IRIAF | News and Discussions

[yugocrosrb95]

The nonsense here is that you are speculating on things you don't understand and you have no sense of observation and no intuition. I maintain more than ever but prediction here that I made several times and we will see the results very soon. Learn to think carefully instead of polluting this forum of speculation worthy of a school child. Iran always gives us several clues so learn to see them well

And did you notice the f-4 SM (super upgraded) in the underground bunker? I'm sure not

Irony is that what you accuse and say against me applies the most to you of all people in here that is not capable of understanding simplest straightforward arguments.
This is not about predicting which you desperately cling on and grasping straws on about me making a prediction when I do not, you can't comprehend that.
This is about what Iran could do more efficiently by not limiting itself on aircraft with outdated aerodynamics when it can design new airframe designs.

F-4 Phantom II is flying brick with two engines that it has are wasted on it when strength of Iranian air force/power can be improved considerably.
For each F-4 there could be two fighter jets since single engine Kfic and F-16/79 were powered by J79 thus Iran could double its fighter jet fleet.
By creating a new aircraft that is designed to carry and use AIM-23B/Fakour-90 that for now only F-14's can mount and launch.

It is downright self sabotage by maintaining outdated aircraft when having capacity to design up to date design in terms of airframe aerodynamics/kinematics.
Opportunity to reduce drag and increase range and even carrying capacity while also reducing radar cross section and improving survivability.
Later on Iran could integrate new engine once they get to the point of being able to do so.

For example when Iran made Yasin jet trainer, once FJ44 equivalent engine is developed with comparable thrust then Yasin will shine like a phoenix.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

Irony is that what you accuse and say against me applies the most to you of all people in here that is not capable of understanding simplest straightforward arguments.
This is not about predicting which you desperately cling on and grasping straws on about me making a prediction when I do not, you can't comprehend that.
This is about what Iran could do more efficiently by not limiting itself on aircraft with outdated aerodynamics when it can design new airframe designs.

F-4 Phantom II is flying brick with two engines that it has are wasted on it when strength of Iranian air force/power can be improved considerably.
For each F-4 there could be two fighter jets since single engine Kfic and F-16/79 were powered by J79 thus Iran could double its fighter jet fleet.
By creating a new aircraft that is designed to carry and use AIM-23B/Fakour-90 that for now only F-14's can mount and launch.

It is downright self sabotage by maintaining outdated aircraft when having capacity to design up to date design in terms of airframe aerodynamics/kinematics.
Opportunity to reduce drag and increase range and even carrying capacity while also reducing radar cross section and improving survivability.
Later on Iran could integrate new engine once they get to the point of being able to do so.

For example when Iran made Yasin jet trainer, once FJ44 equivalent engine is developed with comparable thrust then Yasin will shine like a phoenix.

Another empty comment! I was the only one who predicted that Iran would make an announcement about a fighter jet bunker a few months ago and when I predicted it I said it was coming soon and now it's done

You are a poor observer but in fact, in real life you will see very soon what I say is true, verifiable and it will be confirmed. The F4-SM is a deceptive aircraft not to be taken lightly and you haven't yet understood why they made new airframes for the F-4.

For the engines, I stop repeating how you are wrong on the subject, they already exist, yes yes yes. There will be a DOUBLE surprise on the subject

Uneducated trolls and we are always behind the facts

 

[Arash1991]

When I read the comments about the Iranian Air Force in the past, I often read the question why Iran hardly invests in its air force. And often such discussions have come to the conclusion that the air force is neglected in favor of ground-based air defense, drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. In particular, the own development of a 4+ generation fighter jet or the purchase would not be worthwhile, etc.

The fact that Iran is now also using such expensive underground facilities for the stationing of fighter aircraft indicates to me that Iran will invest more in the air force in the near future. I don't think it will be just buying the Su 35, but that we can expect advanced fighter jets of our own in the current decade. I can't imagine that there will be several of these underground plants to protect an air force that was partly acquired more than 50 years ago (F-4) and whose first prototypes were developed almost 70 years ago. (First prototypes of the F-4 flew in 1954).
There is a deeper sense in building these underground facilities and there is also a deeper sense in making this public at exactly this time.

Apparently, certain groups were supposed to receive a specific message at that exact moment.

The fact that Iran buys Su 35 flankers and wants to protect them in the future also has to do with this. But the fact that several more of these facilities are to be built and perhaps already exist indicates that the program of the air force has larger dimensions than we have previously suspected.

 

[Stryker1982]

When I read the comments about the Iranian Air Force in the past, I often read the question why Iran hardly invests in its air force. And often such discussions have come to the conclusion that the air force is neglected in favor of ground-based air defense, drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. In particular, the own development of a 4+ generation fighter jet or the purchase would not be worthwhile, etc.

The fact that Iran is now also using such expensive underground facilities for the stationing of fighter aircraft indicates to me that Iran will invest more in the air force in the near future. I don't think it will be just buying the Su 35, but that we can expect advanced fighter jets of our own in the current decade. I can't imagine that there will be several of these underground plants to protect an air force that was partly acquired more than 50 years ago (F-4) and whose first prototypes were developed almost 70 years ago. (First prototypes of the F-4 flew in 1954).
There is a deeper sense in building these underground facilities and there is also a deeper sense in making this public at exactly this time.

Apparently, certain groups were supposed to receive a specific message at that exact moment.

The fact that Iran buys Su 35 flankers and wants to protect them in the future also has to do with this. But the fact that several more of these facilities are to be built and perhaps already exist indicates that the program of the air force has larger dimensions than we have previously suspected.

Appears so.

Advancements in avionics are apparent.
Advancements in precision bombs, targeting pods and ECM/DECM
Advancements in additive capabilities, such as upgrading old aircraft to carry Iranian ALCM, and ALBMs
UCAVs are also able to carry small diameter glide bombs
Safe housing is constructed (Likely more exists than we know of)
Acquisition of foreign fighters.
Clear path to a heavy turbofan engine is being developed.

 

[Arash1991]

one bunker buster for each entrance

This does not necessarily mean that the entrances must remain permanently blocked and that a bunker buster bomb must severely damage the entrances. Depending on how the repair teams are trained and what resources they have at their disposal, such entrances can also be cleared quickly.

And yes, if the U.S. can actually carry out bomber missions at such depths, then they must have taken out the Iranian air force and especially the air defense beforehand. If that is the case, then I assume that the war is at a stage where the overall strategic situation looks hopeless anyway.

But a lot has to happen before that happens. If it is a one-time attack, then the damage should be repaired quickly (a few days).

If a runway is bombed, the US engineering units, for example, are able to repair the runway within a few hours or days, depending on the extent of the damage.

The thing that really hurts the operational capability of an airbase over a long period of time is when supplies are compromised. So fuel tanks, repair and maintenance buildings and hangars, power supply or air traffic control facilities such as towers and command centers, or major supply roads (if they cross major passes or bridges and are the only links to the airport).

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Another empty comment! I was the only one who predicted that Iran would make an announcement about a fighter jet bunker a few months ago and when I predicted it I said it was coming soon and now it's done

You are a poor observer but in fact, in real life you will see very soon what I say is true, verifiable and it will be confirmed. The F4-SM is a deceptive aircraft not to be taken lightly and you haven't yet understood why they made new airframes for the F-4.

For the engines, I stop repeating how you are wrong on the subject, they already exist, yes yes yes. There will be a DOUBLE surprise on the subject

Uneducated trolls and we are always behind the facts

As expect you prove my point and don't understand what I stated. xD

 

[Arash1991]

on the one hand, this circumstance also makes an underground air force base vulnerable (although less than an above-ground one, but there are still weaknesses), on the other hand, bombing an air force base is not just limited to destroying enemy aircraft. You have to differentiate between tactical and strategic damage. Strategic damage usually has a long-term or lasting effect, but the effect of this can often only occur after days or sometimes months, since in this case the fighter jets could certainly still fly a few missions (even without maintenance buildings or without large kerosene tanks because there may also be occasional fuel can lie around somewhere else). Tactical bombing doesn't necessarily have to have a long-term or lasting effect, but the effect is usually instantaneous. If a runway is bombed or fighter jets are down, the damage can often be repaired in a few days or with the next purchase.

For permanent strategic bombing of Iran, the USA would need permanent air superiority. This would mean that the US would have to permanently disable Iran's air defenses before being able to launch such strikes.

 

[Stryker1982]

But a lot has to happen before that happens. If it is a one-time attack, then the damage should be repaired quickly (a few days).

Honestly think it should be alot faster than this. A bulldozer should be able to clear the debris in a few hours.

 

[glablo]

Fighter jets move around, and there are numerous air force bases in the country.
Therefore, the story of finding and destroying all enemy air forces in the first wave is an illusion, and the majority of Iraqi aircraft in the Gulf War either remained hidden or defected to Iran, overcoming U.S. forces.
Even in Ukraine today, Su-25s and other fighter are still appearing on the front lines.
Meanwhile, a few huge and conspicuous underground air bases will be neutralized with only a few bunker busters to seal off the entrances
Perhaps Iran even opened up the entrances to be concealed because it understands that in modern warfare, they are useless.
The tunnels and entrances are clearly dilapidated, indicating that they were built in the olden days.

 

[jauk]

When I read the comments about the Iranian Air Force in the past, I often read the question why Iran hardly invests in its air force. And often such discussions have come to the conclusion that the air force is neglected in favor of ground-based air defense, drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. In particular, the own development of a 4+ generation fighter jet or the purchase would not be worthwhile, etc.

The fact that Iran is now also using such expensive underground facilities for the stationing of fighter aircraft indicates to me that Iran will invest more in the air force in the near future. I don't think it will be just buying the Su 35, but that we can expect advanced fighter jets of our own in the current decade. I can't imagine that there will be several of these underground plants to protect an air force that was partly acquired more than 50 years ago (F-4) and whose first prototypes were developed almost 70 years ago. (First prototypes of the F-4 flew in 1954).
There is a deeper sense in building these underground facilities and there is also a deeper sense in making this public at exactly this time.

Apparently, certain groups were supposed to receive a specific message at that exact moment.

The fact that Iran buys Su 35 flankers and wants to protect them in the future also has to do with this. But the fact that several more of these facilities are to be built and perhaps already exist indicates that the program of the air force has larger dimensions than we have previously suspected.

Caution, the main contention is not whether Iran will have a substantive ‘Air Force’. The claim is that the future Air Force, built on Iranian tech, will be fundamentally unmanned. The underground facilities do substantiate a considerable investment in air assets but not manned ones.

In fact, everything points to an unmanned backbone rather than a retrograde manned Air Force.

 

[Hack-Hook]

This does not necessarily mean that the entrances must remain permanently blocked and that a bunker buster bomb must severely damage the entrances. Depending on how the repair teams are trained and what resources they have at their disposal, such entrances can also be cleared quickly.

And yes, if the U.S. can actually carry out bomber missions at such depths, then they must have taken out the Iranian air force and especially the air defense beforehand. If that is the case, then I assume that the war is at a stage where the overall strategic situation looks hopeless anyway.

But a lot has to happen before that happens. If it is a one-time attack, then the damage should be repaired quickly (a few days).

If a runway is bombed, the US engineering units, for example, are able to repair the runway within a few hours or days, depending on the extent of the damage.

The thing that really hurts the operational capability of an airbase over a long period of time is when supplies are compromised. So fuel tanks, repair and maintenance buildings and hangars, power supply or air traffic control facilities such as towers and command centers, or major supply roads (if they cross major passes or bridges and are the only links to the airport).

Not necessary, there cruise missiles designed for such role.
And today's bunker busters are very powerful, one modern one is enough for that.
Another problem with deploying fighters in such bases is the time it take for deployment. And the pictures also showed only F4.
Not mig_29 or f14 or f5

 

[TheImmortal]

Special alloy mesh net above the entrance can shred an incoming munition causing it to predetonate.

GPS jammers deployed near the base during wartime means PGMs will lose their accuracy of 1-5 meters and thus be unable to accurately strike the tight window that is the entrance.

Lastly these airbases will be located in densley packed air defense kill zones made up of S/300-Bavar then medium tier kill systems like Khordad and lastly short range systems like Dezful and Majid.

Too many people here think this is a Hollywood movie, just send in an airplane he just drops one bomb and there goes the entrance. Come on stop watching Star Wars and get real.

Underground airbases have been around since the 40’s and nuclear proof underground air bases have been around since the Cold War.

World militaries know more than random guys on the internet.

 

[thesaint]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1623054399559045120

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

Not to mention that to protect sensitive sites, Iran will have a huge artillery system. Enemy missiles will have great difficulty breaking through Iran's multi-layered defense. I also expect soon an announcement of an intelligent and powerful artillery system which is surely the Iranian pantsir

 

[husseinibnali]

I noticed several points on the underground base subject i would like to share with my friends here:

1-The base which satellite imagery proved its newly constructed and is still under construction in north western Hormouzgan province is a new thing and not old secret which was just unveiled and says that it is a new important shift in the airforce strategic thinking.

2-General Bagheri said the base will be the first of several bases around the country that will be built under the mountains and that means it will be a part of a comprehensive strategic shift to protect the airforce from first strike.

3-I can surley say that the bases were not built to recieve the old known jets like the F-4 only, its a new begining for the airforce to protect the new toys to be recieved soon either is it local or purchased from abroad.

4-This new factor makes me think if they plan to remove all the airforce to those new bases which i think is the most probable or they just going to move part of it.

5-Last but not least,what will the old known airforce bases used for and by whom if my guess is true.