What's new

Aviationintel's analysis on F-313 (Ghaher)

Dominance

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Dec 10, 2014
Messages
117
Reaction score
0
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
This out of the box analysis was previously posted in Military forum.
I repost it here for better exposure:

MY MESSAGE TO THE WEST CONCERNING IRAN’S F-313 “FIGHTER:” ARROGANCE CAN GET YOU KILLED
Posted on February 6, 2013 by aviationintel website

I know people are waiting for me to post a big picture by picture analysis of Iran’s unveiled “F-313″ not-so-fighter fighter. I don’t think this is necessary, obviously the aircraft is questionable for many, many reasons. None-the-less I still want to give my conceptual analysis here as after having a few days to conduct some light research pertaining to the topic and letting the photos of the aircraft gestate, as usual, I have come to some conclusions that are both unique and I believe compelling, especially when compared with what you have probably read splattered elsewhere across the net.

Ok first off I want to highlight where Iran really hurt themselves on the PR game when it comes to the article they presented earlier this week. There are two particular points I want to highlight:

1.) By showing that ridiculous footage of the F-313 “flying” on a supposed test flight, which was clearly a model airplane as stated in the piece I posted just as the story broke. By doing so the Iranians looked like they were blatantly attempting to ruse their global “audience” in an alarmingly childish way. The identity of that radio controlled model has now been confirmed and a big thanks to Aviationinteler Nico for shooting over the evidence:

a271cccc6b6e7bb6caea8086e0b7a5f50ae70af9.jpg



Supposed wind-tunnel testing of the F-313 configuration:

269961_503-copy-450x301.jpg


2.) By calling the aircraft that they put on display a “new fighter” they once again totally discredited whatever actual value showing off that machine to the world could have had. I mean why not say its the beginning of a long road-map of research and development that will end in Iran fielding a low observable indigenous fighter? How on earth could they look at that thing and say “boy is this gonna give America, Israel and their allies something to worry about?” To clarify, not because the aircraft clearly does not even come close to comparing to other “stealth” aircraft but because it is almost certainly not airworthy. I realize that Iran’s leadership, and especially the IRGC, has a grotesque flare for bravado, and overstatements, but the whole idea that this was a new game changing “fighter” was comical and I have to be honest, I had a good laugh too. But once I blocked out Iran’s soaring claims and looked at the bigger picture and the evidence at hand, a much more relevant possibility began to emerge.

So with this in mind it really leaves us with the question of what the heck is the F-313? I have a couple of ideas, both of these theories are much more important than just trying to figure out if what was displayed by the Iranians was an airworthy machine or not, and yes that too is a piece of the puzzle which I will address. As always I aim to provide a “full spectrum” analysis to my readers, so bear with me as I walk you through this.

Theory 1: The F-313 is an absolutely horrible attempt at mocking up a totally fake indigenous stealth fighter intended to give the US and Israel pause and to showcase Iran’s improving technological capabilities to the world. In other words it is just a video of an RC plane whizzing around and a fiberglass and wood shell with some commercially available avionics thrown in to make it look like maybe it could have a purpose. A propaganda campaign with wings, and a poor one at that because Iran’s claims clearly did not match the specimen on display.

Still the Iranians must have known that the world would immediately realize that this little aircraft is at best an idea that has never taken flight or at worst a fantastical model of what an insular engineer thinks a futuristic low observable jet should look like. I find it incredibly hard to believe that if Iran was simply after a propaganda stunt that they would not have come up with something far, far more menacing, in its potential capabilities and aesthetics. Iran does have a robust aerospace engineering academic corps, one that when paired with espionage has been highly effective at keeping incredibly complex foreign aircraft flying decades after anyone thought it possible. See the F-14, of which about two dozen are still in service in upgraded fashion some 30+ years after all support for them was embargoed. Additionally Iran does have the internet and they have access to an avalanche of open source information regarding stealth design. Just go pick up the Aerofax book on the F-22 for instance, every inch of that aircraft is covered in minute detail in it. So if your goal was to create an imposter stealth aircraft, all show and no go, your budget would not be an issue nor would your access to information on the aesthetics and particulars of existing stealthy designs to integrate into something visually new, yet technologically familiar.

So to sum it up I cannot, I will not, believe that this is simply a very poor attempt at spooking the US and Israel and “showcasing” Iranian blossoming ingenuity. The design is too poor, the finish is too shabby and the spotlight was too bright. If I am wrong than Iran’s leadership is so delusional, isolated and drunk on its own ego that there is no reason why they won’t take on the US in the Straits of Hormuz or attempt to irradiate Israel from the map without understanding that they will not live to tell their next generation about it. Such ignorance is incredibly hard to believe, especially for a state that has survived for decades under incredibly harsh circumstances.

So if the “F-313″ is not a total fake than what the hell is it as it is clearly not what they claim it is?:

Theory #2: The aircraft displayed as the F-313, although not a flyable aircraft (yet), is part of a new program to design and produce a light weight, low-cost and low observable indigenous fighter aircraft.

I believe that the aircraft displayed on that turntable is a mockup of a design that the Iranian aerospace sector, and possibly the IRGC, are moving forward with as a proof of concept technology demonstrator and eventually a real production aircraft. For decades, throughout the jet age really, the western aircraft manufacturers designed aircraft on paper and once a configuration was loosely locked into place the firm would build a full-scale mockup to work through engineering issues in scale and to market their design. Keep in mind these mockups were almost always smaller than the final production configuration, had strange oddities and imperfections and were built with non-aircraft grade materials to greatly save time and costs. Often these aircraft would look less than realistic, but still they were a worthwhile engineering and business endeavor.

GrummanMockup-copy-450x205.jpg


adadd-300x207.jpg

Iran’s “F-313″ appears to be an engineering mockup. It is made out of what seems to be fiberglass (you can see it below the cockpit rim) of adequate workmanship. Almost all of the major subsystems are hidden from view, of particular note is the motor. The “pocket” surrounding the exhaust nozzle is not even finished with heat insulating materials, in other words it would melt. There appears to be no weapons bays of any kind. The landing gear’s ability to retract is not clear. The canopy is made out of basic molded plexiglass which would have poor side view quality but decent front view quality. Additionally, there appears to be no latching system to even lock the canopy down. The cockpit is tiny, to the point it actually looks built for a small person. Now this is an interesting point, the ejection seat is actually scaled way down, the stick is equally short, and the instrument panel matches these characteristics. So it is not like the F-313 just has a cramped cockpit, it looks like it was designed FOR a smaller person. More on this later.

Then you have the avionics, they look like some commercially available off the shelf basic EFIS components and some other standard cockpit interfaces and their final configuration still appears to be in flux.

Even with all these issues and imperfections the jet does have some things that lend itself to being an elaborate engineering mockup of decent quality. It has avionics, an ejection seat, a stick, intake covers and exhaust cover, a pitot tube, marker lights, articulating control surfaces (and yes “experts” the canards are partially articulated like on the SAAB JAS-37), a design that would potentially not require fly-by-wire flight control and many small details including subsystem vents and other minutia appear to be included as well. To me, the article displayed to the public clearly looks like a mockup not of a production fighter but of a proof of concept experimental testing aircraft, otherwise known as a “technology demonstrator.” This means that performance such as top speed, acceleration and high-g and angle of attack capability are not its key objectives, it is to test the aircraft’s low observability, stability and other primary concepts.

haveblu-copy-450x174.jpg


Fielding stripped down, sub-scale, technology demonstrators and proof of concept experimental prototypes is not the Iranian way of developing advanced combat aircraft folks, it is the American way! If you saw the Have Blue technology demonstrator (precursor to the YF-117) back in the late 1970s would you have believed it was a precursor to a viable weapon system? Even with its small size, “tiny cockpit,” featureless exterior, lack of a weapons bay, and tiny intakes and exhausts? Probably not!

Technology demonstrators are built as cheaply and as fast as possible. Thus they save money via decreasing weight, thrust, creature comforts, weaponization and especially performance. I laughed yesterday when I read three different site’s analysis stating that the F-313′s inlets are too small and the exhaust does not have an afterburner nozzle and the airspeed indicator only goes to 300 units (probably knots). Come on guys, use your deductive reasoning, you could have said the exact same things about Have blue!

Do you really need massive air intakes and a huge nozzle to accommodate a single J-85? A motor we know the Iranians have reverse engineered and are producing? Go take a look at the size of an F-5A’s inlet and I think your position will change. With the J-85 in mind, maybe some of the clear attempts at saving weight for the technology demonstration phase had to do with the fact that they could only use a single 2,600lb class motor. An F-5′s empty weight is 10,000lbs. I doubt that this little composite jet (F-313) tips the scales over 6,000lbs. Thus a single J85 would probably serve fine for experimental testing. Back to the miniaturized cockpit, if you are cash, weight and thrust strapped and need to prove a design’s viability, building a cockpit for a small pilot can save you weight and money. In the US we would just throw more money at the problem and build a bigger, heavier more expensive jet and choose a larger motor to go along with it as we have many indigenous motor classes to choose from. In Iran they could very well say let’s just use a smaller pilot for the test program because we have to work within our indigenous capabilities and budget. It actually makes great sense and I doubt any discrimination lawsuits would be brought before the Supreme Leader for doing so!
have_blue_6-450x180.jpg


Visual-Stealth-Boeing-Bird-Of-Prey-2-300x152.jpg

Not just Have Blue but all other known technology demonstrators had kit-built looks, relatively poor performance, and used often times commercially available components to lower cost. Just look at Boeing’s cool looking “Bird Of Prey,” which shares the drooped wingtip design with the F-313, or Northrop’s “Tacit Blue” BSAX experimental aircraft (make sure to read my special feature on Tacit Blue), both look like bad movie props not operational aircraft, yet they were some of the most successful experimental combat aircraft programs that we have ever been allowed to know about and both paved the way for a myriad of new operational technologies and combat aircraft designs. Keep in mind these are just the few technology demonstrators we know about, and there are likely dozens and dozens of similar quality that still remain top secret.

tb02m-450x219.jpg

As for the remote-controlled scale F-313 featured in the Iranian press release as the actual aircraft that was featured in the Iranian “test flight” clip, I don’t think this model was built just for propaganda purposes. Iran does have serious budgetary and technical constraints that the US does not have. Designing an experimental aircraft on CAD software, then flying it as a model for preliminary aerodynamic validation is good science, especially considering that this jet clearly does not possess fly-by-wire subsystems. Heck, even America is doing this now in some cases instead of building full-sized, or even smaller scaled manned test articles. Check out the X-48 and the X-36 for goodness sake!

x-36-1223642-copy-450x316.jpg


677705main_ED06-0201-01-copy-450x304.jpg


So with all this in mind, YES I do think the aircraft called the F-313 that Iran showed the world is a piece of a larger emerging aerospace program that could one day lead to an actual operational variant, although one that is larger, more robust and that can carry a sensible payload. Additionally, if the Iranians took the time to show this thing off I think that the actual flying prototype, which will look very similar to the conceptual mockup, is under construction, or about to fly, very soon. In fact even this mockup could possibly be modified to fly, although I highly doubt it. Still, in regards to the aircraft displayed, what is not to say that maybe its hokey canopy is just a stand-in until the real one is ready for installation as forming a continuous piece of high-grade pyrex is no easy task, and maybe the motor has simply not been installed, along with its related nozzle and heat shielding. Maybe the gear can retract, do any of the “experts” claim to have walked around the aircraft in person or possess highly detailed photos of the gear geometry? Once again I do not believe that this specimen is a flying machine, but I must stress once again that even American experimental technology demonstrators do not look like their production cousins, they look cheap and flimsy! Why? BECAUSE THEY ARE.

What would Iran even have to gain if the displayed aircraft did not even have a shred of truth to it? A flash in the pan news story that will only totally discredit them down the road when nothing more ever emerges? Also, just because folks can point out certain areas where the aircraft’s low observability is degraded via its design, that does not mean that Iran is trying to make an invisible aircraft! Use an ounce of damn creativity people! Iranians are asymmetric warriors, it is how they fight via necessity. Are you telling me that an aircraft that is cheap to produce, with a small radar, visible, and IR signature fielded in mass is not a threat? In many ways it is a larger threat than just spending gobs of money developing a jet that you will only end up being able to afford a few of, and that is if designing such a machine is even within the farthest reaches of your nation’s technological capabilities in the first place.

I see an aircraft like the F-313, once evolved, could be a serious quantitative wildcard to deal with. With such a strategy in mind there is no reason it would look like any high-end US, European, Russian or Chinese fighter product. This aircraft would not even need to carry a radar. It could fly very low at subsonic speeds and employ infra-red missiles during pop-up attacks. And if you call yourself an aerospace expert yet can honestly tell me that a low flying, sub 10k lb, composite jet with stealthy features is a massive radar target than please call the Navy and tell them they are fools to employ similar targets as aggressors against their ships and aircraft in training. Let’s not also rule out the potential for this jet to be produced in an unmanned fashion. In this format the F-313 could work as a reusable cruise missile or even a potent decoy. Its limited range would most likely make line of sight data-link problems that Iran faces a non issue. Lastly the F-313, if it continues on as an extremely lightweight fighter, could operate out of small airfield and/or dispersed operating sites, a feature that would be key in almost every external conflict Iran faces today.

I find it very frustrating that even after a couple of days nobody can use their imagination or put themselves in Iran’s shoes when it comes to what they can do to make a difference during protracted air combat with their limited resources, both monetary and technological. Are we so spoiled in the western world that we cannot see the potential of an adaptive threat emerging right in front of our eyes? Sure, it was a big laugh when Iran claimed that they are going to unveil a new indigenous “stealth fighter” for the world to see. We are so used to seeing modern marvels, almost works of art, such as the substantial F-22 and J-20 emerge to oohs and awes that we cannot recognize a totally different approach as a valid capability and a strategic necessity of a potential asymmetric foe? I don’t care how many F-22s, or Rafales you have, if you are confronted with dozens of dispersed small low-signature fighters that are hard to spot visually, on radar or even infra-red detection devices than you are in a world of hurt.

You only carry so many missiles per aircraft per mission, and unlike the enemy, your country has valued a pilot’s life to the point that paying $300M for a single fighter is an acceptable investment. When you don’t have that type of money to spend but you still want to put up some kind of fight your options are usually exploiting a quantitative advantage over a qualitative one and building your weapons with attrition and/or expendability in mind. The F-313 may prove to be an aircraft tailor-made for such a strategy.

As for what you hear elsewhere in the press, the rampant charge to blow off the Iranian’s announcement, no matter how strange, as a clownish joke, sickens me. I have heard almost every “expert’s” verbatim opinion regarding if the exhibited aircraft can fly or not rather than evaluating the potential for such a design concept as whole. Asinine comments that get huge play such as Cyrus Amini of BBC News saying that the aircraft “looks like a cheap copy of the American F-22.” WHAT? So is every aircraft that is built with low observability and air to air operations in mind a cheap copy of the F-22? How does this thing have any relation to an F-22? Was an F-5 just a cheap copy of an F-4 too? Laughable and totally ignorant statement! Israeli aeronautics expert Tal Inbar said, “It’s not a plane, because that’s not how a real plane looks. Iran doesn’t have the ability to build planes. Plain and simple.” And China probably had no way of building a low observable fighter as well until they did. This is such superficial reporting and analysis that it is personally insulting. For some reason none of these folks could not even attempt to connect a few dots to at least put forth the possibility that this is an actual fighter aircraft program that will follow a similar pattern of development as America’s cutting edge air combat technologies? Did these “experts” really expect to see a ready for battle, fully developed stealth fighter sitting in that hanger from a country with a limited technological capabilities and monetary resources? Sure I get it, you can laugh at the big claims and the visual let down at first, but days later these people have not even critically evaluated the situation beyond stating “it’s not a real operational fighter.”

I just don’t know what more to say about this, I am just blown away that these folks have the platform they do. Their superficial commentary does a disservice to all those who look for answers from those who are supposedly in “the know” when it comes to military aviation matters. The Iranians are not as stupid as people think, they have a real vested interest in defending their nation and they are historically incredibly resourceful warriors. Why not at least move beyond their soaring claims and look at what could very well be? A bit of game theory, humility and knowledge of historical aircraft developmental trends can go a long, long way in accurately assessing the F-313′s theoretical potential.,,

Remember this piece of wise military advice: Arrogance can get you killed…
 
. .
This out of the box analysis was previously posted in Military forum.
I repost it here for better exposure:

MY MESSAGE TO THE WEST CONCERNING IRAN’S F-313 “FIGHTER:” ARROGANCE CAN GET YOU KILLED
Posted on February 6, 2013 by aviationintel website

I know people are waiting for me to post a big picture by picture analysis of Iran’s unveiled “F-313″ not-so-fighter fighter. I don’t think this is necessary, obviously the aircraft is questionable for many, many reasons. None-the-less I still want to give my conceptual analysis here as after having a few days to conduct some light research pertaining to the topic and letting the photos of the aircraft gestate, as usual, I have come to some conclusions that are both unique and I believe compelling, especially when compared with what you have probably read splattered elsewhere across the net.

Ok first off I want to highlight where Iran really hurt themselves on the PR game when it comes to the article they presented earlier this week. There are two particular points I want to highlight:

1.) By showing that ridiculous footage of the F-313 “flying” on a supposed test flight, which was clearly a model airplane as stated in the piece I posted just as the story broke. By doing so the Iranians looked like they were blatantly attempting to ruse their global “audience” in an alarmingly childish way. The identity of that radio controlled model has now been confirmed and a big thanks to Aviationinteler Nico for shooting over the evidence:

a271cccc6b6e7bb6caea8086e0b7a5f50ae70af9.jpg



Supposed wind-tunnel testing of the F-313 configuration:

269961_503-copy-450x301.jpg


2.) By calling the aircraft that they put on display a “new fighter” they once again totally discredited whatever actual value showing off that machine to the world could have had. I mean why not say its the beginning of a long road-map of research and development that will end in Iran fielding a low observable indigenous fighter? How on earth could they look at that thing and say “boy is this gonna give America, Israel and their allies something to worry about?” To clarify, not because the aircraft clearly does not even come close to comparing to other “stealth” aircraft but because it is almost certainly not airworthy. I realize that Iran’s leadership, and especially the IRGC, has a grotesque flare for bravado, and overstatements, but the whole idea that this was a new game changing “fighter” was comical and I have to be honest, I had a good laugh too. But once I blocked out Iran’s soaring claims and looked at the bigger picture and the evidence at hand, a much more relevant possibility began to emerge.

So with this in mind it really leaves us with the question of what the heck is the F-313? I have a couple of ideas, both of these theories are much more important than just trying to figure out if what was displayed by the Iranians was an airworthy machine or not, and yes that too is a piece of the puzzle which I will address. As always I aim to provide a “full spectrum” analysis to my readers, so bear with me as I walk you through this.

Theory 1: The F-313 is an absolutely horrible attempt at mocking up a totally fake indigenous stealth fighter intended to give the US and Israel pause and to showcase Iran’s improving technological capabilities to the world. In other words it is just a video of an RC plane whizzing around and a fiberglass and wood shell with some commercially available avionics thrown in to make it look like maybe it could have a purpose. A propaganda campaign with wings, and a poor one at that because Iran’s claims clearly did not match the specimen on display.

Still the Iranians must have known that the world would immediately realize that this little aircraft is at best an idea that has never taken flight or at worst a fantastical model of what an insular engineer thinks a futuristic low observable jet should look like. I find it incredibly hard to believe that if Iran was simply after a propaganda stunt that they would not have come up with something far, far more menacing, in its potential capabilities and aesthetics. Iran does have a robust aerospace engineering academic corps, one that when paired with espionage has been highly effective at keeping incredibly complex foreign aircraft flying decades after anyone thought it possible. See the F-14, of which about two dozen are still in service in upgraded fashion some 30+ years after all support for them was embargoed. Additionally Iran does have the internet and they have access to an avalanche of open source information regarding stealth design. Just go pick up the Aerofax book on the F-22 for instance, every inch of that aircraft is covered in minute detail in it. So if your goal was to create an imposter stealth aircraft, all show and no go, your budget would not be an issue nor would your access to information on the aesthetics and particulars of existing stealthy designs to integrate into something visually new, yet technologically familiar.

So to sum it up I cannot, I will not, believe that this is simply a very poor attempt at spooking the US and Israel and “showcasing” Iranian blossoming ingenuity. The design is too poor, the finish is too shabby and the spotlight was too bright. If I am wrong than Iran’s leadership is so delusional, isolated and drunk on its own ego that there is no reason why they won’t take on the US in the Straits of Hormuz or attempt to irradiate Israel from the map without understanding that they will not live to tell their next generation about it. Such ignorance is incredibly hard to believe, especially for a state that has survived for decades under incredibly harsh circumstances.

So if the “F-313″ is not a total fake than what the hell is it as it is clearly not what they claim it is?:

Theory #2: The aircraft displayed as the F-313, although not a flyable aircraft (yet), is part of a new program to design and produce a light weight, low-cost and low observable indigenous fighter aircraft.

I believe that the aircraft displayed on that turntable is a mockup of a design that the Iranian aerospace sector, and possibly the IRGC, are moving forward with as a proof of concept technology demonstrator and eventually a real production aircraft. For decades, throughout the jet age really, the western aircraft manufacturers designed aircraft on paper and once a configuration was loosely locked into place the firm would build a full-scale mockup to work through engineering issues in scale and to market their design. Keep in mind these mockups were almost always smaller than the final production configuration, had strange oddities and imperfections and were built with non-aircraft grade materials to greatly save time and costs. Often these aircraft would look less than realistic, but still they were a worthwhile engineering and business endeavor.

GrummanMockup-copy-450x205.jpg


adadd-300x207.jpg

Iran’s “F-313″ appears to be an engineering mockup. It is made out of what seems to be fiberglass (you can see it below the cockpit rim) of adequate workmanship. Almost all of the major subsystems are hidden from view, of particular note is the motor. The “pocket” surrounding the exhaust nozzle is not even finished with heat insulating materials, in other words it would melt. There appears to be no weapons bays of any kind. The landing gear’s ability to retract is not clear. The canopy is made out of basic molded plexiglass which would have poor side view quality but decent front view quality. Additionally, there appears to be no latching system to even lock the canopy down. The cockpit is tiny, to the point it actually looks built for a small person. Now this is an interesting point, the ejection seat is actually scaled way down, the stick is equally short, and the instrument panel matches these characteristics. So it is not like the F-313 just has a cramped cockpit, it looks like it was designed FOR a smaller person. More on this later.

Then you have the avionics, they look like some commercially available off the shelf basic EFIS components and some other standard cockpit interfaces and their final configuration still appears to be in flux.

Even with all these issues and imperfections the jet does have some things that lend itself to being an elaborate engineering mockup of decent quality. It has avionics, an ejection seat, a stick, intake covers and exhaust cover, a pitot tube, marker lights, articulating control surfaces (and yes “experts” the canards are partially articulated like on the SAAB JAS-37), a design that would potentially not require fly-by-wire flight control and many small details including subsystem vents and other minutia appear to be included as well. To me, the article displayed to the public clearly looks like a mockup not of a production fighter but of a proof of concept experimental testing aircraft, otherwise known as a “technology demonstrator.” This means that performance such as top speed, acceleration and high-g and angle of attack capability are not its key objectives, it is to test the aircraft’s low observability, stability and other primary concepts.

haveblu-copy-450x174.jpg


Fielding stripped down, sub-scale, technology demonstrators and proof of concept experimental prototypes is not the Iranian way of developing advanced combat aircraft folks, it is the American way! If you saw the Have Blue technology demonstrator (precursor to the YF-117) back in the late 1970s would you have believed it was a precursor to a viable weapon system? Even with its small size, “tiny cockpit,” featureless exterior, lack of a weapons bay, and tiny intakes and exhausts? Probably not!

Technology demonstrators are built as cheaply and as fast as possible. Thus they save money via decreasing weight, thrust, creature comforts, weaponization and especially performance. I laughed yesterday when I read three different site’s analysis stating that the F-313′s inlets are too small and the exhaust does not have an afterburner nozzle and the airspeed indicator only goes to 300 units (probably knots). Come on guys, use your deductive reasoning, you could have said the exact same things about Have blue!

Do you really need massive air intakes and a huge nozzle to accommodate a single J-85? A motor we know the Iranians have reverse engineered and are producing? Go take a look at the size of an F-5A’s inlet and I think your position will change. With the J-85 in mind, maybe some of the clear attempts at saving weight for the technology demonstration phase had to do with the fact that they could only use a single 2,600lb class motor. An F-5′s empty weight is 10,000lbs. I doubt that this little composite jet (F-313) tips the scales over 6,000lbs. Thus a single J85 would probably serve fine for experimental testing. Back to the miniaturized cockpit, if you are cash, weight and thrust strapped and need to prove a design’s viability, building a cockpit for a small pilot can save you weight and money. In the US we would just throw more money at the problem and build a bigger, heavier more expensive jet and choose a larger motor to go along with it as we have many indigenous motor classes to choose from. In Iran they could very well say let’s just use a smaller pilot for the test program because we have to work within our indigenous capabilities and budget. It actually makes great sense and I doubt any discrimination lawsuits would be brought before the Supreme Leader for doing so!
have_blue_6-450x180.jpg


Visual-Stealth-Boeing-Bird-Of-Prey-2-300x152.jpg

Not just Have Blue but all other known technology demonstrators had kit-built looks, relatively poor performance, and used often times commercially available components to lower cost. Just look at Boeing’s cool looking “Bird Of Prey,” which shares the drooped wingtip design with the F-313, or Northrop’s “Tacit Blue” BSAX experimental aircraft (make sure to read my special feature on Tacit Blue), both look like bad movie props not operational aircraft, yet they were some of the most successful experimental combat aircraft programs that we have ever been allowed to know about and both paved the way for a myriad of new operational technologies and combat aircraft designs. Keep in mind these are just the few technology demonstrators we know about, and there are likely dozens and dozens of similar quality that still remain top secret.

tb02m-450x219.jpg

As for the remote-controlled scale F-313 featured in the Iranian press release as the actual aircraft that was featured in the Iranian “test flight” clip, I don’t think this model was built just for propaganda purposes. Iran does have serious budgetary and technical constraints that the US does not have. Designing an experimental aircraft on CAD software, then flying it as a model for preliminary aerodynamic validation is good science, especially considering that this jet clearly does not possess fly-by-wire subsystems. Heck, even America is doing this now in some cases instead of building full-sized, or even smaller scaled manned test articles. Check out the X-48 and the X-36 for goodness sake!

x-36-1223642-copy-450x316.jpg


677705main_ED06-0201-01-copy-450x304.jpg


So with all this in mind, YES I do think the aircraft called the F-313 that Iran showed the world is a piece of a larger emerging aerospace program that could one day lead to an actual operational variant, although one that is larger, more robust and that can carry a sensible payload. Additionally, if the Iranians took the time to show this thing off I think that the actual flying prototype, which will look very similar to the conceptual mockup, is under construction, or about to fly, very soon. In fact even this mockup could possibly be modified to fly, although I highly doubt it. Still, in regards to the aircraft displayed, what is not to say that maybe its hokey canopy is just a stand-in until the real one is ready for installation as forming a continuous piece of high-grade pyrex is no easy task, and maybe the motor has simply not been installed, along with its related nozzle and heat shielding. Maybe the gear can retract, do any of the “experts” claim to have walked around the aircraft in person or possess highly detailed photos of the gear geometry? Once again I do not believe that this specimen is a flying machine, but I must stress once again that even American experimental technology demonstrators do not look like their production cousins, they look cheap and flimsy! Why? BECAUSE THEY ARE.

What would Iran even have to gain if the displayed aircraft did not even have a shred of truth to it? A flash in the pan news story that will only totally discredit them down the road when nothing more ever emerges? Also, just because folks can point out certain areas where the aircraft’s low observability is degraded via its design, that does not mean that Iran is trying to make an invisible aircraft! Use an ounce of damn creativity people! Iranians are asymmetric warriors, it is how they fight via necessity. Are you telling me that an aircraft that is cheap to produce, with a small radar, visible, and IR signature fielded in mass is not a threat? In many ways it is a larger threat than just spending gobs of money developing a jet that you will only end up being able to afford a few of, and that is if designing such a machine is even within the farthest reaches of your nation’s technological capabilities in the first place.

I see an aircraft like the F-313, once evolved, could be a serious quantitative wildcard to deal with. With such a strategy in mind there is no reason it would look like any high-end US, European, Russian or Chinese fighter product. This aircraft would not even need to carry a radar. It could fly very low at subsonic speeds and employ infra-red missiles during pop-up attacks. And if you call yourself an aerospace expert yet can honestly tell me that a low flying, sub 10k lb, composite jet with stealthy features is a massive radar target than please call the Navy and tell them they are fools to employ similar targets as aggressors against their ships and aircraft in training. Let’s not also rule out the potential for this jet to be produced in an unmanned fashion. In this format the F-313 could work as a reusable cruise missile or even a potent decoy. Its limited range would most likely make line of sight data-link problems that Iran faces a non issue. Lastly the F-313, if it continues on as an extremely lightweight fighter, could operate out of small airfield and/or dispersed operating sites, a feature that would be key in almost every external conflict Iran faces today.

I find it very frustrating that even after a couple of days nobody can use their imagination or put themselves in Iran’s shoes when it comes to what they can do to make a difference during protracted air combat with their limited resources, both monetary and technological. Are we so spoiled in the western world that we cannot see the potential of an adaptive threat emerging right in front of our eyes? Sure, it was a big laugh when Iran claimed that they are going to unveil a new indigenous “stealth fighter” for the world to see. We are so used to seeing modern marvels, almost works of art, such as the substantial F-22 and J-20 emerge to oohs and awes that we cannot recognize a totally different approach as a valid capability and a strategic necessity of a potential asymmetric foe? I don’t care how many F-22s, or Rafales you have, if you are confronted with dozens of dispersed small low-signature fighters that are hard to spot visually, on radar or even infra-red detection devices than you are in a world of hurt.

You only carry so many missiles per aircraft per mission, and unlike the enemy, your country has valued a pilot’s life to the point that paying $300M for a single fighter is an acceptable investment. When you don’t have that type of money to spend but you still want to put up some kind of fight your options are usually exploiting a quantitative advantage over a qualitative one and building your weapons with attrition and/or expendability in mind. The F-313 may prove to be an aircraft tailor-made for such a strategy.

As for what you hear elsewhere in the press, the rampant charge to blow off the Iranian’s announcement, no matter how strange, as a clownish joke, sickens me. I have heard almost every “expert’s” verbatim opinion regarding if the exhibited aircraft can fly or not rather than evaluating the potential for such a design concept as whole. Asinine comments that get huge play such as Cyrus Amini of BBC News saying that the aircraft “looks like a cheap copy of the American F-22.” WHAT? So is every aircraft that is built with low observability and air to air operations in mind a cheap copy of the F-22? How does this thing have any relation to an F-22? Was an F-5 just a cheap copy of an F-4 too? Laughable and totally ignorant statement! Israeli aeronautics expert Tal Inbar said, “It’s not a plane, because that’s not how a real plane looks. Iran doesn’t have the ability to build planes. Plain and simple.” And China probably had no way of building a low observable fighter as well until they did. This is such superficial reporting and analysis that it is personally insulting. For some reason none of these folks could not even attempt to connect a few dots to at least put forth the possibility that this is an actual fighter aircraft program that will follow a similar pattern of development as America’s cutting edge air combat technologies? Did these “experts” really expect to see a ready for battle, fully developed stealth fighter sitting in that hanger from a country with a limited technological capabilities and monetary resources? Sure I get it, you can laugh at the big claims and the visual let down at first, but days later these people have not even critically evaluated the situation beyond stating “it’s not a real operational fighter.”

I just don’t know what more to say about this, I am just blown away that these folks have the platform they do. Their superficial commentary does a disservice to all those who look for answers from those who are supposedly in “the know” when it comes to military aviation matters. The Iranians are not as stupid as people think, they have a real vested interest in defending their nation and they are historically incredibly resourceful warriors. Why not at least move beyond their soaring claims and look at what could very well be? A bit of game theory, humility and knowledge of historical aircraft developmental trends can go a long, long way in accurately assessing the F-313′s theoretical potential.,,

Remember this piece of wise military advice: Arrogance can get you killed…


I always welcome a serious discussion and this subject is related to engineering therefore more than welcome.

They say that necessity is the mother of invention, sometimes sanctions bring out the best among the nations. I am aware of the fact that Abadan refinery was repaired to working condition albeit at lesser capacity and without the fluidised cracker; nevertheless it was under the first period of sanction and Iran could only rely on her nationals for engineering expertise. Getting Abadan refinery back into operation was an admirable achievement.

It is evident that Iran has sufficiently technical manpower pool to reverse engineer quite sophisticated machinery. However aerospace is as sophisticated as they come.

There are three important sections in a military plane.

1. Air frame that is fuselage, wings, tail & ailerons.

2. Power plant

3. Avionics which includes radar, instrumentation & weapon systems.


As the article correctly mentions, Air frame & the shape can be designed from the pictures and the data available of the internet. The design can then be fine-tuned with the computer design software and tests in the wind tunnel with the mock up. Composite materials & titanium alloys would be a problem for Iran. However, having already built Azerkash & Saqeh, Aluminium airframe and fibre glass should not pose too much of a problem for the Irani engineers.

Understand this fighter is also powered by J-85. J-85 is a relatively simple turbo-jet designed in the 1950’s. Therefore its design must now be unclassified. Since J-85 was also manufactured under licence in Sweden & in Italy as it powered Fiat –G 91 & Saab 105 fighters; it should be possible to purchase the parts that require Ni-AL alloys that Iran is unable to produce. Hence the J-85 engine has already been successfully reverse engineered and fitted into the Iranian copy of F-5, the Azerkash & its modified version, the Saqeh. It is also no small achievement.

I would therefore conclude that given sufficient funds & manpower resources, Iranians are capable of producing at least a couple of Qaher F-313 aircraft in flyable condition.


In addition to the aerodynamics, modern fighter is only as good as its avionics & weapon systems. Let us look at the aircrafts designed & manufactured by nations other than USA, Russia, China & France before answering the question: Is this aircraft any good?

UK, Germany, Italy & Spain had to form formed a consortium to come up with the Typhoon. Swedish & Brazilian aircrafts needed foreign designed engines before the same could fly. Israel had to abandon Lavi program. Indian LCA program started in 1990’s now 29 years and $2-billion later Tejas is still a long way away from protecting Indian skies.

Japanese started work on Mitsubishi F-2 in the 1990’s with the aim to produce a fighter based on F-16. Best they could do was to come up an equivalent plane costing $130-million per unit and still needed Gen Electric F110 engine to power it. Japan could have purchased F-16 Block 60 at half the unit price.

South Korean's indigenous trainer/fighter program began in 1992. Even though the airframe looks like F-16 (Which South Korea was operating ) it took 10 years before South Koreans could come up with T-50 which is basically an advanced trainer. Power plant is US GE F404 built under licence, hence not fully indigenous.

The point I am trying to make here is that, Japan, South Korea, Israel & India are undeniably more technically advanced than Iran. These countries found it extremely hard to design & manufacture a fighter that could compete with the modern US, French or Chinese fighters; I could bet my right hand that an aircraft designed & built in Iran would not come even close; especially in the RADAR, avionics and stealth technology.

Don’t think that Qaher F-313 would be the cause of any sleepless nights to the Israeli & USA military planners or even to the neighbouring Saudis for that matter, as they have F-15E in their inventory.
 
Last edited:
.
I always welcome a serious discussion and this subject is related to engineering therefore more than welcome.

They say that necessity is the mother of invention, sometimes sanctions bring out the best among the nations. I am aware of the fact that Abadan refinery was repaired to working condition albeit at lesser capacity and without the fluidised cracker; nevertheless it was under the first period of sanction and Iran could only rely on her nationals for engineering expertise. Getting Abadan refinery back into operation was an admirable achievement.

It is evident that Iran has sufficiently technical manpower pool to reverse engineer quite sophisticated machinery. However aerospace is as sophisticated as they come.

There are three important sections in a military plane.

1. Air frame that is fuselage, wings, tail & ailerons.

2. Power plant

3. Avionics which includes radar, instrumentation & weapon systems.


As the article correctly mentions, Air frame & the shape can be designed from the pictures and the data available of the internet. The design can then be fine-tuned with the computer design software and tests in the wind tunnel with the mock up. Composite materials & titanium alloys would be a problem for Iran. However, having already built Azerkash & Saqeh, Aluminium airframe and fibre glass should not pose too much of a problem for the Irani engineers.

Understand this fighter is also powered by J-85. J-85 is a relatively simple turbo-jet designed in the 1950’s. Therefore its design must now be unclassified. Since J-85 was also manufactured under licence in Sweden & in Italy as it powered Fiat –G 91 & Saab 105 fighters; it should be possible to purchase the parts that require Ni-AL alloys that Iran is unable to produce. Hence the J-85 engine has already been successfully reverse engineered and fitted into the Iranian copy of F-5, the Azerkash & its modified version, the Saqeh. It is also no small achievement.

I would therefore conclude that given sufficient funds & manpower resources, Iranians are capable of producing at least a couple of Qaher F-313 aircraft in flyable condition.


In addition to the aerodynamics, modern fighter is only as good as its avionics & weapon systems. Let us look at the aircrafts designed & manufactured nations other than USA, Russia, China & France before answering the question: Is this aircraft any good?

UK, Germany, Italy & Spain had to form formed a consortium to come up with the Typhoon. Swedish & Brazilian aircrafts needed foreign designed engines before the same could fly. Israel had to abandon Lavi program. Indian LCA program started in 1990’s now 29 years and $2-billion later Tejas is still a long way away from protecting Indian skies.

Japanese started work on Mitsubishi F-2 in the 1990’s with the aim to produce a fighter based on F-16. Best they could do was to come up an equivalent plane costing $130-million per unit and still needed Gen Electric F110 engine to power it. Japan could have purchased F-16 Block 60 at half the unit price.

South Korean's indigenous trainer/fighter program began in 1992. Even though the airframe looks like F-16 (Which South Korea was operating ) it took 10 years before South Koreans could come up with T-50 which is basically an advanced trainer. Power plant is US GE F404 built under licence, hence not fully indigenous.

The point I am trying to make here is that, Japan, South Korea, Israel & India are undeniably more technically advanced than Iran. These countries found it extremely hard to design & manufacture a fighter that could compete with the modern US, French or Chinese fighters; I could bet my right hand that an aircraft designed & built in Iran would not come even close; especially in the RADAR, avionics and stealth technology.

Don’t think that Qaher F-313 would be the cause of any sleepless nights to the Israeli & USA military planners or even to the neighbouring Saudis for that matter, as they have F-15E in their inventory.

You are correct. The point is F-313 doesn't need to be on par with any of the modern new fighters to be considered a threat. As an example, the fighter that actually saved British empire from mighty German Luftwaffe was Hurricane. If you read about Hurricane, you will see that it was already outdated when it was introduced. The air frame was a combination of wood and steel and the wings were covered with fabric as opposed to German fighters that were made of Aluminum and covered with the same. The easy and cheap design of Hurricane, enabled British to manufacture and operate quite a large number of them. They could easily build them in their less technically advanced colonies like Canada. The fabric covering was a limit in high speed maneuvering but proved to be a blessing in maintenance as they just need to patch the areas that were torn by bullet. Germans needed to go through a much more expensive process for the same type of repair. Does anyone here doubt that German fighters were technologically decades ahead from the competition? They had jet fighters that could leave the enemy fighter in dust. But it didn't help them because they were not able to produce enough of them.

Same can be said about Soviet T-34. Comparing the technical specs on the paper, it doesn't even come close to any of its German counter part. But Soviet was able to produce them in mass due to its simple and cheap design and the rest is history. We now know which side won. 84,000 of them were built! Germans didn't have any chance against the swarm of these tanks even though their technology was decades ahead.

History is full of these examples: Ottomans maintained naval superiority using primitive trims (like the ones that Greeks and Persian empire used for their wars) against hightech European ship of the lines because for each European ship there was more than 10 Turkish trims to counter. Peter the great (King of Russia) defeated the mighty Swedish Empire using the same technique.

What I want to say is, as Stalin put it :" Quantity has a Quality of its own!". As another American Military General had quoted, WWII was won by ugly and cheap corvettes that were built in hundreds not the sophisticated and expensive battle ships. In the remote possibility of a war between Russia and USA, the deterministic factor in the air superiority would be F-16 and F-18 that are cheaper and easier to produce. 22 B-2 bombers and less than 200 F-22 will be destroyed in the first few weeks of the war. Tens and hundreds are insignificant in an all out war. Just look at the numbers of fighters that were produced in WWII. I think Messerschmidt built more than 11,000 of one of its models during the war.

Getting back to F-313. It is not intended to be as expensive and technologically advanced as the Western top notch fighters. It even doesn't need to have its own radar as the article above mentioned. It is a short range fighter which can easily be linked to Iran's Radar network and use its data to intercept its targets. It is an asymmetric war equipment meaning it is not designed for dog fight with a Raptor. It is designed to attack its targets in mass (like Iran's speed boats), overwhelm their defenses, hit its target and get out. The important thing is to have a platform that you can easily produce in thousands and then it will become a factor that is going to be considered by any country that is thinking about attacking Iran.
 
.
You are correct. The point is F-313 doesn't need to be on par with any of the modern new fighters to be considered a threat. As an example, the fighter that actually saved British empire from mighty German Luftwaffe was Hurricane. If you read about Hurricane, you will see that it was already outdated when it was introduced. The air frame was a combination of wood and steel and the wings were covered with fabric as opposed to German fighters that were made of Aluminum and covered with the same. The easy and cheap design of Hurricane, enabled British to manufacture and operate quite a large number of them. They could easily build them in their less technically advanced colonies like Canada. The fabric covering was a limit in high speed maneuvering but proved to be a blessing in maintenance as they just need to patch the areas that were torn by bullet. Germans needed to go through a much more expensive process for the same type of repair. Does anyone here doubt that German fighters were technologically decades ahead from the competition? They had jet fighters that could leave the enemy fighter in dust. But it didn't help them because they were not able to produce enough of them.

Same can be said about Soviet T-34. Comparing the technical specs on the paper, it doesn't even come close to any of its German counter part. But Soviet was able to produce them in mass due to its simple and cheap design and the rest is history. We now know which side won. 84,000 of them were built! Germans didn't have any chance against the swarm of these tanks even though their technology was decades ahead.

History is full of these examples: Ottomans maintained naval superiority using primitive trims (like the ones that Greeks and Persian empire used for their wars) against hightech European ship of the lines because for each European ship there was more than 10 Turkish trims to counter. Peter the great (King of Russia) defeated the mighty Swedish Empire using the same technique.

What I want to say is, as Stalin put it :" Quantity has a Quality of its own!". As another American Military General had quoted, WWII was won by ugly and cheap corvettes that were built in hundreds not the sophisticated and expensive battle ships. In the remote possibility of a war between Russia and USA, the deterministic factor in the air superiority would be F-16 and F-18 that are cheaper and easier to produce. 22 B-2 bombers and less than 200 F-22 will be destroyed in the first few weeks of the war. Tens and hundreds are insignificant in an all out war. Just look at the numbers of fighters that were produced in WWII. I think Messerschmidt built more than 11,000 of one of its models during the war.

Getting back to F-313. It is not intended to be as expensive and technologically advanced as the Western top notch fighters. It even doesn't need to have its own radar as the article above mentioned. It is a short range fighter which can easily be linked to Iran's Radar network and use its data to intercept its targets. It is an asymmetric war equipment meaning it is not designed for dog fight with a Raptor. It is designed to attack its targets in mass (like Iran's speed boats), overwhelm their defenses, hit its target and get out. The important thing is to have a platform that you can easily produce in thousands and then it will become a factor that is going to be considered by any country that is thinking about attacking Iran.

just one problem, even if i dont agree with you, lets suppose for a moment all that you said is true. that this f-313 is a real project that will eventually conclude in a viable platform that while not as good as say, the f-35, is a usable short range (defence) fighter. the thing is, iran couldnt out produce this against its potential enemies. first thing, "thousands" is unlikely in the extreme for iran to produce unless this thing literally is a plastic shell with a tiny engine without any sensors or weapons, america alone is expected to have 1500+ f-35, two carriers sitting in the gulf could mean like 150+ f-35s sitting at your door step, not including the use of nearby bases. quantity strategy only works when you can actually out produce your enemies. as for those speed boats, in an actually war there is no way any ships will be close enough to the shore for those boats to be of any use, unfortunately for iran there are multiple invasion path from multiple side by land.
 
.
just one problem, even if i dont agree with you, lets suppose for a moment all that you said is true. that this f-313 is a real project that will eventually conclude in a viable platform that while not as good as say, the f-35, is a usable short range (defence) fighter. the thing is, iran couldnt out produce this against its potential enemies. first thing, "thousands" is unlikely in the extreme for iran to produce unless this thing literally is a plastic shell with a tiny engine without any sensors or weapons, america alone is expected to have 1500+ f-35, two carriers sitting in the gulf could mean like 150+ f-35s sitting at your door step, not including the use of nearby bases. quantity strategy only works when you can actually out produce your enemies. as for those speed boats, in an actually war there is no way any ships will be close enough to the shore for those boats to be of any use, unfortunately for iran there are multiple invasion path from multiple side by land.

It is all about deterrence not winning the war. There are less than 3 countries in this world that may hope to win a conventional war with US and Iran is definitely not one of them and it knows it very well. The trick is to increase the cost of a potential war (what is called deterrence) so the people in Pentagon think twice before they decide to attack. You need thousands to win the war. For deterrence, a few hundreds will do.

Yes there are other routes to attack Iran but that means using the air space or soil of Iran neighboring countries which is as good as that country declaring war on Iran. It is a very unlikely scenario as none of Iran's neighbors want to expose themselves to Iran missile attacks at the very least. Iran is like a fortress if you look at its map. It has mountain chains all around on the border line area except for south east and south west corners. Any force that wants to enter Iran but through those two corners need to forget about tanks and mechanized infantry and think about knife fight with Iranian soldiers. Iraq was never able to enter Iran through those mountainous areas during the 8 year war. And Iran has well developed asymmetric techniques to counter ground attacks as well. A very small sample was shown in the fight between Lebanon and Israel in 2006.

US army is naval based. It needs to get its troop and equipment from the motherland to the destination after all and Navy is the only feasible way. Persian gulf is the only water way that US can use to get to Iran if we rule out using Iran neighboring country soil. So It needs to get close and then it needs to deal with the speed boats. How is it going to support its naval bases in Bahrain and UAE otherwise? The speed boats proved very effective deterrence after all. Many believe they were one of the reasons that US gave up the plan to attack Iran in Bush era and after occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. Read about "Millennium Challenge 2002" below. It was a $250 Million simulation to show how good could US navy deal with Iran's speed boats. The result was devastating. US lost 16 capital ships (all its inventory in middle east) in the first 5 days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/washington/12navy.html?_r=0

Finally, you have underestimated Iran's production abilities. During the time it was publicized, Iran was manufacturing an average of 6 Ghadir submarines a year under no rush and in one of its facilities. Right now the total published number of those submarines is around 20. The actual number with that rate should be somewhere around 50 now. It may not be an accurate comparison, but for the sake of the conversation, in 2nd quarter of 2014 and under current heavy sanctions, Iran has produced 488,069 cars (it ranks above Italy!). Now do you think building a simple jet fighter is harder than building 488 cars? If not then, in case of need, Iran has the ability to produce at least 1000 fighters per quarter. Divide it by four and you still get 1000 per year. Again please remember we are not talking about 5th generation fighters. We are talking about simple, light weight and subsonic fighter with minimum equipment. Please see the statistics below:

Production Statistics | OICA
 
.
having declared that it is a copy of the f-22 cheap and best and proves that no hunter ...
 
.
It is all about deterrence not winning the war. There are less than 3 countries in this world that may hope to win a conventional war with US and Iran is definitely not one of them and it knows it very well. The trick is to increase the cost of a potential war (what is called deterrence) so the people in Pentagon think twice before they decide to attack. You need thousands to win the war. For deterrence, a few hundreds will do.

this is true, if the project works out as you want it to, then yes iran will have greater deterrence, i do not dispute this. but is it enough? iran could build 5000 mig15 type jets but that wont cause very long of a pause in pentagon thinking. so it all comes down to how good this jet may be, this we cannot know for sure right now, what we do know is that the design of the f-313 currently as it is, is highly unlikely to be a usable fighter, everything from size, intake and wing designs says it wont work well, then there is the question of engines and sensors, a plane armed with one short range missile is not gonna be much of a show stopper.



Yes there are other routes to attack Iran but that means using the air space or soil of Iran neighboring countries which is as good as that country declaring war on Iran. It is a very unlikely scenario as none of Iran's neighbors want to expose themselves to Iran missile attacks at the very least. Iran is like a fortress if you look at its map. It has mountain chains all around on the border line area except for south east and south west corners. Any force that wants to enter Iran but through those two corners need to forget about tanks and mechanized infantry and think about knife fight with Iranian soldiers. Iraq was never able to enter Iran through those mountainous areas during the 8 year war. And Iran has well developed asymmetric techniques to counter ground attacks as well. A very small sample was shown in the fight between Lebanon and Israel in 2006.

you underestimate america. iraq and afganistan was invaded not only by sea but also through neighboring countries. iraq did exactly what you said, that is threaten with missiles, but history shows us that the US non-the-less convinced others to allow a route(the us is also very good at hunting down launchers). terrain might present a factor, but again is no show stopper, afganistan is pretty mountainous too, not to mention any attack will start with a massive tomahawk/stealth atk rain taking out vital ports, airfields, CnC nodes, while iran could do little to disrupt american command, sortie points or intelligence. this is followed by neutralization of now undefended units like tanks and ships caught out in the open, which allows the beginning of a multi-pronged invasion by land, air and sea, all under the cover of air superiority and long range strike capability along with unparalleled battlefield intelligence through satellites and drones. against this, a fighter is among the last thing you want to fight or deter america. keep in mind planes dont fight by them selves, they need bases that can be protected, they need parts that can be procured even in war. to deter america, iran needs more survivable assets or go nuclear. however where fighters do come in handy is against lessor opponents, for instance deterring a israeli air strike, which a half decent fighter along with good ground sensors would be ideal for. to stand a chance against america at all you need either nuclear capability or the full size and complete conventional war machine package which really only russia and china has.



US army is naval based. It needs to get its troop and equipment from the motherland to the destination after all and Navy is the only feasible way. Persian gulf is the only water way that US can use to get to Iran if we rule out using Iran neighboring country soil. So It needs to get close and then it needs to deal with the speed boats. How is it going to support its naval bases in Bahrain and UAE otherwise? The speed boats proved very effective deterrence after all. Many believe they were one of the reasons that US gave up the plan to attack Iran in Bush era and after occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. Read about "Millennium Challenge 2002" below. It was a $250 Million simulation to show how good could US navy deal with Iran's speed boats. The result was devastating. US lost 16 capital ships (all its inventory in middle east) in the first 5 days.

ive already addressed that america is likely to be able to secured a land route. but lets suppose it cannot. there is no way they would send in the troop transports without clearing the coast where they are landing through airtrikes/naval strikes. speedboats work well if you force the enemy to come close without sinking all your assets from far away. the US has no reason to sent in transports or even ships until the coast is cleared by subs and air attacks. i do know about the millennium challenge, but in that case they threw two forces close together specifically having those capital ships in range of the coastal boats, in war those capital ship will not be in that kind of proximity to the coast until those boats have been sunk by air attacks. and while landing there will continuously be air cover for any survivors.

Finally, you have underestimated Iran's production abilities. During the time it was publicized, Iran was manufacturing an average of 6 Ghadir submarines a year under no rush and in one of its facilities. Right now the total published number of those submarines is around 20. The actual number with that rate should be somewhere around 50 now. It may not be an accurate comparison, but for the sake of the conversation, in 2nd quarter of 2014 and under current heavy sanctions, Iran has produced 488,069 cars (it ranks above Italy!). Now do you think building a simple jet fighter is harder than building 488 cars? If not then, in case of need, Iran has the ability to produce at least 1000 fighters per quarter. Divide it by four and you still get 1000 per year. Again please remember we are not talking about 5th generation fighters. We are talking about simple, light weight and subsonic fighter with minimum equipment. Please see the statistics below:

Production Statistics | OICA

depends on the jet, a f-22 is much harder and costlier to build than 500 ford focus and there are bottle necks such as production of engines which is of course far more difficult than a car engine(difference between the two is far larger than during ww2). if your talking about light, subsonic fighters with minimum equipment, how is that in anyway a deterrence to 1000 f-35s? i have no doubt iran could making 1000 light subsonic barely equipped planes a quarter, but what good does that do? having 10,000 A6M(the famous "zero" fighter) today just means the US will have an k/d of 10,000 kills vs 0 deaths
 
.
this is true, if the project works out as you want it to, then yes iran will have greater deterrence, i do not dispute this. but is it enough? iran could build 5000 mig15 type jets but that wont cause very long of a pause in pentagon thinking. so it all comes down to how good this jet may be, this we cannot know for sure right now, what we do know is that the design of the f-313 currently as it is, is highly unlikely to be a usable fighter, everything from size, intake and wing designs says it wont work well, then there is the question of engines and sensors, a plane armed with one short range missile is not gonna be much of a show stopper.





you underestimate america. iraq and afganistan was invaded not only by sea but also through neighboring countries. iraq did exactly what you said, that is threaten with missiles, but history shows us that the US non-the-less convinced others to allow a route(the us is also very good at hunting down launchers). terrain might present a factor, but again is no show stopper, afganistan is pretty mountainous too, not to mention any attack will start with a massive tomahawk/stealth atk rain taking out vital ports, airfields, CnC nodes, while iran could do little to disrupt american command, sortie points or intelligence. this is followed by neutralization of now undefended units like tanks and ships caught out in the open, which allows the beginning of a multi-pronged invasion by land, air and sea, all under the cover of air superiority and long range strike capability along with unparalleled battlefield intelligence through satellites and drones. against this, a fighter is among the last thing you want to fight or deter america. keep in mind planes dont fight by them selves, they need bases that can be protected, they need parts that can be procured even in war. to deter america, iran needs more survivable assets or go nuclear. however where fighters do come in handy is against lessor opponents, for instance deterring a israeli air strike, which a half decent fighter along with good ground sensors would be ideal for. to stand a chance against america at all you need either nuclear capability or the full size and complete conventional war machine package which really only russia and china has.





ive already addressed that america is likely to be able to secured a land route. but lets suppose it cannot. there is no way they would send in the troop transports without clearing the coast where they are landing through airtrikes/naval strikes. speedboats work well if you force the enemy to come close without sinking all your assets from far away. the US has no reason to sent in transports or even ships until the coast is cleared by subs and air attacks. i do know about the millennium challenge, but in that case they threw two forces close together specifically having those capital ships in range of the coastal boats, in war those capital ship will not be in that kind of proximity to the coast until those boats have been sunk by air attacks. and while landing there will continuously be air cover for any survivors.



depends on the jet, a f-22 is much harder and costlier to build than 500 ford focus and there are bottle necks such as production of engines which is of course far more difficult than a car engine(difference between the two is far larger than during ww2). if your talking about light, subsonic fighters with minimum equipment, how is that in anyway a deterrence to 1000 f-35s? i have no doubt iran could making 1000 light subsonic barely equipped planes a quarter, but what good does that do? having 10,000 A6M(the famous "zero" fighter) today just means the US will have an k/d of 10,000 kills vs 0 deaths

Well, first of all the situation today is much different from what it was back when US invaded Iraq. Right now, Iraq is almost under Iran's control so it can't be used as a rout towards Iran. Recently there was an agreement between the Caspian Sea countries not to allow Nato or foreign forces use their soil as a military base so that removes Iran's northern neighbors off the equation. Afghanistan is not a safe place for US as an operational base. Iran can easily use its proxies in Afghanistan to make life hell for any occupying force, the same way it did in Iraq. That leaves US with two options, Pakistan and Turkey. Pakistan has a pro-Iranian population and its people are already wary of US because of its drone attacks so I think any Pakistani government that allows its soil be used by US against Iran is in deep trouble. So the only possible option would be Turkey.

2nd, missile power of Iran today is not comparable to that of Iraq. Iraq had limited inventory of Skuds that are famous for their inaccuracy. Iran possesses precision missiles with cluster warheads that can easily hit any air filed in the area that can be used for operation against Iran. Iran also has anti-radiation ballistic missiles that can luck on naval or land based radars and hit them with precision. It can use them to take out the missile defenses. Tom hawk has a max range of 2500km. Iran is 2500 km across from north west to south east and 1500 km across on the other diagonal direction. Naval units that want to fire those missiles need to get close to Iran to be able to cover Iran's soil. That puts them in the range of Iran's anti-ship ballistic missiles. The other option is to have B-52 and B-2 fire the missiles from distance. Again that will take them close to the range of Iran AD systems that have shown good capacity of detecting drones and reconnaissance aircrafts. And if they get away from all of that, Iran has indigenous anti-missile systems. And please note Iran doesn't need to have access to it's coastal area to be able to hit naval units. That's why it has developed its ballistic anti-ship missiles. Iran can fire its missiles from center of Iran and still hit ships in the Persian gulf. So US either needs to make sure it has taken out all Iranian lunch pads which are mobile and easy to hide or it can never make sure its naval units are safe in the nearby areas.

In case of any war with Iran, US needs to assure its allies and non-allies that it will keep the oil corridor passing through Strait of Hormoz open. Again how can they keep that route open without physical presence in the Persian gulf. Iran only needs to sink one or two tankers in the strait and then the oil corridor is closed. In that case, China will be the first country to jump into the conflict because now its national interest and industry is at stake. How can US open the route again using only its Air force? And you keep forgetting that it needs to support its bases in UAE and Bahrain. it needs to be able to carry arms to those bases. It can't do it through air. In case of the war, their navy needs to be involved and it is going to be nasty. Otherwise they wouldn't spend $250 million on a simulation to figure out what will happen. I'm sure there are smart enough people in the Pentagon that would say: "hey guys, why don't we bomb them into stone age and then move our fleet safely into the Persian Gulf? Forget about the simulation. We can have one more F-35 with that money!"

3rd, How good an air craft is doesn't really have anything to do with how good a missile it can carry. Nowadays modern missiles are independent of their lunching vessel. You can fire a Yakhont missile from almost any kind of flying vessel, even a commercial chopper. When it is fired, it is a deadly threat to what ever it is going after. Same can be said about the armament that F-313 carries. It can carry fire and forget air to air or air to sea missiles. and as the above author says, who is to say it is not a viable threat to have sea or land skimming fighters that are hard to detect around that pop up here and there and fire missiles towards their targets?

4th, Iran is not relying on its air force to counter the air attacks. As I mentioned, Iran knows its weaknesses and knows it is a futile attempt. Iran is relying on its AD systems to counter air attacks and again with deterrence principal in mind. That's why top priorities in Iran defense strategy are Missiles, AD and radar systems, Naval units and then if there was anything left, it will go to Air force. Any air attacks on Iran will follow by Iran leveling the air base that the aircrafts lunched from so there is a good possibility that those aircrafts won't even be able to land on the same spot that they came from. And then, the aircraft needs to get through multilevel of early warning and passive and active radars to maintain the surprise factor and if it could get through all those, then it needs to deal with a multilevel integrated AD system and in case this project continues, maybe F-313s. I'm sure it is not something that USA can eventually overcome but the question is at what cost? How many $300 milion f-35 will it loose before gaining superiority over Iran's air space? This is called deterrence.
 
.
+1 arminkh , mais il faut savoir egalement que les americain on plus les moyen financier d'une grande guerre, récemment il on déclare qui allé déployer 60% de leur flotte dans le pacifique pour contré la chine , donc la guerre contre l’Iran n'est plus qu'un fantasme .l’Iran et encore pire que l’Afghanistan et l’Irak réunie, les americain vont jeté tout leur argent et il vont perdre toute leur base dans la région ainsi que leur intérêt..sa sera la fin des americain quoi qu'il arrive , n'oublions pas que les irakien était que dans les 20million alors que l’Iran actuelement sont 80 million et la différence c'est que le peuple et unis et tous préparé a la guerre les americain n'attaque que les faible nation et il on montré leur faiblesse contre la Libye il risquerai jamais d'attaqué l’Iran .

mais pour resté dans le sujet je dirait que j’attends de voir le Qaher car ya trop d’élément qui montre que c'est pas un avions malheureusement . et même si sa devez être un avions je le répète encore que l’Iran a besoin d'arme high tech pour proteger sont espace aérien et qu'il faut commander des chasseur russe ainsi qu'une defense anti arienne tel que le S-300/400 .sa nous donnera une defense encore plus crédible et la une attaque contre l’Iran sera vraiment impossible

je suis pas contre les programe maison mais il sont pas assez mature on a pas d'autre choix que de commander du high tech pour dissuader les autre et équilibré un peut les force dans la région .



1 arminkh, but be aware also that the American financial means is more of a great war, it is declared that recently went deploy 60% of their fleet in the Pacific countered for china, so the war against Iran is only a fantasy .l'Iran and worse than Afghanistan and Iraq met the American will cast all their money and will lose all their base in the region and their will intérêt..sa the late American what happens, do not forget that Iraq was in the 20million while Iran actuelement are 80 million and the difference is that the people and all united and prepared to war the American only attacks weak nation and were shown their weakness against Libya ever venture to attack Iran.
but remained in the subject I would say that I expect to see the Qaher because there are too many element that shows that this is not an aircraft unfortunately. and although its planes must be a I repeat that Iran needs high tech weapons to protect airspace and are to be ordered Russian fighter and a defense anti Arian such as the S-300 / 400 .sa give us a more credible defense and an attack against Iran will be really impossible
I am not against programe home but are not mature enough it has no choice but to order high tech to deter other and balanced one may the force in the region

ya t'il une annonce récente qui prouve que le programe f-313 et en construction?

is there a recent announcement proves that the program f-313 and construction?
 
.
is there a recent announcement proves that the program f-313 and construction?
yes , little sister , there is .

there are 2 different versions of Qaher currently being designed .

@SOHEIL can give more info on this .
 
.
yes , little sister , there is .

there are 2 different versions of Qaher currently being designed .

@SOHEIL can give more info on this .
merci grand frère :) mais l'iran se doit d'acheter des chasseur comme le su-30/35 car le qaher et pas de la meme catégorie , ona besoin d'un chasseur de superorité aerienne comme le F-14/15.

un su-30/35 avec un radar AESA et le missile R-77M1/E = (160 a 230 km) en air/air on aura un grand avantage .

le qaher si il existera un jour sera un f-5 furtive rien de plus un petit bombarider pour defendre le pays mais ne pouvons pas menez des operation exterieur .

mais pour sa il faut une levé d'emabrgo, car l'iran pourra acheté des nouveau chasseur mais en plus aura assez d'argent pour developper des programe maison et les rendre plus performand


thank you big brother :) but iran must buy fighter as su-30/35 because the Qaher not in the same category ona need an aerial superorité fighter like the F-14/15.

su-30/35 with an AESA radar and the missile R-77M1 / E = (160 to 230 km) in air / air there will be a great advantage.

the Qaher if one day there will be an F-5 Stealth nothing more than a small bombarider to defend the country, but can not lead the external operation.

but for her it takes up to emabrgo because iran can bought new fighter but also have enough money to develop home programe and make them more performand
 
.
Well, Theory 1 has much more grounds because the following excerpt from the Paragraph has relevance.
So to sum it up I cannot, I will not, believe that this is simply a very poor attempt at spooking the US and Israel and “showcasing” Iranian blossoming ingenuity. The design is too poor, the finish is too shabby and the spotlight was too bright. If I am wrong than Iran’s leadership is so delusional, isolated and drunk on its own ego that there is no reason why they won’t take on the US in the Straits of Hormuz or attempt to irradiate Israel from the map without understanding that they will not live to tell their next generation about it. Such ignorance is incredibly hard to believe, especially for a state that has survived for decades under incredibly harsh circumstances.

The idea may not be to spook the US and Israel but to instil a false sense of confidence in the common Iranian when he hears of the F-22 and other capabilities Iran has to face. The author has given rather fake excuses on the mockups of other nations as looking flimsy and ill-fit to fly.. perhaps the Author is still stuck in the 1940s when such mockups used to exist in the US. The Have blue prototype did look as ridiculous as the Qaher but it was never shown as an operational program. But the Iranian regime perhaps sensing a fear under the surface of the population decided to play out their usual propaganda for the masses.. who as we can see with many Iranians here.. bought it hook,line and sinker.


Theory 2 also has some validity, Iran did/does have an established aviation industry and there is no rule that they cannot research LO designs and systems. However, it would behove them to work on less complex designs first to produce a system that helps them establish a complete manufacturing process for a fighter. Keeping the F-14s and F-4s flying is commendable on any level.. but these are systems Iran has worked with for over 35 years now and so knows them in and out.. in addition, these systems were designed in the 50s and 60s which in no way represents the level of technology of today.
Modified designs such as the Sae'qeh are not an indication that an aircraft like say the Shafagh are. So far, we have seen claims of the fibreglass Qaher as a flying aircraft and have yet to see a prototype of the simpler but much "easier" Shafagh. I have no doubts that Iran possesses enough software engineering capability to create a fighter such as the Shafagh or even the Qaher from scratch.. but whether it has the manufacturing capability is another question for which so far no proof exists.

Also, off topic posts will be deleted without question and the member warned.
 
.
The point I am trying to make here is that, Japan, South Korea, Israel & India are undeniably more technically advanced than Iran. These countries found it extremely hard to design & manufacture a fighter that could compete with the modern US, French or Chinese fighters; I could bet my right hand that an aircraft designed & built in Iran would not come even close; especially in the RADAR, avionics and stealth technology.
Excellent analysis. Except for the above paragraph... Unlike Iran, none of the mentioned countries were/are facing do-or-die situation or living under a constant threat of invasion/annihilation. Things that cant be made, can be procured (and researched upon afterwards) irrespective of sanctions, all that is needed is a deep pocket. Thats my two cents.
 
.
There was an immense amount of work/time required and crazy amount of funding needed for Iran to create a manned fighter jet on par with a modern jet. That is why Iran has invested alot of money into air defence projects and instead took its time slowly developing fighter jets. Let me tell you the name of these air defence system in work.

1- Bavar-373 which compromises of 3 missiles, for low-medium-long range.
2- Talash 3 system- a missile with a range of 200km
3- Alam al hoda- A system compromising with a very long range sadid missile with range of 200-300km
4 -R'a'ad airdefence with 200km,100km and 50 km missile.
5- Talash 2 system, missile with range of 60-100km.
5- Shalamnche missile with range of 50 km, a new AESA radar with range of 250km has been recently made for it.

Most of these system have already been partially showns and some are in development and some are already in service. Some of the systems belong to the IRGC and the other to the regular air defence force. Have a look these long range air defence system, they will soon all be running simultaneously and it means Iran will have more long range air defence in service than any other country. And all these system are different to each other, i.e different detection methods. Some have passive seeker in the missiles as well.

Therefore, now that Iran's air defence system and long range radars like ghadir (1100km range) and sepehr (3000km range) are advance enough to counter and deter potential airstrikes and it also means Iran can now invest more money in fighter jets.
Iran has no problem in designing a fighter jet's body and checking for its radar cross section and aerodynamic, Iran has already made considerable advances in composite materials as well but where Iran lacks is ability to design and manufacture fighter jet engines. Iran's MAPNA group is one of the top 10 turbine companies in the world and they have managed to produce single crystal turbine blades and we know Iran has the J-90 indigenous jet program but until an advance indigenous jet engine is produced then no real fighter jet project will take off (no pun intended).

Qaher 313 was designed for low altitude flying and probably designed with cheap composite material and made to attack ground target and ships. In my opinion, It does not have the tributes to make a potent fighter jet against the enemies modern air force. Having said, they themselves have stated qaher was just a mockup and a concept. It is even highly possible that it could end up tuning into a UCAV. UCAV is another area Iran is actively working in.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom