuilding the IRIAF.



Hack-Hook said:


> a runway damage can be fixed in 2-3 hours max


I meant like the damage done to Damascus International Airport - it was back on track in 6 weeks.


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> So you want to hand over control of the skies to the enemy and effectively let them roam in our airspace at will while you scramble to somehow counter it? Enemy aircraft will come in waves repeatedly and saturate radars. Air defence batteries can only acquire so many targets at a time and even fewer can be engaged with no guarantee all bandits will be intercepted.



Their air power will be neutralized after its static support infrastructure is struck by Iran. Without said infrastructure, no sustained large-scale air campaign is possible.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Plus even successfully hitting enemy airfields, hangars and runways is no guarantee they're down for the count - even extensive damage to these can be repaired within 6 weeks at most.



Radars, munitions storage, maintenance equipment and facilities, towers, power stations etc can't. Employment of a modern air force is dependent upon a very bulky infrastructure. They can't have fighter jets carry out successive sorties from roads or highways.

Also, it's not as if Iran will be sitting idle and allowing them to repair their damaged air bases unhindered. On the contrary, they'll keep getting hit in the midst of any attempted repair works.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> And there needs to be an infinite number of such missiles to sustain such action, which one cannot manufacture enough of even in peacetime, let alone war.



There need to be thousands of missiles to incapacitate the limited number of enemy airbases, and Iran is fielding missiles in the many tens of thousands.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Air defence isn't some end-all, be-all - it's used in conjunction with the air force which intercepts and engages where AA systems fail.



In classical thinking, which is inadequate for Iran. In Iran's case the IADS is used in conjunction with a ballistic and cruise missile force as well as UAV's.

And this has successfully deterred military aggression against Iran.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> IRIAF has few aircraft to dedicate to such a role and can't maintain enough sorties when hostilities begin because within weeks, all these planes will be grounded due to wear and tear and maintenance issues.



The IRIAF's role is subordinate in Iran's defence doctrine.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> GOOD! A North Korean style system which regulates you is exactly what is needed, at least temporarily. Iranian self-centeredness, greed and selfishness is unparalleled - I observe it in my own family, although in Iran's case, it's being done on a level with far-reaching generational consequences.



Needed or not, it's never going to be implemented. It isn't helpful to cogitate on unrealistic eventualities when discussing the Iranian defence budget.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Most of you are stuck in the mentality of screaming "EY VAI!" when the slightest thing goes wrong and hamesheh giryeh mikooni, wailing non-stop about trivialities. Were you to spend even 6 months in india in analogous conditions to how you lived in Iran, you would probably kill yourselves out of depression.



Yeah, well not me. You'll know if you pay attention to my comments.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I meant like the damage done to Damascus International Airport - it was back on track in 6 weeks.



The enemy's attack wasn't designed to jeopardize the normal operation of Damascus International Airport. Also in six weeks Iran would wreak havoc on high value targets across a potential enemy's unprotected territory.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> The enemy's attack wasn't designed to jeopardize the normal operation of Damascus International Airport. Also in six weeks Iran would wreak havoc on high value targets across a potential enemy's unprotected territory.


They wanted to destroy it completely in order to leave it useless for months on end. Syrian air defenses intercepted most of the silos launched at the site but those that did get through did enough to put operations on hold for over a month, requiring the traffic to be redirected to Aleppo.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> completely wrong assumption .first GCC also have missiles of its own , there is one difference . GCC have anti basaltic missile capabilities , we somehow lack on that department.


It's PGCC, you Arab traitor! Go and read your Saudi International. You forgetting Aramco and how their anti-missile capabilities work lol admit it, you love the west and the enemies of Iran more than Iran itself. Iransetiz to the hilt!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

In one of the question and answer videos a while back, he said something about being "darejeh daar"; not sure if that means commissioned as an officer or an enlisted career soldier as opposed to someone drafted?



Hack-Hook said:


> what rank , i'm interested as Kad-ban is no rank in Iranian military . it simply mean Sir in old Persian language.



In one of the question and answer videos a while back, he said something about being "darejeh daar"; not sure if that means commissioned as an officer or an enlisted career soldier as opposed to someone drafted?


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> It's PGCC, you Arab traitor! Go and read your Saudi International. You forgetting Aramco and how their anti-missile capabilities work lol admit it, you love the west and the enemies of Iran more than Iran itself. Iransetiz to the hilt!


The Houthi strikes into saudi arabia showed how utterly worthless their patriot AA system is, even with americans sitting at the controls.

Interestingly, they even ran a report on the chances of intercepting a North Korean ICBM aimed at their homeland and their consensus was that in the practice runs they conducted, there was a mere 50% success rate under scenarios with ideal circumstances. Note that the DPRK hasn't even mastered MIRV yet - this is just how much amerikwa overhypes itself by use of it's propaganda machine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> It's PGCC, you Arab traitor! Go and read your Saudi International. You forgetting Aramco and how their anti-missile capabilities work lol admit it, you love the west and the enemies of Iran more than Iran itself. Iransetiz to the hilt!


dear daylamite please come back and live in Iran here we needs your patriotism


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> In one of the question and answer videos a while back, he said something about being "darejeh daar"; not sure if that means commissioned as an officer or an enlisted career soldier as opposed to someone drafted?


if he said "daraje-dar" it mean he is somewhere between Sergant 3rd class to chief warrant officer
in air force


















in army

















this was mine when i was conscripted in police force

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> completely wrong assumption .first GCC also have missiles of its own



Only KSA among them has few purchased DF-21 (C?) without launchers. The missile has a CEP of ~50-100m and Saudi are known to possess only 12 x TEL's that actually belonged to DF-3 from 80s. There is no evidence that DF-21 has any TEL or is eve deployed. If another War of Cities like exchange starts up between PGCC and Iran, they have nothing but to lose in the conflict. Iranian Missiles, UCAV firepower will just overwhelm them. Their water resources, oil terminals, fields are lying in open. Situation can change very quickly if Saudis or UAE purchase more DF-21 and TELs from China which can happen any time. We know Chinese companies will do anything for money and are masters of under the table deals. 



Hack-Hook said:


> GCC have anti basaltic missile capabilities



Houthis with Qiam-I have many times breached the MIM-104. Why are you assuming that only one type of trajectory will be used to fire at a SAM site? IRGC has always mixed up its attack options. With Qassem and KS the trajectory is getting even more depressed and the terminal speed is enhanced.

List of Iranian Ballistic Missile attacks


*Day**Date**Target**No. of* missilesSunday18 June 2017ISIS after they detonated Bombs in Iran, killing children6 (Solid Zolfaghar, Liquid Qiam-1)Saturday8 September 2018Terror group KDPI that often targetted Iranian soldiers on the border7 (Solid Zolfaghar)Monday01 October 2018ISIL6 (Zolfaghar, Liquid Qiam-1) + UCAV Shahed 191 Wednesday08 January 2020US bases for martyrdom of Gen. Qassem Soleimani (Status of war)22 (Solid Fateh 313, Liquid Qiam-II)Monday13 March 2022Anti Iranian Training Facility/Potential Threat12 (Solid Fateh-110)

If you include Houthis strikes on KSA and UAE they also use a combination of BM and loitering UAVs, Cruise missiles. THAAD can be neutralized this way if the system is overwhelmed from multiple tracjectories of: 

Ballistic
Quasi Ballistic
Glide
Skip Glide
Cruise
Skim Cruise
loitering UAVs



Hack-Hook said:


> 2nd those F-15 can operate well outside the range of those missiles you mentioned.



What would the F-15 do when the base of the F-15 be gone ? KSA has them in 2 FABs. Yes Saudi can theoretically pull some stunt and land back at highways whatever jets will not be taken out by Iranian HIMADS (RCS of 25 m2). But the base is gone. To get into battle zone again the plane will have to be Re-fueled, Re-armed, Re-checked, New mission has to be planned, New pilots need to get to the plane etc etc. Will all of this happen when the jet is parked on a high way in the desert in 50 degrees Celsius while its hangars, maintenance equipment, mission rooms, towers, and armament caches are gone in its home base?

This is what happened to a large base that received 11 Fateh313/Zolfaghars and Qiam-1 missiles. I was talking about 30-40 Missile per base so imagine the havoc. 








Hack-Hook said:


> and you can clear an airfield fairly fast but clearing those underground bases won't be as fast.



No you cant clear up the airfield very quickly. IRGC is not stupid that they would not target the logistics and Communications of the base first.



Hack-Hook said:


> problem with long range search radar and OTH radars . you can't hide them and you can't move them as fast. they are the primary target for a first strike



By that theory, Salman's palace in Riyadh can also be destroyed with 15 Haj Qassems GV's carrying thermobaric munitions (10 tons in total) in the first wave. Countries escalate the conflict based upon what kind of retaliation they may face as a consequence. OTHR of Iran are deeper into territory and won't be fired at easily atleast not by PGCC. They get targetted means conflict escalation to the point that even the red sea coast infrastructure will be targetted by IRGC using bigger weapons. 



Hack-Hook said:


> the notion of a uav centric airforce that have so much popularity between some people seems not based on the fact how successful were bayraktar in Ukraine conflict.
> 
> UAVs are suitable for army aviation not air force.



If I am a planner of PGCC my best bet will be to arm my large AF's with as many long range SOWs as possible and launch them in bulk towards coast near-coast military infrastructure of IRIN, IRGN, IR-AD, IRIAF, UCAV bases to just cut short the arm of Iranian attack capability. Repeated softening of the targets will just put more and more stress on the IADS of Iran because IRIAF will offer little deterrence. Its too small a force. Again, I am in favor of the survival of IRIAF. I want leadership to realize this, and increase the current 200 Million USD budget to atleast 800 USD. A robust interceptor force of atleast 200+ fighters comprising of F-14AM (40), MIG-29M (50), Kowsar-I/II (120) are required along with SIGINT, ELINT UCAVs to enforce A2/AD zones over PG. Currently they are hell bent on murder of IRIAF.



Hack-Hook said:


>



استوار یکم

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> The Houthi strikes into saudi arabia showed how utterly worthless their patriot AA system is, even with americans sitting at the controls.


the houthi attacks are interesting , the question is how many intercepted and how many passed the defense . it all come to quality and quantity.
let put a better example . look at iserael iron dome , how many rocket Palestinian fired , how many intercepted and how many passed the defense


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> It's PGCC, you Arab traitor! Go and read your Saudi International. You forgetting Aramco and how their anti-missile capabilities work lol admit it, you love the west and the enemies of Iran more than Iran itself. Iransetiz to the hilt!



we should not fight with each other. we will be foolish if we keep underestimating the enemy's capabilities. they have $ and western support. this is how they underestimated Iran while Iran was building its missile arm

revival of IRIAF atleast as an interceptor force is a must at all costs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Only KSA among them has few purchased DF-21 (C?) without launchers. The missile has a CEP of ~50-100m and Saudi are known to possess only 12 x TEL's that actually belonged to DF-3 from 80s. There is no evidence that DF-21 has any TEL or is eve deployed. If another War of Cities like exchange starts up between PGCC and Iran, they have nothing but to lose in the conflict. Iranian Missiles, UCAV firepower will just overwhelm them. Their water resources, oil terminals, fields are lying in open. Situation can change very quickly if Saudis or UAE purchase more DF-21 and TELs from China which can happen any time. We know Chinese companies will do anything for money and are masters of under the table deals.


maybe yes maybe no








CNN Exclusive: US intel and satellite images show Saudi Arabia is now building its own ballistic missiles with help of China


US intelligence agencies have assessed that Saudi Arabia is now actively manufacturing its own ballistic missiles with the help of China, CNN has learned, a development that could have significant ripple effects across the Middle East and complicate the Biden administration's efforts to restrain...




edition.cnn.com






drmeson said:


> Houthis with Qiam-I have many times breached the MIM-104. Why are you assuming that only one type of trajectory will be used to fire at a SAM site? IRGC has always mixed up its attack options. With Qassem and KS the trajectory is getting even more depressed and the terminal speed is enhanced.


as i said how many time they failed and how many time they succeed


drmeson said:


> List of Iranian Ballistic Missile attacks
> 
> 
> *Day**Date**Target**No. of* missilesSunday18 June 2017ISIS after they detonated Bombs in Iran, killing children6 (Solid Zolfaghar, Liquid Qiam-1)Saturday8 September 2018Terror group KDPI that often targetted Iranian soldiers on the border7 (Solid Zolfaghar)Monday01 October 2018ISIL6 (Zolfaghar, Liquid Qiam-1) + UCAV Shahed 191Wednesday08 January 2020US bases for martyrdom of Gen. Qassem Soleimani (Status of war)22 (Solid Fateh 313, Liquid Qiam-II)Monday13 March 2022Anti Iranian Training Facility/Potential Threat12 (Solid Fateh-110)


that is an interesting missile , how many day after the attack iran responded ? why you believe this time will be faster.


drmeson said:


> What would the F-15 do when the base of the F-15 be gone ? KSA has them in 2 FABs. Yes Saudi can theoretically pull some stunt and land back at highways whatever jets will not be taken out by Iranian HIMADS (RCS of 25 m2). But the base is gone. To get into battle zone again the plane will have to be Re-fueled, Re-armed, Re-checked, New mission has to be planned, New pilots need to get to the plane etc etc. Will all of this happen when the jet is parked on a high way in the desert in 50 degrees Celsius while its hangars, maintenance equipment, mission rooms, towers, and armament caches are gone in its home base?


their base is gone but also this can be said about Iranian under ground missile bases will be out of question . do you believe USA already didn't shared its satellite imagery of these underground bases with ksa , do you think they are not already aware of their entrance . you think how long it take for ksa to fix its base , you want fuel , they can send some tanker as stopgap for the refueling capacity of the base , and the runway can be fixed in 2-3 hours now answer me how many hours it take to clear the entrance of those bases if they get bombed.

no, relying on air defense is not the answer they never will be able to prevent those base from being bombed , its air force that can do that. by our current strategy in case of enemy attack we only can rely on t6he missiles which are on tels outside those bases in case of enemy attack



drmeson said:


> This is what happened to a large base that received 11 Fateh313/Zolfaghars and Qiam-1 missiles. I was talking about 30-40 Missile per base so imagine the havoc.


did the base destroyed ? did it stop work ?


drmeson said:


> No you cant clear up the airfield very quickly. IRGC is not stupid that they would not target the logistics and Communications of the base first.


communication can be fixed with mobile terminals . logistic can be protected . look at those zolfaqar craters , do you believe they can penetrate underground reinforced craters. how many we used to attack a reinforced structure in iraqi kurdistan 
by the way around those bases is desert , they just can disperse the logistic around those bases in desert in small caches 


drmeson said:


> By that theory, Salman's palace in Riyadh can also be destroyed with 15 Haj Qassems GV's carrying thermobaric munitions (10 tons in total) in the first wave. Countries escalate the conflict based upon what kind of retaliation they may face as a consequence. OTHR of Iran are deeper into territory and won't be fired at easily atleast not by PGCC. They get targetted means conflict escalation to the point that even the red sea coast infrastructure will be targetted by IRGC using bigger weapons.


yes it can , but i wonder if he will be there in case of war , serriously doubt that.


drmeson said:


> استوار یکم


thats correct but i don't knew hid rank wudang master says said he was Darajeh-Dar . that mean گروهبان سه تا استوار یک in iran military it means the guy at most can have a high school diploma and also never did attend military academy , also he must never had shown an outstanding act in his career or he is new to military.
when i was conscripted because i had a medical doctorate i got first lieutenant rank


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> we should not fight with each other.


Read his replies and tell us again if we shouldn't fight. He can't see a picture of bears in northern Iran without commenting russian bears are bigger.

I really wanted to strangle him for it.



Hack-Hook said:


> the houthi attacks are interesting , the question is how many intercepted and how many passed the defense . it all come to quality and quantity.
> let put a better example . look at iserael iron dome , how many rocket Palestinian fired , how many intercepted and how many passed the defense


Those attacks are meant to raise the cost of war, you dumbfuck. A $10,000 missile vs a $3 million interceptor missile, of which they fire multiple at once or an aircraft sortie, which burns about $200,000 every time they take to the air.

Why do you think ksa accepted a ceasefire with the Houthis it's continued to prolong? The cost of war was getting too high, their expensive drones fixed-wing UAVs were being shot down repeatedly and their pawns were making no headway to speak of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> we should not fight with each other. we will be foolish if we keep underestimating the enemy's capabilities. they have $ and western support. this is how they underestimated Iran while Iran was building its missile arm
> 
> revival of IRIAF atleast as an interceptor force is a must at all costs


Revival of the IRIAF has to be done realistically and not with the pipe dreams of over-realiance on western tech. Not gonna happen, our best bet is Russian and indegenous.

Im sorry but @Hack-Hook has gone beyond the scope of simply being cautious, and is going into the territory of copying word for word the same propaganda and lies that the Iransetiz liberals and enemies of Iran say. He can't even bring himself to give Iran any credit for the Aramco attacks...any time Iran makes any power move or anything positive, people like him come here like borj e zahr e mar and shower rehashed Iranstiz criticism at every given moment. He is an anti-Iranian traitor and I will NEVER take back what I said because it is the truth and the truth MUST be exposed for all to see even if it is against your own self.



Hack-Hook said:


> dear daylamite please come back and live in Iran here we needs your patriotism


Just because you live in Iran, allegedly, doesnt mean youre patriotic. Iran definitely doesn't need Iransetiz traitors like you. I'll only come there and flush you out.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Read his replies and tell us again if we shouldn't fight. He can't see a picture of bears in northern Iran without commenting russian bears are bigger.
> 
> I really wanted to strangle him for it.


Thank you! This is exactly what im trying to say! This kind of behaviour can not and will not go unchecked as long as im here. The self-hating prick.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> I want leadership to realize this, and increase the current 200 Million USD budget to atleast 800 USD. A robust interceptor force of atleast 200+ fighters comprising of F-14AM (40), MIG-29M (50), Kowsar-I/II (120) are required along with SIGINT, ELINT UCAVs to enforce A2/AD zones over PG. Currently they are hell bent on murder of IRIAF.


They need to change the annual defence budget to $20 billion and $4 billion out of that must go to the IRIAF.

What peanuts do you wish to buy with $800 million, kek?



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Thank you! This is exactly what im trying to say! This kind of behaviour can not and will not go unchecked as long as im here. The self-hating prick.


I agree, man. It's one thing to be critical - even our veteran users from the Iran Defence Forum and Iran Military Forum days are very analytical and never shy of calling out flaws when they spot them.

But these kinds of comments serve no purpose whatsoever. Only a scumbag would continue pour out such a disgusting stream of them, day after day.


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Those attacks are meant to raise the cost of war, you dumbfuck. A $10,000 missile vs a $3 million interceptor missile, of which they fire multiple at once or an aircraft sortie, which burns about $200,000 every time they take to the air.


dear blessedkingof longing if you believe the missile houthi group fire toward any place in ksa but Najran is just 10000$ or you don't knew that an f-17 is about 20,000$ /flying hours for f15 its 40,000$/h not 200,000 then it show who is what you called me

by the way that 3million dollar is the price of 4 missile in one canister not just one missile 





درضمن ادب چیز خوبی هست


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Revival of the IRIAF has to be done realistically and not with the pipe dreams of over-realiance on western tech. Not gonna happen, our best bet is Russian and indegenous.
> 
> Im sorry but @Hack-Hook has gone beyond the scope of simply being cautious, and is going into the territory of copying word for word the same propaganda and lies that the Iransetiz liberals and enemies of Iran say. He can't even bring himself to give Iran any credit for the Aramco attacks...any time Iran makes any power move or anything positive, people like him come here like borj e zahr e mar and shower rehashed Iranstiz criticism at every given moment. He is an anti-Iranian traitor and I will NEVER take back what I said because it is the truth and the truth MUST be exposed for all to see even if it is against your own self.


yes realistically , wonder what you mean by realistically by spending the money that must be spend on domestic production on Russian out-dated downgraded equipment ?
I'm iran-setiz because i support domestic production , you are iran-parast because you support buying outdated and downgraded Russian equipment 
that's interesting logic



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Just because you live in Iran, allegedly, doesnt mean youre patriotic. Iran definitely doesn't need Iransetiz traitors like you. I'll only come there and flush you out.


well the traitor in my book are the ones who support making our armed force at the mercy of foreign country if they give us parts or not


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> They wanted to destroy it completely in order to leave it useless for months on end. Syrian air defenses intercepted most of the silos launched at the site but those that did get through did enough to put operations on hold for over a month, requiring the traffic to be redirected to Aleppo.



Not sure where you're getting the information about zionist mission objectives from, but if that was their aim, it just goes to underscore the superiority of Iran's doctrinal approach with regards to taking out airfields.

I've no idea what weapons the zionists fired at Damascus, but if it was ballistic missiles which I doubt because Syria has no real ABM capability to speak of (and numerous incoming projectiles appear to have been intercepted), just remember Isra"el" doesn't possess even a tiny fraction of the Iranian BM arsenal.

So when Iran sets outs to neutralize a hostile airbase, it won't look anything like that, rest assured. The furious avalanche of BM's Iran would literally make to rain upon this sort of a target will absolutely saturate enemy defenses - with the handy inclusion of Hormoz-1 anti-radiation missiles going after their ABM shield's radars by the way, and wreck havoc on the ground. Therefore, what you claim Tel Aviv failed at in Damascus, Iran will very much be accomplish.

Moreover you implicitly acknowledged that if struck often and precisely enough, an airfield can indeed be put out of service for a protracted period of time. Quod erat demonstrandum.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Not sure where you're getting the information about zionist mission objectives from, but if that was their aim, it just goes to underscore the superiority of Iran's doctrinal approach with regards to taking out airfields.
> 
> I've no idea what weapons the zionists fired at Damascus, but if it was ballistic missiles which I doubt because Syria has no real ABM capability to speak of (and numerous incoming projectiles appear to have been intercepted), just remember Isra"el" doesn't possess even a tiny fraction of the Iranian BM arsenal.
> 
> So when Iran sets outs to neutralize a hostile airbase, it won't look anything like that, rest assured. The furious avalanche of BM's Iran would literally make to rain upon this sort of a target will absolutely saturate enemy defenses - with the handy inclusion of Hormoz-1 anti-radiation missiles going after their ABM shield's radars by the way, and wreck havoc on the ground. Therefore, what you claim Tel Aviv failed at in Damascus, Iran will very much be accomplish.
> 
> Moreover you implicitly acknowledged that if struck often and precisely enough, an airfield can indeed be put out of service for a protracted period of time. Quod erat demonstrandum.


2-3 years ago Syria fired a dozen m600 at Israel how many hit their target or hit anything i'm really intrested you answer that (M-600 is licensed copy version of Fateh-110 in syria) ?


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> dear blessedkingof longing if you believe the missile houthi group fire toward any place in ksa but Najran is just 10000$ or you don't knew that an f-17 is about 20,000$ /flying hours for f15 its 40,000$/h not 200,000 then it show who is what you called me
> 
> by the way that 3million dollar is the price of 4 missile in one canister not just one missile


Yes, $10,000, you idiot. Those missiles they use in Yemen are assembled in factories on their own soil, with a lot less quality control and far lesser budget than you can imagine.

And it isn't just one aircraft that takes off - an entire squadron is scrambled for a UAV. Plus the F-15E's maintenance is closer to $80,000/hour.


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Yes, $10,000, you idiot. Those missiles they use in Yemen are assembled in factories on their own soil, with a lot less quality control and far lesser budget than you can imagine.
> 
> And it isn't just one aircraft that takes off - an entire squadron is scrambled for a UAV. Plus the F-15E's maintenance is closer to $80,000/hour.


do a little research on what you post


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> This is what happened to a large base that received 11 Fateh313/Zolfaghars and Qiam-1 missiles. I was talking about 30-40 Missile per base so imagine the havoc.



I'd say, multiply those 30-40 missiles by a factor of 20 or so, and it will probably be closer to the number Iran will fire at each one of the enemy's "super bases" in case of a war.



drmeson said:


> we should not fight with each other.



Leaving aside forum discussions, when it comes to Iran's domestic political factions if a major conflict breaks out, chances are that parts of the liberal fifth column and long tolerated _nofuzi _networks will be silenced. They won't be exercising their _enad_ in the midst of a potentially acute life or death situation.

Not to mention that some elements might actually be lying in wait to pass information to the enemy, akin to sleeper cells. I'm talking about political and administrative figures who have a certain status and are freely speaking and acting today in the Islamic Republic: when a member of Rohani's nuclear negotiating team was arrested and convicted of espionage, imagine the rest.

War brings a lot of radicalism with it, and sometimes it's a plain necessity. Remember the 1980's. In a renewed war, some kind of internal purge will definitely take place in Iran.



drmeson said:


> we will be foolish if we keep underestimating the enemy's capabilities. they have $ and western support. this is how they underestimated Iran while Iran was building its missile arm



This is correct, however...



drmeson said:


> revival of IRIAF atleast as an interceptor force is a must at all costs



...20.000 or so additional BM's (improvised estimate) for the cost of a rebuilt IRIAF will have greater survivability and be more effective in their probability to score hits.




Daylamite Warrior said:


> any time Iran makes any power move or anything positive, people like him come here like borj e zahr e mar and shower rehashed Iranstiz criticism at every given moment.



Keep in mind a revolutionary administration is in charge and busy repairing the damage done by the previous liberal team. Its opponents are in overdrive mode trying to hamper the enthusiasm of the anti-imperialist and revolutionary public. Encouraging a depressive mood is one possible means towards that end.




Hack-Hook said:


> 2-3 years ago Syria fired a dozen m600 at Israel how many hit their target or hit anything i'm really intrested you answer that (M-600 is licensed copy version of Fateh-110 in syria) ?



Iran's not going to be firing a mere dozen. Iran's stockpile is in the tens of thousands, and Iranian strikes will be qualitatively incomparable, because they will consist of a carefully calibrated mix of different types of missiles on top of decoys, a cocktail precisely designed to breach enemy ABM shields. In short, it'll be like apples and oranges.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Iran's not going to fire a dozen. Iran's stockpile is in the high tens of thousands, and Iranian strikes will be qualitatively incomparable, because they will consist of a carefully calibrated mix of different types on top of decoys, a cocktail precisely designed to breach enemy ABM shields.
> 
> In short, apples and oranges.


your usual answer , let me tell you . it was 12-15 fateh-110 like missile and they were fired at Golan height and all intercepted. you know why because only saturation is sure way past enemy defense and you can't do that by just ballistic missile , you need cruise missiles , missiles like HARM , drones,....
and you must not foolishly try to attack bases you first must attack radars and and air-defense assets .


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> yes realistically , wonder what you mean by realistically by spending the money that must be spend on domestic production on Russian out-dated downgraded equipment ?
> I'm iran-setiz because i support domestic production , you are iran-parast because you support buying outdated and downgraded Russian equipment
> that's interesting logic
> 
> 
> well the traitor in my book are the ones who support making our armed force at the mercy of foreign country if they give us parts or not


Martike, how many fucking times do we have to tell you that domestic Iranian production is essential. What you seem to gloss over is that Iran can not build an airforce all by itself in any realistic timeframe. So who else can Iran rely on? The west? Are you that dumb? Do you think the west will sell us planes? I doubt even a revolution back to the days of Shah would make the west sell their arms to us. This is why your critizisms are in actual fact veiled calls to get rid of Islamic Republic...which just shows how out of touch you are. Russian is the best and only option, and we need to have imported planes until we have the knowhow to make our own airforce from scratch!

There is nothing trecherous about doing trade with a neighbour...but to change your entire country's philosophy and prinicples just to appease the west so they may sell you some Disneyland tickets is the eptiome of treachery.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> your usual answer , let me tell you . it was 12-15 fateh-110 like missile and they were fired at Golan height and all intercepted. you know why because only saturation is sure way past enemy defense and you can't do that by just ballistic missile , you need cruise missiles , missiles like HARM , drones,....
> and you must not foolishly try to attack bases you first must attack radars and and air-defense assets .



Well, I clearly stated different types of missiles, didn't I? So my answer was covering all of what you listed, with the sole exception of air-launched HARM's because Iran has anti-radiation ballistic missiles to fulfill that role. UAV's will come in a consecutive wave, once missiles achieved to soften up the targets.

This was the qualitative difference I was referring to. However, there will be a quantitative difference as well. Because unlike Syria and thanks to the sheer size of its BM force, Iran can afford to play the game of outright overwhelming enemy ABM assets piece by piece. Simply put, if the enemy has (X) launchers for ABM's and Iran fires (Y) BM's with (X) << (Y), then some BM's are bound to get through even if all the others are intercepted.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Martike, how many fucking times do we have to tell you that domestic Iranian production is essential. What you seem to gloss over is that Iran can not build an airforce all by itself in any realistic timeframe. So who else can Iran rely on? The west? Are you that dumb? Do you think the west will sell us planes? I doubt even a revolution back to the days of Shah would make the west sell their arms to us. This is why your critizisms are in actual fact veiled calls to get rid of Islamic Republic...which just shows how out of touch you are. Russian is the best and only option, and we need to have imported planes until we have the knowhow to make our own airforce from scratch!
> 
> There is nothing trecherous about doing trade with a neighbour...but to change your entire country's philosophy and prinicples just to appease the west so they may sell you some Disneyland tickets is the eptiome of treachery.


One point I must raise though is that it is necessary to reverse engineer the F-14 and be able to build a new and improved one domestically, loaded with modern avionics, AESA, IRST, EW suite and all the rest...engine must be indigenous too.

There was a post by @drmeson about this recently quoting Babak Taghavee and seems work is on the right track.

For my own part, I support purchasing Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but only 4 and 2 squadrons respectively for niche roles (that too, it's to study the airframe primarily and their capabilities are secondary). Aviation, whether civilian or military, cannot be dependent upon foreign powers. The IRIAF being cut off from spare parts during war after the Revolution demonstrates this in the harshest way.



SalarHaqq said:


> War brings a lot of radicalism with it, and sometimes it's a plain necessity. Remember the 1980's. In a renewed war, some kind of internal purge will definitely take place in Iran.


I miss the "Bloody Sands" era of the 1980s. US embassy takeover, US embassy and marine barracks bombings in Beirut, the multiple aircraft hijackings, Lebanese hostage crisis, Operation Morvarid...ah, that was a grand time.

I wish we could return to the old playbook of classical terrorism sometimes.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Well, I clearly stated different types of missiles, didn't I? So my answer was covering all of what you listed, with the sole exception of air-launched HARM's because Iran has anti-radiation ballistic missiles to fulfill that role. UAV's will come in a consecutive wave, once missiles achieved to soften up the targets.
> 
> This was the qualitative difference I was referring to. However, there will be a quantitative difference as well. Because unlike Syria and thanks to the sheer size of its BM force, Iran can afford to play the game of outright overwhelming enemy ABM assets piece by piece. Simply put, if the enemy has (X) launchers for ABM's and Iran fires (Y) BM's with (X) << (Y), then some BM's are bound to get through even if all the others are intercepted.


your different type of missile include quasi ballistic and ballistic missiles . and you think how many Iran can send each hours ?
the problem is that anti radiation ballistic missile is for ships not air defense system and unlike harm , if the radar is turned off that anti radiation ballistic missile don't knew to do what


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Martike, how many fucking times do we have to tell you that domestic Iranian production is essential. What you seem to gloss over is that Iran can not build an airforce all by itself in any realistic timeframe. So who else can Iran rely on? The west? Are you that dumb? Do you think the west will sell us planes? I doubt even a revolution back to the days of Shah would make the west sell their arms to us. This is why your critizisms are in actual fact veiled calls to get rid of Islamic Republic...which just shows how out of touch you are. Russian is the best and only option, and we need to have imported planes until we have the knowhow to make our own airforce from scratch!


you just lost control of your mental state , imagining things , and showed your impolite nature
when you calmed down and regained control of your mental state and could talk two world like a human being we will talk .
*لقمان را گفتند: ادب از که آموختی؟

گفت: از بی ادبان! هر چه از ایشان در نظرم ناپسند آمد از فعل آن پرهیز کردم.

نگویند از سر بازیچه حرفی
کز آن پندی نگیرد صاحب هوش

و گر صد باب حکمت پیش نادان
بخوانند آیدش بازیچه در گوش*​


BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Oh, f-u-c-k off. You live smack bang in the middle of Iran and are clueless of it's hardware, the budgeting and inventory but somehow absolutely thorough with the enemy's equipment.
> 
> Hop over the turkish border and have a smuggler sneak you into Europe if you're so dickmatized by the West.


why do that while my specialty is a needed one , just need to go to embassy and say hello , its me , this is my experience record and this is my specialty , i like go to your country and work there and I get a visa in one month and can go there legally in first class airplane .
there is a difference between me and many of the guys here who bash me . if i wanted to go there i would have done it 20 years ago that i have invitation from embassy. and I'm completely aware of Iran military power as its more than 30 year I'm following it . my difference is i'm not a fanboy living in la la land.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I miss the "Bloody Sands" era of the 1980s. US embassy takeover, US embassy and marine barracks bombings in Beirut, the multiple aircraft hijackings, Lebanese hostage crisis, Operation Morvarid...ah, that was a grand time.
> 
> I wish we could return to the old playbook of classical terrorism sometimes


what are you an anarchist ?


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> One point I must raise though is that it is necessary to reverse engineer the F-14 and be able to build a new and improved one domestically, loaded with modern avionics, AESA, IRST, EW suite and all the rest...engine must be indigenous too.
> 
> There was a post by @drmeson about this recently quoting Babak Taghavee and seems work is on the right track.
> 
> For my own part, I support purchasing Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but only 4 and 2 squadrons respectively for niche roles (that too, it's to study the airframe primarily and their capabilities are secondary). Aviation, whether civilian or military, cannot be dependent upon foreign powers. The IRIAF being cut off from spare parts during war after the Revolution demonstrates this in the harshest way.


Yes Iranians have the creative acumen to reverse engineer more complex tech than the F-14...so there must be a reason why this hasn't happened yet. I dont think they have faith in the F-14 any more as it is a relic of the past now. I also think @drmeson has a point when he says Iran should look toward Mig-29 variants since we have the experience and are already equipped to maintain and operate these aircraft, as opposed to su-27 family.



Hack-Hook said:


> you just lost control of your mental state , imagining things , and showed your impolite nature
> when you calmed down and regained control of your mental state and could talk two world like a human being we will talk .
> *لقمان را گفتند: ادب از که آموختی؟
> 
> گفت: از بی ادبان! هر چه از ایشان در نظرم ناپسند آمد از فعل آن پرهیز کردم.
> 
> نگویند از سر بازیچه حرفی
> کز آن پندی نگیرد صاحب هوش
> 
> و گر صد باب حکمت پیش نادان
> بخوانند آیدش بازیچه در گوش*​


Eh? To az kay mas'habi shode baraye ma?

There is no talking to people like you. You are a flame bating troll and there is no need to be polite any more. We were polite to you already, but you continue to rehash and repeat yourself, and build strawman arguments just to keep the circular argument continuing. Seeing as you have failed to address a single point in my comment, and instead focussed on my mental state, it shows your foundations are weak and you are in no position to speak on this matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Eh? To az kay mas'habi shode baraye ma?


since when being polite is equal to be religious and that poem is from Saadi not a cleric. if anything he made some jokes about the people who pretend to be religious


Daylamite Warrior said:


> There is no talking to people like you. You are a flame bating troll and there is no need to be polite any more. We were polite to you already, but you continue to rehash and repeat yourself, and build strawman arguments just to keep the circular argument continuing. Seeing as you have failed to address a single point in my comment, and instead focussed on my mental state, it shows your foundations are weak and you are in no position to speak on this matter.


go read your post , you didn't made any point there ,


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> since when being polite is equal to be religious and that poem is from Saadi not a cleric. if anything he made some jokes about the people who pretend to be religious
> 
> go read your post , you didn't made any point there ,


Saadi is quoting Luqman, who is in the Quran. Saadi was a Muslim and is using Islamic reasoning. You don't even know what you post half of the time. Who said being religious means being a pacifist and being gentle all the time?! Sometimes it is necessary to be harsh with people.

There wasnt much of a point to reply to since all you could reply to me was some poem and some bollocks about mental health.


----------



## Abid123

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> For my own part, I support purchasing Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but only 4 and 2 squadrons respectively for niche roles (that too, it's to study the airframe primarily and their capabilities are secondary). Aviation, whether civilian or military, cannot be dependent upon foreign powers. The IRIAF being cut off from spare parts during war after the Revolution demonstrates this in the harshest way.


If you want to go for flankers Chinese J-16 is the best option. It has considerably more modern avionics and electronics than SU-35, an AESA radar which provides an situational awareness and electronic warfare advantage. The problem is that it is not for export + China needs permission from Russia to sell it. But... You never know what the future holds..


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Saadi is quoting Luqman, who is in the Quran. Saadi was a Muslim and is using Islamic reasoning. You don't even know what you post half of the time. Who said being religious means being a pacifist and being gentle all the time?! Sometimes it is necessary to be harsh with people.


sa'adi don't quote Loqman , and loqman is not a religious figure . not anybody mentioned in Quran is religious figure, by the way as i said sa'adi also make some funny joke about people who pretend to be religious.

and who says religious people are pacifist , history is filled with wars waged by religious people s in name of religion, i say religion people are the least pacifist among all people .


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> There wasnt much of a point to reply to since all you could reply to me was some poem and some bollocks about mental health.


as i said read your post if you want i quote it here


> Martike, how many fucking times do we have to tell you that domestic Iranian production is essential. What you seem to gloss over is that Iran can not build an airforce all by itself in any realistic timeframe. So who else can Iran rely on? The west? Are you that dumb? Do you think the west will sell us planes? I doubt even a revolution back to the days of Shah would make the west sell their arms to us. This is why your critizisms are in actual fact veiled calls to get rid of Islamic Republic...which just shows how out of touch you are. Russian is the best and only option, and we need to have imported planes until we have the knowhow to make our own airforce from scratch!


what you can't get is if Iran buy foreign aircraft there won't be any money left for producing domestic aircraft
iran can build airforce in realistic time domestically , if the necessary mone injected into the project , if it become a priority 
again show me a single time i supported iran buy any sort of airplane from foreign countries
Don't recall ever called for that , even when ahmadi-nejad was in power and i was completely against him and at the end he showed his true self and the ones who made a saint of him compete with each other to distance him
Russian are the worse option , they never gave us anything , they always back-stabbed us , they just want a weak Iran so we cant threaten their interest in middle east, they don't see us as an ally but as a competitor .
they refused to sell us airplane when we needed them.they hold the air defense system we paid for for 10 years and only were willing to give us Antey-2500 which we didn't want after we built something better they dident provide any support for Kilo sub we bought from them , they refused to provide any upgrade for Mig-29s , they backstabbed us in Shafaq project . they 4 time supported unsc resolutions against us .......


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> your different type of missile include quasi ballistic and ballistic missiles . and you think how many Iran can send each hours ?



Enough to disrupt enemy air force operations. More ballistic missiles can be fired than the number of interceptors the enemy can launch while those BM's are diving towards their targets.



Hack-Hook said:


> the problem is that anti radiation ballistic missile is for ships not air defense system and unlike harm , if the radar is turned off that anti radiation ballistic missile don't knew to do what



If the radar is turned off, increased amounts of regular ballistic missiles will get through.

As for the fact that the main anti-radiation BM unveiled by Iran thus far has been an anti-ship weapon, it doesn't mean the system can't or hasn't been converted into a ground attack variant.

In a 2020 war game, Iran destroyed what was either an "empty" AN/TPY-2 mock up or an actual wave-emitting device made to look like the cited radar. The missile employed had the appearance of a Fateh-series BM.

Whether or not that missile was fitted with dedicated anti-radiation features, the message was clear: that the IRGC has addressed the necessity to take down enemy air defence radars in a complex, multi-layered strike, and it has integrated specific tactics to that effect into its war planning.






So in fact air-launched HARM munitions aren't indispensable since ballistic missiles have been tasked to fulfill this role, and the whole scenario has been rehearsed.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Russian are the worse option ,



Good or bad, they're nonetheless one of only a handful of potential option for imports where needed.

NATO and the zionist regime however are existential enemies to Iran. Huge difference right there.



Hack-Hook said:


> they never gave us anything ,



Disinformation. Russia supplied Iran with a series of weapons, and has cooperated with Iran in the technological realm.



Hack-Hook said:


> they always back-stabbed us , they just want a weak Iran so we cant threaten their interest in middle east, they don't see us as an ally but as a competitor .



Iran and Russia have a strategic level partnership in several domains.

Even if that wasn't the case, it's still far preferable to be seen as a competitor than to be treated as a colonial subject, which is how western and zionist imperialists systematically perceive their so-called "allies" read vassals in the global south.



Hack-Hook said:


> they refused to sell us airplane when we needed them.



A lot has changed on the world stage since the 1990's and early 2000's especially as far as the deterioration of ties between the west and Russia is concerned.



Hack-Hook said:


> they hold the air defense system we paid for for 10 years and only were willing to give us Antey-2500 which we didn't want after we built something better



The S-300 are still a useful asset to Iran's IADS.



Hack-Hook said:


> they backstabbed us in Shafaq project .



Not really, the CEO of Mukhamedov Design Bureau passed away and the company shut up shop.



Hack-Hook said:


> they 4 time supported unsc resolutions against us .......



Unlike the zio-American empire, they're not pursuing a policy aimed at the destruction and balkanization of the Iranian nation-state coupled with definitive uprooting of the Iranian civilization.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I wish we could return to the old playbook of classical terrorism sometimes.



"Terrorism"? Axe that term please. Among other things, it's used by the enemy to misrepresent the legitimate Resistance of movements such as Lebanon's Hezbollah and other close allies of Iran.

Other than that, in the 1980's Iran was at war and in such a scenario, a lot of gloves tend to come off indeed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> sa'adi don't quote Loqman , and loqman is not a religious figure . not anybody mentioned in Quran is religious figure, by the way as i said sa'adi also make some funny joke about people who pretend to be religious.
> 
> and who says religious people are pacifist , history is filled with wars waged by religious people s in name of religion, i say religion people are the least pacifist among all people .


There is literally a sura called Luqman in the Quran! And Saadi has taken Luqman from the Quran because he is a Muslim. Yes everyone that the Quran refers to as a righteous person and draws examples from them are real and tend to be religious people. What are you talking about?! So you posted a poem that wasnt even relevant to what you were replying to. Typical!

I can only speak about Islam, and Islam is about balance. Sometimes you have to be harsh with people.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> as i said read your post if you want i quote it here
> 
> what you can't get is if Iran buy foreign aircraft there won't be any money left for producing domestic aircraft
> iran can build airforce in realistic time domestically , if the necessary mone injected into the project , if it become a priority
> again show me a single time i supported iran buy any sort of airplane from foreign countries
> Don't recall ever called for that , even when ahmadi-nejad was in power and i was completely against him and at the end he showed his true self and the ones who made a saint of him compete with each other to distance him
> Russian are the worse option , they never gave us anything , they always back-stabbed us , they just want a weak Iran so we cant threaten their interest in middle east, they don't see us as an ally but as a competitor .
> they refused to sell us airplane when we needed them.they hold the air defense system we paid for for 10 years and only were willing to give us Antey-2500 which we didn't want after we built something better they dident provide any support for Kilo sub we bought from them , they refused to provide any upgrade for Mig-29s , they backstabbed us in Shafaq project . they 4 time supported unsc resolutions against us .......


Iran has the money to purchase some squadrons of foreign aircraft from Russia as a stop gap until Iran can produce its own fleet of aircraft. You strawman my position that we should put all our eggs in one basket...which I never said, but you keep repeating because youre getting battered by everyone and you're getting desperate.

Of course Iran can build whatever it wants if it had the money. But issue isnt just the money, it's the technology available to them to reverse engineer or at least develop from. So Iran has to be realistic. So far Iran has spent nothing on foreign planes for the past few decades and yet it has nothing to show for it...just a few pathetic mock ups and a rehashed F5. So you cant cry when we are asking for some investment in some real fighter jets from foreign states.

Then why bring up western planes everytime someone suggests Russian ones? We can't buy them and never will. 

Dont talk nonesense, Russia has sold a lot of hardware to Iran. Yes they used to think they were part of the western club but they got humiliated and they still are. That said, we must not burn our bridges with them and they can be useful to us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

SalarHaqq said:


> "Terrorism"? Axe that term please. Among other things, it's used by the enemy to misrepresent the legitimate Resistance of movements such as Lebanon's Hezbollah and other close allies of Iran.
> 
> Other than that, in the 1980's Iran was at war and in such a scenario, a lot of gloves tend to come off indeed.


Also Operation Morvarid was beautiful operation whereby the baathist navy was largely annihilated. There was a recent interview from General Bagheri stating how it took a year of intel gathering to carry out that operation; either that or the one where the majnoon islands and faw where annexed (Valfajr 8?). Either way, these operations had so much that had to happen before, in order for them to be carried out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes Iranians have the creative acumen to reverse engineer more complex tech than the F-14...so there must be a reason why this hasn't happened yet. I dont think they have faith in the F-14 any more as it is a relic of the past now. I also think @drmeson has a point when he says Iran should look toward Mig-29 variants since we have the experience and are already equipped to maintain and operate these aircraft, as opposed to su-27 family.


Dear brother, I disagree with your assessment on the F-14. Prior to it's retirement in the us military, a new variant of the F-14 was launched with the most modern avionics, sensors, an APG-71 radar that could scan and track targets in a 370 km radius (increases to 740 km when 2 F-14Ds fly in conjunction), a system allowing the ground troops to view what the aircraft was seeing and a Joint Tactical Information Distribution System.

Make no mistake - the F-14 was retired solely out of fear of Iran which was stealing spare parts right out of the us military's inventory somehow and they wanted to ground the IRIAF totally. Had that not been the case, they would be flying it even today with even newer and better upgrades. If we can improve on the design to enable it to carry 12 missiles instead of 8 and add engines with a greater thrust to weight ratio (dry thrust - 74kN, afterburner - 125 kN) and with 3D thrust vectoring, we'll have a formidable weapon in our arsenal.

The Mig-29 should be handed over completely to the IRGC-AF and we should procure RD-33MK engines (smokeless, greater thrust) from Russia to power those along with an agreement for indigenous overhaul and upgrades. It serves their skill set much better.

As for the Su-27 family, my preferred purchase choices are the Su-30SM2 (4 squadrons) and Su-35SE (2 squadrons) and we should study the airframes once they're inducted into service. Of course, one condition of purchase should be technology transfer so we can manufacture spare parts at home after 5-7 years (at most 10).


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe yes maybe no
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CNN Exclusive: US intel and satellite images show Saudi Arabia is now building its own ballistic missiles with help of China
> 
> 
> US intelligence agencies have assessed that Saudi Arabia is now actively manufacturing its own ballistic missiles with the help of China, CNN has learned, a development that could have significant ripple effects across the Middle East and complicate the Biden administration's efforts to restrain...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as i said how many time they failed and how many time they succeed
> 
> that is an interesting missile , how many day after the attack iran responded ? why you believe this time will be faster.
> 
> their base is gone but also this can be said about Iranian under ground missile bases will be out of question . do you believe USA already didn't shared its satellite imagery of these underground bases with ksa , do you think they are not already aware of their entrance . you think how long it take for ksa to fix its base , you want fuel , they can send some tanker as stopgap for the refueling capacity of the base , and the runway can be fixed in 2-3 hours now answer me how many hours it take to clear the entrance of those bases if they get bombed.
> 
> no, relying on air defense is not the answer they never will be able to prevent those base from being bombed , its air force that can do that. by our current strategy in case of enemy attack we only can rely on t6he missiles which are on tels outside those bases in case of enemy attack
> 
> 
> did the base destroyed ? did it stop work ?
> 
> communication can be fixed with mobile terminals . logistic can be protected . look at those zolfaqar craters , do you believe they can penetrate underground reinforced craters. how many we used to attack a reinforced structure in iraqi kurdistan
> by the way around those bases is desert , they just can disperse the logistic around those bases in desert in small caches
> 
> yes it can , but i wonder if he will be there in case of war , serriously doubt that.
> 
> thats correct but i don't knew hid rank wudang master says said he was Darajeh-Dar . that mean گروهبان سه تا استوار یک in iran military it means the guy at most can have a high school diploma and also never did attend military academy , also he must never had shown an outstanding act in his career or he is new to military.
> when i was conscripted because i had a medical doctorate i got first lieutenant rank


Medical doctorate . . that means a PHD in medical science with post graduate research work in medicine or just 5 years of medical school. Some people confuse the term Doctor with medical physicians, which seems to be a universal habit. An impressive background indeed. 

All that aside, a well trained, experienced, and well educated non commissioned officer could surpass a lazy fat 4 star general who spent his carrier kissing butt to get up in ranks, which you could see hundreds of examples in the US defense establishment (400 4 star generals????) along with many western NATO states, and also all over the world. some non commissioned officers are critical thinkers with extensive military knowledge due to self education, reading and keeping a breast of the advances in weapons design and manufacturing, methods of war making, defense technologies, as well as sound strategic thinking.. Military academies don't teach much beside basic military discipline, leadership of small units, and elementary matters about logistics, and these basics are given to all non commissioned officers since they are the essential elements or the backbone of any military force. Lacking a military high rank doesn't necessarily disqualify all non commissioned officers as sound military minds.

Lastly, beyond military academies, there are military staff schools i.e. military graduate studies established and intended for mid ranking officers (rank of Major) to educate officers in planning and leadership of major military units in any given branch of the national defense establishment. Even at that level, many officers graduate, but, they lack leadership skills, fortitude, and the decision making skills to be commanders or leaders, so all military matters are only relatively true.


----------



## jauk

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Oh, f-u-c-k off. You live smack bang in the middle of Iran and are clueless of it's hardware, the budgeting and inventory but somehow absolutely thorough with the enemy's equipment.
> 
> Hop over the turkish border and have a smuggler sneak you into Europe if you're so dickmatized by the West.


@waz please address foul language. As for everyone else please maintain decorum. There are better ways to 'stick it' to your opponents without debasing yourself and the forum. It pains me to see this type of language.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

WudangMaster said:


> Also Operation Morvarid was beautiful operation whereby the baathist navy was largely annihilated. There was a recent interview from General Bagheri stating how it took a year of intel gathering to carry out that operation; either that or the one where the majnoon islands and faw where annexed (Valfajr 8?). Either way, these operations had so much that had to happen before, in order for them to be carried out.


My personal favourite the reverse invasion of iraq and the annexation of the faw peninsula. That was a very heroic operation and among my favourites from that war...probably even more so than the H3 airbase attack.



SalarHaqq said:


> "Terrorism"? Axe that term please. Among other things, it's used by the enemy to misrepresent the legitimate Resistance of movements such as Lebanon's Hezbollah and other close allies of Iran.
> 
> Other than that, in the 1980's Iran was at war and in such a scenario, a lot of gloves tend to come off indeed.


I'm actually ambiguous about the term. Depends who and what kind of targets we're terrorizing - I wouldn't care a hoot about blowing up isnotrealis, civilians or military personnel, for exampe but I would object to any attacks against Azerbaijani civilians, although not government officials.


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> I also think @drmeson has a point when he says Iran should look toward Mig-29 variants since we have the experience and are already equipped to maintain and operate these aircraft, as opposed to su-27 family.



yes but does the leadership even want an IRIAF is the question I asked ?

We can waste our days here talking about MIG-29, F-14, SU-35, Kowsar-I, but what if leadership itself does not want the force to survive?


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> yes but does the leadership even want an IRIAF is the question I asked ?
> 
> We can waste our days here talking about MIG-29, F-14, SU-35, Kowsar-I, but what if leadership itself does not want the force to survive?


My two cents - yes, they do. But the catch is they want an IRIAF that is entirely home-built with no reliance on vendors for spare parts and maintenance. An acceptable compromise to them is foreign aircraft with technology transfer.

Until that can be achieved, it will hobble on sustained only by the ingenuity of the mechanics and engineers.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> yes but does the leadership even want an IRIAF is the question I asked ?
> 
> We can waste our days here talking about MIG-29, F-14, SU-35, Kowsar-I, but what if leadership itself does not want the force to survive?


Ridiculous thing to say. Of course they do but they also dont want money siphoning out on trash, when they can focus on drones, missiles etc for the time being. Surely if they didnt want it to survive they would have disbanded it by now, no?



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Dear brother, I disagree with your assessment on the F-14. Prior to it's retirement in the us military, a new variant of the F-14 was launched with the most modern avionics, sensors, an APG-71 radar that could scan and track targets in a 370 km radius (increases to 740 km when 2 F-14Ds fly in conjunction), a system allowing the ground troops to view what the aircraft was seeing and a Joint Tactical Information Distribution System.
> 
> Make no mistake - the F-14 was retired solely out of fear of Iran which was stealing spare parts right out of the us military's inventory somehow and they wanted to ground the IRIAF totally. Had that not been the case, they would be flying it even today with even newer and better upgrades. If we can improve on the design to enable it to carry 12 missiles instead of 8 and add engines with a greater thrust to weight ratio (dry thrust - 74kN, afterburner - 125 kN) and with 3D thrust vectoring, we'll have a formidable weapon in our arsenal.


Sorry I don't engage in baseless conspiracy theory. The US did not abandon the f-14 because they were scared of Iran...it's because better technology came along.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Sorry I don't engage in baseless conspiracy theory. The US did not abandon the f-14 because they were scared of Iran...it's because better technology came along.


But take a look at F-15E and F-15EX. You know, the base F-15 design flew only one year after the Tomcat first flew and the design has been retained to this day and will only keep evolving, probably being in service up to 2040s. Similarly, the F-14 design was viable for a long time to come - it's just that political factors forced it's retirement.

F-14's main bottlenecks at the time was a lack of suitable engine but that was resolved when they fitted it with the General Electric GE-F-110 turbofans. I recall that in the report where they stated the purpose of retirement of the american F-14s, there was a section that spoke primarily about how spare parts kept making their way to Iran from the united states itself and they wanted to take away that channel altogether.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe yes maybe no
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CNN Exclusive: US intel and satellite images show Saudi Arabia is now building its own ballistic missiles with help of China
> 
> 
> US intelligence agencies have assessed that Saudi Arabia is now actively manufacturing its own ballistic missiles with the help of China, CNN has learned, a development that could have significant ripple effects across the Middle East and complicate the Biden administration's efforts to restrain...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com



Nowhere the article you posted (common knowledge) mentions that KSA is operating/building any other missile than DF-21C that they have long been known to possess via purchase from China. Also nowhere it is mentioned that TEL numbers have increased or even seen being deployed. Its common knowledge for 8-10 years now that KSA has possessed DF-21C with a range of 1700 KM and a CEP of 50-100m which CIA ensured cant carry any CBRN warhead. No single satellite or test firing evidence suggests they even have a TEL for that missile. They possess 12 x TEL of DF-3 that they may have been converted but no evidence exists for that. The same KSA was giving money to Ukraine to make a SRBM for them just recently. 

You are going to pit that in a missile exchange against IRGC Aerospace Force? Thats like pitting an MMA champion against a street thug.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said how many time they failed and how many time they succeed



Qiam-I/Burkan broke through the shield many times, there are pics and videos of landing warheads ... would it be difficult for KS or Qassem glide vehicles with quasi ballistic or depressed skip glide trajectories to achieve that what Qiam-I has achieved many times? Them deployed with Emad-II TRV/MaRV and a bunch of loitering drones can easily massacre MIM-104 and even THAAD which has a ... few weaknesses (separate topic)

Th four FABs will not stand by the end of the episode. Like I said Iran will take blows too but at the end of the day IADS of Iran will sustain through Ambush HIMADS, SHORADS and track radars while the attack capability will sustain itself through underground infrastructure and mobile TELS. The attack capability of PGCC will be gone as four FABs will be destroyed. 



Hack-Hook said:


> that is an interesting missile , how many day after the attack iran responded ? why you believe this time will be faster.



Terrorist militias are hard to target. In case of ISIS, IRGC waited for the targets to gather at one place. You cant say same about the conventional military of PGCC. Their FABs, military installments, HOH resources, oil fields and terminals are not hiding anywhere, they are there and will stay there during conflict for IRGC to target. The same can't be said about ISIS or PJAK.



Hack-Hook said:


> their base is gone but also this can be said about Iranian under ground missile bases will be out of question .



PGCC does not have the following to ensure complete destruction of IRGC attack capabilities

1) Not enough accurate BM, CEP of 50-100 with conventional warhead wont hurt IRGC. 
2) The attack trajectory is Ballistic, not quasi, not depressed, not glide but conventional ballastic which is not something that S-300 PMU2 or Bavar-373 can't intercept. DF-21C's terminal speed is not high.
2) They never had any proper Missile exercise where use of TEL BM has been seen (they had weird ones with Somalia and Sudan involving helis) while IRGC holds missile exercises like people visit their friends.
3) There is no evidence of them fielding or deploying Missiles forces. Not a single TEL picture or use of missiles on Houthis either.
4) The range of SOWs are short , highest 250 KM with Storm Shadow. To fire SOWs at any useful target inside Iran the 15-25 m2 RCS bearing Tornado or F-15 will have to get very close to the target where IADS can deal with them.



Hack-Hook said:


> do you believe USA already didn't shared its satellite imagery of these underground bases with ksa , do you think they are not already aware of their entrance .



and what will they use to attack that entrance? You do realise we are talking about a force that has failed to stop Houthis from launching BM from TELs next door in 8 years but somehow you are assuming that the same force (failed to destroy TELs of Houthis) will destroy IRGC's underground bases, mobile TEL, multilaunchers on surface in few minutes?



Hack-Hook said:


> you think how long it take for ksa to fix its base



If Comm towers, aircraft hangars, fuel depots, armoury is gone then it may take weeks.



Hack-Hook said:


> , you want fuel , they can send some tanker as stopgap for the refueling capacity of the base ,



According to you few F-15 of KSA will land on a highways somewhere far away from the reach of IRGC missiles/UCAVs with: 

-no fuel
-no weapons
-Tired pilots
-no quick mechanical check/fix equipment
-no new mission briefing

And you are saying that magically within few mins or hours all of that can be provided.

HOW?



Hack-Hook said:


> and the runway can be fixed in 2-3 hours now answer me how many hours it take to clear the entrance of those bases if they get bombed.



According to you KSA 

- Can land their jets in dessert on highways
- Magically transport A2A, A2G weapons, Fuel, New pilots, mechanical checkup equipment to them
- Rebuild their control towers, fuel depots, runways 
- Can target Iranian bases with some unknown missiles and SOWS that (a) have the CEP of less than 10m to destroy the entrances (b) Have the range and trajectories to get pass Iranian IADs 

I think Russia should hire KSA to win them Ukraine and couple of other countries.



Hack-Hook said:


> no, relying on air defense is not the answer they never will be able to prevent those base from being bombed , its air force that can do that.



here, I am probably the biggest supporter of the survival of IRIAF as a potent interceptor force so your comment should be directed toward those who do not believe in IRIAF's role, people who think purchasing heavy attack aircrafts with large RCS for 85 million USD per unit is the solution.



Hack-Hook said:


> by our current strategy in case of enemy attack we only can rely on t6he missiles which are on tels outside those bases in case of enemy attack




For attack we can totally rely upon our missile and UCAV arsenal but not for defense. IRIAF should be revived as an interceptor force of atleast 240 light fighters with lowest possible RCS, top-notch radars, ECCM packages, e-warefare suits, longest possible BVR, all aspect WVR missiles. Aircrafts that can TDL with IADs, and need not much maintenance. I am defining a force built on: 

F-14AM
MIG-29M/35
Kowsar-I/II 
WingmentUCAVs 

For attack we have the following:

*BM force for *Mobile TEL+ Underground Silos
- Ballistic (3000 KM) MaRV
- Quasi Ballistic (1400 KM) MaRV/TRV
- Glide/Skip Glide (1400-1800 KM) MaRV
- AL-Ballistic (150 KM)

*CM force*
Mobile multitube LA-CM (1450 KM) 
Fighter Launched CM (1000 KM)
Submarine launched (future)
UCAV launched CM (200 KM)
Glide PGM (100+ KM)

*Loitering UCAV SWARM*
2500 KM



Hack-Hook said:


> did the base destroyed ? did it stop work ?



If it was an Airbase housing fighter jets yes it would have stopped working for quite some time. A disaster in war. 30-40 missiles with submunitions, and thermobaric warheads can ruin an airfield.



Hack-Hook said:


> communication can be fixed with mobile terminals . logistic can be protected . look at those zolfaqar craters , do you believe they can penetrate underground reinforced craters. how many we used to attack a reinforced structure in iraqi kurdistan



No evidence exists of PGCC using underground infrastructure at their TABs/FABs. All their aircraft are in nonprotected bunkers and use pretty much-fixed infrastructure. Not a single shred of evidence exists for the mobile strategy you are assuming they would suddenly unleash on Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> by the way around those bases is desert , they just can disperse the logistic around those bases in desert in small caches



Evidence of them using mobile comm towers and radars? 

Here is my claim, even their AD infrastructure is not mobile compared to Ambush SAM strategy of Iran. You are welcome to prove me wrong.


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ridiculous thing to say. Of course they do



Then why cut the budget to 200 million USD per year that has done the following

- Slowed local R&D on larger turbofan
- Local light weight BVR
- Slowed Kowsar-I production
- No sign of Kowsar-II, heavy fighter, AWACS anymore despite previous claims
- No sign of foreign procurement
- Zero upgradation of MIG-29 and SU-24 dying fleet



Daylamite Warrior said:


> but they also dont want money siphoning out on trash,



Define trash ?



Daylamite Warrior said:


> when they can focus on drones, missiles etc for the time being.



Drones and missiles are attack weapons, IRIAF's major job is defense of Iranian skies with IADS



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Surely if they didnt want it to survive they would have disbanded it by now, no?



They actually did years ago and you are just not realizing it.


*Fighter fleet *

- F-14A/AM = 34 current flyable of which 17 are FMC (full mission capable), barely a dozen are F-14AM that can deliver the Fakour-90 punch or even see enemy at 300+KM. Total airframes of F-14A = 61 which IRIAF does not have the $$ to bring to FMC standard for 3-5 Million USD per unit.

- MIG-29 9.12 = 23 with obsolete radars of MIG-23 ML standard and no e-warfare suite. Barely has an arsenal of 30 years old 150 x SARH BVR R-27R1. Fleet is dying without MLU, upgrades but no sign of anything happening even though we are now "strategic allies" of Russia according to some stupidos here.

- Kowsar-I = 4, Electronically the most advanced aircraft in IRIAF with modern western Radar, e-warfare suite, Nav-Comm, TDL, FBW. But its production rate is barely 6/year because of lack of $$$. No sign of BVR procurement/development despite the capability.

*Benign Fleet*
- 23 Mirage F1/Q/EQ/BQ with no radars , not even a single missile or even pylon
- 43 F-7N with 30 KM tracking range with non reliable PL-7C WVR missiles
- 60 F-5E/F with 35 KM tracking range with Fatter/AIM-9J
- 6 Saegheh-I/II testbeds with no radar or weapons

this fleet is a $ and resources burden on IRIAF. They are still part of IRIAF because of lobby's behind them i.e. squadrons operating them, public and private contractors that supply parts for them etc.

*Attack aircrafts*
- 64 F-4E/D of which some ~30 (??) are "Dowran" upgraded with New Radars, ~100+ KM tracking range and 3 different types of ALCM/AShCM
- 30 SU-24 of which 20 or so are FMC?

if budget cuts continue in favor of UCAVs (300 strong fleet now), Navy, Missiles then in few years we may end up with:

10 F-14AM
10-12 MIG-29
15-20 Kowsar-I

Pretty much like how DPRK's current AF is made of ~30 MIG-29S to guard the Island and rest of the prop fleet is made of 50 years old MIG-21, F-7, MIG-23, SU-7 to show on paper that AF exists. We are headed in that direction unless Akhoonds do something about IRIAF. Our Missile program is generation ahead of DPRK with solid fueled accurate systems while our IADS what DPRK cant even dream of but thing is we need this arm as well to support IADS.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Terrorist militias are hard to target. In case of ISIS, IRGC waited for the targets to gather at one place. You cant say same about the conventional military of PGCC. Their FABs, military installments, HOH resources, oil fields and terminals are not hiding anywhere, they are there and will stay there during conflict for IRGC to target. The same can't be said about ISIS or PJAK.



It's not even about the fact that they are hard to target, it's that when it comes to retribution for a terrorist attack there's no pressing time constraint to begin with. The attacking party has all the time it needs to make a political decision as to what the targets will be, what weapons to use, what scope the retaliation will have and so on.

Whereas in a classic war between states, especially given the nature of the respective military doctrines of Iran versus her enemies, the situation is completely different as it calls for rapid reaction on Iran's part.

The IRGC didn't strike back at "I"SIS immediately because it simply didn't _need_ to. No one retaliates to a terrorist attack in a mere matter of minutes.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> no sign of anything happening even though we are now "strategic allies" of Russia according to some stupidos here.



There's a significant nuance between strategic alliance and case-specific / ad hoc strategic partnership(s), which is what I referred to and which pretty much applies to Iran-Russia relations. The terminological specifics carry weight.

Also even if there was a full fledged strategic alliance, Iran would still have to request those upgrades from Russia and that's not necessarily a given - and definitely not the case if your hypothesis of a calculated abandonment of the air force is accurate.


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> There's a significant nuance between strategic alliance and case-specific / ad hoc strategic partnership(s), which is what I referred to and which pretty much applies to Iran-Russia relations. The terminological specifics carry weight.
> 
> Also even if there was a full fledged strategic alliance, Iran would still have to request those upgrades from Russia and that's not necessarily a given - and definitely not the case if your hypothesis of a calculated abandonment of the air force is accurate.



I am afraid wordplay means nothing here. Iran-Russia temporary alignment is of no significant importance in terms of following 

Russia does not supply Iran with anything significant. 

- It declined official requests of Iranian Government to purchase 72 MIG fighters in 90s. 
- It resisted S-300 supply for years 
- It supported sanctions on Iran 

Iranian Leadership does not want an AF anymore

- Its not asking Russia to upgrade or even allow Iran to pull local MLU+Upgrade on obsolete MIG-29 Fleet.
- Its not interested in purchasing any fighter (SU-35 or MIG) from Russia, no official or formal request.
- Its not interested in local production of fighters either (Kowsar-I slow production)
- Its not even interested in purchasing any small amount of modern AF weaponary like light weight BVR missiles or technology like Turbofan TOT

All the while Iran will keep verbally supporting Russian dick-games in east europe, it's illegal claims in Caspian sea. Forgetting what Moscow has been doing to NW Iranic lands for 170 years.


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> But take a look at F-15E and F-15EX. You know, the base F-15 design flew only one year after the Tomcat first flew and the design has been retained to this day and will only keep evolving, probably being in service up to 2040s. Similarly, the F-14 design was viable for a long time to come - it's just that political factors forced it's retirement.
> 
> F-14's main bottlenecks at the time was a lack of suitable engine but that was resolved when they fitted it with the General Electric GE-F-110 turbofans. I recall that in the report where they stated the purpose of retirement of the american F-14s, there was a section that spoke primarily about how spare parts kept making their way to Iran from the united states itself and they wanted to take away that channel altogether.



Not exactly F-14 was a maintenance pig with 50 % more parts than its replacement the F/A-18EF. It offered no smart Air to Surface capability all the while it had a huge RCS (judging from era and built, F-15, F-4, SU-27, Tornado all have 10-25 m2) with no light weight modern BVR integration which is why USN let it die. The AWG-9 and APG-71 offered large search ranges for AWACS role but their track ranges for small fighters were almost being caught by newer smaller radars that later equipped other US fighter. It's successor F/A-18EF has a RCS of 0.75-1.2m2 has superb radar, Air to Air and Air to Surface capability while has much less parts and is easier to maintain. 

We iranians have developed this age old fascination with this aircraft because it massacred the Saddams airforce during the war and now we have no other option. It does offer massive advantage in BVR combat with its LR-BVR attack but 4th generation fighters with upgrades are also carrying such LR-BVR weapons now. 

BT's claims of local F-14 and its weapons do not matter anymore when leadership is not in mood of having an IRIAF at all.


----------



## aryobarzan

@drmeson ...Why we do not see any product flying with jahesh Turbo fan engine...it is more than two years since we saw its introduction...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

aryobarzan said:


> @drmeson ...Why we do not see any product flying with jahesh Turbo fan engine...it is more than two years since we saw its introduction...



Actually many people including me always have believed that Jahesh-700 single crytal Turbofan is intended to power the Shahed-171 UCAV and its current Tolue-14 Turbofan is just a stopgap. Tolue-14 role could be Hoveyzeh LACM and AbuMahdi AShCM. Both of them are driven from KH-55 which is powered by R95 turbofan while Tolue-14 has almost twice the thrust so payload in form of warhead and Guidance system with more modern seeker etc can be deployed in future versions.

Quoting Patarames *"In this Iranian 2014 graphic the Jahesh-700 acts as a core, "supercharged" by an electric fan in front of it. The electrofan is driven by the engines electric generator This makes it both more efficient and increases thrust"*







*https://twitter.com/pataramesh/status/1296690726160474112*

*

 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1418503724796940288*
It tells us two things

1) Strategists have big plans for Shahed-171. They want it be powered by larger more efficient Turbofan, be fuel efficient to have a long range. Hinting towards a Stealth, more heavier unmanned bomber, that can intrude enemy airspace silently, deliver SOWs from internal bays or may provide recce, coordinates (Tactical DataLink) etc. If they deploy 2 x Jahesh-700 on a Shahed-171 slightly redesigned frame then a whole new plethora of roles can be assigned to this UCAV including a A2A+A2G wingmen that can deploy IR seeking missiles from its internal bays and launch PGM as well.

2) Mismanagement of funds are the biggest enemies of Iranian military developments. One group came with Tolue-14 and another came with Jahesh-700. Similar parallel projects got funded. Jahesh-700 is probably a generation ahead of Tolue-14 but thrusts are not that different. None can power a fighter.

Lists of parallel projects in Iran 

OWJ Saegheh-I/II vs HESA Kowsar-I
Shahed-129/149 vs Kaman-22 vs Fotros
Emad-II vs Ghadr-GRV
Qassem Glide-MaRV vs Kheybar Shikan Glide-MaRV

I guess many more exists ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> I am afraid wordplay means nothing here. Iran-Russia temporary alignment is of no significant importance in terms of following



Strategic partnership is the term in use by social scientists to describe occurrences such as the Iranian-Russian cooperation on Syria, Russian deliveries of radar technology to Iran in view of strengthening Iranian defense capabilities against a hypothetical aggression, or the fact that Russian sales of Kornet ATGM's and Yakhont ASCM's to Syria weren't conditioned upon guarantees that Damascus wouldn't pass on a chunk of these to Hezbollah, which contributed to guarding against zionist expansion into Lebanon.

To speak of strategic partnerships in regards to certain aspects of Iran-Russia relations is therefore neither stupid nor word play, it's simply the technically appropriate terminology regardless of one's views about Russia.



drmeson said:


> Russia does not supply Iran with anything significant.
> 
> - It declined official requests of Iranian Government to purchase 72 MIG fighters in 90s.
> - It resisted S-300 supply for years
> - It supported sanctions on Iran



Nonetheless the windfall of Russian supplies and technological cooperation shouldn't be dismissed, especially for Iran's domestic R&D and manufacturing.



drmeson said:


> All the while Iran will keep verbally supporting Russian dick-games in east europe, it's illegal claims in Caspian sea. Forgetting what Moscow has been doing to NW Iranic lands for 170 years.



Iran will even "forgive" (not forget) the USA's crimes* if *they change their oppressive ways, as announced by the IR Leadership. If they don't, they will keep being resisted against. This is what rational foreign policy looks like.

Concerning Russia's position on the legal status of the Caspian Sea, or Iran's position or any other nation's for that matter, based on which international provision could they possibly be deemed illegal? Because the status of the Caspian is in fact one of the most complex and ambiguous questions of territorial partitioning worldwide, as it largely unfolds in a legal grey zone.

However, Iran unlike other littoral states has not ratified the Convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> Then why cut the budget to 200 million USD per year that has done the following
> 
> - Slowed local R&D on larger turbofan
> - Local light weight BVR
> - Slowed Kowsar-I production
> - No sign of Kowsar-II, heavy fighter, AWACS anymore despite previous claims
> - No sign of foreign procurement
> - Zero upgradation of MIG-29 and SU-24 dying fleet


Youre expecting all that on the back of a budget decrease? Are you serious?

Aaanyway, like I have already said, Iran has limited financial resources and their defence is investing most of their money into attack, primarily from drones and missiles. To have an effective airforce to compete with US, Iran just doesnt have that sort of money...so they have had to make some tough choices. Theyre not gonna piss money up the wall just because you and @Hack-Hook have pipe dreams of Kowsar X and SU-57 LOL! Iran will only invest on their airforce if it is worth it, other than that they have to be more calculated than you are sat behind your computer screen.


drmeson said:


> Define trash ?
> 
> 
> 
> Drones and missiles are attack weapons, IRIAF's major job is defense of Iranian skies with IADS


Really? Qaher was trash, Kowsar is trash, everything about IRIAF is trash. It's subpar garbage that will be the first to get annihilated in a war, followed by our Navy. Sorry if that hurt your feelings.

Attack is a form of defence...Iran has a decent SAM network as well.

I know you're a secularist and you want Iran to become a stooge of the west again...but wake the **** up, it aint gonna happen. So the akhoonds are doing the best they can. Even if Iran had money, they would still need to make crazy investments in their airforce for it to even stand more than a few weeks in a war. That is why Iran's detterance has come from other means, with great effect, much to your dismay.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> I am afraid wordplay means nothing here. Iran-Russia temporary alignment is of no significant importance in terms of following
> 
> Russia does not supply Iran with anything significant.
> 
> - It declined official requests of Iranian Government to purchase 72 MIG fighters in 90s.
> - It resisted S-300 supply for years
> - It supported sanctions on Iran
> 
> Iranian Leadership does not want an AF anymore
> 
> - Its not asking Russia to upgrade or even allow Iran to pull local MLU+Upgrade on obsolete MIG-29 Fleet.
> - Its not interested in purchasing any fighter (SU-35 or MIG) from Russia, no official or formal request.
> - Its not interested in local production of fighters either (Kowsar-I slow production)
> - Its not even interested in purchasing any small amount of modern AF weaponary like light weight BVR missiles or technology like Turbofan TOT
> 
> All the while Iran will keep verbally supporting Russian dick-games in east europe, it's illegal claims in Caspian sea. Forgetting what Moscow has been doing to NW Iranic lands for 170 years.


Maybe why Iran doesnt have all those upgrades and planes from Russia is because Russia doesnt want to sell it to us...in which case it is unreasonable to put the blame on the akhoonds. Simple as that. 

Unfortunately, up until the Ukraine war, Putin thought he had a chance of worming his way back into western club, by selling S400s to Turkey but shewed reluctance in selling to Iran because of "rEgiOnAl sTaBiLitY". And yes, Russia has been a trecherous "partner"....However, with the recent global pariah status of Russia, perhaps things may change. We're already seeing cooperation which wasnt there before the war.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Good or bad, they're nonetheless one of only a handful of potential option for imports where needed.
> 
> NATO and the zionist regime however are existential enemies to Iran. Huge difference right there.


the only possible options is our-self, if only people learn from last 45 years


SalarHaqq said:


> Disinformation. Russia supplied Iran with a series of weapons, and has cooperated with Iran in the technological realm.


everything is our own doing , they never cooperate on anything, if any they time and time show they don't want to cooperate with us


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran and Russia have a strategic level partnership in several domains.


partnership of convenience if Russian interest is endangered is not strategic level partnership


SalarHaqq said:


> A lot has changed on the world stage since the 1990's and early 2000's especially as far as the deterioration of ties between the west and Russia is concerned.


they refused to sell s-300, they didn't provided us the needed document for maintaining, kilo submarines ,....... and all those happened in 2010-2020
you see a pattern is repeating itself
interestingly Belarus and Ukraine helped us more than Russia


SalarHaqq said:


> The S-300 are still a useful asset to Iran's IADS.


lol. they gave that to us under of the threat of court and interest and our own air-defense system is more advanced and thats no thanks to Russia , go thank China and Belarus, and believing in our own young scientist in more than 20 university around the country who participated in that national endeavor to show Russia , if we wanted S300 , it was not because we can't produce it otherwise our system is better .


SalarHaqq said:


> Not really, the CEO of Mukhamedov Design Bureau passed away and the company shut up shop.


after they back-stabbed us in the project. that divine justice 



SalarHaqq said:


> Unlike the zio-American empire, they're not pursuing a policy aimed at the destruction and balkanization of the Iranian nation-state coupled with definitive uprooting of the Iranian civilization.


i don't expect any thing from , Israel after all we our self also won\t stop from doing so until Israel destruction , so you who like called other people examples apple and orange comparison , wonder why fail to see the difference of how we are toward Russia by how we are toward Israel . how naive one can be to expect friendship from enemy


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> There is literally a sura called Luqman in the Quran!


there literally 114 chapter in quran , one is called Al-baqareh, one Nahl , one Al-shoara, one Al-Noor, one Al-Naml, one even called Al-Rum , one Saba, one Al-Zukhruf , one Ad-dukhaan ,one Al-Qamar, Al-Hadeed, heck even one called Talaq . how religious are they.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Iran has the money to purchase some squadrons of foreign aircraft from Russia as a stop gap until Iran can produce its own fleet of aircraft. You strawman my position that we should put all our eggs in one basket...which I never said, but you keep repeating because youre getting battered by everyone and you're getting desperate.


sadly we don't have that luxury , and can do that . wonder if russia havve sold us S-300 would Bavar ever have seen light of the day?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Of course Iran can build whatever it wants if it had the money. But issue isnt just the money, it's the technology available to them to reverse engineer or at least develop from. So Iran has to be realistic. So far Iran has spent nothing on foreign planes for the past few decades and yet it has nothing to show for it...just a few pathetic mock ups and a rehashed F5. So you cant cry when we are asking for some investment in some real fighter jets from foreign states.


well , we have different understanding there , that rehashed f-5 have the potential to be better than f-18 if the project get properly funded and managed. and it is a lot different than f-5 , that f-5 comment come from enemies of Iran


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Then why bring up western planes everytime someone suggests Russian ones? We can't buy them and never will.


what western , every time i bring up western airplane i also brought up Chinese air plane , i bring up modern light/medium fighters as example . and only USA, Sweden , France and China have those , Russia Mig-35 could be categorized there but they went an downgrade its radar , so it right now is a downgraded platform nothing but a glorified Mig-29 that latest version of China/Pakistan joint project JF-17 outperform it.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Dont talk nonesense, Russia has sold a lot of hardware to Iran. Yes they used to think they were part of the western club but they got humiliated and they still are. That said, we must not burn our bridges with them and they can be useful to us.


what hardware .our cruise missile , we get help from Ukraine , air defense , Belarus and china and our-self ripping American system and learn from it , anti ship missiles m we learned from Chinese and american missiles . ballistic missile the old one Libya and Pakistan and north Korea, and latter hard work of our young scientist 


WudangMaster said:


> Also Operation Morvarid was beautiful operation whereby the baathist navy was largely annihilated. There was a recent interview from General Bagheri stating how it took a year of intel gathering to carry out that operation; either that or the one where the majnoon islands and faw where annexed (Valfajr 8?). Either way, these operations had so much that had to happen before, in order for them to be carried out.


that wrongly attributed to navy , it was 80% air-force 20% navy . in fact if air-force didn't come to help in time , our navy would have fared worse


BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> The Mig-29 should be handed over completely to the IRGC-AF and we should procure RD-33MK engines (smokeless, greater thrust) from Russia to power those along with an agreement for indigenous overhaul and upgrades. It serves their skill set much better.


we should provide funds to the teams that work on engines in Iran to produce domestically built engine in Iran instead of using that found to beg Russia for engine .


Joe_Adam said:


> All that aside, a well trained, experienced, and well educated non commissioned officer could surpass a lazy fat 4 star general who spent his carrier kissing butt to get up in ranks, which you could see hundreds of examples in the US defense establishment (400 4 star generals????) along with many western NATO states, and also all over the world. some non commissioned officers are critical thinkers with extensive military knowledge due to self education, reading and keeping a breast of the advances in weapons design and manufacturing, methods of war making, defense technologies, as well as sound strategic thinking..


agree but he is not officer .he probably can reach the rank of second or first lieutenant at the time of retirement from military 


Joe_Adam said:


> Lastly, beyond military academies, there are military staff schools i.e. military graduate studies established and intended for mid ranking officers (rank of Major) to educate officers in planning and leadership of major military units in any given branch of the national defense establishment. Even at that level, many officers graduate, but, they lack leadership skills, fortitude, and the decision making skills to be commanders or leaders, so all military matters are only relatively true.


we have a such military school that people instead of high school go there but that again don't guaranty . you become officer , for that you must go to military academy .
or spend years in military and just at the time of retirement you become a junior officer


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Sorry I don't engage in baseless conspiracy theory. The US did not abandon the f-14 because they were scared of Iran...it's because better technology came along.


no navy wanted to keep f-14 because f-18 did not meet navy criteria and still cant replace all the roles of F-14 . it was some senators in Washington who decided that the navy most abandon F-14 and go with F-18 , us navy never liked that decision .


drmeson said:


> Terrorist militias are hard to target. In case of ISIS, IRGC waited for the targets to gather at one place. You cant say same about the conventional military of PGCC. Their FABs, military installments, HOH resources, oil fields and terminals are not hiding anywhere, they are there and will stay there during conflict for IRGC to target. The same can't be said about ISIS or PJAK.


only against kurds they waited for them to gather in one place , there was no such concerns about ISIS . irgc targeted some bases then so knowing their position was not a concern it was probably known from way before , they only stayed operational till then because of incompetence in Syrian army .


drmeson said:


> If Comm towers, aircraft hangars, fuel depots, armoury is gone then it may take weeks.


fuel depot and com tower can be replaced with mobile platform , hangers not really necessary for operation armory can be dispersed around base in small caches 


drmeson said:


> According to you few F-15 of KSA will land on a highways somewhere far away from the reach of IRGC missiles/UCAVs with:
> 
> -no fuel
> -no weapons
> -Tired pilots
> -no quick mechanical check/fix equipment
> -no new mission briefing
> 
> And you are saying that magically within few mins or hours all of that can be provided.
> 
> HOW?


i said in previous quote , they will had to do that if the runway is out of commission and that can be repaired in 2-3 hours
war is nothing like you say we defeat enemy and they can't hurt us , its not at all , like holey defense movies that portrait Iraqi forces as total morons that 10 reject from southern district of Tehran who came to front for fun of it can defeat a battalion of them 


drmeson said:


> 2) Mismanagement of funds are the biggest enemies of Iranian military developments. One group came with Tolue-14 and another came with Jahesh-700. Similar parallel projects got funded. Jahesh-700 is probably a generation ahead of Tolue-14 but thrusts are not that different. None can power a fighter.
> 
> Lists of parallel projects in Iran
> 
> OWJ Saegheh-I/II vs HESA Kowsar-I
> Shahed-129/149 vs Kaman-22 vs Fotros
> Emad-II vs Ghadr-GRV
> Qassem Glide-MaRV vs Kheybar Shikan Glide-MaRV
> 
> I guess many more exists ...


i don\t recall toloue-14 and jahesh-700 as paralel project , they have different use . Toloue-14 is aft-fan turbo fan , it can increase the fuel efficiency and thrust on Toloe-4 but its lifespan would be low .on other hand its a lot cheaper to produce it than jahesh-700 , good for one time weapons like cruise missiles and suicide drones . on other hand Jahesh-700 have that better thrust and fuel efficiency , but it is more expensive to product on plus side its life expectancy is a lot higher . a lot more suitable for higher tire of drones even for light civilian airplane



SalarHaqq said:


> Yakhont ASCM's to Syria weren't conditioned upon guarantees that Damascus wouldn't pass on a chunk of these to Hezbollah


the fact hezbollah don\t have the infrastructure to use them 


SalarHaqq said:


> However, Iran unlike other littoral states has not ratified the Convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea.


not important for them as it actually in effect and they are using Caspian sea resources according to it and Iran do nothing about it . the effect is the same as if Iran ratify it



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre expecting all that on the back of a budget decrease? Are you serious?
> 
> Aaanyway, like I have already said, Iran has limited financial resources and their defence is investing most of their money into attack, primarily from drones and missiles. To have an effective airforce to compete with US, Iran just doesnt have that sort of money...so they have had to make some tough choices. Theyre not gonna piss money up the wall just because you and @Hack-Hook have pipe dreams of Kowsar X and SU-57 LOL! Iran will only invest on their airforce if it is worth it, other than that they have to be more calculated than you are sat behind your computer screen.


at least you accept Iran has limited resource , then care to explain to me how we can both buy Russian overpriced downgraded equipment and at the same time build our own aircraft?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Theyre not gonna piss money up the wall just because you and @Hack-Hook have pipe dreams of Kowsar X and SU-57 LOL! Iran will only invest on their airforce if it is worth it, other than that they have to be more calculated than you are sat behind your computer screen.


pipe dreams is for you , never ever wished for any Russian airplane or western ones ,once mocked the people who wanted Iran to buy Su-30 and Su-35 why they don't go after su-75 and make deal like India did with Su-30 with Russia for Su-75.

funny people failed to see the mockery in that post . sadly the fine twist and art in Persian literature is lost to younger generation and foreigners



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Attack is a form of defence...Iran has a decent SAM network as well.


Sam never gonna cut it completely , its the duty of air force to amend its short coming



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Maybe why Iran doesnt have all those upgrades and planes from Russia is because Russia doesnt want to sell it to us...in which case it is unreasonable to put the blame on the akhoonds. Simple as that.


put the blames on the ones who wont provide the necessary funding for domestic projects


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the only possible options is our-self, if only people learn from last 45 years



Where needed, is what I stated. And Iran's revolutionary leadership is the one which believes in self-reliance and has relentlessly been working towards it, so they certainly don't need to take lessons from anyone in this regard. As opposed to the liberal reformist and moderate factions. That a staunch supporter of the reformist camp would now evoke self-reliance as a subterfuge for blackening Russia is rather comical and utterly self-defeating.

Anyway, Iran is looking to boost cooperation with Russia in the upcoming years, as per Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution's statement, and there's nothing zionist- and western-appeasing liberals can do about it. Spam the internet with anti-Russian incitement and rhetoric, it won't have any effect. Cope with it.



Hack-Hook said:


> everything is our own doing , they never cooperate on anything, if any they time and time show they don't want to cooperate with us



That's untrue and a blatant distortion of historic facts. There are concrete examples of Iranian-Russian cooperation.



Hack-Hook said:


> partnership of convenience if Russian interest is endangered is not strategic level partnership



Thoroughly irrelevant to the contention addressed.

Iran and Russia are in a relation of strategic partnership in several domains, no matter the motivations of each party.



Hack-Hook said:


> they refused to sell s-300, they didn't provided us the needed document for maintaining, kilo submarines ,....... and all those happened in 2010-2020
> you see a pattern is repeating itself
> interestingly Belarus and Ukraine helped us more than Russia



Among the weapons delivered by Russia to Iran in the current millennium are Kasta radar, Nebo radar, OTH technology, various modern anti-tank grenade launchers, Tor M-1, S-300PM2 with S-400 components, Kornet ATGM, Krasnopol laser-guided artillery shells, AK-103 assault rifle licence production and more.



Hack-Hook said:


> lol. they gave that to us under of the threat of court and interest and our own air-defense system is more advanced and thats no thanks to Russia



Iran did learn from radar technology obtained from Russia over the years, not to mention technological cooperation and joint research with Chinese companies.

That Bavar-373 is more advanced in certain aspects than S-300PM2 doesn't mean the latter is of no use. It's still a major long-range high-altitude item in Iran's IADS.



Hack-Hook said:


> after they back-stabbed us in the project. that divine justice



No evidence for such an allegation. And it's human nature, people of old age pass away at one point.



Hack-Hook said:


> i don't expect any thing from , Israel after all we our self also won\t stop from doing so until Israel destruction , so you who like called other people examples apple and orange comparison , wonder why fail to see the difference of how we are toward Russia by how we are toward Israel . how naive one can be to expect friendship from enemy



The zionist entity is an illegitimate colonial one imposed on the indigenous people of Palestine by imperial powers, and it came into being through "ethnic" cleansing. Plus, Iran is advocating regime change in Occupied Palestine much like she advocated it for apartheid South Africa, which is decidedly distinct from the balkanization of a nation-state and from the definitive uprooting of a civilization. Hence there's strictly no comparison between Iran's principled anti-zionist Resistance and zio-American policy aiming for Iran's physical and social destruction.

Moreover, contrary to your attempt at lending some kind of legitimacy to Tel Aviv's enmity, zionist intolerance for the existence of large scale and potentially or effectively powerful nation-states in West Asia is not an immediate reaction to hostility from those states, but a proactive strategy serving zionist pursuit of violent regional hegemony in spite of the settler regime's limited resources and size, a posture explicitly formulated by the likes of Bernard Lewis and Oded Yinon. In layman's terms, whether or not Iran confronts them, they will do all they can to come after Iran.

So nice try, but a failure nonetheless. Interesting also to note the double standard, namely how rabid zionist enmity towards Iran is met with apologetic understanding on your part, whilst a strategic partner - which happens to be in the crosshairs of Iran's existential NATO enemies, is systematically demeaned. No mitigating circumstances for Russia, but plenty for Isra"el", although the former's a partner and the latter's an enemy... That says everything one needs to know about the outlook you're representing, and goes to exhibit its colors in plain sight. You're having an issue is with everything the Islamic Revolution stands for, in particular its anti-imperialist struggle.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> That's a lie and a blatant distortion of historic facts. There are concrete examples of Iranian-Russian cooperation.


what ever they provided was downgraded version , those kronet in hand of hezbollah showed have problem hitting targets 
the radars , are different from the ones russia design in short taking the concept and building our own


SalarHaqq said:


> Totally and completely irrelevant to the contention addressed.
> 
> Iran and Russia are in a relation of strategic partnership in several domains, no matter the motivations of each party.


the partnership is no way a strategic one , you want strategic partnership look at china and Pakistan or turkey and Azerbaijan


SalarHaqq said:


> Among the weapons delivered by Russia to Iran are Kasta radar, Nebo radar, OTH technology, various modern anti-tank grenade launchers, Tor M-1, S-300PM2 with S-400 components, Kornet ATGM, Krasnopol laser guided artillery shells, AK-103 assault rifle licence production and more.


Nebo-m





show it in Iran if you can

Kasta




Russian sources state that its power output is just 1 kW and that it has a viewing range of 150 km up to altitudes of 6 km. It can detect a target with a radar cross-section of 0.3 m2 flying at an altitude of 60 m from a range of 24 km using its standard mast, but this can be extended to 42 km with the 50 m mast.
really ground breaking technology


SalarHaqq said:


> various modern anti-tank grenade launchers



don't make me laugh are you that desperate to find weapon sale , why not include rpg-7 there


SalarHaqq said:


> Tor M-1


downgraded version that cant decide for itself which side is north and which side is south 


SalarHaqq said:


> -300PM2 with S-400 components


don't make me start ranting about it



SalarHaqq said:


> Kornet ATGM,


downgraded export version that hezbollah showed it have problem targetting israeli army vehicle 


SalarHaqq said:


> AK-103 assault rifle licence production and more.


again is that a joke


SalarHaqq said:


> Krasnopol


its krasnopol




its Basir





a lot different , why you most attribute every Iranian achievement to Russia


SalarHaqq said:


> Wrong, Iran learnt a lot from radar technology obtained from Russia over the years, not to mention technological cooperation and joint research with Chinese companies.


the radar technology learned from studying radars recieved from Belarus and China USA not Russia
russia gave us the radars in S-300 after we built our superior Radars compared to what S-300 offer , for start S-300 use Pesa radar while Bavar and #rd of khordad use AESA radar


SalarHaqq said:


> The zionist entity is an illegitimate one imposed on the people of the region by colonialist powers and which came into being through "ethnic" cleansing. Plus, Iran advocates regime change in Occupied Palestine much like she advocated it for apartheid South Africa, which is different from the dismantling and balkanization of a nation-state and from the definitive uprooting of a civilization. Hence there's strictly no comparison between Iran's anti-zionist Resistance and zio-American policy aiming for Iran's physical and social destruction.


that is debating the morality if it, did you ever see me claim Israel is morally or legally just . no . i say even if Israel unjust , even if its illegal . you can't expect it to be your friend , when you state you are its enemy . we never stated we are Russia enemy so compare Iran relation with Russia with Israel and what you expect from them is like comparing orange and apple 


SalarHaqq said:


> Moreover, contrary to your attempt at lending legitimacy to Tel Aviv's existential enmity, zionist intolerance for the existence of large scale and potentially or effectively powerful nation-states in West Asia is not an immediate reaction to hostility from the latter states, but a proactive strategy serving their pursuit of violent regional hegemony in spite of their limited resources and size, as formulated by the likes of Bernard Lewis and Oded Yinon. In layman's terms, whether or not Iran confronts them, they come after Iran.


wonder where i said Israel is legitimate , again read my previous paragraph . its just human nature . now if you don\t consider people who live in Israel and call themselves Israeli not part of the human race . then i can debate with you on that matter.
and the rest of your post is not what we debate here 


SalarHaqq said:


> So nice try, but a failure nonetheless. Interesting also to note the double standards, namely how rabid zionist enmity towards Iran is met by apologetic understanding on your part, whilst a strategic partner - which happens to be in the crossfire of Iran's existential NATO enemies, is systematically demeaned. That says everything one needs to know about the outlook you're representing, and exhibits its colors in plain sight.


again you failed . i ask a question what you expect from an enemy who state is your enemy and you stated that you are his enemy?
then what you expect from an strategic ally ?
here people will decide its failure on my part or your part


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> there literally 114 chapter in quran , one is called Al-baqareh, one Nahl , one Al-shoara, one Al-Noor, one Al-Naml, one even called Al-Rum , one Saba, one Al-Zukhruf , one Ad-dukhaan ,one Al-Qamar, Al-Hadeed, heck even one called Talaq . how religious are they.


Surah Loqman is 31st Surah in the Quran and features Loqman and his son. You are clueless about military issues and now you want to argue haplessly about religion with me? How does the number of surahs refute my claim that Loqman comes from the Quran? Yes the entire Quran is religious, ablah!



Hack-Hook said:


> sadly we don't have that luxury , and can do that . wonder if russia havve sold us S-300 would Bavar ever have seen light of the day?


Of course we do, silly! The Russians also sold us the S300 eventually but I'm sure there was some trasnfer of technology prior to that, I find the unveiling of Bavar too close to the delivery of the s300 to Iran. The reason why we dont is the ToT. 


Hack-Hook said:


> well , we have different understanding there , that rehashed f-5 have the potential to be better than f-18 if the project get properly funded and managed. and it is a lot different than f-5 , that f-5 comment come from enemies of Iran



No the comment came from a realist. Youre dumping on Iran 24/7 on here so you really shouldnt be commenting on whos an enemy of Iran. The F5 or Kowsar will never compete with anything that the west has. It is aerodynamically like the F5 and just as much of a sore thumb as an F5 on enemy radars. It is a joke. Wont take that back because it is the truth!


Hack-Hook said:


> what western , every time i bring up western airplane i also brought up Chinese air plane , i bring up modern light/medium fighters as example . and only USA, Sweden , France and China have those , Russia Mig-35 could be categorized there but they went an downgrade its radar , so it right now is a downgraded platform nothing but a glorified Mig-29 that latest version of China/Pakistan joint project JF-17 outperform it.


Okay but is it Iran's fault that China doesnt sell their jets to anyone in the world? I guess it's Iran's fault why drought or floods occur, or it's Iran's fault why we have diseases and earthquakes...


Hack-Hook said:


> what hardware .our cruise missile , we get help from Ukraine , air defense , Belarus and china and our-self ripping American system and learn from it , anti ship missiles m we learned from Chinese and american missiles . ballistic missile the old one Libya and Pakistan and north Korea, and latter hard work of our young scientist



Between 1995 and 2005, 70% of Iranian arms purchases were from Russia. Facts are not your friend.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> pipe dreams is for you , never ever wished for any Russian airplane or western ones ,once mocked the people who wanted Iran to buy Su-30 and Su-35 why they don't go after su-75 and make deal like India did with Su-30 with Russia for Su-75.
> 
> funny people failed to see the mockery in that post . sadly the fine twist and art in Persian literature is lost to younger generation and foreigners
> 
> 
> Sam never gonna cut it completely , its the duty of air force to amend its short coming
> 
> 
> put the blames on the ones who wont provide the necessary funding for domestic projects


Yes you do hence why you always bring up western planes when we suggest Russian ones. So you are obviously smoking some strong, stepped on dope over there in Paeen Shahr! Maybe because Iran cant afford su-57, have you considered that? Oh so now Russian is good? You flip flop just to keep an argument going which is why your ilk will never mount a credible opposition to Islamic Republic. Hamatoon kale shagheen, and that is a blessing.

I choose not to use religion to mock others or mock the religion itself. Maybe thats why you don't get anywhere with your silly comments, despite you dedicating your life to this.

SAM is definitely enough for Iran and her doctrine. 

No I blame the US for the sanctions and the world for being slaves to the US. Iran is blame free as far as I'm concerned.



Hack-Hook said:


> no navy wanted to keep f-14 because f-18 did not meet navy criteria and still cant replace all the roles of F-14 . it was some senators in Washington who decided that the navy most abandon F-14 and go with F-18 , us navy never liked that decision .


Nice, none of that proves that the F-14 was canned because of Iran or that the F-14 is still missed by the Navy now that they have f35 and F-18. Yea a few old dogs back then hated change and then when the F-18 actually came the F-14 was instantly forgotten. F-14 is only loved so much in US because of that film which I'm sure you get flustered over.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Surah Loqman is 31st Surah in the Quran and features Loqman and his son. You are clueless about military issues and now you want to argue haplessly about religion with me? How does the number of surahs refute my claim that Loqman comes from the Quran? Yes the entire Quran is religious, ablah!
> 
> 
> Of course we do, silly! The Russians also sold us the S300 eventually but I'm sure there was some trasnfer of technology prior to that, I find the unveiling of Bavar too close to the delivery of the s300 to Iran. The reason why we dont is the ToT.
> 
> 
> No the comment came from a realist. Youre dumping on Iran 24/7 on here so you really shouldnt be commenting on whos an enemy of Iran. The F5 or Kowsar will never compete with anything that the west has. It is aerodynamically like the F5 and just as much of a sore thumb as an F5 on enemy radars. It is a joke. Wont take that back because it is the truth!
> 
> Okay but is it Iran's fault that China doesnt sell their jets to anyone in the world? I guess it's Iran's fault why drought or floods occur, or it's Iran's fault why we have diseases and earthquakes...
> 
> 
> Between 1995 and 2005, 70% of Iranian arms purchases were from Russia. Facts are not your friend.


name them and i answer each one , by the way you talk about a time that Russia would have sold it's mother , daughter and sister for money and even then they refused sell us what we wanted

about Loqman sura , still i said is valid , he was not a religious person and not every thing is religious , thats our literature that i versed and Saadi if you bother to read his books you see make interesting jokes about fake religious people .
I don't knew about military and some members here who disagree with me on matter of air force knew about it well is a matter for debate as i time and time showed they don't knew about the equipment and tactic they are talking about
first they sold us it after the threat on paying compensation in court for failing to deliver and after usa abandoned them in that matter and no TOT on that happened , wonder from where you get that , they even didn't use the radar we use in bavar until they built S-500 and even they use different type of missiles , the missile of our top tire air defense is based on USA missile design not Russian ones. 

i don't dump Iran , i don't day dream and instead of being a lobbyist for some foreign company i just promote Iranian design and products . something that some people don't like 

and again why we buy from china when we can have our own if we fund the project domestically


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> i don't expect any thing from , Israel after all we our self also won\t stop from doing so until Israel destruction , so you who like called other people examples apple and orange comparison , wonder why fail to see the difference of how we are toward Russia by how we are toward Israel . how naive one can be to expect friendship from enemy


Oh so now youre a bonafide Ziopig apologist. Can't say im surprised but you have taken yourself past the point of no return. Is Russia killing our scientists? Is Russia killing Palestinians or displacing them? Is Russia threatening nukes against Iran on a daily basis?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Nice, none of that proves that the F-14 was canned because of Iran or that the F-14 is still missed by the Navy now that they have f35 and F-18. Yea a few old dogs back then hated change and then when the F-18 actually came the F-14 was instantly forgotten. F-14 is only loved so much in US because of that film which I'm sure you get flustered over.


did i ever say it canned for iran , no i said it canned because of some politican in Washington who probably was bribed by McDonnel Douglass who failed to sell f-18 to army , they destroyed the parts and equipment to produce f-14 in fear of it falling in iran hand after its retirement , the f-14 was retired for political reason 
f-18 was not loved , navy had no option for it and it could not play the role F-14 could play .and f-14 could was not forgotten they just cut navy budget for it and told them you most use f-18 it happen around 1995-1998 , the navy resist it till 2006


Daylamite Warrior said:


> F-14 is only loved so much in US because of that film which I'm sure you get flustered over.


if you say so. by the way the movie top gun was made because of love of f-14 in navy not otherway around, it was a navy sponsored movie .to sponsor and incite young people to join navy


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> name them and i answer each one , by the way you talk about a time that Russia would have sold it's mother , daughter and sister for money and even then they refused sell us what we wanted
> 
> about Loqman sura , still i said is valid , he was not a religious person and not every thing is religious , thats our literature that i versed and Saadi if you bother to read his books you see make interesting jokes about fake religious people .
> I don't knew about military and some members here who disagree with me on matter of air force knew about it well is a matter for debate as i time and time showed they don't knew about the equipment and tactic they are talking about
> first they sold us it after the threat on paying compensation in court for failing to deliver and after usa abandoned them in that matter and no TOT on that happened , wonder from where you get that , they even didn't use the radar we use in bavar until they built S-500 and even they use different type of missiles , the missile of our top tire air defense is based on USA missile design not Russian ones.
> 
> i don't dump Iran , i don't day dream and instead of being a lobbyist for some foreign company i just promote Iranian design and products . something that some people don't like
> 
> and again why we buy from china when we can have our own if we fund the project domestically


I dont need you to answer anything for me. I know Russia has sold arms to Iran and the evidence is there. You made the claim Russia has never sold us anything but facts are not your friend. I think ive done enough trying to show you the sky is blue, but it seems you're colourblind.

Fake religious people like you? Who use Quran when it suits them but deep down are kaafir akbar? Of course Loqman was religious! Why would the Quran use wisdom from a non-religious person and dedicate a chapter about him? Use your brain one in a while...the fact Saadi used it is because Saadi was a Muslim, and you quoted him so you must also be a fake khar mas'habi like me then.

Yeah I have yet to see anything from you where you won a debate or showed a fact that wasnt refuted instantly by the other members here. So I will reject that claim.

So either Iran is lying about the capabilities of bavar, which was claimed to be equal to S400 at the time, or Russia is taking all of their military accumen from Iranians. After all, you just said S-500 was inspired by Bavar! LOL

But you know full well that isnt practical and there needs to be a hybrid strategy of both domestic and modern foreign jets...but you dont want that because the options arent European or Chinese, so your strategy is a guaranteed defeat of airforce in a war and defeat for Islamic Republic (rubs hands with glee!)....hence why you are an enemy of Iran but trying to veil yourself.

We dont have the money because of sanctions so some sacrifices should be made.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh so now youre a bonafide Ziopig apologist. Can't say im surprised but you have taken yourself past the point of no return. Is Russia killing our scientists? Is Russia killing Palestinians or displacing them? Is Russia threatening nukes against Iran on a daily basis?


do we announced our-self as Russian enemy ,? why its hard for you guys to understand that . why comment on irrelevant matter . 
didn't we also kill israeli missile scientist ?
why compare orange and apple . again where i support Israel . why you guys pull assumption from your....


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> did i ever say it canned for iran , no i said it canned because of some politican in Washington who probably was bribed by McDonnel Douglass who failed to sell f-18 to army , they destroyed the parts and equipment to produce f-14 in fear of it falling in iran hand after its retirement , the f-14 was retired for political reason
> f-18 was not loved , navy had no option for it and it could not play the role F-14 could play .and f-14 could was not forgotten they just cut navy budget for it and told them you most use f-18 it happen around 1995-1998 , the navy resist it till 2006
> 
> if you say so. by the way the movie top gun was made because of love of f-14 in navy not otherway around, it was a navy sponsored movie .to sponsor and incite young people to join navy


Oh so you wrote a paragraph of something irrelevant to what me and @BlessedKingOfLonging were talking about. Standard Hack! He made the claim the F14 was canned by the US because of Iran, I asked for evidence which he couldn't give. Now you're coming here talking to me about how much people loved F14 back in the 90s. Well it's 2022 now and F14 is forgotten...so get your head out of the past.



Hack-Hook said:


> do we announced our-self as Russian enemy ,? why its hard for you guys to understand that . why comment on irrelevant matter .
> didn't we also kill israeli missile scientist ?
> why compare orange and apple . again where i support Israel . why you guys pull assumption from your....


Why should we do that?! When did we kill an Israeli missile scientist, where is your evidence? You're the one who equated our relationship with Israel with that of Russia. Youre the one who said that we should make an enemy out of Russia because they have done just as bad or worse to us than Israel. Like I said, strong, stepped on dope!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> I dont need you to answer anything for me. I know Russia has sold arms to Iran and the evidence is there. You made the claim Russia has never sold us anything but facts are not your friend. I think ive done enough trying to show you the sky is blue, but it seems you're colourblind.


so you don't knew what they sold , you just assume they sold something



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Fake religious people like you? Who use Quran when it suits them but deep down are kaafir akbar? Of course Loqman was religious! Why would the Quran use wisdom from a non-religious person and dedicate a chapter about him? Use your brain one in a while...the fact Saadi used it is because Saadi was a Muslim, and you quoted him so you must also be a fake khar mas'habi like me then.


as i recall it was you who brought up Quran not me , i just put out a verse from one of our greatest poets and writers aka literature . you made a wrong assumption as many other times


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yeah I have yet to see anything from you where you won a debate or showed a fact that wasnt refuted instantly by the other members here. So I will reject that claim.


just go and read last 20-30 page again . winning is when your opponent can't answer you and resort to profanity .
its when they become irrational , there is no need for them to accept defeat


Daylamite Warrior said:


> So either Iran is lying about the capabilities of bavar, which was claimed to be equal to S400 at the time, or Russia is taking all of their military accumen from Iranians. After all, you just said S-500 was inspired by Bavar! LOL


no i said russia used AESA radar in S-500 , we use in Bavar .
i said the missile for bavar , 3rd of khordad , 15th khordad , 9th dey are based on American design not Russian ones . i said the system use Iranian guidance and detection equipment that has nothing to do with russia . and by the way if anything it was Buk-M3 which was inspired by 3rd f Khordad and still failed to reach its capabilities , so LOL on yourself dear bring Iranian achievement down and attribute it to Russia guy


Daylamite Warrior said:


> But you know full well that isnt practical and there needs to be a hybrid strategy of both domestic and modern foreign jets...but you dont want that because the options arent European or Chinese, so your strategy is a guaranteed defeat of airforce in a war and defeat for Islamic Republic (rubs hands with glee!)....hence why you are an enemy of Iran but trying to veil yourself.


fun fact the strategy of Russian airplane fail because first Russia will sell you downgraded overprice equipment after you manage to build better one to distract you from your capabilities and again i wonder where i said we go buy European or Chinese airplane , i said they are better and more advance than Russian ones .
if i knew from where you guys get the idea i support buying foreign military equipment ?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> We dont have the money because of sanctions so some sacrifices


we don't have money because whatever happened some guys come out and say let sell oil and go buy from the foreigners instead of saying let build it our-self and mismanagement on some high level manager and the fact for many years we tolerated corruption for many reasons


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh so you wrote a paragraph of something irrelevant to what me and @BlessedKingOfLonging were talking about. Standard Hack! He made the claim the F14 was canned by the US because of Iran, I asked for evidence which he couldn't give. Now you're coming here talking to me about how much people loved F14 back in the 90s. Well it's 2022 now and F14 is forgotten...so get your head out of the past.


i gave you the gist of what happened , don't knew about people but navy wanted its f-14 , f-18 forced into their through by some politician in Washington.
and what are you talking again go read last 30 page , when i talked about f-14 i always said i support iran build light/medium fighter even i many time stated i like the idea behind Grippen and i believe defense ministry must put fund into kowsar project and turn it into something like grippen , then that plane can replace f-14, Mig-29, F-4, F-5, F-1,J-7 ,su-22 and.... in our air-force the only thing such development can't replace is su-24 that can somehow rectified by missile force 
i said F-14 can out performe flanker in fight which is correct as it has longer range missile. and in close fight at low speed is more maneuverable 
anything else from me about F-14 please bring it up. honestly if you want berate me on something , you have better chance of sticking to kowsar and what it can be , as its the plane that i taklked about a lot and its the airplane that i said Airforce must get and develope

wonder from where you guys bring these claims about me ? if there is anyone else who post in my name and i can\t see his post ?


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh so you wrote a paragraph of something irrelevant to what me and @BlessedKingOfLonging were talking about. Standard Hack! He made the claim the F14 was canned by the US because of Iran, I asked for evidence which he couldn't give. Now you're coming here talking to me about how much people loved F14 back in the 90s. Well it's 2022 now and F14 is forgotten...so get your head out of the past.
> 
> 
> Why should we do that?! When did we kill an Israeli missile scientist, where is your evidence?


They destroyed the entire F-14 fleet, brother. Not a single F-14 is left in their famous aircraft graveyard in Tucson, Arizona. Specifically, the reason mentioned for this war Iran. If the report is online, I'll dig it up and post the link.

Also, he is either talking about the explosion at the Arrow-5 production facility in isnotreal that was blown up (and was covered up) or the killing of aby har even during the Palestinian uprising of 2021 (it was a targeted killing; CCTV was leaked of Palestinians sneaking onto the roof with drums of fuel and lighting it on fire before escaping).


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> so you don't knew what they sold , you just assume they sold something
> 
> 
> as i recall it was you who brought up Quran not me , i just put out a verse from one of our greatest poets and writers aka literature . you made a wrong assumption as many other times
> 
> just go and read last 20-30 page again . winning is when your opponent can't answer you and resort to profanity .
> its when they become irrational , there is no need for them to accept defeat
> 
> no i said russia used AESA radar in S-500 , we use in Bavar .
> i said the missile for bavar , 3rd of khordad , 15th khordad , 9th dey are based on American design not Russian ones . i said the system use Iranian guidance and detection equipment that has nothing to do with russia . and by the way if anything it was Buk-M3 which was inspired by 3rd f Khordad and still failed to reach its capabilities , so LOL on yourself dear bring Iranian achievement down and attribute it to Russia guy
> 
> fun fact the strategy of Russian airplane fail because first Russia will sell you downgraded overprice equipment after you manage to build better one to distract you from your capabilities and again i wonder where i said we go buy European or Chinese airplane , i said they are better and more advance than Russian ones .
> if i knew from where you guys get the idea i support buying foreign military equipment ?
> 
> we don't have money because whatever happened some guys come out and say let sell oil and go buy from the foreigners instead of saying let build it our-self and mismanagement on some high level manager and the fact for many years we tolerated corruption for many reasons


Doesnt matter what they sold, you made the childish inaccurate claim that Russia doesnt sell anything to Iran and that claim has been fully rejected and refuted. Cope.

You quoted Saadi who was quoting Loqman who is in the Quran...you brought religion into this and used an Islamic reference. You may suffer amnesia and brain damage, but that doesn't mean I will allow you to make false accusations like that. The posts are here for all to see.

Man up, theyre just words and theyre justified because you debate in a dishonest and circular fashion. You bring the harshness on yourself. No, winning is when you resort your opponent to use circular reasoning, which is a logical fallacy and a sign of a defeated argument. But look at me trying to explain logic to who! Lol 🤡

Oh dear! You do know the Buk M3 was unveiled a whole year before 3rd Khordad. There may have been ToT from Russia to Iran, but that is as far as Im gonna go to entertain that. After the Russian ban on exporting S-300 to Iran (which was lifted in 2015), Iran decided to develop a similar system domestically: "We have planned to build a long-range air defence missile system similar to S-300. By God's grace and by the Iranian engineers' efforts, we will reach self-sufficiency in this regard". Seems even Iranian officials disagree with you and that S300 is a similar system to Bavar 373, but at the standard of s400 (allegedly). Im not bringing anything down, just being realistic.

By saying they are more advanced than Russian is a moot point that you keep bringing up. It's irrelevant if they are better simply because those nations wont sell to us. All nations sell export and domestic variants, not just evil ol Russia.

Given the choice of waiting a century till we have an indegenous plane or having a sensible hybrid strategy which will yield quicker results, i know which one I would go for. Your strategy is guaranteed failure, my strategy is hybrid and sensible.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> They destroyed the entire F-14 fleet, brother. Not a single F-14 is left in their famous aircraft graveyard in Tucson, Arizona. Specifically, the reason mentioned for this war Iran. If the report is online, I'll dig it up and post the link.
> 
> Also, he is either talking about the explosion at the Arrow-5 production facility in isnotreal that was blown up (and was covered up) or the killing of aby har even during the Palestinian uprising of 2021 (it was a targeted killing; CCTV was leaked of Palestinians sneaking onto the roof with drums of fuel and lighting it on fire before escaping).


Yeah that doesnt prove anything. Just proves they destroyed a bunch of planes. I can understand destroying the planes may have had something to do with Iran, but you made the claim that F14 was canned because of Iran and I am yet to see the evidence. I wait with baited breath.

Again, conspiracy theories that have no evidence.



Hack-Hook said:


> i gave you the gist of what happened , don't knew about people but navy wanted its f-14 , f-18 forced into their through by some politician in Washington.
> and what are you talking again go read last 30 page , when i talked about f-14 i always said i support iran build light/medium fighter even i many time stated i like the idea behind Grippen and i believe defense ministry must put fund into kowsar project and turn it into something like grippen , then that plane can replace f-14, Mig-29, F-4, F-5, F-1,J-7 ,su-22 and.... in our air-force the only thing such development can't replace is su-24 that can somehow rectified by missile force
> i said F-14 can out performe flanker in fight which is correct as it has longer range missile. and in close fight at low speed is more maneuverable
> anything else from me about F-14 please bring it up. honestly if you want berate me on something , you have better chance of sticking to kowsar and what it can be , as its the plane that i taklked about a lot and its the airplane that i said Airforce must get and develope
> 
> wonder from where you guys bring these claims about me ? if there is anyone else who post in my name and i can\t see his post ?


I dont care what a few old dogs thought when F18 was introduced. Some people dont like change. Also give me evdience where F14 defeated Su-27 variant in a real fight....or is it one of your video games again?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> What ever they provided was downgraded version ,



And?



Hack-Hook said:


> those kronet in hand of hezbollah showed have problem hitting targets



No it didn't. It wrecked havoc on zionist Merkava MBT's. Also Hezbollah received their Kornets from Syria not from the batches procured by Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> the radars , are different from the ones russia design in short taking the concept and building our own



Russia was perfectly aware that supplying Iran with radars is synonymous with lending a helping hand to Iranian domestic development of radar technology. This is the reason they went ahead with it.



Hack-Hook said:


> the partnership is no way a strategic one , you want strategic partnership look at china and Pakistan or turkey and Azerbaijan



It's definitely an ad hoc strategic partnership on a number of dossiers.



Hack-Hook said:


> Nebo-m
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> show it in Iran if you can



Don't run in circles with that game. Iran's equivalent drew inspiration from it.



Hack-Hook said:


> Kasta
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian sources state that its power output is just 1 kW and that it has a viewing range of 150 km up to altitudes of 6 km. It can detect a target with a radar cross-section of 0.3 m2 flying at an altitude of 60 m from a range of 24 km using its standard mast, but this can be extended to 42 km with the 50 m mast.
> really ground breaking technology



Ground breaking when one's domestic R&D is in early stages and can use samples of foreign technology to reverse engineer, study and then improve upon.



Hack-Hook said:


> don't make me laugh are you that desperate to find weapon sale , why not include rpg-7 there



It's Iran you're laughing at, not at me. Iran placed orders for those.

Incidentally it neatly invalidates your foregone claim and that's all which matters. Staying factual won't cut it for a reason, buzz words are needed to have people subscribe to the western-sponsored agenda of demonizing Russia.



Hack-Hook said:


> downgraded version



Specious interjection, it's of no relevance that they were downgraded. Downgrading export variants is a normal practice in the international arms business.



Hack-Hook said:


> that cant decide for itself which side is north and which side is south



And you seriously believe in your ability to discern laughter-inducing commentary?



Hack-Hook said:


> don't make me start ranting about it



Nobody cares. Especially Iranian decision makers, who've a better grasp on the subject matter.



Hack-Hook said:


> downgraded export version that hezbollah showed it have problem targetting israeli army vehicle



Hezbollah never made such a claim. It's is a figment of your western-leaning imagination.



Hack-Hook said:


> again is that a joke



Joke's on you, actually.



Hack-Hook said:


> its krasnopol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its Basir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a lot different , why you most attribute every Iranian achievement to Russia



Oh I attributed Basir to Russia now, really? Not to mention "every Iranian achievement"? Interesting, because I'm at a perfect loss as to when and where such a thing is supposed to have occurred.

Lookup the definition of a false syllogism.

https://www.farsnews.ir/news/14001007000834/

https://southfront.org/iran-has-arm...ussian-laser-guided-artillery-rounds-reports/










Iran's Developing Military Capabilities


Iran is a far less modern military power in comparative terms than it was during the time of the shah or during the Iran-Iraq War. Nevertheless, it is slowly improving its conventional forces, and it is now the only regional military power that poses a serious conventional military threat to...




www.csis.org







Hack-Hook said:


> the radar technology learned from studying radars recieved from Belarus and China USA not Russia



Russia as well.

And you mean the same Belarus that is aligned on Moscow and will not export Russian-made military equipment anywhere against Russia's will? The same Belarus that is considered to be hosting Russian defence sector front companies engaging in dealings with nations illegally sanctioned by the US regime, such as Iran? It's rhat Belarus you're talking about, right?



Hack-Hook said:


> russia gave us the radars in S-300 after we built our superior Radars compared to what S-300 offer , for start S-300 use Pesa radar while Bavar and #rd of khordad use AESA radar



Iran acquired the likes of the Kasta radar prior to developing her own iteration.

As for the augmented S-300PM2 Iran obtained, it's still a major long-range high-altitude asset to Iran's IADS and will continue to be for the foreseeable future, irregardless of its delivery date.



Hack-Hook said:


> that is debating the morality if it, did you ever see me claim Israel is morally or legally just . no .



Incorrect. This is not about "morality" per se but about what sets apart Iran's anti-zionist Resistance from Tel Aviv's existential hostility towards the Iranian nation.



Hack-Hook said:


> i say even if Israel unjust , even if its illegal . you can't expect it to be your friend , when you state you are its enemy .



And I'm saying you can bow to them until you're afflicted with severe chronic lumbago, and they'll still be coming for you. Thus it's not a matter of choice for Iran, since their enmity is not a consequence of Iranian actions.

Your shaky attempt at shifting the blame for this conflict onto the Islamic Republic of Iran falls flat yet again.



Hack-Hook said:


> we never stated we are Russia enemy so compare Iran relation with Russia with Israel and what you expect from them is like comparing orange and apple



I expect appropriate and proportionate treatment of partner and enemy, respectively. You are offering the opposite.



Hack-Hook said:


> wonder where i said Israel is legitimate , again read my previous paragraph . its just human nature . now if you don\t consider people who live in Israel and call themselves Israeli not part of the human race . then i can debate with you on that matter.



Your personal preference for debates where you can defend zionists under whatever pretext isn't lost on me nor on other users, but if you have comprehension issues regarding what it is you're given to read, that's no longer my problem.



Hack-Hook said:


> and the rest of your post is not what we debate here



Sure is. Quite obviously so.



Hack-Hook said:


> again you failed . i ask a question what you expect from an enemy who state is your enemy and you stated that you are his enemy?
> then what you expect from an strategic ally ?
> here people will decide its failure on my part or your part



1) Zionist policy aimed at the destruction of Iran was not triggered by Iranian actions. You however are implicitly accusing Iran of having initiated the antagonism.

2) I most definitely expect a patriot to reserve the bulk of their acrimony for his nation's enemies rather than for its partners. This is how a patriot will behave.

In between two friendly chats with "I"DF personnel, do try to enjoy the upcoming deepening of ties between Iran and Russia.



















Iran, Russia and China: Three important, independent powers opposed to the expansionism of the US and the West


The presidents of Russia and Turkey met with the Leader of the Islamic Revolution on July 19, 2022. These meetings were held at the time of the tripartite summit known as The Summit of the Guarantor States of the Astana Process. In a detailed interview with Dr. Ali Akbar Velayati, the advisor to...




english.khamenei.ir


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

@drmeson @Daylamite Warrior @Hack-Hook @WudangMaster @SalarHaqq @TheImmortal 

It seems we're at an impasse here.

Logically, there seem to be only two routes:
(A) Depending on if Babak Taghavee is right and an indigenous TF-30 414-A and F-14 airframe have been developed, we can field a domestic 4th generation fighter integrating all the avionics and sensors embedded on the HESA Kowsar.

Of course, new additions like GaN AESA radar, EW suite and IRST are needed to bolster it and bring it up to 4++ generation standard. And over time, higher engine quality with greater overall dry and afterburner thrust will be needed to bring out its best.


(B) We settle for a stop-gap measure of inducting small numbers of Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but with technology transfer that at least enables us to manufacture our own spare parts rather than being dependent on the russian UAC and for our mechanics and engineers to be able to perform full overhaul and maintenance independently. Otherwise, it's a huge risk and a waste of precious foreign currency.

Regardless of which route is taken, the Mig-29 has to be passed down to the IRGC-AF to allow them to expand their aerial reach and arsenal and modify the platform according to their needs.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh so now youre a bonafide Ziopig apologist. Can't say im surprised but you have taken yourself past the point of no return.



That sentence truly sums it up, doesn't it?



Hack-Hook said:


> i don't expect any thing from , Israel after all we our self also won\t stop from doing so until Israel destruction ,



No need to look much further. The essence of the user's viewpoint is reflected in those words.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You quoted Saadi who was quoting Loqman who is in the Quran...you brought religion into this and used an Islamic reference. You may suffer amnesia and brain damage, but that doesn't mean I will allow you to make false accusations like that. The posts are here for all to see.


abu-Jahl also is in Quran , his wife also there , Feroon also there , i don\t consider them religion . its *Literature* that i quoted not Quran , where in Quran Loqman said he learned politeness from impolite ?.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Doesnt matter what they sold, you made the childish inaccurate claim that Russia doesnt sell anything to Iran and that claim has been fully rejected and refuted. Cope.


it matter if they sold AK-103 or grenade launcher or airplanes .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Man up, theyre just words and theyre justified because you debate in a dishonest and circular fashion. You bring the harshness on yourself. No, winning is when you resort your opponent to use circular reasoning, which is a logical fallacy and a sign of a defeated argument. But look at me trying to explain logic to who! Lol 🤡


what strong logic claim things that are not true and announce victory.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Oh dear! You do know the Buk M3 was unveiled a whole year before 3rd Khordad. There may have been ToT from Russia to Iran, but that is as far as Im gonna go to entertain that. After the Russian ban on exporting S-300 to Iran (which was lifted in 2015), Iran decided to develop a similar system domestically: "We have planned to build a long-range air defence missile system similar to S-300. By God's grace and by the Iranian engineers' efforts, we will reach self-sufficiency in this regard". Seems even Iranian officials disagree with you and that S300 is a similar system to Bavar 373, but at the standard of s400 (allegedly). Im not bringing anything down, just being realistic.


unveiled one year before 3rd of khordad become operational in military which part of bavar-373 is simillar to S-300 please elaborate on that


Daylamite Warrior said:


> By saying they are more advanced than Russian is a moot point that you keep bringing up. It's irrelevant if they are better simply because those nations wont sell to us. All nations sell export and domestic variants, not just evil ol Russia.


interestingly export versions of those airplane are more advanced than the most advanced domestic version of flanker . so i think its more clear now


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Given the choice of waiting a century till we have an indegenous plane or having a sensible hybrid strategy which will yield quicker results, i know which one I would go for. Your strategy is guaranteed failure, my strategy is hybrid and sensible.


a century , yess if don\t fund the project and hand the money to foreigners .



SalarHaqq said:


> That sentence truly sums it up:


Russian apologists and worshipers . what about it


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Russian apologists and worshipers . what about it



I looked very hard but couldn't detect such people anywhere.

However, even if this unheard of species actually existed, I'd take them any day over subjects who try to blame Iran for the existential enmity shown by the zionists.

I'd rather be apologetic towards an imperfect ambivalent partner than towards an unquestionable outright foe. And so would any patriotic person.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> a century , yess if don\t fund the project and hand the money to foreigners .


No one is asking to become dependent on Moscow for aerospace - literally every person here including me says we ought to buy with technology transfer, to the minimum of having independent maintenance/overhaul capabilities and license to manufacture spare parts.



Hack-Hook said:


> Russian apologists and worshipers . what about it


Man, give up the argument already. Every successive reply of yours becomes more nonsensical and treacherous.



Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 872030
> 
> View attachment 872031


From their recent Army-Technical Expo?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Man, give up the argument already. Every successive reply of yours becomes more nonsensical and treacherous.



Now they're trying to equate advocacy of limited stop-gap arms procurement from Russia with bogus excuses for zionist hostility. If this isn't telling I don't know what is.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> abu-Jahl also is in Quran , his wife also there , Feroon also there , i don\t consider them religion . its *Literature* that i quoted not Quran , where in Quran Loqman said he learned politeness from impolite ?.
> 
> it matter if they sold AK-103 or grenade launcher or airplanes .
> 
> what strong logic claim things that are not true and announce victory.
> 
> unveiled one year before 3rd of khordad become operational in military which part of bavar-373 is simillar to S-300 please elaborate on that
> 
> interestingly export versions of those airplane are more advanced than the most advanced domestic version of flanker . so i think its more clear now
> 
> a century , yess if don\t fund the project and hand the money to foreigners .
> 
> 
> Russian apologists and worshipers . what about it


Ablah, does the Quran speak good or bad about Abu Lahab? Can we still draw rulings from Abu Lahabs conditions? Does the Quran speak good or bad about Luqman? Is Luqman not a religious and pious figure? Because the Quran uses Luqman as an example of how a father should teach his son. Hardly the same as Ferown and Abu Jahl. You used a secondary Islamic source, which derived its inspiration from the Quran. There is no hiding that you used religious thinking in your post. I guess its your fitra kicking in.

Pretty sure Russia has sold all of those categories and more to Iran.

Youre the one resorting to circular reasoning. Maybe try to come with something new?

Yes it was unveiled before 3rd Khordad, yet somehow you think Russia copied Iran LOL this why logic is beyond you.

Irrelevant, you made the claim that only Russia gives deficient export models, and now that I've shown you to be wrong, you have reverted back to "western planes are better" line, which I will have to repeat with "west wont sell those planes to us, so you make a moot point". I will repeat myself to your circular reasoning till the cows come home or you come with something. Hope youre ready!

You're thinking in extremes and stawmanning me. I never said we should go one way or the other, im saying we should have a hybrid strategy of both domestic R+D (which would require foreign help) and foreign jets. 

No, Salar jan is suming up your pro-ziopig statement with evidence. Cope.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No it didn't. It wrecked havoc on zionist Merkava MBT's. Also Hezbollah received their Kornets from Syria not from the batches procured by Iran.


please go and read about it more carefully specially on how many fired and how many Merkava-3 and 4 get destroyed in that war. by the way i was talking about when hezbollah fired 3-4 against israeli transport and only one hit it. so it gave the israeli force the time to escape.


SalarHaqq said:


> on't run in circles with that game. Iran's equivalent drew inspiration from it.


made by Iranian engineers , totally different in shape form and probably algorithms because we did that they didn't gave it to us


SalarHaqq said:


> Ground breaking when one's domestic R&D is in early stages and can use samples of foreign technology to reverse engineer, study and then improve upon.


when they gave that to us exactly . at the time how many radar we had in production


SalarHaqq said:


> Specious interjection, it's of no relevance that they were downgraded. Downgrading export variants is a normal practice in the international arms business.


so not strategic partnership , but selling a weapon to us we already get our hands on


SalarHaqq said:


> And you seriously believe in your ability to discern laughter-inducing commentary?


exactly what resulted in downing of ukrainian airplanes , that was not a laughing matter at all


SalarHaqq said:


> Nobody cares. Especially Iranian decision makers, who've a better grasp on the subject matter.


because they refused further purchase from Russia even when they begged us to buy s-400 later. guess what bavar is superior
that also will be the case of kowsar if it get adequate funding . it will be superior to migs or flanker


SalarHaqq said:


> Oh I attributed Basir to Russia now, really? Not to mention "every Iranian achievement"? Interesting, because I'm at a perfect loss as to when and where such a thing is supposed to have occurred.
> 
> Lookup the definition of a false syllogism.
> 
> https://www.farsnews.ir/news/14001007000834/
> 
> https://southfront.org/iran-has-arm...ussian-laser-guided-artillery-rounds-reports/


lol , to Syria not Iran and that isn't that a Russian site


SalarHaqq said:


> Russia as well.


again which Russian radar


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran acquired the likes of the Kasta radar prior to developing her own iteration.
> 
> As for the augmented S-300PM2 Iran obtained, it's still a major long-range high-altitude asset to Iran's IADS and will continue to be for the foreseeable future, irregardless of its delivery date.


very relevant to the delivery date , we received it when we no longer needed it . they hoped to later sell us more , and you expect we throw it in rubbish bin . its natural we use them after we received them .


SalarHaqq said:


> Incorrect. This is not about "morality" per se but about what sets apart Iran's anti-zionist Resistance from Tel Aviv's existential hostility towards the Iranian nation.


you say they are enemy , but you expect them to act like friend !!?
and then you say russia is friend but justify its action because of action of an enemy ?


SalarHaqq said:


> And I'm saying you can bow to them until you're afflicted with severe chronic lumbago, and they'll still be coming for you. Thus it's not a matter of choice for Iran, since their enmity is not a consequence of Iranian actions.
> 
> Your shaky attempt at shifting the blame for this conflict onto the Islamic Republic of Iran falls flat yet again.


exactly which conflict . i don't blame it on anyone . you brought it up . i said its natural , its human nature.
you just wanted compare orange with apple


SalarHaqq said:


> I expect appropriate and proportionate treatment of partner and enemy, respectively. You are offering the opposite.


i say Russia is not enemy , its not a partner either . its a competitor and i expect proportionate approach to relation with them.


SalarHaqq said:


> Your personal preference for debates where you can defend zionists under whatever pretext isn't lost on me nor on other users, but if you have comprehension issues regarding what it is you're given to read, that's no longer my problem.


i don't recall defend them , i recall stating the natural order of things


SalarHaqq said:


> Zionist policy aimed at the destruction of Iran was not triggered by Iranian actions. You however are implicitly accusing Iran of having initiated the antagonism.


if you want to skew my words , to made your point , i can force you to do other thing . every one can see and decide


SalarHaqq said:


> 2) I most definitely expect a patriot to reserve the bulk of their acrimony for his nation's enemies rather than for its partners. This is how a patriot will behave.
> 
> In between two friendly chats with "I"DF personnel, do try to enjoy the upcoming deepening of ties between Iran and Russia.


until Russia back-stab again .
that's something always happened


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Now they're trying to equate support for Russia with bogus excuses for zionist hostility. If this isn't telling I don't know what is.


no you tried to rationalizing Russia backstabbing because of Israel enmity . i pointed out that Israel is enemy and Russia is supposed to be ally . we expect a little difference on how they that you . but seems some people can't understand that.


BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Man, give up the argument already. Every successive reply of yours becomes more nonsensical and treacherous.


since when stating facts become nonsensical and treacherous , but worshiping an entity that time and time showed we can't rely on it is patriotism



Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 872030
> 
> View attachment 872031


to me Fath-14 is as similar to the Russian radar as PAC-2 to 15th of khordad
for god say , they even work at different angles 
for god sake you are comparing Iran 600km radar by Russian 150km one

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

I wish we had a *clean* forum without hack hook

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ablah, does the Quran speak good or bad about Abu Lahab? Can we still draw rulings from Abu Lahabs conditions? Does the Quran speak good or bad about Luqman? Is Luqman not a religious and pious figure? Because the Quran uses Luqman as an example of how a father should teach his son. Hardly the same as Ferown and Abu Jahl. You used a secondary Islamic source, which derived its inspiration from the Quran. There is no hiding that you used religious thinking in your post. I guess its your fitra kicking in.


what it matter . quran talk good about many people are all religion and even that won\t matter what i post was literature and nobody can prohibit me from using iranian arts and literature .
so wonder who is ignorant here 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Pretty sure Russia has sold all of those categories and more to Iran.


sure but fail to bring example


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre the one resorting to circular reasoning. Maybe try to come with something new?


that can be decided by the rest of the people who read the posts , those are something which remain there for people to see for years 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes it was unveiled before 3rd Khordad, yet somehow you think Russia copied Iran LOL this why logic is beyond you.


but 3rd of khordad somehow become operational sooner than that. do you knew how many battery of it russia have produced till today .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Irrelevant, you made the claim that only Russia gives deficient export models, and now that I've shown you to be wrong, you have reverted back to "western planes are better" line, which I will have to repeat with "west wont sell those planes to us, so you make a moot point". I will repeat myself to your circular reasoning till the cows come home or you come with something. Hope youre ready!


again you make some strange claim 
about russia export let just say they sold the lowest model of mig-29 that you can find anywhere , even the prototypes are probably more advance . and i always said Chinese and western airplane are more advance and the only airplane in russia militarythat use modern electronic and technology is Su-57 and they managed to build a whooping 6 of them and before sanctions they could produce 1-2 each year , right now i don't knew how many . just knew they had to remove AESA radar from mig-35


Daylamite Warrior said:


> You're thinking in extremes and stawmanning me. I never said we should go one way or the other, im saying we should have a hybrid strategy of both domestic R+D (which would require foreign help) and foreign jets.


you yourself said our money is limited and you said that just today . and now you claim we hove money to both buy and develop new airplanes !?



Daylamite Warrior said:


> No, Salar jan is suming up your pro-ziopig statement with evidence. Cope.


his evidence is baseless assumption . he made a comparisson and i point to him he compare apple to orange . if he want to compare the so called strategic ally behaviors toward us , he most compare it by how china react toward Pakistan or how USA to Israel or how turkey to Azerbaijan . not how Israel act toward Iran .
and later his mental Gymnastics and conclusion he made from when i pointed the fact to him was nothing but extraordinary and legendary

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

I wish we had a *clean* Zionism_free forum without hackhook

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sardar330 said:


> I wish we had a *clean* forum without hack hook


for that you must prove me wrong. and people must stop worshiping a country that time and time abandoned us in time of need.
by the way i was wondering , what you guys reaction would have been if you were subjected to such nonsense and profanity i faced to last several day , for what .because some member don't like me and want make me leave the forum like several other old Iranian members.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

Hack-Hook said:


> for that you must prove me wrong. and people must stop worshiping a country that time and time abandoned us in time of need.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sardar330 said:


> I wish we had a *clean* Zionism_free forum without hackhook


wonder what you achieve by repeating it , make me leave.
its funny some new member here want me who have been here for more than 10 years leave you guys even didn't wait to pass one year mark

wonder if we must produce a Hack-Hook must go meme like that asad must go meme we had here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lydian fall

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder what you achieve by repeating it , make me leave.
> its funny some new member here want me who have been here for more than 10 years leave you guys even didn't wait to pass one year mark
> 
> wonder if we must produce a Hack-Hook must go meme like that asad must go meme we had here


Everywhere we go in Iranian part we see your extremely low quality posts 

So we close the pages immediately and wait until another person to post something beneficial

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sardar330 said:


> Everywhere we go in Iranian part we see your extremely low quality posts
> 
> So we close the pages immediately and wait until another person to post something beneficial


now facts are low quality, but praising low grade Russian , equipment , saying all we build everything because of Russia . say we must disband part of our army , saying we must go and by Russian outdated downgraded handover instead of building it ourselves is high quality.
saying just like our missiles and radars and defense we can build better airplane than what Russia is willing to give to us is low quality.
the picture is becoming clear little by little you guys don't believe in our abilities

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

Hack-Hook said:


> now facts are low quality, but praising low grade Russian , equipment , saying all we build everything because of Russia . say we must disband part of our army , saying we must go and by Russian outdated downgraded handover instead of building it ourselves is high quality.
> saying just like our missiles and radars and defense we can build better airplane than what Russia is willing to give to us is low quality.
> the picture is becoming clear little by little you guys don't believe in our abilities


شرافتا ۹۰٪ حرفات مزخرف هست

یاوه هایی هست که از ذهن نخودی یه پیرمرد خرفت تراوش میشه

لجن زدی به بخش ما ایرانی ها ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> what it matter . quran talk good about many people are all religion and even that won\t matter what i post was literature and nobody can prohibit me from using iranian arts and literature .
> so wonder who is ignorant here
> 
> sure but fail to bring example
> 
> that can be decided by the rest of the people who read the posts , those are something which remain there for people to see for years
> 
> but 3rd of khordad somehow become operational sooner than that. do you knew how many battery of it russia have produced till today .
> 
> again you make some strange claim
> about russia export let just say they sold the lowest model of mig-29 that you can find anywhere , even the prototypes are probably more advance . and i always said Chinese and western airplane are more advance and the only airplane in russia militarythat use modern electronic and technology is Su-57 and they managed to build a whooping 6 of them and before sanctions they could produce 1-2 each year , right now i don't knew how many . just knew they had to remove AESA radar from mig-35
> 
> you yourself said our money is limited and you said that just today . and now you claim we hove money to both buy and develop new airplanes !?
> 
> 
> his evidence is baseless assumption . he made a comparisson and i point to him he compare apple to orange . if he want to compare the so called strategic ally behaviors toward us , he most compare it by how china react toward Pakistan or how USA to Israel or how turkey to Azerbaijan . not how Israel act toward Iran .
> and later his mental Gymnastics and conclusion he made from when i pointed the fact to him was nothing but extraordinary and legendary


Kheyli khari! 

Nobody is prohibiting you. I just pointed out that you have become religious for us with your quoting of an Islamic text...who cares it is Iranian or in form of poem. The fact is that Loqman specifically was quoted and he is a righteous religious figure in the Quran. Bringing firown and this and that just makes you look dumb.

I dont care too much about what others think or dont think. This is between me and you. But from the look of it people are deciding against you on this forum.

Buk M3 was operational in 2013, 3rd Khordad was operational in 2014. You do the math.

No, I dont buy your exaggerated claims that finished products are worse than prototype. But even if that were the case that just proves domestic versions will always be better than export which is the standard globally. Again you bring up China and the west. That's like saying "why are there poor people when rich people exist?". That's the level of your brain power, va gandesh dare dar miyad.

Yes, money is limited if we were to follow your braindead 100% domestic route in a meaningful timeframe where Iran can defend itself and money is also limited to buy solely foreign. However Iran has the money for a few squadrons of modern Russian jets, which wont be enough to defeat US but is a big improvement. The reason why this is isnt happening is because of the ToT issue and whether or not Russia can produce enough for export considering it is in the middle of a proxy war with the entire west. In the meantime, money will go towards missiles and drones, enough to block out the sun!

You equated a few shoddy arms deals and UNSC sanctions from 10 years ago, which dont exist any more btw, with Israel killing Iranian scientists and threatening Iran with nukes. You hate Iran that much that the blood of your countrymen dont matter, you only worry about why Iran is getting stronger via Russia, an enemy of the west ironically, and not through Israel and the west?!



Hack-Hook said:


> for that you must prove me wrong. and people must stop worshiping a country that time and time abandoned us in time of need.
> by the way i was wondering , what you guys reaction would have been if you were subjected to such nonsense and profanity i faced to last several day , for what .because some member don't like me and want make me leave the forum like several other old Iranian members.


Why do you worship the west who want Iran to be weak, subservient, morally bankrupt and God-less? You're just another cheek of the same arse. Now you're worshipping Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Kheyli khari!
> 
> Nobody is prohibiting you. I just pointed out that you have become religious for us with your quoting of an Islamic text...who cares it is Iranian or in form of poem. The fact is that Loqman specifically was quoted and he is a righteous religious figure in the Quran. Bringing firown and this and that just makes you look dumb.
> 
> I dont care too much about what others think or dont think. This is between me and you. But from the look of it people are deciding against you on this forum.
> 
> Buk M3 was operational in 2013, 3rd Khordad was operational in 2014. You do the math.
> 
> No, I dont buy your exaggerated claims that finished products are worse than prototype. But even if that were the case that just proves domestic versions will always be better than export which is the standard globally. Again you bring up China and the west. That's like saying "why are there poor people when rich people exist?". That's the level of your brain power, va gandesh dare dar miyad.
> 
> Yes, money is limited if we were to follow your braindead 100% domestic route in a meaningful timeframe where Iran can defend itself and money is also limited to buy solely foreign. However Iran has the money for a few squadrons of modern Russian jets, which wont be enough to defeat US but is a big improvement. The reason why this is isnt happening is because of the ToT issue and whether or not Russia can produce enough for export considering it is in the middle of a proxy war with the entire west. In the meantime, money will go towards missiles and drones, enough to block out the sun!
> 
> You equated a few shoddy arms deals and UNSC sanctions from 10 years ago, which dont exist any more btw, with Israel killing Iranian scientists and threatening Iran with nukes. You hate Iran that much that the blood of your countrymen dont matter, you only worry about why Iran is getting stronger via Russia, an enemy of the west ironically, and not through Israel and the west?!
> 
> 
> Why do you worship the west who want Iran to be weak, subservient, morally bankrupt and God-less? You're just another cheek of the same arse. Now you're worshipping Israel.


He is son-in-law of zibakalam the crazy


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> please go and read about it more carefully specially on how many fired and how many Merkava-3 and 4 get destroyed in that war.



I've no desire to read zionist propaganda. I leave that to you if it inspires you so much.



Hack-Hook said:


> by the way i was talking about when hezbollah fired 3-4 against israeli transport and only one hit it. so it gave the israeli force the time to escape.



And I was talking about when Hezbollah smashed Merkavas using their Kornets. Those multiple Merkavas weren't incapacitated by Hezbollah's other anti-tank weapon, the... RPG (yes, another Russian-designed weapon)! 



Hack-Hook said:


> made by Iranian engineers , totally different in shape form and probably algorithms because we did that they didn't gave it to us



Directly benefiting from lessons learnt by examining the Nebo.



Hack-Hook said:


> when they gave that to us exactly . at the time how many radar we had in production



Given its high degree of self-sufficiency, a country like Iran won't be placing orders for arms it sees no benefit in, with benefit being most often determined in terms of how useful these items are for the indigenization of technology. Proof's always in the pudding in this regard.



Hack-Hook said:


> so not strategic partnership , but selling a weapon to us we already get our hands on



Strategic-level partnership on a certain number of geopolitical dossiers.

And unlike what you're implying, Iran has not been wasting funds on imported armaments she has no requirement for.



Hack-Hook said:


> exactly what resulted in downing of ukrainian airplanes , that was not a laughing matter at all



Could have had multiple concurring causes other than supposedly inherent flaws to the SAM system. Moreover Iran never published a technically detailed account on how the incident came about, so your speculative assertion tainted with anti-Russian bias is disingenuous.



Hack-Hook said:


> because they refused further purchase from Russia even when they begged us to buy s-400 later. guess what bavar is superior
> that also will be the case of kowsar if it get adequate funding . it will be superior to migs or flanker



And that's also why the S-300 continues to be fielded by Islamic Iran. Because it's a reliable and efficient item which will keep playing its own dedicated role within the Iranian IADS for years to come.



Hack-Hook said:


> lol , to Syria not Iran and that isn't that a Russian site



Qasem Soleimani is a Syrian general now, sure. Also the third source is reporting earlier sales to Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> again which Russian radar



Every Russian radar Iran spent money on. Iranian planners know what to invest in, they won't ask anyone on this forum for their opinion or permission.

As well as every Belarusian, read Russian front company-supplied one.



Hack-Hook said:


> very relevant to the delivery date , we received it when we no longer needed it . they hoped to later sell us more , and you expect we throw it in rubbish bin . its natural we use them after we received them .



By that faulty logic, Iran could have simply gone for the alternatives Russia was offering, rather than pressing them to deliver the S-300PM variant. No, it's not natural to use something one doesn't need. Rationally thinking entities won't do such a thing. Iran could have sold them off to a third party if she just thought they're trash.



Hack-Hook said:


> you say they are enemy , but you expect them to act like friend !!?



No I don't. But I'm also highlighting the way in which you rationalized their enmity by suggesting Iran is sharing part of the blame.



Hack-Hook said:


> and then you say russia is friend but justify its action because of action of an enemy ?



Don't remember "justifying" any Russian wrongdoing against Iran. As said, you appear to be having a slight comprehension issue at this point.



Hack-Hook said:


> exactly which conflict .



The one you're pretending not to know.



Hack-Hook said:


> i don't blame it on anyone . you brought it up . i said its natural , its human nature.
> you just wanted compare orange with apple



You suggested it's normal for them to show extreme hostility because Iran is seeking their regime's destruction. I responded by demonstrating the fallacy behind that kind of zionist-absolving rhetoric.



Hack-Hook said:


> i say Russia is not enemy , its not a partner either . its a competitor and i expect proportionate approach to relation with them.



This right here is the appropriate approach towards Russia:






Also a rapid look at your commenting history will illustrate that measured against the way you speak about an enemy (i.e. the zionist entity), your views about Russia are more akin to what pious people tend to think of Iblis himself (may the Almighty's curse be upon him).



Hack-Hook said:


> i don't recall defend them , i recall stating the natural order of things



I recall you envisaging an unrealistic discussion scenario under which you would have reason to defend them.



Hack-Hook said:


> if you want to skew my words , to made your point , i can force you to do other thing . every one can see and decide



Yes, everyone can see and decide, Captain Obvious. But perhaps I ought to take back that latter characterization, considering how the fact that you were explaining zionist enmity through the prism of Iranian actions, seems to have escaped your mind.



Hack-Hook said:


> until Russia back-stab again .
> that's something always happened



What's next, saying that the Leader ought to follow your advice?








Hack-Hook said:


> no you tried to rationalizing Russia backstabbing because of Israel enmity .



Only someone who doesn't properly understand what I wrote, could possibly alter its meaning in such a way. Or perhaps an intellectually dishonest one, but I prefer to be optimistic.



Hack-Hook said:


> i pointed out that Israel is enemy and Russia is supposed to be ally . we expect a little difference on how they that you . but seems some people can't understand that.
> 
> since when stating facts become nonsensical and treacherous , but worshiping an entity that time and time showed we can't rely on it is patriotism



Yeah, but one tidbit in that sentence was implicitly supposing zionist hostility is a reaction to Iranian policy. If you had half that level of clemency for a partner, Russia, it'd be more acceptable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Geo29

Azarakhsh-2 officialy with IIR seeker... 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1560891011844509696

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

People should stop attacking @Hack-Hook for no reason. He is giving his opinion.


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Logically, there seem to be only two routes:
> (A) Depending on if Babak Taghavee is right and an indigenous TF-30 414-A and F-14 airframe have been developed, we can field a domestic 4th generation fighter integrating all the avionics and sensors embedded on the HESA Kowsar.



My own assumption ... at best OWJ/IRSSJO can field out something like this, based upon published claims:

*Airframe:* 60-70% locally built, 30-40% parts from some cannibalized or damaged airframes, black market parts
*AWG-9+:* Digitalised local processor unit + 834 local parts are being made in Iranian companies which is reducing the weight of the unit drastically and bringing the search range to 350+ km. They can or may already have added a TDL in the processing unit. 
*Nav-Comm: *New INS/TACAN confirmed
*TF-30-P414 Turbofan:* I believe this will also be a local built parts + overhauled parts 
*WVR Missiles: Azarakhsh all aspect CCD seeker WVR* 100 % indigenous, we have seen it.
*LR-BVR Missiles: Fakour-90 SARH+ECCM *100 % indigenous, we have seen it. *Maghsoud ARH LR-BVR* for 200 KM is still in testing, we have seen pics

So they may show a Saegeh-I/II like version of a F-14A but the problem exists that for mass production of this unit, leadership will give no money for IRIAF. They will show us one assembly line with production rate of some 2-3 units per year at best. Kowsar-I, F-14AM, MIG-29 MLU+upgradation all are victim of lack of $$.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Of course, new additions like GaN AESA radar, EW suite and IRST are needed to bolster it and bring it up to 4++ generation standard. And over time, higher engine quality with greater overall dry and afterburner thrust will be needed to bring out its best.



F-14 has a HUGE RCS. I do not have the source but assumption is that it wont be below 10 m2 because other fighters of similar role, generation and size, shape like F-15, Tornado, F-4, SU-27 have 10-25 m2 RCS. No matter what you do, you can not bring this plane to 4++ generation. That domain belongs to smaller and lighter EF-2000, F/A-18EF, Rafale who all have <1 m2 RCS and are literal electronic laboratories flying in the sky to blind, and deceive the enemy instead of winning speed and thrust contest that aircrafts from 70s were built for.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> (B) We settle for a stop-gap measure of inducting small numbers of Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but with technology transfer that at least enables us to manufacture our own spare parts rather than being dependent on the russian UAC and for our mechanics and engineers to be able to perform full overhaul and maintenance independently. Otherwise, it's a huge risk and a waste of precious foreign currency.



Just to purchase a token force of 24 x SU-35S we will need 4-5 Billion USD. These planes will :

- 10-15 m2 RCS
- IRBIS-E PESA cant track small fighters above 100 km. Imagine the plane taking on EF-2000, Rafale armed with metoer LR-BVR
- TKS-2 or later TDL wont allow integration with Iranian TDL as they are limited to Flanker-Flanker 
- R-77-1 BVR missile it will carry has a range of ~105-110 KM so an F-14AM will have to fly along with it to save it from BVR attack using its own LR-BVR and AWG-9.
- 85 million USD/unit. 

For same amount of money Iran can procure

- 40 additional MIG-29M/35
- 23 IRIAF MIG-29 MLUed and upgraded
- 200 RD-33MK Turbofans for Kowsar-II
- 400 R-77-1 BVR
- 400 R-74 WVR

This will mean we will have a force of ~75 MIG-29M/MIG-35 + 160 Kowsar-I/II all armed with modern BVR, WVR + 40 F-14A/AM . An IRIAF to take on the regional enemies. 



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Regardless of which route is taken, the Mig-29 has to be passed down to the IRGC-AF to allow them to expand their aerial reach and arsenal and modify the platform according to their needs.



IMO, IRIAF itself should be handed over to MOD+IRGC strategists so that 

- they can pressure leadership to release some $$ to save this force from being a victim of missile, navy, UCAV, space program
- bargain with Russia for MIG/SU procurement, IRGC has better relations with Russians (SU-22 upgradation, SU-25 purchase, T-90SM purchase, interoperability in Syria)


----------



## drmeson

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Aaanyway, like I have already said, Iran has limited financial resources and their defence is investing most of their money into attack, primarily from drones and missiles.



You are totally wrong. Iranian defence budget is by no mans small. For a country that purchases nothing from abroad and produces local stuff its freaking 24 Billion surpassing Turkey and even Israel (SIPRI). Its just disproportionate in favor of heavy arming of missile forces, UCAVs, Navy, Radars, HIMADS/SHORADS. IRIAF is just a neglected branch, ppl have different theories:

-Nojeh fearing Akhoonds
-IRGC competes with IRIAF for $$ and has more influence on MoD
-IRIAF has ego lobby groups that push for their own stupid projects like overhaul and maintenance of Mirage F1, F-7N, F-5E/F. Thus waste of money.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> To have an effective airforce to compete with US, Iran just doesnt have that sort of money...so they have had to make some tough choices.



IRIAF can't fight with the US so they should let it die so that it can't even deal with the PGCC+Israel threat? What kind of looney logic is that?



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Theyre not gonna piss money up the wall just because you and @Hack-Hook have pipe dreams of Kowsar X and SU-57 LOL!



You are talking out of your bunghole I am afraid. I have NEVER EVER called for SU-57/75 or J-31 purchases. I am in fact even against the SU-35S bomb truck for 85 Million USD.

IMO plane that fits IRIAF needs from foreign markets is none other than what we already operate and have the proper local infrastructure for ... MIG-29M/35. IRIAF chased this plane in the entire 1990s in heavy numbers. Just in 1992, they wanted some 72 fighters but Yeltsin's drunk days Russia chickened out. Who knows they might have gone for some 150 total airframes to replace Shahi dreams of F-16 and F-17 based IIAF.

Even today if Leadership just focuses on IRIAF they can get a force built around some 100 MIG-29M/MIG-35 and Kowsar-II



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Iran will only invest on their airforce if it is worth it, other than that they have to be more calculated than you are sat behind your computer screen.



IADS is not enough to fight 1000 4+ generation aircraft in PGCC+Israel+Turkey. IRIAF needs to survive at all costs.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Really? Qaher was trash,



I called it a joke before you registered on any Iranian forum. I feel this was some academic project from Malek Ashtar U that worked on low RCS AT designs with Tajik Soviet aircraft designer. Qaher was used for local consumption by Ahamdinejad era idiots who tried to sell a utopian project as some in-production fighter.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Kowsar is trash



*Radar *Grifo-346 replica with a tracking range of around 93 KM, Search range in excess of 110+ KM, official figures and visual evidence
*ECCM* package included
*SAR* with 1 m resolution as much as an F-16C/D
*TDL *Fighter-Fighter, Fighter-UCAV, IAIO head confirmed
*Nav-Comm* INS/TACAN/GPS/UHF, VHF, Shown
*E-Warfare suite *IFF and RWR, Auto Chaff/Flare system, Shown
*Low RCS* N-156 family never exceeded 3m2. F/A-18 of same family is 1.2 m2.
*FBW* BT confirmed
*Glass cockpit *6 MFDs in Tandem seaters, HUD
*4 x Computer systems *for Flight, Weapons, Targetting, Electronic warfare

Above all rivals FCK-I, FC-1 Block I/II, F-20, F-16 Block 30/40. Next generation can incorporate RD-33MK and an AESA radar and we can have our own F-16C/D. We can talk more on this. 



Daylamite Warrior said:


> , everything about IRIAF is trash. It's subpar garbage that will be the first to get annihilated in a war, followed by our Navy. Sorry if that hurt your feelings.



Again you are talking out of your rear bottom. I was probably the first person in IDF and IMF to say IRIAF will die a horrible death at the hands of a disproportionate defense budget. I am the one who started this argument that by current trend IRIAF will not exist by 2030. All this talk of SU-35, F-14, Kowsar, Mig-29 means nothing when the leadership itself wants the force to become DPRK AF so that 1-2 squadrons are FMC's and can gaurd the capital while rest is IADs job to deal with.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Attack is a form of defence...Iran has a decent SAM network as well.



With lower RCS planes emerging and long range SOWs, half of our IADS will become useless. So far PGCC and NW theatre has not got F-35 but in future we will face a force of Rafale, EF-2000, F-35, F/A-18EF that will enter our Airspace and even can fire long range SOWs from the periphery and run back. You need interceptors there to thwart them back. IADS works but not solely.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> I know you're a secularist and you want Iran to become a stooge of the west again...but wake the **** up, it aint gonna happen.



Secularist Shahi will ask for IRIAF to be handed over to IRGC and write paragraphs against Reformists like Rohani?? You make assumptions about people and go on and on.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> So the akhoonds are doing the best they can.



No they are not. The same people who brought us Qaher and called Saeghe-I/II testbeds as F/A-18 equivalents are not trustable as strategists to me.

Mismanaged $$
Lobbyism
Hot air propoganda
Botched up presentations of real accomplishments

List goes on...



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Even if Iran had money, they would still need to make crazy investments in their airforce for it to even stand more than a few weeks in a war.



A force of following

40 F-14AM
75 MIG-29M/35
160 Kowsar-I/II
200 UCAVS for ELINT, SIGINT, mini-AWACS, PGM strike role

is enough to work in conjunction with IADS to stop aerial invasion of Iran so that IRGC can deliver a crushing blow to PGCC+Israel+Turkey through their Missile power. Without the above, IADS will fight but the enemy will still be able to target the infrastructure of Iran. With enemy procuring F-35, EF-2000, Rafale with long range SOWs and creating their own Missile forces (KSA, Turkey) we will lose this assymetric advantage very fast.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> That is why Iran's detterance has come from other means, with great effect, much to your dismay.



Iran still needs IRIAF otherwise IADS will be stressed and stretched out much to your own dismay. Countries who are investing in Air arms are not stupid despite having missile forces arm. What if KSA goes on a purchasing spree from China in next 5 years and ends up with DF-17 HGVs and LACMs to target Iranian IADS ? Chinese provided them with DF-17 and are building nuclear reactors in their country already.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> My own assumption ... at best OWJ/IRSSJO can field out something like this, based upon published claims:
> 
> *Airframe:* 60-70% locally built, 30-40% parts from some cannibalized or damaged airframes, black market parts
> *AWG-9+:* Digitalised local processor unit + 834 local parts are being made in Iranian companies which is reducing the weight of the unit drastically and bringing the search range to 350+ km. They can or may already have added a TDL in the processing unit.
> *Nav-Comm: *New INS/TACAN confirmed
> *TF-30-P414 Turbofan:* I believe this will also be a local built parts + overhauled parts
> *WVR Missiles: Azarakhsh all aspect CCD seeker WVR* 100 % indigenous, we have seen it.
> *LR-BVR Missiles: Fakour-90 SARH+ECCM *100 % indigenous, we have seen it. *Maghsoud ARH LR-BVR* for 200 KM is still in testing, we have seen pics
> 
> So they may show a Saegeh-I/II like version of a F-14A but the problem exists that for mass production of this unit, leadership will give no money for IRIAF. They will show us one assembly line with production rate of some 2-3 units per year at best. Kowsar-I, F-14AM, MIG-29 MLU+upgradation all are victim of lack of $$.


They already manufacture AESA radars for air defence systems. Why not apply the same know how into designing a module that can fit in the F-14M's nose cone?


drmeson said:


> F-14 has a HUGE RCS. I do not have the source but assumption is that it wont be below 10 m2 because other fighters of similar role, generation and size, shape like F-15, Tornado, F-4, SU-27 have 10-25 m2 RCS. No matter what you do, you can not bring this plane to 4++ generation. That domain belongs to smaller and lighter EF-2000, F/A-18EF, Rafale who all have <1 m2 RCS and are literal electronic laboratories flying in the sky to blind, and deceive the enemy instead of winning speed and thrust contest that aircrafts from 70s were built for.


Even the F-15E and F-15EX have a massive RCS, dear brother. Yet the usaf is going ahead with upgrades and rolling out new block fighters on the F-15 design with improved engines, avionics, sensors and armament. Don't be so quick to disregard the F-14 in an interceptor role - all we need is to provide it an AESA radar, an advanced avionics/EW suite and in time an engine with 125kN afterburner thrust and it will provide an aerial shield that nothing else can for three decades, at least.

In the one circle turn, F-14 designs are at a disadvantage compared to the F/A-18 but then again, as I said before, more powerful engines in 125kN thrust category and 3D thrust vectoring will bring it up to speed.


drmeson said:


> Just to purchase a token force of 24 x SU-35S we will need 4-5 Billion USD. These planes will :
> 
> - 10-15 m2 RCS
> - IRBIS-E PESA cant track small fighters above 100 km. Imagine the plane taking on EF-2000, Rafale armed with metoer LR-BVR
> - TKS-2 or later TDL wont allow integration with Iranian TDL as they are limited to Flanker-Flanker
> - R-77-1 BVR missile it will carry has a range of ~105-110 KM so an F-14AM will have to fly along with it to save it from BVR attack using its own LR-BVR and AWG-9.
> - 85 million USD/unit.
> 
> For same amount of money Iran can procure
> 
> - 40 additional MIG-29M/35
> - 23 IRIAF MIG-29 MLUed and upgraded
> - 200 RD-33MK Turbofans for Kowsar-II
> - 400 R-77-1 BVR
> - 400 R-74 WVR
> 
> This will mean we will have a force of ~75 MIG-29M/MIG-35 + 160 Kowsar-I/II all armed with modern BVR, WVR + 40 F-14A/AM . An IRIAF to take on the regional enemies.


Used in conjunction with our IADS, invading bandits will be preoccupied with SAM batteries AND agile Flankers on their tails. All that's required is interoperability and networking with the Air Defence Force IN CASE the PESA fails to get a lock in time and they can keep warning of a lock or a missile launch.

It can take evasive action accordingly and either use it's own BVR option or get in close to engage with Fox 1 and Fox 2 missiles. Dogfighting is where Su-27 and onwards really shine and I don't think even an F-22 will have it easy at such close ranges.

Russia will never sell you RD-33MK with technology transfers. In time, that will become more of a burden than anything else. A license to modify Mig-29s with indigenous packages would be nifty, though.


drmeson said:


> IRIAF itself should be handed over to MOD+IRGC strategists so that
> 
> - they can pressure leadership to release some $$ to save this force from being a victim of missile, navy, UCAV, space program
> - bargain with Russia for MIG/SU procurement, IRGC has better relations with Russians (SU-22 upgradation, SU-25 purchase, T-90SM purchase, interoperability in Syria)


I totally agree. I'm like Mohammad Reza "Pahlavi" in one aspect - he was obsessed with a strong air force and so am I.

Thankfully, apart from this and a few other personal quirks, that's where our similarities end.

Among the 20% disagreements I have with the Revolution, one is lack of investment in the IRIAF.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

drmeson said:


> What if KSA goes on a purchasing spree from China in next 5 years and ends up with DF-17 HGVs and LACMs to target Iranian IADS ? Chinese provided them with DF-17 and are building nuclear reactors in their country already.


This is one of the reasons I hate ch*na and ch*nese.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Buk M3 was operational in 2013, 3rd Khordad was operational in 2014. You do the math.


again introduction is different by armed force getting it 





SA-17 GRIZZLY / Buk-M2







www.globalsecurity.org




russia planned to hand it to army late 2015 early 2016 not in 2013



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Kheyli khari!


maybe yourself , after all heathen consider everyone a heathen . or you also consider that being religion not part of our literature 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> No, I dont buy your exaggerated claims that finished products are worse than prototype. But even if that were the case that just proves domestic versions will always be better than export which is the standard globally. Again you bring up China and the west. That's like saying "why are there poor people when rich people exist?". That's the level of your brain power, va gandesh dare dar miyad.


again you dreamed something i never said


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes, money is limited if we were to follow your braindead 100% domestic route in a meaningful timeframe where Iran can defend itself and money is also limited to buy solely foreign. However Iran has the money for a few squadrons of modern Russian jets, which wont be enough to defeat US but is a big improvement. The reason why this is isnt happening is because of the ToT issue and whether or not Russia can produce enough for export considering it is in the middle of a proxy war with the entire west. In the meantime, money will go towards missiles and drones, enough to block out the sun!


that a few squadran is 4-5 milliard dollar , what is the yearly money allowed to air force.
just do the math yourself


Daylamite Warrior said:


> You equated a few shoddy arms deals and UNSC sanctions from 10 years ago, which dont exist any more btw, with Israel killing Iranian scientists and threatening Iran with nukes. You hate Iran that much that the blood of your countrymen dont matter, you only worry about why Iran is getting stronger via Russia, an enemy of the west ironically, and not through Israel and the west?!


you seems to forget the history and your brain is incapable of understanding i never supported israel but said i don't except Israel be friend with us but Russia which you claim is our strategic partner i except act as a partner . by the way show me evidence that Russia changed its ways if you can?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why do you worship the west who want Iran to be weak, subservient, morally bankrupt and God-less? You're just another cheek of the same arse. Now you're worshipping Israel.


you again went mental and start hallucinating and say i did things that i never did



Sardar330 said:


> He is son-in-law of zibakalam the crazy


well , seems your guys strategy is to just blabbering nonsense , when you can't answer questions.


----------



## drmeson

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> They already manufacture AESA radars for air defence systems. Why not apply the same know how into designing a module that can fit in the F-14M's nose cone?



because the company or sub-group that produces the ground GaN AESA Search/Track antenna is not contracted by the fighter producing company to produce the airborne radar using that tech. They instead awarded the contract to another company or subgroup which has another expertise. This is where lobbyism and lack of central command comes in. 

This is what Tom Cooper and BT have been saying. Countries who go through revolutions and wars always have this problem where central command structure is ruined and tiny cult like groups are formed who start pushing their own projects for funding. Read about USSR vs US weapons production in cold war era. In IRIAF we currently have the following projects and group:

*OWJ/IRSSJO*
F-14AM upgradation
F-14A overhaul
OWJ Turbojets

*Babaei Missile Industries *
Fakour-90, Maghsoud LRBVR
Fattar 
Azarakhsh

*IRIAF Depot level upgradation*
Mirage F1
F-7N 
F-5E/F

*HESA+IEI *
Kowsar-I
Saegheh-I/II
Yasin
F-4E/D upgradation 

*IAI/SAHA group*
Tolue Turbofans
Jashesh-700 Turbofans 

*Multiple other public/private companies *
PGMs
Spare parts

................ So even if you retire a platform somewhere some group will lose their job so they wont let it retire through lobbyism, instead will present some weird idea to keep it going like F-7N Project Erfanian turning it to JL-9. Or if you award money to one group for making a local fighter, rest of the groups will be up the azz of the leadership to stop that from happening because they are deprived of the $ while the competitor is winning it (Words of T Cooper). I wish the next SL of Iran is a tough-*** military commander who could ruin someone for parallel projects and $ wastage (words of BT). 

IRGC is much more successful because call them crude or radicals but they have a central command structure and people are idealist who do not care about personal glory. They have dedicated officers who work towards one goal in conjunction with eachother. Which is why our missile power rose at an accelerated rate.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Even the F-15E and F-15EX have a massive RCS, dear brother.



Which is why USAF use F-35 and F-22 as front line interceptor aircrafts for last 10 years since the advent of modern radars and HIMADS. USN uses F/A-18EF.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Yet the usaf is going ahead with upgrades and rolling out new block fighters on the F-15 design with improved engines, avionics, sensors and armament.



Yes but as an attack aircraft that can muscle down the enemy ground forces and if need be can fire long range AIM-120C/D too. Its firepower is too big that somehow cancels it high RCS problem in modern day combat scene. Same case with F-14, who despite being a maintainance hell with large RCS can still muscle down an enemy invading group of 3-4 fighters just because of its long range search through AWG-9/APG-71 and AIM-54/Fakour-90. 



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Don't be so quick to disregard the F-14 in an interceptor role



I have not disregarded F-14. I was the one who started posting its upgradation package info here, even created a slide.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> - all we need is to provide it an AESA radar, an advanced avionics/EW suite and in time an engine with 125kN afterburner thrust and it will provide an aerial shield that nothing else can for three decades, at least.



Not exactly. F-14 will lose its advantage if PGCC gets meteor BVRAAM on its Rafale and EF-2000. The missile has more range than Fakour-90 and EF-2000 or Rafale can see a F-14A/AM much much earlier to track and fire at it then AWG-9 of F-14 can do in reverse to EF-2000, Rafale. The day they get F-35, its game over for F-14. We will rather need low RCS e-warfare jets to counter that threat.

World is moving towards tiny RCS stealth fighters with long range radars, BVR missiles and electronic warfare suites. F-35, JAS-39, EF-2000, Rafale, F-16V, F/A-18EF do not rely upon their speeds or engine thrusts, they rely upon their low RCS and radar, e-warfare while we are stuck in F-4 bomb truck mentality measuring engine thrusts. 



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> In the one circle turn, F-14 designs are at a disadvantage compared to the F/A-18 but then again, as I said before, more powerful engines in 125kN thrust category and 3D thrust vectoring will bring it up to speed.



At best we can "assume" that BT is right and a local TF30-P414 has been created. So that will be the biggest achievement in fighter size turbofan domain Iranian engineers have so far achieved. Iran does not have the TVC tech at that level. We do have demonstrated TVC in 

- Kickstages of SLVs
- Terminal stages of missiles 
- SAM (Bavar-373)





BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Used in conjunction with our IADS, invading bandits will be preoccupied with SAM batteries AND agile Flankers on their tails. All that's required is interoperability and networking with the Air Defence Force IN CASE the PESA fails to get a lock in time and they can keep warning of a lock or a missile launch.



MIG-29M/35 can do the job for 25-35 Million USD/Unit what SU-35S will do in 85 Million USD. We know MIG like the back of our hand, we dont know Flanker.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Russia will never sell you RD-33MK with technology transfers.



And you are assuming they will sell SU-35S?




BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I totally agree. I'm like Mohammad Reza "Pahlavi" in one aspect - he was obsessed with a strong air force and so am I.
> 
> Thankfully, apart from this and a few other personal quirks, that's where our similarities end.
> 
> Among the 20% disagreements I have with the Revolution, one is lack of investment in the IRIAF.



Shahi Iran had no missile force. IRI has probably the world's 3rd or 4th largest Missile arsenal. Israeli Intel recently concluded that Iranian missile capabilities have gone far ahead of DPRK and Pakistan now. I will post the link.

None the less IRIAF needs to survive otherwise IADS will be stressed out. Esp if Chinese sell their soul to KSA again and our enemies start procuring low RCS fighter armed with long range SOWs.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> This is one of the reasons I hate ch*na and ch*nese.



Why blame them ? why not blame the people who could not avail the Chinese market option ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> I've no desire to read zionist propaganda. I leave that to you if it inspires you so much.


show me proof from Hezbollah
when your situation become hard and knew you are wrong you say that


SalarHaqq said:


> And I was talking about when Hezbollah smashed Merkavas using their Kornets. Those multiple Merkavas weren't incapacitated by Hezbollah's other anti-tank weapon, the... RPG (yes, another Russian-designed weapon)!


in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed un-repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop
this is the one that destroyed by IED , you can guess how much explossive used





by the way that was 2006 , after that they reinforced their tanks in 2014 non of the atgm fired by Palestinian could penetrate the tanks

thats the official report , if you have any evidence contrary to that . i be glad to see it . that will be reassuring to me because in future our allies and troops must face those tanks again and i hope they be prepared for them
you knew after 2006 they added extra belly armor to those tanks




they added trophy to the tanks





that goes your wonder kornets


SalarHaqq said:


> Directly benefiting from lessons learnt by examining the Nebo.


lesson from something they didn't had access to and was designed for another scenario . as always you never stop belittling Iranian achievement and glorifying Russian ones


SalarHaqq said:


> Given its high degree of self-sufficiency, a country like Iran won't be placing orders for arms it sees no benefit in, with benefit being most often determined in terms of how useful these items are for the indigenization of technology. Proof's always in the pudding in this regard.


and iran didn't see any benefit from russia on this regard to put order there , we already could produce our radars


SalarHaqq said:


> Strategic-level partnership on a certain number of geopolitical dossiers.
> 
> And unlike what you're implying, Iran has not been wasting funds on imported armaments she has no requirement for.


yeah atgm and AK-103 according to you .what iran get and needed was in late 90s and early 2000 after that russia rarely gave us anything and what they gave us were not significant at all
all we builtwas due to hard work of our scientist and what we could get our hands on around the middle-east


SalarHaqq said:


> Could have had multiple concurring causes other than supposedly inherent flaws to the SAM system. Moreover Iran never published a technically detailed account on how the incident came about, so your speculative assertion tainted with anti-Russian bias is disingenuous.


again trying to hide the defects in Russian equipment
the cause was clear the sam re-positioned there , the operator forget to set new north south axis and the sam itself could not point to that as a result the operator taught the airplane come from the opposite direction . there are many report on that .


SalarHaqq said:


> And that's also why the S-300 continues to be fielded by Islamic Iran. Because it's a reliable and efficient item which will keep playing its own dedicated role within the Iranian IADS for years to come.


we field s-200 , we field s-125 , we field hawk , ..... we field F-7 and toothless F-1
the reason we field it is because we have it . its inferior to 15th khordad, 3th khordad and Bavar-373


SalarHaqq said:


> Qasem Soleimani is a Syrian general now, sure. Also the third source is reporting earlier sales to Iran.


no the shell were given to the forces in Syria not Iran and was not used in designing basir .


SalarHaqq said:


> Every Russian radar Iran spent money on. Iranian planners know what to invest in, they won't ask anyone on this forum for their opinion or permission.
> 
> As well as every Belarusian, read Russian front company-supplied one.


yeah sure . thats why only half the system recieved


SalarHaqq said:


> By that faulty logic, Iran could have simply gone for the alternatives Russia was offering, rather than pressing them to deliver the S-300PM variant. No, it's not natural to use something one doesn't need. Rationally thinking entities won't do such a thing. Iran could have sold them off to a third party if she just thought they're trash.


the system was not needed at the time and antey 2500 was not accepted because Iran have plans for bavar-373 also antey-2500 shine more in anti ballistic mode compared to pm series and Iran don't face as much threat in that regard compared to enemy aircraft . another case of Russian want to sabotage us, we buy something and they insist on delivering something we didn't need , 10 years late


SalarHaqq said:


> No I don't. But I'm also highlighting the way in which you rationalized their enmity by suggesting Iran is sharing part of the blame.


we sharing the enmity as much as they are our enemy we also are their enemy and will stop at nothing short of their destruction , are you claiming Iran will stop being Israel enemy if tomorrow Israel say we want to be Iran friends ? do you really have such low opinion on Iran foreign policy , are you consider us so naive and fickle


SalarHaqq said:


> Don't remember "justifying" any Russian wrongdoing against Iran. As said, you appear to be having a slight comprehension issue at this point.


but you say we most forget what they did and abandon domestic production in favor of buying from them


SalarHaqq said:


> This right here is the appropriate approach towards Russia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also a rapid look at your commenting history will illustrate that measured against the way you speak about an enemy (i.e. the zionist entity), your views about Russia are more akin to what pious people tend to think of Iblis himself (may the Almighty's curse be upon him).


and how i stated we must be toward Israel ? can you elaborate that and point to exact post i said that


SalarHaqq said:


> Only someone who doesn't properly understand what I wrote, could possibly alter its meaning in such a way. Or perhaps an intellectually dishonest one, but I prefer to be optimistic.


also Only someone who doesn't properly understand what I wrote about nature of Iran and Israel relation, could possibly alter its meaning in such a way. Or perhaps an intellectually dishonest one, but I prefer to be optimistic.


SalarHaqq said:


> Yeah, but one tidbit in that sentence was implicitly supposing zionist hostility is a reaction to Iranian policy. If you had half that level of clemency for a partner, Russia, it'd be more acceptable.


you just dreaming and can never find anywhere i support them .

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> 200 RD-33MK Turbofans for Kowsar-II


if you want to go that route and get a foreign engine another route is ws-13e as it has somehow better metric . but i still say the money must be spend on domestic turbofan engine



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> They already manufacture AESA radars for air defence systems. Why not apply the same know how into designing a module that can fit in the F-14M's nose cone?


miniaturization and awarding contracts

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> if you want to go that route and get a foreign engine another route is ws-13e as it has somehow better metric . but i still say the money must be spend on domestic turbofan engine



Yes. I mentioned RD-33MK based upon the Russian option. If we talk of China then a whole new plethora of options exist for the entire IRI military.

Whatever Iran procures should be CDK atleast or TOT.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> again introduction is different by armed force getting it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SA-17 GRIZZLY / Buk-M2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalsecurity.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> russia planned to hand it to army late 2015 early 2016 not in 2013
> 
> 
> maybe yourself , after all heathen consider everyone a heathen . or you also consider that being religion not part of our literature
> 
> again you dreamed something i never said
> 
> that a few squadran is 4-5 milliard dollar , what is the yearly money allowed to air force.
> just do the math yourself
> 
> you seems to forget the history and your brain is incapable of understanding i never supported israel but said i don't except Israel be friend with us but Russia which you claim is our strategic partner i except act as a partner . by the way show me evidence that Russia changed its ways if you can?
> 
> you again went mental and start hallucinating and say i did things that i never did
> 
> 
> well , seems your guys strategy is to just blabbering nonsense , when you can't answer questions.


Thats the Buk M2, not Buk M3. There are conflicting reports. Wiki says Buk M3 was 2013, and 3rd Khordad was announced in 2014 and in service from 2016. Another aricle:






Sevom Khordad Air Defense Missile System | Military-Today.com


Sevom Khordad, also known as 3rd Khordad, is the most advanced and powerful Iranian medium-range air defense missile system. It was officially displayed in 2016.



web.archive.org





This states that 3rd Khordad was displayed 2016.

Another article about Buk M3 gives dates of end of 2015: 









Buk-M3 Viking 9K317M medium-range air defense missile system data | Russia Russian missile system vehicle UK | Russia Russian army military equipment vehicles UK


Buk-M3 Viking 9K317M medium range surface-to-air defense missile system technical data fact sheet pictures video Russia




www.google.com





Therefore we can conclude that they either came at the same time or the Buk M3 was unveiled slighly before 3rd Khordad....therefore the claim that 3rd Khordad inspired Buk M3 is rejected. If anything ToT and secret cooperation is more probable considering the unison unveiling. 

Where is your evidence I'm a heathen?! Have you opened my heart? Are you God (astaghfurillah)? Only a heathen would call another person a heathen without evidence. Shoor e khodeto neshoon dadee. No in fact I said the opposite, that the literature you shewed was in fact religious lol....fml

Well if we assume that 24 billion is the budget of Iran defence, 5 billion could go to a few squadrons of Mig-35s. The math is very simple.

You're making out that Russia is more of a threat to Iran than Israel, which is absurd and you're lightening the death of Iranian soldiers and scientists as of lower importance than a delayed s300 deal and a few now-expired UNSC resolutions. That is disgusting.

I have answered you well enough but your cartoonish responses and circular reasoning is what is causing this thread to go to shit. My strategy is realistic, not a veiled come get me plea to enemies of Iran with your 100% indegenous plan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Where is your evidence I'm a heathen?! Have you opened my heart? Are you God (astaghfurillah)? Only a heathen would call another person a heathen without evidence. Shoor e khodeto neshoon dadee. No in fact I said the opposite, that the literature you shewed was in fact religious lol....fml


you even don't understand the meaning behind iranian literature , and translate them word to word ???????
for Gods sake how low have become persian language education in our schools.

somebody please tell this guy what is the meaning of what i said


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Well if we assume that 24 billion is the budget of Iran defence, 5 billion could go to a few squadrons of Mig-35s. The math is very simple.


what is the budget of air force . thats important so why your math is flawed


Daylamite Warrior said:


> You're making out that Russia is more of a threat to Iran than Israel, which is absurd and you're lightening the death of Iranian soldiers and scientists as of lower importance than a delayed s300 deal and a few now-expired UNSC resolutions. That is disgusting


again can't remember even implied that remotely.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> I have answered you well enough but your cartoonish responses and circular reasoning is what is causing this thread to go to shit. My strategy is realistic, not a veiled come get me plea to enemies of Iran with your 100% indegenous plan.


let show how your realism is flawed








بودجه دفاعی ایران در سال آینده چقدر است؟


بر اساس لایحه بودجه سال ۱۴۰۱ برای برنامه تقویت بنیه دفاعی و تحقیقات راهبردی دفاعی تا مبلغ چهار میلیارد و پانصد میلیون یورو از سوی سازمان برنامه و بودجه تخصیص خواهد یافت.




www.mehrnews.com




thats the budget to increase military power for army and irgc . not 24 milliard dollar of some guy who are sitting in stokholm.
by your air force from Russia with that money

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> 24 Billion is a tiny budget especially when they are not allowed buy on finance which what countries like Turkey do with their F-16. That 24 Billion has to prop up Navy, Airforce, Irgc and Army, to a level that can detter US and allies from attacking. Sacrifices must be taken and that is what Iran is doing. The detterance is working whether you like it or not. Without the IRGC there would be no Iran, so it's a good thing they take most of the money.





Daylamite Warrior said:


> Well if we assume that 24 billion is the budget of Iran defence, 5 billion could go to a few squadrons of Mig-35s. The math is very simple.


Brother, as far as I can tell, Iran can allot a $30-40 billion budget comfortably even on a sanctioned economy without cutting corners. Why doesn't it go for it and pump money into the IRIAF. The air force was the first service branch to defect during the Revolution and deserves FAR better than the hand it's been dealt.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> The akhoond have no say in the matter and those failures are on the head of IRIAF designers and policy makers. They're military guys, not akhoond. And you want us to give these incompetent people more money to burn? Get a grip!





drmeson said:


> because the company or sub-group that produces the ground GaN AESA Search/Track antenna is not contracted by the fighter producing company to produce the airborne radar using that tech. They instead awarded the contract to another company or subgroup which has another expertise. This is where lobbyism and lack of central command comes in.
> 
> This is what Tom Cooper and BT have been saying. Countries who go through revolutions and wars always have this problem where central command structure is ruined and tiny cult like groups are formed who start pushing their own projects for funding. Read about USSR vs US weapons production in cold war era. In IRIAF we currently have the following projects and group:
> 
> *OWJ/IRSSJO*
> F-14AM upgradation
> F-14A overhaul
> OWJ Turbojets
> 
> *Babaei Missile Industries *
> Fakour-90, Maghsoud LRBVR
> Fattar
> Azarakhsh
> 
> *IRIAF Depot level upgradation*
> Mirage F1
> F-7N
> F-5E/F
> 
> *HESA+IEI *
> Kowsar-I
> Saegheh-I/II
> Yasin
> F-4E/D upgradation
> 
> *IAI/SAHA group*
> Tolue Turbofans
> Jashesh-700 Turbofans
> 
> *Multiple other public/private companies *
> PGMs
> Spare parts
> 
> ................ So even if you retire a platform somewhere some group will lose their job so they wont let it retire through lobbyism, instead will present some weird idea to keep it going like F-7N Project Erfanian turning it to JL-9. Or if you award money to one group for making a local fighter, rest of the groups will be up the azz of the leadership to stop that from happening because they are deprived of the $ while the competitor is winning it (Words of T Cooper). I wish the next SL of Iran is a tough-*** military commander who could ruin someone for parallel projects and $ wastage (words of BT).


I have to say, the people running the IRIAF and the associated firms which cater to them piss me off a lot. They're one of the key reasons so much cash has gone down the shitter.


drmeson said:


> Why blame them ? why not blame the people who could not avail the Chinese market option ?


For being two-timing cunts who deal with us economically but arm our mortal enemies with weapons they intend to use against us.

I won't say much more or someone will bark about "abusing muh allies" but I will say this - the Imperial Japanese Army did nothing wrong during the Second Sino-Japanese War, especially the "Nanking Incident".

The Quran is right to forbid alliances with judeo-christians, let alone infidels. We ought to treat ch*na no differently; it's a vendor and we are customers trying to get the best deal for a dirt cheap price.


----------



## lydian fall

Hack-Hook said:


> show me proof from Hezbollah
> when your situation become hard and knew you are wrong you say that
> 
> in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
> One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop
> this is the one that destroyed by IED , you can guess how much explossive used
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by the way that was 2006 , after that they reinforced their tanks in 2014 non of the atgm fired by Palestinian could penetrate the tanks
> 
> thats the official report , if you have any evidence contrary to that . i be glad to see it . that will be reassuring to me because in future our allies and troops must face those tanks again and i hope they be prepared for them
> you knew after 2006 they added extra belly armor to those tanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they added trophy to the tanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that goes your wonder kornets
> 
> lesson from something they didn't had access to and was designed for another scenario . as always you never stop belittling Iranian achievement and glorifying Russian ones
> 
> and iran didn't see any benefit from russia on this regard to put order there , we already could produce our radars
> 
> yeah atgm and AK-103 according to you .what iran get and needed was in late 90s and early 2000 after that russia rarely gave us anything and what they gave us were not significant at all
> all we builtwas due to hard work of our scientist and what we could get our hands on around the middle-east
> 
> again trying to hide the defects in Russian equipment
> the cause was clear the sam re-positioned there , the operator forget to set new north south axis and the sam itself could not point to that as a result the operator taught the airplane come from the opposite direction . there are many report on that .
> 
> we field s-200 , we field s-125 , we field hawk , ..... we field F-7 and toothless F-1
> the reason we field it is because we have it . its inferior to 15th khordad, 3th khordad and Bavar-373
> 
> no the shell were given to the forces in Syria not Iran and was not used in designing basir .
> 
> yeah sure . thats why only half the system recieved
> 
> the system was not needed at the time and antey 2500 was not accepted because Iran have plans for bavar-373 also antey-2500 shine more in anti ballistic mode compared to pm series and Iran don't face as much threat in that regard compared to enemy aircraft . another case of Russian want to sabotage us, we buy something and they insist on delivering something we didn't need , 10 years late
> 
> we sharing the enmity as much as they are our enemy we also are their enemy and will stop at nothing short of their destruction , are you claiming Iran will stop being Israel enemy if tomorrow Israel say we want to be Iran friends ? do you really have such low opinion on Iran foreign policy , are you consider us so naive and fickle
> 
> but you say we most forget what they did and abandon domestic production in favor of buying from them
> 
> and how i stated we must be toward Israel ? can you elaborate that and point to exact post i said that
> 
> also Only someone who doesn't properly understand what I wrote about nature of Iran and Israel relation, could possibly alter its meaning in such a way. Or perhaps an intellectually dishonest one, but I prefer to be optimistic.
> 
> you just dreaming and can never find anywhere i support them .


I am sure your butt is still burning from 2006

@SalarHaqq @BlessedKingOfLonging You're talking to a hasbara troll @Hack-Hook


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Sardar330 said:


> I am sure your butt is still burning from 2006
> 
> @SalarHaqq @BlessedKingOfLonging You're talking to a hasbara troll @Hack-Hook


I was briefly on the IDF and IMF forums in the past. He's a veteran user who was always critical and somewhat cynical.

Is he a traitor, though? A part of me thinks yes and the other part says he's frustrated in life and this results in him projecting his misery everywhere, including making damning statements that you'd normally hear from enemies (may they be cuckolded and their penises shrink in size).


----------



## lydian fall

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I was briefly on the IDF and IMF forums in the past. He's a veteran user who was always critical and somewhat cynical.
> 
> Is he a traitor, though? A part of me thinks yes and the other part says he's frustrated in life and this results in him projecting his misery everywhere, including making damning statements that you'd normally hear from enemies (may they be cuckolded and their penises shrink).


He is a professional hasbara troll just like 500

90% of their posts are extremely anti Iranian/resistance axis and pro Israheli

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Brother, as far as I can tell, Iran can allot a $30-40 billion budget comfortably even on a sanctioned economy without cutting corners. Why doesn't it go for it and pump money into the IRIAF. The air force was the first service branch to defect during the Revolution and deserves FAR better than the hand it's been dealt.
> 
> 
> I have to say, the people running the IRGC and the associated firms which cater to them piss me off a lot. They're one of the key reasons so much cash has gone down the shitter.
> 
> For being two-timing cunts who deal with us economically but arm our mortal enemies with weapons they intend to use against us.
> 
> I won't say much more or someone will bark about "abusing muh allies" but I will say this - the Imperial Japanese Army did nothing wrong during the Second Sino-Japanese War, especially the "Nanking Incident".
> 
> The Quran is right to forbid alliances with judeo-christians, let alone infidels. We ought to treat ch*na no differently; it's a vendor and we are customers trying to get the best deal for a dirt cheap price.


It's not just about pumping money in, there has to be some worthwhile ToT and willingness from the other side to sell. Cant just keep blaming akhoond everytime. Also without the IRGC Iran would be the 51st state of US. Show some respect!


----------



## WudangMaster

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @drmeson @Daylamite Warrior @Hack-Hook @WudangMaster @SalarHaqq @TheImmortal
> 
> It seems we're at an impasse here.
> 
> Logically, there seem to be only two routes:
> (A) Depending on if Babak Taghavee is right and an indigenous TF-30 414-A and F-14 airframe have been developed, we can field a domestic 4th generation fighter integrating all the avionics and sensors embedded on the HESA Kowsar.
> 
> Of course, new additions like GaN AESA radar, EW suite and IRST are needed to bolster it and bring it up to 4++ generation standard. And over time, higher engine quality with greater overall dry and afterburner thrust will be needed to bring out its best.
> 
> 
> (B) We settle for a stop-gap measure of inducting small numbers of Su-30SM2 and Su-35SE but with technology transfer that at least enables us to manufacture our own spare parts rather than being dependent on the russian UAC and for our mechanics and engineers to be able to perform full overhaul and maintenance independently. Otherwise, it's a huge risk and a waste of precious foreign currency.
> 
> Regardless of which route is taken, the Mig-29 has to be passed down to the IRGC-AF to allow them to expand their aerial reach and arsenal and modify the platform according to their needs.


Really depends on if the Tf30 is made inside the country and if the reliability has reached acceptable levels. Also if the awg9 has been reproduced or an equivalent radar (or even better), then domestic production is the route to go with Bavar 373 type money and attention, it will happen in record time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Hack-Hook said:


> 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).


Unrepairable*


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Daylamite Warrior said:


> It's not just about pumping money in, there has to be some worthwhile ToT and willingness from the other side to sell. Cant just keep blaming akhoond everytime. Also without the IRGC Iran would be the 51st state of US. Show some respect!


Ah, my apologies. I meant to say the people running the *IRIAF* not *IRGC.*

I'll make the edit now.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sardar330 said:


> He is a professional hasbara troll just like 500
> 
> 90% of their posts are extremely anti Iranian/resistance axis and pro Israheli





Sardar330 said:


> I am sure your butt is still burning from 2006
> 
> @SalarHaqq @BlessedKingOfLonging You're talking to a hasbara troll @Hack-Hook





BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> I was briefly on the IDF and IMF forums in the past. He's a veteran user who was always critical and somewhat cynical.
> 
> Is he a traitor, though? A part of me thinks yes and the other part says he's frustrated in life and this results in him projecting his misery everywhere, including making damning statements that you'd normally hear from enemies (may they be cuckolded and their penises shrink in size).


just prove me wrong. i put forward the data , not resort to insulting anybody who has different view than you.
just provide the data that show me wrong


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the fact hezbollah don\t have the infrastructure to use them



No proof for that. Furthermore Hezbollah will not take delivery of an asset without the capability to utilize it, or without realistic plans to acquire said capability.



Hack-Hook said:


> not important for them as it actually in effect and they are using Caspian sea resources according to it and Iran do nothing about it . the effect is the same as if Iran ratify it



Iran was attributed a larger share of the Caspian territorial waters than the percentage of her actual coastline.



Hack-Hook said:


> show me proof from Hezbollah
> when your situation become hard and knew you are wrong you say that



The opposite is the case: your lack of persuasive arguments is compelling you to reference zionist propaganda. In addition to this habit of inverting the burden of proof.



Hack-Hook said:


> in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
> One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop
> this is the one that destroyed by IED , you can guess how much explossive used
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by the way that was 2006 , after that they reinforced their tanks in 2014 non of the atgm fired by Palestinian could penetrate the tanks



It's not necessary to kill the crews or disintegrate a tank into tiny pieces: the tank has to be incapacitated in such a way that it can't be repaired on short notice, and will thus be counted as a de facto loss during the battle or the entire war.

The mishmash of data you copy/pasted is leaving out how many of those 18 tanks they claim were hit by ATGM's, were pulled out of service for the duration of the battle, which is what counts most.

Then again, you're treating zionist-published figures as unquestionable fact.



Hack-Hook said:


> thats the official report , if you have any evidence contrary to that . i be glad to see it . that will be reassuring to me because in future our allies and troops must face those tanks again and i hope they be prepared for them
> you knew after 2006 they added extra belly armor to those tanks



No, the question is why you're taking a zionist "official report" at face value when it's common knowledge that every information released by Tel Aviv is subject to military censorship, and that this regime has a long history of covering up probable losses - including in recent cases of retaliatory assassinations attributed to Iran, which you yourself have treated as factual in other discussions at this forum, despite the lack of real hard evidence (and I actually agree with it, just that the same logic ought to be applied to the case at hand) .

So I don't need to produce proof to the contrary, because the information you offered is by definition anything but trustworthy.

Let us nonetheless put to rest the attempted downplaying of Hezbollah's military achievement, thanks to the citation of more credible numbers straight from the horse's mouth:

*Moreover, the Hizbollah scored several clear victories over Israel’s military. According to an IDF Report Card published in the Jerusalem Post, Israel had deployed some 400 Merkava MK-4 tanks – its safest and deadliest tank – in Lebanon: 40 of these were hit by Hizbollah’s anti-tank weapons, 20 of them were destroyed, and 30 tank crewmen were killed.[10] According to a report published by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Hizbollah’s success with antitank weapons during the July War reflects many years spent training on these weapons as well as a good plan to use these weapons once the battle began.”*









A Paradigm Shift: How Hizbollah Won the War - Palestine Chronicle


By M. Shahid Alam On January 31, 2008, when the Winograd Commission submitted its final report on the Second Lebanese War of July 2006, this was a first in Israeli history: a report on why [...]




www.palestinechronicle.com





When zionists publish contradicting figures of their losses, we should pick whichever ones present the zionist military in a better light, is that what you're saying? This is while even the numbers right above could be minimizing the true extent of damage sustained by Merkava tanks as a consequence of Kornet ATGM impacts.



Hack-Hook said:


> they added trophy to the tanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that goes your wonder kornets



You're treating zionist-made systems as "wonder weapons" while dismissing the efficiency of Russian-made ones. Don't be surprised then if readers consider this as a reflection of political preferences.



Hack-Hook said:


> lesson from something they didn't had access to and was designed for another scenario . as always you never stop belittling Iranian achievement and glorifying Russian ones








https://natoassociation.ca/irans-developing-military-capabilities-part-iv-air-defences-section-ii/

Iran is likely to have had access to the Nebo radar and other components used in the S-300 since the late 1990's or early 2000's, courtesy of a Croatian private arms dealer and more importantly, of what was surely a Russian front company in Belarus. Either way, Belarus will not export any high tier weaponry against Moscow's will.

To state that Iran's access to token samples of foreign systems gave a boost to Iran's domestic R&D and manufacturing is* not belittling at all*. Even China's defence industry was initially relying a lot on reverse-engineering, and it continually benefited over the years from the study of Russian and other weaponry Beijing was purchasing.

As a matter of fact, very few countries in the world are capable of this, so your accusation against me has no ground to stand on.

Not to mention how rich it is to be accused of minimizing Iran's domestic achievements by a staunch supporter of the reformist faction, the same faction which is openly professing its ideological disdain and opposition to the concept of self-sufficiency.



Hack-Hook said:


> and iran didn't see any benefit from russia on this regard to put order there , we already could produce our radars



Strawman. I was responding to your question about the date on which Russia supplied Iran with a radar, which Iran had indeed placed an order for. Now you're talking about stuff Iran did not order.



Hack-Hook said:


> yeah atgm and AK-103 according to you .what iran get and needed was in late 90s and early 2000 after that russia rarely gave us anything and what they gave us were not significant at all



That would be a lie (at this point it can hardly be a careless mistake) for I cited more than ATGM's and AK-103 rifles.

You were implying some of the radar systems Iran purchased from Russia were useless. This would mean Iranian decision makers are idiotic and need your advice on what to order from Russia and what not. Which, needless to say, would be a ludicrous thing to assume.

If Russian supplies to Iran diminished after the early 2000's, that's because Iran's local defence industry had evolved to the point that it could engage in serial production of more hi-tech systems. Not because of some sudden u-turn by Russia.



Hack-Hook said:


> all we builtwas due to hard work of our scientist and what we could get our hands on around the middle-east



...and from reverse-engineering and studying weaponry obtained from Russia and China as well.



Hack-Hook said:


> again trying to hide the defects in Russian equipment
> the cause was clear the sam re-positioned there , the operator forget to set new north south axis and the sam itself could not point to that as a result the operator taught the airplane come from the opposite direction . there are many report on that .



There's no technically detailed, professional report from Iran. And key word here is the *operator forgot to *perform a key setting. Congrats, you just blatantly proved your own assertion wrong: this is not called defective device, but human error.

The Tor series are a powerful and valuable air defence system by all serious accounts. Any attempt to suggest they will randomly misfire due to built-in flaws in their hardware is clownish, sorry to say. No serious military analyst would make such a claim, as it represents gutter press level propaganda.



Hack-Hook said:


> we field s-200 , we field s-125 , we field hawk , ..... we field F-7 and toothless F-1
> the reason we field it is because we have it . its inferior to 15th khordad, 3th khordad and Bavar-373



Iran is not operating the Pechora. The S-200 fulfills a limited niche role within the IADS, it helps deter against enemy AWACS and tanker aircraft by limiting their action radius. That's why it's not been retired yet. Not simply because "we have it".

As for the F-7 and F-1 fighter jets, they're a different pair of shoes due to the fact that the IRIAF's access to up to date airframes is much more limited than air defence forces' access to new (domestically built) SAM systems.

Simplistic blanket statements such as that the S-300PM2 with assorted S-400 components "is inferior to 15th Khordad, 3rd Khordand and Bavar-373" or vice versa make no sense and are unscientific. A correct and more factual formulation would be that the Bavar-373 offers superior performance and advantages in multiple aspects, while the custom S-300PM2 Iran received is on par if not superior in a few others. The other two SAM systems mentionned aren't in the same class.



Hack-Hook said:


> no the shell were given to the forces in Syria not Iran and was not used in designing basir .



I never claimed they were used to design Basir. You were denying Iranian procurement of Krasnopol rounds altogether by pointing to the Basir, in a false syllogism-type of strawman argument. But one proposition does not exclude the other. Sources I provided are explicit about Russian supply of Krasnopol rounds to Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> yeah sure . thats why only half the system recieved



Key word received. Moreover, you were bragging about Belarus in an umpteenth attempt to deny past Russian arms sales, now you're switching to something else without acknowledging the fallacy of your initial contention, namely that most of what Belarus exported to Iran was likely the work of Russian front companies in Minsk.

But this has become a hallmark of a vain anti-Russian crusade, which in fact is more of a side-aspect to a wider, western-absolving agenda seeking to promote a revision of the Islamic Republic's principled policy of anti-imperialist Resistance. It's exactly the same modus operandi which liberal politicians in Iran are resorting to.



Hack-Hook said:


> the system was not needed at the time and antey 2500 was not accepted because Iran have plans for bavar-373 also antey-2500 shine more in anti ballistic mode compared to pm series and Iran don't face as much threat in that regard compared to enemy aircraft .



This represents faulty logic: first you claim S-300's are completely pointless to Iran's IADS but Iran is fielding them anyway, now you counter that Iran rejected the Antey-2500 because she has no use for it. Make up your mind, either Iran has no issues fielding "useless" systems, in which case she would've gone with the S-300VM instead of pressing Russia for numerous months to deliver S-300PM's instead; or, when Iran deploys a system, it's that Iranian planners believe the system in question offers some kind of benefit. Can't have it both ways as per elementary rules of rational inference.



Hack-Hook said:


> another case of Russian want to sabotage us, we buy something and they insist on delivering something we didn't need , 10 years late



Highly condemnable behaviour, but the notion that Russia right from the outset had an intricate secret plan to take Iran's order and then withhold delivery, is nothing but flimsy conspiracy theory. Moscow adjusted to US and zionist pressure after the deal was signed. They shouldn't have and they must be strongly criticized for it, yes. However initially there was no intention to trap Iran. Also, with the lasting deterioration of ties between Russia and the west, episodes like these are bound to become much rarer.



Hack-Hook said:


> we sharing the enmity as much as they are our enemy we also are their enemy and will stop at nothing short of their destruction ,



That's not the point. It's about the fact that the highlighted statement of yours was suggestive of the notion that Iran is the one which initiated the enmity.



Hack-Hook said:


> are you claiming Iran will stop being Israel enemy if tomorrow Israel say we want to be Iran friends ? do you really have such low opinion on Iran foreign policy , are you consider us so naive and fickle



I was analyzing _your_ comment. You're the one who cited Iranian policy as _explanatory of_ zionist hostility.



Hack-Hook said:


> but you say we most forget what they did and abandon domestic production in favor of buying from them



What? Never made such a statement about domestic production.

I find the arguments put forth in favor of a consequent production run for Kosar fighter jets to be convincing. I'd like to see them produced in numbers indeed.

The fact that I _also_ subscribe to PeeD's view that three or four squadrons of modern Flankers purchased from Russia would be within the boundaries of Iran's doctrine and would take some pressure off the IADS in case of a war, does not imply that I'm advocating the abandonment of any of Iran's domestic production lines.



Hack-Hook said:


> and how i stated we must be toward Israel ? can you elaborate that and point to exact post i said that
> 
> also Only someone who doesn't properly understand what I wrote about nature of Iran and Israel relation, could possibly alter its meaning in such a way. Or perhaps an intellectually dishonest one, but I prefer to be optimistic.
> 
> you just dreaming and can never find anywhere i support them .



You're taking aim at Russia more often and more energically than what you're seen doing against the zionist regime. This is what I'm having an issue with since it's hardly in line with Iranian policy and interests now, is it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> The opposite is the case: your lack of persuasive arguments is compelling you to reference zionist propaganda. In addition to this habit of inverting the burden of proof.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not necessary to kill the crews or disintegrate a tank into tiny pieces: the tank has to be incapacitated in such a way that it can't be repaired on short notice, and will this be counted as a de facto loss during the battle or the entire war.
> 
> The mishmash of data you copy/pasted is leaving out how many of the 18 tanks hit by MBT's were pullet out of battle.
> 
> Then again, you're treating zionist-published figures as unquestionable fact. No comment!
> 
> 
> 
> No, the question is why you're taking a zionist "official report" at face value when it's common knowledge that every information released by Tel Aviv is subject to military censorship, and that this regime has a long history of covering up probable losses - including in recent cases of retaliatory assassinations attributed to Iran, which you yourself have described as factual in other discussions at this forum, despite the lack of real hard evidence.
> 
> So I don't need to produce proof to the contrary, because the information you offered is by definition anything but trustworthy.
> 
> Let us nonetheless put to rest this attempted downplaying of Hezbollah's military achievements, thanks to the citation of more credible numbers from the horse's mouth:
> 
> *Moreover, the Hizbollah scored several clear victories over Israel’s military. According to an IDF Report Card published in the Jerusalem Post, Israel had deployed some 400 Merkava MK-4 tanks – its safest and deadliest tank – in Lebanon: 40 of these were hit by Hizbollah’s anti-tank weapons, 20 of them were destroyed, and 30 tank crewmen were killed.[10] According to a report published by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Hizbollah’s success with antitank weapons during the July War reflects many years spent training on these weapons as well as a good plan to use these weapons once the battle began.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Paradigm Shift: How Hizbollah Won the War - Palestine Chronicle
> 
> 
> By M. Shahid Alam On January 31, 2008, when the Winograd Commission submitted its final report on the Second Lebanese War of July 2006, this was a first in Israeli history: a report on why [...]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.palestinechronicle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When zionists publish different contradicting figures of their losses, we should pick those that present the zionist military in a better light, is that what you're saying? This is while even the numbers right above could be minimizing the true amount of Merkava tanks desroyed or seriously damaged by Kornet ATGM's.
> 
> 
> 
> You're treating zionist-made systems as "wonder weapons" while dismissing the efficiency of Russian-made ones. Then don't be surprised if readers consider this as a reflection of political preferences.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 872253
> 
> 
> https://natoassociation.ca/irans-developing-military-capabilities-part-iv-air-defences-section-ii/
> 
> Iran is likely to have had access to the Nebo radar and other components used in the S-300 since the late 1990's or early 2000's, courtesy of a Croatian private arms dealer and more importantly, of what was surely a Russian front company in Belarus. Either way, Belarus will not export any high tier weaponry against Moscow's will.
> 
> To state that Iran's access to token samples of foreign systems gave a boost to Iran's domestic R&D and manufacturing is* not belittling at all*. Even China's defence industry was initially relying a lot on reverse-engineering, and it continually benefited over the years from the study of Russian and other weaponry Beijing was purchasing.
> 
> As a matter of fact, very few countries in the world are capable of this, so your accusation against me has no ground to stand on.
> 
> Not to mention how rich it is to be accused of minimizing Iran's domestic achievements by a staunch supporter of the reformist faction, the same reformist faction which is openly professing its ideological disdain and opposition for the concept of self-sufficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> Anothe typical strawman. I was responding to your question about the date on which Russia supplied Iran with a radar which Iran had indeed placed an order for. Now you're talking about stuff Iran did not order.
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a lie (at this point it can hardly be a careless mistake) for I cited more than ATGM's and AK-103 rifles.
> 
> You were implying some of the radar systems Iran purchased from Russia were useless. This would mean Iranian decision makers are idiotic and need your advice on what to order from Russia and what not. Which, needless to say, would be a ludicrous thing to assume.
> 
> If Russian supplies to Iran diminished after the early 2000's, that's because Iran's local defence industry had evolved to the point that it could engage in serial production of more hi-tech systems. Not because of some sudden u-turn by Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and from reverse-engineering and studying weaponry obtained from Russia and China as well.
> 
> 
> 
> There's no technically detailed, professional report from Iran. And key word here is the *operator forgot to *perform a key setting. Congrats, you just blatantly proved your own assertion wrong: this is not called defective device, but human error.
> 
> The Tor series are a valuable air defence system by all serious accounts. Any attempt to suggest it will randomly misfire due to built-in flaws in the hardware is clownish, to put it mildly. No serious military analyst would make such a claim, as it represents gutter press level propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> Iran is not fielding the Pechora. The S-200 fulfills a limited niche role within the IADS, it helps deter against enemy AWACS and tanker aircraft by limiting their freedom of movement. That's why it's not been retired yet. Not simply because "we have it".
> 
> As for the F-7 and F-1 fighter jets, they're a different pair of shoes altogether, due to the fact that the IRIAF's access to up to date airframes is much more limited than air defence forces' access to new (domestically built) SAM systems.
> 
> Simplistic blanket statements such as that the S-300PM2 with assorted S-400 components "is inferior to 15th Khordad, 3rd Khordand and Bavar-373" or vice versa make no sense and are unscientific. A correct and more factual formulation would be that the Bavar-373 offers superior performance and advantages in multiple aspects, while the custom S-300PM2 Iran received is on par if not superior in a few others. The other two SAM systems mentionned aren't in the same class.
> 
> 
> 
> I never claimed they were used to design Basir. You were denying Iranian procurement of Krasnopol rounds altogether by pointing to the Basir, in a false syllogism-type of strawman argument. But one proposition does not exclude the other. Sources I provided are explicit about Russian supply of Krasnopol rounds to Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> Key word received. Moreover, you were bragging about Belarus in an umpteenth attempt to deny past Russian arms sales, now you're switching to something else without acknowledging the fallacy of your initial contention, namely that most of what Belarus exported to Iran was likely the work of Russian front companies in Minsk.
> 
> But this has become a hallmark of your vain anti-Russian crusade, which in fact is more of a side-aspect to an overarching, western-absolving agenda seeking to promote a revision of the Islamic Republic's principled policy of anti-imperialist Resistance. It's exactly the same modus operandi which liberal politicians in Iran are resorting to.
> 
> 
> 
> This represents faulty logic: first you claim S-300's are completely pointless to Iran's IADS but Iran is fielding them anyway, now you counter that Iran rejected the Antey-2500 because she has no use for it. Make up your mind, either Iran has no issues fielding "useless" systems, in which case she would've gone with the S-300VM instead of pressing Russia for numerous months to deliver S-300PM's instead; or, when Iran deploys a system, it's that Iranian planners believe the system in question offers some kind of benefit. Can't have it both ways as per elementary rules of rational inference.
> 
> 
> 
> Condemnable behaviour, but the notion that Russia right from the outset had an intricate secret plan to take the Iranian order and then refuse to deliver, is nothing but a baseless conspiracy theory. Moscow adjusted to US and zionist pressure after the deal was signed. They shouldn't have and they must be strongly criticized for it, however initially there was no intention to trap Iran. Also, with the lasting deterioration of ties between Russia and the west, episodes like these are bound to become much rarer.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not the point. It's about the fact that the highlighted statement of yours was suggestive of the notion that Iran is the one which initiated the enmity.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about? I was analyzing _your_ comment. You're the one who cited Iranian policy as _explanatory of_ zionist hostility.
> 
> 
> 
> What? Never made such a statement about domestic production.
> 
> I find the arguments put forth in favor of a consequent production run for Kosar fighter jets to be convincing. I'd like to see them produced in numbers.
> 
> The fact that I _also_ subscribe to PeeD's view that three or four squadrons of modern Flankers purchased from Russia would be within the boundaries of Iran's doctrine and would take some pressure off the IADS in case of a war, does not imply that I'm advocating the abandonment of any of Iran's domestic production lines.
> 
> 
> 
> You're taking aim at Russia far more often and more energically than what you're seen doing against the zionist regime. This is problematic since it's not in line with Iranian policy and interests.


Leave him be. Thread is being derailed because of this blathering and I'd rather we discuss something more concrete that endlessly go back and forth with him over something even he knows is false.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Leave him be. Thread is being derailed because of this blathering and I'd rather we discuss something more concrete that endlessly go back and forth with him over something even he knows is false.


Yeah ive given up on him. He will literally argue that the sky is purple and water is dry. He will then take you on a circular reasoning causing you to repeat yourself which is why I had to stop...he got his arse kicked a few posts back as far as Im concerned. He's just a flapping headless chicken at this point...so best to walk away sniggering to ourselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No proof for that. Furthermore Hezbollah will not take delivery of an asset without the capability to utilize it, or without realistic plans to acquire said capability.


then show me proof for that , show me hezbollah long range radars


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran was attributed a larger share of the Caspian territorial waters than the percentage of her actual coastline.


i said it all








Caspian Sea: How Iran Gives Up Territory and Resources to Increase its Influence


The treaty on the Caspian Sea is an example of how Iran gives up its territorial integrity and natural resources in exchange for the increase of influence.




theglobepost.com




this show how turkamanistan get the share that must not have got






SalarHaqq said:


> The opposite is the case: your lack of persuasive arguments is compelling you to reference zionist propaganda. In addition to this habit of inverting the burden of proof.


i post may data , why you wont post yours?
you made a claim and expect others prove you wrong instead of proving your claim is right


SalarHaqq said:


> It's not necessary to kill the crews or disintegrate a tank into tiny pieces: the tank has to be incapacitated in such a way that it can't be repaired on short notice, and will thus be counted as a de facto loss during the battle or the entire war.
> 
> The mishmash of data you copy/pasted is leaving out how many of those 18 tanks they claim were hit by ATGM's, were pulled out of service for the duration of the battle, which is what counts most.


if you actually bothered to read my post you see 370 were fielded 52 were hit and 21 pulled out sent back to be repaired from them 18 were repaired and 5 were scrapped


SalarHaqq said:


> Then again, you're treating zionist-published figures as unquestionable fact.


when you fail to post not zionist data , those are all we have to work it , now a question how many atgm Hezbollah fired to damage those 21 tank


SalarHaqq said:


> No, the question is why you're taking a zionist "official report" at face value when it's common knowledge that every information released by Tel Aviv is subject to military censorship, and that this regime has a long history of covering up probable losses - including in recent cases of retaliatory assassinations attributed to Iran, which you yourself have treated as factual in other discussions at this forum, despite the lack of real hard evidence (and I actually agree with it, just that the same logic ought to be applied to the case at hand) .


then tell us non Zionist truth report , better show us how many tank Hezbollah showed at the war museum later . the question is why you refrain from posting the actual true data based on hard evidence , if you don't accept israel data , then post the data you accept, if they are not top secret and part of national security


SalarHaqq said:


> Moreover, the Hizbollah scored several clear victories over Israel’s military. According to an IDF Report Card published in the Jerusalem Post, Israel had deployed some 400 Merkava MK-4 tanks – its safest and deadliest tank – in Lebanon: 40 of these were hit by Hizbollah’s anti-tank weapons, 20 of them were destroyed, and 30 tank crewmen were killed.


no problem my data say 370 m yours say 400 , well i accept yours . but your data clearly show its failure when they say all 400 tank were MK-4
today 16 year after the war Israel have 550 Merkava-4 that 220 of them are in storage in short they don't have more than 330 active Merkava Mk-4 in-service .and certainly 16 years ago the number were a lot less then ,well if you claim in last 16 year they built zero tank then thats something else.



SalarHaqq said:


> When zionists publish contradicting figures of their losses, we should pick whichever ones present the zionist military in a better light, is that what you're saying? This is while even the numbers right above could be minimizing the true extent of damage sustained by Merkava tanks as a consequence of Kornet ATGM impacts.


Zionist source ? didn't knew that "The Palestinian Chronicle " was a zionist media and Ramzy Baroud, Jennifer Loewenstein are zionists . good you told me that


SalarHaqq said:


> You're treating zionist-made systems as "wonder weapons" while dismissing the efficiency of Russian-made ones. Don't be surprised then if readers consider this as a reflection of political preferences.


no i say after these improvement , the chance of the tank survival against those system increased its not important where is the origin of the systems. now if you claim all Israeli system are junk then look at Iran dome , that now Palestinian had to fire 50-60missile for one pass it



SalarHaqq said:


> https://natoassociation.ca/irans-developing-military-capabilities-part-iv-air-defences-section-ii/
> 
> Iran is likely to have had access to the Nebo radar and other components used in the S-300 since the late 1990's or early 2000's, courtesy of a Croatian private arms dealer and more importantly, of what was surely a Russian front company in Belarus. Either way, Belarus will not export any high tier weaponry against Moscow's will.


no iran didn't have access to nebo radar as no s-300 fielded at the time because they were shipped with parts missing and iran never ever showed it



SalarHaqq said:


> Strawman. I was responding to your question about the date on which Russia supplied Iran with a radar, which Iran had indeed placed an order for. Now you're talking about stuff Iran did not order.


and i say iran didn't get any radar as you failed to show a nebu radar (just said because the iranian radar look like nebu which actually it is not look like it just like your claim about Basir and krasnopol)
for god sake nebu radar have different role than Iranian one


SalarHaqq said:


> That would be a lie (at this point it can hardly be a careless mistake) for I cited more than ATGM's and AK-103 rifles.
> 
> You were implying some of the radar systems Iran purchased from Russia were useless. This would mean Iranian decision makers are idiotic and need your advice on what to order from Russia and what not. Which, needless to say, would be a ludicrous thing to assume.


I implied those radar you claim Iran purchased from Russia actually are made in Iran and not the system you claim Iran bought from Russia , see a little difference from what I said and what you claim I said


SalarHaqq said:


> If Russian supplies to Iran diminished after the early 2000's, that's because Iran's local defence industry had evolved to the point that it could engage in serial production of more hi-tech systems. Not because of some sudden u-turn by Russia.


yes like S-300 order or the mig-29 or the upgrade we wanted for mig-29.........


SalarHaqq said:


> ...and from reverse-engineering and studying weaponry obtained from Russia and China as well.


sure the weapon Russia.didn't provide or we made a deal with china for joint production and the tot of a system and they just gave us the end product , no tot


SalarHaqq said:


> Simplistic blanket statements such as that the S-300PM2 with assorted S-400 components "is inferior to 15th Khordad, 3rd Khordand and Bavar-373" or vice versa make no sense and are unscientific. A correct and more factual formulation would be that the Bavar-373 offers superior performance and advantages in multiple aspects, while the custom S-300PM2 Iran received is on par if not superior in a few others. The other two SAM systems mentionned aren't in the same class.


sure , show me AESA radar on S-300 we received .



SalarHaqq said:


> There's no technically detailed, professional report from Iran. And key word here is the *operator forgot to *perform a key setting. Congrats, you just blatantly proved your own assertion wrong: this is not called defective device, but human error.
> 
> The Tor series are a powerful and valuable air defence system by all serious accounts. Any attempt to suggest they will randomly misfire due to built-in flaws in their hardware is clownish, sorry to say. No serious military analyst would make such a claim, as it represents gutter press level propaganda.


and i said the system could not decide were is north were is south , hawk battery we recieved before revolution didn't had such problem, and they were not supposed to be mobile while tor was supposed to be mobile 



SalarHaqq said:


> I never claimed they were used to design Basir. You were denying Iranian procurement of Krasnopol rounds altogether by pointing to the Basir, in a false syllogism-type of strawman argument. But one proposition does not exclude the other. Sources I provided are explicit about Russian supply of Krasnopol rounds to Iran.


again grasping and straws while drowning , they were for Syrian ndf and militia there not Iran


SalarHaqq said:


> Key word received. Moreover, you were bragging about Belarus in an umpteenth attempt to deny past Russian arms sales, now you're switching to something else without acknowledging the fallacy of your initial contention, namely that most of what Belarus exported to Iran was likely the work of Russian front companies in Minsk.


half system means it won't work , the radar and command center were missing only some trucks carrying missile , if that's your definition of received then ok


SalarHaqq said:


> This represents faulty logic: first you claim S-300's are completely pointless to Iran's IADS but Iran is fielding them anyway, now you counter


yes because we have them and not using them is simply show lack of mental health , we needed them then , no we needed them 10 year sooner


SalarHaqq said:


> that Iran rejected the Antey-2500 because she has no use for it.


what's strange we didn't need antey 2500 and we refused them as a replacement because we didn't order them . we wanted s-300 because it was our deal and at the time we recieved it we could built better system and we built it , we just used tose s-300 because we already paid for them and it was illogical not to use them . wonder what part id hard for you to understand ?


SalarHaqq said:


> Moscow adjusted to US and zionist pressure after the deal was signed. They shouldn't have and they must be strongly criticized for it, yes. However initially there was no intention to trap Iran. Also, with the lasting deterioration of ties between Russia and the west, episodes like these are bound to become much rarer.


that's what happened and just like USA that must first prove its sincerity if we are to obey JCPOA again , Russia also must prove its sincerity.


SalarHaqq said:


> That's not the point. It's about the fact that the highlighted statement of yours was suggestive of the notion that Iran is the one which initiated the enmity.


again something that i didn't said , all i said was that i understand their action as we are enemy but we are not supposed to be Russia enemy so you bringing them in a discussion about Russia is comparing orange and apple.


SalarHaqq said:


> What? Never made such a statement about domestic production.
> 
> I find the arguments put forth in favor of a consequent production run for Kosar fighter jets to be convincing. I'd like to see them produced in numbers indeed.


our limited budget means that if we buy from 4-5 squadron of flanker from them . all our budget to increase military power was 4milliard euro last year for all branches of army , IRGC and basij ,you think how much will be share of air-force ?


SalarHaqq said:


> You're taking aim at Russia more often and more energically than what you're seen doing against the zionist regime. This is what I'm having an issue with since it's hardly in line with Iranian policy and interests now, is it.


you support Israel regime and i also fight that as energetically , the problem is here there is blind support for anything Russians .
there are some group I hate and Russia is not part of them 
1- Alqaeda and its ofshoots like ISIS and Al-nusra or Boko-Haram and Al-Shabab as i consider them Khavarij
2-Hamas as i consider them traitor and backstabbers 
3-Zionism regime as i consider them Racist and a classic example of Apartheid 
the rest I criticize but don't hate so its funny if somebody claim I support the Israel actions


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> He will literally argue that the sky is purple







are you denying the beauty of purple sky, you guys even don't look at the beauties of nature anymore


Daylamite Warrior said:


> water is dry.


as you are so religion and see all the maters in religion light and Quranic verses how you forgot the story of Queen of Sheba and prophet Solomon Pbuh
also don't forget This

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> then show me proof for that , show me hezbollah long range radars



Here's an elementary rule of discussion you are yet to gain mastery of: the burden of proof rests with he who makes an allegation. I provided a compelling piece of circumstantial and rational corroboration, namely that Hezbollah will not induct a missile it cannot fire.



Hack-Hook said:


> i said it all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caspian Sea: How Iran Gives Up Territory and Resources to Increase its Influence
> 
> 
> The treaty on the Caspian Sea is an example of how Iran gives up its territorial integrity and natural resources in exchange for the increase of influence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theglobepost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this show how turkamanistan get the share that must not have got
> View attachment 872417



1) The article shared is beyond ridiculous. It recycles the classic bit of disinformation spewed by anti-IR oppositionists, especially shahis, according to which Iran owned a "50%" share of the sea during Soviet times. This is a cheap attempt to suggest the Islamic Republic gave up Iranian territory. It's enough to look at the map to realize that if Iran's share amounted to "50%", then Azarbaijani off-shore oil would have had to be exploited by Iran and not by the USSR. Also, shortly before his demise the shah's own Foreign Minister, Ardeshir Zahedi, confirmed in an interview available on YouTube what a hollow myth this is. To paraphrase Zahedi's words, "_aslan intor chizi nabud!_"

2) The infographic is debatable. As highlighted elsewhere, the legal status of the Caspian Sea is one of the most complex questions of territorial partitioning in the world, because there's no clear cut response to be found in provisions of international law. So there is no definitive notion of what "share we must have gotten", it's eminently up to debate because it's a legal grey zone we're dealing with.



Hack-Hook said:


> i post may data , why you wont post yours?



Are you sure I didn't?

But that's beside the main point. Because fact remains the data you offered is zionist-issued and I amply explained why it's hardly worth a dime.



Hack-Hook said:


> you made a claim and expect others prove you wrong instead of proving your claim is right



You started off making a bold claim in this regard.



Hack-Hook said:


> if you actually bothered to read my post you see 370 were fielded 52 were hit and 21 pulled out sent back to be repaired from them 18 were repaired and 5 were scrapped



18 + 5 = 21 according to your rules?

I read your post carefully enough, but it appears you yourself have a hard time following what it is you wrote.

1) You never uttered anything about 18 repaired tanks.

2) You clearly stated 18 Merkava MkIV's were hit by ATGM's of which one was destroyed. But you did not specify how many of the 17 remaining ones were retired from the front lines.



Hack-Hook said:


> when you fail to post not zionist data , those are all we have to work it ,



Even if untrustworthy data is the only data available it doesn't cease being untrustworthy and therefore one can't draw far fetched conclusions from it, contrary to what you've been doing.



Hack-Hook said:


> now a question how many atgm Hezbollah fired to damage those 21 tank



Seeing how you're not privy to that information, you aren't in a position to tergiversate on it.



Hack-Hook said:


> then tell us non Zionist truth report , better show us how many tank Hezbollah showed at the war museum later .



Because every tank hit and damaged by Hezbollah was necessarily retrieved by the latter?



Hack-Hook said:


> the question is why you refrain from posting the actual true data based on hard evidence , if you don't accept israel data , then post the data you accept, if they are not top secret and part of national security



In order to put to rest your assertion about the Kornet ATGM, it's enough for me to point to the fact that the numbers you posted are taken from an eminently dubious source.



Hack-Hook said:


> no problem my data say 370 m yours say 400 , well i accept yours . but your data clearly show its failure when they say all 400 tank were MK-4
> today 16 year after the war Israel have 550 Merkava-4 that 220 of them are in storage in short they don't have more than 330 active Merkava Mk-4 in-service .and certainly 16 years ago the number were a lot less then ,well if you claim in last 16 year they built zero tank then thats something else.



Again, the figures you posted are irrelevant because they originate from a biased institution subject to military censorship.

The Mk4 specification in the paper I shared could've been a misquote from the author, which is highly unlikely to be the case of the numbers it cites.



Hack-Hook said:


> Zionist source ? didn't knew that "The Palestinian Chronicle " was a zionist media and Ramzy Baroud, Jennifer Loewenstein are zionists . good you told me that



Had you not stopped at the names of the website and its editors, you'd perhaps have noticed that the paper is referencing its primary source in footnote [10].

Which happens to read as follows:

[10] Yaakov Katz, “IDF report card,” Jerusalem Post (August 24, 2006).

Now I wasn't aware that the "I"DF and Jerusalem Post are "non-zionist" entities. Thanks a bunch for revealing this to me! 



Hack-Hook said:


> no i say after these improvement , the chance of the tank survival against those system increased its not important where is the origin of the systems. now if you claim all Israeli system are junk then look at Iran dome , that now Palestinian had to fire 50-60missile for one pass it



It's abundantly clear that there's no sense of proportion and realism in this glorification of zionist-designed weapons as compared to the tireless disparaging of Russian ones.



Hack-Hook said:


> no iran didn't have access to nebo radar as no s-300 fielded at the time because they were shipped with parts missing and iran never ever showed it



Iran displayed a Nebo radar in a 2010 military parade, as specified in the article I shared.

Here's another one, from 2010:






Reassessing Iran's Air Defences


Iran, S-300, IADS, air defense, missile, radar



www.ausairpower.net







Hack-Hook said:


> and i say iran didn't get any radar as you failed to show a nebu radar (just said because the iranian radar look like nebu which actually it is not look like it just like your claim about Basir and krasnopol)



I showed a source that reminds us how Iran put on display a Nebo radar in 2010.

I never insinuated Basir is copied from Krasnopol. What I underscored, is that Iran obtained Krasnopol rounds from Russia. There's a difference between these two propositions.



Hack-Hook said:


> for god sake nebu radar have different role than Iranian one



1) So it's established now that Iran received advanced Russian radar systems prior to producing her own.

2) Studying advanced radar systems contributes to one's understanding of radar technology in general, and therefore to radar development of one's own. The Nebo and other such systems obtained from Russia gave Iran a boost in her domestic research and development of radar systems.



Hack-Hook said:


> I implied those radar you claim Iran purchased from Russia actually are made in Iran and not the system you claim Iran bought from Russia , see a little difference from what I said and what you claim I said



There was no confusion of that kind on my part.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes like S-300 order or the mig-29 or the upgrade we wanted for mig-29.........



No evidence exists for Iran requesting upgrades to its Mig-29 fleet in the late 2000's or in the 2010's and Russia turning it down.

Nor does the S-300 case represent a u-turn in Russian behaviour. As early as the 1990's already, Russia had been susceptible to US pressure, as the cancellation of arms deals upon request from the Clinton administration shows.

Another fact is that we're likely to witness fewer such incidents with the lasting deterioration of ties between Russia and the west due to the Ukrainian crisis.



Hack-Hook said:


> sure the weapon Russia.didn't provide or we made a deal with china for joint production and the tot of a system and they just gave us the end product , no tot



I was talking about the weapons systems obtained from Russia and China.



Hack-Hook said:


> sure , show me AESA radar on S-300 we received .



Try grasping nuance as well as simple terms such as aspect_s_ (plural).



Hack-Hook said:


> and i said the system could not decide were is north were is south ,



Didn't you explicitly state the operator forgot to carry out the relevant setting? That's not indicative of sub-par or deficient hardware but of human error.



Hack-Hook said:


> hawk battery we recieved before revolution didn't had such problem, and they were not supposed to be mobile while tor was supposed to be mobile



Irrelevant.



Hack-Hook said:


> again grasping and straws while drowning , they were for Syrian ndf and militia there not Iran



The third source I provided is explicit about Russian supply of Krasnopol rounds to Iran - not to Syria, not to the NDF, but outside the context of the Syrian war.



Hack-Hook said:


> half system means it won't work , the radar and command center were missing only some trucks carrying missile , if that's your definition of received then ok



Nobody here has a precise idea as to whether components were missing or not let alone which components, because it's classified information.

Secondly, what Iran procured was helpful to Iranian scientists who inspected the material in detail and learnt something new from it.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes because we have them and not using them is simply show lack of mental health , we needed them then , no we needed them 10 year sooner



Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the opposite.



Hack-Hook said:


> what's strange we didn't need antey 2500 and we refused them as a replacement because we didn't order them . we wanted s-300 because it was our deal and at the time we recieved it we could built better system and we built it , we just used tose s-300 because we already paid for them and it was illogical not to use them . wonder what part id hard for you to understand ?



There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is seeing a role for it.



Hack-Hook said:


> that's what happened and just like USA that must first prove its sincerity if we are to obey JCPOA again , Russia also must prove its sincerity.



Iran has signed multiple contracts with Russia since the S-300 delivery and will continue along that path.








Hack-Hook said:


> again something that i didn't said , all i said was that i understand their action as we are enemy but we are not supposed to be Russia enemy so you bringing them in a discussion about Russia is comparing orange and apple.



One's respective stance vis à vis these two governments is a valid yardstick as to how conforming one's view is with Iran's interests.



Hack-Hook said:


> our limited budget means that if we buy from 4-5 squadron of flanker from them .



3-4 (twelver squadrons).



Hack-Hook said:


> all our budget to increase military power was 4milliard euro last year for all branches of army , IRGC and basij ,you think how much will be share of air-force ?



These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.



Hack-Hook said:


> and i also fight that as energetically , the problem is here there is blind support for anything Russians .



If anything, there's too much Russia-bashing going on considering the current status of Iran-Russia relations.



Hack-Hook said:


> there are some group I hate and Russia is not part of them
> 1- Alqaeda and its ofshoots like ISIS and Al-nusra or Boko-Haram and Al-Shabab as i consider them Khavarij
> 2-Hamas as i consider them traitor and backstabbers
> 3-Zionism regime as i consider them Racist and a classic example of Apartheid
> the rest I criticize but don't hate so its funny if somebody claim I support the Israel actions



There's a slight priority issue here. A supposed "traitor" and "backstabber" whose influence doesn't surpass a ghettoized impoverished strip of land the size of a city, is infinitely more harmless than a nuclear-armed apartheid regime whose associated lobbies have the greatest impact possible on the policies of the world's imperial "superpower".

Same goes for takfiri terrorists, who wouldn't have been able to cause problems if it wasn't for the fact that they've been empowered and propped up by the same zio-American empire - getting the hierarchy of one's enemies wrong is almost as hazardous as being oblivious to their identity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

SalarHaqq said:


> Here's an elementary rule of discussion you are yet to gain mastery of: the burden of proof rests with he who makes an allegation. I provided a compelling piece of circumstantial and rational corroboration, namely that Hezbollah will not induct a missile it cannot fire.


Israeli HAROP anti radiation drones and HARM missiles will hunt them down. Same thing happened in 2020 Karabach war. S-300 radars and TOR-M2 couldn't stand a chance. 

In a better scenario they would just be destroyed with prior intelligence and guided missiles.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> are you denying the beauty of purple sky, you guys even don't look at the beauties of nature anymore
> 
> as you are so religion and see all the maters in religion light and Quranic verses how you forgot the story of Queen of Sheba and prophet Solomon Pbuh
> also don't forget This


The sky is still blue, using camera filters doesnt change that.

When quoting Quran, at least have the decency to give the reference instead of being so disrespectful. The reference is Surah Al Naml Ayat 44 where the As-Sarh was a piece of glass with water underneath it, Sheba thought it was water but was fooled by the glass upon it. So she became a believer by the amazing miracle she witnessed. At no point does the Quran state that "water is dry" nor can you prove that water is dry from a scientific angle either. May Allah guide you.

However, seeing as you are the forum clown, can you also "prove" to me that oxygen is not breathable, fish are a type of dragon and hot is actually cold? Won't ever take anything you say seriously again, so this is purely for mine and my kinsmen's entertainment.


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> The sky is still blue, using camera filters doesnt change that.


It's actually possible for the sky to appear purple

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> It's actually possible for the sky to appear purple


Nobody was talking to you. And no the sky is never purple.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Nobody was talking to you. And no the sky is never purple.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> View attachment 872480


Those are shades of blue. Sorry to offend your god google.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Those are shades of blue. Sorry to offend your god google.


It's almost as if blue and purple are two wavelengths that are very close to each other

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> It's almost as if blue and purple are two wavelengths that are very close to each other
> View attachment 872482


Its almost as though you cant even read what you post lol. Your PATHETIC google search clearly mentions rain clouds as being the cause of colour change, not the clear sky. So while clouds can appear in varying colours, the sky itself is still blue. Please read what you respond to and what you post unless you want me to take you to the cleaners. Stay in your lane.

-edit-

Also guys notice how just as our newly outed zionist Hack Hook was getting a beatdown here, the resident zionist comes along and pokes his nose. Something stinks here....


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Its almost as though you cant even read what you post lol. Your PATHETIC google search clearly mentions rain clouds as being the cause of colour change, not the clear sky. So while clouds can appear in varying colours, the sky itself is still blue. Please read what you respond to and what you post unless you want me to take you to the cleaners. Stay in your lane.


That's some stupid nitpicking but okay lol.

If you want to be nitpicking, the actual color of the sky is black, it's only blue because the light of other stars is diffusing through the atmosphere. That's why once you're above a certain altitude, it becomes black

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> That's some stupid nitpicking but okay lol.
> 
> If you want to be nitpicking, the actual color of the sky is black, it's only blue because the light of other stars is diffusing through the atmosphere. That's why once you're above a certain altitude, it becomes black
> View attachment 872483


I know you probably do, but we dont live in space. On earth, the sky is blue. Not nitpicking, just being accurate. Cope.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> The sky is still blue, using camera filters doesnt change that.


which camera filter that's pure light , look at the center when there is no cloud 
show you don't actually look at the beauties of the nature, just caught up in the mundane daily life 

and about purple sky actually there are some natural and man made phenomena rgar can turn sky into purple
1- Pollution: one possibility is when there is a lot of pollution in the air , this can can cause sky to take a purplish hue
2-Increase in solar radiation, the second possible explanation is that there have beeen an increase is solar radiation reacging earth from space, which could cause the sky to turn purple 
3-more aerosols floating: the third possible cause is tgat there are more aerosols than usual floating around in our atmosphere making it appear as though we see a purplish color 
4-Volcanic Activity: it also possible there have been an increase in volcanic activity as the can eject ash particle into the sky and those can make sky look purplish 
5- another explanation is that the purple sky is an optical illusion caused by the way our eyes process color this happens when there is lots of light pollution in air from things like streetlights and car headlights ; these lights can cause our eye to adjust to see more blue and violet colors making the sky look purple
6-Atmospheric Clouds: natural phenomenon seen in many part of the world , which sky seems purple when there is certain weather condition called stratocomulus clouds occur these clouds are not from vapor , they are built from water droplet and ice crystals which will reflect sunlight that reflection cause the sky to appear purple .
7- sunset or sunrise: probably the most common cause is when the sun is setting or rising it cast a pink and orange glow on the clouds that glow reflect by the water droplet in clouds this reflection cause the sky to appear purple .
about Quranic verse , it was because you liked religious document that i brought that otherwise look at the link i put there and you failed to look at before
Dry Water​that's for today class , i think you learned enough for one day , about clown part as i proved to you there are purple sky and dry water , its not my problem you brought poor example you did not taught well about them before hand 
and an advise , sought out and look at the natures beauty , it will teach you a lot about bigger power who is around us


----------



## Beny Karachun

Hack-Hook said:


> dry water


Isn't that just ice lol


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> hot is actually cold?


well actually cold is lack of hot not hot is cold , i'm not like you to grasp at straws
about fish is type of dragon , is what you mean by dragon , is it a mythical beast or you mean the fossils people saw of prehistoric creatures (Dinosaurs) and they taught they are dragons . if its the first one unlike you guys i like good literature but i don't fantasize and dream about it its the second one , then you get it wrong again actually dragons are offspring of the fishes

and about oxygen , pure oxygen is actually harmful for your body in long term








Is It Harmful to Breathe 100 Percent Oxygen?


The air we breathe contains 21 percent oxygen. Would we be better off breathing 100 percent oxygen?




science.howstuffworks.com





i begin to think i must charge you for the things I'm teaching you



Beny Karachun said:


> Isn't that just ice lol


sort of , but if you take ice in your hand it still feel wet , that is a lot drier



Daylamite Warrior said:


> I know you probably do, but we dont live in space. On earth, the sky is blue. Not nitpicking, just being accurate. Cope.


the sky can feel blue even from earth and its in detail explained in my previous post , its all on how our eyes detect colors and how light reflection and refraction can play on it


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> nor can you prove that water is dry from a scientific angle either. May Allah guide you.


Dry simply means solid state, it means the molecules are densely organized. Water becomes dry below 0 degrees Celsius in our atomspheric pressure. 

It'll never feel dry because our body heat melts it.



Hack-Hook said:


> sort of , but if you take ice in your hand it still feel wet , that is a lot drier


It's feels wet because of your body heat melting the outer layer as soon as you touch it


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Nobody was talking to you. And no the sky is never purple.


you guys and never looking at the sky , remind me of the movie "Girl with a Pearl Earring" when Vermeer ask Griet , what color is the sky and first she fail first time and he then tell her look again and this time she tell the correct color which is mixture of a lot more colors and then he say to here now you understand.
my advice look again


----------



## sanel1412

Iran Got AESA Nebo SVU Years before S300, there are video clips from drils where it is used... Also someone posted Pictures of Kasta radar, that radar is old version of Kasta, no one Use it any more I think... now Kasta 2E is used... Iran has Kasta 2E and also introduced own version...Iran has also Vostok E and Gama D and recently domestic Vostok E is introduced...
Nebo SVU





Kasta 2E

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Here's an elementary rule of discussion you are yet to gain mastery of: the burden of proof rests with he who makes an allegation. I provided a compelling piece of circumstantial and rational corroboration, namely that Hezbollah will not induct a missile it cannot fire.


you say they have the capacity of long range detection , then according the rule of discussion , prove it
don't try to weasel your way out of it , the burden is on your shoulder


SalarHaqq said:


> Are you sure I didn't?
> 
> But that's beside the main point. Because fact remains the data you offered is zionist-issued and I amply explained why it's hardly worth a dime.


the point is that is the only data available


SalarHaqq said:


> 18 + 5 = 21 according to your rules?
> 
> I read your post carefully enough, but it appears you yourself have a hard time following what it is you wrote.
> 
> 1) You never uttered anything about 18 repaired tanks.
> 
> 2) You clearly stated 18 Merkava MkIV's were hit by ATGM's of which one was destroyed. But you did not specify how many of the 17 remaining ones were retired from the front lines.


you see , the correct one is what i post in first post
"in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop"


51 tank hit , 18 of them mk-4 two of those mk-4 destroyed all tha hit to the front of the mk-4 never penetrated the armor an made any meaningful damage.
those 52 hit 21 were sent back for repair . now its up to you if you want to say 18 mk-4 sent back and 3 of other tanks the reality is something else


SalarHaqq said:


> Even if untrustworthy data is the only data available it doesn't cease being untrustworthy and therefore one can't draw far fetched conclusions from it, contrary to what you've been doing.


show us alternate data that don't claim all the tanks deployed in 2006 were MK-4, considering MK-4 production started in 2004


SalarHaqq said:


> Try grasping nuance as well as simple terms such as aspect_s_ (plural).


you can't okay show me any radar on the system we received



SalarHaqq said:


> Seeing how you're not privy to that information, you aren't in a position to tergiversate on it.


literally hundreds of atgm there are videos of then on ******** that show hezbollah fighter firing 5-6 missile toward tanks from different angle



SalarHaqq said:


> Because every tank hit and damaged by Hezbollah was necessarily retrieved by the latter?


so you can't show anything , and expect people believe your claims on faith ?


SalarHaqq said:


> In order to put to rest your assertion about the Kornet ATGM, it's enough for me to point to the fact that the numbers you posted are taken from an eminently dubious source.


again post your different numbers, preferably not from a source that claim Israel had 400 merkava-mk4 at the time


SalarHaqq said:


> Again, the figures you posted are irrelevant because they originate from a biased institution subject to military censorship.
> 
> The Mk4 specification in the paper I shared could've been a misquote from the author, which is highly unlikely to be the case of the numbers it cites.


so you claim israel had the ability to produce more than 200 mk-4 per year at the first year of production


SalarHaqq said:


> Had you not stopped at the names of the website and its editors, you'd perhaps have noticed that the paper is referencing its primary source in footnote [10].
> 
> Which happens to read as follows:
> 
> [10] Yaakov Katz, “IDF report card,” Jerusalem Post (August 24, 2006).
> 
> Now I wasn't aware that the "I"DF and Jerusalem Post are "non-zionist" entities. Thanks a bunch for revealing this to me!


If you only bothered to read jeursalem post you had understood that the Palestinian chronicle was not faithful to what it attributed to Jeursalem Post. its Jeursalem post article that tank to internet i could access easily








IDF report card


An in-depth look at the pluses and minuses of Israel's military operations.




www.jpost.com






> Thousands of anti-tank missiles were indeed fired during the 35 days of fighting, but while soldiers told stories of deadly missile attacks on IDF tanks, Commander of the Armored Corps Brig.-Gen. Halutsi Rudoy told The Jerusalem Post that out of the almost 400 tanks that operated in Lebanon, only a few dozen were hit by anti-tank missiles and only 20 were actually penetrated. In total, 40 tanks were damaged and 30 tank crewmen were killed.



honestly thousands of atgm fired only 20 managed to penetrate tanks and only 30 killed . that is the source you used first , i didn't use it


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran displayed a Nebo radar in a 2010 military parade, as specified in the article I shared.
> 
> Here's another one, from 2010:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reassessing Iran's Air Defences
> 
> 
> Iran, S-300, IADS, air defense, missile, radar
> 
> 
> 
> www.ausairpower.net


oh that not working example that never deployed
a question if you say Bavar-373 is based on that VHF radar why it use S-band and X-band radars, by the way the source of that radar was not russia and it was not working model



SalarHaqq said:


> I showed a source that reminds us how Iran put on display a Nebo radar in 2010.
> 
> I never insinuated Basir is copied from Krasnopol. What I underscored, is that Iran obtained Krasnopol rounds from Russia. There's a difference between these two propositions.


not working nebo-svu , till today there is no nebu radar deployed in iran


SalarHaqq said:


> I never insinuated Basir is copied from Krasnopol. What I underscored, is that Iran obtained Krasnopol rounds from Russia. There's a difference between these two propositions.


Iran didn't Syrian forces advised by Iranian advisors received them


SalarHaqq said:


> The third source I provided is explicit about Russian supply of Krasnopol rounds to Iran - not to Syria, not to the NDF, but outside the context of the Syrian war.


except that they were used in Syria by Syrian


SalarHaqq said:


> Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the opposite.


no paying milliiards of dollar of needed money for a system but not using them show there is some problem there


SalarHaqq said:


> There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is seeing a role for it.


not no benefit to defence industry and research as at the time we could produce better but benefit to defence as we still use s-75 in form of hq-2 we recieved from china. so why not use the better system we paid for


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran has signed multiple contracts with Russia since the S-300 delivery and will continue along that path.


probably again secret contract that i'm not allowed to knew about them


SalarHaqq said:


> 3-4 (twelver squadrons).


okay instead of 4milliard 3 milliard , all the budget to increase iran force capability in all branches of army , irgc, and basij is 4 milliard how much of it assigned to air force , i could not find can you tell me


SalarHaqq said:


> These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.


the regular air force budget for maintaining current capability and paying wages and ... are separate , those 4 milliard euro is the part that you say most be mobilized independently and is for all of Iran armed force branches and belong to 1401 that it increase , before that it was even less


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Iran Got AESA Nebo SVU Years before S300, there are video clips from drils where it is used... Also someone posted Pictures of Kasta radar, that radar is old version of Kasta, no one Use it any more I think... now Kasta 2E is used... Iran has Kasta 2E and also introduced own version...Iran has also Vostok E and Gama D and recently domestic Vostok E is introduced...
> Nebo SVU
> View attachment 872544
> 
> 
> Kasta 2E
> 
> View attachment 872545


not years before , it was recieved with if i'm not wrong Croatian s-300 , the system actually didn't work and its what we used in our Bavar





this is the one we use in 15th khordad





and this is the one in 3rd of khordad







do they look similar to you ?


sanel1412 said:


> Vostok E


you mean Quds radar that is a improved version of *Belarus *radar



sanel1412 said:


> Gama D


come with s-300 after all iran radar development and production of domestic S-Band and X-band radars

i reserve comment on kasta-2e to find more evidence of its existence in Iran and when we got it, do you have any info on that


----------



## sanel1412

Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO.. I am more or less on different military forums from 2006 and follow Iran military even before, so I Know exactly when and where we discussed about all these radar. In fact Iran recently show domesticly overhuled Gamma D, it came Long before S300. Croatia Got only part of S300, and since I am from Bosnia, I can tell you that Croatia, as Bosnia is US puppet

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

sanel1412 said:


> Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO.. I am more or less on different military forums from 2006 and follow Iran military even before, so I Know exactly when and where we discussed about all these radar. In fact Iran recently show domesticly overhuled Gamma D, it came Long before S300. Croatia Got only part of S300, and since I am from Bosnia, I can tell you that Croatia, as Bosnia is US puppet


Always nice to see friendly Bosniaks. Much love 🇧🇦🤍💚🇮🇷

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Always nice to see friendly Bosniaks. Much love 💙💛 (sorry, no heart emoji in deep blue available)


Thx
Croatia Got only part of S300, and that was old version 35+ yrs ago, they parade only part of TELs and some canisters, and even those were towed by old Man trucks... That was 1994 or 1995,dont remeber. While Iran paraded and showed new Nebo SVU, now it May happen that aditional Gama was bought with S300 but Iran Got some even before, I mean they overhuled some few yrs ago domesticly. When it comes to Croatia S300 it is BS, local news wrote a lot about after that parade, and latter Israel and other delegatin visited Croatia to inspect what they had, It turns out they never Got whole operational system.

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## sanel1412

Here is what they showed, not even Tel, Just ca







nisters

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Dry simply means solid state, it means the molecules are densely organized. Water becomes dry below 0 degrees Celsius in our atomspheric pressure.
> 
> It'll never feel dry because our body heat melts it.
> 
> 
> It's feels wet because of your body heat melting the outer layer as soon as you touch it


First of all when you ask for water in a restaurant, you dont get a cup of ice. You get the liquid form....hence why we have a seperate word called ice. Had I said to Hack Hook prove to me "ice is dry" then you may have had a point. That said, a solid is solid and dry is dry. They are different words that mean different things. If you run your fingers on some ice your fingers will be wet!

Therefore by your own admission it cannot be dry! But thanks for derailing the thread!



Hack-Hook said:


> you guys and never looking at the sky , remind me of the movie "Girl with a Pearl Earring" when Vermeer ask Griet , what color is the sky and first she fail first time and he then tell her look again and this time she tell the correct color which is mixture of a lot more colors and then he say to here now you understand.
> my advice look again


Tokhm darvordee Israeliye omad nejatet dad? I look at sky all the time and it is NEVER purple....that means you're probably high most times and are hallucinating.



Hack-Hook said:


> well actually cold is lack of hot not hot is cold , i'm not like you to grasp at straws
> about fish is type of dragon , is what you mean by dragon , is it a mythical beast or you mean the fossils people saw of prehistoric creatures (Dinosaurs) and they taught they are dragons . if its the first one unlike you guys i like good literature but i don't fantasize and dream about it its the second one , then you get it wrong again actually dragons are offspring of the fishes
> 
> and about oxygen , pure oxygen is actually harmful for your body in long term
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is It Harmful to Breathe 100 Percent Oxygen?
> 
> 
> The air we breathe contains 21 percent oxygen. Would we be better off breathing 100 percent oxygen?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> science.howstuffworks.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i begin to think i must charge you for the things I'm teaching you
> 
> 
> sort of , but if you take ice in your hand it still feel wet , that is a lot drier
> 
> 
> the sky can feel blue even from earth and its in detail explained in my previous post , its all on how our eyes detect colors and how light reflection and refraction can play on it


Youre like a fish out of water now, good to see you finally gave up trying to prove the impossible. You made enough of a fool of yourself.

The only thing you have taught me is how backwards the opposition is and how they have deluded themselves with sophistry. To add to that you taught me all of this for free and will continue to do so lol. Oskol!

"Feel blue"? Definitely high on some stepped on drugs in payeen shahr. Yeah if youre colour blind and see blues as purples, sure, but I am not colour blind alhamdulillah.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> you say they have the capacity of long range detection , then according the rule of discussion , prove it
> don't try to weasel your way out of it , the burden is on your shoulder



False again. There are credible sources attesting to the induction of the missiles by Hezbollah. It stands to reason Hezbollah wouldn't take delivery of them if they weren't accompanied by the corresponding radar, or if there weren't realistic plans to add such a capability later on.

You then came along claiming the missiles are deprived of any such radars to this date. Burden of proof rests therefore on you, because your allegation defies logic: prove us they don't possess the radar. And now you're projecting, since it's you trying to dodge it here, not me.



Hack-Hook said:


> the point is that is the only data available



The point is the figures are profoundly unreliable. Much like your conclusion based on them.

And no, it isn't the only data available, as you actually found out after searching online.



Hack-Hook said:


> you see , the correct one is what i post in first post
> "in 2006 370 thank deployed from them 52 hit by atgm , RPG and IEDs . 21 of those 52 recieved enough damage to be pulled out of battle 5 deemed repairable (2 Merkavas MkII, 1 Merkava MkIII, 2 Merkavas MkIV).
> One of the destroyed MkII and one of the destroyed MkIV were hit by IEDs, the rest were lost due to ATGM fire. by the way during the war 18 Merkava MK4 was hit by ATGM and only one destroyed with no death to the troop inside , the other destroyed MK-4 was hit by an IED and in that case there was loss of troop"



It's the "correct" set of numbers based on what? By making unsubstantiated blanket statements like these, you're simply exposing your favorable bias towards zionist military equipment, while trying to argue that anything Russian made is either defective or useless, which quite frankly is a hilarious thing to believe. As said, this posture is typical of the gutter press in NATO countries which peddle their regimes' propaganda, it doesn't fit into a serious discussion.



Hack-Hook said:


> 51 tank hit , 18 of them mk-4 two of those mk-4 destroyed all tha hit to the front of the mk-4 never penetrated the armor an made any meaningful damage.
> those 52 hit 21 were sent back for repair . now its up to you if you want to say 18 mk-4 sent back and 3 of other tanks the reality is something else



The reality is you failed to produce anything of value when it comes to corroborating figures which zionist officials themselves had contradicted earlier on. We both know what it implies as the revised series of data you're illogically clinging to. This is no more no less than your political bias speaking.

Just as you will refuse to take at face value the zionist narrative in regards to the desperate denials of an Iranian hand behind the retaliatory assassination of an Isra"el"i veteran scientist, but yet will happily pass off as fact some gibberish about the 2006 war published by those same zionists for the sole reason that it allows you to take a shot at Russian-made equipment.

The double standard here is quite obvious.



Hack-Hook said:


> show us alternate data that don't claim all the tanks deployed in 2006 were MK-4, considering MK-4 production started in 2004



I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.



Hack-Hook said:


> you can't okay show me any radar on the system we received



Iran was delivered four complete batteries of the S-300PM2 incorporating S-400 elements by the Russian Federation in 2016. These batteries include radars, of which there exist pictures and/or video footage in Iranian service.



Hack-Hook said:


> literally hundreds of atgm there are videos of then on ******** that show hezbollah fighter firing 5-6 missile toward tanks from different angle



Highly selective scenes. No complete visual evidence for the overall picture, so it's hardly possible to tergiversate on this.



Hack-Hook said:


> so you can't show anything , and expect people believe your claims on faith ?



You were implicitly assuming that if Hezbollah successfully blasted large numbers of zionist MBT's using ATGM's, then it should necessarily retrieved a considerable proportion of these damaged or destroyed tanks and placed them at the museum dedicated to the memory of the 2006 aggression. It's a mindless supposition, one that doesn't normally deserve to be addressed. Your latest retort now is off-topic, I'm afraid.



Hack-Hook said:


> again post your different numbers, preferably not from a source that claim Israel had 400 merkava-mk4 at the time



The numbers you produced are decidedly unreliable, and there's little doubt in my mind that you know the reason why. For the foregone statement to be true, alternate figures needn't be thrown in.



Hack-Hook said:


> so you claim israel had the ability to produce more than 200 mk-4 per year at the first year of production



I very much doubt I did.



Hack-Hook said:


> If you only bothered to read jeursalem post you had understood that the Palestinian chronicle was not faithful to what it attributed to Jeursalem Post. its Jeursalem post article that tank to internet i could access easily
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IDF report card
> 
> 
> An in-depth look at the pluses and minuses of Israel's military operations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.jpost.com





Hack-Hook said:


> honestly thousands of atgm fired only 20 managed to penetrate tanks and only 30 killed . that is the source you used first , i didn't use it



Screenshot of the quote you made, relevant part underscored:






"A few dozen" in my book may translate into a number between 30 and 50, more or less. 20 MBT's penetrated out of 30-50 hit ones, represents a respectable score. Also penetration is not a sine qua non condition for disabling. 30 killed crewmen for that same number of successful hits equally qualifies as a military success.

By the way, this shows how I was spot on to assume the author at the Palestinian Chronicle had been mistaken in his reporting of the MBT type, but not about the numbers. So, thanks for proving me right.

As for the "thousands of anti-tank missiles" part, I expected you would admit what you're surely well aware of, namely that this is a totally unrealistic amount. And that it's probably yet another case of a non-specialized journalist, a Jerusalem Post one this time around, mixing up the term "anti-tank missile" with the generic "anti-tank projectile". Because the only way the number could be in the "thousands" (if at all), is if RPG grenades as well as calibre 105 mm M40 recoilless anti-tank rifle rounds (of which Hezbollah is reportedly deploying several tens of thousands) are counted in.

In short, nice demonstration of the sort of spin you're willing to put on information you come across, in hopes of salvaging a rhetoric whose sole purpose is to take aim at any Russian-designed weapons system, most likely due to underlying political preferences.



Hack-Hook said:


> oh that not working example that never deployed



Examined, inspected and studied in the slightest detail, from which valuable knowledge was gleaned, a procedure Iran is known to submit newly acquired military equipment to, and one which has given an undeniable boost to the Iranian defence industries, similar to the path trod by China. There's no shame in admitting to it, and it doesn't take away from the achievements Iranian engineers.



Hack-Hook said:


> if you say Bavar-373 is based on that VHF radar



How about you reined in this colorful imagination.



Hack-Hook said:


> not working nebo-svu ,



Unsubstantiated assertion.



Hack-Hook said:


> till today there is no nebu radar deployed in iran



Just because you never saw one, doesn't mean there are none. Plenty of equipment was and is deployed without Iran making it public for a variety of reasons.

Moreover even if it wasn't, that wouldn't imply Iran did not draw benefit from it. Iranian decision makers know what they're doing, hence why they purchased the Nebo. Do away with this assumption that they're simpletons who'd gain in banking on your or any other forum user's subjective opinion. The success of Iran's military development isn't up for discussion.



Hack-Hook said:


> Iran didn't Syrian forces advised by Iranian advisors received them



That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.



Hack-Hook said:


> except that they were used in Syria by Syrian



That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.



Hack-Hook said:


> no paying milliiards of dollar of needed money for a system but not using them show there is some problem there



Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.



Hack-Hook said:


> not no benefit to defence industry and research as at the time we could produce better but benefit to defence



There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is considering it has a role of its own to play in the general air defence architecture.



Hack-Hook said:


> as we still use s-75 in form of hq-2 we recieved from china. so why not use the better system we paid for



Because Iranian planners see a complementary role for the HQ-2. This is why it's still being operated rather than being retired from service.



Hack-Hook said:


> probably again secret contract that i'm not allowed to knew about them



Reading the press helps, Iran has purchased multiple commodities from Russia since 2016, even invested money in certain projects there.



Hack-Hook said:


> okay instead of 4milliard 3 milliard ,



36 Su-30SM's can be had for around 1,8 billion USD.



Hack-Hook said:


> all the budget to increase iran force capability in all branches of army , irgc, and basij is 4 milliard how much of it assigned to air force , i could not find can you tell me



These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.



Hack-Hook said:


> the regular air force budget for maintaining current capability and paying wages and ... are separate , those 4 milliard euro is the part that you say most be mobilized independently and is for all of Iran armed force branches and belong to 1401 that it increase , before that it was even less



The suggestion at hand is hypothetical by essence. Nobody is insinuating that Iran has already struck such a deal with Russia, but that it would constitute an acceptable investment should Iran decide to go for it.


----------



## SalarHaqq

sanel1412 said:


> Thx
> Croatia Got only part of S300, and that was old version 35+ yrs ago, they parade only part of TELs and some canisters, and even those were towed by old Man trucks... That was 1994 or 1995,dont remeber. While Iran paraded and showed new Nebo SVU, now it May happen that aditional Gama was bought with S300 but Iran Got some even before, I mean they overhuled some few yrs ago domesticly. When it comes to Croatia S300 it is BS, local news wrote a lot about after that parade, and latter Israel and other delegatin visited Croatia to inspect what they had, It turns out they never Got whole operational system.



To legitimately criticize Russia for its condemnable past actions such as the delay in the delivery of the S-300 is one thing, and it's pretty sound no doubt.

Another thing altogether is to turn this into an everlasting grudge, which would be disconnected from the current reality of expanding Tehran-Moscow ties, or to deny that next to its disappointing actions Russia has also supplied some useful material to Iran (without obfuscating Iran's domestic achievements, which of course are the main factor and by far), not to mention portraying every Russian defence product as utterly useless junk. These talking points are simply incongrous.

Thanks for setting the record straight, brother. Corrective contributions like yours are most welcome.



sanel1412 said:


> Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO..



My guess would be, reaction to Iran's ongoing rapprochement with Russia. Reformists and those supporting them are particularly upset because it makes any hypothetical normalization of relations between Iran and the west (one of the strategic goals of reformists) even more improbable.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> That's just semantics honestly kinda stupid to argue about
> 
> Ice is water through and through, linguistics aside. So dry water is considered ice.


Not really, it's accuracy and being precise. Something I value. 

No, frozen water is ice, there is no such thing as dry water lol water is wet, not dry lol you need to go back to primary school or maybe locked up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> No, you just don't understand chemistry, there's no such thing as ice molecules, they're called water molecules, regardless if the state is solid or liquid. Solid water = ice = dry water.


There is no scientific term called dry water to describe ice...nor does any sane scientist describe any state of water as dry. Dryness is an absense of moisture, you cretin! Moisture comes from water. You literally just made all that up because you're a pseudo-scientist with small dick energy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> There is no scientific term called dry water to describe ice...nor does any sane scientist describe any state of water as dry. Dryness is an absense of moisture, you cretin! Moisture comes from water. You literally just made all that up because you're a pseudo-scientist with small dick energy.


Dry means absense of liquid lol. If I splash you with pure alcohol are you dry just because it doesn't contain water?

There's also this apparently




__





Dry water - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Dry means absense of liquid lol. If I splash you with pure alcohol are you dry just because it doesn't contain water?
> 
> There's also this apparently
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dry water - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


Dry means an absense of moisture. Here, look it up in this thing we humans call a dictionary:









Definition of dry | Dictionary.com


Dry definition, free from moisture or excess moisture; not moist; not wet: a dry towel; dry air. See more.




www.dictionary.com





Pure alcohol would evaporate before it touches me and would need special containers at really low temperature. 95% alcohol would be the highest purity a noob like you could make, which would get me wet for a few minutes because it has 5% WATER. 

Ask yourself, is it the water that is dry or is it the silica that's dry? Obviously it's the silica that's dry, not the water itself because it is still in liquid form. You had a stronger argument with the ice spiel, tbh. Back to google you go lol

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Dry means an absense of moisture. Here, look it up in this thing we humans call a dictionary:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definition of dry | Dictionary.com
> 
> 
> Dry definition, free from moisture or excess moisture; not moist; not wet: a dry towel; dry air. See more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dictionary.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pure alcohol would evaporate before it touches me and would need special containers at really low temperature. 95% alcohol would be the highest purity a noob like you could make, which would get me wet for a few minutes because it has 5% WATER.
> 
> Ask yourself, is it the water that is dry or is it the silica that's dry? Obviously it's the silica that's dry, not the water itself because it is still in liquid form. You had a stronger argument with the ice spiel, tbh. Back to google you go lol



Brother, just report this continuous nitpicking about the physical characteristics of water, it's needlessly hijacking the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

SalarHaqq said:


> Brother, just report this continuous nitpicking about the physical characteristics of water, it's needlessly hijacking the thread.


Done. Yeah sorry, I've already proven that water can't be dry a few posts back. This is just trolling at this point. On another note, this is indicative of the dire state of our airforce whereby there is no news to speak about and often times this thread turns toxic with over repeated arguments about what route should be taken and trolls coming to release their oghde. I also find it odd that this zio weasel came here the second hack hook was getting it from all angles. Maybe coincidence. Allahualim.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> False again. There are credible sources attesting to the induction of the missiles by Hezbollah. It stands to reason Hezbollah wouldn't take delivery of them if they weren't accompanied by the corresponding radar, or if there weren't realistic plans to add such a capability later on.
> 
> You then came along claiming the missiles are deprived of any such radars to this date. Burden of proof rests therefore on you, because your allegation defies logic: prove us they don't possess the radar. And now you're projecting, since it's you trying to dodge it here, not me.


the only evidence i saw is kowsar , do you have evidence on something like noor?



SalarHaqq said:


> The point is the figures are profoundly unreliable. Much like your conclusion based on them.
> 
> And no, it isn't the only data available, as you actually found out after searching online.


which basic is the same data , but mistakenly stated all the tanks were merkava-4 , but in all it gave the same amount just 1-2 more or less


SalarHaqq said:


> It's the "correct" set of numbers based on what? By making unsubstantiated blanket statements like these, you're simply exposing your favorable bias towards zionist military equipment, while trying to argue that anything Russian made is either defective or useless, which quite frankly is a hilarious thing to believe. As said, this posture is typical of the gutter press in NATO countries which peddle their regimes' propaganda, it doesn't fit into a serious discussion.


then provide your data , as the data you showed now is basically from the same source but with mistakes . right now you are saying i don't have any data and can\t provide any number , but i also don't accept your data.
honestly that is childish


SalarHaqq said:


> The reality is you failed to produce anything of value when it comes to corroborating figures which zionist officials themselves had contradicted earlier on. We both know what it implies as the revised series of data you're illogically clinging to. This is no more no less than your political bias speaking.


the contradiction come from the fact your source changed the data Zionist official provided if you go and look at the place that your source say it get its data , you see what happens here . i looked at the original article , did you do so ?


SalarHaqq said:


> I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.


yes the data that your source claimed is from Jerusalem post but at Jerusalem post they are different and your source modified them


SalarHaqq said:


> I provided zionist-published figures about crew deaths and MBT destructions provoked by the Kornet ATGM. That's onto itself is more than enough to debunk the sugar-coated figures you seem to be buying into.


5 tank destroyed , 21 tank penetrated and 3 soldier died after hundreds of ATGM fired , really extra ordinary performance


SalarHaqq said:


> Highly selective scenes. No complete visual evidence for the overall picture, so it's hardly possible to tergiversate on this.


as i said there are video on Liv-e-Le-ak that show 5-6 atgm fired at a Tank and they are published by lebanese side not israeli one


SalarHaqq said:


> "A few dozen" in my book may translate into a number between 30 and 50, more or less. 20 MBT's penetrated out of 30-50 hit ones, represents a respectable score. Also penetration is not a sine qua non condition for disabling. 30 killed crewmen for that same number of successful hits equally qualifies as a military success.


370 tank participated , 52 tank hit and 21 penetrated . 18 of the tanks that were hit was merkava-4 , to penetrated , one of them by IED and the other by ATGM.


SalarHaqq said:


> As for the "thousands of anti-tank missiles" part, I expected you would admit what you're surely well aware of, namely that this is a totally unrealistic amount.


as i said hundreds because i saw the videos of 4-5 even more atgm being fired toward the tanks


SalarHaqq said:


> Examined, inspected and studied in the slightest detail, from which valuable knowledge was gleaned, a procedure Iran is known to submit newly acquired military equipment to, and one which has given an undeniable boost to the Iranian defence industries, similar to the path trod by China. There's no shame in admitting to it, and it doesn't take away from the achievements Iranian engineers.


that system is a vhf radar nor bavar , neither 13th of khordad or 3rd of Khordad come with VHF radar
they use s-band and x-band in short they have a lot more in common with Patriot system that we never had access to than s-300 that some journalist claim our system are based on.


SalarHaqq said:


> Unsubstantiated assertion.


never get deployed , such radar till we built or substantialy different fath radar developed


SalarHaqq said:


> Just because you never saw one, doesn't mean there are none. Plenty of equipment was and is deployed without Iran making it public for a variety of reasons.
> 
> Moreover even if it wasn't, that wouldn't imply Iran did not draw benefit from it. Iranian decision makers know what they're doing, hence why they purchased the Nebo. Do away with this assumption that they're simpletons who'd gain in banking on your or any other forum user's subjective opinion. The success of Iran's military development isn't up for discussion.


and you knew they are deployed or think they are deployed ? or perhaps wish they to be deployed. when we have more powerful fath why build nebu-svu , for god sake its not the advanced nebu-m we are talking about its good old nebu-svu


SalarHaqq said:


> That's not what the third link shown is stating. It's explicit about Iran having been supplied Krasnopol rounds by a Russian company, and the transaction it's referring to has nothing to do with the war in Syria.


yes the general in syria gave the iranian supported force in syria 100 canon shell because he was impressed by iranian general . the shell is foundamentally different than our guided artillery shell and you claim they are based on russian one that never even given to iranian


SalarHaqq said:


> Putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.


as i said the need was not the need to study and learn it and no paying money for a system but not use it is the sign of problems.

and if we use s-75 copy why not use s-300 that we have and paid for.?


SalarHaqq said:


> There's no logic in fielding a weapons system one sees no benefit in. If it's deployed and integrated into the IADS, it implies that Iran is considering it has a role of its own to play in the general air defence architecture.


we use s-75 and its integrated , we use crotal and rapier. how effective are there do we need them.

there is different kind of need . we always need air defense systems and the more advance the better as we lack an effective air-force right now. if tomorrow we find some crotale in a storage be assured we don\t say we are producing herz and ya-zahra let not use them . we will deploy them somewhere 


SalarHaqq said:


> Because Iranian planners see a complementary role for the HQ-2. This is why it's still being operated rather than being retired from service.


show me one system we throw away and said let not use anymore


SalarHaqq said:


> 36 Su-30SM's can be had for around 1,8 billion USD.


without supply facility , weapon and spare part nobody buy airplane in such form


SalarHaqq said:


> These funds will have to be mobilized independently from the regular air force budget. It'd be an extraordinary investment, the type of which is consented to only once in a decade or so.


this funds will be mobilized from 4.5 billion euro put aside for increasing the power of armed force and thats separate from usual air force budget. now how you want to use that money its up to you , its for all branches of IRGC, Army and Basij


SalarHaqq said:


> The suggestion at hand is hypothetical by essence. Nobody is insinuating that Iran has already struck such a deal with Russia, but that it would constitute an acceptable investment should Iran decide to go for it.


buying final product from foreigner is not investment . a TOT or investing in domestic product and building the infrastructure for building those products is investment

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> First of all when you ask for water in a restaurant, you dont get a cup of ice. You get the liquid form....hence why we have a seperate word called ice. Had I said to Hack Hook prove to me "ice is dry" then you may have had a point. That said, a solid is solid and dry is dry. They are different words that mean different things. If you run your fingers on some ice your fingers will be wet!


we have a separate word for cold , but what cold , is it something separate or basically just lack of warm?
we have separate word for dark but what is darkness ? is it something but lack of light ?
what i posted is called Dry water or Empty Water if i wanted to talk about Dry Ice I'd have pointed to something else


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Tokhm darvordee Israeliye omad nejatet dad? I look at sky all the time and it is NEVER purple....that means you're probably high most times and are hallucinating.


what saving me i pointed out to the purple sky as i'm interested in painting as a hobby i look around more closely and i see such thing , you wanted to mock me by that post , well we have a verse in Quran for that


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre like a fish out of water now, good to see you finally gave up trying to prove the impossible. You made enough of a fool of yourself.


that's your situation . i pointed out that pure oxygen is actually harmful . and proved you wrong
i point out and about 
about fish is dragon , about i pointed ot if by dragon you mean dinosaurs then they are actually their ancestors, if you mean mythical creatures that breath ice or fire , then you need help.
about hot is cold i pointed out when hotness is low it become cold and they are not separate things .

you see you are grasping at straws , let it go as you re derailing the thread and just make a mockery of yourself.
you see i suggest to look at how salarhaq make his point in a discussion , he knew what he doing , when he say something he is planning an answer for what his opponent might say . you can learn a lot from him . if you use his techniques , they take you more seriously

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Nope, Iran Gamma D Long before, and Croatia S300 is BS, you post a lot of BS lately, I dont Know where you Got all this INFO.. I am more or less on different military forums from 2006 and follow Iran military even before, so I Know exactly when and where we discussed about all these radar. In fact Iran recently show domesticly overhuled Gamma D, it came Long before S300. Croatia Got only part of S300, and since I am from Bosnia, I can tell you that Croatia, as Bosnia is US puppet


do you have picture of any Gamma-d in iran before falaq radar was shown

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the only evidence i saw is kowsar , do you have evidence on something like noor?



Do you have evidence Hezbollah wasn't operating Kosar before they unveiled a few of them publicly? Negative.

Fact is, Hezbollah never disclosed all its weaponry. At times reports surface about some of these undisclosed armaments when enemy intelligence gets wind of them. Hezbollah's possession of Yakhont ASCM is a widely held belief in military circles.









Hezbollah said to have obtained ‘game-changing’ anti-ship missiles


Russian-made Yakhont would give Lebanese terror group the ability to strike Israeli gas platforms and ships in the Mediterranean




www.timesofisrael.com





The associated radar is nothing bulky. It resembles this, and could easily have been transferred to Lebanon along with the missiles and the self-propelled launcher(s):






In short, absence of visual evidence does *not* equal proof that Hezbollah didn't obtain them, while there are reports stating it did.



Hack-Hook said:


> which basic is the same data , but mistakenly stated all the tanks were merkava-4 , but in all it gave the same amount just 1-2 more or less



It paints a successful picture of the Kornet ATGM, with a higher rate of incapacitated tanks as well as 30 killed crewmen, whereas the subsequent data denies this amount of deaths.



Hack-Hook said:


> then provide your data , as the data you showed now is basically from the same source but with mistakes .



Done already.



Hack-Hook said:


> the contradiction come from the fact your source changed the data Zionist official provided if you go and look at the place that your source say it get its data , you see what happens here . i looked at the original article , did you do so ?



It's getting the type designation of the tanks wrong. But faithfully reproduces the reported numbers of tanks hit as well as crewmen killed.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes the data that your source claimed is from Jerusalem post but at Jerusalem post they are different and your source modified them



Hardly.



Hack-Hook said:


> 5 tank destroyed , 21 tank penetrated and 3 soldier died after hundreds of ATGM fired , really extra ordinary performance



No evidence for these sugar-coated, revised zionist figures. But plenty of circumstantial evidence as to their flimsiness (one, they contradict earlier published ones from the same source; two, data published by zionists about their losses is notoriously unreliable due to a military censorship law as well as general propaganda practices).

Another two Isra"el"i analysts confirming Hezbollah's performance in its 2006 anti-tank campaign:






As good as no source other than the zionist regime itself and perhaps some of its western associates is denying this.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said there are video on Liv-e-Le-ak that show 5-6 atgm fired at a Tank and they are published by lebanese side not israeli one



Still not the whole picture, merely an isolated example. More importantly, I'm familiar with the footage (Hezbollah fighters were firing from behind bushes from multiple directions), and there's no evidence that the multiple projectiles this particular tank was hit by were Kornets. Could have been Fagots (AT-4), RPG's or something else altogether.

Also here's no video sharing website by the name Live Leak anymore.



Hack-Hook said:


> 370 tank participated , 52 tank hit and 21 penetrated . 18 of the tanks that were hit was merkava-4 , to penetrated , one of them by IED and the other by ATGM.



Zero evidence for these claims, contradicted what is more by an earlier zionist report.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said hundreds because i saw the videos of 4-5 even more atgm being fired toward the tanks



No justification for such an inference. And it's extremely unlikely Hezbollah would have fielded enough Kornets in 2006 to fire "hundreds" of them in only 33 days, implying that their overall stockpile was much larger even. They received these from Syria, and Syria itself wouldn't have had enough to part with quite as many.



Hack-Hook said:


> that system is a vhf radar nor bavar , neither 13th of khordad or 3rd of Khordad come with VHF radar





Hack-Hook said:


> they use s-band and x-band in short they have a lot more in common with Patriot system that we never had access to than s-300 that some journalist claim our system are based on.



Iran designed and produced VHF radars too, including after taking delivery of the Nebo.



Hack-Hook said:


> never get deployed , such radar till we built or substantialy different fath radar developed



Substantial difference doesn't preclude some technical finding from examination of the Nebo flowing into the conception of Iranian VHF radars at some point.



Hack-Hook said:


> and you knew they are deployed or think they are deployed ? or perhaps wish they to be deployed. when we have more powerful fath why build nebu-svu , for god sake its not the advanced nebu-m we are talking about its good old nebu-svu



That's not how it works anywhere in the world. Just because one system has a superior performance to others in almost every or even in every single aspect, this doesn't necessarily translate into the entirety of previous systems being retired from service. Technically inferior systems can be more cost-effective to procure in numbers, can have exponential performance if massed, can fulfill niche roles while more onerous and precious all-rounders will be positioned elsewhere, such as in better protected locations.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes the general in syria gave the iranian supported force in syria 100 canon shell because he was impressed by iranian general . the shell is foundamentally different than our guided artillery shell and you claim they are based on russian one that never even given to iranian



Have some shame, that's some plain untruth you've now been repeating several times. Show me where in this discussion I suggested Basir is based on Krasnopol, or kindly beat it.

Also, wrong again: the third source I showed is explicit about Iran purchasing Krasnopol rounds *directly* from a Russian company *outside* the context of the Syrian war.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said the need was not the need to study and learn it



Strawman.



Hack-Hook said:


> and no paying money for a system but not use it is the sign of problems.



Yes, putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.



Hack-Hook said:


> and if we use s-75 copy why not use s-300 that we have and paid for.?



Both are fulfilling dedicated roles within Iran's IADS, Iran considers both to be beneficial and to enhance the power of her air defence architecture.



Hack-Hook said:


> we use s-75 and its integrated , we use crotal and rapier. how effective are there do we need them.



Yes, Iran considers she does need them. Else they'd have been retired from service. They are effective in the niche role they're assigned.



Hack-Hook said:


> there is different kind of need . we always need air defense systems and the more advance the better as we lack an effective air-force right now. if tomorrow we find some crotale in a storage be assured we don\t say we are producing herz and ya-zahra let not use them . we will deploy them somewhere



They fulfill a need therefore they're being deployed. It's as simple as that and no wordplay could possibly change it.



Hack-Hook said:


> show me one system we throw away and said let not use anymore



If nothing's gotten rid of, it's that everything's considered useful. Elementary logic.



Hack-Hook said:


> without supply facility , weapon and spare part nobody buy airplane in such form



It's the price tag of an entire such contract.



Hack-Hook said:


> this funds will be mobilized from 4.5 billion euro put aside for increasing the power of armed force and thats separate from usual air force budget. now how you want to use that money its up to you , its for all branches of IRGC, Army and Basij



Additional funds to those 4,5 billion Euro may be mobilized. Nothing says they can't or wouldn't.



Hack-Hook said:


> buying final product from foreigner is not investment . a TOT or investing in domestic product and building the infrastructure for building those products is investment



Investment is defined as an expenditure which enables a benefit or advantage at a later point. The advantage in this case is the additional military capability they grant once the delivery and induction period has elapsed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Atar god of the fire

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561987311033786370

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Do you have evidence Hezbollah wasn't operating Kosar before they unveiled a few of them publicly? Negative.


i have evidence they operate them since 2006


SalarHaqq said:


> Fact is, Hezbollah never disclosed all its weaponry. At times reports surface about some of these undisclosed armaments when enemy intelligence gets wind of them. Hezbollah's possession of Yakhont ASCM is a widely held belief in military circles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hezbollah said to have obtained ‘game-changing’ anti-ship missiles
> 
> 
> Russian-made Yakhont would give Lebanese terror group the ability to strike Israeli gas platforms and ships in the Mediterranean
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The associated radar is nothing bulky. It resembles this, and could easily have been transferred to Lebanon along with the missiles and the self-propelled launcher(s):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In short, absence of visual evidence does *not* equal proof that Hezbollah didn't obtain them, while there are reports stating it did.


wonder why you don't accept others absence of visual as fact but if its suit you then you provide that as something others must accept?


SalarHaqq said:


> It paints a successful picture of the Kornet ATGM, with a higher rate of incapacitated tanks as well as 30 killed crewmen, whereas the subsequent data denies this amount of deaths.





SalarHaqq said:


> Done already.





SalarHaqq said:


> It's getting the type designation of the tanks wrong. But faithfully reproduces the reported numbers of tanks hit as well as crewmen killed.





SalarHaqq said:


> Hardly.


interesting you don\t accept the data i provide but when Palestinian chronicle , provide the same data but with some small mistake you accept that .


SalarHaqq said:


> No evidence for these sugar-coated, revised zionist figures. But plenty of circumstantial evidence as to their flimsiness (one, they contradict earlier published ones from the same source; two, data published by zionists about their losses is notoriously unreliable due to a military censorship law as well as general propaganda practices).


that 3 was keyboard have a mind of itself , its 30 . the rest is what you posted from Palestinian chronicle which they get from Jerusalem post . but in more detail about the number of Merkava-4 getting targeted and how many penetrated .


SalarHaqq said:


> Still not the whole picture, merely an isolated example. More importantly, I'm familiar with the footage (Hezbollah fighters were firing from behind bushes from multiple directions), and there's no evidence that the multiple projectiles this particular tank was hit by were Kornets. Could have been Fagots (AT-4), RPG's or something else altogether.


a lot were probably kronet as Hezbollah fighter had so much of them that there are videos that they left a lot of them behind when they re-positioned 


SalarHaqq said:


> Zero evidence for these claims, contradicted what is more by an earlier zionist report.


which part the number hit , the number penetrated , the number of merkava-4 . the video that you see that Hezbollah fighters were attacking merkava from different direction . what happened to the tank ?


SalarHaqq said:


> No justification for such an inference. And it's extremely unlikely Hezbollah would have fielded enough Kornets in 2006 to fire "hundreds" of them in only 33 days, implying that their overall stockpile was much larger even. They received these from Syria, and Syria itself wouldn't have had enough to part with quite as many.


they have enough that they left lots of them behind without firing them


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran designed and produced VHF radars too, including after taking delivery of the Nebo.


yes but when , it started with Matla-o-alfajr and thats a lot deferent in design to Nebu radars and that nebu was not working


SalarHaqq said:


> That's not how it works anywhere in the world. Just because one system has a superior performance to others in almost every or even in every single aspect, this doesn't necessarily translate into the entirety of previous systems being retired from service. Technically inferior systems can be more cost-effective to procure in numbers, can have exponential performance if massed, can fulfill niche roles while more onerous and precious all-rounders will be positioned elsewhere, such as in better protected locations.


that nebu system when we got it from Belarus was not in working condition and we didn't incorporate it in our radar network so there is no retiring here.


SalarHaqq said:


> Yes, putting to use a complex weapons system one doesn't need is a sign of psychopathology, not the other way around.


as i said there is need and there is need . we always have need for stronger defense as there is no such thing as strong enough defensive position , but when we get the system we had no need for it to advance our own air-defense sytem designs


SalarHaqq said:


> Yes, Iran considers she does need them. Else they'd have been retired from service. They are effective in the niche role they're assigned.


no there would have not , they would have been left there until they'd been considered a bother to maintain . many of the system are left there to be decoy against first strike to protect newer equipment and confuse enemy fighters. that is their use otherwise their effectiveness are as much as Syrian soviet era equipment against Israeli fighters 


SalarHaqq said:


> It's the price tag of an entire such contract.


36*85 = 3,060


SalarHaqq said:


> Additional funds to those 4,5 billion Euro may be mobilized. Nothing says they can't or wouldn't.


that will be against the budget , by the way that number is the one that the budget say we must spend for those but my experience say the actual amount that will be handed to defense ministry for that is actually less than that. and government always take from it for something else


SalarHaqq said:


> Investment is defined as an expenditure which enables a benefit or advantage at a later point. The advantage in this case is the additional military capability they grant once the delivery and induction period has elapsed.


whats your idea about Pahlavi investment in this regards considering they get actual facility for maintaining the equipment

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561987311033786370


that have a lot of probllem , we first built mini turbo jet then turbojet after that mini turbofan and very light turbofan , we must first built a light turbofan like fj-44 then engine like rd-33, f-404, then talk about al-31 or tf-30 or f110
you cant forgo steps

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561987311033786370


This was the news I was waiting for.


----------



## Atar god of the fire

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562023124669026304

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562023124669026304


@Mr Iran Eye Once again, you are proven right! And since the plan has been unveiled, I'm sure some prototypes have already been tested.

But my question is, how did you know this was being built?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> that have a lot of probllem , we first built mini turbo jet then turbojet after that mini turbofan and very light turbofan , we must first built a light turbofan like fj-44 then engine like rd-33, f-404, then talk about al-31 or tf-30 or f110
> you cant forgo steps


"BUT MUH FJ-44, MUH RD-33, MUH-F404! WASTE MORE MONEY ON POINTLESS, OUTDATED SYSTEM, GOY...ER, I MEAN HAMVATAN!"

NO, @Hack-Hook , the heavy engine will be built in 2025-2026 and enter service by the beginning of the 2030s. It will succeed and you will gnaw on it, then move on to some other topic of complaint and "But muh-!" about that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

Sardar, I don’t agree with @Hack-Hook often, but I believe he’s clean.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> "BUT MUH FJ-44, MUH RD-33, MUH-F404! WASTE MORE MONEY ON POINTLESS, OUTDATED SYSTEM, GOY...ER, I MEAN HAMVATAN!"
> 
> NO, @Hack-Hook , the heavy engine will be built in 2025-2026 and enter service by the beginning of the 2030s. It will succeed and you will gnaw on it, then move on to some other topic of complaint and "But muh-!" about that.


we will talk then , but as i said the time table of that photo is completely wrong we didn't built mini turbofan before a full fledged turbo jet .
and if you think in 3-4 year we build AL-31 like engine while we still have not mass produced jahesh-700 well i don't have anything to add to that



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Khafesho dige, ridi be forum. Ive already made a fool out of you.


you made a fool out of yourself, you impolite person, you guys don't get it we still don't mass produce jahesh-700 , the engine was supposed to be used in shahed-171 but what we use there now is Toloue-14 and then you claim a heavy engine in class of AL-31 will be ready in 3 years no in 3 years if fund channeled we will have at best something in class of FJ-44 so we could stop producing owj and use that engine instead .

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

خفه شو مزدور کثیف ^

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> i have evidence they operate them since 2006



No photographic evidence though, nor statements by Hezbollah or Iran themselves.



Hack-Hook said:


> wonder why you don't accept others absence of visual as fact but if its suit you then you provide that as something others must accept?



Because there's circumstantial evidence, or strong rational indications to that effect.



Hack-Hook said:


> interesting you don\t accept the data i provide but when Palestinian chronicle , provide the same data but with some small mistake you accept that .



The two sets of figures clearly aren't identical. Also, I never actually said I will accept the zionist source quoted by Palestinian Chronicle. I shared it to show how zionists contradicted themselves, which goes to punch yet another hole into the credibility of their declarations in general. Now you will endorse these declarations selectively depending on whether or not they suit your narrative, while dismissing them as propaganda when they don't e.g. Tel Aviv's indirect denials about Iran having had a hand in the retaliatory assassination of their veteran scientist.



Hack-Hook said:


> that 3 was keyboard have a mind of itself , its 30 . the rest is what you posted from Palestinian chronicle which they get from Jerusalem post . but in more detail about the number of Merkava-4 getting targeted and how many penetrated .



Bottom line is, you appear to deem credible the sugar-coated zionist data, which is subject to military censorship as well as to the necessity for Tel Aviv to keep alive the myth of invincibility it spent years concocting. Which onto itself goes to compromises the weight of your subsequent conclusions.



Hack-Hook said:


> a lot were probably kronet as Hezbollah fighter had so much of them that there are videos that they left a lot of them behind when they re-positioned



There's no evidence that Kornets were used in that particular footage.



Hack-Hook said:


> which part the number hit , the number penetrated , the number of merkava-4 . the video that you see that Hezbollah fighters were attacking merkava from different direction . what happened to the tank ?



The video is not offering any information as to the type the missiles which it shows being fired.



Hack-Hook said:


> they have enough that they left lots of them behind without firing them



Syria's stockpile wasn't large enough to transfer many hundreds of them to Hezbollah.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes but when , it started with Matla-o-alfajr and thats a lot deferent in design to Nebu radars



Even radical difference in designs does not necessarily preclude the drawing of general lessons about VHF radar technology from examination of the Nebo.



Hack-Hook said:


> and that nebu was not working



Unsubstantiated.



Hack-Hook said:


> that nebu system when we got it from Belarus was not in working condition and we didn't incorporate it in our radar network so thee is no retiring here.



No evidence is wasn't functional nor that it wasn't incorporated. Moreover, if Iran got her hands on a single example then there would've been no point inducting it. None of this implies however that Iran's R&D in the field of radar technology did not yield any clues from the study of this radar.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said there is need and there is need . we always have need for stronger defense as there is no such thing as strong enough defensive position ,



In other terms, Iran saw benefit in integrating into the IADS every single system she actually integrated therein.



Hack-Hook said:


> but when we get the system we had no need for it to advance our own air-defense sytem designs



Iran's own advanced VHF radars went into production years after the acquisition of the Nebo.



Hack-Hook said:


> no there would have not , they would have been left there until they'd been considered a bother to maintain . many of the system are left there to be decoy against first strike to protect newer equipment and confuse enemy fighters. that is their use otherwise their effectiveness are as much as Syrian soviet era equipment against Israeli fighters



Many of the older systems are kept in place because they are fulfilling an active niche role within Iran's IADS. Hence why they keep being fielded. Iran's main enemies won't confuse radar types nor be so easily fooled by them.



Hack-Hook said:


> 36*85 = 3,060



The Su-30SM does cost more like $50 million. Belarus purchased 12 in early 2016 under a deal worth $600 million in total.



Hack-Hook said:


> that will be against the budget , by the way that number is the one that the budget say we must spend for those but my experience say the actual amount that will be handed to defense ministry for that is actually less than that. and government always take from it for something else



There are various possibilities to mobilize additional funds not planned when the budget was ratified. Differed payment and installment plans are another option. A third option would be to adjust the upcoming years' budgets accordingly.



Hack-Hook said:


> whats your idea about Pahlavi investment in this regards considering they get actual facility for maintaining the equipment



The Pahlavi regime lacked sovereignty. Back in the day those fighter jets weren't an asset to Iran, they were there to serve US geostrategic goals because it was Washington which determined Iran's foreign policy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @Mr Iran Eye Once again, you are proven right! And since the plan has been unveiled, I'm sure some prototypes have already been tested.
> 
> But my question is, how did you know this was being built?


I've been analyzing the Iranian army for more than 10 years, I have hundreds of photos, I travel a lot to find useful things. It is very interesting to analyze their announcements on 4, 8 and 12 years old. People here on this forum have very little intuition and often goes around in circles with their intellectual analysis.

Look at Hack-Hook's comments, it's staggering. He thinks that if he does not see things, it is that it does not exist. If he does not see the construction of certain things then it does not exist. I've been saying that the Iriaf section has been the worst section of this forum for a long time. There have been things that have been hidden for years by Iranians and tries of planes and drone never for the public.

Yes this news confirms again as I have said several times in the past that Iran is more advanced than their announcement processes, it is a consistency at home.

Do not suprate if Iran takes us out an intelligent artillery system like a mesbah equipped with an interdience missile. A kind of homemade pantsir. Do not surprise yourself if Iran shows images underground combat aircraft, for me, it's already an old news

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> No photographic evidence, nor any statement by Hezbollah or Iran themselves.


they said they hit Israeli ship with kowsar


SalarHaqq said:


> Because there's circumstantial evidence to that effect.


thats a new one


SalarHaqq said:


> The two sets of figures are clearly not identical. Also, I never said I "accept" the zionist source quoted by Palestinian Chronicle. I shared it to prove that zionists contradicted themselves, which goes to punch another hole into the credibility of zionist declarations in general. Declarations you selectively endorse when they suit your agenda, while dismissing them as propaganda when they don't, e.g. Tel Aviv's indirect denials that Iran had a hand in the retaliatory assassination of their veteran scientist.


those data if not look at diferent of 1-2 in the numbers and the participant tank that one said 370 and another said 400 are the same


SalarHaqq said:


> Bottom is, you deem zionist attempts to cover up their losses to be credible. That onto itself annuls your subsequent conclusions.


what attempt , that was my keyboard didn't type zero


SalarHaqq said:


> No evidence that Kornets were used in the footage you evoked.


but there is that there was so much kronet that when Hezbollah re-positioned it left many behind


SalarHaqq said:


> Zero information about the type the missiles which can be seen fired in the video.


as i said its not important when 18 get fired at and only one get destroyed and another one actually was destroyed by an IED. also as i point hezbollah have so much of that missile that they left them behind and deem it unnecessary to take them with themselves while repositioning


SalarHaqq said:


> Syria did not possess enough Kornets to transfer "hundreds" of them Hezbollah.


but they left them behind , russia had enough , and iran had the money to buy it for them


SalarHaqq said:


> Unsubstantiated claim.


if it was working then the s-300 were usable and could be deployed but those system never get deployed


SalarHaqq said:


> No evidence is wasn't functional, no evidence it wasn't incorporated. Moreover, if Iran got her hands on a single example then there would've been no point inducting it. None of this implies however that Iran's R&D in the field of radar technology did not benefit from the study of this radar.


show evidence that it was functional and incorporated in our radar network then
and there was very much reason to use it if it was functional as it would have become one of our most advanced radars at the time as our radars at the time were pretty much lacking for half of our border in persian gulf we didn't had any radar coverage and .....


SalarHaqq said:


> In other terms, Iran saw benefit in integrating into the IADS every single system she actually integrated therein.


in other term we didn't need them Russia could take them back give us our money plus interest and and fine for not honoring the deal and we could use it two produce 3 time the amount bavar-373 


SalarHaqq said:


> Again, unsubstantiated claim. Iran's own advanced VHF radars went into production years after the acquisition of the Nebo.


but they were different and were not used as part of air defense system but part of our early warning radars .


SalarHaqq said:


> Many of the older systems are kept in place because they are fulfilling an active niche role within Iran's IADS. Hence why they keep being fielded. Iran's main enemies won't confuse radar types nor be easily fooled by them.


no but they had to hit every single one of them that make their work harder


SalarHaqq said:


> The Su-30SM does not cost $85 million. Belarus purchased 12 in early 2016 under a deal worth $600 million in total.


so you now demoted the order from su-35 to su-30 ,dr.meson would have a field day compared that useless aircraft with an aircraft with modern subsystem . if su-35 could have a niche role , that airplane even can't play that



SalarHaqq said:


> The Pahlavi regime lacked sovereignty. Those fighter jets weren't an asset to Iran, they were there to serve US geostrategic goals.


LOL, i'm talking the facility and maintenance line and production line that came with them not the airplane themselves



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Look at Hack-Hook's comments, it's staggering. He thinks that if he does not see things, it is that it does not exist. If he does not see the construction of certain things then it does not exist. I've been saying that the Iriaf section has been the worst section of this forum for a long time. There have been things that have been hidden for years by Iranians and tries of planes and drone never for the public.


i say if you don't accept the others have things that you can't see , why i must accept you have things that the others can't see

by the way i don't talk about something you can hide in a sport complex, i'm talking about a very big radar that if it come online any body around us specially usa could detect its signature , i'm talking about a big radar that could have easily picked up from sky by satellites



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran shows images underground combat aircraft, for me, it's already an old news


that will be a real bad idea

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> they said they hit Israeli ship with kowsar



They didn't specify what the ship was hit with.



Hack-Hook said:


> thats a new one



Not really, it was exhibited by me already.



Hack-Hook said:


> those data if not look at diferent of 1-2 in the numbers and the participant tank that one said 370 and another said 400 are the same



At the end of the day, there's no credibility to figures published by zionists.



Hack-Hook said:


> what attempt



Very similar to how the zionist regime will try to cover up the retaliatory assassination of their veteran scientist by claiming it was an accident. A well rehearsed routine, nothing more.



Hack-Hook said:


> but there is that there was so much kronet that when Hezbollah re-positioned it left many behind



Syria did not own sufficient numbers of Kornets to pass many hundreds of them on to Hezbollah. Many hundreds weren't "left behind".



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said its not important when 18 get fired at and only one get destroyed and another one actually was destroyed by an IED.



Those are zionist propaganda claims. Not substantiated facts by any measure.



Hack-Hook said:


> also as i point hezbollah have so much of that missile that they left them behind and deem it unnecessary to take them with themselves while repositioning



Those are token numbers, nowhere enough to imply that their numbers were in the high hundreds. Also there could be multiple reasons for them supposedly being left behind.



Hack-Hook said:


> but they left them behind , russia had enough , and iran had the money to buy it for them



Why should they? It's not as if they were confronting tens of thousands of tanks. Nor as if dozens would be needed to knock out a Merkava.



Hack-Hook said:


> if it was working then the s-300 were usable and could be deployed but those system never get deployed



There's no evidence for that. Also the S-300's were supplied in meaningful numbers for an integration to make sense. Induction of token samples wouldn't.



Hack-Hook said:


> show evidence that it was functional and incorporated in our radar network then



I take it you have nothing to substantiate the claim you made then? Thanks for the admission.



Hack-Hook said:


> and there was very much reason to use it if it was functional as it would have become one of our most advanced radars at the time as our radars at the time were pretty much lacking for half of our border in persian gulf we didn't had any radar coverage and .....



Prove it wasn't fielded.



Hack-Hook said:


> in other term we didn't need them Russia could take them back give us our money plus interest and and fine for not honoring the deal and we could use it two produce 3 time the amount bavar-373



The fact that Iran chose to take delivery of the systems means Iran didn't need them? Wow, that's some twisted hair splitting right there.



Hack-Hook said:


> but they were different and were not used as part of air defense system but part of our early warning radars .



Doesn't disprove the point in the least.



Hack-Hook said:


> no but they had to hit every single one of them that make their work harder



Now you're arguing the enemy has to strike systems of which you claimed earlier that they pose no threat to the enemy... Brilliant logic, I must say!

Or perhaps you're assuming the enemy is oblivious to what you deem to be the utter uselessness of these systems. Again, what brilliant logic!



Hack-Hook said:


> so you now demoted the order from su-35 to su-30 ,



Not really, it's rather a case of you not paying attention to what is posted.



Hack-Hook said:


> dr.meson would have a field day compared that useless aircraft with an aircraft with modern subsystem . if su-35 could have a niche role , that airplane even can't play that



I trust PeeD's and Evilwesteners' technical expertise. They're the actual professionals active in these fields.



Hack-Hook said:


> LOL, i'm talking the facility and maintenance line and production line that came with them not the airplane themselves



That's because of your apparent failure to grasp that when an imperial patron decides as to how and when one may employ whatever equipment it provides one with, then any and all value said equipment might have had will vanish in practice.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Sardar330 said:


> خفه شو مزدور کثیف ^


Dagheeghan! Didee che saree oon esraeeliye kesafat khodesho resoond be in thread, va onam be mahzi ke in oskol az hame var dash kotak mikhord? Na faghad dar in site, vali dar sekshion e Iraniha ham por az mozdoor hast va bayad saree niqaabeshoonro darareem.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## lydian fall

Jews try to show us very weak, and destroy our relations with Russia and China

The scum in this thread Hack Hook needs a section ban

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> they said they hit Israeli ship with kowsar
> 
> thats a new one
> 
> those data if not look at diferent of 1-2 in the numbers and the participant tank that one said 370 and another said 400 are the same
> 
> what attempt , that was my keyboard didn't type zero
> 
> but there is that there was so much kronet that when Hezbollah re-positioned it left many behind
> 
> as i said its not important when 18 get fired at and only one get destroyed and another one actually was destroyed by an IED. also as i point hezbollah have so much of that missile that they left them behind and deem it unnecessary to take them with themselves while repositioning
> 
> but they left them behind , russia had enough , and iran had the money to buy it for them
> 
> if it was working then the s-300 were usable and could be deployed but those system never get deployed
> 
> show evidence that it was functional and incorporated in our radar network then
> and there was very much reason to use it if it was functional as it would have become one of our most advanced radars at the time as our radars at the time were pretty much lacking for half of our border in persian gulf we didn't had any radar coverage and .....
> 
> in other term we didn't need them Russia could take them back give us our money plus interest and and fine for not honoring the deal and we could use it two produce 3 time the amount bavar-373
> 
> but they were different and were not used as part of air defense system but part of our early warning radars .
> 
> no but they had to hit every single one of them that make their work harder
> 
> so you now demoted the order from su-35 to su-30 ,dr.meson would have a field day compared that useless aircraft with an aircraft with modern subsystem . if su-35 could have a niche role , that airplane even can't play that
> 
> 
> LOL, i'm talking the facility and maintenance line and production line that came with them not the airplane themselves
> 
> 
> i say if you don't accept the others have things that you can't see , why i must accept you have things that the others can't see
> 
> by the way i don't talk about something you can hide in a sport complex, i'm talking about a very big radar that if it come online any body around us specially usa could detect its signature , i'm talking about a big radar that could have easily picked up from sky by satellites
> 
> 
> that will be a real bad idea


On the contrary, excellent news.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> the extent of damage to the ship showed what hit it. and al-mayadin made the claim according to hezbollah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> سایت خبری واضح - موشک کروز ایرانی «کوثر» برگ برنده حزب الله در جنگ ۳۳ روزه
> 
> 
> واضح:المیادین بررسی کرد؛ موشک کروز ایرانی «کوثر» برگ برنده حزب الله در جنگ ۳۳ روزه شناسهٔ خبر: 3740564 - یکشنبه ۲۴ مرداد ۱۳۹۵ - ۱۴:۵۴ بین الملل > خاورمیانه و آفریقای شمالی .jwplayer{ display: inline-block; } مقاومت اسلامی لبنان در جنگ ۳۳ روزه با استفاده از موشک کروز
> 
> 
> 
> vazeh.com



Article's from merely 5 years ago. Pictures of damage to the vessel do not offer conclusive evidence as to what type of weapon exactly was used. My point stands, there was no hard evidence of Hezbollah fielding the Kosar ASCM prior to Hezbollah unveiling them years later.



Hack-Hook said:


> because it was a war that its end was not clear .



Hezbollah was supplied before, not during the war.



Hack-Hook said:


> ans that was their best atgm. you won't throw away such equipment at the war time , when you knew its not that easy to replace them



Nothing can be inferred unless the reasons for the purported abandonment are known. Also these remain token numbers, not enough to assume Hezbollah was in possession of many hundreds of these missiles.



Hack-Hook said:


> agree integration didn't make sense because the system was incomplete and not working.



That it was defective is an unsubstantiated claim. So is the assertion that it wasn't deployed. If the latter held true however, then a more plausible explanation would be that Iran obtained too small an amount for deployment to make sense.



Hack-Hook said:


> honestly , you want proof that it was not incorporated . is such thing possible ,



If it's impossible to furnish proof, then it shouldn't be just portrayed as fact.



Hack-Hook said:


> on other hand there is not a single proof that any s-300 in iran become active until rusia sent those S-300pmu2



Iran would still have gained from the system by examining it.



Hack-Hook said:


> my proof is there is no single evidence that it ever fielded



This by itself doesn't constitute proof, because lots of weaponry in use by Iran is known to have been fielded prior to being presented publicly.



Hack-Hook said:


> what choose , iran already paid for the system . do you wanted another cancelling order like after revolution that order for the aircrafts get cancelled and for years we didn't get our money back and had to pay fine for cancelling the order?



First of all Iran could have had the international tribunal condemn Russia to return the payment with interests. Secondly there's still the fact that they were integrated into the IADS, meaning that Iran is seeing benefit in deploying them - and certainly not as decoys (systems as expensive and sophisticated aren't used as decoys, not to mention the safety of the personnel manning them).



Hack-Hook said:


> show it was not used in our air defensse , but it was used in russian ones , shows the difference in the origin of our system to the rusian one shows our system is a lot more like western system than russian ones.



Again, none of these alleged differences implies that knowledge gleaned from the study of the Nebo didn't contribute in a certain capacity to the accumulation of technical expertise underlying the design and development of those domestic radars.



Hack-Hook said:


> they had to strike them if it want to operate freely just as simple as that and those system may no longer be threat to fighters but they are credible threat to helicopters



In other words, these assets have their use for Iran, be it a limited niche one, and are considered cost-effective. This in turn offers justification for their continued deployment. Exactly my point since the beginning.



Hack-Hook said:


> no previously you clearly said su-35



From the outset and even before the present discussion, I referenced several comments by PeeD and even posted screen shots of them, in which both types (Su-30, Su-35) are clearly cited. As for the present discussion, I only mentioned the Su-30. At any rate, since my trusted sources are the users in question, I consider these two Flanker variants to be acceptable.



Hack-Hook said:


> and you fail to grasp if our technician were not allowed to go near those system before revolution after it they could not use them to keep our airforce and army aviation on foot despite the sanctions



This was addressed in length before, including by user aryobarzan who has first hand knowledge on the topic from personal experience in the Iranian military before the Revolution, and who highlighted the limitations imposed by the US on Iranian technicians and maintenance crews.

Iranian personnel had the capability to perform some maintenance work, but weren't allowed to deploy it to its full extent. In part because it would have led to slashing jobs for US military advisers, but mostly because of Washington's desire to maintain a client in a state of dependency.

Also it's not simply about immediate upkeep, but also a question of long term servicing. In the long run, absence of a spare parts supply chain would have grounded much of the IRIAF especially its most valuable assets like the F-14, if it wasn't for the Islamic Republic's efforts in setting up the corresponding infrastructure. Some short term efforts were required as well.

I see no point in reiterating already concluded matters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561987311033786370



It’s coming (although a bit behind schedule). But the project has been going on for a long time.

I hope to see the prototype by 2025.

Finally we will stop talking about Kowsar and F-5’s once the medium/heavy engine is unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I'm making a list to bring up in 2026 ,i want to be clear do you also believe in AL-31 by 2025 ?



It’s just a picture as placeholder. I believe Iran is trying to say it will unveil an AL-31 class jet engine by 2026. Not that they will unveil reverse engineered AL-31 per se. Graphic was very realistic. But in case of both owj and FJ-22 we have never seen evidence of *major mass production. *Which raises the question how many units Iran can truly produce.

There was a user who came to this board made several posts, in one he mentioned that Iran was testing several engine designs and that most of them were failing longevity or various stages of R&D, but that one showed promise for mass production. This was at least 2 years ago maybe 3. 

Depending how much foreign assistance Iran gets (ex aerospace engineers or state sponsored assistance) will tell us in the end what engine we get.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> my point a noor would have halved ta ship like saar in two just look at the damage when one miisile hit an iranian ship in konarak and compare it to the damage to israeli ship .



Depends on a lot of factors like point of impact and so on. Aso artillery rockets could have caused similar damage. It's not conclusive. So before Hezbollah revealed that they are in possession of the Kosar ASCM and that they used it against the zionist vessel, different possibilities remained plausible.



Hack-Hook said:


> exactly the point that i made , if they had small supply they would have not left their best missile while repositioning



Depends on the situation, there can be compelling reasons. These were just small quantities.



Hack-Hook said:


> it happened many time. and those token numbers wsere tens of missile , when the end of war is not clear, you have limited stock and you have no way to resupply then you wont abandon them



Again not proof for many hundreds having been delivered.



Hack-Hook said:


> if it was deployed its radar signature would have been picked by enemies around iran.



They don't publish that information.



Hack-Hook said:


> and your explanation won't make sense at all even a single radar have its use and fill one gap in our southern border that was filled with gaps at the time



Not if Iranian planners see more use in dismantling and studying it.

At any rate, there's no proof it wasn't deployed.



Hack-Hook said:


> no its not impossible to prove it was not deployed , its imposible to bring evidence it was not deployed they are different, the fact that there is no evidence of it being deployed , the fact nobody picked up its signature . is enough to conclude and show it was not deployed . you say no it was deployed , well bring your facts and evidence and proof , the ball is in your court sir



As I said, much of what Iran is fielding was not revealed before years and there was no evidence of deployment until Iran made it public. So just because no evidence is available, it doesn't imply Iran is not deploying it.

As for nobody picking up its signature, you don't know that. It's not as if the enemy is publishing every radar signal it's picking up from Iran.



Hack-Hook said:


> would have gained alot but, there is a simple question why subsequent iranian air-defense system follow like 3rd of khordad, 15th of khordad , Bavar-373 , 9th of dey, zoobin, mersad-16,.... have far more similarity with western system .



The general science behind western and eastern systems is the same, it's the same physics. One can gain knowledge from studying a Russian system and incorporate that knowledge into the design of a domestic product whose outer looks might be completely different.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said you can't hide radar signature and you can't hide a radar from the eye of satellite



The enemy is not publishing this sort of information.



Hack-Hook said:


> decoys and noisance are those are s-75 not s-3000 why you mistake them and no if the russian were willing to deliver the system iran only could get the compensation for late supply , it all come to the term of the deal



I'm not confusing anything, I'm stating the S-300 is integrated into the IADS and it's definitely not conceived of as a decoy, unlike what you were suggesting about Russian SAM systems present in Iran.

Iran would have gotten back the initial payments she made on top of compensation.



Hack-Hook said:


> you say it happens but can't provide evidence ,the fact not this nor anything similar to it or anything that work in same radio band is used in our airdefense systems is evidence , we use that band only in our early warning radars



There are elements common to radars irregardless of the band they operate in.



Hack-Hook said:


> as i said every single air defense have certain use , we have hundreds of those s-75 , its not me that said we don't use anything we get our hand on , it was you who said we didn't use s-300 because it was in low number



I never made such a statement about the S-300PM2. As for the Nebo radar, it was one hypothesis among others and not a definitive claim.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Hezbollah used Kosar AScM to hit Israel Corvette, at that time Noor was not yet delivered,and also Corvette was close to shore, Noor AScM has minimal range around 30km...Corvette was within visual range from shore, Noor has 160kg warhead, it would sunk Corvette easily.. Kosar AScM has 30kg warhead, range up to 20km, not need any infrastructure, model with EO/IR guidance is excellent for that range

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

drmeson said:


> yes but does the leadership even want an IRIAF is the question I asked ?
> 
> We can waste our days here talking about MIG-29, F-14, SU-35, Kowsar-I, but what if leadership itself does not want the force to survive?


They do not. There will be no conventional Air Force for Iran fortunately. F35s etc are retrograde thinking. Air forces will be manual UAVs transitioned to support roles of current craft to eventually independent AI driven units. It’s happening now as we speak. Cheap, fast, expendable and deadly. Any foreign craft delivered to Iran will have primarily TOT value and as operational craft a far second.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Depends on a lot of factors like point of impact and so on. Aso artillery rockets could have caused similar damage. It's not conclusive. So before Hezbollah revealed that they are in possession of the Kosar ASCM and that they used it against the zionist vessel, different possibilities remained plausible.


which artillery rocket was percise enough to hit a ship 20km away in 2006 and hezbollah had access to it. the damage was consistent with kowsar , why you want to argure on that , a noor even if exploded above the ship not after hitting it (which the missile actually hit the ship) would have completely destroyed upper part of the ship . it was a kowsar that hit the crane on the ship that was the reason for so little damage. the story of noor come from Zionist media because they wanted to hide the fact they taught the missile come from an Egyptian ship 100km away and fired a harpoon at it and destroyed it . it was all their damage control for their hilarious mistake


SalarHaqq said:


> Depends on the situation, thee can be compelling reasons. These were just small quantities.


can be , may be , there also it can mean that they had so much they didn't care 


SalarHaqq said:


> They don't publish that information.


they don't publish that , they die to publish anything about Iran , they even fabricate a lot of stories about Iran to milk some certain countries south of Persian gulf


SalarHaqq said:


> Not if Iranian planners see more use in dismantling and studying it.
> 
> At any rate, there's no proof it wasn't deployed.


dismantling , studying and then put all part together , won't even take 6 month.


SalarHaqq said:


> As I said, much of what Iran is fielding was not revealed before years and there was no evidence of deployment until Iran made it public. So just because no evidence is available, it doesn't imply Iran is not deploying it.


not something that has such signature as a long range radar . that any radio enthusiast can pick up from hundreds of km away


SalarHaqq said:


> The general science behind western and eastern systems is the same, it's the same physics. One can gain knowledge from studying a Russian system and incorporate that knowledge into the design of a domestic product whose outer looks might be completely different.


its the same yes no argument on that , but how you apply it , how you put together the system and..... are different . we used the band waves that western country use in their air defense system not the one that Russian do and like western countries decided to use those vhf radars in the integrated radar network not part of the air defense battery . Russia on other hand use those vhf radars as part of the air defense battery . i don't say we never going to add that to the battery in the future , but right now we decided go for mobility and and precision and my guess is we won't use those in air defense systems until we find a way to employ them in a manner that don't hamper the system mobility


SalarHaqq said:


> I'm not confusing anything, I'm stating the S-300 is integrated into the IADS and it's definitely not conceived of as a decoy, unlike what you were suggesting about Russian SAM systems present in Iran.
> 
> Iran would have gotten back the initial payments she made on top of compensation.


where is say s-300 is decoy , i said s-75 role is only to be a decoy and make enemy busy or be used against targets like helicopters that don't have much capabilities at countering them


SalarHaqq said:


> There are elements common to radars irregardless of the band they operate in.


namely , the band is different , russian radars untill recently were PESA while bavar and 3rd of khordad use AESA , the missiles are different , the launch system is different ...... one use E/O the other don't use it .
the similarity end at the point that both use radio wave in their radars

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> which artillery rocket was percise enough to hit a ship 20km away in 2006 and hezbollah had access to it.



Who exactly knew in 2006 the ship was hit from 20km away? I remember how peer-reviewed authors like Tom Cooper initially were doubting the use of an ASCM, simply because no details were given until a considerable amount of time after the war, and because available elements weren't conclusive enough.



Hack-Hook said:


> the damage was consistent with kowsar , why you want to argure on that , a noor even if exploded above the ship not after hitting it (which the missile actually hit the ship) would have completely destroyed upper part of the ship .



With the level of information available to the public in 2006, it could have been a Nasr. Could have been rockets from closer range. Could have been a Noor malfunctioning, could have been many things to objective observers back then. Until the day Hezbollah revealed that they were fielding the Kosar and had indeed used it against the vessel. In the immediate aftermath of the war and based on the pictures of the damage however, it wasn't possible to draw definitive conclusions.



Hack-Hook said:


> it was a kowsar that hit the crane on the ship that was the reason for so little damage. the story of noor come from Zionist media because they wanted to hide the fact they taught the missile come from an Egyptian ship 100km away and fired a harpoon at it and destroyed it . it was all their damage control for their hilarious mistake



I'm not doubting it was a Kosar. I'm saying the picture of the damaged ship by itself did not provide enough evidence that a Kosar was used. Scroll up to see what the point under discussion was all about.



Hack-Hook said:


> can be , may be , there also it can mean that they had so much they didn't care



Meaning it doesn't provide actual proof.



Hack-Hook said:


> they don't publish that , they die to publish anything about Iran , they even fabricate a lot of stories about Iran to milk some certain countries south of Persian gulf



Not everything. For op-sec reasons alone, they classify some of the data they have on Iran, frankly this is a no-brainer. Nobody in this world will reveal everything their intell could gather about adversaries they might enter an armed conflict with.



Hack-Hook said:


> dismantling , studying and then put all part together , won't even take 6 month.



Unless the knowledge gleaned is added quickly to already existing expertise and that domestic production follows suit rapidly enough, so that it's not deemed worth it to integrate the radar into the IADS for just a short period of time.



Hack-Hook said:


> not something that has such signature as a long range radar . that any radio enthusiast can pick up from hundreds of km away



Private radio enthusiasts are privy to the identity of military radar signatures?



Hack-Hook said:


> its the same yes no argument on that , but how you apply it , how you put together the system and..... are different . we used the band waves that western country use in their air defense system not the one that Russian do and like western countries decided to use those vhf radars in the integrated radar network not part of the air defense battery . Russia on other hand use those vhf radars as part of the air defense battery . i don't say we never going to add that to the battery in the future , but right now we decided go for mobility and and precision and my guess is we won't use those in air defense systems until we find a way to employ them in a manner that don't hamper the system mobility



Which doesn't preclude extraction of useful technical knowledge from the study of that radar.



Hack-Hook said:


> where is say s-300 is decoy , i said s-75 role is only to be a decoy and make enemy busy or be used against targets like helicopters that don't have much capabilities at countering them



The enemy won't confuse the S-75 for something else. And if it's a potent and cost-effective weapon against helicopters, then it means it has a niche utility to the Iranian IADS which justifies its continued depoyment. This is precisely what I've been stating all along.



Hack-Hook said:


> namely , the band is different , russian radars untill recently were PESA while bavar and 3rd of khordad use AESA , the missiles are different , the launch system is different ...... one use E/O the other don't use it .
> the similarity end at the point that both use radio wave in their radars



There's more than that to the general science behind radar technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> With the level of information available to the public in 2006, it could have been a Nasr. Could have been rockets from closer range. Could have been a Noor malfunctioning, could have been many things to objective observers back then. Until the day Hezbollah revealed that they were fielding the Kosar and had indeed used it against the vessel. In the immediate aftermath of the war and based on the pictures of the damage however, it wasn't possible to draw definitive conclusions.


 Nasr-1 tested by iran army in 2008 . at best in 2006 it was in development phase


SalarHaqq said:


> Unless the knowledge gleaned is added quickly to already existing expertise and that domestic production follows suit rapidly enough, so that it's not deemed worth it to integrate the radar into the IADS for just a short period of time.


the knowledge can't be incorporated so fast , it take years .


SalarHaqq said:


> Private radio enthusiasts are privy to the identity of military radar signatures?


they find USSR long range radar in eastern russia sooner than usa army . don't understimate it . but to the question nebu-svu is not exactly new , its radio signature is already well documented after Russia and Belarus used it in eastern Europe


SalarHaqq said:


> The enemy won't confuse the S-75 for something else. And if it's a potent and cost-effective weapon against helicopters, then it means it has a niche utility to the Iranian IADS which justifies its continued depoyment. This is precisely what I've been stating all along.


no but he will be busy countering it that give chance to more robust system doing their work


SalarHaqq said:


> There's more than that to the general science behind radar technology.


and its what ?, the general science , we knew it from the day we get our first radars, we didn't need to dismantle nebu-svu to learn that

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

sanel1412 said:


> View attachment 872836
> View attachment 872837
> View attachment 872835


Close-up pic of 2 of the new glide bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Sineva said:


> Close-up pic of 2 of the new glide bombs.


That black bomb next to it is huge


----------



## drmeson

Do we know specs of the this large huge PGM ?


----------



## Stryker1982

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> @Mr Iran Eye Once again, you are proven right! And since the plan has been unveiled, I'm sure some prototypes have already been tested.
> 
> But my question is, how did you know this was being built?


He didn't know anything.

Everyone on this forum was aware their was a heavier turbofan engine at design if you look at past conversation, but wasn't sure about the progress, timeline or if it would be a copy of any Russian engine or fully indigenous.

We've all been waiting for it. This just confirms that Iran is eying a true heavy interceptor design, well beyond the capability of Kowsar. Things like Kowsar and Yasin is just the stepping stone that need to be done to get to that level, and hopefully the first heavy interceptor class system can be field tested by 2030. Maybe if Iran is much wealthier from a nuclear deal, it will be sooner.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

jauk said:


> They do not. There will be no conventional Air Force for Iran fortunately. F35s etc are retrograde thinking. Air forces will be manual UAVs transitioned to support roles of current craft to eventually independent AI driven units. It’s happening now as we speak. Cheap, fast, expendable and deadly. Any foreign craft delivered to Iran will have primarily TOT value and as operational craft a far second.



manned to unmanned transition will be a slow process. Exclusive Unmanned era will not happen before 2040s. IRIAF will probably be one of the largest AF in the world in the unmanned-only era if trends continue but it will see a very dark period of time during the transition phase due to budget cuts.



Stryker1982 said:


> He didn't know anything.
> 
> Everyone on this forum was aware their was a heavier turbofan engine at design if you look at past conversation, but wasn't sure about the progress, timeline or if it would be a copy of any Russian engine or fully indigenous.
> 
> We've all been waiting for it. This just confirms that Iran is eying a true heavy interceptor design, well beyond the capability of Kowsar. Things like Kowsar and Yasin is just the stepping stone that need to be done to get to that level, and hopefully the first heavy interceptor class system can be field tested by 2030. Maybe if Iran is much wealthier from a nuclear deal, it will be sooner.



Turbofan with 17K dry and 28K lbf afterburning thrust on a Kowsar-I (same avionics) means an F-16D equivalent fighter. 

IRIAF's problems start and end with $$$ for bulk production. They can replicate an F-14 and if we go by BT's articles they already have done that. But can they put that into 12-14units/year production ? No they can and that is because of $.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> manned to unmanned transition will be a slow process. Exclusive Unmanned era will not happen before 2040s. IRIAF will probably be one of the largest AF in the world in the unmanned-only era if trends continue but it will see a very dark period of time during the transition phase due to budget cuts.


I can see this as well.

What do you think of the Karrar being upgraded to a larger design, something like the US XQ-58 operating at a squadron level. Is this a necessary move?

For both sorties and combat air patrol



drmeson said:


> Turbofan with 17K dry and 28K lbf afterburning thrust on a Kowsar-I (same avionics) means an F-16D equivalent fighter.
> 
> IRIAF's problems start and end with $$$ for bulk production. They can replicate an F-14 and if we go by BT's articles they already have done that. But can they put that into 12-14units/year production ? No they can and that is because of $.


So do you believe they are simply waiting for the money and engine to come in to start serial production on Kowsar or move to another design.

I don't see why they should keep the current Kowsar design if they will field an engine with the specifications you suggested. Instead, keeping it as a trainer aircraft.


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> I can see this as well.
> 
> What do you think of the Karrar being upgraded to a larger design, something like the US XQ-58 operating at a squadron level. Is this a necessary move?
> 
> For both sorties and combat air patrol



This is very necessary. A fast UCAV wingmen with low RCS and avionics. There are four candidates for that.

- Karrar. The problem is that they will have to re-design the airframe drastically to accommodate the tracking sensors for A2A role. May be an FC-Radar or an IRST to provide coordinates to A2A weapons. Karrar is too small for that. If you use missiles' own seekers to track the target then the range is compromised below any meaningful point. One solution can be the Tactical data linking that XQ-58 or modern wingmen have. Track radars on manned fighters and ground radars can easily provide coordinates to the receiver node in UCAV which fires the weapon. This system works within the Iranian airspace atleast. Outside the airspace, a manned fighter with long range track radar and TDL will have to fly with UCAV. Current IRIAF only has Kowsar-I with this package (93 KM track+TDL). F-14AM has a long range track option with locally modified AWG-9 but TDL is not clarified and in case of conflict F-14 will have to provide CAP+interception both. As per recent article in key.aero, a highly maneuverable AIM-9X equivalent version of CCD guided all aspect A2A missile is being tested which can be a massive upgrade to IRIAF in the interception role. UCAV armed with two such missiles can accompany the CAP patrols of IRIAF.

There is Mobin that can probably be better than Karrar for this role if enlarged.

- Shahed-171 with Jahesh-700 can take over the role of PGM strike and ELINT. It has low RCS and can intrude enemy airspace easily to acquire targets or search for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> So do you believe they are simply waiting for the money and engine to come in to start serial production on Kowsar or move to another design.



I personally believe IRIAF has no money to buy anything. Tom Copper and BT claim that there are internal IRIAF groups that pull each other legs through lobbyism for $ which resulted in leadership cutting the budget to 200-400 million for a large force out of defence budget of 24 Billion USD. Strategy has less to do with it. A Cordesmann (Janes) claims that IRIAF offers no value to Iranian doctrine so Strategists just gave up on this force altogather. 

Make of it as you will. 



Stryker1982 said:


> I don't see why they should keep the current Kowsar design if they will field an engine with the specifications you suggested.



A proper 4+ generation fighter plane require four factors: 

1) Turbofan Powerplants that can provide 45-50K+ ft/min climb, fast pitch/roll/yaws, high G's, long range. 
2) Radar+Avionics: 100 KM+ track range for a 1-3 m2 target, look down SAR capability, e-warfare suite of RWR, ECCM and then Double duplex Tactical Data linking capability.
3) Airframe (low RCS, FBW)
4) Long range light BVR missiles and all aspect WVR weapons. 

Saeghe/Kowsar Program current tick marks only two of the above four requirements i.e. 2 and 3. Its strong points are that they have used some level FBW on a small RCS airframe and its Radar+Avionics are the best that IRIAF currently has in its hands. Its weak points are the power plants and weapons. OWJ/J-85-21G is too weak to push the aircraft to fight against modern high maneuverable fighters and IRIAF has no lighter weight BVR missiles to arm it with since Fakour-90 and future Maghsoud are F-14 exclusive weapons. 

With this Turbofan requirement, 1 will be fulfilled while with new CCD A2A missile least the plan will get a decent air-to-air weapon. The long-range BVR problem will not be solved unless Iran procures PL-15 for it or comes with its own design. 

Few pages back I discussed how USAF's AIM-9X block III and Israel's Derby are both just highly maneuverable sidewinders with BVR ranges . I really hope this new Azarakhsh CCD seeker missile is something similar, according to BT and Patarames, it is an AIM-9X equivalent. 




Stryker1982 said:


> Instead, keeping it as a trainer aircraft.



I believe Yasin lobby will not let the project die so even if it's not required, Yasin AT will get $ for some level of production. The same job that a Kowsar-I based Trainer squadron can do will be given to Yasin pretty similar to how Mirage F1 is being operated while it has no radar, missile ... let alone missile, it has no pylon to carry missiles but Saddam's legend lives on in IRIAF without offering anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

drmeson said:


> manned to unmanned transition will be a slow process. Exclusive Unmanned era will not happen before 2040s. IRIAF will probably be one of the largest AF in the world in the unmanned-only era if trends continue but it will see a very dark period of time during the transition phase due to budget cuts.
> 
> 
> 
> Turbofan with 17K dry and 28K lbf afterburning thrust on a Kowsar-I (same avionics) means an F-16D equivalent fighter.
> 
> IRIAF's problems start and end with $$$ for bulk production. They can replicate an F-14 and if we go by BT's articles they already have done that. But can they put that into 12-14units/year production ? No they can and that is because of $.


Incorrect. The proof is in the pudding with modern warfare. Conventional craft are merely tail end production runs suffered by the tech leaders (ie US). Leapfroggers (Iran) have moved on. 2040 you say? Then IRI will not have an air force until then which by deduction means it’s coming far sooner than that.

This thread itself is retrograde thinking and has predicted/wanted this or that garbage craft for IRI for god knows how long. Still nothing. And not because Iran can’t it’s because Iran WON’T.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

jauk said:


> Incorrect. The proof is in the pudding with modern warfare. Conventional craft are merely tail end production runs suffered by the tech leaders (ie US). Leapfroggers (Iran) have moved on. 2040 you say? Then IRI will not have an air force until then which by deduction means it’s coming far sooner than that.



Fifth generation fighter jets will keep flying in 2030s. Major countries will enter the 2030s with fleets made of 4++ to 5.0 Generation manned fighters + UCAV bombers and some with wingmen. Almost every fighter maker in this world has either shown or has already flown a 5th generation aircraft and has already signed deals with their clients. I will say safely that we will be surrounded by 4++ to 5.0 Generation fighters by 2030s. Our current trends seem to hint towards IRIAF+IRGCAF becoming a large UCAV force (3rd largest fleet already) with few 4.0 generation manned fighters for interception role only. IRIAF's end as a potential force is not coming, its already here if we go by numbers presented by World Air forces (source of wiki for global AF). Recent most numbers of FMC (Full mission capable) and QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) fighters are down to a point that IADS will have to cover for some spots for interceptions where we actually have no decent fighter to put up a fight in the sky, it will have to be done from the ground through Ambush SAMS. Good or bad ? is upto the reader.

offcourse this will change if leadership starts putting up $$ in the combat aviation by 2025. They have the ingredients, a decent avionics suite, large turbofan is coming, modern BVR and WVR are there. 



jauk said:


> This thread itself is retrograde thinking and has predicted/wanted this or that garbage craft for IRI for god knows how long. Still nothing. And not because Iran can’t it’s because Iran WON’T.



Iran can’t it’s because Iran won't because Iran has no $$$ for IRIAF. Some people call it strategy, some call it inner politics. Like I said make of it what you will. I believe its a mixture of both.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

All 6th gen fighter jet programs are manned. While we are now seeing unmanned concepts introduced (China’s Dark Sword and USA wingman) they are ment to support the next gen of fighters not replace them.







End of the day the deciding factor is quality of electronic subsystems, air to air weapon tech, and engine tech.

Future lies in hypersonic reusable vehicles. Currently we are at single use stage.






So Iran being the leader in this field when it’s not capable of building a 4th Gen heavy engine (at this time) let alone the tech needed for hypersonic scramjet is a peculiar conclusion when it’s UAVs are mostly turbo prop powered and its domestic fighter jet project is using J-85.

Enemy will be fielding high supersonic and hypersonic reusable vehicles for deep strike of HVTs in the 2040’s and 50’s.

Iran could take Kowsar right now and make it unmanned. Doesn’t mean anything taking the human out of the cockpit if your electronics and sats comms can’t do the at least the job of a human. But if you wanted to simply achieve an “unmanned fighter jet” you could do it today. Turkey is well underway in that regard. But it doesn’t mean it can hold its own against a 6th or 7th gen fighter because you slapped an engine into a unmanned airframe and put a FLIR on it.

Human being in the cockpit or not is irrelevant. In fact not being cockpit means even more advanced engine tech as you are no longer worried about G force effects on pilot and can start building airframes with hypersonic engines and advanced metallurgy techniques to cope with airframe stress.

So Iran at Owj and FJ-44 level making the leap to match or at least be competitive with rivals in unmanned fighter/drone jet field is still going to require an enormous amount of tech advancement and a dedicated effort by the state to grow the IRIAF and IRGC-AF.

Because RQ-170 drones flying with FJ-44 engines in 2040s is not going to cut it when your enemy can go from Bahrain to Tehran in 8 mins using a hypersonic reusable strike fighter with the RCS of a bee.

I guess you can say who cares we have our Missile fleet—which is true as long as war doesn’t break out due to enemy accepting high deterrence costs. In the event it does break out, then your underbelly will be exposed to air superiority gap wether manned or unmanned. Switching to unmanned doesn’t make it any easier for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> Iran can’t it’s because Iran won't because Iran has no $$$ for IRIAF. Some people call it strategy, some call it inner politics. Like I said make of it what you will. I believe its a mixture of both.


To build a serious fighter program while under sanctions and a shrinking economy was clearly not a wise decision during the thought processes of the establishment. Until we see finances of Iran improve, we will likely not see anything other than UCAVs. The people who use so called intuition to guess the state of the IRIAF think you can make a fighter program with 10$ and a can of fanta orange. Takes billions actually.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Stryker1982 said:


> He didn't know anything.
> 
> Everyone on this forum was aware their was a heavier turbofan engine at design if you look at past conversation, but wasn't sure about the progress, timeline or if it would be a copy of any Russian engine or fully indigenous.
> 
> We've all been waiting for it. This just confirms that Iran is eying a true heavy interceptor design, well beyond the capability of Kowsar. Things like Kowsar and Yasin is just the stepping stone that need to be done to get to that level, and hopefully the first heavy interceptor class system can be field tested by 2030. Maybe if Iran is much wealthier from a nuclear deal, it will be sooner.


Hi my jealous, yes I knew it because here on the subject of Iriaf, it is a disaster because people have no intuition and do not know how to observe things well. I come to read other response and it's pathetic. Iran's budget is higher than the public budget presented but again, you are blind, without real intuition and observation.

Iran is working to pass the stages and go to a 6th generation combat aircraft. Go laugh all my children together, but time will still be right and quickly. You will have an appearance very soon.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

Le'ts simplify things. Iran's only feasible option is the flanker. Relations between Russia and The US/EU/Israel have hit rock bottom. That drone deal between Iran-Russia might very well be part of a much larger deal.

I've also heard that Iranian pilots are already training to fly SU-35s and SU-30s. It makes sense because the only other feasible options for Iran were the JF-17 which Iran rejected out of quality concerns and the J-10 which China will not trade for oil and because of potential sanctions concerns. I guess the US will have to actually target them and like they're doing to Russia until they learn their lesson.

Anyways i have no concerns about the SU-35. However when it comes to the the SU-30 Iran needs the software codes and technology transfers, as well as a deal to co-produce the fighters in Iran.I think that would be more than fair for both countries.

Realistically though Iran needs alot more than jets from Russia. Iran needs help upgrading its existing fleets of MIG-29s with modern avionics, radars, weapons. Iran also might want to purchase some MIG-31s, just so it can launch large missiles (potentially in the future hypersonic) at enemys. Iran should also upgrade its SU-24s for the same reason, just to use them to launch missiles at enemy positionsl

Iran definitely needs to keep its fleet of fighter jets underground, underneath mountain bunkers, just like its drones. Also in my opinion the F-7s, F-4s and Mirages need to be sold off. The F-4s seem to be the most useful out of the bunch though so maybe just use them until the the wheels fall off ? However the F-7s and Mirages should be sold to Syria and various third world/African nations.

Iran also needs various other parts components for a variety of other weapons which have been mentioned earlier, so this deal is worth billions,along with cooperation in multiple fields.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran is unlikely to be able to build anything except for F-4s until sanctions are removed and then even it will be very challenging. Iran has built some prototypes over the years, the issue is that they don't match or surpass global standards or even a modernized F-4, so then what is the point. The flanker at this point is Iran's most feasible option. Many people here object to such a proposition, but it is what it is. Iran has limited options and its airforce needs a sooner than later.



Stryker1982 said:


> To build a serious fighter program while under sanctions and a shrinking economy was clearly not a wise decision during the thought processes of the establishment. Until we see finances of Iran improve, we will likely not see anything other than UCAVs. The people who use so called intuition to guess the state of the IRIAF think you can make a fighter program with 10$ and a can of fanta orange. Takes billions actually.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

6th generation seems to me like more of a gimmick than anything. It just tries to implement more stealth features and they're supposed to have a loyal wingman, with some of the jets being unmanned. That's basically the future of UAVs. Drones that can fly as fast as jets, maneuver like jets, avoid incoming missiles by dispensing flares and using counter measures. Iran needs to work towards something like this (Turkey is already working on maneuverable and fast drones) Otherwise Iran will get left behind in the dust. Although I suspect that it will be years before we see any of the below fighter jets actually deployed and in service. Western weapons programs tend to be plagued with endless delays and cost over-runs.



TheImmortal said:


> All 6th gen fighter jet programs are manned. While we are now seeing unmanned concepts introduced (China’s Dark Sword and USA wingman) they are ment to support the next gen of fighters not replace them.
> 
> View attachment 873691
> 
> 
> End of the day the deciding factor is quality of electronic subsystems, air to air weapon tech, and engine tech.
> 
> Future lies in hypersonic reusable vehicles. Currently we are at single use stage.
> 
> View attachment 873692
> 
> 
> So Iran being the leader in this field when it’s not capable of building a 4th Gen heavy engine (at this time) let alone the tech needed for hypersonic scramjet is a peculiar conclusion when it’s UAVs are mostly turbo prop powered and its domestic fighter jet project is using J-85.
> 
> Enemy will be fielding high supersonic and hypersonic reusable vehicles for deep strike of HVTs in the 2040’s and 50’s.
> 
> Iran could take Kowsar right now and make it unmanned. Doesn’t mean anything taking the human out of the cockpit if your electronics and sats comms can’t do the at least the job of a human. But if you wanted to simply achieve an “unmanned fighter jet” you could do it today. Turkey is well underway in that regard. But it doesn’t mean it can hold its own against a 6th or 7th gen fighter because you slapped an engine into a unmanned airframe and put a FLIR on it.
> 
> Human being in the cockpit or not is irrelevant. In fact not being cockpit means even more advanced engine tech as you are no longer worried about G force effects on pilot and can start building airframes with hypersonic engines and advanced metallurgy techniques to cope with airframe stress.
> 
> So Iran at Owj and FJ-44 level making the leap to match or at least be competitive with rivals in unmanned fighter/drone jet field is still going to require an enormous amount of tech advancement and a dedicated effort by the state to grow the IRIAF and IRGC-AF.
> 
> Because RQ-170 drones flying with FJ-44 engines in 2040s is not going to cut it when your enemy can go from Bahrain to Tehran in 8 mins using a hypersonic reusable strike fighter with the RCS of a bee.
> 
> I guess you can say who cares we have our Missile fleet—which is true as long as war doesn’t break out due to enemy accepting high deterrence costs. In the event it does break out, then your underbelly will be exposed to air superiority gap wether manned or unmanned. Switching to unmanned doesn’t make it any easier for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sha ah said:


> Iran is unlikely to be able to build anything except for F-4s until sanctions are removed and then even it will be very challenging. Iran has built some prototypes over the years, the issue is that they don't match or surpass global standards or even a modernized F-4, so then what is the point. The flanker at this point is Iran's most feasible option. Many people here object to such a proposition, but it is what it is. Iran has limited options and its airforce needs a sooner than later.


It looks like analysis of the 80s, you are really not serious. No one answered my question which is why Iran has made a new F-4 cell. I already have a good party of the answer. It is completely false, Iran is made much further than you think and the answer to that will come fairly quickly according to my analysis.

On the contrary, building several prototype is very intelligent. They do it with drones and air defense system because they test several technology at the same time. We will see the configuration of weapons on the Kowsar in the future which will demonstrate the genius of the Iranian. They managed to put very modern weapons on the F-7. Imagine how they have to have fun with Qaher-313 to experiment with new technology. He does it with other combat planes.

People also forget that old F-5s are upgraded in Kowsar world. Kowsar itself is continuously upgraded

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> I can see this as well.
> 
> What do you think of the Karrar being upgraded to a larger design, something like the US XQ-58 operating at a squadron level. Is this a necessary move?
> 
> For both sorties and combat air patrol


that will be sofreh-mahi if they decide to finish the project


sha ah said:


> Le'ts simplify things. Iran's only feasible option is the flanker. Relations between Russia and The US/EU/Israel have hit rock bottom. That drone deal between Iran-Russia might very well be part of a much larger deal.


no flanker is no solution at all , as its radar and electronic suits is outdated and cant compete with the radars and internal system of the fighters of the countries around us . also the philosophy that flankers are built upon are also dated and passed its time.


sha ah said:


> I've also heard that Iranian pilots are already training to fly SU-35s and SU-30s. It makes sense because the only other feasible options for Iran were the JF-17 which Iran rejected out of quality concerns and the J-10 which China will not trade for oil and because of potential sanctions concerns. I guess the US will have to actually target them and like they're doing to Russia until they learn their lesson.


do you have evidence for that ? let me answer you no there is no evidence for that , and it's not the first time such rumors are made.


sha ah said:


> Anyways i have no concerns about the SU-35. However when it comes to the the SU-30 Iran needs the software codes and technology transfers, as well as a deal to co-produce the fighters in Iran.I think that would be more than fair for both countries.


Su-30 even worse than Su-35, even latest models of Su-27 are better than su-30s , heck even JF-17 block III is better


sha ah said:


> Realistically though Iran needs alot more than jets from Russia. Iran needs help upgrading its existing fleets of MIG-29s with modern avionics, radars, weapons. Iran also might want to purchase some MIG-31s, just so it can launch large missiles (potentially in the future hypersonic) at enemys. Iran should also upgrade its SU-24s for the same reason, just to use them to launch missiles at enemy positionsl


yes Iran needs buy aircraft from Russia but iran have no business at all design and produce its own fighter jets and here people mock PGCC countries for buying weapon from USA which actually are a lot better than these air planes i hear they want Iran buy.


sha ah said:


> Iran is unlikely to be able to build anything except for F-4s until sanctions are removed and then even it will be very challenging. Iran has built some prototypes over the years, the issue is that they don't match or surpass global standards or even a modernized F-4, so then what is the point. The flanker at this point is Iran's most feasible option. Many people here object to such a proposition, but it is what it is. Iran has limited options and its airforce needs a sooner than later.


Iran even don't bother build anything based on F-4 , all is Iran building is based on F-5 namely kowsar and Yasin

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> To build a serious fighter program while under sanctions and a shrinking economy was clearly not a wise decision during the thought processes of the establishment.



I believe and its my own personal assumption that leadership lost interest in IRIAF stems partly from antics pulled by the force itself in the 2000s and aviation organizations. The strategy of relying upon Missiles, UCAVs, and IADs is there and its a factor but not entirely. SL was invited to Saegheh-I 3-7600 first flight when it was presented as "F/A-18 equivalent". Did they tell him it was only some % rebuilt airframe and had no radar, fire control system? it did not even have a navigation suite so had to be flown with a chase plane. Before that was Azarakhsh which was ... "the first Iranian fighter jet" a HESA+CATIC (Chinese) rebuilt F-5E which was given the avionics of a J-7E. Then F-313. I remember a few Mirage F1s were moderately overhauled and given new paint jobs and the project head was claiming how he "broke the American back" by doing that. When you pull antics like this in front of people who are already standing on a thin ice, threatened by lobby groups, you lose credibility and even your real projects will be seen as meaningless gimmicks. How many people here understand or even know that Iran since 2018 has a 4.0 generation avionics, nav-coom, FBW suite? thats an achievement but that is all lost in the background because of past record of PR stunts. 

All the while leadership saw IRGC going from Shahab-II to firing Glide vehicles with MaRVs on them at MRBM ranges. Them launching tri-staged SLVs from TEL, Bavar-373 tracking targets at 450 km and Sayyad's pulling 30 G's at 6 mach with their TVC. Who will they fund ?



Stryker1982 said:


> Until we see finances of Iran improve, we will likely not see anything other than UCAVs.



Defence budget is not small. it is higher than even those countries that purchase weapons from outside. IRIAF portion in it is small. 



Stryker1982 said:


> The people who use so called intuition to guess the state of the IRIAF think you can make a fighter program with 10$ and a can of fanta orange. Takes billions actually.



Alright lets say out of the 24 Bln USD budget, if they just giving IRIAF some 1.7 Blillion USD. Following thing will happen:

1) 500 million for F-14AM Program. Yearly 10 x F-14A can be restored => upgraded to F-14AM standard which means the Airframe is thoroughly rebuilt, AWG-9 digitalized to provide its legendary 350+ km search range, new INS/TACAN, Fakour-90 LR-BVR. IRIAF possesses 60 airframes which can provide a solid force of ~45-48 long-range BVR attack capable interceptors that can beat the shit out of 75 % of the PGCC intruders over their own airspace. According to BT, OWJ already has mastered building an entire TF-30-P414 and airframe (partial building?) and is just waiting for $. The plane is also supposed to get a Meteor equivalent ARH BVR missile Maghsoud and an AIM-9X equivalent CCD guided missile.

2) 800 Million for Kowsar-I Program for a force of 65 Fighters @ 10 Million USD/Unit fighter and their Armaments as well. Radar, TDL, Nav-Comm, E-Warfare, FBW ... it is the most modern electronic system we have in the sky of Iran. 

3) 500 Million for 23 x MIG-29 9.12 obsolete dying fleet gets upgraded with Zhuk M radars, E-warfare suites, R-77-1, R-74

*Advantages*
This force can provide 140 x 4.0 generation fighters all having modern avionics and weapons package. These can guard PG theatre and NW. The surface fleet will have air cover, helping IADS to the point that it won't get stretched and be attacked by SOWs of enemies. With growing time the enemy aircrafts will have lower RCS and longer range SOWs. They won't even need to enter Iranian airspace or even get near to it. They will just launch their EF-2000 and Rafales to fire supersonic SOWs at Iranian IADS. These fighters with their <1 m2 RCS won't be picked by GWACS search radars easily. 

Only IRIAF can threaten this enemy in sky which it currently can't. 

*Why is it not happening?*
Different theories among critics:

-No $ for IRIAF. heavy % of the budget is for Missile forces, IADS, UCAVs, Navy
-Lobbys within and at periphery of IRIAF fight with each other and MoD is losing interest in funding them. 
-History of meaningless projects that added nothing of value to IRIAF (F-7N, MirageF1, Multiple Saeghe testbeds)
-Nojeh fearing people are still alive and in power. May be more scared after Turkish AF actions during coup.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sha ah said:


> Iran is unlikely to be able to build anything except for F-4s until sanctions are removed and then even it will be very challenging. Iran has built some prototypes over the years, the issue is that they don't match or surpass global standards or even a modernized F-4, so then what is the point. The flanker at this point is Iran's most feasible option. Many people here object to such a proposition, but it is what it is. Iran has limited options and its airforce needs a sooner than later.



In modern combat, F-4 has no place.

10 m2 RCS airframe will be tracked from 200 km away by Captor AESA of EF-2000, Rafale, F/A-18EF who will fire barrages of Meteor-BVRAAMS, AIM-120C/D at it from ~150 KM while it can't replicate this attack on them. Even the Dowran upgraded ones have a tracking range of ~100 KM and no low weiht BVR missile on them. Low maneuverability of F-4 ensures it cant survive against modern-era small low RCS maneuverable fighters. 

It's only role is as an attack aircraft that can launch AShCM or LACM from Iranian airspace. This can be done from the ground too. IRGC has MaRV GVs that can land at enemy head at 4-5 Mach and UCAVs that can enter enemy airspace undetected. 

Iran needs interceptors, not attack aircraft. Lowest possible RCS, small agile airframes with electronics so advanced that they can track+jam+attack enemy from distance and make its life a living hell in the sky. EF-2000, JAS-39, F-16D/V, F/A-18EF, Rafale ... Age of heavy bomb trucks is gone.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> That black bomb next to it is huge


There are some other interesting possibilities for these weapons.
One option is to remove the wing kit and use it as a straight short ranged satellite guided bomb.In this role other options would be fitting it with laser or optronic seekers.
Another option in the long range role would be fitting it with a back up optronic or radar imaging seeker to provide it with dsmac in case satellite guidance is being disrupted.
Essentially these could provide both the irgcaf and the iriaf with a common family of locally developed modern air launched pgms.


----------



## TheImmortal

At some point in past, I calculated IRIAF *budget to be as low as 200M USD *plus whatever funds they make from their various connected companies repairing helicopters and private planes for the civilian sector as a regional maintenance hub in the Middle East.

I highly doubt the IRIAF budget is more than 1B and likely much less. Hence why nearly everything they do is test bed level projects, they don’t have funds for much more when considering most of the funds goes to operating and maintaining the current fleet.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> Nasr-1 tested by iran army in 2008 . at best in 2006 it was in development phase



Then with what was known to the broad public in 2006, any of the other cited options was still plausible.



Hack-Hook said:


> the knowledge can't be incorporated so fast , it take years .



Depends on the type of information.



Hack-Hook said:


> they find USSR long range radar in eastern russia sooner than usa army .



But they didn't identify the exact type nor its specifics. This is outside the reach of ordinary radio enthusiasts.



Hack-Hook said:


> but to the question nebu-svu is not exactly new , its radio signature is already well documented after Russia and Belarus used it in eastern Europe



Military intelligence is not made available to the public.



Hack-Hook said:


> no but he will be busy countering it that give chance to more robust system doing their work



In that case the system does represent a potential threat (of whatever degree) to the enemy. Otherwise the enemy would not bother dedicating time and resources to neutralizing it. Therefore its role is by definition more than just that of a decoy, even if it is limited in scope. The definition of a decoy is something else.



Hack-Hook said:


> and its what ?, the general science , we knew it from the day we get our first radars, we didn't need to dismantle nebu-svu to learn that



The technical details of present day military radar designs aren't in the public domain.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe_Adam

drmeson said:


> I personally believe IRIAF has no money to buy anything. Tom Copper and BT claim that there are internal IRIAF groups that pull each other legs through lobbyism for $ which resulted in leadership cutting the budget to 200-400 million for a large force out of defence budget of 24 Billion USD. Strategy has less to do with it. A Cordesmann (Janes) claims that IRIAF offers no value to Iranian doctrine so Strategists just gave up on this force altogather.
> 
> Make of it as you will.



- The sources mention above such as Tom Copper who is a graphics artist and claims to have access to the inner working/secrets of Iran's air force, is a pretender who cannot be believed since he is neither a military expert nor a reliable source. He simply makes a living on making up fictional stories about Iran, and he hates Iran because his task is to fool Iranian officers to give him tips or insider info about Iran, he is simply an Israeli agent.
- Cordesmann (an old adviser to Sen. McCain) on the other hand is an empty suit who makes his living on collecting open source info from newspapers, magazines, and TV shows. He is a brain-dead old fool who states in many of his annual Iran's military assessment report that Iran is uncapable of matching lowly Jordan in military technologies. I wonder why an old useless fool such as Cordesmann is is still relevant as he is called upon by the Israeli controlled US congress to present his so-called assessments about Iran every year despite the fact that his assessments are exact copies of reports he has done since early 1990s with little or no real change or actual updates? What a surprise, he is a Zionist Jew, and he must make an easy living selling his rubbish at the expense of the US tax payers. 

- Lastly, Janes is the favorite publication suitable for fat military semi-illiterate officers in the third world dictatorships who could barely spell (CHEESE). Their countries pay exuberant sums of money to that useless company to obtain their magazines for those useless officers to read as if they are reading real content-rich stuff, but that's not the case. Whatever Janes prints or utters is intended to berate Iran as a nation, and minimize Iran's advances in all aspects of defense technologies. Frankly, Janes is a mere outdated propaganda shop with very low quality output, and most of their info could be obtained from TV and western media for free. But due to its connection to the British MI6, and the Israeli Mossad its kept alive not for any useful intelligence, but for propaganda purposes, which is no longer working effectively due to advances in communication, and higher awareness among people about military matters.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe_Adam

TheImmortal said:


> "But if you wanted to simply achieve an “unmanned fighter jet” you could do it today. Turkey is well underway in that regard."



Hi, 
With all due respect, I have to disagree with this statement as I see it contrary to reality, and way beyond Turkey's capacity for decades to come. 
Is this statement based on reality i. e. verifiable information? If its from Turkish sources, then its a propaganda piece due to lack of any reliable corroboration as it's not known by any observer in the world. Turkey makes a lot of noise about many super Hi-Tech military systems, but such stories are morale boosters and none is based on facts, just day-dreaming by Erdogan and his cohorts.

Despite Turkey's easy access to Western technology, it still has no ability to design or make a SAM system, an effective modern radar, an MBT class diesel engine, or any four stroke engine all of which are much easer to produce than manufacturing an unmanned fighter jet in par with 4th and 5th generation fighter jets.

Turkey's industrial base and technology couldn't handle upgrading their fleet of M60 MBTs which were handled by the Israelis many years ago. Also, their entry into the UAV club 7 years ago is strictly assembly engineering of components and sub-systems imported wholly from UK, Canada, Austria, USA, and Leonardo of Italy. Turkey's only actual engineering contribution in their UAV(s) are the body panels, period.

To this moment, Turkey has no ability to design and manufacture any major part of a UAV including engine, navigation systems, electro-optics, or any significant sub-system. That's true across the board in every defense platform such as MBTs, Helicopters "the one they made "at least they claim" is an Italian Agusta A129 Mangusta) with the exception of the engines LHTEC CTS800-4N which are sourced from Rolls-Royce and Honeywell.

While UAVs are made by dozens of countries including Turkey, the fact remains; Turkey has neither the know-how nor the capacity at least for the next decade or beyond to produce any functional defense system indigenously including UAVs.


----------



## drmeson

Joe_Adam said:


> .



I care zero for the personal opinions of people, I care for numbers and real evidence. Political affiliations has nothing to do with the evidence at hand which matters. Rest does not. 

Tom Cooper's claims regarding inner lobbyism in IRIAF and MoD is supported by the fact that we have seen multiple meaningless good for nothing projects getting funded. According to him that is because of lobbyism. 

Examples:

-F-7N offers nothing due to its short range, lack of any decent radar, avionics, no good weapon yet the plane is not being retired and some group (its handling squadrons?) have the balls to waste $ on its continuous overhauls and paintjobs. In a conflict these will serve as sitting ducks for enemies. We have seen its wings, VS being made inside Iran. 

-Mirage F1 fleet is even worst than F-7N since the fleet has no radar, weapons or even the pylon to carry weapons. Why is it being overhauled and kept alive is beyond logic. Plane has virtually no value except for jet based aerial tourism perhaps. 

F-5E/F fleet has 45-50 years old avionics yet the fleet is not being dismantled to provide help in Saegheh/Kowsar pproduction. They can barely track a F-4 size fighter at ~36 KM with their antique APQ153 (search upgraded). Good luck in a conflict against F-16V, F-18, EF-2000. Then somebody wasted money and years on Saegheh testbeds calling them in production fighters while they were just practice platforms for HESA to test/practice their manufacturing skills on. 6 airframes were wasted on that PR stunt, before that 3 were wasted on Azarakhsh, what could have been achieved by just 1-2 airframes. 

All the while the actual fighters that we need are facing severe $ shortages. 

- 60 airframes of F-14A yet only 34 are flyable. Only 10-16 are F-14AM upgraded which have the duty to .. get this .. provide Quick Reaction Alert from 4 TABs. Stretched out force ! 
- 23 airframes of MIG-29 fleet lack ARH BVR, E-warfare suites, they fly with MIG-23ML's radar
- Saegheh/Kowsar program is moving very slow despite the fact that these fighters can provide lots of value in E-warfare CAPs. 
- No local light weight BVR
- Delayed local modern WVR 
- Delayed Turbofans for next generation of Saeghe/Kowsar

Now Tom Cooper, BT, Cordesman may all be Zionists but these above written words are facts that we saw with our own eyes. We can sit here and call eveyone a liar but can we deny what we ourselves are seeing ? I would not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## drmeson

Joe_Adam said:


> Is this statement based on reality i. e. verifiable information? If its based on Turkish information or sources its a propaganda piece since it is not obvious nor known to any observer in this world. Turkey makes a lot of noise about many super hi-Tech military systems, but such stories are morale booster and none is based on reality, just day-dreaming by Erdogan and his cohorts.
> 
> Turkey's industrial base and technology couldn't handle upgrading their fleet of M60 MBTs which were handled by the Israelis many years ago. Also, their entry into the UAV club 7 years ago is strictly assembly engineering of components and sub-systems imported from UK, Canada, Austria, USA, and Leonardo of Italy. Turkey's only actual engineering contribution in their UAV(s) are the body panels, period.
> 
> To this moment, Turkey has no ability to design and manufacture any major part of a UAV including engine, navigation systems, electro-optics, or any significant sub-system. That's true across the board in every defense platform such as MBT, Helicopters "the one they made "at least they claim" is an Italian Agusta A129 Mangusta) with the exception of the engines LHTEC CTS800-4N which are sourced from Rolls-Royce and Honeywell.
> 
> While UAVs are made by dozens of countries including Turkey, the fact remains; Turkey has neither the know-how nor the capacity at least for a next decade or beyond to produce any functional defense system indigenously including Drones "UAV".



Most of what you are saying is correct but Turkey has two big advantages over Iran in combat aviation 

1) Its leadership focuses on TAF because they have no missile forces. Turkish AF is the only arm of Turkey that can attack an enemy so they have to maintain a large fleet.

2) Despite bipolar incomprehensible politics by Erdogan, Turkey still is part of the western alliance and has access to western vendors. Read BT's work on gymnastics Iran has to pull to keep its aircrafts flying. Just for a radar, Iran had to get China to copy an Italian smugled system for its fighters. When China ran away due to sanctions, Iran had to look for black market parts and eventually had to resort to local production. It took years to copy an Italian Leonardo Grifo-346 while Turkey can just get the system by placing orders. Its a huge advantage they have over Iran.


----------



## lydian fall

@waz


----------



## TheImmortal

Joe_Adam said:


> Hi,
> With all due respect, I have to disagree with this statement as I see it contrary to reality, and way beyond Turkey's capacity for decades to come.
> Is this statement based on reality i. e. verifiable information? If its from Turkish sources, then its a propaganda piece due to lack of any reliable corroboration as it's not known by any observer in the world. Turkey makes a lot of noise about many super Hi-Tech military systems, but such stories are morale boosters and none is based on facts, just day-dreaming by Erdogan and his cohorts.
> 
> Despite Turkey's easy access to Western technology, it still has no ability to design or make a SAM system, an effective modern radar, an MBT class diesel engine, or any four stroke engine all of which are much easer to produce than manufacturing an unmanned fighter jet in par with 4th and 5th generation fighter jets.
> 
> Turkey's industrial base and technology couldn't handle upgrading their fleet of M60 MBTs which were handled by the Israelis many years ago. Also, their entry into the UAV club 7 years ago is strictly assembly engineering of components and sub-systems imported wholly from UK, Canada, Austria, USA, and Leonardo of Italy. Turkey's only actual engineering contribution in their UAV(s) are the body panels, period.
> 
> To this moment, Turkey has no ability to design and manufacture any major part of a UAV including engine, navigation systems, electro-optics, or any significant sub-system. That's true across the board in every defense platform such as MBTs, Helicopters "the one they made "at least they claim" is an Italian Agusta A129 Mangusta) with the exception of the engines LHTEC CTS800-4N which are sourced from Rolls-Royce and Honeywell.
> 
> While UAVs are made by dozens of countries including Turkey, the fact remains; Turkey has neither the know-how nor the capacity at least for the next decade or beyond to produce any functional defense system indigenously including UAVs.



While I am inclined to agree with you that Turkey routinely engages in propaganda and has not yet been able to build its own domestic supply chain for various high tech products, certain companies are pushing the envelope for what is possible within the confines of Turkish military sector.

My reference to Turkey building an unmanned jet was Barayktar Kizilelma












Again such a project is also within Iran’s capability today. But the question becomes are you merely building something for looks with limited capability increase over a standard heavy MALE UCAV?

We are still quite far away from the type of AI driven fighter jets people seem to think are just around the corner.z


----------



## jauk

Joe_Adam said:


> - The sources mention above such as Tom Copper who is a graphics artist and claims to have access to the inner working/secrets of Iran's air force, is a pretender who cannot be believed since he is neither a military expert nor a reliable source. He simply makes a living on making up fictional stories about Iran, and he hates Iran because his task is to fool Iranian officers to give him tips or insider info about Iran, he is simply an Israeli agent.
> - Cordesmann (an old adviser to Sen. McCain) on the other hand is an empty suit who makes his living on collecting open source info from newspapers, magazines, and TV shows. He is a brain-dead old fool who states in many of his annual Iran's military assessment report that Iran is uncapable of matching lowly Jordan in military technologies. I wonder why an old useless fool such as Cordesmann is is still relevant as he is called upon by the Israeli controlled US congress to present his so-called assessments about Iran every year despite the fact that his assessments are exact copies of reports he has done since early 1990s with little or no real change or actual updates? What a surprise, he is a Zionist Jew, and he must make an easy living selling his rubbish at the expense of the US tax payers.
> 
> - Lastly, Janes is the favorite publication suitable for fat military semi-illiterate officers in the third world dictatorships who could barely spell (CHEESE). Their countries pay exuberant sums of money to that useless company to obtain their magazines for those useless officers to read as if they are reading real content-rich stuff, but that's not the case. Whatever Janes prints or utters is intended to berate Iran as a nation, and minimize Iran's advances in all aspects of defense technologies. Frankly, Janes is a mere outdated propaganda shop with very low quality output, and most of their info could be obtained from TV and western media for free. But due to its connection to the British MI6, and the Israeli Mossad its kept alive not for any useful intelligence, but for propaganda purposes, which is no longer working effectively due to advances in communication, and higher awareness among people about military matters.


I agree all the sources are invalid at best and ludicrous at worst. These days quoting any non Iranian source as seminal is an exercise in futility.



TheImmortal said:


> While I am inclined to agree with you that Turkey routinely engages in propaganda and has not yet been able to build its own domestic supply chain for various high tech products, certain companies are pushing the envelope for what is possible within the confines of Turkish military sector.
> 
> My reference to Turkey building an unmanned jet was Barayktar Kizilelma
> 
> View attachment 874121
> 
> View attachment 874122
> 
> 
> 
> Again such a project is also within Iran’s capability today. But the question becomes are you merely building something for looks with limited capability increase over a standard heavy MALE UCAV?
> 
> We are still quite far away from the type of AI driven fighter jets people seem to think are just around the corner.z


Ahh gaslighting with simplistic interpretations of valid rationale from those ‘people’. Nope, that’s not what those ‘people’ have said through the years.


----------



## sanel1412

This should be home made AIM 7

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It looks like analysis of the 80s, you are really not serious. No one answered my question which is why Iran has made a new F-4 cell.



Because no one understands what the word cell is referring to. The actual English translation for the French "cellule" in this context is air frame.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

You really have to wait for the new announcements that will surprise because the speakers in this section are very painful to read, it is total forfeiture. Make war with them and you will instantly lose with their ridiculous analyzes.


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> This should be home made AIM 7
> 
> 
> View attachment 874135



Looks like a local made AIM-7E2. 

could be the basis of local light weight BVR for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar-I.

I hope it has an ARH seeker and a longer range


----------



## drmeson

drmeson said:


> Looks like a local made AIM-7E2.
> 
> could be the basis of local light weight BVR for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar-I.
> 
> I hope it has an ARH seeker and a longer range



Someone on twitter suggesting that this could be Fakour-90's seeker, electronics inside locally produced body of AIM-7E2 with local motor which means SARH with ECCM, ~60-70 KM range. Something like a modernised British Skyflash missile. Not a bad starting point for local light weight BVR.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Someone on twitter suggesting that this could be Fakour-90's seeker, electronics inside locally produced body of AIM-7E2 with local motor which means SARH with ECCM, ~60-70 KM range. Something like a modernised British Skyflash missile. Not a bad starting point for local light weight BVR.


considering that R-27 was the result of russian studying AIM-7 and AIM-7F and AIM-7M reached those range by changing the engine of AIM-7E to a dual stage rocket and dramatically increased the hit rate of the missile by changing the electronic inside it to modern equipment that's completely feasible but about the seeker it must be different from Fakour seeker . after all AIM-7 supposed to have a diameter of 20cm and AIM-54 that share the same body as fakour to some extent have a diameter of 38cm, even if we say fakour share the diameter of MIM-23 that is 37cm


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> considering that R-27 was the result of russian studying AIM-7 and AIM-7F and AIM-7M reached those range by changing the engine of AIM-7E to a dual stage rocket and dramatically increased the hit rate of the missile by changing the electronic inside it to modern equipment that's completely feasible



Fakour-90's seeker is a tried and tested successful SARH with ECCM. According to report published on key aero, the seeker has been tested to get a lock on Stealth Shahed-191 (0.1 m2 RCS) while Falcons were used to jam the missile so its a proven thing. That on a AIM-7E2 means atleast the electronics are as modern as it gets.

With a composite incorporated body and a MK-58 inspired booster+sustained flight motor it will be a SARH+ECCM, BVR missile with a range of 70 KM. It will give some level of protection to F-4E/D fleet while F-14AM can fly with 2 Fakour-90, 2 Local Sparrow, 2 Azaraksh. A deadly package ranging from 40km to 150 KM.

Saegheh/Kowsar next generation is taking shape.

1 x Al-31F Turbofan
Bit Larger Airframe with added fuel
FBW
Bayenaat-II/Grifo-346 radar or AESA (Grifo-E/KLJ-7A equivalent)
E-Warfare suite with RWR, IFF, ECCM
INS/TACAN, UHF/VHF
Double Duplex Tactical Data linking
Azarakhsh for CCD-guided WVR attack
Local Sparrow for SARH-BVR attack.
Glide SOWs

I believe this plane will cost something around 22 Million USD/unit but will be hell in the sky to deal with.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

drmeson said:


> Looks like a local made AIM-7E2.
> 
> could be the basis of local light weight BVR for F-14AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar-I.
> 
> I hope it has an ARH seeker and a longer range


I remeber there was talk about IRIAF integrating PL12 on some upgraded F 4,it would not be bad option to copy PL 12 and package it in to AIM 7, at this way it would fit existing paylons. And to be fair, smaller diameter ARH AAM is well within Iran capability, it was Just mater of alocating money... We already saw Iranian domestic ARH seeker with 45km range, that is in pair with today moderan ARH seeker. But lets wait, maybe in Day or two specifications Will pop up,and we will find out more



drmeson said:


> Someone on twitter suggesting that this could be Fakour-90's seeker, electronics inside locally produced body of AIM-7E2 with local motor which means SARH with ECCM, ~60-70 KM range. Something like a modernised British Skyflash missile. Not a bad starting point for local light weight BVR.
> 
> View attachment 874232
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 874234


Fakour 90 is ARH Just Like AIM 54,with better ARH seeker.. AIM 54 seeker have range 25km fully acive, while Fakour has 45km.... SARH is bistatic arrangment, missile doesnt have transmiters at all, it has only passive reciver, it looks very difernt than ARH. I dont Know where that info came, but It is wrong.. And even description of missile durring introduction clearly describe ARH

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> I remeber there was talk about IRIAF integrating PL12 on some upgraded F 4,it would not be bad option to copy PL 12 and package it in to AIM 7, at this way it would fit existing paylons. And to be fair, smaller diameter ARH AAM is well within Iran capability, it was Just mater of alocating money... We already saw Iranian domestic ARH seeker with 45km range, that is in pair with today moderan ARH seeker. But lets wait, maybe in Day or two specifications Will pop up,and we will find out more



Except for the fact that Iran does not have PL-12 or access to it. The talk was in 2009-10 when Dowran upgradation started that there would be Chinese upgrades on the F-4E/D to the point that they will become JH-7A equivalents for long-range attack. Integration of PL-12 and PL-5C was among them. But systems they showed later like the PD Radar (Bayyenat-I), Chaff/Flare dispenser, CFT/MFD's, the local AShCM all are Iranian products which implies that the upgrade program was local and nothing from China ever landed for F-4E/D inside Iran including PL-12. 

This Iranian AIM-7 I guess, like Fakour-90 and Azarakhsh WVR, will turn out to be an entirely local thing. Probably, a Fakour-90 packed inside the locally AIM-7E2 airframe so that F-14A/AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar-I can all get a decent modern lightweight BVR package for CAP and QRA missions.




sanel1412 said:


> I dont Know where that info came



*1) https://www.key.aero/article/new-claws-persian-cats*

2) Shalamche uses SARH guidance, and Fakour-90 is Shalamache inside locally produced AIM-54's modified body.



sanel1412 said:


> And even description of missile durring introduction clearly describe ARH



Can you show it ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

I cant find Fakour 90 seeker image, I am sure it is Already posted somewhere here. But here hate few ARH seekers vs SARH... SARH since it is bistatic arrangment where missile has only passive reciver has very different head,while ARH looks as standard airborne radar, which in way it is
First is SARH, rest ARH


















drmeson said:


> Except for the fact that Iran does not have PL-12 or access to it. The talk was in 2009-10 when Dowran upgradation started that there would be Chinese upgrades on the F-4E/D to the point that they will become JH-7A equivalents for long-range attack. Integration of PL-12 and PL-5C was among them. But systems they showed later like the PD Radar (Bayyenat-I), Chaff/Flare dispenser, CFT/MFD's, the local AShCM all are Iranian products which implies that the upgrade program was local and nothing from China ever landed for F-4E/D inside Iran including PL-12.
> 
> This Iranian AIM-7 I guess, like Fakour-90 and Azarakhsh WVR, will turn out to be an entirely local thing. Probably, a Fakour-90 packed inside the locally AIM-7E2 airframe so that F-14A/AM, F-4E/D, Kowsar-I can all get a decent modern lightweight BVR package for CAP and QRA missions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *1) https://www.key.aero/article/new-claws-persian-cats*
> 
> 2) Shalamche uses SARH guidance, and Fakour-90 is Shalamache inside locally produced AIM-54's modified body.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you show it ?


NO it is not, that nonsense that Fakour is Salamache came from fact that few prototypes had same motor designation as I Hawk, a lot of nonsense as I said...There is literary image of Fakour 90 ARH seeker from exibition posted here somewhere and on Twitter, I pick that image from Instagram but cant find it, I Will eventualy and repost


----------



## sanel1412

When Fakour 90 is introduced there was literary description of the missile that said "... doesnt Depend on aircraft radar.." I bet many users Will recall this.. This is not posible with SARH since SARH is one radar with 1 transmiter and 2 recivers... 1 in aircraft and one in missile


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> I cant find Fakour 90 seeker image, I am sure it is Already posted somewhere here.



I have never seen any such image. I have followed the missiles development very closely. If you find it please post it here.

-Officially it has never been clarified it is SARH or ARH system.
-Mashreghnew article on it could not clarify it either.
-BT in AirInternational said SARH and limited to F-14AM only (The link I posted above)
- Same article also said that the reason another Maghsoud ARH missile with 200 KM range is being made is because Fakour-90 is SARH. 

Make of it as you will.



sanel1412 said:


> But here hate few ARH seekers vs SARH... SARH since it is bistatic arrangment where missile has only passive reciver has very different head,while ARH looks as standard airborne radar, which in way it is
> First is SARH, rest ARH
> 
> 
> View attachment 874240
> View attachment 874241
> View attachment 874242
> View attachment 874243



This discussion is futile until we see Fakour's seeker. We have seen Shalamche's seeker which is present in the above slide. If Fakour-90 uses the Shalamche seeker then it will use that seeker in the slide. 



sanel1412 said:


> NO it is not, that nonsense that Fakour is Salamache came from fact that few prototypes had same motor designation as I Hawk, a lot of nonsense as I said...



The notion that Fakour-90 is Shalamche inside AIM-54 airframe came from the fact that since the late 80s few F-14A of IRIAF were modified to carry I-Hawks designated as AIM-23C Sejjil. Its an open thing. They even have been reported to score aerial kill with that missile. Iran later started local production of Hawks as Shalamche SAMs with modern electronics. So came the idea that Fakour-90 is a Shalamche reborn inside AIM-54 with M112 motor which later got changed with locally design M190 motor.






Production version Fakour-90 uses some Iranian M190 Motor which has a much larger operational Temperature domain pointing towards improved operation at higher cieling. 










sanel1412 said:


> There is literary image of Fakour 90 ARH seeker from exibition posted here somewhere and on Twitter, I pick that image from Instagram but cant find it, I Will eventualy and repost



Looking forward to that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Fakour 90 seeker, I Will find image I have it... It is exactly same image Like this one, Just little different , this is also ARH seeker, but 1st generation...


----------



## sanel1412

I found some old images, now I Will post Iranian ARH and SARH seekers and Russian ARH and SARH seekers for Buk and A2A missiles just for comparation











First 3 images are Iranian seekers, there are ARH seekers(on right side) and SARH(left) ... And 4th one is Buk SARH ,5th and 6th ARH











Here is good comparation of two seekers for Buk, built by Agat... Left SARH
( 9E420 digital CW dual plane monopulse semiactive radar homing seeker) 
On right:also Agat ARGS monopulse active radar homing seeker for Buk missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Fakour-90's seeker is a tried and tested successful SARH with ECCM. According to report published on key aero, the seeker has been tested to get a lock on Stealth Shahed-191 (0.1 m2 RCS) while Falcons were used to jam the missile so its a proven thing. That on a AIM-7E2 means atleast the electronics are as modern as it gets.
> 
> With a composite incorporated body and a MK-58 inspired booster+sustained flight motor it will be a SARH+ECCM, BVR missile with a range of 70 KM. It will give some level of protection to F-4E/D fleet while F-14AM can fly with 2 Fakour-90, 2 Local Sparrow, 2 Azaraksh. A deadly package ranging from 40km to 150 KM.
> 
> Saegheh/Kowsar next generation is taking shape.
> 
> 1 x Al-31F Turbofan
> Bit Larger Airframe with added fuel
> FBW
> Bayenaat-II/Grifo-346 radar or AESA (Grifo-E/KLJ-7A equivalent)
> E-Warfare suite with RWR, IFF, ECCM
> INS/TACAN, UHF/VHF
> Double Duplex Tactical Data linking
> Azarakhsh for CCD-guided WVR attack
> Local Sparrow for SARH-BVR attack.
> Glide SOWs
> 
> I believe this plane will cost something around 22 Million USD/unit but will be hell in the sky to deal with.


my concerns is the size , Fakour-90 have a diameter of 37-38cm , AIM-7 a diameter of 20cm which is a little more than half of fakour-90 diameter . fakour 90 seeker literally will not fit inside AIM-7 . they must have used another seeker


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562763179368669184
several users on here criticized my underground airbase Idea as not realistic. Months later, IRIAF revealed their first one.

Today they flew out Iran’s drones, Tomorrow Iran’s interceptors.

4-5 mountain airbases can protect at least 50-75 Iranian interceptors 

It is the most realistic solution to protect Iran’s high value aircraft (including next gen drones) from saturation based attacks (CMs/PGMs).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562763179368669184
> several users on here criticized my underground airbase Idea as not realistic. Months later, IRIAF revealed their first one.
> 
> Today they flew out Iran’s drones, Tomorrow Iran’s interceptors.
> 
> 4-5 mountain airbases can protect at least 50-75 Iranian interceptors
> 
> It is the most realistic solution to protect Iran’s high value aircraft (including next gen drones) from saturation based attacks (CMs/PGMs).


I believe hack-hook has concerns that since the entrances are vulnerable, the bases are essentially useless, but I believe the cons of the vulnerable entrance does not outweigh the pro of safe storage.

If a serious interceptor fleet is acquired, might be worth it to build new airbases inside the mountains sort of like the Hoth airbase in Starwars where the exits of the bases stretches into out outside runway, and all maintenance, fuel, munitions' etcc are stored in the mountain. Isfahan would be ideal. Easy job for Iran, already done by China. May already be in progress in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> I believe hack-hook has concerns that since the entrances are vulnerable, the bases are essentially useless, but I believe the cons of the vulnerable entrance does not outweigh the pro of safe storage.



I have already address this concern

Mesh alloy nets deployed when entrances are closed would be set at specific angles and would pre-detonate PGMs or CMs before they could hit the blast doors at the entrance. Much like cage armour on tank.

Furthermore that is the fail safe mechanism, in addition there would also be CIWS, SOHRADs, Mobin and such covering the short range air defenses of the facility key areas (entrances/ventilation shafts/electrical systems)

The concern that these would be put out of operation are far overblown considering how vulnerable Iran’s airfields are in a prolonged conflict.

China’s built nuclear proof Air Force shelters and bases in anticipation of war with with USA in 60’s and 70’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> I have already address this concern
> 
> Mesh alloy nets deployed when entrances are closed would be set at specific angles and would pre-detonate PGMs or CMs before they could hit the blast doors at the entrance. Much like cage armour on tank.
> 
> Furthermore that is the fail safe mechanism, in addition there would also be CIWS, SOHRADs, Mobin and such covering the short range air defenses of the facility key areas (entrances/ventilation shafts/electrical systems)
> 
> The concern that these would be put out of operation are far overblown considering how vulnerable Iran’s airfields are in a prolonged conflict.
> 
> China’s built nuclear proof Air Force shelters and bases in anticipation of war with with USA in 60’s and 70’s.


Short of heavy EW over the sites, their shouldn't be much of an issue to intercept GBU series bunker busters munitions.


----------



## drmeson

opening of the runways from under-mountain bases are set opposite to the direction of threat with the giant mountains providing impregnable cover. This strategy saves the runway opening from being attacked with a direct BM/CM/SOW attack. Like e.g. to hide such tunnel opening from PGCC and Turkey, the opening should be guarded against both directions by Mountains and open towards North from where a small RCS interceptor can come out make a climb at 50000+ ft/min and turn towards the battle theatre, get coordinates from IADS's and fire away its BVR missiles to disrupt the invading party.

the only way for the enemy to attack such a place will be to use highly maneuverable loitering drones that somehow have to breach through already airborne interceptors and IADS of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> opening of the runways from under-mountain bases are set opposite to the direction of threat with the giant mountains providing impregnable cover. This strategy saves the runway opening from being attacked with a direct BM/CM/SOW attack. Like e.g. to hide such tunnel opening from PGCC and Turkey, the opening should be guarded against both directions by Mountains and open towards North from where a small RCS interceptor can come out make a climb at 50000+ ft/min and turn towards the battle theatre, get coordinates from IADS's and fire away its BVR missiles to disrupt the invading party.
> 
> the only way for the enemy to attack such a place will be to use highly maneuverable loitering drones that somehow have to breach through already airborne interceptors and IADS of Iran.


Could you not use CMs that can be pre-programed with a flight path that allows to take a wide & slow turn to strike the entrance.


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> Could you not use CMs that can be pre-programed with a flight path that allows to take a wide & slow turn to strike the entrance.



that will require a long-range and highly maneuverable CM/SOW which regional enemies do not have. 

Even if at some point they do purchase such a formidable weapon, because of its trajectory, it will have a higher chance of being shot down by IADS than something that has to target a tunnel opening up front with no natural cover.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I have already address this concern
> 
> Mesh alloy nets deployed when entrances are closed would be set at specific angles and would pre-detonate PGMs or CMs before they could hit the blast doors at the entrance. Much like cage armour on tank.
> 
> Furthermore that is the fail safe mechanism, in addition there would also be CIWS, SOHRADs, Mobin and such covering the short range air defenses of the facility key areas (entrances/ventilation shafts/electrical systems)
> 
> The concern that these would be put out of operation are far overblown considering how vulnerable Iran’s airfields are in a prolonged conflict.
> 
> China’s built nuclear proof Air Force shelters and bases in anticipation of war with with USA in 60’s and 70’s.


first those mesh alloys don't detonate the bunker buster bomb because they simply are not stronger than the frontal part of bombs , if you search the net you will see a lot of videos that show how bunker busters rip through such measurement as id they are paper
those facilities are in mountain areas and so those shorads have very limited detection range as the mountain itself will block those CIWS..
in warfare the first strike is more important , you think those airfields are wolunerable then use 1/100 of the money you want to spend on those underground base for fixing those airfields.
a 60-70 technology when there was no PGM. 
Sweden used BAS-90 strategy to counter USSR first strike threat in 80s and they again thinking implementing it again 

its what they did in 1945





in the end of cold war





and i believe that's the best way to protect interceptors, if you like underground bases , use it for your strike aircraft not fighters , those fighters must be ready to fly at given notice m you can't afford don't have access to it and by what i see iran store its strike platforms in those underground bases as Missiles and Drones are strike equipment , you never see 3rd of Khordad or Bavar stored in those facilities and so you will never see any interceptor there


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Short of heavy EW over the sites, their shouldn't be much of an issue to intercept GBU series bunker busters munitions.


you are completely wrong . your assumption is that there will be only one or two . no there be a lot more and only one is enough . on other hand what i say even if they send one thousand it will be divided between hundreds of targets not 4-5 target the density will be a lot lower and it will be a lot easier to intercept them


drmeson said:


> opening of the runways from under-mountain bases are set opposite to the direction of threat with the giant mountains providing impregnable cover. This strategy saves the runway opening from being attacked with a direct BM/CM/SOW attack. Like e.g. to hide such tunnel opening from PGCC and Turkey, the opening should be guarded against both directions by Mountains and open towards North from where a small RCS interceptor can come out make a climb at 50000+ ft/min and turn towards the battle theatre, get coordinates from IADS's and fire away its BVR missiles to disrupt the invading party.


those weapons not only can do 180 degree u-turn before strike they can do 720 degree even more , the draw back is their range will be reduced 
and there is no hiding them from the eye of satellites


----------



## jauk

drmeson said:


> I care zero for the personal opinions of people, I care for numbers and real evidence. Political affiliations has nothing to do with the evidence at hand which matters. Rest does not.
> 
> Tom Cooper's claims regarding inner lobbyism in IRIAF and MoD is supported by the fact that we have seen multiple meaningless good for nothing projects getting funded. According to him that is because of lobbyism.
> 
> Examples:
> 
> -F-7N offers nothing due to its short range, lack of any decent radar, avionics, no good weapon yet the plane is not being retired and some group (its handling squadrons?) have the balls to waste $ on its continuous overhauls and paintjobs. In a conflict these will serve as sitting ducks for enemies. We have seen its wings, VS being made inside Iran.
> 
> -Mirage F1 fleet is even worst than F-7N since the fleet has no radar, weapons or even the pylon to carry weapons. Why is it being overhauled and kept alive is beyond logic. Plane has virtually no value except for jet based aerial tourism perhaps.
> 
> F-5E/F fleet has 45-50 years old avionics yet the fleet is not being dismantled to provide help in Saegheh/Kowsar pproduction. They can barely track a F-4 size fighter at ~36 KM with their antique APQ153 (search upgraded). Good luck in a conflict against F-16V, F-18, EF-2000. Then somebody wasted money and years on Saegheh testbeds calling them in production fighters while they were just practice platforms for HESA to test/practice their manufacturing skills on. 6 airframes were wasted on that PR stunt, before that 3 were wasted on Azarakhsh, what could have been achieved by just 1-2 airframes.
> 
> All the while the actual fighters that we need are facing severe $ shortages.
> 
> - 60 airframes of F-14A yet only 34 are flyable. Only 10-16 are F-14AM upgraded which have the duty to .. get this .. provide Quick Reaction Alert from 4 TABs. Stretched out force !
> - 23 airframes of MIG-29 fleet lack ARH BVR, E-warfare suites, they fly with MIG-23ML's radar
> - Saegheh/Kowsar program is moving very slow despite the fact that these fighters can provide lots of value in E-warfare CAPs.
> - No local light weight BVR
> - Delayed local modern WVR
> - Delayed Turbofans for next generation of Saeghe/Kowsar
> 
> Now Tom Cooper, BT, Cordesman may all be Zionists but these above written words are facts that we saw with our own eyes. We can sit here and call eveyone a liar but can we deny what we ourselves are seeing ? I would not.


Unfortunately everything you listed is not ‘data’. You have access to ‘data’ only if you have access to the item of interest. Everything else is ‘editorial’ based on someone else’s access to data or their personal reasoning and bent.

Barring access, the only thing you and I can rely on other’s editorials (which immediately subjects us to challenges that are hard to overcome—like exactly how you’re being validly challenged here) or rely on our own mind experiments and power of incremental deductive reasoning (which again is hit and miss and again subjects us to challenges)..

So no, you can’t make the claim that you are ‘data’ driven if you don’t have access to data.

And finally, imagery is also a good source if demonstrably untouched.

But to drive the point home, a great recent example is the JWST ‘chorizo’. Caution your ‘data’ are often ‘chorizos’ especially when it comes to matters discussed here:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1553765864553472003


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> those weapons not only can do 180 degree u-turn before strike they can do 720 degree even more , the draw back is their range will be reduced
> and there is no hiding them from the eye of satellites



The range will be reduced so will speed meaning the IADS will find it much easier to search, track and engage. Taking coordinates of such a hidden target covered by Mountains is also difficult for PGCC if we take out Sats out of the equation. 

Iran can hide top notch upgraded further upgraded F-14AM (Maghsoud, Azarakhsh), future Kowsar-II inside these tunnels to quickly pop out guarded by mountains, making a fast climb and turn towards enemy with TDl provided data to engage invaders.


----------



## drmeson

jauk said:


> Unfortunately everything you listed is not ‘data’. You have access to ‘data’ only if you have access to the item of interest. Everything else is ‘editorial’ based on someone else’s access to data or their personal reasoning and bent.





jauk said:


> Barring access, the only thing you and I can rely on other’s editorials (which immediately subjects us to challenges that are hard to overcome—like exactly how you’re being validly challenged here) or rely on our own mind experiments and power of incremental deductive reasoning (which again is hit and miss and again subjects us to challenges)..
> 
> So no, you can’t make the claim that you are ‘data’ driven if you don’t have access to data.



F-7N flying with 3rd generation avionics, tiny Sy-80 radar or Mirage F1 never been see with a pylon let alone a A2A missile (except for one flight 20 years ago) has nothing to do with data, these are universally known facts. F-5E/F fleet is flying with 55 years old APQ-153 is a fact too. These are not someones opinions these are facts unless we start believing that IRIAF is hiding secret weapons and modern level avionics in its Chinese or Shahi era fighter's noses for which we have zero evidence. 

Unlike that we have seen F-14AM upgradation resulting into plane tracking and firing local LR-BVR Fakour-90, Kowsar-I's modern avionics package or Dowran F-4E/D upgrade so we have visual evidence of those changes being made. The 130 x benign fleet of Mirages, F-7N and F-5 have no such upgradations, why are these fighters alive in IRIAF is beyond logic. Tom C and BT claim lobbyism so they could be true .... Or .... they are zionist liars. Make of it as you will.



jauk said:


> And finally, imagery is also a good source if demonstrably untouched.



IRIAF is one of the most camera-friendly AF in the world so serial number verifications are the easiest.

The entire Wiki of AF's around the globe cites "World Air Forces" which provides number count by serial number imagery. They are unbiased and never wrong. They counted Saegheh-I/II as 6 testbeds/fighters (5 F-5E, 1 F-5F) some 7 years ago when some officials in Iran were claiming "Mass production" of fleet. Now after almost a decade we have the same magic digit of "6" weapon less fighters at our hand. Same goes for MIG fleet which stands at 23 fighters. They are never wrong.


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> I found some old images, now I Will post Iranian ARH and SARH seekers and Russian ARH and SARH seekers for Buk and A2A missiles just for comparation
> View attachment 874305
> View attachment 874306
> View attachment 874307
> 
> 
> First 3 images are Iranian seekers, there are ARH seekers(on right side) and SARH(left) ... And 4th one is Buk SARH ,5th and 6th ARH
> View attachment 874308
> View attachment 874309
> View attachment 874310
> 
> 
> Here is good comparation of two seekers for Buk, built by Agat... Left SARH
> ( 9E420 digital CW dual plane monopulse semiactive radar homing seeker)
> On right:also Agat ARGS monopulse active radar homing seeker for Buk missiles
> View attachment 874316





None of these are Fakour-90's seekers. The above pics are of the Khordad system which is a product of IAIO-IEI while Fakour-90 comes from Babaei Group (Ex Shahid Kazemi Industries, banned being related to IRGC's IRSSJO). Two separate Entities. Fact remains that Fakour-90 terminal guidance has never been clarified. Authors like BT claims SARH with based upon its origin of AIM-23C / Shalamche. We will need officially released stats/slides to confirm the truth.

PS. Can you post the above pics in Aryobarzan's Iranian aviation products thread? we are gathering data there.


----------



## drmeson

*https://twitter.com/mhmiranusa/status/1564308440360665088*


The giant hardened military bunker at Mehrabad almost complete at firy pace. 

*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> The range will be reduced so will speed meaning the IADS will find it much easier to search, track and engage. Taking coordinates of such a hidden target covered by Mountains is also difficult for PGCC if we take out Sats out of the equation.
> 
> Iran can hide top notch upgraded further upgraded F-14AM (Maghsoud, Azarakhsh), future Kowsar-II inside these tunnels to quickly pop out guarded by mountains, making a fast climb and turn towards enemy with TDl provided data to engage invaders.


as i said enemy won\t send one two or 10 of the missile , when they wanted to hit a warehouse in syria they sent more than 40.
as i said both IRGC and army only put strike equipment inside the tunnels no defensive equipment will go there, the reason is what i said and the fact that how fast you can send aircraft out of these tunnels , you can do it faster from normal airbases



drmeson said:


> Taking coordinates of such a hidden target covered by Mountains is also difficult for PGCC if we take out Sats out of the equation.


the war with Iraq showed for how long those Sats stayed out of equation , only for the first year that we were only trying to stop iraq advance , when we start counter attack their data were given to Iraq


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> *https://twitter.com/mhmiranusa/status/1564308440360665088*
> 
> 
> The giant hardened military bunker at Mehrabad almost complete at firy pace.
> 
> *
> View attachment 874818
> *


wonder why they build them beside each other instead of put distance between them
by the way are you sure they are hardened , in the video they were looked so flimsy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Those are not hardened in the slightest, they're just shelters from the elements. There's a video from a plane window. The orange structure is more like a proper hangar than a shelter, but still not hardened.



https://imgur.com/ed1loJ1

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> a 60-70 technology when there was no PGM.



Yeah in 60’s and 70’s there was something called nuclear bomb. Maybe you heard of it, it was going to be used against hardened C & C bases and other HVT targets.

China built their underground airforce bases in mountains with nuclear proof strike because they believed US wouldn’t hestitate to use nukes. They were right, recent declassified Pentagon war plans against China back in the Cold War included open acknowledgement of the possibility of nuclear bombs being used on Chinese targets.

Also the only bunker buster that can affect new generation (post Fordow) Iranian underground sites is the MOAB which can realistically only be carried by the B-2 during war time in hostile airspace. Sending a B-52 or C-130 would be a death sentence.

Lastly these tunnels all have pressurized blast doors at X meters for a reason. You won’t be able to cause a concussive blast wave from the entrance to create a tunneling effect and reach deeper into the base, thus the Bunker buster will have to dropped more on the mountain if you want a deeper hit inside the base. And that means more bedrock to cut thru = less probability of penetration.

Pre-Fordow, Iran designed Fordow assuming the bunker buster bombs of early 2000’s +- a margin of error. Debatable if Fordow is truly nuke proof. However, US ended up building bigger bunker busters. Thus Iran when it came to designing Missile bases and the next gen nuclear enrichment hall + centrifuge parts facility (currently being built), built them to withstand a tactical nuclear strike.

So I do trust Iranian military engineers in this regard over us amateurs on a military forum.

*Pataramesh agrees with my assessment btw*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1530509332026118149

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1531872294859046912


Hack-Hook said:


> and i believe that's the best way to protect interceptors, if you like underground bases , use it for your strike aircraft not fighters , those fighters must be ready to fly at given notice m you can't afford don't have access to it and by what i see iran store its strike platforms in those underground bases as Missiles and Drones are strike equipment , you never see 3rd of Khordad or Bavar stored in those facilities and so you will never see any interceptor there



This makes zero sense. First Strike aircraft don’t exist in modern Iranian military philosophy to a significant degree they are replaced by missiles. This isn’t a land invasion of Iran and your enemy (US or Israel) will not be right next to Iran that you can fly over to their country and bomb their targets a la Iraq war.

Iran‘s most important DEFENSIVE task during a war is to protect the skies and take the strain off Iran’s air defense systems from shouldering all the burden and getting exposed. Because if Iran’s air defense rings collapse than it doesn’t matter how many missiles you have, the war is going to leave Iran a bloody mess and will not end in a ceasefire on Iranian terms.

I don’t understand why you cannot understand this basic military premise. It’s shocking you were even in the military (or military police) it seems you lack basic military planning.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> This makes zero sense. First Strike aircraft don’t exist in modern Iranian military philosophy to a significant degree they are replaced by missiles.


Here is the real world deal...

A critical component of defense is deterrence, after all, if your enemy is somehow discouraged from attacking you, that is defense. But also critical to your defense posture and war doctrine is what kind of hardware you have, in other words, what kind of weapons you have determines how you respond.

A missile is a throw away weapon, but not only that, you have no control over it, that mean you have no flexibility in how you could create a deterrence impression. Once you launch the missile, you are committed to war. A threat could be a bluff or worse, a ruse to lead you into action. A missile launched mean you are committed to that ruse whether you know the enemy created that bait or not. It is too late to second guess yourself. The missile is airborne and once it land, it will create death and destruction. War results.

This is why the airplane will always be the superior method in creating a deterrence impression. The airplane can be just as committed to death and destruction as the missile but because the airplane have the option of returning to base, you will never be locked into a response. You can abort the response all the way up to the last second. Your commitment to war is absolute the moment you launched the missile, whereas with the airplane, you can delay commitment until the last moment which can be by crossing the border or wait until literally over the enemy target. The missile cannot offer you that freedom. You launched, you war. So in the long term, the impression non-ally but non-hostile neighbors have of you is that you are dangerous or even unstable. They will always be wary of miscommunication which is always present because they know that you have only one response to a miscommunication -- war. So they would rather minimize their relationship with you.

What I said is not absurd. The airplane's effects on national security postures are reflected in 'The Influence Of Air Power Upon History' by Walter Boyne. This book is on many air chiefs' recommended reading list. The book is in my home library.



https://airpower.airforce.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/AF06-CAF-Reading-List-2011.pdf



The missile's simple design and fast manufacture are seductive but the missile serves only one purpose. The airplane, many.


----------



## Stryker1982

gambit said:


> Here is the real world deal...
> 
> A critical component of defense is deterrence, after all, if your enemy is somehow discouraged from attacking you, that is defense. But also critical to your defense posture and war doctrine is what kind of hardware you have, in other words, what kind of weapons you have determines how you respond.
> 
> A missile is a throw away weapon, but not only that, you have no control over it, that mean you have no flexibility in how you could create a deterrence impression. Once you launch the missile, you are committed to war. A threat could be a bluff or worse, a ruse to lead you into action. A missile launched mean you are committed to that ruse whether you know the enemy created that bait or not. It is too late to second guess yourself. The missile is airborne and once it land, it will create death and destruction. War results.
> 
> This is why the airplane will always be the superior method in creating a deterrence impression. The airplane can be just as committed to death and destruction as the missile but because the airplane have the option of returning to base, you will never be locked into a response. You can abort the response all the way up to the last second. Your commitment to war is absolute the moment you launched the missile, whereas with the airplane, you can delay commitment until the last moment which can be by crossing the border or wait until literally over the enemy target. The missile cannot offer you that freedom. You launched, you war. So in the long term, the impression non-ally but non-hostile neighbors have of you is that you are dangerous or even unstable. They will always be wary of miscommunication which is always present because they know that you have only one response to a miscommunication -- war. So they would rather minimize their relationship with you.
> 
> What I said is not absurd. The airplane's effects on national security postures are reflected in 'The Influence Of Air Power Upon History' by Walter Boyne. This book is on many air chiefs' recommended reading list. The book is in my home library.
> 
> 
> 
> https://airpower.airforce.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/AF06-CAF-Reading-List-2011.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> The missile's simple design and fast manufacture are seductive but the missile serves only one purpose. The airplane, many.


If your at a point where you abort an air operation you already started, that is pretty indicative that you shouldn't be starting a war due to lack of conviction in your actions. Atleast with regards to missiles, you are dealing with an enemy with resolve as proven by the launch.

I don't disagree with your point, I think the idea of running air drills close to an enemy airspace generally gives the point of deterrence without launching anything. For the missiles that option doesn't really exist. Although Iran on many occasions have used it's missiles in the manner which you state on a number of occasions in Iraq and Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah in 60’s and 70’s there was something called nuclear bomb. Maybe you heard of it, it was going to be used against hardened C & C bases and other HVT targets.
> 
> China built their underground airforce bases in mountains with nuclear proof strike because they believed US wouldn’t hestitate to use nukes. They were right, recent declassified Pentagon war plans against China back in the Cold War included open acknowledgement of the possibility of nuclear bombs being used on Chinese targets.
> 
> Also the only bunker buster that can affect new generation (post Fordow) Iranian underground sites is the MOAB which can realistically only be carried by the B-2 during war time in hostile airspace. Sending a B-52 or C-130 would be a death sentence.
> 
> Lastly these tunnels all have pressurized blast doors at X meters for a reason. You won’t be able to cause a concussive blast wave from the entrance to create a tunneling effect and reach deeper into the base, thus the Bunker buster will have to dropped more on the mountain if you want a deeper hit inside the base. And that means more bedrock to cut thru = less probability of penetration.
> 
> Pre-Fordow, Iran designed Fordow assuming the bunker buster bombs of early 2000’s +- a margin of error. Debatable if Fordow is truly nuke proof. However, US ended up building bigger bunker busters. Thus Iran when it came to designing Missile bases and the next gen nuclear enrichment hall + centrifuge parts facility (currently being built), built them to withstand a tactical nuclear strike.
> 
> So I do trust Iranian military engineers in this regard over us amateurs on a military forum.
> 
> *Pataramesh agrees with my assessment btw*


I don't know what you are blabbering, there was a hole in the mountain and I saw with my own eyes captain maverick with his F18 flew 2 minutes into Iran and managed to ravel the underground site with just 2 regular bombs.


AND THIS WAS THEIR MISSION IMPOSSIBLE

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> This is why the airplane will always be the superior method in creating a deterrence impression.



If you have decent air defenses you can shoot down an airplane. If you have exceptional air defenses you can shoot down a 5th Gen.

Good luck trying to shoot down a Mach 10 warhead or a Mach 5 glide warhead flying depressed trajectory. When the target bank is hundreds of targets and interceptors are spread across only so many points.

At that point it becomes interceptor vs missile and who has more kinetic energy to bleed. So THAADS need to be matched up appropriately with their counterparts to have even a decent chance of interception. Or else if you send a patriot to do a THAADS job against a Sejil-2 then it will bleed itself in F-pole.

Airplanes being deterrence don’t even work against the Taliban.

Lastly you missed my point, Iran’s airforce is not built for long range sorties that would be needed against Israel or US.

If you have to choose between protecting your skies vs having extra firepower to do some bombing raid, any General is protecting his skies when the threat is real. Thus limited space in the underground bunker so you choose the more important role aircraft to protect and that is the interceptor not the bomber.




gambit said:


> You can abort the response all the way up to the last second.



Actually that’s not true. In military circles there is a period beyond which you cannot call off the air strike because the supporting functions and military branches are prepared for engagement. What exact period is, is mission specific and probably classified. Certainly is not “last second”. Who wrote this? A Fox News host? Reminds me of Trump calling off Iranian air strikes at “last second”. That had to be walked back by pentagon. You watch too many Hollywood movies if you think that.

You don’t wake up and decide to bomb another country, while thinking the other country isn’t seeing all the preparations taking place. You think they are saying “let’s wait till they drop their bombs on us and then fire back at them”. This isn’t a rifle group firing at each other in 1700’s

Also nearly every major long range missile system today has a self detonation mechanism on them. Iranian missiles have carried them as well especially during testing to not leak too much data during a test flight. US hypersonics also carry them during test flight.

So this thinking that once you fire a missile it’s Armageddon is illogical. Almost as illogical as thinking you can fly 24 fighters at an enemy battle group and call it off at the “last second”.

That’s why military drills are announced in advance. That’s why air defense zone violations with no supporting assets (heightened military alerts, long range assets on alert, carrier groups on alert) are not the end of the world. Militaries can tell when one side is sending their airforce over for show and when it’s serious, the signs are completely different.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

mohsen said:


> I don't know what you are blabbering, there was a hole in the mountain and I saw with my own eyes captain maverick with his F18 flew 2 minutes into Iran and managed to ravel the underground site with just 2 regular bombs.
> 
> 
> AND THIS WAS THEIR MISSION IMPOSSIBLE


I actually just saw the movie today HAHA. I thought that was funny, but the visuals were still very nice


----------



## Muhammed45

gambit said:


> Here is the real world deal...
> 
> A critical component of defense is deterrence, after all, if your enemy is somehow discouraged from attacking you, that is defense. But also critical to your defense posture and war doctrine is what kind of hardware you have, in other words, what kind of weapons you have determines how you respond.
> 
> A missile is a throw away weapon, but not only that, you have no control over it, that mean you have no flexibility in how you could create a deterrence impression. Once you launch the missile, you are committed to war. A threat could be a bluff or worse, a ruse to lead you into action. A missile launched mean you are committed to that ruse whether you know the enemy created that bait or not. It is too late to second guess yourself. The missile is airborne and once it land, it will create death and destruction. War results.
> 
> This is why the airplane will always be the superior method in creating a deterrence impression. The airplane can be just as committed to death and destruction as the missile but because the airplane have the option of returning to base, you will never be locked into a response. You can abort the response all the way up to the last second. Your commitment to war is absolute the moment you launched the missile, whereas with the airplane, you can delay commitment until the last moment which can be by crossing the border or wait until literally over the enemy target. The missile cannot offer you that freedom. You launched, you war. So in the long term, the impression non-ally but non-hostile neighbors have of you is that you are dangerous or even unstable. They will always be wary of miscommunication which is always present because they know that you have only one response to a miscommunication -- war. So they would rather minimize their relationship with you.
> 
> What I said is not absurd. The airplane's effects on national security postures are reflected in 'The Influence Of Air Power Upon History' by Walter Boyne. This book is on many air chiefs' recommended reading list. The book is in my home library.
> 
> 
> 
> https://airpower.airforce.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/AF06-CAF-Reading-List-2011.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> The missile's simple design and fast manufacture are seductive but the missile serves only one purpose. The airplane, many.


Once Shah of Iran submitted his wish list to American companies and institutions related to defense industries. There was plenty of weapons mentioned and requested in his list including submarines, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, fighter jets etc. 

But the Americans strongly refused BMs and submarines. Can you tell us why?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## jauk

gambit said:


> Here is the real world deal...
> 
> A critical component of defense is deterrence, after all, if your enemy is somehow discouraged from attacking you, that is defense. But also critical to your defense posture and war doctrine is what kind of hardware you have, in other words, what kind of weapons you have determines how you respond.
> 
> A missile is a throw away weapon, but not only that, you have no control over it, that mean you have no flexibility in how you could create a deterrence impression. Once you launch the missile, you are committed to war. A threat could be a bluff or worse, a ruse to lead you into action. A missile launched mean you are committed to that ruse whether you know the enemy created that bait or not. It is too late to second guess yourself. The missile is airborne and once it land, it will create death and destruction. War results.
> 
> This is why the airplane will always be the superior method in creating a deterrence impression. The airplane can be just as committed to death and destruction as the missile but because the airplane have the option of returning to base, you will never be locked into a response. You can abort the response all the way up to the last second. Your commitment to war is absolute the moment you launched the missile, whereas with the airplane, you can delay commitment until the last moment which can be by crossing the border or wait until literally over the enemy target. The missile cannot offer you that freedom. You launched, you war. So in the long term, the impression non-ally but non-hostile neighbors have of you is that you are dangerous or even unstable. They will always be wary of miscommunication which is always present because they know that you have only one response to a miscommunication -- war. So they would rather minimize their relationship with you.
> 
> What I said is not absurd. The airplane's effects on national security postures are reflected in 'The Influence Of Air Power Upon History' by Walter Boyne. This book is on many air chiefs' recommended reading list. The book is in my home library.
> 
> 
> 
> https://airpower.airforce.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/AF06-CAF-Reading-List-2011.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> The missile's simple design and fast manufacture are seductive but the missile serves only one purpose. The airplane, many.


Your analysis reminds me of the IBM of the 80s. IBM dominated by far in mainframe technology. Trouble was they had won a war nobody was interested in. They almost went under.The book you reference is also fossilized thinking by a ‘prolific aviation writer’ who has not realized his mainframe moment.

Additionally you fail to mention the innovation Iran has brought to missiles. It’s not missiles themselves but their ability to execute precision and uninterceptable strikes on targets. This significant nuance in combination with other hybrid elements like drones have leapfrogged Iran far beyond a $4.99 pulp book you reference (and it’s ‘updates’).

Same goes with the garbage systems like the F this or that upteenth generation it promotes as the battlefield silver bullets they never were. So, yes, these monstrosities can be recalled once they’ve frightened a tinpot dictator. Iran not so much.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

When was the last time anyone went to war with missiles and how did that turned out?


----------



## gambit

Stryker1982 said:


> If your at a point where you abort an air operation you already started, that is pretty indicative that you shouldn't be starting a war due to lack of conviction in your actions. Atleast with regards to missiles, you are dealing with an enemy with resolve as proven by the launch.


That is a political issue. My point, which no surprise was missed by all in eagerness to 'debunk' an American, was that the airplane in all of its variants offers doctrinal, strategic, and tactical flexibility. No other device, not even the ship, can match. If you throw a rock, you just attacked the enemy via airpower, small as it is. Same with the arrow and the bullet. But all three pales in comparison to the airplane in terms of mastery of the 3rd dimension.



Stryker1982 said:


> I don't disagree with your point, I think the idea of running air drills close to an enemy airspace generally gives the point of deterrence without launching anything. For the missiles that option doesn't really exist. Although Iran on many occasions have used it's missiles in the manner which you state on a number of occasions in Iraq and Syria.


Of course you can exercise with live missiles. Essentially, you will be throwing away a lot of ordnance.

The US military is dedicated to the airplane, and we hope the rest of the world does not.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Also the only bunker buster that can affect new generation (post Fordow) Iranian underground sites is the MOAB which can realistically only be carried by the B-2 during war time in hostile airspace. Sending a B-52 or C-130 would be a death sentence.


you see i don't care at all about destroying what\s inside the bunker as long as it can't get out of it . many more type of bunker busters than MOAB can destroy those entrances and it least keep them closed for several hours more likely days
if in war you give control of the sky to the enemy for that amount of time he can bomb those entrances time and time and time and keep them closed as long as it want



TheImmortal said:


> This makes zero sense. First Strike aircraft don’t exist in modern Iranian military philosophy to a significant degree they are replaced by missiles. This isn’t a land invasion of Iran and your enemy (US or Israel) will not be right next to Iran that you can fly over to their country and bomb their targets a la Iraq war.


there are drones , there f-7 , there are f-4 there are su-24 . those are litterally strike aircrafts .



TheImmortal said:


> Iran‘s most important DEFENSIVE task during a war is to protect the skies and take the strain off Iran’s air defense systems from shouldering all the burden and getting exposed. Because if Iran’s air defense rings collapse than it doesn’t matter how many missiles you have, the war is going to leave Iran a bloody mess and will not end in a ceasefire on Iranian terms.


thats why the interceptors must be ready to fly at notice and underground bases don\t make sense at all , you want to protect them then disperse them around the country in reinforced shelters . not gathered in one place

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> Once Shah of Iran submitted his wish list to American companies and institutions related to defense industries. There was plenty of weapons mentioned and requested in his list including submarines, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, fighter jets etc.
> 
> But the Americans strongly refused BMs and submarines. Can you tell us why?


submarines would have played no role in war with USSR and can you tell me at the time what type of missiles american could provide at the time ?
they agreed on their best airplanes , which was F-14 and F-16 and I'm certain if shah asked them they gave him F-15 as much as he wanted as they saw that as strengthening the line between USSR and energy resources in Persian gulf


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> submarines would have played no role in war with USSR and can you tell me at the time what type of missiles american could provide at the time ?



Submarines are one of the best ways of delivering a nuke.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> When was the last time anyone went to war with missiles and how did that turned out?


honestly , going to war without enough boot on the ground also didn't looked promising ..


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Submarines are one of the best ways of delivering a nuke.


iran was not supposed to have nuke and at the time 1970-78 which type of nukes submarine could deliver .
which type of submarine could deliver them ? were they able to deliver them from Persian gulf ? could transport them to caspian sea ? did those type of submarine who could deliver nukes even deployable in Caspian sea?

USA was not in love with King Mohammad reza , eye and eyebrow . they were calculating what they wanted to give him. they were giving him air force and aviation equipment as much as he wanted and at the best of quality . because they saw it as strengthening factors in their defensive lines . they gave him ground equipment because the exact same reason . they would not have gave him big ships and submarines because they didn't want hip outside Persian gulf , Makoran sea and Arabian sea . that why in the navy the best they agreed was Kidd Class frigates that were good for those areas . they would have given him artillery rockets as much as he wanted but ballistic missile ? even they didn't gave them to Israel . it was french who gave it to them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> submarines would have played no role in war with USSR and can you tell me at the time what type of missiles american could provide at the time ?
> they agreed on their best airplanes , which was F-14 and F-16 and I'm certain if shah asked them they gave him F-15 as much as he wanted as they saw that as strengthening the line between USSR and energy resources in Persian gulf


And that's the main point. Soviets would have flattened us and none of those shiny fighter jets could have made a little difference. 

F14s couldn't stop Soviets missile rain on us. 

Don't forget the importance of Caspian sea. Americans didn't even agree on transferring missiles with a range below 300 KM. BMs are strategic assets, but fighter jets can be easily defused by ground based ADs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> And that's the main point. Soviets would have flattened us and none of those shiny fighter jets could have made a little difference.


no unless soviet would have gone nuclear their air force was inferior to us and if they went nuclear USA saw it as a threat to Persian gulf Energy resources and would have intervened . we had the power to stand against non nuclear attack from USSR, we had better aviation , better air-force , enough ground force to stand an more importantly all the weapons in western hemisphere would have flied toward us in case of war . USSR ballistic missile were nothing of concerns as they were good for terror attack (SCUD Missile) or Nuke delivery system .

Russian interceptors (Mig-25 and Mig-31) had no chance against 160 F-14 we were supposed to get . and we were supposed to replace F-5 with hundreds of F-16s . our Air force would have been just an extension of USA air-force and in case of attack it had all the equipment it need from USA .even the USA . in a conventional war Soviet even would have faced a very harder situation than Ukraine as they would have lost the sky and about ground force our air force had precision strike capabilities not so much about USSR precision strike capabilities existed. 
Don't mistake it shah Army was strong , yes it was not independent and could not stand on its feet , but as long as west continued to support with part and equipment , there were not many who were willing to go against it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> no unless soviet would have gone nuclear their air force was inferior to us and if they went nuclear USA saw it as a threat to Persian gulf Energy resources and would have intervened . we had the power to stand against non nuclear attack from USSR, we had better aviation , better air-force , enough ground force to stand an more importantly all the weapons in western hemisphere would have flied toward us in case of war . USSR ballistic missile were nothing of concerns as they were good for terror attack (SCUD Missile) or Nuke delivery system


You remind me of Ukraine. Ukraine is frontline of NATO and they can't do damn against angry Russians. 


Hack-Hook said:


> Russian interceptors (Mig-25 and Mig-31) had no chance against 160 F-14 we were supposed to get . and we were supposed to replace F-5 with hundreds of F-16s . our Air force would have been just an extension of USA air-force and in case of attack it had all the equipment it need from USA .even the USA . in a conventional war Soviet even would have faced a very harder situation than Ukraine as they would have lost the sky and about ground force our air force had precision strike capabilities not so much about USSR precision strike capabilities existed.


Have you forgot, one needs an airbase to fly those fighters? Even if we had 3000 advanced fighter jets, they were still vulnurable to Soviets guided missiles. Soviet could easily destroy our airbases, we were just a puppet of USA a useless meat which would have been thrown under the bus by west when things heated up between Sovieta and western powers. 



Hack-Hook said:


> Don't mistake it shah Army was strong , yes it was not independent and could not stand on its feet , but as long as west continued to support with part and equipment , there were not many who were willing to go against it.


Shah wasn't an ideological leader. Just like Reza Shah who boasted about his army, an army that operated foreign made fighter jet, collapsed in a matter of seconds. Not eve days

Shah made his people an escapegoat of west.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> F14s couldn't stop Soviets missile rain on us.


what missile rain , they were SCUDs , 300-500km range with a cep of 500-1000m and F-16 and F-4 could deal with them and answered back


Muhammed45 said:


> Don't forget the importance of Caspian sea. Americans didn't even agree on transferring missiles with a range below 300 KM. BMs are strategic assets, but fighter jets can be easily defused by ground based ADs.


thats why there are sead


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> what missile rain , they were SCUDs , 300-500km range with a cep of 500-1000m and F-16 and F-4 could deal with them and answered back
> 
> thats why there are sead


Oh, come on. What did i just read? Soviets was a war machine man, they were the only ones who could stop Germans.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> You remind me of Ukraine. Ukraine is frontline of NATO and they can't do damn against angry Russians.


and Russia can't do a damn thing about it there also they even didn't capture all of donbass yet.
on a side note Iran air force was supposed to be 160xF-14 , 300+ x F16 and hundreds of F-4 . compared that to the demilitarized Ukraine 
at the time we had far more precision strike capabilities than USSR



Muhammed45 said:


> Oh, come on. What did i just read? Soviets was a war machine man, they were the only ones who could stop Germans.


not Soviet , USSR geography and unlimited support by western country , guess why they invaded Iran when Iran declared neutrality ? why they called Iran bridge of victory?



Muhammed45 said:


> Have you forgot, one needs an airbase to fly those fighters? Even if we had 3000 advanced fighter jets, they were still vulnurable to Soviets guided missiles. Soviet could easily destroy our airbases, we were just a puppet of USA a useless meat which would have been thrown under the bus by west when things heated up between Sovieta and western powers.


as i said you are welcome destroy airbase with those scuds . they are not Iskandar , they have a cep of 1km
but iran air force could deliver weapon inside a room through the windows at the time and as i said the range was limited and those airplanes have longer range than the missiles


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> not Soviet , USSR geography and unlimited support by western country , guess why they invaded Iran when Iran declared neutrality ? why they called Iran bridge of victory?


When did west come to help Soviets? When the gutless Stalin took shelter somewhere outside Moscow, it was people of St Petersburg that resisted German invasion.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> Shah wasn't an ideological leader. Just like Reza Shah who boasted about his army, an army that operated foreign made fighter jet, collapsed in a matter of seconds. Not eve days
> 
> Shah made his people an escapegoat of west.


as i said as long as the west supported it the army was strong , it would have crumbled if they stop support . also army of reza-shah was different than the army of Mohammad-reza



Muhammed45 said:


> When did west come to help Soviets? When the gutless Stalin took shelter somewhere outside Moscow, it was people of St Petersburg that resisted German invasion.


and winter never forget that .but west deliver all it could to Soviet during the world war . i'm not expert on that better ask the ones who are more interested about that war.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> iran was not supposed to have nuke and at the time 1970-78 which type of nukes submarine could deliver .
> which type of submarine could deliver them ? were they able to deliver them from Persian gulf ? could transport them to caspian sea ? did those type of submarine who could deliver nukes even deployable in Caspian sea?
> 
> USA was not in love with King Mohammad reza , eye and eyebrow . they were calculating what they wanted to give him. they were giving him air force and aviation equipment as much as he wanted and at the best of quality . because they saw it as strengthening factors in their defensive lines . they gave him ground equipment because the exact same reason . they would not have gave him big ships and submarines because they didn't want hip outside Persian gulf , Makoran sea and Arabian sea . that why in the navy the best they agreed was Kidd Class frigates that were good for those areas . they would have given him artillery rockets as much as he wanted but ballistic missile ? even they didn't gave them to Israel . it was french who gave it to them



Where to start! 

Considering in december 21 2020, USS georgia sailed through the Persian Gulf, that should tell you a nuclear armed submarine could travel through the conditions of the PG. I dont need to remind you the USS georgia was delivered in 1979 so the tech was available at that time. Not sure about Caspian Sea but it would be useful against Communist China or North Korea, who would side with USSR in a nuclear war. Delivering nukes from a sub was technology that was mastered in the 60s. 

You shouldnt take it so personally. The US never gives all its best things out like candy, even to its Anglo-Saxon allies. But of course the wanted to back stab him just like any other dictator in the region. The thing is Iran would have had the technology and tavanayee to make things like ships and missiles themselves, especially if iran continued to be a poodle into the 80s and 90s. Eventually they would have offered these things to a loyal and competent regional ally in Iran. Iran is by far more competent than Israel and Arabs, its just the sanctions that make us look backwards. Iranians are amongst the best at seeking knowledge, whether religious or worldly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> When was the last time anyone went to war with missiles and how did that turned out?


Well, I know several countries having the best airforces in the world, went to war and their airforce brought them no victory of any sort. USA, Soviet, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia.

And today Russia relies more on it's missiles, rather than it's airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jauk

gambit said:


> When was the last time anyone went to war with missiles and how did that turned out?


When was the last time anyone went to war with decrepit F something’s and how did that turn out? 

And leapfrogging pays little attention to retrograde thinking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abid123

Hack-Hook said:


> no unless soviet would have gone nuclear their air force was inferior to us and if they went nuclear USA saw it as a threat to Persian gulf Energy resources and would have intervened . we had the power to stand against non nuclear attack from USSR, we had better aviation , better air-force , enough ground force to stand an more importantly all the weapons in western hemisphere would have flied toward us in case of war . USSR ballistic missile were nothing of concerns as they were good for terror attack (SCUD Missile) or Nuke delivery system .
> 
> Russian interceptors (Mig-25 and Mig-31) had no chance against 160 F-14 we were supposed to get . and we were supposed to replace F-5 with hundreds of F-16s . our Air force would have been just an extension of USA air-force and in case of attack it had all the equipment it need from USA .even the USA . in a conventional war Soviet even would have faced a very harder situation than Ukraine as they would have lost the sky and about ground force our air force had precision strike capabilities not so much about USSR precision strike capabilities existed.
> Don't mistake it shah Army was strong , yes it was not independent and could not stand on its feet , but as long as west continued to support with part and equipment , there were not many who were willing to go against it.


Dude no country on earth besides US could fight Soviet Union in a conventional war. Even the PLA would stand no chance. The Soviet Union was a superpower for a reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
 1


----------



## drmeson

Abid123 said:


> Dude no country on earth besides US could fight Soviet Union in a conventional war. Even the PLA would stand no chance. The Soviet Union was a superpower for a reason.



Shahi IIAF was a beast of its time. At the time time of the revolution, the Soviet AF was flying Su-15, MIG-25, and MIG-23. They had no answer to

79 F-14A
225 F-4E/D
160 F-5E/F
200+ AHJ1

This force would have grown to following

160 F-14A
140 F-16A/B
200 F/A-18
225 F-4E/D
160 F-5E/F
200+ AHJ1

Now the IRIAF is weak for now but our IADS, UCAV and Missile power is unparalleled in the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## gambit

Legend has it that at the end of the Vietnam War, some F-5s were sent to the Soviet Union for eval. Then US intel intercepted a message where the Soviets told their allies that do not get the MIG-21 into a turning fight against the F-5. I read on this discussion that Iran dropped the F-5 in favor of missiles.


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> Legend has it that at the end of the Vietnam War, some F-5s were sent to the Soviet Union for eval. Then US intel intercepted a message where the Soviets told their allies that do not get the MIG-21 into a turning fight against the F-5. I read on this discussion that Iran dropped the F-5 in favor of missiles.



The *only* plane Iran hasn’t dropped is the F-5

Migs are withering away
F-14 is wholly under modernized. The AM upgrade would have been nice 20 years ago not in 2022.
SU-22 are also growing obsolete by the day

What did IRIAF focus on?

F-5 test bed projects and upgrading the dump truck that is the F-4. 

As if we need a F-4 to fire a cruise missile when Kaman-22 and Fotros have that ability not to mention the thousands of cruise missiles that line the PG coast aimed at the sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

mohsen said:


> Well, I know several countries having the best airforces in the world, went to war and their airforce brought them no victory of any sort. USA, Soviet, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia.
> 
> And today Russia relies more on it's missiles, rather than it's airforce.


Your argument actually proved my point as I said earlier that the airplane produced doctrinal, strategic, and tactical flexibility. The missile cannot. Choices always create stress. What it means is that the airplane is a more intellectually sophisticated and financially demanding platform to wield. Tell me that Desert Storm was a failure in terms of airpower.


----------



## drmeson

gambit said:


> Your argument actually proved my point as I said earlier that the airplane produced doctrinal, strategic, and tactical flexibility. The missile cannot. Choices always create stress. What it means is that the airplane is a more intellectually sophisticated and financially demanding platform to wield. Tell me that Desert Storm was a failure in terms of airpower.



It would have been a failed campaign if Iraq had some 3000 MaRVs + CM + Loitering drones at their disposal operating from underground silos. The bases of housing the allied planes would have been hurt pretty bad which would not have deterred the US but it would have made the regional foes shit scared to even go against Iraq. That's the deterrence that an AF of 500 Rafales cant do for you.

... Btw I am one of the biggest supporters of the idea that Iran should not give up manned-IRIAF at any cost. We need 250 low RCS, electronically advanced interceptors.


----------



## gambit

drmeson said:


> *It would have been a failed campaign if Iraq had some 3000 MaRVs + CM + Loitering drones* at their disposal operating from underground silos. The bases of housing the allied planes would have been hurt pretty bad which would not have deterred the US but it would have made the regional foes shit scared to even go against Iraq. That's the deterrence that an AF of 500 Rafales cant do for you.
> 
> ... Btw I am one of the biggest supporters of the idea that Iran should not give up manned-IRIAF at any cost. We need 250 low RCS, electronically advanced interceptors.


So you are saying that we should make variations of drones, kinda like variations of airplanes, but the major difference is that these drones cannot RTB. Thanks for continuing to prove my point.


----------



## drmeson

gambit said:


> So you are saying that we should make variations of drones, kinda like variations of airplanes, but the major difference is that these drones cannot RTB. Thanks for continuing to prove my point.



No?

I am saying that Deterrence is through the attack, not a defense. Iran has the means to attack an enemy to the point that it can destroy the enemy's attacking arm ... means are the MaRV, HGVs, UCAVs, loitering drones, CM

Airforce to me is a defense tool in Iranian doctrine. A force for sole purpose of defence of Iranian skies in conjunction with IADS.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Abid123 said:


> Dude no country on earth besides US could fight Soviet Union in a conventional war. Even the PLA would stand no chance. The Soviet Union was a superpower for a reason.


what Soviet airforce could bring agains 160 f-14 and 300+ F-16 and 100+ f-4 and let not to forget we were partner in YF-17 that later resulted in F-18


----------



## gambit

drmeson said:


> No?
> 
> I am saying that Deterrence is through the attack, not a defense. Iran has the means to attack an enemy to the point that it can destroy the enemy's attacking arm ... means are the MaRV, HGVs, UCAVs, loitering drones, CM
> 
> Airforce to me is a defense tool in Iranian doctrine. A force for sole purpose of defence of Iranian skies in conjunction with IADS.


Like I said earlier, the missile is a one-way weapon, it mean once launched, you are committed to war, whether that is an attack or a defensive response is not the point. So, if you want a deterrence doctrine based upon *INSTANT* commitment to war, then by all means, get as many missiles of all variations as you can. It is like the soldier who just pulled the trigger. He cannot control the bullet. He can brandish his rifle to try to discourage the other guy to surrender or withdraw, and it may work, but which army in the world trains its soldiers that way? None. We train soldiers to shoot to kill, not to wound or to give warnings. That is what the missile does to any deterrence and/or war doctrine. You are committed to killing and nothing else.

What does a cruise missile with loitering capability do for that deterrence doctrine? Nothing. That CM cannot RTB. Once launched, its impact to a target is inevitable no matter how long it can loiter over the area. So you are still at square one -- that the CM with loitering capability is still *INSTANT* commitment to war.

Do we build only frigates or destroyers or battleships? No. We build variations of the warship for different purposes. But precisely because the warship is manned, it gave countries flexibility and many of them became global empires from the days of sails to nuclear power today.

You have fools on your side who mocked my argument. I hope the Iranian military leadership is filled with people like them.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## jauk

gambit said:


> Like I said earlier, the missile is a one-way weapon, it mean once launched, you are committed to war, whether that is an attack or a defensive response is not the point. So, if you want a deterrence doctrine based upon *INSTANT* commitment to war, then by all means, get as many missiles of all variations as you can. It is like the soldier who just pulled the trigger. He cannot control the bullet. He can brandish his rifle to try to discourage the other guy to surrender or withdraw, and it may work, but which army in the world trains its soldiers that way? None. We train soldiers to shoot to kill, not to wound or to give warnings. That is what the missile does to any deterrence and/or war doctrine. You are committed to killing and nothing else.
> 
> What does a cruise missile with loitering capability do for that deterrence doctrine? Nothing. That CM cannot RTB. Once launched, its impact to a target is inevitable no matter how long it can loiter over the area. So you are still at square one -- that the CM with loitering capability is still *INSTANT* commitment to war.
> 
> Do we build only frigates or destroyers or battleships? No. We build variations of the warship for different purposes. But precisely because the warship is manned, it gave countries flexibility and many of them became global empires from the days of sails to nuclear power today.
> 
> You have fools on your side who mocked my argument. I hope the Iranian military leadership is filled with people like them.


A ‘one way weapon’ is the biggest deterrent of all. You have everything backwards.


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> Your argument actually proved my point as I said earlier that the airplane produced doctrinal, strategic, and tactical flexibility. The missile cannot. Choices always create stress. What it means is that the airplane is a more intellectually sophisticated and financially demanding platform to wield. Tell me that Desert Storm was a failure in terms of airpower.


War isn't a race that you could isolate and assess one field separately.

1. US-Iraq war wasn't a real war, neither Saddam, nor his people didn't want to resist against US.

2. Iraq was just a proxy for US against Iran, so US had full info on their gears and capabilities and was able to neutralize them easily.

3. if Iraq had a missile force like Iran, then constant missile raids on airports and ships wouldn't allow US air force any effective role, let alone achieving air superiority. a sinking aircraft carrier isn't the kind of sight you are used to!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

mohsen said:


> War isn't a race that you could isolate and assess one field separately.
> 
> 1. US-Iraq war wasn't a real war, neither Saddam, nor his people didn't want to resist against US.
> 
> 2. Iraq was just a proxy for US against Iran, so US had full info on their gears and capabilities and was able to neutralize them easily.
> 
> 3. if Iraq had a missile force like Iran, then constant missile raids on airports and ships wouldn't allow US air force any effective role, let alone achieving air superiority. a sinking aircraft carrier is the kind of sight you are used to!


Not only that, the IAEA inspectors placed GPS in Iraq's military sites, missile bases, etc. Wherever they went in Iraq, they were free to reveal the locations of Iraqi military sites using advanced GPS receivers. 

The military analysts wondered at that time giving out tens of speculations on how could USA's cruise missiles target Iraqi bases so accurately, some called it a miracle the irony. 

IAEA actually was USA's spying arm against Iraq and its sensitive bases.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

Muhammed45 said:


> Not only that, the IAEA inspectors placed GPS in Iraq's military sites, missile bases, etc. Wherever they went in Iraq, they were free to reveal the locations of Iraqi military sites using advanced GPS receivers.
> 
> The military analysts wondered at that time giving out tens of speculations on how could USA's cruise missiles target Iraqi bases so accurately, some called it a miracle the irony.
> 
> IAEA actually was USA's spying arm against Iraq and its sensitive bases.



And let me add that Iraq had been battered into oblivion by over a decade of harsh sanctions, their military (still dependent on foreign supplies which had ceased arriving) was in shambles, so were their civilian infrastructures following the 1991 onslaught and periodic air raids all along the 1990's. Anyone citing the illegal 2003 invasion as some sort of an outstanding military feat is either disconnected from reality or desperate to embelish a lackluster record.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

mohsen said:


> War isn't a race that you could isolate and assess one field separately.


This comment is utter nonsense. Military historians, academies, focus groups, think tanks, and general staffs do it all the time.



mohsen said:


> 1. US-Iraq war wasn't a real war, neither Saddam, nor his people didn't want to resist against US.


I will admit, am at a loss for words for this. Never thought I see Iranians making excuses for Iraq for Desert Storm.



mohsen said:


> 2. Iraq was just a proxy for US against Iran, so US had full info on their gears and capabilities and was able to neutralize them easily.


Actually, the Iraqi military was equipped with Soviet and Chinese hardware. And what does 'full info' mean? That somehow we had technical knowledge of the AK-47 rifle or the T-72 tank that no one else know? But let US grant that your absurd idea is real --  -- why should that make US combat successes in Desert Storm any less historically significant? Is not intel a critical component of war? Is not exploiting weaknesses a critical component of war?



mohsen said:


> 3. if Iraq had a missile force like Iran, then constant missile raids on airports and ships wouldn't allow US air force any effective role, let alone achieving air superiority.


If Iraq yesterday had a missile force like Iran today, what make you think we cannot change our tactics to produce the same outcome as Desert Storm as how we know it today? You do not. Back then, no one knew how the US would perform, technically and else, but everyone was willing to predict how much casualties Iraq would inflict on US. Then it turned out to be the opposite. So what make you think that Iran's missile force is immune to US?

And please do not use the stupid response like "If you can you would have attacked Iran already" or something equivalent.



mohsen said:


> a sinking aircraft carrier isn't the kind of sight you are used to!


No one has since WW II.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> No one has since WW II.


no one went into those type of war since WW2, just thinking a ship is unsinkable is simply absurd

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arash1991

Some Sources added at the end and marked in the text with numers (sources not complete) : [number]



Hack-Hook said:


> (..)
> Don't mistake it shah Army was strong , yes it was not independent and could not stand on its feet , but as long as west continued to support with part and equipment , there were not many who were willing to go against it.


Agree on that sentence. The point is that we have to figure out the Scenario conditions of a war with the soviet union vs Iran:

Would the Soviet Union attack Iran alone or in context of a bigger war theater in wich europe would be involved too?
What is with the China? Would they also be involved? (Pacific war too?
Only conventional war? If no => Tactical Nuclear weapons or Strategic also allowed?

There are also some other things unmentioned:

Soviet OTH Radar Capacities, Soviet Radar Bases in Azerbaijan would be able to detect everything over whole Iran
Soviet Spies and Communist parties in Iran wich would collaborate with the Soviet Union: Kurds were definitly left oriented and Communist Ideology was a problem in Iran at this time. There were lot of space for Communists in Iran to operate behind enemy lines. Specially some radical parties like Tudeh or still existing Monafeghine Khalgh and so on.

This brings us to some other questions:
Would Irans supply lines be kept open ? I think: Iran vs CSSR: Yes and Iran/Nato vs CSSR = temporary no (cause US had to concentrate mostly on Europe war theatre and Soviet submarines would maybe be able to cut US Supply lines in the Atlantic Ocean for a while. (talking about 70s era, in the 80s USA was absolute supreme in technology)



Muhammed45 said:


> And that's the main point. Soviets would have flattened us and none of those shiny fighter jets could have made a little difference.
> 
> F14s couldn't stop Soviets missile rain on us.
> 
> Don't forget the importance of Caspian sea. Americans didn't even agree on transferring missiles with a range below 300 KM. BMs are strategic assets, but fighter jets can be easily defused by ground based ADs.


Missiles were at this time not precise enough. There was the doctrine that Strategic or MRBM missiles were made for ABC weapons mostly. This is the reason why these missiles were never exported by US because US never exports strategic weapons like B52 Bombers, Long Range Missiles or Medium Range missiles and so on.
I think at this time in the 1970s Destroying an Airbase was not so easy like today. The Soviets had to fight it out mostly.

Althought the soviets had much more equipment on the Iranian border. Personal stuff: My own grandfather was in Irans Army at Shah time as a Commander. And he was based on soviet border (Turkmenistan), he often told me: "When we raised our Artillery barrels in the air (wich sometimes done to show that we are here like muscle game)...the soviets rased theirs to and it were so many. We could raise maybe 20 barrels and the answear from them were several hundret of barrels.

By the way: AD Systems can not shot "easily" enemy aircraft down. There are many factors wich influence it: 1If Irans Airforce operates inside its own terretory than soviet AD would not be able to attack an Iranian aircraft. Done get blinded by pure range. The S-200 System at this time had a very good range up to 300 km. But that does not mean that it can destroy everything within 300km range or even 200km range. The greater the range of the target aircraft, the moreenergy the missile will loose.[1] Air defence missiles have a short burning time. The rest of the flight path they are gliding with high speed to the target. If an F-14 Tomcat inside Irans terretory is locked on by ground based radar in 200 km distance, the F-14 will start also its own maneuvers. It will force the S200 Missile always to change its direction again and again. This will make the missile loose lot of energy and speed its way to its target. The S-200 Missile will not be able to fly a maneuver against that F-14 Tomcat or F-4 or maybe even F-5.
Other factors are the flight height over ground. If a aircraft flies low, enemy radar will detect the aircraft later. And than we have electronic countermeasures and electronic warfare, anto radar warfare, Geography like mountains and so on. Because of this theason, there are many factors that restrict the Air defence systems in different ways. Even today Air defence systems deal with the same problems.
I often read here comments like: "Why was russias S400 not able defend against these israeli airstrikes or: why is the S300 of Syria not able to shoot them down over damascus...they are so poor..and so on and so on."

The answear is, they cant even if they are very sophisticated. Because Israel is operating between or behind the mountains of lebanon [2]or behind the golan heights. That means for Syrian Air defence that there is no radar coverage. Israeli jets just have to go up for a few seconds, fire their missiles and go down again. Thats simple.
The other point is that Systems like S300 work not alone, they are designed to work together with other assets. For example Pansir, BUK, OTH Radar Systems, Electronic Warfare Systems, Passive Radar Systems, Integrated Air defence network and nowadays a live all coverage and decentral working air defence system on wich a tracking radar wich is was earlier not related to another air defence missile / hundrets of km away can guide an air defence missile to its target. Some people really thing if somebody owns a single system that makes them string. But there are so many different factors that influence the sucsess of a mission.
To have a good airdefence you need at least:

Very fast and good communication and commando structure wich makes fast decisions
Discipline and motivated operators because looking at the radar is very boring (Human error factors must be reduced)
Strong logistic for repair and spare parts. They always have to follow that system because a good air defence system planner will never let a system static in the same position. They have to change position several times a day and definitly after every radar activation. (Radar can not always be switched ON because that makes the hunter an hunted object) passive sensors, and other Systems have to feed the System with many informations.
Intelligent commanders of the crew
Functioning Air defence Network and free and fast flow of information (strong communication) 
meeting all these conditions is a challenge in itself. In war, you are confronted with an enemy who tries to destroy these conditions with many means. How well do intelligence agencies work to protect necessary frequencies or other data such as locations, plans and doctrines? What risk is the enemy willing to take to disable your systems? What priority do these systems have for the adversary? There are so many factors that go into the successful deployment of an S-400 or S-300. It is not just the system itself. If any one of these conditions (and not all have been mentioned) fails, it can lead to complete failure of the entire system.



gambit said:


> Legend has it that at the end of the Vietnam War, some F-5s were sent to the Soviet Union for eval. Then US intel intercepted a message where the Soviets told their allies that do not get the MIG-21 into a turning fight against the F-5. I read on this discussion that Iran dropped the F-5 in favor of missiles.



I play DCS combat simulator quite a long time wich is the most realistic combat flight simulator existing. Physics/ Aircraft/ Avionic is very very realistic. Even real fighter pilots are playing these game and there are alot of videos from fighter pilots reaction to this. According to these experience wich can get a non fighter pilot closest to reality as possible. It takes in some cases weeks to handle a new fighter aircraft because you have to get familiar with every physical detail and the machine itself. I can tell as follow:

The F-5 owns a better turn radius than the MiG-21. This was the only advantage. When I fought against MiG 21 in an F-5, the F-5 had big problems with its weight/thrust ratio. Engines are really weak. Also radar is very poor and only good in practice for dogfight. The MiG 21 , is good played can really suck the energy out of the F-5. But at the end of the day all depends to the pilot skills. It makes also a big difference how these aircraft meet each other and how the dogfight will go on. Are they going into a one or 2 circle fight? Who have the sun in its back? and and and. I would definitly consider the F-5 NOT as an absolute supreme fighter in the 70s era.
A F-5 can fight theoretically agains everything. Even a dogfight against an F-18 or F-15 is possible. The problem is just that the F-5 is loosing very very fast energy.[3][4] As an F-5 fighter pilot you have 2 or at maximum 3 circles you can do before loosing your energy wich means you will loose speed. Than you are definitly dead. An F-5 have its corner speed (Best turning rate) at 325 mph. Every mile below or over this will reduce the turning rate massively. (every aircraft owns a perfect corner speed). So is the F-5 looses energy after 2 circles, the speed will decline mostly between 200 to 250 mph when you turn into an 2 circle or one circle horizontal doghfight at thecornerspeed of 325 mph.The turn rate will decline very fast and the only way to get out of this is loosing height to gain speed again to keep your corner speed. But the enemy is potentially in advantage because he have higher altitude AND more energy. When the F-5 fires a missile from low to high altitude with low initial speed, or an MiG 21 fires its own missile from high altitude to low altitude with high initial speed, that makes a big difference. A fighter aircraft with low energy can not outmaneuver a high speed AA missile. The high altitude aircraft with migh energy can. AND it can use the Sun as protection because Infrared Sidewinder missiles mounted on F-5 cant find a target if the enemy aircraft flights with the Sun behind his neck.This is the reason why the Red Team Agressor fighter pilots (wich use F-5 E) in Nevada Nellis Airforce base use the F-5 and are called "Agressors". [5] Because they are the best fighter pilots the US owns and their task is to train these new F-22, F-15 or F-18 fighter pilots in dogfight. And they can really outmaneuver them in an F-5. But this is related to the very very high skills of the best fighter pilots the US owns against relatively new Pilots. But their tactis is the same: Even these guys outmaneuver them in the first one or 2 circles in a dogfight. Is you cant you are definitly dead.



Hack-Hook said:


> what Soviet airforce could bring agains 160 f-14 and 300+ F-16 and 100+ f-4 and let not to forget we were partner in YF-17 that later resulted in F-18


Yeah but this would happen in the 80s. In the 80s the US were nearly supreme in all aspects. The US were so strong in the 80s. This was the last decade of the soviet union. In a war theatre in Europe, Western forces would definitly gain air supriority. There was the F-15. F-16, F-14, Nighthawk, precise laser guided artillery availiable, M1 Abrahams tank and the US had very sophisticated Anti submarine warfare capabilities. There was the GUIK gap. Only thing the soviets were strong were ground force numbers. The US were fully digitalized at this time and electronic warfare capabilities were revolutionary at this time. The soviets mostly used analog systems. Soviet union operated mostly T72 Tanks. Tanks like T-80 were very expensive and not in high numbers. T72 Tank was also designed for ultra high production rate. The best of soviets Interceptor Airforce was the MiG 29 wich was very capable in dogfight, but it relied still on old avionic and electronic systems.

1. 



2. Radar Coverage Tool and Air defence options
3. F5 Manual DCS
4. 



5.https://www.nellis.af.mil/About/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/284166/64th-aggressor-squadron/


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> This comment is utter nonsense. Military historians, academies, focus groups, think tanks, and general staffs do it all the time.


And these are the same morons who predicted a swift victory for Saudi Arabia, or Israel,...



gambit said:


> I will admit, am at a loss for words for this. Never thought I see Iranians making excuses for Iraq for Desert Storm.


Yeah, I know,that's what we expect from people who change war game scenarios to make themselves the winner (MC 2002)! but know this too, since WWII , US hasn't experienced a real war.



gambit said:


> Actually, the Iraqi military was equipped with Soviet and Chinese hardware. And what does 'full info' mean? That somehow we had technical knowledge of the AK-47 rifle or the T-72 tank that no one else know? But let US grant that your absurd idea is real --  -- why should that make US combat successes in Desert Storm any less historically significant? Is not intel a critical component of war? Is not exploiting weaknesses a critical component of war?


I like it when you try to make a fool out of yourself! Western advisors were running the Iraq military during Iran-Iraq war, and whenever it wasn't enough (like Iran's faw operation), your forces intervened directly, and so they had full access to their capabilities to arrange their tactics. also Iraq's communication and electronic systems came from west, and so easily were countered.



gambit said:


> If Iraq yesterday had a missile force like Iran today, what make you think we cannot change our tactics to produce the same outcome as Desert Storm as how we know it today? You do not. Back then, no one knew how the US would perform, technically and else, but everyone was willing to predict how much casualties Iraq would inflict on US. Then it turned out to be the opposite. So what make you think that Iran's missile force is immune to US?
> 
> And please do not use the stupid response like "If you can you would have attacked Iran already" or something equivalent.


The only way to change your tactic against Iran, is to keep your forces out of our missile range, and make them ineffective in the war. but then again, for a country which is thousands of kilometers away and likes to count on extensive support during it's invasions (like months of piling the equipment in your previous wars) that's impossible, even during Vietnam war where you were still able to create support point for forces, US experienced a humiliating defeat. simply you are not a man of war.



gambit said:


> No one has since WW II.


That's why you haven't seen a real war.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Arash1991 said:


> Soviet OTH Radar Capacities, Soviet Radar Bases in Azerbaijan would be able to detect everything over whole Iran


could easily be targeted by Iran air force , and at the time russia really didn't had any airplane that could go against F-14s


Arash1991 said:


> Soviet Spies and Communist parties in Iran wich would collaborate with the Soviet Union: Kurds were definitly left oriented and Communist Ideology was a problem in Iran at this time. There were lot of space for Communists in Iran to operate behind enemy lines. Specially some radical parties like Tudeh or still existing Monafeghine Khalgh and so on.


tudeh group had very little influence in armed force in late 70s the only influential communist group was one certain group that let not name it and its ideology was not actually communism but a combination of Communism and Islamism . by the way left groups have more influence in Universities than in Armed forces


----------



## Hack-Hook

Arash1991 said:


> This brings us to some other questions:
> Would Irans supply lines be kept open ? I think: Iran vs CSSR: Yes and Iran/Nato vs CSSR = temporary no (cause US had to concentrate mostly on Europe war theatre and Soviet submarines would maybe be able to cut US Supply lines in the Atlantic Ocean for a while. (talking about 70s era, in the 80s USA was absolute supreme in technology)


if that happen , Russia was also had to divide its asset , between europe , Iran and don't forget in black sea against turkey. Iran air force at the time was not short of Nato minus USA. and at 80 those F-5 were certainly were replaced with the yf-17 or what come out of it.

about mig-29 the radar of early version of mig-29 were really sucked they relied on old technology so unless they manage to go near the enemy and make it into a dog-fight the air-plane is not much

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arash1991

mohsen said:


> (...)The only way to change your tactic against Iran, is to keep your forces out of our missile range, and make them ineffective in the war. but then again, for a country which is thousands of kilometers away and likes to count on extensive support during it's invasions (like months of piling the equipment in your previous wars) that's impossible, even during Vietnam war where you were still able to create support point for forces, US experienced a humiliating defeat. simply you are not a man of war.


Ive read some Think tank analysis about exactly this. Its about "how to deal with Iran from the distance when it comes to war". The analysis is little bit outdated because since then, Iranian accurate Missile range increased. The solution was in my eyes not very practical but better than nothing. It was to keep distance in the northern Indian Ocean and gain air supriority in the Hormuz Region from there. And after this happens a invasion in Hormuzgan province would be the plan. In my eyes very risky thing. 
The other fact is that they did not give Irans Air defence a high value in this paper. But this also changed. 

One thing that makes really headache in the future will be the development of effective laser weapons. I think laser Weapons are the only solution against Irans Ballistic missiles. 
Anoither point is that US strongly invested specially in the Persian Gulf region in Air defence Systems against missiles. Lot of weapon deals with Arabian States on the Persian Gulf are related to missile defence. Although I dont think that this will be the solution, on the other hand I dont think that they are absolutely useless.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Arash1991 said:


> One thing that makes really headache in the future will be the development of effective laser weapons. I think laser Weapons are the only solution against Irans Ballistic missiles.


Laser weapons require a lot of energy, though and reflective surfaces can render the damage less effective at least.

Will laser technology advance that much in 30 years to be viable for this sort of application?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1564757964224880640

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

mohsen said:


> That's why you haven't seen a real war.


If Desert Storm was not a 'real' war, then neither was the Iran-Iraq War, or any armed conflict since then. So forget about criticizing the MC exercise, which I doubt you understood to start, you changing the meaning and context of what is a 'real' war is more a feeble attempt to minimize a war that exposed Iran's military weaknesses.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

gambit said:


> If Desert Storm was not a 'real' war, then neither was the Iran-Iraq War, or any armed conflict since then. So forget about criticizing the MC exercise, which I doubt you understood to start, you changing the meaning and context of what is a 'real' war is more a feeble attempt to minimize a war that exposed Iran's military weaknesses.


It wasn't a real war. It was a one-sided beat down where the iraqis surrendered more than they fought and friendly fire caused a good portion of coalition casualties.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> If Desert Storm was not a 'real' war, then neither was the Iran-Iraq War, or any armed conflict since then. So forget about criticizing the MC exercise, which I doubt you understood to start, you changing the meaning and context of what is a 'real' war is more a feeble attempt to minimize a war that exposed Iran's military weaknesses.


*Tulsi Gabbard Says 'War With Iran Would Make Iraq/Afghanistan Wars Seem Like A Picnic'*









Gabbard: 'War With Iran Would Make Iraq/Afghanistan...Seem Like a Picnic'


The congresswoman and Iraq War veteran said the strike killing Iranian general Qassem Soleimani has endangered U.S. national security.




www.newsweek.com






Picnic it was regardless of any other war.


----------



## Arash1991

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Laser weapons require a lot of energy, though and reflective surfaces can render the damage less effective at least.
> 
> Will laser technology advance that much in 30 years to be viable for this sort of application?



Yes I think so. Even today there are working laser devices against artillery shell and smaller missiles in use. The point is that battery technology is moving forward very fast or energy saving devices. Iran is also strong in this field and invented functioning early laser weapons. I tguessrange is some kilometers maybe like iron beam, Source
France have Laser Program in development against Air targets between 400 to 600 km range. US also, Nearly every Industrial and technology nation have at least one project directly or indirectly connected to such a project.
Unfortuntely Israel already put these weapons in active use. Its called: "Iron Beam".Source
Its a Laser weapon with 7 km range. It can detect and destroy targets within this range. Targets are artillery shells, small missiles (BM-21) or drones. Development started in 2014 and 2020 the system joined the Zionist forces. 
According to Zionist Regime, Israel can deliver single digit number in the next following years. System have some childrens diseases wich is in my opinion normal if you add an absolutely new technology wich was never used before in that constellation. US also had experimental Laser programs. Generally, the biggest problem of Laser is energy. And back to your question: The next 30 years will be interesting and I personally believe that everything will go in this direction.

About your mirror Idea:
_Ryan Hoffman, Counter-Directed Energy program manager, says that mirrors protect well against low-power lasers. “However, reflective surfaces are not 100 percent reflective,” he says. “The small amount of laser energy that’s absorbed will heat the mirror and cause damage.”_


_To avoid this, drones will require a superior mirror. Dielectric or Bragg mirrors are composed of many layers of dielectric material (a type of insulator), with precise spacing between each one. By adjusting the layers, engineers can create a mirror with a reflectivity of up to 99.99 percent. That reflectivity, however, only works for a specific, narrow range of wavelengths.
_

“_Protecting against all wavelengths would be ideal, but difficult,” Hoffman say_s.

Source

So of this mirror technology will be developed (I think as contermeasure, it will because traditional anti head surfaces have too much weight), we may face the problem to choose between a mirror surface of an object or a stealth coat. For drones, Stealth could be interesting, for ballistic missiles the mirror would be maybe better solution.
But what about Hypersonic missiles? Any Idea? Because Hypersonic is producing a Plasma around the Hypersonic objectwich makes it automatically stealth. Only possibility to track this is done by Quantum Radars wich are working with Quantum mecanics. First prototype developed in China and according to them they are working. Source


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Arash1991 said:


> Yes I think so. Even today there are working laser devices against artillery shell and smaller missiles in use. The point is that battery technology is moving forward very fast or energy saving devices. Iran is also strong in this field and invented functioning early laser weapons. I tguessrange is some kilometers maybe like iron beam, Source
> France have Laser Program in development against Air targets between 400 to 600 km range. US also, Nearly every Industrial and technology nation have at least one project directly or indirectly connected to such a project.
> Unfortuntely Israel already put these weapons in active use. Its called: "Iron Beam".Source
> Its a Laser weapon with 7 km range. It can detect and destroy targets within this range. Targets are artillery shells, small missiles (BM-21) or drones. Development started in 2014 and 2020 the system joined the Zionist forces.
> According to Zionist Regime, Israel can deliver single digit number in the next following years. System have some childrens diseases wich is in my opinion normal if you add an absolutely new technology wich was never used before in that constellation. US also had experimental Laser programs. Generally, the biggest problem of Laser is energy. And back to your question: The next 30 years will be interesting and I personally believe that everything will go in this direction.
> 
> About your mirror Idea:
> _Ryan Hoffman, Counter-Directed Energy program manager, says that mirrors protect well against low-power lasers. “However, reflective surfaces are not 100 percent reflective,” he says. “The small amount of laser energy that’s absorbed will heat the mirror and cause damage.”
> 
> 
> To avoid this, drones will require a superior mirror. Dielectric or Bragg mirrors are composed of many layers of dielectric material (a type of insulator), with precise spacing between each one. By adjusting the layers, engineers can create a mirror with a reflectivity of up to 99.99 percent. That reflectivity, however, only works for a specific, narrow range of wavelengths._
> 
> 
> “_Protecting against all wavelengths would be ideal, but difficult,” Hoffman say_s.
> 
> Source
> 
> So of this mirror technology will be developed (I think as contermeasure, it will because traditional anti head surfaces have too much weight), we may face the problem to choose between a mirror surface of an object or a stealth coat. For drones, Stealth could be interesting, for ballistic missiles the mirror would be maybe better solution.
> But what about Hypersonic missiles? Any Idea? Because Hypersonic is producing a Plasma around the Hypersonic objectwich makes it automatically stealth. Only possibility to track this is done by Quantum Radars wich are working with Quantum mecanics. First prototype developed in China and according to them they are working. Source


I appreciate the response. Unfortunately, I must sleep now and only skimmed the post but when I awake, I'll read the it more carefully.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arash1991

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> It wasn't a real war. It was a one-sided beat down where the iraqis surrendered more than they fought and friendly fire caused a good portion of coalition casualties.


I know what you mean when you write that it was not a real war. However, your statement is wrong by definition. If you look at it exactly and let the war literature come to words in which the war and its rules for victory are described (Sun tzu "the art of war" or Clausewitz "of war") then the war is by definition a war.
War is defined as an organized conflict fought with weapons and violence using considerable means,in which collectives proceeding according to plan are involved. The goal of the collectives involved is to assert their interests. The conflict is to be resolved by fighting and achieving superiority.
Furthermore, a battle should only be fought when it has already been won (suntzu). This means that the opponent must already be weakened so much that the act of war itself is only a formal underpinning of the true balance of power. Furthermore, in a war the opponent is forced to fulfill the will of another party. The means for it is the force. (Clausewitz "of the war")

Don't get me wrong: I understand what you mean and actually want to say with your statement. But still it was a war. Even a very successful one, because the winners of this war have fulfilled all conditions of the philosophy of war almost in perfection.

Good night bro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Arash1991 said:


> Don't get me wrong: I understand what you mean and actually want to say with your statement. But still it was a war. Even a very successful one, because the winners of this war have fulfilled all conditions of the philosophy of war almost in perfection.


I do tend to agree with this. It was succesfull, but what many don't understand, is that war is a tool and a part of diplomacy and politics. The US is successful at this tool, but failed miserably at the other parts and ended up with no tangible results. One must always remember this, but we are in a military forum here so we focus on weapons.

I think after 8 years war, we learned that war is just a small part of diplomacy and politics, and the same results can be attained without firing a shot. War is a last resort for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arash1991

Stryker1982 said:


> I do tend to agree with this. It was succesfull, but what many don't understand, is that war is a tool and a part of diplomacy and politics. The US is successful at this tool, but failed miserably at the other parts and ended up with no tangible results. One must always remember this, but we are in a military forum here so we focus on weapons.
> 
> I think after 8 years war, we learned that war is just a small part of diplomacy and politics, and the same results can be attained without firing a shot. War is a last resort for Iran.


Iran is living that mindset. Thanks to god


----------



## gambit

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> It wasn't a real war. It was a one-sided beat down where the iraqis surrendered more than they fought and friendly fire caused a good portion of coalition casualties.


Can you give a credible reference other than yourself?


----------



## Abid123

gambit said:


> Can you give a credible reference other than yourself?


Why do you have a habit of always mentioning the 1991 gulf war when talking about Iran?

Regarding the Gulf War Saddam Hussein was a complete idiot. Had Iraq gone on the offensive before the allies had build up their forces, it would have been a disaster for the US.

It would mean no coalition buildup, no Desert Shield, No Desert Storm...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

gambit said:


> Can you give a credible reference other than yourself?


Sure, there are thousands of americans who participated in desert storm.

Most have their heads up their arses, much like yourself but a few will tell you as it was - a video game turned reality, difficulty set to moderate (because at least saddam's air force performed in some capacity).


----------



## gambit

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Sure, there are thousands of americans who participated in desert storm.
> 
> Most have their heads up their arses, much like yourself but a few will tell you as it was - a video game turned reality, difficulty set to moderate (because at least saddam's air force performed in some capacity).


So in *YOUR* case, probably someone who play video games, never served a day, his head up his ***, make you just as much a military 'expert' as someone who done 10+ yrs?


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

gambit said:


> So in *YOUR* case, probably someone who play video games, never served a day, his head up his ***, make you just as much a military 'expert' as someone who done 10+ yrs?




10 years at what level though and in which branch? Does that mean you know the ins and outs of Iranian military doctrine? Or have you access to every military branch of the country you serve? Get over yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

gambit said:


> So in *YOUR* case, probably someone who play video games, never served a day, his head up his ***, make you just as much a military 'expert' as someone who done 10+ yrs?


Yes, it does. My head is on my shoulders where it belongs. I'd suggest you poke it out of your bunghole every now and then, though I'm sure you love your smelly, shitstained orifice like women love diamonds.

The americucks had all the intelligence about every piece of hardware the iraqis fielded. You know why? The western components had been supplied by them, west germany and france in the previous decade and the soviet equipment was accounted for through spies, double-agents, defectors plus they'd studied all the aircraft once east germany fell after the Berlin Wall collapsed and every tank iraq had was present in isnotreal's inventory, trophies from their war with the arabs (americans knew where every rivet was inserted after thorough examinations).

Hell, france gave them the codes for the air defence equipment that iraq had which they'd supplied in the '80s. The soviet era AA systems were suppressed with EW and stood little chance against maneuverable american aircraft to begin with...need I go on?

It wasn't a war - they assembled that coalition to make an example of saddam quite brutally. And incompetent and cowardly as he was, he let them walk all over him. So yeah, you senile boomer, take your delusions of "muh real war" to those who swallow such tripe. The insurgency phase of the 2003 iraq war and the war in afghanistan were far more real wars than desert storm will ever be.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Yes, it does. My head is on my shoulders where it belongs. I'd suggest you poke it out of your bunghole every now and then, though I'm sure you love your smelly, shitstained orifice like women love diamonds.
> 
> The americucks had all the intelligence about every piece of hardware the iraqis fielded. You know why? The western components had been supplied by them, west germany and france in the previous decade and the soviet equipment was accounted for through spies, double-agents, defectors plus they'd studied all the aircraft once east germany fell after the Berlin Wall collapsed and every tank iraq had was present in isnotreal's inventory, trophies from their war with the arabs (americans knew where every rivet was inserted after thorough examinations).
> 
> Hell, france gave them the codes for the air defence equipment that iraq had which they'd supplied in the '80s. The soviet era AA systems were suppressed with EW and stood little chance against maneuverable american aircraft to begin with...need I go on?
> 
> It wasn't a war - they assembled that coalition to make an example of saddam quite brutally. And incompetent and cowardly as he was, he let them walk all over him. So yeah, you senile boomer, take your delusions of "muh real war" to those who swallow such tripe. The insurgency phase of the 2003 iraq war and the war in afghanistan were far more real wars than desert storm will ever be.


This is flat-Earth material here.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

gambit said:


> This is flat-Earth material here.


Take a nap, grandpa. The cold war's over and you're an ancient relic left over from it, a fossil and a mere oddity for us to laugh at.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

General Bagheri in a meeting with Chief of Air Staff of the Pakistan Air Force Zaheer Ahmad Babar:
_"It's expected to have a joint program for manned and unmanned fighters withing next one or two years."_

I don't know if he said it as a hope or as part of a plan.

also It was agreed that a team of Pakistani experts visit Iran for further enhancement of cooperations in aviation sector.

Gen Babar also invited Iran to participate in Pakistan air drills through sending fighter jets or observers.

full news:








ایران محدودیتی برای گسترش همکاری نظامی ندارد


رئیس ستاد کل نیروهای مسلح گفت: تحریم‌های تسلیحاتی سازمان ملل حدود یک سال و نیم است که رفع شده‌ است و از این جهت ما با محدودیتی مواجه نیستیم.




www.mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> General Bagheri in a meeting with Chief of Air Staff of the Pakistan Air Force Zaheer Ahmad Babar:
> _"It's expected to have a joint program for manned and unmanned fighters withing next one or two years."_
> 
> I don't know if he said it as a hope or as part of a plan.
> 
> also It was agreed that a team of Pakistani experts visit Iran for further enhancement of cooperations in aviation sector.
> 
> Gen Babar also invited Iran to participate in Pakistan air drills through sending fighter jets or observers.
> 
> full news:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ایران محدودیتی برای گسترش همکاری نظامی ندارد
> 
> 
> رئیس ستاد کل نیروهای مسلح گفت: تحریم‌های تسلیحاتی سازمان ملل حدود یک سال و نیم است که رفع شده‌ است و از این جهت ما با محدودیتی مواجه نیستیم.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mashreghnews.ir



I’m still waiting on the results he promised from his “deals” when he went to Russia a few years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> I’m still waiting on the results he promised from his “deals” when he went to Russia a few years ago.



Oh you know by now brother, what to expect of those "deals" lmao.


----------



## TheImmortal

Blue In Green said:


> Oh you know by now brother, what to expect of those "deals" lmao.



His latest visit last year saying contracts were “concluded”






Iran pursuing contracts for buying defense equip. from Russia - Mehr News Agency







en.mehrnews.com





Zero results


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Flotilla

TheImmortal said:


> His latest visit last year saying contracts were “concluded”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran pursuing contracts for buying defense equip. from Russia - Mehr News Agency
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.mehrnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zero results



Maybe there is a explanation. I don´t know, I´m just speculating.

Nobody´s says it, but I believe there is a secret pact between israelis and russians; "Don´t give advanced weapons to Ukraine and I won´t give to iranians".









Vetoing Victory - Israel Is Blocking (Military) Aid To Ukraine







www.oryxspioenkop.com





If it is truth, you can bet that the fate of delivering Su-35s is sealed.

Hope I am wrong.


----------



## sha ah

I don't know, the US has basically said on 4 occasions now that Russia has purchased hundreds of UAVs from Iran. The White House and the Pentagon both. Not sure if its true but there is something going on behind the scenes, Iran likely supplied Russia with something, atleast some weapons components they were looking for. 

What I'm wondering is if this transaction is possibly part of a larger deal between Russia/Iran ? Is Iran giving Russia UAVs and maybe some other components they now lack ? Because it will take time for the Russians to source alternative parts/components/technology for some of their weapons systems as they adapt to western sanctions ? 

Perhaps this UAV deal is more of a barter/trade type of transaction rather than a straight forward purchase by Russia ? Maybe it's part of a larger deal where Iran will purchase the Bastion coastal air defense system ? S-400 ? SU-35s ? SU-30s ? maybe T-90 tanks or a co-production deal on a new cannon or engine ? 

I believe that if there is a larger deal behind the scenes, that it would be a win win for both parties, since both are trading products which they produce at the raw cost but only time will tell.



TheImmortal said:


> His latest visit last year saying contracts were “concluded”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran pursuing contracts for buying defense equip. from Russia - Mehr News Agency
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.mehrnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zero results


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Iran will purchase the Bastion coastal air defense system ? S-400 ? SU-35s ? SU-30s ? maybe T-90 tanks or a co-production deal on a new cannon or engine ?


the question is why ?


----------



## lydian fall



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Maybe because these weapons could be useful to Iran I would imagine ?



Hack-Hook said:


> the question is why ?


----------



## sanel1412

Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi, Commander of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighters from Russia is on the Air Force's agenda.
He stated that the purchase of Sukhoi 30 is not in the plan and currently the purchase of Sukhoi 35 from Russia is discussed, adding: This issue is on the agenda and we hope to be able to get these fighters in the future.

The Commander of the Air Force also emphasized that the final decision on the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighter jets from Russia rests with the Army Command and the General Staff Command of the Armed Forces
Copy/paste from twitter account MESHKAT, Just to be clear, I would Just copy post but there was no english version

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

sanel1412 said:


> Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi, Commander of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighters from Russia is on the Air Force's agenda.
> He stated that the purchase of Sukhoi 30 is not in the plan and currently the purchase of Sukhoi 35 from Russia is discussed, adding: This issue is on the agenda and we hope to be able to get these fighters in the future.
> 
> The Commander of the Air Force also emphasized that the final decision on the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighter jets from Russia rests with the Army Command and the General Staff Command of the Armed Forces
> Copy/paste from twitter account MESHKAT, Just to be clear, I would Just copy post but there was no english version



@Hack-Hook vaaaaay Amoo Hook, roozet kharab shod, na? 😁

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Maybe because these weapons could be useful to Iran I would imagine ?


will they be ?
for Bastion , we have persian gulf , and Hormoz and if i'm not wrong one version of zolfaqar .
For S-400 we have our bavar.
T-90 , well we have Karrar .
new cannon , engine . we will see how russia is willing to do that.

Su-30, Su-35 honnestly there is literally pages on why those two airplane belong to an era bygone . future airplane must have lower RCS than those two and must be able to control drones , must have AESA radars and a capable and strong link , otherwise they are obsolete

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Brigadier General Hamid Vahedi, Commander of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighters from Russia is on the Air Force's agenda.
> He stated that the purchase of Sukhoi 30 is not in the plan and currently the purchase of Sukhoi 35 from Russia is discussed, adding: This issue is on the agenda and we hope to be able to get these fighters in the future.
> 
> The Commander of the Air Force also emphasized that the final decision on the purchase of Sukhoi 35 fighter jets from Russia rests with the Army Command and the General Staff Command of the Armed Forces
> Copy/paste from twitter account MESHKAT, Just to be clear, I would Just copy post but there was no english version


you mean this ?
ProjectMeshkat

i could not find that can you link to the tweet .



Daylamite Warrior said:


> @Hack-Hook vaaaaay Amoo Hook, roozet kharab shob, na? 😁


Link please , just some unnamed twitter account mention something , don't mean that is true.
maybe you mean this account

Meshkat

by the way in 2016 iran defence minister said they sign a contract with russia for Su-30sm what happened to that .


----------



## sha ah

We have similar weapons but are they as good ? isn't it better to diversify ? Also Iran's airforce is aging. A few dozen flankers with IRST pods and some upgrades for Mig-29s would not be a bad idea. Also such a transaction could lead to bigger and better thing in the future.



Hack-Hook said:


> will they be ?
> for Bastion , we have persian gulf , and Hormoz and if i'm not wrong one version of zolfaqar .
> For S-400 we have our bavar.
> T-90 , well we have Karrar .
> new cannon , engine . we will see how russia is willing to do that.
> 
> Su-30, Su-35 honnestly there is literally pages on why those two airplane belong to an era bygone . future airplane must have lower RCS than those two and must be able to control drones , must have AESA radars and a capable and strong link , otherwise they are obsolete


----------



## sanel1412

In an interview with the Iranian Borna agency, Iranian Army Air Force Commander general Hamid Vahedi said that at the moment the purchase of the Su-30 is not on the plans and on the agenda of the IRIAF now it's buying Su-35 fighters from Russia
Link
%


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> We have similar weapons but are they as good ? isn't it better to diversify ? Also Iran's airforce is aging. A few dozen flankers with IRST pods and some upgrades for Mig-29s would not be a bad idea. Also such a transaction could lead to bigger and better thing in the future.


i believe bavar is better than s-400 it only have less range , its S-500 radar that meet Bavar Radar standards not S-400 and for that we are working on newer version of Sayyad missile

T-90 is upgraded T-72 , karrar is upgraded T-72
bastion well ours at least have higher range , about effectiveness well it was not fired in anger yet so i can't say for sure . but i'm certain on one think , it improve if we work on it , if we stop working on it and go buy foreign system with same mission , it won't improve ot its improvement slow down.

about airplane , flanker only id better from a light/medium fighter in range , a j-10c or JF-17 block3 have far better avionic and radar and have more modern electrical system . so no flanker is no good . i believe we must focus on turning kowsar into such platform not going on shopping spree , our budget for increasing military power for all the branches are just 4 milliard Euro , we cant afford to use it on buying old technology because we think we must do something for airforce , more importantly if we turn Kowsar int something like J-10c, JF-17 block III ,JAS-39 C\E or mig-35 before Russia dumb it down because they could not produce necessary electronic subsystem after 2016 . then we have an airplane both IRIAF and IRGCAF can use and it made our logistic and supply and maintenance streamlined instead of the mess it is now

about our mig-29 they are really old and have limited capabilities , their radar is even inferior to prototype mig-29 , they don't have fly by wire capability and nearly half their weight is the systems that control its flying. have no data link . the only thing that made them above F-5 is their engine . if we want to upgrade them it probably will be nearly as expensive as buying new ones

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> In an interview with the Iranian Borna agency, Iranian Army Air Force Commander general Hamid Vahedi said that at the moment the purchase of the Su-30 is not on the plans and on the agenda of the IRIAF now it's buying Su-35 fighters from Russia
> Link
> %


Borna news i don't rely on it that much , but as he said defense ministry and army must decide at the end and thank God his boss's there think otherwise and believe we can build our aircraft


https://www.isna.ir/news/1401030805566/%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B4-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%88%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%AF-%D8%AC%D9%86%DA%AF%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%87-%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%BE%DB%8C%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%87-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AF


----------



## sha ah

Well China has potent air defense systems and they even export them but they bought the S-400 just to diversify their inventory and open the door to purchasing the S-500, which can shoot down hypersonic missiles in space. 

The Chinese also produce more 5th generation fighter jets than Russia but they still bought Russian jets and hardware just to study them and to diversify their inventory. Also if Iran is trading it's drones for those Russian weapons, then Iran is not really paying full price is it ?

F-5 is honestly a light fighter jet, it can't carry enough payload. A few dozen SU-35s and SU-30's perhaps with technology transfers, license built, would be a good boost for the Iranian airforce. Many of Iran's airframes are simply too old, they won't hold up in a war. Also jointly working on helicopters with Russia would give Iran's helicopter industry a huge boost as well.

Iran's airforce needs a new medium-heavy airframes just to stay relevant. Drones are great but are vulnerable to being hacked, the transmission can be disrupted using EW methods and they're not nearly as fast or maneuverable as a jet. Also a fighter jet is manually controlled by a human pilot, so it can never be tricked into landing in enemy territory or tricked into bombing its own base for example.

Satellites, Iran has been working on them for years, but now thanks to that recent deal with Russia Iran has a military satellite up and running as we speak. A few of those satellites will greatly enhances Iran's capabilities until Iran's own Space launch vehicles catch up. Also potential technology transfers will give Iran's own space industry a boost and potentially save Iran from years of failed experiments and billions in R&D. How do you think the Chinese did it ? They initially got everything from the Soviets.

I'm not sure if Iran has the means to build something like S-500. It might take Iran another decade or longer. Buying a few S-400 batteries opens the door to purchasing the S-500. T-90 components or license built opens the door to the T-14 Armata in the future. Some say that Russia is a declining power but it still has alot of useful things Iran needs. Like I said if Iran is selling its drones to Russia and the cost to Iran is 25%-50% then those Russian weapons going to cost Iran alot less anyways.



Hack-Hook said:


> i believe bavar is better than s-400 it only have less range , its S-500 radar that meet Bavar Radar standards not S-400 and for that we are working on newer version of Sayyad missile
> 
> T-90 is upgraded T-72 , karrar is upgraded T-72
> bastion well ours at least have higher range , about effectiveness well it was not fired in anger yet so i can't say for sure . but i'm certain on one think , it improve if we work on it , if we stop working on it and go buy foreign system with same mission , it won't improve ot its improvement slow down.
> 
> about airplane , flanker only id better from a light/medium fighter in range , a j-10c or JF-17 block3 have far better avionic and radar and have more modern electrical system . so no flanker is no good . i believe we must focus on turning kowsar into such platform not going on shopping spree , our budget for increasing military power for all the branches are just 4 milliard Euro , we cant afford to use it on buying old technology because we think we must do something for airforce , more importantly if we turn Kowsar int something like J-10c, JF-17 block III ,JAS-39 C\E or mig-35 before Russia dumb it down because they could not produce necessary electronic subsystem after 2016 . then we have an airplane both IRIAF and IRGCAF can use and it made our logistic and supply and maintenance streamlined instead of the mess it is now


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> They also produce more 5th generation fighter jets can Russia but they still bought Russian jets and hardware just to study them and to diversify their inventory.


at the time they didn;t as when russia made offer to them on su-35 they refused to buy any more, and why diversify airforce it only make maintenance harder


sha ah said:


> Also if Iran is trading it's drones for those Russian weapons, then Iran is not really paying full price is it ?


i yet to see those drones and no we will pay full price and they pay full price but the problem is that depending on what type of drone we giving them the price of all of them will be equal to 1-2 Su-35 and my problem with Su-35 is not completely with its price its more with its electronic an by the amount we pay for those su-35 we can produce a lot more locally or we can buy twice as much light/medium airplane with more modern equipment from countries like china 


sha ah said:


> F-5 is honestly a light fighter jet, it can't carry enough payload. A few dozen SU-35s and SU-30's perhaps with technology transfers, license built, would be a good boost for the Iranian airforce. Many of Iran's airframes are simply too old, they won't hold up in a war.


russia won't give us that about F-5 can't carry much if you put a more powerful engine like ws-13 or rd-33 or our domestic turbofan engine on it why not its roughly the same size as Grippen-C (f-5 have 10cm less wingspan , is 50cm longer and 40cm less height) and grippen-c can carry 4 meteor + 2x IRIS-T and one hard point reserved for Digital Joint Reconnaissance Pod that cover FLIR and ECM and E/O end have one hard point empty that can be equipped with 3-4 SDB)



sha ah said:


> It might take Iran another decade or longer. Buying a few S-400 batteries opens the door to purchasing the S-500 and like I said if Iran is selling its drone to Russia and the cost to Iran is 25%-50% then those Russian weapons are a bargain.


iran may not be able to build something like s-500 but we can build something better than s-400 and in fact our bavar radar is better than s-400 and iran defence ministry stated that we soon unveil the next generation of bavar which is even better than s-400 so buying s-400 right now make no sense . our current system is more resilliant to electronic warfare and only its missile have less range than one of its missile (40n6e) that i\m sure russia won't give us and sayyad-4 cover the next best missile


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> you mean this ?
> ProjectMeshkat
> 
> i could not find that can you link to the tweet .
> 
> 
> Link please , just some unnamed twitter account mention something , don't mean that is true.
> maybe you mean this account
> 
> Meshkat
> 
> by the way in 2016 iran defence minister said they sign a contract with russia for Su-30sm what happened to that .



Ask Sanel since he was the one who posted the information. 

Valee in ye chak dar e goosh e anhaye ke migoftan neeroo havayee hich fa'aliyati nemikone. Alan behtarin vaght e kharidan e havapaymaye jangade az roosiye hast.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ask Sanel since he was the one who posted the information.
> 
> Valee in ye chak dar e goosh e anhaye ke migoftan neeroo havayee hich fa'aliyati nemikone. Alan behtarin vaght e kharidan e havapaymaye jangade az roosiye hast.


It is literary 1 post under that account, in fact second, there is one pinned.. but It doesnt mater, they are not Source, news is literary all over Internet, twitter, Instagram..Problem is, he did not Read post carefuly, Reason I didnt Just embeded twitter post is because there is no english post.. So I translated it


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566345009229709312

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Like I said, I think Russia has some things Iran needs and Iran has UAVs which Russia currently needs. I think it's a win win for both sides. A mutually beneficial deal. With all the sanctions imposed on Russia and the west showing its true face, there's no better time than now for Iran to work with Russia.

Yes if Iran's F-5's had a more powerful engine, "if" but if they could they would have already. I think SU-30/SU-35 are great multirole fighter jets. Their IRLS pods are an excellent counter measure against 5th generation stealth jets. Iran needs to replace some of its older airframes, the F-4s are already 50 years old, how long do you think they will last ? 60 ? 70 ? years ? come on man Iran needs something new. Also the J-7s need to be put into storage as well, they're obsolete and should be sold to Ethiopia or something.

How many years has Iran been working on SLVs and Satellites. Because of the deal with Russia, Iran has a military spy satellite up and running RIGHT NOW, not in 5 years or wtv timeline Iranian government will try to set.

I'm not saying Iran should stop developing its industry. But think about it, Iran's drones are only as advanced as they are because Iran captured all those US drones. It's good to be self sufficient but you also have to be willing to cooperate with others to progress.



Hack-Hook said:


> at the time they didn;t as when russia made offer to them on su-35 they refused to buy any more, and why diversify airforce it only make maintenance harder
> 
> i yet to see those drones and no we will pay full price and they pay full price but the problem is that depending on what type of drone we giving them the price of all of them will be equal to 1-2 Su-35 and my problem with Su-35 is not completely with its price its more with its electronic an by the amount we pay for those su-35 we can produce a lot more locally or we can buy twice as much light/medium airplane with more modern equipment from countries like china
> 
> russia won't give us that about F-5 can't carry much if you put a more powerful engine like ws-13 or rd-33 or our domestic turbofan engine on it why not its roughly the same size as Grippen-C (f-5 have 10cm less wingspan , is 50cm longer and 40cm less height) and grippen-c can carry 4 meteor + 2x IRIS-T and one hard point reserved for Digital Joint Reconnaissance Pod that cover FLIR and ECM and E/O end have one hard point empty that can be equipped with 3-4 SDB)
> 
> 
> iran may not be able to build something like s-500 but we can build something better than s-400 and in fact our bavar radar is better than s-400 and iran defence ministry stated that we soon unveil the next generation of bavar which is even better than s-400 so buying s-400 right now make no sense . our current system is more resilliant to electronic warfare and only its missile have less range than one of its missile (40n6e) that i\m sure russia won't give us and sayyad-4 cover the next best missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MMCM

sha ah said:


> Like I said, I think Russia has some things Iran needs and Iran has UAVs which Russia currently needs. I think it's a win win for both sides. A mutually beneficial deal. With all the sanctions imposed on Russia and the west showing its true face, there's no better time than now for Iran to work with Russia.
> 
> Yes if Iran's F-5's had a more powerful engine, "if" but if they could they would have already. I think SU-30/SU-35 are great multirole fighter jets. Their IRLS pods are an excellent counter measure against 5th generation stealth jets. Iran needs to replace some of its older airframes, the F-4s are already 50 years old, how long do you think they will last ? 60 ? 70 ? years ? come on man Iran needs something new. Also the J-7s need to be put into storage as well, they're obsolete and should be sold to Ethiopia or something.
> 
> How many years has Iran been working on SLVs and Satellites. Because of the deal with Russia, Iran has a military spy satellite up and running RIGHT NOW, not in 5 years or wtv timeline Iranian government will try to set.
> 
> I'm not saying Iran should stop developing its industry. But think about it, Iran's drones are only as advanced as they are because Iran captured all those US drones. It's good to be self sufficient but you also have to be willing to cooperate with others to progress


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> It is literary 1 post under that account, in fact second, there is one pinned.. but It doesnt mater, they are not Source, news is literary all over Internet, twitter, Instagram..Problem is, he did not Read post carefuly, Reason I didnt Just embeded twitter post is because there is no english post.. So I translated it
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566345009229709312


Very fascinating !


----------



## Abid123

Is SU-35 news confirmed.


----------



## Hack-Hook

as I said the same news also in 2016 surfaced about su-30 ,

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Abid123 said:


> Is SU-35 news confirmed.


Just a statement from a news site, nothing concrete



Hack-Hook said:


> as I said the same news also in 2016 surfaced about su-30 ,


Circumstances were different back then, even you can acknowledge things have changed, the space-based ISR capability they granted us for one, which would've never happened in 2016.


----------



## SalarHaqq

Abid123 said:


> Is SU-35 news confirmed.



A regular news site in Iran reported that it's on the agenda of the Air Force, and that the Defence Ministry and General Staff of the Armed Forces are the ones who'll make the final decision, which suggests that if they agree to it, an order could be placed - in which case Russia in turn would have to accept it and then effectively deliver.




Stryker1982 said:


> Just a statement from a news site, nothing concrete



The news site is quoting an Air Force official, not stating anything by its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

SalarHaqq said:


> The news site is quoting an Air Force official, not stating anything by its own.


I just never heard of this site before, so I do not know if they make fake news or not.


----------



## Hydration

Stryker1982 said:


> I just never heard of this site before, so I do not know if they make fake news or not.


Ive heard this news so many times since 2020


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566369278605119488

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> A regular news site in Iran reported that it's on the agenda of the Air Force, and that the Defence Ministry and General Staff of the Armed Forces are the ones who'll make the final decision, which suggests that if they agree to it, an order will be placed - in which case Russia in turn would have to accept it and then effectively deliver).



Iranian Air Force official is probably the least credible source left in the Iranian armed forces. I can shower you with many articles of false news or predictions in last two decades extending all the way up to Bagheri himself.

Wether it’s Iranian reluctance or Russian reluctance or both, Air Force is in the worst state it’s ever been. Their biggest “accomplishment” in last 10 years has been Kaman-22.

Also outside of the ex-Egyptian SU-35s sitting in storage, questions remain if Russia (specifically Sukhoi) can make the amount of SU-35s Iran needs specified to Iranian needs.

Right now Iran is supplying the Russian car industry with spare parts. What % of Sukhoi SU-35 relies on foreign parts or raw materials? That is the key question we don’t know. Even Sukhoi’s SuperJet passenger plane is 10% western foreign parts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566369278605119488



Why would anyone buy base export version of SU-30? It’s literally a flanker with 20-30 year old electronics. SU-35 has been on the agenda for over 10 years. How slow is this agenda? 

As @Hack-Hook said, this news is nothing new. These Air Force officials just recycle words every couple years. Last year Bagheri said deals were concluded. Everyone here praised the end of the “so called arms embargo” and yet we are at the same point in the SU-35 stage we were several years ago.

Not sure why these “officials” travel to Russia for arms talks then make a stereotypical fluff press release and then we hear nothing. Then the cycle repeats itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

One more Boeing from Iran spoted near Moskow,there was never so many flights to Russia, in Just few months more flights than in few Years, and all Cargo flights. Saha is owned by Iran air force

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566522884624994305

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> One more Boeing from Iran spoted near Moskow,there was never so many flights to Russia, in Just few months more flights than in few Years, and all Cargo flights.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566522884624994305


Russians really love Iranian carpets and saffron, maybe also some pistachios.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Stryker1982 said:


> Russians really love Iranian carpets and saffron, maybe also some pistachios.



Don't forget the lavashak and albaloo khoshk 😋

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## jauk

Stryker1982 said:


> Russians really love Iranian carpets and saffron, maybe also some pistachios.


Nope. سوهان قم.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

jauk said:


> Nope. سوهان قم.
> 
> View attachment 876368


Sohan is the real deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lydian fall



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## drmeson

BT: 24 x SU-35S initial batch and 64 in total.

makes no sense btw production capacity-wise.


----------



## sanel1412

9 Russian civilian air liner aircrafts coming to Iran to recive maintaince

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> 9 Russian civilian air liner aircrafts coming to Iran to recive maintaince


It really is a testament to how resourceful this country has become despite being under so much media and economic attack. 

Even Iran's enemies have grown to respect its industries. No wonder they want to keep the sanctions on, too much potential to unlock otherwise.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## jauk

Stryker1982 said:


> It really is a testament to how resourceful this country has become despite being under so much media and economic attack.
> 
> Even Iran's enemies have grown to respect its industries. No wonder they want to keep the sanctions on, too much potential to unlock otherwise.


Yes. Trial by fire.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Stryker1982 said:


> Even Iran's enemies have grown to respect its industries. No wonder they want to keep the sanctions on, too much potential to unlock otherwise


Iran can be happy that there exists sanctions, cause the sanctions save Iran, shielded it and its people from crazy (not military) us-shit.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## drmeson

One source is saying Iran has also placed an order for Ka-226 Helis.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> One source is saying Iran has also placed an order for Ka-226 Helis.


if we produce Shahed-278, Bell-214 and Sorena helicopters , what need we have for those utility helicopters?


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> if we produce Shahed-278, Bell-214 and Sorena helicopters , what need we have for those utility helicopters?



You ask hard questions.

Haj Qassem GV vs Kheybar Shikan GV
Shahed-149 vs Fotros vs Kaman-22 
Azarakhsh vs SaeghehI/II vs Kowsar-I/II
Zolfaghar-III MBT vs Karrar MBT
Emad-II MRBM vs Khorramshahr-II MRBM vs Ghadr-H MRBM

Ka-226 have already been tested in Iran btw as key-aero reported.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> You ask hard questions.
> 
> Haj Qassem GV vs Kheybar Shikan GV
> Shahed-149 vs Fotros vs Kaman-22
> Azarakhsh vs SaeghehI/II vs Kowsar-I/II
> Zolfaghar-III MBT vs Karrar MBT
> Emad-II MRBM vs Khorramshahr-II MRBM vs Ghadr-H MRBM
> 
> Ka-226 have already been tested in Iran btw as key-aero reported.


at least we built those ourselves , here we are gonna buy something that first we have abundance of it , 2nd we are supposed to build ourselves.
my guess is we even have more utility helicopter than Russia itself.

are we really need them or we are like India that in late 90s went and bought those t-72 Russia called t-90 to save Russia tank industry and then have to praise them once in a while to save face while in reality they only brought them problem , they are under-performing , not suitable for india hot weather , they are a lot more expensive than any t-72 and funny part is Pakistan actually get a lot better deal over T-80 from another country that inherit another part of USSR tank industry

are we on a mission to save Russia aviation industry , i'm afraid very soon we here Iran is interested in Islander missiles and Smerch artillery system


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> at least we built those ourselves , here we are gonna buy something that first we have abundance of it , 2nd we are supposed to build ourselves.
> my guess is we even have more utility helicopter than Russia itself.



Tell me which helicopter engines Iran produces?

Iran still cannot build a heavy helicopter engine. It’s stuck with the light composite Cobras and Bell.

If it could build helicopter engine it wouldn’t be flying 1970’s design transport helicopters. You don’t even know how many of those Cobras/transport can actually fly full time without breaking down. You see some fly during a war game and draw your conclusions based on that small sample of time. Much like Iran’s entire airforce, the sortie rate is down and the airframes/engines cannot take continued stress.

Lets not act like Iran is as self sufficient as China. Even after so long, the IR-140 light transport plane shown off is still not flying. Neither is Yasin. Neither is the attack helicopter prototype.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Tell me which helicopter engines Iran produces?
> 
> Iran still cannot build a heavy helicopter engine. It’s stuck with the light composite Cobras and Bell.
> 
> If it could build helicopter engine it wouldn’t be flying 1970’s design transport helicopters. You don’t even know how many of those Cobras/transport can actually fly full time without breaking down. You see some fly during a war game and draw your conclusions based on that small sample of time. Much like Iran’s entire airforce, the sortie rate is down and the airframes/engines cannot take continued stress.
> 
> Lets not act like Iran is as self sufficient as China. Even after so long, the IR-140 light transport plane shown off is still not flying. Neither is Yasin. Neither is the attack helicopter prototype.


we actually import the engine , did i say we built them . i say we build the helicopter or you guys claiming all the news about we build those helicopters are lie . and bell 206 and 214 play the same role as ka-226 if they are light helicopter then ka-226 is also light helicopter.

and wonder why you compare AH-1 with Ka-226 . they have different role
Ka-226






bell-214





bell-206





now tell me what make Ka-226 more suitable for iran ? it use wheel instead of Skids ?
do we have any facility to maintain Ka-226 ? we have the facility to maintain Bell Helicopters , we new them in and out , we knew nothing about ka-226

and for the record this is AH-1J








a complete different design for a complete different purpose and If i want to go and fight enemy helicopters and tanks i'll take it every time over ka-226

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> we actually import the engine , did i say we built them . i say we build the helicopter or you guys claiming all the news about we build those helicopters are lie . and bell 206 and 214 play the same role as ka-226 if they are light helicopter then ka-226 is also light helicopter.



Tell me which helicopter engine we import for Cobras and Bell.

Tell me what happened to “National Helicopter Project” that was talked about for years and then faded into oblivion.

Most of Iran’s helicopters get overhauled and refurbished. If Iran could build a viable helicopter engine it would have the long talked about attack helicopter project (Super cobra) that prototype is sitting collecting dust on Google earth.

Once again you make mountain out of ant hill. KA-226 news has been around for a while. At the time the helicopter was being looked at for civilian use and medical transport in small numbers. You act like Iran is replacing its entire helicopter fleet with KA-226. The civilian sector and police sector has bought Russian helicopters before. But that was before you became a women who just sits and complains all the time.

Iran also has one of the largest Russian MI helicopter maintenance hubs in the Middle East they were supposed to get licensed by Russia as an official maintenance hub for other countries to send their helicopters too for repairs. Not sure what ended up happening to that. That news came out around the same time as the KA-226 news.

You keep touting Iranian domestic production in areas where Iran is literally the weakest. And when Iran does actually produce something locally (Shahid Solemani) you sit and complain it doesn’t have enough pew pew pew (missiles) on it.

In conclusion you are insufferable and cannot make up your mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Tell me which helicopter engine we import for Cobras and Bell.
> 
> Tell me what happened to “National Helicopter Project” that was talked about for years and then faded into oblivion.
> 
> Most of Iran’s helicopters get overhauled and refurbished. If Iran could build a viable helicopter engine it would have the long talked about attack helicopter project (Super cobra) that prototype is sitting collecting dust on Google earth.
> 
> Once again you make mountain out of ant hill. KA-226 news has been around for a while. At the time the helicopter was being looked at for civilian use and medical transport in small numbers. You act like Iran is replacing its entire helicopter fleet with KA-226. The civilian sector and police sector has bought Russian helicopters before. But that was before you became a women who just sits and complains all the time.
> 
> Iran also has one of the largest Russian MI helicopter maintenance hubs in the Middle East they were supposed to get licensed by Russia as an official maintenance hub for other countries to send their helicopters too for repairs. Not sure what ended up happening to that. That news came out around the same time as the KA-226 news.
> 
> You keep touting Iranian domestic production in areas where Iran is literally the weakest. And when Iran does actually produce something locally (Shahid Solemani) you sit and complain it doesn’t have enough pew pew pew (missiles) on it.
> 
> In conclusion you are insufferable and cannot make up your mind.


the overhaul project are Panha 2091 for AH-J, Shabaviz-2061 for bell-206, Shabaviz-2075 for Bell-205, 

if by national helicopter you mean Saba-248 which suspiciously resemble bell-427 , i guess 6 produced and handed over by 2019. and about its engine they only said its a 4th generation engine and can keep the helicopter at sky for 6 hour at acceptable speed and said the flight altitude can be up to 6km if you wan't more information you must ask this guy








Iran on verge of producing plane, helicopter engines: Maj. Gen. Bagheri


TEHRAN, Aug. 17 (MNA) – Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri said that sanctions made Iran rely on its domestic capabilities and grow in different industries, and one example of such progress is that Iran is on the verge of producing plane and...




en.mehrnews.com




if you mean Homa you must ask the ones who called it national helicopter



TheImmortal said:


> You keep touting Iranian domestic production in areas where Iran is literally the weakest. And when Iran does actually produce something locally (Shahid Solemani) you sit and complain it doesn’t have enough pew pew pew (missiles) on it.


I complained iran didn't produce vertically launched cruise missile yet , go read the discussion if you didn't already


----------



## sanel1412

Iran posess 3th largest helicopter fleet in the World, and also large civilian helicopter fleet and passenger aircrafts, there is no way you can rebuild such fleet with Iran domestic industry, it would take too long, that is why if sanctions would ever be lifted, you Will see large order of passenger aircraft.. Russia could not provide Iran passenger aircrafts because their moderne civilian jets have more than 10% OF US parts... But they can help with helicopter fleet, Iran bought already small number of Ka 226 and tested, electra(or how it is called in Iran, remeber seen few in their yellow scheme) operate some, and if I am not mistake, this version exist in Anti submarine role.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> Iran posess 3th largest helicopter fleet in the World


Sometimes I forget this, even though alot of them have aged.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Iran posess 3th largest helicopter fleet in the World, and also large civilian helicopter fleet and passenger aircrafts, there is no way you can rebuild such fleet with Iran domestic industry, it would take too long, that is why if sanctions would ever be lifted, you Will see large order of passenger aircraft.. Russia could not provide Iran passenger aircrafts because their moderne civilian jets have more than 10% OF US parts... But they can help with helicopter fleet, Iran bought already small number of Ka 226 and tested, electra(or how it is called in Iran, remeber seen few in their yellow scheme) operate some, and if I am not mistake, this version exist in Anti submarine role.


so the solution is to import them from a foreign country instead if using our indigenous capability and renew our fleet in a 5-10 year timetable ?
how much Russia want for ka-226 and how much its to produce one based on bell-206 or bell-205 inside our country ?


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> so the solution is to import them from a foreign country instead if using our indigenous capability and renew our fleet in a 5-10 year timetable ?
> how much Russia want for ka-226 and how much its to produce one based on bell-206 or bell-205 inside our country ?



Negative comment about Iranian achievements yet again. Iran is doomed if it buys it and doomed if it made it itself since you'd still question why a knob or door was placed slightly in a different place to what you imagined. Would it be better for Iran to produce a bell with zero input from US or manufacturer, or have Ka-226 which will have full Russian support and maybe a chance for ToT? Use your brain!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Negative comment about Iranian achievements yet again. Iran is doomed if it buys it and doomed if it made it itself since you'd still question why a knob or door was placed slightly in a different place to what you imagined. Would it be better for Iran to produce a bell with zero input from US or manufacturer, or have Ka-226 which will have full Russian support and maybe a chance for ToT? Use your brain!


honestly your comprehension of the discussion and what i say is so low that you even can't understand that i say our indigenous capability is to the extent that we don't need import anything from your master Russia in that regard .
and yes i believe we better produce those helicopter that you think are just copy of bell helicopter than go and beg Russia to give us helicopter and who is you kidding , your master is notorious for not supporting and providing maintenance after selling downgraded equipment .
Full Russia support and TOT , you can go and fool yourself anybody who is followed Russia wont buy your sale pitch. 

for god sake this newcomer who left and right belittle Iran capabilities tell me to use my brain if to your indoctrinated culture eastern or western masters are more capable than you and bowing to them is an achievement then here i announce each day and each hour i belittle that achievement and in my country there is no place for guys like you


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly your comprehension of the discussion and what i say is so low that you even can't understand that i say our indigenous capability is to the extent that we don't need import anything from your master Russia in that regard .
> and yes i believe we better produce those helicopter that you think are just copy of bell helicopter than go and beg Russia to give us helicopter and who is you kidding , your master is notorious for not supporting and providing maintenance after selling downgraded equipment .
> Full Russia support and TOT , you can go and fool yourself anybody who is followed Russia wont buy your sale pitch.
> 
> for god sake this newcomer who left and right belittle Iran capabilities tell me to use my brain if to your indoctrinated culture eastern or western masters are more capable than you and bowing to them is an achievement then here i announce each day and each hour i belittle that achievement and in my country there is no place for guys like you



Your tiny brain doesn't realise that Iran doesnt have the money nor the manpower nor the time nor the technology to do anything you mentioned. Iran has been under sanctions, and despite its steller efforts at being self sufficient it doesnt mean they dont need some help! Surely your tiny brain would have figured out that if Iran could have done it they surely would have done it. But you seem to think Iran can pull out a 4th Gen aircraft out of it's arse like magic trick! Your zionist masters have really drained your brain here like a zombie NPC!

You're not answering my question because you know im right! You have no evidence that Iran can build a bell from scratch to the same or higher standard. Your beliefs are irrelevant! Having even meager support from a super power like Russia is better than having no support from the US. Do you think countries that have ToT on any western military hardware or equipment like jets do it without support from the original manufacturer?! Are you that dumb?!

Youre an old timer which a lot of people have had enough of! Sometimes you need someone new to come and wake people up to what you're doing. You're the one belittling Iran by throwing them into the lions den without any support, because you know that will destroy Iran and you will reach your goal! Make your mind up, am I western or easter? You cant even forumalte a coherent argument and have to flip flop two extremes and delete as appropriate! You are lost in the woods, intoxicated, with your pants down! I'll tell this to you again, trading with neighbours is not bowing down to foreign powers, but presenting Iran to be slaughtered while theyre ill prepared is, however. Tell that to the border guards who let me enter Iran, and tell that to all my family who have top jobs in Iran! It's snakes like you who are not welcome!

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Surenas said:


> You should try to get laid more often instead of polluting this forum section with your verbal diarrhea.



Oon shoghle pedarete! No i was raised better than that, people grow up instead of worrying about getting laid all the time! Grow up! 

You could also take that advice instead of simping for the Ukrainians and the west, who are clear enemies of Iran. You're living in the west and throwing feces on Iran, im living in the west and lending my support and admiration. Stay where you are!


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Surenas said:


> You must be one of those insecure Iranian kids living in the same West he loathes, hiding behind his self-deluded sense of Iranian nationalism because his lack of social skills prevent him from getting laid and have caused him to be nothing more than an outcast among his western peers he so secretly abhors.
> 
> Clowns like you will never be taken serious, whether in Iran or in the West. Even in this digital space your worthless insights are thrown in the garbage bin.



Youre one of those pathetic gharbzade losers who wants Iran to get bombed so you can open up a brothel there. Your brothel business probably got put out of business in 1979 and you now have a chip on your shoulder. I dont know who has been lying to you, but just because I am born in the UK, I'm still 100% Iranian and feel 100% Iranian. You're trying to supress all that just so you get accepted by the same people who hate your guts deep down. I have done my fair share of laying around and it gets you so far. Thankfully, i value more important things now than trying to eagerly get a rash or STD.

Your salty comment proves that you cant cope that someone is living in the west and supports Iran. Fyi, there are many of us actually as you have acknowledged. I guess we will take each other seriously and so will the Iranians back home who want us to come back and unite again for the greater good. Why are you commenting and replying to me if my comments are garbage and nobody cares? You're grandstanding because your arse is burning and you are going into full soy boy mode. Grandstanding wont cover the fact youre a sell out gharbzade! Im glad me and you are at the opposite ends, Alhamdulillah!


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Surenas said:


> Yes. I'm one of those Iranians who secretly want the yankees to bomb Iran so I can open a brothel for sexually-frustrated kids like you. There must be market for outcast Iranians living in the west who never truly adopted to their enviroment due to a lack of social skills and are now roaming the digital space with their deep sense of insecurity masquared with a deluded sense of Iranian nationalism.



Open it up for yourself first! And as long as Im alive I will do what I can to stop people like you from achieving their goal. Youre a walking STD! It is delusional to think a brown Iranian is part of the same culture as an anglo saxon, that really takes some brainwashing and self-hatred. My approach is more in-tuned with nature and genetic, insofar that my breed is Iranian, and therefore have certain uncompromising traits that sets me, and other realist Iranians, apart from tom, dick or harry. I thank Allah that He has woken me up to the reality that I will never be liked or accepted by the anglo-saxons which you so desperately want to mimic, and that it would only be to my detriment if i were to pursue such delusional aspirations.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Your tiny brain doesn't realise that Iran doesnt have the money nor the manpower nor the time nor the technology to do anything you mentioned.


maybe your master Russia want we think so .
you showed your true face here


Daylamite Warrior said:


> You're not answering my question because you know im right! You have no evidence that Iran can build a bell from scratch to the same or higher standard.


i mentioned in previous posts m the ones that were built from scratch and the ones that were overhauled , and funny your solution if we could not build 100% of a device import all the device from master Russia not just import the part we can't produce and build the rest , shows who has tiny brain and who lack visions . you guys have always been satisfied to bow in front of your masters.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre an old timer which a lot of people have had enough of! Sometimes you need someone new to come and wake people up to what you're doing. You're the one belittling Iran by throwing them into the lions den without any support, because you know that will destroy Iran and you will reach your goal!


if greatness means bowing to illusionary masters of west and east i prefer always remain little .


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe your master Russia want we think so .
> you showed your true face here
> 
> i mentioned in previous posts m the ones that were built from scratch and the ones that were overhauled , and funny your solution if we could not build 100% of a device import all the device from master Russia not just import the part we can't produce and build the rest , shows who has tiny brain and who lack visions . you guys have always been satisfied to bow in front of your masters.
> 
> if greatness means bowing to illusionary masters of west and east i prefer always remain little .



Maybe your zionist master wants Iran to be a lamb to slaughter, but you mask it with contrived demand for self efficiency. This is virtue signalling at its worst! So im Russian because I think its okay to trade with them, but you have no issue with Iran being a lackey of the west. Therein lies the double standards!

Your second paragraph is absolute illegible and incoherent nonesense. I asked you to show evidence that Iran can build a bell from scratch to the same standards as Bell themselves? Also just because Iran can build bells doesnt mean it should close its doors to trade. Again you suggest Iran to limit itself and shoot itself in the foot, for your zionist liberal masters. My solution is realistic and we get to where we need to be in terms of security faster, than your 200 year plan of self sufficiency.

You cant have a master of east and west, thats a contradiction. But it is clear you're a western liberal who wants Irans downfall...The difference is Surena is man enough to admit he's a traitor hell bent on destroying Iran so that Suzie can pleasure him.



Surenas said:


> Then leave this Anglo-Saxon soil. What is stopping you?



Its called reparation, these Saxons have destoyed Iran so we come and be slaves for them, however they didnt envisage that we would build mosques and become more devout Muslims than ever...that is a blessing in disguise and I only thank Allah for that. People like you are the ones who the system managed to corrupt. Either way that wont stop me from taking advantage of what Allah has written for me, prepare in my own time and leave when at a time when Allah has decided. You dont get to call the shots.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Maybe your zionist master wants Iran to be a lamb to slaughter, but you mask it with contrived demand for self efficiency. This is virtue signalling at its worst! So im Russian because I think its okay to trade with them, but you have no issue with Iran being a lackey of the west. Therein lies the double standards!


do need utility helicopter to defend ourself , do we lack them ? no your master Russia want to save its aviation industry by selling those helicopter we can build ourselves .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Your second paragraph is absolute illegible and incoherent nonesense. I asked you to show evidence that Iran can build a bell from scratch to the same standards as Bell themselves? Also just because Iran can build bells doesnt mean it should close its doors to trade. Again you suggest Iran to limit itself and shoot itself in the foot, for your zionist liberal masters. My solution is realistic and we get to where we need to be in terms of security faster, than your 200 year plan of self sufficiency.


I mentioned in my previous posts the helicopters that were built from scratch by us and the ones that were overhauled , and funny your solution if we could not build 100% of a device is to import all the device from master Russia not just import the part we can't produce and build the rest , shows who has tiny brain and who lack visions . you guys have always been satisfied to bow in front of your masters.


Daylamite Warrior said:


> You cant have a master of east and west, thats a contradiction.


as i said lack of vision and imagination .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> But it is clear you're a western liberal who wants Irans downfall...


for that you first must find a post from me that state that we must buy our defensive equipment from west , but I can find thousands of post from you and your friends in just last 1-2 month that said we must import from Russia or attributed our achievement to Russia or said they are copy of Russians products , clearly show who has a master


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Surenas said:


> You are talking like one of those lowlifes South Asians in Britain who similarly can't adopt to their enviroment because of a lack of social skills and cultural sophistication, so they now delude themselves of being part of some kind of vengeful Islamization at the detriment of their Anglo-Saxon overlords.
> 
> You are a disgrace to Iranian culture and its image. Seek medical help because you clearly have some screws loose.



The difference between me and you is you're spreading yourself for these overlords, whereas I am patiently enduring it and hating it in my heart. We are not the same! May Allah reward those south Asians and Arabs and converted Anglo Saxon brothers and sisters who have also been guided to the truth. They are the righteous and they are who I assosiate myself with. I take your first paragraph as a compliment!

Says the traitor that wants Iran to forget its culture in favour of adopting an alien western one, thus become a vassal state again! Who's the disgrace here? If Cyrus the Great is your inspiration he would be the first to slap you in the face for becoming a vassal! Go and build your brothel, and may you die in that state!


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> do need utility helicopter to defend ourself , do we lack them ? no your master Russia want to save its aviation industry by selling those helicopter we can build ourselves .
> 
> I mentioned in my previous posts the helicopters that were built from scratch by us and the ones that were overhauled , and funny your solution if we could not build 100% of a device is to import all the device from master Russia not just import the part we can't produce and build the rest , shows who has tiny brain and who lack visions . you guys have always been satisfied to bow in front of your masters.
> 
> as i said lack of vision and imagination .
> 
> for that you first must find a post from me that state that we must buy our defensive equipment from west , but I can find thousands of post from you and your friends in just last 1-2 month that said we must import from Russia or attributed our achievement to Russia or said they are copy of Russians products , clearly show who has a master



These are helicopters which can be built much quicker and to a higher quality and spec than what we can! That doesnt mean we should cease internal production...if the funds are there we should do both and not restrict ourselves to just one path! And definitely it has to be a country that is the lesser evil which right now is Russia, not your non-binary masters in US.

Stop repeating yourself and spamming! Please refer back to the reply I gave to the exact same illiterate comment!

No thats what Erdogan tries to do and is hated by both west and east! So again you want Iran to be hated by everyone, whereas at least now Iran is gaining some support from the east. This burns you, I get it!

Everytime we bring up buying something from the only nation that will sell to us, aka Russia, you always bring "but western ones are much better bla bla bla". You know we cant get these even with a deal, so why even bring it up? Obviously its clear your masters are in Washington either pahlavichi, mojahedini or some other libtard funded mozdoor! Russia is the best we can do right now! Cope.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> are we really need them or we are like India that in late 90s went and bought those t-72 Russia called t-90 to save Russia tank industry and then have to praise them once in a while to save face while in reality they only brought them problem , they are under-performing , not suitable for india hot weather , they are a lot more expensive than any t-72 and funny part is Pakistan actually get a lot better deal over T-80 from another country that inherit another part of USSR tank industry



arms procurement is not just technical, its also political. A tool to support some countries financially to build political bridges. Indians did what they needed to do to secure Moscow's support for India in many regional matters.



Hack-Hook said:


> are we on a mission to save Russia aviation industry , i'm afraid very soon we here Iran is interested in Islander missiles and Smerch artillery system



SU-35S will eventually land in Iran with its IRBIS-E and R-77-1. Rest I am not sure of because I have yet to see a picture of Ka-226 in Iranian colors. Authentic sources reported its evaluation inside Iran by Iran army aviation or naval aviation but nothing beyond that.

If Iranian Russian relations last for another 10 years like how they are right now then SU-35S fleet will grow upto 80-100 fighters possibly with TOT. BT is saying the plan is for 64 SU-35S. They will replace F-4E/D for sure and help retire the circus prop fleet of Mirages F1Q/EQ, F-7N, F-5E/F. If the relations get cold and a repeat of 1990s happen then by 2030 will see IRIAF flying 24 x SU-35S with 10-15 F-14AM and some 20-30 Kowsar-I. Rest fleet will be gone by then or put in storage (MIG-29, SU-24).



sanel1412 said:


> Iran posess 3th largest helicopter fleet in the World,



No






List of countries by number of heliports - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org







sanel1412 said:


> and also large civilian helicopter fleet and passenger aircrafts, there is no way you can rebuild such fleet with Iran domestic industry, it would take too long, that is why if sanctions would ever be lifted, you Will see large order of passenger aircraft.. Russia could not provide Iran passenger aircrafts because their moderne civilian jets have more than 10% OF US parts... But they can help with helicopter fleet, Iran bought already small number of Ka 226 and tested, electra(or how it is called in Iran, remeber seen few in their yellow scheme) operate some, and if I am not mistake, this version exist in Anti submarine role.



Can you post any pic of Ka-226 in the Iranian service?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

drmeson said:


> Can you post any pic of Ka-226 in the Iranian service?


I dont think that there was ever any real serious chance [previously] of iran acquiring these,as the ka-226ts that were being tested in iran used french engines.Indeed I think that the only power plant choices were western,from allison ,to rr,to turbomeca.
Of course now that these are no longer an option for russia,there is a possibility of iran purchasing these helos.......provided of course that the russians can develop an indigenous engine replacement for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> I dont think that there was ever any real serious chance [previously] of iran acquiring these,as the ka-226ts that were being tested in iran used french engines.Indeed I think that the only power plant choices were western,from allison ,to rr,to turbomeca.
> Of course now that these are no longer an option for russia,there is a possibility of iran purchasing these helos.......provided of course that the russians can develop an indigenous engine replacement for them.



Sanctions (at the time) did not apply to Ka-226 because it was during period of JCPOA and civilian jetliners/helicopters were allowed during that brief window.

As far as I remember they were to be used for medivac as well as search and rescue. Plus they weren’t being purchased in any serious amount of numbers to warrant possible military transfer concerns.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of countries by number of heliports - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Iran probably doesn't quite rank in third position, but the numbers in this list seem exaggeratedly low for Iran. They claim Iran with a 128 units has fewer military helicopter than the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and put the number of civilian helicopters in Iran at a mere 80. Real numbers should be significantly higher than that.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> arms procurement is not just technical, its also political. A tool to support some countries financially to build political bridges. Indians did what they needed to do to secure Moscow's support for India in many regional matters.


ka-226 by no definition can be categorized to anything but a light utility helicopter.


SalarHaqq said:


> Iran is probably doesn't quite rank in third position, but the numbers in this list seem exaggeratedly low for Iran. They claim Iran with a 128 units has fewer military helicopter than the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and put the number of civilian helicopters in Iran at a mere 80. Real numbers should be significantly higher than that.


in Iran if you have money obtaining an airplane is far easier than obtaining a helicopter co outside Iran wealthy people have the option of personal helicopter in Iran they can have personal aircraft but there is no option on buying a personal helicopter


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> we actually import the engine , did i say we built them . i say we build the helicopter or you guys claiming all the news about we build those helicopters are lie . and bell 206 and 214 play the same role as ka-226 if they are light helicopter then ka-226 is also light helicopter.
> 
> and wonder why you compare AH-1 with Ka-226 . they have different role
> Ka-226
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bell-214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bell-206
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now tell me what make Ka-226 more suitable for iran ? it use wheel instead of Skids ?
> do we have any facility to maintain Ka-226 ? we have the facility to maintain Bell Helicopters , we new them in and out , we knew nothing about ka-226
> 
> and for the record this is AH-1J
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a complete different design for a complete different purpose and If i want to go and fight enemy helicopters and tanks i'll take it every time over ka-226



The Ka-226 is a twin-rotor helicopter, something Iran is not operating yet. It would thus represent a technological novelty and that's why Iran has been showing interest in the type for quite some time. Acquisition of a reasonably small-sized batch from Russia would give a boost to domestic R&D, as practically every item Iran purchased from Russia in the past.

Again, I don't think Iranian planners and decision makers are misinformed or short-sighted. They most definitely aren't sell outs either, so they won't choose to sideline domestic production in order to please a foreign power. In other terms, the very rare instances in which they opt for imports, their choice has rational justifications, even if some might fail to see or acknowledge said justifications.



Hack-Hook said:


> in Iran if you have money obtaining an airplane is far easier than obtaining a helicopter co outside Iran wealthy people have the option of personal helicopter in Iran they can have personal aircraft but there is no option on buying a personal helicopter



Assuming this is the case, how is it related to my comment?




Daylamite Warrior said:


> Maybe your zionist master wants Iran to be a lamb to slaughter, but you mask it with contrived demand for self efficiency. This is virtue signalling at its worst! So im Russian because I think its okay to trade with them, but you have no issue with Iran being a lackey of the west. Therein lies the double standards!



However if I may offer and advice, brother, if Iran will gain in acquiring limited quantities of token products from Russia, that's not because of lacking domestic capabilities. We shouldn't be suggesting that Ka-226 imports are preferable than domestic production of Bell copies on grounds that the former would be accompanied by technical assistance from abroad while the latter wouldn't. This sort of argument could be turned against us by pretending we're the ones who wish to subject Iran to an outside power.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> SU-35S will eventually land in Iran with its IRBIS-E and R-77-1. Rest I am not sure of because I have yet to see a picture of Ka-226 in Iranian colors. Authentic sources reported its evaluation inside Iran by Iran army aviation or naval aviation but nothing beyond that.


both waste of money . 
and this ka-226, in 2017 they want to buy it for search and rescue but the deal didn't went through 
the helicopter has weak engine only 580shp each engine in contrast bell-214 engine have 2930shp

by the way who recall this USA helicopter designed in 1953 and retired in early 70s (for the people who said ka-226 has more modern design than bell 206, 205 or 214 or saba-248)







SalarHaqq said:


> Assuming this is the case, what does it have to do with my comment?


answer about your wonder about why Iran have little civilian helicopters , all the helicopters here belong to armed force or organizations


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> their relentless defense of the shah regime including its massive imports of overpriced weapons from the USA (and close to zero domestic defence industries to balance it out)


but you yourself , time and time and times said that iran did have zero production capability at the time of pahlavi , so its strange . you condamn Mohammad Reza Pahlavi importing weapon from west when iran had zero production capability . but now that we have the capability to produce them you and certain members here support importing them from Russia .

very strange



SalarHaqq said:


> The Ka-226 is a twin-rotor helicopter, something Iran is not operating yet. It would thus represent a technological novelty and that's why Iran has been showing interest in the type for multiple years. Acquisition of a reasonably sized batch from Russia would give a boost to domestic R&D, as practically every item Iran purchased from Russia in the past.


not exactly for the fun of it let search twine rotor helicopter in google


twin-rotor helicopter - Google Search



don't you think the first helicopter that show up is a little familiar, we have around 40 of them


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> answer about your wonder about why Iran have little civilian helicopters , all the helicopters here belong to armed force or organizations



Civilian helicopters aren't necessarily in private hands, they include all helicopters operated by the Red Crescent and other non-military state institutions. At any rate, the figure they're giving for military helicopters is definitely understated, probably several fold.



Hack-Hook said:


> but you yourself , time and time and times said that iran did have zero production capability at the time of pahlavi , so its strange . you condamn Mohammad Reza Pahlavi importing weapon from west when iran had zero production capability . but now that we have the capability to produce them you and certain members here support importing them from Russia .
> 
> very strange



But what exactly did I suggest Iran could import? Surely not as good as her entire military like the shah regime used to do, but extremely few, select types of items, and in small quantities at that. And only if it gives a boost to Iran's own R&D (in the case of the Ka-226 because of its twin-rotor technology which Iran could then reverse-engineer for future helicopter types of her own), or if there's a chronological constraint as in the exceptional case of the air force, where it's not certain that Iran will be fielding her own heavy interceptors in sufficient numbers soon enough i.e. before the IRIAF will be forced to retire it's F-14's for good. Even then I advocated to restrict any purchase of Flankers to between 36 and 48 airframes in order to stay within the limits of Iran's asymmetric doctrine.

And I'm not opposed to mass producing Kosars by the way, arguments put forth on here in favor of this convinced me. I just think the future IRIAF could use a heavy interceptor as well, rather than relying solely on light fighters. To me it's not an either/or proposition here, but a and/and one. Some have argued for Flankers instead of Kosars, I don't, I wouldn't mind seeing both in Iranian service and with far superior numbers of Kosars too.

One other exceptional product I believe Iran could buy from Russia for lack of domestic availability in the foreseeable future, are heavy transport planes. Perhaps a few additional Il-76 (for which Iran already has support infrastructure) could be beneficial, and maybe a handful of An-124's. And that's pretty much it. Any other armaments sometimes evoked by users (like Armata tanks, Bastion coastal AShM batteries, S-400's etc), I would definitely not endorse. Now this isn't exactly a huge shopping list, is it.

So my modest suggestion can't be assimilated with pre-revolutionary practice, when about 99% of armaments were imported. If Iran were to go ahead with these two deals, she would still be producing over 98% or so of her arsenal at home. Guess I'm an advocate of 98% self-sufficiency in the military field for the upcoming ten to fifteen years (after which 100% should be a realistic goal), in contrast to the approximately 1% self-sufficiency Iran was enjoying before 1979.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Civilian helicopters aren't necessarily in private hands, they include all helicopters operated by the Red Crescent and other non-military state institutions. At any rate, the figure they're giving for military helicopters is definitely understated, probably several fold.


here it provide 320 ytility and transport + 160 attack helicopter








List of equipment of the Iranian Army - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> here it provide 320 ytility and transport + 160 attack helicopter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of equipment of the Iranian Army - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



That's 352 (!) more than the other list on Wikipedia is alleging. And it would place Iran in 13th position on that same list.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

drmeson said:


> arms procurement is not just technical, its also political. A tool to support some countries financially to build political bridges. Indians did what they needed to do to secure Moscow's support for India in many regional matters.
> 
> 
> 
> SU-35S will eventually land in Iran with its IRBIS-E and R-77-1. Rest I am not sure of because I have yet to see a picture of Ka-226 in Iranian colors. Authentic sources reported its evaluation inside Iran by Iran army aviation or naval aviation but nothing beyond that.
> 
> If Iranian Russian relations last for another 10 years like how they are right now then SU-35S fleet will grow upto 80-100 fighters possibly with TOT. BT is saying the plan is for 64 SU-35S. They will replace F-4E/D for sure and help retire the circus prop fleet of Mirages F1Q/EQ, F-7N, F-5E/F. If the relations get cold and a repeat of 1990s happen then by 2030 will see IRIAF flying 24 x SU-35S with 10-15 F-14AM and some 20-30 Kowsar-I. Rest fleet will be gone by then or put in storage (MIG-29, SU-24).
> 
> 
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of countries by number of heliports - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post any pic of Ka-226 in the Iranian service?


IF you Use wikipedia for reference than there is realy nothing I can discuss with you, you can Use Google maps and count 3 times of that number Just in few air bases. Why these numbers are so low, well probably because many dont understand that IRIAF operate 10 times less helicopters than IRIAA, than you have Navy, IRGC, Police+ civilian fleet. Yes Iran realy posses 3th largest fleet, It has large civilian fleet also.. I follow Iran military for 20+ Years and this forum is realy starting to look Like fucking Child play ground... No offense, I respect every member.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

I May confuse Kamov with this Eurocopter, but I Will look for picture, I am almost sure I saw Kamov, with its rotor configuration it is unique


----------



## sanel1412

If you check, even wikipedia lists IRIAA more than 300 helicopters, and I Know for sure Iran posses one of the largest civilian fleet.. I saw most western sources and all sources are confusing, and mostly because they dont count all branche and if you count all Helicopters of IRIAA, IRIAF, Police, Navy, IRGC, IRGC navy.. etc.. You get 500-600 units.. Add to that also large civilian fleet.. You Got idea

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

SalarHaqq said:


> However if I may offer and advice, brother, if Iran will gain in acquiring limited quantities of token products from Russia, that's not because of lacking domestic capabilities. We shouldn't be suggesting that Ka-226 imports are preferable than domestic production of Bell copies on grounds that the former would be accompanied by technical assistance from abroad while the latter wouldn't. This sort of argument could be turned against us by pretending we're the ones who wish to subject Iran to an outside power.



Thank you brother but, with all due respect, the quote you have of me does not suggest what you are claiming. Allow me to point you in the direction of my stance on the matter, in this very thread, when I was speaking to Hack:



Daylamite Warrior said:


> These are helicopters which can be built much quicker and to a higher quality and spec than what we can! That doesnt mean we should cease internal production...if the funds are there we should do both and not restrict ourselves to just one path! And definitely it has to be a country that is the lesser evil which right now is Russia, not your non-binary masters in US.



As you can see I proposed a balanced approach where the reality is we should be doing both. But the liberal/eslahtalab that reside on this forum like to look at one aspect of what im saying and delete as appropriate to fit their argument. Clutching at straws if you ask me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

This is quote from wikipedia IRAA page, as of septembar 2021
*Islamic Republic of Iran Army Aviation* (*IRIAA*) (in Persian: هواپیمایی نیروی زمینی جمهوری اسلامی ایران), more commonly known as *Havānīrūz* (هوانیروز, Persian pronunciation: [hævɒːniːˈɾuːz]),‎[1] is the army aviation of the Iranian Army ground forces. It is the largest and most professional army aviation service in the Middle East, possessing no less than 300 helicopters both for attack and transport uses.[2] It is also the most experienced in the region, having fought the brutal Iran–Iraq War in the 80s, in which the Havanirooz played a crucial role in destroying and defeating the invading Iraqi armies.[3]


So, I advise not to Use wikipedia for granted, sometime it gets handy, for fast reference but It is Full of nonsense

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Thank you brother but, with all due respect, the quote you have of me does not suggest what you are claiming. Allow me to point you in the direction of my stance on the matter, in this very thread, when I was speaking to Hack:


you were clear , no doubt in what you meant


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Your tiny brain doesn't realise that Iran doesnt have the money nor the manpower nor the time nor the technology to do anything you mentioned. Iran has been under sanctions, and despite its steller efforts at being self sufficient it doesnt mean they dont need some help! Surely your tiny brain would have figured out that if Iran could have done it they surely would have done it. But you seem to think Iran can pull out a 4th Gen aircraft out of it's arse like magic trick! Your zionist masters have really drained your brain here like a zombie NPC!


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Sanctions (at the time) did not apply to Ka-226 because it was during period of JCPOA and civilian jetliners/helicopters were allowed during that brief window.
> 
> As far as I remember they were to be used for medivac as well as search and rescue. Plus they weren’t being purchased in any serious amount of numbers to warrant possible military transfer concerns.


And just out of curiosity exactly how many of these were ultimately assembled in iran,and are currently in service? 
The point I was making was that anything using major western systems,or even for that matter a small percentage of western components,effectively gives the west a veto on the supply of the finished product.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> And just out of curiosity exactly how many of these were ultimately assembled in iran,and are currently in service?
> The point I was making was that anything using major western systems,or even for that matter a small percentage of western components,effectively gives the west a veto on the supply of the finished product.


the deal was for 5-6 to start with and I don't recall any assembling was included in the deal , red crescent and NDMO wanted them for time of disaster and providing emergency missions in time of disaster , those helicopter were completely demilitarized


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> you were clear , no doubt in what you meant



Stop quoting things out of context to make out you're a victim! The comments are still there and have not been deleted like that coward Surena. I invite all to go and watch how you questioned my reading comprehension and called me a Russian agent first, whereby I replied in kind. It takes two to tango and youre not the victim here. Typical libtard croc tears!


----------



## Surenas

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Stop quoting things out of context to make out you're a victim! The comments are still there and have not been deleted like that coward Surena. I invite all to go and watch how you questioned my reading comprehension and called me a Russian agent first, whereby I replied in kind. It takes two to tango and youre not the victim here. Typical libtard croc tears!



I removed the posts because it's clear you have serious mental problems and it isn't noble to ridicule one for his mental deficiencies and struggles.

You should get help in stead of me laying down your insecurities.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Surenas said:


> I removed the posts because its clear you have serious mental problems and it isn't noble to ridicule one for his mental deficiencies and struggles.
> 
> You should get help in stead of me laying down your insecurities.



Youre neither noble or profound in the way you speak. Ad hominem is literally all you have, no other argument. But I will keep my comments there, with your quoted comments, just to show that a) ridam be heykalet, and b) that you deleted your comments whilst knowing that your deranged comments are already plain to see. And security is spreading wide for the west and being a traitor? What a plum!

Allah is helping me, who's helping you?


----------



## drmeson

Sineva said:


> I dont think that there was ever any real serious chance [previously] of iran acquiring these,as the ka-226ts that were being tested in iran used french engines.Indeed I think that the only power plant choices were western,from allison ,to rr,to turbomeca.
> Of course now that these are no longer an option for russia,there is a possibility of iran purchasing these helos.......provided of course that the russians can develop an indigenous engine replacement for them.



I will ask BT


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> ka-226 by no definition can be categorized to anything but a light utility helicopter.



Cash still goes to Moscow, you did not get my point. Arms procurement is sometimes just one country helping an allied country with cash like the Indian example. They have better western lower RCS fighter in hands like Rafale, a true 4.5 generation machine yet they are still paying 60-70 million extortion money to Russia for a 10-15 m2 RCS SU-30MKI which could not defend airspace against the Mirage-III/V. Its politics more than military strategy. 



Hack-Hook said:


> both waste of money .
> and this ka-226, in 2017 they want to buy it for search and rescue but the deal didn't went through
> the helicopter has weak engine only 580shp each engine in contrast bell-214 engine have 2930shp
> 
> by the way who recall this USA helicopter designed in 1953 and retired in early 70s (for the people who said ka-226 has more modern design than bell 206, 205 or 214 or saba-248)



I am not sure if Ka-226 is procured and integrated properly. I have asked for pictorial evidence and I got none so far. 

As for SU-35S, its a numbers game for IRIAF. 

Small order of 24 Jets or if transfer fall in the middle because of cold relations like what happened to a 72 aircraft strong order of MIG-29 only resulted in 24 fighters being transferred without the simulator,just 150 x ARH R-27ER1, will be a disaster for Iran since this will add two squadrons of another aircraft type to IRIAF's maintenance burden. It won't be enough to add anything to interception capabilities since the flanker airframe has a massive 10-15 m2 RCS and has IRBIS-E with small tracking range of 100 km with 100 km ranging BVR of export model R-77-1 for ARH BVR attack which IRIAF needs badly to counter growing arsenal of low RCS 4.5 generation western fighters around Iran. We have no answer to EF-2000, Rafale, F-18EF, F-16V all have <1 m2 RCS, have tracking ranges in excess of 150-200 KM and can fire meteor BVRAAMs and AIM-120C/D at a flanker long before IRBIS-E can even figure out what happened. In few years we will start seeing F-35 flying around us in our enemy territories as well. 

On the other hand IRIAF will hit a gold mine if an order can be increased to what BT claimed to i.e. 88 fighters (24+64) or maybe just 64? This means that IRIAF can get rid of 184-190 relic fleet of F-4E/D (64), MirageF1-Q (23), F-7N (43), F-5E/F (60, can add to Kowsar production). Among these only Dowran upgraded F-4E/D offer some value as they can fire AShCM, LACMs, PGMs. Flanker can do all that much better so 88 x SU-35S can relieve IRIAF of maintaince $ of relic fleet, most of which is just for prop show. There will offcourse be lobbyism by squadrons, and maintenance/overhaul mafia to never let that happen. Different subject. Iran can settle a large deep overhaul plant inside HESA for AL-31, airframe MLU. In time these fighters can be upgraded by Russians with AESA radars. Maybe R-77M or R-37, it's wishful thinking but then long-range BVR engagement will become possible, this will even enable retirement F-14A/AM. This will all cost IRIAF some 10 Billion USD. Order will be complete in late 2020s and can allow HESA to focus on Kowsar-II, low RCS, an electronically advanced light fighter for long-range BVR interceptions and ambush attacks with TDL. 

All in all SU-35S is coming to Iran in one form or another.



sanel1412 said:


> I May confuse Kamov with this Eurocopter, but I Will look for picture, I am almost sure I saw Kamov, with its rotor configuration it is unique
> View attachment 878165



I am afraid these are not Ka-226. If you have Ka-226 in Iranian colors then please post that along with ARH seeker of Fakour-90 that you claimed is an ARH LR-BVR missile. Just reminding.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> IF you Use wikipedia for reference than there is realy nothing I can discuss with you, you can Use Google maps and count 3 times of that number Just in few air bases. Why these numbers are so low, well probably because many dont understand that IRIAF operate 10 times less helicopters than IRIAA, than you have Navy, IRGC, Police+ civilian fleet. Yes Iran realy posses 3th largest fleet, It has large civilian fleet also.. I follow Iran military for 20+ Years and this forum is realy starting to look Like fucking Child play ground... No offense, I respect every member.



How about you do something constructive for the entire forum and list these helis you see on google Maps so that we can complain to wiki page owners? In last 6 months, I have complained to a few pages on the wiki spreading false info on the Iranian military and the owners corrected it, even right now I am in talks with few pages that were using Haartez and Debkafiles as sources for Iranian military equipment. So we can do this to helis that you claim exists and wiki is being a lying bitch. 

Btw wiki is no reference, wiki is where you post references for a claim. It's a platform for references, not the reference itself which is why it has a citation section. Aviation page owners of Wiki uses worldairforces/Flightglobal for aircraft count on the basis of photographed serials released by the airforces themselves. E.g. we know Iran posses some 61 airframes of F-14A by serials, number of crashes and confirmed war losses but among them how many are flyable or "operational with IRIAF" ? by serials, 41, among which how many are FMC (full mission capable) or QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) is another debate. If we go by google maps Iran also possess MIG-23, MIG-27 but we dont count those because they are not operational with IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

drmeson said:


> I will ask BT


BT=Babak Taghvaee?


----------



## drmeson

Sineva said:


> BT=Babak Taghvaee?


 
yes


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> the deal was for 5-6 to start with and I don't recall any assembling was included in the deal , red crescent and NDMO wanted them for time of disaster and providing emergency missions in time of disaster , those helicopter were completely demilitarized


https://www.rotorandwing.com/2017/03/29/russian-helicopters-iran-sign-mou-helo-assembly/

https://www.aviationpros.com/aircra...rs-russian-helicopters-to-test-ka226t-in-iran



drmeson said:


> yes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Sineva said:


> https://www.rotorandwing.com/2017/03/29/russian-helicopters-iran-sign-mou-helo-assembly/
> 
> https://www.aviationpros.com/aircra...rs-russian-helicopters-to-test-ka226t-in-iran



he may be a shahi loyalist with schizophrenia but he is seldomly wrong about IRIAF. Lets not forget this whole SU-35S thing we now hearing from our Generals first came from him ~2 years ago.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> he may be a shahi loyalist with schizophrenia but he is seldomly wrong about IRIAF. Lets not forget this whole SU-35S thing we now hearing from our Generals first came from him ~2 years ago.



Lol he is a garbage source

SU-30/35 news has been going for YEARS

News article from 2016 (6-7 years ago)









Iran backtracks on Russian fighter purchase reports: news agencies


Iran's Defense Ministry said it plans to modernize the air force fleet but denied reports earlier on Saturday that it wanted to buy Russian Sukhoi Su-30 fighter planes, news agencies reported.




www.reuters.com













Confirmed: Iran and Russia to Co-Produce Su-30 Fighter Jet


Iran’s defense minister revealed that Tehran is set to receive the Su-30 fighter jet at an undisclosed future date.



thediplomat.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Who could also forget this news from 2015?

Will Iran Order 150 New Fighter Jets From China?​








Will Iran Order 150 New Fighter Jets From China?


Is Tehran going on a military shopping spree in Asia?



thediplomat.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Iran backtracks on Russian fighter purchase reports: news agencies
> 
> 
> Iran's Defense Ministry said it plans to modernize the air force fleet but denied reports earlier on Saturday that it wanted to buy Russian Sukhoi Su-30 fighter planes, news agencies reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com



SU-30




TheImmortal said:


> Confirmed: Iran and Russia to Co-Produce Su-30 Fighter Jet
> 
> 
> Iran’s defense minister revealed that Tehran is set to receive the Su-30 fighter jet at an undisclosed future date.
> 
> 
> 
> thediplomat.com



SU-30




TheImmortal said:


> Will Iran Order 150 New Fighter Jets From China?
> 
> 
> Is Tehran going on a military shopping spree in Asia?
> 
> 
> 
> thediplomat.com




J-10




................. 


Show us a source before BT saying Iran ever considered/talked about SU-35S.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Show us a source before BT saying Iran ever considered/talked about SU-35S.



First of all he never leaked this ~2 years ago as you claim



drmeson said:


> first came from him ~2 years ago.



Here’s his own words


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566358083181453314
Dec 2021 to Sept 2022 is *10 months. *I know you think this khos khol POS Shahist is credible, but come on he is no secret info guy.

He was wrong below, no deal was signed. By Iran’s generals own words no deal is signed nor has it even been approved by higher ups to acquire SU-35 100%

_#BREAKING: By *mid-January 2022*, #Iran & #Russia will sign a 20 years security & defense agreement through which #Iran will procure over $10 billion USD of weapons including a military satellite, at-least 24 Su-35SE (ex-#Egypt Air Force), 2 S-400 SAM batterries & etc._

Second you need to understand 2016 articles:
Yes Iran was chasing SU-30 in 2016. What else happened then?

Let me refresh your memory:

China became the first export country to receive SU-35 in *late* 2016. They only received 4 SU-35, more in 2017, and the last ones in 2018.

So how would Iran procure SU-35 when only China had just recently received theirs in 2018?....given how bad Russian-Iranian arms relations were? Iran had little chance to get SU-35 back then so they settled for SU-30 and tried to insist on TOT which Russia refused.

Flash forward during Rouhani era Iran was long rumored to be in the hunt for SU-35 after a Sukhoi order book showed an unknown country scheduled to receive 50+ SU-35’s at an arm expo

*Look at the date 2020*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644
As for BT S-400 claim, here is our own @SalarHaqq posting article directly from Russian ambassador to Iran saying they may sell S-400 to Iran* in 2020*






Russia may sell S-400 to Iran after UN embargo expires, ambassador says


Oct 5, 2020 Russia’s ambassador to Iran said Saturday that the Kremlin may sell its S-400 missile defense system to Tehran after the UN arms embargo expires later this month. “We have provided Iran with the S-300. Russia does not have any problem to deliver the S-400 to Iran, and it did not have...



defence.pk






What’s my point? My point is everyone on this damn forum and the OSINT community was already talking about SU-35 the last few years way before BT. Does that mean we have secret info?

BT took widely disseminated news/rumors/analysis and added in the Egyptian angle to form his own opinion just in last 10 months. He has no secret info and he is no Nostradamus....he just took recycled news.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

I show you


drmeson said:


> How about you do something constructive for the entire forum and list these helis you see on google Maps so that we can complain to wiki page owners? In last 6 months, I have complained to a few pages on the wiki spreading false info on the Iranian military and the owners corrected it, even right now I am in talks with few pages that were using Haartez and Debkafiles as sources for Iranian military equipment. So we can do this to helis that you claim exists and wiki is being a lying bitch.
> 
> Btw wiki is no reference, wiki is where you post references for a claim. It's a platform for references, not the reference itself which is why it has a citation section. Aviation page owners of Wiki uses worldairforces/Flightglobal for aircraft count on the basis of photographed serials released by the airforces themselves. E.g. we know Iran posses some 61 airframes of F-14A by serials, number of crashes and confirmed war losses but among them how many are flyable or "operational with IRIAF" ? by serials, 41, among which how many are FMC (full mission capable) or QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) is another debate. If we go by google maps Iran also possess MIG-23, MIG-27 but we dont count those because they are not operational with IRIAF.


I show you wikipedia page for IRIAA where they list more than 300 helicopters, if Just one branche have more than 300,how than country can have 128..I told you it is nonsense


----------



## drmeson

... after your previously posted three links were proven to be unrelated (not about SU-35S) .... 



TheImmortal said:


> *Look at the date 2020*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297989559427440644



Where is the word on Iran showing intent towards procurement of SU-35S? The author of the article this glory tweet cited is _assuming_ *China *as the primary and then *India* as a secondary probable client (not satisfied with flanker) then* Algeria *as all are already long time users of Flanker family. There is no single piece of info on Iran being interested or showing intent other than author's assumption of probability. No claims made! 

While BT's tweet was *not an assumption based upon probability*, it was a *Detailed **C**laim* of a Iran-Russia Deal/Understanding for 24 x SU-35S for OIL $$ + Pilots/technicians already trained. IRIAF's interest in SU-35S later got repeated by Chief of IRIAF. Do we have any other source mentioning Iran signing deals/MoUs with Russia for SU-35S before December 2021? None. There was not a single word of Iran showing any intent for SU-35S before Schizo's own tweet in late 2021 just weeks after Bagheri met Russian MoD in Moscow. An author may opine XYZ plane seems probable for ABC country's AF but that does not imply that they are saying that the country is actually pursuing that plane. 

I care for a journalist's IRIAF related info where he is roughly 7-8/10 times right. You may have better sources inside chief of IRIAF's office then BT but I don't.

Here is the timeline of IRIAF's interests in last decade according to BT

SU-30SM (Iran requested, Russia Declined)
SU-27M3 (Russia offered, Iran declined)
J-10C (Iran evaluated, IRIAF rejected)
JH-7 (Iran evaluated, IRIAF rejected)
SU-35S (Iran requested in late 2021, Russia Accepted, 24, 64 or 88???)



TheImmortal said:


> As for BT S-400 claim, here is our own @SalarHaqq posting article directly from Russian ambassador to Iran saying they may sell S-400 to Iran* in 2020*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia may sell S-400 to Iran after UN embargo expires, ambassador says
> 
> 
> Oct 5, 2020 Russia’s ambassador to Iran said Saturday that the Kremlin may sell its S-400 missile defense system to Tehran after the UN arms embargo expires later this month. “We have provided Iran with the S-300. Russia does not have any problem to deliver the S-400 to Iran, and it did not have...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk



Nobody talked about the S-400. Very different case.


----------



## BigMelatonin

drmeson said:


> SU-30SM (Iran requested, Russia Declined)
> SU-27M3 (Russia offered, Iran declined)
> J-10C (Iran evaluated, IRIAF rejected)
> JH-7 (Iran evaluated, IRIAF rejected)
> SU-35S (Iran requested in late 2021, Russia Accepted, 24, 64 or 88???)


Doubt IRIAF was offered J-10C, they are certainly not in a position to reject it if offered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

sanel1412 said:


> I show you
> 
> I show you wikipedia page for IRIAA where they list more than 300 helicopters, if Just one branche have more than 300,how than country can have 128..I told you it is nonsense



For that another simple indicator is the amount of military helicopters imported (essentially if not exclusively from the USA) prior to the Islamic Revolution by the shah regime. If I'm not mistaken that number stood at around 700.

Although some were lost during the Imposed War, Islamic Iran rapidly acquired the proficiency to repair damage ones and return these to service, to maintain and overhaul the fleet domestically and then to launch her own production lines. It's probable that some locally produced Panha-2091 Toufan and Shahed-285 attack choppers were added to the arsenal, as well as some of the Iranian-made utility helicopters. In addition to the Mi-17's bought from Russia for the IRGC.

Which implies that we can't be too far from the 600-700 Iran used to field in 1979. Minimum number is 500-600 I'd say. 700 units would put Iran in fourth position among nations worldwide in terms of military helicopters according to that one Wikipedia list which got the data for Iran completely wrong. 600 units would place Iran in seventh position ex aequo with India (not counting the additional EU entry in that chart).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

BigMelatonin said:


> Doubt IRIAF was offered J-10C, they are certainly not in a position to reject it if offered.



Dont shoot the messenger. 

I was presenting what certain aviation journalist has claimed to be IRIAF's interests over the years. He is right or wrong is not my concern here.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> J-10C (Iran evaluated, IRIAF rejected)


J10-A not J10-C


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> I show you
> 
> I show you wikipedia page for IRIAA where they list more than 300 helicopters, if Just one branche have more than 300,how than country can have 128..I told you it is nonsense



The page does not list any figure even close to 300 in the fleet *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Army_Aviation#Current_aircraft_inventory*? the digit 300 comes from Gen. Ghorbani, head of IRIAA and only him. The IRIAA page is using the very same worldairforces (global standard) as a reference which lists the total fleet being 128 helis strong across all regular branches and IRGC. I counted again.

See the thing is if our intention here is to challenge Wikipedia for their bigotry against Iran we need to have strong evidence like you were mentioning google maps or some reference data as we have of IRIAF fixed wing fleet or IRIIN fleet. Ironically our national media is just too lame to cover anything related to defense professionally let alone count our military hardware so its up to us, iranian defense followers to do something about it. If you have authentic evidence of Fakour-90 being ARH or heli fleet being 300+ strong then we need to use that evidence to challenge/edit the false info on wiki pages.



Hack-Hook said:


> J10-A not J10-C



Tomayto, Tomahto

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Tomayto, Tomahto


Come on the difference over J-10B is adding Infrared seeker , adding AESA radar , changing engine to WS-10B and capability to fire PL-10 and PL-15 
and now J-10B advancement over J-10A is it become lighter , RCS get reduced and E/O targeting system added to it , it was equipped with laser rangefinders , it was equipped with a more capable electronic countermeasure and warning system . the difference is more than Tomayto and Tomahto

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

drmeson said:


> The page does not list any figure even close to 300 in the fleet *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Army_Aviation#Current_aircraft_inventory*? the digit 300 comes from Gen. Ghorbani, head of IRIAA and only him. The IRIAA page is using the very same worldairforces (global standard) as a reference which lists the total fleet being 128 helis strong across all regular branches and IRGC. I counted again.
> 
> See the thing is if our intention here is to challenge Wikipedia for their bigotry against Iran we need to have strong evidence like you were mentioning google maps or some reference data as we have of IRIAF fixed wing fleet or IRIIN fleet. Ironically our national media is just too lame to cover anything related to defense professionally let alone count our military hardware so its up to us, iranian defense followers to do something about it. If you have authentic evidence of Fakour-90 being ARH or heli fleet being 300+ strong then we need to use that evidence to challenge/edit the false info on wiki pages.
> 
> 
> 
> Tomayto, Tomahto


OK I am Done discussing with you, you dont have Knowledge about even basic stuff, well known, discussed already 15 yrs ago at first IMF... I didnt post wikipedia quote to proove my claim, I dont have to, it is well known fact... I post it it to prove wikipedia should not be used as Source for Iran military, and if you dont Know, I dont Know how you end up at military forum.. IRAN has around 50 CH47, more than 70 Mil 8/17/171..that is Already 120..now go and learn some stuff and get **** off..

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

“Aviation journalist”


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1570090867377029123
More from the “aviation journalist”


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1570084166943010817
Shahist and MEK supporters sit and promote their own propaganda on this board right under people’s noses.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arash1991

sanel1412 said:


> OK I am Done discussing with you, you dont have Knowledge about even basic stuff, well known, discussed already 15 yrs ago at first IMF... I didnt post wikipedia quote to proove my claim, I dont have to, it is well known fact... I post it it to prove wikipedia should not be used as Source for Iran military, and if you dont Know, I dont Know how you end up at military forum.. IRAN has around 50 CH47, more than 70 Mil 8/17/171..that is Already 120..now go and learn some stuff and get **** off..
> View attachment 879020


Im happy that Iran is giving missiles and drones a priority. But its a mistake in my eyes that they are not caring for the airforce (I mean 5th gen fighter jets) and so on. Because the pilots are definitly one of the best. And Investment in strong points is important. Hope we get some Su - 35 in large numbers at least, an some J-10B. Would be nice. And, Iran should not develop its own manned fighterjets. Would definitly make more sense to go for 6th gen development wich means unmanned Fighter aircraft with AI. Goal should be 2035. 
Iran can get along with these 4+ generation and 5th gen fighter aircraft until 2035.
Only an opinion.


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1570096707144224768









Russian Su-35 Fighter 'Demolished' Ukrainian Air Defense Radar By Firing Anti-Radiation Missile, Moscow Says


A Russian Su-35 has allegedly destroyed a Ukrainian air defense system with a special anti-radiation missile, as per the latest video released by the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and a Russian media report.




eurasiantimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

TheImmortal said:


> “Aviation journalist”
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1570090867377029123
> More from the “aviation journalist”
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1570084166943010817
> Shahist and MEK supporters sit and promote their own propaganda on this board right under people’s noses.



In martike BT che adame gohi hast.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Daylamite Warrior said:


> In martike BT che adame gohi hast.



Some crazy *** dude who fled Iran likely a Shahist-MKO supporter. Hates anything IRGC and loves anything IRIAF.

His predictions back in the day were bonkers. I’m quite sure he used to go by an alias named “Michael something” claiming he was was high level in IRGC and defected and was fearful of his life.

Then when that act got old, he pivoted to the Iran freedom fighter/Shahi supporter. You have to ask how someone this stupid and mentally ill can stay relevant without support of foreign governments?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

TheImmortal said:


> Some crazy *** dude who fled Iran likely a Shahist-MKO supporter. Hates anything IRGC and loves anything IRIAF.



@Hack-Hook are you BT?



TheImmortal said:


> His predictions back in the day were bonkers. I’m quite sure he used to go by an alias named “Michael something” claiming he was was high level in IRGC and defected and was fearful of his life.
> 
> Then when that act got old, he pivoted to the Iran freedom fighter/Shahi supporter. You have to ask how someone this stupid and mentally ill can stay relevant without support of foreign governments?



Without a doubt any Iranian sell out that's putting themselves out there are having their strings pulled by something foreign. I just dont understand why he gets a lot of attention by forum users here if he has an agenda. Someone who lies like that is definitely untrustworthy in other matters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> @Hack-Hook are you BT?


you really are a child


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> you really are a child



You may want to look in the mirror once in a while! Was a serious question though, uncanny resemblance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You may want to look in the mirror once in a while! Was a serious question though, uncanny resemblance.


good advice , do it yourself
this post clearly show who is children .








IRIAF | News and Discussions


In martike BT che adame gohi hast. Some crazy *** dude who fled Iran likely a Shahist-MKO supporter. Hates anything IRGC and loves anything IRIAF. His predictions back in the day were bonkers. I’m quite sure he used to go by an alias named “Michael something” claiming he was was high level in...



defence.pk




also you again made a post and said that Iran must not pursue self sufficiency in defense sector. that really raise the question that whats your agenda and who you really present








Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment


Nope, they wear multicam, which is what IRGC-N marine special forces use. They're also in Asaluyeh There's 2 versions. One with TJ100 copy and another with rocket engine I think Thanks for the clarification



defence.pk


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> good advice , do it yourself
> this post clearly show who is children .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRIAF | News and Discussions
> 
> 
> In martike BT che adame gohi hast. Some crazy *** dude who fled Iran likely a Shahist-MKO supporter. Hates anything IRGC and loves anything IRIAF. His predictions back in the day were bonkers. I’m quite sure he used to go by an alias named “Michael something” claiming he was was high level in...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also you again made a post and said that Iran must not pursue self sufficiency in defense sector. that really raise the question that whats your agenda and who you really present
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment
> 
> 
> Nope, they wear multicam, which is what IRGC-N marine special forces use. They're also in Asaluyeh There's 2 versions. One with TJ100 copy and another with rocket engine I think Thanks for the clarification
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk



Show me a quote where I said Iran must not pursue self sufficiency at all. Go on I dare you!

No the child here is you who cant see that Iran should have a hybrid strategy of both internal production and external procurment, just like every other country in the world. You're expecting Iran to magically pull a rabbit out of a hat, because you want to set Iran up to fail! Libtard!

Are you simping for BT? Did me and TheImmortal hurt you for insulting that traitor? Very sus!

Your head is so far up your arse if you were to pull it out you will be the king of England. What makes it worse is your garbage writing skills!

Let's see what I really said:



Daylamite Warrior said:


> These are helicopters which can be built much quicker and to a higher quality and spec than what we can! That doesnt mean we should cease internal production...if the funds are there we should do both and not restrict ourselves to just one path! And definitely it has to be a country that is the lesser evil which right now is Russia, not your non-binary masters in US.



For the record, as can be seen from the above quote, I have clearly said Iran should not stop internal production and set aside resources to do BOTH and not RESTRICT ITSELF TO ONE PATH! You aint got shit on me, Hack!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Show me a quote where I said Iran must not pursue self sufficiency at all. Go on I dare you!
> 
> No the child here is you who cant see that Iran should have a hybrid strategy of both internal production and external procurment, just like every other country in the world. You're expecting Iran to magically pull a rabbit out of a hat, because you want to set Iran up to fail! Libtard!
> 
> Are you simping for BT? Did me and TheImortal hurt you for insulting that traitor? Very sus!
> 
> Your head is so far up your arse if you were to pull it out you will be the king of England. What makes it worse is your garbage writing skills!
> 
> Let's see what I really said:
> 
> 
> 
> For the record, as can be seen from the above quote, I have clearly said Iran should not stop internal production and set aside resources to do BOTH and not RESTRICT ITSELF TO ONE PATH! You aint got shit on me, Hack!


people can decide i have already several times quoted your posts


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> people can decide i have already several times quoted your posts



Lol nice cop out, coward. You haven't quoted anything! Go and pleasure a dojensi! Its halal, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Lol nice cop out, coward. You haven't quoted anything! Go and pleasure a dojensi! Its halal, right?


well , when i say you are nothing but a frustrated teenage , its the evidence
by the way you even don't knew the meaning of the word and the good point about the forum is that you can't deny what you said 
bye


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> well , when i say you are nothing but a frustrated teenage , its the evidence
> by the way you even don't knew the meaning of the word and the good point about the forum is that you can't deny what you said
> bye



I have quoted what I said and you've buckled at the request of evidence. Falsehood has perished in the face of truth right before our eyes! Im probably older than you, and if not then you're a bigger man-child as I once thought. We have a lot of them in our midst. I'll let the Quran and scholars define that, as opposed to your desires, Abu Qazvini!


----------



## Sineva

Some very old footage [1990s] of irans first gen air launched pgm zoobin being test fired

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1569691780798464000

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> OK I am Done discussing with you, you dont have Knowledge about even basic stuff, well known, discussed already 15 yrs ago at first IMF... I didnt post wikipedia quote to proove my claim, I dont have to, it is well known fact... I post it it to prove wikipedia should not be used as Source for Iran military, and if you dont Know, I dont Know how you end up at military forum.. IRAN has around 50 CH47, more than 70 Mil 8/17/171.



Iran also has 61 x F-14 Airframes and around ~90 F-5A/E/F aiframes then how come worldairforces (global standard for air force Wiki entries) can only count serials of 34-41 F-14A/AM and 60 F-5E/F? Possessing an airframe does not mean it's necessarily operational in the force. Some airframes are damaged beyond repair, some are mothballed, some are cannibalized. Your 100 years fan-following of Iranian aviation did not teach you that? 

Worldairforces can barely count serials of 120-130 Helis at best. You want it changed on wiki ? I told you before you need to give the owner of the page, some credible source of info like flighglobal or some "Google Maps" that you were blabbering here about and now you can't post them just like your Fakour-90 ARH seeker which you claimed existed and then went to post seekers for Sayyad series (two different companies, two different patents). 

Online-Chimpouts + Fanboi-ship trolling does not work in literary publishing, which is why Iranian military wiki pages have become an enemy owned clown shows because fanbois like you never cared for use of objective evidence to raise issue with them, instead resorted to trolling on online forum. 



sanel1412 said:


> .that is Already 120..now go and learn some stuff and get **** off..
> View attachment 879020



AGAIN, the same page cites Flighglobal/Worldairforces and IISS to list some ~150 helis in IRIAA service. General Ghorbani's figure of 300 helis has no pictorial or serial verification that can challenge the western controlled website's listed information, in this case Flightglobal. Our very own Mashreghnews, Tasnim, PressTV etc do not care for releasing the official numbers despite journalists having deep access to military compounds. Which is why we have ZERO pictorial or literary evidence for this "300" strong fleet. Its like Saegheh's "Mass production" of 6 aircrafts at best. You want it changed, raise issue with them with evidence or just cope.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> Come on the difference over J-10B is adding Infrared seeker , adding AESA radar , changing engine to WS-10B and capability to fire PL-10 and PL-15
> and now J-10B advancement over J-10A is it become lighter , RCS get reduced and E/O targeting system added to it , it was equipped with laser rangefinders , it was equipped with a more capable electronic countermeasure and warning system . the difference is more than Tomayto and Tomahto



actually .. you are wrong I am afraid. He did not mention J-10A anywhere. 

He mentioned J-10C/F-20C + JH-7 from China. and SU-35S + SU-30SM from Russia.






*https://twitter.com/BabakTaghvaee/status/893062926982053888*


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> actually .. you are wrong I am afraid. He did not mention J-10A anywhere.
> 
> He mentioned J-10C/F-20C + JH-7 from China. and SU-35S + SU-30SM from Russia.
> 
> View attachment 879842
> 
> 
> *https://twitter.com/BabakTaghvaee/status/893062926982053888*


exactly when these test happened , j-10c is an airplane of 2018, j-10 is from 2006


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> “Aviation journalist”



Focus on his IRIAF work esp the one that he publishes in aviation magazines and books, instead of his political agenda. He is mostly right about about IRIAF roughly 7-8/10 times I like I said before. I have been calling him schizophrenic Shahist for 7-8 years now for his political rants. Does this mean I should discredit his IRIAF work too? 

All of us Iranians love Tom C's works which is considered bible for info of IRIAF massacre of Iraqi airforce. Serials, dates, pilot names during encounters etc all came from him in better form than any other source. Should we also call Tom C's IRIAf work a bundle of lies because he calls IRI a fanatic regime? Your logic is shit.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Iran also has 61 x F-14 Airframes and around ~90 F-5A/E/F aiframes then how come worldairforces (global standard for air force Wiki entries) can only count serials of 34-41 F-14A/AM and 60 F-5E/F? Possessing an airframe does not mean it's necessarily operational in the force. Some airframes are damaged beyond repair, some are mothballed, some are cannibalized. Your 100 years fan-following of Iranian aviation did not teach you that?
> 
> Worldairforces can barely count serials of 120-130 Helis at best. You want it changed on wiki ? I told you before you need to give the owner of the page, some credible source of info like flighglobal or some "Google Maps" that you were blabbering here about and now you can't post them just like your Fakour-90 ARH seeker which you claimed existed and then went to post seekers for Sayyad series (two different companies, two different patents).
> 
> Online-Chimpouts + Fanboi-ship trolling does not work in literary publishing, which is why Iranian military wiki pages have become an enemy owned clown shows because fanbois like you never cared for use of objective evidence to raise issue with them, instead resorted to trolling on online forum.
> 
> 
> 
> AGAIN, the same page cites Flighglobal/Worldairforces and IISS to list some ~150 helis in IRIAA service. General Ghorbani's figure of 300 helis has no pictorial or serial verification that can challenge the western controlled website's listed information, in this case Flightglobal. Our very own Mashreghnews, Tasnim, PressTV etc do not care for releasing the official numbers despite journalists having deep access to military compounds. Which is why we have ZERO pictorial or literary evidence for this "300" strong fleet. Its like Saegheh's "Mass production" of 6 aircrafts at best. You want it changed, raise issue with them with evidence or just cope.
> 
> View attachment 879835



Where have the many hundreds of helicopters Iran bought before 1979 gone? Unless these sources provide a realistic answer, the figures they're giving can't be taken all too seriously because they'd suggest that several hundreds of helicopters just went missing.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> exactly when these test happened , j-10c is an airplane of 2018, j-10 is from 2006



Read again, its written on the slide that J-10C was in consideration and deliveries would have started in 2020 or may be beyond.

Personally speaking, I do not think IRIAF would have ever considered J-10A. The plane was a glorified 4.0 generation interceptor at best. Another MIG-29 9.13. J-10C is a solid improvement that BT reported IRIAF thought of or evaluated.



SalarHaqq said:


> Where have the hundreds of helicopters Iran bought before 1979 gone?



Do you have serials and evidence they are operational now?

Because if you do then please post it here so that we can challenge the misinfo being spread by Wiki. Right now we only have words that mean nothing.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Read again, its written on the slide that J-10C was in consideration and deliveries would have started in 2020 or may be beyond.
> 
> Personally speaking, I do not think IRIAF would have ever considered J-10A. The plane was a glorified 4.0 generation interceptor at best. Another MIG-29 9.13. J-10C is a solid improvement that BT reported IRIAF thought of or evaluated.


well my question is when IRIAF evaluatedj-10c the plane start flying in 1018. i knew there was talk about j-10 in 2015 that luckily didn't go through








China, Iran Ponder $1B Oil-For-Arms Deal


Saudi Arabia and Israel believe that Iran will increase oil production and begin spending heavily on weapons after economic sanctions are lifted.




www.ibtimes.com


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> Where have the many hundreds of helicopters Iran bought before 1979 gone? Unless these sources provide a realistic answer, the figures they're giving can't be taken all too seriously because they'd suggest that several hundreds of helicopters just went missing.



Not exactly. Out of the 61 x F-14AM, ~90 x F-5A/E/F/R, ~90 F-4R/E/F current operational fleet counted with serials and deployment is 34-41 Flyable F-14A/AM, ~60 F-5/Kowsar/Sagheh, 64 F-4E/F. 

Can you guess where the rest of the fleets are ? I am not even mentioning where ~20 non operational SU-22M4 (10 operational in IRGC-AF, 14 went to Syria) or 13 Mirage F-1Q/EQ.



Hack-Hook said:


> well my question is when IRIAF evaluatedj-10c the plane start flying in 1018. i knew there was talk about j-10 in 2015 that luckily didn't go through
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China, Iran Ponder $1B Oil-For-Arms Deal
> 
> 
> Saudi Arabia and Israel believe that Iran will increase oil production and begin spending heavily on weapons after economic sanctions are lifted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ibtimes.com



If the plane flew in 2018, then it does not mean this version did not exist in the marketing plans of CAC. Highly likely, the Chinese shared J-10C plans with IRIAF in 2015/16. Because by your theory Indonesia can not be a partner in KF-21 before 2022 because plane "did not exist before 2022".

Why are you saying "luckily" J-10C fits in IRIAF for the right price? I would say it could have been better then other options we had before SU-35S news broke out.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Do you have serials and evidence they are operational now?
> 
> Because if you do then please post it here so that we can challenge the misinfo being spread by Wiki. Right now we only have words that mean nothing.



We have two sets of hard facts:

1) Number of helicopters in Iran in 1979.

2) Those estimates from the sources you cited.

If true these latter figures would imply that hundreds of helicopters are no longer operational. My question is why? I don't think it's a meaningless question, on the contrary.

There is no pictorial evidence with serial numbers for every single item in the Iranian military inventory (why should there be?), in other terms Iranian stockpiles by definition are larger than that for which pictures were released. In other terms yet, nobody can pretend that what Iran is effectively fielding merely boils down to those individual helicopters publicly shown or seen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> If true these latter figures would imply that hundreds of helicopters are no longer operational. My question is why?



Guess why with my following qoute:



> Out of the 61 x F-14AM, ~90 x F-5A/E/F/R, ~90 F-4R/E/F current operational fleet counted with serials and deployment is 34-41 Flyable F-14A/AM, ~60 F-5/Kowsar/Sagheh, 64 F-4E/F.
> 
> Can you guess where the rest of the fleets are ? I am not even mentioning where ~20 non operational SU-22M4 (10 operational in IRGC-AF, 14 went to Syria) or 13 Mirage F-1Q/EQ.





SalarHaqq said:


> There is no pictorial evidence with serial numbers for every single item in the Iranian military inventory (why should there be?)



Wiki aviation pages use worldairforces as standard for citation which relies upon deployed serial numbers. Its not just limited to Iran, its same for the entire world AFs on wiki. Unless we have a better source to challenge worldairforces we can only cope. 



SalarHaqq said:


> in other terms Iranian stockpiles by definition are larger than that for which pictures exist.



I am sure they are ... but do we have evidence to challenge a western owned citation system for spreading misinformation? Unless we have that hard literary or pictorial evidence we can only cope. I am telling you from experience, I have quarreled with many wiki page owners of the Iranian military. Most are just Americans who kept asking me for evidence.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Why are you saying "luckily" J-10C fits in IRIAF for the right price? I would say it could have been better then other options we had before SU-35S news broke out.


because they wanted to hand Azadegan oil field to china for 20 year for the plane . if they wanted to use the money we have and is blocked in china i had no prolem with it . but handing one of our biggest oil field to them for 20 years , for some fighter seriously remaind me of Qajar era works.

we have around 20 bilion asset in china and intrestingly people only talk about 7billion in s. Korea and 1.5 bilion in Japan , nobody talk about 6 bilion in iraqi and we call those money in china revenue that we can use whenever we want . i say instead of giving them an oil field use 1-2 bilion of that revenue








Factbox-Countries where Iranian oil and gas revenues are blocked


Iran has been unable to obtain tens of billions of dollars of its assets in foreign banks, mainly from exports of oil and gas, due to U.S. sanctions on its banking and energy sectors.




www.reuters.com


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> Not exactly. Out of the 61 x F-14AM, ~90 x F-5A/E/F/R, ~90 F-4R/E/F current operational fleet counted with serials and deployment is 34-41 Flyable F-14A/AM, ~60 F-5/Kowsar/Sagheh, 64 F-4E/F.
> 
> Can you guess where the rest of the fleets are ? I am not even mentioning where ~20 non operational SU-22M4 (10 operational in IRGC-AF, 14 went to Syria) or 13 Mirage F-1Q/EQ.



Helicopters should be a tad easier to keep operational. But even when it comes to fighter jets, it doesn't mean the other 20-25 F-14 airframes are no longer flyable. They've just not been seen around by observers nor shown by authorities. Possibly they're in storage but able to be inducted if needed.



drmeson said:


> Wiki aviation pages use worldairforces as standard for citation which relies upon deployed serial numbers. Its not just limited to Iran, its same for the entire world AFs on wiki. Unless we have a better source to challenge worldairforces we can only cope.
> 
> I am sure they are ... but do we have evidence to challenge a western owned citation system for spreading misinformation? Unless we have that hard literary or pictorial evidence we can only cope. I am telling you from experience, I have quarreled with many wiki page owners of the Iranian military. Most are just Americans who kept asking me for evidence.



Well, my issue was not to prove it to those foreign sources. I just meant we ourselves shouldn't take those figures at face value, since they aren't realistic. Although neutralizing their misinformation at Wikipedia would have advantages of its own.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Hack-Hook said:


> because they wanted to hand Azadegan oil field to china for 20 year for the plane . if they wanted to use the money we have and is blocked in china i had no prolem with it . but handing one of our biggest oil field to them for 20 years , for some fighter seriously remaind me of Qajar era works.
> 
> we have around 20 bilion asset in china and intrestingly people only talk about 7billion in s. Korea and 1.5 bilion in Japan , nobody talk about 6 bilion in iraqi and we call those money in china revenue that we can use whenever we want . i say instead of giving them an oil field use 1-2 bilion of that revenue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Factbox-Countries where Iranian oil and gas revenues are blocked
> 
> 
> Iran has been unable to obtain tens of billions of dollars of its assets in foreign banks, mainly from exports of oil and gas, due to U.S. sanctions on its banking and energy sectors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


Yeah, I agree with you. The previous government knew this too but wanted to negotiate by handing over an oilfield which leads me to believe their intentions were dishonourable.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571437408809353217

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571437408809353217


Since when we write on rockets with hand


----------



## shadihassan28

Whatever happened to the shafaq fighter for a subsonic trainer/fighter looked like Iran was on the right path looks similar to the yak series looks wise it seemed like they were only a couple years away looked really professional from the outside


----------



## Hack-Hook

when i say they must retire the circus airplanes and use the money that will be saved on their maintenance by doing so on kowsar development , you guys say I'm traitor .
one of the su-22 crashed .








خبرگزاری فارس - وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند سوخو 22 سپاه در هرمزگان


روابط عمومی نیروی هوافضای سپاه از وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند هواپیمای سوخو ۲۲ این نیرو به دلیل نقص فنی در هرمزگان خبر داد.



www.farsnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> when i say they must retire the circus airplanes and use the money that will be saved on their maintenance by doing so on kowsar development , you guys say I'm traitor .
> one of the su-22 crashed .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> خبرگزاری فارس - وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند سوخو 22 سپاه در هرمزگان
> 
> 
> روابط عمومی نیروی هوافضای سپاه از وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند هواپیمای سوخو ۲۲ این نیرو به دلیل نقص فنی در هرمزگان خبر داد.
> 
> 
> 
> www.farsnews.ir



Su-22 is very old, but while were at it here are some crashes involving newer Western and Chinese jets in Iran:

F-4:









Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost - Flight Journal


Aviation History | History of Flight | Aviation History Articles, Warbirds, Bombers, Trainers, Pilots | Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost




www.flightjournal.com













Iran's Air Force Just Lost a Fighter Jet: U.S. Made F-4 Phantom Just Went Down


Here is what we know, so far.




nationalinterest.org





F-14:









Iran Fighter Jet Crashes after Engine Fails, Pilots Survive


An Iranian fighter plane crashed near the central city of Isfahan on Saturday after its engine failed, but both pilots survived, media reported. The pilots were taken to a local hospital, the official IRNA news agency said. It said there was a techni




english.aawsat.com













Report: Iran Fighter Crash Kills both Crew


An Iranian U.S.-manufactured F-14 fighter jet crashed early on Thursday minutes after takeoff killing both crew, the Fars news agency reported. "The pilot and the co-pilot of an F-14 plane that crashed this morning have been martyred," the news...




www.naharnet.com





J-7:









Two Pilots Dead As Iranian Fighter Jet Crashes During Training Mission


Two Iranian Air Force pilots were killed when their F-7 fighter jet crashed during a training mission near the city of Naeen in central Iran.




www.rferl.org





F-5









Iranian fighter jet crashes near school in Tabriz, killing three people


Two pilots, one civilian on the ground killed in accident; decades of sanctions make Iran's aging fleet hard to maintain




www.timesofisrael.com













Iran TV: 'Technical problem' on fighter jet kills 2 pilots


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — An Iranian fighter jet on Tuesday developed a “technical problem” that killed both of the aircraft's pilots, state TV reported. The report said the incident happened in the country’s southwest, in the city of Dezful, 444 kilometers (270 miles) from the capital, Tehran and...




apnews.com





These are aircraft that are modded and looked after by Iran, but they crash as well. So much for your western jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Su-22 is very old, but while were at it here are some crashes involving newer Western and Chinese jets in Iran:
> 
> F-4:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost - Flight Journal
> 
> 
> Aviation History | History of Flight | Aviation History Articles, Warbirds, Bombers, Trainers, Pilots | Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.flightjournal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Air Force Just Lost a Fighter Jet: U.S. Made F-4 Phantom Just Went Down
> 
> 
> Here is what we know, so far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalinterest.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-14:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Fighter Jet Crashes after Engine Fails, Pilots Survive
> 
> 
> An Iranian fighter plane crashed near the central city of Isfahan on Saturday after its engine failed, but both pilots survived, media reported. The pilots were taken to a local hospital, the official IRNA news agency said. It said there was a techni
> 
> 
> 
> 
> english.aawsat.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Iran Fighter Crash Kills both Crew
> 
> 
> An Iranian U.S.-manufactured F-14 fighter jet crashed early on Thursday minutes after takeoff killing both crew, the Fars news agency reported. "The pilot and the co-pilot of an F-14 plane that crashed this morning have been martyred," the news...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.naharnet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-7:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two Pilots Dead As Iranian Fighter Jet Crashes During Training Mission
> 
> 
> Two Iranian Air Force pilots were killed when their F-7 fighter jet crashed during a training mission near the city of Naeen in central Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rferl.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian fighter jet crashes near school in Tabriz, killing three people
> 
> 
> Two pilots, one civilian on the ground killed in accident; decades of sanctions make Iran's aging fleet hard to maintain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran TV: 'Technical problem' on fighter jet kills 2 pilots
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — An Iranian fighter jet on Tuesday developed a “technical problem” that killed both of the aircraft's pilots, state TV reported. The report said the incident happened in the country’s southwest, in the city of Dezful, 444 kilometers (270 miles) from the capital, Tehran and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are aircraft that are modded and looked after by Iran, but they crash as well. So much for your western jets.


f-4 and f-14 are also old . , j-7 newer , f-5 oldest of all .the circus airplane pieces (J-7 m Su22, Mirage F1, F-5 ) must be retired and the money that will be saved must be into developing the next generation kowsar .when that become ready we can retire F-4, Mig-29 , and if its what i think it will be , hopefully even F-14 and Su-24 .
meanwhile we can replace these airplane with current generation Kowsar as light fighter and when next generation of kowsar become ready the current generation of kowsar can be phased into the role of advanced trainer for IRIAF and IRGCAF


----------



## drmeson

shadihassan28 said:


> Whatever happened to the shafaq fighter for a subsonic trainer/fighter looked like Iran was on the right path looks similar to the yak series looks wise it seemed like they were only a couple years away looked really professional from the outside



Shafagh died with its Soviet Tajik designer.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> f-4 and f-14 are also old . , j-7 newer , f-5 oldest of all .the circus airplane pieces (J-7 m Su22, Mirage F1, F-5 ) must be retired and the money that will be saved must be into developing the next generation kowsar .when that become ready we can retire F-4, Mig-29 , and if its what i think it will be , hopefully even F-14 and Su-24 .
> meanwhile we can replace these airplane with current generation Kowsar as light fighter and when next generation of kowsar become ready the current generation of kowsar can be phased into the role of advanced trainer for IRIAF and IRGCAF



60 x Kowsar-I and 10 x Kowsar-I Trainers can replace the entire prop fleet of the following:

- 23 x Mirage F-1Q/EQ/BQ, that have no Cyrano radar, let alone missiles it has no Pylons to carry missiles. It's a true prop fighter that IRIAF should use at Kish for fighter jet tourism to raise $. The plane has no RWR, no E-Warfare, TDL, or BVR.

- 43 x F-7N has a radar range of 30 KM with its puny Sy-80 radar. Its longest-range missile is 18 km ranging PL-7C which according to two authors use Iranian seekers because Chinese seekers failed. It has the highest crash rate in the IRIAF service. It has no RWR, no E-Warfare, no TDL, and No BVR.

- 60 x F-5E/F fleet has legacy APQ-153 radars that can track a F-4E size fighter at 34 km range. They have no e-warfare, Look down shoot down or BVR capability, and no TDL either. These planes should be dismantled and go into the formation of a repository of parts for the Kowsar-I fleet. 

These ~130 airframes are a burden on IRIAF's budget and are only alive because of lobbyism by cult groups that make $ off maintenance, and overhaul of these jets. Same case I am suspecting will happen if SU-35S will replace F-4E/D and SU-24MK. Esp the resistance that will come from F-4E/D infrastructure runners in Iran. In case of war, they will be butchered in sky at the hands of EF-2000, Rafale, F-18E/F of the enemy. Their retirement will pave the way for saving $$ for following:

- F-14AM upgradations (40-45)
- MIG-29 upgradation to MIG-29M standard (23)
- Kowsar-I/II production (100+)
- SU-35S integration (66)
- Kaman-12/22, Fotros, Shahed-171 UCAVs (300) total fleet 

A not so bad IRIAF if you ask me.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> f-4 and f-14 are also old . , j-7 newer , f-5 oldest of all .the circus airplane pieces (J-7 m Su22, Mirage F1, F-5 ) must be retired and the money that will be saved must be into developing the next generation kowsar .when that become ready we can retire F-4, Mig-29 , and if its what i think it will be , hopefully even F-14 and Su-24 .
> meanwhile we can replace these airplane with current generation Kowsar as light fighter and when next generation of kowsar become ready the current generation of kowsar can be phased into the role of advanced trainer for IRIAF and IRGCAF



Hack, for God sake, F-14 is newer than Su-22 but they also have a tendency to fall. So your point is moot! Also how much money will be freed up by scrapping those museum pieces? Or are you suggesting we sell them? Developing the Kowsar is a dead end endeavour, it hasnt been used once in combat as far as I can see and theyre not even training in them. We have hit a wall with Kowsar and there is no way they are enough to go against anything Russian or Western! Although I agree we should be using these more if youre saying they are good, but whats the hold up?! If we can produce prototypes then we have the blue print to mass produce even first generation Kowsar, let alone Kowsar II. I still believe all this can be done alongside new purchases of Su-35, money and willingness to sell by Russia permitting.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> 60 x F-5E/F fleet has legacy APQ-153 radars that can track a F-4E size fighter at 34 km range. They have no e-warfare, Look down shoot down or BVR capability, and no TDL either. These planes should be dismantled and go into the formation of a repository of parts for the Kowsar-I fleet.


i think you are too generous by giving them tracking range on f-4 size airplane of 34km at the best the radar can be used up to 20km well unless they are facing a tanker airplane

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> - SU-35S integration (66)



Russian agent confirmed! Lol just kidding!

I suggested the same thing and got called a Russia worshipper. Now, Drmeson, if Iran were to not have those 66 Su-35, what would be your evaluation of our airforce, would it be the same, better or worse?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Hack, for God sake, F-14 is newer than Su-22 but they also have a tendency to fall. So your point is moot! Also how much money will be freed up by scrapping those museum pieces? Or are you suggesting we sell them? Developing the Kowsar is a dead end endeavour, it hasnt been used once in combat as far as I can see and theyre not even training in them. We have hit a wall with Kowsar and there is no way they are enough to go against anything Russian or Western! Although I agree we should be using these more if youre saying they are good, but whats the hold up?! If we can produce prototypes then we have the blue print to mass produce even first generation Kowsar, let alone Kowsar II. I still believe all this can be done alongside new purchases of Su-35, money and willingness to sell by Russia permitting.


Su-22 introduced 1970 , f-14 introduced 1974.
here there is a difference . f-14 need for maintenance . this is from 2003


> The F-14 is currently the most expensive aircraft to operate in the Navy inventory, requiring *40 to 60 maintenance manhours per flight hour*. For comparison, the F-18 Hornet requires only 20 hours of maintenance and the latest F-18E/F Super Hornet requires just 10 to 15 hours.


so now will you forgive me for that 4 year in the span of 50 year ?
by way the su-22s actually are newer , they were built in 80s and were handed over to Iraq airforces during the 8 year war .
all F-5, F-4 and F-14s were built during pahlavi time in 70s so no our f-14s are older than our su-22
about thej-7 i don't knew when they were built we get them in mid to late 80 but chaina start producing them from 66


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Also how much money will be freed up by scrapping those museum pieces?


probably around 1/3rd of airforce budget, thats not important part , even if one cent is getting freed up thats one cent that is invested not wasted away


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> i think you are too generous by giving them tracking range on f-4 size airplane of 34km at the best the radar can be used up to 20km well unless they are facing a tanker airplane



That is untouched APQ-153. The IRIAF F-5E under project Ofogh in the late 90s after Gen Sattari's death underwent upgradation of enhanced tracking range to recorded 34 KM. The antenna was changed.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Developing the Kowsar is a dead end endeavour, it hasnt been used once in combat as far as I can see and theyre not even training in them. We have hit a wall with Kowsar and there is no way they are enough to go against anything Russian or Western!


well sorry we didn't go to war yet, and the ones that are handed over to air force are part of air force inventory and see as much use as other air frame see ,


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> Helicopters should be a tad easier to keep operational. But even when it comes to fighter jets, it doesn't mean the other 20-25 F-14 airframes are no longer flyable. They've just not been seen around by observers nor shown by authorities. Possibly they're in storage but able to be inducted if needed.



These numbers do no come from spotters only. Not every airframes of helis, fighters is operational is confirmed by following facts:

- IRIAF's official released photographs of serials (IRIAF happens to be one of the most camera-friendly AF in the entire world). 

- IRIAF itself announces some type of legacy fighter being "overhauled" after years of dysfunctionality and returning to service. Just recently 2 x F-14A came to service that the official himself said was stored for decade+. If the entire fleet of stored airframes are operational how come we keep hearing official statements of airframes coming to service after decades? 

- Deployed fighters are easily countable from satellite pics. IRIAF operates no underground or secret hidden facility. So what they have is visible in their facilites.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> because they wanted to hand Azadegan oil field to china for 20 year for the plane . if they wanted to use the money we have and is blocked in china i had no prolem with it . but handing one of our biggest oil field to them for 20 years , for some fighter seriously remaind me of Qajar era works.



Won't surprise me. 

If words of critics are to be taken into consideration, Rohani's shitshow over the sacrifice of share in the Caspian sea was in return of a series of Russian EW platforms like Zhitel R330ZH, Avtobaza, and Karasuhka-4. All are in possession of IRGC and are lethal systems. 

According to BT J-10C+JH-7 was a priority but IRIAF rejected both while the Chinese probably did not want the Azadegan field either. 

I would say good riddance.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> well sorry we didn't go to war yet, and the ones that are handed over to air force are part of air force inventory and see as much use as other air frame see ,



We have plenty of terrorist on our borders we can take out, and it speaks volumes that our current fleet cant make it to Syria or Yemen without getting refused entry or shot down.


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> These numbers do no come from spotters only. Not every airframes of helis, fighters is operational is confirmed by following facts:
> 
> - IRIAF's official released photographs of serials (IRIAF happens to be one of the most camera-friendly AF in the entire world).
> 
> - IRIAF itself announces some type of legacy fighter being "overhauled" after years of dysfunctionality and returning to service. Just recently 2 x F-14A came to service that the official himself said was stored for decade+. If the entire fleet of stored airframes are operational how come we keep hearing official statements of airframes coming to service after decades?
> 
> - Deployed fighters are easily countable from satellite pics. IRIAF operates no underground or secret hidden facility. So what they have is visible in their facilites.



I meant able to be brought back into service when deemed necessary. I see no reason not to count these towards the total numbers.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> We have plenty of terrorist on our borders we can take out, and it speaks volumed that our current fleet cant make it to Syria or Yemen without getting refused entry or shot down.


thats drones works and army aviation and IRGC aviation job , not air-force duty.


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> I meant able to be brought back into service when deemed necessary. I see no reason not to count these towards the total numbers.



by definition, an AF's fleet is only its active-duty fighters or purposefully active-duty fighters in storage. Not the ones that are damaged, cannibalized, in non-flyable condition. Which is the case with IRIAF. It's not just us, RuAF itself has hundreds of fighters in non flyable condition in storage. They dont count either. I gave an example of MIG-23/27 in IRIAF possession, they can even be seen in dumpyards of Mehrabad. We cant count them since they are not active duty or operationalised.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> Su-22 introduced 1970 , f-14 introduced 1974.
> here there is a difference . f-14 need for maintenance . this is from 2003
> 
> so now will you forgive me for that 4 year in the span of 50 year ?
> by way the su-22s actually are newer , they were built in 80s and were handed over to Iraq airforces during the 8 year war .
> all F-5, F-4 and F-14s were built during pahlavi time in 70s so no our f-14s are older than our su-22
> about thej-7 i don't knew when they were built we get them in mid to late 80 but chaina start producing them from 66
> 
> probably around 1/3rd of airforce budget, thats not important part , even if one cent is getting freed up thats one cent that is invested not wasted away



Doesnt matter, Su-22 is just a modded Su-17 which is early 60s technology! Even Mig-25 is more advanced! F-14 was a more modern jet than both Su-22 and mig-25! So, by your own admission, western jets are garbage because they are newer than Su-22 and they still crash. They both need maintenance which neither Su-22 or F-14 get from their relative native manufacturers.

Doesn't matter when it was built, the technology is frozen in time! F-14 is newer and better than su-22. Thats like saying a 2022 VW Polo is a better car than a 1980s Porsche! Lol Only airframe rigidity is better which counts for nothing when you're blown to bits with a missile! 

Without doubt we need to get rid of those older jets, but the question is where do we put the money. This is the issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

drmeson said:


> by definition, an AF's fleet is only its active-duty fighters or purposefully active-duty fighters in storage. Not the ones that are damaged, cannibalized, in non-flyable condition. Which is the case with IRIAF. It's not just us, RuAF itself has hundreds of fighters in non flyable condition in storage. They dont count either. I gave an example of MIG-23/27 in IRIAF possession, they can even be seen in dumpyards of Mehrabad. We cant count them since they are not active duty or operationalised.



There's a difference between those that can be made operational on more or less short notice and those which can't.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> thats drones works and army aviation and IRGC aviation job , not air-force duty.



Why dont we train our Kowsars and other jets against real targets?! We dont even use our drones within our borders, just ballistic missiles with non-conventional warheads in Iraq and Daesh, which is good work nonetheless! 

Meanwhile our enemies fire on Syria within Lebanese airspace!


----------



## drmeson

SalarHaqq said:


> There's a difference between those that can be made operational on more or less short notice and those which can't.



I am afraid SU-22M4, F-4E/D or F-14A coming back to service after 15-30 years can't be called "operational on short notice"


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Doesnt matter, Su-22 is just a modded Su-17 which is early 60s technology! Even Mig-25 is more advanced! F-14 was a more modern jet than both Su-22 and mig-25! So, by your own admission, western jets are garbage because they are newer than Su-22 and they still crash. They both need maintenance which neither Su-22 or F-14 get from their relative native manufacturers.


are you serious !, are we talking about the technology in airplanes or wear and tear in them due to old age . decide first honestly i must know on what i must comment


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Doesn't matter when it was built, the technology is frozen in time! F-14 is newer and better than su-22. Thats like saying a 2022 VW Polo is a better car than a 1980s Porsche! Lol Only airframe rigidity is better which counts for nothing when you're blown to bits with a missile!


sorry that i say it but your understanding of maintenance is zero , your logic is zero . just make some meaningless post . by the way the question here is which one have more chance of having problem , 40 year old Porsche or brand new VW Polo . just use your brain



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Why dont we train our Kowsars and other jets against real targets?! We dont even use our drones within our borders, just ballistic missiles with non-conventional warheads in Iraq and Daesh, which is good work nonetheless!
> 
> Meanwhile our enemies fire on Syria within Lebanese airspace!


for the records we never ever once used balistic missiles in anger inside our borders,. and why use drone for attack inside our border , we use them for surveillance inside our borders


----------



## drmeson

Food for thought. A future Intra-IRIAF scenario.

*5 x SU-35S (Attack party)*
- 10-15 m2 RCS
- IRBIS-E (Search range 250 KM, Tracking range 100 km)
- IRST
- Full E-warfare package with ECCM, RWR + Jammers
- R-77-1 ARH-BVR (~100 KM) + R-74 All aspect WVR
- Intra Flanker Tactical Datalink
- FBW

VS

*5 x F-14AM (3) + Kowsar-I(2) + Karrar (2) [Interception group]*

_F-14AM (3)_
- 6-10 m2 RCS
- AWG-9+ (Search range 300 KM,~170-200 KM track range)
- Fakour-90 SARH BVR (150 KM) + Azarakhsh CCD Allaspect WVR (40 KM)

_Kowsar-I (2)_
- ~3m2 RCS
- Grifo-346/Bayyeat-II (Search range 115 KM, 93 KM track range)
- ECCM+RWR
- Shahin X-band ECM Pod (Dash II)
- Azarakhsh CCD Allaspect WVR (40 KM)
- Double Duplex Tactical Datalinking with Fighters-Fighter, Fighter-UCAV
- FBW

_Karrar (2)_
- <1 m2 RCS
- 2 x Azarakhsh CCD Allaspect WVR (20 KM without Radar)

Who wins? by What tactics?

@Hack-Hook

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Doesnt matter, Su-22 is just a modded Su-17 which is early 60s technology! Even Mig-25 is more advanced! F-14 was a more modern jet than both Su-22 and mig-25! So, by your own admission, western jets are garbage because they are newer than Su-22 and they still crash. They both need maintenance which neither Su-22 or F-14 get from their relative native manufacturers.
> 
> Doesn't matter when it was built, the technology is frozen in time! F-14 is newer and better than su-22. Thats like saying a 2022 VW Polo is a better car than a 1980s Porsche! Lol Only airframe rigidity is better which counts for nothing when you're blown to bits with a missile!
> 
> Without doubt we need to get rid of those older jets, but the question where do we put the money. This is is the issue.


Actually agree with him buy now develop later su 20 late 60s f 14s late 70s even migs early 90s so if you think about 60 years old su,40 year old f 14s and 30 year old migs all of these jets are past their life cycles no matter how much you upgrade them, I like the Chinese j 10 but like he said money and the will of any country to sell


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> are you serious !, are we talking about the technology in airplanes or wear and tear in them due to old age . decide first honestly i must know on what i must comment
> 
> sorry that i say it but your understanding of maintenance is zero , your logic is zero . just make some meaningless post . by the way the question here is which one have more chance of having problem , 40 year old Porsche or brand new VW Polo . just use your brain
> 
> 
> for the records we never ever once used balistic missiles in anger inside our borders,. and why use drone for attack inside our border , we use them for surveillance inside our borders



Lol youre the one whos confused here by bringing up manufacturing year and equating that to technological advancement! Im saying a Su-22 built in 1979 or 1986 is still a su-22! The fact is F-14 is more advanced despite all of this. I'm not going to try to convince to you the blatantly obvious that F-14 is better than Su-22, you're throwing your own western plane under the bus just to disagree with me LOL

Your knowledge of aircraft is zero, about AD is zero and about Irans true budget is zero. But you carry on these arguments like someone with a lot of oghdeh! The question is which is going to win the race, or evade SAMs. Please use YOUR brain first! 

Im talking about attacking enemies on our borders, which we have plenty, much to the demise of our border guards who you care very little for. Is Iraq in our borders? Was Daesh in our borders? Please learn to read before knee jerk replies.



shadihassan28 said:


> Actually agree with him buy now develop later su 20 late 60s f 14s late 70s even migs early 90s so if you think about 60 years old su,40 year old f 14s and 30 year old migs all of these jets are past their life cycles no matter how much you upgrade them, I like the Chinese j 10 but like he said money and the will of any country to sell



Firstly I dont care what you think, and this isnt what we are discussing at all. Seems you agree Iran needs to buy new jets! Regardless, your wishy washy estimates of aircraft ages, which you admit that Su-22 is older than F-14, just shows you're here to cause an argument and probably should leave this between me and Hack....or someone more knowledgeable than Hack, which isn't you! With all due respect, obviously. Also he wasnt the one who said we lack funds or that China won't sell, it was all me!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Lol youre the one whos confused here by bringing up manufacturing year and equating that to technological advancement! Im saying a Su-22 built in 1979 or 1986 is still a su-22! The fact is F-14 is more advanced despite all of this. I'm not going to try to convince to you the blatantly obvious that F-14 is better than Su-22, you're throwing your own western plane under the bus just to disagree with me LOL
> 
> Your knowledge of aircraft is zero, about AD is zero and about Irans true budget is zero. But you carry on these arguments like someone with a lot of oghdeh! The question is which is going to win the race, or evade SAMs. Please use YOUR brain first!
> 
> Im talking about attacking enemies on our borders, which we have plenty, much to the demise of our border guards who you care very little for. Is Iraq in our borders? Was Daesh in our borders? Please learn to read before knee jerk replies.


honestly you are another level here . the introduction year put the oldest time they can be purchased and i clearly said that su-22 was newer than all our planes you are the one who mistakenly mixing technology with wear and tear due to old age . i don't comment on this anymore and i don't care let you think you are correct you who don't knew anything about wear and tear and technology


again the other people can decide 
and actually Daesh tried to infiltrate our border and we engaged them inside our border and if you go and search old thread of iran section you will find a thread about it. and again its not duty of air-force to engage them its army aviation and IRGC aviation duty to do so, how hard it is to understand


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly you are another level here . the introduction year put the oldest time they can be purchased and i clearly said that su-22 was newer than all our planes you are the one who mistakenly mixing technology with wear and tear due to old age . i don't comment on this anymore and i don't care let you think you are correct you who don't knew anything about wear and tear and technology
> 
> 
> again the other people can decide
> and actually Daesh tried to infiltrate our border and we engaged them inside our border and if you go and search old thread of iran section you will find a thread about it. and again its not duty of air-force to engage them its army aviation and IRGC aviation duty to do so, how hard it is to understand



Youre the one who claimed that airframe age trumps technology and design! Thats all on you! You can run away if you wish. 

Are you serious? Iran Army Aviation is not for attack, its for transporting troops. And yes we sent our boys to fight, with hardly any air cover. It would have been way more effective if we had an airforce that could take out these targets and daesh hideouts, much like Russians did in Syria, to AVOID them to get to our border. So glad ignoramuses like you don't control our Military planning...or do they? Hmmmm


----------



## TheImmortal

Another dinosaur bites the dust. Iran has lost quite a few fighter jets this year. Looks like maintaining these fighters is getting more and more difficult 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571567779597139972


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

TheImmortal said:


> Another dinosaur bites the dust. Iran has lost quite a few fighter jets this year. Looks like maintaining these fighters is getting more and more difficult
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571567779597139972



Yeah you're a bit late with this news, Hack gave us this update and concluded that all Russian jets are not fit for purchase i.e. because an old Su-22 crashed we shouldn't buy Su-35. Alhamdulillah the pilot is safe and maneuvered safely!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> to be honest id be worried about the e-warfare here .those su-35 can datalink with each other , while those F-14+Kowsar +karrar also can datalink with each other . i don't knew how good that AWG-9 act against E-Warfare suit of Su-35 but my strategy would be as soon as i found those su-35 put Kowsars between F-14s .



AWG-9 of F-14AM as per Key-aero has 834 new parts+ciruits and a new Antenna. Search range is 350 KM while track is 200 KM. I would assume its on APG-71 level of F-14D. 



Hack-Hook said:


> then try to made those karrar fly as low as possible and not pointed toward the su 35 but lateral ward then have them fire their missiles toward the su-35 in hope they get 1 or 2 of them . then use the data from 5 linked f-14 to make a solution for firing fakour at half its range toward the su-35 . the dutuy of those kowsar would be to use their jamming capabilities to reduce the effectiveness of those f-35 radar. by the way after firing those karrar missiles toward su-35s i may be tempted to use them as suicide drone and try to attack su-35 with them




SU-35S will use its in-built ECM jamming to save itself from AWG-9+Fakour but to do that it will have to stay in azimuth of AWG-9+ of F-14AM. Thus, allowing the F-14AM to track 10-15 m2 RCS airframe of Flanking and fire 10-12 Fakour-90 from max range (150 KM) and gain altitude for SARH illumination. Now SU-35 will have to get closer to use their own R-77-1 (100 KM) all the while also dodging, jamming, and chaffing Fakour-90s. Or they can flank out and spread. 

While this is happening and SU-35 are busy jamming F-14AM or saving themselves from some 10-12 incoming Fakour-90 .... 2 x Kowsar-I can lead the charge with 2x Karrar from Flanks using terrain masking, suddenly popping up around front most Flankers within WVR range to carry on ECM+WVR attack with Azarakhsh (10 Missiles). IRBIS-E will have a very hard time tracking a Karrar or Kowsar from distance in terrain masking. Sukhois will shoot Kowsars and Karrars but will themselves be shot down by Fakours-90.

My prediction for Losses

3 x SU-35S 

x 

1 x F-14AM 
1-2 x Kowsar 
2 x Karrar 

The situation changes entirely if Kowsar gets a PL-12 or PL-15 like BVR missile. Then charge can be lead by suicidal Karrars each carrying WVR missiles while F-14AM can launch SARH BVR attack from higher altitude while Kowsar can launch ARH BVR attack from terrain masking. Sukhois will have no chance but to retreat from arena.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## thesaint

Purchasing SU-35 or any other jets & developing domestic fighter jets are not mutually exclusive, both can be done in parallel. Iran has enough money to support both if they decide. Iran's total GDP is greater than all it's neighbors and their per capita GDP is better than many countries despite sanctions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

thesaint said:


> Purchasing SU-35 or any other jets & developing domestic fighter jets are not mutually exclusive, both can be done in parallel. Iran has enough money to support both if they decide. Iran's total GDP is greater than all it's neighbors and their per capita GDP is better than many countries despite sanctions.



If the funds are there of course! This is what I'm trying to say instead of put all our eggs in one basket. Does that mean we're both Russian agents now?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre the one who claimed that airframe age trumps technology and design! Thats all on you! You can run away if you wish.


you are the one that can understand we are talking about a bolt break , a blade dislocate , fuel leak and..... when something become old it more likely to find fault and stop working and has nothing to do wit how advance it is .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Are you serious? Iran Army Aviation is not for attack, its for transporting troops. And yes we sent our boys to fight, with hardly any air cover. It would have been way more effective if we had an airforce that could take out these targets and daesh hideouts, much like Russians did in Syria, to AVOID them to get to our border. So glad ignoramuses like you don't control our Military planning...or do they? Hmmmm


you yourself asked for it

hail new Iranian transport helicopter
AH-1J





hail Iran new Transport helicopter Toofan




hail Iran new transport helicopter Shahed-216




hail Iran bell-214 with no ground attack capability

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

thesaint said:


> Purchasing SU-35 or any other jets & developing domestic fighter jets are not mutually exclusive, both can be done in parallel. Iran has enough money to support both if they decide. Iran's total GDP is greater than all it's neighbors and their per capita GDP is better than many countries despite sanctions.



SU-35 purchase is not related to the local fighter program because categories are different. SU-35S is a heavy fighter with a large MTOW. Iranian local fighter program revolves around light small fighters. 

If you ask me, both will happen simultaneously if another reformist government does not return to Tehran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> you are the one that can understand we are talking about a bolt break , a blade dislocate , fuel leak and..... when something become old it more likely to find fault and stop working and has nothing to do wit how advance it is .
> 
> you yourself asked for it
> 
> hail new Iranian transport helicopter
> AH-1J
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran new Transport helicopter Toofan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran new transport helicopter Shahed-216
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran bell-214 with no ground attack capability
> 
> 
> 
> Looks really good is that built from the ground up or heavily upgraded but either way does look good

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yeah you're a bit late with this news, Hack gave us this update and concluded that all Russian jets are not fit for purchase i.e. because an old Su-22 crashed we shouldn't buy Su-35. Alhamdulillah the pilot is safe and maneuvered safely!


lol , the list i made of the airplane that need retired right now was F-5 , Su-22, J-7, F1 only one russian airplane and as i recall in that post i made no mention on any russian plan worth or not worth buying . all is in your mind

i made this post and 


Hack-Hook said:


> when i say they must retire the circus airplanes and use the money that will be saved on their maintenance by doing so on kowsar development , you guys say I'm traitor .
> one of the su-22 crashed .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> خبرگزاری فارس - وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند سوخو 22 سپاه در هرمزگان
> 
> 
> روابط عمومی نیروی هوافضای سپاه از وقوع سانحه برای یک فروند هواپیمای سوخو ۲۲ این نیرو به دلیل نقص فنی در هرمزگان خبر داد.
> 
> 
> 
> www.farsnews.ir



and somebody like an insecure child made this post


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Su-22 is very old, but while were at it here are some crashes involving newer Western and Chinese jets in Iran:
> 
> F-4:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost - Flight Journal
> 
> 
> Aviation History | History of Flight | Aviation History Articles, Warbirds, Bombers, Trainers, Pilots | Iranian F-4 Crashes, Crew Lost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.flightjournal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Air Force Just Lost a Fighter Jet: U.S. Made F-4 Phantom Just Went Down
> 
> 
> Here is what we know, so far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalinterest.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-14:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Fighter Jet Crashes after Engine Fails, Pilots Survive
> 
> 
> An Iranian fighter plane crashed near the central city of Isfahan on Saturday after its engine failed, but both pilots survived, media reported. The pilots were taken to a local hospital, the official IRNA news agency said. It said there was a techni
> 
> 
> 
> 
> english.aawsat.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Iran Fighter Crash Kills both Crew
> 
> 
> An Iranian U.S.-manufactured F-14 fighter jet crashed early on Thursday minutes after takeoff killing both crew, the Fars news agency reported. "The pilot and the co-pilot of an F-14 plane that crashed this morning have been martyred," the news...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.naharnet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-7:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two Pilots Dead As Iranian Fighter Jet Crashes During Training Mission
> 
> 
> Two Iranian Air Force pilots were killed when their F-7 fighter jet crashed during a training mission near the city of Naeen in central Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rferl.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian fighter jet crashes near school in Tabriz, killing three people
> 
> 
> Two pilots, one civilian on the ground killed in accident; decades of sanctions make Iran's aging fleet hard to maintain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timesofisrael.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran TV: 'Technical problem' on fighter jet kills 2 pilots
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — An Iranian fighter jet on Tuesday developed a “technical problem” that killed both of the aircraft's pilots, state TV reported. The report said the incident happened in the country’s southwest, in the city of Dezful, 444 kilometers (270 miles) from the capital, Tehran and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are aircraft that are modded and looked after by Iran, but they crash as well. So much for your western jets.


and you have the audacity to make such base less claim 
by the way Russian airplane are worthless for us as their radars and e-warfare system are old and outdated . they built a good airplane called Mig-35 and then they went and dumbed it down and made it useless against modern aircraft by downgrading its RADAR


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> make it one sit airplane , redesign the casing of those equipment , there be many room and if you use a nonafterburning engine equal in size of ws-13 then you actually can save another 80cm there , let add another 1m to that for back cabin and you have 1.85cm of free space you can install that in its upper front section , use the rest for other things



Kowsar-I already has an F-5E airframe version too. 

Why all these gymnastics when we do know that airframe redesign is a must because of the different weight distribution of new engine? 



Hack-Hook said:


> i say why build it larger , whats the problem if it remain a light fighter , if they use the 2/3rd of back cabin for fuel , that would be more than 1200 liter of fuel or more than all three external fuel tank an f-5 can carry , another 1/3rd of the back cabin space can be used for other equipment and sensor
> also there is another part that can be removed from kowsar and its space put to better use and that is its cannon . so i believe there is enough room if we want.
> 
> 
> by the way i made small mistake two owj produce 44kn with after burner not 36kn but its still mean an non after-burning ws-13 like engine produce 30% more trust than two after-burning OWJ



You did not answer my question. To drag along a 9-10 ton empty weight airframe to 1.4 Mach, (French Rafale) at supercruise, you need a 22K lbf thrust with 6-7:1 T/W ratio dry. 

Kowsar-I's current empty weight is 4.4 tons. If they enlarge the airframe, install a larger radar, IRST, refueling probe, twin VS etc then the weight might increase to 6-7 tons empty. Even if you use AL-31 equivalent the dry thrust will be 19K lbs with a T/W ratio of 4.9:1. I am afraid such a plane will barely be able to hit 1.6 Mach with a climb rate of ~40,000 feet/min. Not bad but not very good either.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> you are the one that can understand we are talking about a bolt break , a blade dislocate , fuel leak and..... when something become old it more likely to find fault and stop working and has nothing to do wit how advance it is .
> 
> you yourself asked for it
> 
> hail new Iranian transport helicopter
> AH-1J
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran new Transport helicopter Toofan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran new transport helicopter Shahed-216
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hail Iran bell-214 with no ground attack capability



Reliability is secondary when it is 10 times more likely to get blown out of the skies. Besides 5-10 years difference in airframe age is negligible in terms of how well Iran keeps these things in sky. Don't let these sad news of crashes take away of how incredibly impressive that Iran has managed to get them operational this far. Regardless su-22 is older technology to F-14. End of discussion!

Lol I never said Iran doesnt make helicopters, I said Iran army aviation is not an air attack outfit. Only our AIRFORCE, emphasis on the word FORCE, can do the job, which they didnt in the case of Daesh, or any other border skirmishes we have had! Besides, I still dont think our bells are as good as an American made one, because we dont have 24/7 technical support from Bell any more. Unlike if we were to purchase Russian choppers! But that's a different argument.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> SU-35S will use its in-built ECM jamming to save itself from AWG-9+Fakour but to do that it will have to stay in azimuth of AWG-9+ of F-14AM. Thus, allowing the F-14AM to track 10-15 m2 RCS airframe of Flanking and fire 10-12 Fakour-90 from max range (150 KM) and gain altitude for SARH illumination. Now SU-35 will have to get closer to use their own R-77-1 (100 KM) all the while also dodging, jamming, and chaffing Fakour-90s. Or they can flank out and spread.


I don't use missiles at max range , they loose their kinetic power , in fact i'd be glad if they do it at max range , iy just made it easier evade them or just turn back and let missile fall out of sky or it make several course adjustment and loose all its kinetic power


drmeson said:


> While this is happening and SU-35 are busy jamming F-14AM or saving themselves from some 10-12 incoming Fakour-90 .... 2 x Kowsar-I can lead the charge with 2x Karrar from Flanks using terrain masking, suddenly popping up around front most Flankers within WVR range to carry on ECM+WVR attack with Azarakhsh (10 Missiles). IRBIS-E will have a very hard time tracking a Karrar or Kowsar from distance in terrain masking. Sukhois will shoot Kowsars and Karrars but will themselves be shot down by Fakours-90.


why not use kowsar e-warfare ability to make effectiveness of those ibris-E lower while we keep them back with the f-14s and let Karrar do the attack while flying as low as possible . and by the way the number of karrar in your scenario is a little low, the wingman is supposed to be more than the master aircraft not less than them


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> lol , the list i made of the airplane that need retired right now was F-5 , Su-22, J-7, F1 only one russian airplane and as i recall in that post i made no mention on any russian plan worth or not worth buying . all is in your mind
> 
> i made this post and
> 
> 
> and somebody like an insecure child made this post
> 
> and you have the audacity to make such base less claim
> by the way Russian airplane are worthless for us as their radars and e-warfare system are old and outdated . they built a good airplane called Mig-35 and then they went and dumbed it down and made it useless against modern aircraft by downgrading its RADAR


Can I make @Hack-Hook ignore people because all they want is attention I’m going to listen @Stryker1982 hes just being hostile to be hostile And as soon as I post this he will come at me again just going to ignore people this site should be to just enjoy ideas does anyone believe the Iranian military is making notes on this site great ideas or not they have their own plans

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> lol , the list i made of the airplane that need retired right now was F-5 , Su-22, J-7, F1 only one russian airplane and as i recall in that post i made no mention on any russian plan worth or not worth buying . all is in your mind
> 
> i made this post and
> 
> 
> and somebody like an insecure child made this post
> 
> and you have the audacity to make such base less claim
> by the way Russian airplane are worthless for us as their radars and e-warfare system are old and outdated . they built a good airplane called Mig-35 and then they went and dumbed it down and made it useless against modern aircraft by downgrading its RADAR



I called you a traitor because of your refusal to buy available Russian jets that are more modern, reliable, and proven than Kowar or whatever we have! So you agree F-14, F-5, F4 etc are all circus as well? And why can't that money be used towards purchasing new jets? This is why we're here arguing the toss. 

Russian jet's are quiter with their restrictive datalink, and have better radar systems than what we have. Again it is the best we can get our hands on! Something you can't get through your head!

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> lol , the list i made of the airplane that need retired right now was F-5 , Su-22, J-7, F1 only one russian airplane and as i recall in that post i made no mention on any russian plan worth or not worth buying . all is in your mind
> 
> i made this post and
> 
> 
> and somebody like an insecure child made this post
> 
> and you have the audacity to make such base less claim
> by the way Russian airplane are worthless for us as their radars and e-warfare system are old and outdated . they built a good airplane called Mig-35 and then they went and dumbed it down and made it useless against modern aircraft by downgrading its RADAR



With following factors

- $$
- Local infrastruture
- IRIAF experience

the best airplane to be procured from Russia is in fact MIG-29M/MIG-35.

Russian electronics have always been step below western ones. F-15 vs Su-27, F-16 vs MIG-29, F-14 vs MIG-31. Russian radars, and electronics have always been lesser in capability. It makes sense too Russia never had the diversified manpower that west had nor it had the big corps money at its disposal. It was like one nation taking on two continents.

Saying that Golden opportunity for Iran right now is that Russia needs us and we can have TOT's and purchases. I say leadership should go for 24+66 = 88 x SU-35S for 10 Billion USD. These are not some great A2A fighters, they have huge RCS, less capable radars but they are ... deterrence that IRIAF currently lacks. A Fleet made of 300 fighters, F-14AM, MIG-29M, Kowsar-I/II, SU-35S, 300 x MALE UCAVS is enough to deal with regional foes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> Can I make @Hack-Hook ignore people because all they want is attention I’m going to listen @Stryker1982 hes just being hostile to be hostile And as soon as I post this he will come at me again just going to ignore people this site should be to just enjoy ideas does anyone believe the Iranian military is making notes on this site great ideas or not they have their own plans



No you can't tell grown adults who they can and cant speak to! I think youre the one who wants attention because nobody here was talking to you. Sometimes adults get heated and passionate! I know you love seeing Iranians struggle but you don't have to get involved! There is an ignore button if I'm being too much!


----------



## drmeson

shadihassan28 said:


> Can I make @Hack-Hook ignore people because all they want is attention I’m going to listen @Stryker1982 hes just being hostile to be hostile And as soon as I post this he will come at me again just going to ignore people this site should be to just enjoy ideas does anyone believe the Iranian military is making notes on this site great ideas or not they have their own plans



chill buddy, its the internet. 

You can post whatever you want on topic and if someone misbehaves, report to mods.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> I don't use missiles at max range , they loose their kinetic power , in fact i'd be glad if they do it at max range , iy just made it easier evade them or just turn back and let missile fall out of sky or it make several course adjustment and loose all its kinetic power



If they do that, the chase planes in terrain masking trajectory like Kowsar-I +Karrar can easily track them from the rear and fire IR seekers at them from 40 KM. 



Hack-Hook said:


> why not use kowsar e-warfare ability to make effectiveness of those ibris-E lower while we keep them back with the f-14s and let Karrar do the attack while flying as low as possible.



By flying F-14AM low you are underutilizing the speed and threat of Fakour-90. Also if the terrain is mountainous the SARH illumination can only be one from high altitude. Which is why F-14AM needs to be high up. IRIAF used these tactics in the war too. 

Kowsar-I can jam IRBIS-E and track SU-35 from terrain masking trajectory as well. Remember Su-35 has a RCS of 10-15 m2 so Grifo-346 is tracking it at 93 KM from where it can launch an ECCM attack at it while IRBIS-E has a track range of 100 KM for a F-5 airframe (~3 m2) so both will track eachother around same time except that SU-35S are being fired upon by 10-12 Fakour-90. 

This scenario tells us why the world moved towards smaller low RCS planes with the longest possible radar track ranges and BVR missiles. F-18E/F, F-16V, EF-2000, JAS-39E, Rafale, J-10C ... no professional Airforce wants huge RCS trucks from 1970s-80s anymore. We will hit a jackpot too if Kowsar-II is developed with <1 m2 RCS.



Hack-Hook said:


> and by the way the number of karrar in your scenario is a little low, the wingman is supposed to be more than the master aircraft not less than them



I was making things more spicy. Theoretically, we can get 10 x Karrars launched with 2 x Azarakhsh WVR on each.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Kowsar-I already has an F-5E airframe version too.
> 
> Why all these gymnastics when we do know that airframe redesign is a must because of the different weight distribution of new engine?


the f5-E air-frame version is shorter than f5-F version , what i mean is get f5-F version airframe and make it single sit in kowsar-2


drmeson said:


> You did not answer my question. To drag along a 9-10 ton empty weight airframe to 1.4 Mach, (French Rafale) at supercruise, you need a 22K lbf thrust with 6-7:1 T/W ratio dry.


depend on the design of the air-frame a JAS-39 can super-cruise up to 1.2mach with two missile at 54kn and around 9 ton of weight (Airplane , missiles and fuel) Rafale needed that power because they test it with 4 missile and one drop tank
so if jas-39 can do that why not f-5 which is famous for its fast cruise speed

by the way my question is if we don't change F-5F exterior design , remove back sit and use it for fuel and the equipment we want .and add 30% to the thrust , why it cant fly at mach 1.9 instead 1.6 ?


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> By flying F-14AM low you are underutilizing the speed and threat of Fakour-90. Also if the terrain is mountainous the SARH illumination can only be one from high altitude. Which is why F-14AM needs to be high up. IRIAF used these tactics in the war too.


no let kowsar and F-14 fly high but always stay at limit range of Su-35 engagement windows , and use their e-warfare to keep those su-35 busy , meanwhile send those Karrar toward the su-35 at lowest possible altitude . and let them do the first strike . 


drmeson said:


> Kowsar-I can jam IRBIS-E and track SU-35 from terrain masking trajectory as well. Remember Su-35 has a RCS of 10-15 m2 so Grifo-346 is tracking it at 93 KM from where it can launch an ECCM attack at it while IRBIS-E has a track range of 100 KM for a F-5 airframe (~3 m2) so both will track eachother around same time except that SU-35S are being fired upon by 10-12 Fakour-90.


i say keep those Fakour-90 or fire 1-2 just jam those IBRIS-E the best you can and let the karrar surprise them


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> the f5-E air-frame version is shorter than f5-F version , what i mean is get f5-F version airframe and make it single sit in kowsar-2



I think the length change is because of nose section not the fuselage. Even if you remove the back seat, the space made will become a bone of contention between: 

- IRST, Jammers
- Fuel
-Afterburner Turbofan 




Hack-Hook said:


> depend on the design of the air-frame a JAS-39 can super-cruise up to 1.2mach with two missile at 54kn and around 9 ton of weight (Airplane , missiles and fuel) Rafale needed that power because they test it with 4 missile and one drop tank
> so if jas-39 can do that why not f-5 which is famous for its fast cruise speed



JAS-39 low performance supercruise is the prime example of what I was saying before. The plane's empty weight is 6.5 tons which is what Kowsar-II will be around as well. The Volvo RM12 has barely 5:1 T/W (dry) so the supercruise is low rated barely pushing the aircraft to 1.4 mach. While what you are targetting is a 1.8 Mach with a 50K feet/min climb, high turn rate etc for ~6.5 tons airframe with AL-31 like turbofan which has same T/W of ~5:1




Hack-Hook said:


> by the way my question is if we don't change F-5F exterior design , remove back sit and use it for fuel and the equipment we want .and add 30% to the thrust , why it cant fly at mach 1.9 instead 1.6 ?



First calculate the empty weight of this design and I will tell you why


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> First calculate the empty weight of this design and I will tell you why


let say we don't touch the aerodynamic and it be roughly the same weight and for newer e-warfare let add 100kg and another 900kg of more internal fuel , but reduce at least two hundred to 3 hundred by removing the back cabin .
by the way does we lack length in the nose of f-5 or its actually the width of the nose that make the problem , i say remove the cannon and its ammo , it both reduce weight and make more room for the radar by this we probably can save 100kg by removing cannon, ammo and old radar and install a new one about engine weight two J-85 weight about 620kg rd-33 weight about 1ton , remove its afterburner , it probably weight about 700-750kg that mean adding 100-150kg to the final weight
so my guess is right now kowsar with fuel weight around 7100 the new design will be 7700-7900 kg for JAS-39 that weight is around 9100kg


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

@Mr Iran Eye to'am faghad beshin oonja be rishe ma bekhand.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> 7700-7900 kg for JAS-39 that weight is around 9100kg



Right and the T/W ratio of Volvo for Grippen is 5:1 which gives it barely 1.2 Mach for 2x missiles. 

To reach 1.8 mach and 50K feet/min climb, Kowsar-II weighing 8 tons (your calculations) will need a Turbofan with atleast 18,000-20,000 lbf dry thrust and a T/W ratio of 6.5-7:1. 

Here is my question, is OWJ capable of churning out such a monster engine because if they can, then it means they are already beating Russian AL-31F. 

Supercruise is a benefit but which modern fighter in the entire world leaves out afterburner just because they can supercruise? Rafale has the highest speed of 1.5 Mach without afterburner yet designers are not sacrificing the afterburner.


----------



## drmeson

@Mr Iran Eye is a troll but who cares

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I think Peed must be in severe depression when he read the most ridiculous things here than the product forum. With the addition of new arrival as stupid as the ancients, this section and the others are made sad to see. I have never seen so many ridiculous analyzes in 10 years. It is high time that Iriaf really shows us some surprises

Hey Drmeson, I have been interested in the Iranian army for over 10 years and I know very much about the subject. Before you arrive on the forum, I already defended the Jet Kowsar. I have hundreds of photos, I look a lot and continue. Like the others you slip, I always maintain my predictions and I have not said everything here. Peed did not say everything here, he kept certain things for him.

I do not always agree with Amir Patriot but he should come more often because he better than certain people here. He must see that it skies solid here. I am sure that many people who read this forum without ever intervening must see the forfeiture of the analyzes made here by most of you

This forum was better a few years ago

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## drmeson

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I think Peed must be in severe depression when he read the most ridiculous things here than the product forum. With the addition of new arrival as stupid as the ancients, this section and the others are made sad to see. I have never seen so many ridiculous analyzes in 10 years. It is high time that Iriaf really shows us some surprises
> 
> Hey Drmeson, I have been interested in the Iranian army for over 10 years and I know very much about the subject. Before you arrive on the forum, I already defended the Jet Kowsar. I have hundreds of photos, I look a lot and continue. Like the others you slip, I always maintain my predictions and I have not said everything here. Peed did not say everything here, he kept certain things for him.
> 
> I do not always agree with Amir Patriot but he should come more often because he better than certain people here. He must see that it skies solid here. I am sure that many people who read this forum without ever intervening must see the forfeiture of the analyzes made here by most of you
> 
> This forum was better a few years ago



Suck my "F-4SM", you funny troll


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Mr Iran Eye said:


> With the addition of new arrival as stupid as the ancients, this
> This forum was better a few years ago



I am one of the ancients, thats why, I used to be called "The Iranian" back in IMF days! I used to argue with Shirazi all the time! Wonder what happened to him! I never thought to join this forum until after IMF closed down, because us IMF guys always looked down on here as some liberal pro-west s-hole!


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> @Mr Iran Eye is a troll but who cares



Been saying this for a long time.

If he isn’t a troll he is a delusional fanboy that puts even the worst Pakistani fanboy to shame.


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571839214559592450

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571839214559592450



The F14 loss is the only one that really hurts. 

F-7 was garbage anyway. SU-22’s sort of hurt from a bombing role standpoint and CM launcher.


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Been saying this for a long time.
> 
> If he isn’t a troll he is a delusional fanboy that puts even the worst Pakistani fanboy to shame.



Our section is infested with no-knowledge trolls and online tough teens. Repeat of IDF and IMF 



TheImmortal said:


> F-7 was garbage anyway. SU-22’s sort of hurt from a bombing role standpoint and CM launcher.



Earlier we get rid of these prop "fighters" like F-7N, Mirage-F1E/EQ, F-5E/F the better.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

drmeson said:


> Our section is infested with no-knowledge trolls and online tough teens. Repeat of IDF and IMF



IMF wasnt that bad, and there were plenty of arguing and toxicity here as well. The good thing about having this place and IMF together was everyone could stay in their own circle. Sadly IMF got trolled and attacked by bots because of its largly pro-IRI membership. I hope Izirbat is doing okay.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Suck my "F-4SM", you funny troll



Drmeson still powder in the nose lol

The f-4 SM is a reality, a real reality, the truth. Not observant enough, not intelligent enough to understand him. Time is on my side. You still don't know why, they redid the cell of the f-4. Continue your big delirium on the Su-35, you are amazing to read.

I am waiting for a series of announcements to ridicule you and I know that there are people who are attentive to my predictions. By the way, Iran is working on a new drone that mixes cruise missile and drone. Unique in the world in its kind. And what about the red drone .... To be continued

F4 Sm the reality of the real


----------



## husseinibnali

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Drmeson still powder in the nose lol
> 
> The f-4 SM is a reality, a real reality, the truth. Not observant enough, not intelligent enough to understand him. Time is on my side. You still don't know why, they redid the cell of the f-4. Continue your big delirium on the Su-35, you are amazing to read.
> 
> I am waiting for a series of announcements to ridicule you and I know that there are people who are attentive to my predictions. By the way, Iran is working on a new drone that mixes cruise missile and drone. Unique in the world in its kind. And what about the red drone .... To be continued
> 
> F4 Sm the reality of the real


What’s with the F4 Sm you mentioned many times?
What’s so special about it?

Cruise missiles and drones at the same time?
I think you mean cruise missile that can change its target and mission and route during flight and that’s not a new thing in the world.

And about the red drone,yes we saw it in an exhibition recently but nobody knows if it has any unique features


----------



## Stryker1982

husseinibnali said:


> Cruise missiles and drones at the same time?
> I think you mean cruise missile that can change its target and mission during flight and that’s not a new thing in the world.


Basically referring to Karrar which is a cruise missile acting as a drone, which we already have.

As for building a new version of Karrar that wouldn't really be a shock to anyone. We've already seen the concept of Sejil and Mobin drones/CMs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Nostradamus—make a prediction vague enough. Then what it comes true say that’s what you were claiming all along.

Tarot card readers, mediums, and psychics use the same strategy. 

No one here has secret info let’s be real.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

people who were dreamt of egyptian Su-35 accept my sincere condulences 




__





Military Watch Magazine







militarywatchmagazine.com


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> people who were dreamt of egyptian Su-35 accept my sincere condulences
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Military Watch Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> militarywatchmagazine.com



They weren’t Egyptian SU-35’s. No where in that article does it say they were. In fact article is a little bit late in saying Egypt MAY cancel their order. They already did, did they not?

_Notable improvements over the Su-27 include new far more powerful engines with thrust vectoring capabilities, a much extended endurance, over quadruple the detection range against aircraft, integration of the Irbis-E phased array radar and twin AESA radars in its wing roots, a high composite airframe and entirely new avionics providing compatibility with a range of new weapons._

Seems like a fighter jet worth adding even 24 of them.

Again I will reserve judgment till they actually land in Iran. I already have gone on record supporting SU-35S purchase if possible.

Wether Iran does it or Russia allows it who knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> They weren’t Egyptian SU-35’s. No where in that article does it say they were. In fact article is a little bit late in saying Egypt MAY cancel their order. They already did, did they not?
> 
> _Notable improvements over the Su-27 include new far more powerful engines with thrust vectoring capabilities, a much extended endurance, over quadruple the detection range against aircraft, integration of the Irbis-E phased array radar and twin AESA radars in its wing roots, a high composite airframe and entirely new avionics providing compatibility with a range of new weapons._
> 
> Seems like a fighter jet worth adding even 24 of them.
> 
> Again I will reserve judgment till they actually land in Iran. I already have gone on record supporting SU-35S purchase if possible.
> 
> Wether Iran does it or Russia allows it who knows.


Su-35 certainly don't have AESA radar at the root of the wings , the writer mixed su-57 with su-35


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Su-35 certainly don't have AESA radar at the root of the wings , the writer mixed su-57 with su-35



_Unlike the Irbis-E which uses both electronic and mechanical scanning, these two sensors *embedded in the its wings’ *leading edged are Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars. The twin N036B-1-01 L-band radars provide increased angular coverage, and are ideal for tracking stealth targets and for electronic warfare. AESA radars are not only more powerful than passively scanned array designs, but are also much more difficult to jam. The L-band operates in the 1.0 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz region of the radio spectrum with wavelengths of 15-30 cm, which is much longer than X-band radars of 8-12 Ghz frequency. These long wave radars are considered much more capable of detecting stealth aircraft, as most stealth fighters are optimised to evade X-band radar waves._











__





Military Watch Magazine







militarywatchmagazine.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> Su-35 certainly don't have AESA radar at the root of the wings , the writer mixed su-57 with su-35



This is false since Russia has AESA technology via Phazotron's Zukh-AE which was upgraded on Indian Su-30MKI. It is said that it isnt as good as US technology, which leads me to believe the AESA on Kowsar is also subpar. No point in putting something subpar on their main Su-35 fleet, because of cost, but is something we will see in the future.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> _Unlike the Irbis-E which uses both electronic and mechanical scanning, these two sensors *embedded in the its wings’ *leading edged are Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars. The twin N036B-1-01 L-band radars provide increased angular coverage, and are ideal for tracking stealth targets and for electronic warfare. AESA radars are not only more powerful than passively scanned array designs, but are also much more difficult to jam. The L-band operates in the 1.0 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz region of the radio spectrum with wavelengths of 15-30 cm, which is much longer than X-band radars of 8-12 Ghz frequency. These long wave radars are considered much more capable of detecting stealth aircraft, as most stealth fighters are optimised to evade X-band radar waves._
> 
> View attachment 880940
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Military Watch Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> militarywatchmagazine.com


thats part of Byelka radar it consist of N036 at the nose of the airplane and two N036L-1-01 on the side of the forward body and two N036B-1-01 at the front of the wing .
as far as im aware only 6 produced and they are used in Su-57 . if they also added it to Su-35 its news to me



Daylamite Warrior said:


> This is false since Russia has AESA technology via Phazotron's Zukh-AE which was upgraded on Indian Su-30MKI. It is said that it isnt as good as US technology, which leads me to believe the AESA on Kowsar is also subpar. No point in putting something subpar on their main Su-35 fleet, because of cost, but is something we will see in the future.


first kowsar don't have AESA .the radar is based on Grifo-346
second that radar was built for mig-29
third they had to cabcel AESA radar for Mig-35 because they were not able to produce it and no Su-35 uses Ibris-E which is PESA


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> thats part of Byelka radar it consist of N036 at the nose of the airplane and two N036L-1-01 on the side of the forward body and two N036B-1-01 at the front of the wing .
> as far as im aware only 6 produced and they are used in Su-57 . if they also added it to Su-35 its news to me



It’s always had the two side AESAs (at least in the S variant). I tried to tell you guys and posted pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> Su-35 certainly don't have AESA radar at the root of the wings , the writer mixed su-57 with su-35


Ausairpowers Carlo Kopp wrote about it waaay back in 2009
*http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-06.html*
its kind of weird how everyone seems to have forgotten about this as it was publicly unveiled back at MAKS 2009

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Sineva said:


> Ausairpowers Carlo Kopp wrote about it waaay back in 2009
> *http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-06.html*
> its kind of weird how everyone seems to have forgotten about this as it was publicly unveiled back at MAKS 2009



So much gibberish written over pages and pages of this thread during recent months about the alleged "uselessness" of the Su-35S's radar and electronics, about it lacking AESA technology, about it being a piece of trash, bla bla bla. Turns out reality's a pretty different story, isn'it.

Lesson for neutral readers to take the "muh, Russian equipment so much inferior to western equivalents" narrative with a dose of salt whenever they're confronted with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> thats part of Byelka radar it consist of N036 at the nose of the airplane and two N036L-1-01 on the side of the forward body and two N036B-1-01 at the front of the wing .
> as far as im aware only 6 produced and they are used in Su-57 . if they also added it to Su-35 its news to me
> 
> 
> first kowsar don't have AESA .the radar is based on Grifo-346
> second that radar was built for mig-29
> third they had to cabcel AESA radar for Mig-35 because they were not able to produce it and no Su-35 uses Ibris-E which is PESA



But Iran has AESA technology which they could use but they dont on any of their planes. Why? And why are you bringing up Mig-35? 

So, Russian AESA are being used for Indian Su-30MKI right now because "they are not able to produce it"?! Did they grow on trees? The evidence is that Russia does have AESA and can be used for Su-35. So you were lying/misinformed this whole time and now its exposed. Learn from it!


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> It’s always had the two side AESAs (at least in the S variant). I tried to tell you guys and posted pictures.
> 
> View attachment 880942





Sineva said:


> Ausairpowers Carlo Kopp wrote about it waaay back in 2009
> *http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-06.html*
> its kind of weird how everyone seems to have forgotten about this as it was publicly unveiled back at MAKS 2009





SalarHaqq said:


> So much gibberish written over pages and pages of this thread during recent months about the alleged "uselessness" of the Su-35S's radar and electronics, about it lacking AESA technology, about it being a piece of trash, bla bla bla. Turns out reality's a pretty different story, isn'it.
> 
> Lesson for neutral readers to take the "muh, Russian equipment so much inferior to western equivalents" narrative with a dose of salt whenever they're confronted with it.


one small problem . you don't use L-Band radar for tracking , its X-Band that is favorite in that regard. second have you guys read the article . it says NIIP built such array , it even say it can be put on Su-27 , don't tell me you believe su-27 also have AESA radar .

the option was there since 2011 , but it was not used unless sukhoi - 57, by the way the way russia implemented those units provide higher angle of coverage but , at the expense of range
and look at the number of units here




and compare them with the numbers here 




tell you about the efficiency of radar
and more importantly look at this Su-35s from frontal view




do you see any N036B-1-01 there ? there is no accesspanel in leading edge flaps of su-35s for them in su-57 you see those accesspanels 




let me make a challange outside that poster find me any other photo of su-35 with themand this is how those L-band Radar work








Exposed! Sukhoi Su-57’s X-band N036 Byelka And N036L L Band Radars Are Not What You Think?


Su-57’s “distributed radar” must radiate electromagnetic waves outwards to work, equivalent to a person walking at night with flashlights all over his body, making it easier to be…




www.globaldefensecorp.com




in short if they find anything , its up to Ibris-E to track it


> There are two N036 L-band phased array radars on the movable leading-edge flaps. Their detection range is equivalent to that of the N036 main fire control radar, and the wider-wavelength L-band has a stronger ability to detect targets than the X-band. However, because of the wide wavelength, the L-band radar has low accuracy and can only provide the approximate coordinates of the target.
> 
> N036L can only detect the target’s range and azimuth information as a flap radar but cannot measure the height. In other words, after the N036L radar finds the target, the X-band radar on the nose still needs to search by itself.



also again remain the russia production capability , don't forget they had to dumb down mig-35 radar 


> In addition, the gallium arsenide components of the active phased array radar used by the Su-57 are still produced in South Korea. Not long ago, the exporter Seoul Semiconductor Corporation of South Korea, under pressure from the United States, has announced that it would stop selling high-performance gallium arsenide semiconductor equipment to Russia.
> 
> The export ban will affect the production of the Su-57’s radar and other types of equipment such as Su-35’s radar.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> But Iran has AESA technology which they could use but they dont on any of their planes. Why? And why are you bringing up Mig-35?
> 
> So, Russian AESA are being used for Indian Su-30MKI right now because "they are not able to produce it"?! Did they grow on trees? The evidence is that Russia does have AESA and can be used for Su-35. So you were lying/misinformed this whole time and now its exposed. Learn from it!


india cancelled order for more Su-30mki , they wanted AESA , did they get it? last time i checked they werde still using this one








Bars radar - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




the radar fiasco was one of the reason india ditched sukhoi for rafale and right now india have love intrest with Rafale.

and i bring mig-35 to point out that rusia is not capable to produce enough AESA radar for its jet . and had to cancel the AESA on mig-35 to be able to produce enough T/R mudule for Su-57


----------



## sanel1412

Last 10 days,it is reported that air bridge was been observed,Iranian cargo aircrafts landing near Moscow,from begining of Ukraine war there was unusualy high number of Iranian flights to Russia,in just few months more flights than in years,but last 10 days was even more frequent. There was never better time for Iran to got what it want from Russia,and high chance to get it in exchange for Iranian products. Iran needs temporary solution,there is no chance it can rebuild its airforce for short time,so SU35 would boost significatly Iran defense capabilites. These deals rearly came alone,so it would probably follow with cooperation on other fields,but we will see. I remeber deals with Russia from 2005 or 2006 when Tor was negotiate,they promised bunch of things that never saw light of the day,Russia used many those deals to blackmail west and trade it,but this is different time..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> india cancelled order for more Su-30mki , they wanted AESA , did they get it? last time i checked they werde still using this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bars radar - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the radar fiasco was one of the reason india ditched sukhoi for rafale and right now india have love intrest with Rafale.
> 
> and i bring mig-35 to point out that rusia is not capable to produce enough AESA radar for its jet . and had to cancel the AESA on mig-35 to be able to produce enough T/R mudule for Su-57



Yes they are shifting to western jets due to western pressure and Russian lack of capacity to fulfill domestic and export needs! Not because the technology is not there. Also there is no evidence that Su-30MKI dont have AESA capability. In fact India is trying to make its own AESA for their Su-30s. There is also no evidence that AESA has been cancelled for Mig-35 program:





__





Zhuk-AM AESA radar test phase scheduled for early 2019


Zhuk-AM AESA radar test phase scheduled for early 2019




www.airrecognition.com





The issue is it is on hold because of cost and that Russian PESA is relatively close to AESA capabilities. So this whole BS about Su-35s not having AESA capability is a lie, it's just that Russians are tight fisted with it and rightly so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes they are shifting to western jets due to western pressure and Russian lack of capacity to fulfill domestic and export needs! Not because the technology is not there. Also there is no evidence that Su-30MKI dont have AESA capability. In fact India is trying to make its own AESA for their Su-30s. There is also no evidence that AESA has been cancelled for Mig-35 program:


as you say the technology is there and india trey to make its own , the key is the technology is there but not implemented , and they had to dumb down mig-35 because they could not produce it in numbers as they relied on S. /korea for the componnent and they sanctioned them under usa pressure.

also i don't even remember usa put any pressure on india for not buying reussian equipment , the reason is simple Su-30MKI meet india needs in 90s but situation changed it wont meet their need in 20s and russia for more than 15 years failed to provide india with AESA they wanted and india right now have no AESA of its own they try to build , but who knew when it become ready and they saw what happened in the war with pakistan and said to themselves enough is enough and went with french airplane .


Daylamite Warrior said:


> There is also no evidence that AESA has been cancelled for Mig-35 program:


you and your evidences . the fact it is being shipped and offered with Zhuk-ME is proof enough for me , they don't offer it with Zhuk A/AE anymore



Daylamite Warrior said:


> The issue is it is on hold because of cost and that Russian PESA is relatively close to AESA capabilities.


don't make me laugh


Daylamite Warrior said:


> So this whole BS about Su-35s not having AESA capability is a lie, it's just that Russians are tight fisted with it and rightly so.


do you knew how many Byelka radar they have managed to produce , let me tell, you can count them with fingers of both your hand , now do you want me to tell you how many airplane AESA radar china. USA , Britain or Italy produced till today , you can't count them thats the difference in industrial production capabuility of those countries and russia


----------



## Sineva

SalarHaqq said:


> So much gibberish written over pages and pages of this thread during recent months about the alleged "uselessness" of the Su-35S's radar and electronics, about it lacking AESA technology, about it being a piece of trash, bla bla bla. Turns out reality's a pretty different story, isn'it.
> 
> Lesson for neutral readers to take the "muh, Russian equipment so much inferior to western equivalents" narrative with a dose of salt whenever they're confronted with it.


Ultimately its not like iran really has that much choice to begin with,the west certainly isnt going to supply iran with new 4th gen+ fighters and strike aircraft,and the financial costs of iran trying to develop a heavyweight fighter on its own would be ruinous,not to mention a shocking waste of resources that would be better spent on other weapons systems.
This is potentially the first serious opportunity that iran has had in the last 30-40 years to rebuild and modernise the airforce for the next 20+ years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> let me make a challange outside that poster find me any other photo of su-35 with them


Sure,here you go....













Unless of course this is something else that just happens to be in the exact same place.

Now I dont know if every su35 has this system fitted,but its clear that some of them certainly do,at least judging by the pics out there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Sure,here you go....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless of course this is something else that just happens to be in the exact same place.
> 
> Now I dont know if every su35 has this system fitted,but its clear that some of them certainly do,at least judging by the pics out there.


well let say it like this thats The Type 4283MP IFF interrogator has an active electronic scanning array (AESA) located along the wing leading edges.. it can't be used for tracking targets


----------



## jauk

Good if true:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572209245734436865

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Maybe the airforce has finally [belatedly] decided to get itself a piece of the [aero-ballistic] missile pie.
God knows,its better late than never.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Maybe the airforce has finally [belatedly] decided to get itself a piece of the [aero-ballistic] missile pie.
> God knows,its better late than never.


you think those tanks are also belong to airforce ?
since when we mark our missiles with hand ? more like a prank


----------



## BigMelatonin

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Russian lack of capacity to fulfill domestic and export needs! Not because the technology is not there.


Yes exactly, it's not a question of whether can make an AESA radar at all but whether they can actually make them in numbers to deliver to a potential buyer. How many Byelka radars/Su-57s have been produced? 6? We're not dealing with the Soviet Union anymore, Russia is putting rubber blocks instead of explosives in their tanks in Ukraine. How do you expect them to deliver ~60 fighters to Iran when they aren't even meeting domestic demand? Are they going to sell us RuAF stocks while they're at war?


But regardless why are people comparing wing root AESA with nose-mounted radar? You've got maybe a fraction of the TRMs that a full nose-mounted radar would have. It's there to maybe pick up something in the aircraft's "peripheral vision," not to track targets, that's the job of the Irbis-E.



jauk said:


> Good if true:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572209245734436865


Not shocking, like I've been saying, these aircraft do not meet Iran's needs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

BigMelatonin said:


> Yes exactly, it's not a question of whether can make an AESA radar at all but whether they can actually make them in numbers to deliver to a potential buyer. How many Byelka radars/Su-57s have been produced? 6? We're not dealing with the Soviet Union anymore, Russia is putting rubber blocks instead of explosives in their tanks in Ukraine. How do you expect them to deliver ~60 fighters to Iran when they aren't even meeting domestic demand? Are they going to sell us RuAF stocks while they're at war?
> 
> 
> But regardless why are people comparing wing root AESA with nose-mounted radar? You've got maybe a fraction of the TRMs that a full nose-mounted radar would have. It's there to maybe pick up something in the aircraft's "peripheral vision," not to track targets, that's the job of the Irbis-E.
> 
> 
> Not shocking, like I've been saying, these aircraft do not meet Iran's needs.



First of all Hack Hook said that su-35 didnt have AESA at all and made it out that Russia cant make these. These all turned out to be lies! Also, where the hell have you got 60 from?! Drmeson? These rumours started with Russia allegedly selling us Egypt's unwanted batch of 24 Su-35, which are already made and ready to sell! These 24 will be enough to fill in the gap and get ourselves aclimtised to a REAL 4th gen aircraft, not a Peykan with a Ferrari dashboard stuck inside of it! Great for R+D and developing our own indegenous designs. You eslatalabha are setting us up for failure, its so see-through and tactless that it's embarrassing. 

And is there a habit on this forum of name dropping random planes that arent even in discussion? Who the hell is talking about Su-57 and Byelka? Why show a post about Su-30 when were discussing Su-35?! False equivocation does not win you arguments, it just makes you look desperate to be honest! Russia has the ability to make Zhuk AE AESA for their flankers. And whats stopping Iran transfering its AESA technology for Bavar 373 and using it on their aircraft? Because from where Im sitting, IRIS-B is better than anything Iran has on its planes currently.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

jauk said:


> Good if true:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572209245734436865


What about SU-35?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> as you say the technology is there and india trey to make its own , the key is the technology is there but not implemented , and they had to dumb down mig-35 because they could not produce it in numbers as they relied on S. /korea for the componnent and they sanctioned them under usa pressure.
> 
> also i don't even remember usa put any pressure on india for not buying reussian equipment , the reason is simple Su-30MKI meet india needs in 90s but situation changed it wont meet their need in 20s and russia for more than 15 years failed to provide india with AESA they wanted and india right now have no AESA of its own they try to build , but who knew when it become ready and they saw what happened in the war with pakistan and said to themselves enough is enough and went with french airplane .
> 
> you and your evidences . the fact it is being shipped and offered with Zhuk-ME is proof enough for me , they don't offer it with Zhuk A/AE anymore
> 
> 
> don't make me laugh
> 
> do you knew how many Byelka radar they have managed to produce , let me tell, you can count them with fingers of both your hand , now do you want me to tell you how many airplane AESA radar china. USA , Britain or Italy produced till today , you can't count them thats the difference in industrial production capabuility of those countries and russia



Not beings able to produce it in number because of a war is not the same as saying "Su-35 dont have AESA, Russia weak, America stronk"! The question is such system could well be on the 24 we are realistically rumoured to get, because they were intended for Egypt and already made. 

The Indians modded their own planes without Russian approval or oversight which is what lead to them failing and not meeting needs. It's not Russia's fault that Indian pilots are inept at using PESA radar. So with political pressure, in came the west with shiny new toy for the Indians and eventually they were snake charmed away. They still believe in flankers hence why theyre going through the trouble of putting their own ghozmit AESA on their flankers...if what you say is true they needn't bother. So out of touch as per usual.

Yes intelligent people use evidence not what some nobody on a forum is shoving down my throat. Get me evidence that it is cancelled for mig-35 or claim rejected.

Are faghat bekhand, barikallah. Neshoon mide harfaye zede nagheezet bedoone sanad hast, va baraye hamin dala'el harfat bateleh. Sooghoot kardee!

There you go again slurping the west and china, something we cant dream of getting. The system for Su-57 is different for flankers, you do know that right?


----------



## thesaint

Are all those Iranian flights to Russia (carrying drones) returning back empty or loaded?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

thesaint said:


> Are all those Iranian flights to Russia (carrying drones) returning back empty or loaded?


it's the same question I asked myself too.
it would be a useless waste of fuel if they come back empty


----------



## BigMelatonin

Daylamite Warrior said:


> First of all Hack Hook said that su-35 didnt have AESA at all and made it out that Russia cant make these. These all turned out to be lies! Alse where the hell have you got 60 from?! Drmeson? These rumours started with Russia allegedly selling us Egypt's unwanted batch of 24 Su-35, which are already made and ready to sell! These 24 will be enough to fill in the gap and get ourselves aclimtised to a REAL 4th gen aircraft, not a Peykan with a Ferrari dashboard stuck inside of it! Great for R+D and developing our own indegenous designs. You eslatalabha are setting us up for failure, its so see-through and tactless that it's embarrassing.
> 
> And is there a habit on this forum of name dropping random planes that arent even in discussion? Who the hell is talking about Su-57 and Byelka? Why show a post about Su-30 when were discussing Su-35?! False equivocation does not win you arguments, it just makes you look desperate to be honest! Russia has the ability to make Zhuk AE AESA for their flankers. And whats stopping Iran transfering its AESA technology for Bavar 373 and using it on their aircraft? Because from where Im sitting, IRIS-B is better than anything Iran has on its planes currently.


No they can make AESA radars just not in large numbers as demonstrated by the fact they have only made 6 Su-57s with Byelka AESA radars. 24 Su-35 is an even more useless number than 60. All this discussion is based on rumors, planes like Su-30 are relevant to the discussion because we cannot assume Russia is willing to sell us Su-35.

Again you're the one obsessed with Kowsar. It's time to move one from the platform to an to a new fully indigenous platform but how will you do that with if you spend all your budget on Su-35?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

BigMelatonin said:


> No they can make AESA radars just not in large numbers as demonstrated by the fact they have only made 6 Su-57s with Byelka AESA radars. 24 Su-35 is an even more useless number than 60. All this discussion is based on rumors, planes like Su-30 are relevant to the discussion because we cannot assume Russia is willing to sell us Su-35.
> 
> Again you're the one obsessed with Kowsar. It's time to move one from the platform to an to a new fully indigenous platform but how will you do that with if you spend all your budget on Su-35?



Your assumptions that we are not getting them are no more credible than the rumours that we are. We are talking about hypothetically getting Su-35s, which would be bettet than what we have. 0 is also more useless than 24, catch my drift? 

Stop bringing up Byelka! It is a different family of system specifically for 5th Generation aircraft:









Byelka (radar) - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





And Zhuk-MA and AM is different and used for migs and for older flankers:









Zhuk (radar) - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





Stop comparing apples and oranges, it doesn't add to your argument and they are not relevant. No Su-30 is not the same as an Su-35, again it shows how willing you are to bend the truth just to pull the wool over people's eyes. So, no, not relevant.

You're the guys who keep shoving Kowsar down my throat! Its you who are obsessed. Has Iran had any luck in making a new platform? Or do you think they may need some help? How do you know "all our money" will be thrown to buying these 24 jets? Have you seen our finances? Or are you slurping anti-Iran propaganda?! We're a bigger economy than Saudi Arabia and they have 5th Gen Aircraft! So the money is there for procuring new jets and developing our own indegenous aircraft.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

husseinibnali said:


> What’s with the F4 Sm you mentioned many times?
> What’s so special about it?
> 
> Cruise missiles and drones at the same time?
> I think you mean cruise missile that can change its target and mission and route during flight and that’s not a new thing in the world.
> 
> And about the red drone,yes we saw it in an exhibition recently but nobody knows if it has any unique features


No, I'm talking about another much more important red drone

The F-4 is based on a new cell, new electronics, modification of the cockpit, modification of the input of a new engine trying, new radar and more


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Not beings able to produce it in number because of a war is not the same as saying "Su-35 dont have AESA, Russia weak, America stronk"! The question is such system could well be on the 24 we are realistically rumoured to get, because they were intended for Egypt and already made.


i don't think russia was in war in 2004-2005 if i'm not wrong and india wanted aesa


Daylamite Warrior said:


> First of all Hack Hook said that su-35 didnt have AESA at all and made it out that Russia cant make these. These all turned out to be lies!


if you think you can track any thing with those 12 L-Band T/R module then you are welcome to the airplane , instead of 60 go and buy 600 but when they fall out of sky against enemy aircraft don't come and cry


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Russia has the ability to make Zhuk AE AESA for their flankers. And whats stopping Iran transfering its AESA technology for Bavar 373 and using it on their aircraft? Because from where Im sitting, IRIS-B is better than anything Iran has on its planes currently.


first zuk AE is for mig-29/35 not flanker .and very simple the question of miniaturization prevent you to use the AESA technology of Bavar in Airplanes . have you seen how big T/R module on Bavar are , you think why ground base radar have longer range than air based ones


Daylamite Warrior said:


> The Indians modded their own planes without Russian approval or oversight which is what lead to them failing and not meeting needs. It's not Russia's fault that Indian pilots are inept at using PESA radar.


so this is current explanation , no longer USA pressure ?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> They still believe in flankers hence why theyre going through the trouble of putting their own ghozmit AESA on their flankers.


india flankers don't use AESA they use BAR 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Are faghat bekhand, barikallah. Neshoon mide harfaye zede nagheezet bedoone sanad hast, va baraye hamin dala'el harfat bateleh. Sooghoot kardee!


so that's explanation for several week of your laugh , good that you admit I laugh at you because its several day you are suggesting we use T/R module of Bavar in Aircrafts .
i laugh at you because you want to use L-Band radar for tracking, I laugh at you because you think Russia still have Mig-35 with AESA radar on offer.
I laugh at you because you think indian pilots don't knew how to use Radar on Su-30MKI


Daylamite Warrior said:


> There you go again slurping the west and china, something we cant dream of getting. The system for Su-57 is different for flankers, you do know that right?


it seems those L-Band radar are the same


----------



## sahureka2

from the Russian specialized press, yesterday this news, as always to be evaluated, confirmed or refuted.
_"Iran intends to acquire 64 Russian Su-35 fighters, which will allow the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to form five separate squadrons. A third of the fighter jets can be transferred to the Iranian Air Force by the end of this year, while the rest of the fighters, according to Arab media, Iran will be able to receive before 2025."
https://avia.pro/news/iran-kupit-u-...-formirovaniya-pyati-istrebitelnyh-eskadriliy_

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> from the Russian specialized press, yesterday this news, as always to be evaluated, confirmed or refuted.
> _"Iran intends to acquire 64 Russian Su-35 fighters, which will allow the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to form five separate squadrons. A third of the fighter jets can be transferred to the Iranian Air Force by the end of this year, while the rest of the fighters, according to Arab media, Iran will be able to receive before 2025."
> https://avia.pro/news/iran-kupit-u-...-formirovaniya-pyati-istrebitelnyh-eskadriliy_


They at least could decidi IRGCAF or IRIAF


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> from the Russian specialized press, yesterday this news, as always to be evaluated, confirmed or refuted.
> _"Iran intends to acquire 64 Russian Su-35 fighters, which will allow the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to form five separate squadrons. A third of the fighter jets can be transferred to the Iranian Air Force by the end of this year, while the rest of the fighters, according to Arab media, Iran will be able to receive before 2025."
> https://avia.pro/news/iran-kupit-u-...-formirovaniya-pyati-istrebitelnyh-eskadriliy_



According to Arab media.

The same Arab media that says Israeli F-35 fly over Iran all the time?


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> According to Arab media.
> 
> The same Arab media that says Israeli F-35 fly over Iran all the time?


I also wrote:
*as always to be evaluated, confirmed or refuted.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> I also wrote:
> *as always to be evaluated, confirmed or refuted.*



I’m questioning why Russian “specialized press” would need to quote Arab media about their national defense product.


----------



## drmeson

India ditched SU-30 for a simple reason. The "domestic production" is barely domestic and is in fact Moscow-supplied CKD kits that India assembles and calls its local production. Even these CKD kits have price tag of 65 Million USD for a SU-30MKI. That much money for a 10-14 m2 RCS airframe and non-AESA radar whose max BVR engagement capability is even less than FC-1 Block III. These Flankers could not defend Indian airspace against F-16C/D and FC-1 Block II who in the presence of SU-30MKI entered deep into the Indian airspace shot down Indian MIG-21-93, caused friendly fire shoot down of Indian Helicopter, bombed an Indian military base and left unharmed. In contrast, flankers were busy saving themselves from the barrage of AIM-120C strikes. Indians learned this lesson way late than Israel, China, France, UK, Korea etc who have already learned that small RCS, light airframe, powerful electronics, radars, and the longest possible range BVR wins you air battle. Rafale with its <1 m2 RCS and meteor would not have let it happen.

The flanker family has its place in modern aviation. They are great surface attackers with high MOTW, a variety of A2G armaments even though their Synthetic Aperture Radar SAR capabilities are lesser than their western counterparts. SAR of IRBIS-E of SU-35S has a resolution of 3m while that of Kowsar's Grifo-346 is 1m. It's a very important thing in a war where precision strikes are a norm-necessity.

Their other massive advantage is long-range CAP flights with a mini AWACS role. IRBIS-E may have a bad tracking range as their own video showed it tracking a fighter at 100KM. But they have massive search ranges ... like the F-14's AWG-9, only with much more modern T/R modules and processing units so SU-35S can petrol the Iranian skies for a long time and in case of engagement has its 100 km ranging BVR R-77-1 and R-74 all aspect WVR.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

India has more than 250+ SU-30. Their SU-30 fleet alone is bigger than the entire Iranian airforce.

This thinking that they ditched SU-30 is quite frankly hilarious. They built an absurd amount for a single variant aircraft.

The real reason is that since the initial signing of the deal, over time India became less a balanced independent power and more a Western leaning lackey.

Thus there were REAL ramifications both in military industry and economic industry of India if they did not purchase western fighters this time around. Not to mention Russia had nothing to offer this time around. SU-75 and SU-57 are no where near mass production ready.

Not to mention the fact westerns arms lobbyists likely swayed India’s military commanders with gifts and bribes.


----------



## drmeson

...............

*BT has just recently published an article on SU-35S ad other purchases from Russia*

- 24 x SU-35S, confirmed. MoU/Deal was first time discussed and signed in October 2021 by Bagheri in Moscow the problem was Iranian insistence on oil payments. Was discussed again in January when the agreement was reached. He confirmed that SU-30SM was first time sought by IRIAF in 2006 with TOT but was no longer part of plans when sanctions were removed. 

- 64 x SU-35S will be the total order (IRIAF's mentioned need), he did not mention if they are total 64 or in addition to the above-mentioned 24 which will make the fleet 88 x Super Flankers strong. Arab media is spreading rumors that IRGCAF will own 64 (or 40) fighters IRIAF will get 24. Make of it as you will. SU-35S is intended to replace 64 x F-4E/D, 23 (12 active) x Mirage F-1Q/EQ and ~30 (16 active) x SU-22M4.

- 23 x MIG-29 fleet is being MLUed/Upgraded to MIG-29 SMT standard which means R-77-1 and R-73M/R-74 with 60 deg OBS will be procured. He did not mention if additional airframes will be procured. There is a upgradation facility already semi functional in Mehrabad for this purpose.

- 30 x SU-24MK will be brought to SU-24M2 standards. This will be a massive upgrade. 

- Yak-130 is being discussed. This makes no sense because what is Yasin AT is for then ? again parallel projects are being run. The dilemma of Iran.

*His work on Kowsar/Saegheh and F-14AM (recently published)*

- There will be a fleet of 64 x Kowsar-I. Entire current fleet of 35 x F-5E and 14 x F-5F will form repository parts for them. the rest of the numbers are built from scratch. He says OWJ turbojets are not entirely built from scratch and use some black market-purchased parts of J-85-GE-21A. He confirmed the FBW, Modern Radar+ECCM, E-Warfare suite of Jammer, IFF, RWR, Chaff/Flare, Double Duplex Data linking and 5 computers out of which two are entirely dedicated to the weapons systems. After this production, Kowsar-II/Saegheh-III will get into production. 

- 40 x F-14A are in flyable condition out of which ~20 are Full mission capable (FMC) and can be deployed for Quick Reaction Alerts (QRA). Some ~12 are F-14AM that can search/track at 350/200 KM and can use Fakour-90 (100 units made) or AIM-54 (30 x massively overhauled units). This number will increase. OWJ industries have created an entire local airframe and has also built a local TF-30-P414 turbofan. There is a 200 Km long ranging BVR being developed by Babaei Missile Industries with ARH seeker and ECCM capabilities of Fakour that can track even Shahed-171 in a Jamming environment. The plane will also receive a very modern WVR missile "Azaraksh" with a range of 40 KM with Focal Plane Array (FPA) _seeker_ using video-camera type charge-_coupled_ device (CCD). It will have a 4 different motors controlling 4 canards, very similar to AIM-9X Block II/III.

- All above proves one thing. Russia does not allow local upgrades. Money must receive Moscow if you touch their planes. 

- Good Bye to Mirage F1/Q/EQ (23), F-7N (43), F-5E/F/R(60)

..........................................................................

IRIAF+IRGC-AF future fleet (RCS m2, Search/track range KM, BVR, WVR, e-warfare, TDL)

*104 x Heavy Interceptors/CAP (4.0 to 4++ generation)*
64 x SU-35S (10-14 m2, IRBIS-E 250/100+, R-77-1+R-74, yes, yes) 
40 x F-14AM (6-10 m2, AWG-9+ 350/150, Fakour-90+AIM-54+Azarakhsh WVR, No, Yes?)

*87+ (Manned) + 200 (Unmanned) Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) (4.0 to 4+ generation)*
23 x MIG-29 SMT (3-5m2, Zhuk-ME 180/120, R-77-1+R-73M, yes, no)
64 x Kowsar-I (<3m2, Grifo-346 115/93, local AIM-7E2+Azarakhsh WVR, Yes, Yes)
Unknown x Kowsar-II (<3m2, Grifo-E equivalent AESA 200/150, local AIM-7E2+Azarakhsh WVR)
200 x Karrar UCAV Wingmen (<1 m2, Azarakhsh WVR)

*124 (Manned) + 350 (Unmanned) Attack/ELINT/SIGINT, PGM (4.0 to 3++ generation)*
30 x SU-24M2 (?? R-60M/R-73+KH-29+KH-58+KAB series PGM, No, No)
64 x F-4E/D (10m2, Bayyenat-II 150/100, AIM-7E2+AIM-9P/J+Ya-Ali LACM+Ghader/Nasr AShCM+ Glide PGM, No, No)
30 x SU-22M3 (16 active) (??, R-60M+Fajr-4 ALBM+Hoveyzeh LACM+Glide PGM, yes, yes)
200 x Mohajer-6 (Synthetic Aperture Radar, EO/IR, Laser guided, TV guided PGM)
50+ x Shahed 171/191 Stealth Flying wing UCAV (SA Radar, EO/IR, Laser+TV guided PGM)
40 x Shahed 129/149 (Synthetic Aperture Radar, EO/IR, Laser guided, TV guided PGM)
40 x KAMAN-22+12 (Synthetic Aperture Radar, EO/IR, Laser guided, TV guided PGM, E-Warfare X band Pods Shahin-II/Oghab)
30 x Ababil-5 (Synthetic Aperture Radar, EO/IR, Laser guided, TV guided PGM)

*12 x Advanced trainers (4.0 generation)*
Yak-130?? (~1 m2, Phazotron Kopyo 120/80, R-73M, Yes, No?)
Yasin AT (??m2, Grifo-346 115/93, Azarakhsh WVR, Yes, No?)

*Loitering/Suicide Drones*
Shahed-136
Arash-I/II

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> India has more than 250+ SU-30. Their SU-30 fleet alone is bigger than the entire Iranian airforce.





TheImmortal said:


> This thinking that they ditched SU-30 is quite frankly hilarious. They built an absurd amount for a single variant aircraft.



Means nothing. They procured SU-30MKI long before western 4++ generation fighters were available to them. F-18E/F, EF-2000 T2/4, Rafale, JAS-39E all came to markets much later than India was already ballz deep into Flankers. Their problems became visible after their beat down against F-16C/D the first thing they did was to procure the French Rafale, a fighter that itself has a RCS of <1m2 and can engage enemy with BVR missile ranging > 200KM. Su-30MKI cant do anything of above.



TheImmortal said:


> The real reason is that since the initial signing of the deal, over time India became less a balanced independent power and more a Western leaning lackey.



That again means nothing because to keep Russia aligned they are still paying heavy $$ money to Russian military industries. Russia is supplying CDK kits of SU-30MKI for almost the price of SU-35S and the SU-30MKI upgradation program in India will be partnered by Russian MoD's front firms for billions of USD. So much for domestic production. 



TheImmortal said:


> Thus there were REAL ramifications both in military industry and economic industry of India if they did not purchase western fighters this time around.



To counter Chinese PLAAF of 600 x J-10C, J-20, Flankers, Indian AF needed a low RCS 4++ generation western fighter. They are no fools they opened LCA and MCA programs parallel to Sukhoi procurement in which requirements were only met by western fighters as Russia had no small RCS, heavy avionics fighter to sell. MIG-35 came later. So their LCA became local TEJAS fighter and MCA is Rafale,a low RCS avionics heavy fighter. Not to mention their eternal enemy Pakistan wields a fleet of 250 F-16C/D, FC-1 block I/II/II, J-10C. They have proper skirmishes with both countries. So they had no choice but to look for a machine that means business and Flanker is not designed for this. Its like somebody procures F-15C and starts hoping it will somehow beat a Rafale. Different roles, different capabilities.


----------



## Sineva

drmeson said:


> India ditched SU-30 for a simple reason. The "domestic production" is barely domestic and is in fact Moscow-supplied CKD kits that India assembles and calls its local production. Even these CKD kits have price tag of 65 Million USD for a SU-30MKI. That much money for a 10-14 m2 RCS airframe and non-AESA radar whose max BVR engagement capability is even less than FC-1 Block III. These Flankers could not defend Indian airspace against F-16C/D and FC-1 Block II who in the presence of SU-30MKI entered deep into the Indian airspace shot down Indian MIG-21-93, caused friendly fire shoot down of Indian Helicopter, bombed an Indian military base and left unharmed. In contrast, flankers were busy saving themselves from the barrage of AIM-120C strikes. Indians learned this lesson way late than Israel, China, France, UK, Korea etc who have already learned that small RCS, light airframe, powerful electronics, radars, and the longest possible range BVR wins you air battle. Rafale with its <1 m2 RCS and meteor would not have let it happen.
> 
> The flanker family has its place in modern aviation. They are great surface attackers with high MOTW, a variety of A2G armaments even though their Synthetic Aperture Radar SAR capabilities are lesser than their western counterparts. SAR of IRBIS-E of SU-35S has a resolution of 3m while that of Kowsar's Grifo-346 is 1m. It's a very important thing in a war where precision strikes are a norm-necessity.
> 
> Their other massive advantage is long-range CAP flights with a mini AWACS role. IRBIS-E may have a bad tracking range as their own video showed it tracking a fighter at 100KM. But they have massive search ranges ... like the F-14's AWG-9, only with much more modern T/R modules and processing units so SU-35S can petrol the Iranian skies for a long time and in case of engagement has its 100 km ranging BVR R-77-1 and R-74 all aspect WVR.


Ideally the iriaf would be wanting the R-37m and K-77M a2a missiles for its su35 fleet,as these [on paper at least] equal or exceed the capabilities of the a2a weapons carried by the gulfie/zionist/nato airforces in the region.Otherwise the iriaf could potentially wind up facing the exact same sort of problems that the indians had in a particularly embarrassing a2a engagement recently.
The other option would be an iranian developed next generation phoenix missile with all of the bells and whistles of a top end a2a missile,ie 300km+ range,aesa seeker,or combined radar+ir seeker,2-way data link,etc....
The other deficiency is the lack of a modern russian targeting pod.[apart from the T-220]
This would be an excellent opportunity for the iriaf to develop a pod while also modernising [long overdue] its early 90s era pgms to operate with it.
Even better would be if the iriaf and the irgcaf could work together on this,as the irgcaf has at least built and tested a prototype of a pod and also has developed the most modern air launched pgms,ie yasin,bina,balaban,that iran currently fields,so this would be an excellent opportunity for the iriaf to adopt them into service as well.
Plus you also have a new generation of much larger and much more powerful optronic turrets being developed,such as for the gaza/shahed 149 drone,this would be ideal as the head unit of any such pod.


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Means nothing. They procured SU-30MKI long before western 4++ generation fighters were available to them. F-18E/F, EF-2000 T2/4, Rafale, JAS-39E all came to markets much later than India was already ballz deep into Flankers.



Agreed. You’re just further making my point. Some forget till relatively recently, India was under sanctions for its nuclear (weapons) program by the West. The SU-30 deal was signed in 1996, no body in the West would give India any significant aircraft at that time.



drmeson said:


> Their problems became visible after their beat down against F-16C/D the first thing they did was to procure the French Rafale, a fighter that itself has a RCS of <1m2 and can engage enemy with BVR missile ranging > 200KM. Su-30MKI cant do anything of above.



I would say India also has a problem training pilots. Their pilots are simply not comparable to average western or even Iranian pilot.



drmeson said:


> That again means nothing because to keep Russia aligned they are still paying heavy $$ money to Russian military industries. Russia is supplying CDK kits of SU-30MKI for almost the price of SU-35S and the SU-30MKI upgradation program in India will be partnered by Russian MoD's front firms for billions of USD. So much for domestic production.



They are paying $62M per aircraft. The higher cost is simple….economies of scale. They are built in batches rather than large numbers at the time. The cost would drop by half if they built to economies or scale this is straight from Indian commanders mouths. But politicians made the decisions.

As for Rafael at $250M an aircraft costing India, you can equip 4 SU-30MKI for that price.

Let’s not forget what I just said about corruption and lobbyist deals that these western arms companies excel at trapping foreign politicians and commanders with sex, drugs, money, influence, etc.






Military Watch Magazine







militarywatchmagazine.com


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> Agreed. You’re just further making my point. Some forget till relatively recently, India was under sanctions for its nuclear (weapons) program by the West. The SU-30 deal was signed in 1996, no body in the West would give India any significant aircraft at that time.



The point I was making is that India bought SU-30MKI when they had no better option available. They moved toward western better platforms the moment they could and their weakness is just recently got exposed. 

Let alone Rafale, Why India spent billions of USD on upgradation of Mirage-2000 and Jaguars if SU-30MKI's strike capability is so brilliant? They are trying their best to get out of the Russian grip but failing to do so.



TheImmortal said:


> I would say India also has a problem training pilots. Their pilots are simply not comparable to average western or even Iranian pilot.



Possibly but point I was making is that SU-30MKI or any flanker is not suitable for taking on modern western jets of 4+ generations or beyond. You cant expect a 10-14m2 RCS airframe armed with 100 KM ranging BVR R-77-1 against a ~1 m2 F-16D armed with AIM-120D or a <1 m2 EF-2000 armed with a nasty piece of work called Meteor BVRAAM. 

People need to understand, esp the posters here on our section that Flanker design was built in mid-late 1970s as a counter product to American F-14/F-15 programs. Its job was to be a multirole fighter that can attack ground/ships and hold its own in air too. It predates the 4.5 generation of little electronic warfare savvy fighters like EF-2000, Rafale, JAS-39E, F-18E/F, J-10C, F-16D who all have multifold lower RCS with superior electronics and missiles package. They all have lower MOTW and capacity that Flanker though so yes Flanker family beats them in strike capability by margin. Like I said, different jobs, different roles. With SU-35S, IRIAF has the golden opportunity to get rid of F-4E/D, SU-24 while Kowsar-I/II can kick out F-7N, F-5, Mirages. 



TheImmortal said:


> They are paying $62M per aircraft. The higher cost is simple….economies of scale. They are built in batches rather than large numbers at the time. The cost would drop by half if they built to economies or scale this is straight from Indian commanders mouths. But politicians made the decisions.
> 
> As for Rafael at $250M an aircraft costing India, you can equip 4 SU-30MKI for that price.



Rafale procurement is a necessity for them, not some political move. Indians are known for $$ corruption but India has nothing to gain from France in particular. If politics was the goal why not make global superpower US your ally by purchasing F-18E/F (equivalent to Rafale) instead of France? Super Hornet was part of the MCA program of India and lost to Rafale. Rafale is just the best they could manage and they got it. Yes I am sure Indian politicians somehow may have received bribes from France but after Indian AF had already chosen Rafale. 



TheImmortal said:


> Let’s not forget what I just said about corruption and lobbyist deals that these western arms companies excel at trapping foreign politicians and commanders with sex, drugs, money, influence, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Military Watch Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> militarywatchmagazine.com



And Russians won't do it? What makes India still purchase SU-30MKI CDK kits for 65 million USD and pay billion in name of upgradation programs of it and MIG fleet when they have and order for 130 Rafale? Nobody is an angel in business. We are developing a UCAV market in competition to Turkey, Israel. I am sure we will pull our own dirty tricks too.


----------



## drmeson

Sineva said:


> Ideally the iriaf would be wanting the R-37m and K-77M a2a missiles for its su35 fleet,as these [on paper at least] equal or exceed the capabilities of the a2a weapons carried by the gulfie/zionist/nato airforces in the region.Otherwise the iriaf could potentially wind up facing the exact same sort of problems that the indians had in a particularly embarrassing a2a engagement recently.
> The other option would be an iranian developed next generation phoenix missile with all of the bells and whistles of a top end a2a missile,ie 300km+ range,aesa seeker,or combined radar+ir seeker,2-way data link,etc....





Russians would not sell R-37 as they did not sell R-33. The R-77-1 is coming though so it will arm the SU-35S and MIG-29 fleet. 

Iran has Fakour-90 which is a powerful weapon at long BVR ranges and Maghsoud is coming with ARH seeker, ECCM with 200 Km range. Irony is that only F-14AM can fire these weapons.

They recently showed a local AIM-7E2 which if uses modern motor may break into 70-80 KM range zone with ARH seeker, it will be deadly since F-4E/D, Kowsar, F-14A/AM (164 fighters) can use it.



Sineva said:


> The other deficiency is the lack of a modern russian targeting pod.[apart from the T-220]
> This would be an excellent opportunity for the iriaf to develop a pod while also modernising [long overdue] its early 90s era pgms to operate with it.



Iranian target tracking sensors are catching up very fast. But SU-35S itself is a menace when it comes to ground attack with its MTOW and variety of armaments.

What I would focus on will be the integration of IRST in Kowsar fleet. Khordad systems use local TS-2 system which has a passive range of 150 KM. Easy to mount on a Kowsar airframe.

This means in case of war, SU-35S, MIG-29 SMT and Kowsar-I can just turn off their radars and rely upon passive search and track of even low RCS enemy fighters. Once tracked they can either go for heat seekers or can turn on radars quickly to fire weapons and leave the area.



Sineva said:


> Even better would be if the iriaf and the irgcaf could work together on this,as the irgcaf has at least built and tested a prototype of a pod and also has developed the most modern air launched pgms,ie yasin,bina,balaban,that iran currently fields,so this would be an excellent opportunity for the iriaf to adopt them into service as well.
> Plus you also have a new generation of much larger and much more powerful optronic turrets being developed,such as for the gaza/shahed 149 drone,this would be ideal as the head unit of any such pod.



Kowsar-I's ground attack package seems superb, it has a Weapons management computer (WMC) which itself suggests the right weapon for the tracked target and a Ballistic computer (Ball-C) for accuracy. Its already shown with SDB-1 like local glide PGM. Plane has a double duplex tactical datalink with UCAVs and fighters so it can easily carry out precision strikes. 2 x Kowsar-1 with 1 x Kaman-22 (EO-IR tracing, ECM Pods) and 2 x KAMAN-22 (just PGM, LACM) means a secure precision land attack run of 15,000 lbs of Land attack cruise missiles, glide PGMs. Quite a handsome package I would say.

If it was upto me I would have given IRIAF under IRGC's management atleast if not under full control. Atleast the parallel projects would have stopped to save $ and resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No and no !!

F-4 and other improvement planes will survive until they are destroyed in a way or otherwise.They will be in support of attack and you must not know anything about the war tactics to want to get rid of the planes that are active and in working order.

Iran is working on at least 3 combat planes. The purchase of SU-35S just improves Arian force and technical knowledge. Iran is working on at least 3 combat planes. The purchase of SU-35S just improves Arian force and technical knowledge.

What would be the changes desired by Iran? Iran themselves will certainly modify certain things as they like to do

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Ideally the iriaf would be wanting the R-37m and K-77M a2a missiles for its su35 fleet,as these [on paper at least] equal or exceed the capabilities of the a2a weapons carried by the gulfie/zionist/nato airforces in the region.Otherwise the iriaf could potentially wind up facing the exact same sort of problems that the indians had in a particularly embarrassing a2a engagement recently.


The question is can su-35 get a lock on enemy fighter at range more than 100km. You put a 200km range radar on it then demand a 200km range missile


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> The question is can su-35 get a lock on enemy fighter at range more than 100km. You put a 200km range radar on it then demand a 200km range missile



One of the reasons we won't solve the F-14A/AM replacement problem even after spending some close to 10 billion USD. Unless a long-track range radar and an ARH LR-BVR are procured, F-14A/AM are not going anywhere which is why IRIAF despite having a midget budget spent money on Fakour-90 development and mass production. No Su-35S, MIG-29SMT can weild such BVR power.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> The question is can su-35 get a lock on enemy fighter at range more than 100km. You put a 200km range radar on it then demand a 200km range missile



You are not shooting a fighter jet down at 200KM. This is Hollywood thinking.

F-14AM cannot get a radar lock at 190KM. It can DETECT a 5m2 around 170km, but useless for targeting.

If going up against a <1m2 object, then F-14AM will be lucky to track at less than 100KM.

Idk why you guys think an F-14 is going to be shooting anything down above 100KM distance. Unless it’s going after a bomber size target. But Rafael, F-15, F-16….forget about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> You are not shooting a fighter jet down at 200KM. This is Hollywood thinking.
> 
> F-14AM cannot get a radar lock at 190KM. It can DETECT a 5m2 around 170km, but useless for targeting.
> 
> If going up against a <1m2 object, then F-14AM will be lucky to track at less than 100KM.
> 
> Idk why you guys think an F-14 is going to be shooting anything down above 100KM distance. Unless it’s going after a bomber size target. But Rafael, F-15, F-16….forget about it.



BVR engagement is more about deterrence than actual shoot-down. I posted SU-30MKI failure against AIM-120C barrage by bunch of F-16C/D. None of the SU-30MKI was shot down in that battle, atleast not proven, but the point is such a long ranged track-lock-shoot strategy shakes the enemy up, the enemy will no longer follow their course, they will have to deploy e-warfare, dodge the incoming missile, change course etc. Many things will happen which will give the BVR shooting aircrafts leverage over them. If you are a bombing party your attack aircrafts can get in to attack the targets on ground while enemy interceptors are busy defending themselves against the incoming missiles. The same aircrafts who shot the BVR missiles first can dash quickly towards shaked up enemy to launch further attacks with IR-seeking missiles. Israelis developed Derby-IR for this purpose to be fired in succession with AIM-120. French MICA and American AIM-9X Block II/II all have IR seekers and yet are BVR domain missiles for the ame purpose. AIM-120C/D rattles the enemy, IR seeker finishes the rattled enemy.

Btw this strategy was used massively by IRIAF during the war. They fired AIM-54 from long distance to deter the enemy which rendered the enemy MIG-25PD and MIG-23 ML completely useless with their R-40 and R-23 missiles. These aircrafts sucked at low altitude so Iraqis quickly understood that they cant get near to F-14A. They had to use terrain masking sneak attacks with newly imported Mirage F-1Q/EQ.

We do not know the capability of AWG-9+ which according to published articles has 800+ local circuits and parts now including the antenna. If its APG-71 equivalent then its search/track range will be around ~270/190 KM for ~5m2 target i.e. a MIG-29 like fighter. The track will become certain at around 150 KM for 5m2 at which range Fakour-90 SARH or AIM-54+ can be deployed, allowing other fighters with fast climb or dash to get into the WVR zone of the enemy to finish it with IR seeking missiles. No other aircraft even in future IRIAF can do this job. We need R-37 or PL-15 equivalent in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

Russia's Su-35 may be alternative if deal on purchase of US F-16 fails: Official


A senior Turkish official says Ankara may consider the purchase of Russian Su-35 fighter jets, if the deal on buying F-16 aircraft from the United States fails.




www.presstv.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Now 2 new Kaiman 22 can be seen in one of the facilities of Army Jihad self-sufficiency organisation
Source Meshkat(Farsi account)

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ich

thesaint said:


> Russia's Su-35 may be alternative if deal on purchase of US F-16 fails: Official
> 
> 
> A senior Turkish official says Ankara may consider the purchase of Russian Su-35 fighter jets, if the deal on buying F-16 aircraft from the United States fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.presstv.ir



What is going on? I thought Turkey has its own 4++ fighter jet nearly finished? I read it here on pdf.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## drmeson

Ich said:


> What is going on? I thought Turkey has its own 4++ fighter jet nearly finished? I read it here on pdf.



Turkies also have fifth generation mockups and a UCAV they claim rivals F-22

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> Now 2 new Kaiman 22 can be seen in one of the facilities of Army Jihad self-sufficiency organisation
> Source Meshkat(Farsi account)



Kaman-22 with a jet engine can become a solid platform for ELINT, SIGINT wingmen for CAP flight as it can now get the speed to keep up with CAP-fighters. Confirmed by head of IAIO, this UCAV has two way Tactical datalink with Kowsar-I and SU-22M4 atleast. SU-22M4 are in IRGCAF hands but the TDL is same. Also the plane carries ECM + Tracking pods, PGMs.

I guess IRIAF (Air to Air) force is taking shape brilliantly.

*Heavy Interceptors:* SU-35S (64), F-14AM (40)
*CAP, Quick Reaction Alerts:* MIG-29 SMT (23), Kowsar-I (65), Karrar-Wingmen (200)
*ELINT, SIGINT: *Kaman-22

*Long range BVR: *Fakour-90 (150 KM, SARH), AIM-54+ (170 KM, ARH, 30 units)
*Mid Range BVR = *R-77-1 (100+ KM, ARH), R-27ER1 (80 KM, 
*Mid Range WVR = *R-73E (All aspect IR, 30 KM), Azarakhsh (All aspect CCD Imaging IR, 40 KM)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Kaman-22 with a jet engine can become a solid platform for ELINT, SIGINT wingmen for CAP flight as it can now get the speed to keep up with CAP-fighters. Confirmed by head of IAIO, this UCAV has two way Tactical datalink with Kowsar-I and SU-22M4 atleast. SU-22M4 are in IRGCAF hands but the TDL is same. Also the plane carries ECM + Tracking pods, PGMs.
> 
> I guess future IRIAF is taking shape brilliantly.
> 
> *Heavy Interceptors:* SU-35S (64), F-14AM (40)
> *CAP, Quick Reaction Alerts:* MIG-29 SMT (23), Kowsar-I/II (100), Karrar-Wingmen 100)
> *Attack/Antishipping: *SU-35S (64), Kowsar-I/II (100), SU-24M2 (30), F-4E/D Dowran (64) *
> ELINT, SIGINT: *Kaman-22


The design have limited potential for high speed and more leaned toward endurance I doubt it be a good choice for a wingman. For that a platform based on karrar or shahed-171 are a lot more suitable.
If they want to build a wingman out of it they had to make its wing a lot stronger so it can tolerate high sub sonic speed. Thew landing gear must become a foldable one so it reduce the air resietanre. And if they manage to add a delta to the base of the wing that be a plus


By the way su-35 as interceptor. Come on


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> The design have limited potential for high speed and more leaned toward endurance I doubt it be a good choice for a wingman. For that a platform based on karrar or shahed-171 are a lot more suitable.
> If they want to build a wingman out of it they had to make its wing a lot stronger so it can tolerate high sub sonic speed. Thew landing gear must become a foldable one so it reduce the air resietanre. And if they manage to add a delta to the base of the wing that be a plus



There is a difference between Wingmen and a CAP-Wingmen

How things are taking shape, Karrar is the Wingmen, it has already tested Imaging-IR Azarakhsh A2A, it has tiny RCS and speed so a swarm of 10-12 can be rushed towards intruders.

Kaman-22 with Shahin-II ECM pods and Trackers and TDL with Kowsar seems like a CAP or CAS attack wingmen. It can provide Jamming/ECM, track targets or attack them in TDL with fighters. A jet powered one will have enough speed for this job. No fighter performs CAS or CAP missions at high speed. 




Hack-Hook said:


> By the way su-35 as interceptor. Come on



IRIAF has no other choice, you cant just rely upon old horse F-14A/AMs for interceptions.

MIG-29 SMT with get the R-77-1 for BVR but there are just two squadrons which I guess will be dedicated to defending the cities, and critical sites. Kowsar-I has brilliant BVR capability if we go by radar and avionics but lacks the missile, may be it will get the R-77-1 package in the end or local AIM-7E2 they showed with ARH seeker and better motor that can push it to 70-80 KM domain. 

This leaves us with SU-35S. The IRBIS-E being PESA is ECM vulnerable, RCS is huge, BVR is Mid-ranged but it can supplement F-14A/AM force for such roles. Also the plane has inter-Flanker TDL so they can use pack-attack strategy.


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> IRIAF has no other choice, you cant just rely upon old horse F-14A/AMs for interceptions.
> 
> MIG-29 SMT with get the R-77-1 for BVR but there are just two squadrons which I guess will be dedicated to defending the cities, and critical sites. Kowsar-I has brilliant BVR capability if we go by radar and avionics but lacks the missile, may be it will get the R-77-1 package in the end or local AIM-7E2 they showed with ARH seeker and better motor that can push it to 70-80 KM domain.
> 
> This leaves us with SU-35S. The IRBIS-E being PESA is ECM vulnerable, RCS is huge, BVR is Mid-ranged but it can supplement F-14A/AM force for such roles. Also the plane has inter-Flanker TDL so they can use pack-attack strategy.


honestly if we want to buy a foreign aircraft for that role i believe there is one other aircraft which is more suitable and that is J10-C and china is willing to sell that aircraft, and that come with PL-12 and PL-15 that is better than R-77 that come with Su-35

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly if we want to buy a foreign aircraft for that role i believe there is one other aircraft which is more suitable and that is J10-C and china is willing to sell that aircraft, and that come with PL-12 and PL-15 that is better than R-77 that come with Su-35


When did they express their willingness to sell fighter jet to us ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> J10-C and china is willing to sell that aircraft



Did Xi tell you personally on WhatsApp?

Considering their satellite state (Pakistan) just received the fighter jet. Iran has about as much chance as you growing a tail.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Did Xi tell you personally on WhatsApp?
> 
> Considering their satellite state (Pakistan) just received the fighter jet. Iran has about as much chance as you growing a tail.


yes , in the same chat we had with Putin and he expressed his willingness to sell us su-35s



OldTwilight said:


> When did they express their willingness to sell fighter jet to us ?


china already tried to sell us that airplane several years ago, and its in the list of airplanes they are willing to sell to foreign parties


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> china already tried to sell us that airplane several years ago, and its in the list of airplanes they are willing to sell to foreign parties



No they did not. Stop spreading lies. There was “rumors” they tried to sell us the outdated J-10A not J-10C. Just like several years ago Russia tried to sell us SU-27 when we asked for SU-30…..not SU-35S.

J-10A…..A plane from late 90’s/early 00’s. If rumors are true, It was rejected (probably because it was outdated).

Pakistan is single benefactor of Chinese military aid and it literally just received J-10C.

Very unlikely China will turn over high tech military aid to Iran. Way to pragmatic for that given it’s mutual economic relations with the West.

The last major Chinese offensive arms deal was for C-802 missiles and that was a headache of deal.


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> honestly if we want to buy a foreign aircraft for that role i believe there is one other aircraft which is more suitable and that is J10-C and china is willing to sell that aircraft, and that come with PL-12 and PL-15 that is better than R-77 that come with Su-35



Acquisition of PL-12/PL-15 will depend upon what radar next generation of Kowsar/Saegheh uses. If it will be of Grifo/NREIT (KLJ series) origin like Kowsar-I, then PL-12/PL-15 will be easy to integrate on them because of open architecture of Leonardo Radars. 

Literature published on Kowsar-I's radar says that radar is ditto of Grifo system (replica of Grifo-346) but the TOT for IEI, Iran came from China not Italy directly; Or to avoid sanctions, Leonardo sold the system to Chinese CATIC's radar division called "NREIT" which produces KLJ series radar. They apparently sold the blueprints to Iran under project "Silk Route II". NREIT has no radar product in its brochure equivalent to Grifo-346, the closest is KLJ-7 of FC-1 Block II/JF-17 Thunder which lacks ECCM package like the one in Grifo-346.

If IEI develops next generation's radar on blueprints of Grifo-E (AESA) or its chinese equivalent KLJ-7A then integration of PL-15 will be easy. 

Saying that IRIAF will soon have multiple BVR missiles at its hands:

*Long range BVR: *
Masghsoud (200 KM, ARH, In development)
Fakour-90 (150 KM, SARH, 100 Units delivered) 
AIM-54+ (170 KM, ARH, 30 units overhauled)
*Mid Range BVR *
R-77-1 (100+ KM, ARH, coming) 
R-27ER1 (80 KM, SARH, 150 Units)
Local AIM-7E2 Copy (~70-80 KM KM, ARH/IR??, In development)

My money is on local AIM-7E2 becoming the Iranian light BVR missile and it could be ARH/IR.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mack8

Hi Drmeson,

Are there pictures of this iranian AIM-7E2, and any other info about it, weight, dimensions etc?


----------



## drmeson

mack8 said:


> Hi Drmeson,
> 
> Are there pictures of this iranian AIM-7E2, and any other info about it, weight, dimensions etc?



Just one pic, nothing else has been unvieled or published yet







Our *assumption* here like it using modern motor, ARH/IR seeker is based upon the fact that same company (Babaei Missile Industries) that makes Fakour-90 showed it as their product in recent times, offcourse Media did not care to cover it like they should have. That company's favorite method is taking US missiles and putting Iranian motors and seekers in them like Fatter was AIM-9J with Iranian seeker, Fakour-90 is Iranian Shalamche inside AIM-54 like body. So this AIM-7E2 could be very same.

.........

Published Info (Official and Journalistic) do exists on following 

*Long range BVR:*
Masghsoud (200 KM, ARH+ECCM, In development)
Fakour-90 (150 KM, SARH+ECCM, 100 Units delivered already)

*WVR*
Azarakhsh (40 KM from fighter, 18 KM from UCAV, CCD Imaging IR, 4 x Actuators)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

J10 is simple not powerful for air superiority fighter Iran needs,F14 can fire 6 long range BVR while TWS 24 target,there are few aircrafts today only with that power,J10 can fire at 2 simultanesly as F16,F16 can fire second long range BVR only when first became active,that mean when shit start,you need more aircrafts to cover same area...
Did you notice J10 just recently got DSI at air intakes,you need that ,ramp or other kind of airflow reducers only for aircrafts that fly over 1.7 or 1.8 mach...which mean,it was not even fast for many roles in older variant....now am not saying J10C is not good but Iran needs to have big boys,two engine air suleriority like SU 35,F15,F14...you cant replace these aircrafts with F16,J10...every country that even consider posibility of going to war maintain at least 2 types of narrow role aircrafts...USAF orders if you check their plans,consist of many aircrafts but F15 is still largest ,they fly F22 ...Russia also.. I see Iriaf buy aircrafts like J10 or Mig 35 only as addition to SU35 or similar aircraft. IRIAF is large,it needs more than one type of aircraft anyway...but right now,priority is powerfull air superiority fighter jet ,and I can agree that it would be worth to buy J10C in addition just to get access to chinese a2a weapons,they indeed offer better range of weapons than Russians

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

sanel1412 said:


> J10 is simple not powerful for air superiority fighter Iran needs,F14 can fire 6 long range BVR while TWS 24 target,there are few aircrafts today only with that power,J10 can fire at 2 simultanesly as F16,F16 can fire second long range BVR only when first became active,that mean when shit start,you need more aircrafts to cover same area...



(1) In modern combat, F-14AM upgraded AWG-9 will barely track a ~1 or <1 m2 fighter from ~100-120 KM by rough estimation. So the LR-BVR advantage is neutralized against small RCS fighters like JAS-39E, EF-2000, Rafale, F-16V, F/A-18E/F. These are the adversaries we might face before F-35 start showing up in Persian Gulf states. 

(2) Meanwhile F-14 airframe itself has an RCS of 6-10 m2 which will increase if its flying with 4 x large Fakour-90 and 2 x WVR missiles. The Captor-E AESA (EF-2000 T4) or RBE2 (Rafale M) e.g. will see such a large RCS from 150+ KM away to attack it with long-range ARH Meteor BVRAAM or AIM-120D. That if they dont start jamming the AWG-9 first. F-14A/AM in IRIAF has no ECCM package on itself so it would have no chance to defend itself. 

Although I am not a fan of J-10C (the operational variant) it has an AESA and ECCM package + PL-15 which has a longer range than an R-77-1. 




sanel1412 said:


> Did you notice J10 just recently got DSI at air intakes,you need that ,ramp or other kind of airflow reducers only for aircrafts that fly over 1.7 or 1.8 mach...which mean,it was not even fast for many roles in older variant....now am not saying J10C is not good but Iran needs to have big boys,two engine air suleriority like SU 35,F15,F14...you cant replace these aircrafts with F16,J10...every country that even consider posibility of going to war maintain at least 2 types of narrow role aircrafts...USAF orders if you check their plans,consist of many aircrafts but F15 is still largest



F-15 is primarily an attack aircraft in US for quite some time now, they do not use it for aerial engagement since the advent of F-22, F-35. Not saying it can't do that but they have better tools for that like F-22, F-35, F/A-18EF. Its not just US itself, even Japanese, Koreans, Saudis, and Israelis are moving towards the smallest possible RCS fighters and all of them are owners of large F-15 fleets. 

The Trends the world is moving toward are

lowest possible RCS
AESA radars with tracking ranges beyond 150 KM for fighter sized targets
ECM/ECCM
Double Duplex Tactical Data linking 
Longest possible ARH BVR (AIM-120D, Meteor, Pl-15, R-37) 
All-aspect WVR with no-escape zones at 50+KM (AIM-9X Blk II/III) series 

IRIAF is kinda ticking many of these boxes. 




sanel1412 said:


> ,they fly F22 ...Russia also. I see Iriaf buy aircrafts like J10 or Mig 35 only as addition to SU35 or similar aircraft. IRIAF is large,it needs more than one type of aircraft anyway...but right now,priority is powerfull air superiority fighter jet ,and I can agree that it would be worth to buy J10C in addition just to get access to chinese a2a weapons,they indeed offer better range of weapons than Russians



To dominate the A2A role, the SU-35S will need a major upgrade package of following

(1) AESA radar with long track ranges, IRBIS-E is not gonna cut it with its 100 KM tracking range against small targets. Its also a PESA which is vulnerable to jamming.

(2) IRIAF will need integration of R-37 LR-BVR missiles on SU-35S to thwart the enemy from distance. The current export variant BVR Russia sells is R-77-1 ARH missile which is barely 100 KM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Ich

drmeson said:


> The Trends the world is moving toward are
> 
> lowest possible RCS
> AESA radars with tracking ranges beyond 150 KM for fighter sized targets
> ECM/ECCM
> Double Duplex Tactical Data linking
> Longest possible ARH BVR (AIM-120D, Meteor, Pl-15, R-37)
> All-aspect WVR with no-escape zones at 50+KM (AIM-9X Blk II/III) series



plus: autonomous unmanned wingman who do the bombing/attack while "mothership" flyes/stays behind and provides data

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Ich said:


> plus: autonomous unmanned wingman who do the bombing/attack while "mothership" flyes/stays behind and provides data



Yes and as rudimentary as it right now IRIAF does have Karrar with Azaraksh-WVR missile for this job. The UCAV has the speed, altitude to threaten the enemy.







The range of the missile suffers greatly right now because IR seeker of the missile has to track the target itself. The same problem R-73 cant be integrated on any IRIAF fighter. Either they give Karrar an IRST or Tactical datalink with fighters (Kowsar-1 has this) to provide coordinates. None the less its a start. IMO karrar should be enlarged with larger Toloue turbojet. Project can be a gold mine for IRIAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

@Mr Iran Eye is a Bung Bung and a troll

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Ich

drmeson said:


> Either they give Karrar an IRST or Tactical datalink with fighters (Kowsar-1 has this) to provide coordinates.



This for sure is in the development. But it has to be a system what can implement also on other fighters...like SU-35. It will take some time cause the electronic in SU-35 has to be modified, but this anyway has to be done cause of better radar and BVR provided by own systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Ich said:


> This for sure is in the development. But it has to be a system what can implement also on other fighters...like SU-35. It will take some time cause the electronic in SU-35 has to be modified, but this anyway has to be done cause of better radar and BVR provided by own systems.



Following are a must for IRIAF in coming years 

Domestic AESA airborne radars
Double duplex tactical datalinking for every Fighter, UCAV
Lighter weight ARH BVR missile
High ranged Imaging seeker WVR that can be carried by UCAVs and CAP fighters

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

drmeson said:


> Just one pic, nothing else has been unvieled or published yet
> 
> View attachment 883198
> 
> 
> Our *assumption* here like it using modern motor, ARH/IR seeker is based upon the fact that same company (Babaei Missile Industries) that makes Fakour-90 showed it as their product in recent times, offcourse Media did not care to cover it like they should have. ...




Our or Your assumption!??

Come on, the AIM-9 dies not use an IR-seeker and as such it is even more unlikely any reverse-engineered clone would even feature a double seeker combining radar and IR!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arslank03

drmeson said:


> Yes and as rudimentary as it right now IRIAF does have Karrar with Azaraksh-WVR missile for this job. The UCAV has the speed, altitude to threaten the enemy.
> 
> 
> View attachment 883272
> 
> 
> The range of the missile suffers greatly right now because IR seeker of the missile has to track the target itself. The same problem R-73 cant be integrated on any IRIAF fighter. Either they give Karrar an IRST or Tactical datalink with fighters (Kowsar-1 has this) to provide coordinates. None the less its a start. IMO karrar should be enlarged with larger Toloue turbojet. Project can be a gold mine for IRIAF.



this is an a2g missile.


----------



## drmeson

Deino said:


> Our or Your assumption!??



Me and another user Hack Hock discussed the possibilities of Iranian modification in local AIM-7E2 pages back extensively so its not just me. 



Deino said:


> Come on, the AIM-9 dies not use an IR-seeker



Every major version of AIM-9 uses some type of IR seeker, what are you talking about?



Deino said:


> and as such it is even more unlikely any reverse-engineered clone would even feature a double seeker combining radar and IR!



I think you are confusing Iranian AIM-9 copies called Fatter, Azarakhsh which are in service with recently shown Iranian AIM-7E2 for which we literally have no information. Nobody said anywhere that AIM-9 has radar???? we were just assuming that this new AIM-7E2 copy might have local ARH or may be some modern IR seeker. AIM-9 copies have nothing to do with it.

This may help 

AIM-9J/P copy in Iran is called Fattar (limited production since 2010s)
AIM-9X like missile in Iran is called Azarakhsh (Recently unvieled, has A2A, A2G versions)
AIM-7E2 Copy ... No info yet


Details of Azarakhsh WVR missile

*https://www.key.aero/article/how-iran-manages-keep-its-f-14-tomcats-flying*









arslank03 said:


> this is an a2g missile.



Azarakhsh has both A2A and A2G versions

*https://www.key.aero/article/how-iran-manages-keep-its-f-14-tomcats-flying*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

drmeson said:


> Me and another user Hack Hock discussed the possibilities of Iranian modification in local AIM-7E2 pages back extensively so its not just me.
> 
> 
> 
> Every major version of AIM-9 uses some type of IR seeker, what are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are confusing Iranian AIM-9 copies called Fatter, Azarakhsh which are in service with recently shown Iranian AIM-7E2 for which we literally have no information. Nobody said anywhere that AIM-9 has radar???? we were just assuming that this new AIM-7E2 copy might have local ARH or may be some modern IR seeker. AIM-9 copies have nothing to do with it.
> 
> This may help
> 
> AIM-9J/P copy in Iran is called Fattar (limited production since 2010s)
> AIM-9X like missile in Iran is called Azarakhsh (Recently unvieled, has A2A, A2G versions)
> AIM-7E2 Copy ... No info yet
> 
> 
> Details of Azarakhsh WVR missile
> 
> *https://www.key.aero/article/how-iran-manages-keep-its-f-14-tomcats-flying*
> 
> 
> View attachment 883439
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Azarakhsh has both A2A and A2G versions
> 
> *https://www.key.aero/article/how-iran-manages-keep-its-f-14-tomcats-flying*




But why then did you post a AIM-7 image? This is clearly not an AIM-9 based design. I only quoted you and the image you used above.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mack8

Deino said:


> But why then did you post a AIM-7 image? This is clearly not an AIM-9 based design. I only quoted you and the image you used above.


Hi Deino,

You must be refering to the AIM-7 image Drmeson posted in response to my question regarding any images of the iranian AIM-7E2 reverse engineered equivalent. Iranian AIM-9 and AIM-7 derivatives are two different things/ subjects.


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

WudangMaster said:


>


What was discussed here? I request that when you post a Persian language video, you list the topics with the gist of the discussion, mainly for me 😅 but also for members who don't speak the language, if it's not too much trouble.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

For a future Iranian 5th generation fighter aircraft design, what should be the optimal design?





Should we go with the diamond-pattern delta wings with a plethora of control surfaces?





Or is a large blended wing design to gain maximum altitude the best?

(Take it away, @Hack-Hook - floor is yours.)


----------



## TheImmortal

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> For a future Iranian 5th generation fighter aircraft design, what should be the optimal design?
> View attachment 884444
> 
> Should we go with the diamond-pattern delta wings with a plethora of control surfaces?
> 
> View attachment 884445
> 
> Or is a large blended wing design to gain maximum altitude the best?
> 
> (Take it away, @Hack-Hook - floor is yours.)



Wait for US to reveal its 6th Gen fighter prototype in next 5 years then try your best to copy it.

5th Gen is already obsolete from a design standpoint, so why copy a dated design from the 1990’s? They want to retire some of the older F-22’s already.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> Wait for US to reveal its 6th Gen fighter prototype in next 5 years then try your best to copy it.
> 
> 5th Gen is already obsolete from a design standpoint, so why copy a dated design from the 1990’s? They want to retire some of the older F-22’s already.


What I heard about the NGAD isn't promising. A bomber sized flying wing aircraft or at least a delta wing which sacrifices agility for range and relegates most of it's prime functions to wingmen UAVs...it's a disaster waiting to happen.


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> What I heard about the NGAD isn't promising. A bomber sized flying wing aircraft or at least a delta wing which sacrifices agility for range and relegates most of it's prime functions to wingmen UAVs...it's a disaster waiting to happen.


what's the use of agility for it ? it is stealth , and it has agile wingman to the job, for it a good datalink and high quality stealth is more important . its not supposed to do dogfight.


TheImmortal said:


> Wait for US to reveal its 6th Gen fighter prototype in next 5 years then try your best to copy it.
> 
> 5th Gen is already obsolete from a design standpoint, so why copy a dated design from the 1990’s? They want to retire some of the older F-22’s already.


I most disagree with that . what's the difference between 5th gen and 6th gen fighters ?
is it their shape or the stealth quality of materials in them or its more about those wingman and datalink or the weapons , you can take your pick so just copy the shape won't be much.
also 6th gen is supposed to be ready between 30s to 50, I say it will be more in 40s probably late 40s do we must wait till then ?


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> For a future Iranian 5th generation fighter aircraft design, what should be the optimal design?
> View attachment 884444
> 
> Should we go with the diamond-pattern delta wings with a plethora of control surfaces?
> 
> View attachment 884445
> 
> Or is a large blended wing design to gain maximum altitude the best?
> 
> (Take it away, @Hack-Hook - floor is yours.)


if i want to build based on a foreign design i won't go with Su-57 or F-22 or Even J-20 or J-31 or F-35 i choose this one from Northrop




YF-23 lost to lockheed F-22 because they instead of emphasizing on maneuverability it cared more about Stealth its a lot stealthier than F-22 it even had longer range , it provided the same supercruise speed , what it lacked was trust vectoring and that reduce its maneuverability and at the time 1985 it was still a thing . as every one knew I'm not a fan of supermaneuvrability and believe its being phased out of today warfare as all the kill have become BVR these days
by the way the air craft not only had lower all aspect radar cross section , it even had less infrared signature even if you looked at it directly from the back and achieved that by using technologies Northrop used in b-2
one of the few video of it flying

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

but as said previously, you cant copy the design and say I built a stealth fighter there are lots and lots of hurdle to pass , so i hope our next airplane approach to stealth won't be like F-22 or YF-23 and be more like Rafale and Grippen after all lifting a huge rock is sign of not throwing it


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> I most disagree with that . what's the difference between 5th gen and 6th gen fighters ?
> is it their shape or the stealth quality of materials in them or its more about those wingman and datalink or the weapons , you can take your pick so just copy the shape won't be much.
> also 6th gen is supposed to be ready between 30s to 50, I say it will be more in 40s probably late 40s do we must wait till then ?












These concept images are from US military giants (ex Lockheed Martin) themselves.

US is in a race against China for 6th Gen fighter. Competition means we will see them much sooner than 2050’s









China Is Working On Its Own Sixth-Generation Fighter Program: Official


Air Combat Command boss says China’s next-generation air combat program will parallel the U.S. Air Force’s.




www.thedrive.com





Chinese concept


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> View attachment 884745
> 
> View attachment 884746
> 
> 
> These concept images are from US military giants (ex Lockheed Martin) themselves.
> 
> US is in a race against China for 6th Gen fighter. Competition means we will see them much sooner than 2050’s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China Is Working On Its Own Sixth-Generation Fighter Program: Official
> 
> 
> Air Combat Command boss says China’s next-generation air combat program will parallel the U.S. Air Force’s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedrive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese concept


concept design , god only know what the final design would be
have you seen the concept design of f-22 . it also had delta wing



















by the way that chinse concept is the drone part of the project


here is Iran project to satisfy you 





as you see if they have continued the project it was more looked like YF-23 than any other airplane around


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> as you see if they have continued the project it was more looked like YF-23 than any other airplane around



US already built their prototype. It was in the news for fastest time of a fighter to go from concept to prototype aided by 3D printing.

Iran? Please save the jokes. Iran is stuck with F-5 and J-85 engine. Let’s not act like Iran has any serious fighter jet program.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> US already built their prototype. It was in the news for fastest time of a fighter to go from concept to prototype aided by 3D printing.
> 
> Iran? Please save the jokes. Iran is stuck with F-5 and J-85 engine. Let’s not act like Iran has any serious fighter jet program.


don't knew didn't a drone that looked like Sofreh-Mahi crashed in Isfahan last year ?
and USA still fails to make a viable hyper sonic glide vehicle . the only hyper sonic vessel they made was was Darkstar that a navy test pilot named Captain Pete Mitchell destroyed

all i see here are computer generated photo


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> don't knew didn't a drone that looked like Sofreh-Mahi crashed in Isfahan last year ?



An RC Toy plane? I have seen better quality out of civilian hobbyists. 



Hack-Hook said:


> and USA still fails to make a viable hyper sonic glide vehicle . the only hyper sonic vessel they made was was Darkstar that a navy test pilot named Captain Pete Mitchell destroyed



US hypersonic glide vehicle program is progressing as needed. Russia has HGVs, what help did it do it in Ukraine? 



Hack-Hook said:


> all i see here are computer generated photo



Because it’s a black project. The “UFOs” above Iranian sites I guess were aliens? Just because they don’t show you certain aircraft don’t mean they aren’t already being tested/existed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> Because it’s a black project. The “UFOs” above Iranian sites I guess were aliens? Just because they don’t show you certain aircraft don’t mean they aren’t already being tested/existed.


There have been reports of UFOs going back to the Roman Empire. Not everything is "AMERIKWA 🇺🇸, CUCK YEAH!"


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> An RC Toy plane? I have seen better quality out of civilian hobbyists.
> 
> 
> 
> US hypersonic glide vehicle program is progressing as needed. Russia has HGVs, what help did it do it in Ukraine?
> 
> 
> 
> Because it’s a black project. The “UFOs” above Iranian sites I guess were aliens? Just because they don’t show you certain aircraft don’t mean they aren’t already being tested/existed.


those UFO are there since 50s
usually there are better explanation for them.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

F-35s Struggle To Fly! Frustrated South Korea Says Its US-Origin Stealth Fighters Marred By Defects


South Korea's lawmakers stated that the nation's F-35 A stealth fighter jets were labeled as operationally unready 234 times over 18 month




eurasiantimes.com





Our F-5s and F-14s may have a chance? @Hack-Hook

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> There have been reports of UFOs going back to the Roman Empire. Not everything is "AMERIKWA 🇺🇸, CUCK YEAH!"



UFOs around highly contested nuclear programs are usually foreign spy aircraft using black project tech. See Blackbird, U2, RQ-170, RQ-180, etc



Hack-Hook said:


> those UFO are there since 50s
> usually there are better explanation for them.



Please do tell professor. UFO are actually there for hundreds of years (maybe even thousands depending on how you interpret ancient record) you can find them in newspaper period in medival period.

But UFOs around contest nuclear sites are usually foreign surveillance aircraft. I doubt aliens are interested in primitive fission tech.



Daylamite Warrior said:


> F-35s Struggle To Fly! Frustrated South Korea Says Its US-Origin Stealth Fighters Marred By Defects
> 
> 
> South Korea's lawmakers stated that the nation's F-35 A stealth fighter jets were labeled as operationally unready 234 times over 18 month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eurasiantimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our F-5s and F-14s may have a chance? @Hack-Hook



F-14 was maintenance heavy due to swept wing design and engines.

F-35 is maintenance heavy as well.

It’s normal for cutting edge planes. Most militaries on the planet have significant portion of their airforce planes “not ready” due to costs of maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> But UFOs around contest nuclear sites are usually foreign surveillance aircraft. I doubt aliens are interested in primitive fission tech.


usually some meteorite , weather phenomenon , quadcopter. ...



TheImmortal said:


> F-14 was maintenance heavy due to swept wing design and engines.


part of F-14 being a maintenance hazard was due to it being an old airframe , i can't call F-35 old


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> UFOs around highly contested nuclear programs are usually foreign spy aircraft using black project tech. See Blackbird, U2, RQ-170, RQ-180, etc


UFO incidents occurred even back in the Shah's era and caused loss of aircraft. Are you suggesting the Pentagon sent an unmanned aircraft (the likes of which currently doesn't exist) back in time to down them?


----------



## aviator_fan

Daylamite Warrior said:


> F-35s Struggle To Fly! Frustrated South Korea Says Its US-Origin Stealth Fighters Marred By Defects
> 
> 
> South Korea's lawmakers stated that the nation's F-35 A stealth fighter jets were labeled as operationally unready 234 times over 18 month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eurasiantimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our F-5s and F-14s may have a chance? @Hack-Hook


It has an accident rate of < 1 per 100K hours of flying. F-16s and F-15s are up to 2.5. So no doubt it will inch up. In the meantime the Royal Navy has deployed it on carriers and already in active deployments. They have over 500K hours logged around the world

I think the F-5s may have a chance, for sure, specially the one with two tales, if they went against the Koreans flying the F-35s. Btw, Koreans also had a missile crash yesterday so not exactly a good track record with modern weaponry


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> usually some meteorite , weather phenomenon , quadcopter. ...



More likely trans dimensional beings than trying to say a meteorite stopped at a dime while going Mach 20 and then changed directions.



Hack-Hook said:


> part of F-14 being a maintenance hazard was due to it being an old airframe , i can't call F-35 old



Even when new, it was maintenance heavy. Swept wing design contributed to that as it was a new technology.



BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> UFO incidents occurred even back in the Shah's era and caused loss of aircraft. Are you suggesting the Pentagon sent an unmanned aircraft (the likes of which currently doesn't exist) back in time to down them?



They occurred also in WW2 with balls of light called foo fighters.

A small portion of UFO sightings are likely Inter-dimensional beings or a type of inter dimensional phenomenon. As we know string theory points to 11-12 dimensions.

If you understand how an object moves thru inter dimensional space then you will realize these balls of light with absurd properties are 3D in our eyes but likely multi dimensional objects originally.

Makes way more sense than little green men species spending decades to reach us from another point in our galaxy. Only to never contact us formally. 

Last possibility is you slightly alluded to it. Which is time travel. Time travel to the future is proven. Time travel to the past is possible using exotic matter. Now why would someone go into the past if the past they are altering can never be the reality they came from (due to grandfather paradox) but a separate alternate reality?

It is possible at one point humanity in general gets so advanced they return back to the past to alter historical events thus creating (or spawning) countless alternate realities in the hopes of creating worlds with better “endings”.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> More likely trans dimensional beings than trying to say a meteorite stopped at a dime while going Mach 20 and then changed directions.


then certainly not Americans as they still struggle with mach-7 and straight line 


TheImmortal said:


> Even when new, it was maintenance heavy. Swept wing design contributed to that as it was a new technology.


not my word, on USA navy crew who maintained the aircraft said that


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> More likely trans dimensional beings than trying to say a meteorite stopped at a dime while going Mach 20 and then changed directions.
> 
> They occurred also in WW2 with balls of light called foo fighters.
> 
> A small portion of UFO sightings are likely Inter-dimensional beings or a type of inter dimensional phenomenon. As we know string theory points to 11-12 dimensions.
> 
> If you understand how an object moves thru inter dimensional space then you will realize these balls of light with absurd properties are 3D in our eyes but likely multi dimensional objects originally.
> 
> Makes way more sense than little green men species spending decades to reach us from another point in our galaxy. Only to never contact us formally.
> 
> Last possibility is you slightly alluded to it. Which is time travel. Time travel to the future is proven. Time travel to the past is possible using exotic matter. Now why would someone go into the past if the past they are altering can never be the reality they came from (due to grandfather paradox) but a separate alternate reality?
> 
> It is possible at one point humanity in general gets so advanced they return back to the past to alter historical events thus creating (or spawning) countless alternate realities in the hopes of creating worlds with better “endings”.


Subhan-Allah.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Daylamite Warrior said:


> F-35s Struggle To Fly! Frustrated South Korea Says Its US-Origin Stealth Fighters Marred By Defects
> 
> 
> South Korea's lawmakers stated that the nation's F-35 A stealth fighter jets were labeled as operationally unready 234 times over 18 month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eurasiantimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our F-5s and F-14s may have a chance? @Hack-Hook


Sure, they do...Here is my response to the usual F-35 'Pierre Sprey' critic... 






F-35s Struggle To Fly! Frustrated South Korea Says Its US-Origin Stealth Fighters Marred By Defects


J-10 crash had been reported and witnessed, if J-20 crashed but there's no one reporting or seeing the crash, J-20 could be really invisible. will the chinese govt publicly report major issues with their platforms?



defence.pk

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## tsunset

Why Iran doesn't hire an Indian or a Pakistani or Chinese guy to steal their fighter jets blueprints, i mean that airforce problem is persisting for decades, why not pay an Indian engineer or a Chinese engineer and ask him to steal blueprints for WS-15, RD-33 and AL-31 so no need to force with Russia or China proposing Iran only old fighters such as the J-10A

If the Indian guy succeed, this would allow Iran to build their own Su-30 and make modifications on it without Russia being able to say a word, if he can steal every blueprints that he could, Iran would be able to make:

- SU-30 (just change its name to something else like Kowsar-200)
- Mirage 2000 (again just change all the names)
- Tejas

If the Pakistani performs well and gets us JF17 Block 3 blueprints
-J-10C parts

And the Chinese being the most crucial, he could get us
- J-10/16/20/31 and PL-15, PL-21 blueprints and parts smuggled with corrupted people inside Pakistan and China to deliver them to us

Why just Iran don't do that, pay them like 2million$ each who would refuse such an amount for doing that

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Why Iran doesn't hire an Indian or a Pakistani or Chinese guy to steal their fighter jets blueprints, i mean that airforce problem is persisting for decades, why not pay an Indian engineer or a Chinese engineer and ask him to steal blueprints for WS-15, RD-33 and AL-31 so no need to force with Russia or China proposing Iran only old fighters such as the J-10A


we already have RD-33 and TF30-P-412A there is no need to do that and we are working on a turbofan engine , the problem is that the project don't have enough funds.
and our airforce decided they like N-156f fighter design


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The construction of the heavy hunter of Iran officially started in 2020 so wait for the continuation before speculating in a vacuum as usual

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

When is the project's deadline?


Mr Iran Eye said:


> The construction of the heavy hunter of Iran officially started in 2020 so wait for the continuation before speculating in a vacuum as usual


----------



## Kingdom come

tsunset said:


> Why Iran doesn't hire an Indian or a Pakistani or Chinese guy to steal their fighter jets blueprints


Are you Iranian ?
is this how the avg Iranian thinks? 
You want to steal technology?


----------



## tsunset

Kingdom come said:


> Are you Iranian ?
> is this how the avg Iranian thinks?
> You want to steal technology?


No
This was mainly an ironic message because Iran seems to struggle so much airforce wise


----------



## Kingdom come

tsunset said:


> No
> This was mainly an ironic message because Iran seems to struggle so much airforce wise


You can't write irony like that


----------



## scimitar19

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The construction of the heavy hunter of Iran officially started in 2020 so wait for the continuation before speculating in a vacuum as usual


Construction as if a development process or production in numbers?


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

Sineva said:


>


On what date is aeronautical demonstration or military material was presented with these colors Thanks in advance for a possible reply

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shadihassan28

Sineva said:


>


Is that a Yasin with a paint job, looks clean and ready to go if it is.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

sahureka2 said:


> On what date is aeronautical demonstration or military material was presented with these colors Thanks in advance for a possible reply


Sorry,but all I found was this single pic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

When we discussed Fakour 90 guidance,I spent 20 minutes looking for statemant of Air Force commander from ceremony when it is introduced..and could not find,today find it accidently on military.ir

Quote
"This missile has a range of 160 km and a speed of Mach 5, and it has an intelligent guidance system, which means that it can continue its operation until it hits the target *after being fired* *independently of the aircraft's radar system.*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## TheImmortal

shadihassan28 said:


> Is that a Yasin with a paint job, looks clean and ready to go if it is.



Won’t be mass produced. This project has been laying in workshop level production for years now.

No one wants to mass produce it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

TheImmortal said:


> Won’t be mass produced. This project has been laying in workshop level production for years now.
> 
> No one wants to mass produce it.


request: do you have any sources to attach, or is it your personal consideration? 
thanks for a possible answer

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

sahureka2 said:


> request: do you have any sources to attach, or is it your personal consideration?
> thanks for a possible answer



Just my Personal consideration.

It has been shopped at weapons expos to third party countries - no interest. It has been shopped to IRIAF - no interest. It doesn’t take 10+ years to make a trainer. This project is almost as old as F-5 test bed projects.

The Kowsar project at least gets token orders from IRIAF. I have not yet heard a single batch of orders for this. Now they painted it white instead of prototype green. 

I don’t know if it’s funding issue or capability issue. But it doesn’t make sense why a squadron or two of these wouldn’t have been built by now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Yasin is a technological jewel. It remains to be seen if the designers have made the rear cockpit manage by artificial intelligence. To be continued

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Yasin is a technological jewel. It remains to be seen if the designers have made the rear cockpit manage by artificial intelligence. To be continued


the design have no advantage against kowsar but in one aspect and that is of they decide to use it for CAS and even for that , they have to use stronger engine for it to support more weapon and better armor to become something like su-35 and even that niche is dying because of emergent of drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> the design have no advantage against kowsar but in one aspect and that is of they decide to use it for CAS and even for that , they have to use stronger engine for it to support more weapon and better armor to become something like su-35 and even that niche is dying because of emergent of drones.


You mean Su-25 and not Su-35? I hope that was honest mistake/typo from you and Su-25 has a single pilot thus Yasin would need a change.
Another is Jahesh-700 being upscaled to provide 1500 or 1600 kilogram of thrust while fitting inside same space as Owj turbojet engine.
Then reduce fuel storage enough for new rear landing gear inside body that replaces one that is inside wing of Yasin like F-5 series.
Thus new wing can be made that is stronger and possibly lighter too, maybe even made to carry jet fuel if possible.


----------



## tsunset

@Hack-Hook Are you an HESA shareholder or what 🧐

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> You mean Su-25 and not Su-35? I hope that was honest mistake/typo from you and Su-25 has a single pilot thus Yasin would need a change.
> Another is Jahesh-700 being upscaled to provide 1500 or 1600 kilogram of thrust while fitting inside same space as Owj turbojet engine.
> Then reduce fuel storage enough for new rear landing gear inside body that replaces one that is inside wing of Yasin like F-5 series.
> Thus new wing can be made that is stronger and possibly lighter too, maybe even made to carry jet fuel if possible.


yes su-25,



tsunset said:


> @Hack-Hook Are you an HESA shareholder or what 🧐


no but I'm not Rosoboronexport sale representative .
yasin is also made by HESA and I believe its a waste of resources

and for the records HESA is a subsidiary of IAIO and both company are government owned and have no share in stock market


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> yes su-25,
> 
> 
> no but I'm not Rosoboronexport sale representative .
> yasin is also made by HESA and I believe its a waste of resources
> 
> and for the records HESA is a subsidiary of IAIO and both company are government owned and have no share in stock market


Yasin is not a waste of resources and further development would make it top of the line.
Only major downfall for Yasin jet trainer is only usable engine for it is Owj turbojet.
They could have tried to export Yasin perhaps for example to North Korea.
It would be able to replace Mig-15 and Mig-17 based jet trainers there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> no but I'm not Rosoboronexport sale representative .



No you are a pro-western shill hellbent on weakening Iran at any given chance.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## sahureka2

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Yasin is not a waste of resources and further development would make it top of the line.
> Only major downfall for Yasin jet trainer is only usable engine for it is Owj turbojet.
> They could have tried to export Yasin perhaps for example to North Korea.
> It would be able to replace Mig-15 and Mig-17 based jet trainers there.


certainly it could be an opportunity, but it should be remembered that North Korea is subject to embargoes and total sanctions inherent in the sale of armament, therefore an alternative would be that a "derivative" of the Yasin is built directly into the DPRK. On the other hand, already in the past and more recently I think that there has been a certain form of exchange of technology and military projects and which subsequently led to local production in both countries. Just to stay in the naval artillery sector, it occurs to me that the DPRK showed a version of the Oto Melara 76/62 on its surface effect naval units (recently also with stealth turret) and this immediately got me thinking al Fajr-27; while for the 6 barrel 30mm CIWS "Kamand" Iran may have had technological help from the North Koreans, since they have long been making a very similar weapon, even if it does not have a stealth dome. Without forgetting that it seems that they use the same method to locate the target for anti-ship missiles, very often without a specific radar to guide them. Returning to the Yasin, a collaboration with the DPRK could lead, in addition to the training version, to its further development, for example also in the version with a single seat for close air support and thus retire the Mig-15/17 in many of their missions.
We remember that the North Koreans modified many of these ancient aircraft for mission close air support by adding four hardpoints under the fuselage, so a Yasin-like aircraft could effectively replace them. However, these are only hypotheses.

here a couple of photos of modified Mig-15

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> No you are a pro-western shill hellbent on weakening Iran at any given chance.


you can call me that if i promoted buying western aircraft , so your comment is baseless , but i clearly can say 
You are a pro-Russia shill hellbent on weakening Iran at any given chance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> you can call me that if i promoted buying western aircraft , so your comment is baseless , but i clearly can say
> You are a pro-Russia shill hellbent on weakening Iran at any given chance.



You always compare our only viable option of getting decent modern aircrafts with western counterparts, so you do simp for western manufacturers. Secondly, your pigheaded insistence on Iran going fully indegenous would be playing into the hands of your buddies in the west. Im a patriotic Iranian who has a little bit more wisdom than you do. I guess any nation that buys from another nation is a shill?! LOL you are not only a pathetic western libtard shill but a retarded one as well.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You always compare our only viable option of getting decent modern aircrafts with western counterparts, so you do simp for western manufacturers. Secondly, your pigheaded insistence on Iran going fully indegenous would be playing into the hands of your buddies in the west. Im a patriotic Iranian who has a little bit more wisdom than you do. I guess any nation that buys from another nation is a shill?! LOL you are not only a pathetic western libtard shill but a retarded one as well.


I even compare it by J-10 and JF-17 you guys only see western aircrafts . sorry i don't believe in HAL-Tejas to compare it with that aircraft


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> I even compare it by J-10 and JF-17 you guys only see western aircrafts . sorry i don't believe in HAL-Tejas to compare it with that aircraft



For the millionth time, we have zero chance of getting Chinese and YOU KNOW it! Shill!


----------



## tsunset

@Hack-Hook Do you think that Su-15, MiG-17 or a MiG-21-23 or A7 Corsair/F8 Crusader/EMB 314 and F-80 can shut down easily a Su-35?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

What about Iran attack helicopters? Is the Toufan and Shahed 285 produced? Is there a production or is it still relying on Cobras while keeping the fleet at same number and only upgrading and maintaining them?

I think Iran could benefit also from some Ka-52E and Mi-28NE to cement its helicopter capabilities and CAS (i swear i'm not a Rosoboronexport representant or shareholder), but this could be nice to see new helicopters for the ground forces, notably if a fight occurs with Azerbaidjan Republic and to strike terrorists near the borders (like Israeli is doing that with their apaches...), safety eject also is beneficial, don't matter if helicopter crashes, but the pilot is way more valuable than the helicopter

Iran could also get more experience and knowledge on the helicopter field and their components, maybe capable to make in the future ECM for them and even anti-radar/anti radiation helicopter borne missiles like the AGM Sidearm

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

Do you guys think Russia would allow the sale of R37M BVR 200-400km range air to air missiles if there is indeed acquisition of Su-35 by Iran? Or will they only propose the R-77 export with 110km range only?

What would be the option for Iran to have increased range BVR missiles on Su-35 for instance?


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Do you guys think Russia would allow the sale of R37M BVR 200-400km range air to air missiles if there is indeed acquisition of Su-35 by Iran? Or will they only propose the R-77 export with 110km range only?
> 
> What would be the option for Iran to have increased range BVR missiles on Su-35 for instance?


the question is what is the use of R-37m if it only can get lock on tanker size target at 100km, r-77 is capable enough if you want hit tankers at that distance


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the question is what is the use of R-37m if it only can get lock on tanker size target at 100km, r-77 is capable enough if you want hit tankers at that distance



I hate to break it to you, but forget about tankers for one moment….most fighters will struggle to get a lock on another modern fighter at distance greater than 100KM-125KM. 

Some of you play video games too much or still think this is the 1960’s when RCS was 30.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> @Hack-Hook Do you think that Su-15, MiG-17 or a MiG-21-23 or A7 Corsair/F8 Crusader/EMB 314 and F-80 can shut down easily a Su-35?


do those aircrafts even have radars that can get a track 20km away.

and you can mock me but the fact remain that in 4th of August 1986 , an Iraq Mig-25 shot down by an f-5 flying by colonel Zare-Nejad from 2nd hunter Squadron in Tabriz sneaked behind an Iraqi Mig-25rb (Foxbat-B) and shot it down by gunfire

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

Hack-Hook said:


> the question is what is the use of R-37m if it only can get lock on tanker size target at 100km, r-77 is capable enough if you want hit


R37 is way faster, more appropriated to intercept low observable assets and AWACS, tankers, it meant for intercepting low observable assets like F-35/F-22/B-2 and B-1

R77 had poor performances for exemple in the Pakistan India skirmishes, they gone to the Israelis to get I-Derby ER missiles instead of R77 export


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> I hate to break it to you, but forget about tankers for one moment….most fighters will struggle to get a lock on another modern fighter at distance greater than 100KM-125KM.
> 
> Some of you play video games too much or still think this is the 1960’s when RCS was 30.


I think I for many times said that ibris-E can track a mig-29 size fighter at the range of 42km when it is directly in front of it

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## tsunset

And what about helicopter fleet? Is it all good and nothing to add/buy/change @Hack-Hook , Iran produced Shahed-285?

What do you think if Iran was going to buy some Mi28NE and Ka-52 or some Z-19E?


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> R37 is way faster, more appropriated to intercept low observable assets and AWACS, tankers, it meant for intercepting low observable assets like F-35/F-22/B-2 and B-1
> 
> R77 had poor performances for exemple in the Pakistan India skirmishes, they gone to the Israelis to get I-Derby ER missiles instead of R77 export


you are welcome intercept f-35 and F-22 and B-2 at the range of R-37
b-1 and b-52 maybe . in fact if the enemy fighter can track you and get a lock on you at 90km , and you are in a tanker or bomber , you simply are better eject . you have no way escape r-77 .in those types of aircrafts .

if you are in an AWACS and an enemy fighter track you at 100km , no at 200km without you already informed your escort and leaving the area ways before that , you must be court martialed for being drunk and not look at what you see on your sensors


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> And what about helicopter fleet? Is it all good and nothing to add/buy/change @Hack-Hook , Iran produced Shahed-285?
> 
> What do you think if Iran was going to buy some Mi28NE and Ka-52 or some Z-19E?



what you suggest mil-28 , ka-52. if you want to buy helicopters in size of AH-1j or the ones who play that role why bother , just buy the engine and build the rest .
don't iran already claim it produce Panha 2091 (IAIO toofan) in 2010 and in 2013 claimed and improved version called IAIO Toofan II
if you mean utility helicopters , we produce Shabaviz 2-75 which is a copy of bell 214c and Shabaviz 206-1 which is copy of bell-206 and we have Shahed-278 and Saba-248
if you want light attack helicopter we have shahed-285

so as I said it remain what type of helicopters , if its something in class of CH-47 or Mil-26 that will be a nice welcome for our army

this post may be of help








Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment


You say extra ammo. If it still retains the same auto loader as the Russian design, then the Iranians have a flawed tank especially against modern ATGMs. Auto loader in T-90 is different than T-72. And the cook off top was due to lack of blow out panels which T-90 added. T-90’s cook off at...



defence.pk


----------



## jauk




----------



## tsunset

__





Iran Jams Enemy’s Aircraft from 400 km Away: Official - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian deputy defense minister highlighted the country’s great progress in the air defense industry, saying the military forces have jammed a hostile reconnaissance aircraft at a distance of 400 kilometers.




www.tasnimnews.com





Today Saudi Arabia said they lost an F-15 due to "technical problem" in August when they intercepted 2 houthis drones



> Dismissing the foreign media propaganda aimed at downplaying the quality of Iranian arms, the deputy minister said such hostile attempts have mainly focused on Iranian drones.
> 
> “The enemy had acknowledged our missile power, but it did not expect us to make fundamental progress in the drone sphere under such sanctions,” he added.





> “A few years ago, when photographs of our advanced missiles and drones were released, some said that they were photoshopped. But now they’re saying ‘Iranian drones are very dangerous, why are you selling it to so and so, why are you giving it to so and so?’,” the Leader stated.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah




----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1588559593067941890

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1588559593067941890

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1588559593067941890


Are they preparing to put it in a air show


----------



## Super Falcon

mosu said:


> waow nice work


These are just mock ups never even flown and even are never will fly

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

Super Falcon said:


> These are just mock ups never even flown and even are never will fly


9 year old comment.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Super Falcon said:


> These are just mock ups never even flown and even are never will fly






if its not flown and not tested , you think how we say its inferior to kowsar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> if its not flown and not tested , you think how we say its inferior to kowsar


I think it was reference to a very old post I’m assuming he clicked on the Air Force page didn’t notice the date, I’m fairly sure referencing qaher 313


----------



## tsunset

Why Iran doesn't go on a standard color for their fleet instead of splinter cell colors on their fighters? Like nearly all countries in the world got grey or black as standard color, more professional and easier to sort, they should also use make a standard glass for the cockpits, as today only Russia uses splinter cell paint kits for their fighters along with Iran


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Why Iran doesn't go on a standard color for their fleet instead of splinter cell colors on their fighters? Like nearly all countries in the world got grey or black as standard color, more professional and easier to sort, they should also use make a standard glass for the cockpits, as today only Russia uses splinter cell paint kits for their fighters along with Iran


its supposed to make the airplanes when flying low (near ground) more invisible to the eye of the enemy pilots who fly at higher altitude , the desert color Iran is using is more suitable for middle east the one Russia is using is more suitable for winter in east Europe.

but i agree if they want to keep that camo its better only paint top of the aircraft with that and paint lower half something that make the airplane blend more with background sky

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

sahureka2 said:


> request: do you have any sources to attach, or is it your personal consideration?
> thanks for a possible answer


It has no advantage over Kowsar and it competes for same engines and a lot of other resources. I think its v stab has an advantage where a student pilot can get out of a spin and the bigger canopy is better for students but that's about it. 
It would be a good export item potentially, but even then an export version of Kowsar might still be better. 
Years ago someone posted the steps needed train from a cesna to heavy fighter; does a p[pilot need to go from a Beechcraft to yasin to kowsar to tomcat/su35 or can a pilot go from beechcraft to kowsar and then something heavy?


----------



## sahureka2

WudangMaster said:


> It has no advantage over Kowsar and it competes for same engines and a lot of other resources. I think its v stab has an advantage where a student pilot can get out of a spin and the bigger canopy is better for students but that's about it.
> It would be a good export item potentially, but even then an export version of Kowsar might still be better.
> Years ago someone posted the steps needed train from a cesna to heavy fighter; does a p[pilot need to go from a Beechcraft to yasin to kowsar to tomcat/su35 or can a pilot go from beechcraft to kowsar and then something heavy?


thanks for the reply, but I must point out that these are still personal considerations, certainly also partly acceptable, but always personal.
In my question I asked "sources" official sources were implied.
However interesting your point of view on the subject.
In any case, the Kowsar remains, even if improved, a clone of the F-5 and a possible export would see the interested states suffer the ire of the Northrop heir who holds the original patent and consequently of the USA, therefore very difficult that it is possible check for a possible export.
Instead the Yasin, even if at the moment the engine is a clone of the J-85, looks like a completely Iranian project, has its own original silhouette and the project could grow further to be able to carry out different missions, from training to close air support, both in two-seater and possibly single-seater version.
Could it be of interest to some nation?
Difficult to answer, but some names are spinning in my head, it is important that it is reliable and logistically well supported in the after sales.
It would certainly be a win for the Iranian aviation industry and its engineers and technicians

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> In any case, the Kowsar remains, even if improved, a clone of the F-5 and a possible export would see the interested states suffer the ire of the Northrop heir who holds the original patent and consequently of the USA, therefore very difficult that it is possible check for a possible export.


our deal with Northrop over F-5 allow us producing the airplane , also the plane may look similar to f5 but it actually is longer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> our deal with Northrop over F-5 allow us producing the airplane , also the plane may look similar to f5 but it actually is longer


I was not aware of this permit-license, but having permission from Northrop to make it (for Iran) is a different matter than having permission to export it to third countries, so you should always have permission not only from heir of Northrop, but also of the USA which holds the legal key to grant or prohibit the export permit.
Certainly Iran may not be interested in receiving the permit, the problem will be for any customers who could suffer the ire of the USA (sanctions, embargoes, blocking and confiscation of bank accounts, etc.), alternatively they are the Iranian upgrades for F- 5 that could be supplied to countries that still have them on line or in stock (for example Venezuela-Vietnam) and possibly provide for the reconstruction to bring them back to zero flight hours.
While the Yasin is an Iranian patent to be offered without problems to friendly countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> I was not aware of this permit-license, but having permission from Northrop to make it (for Iran) is a different matter than having permission to export it to third countries, so you should always have permission not only from heir of Northrop, but also of the USA which holds the legal key to grant or prohibit the export permit.
> Certainly Iran may not be interested in receiving the permit, the problem will be for any customers who could suffer the ire of the USA (sanctions, embargoes, blocking and confiscation of bank accounts, etc.), alternatively they are the Iranian upgrades for F- 5 that could be supplied to countries that still have them on line or in stock (for example Venezuela-Vietnam) and possibly provide for the reconstruction to bring them back to zero flight hours.
> While the Yasin is an Iranian patent to be offered without problems to friendly countries.


if the internal component is different and the size of airplane is different , I wonder on what ground USA want to complain about the aircraft
general shape of it , like apple rounded rectangle patent ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> if the internal component is different and the size of airplane is different , I wonder on what ground USA want to complain about the aircraft
> general shape of it , like apple rounded rectangle patent ?


as I wrote the problem is not if Iran wants to sell Kowsar (aka F-5) on the contrary I think it does not care to have the permission of the USA, the problem of the USA would be posed to the nation that could be interested in buying the Kowsar, on these could fall the wrath of the USA.
Therefore, any sale of the newly built Kowsar could only be directed to countries already subject to US sanctions and embargoes - nations that would not matter if the US put more sanctions.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

I just looked at images of Su-25 and I think Yasin would benefit from such landing gear then Yasin could carry heavier payload on wings than Kowsar.


----------



## WudangMaster

sahureka2 said:


> thanks for the reply, but I must point out that these are still personal considerations, certainly also partly acceptable, but always personal.
> In my question I asked "sources" official sources were implied.
> However interesting your point of view on the subject.


I guess a factor for Yasin vs Kowsar being used by IRIAF or other air forces is what stepping stones are there for pilots to train before getting on a heavy fighter. Yasin does have some features better suited for training more novice pilots whereas Kowsar was always called an advanced trainer, one step before graduating to a tomcat or SU35. 
Does an air force need both types or can a pilot leap from a beechcraft type plane to kowsar. Yasin does have a bigger canopy view and its tail was said to help a pilot get out of a spin or something, so maybe both planes are needed (or a limited number of yasins with more kowsars) in some cases.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> I guess a factor for Yasin vs Kowsar being used by IRIAF or other air forces is what stepping stones are there for pilots to train before getting on a heavy fighter. Yasin does have some features better suited for training more novice pilots whereas Kowsar was always called an advanced trainer, one step before graduating to a tomcat or SU35.
> Does an air force need both types or can a pilot leap from a beechcraft type plane to kowsar. Yasin does have a bigger canopy view and its tail was said to help a pilot get out of a spin or something, so maybe both planes are needed (or a limited number of yasins with more kowsars) in some cases.


by spin if you mean flat spin i like to see a pilot manage to take F-5 into flat spin


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> by spin if you mean flat spin i like to see a pilot manage to take F-5 into flat spin


It was some special feature about the tail that was mentioned when it was first unveiled years ago. Not sure what exactly, just that it is well suited for more novice pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

(An answer to some of the problems raised above)
If we look at some of the products that Iran has shown and announced that they are manufactured locally and by its experts and engineers, I think that it is capable of:
(not at once)
1- Iran can design and manufacture the airframe and paint as appropriate
2- it can make BVR missiles with seeker and tracker etc
3- It can make avionics and electronics
4- Take-off and landing system and automatic control of the wings
But it can not manufacture the medium and heavy-duty turbofan engine with its power
Other things noted in Iran's capabilities can be added

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Hack-Hook said:


> what you suggest mil-28 , ka-52. if you want to buy helicopters in size of AH-1j or the ones who play that role why bother , just buy the engine and build the rest .
> don't iran already claim it produce Panha 2091 (IAIO toofan) in 2010 and in 2013 claimed and improved version called IAIO Toofan II
> if you mean utility helicopters , we produce Shabaviz 2-75 which is a copy of bell 214c and Shabaviz 206-1 which is copy of bell-206 and we have Shahed-278 and Saba-248
> if you want light attack helicopter we have shahed-285
> 
> so as I said it remain what type of helicopters , if its something in class of CH-47 or Mil-26 that will be a nice welcome for our army
> 
> this post may be of help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment
> 
> 
> You say extra ammo. If it still retains the same auto loader as the Russian design, then the Iranians have a flawed tank especially against modern ATGMs. Auto loader in T-90 is different than T-72. And the cook off top was due to lack of blow out panels which T-90 added. T-90’s cook off at...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk


I think that Iran can get a helicopter industry with capabilities similar to the Venom and Viper
And that's all you need
And if it’s made or re-engineered ch-53 that would be very cool

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Iraqi soldier said:


> 4- Take-off and landing system and automatic control of the wings
> But it can not manufacture the medium and heavy-duty turbofan engine with its power
> Other things noted in Iran's capabilities can be added


When it comes to engines in recent years knowledge is not an issue but it seems choosing the main path from now on is the main problem since resources are limited.

for example in civilian path you need extremely reliable engine which requires easy maintenance and uses least amount of fuel.

In military path sometimes you need to push engine to the max but since you have expertise in your army you may sacrifice easy maintenance here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Iraqi soldier said:


> I think that Iran can get a helicopter industry with capabilities similar to the Venom and Viper
> And that's all you need
> And if it’s made or re-engineered ch-53 that would be very cool


well , about ch-53 i have my doubt . if we spend the money on it engine in class of what is inside Uh-1 and AH-1 probably is achievable in 4-5 year but the one in CH-53 is 2.5-3 time more powerful , i have my doubt about it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

B-21 ?

What is he talking about? Something new?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591176888168624130

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> B-21 ?
> 
> What is he talking about? Something new?
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591176888168624130


something that Northrop hope to make operational in next 5-10 years to replace B-2


----------



## Stryker1982

Hack-Hook said:


> something that Northrop hope to make operational in next 5-10 years to replace B-2


Oh, for some reason I thought he was talking about some Iranian delta wing bomb that was going to be unveiled soon. Nevermind haha


----------



## mohsen

Iranian/Russian journalist says Iran has received 60 su35 fighters.
https:// t. me/khayalpressa313/6896

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

not true until we see it flying in Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Iranian/Russian journalist says Iran has received 60 su35 fighters.
> https:// t. me/khayalpressa313/6896


well let just say that is the price of 100,000 shahed-136 if we estmate the price at 50,000$ a piece , if we go with 20,000$ that will be 250,000 shahed-136


----------



## mohsen

yugocrosrb95 said:


> not true until we see it flying in Iran.


Just hold this news in a corner of your mind for future use.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Cancerous Tumor said:


> When it comes to engines in recent years knowledge is not an issue but it seems choosing the main path from now on is the main problem since resources are limited.
> 
> for example in civilian path you need extremely reliable engine which requires easy maintenance and uses least amount of fuel.
> 
> In military path sometimes you need to push engine to the max but since you have expertise in your army you may sacrifice easy maintenance here.
> View attachment 895476


I believe that Iran should direct its resources towards an industry other than aviation, such as semiconductors, composite materials, etc.

Because Iran has adopted a method of war and repelling the attack, and it is successful, and no one will be exposed to it in particular, and its location allows it to control the sea port of energy and energy fields and a spoiled state that the West wants to protect.

So

It should make better use of its resources.

It was also used previously in the manufacture of missiles and defense systems

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Persian infographic for SU35!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Persian infographic for SU35!


For Gods sake these blogger and their quest for more click.
do you guys knew the ols-35 on su-35 is of old generation and only can detect 4 target , while for example a newer model FLIR like Pirate which is installed on Typhon can track up to 500 individual target.
and the SAR capability of IBRIS-E even according to its producer is limited and have a resolution of 3m and it can only engage a destroyer size target at 100km most for comparison the range for an F-16 block 60+ is around 300km and those 400km radar number is not in normal scan its for a very narroe 10-15degree scan in front for a normal 120 degree scan the range is 200km and at most according to producer video 100km engagement (other videos show less) if there is no E-Warfare

and those maneuver are irrelevant as these days even modern infrared missiles are bvr

and the photo state a wrong wingspan for the fighter

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> For Gods sake these blogger and their quest for more click.
> do you guys knew the ols-35 on su-35 is of old generation and only can detect 4 target , while for example a newer model FLIR like Pirate which is installed on Typhon can track up to 500 individual target.
> and the SAR capability of IBRIS-E even according to its producer is limited and have a resolution of 3m and it can only engage a destroyer size target at 100km most for comparison the range for an F-16 block 60+ is around 300km and those 400km radar number is not in normal scan its for a very narroe 10-15degree scan in front for a normal 120 degree scan the range is 200km and at most according to producer video 100km engagement (other videos show less) if there is no E-Warfare
> 
> and those maneuver are irrelevant as these days even modern infrared missiles are bvr
> 
> and the photo state a wrong wingspan for the fighter


The point was the timing of this infographic, not it's content.


----------



## yugocrosrb95

mohsen said:


> The point was the timing of this infographic, not it's content.


Doesn't change the fact it is useless and pointless.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## tsunset

Kowsar and JF-17, F-5 and Harrier GR.3 destroys Su-35 easily so it's pointless to spend billions on that fighter that gets wrecked by western better white technology...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Kowsar and JF-17, F-5 and Harrier GR.3 destroys Su-35 easily so it's pointless to spend billions on that fighter that gets wrecked by western better white technology...


can you explain when somebody claimed f-5 and harrier can destroy su-35 and kowsar and jf-17 can do it easily ?
what here is said is su-35 is useless for iran as it can't compete with rafale and f-15sa and f-16 block-72 that is around us

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

tsunset said:


> Kowsar and JF-17, F-5 and Harrier GR.3 destroys Su-35 easily so it's pointless to spend billions on that fighter that gets wrecked by western better white technology...



Lol i hope you're being sarcastic!



Hack-Hook said:


> can you explain when somebody claimed f-5 and harrier can destroy su-35 and kowsar and jf-17 can do it easily ?
> what here is said is su-35 is useless for iran as it can't compete with rafale and f-15sa and f-16 block-72 that is around us



You seem to think that what we have is enough, so he is taking the piss out of you, ahmagh lol


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Hack-Hook said:


> حسنًا ، حول الفصل 53 لدي شك. إذا أنفقنا المال على المحرك في فئة ما بداخل Uh-1 و AH-1 ، فمن المحتمل أن يكون من الممكن تحقيقه في 4-5 سنوات ولكن المحرك الموجود في CH-53 أقوى بمقدار 2.5-3 مرات ، لدي شك في ذلك





Hack-Hook said:


> well , about ch-53 i have my doubt . if we spend the money on it engine in class of what is inside Uh-1 and AH-1 probably is achievable in 4-5 year but the one in CH-53 is 2.5-3 time more powerful , i have my doubt about it


I know that the power of the engine is twice the power of the TV3 engine, but if it can copy this engine, it can re-engineer the T-64 engine

That's what you do with the Venom and Viper helicopters


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1592513820106555394

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1593011302733344768

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> well let just say that is the price of 100,000 shahed-136 if we estmate the price at 50,000$ a piece , if we go with 20,000$ that will be 250,000 shahed-136


Strategic weapon systems don't fit the methodology of Hay-Market barter deal to be measured in pennies or dollars my friend. 

For Russia selling SU-35 to Iran nowadays is a strategic decision far outweighing pennies or dollars. It is a long term national security issue that Russia recognized during the war in Ukraine. Its true, the transaction benefits Iran, it also benefits Russia but on lesser scale. Iran will be a cornerstone of Russia's future dealings with regional and global issues because Iran shown its weight and influence as a prominent rising power. 

For the Russians it became obvious & proven that Iran is nation that could be relied upon as an ally a hot-topic spoken about daily in the Russian parliament, political circles, Russian media, and by the Russian regular folks in a highly positive light. By assisting Russia, and showing friendship, Iran took a great political risk that no other nation dared to take and none will "except" Belarus but Belarus is a sister nation, a nation with similar culture, intertwined in shared history, ethnicity, and relion, while Iran is not . . . 

Russia sold huge quantities of arms to China and India since 1960s "USSR & Russia". Despite the physical size of those two big bulky nations "almost 3 billion in total", but they are spineless and global jokes especially India which is ready to take advantage of the Ukraine war by gobbling Russian oil and grains in great quantities at fire sale prices, and yet as usual, never gutsy enough to announce any active support to anyone. India didn't transfer a single penny's worth of material to Russia while 95% of Indian media is against Russia. Chinese are not as a worthless cowards but they scores less than 3 points on the scale of 1:10 to India's ZERO "0:10" which seems to indicate three folds higher manhood traits, but it's not that simple.

Iran's steadfast stand side by side with Russia shows who is the man in the global crowd and who are the weakling cowards.

Selling 64 or 240 SU-35 "not enough produced, I know" to Iran is very realistic and if Iran places orders for those jets, then rest assure they will get as many as they want. Plus, the planes will be upgraded/modified to state of the art technology along with many other military technologies that no nation has access to but Russia.

Not a mere opinion, its happening as we speak. 
Don't get me wrong, I love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon. The Russian platform when updated with LR/robust AESA along with generation 5 electronics and sensors it will be the best aircraft in Iran's air force since the Grumman F-14 Tomcats, but much better. I hope they get at least 8 full squadrons including some from Russian military stocks if necessary to form that 8 squadrons of SU-35s force.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## jauk

Joe_Adam said:


> Strategic weapon systems don't fit the methodology of Hay-Market barter deal to be measured in pennies or dollars my friend.
> 
> For Russia selling SU-35 to Iran nowadays is a strategic decision far outweighing pennies or dollars. It is a long term national security issue that Russia recognized during the war in Ukraine. Its true, the transaction benefits Iran, it also benefits Russia but on lesser scale. Iran will be a cornerstone of Russia's future dealings with regional and global issues because Iran shown its weight and influence as a prominent rising power.
> 
> For the Russians it became obvious & proven that Iran is nation that could be relied upon as an ally a hot-topic spoken about daily in the Russian parliament, political circles, Russian media, and by the Russian regular folks in a highly positive light. By assisting Russia, and showing friendship, Iran took a great political risk that no other nation dared to take and none will "except" Belarus but Belarus is a sister nation, a nation with similar culture, intertwined in shared history, ethnicity, and relion, while Iran is not . . .
> 
> Russia sold huge quantities of arms to China and India since 1960s "USSR & Russia". Despite the physical size of those two big bulky nations "almost 3 billion in total", but they are spineless and global jokes especially India which is ready to take advantage of the Ukraine war by gobbling Russian oil and grains in great quantities at fire sale prices, and yet as usual, never gutsy enough to announce any active support to anyone. India didn't transfer a single penny's worth of material to Russia while 95% of Indian media is against Russia. Chinese are not as a worthless cowards but they scores less than 3 points on the scale of 1:10 to India's ZERO "0:10" which seems to indicate three folds higher manhood traits, but it's not that simple.
> 
> Iran's steadfast stand side by side with Russia shows who is the man in the global crowd and who are the weakling cowards.
> 
> Selling 64 or 240 SU-35 "not enough produced, I know" to Iran is very realistic and if Iran places orders for those jets, then rest assure they will get as many as they want. Plus, the planes will be upgraded/modified to state of the art technology along with many other military technologies that no nation has access to but Russia.
> 
> Not a mere opinion, its happening as we speak.
> Don't get me wrong, I love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon. The Russian platform when updated with LR/robust AESA along with generation 5 electronics and sensors it will be the best aircraft in Iran's air force since the Grumman F-14 Tomcats, but much better. I hope they get at least 8 full squadrons including some from Russian military stocks if necessary to form that 8 squadrons of SU-35s force.


Thanks. However, the fundamental question is, regardless of funds and tech, is 'air superiority' and payload delivery via expensive craft obsolete. I believe it is. Cheap strike with intelligent munitions are the future. Aren't we seeing this unfold before our eyes as we speak?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Joe_Adam said:


> Strategic weapon systems don't fit the methodology of Hay-Market barter deal to be measured in pennies or dollars my friend.
> 
> For Russia selling SU-35 to Iran nowadays is a strategic decision far outweighing pennies or dollars. It is a long term national security issue that Russia recognized during the war in Ukraine. Its true, the transaction benefits Iran, it also benefits Russia but on lesser scale. Iran will be a cornerstone of Russia's future dealings with regional and global issues because Iran shown its weight and influence as a prominent rising power.
> 
> For the Russians it became obvious & proven that Iran is nation that could be relied upon as an ally a hot-topic spoken about daily in the Russian parliament, political circles, Russian media, and by the Russian regular folks in a highly positive light. By assisting Russia, and showing friendship, Iran took a great political risk that no other nation dared to take and none will "except" Belarus but Belarus is a sister nation, a nation with similar culture, intertwined in shared history, ethnicity, and relion, while Iran is not . . .
> 
> Russia sold huge quantities of arms to China and India since 1960s "USSR & Russia". Despite the physical size of those two big bulky nations "almost 3 billion in total", but they are spineless and global jokes especially India which is ready to take advantage of the Ukraine war by gobbling Russian oil and grains in great quantities at fire sale prices, and yet as usual, never gutsy enough to announce any active support to anyone. India didn't transfer a single penny's worth of material to Russia while 95% of Indian media is against Russia. Chinese are not as a worthless cowards but they scores less than 3 points on the scale of 1:10 to India's ZERO "0:10" which seems to indicate three folds higher manhood traits, but it's not that simple.
> 
> Iran's steadfast stand side by side with Russia shows who is the man in the global crowd and who are the weakling cowards.
> 
> Selling 64 or 240 SU-35 "not enough produced, I know" to Iran is very realistic and if Iran places orders for those jets, then rest assure they will get as many as they want. Plus, the planes will be upgraded/modified to state of the art technology along with many other military technologies that no nation has access to but Russia.
> 
> Not a mere opinion, its happening as we speak.
> Don't get me wrong, I love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon. The Russian platform when updated with LR/robust AESA along with generation 5 electronics and sensors it will be the best aircraft in Iran's air force since the Grumman F-14 Tomcats, but much better. I hope they get at least 8 full squadrons including some from Russian military stocks if necessary to form that 8 squadrons of SU-35s force.


Russia is simply in no position to sell any aircraft if they build ant they need it to replace the aircraft they lost during this war

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Piet

Hack-Hook said:


> we already have RD-33 and TF30-P-412A there is no need to do that and we are working on a turbofan engine , the problem is that the project don't have enough funds.
> and our airforce decided they like N-156f fighter design





Joe_Adam said:


> Strategic weapon systems don't fit the methodology of Hay-Market barter deal to be measured in pennies or dollars my friend.
> 
> For Russia selling SU-35 to Iran nowadays is a strategic decision far outweighing pennies or dollars. It is a long term national security issue that Russia recognized during the war in Ukraine. Its true, the transaction benefits Iran, it also benefits Russia but on lesser scale. Iran will be a cornerstone of Russia's future dealings with regional and global issues because Iran shown its weight and influence as a prominent rising power.
> 
> For the Russians it became obvious & proven that Iran is nation that could be relied upon as an ally a hot-topic spoken about daily in the Russian parliament, political circles, Russian media, and by the Russian regular folks in a highly positive light. By assisting Russia, and showing friendship, Iran took a great political risk that no other nation dared to take and none will "except" Belarus but Belarus is a sister nation, a nation with similar culture, intertwined in shared history, ethnicity, and relion, while Iran is not . . .
> 
> Russia sold huge quantities of arms to China and India since 1960s "USSR & Russia". Despite the physical size of those two big bulky nations "almost 3 billion in total", but they are spineless and global jokes especially India which is ready to take advantage of the Ukraine war by gobbling Russian oil and grains in great quantities at fire sale prices, and yet as usual, never gutsy enough to announce any active support to anyone. India didn't transfer a single penny's worth of material to Russia while 95% of Indian media is against Russia. Chinese are not as a worthless cowards but they scores less than 3 points on the scale of 1:10 to India's ZERO "0:10" which seems to indicate three folds higher manhood traits, but it's not that simple.
> 
> Iran's steadfast stand side by side with Russia shows who is the man in the global crowd and who are the weakling cowards.
> 
> Selling 64 or 240 SU-35 "not enough produced, I know" to Iran is very realistic and if Iran places orders for those jets, then rest assure they will get as many as they want. Plus, the planes will be upgraded/modified to state of the art technology along with many other military technologies that no nation has access to but Russia.
> 
> Not a mere opinion, its happening as we speak.
> Don't get me wrong, I love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon. The Russian platform when updated with LR/robust AESA along with generation 5 electronics and sensors it will be the best aircraft in Iran's air force since the Grumman F-14 Tomcats, but much better. I hope they get at least 8 full squadrons including some from Russian military stocks if necessary to form that 8 squadrons of SU-35s force.


“In addressing the acquisition of Su-35 Flanker F’s as per Joe_Adam, he states that he would “love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon.”

I have for a substantial time studied the above and wish to ad my 2c worth to this discussion.

To this end I have included a shortcut to a drop box that contains a five part ‘paper’ in which I attempt to do just this.

These five parts amounts to 148MB though and are heavy on images plus explanatory text. It renders the best when opened in Word.

This paper would not have been possible without posts to Secret Projects (UK), and https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.









IRI FCA


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

After the war they could sell them. Iran is not in a huge hurry. If Iran gets a few dozen SU-35s in exchange for some drones/missiles and some cash, that would be a great deal. SU-35 has thrust vectoring. The F-5 even in the Iran-Iraq war, was a secondary aircraft delegated to support roles. F-5 is good for training or with modern components, with AWACS, you can maybe fly them low and sneak up behind opponents. Iran also needs AWACS and more satellites from Russia. 

I don't know if you read the other thread but I read about a group of Chinese flanker pilots that went to Thailand to compete against the Royal Thai Air force Gripen pilots. The flanker pilots completely defeated the Gripen in close range combat. However the second day, they engaged in BVR and that's when the Gripens won decisively. It was because of two main reasons. One the Thai were more familiar with the terrain. Second, the Chinese pilots were said to easily fall into basic traps that the Thai pilots would set for them. They wouldn't really trained to think critically / think outside the box. 

The whole Soviet doctrine is different from western doctrines in the sense that they have a set of mission parameters and must follow the mission to the letter. They basically don't have as much freedom of execution as western pilots. However that was a few years ago and since then the Chinese have changed their approach. The Russians though have stuck to their old ways and they don't get enough training hours. I think that's all going to change now after Ukraine.



Hack-Hook said:


> Russia is simply in no position to sell any aircraft if they build ant they need it to replace the aircraft they lost during this war


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> SU-35 has thrust vectoring.


what is the use of thrust vectoring in modern warfare, can you explain that to me .
considering that these days even an AIM-9 has the range beyond 40km and can pull more G than any fighter available . and the pilot don't even need to turn its aircraft toward enemy , he just need move his head to that direction.


sha ah said:


> I don't know if you read the other thread but I read about a group of Chinese flanker pilots that went to Thailand to compete against the Royal Thai Air force Gripen pilots. The flanker pilots completely defeated the Gripen in close range combat. However the second day, they engaged in BVR and that's when the Gripens won decisively. It was because of two main reasons. One the Thai were more familiar with the terrain. Second, the Chinese pilots were said to easily fall into basic traps that the Thai pilots would set for them. They wouldn't really trained to think critically / think outside the box.


Grippen C/D of Thailand don't have magical radar with range of 400km
they had a PS-05/A Mark 3 Pulse Doppler radar works in the 8–10 GHz band and has 1 kW energy output It is capable of detecting a fighter aircraft from 120 km distance and can see road traffic and count ships at anchor in a harbor at 70 km.
now why you think those Flankers were thrown out of the sky when artificial limitation on the Grippen removed ? very simple they come with two pod ALQ-TLS electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod and Digital Joint Reconnaissance Pod these gave them E-Warfare and battlefield capabilities that render everything flanker had useless . even Rafale pilots said that in wargame a Grippen can frighteningly near you without you become aware of them .

you can put the longest range missile and strongest engine on an airplane , it can be super maneuverable , but all that is useless if enemy can easily beat you in E-Warfare and that is the weakness of Russia , you can say its their Achilles Heel .



by the way its funny call kowsar an F-5 . do you knew the difference of radar and E/W capabilities of those two airplane ?are you aware of how much more information about battlefield the pilot have compared to an F-5
right now kowsar after f-14 have the strongest radar among Iran airplanes but there is one different F-14 do it by brute force and kowsar do it by finesse

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

The Iranians know what specifications a fighter-interceptor or bomber must have
Because they fought a war in which they used a fighter that has a long-range radar and a long-range air-to-air missile
And they saw the air power used by NATO and America in the two Gulf wars, which adopted electronic warfare and air defense suppression
So
They want an interception air force that works in conditions of confusion and has long-range radar and missiles


----------



## sahureka2

F-5E this years Kenya Airforce day










are Iranian F-5Es also used in this configuration ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## applesauce

sha ah said:


> I don't know if you read the other thread but I read about a group of Chinese flanker pilots that went to Thailand to compete against the Royal Thai Air force Gripen pilots. The flanker pilots completely defeated the Gripen in close range combat. However the second day, they engaged in BVR and that's when the Gripens won decisively. It was because of two main reasons. One the Thai were more familiar with the terrain. Second, the Chinese pilots were said to easily fall into basic traps that the Thai pilots would set for them. They wouldn't really trained to think critically / think outside the box.
> 
> The whole Soviet doctrine is different from western doctrines in the sense that they have a set of mission parameters and must follow the mission to the letter. They basically don't have as much freedom of execution as western pilots. However that was a few years ago and since then the Chinese have changed their approach. The Russians though have stuck to their old ways and they don't get enough training hours. I think that's all going to change now after Ukraine.



no.

china took old school su-27s with them (or rather, the j-11A)
it was very maneuverable like all flankers, and did well within visual range combat.
it got whipped in BVR, sensors and general situation awareness, it had nothing to do with doctrine or "thinking outside the box" .
china would take the j-10C to later exercises with thailand, where the j-10 proceeded to demolish gripens.

you make the general mistake that all westerners make about china, that china is just a poorer soviet union. china has never used soviet doctrines. china could not if they wanted, china for a long time was not the industrial giant that the soviets were, and their founding was very different, the soviets used a bunch of untrustworthy former imperial officers and soldiers along with masses of convicts and such and these required supervision and top heavy command. the PLA and the chinese red army before it did not, the PLA were fully trusted to take initiative in war and individual commanders and soldiers often made on the fly decisions in battle. its infantry tactics were such that even the us studied it. unit cohesion was immersively high, chinese units could take 90% casualties and continue to fight. and its not just on paper, in the korean war, plenty of units were bombed out but still defending their areas against numerically superior and better equipped american units, with numerous cases of entire units reduced to a few or even just one guy yet they continued to defend a hill rather than break and run . in the 62 war against india, individual soldiers got lost in the mountain but if a handful of friendlies found each other they would independently form small fire teams and continue to advanced the objective. the chinese have homed this over a long period of time, high command sets the overall objective or strategic goals, men on the ground do whatever tactically needed to get there.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sahureka2 said:


> F-5E this years Kenya Airforce day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are Iranian F-5Es also used in this configuration ?


The maneuverability and this F-5 must be really reduced because it wears a large weight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The maneuverability and this F-5 must be really reduced because it wears a large weight


bombing formation , the idea is they do the bombing and from base to target they use external fuel tanks and then they drop them and the bombs and voila they have an f-5 in interception formation with only two AIM-9 that can escape or engage incoming enemy

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## tsunset

Su-35 is more maneuverable than F-4 and F-5 and F-14


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Su-35 is more maneuverable than F-4 and F-5 and F-14


again what is the use , what super maneuverability bring to modern air warfare outside air-shows ?
are you guys suggesting that su-35 can outmaneuver incoming enemy missiles ?
honestly do you guys get your information from TopGun Movies ? news for you all the airplane were shot down by air defense if it was real . the missile even don't need to hit aircraft to destroy it and it certainly won't chase aircraft . it don't care if the aircraft stop mid flight


----------



## strateger

After seeing how effective Iranian drones and missiles have been against NATO equipment in Ukraine, I wouldn't doubt how effective other Iranian technology such as Toofan APC's, Karrar and other tanks, and Kowsar jets. It's clear that those F5's are probably the most upgraded in the world, and if they are indeed new airframes, engines, avionics, etc as it appears I wouldn't doubt them at all. Seeing Iranian equipment in Iraq, Kurdistan, Syria, and now Ukraine.... absolutely no reason to doubt them.

Russia can't fully use MIG-35, SU-35, SU-34, etc in Ukraine because of modern air defense. This is a good warning for any country who spends a fortune on fighter jets. The most used jet in Ukraine has been SU-24s and SU-25s, both Cold War era jets. To hit targets Russia has used Iskander missiles, cruise missiles, and Iranian drones. 

Iran should be manufacturing modern cruise missiles in huge quantities instead of fighter jets... and keep producing Kowsar and introduce a bomber they can make like reverse-engineered F4's of SU-22's... Iran already has cruise-missile style weapons systems for F4's and SU-22's... Might as well just make the jet and continue upgrading. Russia literally can't use MIG-35's or SU-35's in Ukraine because of Air Defense. Why make them?

Iran Air Force:
Kowsar
Modern F4 
Modern SU-22

That's it. Everything else is cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, air defense, artillery, and ground forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

This person posted a clip of an SU-35 landing in Iran:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

strateger said:


> Russia can't fully use MIG-35, SU-35, SU-34, etc in Ukraine because of modern air defense. This is a good warning for any country who spends a fortune on fighter jets. The most used jet in Ukraine has been SU-24s and SU-25s, both Cold War era jets. To hit targets Russia has used Iskander missiles, cruise missiles, and Iranian drones.


No its more because they didn't care about SEAD and didn't properly invested in that aspect of air force . su-34 and su-30 also didn't faired well knew why because of Russia obsession with FAB-500 and Fab-1000

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

jauk said:


> This person posted a clip of an SU-35 landing in Iran:


probably refueled in Iran on their way to Syria

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

Hack-Hook said:


> again what is the use , what super maneuverability bring to modern air warfare outside air-shows ?
> are you guys suggesting that su-35 can outmaneuver incoming enemy missiles ?
> honestly do you guys get your information from TopGun Movies ? news for you all the airplane were shot down by air defense if it was real . the missile even don't need to hit aircraft to destroy it and it certainly won't chase aircraft . it don't care if the aircraft stop mid flight


Could a supposed AESA Kowsar carry R-37 AAM? This is the longest range and fastest AAM, Su-35 can carry it but i don't know if Russia would allow to sell it

Fakour is too heavy, too big, slow, not agile and got an overkill payload, this is made like the aim-54 made to hit multiple fighters in formation at once '


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Could a supposed AESA Kowsar carry R-37 AAM? This is the longest range and fastest AAM, Su-35 can carry it but i don't know if Russia would allow to sell it


su-35 can't use that missile against for example a mig-29 at the range above 100km
because it simply don't get a lock at those distance


tsunset said:


> Fakour is too heavy, too big, slow, not agile and got an overkill payload, this is made like the aim-54 made to hit multiple fighters in formation at once '


Fakour is not suitable for the role , there is indication of Iran working on something based on AIM-7 body for the role

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

I once read that Dehghani Firouzabadi, Scientific Assistant to the President of the Republic, demanded that the production of electronic chips based on 180 nanometer technology begin.
But I searched a lot and did not find this wonderful news
There are many countries that Iran can supply with this technology, such as Russia, China and India
It has quartz sand with a purity of 99%
It has wafer-based industries such as solar panels, LED lights and screens, as well as electronic chips.
If anyone finds it, please tag me


----------



## Iraqi soldier

tsunset said:


> Su-35 is more maneuverable than F-4 and F-5 and F-14


Maneuvering for fighters is not an important issue

Iran knows what it needs
Iran has gone through experiences and gained experience from the wars it went through or happened next to it
It has possessed fighters with long-range missile and radar features.
This is what you need in wars today
This is what Iran is looking for in fighters
AESA long range radar
And BVR missiles, I think Iran can manufacture it because it has two experiments, the first in the Fakour industry, and the second in the Sayyad 4B industry.

Iran knows the importance of electronic warfare from its observation of the recent American wars.
America relies on the suppression of air defense systems and electronic warfare
Therefore, it will pay great attention to this aspect in the manufacture or purchase of its fighters

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## strateger

tsunset said:


> Su-35 is more maneuverable than F-4 and F-5 and F-14



Which means nothing... There are no dog fights. Fighter jets are mobile cruise missile launchers now for the most part. Mobile cruise missile launchers and ground support.

Fully modernized F4 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc.... Upgraded/new J79 engines
Fully modernized F5 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc..... Upgraded/new J85 engines
Fully modernized SU-22 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc.... Upgraded/new AL-21 engines

+

Cruise missiles
Ballistic missiles
Air defense

That's it right there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iran's F-4s are over 50 years old now. How much longer can Iran continue to use them ? Until they're 60 years old ? 70 years old ? The US is about to retire its fleet of F-22s. Fighter jets are only meant to be used for 20-30 years. Airframes and parts can only last for so long, they can only take so much wear and tear before they break down completely.



strateger said:


> Which means nothing... There are no dog fights. Fighter jets are mobile cruise missile launchers now for the most part. Mobile cruise missile launchers and ground support.
> 
> Fully modernized F4 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc.... Upgraded/new J79 engines
> Fully modernized F5 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc..... Upgraded/new J85 engines
> Fully modernized SU-22 - Ability to produce new engines, airframes, avionics, etc.... Upgraded/new AL-21 engines
> 
> +
> 
> Cruise missiles
> Ballistic missiles
> Air defense
> 
> That's it right there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Here's the story of the fighters
The fighter is used to carry weapons and sensors (missiles, radar...) and deliver them to the enemy after detecting and destroying the target, and it must have protection elements from air threats such as missiles and interceptors, so it is equipped with interceptor missiles, jamming devices and electronic warfare, and these aircraft are in constant contact with the command to receive orders or change assignment.

Therefore, it must have an engine and the rest of the above-mentioned elements...
Iran looks at the war from its angle
She doesn't have that technology and industry
And if you get it, it will be after a long time

Therefore, I resorted to other, more effective methods in confronting the assault and collecting it quickly

It focused on ballistic missiles that can hit the target quickly, powerfully, and accurately, and can bypass defenses and electronic warfare

On the other hand, it relied on providing a local industry for the most powerful defense systems

Thus, it has invested its money in a better, more effective and powerful way to prevent war or repel aggression

At the same time, Iran has not stopped working to obtain technology that has a dual use in the military and civil fields, such as engines, secure communications, and monitoring targets in the event of an internal rebellion.


I think it has experts who study and analyze what Iran should get and arrange it according to a list of priorities from most important to important...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah




----------



## Flotilla

Iraqi soldier said:


> Therefore, I resorted to other, more effective methods in confronting the assault and collecting it quickly
> 
> It focused on ballistic missiles that can hit the target quickly, powerfully, and accurately, and can bypass defenses and electronic warfare


Anyway, sooner or later you need good SAM systems to protect those ballistic missiles. And for protecting those SAM sites you need good range aircrafts. Here comes F14s that were soooo good, but they are dying. So buying some Su35 will always enhance your integrated air defense grid.
Kowsar are very good for CAS missions, they are useful as fighters, they can be in QRA in their bases. But for CAP patrols and dissuade Americans bombers and other aircraft equiped with long range missiles you need a good long range aircraft that can complement and eventually replace old F14s. Nobody doubts about remarkable effort to make a truly multirole F5 (Kowsar). But IRIN needs a long range, wide body (twin engine), multisensor and connected to that air defense grid... and only J16 and Su35 are avaiable for IRIN right now. Future will show more exciting milestones in Iran aeronautical industries. But Su35 it is good, more than good right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sha ah




----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


>


DCS is not 100% accurate but f-14 is very deadly in dogfight if the pilot is experienced enough to dictate the enemy combat situation and there is one situation that f-14 shine even against enemies with supermaneuverable and thrust vectoring engine and that is when you made them participate in a fight at low speed.
nearly nobody can beat it at low speed dogfight specially at low altitude in denser air .
the first two round i wondered why he didn't extend the wing fully and didn't go to a low speed fight .


but well DCS is not 100% accurte and more importantly who will do such dogfight anymore , they are fighter pilot not gunslinger . they engage with AIM-54 and R-77 and if they are close they use AIM-9 and R-73

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Another F-35 broke down.









Down & Out! US F-35B Stealth Fighter Spotted With Its 'Nose Down' On The Runway In Japan. Here's Why


F-35B Lightning II fighter jet was photographed parked in Okinawa, Japan with its nose down on the road. The visuals sparked concerns




eurasiantimes.com

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Another F-35 broke down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Down & Out! US F-35B Stealth Fighter Spotted With Its 'Nose Down' On The Runway In Japan. Here's Why
> 
> 
> F-35B Lightning II fighter jet was photographed parked in Okinawa, Japan with its nose down on the road. The visuals sparked concerns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eurasiantimes.com


landed too fast ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> landed too fast ?


Nose landing gear was in reverse so something broke.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> Nose landing gear was in reverse so something broke.


isn't that computer controlled in f-35 ?
it may not seem much but fixing that damage in a 5th generation fighter gonna be too expensive .


----------



## sha ah

That's what I mentioned in another part of the forum (ground section) is that it's not really feasible to have $20 million dollar tanks and $100 million dollar fighter jets. Because that will make military commanders extremely reluctant to deploy them into the battlefield, especially in a high intensity conflict. So then what's the point ? 

Sure you can use them against ethnic minorities and militants with no effective counter measures but against a peer level adversary, then what ? I mean imagine deploying an F-22 against an S-500 that can launch missiles at hypersonic speeds ?

Or AbramX against Iran with Toophan 7 ATGM with thermobolic warheads ? Even the American future soldier program suit / gear against thermite bombs ? Is it really feasible ? I don't think so. The general that deploys such forces against such rivals and sustains massive losses, is likely to be forced into early retirement is anything.



Hack-Hook said:


> isn't that computer controlled in f-35 ?
> it may not seem much but fixing that damage in a 5th generation fighter gonna be too expensive .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869890041921536

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869913534210049

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869932626862080

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869945880694784

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869970878742529

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601873808612368385

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601869890041921536
So much for the Su-35 being "useless junk" due to having an allegedly inferior radar. So much for its speed, altitude, payload and the like being of "no relevance". So much for kinematic power "not counting" because "today all air to air engagements are fought at BVR ranges". Some have been repeating these notions in a sustained manner, owing to the markedly negative views they hold of Iran's partner Russia as well as of the Russian defense industries.

That those assessments fail to do justice to the actual complexity of the subject matter, because kinematic power for instance can impact on things such as detection range or because the Su-35 can be coupled with Iran's IADS through a datalink, was intuitively obvious to many. A knowledgeable source such as Patarames needed to explain it in accurate terms, glad they did.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> That it's actually more complex than those superficial assessments because kinematic power for instance can impact on things such as detection range


as far as I'm aware kinematic power have zero impact on detection range 


SalarHaqq said:


> because the Su-35 can be coupled with Iran's IADS through a datalink


sadly for your theory that data-link on su-35 is propriety and can't talk with the data link used in rest of Iran equipment , well there always is the options to throw away 40 years of heard work an achievement and built our defense industry around outdated su-35. so we satisfy some people urge to buy something from Russia (outdated OLS-35, Outdated Radar outdated e-warfare system)

and incidentally your knowledgeable source claim Low RCS aircraft can be detected with s-band radar , interestingly its L-Band that work better against Low RCS object not S-band and guess what latest models of su-35 have it but L-band can't be used for targeting enemy , you knew something is out there but you must wait till you reach in range that your x-band radar can pick enemy to engage it in short its only good for knowing there is F-35 there and escape as soon as possible . if we want airplane for escape , better not waste money on it at all

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> sadly for your theory that data-link on su-35 is propriety and can't talk with the data link used in rest of Iran equipment , well there always is the options to throw away 40 years of heard work an achievement and built our defense industry around outdated su-35. so we satisfy some people urge to buy something from Russia (outdated OLS-35, Outdated Radar outdated e-warfare system)


As if Su-35's data-link systems can't be easily upgraded/adjusted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> As if Su-35's data-link systems can't be easily upgraded/adjusted.


upgraded no , must be replaced and just think how Russia be happy if you do that .
and even if you do that there is small problem of old RADAR , Old IRST and limited E-Warfare capabilities .
more importantly the numbers will be limited and have no impact at all


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> upgraded no , must be replaced and just think how Russia be happy if you do that .
> and even if you do that there is small problem of old RADAR , Old IRST and limited E-Warfare capabilities .
> more importantly the numbers will be limited and have no impact at all


And why should that be a problem for the Russians? I really don't understand why you are focusing on such a negligible technicality issue

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> And why should that be a problem for the Russians? I really don't understand why you are focusing on such a negligible technicality issue


those are negligible ?
wonder what factor in aircraft is important for you guys ? range and speed with afterburner ?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> those are negligible ?
> wonder what factor in aircraft is important for you guys ? range and speed with afterburner ?


The technical effort required to fix this issue is negligible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> The technical effort required to fix this issue is negligible.


adding Sejjil to F-14 took a decade and the problem was not f-14 carrying the missile or releasing it . it was mainly introduce a delay between the aircraft release the missile and the missile start, making it compatible with AWG-9 was a lot easier

that datalink , interact with all airplane critical system , its not easy modify it . and intrestingly your guys solution is paying twice for the aircraft subsystem , once for russian one and anotheer one for our own system and as i said it won't fix PESA problem and OLS-35 deficiencies and its limited E-warfare capabilities (well you can fix this one with a POD)


----------



## Piet

Piet said:


> “In addressing the acquisition of Su-35 Flanker F’s as per Joe_Adam, he states that he would “love to see Iranian made hi-tech/long range superiority fighters but due to lack of funds, the projects started slow in piecemeal fashion. That must be overcome, hopefully very soon.”
> 
> I have for a substantial time studied the above and wish to ad my 2c worth to this discussion.
> 
> To this end I have included a shortcut to a drop box that contains a five part ‘paper’ in which I attempt to do just this.
> 
> These five parts amounts to 148MB though and are heavy on images plus explanatory text. It renders the best when opened in Word.
> 
> This paper would not have been possible without posts to Secret Projects (UK), and https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRI FCA
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Updated Link DropBox 









IRI FCA


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> upgraded no , must be replaced and just think how Russia be happy if you do that .
> and even if you do that there is small problem of old RADAR , Old IRST and limited E-Warfare capabilities .
> more importantly the numbers will be limited and have no impact at all



This has been debunked repeatedly

Russia did it for Chinese SU-30’s no problem. China had some of the first technologies that no other SU-30/SU-35 including Russian had. Russia did many first time upgrades/replacements for China. Then Chinese did their own later on and Russia didn’t care.

This myth that Russia wouldn’t be happy has zero basis considering how much they changed the flanker platform for China back in early to mid 2000’s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

I enclose an article published yesterday by Military Watch Magazine
<<Iranian Air Force Pilots Have Begun Training on Russian Su-35s: Was the Fighter the Right Choice?>>
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/iranian-pilots-train-su35-choice

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Flotilla

It is the most inmediate choice for IRIAF. J10C is not avaiable due to pressure of EU and USA to China. More interesting was John Kirby worries about new weapons deals between Iran and Russia. In such escenario, Iran is able to ask some ToT in many fields, starting from aviation machining parts and ending in alloys and machining parts for bigger submarines. Iran can even give a boost in other projects like Mig-35 that seems to be paralized.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Flotilla said:


> It is the most inmediate choice for IRIAF. J10C is not avaiable due to pressure of EU and USA to China. More interesting was John Kirby worries about new weapons deals between Iran and Russia. In such escenario, Iran is able to ask some ToT in many fields, starting from aviation machining parts and ending in alloys and machining parts for bigger submarines. Iran can even give a boost in other projects like Mig-35 that seems to be paralized.



Kiss China good bye as an option. They didn’t even military support the closest thing they have to an ally and communist like minded country in Russia, what do you think they will do for Iran?

Even after recent color revolution activities in the country (COVID protests) China is still antsy of engaging the west.

Any possibility of major arms deal with China is quite frankly absurd. Minor Tech transfers and component transfers still happen behind the scenes, but that’s because it’s difficult for West to prove.

Russian-Iranian military relations only got better because Russia has literally no one to turn to for arms besides Iran (and maybe North Korea).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiarash

*بهشت عدن اگر خواهی بیا با ما به میخانه *

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Muhammed45

Simorgh rises from Antonov's ashes


After a long time of no news about the famous and marginal project of building a transport aircraft with military use in our country, the "Simorgh" aircraft was unveiled at the end of May this year by the aviation industry of the Ministry of Defense and support of the Armed Forces, which...



defence.pk

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> as far as I'm aware kinematic power have zero impact on detection range



Then read the "Tweets" again. They explain in what way it does.



Hack-Hook said:


> sadly for your theory that data-link on su-35 is propriety and can't talk with the data link used in rest of Iran equipment ,



A compatible one can be developed locally.



Hack-Hook said:


> well there always is the options to throw away 40 years of heard work an achievement and built our defense industry around outdated su-35. so we satisfy some people urge to buy something from Russia (outdated OLS-35, Outdated Radar outdated e-warfare system)



The propositions at hand are not mutually exclusive.

If Iran decides to purchase two-three squadrons of Su-35 (assuming Russia will accept to deliver), while at the same time proceeding to manufacture 100 to 120 Kosars, Simorq AEW aircraft, Simorq aerial refueling planes, to develop and produce new AAM weapons and jammers, to keep up the R&D on engines, to start work on a future domestic heavy fighter, to continue churning out UAV's en masse and designing new ones, that would not amount to 'throwing away 40 years of hard work and achievements'.

The above described program would actually imply an unprecedented expansion of Iran's aerospace industry. A limited order of Su-35 wouldn't interfere with it, on the contrary these measures would be complementary.



Hack-Hook said:


> and incidentally your knowledgeable source



The source _is_ knowledgeable. Patarames explained in those posts how the Su-35 would enhance Iran's defensive capabilities.



Hack-Hook said:


> claim Low RCS aircraft can be detected with s-band radar , interestingly its L-Band that work better against Low RCS object not S-band and guess what latest models of su-35 have it but L-band can't be used for targeting enemy , you knew something is out there but you must wait till you reach in range that your x-band radar can pick enemy to engage it in short its only good for knowing there is F-35 there and escape as soon as possible . if we want airplane for escape , better not waste money on it at all



I trust Patarames won't be making amateurish mistakes about radars and detection. The user's credentials don't really stand to debate in the field of defense technology.

Iranians with opposite geopolitical leanings ought to come to terms with the fact that Iran will continue military cooperation with both Russia and China. The Islamic Republic isn't going to reduce ties with partners and there will be no rapprochement with the west. Nor will this put the any dent into Iran's domestic defence industry, as it never did.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## jauk

Kiarash said:


> بهشت عدن اگر خواهی بیا با ما به میخانه
> View attachment 905364


که از پای خمت روزی به حوض کوثر اندازیم...

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring​*U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.*

by Joseph Trevithick | PUBLISHED Dec 9, 2022 6:54 PM









Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring


U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.




www.thedrive.com

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Joe_Adam

SalarHaqq said:


> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring​*U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.*
> 
> byJoseph Trevithick | PUBLISHED Dec 9, 2022 6:54 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring
> 
> 
> U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedrive.com


JOSEPH TREVITHICK's 15 paragraph keeps repeating the same theme over & over again "Iran's air arm continues to rely heavily on Cold War-era U.S.-made F-4 Phantom IIs, F-14 Tomcats, and F-5E/F Tiger IIs and locally reworked versions thereof, all of which were inherited following the 1979 revolution and are increasingly difficult to sustain. Relatively small numbers of dated Soviet, French, and Chinese types are also in Iran's inventory.", and yet, the he goes to show the US/western concerns about the infusion of new technology into Iran's air force. And yet again, contradicting his own theme by bragging about the highly sophisticated US aircrafts possessed by Israel & S. Arabia . . ?


This is an obvious anti Iran propaganda since none of it is based on real transactions, but speculations by the Zionist quarters to inflate the coming danger from any Iran/Russia tech-transfer which unsettels the Israelis & their allies. 

Iran keeps marching forward in its quest to gain the upper hand in military technologies by all means possible, which is a very good sign since no nation on earth could master all modern hi-tech technologies based strictly on local knowledge. So a helping hand goes a long way for both Iran and Russia to transfer their core competencies to the other side by which both nations reduce their RD budgets and the manufacturing time, save billion of dollars, and obtain proven mature technologies for almost no cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Then read the "Tweets" again. They explain in what way it does.
> 
> 
> 
> A compatible one can be developed locally.
> 
> 
> 
> The propositions at hand are not mutually exclusive.
> 
> If Iran decides to purchase two-three squadrons of Su-35 (assuming Russia will accept to deliver), while at the same time proceeding to manufacture 100 to 120 Kosars, Simorq AEW aircraft, Simorq aerial refueling planes, to develop and produce new AAM weapons and jammers, to keep up the R&D on engines, to start work on a future domestic heavy fighter, to continue churning out UAV's en masse and designing new ones, that would not amount to 'throwing away 40 years of hard work and achievements'.
> 
> The above described program would actually imply an unprecedented expansion of Iran's aerospace industry. A limited order of Su-35 wouldn't interfere with it, on the contrary these measures would be complementary.
> 
> 
> 
> The source _is_ knowledgeable. Patarames explained in those posts how the Su-35 would enhance Iran's defensive capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> I trust Patarames won't talk rubbish about radars and detection. The user's credentials in this field do not stand to debate.
> 
> Iranians with opposite geopolitical preferences ought to come to terms with the fact that Iran will continue military cooperation with both Russia and China. The Islamic Republic is not going to reduce ties with partners and there will be no rapprochement with the west. Nor will this put the any dent into Iran's domestic defence industry, as it never did.



Stop arguing with @Hack-Hook, he rather our pilots continue to die trying to save F-4’s and F-5’s and F-7’s from crashing into the ground than add some modern fighters. He believes adding some SU-35 = death of Iranian fighter jet program. With such logic adding Nodong missiles from NK in 80’s & 90’s = death of Iranian missile program.

Any argument over lack of customization is laughable considering the things Russia did for Chinese flankers in early 2000’s (very well documented) as well what China did to their own flankers afterward as modernization effort.

When China wanted to breach Taiwan airspace this year guess what they used? Flankers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

Joe_Adam said:


> JOSEPH TREVITHICK's 15 paragraph keeps repeating the same theme over & over again "Iran's air arm continues to rely heavily on Cold War-era U.S.-made F-4 Phantom IIs, F-14 Tomcats, and F-5E/F Tiger IIs and locally reworked versions thereof, all of which were inherited following the 1979 revolution and are increasingly difficult to sustain. Relatively small numbers of dated Soviet, French, and Chinese types are also in Iran's inventory.", and yet, the he goes to show the US/western concerns about the infusion of new technology into Iran's air force. And yet again, contradicting his own theme by bragging about the highly sophisticated US aircrafts possessed by Israel & S. Arabia . . ?
> 
> 
> This is an obvious anti Iran propaganda since none of it is based on real transactions, but speculations by the Zionist quarters to inflate the coming danger from any Iran/Russia tech-transfer which unsettels the Israelis & their allies.
> 
> Iran keeps marching forward in its quest to gain the upper hand in military technologies by all means possible, which is a very good sign since no nation on earth could master all modern hi-tech technologies based strictly on local knowledge. So a helping hand goes a long way for both Iran and Russia to transfer their core competencies to the other side by which both nations reduce their RD budgets and the manufacturing time, save billion of dollars, and obtain proven mature technologies for almost no cost.


After 42 years going solo Iran has found a partner in technology and that I consider a God send for Iran...I am a fierce proponent of in-house developments but there are areas of technology that Iran needs help . Space and aviation are two areas that Russia is years ahead of Iran and there is no shame In admitting that..so Yes by all means buy the SU35 if they offer it but do not drop the in-house development of Iranian heavy fighter..they are not mutually exclusive...can not wait to see the reaction of Iran's southern neighbors when the first Su35s land in Merabad airfield..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Then read the "Tweets" again. They explain in what way it does.


it increase the range of missile , it won't increase the range of detection . and incidentally su-35 can only benefit of it when it use its afterburner , something that reduce its range dramatically , on other hand an aircraft without supercruise capability don't have such problem


SalarHaqq said:


> A compatible one can be developed locally.


yes but as it must interface with all critical component of airplane , it won't be cheap and it take time. and we must pay twice for it


SalarHaqq said:


> assuming Russia will accept to deliver


assuming it's capable to deliver.


SalarHaqq said:


> while at the same time proceeding to manufacture 100 to 120 Kosars


there is no money for both , only one and you can take your pick , don't forget the budget to increase the capabilities od all Iranian armed force branches, is about 4 milliard euro , you think how much is for air force?


SalarHaqq said:


> Simorq AEW aircraft, Simorq aerial refueling planes, to develop and produce new AAM weapons and jammers, to keep up the R&D on engines, to start work on a future domestic heavy fighter, to continue churning out UAV's en masse and designing new ones, that would not amount to 'throwing away 40 years of hard work and achievements'.


only if you spend 6-7 milliard dollar on 4x squadron of su-35 there won't be any left for the rest


SalarHaqq said:


> The source _is_ knowledgeable. Patarames explained in those posts how the Su-35 would enhance Iran's defensive capabilities.


i don't doubt that , but he wrote that tweets based on another article and he also could not answer my concerns about the deal.


SalarHaqq said:


> I trust Patarames won't be making amateurish mistakes about radars and detection. The user's credentials don't really stand to debate in the field of defense technology.


hi mistake L-Band with S-band . you can deny it , but the post is out there for anybody to see it
if it was s-band then there was no problem using it for engaging low rcs aircraft as many air defence system around the world use s-band radar


SalarHaqq said:


> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring​*U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.*
> 
> by Joseph Trevithick | PUBLISHED Dec 9, 2022 6:54 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring
> 
> 
> U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedrive.com


they said the same about su-30


TheImmortal said:


> Stop arguing with @Hack-Hook, he rather our pilots continue to die trying to save F-4’s and F-5’s and F-7’s from crashing into the ground than add some modern fighters.


outdated that fall from sky in any conflict with what our neighbors have


TheImmortal said:


> Nodong missiles from NK in 80’s & 90’s = death of Iranian missile program.


those nodong was base of iran modern missile program. not something to compete with them


TheImmortal said:


> Any argument over lack of customization is laughable considering the things Russia did for Chinese flankers in early 2000’s (very well documented) as well what China did to their own flankers afterward as modernization effort.


consider that india since 2006 is waiting for AESA radar for Su-30 , where is that radar ?
and remember the lack of it made india had to keep the aircraft 100km away from any conflict area.
by the way its how many years we are waiting for SM2 upgrade for our mig-29 (its an old Upgrade and not even the latest upgrade)


TheImmortal said:


> When China wanted to breach Taiwan airspace this year guess what they used? Flankers.


8 x J-16 and one y-8
well buy those su-35 with standards like J-16 and I'm not that much against it but still believe developing kowsar program is the way to go.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring​*U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.*
> 
> by Joseph Trevithick | PUBLISHED Dec 9, 2022 6:54 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian Su-35s Could Soon Be Delivered To Iran, Pilots Trained Last Spring
> 
> 
> U.S. officials say Russian training for Iranian pilots on the Su-35 is part of a deepening relationship spurred on by the conflict in Ukraine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedrive.com


this show how credible the article is

it is no secret that Tehran has been looking to acquire S-400 long-range surface-to-air missile systems for years now.
As with its air force, Iran's air defense network is composed in significant part of aging systems it inherited from the government of the Shah. It also has a relatively small number of newer systems acquired from Russia, including S-300 surface-to-air missile batteries, since the end of the Cold War. The country has produced a number of local designs based on older American and Russian designs, as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Any argument over lack of customization is laughable considering the things Russia did for Chinese flankers in early 2000’s (very well documented) as well what China did to their own flankers afterward as modernization effort.


This was also the case with the indian and malaysian flankers as well,which both used a variety of foreign weapon systems and avionics.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> This was also the case with the indian and malaysian flankers as well,which both used a variety of foreign weapon systems and avionics.


interestingly can you tell me its how long India is waiting for Russia to provide AESA for Su-30


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> interestingly can you tell me its how long India is waiting for Russia to provide AESA for Su-30


To the best of my knowledge russia isnt providing any aesa radars for the indian su30 fleet.There was talk of a super flanker upgrade program over a decade ago,but that didnt go anywhere,possibly cost was an issue considering the size of the indian flanker fleet.
The indians have now it seems resurrected the super flanker program and have decided to produce an aesa upgrade themselves.
It does seem that up until fairly recently the indians seemed happy enough with the N011M Bars pesa radar,indeed I have little doubt that iran would`ve been very thankful just to get its hands on the baseline su30s with the same bars pesa radar........if those had ever been offered [LOL!!].
Ultimately tho its not as if iran really has that much to chose from anyway,now does it?.
To me this is rather like irans acquisition of north korean hwasongs [scud copies] during the war of the cities,these were clearly not as good as the soviet originals quality wise,but they did do what they needed them to,and considering that no one else was willing to supply iran with them,well......
All in all tho`,I think that iran could do far,far worse than the su35 as a starting point for the indigenous development of a modern,ie post cold war/21st century,heavy fighter complete with modern avionics and modern weapons systems,indeed one only has to look at what the chinese were able to ultimately achieve using the su30 as a template.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> I think that iran could do far,far worse than the su35 as a starting point for the indigenous development of a modern,ie post cold war/21st century,heavy fighter complete with modern avionics and modern weapons systems,indeed one only has to look at what the chinese were able to ultimately achieve using the su30 as a template.


that would be iran indigenous program and airplane , not something subpar bought , that add to iran experience and expertise , buying it wont help at all.
and su-35 can stand against non of the PGCC airforce or israel so buying it is waste of money

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Piet

Hack-Hook said:


> that would be iran indigenous program and airplane , not something subpar bought , that add to iran experience and expertise , buying it wont help at all.
> and su-35 can stand against non of the PGCC airforce or israel so buying it is waste of money



This is a subject that has garnered comments of various kinds. Some are in favor of the Sukhoi Su-35S Flanker E, some are not. If the IRIAF is successful in acquiring this a/c, then it would have to be in sufficient numbers to really impact the air space over Iran. A number of 24 is a little on the lean side. Sixty would be more adequate if achievable.

What can possibly also be considered besides its air-air role is a possible long-range A-G role.

Returning to the probable future Iranian combat a/c. A heavy hunter has been alluded to as well as a ‘heavy’ turbofan. Opinion has it that this engine has already flown in a testbed.

Regarding an F-5 based a/c for Iran’s future combat a/c, this has elicited a measure of dissent as well as positive comments. An AESA FCR radar is still lacking at this time.

I wonder if this can be solved by following the following route: - Consider the Kowsar’s Grifo-346/KLJ-XX/Bayyenat-11 (NRIET – ToT- ed to Iran by China?). This could in turn begat the Grifo-E, or a Chinese-Iranian derivative thereof (viz. Bayyenat-111?). The rest of Kowsar’s EW-suite and other systems should be adequate to be read over to whatever combat a/c eventually emerges.

As the SAAB Gripen JAS-39 has often been invoked here as a possible example of such an a/c, it goes to show what can be achieved by a light-medium wight multi-role a/c.

I hope that the last day of the Kish Air show will render some real clues to this end.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> it increase the range of missile , it won't increase the range of detection .



It's the detection range of low observable aircraft which gets increased thanks to the Flankers' high kinetic properties.



Hack-Hook said:


> and incidentally su-35 can only benefit of it when it use its afterburner , something that reduce its range dramatically , on other hand an aircraft without supercruise capability don't have such problem



Its range is important enough to compensate.



Hack-Hook said:


> yes but as it must interface with all critical component of airplane , it won't be cheap and it take time. and we must pay twice for it



Not going to be a huge expenditure.



Hack-Hook said:


> assuming it's capable to deliver.



Russia has spare Su-35's from the stalled Egyptian deal, and yes, Russia is capable of fulfilling orders for fighter jets, it has always been.



Hack-Hook said:


> there is no money for both , only one and you can take your pick , don't forget the budget to increase the capabilities od all Iranian armed force branches, is about 4 milliard euro , you think how much is for air force?



I addressed this before: additional funds can be released on an ad hoc basis on top of those 4 billion Euros, to fund extraordinary acquisitions.



Hack-Hook said:


> only if you spend 6-7 milliard dollar on 4x squadron of su-35 there won't be any left for the rest



See above.



Hack-Hook said:


> i don't doubt that , but he wrote that tweets based on another article



The "Tweets" feature analysis grounded in technical data, they aren't based on any one specific article.



Hack-Hook said:


> and he also could not answer my concerns about the deal.



Their demonstration is pristine.



Hack-Hook said:


> hi mistake L-Band with S-band . you can deny it , but the post is out there for anybody to see it
> if it was s-band then there was no problem using it for engaging low rcs aircraft as many air defence system around the world use s-band radar



I know of the user's credibility and that's enough for me.



Hack-Hook said:


> they said the same about su-30



Don't remember Washington regime officials claiming Iranian pilots were receiving training on the Su-30.



Hack-Hook said:


> this show how credible the article is
> 
> it is no secret that Tehran has been looking to acquire S-400 long-range surface-to-air missile systems for years now.
> As with its air force, Iran's air defense network is composed in significant part of aging systems it inherited from the government of the Shah. It also has a relatively small number of newer systems acquired from Russia, including S-300 surface-to-air missile batteries, since the end of the Cold War. The country has produced a number of local designs based on older American and Russian designs, as well.



I don't give a hoot about any of the funny assumptions made by the author of the article. The interesting part is where he's citing USA regime officials about Iranian pilots getting trained to operate Su-35 fighter jets in Russia.

The USA regime almost exclusively spreads disinformation when it comes to the Iranian military. On the specific topic of recent Iranian-Russian arms deals though, they seem to have been unusually close to reality so far. When they first declared Iran had sold UAV's to Russia and that these will be put to use in Ukraine, I was convinced it was propaganda. In light of this, their statements about the Su-35, true or not, ought not to be dismissed out of hand. At any rate, this justifies sharing the paper.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> It's the detection range of low observable aircraft which gets increased thanks to the Flankers' high kinetic properties.


I believe it has nothing to do with detection , if you say otherwise then explain how


SalarHaqq said:


> Its range is important enough to compensate.


after using afterburner , its range is not that high anymore


SalarHaqq said:


> Not going to be a huge expenditure.


if you want to modify a system that interact with all critical components , it gonna be a large expenditure, of both money and time 


SalarHaqq said:


> Russia has spare Su-35's from the stalled Egyptian deal, and yes, Russia is capable of fulfilling orders for fighter jets, it has always been.


that it probably need for itself


SalarHaqq said:


> I addressed this before: additional funds can be released on an ad hoc basis on top of those 4 billion Euros, to fund extraordinary acquisitions.


can be but when it was released for army , just show me one more time it happened . its in the realm of can be done , but will it be done?


SalarHaqq said:


> The "Tweets" feature analysis grounded in technical data, they aren't based on any one specific article.


he at the beginning said himself its controversial


SalarHaqq said:


> I know of the user's credibility and that's enough for me.


everyone knew about Aristotle credibility and it was enough to them to kill anybody opposed his ideas for thousands of years 


SalarHaqq said:


> Don't remember Washington regime officials claiming Iranian pilots were receiving training on the Su-30.


Washington for 40 year claimed Iran is just 6 month away from nuke , they claimed Iraq had WMD , they claimed Iran used Chemical and biological weapon at the time of war with Iraq ,......
do I need to continue , and how you accept Washington claims when they suit you but when others post them you say its lies because it come from Washington and they have an agenda


SalarHaqq said:


> The interesting part is where he's citing USA regime officials about Iranian pilots getting trained to operate Su-35 fighter jets in Russia.


Washington never was shy of fabricating lies when it suit their Iran fearmongering campaign 


SalarHaqq said:


> When they first declared Iran had sold UAV's to Russia and that these will be put to use in Ukraine, I was convinced it was propaganda.


they at the time said Iran sold ballistic missile to Russia and by the way interesting part is all the date they show on the drones component belong to the month before the war or 1 month of war , I yet to see anything newer and interestingly they made the claim 4-5 month into the war , remained me of the time when Iran out of nowhere announced the presence of Fordow to IAEA according to our NPT obligation , then Washington come and claimed that they were aware of the existence of the facility , *Afterwards*


----------



## jauk

Hack-Hook said:


> that would be iran indigenous program and airplane , not something subpar bought , that add to iran experience and expertise , buying it wont help at all.
> and su-35 can stand against non of the PGCC airforce or israel so buying it is waste of money


I agree (except for the PG mini-countries--they will never ever engage Iran). However, I simply don't see any clear advantage to Iran purchasing these. A TOT of manufacturization is good but you don't need so many aircraft for this. At the end, I trust IRI's decision making in this regard but I don't see the rationale.


----------



## Hack-Hook

jauk said:


> I agree (except for the PG mini-countries--they will never ever engage Iran). However, I simply don't see any clear advantage to Iran purchasing these. A TOT of manufacturization is good but you don't need so many aircraft for this. At the end, I trust IRI's decision making in this regard but I don't see the rationale.


interesting part is that people who talk about benefit of this in studying the aerodynamic of this airplane and engines forget that engine in size of RD-33 are beneficial to Iran and aerodynamic in flankers use the exact same ideas that were used in Mig-29 and we already have access to them but for some reason there is no evidence we using them in our research and development


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> I believe it has nothing to do with detection , if you say otherwise then explain how



I explained all there was to explain.



Hack-Hook said:


> after using afterburner , its range is not that high anymore



Great enough under realistic conditions. Patarames knows what they're talking about.



Hack-Hook said:


> if you want to modify a system that interact with all critical components , it gonna be a large expenditure, of both money and time



No. And such details won't be lost on the author. Observations like the above won't achieve to shed doubt on the author's conclusions.



Hack-Hook said:


> that it probably need for itself



No hurdle for Russia in supplying clients.



Hack-Hook said:


> can be but when it was released for army , just show me one more time it happened . its in the realm of can be done , but will it be done?



If Iran's interested in purchasing those fighters and there's enough domestic support for the deal from key decision makers and institutions then funds will be mobilized.



Hack-Hook said:


> he at the beginning said himself its controversial



Can't find such a mention in the "Tweets".

Patarames is asking three introductory questions, proceeding with a technical demonstration and reaching a conclusion. Their conclusion is that in the worst case scenario, addition of the Su-35 would:



> *In total:
> 
> F-35 surprise deep strikes become more like one-way missions with Su-35, ready to chase down
> 
> + Allowing interceptions at larger distances from Iran's border leading to mission-kill
> 
> A massive costly air campaign is necessary to penetrate to Iran's critical sites*



No cons mentioned. I'll go with that assessment.



Hack-Hook said:


> everyone knew about Aristotle credibility and it was enough to them to kill anybody opposed his ideas for thousands of years



The rational view is that all things being equal, the more a person is qualified the more they'll be credible on technical considerations.



Hack-Hook said:


> Washington for 40 year claimed Iran is just 6 month away from nuke , they claimed Iraq had WMD , they claimed Iran used Chemical and biological weapon at the time of war with Iraq ,......
> do I need to continue , and how you accept Washington claims when they suit you but when others post them you say its lies because it come from Washington and they have an agenda



Addressed already. And I take it they did not claim Iranian pilots trained on the Su-30.



Hack-Hook said:


> Washington never was shy of fabricating lies when it suit their Iran fearmongering campaign



Addressed already.



Hack-Hook said:


> they at the time said Iran sold ballistic missile to Russia



They declared they cannot confirm.



Hack-Hook said:


> and by the way interesting part is all the date they show on the drones component belong to the month before the war or 1 month of war , I yet to see anything newer and interestingly they made the claim 4-5 month into the war , remained me of the time when Iran out of nowhere announced the presence of Fordow to IAEA according to our NPT obligation , then Washington come and claimed that they were aware of the existence of the facility , *Afterwards *



Does not affect the point.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> I explained all there was to explain.


which didn't include how a larger kinetic energy help to increase the detection range 


SalarHaqq said:


> Great enough under realistic conditions. Patarames knows what they're talking about.


he didn't made claim about su-35 range 


SalarHaqq said:


> No.
> 
> And Patarames knows what they're talking about. Such details won't be lost on them, so observations like these won't achieve to shed doubt on their conclusions.


no


SalarHaqq said:


> There's no hurdle for Russia in supplying clients.


just the small problem that they are sanctioned for some critical systems and component and they are not managed to fix that problem yet.


SalarHaqq said:


> If Iran's interested in purchasing those fighters and there's enough domestic support for the deal from key decision makers and institutions then funds will be mobilized.


we will see , the question is if Iran is interested and defence ministry and army were not that enthusiast.


SalarHaqq said:


> Can't find such a mention in the "Tweets".
> 
> Patarames asks introductory questions, proceeds with a technical demonstration and concludes. Their conclusion is that in the worst case scenario, addition of the Su-35 would:


look at his later tweets


SalarHaqq said:


> No cons mentioned. I will go with that assessment.


if you want to chase them you must use afterburner that increase fuel consumption up to 3 time on AL-41


SalarHaqq said:


> The rational view is that all things being equal, the more a person is qualified the more they'll be credible on purely technical subjects.


show you must never stop questioning those qualified persons , they are not God , they make mistakes


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> which didn't include how a larger kinetic energy help to increase the detection range



It did.



Hack-Hook said:


> he didn't made claim about su-35 range



So read them again.



Hack-Hook said:


> no



I'd beg to differ.



Hack-Hook said:


> just the small problem that they are sanctioned for some critical systems and component and they are not managed to fix that problem yet.



Speculation is what this amounts to.



Hack-Hook said:


> we will see , the question is if Iran is interested and defence ministry and army were not that enthusiast.



Public declarations or absence thereof do not necessarily offer an adequate reflection of the deliberations taking place among decision making circles, especially when considering defence and security issues. The simple answer is no outsider knows enough to make strong inferences.



Hack-Hook said:


> if you want to chase them you must use afterburner that increase fuel consumption up to 3 time on AL-41



The mere fact that afterburner usage increases fuel consumption up to three times, does not mean this would preclude effective chasing under circumstances relevant to the defence of Iranian airspace. Many more parameters would need to be taken into account and calculations made. The notion that the Su-35 would be incapable of effectively putting to use its aerodynamic properties in an air to air engagement because of increased fuel consumption is, for all practical purposes, ruled out by Patarames' conclusions.



Hack-Hook said:


> show you must never stop questioning those qualified persons , they are not God , they make mistakes



Objections presented thus far did not strike me as convincing. Nor were they as comprehensive and encompassing in their approach.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The S-35 is excellent combat aircraft and much more technological than detractors think. Many imbecility are said about the S-35 here on this forum. To read their words, it looks like they built and piloted the plane, a real joke

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Iran must have a ✈️ from Russian 
And technology from Chinese


----------



## tsunset

Iran should stop trusting China and Russia.

Russia never delivers, can someone tell me what "major" weapon or system Russia delivered to Iran after the S-300PMU2s, beside AK guns and small arms?

Egypt, Indonesia, Algeria and many others can buy over the counter Russian jets and systems and gets delivered like mentioned in their contracts.

But Iran has to get a coupon that authorizes it to get delivered (sending drones to Russia and discount crude oil trade) but still nothing delivered or made.

Russia will undoubtedly backstab Iran and 99% never deliver anything, they only care about their own interests (naturally like any country) and if the money comes.

For China, their current strategy is to squeeze countries victim of white imperialism. China never pays for Iranian crude oil and even talk bad on Iran and delivers ballistic missiles to Saudi Arabia, don't respect their contracts with Iran, what kind of strategic coop is that?


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

tsunset said:


> Iran should stop trusting China and Russia.
> 
> Russia never delivers, can someone tell me what "major" weapon or system Russia delivered to Iran after the S-300PMU2s, beside AK guns and small arms?
> 
> Egypt, Indonesia, Algeria and many others can buy over the counter Russian jets and systems and gets delivered like mentioned in their contracts.
> 
> But Iran has to get a coupon that authorizes it to get delivered (sending drones to Russia and discount crude oil trade) but still nothing delivered or made.
> 
> Russia will undoubtedly backstab Iran and 99% never deliver anything, they only care about their own interests (naturally like any country) and if the money comes.
> 
> For China, their current strategy is to squeeze countries victim of white imperialism. China never pays for Iranian crude oil and even talk bad on Iran and delivers ballistic missiles to Saudi Arabia, don't respect their contracts with Iran, what kind of strategic coop is that?


Ofcourse they think about their own interests and are slow in projects or even leave projects. But still there are more common interests which bring Iran, China and Russia closer to each other compared to other countries. Iran works with Russia on nuclear and transit projects and now also on defence. There are some common interests in Caspian sea, central Asia as well. However Iran knows that they can't trust them blindly, but we've to work together where interests align.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> It did.


are you 4 year old ?


SalarHaqq said:


> The mere fact that afterburner usage increases fuel consumption up to three times, does not mean this would preclude effective chasing under circumstances relevant to the defence of Iranian airspace. Many more parameters would need to be taken into account and calculations made. The notion that the Su-35 would be incapable of effectively putting to use its aerodynamic properties in an air to air engagement because of increased fuel consumption is, for all practical purposes, ruled out by Patarames' conclusions.


that aerodynamic properties do nothing if you can't get a lock on enemy and both IBRIS-E and OLS-35 are outdated

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## strateger

sha ah said:


> Iran's F-4s are over 50 years old now. How much longer can Iran continue to use them ? Until they're 60 years old ? 70 years old ? The US is about to retire its fleet of F-22s. Fighter jets are only meant to be used for 20-30 years. Airframes and parts can only last for so long, they can only take so much wear and tear before they break down completely.



With all due respect, you misunderstood what I was suggesting. Iran needs to produce brand new F4, MIG-21, and SU-22 airframes, with brand new and composite materials. Russia needs to provide blue-prints for AL-21 engines (which is basically a Russian J79) and the SU-22 and MIG-21 airframe. These are relatively simple airframes compared to many others. Iran should have no trouble making SU-22's and MIG-21 airframes and Russia should give Iran the AL-21 engine and the R-11, both a large delivery of the engines and the instructions on how to manufacture and maintain them.

Iran can then put modern weapons systems, radars, avionics, HUD displays, etc on them. These are all Mach 2 aircraft. 

They would have an inexpensive fleet of brand new, simple, and reliable jets that can carry all of Iran's smart bombs, cruise missiles, glide bombs, etc. Nothing else is needed or effective.

China was making J7's until 2015 and still have many in service. It's an incredibly effective airframe.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## 925boy

tsunset said:


> Iran should stop trusting China and Russia.
> 
> Russia never delivers, can someone tell me what "major" weapon or system Russia delivered to Iran after the S-300PMU2s, beside AK guns and small arms?
> 
> Egypt, Indonesia, Algeria and many others can buy over the counter Russian jets and systems and gets delivered like mentioned in their contracts.
> 
> But Iran has to get a coupon that authorizes it to get delivered (sending drones to Russia and discount crude oil trade) but still nothing delivered or made.
> 
> Russia will undoubtedly backstab Iran and 99% never deliver anything, they only care about their own interests (naturally like any country) and if the money comes.
> 
> For China, their current strategy is to squeeze countries victim of white imperialism. China never pays for Iranian crude oil and even talk bad on Iran and delivers ballistic missiles to Saudi Arabia, don't respect their contracts with Iran, what kind of strategic coop is that?


You sound like you work for the french govt, seriously.


----------



## tsunset

925boy said:


> You sound like you work for the french govt, seriously.


First it was that I'm a salesman of Rosoboronexport for arguing about Su-35 and Ka-52 with @Hack-Hook, Now i work for the french govt? What did i pushed for that would benefit France lol, you can look at my post history and i am actually for Iran to get Su-35s, I'm only pointing out that Russia never delivered something for more than a decade and are not serious at all, as well as getting pressure by the US in the past and China doesn't pay for crude

And now that Netanyahu, a Putin's friend is back, you can only expect that Russia will deliver nothing or even worse


----------



## Indos

Hack-Hook said:


> that aerodynamic properties do nothing if you can't get a lock on enemy and both IBRIS-E and OLS-35 are outdated



Still much better than current Iranian fighters

Indonesia keeps operating its Sukhoi and Finance Minister has agreed to refurbishment and upgrade of our Sukhoi with around 200 million USD package. This plane is very beneficial for long range operation, showing present around Iranian territory and will be able to make deathly naval attack

Indonesian Sukhoi















*KH 29 test*






---------------------------------

SU 35 Cockpit

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1604058972969144321

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> Still much better than current Iranian fighters
> 
> Indonesia keeps operating its Sukhoi and Finance Minister has agreed to refurbishment and upgrade of our Sukhoi with around 200 million USD package. This plane is very beneficial for long range operation, showing present around Iranian territory and will be able to make deathly naval attack
> 
> Indonesian Sukhoi
> 
> View attachment 906506
> 
> View attachment 906507
> 
> View attachment 906508
> 
> 
> *KH 29 test*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 
> SU 35 Cockpit
> 
> View attachment 906509


maybe good for indonesia because it has no indigenous aircraft program , we have one , we are now at the place many countries were.
in70-80 many countries indigenous program was shutdown because they choose the easier path and went after F-16 & F-18 two country choose their indigenous program and didn't let corrupt politician and bribery destroy their indigenous program , they are France and Sweden .
we are exactly at same junction in our aviation history , buy Su-35 or invest in our indigenous program and refine Kowsar design . it's now we must decide what route we choose , France Route or Canada route ?
I personally prefer France route .

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Indos

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe good for indonesia because it has no indigenous aircraft program , we have one , we are now at the place many countries were.
> in70-80 many countries indigenous program was shootdown because they choose the easier path and went after F-16 & F-18 two country choose their indigenous program and didn't let corrupt politician and bribery destroy their indigenous program , they are France and Sweden .
> we are exactly at same junction in our aviation history , buy Su-35 or invest in our indigenous program and refine Kowsar design . it's now we must decide what route we choose , France Route or Canada route ?
> I personally prefer France route .



Refine Kowsar design ? You think refining Kowsar design will make you have 5 generation fighter design ? 

Indonesia is not overly ambitious, we are currently junior partner in KF21 program. We understand our limitation. We prefer making N219 with much less cost then making our own 5 generation fighter without any partner. Next program is R80 inshaAllah as basic design has already been near complete

Unlike military plane, civilian planes dont have requirement in term of STEALTH and others, so when you make one, you are likely be able to sell the same plane for 100 years with limited modification improvement along every 10 years. Business wise, it is quite profitable. 

Despite Indonesia has KF21 program, we still buy around 6 Rafale planes and will likely buy more until the planes have 1 squadron (18 planes) or 2 squadrons (12 planes each).

Your government has already decided to get those SU35. With Iran already big defense budget, I believe that SU35 acquisition will not jeopardize Iran aerospace program. Oil price will likely keep high while Iran SU 35 acquisition is also conducted in barter scheme with Russia

Indonesia defense budget is only 9 billion USD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Indos said:


> Still much better than current Iranian fighters
> 
> Indonesia keeps operating its Sukhoi and Finance Minister has agreed to refurbishment and upgrade of our Sukhoi with around 200 million USD package. This plane is very beneficial for long range operation, showing present around Iranian territory and will be able to make deathly naval attack


Iran’s main interest in the Su-35 is its role as an interceptor, to reinforce/extend the reach of its IADS. Strike missions are mainly, but not exclusively, the job of Iran’s BM forces. Though also here the Su-35 could come in handy and provide additional attack vectors and situational awareness. The fighter jet’s kinetic performance and ability to perform long-range missions, as you mentioned, is of great value for a country the size or Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Indos said:


> Refine Kowsar design ? You think refining Kowsar design will make you have 5 generation fighter design ?


su-35 is not a 5th generation fighter and 24 Egyptian ones add nothing new to our air-force capability , only stunt development of kowsar.


Indos said:


> Your government has already decided to get those SU35.


no if you followed the news yo would have saw that Defense ministry was opposed to it , Army was opposed to it , our supreme leader guidelines are against it .
only one old air-force general was interested in it and tanks God they won't make the decision . that is a lot different from what you implied by "your government has already decided to get those SU-35" comment


Indos said:


> With Iran already big defense budget


you don't knew about Iran defense budget , its even less than Qatar and UAE , also that number mostly go for paying wages and maintaining current capabilities , last year Iran budget for increase military capabilities for all branches of armed force was 4 milliard $ , those 4 milliard go to IRGC, Army and basij , the part that go to army must be divided between air-force , Navy and ground force and air defense forces . now tell me how much of that big defense budget you think will be put aside for Air Force , how we can buy anything with that money , without getting it from our foreign currency strategic reserves and how long it take to replace it , how we will be able to continue our indigenous program after buying those 24 already outdated airplane that nobody wants ?



Messerschmitt said:


> The fighter jet’s kinetic performance and ability to perform long-range missions


can you explain to us what you mean by Kinetic performance ?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Indos

Hack-Hook said:


> su-35 is not a 5th generation fighter and 24 Egyptian ones add nothing new to our air-force capability , only stunt development of kowsar.
> 
> no if you followed the news yo would have saw that Defense ministry was opposed to it , Army was opposed to it , our supreme leader guidelines are against it .
> only one old air-force general was interested in it and tanks God they won't make the decision . that is a lot different from what you implied by "your government has already decided to get those SU-35" comment
> 
> you don't knew about Iran defense budget , its even less than Qatar and UAE , also that number mostly go for paying wages and maintaining current capabilities , last year Iran budget for increase military capabilities for all branches of armed force was 4 milliard $ , those 4 milliard go to IRGC, Army and basij , the part that go to army must be divided between air-force , Navy and ground force and air defense forces . now tell me how much of that big defense budget you think will be put aside for Air Force , how we can buy anything with that money , without getting it from our foreign currency strategic reserves and how long it take to replace it , how we will be able to continue our indigenous program after buying those 24 already outdated airplane that nobody wants ?



If that is the case then I cannot argue any more. Future challenge is not about 4 gen fighters any more. This has been shown in latest Pitch Black exercise in Australia this year with 6 Singaporean F15 SG can be eliminated by just 2 Australian F35 where those 6 F15SG cannot even detect 2 Australian F35 until the missile reach the plane (simulation).

I would like to see Iran has China J 20 Dragon then SU 35 if Iran is able to acquire it


----------



## OldTwilight

If we can , we should buy su-35 or even pakfa ...

Even by operating 4++ fighter, we can learn a lot

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Indos said:


> If that is the case then I cannot argue any more. Future challenge is not about 4 gen fighters any more. This has been shown in latest Pitch Black exercise in Australia this year with 6 Singaporean F15 SG can be eliminated by just 2 Australian F35 where those 6 F15SG cannot even detect 2 Australian F35 until the missile reach the plane (simulation).
> 
> I would like to see Iran has China J 20 Dragon then SU 35 if Iran is able to acquire it



Zero chance Iran can acquire J-20.

Look at Pakistan for indication what Iran could try to get. Pakistan has a much closer military/arms relationship with China than Iran ever will.

JF-31 might be for export, but I doubt Chinese would export J-20 even to Pakistan.

Iran likely can’t get either so it doesn’t even matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

Indos said:


> If that is the case then I cannot argue any more. Future challenge is not about 4 gen fighters any more. This has been shown in latest Pitch Black exercise in Australia this year with 6 Singaporean F15 SG can be eliminated by just 2 Australian F35 where those 6 F15SG cannot even detect 2 Australian F35 until the missile reach the plane (simulation).


Detection shouldn’t be a major issue in Iran’s case though due to its extensive EW radar network. Iranian interceptor aircraft wouldn’t have to solely rely on their own radars‘ detection capabilities, as in that simulated exercise, but would receive target coordinates from Iran’s IADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Flotilla

Shapur Zol Aktaf said:


> Ofcourse they think about their own interests and are slow in projects or even leave projects. But still there are more common interests which bring Iran, China and Russia closer to each other compared to other countries. Iran works with Russia on nuclear and transit projects and now also on defence. There are some common interests in Caspian sea, central Asia as well. However Iran knows that they can't trust them blindly, but we've to work together where interests align.



I agree. Iran doesn´t need to be close ally of them. China needs Iran because the more military capability of Iran the less pressure of US assets in far east, and Russia needs Iran because Russia has lost many of old customers of their weaponry and industry because of the sanctions. It is the moment of Iran for squeezing Russia and even China in many ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Indos said:


> With Iran already big defense budget, I believe that SU35 acquisition will not jeopardize Iran aerospace program. Oil price will likely keep high while Iran SU 35 acquisition is also conducted in barter scheme with Russia



This is true. It's not an either-or situation at all. The suggestion that an acquisition of 24 to 64 Su-35 would somehow kill Iran's indigenous fighter programs is a fallacy and a baseless fabrication. Much as China's continued purchasing of fighter jets from the USSR and Russia did not prevent it from launching and steadily expanding its domestic industry, Iran would proceed in a similar manner.

That the Su-35 would grant an additional punch to Iran's air defence capabilities was demonstrated by knowledgeable users, whilst no credible counter was offered by anyone.

Reactions: Like Like:
 6


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> This is true. It's not an either-or situation at all. The suggestion that an acquisition of 24 to 64 Su-35 would somehow kill Iran's indigenous fighter programs is a fallacy and a baseless fabrication. Much as China's continued purchasing of fighter jets from the USSR and Russia did not prevent it from launching and steadily expanding its domestic industry, Iran would proceed in a similar manner.
> 
> That the Su-35 would grant an additional punch to Iran's air defence capabilities was demonstrated by knowledgeable users, whilst no credible counter was offered by anyone.


no the impression that they divert money from somewhere else to buy them is fallacy . Iran budget already have a chronic disease of not being achieved , and all fields have experienced the problem of not receiving the money assigned for them.
a question were was the last year that Iran budget achieved ?
when was the last year that military received all the money that it was supposed to get according to the budget ?
china bought 20 jet from Russia for political reason , the number compared to more than 1000s Chinese made jet and 100s of chines 5th generation jet is nothing.

and the credible counter and evidence against the benefit of Su-35 offered, you can just go back in this thread and see them again , you just decided not to see them . your argument when faced with numbers was , they can assign money from some where else

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> no the impression that they divert money from somewhere else to buy them is fallacy .



If a decision is made to purchase them, funds will be released from outside the budget. Not "diverted".



Hack-Hook said:


> Iran budget already have a chronic disease of not being achieved , and all fields have experienced the problem of not receiving the money assigned for them.
> a question were was the last year that Iran budget achieved ?
> when was the last year that military received all the money that it was supposed to get according to the budget ?



Irrelevant given that such an acquisition is not supposed to be funded via the regular yearly defence budget to boot.



Hack-Hook said:


> china bought 20 jet from Russia for political reason , the number compared to more than 1000s Chinese made jet and 100s of chines 5th generation jet is nothing.



China bought over a hundred fighter jets from the USSR and Russia even as it was producing its own. Buying limited numbers of fighters does not necessarily imply stopping domestic production. To claim otherwise in the context of the Islamic Republic of Iran is to push a fallacy.



Hack-Hook said:


> and the credible counter and evidence against the benefit of Su-35 offered, you can just go back in this thread and see them again , you just decided not to see them .



Nothing of the sort was offered.



Hack-Hook said:


> your argument when faced with numbers was , they can assign money from some where else



It's not that they can it's that this is how it's supposed to be done. The notion that an extraordinary weapons procurement would have to be financed through the regular defence budget is another comical fallacy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abid123

Hack-Hook said:


> how we will be able to continue our indigenous program after buying those 24 already outdated airplane that nobody wants ?


Oh please.... Did you just call the SU-35 "outdated"? I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

I am not a fan of the SU-35 but would not call it "outdated". Not even close to being "outdated". 

The SU-35 presents a great threat to any 4th generation aircraft out there.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Irrelevant given that such an acquisition is not supposed to be funded via the regular yearly defence budget to boot.


on that you are wrong , every expenditure is according to the budget and the su-35 buying is also from that around 4 milliard that is supposed to be spended for increasing the capabilities of armed forces .


SalarHaqq said:


> China bought over a hundred fighter jets from the USSR and Russia even as it was producing its own. Buying fighters does not necessarily imply stopping domestic production. To claim otherwise is to push a fallacy and a lie.


at the time of ussr china was producing shit . don't forget that fact . they didn't have any engine of their own , they had no radar of their own , what they were producing was called j-7.
and don't compare china budget with ours


SalarHaqq said:


> It's not that they can it's that this is how it's supposed to be done. The notion that an extraordinary weapons procurement would have to be financed through the regular defence budget is another comical fallacy.


not regular , a 4 milliard $ that is put aside for increasing the power of armed forc


----------



## Hack-Hook

Abid123 said:


> Oh please.... Did you just call the SU-35 "outdated"? I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
> 
> I am not a fan of the SU-35 but would not call it "outdated". Not even close to being "outdated".
> 
> The SU-35 presents a great threat to any 4th generation aircraft out there.


the Radar is outdated , the IRST is outdated , electronic warfare system is also out dated and belong to 20 years ago now tell me what is advanced and modern about the airplane ?
the latest generation of the airplane maybe introduced in 2014 but the component for the modernization were designed in 2002-2007 airplane was introduced in 2007 with those component , the radar belong to 2004 and is PESA not AESA and can be defeated in E-warfare against more modern radars , the OLS-35 belong to early 2000s and use the technology of then .

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

> not regular , a 4 milliard $ that is put aside for increasing the power of armed forc



Extraordinary procurements aren't supposed to be funded through the above either.



Hack-Hook said:


> at the time of ussr china was producing shit . don't forget that fact . they didn't have any engine of their own , they had no radar of their own , what they were producing was called j-7.



Importing engines and radars en masse (nearly 2500 J-7 were manufactured) did not prevent China's domestic industries from progressing.

The Su-35 is not a replacement to indigenous Iranian programs, it would be a complement. A limited batch of Su-35's will not satisfy Iran's air force needs over the next decades, so domestic programs would be guaranteed to be maintained.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Extraordinary procurements aren't supposed to be funded through the above either.


and how you knew ?
did we bought those Mig-29 with extra money diverted from somewhere else ?


SalarHaqq said:


> Only strengthens the point: importing engines and radars en masse (nearly 2500 J-7 were manufactured) did not prevent China's domestic industries from progressing.


china military budget vs our military budget is the key difference


SalarHaqq said:


> The Su-35 is not a replacement to indigenuous Iranian programs, it would be a complement. A limited batch of Su-35's will not satisfy Iran's air force needs over the next decades, so domestic programs would be guaranteed to be maintained.


its against iran guidelines and sadly will satisfy some politician in parliament . the air force will never be satisfied with any air craft and want more

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

So good chance this Su-35 is real? IAF will be big mad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

China never proposed anything to Iran beside J-10A, an ultra obsolete fighter

China will never sell anything to Iran, even if there is a contract, they will not deliver or abide by any contract

China is squeezing countries that are victims of white imperialism (Russia and Iran) and should never be trusted beside trading, Iran literally gives them crude, they will not pay

Russia have a better expertise on turbojets than China, but China got better electronics, Iran also have decent electronics but no turbojet

Iran should cooperate with Russia and get access to turbojet technology, this is what is making Iran stuck on aircraft field for decades

But also Iran should never expect something from Russia, I'll change my words if there is a concrete deal with acts, otherwise right now Russia still never delivered something to Iran and no tot took place

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> the Radar is outdated , the IRST is outdated , electronic warfare system is also out dated and belong to 20 years ago now tell me what is advanced and modern about the airplane ?
> the latest generation of the airplane maybe introduced in 2014 but the component for the modernization were designed in 2002-2007 airplane was introduced in 2007 with those component , the radar belong to 2004 and is PESA not AESA and can be defeated in E-warfare against more modern radars , the OLS-35 belong to early 2000s and use the technology of then .


so what is alternative !?

You can't except any extordinary thing from ISI totalitirms dictatorship .... modern air craft need software , but as a software engineer who decline an offer from nethersland ( foolish act by me ) , I can say almost no good software engineer can work in Iran governmental and military section ... the payment is bad ( less than a waiter in UAE ) and the treatment is even worse ....

I don't know about other section but among engineers , we developers are most rebellious people and have highest paycheck but even with that, I myself after 7 years of continues software engineering carrier has no hope to be able buy a small house in near future ...

so, don't except miracle from Iranian engineers with average paycheck of 300$ per month ...

And lets me tell you I'm certain that half of these weapons they unveiled don't have any software test suit , and has low quality code as heart of their software ....
I'm currently working with a bank as contractor , they don't knew about testing or even antique software development methods ... working with them is hard and the payment is below average ( even compare now half-dead private sector ) ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> and how you knew ?



By resorting to logic.



Hack-Hook said:


> china military budget vs our military budget is the key difference



What matter is the political will to entertain domestic capabilities and there's no difference here between Iran, the DPRK and China.

Funds for a limited purchase of Su-35 will be made available on top of regular expenditures if a decision to this effect is made. Would still represent no more than a fraction of what countries surrounding Iran have spent on imported fighter jets over the years.



Hack-Hook said:


> its against iran guidelines and sadly will satisfy some politician in parliament . the air force will never be satisfied with any air craft and want more



The guidelines don't prohibit token auxiliary procurements from abroad in a complementary role. Iran imported a considerable number of planes from Russia before, even as domestic industries were up and running and being developed steadily. Sardar Baqeri stated during his visit to Moscow that Iran has contracts with Russia for further military aircraft.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> By resorting to logic.


so you don't knew


SalarHaqq said:


> What matter is the political will to entertain domestic capabilities and there's no difference here between Iran, the DPRK and China.
> 
> Funds for a limited purchase of Su-35 will be made available on top of regular expenditures if a decision to this effect is made. Would still represent no more than a fraction of what countries surrounding Iran have spent on imported fighter jets over the years.


again claim about thing , you assume but actually don't knew .

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> so you don't knew



I know that when an extraordinary procurement is decided upon, there's no need for it to be covered by the ongoing year's budget. Payment is done in installments stretched over future annual budgets. Resources can also be drawn from strategic reserves. In the specific case of Iran and Russia, there's also a distinct possibility that barter trade may come into play at some stage.

I know all these things. In other terms, I know for a fact that this year's defence budget as well as that 4 billion Euro are of no consequence when it comes to Iran's ability to place an order for two to four squadrons of Su-35 fighter jets with Russia. Point made.



Hack-Hook said:


> again claim about thing , you assume but actually don't knew .



I use logic to debunk the claim that Iran doesn't have the material possibility to buy 24 to 64 Flankers. It's a funny assertion no matter how one may look at it. Purchasing power wise, a country like Iran can buy dozens upon dozens of fighter jets in a go if it so decides. There is no financial hurdle and to suggest otherwise would amount to playing naive.


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

SalarHaqq said:


> I know that when an extraordinary procurement is decided upon, there's no need for it to be covered by the ongoing year's budget. Payment is done in installments stretched over future annual budgets. Resources can also be drawn from strategic reserves. In the specific case of Iran and Russia, there's also a distinct possibility that barter trade may come into play at some stage.
> 
> I know all these things. In other terms, I know for a fact that this year's defence budget as well as that 4 billion Euro are of no consequence when it comes to Iran's ability to place an order for two to four squadrons of Su-35 fighter jets with Russia. Point made.
> 
> 
> 
> I use logic to debunk the claim that Iran doesn't have the material possibility to buy 24 to 64 Flankers. It's a funny assertion no matter how one may look at it. Purchasing power wise, a country like Iran can buy dozens upon dozens of fighter jets in a go if it so decides. There is no financial hurdle and to suggest otherwise would amount to playing naive.


I think in the end only one squadron worth of Su-35S will be delivered to Iran (12 airframes), mostly because Putin has to give SOMETHING in return for all the help with drones. Pretty much rinse and repeat of the MiG-29 sale fiasco.

However, you're right - Iran can certainly afford at least 24 aircraft at even $70 million if russians suddenly increase the price. Comes to around $1.68 billion and IRGC's black budget is way larger than that.


----------



## OldTwilight

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Y
> 
> Yeah, dumbfuck, they're designing automated aircraft and anti-aircraft systems with zero technical basis in software design. Go peddle your stories elsewhere.
> 
> I'm glad the IRGC and Defence Ministry as a whole block you gabars from entering such sensitive jobs because you'll sell state secrets to the enemy at the drop of a hat (and indeed, someone posted a whole article about it in a thread where an engineer drove around the desert identifying points to disable with missile strikes).
> 
> Get a time machine and f-u-c-k back off to the reign of His Late and Drunken Majesty to the Gabar Kangdumb/Kingdom of Iran (GKI) where 50% of the nation was illiterate and poorer than it is right now. GKI is the perfect place for scumbags like you to be stifled, impoverished and ultimately wasted to a slow death in some hovel without a functioning toilet.
> 
> I bet you have a shitty CV and portfolio too which is why you work under some raggedy scam bank.


I don't know you ... But the truth is hard to swallow ...
With current state we are in downward trajectory


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

OldTwilight said:


> I don't know you ... But the truth is hard to swallow ...
> With current state we are in downward trajectory


What truth? The same "truth" all those simps, whores and gabars were chimping out about the past few months (and being gunned down over)?

There's a reason why you're in a downward spiral. The previous generations educated in Sharif University were identical to you in mindset - they wanted to live like the White sahibs and earn millions, which is why they fled after finishing their free education.

Fast forward 30 years, these people got the blow on the chin - the West is in economic turmoil, taxes are bleeding them dry and their children (if they had any) are total directionless brats.

You people are lazy, stupid and treacherous thinking the grass is greener on the other side. Every Iranian like you wants to be a Shahenshah with the shortest path possible. Well, hello! Life doesn't work that way.

The very least you guys could do is create a start-up for projects in agriculture which the country needs and collaborate with the government for state-funding but of course you won't - murtads like you want want collapse the Islamic Republic and bring back GKI (gabar kangdumb of Iran).


----------



## OldTwilight

If you're paid then I hope you get enough money , if you don't get paid then I feel sorry for you


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

OldTwilight said:


> If you're paid then I hope you get enough money , if you don't get paid then I feel sorry for you


This place isn't your bank's human resources department. Go complain there, not to us.


----------



## OldTwilight

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> This place isn't your bank's human resources department. Go complain there, not to us.


Well , I don't know you ...
I'm here for 10 years, I know what I am saying , but you don't....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

OldTwilight said:


> Well , I don't know you ...
> I'm here for 10 years, I know what I am saying , but you don't....


Yeah, I don't get shit what you're saying either, largely because you're vague beyond belief. Plus I have zero idea where you got your degree from, what your CV's like and I generally mistrust murtad gabars like yourself because you are champion liars to begin with.

Apply for a job in *ndia 🇮🇳 - Pune and Bangalore are decent for software engineers. Not because I have any interest in seeing you be able to earn but simply because I want you to get the **** out of Iran because you can't be trusted to remain there (no gabar can).


----------



## jauk

?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1606967427002163202

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

$200 million dollar disaster. F-35 Lighting II crashes while attempting a vertical landing 






Israel grounds 11 F-35s following recommendation. 









Israeli Air Force grounds 11 F-35 fighter jets following recommendation from U.S. - I24NEWS


The incident that prompted the move took place at a north Texas military base on December 16 - Click the link for more details.




www.i24news.tv





Incredible footage. Two surface to air missiles, presumably S-300 missiles, just barely miss hitting a Russian drone. Does anyone know what kind of drone this is ? Any idea ? Is it a Russian drone ? Iranian drone ?


----------



## sha ah

South Korea fires at North Korean drones that crossed border – DW – 12/26/2022


For the first time in five years, several North Korean drones violated the South's airspace, according to Seoul. The incident comes after a record pace of North Korean weapons demonstrations this year.




www.dw.com


----------



## sha ah

New SU-35 recently delivered to the Russian Air Force

So apparently Iranian pilots are already training and Iran will soon receive 24 SU-35s from Russia. I believe that this deal is much larger than just the SU-35s. Iran desperately needs AWACS planes. Russia could also provide Iran with parts so that Iran can upgrade its MIG-29s and Iran will more than likely have the option of purchasing more jets in the coming years. Iran could also end up purchasing the S-400, Bastion-P coastal air defense system, tank components, helicopter components and both sides are likely to cooperate on several joint military projects in the near future.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1607321188547833857

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> New SU-35 recently delivered to the Russian Air Force
> 
> So apparently Iranian pilots are already training and Iran will soon receive 24 SU-35s from Russia. I believe that this deal is much larger than just the SU-35s. Russia could provide Iran with parts so that Iran can upgrade its MIG-29s and Iran will more than likely have the option of purchasing more jets in the coming years. Iran could also end up purchasing the S-400, Bastion-P coastal air defense system, tank components, helicopter components and both sides are likely to cooperate on several joint military projects in the near future.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1607321188547833857


well thanks God it become clear where those Egyptian Su-35 went and the drama ended.
by the way honnestly do you believe iran have even 1% interest in S-400 ?


----------



## jauk

sha ah said:


> <CLIP!>Iran could also end up purchasing the S-400, Bastion-P coastal air defense system <CLIP!>
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1607321188547833857


Nonsense and small thinking.


----------



## sha ah

Well Iran has Bavar, but it's always good to diversity and how many Bavar SAMs has Iran built anyways ? Also how long would it take Iran to build something like the S-500 ? Maybe 10+ years or more ? Also Iran needs military grade spy satellites. I'm not talking about putting micro sized research satellites in space for a short period of time. Iran has plans but again it might take years. Until then Iran needs something now. Not to mention that the procurement of these weapons systems will likely give Iran's own industry a boost. Also since both countries are under harsh sanctions and will likely continue to remain under harsh sanctions for the foreseeable future especially Iran, it makes logical sense for both to work on military projects together.



Hack-Hook said:


> well thanks God it become clear where those Egyptian Su-35 went and the drama ended.
> by the way honnestly do you believe iran have even 1% interest in S-400 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Well Iran has Bavar, but it's always good to diversity and how many Bavar SAMs has Iran built anyways ? Also how long would it take Iran to build something like the S-500 ? Maybe 10+ years or more ? Also Iran needs military grade spy satellites. I'm not talking about putting micro sized research satellites in space for a short period of time. Iran has plans but again it might take years. Until then Iran needs something now. Not to mention that the procurement of these weapons systems will likely give Iran's own industry a boost. Also since both countries are under harsh sanctions and will likely continue to remain under harsh sanctions for the foreseeable future especially Iran, it makes logical sense for both to work on military projects together.


the question is what s-400 bring to Iran ? even our 3rd of khordad air defense have 200km of rang , what is the range of s-400 export missile 
and about bavar , well 1 prototype , but the reason is it was in development phase.
we sew they produced the missile for it . are you implying they begin producing missiles without begin producing the system and the problem with s-400 is its radar is inferior to bavar.


----------



## sha ah

When it comes to S-400 and Bastion, it's the Pentagon that said Iran was interested. There's probably a 50/50 chance that it's true considering Pentagon's track record.



jauk said:


> Nonsense and small thinking.



Analysts claim that Bavar is superior to S-300 but not S400. 3rd of Khordad is an analog of the BUK SAM, which Iran never would have been able to build without first purchasing BUK from Russia. If the S-400 is as "inferior" as you claim then why did China, India, Turkey purchase it and risk heavy sanctions in the process ? All those countries can build air defense systems and in the case of India and Turkey, they have access to advanced western technology and components.



Hack-Hook said:


> the question is what s-400 bring to Iran ? even our 3rd of khordad air defense have 200km of rang , what is the range of s-400 export missile
> and about bavar , well 1 prototype , but the reason is it was in development phase.
> we sew they produced the missile for it . are you implying they begin producing missiles without begin producing the system and the problem with s-400 is its radar is inferior to bavar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

Ukraine official urges 'liquidation' of Iranian weapons factories


A top Ukrainian presidential aide called for the "liquidation" of Iranian factories making drones and missiles, as well as the arrest of their suppliers, as Kyiv accused Tehran of planning to supply more weapons to Russia.




www.reuters.com





Ukraine official urges 'liquidation' of Iranian weapons factories​
KYIV, Dec 24 (Reuters) - A top Ukrainian presidential aide called for the "liquidation" of Iranian factories making drones and missiles, as well as the arrest of their suppliers, as Kyiv accused Tehran of planning to supply more weapons to Russia.

Writing on Twitter on Saturday, Ukrainian presidential aide Mykhailo Podolyak said Iran "blatantly humiliates the institution of international sanctions", before calling for the destruction of Iranian weapon factories in response.

Kyiv has accused Tehran of supplying 1700 Shahed-136 loitering munitions to Moscow, which it says have been used to hit targets in Ukraine since September. Iran denies the allegations.

Ukraine's espionage chief said in an interview released on Friday that Russia had already launched around 540 of the drones at military and energy targets in Ukraine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

sha ah said:


> When it comes to S-400 and Bastion, it's the Pentagon that said Iran was interested. There's probably a 50/50 chance that it's true considering Pentagon's track record.
> 
> 
> 
> Analysts claim that Bavar is superior to S-300 but not S400. 3rd of Khordad is an analog of the BUK SAM, which Iran never would have been able to build without first purchasing BUK from Russia. If the S-400 is as "inferior" as you claim then why did China, India, Turkey purchase it and risk heavy sanctions in the process ? All those countries can build air defense systems and in the case of India and Turkey, they have access to advanced western technology and components.


None of what you say is based on coherent or knowledgeable thinking. Please stop trying to ‘shallow engage’. It’s painfully obvious. You’re anti-Iranian posts infested with anti-Iranian sources (same ones-‘analysts’-you’re weakly referencing now) are manifest and tagged.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Analysts claim that Bavar is superior to S-300 but not S400.


only on the ground of the range of missiles and interestingly they compare baver with the domestic s-400 missiles not the export version that have less range.
also none of those analysis go and compare the most important part of the systems which is engagement and detection radar.


sha ah said:


> 3rd of Khordad is an analog of the BUK SAM, which Iran never would have been able to build without first purchasing BUK from Russia.


not an analogue , of Buk . for start the range of the missiles are 4-5 time that of buk , its battalion radar has a range of 450km buk never had that and the telar can engage targets from 70km away without even turning on its radar . no buk missile can do that more importantly Iran didn't use SA-11, if I'm not wrong we bought SA-6 (kub) and developed a system based on that in RAAD and Talash Project and it resulted in 3rd of Khordad


sha ah said:


> If the S-400 is as "inferior" as you claim then why did China, India, Turkey purchase it and risk heavy sanctions in the process


already answer that , india indigenous projects are in class of KUB and some manpad , the rest of their systems based on foreign design , turkey for years waited for patriot and usa didn't gave them that and about Hisar air defense system only the short to medium range is ready . about china , tell me what is the best indigenous china air defence system ? and you get your answer.


----------



## DoubleYouSee

F-16am simulator

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sha ah

I'm not anti Iranian. That's impossible since I'm an Iranian nationalist. I come here out of academic interest. If you want to live in a cave, that's fine, go right ahead, close your eyes and cover your ears. However for every crisis and conflict there are atleast two sides to every story and I want to see both sides. You're obviously not mature enough to handle differing narratives, but that's not my problem.



jauk said:


> None of what you say is based on coherent or knowledgeable thinking. Please stop trying to ‘shallow engage’. It’s painfully obvious. You’re anti-Iranian posts infested with anti-Iranian sources (same ones-‘analysts’-you’re weakly referencing now) are manifest and tagged.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Okay but how many Bavar SAMs has Iran built 50 ? 20 ? 10 ? Obviously it would be a rational idea to produce the Bavar SAM but even then it's always good to diversity a little bit. I'm not saying that Iran should or must purchase the S-400 but Iran might end up purchasing it. It is a possibility regardless of how you feel about it.

Also 3rd of Khordad is still an analog of BUK regardless of how much its optimized. Iran never would have been able to build it without reverse engineering the BUK air defense system first. Same thing with Iran's various F-5 analogs (Kowsar, Saeqeh, etc). Iran had to reverse engineer the F-5 and to do that they first had to purchase it from the United States. Even the missiles used in the Sayyad SAM are reverse engineered from the American RIM-66 anti ship missile.

Iran didn't build any of the above mentioned products from scratch. Don't get me wrong, Iran has built some products from scratch, but by and large Iran is still in a transitional phase at the moment when it comes to being self sufficient with its military industrial complex. Just look at the remains of Iranian drones that that have fallen into Ukrainian hands. They're filled with American/Japanese and other foreign components. 

Same thing with the Turksih Bayraktar TB-2. American weapons also have some Chinese supplied components, some from Taiwan and other nations. We're living in a globalized world and once one nation produces an excellent product, it's natural that others will want to use it as well. Just like how the Russians purchased the Shahed-136 from Iran and are now building it under license.

Anyways my point is that for Iran to have been able to reverse engineer the 3rd of Khordad or F-5 , Iran first had to purchase those weapons systems from foreign countries. I find your stance on this issue to be contradictory. You're advocating Iranian products that were reverse engineered from foreign technology, while at the same time you're vehemently opposed to Iran purchasing any new technology that will very likely lead to new and more advanced products in the future. To me, this seems counter productive.

Anyways I think we can agree to disagree on this one.



Hack-Hook said:


> only on the ground of the range of missiles and interestingly they compare baver with the domestic s-400 missiles not the export version that have less range.
> also none of those analysis go and compare the most important part of the systems which is engagement and detection radar.
> 
> not an analogue , of Buk . for start the range of the missiles are 4-5 time that of buk , its battalion radar has a range of 450km buk never had that and the telar can engage targets from 70km away without even turning on its radar . no buk missile can do that more importantly Iran didn't use SA-11, if I'm not wrong we bought SA-6 (kub) and developed a system based on that in RAAD and Talash Project and it resulted in 3rd of Khordad
> 
> already answer that , india indigenous projects are in class of KUB and some manpad , the rest of their systems based on foreign design , turkey for years waited for patriot and usa didn't gave them that and about Hisar air defense system only the short to medium range is ready . about china , tell me what is the best indigenous china air defence system ? and you get your answer.


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Also 3rd of Khordad is still an analog of BUK regardless of how much its optimized. Iran never would have been able to build it without reverse engineering the BUK air defense system first


As I said more like KUB not BUK. 
Wonder when we started the raad project if we had access to BUK. 


sha ah said:


> Iran didn't build any of the above mentioned products from scratch. Don't get me wrong, Iran has built some products from scratch, but by and large Iran is still in a transitional phase at the moment when it comes to being self sufficient with its military industrial complex. Just look at the remains of Iranian drones that that have fallen into Ukrainian hands. They're filled with American/Japanese and other foreign components.


For the radars on bavar and 15th of khordad we didn't had any help from USA or Russia. 



sha ah said:


> Iran didn't build any of the above mentioned products from scratch. Don't get me wrong, Iran has built some products from scratch, but by and large Iran is still in a transitional phase at the moment when it comes to being self sufficient with its military industrial complex. Just look at the remains of Iranian drones that that have fallen into Ukrainian hands. They're filled with American/Japanese and other foreign components.


Those are components they are not drones or anything else. Iran designed the drones itself. 


sha ah said:


> Anyways my point is that for Iran to have been able to reverse engineer the 3rd of Khordad or F-5 , Iran first had to purchase those weapons systems from foreign countries. I find your stance on this issue to be contradictory. You're advocating Iranian products that were reverse engineered from foreign technology, while at the same time you're vehemently opposed to Iran purchasing any new technology that will very likely lead to new and more advanced products in the future. To me, this seems counter productive.


3rd of khordad is not reverse engineered that is a misconception. We get KUB and built raad project based on that and forked it to become 3rd of khordad 3 generation later. Russia get KUB and developed it to become BUK m3. They are separately developed from an older system by two different team. They are not even that compatible with each other anymore. 
About aircraft we already bought enough aircraft we don't need to buy more till judgment day. If we are supposed to build new aircraft we have enough to build upon and develop and anything short of 5th gen aircraft won't add anything to our knowledge.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> You're advocating Iranian products that were reverse engineered from foreign technology, while at the same time you're vehemently opposed to Iran purchasing any new technology that will very likely lead to new and more advanced products in the future. To me, this seems counter productive.


Tell me what su-35 bring us? How it add to our knowledge.? 
And why you believe kowsar is equal to f5 and is reverse engineered f5 even the body is modified, RADAR is modified E-Warfare suit is modified it has different system to control the airplane it has data link capabilities. The design itself i despite being old is not that bad after all F-18 Also built on te same architecture. 
Only copy is engine and that will change in time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

sha ah said:


> I'm not anti Iranian. That's impossible since I'm an Iranian nationalist. I come here out of academic interest. If you want to live in a cave, that's fine, go right ahead, close your eyes and cover your ears. However for every crisis and conflict there are atleast two sides to every story and I want to see both sides. You're obviously not mature enough to handle differing narratives, but that's not my problem.


You are anti-Iranian and the ‘side’ you believe in is run by likes of you who are run by foreigners. Stop wiggling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Hack-Hook said:


> Tell me what su-35 bring us? How it add to our knowledge.?
> And why you believe kowsar is equal to f5 and is reverse engineered f5 even the body is modified, RADAR is modified E-Warfare suit is modified it has different system to control the airplane it has data link capabilities. The design itself i despite being old is not that bad after all F-18 Also built on te same architecture.
> Only copy is engine and that will change in time.


This fellow you are talking with has "zero" technical experience..I bet he never touched a hammer in his hand..He talks about complex engineering trade offs that goes behind the scene before a project starts...He also thinks he is "Nationalist Iranian" but he promotes anti Iran propaganda prepared for him by Iranian enemies..Dump him as many of us have done.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Ukraine official urges 'liquidation' of Iranian weapons factories
> 
> 
> A top Ukrainian presidential aide called for the "liquidation" of Iranian factories making drones and missiles, as well as the arrest of their suppliers, as Kyiv accused Tehran of planning to supply more weapons to Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukraine official urges 'liquidation' of Iranian weapons factories​
> KYIV, Dec 24 (Reuters) - A top Ukrainian presidential aide called for the "liquidation" of Iranian factories making drones and missiles, as well as the arrest of their suppliers, as Kyiv accused Tehran of planning to supply more weapons to Russia.
> 
> Writing on Twitter on Saturday, Ukrainian presidential aide Mykhailo Podolyak said Iran "blatantly humiliates the institution of international sanctions", before calling for the destruction of Iranian weapon factories in response.
> 
> Kyiv has accused Tehran of supplying 1700 Shahed-136 loitering munitions to Moscow, which it says have been used to hit targets in Ukraine since September. Iran denies the allegations.
> 
> Ukraine's espionage chief said in an interview released on Friday that Russia had already launched around 540 of the drones at military and energy targets in Ukraine.


These fvcking uki 🤡clowns🤡 have gone nuts,literally.....
I especially love his claim that iran "blatantly humiliates the institution of international sanctions",does he mean the us or un ones? 
Shouldnt that claim also apply to russia as well?,after all its buying as many of them as it can. 😏

On the serious side tho` I think it shows just what formidable weapons systems the s-131/136 combo have turned out to be.
As far as I can recall this is actually the first time that a great power [UNSC/NW State] nation has bought,indeed not only bought but begun license production of,a weapons system that was designed,tested and manufactured in a muslim nation.So this is actually military history being made here.
This is another big military first for iran,strangely tho no mention of it in the west,funny that,eh?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

You can believe whatever you want, but your beliefs don't define who I am or what I believe. I consider myself a nationalist because I want Iran to be the best country and I love Iran. 

I don't promote anything, I post it for the sake of discourse. Some people can't handle conflicting points of view like a child can't handle a roller coaster ride. That's not my problem.

You can choose to confine yourself to only receive information from only one source, rather than seeing what both sides have to say. However that kind of behavior leads to ignorance. 

I'm a natural skeptic so I refuse to blindly follow any one source. I will take what both sides are saying into consideration and use logical deduction and critical thinking to try and determine the truth. 




aryobarzan said:


> This fellow you are talking with has "zero" technical experience..I bet he never touched a hammer in his hand..He talks about complex engineering trade offs that goes behind the scene before a project starts...He also thinks he is "Nationalist Iranian" but he promotes anti Iran propaganda prepared for him by Iranian enemies..Dump him as many of us have done.



LOL you think a foreign intelligence agency that controls mainstream media outlets and has strong influence over the most popular platforms in the world would bother paying someone to post something on a forum that half a dozen to a dozen people view in a day ?

Sorry to burst your bubble but you're not the Iranian James Bond and this forum is really insignificant. Maybe it's the most important part of your day but it's really nothing in the big picture. That's just the truth.



jauk said:


> You are anti-Iranian and the ‘side’ you believe in is run by likes of you who are run by foreigners. Stop wiggling.
> 
> View attachment 907895


----------



## sha ah

If you put yourself in their shoes, their anger is understandable. But I believe that this proves that their claims about shooting down 100% of the drones and missiles launched by Russia is fake. If they were shooting down 100% then why would they care ? 




Sineva said:


> These fvcking uki 🤡clowns🤡 have gone nuts,literally.....
> I especially love his claim that iran "blatantly humiliates the institution of international sanctions",does he mean the us or un ones?
> Shouldnt that claim also apply to russia as well?,after all its buying as many of them as it can. 😏
> 
> On the serious side tho` I think it shows just what formidable weapons systems the s-131/136 combo have turned out to be.
> As far as I can recall this is actually the first time that a great power [UNSC/NW State] nation has bought,indeed not only bought but begun license production of,a weapons system that was designed,tested and manufactured in a muslim nation.So this is actually military history being made here.
> This is another big military first for iran,strangely tho no mention of it in the west,funny that,eh?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

I'm not sure what you're saying, so Kowsar/Saeqeh is not an analog of F-5 ? Yes the body is made out of synthetic materials like carbon fiber, yes it has a more modern radar which is built under license from China, but it's still an analog of the F-5. It's based on the F-5 blueprint. Its dimensions are more than 90% identical.

Just to give you an example, the US has been building the C-130 Hercules for 50 years years. A C-130 Hercules built in 2022 is completely different from a C-130 Hercules built in the 1950s or 60s but it's still a C-130 Hercules. The new C-130's, their airframes are built from different materials, the technology, the components, sensors, everything is different, but it's still a C-130. They could call it anything they want but as long as its based on the same blueprint, it's basically the same thing.

Honestly I don't think the SU-35 is the best fighter jet out there, I don't even think it's the best 4th generation fighter on the market, but Iran's airforce cannot purchase western jets. so they have two choices, SU-35 or J-10 and it seems that they chose SU-35. Compared to the F-5 it's faster, more maneuverable, can carry a larger payload and has thrust vectoring. It's not a bad platform.

You keep mentioning that F-5 can be upgraded with newer and better components, which is true, but you disregard the fact that the same can be said about the SU-35. Iran's airforce can upgrade its components/sensors including radar, avionics, etc if they find them to be insufficient. I don't see them upgrading anything right away but in a few years they very well might.

If Iran could build a medium-heavy fighter jet that could live up to modern standards, then there would be no need to look elsewhere, but if they could then they would have already by now. I'm not talking about a display model or prototype that doesn't fly (Qaher), I'm talking about mass production of a modern platform. I think the F-5 is a decent platform for what it is, but it's not suitable as a frontline fighter. As a secondary platform in a support role, yes, but not as a frontline fighter jet.

Anyways just wait and see what happens. It seems all but certain that the SU-35 deal has already been signed and if Iranian pilots are already training then its just a matter of time, but you never know. As far as I'm concerned, until the jets land in Iran, it's not a done deal.



Hack-Hook said:


> Tell me what su-35 bring us? How it add to our knowledge.?
> And why you believe kowsar is equal to f5 and is reverse engineered f5 even the body is modified, RADAR is modified E-Warfare suit is modified it has different system to control the airplane it has data link capabilities. The design itself i despite being old is not that bad after all F-18 Also built on te same architecture.
> Only copy is engine and that will change in time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## tsunset

I browsed the last 300 pages from 2020, and people are always arguing with Hack-Hook about Su-35, why is this eternal debate with him still going?

Just let's get okay, Hack Hook hates the Su-35 and says it is obsolete and unworthy against any western fighter jets or any fighters possessing AESA, that it would be useless and overpriced for Iran and that Iran could do nothing with it, that Iran needs to still keep working on the F-5 airframe for eternity and makes everything by itself, that Su-35 range is very low and their missiles are bad. That's it no need to debate forever about this

For my position Su-35s would be very useful for bombing terrorist or separatist positions near borders, instead of over relying on missiles and drones for such targets, air strikes are more precise and more reliable to hit critical positions and avoid early warning, as well as making good propaganda coups for Iran Air Force

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## strateger

sha ah said:


> I'm not sure what you're saying, so Kowsar/Saeqeh is not an analog of F-5 ? Yes the body is made out of synthetic materials like carbon fiber, yes it has a more modern radar which is built under license from China, but it's still an analog of the F-5. It's based on the F-5 blueprint. Its dimensions are more than 90% identical.
> 
> Just to give you an example, the US has been building the C-130 Hercules for 50 years years. A C-130 Hercules built in 2022 is completely different from a C-130 Hercules built in the 1950s or 60s but it's still a C-130 Hercules. The new C-130's, their airframes are built from different materials, the technology, the components, sensors, everything is different, but it's still a C-130. They could call it anything they want but as long as its based on the same blueprint, it's basically the same thing.
> 
> Honestly I don't think the SU-35 is the best fighter jet out there, I don't even think it's the best 4th generation fighter on the market, but Iran's airforce cannot purchase western jets. so they have two choices, SU-35 or J-10 and it seems that they chose SU-35. Compared to the F-5 it's faster, more maneuverable, can carry a larger payload and has thrust vectoring. It's not a bad platform.
> 
> You keep mentioning that F-5 can be upgraded with newer and better components, which is true, but you disregard the fact that the same can be said about the SU-35. Iran's airforce can upgrade its components/sensors including radar, avionics, etc if they find them to be insufficient. I don't see them upgrading anything right away but in a few years they very well might.
> 
> If Iran could build a medium-heavy fighter jet that could live up to modern standards, then there would be no need to look elsewhere, but if they could then they would have already by now. I'm not talking about a display model or prototype that doesn't fly (Qaher), I'm talking about mass production of a modern platform. I think the F-5 is a decent platform for what it is, but it's not suitable as a frontline fighter. As a secondary platform in a support role, yes, but not as a frontline fighter jet.
> 
> Anyways just wait and see what happens. It seems all but certain that the SU-35 deal has already been signed and if Iranian pilots are already training then its just a matter of time, but you never know. As far as I'm concerned, until the jets land in Iran, it's not a done deal.



It's completely obvious that the Kowsar is nearly identical to an F-5. The things you mention are significant, with one obvious exception. The engine. You didn't mention that. 

*Kowsar has*:
New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-85 called Owj
Modern instrument panels and radars
Capable of carrying modern precision weapons

This is incredible development, and possibly incredibly lucky for Iran given the new reality of modern warfare. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and have rendered stealth airframes as nearly obsolete. Dogfighting is over. Everyone knows dogfighting is over. The era of having to fly over the target to drop a bomb is over.

If Iran had a jet with an F-4 airframe that had:

*New Hypothetical F4*
New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-79 called Owj-79
Modern instrument panels and radars
Capable of carrying modern precision weapons, cruise missiles, etc

It would essentially need nothing else in the air force.

The F4 carries 18,000 pounds of bombs/missiles
F18 carries 13,000 pounds of bombs
F15 carries 15,000 pounds of bombs
F22 carries 20,000 pounds of bombs
F35 carries 23,000 pounds of bombs

If Iran has a Mach 2.2 aircraft with new materials, new engines, new radars, and can carry 18,000 pounds of precision cruise missiles, precision glide bombs, etc then what else is needed? Kowsar can carry weapons, dog fight if needed, etc. Air defense, ballistic missiles, and drones are already things that Iran does a superb job with.

Imagine an airbase in southern Ukraine and Iran has joined its Russian ally in the war... and Iran's objective is to assist in taking Kherson, Mykolaiv, and Odessa in the south. On the airfield you have:


24 "new" F4's with the charactertics described above (new airframes, new engines, new radars, etc). F4's are armed with Balaban and Yasin glide bombs, and also Qader air to surface precision cruise missiles
14 Kowsars armed with sidewinders
5 Fateh 110 launchers
Shahed-136 drones
I am not suggesting Iran would ever do this, or should do this, its a hypothetical scenario of a modern war zone to provide context. Is there any target in Ukraine that Iran could not hit? Is there any advantage, using these bombs/missiles, that a SU-57, F-35, etc would provide? If so, is it worth the cost? Also, would it be more efficient to do that with drones or ballistic missiles? We are talking about Mach 2 aircraft that can deliver precision weapons from many kilometers away.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

Has anyone else heard about this. It's hard to believe. I wonder if the Turkish authorities were aware of this. If its proven that they were aware they're going to get in alot of trouble for sanctions evasion. The US might even try seizing these planes by pressuring any country they fly to. Or perhaps Iran will simply keep them and use them for the next 2-3 decades ? I don't know what to make of it.









Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran


Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, w...




scramble.nl





*Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran*

On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, which had been stored at Johannesburg since spring 2019 were ferried to Tehran (Iran).

The four aircraft were withdrawn from use by Turkish Airlines in late 2018/early 2019. After a few months of storage at Istanbul, they were ferried to Johannesburg in March and April 2019 and all four were registered in the Guernsey (2-REG) register on behalf of a company based in Hong Kong, called AVRO Global Limited.

On the afternoon of 23 December all four aircraft left Johannesburg at almost the same time with Burkino Faso registrations XT-AKA, XT-AKB, XT-AKK and XT-ALM. Scramble Magazine does not know which XT-registration belongs to which MSN. If you have more information, please let us know at social@scramble.nl

The four aircraft involved are:

msn _*115*_, 2-AVRA, ex TC-JDM
msn _*180*_, 2-AVRB, ex TC-JDN
msn _*270*_, 2-AVRC, ex TC-JIH
msn _*331*_, 2-AVRD, ex TC-JII

In the original flightplan Uzbekistan was mentioned as the final destination, but once in Iranian airspace, the aircraft diverted to Tehran where they landed.

The flight numbers used for this flight used a MAN airline code. This code does not exist, but given the aircraft final destination, we assume this is a hint to its new owner ... Mahan Air. So despite the sanctions against Iran, it looks like some clandestine transaction took place and these four ex Turkish A340-300s will call Tehran home for the rest of their operational life.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sha ah

He's against Iran importing any new technology when the models built in Iran he's advocating are themselves analogs of previously imported technology. The SU-35's will surely give Iran a huge boost in every way.

Going against western fighter jets from western nations face to face is nearly impossible. Even if Iran were to import fighter jets like the Rafale, Gripen, F-35, they wouldn't stand a chance against their western counter parts in case of a conflict because they would be export models.

Not to mention the western nations could always turn off their communications since they're the ones who wrote the codes and control the satellites. I'm not sure if they would have a kill switch but I doubt if they would give Iran the source codes.

Aside from SU-35 Iran's airforce desperately needs AWACS planes as well as an engine for the Iran 140, as well as a variety of other parts and components for various industries. Now that the Russians are under harsh western sanctions and are staunchly opposed to the west, it's really a golden opportunity for Iran to import all the technology they need from Russia.

In this situation the Russians are more willing than ever to sell military technology to Iran and whereas they usually would not be willing to give Iran source codes / blueprints / technology transfers, now they are, so why not take advantage of it ?



tsunset said:


> I browsed the last 300 pages from 2020, and people are always arguing with Hack-Hook about Su-35, why is this eternal debate with him still going?
> 
> Just let's get okay, Hack Hook hates the Su-35 and says it is obsolete and unworthy against any western fighter jets or any fighters possessing AESA, that it would be useless and overpriced for Iran and that Iran could do nothing with it, that Iran needs to still keep working on the F-5 airframe for eternity and makes everything by itself, that Su-35 range is very low and their missiles are bad. That's it no need to debate forever about this
> 
> For my position Su-35s would be very useful for bombing terrorist or separatist positions near borders, instead of over relying on missiles and drones for such targets, air strikes are more precise and more reliable to hit critical positions and avoid early warning, as well as making good propaganda coups for Iran Air Force

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

I don't know, the military aviation industry has come a long way since the F-4/F-5 were first introduced. With fighter jets like the F-22 and Rafale out there, I think it's time Iran's airforce either builds or acquires new fighter jets using more contemporary designs. Just my opinion.

What I wonder is if Iran is working on a highly maneuverable UAV, something like the Turkish Kizilelma or the Chinese Wuzhen-8 hypersonic reconnaissance/suicide drone. I've seen some miniature prototypes over the years being tested in Iran.

Iran surely has most of the technology required to build such a drone (engine, radar, avionics, etc), the only issue is satellite communications and preferably AWACS planes, but with the recent military satellite Iran purchased from Russia, with hopefully more to come, along with the 10 fold increase in Iran's space industry budget, that piece of the puzzle should not be a problem.



strateger said:


> It's completely obvious that the Kowsar is nearly identical to an F-5. The things you mention are significant, with one obvious exception. The engine. You didn't mention that.
> 
> *Kowsar has*:
> New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
> A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-85 called Owj
> Modern instrument panels and radars
> Capable of carrying modern precision weapons
> 
> This is incredible development, and possibly incredibly lucky for Iran given the new reality of modern warfare. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and have rendered stealth airframes as nearly obsolete. Dogfighting is over. Everyone knows dogfighting is over. The era of having to fly over the target to drop a bomb is over.
> 
> If Iran had a jet with an F-4 airframe that had:
> 
> *New Hypothetical F4*
> New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
> A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-79 called Owj-79
> Modern instrument panels and radars
> Capable of carrying modern precision weapons, cruise missiles, etc
> 
> It would essentially need nothing else in the air force.
> 
> The F4 carries 18,000 pounds of bombs/missiles
> F18 carries 13,000 pounds of bombs
> F15 carries 15,000 pounds of bombs
> F22 carries 20,000 pounds of bombs
> F35 carries 23,000 pounds of bombs
> 
> If Iran has a Mach 2.2 aircraft with new materials, new engines, new radars, and can carry 18,000 pounds of precision cruise missiles, precision glide bombs, etc then what else is needed? Kowsar can carry weapons, dog fight if needed, etc. Air defense, ballistic missiles, and drones are already things that Iran does a superb job with.
> 
> Imagine an airbase in southern Ukraine and Iran has joined its Russian ally in the war... and Iran's objective is to assist in taking Kherson, Mykolaiv, and Odessa in the south. On the airfield you have:
> 
> 
> 24 "new" F4's with the charactertics described above (new airframes, new engines, new radars, etc). F4's are armed with Balaban and Yasin glide bombs, and also Qader air to surface precision cruise missiles
> 14 Kowsars armed with sidewinders
> 5 Fateh 110 launchers
> Shahed-136 drones
> I am not suggesting Iran would ever do this, or should do this, its a hypothetical scenario of a modern war zone to provide context. Is there any target in Ukraine that Iran could not hit? Is there any advantage, using these bombs/missiles, that a SU-57, F-35, etc would provide? If so, is it worth the cost? Also, would it be more efficient to do that with drones or ballistic missiles? We are talking about Mach 2 aircraft that can deliver precision weapons from many kilometers away.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

China fighter jet flew within six metres of US surveillance plane​_Video of incident shows a Chinese J-11 jet flying dangerously close to a US surveillance plane over the South China Sea._









China fighter jet flew within six metres of US surveillance plane


Video of incident shows a Chinese J-11 jet flying dangerously close to a US surveillance plane over the South China Sea.




www.aljazeera.com


----------



## Deino

sha ah said:


> China fighter jet flew within six metres of US surveillance plane​_Video of incident shows a Chinese J-11 jet flying dangerously close to a US surveillance plane over the South China Sea._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China fighter jet flew within six metres of US surveillance plane
> 
> 
> Video of incident shows a Chinese J-11 jet flying dangerously close to a US surveillance plane over the South China Sea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aljazeera.com




And what has thsi to do with the IRIAF?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608402015981568003

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> If you put yourself in their shoes, their anger is understandable.


Ukranians anger is understandable but their threats against Iran arent- please i hope you see the difference- Ukraine is so foolish and unwise, if it provokes Iran to fire missiles at Ukraine, that state might collapse shortly after, or NATO will have to do an "emergency operation" to hold up west Ukraine asap.


sha ah said:


> But I believe that this proves that their claims about shooting down 100% of the drones and missiles launched by Russia is fake.


100%, and you are spot on on that- Air defense by nature is a low efficiency game, so we knew Ukraine has been lying about its air defenses interception rates for a while now..Ukraine said its intercepting 80% of Shahed `136s..hoooow? thats just too high, and with degraded and ammunition-low air defenses for Ukraine today, there is no way Ukraine can intercept even up to 50% of the Shahed 136s.

The sign IMO that Ukraine is effectively downing the Shahed 136s would be that Russia would fire increasing numbers of them into Ukraine, because more would be getting shot down, but i havent seen Russia shoot more and more Shahed 136s..Russia even paused using them, so i believe Ukraine shoots down 50% of SHaheds on christmas day type of days for the Ukranian army, but most days arent Christmas..but i guess the US govt is Ukraine's daily father Christmas..sad.


----------



## tsunset

Anyone believing any claims of things destroyed or numbers coming from Ukraine government should either lack a brain or doing it on propaganda purpose to spread it

Ffs this is war, Russia too uses exaggerated numbers to boost soldier morale and demoralize opponent, same for Ukraine but their war propaganda touches not only Ukrainian but prominently westerners, same for any past war, during Iran Iraq war, Saddam was claiming he bombed completely all Iran bases and destroyed thousands of aircraftsthe first days and that the rush will be very easy so his soldiers could go with less fear, same for Iran, Iranians were told Iraqis were weakened so more morale to fight and defend. Same for Vietnam, China, Pakistan vs India, same for Nazis and just any war from any party of a conflict

Keep in mind that the Ukrainian part loves to record everything they destroy from drones to dead soldiers to executions, if they destroyed so much drones we would have images popping out everywhere and satellite imagery

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> Going against western fighter jets face to face is nearly impossible. Even if Iran were to import fighter jets like the Rafale, Gripen, F-35, they wouldn't stand a chance against their western counter parts in case of a conflict because they would be export models.


Then why buy them when thy can't go against KSA or UAE? For showing them in army day. 
And what we can learn from it our indigenous airplane need something in class of rd-33 not AL-31 or AL-41. You want study it's aero dynamic then study MIG-29 aerodynamic. You want it's radar then knew its old and susceptible to e-warfare and if scaled down to a size suitable for light to medium fighter the result will be shitty. You want its irst, it's one of the oldest and least effective and guess what we already build better sensors than the one used in it.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

strateger said:


> It's completely obvious that the Kowsar is nearly identical to an F-5. The things you mention are significant, with one obvious exception. The engine. You didn't mention that.
> 
> *Kowsar has*:
> New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
> A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-85 called Owj
> Modern instrument panels and radars
> Capable of carrying modern precision weapons
> 
> This is incredible development, and possibly incredibly lucky for Iran given the new reality of modern warfare. Drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and have rendered stealth airframes as nearly obsolete. Dogfighting is over. Everyone knows dogfighting is over. The era of having to fly over the target to drop a bomb is over.
> 
> If Iran had a jet with an F-4 airframe that had:
> 
> *New Hypothetical F4*
> New airframes made of modern materials, carbon fiber, etc.
> A new, improved engine that is reverse-engineered from the J-79 called Owj-79
> Modern instrument panels and radars
> Capable of carrying modern precision weapons, cruise missiles, etc
> 
> It would essentially need nothing else in the air force.
> 
> The F4 carries 18,000 pounds of bombs/missiles
> F18 carries 13,000 pounds of bombs
> F15 carries 15,000 pounds of bombs
> F22 carries 20,000 pounds of bombs
> F35 carries 23,000 pounds of bombs
> 
> If Iran has a Mach 2.2 aircraft with new materials, new engines, new radars, and can carry 18,000 pounds of precision cruise missiles, precision glide bombs, etc then what else is needed? Kowsar can carry weapons, dog fight if needed, etc. Air defense, ballistic missiles, and drones are already things that Iran does a superb job with.
> 
> Imagine an airbase in southern Ukraine and Iran has joined its Russian ally in the war... and Iran's objective is to assist in taking Kherson, Mykolaiv, and Odessa in the south. On the airfield you have:
> 
> 
> 24 "new" F4's with the charactertics described above (new airframes, new engines, new radars, etc). F4's are armed with Balaban and Yasin glide bombs, and also Qader air to surface precision cruise missiles
> 14 Kowsars armed with sidewinders
> 5 Fateh 110 launchers
> Shahed-136 drones
> I am not suggesting Iran would ever do this, or should do this, its a hypothetical scenario of a modern war zone to provide context. Is there any target in Ukraine that Iran could not hit? Is there any advantage, using these bombs/missiles, that a SU-57, F-35, etc would provide? If so, is it worth the cost? Also, would it be more efficient to do that with drones or ballistic missiles? We are talking about Mach 2 aircraft that can deliver precision weapons from many kilometers away.


Good news for you, these F4 SM (super improving) exist now and for their numbers, I don't know, it's a very interesting secret from Iran.


----------



## aryobarzan

sha ah said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608402015981568003


Iran buys five planes to boost fleet size of domestic airlines​Thursday, 29 December 2022 7:28 PM *[ Last Update: Thursday, 29 December 2022 7:28 PM ]*





Iran takes delivery of five second-hand planes to boost fleets of its domestic airlines.
*Iran has taken delivery of five second-hand planes to boost the fleet size of its domestic airlines amid sanctions that have effectively barred the country from purchasing brand new aircraft.*
Head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization (CAOIRI) Mohammad Mohammadi Bakhsh said on Thursday that the five Airbus and Boeing planes that had arrived in the country in recent days had an average age of 15 years.
Mohammadi Bakhsh said the planes will be supplied to three domestic airlines without identifying their names.
He hailed the arrival of the planes as a success for Iran amid US sanctions that seek to paralyze the civil aviation system in the country.


> “Despite the sanctions, the country’s aviation fleet is being renovated and rejuvenated,” the official told the IRIB News.


CAOIRI spokesman Hassan Khoshkho indicated in a statement late on Wednesday that four of the newly-arrived planes were Airbus A340s that had been manufactured in France. The official would not elaborate on more details.
Iran’s flag carrier Iran Air had announced in mid-November that it had plans to increase its active fleet size by five planes until March.
Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:
www.presstv.ir
www.presstv.co.uk

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

sha ah said:


> Has anyone else heard about this. It's hard to believe. I wonder if the Turkish authorities were aware of this. If its proven that they were aware they're going to get in alot of trouble for sanctions evasion. The US might even try seizing these planes by pressuring any country they fly to. Or perhaps Iran will simply keep them and use them for the next 2-3 decades ? I don't know what to make of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran
> 
> 
> Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, w...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> scramble.nl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran*
> 
> On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, which had been stored at Johannesburg since spring 2019 were ferried to Tehran (Iran).
> 
> The four aircraft were withdrawn from use by Turkish Airlines in late 2018/early 2019. After a few months of storage at Istanbul, they were ferried to Johannesburg in March and April 2019 and all four were registered in the Guernsey (2-REG) register on behalf of a company based in Hong Kong, called AVRO Global Limited.
> 
> On the afternoon of 23 December all four aircraft left Johannesburg at almost the same time with Burkino Faso registrations XT-AKA, XT-AKB, XT-AKK and XT-ALM. Scramble Magazine does not know which XT-registration belongs to which MSN. If you have more information, please let us know at social@scramble.nl
> 
> The four aircraft involved are:
> 
> msn _*115*_, 2-AVRA, ex TC-JDM
> msn _*180*_, 2-AVRB, ex TC-JDN
> msn _*270*_, 2-AVRC, ex TC-JIH
> msn _*331*_, 2-AVRD, ex TC-JII
> 
> In the original flightplan Uzbekistan was mentioned as the final destination, but once in Iranian airspace, the aircraft diverted to Tehran where they landed.
> 
> The flight numbers used for this flight used a MAN airline code. This code does not exist, but given the aircraft final destination, we assume this is a hint to its new owner ... Mahan Air. So despite the sanctions against Iran, it looks like some clandestine transaction took place and these four ex Turkish A340-300s will call Tehran home for the rest of their operational life.


Aware?

Mate they are likely fully in lockstep behind this operation to get these planes into Iran 😂 . Probably with a big fat paycheck $


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> average age of 15 years


Avarage age of 15 is a little worrying. If the age was 15 I was not that worry but now I'm wondering if some have around 10 and one there an age above 20



aryobarzan said:


> Iran’s flag carrier Iran Air had announced in mid-November that it had plans to increase its active fleet size by five planes until March.


I wonder if it means we most expect several other batch of airplanes in near future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

No I meant going up against the fighter jets of western airforces, because export variants are always inferior. On a regional level Iran's airforce can still compete and SU-35s will give Iran a boost.

If Iran could build something that the airforce wanted then why haven't they done it already ? Obviously there is something preventing them from doing it, otherwise they would have already.

If Iran can build better radar and sensors than those featured in the SU-35, then that's great, they can immediately upgrade those components, making the SU-35s more formidable.

Anyways what Iran really needs to work on is something like the Turkish Kizilelma drone or the Chinese Wuzhen-8. The jet engines Iran currently produces are more than good enough for the task and the rest of the components Iran should be able to build or source. 

Also Iran needs AWACS planes and an engine for the Iran-140. I'm pretty sure the Russians have an engine that's compatible. That would give Iran's aviation industry a huge boost. If Iran acquires it, it will likely be under license or technology transfers.



Hack-Hook said:


> Then why buy them when thy can't go against KSA or UAE? For showing them in army day.
> And what we can learn from it our indigenous airplane need something in class of rd-33 not AL-31 or AL-41. You want study it's aero dynamic then study MIG-29 aerodynamic. You want it's radar then knew its old and susceptible to e-warfare and if scaled down to a size suitable for light to medium fighter the result will be shitty. You want its irst, it's one of the oldest and least effective and guess what we already build better sensors than the one used in it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sahureka2

sha ah said:


> Has anyone else heard about this. It's hard to believe. I wonder if the Turkish authorities were aware of this. If its proven that they were aware they're going to get in alot of trouble for sanctions evasion. The US might even try seizing these planes by pressuring any country they fly to. Or perhaps Iran will simply keep them and use them for the next 2-3 decades ? I don't know what to make of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran
> 
> 
> Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, w...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> scramble.nl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Four ex Turkish Airlines Airbus A340s disappear to ... Iran*
> 
> On 23 December 2022, a day the world was busy with Christmas preparations, four ex Turkish Airlines’ Airbus A340-300s, which had been stored at Johannesburg since spring 2019 were ferried to Tehran (Iran).
> 
> The four aircraft were withdrawn from use by Turkish Airlines in late 2018/early 2019. After a few months of storage at Istanbul, they were ferried to Johannesburg in March and April 2019 and all four were registered in the Guernsey (2-REG) register on behalf of a company based in Hong Kong, called AVRO Global Limited.
> 
> On the afternoon of 23 December all four aircraft left Johannesburg at almost the same time with Burkino Faso registrations XT-AKA, XT-AKB, XT-AKK and XT-ALM. Scramble Magazine does not know which XT-registration belongs to which MSN. If you have more information, please let us know at social@scramble.nl
> 
> The four aircraft involved are:
> 
> msn _*115*_, 2-AVRA, ex TC-JDM
> msn _*180*_, 2-AVRB, ex TC-JDN
> msn _*270*_, 2-AVRC, ex TC-JIH
> msn _*331*_, 2-AVRD, ex TC-JII
> 
> In the original flightplan Uzbekistan was mentioned as the final destination, but once in Iranian airspace, the aircraft diverted to Tehran where they landed.
> 
> The flight numbers used for this flight used a MAN airline code. This code does not exist, but given the aircraft final destination, we assume this is a hint to its new owner ... Mahan Air. So despite the sanctions against Iran, it looks like some clandestine transaction took place and these four ex Turkish A340-300s will call Tehran home for the rest of their operational life.


as written in the article the four aircraft were ex Turkish Airlines, the owner was Avro Global Limited based in Hong Kong since 2019, therefore no problem for Turkey

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran should do this, Iran will have to do this, so wait for them to present achievements that are not yet publicly revealed to keep secret before saying anything here.


----------



## strateger

sha ah said:


> I don't know, the military aviation industry has come a long way since the F-4/F-5 were first introduced. With fighter jets like the F-22 and Rafale out there, I think it's time Iran's airforce either builds or acquires new fighter jets using more contemporary designs. Just my opinion.
> 
> What I wonder is if Iran is working on a highly maneuverable UAV, something like the Turkish Kizilelma or the Chinese Wuzhen-8 hypersonic reconnaissance/suicide drone. I've seen some miniature prototypes over the years being tested in Iran.
> 
> Iran surely has most of the technology required to build such a drone (engine, radar, avionics, etc), the only issue is satellite communications and preferably AWACS planes, but with the recent military satellite Iran purchased from Russia, with hopefully more to come, along with the 10 fold increase in Iran's space industry budget, that piece of the puzzle should not be a problem.



That's not the point I was making... the point is, with ballistic missiles and drones... what is the need for an F-22 and a Rafale? Again, with the weapons systems I mentioned... in a modern battle theatre.... tell me which targets Iran can't hit? Air launched cruise missiles and glide bombs from F4's and SU-22's.... Built new... Upgraded to modern avionics, new engines, new carbon/composite airframes.... What target can they not hit?


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> on that you are wrong , every expenditure is according to the budget and the su-35 buying is also from that around 4 milliard that is supposed to be spended for increasing the capabilities of armed forces .
> 
> at the time of ussr china was producing shit . don't forget that fact . they didn't have any engine of their own , they had no radar of their own , what they were producing was called j-7.
> and don't compare china budget with ours
> 
> not regular , a 4 milliard $ that is put aside for increasing the power of armed forc


With all due respect, I am puzzled by the insistence on the $4 billion figure, which is frankly comical and it would be suicidal. I don't believe the mullas are that foolish. Also, it's impossible to keep the military leaders silent while Iran is under constant threats externally from the West US/NATO/Israel, Gulf Arab regimes, and internally thru insurgencies "low intensity war" at least in two regions "north west, and south east".

The link below shows a close estimate of the actual budget, which I don't think is accurate. The actual number is even greater:








Iran Boosts Military Budget To Stand Among Top 15


Iran has increased its military expenditure for the first time in four years to become the 14th largest military spender last year.




www.iranintl.com





The actual Iranian Defense Budget according to every reliable source was $16 billion in 2020. Since then, the military budget estimate is beyond $25 billion now. Moreover, there are many ongoing weapons projects not listed under that number and it could be several additional billions. The government in Iran traditionally underestimates the crude oil prices by at least 25-30%, and that applies to Petrochemicals which fetches 12-15 billion annually. Such policy allows the government to allocate much of the extra income not projected in the annual budget to Iran's military, which has been the case for a long time "since early 2000s".

It's impossible to imagine that Iran spends only $4 billion on the military. They announce such ridiculous numbers as a mean to conceal Iran's actual expenditure due to their constant war footing and threats from the West. I am absolutely sure the actual funds allocated to the military exceeds 20 billions. Basic math should tell you; how Iran could makes all those modern weapons in such rapid pace on a $4 billion budget? The Mullas doing a great job in portraying Iran as the ultimate weakling vegetarian who could barely manage paying salaries of the military personnel serving in the two branches "Army & Guards". If we estimate the actual cost of feeding a 500,000-600,000 force "just basic food and soft drinks would cost $4 a pop "fair estimate?" that would be $864,000,000 a year. If we add an average $100 monthly salary per each military person, the payroll adds an additional $720,000,000. Furthermore, almost all of Iran's weapon development projects involve civilian contractors that must be paid handsomely since designing hi-tech things don't derive from your basic folks but need highly educated professionals and highly equipped shops and fabrication establishments, and that means a lot of money? How much money one would ask; in my estimates it must be in hundreds of millions or even over a billion annually "very conservative number". There went $2.6 billions in that imaginary $4 billion number. Do you really think an armed forces that large could manage on $1.4 to be an effective battle ready force on a ultra-diet budget of $4 billions? I left out the cost of consumables, maintenance cost, the cost of dozens of large-scale exercises' etc.

The actual story is different by a very wide margin.

Thanks to this intriguing topic, it's worth examining, but only God knows what the actual figure might be, however, rest assure, its many folds greater than $4 billions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> No I meant going up against the fighter jets of western airforces, because export variants are always inferior. On a regional level Iran's airforce can still compete and SU-35s will give Iran a boost.


actually ksa f-15e strike eagle or F16v of bahrain and kuwait f-18E/F are one of the most advance version . practice of export version is more played by Eastern blocks



sha ah said:


> If Iran could build something that the airforce wanted then why haven't they done it already ? Obviously there is something preventing them from doing it, otherwise they would have already.


engine

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Joe_Adam said:


> With all due respect, I am puzzled by the insistence on the $4 billion figure, which is frankly comical and it would be suicidal. I don't believe the mullas are that foolish. Also, it's impossible to keep the military leaders silent while Iran is under constant threats externally from the West US/NATO/Israel, Gulf Arab regimes, and internally thru insurgencies "low intensity war" at least in two regions "north west, and south east".


the 4milliard is not the budget for armed force , its the budget to increase the capabilities of armed force , AKA acquire new equipmet . the budget to maintain the current capabilities , pay wages , and keep up with the daily costs is separate .


Joe_Adam said:


> The actual Iranian Defense Budget according to every reliable source was $16 billion in 2020. Since then, the military budget estimate is beyond $25 billion now.


as explained before 4 milliard is not defense budget , its the budget to increase defensive capabilities , those around 20milliard is all of defense budget


Joe_Adam said:


> It's impossible to imagine that Iran spends only $4 billion on the military. They announce such ridiculous numbers as a mean to conceal Iran's actual expenditure due to their constant war footing and threats from the West. I am absolutely sure the actual funds allocated to the military exceeds 20 billions. Basic math should tell you; how Iran could makes all those modern weapons in such rapid pace on a $4 billion budget? The Mullas doing a great job in portraying Iran as the ultimate weakling vegetarian who could barely manage paying salaries of the military personnel serving in the two branches "Army & Guards". If we estimate the actual cost of feeding a 500,000-600,000 force "just basic food and soft drinks would cost $4 a pop "fair estimate?" that would be $864,000,000 a year. If we add an average $100 monthly salary per each military person, the payroll adds an additional $720,000,000. Furthermore, almost all of Iran's weapon development projects involve civilian contractors that must be paid handsomely since designing hi-tech things don't derive from your basic folks but need highly educated professionals and highly equipped shops and fabrication establishments, and that means a lot of money? How much money one would ask; in my estimates it must be in hundreds of millions or even over a billion annually "very conservative number". There went $2.6 billions in that imaginary $4 billion number. Do you really think an armed forces that large could manage on $1.4 to be an effective battle ready force on a ultra-diet budget of $4 billions? I left out the cost of consumables, maintenance cost, the cost of dozens of large-scale exercises' etc.


it all come front the fact you don't knew how military budget will be distributed



Joe_Adam said:


> The actual story is different by a very wide margin.


yes its different but from what you said . its exactly what I explained


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> the 4milliard is not the budget for armed force , its the budget to increase the capabilities of armed force , AKA acquire new equipmet . the budget to maintain the current capabilities , pay wages , and keep up with the daily costs is separate .
> 
> as explained before 4 milliard is not defense budget , its the budget to increase defensive capabilities , those around 20milliard is all of defense budget
> 
> it all come front the fact you don't knew how military budget will be distributed
> 
> 
> yes its different but from what you said . its exactly what I explained


Is it really that much fun to spend days and weeks arguing about a non verified gossip or imaginary topics. Thanks, I don't need to know how its distributed as no one ever would know such things.

The notion that you explained such matters is not what people read from your posts, and me included. The doom and gloom you sounding shows that Iran is totally screwed and there are no competent leaders nor functioning brains in Iran's military & political establishments who could manage Iran's military needs . . ! 

Furthermore, thank you, I am not interested in endless discussions about topics or numbers that make no sense. It's my bad for paying attention to imaginary numbers. By the way, I am in no contest with you or anyone else. A healthy discourse means seeking facts but never to spend endless hours & days writing arguments just for the sake of having the last word albeit incoherent or baseless. 

Still wondering; how on God's earth you knew that magic procurement figure of $4 billion. Don't need to answer the question since it won't convince me or any other member of the this forum. If you think its $4 billions, then it's good enough for me, period.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Joe_Adam said:


> Is it really that much fun to spend days and weeks arguing about a non verified gossip or imaginary topics. Thanks, I don't need to know how its distributed as no one ever would know such things.
> 
> The notion that you explained such matters is not what people read from your posts, and me included. The doom and gloom you sounding shows that Iran is totally screwed and there are no competent leaders nor functioning brains in Iran's military & political establishments who could manage Iran's military needs . . !
> 
> Furthermore, thank you, I am not interested in endless discussions about topics or numbers that make no sense. It's my bad for paying attention to imaginary numbers. By the way, I am in no contest with you or anyone else. A healthy discourse means seeking facts but never to spend endless hours & days writing arguments just for the sake of having the last word albeit incoherent or baseless.
> 
> Still wondering; how on God's earth you knew that magic procurement figure of $4 billion. Don't need to answer the question since it won't convince me or any other member of the this forum. If you think its $4 billions, then it's good enough for me, period.


well wonder why people post those unverified rumors again and again and again , even after Russia gave those airplanes to its air force


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Joe_Adam said:


> Is it really that much fun to spend days and weeks arguing about a non verified gossip or imaginary topics. Thanks, I don't need to know how its distributed as no one ever would know such things.
> 
> The notion that you explained such matters is not what people read from your posts, and me included. The doom and gloom you sounding shows that Iran is totally screwed and there are no competent leaders nor functioning brains in Iran's military & political establishments who could manage Iran's military needs . . !
> 
> Furthermore, thank you, I am not interested in endless discussions about topics or numbers that make no sense. It's my bad for paying attention to imaginary numbers. By the way, I am in no contest with you or anyone else. A healthy discourse means seeking facts but never to spend endless hours & days writing arguments just for the sake of having the last word albeit incoherent or baseless.
> 
> Still wondering; how on God's earth you knew that magic procurement figure of $4 billion. Don't need to answer the question since it won't convince me or any other member of the this forum. If you think its $4 billions, then it's good enough for me, period.


Thank you for your comment concerning the military budget of Iran. Since I have been on the forum that I say that the real army budget is higher than the public budget. I have always talked about a secret budget. It's the same thing with weapons still hidden but it will come mainly in aviation


----------



## Flotilla

Joe_Adam said:


> Furthermore, almost all of Iran's weapon development projects involve civilian contractors that must be paid handsomely since designing hi-tech things don't derive from your basic folks but need highly educated professionals and highly equipped shops and fabrication establishments, and that means a lot of money? How much money one would ask; in my estimates it must be in hundreds of millions or even over a billion annually "very conservative number".


But, assuming your estimations are right, what it is the problem exactly?.


----------



## tsunset

Do not trust a single world from "Iran International", they are linked to the Saud family and fully financed by them, the channel doesn't even have any ads and runs 24/24 7/7 live non-stop


Hack-Hook said:


> the 4milliard is not the budget for armed force , its the budget to increase the capabilities of armed force , AKA acquire new equipmet . the budget to maintain the current capabilities , pay wages , and keep up with the daily costs is separate .


The thing is that every state can temporarily boost their military funds to buy certain materials and weapons, Iran isn't capped with its normal budget for eternity, there is a "black budget"/"in case" budget too for big expenses such as Su-35 purchase. 20milliards is the budget in normal time, politics and generals can ask for uncapping if they need a one time purchase of big and costy systems/fighters etc

SU-35 would hopefully come with R-37 missiles at least as a part of the coop deal, or a modernization of MiG-29 to MiG-29M2, Iran will undoubtedly work on a recent platform such as the Su and the MiG instead of sticking for eternity with rotting F-4 and F-5 and Mirage F1 going nowhere and being stuck for decades

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

*World's top 15 military budgets 2021 (Iran is No 13 with $25 billion)





*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> SU-35 would hopefully come with R-37 missiles at least as a part of the coop deal, or a modernization of MiG-29 to MiG-29M2, Iran will undoubtedly work on a recent platform such as the Su and the MiG instead of sticking for eternity with rotting F-4 and F-5 and Mirage F1 going nowhere and being stuck for decades


those migs modernization really don't worth the budget , the airframe is too old . to me the best solution would be replace their radar and avionics with what we used in kowser and don't bother with engine upgrade , maybe even use a scaled up version of radar in kowsar .(the radar in our Mig-29s is the weakest RADAR possible on any mig-29 variant they are the first generation export for non-Warsaw pact buyers)
I don't think going all the way to m2 standard for those airframe can be justifiable by the cost compared to what we can take from aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

aryobarzan said:


> *World's top 15 military budgets 2021 (Iran is No 13 with $25 billion)
> 
> View attachment 908828
> *


Rouhani had destroyed it, something is happening. A big purchase? Maybe


----------



## sahureka2

request:
Can anyone recognize what type of plane the Iranian paratroopers are jumping from?
in the video at minute 3:11




Thanks in advance


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

sahureka2 said:


> request:
> Can anyone recognize what type of plane the Iranian paratroopers are jumping from?
> in the video at minute 3:11
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance








C-130?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

sahureka2 said:


> request:
> Can anyone recognize what type of plane the Iranian paratroopers are jumping from?
> in the video at minute 3:11
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance


they usually use c-130 for that , probably in future when simorgh become ready we will see both beside each other

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------

