Who exactly told you Yasin was abandoned? It's in development rn. It's meant to be an advanced trainer and later a CAS aircraft, not a fighter
as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place
Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack .
not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built
if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
no it won't save them but it made enemy have to use heavy weapon , they had to come to at most 20km away from the target ,not 100km away , it will be effective against drones and cruise missiles .and so enemy cant do attack from outside our border , it keep the assets safe from collateral damage.
your bases are mountain bases , enemy can fly low and hide from you and I doubt S-300 can keep b2 at bay and non of the systems you mentioned will be at their peak performance in mountainous areas .
as i said enemy don't need to destroy the base , the entrance is enough and f-15 can carry several GBU-27 which will be more than enough to deal with the entrance of such bases.
the protection will be provided with national air defense grid and some local short air defense for point defense , you can even use some CIWS for point air defense and let your integrated long and middle range sams do the defense against airplanes.
and it fail as it cant provide any protection at all
and the attack capabilities of our enemy is a lot different from then . do you believe they stayed in 1991?
so you say because Iran have many way to protect the aircraft , we must gather all of them in one place ?
Explain how dispersal of assets is supposed to protect a first strike of approx. 600 low RCS cruise missiles launched from Ticonderoga-class ships, B-52s, B-1B's and B-2 bombers in the first wave. Followed by dozens of F-16s armed fully with JASSM missiles, likely totalling over 1000+ missiles in less than 24 hours.as metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.
the only feasible way of protecting your asset against first strike is distributing them in various bases around the country and its the only way for Iran to operate its air force as it gonna be mainly consisted of Kowsar and its variants in future its the only way to overcome the range problem of the fighter
who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place
Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack .
about your question first don't store your equipment in building suitable for workshops , and then as i said disperse them don't put all your egg in one basket
not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
and go fix that enterance easily if you can
and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109
or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work
end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built
if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
IRIAF decided to go with Kowsar as Yasin was underperforming compared to it and we certainly don't have nor money and neither resource to invest in two production line for two airplane that are in same class and have the exact same capabilities.
simply a cruise missile is not a penetrating weapon and is not that strong against properly sheltered aircraft and it prevent collateral damage and if enemy want to use bunkerbuster bombs they had to go as near as 20-25km away from those bases . now enemy have assets that can do that but they are limited they can go near 40-5 base but they cant do that to 50-60 bases
We saw the second prototype literally a few months agoas metal cage worked for Russians tanks against javelin in Ukraine
the idea of gathering all your air asset in 4-5 under mountain base is absurd and you think how these bombs come toward target , they can come from top , they can come from forward . just look at some video of their test in youtube , they are not free fall bomb which only have one mode of attack.
the only feasible way of protecting your asset against first strike is distributing them in various bases around the country and its the only way for Iran to operate its air force as it gonna be mainly consisted of Kowsar and its variants in future its the only way to overcome the range problem of the fighter
who said out in the open , I say out in shelters , I rather instead of puting them in 5 place put them in 50 or 60 or even 100 place
Protecting in peace time is harder than protecting in war as in war you expect the attack and in peace time you don't expect the attack .
about your question first don't store your equipment in building suitable for workshops , and then as i said disperse them don't put all your egg in one basket
not steel door around it is enough , the change in the shape of the area , the torsion on the door make that entrance unusable for more than some hours
and go fix that enterance easily if you can
and about your metal fence idea , see how it will work , just a mere BLU-109
or what GBU-27 can do , its a GBU-24 put in the body of a blu-109 penetrating bomb . and its how GBU-24 work
end I mentioned another valid tactic that was designed to protect Sweden airforce against USSR attack and now the program being activated to counter Russia hypothetical attack , wonder which tactic is more useful for us . by the way can you tell me when those base were built
if you see any , beside that prototype that were shown 3 years ago please inform us.
IRIAF decided to go with Kowsar as Yasin was underperforming compared to it and we certainly don't have nor money and neither resource to invest in two production line for two airplane that are in same class and have the exact same capabilities.
we saw production line of kowsar ,yasin in correct form is waste of resource and in all metric is inferior to Kowsar. and how you are not sure its the same prototype but modified.
Yasin only made one sense ,to be enlarged and redesigned into something like Su-25 and for that they need to add a lot of armor to it and here we come back to our chronic engine problemwell , it is not wast of time and effort , Kowsar was an upgrade for F5 , Yassin was a real act to try and design and build an aircraft from zero ...
Maybe Yassin has some unique value for training ... maybe cost , maybe configuration ... or maybe they just wanted low cost sub-sonic reliable aircraft for first phase of training new pilot ...
For sure Yassin has zero combat capability compare to Kowsar ( which is almost useless as well )
Yassin design is like this one
AIDC AT-3 - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
although if you compare these 2 pics , you can see so many diffrence in details which mean Yassin is completely Iranian engineered product
AIDC_AT_3
see it as low cost stable training aircraft .... it design is stable in core and from the look it doesn't need flight correction by computer ... and if it is low cost , then we can increase our pilot training duration ...
we have f5 and an army of its derivatives for that role what need we have for yasin ?
if they are going to fly kowsar in future then better train them with two sit version of that aircraft
don't answer whats the need for another trainer , we can use Kowsar and F-5 for training instead of building a production line and 20 yasin we can spend that money to produce 30 more kowsar.
as I said the people can train in two sit version of kowsar and by doing that they become a lot more familiar with the airplan that they will fly in future than when they train with Yasin . its waste of resource .
