What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

.
As far as I know during WW2 world saw first fighter jets . to be precise Germany was the first nation that used Jet fighters at second year of WW2 ( 1941 ).at 1974, 33 years after first jet German jet fighter(that used in war) , France flown her first Mirage 2000 which is superior compare our domestic Kowsar at 2018 ! France changed from a almost loser of war into giant jet builder country .:rolleyes:

Agree with your second point !

You miss the point.

Iran is WORLD CLASS in UAV production to the point that Russia had to get technology transfer from Iran And Israel (separately) in order to beef up their pathetic UAVs!!

Why is that? That is because Iran has been making and using UAVs since Iran-Iraq war! It was one of the first countries to extensively use them in combat role! That is DECADES of experience.

Iran has been extensively modernizing fighter jets since ONLY 1997 and just began developing its own fighter design (Qaher) in 2010! It reverse engineered its first fighter jet engine ONLY in the last 10 years!

So suddenly everyone is of belief that under robust economic sanctions and a strict arms embargo that Iran should ALREADY have a fighter jet on par with leading world powers?

Russia and USA have have been making aircraft since before your grandfather was probably born.
 
.
What do you get for that role?

Bear in mind the F-5 design is so cost optimized that it has 4 times (no guessing, fact) lower maintenance effort/cost and hence lifetime cost than a F-4

The F-4 on the other hand has a up to 3 times higher payload. While the F-5 is at least half and up to 3 times as expensive per airframe.
Do you want a F-5 with 5 Mk.82 within 50km of your requested strike position or a F-4 with 15 Mk.82 at 150km?
For that I Like to use A10 or Su-25 or even Yak-130
 
.
Jet engine is something that restrict us .... if our turbofan jet engine program show its fruit and we become able to atleast make reliable cost-effective and optimized turbo fan engine with at least 24-30 Killo Newton dry thrust power , then we simply can design and build something like these ( light fighter jet ) :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder


with J-85 like engine , we can't build anything better and more advance ( and useful ) than F-5

but we should find a way to keep our politicians and commanders mouth close or all of our effort lose their meaning ....

become able to domestically turn 3gneration F-5 to 4th-Generation F-5 is good achievement but they ruined it ....
 
Last edited:
.
if our politicians keep their mouth shots , then we are in right direction but our advancing is slow .... very very slow ...

Today's news

پروازهای خروجی فرودگاه مهرآباد مختل شد/نارضایتی مردم از ایرلاین‌های داخلی

به گزارش خبرنگار اقتصادی خبرگزاری تسنیم، یکی از مسافران پرواز 964 هواپیمایی ایرتور با اشاره به افت شدید کیفیت خدمات‌رسانی شرکت‌های هواپیمایی، اظهار کرد: پرواز تهران-مشهد ایران ایرتور قرار بود ساعت 8 و 35 دقیقه امروز صبح انجام شود، اما به دلیل آنچه نقص فنی اعلام شده تا اطلاع ثانوی این پرواز با تاخیر انجام می‌شود.

وی ادامه داد: وضعیت امروز پروازهای فرودگاه مهرآباد نامناسب است چند پرواز به دلیل وضعیت جوی و نقص فنی کنسل شده یا با تاخیر نامشخص انجام خواهد شد.

وی با بیان این‌که پرواز اردبیل یکی از این پروازهاست، تصریح کرد: قیمت بلیت پروازهای داخلی نسبت به چند هفته پیش سه تا چهار برابر شده اما متاسفانه خدمات ایرلاین‌ها نه تنها افزایش نیافته بلکه به شدت افت کرده است.



https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...اد-مختل-شد-نارضایتی-مردم-از-ایرلاین-های-داخلی

Okay let's blame sanctions again !!!!! :lol:

quote-fool-me-once-shame-on-shame-on-you-fool-me-you-can-t-get-fooled-again-george-w-bush-91-40-81.jpg
 
.
For that I Like to use A10 or Su-25 or even Yak-130

Why? You want to play a high attrition game by fling low with Su-25 and A-10? Damaged airplanes and lost airplanes?
We are technology wise at a point today where high altitude bombing from 10km altitude can be done sufficiently accurate. That was not the case in the days of A-10 and Su-25. Plus it requires less skill, less braveness and you of course have much better battlefield overview from 10km altitude.

Su-24, F-111, Su-25 and A-10 have their benefit when the airspace is contested or hostile and terrain masking and speed is one solution for survival.
Against enemies without radar guided large SAMs and fighters, like insurgencies, there is no need for that capability.

Su-25/A-10 instead of the F-5 is a solution, you can also fly it high and do the bombing. But which design is cheaper and cheaper to operate?
So despite the lack of supersonic fleeing capability, a Su-25 with similar avionics would maybe be better than the Kowsar, but how much does it cost compared to the internal Kowsar? How much are operation costs in comparison?

The Kowsar with its tandem glass cockpit is a good supersonic trainer for the future. With its SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system and targeting pod, it is a good CAS aircraft. With its SVP-24 like system (not fully confirmed), it can cost effectively do high altitude dumb bombing in non-contested airspace. In contested airspace it can do low level bombing at higher attrition rate and always be a good surprise for enemy aircrafts with HOBS WVR AAMs.
So I see at least two specialized roles for this aircraft and a requirement of 60-200.
 
.
خط تولید جنگنده کوثر راه افتاده و در حال تولید هستیم/ صرفه جویی 16 و نیم میلیون دلاری با کوثر
به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، امیر بنی طرفی رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، شب گذشته با حضور در برنامه گفتگوی ویژه خبری، در خصوص جنگنده کوثر که روز گذشته با حضور رئیس جمهور رونمایی شد، اظهار داشت: برای تست این جنگنده 28 سورتی پرواز در نظر گرفتیم که تاکنون حدود 20 سورتی آن انجام شده و اکنون آخرین تست‌های خود را پیش از واگذاری به نیروی هوای ارتش به عنوان نیروی کاربر می گذراند.

بنی طرفی با بیان اینکه خط تولید جنگنده کوثر آماده بوده و هم اکنون نیز در حال تولید است، گفت: با تولید این جنگنده، در کل هواپیما 16 و نیم میلیون دلار و در بخش اویونیک 7 و نیم میلیون دلار صرفه جویی میشود.

وی درخصوص خمکاری با بخش خصوصی و شرکت های دانش بنین در این موضوع نیز تصریح کرد: ۷۵ درصد کار این هواپیما در بخش خصوصی صورت گرفت و ما در وزارت دفاع آن را هدایت کردیم.

رئیس سازان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع افزود: در صنعت دفاعی شاید سه چهار درصد از کشورهای خارجی استفاده کرده ایم و علی رغم تحریم ها همیشه با تلاش و توان داخلی پیشرفته ایم

بنی طرفی اضافه کرد: سرریز فناوری های صنایع دفاعی در حوزه غیر نظامی هم مورد استفاده قرار می گیرد و ما نیز بدلیل تحریم هایی که هواپیماهای غیرنظامی ما شدند در بخشهای تامین قطعات این هواپیماها به این حوزه کمک می کنیم.
https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970...راه-افتاده-و-در-حال-تولید-هستیم-صرفه-جویی-6-و
 
.
Here another idea for you guys start using dummy bombs on F-5s and drop your dummy bombs at the same time with your actual precise bombs through UAVs during your operations .instead of upgrading F-5s to Kowsar you will save 7.5 million dollar and you can put your 62 knowledge based companies 10 universities and 4000 persons to work on something that can be useful for you I mean really useful .

what about trainer usage ? send your current F-5s just to do little bit maneuvering and break sound barrier .believe me its much better training since original F-5 can achieve higher speeds and put more pressure on your pilots :rolleyes: .

much more cost efficient plan with almost same result .
 
.
من انگلیسیم زیاد خوب نیست و سوتی میدم . لطفا یکی از دوستان زحمت بکشه یه تاپیک کلی از این کوثر با تیتر kowsar:modernized iranian made f5
یا یچیزی مشابه این اسم بزنه و همه عکس هارو داخل اون قرار بده
 
.
Why? You want to play a high attrition game by fling low with Su-25 and A-10? Damaged airplanes and lost airplanes?
We are technology wise at a point today where high altitude bombing from 10km altitude can be done sufficiently accurate. That was not the case in the days of A-10 and Su-25. Plus it requires less skill, less braveness and you of course have much better battlefield overview from 10km altitude.

Su-24, F-111, Su-25 and A-10 have their benefit when the airspace is contested or hostile and terrain masking and speed is one solution for survival.
Against enemies without radar guided large SAMs and fighters, like insurgencies, there is no need for that capability.

Su-25/A-10 instead of the F-5 is a solution, you can also fly it high and do the bombing. But which design is cheaper and cheaper to operate?
So despite the lack of supersonic fleeing capability, a Su-25 with similar avionics would maybe be better than the Kowsar, but how much does it cost compared to the internal Kowsar? How much are operation costs in comparison?

The Kowsar with its tandem glass cockpit is a good supersonic trainer for the future. With its SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system and targeting pod, it is a good CAS aircraft. With its SVP-24 like system (not fully confirmed), it can cost effectively do high altitude dumb bombing in non-contested airspace. In contested airspace it can do low level bombing at higher attrition rate and always be a good surprise for enemy aircrafts with HOBS WVR AAMs.
So I see at least two specialized roles for this aircraft and a requirement of 60-200.
Kowsar have a serious flaw and that is its low payload capacity, that's the problem and SU-25 is around 11 Million$ if you want to buy a new one , but you always can built something based on it or on A10 design, To be honest I think if they have developed Burhan instead of building something based on F-5 it was better
 
.
Kowsar have a serious flaw and that is its low payload capacity, that's the problem and SU-25 is around 11 Million$ if you want to buy a new one , but you always can built something based on it or on A10 design, To be honest I think if they have developed Burhan instead of building something based on F-5 it was better

With 3200kg the payload of the F-5 is ok.
A Su-25 can haul more but the point is:

The F-5 was the last US "3rd World" fighter. Something that was designed to be cheap, cheap to operate and cheap to handle. Providing nations that could otherwise go into Soviet sphere of influence with a cost effective weapon was still a US goal in the 60's. After that and after the situation got stabile, weapons became just Business.
The F-16 already got a engine so complex and expensive that it went far from the idea of a efficient weapon, it was designed for US needs.

Soviets never had a "3rd world" export fighter but building fighters was not commercial business for them. They always sought a cost effective weapon instead, communist ideology.

So yes, the Su-25 might be comparable in overall costs to the F-5 and haul a ton more payload, but the IRIAF likes the F-5 for it's cost effectiveness. Alone the fleet size, infrastructure and experience make it a more favorable platform for the task.

Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).

You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.
 
.
With 3200kg the payload of the F-5 is ok.
A Su-25 can haul more but the point is:

The F-5 was the last US "3rd World" fighter. Something that was designed to be cheap, cheap to operate and cheap to handle. Providing nations that could otherwise go into Soviet sphere of influence with a cost effective weapon was still a US goal in the 60's. After that and after the situation got stabile, weapons became just Business.
The F-16 already got a engine so complex and expensive that it went far from the idea of a efficient weapon, it was designed for US needs.

Soviets never had a "3rd world" export fighter but building fighters was not commercial business for them. They always sought a cost effective weapon instead, communist ideology.

So yes, the Su-25 might be comparable in overall costs to the F-5 and haul a ton more payload, but the IRIAF likes the F-5 for it's cost effectiveness. Alone the fleet size, infrastructure and experience make it a more favorable platform for the task.

Russia won't sell Iran Su-25 for $11 million, but we can build a Kowsar for 16 million with SAR-GMTI radar, modern navigation system, SVP-24 equivalent and advanced targeting pod, which the 11 million internal price Su-25 of 80's vintage don't has. All that makes up 7,5 million, means the airframe itself with engines costs just 8,5 millions, take 3-4 million away for the two engines and you build a supersonic rated non-composite material fighter airframe for 5$ million and that is for limited numbers.
You won't get a Su-25 with equal avionics from Russia for 20 million (5m export profit and 10m built cost).

You can get a single engine L-159 for $10 million with similar avionics.
You can get a twin engine YAK-130 for $15 million.
But neither are supersonic and none carries more than the F-5.

Realistically how will the jet preform though? I know I don't speak for myself when I ask this since many who follow military related topics tend to label Iran as a maker of fake and or grossly underwhelming products when it comes to the standard big ticket item; tanks, jets, ships etc, etc. So Iran coming out and talking about this F-5 upgrade/variant I'm guessing only brings more speculation as to whether or not Iran is trying to show its legit advancement in Jet tech or just another propaganda ploy midst increasing economic hardship and regional/trans-regional tensions. how often does Iran use the F-5 currently, how many are in service, what is the real world efficacy of this rather dated aircraft.

I'm just absolutely stumped on what this F-5 variant is for exactly. Is Iran planning on finally focusing on a build up of it's air force? As well as how many Iran is willing to produce (I think this is always overlooked, given how bad a shape Irans air force is in currently).

Some one said in this thread earlier or perhaps another thread that Iran needs interceptors and I completely agree with that sentiment. Given that this plane looks rather small I'm guessing its flight range is not that big so it's for close air combat, or air-to-ground combat?

Anyways, You said that since this air craft is cost effective so one would HOPE that Iran at least produces an amicable amount of them. Personally I think Iran needs to shift away from ballistic missiles and focus more on jet production and technology. BMs are a great deterrent but the 21st war needs more than just missiles.
 
.
خط تولید جنگنده کوثر راه افتاده و در حال تولید هستیم/ صرفه جویی 16 و نیم میلیون دلاری با کوثر
به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، امیر بنی طرفی رئیس سازمان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع، شب گذشته با حضور در برنامه گفتگوی ویژه خبری، در خصوص جنگنده کوثر که روز گذشته با حضور رئیس جمهور رونمایی شد، اظهار داشت: برای تست این جنگنده 28 سورتی پرواز در نظر گرفتیم که تاکنون حدود 20 سورتی آن انجام شده و اکنون آخرین تست‌های خود را پیش از واگذاری به نیروی هوای ارتش به عنوان نیروی کاربر می گذراند.

بنی طرفی با بیان اینکه خط تولید جنگنده کوثر آماده بوده و هم اکنون نیز در حال تولید است، گفت: با تولید این جنگنده، در کل هواپیما 16 و نیم میلیون دلار و در بخش اویونیک 7 و نیم میلیون دلار صرفه جویی میشود.

وی درخصوص خمکاری با بخش خصوصی و شرکت های دانش بنین در این موضوع نیز تصریح کرد: ۷۵ درصد کار این هواپیما در بخش خصوصی صورت گرفت و ما در وزارت دفاع آن را هدایت کردیم.

رئیس سازان صنایع هوایی وزارت دفاع افزود: در صنعت دفاعی شاید سه چهار درصد از کشورهای خارجی استفاده کرده ایم و علی رغم تحریم ها همیشه با تلاش و توان داخلی پیشرفته ایم

بنی طرفی اضافه کرد: سرریز فناوری های صنایع دفاعی در حوزه غیر نظامی هم مورد استفاده قرار می گیرد و ما نیز بدلیل تحریم هایی که هواپیماهای غیرنظامی ما شدند در بخشهای تامین قطعات این هواپیماها به این حوزه کمک می کنیم.
https://www.farsnews.com/news/13970530000073/خط-تولید-جنگنده-کوثر-راه-افتاده-و-در-حال-تولید-هستیم-صرفه-جویی-6-و

What lieing scum they are.... they cant even keep thier lies the same. Yesterday they said that this piece of crap copy of F-5 was going to save them $7.5 million, today they say it will save them $16.5 million! Over night the vale of the plane went up by $9 million. What a joke this system is.
 
. .
even if the initial project of the F-5 is very dated, I think no one doubts the goodness of this platform.
And no one would be disappointed if a nation that has been using it for decades and over time due to external causes had to implement the infrastructure to make spare parts, until it had the possibility to rebuild complete aircraft, which in fact gave birth to the industry national aviation;

I wrote today no one would have to say if he decides to continue with this plane made thanks to the enormous amount of work done by Iranian technicians and engineers in doing the reverse enginereng and then implement the modernization to her as possible, turning it into a product that can boast of the brand - made in Iran - with which to re-arm part of its air fleet.
What is not acceptable are the bombastic declarations in presenting this plane making it perceive that it is a completely new product from the origin of the national pencil.

Honor to the new F-5 Made in Iran and to those who helped to make it happen, for me it's a beautiful airplane
Shame for the words with which they presented it, because in seeing it all a smile appeared, recognizing its true origin, behavior of the military and civil authorities that actually overshadowed the work done.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom