Iran Military Forum

So the cost of  6000 SA fighter at 2 million dollars  is 12 Billion dollars ! Cheaper then buying SU 27 ! 

Also cost of 1200 SA fighter at 2 million dollars is 2.4 Billion dollars ! 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-4_Skyhawk

Dont forget the pilots/groundpersonal/infrastructur for 1200 birds...or 6000....

To beat F-35 you need a Stealth Aircraft of your own.

Maybe you are right . And non stealth can not beat F35 . And ECM and chaff and drones will not fool it's radar . But F35 will not be available for a few more years in large numbers . For now ( next 2~5 ) years , the US is still buying F18 for it's fleet until problems with F35 are solved . SA fighter as it is , is not stealth . But it is still a fighter . The probability of making a stealth airframe from ground up and making stealth coverings for present planes are roughly equal . ( both methods rely on using adhesives and resins and similar fabrics ) . Also present danger is from F18 . So it makes more sense to build SA in large numbers against F18 and when stealth coverings become available then convert them against F35 . This is far better than wait for a few years say  2~ 5 without air cover against F18 , and then find that when attack comes that production capacity does not exist to quickly make 2000 stealth planes . Also converting airframes should be quicker than building entire airframes .

By the way nomad where have you got figure 2,000 of invading US aircrafts? 10 US Aircraft Carriers (class Nimitz) can only launch 900 Aircrafts all together.

It is the total number of aircraft available to US navy in a long war . Involving replenishment of lost aircraft from other bases or mainland US ( A war of 18 month or two years ) . A short war of say six month may only require one ship load of planes of say 600 ~ 900 planes .

900 x 7 (ratio) x 30 (million dollars for one SU-27) = 189 billion dollars. Still too expensive.

Agree . So need cheap homemade planes in large number . ASAP .

The U.S economy is being crushed under its enorous military spending. Iran need not make the same mistake.

I think I remember mentioning stealth conversion and reading that air-force had started this programme with present fighter fleet . However if new SA fighters are built as non-stealth plane , then it may be possible to show a little foresight and design the airframe so that stealth modifications can be easily added later as modular bolt on panels instead of wrapping the plane up with stealth bandages and glue .

At the design stage the fuselage of SA can have added internal hardpoints ( places where nuts and bolts can be fixed later ) all around the sides of the plane and upright portions . Leading edges of wings and rudders can also be made so as to be bolt on and be able to be replaceable with stealth components later . The panels offer a better solution than adhesives . As they can be replaced and repaired more easily . And they offer the adavantage that they may be able to be made seperately and stored also . Different kit can be made for different plane . This panels can be made to be strong and lightweight and hug the body of plane like corset . They may also be made so that external surfaces offer an angled surface to radar , and are also aerodynamic  .   

Allowing the entire wing and rudders to be replaced with composite ones at later date will help greatly . If wing loading and speed is relatively low then this can be done easier . Making the two wings as one unit will also help .  This approach of gradual stealth will allow gradual transformation of existing and future planes , as and when components are tested and made available .

Allowing the entire wing and rudders to be replaced with composite ones at later date will help greatly. If wing loading and speed is relatively low then this can be done easier. Making the two wings as one unit will also help. This approach of gradual stealth will allow gradual transformation of existing and future planes, as and when components are tested and made available.

Let's assume that 900 Iranian Stealth Aircrafts X can engage US F-35s with 1:1 ratio.
If Stealth Aircrdaft X will cost 30 million dollars then

900 (Stealth Aircrafts X) x 30 (million dollars) = 27 billion dollars. That is how much parity with US will cost.

So building complete Stealth Aircrafts as you mentioned (with Aircraft body completely made of plastic) will significantly improve engagement ratio (to 1:1) and overall program cost (to 27 billion dollars).

If you want to defend Iran with Aircrafts then Stealth technology is the only way to minimise the cost.

In my opinion shot and long range Anti Stealth SAM technology can be achieved earlier and cheaper than technology of Stealth Aircrafts. Mersad, Igla, S-300, Nebo SVU are very interesting developments in SAM technology that might be used to shoot down Stealth Aircrafts.

In my opinion iran shouldn't invest much into air-to-air planes, besides the maintenace of the current fleet. Iran should invest in jets capable of anti-shipping operations; so it can take out US ships.

It is not necessary for Iran to build Anti Ship Aircrafts since Iran has already developed TV/IR guided Anti Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM). The name of missile is Khalij Pars. It has 650 kilograms AP/HE warhead and range of 300 kilometers.

Here is information taken from posts on this forum.


"Khalij Pars" (Persian Gulf) missile could be based on a Fateh-110. The next generation might be a version of Qiam-1. Similar Chinese DF-21D missile (which has TV, IR, and SatNav for guidance) will likely be fired in Salvos against enemy Aircraft Carriers.

Khalij Pars ASBM:

- Targets are searched via OTH radars, UAVs, other maritime surveillance aircraft. Then ASBM is launched from mobile TEL
- Guidence by INS and terminal TV/IR seekers
- Target dimensions of 300 m x 70 m
- 650kg warhead
- AP/HE warhead
- Can leave a crater of 7-18 m size
- 3 mach or 1,029.6 meters/second speed
- Range of missile is 300 km
- Attack mode: vertical (top-down)

- Article by Iranian News website http://www.mashreghnews.ir actually talks about it's effectiveness vs missile defence systems like the US Navy SM-3 which most people will remember us talking about here when it was first tested. It confirms the conclusion we came to which was that Khalij Fars travels under the engagement envelope of the US Navy SM-3 and can hit US Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) equipped vessels. Those ships were supposed to guard US Aircraft Carriers against Ballistic Missile and Aircraft attacks.

(information was taken from forum topic below)
Topic: "Iran started mass production of Anti-ship smart Balistic missiles".
http://www.iranmilitaryforum.net/index.php?topic=7230.0

Agree . For many reasons :

(1) US has long range SAM and radar to about 200 KM range . Based on ship .

(2) US has low RCS ships , making use of radar guided anti - ship difficult form plane .

(3) Iran pilot has no ground support against US plane at sea . ( RADAR , SAM , CHAFF , ECM ) .

(4) Iran pilot can not be recovered if ditched at sea .

I think only use anti-ship missile from plane if :

(1) Iran plane  launch anti-ship missile from more than 200 KM .

(2) Either passive radar guidance or IR / optic guidance needed against low RCS ship .

(3) More capable low RCS plane available . Or confidence in jamming ship radar .

(4) Ability to recover pilot at sea .

(5) Use of other assets such as helicopters , subs , ship or shore based missiles not possible .

I also think Iran can produce SA in large numbers as it has made other equipment in large numbers also . The reason why it has not done so may be other than Industrial capacity . I have to rule out politics or economics , because Iran did not bow down about nukes so it won't be pressured about aircraft or missile range . Also Iran leadership is unified and this will not allow internal politics to stand in the way . So it seems technical consideration or pilot resistance may be a cause .

As far as technicals , if it is an F18 type plane or even a F5 type plane then it will be good against Hornets . And with careful modular design it can be slowly transformed into stealth aircraft to fight F35 in few years time . Pilots may resist the idea of the SA being used because of high attrition rates . This is a genuine concern . I have no good answer for it . Apart from saying that large number of Bassej volunteers with high motivation can be trained . But they still need a plane . What better than new SA fighters . At least the flight charecteristics will be the same as stealth SA fighters . Also establishing the production capacity now will enable rapid increase in SA numbers at short notice .

Another reason for using Iran jet fighter in Iran only is that Helicopter and ship and sub and shore based cruise misslies  can not defend airspace and do dogfights . Only Iran jet planes can , and they are in short supply and they should ALL be taken off shore duty and put to air defence duty ! Against high value target such as carrier , duplicate and triplicate weapon exist . Against defending airspace only Iranian SAM exist and planes .


                                                                                                 

My figures of  F5 vs F18  of 4 : 1  , are based on published information of actual simulations and computer simulations  on the internet and TV . But I am sure Iranians can carry out their own simulations ( both practical and computer ) to determine the actual numerical superiority needed against F18 and F35 by SA fighters . There are many planes in Iran inventory that can be made into aggressor squadron to mimic the performance of F18 , in simulated dog-fights against SA fighters . Iran has many clever computer engineer also to make flight simulators etc . They are the ones to decide finally on this matters .

The same goes for SAM systems . But against very high value targets like enemy planes , many different systems are needed . All relying on different environments : Optics / Radar / WVR / BVR / planes / missiles .....................................

Iran has to build a Stealth Aircraft than can go 1:1 against US F-35. Perhaps a Light Stealth Interceptor that is faster and cheaper than F-35. That is the only affordable solution that relies on countering US with Aircrafts of your own.

I would put 50 million dollars as maximum price for Iranian Stealth Interceptor. That would give
900 (Stealth Interceptors) x 50 (million dollars price) = 45 billion dollars. Offer a cheaper solution if you can.

Russia (if not for sanctions) could sell Iran Stealth SU T-50 for a price of 57 million dollars each.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_T-50
"1,000 aircraft over the next four decades will be produced in a joint venture with India, 200 each for Russia and India and 600 for other countries." So there is a room for additional orders.

I do not know if Russia could sell SU T-50 blueprints (as a transfer of technology) to Iran. SU T-50 development has costed Russia 10 billion dollars. Then it will cost Iran 10 billion dollars to buy SU T-50 technology from Russia. And additional money will be spent to manufacture SU T-50 for a price of 57 million dollars each.

The only cheaper way is to build Anti Stealth short and long range SAMs. 1 Iranian Mersad (short range) SAM would costs around 10 million dollars. 5 times cheaper than hypothetical future Iranian Stealth Interceptor.

the way it is is going is Unmanned Fighter Jets, pilots are and will become obsolete, it saves lifes. Irans far better off using missiles and building a anti air defense layer, cheaper saves more lifes.

and then in meant time iran can concentrate on one decent aircraft and perfect it... i think this is what iran is doing.

at the end of day in my opinion fighter jets are not needed they dont win wars they just drop bombs, and that can be stopped without the need for another jet fighter.

Also you have the benefit of showering the sky with anti air and not having to worry about your own.

no it can not. i think.

I think there are not enough resources for a F-14 production line at the moment. Technically i think it wont be such a great challenge for Iran to do so, cause they already produce the whole parts for maintenance.