IRIAF | News and Discussions

[sha ah]

I think you're underestimating the F-5 a bit. I mean Thailand recently upgraded a batch of Vietnam era F-5's with AESA capabilities and new avionics. For the cost of production and maintenance it's really worth it. The US navy still uses them. I mean you can transport 4 of them in a 737. It's not a frontline fighter but as a conventional backup fighter it's great.

As for the SU-57, I mean Russia really needs $$$ to produce these. They're only planning on producing 76 by the end of the 2020's, so they need a few nations to seriously invest. The Indian's are being flaky lately, wanting to invest more in western aircraft, so Iran and a few other nations investing a few hundred billion in the SU-57 is really what Russia needs as a pillar for the program.

So far, Iran hasn't shown any serious interest in major weapons purchases from Russia or China but that could just be a game of chicken. Of course by showing interest that gives away leverage. Iran's leaders and military leadership know better than that. Most likely, once the nuclear deal is re-activated, Russia and China will come to Iran and make offers rather than Iran acting needy now.

No doubt flying in your own Airspace increases you chances of survival that fact remains true for any fighter on the planet.

However, in a proper cost benefit analysis you can't simply close your eyes to Iranian F-5 stats in areal engagements against the Iraqi Air Force.


At Iran's level of technology, fixating on improving and producing the F-5 for use as anything other than a trainer as appose to even the F-4 does not make sense to me even at triple the cost it still makes no sense. With a modified F-4 your at least getting the payload capacity, range and air refueling capability to conduct strikes against various types of targets beyond your boarders.

And it's about time Iran moved away from this fixation with the F-5 and the OWJ engines....

 

[Hormuz]

That Image i found in the Internet some years ago. I don’t Know if it's real but maybe Iran someday have some Su 57.

it was discussed in the old IMF. it's photoshop, very sadly. i would love to see this fighter with Iranian flag on it.

 

[Shawnee]

The bottleneck is still the engine. Avionics, ammunition and radars are not F5 anymore. It is already 4+ generation.
...

 

[WudangMaster]

No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.

 

[sha ah]

Yeah it's obvious F-5 can't be a frontline fighter for Iran, but it's a great low cost, easy maintainable trainer, and conventional light fighter with some under-rated bvr capabilities. If Iran were to purchase over 100 SU-30/35 variants with a few dozen SU-57 and build a few dozen more optimized F-5's, that would really be perfect.

Iran has lots of options in this regard. They can even buy a SU-27 variant from China, the J-11 or perhaps a few dozen 5th generation fighters from China, all with technology transfers ofcourse. Hypersonic missiles and hardened underground aircraft barracks should also be in Iran's future.

No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.

 

[Shawnee]

We need ammunition delivery and also ammunition delivery rate.

Missiles gives us the ability of ammunition delivery rate. Literally 1000 tones per hour is possible with missile magazines. This will annihilate infrastructures of a regional power within a day. Yes. It is simple math.

Fighters provide gradual ammunition delivery at a lower delivery rate, if they survive the initial first strikes. Nevertheless we absolutely need them.

Israel needs a month to two of air strike to deliver the mass Iran delivers in one day of missile barrage. This is only if their Air Force stays safe through the missile barrage. Missiles are more safe under granite mountains. The same cannot be done with fighters. Yet missiles are more expensive than simple ammunition. So you better finish the enemy on the first five days of missiles barrage. Fighters if protected can deliver missiles more effectively.

Now you have to divide the budget correctly.

 

[Stryker1982]

We need ammunition delivery and also ammunition delivery rate.

Missiles gives us the ability of ammunition delivery rate. Literally 1000 tones per hour is possible with missile magazines. This will annihilate infrastructures of a regional power within a day. Yes. It is simple math.

Fighters provide gradual ammunition delivery at a lower delivery rate, if they survive the initial first strikes. Nevertheless we absolutely need them.

Israel needs a month to two of air strike to deliver the mass Iran delivers in one day of missile barrage. This is only if their Air Force stays safe through the missile barrage. Missiles are more safe under granite mountains. The same cannot be done with fighters. Yet missiles are more expensive than simple ammunition. So you better finish the enemy on the first five days of missiles barrage. Fighters if protected can deliver missiles more effectively.

Now you have to divide the budget correctly.

We assume a conflict with Israel for example would be highly short term (2 weeks).

Launching 50 Ballistic Missiles /day to prevent exhausting missile inventories and deterrence for further action, not including Quasi Ballistic Missiles would deliver 700 missiles in 2 weeks.

If we assume a 600kg warhead, the amount of matter dropped on Israel would be equivalent to nearly 925 tons. The damage would be equivalent to multiple tactical nuclear weapons. That's why they hate so much.

 

[Shawnee]

We assume a conflict with Israel for example would be highly short term (2 weeks).

Launching 50 Ballistic Missiles /day to prevent exhausting missile inventories and deterrence for further action, not including Quasi Ballistic Missiles would deliver 700 missiles in 2 weeks.

If we assume a 600kg warhead, the amount of matter dropped on Israel would be equivalent to nearly 925 tons. The damage would be equivalent to multiple tactical nuclear weapons. That's why they hate so much.

In a war with Israel:

1. It is a waste of missile to be used from Iran in large scale. Geographic depth should be used. You can use Fajr missile, Fateh missile, and hand grenade! too.

2. 50 per day is very low rate and 1000/h is more necessary. Time will be in Israel Airforce favor. You have to 0-0-0 quickly. Time is existence. 1000/h is possible.

3. Israel may use nuclear strike on day 1, when it sees its infrastructures destroyed. So you have to make your deterrence and power very very very clear. You don’t want to hit them harder unless they play it stupid.

Mainland arsenal in Iran should be darn full for many regional adversaries. There, you need money.

Now do you want 50 Su-57 or another 10000 missiles in your arsenal?

 

[aryobarzan]

Any one who advocates iran should buy (at this time) these super expensive foreign made fighter jet of 5th,6th or 7th gen lol..is reading too many aviation magazines..

Put that little damn money that you have at what you are good at. And that is missile ,Drones..of all kinds. make it hypersonic if you can.

Be innovative with your money...Work on Super guns ..remember saddam ..he brought the tech from Canada..Israel assassinated the Canadian Engineer who was building them for IRAQ..guess why...because they were afraid of it,,,

Use the rail-in/rail- out guns from the mountain sites and deliver the payload to the Arabs in the south..cheap and high rate..lol inside mountains no one can bomb them.

Buy, or steal or beg for Tech if you can but make your own damn Aircraft..Iran has time..no rush to have them now ..Iran is covered for now..
Have some respect for the Kowsar..for god's sake that was a "Learning curve" project....and guess what.... it is a good cheap aircraft to produce for what it is...excellent work for a country that before had "ZERO" aviation experience.

 

[VEVAK]

I think you're underestimating the F-5 a bit. I mean Thailand recently upgraded a batch of Vietnam era F-5's with AESA capabilities and new avionics. For the cost of production and maintenance it's really worth it. The US navy still uses them. I mean you can transport 4 of them in a 737. It's not a frontline fighter but as a conventional backup fighter it's great.

As for the SU-57, I mean Russia really needs $$$ to produce these. They're only planning on producing 76 by the end of the 2020's, so they need a few nations to seriously invest. The Indian's are being flaky lately, wanting to invest more in western aircraft, so Iran and a few other nations investing a few hundred billion in the SU-57 is really what Russia needs as a pillar for the program.

So far, Iran hasn't shown any serious interest in major weapons purchases from Russia or China but that could just be a game of chicken. Of course by showing interest that gives away leverage. Iran's leaders and military leadership know better than that. Most likely, once the nuclear deal is re-activated, Russia and China will come to Iran and make offers rather than Iran acting needy now.

And the fact that Thailand operates 27 F-5's with plans to retire them and replace them with the Saab Gripens in the next 5-10 years proves what exactly? and yes 10 of them will be upgraded with AESA radars to allow them to stay in service for another decade.
I'm guessing as soon as the Thai Airforce got it's hands on AESA radars they figured out rather quickly that it's F-5's wouldn't have a chance against an AESA equipped fighter....

And lets assume that within the next few years Iran manages to produce an airborne AESA fire control radar or something equivalent now tell me how would it make sense to equip Kosars with such a radar and the weapons to go with as appose to all the other supersonic fighters in Iran's fleet?

And if after all these years fixating on the F-5 our current production capacity of the OWJ engine is only 6 per year or 1 every 2 months then at least to me it means that the choice of the F-5 and the OWJ engine to fixate on was a MISTAKE! And to me the ONLY way producing this aircraft makes sense is if and only if it doesn't effect and take away from your capability to focus on the development and production of a more capable fighter!


As for me underestimating the capabilities of the F-5E, again, this is an aircraft Iran has 8 years of war experience with. So it's stats on within visible range engagements against less sophisticated Airforce and against less trained pilots flying 60's era fighters are known. So the idea that it's somehow going to go up against a fighter equipped with a modern IRST let alone an AESA equipped fighter is absurd!

 

[TheImmortal]

The Kowsar and the programs/variants that preceded it at worst were test bed programs and at best were modernization programs at keeping the F-5 flying for another 2-3 decades.

It wasn’t a serious program designed to put up an air superiority fighter. At the end of the day you cannot change physics. F-5 was designed as a cheap export light fighter/trainer for wars against Soviet fighters. Quantity over quality.

You cannot take that plane and suddenly make it an air superiority fighter anymore you can take a truck and make it a formula one car.

 

[Shawnee]

A bit of history:
When Iran made the first Toloue engine, senior members of the time did not know whether to be happy or upset.

It was our first jet engine. However the lifespan was one hour!! Production rate was also low.
Efficiency was so low that materials would malfunction in one hour. It took years to improve it and the speed of progress is acceptable, when you compare to China and India. Main Chinese engine still has Russian controller parts per my knowledge. I hope I am wrong.

Can TOT help Iran?
Looks up Tejas, as the legend of TOTs. Barely an acceptable assembly job. Note that we lag India in foreign relations, money and population.
Look up Kaveri.
I hope we can have collaborations with China, and NK.

Questions:
Do we need a better airforce? Absolutely.
Is Kowsar a good fighter? No.
Are we on the correct path with Kowsar? We are doing OK.

Finally:
Will we lose a war because of not having good fighters?

Not having good fighters is not among the top 10 reasons of losing a war in Iran. I am more concerned of losing 20 Su-57 on day 1 of a war.

 

[Sina-1]

A bit of history:
When Iran made the first Toloue engine, senior members of the time did not know whether to be happy or upset.

It was our first jet engine. However the lifespan was one hour!! Production rate was also low.
Efficiency was so low that materials would malfunction in one hour. It took years to improve it and the speed of progress is acceptable, when you compare to China and India. Main Chinese engine still has Russian controller parts per my knowledge. I hope I am wrong.

Can TOT help Iran?
Looks up Tejas, as the legend of TOTs. Barely an acceptable assembly job. Note that we lag India in foreign relations, money and population.
Look up Kaveri.
I hope we can have collaborations with China, and NK.

Questions:
Do we need a better airforce? Absolutely.
Is Kowsar a good fighter? No.
Are we on the correct path with Kowsar? We are doing OK.

Finally:
Will we lose a war because of not having good fighters?

Not having good fighters is not among the top 10 reasons of losing a war in Iran. I am more concerned of losing 20 Su-57 on day 1 of a war.

Your assessment is completely correct. Some members think that Iran has wasted time with f5 and its power plant, completely forgetting the fact that Iran was engineering illiterate prior to the Iraq war. Now Iran has several organizations manufacturing turbines of various types.

Let me emphasize that. Not only Iran didn’t have a heavy industry in any shape or form before the war. We couldn’t even produce nuts and bolts. So let’s not forget our past when criticizing the hardworking engineers and managers in the defense sector.

 

[jauk]

Your assessment is completely correct. Some members think that Iran has wasted time with f5 and its power plant, completely forgetting the fact that Iran was engineering illiterate prior to the Iraq war. Now Iran has several organizations manufacturing turbines of various types.

Let me emphasize that. Not only Iran didn’t have a heavy industry in any shape or form before the war. We couldn’t even produce nuts and bolts. So let’s not forget our past when criticizing the hardworking engineers and managers in the defense sector.

100%. Additionally, all the efforts we see in creating an old school and conventional 'air force' is definitely geared toward acquiring the knowledge (s) for powerplants, metallurgy, aerodynamics, weaponizatoon, guidance, electronics, etc. All of which have applications far beyond building over complex/redundant human piloted aircraft. Much like rocket and space industries, aircraft industries have multiplicative effects.

 

[sanel1412]

No one is denying kowsar's value as an advanced trainer and CAS/COIN and light a2a platform. Brazilians even added an israli a2a missile of impressive range and their radars are still analogue, so I can imagine the Thai F-5s with AESAs coupled with a long range a2a missile can be useful in defending cities or serving some limited combat roles in modern times; but Iran needs something heavier and that is the end of it.
One thing I am curious about with the Brazilian F- is if the israli missile they use locks on with its own radar because the range seems far beyond what the craft itself can see.

No radars are digital,you are mixing two different thing,radar can be digital and pulse doppler in same time,digital means that it is built using solid state tech and use modern digital processing tech...you can completly digitalise system,like Russians offer modernization for their all old systems(s-125,kub..)without actually change anything else....also Iran did digitalisation of HAWK and all other older systems without changing core arhicteture...pulse dople,continuos wave...etc..those are just radar techniques ....pulse dopler is base for SAR radar also....So,digitalization of older systems you are basicly changing analoge components with solid state tech(transistors,chips,micro controlers..etc)and you bring digital signal procesing,which for example makes integration of different components very easy,also offer better security and resistance...thus high procesing power and reducing size of device...basicly you can now produce and put radar with 160-200km range in F-5 or Mig-21/F7 very easily,with difitalization it very easy integrate any modern weapons .