IRIAF | News and Discussions

[lydian fall]

Jews try to show us very weak, and destroy our relations with Russia and China

The scum in this thread Hack Hook needs a section ban

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

they said they hit Israeli ship with kowsar

thats a new one

those data if not look at diferent of 1-2 in the numbers and the participant tank that one said 370 and another said 400 are the same

what attempt , that was my keyboard didn't type zero

but there is that there was so much kronet that when Hezbollah re-positioned it left many behind

as i said its not important when 18 get fired at and only one get destroyed and another one actually was destroyed by an IED. also as i point hezbollah have so much of that missile that they left them behind and deem it unnecessary to take them with themselves while repositioning

but they left them behind , russia had enough , and iran had the money to buy it for them

if it was working then the s-300 were usable and could be deployed but those system never get deployed

show evidence that it was functional and incorporated in our radar network then
and there was very much reason to use it if it was functional as it would have become one of our most advanced radars at the time as our radars at the time were pretty much lacking for half of our border in persian gulf we didn't had any radar coverage and .....

in other term we didn't need them Russia could take them back give us our money plus interest and and fine for not honoring the deal and we could use it two produce 3 time the amount bavar-373

but they were different and were not used as part of air defense system but part of our early warning radars .

no but they had to hit every single one of them that make their work harder

so you now demoted the order from su-35 to su-30 ,dr.meson would have a field day compared that useless aircraft with an aircraft with modern subsystem . if su-35 could have a niche role , that airplane even can't play that


LOL, i'm talking the facility and maintenance line and production line that came with them not the airplane themselves


i say if you don't accept the others have things that you can't see , why i must accept you have things that the others can't see

by the way i don't talk about something you can hide in a sport complex, i'm talking about a very big radar that if it come online any body around us specially usa could detect its signature , i'm talking about a big radar that could have easily picked up from sky by satellites


that will be a real bad idea

On the contrary, excellent news.

 

[SalarHaqq]

the extent of damage to the ship showed what hit it. and al-mayadin made the claim according to hezbollah

سایت خبری واضح - موشک کروز ایرانی «کوثر» برگ برنده حزب الله در جنگ ۳۳ روزه

واضح:المیادین بررسی کرد؛ موشک کروز ایرانی «کوثر» برگ برنده حزب الله در جنگ ۳۳ روزه شناسهٔ خبر: 3740564 - یکشنبه ۲۴ مرداد ۱۳۹۵ - ۱۴:۵۴ بین الملل > خاورمیانه و آفریقای شمالی .jwplayer{ display: inline-block; } مقاومت اسلامی لبنان در جنگ ۳۳ روزه با استفاده از موشک کروز

vazeh.com

Article's from merely 5 years ago. Pictures of damage to the vessel do not offer conclusive evidence as to what type of weapon exactly was used. My point stands, there was no hard evidence of Hezbollah fielding the Kosar ASCM prior to Hezbollah unveiling them years later.

because it was a war that its end was not clear .

Hezbollah was supplied before, not during the war.

ans that was their best atgm. you won't throw away such equipment at the war time , when you knew its not that easy to replace them

Nothing can be inferred unless the reasons for the purported abandonment are known. Also these remain token numbers, not enough to assume Hezbollah was in possession of many hundreds of these missiles.

agree integration didn't make sense because the system was incomplete and not working.

That it was defective is an unsubstantiated claim. So is the assertion that it wasn't deployed. If the latter held true however, then a more plausible explanation would be that Iran obtained too small an amount for deployment to make sense.

honestly , you want proof that it was not incorporated . is such thing possible ,

If it's impossible to furnish proof, then it shouldn't be just portrayed as fact.

on other hand there is not a single proof that any s-300 in iran become active until rusia sent those S-300pmu2

Iran would still have gained from the system by examining it.

my proof is there is no single evidence that it ever fielded

This by itself doesn't constitute proof, because lots of weaponry in use by Iran is known to have been fielded prior to being presented publicly.

what choose , iran already paid for the system . do you wanted another cancelling order like after revolution that order for the aircrafts get cancelled and for years we didn't get our money back and had to pay fine for cancelling the order?

First of all Iran could have had the international tribunal condemn Russia to return the payment with interests. Secondly there's still the fact that they were integrated into the IADS, meaning that Iran is seeing benefit in deploying them - and certainly not as decoys (systems as expensive and sophisticated aren't used as decoys, not to mention the safety of the personnel manning them).

show it was not used in our air defensse , but it was used in russian ones , shows the difference in the origin of our system to the rusian one shows our system is a lot more like western system than russian ones.

Again, none of these alleged differences implies that knowledge gleaned from the study of the Nebo didn't contribute in a certain capacity to the accumulation of technical expertise underlying the design and development of those domestic radars.

they had to strike them if it want to operate freely just as simple as that and those system may no longer be threat to fighters but they are credible threat to helicopters

In other words, these assets have their use for Iran, be it a limited niche one, and are considered cost-effective. This in turn offers justification for their continued deployment. Exactly my point since the beginning.

no previously you clearly said su-35

From the outset and even before the present discussion, I referenced several comments by PeeD and even posted screen shots of them, in which both types (Su-30, Su-35) are clearly cited. As for the present discussion, I only mentioned the Su-30. At any rate, since my trusted sources are the users in question, I consider these two Flanker variants to be acceptable.

and you fail to grasp if our technician were not allowed to go near those system before revolution after it they could not use them to keep our airforce and army aviation on foot despite the sanctions

This was addressed in length before, including by user aryobarzan who has first hand knowledge on the topic from personal experience in the Iranian military before the Revolution, and who highlighted the limitations imposed by the US on Iranian technicians and maintenance crews.

Iranian personnel had the capability to perform some maintenance work, but weren't allowed to deploy it to its full extent. In part because it would have led to slashing jobs for US military advisers, but mostly because of Washington's desire to maintain a client in a state of dependency.

Also it's not simply about immediate upkeep, but also a question of long term servicing. In the long run, absence of a spare parts supply chain would have grounded much of the IRIAF especially its most valuable assets like the F-14, if it wasn't for the Islamic Republic's efforts in setting up the corresponding infrastructure. Some short term efforts were required as well.

I see no point in reiterating already concluded matters.

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1561987311033786370

It’s coming (although a bit behind schedule). But the project has been going on for a long time.

I hope to see the prototype by 2025.

Finally we will stop talking about Kowsar and F-5’s once the medium/heavy engine is unveiled.

 

[TheImmortal]

I'm making a list to bring up in 2026 ,i want to be clear do you also believe in AL-31 by 2025 ?

It’s just a picture as placeholder. I believe Iran is trying to say it will unveil an AL-31 class jet engine by 2026. Not that they will unveil reverse engineered AL-31 per se. Graphic was very realistic. But in case of both owj and FJ-22 we have never seen evidence of major mass production. Which raises the question how many units Iran can truly produce.

There was a user who came to this board made several posts, in one he mentioned that Iran was testing several engine designs and that most of them were failing longevity or various stages of R&D, but that one showed promise for mass production. This was at least 2 years ago maybe 3.

Depending how much foreign assistance Iran gets (ex aerospace engineers or state sponsored assistance) will tell us in the end what engine we get.

 

[SalarHaqq]

my point a noor would have halved ta ship like saar in two just look at the damage when one miisile hit an iranian ship in konarak and compare it to the damage to israeli ship .

Depends on a lot of factors like point of impact and so on. Aso artillery rockets could have caused similar damage. It's not conclusive. So before Hezbollah revealed that they are in possession of the Kosar ASCM and that they used it against the zionist vessel, different possibilities remained plausible.

exactly the point that i made , if they had small supply they would have not left their best missile while repositioning

Depends on the situation, there can be compelling reasons. These were just small quantities.

it happened many time. and those token numbers wsere tens of missile , when the end of war is not clear, you have limited stock and you have no way to resupply then you wont abandon them

Again not proof for many hundreds having been delivered.

if it was deployed its radar signature would have been picked by enemies around iran.

They don't publish that information.

and your explanation won't make sense at all even a single radar have its use and fill one gap in our southern border that was filled with gaps at the time

Not if Iranian planners see more use in dismantling and studying it.

At any rate, there's no proof it wasn't deployed.

no its not impossible to prove it was not deployed , its imposible to bring evidence it was not deployed they are different, the fact that there is no evidence of it being deployed , the fact nobody picked up its signature . is enough to conclude and show it was not deployed . you say no it was deployed , well bring your facts and evidence and proof , the ball is in your court sir

As I said, much of what Iran is fielding was not revealed before years and there was no evidence of deployment until Iran made it public. So just because no evidence is available, it doesn't imply Iran is not deploying it.

As for nobody picking up its signature, you don't know that. It's not as if the enemy is publishing every radar signal it's picking up from Iran.

would have gained alot but, there is a simple question why subsequent iranian air-defense system follow like 3rd of khordad, 15th of khordad , Bavar-373 , 9th of dey, zoobin, mersad-16,.... have far more similarity with western system .

The general science behind western and eastern systems is the same, it's the same physics. One can gain knowledge from studying a Russian system and incorporate that knowledge into the design of a domestic product whose outer looks might be completely different.

as i said you can't hide radar signature and you can't hide a radar from the eye of satellite

The enemy is not publishing this sort of information.

decoys and noisance are those are s-75 not s-3000 why you mistake them and no if the russian were willing to deliver the system iran only could get the compensation for late supply , it all come to the term of the deal

I'm not confusing anything, I'm stating the S-300 is integrated into the IADS and it's definitely not conceived of as a decoy, unlike what you were suggesting about Russian SAM systems present in Iran.

Iran would have gotten back the initial payments she made on top of compensation.

you say it happens but can't provide evidence ,the fact not this nor anything similar to it or anything that work in same radio band is used in our airdefense systems is evidence , we use that band only in our early warning radars

There are elements common to radars irregardless of the band they operate in.

as i said every single air defense have certain use , we have hundreds of those s-75 , its not me that said we don't use anything we get our hand on , it was you who said we didn't use s-300 because it was in low number

I never made such a statement about the S-300PM2. As for the Nebo radar, it was one hypothesis among others and not a definitive claim.

 

[sanel1412]

Hezbollah used Kosar AScM to hit Israel Corvette, at that time Noor was not yet delivered,and also Corvette was close to shore, Noor AScM has minimal range around 30km...Corvette was within visual range from shore, Noor has 160kg warhead, it would sunk Corvette easily.. Kosar AScM has 30kg warhead, range up to 20km, not need any infrastructure, model with EO/IR guidance is excellent for that range

 

[jauk]

yes but does the leadership even want an IRIAF is the question I asked ?

We can waste our days here talking about MIG-29, F-14, SU-35, Kowsar-I, but what if leadership itself does not want the force to survive?

They do not. There will be no conventional Air Force for Iran fortunately. F35s etc are retrograde thinking. Air forces will be manual UAVs transitioned to support roles of current craft to eventually independent AI driven units. It’s happening now as we speak. Cheap, fast, expendable and deadly. Any foreign craft delivered to Iran will have primarily TOT value and as operational craft a far second.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Depends on a lot of factors like point of impact and so on. Aso artillery rockets could have caused similar damage. It's not conclusive. So before Hezbollah revealed that they are in possession of the Kosar ASCM and that they used it against the zionist vessel, different possibilities remained plausible.

which artillery rocket was percise enough to hit a ship 20km away in 2006 and hezbollah had access to it. the damage was consistent with kowsar , why you want to argure on that , a noor even if exploded above the ship not after hitting it (which the missile actually hit the ship) would have completely destroyed upper part of the ship . it was a kowsar that hit the crane on the ship that was the reason for so little damage. the story of noor come from Zionist media because they wanted to hide the fact they taught the missile come from an Egyptian ship 100km away and fired a harpoon at it and destroyed it . it was all their damage control for their hilarious mistake

Depends on the situation, thee can be compelling reasons. These were just small quantities.

can be , may be , there also it can mean that they had so much they didn't care

They don't publish that information.

they don't publish that , they die to publish anything about Iran , they even fabricate a lot of stories about Iran to milk some certain countries south of Persian gulf

Not if Iranian planners see more use in dismantling and studying it.

At any rate, there's no proof it wasn't deployed.

dismantling , studying and then put all part together , won't even take 6 month.

As I said, much of what Iran is fielding was not revealed before years and there was no evidence of deployment until Iran made it public. So just because no evidence is available, it doesn't imply Iran is not deploying it.

not something that has such signature as a long range radar . that any radio enthusiast can pick up from hundreds of km away

The general science behind western and eastern systems is the same, it's the same physics. One can gain knowledge from studying a Russian system and incorporate that knowledge into the design of a domestic product whose outer looks might be completely different.

its the same yes no argument on that , but how you apply it , how you put together the system and..... are different . we used the band waves that western country use in their air defense system not the one that Russian do and like western countries decided to use those vhf radars in the integrated radar network not part of the air defense battery . Russia on other hand use those vhf radars as part of the air defense battery . i don't say we never going to add that to the battery in the future , but right now we decided go for mobility and and precision and my guess is we won't use those in air defense systems until we find a way to employ them in a manner that don't hamper the system mobility

I'm not confusing anything, I'm stating the S-300 is integrated into the IADS and it's definitely not conceived of as a decoy, unlike what you were suggesting about Russian SAM systems present in Iran.

Iran would have gotten back the initial payments she made on top of compensation.

where is say s-300 is decoy , i said s-75 role is only to be a decoy and make enemy busy or be used against targets like helicopters that don't have much capabilities at countering them

There are elements common to radars irregardless of the band they operate in.

namely , the band is different , russian radars untill recently were PESA while bavar and 3rd of khordad use AESA , the missiles are different , the launch system is different ...... one use E/O the other don't use it .
the similarity end at the point that both use radio wave in their radars

 

[SalarHaqq]

which artillery rocket was percise enough to hit a ship 20km away in 2006 and hezbollah had access to it.

Who exactly knew in 2006 the ship was hit from 20km away? I remember how peer-reviewed authors like Tom Cooper initially were doubting the use of an ASCM, simply because no details were given until a considerable amount of time after the war, and because available elements weren't conclusive enough.

the damage was consistent with kowsar , why you want to argure on that , a noor even if exploded above the ship not after hitting it (which the missile actually hit the ship) would have completely destroyed upper part of the ship .

With the level of information available to the public in 2006, it could have been a Nasr. Could have been rockets from closer range. Could have been a Noor malfunctioning, could have been many things to objective observers back then. Until the day Hezbollah revealed that they were fielding the Kosar and had indeed used it against the vessel. In the immediate aftermath of the war and based on the pictures of the damage however, it wasn't possible to draw definitive conclusions.

it was a kowsar that hit the crane on the ship that was the reason for so little damage. the story of noor come from Zionist media because they wanted to hide the fact they taught the missile come from an Egyptian ship 100km away and fired a harpoon at it and destroyed it . it was all their damage control for their hilarious mistake

I'm not doubting it was a Kosar. I'm saying the picture of the damaged ship by itself did not provide enough evidence that a Kosar was used. Scroll up to see what the point under discussion was all about.

can be , may be , there also it can mean that they had so much they didn't care

Meaning it doesn't provide actual proof.

they don't publish that , they die to publish anything about Iran , they even fabricate a lot of stories about Iran to milk some certain countries south of Persian gulf

Not everything. For op-sec reasons alone, they classify some of the data they have on Iran, frankly this is a no-brainer. Nobody in this world will reveal everything their intell could gather about adversaries they might enter an armed conflict with.

dismantling , studying and then put all part together , won't even take 6 month.

Unless the knowledge gleaned is added quickly to already existing expertise and that domestic production follows suit rapidly enough, so that it's not deemed worth it to integrate the radar into the IADS for just a short period of time.

not something that has such signature as a long range radar . that any radio enthusiast can pick up from hundreds of km away

Private radio enthusiasts are privy to the identity of military radar signatures?

its the same yes no argument on that , but how you apply it , how you put together the system and..... are different . we used the band waves that western country use in their air defense system not the one that Russian do and like western countries decided to use those vhf radars in the integrated radar network not part of the air defense battery . Russia on other hand use those vhf radars as part of the air defense battery . i don't say we never going to add that to the battery in the future , but right now we decided go for mobility and and precision and my guess is we won't use those in air defense systems until we find a way to employ them in a manner that don't hamper the system mobility

Which doesn't preclude extraction of useful technical knowledge from the study of that radar.

where is say s-300 is decoy , i said s-75 role is only to be a decoy and make enemy busy or be used against targets like helicopters that don't have much capabilities at countering them

The enemy won't confuse the S-75 for something else. And if it's a potent and cost-effective weapon against helicopters, then it means it has a niche utility to the Iranian IADS which justifies its continued depoyment. This is precisely what I've been stating all along.

namely , the band is different , russian radars untill recently were PESA while bavar and 3rd of khordad use AESA , the missiles are different , the launch system is different ...... one use E/O the other don't use it .
the similarity end at the point that both use radio wave in their radars

There's more than that to the general science behind radar technology.

 

[Hack-Hook]

With the level of information available to the public in 2006, it could have been a Nasr. Could have been rockets from closer range. Could have been a Noor malfunctioning, could have been many things to objective observers back then. Until the day Hezbollah revealed that they were fielding the Kosar and had indeed used it against the vessel. In the immediate aftermath of the war and based on the pictures of the damage however, it wasn't possible to draw definitive conclusions.

Nasr-1 tested by iran army in 2008 . at best in 2006 it was in development phase

Unless the knowledge gleaned is added quickly to already existing expertise and that domestic production follows suit rapidly enough, so that it's not deemed worth it to integrate the radar into the IADS for just a short period of time.

the knowledge can't be incorporated so fast , it take years .

Private radio enthusiasts are privy to the identity of military radar signatures?

they find USSR long range radar in eastern russia sooner than usa army . don't understimate it . but to the question nebu-svu is not exactly new , its radio signature is already well documented after Russia and Belarus used it in eastern Europe

The enemy won't confuse the S-75 for something else. And if it's a potent and cost-effective weapon against helicopters, then it means it has a niche utility to the Iranian IADS which justifies its continued depoyment. This is precisely what I've been stating all along.

no but he will be busy countering it that give chance to more robust system doing their work

There's more than that to the general science behind radar technology.

and its what ?, the general science , we knew it from the day we get our first radars, we didn't need to dismantle nebu-svu to learn that

 

[Sineva]

View attachment 872836View attachment 872837View attachment 872835

Close-up pic of 2 of the new glide bombs.

 

[Stryker1982]

Close-up pic of 2 of the new glide bombs.

That black bomb next to it is huge

 

[drmeson]

Do we know specs of the this large huge PGM ?

 

[Stryker1982]

@Mr Iran Eye Once again, you are proven right! And since the plan has been unveiled, I'm sure some prototypes have already been tested.

But my question is, how did you know this was being built?

He didn't know anything.

Everyone on this forum was aware their was a heavier turbofan engine at design if you look at past conversation, but wasn't sure about the progress, timeline or if it would be a copy of any Russian engine or fully indigenous.

We've all been waiting for it. This just confirms that Iran is eying a true heavy interceptor design, well beyond the capability of Kowsar. Things like Kowsar and Yasin is just the stepping stone that need to be done to get to that level, and hopefully the first heavy interceptor class system can be field tested by 2030. Maybe if Iran is much wealthier from a nuclear deal, it will be sooner.