IRIAF | News and Discussions

[pin gu]

I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist.

IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC.

Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality.

Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe.

All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF.

I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe.

yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?

your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .

I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .

In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.

I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )

I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .

about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .

 

[VEVAK]

I will get a lot of flak from fellow countrymen for saying this but I choose to be a realist.

IRIAF has suffered less because of sanctions compared to the damage that came from internal politics of IRI post Nojeh Coup some 37 years ago. Generation of soldiers in our conventional military has changed since then but majority of the mullahs from that time are still alive and active in the govt. They would never let a conventional military arm to develop to the point that it can parallel their own military arm called the IRGC.

Do you guys seriously believe that IRI with 19th largest foreign reserves, engaged in 3 proxy wars, can't afford 120-150 4+ jets or a TOT for such thing ? that's a lie created by apologists and idiots who want to bury their heads in ground rather than face reality.

Khomeini era Mullahs have done exceptionally well. They have guarded our country, they have destroyed and taken the fight to our enemies through military and political maneuvering but they have always been doubtful of our conventional armed forces. This goes back actually, as soon as war stopped, there were orders for 148 Mig-29 and high numbers of Su-24 out of which only 22 came. So there was need that was not fulfilled. What did Tehran do ? nothing ... In late 90s there was option for high numbers (may be up-to 10-12 squadrons) of Mirage F-1C (or customized up-gradated version upto Spanish M standard). What became of it ? Nothing ... At-least an investment in TOT would have made sense may be with china (in LCA FC-1 and MRCA FC-20). Almost every serious regional country has TOT plants for fourth generation fighters except for IRI because there is no will and there has never been any. Common arguments are like Russians do not sell, Chinese planes are not liked by IRIAF, Western fighters are out of reach ? Chinese fighters are not liked by IRIAF, they must be hell excited for ex Vietnamese F-5EF rebuilt/welded steel mutants called Saeghe.

All this when recently lots of money was wasted on old bomb trucks Su-22 to equip IRGC-AF.

I personally believe that IRIAF should be merged with IRGC-AF under command of govt. trusted IRGC General so that this doubtful mentality can cease to exist and Iran can again have a glorious AF like it always had. Do not forget It was IRIAF that failed baathists in 80s war. We downed 159 baathists jets using our front line fighter while losing just 3 of ours. Why ? Because we had that machine in our hands. Now we have nothing. I like Mullahs, I like Shah ... I don't care who runs Tehran, I just want Iran to be safe.

yes our AD is getting stronger, our Missile force can knock teeth out regionally ... but we cant ignore our AF and that is a fact. Our regional alliance has won Syrian and Iraqi battles because of air power. What if Kremlin would have decided otherwise .... ?

FYI the day's where the government was scared of the Artesh gaining too much power is long passed my friend! Those are nothing but western delusions!

I would not mix the IRIAF with IRGC Aerospace forces if you want to shake up the IRIAF then sack the head of the IRIAF specifically for a lack of innovation

Fact is IRIAF has no one to blame but it's self!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1.Iran's Navy is building it's own Ships and Subs many of which were developed by it's own personal & proper management and coordination with Iran's Defense Industry & they are far ahead of the IRGC Navy!

2.IRGC Aerospace forces are building Advanced Ballistic Missiles & UAV's far more capable than most Air Force UAV's & it's not because of funding!

3.Iran's Artesh Ground Forces are building various types of equipment some impressive & some not so much

4. Iran's Air Defense Forces are building various radars & SAM's that are very impressive

And yes they all did it by cooperating with various defense industry companies!

BUT What have IRIAF commanders done when faced with sanctions in terms of innovation not upkeep?????

IRIAF has highly educated personal, they have tools & facilities required to build many of the parts plus the tools they didn't have they could and should have built so they can develop their own Jet engines & prototypes and if they had built a prototype worth producing then they could of handed it over to the defense industry for production!

If your country is being sanctioned & prohibited from buying Aircraft then they are at war with you! And it may be a different type of war but still you need to adjust yourself and your command decisions accordingly!

By 2005 Iran's Air Force should have built all the tools and facilities required to at the very least build a full scale working prototype of a new Air Frame and an new engine every two years
For the prototypes you use parts already available F-14 Landing Gears, F-4 Cockpit, F-4 J-79 Engines & all Airframes equipped with internal weapons bays with low RCS & IRST built in!
By now they should have had 5 designs of Airframes & Engines combined the best of the best & started production

 

[VEVAK]

your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .

I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .

In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.

I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )

I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .

about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .

 

[VEVAK]

your concern about airforce deeply connected to our defense doctrine and our neighbors behavior .
right now its possible for us to buy huge number of fighters like su-30 but lets calculate what will happen if we do it . if we buy huge number of fighters ( more than 100 ) its possible that Russians will agree to some terms of TOT but after that our neighbors mainly SA and co will even buy more arms mostly from US that will lead our region to more militarized zone which is opposite of our foreign policy .

I'm newbie in military equipment and stuff but as far as I know Su-30 is multirole fighter and its capabilities on air to air fights will not be that good and providing air superiority will not be possible for us against our rivals. still su-30 is good bomber .

In that regard we have our light fighters like F-5(local saeghe ) as you mentioned .
compare to Su-30 our saeghe is cheaper , we produce it locally , sub systems are Iranian , we rely on ourself for building its missiles and bombs plus we have years of experience with our F-5.

I say all this not the way disrespecting Su-30 or its capabilities I know its one hell of fighter and amazing airplane but unfortunately it has not a lot to offer us from cost - benefit point of view
I think at best we are going to buy under 50 in long term deal like 12-24 su-30 in first 3 years then 12-24 more in next 3-5 years ( if we can reach deal with Russians )

I want to point out even IF we had capability to produce su-30 locally right now we would never build a lot in first 10 years may be same 3-4 squadron because arms race effect . and after that just replace our old F-5s with new Su-30s .

about other part yes after revolution new system was unstable so it was necessary to protect it with loyal army ( sepah ) . but today both Army or Irgc are strong arms of country so its not logical to keep Army behind as you can see alots of things changed on ground in these years .

Buying Aircrafts that you can't maintain, build parts & weapons for goes against Iran's defense doctrine but if they agree to a technology transfer of all components of a Su-30 I believe Iran would buy a large number +200 because that's a technology boost in various fields so it wouldn't be just about the Air Force!

But I agree if the Russians don't agree to licensed production of all components and don't give Iran access to the weapons system and the ability to build it's own spare parts then Iran might at maximum agree to buy a maximum of 50-60 units but even that they would at the very least have to agree on an assembly line inside Iran because Iranian laws prohibit such sales!
But 50-60 will only be for Air Superiority over Iranian Airspace

At a minimum It will cost Iran upwards of $150 Million USD per unit to purchase a simple Su-30 (Aircraft, Spare Parts, Pilot Gear, Training equipment, limited weapons) And that doesn't include the cost of training a pilot for years before they can even fly such an aircraft, fuel cost & upkeep of the Aircraft.
With that money Iran can build 150 $1million usd cruise missiles and take out one or at max 2 Airbases within 1500km of Iranian boarders with fairly good accuracy! And then use it's UAV's, Su-24's & F-4's to do the rest

I disagree on Saeghe & Azarakhsh (F-5) other than to be used as trainers I believe Iran's experience in the Iran-Iraq war has showed them to be quite useless

F-5's don't have the payload capacity, their Engines are too small & weak and lack the endurance required for Air-Air refueling
And Iran and a few other countries have added Air refueling capability on some of their F-5's but the aircraft's airframe & engines are not built for it

Iran can build engines and Air Frames in limited numbers & the tools and hours required to build a J-85 engine is roughly the same it would be if you were going to build something double that size using the same amount of moving parts and it would be easer to make some of the parts sturdier and stronger like the ball bearings and you can potentially get a lot more power out of it
Same with the Airframe Iran will always be limited in the numbers they can build so you might as well build something bigger with the potential of carrying more advanced electronics from IRST to Radars


I think Iran can take the J-79 replace half the moving compressors in the front half with larger fixed Airflow blades and add a bigger fan upfront (not by making the fans longer rather the design of the casing wider designed in a way so you can have limited bypass (it would be better if it had 2 CRP's) And then you up grade the combustion chamber & fuel injection system the J-79 was built in the 60's so there are many upgrades within Iran's capability to do if they choose to


I think Iran should invest in building bigger engines using different types of fuel like bigger LNG based engines on a bigger low RCS fighter & work towards making the combustion chambers sturdier & more compact capable taking in a mixture of high pressure vaporized LNG + conventional spray

 

[AmirPatriot]

Airpower is good for low intensity warfare and there UAVs are the future. The resource difference is magnitudes. Some info:

Except that a combat aircraft has certain advantages over a missile. Namely payload, and reusability.

You gave a typical CAS cost. I found a helpful site which gives F-15E loadouts.

Take this mixed CAS loadout, for OEF (Operation Enduring Freedom) in Afghanistan.

http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/weapon...s/125-enduring-freedom#0-5-loadout-5-mixedcas

That is about 4 tons worth of air to ground munitions (not counting the air-to-air munitions). Assuming a Fateh-313 has a 650 kg warhead and costs $1 million, to achieve the same effect as a single F-15E you'd have to expend about 6 Fatehs, costing $6 million.

So your 1 F-15E sortie costing approx. $220,000 is about 27 times cheaper than a Fateh attack.

Of course, a F-15E costs $44 million to buy. But after 8 missions, your Fatehs have cost $48 million and your F-15E $46 million. Assuming your F-15E survives at least 8 missions (they survive more...), you are saving money with a proper air force. And besides, with the F-15 you can hit 8 targets, with the Fateh only 6.

Now, even if you are optimistic and say a Fateh-313 costs $500,000 (personally I don't think so), that would be 16 missions. Still pretty good.

I've said this before, missiles should be used to penetrate and destroy air defences, as well as to strike high value targets. Aircraft should defend airspace and when on the offensive, clean up. Then keep the enemy's head down with their high payload capacity.

 

[PeeD]

@AmirPatriot

Good calculation. However I wasn't talking about missiles, I said UAVs are the future for low intensity warfare. The graphics I provided show data in favor for UAVs.

Missiles are for high intensity warfare and in total more expensive than airpower as you pointed out, more so if you want to use it down to CAS. The least expensive way is to end the high intensity warfare with missiles and simply start a ground operation with artillery for the low intensity portion of the conflict.

PS: I think the Fateh-313 costs significantly less than 500k $ a piece for Iran but that's speculation

 

[AmirPatriot]

@AmirPatriot

Good calculation. However I wasn't talking about missiles, I said UAVs are the future for low intensity warfare. The graphics I provided show data in favor for UAVs.

Missiles are for high intensity warfare and in total more expensive than airpower as you pointed out, more so if you want to use it down to CAS. The least expensive way is to end the high intensity warfare with missiles and simply start a ground operation with artillery for the low intensity portion of the conflict.

PS: I think the Fateh-313 costs significantly less than 500k $ a piece for Iran but that's speculation

But all high intensity warfare does not require missiles. Striking enemy supply lines and and especially industry would be much easier with aircraft. You can save your missiles for high value targets - air defence sites, runways, command and control etc. Then with the air defence and airfields degraded, the air force can go against a weakened opposition and achieve air superiority. With the high payload capacity of aircraft they can take out enemy hardened aircraft shelters to achieve air supremacy. Then, if the war is serious enough, industry can be targeted. Considering Iran's current regional enemies, that can mean oil production/refineries, ports etc.

All this can be done very rapidly. Air fields can be repaired quickly, and missiles are not always accurate, numerous or effective enough to keep them down for sufficient time. One would expect a massive missile swarm to destroy air defence sites and make runways inoperable. With aerial enemy air defence (both ground and air based) degraded or destroyed, the air force would have a much freer hand in enemy airspace, allowing it to pummel runways which may have only sustained minor damage, as well as destroy enemy aircraft on the ground - much easier with the firepower and precision of aircraft. All of this paragraph could be done in less than 24 hours, if you have enough missiles and TELs.

 

[rahi2357]

BMs and jets are different animals And we need both .No Question about it .
But when you can't afford jets then tactical BMs and CMs are the best pain killers .
Guys we need a proper air force , otherwise " we need nukes " , As dear @OldTwilight always says .

 

[PeeD]

@AmirPatriot

The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.

The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.

You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.

I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure.

Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.

The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.

That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.

In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.

 

[TheImmortal]

1.Iran's Navy is building it's own Ships and Subs many of which were developed by it's own personal & proper management and coordination with Iran's Defense Industry & they are far ahead of the IRGC Navy!
squadron

I disagree with this post.

1) Iran's (military) shipbuilding is quite simply a joke.

Jamaran was unveiled what 10 years ago? How many mowj and mowj upgrade variants are in commission? Two?

2 small 1970 era design corvettes in 10 years is terrible build rate.

There have been no new Ghadir subs produced in 5 years.

The Fateh sub was built with such low quality materials that it had to be rebuilt! A long delayed project.

The Khalij destroyer project is no where to be found outside of plastic toy models.

At this rate Iran won't have a decent navy for another 25+ years!

Second your comparison of Iran Navy and IRGC Navy is flawed. They are operating two different doctrines.

Iran Navy is a blue ocean Navy (or at least it desires this capability). Thus it will be built with traditional naval ship structure (subs, destroyers, frigates, etc)

IRGC Navy is focused on coastline and khalij defense. Operation prey mantis showed even with the latest navy ships, the US could demolish Iran ships on a ship vs ship basis. US has been building naval ships since pre-WWI (you could say prior to 1800s)

Thus the IRGC developed a low cost asymmetric swarm technique. They are focused on fast highly maneuverable low RCS speedboats that can fire cruise missiles.

 

[AmirPatriot]

@AmirPatriot

The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.

The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.

You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.

I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure.

Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.

The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.

That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.

In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.

I strongly disagree.

I deliberately said enemy air defence would be "degraded" not destroyed. It is not easy to be sure when you are using missiles and therefore cannot be sure of the destruction of your targets, since they have not been launched from an aircraft than could confirm this. Iran's current UAV (and to a smaller degree RF-4E, if it is even operational anymore) based aerial reconnaissance capability can only really enter permissive airspace.

I therefore think it would be foolish to send UCAVs with no self defence capabilities when even a few aircraft that remained airborne or are using foreign airbases survive or a few remaining batteries that used movement effectively could slaughter them in the air.

Furthermore, I don't think UCAVs with a few Sadid PGMs each would be nearly enough firepower. I already said that airpower would be used to deliver the major firepower after the missiles have taken out high priority/capability targets. A 35 kg Sadid will NOT punch through a hardened aircraft shelter. It would scratch it. Same for runways. It would NOT do major damage to heavy industry.

There is a VERY good reason why the US uses 2000 lb GBU-31s, why the Russians have their KAB-1500L, why the Israelis, French and British have their special runway destroying bombs.

A dual track approach is the best. It is what the US follows, except instead of ballistic missiles they use cruise missile swarms.

Moreover I'm still of the opinion that Iran needs aircraft for air defence and future A2/AD roles. Modern fighter aircraft almost always have a multirole capability and to not take advantage of this would be a waste of assets.

 

[PeeD]

Agreed, you can not be sure whether the enemies air defense is sufficiently degraded to be inoperational.

Then there is the question is it necessary to have air superiority over the whole airspace of the enemy? High value targets deep inside the country are the task for the BM/CM force. All the rest like CAS takes place close to the front. A Bavar-373 close to the front will reach around 300km into the enemies airspace. For all that 300km, the UACV force could operate against a degraded enemy and do all the hauling.

In your mind is a high offensive capability, there a smaller fleet of PAK-FA or Mig-31BM would be good to finish-off the remaining airpower deeper in the enemy country, agreed.
What I'm talking about is the bombing capability beside the missile force that Iran currently lacks in Syria. I advocate the use of smaller UACV swarms for that purpose not fighter/bombers.
Now you added the requirement to establish complete air superiority over the complete enemy airspace. Good for that luxury 100 Mig-31BM would be quite useful. Lets see where Iran wants to get with the Qaher-313, it might be that added capability.

Irans first serious capability was establishing the offensive missile force, result is a high intensity paralyzing capability that could on it's own end the conflict.

The came a SAM force will become operational soon that can reach deep into a neighboring airspace, protect the own airspace, the own offensive missile forces and contest airspace over the front.

In future an UACV fleet will become operational that can also do the low intensity bombardment portion of the conflict if the enemy don't come to the table after the high intensity missile phase.

After that the capability could be extended with those 100 Mig-31 to establish airsuperiority over the whole enemy airspace to completely dominate it.

And after that another luxury will be added that increases the warfighting capability.


As for the firepower: the 35kg Sadid will be sufficient for 70% of the targets during a war. All the rest could be done by RQ-170 size UACV with 2 one ton bombs each. In fact, if the +5000m altitude capability is degraded sufficiently, something like a C-130 bomber variant could do the heavy bombing...


One has to realize that Iran is confronted with opponents with up to 10 times the defense budget regionally and 100 times globally. If you want to win a war against such a superiority, you can't do it with their methods. If Iran would go for a conventional airpower competition, it would never be able to win a war against them. It's a true trap.

 

[VEVAK]

I disagree with this post.

1) Iran's (military) shipbuilding is quite simply a joke.

Jamaran was unveiled what 10 years ago? How many mowj and mowj upgrade variants are in commission? Two?

2 small 1970 era design corvettes in 10 years is terrible build rate.

There have been no new Ghadir subs produced in 5 years.

The Fateh sub was built with such low quality materials that it had to be rebuilt! A long delayed project.

The Khalij destroyer project is no where to be found outside of plastic toy models.

At this rate Iran won't have a decent navy for another 25+ years!

Second your comparison of Iran Navy and IRGC Navy is flawed. They are operating two different doctrines.

Iran Navy is a blue ocean Navy (or at least it desires this capability). Thus it will be built with traditional naval ship structure (subs, destroyers, frigates, etc)

IRGC Navy is focused on coastline and khalij defense. Operation prey mantis showed even with the latest navy ships, the US could demolish Iran ships on a ship vs ship basis. US has been building naval ships since pre-WWI (you could say prior to 1800s)

Thus the IRGC developed a low cost asymmetric swarm technique. They are focused on fast highly maneuverable low RCS speedboats that can fire cruise missiles.

1st I'm NOT talking about Tactics I'm talking about equipment!
2ndly Your knowledge about how Iran's military is structured & the equipment Iran's Navy is producing is quite limited!

3rd You don't know anything all you know is what Iran chooses to show on TV & the idea that Iran hasn't built a Ghadir Sub in the past 5 years is only in your head!

Here is a small glimpse
Iran's Navy designs, builds overhauls & upgrades all of it's own vessels & this is also how Iran trains future engineers that are not only educated but also experienced for the countries civilian ship industry

As for your delusions about what limited equipment they build:

So in terms of large ships they 1st built the Jamaran then the Damavand frigtates then they shift focus on a research vessel & then went back to finishing the Sahand frigate (They can deploy it within weeks if they needed too)
In terms of equipment every ship has been more advanced than the one before in terms of equipment!

So far they have built 5 Missile Boats with the 6th being almost completed (They also have 3-4 Missile Boat halls completed but they haven't been a priority so they've been sitting around for years) and newer Iranian missile boats are more advance than some countries corvettes

Aside from those they have built Hovercrafts, Landing Crafts, Training equipment & simulators, various types of weapons from Naval Cannons to mines & torpedo's, various types of sensors from radars to sonars, large naval facilities for naval research & development, Dry docks, portable dry-docks, tugboats, a new large Naval port is currently under development, Iran navy has built mine layer & countermeasures...

Iran's navy has built 2 classes of SDV, Nahang Sub(was Iran's 1st sub), Ghadir Subs Iran's 2nd sub class has been produced in large numbers & to this day Iran plays around with the hall design with some being wider and other longer, Fatteh Sub & yes the 1st one had problems but SO WHAT? Iran just learned how not to do a thing that's normal in R&D & Beesat Sub that's under development

Iran's Navy's Overhaul & Upgrade program goes unnoticed but Iran has overhauled & upgraded everything from it's largest ship Kharg & to costal patrol vessels to it's corvettes & frigates.

So you see if Iran's Naval commanders were stupide they could have easily just focused their efforts on building a bunch of large warship & importing some of the harder equipment to produce! But then I think any intelligent person could have easily told you what would of happened then....

A truly domestic & independent Navy needs Research Vessels & Facilities, Training Equipment & simulators, In shore and off shore Repair & logistical support equipment & vessels of all types from tugboats & landing crafts to Warships & subs!

 

[VEVAK]

@AmirPatriot

The term aircraft can be replaced with UACV in your post.

The high intensity phase of the conflict is fought by missiles. In the first hours the enemy airpower and airdefense is degraded to a extend that higher tier systems are out of action --> the point when air superiority can be established at 5000m+ altitude, UACV swarms can literally rule the airspace.
At that point, the high amount of ordnance can be delivered at 6000m altitude by cheap UACVs.

You can also use manned jet fighter-bombers, but for what reason? There is no need for the additional capabilities they offer. They were designed to fight in situations where no air superiority is established and hence have fuel thirsty, maintenance heavy high power turbines, high power AA mode radars, complex maneuverability and G load optimized airframes and highly trained pilots. All this is paid for in acquisition cost and operation costs.

I'm talking about a capability that is not there yet, about a future force structure.

Iran has came too far to move back and try to have an expensive air power component that can fight a limited high intensity conflict.
But for low intensity, to put it simply; piston engine equipped Shahed-129 with just ~150kg playload capability can rule the enemy airspace if no asset for +5000m altitude targets is left operational.

The difference is so grave an significant that for a single F-35, I expect the acquisition of a fleet of 400 Shahaed-129, cost wise.

That small IRGC-ASF "RQ-170 like" fyling wing UACV with 4, 35kg Sadid PGMs. This is the right direction, cost-effective expandable UACVs swarms which just have to fight in low intensity environment.

In the end cost decides and this novel approach wins there hands down.

There is what Iran's minimum capabilities should be and what Iran's future potential should be!

In terms of Aircraft the U.S. is already developing 6th Gen aircraft who will be twin seat & the rear pilot will be controlling other UCAV(s). But now ask yourself why? why not strictly rely on SATCOM & make all your 6th gen fighters unmanned?

And the answer is simple!
1st You don't put all your eggs in one basket because their is a chance that your communication can be jammed, hacked, or destroyed whether it be on the ground or in space!

2ndly The simple fact is fixed sites & satellites in a fixed orbit are easier to disrupt or destroy for a country that has that capability as oppose to a fast moving LOW RCS Aircraft moving around at different altitudes....

3rd A prepared Air Force using Early Warning Systems & other sensors can scramble it's aircraft in the Air Before cruise missiles have time to reach that facility & larger conventional Ballistic Missiles currently don't have the accuracy to hit targets accurately enough to destroy a well protected Aircraft bunker (Plus that's not the type of weapon Iran is facing)

So to build a military without an Air Force equipped without Fighter Jets, Air born early warning systems & sensors is to build a military based on the assumption that your enemy is stupid & they are not going to target your Radars, Early Warning Systems, sensors & communication sites using a blitz missiles attack before they send in their Air Force when in reality those are the 1st targets they'll be going after to make their enemy Death(communication), Dumb(taking out command centers) & Blind (Taking out radars & sensors of all types)

So although having UAV's that can do all types of tasks is very important BUT at the end of the day you can not replace one for the other! And Iran needs both manned fighter jets & manned airborne sensors AND UAV's & UCAV all types


Now whether Iran should buy fighter Jets like the Su-30 or Build our own well that depends on if that's going to be a technology transfer or NOT!
If it's a technology transfer where Iran fully gains the ability to build the Air Frame, Engine, Radar, sensors, weapons & weapons system then yes I would invest in it even if the minimum order is 300 Aircraft & even if the cost is $100Billion to be paid at a rate of $10 Billion USD a year for the next ten years

But if it's not a full tech transfer then NO! Iran needs to invest in building it's own and small low payload fighter like the Saegheh, Kowsar, Q-313,... are NOT the way!

 

[Stryker1982]

Agreed, you can not be sure whether the enemies air defense is sufficiently degraded to be inoperational.



In future an UACV fleet will become operational that can also do the low intensity bombardment portion of the conflict if the enemy don't come to the table after the high intensity missile phase.

I'm curious at what UACV fleet you speak of. I don't remember Iran having any operational UACV fleet that can drop heavy payloads. Shahid-129 seems to be proven, but Iran has unvield man armed drones but we've yet to see if they truly work. Like the RQ-170 model bomber a while ago. I only wish the Sadid was like a Yankee hellfire missile but it seems to be more of a bomb with a small payload than a rocket. If Iran wants a deadly UACV capability it would require better and more powerful engines in order to carry heavier payloads. This is something we have always had a problem with. Engines!!!