IRIAF | News and Discussions

[Ray_Atek]

Iriaf should move toward yf-17 as usa , the documents of it already in Irief hand from shah era or mig29, or move to some other heavier platform than F5.
With putting Air Intake under wings which is hard step.
The era to have high diameter A2A missile has finished as china prove it and Kowsar can carry 4 to 6 A2A light missile easily (3 ton payload) but for short rang and difficult to insure on it for point Air defence systems protection.
With this production rate of Kowsar which has short range and less payload to carry than F16, it is difficult to guess Iriaf target for holding f5 production line.
Upgrading Irief F7 or su22 platform to Pakistani jf17 or same with technology transfer may help more.

 

[mack8]

If they deliver another batch of Yasin trainer jets , then they have plan to continue domestic fighter jets program, if not , then we can forget out domestic fighter jets till Russia stops provide fighters and they would be forced to commit on it ...

side note : IMO purchase of Yak-130 is one of direct result of performing Yasin flight test. Russians saw if they don't supply Iran with Yak-130 , Iran can build its own trainer jet and maybe this is their last opportunity to sell trainer jet to Iran ...

Sorry, but that's just misleading. Considering the track record to date of the manned aviation sector which imo has been the worse of all iranian indigenous efforts (BMs, drones, SAMs etc. programs produced good, highly respectable results, but should i go on again about the pathetic Saeqeh saga or the Qaher abomination that wasted very valuable time and money, but even worse brought embarassment on Iran?), even in the best possible scenario i can't see the Yasin in service much before 2030. The second, improved prototype hasn't even flown yet, never mind going through all the testing necessary for a new aircraft, nevermind correcting any eventual flaws.

And what "another batch" are you talking about? Again, there are only 2 Yasins to date, the demonstrator and the second, unflown as of yet, improved airframe.

The Yak-130 is available now, and the current political situation finally led to it's delivery. That is all.

 

[mack8]

The only problem with MIG-35 is it’s still in prototype stage. Less than 10 exist (8). I’m not sure realistically at this time Russia has the time to build these during the Ukraine war or even wants to.

Getting SU-30 & SU-35 while getting our own MIG and SU upgraded would be HUGE.

I would focus on joint development of SU-75 “checkmate” (not to be confused with SU-57) with Russia for the future.

With 6th gen USAF fighters emerging sometime in mid 2030’s along with Turkish and NATO next gen fighter jets, any additional 4th gen purchases seems a waste.

SU-35 provides an immediate IADS protector, but eventually Iran will need 5th gen low RCS protectors to increase survivability wether that comes from Russia or Iran’s domestic development or both, doesn’t matter. By 2030’s even the Arabs will be flying 5th Gen fighters (US, European, or Chinese).

Me i call MiG-35 all the new airframes such as Egypt and Algeria has, this whole MiG-29M/MiG-35 confusion is silly imo. The only difference between the two is whether the AESA radar is present or not.

That Russia hasn't ordered larger numbers of MiG-35s is a grave mistake imo, they would have been a welcome addition in the current situation.

As to a hypothetical Iran order, even if the AESA radar is not ready yet it's not the end of the world, they can be upgraded later on. What it brings to the table is availability, thus quickly building up numbers, replacing the F-5, at least in frontline service. Besides MiG would very much welcome such an order and probably give Iran a good deal.

Besides there could also be scope of further cooperation with MiG, Yasin is quite similar to MiG-AT so probabaly MiG could help speed things up for instance.

 

[Gomig-21]

I used to spend time on FDZ ages ago, though my french was too bad to keep using.

It was much better than mine!

Re the Su-35 in iranian hands and the US/israelis shooting themselves in the foot, that's one of the reasons i want to see IRIAF Su-35 so badly. If that will be confirmed then we can laugh at the yanks and israelis for being absolute suckers and losers whenever we see an IRIAF Su-35.

Yep. Hard to believe all the US defense and intelligence hanchos muchachos didn't think of that possibility. They're so hell bent on attacking Iran for Israel's sake (which is absolutely ridiculous & beyond belief) that they didn't think of that possibility when pressuring Egypt to give them up!? They must've of so maybe it's just a never-ending trust issue with Egypt.

And we know the US is constantly "reviewing" (for the lack of a better term) the plan of attack on Iran because of the recent phone calls from Trump that were recorded of him having classified documents at his Mar-A-Lago estate that were complete Department of Defense breakdowns and strike plans for attacking Iran's 5 nuclear sites. So we know that at least Trump has had a hard-on boner for that, and those plans are definitely on record for if they ever decide to pull it off.

I'd hate to see the US get involved in such a terrible thing, and if the Jews go alone, then all the power to the IRIAF Su-35s to pick them off. Imagine Iranian SU-35s and F-14s popping a bunch of aggressors F-35s? Wow, what a thing that would be.

And man the Su-35 in EAF cammo looks absolutely gorgeous.

Bruh...you're gonna make me cry again.
We were surprised to see the MiG-29M/M2s come in this desert camo since all the testing platforms were painted in it.

Which was the same as the Ka-52s and several of the transport aircraft. But then they showed up in that blue/grey scheme.

We figured they would be mostly assigned to interception and coastal patrolling/anti-ship missions (similar to the F-7 AIRGUARD tasks) since it looked like a naval camo. But that hasn't been the case. Only thing we came up with was that it's a close match to the old MiG-19s/F-6 from way back and isn't for specific & dedicated missions.

That was a better choice for the Su-35s than the desert colors for sure. I also agree with you on the M/M2 designation that it shouldn't be the case simply because they came with the Zhuk-ME pulse doppler radar and not the Zhuk-AE AESA. The only other difference is the MiG-35 has a built-in target designator instead of the M/M2 which has to use the T-220 pod. Big deal, but it is what it is.

The other thing to look out for with Iran's potential Su-35s is the EAF seemed to have ordered the standard R-77 (RVV-AE) with the MiG-29s and not the R-77-1 (RVV-SD) which was available for export and is the upgraded version of that missile with longer range and other better guidance & homing features. Even better would've been the R-77M with even longer range. But I'm with you on the greater ranges might not be such an advantage once these things are traveling 200kms. The same with the R-73 they ordered instead of the R-74.

Plus they didn't order any of the R-27 variants which I thought for sure they would. So we thought they must've been waiting for the radar upgrade to the Zhuk-AE (which was part of the MiG deal) but Russia hasn't been able to finalize that. That was also part of a request for an additional 70 MiG-35s but because of the delay in the radar, MiG hasn't been able to finalize the MiG-35 operationally. The other obstacle is probably CAATSA.
Sucks biiiiiig tiiiiiime.

All that being said, Iran should get the R-77-1 or M, the R-27EA or EM, and the R-74 (RVV-MD) for better short-range off-boresight angle and NEZ. Stack them up, fellas. They'll need to load up on the best air-to-air and air-to-ship missiles to dedicate the Su-35IR (for Iran ) and have them assigned to interception and naval attack missions along with the F-14s.

 

[drmeson]

I always appreciate your technical insight,

Thanks

though we shouldn't overhype the Fakkour into something that it's not.

Nobody is hyping anything. I merely responded to the Turkish troll.

For one the range is nothing special nowadays, 150 km is pretty much matched by the AIM-120D and Meteor among others,

Nobody is operating AIM-120D or Meteor in the Iranian neighborhood right now except for Qatar whose only Forward Airbase (FAB) will be turned into rubble by IRGC's missile command if they go rogue against Iran. There goes the entire fleet.

By the time Saudis integrate Meteor on EF-2000 Iran will have Maghsoud ARH with 200 KM range. Remember IRIAF's job is to defend Iranian airspace so F-14A/Am has no reason to leave the IADS cover.

you'd think with modern electronics and rocket motors you'd easily get 200 plus km out of it

electronics has nothing to do with range.

Also it's a big and not highly maneuverable missile, so perhaps not as good at killing other fighters as other designs.

Not exactly. Fakour's airframe is ~80-90% AIM-54 like with a more powerful Solid rocket motor M118. AIM-54 could reach 4-5 Mach pulling 20G's so you can imagine what Fakour-90 will be doing with even stronger motor.

Of course any oponent using older missiles such as AIM-120C would be in serious trouble when facing the Fakkour.

This is indeed the current situation. By time others will have AIM-120C-7/AIM-120D or Meteor. IRIAF will have the following

BVR
Maghsoud ARH+ECM 200KM (F-14AM)
Fakour-90 SARH+ECM 150KM (F-14AM)
R-77SD ARH 110 KM (MIG-29SMT, SU-35S)
Arash AIM-7 100 KM? (Kowsar-1, F-14AM)

But again, to really count for something, all the IRIAF F-14 fleet must be upgraded to the AM standard and able to fire the Fakkour.

Current inventory is 100 x Fakour-90 (delivered in 2020) + 30 overhauled AIM-54+
Current number of F-14AM is barely 10-15 out of a fleet of 42 operational airframes. How many are deployed as FMC interceptors, varies.

Regardless of the above, Fakkour is a very important development and advance for IRIAF despite whatever limitations it might have, much better to have it than not.

You are right, without Fakour, there were only 30 x overhauled AIM-54 left.

On the other hand the R-37M looks to be a real killer in Ukraine, imo i think mainly because of it's very long range (as far as 300 km as i see written, so it's launched well outside the opponents range and forces him defensive) and high speed so perhaps the Maghsound with 200km range and ARH seeker will be a significant improvement for IRIAF over the Fakkour.

Russia will never share R-37M with anyone. Maghsoud is shown but not tested yet.

 

[drmeson]

Simply put, if SARH was good enough, we would still be using it.

LUL wat????

On paper Phoenix has a lot of range but you can't utilize it.

Same can be said about AIM-120D, Meteor, R-37 ... none of the long range missiles have ever killed anything at their max ranges. BVR is a deterent more than an actual killer.

In reality you will spend your 4-6 missiles at long range, the enemy will close in and kill you with the remainder of his 12 fucking missiles.

If an F-14AM releases Fakour missiles after 10 KM each that means from 150 KM to 100 KM away, 4-6 missiles are coming at 4-5 Mach at the enemy aircraft while pulling 15-20G's, they cant be jammed either because of ECM and SARH illumination, they wont loose the track because they are tested against flying wings UCAVs of IRGC ... no aircraft in the world can survive that kind of attack. You will not understand this offcourse.

Any idiot can make a big missile

Except for US (AIM-54), Russia (R-33, R-37), Iran (Fakour-90, Maghsoud), nobody ever could.

The ability to make it smaller to make it fit into an internal weapons bay, the ability to make it lighter so that you can carry ridiculous numbers like 12 is what matters in 21st century.

LUL wat???

 

[HAIDER]

Russian-made combat trainer aircraft joins Iran’s Air Force​

Updated 8:01 AM CDT, September 2, 2023
Share
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran’s news agencies are reporting that a Russian-made YAK-130 combat trainer aircraft is in the country and has joined the Air Force.
The report by ISNA said the advanced combat trainer aircraft is able to meet the training needs of pilots to learn to fly 4th-generation fighters.
In April, Iran announced that it had finalized a deal to buy Su-35 fighter jets from Russia.
Iran and Russia have a close relationship, especially in military equipment.
Iranian drones have been a key element of Russia’s continued war on Ukraine. Tehran has offered a series of contradictory explanations about the drones, first denying it supplied them to Moscow and then claiming it sold drones only before the war began. However, the volume of drones used in the conflict shows a steady supply by Iran of the bomb-carrying weapons in the war.
In June, the White House said Iran is providing Russia with materials to build a drone manufacturing plant east of Moscow as the Kremlin looks to lock in a steady supply of weaponry.

The Avionica fly-by-wire flight control system is used to adjust the stability and controllability characteristics and flight safety systems to simulate a number of aircraft such as the MiG-29, Su-27, Su-30, F-15, F-16, F-18, Mirage 2000, Rafale, Typhoon and future fighters such as the F-35.

The pilot selects the software model of the simulated aircraft’s control system on the Yak-130 on-board computer. The pilot can select the model during flight. The system can be forgiving to allow cadet pilots the easy acquisition of piloting skills.

The open architecture avionics suite includes two computers and a three-channel information exchange multiplexer. The navigation suite includes laser gyroscopes and GLONASS / NAVSTAR global positioning.

 

[drmeson]

I hope that is the case. However, Historical Evidence on BVR points to the contrary. No one knows how F-90 would perform in wartime, but based on historical data of BVR use during warfare (including during the time its less modernized predecessors existed) paints a very unfavorable picture.

I’m sure the Iranian Air Force knows this since they were trained by USAF and hence there has not been massive investments in field of BVR by IRIAF.

A former US pilot wrote a briefing on how inaccurate BVRs are at securing kills.


In the AMRAAM project office, Air Force Col. James Burton had been handed the job of collecting hard information on the effectiveness of missiles in air-to-air combat. Burton studied all 407 known missile kills made in the air since 1958 (except for the 1967 Middle East war and Pakistan's 1971 clash with India), focusing hard on the 2,014 missile firings made during the Vietnam War and the 1973 and 1982 Middle East skirmishes.

Burton fast became one of the most unpopular men in the Pentagon. He titled the briefing he gave on his findings "Letting Combat Results Shape the Next Air-to-Air Missile." His findings: Of more than 260 Arab aircraft knocked down by Israel in 1973, only five fell to Sparrows in 12 firings. Of the 632 Sparrows fired in all the wars Burton studied, only 73 destroyed the airplane they were fired at, for a kill rating of 11%. The ancient Sidewinder did almost three times better: of some 1,000 Sidewinder firings, 308 kills resulted in a kill rating of 30%.

To the horror of those he briefed, Burton told them he found only four BVR kills in all the wars he covered. What is more, each of the four (two by Israel, two by F04s in Vietnam) was carefully staged outside the confusion of combat to prove BVR's combat worthiness. One Southeast Asia kill was listed as a MiG-21 when it was really an F-4 mistakenly identified and shot down using Combat Tree, the BVR identification equipment of the era that was supposed to sort friend from foe. According to Burton, the only reason Israel went after its two BVR kills was strong pressure from the U.S. to establish BVR doctrine.

In 1984, Burton managed to have the idea tested in McDonnell Douglas' differential maneuvering simulators. The results were devastating. Over and over, ARM-equipped fighters shot down AMRAAM aircraft and missiles. The results were turned over to the AMRAAM office, which invalidated them and threw out the exercise. In airborne tests in Nevada, Red Force aircraft using simple radar homing and warning devices could see Blue Force AMRAAM radars coming on 10 mi. away. The warnings allowed Red Force to turn away and beat the missile. When the AMRAAM radar was reset to come on 5 mi. from the target aircraft, the change negated the longed-for BVR scenario.

In 1969, the DOD tried to test an air-to-air ARM developed from the Sparrow airframe under the project name Brazo. At modest cost, three test firings destroyed three target drones. Amlie says the program "was cancelled when it could be interpreted as eliminating large radar fighters such as the F-14 and F-15, since the tests proved you could not use a radar fighter in combat when up against ARMs. The only countermeasure was to turn the radars off, so everything was swept under a rug." Now, department rumblings suggest that development of an air-to-air ARM is again under consideration.

More evidence:


The problems continued after Vietnam. In “Promise and Reality: Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Air-To-Air Combat” a 2005 paper done for the Air War College, Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Higby (now General Higby shows in great detail that from Vietnam up to Desert Storm the billions invested BVR missile technology contributed almost nothing to the United States’ domination of the skies. Combining data from Israeli and American missions, he finds that out of 632 shots taken with BVR-capable missiles, only four resulted in kills from beyond visual range — a scant 0.6 percent. During this same period, 528 air-to-air kills were made at closer range — 144 with guns and 384 with missiles fired at opponents within visual range.

We do have anecdotal evidence: In 1999, when two MiG-25s violated the no-fly zone over southern Iraq, U.S. fighters fired six of our most sophisticated BVR missiles at them. All six missiles missed and the MiG-25s escaped to fight another day. While pervasive coverage by AWACS surveillance and control planes has given our pilots much better friend-or-foe recognition, allowing more BVR shots to be taken, true BVR kills against competent opponents are rare.

A 2011 RAND report noted that enemies successfully engaged beyond visible range after 1991 “were fleeing, non-maneuvering, and did not employ countermeasures.” “In Operation Allied Force,” the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, RAND notes, “the Serbian MiG-29s that were shot down did not even have functioning radars.” In other words, we might now be achieving BVR kills against third-rate vastly outnumbered opponents while enjoying pervasive AWACS coverage. But that is a far cry from getting kills against equally skilled peer competitors in contested air space where we may be outnumbered in terms of both planes and missiles.

What if the World’s Most Expensive Fighter Planes Can’t Defeat Our Enemies? | National Review

www.nationalreview.com

There is no indication R-77 is any different than top of line Western BVRs. History has shown BVR capabilties is vastly overrated and has tremendously underperformed. (See my post above).

Go google BVR kill stats if you don’t believe me. Gonna take a wild guess and say there is less than 15 verified BVR kills in the history of warfare going back to 1960.

- It is stupidity to compare the electronics and motors of 1960s Early AIM-7 to modern BVR ARH/Dual guidance bearing missiles. It's like saying because SCUD-BM had a CEP of 500m in 1970s so Fattah HGV with its 2-5 m CEP must not be produced today.

- Only real BVR combats involving 4th and 3rd generation fighters actually happened in Iran-Iraq war where AIM-54+AIM-7E2 went against R-40, R-23, Matra. Both sides scored victories with BVR. Iranian aerial confirmed aerial kills were roughly 80% scored by AIM-54 alone. Iraqis also claim victories with R-40. BVR is not as useless as you trying to make it.

- If nothing else, BVR weapons act as disruptive deterrents more than actual kill vehicles in most cases. It's used to deter enemy aircraft from approaching their target. Even if it does not kill the enemy, it can shake them up to the point that they will no longer be able to achieve their goal. Examples exist in recent times as well.

 

[HAIDER]

An open architecture avionics suite installed on the Yak-130 allows a wide range of western weapon systems and guided missiles to be integrated including the AIM-9L Sidewinder, Magic 2 and the AGM-65 Maverick. Weapons fits include the Vikhr laser-guided missile, R-73 infrared-guided air-to-air missiles (NATO designation AA-11 Archer) and the Kh-25 ML (NATO designation AS-10 Karen) air-to-surface laser-guided missile. A Platan electro-optical guidance pod is installed under the fuselage for deployment of the KAB-500Kr guided bomb.​

AIM-9L Sidewinder​

af.mil
The Sidewinder is the most widespread Air-to-Air missile in the world; its first version, the AIM-9B, entered service in 1953 and since then it has been continuously updated up to the latest versions AIM-9L and AIM-9M and it boasts many imitation attempts, like the Russian AA-2 “Atoll” or the Israeli Rafael “Shafrir 2”.

It features four detachable double-delta control surfaces behind the nose and a roll stabilizing rear wing/rolleron assembly. The main components of the missiles are an infrared homing guidance system with “all aspect” capability, an explosive/fragmentation warhead weighting about 10 Kg and an active optical target detector. According to the avionic system of the carrier aircraft, the missile can be fired in two modes:

• “Boresight Mode”: IR seeker slaved to the aircraft weapon aiming system
• “Scan Mode”: IR seeker performs autonomous scanning

Technical specification

LENGTH:	2.87 m
DIAMETER:	127 mm
WING SPAN:	0.64 m
WEIGHT:	87 Kg
WARHEAD:	9.5 Kg HE/fragmentation
FUZE:	Active Laser
GUIDANCE:	IR
PROPULSION SYS.:	Rocket motor, solid propellant
RANGE:	8 Km

Source nibbio14.altervista.org

Magic 2 (R-550)​

Magic 2 missile​

Magic R550 -“All aspect” medium-range missile, developed in 1967 by Matra and entered service in 1974. Advanced aerodynamic characteristics, thanks to moving control fins near the nozzle, in combination with four aerodynamic vanes which serve to stabilize the flow for better control.​

LAUNCH-PLATFORM	Mirage 2000, Rafale, F-16, Sea Harrier, Mirage 5, Super Etendard, Mirage F1, Mirage III
DESIGNER	Marta, MBDA
COUNTRY	France
IN SERVICE	1975 (Magic) 1986 (Magic II)
TYPE	Short-range air-to-air missile
POWER PLANT	Rocket motor
Thrust, kN	–
DIMENSIONS
Length, mm	2750
Diameter, mm	160
Wing span, mm	470
WEIGHT
Weight, kg	89
Warhead weight, kg	30
Warhead type	Fragmentation
GUIDANCE SYSTEM	IR
PERFORMANCE
Speed, (Mach)	4
Range, km	15

Source redstar.gr​

AGM-65 Maverick​

AGM-65 Maverick​

Vikhr laser-guided missile​

turbosquid.com
The 9A4172 Vikhr is a Russian long-range anti-tank guided missile. It is known in the West as the AT-16 Scallion. It was developed in the Soviet Union during the 1980s. At the time Soviets needed a new missiles, to replace the 9K114 Shturm (AT-6 Spiral) system, that could penetrate contemporary Western main battle tanks with composite and explosive reactive armor, such as the American M1 Abrams, German Leopard 2, and British Challenger. Prototypes were tested by the Soviet armed forces in 1989. First production missiles were delivered in 1992. During the same year the Vikhr was first publicly revealed. Since its introduction sales of the Vikhr missile have been slow, partly because Russia also uses Ataka missile, developed by another manufacturer, which is similar in function, but uses different guidance. In 2013 Russian MoD ordered over 6 000 Vikhr-1 missiles in order to prevent the manufacturer from going bankrupt. Delivery was completed in 2016. The Vikhr has been exported to Egypt, and possibly some countries.

Launchers with the Vikhr missiles can be mounted on helicopters, vehicles and watercraft. This missile is typically used on Russian helicopters, such as the Ka-52, and Su-25T ground attack aircraft. However much more numerous Russian Mil attack helicopters, such as the Mi-24 and Mi-28 are typically equipped with broadly similar Ataka anti-tank missiles.

The Vikhr missiles are used in conjunction with APU-6 and APU-8 aviation launchers. The APU-6 launcher carries 6 missiles and is used on the Ka-50 helicopters. The APU-8 launcher carries 8 missiles and is used on the Su-25T ground attack aircraft.

Country of origin	Russia
Entered service	1992
Missile
Armor penetration	1 000 mm behind ERA
Missile length	2.75 m
Missile diameter	0.13 m
Fin span	0.38 m
Missile launch weight	45 kg
Warhead weight	10 – 12 kg
Warhead type	Tandem HEAT
Range of fire	up to 10 km
Guidance	Laser-guided

Source military-today.com​

R-73 infrared-guided air-to-air missiles (NATO designation AA-11 Archer)​

military.wikia.org
The R-73 short-range air-to-air missile was developed by “Molniya” (recently the special design bureau Nr.4) design bureau. It’s team at the beginning of the 1970s developed the R-60 missile and the R-73 was intended to replace it. It is known as the AA-11 “Archer” with NATO countries.

Missile features a wide angle infrared seeker and extreme maneuverability.

The R-73 is completed with a vectored trust system to makevery tight turns. It’s minimum range of fire is 0.3 km and missile is intended as a dogfight weapon in close air combats. Furthermore the R-73 is considered to be the most dangerous weapon system in close visual combat.

There were developed later variants of the R-73 missile:

– The R-73E missile features extended range;

– The R-73M1 (sometimes designated as R-73 RDM-1) features improved overall performance;

– The R-73M2 (R-73 RDM-2) has even better performance characteristics than it’s predecessor – the R-73M1;

– The K-74ME.

All these missiles have the same AA-11 “Archer” NATO designation.

Model	R-73E	R-73M1	R-73M2
Entered service in	?	1982	?
Range against closing target	< 30 km	30 km	40 km
Range against receding target	< 15 km	15 km	?
Weight	115 kg	105 kg	110 kg
Weight of warhead	7.4 kg	8 kg	?
Type of warhead	expanding rod
Speed	Mach 2.5
Guidance	infrared
Kill probability	?	0.6	?
Length	2.9 m
Diameter	0.17 m
Fin span	0.51 m
Carried by	Ka-50, Ka-52, MiG-29, MiG-31, Su-25, Su-27, Su-30, Su-33, Su-34, Su-35, Su-37, Su-39, Yak-141

Source enemyforces.net​

Kh-25 ML (NATO designation AS-10 Karen) air-to-surface laser-guided missile​

The Kh-25/Kh-25M (Russian: Х-25; NATO:AS-10 ‘Karen‘) is a family of Soviet lightweight air-to-ground missiles with a modular range of guidance systems and a range of 10 km. The anti-radar variant (Kh-25MP) is known to NATO as the AS-12 ‘Kegler‘ and has a range up to 40 km.Designed by Zvezda-Strela, the Kh-25 is derived from the laser-guided version of their Kh-23 Grom (AS-7 ‘Kerry’). It has now been succeeded by the Kh-38 family, but the Kh-25 remains in widespread use.​

The Kh-25 is very similar to the later version of the Kh-23, with cruciform canards and fins.

The Kh-25MP has two versions of its homing head, 1VP and 2VP, sensitive to different frequencies.

The original Kh-25 entered service with the Soviet Air Force between 1973-5, equipping the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23, MiG-27 and Sukhoi Su-17M. Since then it has been cleared for use on the MiG-21, MiG-29, Sukhoi Su-17/20/22 family, Sukhoi Su-24, Su-25 and Su-27. It can also be carried by attack helicopters such as the Kamov Ka-50.

Kh-25ML – semi-active laser guidance with tandem warhead that can penetrate 1 metre (39 in) of concrete.

Specifications
Weight	Kh-25ML :299 kg (659 lb) Kh-25MP :315 kg (694 lb)
Length	Kh-25ML :370.5 cm (12 ft 2 in) Kh-25MP 1VP :425.5 cm (167.5 in) Kh-25MP 2VP :435.5 cm (171.5 in)
Diameter	27.5 cm (10.8 in)
Warhead	High explosive, shell-forming
Warhead weight	Kh-25MP :89.6 kg (198 lb), Kh-25MR :140 kg (309 lb)
Wingspan	75.5 cm (29.7 in)
Operational range	Kh-25ML :11 km (5.9 nmi) Kh-25MP :up to 60 km (32 nmi) Kh-25MTP : 20 km (11 nmi)
Speed	Kh-25ML :1,370–2,410 km/h (850–1,500 mph) Kh-25MP :1,080–1,620 km/h (670–1,000 mph)
Guidance system	Laser guidance, passive radar, TV guidance, IIR, Satellite guidance,active radar homing depending on variant
Launch platform	MiG-21, MiG-23/27, MiG-29, Ka-52 , Su-17/20/22, Su-24,Su-25, Su-27, Yakovlev Yak-130 Kh-25MP : MiG-23/27, Su-17/22, Su-24, Su-25

Source wikipedia.org​

KAB-500Kr guided bomb​

The KAB-500Kr corrected air bomb is designed to engage stationary ground/surface small-sized hardened targets, such as reinforced concrete shelters, runways, railway and highway bridges, military industrial installations, warships, and transport vessels.

KAB-500Kr​

Weights: total/warhead/HE, kg	520/380/100
Dimensions:
length, m	3,05
diameter, m	0,35
empennage, m	0,75
Bomb drop altitude, km	0,5-5
Carrier speed, km/h	550…1100
Root mean square deviation, m	4…7
Warhead type	concrete-piercing
	(high explosive penetrator)

The aircraft is fitted with a 30mm GSh-301 cannon or a podded GSh-23 cannon installed under the fuselage. It can also deploy unguided B-8M and B-18 rockets, 250kg and 50kg bombs and cluster bombs.

B-8M rocket pod​

Wikimedia Commons
rocket pods B-8M1

– length: 2 760 mm
– body diameter: 520 mm
– the weight of the empty rocket pods: 160 kg
– the number of portable missiles: 20
– carrier: aircraft

Source armedconflicts.com

‘S-8’ 80mm unguided rocket​

The S-8 system is the main caliber weapon in the class of unguided aircraft rockets and can solve a variety of aircraft missions.

The rocket is provided with a solid propellant motor with a summary thrust pulse of 5,800 N.s and operating time of 0.7 s. Progressive methods for body shaping from ready-made rolled aluminum and unique engineering solutions in terms of separate elements aimed at reducing motor manufacturing labor consumption and costs are used in its construction.

The following types of S-8 rockets are operational today:

• • S-8KOM with HEAT fragmentation warhead;
  • S-8BM with concrete-piercing (penetrating) warhead;
  • S-8-OM with illuminating warhead.

B-13 Rocket pod​

KAB-500Kr guided bomb and B-13 Rocket pod​

‘S-13’ type 122mm unguided rocket​

The S-13 is a 122 mm calibre unguided rocket weapon developed by the Soviet Air Force for use by military aircraft. It remains in service with the Russian Air Force and some other countries.

S-13T: Tandem HEAT, range 1.1 – 4 km Combined penetration of 6 m of earth and 1 m of reinforced concrete. Velocity 500 m/s.

S-13T​

S-13OF: The only 122mm rocket available, this large rocket packs a blast-fragmentation warhead with some serious wallop, dealing significant damage to soft targets and lightly armored vehicles, and can even destroy a main battle tank with a direct hit. With only 5 rockets per pod, accurate delivery is key.

The S-13OF​

30mm GSh-301 cannon​

​

30mm GSh-301 cannon​

The GSh-301 is a modern Soviet single barrel autocannon with a high rate of fire. It arms the two most common types of Soviet multirole fighters, the MiG-29 and the larger Su-27.

The GSh-301 fires the 30x165mm round at a rate of fire of 1.500 to 1.800 rpm. Short bursts are fired. A 100 round burst destroys the barrel. Effective range is quoted as 200 to 800 m against aerial targets and 1.200 to 1.800 m against ground targets. Combined with targeting computer and laser range finder accuracy is reported to be good.

Type	Autocannon
Caliber	30x165mm Soviet
Mechanism	Short recoil operated
Barrel	1.500 m barrel
Dimensions	1.978 m long, 156 mm wide, 185 mm tall
Weight	46 kg
Feeding	Single belt feed
Rate of fire	1.500 – 1.800 rpm
Muzzle velocity	860 m/s
Recoil	?
Remarks	2.000 round barrel life

Source weaponsystems.net

GSh-23 cannon gun pod​

The GSh-23 functions on the Gast principle. In this twin barrel setup the recoil from one barrel cycles the action of the other, allowing for an instant high rate of fire. The GSh-23 is belt fed from a single belt. The GSh-23L adds a muzzle brake that helps reduce recoil. Both GSh-23 and GSh-23L are solenoid fired.

The GSh-23 fires the 23x115mm round that is also widely used in other Soviet aircraft cannon. The rate of fire is 3.000 to 3.400 rpm and is instantly achieved as opposed to Gatling type weapons. The muzzle velocity of 715 m/s is low compared to other modern aircraft cannon.

Image: Makarov Aleksey

Type	Autocannon
Caliber	23x115mm AM-23
Mechanism	Gas operated, Gast principle
Barrel	Twin barrel, 1.000 m, rifled, 10 grooves, 575 mm right hand twist
Dimensions	1.387 m long, 165 mm wide, 168 mm tall
Weight	50 kg
Feeding	Single belt feed
Rate of fire	3.000 – 3.400 rpm
Muzzle velocity	700 – 730 m/s
Recoil	2.900 kg recoil force
Remarks	Muzzle brake

Source weaponsystems.net​

RADAR​

The Yak-130 is fitted with the 8GHz to 12.5GHz Osa or Oca (Wasp) radar developed by NIIP Zhukovsky. The radar has the capacity to track eight airborne targets simultaneously, simultaneously engage four targets at all angles and simultaneously track two ground targets. The detection range against 5m² cross section targets is 40km in the rear direction and 85km in the forward direction. The lock-on range for operation in automatic tracking mode is 65km.​

 

[drmeson]

I said here on this forum that the IRIAF is thinking of the 5th generation but they are already aiming in their research for the 6th generation of combat aircraft.

Just shut up man. please.

For god sake Fakour 90 just like AIM 54 use ARH guidance

Please provide evidence of Fakour-90 using ARH seekers

The only problem with MIG-35 is it’s still in prototype stage. Less than 10 exist (8). I’m not sure realistically at this time Russia has the time to build these during the Ukraine war or even wants to.

BS logic

MIG-35 = MIG-29KR or Fulcrum D, produced on the same assembly line as MIG-29M/M2/K/KR.

100+ MIG-29K/KR exist.

Changing the designation from "29KR" to "35" does not make it a different plane.

 

[TheImmortal]

- It is stupidity to compare the electronics and motors of 1960s Early AIM-7 to modern BVR ARH/Dual guidance bearing missiles. It's like saying because SCUD-BM had a CEP of 500m in 1970s so Fattah HGV with its 2-5 m CEP must not be produced today.

You missed the RAND report comparing the kills since 1991 and efficacy of BVR. I would trust the analysis of an institute such a RAND. BVR electronics have improved, but there is no indication that has led to a higher kill rate especially when considering the advancement in aircraft. Your BM analogy is off the mark and irrelevant to the discussion regarding A2A combat. Let’s keep it on topic.

Technology is a double edge sword for your argument, look at ECW/jammers in 1960’s vs 2020’s. Look at RCS in 1960-1980’s vs RCS today. It’s not like 1960’s tech was not advanced, Iran still cannot produce the equivalent of a F-14 radar or something more advanced. So clearly electronics in this era were quite formidable and still relevant today. Yes electronics have improved, but fighter jet countermeasures and advancements in engine tech/radar/ECM are much higher today than I would say the jump from an Iran’s US supplied AIM missiles to Fakour-90.

Look at how R-73M is performing in Ukraine. I posted an article regarding that.

- Only real BVR combats involving 4th and 3rd generation fighters actually happened in Iran-Iraq war where AIM-54+AIM-7E2 went against R-40, R-23, Matra. Both sides scored victories with BVR. Iranian aerial confirmed aerial kills were roughly 80% scored by AIM-54 alone. Iraqis also claim victories with R-40. BVR is not as useless as you trying to make it.

This is not quite true. If you have data to support this I will gladly accept it. Both sides made a lot of claims that are difficult to verify. I mean look at how many jets Iran claims to have destroyed alone (both on the ground and in the air)

Furthermore, air scored kills we don’t know how many missiles were fired to score 1 kill and the range it happened. You can fire BVR missiles at visual range and the study found that happened more often than not. So just because a BVR missile was used =/= it was done at BVR range.

Lastly If you have to fire 10 missiles to score a kill. That’s a kill probability of 10%. Not very good and not exactly sustainable in a long war of attrition.

But as for Iraq let me say this:

• The MiG-21 was Iraq's primary air defense fighter when the war began, and was provided to Iraq in the standard export version. This aircraft is a moderately effective medium to high altitude day fighter with a mediocre radar and avionics. The Iraqis indicate that their versions of the MiG-21 lack adequate radar range, look-up capability, gun computers and missile fire controls. They are "blind" in the look-down or low altitude combat mode, and the pilot must rely on visual sighting and fire control. This means the fighter has little or no low altitude or beyond visual range search and kill capability, except when he is vectored precisely to a target by external radars. Even then, the MiG-21 lacks modern gun sights and an effective air-to-air missile system for dogfighting against low flying attacker.
• MiG-23 has some times been described as a "miniaturized F-4," but this description is incorrect. The MiG-23 can perform the same general spectrum of roles, but has grossly inferior avionics. The export model of the MiG-23 is referred to as the "Flogger E" by NATO, and has the same high Mach airframe and systems as the MiG-23 fighter, but uses the inferior "Spin Scan" radar instead of the latter's "High Lark" nose radar. It lacks effective look-up and look- down capability, uses the inadequate Sirena-2 radar warning radar, has mediocre fire control avionics, and can only use the AA-2 air-to-air missile rather than the AA-7 and AA-8 used on Soviet versions of the MiG-23
• Iraqis evidently received 25 sanitized versions of the MiG-29 Fulcrum in May-1987, bit it did not play a major role in the fighting. The aircraft rapidly proved to be fuel hungry and difficult to maintain. It was also delivered without the advanced look down-shoot down radars and computers which are standard on Soviet models of the MiG-29, and the Iraqi version can only be used in day fighter roles. The Soviets evidently supplied the MiG-29s in this condition in spite of Iraqi demands for the Soviet version aircraft. They refused Iraq deliveries of more advanced versions of the MiG-23 and MiG-27
• Some reports have suggested that Iraq's Soviet-made aircraft, like their Soviet counterparts, contain onboard anti-jamming (ECM) gear, in contrast to the Western emphasis on specialized jammer planes. There is little evidence, however, of internal ECM capability onboard any Iraq MiGs or Sukhois, and the Iraqis have bought external ECM pods in the West. Iraq does seem to have improved its ECM and countermeasure capabilities in 1987 and 1988, but reliable details are not available.
• The Mirage F-1 is powered by one 15,870-pound SNEMCA Atar 9K50 afterburning turbojet. It is armed with two 30 mm DEFA 553 cannon with 125 rounds per gun. In the interceptor role it normally carries two R550 Magic IR air-to-air missiles for short range combat and one Super 530F radar homing air-to-air missiles, and carries up to 4,000 kg (8,000 pounds) of ordnance in the attack role. Iraq currently has Mirage F-1EQ, F-1EQ-200, and F-1EQ5 aircraft. There is also a dual seat trainer. The basic version of the Mirage F-1EQ has the more advanced avionics required by the all-weather role, but does not have high radar range, an advanced avionics computer, or a true look-down capability. Some of the Mirage F-1s have been stripped of their air defense avionics to provide increased range, have extra fuel tanks and can carry the AM-39 Exocet

https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/media/csis/pubs/9005lessonsiraniraqii-chap13.pdf

- If nothing else, BVR weapons act as disruptive deterrents more than actual kill vehicles in most cases. It's used to deter enemy aircraft from approaching their target. Even if it does not kill the enemy, it can shake them up to the point that they will no longer be able to achieve their goal. Examples exist in recent times as well.

This I agree with which works if you have an airforce that is vulnerable to anti air fire like Russia does. However if your opponent is masters in ECM and can see the locations of your radars radiation from space ISR (Israel and USA) or they have 100+ 5th Gen fighters with <.01 front RCS m2 then they will challenge you during war. So the scare factor is alot less.

If you get a chance read the R-37M article I posted. I’d like to hear your opinion.

But BVR to me is vastly overrated. Even today ground based radar with air defense missiles much stronger/faster/bigger guidance unit than A2A missile can struggle to down a target outside 75KM+ in war time. There is simple too many options a modern fighter jet has to counter at very long distances of 100KM+

 

[TheImmortal]

BS logic

MIG-35 = MIG-29KR or Fulcrum D, produced on the same assembly line as MIG-29M/M2/K/KR.

User said MIG-35 not MIG-29KR or the derivatives. I correctly pointed out MIG-35 (with its upgraded radar and avionics suite) is still in test bed mode.

Furthermore, in 03/2021 MIG was merged into Sukhoi due to financial difficulties. They sold quite a lot of their land in the process. There have been no new foreign orders for MIGs since 2019-2020 and no major deliveries of MIG-35 either to Russian air force. The hyped MIG-41 is no where to be heard of.

I don’t see why Sukhoi would spend the headache of building MIGs for Iran when it has its own assembly lines building it’s own product. The future of MIG is in doubt and only the Russian military could save it at this point, not Iran and its relatively small order book. Does not make much logistical sense to boot up and retro fit factories for 1-2 squadron order.

So there is no “BS logic”. MIG-35 is simply not feasible order and MIG-29s can be added to the list as well. Unless Iran wants to buy used ones from the Russian airforce.

I further don’t see the value in the long run 2030+ carrying more and more 4th Gen fighters. Unless Iran thinks it has zero chance of getting its hands on SU-75 checkmate or thinks it’s own domestic industry will not be able to build its own TFX project than yes buying more MIGs and SU-30/35 is better than having your IADS be under full strain during a major air war.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

Just shut up man. please.



Please provide evidence of Fakour-90 using ARH seekers



BS logic

MIG-35 = MIG-29KR or Fulcrum D, produced on the same assembly line as MIG-29M/M2/K/KR.

100+ MIG-29K/KR exist.

Changing the designation from "29KR" to "35" does not make it a different plane.

No, I will not be silent, yes the IRIAF is already working to move towards 6th generation aircraft. You stop your bullshit saying that there are 4 Kowsar, it's sane to say such bullshit.

 

[AmirPatriot]

Don't want to get too much into the BVR discussion but I will say that from my perspective Fakour is a disappointment and Maghsoud (if that project ever reaches fruition) would need a significant range advantage to justify how much heavier it is than the likes of AMRAAM/Meteor.

It was much better than mine!



Yep. Hard to believe all the US defense and intelligence hanchos muchachos didn't think of that possibility. They're so hell bent on attacking Iran for Israel's sake (which is absolutely ridiculous & beyond belief) that they didn't think of that possibility when pressuring Egypt to give them up!? They must've of so maybe it's just a never-ending trust issue with Egypt.

And we know the US is constantly "reviewing" (for the lack of a better term) the plan of attack on Iran because of the recent phone calls from Trump that were recorded of him having classified documents at his Mar-A-Lago estate that were complete Department of Defense breakdowns and strike plans for attacking Iran's 5 nuclear sites. So we know that at least Trump has had a hard-on boner for that, and those plans are definitely on record for if they ever decide to pull it off.

I'd hate to see the US get involved in such a terrible thing, and if the Jews go alone, then all the power to the IRIAF Su-35s to pick them off. Imagine Iranian SU-35s and F-14s popping a bunch of aggressors F-35s? Wow, what a thing that would be.


Bruh...you're gonna make me cry again.
We were surprised to see the MiG-29M/M2s come in this desert camo since all the testing platforms were painted in it.

View attachment 951834

Which was the same as the Ka-52s and several of the transport aircraft. But then they showed up in that blue/grey scheme.

View attachment 951826

We figured they would be mostly assigned to interception and coastal patrolling/anti-ship missions (similar to the F-7 AIRGUARD tasks) since it looked like a naval camo. But that hasn't been the case. Only thing we came up with was that it's a close match to the old MiG-19s/F-6 from way back and isn't for specific & dedicated missions.

View attachment 951829

That was a better choice for the Su-35s than the desert colors for sure. I also agree with you on the M/M2 designation that it shouldn't be the case simply because they came with the Zhuk-ME pulse doppler radar and not the Zhuk-AE AESA. The only other difference is the MiG-35 has a built-in target designator instead of the M/M2 which has to use the T-220 pod. Big deal, but it is what it is.

The other thing to look out for with Iran's potential Su-35s is the EAF seemed to have ordered the standard R-77 (RVV-AE) with the MiG-29s and not the R-77-1 (RVV-SD) which was available for export and is the upgraded version of that missile with longer range and other better guidance & homing features. Even better would've been the R-77M with even longer range. But I'm with you on the greater ranges might not be such an advantage once these things are traveling 200kms. The same with the R-73 they ordered instead of the R-74.

Plus they didn't order any of the R-27 variants which I thought for sure they would. So we thought they must've been waiting for the radar upgrade to the Zhuk-AE (which was part of the MiG deal) but Russia hasn't been able to finalize that. That was also part of a request for an additional 70 MiG-35s but because of the delay in the radar, MiG hasn't been able to finalize the MiG-35 operationally. The other obstacle is probably CAATSA.
Sucks biiiiiig tiiiiiime.

All that being said, Iran should get the R-77-1 or M, the R-27EA or EM, and the R-74 (RVV-MD) for better short-range off-boresight angle and NEZ. Stack them up, fellas. They'll need to load up on the best air-to-air and air-to-ship missiles to dedicate the Su-35IR (for Iran ) and have them assigned to interception and naval attack missions along with the F-14s.

I would sure hope that Iran does go with the R-74 and R-77-1, instead of the older versions. The IRIAF knows first hand how powerful a missile range advantage is.

By the way, do you know if the Su-35's L-band arrays in the wing leading edge were part of the Egyptian order, or available for export at all? From what I can gather they're IFF arrays, so I would hope they're included but I guess even if they weren't the Irbis would have some kind of integrated IFF array.

 

[sami_1]

It was much better than mine!



Yep. Hard to believe all the US defense and intelligence hanchos muchachos didn't think of that possibility. They're so hell bent on attacking Iran for Israel's sake (which is absolutely ridiculous & beyond belief) that they didn't think of that possibility when pressuring Egypt to give them up!? They must've of so maybe it's just a never-ending trust issue with Egypt.

And we know the US is constantly "reviewing" (for the lack of a better term) the plan of attack on Iran because of the recent phone calls from Trump that were recorded of him having classified documents at his Mar-A-Lago estate that were complete Department of Defense breakdowns and strike plans for attacking Iran's 5 nuclear sites. So we know that at least Trump has had a hard-on boner for that, and those plans are definitely on record for if they ever decide to pull it off.

I'd hate to see the US get involved in such a terrible thing, and if the Jews go alone, then all the power to the IRIAF Su-35s to pick them off. Imagine Iranian SU-35s and F-14s popping a bunch of aggressors F-35s? Wow, what a thing that would be.


Bruh...you're gonna make me cry again.
We were surprised to see the MiG-29M/M2s come in this desert camo since all the testing platforms were painted in it.

View attachment 951834

Which was the same as the Ka-52s and several of the transport aircraft. But then they showed up in that blue/grey scheme.

View attachment 951826

We figured they would be mostly assigned to interception and coastal patrolling/anti-ship missions (similar to the F-7 AIRGUARD tasks) since it looked like a naval camo. But that hasn't been the case. Only thing we came up with was that it's a close match to the old MiG-19s/F-6 from way back and isn't for specific & dedicated missions.

View attachment 951829

That was a better choice for the Su-35s than the desert colors for sure. I also agree with you on the M/M2 designation that it shouldn't be the case simply because they came with the Zhuk-ME pulse doppler radar and not the Zhuk-AE AESA. The only other difference is the MiG-35 has a built-in target designator instead of the M/M2 which has to use the T-220 pod. Big deal, but it is what it is.

The other thing to look out for with Iran's potential Su-35s is the EAF seemed to have ordered the standard R-77 (RVV-AE) with the MiG-29s and not the R-77-1 (RVV-SD) which was available for export and is the upgraded version of that missile with longer range and other better guidance & homing features. Even better would've been the R-77M with even longer range. But I'm with you on the greater ranges might not be such an advantage once these things are traveling 200kms. The same with the R-73 they ordered instead of the R-74.

Plus they didn't order any of the R-27 variants which I thought for sure they would. So we thought they must've been waiting for the radar upgrade to the Zhuk-AE (which was part of the MiG deal) but Russia hasn't been able to finalize that. That was also part of a request for an additional 70 MiG-35s but because of the delay in the radar, MiG hasn't been able to finalize the MiG-35 operationally. The other obstacle is probably CAATSA.
Sucks biiiiiig tiiiiiime.

All that being said, Iran should get the R-77-1 or M, the R-27EA or EM, and the R-74 (RVV-MD) for better short-range off-boresight angle and NEZ. Stack them up, fellas. They'll need to load up on the best air-to-air and air-to-ship missiles to dedicate the Su-35IR (for Iran ) and have them assigned to interception and naval attack missions along with the F-14s.

The policy pursued by the Iranians and Turks against other countries in an attempt to show that they are even better at buying weapons is reflected in the irrefutable facts.
All the weapons that Egypt requested from Russia were of special specifications for Egypt. For example, the KA-52 plane was equipped with better French cameras. Now the Russians have produced something similar to it in the KA-52M/K, KTS version. In the same way, the Egyptian plane was provided with the President-S countermeasure suite.
Which was not supplied by Russian aircraft to its fleet, and its losses increased
The structure was developed, so the Egyptian version has a special name
Nile Crocodile and the integration of Egypt's developments into the latest Russian versions, the KA-52, meaning that Egypt had a better vision.
MiG-29M

First, we understand why Egypt requested this plane, because United Warlite did not provide Egypt with the modern ammunition it requested for the F-16 fighter.
Among the most important of them are the AIM-120C7/8 missiles
Simply put, when Egypt requested the MIG-29, it requested it with special specifications and special equipment, so Algeria requested the Egyptian version directly
The plane remained under development until 2020 to integrate various Russian modern munitions into it according to Egyptian demands and not the munitions that other countries had acquired in the past.
What Egypt requested of copies of the R-77 missile is the R-77-1, RVV-SD version of 300 missiles. The Russians provided limited numbers of older copies as a gift only for Egypt to use in training instead of the newer versions
We come to another point, Egypt asked Russia for the R-77ME missile, and this was the condition for Egypt to obtain a new batch of the MIG-35 plane, which is to complete the development of the radar with specifications that are not less than the parallel western radar, in addition to special developments for Egypt on the structure and engine, whether for the MIG-29M version with an increase The proportions of composite materials and improving the reliability of the RD-33MK engine, as well as better propulsion capacity, meaning that Egypt did not buy the MIG-29M plane at a cost of $42 million for the plane, with the specifications and modifications requested by Egypt, and the MIG-35 plane. Until this moment, the AESA radar has not entered the actual production lines.
Therefore, Egypt is interested in the J-10 & FC-31 aircraft from China, and in order for us to know how important the missiles are to Egypt, Egypt has requested that the PL-15E missile be produced locally so that Egypt can obtain its highest specifications with a range between 200-300 kilometers instead of the export version of 145 kilometers. That is, the opinions. The naivety that says that Egypt obtains ammunition at modest levels is contrary to the Egyptian trends in the first place, which demand the best ammunition.

Coming to the subject of the Egyptian SU-35, Egypt requested modifications to the aircraft for 30 aircraft. These modifications are worth $550 million, including increasing the engine’s propulsion capacity to provide sufficient power for the AESA radar requested by Egypt, which is a copy of the SU-57 radar. The aircraft is lighter in weight by increasing the proportions of aircraft composite materials and systems. Electronic warfare and a better Avionics. Its manufacturing ended at the beginning of 2022, but the modifications required a longer time, so Egypt signed an agreement with Russia to keep the aircraft in Russia until the development program ends and the Russians also exploit Egyptian airports.
The Russians at the ARMY-2023 exhibition announced several news, including that there is a new country customer for the SU-35 plane, which is believed to be Iran and has nothing to do with the Egyptian deal at all. They doubled the production capacity of the SU-35/34 aircraft at a rate of 24 aircraft for each model and 12 Su-57 aircraft annually to meet the needs of the Russian Air Force and export markets, and all this after the completion of the last Russian request for the last batch of 28 aircraft and the end of manufacturing the Egyptian aircraft.
The same thing, the production line of the MIG-35 plane has reached 30 aircraft annually, and there is only one deal for export to an African country. Egypt rejected it due to its modest level, so the Italians offered the M346 plane, which Egypt rejected because the performance and price equation is unbalanced, and Egypt tended to compare between the T-50/FA-50 and LCA TEJAS planes. The matter here is Egypt looking for the best available plane to work as an advanced training plane LIFT / LCA CAS, and the price will drop Given that Egypt requires large numbers of locally produced 70 training aircraft, 10 planes for air games, 36-60 light fighters, meaning that the Egyptian demands are great, and if the Egyptians have a kind of intelligence, a training plane for sixth generation fighters can be developed that is derived from it with a more recent design than one of the designs of the winning plane in the tender that The winner will be announced at EDEX-2023
The problem with Iran is its aggressive and colonial policy, so it is subject to international sanctions. I understand that they have armament demands for their air force, which relies on the F-4/F-5/F-14 aircraft and even old copies of the MIG-29/SU-24 aircraft, and the same applies to antique and old ammunition, even if Its performance has been improved. It has simply not been tested. The success of the Iranian UAV came after its success in battles, and it does not need complex techniques. There is a difference between the production of Russian and Israeli anti-tank missiles and even copies of the American TOW / DROGAN missiles.
And the production of air-to-air missiles, so Iran’s production of AIM-54 missiles, even if with simple improvements, means that they are effective. The Iranians can argue, but the armament is integrated systems, i.e. aircraft, radar, communications systems and ammunition. They are talking about FAKUR-90 / AIM-7E2 missiles, old generations, limited effectiveness and they will be dangerous. On the fighters that carry it
Because it will face MICA/AIM-120 missiles, and it has been developed with combat experiences that have improved its performance.

The problem with the Turks and the Iranians is that complex weapons require multiple expertise and experiments in order to prove their success. The Turks have good chances because the West allowed them to transfer technology. Iran was obtaining some technologies from the West’s caliphs, and only Greece maintained Iranian aircraft to maintain its air fleet in secret.

Let us clarify important thingsWhy are the projects to reproduce the F-5 almost halted during 15 years? How many planes have been produced? 30 because there are no Western engines and components for them.The same applies to Iranian helicopters, in limited numbers
The same thing, the ALTAY tank project has been suspended since 2014 because there is no engine, and they accepted the unreliable Korean engine because there is no alternative.Why is Iran remanufacturing the F-5 plane and producing the Taiwanese AT-3 plane, because it has neither the components nor the real capabilities?Even the Iranians did not redesign the F-5 in a modern way or parallel to the lightest fourth generation fighters and even used it as a LIFT plane instead of obtaining the YAK-130 because they are simply products with limited capabilities and capabilities and are not suitable for modern battles.The Turks themselves, the HURHET project, are threatened with stopping if America does not provide them with the GE F-404 engine, even for versions with a propulsion capacity of 17,700 pounds. These projects are threatened by the lack of basic and main components other than the volume to spend on them.The military weakness of these countries is reflected in their ability to achieve their strategic interests in the Middle East and the GulfFor simple examples, can Iranian planes confront... RAFALE F3R / TYPHOON / F-16 BLOCK 72/60 FIGHTERS Any Iranian fighter will be discovered first before the Gulf fighters are even discovered.These are the reasons that made Egypt request Russian fighters with special specifications and also with local modifications and through other countries, and the Russians agreed for simple reasons. Egypt has better RAFALE fighters, better than the MIG-29M, and their experience is 40 years in modern Western fighters. The Russians responded by developing the SU-35 to Egypt’s demands simply because Egypt I explained to them the weaknesses of the Russian fighters and also paid for development. Here is a problem with the Iranians. They basically do not know the true capabilities of Western fighters and they have sanctions. So anything the Russians offer them they will accept because there is no alternative and the Sikhs are not better as some imagine. This reminds me of the first Egyptian arms deal with Russia in 1955. The Egyptians They bought Joseph Stalin's large, heavy tanks because they basically did not have real tanks. Therefore, anything offered by the Soviets is accepted by the Egyptians. Ignorance of the weapons capabilities and the capabilities of arming your enemy makes you choose low qualities. This point is ignored by those who only speak of great ignorance of the facts of matters.