What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

Owj is fuel hungry and is not sufficient for UAVs . what part of it is hard to understand . an airplane with a turbojet engine needs nearly twice as much fuel to do the job that the same airplane with simillar power Turbofan engine needs to do the same job ,
the difference will be like the difference of Mig-25 and Mig-31

going after turbo jet is waste of ressource and there is a lot difference going from Jahesh-700 to something like FJ-44

you want to waste limited fuel your uav carry on after burner. and A UAV with FJ-44 will have twice the endurance of the same UAV with owj then how you claim its absolutely sufficient for uav. your uav is not a suicide UAV so you try make it cheap .


Hack-Hook my friend,

VEVAK's post offers a very intelligent way for Iran to go forward.

All of us, including VEVAK (I am sure) may want Iran to build AL41F or heck, may be even PW F135-300 that is coming out in 2023 for F-35 upgrade. But it just isn't going to happen. We have to be logical and sensible.

VEVAK's point (I believe) is "logical and potentially, most practical".

Iran could add (a type of bolt-frame into F-14 engine housing like Eurofighter has) and add AL21 into its F-14s. Look at it like this (without afterburner) now, the F-14 has 2x17,000ish thrust engines instead of 2x11,000 of the TF30-414A (hence it saves fuel usage even at higher thrust range up to 17,000 without resorting to afterburner). The engines in Iran's F-14s are not the same as the TF30s that U.S. had. In fact Iran's TF30s were downgraded (not even the P-100 (F-111) that we use to work on in Lakenheath U.K. on behalf of U.S. - yes, Iran's engines are the old crap, slightly upgraded, but really crap. However, its fuel consumption is lower than what people know. It offered crazy "great" fuel efficiency, like .68 lb/lbforcehour. Not bad at all when you think most U.S. engines are much higher.

Regarding "waste of space on turbojet" ... I really don't agree with this. I have sat in a room, so many times, with people so much smarter than me, and listened to debates on using this engine vs. that engine. I think very differently than most comments in this blog. There are so many things to consider, not just published manufacturer data. My favorite strategic air combat ideology is about "the number of sorties per day". This is a very different way to think about fighter jets than engine performance. Anyways.

For Iran, nothing is as important as being "SELF-SUFFICIENT". Fuel efficiency, range, thrust performance, etc. etc. are a very distant second. What's the point if you can't get parts for your military?

Iran has (or had) more than $2b worth of parts left in the warehouse in Long Beach during 1978. It had access to almost NONE of it, except the few things they gave Iran as part of Iran-Contra.

Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.

Russians are also MORE LIKELY to help Iran with AL21 than its premium engines.

Yes, yes, yes .... you want to go all the way to the top. But Rome wasn't build in a day. You have to swallow your pride and start with baby steps.

(off the point, but in my opinion Iran needs, more than anything right now, ... training, training, training for the the pilots - including FLIR training, digital network data distribution and sharing training for complex combat scenarios). They actually know this since they tried to get Sweden to offer them such training (and it would have been a GREAT ONE), but Sweden refused. Having an aircraft available soon is MORE IMPORTANT than waiting a few years until you have a AL31 class engine. Pilots need training with the latest air combat techniques and weapons platforms.

Fuel consumption between these two engines - AL21 vs a AL31 candidate - (depending whether we are talking about take-off, mid-altitude, or high altitude - or whether we are talking about with- or without afterburner) is really no more than about 15%. Your idea of DOUBLE is wrong, unless we are ONLY thinking about J-85 and even then, it is not exactly correct. Not DOUBLE. But yes, you are right, it is high.

If you tell me about a scenario where one is better (AL21 vs. what you want Iran to build right away), I can offer you a scenario where the other has its benefits/merits too.

Owj/J85 is indeed fuel inefficient. Granted. But still it is the second best engine in its class. I have another favorite, same class, (much better engine than J-85 but most people are not familiar with it so I will not bother mentioning here or discussing it). This class of engine (J85) has its own benefits/merits. So let's not disregard it.

However, for UAV or drones, I would actually disagree with you and prefer to use FJ-44 instead of J85.

Iran is not like China or U.S. or France or Germany. It is more like Pakistan. It can only focus a chunk of its resources to one or a few projects at a time.

So be patient. Be mindful. And, don't let PERFECTION be the enemy of GOOD ENOUGH.

You know who hates Iran's strategic thinking more than anyone else? You will be surprised to hear this. I heard James Woolsey say on CSPAN, that "no one hates Iran's strategic patience and clear-thinking more than CIA".

I can understand why.

Iran fights U.S. based on Iran's strengths, not the way U.S. wants Iran to fight. Thanks to the IRGC clear thinking, or I call it "lateral thinking".

Ballistic missile strike against U.S. after Suleimani assassination was what they hated so much.

U.S. "looked" scared and incapable of defending itself.

They know they are stronger than Iran but still they sh!t in their pants when they think about war with Iran. I am from a military family. Trust me when I tell you ... military people in U.S. and Europe worry about how Iran "thinks and behaves" in a war scenario.

Just the same as why Israel hates to fight Hezbollah.
 
Last edited:
.
Hack-Hook my friend,

VEVAK's post offers a very intelligent way for Iran to go forward.

All of us, including VEVAK (I am sure) may want Iran to build AL41F or heck, may be even PW F135-300 that is coming out in 2023 for F-35 upgrade. But it just isn't going to happen. We have to be logical and sensible.

VEVAK's point (I believe) is "logical and potentially, most practical".

Iran could add (a type of bolt-frame into F-14 engine housing like Eurofighter has) and add AL21 into its F-14s. Look at it like this (without afterburner) now, the F-14 has 2x17,000ish thrust engines instead of 2x11,000 of the TF30-414A (hence it saves fuel usage even at higher thrust range up to 17,000 without resorting to afterburner). The engines in Iran's F-14s are not the same as the TF30s that U.S. had. In fact Iran's TF30s were downgraded (not even the P-100 (F-111) that we use to work on in Lakenheath U.K. on behalf of U.S. - yes, Iran's engines are the old crap, slightly upgraded, but really crap. However, its fuel consumption is lower than what people know. It offered crazy "great" fuel efficiency, like .68 lb/lbforcehour. Not bad at all when you think most U.S. engines are much higher.

Regarding "waste of space on turbojet" ... I really don't agree with this. I have sat in a room, so many times, with people so much smarter than me, and listened to debates on using this engine vs. that engine. I think very differently than most comments in this blog. There are so many things to consider, not just published manufacturer data. My favorite strategic air combat ideology is about "the number of sorties per day". This is a very different way to think about fighter jets than engine performance. Anyways.

For Iran, nothing is as important as being "SELF-SUFFICIENT". Fuel efficiency, range, thrust performance, etc. etc. are a very distant second. What's the point if you can't get parts for your military?

Iran has (or had) more than $2b worth of parts left in the warehouse in Long Beach during 1978. It had access to almost NONE of it, except the few things they gave Iran as part of Iran-Contra.

Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.

Russians are also MORE LIKELY to help Iran with AL21 than its premium engines.

Yes, yes, yes .... you want to go all the way to the top. But Rome wasn't build in a day. You have to swallow your pride and start with baby steps.

(off the point, but in my opinion Iran needs, more than anything right now, ... training, training, training for the the pilots - including FLIR training, digital network data distribution and sharing training for complex combat scenarios). They actually know this since they tried to get Sweden to offer them such training (and it would have been a GREAT ONE), but Sweden refused. Having an aircraft available soon is MORE IMPORTANT than waiting a few years until you have a AL31 class engine. Pilots need training with the latest air combat techniques and weapons platforms.

Fuel consumption between these two engines - AL21 vs a AL31 candidate - (depending whether we are talking about take-off, mid-altitude, or high altitude - or whether we are talking about with- or without afterburner) is really no more than about 15%. Your idea of DOUBLE is wrong, unless we are ONLY thinking about J-85 and even then, it is not exactly correct. Not DOUBLE. But yes, you are right, it is high.

If you tell me about a scenario where one is better (AL21 vs. what you want Iran to build right away), I can offer you a scenario where the other has its benefits/merits too.

Owj/J85 is indeed fuel inefficient. Granted. But still it is the second best engine in its class. I have another favorite, same class, (much better engine than J-85 but most people are not familiar with it so I will not bother mentioning here or discussing it). This class of engine (J85) has its own benefits/merits. So let's not disregard it.

However, for UAV or drones, I would actually disagree with you and prefer to use FJ-44 instead of J85.

Iran is not like China or U.S. or France or Germany. It is more like Pakistan. It can only focus a chunk of its resources to one or a few projects at a time.

So be patient. Be mindful. And, don't let PERFECTION be the enemy of GOOD ENOUGH.

You know who hates Iran's strategic thinking more than anyone else? You will be surprised to hear this. I heard James Woolsey say on CSPAN, that "no one hates Iran's strategic patience and clear-thinking more than CIA".

I can understand why.

Iran fights U.S. based on Iran's strengths, not the way U.S. wants Iran to fight. Thanks to the IRGC clear thinking, or I call it "lateral thinking".

Ballistic missile strike against U.S. after Suleimani assassination was what they hated so much.

U.S. "looked" scared and incapable of defending itself.

They know they are stronger than Iran but still they sh!t in their pants when they think about war with Iran. I am from a military family. Trust me when I tell you ... military people in U.S. and Europe worry about how Iran "thinks and behaves" in a war scenario.

Just the same as why Israel hates to fight Hezbollah.
Would it not be easier for Iran to acquire a decent number of second hand Al-21s or Rd-33s from a friendly country either overtly or covertly for it to power new medium-heavy fighter designs until it can perfect her own engines?
 
.
Would it not be easier for Iran to acquire a decent number of second hand Al-21s or Rd-33s from a friendly country either overtly or covertly for it to power new medium-heavy fighter designs until it can perfect her own engines?

GREAT thinking.

Yes, I know of sources in Ukraine that are willing to sell (black market) AL21s to Iran.

U.K. got a couple for testing purposes. A company in Texas bought one for testing.

But Iran has had so many "tricks" played on it - like Hajizadeh paid for radars he never got and found out the entire thing was to trick Iran to get one of its sourcing teams. So not only Iran lost money, never got the engine, also lost a sourcing team in Georgia.

So it is more difficult that it seems.

And, I do believe Iran can build AL21 with help from Russia and if it REALLY decides to do so (political will).

Believe me BAVAR 373 is more complex of a project than AL21 engine manufacturing.
 
.
GREAT thinking.

Yes, I know of sources in Ukraine that are willing to sell (black market) AL21s to Iran.

U.K. got a couple for testing purposes. A company in Texas bought one for testing.

But Iran has had so many "tricks" played on it - like Hajizadeh paid for radars he never got and found out the entire thing was to trick Iran to get one of its sourcing teams. So not only Iran lost money, never got the engine, also lost a sourcing team in Georgia.

So it is more difficult that it seems.

And, I do believe Iran can build AL21 with help from Russia and if it REALLY decides to do so (political will).

Believe me BAVAR 373 is more complex of a project than AL21 engine manufacturing.

Iran has SU-22’s that run on AL-21’s.

It could put an SU-22 in storage and have an engine if it truly wanted.
 
.
Iran CAN (potentially) be self sufficient with AL21. The possibility of this is FAR MORE LIKELY than building an engine in the class of an AL31.
Why go after al-31 why not first start with something for our bigger drones and light fighter then go for something in class RD-33 and then go toward Al-31 and Al-41.
I wonder how AL-21 will help us in that direction. Put our hope on Al-21 only lead to engines like GE4 and we'll you are welcome to use a big Toloue-4 (the only turbojet engine introduced in 21 century or try to go the next step which is turbofan.
AL-21 only limit your airplane
 
.
Iran has SU-22’s that run on AL-21’s.

It could put an SU-22 in storage and have an engine if it truly wanted.

Yes, you are correct. But the engine has a 1,800 to a max 2,100 hour life. I am not sure what age Iran's SU22 engines are. Iraq used these quite extensively. Not sure how much juice they still have in em.

But Iran needs more engines anyways, and needs a replenishment strategy, i.e. build the engines before they actually need them and the older engines need to be replaced.

Iran needs about 200+ engines if they do what I am thinking of, for their needs in the next 5 years.

They need a manufacturing solution.
 
.
Why go after al-31 why not first start with something for our bigger drones and light fighter then go for something in class RD-33 and then go toward Al-31 and Al-41.
I wonder how AL-21 will help us in that direction. Put our hope on Al-21 only lead to engines like GE4 and we'll you are welcome to use a big Toloue-4 (the only turbojet engine introduced in 21 century or try to go the next step which is turbofan.
AL-21 only limit your airplane

Great question.

I have under design at least some 20+ fighter jets that I am working on in CAD/CAM. All these are great for "theoretical" purposes, but REALITY is always something totally different.

Iran needs an engine that has flexibility for different scenarios to make the investment for its development worthwhile. Ideally, or naturally based on realities, it can ONLY build one single engine for all its needs. Certainly for the next 10 years.

You can always downgrade an engine, but impossible to upgrade the thrust too much.

Look at AL41F - in REALITY it is an AL31 with advanced materials and better features (some). It was improved from 27,000 to max 32,000 (emergency) although more like 30,000 regular. That is about 10% after all this development and all the cost. They do have a new one though for the Su-57 - that one is much better though.

You can always down grade to 25,000 thrust but not the reverse.

Iran should start from an engine that has highest thrust it can start with. Then lower it if needs be for certain platforms.

RD-33 is just too low of a thrust threshold for Iran's needs. I like the engine, worked briefly with an older one should say. Not against it.

But Iran needs a 27,000 and up - level engine and it can always downgrade it (remove stages) to 24,000 or even 22,000 if needed for some platforms. But it needs to start with higher.

I know people in Iran in the Air Force, but they are low level. But I don't know anyone that has access to the decision makers. If I did, my proposal for Iran's air force command and decision makers would be:

Start with R-35 engine (you have a dozen in the Mig 23 that Iraq moved to Iran in 1991). Contact manufacturers in Russia that can start INDEPENDENTLY (Khatchaturov R-35-300) production with technology transfer (this is how the Shah bought F-14 by bribing certain members of the U.S. congress and by giving $300m - financial assistance - to Grumman so Iran could buy F-14). Iran can do the same with this engine. Creates jobs in Russia, Iran can have technology transfer, and this engine is a good engine with 28,000/18,000 thrust (afterburner and military).

This is a strategy that COULD WORK.

Or Iran can simply do reverse engineering. Russia won't care. Iran can also bring in consultants from Russia to help with development. It can be done within a 10 months period.

Then Iran has an engine that is high enough thrust to make Russia want to sell AL31 to Iran or have joint manufacturing TOT agreements. Leverage is what Iran needs.

Without a doubt Iran needs a higher thrust class engine. RD33 is not worth all this effort. By the end, one would say ... "ahh I wished I had done all this for something that had close to 30,000 lbs of thrust rather than 18,000 or 19,000".

Yes, R35 is not perfect.

Yes, uses a lot of fuel.

But imagine putting an R-35 non-afterburner in F-14 ??? just imagine ... (theoritically)

almost 19,000 lbs of trust without afterburner. F-14 can take off without afterburner and can go supersonic without afterburner. Over the span of a mission, it will have a higher range. This is just a VERY CRUED comparison that is not necessarily sensible. A more realistic one would be: With almost 50% higher thrust (from 20,000 to 29,000 afterburner take off thrust), the f-14 can carry more fuel, and hence more range, due to substantially higher take off weight.

Now you begin to see why I would recommend such a scenario.

Better Compromise. Not in love with this engine, but the compromise is better for Iran than anything else I see realistically at the moment that Iran AF could do.
 
Last edited:
.
Great question.

I have under design at least some 20+ fighter jets that I am working on in CAD/CAM. All these are great for "theoretical" purposes, but REALITY is always something totally different.

Iran needs an engine that has flexibility for different scenarios to make the investment for its development worthwhile. Ideally, or naturally based on realities, it can ONLY build one single engine for all its needs. Certainly for the next 10 years.

You can always downgrade an engine, but impossible to upgrade the thrust too much.

Look at AL41F - in REALITY it is an AL31 with advanced materials and better features (some). It was improved from 27,000 to max 32,000 (emergency) although more like 30,000 regular. That is about 10% after all this development and all the cost. They do have a new one though for the Su-57 - that one is much better though.

You can always down grade to 25,000 thrust but not the reverse.

Iran should start from an engine that has highest thrust it can start with. Then lower it if needs be for certain platforms.

RD-33 is just too low of a thrust threshold for Iran's needs. I like the engine, worked briefly with an older one should say. Not against it.

But Iran needs a 27,000 and up - level engine and it can always downgrade it (remove stages) to 24,000 or even 22,000 if needed for some platforms. But it needs to start with higher.

I know people in Iran in the Air Force, but they are low level. But I don't know anyone that has access to the decision makers. If I did, my proposal for Iran's air force command and decision makers would be:

Start with R-35 engine (you have a dozen in the Mig 23 that Iraq moved to Iran in 1991). Contact manufacturers in Russia that can start INDEPENDENTLY (Khatchaturov R-35-300) production with technology transfer (this is how the Shah bought F-14 by bribing certain members of the U.S. congress and by giving $300m - financial assistance - to Grumman so Iran could buy F-14). Iran can do the same with this engine. Creates jobs in Russia, Iran can have technology transfer, and this engine is a good engine with 28,000/18,000 thrust (afterburner and military).

This is a strategy that COULD WORK.

Or Iran can simply do reverse engineering. Russia won't care. Iran can also bring in consultants from Russia to help with development. It can be done within a 10 months period.

Then Iran has an engine that is high enough thrust to make Russia want to sell AL31 to Iran or have joint manufacturing TOT agreements. Leverage is what Iran needs.

Without a doubt Iran needs a higher thrust class engine. RD33 is not worth all this effort. By the end, one would say ... "ahh I wished I had done all this for something that had close to 30,000 lbs of thrust rather than 18,000 or 19,000".

Yes, R35 is not perfect.

Yes, uses a lot of fuel.

But imagine putting an R-35 non-afterburner in F-14 ??? just imagine ... (theoritically)

almost 19,000 lbs of trust without afterburner. F-14 can take off without afterburner and can go supersonic without afterburner. Over the span of a mission, it will have a higher range. This is just a VERY CRUED comparison that is not necessarily sensible. A more realistic one would be: With almost 50% higher thrust (from 20,000 to 29,000 afterburner take off thrust), the f-14 can carry more fuel, and hence more range, due to substantially higher take off weight.

Now you begin to see why I would recommend such a scenario.

Better Compromise. Not in love with this engine, but the compromise is better for Iran than anything else I see realistically at the moment that Iran AF could do.
In your opinion,--how long will it take for Iran to build a decent turbofan engine? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years?

India for example failed with their GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri engine after 30 years of development....
 
Last edited:
.
Owj is fuel hungry and is not sufficient for UAVs . what part of it is hard to understand . an airplane with a turbojet engine needs nearly twice as much fuel to do the job that the same airplane with simillar power Turbofan engine needs to do the same job ,
the difference will be like the difference of Mig-25 and Mig-31

going after turbo jet is waste of ressource and there is a lot difference going from Jahesh-700 to something like FJ-44

you want to waste limited fuel your uav carry on after burner. and A UAV with FJ-44 will have twice the endurance of the same UAV with owj then how you claim its absolutely sufficient for uav. your uav is not a suicide UAV so you try make it cheap .




1617186801095.png



So although per pond of thrust the OWJ is a fuel hungry engine, the platforms you can build around them with sufficient upgrades will at least have a chance to go toe to toe with enemy fighters at shorter ranges.

On top of that, Owj has a lot of room for upgrades and improvements that can further increase it's potential....


By the most part Fj44 is just an enlarged version of the Fj33/Jahesh-700 with a few additional upgrades on the later models

1617187610223.png


1617186583820.png




And of course they would be good engines for a high glide flying wing design or a light subsonic jet trainer but it is not now nor will it ever be ideal for a viable supersonic fighter or supersonic ucav....

If sacrificing range for speed didn't make sense no one would ever put afterburners on jet engines!
For pilots, speed is life!

So the priority right now needs to be high powered high thrust engines for a heavy high speed force multiplier!!!! And not yet another weak low thrust engine to power yet another trainer!

Beh ean meghan ghaz cherooni!

Degheh az Farancavii ha e daheh panjah aghab tar neesteem keh!
So if this absurd path of obsession over trainers or weak platforms continues then there really needs to be an investigation into why because it's looking more and more like treason to me!

Iranian engineer need to be pushing the boundaries of science and technology in the country not the boundaries of how not to spend money!
 

Attachments

  • 1617186800872.png
    1617186800872.png
    52.2 KB · Views: 44
.
View attachment 729840


So although per pond of thrust the OWJ is a fuel hungry engine, the platforms you can build around them with sufficient upgrades will at least have a chance to go toe to toe with enemy fighters at shorter ranges.

On top of that, Owj has a lot of room for upgrades and improvements that can further increase it's potential....


By the most part Fj44 is just an enlarged version of the Fj33/Jahesh-700 with a few additional upgrades on the later models

View attachment 729846

View attachment 729839



And of course they would be good engines for a high glide flying wing design or a light subsonic jet trainer but it is not now nor will it ever be ideal for a viable supersonic fighter or supersonic ucav....

If sacrificing range for speed didn't make sense no one would ever put afterburners on jet engines!
For pilots, speed is life!

So the priority right now needs to be high powered high thrust engines for a heavy high speed force multiplier!!!! And not yet another weak low thrust engine to power yet another trainer!

Beh ean meghan ghaz cherooni!

Degheh az Farancavii ha e daheh panjah aghab tar neesteem keh!
So if this absurd path of obsession over trainers or weak platforms continues then there really needs to be an investigation into why because it's looking more and more like treason to me!

Iranian engineer need to be pushing the boundaries of science and technology in the country not the boundaries of how not to spend money!
its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4

and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones
 
.
In your opinion,--how long will it take for Iran to build a decent turbofan engine? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years?

India for example failed with their GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri engine after 30 years of development....

Honestly, I can't answer that with any degree of accuracy.

There are so many things that go into such a project.

It took RR about 17 years to develop RB.183 and that was suppose to be an upgrade of Spey.

So even organizations with huge resources fall apart just like Kaveri. India has so many challenges and issues on its plate, they really have problems. Thanks to deciding to go the "software" route like the Brits, they have an economy, if they had gone the "hardware" route, they would be f**ked today.

Ask an Indian who is familiar with what I am talking about, and they will explain it in detail about my statement above.

Iran's development of a turbofan engine of a certain quality depends on all the details and who is supporting it and TOT and a range of other things. Iran can also copy TF30-414A (although I seriously DO NOT recommend it). But it can ignore an idiot like me and go ahead and do so. It would probably take 2-3 years from when they apply POLITICAL WILL to do so and allocate funds for R&D and
manufacturing.

Iran however, does not believe this is a sensible way to spend time, money, and resources. They are trying to be forward thinkers. Which makes a lot of sense.

I am sorry I cannot answer your question with any degree of accuracy. I just don't know. The details are unknown. The strategies are so vast. The question regarding the engine is like a drop of water in the ocean.
 
.
its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4

and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones


Good points.

I believe, possibly my error in judgment, that Iran needs to build ONE ENGINE first, and then go ahead and try to make a second one. So ideally, it would be better to build a bigger engine than a smaller one.

Iran seems to be building Owj/J85 at the moment. If they can do this, at least 100+ engines per year, then by all means, I will eat my words and fine let's stick to this and use it as a strategy for "current" Iranian AF problems.

F-5e can be upgraded (similar to Brazilian F5s) and if they can add a good PESA radar with solid state amplifiers and can add Fakour/Phoenix missiles - then fine. I will be happy.

I am not a fan of J85, and have never been. But I will live with it as long as Iran is producing, ideally, 100+ fighter jets per year in that class to catch up with training, and build once again a viable air force.

If they could replace the 750lb J85 engines with the 3rd generation GE J-97 - I would be even more happier. This engine has incredible performance, has been used in UAVs, and I just love this engine.

At 8,000lbs of thrust, Iran can build an aircraft that almost emulates a Saab Gripen C/D with a total of 16,000lbs of thrust. Okay, not with AESA but still close enough to give them an edge under certain circumstances.

However, all of these seem like a PIE IN THE SKY for Iran.

Iran issues all come down to ... TIME

They have 4 years (during Biden) to prepare for what may happen afterwards. Iran has been awfully wrong when it comes to pre-planning and forward thinking. Biden will not be in office forever. His VP is a serious Zionist and her husband is on the phone with AIPAC and FDD's Mark Dubowitz on almost daily (more accurately monthly) basis. She is best friends with Barbara Boxer, the CA Senator (serious Zionist) who said "Iranians are vicious people", even when Chris Hayes corrected her ("not all Iranian people are vicious"), she still mumbled and continued.

Iran should be concerned with what is coming after Biden. If they are not, then AGAIN they will pay the price. Beating up on Iran is a pastime in U.S. and there is no benefit to anyone in U.S. to want to better the relationship with Iran. You would think the people of South Carolina, Texas, and Arkansas would demand their senators (Leslie Graham, Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton) to want better relationship with Iran so their people would benefit economically from Iran's purchase of Boeing airplanes, rice, and corn ... all 3 states would have a huge boom in economy. NO ... Zionists control these 3 senators to serve Israel, not American people. Huge amount of their campaign financing comes from the Zionist billionaires like Paul Singer, Maryam Adelson, and Bernard Marcus.

I would put a huge effort into building either a fixed wing F-14 or a heavily upgraded F-14 with AESA and thrust vectoring with Russian help (which they would be happy to do if they got paid with gold), or even upgrade F-4e like the last few projects which the Brits and RAF were working on, a very high end F4e.

Once Iran has 200+ of these, then it can start building a high end, Su57 or whatever it can and take its sweet time.

Iran should not WASTE TIME since 3 years under Biden will go by REALLY FAST. Go with proven platforms and cut R&D time as much as possible. Work on projects that make sense, e.g. upgrade a phoenix missile to the fuel and body structure standards of Russian R-37. Long range missiles with good no-scape-zones are the future. They should also invest in the equivalent of Meteor, or a missile with long range capability of RAMJET engine.

Instead of a Su57 with Fakour and Sayad, I rather have an upgraded F-14 with R-37 and Meteor and I don't give a damn how old looking F-14 or even F4 is.

I would rather have a $10, F5e with R-37 and Meteor, if possible, as long as Iran has 200+ of these.

Iran does not have much TIME. It needs to make decisions SMARTLY.

You may want everything, but YOU CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING.
 
Last edited:
.
Seriously there! Iran should do this, Iran should do this, you're not serious

Iran has absolutely nothing to envy the F-5 Brazilians so stop delirious. On the subject of combat jets, Iran hides their game well and on the subject of engines as well. The Saeqeh was introduced in 2007 and if we count the construction of 3 planes per year with the Kowsar, that gives the figure of 42. This number is a minimum.

If we consider that Iran very much likes to diversify the technologies as in the very diversified drones then we can easily predict that there are different technologies in the F-5 that we have not seen yet. 1 years after the introduction of Kowar, Iranian authorities said there had been great improvement in a short period of time.

It is very clear that Iran is hiding fighter jets with different technologies but I am sure they will demonstrate some soon.
 
.
its not the discussion about weak trainer or high power multiplier , all the trainer we produced were technology demonstrator. non of them produced in enough number to be useful for our air-force. more importantly I can't see any heavy fighter project in pipeline .
all I see is light fighters and drones . drones actually get delivered and light fighter are produced it seems by speed of 1-2 per year.
we have all the time we need if we want to produce a heavy engine . why not make an efficient modern engine which can help us for now and future instead of developing an old brute that may be useful in future and at best give us an airplane like Mig-23 or F-4

and no you can't build all your air-force based on one heavy engine. you need heavy engine , you need light engine and you need medium ones as you need heavy fighter , light fighter and drones

You are correct, you can not build your entire Air Force around 1-2 type of engines. However we already have low thrust engines, We can already power lighter low payload jet UCAV's around OWJ, Jahesh 700, Tolue 5 & other engines
We can already build light subsonic trainers and CAS fighters.... So the requirement and priority when it comes to Jet propulsion R&D needs to be heavy high trust engines

Wheatear Iran build F-5's or a supersonic strategic bomber similar to the Mirage IV, without major investment in mass production infrastructure of various parts, our production output will remain around 1-6 Aircrafts per year.... And constantly switching between weak engines is NOT going to help the situation and instead it just gives them yet another excuse because instead of focusing on production they have to now focus on yet another engine to produce and yet another platform to take to production

If OWJ aviation is unable to greatly increase the production of a simple engine like the OWJ or improve on it then the problem is with OWJ aviation management & or funding not the engine...

And I'm not saying that we should never produce the Fj44 or Improve on the Jahesh700 only that we allow the natural course of development and improvement of the Jahesh700 to take it's natural course of development.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, when you start producing larger high thrust engines the waisted alloys and composite generated from their production can be recycled and reused in the production of smaller engines. So producing heavier high thrust engines will naturally give Iran the capability to produce more capable lighter engines at an overall reduced cost.
 
.
I think people underestimate complexity of Jet engines.

You could give the best engineer group in Iran, a blueprint of AL-41 and $1B in r&d and they will fail to produce one AL-41.

It’s like asking someone to copy Coca-Cola. It’s just as much an art (timing of blades and construction of materials and its properties) as it is a science.

So for Iran to build a heavy engine it’s going to take time, luck, and a lot of development especially with its paltry military budget. People like to point to China, but China has a military budget that is 40x Iran and in 1990 it was 17B basically what Iran’s military budget is today. So let that sink in....30 years ago China had the same military budget as Iran today also add the fact that China had access to foreign parts and transfer of technology from fall of Soviet Union and you can see why comparing Iran to China in terms of military developments is like comparing a Honda to Ferrari.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom