"Jahesh-700", Iran's first turbofan engine

[yugocrosrb95]

we just only could put 2x MIM-23 under the wing there was no space for it under the body.
you want to increase the height of pylon . good, do that hope you are have a solution for air vortex between your drone and the body of airplane , it will be strong enough to rip the drone , pylon and even part of the airplane structure

and please tell me which UAV you want to attach to F-14

Another reply from you that doesn't make any sense...
Missiles used by MIM-23 are heavier than AIM-54.
How do you think biplanes solved vortex problem?

None of existing UAV's in Iranian inventory are suitable.
There would need to design a new one to begin with.
It would also require to have variable sweep wing.
Thus also viable to be launched from a tanker.

UAV could be made to act as a wing to generate lift.
Thus less drag than bith missiles and fuel tanks.
Like 4 AIM-54 and 2 fuel tanks 1000 liter each.

That is if potential 3.6 ton UAV was the high end goal.
Alternatively for UAV that is conformal with airframe.
By just using 4 hard points that are used by AIM-54.
Then weight is halved to 1.8 tons at very high end.
Initially when attached it is upside down.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Another reply from you that doesn't make any sense...
Missiles used by MIM-23 are heavier than AIM-54.
How do you think biplanes solved vortex problem?

the problem is not the weight , its the size , MIM-23 have bigger wing span it had a wingspan of 1.23 and a diameter of 37cm.
AIM-54 while had a larger diameter of 38cm had a smaller wingspan of 91cm
that was the reason we could not put aim-23 under the body and could only put two of them under the wing


it means if you want put 4 uav under F-14 , it has to be the size of AIM-54 . under 40cm wide , wingspan no more than 90cm and a length no more than 420cm
Jahesh-700 core is 90cm long and 46cm wide and that's without any casing

 

[yugocrosrb95]

the problem is not the weight , its the size , MIM-23 have bigger wing span it had a wingspan of 1.23 and a diameter of 37cm.
AIM-54 while had a larger diameter of 38cm had a smaller wingspan of 91cm
that was the reason we could not put aim-23 under the body and could only put two of them under the wing

it means if you want put 4 uav under F-14 , it has to be the size of AIM-54 . under 40cm wide , wingspan no more than 90cm and a length no more than 420cm
Jahesh-700 core is 90cm long and 46cm wide and that's without any casing

That is non-issue and irrelevant for an UAV/Drones/Cruise Missiles.
Since wings themselves can be recessed into the body of missile itself.
Or conformal to the body of the air frame as there is no tube to worry about.

Special conformal pylon could be made that uses all four AIM-54 hard points.
That would allow for more flexibility with shape of UAV/ALCM air frame.

 

[Hack-Hook]

That is non-issue and irrelevant for an UAV/Drones/Cruise Missiles.
Since wings themselves can be recessed into the body of missile itself.
Or conformal to the body of the air frame as there is no tube to worry about.

Special conformal pylon could be made that uses all four AIM-54 hard points.
That would allow for more flexibility with shape of UAV/ALCM air frame.

and exactly to achieve what ? probably you are aware that if you retract those wings , then drone can't be armed and turn into a slow but very expensive suicide drone .

 

[yugocrosrb95]

and exactly to achieve what ? probably you are aware that if you retract those wings , then drone can't be armed and turn into a slow but very expensive suicide drone .

I said UAV /Drone/Missile.

For UAV as it would not need a warhead such as 410kg that Kh-55 missile has.
Thus such could be allocated to have more fuel thus longer range and endurance.
As too landing gear once it nears minimum required fuel to reach mainland of Iran.
With Jahesh-700 the range when launched from F-14 could be about 6000 kilometers.
Thus could perform a search and expose operation of American aircraft carrier group.

 

[Hack-Hook]

I said UAV /Drone/Missile.

For UAV as it would not need a warhead such as 410kg that Kh-55 missile has.
Thus such could be allocated to have more fuel thus longer range and endurance.
As too landing gear once it nears minimum required fuel to reach mainland of Iran.
With Jahesh-700 the range when launched from F-14 could be about 6000 kilometers.
Thus could perform a search and expose operation of American aircraft carrier group.

you are wrong on that. . for that you can launch it from ground with a booster rocket. about range , well there is one small problem with your calculation . you have a projectile A, with a range of 300km when launched from ground , well it probably be 450-500km if launched from altitude at high speed .
now you have projectile B , it has the range of 3000km if launched from ground , it wont have 4500-5000 km if launched from altitude , it probably be 3400-3500km its all come back how much fuel , it use to reach that altitude and speed and it won't be half its fuel if it has that much fuel that already can reach 3000km

and again your assumption of using a turbofan engine reduce the amount of fuel used compared to turbojet is wrong.
it reduce the fuel used compared to turbo jet for the same amount of thrust produced .
a Karrar with Tolu engine will use a lot less fuel with a Karrar with Jahesh-700 engine simply because the Karrar don't need the power output of Jahesh-700 and the small Tolu-e-4 engine consume less fuel compared to the bigger and more powerful Jahesh-700 engine but produce enough thrust for small drone like karrar .

and another problem for your assumption is that all the space released by removing the warhead will go to fuel , no your uav needs far more sophisticated sensors and guidance system so most of the space go to them and s lot less realstate remain for fuels
and by the way I'm assure no pylon on f-14 is rated for anything as heavy as 1300kg Kh-55 or 2400kg KH-65 . so its useless about talking 450kg warhead removal theory

 

[yugocrosrb95]

You are one in the wrong as your reply is utter nonsense that you should feel embarrassed for posting such in here.
All you do is demonstrate that you don't have any valid argument because you do not think about it thoroughly at all.
None of what you have said makes any sense to anyone informed, let alone in matters of physics that you ignore or don't know.

Toloue-4 is more than one third of weight of Jahesh-700 in weight while consuming three times more fuel per generated thrust.
Jahesh-700 can produce double the thrust than Toloue-4 while only consuming two third's of fuel per second that Toloue-4 does.

Warheads are made of heavy steel and explosives that are much denser per volume than jet fuel as too electronics that you mention.
If we just consider that F-14 could carry on its center line hard points about four AIM-54 Phoenix then that is 1800 kilograms at very least.
Older sensors that ALCM have such as Kh-55 are much heavier than what can be done with far more modern technologies that Iran could use.

What Iran has inside their UAV's is probably far lighter and takes far less space than electronics of Kh-55 thus more fuel or features can be added.
Since removal of warhead and reduction in space taken by electronics, that can be invested in longer body for the UAV to increase fuel storage.
One third of weight of Kh-55 is warhead itself that it carrier that is probably as heavy as amount of fuel that Kh-55 can store in missile body.

First Kh-55 model weight at 1210 kilograms, F-14 could carry with center line hard points a UAV that is 50 percent heavier than Kh-55.
Amount of fuel that potential UAV could have may be as three times as much as Kh-55 has thus range could be over 7500 kilometers.
Though when it comes to weight, probably limitation with AAM is the recoil that launching of those can cause to the air frame.

It may well be that simply detaching from hard point / pylon would allow for considerably heavier payload than four AIM-54.
For example F-14B in center line front hard point's / pylon's which it had two, could carry GBU-31, each being over 900kg.
Would not be surprising if it turns out that with all center line hard point's / pylons carrying capacity is around 2400kg.

Iran could may as well have a UAV that could be up in the air for 48 hours or even more.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Toloue-4 is more than one third of weight of Jahesh-700 in weight while consuming three times more fuel per generated thrust.
Jahesh-700 can produce double the thrust than Toloue-4 while only consuming two third's of fuel per second that Toloue-4 does.

well what you don't get it that each engine have a ideal performance at a specified thrust , you don't get that ideal performance if you reduce the thrust .

You are one in the wrong as your reply is utter nonsense that you should feel embarrassed for posting such in here.
All you do is demonstrate that you don't have any valid argument because you do not think about it thoroughly at all.
None of what you have said makes any sense to anyone informed, let alone in matters of physics that you ignore or don't know.

don't worth answering

Warheads are made of heavy steel and explosives that are much denser per volume than jet fuel as too electronics that you mention.

only if they are bunker-buster otherwise no and again no those electronic and warhead have lots of empty spaces filled with air , there is no such thing in a fuel tank

If we just consider that F-14 could carry on its center line hard points about four AIM-54 Phoenix then that is 1800 kilograms at very least.

divided in 4 not just on one pylon

Older sensors that ALCM have such as Kh-55 are much heavier than what can be done with far more modern technologies that Iran could use.

kh-101 is heavier, kh-65 is heavier

What Iran has inside their UAV's is probably far lighter and takes far less space than electronics of Kh-55 thus more fuel or features can be added.

and those fuel is heavier than those electronics

Since removal of warhead and reduction in space taken by electronics, that can be invested in longer body for the UAV to increase fuel storage.
One third of weight of Kh-55 is warhead itself that it carrier that is probably as heavy as amount of fuel that Kh-55 can store in missile body.

they are not much lighter than fuel tanks .

First Kh-55 model weight at 1210 kilograms, F-14 could carry with center line hard points a UAV that is 50 percent heavier than Kh-55.

again you are wrong , you assume the shared weigh that pylons can tolerate can be put on one pylon , well its wrong assumption

Amount of fuel that potential UAV could have may be as three times as much as Kh-55 has thus range could be over 7500 kilometers.
Though when it comes to weight, probably limitation with AAM is the recoil that launching of those can cause to the air frame.

and again you are wrong to make that assumption that you can put such drone that probably weight more than 1500-1600kg on f-14

For example F-14B in center line front hard point's / pylon's which it had two, could carry GBU-31, each being over 900kg.

GBU-31 is JDAM its a kit for iron bombs , those gbu-31 can actually be mk-82, mk-83 or mk-84. so they were probably MK-82 & MK83 not MK-84 MK-82 and MK-83 are 500 and 1000 Pound bomb but still considered gbu-31

Would not be surprising if it turns out that with all center line hard point's / pylons carrying capacity is around 2400kg.

If you want to knew it actually can carry MK-84 on its pylons and the total weight is 6700kg but the point is what it can carry on each pylon is less than 1000kg it can carry 6x950kg MK-84 + 2 sidewinder , but it can't carry one single kh-55 because its heavier than 1000kg maximum on each pylon


and as i said what you said is not possible as the problem is not only weight but the size is also important

ther is a reason when usa wanted to test ASM-135 which is only 1180kg, they could not use it on normal f-15 and had to actually use a modified f-15
so as I said your UAV is better launched from ground or a heavy bomber like Su-24 which actually designed for such load not F-14 which is not designed for such loads

 

[yugocrosrb95]

All you do is yet again demonstrate that you have no argument.
On top of that you are disingenuous by ignoring my previous point.
I did not ever say put 1.8 ton UAV onto a single pylon, never ever ever.
What I stated that four pylons could carry such, that means use all of them.
But you have to ignore that as too when I stated a specialized mount is needed.
As for Jahesh-700, its maximum or optimal thrust would be needed for a 1.8 ton UAV.
F-14 can carry up to four of Mk-84 bombs on its center line hard points / pylons.
That is 3.7 tons of weight total that center line of F-14 could handle at most.
Do not ignore that I stated specialized mount would be needed for a UAV.
Or whenever a air launched land attack cruise missile is ever mounted.
Basic Kh-55 is 6.4 meters long while two AIM-54 total at 7.8 meters.
Accounting spacing between AIM-54's and its roughly 9 meters.

 

[Hack-Hook]

On top of that you are disingenuous by ignoring my previous point.
I did not ever say put 1.8 ton UAV onto a single pylon, never ever ever.
What I stated that four pylons could carry such, that means use all of them.

you can't put a single uav or missiles on two pylons , those pylons won't get released at the same time, if you put them on two pylon , one will get released and after a small time the other will be released . ddon't forget they designed for A2A missile not bombs m the pilot had to release them one by one
as a result if you do what you want to do you just damage the aircroft and the drone as the drone simply tilt and hit aircraft body .

But you have to ignore that as too when I stated a specialized mount is needed.

that specialized mount is not answer , if you want to do that , you had to change all the pylon and release mechanism of F-14

As for Jahesh-700, its maximum or optimal thrust would be needed for a 1.8 ton UAV.

and you still didn't said what the role of that UAV will be. that engine core is nearly as wide as J-85 , the diameter of that drone will be at least 6ocm if the wings all are folded completely if not it even be wider.and as i said there be no space . your big drone is better to be launched from ground , launching it from air crafts is useless , pointless , problematic and just making unnecessary problems

F-14 can carry up to four of Mk-84 bombs on its center line hard points / pylons.

no it can carry 4 on its belly , 2 on its wing glove and two sidewinder beside those two under wing glove, but in separate pylons and the size is important
MK-84 is 45cm wide and 328cm long . your UAV is clearly longer and wider than those numbers. .

That is 3.7 tons of weight total that center line of F-14 could handle at most.

no it actually can handle a little more than 4 tons of weight ,a but it has nothing to do with argument , the weight on each pylon and the size is what is important . not the total weight

Do not ignore that I stated specialized mount would be needed for a UAV.
Or whenever a air launched land attack cruise missile is ever mounted.

and that is not the role of F-14 , it has no equipment for targeytting ground units and those special mount wont help , it help if you want for example add russian bombs or missiles that are not compatible with american design or you want to yuse 3-4 sdm instead of one MK-84. you can't add a specialized mount and add a missile or uav that is out of spec , in fact by doing so you made the situation worse because those pylons not only have to carry those out of spec bombs but also those specialized mount.
you think how heavy a mount that can tolerate 1.5ton of weaponry would be?

Basic Kh-55 is 6.4 meters long while two AIM-54 total at 7.8 meters.
Accounting spacing between AIM-54's and its roughly 9 meters.

what nonsense is that 9m . who told you there is 9m of space there
this is F-14 underbelly

the body of the missile is 38cm wide and 3.8m long the spacing is not even 0.5m
at most you have 8m but its not important as those pylons are not synced if you put your drone there is its clear that distance between engine and the missile is not even 20cm , its what that make problem

All you do is yet again demonstrate that you have no argument.

thats what you do , every single of your argument answered and the problem with them are shown.
the airplane simply is not designed for that role , what you suggest not only add non to its capability , but reduce from them . and your suggestion have no actual use , you want to use cruise missile , use a bomber like Su-21, Su-24 or F-4 or J-7 for the role why damage the interceptor .
you want release such big drones , well launch them from ground , there is no need to launch them from sky .

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Except you again demonstrate that you have no argument because you yet again ignore inconvenient proposal that renders your arguments as non arguments.
Again, I stated that a custom and specialized pylon would be needed that mounts on those center line / belly hard points, are you again going to ignore this?
Or will you simply assert that it must be released one at a time rather than ever consider that mechanism for release would be on specialized pylon?

None of those aircraft you mention as alternative have either right hard point placement and or carrying capacity and or thrust when carrying X amount of payload.
On top of that matter of fuel efficiency as those guzzle considerably or way more fuel per generated thrust along have turbojet engines with poor work life span.
F-14 is most capable and economic out of them all others that you have mentioned, only Mig-29 could compete though it has no center line / belly hard points.

Anyway I have multiple times stated role of such UAV, will you say I did not thus lie and continue to be disingenuous? I won't be surprised if you do that.

 

[Hack-Hook]

inconvenient proposal that renders your arguments as non arguments.
Again, I stated that a custom and specialized pylon would be needed that mounts on those center line / belly hard points, are you again going to ignore this?

and you don't knew for F-14 there is no difference between underbelly pylons and under wing glove pylon .
in fact under the wing glove there is no space restriction that there is under the belly of aircraft
and your specialized pylon , means modifying all the aircraft skeleton as the problem is not with weapon mount but how much weight the skeleton can tolerate at one point, specially considering the fact that f-14 don't restrict pilot on how many G it can pull when do a maneuver , and there was cases that inexperienced pilots pull even up to 11G in maneuvers .

Or will you simply assert that it must be released one at a time rather than ever consider that mechanism for release would be on specialized pylon?

as said that specialized pylon won't be an specialized pylon alone . it would be an specialized pylon that need a modified and strengthened aircraft skeleton.

None of those aircraft you mention as alternative have either right hard point placement and or carrying capacity and or thrust when carrying X amount of payload.

those aircraft have the carrying capacity , and go and build your specialized pylon for those aircraft, its those aircrafts duty to do that work not F-14

F-14 is most capable and economic out of them all others that you have mentioned, only Mig-29 could compete though it has no center line / belly hard points.

your mission don't need a capable aircraft and for carrying jobs F-4 and Su-24 are a lot more capable than Mig-29
and belly hard point is not important and F-4 had it it can carry more weapon than F-14 its pylons are capable of carrying 1100kg and it was used to carry B-28 and B-43 nuke it can carry GBU-10 and MK-82
on other hand Su-24 pylons can carry KAB1500L and Kab-1500s-E meaning they don't even need modification to carry your drone , their pylons already can tolerate 1500kg



buyt all this discussion is useless , you claim your uav will have a 7500km range , well instead of modifying the aircraft to carry it , please go and modify the UAV to be able to take off from ground.

and you still not decided what sort of uav your uav is and what capability it supposed to have

 

[yugocrosrb95]

You just now proved my point and argument about you.
You continue to be disingenuous and resort to lying.
You pretend as I haven't stated the role of UAV.

Why do you keep ignoring fact that I have stated that goal of such UAV was to find an aircraft carrier group hence need for long range.
As for Su-24, each hard point that can mount KAB-1500 is far apart from each other unlike for F-14 belly hard points for Mk-84 bombs.
There can be one specialized pylon that is mounted on all four belly hard points thus over 3 ton ordnance could be an option for use.
Or have two specialized pylons each connecting one front and one rear belly hard point to be able to carry a 1.8 ton ordnance.
If specialized pylon that utilizes all four belly hard points is made, then a very potent conventional bomb can be used.
Thermobaric type bomb with equivalent yield of over 20 tons of TNT more potent that Mother Of All Bombs.

By the logic of UAV only being launched from ground then no one would have made air launched cruise missiles ever.
Or for there to be aircraft that carry air to air missiles thus by your logic one could say that anti air missiles should only be ground launched.
F-14 is in position to be able to carry far heavier single piece of ordnance than any other jet aircraft that Iranian air force has in its inventories.

F-14 could be a platform to conduct Air Launch To Orbit insertion of satellites into low earth orbit.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Why do you keep ignoring fact that I have stated that goal of such UAV was to find an aircraft carrier group hence need for long range.

the uav if has 7500km of range according to you , don't need to be fired from Aircraft . more importantly your concept of carrier battle group is wrong in wartime how an actual carrier battle group look is that those ships distributed in an area the size of Iran , they are never together like holliwood movie .

As for Su-24, each hard point that can mount KAB-1500 is far apart from each other unlike for F-14 belly hard points for Mk-84 bombs.
There can be one specialized pylon that is mounted on all four belly hard points thus over 3 ton ordnance could be an option for use.

so you want to use 3 ton drone now . well Ok give me a size for that drone . so i prove you mathematically how wrong your idea is.

r have two specialized pylons each connecting one front and one rear belly hard point to be able to carry a 1.8 ton ordnance.

su-24 already able to carry that load

If specialized pylon that utilizes all four belly hard points is made, then a very potent conventional bomb can be used.
Thermobaric type bomb with equivalent yield of over 20 tons of TNT more potent that Mother Of All Bombs.

so you want to use FOAB, or MOAB
FOAB : 7.1t with a lenghth of 7m and a diameter of 930mm
MOAB: 10.3ton with a length of 9.19m and a diameter of 1030mm
do you knew how high f-14 belly is from ground make an educated guess yourself

what is under the belly is not even 50cm and your specialized pylon make the distance to the ground even less

f-14 belly is 4 feet above the ground , the pylon will be around 1 feet at least , and the bomb or drone need at least be 50cm above ground for safety reason
you have something with the diameter of 45-50cm at most now please give me diametere for your monstrosity , sitting behind a pc and make ideas is not hard , turn those ideas into real products is the real work as i said in F-14 there is not enough space for what you say no matter how you change the pylons as it only affect weight not space

By the logic of UAV only being launched from ground then no one would have made air launched cruise missiles ever.

they are not 3ton or 7ton monstrosity and are fired from strategic bombers not interceptors. there is a difference in their design

Or for there to be aircraft that carry air to air missiles thus by your logic one could say that anti air missiles should only be ground launched.

you sit and think for 20sec and you see the flaw of your logic here

F-14 is in position to be able to carry far heavier single piece of ordnance than any other jet aircraft that Iranian air force has in its inventories.

no its not , it has a mission and it most do its mission

F-14 could be a platform to conduct Air Launch To Orbit insertion of satellites into low earth orbit.

no it can't a missile like ASM-135 was the only thing that tried to send anything from a fighter jet to space and it was never reached escape velocity , it was only a cheap anti satellite design for satellite in LEO it only could reach mach-12 while only had to send 14kg projectile up to 500km

 

[Hack-Hook]

and b=by the way there is a reason Russia uses Tu-160 for FOAB and USA uses B-52 B2 and B-1 for the role and they don't use su-34 or F-15