What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

Sorry for the late response @PeeD.

No worries.

Again, it has Titanium load structures. Besides, those wings are very thin, whereas Qaher's are quite thick.

Actually we don't know what it is, its just likely Ti. The RQ-170 wings are equally thick as those on the F-313, only getting thinner as they extend. Actually thicker wingroots are better for the structural connection, enabling the use of materials with high volume / mechanical strength ratio like composites.
Anyway, if it is Ti on the RQ-170, it could be primary due to the extrem length of the fueled wings, as said.

I was talking more about the pylons themselves, though now I think on it a bit more, the pylons can be removed, like those on the F-35 and F-22.

Though I'm still not convinced that something like a 2000 lb bomb will not prevent the bomb bay doors from opening, which would mean, considering the fact that the AIM-54 is actually bigger than a GBU-31, another 4000 lb of unused capacity.

No issue if designed correctly.

That is more to do with depriving it of it's energy reserves rather than outright dodging. If you detect a missile, say, 50 km away, you can turn around and make manoeuvres into different altitudes and directions. The missile would have to follow this, and because at this stage of it's flight it is unpowered, it will not have the energy and therefore range to even reach you, let alone force you to dodge it. This is the standard method used in professional air forces.

I don't know anymore the context. Bleeding energy is a way to bring down the G capability of the AAM, be it by flying in opposite direction or flying in dense air layers or forcing it to maneuver to bring it into intercept position. All counts and at the time it reaches you, a 5 g turn could be sufficient to evade it.
 
.
how do you know what material used in q 313 are you one of designer we dont know i read your things you speak like someone how build or make qaher or anything else . why speak so strongly about q-313 or else the commanders or designer dont say anything about engine or material but you know like that 500 meters cep please dont say anything you dont know its right or say its my idea

Really! What are you 10? You claim to be 40 year's old and in Iran's Army & I have to explain to you why the F-313 has a cheap Airframe?
Clearly your knowledge base regarding the subject is quite limited!
F-5's have cheap Airframes, Saegheh & Azarakhsh have cheap airframes, F-16's have cheap Air frames & the Q-313 also has a cheap Airframe!
If you had limited knowledge regarding Fighters you would know this & you wouldn't need me to explain it to you!
Clearly your either a Child or someone with NO knowledge regarding Fighters!
Your just going based on emotion! Not FACTs!
 
.
I don't care what manned airpower Russians operate since WWI to the 90's.
I care which of their weapon systems were game changers. The Oka was one, the Mig-25 not.

... well I don't know how we came back on that topic... Either you don't understand what I write or I write unclear.

1st You claimed the Russian have chosen Air Defense systems like S-400 over fighters because they've built no more than a handful of Su-Pak-Fa!
So I showed you how many fighters they have added to their fleet in the past decade alone!

Then you claimed that the main threat to NATO was a 500km Ballistic Missile produced between 1979 - 1987!

Vs 100's of large supersonic, high altitude bombers they had active each capable of flattening a city or an Air Base! And a 500km Oka missile & today's Iskandar missiles are NOTHING compared to the lethality of those bombers & every weapons has it's use!

Systems like the Oka & today's Eskandar have the capability to cripple enemy Radar, Communication & disrupt operations at bases within RANG!

Even with the USSR's old boarder that missile was not something that could pose a threat to most EU countries it couldn't even fly past Germany! So again your statement is absurd!

Detection depends on the LO or VLO level of the F-313. Only very powerful radars such as the APG-81 might be able to pick up a stealth F-313 from ranges beyond 100km. My open source calculations show that a F-313 with a RCS of 0,02m² would be able to go undetected to around 100km against the APG-81.

But even if it is detected, we talk about distances of 100km range. Which AMRAAM variant do they want to use to catch the F-313 before it shoots and dives down?

OMG your contradicting yourself! 1st ether the Aircraft can go undetected at high altitudes up to 100km or NOT! Which is it! If it can then why the hell do you need GE? It is absurd to have a pilot fly in a high risk environment for NO GOOD reason! If your building a fighter to only fly over your own territory & it's stealth characteristics protect it from detection & targeting up to 100km then you would have to be insane to deploy the added drags of an increased GE capability on your fighter jet!

You said you plan on climbing at 130km sowing your belly & it's a miss calculation on your part to think it would be stealthy!!!!! And what would be the point if they can't detect you at 100km away why the hell would you fly low and then be forced to clime painstakingly slowly to get to an optimal altitude so you can fire your Fakour-90's! 2ndly when a missiles MAX range is 90km that means it has that range when firing it at high altitude at supersonic speeds! The Fakkour-90 Max range fired from F-313 in the most optimal condition possible will at best be 60-70km! In Iran-Iraq war F-14 pilots would hold off firing the AiM-54 until they got to within 30-50km




from 1979 until 1987 So you again know more than anyone else. The belly RCS of the F-313 is too large to counted U.S radars? No. In stealth even larger but featureless area (such as the F-313 belly), can have a lower RCS than a front with intakes and cockpit.

WRONG! Using radar deflection, if the U.S. had made the F-117 any bigger it would have been detected!



So No! The cracks aren't what made the F-117 stealthy it's a miss conception it's was the angle of the surface that gives you the stealth features & the reason the US Air force chose not to make the F-117 more aerodynamic was because they thought it was MAGIC & due to a lack of understanding of what it was that made it stealthy they chose to keep it like that! And now that they do understand those methods they aren't being used anymore

And it's your absolute miss understanding as to how a radars works makes you think that you can somehow show your belly and remain stealth! The F-117, F-22 or the F-313 would not remain stealth by showing their belly the is why the F-22 was made to force the pilot into a straight and stabile flight & this is why the F-117's got pre programed to fly straight & maintain a direct path to their designated target!

Making the aircraft square doesn't effect cost! If anything any structural designers would tell you that you would end up with a weaker Airframe which would in term require you to use more materials which results in an increase cost!

Curved structure is one of reasons why a Turtles shell is strong it is why Soda cans are made round instead of square...

The F-22/-35 also uses deflection + RAM, just in a more advanced manner necessary for its aerodynamic requirements.

Yes the F-22 uses various types of stealth features including but not redistricted to deflection! they use various methods in different parts and I suspect they even use a honeycomb design likely with a mix of ceramic, iridium,.... with an interior honeycomb matrix design to make a bulky but stealthy & high heat resistant TVC

I think I know what you want to say. But it is wrong. F-22 and F-117 stealth work in the same way, no need for straight flight nonsense. Both have RCS management with certain spikes...

WRONG! As explained before, the F-117 uses deflection & the RAM used on it is ONLY for the purpose of getting a clear deflection off the reflective surfaces of the aircraft! NOTHING MORE!



you have a very simplistic, useless view. You want to detect the F-313 starting the pop-up with IRST against a warm ground, in warmer air, at what ranges? 100km? 150km? What would the range be against a afterburner equipped aircraft? 200km?

As long as the non-afterburning F-313 at its pop-up remains undetected till the F-90 shoot, it has won.

Long range known IRST have ~40-50km max range depending on whether its the front or back or weather you have afterburners on or off! Although every advanced country in the world is working to increase that and the most advanced versions of any country is not likely to be made public!

Body heat from a human can be detected on the ground using advanced optics let alone an Aircraft! Here your special RQ-170 engine with the thermal signature of the UAV being detected with Iranian optics




The good thing is, those systems are just expensive and difficult in R&D, production can be very low cost. A very good thing. Unlike engines, which are difficult in R&D AND production AND raw materials...
So Iran better makes max. use of that advantage.



One of the few good point you made. Yes terrain masking will pose a problem. What I want to see are not just com-sats but high flying relay drones in very large numbers, a kind of expandable drone based satcom. Not just for the F-313 but anything.


New avionics like that need to be first developed for the F-313 and then we can think about if it's worth the money to upgrade the IRIAF legacy force with it. In some instances new avionics are implemented.

Whats frontal RCS had the F-5? 1-2m² frontal? What the F-14? 6-8m²? This is 4-8 times RCS difference. In stealth we want to achieve 10-20-25 times less RCS in X-band. At 20 times, things become serious and Americans dream/claim about 35-40 times these days. The Objective for the F-313 should be 20 times.

Your claiming with $8-10Million USD per aircraft Iran can not only build the aircraft but build 100 per year! If building advanced Avionics, electronics & sensor fusing an Aircraft was so cheap and easy they would have done it here

And I'm not saying it's out of Iran's capabilities but what I am saying is the cost will add up to a point that it would not make sense to put a pilot & those electronics on a platform with a cheap airframe & limited payload!

Sorry, I'm not that stupid. No, its about the AMRAAM that does 80km head on at 12km altitude and mach 1,8. But this is for a target which is also at 12km altitude. At 20m, the same AMRAAM shot under the same conditions will have to go down into dense atmosphere and retain G-capability. It means, against a F-313 that AMRAAM would have a range of 50km, while 80km against a Su-35. You are just not aware of such effects...

Why would you think an AMRAM's range would be any different against a F-313 vs a Su-35?

1st you said you plan on taking altitude at 130km away are you changing that? If your planning on staying at 20meters altitude up to 50km even if you could get that close at what range do you plan on taking altitude? Worst case for US fighter is that they see you at 50km but can't lock on using radar base missiles so they'll either turn around make you chase something you can't catch & empty your fuel or speed up and dive for an IRST lock at ~35-40km before you can get within weapons range

But more likely than not they'll lock on using radar based AMRAMS long before you can get within 50km


Good. The F-313 better also uses RAM. But the point is: The Americans spent 2billions an airframe for something that is not survivable on its own? No. They changed it mid during development to offer the low level evasion capability.
It better be escorted by F-22 yes, but it is not completely helpless, it dives down an disappears if the package gets intercepted.

Just like the F-117 the F-313 would have to use RAM coating for a clear Radar deflection! The F-117 didn't use RAM to build the skin or structure it's just paint!


Aha... I didn't say it uses honeycomb composite its just one possibility. But what I say is that you have no idea about composites and manufacturing.

I try to tell you how it works: a rounded F-22 like stealth design computed and tested has very tight form tolerances. If you want to build those parts with say a sandwich composite, the necessary efforts =costs are much higher.
Now imagine how much cheaper a faceted stealth design with even surfaces is...


You have little understanding of composites, structural design & manufacturing if you think that's true!

And again it's Ti used & Ti casting what made the F-22 expensive! It has nothing to do with round vs square

Please, don't repeat yourself about Ti. The Su-57 is about the have equal or better supercruising capabilities than the F-22 by using more composite material...

If the F-313 has a composite based sandwich bodypart design with integrated RAM at lower price than Al or Ti, then everything is fine.
If a sufficiently good facet stealth is developed for major airframe sections, so that those composite bodyparts can be even geometry, even higher cost savings are possible. Bear in mind, as sub-sonic design, there is no need for complex/expensive rounded stealth for aerodynamic reasons.

Long range shoots (needed as F-313 would shoot at 100km), are always at the edge of the envelope, speed won't be mach 4 at 12km altitude and wont be more than mach 2,5 at 50m altitude.

If it becomes reality, expect optical warning sensors for the production F-313.

The F-22 uses 42% Ti + composites + it's Ti casting of large part that removes the need for a bunch of bolts that not only further reduces it's weight but also gives it a smoother surface & that = less drag, higher thrust to weight ratio, more room for fuel!!!! which = Super cruise!

You'll NEVER get a 100km from the Fakour-90 off the F-313! NOT POSSIBLE AT ANY ALTITUDE

The Turks have started a project for a 5th gen. fighter, a 20 billion project until production stage. They will get help on engines from GB and help from various European companies. South Korea is doing another such textbook airpower project, Indians have one such too.

Such projects are immensely difficult and in total too conventional textbook approached for Iran.
-Iran of 1990 was thinking about deterring Israel in future.
-Iran of 2000 could deter Israel and was thinking about wining a conventional war against Israel and deter the U.S.
-Iran of 2010 could force ceasefire (win) in a conventional war upon Israel and had a deterrence against the U.S.
-Iran of 2020 should be able to annihilate Israel and force ceasefire (win) a conventional war against the U.S
-Iran of 2030 should be able to put a high (conventional) destructive risk against U.S mainland.

How can such ambitions afford a 20 billion, 15 years textbook project for manned airpower?

The notion that Iran can't afford to add $1.5 Billion a year towards a fighter program is absurd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sub systems developed on such a program have wider implications and will result in the growth of the country in various fields both in terms of civilian & military products!
It's NOT just about a fighter!
As for the engine I would say Iran would have to develop it's OWN! It wouldn't matter if the engine is a larger Turbojet engine as long as it's the MOST advanced engine within Iran's capabilities!

Everything from the materials used to the sub components will help the countries economy grow by expanding the production of various alloys and sub systems....

Any Iranian politician, leader or... that thinks that after 40 years of not upgrading the countries Fighter Fleet SHOULD BE SHOOT!
Where is Iranian petrol dollars & tax money going? We have real problem on our hands if we are stuck with leaders who think paying $1.5 Billion a year to develop our own fighter is too high a price to pay especially after almost 40 years of neglect of Iran's Air Force!
$1.5 Billion a year is NOT going to make or break Iran! It won't turn Iran into a super power if spent on increased Missile production & It won't break Iran if spent on a fighter program!

The need to produce various super alloys like Titanium, Iridium, Tungsten, CMC,.... go well beyond the need to produce a fighter!
Even the components that aren't duel use in a fighter are made out of materials that are!

On one hand you claim that Iran can't afford to pay $1.5 Billion for a fighter program & on the other hand you claim we can somehow afford a high cost war against Israel & the U.S. without even needing an advanced Air Force!
And the capability your suggesting Iran will have in the next 3 years without an advanced Air Force is absurd let alone your claims for the next decade!

To win a war against the U.S. in the M.E. and have a true deterrent this is what you'll need in the next decade!
1.A fleet of 500 Su-35/37 (or better) + 60 5th Gen Stealth Air Superiority fighters Su-PAK, J-31 or F-22's & you'll need 4-5 new bases across central Iran with bunkers that are harder to hit & capable of faster deployment.
2.A Fleet of at least 10 Supersonic Bombers B-1 or Tu-22M type
3.A fleet of at least 5 Large size AWACS + 20 Smaller to mid size AWACS + 20 Air born UAV control & command
4.A fleet of 20-50 Small to mid size Air refueling Tankers! (Iran should of attempted to redesign the AN-140 into a more glide capable Airframe strengthened with composites for military use only! equipped with a variant of Iranian Owj engines!
(Basically for your Air Force you'll need to spend $12-$15 Billion a year for the next decade with a mix of purchases and domestic products)
5.1000 armed version of the Simorgh UCAV (or better)
6.1000's of MALE UCAV's
7.You'll need 25 Battalions of S-300 or Bavar-373 spread across the country with at least 500-600 Tel's on top of what Iran already has today
8.You'll need a stock of 10,000 Cruise Missiles & Karrar's & the ability to fire at least 1000 per day
9.You'll need 10,000 MRBM missiles with the ability to fire 1000 per day all with the accuracy of 200 meters or less and you'll need 10,000 Zolfaghar & Fatteh Class missiles CEP 50 meters or less!
10.You'll need 30 Fatteh Class subs or larger for your blue water sub fleet!

And if all you have is 30,000 missiles & you fire 3000 per day you'll just run out in 10 day's or you can just fire 300 per day and you would still run out in 100 day's!!!! It's a delusion to think you can replace an Air force with a bunch of Missiles!
 
.
To win a war against the U.S. in the M.E. and have a true deterrent this is what you'll need in the next decade!
1.A fleet of 500 Su-35/37 (or better) + 60 5th Gen Stealth Air Superiority fighters Su-PAK, J-31 or F-22's & you'll need 4-5 new bases across central Iran with bunkers that are harder to hit & capable of faster deployment.
2.A Fleet of at least 10 Supersonic Bombers B-1 or Tu-22M type
3.A fleet of at least 5 Large size AWACS + 20 Smaller to mid size AWACS + 20 Air born UAV control & command
4.A fleet of 20-50 Small to mid size Air refueling Tankers! (Iran should of attempted to redesign the AN-140 into a more glide capable Airframe strengthened with composites for military use only! equipped with a variant of Iranian Owj engines!
(Basically for your Air Force you'll need to spend $12-$15 Billion a year for the next decade with a mix of purchases and domestic products)
5.1000 armed version of the Simorgh UCAV (or better)
6.1000's of MALE UCAV's
7.You'll need 25 Battalions of S-300 or Bavar-373 spread across the country with at least 500-600 Tel's on top of what Iran already has today
8.You'll need a stock of 10,000 Cruise Missiles & Karrar's & the ability to fire at least 1000 per day
9.You'll need 10,000 MRBM missiles with the ability to fire 1000 per day all with the accuracy of 200 meters or less and you'll need 10,000 Zolfaghar & Fatteh Class missiles CEP 50 meters or less!
10.You'll need 30 Fatteh Class subs or larger for your blue water sub fleet!

And if all you have is 30,000 missiles & you fire 3000 per day you'll just run out in 10 day's or you can just fire 300 per day and you would still run out in 100 day's!!!! It's a delusion to think you can replace an Air force with a bunch of Missiles!



Its really sad because you think with all this oil and natural gas Iran has you wonder where all this money is going?? Not with this economy can Iran support even half of what is required here, because of garbage economy. Somehow the country with the most natural resources and potential only has a $400 billion GDP. I hate to say it but its true. Iran definitely has the technical expertise and smart youth to do alot of what is needed here without purchasing abroad but the country is somehow not wealthy because of bad leadership and politics. When will this change?
 
.
1st You claimed the Russian have chosen Air Defense systems like S-400 over fighters because they've built no more than a handful of Su-Pak-Fa!
So I showed you how many fighters they have added to their fleet in the past decade alone!

They basically keep their current and past numbers by replacing old ones. Officials already indicated that if the economic situation does not get better, numbers of Su-57 would be low.

Then you claimed that the main threat to NATO was a 500km Ballistic Missile produced between 1979 - 1987!

Vs 100's of large supersonic, high altitude bombers they had active each capable of flattening a city or an Air Base! And a 500km Oka missile & today's Iskandar missiles are NOTHING compared to the lethality of those bombers & every weapons has it's use!

Systems like the Oka & today's Eskandar have the capability to cripple enemy Radar, Communication & disrupt operations at bases within RANG!

Even with the USSR's old boarder that missile was not something that could pose a threat to most EU countries it couldn't even fly past Germany! So again your statement is absurd!

500km is enough to take out close airbases. The whole idea is to force enemy airpower to operate at longer ranges which limits deep strike capability, survivability and Sortie generation rate.
Most importantly in a conventional conflict, as any superpower level country can just nuke everything, but the stronger one can even win conventionally. Game changers like the Oka helped there.

OMG your contradicting yourself! 1st ether the Aircraft can go undetected at high altitudes up to 100km or NOT! Which is it! If it can then why the hell do you need GE? It is absurd to have a pilot fly in a high risk environment for NO GOOD reason! If your building a fighter to only fly over your own territory & it's stealth characteristics protect it from detection & targeting up to 100km then you would have to be insane to deploy the added drags of an increased GE capability on your fighter jet!

- No contradiction, just too complex for you
- Nobody knows the real APG-81 range performance
- GE increases thrust, effectively speaking. You use GE and low level regime because you can't compete on engines at high altitude, but as the gap gets smaller, you come close to compete kinematicaly at low level with GE.

And what would be the point if they can't detect you at 100km away why the hell would you fly low and then be forced to clime painstakingly slowly to get to an optimal altitude so you can fire your Fakour-90's! 2ndly when a missiles MAX range is 90km that means it has that range when firing it at high altitude at supersonic speeds! The Fakkour-90 Max range fired from F-313 in the most optimal condition possible will at best be 60-70km! In Iran-Iraq war F-14 pilots would hold off firing the AiM-54 until they got to within 30-50km

Your numbers are wrong and you know nothing about the F-90 or a further development of it for the F-313.

So No! The cracks aren't what made the F-117 stealthy it's a miss conception it's was the angle of the surface that gives you the stealth features & the reason the US Air force chose not to make the F-117 more aerodynamic was because they thought it was MAGIC & due to a lack of understanding of what it was that made it stealthy they chose to keep it like that! And now that they do understand those methods they aren't being used anymore

And it's your absolute miss understanding as to how a radars works makes you think that you can somehow show your belly and remain stealth! The F-117, F-22 or the F-313 would not remain stealth by showing their belly the is why the F-22 was made to force the pilot into a straight and stabile flight & this is why the F-117's got pre programed to fly straight & maintain a direct path to their designated target!

There are two driving parameters, surface area as you said an smoothness of the surface. The B-2 and less so the F-313 belly are smooth, this helps to have a lower RCS despite a large area. It also means RAM can be easier and better applied.

Making the aircraft square doesn't effect cost! If anything any structural designers would tell you that you would end up with a weaker Airframe which would in term require you to use more materials which results in an increase cost!

Curved structure is one of reasons why a Turtles shell is strong it is why Soda cans are made round instead of square...

- Skin airframe has almost no impact on structural strength, this is done by the inner skeleton structures.
- Making a brick square aircraft, sure as hell reduces manufacturing costs. That you don't realize this, speaks volumes...

WRONG! As explained before, the F-117 uses deflection & the RAM used on it is ONLY for the purpose of getting a clear deflection off the reflective surfaces of the aircraft! NOTHING MORE!

There are just two basic physical methods in stealth: Deflection and absorption. Whether curved stealth or facted stealth is used, is unimportant... The Su-57 uses faceted stealth at nacelle and lower fuselage...

Long range known IRST have ~40-50km max range depending on whether its the front or back or weather you have afterburners on or off! Although every advanced country in the world is working to increase that and the most advanced versions of any country is not likely to be made public!

Body heat from a human can be detected on the ground using advanced optics let alone an Aircraft! Here your special RQ-170 engine with the thermal signature of the UAV being detected with Iranian optics

Ok, so your IRST can't detect the F-313 at 100 shooting range? Good enough.
Certainly modern IRST have longer range and work better at high altitudes with afterburning, supersonic aircraft. The fact that you have problems with those statements, again speaks volumes.

Why would you think an AMRAM's range would be any different against a F-313 vs a Su-35?

1st you said you plan on taking altitude at 130km away are you changing that? If your planning on staying at 20meters altitude up to 50km even if you could get that close at what range do you plan on taking altitude? Worst case for US fighter is that they see you at 50km but can't lock on using radar base missiles so they'll either turn around make you chase something you can't catch & empty your fuel or speed up and dive for an IRST lock at ~35-40km before you can get within weapons range

But more likely than not they'll lock on using radar based AMRAMS long before you can get within 50km

Again you have not understood what I wrote there...
Su-35=high altitude=less drag for AMRAAM
F-313=low altitude=more drag for AMRAAM

You might think if it goes ballistic it has a longer downrange against a low altitude F-313 but dynamic pressure will force it down to speeds like mach 1, where a 3g maneuver is enough to dodge it.
No, a F-313 hunting AMRAAM must retain at least mach 2 at impact to be effective and this means a considerably reduced range.
The whole evasion and survivability discussion involves to many parameters to make it as simple as you want.

Just like the F-117 the F-313 would have to use RAM coating for a clear Radar deflection! The F-117 didn't use RAM to build the skin or structure it's just paint!

As a product of today, the F-313 would need to use a skin with integrated RAM, RAS as on the F-35 for example. Otherwise the need of maintenance for its operation regime would be too high.

You have little understanding of composites, structural design & manufacturing if you think that's true!

And again it's Ti used & Ti casting what made the F-22 expensive! It has nothing to do with round vs square

So you compare filament tanks to laminate/sandwich/honeycomb, RAM/RAS skin part of an airframe? Its very clear who has no knowledge on this...

If building advanced Avionics, electronics & sensor fusing an Aircraft was so cheap and easy they would have done it here

Keep your argumentation at a useful level... Avionics are certainly cheaper in everything than an engine for example, manufacturing, engineering, materials, maybe in rare cases just except for R&D...
That they have not created Iranian ones for the Il-76 is simply because it is not worth the effort, too small fleet size and affordable alternatives.
They would certainly design an advanced avionics suite for the F-313 to allow low level flight. This is the area in which we can jump forward as there is no 50-100 years metallurgy experience necessary to get the right formula for a long-life turbine blade.

The F-22 uses 42% Ti + composites + it's Ti casting of large part that removes the need for a bunch of bolts that not only further reduces it's weight but also gives it a smoother surface & that = less drag, higher thrust to weight ratio, more room for fuel!!!! which = Super cruise!

Check the Su-57... as a supercruising 15g rated airframe it uses traditional Russian Ti but has a much higher composite amount than the F-22. But I have no idea what this has to do with our topic.

You'll NEVER get a 100km from the Fakour-90 off the F-313! NOT POSSIBLE AT ANY ALTITUDE

You can't and don't know... You seem to not be aware that the speed difference for teen fighters compared to the F-313 would be just mach 0,5-0,8 in real life and they make claims claims of above 100km for the small and low power AMRAAM. And we are not talking about a further improved F-90 for the F-313 which could e.g use a composite motor casing.



As for the 5th gen. fighter project discussion.
The F-313 could be the first right step. The next airpower asset that would make sense for Iran would be a twin engine/seat, kinematic monster superior to the Mig-31 and with VLO capabilities above that of the F-22 (although future sensor technology could negate stealth).

This would make sense for Iran as a airpower weapon system and we are many years away from building it. But the F-313 and its "mass production" will help immensely.

The point is simply that a weapon system bust be superior to alternatives to be acquired and not for the sake to have a large airforce or because everybody is doing something.


PS: I haven't watched it, but I recommend you to avoid youtube uploaded U.S documentations about U.S weapon systems... at least don't bring them up as source...
 
.
Its really sad because you think with all this oil and natural gas Iran has you wonder where all this money is going?? Not with this economy can Iran support even half of what is required here, because of garbage economy. Somehow the country with the most natural resources and potential only has a $400 billion GDP. I hate to say it but its true. Iran definitely has the technical expertise and smart youth to do alot of what is needed here without purchasing abroad but the country is somehow not wealthy because of bad leadership and politics. When will this change?

Iran's economy won't change until Iran decides to make 2 major changes

1. Increasing Tourism & expand on industries inside Iran (At least parts of Iran) by removing a few absurd and outdated religious restrictions at least in specific areas that have the potential of being Tourist destinations!

Enforcing Hejab, Ban on Alcoholic Beverages, Restrictions on Music & entertainment,.... These actions directly effect Tourism which is the LARGEST industry in the world!!!!!!!!! This is what allows Turkey to have 20-40 Million Tourists every year & that's a lot of foreign capital coming in to spend money! And various industries inside of Turkey very smartly took advantage of that from industries directly effected by it like Airline, Hotels & Resorts to industries that were indirectly effected by it like clothing, beverage, entertainment,..... & Turkish products evolved & got better in terms of quality, verity,....
As appose to Iran's 3-5 Million Tourists who by a vast majority are religious pilgrims who don't come to spend money! And you have a major deficit in that regard & every year millions of Iranians take the capital made inside the country to spend outside the country because what they consider fun is none existent inside the country. which results in more cash going out than coming in!

And it results in Turkey with a population of 80 million which technologically is not much more advanced than Iran having a GDP(nominal) DOUBLE that of Iran's at $860 Billion & a GDP(ppp) of $2 Trillion USD ranked 13th in the world! And they do it without any major Oil or Gas industry & they don't produce the most advanced car's in the world or the most advanced computers in the world so technologically they are not more advanced!

In Iran sanctions are often used as an excuse but sanctions have nothing to do with it! It's Iran's own policies that's shooting it's self in the foot!


2.Iran needs a massive investment in it's defense industry especially for building and mass producing the most advanced military products within the countries capabilities! Iran's defense industry should be at the front line of Iran's technological advancements in almost every field! And what they produce should have a direct effect on civilian products all across the country! Without it, trying to compete globally whether it be civilian or military products will be extremely difficult! (This is also lacking in Turkey & it's what separates more technologically advanced countries like S.Korea, Germany, France, U.K., Japan with roughly the same population from Turkey)



Now unlike many of those governments Iran's government on top of taxes is getting a steady supply of funding via oil, natural gas, mining, telecommunications & various other government owned and operated companies & service providers!
Which makes the Iranian government one of the top 15 richest governments in the world at least they have one of the top 15 largest budgets! So the idea that out of ~$300Billion USD budget you can't cut, move around and find a way to add an additional $20 Billion to your military is beyond absurd! In fact, every penny they get from oil should go directly towards Iran's Military Industry especially for the next 4 years!
 
.
Iran's economy won't change until Iran decides to make 2 major changes

1. Increasing Tourism & expand on industries inside Iran (At least parts of Iran) by removing a few absurd and outdated religious restrictions at least in specific areas that have the potential of being Tourist destinations!

Enforcing Hejab, Ban on Alcoholic Beverages, Restrictions on Music & entertainment,.... These actions directly effect Tourism which is the LARGEST industry in the world!!!!!!!!! This is what allows Turkey to have 20-40 Million Tourists every year & that's a lot of foreign capital coming in to spend money! And various industries inside of Turkey very smartly took advantage of that from industries directly effected by it like Airline, Hotels & Resorts to industries that were indirectly effected by it like clothing, beverage, entertainment,..... & Turkish products evolved & got better in terms of quality, verity,....
So west anti Iranian propaganda has no effect, but Iranian culture (for example the hijab) is the obstacle!
American's visa ban has no effect, but the restriction of Alcohol is an obstacle!
The Tourist: hey I don't wanna visit Iranian culture cause there is no Alcohol in it! (sounds more like a drug addict)
----------
But here is the real world numbers, while the whole European tourists weren't more than 100,000, number of regional tourists decrease from 4,442,419 to 4,091,354 after the JCPOA:
photo_2017-09-17_16-08-54.jpg



آدرس غلط مسئولین به مردم در پسابرجام به ضرر صنعت گردشگری خواهد بود
چرا مسئولین حوزه گردشگری پشت سفارت عربستان پنهان می‌شوند!؟
بعد از برجام گردشگران ورودی از کشورهای همسایه کم شدند
مجموع گردشگران اروپایی که بعد از برجام به ایران آمدند به 100 هزار نفر نمی رسد
 
.
@VEVAK

Your distorted view and understanding shows itself again with the tourism argument.

You have a static, non-felxible, non-open, almost reactionary view on things, a kind of (western) textbook approach.

Its funny that your tourism case is so similar to that on airpower and the jet engine... Same as we can't compete in those areas, we also can't compete with Turkish alcohol flatrate offers at their (closer) Mediterranean beaches and their developed tourism infrastructure. They have all the KPIs on their side, its a lost cause.
Its actually sad, as many people in Iran, who have not seen the outside world, think Iran can become big via tourism...
At least try to take Japan or South Korea as a example who produce products with high added values and don't try to host drunk party foreigners with sun at beaches...
This is not meant to condemn Turkish tourism model or even alcoholic westen tourism style, it works for them.
 
.
Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.


Did you listen to Donald Trump’s UN speech today?

Standing in front of the world, Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.

He then blamed Iran for terrorism and lauded Saudi Arabia - which birthed ISIS and Al Qaeda - as the region’s great fighter of terror.

Finally, Trump claimed to stand in solidarity with the Iranian people. Think about that. This is the man who tried to ban all Iranians from the United States, including students, green card holders, and even grandparents.


 
.
Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.


Did you listen to Donald Trump’s UN speech today?

Standing in front of the world, Trump said the Iran deal is “an embarrassment to the United States” and strongly hinted that he will rip it up in October.

He then blamed Iran for terrorism and lauded Saudi Arabia - which birthed ISIS and Al Qaeda - as the region’s great fighter of terror.

Finally, Trump claimed to stand in solidarity with the Iranian people. Think about that. This is the man who tried to ban all Iranians from the United States, including students, green card holders, and even grandparents.

He's been saying he's gonna rip it out before even becoming president. Nothing is certain until he does. It would be a clever strategy for the U.S to constantly threaten to deal to prevent foriegn invesment into Iran. To keep people from investing there through fear of iminint tear up of the deal. Sec Tillerson already said Iran is in technical complaince of the deal. What more is their if you are technically correct?.
 
.
@VEVAK

Your distorted view and understanding shows itself again with the tourism argument.

You have a static, non-felxible, non-open, almost reactionary view on things, a kind of (western) textbook approach.

Its funny that your tourism case is so similar to that on airpower and the jet engine... Same as we can't compete in those areas, we also can't compete with Turkish alcohol flatrate offers at their (closer) Mediterranean beaches and their developed tourism infrastructure. They have all the KPIs on their side, its a lost cause.
Its actually sad, as many people in Iran, who have not seen the outside world, think Iran can become big via tourism...
At least try to take Japan or South Korea as a example who produce products with high added values and don't try to host drunk party foreigners with sun at beaches...
This is not meant to condemn Turkish tourism model or even alcoholic westen tourism style, it works for them.
exactly the 100% manoto watcher only manoto or voa or bbc i see too but not like him i see both side
 
.
They basically keep their current and past numbers by replacing old ones. Officials already indicated that if the economic situation does not get better, numbers of Su-57 would be low....

The number of Aircraft the Russians have active & the number they have in storage is like Night & Day so this is not about replacing the Old they are adding to their stockpile & if they had all these money problems they would of just done a overhaul and upgrade as they are doing with the MiG-31's!

There is no reason for the Russian to have 1000's of Fighter Jets on active duty! And the number of fighters they have active today will be nothing compared to what they'll have in a short time if & when needed!

500km is enough to take out close airbases. The whole idea is to force enemy airpower to operate at longer ranges which limits deep strike capability, survivability and Sortie generation rate.
Most importantly in a conventional conflict, as any superpower level country can just nuke everything, but the stronger one can even win conventionally. Game changers like the Oka helped there....

Game changer!!!!!! LOL! OMG! Take a look at a map before you type! They won't even be able to reach U.S. radar sites in Poland with 500km! What game changer???

This is only in your head!

- No contradiction, just too complex for you
- Nobody knows the real APG-81 range performance
- GE increases thrust, effectively speaking. You use GE and low level regime because you can't compete on engines at high altitude, but as the gap gets smaller, you come close to compete kinematicaly at low level with GE....

Wrong! Your over simplifying things & constantly trying to come up with excuses!

Plus, it's a simple question will the Q-313 be detected at altitude at beyond 100km or NOT?

As for engine! Iran can simply increase the diameter of the OWJ engine without increasing the length of the compressors blades with little adjustment! And yes you will use more fuel but fuel consumption is irrelevant if your focus is over your own territory!

Plus J-85's are capable of supersonic flight which means you need a good excuse for adding drag of added GE capability! And if your claiming that you'll be fully stealth at altitude regardless then there is no reason why anyone in their right mind would sacrifice speed for GE


Your numbers are wrong and you know nothing about the F-90 or a further development of it for the F-313....

I don't need to know about the F-90 in terms of range it will not surpass the AiM-54 & Iran it's self is claiming it's a Mid range missile not a BVR missile

Your making things up!

You claim Iran's Air Defense systems will be doing the targeting which may be possible if the aircraft was flying at altitude but to data link to an Aircraft at 20-50 meters off the ground it's absurd!

There are two driving parameters, surface area as you said an smoothness of the surface. The B-2 and less so the F-313 belly are smooth, this helps to have a lower RCS despite a large area. It also means RAM can be easier and better applied....

Vay vay vay!!!!!!!!!!! Again you don't understand how radars work! Smoothness allows for better deflection at an angle! To over simplify it for you, have you ever skipped rocks off water? Now if you don't throw at a right angle your rock will sink & if the water is wavy (not smooth) it will cause your rock to sink! In the same manner you can deflect laser light off water or a surface at an angle!!!!!!!!!! So the belly of the F-117, F-22, F-313, F-35, Su-Pak, J-31..... NONE of them will be stealthy!!!!!!!!!!

- Skin airframe has almost no impact on structural strength, this is done by the inner skeleton structures.
- Making a brick square aircraft, sure as hell reduces manufacturing costs. That you don't realize this, speaks volumes...
...

YOU DON'T have a CLUE do you! LOL! No point in me arguing with someone who keeps denying well known facts!




Again you have not understood what I wrote there...
Su-35=high altitude=less drag for AMRAAM
F-313=low altitude=more drag for AMRAAM

You might think if it goes ballistic it has a longer downrange against a low altitude F-313 but dynamic pressure will force it down to speeds like mach 1, where a 3g maneuver is enough to dodge it.
No, a F-313 hunting AMRAAM must retain at least mach 2 at impact to be effective and this means a considerably reduced range.
The whole evasion and survivability discussion involves to many parameters to make it as simple as you want.
...

You can fly a Su-35 at any altitude!!!!!!!!!!!! Again at what altitude did you plan on pupping up? And a Su-30 at altitude has BVR capability!


So you compare filament tanks to laminate/sandwich/honeycomb, RAM/RAS skin part of an airframe? Its very clear who has no knowledge on this...
...


Keep your argumentation at a useful level... Avionics are certainly cheaper in everything than an engine for example, manufacturing, engineering, materials, maybe in rare cases just except for R&D...
That they have not created Iranian ones for the Il-76 is simply because it is not worth the effort, too small fleet size and affordable alternatives.
They would certainly design an advanced avionics suite for the F-313 to allow low level flight. This is the area in which we can jump forward as there is no 50-100 years metallurgy experience necessary to get the right formula for a long-life turbine blade.
...

LOL!!! You don't know anything buddy!

upload_2017-9-19_14-25-29.png


It doesn't matter what shape it is if your using Ti or Composites or a sandwich because your either cutting or using a mold & casting! It sure as hell doesn't effect the overall costs in any meaningful way!

And as I told you before square straight vs round and curve = weaker = more materials required!!!! What goes on in your head is nothing more than fiction made up due to your limited knowledge on the subject!

Check the Su-57... as a supercruising 15g rated airframe it uses traditional Russian Ti but has a much higher composite amount than the F-22. But I have no idea what this has to do with our topic.
...

Traditional Ti means putting it in a press & doing Thermal, oxidation & pressure treatment & it results in a heavier & stronger Ti than the ones used on the F-22 but the F-22 doesn't require 1000's of heavy bolts to keep the Airframe together and it also results in a smoother surface! all these combined = better super cruise = better stealth

You can't and don't know... You seem to not be aware that the speed difference for teen fighters compared to the F-313 would be just mach 0,5-0,8 in real life and they make claims claims of above 100km for the small and low power AMRAAM. And we are not talking about a further improved F-90 for the F-313 which could e.g use a composite motor casing.
...

Yea sure go talk to a pilot and tell him how 0.5 mach is not a big deal! LOL! my God!

As for the 5th gen. fighter project discussion.
The F-313 could be the first right step. The next airpower asset that would make sense for Iran would be a twin engine/seat, kinematic monster superior to the Mig-31 and with VLO capabilities above that of the F-22 (although future sensor technology could negate stealth).

This would make sense for Iran as a airpower weapon system and we are many years away from building it. But the F-313 and its "mass production" will help immensely.

The point is simply that a weapon system bust be superior to alternatives to be acquired and not for the sake to have a large airforce or because everybody is doing something.


PS: I haven't watched it, but I recommend you to avoid youtube uploaded U.S documentations about U.S weapon systems... at least don't bring them up as source...

Like it or NOT F-313 is a JOKE!

And your delusions about Iran producing 800 of them will be meet with reality!!!!!!!!! At max I can see Iran producing 50 or so NOTHING MORE!
These are nothing but wishes and hopes of a child and all I have to do is wait and time will prove it!

So this one goes out to all the foolish supporters of the F-313 that think 800 F-313 will ever be produced or could even go up against 200 F-15 or Su-30's


P.S. I'll post whatever I want! I suggest you try to prove your BS! O wait but how could you! Because it retarded with no factual bases!

So west anti Iranian propaganda has no effect, but Iranian culture (for example the hijab) is the obstacle!
American's visa ban has no effect, but the restriction of Alcohol is an obstacle!
The Tourist: hey I don't wanna visit Iranian culture cause there is no Alcohol in it! (sounds more like a drug addict)
----------
But here is the real world numbers, while the whole European tourists weren't more than 100,000, number of regional tourists decrease from 4,442,419 to 4,091,354 after the JCPOA:
photo_2017-09-17_16-08-54.jpg



آدرس غلط مسئولین به مردم در پسابرجام به ضرر صنعت گردشگری خواهد بود
چرا مسئولین حوزه گردشگری پشت سفارت عربستان پنهان می‌شوند!؟
بعد از برجام گردشگران ورودی از کشورهای همسایه کم شدند
مجموع گردشگران اروپایی که بعد از برجام به ایران آمدند به 100 هزار نفر نمی رسد

Yea good thing we are the ones that invented wine! LOL! Iranian culture has nothing to do with it!

Turkey Tourism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Turkey

They hit 40 Million in 2014!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So NOPE!

Forcing women to ware the Hijab has nothing to do with Iranian Culture & has nothing to do with Islam!
Banning Alcoholic Beverages has nothing to do with Iranian culture! It has to do with Islam! And it's this deluded Ban the prevents the government from properly regulating (And that why Basiji's won't go unemployed instead they will be diverted towards regulations and keep the public safe rather than harassing them)

People that like to learn about other cultures during travel have a CHOICE! Go to a country where the government puts a dress code on you vs ones that don't! It's an easy choice really!
People travel to have fun, shop & enjoy life! Which seems to be something your incapable of understanding!
 
.
There is no reason for the Russian to have 1000's of Fighter Jets on active duty! And the number of fighters they have active today will be nothing compared to what they'll have in a short time if & when needed!

The storage is one thing. The active fleet with competitive gear and pilots with experience on them another...

Game changer!!!!!! LOL! OMG! Take a look at a map before you type! They won't even be able to reach U.S. radar sites in Poland with 500km! What game changer???

This is only in your head!

Keep the context, I was talking about the Oka being a game changer when it appeared... in the 80s it could attack airbases inside France... In total one key to success is to force the enemy airpower away.

Wrong! Your over simplifying things & constantly trying to come up with excuses!

Plus, it's a simple question will the Q-313 be detected at altitude at beyond 100km or NOT?

Are you kidding? How could anybody know that?...

As for engine! Iran can simply increase the diameter of the OWJ engine without increasing the length of the compressors blades with little adjustment! And yes you will use more fuel but fuel consumption is irrelevant if your focus is over your own territory!

Nonsense... increasing the diameter with simple adjustments...

Plus J-85's are capable of supersonic flight which means you need a good excuse for adding drag of added GE capability! And if your claiming that you'll be fully stealth at altitude regardless then there is no reason why anyone in their right mind would sacrifice speed for GE

If you can't fly fast at high altitude, you have to find solutions. GE and subsonic low altitude is one such.

I don't need to know about the F-90 in terms of range it will not surpass the AiM-54 & Iran it's self is claiming it's a Mid range missile not a BVR missile

Your making things up!

Range of F-90 is unknown and that 90 is certainly not the range...

You claim Iran's Air Defense systems will be doing the targeting which may be possible if the aircraft was flying at altitude but to data link to an Aircraft at 20-50 meters off the ground it's absurd!

IADS does the detection.

Vay vay vay!!!!!!!!!!! Again you don't understand how radars work! Smoothness allows for better deflection at an angle! To over simplify it for you, have you ever skipped rocks off water? Now if you don't throw at a right angle your rock will sink & if the water is wavy (not smooth) it will cause your rock to sink! In the same manner you can deflect laser light off water or a surface at an angle!!!!!!!!!! So the belly of the F-117, F-22, F-313, F-35, Su-Pak, J-31..... NONE of them will be stealthy!!!!!!!!!!

F-117, Tacit Blue and B-2 were specially designed to have a featureless belly to have low RCS against ground radars...

You can fly a Su-35 at any altitude!!!!!!!!!!!! Again at what altitude did you plan on pupping up? And a Su-30 at altitude has BVR capability!

What has this to do with what I said???

It doesn't matter what shape it is if your using Ti or Composites or a sandwich because your either cutting or using a mold & casting! It sure as hell doesn't effect the overall costs in any meaningful way!

And as I told you before square straight vs round and curve = weaker = more materials required!!!! What goes on in your head is nothing more than fiction made up due to your limited knowledge on the subject!

Look, you have problems with the fuselage shape of the F-313 and think the designers are stupid and you know better.
I told you it can have many different reasons why it is not rounded like on F-22, one of them is cost.
Now you argument that a molded laminate could be as or almost as cheap as flat skin parts.
Yes could, many things could, but what point does it make to talk about something we don't know about? Useless waste of time...
How you would want to mold a 3D geometry honeycomb structure, at what cost?
This is useless... Just accept that there could be reasons for that design decision, including cost/producebility and others. Being a smarta** and saying the designers are fools is useless.

Yea sure go talk to a pilot and tell him how 0.5 mach is not a big deal! LOL! my God!

Again you show little understanding of the context and physics: Of a total speed of 1500m/s, 150m/s (10%) is decreased due to the subsonic F-313 for a total of 1350m/s instead. The reality is more complex but this is a small display of the difference of mach 0,5 on a mach 5 missile...

Like it or NOT F-313 is a JOKE!

And your delusions about Iran producing 800 of them will be meet with reality!!!!!!!!! At max I can see Iran producing 50 or so NOTHING MORE!
These are nothing but wishes and hopes of a child and all I have to do is wait and time will prove it!

So this one goes out to all the foolish supporters of the F-313 that think 800 F-313 will ever be produced or could even go up against 200 F-15 or Su-30's

Keep your facts straight: I never said Iran will produce 800 F-313, I also never said that my airdefense operation regime for the F-313 is reality.
But I like the idea more than 200 Su-30.

Point is, IR Iran has somehow survived up without the U.S neutralizing it. It's not due to uninnovative conventional approaches which you advocate but for example a light fighter with my operation regime proposal, as the F-313.

With your ideas, the IR Iran would have been neutralized long time ago.
 
.
The storage is one thing. The active fleet with competitive gear and pilots with experience on them another....

Yea because they can afford to keep adding fighters to their stock but a pilot that's just too expensive!
As if the country has no reserve forces & keeps adding fighters to their storage without any thought to who is going to pilot them in case of an emergency!

And here you go again, assuming people are stupid!

Keep the context, I was talking about the Oka being a game changer when it appeared... in the 80s it could attack airbases inside France... In total one key to success is to force the enemy airpower away..

Fired how many missiles and from where?
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! I TOLD YOU TO LOOK AT A MAP BEFOR YOU TYPE!

USSR wouldn't of been able to fire it's Oka missiles from one side of Germany to the other side of Germany!
And even if they had managed to somehow magically transported it's Oka missiles in western parts of east Germany they still wouldn't of been able to hit Paris & would of at best been able to go 150km into French territory!

That is NO Game Changer!

For the Russians in the 80's & 90's in terms of conventional weapons Su-27, Various Russian diesel and nuclear subs, Long range high altitude supersonic bombers, S-300, Kh-55... These were game changers! Weapons that if even one was taken out would of changed calculation on a large scale!

Are you kidding? How could anybody know that?....

Your the one that claimed that a F-313 will not be detected at that range!

Nonsense... increasing the diameter with simple adjustments....

Yes it is possible & easily within Iran's capability to do with little adjustment to the existing OWJ engines! Building larger diameter engines is well within Iran's capability to do especially if you don't change the length of the Turbines and compressors!
The hard part would always be increasing lifespan, and reducing fuel consumption! And even in that aspect it would be easier to play around with on a larger diameter engine rather than a smaller diameter engine.

If you can't fly fast at high altitude, you have to find solutions. GE and subsonic low altitude is one such..

In terms of Air to Air capability what your claiming is absurd! Any fighter can fly low! That's a tactic you don't limit and build fighters around one tactic! It's absurd!

Your not just limiting speed! Your limiting climb rate, turn rate, maneuverability, speed, BVR capability,...

Range of F-90 is unknown and that 90 is certainly not the range....

What ever the range is Iran claims it's a Mid range Air to Air missile!

IADS does the detection..

IADS can do all the detection it wants the point is there is no way you can target the aircraft unless it can somehow have two way secured communication with the fighter having it's direct coordinates & guide the missile to a range where it can turn on it's active seeker!

Flying low in GE mode limits line of sight limiting your ability to have secured 2 way communication in GE in between mountains in the middle of nowhere

One way frequency will never be secure because you don't know who is broadcasting and who your targeting!

F-117, Tacit Blue and B-2 were specially designed to have a featureless belly to have low RCS against ground radars....

Absolutely WRONG! Their belly are stealth only at level flight! If they show their belly in a high angle turn or climb they will be detected! ALL OF THEM!



Look, you have problems with the fuselage shape of the F-313 and think the designers are stupid and you know better.
I told you it can have many different reasons why it is not rounded like on F-22, one of them is cost.
Now you argument that a molded laminate could be as or almost as cheap as flat skin parts.
Yes could, many things could, but what point does it make to talk about something we don't know about? Useless waste of time...
How you would want to mold a 3D geometry honeycomb structure, at what cost?
This is useless... Just accept that there could be reasons for that design decision, including cost/producebility and others. Being a smarta** and saying the designers are fools is useless..

It's not just the Fuselage! It's the wings, Engines, intakes,...

And your making things up! What part of it is Honeycombed & I'll explain to you how!

Is it the skeleton of the nose that's honeycombed? If so you cut it in any shape you want it!
Is it the skin? if that was the case you would need 4-5 flat pieces welded or bolted to each other for the nonsense your saying to make any kind of sense! which it is nonsense! Your making up excuse for a pour job!
There are no 4-5 pieces! It's a single peace mold on the nose and you can cut out the mold for the Airframe in any shape you want with little effect!

Your just making up BS & you just wanna make sense out of something that doesn't make sense using cost as an excuse!

As I repeated a million times already the F-22 is more expensive due to the amount of Ti used & Ti Casting of large parts that require larger tools that's what sets it apart not whether it was rounded or straight!

The reason why the F-117 is shaped that way was due to a miss understanding as to what caused it to be stealth!
And once the U.S. got into detail as to why, they stopped building stealth Aircraft in that manner!



Again you show little understanding of the context and physics: Of a total speed of 1500m/s, 150m/s (10%) is decreased due to the subsonic F-313 for a total of 1350m/s instead. The reality is more complex but this is a small display of the difference of mach 0,5 on a mach 5 missile....

Again, your basing your info on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!

An Air to Air missile in a ballistic trajectory will have a longer range at lower altitude! That's FACT! That's common sense!

Now you can claim your radar targeting will be effected due to ground clutter! That is factual! But the range of your missile is not going to be reduced by the numbers your claiming! In fact the opposite is true if your trying to calculate the max range of a missile your range will reduce at higher altitudes!
Also nothing is stopping Russian Fighter from flying low either!


Keep your facts straight: I never said Iran will produce 800 F-313, I also never said that my airdefense operation regime for the F-313 is reality.
But I like the idea more than 200 Su-30..

What you like and what reality is are two different things!

Point is, IR Iran has somehow survived up without the U.S neutralizing it. It's not due to uninnovative conventional approaches which you advocate but for example a light fighter with my operation regime proposal, as the F-313.

With your ideas, the IR Iran would have been neutralized long time ago.

Iran hasn't been without an Air Force! Hell in the 90's the Americans shredded their own F-14's because they didn't want Iran flying it's own F-14's and over the years they have gone to great lengths to prevent Iran from having a real Air Force So NO! Absolutely WRONG!

If Iran had purchased only 12 Su-27/Su-30 fighters a year for the past 2 decades it would have been much stronger today than it already is NOT LESS!

And no one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Missile Program should be cut for a fighter program! That's absurd! It's like saying from now on I'm not going to buy shoes only socks! It's absurd!
You need shoes and socks! Air Force & Missiles!

Security challenges change, countries adapt & if you fail to adapt you will lose! F-313 looks like a covert US attempt to prevent Iran from having a Air force that could challenge their Air Superiority!
Why every time they try to build a fighter they stick with small diameter engines or single engine fighters in an Oil rich country with vast territory it's absurd!

I'd rather have a larger faster fighter capable of firing more capable missiles!
MiG-25 was a steel base Airframe! I'd rather see Iran build an interceptor like that to make up the difference than the F-313 in an Air to Air role
 
.
Yea because they can afford to keep adding fighters to their stock but a pilot that's just too expensive!
As if the country has no reserve forces & keeps adding fighters to their storage without any thought to who is going to pilot them in case of an emergency!

And here you go again, assuming people are stupid!



Fired how many missiles and from where?
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! I TOLD YOU TO LOOK AT A MAP BEFOR YOU TYPE!

USSR wouldn't of been able to fire it's Oka missiles from one side of Germany to the other side of Germany!
And even if they had managed to somehow magically transported it's Oka missiles in western parts of east Germany they still wouldn't of been able to hit Paris & would of at best been able to go 150km into French territory!

That is NO Game Changer!

For the Russians in the 80's & 90's in terms of conventional weapons Su-27, Various Russian diesel and nuclear subs, Long range high altitude supersonic bombers, S-300, Kh-55... These were game changers! Weapons that if even one was taken out would of changed calculation on a large scale!



Your the one that claimed that a F-313 will not be detected at that range!



Yes it is possible & easily within Iran's capability to do with little adjustment to the existing OWJ engines! Building larger diameter engines is well within Iran's capability to do especially if you don't change the length of the Turbines and compressors!
The hard part would always be increasing lifespan, and reducing fuel consumption! And even in that aspect it would be easier to play around with on a larger diameter engine rather than a smaller diameter engine.



In terms of Air to Air capability what your claiming is absurd! Any fighter can fly low! That's a tactic you don't limit and build fighters around one tactic! It's absurd!

Your not just limiting speed! Your limiting climb rate, turn rate, maneuverability, speed, BVR capability,...



What ever the range is Iran claims it's a Mid range Air to Air missile!



IADS can do all the detection it wants the point is there is no way you can target the aircraft unless it can somehow have two way secured communication with the fighter having it's direct coordinates & guide the missile to a range where it can turn on it's active seeker!

Flying low in GE mode limits line of sight limiting your ability to have secured 2 way communication in GE in between mountains in the middle of nowhere

One way frequency will never be secure because you don't know who is broadcasting and who your targeting!



Absolutely WRONG! Their belly are stealth only at level flight! If they show their belly in a high angle turn or climb they will be detected! ALL OF THEM!





It's not just the Fuselage! It's the wings, Engines, intakes,...

And your making things up! What part of it is Honeycombed & I'll explain to you how!

Is it the skeleton of the nose that's honeycombed? If so you cut it in any shape you want it!
Is it the skin? if that was the case you would need 4-5 flat pieces welded or bolted to each other for the nonsense your saying to make any kind of sense! which it is nonsense! Your making up excuse for a pour job!
There are no 4-5 pieces! It's a single peace mold on the nose and you can cut out the mold for the Airframe in any shape you want with little effect!

Your just making up BS & you just wanna make sense out of something that doesn't make sense using cost as an excuse!

As I repeated a million times already the F-22 is more expensive due to the amount of Ti used & Ti Casting of large parts that require larger tools that's what sets it apart not whether it was rounded or straight!

The reason why the F-117 is shaped that way was due to a miss understanding as to what caused it to be stealth!
And once the U.S. got into detail as to why, they stopped building stealth Aircraft in that manner!





Again, your basing your info on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!

An Air to Air missile in a ballistic trajectory will have a longer range at lower altitude! That's FACT! That's common sense!

Now you can claim your radar targeting will be effected due to ground clutter! That is factual! But the range of your missile is not going to be reduced by the numbers your claiming! In fact the opposite is true if your trying to calculate the max range of a missile your range will reduce at higher altitudes!
Also nothing is stopping Russian Fighter from flying low either!




What you like and what reality is are two different things!



Iran hasn't been without an Air Force! Hell in the 90's the Americans shredded their own F-14's because they didn't want Iran flying it's own F-14's and over the years they have gone to great lengths to prevent Iran from having a real Air Force So NO! Absolutely WRONG!

If Iran had purchased only 12 Su-27/Su-30 fighters a year for the past 2 decades it would have been much stronger today than it already is NOT LESS!

And no one in their right mind would ever suggest that the Missile Program should be cut for a fighter program! That's absurd! It's like saying from now on I'm not going to buy shoes only socks! It's absurd!
You need shoes and socks! Air Force & Missiles!

Security challenges change, countries adapt & if you fail to adapt you will lose! F-313 looks like a covert US attempt to prevent Iran from having a Air force that could challenge their Air Superiority!
Why every time they try to build a fighter they stick with small diameter engines or single engine fighters in an Oil rich country with vast territory it's absurd!

I'd rather have a larger faster fighter capable of firing more capable missiles!
MiG-25 was a steel base Airframe! I'd rather see Iran build an interceptor like that to make up the difference than the F-313 in an Air to Air role


Will we ever though be able to challenge U.S Airpower in case of war, even with large quantities of Su-30's or Su-35 or Iranian equivalent. I'm not saying we shouldn't even have a program or spend any money on airforce. Airforce is really key element in modern warfare. But in terms of going up against say, 2 b-1 lancers, and 4 F-22's. These 6 fighters with long range firepower alone will destroy dozens of aircraft.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom