IRIAF | News and Discussions

[AmirPatriot]

So I don't give you a source or example, but keep a professional approach before saying: "... has next to no technical credibility"...

If you have no sources or examples, then this is an unproven and experimental materials concept. Now, innovation is no bad thing, but you must remember the most advanced aircraft we've made is an F-5 with an extra tail and some newer electronics. We are in no position to try things the great powers of the aviation world haven't tried.

I'm not anti-titanium but ask any engineer with knowledge: Carbon fiber does everything titanium does, just better

Except that Titanium unlike Carbon Fibre is isotropic and can therefore hold tension in both directions, which would allow for more effective, cheaper, and less complex construction than just using Carbon Fibre.

If titanium wingboxes would be too expensive for a $8m airframe

$8 million for just the airframe without subsystems is still a little optimistic, but ok.

They don't block them, they would be at the outer, lower edge of the broad fuselage.

So you want them to stick out like the F-15E's side pylons (LCT-14 to LCT-16 in the below diagram). Not great for stealth.

All those systems are highly cost effective. Some of them are scientifically extremely advanced but none of them is in production as difficult to master as jet engine technology.

Then we do what we must do, and steal, bribe, reverse engineer, and hack the necessary technology for designing and producing jet engines. We cannot ignore this technology and make less advanced engines hoping we won't need the more advanced ones. It is an extremely important technology for the present and future.

Yes maneuverability is mainly for missile dodging these days.

Not really. HOBS missiles of the present cannot be dodged. Maneuverability is used for getting suitable firing positions on enemy aircraft.

 

[PeeD]

If you have no sources or examples, then this is an unproven and experimental materials concept. Now, innovation is no bad thing, but you must remember the most advanced aircraft we've made is an F-5 with an extra tail and some newer electronics. We are in no position to try things the great powers of the aviation world haven't tried.

That F-5 was just an IRIAF internal project, while the F-313 has the whole defense industry behind it and access to all available subsystems.
So the situation is very different.

As for no proven equivalent. The RQ-170 is one. It seems to have titanium load structures for the wings, but its wings are much longer and heavier loaded than the short weaponless F-313 wings.
I see a good chance to avoid massive use of expensive conventional load structures for the F-313.

Except that Titanium unlike Carbon Fibre is isotropic and can therefore hold tension in both directions, which would allow for more effective, cheaper, and less complex construction than just using Carbon Fibre.

In many directions yes. Whether it is cheaper remains open but it is certainly not more effective. Whether its anisotropic nature can't be exploited for the "wing boxes" remains open too. Whether Iran is not already strong in carbon fiber manufacturing, remains also open.
I want to see smart innovative solutions for a subsonic, 5g rated fighter. If titanium is for some reason more cost effective and available, go for it in the amount necessary.

$8 million for just the airframe without subsystems is still a little optimistic, but ok.

No, with everything the complete product.

So you want them to stick out like the F-15E's side pylons (LCT-14 to LCT-16 in the below diagram). Not great for stealth.

LCT 1-3 and RCT 1-3. Why you mention stealth? You asked for a secondary bomb truck capability. Any external weapons will compromise stealth but you wanted to have a massive bombing capability at low intensity phase.

Then we do what we must do, and steal, bribe, reverse engineer, and hack the necessary technology for designing and producing jet engines. We cannot ignore this technology and make less advanced engines hoping we won't need the more advanced ones. It is an extremely important technology for the present and future.

This is a difficult discipline that just requires experience, decades of materials experience in the production. That's why this capability can't become instantly available like most other fields.
They have started. The J90 is the first real product. We are in a fortunate position because out industry has companies like MAPNA which at least trains material engineers.
The point is, that just now Iran can allow the luxury to go for engine technology and mainly because of the RQ-170 in all it's ways, if you ask me.

Not really. HOBS missiles of the present cannot be dodged. Maneuverability is used for getting suitable firing positions on enemy aircraft.

It's about dodging BVR AAMs at the edges of its envelope... 5th gen. fighters will come at supersonic speed and high altitude and shot their BVR AAMs before you can shot. Maneuverability is not of much use for this concept, except for trying to dodge the AAM.
If they have spend all of their BVR AAMs they will just leave the battlefield at will and you 3-4 gen fighter can't hunt them.
Hence to get to the pole position for the AMRAAM shot, no super-maneuverability is needed.

Of course the F-313 better not agrees to these game rules.

 

[ashool]

You don't know me! And you don't know what I do know and what I don't know!
And a 500 meter CEP on a Ballistic Missile that has a range of 1700km for a country that not equipped with various space assets is astonishing!
The reason you think it's not is due to your limited knowledge on the subject!
And it's disrespectful to the kids that worked day and night to achieve it!
Achieving 500 meter CEP means you can target large facilities which allows you to cut that CEP by over 50% with further adjustments & upgrades
And FYI Iran was already working on Emad-2 when they tested the Emad so honestly YOU DON'T KNOW JACK!

As for the Materials used on the Airframe of the Q-313 again if you truly spoke Farsi and had the attention span of an adult you would know that the Airframe was made out of low cost materials based on info given by Iran it's self & what I know and how I know is NONE of your business!

1.and you know perfectly about them(are you minister of defense) 2. who said those things you so proud about. is perfectly right. 3 its an iranian forum and im iranian so its my business what you say about iran and iran made your pm full of maybe lie or Biased or negative wave i dont know this one . im 41 years old and im in army but i think if you are adult you are mad one be nice and accept you mistake

And FYI Iran was already working on Emad-2 when they tested the Emad so honestly YOU DON'T KNOW JACK!

nadide ghayb gofti .when you have no right information dont behavior like ..... attention you have no flag and i dont think (if you are iranian) you have good or honest option or negative personality about made in iran

 

[VEVAK]

You are too much in history. In 1980, the value and position of the airforce was much different than today with the advent of missiles and drones.

That's absolutely wrong! And has no factual bases! In fact if there was an inkling of truth in that statement Iran wouldn't of needed to the Russians to come in with their bombers & fighters to fight off a rag tag group of terrorists! Plus, all you have to do is look around at the money being spent to advance Air forces all across the globe!

Yes the number of fighter required has reduced because countries are buying more advanced more expensive force multipliers & they are replacing the need for "cheep" fighters with limited capabilities with missiles & UCAV's

Limited capabilities means limited sensor, radar, low payload with limited survivability due to a lack of speed, range, endurance, maneuverability & limited situational awareness!

I claim terrain masking and low level flight + VLO is better than a high-G manouver, for missile evasion. Now what?

Any Aircraft can fly low! specially with advanced Fly by wire systems extreme low level flights will be done by computers without the need of advanced flying skills! But is your airframe strong enough to do it & get hit a few times by AAA and shrapnel that's the real question!

And Speed, maneuverability & endurance are key in evading missiles just ask any fighter pilot!

Again you live in the past and take lessons of a technological past. Just like Russian subs were a better alternative than ground effect CM carriers (which is the reason why to didn't go forward with it) conventional airpower has better alternatives today for Iran.
Leaps in computers, memory, sensors totally change today form the 70's.

Yes technology has advanced which allows for thrust vectoring which means basing a Fighter Jet on GE is absurd!

The F-313 lacks the capability to be a useful offensive aircraft, hence it will mainly operate in friendly airspace with an advanced IADS. In cruise phase with GE it will be almost blind, but when it does the pop-up for target acquisition, its eyes will open. Irans IADS is more important than its airforce and hence will not be taken out anytime soon.

Working on IADS should not impede you from working on a fighter Air Frame and engines & if anything the tech gained should help with developing better weapons & sensors

If war start and your Air Force is limited to your own Air Space & your incapable of making your enemy death, dumb & blind then you will lose!

It seem you don't even understand the science behind why aircrafts fly at low levels if you think we need a fighter with GE capability to be used over our own airspace!

The reason you fly low is due to the line of sight, terrain and the curvature of the earth that limits ground based radars from detecting aircrafts regardless of it's shape and RCS!

So building a fighter to fly low but only over your own terrain is even more absurd!

... I tell you that faceted stealth is certainly cheaper during airframe manufacturing. This is a fact, anyone with any knowledge in engineering knows this. Advanced curved stealth is harder to manufacture and hence more expensive...

Its stealth features look sound up until now and will improve for the flight prototype.

O MY GOD! Inaccurate, absurd NONSESNE!

You can claim that radar deflection is a cheaper way to reduce RCS than RAM (Radar Absorbent Materials) but no one in their right mind would ever tell you that rounding off the edges using the same materials has any effect on price! That's absurd!

And again, for radar deflection to work you need to map the enemy radar & fly straight towards it! And if your claiming the F-313 will only be used over Iranian territory then what radar are you planning to fly it towards?

And if the Aircraft is meant to fly in GE mode then why the hell do you need radar deflection underneath your aircraft at all? again, nothing about the F-313 makes any type of sense!

You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...

Again: You can't credibly make that judgment. You know nothing about the involved parameters. Again you simplify things and get a distorted picture...

At this stage we see 6 large yaw moment producing control surfaces on two wings,

I'm sorry but if I see my country throwing it's self in an endless pit just because a few people that don't know a damn thing about what an Air Force & and fighter program should be think the F-313 looks cool and we should build it! When I see that happening & I see idiots on Iranian media that know nothing keep bringing it up that puts pressure on the MOD over a useless aircraft I sure as hell am going to judge and scream and makes as much noise as I can to prevent it when I know for a FACT that the country is capable of building something much more capable that that ridicules aircraft!

It is certainty subsonic. But you can't judge its speed, payload, endurance etc.
Just tell me why a T-38 can supercruise on dry J85? In your simplistic world, this should be impossible. A 4-5 ton jet go subsonic on 18KN =~1,8t thrust?
No, you cant make such judgment, aerospace is more complex than that.

You mean it can go Supersonic not Super cruise! The F-5 can also go Supersonic at altitude!

1st and foremost you have to see if your engine is capable of supersonic flight just because an engine has 20,000lbf doesn't necessarily make it supersonic!
2ndly there are Aerodynamic limitation for example the size, thickness & angle of the wings could restrict your speed
depending on your design and thrust a simple thing like taileron vs fixed low angle elevator will restrict speeds and if you have too much power a low angle elevator will cause your aircraft to shake so the aerodynamic properties of an aircraft from it's wings to it's canards(if there are any), the moving parts, taileron & fuselage are extremely important!

Next is the thrust to weight ratio of an aircraft although it clearly doesn't prevent you from going supersonic but if you want super cruise a lot of things have to go right & super cruise ONLY matters if you can do it on an armed aircraft or else an unarmed aircrafts performance is irrelevant in the world of combat fighters like the BD-10
That's why I'm not a fan of the F-16 or the F/A-18! Yes an unarmed F-16 & F/A-18 have a low RCS and they perform beautifully when they are not armed with anything & they can do a OK job when running away BUT like the F-5 put a fuel pod on them and a few thousand pounds of ordnance and then see how they preform!

Aha so how do you know the RCS of the F-117? We can approximate both in a paper of the size of a masters or better PhD degree via simulations. I myself think the F-117 has better stealth than the F-313, but I don't claim to know it for fact. You have a very flawed methodic.


Iran can have very good topological maps of the country for the F-313 to operate in and that's sufficient.
CMs are never easy to shot down and hard to detected both because of their low altitude and high subsonic speed. Now in Iran terrain masking gets added to this.
Btw. there is even a possibility that topological maps were captured with the RQ-170.

O MY GOD! Yes you know it for a FACT! Angle of the wing, Cockpit, Optical System,.... So yes you know it for a FACT!

Getting the topography for Iran is quite simple! The tech behind it is simple! And Iran has the sat to do it! Whether you wanna believe it or not the tech is not that complicated & Iran has it!

They better re-invent the wheel, because they lack the key, a state of the art engine like at the moment just Russians (about to) and Americans have. To compete with a kinematic monster at high altitude, you need that key.
It looks like they just did the best thing possible for a country with inferior engine technology. A completely different approach which keeps it out of the kinematic-altitude game but can kill those.

Chinese at least were never as creative as Iranians in defense. We should be proud about such unconventional solutions.

Your mistaken! va tavanaii bacheh ha e khodemoon o dast e kam megeerri! Do you see how many Iranians are working and JPL and NASA & these are kids coming from Iran not Iranian Americans that have been here for years! If you fail to invest in them then your failing the country!

Come on, it was never about fuel... It is about engines, engines and engines. If the RQ-170 was advanced to boost Iran to the edge of the competition, while to difficult to upscale, they better go for RQ-170 engine copies in the F-313. Its better than playing the 30-40 year old technology catch up game (RD-33/WS-10). A 10 year catch up game could be worth the effort.
I don't know whether the J90 is based on that engine but you mainly build a light fighter if you lack engine tech.
You also build light fighters to just buy the entry ticket into airpower. 100 license built Su-30 have no chance against US airpower, but 800 expandable F-313 might have.
Or more simple: 100 Su-30= joke, 800 F-313= a credible capability (still below IADS capability), 2000 F-313= a serious capability, 2000 Su-30= good way to bankruptcy= TKO.


That unconventional, unproven, never existed in similar form, F-313 might be just that.


Agreed and fortunately we see just that. Soon a fighter subsystems will be built at home and then we can talk about the serial production of the F-313 (if it is a real project).

RQ-170 style engines on a subsonic aircraft with limited sensor capability sure why not! But again that doesn't mean the F-313 is worth producing!

Iran's new defense minister has already announced that they plan on starting a real fighter project which again means the F-313 is clearly inadequate and they know it! I just hope they build a twin seat fighter off an existing 5th gen design like the F-22, YF-23 or J-33!

And how do your jump from 100 Su-30's to 2000 Su-30's?

With $50 Billion USD Iran can buy almost 500 Su-30's paid at a rate of $5 Billion per year in a span of a decade that would be $5 Billion USD a year & you cut your purchase to 12 aircrafts a year after the 1st decade & NO ONE will go bankrupt! But I would only advocate for that if & only if the aircrafts were co produced inside Iran with Iran having access to the weapons system so we can build our own weapons!

Air to Air mode 1000 F-313 will never be able to stand up to 200 Su-30's or F-15's or Typhoons so NO 800 F-313 = a JOKE!
And I'll take 100 Su-35's or F-35's or F-22's or J-31's or Su-Paks over 800 F-313 any day any time & in any situation!

1.and you know perfectly about them(are you minister of defense) 2. who said those things you so proud about. is perfectly right. 3 its an iranian forum and im iranian so its my business what you say about iran and iran made your pm full of maybe lie or Biased or negative wave i dont know this one . im 41 years old and im in army but i think if you are adult you are mad one be nice and accept you mistake

nadide ghayb gofti .when you have no right information dont behavior like ..... attention you have no flag and i dont think (if you are iranian) you have good or honest option or negative personality about made in iran

Admit my mistake! LOL! You don't know anything! When Emad was tested publicly the system was already distributed across our bases!
Emad's successor was almost completed when they did the public testing & it's CEP is 500 meters you can cry about it all your want it is what it is!

And I'm not going to go waist my time finding a flag so you can feel better! I'm 100% Iranian! I was born in Iran I went to school in Iran so cry cry away!

Junk is Junk and when Iran produces amazing equipment like Zolfagar Missile, Shahed-129, Simorgh, Saegheh, Karrar, Soumar, Ya Ali, Ghadir, Jamaran, Sina, Sejil-2, Emad, Bina, Qassed1/2/3..... I don't shy away from saying it & when they produce Junk like F-313 I'm not going to shy away from saying it because when we produce junk we should know that it's junk so we correct it so we don't fall into a false sense of pride & produce junk just because it looks cool & it was made in Iran!
Junk is Junk & 500 meters is good accuracy on a ballistic projectile at 1700km
41 & in the Army means nothing to me most Iranians have to serve so what??????& yes I did! So what?

 

[PeeD]

That's absolutely wrong! And has no factual bases! In fact if there was an inkling of truth in that statement Iran wouldn't of needed to the Russians to come in with their bombers & fighters to fight off a rag tag group of terrorists! Plus, all you have to do is look around at the money being spent to advance Air forces all across the globe!

Yes the number of fighter required has reduced because countries are buying more advanced more expensive force multipliers & they are replacing the need for "cheep" fighters with limited capabilities with missiles & UCAV's

Limited capabilities means limited sensor, radar, low payload with limited survivability due to a lack of speed, range, endurance, maneuverability & limited situational awareness!

Nobody cares about what world air forces do. I care about what the Soviet military was doing in the 80's. That is serious adult stuff. I care about what fear and terror the Oka missile system was causing in NATO command. The fear that it would ground their airpower on which they relied so much.

Iran had nothing comparable after the revolution, just it's airforce, the strongest force it had. But this belongs to the past. The position of the airforce have shifted down.

Any Aircraft can fly low! specially with advanced Fly by wire systems extreme low level flights will be done by computers without the need of advanced flying skills! But is your airframe strong enough to do it & get hit a few times by AAA and shrapnel that's the real question!

And Speed, maneuverability & endurance are key in evading missiles just ask any fighter pilot!

Speed and maneuverability as well as altitude is what counts in conventional air combat. Everyone will try to keep it's speed and altitude.
So this is the textbook.
Now to the F-313 which will pop-up, shoot and dive. why i it doing this? Because it may take too long for you to acquire that LO/VLO target and shoot your AMRAAM. Even if you manage to shot, the disappearance of the F-313 behind terrain, makes you loose contact to the target. Loss of contact will force you to hunt it in oder to provide your AMRAAM with a necessary course update.
Even if your AMRAAM gets to the F-313, its altitude of 15-20m above clutter, the attack aspect necessary and its X-band LO/VLO vs. the small AMRAAM aperture (+ chaff + ECM). Will give you similar, if not better capability to evade the shot than a 10g turn at 40k feet.

So much about simple textbook tactics and we didn't even consider the loss of kinematic capability = range, the hunting fighter/AMRAAM would encounter against a low level target etc.

Yes technology has advanced which allows for thrust vectoring which means basing a Fighter Jet on GE is absurd!

On a simple look, yes. But in reality, GE means effectively more thrust compared to a non-GE aircraft and compensating the lower thrust is a main objective.
I already said it: at sea level the dry and armed F-313 might do mach 0,7 without GE and mach 0,9 with. The armed afterburning F-15 might do mach 1,2 at sea level.

If war start and your Air Force is limited to your own Air Space & your incapable of making your enemy death, dumb & blind then you will lose!

In the past yes. Today BMs and CMs will do the crippling work and much better.
Hence the primary role of the F-313 can very well and good be that of a dedicated IADS asset.

Imagine S-171 doing the target acquisition and Zolfaghars striking.

The reason you fly low is due to the line of sight, terrain and the curvature of the earth that limits ground based radars from detecting aircrafts regardless of it's shape and RCS!

So building a fighter to fly low but only over your own terrain is even more absurd!

... the same counts for airborne radars if you are lucky enough to have a country with the mountainous topography like Iran. Low level flight of the F-313 is primary for evading airborne X-band radars trying to hunt it.

O MY GOD! Inaccurate, absurd NONSESNE!

You can claim that radar deflection is a cheaper way to reduce RCS than RAM (Radar Absorbent Materials) but no one in their right mind would ever tell you that rounding off the edges using the same materials has any effect on price! That's absurd!

Look, it's very basic: Curvature stealth like on the F-22 is not only harder to compute and design than F-117 style faceted stealth. it is also harder and more expensive to manufacture. Very basic and has nothing to do with RAM.

Do you have any manufacturing knowledge to get it?

And again, for radar deflection to work you need to map the enemy radar & fly straight towards it! And if your claiming the F-313 will only be used over Iranian territory then what radar are you planning to fly it towards?

My F-313, pop-ups and shoots BVR AAMs. During the pop-up and later evasion, stealth features help survival against X-band radars.

And if the Aircraft is meant to fly in GE mode then why the hell do you need radar deflection underneath your aircraft at all? again, nothing about the F-313 makes any type of sense!

The belly will be exposed in the pop-up maneuver...

You mean it can go Supersonic not Super cruise! The F-5 can also go Supersonic at altitude!

I meant supercruise --> flying subsonic without afterburners, the T-38 was capable of that. But it shouldn't in your simplistic world, or not?

1st and foremost you have to see if your engine is capable of supersonic flight just because an engine has 20,000lbf doesn't necessarily make it supersonic!
2ndly there are Aerodynamic limitation for example the size, thickness & angle of the wings could restrict your speed
depending on your design and thrust a simple thing like taileron vs fixed low angle elevator will restrict speeds and if you have too much power a low angle elevator will cause your aircraft to shake so the aerodynamic properties of an aircraft from it's wings to it's canards(if there are any), the moving parts, taileron & fuselage are extremely important!

Next is the thrust to weight ratio of an aircraft although it clearly doesn't prevent you from going supersonic but if you want super cruise a lot of things have to go right & super cruise ONLY matters if you can do it on an armed aircraft or else an unarmed aircrafts performance is irrelevant in the world of combat fighters like the BD-10
That's why I'm not a fan of the F-16 or the F/A-18! Yes an unarmed F-16 & F/A-18 have a low RCS and they perform beautifully when they are not armed with anything & they can do a OK job when running away BUT like the F-5 put a fuel pod on them and a few thousand pounds of ordnance and then see how they preform!

Ok, agreed on many points. Now based on that, how you want to judge the F-313 performance?

O MY GOD! Yes you know it for a FACT! Angle of the wing, Cockpit, Optical System,.... So yes you know it for a FACT!

Its more complex than that. Let me say that you neither know the F-117 RCS nor that of the F-313. We haven't even seen a flight-rated prototype of the F-313.

Getting the topography for Iran is quite simple! The tech behind it is simple! And Iran has the sat to do it! Whether you wanna believe it or not the tech is not that complicated & Iran has it!

Certainly. And we better make best use of it for the "air defense fighter" F-313.

Your mistaken! va tavanaii bacheh ha e khodemoon o dast e kam megeerri! Do you see how many Iranians are working and JPL and NASA & these are kids coming from Iran not Iranian Americans that have been here for years! If you fail to invest in them then your failing the country!

Talent is one thing, a healthy large enough industry to produce it, another. They show their talent with the innovative (maybe revolutionary), F-313 design and even more by designing a PRODUCABLE fighter for our current industry and the numbers necessary.
This shows the tavanaii of the bacheha

RQ-170 style engines on a subsonic aircraft with limited sensor capability sure why not! But again that doesn't mean the F-313 is worth producing!

Sensor capability is secondary if you operate within an IADS. The F-313 is a survivable flying TEL.

Iran's new defense minister has already announced that they plan on starting a real fighter project which again means the F-313 is clearly inadequate and they know it! I just hope they build a twin seat fighter off an existing 5th gen design like the F-22, YF-23 or J-33!

Good if they have necessary spare money. They can try and we wait to see numbers of them entering service. They better be in F-22/Su-57 class because we need to beat those. Su-30/F-15 are of the past and would be killed too soon.

And how do your jump from 100 Su-30's to 2000 Su-30's?

With $50 Billion USD Iran can buy almost 500 Su-30's paid at a rate of $5 Billion per year in a span of a decade that would be $5 Billion USD a year & you cut your purchase to 12 aircrafts a year after the 1st decade & NO ONE will go bankrupt! But I would only advocate for that if & only if the aircrafts were co produced inside Iran with Iran having access to the weapons system so we can build our own weapons!

2000 Su-30, because this is the number needed to fight the U.S. It's not me who wants to fighter fire with fire, you guys insists on airpower. This in light of the known impotence of US airpower against ground based S2A threats... fighting fire with water is not cool enough ha?

Air to Air mode 1000 F-313 will never be able to stand up to 200 Su-30's or F-15's or Typhoons so NO 800 F-313 = a JOKE!
And I'll take 100 Su-35's or F-35's or F-22's or J-31's or Su-Paks over 800 F-313 any day any time & in any situation!

My IADS asset F-313 would be a real killer of any 4th gen. fighter and have a credible capability against 5th. Yes only inside Irans IADS, but that's a limitation I can live with.
Most importantly it would be a killer that could be delivered in numbers, just as the Karrar tank is. Something that can satisfy our needs, not something produced at 12 or 24 pieces a year...

As the soviets called such things: a mobilization weapon. Its mass numbers of Dshk, or 107mm MLR or 106 recoiless guns that provide the firepower, not fancy catalog weapons. The same with airpower and Iran seems to have understood this.
We certainly have no time to play childish games like many other countries...

 

[VEVAK]

Nobody cares about what world air forces do. I care about what the Soviet military was doing in the 80's. That is serious adult stuff. I care about what fear and terror the Oka missile system was causing in NATO command. The fear that it would ground their airpower on which they relied so much.

Iran had nothing comparable after the revolution, just it's airforce, the strongest force it had. But this belongs to the past. The position of the airforce have shifted down....

The real fear from Soviet Missiles are the NUKE's that you can arm them with! And I've already posted how many fighters the Soviets have added to their fleet just in the past few years!
So using the Russians as an example is absurd!

Russians fly the fastest interceptors on the planet! Fly large supersonic fighters, extremely large heavy bombers, to high maneuvering bombers! Russians fly the most maneuverable fighters on the planet even more maneuverable than American fighters! The thrust to weight ratio on their fighters is the best in the world! Russians also have one of the most diverse Air Forces on the planet with each fighter being built for a specific purpose! And Russian investment in Fighter R&D continues with plans on having a space based fighters in the next 20-30 years

The reason Russians put their IRST on the top of the nose is because they specifically built them for tactics to be used against the American who are mostly trained to fly at high altitudes

Speed and maneuverability as well as altitude is what counts in conventional air combat. Everyone will try to keep it's speed and altitude.
So this is the textbook.
Now to the F-313 which will pop-up, shoot and dive. why i it doing this? Because it may take too long for you to acquire that LO/VLO target and shoot your AMRAAM. Even if you manage to shot, the disappearance of the F-313 behind terrain, makes you loose contact to the target. Loss of contact will force you to hunt it in oder to provide your AMRAAM with a necessary course update.
Even if your AMRAAM gets to the F-313, its altitude of 15-20m above clutter, the attack aspect necessary and its X-band LO/VLO vs. the small AMRAAM aperture (+ chaff + ECM). Will give you similar, if not better capability to evade the shot than a 10g turn at 40k feet....

Again, absurd! and how is that any different from any other fighter? Any fighter can fly low and hid behind terrain!
Su-25's are built like Tanks, they fly at low altitudes & can achieve what 900km at low altitudes? But that doesn't mean they'll ever be able to go up against F-15 in Air to Air combat!
And more advanced fighter with fly by wire systems can do it far more safely without the need of advanced flying skills!
Also, modern fighters can do it at higher speeds with high maneuverability! A Russian Su-35/37 will fly low, will use the IRST on it's nose to passively target a high altitude stealth aircraft and will target a stealth fighter without the need of any other system & it's R-74 will likely achieve the same range of a Fakur-90 being fired at low speed & low altitudes! And at what range & flying at what speed did you plan on popping up? & at what altitude did you plan on firing your missile?

Fakour-90 is a heavy, low maneuvering missile(comparatively) & it's mainly built to be fired at high speed, high altitude flight for a look down shoot down capability!

F-313 is NOT capable of high angel of attack & it's wings & Airframe design will prevent it from having a high climb ratio & Americans have IRST on their fighters supported by AWACS systems & sats so even if you could somehow manage to fool the Radar (Which I doubt) there is NO WAY your going to fool SAT's, AWACS & IRST altogether to get within weapons range, lock on & fire before your shot down! And even Iran's Media is not claiming that the Aircraft will be used in a Air to Air role!

At best it's a cheep low RCS platform to have to be used in close Air Support or for specific mission! It will either carry 2 modified version of the Bina, Kowsar, NASR or NASER Missile or another engine assisted air to ground platform allowing the aircraft to target & fire projectiles outside the range of any AAA system!

And if it is capable of GE it would still need an advanced Fly by wire system to fly the aircraft over land especially over Iranian terrain while taking advantage of aerodynamic properties of GE at cruise speeds & without various sub systems flying a low altitude aircraft with a single pilot that has to pilot at low altitudes & target ground targets in a high risk situation with a low surviving airframe is just not a good idea unless you have various subsystems

For a single pilot version flying at low altitudes you'll need an Advanced Fly by Wire system, with an advanced auto pilot, Sensor fused electronics, HOTAS, your optics will have to be placed on top (NOT the bottom), you'll need some kind of helmet mounted targeting capability, every PGM you use either has to be modified to be dropped from a weapons bay or you'll need to add more weight by putting hydro mechanical pod that can safely bring the weapons out for targeting & at the end of the day putting all those systems on a low surviving airframe on a high risk low flying, low payload platform doesn't make sense & putting 2 pilots on a low payload platform doesn't make sense either!

So much about simple textbook tactics and we didn't even consider the loss of kinematic capability = range, the hunting fighter/AMRAAM would encounter against a low level target etc....

American fighters are mostly built for look down shoot down capability & this idea that low lever flight is going to save you is far from reality!

On a simple look, yes. But in reality, GE means effectively more thrust compared to a non-GE aircraft and compensating the lower thrust is a main objective.
I already said it: at sea level the dry and armed F-313 might do mach 0,7 without GE and mach 0,9 with. The armed afterburning F-15 might do mach 1,2 at sea level....

Su-25 that's built like a tank does Mach 0.7 at sea level & doing Mach 0.9 in GE requires advanced Fly by wire system & advanced terrain counter mapping because it's just not humanly possible to maintain that speed & not crash at long distances!!! Automatically piloted Russian Cruise Missiles had trouble maintaining low level flight in Iran's terrain so the idea that a human can do it is just not in the realm of possibility

In the past yes. Today BMs and CMs will do the crippling work and much better.
Hence the primary role of the F-313 can very well and good be that of a dedicated IADS asset.

Imagine S-171 doing the target acquisition and Zolfaghars striking....

BM's & LACM capability to do damage has been around for decades! It may be a fairly recent development for Iran but this is nothing new!

For fixed targets within 600km of Iranian boarders I believe Iranian missiles & UAV's can do the job! So again you'll need an Air Force with fighters and bombers for ranges beyond that making light aircraft & weak engines like the F-313 useless!
And you have to realize that your enemy is NOT stupid! No one is going to attack Iran and park it's Air Assets within 600km of Iranian boarders

... the same counts for airborne radars if you are lucky enough to have a country with the mountainous topography like Iran. Low level flight of the F-313 is primary for evading airborne X-band radars trying to hunt it....

This only applies to long ranges & it doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to get within weapons range! Low level flying is nothing new! A Su-25 flying at low altitudes will NEVER be able to go up against an F-15 for areal combat & that's why the Russians never armed them to do so because it ridicules!

Look, it's very basic: Curvature stealth like on the F-22 is not only harder to compute and design than F-117 style faceted stealth. it is also harder and more expensive to manufacture. Very basic and has nothing to do with RAM.

Do you have any manufacturing knowledge to get it?...

WRONG! 1st off the F-22 uses Titanium Casting which was a new method that had to be developed that required new tools! And that's the main thing that sets it apart from the Airframe of most fighters
42% of the F-22 is made out of Titanium as appose to ~22% used on the F-14 but building the F-14 titanium parts required wasting more ti than was used on the aircraft! where as the F-22 used more Ti rather than wasting it & instead used composites to further strengthen the airframe rather than more treatment
The Ti on F-14 although stronger they are not as wildly used as the F-22 & instead steel is used on the F-14 & result is an overall lighter & stronger Airframe! And the wide use of titanium reduces weight that results in better performance!

The nonsense you just said would ONLY be relevant if an F/A-18 was somehow cheaper to produce than an F-117
And it is NOT!

And most of the cost of an Air Frame is due to the materials used, the amount & size!

Whether you make your mold square or round on steel & composites or whether or not you wanna cut your titanium or aluminum a certain shape has little to no effect on cost!

It's absolute BS! Especially if your Airframe is made out of steel, aluminum & composite mixture!

now certain area's of an Aircraft like where you put your landing gear & where and how your connect your wings depending of the fighters require you to do treatments and even if you do press, heat & oxidation treatment you can still round off the edges with precision cuts
If your using a mold for your random you can press the mold in any shape or from you want

SO NO it's absolute NONSESE! It's like saying if we make the Saeghe square we could potentially save money!

My F-313, pop-ups and shoots BVR AAMs. During the pop-up and later evasion, stealth features help survival against X-band radars.



The belly will be exposed in the pop-up maneuver......

Again, absurd!

I meant supercruise --> flying subsonic without afterburners, the T-38 was capable of that. But it shouldn't in your simplistic world, or not?...

The BD-10 doesn't even have afterburners!!!! T-38 does! It doesn't make it a capable combat aircraft!

Ok, agreed on many points. Now based on that, how you want to judge the F-313 performance?...

It's like taking a Su-25 removing it's survivability factor & payload capability just to reduce the RCS & yes it may be useful for specific situations but most definitely nothing worth mass producing & nothing a low budget country like Iran should be wasting it's resources on

Certainly. And we better make best use of it for the "air defense fighter" F-313....

F-313 will never be an Air Defense fighter and Iran has never claimed that it is!

Talent is one thing, a healthy large enough industry to produce it, another. They show their talent with the innovative (maybe revolutionary), F-313 design and even more by designing a PRODUCABLE fighter for our current industry and the numbers necessary.
This shows the tavanaii of the bacheha...

Good if they have necessary spare money. They can try and we wait to see numbers of them entering service. They better be in F-22/Su-57 class because we need to beat those. Su-30/F-15 are of the past and would be killed too soon....

Having a fighter program is not just about what you plan on doing in a war with the U.S.! That's the wrong way to look at it!

GTG ttyl

 

[PeeD]

The real fear from Soviet Missiles are the NUKE's that you can arm them with! And I've already posted how many fighters the Soviets have added to their fleet just in the past few years!
So using the Russians as an example is absurd!

NATO feared that the Soviets could fight a conventional war and cripple their airpower by systems like the Oka. The degradation would then force NATO to use nukes first. The Oka was forbidden and destroyed and is one of Irans role models instead of high attention to airpower.

What Russians do today or not is not applicable to Iran. They might be able to afford the luxury of 4th gen. airpower in numbers...

Any fighter can fly low and hid behind terrain!
Su-25's are built like Tanks, they fly at low altitudes & can achieve what 900km at low altitudes? But that doesn't mean they'll ever be able to go up against F-15 in Air to Air combat!

This is one tactic. The B-2 applies it in case of detection. If terrain and low level flight capability is available this tactic can be used.
If a F-15 detects a F-90 shooting F-313 at 100km despite stealth, maybe due to radar emissions, it will start the hunt. The question is now where the terrain masking F-313 is by the time it reached the point of last detection. It could have escaped in any direction. It can fly and look down with it's radar, but what really counts in such a engagement is the fuel spent to do so. The F-15 is 20-50% faster but if the search takes too long, it has to abort and go home.
Yes one has to think a moment to understand this...

A Russian Su-35/37 will fly low, will use the IRST on it's nose to passively target a high altitude stealth aircraft and will target a stealth fighter without the need of any other system & it's R-74 will likely achieve the same range of a Fakur-90 being fired at low speed & low altitudes!

The F-313 would reach high altitude in the pop-up for the shoot

And at what range & flying at what speed did you plan on popping up? & at what altitude did you plan on firing your missile?

12km altitude and 100km (~130km start of pop-up) distance to target is my operation regime model.

F-313 is NOT capable of high angel of attack & it's wings & Airframe design will prevent it from having a high climb ratio

If the climb rate is = ~3min to 12km AGL, it is sufficient. It doesn't have to be a F-104...

Americans have IRST on their fighters supported by AWACS systems & sats so even if you could somehow manage to fool the Radar (Which I doubt) there is NO WAY your going to fool SAT's, AWACS & IRST altogether to get within weapons range, lock on & fire before your shot down! And even Iran's Media is not claiming that the Aircraft will be used in a Air to Air role!

Yes Iranian Media is not claiming it, it is a concept I put up.

You overestimate U.S detection capability. Have you witnessed that during a ~20° climb angle, the intake of the F-313 is not visible, just the facet stealth belly? Maybe because it is designed for a pop-up, which would also be the most dangerous period of its operation? It does the pop-up undetected with it's X- to S-band stealth (=AWACS, APG-XX), (E-2 excluded at this point).
As for IRST and space sensors... those capabilities are either unknown or for IRST, the F-313 does to best possible defense against it --> pop-up climb without afterburner.

At best it's a cheep low RCS platform to have to be used in close Air Support or for specific mission! It will either carry 2 modified version of the Bina, Kowsar, NASR or NASER Missile or another engine assisted air to ground platform allowing the aircraft to target & fire projectiles outside the range of any AAA system!

This would be ridiculous with Irans current drone capabilities... If it's operation regime is just that, then they better cancel it...

And if it is capable of GE it would still need an advanced Fly by wire system to fly the aircraft over land especially over Iranian terrain while taking advantage of aerodynamic properties of GE at cruise speeds & without various sub systems flying a low altitude aircraft with a single pilot that has to pilot at low altitudes & target ground targets in a high risk situation with a low surviving airframe is just not a good idea unless you have various subsystems

And this is exactly where the talent of the Iranians can be employed effectively. Building such a FBW terrain avoidance autopilot is what is in reach and produced at a very low price. No materials, no complex production.
It is one of the enabler for my F-313 operation regime to work...

American fighters are mostly built for look down shoot down capability & this idea that low lever flight is going to save you is far from reality!

They have reduced range performance while doing so. But what I meant is that also a AMRAAM used against a low flying target will have reduced range due to higher dynamic pressure...

Su-25 that's built like a tank does Mach 0.7 at sea level & doing Mach 0.9 in GE requires advanced Fly by wire system & advanced terrain counter mapping because it's just not humanly possible to maintain that speed & not crash at long distances!!! Automatically piloted Russian Cruise Missiles had trouble maintaining low level flight in Iran's terrain so the idea that a human can do it is just not in the realm of possibility

I don't want the pilot doing the low level GE flight, it must be fully automated.

BM's & LACM capability to do damage has been around for decades! It may be a fairly recent development for Iran but this is nothing new!

For fixed targets within 600km of Iranian boarders I believe Iranian missiles & UAV's can do the job! So again you'll need an Air Force with fighters and bombers for ranges beyond that making light aircraft & weak engines like the F-313 useless!
And you have to realize that your enemy is NOT stupid! No one is going to attack Iran and park it's Air Assets within 600km of Iranian boarders

Our context is Iran and high precision BM/CM is a recent capability.

Look, the Russians have avoided all-aspect stealth for the Su-57 because they have no hope that it could strike targets deep in a advanced opponents territory.
The F-22 was designed to do this but has very questionable chance against a country like Iran with its IADS.

Everything else needs a massive SEAD/DEAD machinery like only the Americans have and then it would take huge efforts to reach a protected target inside an advanced IADS.
Now if the target is time critical and degrades your warfighting capabilities, you better pay the price of a 2000km range BM or high numbers of CMs to kill that target.

It just means one thing: give me something better than the F-22, or a huge several thousand large fighter/bomber fleet or skip the idea to kill 600km+ targets with conventional airpower.

This only applies to long ranges & it doesn't mean the F-313 will be able to get within weapons range! Low level flying is nothing new! A Su-25 flying at low altitudes will NEVER be able to go up against an F-15 for areal combat & that's why the Russians never armed them to do so because it ridicules!

I'm not a big believer in B-2 survivability, but that low level escape tactic is THE main survivability mean of the B-2. Were B-2 also too stupid and didn't take their lesson from the Su-25?

WRONG! 1st off the F-22 uses Titanium Casting which was a new method that had to be developed that required new tools! And that's the main thing that sets it apart from the Airframe of most fighters
42% of the F-22 is made out of Titanium as appose to ~22% used on the F-14 but building the F-14 titanium parts required wasting more ti than was used on the aircraft! where as the F-22 used more Ti rather than wasting it & instead used composites to further strengthen the airframe rather than more treatment
The Ti on F-14 although stronger they are not as wildly used as the F-22 & instead steel is used on the F-14 & result is an overall lighter & stronger Airframe! And the wide use of titanium reduces weight that results in better performance!

The nonsense you just said would ONLY be relevant if an F/A-18 was somehow cheaper to produce than an F-117
And it is NOT!

And most of the cost of an Air Frame is due to the materials used, the amount & size!

Whether you make your mold square or round on steel & composites or whether or not you wanna cut your titanium or aluminum a certain shape has little to no effect on cost!

It's absolute BS! Especially if your Airframe is made out of steel, aluminum & composite mixture!

now certain area's of an Aircraft like where you put your landing gear & where and how your connect your wings depending of the fighters require you to do treatments and even if you do press, heat & oxidation treatment you can still round off the edges with precision cuts
If your using a mold for your random you can press the mold in any shape or from you want

SO NO it's absolute NONSESE! It's like saying if we make the Saeghe square we could potentially save money!

You are way off VEVAK... Be sure that the F-313 body parts are some kind of composite, almost certainly a sandwich or honeycomb design. It seems you have no idea how much easier=cheaper it is to manufacture even facet geometries with sandwich composite?

What the hell have F-22 titanium body parts to do with this??? They have to use Ti because of thermal loads which supercruising creates --> a task for which Ti is very good... the F-313 is subsonic/"cold".
You'r way off the topic

The BD-10 doesn't even have afterburners!!!! T-38 does! It doesn't make it a capable combat aircraft!

Ok, I see you don't get what I meant...

It's like taking a Su-25 removing it's survivability factor & payload capability just to reduce the RCS & yes it may be useful for specific situations but most definitely nothing worth mass producing & nothing a low budget country like Iran should be wasting it's resources on

Su-25: Armored, capable of low level piloted flight of 30-100m AGL
F-313 proposal: LO or VLO, autopiloted GE low level flight of 15-20m AGL, ECM, exclusive use of terrain masking
B-2: VLO, autopiloted low level flight of 30-50m AGL, high power ECM, use of terrain masking at opportunity.

One question would be the anti-clutter performance of the AIM-120 seeker against a target at 15m AGL.

F-313 will never be an Air Defense fighter and Iran has never claimed that it is!

Right. Any other use than what I described would make no sense, it would be predestined to be replaced by drones.

Having a fighter program is not just about what you plan on doing in a war with the U.S.! That's the wrong way to look at it!

It is what Iran has done ever since the post-war era and is what has brought it where it is today.

 

[Zathura]

Russian Helicopters’ Ka-226T Clears Iranian High-temperature Tests

Russian Helicopters’ Ka-226T light multi-purpose helicopter has cleared tests with support from Iran Helicopter Support and Renewal Company (IHSRC).

The tests were carried out in the framework of a memorandum signed by Helicopters of Russia JSC (part of Rostekh State Corporation) and IHSRC at the HeliRussia international exhibition in May 2017, and their purpose was to confirm the possibility of operating the helicopter at ambient temperatures up to +50 degrees Celsius, the company said in a statement Wednesday.

"Testing of the Ka-226T in the extreme climatic conditions of Iran will make the helicopter even more attractive for the potential operators not only in this country but also throughout the Middle East. We can notice the great interest towards this helicopter in the region even now, and we hope that our cooperation with our partners from IHSRC will allow us to turn this interest into several contracts and agreements," said Andrey Boginsky, CEO of Russian Helicopters.

The light utility helicopter Ka-226T has a coaxial twin-rotor system, its maximum takeoff weight is 3.6 t, and it is able to transport up to 1 t of payload. The main distinctive feature of the helicopter is its modular design - a transport cabin that can carry up to 6 people or modules with special equipment can be easily installed on the Ka-226T. Improved performance characteristics of the Ka-226T, its eco-friendly features, cost effectiveness; advanced avionics and additional flight safety solutions make this helicopter one of the best models in its class.

SOURCE: defenceworld

 

[ashool]

Admit my mistake! LOL! You don't know anything! When Emad was tested publicly the system was already distributed across our bases!
Emad's successor was almost completed when they did the public testing & it's CEP is 500 meters you can cry about it all your want it is what it is!

And I'm not going to go waist my time finding a flag so you can feel better! I'm 100% Iranian! I was born in Iran I went to school in Iran so cry cry away!

Junk is Junk and when Iran produces amazing equipment like Zolfagar Missile, Shahed-129, Simorgh, Saegheh, Karrar, Soumar, Ya Ali, Ghadir, Jamaran, Sina, Sejil-2, Emad, Bina, Qassed1/2/3..... I don't shy away from saying it & when they produce Junk like F-313 I'm not going to shy away from saying it because when we produce junk we should know that it's junk so we correct it so we don't fall into a false sense of pride & produce junk just because it looks cool & it was made in Iran!
Junk is Junk & 500 meters is good accuracy on a ballistic projectile at 1700km
41 & in the Army means nothing to me most Iranians have to serve so what??????& yes I did! So what?

how old are you i think you are kid who go and read some army magazine from west and come with prude man say dehghan said cep 500 find lol where he said that and after that be so manor f-313 made of cheap material are you made those material if you are iranian you must prude of it and show it and where are you now in iran or like this manoto tv watcher in uk or usa or uae or sua which one and where are you served im official not vazife lol i think you are fool who think now any think go watch kids tv its beter for you

 

[ashool]

bia degheh ean am bara ma ghod ghod mekonan...
har vaght sakhtesh 100 dar 100 shod bad harf bezaneed... ba oon ghaher keh aberoo eay melato bordeen!

this is yours too but now you speak about it material go and find peace with .....

 

[VEVAK]

NATO feared that the Soviets could fight a conventional war and cripple their airpower by systems like the Oka. The degradation would then force NATO to use nukes first. The Oka was forbidden and destroyed and is one of Irans role models instead of high attention to airpower.

What Russians do today or not is not applicable to Iran. They might be able to afford the luxury of 4th gen. airpower in numbers....

Absurd!!!!!!!!!!! Russia developed the MiG-25 1st & had the fastest large scaled deployed fighter force on the planet!
MiG-25 First flight 1964 introduced 1970
Su-24-1974
Su-25 Introduced 1981
MiG-31 Introduced 1981
MiG-29 Introduced 1982
Su-27 stared production 1982 introduced in 1985
Tu-22M Large Supersonic Bomber 500 produced 1967-1997 Before that the Tu-22 & Tu-28
Let me not waist my time and post this so you can see how absurd your statement is!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aircraft_of_the_Soviet_Union_and_the_CIS

All the fighters built across EU couldn't match them in Quantity, Quality & variety!

And Air Defense systems in the 80's in EU although developed, lacked the capabilities of high altitude, high speed engagement that means the biggest threat were Russian High speed, High Altitude, Heavy Payload, Long Range bombers deployed in large scales that could do carpet bombing of any target in EU & conventional missiles were NOTHING compared to that!

This is one tactic. The B-2 applies it in case of detection. If terrain and low level flight capability is available this tactic can be used.
If a F-15 detects a F-90 shooting F-313 at 100km despite stealth, maybe due to radar emissions, it will start the hunt. The question is now where the terrain masking F-313 is by the time it reached the point of last detection. It could have escaped in any direction. It can fly and look down with it's radar, but what really counts in such a engagement is the fuel spent to do so. The F-15 is 20-50% faster but if the search takes too long, it has to abort and go home.
Yes one has to think a moment to understand this....

1st off the MAX Range of the Fakour-90 is 90km at high speed and high altitude engagement in a look down shoot down scenario fired from F-14's flying at +40,000 ft!

And at 100km the point of detection will be as soon as you come up from behind a mountain & you'll be detected and engaged upon using much faster radars & missiles in an easy look down shoot down tactic which is what Americans are trained for! And they'll empty their missiles turn around and easily move out of range of your missile even if you did some how have the time to lock on!

The F-313 would reach high altitude in the pop-up for the shoot
12km altitude and 100km (~130km start of pop-up) distance to target is my operation regime model.
If the climb rate is = ~3min to 12km AGL, it is sufficient. It doesn't have to be a F-104....

3 min as your climbing their AESA radars will detect you & empty out their BVR missiles & turn back & head out of your range! There is no hiding behind terrain when you plan to start taking altitude at 130km & you'll give them a bigger target once you pull up the nose & show your belly (Not the other way around) & while your missile is climbing to get to cruise altitude for long range engagement their missiles are coming right at your! It's absurd ask any IRIAF pilot!

Yes Iranian Media is not claiming it, it is a concept I put up.

You overestimate U.S detection capability. Have you witnessed that during a ~20° climb angle, the intake of the F-313 is not visible, just the facet stealth belly? Maybe because it is designed for a pop-up, which would also be the most dangerous period of its operation? It does the pop-up undetected with it's X- to S-band stealth (=AWACS, APG-XX), (E-2 excluded at this point).
As for IRST and space sensors... those capabilities are either unknown or for IRST, the F-313 does to best possible defense against it --> pop-up climb without afterburner..

F-313 just as in the F-117 uses radar deflection! radar feactures is what is used on the F-22 where the angels of your wings, intakes, stabilizers,.. are all the same....

F-117 like the F-313 uses an outdated stealth feature that relies on deflection & unlike the F-22 the aircraft HAS to fly directly towards a radar at a correct angle for it to work & that's why U.S. built a limited number to be used for specific missions where your flying straight towards 1 radar & that method is outdated because the very same thing that made the F-117 stealthy worked against it in a digitized multi radar & EWS networked Air Defense network which is what most countries that the U.S. considers a threat now have!

Modern IRST don't need your afterburners to be turned on! Today the lack of afterburners only reduces engagement range of cheaper MANPAD's! Lack of afterburners don't protect UAV's, Helo's, A-10 or Su-25's from modern MANPAD's let alone an IRST! The heat created by fiction is enough! And how often do you think a fighter can turn on it's afterburners for you to think an Aircraft manufacturers put IRST on an aircraft for if and when an enemy fighter turns on it's burners?

This would be ridiculous with Irans current drone capabilities... If it's operation regime is just that, then they better cancel it....

Good so they should cancel it! Or if they have gone too far already just produce it in limited numbers because that is it's max capability! & yes produced in limited numbers for specific missions like flying out 400km towards the Indian Ocean to engage ships from a distance of 50-100km would expand Iran's reach using a cheap Low RCS platform!

I would also say I would use them as small & cheap Tankers spread out across the country allowing me to station most of my Air Force deeper in the country & they would be a much harder target to hit than 4 or 5 large tankers

And this is exactly where the talent of the Iranians can be employed effectively. Building such a FBW terrain avoidance autopilot is what is in reach and produced at a very low price. No materials, no complex production.
It is one of the enabler for my F-313 operation regime to work....

You wanna put advanced fly by wire system, advanced avionic, sensor fused capability, HOTAS, Helmot mounted display, terrain counter mapping capable autopilot, PGM targeting from weapons bay,.... & a highly trained pilot on an low surviving, low maneuvering, high drag airframe to fly in a high risk low altitude sorties with limited payload & full reliance on ground equipment for anything beyond visible range!
And does every spot in Iran have cell coverage for you to think that Iran will be able to securely relay large amounts of data securely at low altitudes? NO! & the same terrain that will hide you will prevent you from receiving secure data!

And If it was so cheap and easy to upgrade your electronics package why doesn't Iran just do that with it's current Saegheh, Azarakhsh & F-5's....
In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-5's were easy targets due to their limited radar, lack of situational awareness, range & speed! And they had a lower RCS than Iranian F-14's & that was in the 80's!

They have reduced range performance while doing so. But what I meant is that also a AMRAAM used against a low flying target will have reduced range due to higher dynamic pressure....

Wrong! Americans like build their Air capability around look down shoot down capability & that would only be true if the missile 1st dove down & then flew straight at you again that's absurd & it's based on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!

I don't want the pilot doing the low level GE flight, it must be fully automated..

So why do you need a pilot? The Aircraft is going to fly it's self and your Air Defense is going to target the Aircrafts! what you just push the button?

Our context is Iran and high precision BM/CM is a recent capability.

Look, the Russians have avoided all-aspect stealth for the Su-57 because they have no hope that it could strike targets deep in a advanced opponents territory.
The F-22 was designed to do this but has very questionable chance against a country like Iran with its IADS.

Everything else needs a massive SEAD/DEAD machinery like only the Americans have and then it would take huge efforts to reach a protected target inside an advanced IADS.
Now if the target is time critical and degrades your warfighting capabilities, you better pay the price of a 2000km range BM or high numbers of CMs to kill that target.

It just means one thing: give me something better than the F-22, or a huge several thousand large fighter/bomber fleet or skip the idea to kill 600km+ targets with conventional airpower..

Again, wrong! aside from that fact that they have so many nukes that No super power would be stupid enough to start a war with them!

The fact that Missiles are your 1st strike weapon for the Russians & the U.S. is not in doubt! But that doesn't reduces their need for an Air Force! Russians have a lot of space based assets that allows them to see, locate & target any relevant SAM system & in a conventional attack they'll use missiles & long range air to ground PGM to 1st take out any Air Defense system, communication & command structure! And only then their Air Force will come into play!

And in Air to Air battles they rely on countermeasures & tactics to evade incoming missiles & they are confident in their ability to detect & target stealth Aircraft using onboard systems on their Aircraft! And if the Russians are sure of their ability to detect stealth then they are sure the Americans can do it too

Plus with advances in NANO tech you can probably make any Aircraft stealth

I'm not a big believer in B-2 survivability, but that low level escape tactic is THE main survivability mean of the B-2. Were B-2 also too stupid and didn't take their lesson from the Su-25?.

B-2's use RAM & their design allows for long range bombing missions & they will not be deployed over enemy territory until US missiles destroy your high altitude SAM capability & even then they'll be escorted by F-22's!

You are way off VEVAK... Be sure that the F-313 body parts are some kind of composite, almost certainly a sandwich or honeycomb design. It seems you have no idea how much easier=cheaper it is to manufacture even facet geometries with sandwich composite?.

What the hell have F-22 titanium body parts to do with this??? They have to use Ti because of thermal loads which supercruising creates --> a task for which Ti is very good... the F-313 is subsonic/"cold".
You'r way off the topic.[/QUOTE]

Even with a honeycomb design you can round off the edges in the same way you round off a Helo's rotor blades by simply cutting them!
SO WRONG! And absolutely absurd to think the F-313 even uses a honeycomb design! they use simple Radar Deflection nothing more!

No I'm not! You claimed the F-22 was more expensive to build than the F-117 because the F-117 uses flat surfaces & I'm explaining to you how absurd that is and the main reason why the F-22 is so expensive is due to the large amount of TI used & it's Ti casting method not it's curved design!

F-14, F-15, Su-Pak all use under 25% Ti & even less on the F-117 vs the F-22 that uses 42% which allows for Supercruise on a low drag air frame with internal weapons bay with greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio & if you used Ti casting you'll automatically get a smoother Air Frame!

If the Russians take the Su-Pak design & increase ti to 40-50% using Ti casting in a 2-3 peace fuselage design it will be capable of super cruise in fact if you do that to any Russian fighter that has grater than 1 thrust to weight ratio it will be capable of super cruise
large Ti casting is key because it removes the need of adding useless bolts and screws & allows you to carry more fuel

Su-25: Armored, capable of low level piloted flight of 30-100m AGL
F-313 proposal: LO or VLO, autopiloted GE low level flight of 15-20m AGL, ECM, exclusive use of terrain masking
B-2: VLO, autopiloted low level flight of 30-50m AGL, high power ECM, use of terrain masking at opportunity

One question would be the anti-clutter performance of the AIM-120 seeker against a target at 15m AGL.


Right. Any other use than what I described would make no sense, it would be predestined to be replaced by drones..

OMG! You think from above 25,000 ft 30m or 15m is going to make a difference? NO! unless your directly hidden behind a terrain it makes no difference in a look down shoot down scenario!

Now if your a high maneuvering fighter with a greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio flying low with high sensor capability you may be able to make the missile miss on a hi g maneuver on it's final approach which will cause it to hit the ground before it can turn but you don't need to be that close to the ground even at 200 meters the missile is coming at you in a dive at Mach 4
F-313 lack the sensor capability to even react especially with your optics underneath the nose your dead!

It is what Iran has done ever since the post-war era and is what has brought it where it is today.

If you stick to an easily predictable tactic & you refuse to adapt while your enemy is adapting to you then you'll be an easy target

In Iran most of the countries mines are owned by the government! Iran is easily poised to develop a highly capable Airframe with a high thrust engine!
Iran has Ti, Iridium, Tungsten, Magnesium,.... all at home! The mines are mostly owned by the government & we are not a capitalist country that sells weapons to it's self! We have Oil and making Hydrogen & Oxygen is as simple as sticking DC power into sea water! So again I don't see any logic behind producing an Air frame using cheap materials using light fuel efficient engines!
Increasing the size of your Jet Engines is really not that difficult!

If it was up to me I'd take the F-14 exterior design & I would make modification to the front to allow it to carry an internal weapons bay & increase fuel capacity. Using Ti & Ti casting (40-50% Ti) in a 3-4 large peace design fuselage reinforced with campsites
powered by a 4ft in diameter Turbojet engine to start (To be upgraded in time)
Equipped with the upgraded digitalized AWG-9 (To be upgraded in time)
I would keep the wings until I can develop Thrust Vectoring & only them for a fixed simpler design

For RCS reduction I would use nano-coating for radar deflection just as how a small DLP chip has tiny mirrors I would use deflection in a nano scale on areas with high RCS

And who cares about what the US has this is about pushing the boundaries of technology inside Iran!

We have Ti it's owned by the government & there is no reason why we shouldn't be producing our own products with it!

Government needs to invest in the Youth and on a fighter program that pushes the boundaries of technology in side the country regardless of how advanced the U.S. Air Force is! And the F-313 is just not something that could ever do that!

 

[PeeD]

Absurd!!!!!!!!!!! Russia developed the MiG-25 1st & had the fastest large scaled deployed fighter force on the planet!
MiG-25 First flight 1964 introduced 1970

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.

And at 100km the point of detection will be as soon as you come up from behind a mountain & you'll be detected and engaged upon using much faster radars & missiles in an easy look down shoot down tactic which is what Americans are trained for! And they'll empty their missiles turn around and easily move out of range of your missile even if you did some how have the time to lock on!

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?

3 min as your climbing their AESA radars will detect you & empty out their BVR missiles & turn back & head out of your range! There is no hiding behind terrain when you plan to start taking altitude at 130km & you'll give them a bigger target once you pull up the nose & show your belly (Not the other way around)

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.

F-313 just as in the F-117 uses radar deflection! radar feactures is what is used on the F-22 where the angels of your wings, intakes, stabilizers,.. are all the same....

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

F-117 like the F-313 uses an outdated stealth feature that relies on deflection & unlike the F-22 the aircraft HAS to fly directly towards a radar at a correct angle for it to work & that's why U.S. built a limited number to be used for specific missions where your flying straight towards 1 radar & that method is outdated because the very same thing that made the F-117 stealthy worked against it in a digitized multi radar & EWS networked Air Defense network which is what most countries that the U.S. considers a threat now have!

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...

Modern IRST don't need your afterburners to be turned on! Today the lack of afterburners only reduces engagement range of cheaper MANPAD's! Lack of afterburners don't protect UAV's, Helo's, A-10 or Su-25's from modern MANPAD's let alone an IRST! The heat created by fiction is enough! And how often do you think a fighter can turn on it's afterburners for you to think an Aircraft manufacturers put IRST on an aircraft for if and when an enemy fighter turns on it's burners?

Again 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.

You wanna put advanced fly by wire system, advanced avionic, sensor fused capability, HOTAS, Helmot mounted display, terrain counter mapping capable autopilot, PGM targeting from weapons bay,.... & a highly trained pilot on an low surviving, low maneuvering, high drag airframe to fly in a high risk low altitude sorties with limited payload & full reliance on ground equipment for anything beyond visible range!

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.

And does every spot in Iran have cell coverage for you to think that Iran will be able to securely relay large amounts of data securely at low altitudes? NO! & the same terrain that will hide you will prevent you from receiving secure data!

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.

And If it was so cheap and easy to upgrade your electronics package why doesn't Iran just do that with it's current Saegheh, Azarakhsh & F-5's....
In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-5's were easy targets due to their limited radar, lack of situational awareness, range & speed! And they had a lower RCS than Iranian F-14's & that was in the 80's!

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.

Wrong! Americans like build their Air capability around look down shoot down capability & that would only be true if the missile 1st dove down & then flew straight at you again that's absurd & it's based on the assumption that the Americans are stupid!

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...

So why do you need a pilot? The Aircraft is going to fly it's self and your Air Defense is going to target the Aircrafts! what you just push the button?

Yes. Until you don't give them a AI sorftware that can do all the stuff a RIO does as well as a 100% secure and continuous communication...

Plus with advances in NANO tech you can probably make any Aircraft stealth

The question is what degree of stealth and against which bands...

B-2's use RAM & their design allows for long range bombing missions & they will not be deployed over enemy territory until US missiles destroy your high altitude SAM capability & even then they'll be escorted by F-22's!

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.

Even with a honeycomb design you can round off the edges in the same way you round off a Helo's rotor blades by simply cutting them!
SO WRONG! And absolutely absurd to think the F-313 even uses a honeycomb design! they use simple Radar Deflection nothing more!

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...

No I'm not! You claimed the F-22 was more expensive to build than the F-117 because the F-117 uses flat surfaces & I'm explaining to you how absurd that is and the main reason why the F-22 is so expensive is due to the large amount of TI used & it's Ti casting method not it's curved design!

F-14, F-15, Su-Pak all use under 25% Ti & even less on the F-117 vs the F-22 that uses 42% which allows for Supercruise on a low drag air frame with internal weapons bay with greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio & if you used Ti casting you'll automatically get a smoother Air Frame!

If the Russians take the Su-Pak design & increase ti to 40-50% using Ti casting in a 2-3 peace fuselage design it will be capable of super cruise in fact if you do that to any Russian fighter that has grater than 1 thrust to weight ratio it will be capable of super cruise
large Ti casting is key because it removes the need of adding useless bolts and screws & allows you to carry more fuel

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.

Now if your a high maneuvering fighter with a greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio flying low with high sensor capability you may be able to make the missile miss on a hi g maneuver on it's final approach which will cause it to hit the ground before it can turn but you don't need to be that close to the ground even at 200 meters the missile is coming at you in a dive at Mach 4

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.

F-313 lack the sensor capability to even react especially with your optics underneath the nose your dead!

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

If it was up to me I'd take the F-14 exterior design & I would make modification to the front to allow it to carry an internal weapons bay & increase fuel capacity.

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?

 

[mohsen]

happened for the first time, overhaul of IL-76 after three years grounding:
فیلم/ نخستین تعمیر هواپیمای فوق سنگین در کشور

 

[AmirPatriot]

IRIAF B-747 delivering 40 tons of humanitarian aid from Iranian Red Crescent to Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

ارسال محموله هلال احمر ایران برای مسلمانان میانمار

​

 

[AmirPatriot]

Sorry for the late response @PeeD.

That F-5 was just an IRIAF internal project, while the F-313 has the whole defense industry behind it and access to all available subsystems.
So the situation is very different.

Nevertheless, their experience and established industry allows them to do experimental designs, of which I'm sure you are aware of.

Trawling through Cold War aviation designs/prototypes and their in many cases utterly mental nature is a favourite pastime of mine.

As for no proven equivalent. The RQ-170 is one. It seems to have titanium load structures for the wings, but its wings are much longer and heavier loaded than the short weaponless F-313 wings.

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

No, with everything the complete product.

I think we discussed this enough already. We just have to agree to disagree, even though I find this miscalculation a critical flaw in your concept.

LCT 1-3 and RCT 1-3. Why you mention stealth? You asked for a secondary bomb truck capability. Any external weapons will compromise stealth but you wanted to have a massive bombing capability at low intensity phase.

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.

It's about dodging BVR AAMs at the edges of its envelope

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.